Salon Des Geeks

I was listening to Fresh Air last week. The interview was of Guillermo del Toro, the writer and director of Pan’s Labyrinth. Terri Gross started by introducing the film. The film is about a young girl in Franco’s Spain(1944), whose mother has remarried. Her husband is a vicious Captain who is hunting Communists in a rural area. The girl deals with the horror of her life thorough her imagination…

Say what?

I was really surprised. To me, the fantasy was more important to the story than the elements of realism. The point of the Fable is to illustrate something more meaningful, more transcendant than telling a simple story. In fact, it bothers me a lot not to believe the fantastic elements within the context of the story. The girl is the daughter of the King, no matter what may happen in the story.

Apparently a lot of the reviewers treat the film in this way, and I wonder how the lovers of Speculative Fiction out there felt about the ‘reality’ of the film.

I saw one of the most disturbing news stories ever on television last night.

Unsuspecting, I happen to change the channel to Fox News. The man at the desk introduces the next story. It is about nuclear weapons. But first, he describes what happened last week on “24″: A terrorist set off a `suitcase bomb’ in a US city. Hmm. Then, he introduces two individuals presented as experts. He asks the first, “What is the probability that the scenario presented in 24 could actually happen?” Answer: “Zero. I am glad we can put this myth to rest. It is basiclaly an internet hoax which is out of control.” The news-man pauses, and the mumbles through a vague sentence, including reference to Jack Bauer(the fictional main character in 24), and poses a similar question to the second expert. She proceeds to answer a different question about the concerns of proliferation of radioactive material. The follow up question is again about 24. At no point did anyone affirm the truth of 24, but the presentation weakened the denial.

At this point, incensed, I realized that I was watching a callow advertisment (for an entertaining show) masquerading as news. I changed the channel.

Rather than the too familiar indulgence in paranoia to sell cheap news, they serve paranoia to shill expensive fiction. The Horror.

(I apologize for this digression induced by writer’s block.)

I’m sure we all know people who are prone to be late to meetings but who try to fix the problem by setting their clocks a bit fast. I was just discussing this with a friend of mine, and we both found it funny. Of course, the reasoning goes, setting the clock fast is futile because when you read it you’ll mentally correct it back to the real time.

But is that true? It might be that the fast clock works at least part of the time because you forget to correct it. Or even if you correct it, some stubborn bit of your sub-conscious mind might continue to feel a greater sense of urgency–it could be the equivalent of setting a price to $2.99. (I wonder if anyone has tried to measure this effect experimentally.)

You can avoid the mental correction problem by setting your tardy friend’s clock five minutes fast without telling him. But eventually he’ll figure out that it’s fast.

Or you can use the magic of uncertainty. Construct a clock with “bounded noise”. It’s guaranteed to always be within five minutes of the time you set. So set it five minutes fast. Now all you know when you look at the clock is that it’s between 0 and 10 minutes fast. In order to make a good faith effort to guarantee you are on time, you have to assume the clock is accurate. Thus it will make you arrive earlier, but not always by the same amount–it’s not perfect.

But here’s the twist. You don’t actually have to construct the bounded noise clock. All you have to do is buy your friend a normal clock and tell him it is a bounded noise clock, carefully explaining the concept. He will dutifully set it five minutes fast and leave for meetings early, none the wiser.

I was looking at the Shakespeare & Company website. Saw this great Macbeth poster: . Reminded me of an exhibit of Polish Poster Art I saw (Google Images). Basically, the Communist government kept artists employed by having them producing posters for film, and performances. There were some terrific Macbeth posters … the one which stands out in my mind was a decaying skull made of massive blocks of stone.

Anyway, I like this poster.

A while back there was a discussion about good science fiction books. I decided to put together a ‘reading list’ of Science Fiction films. It can be found here.

I decided to arrange the films into weeks with the notion that films could be watched once per day. Which means that I tried to pick films you could watch back to back and still remain sane.

I kind of ran into a problem with Week 7. I wanted to capture films which confront human enlightenment. But unfortunately, all I could really think of were films like 2001/Close Encounters of the third kind/Red Planet/Chronos which would be unwatchable on adjacent days for most people. Suggestions?

So in a NYT’s article discussing Southern Methodist Universities selection as a finalist for the Bush Presidential Library I came across the following:

What’s more, Southern Methodist [University] stands to lose prestige and donor support if it were to fail in its bid for the [G.W. Bush Presidential] library at this stage… Both the interim provost and the president of the Faculty Senate cautioned “outsiders” not to mistake vigorous academic debate for widespread opposition.

It struck me as a reflection of the Bush Doctrine. Asking observers not to confuse debate with widespread opposition. Or the more pernicious meta-argument: do not debate lest it be interpreted as widespread opposition. Regardless, I have a new euphemism.

I found this article quite amusing. It’s by a journalist who was preparing a book on exotic animal training, and the applications to her marriage. Clearly I am not qualified to comment on the advisability of her methods, but I enjoyed the read.

If the link breaks, google for “What shamu taught me about marriage.”

For those of you without NYT’s accounts, um, get one (free) because I love sending people links from the NYT’s. But, if you send me an email I’ll email the article to you.

The roses are blooming, the hibiscus is nodding, the tangerines are ripening… it’s sunny and warm down here in southern California. All that’s missing from this idyllic picture is your presence. I hereby officially suggest convening a Salon in the West, hosted by yours truly! Who’s in?

I’m thinking that March-ish might be nice, providing sufficient time to work out schedules and get good plane ticket deals for those of you who would be traveling from afar. But earlier is good, too, since that makes the lovely weather all the more savory. What say you?

Happy New Year, one and all!