Take a photo of a barcode or cover
kevin_shepherd's Reviews (563)
Winsor McCay (b.1866-d.1934), for those unfamiliar, was a master cartoonist and animator. Although he did other strips, he is best known for his ‘Little Nemo’ which ran in full page panels (you see kids, we used to have these publications called “newspapers”…). Nemo, McCay’s creation, was a child who dreamed semi-coherently and in sequence. At the end of every strip Little Nemo would wake-up safe at home, his parents apparently oblivious to his dream state adventures.
As sheer art, this is fantastic. By the standards of any era, McCay was an imaginative genius. I don’t think anyone could thoroughly look at the history of comics and not acknowledge Nemo as an instrumental milestone in the evolution of the art form. It’s simply brilliant.
Nevertheless, when looking at Nemo with 2022 eyes, there are a few old fashioned comic devices that are no longer comical. Child abuse and animal abuse pop up here and there—racist caricatures, however, are rampant(!). If you are unaware of how appalling POC portrayals were in 1907, prepare to be repulsed. It’s just that bad.
As sheer art, this is fantastic. By the standards of any era, McCay was an imaginative genius. I don’t think anyone could thoroughly look at the history of comics and not acknowledge Nemo as an instrumental milestone in the evolution of the art form. It’s simply brilliant.
Nevertheless, when looking at Nemo with 2022 eyes, there are a few old fashioned comic devices that are no longer comical. Child abuse and animal abuse pop up here and there—racist caricatures, however, are rampant(!). If you are unaware of how appalling POC portrayals were in 1907, prepare to be repulsed. It’s just that bad.
The Washington Connection and Third World Fascism: The Political Economy of Human Rights: Volume I
Edward S. Herman, Noam Chomsky
Chomsky and Herman give a detailed accounting of the underbelly of U.S. foreign manipulation and intervention. Whether it’s Vietnam or Nicaragua or Iran or Thailand or Brazil or The Dominican Republic or a hundred other places—our sphere of influence is extensive, our hypocrisy is boundless, and our methodology is mind numbingly heartless.
“U.S. beneficence and good intentions are sustained assumptions abroad that sustain self-righteousness and self-deception at home.”
“U.S. beneficence and good intentions are sustained assumptions abroad that sustain self-righteousness and self-deception at home.”
“It has always seemed strange to me… The things we admire in men, kindness and generosity, openness, honesty, understanding and feeling are the concomitants of failure in our system. And those traits we detest, sharpness, greed, acquisitiveness, meanness, egotism and self-interest are the traits of success.” ~John Steinbeck
“Just when you begin thinking of yourself as memorable, you run into someone who can't even remember having met you.” ~John Irving
I’m not certain of Hawthorne’s target audience but I have to assume, after reading this, that it was medieval cosplayers between the ages of seven and seventeen. This has a Shakespearean verbiage that may have been in vogue in 1853, but now reads as pretentious and wordy. Still, there were a few moments when this adaptation of Greek mythology was magical—but a few inspired bits here and there ‘doth not a classic make.’
The problem with seeing classic films before reading the classic novels that inspired them is that we forever associate the cinematic characters with the literary characters. I can’t read “Dorothy Gale” without picturing Judy Garland. “Atticus Finch” is forever Gregory Peck. “Sam Spade” is forever Humphrey Bogart. “Captain Yossarian” is forever Alan Arkin. “Holly Golightly” is forever Audrey Hepburn. etc. etc. etc.
Now picture, in your mind’s eye, Audrey Hepburn using the “N” word in casual conversation. If this doesn’t sicken you at least a little then I don’t think I want to know you.
I’ve heard all the arguments. I understand that things were different in 1958. I understand that ‘course language’ adds a sense of realism. I get all those things, but when it comes to acceptable flaws of supposedly likable characters I draw the line at racism.
*NOTE: Since I’m drawing comparisons between the 1958 novella and the 1961 film, I should point out that Mickey Rooney’s character, an appallingly racist stereotype of a Japanese man, is just as bad (if not worse) than anything in Capote’s book. It’s all so sadly unnecessary.
Now picture, in your mind’s eye, Audrey Hepburn using the “N” word in casual conversation. If this doesn’t sicken you at least a little then I don’t think I want to know you.
I’ve heard all the arguments. I understand that things were different in 1958. I understand that ‘course language’ adds a sense of realism. I get all those things, but when it comes to acceptable flaws of supposedly likable characters I draw the line at racism.
*NOTE: Since I’m drawing comparisons between the 1958 novella and the 1961 film, I should point out that Mickey Rooney’s character, an appallingly racist stereotype of a Japanese man, is just as bad (if not worse) than anything in Capote’s book. It’s all so sadly unnecessary.
“Your memory is a monster; you forget—it doesn’t. It simply files things away. It keeps things for you, or hides things from you—and summons them to your recall with a will of its own. You think you have a memory—but it has you!”
Radium, in all its many forms and incarnations, can be dangerous AF. We know this now, but “back in the day” it was used in dermatology, homeopathy, cosmetics, wristwatches, architecture, and even high fashion. And its value wasn’t strictly utilitarian; the possession of a few micrograms of radium in a tiny vial was, in fact, high social currency.
Good science writers are able to make complex topics enjoyable and accessible to laypersons (like me) without resorting to the tactics of condescension or misrepresentation. Lucy Jane Santos makes it look easy. She shuttles her readers through the storied history of radium, from its discovery in 1902 to its current use in medical therapies, by artfully braiding physics and chemistry with colorful biographical snippets of the personalities involved. This is a weird, sometimes tragic, always fascinating chronology.
Good science writers are able to make complex topics enjoyable and accessible to laypersons (like me) without resorting to the tactics of condescension or misrepresentation. Lucy Jane Santos makes it look easy. She shuttles her readers through the storied history of radium, from its discovery in 1902 to its current use in medical therapies, by artfully braiding physics and chemistry with colorful biographical snippets of the personalities involved. This is a weird, sometimes tragic, always fascinating chronology.
On the book: A sympathetic synopsis of one man's life, with as much biographical data as could be crammed into 156 illustrated pages. This is my second book in the "For Beginners" series, the first being on Charles Darwin. Where author Jonathan Miller focused on Darwin's professional accomplishments and legacy, Errol Selkirk's 'Hemingway' is more of a true biography. This reads like a meticulously researched 300 page draft that was grudgingly edited for people with short attention spans.
On the man: There are no simple adjectives that would encompass the entirety of Hemingway's existence. He was a braggart and a bullshit artist, even when embellishments and exagerations were unnecessary. As a husband, he was a self-described son-of-a-bitch. As a writer he could, at times, be brilliant. As for suicides, I feel more anguish for the loss of Sylvia Plath or Virginia Woolf than I do for Ernest Hemingway, maybe because Hemingway's demons were of his own making. His exploits were legendary, but so were his vices. Selkirk does a fine job of chronicling both and letting you draw your own conclusions.
On the man: There are no simple adjectives that would encompass the entirety of Hemingway's existence. He was a braggart and a bullshit artist, even when embellishments and exagerations were unnecessary. As a husband, he was a self-described son-of-a-bitch. As a writer he could, at times, be brilliant. As for suicides, I feel more anguish for the loss of Sylvia Plath or Virginia Woolf than I do for Ernest Hemingway, maybe because Hemingway's demons were of his own making. His exploits were legendary, but so were his vices. Selkirk does a fine job of chronicling both and letting you draw your own conclusions.
A nice 1980's romp through the labyrinth of capitalist theory, history and terminology, with some frightfully accurate predictions for the now-present future. Robert Lekachman was well ahead of his time.
"...the argument that competition, even where it is to be found, must enhance the public good is deflated by the ever-increasing environmental damage inflicted by externalities. As scientists learn more about their effects, the materials and processes of advanced industrialism loom more and more menacing to public health and worker life and safety." (pg. 170)
"It may well occur that growing worker disaffection and increasing social tension will frighten dominant corporate and financial interests into an authoritarian response. It is easy to believe that business leaders, always far more attached to their own power and influence than to mass forms of democracy, will, under stress, jettison civil liberties..." (pg. 173)
And finally: "Average citizens can no longer afford the luxury of abstaining from politics or treating contests for office as spectator sports. The self-interest of those who live by their labor requires replacement of capitalism by democratic socialism." (pg. 173)
"...the argument that competition, even where it is to be found, must enhance the public good is deflated by the ever-increasing environmental damage inflicted by externalities. As scientists learn more about their effects, the materials and processes of advanced industrialism loom more and more menacing to public health and worker life and safety." (pg. 170)
"It may well occur that growing worker disaffection and increasing social tension will frighten dominant corporate and financial interests into an authoritarian response. It is easy to believe that business leaders, always far more attached to their own power and influence than to mass forms of democracy, will, under stress, jettison civil liberties..." (pg. 173)
And finally: "Average citizens can no longer afford the luxury of abstaining from politics or treating contests for office as spectator sports. The self-interest of those who live by their labor requires replacement of capitalism by democratic socialism." (pg. 173)