THE MT VOID
Mt. Holz Science Fiction Society
10/28/05 -- Vol. 24, No. 18, Whole Number 1306
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:
Pulp Covers (site pointer)
National Novel Writing Month (comments by Tim Yao)
Astrology in the Classroom (comments by Mark R. Leeper)
Your Horoscope (comments by Mark R. Leeper)
Without Power (comments by Mark R. Leeper)
Are Movies Better Than Ever? (comments by Mark R. Leeper)
Intelligent Design (letter of comment
by Gerald S. Williams)
Foreigners (letter of comment by George MacLachlan)
WAR OF THE WORLDS (film review by Mark R. Leeper)
GOOD NIGHT, AND GOOD LUCK (film review by Mark R. Leeper)
SEVEN SWORDS (film review by Mark R. Leeper)
This Week's Reading (THE BOOKSELLER OF KABUL,
GALLIMAUFREY TO GO, MASTERS OF MYSTERY,
TRENT'S LAST CASE, DEVIL IN A BLUE DRESS,
and INTO AFRICA) (book comments by Evelyn C. Leeper)
===================================================================
TOPIC: Pulp Covers (site pointer)
The whole site is pretty darn impressive, but this page is an
archive of virtually ALL science fiction magazine covers from 1926
to 1966 including list of contents if you go far enough.
http://www.noosfere.com/showcase/pulps__magazines_americains.htm
Also a good place to practice your French. The same site has
artwork by artist.
Another site, http://www.coverpop.com/visco.php, has a similar
archive, but can only be accessed randomly. It is fun, though.
[-mrl]
===================================================================
TOPIC: National Novel Writing Month (comments by Tim Yao)
Tim Yao writes us:
I was wondering if you and Mark had run across NaNoWriMo
(National Novel Writing Month). See http://www.nanowrimo.org.
It is a completely free contest with supporting (and very active)
web forum that challenges people to complete a novel of at least
50,000 words in the month of November. I've met this goal twice
(though, technically speaking, my second novel isn't complete
though it is longer than the first) and I am a volunteer
municipal liaison for the Chicago western suburbs this year.
Just thought maybe you and your readers might be interested in
this (I think that most SF&F fans have at least thought of
writing their own novels...). [-ty]
We hadn't run across it but we have now. Thanks, Tim. [-mrl]
===================================================================
TOPIC: Astrology in the Classroom (comments by Mark R. Leeper)
This appeared in the news just a bit too late to make it into my
editorial of last week. A major advocate of the teaching of the
"theory" of Intelligent Design, Michael Behe, a biochemist at
Lehigh University in Bethlehem, Pennsylvania, admitted on the
witness stand that by his definition astrology would also be
considered a scientific theory. This gave his supporters second
thoughts.
I suppose that one might argue that it would not hurt to tell
students that there are those who do believe that the stars
control our destinies. That there are people who believe such
things may be something that students could usefully know. But
it is not one of the most important facts that students could be
learning. The advocates of Intelligent Design might well not be
happy if what was taught was the fact that there are people who
believe in Intelligent Design and people who believe in
astrology. I am reminded that the same advocates of prayer in
the classroom wanted the prayer to come from only certain
specified religions and were horrified that neo-pagan prayers
might be included alongside Christian prayers.
Details at http://www.newscientist.com/article.ns?id=dn8178.
[-mrl]
===================================================================
TOPIC: Your Horoscope (comments by Mark R. Leeper)
(Due to economy concerns we cannot provide complete horoscopes.
Your cooperation is appreciated.)
Everyone: Last week I told everybody to go back to the sign they
were born under. I think some clarification is in order. The
star patterns have precessed since the horoscope was first made.
People are not actually born under their birth sign. Some of you
are trying to switch signs because you were not actually born
under your sign. This is just a technicality. In fact, nobody
was born under his or her sign. That is just the way things are.
Deal with it. I am just sorry I started this whole mess. Go back
to the horoscope sign you had a year ago. Surely you have brains
enough to do that. [-mrl]
===================================================================
TOPIC: Without Power (comments by Mark R. Leeper)
I read in the news that there are six million people in Florida
without power. Is it only six million? I would have thought
there had to be more people without power or Jeb Bush would not
be governor. (Okay, so it is a cheap shot.) [-mrl]
===================================================================
TOPIC: Are Movies Better Than Ever? (comments by Mark R. Leeper)
Last month I was at the Toronto International Film Festival. A
week or so before the festival we go through a process of
choosing the films that we wanted to see. For years I had been
picking films by whether the film sounded good or not. Some
turned out to be good, and some were stinkers. This year I had
chose films in a sort of unorthodox manner. I was actually
making the description of the film a low priority in my decision
criteria. I had discovered in the past that they would choose
some venues for the films they thought were worthy and I made the
location much more important in by choosing algorithm. Choosing
films by where they were playing I had dubbed "Feng Shui film
selection." Evelyn and a friend who goes with us both tried to
convince me that it was silly to choose this way. But I thought
it was worth a try.
Evelyn would tell people about this choice technique if we talked
to them waiting for films. Towards the middle of the festival I
told her not to tell anyone else how we were picking films
because we were very successful and it might kill the odds if too
many people knew how to choose very good films. The simple fact
was we were seeing one good film after another. Usually we were
lucky if we got one or two good ones a day. This year we seemed
to be getting a lot of good films. Usually you are lucky if you
pick one film that impresses you. This year we were impressed by
a lot. Rather than one film a day in my +2 range we would get
maybe two or maybe three. Of 45 films, 22 where low +2 or
better. That is a fairly good rating.
Eventually we realized that other people were telling us that
they were also seeing more good films this year than in previous
years. What I eventually decided is that our success may have
had little to do with The Feng Shui of Film Choice. There really
were better films coming out this year.
Eventually we realized that other people were telling us that
they were also seeing more good films this year than in previous
years. What I eventually decided is that our success may have
had little to do with The Feng Shui of Film Choice. There really
were better films coming out this year.
Then I started putting two and two together. This has been a
very bad year for film ticket sales. For many years the film
industry has realized that the engine that pulled the industry is
the teenage audience, particularly the male teenage audience.
This year that audience is not going to the movies as much.
The younger audience was not considered so important until that
late 1970s. Blockbusters like JAWS and STAR WARS had really
brought in a teenage audience in large numbers. These really are
the people who spend a lot on entertainment. The industry chose
to zero in on this audience. We got a lot of high action films.
We got a lot of science fiction and horror films. We got films
based on new media that spoke the language of teens: video games
and comic books.
Serious films with intellectual content were not selling to the
teen audience and generally retreated to be seen mostly in art
houses. There was still an audience for better films and
companies with names like Miramax, October, Focus, and Lion's
Gate served that audience, but the major studios were not making
that sort of film. As it happens to the film industry every few
years, new technology comes along and shakes it up. First there
was radio, then television, and then the video revolution. Now
there are inexpensive DVDs that bring films to market not a long
time after the films played in theaters. Speaking for myself,
these days when a good film comes out that is getting good
reviews I first put it on my Netflix queue, then I look to see if
it is playing in theaters. I can always remove it from my queue
later if I see it in a theater. The studio makes a lot less
profit on me renting a film from Netflix.
So more mature viewers are not as dependent on the theaters.
Meanwhile the teen audience is getting their fun cell-phoning to
friends, instant messaging, surfing the Internet. They have
something akin to movies on PlayStations and Xboxes, but there
they get to participate in the explosions and chases and fights.
The medium for them is going from being passive to interactive.
The writing in the traditional sense is not very important to this
audience. A teen on a PlayStation is not very concerned about
the human condition.
Meanwhile, the theaters are becoming less inviting to mature
viewers. The price of tickets has been going up each year. A
generation brought up with less emphasis on manners has really
hurt the theater viewing experience badly. Then theaters are
trying to keep profits up by showing more non-film ads. They
increase the prices at the concession stands. Theaters have been
saving money by hiring inexperienced people to run the theaters.
Incompetence in running theaters is taking a toll in the viewing
experience with obvious and irritating errors in projection.
Theaters are not being very well cleaned.
Some of the theaters in my area are taking some modest counter-
action. They are lowering the price of admission at some times
when the young crowd cannot come. They are having ushers come in
to patrol the theaters and look for offensive behavior. They are
trying to make the theaters friendlier to mature audiences.
People over thirty may not be the target audience yet, but they
are definitely more in the film industry's mind. With the teen
dollar moving away from theaters there may be less money overall
invested in films and a bigger proportion of what is there will
be going after a more mature market.
One principle that the industry may be reminded of is that good
writing may be a better investment than good special effects.
Perhaps an investor knows he can put a lot of money into effects
and it will get something nice put on a screen. But these days
the visual effects alone will not guarantee success. Investing
in writing and acting may prove to yield a better return. It may
no longer be the greater gamble.
So as much as I would like to think that my wacko formulae was
what got us better films to see at Toronto, it may well be that
there are other reasons we had such a good year in Toronto. It
may be that the film industry is trying to get its act together
and make less flashy but better films. I hope so. [-mrl]
===================================================================
TOPIC: Intelligent Design (letter of comment by Gerald S. Williams)
Jerry Williams responds to Mark's article on Intelligent Design
that appeared in the 10/21/05 issue of the MT VOID:
I haven't read "On Pandas and People" (if I have the name right),
nor am I interested in the details behind that particular
argument. However, I think that the scientists are wrong on this
one. At least, they are wrong in the sense that their arguments
are flawed. The main argument I hear used is that Intelligent
Design is "Bad Science". This is a flawed argument on multiple
counts:
1.) School is about learning, not science. And it doesn't matter
that Biology is generally considered a science course--it all
used to be considered "philosophy" at one point. If you narrow
your vision of what may be taught to only what you currently
teach, you've just guaranteed stagnation (and worse). So it's
okay to talk about a little history or philosophy in a "science"
class.
2.) Darwinism is bad science. When learning about it in school,
I remember realizing that it doesn't add up, at least not as
presented. There are many situations where a slow-and-steady
process of random mutations could not explain the rate of certain
evolutionary processes. The theory is incomplete unless you add
some factor that accelerates and even targets these mutations.
Yet this is not (or at least was not) the way it was taught. No,
we were supposed to simply accept that random mutations over
millennia are the key even though it doesn't *really* stand up to
close examination in at least some cases. This is not good
science. If there are biologists who think that it really does
stand up to close examination without enhancing the theory, then
my challenge to them is to update the curriculum and prove it.
If you don't do that, you've failed to teach it properly.
3.) Intelligent Design does poke at some holes in what we like to
teach as known science. By questioning the validity of an
existing theory, it is doing a service to science, not a
disservice. Are we afraid the theory can't survive the question?
If not, it should ultimately be refined and strengthened by
further questioning. Suppressing any who question existing
theory will have the opposite effect.
You've probably heard it said that we no longer teach people how
to reason in the United States. I think this is just another
example. If we spent the time to teach science that actually
stands up to criticism, it would stand up against questions such
as this one. This type of debate should be welcomed.
So my answer to any scientists attacking Intelligent Design is
that they should spend more time shoring up evolutionary theory
than attacking those that question it. Such attacks are attacks
on reason itself.
P.S. There are a few things that could be done (IMHO) in order to
make Intelligent Design more palatable:
First, stop calling it a theory. If you want it to look like
science, call it a refutation. I don't know whether it is the ID
camp or its opponents that call it a theory, though.
Second, any time it mentions the possibility of an intelligent
designer, qualify it as in the following example: "This strongly
suggests the presence of an intelligent designer, such as the
Flying Spaghetti Monster." [-gsw]
===================================================================
TOPIC: Foreigners (letter of comment by George MacLachlan)
Been following your thread on slang terms for foreigners or
outsiders. Your interesting observation that most start with a
'G' reminded me that the Japanese use the term "Gaijin" for
foreigners. (I suspect you already know this, but since you
didn't include it in your list, I thought I'd pass it along.)
[-gfm]
I believe the Gaelic term for foreigner or outsider is
"sassenach", which roughtly translates as "outlander".
[Mark replies on "gaijin", "Of course. My memory must be going.
-mrl]
===================================================================
TOPIC: WAR OF THE WORLDS (film review by Mark R. Leeper)
CAPSULE: This is a somewhat faithful but otherwise unsavory and
highly unsatisfying updating of the H. G. Wells novel. Aliens
conquer the world in six-legged crab-like war machines. The film
has the impact of a Sci-Fi Channel film and the writing may not
even be that good. Overall this is the least satisfying of the
four film adaptations to date. Rating: 0 (-4 to +4) or 4/10
There have been six major dramatizations of H. G. Wells's 1898
novel THE WAR OF THE WORLDS. It has been adapted as a radio
play, a rock opera, and four times as a film. Of the films, one
was released in 1953 and three were released in June 2005. This
version was directed and edited by David Michael Latt. Of the
six versions, Latt's version arguably ranks second in being
faithful to the novel but dead last in entertainment value. Latt
updates the story to the present, as do three of the other
versions. But actually a fair amount of the content of the Wells
novel made it to the screen, even if it is in barely recognizable
form.
C. Thomas Howell plays Dr. George Herbert (cute name), an
astronomer who plans to go on vacation with his wife and son.
But what is this? There are strange sightings in the sky. They
make him send his family on ahead as he investigates the odd
phenomena. It is not long before the cylinders are falling and
the explosions beginning.
The most striking thing about this version is that the film
itself is not striking at all. If this were not based on the
Wells, it would seem like just one more weak made-for-television
monster quickie. The writing frequently is embarrassing.
Because there would be little time for sex in the story, one of
the first scenes of the film shows the main character's wife
nude. It is almost as if the screenwriter had it on a checklist
of required script features: "One scene with nudity. Check."
Later as people look over the sandpit with the aliens--they are
never identified as Martians--one of the women comments, "It
smells like ass." Thank you, that was a piece of imagination I
did not need.
The war machines are not what Wells described. They appear to be
crab-like bionic machines combining biology and machinery.
Making the machines more biological, beyond just using biology to
suggest shape, has rarely been done even in illustrations of the
books. That is probably the best point of this film. Beyond
that the film is just not interesting visually. Digital effects
are added trying to make it spectacular, but in very
unimaginative ways. Inexplicably when the cylinders land they
explode like missiles. That has to be hard on the aliens inside,
but the filmmakers have not thought this aspect through. But a
centerpiece of other film versions, a cylinder landing and
crashing into a house, is shown instead from inside the house for
a less expensive but also less impressive effect.
There is little reason to want to see this version of WAR OF THE
WORLDS beyond the visualization of the Martian war machines. The
updating to the 21st century in New Jersey and Washington D.C. is
uninteresting. The film loses the majesty and the impact of the
original story. It is one of two low-budget me-too production
timed to correspond with the release of Steven Spielberg's
adaptation. The other "me-too" managed a minor trump on
Spielberg by setting the story in Wells's period and by using
stylized effects rather than attempting photo-realism. None have
captured the thrill of George Pal's version. This version is not
really much worth seeing I rate it a low 0 on the -4 to +4 scale
or 4/10.
(Available on DVD. Mark Leeper reviewed Timothy Hines's version
of H. G. Wells's WAR OF THE WORLDS in the 06/24/05 issue of the MT
VOID, Steven Spielberg's version in the 07/01/05 issue, and the
original in the 07/08/05 issue. Kate Pott also reviewed all three
in the 07/08/05 issue.) [-mrl]
===================================================================
TOPIC: GOOD NIGHT, AND GOOD LUCK (film review by Mark R. Leeper)
CAPSULE: Director George Clooney gives us a very fine film and
David Strathairn gives a superior performance as Edward
R. Murrow. This is a short but riveting account of a legendary
journalist taking on the strongest forces of Red Scare politics
and using the medium of television as a powerful tool rather than
an entertaining toy. The only misstep is in the overuse of jazz
interludes. Rating: +3 (-4 to +4) or 9/10
GOOD NIGHT, AND GOOD LUCK is a long overdue cinematic tribute to
one Egbert Roscoe Murrow, known better as Edward R. Murrow, an
American who achieved the status of hero in a field that does not
generate many heroes, broadcast journalism. Murrow combined in
one person an incisive mind that made him a superb writer, a deep
voice that had a quality of always sounding like the Voice of
Reason incarnate, a face that was eloquent of integrity, and the
will and courage to do the right thing even at risk to his
career. He also had a position that allowed him the opportunity
to martial all these qualities where they could do a substantial
good. Had he been missing any of these features--if, say, he had
a voice like Truman Capote's--he could not have inspired in the
American people the confidence that he did.
GOOD NIGHT, AND GOOD LUCK is a concise film, only 90 minutes,
about an important chapter in Murrow's life. In 1953 and 1954,
while working at the CBS network, Murrow exposed government
excesses during the paranoia of the Red Scare. He dared to take
on both the military and Senator Joseph McCarthy in their red-
baiting and exposed their hypocrisy. This brought him into
conflict not only with both and also with his CBS management.
His bosses were was less enthusiastic to take risks this cause,
even if they sympathized. The film also looks at that network's
willingness to compromise Murrow's hard-hitting, responsible
journalism for safe political positions and more lucrative
entertainment.
In the film Murrow is willing to sign an oath of loyalty to the
United States, but not to compromise his positions. He soon is
doing an expose investigating the story of Milo Radulovitch, an
airman dismissed from his position because of a dubious legal
case that he was a security threat. This brings Murrow to
Senator Joseph McCarthy's attention and McCarthy strikes back.
The senator attempts to use smear tactics on Murrow. In the
attempt McCarthy destroys his own credibility.
George Clooney co-writes, directs, and plays a leading role in
this succinct film about America's greatest broadcast news
journalist. The script that Clooney co-wrote with Grant Heslov,
himself more frequently an actor, is unusually intelligent. The
dialog we hear in the newsroom sounds real and not simplified to
make it more immediately understandable for the audience. The
narrative is kept intense and compelling. The one flaw in the
film, however, was the insertion of several jazz songs as breaks
in the story flow. The songs sung by Dianne Reeves comment on
the action, but they are superficial comments at best that do not
really tell a lot about the action. Their interruption quickly
becomes unwelcome.
David Strathairn plays the commentator Murrow who rarely smiled
and even whose jokes seemed deadly serious. (The picture of
Murrow at the PBS site does show him smiling but it is hard even
to recognize a smiling Murrow.) Strathairn has the cadences of
Edward R. Murrow's oral delivery down well, though not perfectly.
George Clooney and Frank Langella are good as Fred Friendly and
William Paley, but their performances are not quite as crucial as
is Stathhairn's. Murrow's voice is the most important, because
it was Murrow who was in front of the public and whose voice is
still familiar to many from his World War II reporting from
London and from his 1950s television broadcasts. The filmmakers
decided not to have an actor play Joseph McCarthy and so instead
used news footage of the Senator. It might have been nearly
impossible to get an actor to play the Senator correctly. (In my
opinion the same should be done with Richard Nixon in films, who
always seems exaggerated when portrayed by actors in film.) The
footage of McCarthy is in black and white and perhaps for that
reason the entire film is monochrome. But this immeasurably
improves the texture of the film. And the photography is sharp
and high-contrast in a style reminiscent of 1950s Life Magazine
photography. The effect is similar to what Martin Scorsese using
the monochrome photography for RAGING BULL.
There had been a PBS documentary on Murrow, but never a film
about this figure. Better late than never, this tribute to the
great newsman and his struggle against the evil of the Red Scare
is a quality film all the way. It is a film strong, intense, and
steely. I rate GOOD NIGHT, AND GOOD LUCK a +3 on the -4 to +4
scale or 9/10. It is interesting that two films about standards
of journalism are in release at the same time. It is worthwhile
to compare Murrow's standard of journalism with that of Truman
Capote in the film CAPOTE. [-mrl]
===================================================================
TOPIC: SEVEN SWORDS (film review by Mark R. Leeper)
CAPSULE: Tsui Hark tells the story of seven defenders of justice
standing against the minions of an evil ruler of the Qing
Dynasty. An evil mercenary general named Fire-Wind has killed
hundreds in support of the Qing Emperor's ban on martial arts.
Now seven peasants, each a great martial artist, ban together to
defeat the evil Fire-Wind. Yada, yada, yada. The story is just
as comic-book-ish as it sounds with some interminable battle
scenes. Your enjoyment will be limited by your capacity to watch
people try to carve each other up. Rating: +1 (-4 to +4) or
6/10
As many will be aware, Tsui Hark is one of the most respected
names in Hong Kong action films. He is producer of three series
of action films: A CHINESE GHOST STORY, A BETTER TOMORROW, and
ONCE UPON A TIME IN CHINA. The latter he directed. His latest
is SEVEN SWORDS, shot as a four-hour epic film. The version I
saw was 130 minutes and it felt long at that. The source of the
story is the novel SEVEN SWORDSMEN FROM MOUNT TIAN, by Liang Yu-
sheng. The story has already been produced as a television
series in seventy-four chapters.
The setting is feudal China in the 1660s. The cruel Qing emperor
has forbidden martial arts. His chief general is Fire-Wind who
enforces the laws of the emperor with utmost barbarity and
collects a reward for every law-breaker he kills. He has gotten
quite rich this way. Heroes arise among the peasants to resist
the evil rule. It seems there are seven divine swordsmen with
divine swords on Mount Tian. (Well, six divine swordsmen and one
divine swordswoman.) The seven defenders assemble and defend the
people. (Why do heroes so often come in packs of sevens? Not
six. Not eight.) One of the heroes, Chu, decides he likes the
Korean woman that Fire-Wind is keeping as his private stock. She
is Green Pearl--probably not her real name--and Chu decides he
likes Fire-Wind's taste if nothing else. He steals Green Pearl.
But as Green Pearl is a Korean, the Chinese peasants are lees
than keen to welcome her. Each of the seven defenders of good
has his own unique characteristics. One refuses to kill, for
example. He defeats his enemies without the luxury of killing.
Each of the swords is odd in some way. One of the swords slips
through the hilt and then has a point at the other end, confusing
enemies no end.
In Asia there are many viewers who are familiar with the novel
that the film is based on and the TV-series. The story is
difficult to follow. Western audiences will be more dependent on
the subtitles and they do not give all the support that might be
desired, at least in the print I saw.
Some of the visual effects leave something to be desired. A
cannon that is pointed at the ground when it goes off floats away
like Peter Pan. Some particularly obvious wirework is used to
contravene those tiresome laws of physics. So the enhanced
martial arts bear about the same relation to real martial arts
that professional wrestling bears to Olympic wrestling. That is
not to imply it does not require a great deal of skill and grace
to look good at the end of a wire, but it should not be confused
with real martial arts or real anything. Various visual stunts
are used in the photography. There are scenes that are in black
and white with one object in color, an effect familiar from
ZENTROPA and from SIN CITY.
It is not clear whether this story will play better in Asia where
audiences are familiar with the story or here where they are not.
Rumor has it that the film is not doing as well as hoped in Asia
and is getting a cool reception. Here it is over two hours of
action that after the first hour becomes more numbing than
exciting. The story is a little confused and hard to follow,
though better subtitling might help there. Some of the plot is a
little familiar and borrowed from better films including THE GUNS
OF NAVARONE. Still, there is some nearly majestic photography.
This film may have a hard time competing for an audience now used
to martial arts films of the beauty of those of director Zhang
Yimou. I would rate SEVEN SWORDS a +1 on the -4 to +4 scale or
6/10. [-mrl]
===================================================================
TOPIC: This Week's Reading (book comments by Evelyn C. Leeper)
If you think that democracy and equality has come to Afghanistan,
THE BOOKSELLER OF KABUL by Asne Seierstad (ISBN 0-316-73450-0)
may convince you otherwise. Asne Seierstad is a journalist who
spent time with an Afghani family, and in this book tells of what
she saw. While the head of the family, Sultan Khan ("Sultan" is
a name, not a title), is finally able to sell all sorts of books
without fear of the Communists, the Taliban, or any other
government group, he still rules his house as a despot. His
first wife is relegated to maintaining his house in Pakistan
while Khan spends his time with his young second wife--when he's
not badgering the rest of his family. And he is not atypical.
Afghani women may officially be freed of the burkha, but whether
or not a woman wears one is still the decision of her father or
husband rather than her own. They can not work as teachers or
nurses--but again, only when their male "controller" allows it.
(The book is copyright 2002, so presumably the experiences are
from shortly before that.)
GALLIMAUFREY TO GO by J. Bryan, III (ISBN 0-440-20775-4) is a
medley (which is what "gallimaufrey" means). One chapter talks
about half a dozen eccentrics, another has a set of quotations
about Christmas and descriptions of various customs for it, and
yet another has notes about nature. Each quotation or
description is very short, making this an ideal bathroom book.
There are two questions Bryan asks in the "Information, Please"
chapter that I'll ask here. One is "When was the last time there
was no airplane in the skies anywhere?" And the second is "Has
any important invention or discovery ever come from the southern
hemisphere?" [Yes, the discovery of the South Pole. -mrl] I
know Sir Ernest Rutherford came from New Zealand, but he made his
discoveries elsewhere, so they probably don't count. [Actually.
Roald Amundsen came from Norway, but I believe he was in the
Southern Hemisphere at the time he discovered the South Pole.
The view of the Pole is much better from the Southern Hemisphere.
-mrl] I think that Gandhi's civil disobedience in South Africa
might be one (although not the type of invention/discovery that
Bryan is thinking of), or the Australian boomerang. (I asked
this at a discussion group meeting, and Charles Harris suggested
Christian Barnard's heart transplant technique.)
MASTERS OF MYSTERY by H. Douglas Thomson (ISBN 0-486-23606-4) is
a survey of the mystery field--written in 1931. As such, it
understandably covers many writers whose stars have been eclipsed
by other authors. Freeman Wills Crofts is not exactly a
household name these days, while Dashiell Hammett gets only six
lines--and Thompson makes a major error in them (he puts Sam
Spade in RED HARVEST and THE DAIN CURSE). There has been a
change in critical attitudes towards mysteries (and towards
literature in general) in the last seventy years, so this is
valuable as an insight into the attitudes of the time, as well as
a place where one can find at least some information about the
lesser-known early mystery writers. And editor E. F. Bleiler's
footnotes elaborate on Thompson's brief allusions, correct
Thompson's errors of fact, and quibble with some of what he sees
as Thompson's errors of judgement. Warning: Thomson assumes you
have read all the works he discusses, so there are spoilers if
you have not.
TRENT'S LAST CASE by E. C. Bentley (0-06-080440-8) is one of the
classics that Thompson discusses. Bentley was tired of the
"infallible detective", so his Trent is definitely not
infallible. And as part of my on-going cataloguing of anti-
Semitism in early twentieth century English mysteries, I'll cite
one sentence from this 1913 novel: "In Paris a well-known banker
walked quietly out of the Bourse and fell dead upon the broad
steps among the raving crowd of Jews, a phial crushed in his
hand."
And just to provide "equal time", I'll include this from DEVIL IN
A BLUE DRESS by Walter Mosley (ISBN 0-393-02854-2): The narrator
is remembering his time in the Army and the liberation of one of
the death camps, and says, "That was why so many Jews back then
understood the American Negro; in Europe the Jew had been a Negro
for more than a thousand years."
INTO AFRICA: THE EPIC ADVENTURES OF STANLEY & LIVINGSTONE by
Martin Douglas (ISBN 0-7679-1074-5) reveals more of the negative
sides of the two explorers than most people know, while at the
same time respecting their achievements. The revelation that the
American Henry Morton Stanley was really John Rowlands from Wales
will not be a surprise to many people--this has been somewhat
widely known for a while. (Oddly, the index does not have any
entry for "Rowlands, John"--not even a "see Stanley, Henry".)
But the details of the political machinations, and their dealings
with slave traders (by both Stanley and the staunch abolitionist
Livingstone), and their interest in the local women are probably
new to most people. (I have read Henry M. Stanley's THROUGH THE
DARK CONTINENT as published by Dover, but Dugard says, "the
emotions set forth in [Stanley's] books were often revised from
his more honest journal entries.") Sidi Mubarak Bombay is
mentioned often; in fact, other than Stanley and Livingstone, he
is one of the people with the most index entries. Burton, Speke,
Stanley, and Livingstone have all had reams written about them--
has anyone done a book about Sidi Bombay? (Quick answer--not
that I could find in amazon.com.) [-ecl]
[I think Stanley found Livingstone in the Southern Hemisphere.
-mrl]
===================================================================
Mark Leeper
mleeper@optonline.net
Reality is that which, when you stop
believing in it, doesn't go away.
-- Philip K. Dick