It's bad enough that the definition of "news" has come to mean stories about bad jokes from shock jocks and paternity tests. That stories which were once the purview of tabloids are now routinely given as much, if not more, play on major news outlets as stories that actually have some worth.
So what's the latest "news" off the AOL feed?
Kirsten Dunst says she likes to smoke pot.
Aside from the minor name irony of Mary Jane liking Mary Jane, an LA actress says she likes to smoke pot? My God, how is this REMOTELY news? Tell me a staunch anti-drug advocate is found stoned, and that's a story, but an LA actress? You're kidding, right? What next? Jerry Seinfeld announces he likes jokes? Or, as another poster commented on the Imus thread, this just in: Water is wet.
PAD
Posted by Peter David at April 11, 2007 08:55 AM | TrackBack | Other blogs commentingI think the story here is that Dunst was dumb enough to admit to using drugs about a month before her big summer action film (one that is arguably targeted toward kids, though it is PG-13) comes out.
It will be amusing to see the backpedaling commence. "I.. uh... was talking about pots... you know, I like to cook and stuff."
Considering that all of the news programs came to a screeching halt yesterday to give us the name of Anna Nicole Smith's baby-daddy, I'm not surprised anymore about what is considered "news" these days.
BTW, thanks for mentioning my "water is wet" line.
What next? Jerry Seinfeld announces he likes jokes?
Eureka! That statement was a revelation to me! It was the final missing piece of the puzzle.
Jerry Seinfeld likes jokes. He likes them so much that he hoards the funny ones and doesn't put them in his act.
*whew*
Another of life's little mysteries solved.
;-)
"I think the story here is that Dunst was dumb enough to admit to using drugs about a month before her big summer action film (one that is arguably targeted toward kids, though it is PG-13) comes out."
First of all, like that's going to matter. Let some organization just *try* to stage a boycott of SM3 and see how far they get with it.
Second, I doubt she brought it up out of nowhere. Maybe the interviewer asked her about her position on drugs, or even asked, "So how does Mary Jane feel about Mary Jane?" At which point she has three choices: No comment. Lie. Or tell the truth. "No comment" is a red flag. A lie just begs for someone to contradict her ("Kirsten said she doesn't smoke pot? That's a laugh. We got high together just last Thursday." NOW you've got an even bigger story.) Generally speaking, the truth is easier to remember, and she obviously genuinely feels it's no big deal. Given the environment she lives in, to her it really isn't.
PAD
Too bad for Alberto Gonzales he didn't take your advice. :-)
Maybe she's angling to get excused from the publicity tour for Spidey-3 like Keith Richards has on Pirates-3.
I think the story is that admitting responsible marijuana use is still controversial in this country.
My favorite angle is that she also mentioned how much Carl Sagan liked to toke up. Billions and billions of times, I'll warrant.
It seemed obvious to me after hearing her in a single interview. She was stoned out of her mind.
Like smoking pot is a big deal with all the botulism that will be injected into her face in the next 15 years...
SOMETHING has to kill those brain cells...well the ones that are still alive.
While I'm not an advocate of drug legalization, when one looks at the government stigma placed on pot it's nothing short of absurd when alcohol (a depressant that is arguably much more destructive than weed) is so readily accepted in American society.
Journalism is having a fourth estate sale.
Trying to compete with youtubers, the blogosphere and the rumor mill has given MSM no recourse but to lower themselves to that level. There is no Chicago Handbook of style and libel manual for the Internet afaik, and a pooled resource like Wiki is unreliable because anyone can change/edit. "facts" are fictional nowadays.
Lets be honest here. There really is no such thing as a "news" industry in America anymore. The "news" shows that actually traffic in pure news without editorial, spin or a desire to portray Hollywood gossip as more important then the laws being passed that effect our lives are few and far between. The majority of "news" in this country has become entertainment geared in order to bring in the ratings and generate $$$$.
It's not even that new. Back in the 80's I ticked off a local news personality that came to my High School to speak to some of our classes. I, being a budding news junkie and having no tact, raised my hand, got called on and asked her exactly why THE LOCAL NEWS was wasting half of its thirty minute broadcast time everyday for weeks on end to tell us that nothing new had happened in the Jim and Tammy Faye saga, but that they would recap the nothingness in case anybody had been in a coma for the previous three weeks of nothing new. I found this rather annoying when there were some serious issues happening in the Commonwealth with employment, crime and our lawmakers on the Hill tripping over themselves. Lets just say that my teacher wasn't too thrilled with me.
Hell, even the dumber stories that are more for entertainment then news never die. How many Joey Butacan'tspellhislastname stories did we get after the whole Long Island Lolita thing was over. Local and national news would would give us updates on his music video, his new run ins with the law, his new business ventures, his marital troubles and the anniversary special where they all got to be interviewed at once. ?????????
Was it really news that Bobbit became a porn actor? Did it really warrant the coverage it got? Why are we getting ten minutes of Paris Hilton coverage on news programs that aren't aired on the E Network? Do we really care that P Diddy is selling his home for whatever millions of dollars so that he can by a new home with approximately 12,000 more rooms and 5,000 more bathrooms then his old one?
I don't, but if you look at the ratings of various news programs you'll see that I'm in the minority. It's one of the reasons that I love my DVR. It does tend to make a one hour news program play in twenty-five minutes.
No, not surprised at all that you're seeing this as a major news story. There are some mornings these days when I'm just surprised that this fluff isn't the only news stories that you're seeing.
Rant over.
8(.....
If I need idiot news, I have FARK.com. If I need news, it's bbc.co.uk. The TV is only on for sound in terms of news, because the only useful person on any news channel anymore (I don't have actual BBC due to ditching the cable box) is Jack Cafferty, the original crusty old bastard.
WHAT! Water is Wet? OMG you have just changed my life.
I haven't seen the actual report (a quick search in the Usual Media Suspects didn't turn it up), but that doesn't stop me from making a couple of points:
1) Besides the three options PAD presented (lie, "no comment," truth), the more usual "out" I've often seen famous people use is something along the lines of, "I have, in the past, used illicit substances." ("In the past" could well mean "I don't have a lit bong crammed into my mouth as we conduct this interview.")
2) The (admittedly flimsy) "story" is that someone of note actually admits in an interview to committing -- presumably with no intent to stop -- a fairly serious felony. Regardless of one's feelings on the law, those who routinely break the law seldom admit to it in any sort of public forum.
3) The other aspect of the "story" is that someone of note admits to doing something that is normally considered private or personal. It's much the same way that the press would have a field day with an interview that yielded headlines such as, "President Fuebar admits yanking crank thousands of times as teenager" or "President Fuebar admits relief after taking a big stinky dump at least once a day." No, it isn't news, but it's enough of a taboo to print it.
according to this article she did mention Carl Sagan.
"My best friend Sasha's dad was Carl Sagan, the astronomer. He was the biggest pot smoker in the world and he was a genius."
She also said:
"I've never been a major smoker, but I think America's view on weed is ridiculous. I mean - are you kidding me? If everyone smoked weed, the world would be a better place."
Here's the current list of articles covering this hot news sstory. At this time it is mostly tabloid news.
2) The (admittedly flimsy) "story" is that someone of note actually admits in an interview to committing -- presumably with no intent to stop -- a fairly serious felony. Regardless of one's feelings on the law, those who routinely break the law seldom admit to it in any sort of public forum.
Doesn't she live in California, where it's actually no a fairly serious felony? Or am I misinformed about the legal state of marihuana there?
Possession of marijuana is still a serious felony on the federal level and AG Gonzo the Great has made it clear that he believes federal law trumps state law.
I fail to see why pot is so controversial in american society, but maybe if more people admitted using it it would become less of a taboo. Western world spends a huge amount of money prosecuting a substance that has much less effect than, say, six shots of tequila or a gun on a house where children live. Money that could be better spent almost any other way.
While Dunst is not the tidal changing role model kind, maybe a few hundred like her would erase that ridiculous stigma so taxes can start flowing in the right direction.
It never fails to make me angry, to see how insane and hypocritical our society is, whenever I contemplate anti-marijuana laws (and the lack of legislation forbidding alcohol).
It's a bit off-topic, but speaking of major hypocrisis and double standards... I've read a few days ago many comments in Newsarama about how horrible and annoying the new Supergirl character is, because she acted all slutty and threw herself at the much older Hal Jordan in "the Brave and the Bold" comic, seeing that she is only 17.
Now just imagine a 17-year old SuperBOY acting all horny and flirting with older superheroines, like Superboy used to do in the 1990s, and people would say how the character is cool and funny.
Our society is simply insane.
Possession and use of marijuana is NOT a serious felony on the federal level, so long as you only have small amounts for personal use. The serious felony level doesn't get reached until you start dealing. Mere possession is a minor felony at best. Now, driving under the influence of pot is a serious offense most places, but not really more so than driving under the influence of alcohol. Impaired is impaired.
Mind you, that Dunst tokes occasionally would explain statements of hers like opining that Peter should be killed off and the next Spider-Man movie be about Mary Jane as a single mother raising their mutant baby....
This just in, the sun having risen in the east this morning appears to set in the west. Will there be nightfall? Tune in as we keep you up to date on potential outbreak of night. Tonight at 11.
I think the story is that admitting responsible marijuana use is still controversial in this country.
Wow. Is there such a thing as "responsible marijuana use"?
And this just in: Comic book fans hate comic books.
I'm as mad as hell and I'm not going to take it anymore...
I agree with you on the other stuff, but I think that the Imus story is significant. It would be different if it were some random asshole, but Imus has famous news correspondents and presidential candidates on his show. People need to know that by appearing on his show, they're implicitly legitimizing his language and views.
[digress] PAD, are you going to do a blog for GRINDHOUSE? Amazingly entertaining film. [/digress]
responsible marajuana use is like responsible drinking - you indulge and then chill out - you don't drive, operate heavy machinery, start any fights, etc. - they're both depressants, so use the downtime, let your mind float, hang with your friends & then go to work the next day sober.
for a pretty clever illustation of what is and isn't news, read Terry Pratchett's "The Truth" - people don't want "news" - what they are interested in is "olds" - as in same old s#%!
It's a bit off-topic, but speaking of major hypocrisis and double standards... I've read a few days ago many comments in Newsarama about how horrible and annoying the new Supergirl character is, because she acted all slutty and threw herself at the much older Hal Jordan in "the Brave and the Bold" comic, seeing that she is only 17.
One word for those "fans" - Arisia. Until the massive retcon, she was underage...
(I may have misspelled the name - I'm not a rabid GL fan - but you know what I mean anyway, right?)
"responsible marajuana use is like responsible drinking"
Responsible illegal activity is just like resposible legal activity? Really? Try to get that one to fly with the arresting officer, the District Attorney, the Judge and then your new bunkmates in jail. I'm sure they can use the laugh.
Some people seem to think that is something is "the law" then we all should fall in line. Since we all more or less agree on what a responsible use of alcohol is like... would that change if prohibition came into effect again? Responsible use includes any use that doesnt harm others. Period.
If the law decides to mess around with how people spend their time, it doesnt change whats responsible and whats not. It only changes the legal status of it. But its not smoking pot what puts you in jail or gets you fined, make no mistake. Its the law.
If acting against a law you consider unfair by doing something that harms no one is irresponsible, then no one would have fought to change so many unfair laws. Because the laws change and that doesnt change the ethical meaning of your actions.
"Responsible illegal activity is just like resposible legal activity?"
well, yes, if one is addressing the idea of how one conducts oneself while intoxicated and not the legality of the means - which was my point - absolutely.
I go out with some friends one night. I have a couple of drinks, cut myself off and switch to tea two or three hours before we leave. On the way home, I get stopped at a checkpoint that RPD has set up. They ask if I've been drinking and I tell them I had two beers over two hours ago while at dinner with friends. They give me some roadside tests and a PBT. I pass the tests and I only blow a .01. I'm fine, I'm legal and I'm unimpaired.
I go home to my preggers wife and the next day I'm back on the job. I drank legally and in a responsible manner.
John Q. Public goes to his friend's house. They smoke some weed. A couple of hours later, John is on the way home and gets stopped at the same police checkpoint. They smell the weed on his cloths and ask him to step out of the car. Between the smell, the glassy eyes and other indicators, they feel that they have enough there for an arrest. They take John to the magistrate and get a warrant to have blood drawn at the local hospital. The lab boys send the officers the good news a few days later. John gets tried and convicted pays a hefty fine and/or does jail time.
If John had a wife, kid or anybody else that depended on him in any serious way, then John let them down. He's likely no longer there and they're as screwed as he is. I see it all the time.
John did something illegal in an unresponsible manner purely because it was illegal. He's messed up his future ability to earn a good living and he's left the people that count on him now hanging in the wind.
Like I said, I get to see it all the time. It's not pretty. And it's not even close to responsible.
Marijuana is passe. If Dunst wants to remain an "A-lister" she needs to get hooked on heroin.
// I think the story is that admitting responsible marijuana use is still controversial in this country.
My favorite angle is that she also mentioned how much Carl Sagan liked to toke up. Billions and billions of times, I'll warrant. //
Carl Sagan's pot use has been widly reported in lots of places, he was apparently quite open about it, saying it helped him think. Those who support legalizing pot always seem to bring up Sagan, apparently thinking it adds some respectabilty to thier point.
Speaking of smoking pot being controversal in this country, Bill Marh had a great comment on his show a week of so ago about illegal vs legal drugs,
"The Beatles took illegal drugs and wrote Sgr Pepper, Anna Nichole Smith took legally prescribed drugs and couldn't remember to call 911"
On the other hand, illegal drugs made John Lennon think Yoko Ono was attractive and could sing.
I think that's the most powerful "just say no" message of all.
[digress] PAD, are you going to do a blog for GRINDHOUSE? Amazingly entertaining film. [/digress]
I second your digression, though I don't know if the movie is PAD's cup o' tea. I loved it. Looks like the two of us are in the minority though, Sasha.
I have absolutely no interest in seeing "Grindhouse." Perfectly content to wait until it shows up on one of the hundred or so movie channels I subscribe to.
PAD
yeah, I kind of figured...it's definitely not for all tastes.
hey everyone--forget the big Kirsten scoop. Check out http://www.aintitcool.com/node/32250 for the supposed first look at the grey Iron Man suit from the upcoming Iron Man movie. Booyah!
Damn--here's real news; Kurt Vonnegut dead at 84. One of the great ones.
In further developments, Jenna Jameson not a virgin, fire hot, rap music isn't, and wasn't there war or something going badly somewhere?
Sorry, gotta apologize about my previous post landing where it did right below Bill Mulligan's. No disrespect was intended.
Which leads to the question, "Who's gonna be red assed and pissed off for us now?"
Posted by Jonathan
It's a bit off-topic, but speaking of major hypocrisis and double standards... I've read a few days ago many comments in Newsarama about how horrible and annoying the new Supergirl character is, because she acted all slutty and threw herself at the much older Hal Jordan in "the Brave and the Bold" comic, seeing that she is only 17.
One word for those "fans" - Arisia. Until the massive retcon, she was underage..hell did they get away with that?
And if you want Just Plain Weird - how about Hank Pym, Ultron (who has sometimes referred to Pym as "Father" as he tries to kill him) and and Ultron's robot "bride" (with her steel garter riveted to her thigh), Jocasta. (And if that doesn't ring a bell, look up the Oedipus...)
BTW - "Arisia" is the correct spelling; she and the gaseous GL Eddore were a nod to "Doc" Smith's "Lensman" space-opera series from the Forties, which was the, shall we say, "inspiration" for a heck of a lot of the furniture in GL. Arisia is the home planet of the super-human Ultimate Good Guys who gave the Lens [not so powerful as the Power Ring, but pretty impressive anyway] to the Galactic patrol, and Eddore was the home planet (which crashed in from another universe) of the Ultimate Bad Guys. They're not bad as space opera from that period goes, but you have to allow for the writing styles of the day.If you like space opera, you might enjoy them, especially seeing how some of the ideas from them were recycled in GL. Skip the nominal "first two" books, TriplanetaryFirst Lensman and start with Galactic Patrol; go back to the other two after you read all of the "later" books in order.
Some interesting commentary, definitely demonstrates the racial and social divide.
Yes, a big deal is being made out of the Imus issue, not so much that it should any moreso than Anna Nicole's "baby daddy," but because of the public figures which he draws to his program and whose very appearance suggest an acceptance of this type of behavior. This story is also a testament to how far the news media have fallen.
I and a good majority of other black people would agree with the assessment that Jesse Jackson and Al Sharpton are attention seekers to the nth degree, and I doubt that the average black person cares whether or not Imus is a racist. Minorities are probably accustomed to racist attitudes, opinions, and sentiments being shrouded beneath the surface. Its the manner in which this issue came about that is causing all of the drama for the masses.
What makes this whole dialogue interesting to me are the comparisons, misinterpretations and misunderstandings about black culture.
(And to clarify, the 'nappy headed' portion of the statement is the racial aspect, the 'ho's' is more disdainful for women, but ho's can be found in any race.)
When you have Mr. Mulligan here making statements such as, "Some were quite well spoken and one surprized the hell out of me," I'm left scratching my head wondering what did you expect them to sound like? Thats as backhanded a compliment as ever. And I seriously doubt his intention was to be derogatory but its an offhand comment such as this that speaks to the social and cultural divide.
When you try to use rap in your comparisons Peter, you should be mindful of the fact that not every rap song involves someone degrading a woman or killing a cop or any other such foolishness. To make such a blanket generalization reveals a strong level of ignorance, and this is something that is typical of individuals in the news media as well. There are a wide variety or styles, genres and sub-genres of the hip-hop culture that you can pick and choose from if you so desired. And probably quite a few that you would enjoy, recognize and relate to as storytellers and wordsmiths.
A rapper (Snoop Dogg) also made an excellent point about the distinction of what is being spoken upon when a 'bitch' or 'ho' is addressed in a song versus the situation with the Rutgers basketball team. "Rappers are not talking about collegiate basketball girls who have made it to the next level in education and sports. We're talking about ho's that's in the 'hood that ain't doing shit, that's trying to get a n---a for his money. These are two separate things." For many black people who see and live with that distinction comes the issue with Imus and how he addressed the Rutger's women's team.
Just as our news has sunk to the level of the tabloids, the ability for individuals to say and do extremely stupid stuff and then try to 'apologize' for it after the fact is out of control. A great many Black people and other races take issue with the fact that incidents involving non-minorities are often swept aside or overlooked once anapology is issued but when the situation involves a minority negatively it is somehow a major controversy - especially if its a minority celebrity which definitely means that the issue will seemingly forever be addressed by the news media and the individual never allowed to move on with their life (quite different from the likes of say Tim Allen, Robert Downey Jr., or George Bush and their drug issues), and if its a situation that reflects positively the chances of it being addressed in the news media are slim.
When you have individuals like Bill O'Reilly going after an individual such as Ludacris (an extremely witty party style rapper who's also capable of creating some profound songs such as "Runaway Love" with Mary J. Blige) and trying to ruin his career by attempting to paint a picture of him as something he is not (gangster, killer, drug dealer) versus what he was: a college educated man who also was an on-air radio personality before his rap career took off; and now is: a successful rap artist and actor,
it demonstrates exactly the type of gross generalization that occurs in the news media and that has been occuring in some of the posts listed here.
-- Yuri
Television news hasn't been "news" since the days of Walter Cronkite.
News appears to be more of a "news commentary" where putting the reporter's personal spin on a story rather than the objective view. My local newspaper, Newsday, has been accused of this in the past.
Granted, there are some stories that it is difficult, if not impossible, for a newsperson to distance themselves from (9/11 and Columbine, for example).
Not to mention the content, where they make fairly insignificant stories significant.
Ever wonder if the "Men In Black" movies were correct? Maybe we should be reading the tabloids instead of the "serious" newspapers....
"When you try to use rap in your comparisons Peter, you should be mindful of the fact that not every rap song involves someone degrading a woman or killing a cop or any other such foolishness. To make such a blanket generalization reveals a strong level of ignorance, and this is something that is typical of individuals in the news media as well."
Don't take this wrong, but...do you think I'm stupid? I mean, honestly. Do you think I'm unaware that rap songs cover everything from "U Can't Touch This" to "Men in Black," and that the majority of them are fairly harmless?
Honestly, I just don't understand when, if I make a statement about something such as "rap songs say this" or "fans say that," someone is always, ALWAYS jumping in to declare, "But you know, not ALL of (whatever) is that way, don't you know that?" The answer to which of course is, Of course I know that because I'm Not Stupid. It's incomprehensible to me. I mean, there's only two options here: You think I'm that stupid, or you don't think I'm that stupid. If it's the former, then why are you even bothering with me, and if it's the latter, then why are you saying it?
"A rapper (Snoop Dogg) also made an excellent point about the distinction of what is being spoken upon when a 'bitch' or 'ho' is addressed in a song versus the situation with the Rutgers basketball team. "Rappers are not talking about collegiate basketball girls who have made it to the next level in education and sports. We're talking about ho's that's in the 'hood that ain't doing shit, that's trying to get a n---a for his money. These are two separate things.""
Yeah, here's the thing: Considering how routinely I hear and/or read about male teens, both white and black, referring to/addressing other girls as "ho's," I have to think that it's a distinction that's way too subtle for many fans of the genre. In fact, I'd go so far as to say that you've just tossed out a nifty piece of double standard: On the one hand you hold me to exact literal reading of my words, and because I don't toss in qualifiers such as "some," you assume I'm talking about all rap songs...but on the other hand, you instantly accept Snoop Dogg's assertion that people should be able to read between the lines and know that not ALL women are being considered ho's and bitches in rap songs...just the ones that deserve it.
Tell me that Snoop Dogg offers an apology to all women who were called ho's and bitches because of a mindset influenced by negativity in SOME (happy?) rap songs, and I might be impressed. But he didn't. He simply put forward what he considers an obvious distinction, with the implication that if someone thinks otherwise, then they're just getting it wrong. Imus, meantime, said one stupid thing and has since then apologized frequently and continously, and yet continues to be punished and receive no forgiveness. For all the difference it made, he could just as easily have said, "You know what? It was a joke. Jokes aren't meant to be taken seriously, and if you're taking it seriously, then you really need to lighten up."
PAD
wow.
The thread started on the topic of what's news, has spread to pot smoking vs. drinking and bounced along to Imus, which originally appeared in another thread.
someone here is typing under the influence!
;)
I have absolutely no interest in seeing "Grindhouse." Perfectly content to wait until it shows up on one of the hundred or so movie channels I subscribe to.
Shame. I was looking forward to take on the storytelling structure of "Death Proof" and Zoe Bell's debut performance.
. . . .
But back on topic, have you heard about the Pennsylvania DJ who just got fired? Basically, for a "Phrase That Pays" contest, he decided that the phrase would be "I'm a nappy-headed 'ho."
Not too swift that one is.
Back to the point of what constitutes news, I'm in total agreement with you PAD. I got bigger concerns than what some actor says or who's the father of a celebrity's child. I wish I knew how news outlets decide/find out this is what the majority is interested in. I got a family member going to Afganistan in the fall and a friend going trough a divorce, I could really care less about tabloid type news, yet yesterday I couldn't change the channels fast enough without someone telling me who the fathered the child of someone I dont give a ^%$#@# about.
Who's to blame? The news outlets, or the gossipy folks who live vicariously trough famous people? Take Dunst, I'm looking forward to her new movie and have enjoyed some of her work, but I don't care what she does or says on her own time. I don't understand the folks who believe that an entertainer is obliged not only to entertain on stage and screen, but also have to give up their privacy just so some can gossip. I really don't understand why we have the right to invade their privacy.
I've read a few days ago many comments in Newsarama about how horrible and annoying the new Supergirl character is
Oh, come on. The sixties Supergirl had an affair with her horse.
This would be the reason why the term "slow news day" was coined.
Yuri, Peter has already thoroughly responded to your comments directed at him. So I'm going to limit myself to your comments regarding Bill Mulligan.
To fairly interpret Mulligan's words, you need to look at them in context. He was responding to the following post from our host (with the most -- sorry, couldn't resist):
"Here's a silly question: Has anyone seen the picture of the girls in question? Are they, in fact, nappy-headed? I'm just curious. (And why do I have the song, "Guess who's coming to dinner, Natty Dreadlocks" running through my head?)"
Mr. Mulligan responded thusly:
"i watched some of the press conferance they just had. The girls looked like perfectly normal athletic types. Some were quite well spoken and one surprized the hell out of me when asked by a reporter if politicians should continue to go on the Imus show. Her reply was that a person running for president wants to make the biggest impact so of course they should go on the show that gets the most attention. Didn't expect that."
Bill was merely observing that he saw nothing out-of-the-ordinary about these girls, and certainly nothing that would justify Imus' foul insult. And he did NOT express surprise some of them were well-spoken. He expressed surprise that one of girls who had been insulted wouldn't hold it against a presidential candidate for appearing on Imus' program. Had I been so insulted by Imus, I'm not sure I'd've been so level-headed. So I share Bill's surprise in that regard.
I'm not sure when being called "articulate" or "well-spoken" became a back-handed compliment or thinly veiled insult. I recently gave a presentation at work, and later learned that someone in the audience subsequently described me as "articulate" and "well-spoken." I took it as praise, pure and simple. When a white person cannot even compliment a black person without being suspected of bigotry, I submit to you that political correctness has clearly run amok.
By the way, Bill Mulligan has mentioned in this blog that one of his sisters is dating a black man (from Nigeria, I believe). Moreover, during the Islamic Revolution in Iran in the 1970s, Bill's father and mother adopted two Iranian children to help them escape from danger. Surprised? Well, that's what you get for pre-judging people.
Look, I am the first to admit: it's harder to be black in this country than it is to be white. But that doesn't justify responding to prejudice with prejudice.
Black people do not constitute a monolithic group. I get that. But neither do white people. Your post leads me to wonder if you get that. I'm willing to acknowledge there is much I don't know, to listen to you, to try to understand you. Are you truly willing to do the same? Because ultimately the only way we're going to be able to change society in a positive way is to work with one another, not against one another.
When you have Mr. Mulligan here making statements such as, "Some were quite well spoken and one surprized the hell out of me," I'm left scratching my head wondering what did you expect them to sound like? Thats as backhanded a compliment as ever. And I seriously doubt his intention was to be derogatory but its an offhand comment such as this that speaks to the social and cultural divide.
In my defense, I was responding to someone who asked if the ladies were in fact "nappy-headed". I said (full quote) i watched some of the press conferance they just had. The girls looked like perfectly normal athletic types. Some were quite well spoken and one surprized the hell out of me when asked by a reporter if politicians should continue to go on the Imus show. Her reply was that a person running for president wants to make the biggest impact so of course they should go on the show that gets the most attention. Didn't expect that.
So to answer your question, I expected them to sound more like college athletes who, in my experience, are not the most articulate people around. It's also clear from my entire quote that what "surprised" me was not that they could speak but that, when given the opportunity to take an easy shot at the politicians who appear on the Imus show, the team leader gave a reply that was unexpectedly fair. Cutting off my sentence where you did gave a very different spin on what I said. Was that intentional?
I've also been very impressed with the way the (now declared innocent) Duke lacrosse players have come across in their interviews. So maybe I need to revise my perception of athletes, black or white.
And finally...how did this end up in this thread?
Bill, it appears while I was speaking for you, you were sneakily writing a post in an attempt to speak for yourself. How many times do we have to go over this, Bill? How many times?
Sigh... just in case my lame joke above was unclear, I know damn well my good friend Bill can speak for himself. But I felt honor-bound to speak up out of friendship for Bill and, more important, out of a commitment to the truth.
By the way, Bill Mulligan has mentioned in this blog that one of his sisters is dating a black man (from Nigeria, I believe).
Actually it was my daughter, and they have broken up. But I understand you never go back so...
Thanks, Bill. Boy, the people who think we are the same person writing under different names must have red cheeks now, eh? Or we are a very fast typist.
Posted by: Bill Mulligan at April 12, 2007 11:31 AM
Actually it was my daughter, and they have broken up.
Uhm... oops. Sorry. Hope I didn't bring up anything that I shouldn't have...
"maybe I need to revise my perception of athletes, black or white."
They prefer the term geekly challenged.
"Bill, it appears while I was speaking for you, you were sneakily writing a post in an attempt to speak for yourself."
He's actualy suprisingly articulate.
If she's not doing it in Hawaii in a bikini with Drew Barrymore and Cameron Diaz I'm not interested.
I remember teenager mini-skirted Arisia chasing Hal Jordan, and also the Ultron/Pym/Wasp/Jocasta thing. Comet the Super Horse was a bit before my time, but I've read about it.
It's funny how many fans complaining of how today's comics are so full of sexual innuendo and politics and real world issues are unaware that comics in the past have also been full of those things. Particularly politics. Marvel Comics in the 1970s sometimes seemed to be all politics, all the time.
But what I was really raving about was the double standard of how males and females are seen regarding sexual conduct. If a male character is a "skirt chaser" or a "ladies' man", the character is cool. Now, if a female character chases men, she is a horrible slut. This is doubly true when the character is question is a teenager. A male teen character can be depicted as horny and it's the most natural thing in the world, but a female teen can't be horny, or it's a horrible personal failing on her part.
I always thought comic book fans were supposed to be more open-minded than the general public, and was a bit surprised by the vehemence in some of the comments in newsarama.
"But what I was really raving about was the double standard of how males and females are seen regarding sexual conduct."
This is going to sound flip an stereotypical, But it's to some degree because guys know guys.
Plus, some things haven't changed that much. You still have older brothers being told that it's "their job" to watch out for their younger sister in school. You still have Feminist groups that want things both ways. Plus, I honestly think that, no matter how much we want it to be otherwise, we're all hardwired to react to situations like that differently thanks to years of societal re-enforcement of certain ideas.
Maybe that will change one day, but do we really want to get to the point where ANY underage child having an affair with an adult is socially acceptable?
"Thanks, Bill. Boy, the people who think we are the same person writing under different names must have red cheeks now, eh?"
I'm still not convinced. Two different laptops in a wireless hub zone, start typing one post on one, then do another on the other, and the fact the Bill M's(not a bad name for a band, actually) are never seen together....
But then, it'd be a shame to have two such interesting personalities in one skull when I don't even have a whole single one in mine.
Bill Mulligan and I were seen together in a restaurant in Watertown last year. My girlfriend, Jeannie, was there as well and can bear witness.
None of us were smoking pot with Kirsten Dunst at the time.
I'd like to do a non sequitur digression for just a second to tell PAD it was really nice to see Sachs & Violens again in his latest novel. :)
Posted by: R.J. Carter at April 12, 2007 03:07 PM
I'd like to do a non sequitur digression...
Like this thread hasn't already gone off the rails? ;)
Bill Myers wrote: "Bill Mulligan and I were seen together in a restaurant in Watertown last year. My girlfriend, Jeannie, was there as well and can bear witness."
Yes, but were you photographed together? That's the important distinction. Unless we're presented with photographic proof, how do we know the "meeting" wasn't some elaborate trick?
But even then, we couldn't be sure. Bill Milligan could very well have arranged to have one of his handy "Bill Myers" robots at the restauraunt that day. Did anyone bring along a powerful electromagnet to confirm "Bill Myers" was flesh and blood?
Or maybe "Bill Milligan" was the robot. Same question applies, either way.
For that matter, how do we know the various "people" who post in these threads aren't really characters that PAD invented as part of an exercise to see if he could create a wide-ranging cast of characters to "talk" and "argue" about various topics? We know he's a talented enough writer that he could pull something like that off.
And if he managed to pull it off for more than, what? Five years now?, that'd be a major accomplishment. Almost on par with successfully faking your death.
Which reminds me. Has PAD ever been photographed with either Andy Kaufman or Elvis?
Hmmmmnn. I wonder....
As to the main topic, I agree. A lot of "news" isn't news. In fact, I recently cancelled my subscription to the local paper when the headline in their lead story spoke of bringing in a psychic in a missing person's case.
While it has its flaws, my own little corner of the Fourth Estate at least tends not to offer up such "non stories" as depicted above as "news." At least outside of the entertainment section. We did not, for example, jump on the "all O.J. all the time" bandwagon back during the O.J. trial. As I recall, there was a story when he was arrested and one when he was acquitted.
If I were running a news organization in which what happened in Hollywood had any relevance to our readers/viewers/listeners, I wouldn't even mention the Dunst pot smoking matter unless she were arrested for it. And then I'd put in something like this:
"Hollywood actress Jane Doe was arrested recenly for possession of marijuna. She faces a court date on (date)."
or
"Hollywood actress Jane Doe was ordered to serve ____ days jail time/pay a $____ fine/perform community service in connection with a recent marijuna arrest."
Beyond that, it's not news.
Same with Ms. Smith. Again, unless my hypothetical news organization was based in A) Hollywood; B) her hometown or C) where she died, she'd get maybe this:
"Model dies under mysterious circumstances.
"Anna Nicole Smith, a model who initially gained fame when she married a wealthy octogenarian, has died under mysterious circumstances in the Bahamas. She was 39.
"Local police continue to investigate."
The only way it would justify more copy would be if someone in my coverage area was directly involved:
"The investigation into the death of a model has turned to the tiny hamlet of Tippecanoeandtylertoo. Sheriff's deputies have arrested a local man in connection with the incident."
(and so on...)
Rick
Posted by: Rick Keating at April 12, 2007 03:54 PM
Bill Milligan...
No, I'm fairly sure I had lunch with Bill Mulligan. I've never met this "Bill Milligan" character.
Are you sure you haven't been smoking pot with Kirsten Dunst, Rick?
"For that matter, how do we know the various "people" who post in these threads aren't really characters that PAD invented as part of an exercise to see if he could create a wide-ranging cast of characters to "talk" and "argue" about various topics? We know he's a talented enough writer that he could pull something like that off."
Sounds like an idea for a Stephan King novel.
Has anybody written a book or a novel about bloggers?
A blogger investigates the death of one of the posters on his thread only to discover that the whole blog exists in his mind.
I call for an decision of the UN security council making it illegal to mention Anna Nicole Smith for the next 100 years.
Pot, prejudice, slutty superheroines, evill Bill Myers (Mulligan?) robots, and we're all inventions of PAD's increasingly feverish imagination...HOLY SYNTAX ERROR IT"S THE MATRIX!!!!
Bill Myers:
Would you believe you have a rare eye disease which causes you to misread certain vowels?
No?
Would you believe that Mulligan and Milligan are analogues of each other in parallel universes? If you met the one with the goatee, that was the alternate universe Bill Milligan.
No?
Well, what other alternative could there be? I couldn't possibly have made a typo. I mean my administration is incapable of error. We don't-
Oh, sorry. For a moment there, I thought I was the President. Must be the fumes from the new carpeting they're installing.
Maybe it was a typo after all.
Rick
For that matter, how do we know the various "people" who post in these threads aren't really characters that PAD invented as part of an exercise to see if he could create a wide-ranging cast of characters to "talk" and "argue" about various topics? We know he's a talented enough writer that he could pull something like that off.
Oh wouldn't that be so cool?
Would you believe that Mulligan and Milligan are analogues of each other in parallel universes?
Maybe Bill MILLIGAN is my clever disguise name. As clever disguise names go it isn't very clever or a terribly good disguise but it's still way better than Obi Wan Kenobi going as "Old Ben" Kenobi. Which, I have to add actually worked!
The Dark Side of the Force isn't very bright, I guess.
As clever disguise names go it isn't very clever or a terribly good disguise but it's still way better than Obi Wan Kenobi going as "Old Ben" Kenobi. Which, I have to add actually worked!
The Dark Side of the Force isn't very bright, I guess.
I figure that he was just using the Jedi Mind Trick on everyone in a 5-mile radius until they lost the ability to move short-term memories into long-term storage. It would certainly help explain why no one noticed that he was still wearing Jedi robes...
"It would certainly help explain why no one noticed that he was still wearing Jedi robes..."
At the beginning of Star Wars it seems that the robes worn by Obi-Wan Kenobi were a robes of person living in tatooine. They are similar in style to the ones worn by Luke's uncle. When the prequels came I somewhat expected the Jedi to have a different kind of costume, more appropriate to their high role in pre-Impirial society.
I don't think Ben Kenobi was much of an attempt at hiding. Why would the few farmers in a distant part of a distant planet associate a crazy hermit named Ben with a Jedi named Obi-Wan they probably never heard of. Obi-Wan was hiding in plain site. The question is, why didn't Darth Vader scour the galaxy looking for Obi-Wan? Was his mind ever turned toward the planet he came from? Had he come visiting, the first thing that would have caught his ear was that a young person with his family name was living in Tatooine, who was much more easily spotted than Ben Kenobi. In the alternative version of Revenge of the Sith that exists only in my mind (and computer), Darth Vader made a conscious choice to let Obi-Wan go and to avoid his past in Tatooine.
And now back to our regularly scheduled programing.
Bill Myers wrote: "Bill Mulligan and I were seen together in a restaurant in Watertown last year. My girlfriend, Jeannie, was there as well and can bear witness."
Yes, but were you photographed together? That's the important distinction. Unless we're presented with photographic proof, how do we know the "meeting" wasn't some elaborate trick?
Photoshop. :-)
The question is, why didn't Darth Vader scour the galaxy looking for Obi-Wan? Was his mind ever turned toward the planet he came from? Had he come visiting, the first thing that would have caught his ear was that a young person with his family name was living in Tatooine, who was much more easily spotted than Ben Kenobi.
A gentleman who writes online under the nom du pixel of Cheeseburger Brown (I think his real name is Frederick Heming) wrote a wonderful short novel, in the form of Darth Vader's blog, starting just before the intercept of the Rebel ship above Tatooine in A New Hope, and finishing just before the throne-room scene in Return of the Jedi. In it, Vader notes that he doesn't like going to Tatooine because the whole region of space is so awash in Force-twists and probability whorls, it makes it almost impossible for him to sense anything. (That's also why he couldn't seem to hit Luke's ship at the Battle of Yavin - he was having trouble seeing past the ripples in the Force.)
If you haven't read Memoirs of a Monster, I highly encourage it. It's well-written, revealing of what the character of Anakin Skywalker should have been like, and funny as frak (especially the recurring pain in all the diodes down the left side of Vader's armor).
Posted by Rene
I remember teenager mini-skirted Arisia chasing Hal Jordan, and also the Ultron/Pym/Wasp/Jocasta thing. Comet the Super Horse was a bit before my time, but I've read about it.
Somehow i wiped out some of my post -
Arisia got made physically older by her Power Ring, but was still the saem actual age...
Remember Amethyst? twelve-year old on Earth, Sexy twenty-something in a miniskirt on Gemworld, in a political situation in which either rape, dynastic marriage or Just Plain Fooling Around was fairy probable?
Or the stepmother/stepson pair who became the physical vector for Dr Fate, in which the stepmother apparently had Designs on him (and he got Made Older, too, as i recall...)
Or possibly the creepiest romantic liaison of all (given how it was portrayed) Terra and Slade...
"At the beginning of Star Wars it seems that the robes worn by Obi-Wan Kenobi were a robes of person living in tatooine. They are similar in style to the ones worn by Luke's uncle. When the prequels came I somewhat expected the Jedi to have a different kind of costume, more appropriate to their high role in pre-Impirial society."
Actually, me and my friends believed for two decades the outfit Luke was wearing in Return was the real Jedi attire. After the prequels we finally knows that Luke was a pervy goth who wore black leather even in the desert and the jungle...
Thanks Jonathan. I'll take a look.
"A gentleman who writes online under the nom du pixel of Cheeseburger Brown (I think his real name is Frederick Heming) wrote a wonderful short novel, in the form of Darth Vader's blog, starting just before the intercept of the Rebel ship above Tatooine in A New Hope, and finishing just before the throne-room scene in Return of the Jedi. In it, Vader notes that he doesn't like going to Tatooine because the whole region of space is so awash in Force-twists and probability whorls, it makes it almost impossible for him to sense anything. (That's also why he couldn't seem to hit Luke's ship at the Battle of Yavin - he was having trouble seeing past the ripples in the Force.)"
I personaly prefer a psychological explanation. But then, my alternative version of the prequels has had only one and a half readers (me and my sister), so what do I know.
"Actually, me and my friends believed for two decades the outfit Luke was wearing in Return was the real Jedi attire. After the prequels we finally knows that Luke was a pervy goth who wore black leather even in the desert and the jungle..."
It's a valid life style choice.
It was a reasonable assumption that when Like became a Jedi in Return, he assumed the costume of a Jedi. I had similar thoughts. So in my alternative version some Jedi ware cloaks like the one Like wore in Return. Others, a costume like Obi-Wan's, and others a more clean cut version of the same costume in white or blue. This is a good way to display philosophical and cultural differences among the Jedi. O well. At least I can tell the difference between what's inside my mind and thee real world, most of the time.
I kind of remember a story on the old comic book series about a young Obi Wan dressed in sleek black much like Luke's in Return. But If that comic book was valid SW info, we would have had a giant green rabbit instead of JarJar... wich would have been an improve.
and as for valid lifestyle choice...I agree but only if you bathe in dehodorant every morning. Else, its highly offensive to others. Maybe bad odor is a jedi power too.
Unless Jedi dont sweat.
Posted by: El hombre Malo at April 13, 2007 07:37 AM
"and as for valid lifestyle choice...I agree but only if you bathe in dehodorant every morning. Else, its highly offensive to others. Maybe bad odor is a jedi power too.
Unless Jedi dont sweat."
Why do you think all the henchmen in Jabba's palace were suffocating when Luke came in?
I vaguely remember seeing Lucas give a comment after Phantom Mistake came saying that they had tried a variety of costumes for the Jedi order and simply decided that the brown robes were what looked best. Of course, heavy brown robes aren't any more practical in a combat situation that tight leathers, but whatever.
But let's face it, Obi-Wan's scheme to hide Luke was hardly brilliant: He hid the baby with Little Orphan Annie Skywalker's stepbrother on LOAS's homeworld using the Skywalker name. Then, he proceeded to spend nearly 20 years watching over the kid incognito. His brilliant new identity just involved changing his first name.
Hell, at least Bal Organa had the sense not to raise the girl as Leia Skywalker.
"Why do you think all the henchmen in Jabba's palace were suffocating when Luke came in?"
Right...Jedis raise their arms and make a gripping motion when they suffocate foes, but its all a clever deceiving gesture, since all they need to do its raise the arm.
Is this retro-continuity or what?
Now we're on Star Wars?
yeah, people around here are hitting various types of bongs. ;):P:O
"Unless Jedi dont sweat."
Well, think about it. Both the Skywalkers come from a desert planet(not to be confused with a dessert planet) and neither seemed to be in any discomfort. Qui-Gonn fought in the desert, not a bead of sweat anywhere. It's all some weird perversion of the Jedi mind trick.
Woulda made a great deodorant campaign, though. "Arid Extra Dry--from the scorching pits of Tatooine to your pits."
"Woulda made a great deodorant campaign, though. "Arid Extra Dry--from the scorching pits of Tatooine to your pits.""
Qui-Gon for Men by l'Oreal
---------------
"I vaguely remember seeing Lucas give a comment after Phantom Mistake came saying that they had tried a variety of costumes for the Jedi order and simply decided that the brown robes were what looked best. Of course, heavy brown robes aren't any more practical in a combat situation that tight leathers, but whatever."
It seemed to have worked fine after all. There were many things I didn't like about the prequels (list attached), but the Jedi costumes was the least of them.
"But let's face it, Obi-Wan's scheme to hide Luke was hardly brilliant: He hid the baby with Little Orphan Annie Skywalker's stepbrother on LOAS's homeworld using the Skywalker name. Then, he proceeded to spend nearly 20 years watching over the kid incognito. His brilliant new identity just involved changing his first name."
Unless you assume that he wasn't actually trying to hide them, but was pretty sure Vader wouldn't be looking.
In my aformentioned alternative version (I know, it's silly, but I needed a way to cope with the disappointment with the prequels, and watching the movies while thinking of my own alternative versions is my way; I think Bush does the same thing while watching the news) I tried to address this issue. First, by using Ben as a familar nick name for Obi Wan by Anakin: it's not a pseudonym, but just a nickname. Secondly, instead of having Amidala die at childbirth, she goes to Anakin/Vader (already in full armor), and tells him that the children are dead, which sends him one step deeper into the dark side and also gives him the motivation to leave any aspect of his past behind. Thirdly, I had one or two references of Obi-Wan having to learn to temper his impatience by spending years waiting for Luke to grow up. It is more satisfying for me to watch these movies because of those little private rewrites. Why accept the movies as they are?
I like the idea of the "force ripples" or whatever. Given that not only Obi-wan but also Qui-Gon, The Friendly Ghost were on the planet, there should have been enough Mitachlorian Power to keep the boy hidden.
yeah, people around here are hitting various types of bongs. ;):P:O
Nope, we're doing all this cold sober...which is actually a lot sadder, now that I think of it...
>do we really want to get to the point where ANY underage child having an affair with an adult is socially acceptable?
Not really. But define "underage child". Differs - legally - from jurisdiction to jurisdiction and from country to country. Heck, even differs within countries, depending on when you look. Used to be perfectly acceptable for people to get married at 14 in colonial times. Now? Forget it. A hundred years from now? I'm not placing any bets.
As for Arisia, OK, I had a fondness for the character so I'm biased. But consider this: she was deemed old/mature enough to be entrusted with one of the most powerful weapon/device in the known universe. Next to that what's a roll in the hay with an older man?
Posted by The StarWolf
As for Arisia, OK, I had a fondness for the character so I'm biased. But consider this: she was deemed old/mature enough to be entrusted with one of the most powerful weapon/device in the known universe. Next to that what's a roll in the hay with an older man?
"Last month I was a typical fourteen-year-old - now I'm fighting the greatest menace the Galaxy has ever known," or words to that effect.
A hundred years from now? I'm not placing any bets.
I wonder. If a lot of the life extension technologies that we see a lot of in science fiction or in futurist articles pan out, we might find ourselves in a society where people might not even consider getting married until they're 50 or more.
Consider also that, particularly among the noble classes, it was once common practice for a middle aged or older man to marry a teenaged girl.
But the whole thing with Hal and Arisia, even artificially aged, was still icky to me in my early 21st century sensibility.
I thought the Hal/Arisia thing adequately exemplified the disparity we might have with alien cultures about something very sensitive to ourselves. Didn't that storyline evolve to something along the lines of Arisia already being of marrying age in her own culture?
Meanwhile, the Star Wars theories come at a time when a buddy of mine passed me this text file that's a combination of "Star Wars" meets "Loose Change" that I thought I'd share:
Websurdity Link: This article was inspired by the fine users at the
James Randi Educational Foundation (JREF) Forum, to whom I am
indebted for the use of much of this material.
We’ve all heard the “official conspiracy theory” of the Death
Star attack. We all know about Luke Skywalker and his ragtag bunch of
rebels, how they mounted a foolhardy attack on the most powerful,
well-defended battle station ever built. And we’ve all seen the
video over, and over, and over, of the one-in-a-million shot that
resulted in a massive chain reaction that not just damaged, but
completely obliterated that massive technological wonder.
Like many Americans, I was fed this story when I was growing up. But
as I watched the video, I began to realize that all was not as it
seemed. And the more I questioned the official story, the deeper into
the rabbit hole I went.
Presented here are some of the results of my soul-searching regarding
this painful event. Like many citizens, I have many questions that I
would like answered: was the mighty Imperial government really too
incompetent to prevent a handful of untrained nerf-herders from
destroying one of their most prized assets? Or are they hiding
something from us? Who was really behind the attack? Why did they
want the Death Star destroyed? No matter what the answers, we have a
problem.
Below is a summary of my book, Uncomfortable Questions: An Analysis
of the Death Star Attack, which presents compelling evidence that we
all may be the victims of a fraud of immense proportions.
Uncomfortable Questions about the Death Star Attack

1) Why were a handful of rebel fighters able to penetrate the
defenses of a battle station that had the capability of destroying an
entire planet and the defenses to ward off several fleets of battle
ships?
2) Why did Grand Moff Tarkin refuse to deploy the station’s large
fleet of TIE Fighters until it was too late? Was he acting on orders
from somebody to not shoot down the rebel attack force? If so, who,
and why?
3) Why was the rebel pilot who supposedly destroyed the Death Star
reported to be on the Death Star days, maybe hours, prior to its
destruction? Why was he allowed to escape, and why were several
individuals dressed in Stormtrooper uniforms seen helping him?
4) Why has there not been an investigation into allegations that
Darth Vader, the second-ranking member of the Imperial Government, is
in fact the father of the pilot who allegedly destroyed the Death Star?
5) Why did Lord Vader decide to break all protocols and personally
pilot a lightly armored TIE Fighter? Conveniently, this placed Lord
Vader outside of the Death Star when it was destroyed, where he was
also conveniently able to escape from a large-sized rebel fleet that
had just routed the Imperial forces. Why would Lord Vader, one of the
highest ranking members of the Imperial Government, suddenly decide
to fly away from the Death Star in the middle of a battle? Did he
know something that the rest of the Imperial Navy didn’t?
Just to throw in my two cents: I always assumed that Ben Kenobi was his real name and Obi-Wan was his Jedi name (much like the Sith change their names). It would explain why so many of the Jedi have those similar, hyphenated names (Obi-Wan, Qui-Gon, Ki-Adi... um, okay, that's only three, which isn't exactly "many"). Actually, never mind... Anakin would have changed his name, if that were true. Scratch that theory. Obi-Wan's just an idiot.
Coming back to the Arisia thing for a minute...My recollection is that Arisia approached Hal, told him her feelings and was politely rebuffed because, as has been pointed out, Hal was much older than Arisia (some ambiguous thirty-something age to her thirteen or fourteen).
Arisia, posessing as she did the Most Powerful Weapon in the Universe, then used her power ring to age herself into a physically-mature woman. Hal was rightly shocked to discover this, and initially pointed out that she was still chronologically and mentally 13/14, but I think he did eventually give in--it's been a while since I read the issues.
Re: How'd Obi-wan do it. Remember, even with Obi-wan and Qui-Gon on Tatooine, there was also Yoda chillin' on Dagobah.
It also seems that the Emperor had an interest in keeping Luke alive. Given he told Anakin/Darth Vader that Amidala and the baby (he didn't know about there being twins), and that news driving our boy right over the edge, Darth probably stopped looking for his son.
Since Luke wasn't using the Force, Obi-wan, Qui-Gon, and (possibly) Yoda would have had an easier time hiding him. Added to Vader's maybe not looking for his son, hiding him in the ass end of nowhere isn't such a bad idea.
Of Mulligans and Milligans.
Over at http://www.landofthelost.com/
a forum dedicated to the 1974-1976 Saturday morning TV series Land of the Lost, * someone has occasionally tried to pass himself off as one of the show's stars, Spencer Milligan. Only he uses the name "Mulligan" in his posts.
Or maybe he deliberately uses the wrong name to indicate that he's not really trying to pass himself off as the genuine article. I'm not sure. But no one except newbies has taken him at face value.
At any rate, no doubt the universe caused Bill Mulligan to become known as Bill Milligan in this thread in order to balance out the incorrectly named "Spencer Mulligan" over there.
And by maintaining such balance, we needn't worry about the universe exploding.
So, it wasn't a typo after all. The universe made me do it.
Regarding Kenobi, although Star Wars the movie was released before The Incredible Hulk and within the context of the story, the events take place a "long time ago", the Jedi Knight in hiding somehow learned of Dr. David Bruce Banner and took a page from his book of aliases. Only Kenobi kept his last name and didn't constantly change his first.
By the way, Memoirs of a Monster is the subtitle. The main title is The Darthside.
Rick
*Of course I speak of the good original Land of the Lost series, in large part created by David Gerrold (who also served as first season story editor), which, despite budget limitations, felt like it was set in another universe; not the early 1990s remake, filmed outdoors in a park somewhere, which looked like it took place in a park somewhere.
Posted by: Manny at April 13, 2007 03:19 PM:
"Re: How'd Obi-wan do it. Remember, even with Obi-wan and Qui-Gon on Tatooine, there was also Yoda chillin' on Dagobah.
It also seems that the Emperor had an interest in keeping Luke alive. Given he told Anakin/Darth Vader that Amidala and the baby (he didn't know about there being twins), and that news driving our boy right over the edge, Darth probably stopped looking for his son.
Since Luke wasn't using the Force, Obi-wan, Qui-Gon, and (possibly) Yoda would have had an easier time hiding him. Added to Vader's maybe not looking for his son, hiding him in the ass end of nowhere isn't such a bad idea."
Manny, you present 3 good alternatives.
1) That Yoda or Obi-Wan or both used the force to hide Luke and themselves. I like that because it creates a nice parallel with Yoda's own inabillity to sense the Sith or the future threats they posed while he was the man in power.
Wasn't it mentioned in one of Timothy Zahn's books that Dagobah was somehow shielding Yoda? I prefer your approach, because it means that Yoda was actively hiding himself. Somebody could right a good book about what Yoda and/or Obi-Wan were doing while they were waiting for Luke to hatch.
2) The idea that Palpatine knew about Luke offers very interesting possibilities. But I'm not sure it's very likely that Palpatine would have not simply taken Luke as soon as possible and secretly started training him. This could be a good 'what if' kind of story. Unless we come up with a reason why it was better for Palpatine that Luke will grow up the way he did.
3) The third option is the simplest. That Vader wasn't looking for Luke because as far as he knew he was never born. That still leaves the quesion, why didn't he look for Obi-Wan? Conspiracy again? After all, considering Obi-Wan mutilated him and left him to die a long agonizing death (in one of the weaker point of Revenge of the Sith), it seems Vader took it rather well. Wouldn't he want revenge? Or was he afraid? I would prefer anexplanation that some part of him chose to let Obi-Wan go. But the relationship between Anakin and Obi-Wan was never established very well in the movies.
Question: is it silly to be discussing this?
Answer: would a discussion about Kirsten Dunst pot smoking habits be more satisfying?
I'd like to hear more about this whole Hal Jordan story, but I don't know anything about it.
*Of course I speak of the good original Land of the Lost series, in large part created by David Gerrold (who also served as first season story editor), which, despite budget limitations, felt like it was set in another universe; not the early 1990s remake, filmed outdoors in a park somewhere, which looked like it took place in a park somewhere.
There was a second Land Of The Lost show??? I did not know that, sir.
I'm thinking about making a Sleestack costume someday for Halloween. Not many will get the reference but for those people who do it will kill.
there was also Andy Milligin, who made movies in Staten island, where I was born. His movies are so terrible I've seen most of them only once.
"There was a second Land Of The Lost show??? I did not know that, sir."
I was stuck watching a friend's kids several times when that show was on. Trust me, you missed nothing.
"I'm thinking about making a Sleestack costume..."
Green or brown(ish)?
I think we may be talking about the same one. It's been a loooonnnnngggggg time since I saw the series.
Are you talking about the Sleestack from another time who could talk and was the Marshall's friend?
Technically the gold Sleestacks are actually Altrusians.
(Excuse me, I seem to have misplaced my life.)
I actually remember the episode where Enik the Altrusian realized that the Sleestacks were his decendants and not his ancestors. I felt bad for him. Does the show hold up or am I better off with fond memories?
I haven't a clue Bill.
I haven't seen it since it aired originally.
Yeah, I remember that episode too.
You remember the portals/pyraminds?
Kathleen David asked, "Remember the Gold Sleestack?"
The "Gold Sleestak" was Enik, an Altrusian (the ancestors of the Sleestak), who found himself propelled forward in time to a period in his own history when his highly advanced civilization had degenerated into barbarism. He wants very much to get back to his own time to prevent this catastrophe. Enik was played by the late Walker Edmiston, and first appeared in the first season episode, "The Search", written by Walter Koenig.
The entire original Land of the Lost series is now out on DVD. Has been for about two or three years, now.
Bill Mulligan: Yes, there was a second Land of the Lost series. When I first heard about it I was excited because I looked forward to seeing a really cool waterfall scene using up-to-date special effects.
Only the family in the new series (the Porters) didn't plunge over a waterfall. Instead, in the opening credits, their Jeep-like vehicle (don't know if it was an actual Jeep or not) falls through an opening in the ground during an earthquake, does a complete somsersault, and is still driveable as they drive it out of the cave.
I watched a few episodes, but never got into it. I didn't like their depiction of the Sleestak (one sounded like Mortimer Snerd, an apparently common affliction of "kids show" of that early 90s era, given how often I'd come across those Snerdian vocal qualities.
Also, in the original, the Marshalls are literally chased into their cave, High Bluff, by Grumpy; and all they have are the few supplies they brought along on their rafting expedition? The Porters? They somehow were able to build a treehouse, and not only have a Jeep (or whatever) but also a tape player.
The original Land of the Lost was much better in terms of creating a believeable alien environment. Sure, it had limitations, but it also had writers like Larry Niven, Wina Sturgeon and D.C. Fontana involved, as well as the previously mentioned David Gerrold and Walter Koenig. I don't know who wrote for the new series, but I suspect they were TV writers, not writers with a background in science fiction.
Rick
Bill, in my opinion, the show holds up, though again, it's not perfect. If you're interested, stop over at the Land of the Lost website, go to the forums page, click on the thread "Land of the Lost boxed sets on DVD" and read the episode review threads (you'll have to go back a few pages as that particular thread has been dormant for a while). A bunch of us went through each episode and discussed their merits and demerits.
Rick
Kathleen David asked "remember the portals/pyramids?"
Those were the Pylons.
Rick
P.S. One of the great things about the original Land of the Lost, something I doubt we'd see today (especially on a "kids' show", is that the Marshalls learned various things about this strange new land bit by bit, over the course of the first season. If I recall correctly, Gerrold structured it that way. Take, for example, the Pylons. I believe we see one in the first episode, but don't get inside (or even have reason to believe you can get inside until the eighth episode.
Funny, I thought his name was Enid. I always wondered about that. I saw some footage from the original in a friend's collection(bootlegs from a con) and excusing the limitations of the source, I thought it held up pretty well.
And I still miss Chaka.
"Technically the gold Sleestacks are actually Altrusians."
Hey, I was SIX when I last saw it in its first run.
I'm surprised ay how much I remember from it though.
The Medusa episode, Grumpy, the fever epidemic, learning that the Land's weather and environment was controlled by the crystals in the Pylons and Skylons (I can't believe I can remember those names) and that weird pit in the caves of the Sleestacks.
Huh, I haven't thought about that series in years. Thanks for the pointer, Rick. I'll have to seriously think about convincing my wife that those DVD sets are necessary child rearing tools that could be vital in the overall education of our soon to be kid.
Sean,
Koening originally wanted to name Enik "Eneg", after Gene Roddenberry, but Gerrold nixed that, presumably because it was such an obvious Tuckerism.
Jerry,
speaking of the Medusa episode (a third season episode), One of the few times I thought a cut made during a show's return in re-runs was better than the original cut occurs in that episode. The Sci-Fi channel re-ran Land of the Lost in the early 90s and made cuts. In the case of "Medusa", one cut removed the coda entirely.
Here's how it went as originally aired: Jack defeats Medusa, who is now a stone statue, just like her victims. He walks out of her garden. Cut to commercial, and come back for the coda in which Holly observes that the trouble with vanity and other such vices is "you never know when you might get stuck that way."
As re-edited by Sci-Fi in the mid 90s:
Jack walks out of the garden. Cut to closing credits.
Much better that way.
For the record, such "moral of the story" codas were more typical of the third season than the first two. At least ones so blatantly obvious as the example above.
If you can only get one season, get season 1. That's not to say seasons 2 and 3 aren't as good, but Gerrold structured season 1 to stand alone- especially since he didn't know if they'd have a second season. He also designed it (with help from Larry Niven) so that the last episode of the season would dovetail with the first, so that if it had been just one season, and you caught it in reruns, you could smoothly go from the end back to the beginning again.
Rick
(At the risk of starting a war with video shop owners on the board.....)
Well, if you ever want to find out how well it holds up, Deepdiscount.com has the entire series for $59.82 + free shipping. It'll be a hard sell on my end, but I should be able to con the wife... er... I mean convince the wife that $60 is a small price for the overall benefits that it will provide in the raising of our child.
I know I'm coming a little late the the party, but I just have to toss my two cents in concerning Leia, Vader, Jedi robes, etc...
It should be noted that some is conjecture on my part, some is cobbled together from EU sources, and I've got enough trivia rattling around in my head that the line admittedly gets blurred between the two at times. So, if I inadvertantly claim an idea from print as my own, I give a pre-emptive "mea culpa."
It's been mentioned in a couple of sources that traditional Jedi robes are essentially simple traveler's robes of a type which can be seen in any spaceport in the galaxy. This serves the dual purpose of being humble, which befits an order dedicated to service and a certain degree of ascetism, and letting Jedi blend into the average crowd as a situation may demand.
As to Obi-Wan and Yoda deciding to have Luke's family raise him, I'm willing to chalk that one up largely to a Force "hunch" on Yoda's part. Also, it's entirely possible that Obi-Wan changed his name to Ben and kept his last name was to keep it close enough to the truth that he would react naturally to it in conversation. Besides, in a galaxy of billions upon billions of beings, he's probably not the only Kenobi.
I'm fairly certain that Palapatine knew at least about Luke, and possibly about Leia. I figure that he let Luke be instead of raising him himself because Vader's turn was based entirely on his fear for his family, and cemented by thinking they were dead. Having his son around would be a potential threat to his loyalty to the Emperor. Of course Vader, diminished Force potential aside, was still too useful as a right-hand-man and enforcer to cast aside in favor of someone who wouldn't really come into his power for another couple of decades, particularly since Vader himself was an integral part of Luke's planned fall to the Dark Side. (It almost worked, too)
Now, as to Leia, I think she was Palpatines Plan-C, like she was for Yoda and Obi-Wan, just not in the same way. In a worst-case scenario, Palpatine having to kill Luke and being stuck with Vader for a while longer, or losing both Vader AND Luke, Leia, blissfully unaware of her true heritage, could be counted on to have a child at some point, carrying on the Skywalker bloodline.
-Rex Hondo-
Posted by: Micha at April 13, 2007 06:24 PM
"2) The idea that Palpatine knew about Luke offers very interesting possibilities. But I'm not sure it's very likely that Palpatine would have not simply taken Luke as soon as possible and secretly started training him. This could be a good 'what if' kind of story. Unless we come up with a reason why it was better for Palpatine that Luke will grow up the way he did."
Palpatine needed Luke to have normal life so that he could first pervert or corrupt the nature of Luke's relationships, then tale them away and replace the people in those relationships with himself and the Dark Side.
He also probably didn't trust Vader much father than he could toss him. Even if he didn't know where Luke was exactly, he believed Luke would inevitably come to the Emperor himself and replace Vader as his hatchet man.
"3) The third option is the simplest. That Vader wasn't looking for Luke because as far as he knew he was never born. That still leaves the quesion, why didn't he look for Obi-Wan? Conspiracy again? After all, considering Obi-Wan mutilated him and left him to die a long agonizing death (in one of the weaker point of Revenge of the Sith), it seems Vader took it rather well. Wouldn't he want revenge? Or was he afraid? I would prefer anexplanation that some part of him chose to let Obi-Wan go. But the relationship between Anakin and Obi-Wan was never established very well in the movies."
It's also possible that Vader figured he had taken everything fom Obi-wan--the Jedi Knights, his belief in Anakin as "the One", the Republic--and took some sort of pleasure in letting him live with the loss.
Another possibilty is that Palpatine used the force to keep Vader from being distracted by a search for Kenobi, Luke, and/or Yoda. The effort involved interfered wth the Emperor's ability to accurately locate Luke or predict Luke's influence on future events.
"Question: is it silly to be discussing this?
Answer: would a discussion about Kirsten Dunst pot smoking habits be more satisfying?"
What's wrong with silly?
Changing the subject once again, I bring actual important news.
(importance not valid in all areas)
I previously mentioned on another thread that I recently sold my short story "Ascension" to the science fiction and fantasy audiozine SCYWEB BEM. It'll be published sometime in the next year.
Now, on a related note (and in answer to a question Bill Myers asked some time back), my radio play, "With Best Regards Ronnie Silver: The Damiani Diamond Matter", which was performed and broadcast in Kalamazoo, Michigan in early 2006, is available for your listening pleasure for a limited time (about one year). To hear the play (a mystery, for the record), visit here:
http://www.allearstheatre.com/rewind.asp
Rick
Posted by Paul1963
Arisia, posessing as she did the Most Powerful Weapon in the Universe, then used her power ring to age herself into a physically-mature woman. Hal was rightly shocked to discover this, and initially pointed out that she was still chronologically and mentally 13/14, but I think he did eventually give in--it's been a while since I read the issues.
Actually, as i recall it (giving my inner geek full rein), it was one of those "Gee-I-didn't-know-it-could-do-that-just-because-I-subconsciously-wanted-it" power ring bits.
I recall Arisia feeling less than 100% for an issue or two and then suddenly "mysteriously collapsing" and waking up physically twenty-something...
Posted by: Rex Hondo at April 13, 2007 11:21 PM:
"EU sources"
The European Union?
"Also, it's entirely possible that Obi-Wan changed his name to Ben and kept his last name was to keep it close enough to the truth that he would react naturally to it in conversation. Besides, in a galaxy of billions upon billions of beings, he's probably not the only Kenobi."
I think Obi-Wan was clever enough to use a better alias if he wanted.
Maybe Kenobi is the galactic equivalent of Smith.
Does the fact that Obi-Wan and Qui-gon have similar style names suggest that they are from the same planet?
"As to Obi-Wan and Yoda deciding to have Luke's family raise him, I'm willing to chalk that one up largely to a Force "hunch" on Yoda's part."
Maybe they wanted somebody they knew and/or trusted to take care of the child. How many were there who were trustworthy enough? Maybe they felt he should grow up in a Tatooine environment?Here again we have a flaw in the prequels, that the character of Owen is just a nobody. Wouldn't it have been more interesting if he were Anakin's real brother. I would have had him as a half brother. That would have also made him a good contrast between his personality and Anakin. It also fits better with the impression in the beginning of A new Hope, that Owen knew Anakin well.
"I'm fairly certain that Palapatine knew at least about Luke, and possibly about Leia."
I prefer the idea that Palpatine found out about Leia as a result of Luke being careless with his emotions during the final battle, or something to that effect.
Wouldn't Palpatine want to bring up Luke the way he brought up Mara Jade? Wouldn't he want him to grow up and train from early age under his thumb? He could easily have kept him hidden from Vader. But maybe it is better for him that they start good and then corrupt? Or maybe he wanted Luke to go through Jedi training? Or maybe he wanted Luke to lead him to the remaining Jedi? Many possibilities.
I felt that the Sith apprentices should have gone through a process of being better, as far as Palpatine was concerned: starting with the animalistic Darth Maul, then to the next one, then to Darth Vader, with Luke being the next progression. Here again the slopiness of the prequels in aparent in the character of Count Dukooo. I had a much better idea.
"Another possibilty is that Palpatine used the force to keep Vader from being distracted by a search for Kenobi."
Wouldn't Palpatine want Obi-Wan found? another good story for the time between the end of Revenge of the Sith and A New Hope.
Damn--here's real news; Kurt Vonnegut dead at 84. One of the great ones.
I would characterize Vonnegut's work as a descendent of Ambrose Bierce, and Bierce as a descendent of at Dante, where, like the Devil's Dictionary and the Divine Comedy (and the Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy after them), he constructed fantasies that reveal the underlying agendas obscured by the pretenses presented to us. I'm not familiar enough with Cervantes to be sure he fits in there, but I wouldn't be surprised if that was the case.
Vonnegut said he was trying to poison the minds of people with humanity before they became generals and leaders and such, and everything I know about him are views that horrify you. What nice thing could you possibly say about him that qualifies him as "One of the great ones?"
Let me rephrase:
...an application of a scientific observation you found an anathema.
Unfortunately(?), I began my Vonnegut reading with SIRENS OF TITAN and, well, ended my Vonnegut reading there. The way he just transitioned instantly to a s seemingly huge non sequitur, only to spend part of the rest of the book showing why it wasn't really, simply smacked of dreadful writing, designed to needlessly confuse the reader to no good purpose. I have since come up with a theory as to why he did it, but it still doesn't particularly appeal to me and killed me off his writings.
I like smoking pot as well. And I hate how ho's are always trying to get me for my money. And Peter, you should know that Sienfeld doesn't like ALL jokes.
And I hate how ho's are always trying to get me for my money.
I'm wondering what you have in mind as a better exchange for money than sex.
Marshall, Will and Holly... on a routine expedition... and the greeeeeaaaatest earthquake ever known...
God, that takes me back. I remember I even had the ViewMaster reels of that show.
I know you don't think this way because I'm the only one I've heard charactize Vonnegut's work this way, and you've characterized me as devoid of wisdom and, with the exception of perhaps a few comments, thought.
Your opinion of Kurt Vonnegut is perfectly valid as far as I'm concerned, though, admitedly, the level of concern I have for your opinion of Kurt Vonnegut is kind of small.
When I cited Vonnegut's deference to a scientist who dismissed the notion of the spontaneous arrival of life as depicted on evolutionary timelines, it seemed to lower your evaluation of him. The scientist in question was referring to life on earth originating from elsewhere, but part of the recent tributes to Vonnegut included a comment by him that he believed there was a divine influence on evolution, so his use of the quote was probably meant to support this view -- a view you found an anathema.
My evaluation for him as someone having an understanding of evolutionary science perhaps. not my evaluation of him as a writer or a man. As I recall, the statement was presenetd as something on the order of evolution being as likely as a 747 spontaneously being made form the parts being tossed around by a tornado, which is a bad argument for all the reasons that we went over before. As I haven't read the actual book it came from I have no idea if that idea is presented as his actual opinion, another characters, or just Vonnegut being whimsical. Whatever the facts there, I certainly hope nobody takes it seriously as a critique of evolution.
Being possibly wrong about topics such as evolution does not disqualify a writer from being one of ther greats. Why would it?
Vonnegut was a socialist and a proud liberal, perhaps more severely than Daily Kos, who you've characterized as hateful.
I don't automatically dislike people I disagree with. Vonnegut was a far more interesting guy than the writers at Daily Kos and certainly a better writer, faint praise there.
Having political positions I don't subscribe to does not disqualify a writer from being one of the greats. Why would it?
Vonnegut said he was trying to poison the minds of people with humanity before they became generals and leaders and such, and everything I know about him are views that horrify you. What nice thing could you possibly say about him that qualifies him as "One of the great ones?"
He was a great writer and an interesting person. Sorry if my liking him somehow messes with whatever it is you've constructed to make sense of This Baffling World but so it goes.
To answer a question waaaaaaay up there . . .
Has anybody written a book or a novel about bloggers?
Yes. I can't recall the title of it, but I remember reading the description when I shelved it. It looke like an odd sort of hipster angst thing. I didn't read it.
I'm thinking about my next NaNovel being about blogs and messageboards and the consequences when a fanfic writer gives a copy of her fiction to the celebrities she's written about.
The tentative title is "Slash".
Vonnegut was speaking for "Kurt Vonnegut" when he cited the abiogenesis comment.
Your opinion of Kurt Vonnegut is perfectly valid as far as I'm concerned, though, admitedly, the level of concern I have for your opinion of Kurt Vonnegut is kind of small....
I don't automatically dislike people I disagree with. Vonnegut was a far more interesting guy than the writers at Daily Kos and certainly a better writer, faint praise there.
Vonnegut said he was trying to poison the minds of people with humanity before they became generals and leaders and such, and everything I know about him are views that horrify you. What nice thing could you possibly say about him that qualifies him as "One of the great ones?"He was a great writer and an interesting person. Sorry if my liking him somehow messes with whatever it is you've constructed to make sense of This Baffling World but so it goes.
You didn't disagree whatever qualification for the term "hateful" that applied to DailyKos also applied to Vonnegut. I'm still curious as to what it is you liked about him that allows you to overlook qualities you would despise in others. I don't doubt they're lurking in your noodle, I'm just wondering if you are conscious of it. Can you think of a favorite moment?
For example, he put Slapstick at the bottom of his list of works in order of quality, but it has my favorite moment of his. An old man preparing for the funeral of the stillborn baby of his teenaged granddaughter gives the story of his seemingly nonsensical life. Then he dies and the last chapter devolves into a fairytale-telling of the journey of the granddaughter to join him, picking up where Swain left off in his telling.
Vonnegut slips in I think one line about how the granddaughter was impregnated by a kidnapping and rape she managed to escape from, and then the fairytale continues for the rest of the chapter until he ends it on "And so on." So, you see, he wrote like 300 pages of nonsense and still somehow manages to break the reader's heart.
For the "Lonesome No More" theme of the book, tribalism as Vonnegut presents it shelters the "fairytale" of our lives so to speak, so it was appropriate for the book to end in a fairytale idiom -- the fairytale that allows the granddaughter to endure the victimization Vonnegut ambushed the horrified reader with.
Viewed in context of the book's themes, Imus savaged the fairytales of those girls, savaging the mechanism in them we all need to cope as the fairytale allowed Swain's granddaughter to cope. Imus's supporters deny white racism simply has a more devastating role in those black girls' fairytales than black racism.
Now that I think about it, Vonnegut has been depressed and suicidal for over 20 years, and with what he knew, Jesus, who could blame him for being heartbroken over everything?
You didn't disagree whatever qualification for the term "hateful" that applied to DailyKos also applied to Vonnegut.
I don't feel obligated to address every point you make. Shocking but true. I also have not always automatically assumed that when you ignore or fail to address a point that someone makes to you it should be interpreted as agreement on your part. Should I?
I honestly don't see much to compare the usual Daily Kos crowd with Vonnegut. For one thing-- crowd does not equal person. Most of the real hate on the daily Kos site comes from the commentators and monor diarists, not Markos himself.
For another thing I suspect that one would have to read many many many days worth of daily kos posts to find the same wit you could get from a page or two of any of Vonnegut's novel's.
I don't know about favorite moment, but my favorite novel is, no surprise, Slaughterhouse 5. I don't think he ever wrote anything as great as that one again but neither have the vast majority of writers.
I don't feel obligated to address every point you make. Shocking but true. I also have not always automatically assumed that when you ignore or fail to address a point that someone makes to you it should be interpreted as agreement on your part. Should I?
As we provide replies to ourselves for every point someone makes to us, I simply share all of the ones replying to posted points, chasing after unconscious reactions if I have to. I consider the practice of chasing after one's unconscious reactions to be an exercise in trusting one's self. If you have faith in yourself, you have no reason to fear your own unconscious workings.
As I consider some points dependent on others, by addressing the independent points, I address the dependent ones. Where my responses receive no replies, I consider my responses adequate.
I don't know about favorite moment, but my favorite novel is, no surprise, Slaughterhouse 5. I don't think he ever wrote anything as great as that one again but neither have the vast majority of writers.
Well, you're talking about his most popular novel, which is fine. If you refer to him as great, maybe you're like me and observed a tradition or two he shared with other creators, like the tradition of managing pretense I mentioned above leading to the Borat movie. Or whatever. Perhaps you'll engage in an exercise of trusting in yourself to track down what you are referring to as Vonnegut's greatness, since the answer explains what makes the views you find an anathema in others tolerable in him.
Fox News Alert:
The Earth is Round!
Seriously, News has become sensationalistic, News has become "Angelina Jolie eats at Sardi's, we'll have a 10 minute analysis and commentary at 11" when actually there is no substance and the real news gets buried.
Let me give you an example, 5 or so years ago I posted here on a topic Peter did, and I said I was a shiksa, someone told me Shiksa meant girl, when I thought it was Gender-neutral, another poster told me the correct term was and I apologized to Peter although, I don't know if he ever saw it or the kickoff to it. At any rat, no harm no foul.
Now, if I had made that mistake, someone would have "Ignorant Gentile offends Jewish Sci-fi Writer" on Monday, Tuesday, the Anti-Defamation League would make comments of how disgraceful it is before wanting my ass on a platter on Wednesday. They wouldn't have even cared if I apologized to Peter. Thursday all 3 cable networks' talking heads would be devoting hours of time, just to wonder if I'm insane, retarded, or promoting an ultra-conservative Christian Fundamentalist agenda. On Friday, they'd be analyzing my home life, wonder if I've come from a broken home, what my personal socioeconomic status is, and if I'm getting any. On Saturday, Bush's weekly radio address bails me out, but now I'm seen as an Anti-Semitic, retarded, psychopathic, lower-middle class, ultra-conservative Christian Fundamentalist who prabably isn't getting any.
Slow News Day? I think the last time there was hard news was when Israel invaded Lebanon... Oh No here we go again!!
Charles Waldo
I don't accept your premise that Mr Vonnegut has very much in common with the posters at Daily Kos, so I don't see very much use in the exercise.
I am frankly puzzled as to why there is any mystery to you on why I would consider him one of the greats (I suppose it's a fair question to ask--one of the great what? Great writers of the 20th century, I would reply.). His politics are of no relevance to me--Slaughterhouse 5 would be as great a book were it written by a speechwriiter for barry Goldwater...to me, anyway.
Harlan Ellison is probably my favorite living writer and I rather doubt we would see eye to eye on a majority of issues (though who knows? We tend to look at only a few issues and use them to classify people politically, leaving a lot of other things unexamined). For the life of me I don't find anything the least bit surprising about it. I would suggest, in fact, that if anyone finds that their favorite artists all share their own views they may well be needlessly denying themselves a great deal of pleasure on purely political grounds.
Why is he great? He wrote some great books taht captured the tone of the time and he was very influential to those who followed. He also brought science fiction elements into the mainstream, which is no easy feat, given the bias against it from most critics.
What is the correct term--sheygets?
I had a few Jewish girlfriends. Their folks were, if not exactly singing Hava Nagila, ok with that, but if a brother dated a shiksa...yikes!
What I find interesting is that a number of the girls I knew who wer fairly relaxed about their Jewish identity have become much more serious about it as the years have gone on. When I was in college there was a lot of talk about the loss of Jewish identity to intermarriage and smaller families and lack of interest in the culture. I wonder if that has changed across the board or if my small sample is just an abberation.
I don't accept your premise that Mr Vonnegut has very much in common with the posters at Daily Kos, so I don't see very much use in the exercise.
Bill, please forgive my double-take when you deny Kurt Vonnegut is hateful.
I myself feel that our country, for whose Constitution I fought in a just war, might as well have been invaded by Martians and body snatchers. Sometimes I wish it had been. What has happened, though, is that it has been taken over by means of the sleaziest, low-comedy, Keystone Cops-style coup d’etat imaginable. And those now in charge of the federal government are upper-crust C-students who know no history or geography, plus not-so-closeted white supremacists, aka “Christians,” and plus, most frighteningly, psychopathic personalities, or “PPs.”
To say somebody is a PP is to make a perfectly respectable medical diagnosis, like saying he or she has appendicitis or athlete’s foot. The classic medical text on PPs is The Mask of Sanity by Dr. Hervey Cleckley. Read it! PPs are presentable, they know full well the suffering their actions may cause others, but they do not care. They cannot care because they are nuts. They have a screw loose!
And what syndrome better describes so many executives at Enron and WorldCom and on and on, who have enriched themselves while ruining their employees and investors and country, and who still feel as pure as the driven snow, no matter what anybody may say to or about them? And so many of these heartless PPs now hold big jobs in our federal government, as though they were leaders instead of sick.
What has allowed so many PPs to rise so high in corporations, and now in government, is that they are so decisive. Unlike normal people, they are never filled with doubts, for the simple reason that they cannot care what happens next. Simply can’t. Do this! Do that! Mobilize the reserves! Privatize the public schools! Attack Iraq! Cut health care! Tap everybody’s telephone! Cut taxes on the rich! Build a trillion-dollar missile shield! [F---] habeas corpus and the Sierra Club and In These Times, and kiss my ass!
--27 January 2003
Ok, so you think Kurt Vonnegut is hateful? Or you think I think Kurt Vonnegut is hateful? Or you think I SHOULD think that Kurt Vonnegut is hateful?
I'm sorry, I just don't see what your agenda is here or why it matters to you.
As for the passage you quote--Again, I have to apologize but it doesn't seem to have the desired effect. Kurt Vonnegut was one of the great writers of our time. The typists at Daily Kos, conversely, are not. The fact that Mr Vonnegut may share thoughts, opinions etc with said typists changes my opinion not a bit.
I don't know what you expect to accomplish here. Even if you give me absolute proof that Mr. Vonnegut secretly put poisoned milk into the cereal of schoolchildren it will have little effect on my opinion of him as a writer. If it really bothers you that we both like the man's work you will have to somehow convince me that Slaughterhouse 5 is actually a lousey book. Good luck on THAT one!
Ok, so you think Kurt Vonnegut is hateful? Or you think I think Kurt Vonnegut is hateful? Or you think I SHOULD think that Kurt Vonnegut is hateful?
Considering the quote is more severe than anything presented on the homepage of DailyKos, and you've characterized DailyKos as hateful, I still do the double-take how you can deny Vonnegut is hateful by your standards.
If it really bothers you that we both like the man's work you will have to somehow convince me that Slaughterhouse 5 is actually a lousey book.
Well, now that you mention it, I consider it second to Breakfast of Champions as qualifying for his weakest novel.
Vonnegut compared writing to holding a conversation in a restaurant: you speak to your table to hold their interest while speaking clearly enough to allow anyone listening in to grasp the appeal with which you hold your intended audience. He said you should write to hold the attention of one person... something about trying to make love to the world and you wind up catching cold.
Slaughterhouse 5 seemed to trip over who its intended audience was. It had an innovative critique of Christianity, but seemed like a lot of exposition on the fatalistic nature of time and he gave no character you felt compelled to root for. Can you remember any funny lines from it?
In Hocus Pocus, he did this odd build up to where the character meets the son he never knew he had, but was careful to speak so as not to dispel all the lies he told his mother about his identity and accomplishments. For Galapagos, he had Kilgore Trout greeting the book's narrator, Trout's son, at the opening of the blue tunnel leading to the afterlife, and Kilgore getting so pissed off at Leon wanting to see what was going to happen next, he closed the tunnel on Leon for a million years. Bluebeard had the witty banter of the pill-popping Circe Berman. In Jailbird, he led us into the mind of homeless billionaire Mary Kathleen O'Looney. In Timequake, which also addressed the fatalistic nature of time, he, as the narrator, greets us in the middle of the book from the year 2010 and ambushes us with a funny outcome.
And in Slaughterhouse 5 he gives us the indifferent Billy Pilgim. You say he hasn't written anything great since then, but almost all of his books afterward seemed more engaging than it.
Bill,
"His politics are of no relevance to me--..."
See, there's your problem. You're trying to discuss a topic that involves understanding the nuance and concept of separating an artist's sociopolitical views or opinion essays from his fictional work with someone who seemed unable to grasp the conceptual difference between one death and thousands of deaths.
I'm not much of a fan of Vonnegut's opinion essay work, but I can still enjoy the fiction works he did where he injected those ideas into the storytelling. I enjoyed the slightly dark whimsy in stories like Tomorrow and Tomorrow and Tomorrow and loved Slaughterhouse 5.
Differing opinions or political points of view need not mean one cannot enjoy a well crafted story. Take PAD as an example since it's pretty well established that I am a fan of his work. PAD often throws his POV into his stories. Some I agree with, some I don't. His Crazy 8 story was for me, at least politically, contrived, heavy-handed and rather weak. It was still well written, well structured and enjoyable as a piece of fiction.
Micha brought up the controversies surrounding Wagner in another thread. Love his works. He was a great composer, but apparently he was a lousy human being.
You and I can both likely rattle of loads of actors and directors who hold radically differing views from our own that we still find enjoyable. The skill of an actor or director, and thus the enjoyment of their skills, is not based on his or her voting record or views on affirmative action, gun control or Hiroshima.
Vonnegut was a great writer. He created enjoyable works of fiction that were admired by many for a plethora of reasons. His personal leanings don't enter into that. Most sane human beings can wrap their minds around that. The other group can't.
You're also attempting to discuss something with a nut who seems determined to pick a fight over anything tonight. Go check out the Q&A thread. He's seemingly picked some random poster, applied his Bizzaro logic to the guy's question and then called him out for criticizing HIS question. No, really. Go check it out. It's so sad it's almost funny. Probably confused the other guy to no end.
But, hey, fire away all night. We all need our little amusements from time to time. For all I know, you've members or extended members of the Clan Mulligan over for a weekend's visit and you're showing them the "comedy" stylings of our resident Bizzaro World refugee for twisted laughs. Hey, where else can you introduce them to performance art that simultaneously amuses and bores the viewer senseless?
Posted by: Micha at April 14, 2007 07:48 AM
"EU sources"
The European Union?
Sorry. EU = Expanded Universe.
Wouldn't Palpatine want to bring up Luke the way he brought up Mara Jade? Wouldn't he want him to grow up and train from early age under his thumb? He could easily have kept him hidden from Vader. But maybe it is better for him that they start good and then corrupt? Or maybe he wanted Luke to go through Jedi training? Or maybe he wanted Luke to lead him to the remaining Jedi? Many possibilities.
Well, if we accept, for the sake of argument, that Palpatine knew about at least Luke all along, you actually touch on one of the possibilities I like the most. I find it probable that a fallen champion is somehow more powerful than somebody who's simply fed hate from an early age. From a dramatic standpoint, it is a recurring theme in storytelling throughout the ages, in keeping with the "Monomyth" structure of the Star Wars saga. Plus, such a manipulation and fall would be much more appealing to Palpatine's twisted sensibilities.
Besides, I've always had the impression that Palpatine was always far too overconfident and in love with his own plots and machinations.
-Rex Hondo-
Huh.
I tell everyone I had lunch with Bill Mulligan... and it triggers a lengthy discussion about the order of the Jedi Knights. The only thing that's scarier... is that it all seems to make perfect sense.
We are really, seriously weird.
Oh, if I had a dime for every time a lengthy geek digression was triggered by something seemingly unrelated and completely innocuous...
-Rex Hondo-
Posted by: Bill Mulligan at April 14, 2007 10:58 PM:
"What is the correct term--sheygets?"
Good for you Bill. I only found out that that's the meaning of the term recently (not Jewish male, as opposed to shiksa, which is female). It also has other meanings. When I wanted to refer to a non Jewish male in a funny way I used to call him 'Shiks'.
If anybody has a reason to be offended by these terms it's not-Jews. However, this is another one of those cases where the term's meaning does not have the negative connotation it used to. It's more about the attitude of a Jew to somebody non-Jewish, usually possessing qualities Jews feel they lack.
"I had a few Jewish girlfriends. Their folks were, if not exactly singing Hava Nagila, ok with that, but if a brother dated a shiksa...yikes!"
This could be because according to Jewish religious law (for those who care about it) Judaism is passed by the mother. Or they could just be more protective of the boys because of a lingering patriarchal attitude.
"What I find interesting is that a number of the girls I knew who wer fairly relaxed about their Jewish identity have become much more serious about it as the years have gone on. When I was in college there was a lot of talk about the loss of Jewish identity to intermarriage and smaller families and lack of interest in the culture. I wonder if that has changed across the board or if my small sample is just an abberation."
This goes to what I was talking earlier about the tension between the wish to assure the continuance of a unique cultural identity, and the welcoming of the assimilating aspects of American society such as intermarriage. Obviously, the more you assimilate the more effort it takes to keep aspects of the unique identity, especially for Jews who have no phyisical characteristic, a different religion, and are not that many. My sister is studying in Berkley now and she finds herselfgoing to trouble to celebrate holidays that here in Israel were so self evident it took little effort.
Sometimes I read articles claiming the Jewish community is shrinking in the US. But I don't know how true it is. As I understand it American Jews try to find a blance between the two tensions, sometimes more successfully, sometimes less. It seems like hard work.
-----------------------
Posted by: Jerry Chandler at April 15, 2007 01:16 AM:
"Micha brought up the controversies surrounding Wagner in another thread. Love his works. He was a great composer, but apparently he was a lousy human being."
If Jews threw out all creators who held antisemitic opinions, we'd have a very diminished cultural horrizons.
-----------------------
Posted by: Rex Hondo at April 15, 2007 02:28 AM
""EU sources"
The European Union?
Sorry. EU = Expanded Universe."
No need to appologize. I didn't know the term but I was also being silly.
I agree with your thoughts about Palpatine completely. Maybe somebody will one day write his story.
--------------------
Posted by: Bill Myers at April 15, 2007 05:47 AM:
"I tell everyone I had lunch with Bill Mulligan... and it triggers a lengthy discussion about the order of the Jedi Knights. The only thing that's scarier... is that it all seems to make perfect sense."
Well of course. The connection is plainly observable. It baffles me that you can't see it.
I always assumed you were Bill Mulligan's apprentice.
Okay, as long as we're digressing like crazy here...
A friend of mine got me in to see "Revenge of the Sith" for free. And no, we didn't sneak in! My friend's wife works for a company that was treating customers to a free screening of the movie, and they invited me to tag along.
Anyway, cutting to the chase, after the closing credits began to roll, my friend turned to me and jokingly asked, "What do you Episode IV is going to be about?"
"I'm thinking either a romantic comedy or a musical," I replied.
And in Slaughterhouse 5 he gives us the indifferent Billy Pilgim. You say he hasn't written anything great since then, but almost all of his books afterward seemed more engaging than it.
Actual quote: I don't think he ever wrote anything as great as that one
"as great" NOT "I don't think he ever wrote anything great after that one". As great.
It's impossible to talk to you Mike, even when you are keeping the nastiness in check. If you can't accept what's said you make it into something unsaid.
But, hey, fire away all night. We all need our little amusements from time to time. For all I know, you've members or extended members of the Clan Mulligan over for a weekend's visit and you're showing them the "comedy" stylings of our resident Bizzaro World refugee for twisted laughs. Hey, where else can you introduce them to performance art that simultaneously amuses and bores the viewer senseless?
I've left Clan Mulligan (truer than you know, we have 3 houses on one street, a position of strength we use to bully Clan Kappler and Clan Parisi) and am back in North Carolin, bringing bad weather with me, it seems. Hey, but the people I left are in far worse shape, with a Nor'easter a-coming. Ha ha, suckers.
Besides, I've always had the impression that Palpatine was always far too overconfident and in love with his own plots and machinations.
Yeah, he did have that fatal James Bond villain complex going there.
I tell everyone I had lunch with Bill Mulligan... and it triggers a lengthy discussion about the order of the Jedi Knights. The only thing that's scarier... is that it all seems to make perfect sense.
Do you remember the part where I waved my hand at you and you suddenly insisted on paying the bill?
This could be because according to Jewish religious law (for those who care about it) Judaism is passed by the mother.
Duh, yes of course, it makes perfect sense.
I always assumed you were Bill Mulligan's apprentice.
Which got me to thinking about how Bill myers would look with a braid. Unfortunately I did it while drinking coffee and now I have a mess to clean up.
"... bringing bad weather with me, it seems."
No kidding. You slammed the heck out of us on your way through. Thanks.
Didn't Douglas Adams write about a character who was a weather God but didn't know it and the clouds were always paying homage to him by rining on him but all he knew was that the weather was always gloomy wherever he was?
Not taht I', saying that's the case here. If I could control the weather I'd have it snow wherever Al Gore showed up to lecture on Global Warming...oh, wait.
Micha:
"This could be because according to Jewish religious law (for those who care about it) Judaism is passed by the mother."
Bill Mulligan:
"Duh, yes of course, it makes perfect sense."
Micha:
How could you know? anyway, I'm not sure that's the reason. People who oppose intermarriage of Jews with non Jews are usually quite unhappy even if it's daughters.
Rex Hondo:
Besides, I've always had the impression that Palpatine was always far too overconfident and in love with his own plots and machinations.
Bill Mulligan:
Yeah, he did have that fatal James Bond villain complex going there.
Micha:
I don't know. Palpatine kept himself safe until Return of the Jedi. And that plan was pretty clever. His plans in the prequels were over complicated. But they have the advantage of being considered successes no matter what happened.
Bill Myers:
A friend of mine got me in to see "Revenge of the Sith" for free.
Micha:
some would say you were overcharged.
Bill Myers:
Anyway, cutting to the chase, after the closing credits began to roll, my friend turned to me and jokingly asked, "What do you Episode IV is going to be about?"
"I'm thinking either a romantic comedy or a musical," I replied.
Micha:
Actually it wouldn't take much effort to imagine revenge of the Sith (and perhaps the other movies too) as a musical. They seem to have a very musical-like quality to them. Imagine Anakin and Obi-Wan singing while they duel in their final battle. I always refer to the scene of Anakin and Padme froliking in the mountains of Naboo in Attack of the Clones as the 'Sounds of Silence' scene.
Posted by: Bill Myers at April 15, 2007 08:52 AM:
"Anyway, cutting to the chase, after the closing credits began to roll, my friend turned to me and jokingly asked, "What do you Episode IV is going to be about?"
We are probably going to find out the Maggie Simpson is the real master of the Sith.
"I always assumed you were Bill Mulligan's apprentice."
So, apparently in this backward region of the Sagittarian Arm of the Galaxy where digital watches are still considered a pretty neat idea, "Bill" is substituted for "Darth."
Frighteningly, Bill Engvall suddenly makes perfect sense.
You're also attempting to discuss something with a nut who seems determined to pick a fight over anything tonight. Go check out the Q&A thread. He's seemingly picked some random poster, applied his Bizzaro logic to the guy's question and then called him out for criticizing HIS question. No, really. Go check it out. It's so sad it's almost funny. Probably confused the other guy to no end.
I learn from interacting here because it facilitates me in chasing down my unconscious reactions to what's said here, allowing me to present my disagreements with less and less ambiguity -- this is how convention is challenged and is perhaps the first virtue of extending free speech to all.
But my tie to this site is not so strong that I won't address your accusation with this offer: If Peter says he reviewed my 2 posts in the Q&A thread and agrees that, as it appears to him, my reaction made no sense to the poster, then I will take responsibility for misjudging the fan outcry to rescue the All Star Squadron, and, except to respond to references to me, stop posting here.
Actual quote: I don't think he ever wrote anything as great as that one.
"as great" NOT "I don't think he ever wrote anything great after that one". As great.
It's impossible to talk to you Mike, even when you are keeping the nastiness in check. If you can't accept what's said you make it into something unsaid.
So you say Slaughterhouse 5 is great because Vonnegut says its great? Taking your word literally, my referring to my posts as great should ease your parsing of them.
In a post about the prominence of non-news in the news, you cite as news the death of a man whose political views were more severe than views you've characterized as heinous. I am still curious as to what what you have in mind that allowed you to tolerate those views in him. If you can't reply, don't.
I don't think he ever wrote anything as great as that one again
Your "actual quote" and your exclusion of your use of "again" prompted me to overlook that you were quoting yourself. Please disregard my reply and let me rephrase the comment you are replying to:
You say he hasn't written anything as great since then, but almost all of his books afterward seemed more engaging than it.
You say he hasn't written anything as great since then, but almost all of his books afterward seemed more engaging than it.
There is an easy explanation for this. Get ready:
We disagree.
You like some of his other books better. I like Slaughterhouse 5 best. A simple matter of opinion. No mystery. Move along. Nothing to see. Was that so hard.
In a post about the prominence of non-news in the news, you cite as news the death of a man whose political views were more severe than views you've characterized as heinous. I am still curious as to what what you have in mind that allowed you to tolerate those views in him. If you can't reply, don't.
I have replied. You can't read it, appaenrently or you can't accept it or whatever. Assumming your characterization of Mr Vonnegut's views is accurate--an assumption I would not make given your poor performance regarding other people--it still has zero (none) (zip) revelance to me in calling him a great writer.
If Rosie O'Donnel writes a book as great and as influential as Slaughterhouse 5 I will have no problem aknowledging her, even if I think her politics are often nonsensical.
Similarly, my enjoyment of Wagner's work is not reduced by his anti-semitism. As Bill Myers and Micha have alluded to, if one had to disregard the art of people who believed in things contrary to one's own views there would be little left to enjoy.
None of this seems as surprising to me as you seem to find it.
If it really bothers you that we both like the man's work you will have to somehow convince me that Slaughterhouse 5 is actually a lousey book.
Well, now that you mention it, I consider it second to Breakfast of Champions as qualifying for his weakest novel....There is an easy explanation for this. Get ready:
We disagree.
You like some of his other books better. I like Slaughterhouse 5 best. A simple matter of opinion. No mystery. Move along. Nothing to see. Was that so hard.
The challenged to criticize the book was yours.
The challenged to criticize the book was yours.
Um...well, no, actually I was just telling you that the only way you could get me to reverse my high opinion of Vonnegut as a writer would be to convince me that he was not a good writer. I didn't think you could or would actually try and, I should point out, claiming that the book I find as best evidence of his greatness is actually inferior to his other works would only mean that I have underestimated him. So...
I think it's time one of us put this discussion out of its misery.
"I think it's time one of us put this discussion out of its misery."
I think that time came long before this. I'm surprised it went this far. I'm quite convinced that Mike is mentally ill. That's not a joke or an insult... I mean it literally. No one's doing him any favors by indulging him. I just hope he gets or is getting the psychiatric help he needs. Unless, of course, he's happy living in his Bizarro world where logic doesn't exist and the only books ever written are The Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy, The Divine Comedy, and the works of Kurt Vonnegut and Ambrose Bierce (okay, THAT part may have been intended as an insult).
"I think that time came long before this. I'm surprised it went this far. I'm quite convinced that Mike is mentally ill. That's not a joke or an insult... I mean it literally."
I've had similar suspicions. But I must admit that I am often tempted to respond directly or indirectly to Mike's posts. Do you think ignoring him is the better course of action from a mental health standpoint? I don't want to cause anybody harm just to indulge my impulse to respond to something of interest.
Hmm...An out for Kirsten...
"I meant smoking pot in Amsterdam. Where it's legal. I would never willfully break the law here."
Oh - PAD to answer your question as to why it's even remotely news:
It moves paper. And that's the only explanation.
One of my favorite papers is the Wall Street Journal. It's biased, sure, but toward its readers, which happen to be people involved in moving money. Therefore, it seems to be the paper least fettered with tabloid matters, since that won't sell a Wall Street Journal. However, an article about the economic effect of Tom Cruise jumping on a couch (which did actually effect the film business and had it take a hard look at its star system) does make it to the paper once in awhile.
And I hate business.
If it really bothers you that we both like the man's work you will have to somehow convince me that Slaughterhouse 5 is actually a lousey book....
Um...well, no, actually I was just telling you that the only way you could get me to reverse my high opinion of Vonnegut as a writer would be to convince me that he was not a good writer.
This sounds like a backpedal.
I think it's time one of us put this discussion out of its misery.
You are free to not reply.
I'm quite convinced that Mike is mentally ill.
Are you the author of the "robert's Journal" page you link to?
One of my favorite jokes, one that only Jason and I seem to find funny, is the following:
What do you get when you stab a baby in the face thirty times?
An erection.
Admit it, that's freaking hilarious....
Even if you're linking to that page arbitrarily, please excuse me if your diagnosis doesn't carry any weight with me.
Posted by: Skywalker Scullion at April 15, 2007 01:22 PM
"I always assumed you were Bill Mulligan's apprentice."
So, apparently in this backward region of the Sagittarian Arm of the Galaxy where digital watches are still considered a pretty neat idea, "Bill" is substituted for "Darth."
Frighteningly, Bill Engvall suddenly makes perfect sense.
And that's not all.
Bill the Cat? Obviously Sith alchemy gone horribly wrong, probably due to experiments perfomed by Bill Nye the Science Guy, greatly misinterpreting the orders of Bill Clinton to create the ultimate Sith pussy.
-Rex Hondo-
How did I miss that one? HOW? I'm so disappointed in myself. But, think of it, get Bills Clinton and Gates together in a secret society somewhere, and what do you have?
First one to say the Buffalo Bills gets hit with a meatball.
No, you get...the Billuminati!
No, you get...the Billuminati!
Now we have to kill him. Damn. I liked Sean.
As we all just love free speech here, just what is anyone's standing for saying such a "news report" is unacceptable? It's surprising that Ms. Dunst fell into the trap, of course, but I am rather concerned that posters here refer to "responsible marijuana use." The last I heard, the responsibility of committing a misdemeanor (or a violation, in a few localities) was a matter of some controversy. I don't find it very responsible to flout the law and risk jail time or a fine. Changing a bad law is responsible; Violating a standing one is not.