I hate snow more than 90% of the time I see it anyway, so when it's mixed with 40 mph winds, sleet and doled out in half-foot-deep-or-more amounts, I find myself assuming a wrath towards it of near-Biblical proportions.
I am, of course, a man of peace and I wish to be at odds with no one on earth. I own no weapons save for those socks I didn't wash the last time I wore them to mow the lawn. But should anyone brave the elements, come to my home, knock on my door and sing "White Christmas" to me, I shall direct upon that person the Gaze of Instant and Painful Death. And it will be several minutes before I am sorry.
Thursday, December 24, 2009
Monday, December 21, 2009
Gotta Watch Them Verbs
This article by author Naomi Wolf suggests that Carrie Bradshaw, the character played by Sarah Jessica Parker in Sex and the City, became "feminism's foremost philosopher." But how can you take Ms. Wolf seriously?
It's not because Bradshaw is what we quaintly used to call a "fictional character" and thus has no philosophy not given her by writers, Ms. Parker and show producers (one of whom I went to college with).
Nor is it because this fictional character was a shoe-obsessed airhead who spent most of the show chasing after a man (Chris Noth's "Mr. Big") who, from what I hear, frequently treated her poorly.
No, it's far simpler than that. Second paragraph, first sentence. Ms. Wolf says the show "centred not around a couple," using that funny British spelling because this article appears in a British paper. It is impossible, of course, to center or centre around anything. You may orbit around something, you may revolve around something, you may circle around something or you may wander around something.
But you can only center on something. Remember, the center of a circle is the point that is equidistant from all points on the circle. That means it has to be one location, and that means it can't be "around" anything.
Just a former reporter's pet peeve. I feel better now.
It's not because Bradshaw is what we quaintly used to call a "fictional character" and thus has no philosophy not given her by writers, Ms. Parker and show producers (one of whom I went to college with).
Nor is it because this fictional character was a shoe-obsessed airhead who spent most of the show chasing after a man (Chris Noth's "Mr. Big") who, from what I hear, frequently treated her poorly.
No, it's far simpler than that. Second paragraph, first sentence. Ms. Wolf says the show "centred not around a couple," using that funny British spelling because this article appears in a British paper. It is impossible, of course, to center or centre around anything. You may orbit around something, you may revolve around something, you may circle around something or you may wander around something.
But you can only center on something. Remember, the center of a circle is the point that is equidistant from all points on the circle. That means it has to be one location, and that means it can't be "around" anything.
Just a former reporter's pet peeve. I feel better now.
Yet Another Big Honkin' Lump of Coal...
...to me, to go with the egg on my face for not following the article about Dr. Nathan Grills far enough to find out that the Australian professor was spoofing scientific articles about silly subjects, something I of course hold very dear.
In fact, Dr. Grills plays Santa and he says he does so out of a belief in what he calls:
Oh, it gets worse for me yet. In his everyday work, Dr. Grills studies HIV transmission in rural areas of India to see how charities can help victims of the disease in those regions. I feel like I just kicked a puppy...that is, I feel like this his how I would feel if I ever had kicked a puppy, because I am not the kind of person who would do such a thing, although based on how I made fun of this really neat guy you probably shouldn't take my word for that.
As one of the people who made fun of your spoofed study, Dr. Grills, I certainly apologize, on the one-in-a-million chance either of my readers ever meets you and mentions my earlier post to you. And the study itself is pretty dadgum funny. It gave me a ho-ho-ho for the day.
In fact, Dr. Grills plays Santa and he says he does so out of a belief in what he calls:
...the true meaning of Santa. The true Santa, Saint Nicholas, was a very generous man who gave of all his wealth to bless others who were in need. This was a reflection of one of the greatest gifts given to humanity: the baby Jesus. We need to reclaim Christmas for the beauty of giving and loving.
Oh, it gets worse for me yet. In his everyday work, Dr. Grills studies HIV transmission in rural areas of India to see how charities can help victims of the disease in those regions. I feel like I just kicked a puppy...that is, I feel like this his how I would feel if I ever had kicked a puppy, because I am not the kind of person who would do such a thing, although based on how I made fun of this really neat guy you probably shouldn't take my word for that.
As one of the people who made fun of your spoofed study, Dr. Grills, I certainly apologize, on the one-in-a-million chance either of my readers ever meets you and mentions my earlier post to you. And the study itself is pretty dadgum funny. It gave me a ho-ho-ho for the day.
Thursday, December 17, 2009
Another Big Honkin' Lump of Coal
To the apparently underemployed Dr. Nathan Grills from Monash University in Australia, who suggests that the image of the right jolly old elf, all chubby and plump, promotes obesity in children.
The tradition of leaving Santa a glass of brandy also promotes an image of drunken driving, Dr. Grinch -- Grills, I mean -- says. I respond thusly:
1) As we learned from any number of Rankin-Bass Christmas specials, the reindeer are sentient. Santa can have as much brandy as he wants; he has nine designated drivers and one of them has an illuminated nose.
2) I'd imagine that after Santa's "helper," AKA "Dad," sweats through the midnight, midnight-plus-one and perhaps midnight-plus-two-and-three hours to put together that blasted bicycle, he's earned a swig, so lay the bleep off, Doc.
3) Children love Santa, but children do not want to be Santa. There is no waiting line to perform chimney-work, for example.
4) A glass of brandy and a mince pie left out for Santa? Australians have some different holiday traditions, it would seem. No wonder the old lush never touched the milk and cookies my sister and I made sure were left for him.
You know, if university professors like Dr. Grills and the fellow mentioned the other day keep this up, all that coal is going to make people start questioning their ecological commitment.
The tradition of leaving Santa a glass of brandy also promotes an image of drunken driving, Dr. Grinch -- Grills, I mean -- says. I respond thusly:
1) As we learned from any number of Rankin-Bass Christmas specials, the reindeer are sentient. Santa can have as much brandy as he wants; he has nine designated drivers and one of them has an illuminated nose.
2) I'd imagine that after Santa's "helper," AKA "Dad," sweats through the midnight, midnight-plus-one and perhaps midnight-plus-two-and-three hours to put together that blasted bicycle, he's earned a swig, so lay the bleep off, Doc.
3) Children love Santa, but children do not want to be Santa. There is no waiting line to perform chimney-work, for example.
4) A glass of brandy and a mince pie left out for Santa? Australians have some different holiday traditions, it would seem. No wonder the old lush never touched the milk and cookies my sister and I made sure were left for him.
You know, if university professors like Dr. Grills and the fellow mentioned the other day keep this up, all that coal is going to make people start questioning their ecological commitment.
You're Looking in the Wrong Place
Sometimes, even famous people I like say things that don't make much sense. Sam Elliott, the only man alive whose mustache could probably beat Chuck Norris's in a fair fight, thinks the reason that New Line Cinema didn't make sequels to 2007's The Golden Compass was because the Roman Catholic church put too much pressure on them to shelve the project.
Compass was based on the first -- and best -- of Philip Pullman's "His Dark Materials" fantasy novels. Pullman is an English writer who despises C.S. Lewis's "The Chronicles of Narnia" children's novels and was initially pretty upfront that his works were designed as a sort of "anti-Narnia," although he didn't use that term.
Pullman misreads Lewis at a number of critical points. His trilogy has the disadvantage of having enough attitude and agenda for three books, but having story enough for only one and a half. And New Line was facing the reality that a film based on the best book of the series draws a 42% rating at Rotten Tomatoes and carries the barely better than break-even score of 51 at Metacritics.
New Line was also facing a wretched financial picture, managing to somehow squander the mint of money that came from The Lord of the Rings trilogy into several year's worth of box-office underwhelmingness. They spent between $180 and $200 million on Compass and had an initial domestic take of barely $70 million (Mr. Elliott's figure of an $85 million gross comes from who knows where). New Line, in fact, went under and was bought out by Warner Bros. less than three months after Compass was released.
This writer notes that the church has protested a number of things which have gone on to do quite well, among them a handful of little movies about an English boy wizard, a gal from the Detroit suburbs who's sold a record or two, and some books about vampires written by a Mormon homemaker.
So I'm going to take the risk of disagreeing with Mr. Elliott, who's one of my favorite character actors, and say that the real reason no one's going to make any sequels to The Golden Compass has more to do with The Green Paper than any religious influence that the Roman Catholic church holds over the board of directors of New Line Cinema or its successors.
Compass was based on the first -- and best -- of Philip Pullman's "His Dark Materials" fantasy novels. Pullman is an English writer who despises C.S. Lewis's "The Chronicles of Narnia" children's novels and was initially pretty upfront that his works were designed as a sort of "anti-Narnia," although he didn't use that term.
Pullman misreads Lewis at a number of critical points. His trilogy has the disadvantage of having enough attitude and agenda for three books, but having story enough for only one and a half. And New Line was facing the reality that a film based on the best book of the series draws a 42% rating at Rotten Tomatoes and carries the barely better than break-even score of 51 at Metacritics.
New Line was also facing a wretched financial picture, managing to somehow squander the mint of money that came from The Lord of the Rings trilogy into several year's worth of box-office underwhelmingness. They spent between $180 and $200 million on Compass and had an initial domestic take of barely $70 million (Mr. Elliott's figure of an $85 million gross comes from who knows where). New Line, in fact, went under and was bought out by Warner Bros. less than three months after Compass was released.
This writer notes that the church has protested a number of things which have gone on to do quite well, among them a handful of little movies about an English boy wizard, a gal from the Detroit suburbs who's sold a record or two, and some books about vampires written by a Mormon homemaker.
So I'm going to take the risk of disagreeing with Mr. Elliott, who's one of my favorite character actors, and say that the real reason no one's going to make any sequels to The Golden Compass has more to do with The Green Paper than any religious influence that the Roman Catholic church holds over the board of directors of New Line Cinema or its successors.
Wednesday, December 16, 2009
One Big Honkin' Lump of Coal
That will be on its way forthwith to one David Kyle Johnson, an assistant professor of philosophy at King's College in Wilkes-Barre, PA. Professor Johnson takes to the Baltimore Sun to enlighten us all about how wrong it is to encourage children to believe in Santa Claus.
Professor Johnson also provides another fine example of my thesis that professors don't have enough to do.
Professor Johnson also provides another fine example of my thesis that professors don't have enough to do.
Tuesday, December 15, 2009
Due Credit
Since I dinged Stephen King for uncomplimentary comments about military folks, it's proper that I acknowledge his good gesture to National Guard troops from his home state of Maine.
About 150 soldiers scheduled for deployment in January will get bus tickets home thanks to King, who donated $12,999 towards their tickets from a training base in Indiana to Portland and to Bangor, Maine's major cities. The cost was $13,000, but King is apparently a bit of a triskedekaphobe and didn't want to jinx the troops, so his assistant put in the extra dollar.
About 150 soldiers scheduled for deployment in January will get bus tickets home thanks to King, who donated $12,999 towards their tickets from a training base in Indiana to Portland and to Bangor, Maine's major cities. The cost was $13,000, but King is apparently a bit of a triskedekaphobe and didn't want to jinx the troops, so his assistant put in the extra dollar.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
