THE MT VOID
Mt. Holz Science Fiction Society
04/08/05 -- Vol. 23, No. 41 (Whole Number 1277)
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:
My Take on America (comments by Mark R. Leeper)
Farbling (letter of comment by Carl Aveyard)
Native Americans (letter of comment)
Movies about Books (letter of comment)
SIN CITY (film review by Mark R. Leeper)
KUNG FU HUSTLE (film review by Mark R. Leeper)
MINDSCAN by Robert J. Sawyer (book review by Joe Karpierz)
This Week's Reading (THE NAME OF THE ROSE, George Eliot's
LIFE AND LETTERS, and THE OXFORD BOOK OF ENGLISH
DETECTIVE STORIES) (book comments
by Evelyn C. Leeper)
===================================================================
TOPIC: My Take on America (comments by Mark R. Leeper)
On one of my mailing lists we were discussing American foreign
policy and someone said something that I found at once intriguing
and irritating. What he said was:
"We're a fanatical race, we Americans. The god we (that's the
root mean square 'we') believe in is a cartoon--Jesus as cowboy.
We very piously beseech this god to 'bless America', and in so
doing presume that he'll be at best indifferent--as we are--to
the rest of the world. Umm, that's indifferent to their cultures
and world views, of course. We've got a problem when we find
*our* resources, which are our birthright, under their sand."
I wanted to share my response and my take on America.
I think that there are those on the left wing who want to
exaggerate American's faults and see it as evil. You have those
on the right wing who want to characterize America as a paragon
of virtue. And the truth is somewhere in between with a lot of
space on either side. The writer is one of the people negative
on America, so my response will be about the gap on that side.
He says we are a fanatical race. We are actually not a race at
all. We are a combination of many cultures. And being a
combination of many cultures, in fact, has kept us fairly
sanguine. When we were a combination of fewer cultures we
committed atrocities against the native population, but the more
cultures consenting to co-exist here, the more reasonable we
become. Can anyone honestly look at people being stoned to death
in the Middle East or at the ovens of Auschwitz or any of fifty
other examples and still say we are amongst the most fanatical
countries in the world?
America does have strength in large part because of our unique
economic and geographical position. And we tend to use that
strength to unilaterally elect ourselves the world's policeman in
a world that desperately needs a policeman. And that is why we
tend to intervene in other countries' problems. It was actually
not for the giant oil fields of Somalia and Bosnia that we went
into those counties to intervene in their problems. In Bosnia
the mission was to save the lives of Moslems, and their religion
did not seem to be a big factor in that decision to intercede.
That was after Europe farbled and complained about what was going
on in Bosnia and debated and did some nothing and then some more
nothing--America is accused of racism for not intervening in the
Rwandan genocide. It would be accused of interventionism if we
had. It is a "damned if you do, damned if you don't" situation.
And most of the rest of the world is no better than Europe. I
have a lot of respect for Australians who seems to be a generally
very good people. But I lost some of that respect when I was in
their country in 1999. In August, when I was there, East Timor
chose independence from Indonesia. The territory fell into
barbarity as pro-Indonesian militias and the army engaged in a
campaign of terror and murder to suppress the people who stood
for independence. This was all taking place pretty much on
Australia's doorstep. And how was Australia reacting? People on
television were angrily and indignantly asking, "Why isn't
America doing something about it?" Australia was letting people
die and waiting for the Americans to come from half a world away
to set things right. Well, I do feel we are superior to some
people if you want to know. The people who will criticize
America as doing wrong no matter what it does are the people I
feel superior to.
Those of the right wing who think the United States is on a
mission from God and who are trying to turn this country into a
theocracy are every bit as wrong as the correspondent above.
But to my mind he is also every bit as wrong as they are. [-mrl]
===================================================================
TOPIC: Farbling (letter of comment by Carl Aveyard)
In repsonse to Mark's article on cold fusion in the 03/25/05
issue, Carl Aveyard says, "'Farbling'? Not in my OED...."
http://www.slangsite.com defines it as "To work aimlessly,http://www.slangsite.com defines it as "To work aimlessly,
amiably, without focus." I first heard it at the 1976 Worldcon
in Kansas City, when they said that the half-time entertainment
at the Masquerade would be extended because the judges were still
farbling. [-ecl]
===================================================================
TOPIC: Native Americans (letter of comment)
In response to Mark's article on attitudes towards Native
Americans in the 04/01/05 issue, Joseph T. Major wrote:
Your correspondent said "White Educated Folks dig up my
ancestors' graves and they call it archaeology, if I went and dug
up a two-hundred-year-old WEI [White European Immigrant] grave,
what would they call it?"
Archaeology.
Read MARTIN'S HUNDRED by Ivor Noel Hume where he discusses the
digging up of graves of "White European Immigrants" in the
Martin's Hundred settlement near Williamsburg, Virginia, as part
of an archaeological investigation of the site.
Some of those people might have been my ancestors, you know. [-
jtm]
Mark responded, "Point taken, though I would think that is more
like 350 years."
And Fred Lerner wrote:
When I was in St. Petersburg I remarked on how much the exhibits
on the native peoples of Siberia in the State Ethnographic Museum
resembled those on native North American peoples in the great
American natural-history museums. Traditionally North American
museum keepers seem to have regarded ethnography as a branch of
natural history. Perhaps this is because we never had a colonial
empire in the European sense, and so no perceived need for
something like the Tropical Museum in Amsterdam, which
commemorated the Dutch colonies in Surinam and the Indies. You
seemed to hint at a more sinister explanation: perhaps it's
because defining Native Americans as a natural phenomenon rather
than a complex of civilisations made it easier to justify their
subjugation.
In any case, the question of whether Native artifacts belong in a
"natural history" museum seems irrelevant to whether it's
appropriate to exhibit such works in an art museum. And I can't
see any reason to lament or discourage the exhibition of
contemporary work by Native artists in art museums. (I stipulate
the exception of those works whose exhibition would contravene
religious or cultural taboos subscribed to by the artist.) [-fl]
===================================================================
TOPIC: Movies about Books (letter of comment)
Evelyn's request for films about movies about books and bookstores
in the 04/01/05 issue generated a lot of response.
Even before the issue was sent out, Mark responded: "Can I start
you out? People study books and a book starts a romance in
FIDDLER ON THE ROOF. Also there are BEAUTY AND THE BEAST (the
Disney version), THE BIG SLEEP, BOULEVARD OF BROKEN DREAMS, LA
DISCRETE, LE DIVORCE, THE EVIL DEAD I & II, THE FRISCO KID, FINAL
CUT, I MADMAN, LOVE AND MONEY, THE NAME OF THE ROSE, NEVERENDING
STORY I & II, NOTTING HILL, THE PAGEMASTER, PROSPERO'S BOOKS,
SERENDIPITY, THE STONE READER, TALES FROM BEYOND, TO THE DEVIL A
DAUGHTER, TURTLE DIARY, UNFAITHFUL, WRESTLING ERNEST HEMINGWAY,
and YENTL. I can give you more if you include comic books (e.g.,
UNBREAKABLE) or people who read books in libraries (e.g., IPCRESS
FILE, NIGHT OF THE DEMON) or films with scenes in bookstores
(e.g., THE ETERNAL SUNSHINE OF THE SPOTLESS MIND, UNTIL SUNSET,
and THE MYTH OF FINGERPRINTS.)
Fred Lerner asked, "Has anyone ever made a movie of Christopher
Morley's THE HAUNTED BOOKSHOP?" The answer is no. Mark noted
that the only Morley book adapted to film seems to be KITTY
FOYLE: THE NATURAL HISTORY OF A WOMAN. Lerner responded, "His
novels PARNASSUS ON WHEELS and its sequel THE HAUNTED BOOKSHOP
are justifiably beloved by bibliophiles. I'm surprised that they
haven't been filmed. I wonder if they were ever adapted for
television. Though on second thought, I doubt that their target
audience would bother to watch them!"
Steve Lelchuk also recommended THE NEVERENDING STORY.
===================================================================
TOPIC: SIN CITY (film review by Mark R. Leeper)
CAPSULE: The flash is exaggerated and the plot has minimal
importance in this hyper-noir crime story based on Frank Miller's
graphic novel. To take a phrase from the script, it is "loud and
nasty." I have more respect than affection for this admittedly
successful effort to give a film the feel of a graphic novel.
But the characters were just not developed and the story has the
resonance of a "Heavy Metal" comic book story. Rating: +1 (-4
to +4) or 6/10
What's black and white and red all over? Well, one answer is the
blood-soaked, enhanced-monochrome adaptation of Frank Miller's
graphic novel SIN CITY. In this film co-directors Robert
Rodriguez and Frank Miller do for film noir what Sergio Leone did
for the western. They make a film that is solid dramatic scenes
without the plot connective tissue. I cannot say that there was
no plot to SIN CITY. By the end of the film the pieces
remarkably seem to add up to a kind of plot. (Please don't write
me for explanations. I may have followed the plot for at most
five minutes and then I might have been fooling myself.) But
from one scene to the next the writers seem to be just throwing
in plot complications that lead to more sensationalized scenes.
This film has multiple castrations, a hanging, many nearly nude
women, multiple serial killers, corrupt politicians . . . the
list goes on and on and on and on.
SIN CITY has two kinds of scenes, those that are highly-charged
and those that are super-charged. For me the excess of excess of
excess became off-putting. The story has not one really
interesting character and probably not one uninteresting scene.
The dialog is not just over-ripe, it is downright fermented.
Understanding how any specific scene fits into the overall plot
is not only pointless, it is nearly impossible. Perhaps it is
best for the viewer to just let the film wash over him. There
are multiple plots including one with the mob trying to take over
Oldtown. That the seedy neighborhood of a place called Basin
City that seems to have equal parts of New York and Los Angeles.
Also, there are interlocking plots concerning two or three serial
killers.
This is a film of much more style than substance. Even if the
scenes all fit together to make a plot, it would be a rather
hackneyed one. One scene after another is soaked in blood and
testosterone. If you drew a line from Raymond Chandler to Mickey
Spillane and extended it out three times you would get to SIN
CITY.
Maybe there is not more blood than in other film but it just
seems there is a lot because it is highlighted. The film is shot
in color then the color is removed entirely or with the possible
exception of one or two objects in a scene. Maybe the entire
scene will be monochrome and just the copious splattered blood
will be in vivid red. This was a visual technique pioneered in
the 1992 film ZENTROPA and in television ads for some "simple
yellow pill" whose name I have forgotten. Stephen Spielberg also
used it for some scenes of SCHINDLER'S LIST. Here the technique
combines with Robert Rodriguez's terrific photography to recreate
the potent if less than realistic images of the art work in a
Frank Miller comic book. And the imitation of graphic style is
impressive.
Bruce Willis plays John Hartigan, a misunderstood hero with a
good heart and a bad one (figuratively and medically
respectively). This is a film that is top-heavy with familiar
faces, some in unfamiliar make-up. Without knowing he was in the
film, I spotted Mickey Rourke, but I was proud of myself for
doing so. Also along are notables like Elijah Wood, Benicio Del
Toro, Michael Clark Duncan, Josh Hartnett, Michael Madsen, Clive
Owen, Nick Stahl, Rutger Hauer, and Powers Booth. Wow, that is
an impressive cast, and at least they know to not play the film
tongue-in-cheek.
This is a film full of testosterone-stoked cliches. There is a
lot of sound and fury but not much in the way of any substance.
But visually it is hypnotic. On balance I rate it +1 on the -4
to +4 scale or 6/10.
(Available on DVD.)
[-mrl]
===================================================================
TOPIC: KUNG FU HUSTLE (film review by Mark R. Leeper)
[This review was originally printed in the 01/07/05 issue of the
MT VOID, but since the film is getting its United States release
today, we are reprinting it.]
CAPSULE: From the director of SHAOLIN SOCCER comes this satire on
the Shaw Brothers martial arts films, which is live-action but
takes on the style of a cartoon. It is a very funny film, even
for people who are not kung fu enthusiasts. Rating: high +2 (-4
to +4) or 8/10
Very few comedies actually make me actually laugh out loud. I did
not have high expectations of a film with a title like KUNG FU
HUSTLE. Martial arts films usually do not do much for me. To say
I laughed out loud is one of the highest compliments I can give a
comedy. All my low expectations were dashed. This film written
by, directed by, and starring Stephen Chow was the funniest comedy
I saw in 2004.
The scene is the 1940s and the story opens in a police station
with a super-elite squad of police being mopped up by the
incredible force of one legendary street gang. I mean these guys
are really tough. After totally destroying the police the gang
walks out to the street only to run into The Axe Gang. The gang
that the police could not stop is in seconds wiped out by the even
more incredibly powerful Axe Gang. These are people in their
suits, ties, and top hats that never even get mussed and are not
to be trifled with. The Axe Gang members are mean and they are
powerful. They also dance very stylishly. Their influence has
spread just about everywhere but to a little slum called Pig Sty
Alley. This looks like just a normal low-rent section of
Shanghai. The residents play off of each other in very normal
ways. Living there is not easy and it has made the denizens
tough. Now the super-powerful Axe Gang wants to take over the
streets of Pig Sty Alley. The smart money would bet on the Axe
Gang. But then the smart money doesn't live in Pig Sty Alley if
it is really smart. The Axe Gang finds taming this one little
slum neighborhood will take more than they could ever imagine.
This wild satire of old Shaw Brothers' kung fu films is live
action but has the level of reality of a Chuck Jones cartoon. The
unexpected and hilarious happens time after time, catching the
viewer by surprise. The mammoth battles are outdone by the
supreme battle. The supreme battles are brushed away by the
ultimate battles and the ultimate battles are pushed aside by even
more absolute battles. Stephen Chow previously directed SHAOLIN
SOCCER, a film that enjoyed great popularity worldwide. After
seeing KUNG FU HUSTLE I rented SHAOLIN SOCCER. Stephen Chow seems
to get better with every film. I give KUNG FU HUSTLE a rating of
a high +2 (-4 to +4) or 8/10. [-mrl]
===================================================================
TOPIC: MINDSCAN by Robert J. Sawyer (copyright 2005, TOR, $24.95,
303pp, ISBN 0-765-31107-0) (book review by Joe Karpierz)
I've said that the best science fiction is not about the gadgets
or the technology, but about how the gadgets or technology affect
the lives of the characters in the story (that's not to say that
I don't think the cool techie stuff isn't important or that I
don't like it--I love it). MINDSCAN is the *perfect* example of
this statement. Indeed, it is not only that--it is a tremendous
example of how technology affects an entire species.
MINDSCAN is the latest novel from Hugo-winning Canadian author
Robert J. Sawyer. Sawyer's novels have always been full of
ideas, and this one is no different. In traditional Sawyer
fashion, this novel tells a terrific story in a straightforward,
"let's not intentionally confuse the reader" fashion. In my
opinion, this is what makes him one of the top writers in the
field today.
Oh yeah--the book. :-)
The story takes place in our century (remember when a story
taking place in the 21st century was futuristic?). The
technology to copy one's consciousness and have it loaded into an
android body has been developed. It is, of course, a technology
available only to the rich--at least for now. And so our main
characters, Jake Sullivan (heir to a large Canadian brewery
business), and Karen Bessarian (an author whose background is
based on J.K. Rowling), are fairly filthy rich. People who
undergo the Mindscan process are generally old, infirm, and dying
--they want to live a longer life. Jake is not old--he is about
my age (no wisecracks from the editor of this fine electronic
publication, please :-)), but he has a condition which could
cause him to keel over at any moment. So, since he wants to live
longer than he's likely to, he undergoes the process. Karen is
old--her popular dinosaur novels are years behind her, but she
wants to continue to write--so she undergoes the process.
But there is, of course, a catch (there's *always* a catch)--once
your consciousness is copied into (onto?) the android, your
original body--your shed skin, if you will--is shipped off to the
far side of the moon to live out the rest of its days without
ever seeing or talking to its android counterpart. The Mindscan
copy is now the real you, since you've signed your rights over to
it.
And so leads to the dual conflicts in the story. A cure is found
for Jake's condition, and after he undergoes the curative surgery
he wants to go back to earth and lead his normal life. Karen's
son is suing her android for access to the estate--his claim is
that his real mother is dead, that the android has no claim to
either her estate or her life. To complicate matters a little
more, the android Jake and Karen are now romantically involved.
The remainder of the novel investigates the issue of just what
makes up a person--what makes them real, what makes them
conscious, what makes them who they are. Is the person the body,
is it the consciousness, is it the soul? (As an interesting by-
play to this whole thing, the head of the Roman Catholic Church,
Pope John Paul II, passed away recently. If the Mindscan process
were available today, would he undergo it, and then would the
android pope be considered a real person and the actual
representative of the Christian God here on Earth? Indeed, if
so, would the worldwide Catholic population accept a machine as
the head of the Church? Just asking.) And does it matter if the
consciousness is inside a mechanical body?
The book takes on another challenge--that of telling a story from
two different viewpoints that are the same character. Sawyer
takes on this challenge and does a terrific job. It also isn't
afraid to tackle the issues mentioned in the previous paragraph
(other than the Pope--there's another story in there
somewhere[*]), but there are many more that could have been
covered in a much longer novel. But the novel isn't long because
it doesn't need to be. Sawyer tells the story he wants to in a
tightly compacted fashion--he always does. The story he wants to
tell here is really the beginning of the effect that the Mindscan
process has on humanity--the rest of the story is not the point--
although if he wants to revisit this particular setting, I dare
say he could write three or four novels about this.
All in all, to quote someone else, this is vintage Sawyer. Pick
this one up. You'll love it. [-jak]
[(*) I reminded Joe that Clifford Simak did something similar to
this in PROJECT POPE. -ecl]
===================================================================
TOPIC: This Week's Reading (book comments by Evelyn C. Leeper)
I watched the film THE NAME OF THE ROSE recently, so I decided to
re-read the Umberto Eco novel (ISBN 0-156-00131-4). The movie
was actually a fairly decent adaptation, as these things go. But
a lot of the theological discussion had to be cut, and they had
to give it a Hollywood ending (i.e., the library still burns, but
the girl survives). This is similar to the adaptation of THE
CLUB DUMAS by Arturo Perez-Reverte into the film THE NINTH GATE.
In that, one reason for the title change was that the entire
Alexander Dumas thread was dropped. I suppose that means we
could still see a movie called THE CLUB DUMAS which contains that
thread. Somehow, though, I doubt there will be another movie of
THE NAME OF THE ROSE containing the theological threads.
George Eliot's LIFE AND LETTERS (no ISBN) is an interesting
attempt at autobiography edited by Eliot's husand J. W. Cross.
(You did know that George Eliot was a pen-name for Mary Ann
Evans, right?) It consists of close to a thousand pages of
letters and extracts from letters, along with connecting and
explanatory comments by Cross. I've seen similar collections of
letters for other people, but I think Cross put in more
additional material than is usual. Of course, if you are not a
fan of Eliot's novels, this is not going to appeal to you, and
even if you are, this is out of print. But it's still around a
bit, and a research library might have a copy.
THE OXFORD BOOK OF ENGLISH DETECTIVE STORIES edited by Patricia
Craig (ISBN 0-192-80375-1) is a 1990 collection of the classics
of that genre. It is a great collection, even if the people who
are most likely to be interested in it are also the most likely
to have read many of the stories already. It might make a good
gift for someone who has just discovered the English detective
story, though, and needs a sampler to see which authors he might
like. [-ecl]
===================================================================
Mark Leeper
mleeper@optonline.net
The temptation shared by all forms of
intelligence: cynicism.
--Albert Camus