THE MT VOID
Mt. Holz Science Fiction Society
04/18/08 -- Vol. 26, No. 42, Whole Number 1489
El Honcho Grande: Mark Leeper, mleeper@optonline.net
La Honcha Bonita: Evelyn Leeper, eleeper@optonline.net
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:
The Generation and Information Gap (comments
by Mark R. Leeper)
A Modest Revision (comments by Mark R. Leeper)
REFUSENIK (film review by Mark R. Leeper)
THREE CUPS OF TEA by David Oliver Relin and Greg Mortenson
(book review by Mark R. Leeper)
Rock Star and Guitar Hero (letters of comment
by Richie Bielak and Jerry Ryan)
Shakespeare in the Nude (letters of comment by Fred Lerner
and Mike Glyer)
The Black Legion and Historical Inaccuracy in Movies
(letter of comment by Paul Chisholm)
This Week's Reading (THE PIG THAT WANTS TO BE EATEN,
PHYSICS FOR ENTERTAINMENT, FOLLYWOOD, and
concordances) (book comments by Evelyn C. Leeper)
===================================================================
TOPIC: The Generation and Information Gap (comments by Mark
R. Leeper)
Beloit College each year prints a list of how differently people
as young as their incoming freshmen see the world. For example
people of that age have never known the Berlin Wall before it
fell. This year's list is at
http://www.beloit.edu/~pubaff/mindset/2011.php
and you can see previous years' lists by going to
http://www.beloit.edu/~pubaff/mindset/
I think, however, the freshmen should make their own list. I
will start them with:
Your parents probably...
1. Think a "snitch" is someone who "tattles" (whatever that
means).
2. Think that "hooking up" gets easier with wireless.
3. Have never held a Wii.
5. Cannot read Leetspeak (OR Geekspeak).
6. Don't know what benefits come with "friends with benefits."
7. Are NOOBs.
CD9 G2G
[-mrl]
===================================================================
TOPIC: A Modest Revision (comments by Mark R. Leeper)
I am getting up a petition to rearrange the titles of Jules
Verne's best-known (in other words filmed) novels. Now what do I
mean by that?
20,000 LEAGUES UNDER THE SEA has been a problem for people for a
long time. The title is the crux. First of all nobody is quite
sure any more what a league is. Originally it was supposed to be
[Note: little-known piece of erudition coming up] the distance a
horse could travel in an hour. Depending on where you are that
could be a different distance. In America we drive our horses
harder so an American league is about 3.5 miles. In France they
have formalized it. Their national league is closer to 2.5 miles
(or 4 kilometers). This is the kind of horses they have in
France and may be one reason that nobody brags that their horse's
lineage is French. 20,000 leagues is about 50,000 miles. First
of all, the people who thought that Verne was talking about depth
are right out. You can't go 20,000 leagues deep on this planet
without popping out the other side and still going some distance.
Horse distance is measured in horizontal units since right after
the time of Pegasus. Verne meant horizontal distance. It is two
different thoughts. The characters go a horizontal distance of
50,000 miles and during that time they are under the sea. They
are not 20,000 leagues deep.
But here we run into problems again. In the whole course of the
novel the characters are never UNDER the sea. They are
frequently IN the sea. If you submerge yourself in a swimming
pool is it more accurate to say you are under the swimming pool
or in the swimming pool? Right. You are in the pool. You could
only be under the swimming pool if there were some sort of tunnel
system underground beneath the swimming pool. At no point are
Captain Nemo, his submarine, or his involuntary guests actually
under the sea. To be difficult one could argue that the sea is
water and they are under water. But then they are not under the
sea; they are under only part of the sea. They are under the
part of the sea that is over them. By the same token they are
over the part of the sea that is under them. There is also part
of the sea that is neither over nor under them and this part of
the sea they are beside. It, in fact, seems unlikely that they
are ever under even most of the sea. I doubt that the Nautilus
could go very deep considering what we know to be the depth of
the ocean and it was supposed to be a very early submarine. Most
of the sea would be under them rather than it being them who are
under it. And of course there remains the problem that a horse
does not travel very far in an hour in the sea even if it is a
seahorse.
Now we could correct the title of the book to be 20,000 LEAGUES
IN THE SEA, but it might make more sense to give another Verne
novel this title. The obvious one is one in which people
actually are under the sea. The proper choice would be the book
we now erroneously call JOURNEY TO THE CENTER OF THE EARTH. This
book is also arguably misnamed. It is not at all clear to me
that the adventurers here ever reach the geometric center of the
earth. Nor is it even well-defined what that center is. Is it
the geometric center by distance or is it the center of momentum
for the mass of the planet. It does not matter; the travelers
never actually reach either point. So to call the novel JOURNEY
TO THE CENTER OF THE EARTH is a fraud and a sham. Because most
of the most avid readers are teenagers this makes it doubly bad.
Have you seen their hurt little faces when they realize the title
of the book has sold them a bill of goods? It becomes one more
fraud that the older generation has foisted upon them.
The one defense I can see is if you think the center the way you
think of the center of a Tootsie Roll Pop. A Tootsie Roll Pop is
a sucker with a center that is of the same primordial material
that originally formed the first Tootsie Roll. If one was very
tiny or one had a very giant version of a Tootsie Roll Pop, one
could burrow down to the (Tootsie-Rollish) "center" without ever
reaching the (geometric) center or the center (of momentum).
Actually at the true center there is not even Tootsie Roll but a
stick of rolled paper waiting to disintegrate on the eater's
tongue and to leave bits of paper in the mouth after the pop has
been consumed. But this interpretation of center is still
misleading if not an out and out cheat. No, the only honest
thing to do would be to award the title of 20,000 LEAGUES UNDER
THE SEA to the novel that is now called JOURNEY TO THE CENTER OF
THE EARTH.
Now before someone complains about this proposal let me be
perfectly honest with my readers and take my lumps. No, I don't
know that the travelers in 20,000 LEAGUES UNDER THE SEA (the
novel formerly known as JOURNEY TO THE CENTER OF THE EARTH)
actually travel 20,000 leagues, but we never do get an accounting
of how far they travel so it could have been. We would not know
how far the travelers travel in the novel formerly known as
20,000 LEAGUES UNDER THE SEA if the distance did not appear in
the (former) title. There is also the question of what part of
the trip was actually under the sea versus what part of the trip
was under dry land. I would say that for the whole trip the
explorers arguably are under the sea in that the sea is on a
level over their heads. One can say something is under the sun
without the sun being directly overhead. So in 20,000 LEAGUES
UNDER THE SEA (the novel formerly known as JOURNEY TO THE CENTER
OF THE EARTH) we can say that the travelers are at a lower level
than that of the sea so the title is now arguably accurate.
So while it obviously makes sense to rename JOURNEY TO THE CENTER
OF THE EARTH to be 20,000 LEAGUES UNDER THE SEA that leaves the
submarine story (once called 20,000 LEAGUES UNDER THE SEA)
without a title. Well, the novel obviously needs a title. As of
this writing I am giving serious consideration to calling it FROM
THE EARTH TO THE MOON. [-mrl]
===================================================================
TOPIC: REFUSENIK (film review by Mark R. Leeper)
CAPSULE: This is the saga of the Refuseniks, Jews in the Soviet
Union who requested to leave knowing they would be treated as
enemies of the state and given harsh and at times barbaric
treatment. A new documentary written and directed by Laura
Bialis tells the story of the nearly thirty years of courage in
the face of repression in the Soviet Union. This is polished and
evocative filmmaking. Rating: +2 (-4 to +4) or 7/10
It is spring. This is time of Easter and Passover and the time
of year that it is traditional for television to run the film THE
TEN COMMANDMENTS. This year there is another and somewhat
parallel story being released, though this one is a documentary
of recent history. The film is REFUSENIK, and it tells the story
of Jews again held against their will in a country that will not
let them go. The country was Russia in the last decades of the
Soviet Union. Russia's tradition was to suppress and abuse the
Jews with discrimination building to pogroms back in Tsarist
times. The coming of communism to Russia brought only a short
respite before the new rulers of the country continued with their
repressive policies. Under Stalin the repression began again and
it specifically targeted the Refuseniks--Jews who had requested
to leave the country--for almost three decades. With American
and the newly founded Israel ready and anxious to provide a haven
for these Jews they needed only the permission of the government
to exit. As a policy permission was never granted. Being
refused the people came to be called Refuseniks, but their
punishment went beyond merely being refused. Jews who requested
to leave were treated with barbaric hatred. They typically lost
their employment and frequently were imprisoned and even
tortured. Many were exiled to the frozen Gulag. Others were
treated as mentally ill for wanting to leave the "ideal workers'
state" and were committed to mental institutions. With the fall
of the Soviet Union and with pressure from the West and worldwide
eventually the Jews of the Russia were allowed to leave.
1,500,000 of them did leave, most settling in Israel and the
United States.
While in the 1970s and 1980s the Refusenik movement got some
public attention, little has been said about it since. So as not
to forget what happened Laura Bialis writes and directs this
documentary about the story of the Refusenik movement. The style
is mostly eyewitness accounts by participants, many of whom were
activists in and out of the Soviet Union in the events of the
movement. Their stories are illustrated with archival and
newsreel footage. Best known among the activists is Natan
Sharansky, who had requested and been denied an exit visa. In
1977 Sharansky was arrested and tried for invented charges of
treason and spying for the United States. These charges have
since been shown to be false. Sharansky was incarcerated in
Leftorovo Prison were he remained under barbaric conditions for
16 months. He was then sent to a prison camp in the Siberian
Gulag where he remained for nine more years as his wife
desperately worked for his release. By 1986 the USSR was
foundering and was anxious for Glasnost. Then President Ronald
Reagan made clear that the treatment of Soviet Jews would be a
strong consideration in the negotiations. Sharansky was released
in 1986. His story and the stories of Kirov Ballet star Valery
Panov and of physicist Andrei Sakharov, all Refuseniks, are part
of the story.
Where the documentary falls down a bit is in not discussing the
motives of the Soviets in repressing the Refuseniks. Michael
Gorbachov is quoted as saying that these people were considered
to be people of value to the Soviet Union, but they could make
little contribution as laborers in the Gulag. It is more likely
that he did not want to set a precedent of letting one group go
when so many other groups might have wanted the same privilege.
And eventually they as well as the Refuseniks got it.
REFUSENIK bears witness to the struggle of the Refuseniks and of
the changes that their courage and that of the international
community brought about. This film makes a good pairing with THE
SINGING REVOLUTION (2007), which was released earlier this year
and tell the story of Estonia's campaign to free themselves from
the yoke of the Soviet's. Both have messages that we need just
now. I rate REFUSENIK a +2 on the -4 to +4 scale or 7/10.
REFUSENIK scheduled to be released in New York City May 9 and in
Los Angeles on May 23.
Film Credits: http://us.imdb.com/title/tt1187354/
[-mrl]
===================================================================
TOPIC: THREE CUPS OF TEA: ONE MAN'S MISSION TO PROMOTE PEACE . . .
ONE SCHOOL AT A TIME (a.k.a. THREE CUPS OF TEA: ONE MAN'S MISSION
TO FIGHT TERRORISM AND BUILD NATIONS ONE SCHOOL AT A TIME) by
David Oliver Relin and Greg Mortenson (book review by Mark
R. Leeper)
THREE CUPS OF TEA is the story of Greg Mortenson, apparently as
told by Mortenson to David Oliver Relin. So to begin with, who
is Greg Mortenson and why should the reader be interested in his
life story?
Mortenson was a nurse whose hobby was mountaineering. He
attempted to climb K2, the world's second tallest and most
ferocious mountain. But that is not what the book is about. He
failed in his climb and nearly died. (Nearly dying seems to have
become a recurrent experience of his life.) Trying to save his
life his two Balti porters took him to Korphe, their isolated
mountain village there in the Karakoram mountain range of
northern Pakistan. Grateful for the hospitality that saved his
life he promised the villagers that he would return one day and
build them a school so that the children and especially the girls
of the village could be educated.
A big chunk of the book is how he got funding, how he got
materials, and how he built that first school, first having to
build a bridge. He became a local hero and soon other villages
were begging him to build schools. It was just one thing sort of
leading to another. He soon became the centerpiece of the
Central Asia Institute, a charitable organization founded by a
rich American. Its aim is to bring education and literacy to the
youth of the region and especially to the girls.
Along the way he was arrested, kidnapped, and had fatwas declared
against him. He stood up to more than a few self-serving
religious leaders and gangsters wanting a share of the money
going to the school. His adventures make fascinating reading but
even more so do his observations of local life throughout the
Karakoram Mountain range.
Mortenson and Relin give us a good feel for the texture of life
in Pakistan and in neighboring Afghanistan. The book is
enthralling. Most of the people he meets are opposed to the
power of the Wahhabis and the Taliban and their best weapon
against them are the schools. The schools that Mortenson builds
are an alternative to the madrassas that so often teach extremism
and hatred.
Everything changed for the United States with the September 11
attacks, and this book is one of the things that changes. Late
in the book Mortenson comes to the belief that the schools he is
building, and more if they could be built, are an answer to
terrorism. (Note the book has two subtitles indifferent
editions, one aggressive and one not.) It should be only a very
faint criticism of Mortenson to say that he probably does not
really have the answer to terrorism. But it is the message that
he is spreading in talks and in publicity for his work. And by
the account in the book it seems that people are being convinced.
Why do I feel he does not really have the answer? (And here I
admit I am expressing just expressing my own opinions.) First
extremist Islam does not need huge numbers of recruits for its
goals. Even if Mortenson won over all the people of the
Karakoram, an impossible task, the extremist elements would still
have no problem getting the numbers they need to wage their
conflict. Consider how few people it actually took to execute
the September 11 operation. How widespread a system of schools
would be needed to starve the extremists of the numbers needed
for such projects? Certainly more than could possibly be
feasible.
That raises the question of the costs of this number of schools.
Mortenson is able to build his schools at minimal costs. It is
something on the order of ten to twenty thousand dollars per
school. That is a bargain price, but it is still too high. The
school-building project works on charitable donations. It is in
competition for donations with Doctors without Borders, Oxfam,
and just about every other charitable organization. Certainly in
a just world there would be sufficient funds, but it is by no
means clear there is. In the book we here about large spikes in
the inflow of money when there is publicity for the work in
magazines like Parade. The book itself is really one such plea
for funding. Eventually that money will run out and he will need
to get more still publicity. If Mortenson's organization is not
self-sustaining it will be very limited.
The book glosses over the question of what sort of security his
schools will have. The book shows over and over the power the
Islamic extremists have in that part of the world. I suspect it
still understates the problem. The people of the villages seem
in the book to be very committed to keeping out the extremist
forces. But these schools are a tempting prize for the Taliban.
They are ready-built potential madrassas. The schools are too
vulnerable to being taken by force and converted to the precisely
the purposes that Mortenson is opposing. Mortenson and his
organization will die one day, but the buildings and extremist
Islam will go on. The schools are particularly tempting targets
because of Mortenson's avowed (and fully-justified) mission to
educate the girls. The girls certainly have never had any other
opportunity for an education. But nothing makes the Islamic
extremists so uncomfortable as the threat that women will become
Westernized and liberated. (Consider how angry the Saudis were
in the first Gulf War that American women were in the military
and driving Jeeps. Saudi women's rights fall far short of the
right to drive.) That belief alone on the part of the Islamists
makes the Mortenson schools prime targets that will remain so
long after the fickle West loses interest in them. If the
Mortenson schools do not receive long-term military support from
a government that has always ignored this region, the schools
will eventually become more of a liability than an asset. One
feels that the greatest challenges to Mortenson's program lie in
the future.
Certainly there are any number of very good reasons to support
the work of Greg Mortenson, but as a long-term strategy to combat
terrorism it is questionable, regardless of the good the schools
do in the short term. His book is an excellent view of that
region of the world, a region of which we in the United States
have little knowledge. [-mrl]
===================================================================
TOPIC: Rock Star and Guitar Hero (letters of comment by Richie
Bielak and Jerry Ryan)
In response to Mark's article about Rock Star and Guitar Hero in
the 04/11/08 issue of the MT VOID, Richie Bielak writes:
Both of these games are very popular in my house :-). The funny
thing is that I play actual guitar, and have played in actual
rock bands back in high school. So I get to make fun of my kids
and their friends.
Their response is summarized by Eric Cartman (from the "South
Park" "Guitar Hero" episode): "Real guitars are for old people"
;-)
But these games are actually small social happenings. The also
introduce the kids to some classic bands: "Dad, did you hear this
great song 'Sunshine of your Love'"? ;-)
I recently read few columns on cultural impact of technology and
Moore's Law in particular. Take a look here:
http://tinyurl.com/368ss6
This is a first in a series of three articles. One of the topics
is impact of games on education... [-rb]
And Jerry Ryan writes:
Ah, Guitar Hero!
My sixteen-year-old son purchased this for himself and is
obsessed with it.
The "game controller" is a guitar with buttons on the fretboard.
The buttons correspond to strings and, thus, notes. While the
game is playing, the screen displays guitar strings moving toward
you. When you are to play a note, you see a colored circle
glowing on the string ... and when that colored circle reaches
you, you press that color button to play the note.
Points are given for clicking the right button at the right time.
Bonuses are granted for successive error free button presses.
High enough bonuses let you hit the whammy bar for even more
points. You are penalized for missing notes. If you miss enough
notes, the game gives up on you, and the scene on screen cuts to
your character getting booed off stage.
Like most of these games, the player gets to select a persona and
an appearance. Scores are remembered across play sessions, and
cumulative scores are kept. You can increase your degree of
difficulty if you like: simpler levels have fewer strings and
notes for you to play, while harder levels are, well, harder.
Same songs, more stuff that you are expected to play.
It *is* funny to watch my son and his friends on this game. Some
kids come over just to watch the other kids play. Some bring
*their* game controllers, plug in, and play Guitar Hero as a
competition.
Yes, I've tried it. Yes, I'm awful at it. My wife, who plays
guitar, says that ability to play guitar actually prevents you
from playing the game well... [-gwr]
Mark responds:
When I was young, kids wanted to be astronauts, winning some sort
of silly victory for humanity. But it is nice to see that they
have much more realistic goals these days. Most of these kids I
think really could grow up to be rock stars. These days it seems
like just about anybody can become a rock star. We are not
nearly so obsessed with some different talents as we once were.
Give these boys and girls a chance to grow up and we will have
some of the greatest rock stars, football players, and kung fu
fighters of any country anywhere. Then this country will have
the future it deserves, I'll bet. [-mrl]
===================================================================
TOPIC: Shakespeare in the Nude (letters of comment by Fred Lerner
and Mike Glyer)
In response to John Purcell's letter of comment about a
production of MACBETH in the nude in the 04/11/08 issue of the MT
VOID, Fred Lerner writes, "Naked Hamlet, eh? I hope it turned out
better than PROSPERO'S BOOKS. This is the only film I've ever
seen that caused a palpable feeling of relief among the audience
when it was finally over." [-fl]
And in response to Mark's comment ("As for the naked Hamlet
[sic], was it done in modern undress or was it nudity authentic
to the period?"), Mike Glyer asks, "'Nudity authentic to the
period'? Did people have different birthday suits back then?"
[-mg]
Mark replies, "Well, that was the point of the joke, but actually
the answer is yes, at least with males. And not just Jewish
ones. (No, as Evelyn points out the Jews would look the same.
But again I don't think the Globe had many Jewish actors.)"
And Evelyn adds, "Besides, Shakespeare had only one Jewish role.
Moving to a later period of English literature, though, John
Sutherland includes the essay 'Is Daniel Deronda circumcised?' in
his book CAN JANE EYRE BE HAPPY? In it, he notes that at least
by the 19th century, circumcision was often performed in Britain
for medical as well as religious reasons, even though it did not
become widespread until the end of the that century." [-ecl]
===================================================================
TOPIC: The Black Legion and Historical Inaccuracy in Movies
(letter of comment by Paul Chisholm)
In response to Mark's comments on the Black Legion in the
04/11/08 issue of the MT VOID, Paul Chisholm writes, "The
Wikipedia article on the Black Legion
(http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Black_Legion_%28murder_cult%29)
is only a stub, but there's as yet no article at all on Charles
Poole. There's enough information out there, especially since
some news publications have opened their archives back that far.
Some cost money, some not:
http://www.time.com/time/magazine/article/0,9171,756152,00.html
[-psrc]
Mark replies, "True, but the Wikipedia was enough to show I was
wrong about the film THE BLACK LEGION. The Black Legion was not
a fictionalized version of the Klan, it was a real sub-
organization of the Klan." [-mrl]
Paul continues, "When I saw http://tinyurl.com/ynkw5u ['10
Most Historically Inaccurate Movies'], I immediately thought of
you and Evelyn." [-psrc]
Mark replies, "I disagree with some of their choices only in that
there are probably much worse historical errors in films.
BRAVEHEART did have the error they mentioned but it also
dramatized the Battle of Stirling Bridge without the river or the
bridge. The English by crossing the narrow bridge cut their
numbers in half. Half were on the far side of the river and
could do nothing, the other half had the river behind them and no
room to back up. William Wallace chose just the right moment to
attack. In the film they dramatized the battle leaving out both
the bridge and the river. To me that may be as bad as having a
child seven years after he died." [-mrl]
===================================================================
TOPIC: This Week's Reading (book comments by Evelyn C. Leeper)
THE PIG THAT WANTS TO BE EATEN by Julian Baggini (ISBN-13
978-0-452-28744-0, ISBN-13 0-452-28744-8) is a collection of a
hundred "thought experiments". A lot of them are science
fictional in nature or origin, such as "Pre-emptive justice" from
Philip K. Dick's "Minority Report" and whether "human rights"
extend to aliens and/or intelligent non-human Earth species.
Others are more mundane--should a Prime Minister accept a ten-
million-pound bribe to provide clean water for hundreds of
thousands of people in Africa in exchange for a knighthood? This
is the sort of book that one cannot read straight through--you
want to read one "experiment", then stop and think about it for a
while.
PHYSICS FOR ENTERTAINMENT by Yakov Perelman (ISBN-13
978-1-4013-0921-3, ISBN-10 1-4013-0921-3) is a reprint of the
1936 edition of a book originally written in 1925 in Russia.
(Perelman died in the Siege of Leningrad in 1942.) It consists
of short articles about various aspects of physics, often tied in
to science fiction. For example, Perelman discusses why Wells's
Invisible Man would be blind, and why the occupants of Verne's
space capsule would have problems cooking dinner. Others are
straightforward looks at things like neat tricks with refraction,
and why various "perpetual motion" machines aren't. This would
be a great gift for a science-minded teenager. (It is also kind
of cool-looking in a retro sort of way, because it uses the same
plates as the 1975 Mir (Moscow) edition.)
FOLLYWOOD by Michael Hollister (ISBN-13 978-1-4208-5349-X,
ISBN-10 1-4208-5349-X) shows a lot of research--in fact, that
seems to be its main purpose. The book has three aspects:
- the relating of various Hollywood stories and anecdotes,
- the (lengthy) recounting of the making of four movies that were
never made in our world, and
- the presentation of the House Un-American Activities Committee
hearings and the Hollywood blacklist.
For the latter, Hollister seems to have a definite agenda in
making the blacklist seem like it was a good and reasonable thing
to do.
But to do this, he has to re-write history to some extent. So
when he reaches the climactic meeting of the Directors Guild, at
which they are debating whether to require a loyalty oath, he has
John Ford respond to Cecil DeMille's pushing of the oath by
saying:
"I am a director of westerns. I am one of the founders of this
Guild. I would like to state that I have been on Mr.
Mankiewicz's side of the fight all through it. ... I don't
agree with C. B. DeMille. I admire him. I don't like him, but I
admire him, and without Mr. DeMille, your Guild is busted up."
What Ford actually said (according to all reports I have read),
is:
"My name's John Ford. I make Westerns. I don't think there is
anyone in the room who knows more about what the American public
wants than Cecil B. De Mille. In that respect I admire him. But
I don't like you, C. B. I don't like what you stand for and I
don't like what you've been saying here tonight."
He also moved that De Mille resign from the board of directors--
hardly in keeping with what Hollister has him saying.
[http://anecdotage.com/index.php?aid=2487 and others]
And Hollister also left off what DeMille was doing that was the
proximate cause--reading off the names of people he thought might
be Communists with a Jewish accent to emphasize that they were
all Jewish.
Now, I obviously have the view that blacklist et al was a bad
thing, so I may be somewhat biased here, but it seems to me that
Hollister is not playing fair here. He has Ford saying, in
effect, that he admires DeMille (in this debate) even though he
doesn't like him, when in fact what he said was that even though
he admired DeMille (as a director), he did not like him. And he
leaves off some important information about how the blacklist was
carried out.
Maybe I am expecting too much from a self-published book. But
what we have here are recycled anecdotes, unlikely film
treatments (one suspects Hollister has a secret desire to be a
film writer), and a very slanted presentation of a critical
period in Hollywood (and national) history. Not recommended.
Last week I wrote about how I had bought Cruden's CONCORDANCE to
replace my Strong's CONCORDANCE, because Cruden's was about one
tenth the size. I should have realized why. Strong's is the
"*Exhaustive* Concordance of the Bible", while Cruden's is only
the "*Complete* Concordance to the Holy Scriptures" [emphases
mine]. :-( (Actually, part of the reason for the difference are
the appendices to Strong's, which have the original Hebrew,
Chaldean, and so on for various words.) [-ecl]
===================================================================
Mark Leeper
mleeper@optonline.net
Good judgement comes from experience.
Experience comes from bad judgement.
-- Jim Horning