Posts

Showing posts from July, 2022

A new niece; the “little house” books; the Hardy boys

The time has come to salute our new niece, Belladonna “Bella” Jean Louise. She was born to Brianna – who now goes by “Atticus” (“Atti”) – and to “Atti’s” partner, “Ike.”

Karin went to Michigan yesterday and visited the child and her parents.

♦ ♦ ♦ ♦ ♦

Samuel pulled Laura Ingalls Wilder’s books off the shelf and spread them out across the floor. Which of them do you think caught his attention? That’s right: Farmer Boy. The only one in the series about little Almanzo Wilder. The only one about a boy.

The only one I’ve read, as it happens.

Karin tells me that when she was a little girl, she read all of the series *except* Farmer Boy. “That one is dumb,” her mom advised her.

♦ ♦ ♦ ♦ ♦

I had the opposite limitation. I tried, when I was younger, to read some Nancy Drew books. I failed. But I succeeded in devouring dozens of Hardy Boys mysteries.

Now, after some thirty years, I’m rereading one of my old favorites: While the Clock Ticked (the eleventh novel in the series). Samuel and Daniel will be reading The Hardy Boys before long, I expect, and I’d like to be conversant in that literature.

The pacing is breakneck. There’s an amusing scene in which Frank and Joe attend a party with their girlfriends for all of five minutes before they rush off again to pursue a lead.

The police are implausibly nice. They’d like nothing better than to share information with the teenaged sleuths. Frank and Joe’s friend group ticks the important boxes, race-wise. In just a couple of pages, the Italian-American “chum,” the Jewish-American “chum,” and the Irish-American “chum” all are introduced. (Introduced, but never developed as characters.) Nowadays, other races than these are the beneficiaries of token inclusion; but a similar diversity principle seems to have guided the great mercenary children’s writings of 1932.

Then, of course, there’s Chet Morton, a rounder character in more ways than one. The chums go hiking in the woods, and Chet keeps pleading with them to stop so they can all eat their sandwiches. This is where the book provides character development and comical relief.

♦ ♦ ♦ ♦ ♦

Back to Laura Ingalls. I picked up Little House in the Big Woods, also published in 1932, and read the first chapter. Its prose is plain but descriptively exquisite; I wouldn’t be surprised if it were a direct influence upon that of Nobel winner Alice Munro. (I’m especially reminded of her story “Boys and Girls.”) A lot happens in the big woods, but it happens out of view. The children wake up to see dead deer hanging from the trees. Pa kills the family’s pig; Laura stays indoors and listens while it squeals. Predators lurk outside the house.

The taste for this more atmospheric sort of writing comes later in life, I think. First comes a hunger for stories like The Hardy Boys, stories for one-track-minded readers. Not all children, but many children, are like greyhounds chasing a mechanical rabbit.

1996, the best year in movie history, pt. 53: Twister

I’m watching YouTube videos with Samuel. His request: “Some tornadoes in Nebraska.”

That’s my boy.





The best scene in The Wizard of Oz is the tornado scene. Same goes for Dr. T and the Women. That tornado scene turns into a birthing scene: Richard Gere falls out of the sky, wakes up in the desert, staggers into a peasant’s hut, and helps to deliver a child. My favorite, though, is the “tornadoes over Los Angeles” scene in The Day After Tomorrow.

Those movies have many things going for them, but that’s beside the point. As long as your special effects are adequate, your tornado movie will be awesome. That’s just a consequence of what it is to be a tornado.

You can make your tornadoes as realistic or as surrealistic as you like: tornadoes are ordinary and bizarre. You can have lousy actors. You can have a lousy story. You can have a tornado full of sharks. (No, I haven’t seen that movie.) The tornado itself will cover a multitude of sins.

Twister, mercifully, has lots and lots of scenes with tornadoes.

Its “human interest” story is pretty dumb. Roger Ebert describes it:
Melissa is not happy. One minute she’s engaged to handsome young Bill Harding, who has a promising career as a TV weatherman ahead of him. The next minute, she’s cowering in a pickup truck while tornadoes blow houses at her. And Bill can’t wait to find another tornado. “When you told me you wanted to chase tornadoes,” she tells him, “I thought that was a metaphor.” It is a metaphor, Melissa, but not for Bill’s dream. It’s a metaphor for Twister, a movie that chases tornadoes with such single-minded dedication that plot, character, dialogue and even your engagement all disappear into the Suck Zone – which is, we learn, that part of the tornado that sucks up everything in its path. By the end of the film, we have seen trees, TV towers, drive-in theaters, trucks, houses, barns and even cows sucked up by the Zone. Well, maybe only one cow. “I think it’s the same one, coming past again,” Bill tells Jo.
I feel sorry for Melissa (Jami Gertz), the only sane person in the movie. If I had to be married to Melissa or to Jo (Helen Hunt), I’d choose Melissa. Bill Harding (Bill Paxton) wants to choose Melissa but can’t. Jo’s got him sucked in, chasing after her dream, which is a death wish. (There are better death-wish movies from 1996: Maborosi; Normal Life.) When Jo was a little girl, she had to watch a tornado suck her dad out of a storm cellar. It screwed her up real good.

The domestic-strife-in-a-tornado theme would be detailed with infinitely greater sensitivity a year later, in an episode of King of the Hill.

Again, all of this is beside the point. This movie has tornadoes; and not in a coy way, the way Jaws has a shark but overwhelmingly consists of people waiting around for the shark. (Take Shelter might be the best tornado movie in that vein. If the people in Jaws are like, “We’re gonna need a bigger boat,” the guy in Take Shelter is like, “We’re gonna need a better storm cellar.”) The tornadoes in Twister are visible and plentiful, and they get better as the movie goes along. I confess, the first few tornadoes underwhelmed me, but the last two or three made the viewing worthwhile. Gene Siskel famously said: “I always ask myself, ‘Is the movie that I am watching as interesting as a documentary of the same actors having lunch together?’” In the case of Twister, a better question might be: Is this movie as interesting as a documentary about the same tornadoes? The answer is: Alas, probably not. All the YouTube videos in this entry are more interesting than Twister. But that doesn’t mean Twister isn’t awesome. It has a plethora of tornadoes. And it has lots of good location filming (in Oklahoma, mostly), and breathtaking skies.

P.S. I told Samuel the movie might be scary, so he stayed at the top of the stairs and listened but didn’t watch. He kept saying, “Oh my goodness! Oh my gracious!”

Beethoven is so sleepy

Sweltering heat this week. So, no mowing.

And then, much rain – especially, these last three days. So, again, no mowing; but the grass certainly has kept on growing.

Our neighbors mowed when the weather permitted. Alas, during those all-too-brief interludes, I was indisposed to mow. Everyone else’s lawns were made much tidier than our lawn. Today, one of our neighbors took it upon himself to mow our lawn – the front, but not the back.

I am actively reading at least seventeen books. How did I get into this mess.

As I type this, on my bed, Daniel performs his night-time ritual, which is to lie next to me, shrieking, until I am able to bring up Spotify and put on some nice Vangelis or Beethoven or Brian Eno. Then he rolls onto his side and brings his hand forward to touch my shirt. He sucks his pacifier and quickly goes to sleep.

In his crib, in the dark, Samuel comments: Beethoven is so tired. Beethoven is so sleepy.

Yes, he is.

Lament

Whatever did I do to receive several emails each day from Conservative Direct (which appears to be a spamming agency)?

What robot decided I was the sort of person who’d want or need to read endless “BREAKING” allegations against “Sleepy” Joe Biden? (Not to mention his son.)

I ought to mark this as spam, but, every day, the headlines reel me in.

Some of today’s offerings (pretty mild, really):

(1) “Biden Retiring the U.S. Dollar” (in case I’d missed this bombshell the first four dozen times).

(2) “Hunter Biden Probe Will End with ‘Very Sympathetic Plea Agreement,’ Former Federal Prosecutor Predicts.”

(3) “BREAKING: Does Biden Really Have COVID or Is It an Elaborate Cover Up?” To be fair, this is where I first saw that Biden has COVID. (I’m assuming it’s not an elaborate cover-up.) I guess it’s possible to get real information if you read between the lines.

Next, the blogs and tweets of academia. Leiter rails against the woke young PhDs who are one-upping each other on Twitter. (These people really are pretty ludicrous.)

Do I have a short memory, or is public discourse at its lowest ebb since I was born? Or maybe I should say “discourses.” I was reading a postmodernist historian today who disparaged talk of the “discipline” of history in favor of talk of various “discourses” of history. (More on him some other time.) Are political “discourses” usually this insular? Are they usually this money-and-status-driven? (How do these things get measured?) Is this just par for the course, humanity-wise? In Shakespeare, old Lord Timon puts all his money into “culture,” gets zilch in return, quits Athens, and goes to live in a cave.

I would keep on ranting, but Karin wants us to go to sleep.

Quino

Happy birthday, yesterday, to my dad. I spent a couple of hours at his house, along with Karin, Samuel, and Daniel. Stephen dropped by, too.

It turns out that my dad shares a birthday with Quino, the famous Argentinian cartoonist who died two years ago. If I had to rank newspaper comics in terms of, I dunno, some combination of intrinsic merit and life-impact, Peanuts would tower above all the others; and then would come Condorito, and then the gag comics of Quino. (I also grew up reading Quino’s daily strip, Mafalda, but was less taken with it.)

No niche-occupiers for me. I like my cartoonists to have hugely universal appeal.

Quino was just featured in a Google Doodle, throughout Latin America and in parts of Europe. I guess his appeal isn’t universal enough for the United States.

He isn’t a good caption writer. His best work is mostly wordless. Or it uses gibberish, as in this famous strip.

A few themes:

Owners.

Workers. (Uber, anyone?)

Politicians.

Law and order.

Reading/dreaming. (He is very good at drawing dreams.)

More reading.

Loneliness (one).

Loneliness (two).

Death (one).

Death (two).

The closest thing in this country is The Far Side. But Quino draws better, and with a certain grandeur.

Karin’s injuries; drawing; rolling over; body-text fonts, pt. 5: Charter

That longish stroll I mentioned last time was bad for Karin’s feet. She blistered them; then, unshoed at home, she cut her foot on the sharp edge of a bedframe. She sprayed her wounds, making them worse. She asked me to bind them. While I was doing this, Samuel got into the Band-Aid box (as is his way) and used up many Band-Aids. He asked me to put one on his wrist. He peeled it off and asked me to put it on him again. This was repeated many times. I’m not sure if he thought the Band-Aid needed to be attached just right or if he simply enjoyed having it come on and off.

He’s not averse to repetition – to practicing. This will serve him well in life.

He draws the same things repeatedly on his whiteboard. Or he asks me to draw. He never tires of looking at 2- or 3-D shapes. I tire of drawing them, though. One day, for novelty’s sake, I drew some foods – a pizza, a stick of broccoli, a banana – and gave them happy faces and hats. It was a mistake: Soon, Samuel was asking me to draw a happy eggplant and a happy daikon. I had to look up what a daikon is.

As usual, there’s less to say about Daniel, although I’m sure his little brain is quietly making even greater strides than Samuel’s right now. He continues to delight in everything (except when he doesn’t). Lately, he’s been rolling onto his belly, but not back the other way. He gets his arms caught under himself, which makes him panic.

♦ ♦ ♦ ♦ ♦

Now, the body-text font.

A descendant of Fournier, Charter is one of the most versatile serifed fonts. Matthew Carter designed it in the 1980s, for low-res. printing.

It looks good at any size. (Any visible size.)

It looks good on paper, on computer and phone screens, and on signage for the St. Joseph County Public Library (although, in this example, more space should have been put in between the majuscules).


I often see Charter in e-books and on blogs. I don’t see it in many printed books. Not that it looks bad in them. I own five books set in Charter. The bible from which I read in high school was set in Charter.

I like Charter in newspapers and magazines, although I don’t often see it in those media. I prefer it on rough paper, not glossy paper.

Bitstream Charter – the original design – is free. Of the free variants, my favorite is XCharter. Charis SIL, with glyphs in many languages, is available as a Google font.

Charter, or Charis, would work as body text in a Google Doc or a slide show.

In a better world, Calibri, Cambria, and Times New Roman would be less ubiquitous in draft documents; Minion would be less ubiquitous in publishing (especially in scholarly works with tiny print); and Charter would be the apathetic typesetter’s default font.

Mo Farah; strolling; July’s poem

Here is stunning news concerning one of the world’s great athletes:

“Sir Mo Farah reveals he was trafficked into the UK using another child’s name.”

♦ ♦ ♦ ♦ ♦

Today’s weather was on the cool side. I did two strolls of forty-plus minutes: one with Daniel and Samuel, and one with Daniel, Samuel, and Karin.

Samuel now owns a pair of sunglasses that he wears during his strolls and car rides. When he wants to leave the house, he puts on his glasses and asks to head out to “the church” – his all-purpose term for the store, the park, etc.

Daniel’s head flops around too freely in the stroller. Today’s first stroll put him to sleep; he leaned forward, his head dangling over his chest. His little legs seem to have been sunburned.

♦ ♦ ♦ ♦ ♦

This month’s poem, by Kate Bush, is “Wow.”

⎯⎯⎯⎯⎯⎯⎯⎯⎯⎯
We’re all alone on the stage tonight
We’ve been told we’re not afraid of you
We know all our lines so well, uh-huh
We’ve said them so many times
Time and time again
Line and line again

Ooh, yeah, you’re amazing
We think you’re incredible
You say we’re fantastic
But still we don’t head the bill

Wow! Wow! Wow! Wow! Wow! Wow! Unbelievable!
Wow! Wow! Wow! Wow! Wow! Wow! Unbelievable!

When the actor reaches his death
You know it’s not for real: he just holds his breath
But he always dives too soon, too fast to save himself
He’ll never make the screen
He’ll never make the Sweeney
Be that movie queen
He’s too busy hitting the Vaseline

Ooh, yeah, you’re amazing
We think you are really cool
We’d give you a part, my love
But you’d have to play the fool

Wow! Wow! Wow! Wow! Wow! Wow! Unbelievable!
Wow! Wow! Wow! Wow! Wow! Wow! Unbelievable!

We’re all alone on the stage tonight
We’re all alone
On the stage
Tonight
⎯⎯⎯⎯⎯⎯⎯⎯⎯⎯

I’ve had job interviews like this one.

An update about the pork: Or, what we did this weekend

The pork has been cooked and pulled. It required hours and hours of labor. Karin & I took turns tearing strips of meat off the bones and putting them into baggies for freezing (1 lb. in each baggie).

We employed different techniques. I bagged the meat together with the fat and the skin. Karin separated the fat and the skin from the meat; then, she fried the skin strips, for snacking, and saved the bones, for brothing.

Jasper and Ziva lurked close by.

I’ve been trying hard to stay within my caloric budget. To eat a decent quantity of pork in one sitting, I must forego its garnishes: sauces, coleslaw, etc.

We’ve had one pork meal so far. I ate my pork with a nearly plain baked potato.

Tonight, we went to Karin’s mom’s house for the monthly family dinner. A lot of my in-laws on that side of the family have worked as cooks. I wasn’t about to brag about how we had managed to cook our pulled pork.

They had plenty to talk about, anyway: shooting ranges; home arsenals; the bar scene; enormous, muscular bouncers with gentle dispositions; bouncers who work at shooting ranges, who used to be prison guards; and where in the Bible it says that God never gives you more trouble than you can handle (it says it nowhere, Karin’s seminary-trained mother told them; the idea that the Bible says this is hogwash).

Some wisdom from Mary Midgley

Here is a short and (for us) timely piece written in the 1950s by the philosopher Mary Midgley. It’s lovely from beginning to end – in many ways.

The topic of abortion is introduced in the last paragraph, which I quote here (but do read the earlier paragraphs first, if you are up to it):
Great men, simply by their ignorance of a topic, can lay a remarkably strong taboo on the mention of it even where it happens to be entirely relevant. I saw a singular instance of this lately in a correspondence about the law of abortion. A writer pointed out that many women who had wished to be rid of their child two months after conception were eager to bear it three months later, and finished apologetically, “Expect no logic from a pregnant woman.” But of course there was nothing wrong with the logic. The premises were changed. A child at two months feels like an ailment; at five months it feels like a child. The woman had passed from the belief, “I am not well” to the belief, “I am now two people.” And the only thing wrong with that belief is that it is one which is unfamiliar to logicians. That, I suspect, is an unphilosophic objection.
One might disagree that the mother’s feelings during pregnancy shed light upon the moral status of the unborn child (or upon the mother’s moral position vis-à-vis her child). But the burden of proof lies with the person who’d discount those feelings.

What’s cavalier is this sort of attitude:


P.S. Midgley’s piece was rejected when it was drafted. It appears now in The Raven,
a magazine of original philosophy written for intellectually curious readers with or without academic training in the discipline. It aims to revive an essayistic style of philosophy that was more common in academic venues as recently as thirty years ago but has gradually disappeared – that is, to publish contributions to the “literature” that deserve to be called literature.
P.P.S. I want to make one rejoinder to Midgley’s piece. It’s true that Descartes never married; but he did have a daughter, Francine, who died young. He’s thought to have been profoundly affected by the experience.

P.P.P.S. Just how solitary is Descartes’s theory of knowledge, anyway? Yes, the meditator’s own consciousness is the “Archimedean point” from which he comes to know the world. But when he examines his consciousness, he detects another person: a person more perfect than himself: a person whose commitment not to deceive, whose commitment vis-à-vis the meditator, is what enables the meditator to know the world. This may still be “adolescent.” A youth hopes that contact with one other person will open a window onto the world. But that’s not so self-centered as when a philosopher accepts the Cartesian starting-point and then tries to gather knowledge without looking to another person – outside, or inside, himself.

A weed is a plant out of place

Karin got one of her largest paychecks of the year and went “hog wild” – literally – buying such a huge hunk of “clearance” pork that I had to lug it through the house for her.

Said she: “I’ll ask Scott” – her new stepfather – “to smoke it for us.”

Nothing doing. Karin’s mom & Scott moved into a new house this weekend. They no longer have access to their smoker.

I’m all for putting the pork into various slow cookers and then shredding it and eating it with homemade “Alabama” sauce.

(See, I am become a middle-aged man who talks about his meats.)

By the end of the week, we should have the picnic table that I ordered through Facebook Marketplace. I’ve been fond of picnic tables since I was in high school. I and my dorm-mates used to enjoy suppers out of doors.

Karin & I tend to pursue our respective “home improvement” ideas independently of one another. Her ambition for the back yard, tonight, was to pull out weeds that no one sees. This was complicated by her confusion as to what is and what isn’t a weed. I told her about a passage in Jim Thompson that I read not long ago, in which Lou Ford’s defense lawyer tells him a definition that comes “right out of the agronomy books”:
“A weed is a plant out of place.” I find a hollyhock in my cornfield, and it’s a weed. I find it in my yard, and it’s a flower. … You’re in my garden, Mr. Ford.
I’ve been revisiting the nineties’ contextualist epistemologists, whom I briefly studied many years ago, in order to read the aughts’ “pragmatic encroachment” epistemologists (whose work I was downright oblivious to at the time). Keith DeRose, in a recent collection of old and new essays, is apologetic because his “Solving the Skeptical Problem” is such a long paper. David Lewis ends his famous paper, “Elusive Knowledge,” by saying that although he could have written it longer, and nearer to the truth, that wouldn’t have been in anyone’s interest. His paper displays a certain amount of formalism thrown about informally, together with casual references to guys named Fred and Donald in the vicinity of San Francisco, in service of a view with Chestertonian paradoxicality. An insider’s paper: important, but surely a pain to teach. A paper with weed-like qualities in just about any home garden.