THE MT VOID
Mt. Holz Science Fiction Society
11/19/04 -- Vol. 23, No. 21 (Whole Number 1257)
El Presidente: Mark Leeper, mleeper@optonline.net
The Power Behind El Pres: Evelyn Leeper, eleeper@optonline.net
Back issues at http://www.geocities.com/evelynleeper
All material copyright by author unless otherwise noted.
All comments sent will be assumed authorized for inclusion
unless otherwise noted.
To subscribe, send mail to mtvoid-subscribe@yahoogroups.com
To unsubscribe, send mail to mtvoid-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com
Topics:
Turnabout Is Fair Play (comments by Mark R. Leeper)
Further Thoughts on the Limits of Multiculturalism
(comments by Mark R. Leeper)
Half-Tracks (letters of comment)
RAY (film review by Mark R. Leeper)
TRILOGY: THE WEEPING MEADOW (film review by Mark R. Leeper)
SALVADOR ALLENDE (film review by Mark R. Leeper)
This Week's Reading (BOOKS AND READING: A BOOK OF
QUOTATIONS; LETTER FROM NEW YORK; BRASS KNUCKLES;
and MURDER, MY DEAR WATSON) (book comments
by Evelyn C. Leeper)
===================================================================
TOPIC: Turnabout Is Fair Play (comments by Mark R. Leeper)
Seven score and one year ago today Abraham Lincoln gave the
Gettysburg address. [-mrl]
===================================================================
TOPIC: Further Thoughts on the Limits of Multiculturalism
(comments by Mark R. Leeper)
Last week I wrote about the trade-off of unrestrained
multiculturalism and the threat that we could be inviting real
enemies into our country. I said.
"I think we have to make some hard choices [as] to just what
boundaries we can afford to put on religious tolerance. We did
not allow the Mormons to practice polygamy, so there is one
precedent. We have to decide what limits we place on our
multiculturalism."
Charlie Harris responded:
"This is one of the rare occasions when I don't have a clue what
you're trying to say (or imply). What in the world does religious
tolerance have to do with terrorist violence? What hard choices
do we need to make about limits on multiculturalism? We already
don't allow people to go around killing people, whether or not
their religion tells them to. You say that Draconian surveillance
of 'radicals suspected to be likely to attack' is
unconstitutional, and anyway insufficient. So are you suggesting
that a larger group--all radicals? all Muslims?--should be
subjected to less intensive surveillance? The only new limit I
can think of is proscribing the advocacy of killing--which of
course would be unenforceable and ineffective."
Let me try to say it a little bit plainer. I am not trying to
imply anything about anybody, but that there are people who have
destructive agendas. Given that fact we should be thinking about
what our policy should ideally be. If you allow into your country
people who sincerely believe that it is right to kill all people
who disagree with them you will have serious problems. You likely
will have a war within your own country. If, in the spirit of
multi-cultural inclusion, you invite such people into your
country, the result will be murders and power struggles and very
possibly internal war. The first attacks in this war are
unexpected and so labeled terrorism.
Charlie says we don't let people kill other people, but I'm not so
sure we can prevent it. Even without the multicultural aspect,
when you see a headline that says "Man Shoots Wife Then Turns Gun
On Himself" is that really an action our society does not allow?
We don't condone it, but we can't stop it either. In what way
could we not allow it? By the same token by what mechanism do you
disallow suicide bombing? How do you punish an action that
includes suicide? And even if suicide is not part of it and you
arrest a few perpetrators seen by their own people as heroes and
martyrs to Allah, have you really disallowed it? There are many
in Europe who think not.
Deutsche Welle's European Press Review reported on these issues,
"In Vienna, Der Standard observed that multiculturalism doesn't
work where people are indifferent to it. Although one shouldn't
jump to conclusions so soon, it's no coincidence that religiously
and culturally driven violence has broken out in the Netherlands,
of all places. For decades Dutch society was seen as the most
tolerant in the world. That environment increased the already
strong immigration from predominantly Muslim former colonies. For
a long time, integrating the immigrants appeared to be not only
problem-free, but even downright exemplary. The murder of [Dutch
politician Pim] Fortuyn a year and a half ago suddenly made clear
that this notion was based largely on a mixture of illusion and
indifference. Multicultural Dutch society was so politically
correct that hardly anyone wanted to take a closer look."
I am not advocating any policy but that people think about a very
difficult issue that has to be resolved. The ideals of completely
unbridled multiculturalism and inclusiveness may not be ideal for
our society. Certainly the ideal of security is not either.
There is an unpleasant trade-off that has to be made, as the
people of the Netherlands are discovering this week. And there
are people in this country who are making knee-jerk responses
siding with one side or the other of this issue. I think I have
been an advocate for multiculturalism more than most people. I
have traveled a lot and seen and respected cultures all over the
world. But there are historical precedents, like the Thugee, that
convince me that I would not want to extent approval to all
possible cultures. [-mrl]
===================================================================
TOPIC: Half-Tracks (letters of comment)
John Sloan writes: "Sunset Limos in the Denver area is famous for
using stretch SUVs and stretch Hummers as limos (you'll know them
by their license places, "SUNSET 2", "SUNSET 4" etc.). Can a
stretch half-track really be far behind? How long would a
stretch-Greyhound bus be?"
This prompted Mark to ask if John had ever seen the film THE BIG
BUS, which did indeed feature a stretch bus. John replied,
"Thanks a lot. I had managed to repress that memory along with
all my other traumatic experiences . . . *until now*. Normally it
takes a quack hypnotist to bring this stuff to the surface, but
no, Mark Leeper does it with just one short code phrase, like
something out of THE MANCHURIAN CANDIDATE. I feel a spree of some
kind coming on. Probably a good thing you're in New Jersey. Did
sorta like the automatic bus wash, though...."
Jerry Williams said: "I actually worked for somebody that owned
several half-tracks and other armored personnel carriers. (He
also owned some tanks, but couldn't legally import them, at least
at the time.) You probably already guessed that he was an arms
dealer (a legitimate one, I assure you). His US operations didn't
deal with weapons (mostly army surplus and the like), but I
learned quite a few interesting things during that summer job
anyway (e.g., you can actually buy something very much like the RV
featured in "Stripes"). One minor glitch in your plan:
apparently, you need a permit any time you move a tracked vehicle
over a road. On the other hand, you can own a wheeled APC as long
as no machine guns are still mounted on it. My old boss used to
keep one in his driveway (no doubt only because it wouldn't fit in
the garage). He would use it for special occasions, such as Boy
Scout trips with his son. :-)"
Long-time correspondent Bill Higgins suggests that there is a
market: "You have struck a nerve. Ever since my teenage years, I
have been a lover of halftracks. This sales pitch really speaks
to me. So I may not be ready to become your partner, but if you
can come up with a shiny red M3, I might be a customer. (Truth be
told, I love the rakish lines of the Sonderkraftfahrzeug 251 more,
but with an M3, I would at least be the First Kid On My Block To
Own One.)"
Mark is tempted: "Uh, okay. Well, of course I was joking in the
editorial. I was just being silly. But, uh, just to run the
gag.... How much might you pony up, uh, what price range would
you consider reasonable for one of these really nice half-tracks?
I mean one really nicely appointed? In a sort of candy-apple red.
Looking really nice. Delivered to your front lawn? Isn't the
Sonderkraftfahrzeug 251 more a three-quarters track? I'm not an
expert, but I know how to use Google."
===================================================================
TOPIC: RAY (film review by Mark R. Leeper)
CAPSULE: As a biopic RAY follows a time-honored formula. Jamie
Foxx is magnetic as Ray Charles but does not show us enough inner
conflict. The film is at its best showing the roots of the
character. But the music is fine and is what will please
audiences. Rating: high +2 (-4 to +4) or 8/10
Bear with me a moment on this one. I watch movies from my
exercycle. I recently watched a film recorded off IFC that I had
never heard of. It was called TWO FAMILY HOUSE with Michael
Rispoli. He plays a lower-middle class Italian-American. Over
the course of three exercycle sessions on three different days his
character had me chuckling, had me angry, and actually had me
crying. While I was pumping away on the exercycle, his
performance cut through all the interference and actually brought
tears to my eyes. It is going to be a while before I will again
think about whether a performance is really good and not compare
it to Rispoli in TWO FAMILY HOUSE.
People are talking about Jamie Foxx for Best Actor for his
performance in RAY. He smiles like Ray Charles and he swings his
head like Ray Charles. With the makeup and glasses he looks like
Ray Charles. At the right point in his career he is itchy-fidgety
like Ray Charles was. His impression of Ray Charles is pretty
darn good. But does he show us the inner man? What about his
love for music? How can we tell what he feels about the music?
Other people in the film talk about how much Charles loves music.
At times the usual Ray Charles smile gets a little broader when he
has just finished a nice piece of music. At one point in an
argument with his girlfriend he spontaneously creates and bursts
forth with an almost complete "Hit the Road, Jack." But none of
this actually tells us much of the nature of the man or his ardor
for music. How is his character developed? Charles as we see him
likes sex and he likes drugs. There is nothing surprising about
that. He has waking nightmares from an incident in his childhood.
Still at the end of the film Jamie Foxx can truthfully sing "But
You Don't Know Me." And really we don't except on a superficial
level. In fact we probably get more emotion conveyed by the
performance of Tequan Richmond playing the ten-year-old Ray
Charles Robinson.
Still, while Foxx does perform the mannerisms it is hard to look
at anything else on that screen. He really is magnetic, and that
is acting of a sort. It is probably as much as the role allows,
since without the use of his eyes to convey his feeling he has to
remain something of a cipher. Foxx does as much as the script and
conditions allow, so I think that he is good, but it is not really
a great performance. He is at his best when he is haunted by
memories of his youth or is being honest about how he detests the
darkness and how it cuts him off from other people. But it does
not add up to an understanding.
The film starts with Ray Charles Robinson leaving home to make a
career of music. As he does we have flashbacks to his youth that
taken together form a second story line. As an adult he is
exploited by nearly everybody he meets, but nearly everybody
recognizes that he has real talent. In spite of his blindness he
seems to be able to function almost as if he can see. He cleverly
gets around many problems of the blind by using his hearing and
his memory. He insists that he be paid only in one-dollar bills
to avoid the danger of being short-changed. But he gets along and
eventually has contracts first with Atlantic Records and then with
ABC-Paramount. People may not be impressed by his style but they
are impressed by his talent. He refuses to be connected to one
kind of music, frequently changing his style. Sometimes the
strange combinations actually anger the public. When he mixes R&B
lyrics with Gospel-style music he angers an audience that
considers it blasphemy, but he quickly shifts gears and moves on
to other styles. Meanwhile we frequently flash to his past to see
the forces that formed him.
Those of us old enough can take the action of the film and peg it
to the actual years. I was in seventh grade when "Hit the Road,
Jack" was released. The period is recreated with camerawork that
frequently looks a lot like faded 1950s and 1960s home movies.
The background world may be at least as interesting as the
biography.
Musical biography films have used this same template since THE
JOLSON STORY. They show a lot of good in the person, a little
bad, and they pepper the film with the subject's best-loved
melodies. Then they show everybody (or everybody who counts)
loving or coming to love those melodies. Maybe some people don't
so much love the person who created that music, but everybody goes
mad for the music itself. That is THE JOLSON STORY, THE BUDDY
HOLLY STORY, LA BAMBA, GREAT BALLS OF FIRE, A SONG TO REMEMBER,
YOUR CHEATIN' HEART, and many others, including RAY. Taylor
Hackford directed as well as co-produced and co-wrote the film.
In 1980 he made one of the best films ever about the recording
industry, THE IDOLMAKER (a fictionalized biography of Bob
Marucci). And one reason it was good is that it didn't follow
that formula at all. I am a little disappointed that this second
foray into music industry films is less challenging.
It is hard to go wrong with a film that shows Southern
discrimination, sex, and drugs, and glues it together with the
soulful music of Ray Charles. This is not the most ambitious film
around, but it is entertaining. I rate it a high +2 on the -4 to
+4 scale or 8/10. [-mrl]
===================================================================
TOPIC: TRILOGY: THE WEEPING MEADOW (film review by Mark R. Leeper)
CAPSULE: The first of a trilogy of films by Greek director Theo
Angelopoulos tells the story of thirty tragic years in a woman's
life. Rating: low +2 (-4 to +4) or 7/10
This film is the first film of Greek director Theo Angelopoulos's
trilogy of films simply called TRILOGY. TRILOGY: THE WEEPING
MEADOW covers the life of one woman from 1919 to the late 1940s.
During this period the Greeks flee from Odessa, are involved
conflicts between the government and trade unions, enter World War
II, and have a civil war between fascists and communists. The
film runs almost three hours in length and uses an appreciable
chunk of Greek history as a backdrop.
Eleni (Alexandra Aidini) is adopted as a refugee from Odessa when
the revolution comes. In the family that adopts her there is a
boy her own age. As the boy grows up he shows musical talent and
Eleni is attracted to him, in spite of having been raised
essentially as his sister. But when Eleni comes of age, it is the
father of the family, Spyros (Vasilis Kolovos), who arranges to
marry her. On the wedding day Eleni runs away from the ceremony
where she would marry the father and runs off with the son. The
two become fugitives from Spyros.
Angelopoulos's trademark are his very long takes, perhaps no
shorter than those by Tarkovsky or Amos Gitai, but considerably
more detailed and interesting. He will pan across showing an
entire Greek village with its work and other activities. In
another scene he gives us a visual essay of a Greek funeral on
water. In this film water is always associated with pain and
death. Since the usual connection is with the life cycle he may
be saying that pain and death are just natural functions of life.
They certainly are for Eleni. Angelopoulos says he wants his film
to be a study of the human condition running with deep emotions
and sincerity. Certainly the predominant emotion we see in this
film is pain. It is a moving document, but not likely to get a
wide release in the United States, where killing and dying are
endemic in films but pain is a rarity.
I believe the next two parts of the trilogy will continue the
story of Eleni's life, though it is hard to believe with all the
experience and anguish in this film that she still has two-thirds
of her story to go. [-mrl]
===================================================================
TOPIC: SALVADOR ALLENDE (film review by Mark R. Leeper)
CAPSULE: This is an angry documentary about the rise and fall of
the socialist and populist Salvador Allende who was toppled from
power and committed suicide during a rightist coup in Chile.
Rating: high +1 (-4 to +4) or 6/10
Patricio Guzman takes a highly sympathetic view of the
controversial leftist president of Chile Salvador Allende and
documents the conspiracies against him. Allende was an
intellectual and a populist with strong socialist leanings. This
made him a threat to the Right Wing elements in his own country.
While his policies were at first effective when he was elected
president, he made powerful enemies, particularly among his
country's military, and the country fell into unrest and chaos.
At least twice there were attempts to remove him from office with
coups d'etat by the Chile military apparently aided by the
American Central Intelligence Agency. September 11, 1973 (another
tragic September 11), there was a violent military coup in Chile
and his palace was bombed. Allende committed suicide and Chile
was seized by a right wing military government led by General
Augusto Pinochet. The new government took control of the streets
in a reign of terror and mass murder. (Readers may remember an
account of those events in Costa-Gavras's film MISSING.) That
military regime held power for eighteen years. In the hands of
Guzman, Allende seems to be a president who had good ideas but who
failed to unite the extremist elements in his extremely polarized
country. By openly allying himself with Fidel Castro and by
nationalizing industries he clearly frightened and provoked an
extreme reaction from right wing elements inside (and
unfortunately also outside) his country.
Guzman's biographical study is not tremendously innovative as a
documentary. It is probably being chosen for film festivals
because the story it tells is political and shocking. At least
that is true if you have not heard before about what happened or
about the United States intelligence community's involvement. The
film's release comes at a time when ironically the American public
seems to be leaning toward wanting a more effective intelligence
community. The film shows the arts prospering under the first
year of Allende's leadership. Murals and decoration of roadways
has since been painted over by the new government. He seems to
have a lot of good ideas. But he did not have the power to do
what he needed to do, not unlike our own Jimmy Carter. SALVADOR
ALLENDE is an angry look of what might have been but wasn't.
Chilean Guzman captures the populist appeal of Allende's campaign
and the fervor many of the people felt for the candidate. [-mrl]
===================================================================
TOPIC: This Week's Reading (book comments by Evelyn C. Leeper)
"I find that a great part of the information I have was acquired
by looking up something and finding something else along the way."
--Franklin P. Adams
Dover Thrift Books started out as classics old enough to be in the
public domain. Sometimes this took the form of new poetry
anthologies, but containing entirely public-domain material. A
second form has been added, the anthology of quotations. One
advantage of the latter is that you can include quotations from
current authors and personalities without having to pay
royalties. I just finished BOOKS AND READING: A BOOK OF
QUOTATIONS, edited by Bill Bradfield (ISBN 0-486-42463-4), and you
will be seeing many of the quotations in weeks to come leading
this column.
Helene Hanff is best known for 84, CHARING CROSS ROAD. People may
also have heard of her books THE DUCHESS OF BLOOMSBURY STREET and
Q'S LEGACY, but she also wrote a few others, including APPLE OF MY
EYE (a guidebook to New York) and LETTER FROM NEW YORK (ISBN
0-060-97543-1), which is a collection of short radio pieces that she
recorded for the BBC. (The title is obviously patterned on
Alistair Cooke's long-running "Letter from America".) They make a
nostalgic portrait of New York of the 1970s; New York has changed
a lot since then. It's not up to her better-known books, though.
Frank Gruber's BRASS KNUCKLES had a United States publication, but
so long ago (1966) that it has no ISBN. Still, lots of copies are
available used through bookfinder.com. You also might run across
some of these stories in anthologies. Gruber wrote a lot of pulp
fiction; this book collects some of his stories featuring "Oliver
Quade, the Human Encyclopedia." Quade knows everything,
apparently from having read a set of encyclopedias through--four
times. And so he solves murders (or escapes from deathtraps)
using all sorts of arcane knowledge, (The escapes usually involve
chemistry and being able to construct an explosive from whatever
odds and ends happen to be there.)
MURDER, MY DEAR WATSON, edited by Martin H. Greenburg (ISBN
0-7867-1081-0), is yet another anthology of new Sherlock Holmes
stories. I am beginning to feel that these themed anthologies
have run their course--the stories in this are rather pale and
anemic for Sherlockian tales. This is not to say that no one is
writing good Sherlockian stories--last year's Neil Gaiman's "A
Study in Emerald" was great--but Greenberg does not seem to be
managing to collect or commission them. I am glad I checked this
one out of the library instead of buying it. [-ecl]
===================================================================
Mark Leeper
mleeper@optonline.net
Rennie's Law of Credibility: Scientists don't
always know best about matters of science--
but they're more likely to be right than the
critics who make that argument.