THE MT VOID
Mt. Holz Science Fiction Society
04/15/11 -- Vol. 29, No. 42, Whole Number 1645
Frick: Mark Leeper, mleeper@optonline.net
Frack: Evelyn Leeper, eleeper@optonline.net
All material is copyrighted 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:
Second Life (comments by Mark R. Leeper)
Foreign-Language Spy Films (comments by Mark R. Leeper)
A Close Look at KING KONG (comments by Mark R. Leeper)
PAUL (film review by Mark R. Leeper)
JOHNNY BE GONE (film review by Mark R. Leeper)
SOURCE CODE (letters of comment by Mark Brader and
Evelyn C. Leeper)
SLEEP DEALER (letter of comment by David Anolick)
PLANET OF THE APES (letter of comment by Guy Lillian III)
Mark Twain (letters of comment by Kip Williams and
Keith F. Lynch)
This Week's Reading (NIGHTMARES OF EMINENT PERSONS, MIND:
A BRIEF INTRODUCTION, NAMING AND NECESSITY,
VINTAGE SEASON, and IN ANOTHER COUNTRY) (book comments
by Evelyn C. Leeper)
==================================================================
TOPIC: Second Life (comments by Mark R. Leeper)
Again I am on the subject of Second Life, the virtual reality
world. I suggested that the people you would meet in Second Life
are the same losers you meet in Reality. I hate to sound like a
misanthrope. I have thrown together my virtual reality world for
misanthropes. I call it First Life. I mean this to be the Second
Life for people like Burgess Meredith in the TWILGHT ZONE episode
"Time Enough at Last." You run it and a blank screen comes up. It
makes no demands on you. You can go read a book if you want.Right
now it works on UNIX systems. I will soon have an iPhone and an
iPad interface. And next week I will have a version than runs on
an Etch-a-Sketch. [-mrl]
==================================================================
TOPIC: Foreign-Language Spy Films (comments by Mark R. Leeper)
Another rare and interesting film has shown up and has been pointed
out by the Open Culture site. The film is THE HYPERBOLOID OF
ENGINEER GARIN (1965). Don't let the title put you off. It is not
about mathematics. The Hyperboloid is a death ray. The film is
sort of James-Bond crossed with 1940s serial. It does not have
quite that pace, but that seems to be where the ideas come from.
Engineer Garin has a death ray much like a laser and Garin intends
to burn down whole cities to rule the world. (The laser was
invented in 1960 so it had been around for five years when this
film was made, but perhaps they wanted to brag it was predicted in
a 1927 Russian novel THE GARIN DEATH RAY by Aleksey Tolstoy.
Anyway, the film is in Russian with English subtitles (with some
bizarre subtitles indicating they were not written by anyone with a
great command of English). There are some nice scenes of
destruction in the second half. The Open Culture source is:
http://tinyurl.com/leeper-deathray
Or you can get it directly from YouTube:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mdOHIulnnTM
On another note, if you are into satires on James Bond film, there
are two fairly funny satires on the Bond films involving OSS agent
117. There are on Netflix Instant:
http://tinyurl.com/leeper-OSS117
[-mrl]
==================================================================
TOPIC: A Close Look at KING KONG (comments by Mark R. Leeper)
We recently got ourselves a Blu-ray player and got with it some
features we were unaware of. One total surprise is that the
machine does something with the picture from a plain, old-fashioned
(if that is the proper adjective) DVD. The picture from a DVD was
clearer and sharper. I am told this has do to with something
called "upscaling" or "upconverting". I do not follow it
technically, but I have been trying out the improved imaging with
several DVDs that benefit from showing screen detail. That was how
I decided to watch for maybe the fiftieth time one of my favorite
films, KING KONG. Because I really could see more on the screen I
gave the film a very close watching like I have not given it in
years. I always seem new material. The following are observations
I made on this or perhaps a recent viewing.
-- Different films have varying degrees of detail in their visuals.
KING KONG really was a film made for a big screen. This is one
film that really benefits from a big, high-resolution screen.
-- There are several script contrivances intended to communicate
information to the viewer, not very subtly. Carl Denham and
Captain Englehorn each tell the other reasons their rushed
departure as if the other is resisting. They seem to be in violent
agreement that they should get the boat out of there. It makes
sense to bring the audience up to speed, but why would the two men
argue a point on which they agree?
-- Under strong time pressure, Denham is frantically searching the
streets for a leading lady. So why does he walk into an obviously
empty fruit stand? It works out well, but in context it does not
seem to be something he would do with his time running out.
-- Driscoll's hand gestures when giving orders just seem to be
swinging his arms. Neither Cabot nor Wray gives believable
performance in their on-deck conversations.
-- It is a picky point, but Denham cannot make up his mind if Kong
actually is a beast or not. He calls him "the beast," but
elsewhere says that he really
is neither man nor beast.
-- Where are the other actors for Denham's film? Denham will need
a male lead to provide a "love interest" for Ann's character.
There seem to have been no other actors but Ann on board the
Venture at all.
-- In the screen test, Ann seems to know register fear before
Denham tells her that is the reaction he wants. Ann is unable to
scream even before she is told her throat is paralyzed.
-- When the watch says there are breakers ahead, there is no sound
like breakers to be heard on the soundtrack.
-- Most signs of civilization seem like they are taking place on or
about the film's year of 1933. Why then is Denham still using a
hand-cranked, non-sound camera?
-- How did this curious mix of racial types happen to all be on
Skull Island? Yes, they are all black, but there is a great deal
of variation among them.
-- How did the natives know exactly where to board the Venture to
find Ann, and is it a contrivance that Ann is right next to a
ladder making it easy for them?
-- Where does Kong live? It must be near the doorway in the wall
since he is close enough to respond to the gong. But he cannot
live that nearby. In this area he has to fight for his life three
or four times a day, and it is frequently a near thing who is going
to win these fights. Living in this neighborhood would wear him
down very quickly. A related question, but not one I can claim is
original, is where are Kong's progenitors? It is too much to
assume that he is just the last of an extinct species.
-- The animated Kong has elongated nostrils and a very boney brow
line. His face is flexible enough to express a wide range of
emotions. The large live-action face has a much less pronounced
brow line and less elongated nostrils. Its face is not nearly so
flexible. They look like two very different animals.
-- The stegosaurus has very primitively rendered feel with splayed
toes. They look like they were molded in clay. The stegosaurus is
way too big when the crew walks past it. The plates on his back
look to be about five feet wide. They should be more like eighteen
inches. The spikes on his tail do not seem rigid. They look
rubbery.
-- The brontosaurus (or whatever sauropod it is) has canine teeth
and runs fast. Neither is accurate.
-- Roots of tree that is used for a bridge seem to glow white next
to Kong, probably an artifact of front projection.
-- After the fight with the serpent (?), for no apparent reason the
pool in the grotto flashes white when Kong walks past it and then
returns to dark.
-- Hanging off the vine at Kong's cliff the woman does not look
like Ann and the man looks very different from Bruce Cabot. They
are both poorly matched stunt doubles.
-- When Kong bursts through the door in the wall we see translucent
natives in front of his left leg (on your right).
-- After Kong escapes from the Manhattan theater and takes Ann we
see Denham and Driscoll go up on the roof the partially obscured
sign behind them says "MA". The letters flash in a sequence that
does not allow for there to be any more letters besides M and A.
Why have an illuminated sigh that just says "MA"?
-- In spite of interpretations to the contrary, Ann Darrow never
shows the slightest bit of sympathy for Kong. From first sight to
Kong's death she seems to hate and fear him.
KING KONG was made at a time when the special effects were cutting
edge. By today's standards we can see that some of the effects
were slipshod and could have been improved with more care. But if
you love a film you want to see even the blemishes. It still is a
great film, and with the unlikely but possible exception of THE
WIZARD OF OZ it the most beloved film in cinema history. [-mrl]
==================================================================
TOPIC: PAUL (film review by Mark R. Leeper)
CAPSULE: Where PAUL falls short of Simon Pegg's previous two films
is that they knew where they were going, and where they were going
was a big part of the humor. Paul has a perfunctory plot on which
was hung a bunch of nearly independent gags intended to be funny.
Almost all of the humor is added on rather than being part of the
structure of the story. Then the gags were just not strong enough
and too often based on the false assumption that a lot of swearing
in a film is funny, particularly if it comes from someone you would
not expect to swear. It is not that the swearing damages the film,
but it takes the place of cleverer gags. Director Greg Mottola did
not understand what makes a Simon Pegg comedy funny. And neither
did Simon Pegg or co-writer Nick Frost. Rating: low +1 (-4 to +4)
or 5/10
Simon Pegg and Nick Frost have a long history of working together
in British comedy television. More recently they have been making
films. In 2004 they starred in SHAUN OF THE DEAD, and in 2007 they
acted together in HOT FUZZ, two delightful quirky comedies. On
those films Pegg co-wrote with writer/director Edgar Wright. For
PAUL Pegg is co-writing with as well as acting with Nick Frost.
Edgar Wright has been demoted to script editor. Edgar, we need you
back. It is not that PAUL is a bad film, but it lacks the
intelligence of SHAUN OF THE DEAD and HOT FUZZ. With both of those
films there is the feeling from the beginning that the viewer is in
good hands. It is totally unpredictable where these stories will
go, but it is clear the filmmakers know. PAUL has a very different
sort of feel. Instead of a strong story arc, it has a flimsy arc
and then a bunch of gags and action scenes are hung on that frame
like ornaments on a Christmas tree. Particularly for science
fiction film and comic fans there are a lot of funny bits, but one
has the feeling that they could be removed and the plot and idea of
the film would not change much.
It seems that two science fiction dweebs from Britain are renting a
motor home and visiting the science-fiction-related sites of the
American Southwest. They will start with San Diego Comic Con and
continue to sites like Area 51, the Black Mailbox, and Roswell.
Simon Pegg is Graeme Willy and Nick Frost is Clive Gollings. Along
the way they unexpectedly pick up a third member for their party,
an extraterrestrial alien. The joke is that he does not have an
unearthly name like Klaatu or even a title like the Doctor. His
name is Paul (voiced by Seth Rogan). And his behavior matches his
name. He has been on this planet for sixty of our years and has
assimilated so much that he not only talks like Seth Rogan, he acts
like him also. He has mastered the fine art of profanity and likes
it just about as much as you would expect that Seth Rogan would.
And the whole plot is in service of that one gimmick. This is an
alien would make a good drinking and drugs buddy. Within that
conceit there is sort of a plot of getting Paul where he can be
picked up by a flying saucer. Parts of the saucer look like a
smaller version of the United Planets Cruiser from FORBIDDEN
PLANET. And all over there are little references to science
fiction and action films. Bits of dialog are snatched from all
over the place. This might be a good film to watch on DVD so it
can be easily stopped to think about the sources. There are
details that might have been funny that were lost in the British
actors failure to enunciate. The story takes the characters all
over the Southwest chased by some inept "men in black." Also
involved is a fundamentalist evangelical father and his daughter.
The latter has a crisis of faith with the discovery that in spite
of all her dogma to the contrary there really are aliens.
In addition to its comic actors of current popularity, people like
Seth Rogen, Jason Bateman, Pegg and Frost, Jane Lynch, and Jeffrey
Tambor, it is nice to see some of the previous generation actors,
particularly Blyth Danner and another woman who shall remain
nameless since though we hear her highly recognizable voice
throughout the film, she remains unseen for most of the film like
Blofeld in early Bond films.
Pegg and Frost throw in as much satire of American culture, science
fiction fandom, and good old boy relationships as they can, but it
would have been a stronger comedy if it had been more essential to
the structure of the film. PAUL is Simon Pegg's JAY AND SILENT BOB
STRIKE BACK. I rate it a disappointing low +1 on the -4 to +4
scale or 5/10.
Film Credits: http://www.imdb.com/title/tt1092026/
What others are saying:
http://www.rottentomatoes.com/m/paul/
[-mrl]
==================================================================
TOPIC: JOHNNY BE GONE (film review by Mark R. Leeper)
CAPSULE: Life is torment for Johnny, a transsexual who hates his
physical maleness. When the emotional screws are turned too
tightly on Johnny, he releases the pressure in a truly disturbing
sequence. This is the second film from writer/director Trevor
Juenger. It is roughly edited (also by Juenger) to give a stark,
grunge feel. JOHNNY BE GONE will be highly selective in its
appeal. The viewer's reaction will be come in large part from a
capacity to appreciate the anguish on film. JOHNNY BE GONE has
nudity and strong violence. Rating: 0 (-4 to +4) or 4/10
Spoiler Warning: This review contains spoilers.
JOHNNY BE GONE is a rough, violent, unpolished film with a rough,
violent, unpolished story. Chicago-based Trevor Juenger wrote and
directed this 44-minute film about a transsexual living in both
St. Louis and agony. Every day he is facing hatred for what he is,
and more than a little of it is self-hatred. Johnny (played by
Erik A. Williams, who co-produced this low-budget film with
Juenger) lives in constant mental torment each day. He desperately
wants a sex-change operation, but in the interim he would settle
for a job at the local sandwich shop. The owner of the shop
refuses to hire him since the customers would probably object to
him. The film opens with a gang from the same sandwich shop
beating him and binding his ankles to hang him head down from a
tree. With the exception of his roommate Logan (Joe Hammerstone),
everyone who knows Johnny treats him with indifference at best; at
worst, well, the film opens with him being hung from a tree. There
is also a mother figure in Johnny's life, but she is in the form of
a talking rabbit who gives Johnny the same warm caring relationship
that Norman Bates had with his mother. It seems there are not
enough tormentors in Johnny's life without him creating a talking
rabbit to make matters even worse.
Johnny spends his time hating those parts of his anatomy that stand
between him being what he is and being the woman he wants to be.
The hatred builds and is finally expressed in actions that are
probably more explicit and graphic than many viewers will want to
see. This is a film that is made to disturb and it will not be a
pleasant watch. The film feels like a grungy American version of a
Yukio Mishima story.
Juenger has intentionally made this film as uncompromising as he
could manage. The hand-held camera photography is jarring and at
times I found it hard to see with the film was showing me. I had a
synopsis with the film at I needed it to understand what I was
seeing in the climax. Juenger likes to give us images of Johnny's
pets. I waited for this attention to pets to pay off in some way,
but if it was more than padding, I missed it. The film creates a
claustrophobic world for Johnny. Living in St. Louis there must be
more than one place where Johnny could work and where he might be
more welcome than at the sandwich shop that is such a hotbed of
anti-transsexual bigotry. But his world seems reduced to four or
five locations.
A downer of an experience, JOHNNY BE GONE has a rising tension
until it gives forth a intense release. I rate JOHNNY BE GONE a 0
on the -4 to +4 scale or 4/10. JOHNNY BE GONE is making the rounds
of film festivals.
Film Credits: http://www.imdb.com/title/tt1546402/
[-mrl]
==================================================================
TOPIC: SOURCE CODE (letters of comment by Mark Brader and
Evelyn C. Leeper)
SPOILERS ahead!
In response to Mark's review of SOURCE CODE in the 04/08/11 issue
of the MT VOID, Mark Brader writes in email to Mark:
[Regarding Colter inhabiting Sean's body, and hence Sean having to
die] Looks that way, doesn't it? I wonder what Christine will say
when she realizes her boyfriend has total amnesia about being a
teacher.
[Regarding creating a large number of universes in which Chicago is
destroyed] I took it to be accessing, not creating, parallel
universes. In which case we can assume there are an infinite
number of universes where the project was developed and Colter or
his analog succeeded, and an infinite number where Chicago was
lost. "All the Myriad Ways".
[Regarding whether Colter disables the bomb in the final universe]
Now this one was covered. He guessed correctly that because the
train bomb had a cell phone trigger, this bomber would only use
that mode. He then disabled the train bomb by removing both cell
phones, assuming correctly that there wasn't a third one; and he
disabled the dirty bomb by disabling (i.e. confining) the bomber.
[-mb]
And Evelyn writes:
Isn't there something wrong with the entire basic premise of SOURCE
CODE? If the plan is, in effect, to put Colter Stevens into the
last eight minutes of memories of Sean Fentress, how can Stevens
have any idea of what will happen or who he will see as soon as he
diverges from those memories? If Fentress had stayed in his seat
the whole time, how could Stevens possibly find out about the white
van?
One response might be that the ending indicates that Stevens is not
just in Fentress's memories, but in an entire alternate world
constructed from these. Overlooking how one could possibly do
this, this result is entirely contrary to what the project leaders
in the main timeline say is possible, so how could they have
possibly expected the project to work, and hence how could they
ever get any funding for it? [-ecl]
==================================================================
TOPIC: SLEEP DEALER (letter of comment by David Anolick)
In response to Mark's comments on SLEEP DEALER in the 01/28/11
issue of the MT VOID, Dave Anolick writes:
In the 01/28 MT Void you listed the top SF/Fantasy films of the
'00s. I hadn't seen a couple of them, so I threw them on my
Netflix Queue. I was in no rush to watch them. There was a mix-up
in my Queue and when SLEEP DEALER got shipped to me yesterday I
actually wanted a different movie. Well, I'm glad that I "goofed"
because it was another great movie that I never would have seen
without the MT VOID.
Just wanted to say thanks (for the hundredth time?) for your great
work. [-da]
Mark responds:
Hey! That's what I like to hear. Currently the films that I think
are under-appreciated are this one and THE MAN FROM EARTH. I
recommended SLEEP DEALER to Dan Kimmel who still has not seen it I
think, but he trusted my recommendation enough to pass it to the
people planning the Boston Science Fiction Film Marathon. They had
never heard of it either, but the trailer intrigued them and
however they decide it they used it to close a Marathon. On the
other hand I recommended it to one of my correspondents, and he
really objected to the politics. (However, the political
speculation about water rights is well-grounded in incidents that
have already happened.) In any case, thanks for your mail. It
made my day. [-mrl]
And Dave replies:
Glad I made your day, because you have made mine with this movie
and in the past. I had seen THE MAN FROM EARTH based on your first
MT VOID recommendation a few years ago. That one has really stayed
with me. It was so simple, straightforward, thought provoking and
incredibly well done.
I wasn't too thrilled with the end of SLEEP DEALER, which was a bit
obvious and simplistic given the complex problems and society that
the movie had built up. But I thought the extrapolation of
technology, politics, etc. was very realistic. I'm hopeful it
doesn't go that direction, but certainly could see it happening in
a similar way. [-da]
==================================================================
TOPIC: PLANET OF THE APES (letter of comment by Guy Lillian III)
In response to Mark's comments on PLANET OF THE APES (in his review
of SOURCE CODE) in the 04/08/11 issue of the MT VOID, Guy Lillian
writes:
What's absurd about PLANET OF THE APES is that Taylor never looks
up and sees the #$&%@ moon! True, they do mention that the nights
are overcast, hut as we all know, you can often see the moon in the
daylight. Well, so what? PLANET OF THE APES is still a very fun
flick, Heston is a hoot and the makeup is astounding. Gotta say,
though, that Manhattan obviously "grew" a great deal to the south,
for Taylor and his Hammer girl to be able to view Lady Liberty that
close up and from that angle. [-gl3]
==================================================================
TOPIC: Mark Twain (letters of comment by Kip Williams and
Keith F. Lynch)
In response to Evelyn's comments on book sales in the 04/08/11
issue of the MT VOID, Kip Williams writes:
I've got WHO IS MARK TWAIN? as well, and it's always great to find
more short nonfiction from him (or anything, but short nonfiction
in particular). If you don't already have the Library of America's
two-volume COLLECTED TALES, SKETCHES, SPEECHES & ESSAYS--and I'm
talking to anybody who sees this--it has my highest commendation
and I wish I had a version for my reader.
After I finish that (I've been reading it a bit at a time, partly
to save it for later, and partly so my head won't explode), and of
course some of it I've already read. After that there will still
be the AUTOBIOGRAPHY (including forthcoming volumes), and then I
may as well read as many of his letters as I can get my hands on
(such as the massive volume or volumes at Project Gutenberg).
I found my ticket stub from seeing Hal Holbrook's "Mark Twain
Tonight" shortly before we left Virginia, and I'm irked that ticket
stubs from completely forgettable shows are still in great shape,
while this one is fading and has some moisture damage. [-kw]
Keith F. Lynch responds:
All of that material is almost certainly available free online, as
it's in the public domain.
Speaking of inexpensive text, I just got home from a used book sale
at a Catholic girls' school. I bought 15 hardbacks, 18 paperbacks,
and 5 DVDs for a total of $10. The weather was beautiful. Metro
was its usual self--when I changed trains at Metro Center, all
three escalators between the two levels were broken, which is
especially annoying when I have a hand truck, and the Red Line
train had major delays. On the way home, the first train smelled
strongly of overheated brake pads, and the second train had no
ventilation and was at least 100 F (38 C) (which doesn't bother me,
but certainly bothered other passengers). [-kfl]
Evelyn replies:
According to the Mark Twain project at UC Berkeley, "What Mark
Twain himself published, or anything of his that others published
posthumously before the year 1923, is in the public domain and may
be quoted or reproduced in its entirety without permission. Mark
Twain writings of any kind, whether literary manuscripts,
notebooks, marginalia, or letters which came to light after 2001
and which were not published in the Microfilm Editions or elsewhere
before the end of 2002 are likewise in the public domain." This
implies that unpublished works which were known before the end of
2002 are *not* in the public domain. (For example, the new edition
of the autobiography is not in the public domain.) Still, there
are enough writings that are freely available to keep one busy for
a long time.
One of the things that makes collecting Twain difficult is that
because a lot is in public domain, there are various collections of
short pieces which overlap other collections. One ends up with a
lot of duplicate material. For example, THE DEVIL'S RACE-TRACK,
THE HIDDEN MARK TWAIN, LETTERS FROM THE EARTH, LIFE AS I FIND IT,
MARK TWAIN ON THE DAMNED HUMAN RACE, A PEN WARMED-UP IN HELL, and
TALES OF WONDER are all books that have overlap with other volumes
I have (primarily those from the Harper Authorized Edition). And
I'm sure there are multiple versions of "The Complete Short
Stories" and "The Complete Essays" of Mark Twain. [-ecl]
==================================================================
TOPIC: This Week's Reading (book comments by Evelyn C. Leeper)
NIGHTMARES OF EMINENT PERSONS by Bertrand Russell (ISBN 978-0-851-
24629-1) is labeled on the dust jacket as "Bertrand Russell's
Latest Work of Fiction", and indeed he did have a previous volume
of stories, SATAN IN THE SUBURBS. But who knew that Bertrand
Russell wrote science fiction? NIGHTMARES OF EMINENT PERSONS
consists of ten "nightmares" and two longer pieces. One nightmare,
for instance, is "The Metaphysician's Nightmare", in which a tour
of Hell includes "a particularly painful chamber inhabited solely
by philosophers who have refuted Hume. These philosophers, though
in Hell, have not learned wisdom. They continue to be governed by
their animal propensity toward induction. But every time that they
have made an induction, the next instance falsifies it. This,
however, happens only during the first hundred years of their
damnation. After that, they learn to expect that an induction will
be falsified, and therefore it is not falsified until another
century of logical torment has altered their expectation.
Throughout all eternity surprise continues, but each time at a
higher logical level."
[Hume argued against induction by claiming that there was no way to
justify the use of induction without resorting to it in the
justification. That is, any justification of induction reduces to,
"Induction has always worked in the past," which is basically just
using induction to justify induction. See David Hume's Treatise of
Human Nature, Book 1, Part 3.]
Charles W. Stuart's pen-and-ink illustrations are quite elegant,
and reminiscent of Virgil Finlay, but Stewart makes one major error
that no one at Simon and Schuster seems to have caught: he
illustration for the far future Inca civilization has a beautiful
*Meso-American* (Aztec or Mayan) pyramid. The Incas had nothing
like it.
I ran across the problem of induction (and other quandaries) in
MIND: A BRIEF INTRODUCTION by John R. Searle (ISBN 978-0-19-515733-
8), in which Searle lists ten basic conundrums about the mind (and
then analyzes and discusses them):
- The Mind-Body Problem
- The Problem of Other Minds
- Skepticism about the External World
- The Problem of Perception
- The Problem of Free Will
- The Problem of Self and Personal Identity
- Do Animals Have Minds?
- Sleep
- The Problem of Intentionality
- The Problem of Mental Causation and Epiphenomenalism (this is
where induction comes in)
- The Problem of The Unconscious
- Psychological and Social Explanation
I don't always agree with Searle's conclusions, but I find his
logic fascinating. For example, in trying to justify a belief in
free will, he says, "That we should have these massive experiences
of freedom if there is no biological cash value to the experience
seems an absurd result from an evolutionary point of view. The gap
involves a major biological investment by such organisms as humans
and higher animals. An enormous amount of the higher biological
economy of the organism is devoted to conscious rational decision
making." We spend a lot of time not just in training ourselves,
but also in training our young to make good decisions, and where
would all this have come from if everything is predetermined?
(Searle gives a much more detailed analysis, of course.)
As part of the reading list that included Searle's MIND, I also
read NAMING AND NECESSITY by Saul A. Kripke (ISBN 0-674-59846-6),
transcripts of three lectures given at Princeton in 1970 and a
classic in the field of philosophy of language. But it also turns
out to have strong connections to alternate history.
In analyzing language, philosophers use the idea of "possible
worlds" or of counterfactuals to test various theories. For
example, if on some duplicate Earth there is a substance that looks
like water, serves all the purposes of water, and is called water,
but has a different molecular structure, does someone there mean
the same thing when he says "water" as we do?
But even more directly connected to alternate history is the
question of proper names, which is called "transworld
identification." First of all, to whom are we referring when we
say "Richard Nixon"? We can try to answer that with a list of
properties: he was born in Yorba Linda, he was Vice-President under
Eisenhower, he was President from 1969 to 1974, and so on. But we
might talk about an alternate world in which Nixon was not
President. Is he no longer Nixon? I cannot speak for
philosophers, but alternate history fans would probably say he is
still Nixon. What about if he wasn't Vice-President either? What
if he did not do anything the same except be born on the same date
to the same parents? What if they gave him a different name as
well. Is that John Nixon the same as our Richard Nixon?
To writers (and readers) of alternate history this is important.
For example, it is pretty much impossible to have a world in which
the United States loses World War II, and Nixon still becomes Vice-
President under Eisenhower. But what if instead something
different happens to Nixon early in his life--is he still Nixon?
If he gets a slightly different set of genes, but is still born on
the same day with the same name to the same parents, is it still
Nixon? And when we read an alternate history where the South won
the Civil War and in 1960 there is a character in California named
Richard Nixon, are we supposed to believe that is the same Nixon?
I recently re-read VINTAGE SEASON by C. L. Moore, or Henry Kuttner,
or Lawrence O'Donnell, or whatever combination of those is credited
as the author. (The story is credited to different authors in
different places and they are all names for Moore and/or Kuttner,
who formed a wife and husband writing team.) And then I watched
the film based on it, which has even more names than the author of
the novella (hard as that is to believe). It is known variously as
THE GRAND TOUR, DISASTER IN TIME, GRAND TOUR; DISASTER IN TIME, and
TIMESCAPE. (Given that *I* think of it as "Vintage Season", I
always have great difficulty looking it up!)
To explain why I re-read and watched this, and to comment on it,
involves SPOILERS. If you don't want SPOILERS, stop now (this is
the last review this week).
The story involves a group of tourists who seem very out of place
in the B&B they have somewhat commandeered. They keep saying very
odd things that make it very easy for the reader to figure out
what's going on; one wonders why the B&B owners are so slow on the
uptake. (Hint: they keep making references to London in 1666 and
Europe in 1348.)
The movie goes this one better, piling Ossa upon Pelion, as it
were, in a way that very much reminded me of recent events. As the
saying goes, it's one damn thing after another. However, the movie
also has a subplot of the B&B owner having lost his wife in a car
accident, having a father-in-law who is trying to take his daughter
away, etc., in addition to the owner becoming more directly
involved in the technology. All this helps fill out the time and
add some action scenes, but really is not essential to the story.
(And this is similar to the current film SOURCE CODE, in that it
worries that the basic premise is not enough for a movie, and so
adds a lot of additional and unnecessary plot.)
The novella is available in a Tor Double paired with Robert
Silverberg's IN ANOTHER COUNTRY, the same story told from a
different point of view (ISBN 0-812-50193-4). So in effect, you
can experience three versions of the same story. [-ecl]
==================================================================
Mark Leeper
mleeper@optonline.net
Logic is like the sword--those who appeal to it,
shall perish by it.
--Samuel Butler