THE MT VOID
Mt. Holz Science Fiction Society
11/02/12 -- Vol. 31, No. 18, Whole Number 1726
Donnie: Mark Leeper, mleeper@optonline.net
Marie: 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, Lectures,
etc. (NJ)
Realization (comments by Mark R. Leeper)
Entering the Science Fiction World For Real (comments
by Mark R. Leeper)
CARNIVAL OF SOULS (film comments by Evelyn C. Leeper)
Duck and Cover and Harry Belafonte (letter of comment
by Taras Wolansky)
What Is Science (letter of comment by Fred Lerner)
Wednesday's Child (letter of comment by Kip Williams)
This Week's Reading (THE WORLD BEHIND THE DOOR: AN ENCOUNTER
WITH SALVADOR DALI and FANTASMAS: SUPERNATURAL STORIES
BY MEXICAN AMERICAN WRITERS) (book comments
by Evelyn C. Leeper)
===================================================================
TOPIC: Science Fiction (and Other) Discussion Groups, Lectures,
etc. (NJ)
November 8: K-PAX (2001), Middletown (NJ) Public Library, 5PM;
discussion after the film
November 15: TRIGGERS by Robert J. Sawyer, Old Bridge (NJ) Public
Library, 7PM (note this is the *third* Thursday)
December 6: TWO FAMILY HOUSE (film hosted by Mark Leeper),
Old Bridge (NJ) Public Library, 6:30PM
December 20: DEATH OF A SALESMAN by Arthur Miller, Old Bridge (NJ)
Public Library, 7PM
Date TBD: THE RAPTURE OF THE NERDS by Cory Doctorow and Charles
Stross, Old Bridge (NJ) Public Library, 7PM
Speculative Fiction Lectures:
November 3: Linda Addison (Bram-Stoker-Award-winning author), Old
Bridge (NJ) Public Library, 12N
Northern New Jersey events are listed at:
http://www.sfsnnj.com/news.html
===================================================================
TOPIC: Realization (comments by Mark R. Leeper)
I am starting to find people in their seventies who are actually my
generation. That never used to be true. There was a time when
most people of my generation were mostly in their teens. Now
people in my generation are starting to admit to being near-
septuagenarians and even closet septuagenarians. It just goes to
show you. Trust people and you see what happens. I don't mean to
point fingers, but a lot of them were the first to enter their
fifties also. [-mrl]
===================================================================
TOPIC: Entering the Science Fiction World For Real (comments by
Mark R. Leeper)
I think I have been interested in science fiction from around age
five or six. And it did not take me long to realize that science
fiction did not get a lot of respect from people in general. The
term "science fiction" is frequently used as a synonym for
silliness. To call something a silly idea you brand it as "science
fiction." And while it is probably true that no four-hundred-foot
creatures are ever going to come out of Tokyo Bay, that is not the
whole stock and trade of science fiction. There are things that
are outside of current human experience that really can happen.
One of those things is significant climate change.
One of the purposes of science fiction is to give serious thought
to certain kinds of things happening and considering what effects
they will have. An editorial page I read (I think it was from the
"Wall Street Journal") laughed at the suggestion that we need to
prepare a strategy for what to do if it looks like the planet will
have a collision with an asteroid. They call that idea "science
fiction." But there is a non-zero-probability it could happen even
if it has not happened in the short span of time that is human
memory. It is a poor policy to prepare only for the sort of
problems we have faced in the past and are used to.
People have a hard time imagining that serious change really could
happen, particularly if they have selfish interest in ignoring the
possibility of that change. And for a long time there was a large
political force denying that global warming was happening. Plain
old probability gave the issue a plausible deniability. How so?
Imagine you are playing roulette. On the first spin of the wheel
you win if any number from 1 to 36 comes up. That is, any number
but zero and double zero coming up is a win for you. On the second
spin you win on anything from 1 to 35. Third spin will have you
win with the numbers from 1 to 34. And it will continue in the
same way. What sort of behavior would you see in terms of wins and
losses? Certainly at the start of the game you will have long
strings of wins punctuated by relatively short stretches of losses.
You can easily be skeptical that the long strings of losses are
coming. Particularly if you see it to be in your benefit to be
unconvinced that losing stretches are coming. If there are
stretches of wins still happening it can be a while before you see
the losses outnumbering the wins. But it will happen eventually.
The weather phenomenon is much the same. The presence of global
warming does not mean we will not get some rashes of cold weather.
And certainly when we do there will be those who point to them
saying they disprove the phenomenon of global warming. But the
best prediction is that these intervals will become shorter and
fewer as time goes by. In other words there is some variability
centered around a warming trend.
As far as global warming is concerned, it looks like our winning
streaks may be more limited in the future. In fact we now may be
on a losing streak. It looks like 2012 is going to be the hottest
year on record, beating out 2005, the previous record holder. And
prior to this year, of the twelve hottest years on record only one
was prior to 2001.
http://tinyurl.com/void-warmest-years
This year massive droughts have driven the corn crop to a five-year
low. The Corn Belt is suffering its worse drought in more than
fifty years. That is going to translate to higher costs for food
and fuel. The fuel problem is that people who want corn for food
are competing with people who want corn ethanol for fuel.
Competition will be driving up the cost for each. And the machines
that are used to grow and collect the corn will need fuel
themselves, complicating the issue.
There are two bits of comfort in all this. (It may be cold comfort
for such a warm year.) One comfort is that at least some of the
people who have argued obstinately that global warming does not
exist have changed their position. They now say that there
actually may be global warming after all but it certainly is not
the result of human action. I fully expect them to soon move on to
a position that warming may indeed be the result of human action,
just not their particular action. Then maybe it will be their
action, but action from long ago. They will want smaller and more
defensible boundaries to defend as the evidence that they have been
wrong becomes harder to deny.
The other piece of comfort is that the disastrous climate this year
is not very much the result of this year's ignoring of the problem.
Had we last year slammed on the brakes on creating greenhouse
gasses we would probably still be having droughts and heat waves.
We are not a whole lot worse off than we would have been if we had
done the right thing last year. Our environment and the whole
earth is a giant heat sink. It takes a long time to heat it up and
a long time to cool it back down. The warming does not stay where
it was put. It gets smeared over decades. This year's heat waves
and droughts are for the most part a gift from the last generation.
The warming we cause today is the legacy we are leaving the next
generation. And some of the same people who seem the most
concerned of the financial debt we are leaving our children are the
least concerned about destroying their environment.
Well, what has posterity ever done for us? [-mrl]
===================================================================
TOPIC: CARNIVAL OF SOULS (film comments by Evelyn C. Leeper)
Last week one of the mailing lists I'm on had an on-line film
discussion about CARNIVAL OF SOULS. Here are a few of the comments
I had; they probably will not make sense if you have not seen the
movie. There are *SPOILERS* for both CARNIVAL OF SOULS and another
movie.
Who is the man Mary keeps seeing? He is supposed to represent
death, I suppose, but it certainly is never very clear.
Mary doesn't look at the first organ owner when she talks to him,
except at the end when she says she's never coming back. She also
usually doesn't look at the doctor when she is talking to him.
Saltair Pavilion II, where it was filmed, closed in 1958, and was
destroyed by arson in 1970. Saltair III was built in 1981 from an
old aircraft hanger a mile west of the original. As of 2005,
concerts were held there. However, Saltair is *west* of Salt Lake
City, so Mary would not have passed it on the way from Kansas. (We
went there on one of our trips to Utah. Mark will probably have
more comments on it.)
In Kansas, the organ teacher (?) tells her to put her soul into her
playing. In Salt Lake City, the minister says, "That's why they
put up this barrier," and Mary replies, "It'd be very easy to step
around it." This is, of course, what she is doing with the barrier
between life and death. Later the minister says (when Mary is
playing the strange music), "I feel sorry for you and your lack of
soul." There are also several other references to souls.
There are two sequences when Mary "becomes invisible" to everyone
else, and all sound ceases. Each time it ends when Mary sees a
bird and hears it chirping. Maybe the bird is a reference to the
bird in DR. JEKYLL AND MR. HYDE with Frederic March, where a bird
is singing, but when a cat attacks it, Jekyll changes into Hyde.
For that matter, when Mary is invisible in the store, does the
sales clerk see the dress Mary is carrying float out of the
dressing room and onto the rack? Or does it magically appear at
some point? Or what? (That's the problem with invisibility--does
it extend to clothes you wear and things you carry?)
(THE SIXTH SENSE may draw somewhat from this. I'm sure Shyamalan
had seen CARNIVAL OF SOULS before making THE SIXTH SENSE.)
It's a sign of the times when the movie was made (1962) that Mary
always covers her head in church, even when practicing in an empty
church. But what kind of church is it? It seems clear it is not a
Catholic church, so the minister's collar and the stained glass
windows indicate probably either Episcopalian or Presbyterian.
Other signs of the times, include that the car has an AM-only radio
and that she drives to Utah on two-lane roads with gravel
shoulders. There were certainly *some* interstate highways at the
time, but major sections of I-70, which would be the current route
to use, was not completed until the 1970s and later.
Also, she stays in the car on the lift in the garage, another sign
that things have changed a lot since then.
I don't know why Mary lets the creepy neighbor in, but he really
reminds me of Angie in MARTY.
The other customer at the bus station window obviously knows she is
there, even though the script claims not.
Is the car that goes off the bridge a Schroedinger's car, where she
is half-dead and half-alive until you fish the car out and look and
the wave form collapses? [-ecl]
===================================================================
TOPIC: Duck and Cover and Harry Belafonte (letter of comment by
Taras Wolansky)
In response to Mark's comments on "duck-and-cover" films in the
10/12/12 issue of the MT VOID, Taras Wolansky writes:
On "duck and cover": It's funny to think that a good defense
against nuclear weapons is white clothing, a big hat, and
sunglasses. I once saw a picture of a Hiroshima survivor with a
pattern burned into her back, where black lines on her white blouse
got very, very hot. And of course getting under your desk
protected you from falling debris.
My impression is that nuclear weapons got smaller rather than
larger--because the increasing accuracy of delivery vehicles made
large bombs wasteful. So the advice is still good. [-tw]
Mark responds:
I am not sure where my father got it but in the 1950s my father had
a large report from the Atomic Energy Commission showing what has
been learned from studying of Hiroshima after the attack. I think
I have seen the same photographs. (I don't think it warped me, but
maybe something did.) Of course it was not a part of the helpful
instructions at the time, but when you saw the flash there was no
time to put on a while shirt. [-mrl]
In response to Mark's comments on Harry Belafonte in the same
issue, Taras writes:
The reference to Harry Belafonte rang a bell faintly. Ronald
Radosh, a former man of the Left himself, described Belafonte as a
Stalinist who admired Castro and called Colin Powell a house slave.
See http://archive.frontpagemag.com/readArticle.aspx?ARTID=21534.
[-tw]
Mark responds:
I am not sure why you are bringing politics into a discussion of
non-political song lyrics, but at the time Belafonte raised a great
deal of controversy and all kinds of people said all kinds of
things about him. I think of Belafonte as somebody who was
somewhat admired who took a public stand that desperately needed to
be taken. He had been formed by a lot of what had been inflicted
on him. He did not come off as well in interviews and took on
extreme views. I don't think he ever ran for office, knowing his
own limitations, but he would admit to extreme views when asked.
Probably the reason he still is a role model to some extent was
that he had extreme private views that he came by honestly, but
didn't force his views on others. Instead he advocated a policy
that we now think of as common sense, thank goodness. Perhaps he
should be a role model on what to do with extremist views.
If you saw the way our current-day Republican candidates tore into
each other and Obama a few months ago, why should we expect that
those on the 1950s left should have all agreed with each other or
even have any less vitriol when they disagreed? [-mrl]
Taras concludes:
Sorry I've not been commenting much lately. [-tw]
Mark replies:
It is always interesting when you do comment and since, as Evelyn
figures, about 25% of the members do comment, which is incredibly
high for a fanzine. [-mrl]
===================================================================
TOPIC: What Is Science (letter of comment by Fred Lerner)
In response to Mark's comments on what is science in the 0/19/12
issue of the MT VOID, Fred Lerner writes:
Mark wrote "It is a question of what we want the words to mean.
But there are sciences that make observations but without error
bars. Psychology has no error bars. Of course, psychology is an
inexact science and mathematics is a very exact discipline. "
Wouldn't astronomy be a better comparison than psychology?
Mark replies:
You do not explain your reasoning and on the face of it I
definitely disagree. If I want to measure the mass of the planet
Mars I will need to make some numerical measurements. None of
those measurements can be absolutely precise. I will have to
compute the probable value and the range of possible error.
Psychology rarely would get into measurements. I will not say
never, but I would think it would be rarely. In fact Google shows
I am wrong. I do find an a paper entitled, "Measurement error in
psychological research: Lessons from 26 research scenarios":
http://tinyurl.com/void-measurement-error. [-mrl]
===================================================================
TOPIC: Wednesday's Child (letter of comment by Kip Williams)
In response to Mark's comments on Wednesday's child in the 10/19/12
issue of the MT VOID, Kip Williams writes:
Beware, Mark! John Sloan offers apparent confirmation of your
observation that most people of your age were born on a Wednesday,
but unless you share the same exact birthday, acceptance of his
data in your dataset is most likely to allow (or require) the
inclusion of other data that will water your case down to about 14%
of what it was before he chimed in.
Mark replies:
His is not confirmation but an observation of a similar phenomenon.
I am nearly certain that John is not my age. It is just a separate
case of devilishly good looks and birth-day-of-week of convergence.
It is too small a set to be statistically significant. [-mrl]
===================================================================
TOPIC: This Week's Reading (book comments by Evelyn C. Leeper)
THE WORLD BEHIND THE DOOR: AN ENCOUNTER WITH SALVADOR DALI by Mike
Resnick (ISBN 978-0-8230-0416-4) is part of Watson-Guptill's "Art
Encounters", a series of young adult novels about artists.
(Resnick has also written LADY WITH AN ALIEN: AN ENCOUNTER WITH
LEONARDO DE VINCI and A CLUB IN MONMARTRE: AN ENCOUNTER WITH HENRI
DE TOULOUSE-LAUTREC.) A familiarity with Dali's work would be
helpful for the reader, as much of what Dali describes from his
dreams appears in one or more famous paintings of his. (The stilt-
legged elephants appear in "One Second Before Awakening from a
Dream Caused by the Flight of a Bee Around a Pomegranate", but in
also "The Temptation of St. Anthony".) The basic idea is that Dali
can get to another world through a door at the back of his closet,
and no, it's not Narnia. It is a world where everything in Dali's
work that is so bizarre is normal and everything normal in our
world (such as level floors, and effect following cause) is
considered bizarre, (That makes this a fantasy novel rather than
just biographical fiction, if you care.)
I am not sure that the mind of Dali is suitable for a young adult
novel, but Resnick does the best he can, and fans of his will
probably find this of interest.
FANTASMAS: SUPERNATURAL STORIES BY MEXICAN AMERICAN WRITERS edited
by Rob Johnson (ISBN 978-1-931-01002-3) is an anthology of nineteen
stories distinguished from magical realism (according to the
introduction by Kathleen Alcala) by having a basis in oral
tradition, an influence from folk religions, the use of vernacular
forms, and the influence of United States life and culture. (In
that sense, there is a similarity to Neil Gaiman's AMERICAN GODS,
which repositions European folk religions into the United States.)
While it may seem that these stories often have familiar
stereotypes (curanderos, for example, or various pre-Columbian
tropes), it is also true that as soon as one identifies a literary
movement or genre, one is likely to find a thread running through
it, and this may be somewhat stereotypical.
(FANTASMAS is published by the deceptively named Bilingual
Press/Editorial Bilingue--deceptive because the book is not in fact
bilingual, but is entirely in English.) [-ecl]
===================================================================
Mark Leeper
mleeper@optonline.net
If people only spoke when they had something to say,
the human race would soon lose the power of speech.
--Kitty Fane (THE PAINTED VEIL)