Skip to main content

of interest


The Great Unraveling: Losing Our Way in the New Century by Paul Krugman has generated the first really intriguing review to come out of Powell's review-a-day service. In Michael Moore's Dude, Where's My Country, the author consistently refers to George W. as "Mr. Bush," instead of "President Bush." I thought this was an effective, but childish way to underline the questionable method through which the he entered into power. After reading this quote:
Using Napoleon as a case study, the author analyzes how a "revolutionary power" goes about overturning a stable political system. In short, the revolutionary power rejects the legitimacy of the system in power, but instead of stating this openly to a fickle public, the "revolutionary power" maintains a public façade of support for the current system, while all the while working under the table to undermine it, only coming clean once the change has become irreversible.
I got the shakes for a little bit.

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Tony diTerlizzi and classic D&D monsters

The sixth entry of his series on drawings of classic D&D monsters is up. He's one of my favorite fantasy artists. His work tends toward the charming and cozy, rather than others' focus on machismo or melodrama.
Post a Comment
Read more

sad fate

“Our legendary personalities are evergreen ‘brands’ with the benefit of worldwide recognition,” reads a message on the Richman agency’s website. Guardian UK Article *vomits* Where is the line drawn between “public figure” and “celebrity”? How can a dead person have an agent, particulary where there are no specific works concerned other than a sense of character? It’s one thing to insist that Duck Soup is a work that should be protected (which any more simply means controlled by whomever has the most buX0rs), but shouldn’t personalities and such pass into the public domain as well? ( boingboing : Bill Gates 0wns Einstein, Groucho , Freud, Asimov, Fuller, et al )
Post a Comment
Read more

on sheeps and androids

The movie Blade Runner is very dear to my heart. It is a treatise on the nature of existence expanding on, and perhaps exceeding the reach of the Phillip K. Dick work which inspired it, Do Androids Dream of Electric Sheep? Perhaps I have missed out on some greater subtlety of PKD's work, but the point of DADoES pursues the definition of fake, while Blade Runner instead focuses on what is real. Where the replicants in the novel are sociopathic monsters who emulate emotions solely to gain traction against humans who may hunt them, the humans there rely on machines to dictate their own emotions for them. They dial for "energetic determination" or "six-hour self-accusatory depression." As much as the replicants are machines incapable of real emotion, humans are similarly reliant on a machine to simulate emotion for them. In contrast, the movie's central them is spelled out for us in Deckard's apartment, when Rachel is playing the piano. She professe...
Post a Comment
Read more