John D. Rateliff's Blog, page 178
July 28, 2012
The New Rule
So, the new rule is, I'm not to use Janice's sharp knives in the kitchen.
In other news, the stitches come out in ten days.
--John R.
In other news, the stitches come out in ten days.
--John R.
July 26, 2012
We Go to See the Pharaoh
So, yesterday we celebrated our anniversary by taking the day off and heading down to the Pacific Science Center (part of the 1962 World's Fair complex, a little north and west of the base of the Space Needle). We've been there once before, a few years back, to see Lucy*; seems we only go there to see really old corpses.
We'd planned to see the Imax film about the pharaohs, then take in the exhibition, but traffic was bad, so that we arrived after the film's start time. Not to worry; the good folks there shifted our times around so we cd go into the Tut exhibit at 12 rather than 12.30 and the film afterwards, starting at 2.30.
Just before going into the exhibit we all watched a short film narrated by Harrison Ford, famous for playing an old tomb robber (which, given what we were about to see, seemed wholly appropriate). Then it was into the exhibit itself. Janice and I had given a pass on the audio tour with headphones; recently we've noticed how it seduces you into a rhythm: pause in front of item, listen to audiotrack, move to next time, repeat. We had a much better experience wandering around, looking at the items in whatever order made sense at the time.
One of the great things about this exhibit, paradoxically, is that there aren't too many items on display. That's not to say there weren't a lot, but that they weren't all crowded together. Instead, the statues were out in the open, surrounded by don't-cross-this-line cords that nonetheless let you get pretty close (a great help, when you're eyesight's not what it could be). Even better, you could walk all the way around almost every item on exhibit, which meant you could compare profiles of statues, see what was carved on the back of a stele, &c.
My favorite item, by far, was a colossal statue of Akhenaten; the bottom half was missing, but they'd mounted it high enough so the king's long, narrow face looked down on us from the appropriate height. Don't think I've ever seen any of the Amarna revolution art in person before, and it was breathtaking. My next favorite, predictably enough, was the decorated stone box containing the remains of Prince Thutmose (Akhenaten's older brother)'s cat. There were three depictions of the cat itself, one in mummified form, and another of it facing a little table piled with nom (including what looks like a whole duck -- this was apparently one well-fed cat). I'm certain the cat's name must be carved among all the hieroglyphs running up and down the box, but no translation was provided, either in the signage nor on the postcard or souvenir book.**
There were many, many other wonderful things to see -- such as a statue of Khafre, builder of the second Great Pyramid of Giza and also, perhaps even more significant, of the Sphinx, which he had carved with his own features -- thus looking at this statue is a great way to see how the Sphinx originally looked, before forty-five centuries or so of wear and tear had their way with it. Side by side with this statue was one of his son Menkaure, builder of the third (and smallest) pyramid of the three. I looked around for one of Khufu, builder of the Great Pyramid itself, but didn't find one -- then remembered that only a single image of him survives, a little statuette a few inches high, and no doubt far too precious to go out on the road like this.
Another striking item was a head of an Amarna princess with a bizarrely elongated skull. That this was clearly deliberate was shown by another piece in the next room that showed a charioteer with the same mis-shapened skull. Was this the result of deliberate manipulation of infant's skulls to produce a desired effect, as is still done in some countries in the world today, or an artistic effect, or what? V. odd.
Wandering around an exhibit like this, I was v. much struck by how little distance separates us from the people of pharaonic times: the bed, the chair, the sandals, the pretty little gold cup. Things that initially seem odd on second thought aren't that different at all -- for example, there was a statue of one princess who became became a priestess and was said to have married the god: I've known nuns in my time, who undergo a ceremony to become Brides of Christ. The uncomfortable side of this is that while it's all well and good to move statues around, you can't enter the final rooms of the exhibit -- the ones dedicated to Tutankhamun himself -- without being aware you're surrounded by things looted from a tomb. The unwrapped mummy at the very end of the exhibit is an exact replica of the real thing, which is thankfully still in his tomb in the Valley of the Kings -- but I cdn't look at it without thinking of the flowers (not mentioned here) his widow and friends and family strewed on the real mummy before closing the innermost coffin for the last time. Putting a flower in the coffin when saying farewell to a loved one: something people still do today.
All in all, a wonderful exhibit; one of the most visitor-friendly and satisfying I've ever been to. That makes the second Egyptian museum visit of the year, the first having been to the Carnegie when we were in Pittsburgh last month. That display was mainly pots (many of them pre-dynastic) and tools and jewelry, plus a few late-era mummies in mummy-cases near the end. So that collection was focused more towards relatively ordinary people, while the Tut exhibit was pharaohs and family and nobles.
Next up will be the British Museum and the Flinders Petrie (which turns out not to be in Oxford at all, as I'd thought, but at University College London -- not that far from where we'll be staying, fact.***
After that, we moseyed over to the Imax (only the third Imax film I've ever seen, with one of the other two having been on my only previous visit to the Pacific Science Center) -- this one focused more on the royal mummy cache than Tutankhamun; it was distinguished mainly by being narrated by Christopher Lee and by the actress playing Nefertiti being able to walk slinkily in desert sand. That, and one sequence where it showed the face of pharaoh after pharoah and then immediately cut to the temple or monuments or complex that particularly king had constructed.
A short snack later, and we were off to get stuck in traffic (fifty minutes to get from the parking garage to the interstate, which isn't really that far (maybe a mile or so). A short rest, and then meeting up with friends for a quiet, enjoyable meal in view of the sun setting over the Sound. V. nice!
So, if you're at all interested in Ancient Egypt and live in or will be passing through the Seattle area, this exhibit is well worth visiting. Esp. considering how rarely material like this leaves Egpyt. The official name of the exhibit is "TUTANKHAMUN: THE GOLDEN KING AND THE GREAT PHARAOHS", and it's scheduled to stay at in Seattle until January 2013.
And now we're even toying with the idea of revisiting the Field Museum's ancient Egypt display -- probably the single one we're most familiar with, from earlier visits back when we used to live in Wisconsin -- when we're back in the area for my talk at Marquette in October. That'd be five Egyptian exhibits in one year, which sounds pretty good to me. We'll see what we can manage when the time comes.
--John R.
*with Janice's friend Patty, owner of Henry, himself the subject of a previous post.
**I was right: the cat's name was Ta-Miaut ("The She-Cat"); apparently Prince Thutmose was the literal sort. Here's a link to a site showing the cat's box from all directions; the only thing you miss from this is the rich yellow-brown gold color of the box itself. For that, take a look at the second link below as well and scroll down to the bottom of the first page:
(1) http://www.mafdet.org/tA-Miaut.html(2) http://carlos.emory.edu/PDF/Classroom%20TUTorial_Thutmose's%20Cat.pdf
***while we're there, I'll have to go by and pay my respects to Jeremy Bentham, if he's still in his glass box (as he was when I was there in '81).
We'd planned to see the Imax film about the pharaohs, then take in the exhibition, but traffic was bad, so that we arrived after the film's start time. Not to worry; the good folks there shifted our times around so we cd go into the Tut exhibit at 12 rather than 12.30 and the film afterwards, starting at 2.30.
Just before going into the exhibit we all watched a short film narrated by Harrison Ford, famous for playing an old tomb robber (which, given what we were about to see, seemed wholly appropriate). Then it was into the exhibit itself. Janice and I had given a pass on the audio tour with headphones; recently we've noticed how it seduces you into a rhythm: pause in front of item, listen to audiotrack, move to next time, repeat. We had a much better experience wandering around, looking at the items in whatever order made sense at the time.
One of the great things about this exhibit, paradoxically, is that there aren't too many items on display. That's not to say there weren't a lot, but that they weren't all crowded together. Instead, the statues were out in the open, surrounded by don't-cross-this-line cords that nonetheless let you get pretty close (a great help, when you're eyesight's not what it could be). Even better, you could walk all the way around almost every item on exhibit, which meant you could compare profiles of statues, see what was carved on the back of a stele, &c.
My favorite item, by far, was a colossal statue of Akhenaten; the bottom half was missing, but they'd mounted it high enough so the king's long, narrow face looked down on us from the appropriate height. Don't think I've ever seen any of the Amarna revolution art in person before, and it was breathtaking. My next favorite, predictably enough, was the decorated stone box containing the remains of Prince Thutmose (Akhenaten's older brother)'s cat. There were three depictions of the cat itself, one in mummified form, and another of it facing a little table piled with nom (including what looks like a whole duck -- this was apparently one well-fed cat). I'm certain the cat's name must be carved among all the hieroglyphs running up and down the box, but no translation was provided, either in the signage nor on the postcard or souvenir book.**
There were many, many other wonderful things to see -- such as a statue of Khafre, builder of the second Great Pyramid of Giza and also, perhaps even more significant, of the Sphinx, which he had carved with his own features -- thus looking at this statue is a great way to see how the Sphinx originally looked, before forty-five centuries or so of wear and tear had their way with it. Side by side with this statue was one of his son Menkaure, builder of the third (and smallest) pyramid of the three. I looked around for one of Khufu, builder of the Great Pyramid itself, but didn't find one -- then remembered that only a single image of him survives, a little statuette a few inches high, and no doubt far too precious to go out on the road like this.
Another striking item was a head of an Amarna princess with a bizarrely elongated skull. That this was clearly deliberate was shown by another piece in the next room that showed a charioteer with the same mis-shapened skull. Was this the result of deliberate manipulation of infant's skulls to produce a desired effect, as is still done in some countries in the world today, or an artistic effect, or what? V. odd.
Wandering around an exhibit like this, I was v. much struck by how little distance separates us from the people of pharaonic times: the bed, the chair, the sandals, the pretty little gold cup. Things that initially seem odd on second thought aren't that different at all -- for example, there was a statue of one princess who became became a priestess and was said to have married the god: I've known nuns in my time, who undergo a ceremony to become Brides of Christ. The uncomfortable side of this is that while it's all well and good to move statues around, you can't enter the final rooms of the exhibit -- the ones dedicated to Tutankhamun himself -- without being aware you're surrounded by things looted from a tomb. The unwrapped mummy at the very end of the exhibit is an exact replica of the real thing, which is thankfully still in his tomb in the Valley of the Kings -- but I cdn't look at it without thinking of the flowers (not mentioned here) his widow and friends and family strewed on the real mummy before closing the innermost coffin for the last time. Putting a flower in the coffin when saying farewell to a loved one: something people still do today.
All in all, a wonderful exhibit; one of the most visitor-friendly and satisfying I've ever been to. That makes the second Egyptian museum visit of the year, the first having been to the Carnegie when we were in Pittsburgh last month. That display was mainly pots (many of them pre-dynastic) and tools and jewelry, plus a few late-era mummies in mummy-cases near the end. So that collection was focused more towards relatively ordinary people, while the Tut exhibit was pharaohs and family and nobles.
Next up will be the British Museum and the Flinders Petrie (which turns out not to be in Oxford at all, as I'd thought, but at University College London -- not that far from where we'll be staying, fact.***
After that, we moseyed over to the Imax (only the third Imax film I've ever seen, with one of the other two having been on my only previous visit to the Pacific Science Center) -- this one focused more on the royal mummy cache than Tutankhamun; it was distinguished mainly by being narrated by Christopher Lee and by the actress playing Nefertiti being able to walk slinkily in desert sand. That, and one sequence where it showed the face of pharaoh after pharoah and then immediately cut to the temple or monuments or complex that particularly king had constructed.
A short snack later, and we were off to get stuck in traffic (fifty minutes to get from the parking garage to the interstate, which isn't really that far (maybe a mile or so). A short rest, and then meeting up with friends for a quiet, enjoyable meal in view of the sun setting over the Sound. V. nice!
So, if you're at all interested in Ancient Egypt and live in or will be passing through the Seattle area, this exhibit is well worth visiting. Esp. considering how rarely material like this leaves Egpyt. The official name of the exhibit is "TUTANKHAMUN: THE GOLDEN KING AND THE GREAT PHARAOHS", and it's scheduled to stay at in Seattle until January 2013.
And now we're even toying with the idea of revisiting the Field Museum's ancient Egypt display -- probably the single one we're most familiar with, from earlier visits back when we used to live in Wisconsin -- when we're back in the area for my talk at Marquette in October. That'd be five Egyptian exhibits in one year, which sounds pretty good to me. We'll see what we can manage when the time comes.
--John R.
*with Janice's friend Patty, owner of Henry, himself the subject of a previous post.
**I was right: the cat's name was Ta-Miaut ("The She-Cat"); apparently Prince Thutmose was the literal sort. Here's a link to a site showing the cat's box from all directions; the only thing you miss from this is the rich yellow-brown gold color of the box itself. For that, take a look at the second link below as well and scroll down to the bottom of the first page:
(1) http://www.mafdet.org/tA-Miaut.html(2) http://carlos.emory.edu/PDF/Classroom%20TUTorial_Thutmose's%20Cat.pdf
***while we're there, I'll have to go by and pay my respects to Jeremy Bentham, if he's still in his glass box (as he was when I was there in '81).
July 25, 2012
Twenty Years
I am the luckiest man in the world.
Exhibit A: Today is my twentieth wedding anniversary.
Hard to believe, but true.
I rest my case.
--John R.
Exhibit A: Today is my twentieth wedding anniversary.
Hard to believe, but true.
I rest my case.
--John R.
July 24, 2012
6339 songs
So, a few months back* I started listening to the songs on my iPod -- ALL the songs on my iPod -- in alphabetical order. My thinking was that there's a lot of great music there I never listen to because I don't think about it. It's the problem of too many choices: out of over six thousand songs, which ones do I want to hear at any given time? I can always think of a good starting point, but where to go from there? Janice's solution, and it's a good one, is to hit shuffle and enjoy a mix of what the iPod gives her. But that ironically works better with her mini-iPod than with our old 80-gig iPod: too many recorded books on the latter introduce a jarring note, as one song is followed by a randomly-excerted bit of text (some of which inconveniently run over an hour in length), followed by another song; it breaks up the background-music element of my listen-while-you-work routine.
So, I decided to listen to everything, going under the "Songs" option and starting with #1 ("A" by the Bare Naked Ladies) and ending yesterday, early evening, with #6339 ("10538 Overture" by E.L.O.) -- iPod's alphabetization first running through the alphabet (the vast bulk of the songs, ending in #6129 (Herb Albert's "Zorba the Greek"), then things in foreign scripts --I have a fair number of pieces from anime soundtracks with unrecognizable (to me) titles in kanji. Then last of all came numbers, which included not just songs like "867-5309 but also radio station dial numbers (for use in playing it in the car) and audio recordings I'd made (titled by date) at the 2004 Marquette Blackwelder conference and again at another 2007 Tolkien event.
Of course, I didn't feel obliged to listen literally to 6,339 tracks. Some songs are on there multiple times -- which is fine, when listening to them by album, but can be a bit much when listening to them alphabetically, song by song. I think I really did listen to "Hey Jude" five times in a row, but then I really like Hey Jude (na-na-na-naah), while I think I skipped over some of the multiple versions of "If I Had a Million Dollars", good though that song is.
My conclusion? I have a lot of good music on this old iPod. Not surprisingly, there's a lot of Beatles, and McCartney, but surprisingly there's more Warren Zevon and Bare Naked Ladies than I'd expected and somewhat less Alan Parsons Project or Tears for Fears (given that I have all the latter two's albums). Also, there can't possibly be as many tracks for "Pirates of Penzance" and "Les Miserables" as there seemed to be. There just can't.
Also, that I was wise when starting to build my iTunes account all over again on the new laptop after the old laptop's catastrophic failure a few years back, in that now instead of adding a whole album I only add the songs I like and want to listen to from that album -- which may be the whole thing, or may be a single song.
What's next? I think it's time to dip back into my .45s again when I'm at home and downstairs, though for working-by music they require I be working on a project that benefits by frequent interruption -- which is a rare sort of project indeed. More likely I'll devote worktime music to the albums rather than the singles, many of which I never did replace with cds and most of which still play just fine.
And for the iPod, I'll probably do some shuffle within the songs by a specific artist.
And my next music purchase? That'll probably be the new George Harrison album, which I just found out about a few days ago.
Good listening, all.
--John R
*unfortunately, I didn't make any note of the time.
So, I decided to listen to everything, going under the "Songs" option and starting with #1 ("A" by the Bare Naked Ladies) and ending yesterday, early evening, with #6339 ("10538 Overture" by E.L.O.) -- iPod's alphabetization first running through the alphabet (the vast bulk of the songs, ending in #6129 (Herb Albert's "Zorba the Greek"), then things in foreign scripts --I have a fair number of pieces from anime soundtracks with unrecognizable (to me) titles in kanji. Then last of all came numbers, which included not just songs like "867-5309 but also radio station dial numbers (for use in playing it in the car) and audio recordings I'd made (titled by date) at the 2004 Marquette Blackwelder conference and again at another 2007 Tolkien event.
Of course, I didn't feel obliged to listen literally to 6,339 tracks. Some songs are on there multiple times -- which is fine, when listening to them by album, but can be a bit much when listening to them alphabetically, song by song. I think I really did listen to "Hey Jude" five times in a row, but then I really like Hey Jude (na-na-na-naah), while I think I skipped over some of the multiple versions of "If I Had a Million Dollars", good though that song is.
My conclusion? I have a lot of good music on this old iPod. Not surprisingly, there's a lot of Beatles, and McCartney, but surprisingly there's more Warren Zevon and Bare Naked Ladies than I'd expected and somewhat less Alan Parsons Project or Tears for Fears (given that I have all the latter two's albums). Also, there can't possibly be as many tracks for "Pirates of Penzance" and "Les Miserables" as there seemed to be. There just can't.
Also, that I was wise when starting to build my iTunes account all over again on the new laptop after the old laptop's catastrophic failure a few years back, in that now instead of adding a whole album I only add the songs I like and want to listen to from that album -- which may be the whole thing, or may be a single song.
What's next? I think it's time to dip back into my .45s again when I'm at home and downstairs, though for working-by music they require I be working on a project that benefits by frequent interruption -- which is a rare sort of project indeed. More likely I'll devote worktime music to the albums rather than the singles, many of which I never did replace with cds and most of which still play just fine.
And for the iPod, I'll probably do some shuffle within the songs by a specific artist.
And my next music purchase? That'll probably be the new George Harrison album, which I just found out about a few days ago.
Good listening, all.
--John R
*unfortunately, I didn't make any note of the time.
July 21, 2012
A Very Odd Chickadee
Drink, little hummingbirdDrink your fillIf you don't do itThe chickadee will.
--JDR, 7/21-12
So, one day early last week, I think it was, I looked out to see a chickadee on the dowel from which hangs the hummingbird feeder, and a hummingbird buzzing about above, the chickadee clearly watching the even littler bird and trying to figure out what it was and what it was up to. Then the hummingbird, deciding the chickadee was probably not a threat, zoomed in, lapped up a little hummingbird juice, and was off.
What happened then surprised me: once the hummingbird was gone, the chickadee launched itself at the little tube-feeder, clinging to the cap at its base with its little passerine feet. I thought it was going to be in for a rude surprise when it found the tube was full not of sunflower seed chips, like the finch feeder at the opposite end of the porch, but sugar-water. It pecked at the opening a few times and flew off.
But then the next day it was back. No hummingbird around this time, but I saw the chickadee on the dowel, looking all round to see if the coast was clear, then v. deliberately perch on the tube again and take a few sips before once again flying off. A day or two later Janice saw it too, and it's been back regularly since then (we see it about every other day or so, and it no doubt makes trips we don't happen to see).
So, there's something new: a chickadee with a sweet tooth.* More things, Horatio, indeed.
--John R.
P.S.: As for the hummingbirds, saw two go at it twice yesterday, most unusually inside the railing of the deck rather than out over open space. There was much tsking, and some helicoptering, and enough posturing and positioning to do a musketeer proud, but no actual contact (such is not the hummingbird way).
*not that chickadee have teeth, but you know what I mean.
--JDR, 7/21-12
So, one day early last week, I think it was, I looked out to see a chickadee on the dowel from which hangs the hummingbird feeder, and a hummingbird buzzing about above, the chickadee clearly watching the even littler bird and trying to figure out what it was and what it was up to. Then the hummingbird, deciding the chickadee was probably not a threat, zoomed in, lapped up a little hummingbird juice, and was off.
What happened then surprised me: once the hummingbird was gone, the chickadee launched itself at the little tube-feeder, clinging to the cap at its base with its little passerine feet. I thought it was going to be in for a rude surprise when it found the tube was full not of sunflower seed chips, like the finch feeder at the opposite end of the porch, but sugar-water. It pecked at the opening a few times and flew off.
But then the next day it was back. No hummingbird around this time, but I saw the chickadee on the dowel, looking all round to see if the coast was clear, then v. deliberately perch on the tube again and take a few sips before once again flying off. A day or two later Janice saw it too, and it's been back regularly since then (we see it about every other day or so, and it no doubt makes trips we don't happen to see).
So, there's something new: a chickadee with a sweet tooth.* More things, Horatio, indeed.
--John R.
P.S.: As for the hummingbirds, saw two go at it twice yesterday, most unusually inside the railing of the deck rather than out over open space. There was much tsking, and some helicoptering, and enough posturing and positioning to do a musketeer proud, but no actual contact (such is not the hummingbird way).
*not that chickadee have teeth, but you know what I mean.
July 20, 2012
The Great Turtle Escape
So, I was glad to read about the 1600 turtles that escaped a turtle farm in Georgia recently, probably not because of turtles-rights advocates but as a side effect of scrap-metal thieves' work. I feel sorry for the turtle farmer, but glad for the turtles -- some of whom wd have been sold to pet stores and others shipped to China (or Chinese markets) to be eaten.
The story got picked up by NPR and the associated press, mainly because people are tickled by the idea of so many of a traditionally slow animal successfully running away. They must never have had pet turtles: anyone who has can tell you they can put on a surprising burst of speed when they want to. My sister and I had a long string of miniature pet turtles when we were growing up, some of whom died and some of whom escaped at various times (e.g., when outside in their summer wading pool if a high wind whipped up and flipped it over), none of whom we ever recovered.*
So, let's hope these made good their escape and remain at large -- though it's certainly bad news for any tadpoles in the region, and might well cut down on the minnow population as well.
Here's a link.http://timesfreepress.com/news/2012/jul/19/turtles-flee-farm-in-chattooga-county/
And, just because it's pretty amazing to watch, here's some footage from another site (http://www.themarysue.com/1000-turtle...) that shows a turtle deliberately pushing another, upended turtle back right-side-up again:
http://youtu.be/QK9Xj7eY0UU
--John R.current reading: WHERE THEY STAND by Rbt Merry (presidential rankings) & I THOUGHT OF DAISY by Edmund Wilson.
*I'd love to have a turtle now, but turtles and cats are a bad mix.
The story got picked up by NPR and the associated press, mainly because people are tickled by the idea of so many of a traditionally slow animal successfully running away. They must never have had pet turtles: anyone who has can tell you they can put on a surprising burst of speed when they want to. My sister and I had a long string of miniature pet turtles when we were growing up, some of whom died and some of whom escaped at various times (e.g., when outside in their summer wading pool if a high wind whipped up and flipped it over), none of whom we ever recovered.*
So, let's hope these made good their escape and remain at large -- though it's certainly bad news for any tadpoles in the region, and might well cut down on the minnow population as well.
Here's a link.http://timesfreepress.com/news/2012/jul/19/turtles-flee-farm-in-chattooga-county/
And, just because it's pretty amazing to watch, here's some footage from another site (http://www.themarysue.com/1000-turtle...) that shows a turtle deliberately pushing another, upended turtle back right-side-up again:
http://youtu.be/QK9Xj7eY0UU
--John R.current reading: WHERE THEY STAND by Rbt Merry (presidential rankings) & I THOUGHT OF DAISY by Edmund Wilson.
*I'd love to have a turtle now, but turtles and cats are a bad mix.
July 18, 2012
Two Peter Jackson (et al) interviews
So, now they've wrapped up principal photography on THE HOBBIT -- though of course this is far from meaning they've stopped filming, if the extensive rounds of pick-up filming that characterized the LotR film trilogy are anything to judge by. And there are various bits in the following interviews about Jackson & co. wanting to film more material from the appendices, apparently with the idea of lengthening the two movies rather than adding a third.
Here's the first link (courtesy Janice):
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/07/15/peter-jackson-the-hobbit-director-48-fps-comic-con_n_1674177.html
And here's the second link (courtesy Steve B):
http://collider.com/peter-jackson-martin-freeman-the-hobbit-interview/180675
Despite the really, really annoying puffery about 3D (which is a nightmare to watch for anyone with really strong glasses, like mine) and Jackson's snooty dismissal of "guys who are in love with the technology of 1927", I found both of these interesting: there's still a ton of work to do, but we're getting into the final stages now, frenzied as those will no doubt be.
Oh, and don't forget to click on the link at the end of the first paragraph of the second piece: although the Comic-Con people are apparently incapable of spelling Tolkien's name right, there's some interesting point in the attached panel report -- such as the (to me) amusing declaration that they're adding a female character not in Tolkien because they want to stay true to the spirit of Tolkien (try parsing that one out) and Peter Jackson's quip when asked if he'll be doing any SILMARILLION movies someday: "I think the chances of me living past 100 are slim". That about sums it up.
Only about five months to go. Wow.
--John R
Here's the first link (courtesy Janice):
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/07/15/peter-jackson-the-hobbit-director-48-fps-comic-con_n_1674177.html
And here's the second link (courtesy Steve B):
http://collider.com/peter-jackson-martin-freeman-the-hobbit-interview/180675
Despite the really, really annoying puffery about 3D (which is a nightmare to watch for anyone with really strong glasses, like mine) and Jackson's snooty dismissal of "guys who are in love with the technology of 1927", I found both of these interesting: there's still a ton of work to do, but we're getting into the final stages now, frenzied as those will no doubt be.
Oh, and don't forget to click on the link at the end of the first paragraph of the second piece: although the Comic-Con people are apparently incapable of spelling Tolkien's name right, there's some interesting point in the attached panel report -- such as the (to me) amusing declaration that they're adding a female character not in Tolkien because they want to stay true to the spirit of Tolkien (try parsing that one out) and Peter Jackson's quip when asked if he'll be doing any SILMARILLION movies someday: "I think the chances of me living past 100 are slim". That about sums it up.
Only about five months to go. Wow.
--John R
July 17, 2012
iPads for the Dead
So, the NEWS OF THE WEIRD (by Chuck Shepherd) that gets included in each month's FUNNY TIMES collects together weird news from all over, ranging from the risible to the way out there. Perhaps the strangest of all are those which follow their own logic through to a surreal conclusion. Case in point: for years it's been the custom in China to burn paper money for the use of those who have passed on.* Sometimes other items are burned too -- the film MR. VAMPIRE III has a scene in which two friendly ghosts are given new outfits by their priest-partner burning some paper clothes for them.
But now the dead are getting wired, or so it seems. NEWS OF THE WEIRD** reports that recently paper iPads have become a popular items (selling in Hong Kong for about $3 apiece) to be offered up to the dead at the yearly Qingming (tomb-sweeping) festival. Does this mean the dead will soon be online? All sorts of story ideas there -- though to be fair SERIAL EXPERIMENT LAIN*** already touched on this a decade ago. Still, don't think a novel about e-mails from the dead can be far off; just hope it's given more of a fantasy than a horror treatment (e.g., along the lines of Terry Pratchett's JOHNNY & THE DEAD.
--John R.
*note that the theory is exactly the same as that followed by the pharaohic Egyptians, who buried items with the dead so that the departed cd use their spirit-analogues in the spirit-world.
**THE FUNNY TIMES, July 2012 issue, page 15, 1st column.
***the show opens with a girl jumping to her death from atop a building; a few scenes later, several of her schoolmates (including the title character, Lain) start getting emails from her. The most memorable: when asked what dying felt like, she writes it really hurts!
July 16, 2012
Final MERPcon Video
As long as I'm posting links, I might as well include Michael Martinez's Guest of Honor speech from the same event (MERPcon IV, 2008): mostly about dwarves as a wandering people, but ranging far and wide, particularly in the question period. No video or audio problems at all, making this one the easiest of the three to watch.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1Xs82zgZmjM&feature=relmfu
In case I didn't say it before, many thanks to Hawke for arranging the event and inviting me to take part.
And, just because it seems apropos, here's the interview I did with Michael M. for his site, back in October; it was an honor to be included among such interesting people as Jn Garth, Jason Fisher, Douglas Kane, Michael Drout, Wayne & Christina, & Janet Croft; I hope he'll do many more in months to come.
Here's the link:
http://middle-earth.xenite.org/2011/10/21/an-interview-with-john-rateliff/
--John R.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1Xs82zgZmjM&feature=relmfu
In case I didn't say it before, many thanks to Hawke for arranging the event and inviting me to take part.
And, just because it seems apropos, here's the interview I did with Michael M. for his site, back in October; it was an honor to be included among such interesting people as Jn Garth, Jason Fisher, Douglas Kane, Michael Drout, Wayne & Christina, & Janet Croft; I hope he'll do many more in months to come.
Here's the link:
http://middle-earth.xenite.org/2011/10/21/an-interview-with-john-rateliff/
--John R.
July 15, 2012
More MERPcon Video
As long as I'm posting links to footage of me talking, I might as well include this video, also from MERPcon IV (Spokane, 2008), in which Michael Martinez and I do a Question & Answer session that runs 1hr 14 minute & 58 seconds. While I have a clear memory of my 'Brief, Sad History' piece -- having written it, practiced delivering it, and then later posted the text online -- I had only vaguer memories of the Q&A, since it was unscripted and I didn't have any record of its contents.
Until now. And, even though there are some technical glitches with the audio track, I found it interesting to watch an event I took part in but which I didn't remember in any detail. The theme of the conference was Tolkien's dwarves: hence a number of naur-centric questions. Among the topics Michael and I tackled were Egyptian and Hebrew analogues to Tolkien's dwarves, the sudden (circa 1930) shift of dwarves from an evil to a (mostly) good people in the legendarium, my naming Feanor as the most evil of all Tolkien's elves, any sources of mithril outside Moria, the Hobbit/Silmarillion connection, Thor analogues in the mythology, Orcs (and the names "orc" vs. "goblin"), King Bladorthin, the location and population of Dorwinion, the 1960 Hobbit, and our (then-)current projects. I'm glad to say I'd pretty much give the same answers again, though given the chance I'd look up various points rather than have to remember them on the fly. And I found the precision of Michael's knowledge on a wide array of points impressive, as well as enjoyed his ideas (the Egyptian/dwarves connection was interesting and new to me).
It's true the wayward audio track does make for some difficulties: the sound cuts out altogether perhaps a dozen times, but rarely for more than a minute at a time, and many for about fifteen seconds (especially the latter ones); the main exception I noted occurs at 13.45 and lasts until 19.30, or for almost six minutes. These skips cause the sound track to get ahead of the video track but don't affect the comprehensibility of the thing much. If you find the skips bothering you, I advise opening a second window with something browsable but not of absorbing interest which you can click on when the sound cuts out on the Q&A, then go back to the MerpCon video when the sound comes back. That's what I did anyway, and found it worked pretty well (a strategy I borrowed from my wife, who plays solitaire or Carcassone while listening to NPR on her Ipad).
Here's the link to the video of the Q&A:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QzBsSi-8mAo
--John R.
Until now. And, even though there are some technical glitches with the audio track, I found it interesting to watch an event I took part in but which I didn't remember in any detail. The theme of the conference was Tolkien's dwarves: hence a number of naur-centric questions. Among the topics Michael and I tackled were Egyptian and Hebrew analogues to Tolkien's dwarves, the sudden (circa 1930) shift of dwarves from an evil to a (mostly) good people in the legendarium, my naming Feanor as the most evil of all Tolkien's elves, any sources of mithril outside Moria, the Hobbit/Silmarillion connection, Thor analogues in the mythology, Orcs (and the names "orc" vs. "goblin"), King Bladorthin, the location and population of Dorwinion, the 1960 Hobbit, and our (then-)current projects. I'm glad to say I'd pretty much give the same answers again, though given the chance I'd look up various points rather than have to remember them on the fly. And I found the precision of Michael's knowledge on a wide array of points impressive, as well as enjoyed his ideas (the Egyptian/dwarves connection was interesting and new to me).
It's true the wayward audio track does make for some difficulties: the sound cuts out altogether perhaps a dozen times, but rarely for more than a minute at a time, and many for about fifteen seconds (especially the latter ones); the main exception I noted occurs at 13.45 and lasts until 19.30, or for almost six minutes. These skips cause the sound track to get ahead of the video track but don't affect the comprehensibility of the thing much. If you find the skips bothering you, I advise opening a second window with something browsable but not of absorbing interest which you can click on when the sound cuts out on the Q&A, then go back to the MerpCon video when the sound comes back. That's what I did anyway, and found it worked pretty well (a strategy I borrowed from my wife, who plays solitaire or Carcassone while listening to NPR on her Ipad).
Here's the link to the video of the Q&A:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QzBsSi-8mAo
--John R.
John D. Rateliff's Blog
- John D. Rateliff's profile
- 38 followers
John D. Rateliff isn't a Goodreads Author
(yet),
but they
do have a blog,
so here are some recent posts imported from
their feed.
