Author Archives: Bob Evans

Thinking Beyond the Gun

The issue of 3-D printed guns is once again making news. This has naturally provoked a lot of talk and heat from the usual opposed corners of debate. The Trump administration dropped the government’s opposition to Defense Distributed file sharing the 3-D printer instructions for making firearms but a Federal judge has stepped in and made a fresh injunction halting the process.
Both side of the debate seem to focus on the firearm element of the issue. That’s to be expected, gun rights, just as is the case with abortion rights, is primarily an issue of culture, emotions, and tribalism. However I want to look at the underlying principals and what that could mean.
At issue is spreading knowledge and if the government can preemptively, for the public good, forbid the dissemination of knowledge.
When the Obama administration first forbid Defense Distributed from placing the files on the Internet they did it through a national security rationale. There are laws, and these laws are not bad ones in my opinion, that make the sharing of some technologies internationally illegal. Some knowledge must be kept from the hands of our adversaries; this applies to both classified and non-classified information. Now I think, and this is purely opinion, that the Obama administration used the as a justification but that preventing 3-D printer instructions for common firearms was a bit of a stretch. Defense Distributed challenged the government in court and the new administration ceased defending the Obama’s administration’s position.
The essential argument is that printer instructions for making firearms are too dangerous and therefore the government has a compelling interest in control the flow of such information.
Consider this what other information might be considered detrimental to the public good and therefore subject to the government’s prior restraint? How far are you willing to allow the government to go on this? Is it only firearms? Certainly other actor, if this action is allowed, will push the envelope and make all sorts of logical arguments as to why this or that must be restricted for the common good. Do not create a governmental power that you are not willing to hand over to your worst political opponent.
This is not an argument that unlimited anonymous guns are a good thing or even unavoidable but be careful about jumping on the first obvious remedy. You want to be sure it is medication and not a poison pill.

Share

The Oddest Dream I Ever Had

There was a bit on twitter the other day where someone asked others to describe their weirdest dream in five words. This followed describing favorite books and movies also with the five-word limitation. This prompted me to remember a dream from 1977 when I was sixteen and spending the summer with my older sister,

My niece Heather was an infant and as is the way of infants rarely slept through the night. By a quirk of chance the times that I went to sleep, rather late, synchronized with Heather’s cycles in such a manner that when she awoke in the night it often interrupted my middle of the night dreaming. People dream on a roughly 90 minute cycle and those dream from the middle of my sleep are particularly odd.

I remember bits and pieces of those strange phantasms but this one I think is the strangest. First off I am not in the dream. I do not know how common this is for other but I will occasionally have dreams in which I never appear. In these I am a spectator, much like watching a fully realized film that happens to carry smell, taste, and touch in addition to visuals and sound. In fact I have had dream that really were movies, complete with known actors in some of the parts. This dream had no named actors.

The situation is a newly wed couple. The husband has come home from work and they have seated themselves to the dinner she prepared, a whole roasted chicken. Their conversation slides from loving to sniping and arguing. As the scene progresses it becomes obvious, though I could not say how, that the chicken, the dead and cooked bird centered in the table, is manipulating their minds with its own psychic powers. The couple’s disagreement turns to shouting but on the cusp of becoming violent they recognize that it is not their own will at work but the chicken’s. (My, that’s a strange sentence all by itself.) Before they can do anything about the foul fowl the chicken reveals further psychic abilities and takes control of their bodies, forcing the couple to grab a broom handle and feed it into the kitchen’s garbage disposal. Unable to release their grip on the shaft the pair struggles in horror as they are drawn down into the strangely deadly device.

And that’s where I woke up to Heather’s cries for a feeding. I laid there in the dark waiting for Rod Serling to step out of the corner and begun to post episode wrap up. It would have been nice if someone explained that dream.

There were other weird dream that summer, humanoid aliens with glowing spots in their forehead invading New England but stopped by the alligators and so on but nothing as odd at the mental, mad chicken.

Share

Casablanca and DREAM

Recently I have started listening to various podcasts, political; entertainment, and writing are the most represented subjects. One of the writing podcasts is Writing Excuses and it features a number of established writers discussing in an abbreviated format, just 15 minutes or so for each episode, various subjects and approaches to improve one’s writing. An episode I listened to recently concerned character arcs, the emotional trajectory and changes a character undergoes through the course of a story. Author Mary Robinett Kowal presented a tool for charting a character’s course through the arc and she put it in the form of a mnemonic; DREAM.

D: Denial. The character is in denial about the needed change, the aspect of their personality that is damaged or missing.

R: Resistant. The character, presented with evidence of the subject of their denial, resists the evidence, doubling down on their denial.

E: Explore. The character begins exploring the missing aspect of their nature, moving tentatively away from their denial.

A: Acceptance. The character accepts the truth of the flaw or missing elements that they need to change.

M: Modify. The character’s actions are modified by their acceptance and this expresses the new ground state for the character.

I thought it would be an interesting exercise to apply this tool to perhaps the most well know character arc in cinema, Richard ‘Rick’ Blaine’s transformation from self-centered cynic to Romantic fighter in the 1942 classic Casablanca.

Denial: The film starts with Rick, by way of his actions, expressing his denial of any need for personal relationship or any ideology other than his own self-interest. He dismisses romantic attachments existing only in the moment. “Where were you last night? – I can’t remember that far back. Will I see you tonight? -I never plan that far ahead.” When Ugarte begs for help Rick is plain that he ‘sticks his neck out for no one.’ However we, as the audience, are given glimpses that this is not Rick’s true character. Captain Renault probes Rick’s character, speculating on what brought him to Casablanca and Rick’s evasive lies are evidence of a different character hiding inside the cynic. Rick’s holding the transit letter stolen by Ugarte and not turning them over to the authorities is also an indication that there are things he may think are more important then himself and he will not willingly assist the Nazis or their puppet government.

Resistant: Rick is confronted with his facade when Isla Lund comes back into his life. He tries to shows that she doesn’t mean much to him when he effectively calls her a prostitute and dismisses any possibility of any love lingering in his heart. Sam, another character utilized to reveal truths that Rick will not admit to himself, gives voice to Rick desire to run away. Rick insisting that Sam play As Time Goes Byis Rick proving that he and Isla’s former love means nothing now is his resistance given voice.

Explore: After Rick sobers up he seeks out Isla and tries to get her to tell the story he rebuffed while drunk but she refuses. When he goes to her this is Rick exploring the concept that he hasn’t gotten over Isla. He doesn’t say so overtly, he still wears an armor of cynicism but it is still merely a facade.

Acceptance: When Isla comes to him and threatens to kill him for the transit letters and Rick does nothing, inviting her to shoot him, he is accepting that he has never stopped loving Isla. The self-centered armor falls away and he leaves himself open to death. Isla’s collapse and inability to kill him forces Rick to accept the truth about their love and himself.

Modification: At the end of the film Rick convinced Isla, even though they love each other deeply, to go away with Victor. He has given up his gin joint and joins the resistance fighting to Nazis. He has changed his actions, committing himself to a cause larger then his own petty interests.

I have to say I think this tool works pretty damn well.

Share

The James Gunn Affair is not Over

There are two major continuing elements to the internet fueled controversy surrounding Disney’s firing of James Gunn from not only the Guardians of the Galaxy films but also from participation in the larger Marvel Cinematic Universe.

The first is the firing and presumable replacement for Gunn as writer/director of the massively successful franchise. Popular with fans, beloved by the cast, and having made the studio a metric ton of money Gunn’s dismissal has sparked a furious backlash and even though production is slated to start in early 2019, right around the corner and massive tent-pole production terms, no replacement has been named. Bob Iger, head of Disney, has been on vacation and made no public statement concerning the kerfuffle. It is possible, given spurious nature of the charges, the public outcry, including a petition to reinstate Gunn that has gathered more than 3000,000 signature, and the massive risk to one of the studio’s premier properties, that Iger may reverse the hasty decision and try to sail on as though nothing of note happened in the mad days of summer. We have no evidence either supporting or undercutting the possible course of action but I fervently hope it comes to pass.

Second is the continuing political ramification of the affair. Make no bones about it, this had nothing to do with good taste, offensive unfunny jokes, or alt-right trolls clutching their pearls and requiring smelling salts after suffering psychic damage from Gunn’s distasteful styling. This was a political hit job. As a prominent progressive with a large soapbox and sharp disagreement with Trump’s administration Gunn represented a danger and a target for the alt-Right. They mobilized, launched a cynical ploy, and succeeded in scaring a corporation into damaging its image and collection a pelt for their collection at the same time. Already a number of comedian have come under similar attacks, Michael Ian Black, Patton Oswald, and Sarah Silverman, have all seen the trolls digging up past comments and tweets in an attempt to replicate this outcome. What are the common elements among these individuals? They are comedians, people who often go for shock as a method of entertainment, and they are all outspoken liberals and heavily critical of the current administration. If a tactic succeeds it will be repeated. If Gunn’s firing stands then the Alt-Right will employ this attack again and again.

It is imperative that the ends here and that this ends now.

Share

A Slur That’s Truly Meaningless

“Political chaos is connected with the decay of language…” George Orwell

 

There are lots slurs hurled by both sides in the dirty trench warfare that is American politics. Most fall into various forms of an ad hominem, something that to me usually indicates a flailing debater who has exhausted their supply of facts and reason. There is one slur hurled from the right towards the left that moves beyond mere ad hominem and into the realm of meaningless noise – ‘Virtue Signaling.’

Its application would seem to indicate that the subject of the insult is engaging in empty symbolism, pronouncing through words, symbol, or meaningless action that they posses virtue on a given topic in an attempt to endear themselves to leaders of that topic or cause. The subtext of the insult seems to contain several parts;

1) That action or symbol is meaningless because the signaler is not actually doing anything.

2) The virtue is false, the position cannot be defended and the purpose of the signaling is to close ranks and protect the tribe.

3) That the signaler is a weak follower craving the affirmation of their tribe’s leader. It’s not a surprise that the people most likely to hurl this particular insult are also adherents to the discredited ‘Alpha and Beta Wolf’ hypothesis.

What is endlessly ironic is that the people uttering this slur are often signaling their own virtue.  Accusing opponents of ‘virtue signaling’ of course proclaims to one’s allies that one stands with conservative virtues, drawing a clear line of who is in the tribe, including the signaler.

Beyond the ironic the action is nearly always hypocritical. Only the virtues of the left can be subject to the insult of ‘virtue signaling.’ Renaming foodstuffs to thing like ‘Freedom Fries’, pinning miniature flags to your lapels, standing for anthems, or wearing politically aligned clothing such as NRA ball caps are all displays to the world the virtuous values of the conservative signaler. The actions themselves do nothing but exist only as a form of speech. (Don’t get me wrong speech is powerful. If it wasn’t people would expend so much energy telling you that you’re wrong when you express yourself.)

I find that this complaint of  ‘virtue signaling’ is very closely related to complaints about ‘politics’ in entertainment. I have rarely, if ever, heard anyone insist that a political philosophy that they agree with should be excised from some popular media they enjoy, it is that opposing viewpoint that they want excluded. Their own virtues they want to celebrate and it is only in the third person it becomes a fault that invites mocking.

Wear your virtues and values proudly.

Share

The James Gunn Mess

Disney should rehire James Gun.

The online campaign that led to his firing was an orchestrated hit-job with purely political motivations. Gunn was a vocal liberal who used his voice and his standing to shout his opposition to the current administration and its defenders. This made him beloved by some and hated by others but it was politics and when attacked Conservative darling Ben Shapiro that was pebble that started the landslide. The Daily Caller then went and dug up old bad-taste humor from nearly a decade ago, jokes, posts, and tweets, that Gunn had address and apologized for years ago. After The Caller resurfaced these ‘issues’ it was picked up by two alt-right personalities, one of whom helped spread the insane ‘pizza-gate’ conspiracy, and they drummed up the alt-right into attack mode, scaring Disney, ever fearful of anything that might stain their ‘wholesome’ image, into firing Gunn.

This was not morality. This was not ‘standards of good taste.’ This was payback for standing against the administration and having a soapbox that allowed such standing to be seen by far too many people.

The Gunn Affair is no way analogous with what happened with Rosanne Barr. There are critical differences between the two cases. Rosanne’s offensive statements were not dug up from nearly a decade in the past but were reflections of her current mindset about what she deemed acceptable and what was not. Roseanne, already in the hot glare of the spotlight, riding a wave of intense publicity centered around her attitude and politics engaged in her inexcusable behavior and then when called out on her obnoxious attack on particular people instead of apologizing she attempted to hide her culpability behind prescription drugs. The most important difference between the two isn’t centered about when it happened, or the sufficiency of their apologies but rather is ground in this very simple fact; bad taste jokes about rape and bestiality are not rape and bestiality but racist jokes areracist. Rosanne Barr suffered the immediate effects of shouting vile, racist, personal attacks in the public sphere This is not at all what happened with James Gunn and his bad taste, (and frankly unfunny) jokes uttered many years ago.

I have heard the argument that really this is all because the ‘SJWs’ started this sort of public personal destruction. I guess, though it is not clear, that the intention of such a comment is to say that the true people are fault and who should shoulder the blame for this is are the ‘SJWs’ for unleashing this tactic. (Side note; I think anyone who utters ‘SJW’ as a pejorative is no better than those who toss about ‘teabagger’ in a similar fashion. It’s nothing but a cheap ad hominem.)

First off if that is your position I would think very carefully before deploying that line of reasoning. Applied to other social/political issues, laying the responsibility at the toolmakers versus the tool users leads guilty parties you would not want to be found culpable.

Second, I remember the 2003 invasion of Iraq and the conservative feeding frenzy against the country music group The Dixie Chicks. Fanning public outrage over a celebrity’s political beliefs is nothing new and not a tactic that can be ascribed as the fault of a single side in American politics. When a street criminal killed Peter Parker’s Uncle Ben Peter was not responsible, the gun manufacturer was not responsible, the street criminal bears all the blame. The conservative alt-right is responsible for this campaign against James Gunn and Disney is responsible for their cowardly caving.

Share

A Rare Treat

For many years now most Sunday finds my Sweetie-wife and I at the World Famous San Diego Zoo. It’s a lovely way to get in a few miles of walking while seeing lovely animals from around the globe. If you follow my social media accounts you’ll often see photos snapped with my iPhone whenever I am lucky enough to capture an interesting moment.

In all the years and all the Sundays of these Zoo excursions we have never seen the mountain lion our side of its den.

This is not surprising as mountain lions are crepuscular, that is they hunt during twilight, the dim light of dawn and dusk are when they stalk their prey. Midmornings, when my Sweetie-Wife and I would arrive at the enclosure located near the back of the facility, the big can is found in its den, sleeping.

This Sunday was different.

We had crossed the recently completed canopy bridge that spans over the canyon where you can find the pandas, and emerged just outside of the Elephant Odyssey exhibit when she noticed that there was a crowd at the mountain lion enclosure. We walked over just as a zookeeper, standing in the enclosure itself, was completing a talk. Evidently we had arrived just as they were about to feed the feline. I scanned the enclosure and spotted the lion’s meal, a dead rabbit the usual meal offered carnivores at the zoon, placed on a tree limb. The keeper finished his and left the cage. A few moments later the mountain lion entered.

These two photos are the best ones I got and it was such a treat seeing that big cat stalking about his home.

Share

The 2018 WorldCon Kerfuffle

In the last few days the SF writer and fan communities discovered that apparently the WorldCon committee found a fresh pile of poo to step into. If you are not familiar with a science-fiction convention, and that is a different thing than a Star Trek or other Media focused convention, there are few standard and well loved elements to these gatherings; there are art shows where professional and fan artists display lovely pieces that often go up for auction, there are dances and parties, there are costume competitions and room after room of panel discussions.

These panel discussion ranges in topics form the nuts and bolts of the SF publishing and art businesses, to the latest films and television sensations. For me going to the panels is a central reason for attending conventions. The exposure to new ideas, breaking science, and writers that I have not been exposed to enrich my own writing, expand my knowledge, inspire new ideas, and introduce me to new favorite authors. Having a good mix of people on panels is a critical aspect to their success.

Before is get into the mess that appears to be this year’s Worldcon one more aspect that is important to understand, it is at the WorldCon where the Hugo awards, the best known and longest running award within in the SF and Fantasy community. Being nominated for a Hugo in any category is a big deal and a sign that an author or artist not only is talented but also has an active base of fans, as it is the WorldCon attendees that nominate the slate of potential winners. Winning a Hugo is a tremendous step up for a newly emerging artist or writer.

The 2018 WorldCon is held next month in San Jose and panel participants have been notified of their panel assignments. With WorldCon, a very important convention in the community, more people volunteer t appear on panels than can ever been accommodated. I myself submitted to appear, as I often do with smaller, local conventions. However I was not surprised when I was not invited to participate in any panels. I am still establishing myself but apparently a number of Hugo nominees have also been given the cold shoulder and were not invited to sit on any panels. The implication was that theses Hugo Nominees were not well known enough to get panel assignments.

This is madness.

A good panel should have a mix of opinions, styles, and experience. Not only are panels a great way for lesser known authors and artist to expand their audience, reaching new people, but fresh perspectives are critical to any growth of the medium. Authors and artists that are well established have much wisdom to share but also their views may be out of date and newer entrants into the field can give critical insights to the way things are working now.

A number of established authors have already publicly announced that they are willing to surrender their panel positions to make way for emerging people, a wonderful example of paying it forward.

This issue is not the only one to explode over the upcoming WorldCon and I hope that the committee is able to right this ship and host an inclusive, fun, and exciting convention next month.

Share

Why is Trump Deferential to Putin?

Even before last week’s terrifying and subservient joint press conference it’s been clear that Donald Trump not only admires Vladimir Putin, but also actively defers to the former KGB operative. On the world’s stage his displayed the true colors of his ‘America First’ philosophy, blame America first.

Without any reasonable question it is fact that the Russian government engaged in a wide-ranging, committed, and vigorous operation to influence the 2016 presidential campaign seeking to benefit Donald Trump and deny Hillary Clinton the office of President. Since taking office, with the American Intelligence community in rare unanimity concerning the Russian operation the Trump administration has taken no actions punishing the Russian for their attacks on our democracy, no measure to safeguard future elections, nor utter even a mild condemnation. Why?

Before I explore the theories as to why Trump takes no action and defers to Putin let me set aside, for the moment, the question of collusion. Those charges are being investigated and we should await the information produced before coming to a conclusion.

Theory 1: Putin has something on Trump.

This covers a lot of potential ground, everything from damaging salacious material to financial pressure due to the nature of the Trump Organization’s funding. The opaque natures of the Organization and Trump’s refusal to disclose his finances and tax records keep such suspicions alive.

Theory 2: Trump and Putin are simpatico.

It is possible that Trump and Putin share a worldview and as such come to similar conclusion about the world and what is happening.

Theory 3: Trump’s ego is too fragile.

The crux of this idea is that Trump is incapable of admitting any concept that weakens his electoral victory. His ego demands that his victory be a product of his ‘very stable genius’ and any condemnation or recognition of Russia interceding on his behalf undercuts this and challenges his fragile self-image.

Theory 4: Trump is naive.

This one speaks to the fact that Trump is in experienced as a politician and when confronted with news he dies not like, that the Russian decidedly interceded on his behalf, and a sooth experienced manipulator such as Putin telling him what he wants to hear, Trump is unable to separate what he wants from what is true.

There’s a lot of differences between those four theories, swinging from being in the pocket of a foreign power to simply being thick in the head but here is one thing I think is inescapable no matter which theory turns to to bets fit the facts:

ANY of these means he is incapable of being a proper president. No person cripple by any of these conditions can be trusted with the awesome powers of the US Presidency.

Share

Movie Review: The First Purge

A small digression; Back in the early 80’s a local theater used to have what was called ‘Dollar Night.’ Every Tuesday admission to all movies, all day, all showings, was just one dollar. Dollar Night was very popular and my friends and myself often took bold risks seeing all manner of movies because well, it was only a dollar. Granted there we endured a lot of bad movies, The Perils of Gwendolyn in the Land of the Yik-Yakcertainly comes to mind. However even with such cinema classics scarring us for life seeing the sheer number of movies that Dollar Night allowed was a pleasure. I am reminded of those days because earlier this month I enrolled in the AMC Theaters subscription program AMC’s A-List. For $19.95 per month subscribers can see up to 3 movies per week for no additional charge. Granted, even with inflation that does not reach the level of discounts that Dollar Night achieved but it does open up the doors for more films and more experimentation in which films I am willing to give a chance in the theater versus waiting for eventual home viewing by way of streaming, premium channels, or disc. It was utilizing that subscription and the strength of MovieBob’s review that lead to me going out last night for The First Purge.

The fourth film in the Purgefranchise (With a television series slated for airing this year) The First Purge is a prequel exploring the origins of the first story’s central premise; that for one evening a year all laws are suspended allowing the American people to cathartically expel their personal violence. (A concept Star Trekfans will remember from the TOSepisode Return of the Archons.) Utilizing footage from crises around the world The First Purge establishes the backstory of a grand economic collapse that lead the assent of a new American political party The New Founding Father of America. The NFFA sweeps in election gaining control at local, state, and federal levels. (Showing that the filmmakers of this franchise already understand the American political system better than more ‘serious’ storytellers.) Using the research of psychologist Dr. Updale (Marisa Tomei) they implement the first purge on a small-scale experimental basis, subjecting Staten Island to a twelve-hour period of lawlessness with hopes, if participation is great enough, of rolling it out nationally. Residents of the area are offered $5000 to remain on Staten Island for the experiment and even more to participate in cathartic violence. (A here the filmmakers display a typical Hollywood misunderstanding of the scientific process.) In addition to follow Dr. Updale and the NFFA party members implementing this experiment the film follows two principal groups of characters, the first centered on community activist and Purge opponent Nya as she attempts to keep her people safe and out of the purge, and the Dmitri, Nya’s ex-lover and leader of a local drug gang. Dmitri also does not believe in the purge but has far less concern for the community than the idealistic Nya. All the character, Updale, Nya, and Dmitri find their worldview and assumption challenged as the reality of the ‘experiment’ and it actual aims are discovered.

The First Purge is dystopian science-fiction prompted as an action/horror film and as with all dystopias it is inherently a political story. If you are a Trump supporter or Trump adjacent the political message is not for you. After all look at one of the movie’s official poster and you’ll see that they are not trying for subtlety. And while U can quibble with some of their statements I celebrate a story, a film, or any art having a point of view.

I mentioned MovieBob’s review, he gave The First Purge 3 out of 5 stars and I think perhaps he was a tad generous. There are glaring flaws in the film’s execution but nor are there any real moments that rise to interesting heights. I think The First Purge is a competent film and get in, tells it story, hits its marks and gets out. For a solid but not stellar performance I would give it 2.5 stars, right in the middle.

I started this review mentioning the long dead ‘Dollar Night.’ While I sat through the previews of coming attraction there were a few that I knew I would see now that the AMC A-List removed the ‘Am I $15 interested?’ hurdle for future films.

Share