THE MT VOID
Mt. Holz Science Fiction Society
07/06/12 -- Vol. 31, No. 1, Whole Number 1709
Green Hornet: Mark Leeper, mleeper@optonline.net
Kato: 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
The latest issue is at http://www.leepers.us/mtvoid/latest.htm.
An index with links to the issues of the MT VOID since 1986 is at
http://leepers.us/mtvoid/back_issues.htm.
Topics:
Science Fiction (and Other) Discussion Groups (NJ)
Higgs Quandry (comments by Mark R. Leeper)
Proof That Science Fiction Is Now Mainstream (comments
by Evelyn C. Leeper)
Prophecy (comments by Mark R. Leeper)
Comments on THE 7TH VOYAGE OF SINBAD (Part 1) (comments
by Mark R. Leeper)
Computers Are Only as Smart as Their Programmers (comments
by Evelyn C. Leeper)
Biff! Bang! Pow! A Responding Review of SOURCE CODE and
CAPTAIN AMERICA (film reviews by Dale L. Skran, Jr.)
THE BEAST WITH FIVE FINGERS and Bach's Chaconne (letter of
comment by Kip Williams)
This Week's Reading (OF MEN AND MONSTERS, THE JUNGLE BOOK,
and AFTER THE FALL BEFORE THE FALL DURING THE FALL)
(book comments by Evelyn C. Leper)
==================================================================
TOPIC: Science Fiction (and Other) Discussion Groups (NJ)
July 12: RAY BRADBURY THEATER (selected episodes) (1985-1992),
Middletown (NJ) Public Library, discussion after
July 26: SCHILD'S LADDER by Greg Egan, Old Bridge (NJ) Public
Library, 7PM
August 9: WYRD SISTERS (1999), novel by Terry Pratchett,
Middletown (NJ) Public Library, discussion after
August 16: THE ASTONISHING HYPOTHESIS by Francis Crick, Old Bridge
(NJ) Public Library, 7PM
September 27: CYBERIAD by Stanislaw Lem, Old Bridge (NJ) Public
Library, 7PM
October 18: THE KALAHARI TYPING SCHOOL FOR MEN by Alexander McCall
Smith, Old Bridge (NJ) Public Library, 7PM
November 15: TRIGGERS by Robert J. Sawyer (tentative), Old Bridge
(NJ) Public Library, 7PM (note this is the *third* Thursday)
December 20: DEATH OF A SALESMAN by Arthur Miller, Old Bridge (NJ)
Public Library, 7PM
Northern New Jersey events are listed at:
http://www.sfsnnj.com/news.html
==================================================================
TOPIC: Higgs Quandry (comments by Mark R. Leeper)
Personally I think I am a little confused by all this talk about
perhaps having identified the Higgs particle and perhaps not. This
is supposed to a majorly important particle. This is what gives
matter mass, and mass is one of the most important and obvious
concepts in physics. Isn't this like saying, "We have a room full
of chipmunks and we think we may have found the one elephant"?
[-mrl]
==================================================================
TOPIC: Proof That Science Fiction Is Now Mainstream (comments by
Evelyn C. Leeper)
I am listening to a seventy-episode "History of Rome" podcast
series. The latest one I heard was the episode about Pyrrhus of
Epirus and his battles with the Romans in the Third Century BCE.
In the middle of his lecture, the professor says of one of the
battles, "The Romans were led by Publius Decius ... who brought
with him new devices to deal with the war elephants, including
chariots that would circle the legs of the huge beasts with rope
and bring them crashing down. It was the same tactic that had
served the Rebel Alliance so well against the Imperial walkers
during the battle for Hoth." And then he just kept going--no
explanation, not even a change of tone.
(Later he also said of Pyrrhus, "Never had a general won so many
battles for so little to show for it." He must mean "up to this
point," because there is a famous exchange between Vietnamese
General Giap and an American many years after the end of Vietnam
War. The American said, "You know, General, we never lost a
battle," and Giap replied, "That may be true but it was also
totally irrelevant.")
[-ecl]
==================================================================
TOPIC: Prophecy (comments by Mark R. Leeper)
In KING KONG Jack Driscoll most ungallantly tells Anne Darrow that
women on ship cannot help being a bother. Of course today we know
that to be just his prejudices coming out. The fact that twelve of
the crew "met horrible death" trying to rescue her wasn't her
fault. She couldn't help it. [-mrl]
==================================================================
TOPIC: Comments on THE 7TH VOYAGE OF SINBAD (Part 1) (comments by
Mark R. Leeper)
This is a short word of explanation about what follows. June 29
was the 92nd birthday of stop-motion animator Ray Harryhausen. For
most of the time I was growing up he was the premier special
effects wizard of Hollywood--from the early 1950s until the coming
of STAR WARS. His greatest film was probably JASON AND THE
ARGONAUTS, followed closely by THE 7TH VOYAGE OF SINBAD. Other
greats that he animated include THE BEAST FROM 20,000 FATHOMS,
EARTH VS. THE FLYING SAUCERS, MYSTERIOUS ISLAND, THE VALLEY OF
GWANGI, and CLASH OF THE TITANS. And he came from within fantasy
fandom. From early youth he remained close friends with Forrest J.
Ackerman and Ray Bradbury.
The B-Movie Podcast discusses a broad range of films that could by
some stretch of the imagination be called B-Movies. Affiliated
with the podcast there is a Yahoo group to discuss topics relevant
to the podcast (set up by MT VOID reader Nick Sauer--thank you very
much, Nick). I suggested to the Yahoo group that for Harryhausen's
birthday group members would re-watch THE 7TH VOYAGE OF SINBAD and
then we could have an on-line discussion of the film. Each
participant should look for some details in the film that he or she
never noticed before. I watched the film and took notes. This
article was written from my notes on THE 7TH VOYAGE OF SINBAD.
On to what came to my mind when watching the film:
The first film I ever remember being asked my opinion of was THE
7TH VOYAGE OF SINBAD. I had seen it with two friends and my
brother at a Saturday afternoon matinee. After the movie my
friends' mother asked an eight-year-old me what I thought of it. I
thought it over and said, yes, it was pretty good. (It was
certainly a *lot* better than the usual matinee fare, which was
things like Mr. Magoo films.) I guess that was my first film
review. Little did I know that 54 years later it would be
considered a classic.
Well, I can't say that on this viewing I noticed anything earth-
shakingly new. I did notice that the translucent barrier the genie
creates makes the same noise that the flying saucers of EARTH VS.
THE FLYING SAUCERS did. That may well be the sewer noise. When
EARTH VS. THE FLYING SAUCERS was shot the underground hallways were
actually shot at a waste treatment facility. The sound coming from
the sewer pipes was particularly strange and somebody decided to
record it and to use it in the film. This was probably that same
sound.
There is a lot in this film reminiscent of other Harryhausen films.
The translucent barrier the genie creates with his cartwheels was
an effect Harryhausen had used as a force field around the landed
saucer in EARTH VS. THE FLYING SAUCERS. When the Cyclops wades
into the sea the water around him is churned to white crests. It
is a lot like the similar effect of the spaceship in the water in
20 MILLION MILES TO EARTH. Of course the sword fight with the
skeleton would be done again and more elaborately in JASON AND THE
ARGONAUTS. I suppose we could even say that there is some of the
rhedosaurus in the dragon. There definitely is something of the
Ymir from 20 MILLION MILES TO EARTH in the second Cyclops.
Specifically the armature inside the model of the Ymir was
cannibalized to make the second Cyclops. I suspect that when the
scripts were written for Harryhausen films they started with a list
of the effects Harryhausen wanted to do and then they wrote a story
to connect the effects. JASON AND THE ARGONAUTS just ends abruptly
after the last special effect leaving a lot more story to tell.
(Of course if they had finished the story of Jason and Medea, it
would have been a very different film for a very different
audience.)
Oh, and guess it finally registered with me after all these years:
the title says "7TH" not "SEVENTH."
I have not seen formally announced, but I see there has been
another Sinbad film made, though not by Ray Harryhausen. There
have been several non-Harryhausen Sinbad films made, but this one
claims to be made in Harryhausen's process of Dynamation--
Harryhausen's process of stop-motion animation. Apparently this is
a prequel to 7TH VOYAGE with Sinbad again rescuing Princess Parisa.
(That makes this the first time that two Sinbad films are actually
supposed to be in the same series. Usually we have a different
actor playing what could be a different Sinbad.) The film is
SINBAD: THE FIFTH VOYAGE. Shahin Sean Solimon both directs and
stars; it is usually not a good sign when one person does both
tasks. An early trailer actually made it look good with special
effects very much in the Harryhausen style.
I do not what to give the impression that THE 7TH VOYAGE OF SINBAD
is a perfect film. Next week I will continue and discuss some of
the negative aspects of the film.
Trailer for SINBAD: THE FIFTH VOYAGE
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qwS-gYb1yQQ
[-mrl]
==================================================================
TOPIC: Computers Are Only as Smart as Their Programmers (comments
by Evelyn C. Leeper)
Computers are supposed to make things easier. Sometimes things go
wrong.
Dreyfus, the investment house, just revamped their site and now
offers the option to receive certain communications electronically
rather than by paper. They give you a list of four types of
mailings and ask you to check off what you want electronically.
One of the four is "Transaction Advices". Well, this generates a
lot of paper, so I checked it off. But three weeks later, I am
still getting paper copies. So I called Dreyfus, and after talking
to someone there (and being put on hold four times during the
process) it was established that I had done everything correctly,
but that Dreyfus was required (by law?) to send paper copies of
transaction advices.
To which my obvious question was: "If you can't send transaction
advices electronically, why do you even offer me that option for me
to choose?"
The person I talked to had no idea.
This is the second time this week this sort of problem has come up.
The other was on Paperback Swap. Books are listed by ISBN, but if
you have a book with no ISBN, the system will assign a five-digit
"pseudo-ISBN". While a regular ISBN applies to all copies of that
book, a pseudo-ISBN refers only to the specific copy it is listed
for. So while it is meaningful to "wish for" (get in line for the
next available copy) a book with a normal ISBN, it does not make
sense for a book with a pseudo-ISBN. The site managers are
constantly saying they people should not wish for a book with a
pseudo-ISBN. To which we keep asking, "Why don't you just disallow
people from doing so?" You cannot wish for a book for which you
are already wishing, or one that you have offered to others, so
they are clearly running some checks on wishing. Why can't they
add one more? [-ecl]
==================================================================
TOPIC: Biff! Bang! Pow! A Responding Review of SOURCE CODE and
CAPTAIN AMERICA (film reviews by Dale L. Skran, Jr.)
I just noticed Mark's review of the Hugo nominees for Dramatic
Presentation Long Form this year, and find myself in substantial
agreement with his views on the latest HARRY POTTER and GAME OF
THRONES (which I also recently reviewed). However, I found myself
in equally substantial disagreement with his views on SOURCE CODE
and CAPTAIN AMERICA. I agree with Mark that it would take
something amazing (like a comet striking the Earth!) to prevent
GAME OF THRONES from winning the long form, but I think he has
undervalued the other two movies, both of which are Hugo-worthy.
As it turns out, I have just recently seen SOURCE CODE on DVD for
the first time, and it blew me away. It is one of the best new SF
films that I have seen in years. Aside from the misleading title,
on which I agree with Mark, I disagree with pretty much everything
else he says about the film. VIDEO GAME is not an apt title since
the main character is not in a simulation (although he thinks that
he in a simulation for part of the movie), but in a series of
alternate timelines. The movie asks you to believe that brain
similarities on the quantum level allow Army helicopter pilot
Colter Stevens to connect for an eight-minute period to one Sean
Fentress, a school teacher traveling on a train to Chicago in a
different timeline. Colter is not connecting to a memory or a
simulation, but a complete real world, which is why he can get out
of the train during some of the eight-minute periods. However,
when he dies as Fentress in the alternate timeline, he reverts back
to the main line as Colter because the connection is broken. This
happens each time he fails to stop the bomber. I can't resist
playing the game of suggesting an alternate title--I suggest
CONNECTION instead of VIDEO GAME.
Now you may or may not find this believable, but I would argue that
it is at least not obviously impossible, and so we have our story
as Colter struggles to complete his mission, which is to find and
stop the bomber who killed Fentress (and many others) before his
eight minutes are up). I don't want to spoil any of the wonderful
plot twists that Colter encounters as he tries over and over again
to beat the bomber, and finally as he seeks to escape fate itself.
The imaginative conclusion reminds me of a good Greg Egan story--
full of quantum weirdness. I rate the movie a high +3. This is a
PG-13 movie with some violence and scary scenes, but is suitable
for a wide audience. However, be warned that SOURCE CODE has a very
complex, fast moving plot, possibly too complex for many audience
members, which also involves the audience in difficult ethical
issues which some may find depressing or frightening. SOURCE CODE
is the rare SF movie that actually employs of cutting-edge
scientific ideas and lots of them while keeping you on the edge of
your seat.
CAPTAIN AMERICA is in many ways the opposite of what Mark says it
is. He states that the plot is predicable in that the hero is
obviously going to always survive, and thus of little interest.
Although there are surely superhero comics and movies that fit this
description, CAPTAIN AMERICA is not one of them. I reject the idea
that merely knowing the hero will survive prevents an interesting
tale from being told. If this were so, no book about the exciting
and action packed life of, say, George Washington, can be
interesting since you know in advance that he dies of illness as an
old man.
Setting aside that you know Steve Rogers is going to survive
somehow because (a) he does so in the comic and (b) you know he
will appear in the upcoming AVENGERS movie, this is one of the more
realistic and tragic of the current series of Marvel superhero
movies. Rogers loses his best friend (to death in combat) and his
lady-love (to the sands of time). In fact, he loses his entire
world. Roger's treatment by the US government is also humorously
realistic--he works lifting motorcycles with girls on them as part
of a stage show pumping war bonds!
The period design is, as Mark reports, excellent, but this is also
just as good a superhero origin story as the IRON MAN movie. Steve
Rogers was the bravest and most determined man of his time before
being remade as a superhuman and the movie tells this tale well.
The weakness of the movie is that two villains from the comic,
notably the head of Hydra (Johnann Schmidt in the movie, Baron
Strucker in the comics) and the Red Skull are conflated into a
single person who is drawn in rather broad strokes, although well
played by Hugo Weaving. Part of the problem with comic book Nazis
is that their villainy pales beside that of the real-life Nazis,
and that is certainly the case with Red Skull in CAPTAIN AMERICA.
Via the lens of Magneto/Eric Lensherr X-MEN FIRST CLASS does a
better job of portraying a Nazi villain in a comic book setting.
I'm rating CAPTAIN AMERICA as a high +1 movie. However, this is a
combination of a +2 origin story merged with a +0 Red Skull arc.
It is generally suited for a wide range of audiences, but filled
with pulp style action and Nazi villainy.
Getting around to rating the Long Form nominees, I list them as:
[1] SOURCE CODE
[2] GAME OF THRONES
[3] HARRY POTTER
[4] CAPTAIN AMERICA
[5] No award
[not voted] HUGO (since I have not seen it)
Having said all that, I still think GAME OF THRONES is most likely
to win, and it certainly a very worthy entrant. George R. R.
Martin has never gotten all the accolades he deserves, and GAME OF
THRONES is his masterpiece. However, SOURCE CODE is something you
should check out. I've already voted it #1 in several timelines.
[-dls]
Mark replies:
Let me respond to Dale.
SOURCE CODE:
The premise of this film is, as Wikipedia says, "The Code allows
its user to experience the last eight minutes of another compatible
person's life within an alternate timeline." That was my
impression also. That is what we are told is the premise.
However, the writers break that rule. The main character is not
experiencing the other person's life those eight minutes but is
becoming that person and controlling him to have different
experiences. The premise was essentially that he could go along
for the ride, but instead he is able to slip into the driver's
seat. It may be a better story that way, but it was not the stated
premise.
CAPTAIN AMERICA:
Dale is wrong that I said the film as a whole was predictable. I
did say the fights and chases were. Dale says, "I reject the idea
that merely knowing the hero will survive prevents an interesting
tale from being told." I reject it too, but that was not what I
said. I didn't comment on that at all in my posting. I had said,
"like all of Marvel's superhero films [CAPTAIN AMERICA] involves
fights and chases whose outcomes are never either interesting or in
doubt." That is all I said on the subject. Think about FROM
RUSSIA WITH LOVE. The fights and chases have outcomes that are
totally predictable. But the story has enough interest and
character value to keep me involved. So what makes one chase or
fight interesting and another dull?
There is a chase by boats in FROM RUSSIA WITH LOVE. Bond is
outnumbered, surrounded, and losing, and it is a challenge to
figure out what he can do. Then he uses his environment and a
flare gun to get out of his situation in an unexpected way. The
resolution of that chase is actually clever. Think how dull that
chase would have been if the resolution were just that Bond's boat
was the fastest. Instead the chase sets up a puzzle and then
solves it.
Watch a Jackie Chan chase. He does a lot of clever problem solving
along the way. He uses props in unexpected ways. This is a
tradition going back to Buster Keaton whose chases were brilliant
at finding unexpected features of the environment to aid him in his
chases. You know the coming outcome, but it is not because the
hero wins by brute force. You don't necessarily need a puzzle like
this, but you need to do more than just contrive that your hero
wins.
Much more screen time is spent on a much longer chase through urban
streets in CAPTAIN AMERICA. Is the hero fast enough to catch his
quarry? The answer is just "yes". The writer could think of
nothing more clever than brute force to allow him to win. The
filmmakers just ran the background of the picture fast enough to
make it look like Captain America was running at that speed. He
does not even seem to be pumping his legs fast enough. And I
remember no puzzles for the hero or the viewer to figure out.
Watching the film I was just supposed to sit there and see the
images and the background moving past him quickly. As I said in my
posting, "With all the chases and fights, we know who will win and
just have to sit patiently while it happens." What makes a chase
or fight interesting is not who is going to win, or how spectacular
the visual effects are. It is how the action makes you think
and/or surprises you. I still think Marvel films are weak on that
aspect. You just have to just park your mind during most chases
and fights. So, Dale, what made that chase in CAPTAIN AMERICA
interesting or challenging for you? [-mrl]
==================================================================
TOPIC: THE BEAST WITH FIVE FINGERS and Bach's Chaconne (letter of
comment by Kip Williams)
In response to Mark's comments on THE BEAST WITH FIVE FINGERS in
the 06/29/12 issue of the MT VOID, Kip Williams writes:
Wrong Bach Chaconne! It's based on the same Bach piece for
unaccompanied violin, but the version in the movie is the Brahms
transcription for left hand alone. Not to be confused with Zichy's
left-hand transcription, mind you. The Busoni version you linked
to is a much grander version (described as sounding like a piano
transcription of a full orchestra version), and it also wanders off
the track from time to time as Busoni adds measures here and there.
It's also popular in other arrangements. Schumann wrote a piano
accompaniment for it. Segovia played it on guitar. I sometimes
play it on my Concertmate 380--it's one of the biggest pieces that
(with some cramping) can be made to fit in its 32 keys. [-kw]
Mark replies:
I take it you can see how I would think this was the music that was
in the film.
I listen to the link and it sounds like the melody that was in the
film. You are deeper into music theory than I am. I just wanted
enough of the melody so that readers will be reminded of the film
if they have seen it before. It certainly does that. Am I right
that it is, in fact, the same piece of music but like a different
arrangement. Can you point me to an .mp3 file or video that has
the correct transcription so I can pass it on to the readers?
[-mrl]
And Kip responds:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yP6L6gNYhfM is a performance by
Sokolov of the Brahms version, which is more restrained and closer
to the Bach than Busoni's famous version (which is enjoyable in a
different way).
You are right; it absolutely is the melody in the film, and if you
were to somehow have the pieces playing side by side, they'd mostly
stay with each other, except where Busoni added some measures ("the
director's cut"?). Same if you had someone else playing Bach's
original alongside. (Hell, that would be interesting.) Here's
Gidon Kremer playing the original version, which is one of the
greatest solo violin pieces written:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?vÛJPVnJ8m-Y
Anyway, back to work. I'm watching my daughter's soccer practice
while preparing updates for next month's Friends of the Library web
page. Let me know if this explanation is inadequate! [-kw]
==================================================================
TOPIC: This Week's Reading (book comments by Evelyn C. Leeper)
When I read OF MEN AND MONSTERS by William Tenn (ISBN 978-0-575-
09944-9), my first thought was that this was inspired by, or a
response to, the speech by the artilleryman in H. G. Wells's WAR OF
THE WORLDS:
"Well, it's like this," he said. "What have we to do? We have to
invent a sort of life where men can live and breed, and be
sufficiently secure to bring the children up. Yes--wait a bit, and
I'll make it clearer what I think ought to be done. The tame ones
will go like all tame beasts; in a few generations they'll be big,
beautiful, rich-blooded, stupid--rubbish! The risk is that we who
keep wild will go savage--degenerate into a sort of big, savage
rat.... You see, how I mean to live is underground. I've been
thinking about the drains. Of course those who don't know drains
think horrible things; but under this London are miles and miles--
hundreds of miles--and a few days' rain and London empty will leave
them sweet and clean. The main drains are big enough and airy
enough for anyone. Then there's cellars, vaults, stores, from
which bolting passages may be made to the drains. And the railway
tunnels and subways. Eh? You begin to see? And we form a band--
able-bodied, clean-minded men. We're not going to pick up any
rubbish that drifts in. Weaklings go out again. ..."
"Those who stop obey orders. Able-bodied, clean-minded women we
want also--mothers and teachers. No lackadaisical ladies--no
blasted rolling eyes. We can't have any weak or silly. Life is
real again, and the useless and cumbersome and mischievous have to
die. They ought to die. They ought to be willing to die. It's a
sort of disloyalty, after all, to live and taint the race. And
they can't be happy. Moreover, dying's none so dreadful; it's the
funking makes it bad. And in all those places we shall gather.
Our district will be London. And we may even be able to keep a
watch, and run about in the open when the Martians keep away. Play
cricket, perhaps. That's how we shall save the race. Eh? It's a
possible thing? But saving the race is nothing in itself. As I
say, that's only being rats. It's saving our knowledge and adding
to it is the thing. There men like you come in. There's books,
there's models. We must make great safe places down deep, and get
all the books we can; not novels and poetry swipes, but ideas,
science books. That's where men like you come in. We must go to
the British Museum and pick all those books through. Especially we
must keep up our science--learn more. We must watch these
Martians. Some of us must go as spies. When it's all working,
perhaps I will. Get caught, I mean. And the great thing is, we
must leave the Martians alone. We mustn't even steal. If we get
in their way, we clear out. We must show them we mean no harm.
Yes, I know. But they're intelligent things, and they won't hunt
us down if they have all they want, and think we're just harmless
vermin. ..."
"After all, it may not be so much we may have to learn before--
Just imagine this: four or five of their fighting machines suddenly
starting off--Heat-Rays right and left, and not a Martian in 'em.
Not a Martian in 'em, but men--men who have learned the way how.
It may be in my time, even--those men. Fancy having one of them
lovely things, with its Heat-Ray wide and free! Fancy having it in
control! What would it matter if you smashed to smithereens at the
end of the run, after a bust like that? I reckon the Martians'll
open their beautiful eyes! Can't you see them, man? Can't you see
them hurrying, hurrying--puffing and blowing and hooting to their
other mechanical affairs? Something out of gear in every case.
And swish, bang, rattle, swish! Just as they are fumbling over it,
swish comes the Heat-Ray, and, behold! man has come back to his
own."
It's all in the Tenn: the gigantic size of the invaders, mankind
living in burrows, the use of the drains, the winnowing of the
weak, the attempts to harness ancient science to help mankind and
possibly defeat the invaders. It is not unusual to see a science
fiction novel written in response to another (consider Robert
Heinlein's STARSHIP TROOPERS, Joe Haldeman's THE FOREVER WAR, and
John Scalzi's OLD MAN'S WAR), so to assume OF MEN AND MONSTERS was
is not all that far-fetched.
(Other examples of responses include Donald Kingsbury's
PSYCHOHISTORICAL CRISIS in response to Isaac Asimov's "Foundation"
series, and several short stories in response to Tom Godwin's "The
Cold Equations".)
One also sees elements of the classic "generation ship" trope,
particularly the idea that after a few generations the inhabitants
will have imperfect knowledge of what their actual situation is.
Robert A. Heinlein originated this, in the second "generation ship"
story, "Universe" (written for the May 1941 ASTOUNDING, less than a
year after Don Wilcox wrote the first, "The Voyage That Lasted 600
Years", AMAZING, October 1940). In OF MEN AND MONSTERS, humanity
(or at least many of the tribes thereof) think that their burrows
and the monsters' house (or even more specifically, the monsters'
storeroom) is all there is to the universe. They have rote
learning of some astronomy, but no idea what it means. (Shades of
John W. Campbell's "Nightfall" as well?)
I recently watched the 1942 version of THE JUNGLE BOOK (with Sabu)
and noticed a couple of details. In the book by Rudyard Kipling
(ISBN 978-0-140-43282-4), Buldeo the village hunter is negative on
Mowgli, calling him "the Jungle brat" and in general being
dismissive of him. But in the film, he is a fanatic about Mowgli,
proclaiming of him: "This is a thing of the jungle. This boy has
been reared in the jungle. He has the evil eye. I warn you all--
he had the evil eye. He is a wolf; let one in and all will follow.
He will bring down the jungle upon us." This is far more than
Buldeo says in the book--and very similar to what the Nazis were
saying about the Jews, the Roma, and others in 1942. It is
possible I am reading too much into the film, but it is also true
that war-time films often had a war-related message even when they
were about something else entirely.
The film also relies a lot on nature and travel footage, which is
often clearly of a different film stock than the footage filmed
specifically for the movie. Alas, the Technicolor (on the DVD
version I saw) has not aged well. At the beginning the storyteller
is identified as the one wearing "the yellow turban," but when you
see him, the turban looks white. Also, some reels are darker than
others, meaning that people change skin tone when the reels change.
(Mark came in while I was watching it and said he had seen some of
it on TCM recently and it had excellent color there, so someone
must have restored it recently. The DVD version I saw was on one
of those "15 Films for $5" DVDs.)
The film is a bit inconsistent. Sometimes when Mowgli talks to the
animals, it is in animal language that we (and the humans other
than Mowgli) do not understand (wolf howls, monkey chattering,
etc.), but when he talks to the cobra, they both speak English and
Mahala also understands them.
For that matter, the girl and the whole sub-plot of the treasure
trove at lost city were added for the film. I guess the animal
stories alone--including a tiger attack on the village--were not
considered exciting enough.
AFTER THE FALL BEFORE THE FALL DURING THE FALL by Nancy Kress (ISBN
978-1-616-96065-0) looked very promising: Kress is an excellent
writer and this was a stand-alone novel of under 200 pages--a rare
breed these days. Unfortunately, the novel was highly
unsatisfactory. *SPOILERS* There are three threads interwoven,
one taking place during 2013, one during 2014, and one during 2035.
The characters in the post-apocalyptic 2035 have their own view of
what has happened. They are frequently confused by what is going
on, so the reader knows to distrust some of what they say or think,
but even so the objective facts presented indicate a certain past
history. However, as the earlier threads leading up to the
apocalypse are revealed, they make pretty much everything the 2035
characters think and say wrong, and even call into question the
objective facts, as well as leaving a *lot* of unresolved
questions. For example, are there any Tesslies? If not, what are
those things they are seeing, and who built all the technology they
are using? And isn't it convenient that the young characters from
2035 were able to collect exactly the items they were going to need
later without having any understanding of what those items were
when they grabbed them because they had never seen them before
(e.g., tents or bags of seeds)? The "intelligent being" that Kress
seems to propose might conceivably be able to orchestrate the
events of 2013 and 2014, but the technology et al of the 2035
thread has to be considered as beyond the realm of possibility
without some additional explanation.
HOW TO DISAPPEAR by Frank M. Ahearn with Eileen C. Horan (ISBN 978-
1-59921-977-6) was recommended in Bruce Schneier's blog about
security (http://www.schneier.com), and since the library had a
copy, I figured I would read it. Of course, the first thing to
think about is that if I *were* going to try to disappear, checking
books out of the library is the wrong way to go about (even if they
are not for specific destinations). The thing to do is to go to a
different library, where I am not known, and read the books there.
I also discovered that it is easier to disappear if you are not all
over the Web and the Internet already (no surprise there). [-ecl]
==================================================================
Mark Leeper
mleeper@optonline.net
Brigands demand your money or your life;
women require both.
--Samuel Butler