Tuesday, November 27, 2007
Which way is up for The Golden Compass?
The first of Phillip Pullman's 'Dark Materials' trilogy, The Golden Compass, is about to premier as a film next week starring Nicole Kidman. There's been a firestorm of controversy brewing about the film claiming that it is promoting atheism. Well, at least that's the word on the streets and online; reality is a bit more complex.
First point: It's a fantasy world, similar to ours but in another dimension. One of the great aspects of the story is the juxtaposition of what we recognize in our world and those in main character Lyra Silvertongue's world. They fly motorized zeppelins and have harnessed electricity for some uses, but don't have automobiles and use kerosene lamps. Oh yes, and there are talking armored bear warriors. While the image of 'the church' as an authoritarian entity run amok comes through, owing that this is a parallel (fantasy) world the relationship of this church and those of our real world is highly allegorical. Frankly, I thought the books could've just as easily been an allegory for the Reformation as atheism.
The biggest issues seem to focus on Pullman's personal atheism (or agnosticism) as revealed in some interviews, and moreover that this film is a plot to get children enthused about the books after seeing the film. The notion put forth by the Catholic League and others is that the film waters down the anti-Catholic/anti-Christian messages in the book. They fear parents will innocently buy the remaining books for their kids, who will be brainwashed into doubting the presence of God.
Even the folks at FOX News note in their typically 'unbiased' piece that: "The anti-religious themes get progressively stronger with each book in the trilogy; in the final installment, the characters succeed in killing a character called God — who turns out to be a phony, and not God after all."
Um. . . so they don't kill God after all, I guess?
A note to the folks at Fox, the external animal spirits in the book (souls in our world) are called daemons, not demons, which sorta maybe has a satanic ring to it, but why quibble?
The funny thing is atheist groups are angry with the studio for what they consider a watering down of Pullman's anti-God storyline. This caused the author to quip that, "This must be the only film attacked in the same week for being too religious and for being anti-religious -- and by people who haven't seen it."
And here I thought the Christian right had better things to do in December, like complain about the plot to once again take Christ out of Christmas. Just remember folks, an anagram for 'Santa' is 'Satan'. . . I'm just sayin'.
Happy Holidays!!
The first of Phillip Pullman's 'Dark Materials' trilogy, The Golden Compass, is about to premier as a film next week starring Nicole Kidman. There's been a firestorm of controversy brewing about the film claiming that it is promoting atheism. Well, at least that's the word on the streets and online; reality is a bit more complex.
First point: It's a fantasy world, similar to ours but in another dimension. One of the great aspects of the story is the juxtaposition of what we recognize in our world and those in main character Lyra Silvertongue's world. They fly motorized zeppelins and have harnessed electricity for some uses, but don't have automobiles and use kerosene lamps. Oh yes, and there are talking armored bear warriors. While the image of 'the church' as an authoritarian entity run amok comes through, owing that this is a parallel (fantasy) world the relationship of this church and those of our real world is highly allegorical. Frankly, I thought the books could've just as easily been an allegory for the Reformation as atheism.
The biggest issues seem to focus on Pullman's personal atheism (or agnosticism) as revealed in some interviews, and moreover that this film is a plot to get children enthused about the books after seeing the film. The notion put forth by the Catholic League and others is that the film waters down the anti-Catholic/anti-Christian messages in the book. They fear parents will innocently buy the remaining books for their kids, who will be brainwashed into doubting the presence of God.
Even the folks at FOX News note in their typically 'unbiased' piece that: "The anti-religious themes get progressively stronger with each book in the trilogy; in the final installment, the characters succeed in killing a character called God — who turns out to be a phony, and not God after all."
Um. . . so they don't kill God after all, I guess?
A note to the folks at Fox, the external animal spirits in the book (souls in our world) are called daemons, not demons, which sorta maybe has a satanic ring to it, but why quibble?
The funny thing is atheist groups are angry with the studio for what they consider a watering down of Pullman's anti-God storyline. This caused the author to quip that, "This must be the only film attacked in the same week for being too religious and for being anti-religious -- and by people who haven't seen it."
And here I thought the Christian right had better things to do in December, like complain about the plot to once again take Christ out of Christmas. Just remember folks, an anagram for 'Santa' is 'Satan'. . . I'm just sayin'.
Happy Holidays!!
Mind the Pink Slip
Anyone who has ever travelled to London and ridden on its world famous underground has heard the pleasant voice of Emma Clarke repetitiously warning passengers to "Mind the Gap." Despite her eight years of service the underground has sacked Ms Clarke, as reported on PRIs The World show yesterday.
It appears that Ms Clarke got into hot water by posting spoof train announcements on her personal website. They're pretty funny and also pretty darn harmless, as a listen on the above link will show. Still, it appears they were troubling enough to some folks for her to be canned. The authority responsible denies that the spoofs were the reason for her dismissal (although they must be popular, since her website crashed from all of the traffic), citing instead a comment she made calling riding on the Tube a 'dreadful' experience. Clarke insists that was taken out of context and that she said riding the underground would be dreadful for her since she'd be forced to listen to her own voice over and over again.
The bigger issue here is again privacy issues online. I guess its possible that in her contract the Underground prohibited her from goofing on it, though that would seem a bit extreme. Its certainly common enough on TV, where politicians and entertainers frequently go on shows like The Simpsons and Saturday Night Live and mock their positions or personas to get a laugh.
But its a slippery slope. Teens on MySpace showing drunken/stoned/explicit photos have found themselves in trouble with parents, law enforcement, and even colleges and universities. Recently an intern was fired for lying to his employer about faking a sick day and then blogging about his activities that day. The question of blogs and employment has hit Comedy Central and even CNN as young, cyber-minded interns record the details of their lives online, including things that they witness at work.
Mind the 'generation' Gap. And good luck to Ms Clarke; Kings Cross station won't be the same without you.
Anyone who has ever travelled to London and ridden on its world famous underground has heard the pleasant voice of Emma Clarke repetitiously warning passengers to "Mind the Gap." Despite her eight years of service the underground has sacked Ms Clarke, as reported on PRIs The World show yesterday.
It appears that Ms Clarke got into hot water by posting spoof train announcements on her personal website. They're pretty funny and also pretty darn harmless, as a listen on the above link will show. Still, it appears they were troubling enough to some folks for her to be canned. The authority responsible denies that the spoofs were the reason for her dismissal (although they must be popular, since her website crashed from all of the traffic), citing instead a comment she made calling riding on the Tube a 'dreadful' experience. Clarke insists that was taken out of context and that she said riding the underground would be dreadful for her since she'd be forced to listen to her own voice over and over again.
The bigger issue here is again privacy issues online. I guess its possible that in her contract the Underground prohibited her from goofing on it, though that would seem a bit extreme. Its certainly common enough on TV, where politicians and entertainers frequently go on shows like The Simpsons and Saturday Night Live and mock their positions or personas to get a laugh.
But its a slippery slope. Teens on MySpace showing drunken/stoned/explicit photos have found themselves in trouble with parents, law enforcement, and even colleges and universities. Recently an intern was fired for lying to his employer about faking a sick day and then blogging about his activities that day. The question of blogs and employment has hit Comedy Central and even CNN as young, cyber-minded interns record the details of their lives online, including things that they witness at work.
Mind the 'generation' Gap. And good luck to Ms Clarke; Kings Cross station won't be the same without you.
Labels: Privacy
Sunday, November 25, 2007
Farmer's Lament
OK, if you're an American farmer there's an awful lot to lament. But my years of devotion to mass media have left me with one strong conclusion, just again reinforced by this-- yet another farmer has stuck his limb into unimaginably vicious, blade-filled machinery and has had a major body part severed. And survived.
A classic American story if ever there was one. As this meta-narrative has been developed, the hero innocently crams a valuable body part into a piece of above-mentioned vicious machinery because they thought it: needed cleaning; had run over a pussycat; was turned off; was napping. Only to find that. . . it wasn't, and their foot; arm; arms; lower torso was virtually shredded; minced; lopped off like a piece of Elgin sausage; in said vicious machinery. Typically in this story the hero, well-disengorged from his mutilator, clambers into his F-150 and improbably drives to safety; shifting with his teeth and steering with his battered nose.
Now take a look it this guy, who used his John Deere brand pocketknife (he gave them a cite in the story) to CUT OFF what remained of his hand (and then arm) after it got caught in a nasty bit of farm machinery! And there was a brush fire consuming him too!!
Y'know, farming is indeed a dangerous business. It would maybe be less so if the handful of behemoth corporations who run the whole agricultural enterprise wouldn't continually demand more of the American farmer than they can be expected to give. Faster, faster, faster must be the continual voice that they hear in the back of their heads, whether coming from inside or outside from the pressures of companies making unrealistic demand or production schedules on them.
From the cattle ranch to the corn fields, agriculture is in decline. Yet people like Farmer Parker continue weather on.
I won't make a cynical retort here.
OK, if you're an American farmer there's an awful lot to lament. But my years of devotion to mass media have left me with one strong conclusion, just again reinforced by this-- yet another farmer has stuck his limb into unimaginably vicious, blade-filled machinery and has had a major body part severed. And survived.
A classic American story if ever there was one. As this meta-narrative has been developed, the hero innocently crams a valuable body part into a piece of above-mentioned vicious machinery because they thought it: needed cleaning; had run over a pussycat; was turned off; was napping. Only to find that. . . it wasn't, and their foot; arm; arms; lower torso was virtually shredded; minced; lopped off like a piece of Elgin sausage; in said vicious machinery. Typically in this story the hero, well-disengorged from his mutilator, clambers into his F-150 and improbably drives to safety; shifting with his teeth and steering with his battered nose.
Now take a look it this guy, who used his John Deere brand pocketknife (he gave them a cite in the story) to CUT OFF what remained of his hand (and then arm) after it got caught in a nasty bit of farm machinery! And there was a brush fire consuming him too!!
Y'know, farming is indeed a dangerous business. It would maybe be less so if the handful of behemoth corporations who run the whole agricultural enterprise wouldn't continually demand more of the American farmer than they can be expected to give. Faster, faster, faster must be the continual voice that they hear in the back of their heads, whether coming from inside or outside from the pressures of companies making unrealistic demand or production schedules on them.
From the cattle ranch to the corn fields, agriculture is in decline. Yet people like Farmer Parker continue weather on.
I won't make a cynical retort here.
Wednesday, November 21, 2007
Le Union Busting?
Nicholas Sarkozy is keeping true to his pledge of US-style economic reforms by challenging the French railway (SNCF) workers special pension rules, which allow them to retire 2 1/2 years earlier than most French citizens. The result has been a rail and transport strike that has paralyzed most of France for a week. Since the SNCF union also represents local rail workers such as Paris metro operators, the resulting chaos has been far more widespread on mass-transit-dependent France than it would be in other nations. Further, the BBC today reported that sabotage has erupted on the nation's famed high speed TGV rail line; such acts of sabotage could have repercussions that last longer than any strike, not to mention the potential for disaster. SNCF negotiators blamed the destruction on renegade elements in the country.
In a related article the BBC wonders if this is Sarkozy's 'Thatcher Moment.' The answer to this question may well have a huge impact on economies across the EU. In his favor, most French are envious/annoyed by the privileged retirement position of the railway workers and are in favor of an equalizing reform. But it is unclear if will this be a broader movement that will in history be seen as a major turning point ala Reagan's destruction of the Air Traffic controllers union in 1981, which signalled the end of collective-bargaining strength in the US (coupled as it was with a host of pro-business, anti-labor laws which changed the playing field of the US economic situation to this day).
It would seem that sea change will not come as easily to Mr Sarkozy. While unions are relatively weak and small in France, there is a strong national sense of collectivization and equalite that resonate deeply in France. Also affected by Sarkozy's intended labor reforms are many health, welfare, and education employees who also staged a walkout and demonstrations this week. Here there is little broad national support for his reforms. last night on French TV news defeated Socialist Presidential candidate Segoline Royal asked Mr Sarkozy to treat French workers "with respect." Others interviewed on the street held that Sarkozy had received a 170% pay raise and asked why that shouldn't hold for them, too?
Such comments signal a prime difference between France and the US in attitude. It has become the prevailing thought here (despite some recent cracks in the facade) that powerful people, important people, successful people simply deserve a disproportionately larger slice of the pie, even a grossly larger slice. Its why income disparity has grown so much in the US in the past 30 years and has done so seemingly under the radar of the average American. Americans in large numbers believe in the Horatio Alger rags-to-riches fable--we approve of financially favoring the richest elements of our society because a large number of us believe that we will one day ascend to that level. This despite many reports showing that class mobility here is on par with countries like France and the UK, and less than many Scandanavian nations (read 'pinko, liberal, cradle-to-grave welfare states') .
So its a mixed bag for Sarko at the moment. To date his Bush-embracing, j'taime USA stance hasn't hurt his popularity very much, and he may still be able to fundamentally change the driving force of politics in France by bringing the opposition to the political bargaining table and out of the streets (where it has typically held the upper hand and quashed many a reform attempt in the past). But it remains unclear if he will wield the power of Milk-Snatcher Thatcher or GOP-canonized Ronnie Reagan to usher in a fundamentally different era in French economics and politics.
Nicholas Sarkozy is keeping true to his pledge of US-style economic reforms by challenging the French railway (SNCF) workers special pension rules, which allow them to retire 2 1/2 years earlier than most French citizens. The result has been a rail and transport strike that has paralyzed most of France for a week. Since the SNCF union also represents local rail workers such as Paris metro operators, the resulting chaos has been far more widespread on mass-transit-dependent France than it would be in other nations. Further, the BBC today reported that sabotage has erupted on the nation's famed high speed TGV rail line; such acts of sabotage could have repercussions that last longer than any strike, not to mention the potential for disaster. SNCF negotiators blamed the destruction on renegade elements in the country.
In a related article the BBC wonders if this is Sarkozy's 'Thatcher Moment.' The answer to this question may well have a huge impact on economies across the EU. In his favor, most French are envious/annoyed by the privileged retirement position of the railway workers and are in favor of an equalizing reform. But it is unclear if will this be a broader movement that will in history be seen as a major turning point ala Reagan's destruction of the Air Traffic controllers union in 1981, which signalled the end of collective-bargaining strength in the US (coupled as it was with a host of pro-business, anti-labor laws which changed the playing field of the US economic situation to this day).
It would seem that sea change will not come as easily to Mr Sarkozy. While unions are relatively weak and small in France, there is a strong national sense of collectivization and equalite that resonate deeply in France. Also affected by Sarkozy's intended labor reforms are many health, welfare, and education employees who also staged a walkout and demonstrations this week. Here there is little broad national support for his reforms. last night on French TV news defeated Socialist Presidential candidate Segoline Royal asked Mr Sarkozy to treat French workers "with respect." Others interviewed on the street held that Sarkozy had received a 170% pay raise and asked why that shouldn't hold for them, too?
Such comments signal a prime difference between France and the US in attitude. It has become the prevailing thought here (despite some recent cracks in the facade) that powerful people, important people, successful people simply deserve a disproportionately larger slice of the pie, even a grossly larger slice. Its why income disparity has grown so much in the US in the past 30 years and has done so seemingly under the radar of the average American. Americans in large numbers believe in the Horatio Alger rags-to-riches fable--we approve of financially favoring the richest elements of our society because a large number of us believe that we will one day ascend to that level. This despite many reports showing that class mobility here is on par with countries like France and the UK, and less than many Scandanavian nations (read 'pinko, liberal, cradle-to-grave welfare states') .
So its a mixed bag for Sarko at the moment. To date his Bush-embracing, j'taime USA stance hasn't hurt his popularity very much, and he may still be able to fundamentally change the driving force of politics in France by bringing the opposition to the political bargaining table and out of the streets (where it has typically held the upper hand and quashed many a reform attempt in the past). But it remains unclear if he will wield the power of Milk-Snatcher Thatcher or GOP-canonized Ronnie Reagan to usher in a fundamentally different era in French economics and politics.
Labels: Economics, France, Sarkozy
