No More Marriages, Only Weddings

Thursday, April 21st, 2011

W.F. Price examines changing expectations through the lens of Disney princesses:

Snow White, a girl who cheerfully cooks and cleans for short, stout and bald working men and brings some feminine grace and genuine kindness into the mix as well is an example of the old ideal wife. Not every man would get a Snow White, but he could at least expect that women aspired to be somewhat like her as wives and, most importantly, were expected to be so.

Just 13 years later, after the war that changed everything, Disney released another fairytale movie: Cinderella. Like Snow White, Cinderella was the victim of a cruel stepmother who forced her to work as a maid, but her attitude shows a marked difference. Not only does she bitch and moan about housework, she even indulges the household pests, bringing them food and protecting them from the cat.

The plot in Cinderella revolves around a royal ball in which the prince must choose a wife at the insistence of his father. The ball therefore represents female competition along the lines of the modern mating ritual, where females deck themselves out in all manner of finery and compete for the alpha male’s attention. Again, here is another departure from Snow White. Rather than the modest, bashful young princess waiting for a prince to sweep her away, we have a horde of women descending on a giant dance floor competing for the prize, a desirable male who is reluctant to commit. It’s a scene one can see today in clubs in big cities.

After a catfight and some subsequent hocus pocus, Cinderella emerges victorious in the contest to win the prince’s affection, and the king tracks her down by means of one of the high-heeled shoes she left behind. A fabulous wedding in a palace ensues, and the movie is over.

Cinderella is the template upon which today’s girls structure their dreams. Their overriding goal is to win their reluctant prince and stand victorious over the other women at the altar. That’s it. Once it’s over and they are married, it’s all a big letdown. The man is no longer a groom and princely, there are screaming kids and filthy clothes and dishes, no more people are honoring her and the gown is in a box. Drudgery was never part of the bargain, and who the hell is this schlub sitting on the couch watching football to expect a princess to fix him dinner?

So there we have it: there are no more wives, only brides; no more marriages, only weddings. And this change in our society happened over half a century ago.

Greg Mortenson’s Incredible Story

Monday, April 18th, 2011

A friend recommended that I read the “incredible story” of Greg Mortenson’s Three Cups of Tea. The folks at 60 Minutes also found it incredible:

The heart of Mortenson’s “Three Cups of Tea” is the story of a failed attempt in 1993 to climb the world’s second-highest peak, K2.  On the way down, Mortenson says, he got lost and stumbled, alone and exhausted, into a remote mountain village in Pakistan named Korphe. According to the book’s narrative, the villagers cared for him and he promised to return to build a school there. In a remote village in  Pakistan, 60 MINUTES found Mortenson’s porters on that failed expedition. They say Mortenson  didn’t get lost and stumble into Korphe on his way down from K2. He visited the village a year later.

That’s what famous author and mountaineer Jon Krakauer, a former donor to Mortenson’s charity, says he found out, too. “It’s a beautiful story.  And it’s a lie,” says Krakauer.  “I have spoken to one of his [Mortenson’s] companions, a close friend, who hiked out from K2 with him and this companion said, ‘Greg never heard of Korphe until a year later,’” Krakauer tells Kroft.  Mortenson did eventually build a school in Korphe, Krakauer says, “But if you read the first few chapters of that book, you realize, ‘I am being taken for a ride here.’ ”

The Real Villain

Saturday, April 16th, 2011

Ayn Rand’s works aren’t hard to caricature — which is why it’s so infuriating that the caricaturists routinely miss the point:

When Rand created the character of Wesley Mouch, it’s as though she was anticipating Barney Frank (D., Mass). Mouch is the economic czar in “Atlas Shrugged” whose every move weakens the economy, which in turn gives him the excuse to demand broader powers. Mr. Frank steered Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac to disaster with mandates for more lending to low-income borrowers. After Fannie and Freddie collapsed under the weight of their subprime mortgage books, Mr. Frank proclaimed last year: “The way to cure that is to give us more authority.” Mouch couldn’t have said it better himself.

But it’s a misreading of “Atlas” to claim that it is simply an antigovernment tract or an uncritical celebration of big business. In fact, the real villain of “Atlas” is a big businessman, railroad CEO James Taggart, whose crony capitalism does more to bring down the economy than all of Mouch’s regulations. With Taggart, Rand was anticipating figures like Angelo Mozilo, the CEO of Countrywide Financial, the subprime lender that proved to be a toxic mortgage factory. Like Taggart, Mr. Mozilo engineered government subsidies for his company in the name of noble-sounding virtues like home ownership for all.

Still, most of the heroes of “Atlas” are big businessmen who are unfairly persecuted by government. The struggle of Rand’s fictional steel magnate Henry Rearden against confiscatory regulation is a perfect anticipation of the antitrust travails of Microsoft CEO Bill Gates. In both cases, the government’s depredations were inspired by behind-the-scenes maneuverings of business rivals. And now Microsoft is maneuvering against Google with an antitrust complaint in the European Union.

The reality is that in Rand’s novel, as in life, self-described capitalists can be the worst enemies of capitalism. But that doesn’t fit in easily with the simple pro-business narrative about Rand now being retailed.

Beast’s Castle

Thursday, April 14th, 2011

Disney has a long history of using forced perspective at its parks, and Beast’s Castle, which they’re building as part of the new Fantasy Land in the Magic Kingdom, takes it to another level:

Buying up the Golden Age of Illustration

Sunday, April 10th, 2011

Collectors are moving on from first editions to the original art that went into them:

Last October, Garth Williams’s original drawing for the cover of E.B. White’s 1952 book “Charlotte’s Web” sold at Heritage Auctions for $155,350, five times its high estimate. Two years before that, a British collector paid Sotheby’s in London a record $578,384 for Ms. Potter’s 6-inch-square watercolor, “The Rabbits’ Christmas Party: The Departure.”

On Monday, Sotheby’s in New York will test this market again by offering up 193 original illustrations for children’s books priced to sell for at least $989,000 combined.

Sotheby’s sale is peppered with recognizable characters like “Winnie-the-Pooh,” “Madeline” and “Babar,” each priced to sell for at least $40,000. But the pricier works in the sale stretch back to the late 1800s and early 1900s, including Jessie Willcox Smith’s 1910 portrait of a young girl with rosy cheeks, “How Doth the Little Busy Bee.” Originally published in “A Child’s Book of Old Verses,” the portrait is priced to sell for at least $200,000.

The pool of collectors who focus on original children’s book art is still relatively small and concentrated in America, Britain and Japan, according to Nick Clark, chief curator of the Eric Carle Museum of Picture Book Art in Amherst, Mass. But the category also draws its share of one-time buyers determined to own something by a childhood favorite like E.H. Shepard, who drew A.A. Milne’s “Pooh” characters.

By and large, collectors will pay more for an illustration used on a cover than for anything displayed inside; they’ll also pay more for a “Babar” elephant drawn by series creator Jean de Brunhoff than for subsequent versions by Mr. de Brunhoff’s son, Laurent.

Since the recession, values seem to be holding up best for children’s-book art made between 1880 and 1940, an era known as the Golden Age of Illustration when technological advances in printing presses made it possible to churn out colorfully ornate books.

Among children’s books, this canon includes British illustrator Arthur Rackham (1867-1939), whose otherworldly characters blend the grotesque imagery of Norse mythology with the Zen of Japanese woodblock prints. Sotheby’s wants at least $50,000 for Mr. Rackham’s pair of 1906 watercolors, “Two Winter Fables: Mother Goose [and] Jack Frost.” Other favorites include Danish illustrator Kay Nielsen (1886–1957), who is best known for his work in Walt Disney’s “Fantasia.”

Jim Henson’s early work

Friday, April 8th, 2011

Jim Henson’s early work was in advertising — something the work itself often joked about:

P.J. O’Rourke Shrugged

Wednesday, April 6th, 2011

Atlas shrugged — and so did P.J. O’Rourke:

But I will not pan “Atlas Shrugged.” I don’t have the guts.  If you associate with Randians — and I do — saying anything critical about Ayn Rand is almost as scary as saying anything critical to Ayn Rand.  What’s more, given how protective Randians are of Rand, I’m not sure she’s dead.

The woman is a force.  But, let us not forget, she’s a force for good.  Millions of people have read “Atlas Shruggged” and been brought around to common sense, never mind that the author and her characters don’t exhibit much of it. Ayn Rand, perhaps better than anyone in the 20th century, understood that the individual self-seeking we call an evil actually stands in noble contrast to the real evil of self-seeking collectives.  (A rather Randian sentence.) It’s easy to make fun of Rand for being a simplistic philosopher, bombastic writer and — I’m just saying — crazy old bat.  But the 20th century was no joke. A hundred years, from Bolsheviks to Al Qaeda, were spent proving Ayn Rand right.

His Beautiful Dark Twisted Fantasy

Wednesday, April 6th, 2011

The New York Times gets around to interviewing George R. R. Martin about his beautiful dark twisted fantasy, Game of Thrones, which is coming to HBO in a couple weeks:

I always wanted to do something in epic fantasy. But not just to rehash Tolkien. I wanted to do something to make it my own. To some extent, the project was also a reaction to my own Hollywood career. I was out there for 10 years, from roughly 1985 to 1995. I was on staff on “The Twilight Zone” and “Beauty and the Beast” as a writer-producer, and then I did about five years of development, doing pilots for shows of my own and some feature film scripts. The theme of that whole period for me was, I would always turn in my first draft to whatever network or studio or producer I was working for and the reaction was inevitably, “George, this is great. It’s terrific, it’s a wonderful read, thanks. But it’s three times our budget. We can’t possibly make it. It’s too big and it’s too expensive.”

So then I would go in and I would start cutting. I would combine characters and trim out giant battle scenes, make it produceable. Although the later drafts of those scripts were always more polished, because I’d revised them several times, my favorites were always the first drafts, which had all the good stuff in it which I had to take out because it was too expensive and too big. When I returned to prose, which had been my first love, in the 90s, I said I’m going to do something that is just as big as I want to do. I can have all the special effects I want. I can have a cast of characters that numbers in the hundreds. I can have giant battle scenes. Everything you can’t do in television and film, of course you can do in prose because you’re everything there. You’re the director, you’re the special effects coordinator, you’re the costume department, and you don’t have to worry about a budget.

Of course the irony of all this is the project that I thought most unlikely to ever be filmed — the project that was actually unfilmable — is now going to be this big show on HBO.

Lions Gate Finalizing Netflix Deal to Stream All Seasons of “Mad Men”

Tuesday, April 5th, 2011

Lions Gate Entertainment, which produces “Mad Men,” has finalized a deal with Netflix to stream all seven seasons for between $75 million and $100 million — close to $1 million per episode.

Scott Adams on Context

Friday, April 1st, 2011

Scott Adams (Dilbert) asked his readers to suggest a topic, and they overwhelmingly suggested that he write about Men’s Rights — which led him to write a piece embracing the Men’s Rights viewpoint before calling them a bunch of pussies. He does write comedy, after all.

This didn’t end well:

The short answer is that I write material for a specific sort of audience. And when the piece on Men’s Rights drew too much attention from outside my normal reading circle, it changed the meaning. Communication becomes distorted when you take it out of context, even if you don’t change a word of the text. I image that you are dubious about this. It’s hard to believe this sort of thing if you don’t write for a living and see how often it happens. I’ll explain.
[...]
Contrast my style of blogging to the most common styles, which include advocacy for some interest group or another, punditry, advice, and information. Now imagine moving my writing from the context of this blog to the context of an advocacy blog. You can see the problem. Men thought I was attacking men, and women thought I was attacking women. The message changed when the context changed. I saw that developing, so I took down the post.
[...]
I confess that I misjudged the degree of excitement this would generate. Indeed, the big fuss didn’t happen for over three weeks. I also didn’t predict that critics would reprint the post one component at a time so they could dissect it, which has the fascinating effect of changing the humorous tone to something hideous. Humor requires flow and timing. A frog isn’t much of a frog after you dissect it.

Then the secondary effect kicked in, like the famous game of telephone. The second wave of critics got their meaning partly from the dissected post and partly by reading the wildly misleading paraphrasing of other critics. By this point the thing gained a whole new meaning.

Next came the labeling. Once the piece had been reprinted on feminist blogs, the “with us or against us” instinct took over. I clearly wasn’t supporting every element of the Feminist movement, and therefore I was presumed an enemy and labeled a misogynist. I was also labeled an asshole, which I have come to understand is a synonym for male.

Emotions about the piece were running high. When humans get emotional (yes, including men), our critical thinking skills shut down. In this case, the original post on Men’s Rights became literally incomprehensible to anyone who had a dog in the fight.

I know from experience that trying to clarify my opinion always turns into “He’s trying to backpedal because we caught him! Ha!” People don’t change opinions just because new information comes in. They interpret the new information as confirmation of their existing opinion.

He summarizes his view:

You can’t expect to have a rational discussion on any topic that has an emotional charge. Emotion pushes out reason. That is true for all humans, including children, men, women, and people in every range of mental ability. The path of least resistance is to walk away from that sort of fight. Men generally prefer the path of least resistance. The exception is when men irrationally debate with other men. That’s a type of sport. No one expects opinions to be changed as a result.

Are women more emotional than men? I’m not sure how you measure that sort of thing. On the emotional scoreboard, does one person’s anger equal another person’s excitement? All I know for sure is that the Men’s Rights group I poked with a stick has some irritable dudes.

He ends with his original essay.

The Moses of Nerds

Thursday, March 31st, 2011

Steve Sailer calls Robert Heinlein the Moses of Nerds:

A central figure in the evolution of obsessive geeks into a self-aware, self-confident community was science-fiction author Robert A. Heinlein (1907-1988). For many of the mid-20th century’s lonely youths, discovering Heinlein stories in pulp sci-fi magazines or at the public library was a you-are-not-alone moment.

[...]

A touching scene in Patterson’s biography illustrates why Golden Age science-fiction writers and readers so loyally regarded Heinlein as their dean. At a 1941 science-fiction convention where Heinlein was the guest of honor, he took great pains to be a suave host for his awkward fans:

[Heinlein] was probably the most sophisticated and cosmopolitan person the fans had ever come into contact with, and he seemed to them like something out of a movie.…Science-fiction readers in 1941 were social outcasts. To be told — seriously — that they were personally an important element in human progress was apparently…intoxicating for them.

With fans this desperate for leadership, Heinlein likely could have set up a personal cult in the manner of his contemporaries, the lesser novelists Ayn Rand and L. Ron Hubbard. (Although unconfirmed, it has been widely reported that Heinlein gave Hubbard the idea of turning Dianetics, originally a low-cost competitor for Freudianism, into the tax-free religion of Scientology.)

Fortunately, Heinlein resisted the temptation to found a cult. He had too much generosity of spirit and too little monomania for the Rand-Hubbard path. Three of his books became cult novels anyway. Tellingly, they each found their way to a different cult. Starship Troopers appeals to militarists, Stranger in a Strange Land to hippies, and The Moon is a Harsh Mistress to libertarians.

Heinlein was not an ideologue, Sailer emphasizes, but rather an artist whose medium was ideas, an intellectual provocateur.

A 1911 isn’t a 1911

Wednesday, March 30th, 2011

The second season of Top Shot started with a challenge that involved shooting billiard balls that were partially blocked by other billiard balls, using a standard 1911 pistol — which bears little resemblance to what pistol champions like Athena Lee or Chris Tilley shoot in the “open” division of IPSC:

With the 1911 they didn’t let us practice. I shoot with optics for the most part. For the last 20 years I’ve been shooting my Open division gun with about a pound and half trigger pull, red dot, everything. I’m not trying to make excuses. When we saw the first challenge I saw the billiard balls and the 1911 and thought “OK, I got this,” but as soon as I picked up that 1911 I knew I was in trouble.

I was like “Wow, this gun sucks.” Then, as soon as I lined up my sights I saw that my front sight was bigger than the pool ball. I’m not used to shooting iron sights. I know the concept, I’ve shot them and trained with them before, but I don’t shoot iron sights anywhere near as much as I shoot my Open gun. But I figured that all the same principles apply, I’d just line up the sights and make sure the front sight was in focus and press, “Bang!” and I missed.

Gor

Wednesday, March 30th, 2011

I haven’t read any of John Norman’s Gor novels, but I’m aware of them because of their notoriety for what they evolved into over the course of the 29-book series.

The first few books start off as planetary romance adventure novels, in the style of Edgar Rice Burroughs’ John Carter of Mars stories: British professor Tarl Cabot finds himself transported to the lower-gravity world of Gor, where he becomes a superheroic swordsman.

Over time though, the series grew more philosophical — which makes sense when you realize that author John Norman is actually Queens College CUNY philosophy professor John Lange — and more sexual, with an emphasis on the natural hierarchy that places men above women — which, I suppose, makes “sense” when you realize that Lange is also a classical scholar.

Charlie Jane Anders of io9 interviews Lange about his influences:

I think, pretty clearly, the three major influences on my work are Homer, Freud, and Nietzsche. Interestingly, however obvious this influence might be, few, if any, critics, commentators, or such, have called attention to it. Perhaps it is so obvious that it is simply taken for granted. In Homer you have the primitive, hardy, aristocratic warrior ethos; in Nietzsche you have the rank, distance, and hierarchy, concern with the etiology of belief, the trenchant culture criticism, and such; and, in Freud, of course, you have the depth psychology, and a sense of the radical centrality of sex to the human condition.

Apparently the parody, Houseplants of Gor, matches the tone of the later stories:

The spider plant cringed as its owner brought forth the watering can. “I am a spider plant!” it cried indignantly. “How dare you water me before my time! Guards!” it called. “Guards!”

Borin, its owner, placed the watering can on the table and looked at it. “You will be watered,” he said.

“You do not dare to water me!” laughed the plant.

“You will be watered,” said Borin.

“Do not water me!” wept the plant.

“You will be watered,” said Borin.

I watched this exchange. Truly, I believed the plant would be watered. It was plant, and on Gor it had no rights. Perhaps on Earth, in its permissive society, which distorts the true roles of all beings, which forces both plant and waterer to go unh appy and constrained, which forbids the fulfillment of owner and houseplant, such might not happen. Perhaps there, it would not be watered. But it was on Gor now, and would undoubtedly feel its true place, that of houseplant. It was plant. It would be watered at will. Such is the way with plants.

Borin picked up the watering can, and muchly watered the plant. The plant cried out. “No, Master! Do not water me!” The master continued to water the plant. “Please, Master,” begged the plant, “do not water me!” The master continued to water the plant. It was plant. It could be watered at will.

The plant sobbed muchly as Borin laid down the watering can. It was not pleased. Too, it was wet. But this did not matter. It was plant.

“You have been well watered,” said Borin.

“Yes,” said the plant, “I have been well watered.” Of course, it could be watered by its master at will.

“I have watered you well,” said Borin.

“Yes, master,” said the plant. “You have watered your plant well. I am plant, and as such I should be watered by my master.”

The Real Sound of Shakespeare

Tuesday, March 29th, 2011

London’s Globe theatre plans to present Troilus and Cressida in authentic Elizabethan English, the real sound of Shakespeare:

By opening night, they will have rehearsed using phonetic scripts for two months and, hopefully, will render the play just as its author intended. They say their accents are somewhere between Australian, Cornish, Irish and Scottish, with a dash of Yorkshire — yet bizarrely, completely intelligible if you happen to come from North Carolina.

For example, the word “voice” is pronounced the same as “vice”, “reason” as “raisin”, “room” as “Rome”, “one” as “own” — breathing new life into Shakespeare’s rhyming and punning.
[...]
The actors have been coached by David Crystal, one of the world’s most prominent language experts. He prepared the phonetic script by meticulously researching the rhymes, meter and spellings within Shakespeare’s plays and believes the dialect to be “about 80% accurate”.

“There are three important sources of evidence for this,” he says. “The first is the sound of the puns and jokes, the second is the spellings in the original texts. The third and most important piece of evidence is that, at the time there was a group of phoneticians who actually wrote in great detail about how the sounds of English were pronounced.”

The 17th century writer and dramatist Ben Johnson, for example, says the letter “r” was pronounced with a growl. “He tells us there’s a doggy sound — think ‘grrrr’,” Mr Crystal says.

How Athena Lee Got Started Shooting

Monday, March 28th, 2011

Athena Lee explains how she got started shooting, hoping for a chance to eat at McDonald’s:

My dad started shooting IPSC style shooting, he was the shooter in the family. In the Philippines, shooting is a little bit expensive. It’s not like here where guns are readily available. My dad had been shooting at the time for about 4 or 5 years, and this was back in December of 1991, he went to the shooting range to practice for a Steel Challenge tournament. I went with him because I figured that he and his friends would go out and get something to eat at McDonalds, which had just opened in the Philippines.

That was a big deal, because while here in the US there is a McDonalds on just about every block, over there they just didn’t exist. This one was the first, so I went with him and helped him pick up brass and whatnot after he shot. Of course, being 13, I got bored really fast. He noticed and said “Hey, try shooting this single stack 1911 in .38 Super.” Those may not have been his exact words, but he told me to “Try the gun, shoot at these targets.”

So, the first stage I ever shot was the Steel Challenge stage “Smoke ‘em and Hope,” for those of you who are familiar with that setup. The targets were gigantic and really close so it was pretty easy.

Being new, I didn’t care about times. I just kept hitting and hitting and I kept asking my Dad for more magazines. He figured that I was holding the gun pretty safely, which was remarkable because I was less than five feet tall at the time, and my hands were tiny. Still, I was gripping the gun well so he decided to let me shoot.

He had me dry fire for about two weeks, and then I joined the upcoming Steel Challenge match.