Riba Rambles:
Musings of a Mental Magpie

Reader's digest

The end of January and February, I tried my hand at writing brief reviews of my reading that month. I've been tracking every book I've read since 2000, but tried following other people's example with a monthly roundup.

Needless to say, got busy end of March, and never quite picked it back up again. But we're now at the midyear point, so I may as well check my progress so far.

94 books (or novel-length fanfics) completed in the past six months. Of those, 14 were nonfiction, 19 were YA fiction, and the other 61 were adult fiction. Of the adult fiction, 43 were fanfic, and three of those fanfics I've read multiple times. According to my calendar view, I've read something every week of the year.

If I had to choose a top-of-the-top list, it would go as follows:

• Nonfiction:
  • A History of reading by Alberto Manguel
  • Reinventing Shakespeare: a cultural history, from the Restoration to the present by Gary Taylor
  • The Speckled monster: a historical tale of battling smallpox by Jennifer Lee Carrell
• YA fiction: Excluding rereads, only one real standout:
        •  The Amulet of Samarkand by Jonathan Stroud
• Adult fiction (excluding fanfic and excluding rereads):
  • The Speed of dark by Elizabeth Moon
  • Tooth and claw by Jo Walton

I'll confess, I don't really know what the above might signify, but hopefully it will make matters easier for my end-of-the-year list in another six months.

Meanwhile, tee hee!

Your Harry Potter Wedding by shimmerbaby
Username:
Soon to be:	Mrs Draco Malfoy
How he proposed:	He wrote it on a wall. With his own blood.
Maid of honour:	Tonks
Objections:	Tom Riddle came back again and tried to seduce you by hissing at your wedding.
The outcome:	You were both killed by Voldemort, on your wedding night.
Created with the ORIGINAL MemeGen!

Isn't it romantic?

[I really have to give up on posting these memes; recoding the shoddy HTML isn't worth the hassle...]

Putting on my thinking cap

So, finally took the Find Your Hogwarts House: The Harry Potter Sorting Hat Personality Test everybody's been going on about. Primary answer should be unsurprising to anybody who knows me:

	77%	Ravenclaw	Said Ravenclaw, "We'll teach those whose intelligence is surest." Ravenclaw students tend to be clever, witty, intelligent, and knowledgeable. Notable residents include Cho Chang and Padma Patil (objects of Harry and Ron's affections), and Luna Lovegood (daughter of The Quibbler magazine's editor).
	72%	Gryffindor	Said Gryffindor, "We'll teach all those with brave deeds to their name." Students of Gryffindor are typically brave, daring, and chivalrous. Famous members include Harry, Ron, Hermione, Albus Dumbledore (head of Hogwarts), and Minerva McGonagall (head of Gryffindor).
	72%	Hufflepuff	Said Hufflepuff, "I'll teach the lot, and treat them just the same." Hufflepuff students are friendly, fair-minded, modest, and hard-working. A well-known member was Cedric Digory, who represented Hogwarts in the most recent Triwizard Tournament.
	23%	Slytherin	Said Slytherin, "We'll teach just those whose ancestry is purest." Slytherin students are typically cunning and hungry for power. Important members include Draco Malfoy (Harry's nemesis), Professor Severus Snape (head of Slytherin), and Lord Voldemort.

Was the answer ever really in doubt?

The low Slytherin score surprises me somewhat, because I thought I was a bit more devious than that. On the other hand, outside of fantasies involving running for president, I've always pictured myself finding a comfortable niche rather than climbing the corporate ladder. So maybe that makes sense. And it ties in with this morning's personality quiz.

I also can't help thinking I deserve extra brownie points for Ravenclaw for how I filled out the survey: I ported the questionnaire into a database so I could answer the questions at my leisure, and then used string-concatenation to create a new HTML form with my responses filled-in automatically for a single-button submission.

At any rate, I'll confess my mind was wandering during the rest of the Sorting, so if any of are Housemates, please let me know!

Reminder to self

There is no such thing as the job fairy, who will magically gift me with a marvelous new job. It takes a lot of hard work to find a new job, and nobody else can do it for me, no matter how much I wish it were otherwise.

[If this mantra sounds at all familiar, I invented it early June]

I hate job-hunting!!! Argh!

Meme me

Considering that potential employers may (are?) reading this journal, it would probably be the wisest course to stay away from any of the silly personality test memes making the rounds. But what the hey. Ever since I discovered D&D, I've thought of myself as having higher INT than WIS.

20 Questions to a Better Personality

You are an SRDF--Sober Rational Destructive Follower. This makes you a font of knowledge. You are cool, analytical, intelligent and completely unfunny. Sometimes you slice through conversation with a cutting observation that causes silence and sidelong glances. You make a strong and lasting impression on everyone you meet, the quality of which depends more on their personality than yours.
You may feel persecuted, as you can become a target for fun. Still, you are focused enough on your work and secure enough in your abilities not to worry overly.
You are productive and invaluable to those you work for. You are loyal, steadfast, and conscientious. Your grooming is impeccable. You are in good shape.
You are kind of a tool, but you get things done. You are probably a week away from snapping.

So how accurate is that? Let's see...

• I really like and agree with (and am flattered by) the "font of knowledge" description.
• Pouting a little at the "completely unfunny" remark. [On the other hand, I do pun.]
• "Persecuted" and "target for fun" reminds me of my public school days when I was persecuted and targeted by bullies for mockery. However, I'm over that now and largely deal by ignoring such treatment, and it really was confidence and security that helped me overcome those scars, so that seems reasonable.
• Loyal? Well, I stayed with Lotus/IBM for over ten years, despite offers to jump ship for big money at Internet startups during the boom. If I had my druthers, I would've made a lifelong career there.
• And I really hope they're wrong about that "one week from snapping."

Whether or not it's accurate, it's not terribly unflattering (I don't think -- should I be more paranoid?)

I've been meaning to take The Harry Potter Sorting Hat Personality Test for weeks now, but it's 112 questions each on a 1 through 9 scale, and I just haven't had the time nor patience. [Well, I suppose that rules out Hufflepuff... :) ]

yeep

Dear goodness! I most heartily apologize to all you LiveJournalers who are getting my posts duplicated over and over and over again on your friends pages. Please don't unsubscribe. I'm trying to get the settings fixed so it won't happen again. It appears that LJ settings won't retain the correct URLs for my archive pages, and each time a post has a different URL, LJ believes it's a wholly new entry and reposts it again. I think I've got it fixed this time. I hope. I pray. If not, I'm sorely tempted to just disable the syndicated feed for a few days until all of the current posts you're seeing over and over again have been pushed down so you won't get yet another iteration of the same-old same-old.

Look out! Here comes the Spider-Man!

If one has to find advantages to being unemployed, they would include the ability to see movies at the less-crowded (and cheaper) weekday matinees. I won't see "kid films" at matinees, because, well, the audience is packed with... kids. But for films geared towards an older set, weekday matinees are the way to go if you can.

We just saw Spider-Man 2 on its opening day.

Excellent. Excellent. Excellent.

Let's just put it this way. The story was written by Michael Chabon (Kavalier & Clay) and Gough & Millar (co-creators of Smallville). Directed by Sam Raimi. Can you name a better group of people for a big budget superhero flick? Here's what some people who know the genre had to say:

Comics2Film:

'Spider-Man 2' is the best superhero movie ever made. Early reports were saying that this film has the best superhero fight since 'Superman 2' … and I'm here to say, well of course it does, it's the best superhero movie EVER!

Roger Ebert:

"Spider-Man 2" is the best superhero movie since the modern genre was launched with "Superman" (1978).

I haven't similar breadth of experience to make such a comparison, but it was damn good.

For the record (and to refresh my own memory), here's the blog post I wrote two years ago after seeing the first Spider-Man film. Last time, I wrote "I'm pretty sure I had a stupid grin on my face for most of the film." Not this time. I got too caught up in the story. Flinching during the fight scenes, cringing when Peter bollixes up his attempts at a "normal" life, cheering at the good parts...

What I loved most was the attention to detail. These are people who clearly know and love the comic book, writing a film for fans of that comic. The filmmakers didn't need to use minor characters from the comic book -- indeed, it probably made casting more difficult that, for example, they couldn't give JJJ a generic secretary, but she was Betty Brant. I don't know if they even mentioned her name, but those in the know could tell.

And that makes a difference. In the early 1990s, when DC was succeeding with TV/film projects like Flash and Batman while Marvel was mired in the Dolph Lundgren Punisher and the never-released Fantastic Four, I wrote that DC's fidelity to their characters and universe made their adaptations more successful than Marvel's. Well, it appears that Marvel has learned that lesson -- and DC has forgotten. [Is there any reason to change Catwoman's name from Selina Kyle? That kind of gratuitious change turns off the fans without providing any box office draw.]

But back to the matter of detail, just compare these two images:

For those not already aware, the comic image comes from 1967. Nice homage, no?

Over the course of the film, I spotted seeds for four possible villains, although I suspect I know which angle producers will actually take for the next film.

Overall, they hit all the right notes, down to Spidey's body language. [I also spotted Stan Lee's cameo.] By the end of the movie, I was desperately wanting to dig through my comic boxes to find my back issues of Spider-Man to reread them all. [Probably won't happen, because the comic boxes aren't terribly accessible, but I want to.] On the drive home, Ian and I talked about the movie and comic and character of Spider-Man. I realized what it is about Spidey's wisecracks and corny quips. Spider-Man is an unpopular kid's idea of how the popular types are expected to act.

The only problem I had with the film was actually with the audience. As the credits started to roll and I stood up to let other people past, somebody in the back of the theater flung barbecue sauce into my hair. Ugh! No idea whodunnit, unfortunately, or I would've reported them to the theater managers.

One trailer worth mentioning: National Treasure, starring Nicholas Cage. Treasure hunters, masonic mysteries, action and chases. Don't want to spoil too much (I recommend viewing the trailer online), but it actually looks pretty good.

And can I just say that I, Robot looks positively dreadful! I mean, it may be a perfectly fine film for what it is, but it is not I, Robot. In fact, the story I've seen conveyed in the trailers is directly antithetical to Asimov's intent when he first wrote those stories. At that time, most robots in SF were portrayed as villainous monsters. Asimov didn't think that robotics would necessarily be evil, so wrote his stories to show robots in a more positive (positronic?) light. And then 20th Century Fox took an existing script for a sci-fi flick with rampaging robots, bought the rights to Asimov's title and slapped that on. They threw in some references to the Three Laws and renamed a few characters (you mean this isn't how you pictured Susan Calvin?) and what you have is a travesty. Had it a different name, I would probably look on it more favorably. Or at least just look aside, because it doesn't seem terribly to my tastes. But as I, Robot it's going to be a failure.

These terrors and these tyrannies

Between Shakespeare and site problems, I never had a chance to mention Eileen McNamara's Sunday column:

Madrid was not hosting a national political convention when the bombs went off.
It was a workday morning like any other until some explosive-laden backpacks tore apart four commuter trains last March, killing 191 passengers and wounding many hundreds more. It was not unlike the day two and a half years before when thousands of Americans died sitting at their desks or on airliners that had been turned into guided missiles.
The routine nature of those days, the very ordinariness of those victims is worth remembering
<snip>
There have been no specific threats against Boston, where Democrats will meet July 26-29 to nominate Massachusetts Senator John F. Kerry for president, or against New York, where Republicans will reaffirm their faith in President George W. Bush a month later. There has been, instead, an unquestioned assumption that the conventions would be an appealing, symbolic target of opportunity for terrorists.
Why? If surprise and vulnerability are crucial weapons in the terrorists' arsenal, why attack a fortress when the guards are on alert?

One year ago, I made a prediction, and with all the hysteria surrounding possible terror attacks in the Boston area, it seems time to remind folks of it.

The White House (through the departments of Justice and Homeland Security) control the issuing of terror alerts. They choose when to issue warnings and when to lift them.

The 2004 Democratic Convention will be held from July 26-29, 2004.

Who is willing to bet that there will be some major terror alert that weekend or shortly beforehand? The 24-hour news channels constantly need new "urgent" material, and these warnings suck up all the media attention. Time it right, and the Democratic convention speakers won't have time to react. And with all the Dems booked at the convention, they won't be free to appear as opposing viewpoints on the news shows, giving an even more lopsided tilt to the conservative talk media. All combined, this could suck the oxygen out of the convention and thus eliminate the traditional post-convention bounce the party normally picks up.

And what are the risks? Sure, they can be accused of manipulating the alerts, but:

1. if the timing is right the Democrats at the convention won't have time to react.
2. if Democrats yell but nobody hears, does it make a ripple? [See here for an answer.]
3. unless the charge can be made quickly and strongly, media attention will shift to the next urgent story, blunting its impact.

The benefits are so great for the GOP, that I'm willing to wager on this. Any takers?

I'm not in a good position to be placing bets right now, but I still think the odds are favorable. Ashcroft got into some rhetorical hot water last month over accusations that his last terror alert was politically motivated -- especially since he didn't coordinate the announcement with the Department of Homeland Security. [NYT: Asked about the timing of his new warnings about the suspects, Mr. Ashcroft said, "We believe the public, like all of us, needs a reminder."] On the other hand, if he's done it once, the odds may be better he'll do it again. Besides, how many people will hear the terror alert, and how many its criticisms?

Here's to thy better fortune and good stars

We grabbed Chinese food last night, so here was my fortune:

Your biggest virtue is your modesty.

And here's my Free Will Astrology for the week ahead:

I propose that you conduct a radical experiment for the next three weeks. Between now and July 22, try on the theory that life is on your side. Assume that all of creation is conspiring to give you exactly what you need, exactly when you need it. At least once every day, speak these words with passionate sincerity: "I believe that reality is a sublime comedy staged for my education and amusement, and that there is a benevolent conspiracy to liberate me from my ignorance and help transform me into the unique masterpiece I was born to be."

Speaking of sublime comedies, I had an idea for a silk-screen t-shirt design to feature the Corpus Christi portrait of Marlowe, but before I consider Cafe Press-ing the design v. just making up a few copies for friends, I'm wondering who might actually be interested. [No, I'm not quite ready to share the slogan, but it cracked Ian up if that means anything.] It also depends on finding a nice t-shirt-size reproduction of the artwork, though I think Dolly Wraight's book may have something scannable.

^*Title quote from Dido, Queen of Carthage Act II, Scene 1.

New York Review of Books

I may have mentioned earlier that I got a free six-month subscription to The New York Review of Books. Fun read, and it's one of those magazines where the advertisements are as interesting as the articles. So I can comfortably discard the print copies, I've gone through the two issues I've received so far and listed the books (in articles and ads) that intrigued me. Don't know that I'll ever read them all, but on the offchance I'm looking for something to read, here's the list of what I found for future reference.

Oh, speaking of literature, thanks to Pellegrina for drawing my attention to a new fictional portrayal of Christopher Marlowe. I've added it to my Marlowe in modern fiction list, bringing the total works published since 1976 (that I've found) to 36.

Whoah! We won!

As my earlier post shows, I was not expecting the Supreme Court to rule on ACLU v. Ashcroft today.

I was also not expecting the Supreme Court to side with the ACLU. [After all, filters aren't mandatory according this law. They're only mandatory if libraries accept federal funding -- which, of course, all public libraries need...]^*

Now on first glance it appears that overall constitutionality of COPA is going back to the lower courts. But until those courts rule, COPA will not be enforced.

Repeat: there's still going to be a trial on the efficacy of filters (Seth, you ready?), but, well, let me quote the majority directly:

Held: The Third Circuit was correct to affirm the District Court's ruling that enforcement of COPA should be enjoined because the statute likely violates the First Amendment.

Woo-hoo!

^*Correction: filtering as a condition of funding was CIPA, not COPA. My mistake.

Apologies again

To LJ users at least, and anyone else who will be inconvenienced by this.

It appears that while I was trying to fix journal publishing over the weekend, Blogger took it upon itself to rename my journal archive filenames. I noticed this when LJ finally read my synidcated feed and posted not the seven posts from the blackout, but all fifteen posts in the XML feed.

I've just corrected the URL, but that means LJ is probably going to republish those seven posts once more. My sincerest apologies for cluttering up your friends pages. I'll do my best to do better in the future and prevent this from happening again.

We apologize for the inconvenience

First of all, sorry for the sudden glut of posts. We've been having technical difficulties on our server. During this time, I continued to submit posts to Blogger, but was unable to send them to my website. A few of them are now dated, as I was reporting on timely events that have since passed. But, rather than rewrite them all in hindsight, I'm just going to leave them as they are, a record of my thoughts at those dates and times. It's somewhat interesting blogging when no one can read.

Obviously, the Supreme Court has ruled without benefit of my commentary. At this point, I really haven't much to add to what's already out there. As many others have already pointed out (and as I've written prior to the outage), SCOTUSBlog remains the best source of breaking news and analysis and links. It looks like the final two decisions will be released Wednesday morning, and that includes Ashcroft vs. ACLU, aka the COPA (Copa-cabana... Music and passion libraries must ration, due to COPA! Don't filter us...) Honestly, I've got a bad feeling about how the Court will rule in this case. But, I've been wrong before and I'm hoping to be wrong again.

---

By the way, what's the deal with NPR and the Central Artery? While driving through the underground tunnel, I can get no WBUR signal at all. I was able to hear WGBH from the bridge to about exit 23, and then it too turned all static. Meanwhile, I can still receive other radio signals, higher and lower on the dial, including AM and college radio stations. So why no NPR? If I can get 88.9 and 90.3 and 91.9, why not 89.7 and 90.9 which fall between those? It's not signal strength, because I can receive 90.9 as far away as Sturbridge to the west and Manchester NH to the north -- both of them further than I get 88.9 whose signal remained strong. So far the only explanations that make sense to me are either censorship (the tunnel authority doesn't want to carry NPR) or kickbacks -- wondering if radio stations weren't somehow required to pay for the Central Artery to carry their signal in the tunnel, and the NPR stations didn't pony up. But those both sound too... paranoid to be the truth. Anybody know the real explanation?

---

A few weeks ago, I wrote about the Conference of Catholic Bishops, and Bush's attempted manipulation of them over the issue of Communion. Nathan Newman shares the results. Regarding Communion, they left that decision up to individual bishops, rather than setting a blanket policy.

But possibly the most fascinating fact is that Vatican officials clearly told the Bishops that voters are free to support pro-abortion politicans without sinning, if they support them for other policies:

As many of you know, Vatican officials offered both principles and advised caution and pastoral prudence in the use of sanctions. . .It is important to note that Cardinal Ratzinger makes a clear distinction between public officials and voters, explaining that a Catholic would be guilty of formal cooperation in evil only if he were to deliberately vote for a candidate precisely because of the candidate's permissive stand on abortion. However, when a Catholic does not share a candidate's stand in favor of abortion and/or euthanasia, but votes for that candidate for other reasons, it is considered remote material cooperation, which can be permitted if there are proportionate reasons.

Mark that statement. Essentially, the Vatican's official position is that abortion IS NOT an issue that trumps every other issue politically. By the logic of this statement, the Vatican is saying that if a poltician is pro-choice, but supports many other priorities of the Church, it is quite reasonable for Catholic voters to support them over a politican who is pro-life, but fails to support Catholic doctrine on many other issues.

Which leaves John Kerry is a great position, since by at least one measure, he is the best Catholic in the Senate on supporting the priorities of the Conference of Catholic Bishops on non-abortion issues.

---

As seen on several people's LiveJournals this weekend: Worst Logo Ever. As Ian quipped when I showed it to him, they're supposed to use the after picture!
In a similar vein, don't forget: Onan provides the power that keeps you going on the water, on the road, in your work, and at home. (Onan is a registered trademark of Cummins Inc.) Maybe that explains Dick Cheney's outburst?

I'm sure I'll have more to say later, but for now, I'll try to let folks catch up with what I've written so far. Share and enjoy!

Boston T Party?

I know nobody's going to see this until we remedy the technical problems, but...

Regarding the new MBTA search policy, I saw a Herald article with the following quote:

``If they had searched people like they were supposed to, 9-11 wouldn't have happened,'' said Tresa Williams, 19, of Boston. ``I've got no problem with it.''

Say what???? Did any of the hijackers actually ride the T to Logan airport? If so, what were they carrying with them that the searchers might've found? Most accounts say they had nothing more dangerous on them than box cutters. The MBTA's DNC Travel Info doesn't say anything about what they're actually searching bags for or what they're going to do about anybody carrying a sharp object. [I sure as hell hope they're not going to confiscate items. Ian needs a corkscrew for work, and usually has leatherman tools on his belt. They're nearly an automatic part of his wardrobe.]

You know, that's a good point. What are they searching bags for? If you refuse a search, they can supposedly prevent you from boarding the T, but are there other items whose possessions will lead to the detention of their owners? [Sorry for the convoluted grammar.] At least airports have a list outside the metal detectors of what isn't permitted. Is there any such list for the DNC, or are they just afraid of large packages? I mean, I have a license to carry concealed. Nothing in the new MBTA regulations say I can't bring a weapon with me. [Not that I have one, but what about security guards who might take the T to work.] What about construction workers who might be carrying around sharp instruments. Where's the advance information on what is and isn't allowed? Anybody?

If the Herald quote counts as one of the stupidest comments I've seen about MBTA security, I heard one of the best this weekend at a party (sorry, I don't recall who said this). These bag searches and restrictions aren't going to make the T any safer. What they will do instead is cover the MBTA's ass. If (heaven forbid) something does happen, there will most certainly be lawsuits against the MBTA. By taking these precautions (which inconvenience far more than they actually protect), it will look like the MBTA is doing something, and protect them from liability. If they didn't conduct such searches and shutdowns, critics will complain "if only..." and "why didn't they..."
So these policies are designed as a CYA measure more than they're effective or targeted to actual threats.

PS: Boston Online's Universal Hub is a good central aggregator for news and comments upon this issue. According to Boston Common, "[t]he T Riders Union is holding an emergency meeting tonight (Monday), 5:30 to 7:30 p.m., 2181 Washington Street, Roxbury (Next to Payless Shoes, Dudley Square)" to figure out how to best respond to the new policies.

Yaaay

Well, haven't gotten FTP up and running yet, but I just noticed the Boston Globe printed my letter! They edited it a bit, but kept most of the good stuff. Let's hope it makes a difference.

BTW, Boston Common notes that the National Lawyers Guild will be running a campaign starting Monday on the T's new random-search policy, including "buttons for passengers that state 'I DO NOT CONSENT TO A SEARCH.'" The guild has more material on the search policy available here. There will also be a rally against the T random search policy, July 1st 8 to 9 a.m. at Park Street station. More info including contact information here.

The stuff that dreams are made of

How frustrating.
This morning I dreamed that it was morning and I was at work (not any real workplace I've had) and wanted to phone Ian to make sure he woke up in time that he wouldn't be late to his own job. Now, I heard a long time ago that one cannot actually read in dreams. The reading material will not remain stable, but shifts each time one looks back at it. Well, I was trying to dial our home telephone number: ten digits. And every single time I tried, I would somehow mess up on the eighth or ninth digit. I was pressing them correctly, but when I was confirming on the little readout screen on the phone, it would invariably show a wrong number. And in my dream, this kept going on for twenty minutes (I don't know how long this was objectively, but that was my subjective feeling). I tried on two different phones in the office, and had the same problem on both. Finally, with the time Ian would have to leave rapidly approaching, I successfully dialed 0 for the Operator, verbally told her the correct phone number, and she tried to connect us. Unfortunately, Ian didn't pick up and I got the answering machine, and I was left hoping that he was in the shower or out the door already and not sleeping through the ringing of the phone.

Not the most frustrating dream I've ever had, but certainly annoying. Once, several years ago, I dreamed I was trying to solve the four color theorem on a torus, which was complicated by the fact that I was dreaming in black and white and after a certain number of colors, would quickly lose track of which segment was which shade. [I eventually asked on sci.math and was told that torii require no more than seven colors. ] The following evening, I dreamed I was trying to solve a magic square using the digits 1 through 9. That I was able to solve in my sleep, astonishingly enough...

I'll also note for personal purposes that last night marks the third time (as far as I'm aware) that I dreamed of being the Dawn Granger Dove, though that was an entirely unrelated dream to the one described above. [BTW, from the same frustrating telephone dream last night, don't try to walk to work over cobblestones in boots with a spike heel!]

Also, for the first time in the last three days, we didn't lock Boopsie out of the bedroom when we went to sleep. [Primarily because she was already asleep on the bed when we went to sleep.] Needless to say, she spent nearly the entire night on the bed -- occupying the foot of my side of the bed. Which was somewhat uncomfortable for me, but shows how much she misses us, because she usually doesn't sleep with us at all, except for particularly cold nights. [For the most part this weekend, we've been allowing her in the bedroom only when one of us has been able to chaperone her. And when we weren't going to be in the bedroom, we've locked her out. That seems to have worked to prevent her from peeing on the bed, though we're still having trouble getting her to eat her meds.

At any rate, I realize that people haven't been able to read this nor any of my other entries from yesterday. [Somebody hacked into the server via FTP, so we've tried to lock down FTP, only to discover it was also locking Blogger out of the server. Must fix.] Hopefully I'll get it working soon, so you can read what I've been posting soon, preferably before the Supreme Court issues the latest batch of rulings at ten a.m.

Economies of scale

Crazy question, but we're curious about soda siphons (old-fashioned seltzer makers). Does anybody have or use one? I'm wondering about the relative economies of soda siphons as compared to just buying bottled seltzer. We assume that over the long run, the soda siphon may be cheaper, but how long is that long run? How much seltzer can one charger make before it needs to be replaced. When's the break even point. Anybody?

Meanwhile, I discovered that Virgil's, makers of a damn fine root beer, is now making a cream soda. Don't bother. Although the ingredients are simple enough (cane sugar and vanilla) that you'd expect goodness, it tastes positively cloying. So sweet it almost feels syrupy. Unfortunate. Several years back I had some Passover Polar Cream Soda -- again, just carbonated water, sugar and vanilla, and it had a delightful crisp clean taste (like vanilla and sugar, amazingly enough) that I've been looking for ever since. At any rate, we've got another three bottles of the Virgil's cream soda. Given this description, anybody interested in a taste?

No more yielding but a Dream

Okay, due to technical difficulties, nobody actually got to see the previous post before showtime.

Ian and I did go to Midsummer Night's Dream in Boston Common. According to my notes, the performance we saw last year was rained out during Act II Scene 1; today we arrived during Act II Scene 1 -- almost the exact same spot, as Demetrius was trying to shake off his stalker in the woods (if I ever get a spaniel, I want to name it Helena!). Today was a warm sunny day, so we risked sunburn much more than storm. Different actors, but they still dressed the four young lovers in 1950s outfits for easy identification, though the fairies' costume was styled completely differently. Given a small cast, hit-and-miss amplification, and a crowd that might come and go at any time, the play was greatly simplified. For example, they eliminated Titania's four fairies, and shortened those scenes accordingly. (Once again, I brought along my Dover Thrift Edition of the play for comparison. Quite useful.) The four lovers were impressively acrobatic, the men tumbling as they battled with one another, or picking up first one of Helena's legs to kiss, and then the other man lifting her other leg until they're suspending her in mid-air. Very humorous, but the physicality also made it much more... threatening and rape-like to Helena than many other productions.

Ian made banana bread this morning, just 'cause (they were originally going to be banana pancakes, but the dough was too thick, so he changed directions). We brought that along, also packing some drinks and cheese and dried fruit, and had a lovely afternoon of it. After the play, we walked around Boston Garden and the Swan Pond before eventually heading back home.

I continued to think about how the young lovers' costumes so carefully conveyed the characters' natures for the audience: Demetrius was more respectably dressed than Lysander, making it clear why Hermia's father preferred him. And Hermia was better dressed than Helena, giving more reason for the latter's jealousy. The 1950s dress conveyed this quite well, in quick broad brushes playing to stereotypes for easy identification. [According to this essay (PDF) by Gary Taylor, this was also true during Shakespeare's day: "Clothing was so important to the actors because it so quickly and efficiently established recognisable social identities: gender, status, occupation, wealth."] I started to wonder if there weren't other costumes that would allow for similar shorthand, but in truly modern dress. Make Demetrius a jock and Lysander a goth, for example?
And then I thought... what about introducing race into the mix? Anybody seen or heard of good cross-casting of Dream? Depending how it's done, it could add a whole 'nother layer to Egeus' preference and Hermia's rebellion. Interestingly enough, in Act III Scene 2, Lysander refers to Hermia as "you Ethiope!". The footnotes say it alludes to her "brunette complexion," but that could just as easily mean skin color. I wonder how it might best be done. Clearly, Hermia and Lysander would have to be of different races, to explain Egeus' disapproval. But which races those are, and how to cast Helena and Lysander... there are many options, equally good.
I haven't the writing skills to do so myself, but I also continue to ponder the possibilities of gender-swapping roles in MND. I think the best way to go would be to make Lysander female -- Hermia wishes to avoid her arranged marriage by running off in the woods with her female lover (Sandra? Lisa?). Her best friend Helena informs her husband-to-be (upon whom she has a crush), and the usual hijinks ensue. The advantage of this gender swap is that even with Puck's love potion, nobody is untrue to their orientation.

As we talked about this, Ian also expressed regret that so few directors make use of the physical descriptions given within the text when casting the roles. Hermia is low and little, almost "dwarfish"; Helena has height and long legs, a "maypole." But do any productions actually make an effort to cast women of different heights, so this exchange of insults actually has some bite to it?

One final question that occurred to me. I noticed that Ian laughed most in scenes featuring Bottom and the mechanicals. I know that during the Interregnum, when Cromwell closed the theaters, only two adaptations of Shakespeare plays were known to have been performed. One of them was a stripped down version of MND, titled Bottom's Dream and focusing solely on the mechanicals' plot. Given that these productions were actually performed and viewed by people much like the subjects of the play (rather than mocking the mechanicals for the benefit of the upper-class), I'm incredibly curious to read a copy. So far, quick Googling hasn't turned anything up, but if anybody knows were I can find a script to read (online or published editions I can get from the library), I'd be most appreciative.

At any rate, lots of fun. It was a perfectly serviceable production -- nothing extraordinarily great or innovative, but they've got excellent source material and didn't do any injustice to it. This weekend was the first performances of the show. It'll be making the rounds of the city parks (Dorchester, Southie, Mattapan, the Fens) before returning to Boston Common on August 1. Meanwhile, the main company will be performing Much ado about nothing from July 10 through August 1, all shows free and in Boston Common. I intend to attend, so if others wish to share which evenings or weekends work best, maybe we can go as a group. Pot luck picnic and a play! Who's interested?

Last Minute Shakespeare Notice:

Just seen in this morning's Boston Globe:

It's not midsummer, but who are we to criticize free performances of "A Midsummer Night's Dream"? Through Aug. 1, the Commonwealth Shakespeare Company Apprentice Company plays seven Boston neighborhoods for its 2 p.m. "Tour of the Parks" program. Today's venue is the Boston Common Parade Ground. Rain or shine.

The full tour schedule is available online.

This is the same company whose Midsummer Night's Dream we tried to watch last summer, only to be rained out in the second act. I don't know if they'll be staging this the same way (that version used 1950s garb as character shorthand), but Ian and I are going to attempt to make it. We'll probably be late, but as Ian said, it's not like they can keep us out until intermission. Or, as I put it, how much are we going to miss? We've seen the play often enough. Coming in in the middle, probably the most difficult thing to pick up will be which of the four lovers are whom.

Also in today's Globe, I saw that Salem State will be performing The Complete Works: Abridged and I got a mailing from New England Shakespeare Festival announcing their summer schedule for Richard III (sadly, the Massachusetts showings aren't as convenient as previous tours). I probably should post all these to Bard_In_Boston, but I'll wait until later (unless somebody else would care to do the honors -- I did intend for it to be an open community where anybody can announce events for the benefit of everyone; not solely a service of yours truly).

I'd write more, but I'm in a bit of a rush to get ready so we can go. Ta!