Dumb Tummy

I could wake up thinking about stories, but instead my brain wants to think about dumb people's ideas of argumentation.

This morning its more dumb free market fundamentalism, the kind that calls anything not sufficiently laissez faire 'socialism' and likes to spout of pointless aphorisms like "all governments fail their people 100% of the time" and "governments are wrong because they use force". Of course, its okay for them to use force when its something the free market fundamentalist approves of.

Anyway, so my brain decides to take a new route, and here's where it eventually got (though this is the tl;dr formulation): Big business spends a lot of money on government, on buying politicians, buying access to politicians, buying lobbyists, etc. so we should view it as free market activity, ie. the government is part of the market. Since the market can't do any wrong, the government can't either. So a free market fundamentalist either needs to deny that business spends money on politics (impossible) or that some market activity is bad.

They'd make protests, which is why my brain iterated through dozens of more complex formulations, but that's basically where it ends up. Free market fundamentalism is stupid.

High Performance Logic

Cops kill black people in higher numbers than they kill white people, but black people kill the majority of other killed black people.

Immigrants are dangerous because they kill Americans, but killed Americans are mostly killed by other Americans.

This can mean only one thing:

We should emigrate the white Americans and immigrate all the immigrants into America where, because of emigration, there would be no white Americans to kill in America, and the immigrants would only kill other immigrants and black people, and the black people could kill the immigrants too, but mostly other black people. The white Americans could just kill all the people wherever they emigrated because they have the most guns.

Except Israel.

Not really a title...

I had to write down an incomplete thought and this was the most convenient place. It makes sense to protect a culture that is actually successful from change. Growing up in a privileged community, this was a kind of theme. If through hard work and good management of resources, a group of people build for themselves something blessed, it only makes sense that they must protect the core of their culture from both the desperate and the opportunistic. But there should be a clear distinction between a successful culture and an exploitative one, though it may be that in the modern world, such a distinction does not exist. We all get our affordable dry goods, etc. from impoverished nations, where the workers are paid next to nothing for their toil. What looks like 'success' may merely be the advantageous positioning of oneself in nearer the top of the economic food chain, not necessarily more work or better management. To think otherwise is akin to the Gospel of Wealth: your riches show you're beloved of God, and nothing can disprove that, as has been for practical purposes shown.

Sad Ryan Gosling: A Bladerunner Story

I'm gonna review a movie!

That's always exciting, because in almost all cases, I'm an insufferable critic and hate everything. Not in this case. In this case, I actually liked the movie! I liked it even though there was A LOT wrong with it.

In fact, after my list of negatives, you'll probably say, "You didn't really like this, did you?" But I insist I did.

We begin.

The original Blade Runner was a flawed masterpiece, in which the "hero" haplessly moves about the landscape getting his ass rescued one time after the next. I was sad at viewing it (in theaters) just a couple years ago to see that it was no longer aging well. These things happen; it doesn't mean that the movie wasn't still a stroke of genius and deeply influential.

What about 2049 then? What did it get right? I shall tell you! The setting, replicated and extrapolated from the original, was nearly pitch perfect. The CGI was for the most part tastefully done. The technology of the future was passably extrapolated from the original, improving but not improving so much as to make it feel like things really work that well in this dingy future. The set design, including the use of distinctive lighting (very Ridley Scott) to set apart spaces and themes, was magnificent, creating interesting spaces throughout the movie (perhaps with the exception of the police offices). The ambient noise track I thought was gorgeous and kept me inside of the movie even as I could appreciate its craftsmanship.

So, what did 2049 get wrong? Everything else. The story was haphazard, the plot full of holes, and the grand 'reveal' at the end was entirely nonsensical, failing to explain the deepest mystery at the center of Gosling's questing. Little was done with the arch-villain, making me wonder if they're not setting up another sequel. Perhaps the worst facet of the presentation, however, was the heavy handedness of the moral sphere in which we are told to operate. From the very first scenes, Gosling the Replicant is derided and called silly epithets ("Skin Job") for no apparent reason. The real humans are laughably cruel toward him, and this point is made over, and over, and over again. Likewise, the notion that Replicants are slave labor, devoid (ostensibly) even of proper free will is poured over our heads like soggy noodles ad infinitum. In the original, the plight of the Replicants is in the background, but it is left largely to the viewer to form their understanding about them; we are not spoonfed emotions (which turn out not to stick well anyway, as we are always 'told' what to feel rather than having those feelings elicited through demonstration).

The pacing was also a bit awry. The movie felt VERY long (though I did not mind this that much, honestly, because the movie made good use of 'silent' scenes where we could simply watch the alien world do its thing), particularly in the beginning. It seems to have to do with modern movie-goer expectations, but a great deal of time, nearly the entire first half, was focused on 'world building', with the characters being merely expressions for showing how the world works. This is the flip from the original, and, for my part, something I preferred in the original. The original (and perhaps older works generally) was a story set in a fully realized world, though a world where we are not told (explicitly anyway) how everything works. 2049 eschews this either because it supposes what its audience wants or thinks its audience too stupid to pick up on subtleties; rather than being a story about people in a realized world, it is a story about the world through the people, if that makes sense. As such, the characters are never treated with sufficient reality to really elicit any strong feelings about them. Though maybe that's okay. At any rate, I would have preferred less hand holding to guide me along with what I was supposed to feel, and more attention to plot and characterization.

This movie earned 8 Wiffles out of 3 Mueslis. Worth seeing, especially in theaters (as I'm not sure the tiny, tiny, tiny explanatory texts will ever be visible on a screen smaller than 40 feet)

Dear Al Franken

Sure I'll get in trouble for this. Whatever. An open letter to Al Franken:

Dear Mr. Franken,

You shouldn't resign.

Here's why:
1) Your private shame is of less importance than your public duty.
2) Your political opponents will never give up, will never back down, and their constituents will support them so long as they are not forced from office.

No matter how sleazy a fellow it turns out you are, my understanding is that you've done some good in your time in the legislature. If you can still do good, then there is no reason to leave and every reason to stay. It is your duty to absorb all your shame and remain standing for as long as the people say. If the people want to be rid of you, they will do so through direct action or at the least not elect you in the next cycle.

If you are an actual servant of the people, then your duty is to remain until your service is complete.

Nothing here!

Ok no I'm not writing a real blog post. But I hope to soon!

So after getting back from my wilderness excursion, I was cast directly into Celtic Fest preparations. Lots of 10-14 hour days, and otherwise plenty of sleeping (thankfully). I was pretty strung out at the end of it there, but I'm getting back on my feet after a relatively light work week.

I want to go through Drakenschloss again but another reader (who I expected the worst from) gave a positive review, so it shouldn't be long now. I may have an actual artist for the cover this time! Very Excited.

Anyway, that's all for now, just wanted to drop a line now that I'm not dying in a ditch anymore. G'nite!

So...tired...more to come

More tired to come...uf...

So the last two weeks I've been working non-stop (either prepping for festival or trimming trees) and dog sitting, which equals long days and disturbed nights, as dogs wake me up a good bit. B (real name rescinded) especially keeps me up, the old devil. He's 16 and coughs and hacks and mutters to himself, and some nights he turns into a little gas cloud and the stink wakes me up.

Anyway, this coming week I'm going on an adventure. Going to go 'rough it' with a group, which I've never really done. Never roughed it. Looking forward, though I do wish I was going into it better rested. Also coughed up a lung money-wise to get all the necessary gear I didn't have and food for the week. So that's just to say, no updates for at least a week, and then gotta get right back to working after I'm back. No rest for the weary.