StevenRayOrr.com

Writing, Improvisation, and Role-playing

Steven Ray Orr — Sat, 15 Jun 2013 15:56:00 PDT

Steven Ray Orr for The Way of Improvisation:

As a writer, I knew that storytelling was an isolated affair that involved ruthlessly stealing ideas from friends, family, and anyone else that happened upon my path, but Dungeons & Dragons is the antithesis of such selfishness and best understood as a method of crafting a communal narrative. Just as the limitations of genre, form, and style bind written stories, so too are there rules in D&D that confine what is possible, but role-playing removes the absolute authorial control that comes with solitary storytelling.

Take a look glance at the brief piece I wrote for Dave Morris’ “resource for the thoughtful improvisor”. It is just a few thoughts tracing a path through my history as a storyteller and while you are there you may as well read a few other pieces – I particularly enjoyed Ryan Miller’s “Loving Your Mistakes”.

Stop Calling Us Fans

Steven Ray Orr — Tue, 11 Jun 2013 13:22:00 PDT

Mellisa Tolentino for SiliconAngle:

It’s too early to tell whether iTunes Radio will be a hit or miss, but surely Fanboys and hipsters alike will be raving about the service soon as it’s available for listeners to try out. We’ll soon find out one way or another.

In an otherwise well written and interesting article, Mellisa ends with this nonsense. I have never read SiliconAngle before, but their claim of focusing on “where computer science intersects [with] social science” is undermined when their writers decide to throw casual insults instead of thoughtfully concluding their articles.

I do not, necessarily, take umbrage with the terms “Fanboy”¹ or “hipster”² as descriptors, but the stereotype of the raving Apple fan is tired and insulting. Not to mention that we are well beyond Apple products being primarily utilized by a vocal minority. My mother might try out Apple Radio before I have a chance to. The product is interesting and it is going to be available in the wild in a few months. And it is more likely that Mellisa and the other tech journalists are going to be declaring it a hit or miss long before us “Fanboys and hipsters” have an opportunity to try it out.

Except, of course, as gendered terminology. That is as good a reason as any for us to stop using it. And, while on the topic, why do people insist on capitalizing “fanboy” – particularly when writing about Apple?
↩
I have not read his work, but I have been told that Mark Greif has done some interesting work with the notion of the hipster. At some point, I will read his New York Magazine piece that includes the line, “It would be too limited, however, to understand the contemporary hipster as simply someone concerned with a priori knowledge as a means of social dominance”. Knowledge bombs everywhere.
↩

"But his noodle lives on..."

Steven Ray Orr — Sat, 01 Jun 2013 12:25:00 PDT

Pitchaya Sudbanthad for The Morning News:

In between surviving multiple point-blank-range assassination attempts and a failed kidnapping in which he emerged alive from the burning wreckage of a battleship his own air force had just bombed, Pibulsongkram decided that Thailand needed noodles.

The history of a food dish told as a government propaganda story. “Freedom Fries” is amateur hour compared to Pad Thai – in both the complexity of the meal and the narrative. It seems fitting that a snack as basic as deep fried potatoes would hardly serve up as interesting a story as the preparation of the Saen Chan noodle. Even the names of the ingredients are more worthy of a grand tale.

Tyranny of the Majority

Steven Ray Orr — Fri, 31 May 2013 02:19:00 PDT

Will Leitch for Deadspin:

The beauty of the Web is that it belongs to you, and me, and to each of us, individually. What are other people doing on the Internet? Who the hell cares? I’ll just find people who like doing what I’m doing and talk to them.

This.

I first came to the Internet to escape what was popular in favor of my own interests. Now I eschew the Internet as a variation on that theme. This sounds a bit like the groupie that hates that their favorite band has “gone mainstream”, but you will have to trust that I am not lamenting the bygone pre-digital era. It is just that I used to believe that the Internet was a space where people could retreat from the tyranny of the majority opinion – “here’s to the crazy ones” and all that.

There might not be a point to this rambling. If people want to engage in the popular who am I to delegitimize it? Nor am I entirely certain that I am on the right side with my thoughts on the current state of the web. Maybe Facebook is what we should be doing with the Internet.

I sure hope not though.

Making Feelings (and Soda)

Steven Ray Orr — Mon, 13 May 2013 01:34:00 PDT

Joshua Rothman for the New Yorker:

That’s it—that’s what soda really is. The problem for Coke and Pepsi isn’t that SodaStream cuts into sales. It’s that SodaStream demystifies soda. Coke and Pepsi have spent a century teaching us to have feelings about our sodas. SodaStream shows us what those feelings are really made of.

I don’t know much about that. What I do know is that I am rather taken by the ability to craft my own flavors of soda. Homemade vanilla coke? Yes please. More importantly, I am all in favor of demystifying the commercial world in favor of individual choice. Consumers of the world, unite! We have nothing to lose but our chains.

Fine Lines

Steven Ray Orr — Tue, 26 Feb 2013 16:32:00 PST

Recently, The Onion tweeted a joke about nine year old actor Quvenzhané Wallis and many people found it to be offensive. I have already written about the difference between harm and offense, so I do not intend on rehashing those thoughts. People are going to be offended by it, particularly because of the words chosen – and who they were aimed towards – and that ship has already long sailed. But was The Onion doing something other than maliciously attacking a child? Avery Edison tries to answer that question:

The only logical-but-absurd extension of this horror show (and that’s the heart of satire: taking a concept and stretching it to almost-breaking point) is to, for no reason, call a small child the worst thing you possibly could.

Satire can be just as difficult to pull off as it can be to understand, so it often misses the mark. This is particularly the case when children are involved. Avery does a good job of navigating the nuances of the original intent. This does nothing to salvage the joke itself, as there has already been an apology and explaining humour always kills it, but if you had intended on demonizing and hating The Onion forever, Avery provides a well-thought argument for perceiving them as something other than monsters.

A Different Universe...

Steven Ray Orr — Thu, 21 Feb 2013 23:48:00 PST

It would seem that concerns about Manny Malhotra are pressing on my thoughts tonight. This is another excellent piece about the unfortunate situation he is in, by Patrick Johnston for Canucks Army:

In a different universe, this doesn’t happen.

The puck never hits him in the eye; he doesn’t need major surgery to save his eye; there doesn’t have to be a major comeback. No decision is ever forced about his elite-level usefulness by the pressures of a salary cap.

Not Conquered

Steven Ray Orr — Thu, 21 Feb 2013 23:25:00 PST

Daniel Wagner for The Score:

In the case of Malhotra, it’s not a matter of being unable to play, but of being at risk for further injury. The danger of a blindside hit to the head is heightened for Malhotra simply because he now has a larger blindside to deal with. Malhotra felt that he could manage the risk and continue playing, but Canucks management, after reviewing video, were not convinced. They pulled the plug on his season, not Malhotra.

A reminder that, so often, our lives are not solely directed by our own actions and intentions. We are not the masters of our fates.

The Point of the Harlem Shake

Steven Ray Orr — Thu, 21 Feb 2013 22:59:00 PST

Colin Horgan for Macleans:

The second important event was that the meme transcended an important boundary when someone (finally?) posted a clip of a washing machine “doing” the Harlem Shake … As far as things go on the internet, it was essentially perfect, effectively dialing the meme to whatever degree is always necessary for it to tilt from absurdity to eventual complete and total meaninglessness.

Even amidst the endless papers and books that I am reading for grad school, I still caught the Harlem Shake meme. It is, as far as ridiculous aspects of Internet culture go, pretty spectacular (particularly the video Colin mentions), but the rumblings I heard about “racial concerns” of the meme had me frustrated and wanting to articulate those frustrations. Instead of doing it myself, I had the pleasure of reading Colin clearly explain the self-referential McLuhan-esque nature of meme-culture: “the point of the meme is only the meme itself”.

Indeed.

On Relations

Steven Ray Orr — Sat, 12 Jan 2013 22:42:00 PST

Aaron James Mills for the Rabble:

Colonization is not a completed historical fact from which all must simply move on; it is a deliberate, daily violence continuing this moment and anyone promoting that Indigenous peoples are ignorant not to accept this violence as legitimate is at worst, racist; at best, living in a dream palace.

A keen and thoughtful collection of thoughts on Idle No More. Aaron has expertly navigated the topic and his words are certainly worth reading; he is well-versed in the difficult task of respecting complexity. My words do not do his justice, so I suggest reading his for yourself.

Gazing at Seams

Steven Ray Orr — Wed, 26 Dec 2012 00:29:00 PST

Jodie Foster for the Daily Beast:

If I were a young actor today I would quit before I started. If I had to grow up in this media culture, I don’t think I could survive it emotionally. I would only hope that someone who loved me, really loved me, would put their arm around me and lead me away to safety.

The thing that I hate most about this Kristen Stewart / Robert Pattison nonsense is that it has forced me to take Stewart’s side on something.¹ Celebrity culture is a phenomenon that is incredibly damaging to the individuals that are fetishized, to say nothing of society itself. I won’t pretend to be without my heroes, but there is a distinct line between admiration and obsession. We are worse off, as human beings, for our gossipy worship.

Granted, I have never seen the Twilight movies and I actually kind of enjoyed her in Adventureland, but that just gets in the way of the story I’m trying to tell. Nobody ever said that I was guilty of narrative consistency.
↩

Paper Islands

Steven Ray Orr — Tue, 25 Dec 2012 23:52:00 PST

Joshua Keating for Foreign Policy Magazine:

In this era of rising sea levels, it’s not unusual for islands to disappear beneath the surface, but based on depth readings at the site, this island seems never to have existed.

Paper streets were a regular trick of map makers to ensure that their designs were not copied: the placement of roads that didn’t exist to trick up plagiarists. Yet another reason that the map is not the land. I am no good with navigating via street maps anyway, but paper islands? Now I can’t even trust land to be where I expect it? Mine eyes are made the fools o’ the other senses / Or else worth all the rest.

A Brief History of Modern Television

Steven Ray Orr — Mon, 24 Dec 2012 23:12:00 PST

Alan Sepinwall for Grantland:

The story of Lost makes no sense.

Neither did the story of the story of Lost. I had always known that it was improbable that it ever got made, but I didn’t know just quite how improbable. Alan has carefully worked through the “important” series’ of recent television history – Lost being one of them – and explained why and how they changed the medium. If his explorations of Battlestar Galactica and Breaking Bad are anywhere near as good as this, the book is going to be well worth picking up.

Earth Below

Steven Ray Orr — Thu, 06 Dec 2012 11:49:00 PST

Bill Nye for Big Think:

If you want to deny evolution and live in your world, in your world that’s completely inconsistent with everything we observe in the universe, that’s fine, but don’t make your kids do it because we need them. We need scientifically literate voters and taxpayers for the future. We need people that can—we need engineers that can build stuff, solve problems.

We have to live in the world. Regardless of what you believe about tomorrow, regardless of where you believe we originated, regardless of your spirituality, your religion, and your mythology. We have to live in this site of physics and biology, where gravity operates and species evolve. This earth is our home and we exist here, now. It serves us no good to pretend otherwise or claim that that which we experience here is false. Our theory of gravity may not be true, but it is our current best explanation of the world – in such a way that we are able to build skyscrapers and land robots on Mars. So too of evolution which has led us to better understandings of biodiversity, of agriculture, of health and medicine.

While it matters a great deal what you believe of the world beyond this world, that does not absolve you of your responsibility to this world. “Science” is our collected best answers to the questions of this universe in which we currently live. To not “believe” in it is not some form of noble skepticism nor is it a show of faithful devotion. It is willful ignorance of one of the most basic of truths of the universe, a fact that comes even before worship and God: we live in this world. Heaven above requires earth below.

Why I Tweet

Steven Ray Orr — Thu, 06 Dec 2012 11:36:00 PST

Matt Haughey:

There’s no memory at Twitter: everything is fleeting.

Facebook is dedicated to remembering; the purpose of Twitter is living.

Total Recall (2012)

Steven Ray Orr — Tue, 04 Sep 2012 10:50:00 PDT

From the Zhuangzi:

Once Zhuangzi dreamt he was a butterfly, a butterfly flitting and fluttering around, happy with himself and doing as he pleased. He didn’t know he was Zhuangzi. Suddenly he woke up and there he was, solid and unmistakable Zhuangzi. But he didn’t know if he was Zhuangzi who had dreamt he was a butterfly, or a butterfly dreaming he was Zhuangzi. Between Zhuangzi and a butterfly there must be some distinction! This is called the transformation of things.

Rene Descartes was a French philosopher far removed from the Taoist Zhuangzi, but he was likewise concerned with this transformation of things. He sought to establish a philosophical groundwork based only in absolutely certain principles: Cartesian doubt. He posited that since our beliefs are malleable and they change over time, they can not be used to reliably determine truth; he further suggested that our own senses, despite seeming definitive and true, cannot always be trusted to be a measure of the real world; and because there were situations wherein our experiences were false, he wanted to remove experience from the realm of philosophy. To do this, he suggested the existence of an insidious demon capable of filling our minds with dreams that appear with all the vividness of reality.¹

All of the best science fiction is allegory. The canon is filled with carnival mirrors that reflect distorted versions of ourselves, stories that tell us how to live through the lenses of possible tomorrows.

Orson Scott Card’s Speaker for the Dead is a parable for our own relations to each other, but explored as a question of xenology — beautifully told through the paired narratives of the alien Pequeninos and the all too human Rebeira family.

The symbolism in Frank Herbert’s Dune brings forth questions about resource economics, about hero worship, about destiny and free will. His universe was separated from ours by both time and distance, but characters were faced with problems that spoke to the humanity that we shared with them.

Paul Verhoeven’s original Total Recall is an exercise in epistemology that reminds us of Descartes’ demon, the imagined creature able to fill our minds with dreams that had the appearance of reality. But where we may have trouble admitting the possibility of Descartes’ demon, there is little such difficulty for Quaid as he is quickly made to accept the reality of Rekall’s claims. So the film becomes an excellent thought experiment where the character is forced to make choices that would make sense if one reality is true and be absolute lunacy if it is not. To this day, there is still debate over whether Total Recall’s final moments² are an admittance of unreality or a decision to accept that the truth of the situation does not matter — Quaid is, for the first time, perfectly happy and how important is it that his happiness be brought about from actual events instead of a virtual reality.

Total Recall (2012) is a reflection of Verhoeven’s movie bounced off a pair $500 Ray-Bans. At times, there are horrible, hideous shades of the original film, but they pale in comparison. A remake should take elements and inspiration from its predecessor to craft an updated story that speaks to the new audience watching it. Total Recall (2012) is an action movie that barely succeeds at that genre, let alone living up to the science fiction elements or the philosophical questions of the film that birthed it: at no point are we made to question which reality the character is living in; at no point do we marvel at the vastness of the constructed film world; and at no point do we actually care about any of the characters, the situations that they find themselves in, or the grand narrative themes of the film.

Total Recall (2012) is a failure as a film and the only reason that you would choose to watch the Wiseman remake over the original is if you had an affinity for Colin Farrell and Jessica Biel or, I suppose, if you had an entire hemisphere of your brain violently removed.

Decartes’ Meditations on First Philosophy:

I will suppose therefore that not God, who is supremely good and the source of truth, but rather some malicious demon of the utmost power and cunning has employed all his energies in order to deceive me. I shall think that the sky, the air, the earth, colours, shapes, sounds an all external things are merely the delusions of dreams which he has devised to ensnare my judgment.

↩

                   MELINA
               (overwhelmed)
         Quaid, I can't believe it...
         It's like a dream.

On hearing her words, Quaid’s expression turns grim and confused.

                  MELINA (CONT'D)
         What's wrong?

                  QUAID
         I just has a terrible thought...
         What if this is all a dream?

                  MELINA
         Then kiss me quick...
         before you wake up.

↩

We Are All Canucks

Steven Ray Orr — Fri, 31 Aug 2012 23:52:00 PDT

Harrison Mooney for Puck Daddy:

If we’re being fair, the most essential aspects of Canuck fandom are pessimism and self-loathing. In the 41 years of this franchise, very little has gone our way and it’s gotten to us. We’ve become oversensitive. Our fuse is short. It can make us our own worst enemy, such as that one time we rioted.

And also that other time.

As a recently converted Canucks fan it is nice to be reminded of the depth and breadth of the team’s history. For many of us, there is more to hockey than sticks on ice and pucks in nets; the Canucks are an important part of Vancouver and British Columbia. It is not just the fans that are defined by the team, but also the city and the province. “We are all Canucks” is as much a reminder of our shared identity as it is a supportive rallying cry. We are, whether we like it our not, shaped by those around us and cannot help but be transformed by proximity. It is the nature of the human being.

That being said, I am not advocating that we treat the history of the Canucks with the same significance of our country and our peoples, but it is a narrative about our heritage and it does mean something. As with all stories, that is enough to make it worthy of the telling and Harrison Mooney proves himself an excellent historian.

Neil Armstrong, 1930-2012

Steven Ray Orr — Wed, 29 Aug 2012 23:38:00 PDT

From the family of Neil Armstrong:

While we mourn the loss of a very good man, we also celebrate his remarkable life and hope that it serves as an example to young people around the world to work hard to make their dreams come true, to be willing to explore and push the limits, and to selflessly serve a cause greater than themselves.

The moon was beautiful tonight. Clouds tried to hide it, but the need to illuminate was too great, a reminder of the immensity and scale of the world beyond our charts and maps.

The death of Neil Armstrong is such a strange marker for our species: he was but one of the human beings that touched that piece of heaven. Eleven others have that opportunity, but we remember one man. He symbolized something greater than the successful completion of a race: Neil Armstrong represents our capacity to dream beyond ourselves, to imagine that which is not a part of us as within our power to attain. First we believed that the moon, the stars were more than lights above us and then we reached up to grasp them. We gathered stardust with our hands.

Because of Neil Armstrong, our children know the vastness of our potential. They look up at the moon and, realizing what is possible, dream of standing amidst the stars. One day, in the not-distant future, one of those children will be part of Armstrong I and mirror his steps on Mars, further forging our pathway through the stars.

I can’t wait.

Assange Is No Tragic Hero

Steven Ray Orr — Wed, 22 Aug 2012 13:55:00 PDT

Ravi Somaiya for the New York Times:

Beyond the reach of police officers waiting to arrest him and with hundreds of supporters looking on, Julian Assange, the founder of WikiLeaks, took to the balcony of Ecuador’s embassy here on Sunday to condemn the United States government and cast himself as one of the world’s most persecuted whistle-blowers.

The dramatic form of tragedy makes art out of suffering. Aeschylus pained Agamemnon and Orestes for the beauty of his Oresteia; Antigone had to choose between the laws of men and the Law; and Plato documented the trial of Socrates in order to showcase justice, both the miscarriage and the celebration of it. Of these figures, only Antigone and Socrates share a common bond: their obligation to a force that is beyond themselves. But of these figures, which should be praised and which should be scorned?

When Orestes avenges his father’s murder, we are supposed to praise his sense of duty and courageousness, but Orestes was not even sure that his actions were righteous. It is only after he holds the bloodstained robes of Agamemnon that he knows he has done good. Even the action of matricide itself is hardly worth of note, because Orestes believes he will be absolved of the crime. Simply put, Orestes stayed off of the grass because a sign told him too.

It is only in The Eumenides that we get our first glimpse of the tragic circumstances of Orestes and that is only because he must outrun the consequences of his actions: Clytemnestra’s summoning of the furies, but this is hardly the tragedy, because Orestes is simply getting what he should have expected of his crime. His suffering, as represented by the furies, is a manifestation of his own guilt.

Agamemnon thinks his kingly obligations allow him to shirk his fatherly duties and trade the life of his daughter to honor the gods. Orestes believes himself the sole keeper of the laws of men (in punishing Aegisthus for adultery) and the Law (in avenging his father by killing his mother). Antigone and Socrates are polar opposites to the House of Atreus. They are each bound, not merely by the creed of a king or the word of the gods, but by an obligation that has absolute rule over both. Their tragedy is that they both know their places in the world and suffer for it.

Antigone knows that she is Creon’s subject, but she also knows that she is first subject to something greater: to truth. Her brother must be buried, because it is the place of all human beings to end up in the ground. We are born and our lives can be as free as we desire, but when we die we are to return to the earth.

This act also serves to showcase the hubris of Creon. He may be king, but he is also a man and it is a Law far above him that he breaks in ordering the public display of Polynices. When he punishes Antigone for upholding the law, he is claiming that his rules are more important and is then punished himself, losing his son and wife before falling to madness.

Antigone and Socrates are tragic heroes because they, in recognizing their obligation to truth and answering the call, are punished. They do not attempt to escape or talk their way out of their situations: they have acted for the Law, but against the law and must face the consequences of those actions.

They suffer and ultimately die for doing the right thing. Does every answer to the call of truth have to end in death? Not necessarily, but for every Rosa Parks there is a Martin Luther King, Jr.; for every William Du Bois, there is a Malcom X. Speaking truth to power is always a dangerous exercise, but for some the call is too loud to ignore. These grand figures, with those of Antigone and Socrates, have not left behind guidelines on how to capitalize on moments of truth or beauty, because there are none. Sophocles and Plato simply remind us that, even amidst our strangely relentless struggle against the universe, there is something greater than ourselves.

Justice as Naturalization

Steven Ray Orr — Fri, 17 Aug 2012 23:39:00 PDT

Mike Danton for Gong Show Gear:

Burning wood flaking apart and turning into hot, scolding coals. I find myself adding wood every thirty minutes or so to feed my addiction for smores. I have less than four weeks before I head to the UK for my second professional season since being released from prison. I have not been this excited for a hockey season since my year in St. Louis.

Mike’s history as a professional hockey player is complicated and involves an estranged and abusive father, an agent accused of child molestation, and a drug-inspired attempt kill one of them with a hitman met through a friend of a friend. He pleaded guilty to the crime, spent time in prison for it, and was paroled due to his complete rehabilitation — which involved taking correspondence university courses towards a degree, getting his first aid certification, and a considerable amount of therapy. He went to prison as an incredibly sick young man that was desperately in need of help, but had neither the family nor the friends to see his pain; with his jail time he made use of the opportunity to get a formal education, to develop into an adult, and to better himself as both a citizen and a human bring.

This is the ideal form of justice. The purpose should not be to prevent criminals from reoffending, instead it should be a process by which they are transformed into people who would not want to break the law, into people that would view themselves as incapable of breaking the law. It should be designed to build character, to establish maturity, and to naturalize those who fallen out of society.¹ I grant that prison as punishment serves as somewhat of a deterrence, but such a system does not acknowledge the unique position of incarceration to influence some of the most in need members of our society.

I do not know whether Mike has the skills required to be an NHL-caliber player in the current league, but I think that his barrier to entry should be based on that question alone and not a criminal action that was committed by an incredibly different individual. The justice system has already worked and it is harmful to continue punishing him despite his ability to change — harmful to him, harmful to us, and harmful to the fabric of our civilized society. He has proved himself worthy enough to return to our community, now we should see if he can prove himself worthy to return to hockey. He should have the opportunity and it should be possible and we, as a society, should not stand in the way.

(Via Puck Daddy)

While naturalization is generally thought of as the admittance of foreigners into citizenship, I tend to think of it as the transformation of foreigners into citizens. In this sense, it seems fitting to use immigration terminology when speaking of the justice system — as long as one views criminals as individuals who have broken themselves against the law, as opposed to individuals who have broken a law. In this way, criminals have stopped being citizens, have broken the social contract when they are found guilty. This imagining has difficulties of its own particularly when it comes to the rights and freedoms, so it needs to be further thought through. Consider: arguments such as this have been used heavily in recent years to detain suspected terrorists, commit warrantless surveillance, and kill enemy combatants.
↩

We Are People, Always

Steven Ray Orr — Thu, 16 Aug 2012 23:59:00 PDT

Chris Sprow for the Morning News:

People in mental hospitals are pretty normal. In fact, they’re just like my family. They’re quiet, or loud, moody, addicted to drugs. They hold grudges. They have all of our tendencies, but they recognize their problems and want to fix them.

We are people, always — even when have fallen down, even when we are not well, even when we seem not to be. It is our failure to recall this simple truth that accounts for most of the discord between human beings. We would do well to remind ourselves of that phrase — “we are people, always” — before speaking out in anger, in hate, in anything but understanding.

The Labor of Thine Hands

Steven Ray Orr — Mon, 13 Aug 2012 20:09:00 PDT

John Rogers:

I type for a living, and my stupid little typing creates a couple hundred jobs. I’m an actual job creator, which was the last damn thing anybody expected when I started telling jokes in bars. And I don’t think that raising my tax rate by 3.4% so you, my fellow citizen, won’t lose your … house when your kid gets cancer, or maybe we get a functioning power grid or roads that wouldn’t be substandard in ZIMBABWE is “socialism”. It’s basic. Goddam. Decency.

So long have we been told that we are owed the fruits of our labour that we have forgotten that fruit grows on trees, that this planet has not been parcelled off into acres and plots ready for us to stake claim to. We fight each other over imaginary lines because we believe that this land can be owned and cultivated into possessions that belong to us. “This is mine” creates the individual, creates the human being that is capable of seeing itself as separate from the world. By all of this, we are made to be alone.

This is a loneliness that we feel in our souls, it is an emptiness that cannot be made full by the amount of this world that we claim to hold dominion over. Pile all of your possessions together and they will have made nothing more than a pile. We do become greater by the size of our houses nor the models of our cars; we are not made superior by virtue of our acquisitions nor by the balances of our bank accounts.

We have forgotten the fable of Midas, of his insatiable prayer and his great abundance. He who desired to be the wealthiest of the world and, to his eternal misfortune, gathered riches aplenty. Like us, he too was filled with pride by the measure of his prosperity, but at the end he found himself starving and alone.

We should seek after better notions than that.

We should seek to be better people than that.

"Maybe catharsis is all we have"

Steven Ray Orr — Wed, 08 Aug 2012 20:54:00 PDT

Patrick Symmes for Outside Magazine:

It’s amazing what you notice on the 38th replay of a surveillance tape, running the grainy recording backward and forward, pausing and advancing. Sometimes I’d back the tape up to before the 17 minutes that changed my life. All the way back to the part where I still had a bicycle.

Never before has bike thievery been so interesting.

Theft is one of those problems that I wish I could point to someone and blame, “you should be held responsible”, but poverty and capital are strongly linked. We have poor people for the same reason that we have rich people: our economic system of capitalism. Neither end of the financial spectrum should be accountable for the nature of that system, but each believes that the other is the wrongdoer and treat them with disgust or anger: “the poor are only so because of their own laziness”; “the rich build their fortunes at the expense of others”.

It is incredibly rare for warfare to be a useful solution regardless of the problem; class warfare is no exception.

Signals and Noise

Steven Ray Orr — Mon, 06 Aug 2012 00:55:00 PDT

Roshan Choxi:

This post isn’t about politics, it’s about noise. I realize there’s some irony in the medium of this message being a blog post. I’m not advocating that you pack up canned beans and a Snuggie and go off the grid, just turn down the noise in your life.

We all frequently make claims of busyness, that our time is somehow full, but how much of each day is spent ignoring the signal in favor of the noise? We stay caught up on timelines and tweets, on gossip masquerading as news and news that we have no need for. The Internet brought about the 24-hour news cycle, but that is simply another symptom of the same disease: information overload. There is too much data available; the human being has been overwhelmed by technologies of access. It is suggested that this information serves a purpose that is worthy and has value: entertainment — which is another way of saying that it is keeping us occupied.

Humans beings are so much better than hedonism; this is not how we are made great. Self-indulgence may be a way of living, but it is certainly not a life.

Curiosity

Steven Ray Orr — Sun, 05 Aug 2012 22:33:00 PDT

NASA.gov:

NASA’s Curiosity rover has landed on Mars! Its descent-stage retrorockets fired, guiding it to the surface. Nylon cords lowered the rover to the ground in the “sky crane” maneuver. When the spacecraft sensed touchdown, the connecting cords were severed, and the descent stage flew out of the way. The time of day at the landing site is mid-afternoon – about 3 p.m. local Mars time at Gale Crater. The time at JPL’s mission control is about 10:31 p.m. Aug. 5 PDT (early morning EDT).

Democratic Illusions

Steven Ray Orr — Sat, 04 Aug 2012 11:30:00 PDT

Rebecca Traister for The New York Times:

There simply was never going to be a liberal messiah whose powers could transcend the limits set by a democracy this packed with regressive obstructionists. That doesn’t mean we can’t hope for, seek and demand better from politicians and presidents. But we can’t spend our time focused on alternate realities in which our country, its systems and its climate are not what they are.

While I am constantly frustrated when conservatives claim that President Obama has not achieved anything meaningful with his presidency, I can at least understand it: they are lying with the purpose of getting their candidates elected.¹ That same explanation falls apart for progressives as there is no such reason for such their dishonesty. Health care, clean energy, the Iraq war, Hate Crimes legislation, “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell”, financial regulation. Those are just the areas that immediately come to mind when thinking about major Democratic Party policies that President Obama has implemented.

The problem goes back to the fundamental difference between Democrats and Republicans: liberals are interested in changing existing social, political and economic structures for the express purpose of creating of a new country that is better than the one we live in; conservatives tend to believe that our historical roots and ideals should be strictly adhered to, that modern policies should be built within the framework of the existing foundations. It is a dichotomy of progress and tradition that is hardly unique to politics, but it is proving extremely difficult for Democrats to navigate. The liberal promise is of an idealistic future, but it fails to make clear that this paradise is a long-term goal and will take continued effort before the culture itself is transformed. It does not even define how that future would look instead leaving that to each individual, which cements an expectation that cannot possible be fulfilled: the reality is never as appealing as the illusion, particularly when we create those illusions ourselves.

If you take umbrage with “lying”, feel free to replace it with a more kind word that still gets across the point that they are misrepresenting his accomplishments — some of which they actually agree with.
↩

A Reminder of Courage

Steven Ray Orr — Sat, 04 Aug 2012 10:47:00 PDT

Bella English for The Boston Globe:

“Dad, you might as well face it,’’ Wayne recalls Jonas saying. “You have a son and a daughter.’’

That early declaration marked, as much as any one moment could, the beginning of a journey that few have taken, one the Maineses themselves couldn’t have imagined until it was theirs. The process of remaking a family of identical twin boys into a family with one boy and one girl has been heartbreaking and harrowing and, in the end, inspiring.

This is a story about a child and a family that show astounding bravery; it has been in my queue for months, because I have been trying to find a way to talk about it, trying to come up with words to express my thoughts. After rereading it today, I realize that it does not need my voice added to it — it speaks for itself.

Verpixelungsrecht

Steven Ray Orr — Tue, 31 Jul 2012 11:11:00 PDT

Jeff Jarvis in his book, Public Parts:

When the adulterated Street View debuted, I was less amused than appalled. I took to my blog, crying, “Germany, what have you done? You have digitally desecrated your cities.” Navigating a lovely German landscape online, one is suddenly assaulted with a fog of pixels obscuring the public view.

The Internet has forever changed privacy. We expect for the things that we do in our online spaces to be hidden and private, despite the open nature of these social networks: Twitter profiles are, most often, completely unlocked; Facebook updates are shared with hundreds of “friends”; Instagram geo-tags personal photos and sends them to public timelines. And once something has been placed online it is often permanently available — even if the user chooses to delete it, because it was once part of the public realm.

Do not take this to be an outcry about the tyranny of Google or Facebook; we have brought about this loss of solitude with our desire for the complimentary. We have given up our freedom in favor of free products, but we have done so willingly. We do not give money in exchange for Facebook or Gmail, so those companies must seek their profits elsewhere. This is the nature of capitalism and, while it may be possible to go back to the older model of simple exchange, we seem perfectly content with the return that we get for our privacy.

The Internet has transformed the very nature of the human being without necessarily changing the perceptions that we hold about ourselves. We still seem to believe that the right to freedom is absolute, despite the frequency with which we give it up.

Springboarding

Steven Ray Orr — Mon, 30 Jul 2012 22:48:00 PDT

Anthony Kay:

There’s more to writing a book than typing words on screen and applying a virtual binding to the result. You need to actually tell an interesting and compelling story or series of stories.

My site is, quite obviously, not meant to be considered with the same expectations that would come with a novel or non-fiction collection. That being said, I try to ensure that I am proud of everything on it;¹ my steadfast aim is to be interesting and compelling.

When I point you towards another website, it is my way of recommending the words of another writer — or, as I make explicitly clear, it is my way of attacking what I perceive to be as nonsense. When I write about a video game or a television show, I share with you my experience of that medium; it is a recommendation of sorts, but it is also meant to be an entirely personal response to a piece of art. These are both methods of stacking words upon art in an effort to create more art; using the thoughts of another as a springboard for my own, aiming towards beauty. I probably fail more often than I succeed, but at least I am being honest with my intentions.

(Via The Loop)

Which is one reason that there is no manner of public commenting available.
↩

The Elder Scrolls V: Skyrim

Steven Ray Orr — Sun, 29 Jul 2012 16:20:00 PDT

He is not my first dragon. He may not even be my fortieth dragon. The Elder Scrolls V: Skyrim is, after all, high fantasy and enormous, fire-breathing lizards are par for the course. When once I ran from these beasts, now I am a veteran dragon slayer and choose to seek them out for experience and profit. My usual strategy involves throwing fireballs while the serpentine creature circles above and eventually, if it is foolish enough to land nearby, I will leap onto its head and drive my mace through its skull. Yes, it has been a long time since I feared these pinnacles of the fantasy genre and the one flying above me is no exception. In fact, it is proving to be more an irritation than anything else as I was in the middle of gathering herbs for an alchemical project that I am in the midst of. You read that right. I have reduced this beautiful and complexly layered game to a flower-picking simulator that keeps rudely being interrupted by the presence of hostile monsters.

My roommate recently requested that I take Skyrim from him and hide the disk, believing himself too weak to actively walk away from the addictive nature of a horticulture simulation. Instead of learning from his weakness and examining my own tendencies with the game, I have taken it upon myself to double my hours spent in Tamriel — video gaming for two, as it were. He does not approve, although that has more to do with my complete disregard for the actual plot of the game. “Don’t you want to know what happens?” he asks while I organize my imaginary bookshelves yet again. He does not understand.

Skyrim contains within it an entire country to explore — not a whole world, mind you, as in the prior Elder Scrolls games we already charted the deserts and cliffs of Hammerfall and High Rock; we have visited the once-uncultivated Imperial Province; and we have seen the volcanic Red Mountain of Morrowind. In Skyrim we are brought to the northern territory of a much greater continent, but at no point does it feel small. There is a history here, some of it obvious and some of it hinted, that stretches back centuries to times when ancient heroes and villains walked the snowscape, when bloody wars were fought over succession and independence, and when mere mortals ascended to divinity. This is the backdrop into which you are thrust and wherein the game asks you to usher in the next era of Skyrim province to add to the already complex tapestry that makes up past events.

While it is hardly innovative for a game to have earth-shattering stakes and grand heroes that will be remembered throughout the ages, Skyrim is so incredible because of the sheer optionality of being that hero: it asks you to save the world, but does not force the issue. Video games have a tendency towards railroading the player into the plot, demanding that they experience their stories in an entirely linear fashion with the occasional illusory choice. This is not to say that there is anything wrong with this kind of storytelling; it is no more bad than the manner in which the novel explores a narrative is bad. Open-world games like Grand Theft Auto and Mass Effect do allow the player to escape the sequential plot, but there are strict limitations on what can be done that serve to make the game world seems much smaller than the scope that it pretends to inhabit. You are, at all times, in hero mode. Even when there are opportunities for side missions, they tend to mirror the gameplay of the main plot, but in Skyrim the Dragonborn quests are but a small sliver of the possible undertakings: players are free to join various guilds and explore the relationships therein; one can contract vampirism or lycanthropy, feeding¹ and hunting as creatures of the night; players can undertake the Sacred Trials or recover the Daedric artifacts or seek out the Dragon Priests or, or, or. And these are just some of the quest-based activities. Which brings us back to horticulture simulations.

I used to believe that I played video games for the same reason that I read books or watched movies: to follow a narrative, to fall in love with beautiful characters, and to experience a world unlike my own. Of those three, it is only the last that Skyrim comes close to — and even then it is only true because my in-game adventures are occasionally delayed by bandits or dragons, an annoyance that does not seem possible in the surroundings beyond my controller. While I have completed many quests and explored many dungeons, I have spent as much, if not more, time doing what can only be described as video game chores. Pursuing alchemy serves me little purpose in the game, as there are only three types of potions that I have used in the entirety of my adventures. Collecting armor and weapons seems mildly helpful, but is proven useless when paired with my stockpiles of gems and books and foods that are gathered and sorted only to sit in cabinets and on bookshelves. I even go out of my way to visit each location that presents itself for the express purpose of having a full map of Skyrim. I have, much to my dismay, become a bore.

None of this is to say that I am bored by the game. I still find pleasure in my experiences within its world and I actively choose to play Skyrim over other enjoyable activities, but I am so completely underwhelmed by the primary narrative that I have eschewed it so that I could discover one of my own, one that has been crafted between myself and the game world. This is not the passive storytelling of movies or novels, nor is it the carefully tailored interaction of most video games; this is an artistic process wherein the player is also a creator. It is the connection of found stories to form a entirely personal narrative that trumps whatever fiction Skyrim’s authors wrote.

This is similar to the procedurally generated world of Minecraft which is designed with almost no semblance of authorial intent.² Certainly there is meaning to be found within these structures, but the stories that these video games construct are entirely relative to the people that are brought into them and so the significance is wholly subjective. While the results are similar, there is an important difference between these two games: Skyrim tried to tell a compelling story. Money, time, and energy were committed to the process. There were people hired for the express purpose of creating the definitive plot of the game, to make it meaningful and worthy of attention, but I had no qualms about ignoring their work in favor of stealing cheese from giants. Despite this, Skyrim is not a resounding failure in the sense of telling a particular story — truthfully, it is about average for a video game. Furthermore, there are wonderful plots within it, worthy of being followed and the writers have proven themselves able to evoke differing emotions. The reason that I am singling out the narrative is that it stands in stark comparison to the rest of the game into which players have sunk hundreds of hours.

Autonomy in video games is rare, because of how incredibly difficult it is to allow players the number of options that will make them feel free. Often, this is overcome by simply accounting for the most obvious possibilities, but this poor execution creates an illusion of in-game freedom and serves only as a source of frustration when players realize that they have been tricked. We come to understand that the game world is limited despite the promise of autonomy. The illusion is shattered. There are only a few edge cases where players will permit being restricted: Skyrim does not allow the killing of children, which we accept for moral reasons, nor does it allow the destruction of our environments, which we accept as a technical limitation. Beyond these examples, players are free to interact with Tamriel as they desire — until we follow the main storyline.

Skyrim tries desperately to be two different video games: in one, it is an open-sandbox that allows players to create their own story within a beautiful game world; in the other, it is an attempt at epic fantasy that weaves together dragons, political machinations, and a destined hero. These two games are not compatible with each other and, when paired together, serve only to undermine the intentions of the other. None of this is to say that Skyrim is a bad game — it is, most certainly, the best entry in the already fantastic Elder Scrolls series — but it could be so much better.

How would fans react if Bethesda were to announce that The Elder Scrolls VI would have no overarching story, no heroic and fated protagonist, and no stakes that held the entire world in the balance? What would you say if the next game took all the resources that would be spent on crafting the main storyline and transfered them into making the game world fuller? Would players still jump at the chance to craft their own stories in this next instance of Tamriel?

The answers to those questions depends entirely on what you believe made Skyrim so great. Personally? I would just hope that the collector’s edition comes with a fresh pair of gardening gloves. Look out, flowers, here I come!

It is possible to feed upon your indentured bodyguards and loved ones as they sleep, safe in the home you share with them. The sheer evil of this possibility was overwhelmed only by my curiosity as to what the consequences of such terrible attention to one’s vows and bonds. I could hardly blame these people if they were to leave me, the monster that I have become, but instead, most horrifying of all, they do not seem to think anything of it. Yes, your spouse will have absolutely no complaints if you choose to regularly sate your vampiric hunger with their flesh. A lack of regard for the details or a measure of love and devotion? Take it as you will.
↩
As I understand it, a manner of completion was added to the game in the form of a dimension called “The End” with a final boss known as “The Ender Dragon”. It is as if Notch included it simply to mock Minecraft’s detractors: “You want a reason to play the game? Here! There’s even an achievement to go along with winning the game. It’s called ‘The End’. Now go away.”
↩

Adaptation Versus Inspiration

Steven Ray Orr — Tue, 24 Jul 2012 23:54:00 PDT

Mark Ciocco:

Does The Dark Knight Rises succumb to the [weight of expectation]? Perhaps, but it’s as good as I could have ever expected. It’s certainly miles ahead of [Spider-Man 3 and X-Men: The Last Stand], even if it doesn’t quite reach the heights of its predecessor. It’s worth taking a look at why The Dark Knight was so successful. To my mind, it’s because that movie transcended its origins.

Piecing together my own thoughts on the film is proving difficult — for a number of reasons, not the least of which is the horrific shooting in Aurora, Colorado — but I am trying to organize myself in such a way that I, at the very least, sound coherent. Until I can manage that, I suggest you check out the rest of Mark’s piece. It is an excellent review of The Dark Knight Rises as well as an examination of final movie and where it stands in relation to other adaptations from comic books.

The Things You Own

Steven Ray Orr — Mon, 23 Jul 2012 19:52:00 PDT

The Economist:

Dichter concluded that it wasn’t exactly the smell or price or look or feel of the soap, but all that and something else besides—that is, the gestalt or “personality” of the soap.

This was a big idea. Dichter understood that every product has an image, even a “soul”, and is bought not merely for the purpose it serves but for the values it seems to embody. Our possessions are extensions of our own personalities.

In our journey to adulthood, we may give up our security blankets and teddy bears, but that hardly means that we overcome the very notion of relating to the world around us. Our connection with objects does not disappear, it changes and grows more complex and intimate. We bond with books and cars and picture frames, believing that they tell stories about who we are as people: “these are the things I like, the things that hold my history”.

It is self-definition; it is storytelling; it is the creation of personal mythologies. The products we buy define us and there are examples aplenty: in choosing to drink Starbucks coffee, we become the kind of people who go to Starbucks, adding ourselves to a group that is marked by this commonality; likewise, we all have heard someone proclaim, full of self-righteousness, that they would “never eat at McDonald’s”, describing themselves by the products that they would not deign to use.

We are who we are by our choices, but we regularly forget the width and depth of what it is that we do choose. We live haphazardly, from moment to moment, without deliberation. We buy for convenience. We buy for price. We buy without regard for the kind of people that we are becoming through our purchases. The things that we own begin to own us, begin to tell stories about us that we had no intention of making true.

This is not to say that thrift is foolishness or that convenience is without value. As in most of my preaching, this is a matter of the examined life. Live deliberately; with the discussion of virtue and the life of enquiry.¹ We have these minds capable of thought and self-definition, so use them. Look around and ask yourself what stories your possessions tell about you.

Plato’s Apology:

It is the greatest good for a human every day to discuss virtue and the other things, about which you hear me talking and examining myself and everybody else, and that life without enquiry is not worth living for a human.

↩

First They Came...

Steven Ray Orr — Thu, 19 Jul 2012 23:12:00 PDT

As far as I am concerned, the last word on the Daniel Tosh Incident can be had by Lindy West for Jezebel:

At no point in time will some shimmery grandpa-of-the-future say, ‎”When I was your age, Timmy, we had these things called ‘jokes.’ But then they came for our rape humor and our racism, so comedy died and chuckles were abolished.” I’m pretty sure there are a couple of jokes out there that don’t involve a lady getting raped.

Learn, Think, Speak

Steven Ray Orr — Thu, 19 Jul 2012 13:52:00 PDT

Philip Hofstetter:

Until you know all the facts, until you were there, on the ladder holding a hose trying to extinguish the flames, until then, you don’t have the right to assume that you’d do better.

The world we live in is incredibly complicated.

We live in a culture of criticism wherein we feel entitled to speak on any topic that strikes our fancy. This is a right that we believe inherent to our democracy. Opinion overrides education; an emotional plea trumps an informed one; many loud voices drown out one that is knowledgable.

I do not pretend to be innocent of this, but I do my best to speak with authority only on the topics that I am an authority on. This is not to say that it is impossible to become an expert from the comfort of your armchair, just that we should acknowledge that the world is complicated and one can never be too informed. Learn, think, and speak. But do so in that order.

The Limits of Comedy

Steven Ray Orr — Tue, 17 Jul 2012 22:05:00 PDT

John Seavey for MightyGodKing:

This is one of those things that I’m going to act all self-righteous about, because yes, I am better than someone who thinks it’s okay to threaten a woman with sexual assault when she says a comedian isn’t funny. It’s not that high of a bar.

While my sense of humor can hardly be considered friendly, I have found the Daniel Tosh Incident to be a particularly damning indictment of our culture. Not the joke itself — although it was outrageously inappropriate, even in the context of a stand up routine. He should not have said it, but I will accept it as an impromptu response to being shouted at during a show. Not approve, not forgive. I simply accept that Tosh felt the way he claims that he did. Which is what permits me to accept his apologies as actually apologetic.

My frustration is with the various defenders, far removed from the heat of the moment, that feel obligated to condone his actions. It was wrong. There are no situations wherein a comic is allowed to do that. Excuse it as an accident or a temporary lapse of judgment, if you must defend the character of a comedian best known for making a clip show of YouTube videos, but do not pretend that the man is somehow justified in suggesting, even in a lousy attempt at humor, that a woman in the audience should be raped. It was wrong and I feel absolutely no shame in acting self-righteous about this.

Feminist Star Wars

Steven Ray Orr — Tue, 10 Jul 2012 23:03:00 PDT

While we are on the topic, John Seavey also wrote an excellent feminist reimagining of Star Wars Episode V: The Empire Strikes Back:

The point of all this? Only that it is possible to handle Leia as an active, decisive, intelligent, emotionally-mature female character without losing the essential plot of ‘Empire’. The fact that they didn’t do this isn’t a reflection of some insoluble plot conundrum, it’s a reflection of laziness and a reliance on stereotypes of female behavior on the part of the writers.

Did I mention that he tends not to pull punches?

Adding To The Canon

Steven Ray Orr — Tue, 10 Jul 2012 21:06:00 PDT

No matter the works involved, it is heresy to reimagine the canon. Just think of the outrage there would be if someone were to remake Total Recall or radically transform the plays of the Bard. Audiences would riot and the streets would become rivers running red with blood.

Oh. Wait.

If Romeo & Juliet can become West Side Story and Total Recall (1990) can become Total Recall (2012), no works are sacred enough to be spared. To that effect, John Seavey has suggested alternative responses to the most important moment in the Star Wars saga¹:

Instead of fighting to redeem Vader, Luke would be fighting against his own self-doubt. Both his mentors lied to him. The man who showed him a wider universe turns out to have deprived him of his first connection to it.

Stories are meant to be told and retold. The good ones, the ones that stand out, evolve into a sort of myth that becomes much bigger than the original.

The most interesting moment in Reign of Fire was when two characters were reenacting the very scene from Empire that John is talking about. Why? Because they are not doing a perfect replication, instead altering it to better fit with a new audience. They could have chosen to create something completely new, but it is an important story from their own childhood that they believe has value and needs to be remembered.

George Lucas believes he is doing this with his recut and remastered versions of the original trilogy, but adding digital background aliens and making clear that Greedo shot first are superficial changes: they do nothing to update the story itself for an audience thirty years removed from the first release. In truth, by licensing the franchise out, Lucas has already done a great deal of work to build Star Wars into a much bigger story and it has become a mythology into itself. Clone Wars, the second trilogy, Knights of the Old Republic, countless novelizations. The scope of the universe that Lucas started has become too vast for any one person to know it at all, let alone take credit for.

This is all to say: there is room enough in Star Wars for John Seavey’s take on the films especially because he has clearly thought these ideas through and does not suggest them without fleshing out their significance to the overall narrative of the series.

Vader: “If you only knew the power of the dark side. Obi-Wan never told you what happened to your father.”
Luke: “He told me enough! He told me you killed him.”
Vader: “No. I am your father.”

↩

Fahrenheit 451

Steven Ray Orr — Mon, 09 Jul 2012 01:03:00 PDT

Mark Ciocco’s thoughts on Fahrenheit 451:

There’s nothing particularly special about the characters or the plotting of the story, but Bradbury’s ideas and style seem to carry the book. Bradbury’s delirious prose evokes a lot of emotion and imagery … It’s not an easy read, perhaps even overly poetic, but in this case it works. The novel is short enough and the ideas behind it are crazy enough that Bradbury’s style fits.

I have always felt that Ray Bradbury was more poet than author; that his words and sentences flowed much more smoothly than those of his futurist contemporaries — Asimov may have written better science and Heinlein may have been grander in scope, but Bradbury wrote more beautifully than either of them.

And he was not concerned with predicting forward in time or in suggesting fantastic technologies. His use of the future, dystopian or otherwise, was a method of exploring the human condition and he crafted stories in an attempt to answer fundamental questions about the nature of being alive. Fahrenheit 451 was not an imagining of the world that could have been, it was an examination of the human being through the lenses of censorship and mass media – not prediction, but allegory.

Mass Effect 3: Extended Cut

Steven Ray Orr — Sat, 07 Jul 2012 12:25:00 PDT

Mass Effect is over. Finally.

With Extended Cut, the trilogy has been completed and an end placed on the story of Commander Shepard. While it is certainly possible that more content will be released and more stories will be told in this universe, Mass Effect 3: Extended Cut finishes a series that has lasted half a decade — a series that did for video game storytelling what the Halo games did for first-person shooters.

Commander Shepard is, despite her intentions or desires, a hero and she is thrust into situations where she is the only person able to prevent the complete destruction of every living creature in the universe. But Mass Effect was also a series about the struggle against forces greater than yourself and against powers well outside of your ability to control: there were events that could not be prevented and there were costs that had to be paid.

While the original Mass Effect game provided players with the ability to make decisions, it was not until the sequels that those choices became significant — they were transformed from simple binaries of good/evil and nice/mean into questions of expedience versus difficulty; of faith versus reason; of desperation versus integrity. Bioware created a universe where players could aim to be anti-heroes or paragons of virtue with room to slide between the two, but they also made actions, and the manner by which they were enacted, have consequences.

It made for an interesting gaming experience. Casual ruthlessness was easy and often fun, but it could have results that spanned the duration of the series; likewise, adhering to virtuous ideals might make the present much more difficult, but later provide benefits that could not have been foreseen at the time. What we did and the way that we did it felt important, because we were able to understand and examine the results of our actions (and inactions).

Which brings us to the ending of Mass Effect 3, wherein all of the decisions we have made prior and all of our original intentions culminate in the ultimate choice of the series: Shepard is responsible for the fate of every creature, every species, and every bit of life in the universe. It can prove to be an incredibly difficult decision — particularly because it toys with some of our fundamental understandings of the game world – and one that will have have effects much grander in scale than any prior action. Regardless of how the player ends the series, Mass Effect 3’s final heroic moments will be tragic, in at least one sense.

One of the problems with this original ending of the game is that, unlike every other moment in the series, the player is given no indication of what the results of that final decision are. We see a few vague cutscenes that seem to indicate only that we have “succeeded”, but not how or why or what is left behind or at what cost. For a series that was so good at providing conclusions, the original ending feels incredibly lack-luster. It was an infuriating end to an otherwise incredible series.

Fortunately, enough fans raised hell until Bioware agreed to release Mass Effect 3: Extended Cut which, although leaving the ultimate decision mostly unchanged, better explained the options and revealed their consequences and, in doing so, they reiterated a major theme of the last two games: that there are not necessarily “right” choices. Can the cost of victory be too great when the battle is on a galactic scale? What use are ideals when the very notion of “life” is at stake? Good people can die, bad people can have the right idea, and the best possible outcome can be different for each individual.

Does Extended Cut resolve the series into a perfect story that will leave each player satisfied and resolved? Of course not. There are still gaping problems with regards to the coherence of the entire Mass Effect 3 finale that are frustrating to anyone interested in the idea of storytelling or narrative structure or a complete product. With regards to those problems with the game, there could be no simple solution: Bioware would have had to create a new ending that completely altered the last scenes of the game. Even then, I would likely still complain that the ending should require some agency from player instead of being a cinematic. It also would not hurt to, in some way, involve the characters that we have come to appreciate and care for through the course of the story – as was done expertly with Mass Effect 2’s suicide mission.

All of this to say that Mass Effect 3: Extended Cut fixed what it could and ignored what it could not. It provided a pretty important piece to a story that easily passed one hundred hours: closure. I was able to walk away from it with resolution to a world that I spent so much time exploring and to the characters that I explored that world with. It is not perfect, but it is an ending; that will have to do.

The Pinnacle of Civilization

Steven Ray Orr — Thu, 05 Jul 2012 23:22:00 PDT

Michele Catalano for American McCarver:

What does bother me about the whole IFOCE (yes, competitive eaters have their own federation) is that the people who partake in this stuff take themselves so seriously as to refer to themselves as athletes. Eating is not a sport.

I had the great misfortune of seeing the Nathan’s Hot Dog Eating Contest while I was out for lunch as, for some reason, my local Boston Pizza thought that a good time involved watching a man named Joey Chestnut attempt to not puke sausages. It was terrifying and disgusting, but I kept finding myself drawn to the horrific images on the screen. I imagine that I was hardly much of a conversationalist, because I was too busy wondering if this is what Plato envisioned when he spoke about his republic: naked wrestling competitions are an entirely appropriate conduct for citizens, but I am not sure if there is a place in the term “civilization” for forcing watery hot dogs down your throat faster than the guy next to you.

It is not enough to simply be free, we should be worthy of that freedom.

Counterfeiting

Steven Ray Orr — Wed, 04 Jul 2012 22:38:00 PDT

David Wolman for Wired:

Kuhl wanted to get back to the simpler (and legal) business of being a graphic artist. But one aspect of the bust stuck in his head: An expert witness from Germany’s central bank had extolled the quality of Kuhl’s forgeries. There was also something poetic, Kuhl thought, about demonstrating to the world that those coveted, almost sacred US dollars were nothing more than intricate images mass-produced on fancy paper.

One can find poetry anywhere, if only you know how to look for it. On the surface, this is simply the story of a criminal interested in getting rich; with an attention to detail, it becomes the romantic tale of an artist who allowed his pursuit of perfection to steer himself into troubled waters.

(Via Hacker News)

Decision Making

Steven Ray Orr — Wed, 04 Jul 2012 01:19:00 PDT

Jan Crawford for CBS News:

The inner-workings of the Supreme Court are almost impossible to penetrate. The court’s private conferences, when the justices discuss cases and cast their initial votes, include only the nine members — no law clerks or secretaries are permitted. The justices are notoriously close-lipped, and their law clerks must agree to keep matters completely confidential.

So much of politics is done with heavy mallets and raised voices — there is no artistry to the House of Representatives — but the ultimate arbiters of law in this country quietly debate the most important issues of the nation in secret. This is not the terrible “justice done in shadows”¹ that we, as a people, should fear; it is simply the process by which the Supreme Court develops arguments into the beautiful (and binding) majority opinions and joint dissents that we eventually read. We are not privy to the conversations between justices that lead to their decisions, because their words have the full force of law: once set, the opinions of the Supreme Court become absolute rules by which all other justice can be measured and applied to. Does that not merit the liberty of time to think and the privacy with which to do so?

“Justice that must be done in shadows is hardly justice at all.”
↩

The Burden of Truth

Steven Ray Orr — Wed, 04 Jul 2012 00:10:00 PDT

Khoi Vinh:

Whatever shape that Sorkin’s [Steve Jobs] screenplay takes, its first duty will always be to itself — that is to say, it must function as entertainment first, and history second. That’s what movies do, and it’s exactly why we enjoy them.

We watch movies to be entertained. We read history books to learn about history. There are times when both can be found in a single source, but creating art is a difficult enough task enough without adding the burden of truth.

The Newsroom

Steven Ray Orr — Tue, 03 Jul 2012 20:34:00 PDT

Regarding the the pilot episode of The Newsroom, Mark Lisanti and Sean Fennessey for Grantland:

Based on the vitriol, I half-expected a rousing smash-cut intro featuring Jeff Daniels lighting Emily Mortimer’s hair on fire while dancing to “Call Me Maybe” as Sam Waterston and Jane Fonda ritually sacrificed a bikini-clad Olivia Munn.

If you expect the second coming of The West Wing, you will be disappointed by The Newsroom. That show was an incredibly rare occurrence as the single greatest factor in its success was timing. The Newsroom is closer to The Social Network than it is to anything else Aaron Sorkin has done, even Sports Night.¹ He has clearly changed as a writer in the last few years and his award nominations prove that it has been for the better. Still, there are vintage Sorkin ideas here: the uncompromising protagonist; a team of amateurs and youngsters against the world; the moral high ground.

I do not have much in the way of complaints, but I would appreciate if Aaron Sorkin let powerful women be powerful instead of dependent on men. And, if he would be so kind, less making fun of the Internet — although if I can only have one, I will take the former.

Overall, the show works — if only because it provides an opportunity to watch Sam Waterson play an absolute drunkard of a human being. To the critics that are complaining about this being yet another Sorkin morality play, consider not watching his shows as this is what he does. Moneyball was the exception and not much of one.

Enough italics for you?
↩

Abraham Lincoln: Vampire Slayer

Steven Ray Orr — Thu, 28 Jun 2012 23:26:00 PDT

History prefers legends to men. It prefers nobility to brutality, soaring speeches to wild deeds. History remembers the battle, but forgets the blood.

The movie delivers exactly what the title promises — in much the same way that Snakes on a Plane did. There are clever twists on Lincoln’s history and some unexpected subtleties to the film, but it is, first and foremost, an action-adventure-alternate-history movie. Either that appeals to you or it does not.

Batman Rising

Steven Ray Orr — Wed, 27 Jun 2012 00:16:00 PDT

In a few weeks, The Dark Knight Rises will come out. I am wary, because The Dark Knight, while a good movie, falls apart after a bit of refrigerator logic: for a man who claims to be an “agent of chaos”, the Joker sure has some incredibly complicated plans – some of which require him to have telepathic powers of deduction. And (while we are on the topic of nonsense leaps that the plot requires us to make) why does Batman need to take the fall for Harvey Dent’s insanity?; why not blame the Joker?; or, if you think some people would find it difficult to believe he could have planned this far in advance (although see above), make up a fake villain and say that Batman saved Commissioner Gordon’s family? If we’re already committed to making up a story and getting a bunch of people in on the conspiracy, why not make up a more useful one?

Still, I am excited. Batman has always been favourite superhero and Lamar Henderson reminds me why:

Bruce Wayne hates Batman. He hates that he has to use this weapon he has created, and wishes that people like Harvey Dent would be successful and make the world a better place.

Most of all, Bruce hates himself. He hates himself because the only way he can think to combat the brutality of Gotham City is to simply be more brutal than anyone else.

He is a hero, not because he wants to be, but because he must be. He seeks a world where people like him cannot possibly be rallied behind as champions; where people like him are unnecessary and do not exist. But for all his knowledge and power, Bruce Wayne is unable to create a better Gotham without resorting to the same brutalities of his enemies — and the fall of Harvey Dent, so closely mirroring that of Bruce Wayne, serves only to raise the question of whether it is possible to truly be the White Knight. There are no happy endings for Batman, either he falls victim to a world that is stronger than he is, or he becomes the last villain standing.

Isn’t that a much more compelling narrative than the contrived magic-glowing rock difficulties and inevitable successes of an all-powerful space alien?

Panta Rhei

Steven Ray Orr — Sun, 24 Jun 2012 23:05:00 PDT

Jonah Lehrer for Wired Magazine:

In the past decade, scientists have come to realize that our memories are not inert packets of data and they don’t remain constant. Even though every memory feels like an honest representation, that sense of authenticity is the biggest lie of all.

Every time we recall an event, the structure of that memory in the brain is altered in light of the present moment, warped by our current feelings and knowledge

Life is coloured by life. It has long been known that we understand new experiences in relation to old ones, but memory is proving to be so much more complicated: we cannot recall our yesterdays without having those events altered by our todays. There are no absolute histories. We have memories and then memories of those memories, built upon each other until we are so disconnected from the original happening that we can hardly claim to have experienced them in any meaningful way. We have been changed, not only by the incidents themselves, but also by our recollections of them.

Put another way, everything continues to flow — the river, the bank it runs along, and the being that steps into it — not only while we are in the water, but also long after we believe that we have moved on.

Poetry and Truth Telling

Steven Ray Orr — Thu, 21 Jun 2012 13:06:00 PDT

Sean Flynn for GQ:

She also found his prison mug on the counter and saw that it seemed to be filthy, as if the warden had never allowed Jessie to use a dishrag. Miss Stephanie scrubbed that mug. She scoured it until it was smooth as a newborn’s cheek. But she couldn’t make the inside white again. It’s stained a deep brownish black, and it will be that way forever.

This is storytelling mixed with journalism; it is poetry joined with truth telling; it is the revealing of sins in such a way that it explains to us the details of an incident while also speaking to a more general human condition; it is both truthful and true.

Jessie Misskelley, Jason Baldwin, and Damien Echols spent eighteen years in prison after a trial that hardly deserves to be called as such. Their guilt or innocence is almost inconsequential, because they were imprisoned without the opportunity for justice. Our faith in our legal system is based, almost entirely, on the idea that we will have the ability and the opportunity to make use of it to defend ourselves if the need ever arises. If that is taken away from us, if that is taken away from any one of us, the social contract begins to break down.

Kurt Vonnegut, Freethinker

Steven Ray Orr — Thu, 21 Jun 2012 12:38:00 PDT

Christopher Buckley for the New York Times:

This was echt Vonnegut: not with a bang or a whimper but with a shrug. If he, like Twain, was angry at the universe — and had every reason to be — he wasn’t going to yell himself hoarse or make himself a spectacle in the process. He possessed more ambivalence than passion.

There is a sadness to Vonnegut’s stories, as if his writing was more rote than expression — as if he had experienced it all before and would experience it all again. This theme repeats itself in much of his writing, culminating finally with Timequake wherein all of humanity is forced to relive the same ten years of their life again without an opportunity to change the events. This is a terrible enough prospect in itself, but it carries all the more force when it comes from a man with such a deep history in the horror of existence: he lived through the suicide of his mother; he lived through a World War II POW camp and the fire-bombing of Dresden; he lived through his own all-consuming depression.

But Vonnegut denies the idea that we should wallow in tragedies, his or any other. We are brought to this existence merely by coincidence and everything that follows is equally coincidental, as with leaves on the wind. Life, and tragedy, happens.

So it goes.

Why I Read

Steven Ray Orr — Wed, 20 Jun 2012 11:17:00 PDT

Visual stories exhaust me. There is an excess of information that I am required to process in order to comprehend them to my own satisfaction and if I cease to focus on this deluge, even briefly, I am lost. This issue is lessened at the theatre, because my attention is fully directed in a single, all-consuming direction.¹ Mild irritation becomes major frustration when I am watching something on my television as I consistently feel that I am missing important information and attempt to resolve it by making liberal use of the Pause button which allows me the freedom to rewatch (or at the very least, thoughtfully ponder) a scene until I understand it — at least, understand it enough to feel comfortable with moving on.²

While reading, my mind is allowed the opportunity to wander: I visualize characters and the way that they interact the world around them; I follow paragraphs or conversations with an attention to the language used and imagine cadences that color the text; and I am free to stop and go at my whim, letting myself be influenced by the ideas contain within the writing. There are the details of the text and then the details of my imagination, both of which are equal partners in the experience of the story.

In this sense, the act of reading is a method of flexing my creative muscles. Where movies and television drain, a novel will invigorate. This is one of the reasons that my cable package has been dramatically reduced to the minimum necessary to view hockey games — and, come the fall, I will probably rid myself of that in favor of NHL GameCenter.³ For the television shows that I insist on watching, I would rather make use of my Apple TV.

I do not read merely for entertainment; I read because it is the process by which I am able to write. I read because it allows me to breathe.

Although it does explain my desire to assault random strangers who insist on pulling out their phones during the movie.
↩
Which illuminates the frustration that my roommates feel when they choose to watch something with me (or: the anxiety I feel when unable to do this).
↩
Sportscasts often slow down the narrative for the viewer with instant replays, different camera angles, and commentators explaining the action. Worth noting: I do not have the same difficulty watching a hockey game that I do a tv show. Is this because of these “tricks” or is it because sports force me to focus or is it because sports are significantly less difficult to follow than Lost?
↩

In Context

Steven Ray Orr — Fri, 15 Jun 2012 21:48:00 PDT

Tycho Brahe:

Being mad at it is apparently a thing, a compulsory thing. Except I don’t do compulsory, and I also don’t do infantilizing chivalry. So I don’t do well at these kinds of parties.

It would be entirely legitimate to accuse the Hitman games of being violent — the premise is in the title and needs no explanation — but the claims of misogyny are, as Tycho reminds us, utter nonsense. There is a difference between violence against women and acts of violence. Context is important. Look at the difference in the way that the law treats an assault and a hate crime.

So when we see Agent 47 killing assassins dressed as nuns, we should keep aware of this distinction. It is quite clear that this is not eroticism as there is not enough tightly fitting leather on the planet to transform this into smut. It is likewise quite clear that this is not misogyny as their gender is only important in-so-far as it is necessary for them dress as nuns. This is violence, plain and simple. To say otherwise is to completely ignore the context, as reactionary interest groups are often want to do.

Cultivating Literacy

Steven Ray Orr — Tue, 12 Jun 2012 22:23:00 PDT

Michael J. Coren for Fast Company:

Stanley is doing more than providing paper; he’s creating the psychological motivation for students to dive into literature (or books of any kind) despite their surroundings. “Pushing banned/challenged books provides those kids with a shield to use against that pressure. Instead of reading a great work of literature, they’re breaking the rules and discovering what they (parents, adults, the establishment, etc.) don’t want them to know.”

How does one become a reader? How do you cultivate a love of literature? How do you train someone to enjoy the very act of turning pages and letting words flow over them?

It is a difficult task and, in our high stimulus culture, it grows ever more difficult. There are distractions aplenty even for those already captivated by the written word, so it is hardly surprising that many would rather aim themselves towards other undertakings than completing Moby Dick.

Reading is active. It requires attention, focus, and engagement with the medium. The written language is a metaphor that we must translate in order to understand, completely unlike the auditory nature of music or the visual nature of television. Realized in this manner, it is easier to recognize why reading can be considered a “hard” task; when compared to allowing a medium to wash over you, finishing a novel could be downright impossible.

Harry Potter succeeded because it told a story that children could imagine themselves in. This is likewise true of The Chronicles of Narnia, of Animorphs, or of The Hunger Games. You do not first become a reader, you begin by finding yourself in the shoes of Katniss or the Pevensie children. The love of the literary is a byproduct of this transformation. We must first be taught to imagine another world – to become jealous and envious of other lives; to wish, desperately, for characters and situations outside of ourselves – before we can ever become Readers.

Do not simply give youth banned books in an attempt to draw their attention, instead find out what captivates them and aim to find books that match with those interests. All cultivation requires work, it is an active process and needs to be tailored to meet the changing needs of whatever it is that you are trying to grow. If you want to to produce a reader, find out what they want to read and give it to them.

Will this transform every student into a literary fiend, desperate to absorb the classics? Of course not, but the goal should not be to make every student interested in reading, because, just as there is great variety in subject matter between readers, there is likewise great variety in interests and foci. The goal should be to ensure that all students who can be readers are.

Ray Bradbury, 1920-2012

Steven Ray Orr — Wed, 06 Jun 2012 07:50:00 PDT

Today, something wicked this way came.

2012: A RIM Odyssey

Steven Ray Orr — Sun, 03 Jun 2012 00:07:00 PDT

Michal Lev-Ram for CNNMoney:

RIM’s woebegone story is the stuff of science-fiction epic.

No, I promise you, it is not. I have read a great deal of science fiction and not a single plot even comes close to resembling the rise and fall of Research In Motion. RIM’s history is much more simple: it is a company that innovated once and then failed to catch on to the innovations of its competitors. Now it is trying desperately to remain relevant despite significance disadvantages in timing and talent.

Rather commonplace, actually. Asimov would not have had any interest in such an ordinary story and, judging from his poorly written piece¹ on the company, neither did Michal Lev-Ram.

(Via Wil Shipley)

Accurate as it may be.
↩

The Steve Jobs Movie

Steven Ray Orr — Sat, 02 Jun 2012 22:20:00 PDT

Farhad Manjoo:

Here’s a prediction: Aaron Sorkin’s film adaptation of Walter Isaacson’s Steve Jobs biography is going to be a disaster. … When it opens at a theater near you in a few years’ time, the film will become the toast of Hollywood and an instant blockbuster, and not long after it will attain the status of documentary truth: Sorkin’s film will become the definitive account of Jobs’ life, the thing we’ll all think about when we try to remember Steve Jobs.

It seems that we need to have a conversation about truth, art, and the space between the two. Just because it happened doesn’t mean it is worth telling. Just because it happened doesn’t mean that it will sell. Just because it happened doesn’t mean that it is art.

Benjamin Franklin probably didn’t do anything with a key and a kite and a thunderstorm. Did you know? Do you care? It makes a good story so we tell it. We build the mythology of our heroes (and villains) through the best narratives that we can construct, not necessarily the most true. Aaron Sorkin is not a truth-teller; he is a storyteller. His entire purpose is to entertain and he has a knack for doing just that. Hopefully he manages to do so with this film, because there are parts of Steve Jobs’ life that would do incredibly well with the Sorkin treatment. Personally, I can’t wait. The author of this piece is not so excited. I have some advice for him: do not watch it, particularly since you do not seem to know the difference between biography and story.

(Via Hacker News)

Remaining On Task

Steven Ray Orr — Sat, 02 Jun 2012 16:39:00 PDT

Alex Micek:

The thing I love about books has nothing to do with nostalgia, but the fact that, when I have a book, I can’t do anything with it other than read.

Computers are a fantastic tool and capable of doing any number of helpful tasks, but there is a usefulness to the more simple machines that forces one to focus. This likely explains my fondness for pen and paper or my tendency to read a book instead of an eReader. It probably explains why I find my iPad gets more use than my computer, despite the latter being more powerful and having a larger display: multitasking is not an option.¹

Single function tools do not eliminate distractions, but the way that my mind wanders while reading a physical book is a completely different experience than when I can easily access my twitter feed or Hacker News. Reading Red Planet has me considering the nature of space travel, colonization, and the question of humanity’s place in the universe — which is considerably closer to the task that I am on than what @NotTildaSwinton has to say — and this sort of diversion is actually a part of the experience of the novel.

This is particularly important when I am trying to write, as the sentence or thought that I an actively engaged in crafting does not need to be the only part of the work that I am considering. So, while I may be diverted from the particulars, I still remain on task.

This might be true: the more complex a system is, the more complex one’s experience with that system is; especially when compared to simple systems.

Rapid switching between single tasks is not the same.
↩

I Love You, James Cameron

Steven Ray Orr — Fri, 25 May 2012 20:38:00 PDT

MightyGodKing regarding Titantic:

I trust nobody will argue that the boat-sinking part of the movie is anything other than excellent. Even in early 1997 when people were considering murder of Leo fangirls as justifiable homicide, they were willing to admit that the actual boat-sinking part was stunning, and it holds up today. [James] Cameron’s ability to instill drama and excitement into what could easily have been a foregone conclusion remains one of his signal achievements as a filmmaker.

Whenever his name is mentioned, I have a tendency to speak ill of James Cameron and his abilities as a filmmaker, but after thinking about it at length, I have come to a horrible realization: I have liked every Cameron movie that I have seen.

Terminator? Rambo: First Blood? Definitely! Aliens? T2? Sure. True Lies? The Abyss? Put ‘em on!

There is a disconnect between my imaginary portrait of the man and his actual history as a writer and a director — a disconnect that is based, almost entirely, on two movies that I have not even seen: Titantic and Avatar.

In 1997, I was too young for Titantic to hold any sort of appeal; other films caught my attention and had an easier time seducing me than the notion of watching people drown in cold water.¹² By the time Titantic would have shown up on my Netflix queue³ it had already hit critical mass and a counter-culture was developing. It was cool to hate it and I wanted pretty desperately to be cool, so I shouted from the rooftops my loathing for a movie that I had not seen and an actor who was, at the time, prettier than the girls I went to school with.

Now, fifteen year later, my not having watched Titantic makes me “that guy” — you know the one: the douchebag who refuses to do something solely because everyone else is doing it or has done it, despite the fact that there is no actual pride to be found in abstaining from whatever nonsense topic seems to have attracted their ire.⁴ I find myself unable to speak eloquently on the film and how it compares to other Cameron works that I clearly enjoy. This is not a position of superiority. My loathing of this man as a writer and a director has no basis on reality and is entirely rooted in wanting to seem cool to ten year old kids.

How messed up is that?⁵

In ascending order of awesome: Speed 2: Cruise Control, Conspiracy Theory, Tomorrow Never Dies, Mortal Kombat: Annihilation, Jurassic Park: The Lost World, G.I. Jane, In & Out, The Fifth Element, Batman & Robin, Men in Black, Face/Off, Event Horizon, The Devil’s Advocate, The Saint, Grosse Pointe Blank, Con Air, Cube, Good Will Hunting, The Full Monty, Starship Troopers, Gattaca and Air Force One/Contact.
↩
What I am trying to say is that I could exclusively watch movies released in 1997 and would not consider it to be a loss; and that I had a pretty messed up idea of “good” when I was ten; and that I have no idea how to rank things in ascending order. The Full Monty is ranked above Event Horizon which is above G.I. Jane? What drugs would I have to be smoking for that to be true?
↩
Get it? Because Netflix queues didn’t exist in 1997. When I was a kid, you had to go to the Netflix store and pick up your subscriptions from a real person.
↩
People who don’t have Facebook accounts fall into this category.
↩
Avatar still objectively sucks though.
↩

Community

Steven Ray Orr — Thu, 24 May 2012 22:24:00 PDT

Dan Harmon:

A few hours ago, I landed in Los Angeles, turned on my phone, and confirmed what you already know. Sony Pictures Television is replacing me as showrunner on Community, with two seasoned fellows that I’m sure are quite nice — actually, I have it on good authority they’re quite nice, because they once created a show and cast my good friend Jeff Davis on it, so how bad can they be.

Community was an incredibly good show for the first two seasons and then a terribly uneven show for the most recent one. Dan Harmon bears some responsibility for that, of course, but it has not been an easy year: the mid-season hiatus, dealing with Chevy Chase, cancellation threats, and changing the structure of a good show in order to keep it fresh. Still, between the falling ratings and the strange direction that the show has taken, blame would inevitably fall on someone. Dan Harmon may not have deserved it, but he certainly made it easy for Sony Pictures to fire him.

The news did not surprise me. It does not seem as if it surprised him. Here is to hoping that he picks himself up from this experience and goes on to create someone that compares to Community’s beginnings. And, while we are at it, here is to hoping that the new showrunners can revive the show to a modicum of its original brilliance.

The Undiscovered Country

Steven Ray Orr — Sat, 19 May 2012 00:22:00 PDT

Steven Siceloff for NASA:

Space Exploration Technologies, or SpaceX, of Hawthorne, Calif., on Friday targeted May 19 for the launch of its upcoming demonstration mission to the International Space Station. Liftoff time is at 4:55 a.m. EDT, with a launch window that is instantaneous

I get caught up in the romantics of this.

We could be explorers again like Magellan or Shackleton, this time charting the vast, infinitude of the stars. We could see planets and moons that are but specks in a telescope. It has been so easy, over the last few years, to become jaded with politics and our society and the minutia of technology. SpaceX gets me excited about “the future (of our species)” which hasn’t happened in a long time.

I would absolutely love to stand on the surface of Mars or see Alpha Centauri with my own eyes, but I also know that such things are outside of my grasp. Poets and philosophers make for lousy explorers. It is enough for me that we, as a species, are reaching upward. It is enough for me that we, as a people, are overcoming chains that were not even imagined by our ancestors — tasks so difficult, so alien that they would only describe it as touching the face of god. This is about more than the whimsical realized dream of an individual; it is the progression of the entire species.

This is how human beings are made great.

(Via Hacker News)

Diablo 3

Steven Ray Orr — Fri, 18 May 2012 20:25:00 PDT

Jay Barnson:

But do you want to know the best form of anti-piracy?

Being pro-customer.

Just my opinion.

But then, they sell a million copies at launch, and I … uh, don’t. So maybe I’m the idiot here.

It has been a long time since I considered myself a gamer. Yes, I poke my head out of my shell for some of the high-profile releases — Skyrim being the most recent — but I have given up my focus on midnight releases and teaser trailers. The amount of work required to keep up on every “must have” game has become more effort than I am willing to put into the hobby, but I still find myself drawn to long-awaited sequels.

I fondly recall my first two forays into Hell¹ and the eleven years that it has taken for Diablo III to arrive is long enough for those memories to build into a kind of mythology. Like any remembrances given sufficient time to establish deep roots, the game has been replaced by the idea of the game. I do not know whether I could return to those versions of Tristram and Sanctuary — at least, not without experiencing a disconnect between the reality and the memory.

So it is with no small amount of trepidation that I gaze on at Diablo III; it is not likely that I will have the same experiences that I once did. Things change. The past colours the present and not often favourably. Demon hunters and monks, auction houses, auto-levelling. Differences stand starkly in opposition to our memories. Games are different than they used to be. The mass multiplayer style of online authentication has changed the relationship that gamers have with publishers, with developers. The moment of purchase begins a relationship, but constant Internet connections ensures that relationship continues long after money is spent.

I have not yet begun my tryst with Diablo III. Eventually, I will. Which may be proof enough that Blizzard knows what they are doing with this game: they are still getting my money. Despite my concerns, despite memories, despite “Always On” DRM. Blizzard is still getting paid.

Maybe they do know what they are doing…

Just let it slide.
↩

Samuel L. Jackson, Perfectionist

Steven Ray Orr — Wed, 16 May 2012 00:06:00 PDT

Pat Jordan for the New York Times:

Before shooting, [Samuel L.] Jackson reads his script a dozen times, sometimes memorizing all the other characters’ lines as well as his own. Jackson is almost pathologically meticulous about hitting his mark, picking up a prop, say, on the same word, take after take. “That’s called playing the movie game,” he said.

Jackson is one of my favorite actors. The amount of work that he puts into his parts ensures that watching him play them is anything but work. Because of him, even the movies that are flops still feel fun and have a life to them. He seems incredibly aware of his good fortune in being allowed to act – and at no point does he take that for granted.

(Via Matt Thomas)

Also of hilarious note from the same article:

Correction: April 26, 2012

An earlier version of the Samuel L. Jackson Movie Generator included a photograph of a Tupac Shakur impersonator, not one of Shakur himself.

Self-Definition

Steven Ray Orr — Tue, 15 May 2012 23:02:00 PDT

jonnathanson at Hacker News:

Long before many (most?) of us even realized we had a conscious say in being weird, our peers made that call for us. What we’re actually choosing is how to contextualize and reckon with that weirdness.

Self-definition comes long after we are defined by others. Usually, we must first choose whether to accept or reject the labels that others thrust on us. Human beings do not exist in social vacuums and who we are is a question of how we relate to those around us.

The nature of this does not change outside of high school. The difference is the level of freedom that one experiences when removed from the ridiculous structures that come with being an adolescent: teachers, home rooms, lunch breaks, curfews. I will not deny that these things have a place – particularly when one is developing and unable (or unwilling) to make responsible decisions for oneself. But we also have to acknowledge that the environment that it creates is incredibly problematic. At least, those of us who were damaged by it have to acknowledge it – even if some of us come out better for having experienced it, there are enough who don’t that for it to be worrying.

High school is a terrible place to discover yourself. The part that troubles me is that I cannot come up with anything better.

Cast Long Shadows

Steven Ray Orr — Tue, 15 May 2012 21:21:00 PDT

Mind Hacks:

If I read the phrase “as addictive as cocaine” one more time I’m going to hit the bottle.

There is a tendency in our culture to refuse responsibility for our actions. We blame. We litigate. We do everything but acknowledge the possibility of our own ineptitude. It is so ingrained in our social structures that it seems entirely normal for us to seek justice in any slight or harm, perceived or otherwise.

“As addictive as X” is a symptom of this disease, of our inability to examine our actions as having consequences that we could have and should have foreseen. This is not to suggest that addiction does not exist, but simply a reminder that it is not the cause for every time that we lack the willpower to say, “no”. We are imperfect beings and we will, on occasion, make poor decisions. The key is that we should learn from them so that we do not continue to make those poor decisions in the future.

To claim that we are victims of addiction every time we are inept does not teach anything and it does not lead to a capable human beings; the moment of clarity¹ is a moment of complete powerlessness and it is not a state that we should be eager to step into. We should, whenever possible, aim to cast long shadows and be powerful beyond measure.

(Via The Morning News)

Vincent: So you decided to be a bum?
Jules: I’ll just be Jules, Vincent; no more, no less.
Vincent: Let me ask you something, when did you make this decision? When you were sitting there eating that muffin.
Jules: Yeah, I was sitting here, eating my muffin and drinking my coffee, when I had what alcoholics refer to as a moment of clarity.

- Pulp Fiction
↩

Callings

Steven Ray Orr — Tue, 15 May 2012 20:38:00 PDT

From Greg Bishop’s piece on Tom Thibodeau, Chicago Bulls head coach:

“This is his life,” Duncan said. “For better or worse, he doesn’t have a lot of other interests. Maybe he has no other interests.”.

Thibodeau told him, “There’s no room in my life for a woman if I’m going to be a basketball coach.”

Selfishly, we wish it were different sometimes,” David said. “That we’d be able to see him with the family, mess around with his kids, the way he messes around with ours, normal stuff. If I could choose fame over that, I would take him here in a second. But this is his dream. So this is our dream.”

A reminder that we can be called to many different tasks and that success is a small measure of talent combined with absolute determination. Genius has more to do with a state of mind than an inborn gift.

(Via Matt Thomas)

I Am American*

Steven Ray Orr — Mon, 14 May 2012 23:06:00 PDT

I was born in Saskatchewan; I was raised in British Columbia; and I am American.

To be perfectly clear, there are no technicalities here: both Canada and the United States consider me to be a Canadian citizen; I have a British Columbian driver’s license; and both the words “Liberal” and “Conservative” are naturally capitalized when I spell them. Geographically, I may be a Canadian, but globalization and the Internet have radically altered the way that we perceive ourselves.

I have no intentions of misleading when I speak in broad terms about how we have lost the American dream. I, primarily, read about politics and news within the United States. Most of my cultural and social influences are from American sources. It has stopped being possible for me to understand my identity without acknowledging the nation and culture that so strongly defines my politics, entertainment, and news.

Hopefully, this helps alleviate any confusion on regarding my geography.

To Care and to Carry

Steven Ray Orr — Mon, 07 May 2012 22:58:00 PDT

Judy Patrick for the Huffington Post:

What if we publicly challenged the notion, rooted so deep in this fiercely individual culture, that we are not each others’ keepers? What if we believed, and acted as if, we have a responsibility for one another and that together we must work to leave a healthy state for our children and our neighbors’ children?

Can we admit that this system, whatever we are calling it, is broken? How many people have to starve before we declare capitalism to be an inappropriate method of organizing human beings? How many have to die because of a lack of medicine or shelter or care?

None of us were built to be Atlas, bearing the world upon our backs utterly alone, but it might be possible that we were not even built to carry our own weight alone. Life makes weary our bones and there comes a time when we must rest. This we all know, even if we would rather not admit that age will make us weaker. Why is it so difficult to make this jump from elderly care to poverty?

We are not perfect. At times, we lean upon those who care for us and let them carry some of our weight. This is not a measure of our individual weakness; it is a measure of our combined strength, of our ability to come together and be something much greater than the sum of our parts. That is what a society is, that is what a nation should be: to care for each other enough to carry each other.

Bigots and Tyrants

Steven Ray Orr — Mon, 07 May 2012 22:53:00 PDT

The Washington Post:

When asked about his views on same-sex marriage, Vice President Biden said he is “absolutely comfortable” with men marrying men and women marrying women. When Education Secretary Arne Duncan was asked Monday whether he thinks that same-sex couples should be able to marry, he said, “Yes, I do.”

This is nowhere near where the United States, as a nation, needs to be on this. Same-sex marriage is not an “issue”; homosexuals are no more an “interest group” than were disenfranchised women; and this is not a topic on which political points should be scored. Same-sex marriage should be allowed because to deny it is tyranny.

That Dream

Steven Ray Orr — Fri, 04 May 2012 22:11:00 PDT

Joseph Stiglitz for The European:

What is happening to most citizens in a country? When you look at America, you have to concede that we have failed. Most Americans today are worse off than they were fifteen years ago. … The economic system is not delivering.

The American Dream has been shattered.¹ It is no longer conceivable to imagine ourselves, in the 21st Century, as possible of attaining even an ounce of our once immeasurable capacity, let alone fulfilling the promise of greatness that this democracy was founded upon. We live and work and survive because capitalism demands it, but this system finds no intrinsic value in the human being. It is only our capacity to produce that permits our survival.

Our wealth, our money, our debts have become the chains by which we are bound, but not to each other. “Welfare state” has become a dirty word which politicians throw at each other, instead of clinging to as a battle cry behind which to rally forces. But why should our fates be separate from each other? Why is it somehow noble to rise and fall with an economy run by exchanges of wealth and private corporations?

There is a once-simple truth that has become obfuscated by debit cards and credit limits and bank loans and stock markets. It is a notion that, very soon, may only be possible metaphorically and, thus, even easier to forget.

Money burns.

Even in a bank account, even on Wall Street, money can still be let go of.

It is not yet the time for that to happen. This crisis, although terrible, is not at that apex – not yet, anyway – but we should try to remember that money is simply numbers on paper and accounts with a bank. It only has the importance that we give it and we need to ask ourselves, as individuals and as a society, whether that valuation is worthy of humanity.

(Via The Morning News)

“That dream of a land in which life should be better and richer and fuller for everyone, with opportunity for each according to ability or achievement. … It is not a dream of motor cars and high wages merely, but a dream of social order in which each man and each woman shall be able to attain to the fullest stature of which they are innately capable, and be recognized by others for what they are, regardless of the fortuitous circumstances of birth or position.” -James Truslow Adams, The Epic of America
↩

Reminder

Steven Ray Orr — Fri, 04 May 2012 21:44:00 PDT

Johannes Bonke and Sven Schumann interview Colin Farrell:

I believe in fucking everything, man. Human life is magic – in all its tragedies and all its glory; it’s really magic that we exist here at all. If you think about what it takes to create a life it’s just insane, but we get away from that way too easily.

Every now and then, I need to be reminded of this fact: our very existence is worthy of marvelling at – if only to humble ourselves. Miracles abound, everywhere, even from within our own skin.

Just Is

Steven Ray Orr — Wed, 02 May 2012 21:32:00 PDT

Alan Schwarz for the New York Times:

“It’s not the right thing to do, but I did it,” Mr. Strachman said, acknowledging that his actions violated copyright law.

“If I were younger,” he added, “maybe I’d be spending time in the hoosegow.”

Captain Curran misspoke. To him, it is the right thing to do, despite being against the law.

There is often a distinction between what is legal and what is right – our lawmakers do not have an inherent tendency towards being just, particularly in a democracy. Our laws have transitioned from a method by which individual rights are protected to an incredibly complex system that regulates nearly all aspects of society. It may be inevitable that we experience minor losses of justice through the institution that is big government in an effort to prevent even greater injustices.

I confess to not being particularly interested in whether sending pirated movies to active duty soldiers is an issue worthy of our legal system.¹ It seems a rather ordinary act of theft and a rather extraordinary act of kindness. It can, without contradiction, be both; being a good human being and being a good citizen can be at odds with each other. Sometimes we are forced to choose between those duties. Captain Curran had no trouble making his choice.

Although I don’t think that it should matter whether the actor involved is a 92-year-old veteran or a twenty-something torrent junkie.
↩

"This fortress of well-being"

Steven Ray Orr — Sun, 29 Apr 2012 23:40:00 PDT

Elizabeth Kiem for The Morning News:

Unlike past dissenters, today’s protesters reject the notion that they owe their welfare (be it good or bad) to the state (be it benevolent or corrupt). They have more to lose than their parents ever did – the freedom to travel, buy nice stuff, and berate the government from the confines of their well-furnished kitchens, fashionable cafes, and high-speed chatrooms – but today’s middle-class does not equate personal comfort with a functioning society.

We are responsible for our own destinies. It is not dishonest leaders nor the state itself that determine where we, as a people, shall go: it is the body politic, us, that is responsible for the fate of our nation. This is as true here in North America as it halfway across the world in Russia.

Bolotnaya and Occupy both point outward and declare, “the thieves are there,” but within the systems that we currently live there are always going to be thieves and there is always going to be corruption. If not Putin, then Medvedev. If not Wall Street, then Main Street. It is the problem most protest movements face: they aim at the rot and ignore the disease; they seek to attack an example and ignore the system that creates them, the society that creates them. It is easy to demand that others change things for you, but often has little effect; creating a community and shifting opinions is much more difficult, but can permanently transform a society.

Paul Krugman, Warrior-Economist

Steven Ray Orr — Sat, 28 Apr 2012 22:50:00 PDT

Jonathan Chait for the New York Magazine:

The most remarkable attribute [Paul] Krugman has brought to the [New York] Times is rudeness. The social niceties that accompany his exalted position are utterly lost on him. He does not seek out the company of famous politicians and cannot be courted with flattery or access. He understands that you can’t arrive at truth without explaining why mistaken beliefs are wrong.

Krugman is an unabashed liberal and he does not apologize for his views nor the manner by which he attacks his opposition. He is righteous and therefore an immovable object; he will not compromise, because to do so would separate him from the truth. It is a thoroughly Republican view of politics: stand firm – either your opponent will cave or the ground beneath you will.

I am not convinced that this is an effective method for governance in a democracy, since issues are rarely so simple as to be a choice between binaries – the reality of a two-party system in the United States does not mean that there are necessarily only two viable options – but Krugman’s style of argument certainly stands in stark opposition to numerous ineffective liberal voices. While others practice middle ground politics or write columns full of politeness, Krugman stands on his roof throwing stones daring others to attack him on his terms. Where others broker deals and agree to disagree, he champions causes with a forcefulness more akin to a warrior than a columnist.

Agree or disagree on his politics, but you cannot deny the strength of his voice.

Reactionary Politics

Steven Ray Orr — Wed, 25 Apr 2012 21:08:00 PDT

Joel Spolsky:

The internet seems to ignore legislation until somebody tries to take something away from us… then we carefully defend that one thing and never counter-attack. Then the other side says, “OK, compromise,” and gets half of what they want. That’s not the way to win…

I have not posted about SOPA, PIPA, or CISPA, because the issues are much more complicated than I can sum up in five-hundred words. The bills are Bad, for the Internet, for free speech, for privacy. That I know and can clearly articulate without much effort. The problems with it are rather eloquently being explained in various other places – Technica has written at length on the various pieces of legislation and Timothy B. Lee’s recent article is probably the best breakdown of the privacy concerns.

CISPA is a piece of legislation proposed to deal with legitimate issues that have arisen from the success of the Internet, but it is being designed and guided by those who either do not understand the technology or have goals that run counter to its intentions. We will not sit idly by while they attempt to knock down the walls that we have spent the last two decades building. We will protest. We will shout. We will stand our ground and declare that this is too far.

And we will probably win this particular fight.

The problem is the next one, when the battle lines are less sexy and the rights we lose aren’t as stark. The problem is when they learn where we are willing to draw the line and then get as close as the can to it without causing outrage. We are practitioners of reactionary politics and eventually we will lose.

It is time for us to stand up and start building something. Stopping CISPA is only be the first step in a long process. Cybersecurity and privacy important issues to us and we should take part in the creation of those policies. We should be an interest group that guides policy, not a protest movement that attacks it. We have created the Internet that we wanted to see, now we have to protect it and that is not as sexy and is significantly harder.

Are we willing to put in that work? Are we willing to govern? Because if not then we are going to see this incredible tool legislated away into a hollow shell of its former self.

And we will only have ourselves to blame.

The Burdens of Prescience

Steven Ray Orr — Wed, 25 Apr 2012 20:30:00 PDT

Chris Ziegler for The Verge has a piece about the original Google Phone, but the reason that I am linking to it is a comment left by capnbob:

It’s lonely having too much foresight.

Pockets of comedy and genius from the comments of a random tech news article.

Honest Capitalists

Steven Ray Orr — Sat, 21 Apr 2012 21:06:00 PDT

Sarcasm aside, Larry Olmsted’s entire series on Domestic Kobe is worth reading, if only because of his insistence on honesty with names, but I found myself more impressed by his linkage between truth telling and capitalism:

If you like Sterling Silver beef, you should buy it. If you don’t, never buy it again. That is how capitalism works. I haven’t tried it, so I can’t say, but I already like it simply because it does not pretend to be something it is not.

Like most things, capitalism would be a significantly easier structure if candor were the rule, not the exception.

Kobe Potato Chips

Steven Ray Orr — Sat, 21 Apr 2012 20:51:00 PDT

Larry Olmsted for Forbes:

All the myths about cows getting massages and drinking beer while listening to classical music are just that, myths, but nonetheless real Kobe beef is produced under some of the world’s strictest legal food standards, whereas “domestic Kobe” beef production, along with that in Australia and South America, is as regulated as the Wild West.

I’m shocked – shocked! – to find advertising going on in here! You mean to suggest that companies practice dishonesty in order to entice customers? That is absolutely outrageous and I will not continue to listen to such nonsense.

Now excuse me while I eat my “low fat”, “natural”, “sugar free” snack foods.

(Via the Morning News)

Tyler Durden Was An Ass

Steven Ray Orr — Thu, 19 Apr 2012 23:08:00 PDT

Rachel Bublitz:

Once we get closer to these physical ideals there is just as much shame as having undesirable features. It begs the question, how can we ever be satisfied? Who made us this way that we dislike the “good” parts of are bodies as much as the “bad”?

Pride is the original sin. It is through pride that Lucifer was thrown from heaven and, likewise, it was ego that began Eve and Adam’s fall from grace. One might argue that our lack of comfort in our own skins, despite beauty, is a recognition of that most fundamental of mortal sins.

I think the problem is that human beings have become coded for self-loathing; to, in recognizing that which separates us from those around us, feel contempt for the parts of ourselves that deviate from the norm, be it success, be it greatness, be it beauty. Even as we envy qualities that distinguish others from the herd, we cannot help but despise those like qualities in ourselves.

The problem is “norms”. The problem is the entire concept of normality. If we were to get over that, as a society, we would probably find ourselves much happier.

(Via @errabund)

A Confession

Steven Ray Orr — Tue, 17 Apr 2012 14:05:00 PDT

Nell Boeschenstein for the Morning News:

Despite being surrounded on all sides—as if held hostage—by books, the last thing I’ve wanted to do for the past weeks (months, even, if I’m honest) is read. This is not a confession, just a fact: I can’t read. Or read, at least, with any pretense of endurance.

All writing is a form of confession, but it is usually wrapped in metaphor as to disguise the truth revealed about the author. True confessions are much more difficult to make, particularly when they take the form of, “I cannot do this”. All artists question their abilities, even masters of the craft, but those doubts cannot be allowed free reign lest they cripple even the most talented creators.

Nell’s confession is not an admission of defeat. It is the way by which she attacks the demon that is feeding her incantations of defeat. Writer’s block and reader’s block are the same villain, both simply the way by which we are overwhelmed with The Word. Nell’s piece is her way of saying that she will be overwhelmed no longer.

Addendum to Attention

Steven Ray Orr — Thu, 12 Apr 2012 21:57:00 PDT

None of this should be taken as an indication that I am unwilling to hear criticism or disagreeing opinions. It has taken me longer than I would like to admit that I do not particularly enjoy being wrong when I have settled my thoughts on a matter. The only surefire remedy that I have found is to do it as infrequently as possible. I do not pretend that I am always right, but it is as good an aim as any – particularly when understanding that obtaining knowledge involves a great deal of work.

The point is to spend as much time as possible making up ones mind on matters. Read, listen, think, and then decide (preferably after going through the first three steps multiple times).

"I’m still paying attention"

Steven Ray Orr — Thu, 12 Apr 2012 20:07:00 PDT

Matt Gemmell:

It’s OK to cut out negative people from your life. Everyone has a right to their opinion, but people don’t have a free pass to be heard by you, particularly if their manner of expression is consistently unpleasant or unproductive.

Focus is an intricate phenomenon. There are so many different directions that we are drawn in, it can be difficult to choose those objects that are worthy of our attention. I have no trouble finding interesting things and developing thoughts around them; where my problems arise from is the manner in which I throw myself, head first, into the pit of wasting time on every person and purpose that connects to those interesting things. Not all people are deserving of our time; not every argument deserves to be heard or, having been heard, deserves reply.

We should be willing to give up on the people that burn us out. We should let ourselves let them go.

Thank you for the reminder, Matt.

How To Be a Feminist

Steven Ray Orr — Tue, 10 Apr 2012 22:33:00 PDT

Gabe for Penny Arcade:

How about all of you that hate me get together and have your own conference. I need you to decide if half naked girls are empowered or exploited because I’m doing my fucking best here and it’s apparently always wrong. I swear to God I don’t understand how I’m supposed to know if I’m promoting the patriarchy or criminalizing the female body.

The title of this post is not meant to be a statement – it is a cry for help. Being a feminist comes with a lot of contradictions and even more people yelling at you for doing it wrong in some way.

Why can’t we just get to the part where we all treat each other like human beings?

Representing Truth

Steven Ray Orr — Mon, 09 Apr 2012 22:53:00 PDT

Mary McCarthy:

In any account of reality, even a televised one, which comes closest to being a literal transcript or replay, some details are left out as irrelevant (though nothing is really irrelevant). The details that are not eliminated have to stand as symbols of the whole, like steno graphic signs, and of course there is an art of selection, even in a newspaper account: the writer, if he has any ability, is looking for the revealing detail that will sum up the picture for the reader in a flash of recognition.

On September 20th, 2001, Jon Stewart gave a monologue that was able to capture the pain of an entire nation. He did not recite a list of the dead or attempt to explain how the city and country were rebuilding instead he spoke about his experience of 9/11 and how it recalled to him the assassination of Martin Luther King. It had more truth than could possibly come to light from the simple recitation of data. Likewise, when Elie Wiesel wrote Night, he was able to reveal the Holocaust in its enormity, despite it being the testimony of a single person and only writing his own experiences of the global happening.

All account of truth is merely representation. No literary description can perfectly mimic an actual event nor should we want it to as it would be information excess and comprehension would become difficult, if not impossible. We want our truth to be filtered so that we can access and understand it.

There are two types of journalists: the factual and the representational. The former is boring and easily replaced by a combination of instant communication and global information databases; the latter is the only form that will allow the news industry to survive the rise of the Internet and social media. Journalism cannot be the art of speaking absolute truth for that is an impossible task; newspapers and broadcast stations must become distilleries of the factual, condensing events to best speak to a situation, to become a symbol of the whole incident and, in doing so, reveal an element of truth about the world around which the events occurred.

More Disgruntled Reflections

Steven Ray Orr — Fri, 06 Apr 2012 15:43:00 PDT

Mark Ciocco got a Kindle this Christmas and has a few complaints. His experiences track pretty well with everything else that I have heard, but there is one point that I think is somewhat less common:

I like page numbers. I don’t think this really qualifies me as a luddite, but perhaps I am a bit of a crackpot. Still, I really miss page numbers, and the worst part is that on many occasions, the book will have page numbers available, they just aren’t displayed by default.

The lack of proper pagination is a frustration that I share, although not just because eBooks have no real frame of reference. I am an academic and cannot get away from that. How am I supposed to accurately cite an eBook without page numbers? And it is not as if an iPad makes this problem any easier, since the number of pages depends entirely on font choices. Still, some of the problems that bother Mark about his Kindle would be solved by an iPad. Of course, the iPad has other drawbacks that come with being a multipurpose device.¹

If only Apple would make an eReader.²

Size and weight are both prohibitive for extensive bedtime reading.
↩
I know that it is not going to happen and I should just give in, perhaps buy a Kobo since it supports ePub and that is important to me. But none of the eReaders out there have met all of my requirements so I have not take the plunge yet. If a Kindle mysteriously appeared on my doorstep, I would probably get over my complaints and be buying an eBook a week instead of every couple of months. But as Mark points out, I am still attached to my physical library and cutting that particular cord might have to be saved for the next generation of young whippersnappers.
↩

No More Forced Pregnancies

Steven Ray Orr — Thu, 05 Apr 2012 22:48:00 PDT

It should come as no surprise to anyone that I am, on most social issues, somewhere left of the entire Democratic Party. That is fairly meaningless for me to say, because democrats, as a whole, are notoriously lousy at stating or holding any position that they decide to honor with their focus, but this is not meant to be a critic of the problem that we call “politics”.

Marie is one of my favorite Internet-people.¹ She claims to exist although it would not concern me too greatly if she did not as her words still do and I think that we are all aware of the significance that I put on letters placed strategically in a line. Lately, she has put her not inconsiderable talent towards championing an issue that she has been silent about: government-forced pregnancies.

Language is important and the names that we give our actions are often as significant as the acts themselves. I do not know enough about linguistics to know the terminology that a linguist would use, but the idea is simple enough: narrative has an effect on thought. To call it a matter of choice or abortion rights is to make the issue smaller than it is, as Marie reminds us:

This is about so much more than the right to not be influenced by a stranger’s opinion. This is every bit as visceral as the right to not be dragged away in the night, to not be imprisoned without cause, to not have unapproved medical procedures done to you against your will. This isn’t about being told you can’t wear a certain t-shirt in school or at work. This is about being told that you must remain pregnant, no matter what you think or want, no matter what sound medicine says, and no matter how much suffering doing so is going to bring to you or anybody else.

I have only two words to say on the matter: I agree. Anything else would neither be as eloquent nor have the same force as Marie’s own well-thought salvos.² This space is my personal soapbox and I spend most of my time wrapped up in theory or philosophy or literature, but this is also where I put myself on the public record. As such, I am taking this opportunity to voice my support for this issue: I am clearly and expressly stating that to ban abortion is to force pregnancy and that this is no longer a matter for us to debate. We cannot call ourselves a free society while we systematically strip half of our population of the right to self-govern.

If that upsets you, makes you think less of me, or discourages you from reading my thoughts, so be it, as there is absolutely no way in which we will be able to come together on this. If it does not, do yourself a favor and start reading Marie’s blog. She looks to be just getting started.

I have always known her as Puredoxyk, but that goes back a long way and I have a tendency to call people by their given names when I do not know their preference. We really do need to solve this web-identity problem…
↩
Yes, I am saying that her posts are weapons with which she arms herself in the war on women.
↩

Codicology

Steven Ray Orr — Tue, 03 Apr 2012 23:59:00 PDT

Khoi Vinh:

It would be nice if there was a way to replicate that part of the reading experience electronically too, that kind of real world happenstance that doesn’t require signing up or signing in to anything, just carrying around whatever book you’re reading and being open enough in your body language to welcome small talk from perfect strangers

I do not advocate that we throw away our iPhones in favor of smoke signals or give up our Kindles because they are not perfect replications. At the same time, I worry any time that we march head first towards a new device; it is not enough to be satisfied with our gains, we also have to be aware of what gets left behind when our technologies transform. We are altered as much by changes in our tools as they are altered by us. This is the way of the world, but it is important that we ask ourselves whether our tools are worth their costs and, if not, how we can regain that which has been taken away.

I want to carry my library in my pocket not in a moving van. I want to fall in love with the Kindle. I want to favor the ease of the electronic over the cumbrance of ink and paper. I want to give up my dog ears in favor of bookmarks and my scrawled thoughts for simulated sticky notes. I want people to see the books that I am reading and for it to make them think, good or ill. I want to be able to share my experience of a story by showing off a well worn novel. I want people to see my “extras” shelf which is a collection of books meant to be given away at idle interest, because that is how important they are to me.

eBooks are not there yet. I have little doubt that, one day, they will be. But until then, I will stick to my recto and verso.

"We will keep mum"

Steven Ray Orr — Tue, 03 Apr 2012 17:51:00 PDT

James Victoire for Esquire:

One thing is clear: There is a young America and there is an old America, and they don’t form a community of interest. One takes from the other. … Across the board, the money flows not to helping the young grow up, but helping the old die comfortably.

I have always believed that the purpose of politics is to create a future for our children that is better than we ourselves received. While it is possible that this represents nothing more than a remarkably naive view of the world, I cannot help but take a more cynical attitude and begin to doubt my motives, starting to believe that I have succumb to my own biases: I have no children of my own and am part of the generation that has stepped outside of the careful protection of their parents into a world that hardly seems encouraging. How else, asks the pessimist, would I see politics, but as an extension of my personal security and prosperity?

Perhaps, as I grow older, my understanding of the political will change to something more resembling a desire to simply rest as comfortably as I can – possibly in a swimming pool made up of the wealth that I have ruthlessly squeezed from foolish college students and interns desperate for “work experience”. While I can recognize such a capacity within myself, I hope that it does not come to that.

Instead, I hope that I will remember my time within a system that was not designed with my best interests in mind. I hope that fresh will stay the frustrations I felt at being ignored and undermined. While I have been luckier than some, I also can point to numerous occasions that my welfare has been outside of my own control. Self-satisfaction will never be an instrument of change, of development, or of evolution. If we are to, as a people, become better, it has to through the collective acknowledgement that the well-being of us all is of greater importance than the interests of any one individual.

(Via The Morning News)

17

Steven Ray Orr — Wed, 28 Mar 2012 22:55:00 PDT

Christopher Bird:

Now – were I black and in America, I would be perpetually pissed off to begin with, because it’s quite evident that being black in America means you get a different set of rules than, say, white people do.

I have not written about Trayvon Martin because I have no words with which to express the anger that I feel. An unarmed black kid was shot and murdered by a twenty-something racist. Unless Trayvon came after Zimmerman¹, unless Trayvon had a gun², there is no word to describe what happened other than “murder”. If the facts are in dispute it is a matter for the courts yet, somehow, this event has become a matter of politics and polarization.

How can there be anything to argue over? A child was killed.

He didn’t.
↩
He didn’t.
↩

Knowledge is Not Power

Steven Ray Orr — Tue, 27 Mar 2012 19:48:00 PDT

William Johnson for the New York Times

My best teachers, the ones I still think about today, exposed me to new and exciting ideas. They created classroom environments that welcomed discussion and intellectual risk-taking.

It wasn’t Ms. Leonard’s fault that 15-year-old me couldn’t process this lesson completely. She was planting seeds that wouldn’t bear fruit in the short term. That’s an important part of what we teachers do, and it’s the sort of thing that doesn’t show up on high-stakes tests.

Information is no longer cheap, it has become free: libraries were the beginning of this devaluation, but it was only when paired with the ease of access provided by the Internet that repositories of knowledge were able to radically transform human beings.

We have shed one aspect of our mortality and journeyed closer to the posthuman ideal: to be better, faster, stronger than those that came before us. Technologies are used in such a way that allows us to overcome natural selection. The contemporary human has near-instantaneous access to information, which brings into question the role that our educators fill. If we do not need the gift of memory (instead calling facts to our attention when we require them), is there still a need for the institution of school as it exists today?

This is how I view debates on education, although I am starting to realize that I may be in the minority on the subject: No Child Left Behind and the Race to the Top are programs guided by the belief that students need to know trigonometry and amphibian anatomy; teachers themselves are graded based on the number of students able to pass standardized tests; and extracurricular or non-standard programs are treated as frivolous and low priority. It is an education system that is rooted in the idea of knowledge as power, but by that standard, those with the fastest Internet connections should be the strongest of us all.

The Information Age has revealed to us how useless knowledge is without the capacity to understand it (and, understand it, to find a way to make use of it). Education is the process through which we are taught how to learn, not the passage of information from the knowledgable to the unknowing. Our teachers should not simply fill us with facts and numbers, as one would fill an empty glass. A good teacher is one that instills a drive to learn, that teaches ways to make use of knowledge, and that creates the capacity for curiosity and wisdom. This is not an easy task. Think back to those teachers (both in and out of the classroom) that fostered such tendencies in you: was it without struggle that they altered the path upon which you were on?

I am not claiming that all education occurs in a classroom. I am simply suggesting that we start all conversations about education policy from the question of what role we wish our instructors to fill: if we wish them to be merely glorified babysitters, watching over children and young adults that are incapable of being left alone, acknowledge the difficulties that come with such a job and pay them accordingly; if we desire curriculums that develop human beings capable of wisdom and greatness and beauty, fix the clearly apparently hurdles that prevent such educations, and pay the teachers accordingly for their services.

Or leave our education system as is: broken and without much merit. Most students will struggle along, meeting the minimum standards without ever recognizing any greater potential within themselves. A rare few will thrive despite the environment due mostly to the efforts of those who choose to instruct in spite of a thankless teaching environment. Is this what we want our schools to look like?

(Via Matt Thomas)

To Be Heracles

Steven Ray Orr — Sun, 25 Mar 2012 23:12:00 PDT

The Economist:

Exercise works its magic, at least in part, by promoting autophagy. This process, whose name is derived from the Greek for “self-eating”, is a mechanism by which surplus, worn-out or malformed proteins and other cellular components are broken up for scrap and recycled.

It is nice to have an explanation for why my body enjoys exercise other than the dubious claim of experiencing a “runner’s high”.

While exercising, I lose the ability to coherently connect my thoughts together. Every time I prepare for any sort of fitness routine, I have the romantic notion of using the upcoming “wasted time” productively. In fact, as my non-running workouts take place in the living room, I spend most of the “wasted time” looking at my bookshelves and imagining better ways in which they could be organized. That thought process never gets much further than the basic premise, because I find myself incapable of piecing ideas together; all that I can manage is the understanding that books sometimes belong on shelves.

Archetypes exist because they speak to a truth that we are capable of recognizing. Brains and brawn are disconnected forms, because we understand how difficult it is to maintain both within the same body; it is not an impossible task, merely Herculean. The labors of today are nothing like the slaying of the Nemean lion or fetching Hesperides’ apples, but contemporary sins require new atonements to match them. If we seek the favor of ancient Greek gods, we must be prepared for the difficulties that will prove our worth.

Retesting

Steven Ray Orr — Thu, 22 Mar 2012 21:41:00 PDT

19 years after his first writing, Drew Magary retakes the SAT test for Deadspin¹:

It’s as if the entire test had been conceived of and written by the SS. Would it kill them to have a bit of levity in the copy? Perhaps a bit of gentle reassurance? “Look, we know this is stressful for you. Just hang with us and you’ll get to go to Dairy Queen afterwards.” I think something like that would be really helpful to the more testing-averse kids out there.

Comedy as critique and an excellent example of both.

The purpose of most standardized testing is to prove a capacity to pass standardized tests. There are no applicable life skills to be learned from such pursuits. It makes me wonder how I would treat the opportunity to go back and redo my schooling: would I, knowing my abilities, strive harder than the first time or would I, knowing the futility of the system, commit myself elsewhere?

(Via The Morning News)

I just learned that SAT is an acronym without meaning: it is neither a test of scholarly aptitude nor scholastic assessment. The initials once stood for both, but now the acronym is empty and has meaning only as a brand.
↩

The Reddish-Yellow Rush

Steven Ray Orr — Tue, 20 Mar 2012 22:30:00 PDT

Sarah C. Rich for Design Decoded:

It’s no accident that the brilliant colors of citrus fruit – bright yellow, radiant orange, pink grapefruit – are also the hues used to depict dreamy California landscapes in graphic design and illustration going back centuries. The agriculture of the Pacific coast has long been a medium for communicating a sense of place and a way of life to people in far less fruitful climes.

Art and meaning appear from unsuspected mediums.

That said, it strikes me that something has changed since the days of Airship Brand Sunkist oranges. It is not often that I recognize a story being told¹ to me through packaging.² Does this reflect a difference in technique or in attention span? Or, more likely, both (with one reflecting/causing the other)?

We all pretend that we cannot be advertised to, but there is more science to the craft than there is art. Recognizing that we are being manipulated may actually do nothing to prevent companies from doing so and eventually becomes a strategy for them to utilize; consumption is a much a disease of the mind as it is of the lungs.

*Sold.
↩
Jones Soda seems to come to mind easiest: amateur photography meant to evoke any number of emotions, all with the intent of guiding your eyes away from the generic packaging of the traditional soda companies.
↩

That Childlike Wonder

Steven Ray Orr — Sun, 18 Mar 2012 11:16:00 PDT

David Eric Tomlinson for the Morning News.

In the ring the rules are clear. Outside of it we must make them up as we go along. We sit on our barstools because it’s easier than standing up for what we believe in. We learn to fight because it’s easier than learning to love. Everything is connected. Power comes from the place you’d least expect. Move, and get hurt.

But don’t hold onto the pain.

Perhaps we get older and our bodies give out because we lose the childish ability to let go, to experience a series of incidents as merely that which happens to us instead of that which defines us. Perhaps, in filling our bodies with wisdom and knowledge and truth, we become heavy; we make ourselves unable to move, get hurt, and move again.

It is children that know how to love without regret, throwing themselves wholly into their lovers. They do so with ease and intensity. Even the way in which they hug, arms stretched out as if it were possible for them to completely envelope the object of their affection, is evidence of their powerful affinities. As we age and satisfy ourselves in wisdom we attach ourselves to fates and soul mates, proudly declare ourselves to be seeking out they whom we are meant to be with. We ignore the now in favor of some future now where we imagine ourselves to be happy instead of finding the pleasures of the moment.

Instead of learning how to let go of pain, we believe the key to satisfied life is that we should wait and experience only that which comes without scars. We make up rules for ourselves that we think will keep us from getting wounded, never realizing that these rules keep us aimed towards some impossible utopia.

This may be a way to keep living, but it is not a life.

Unthought Questions

Steven Ray Orr — Thu, 15 Mar 2012 22:58:00 PDT

OrbitalPete on reddit/AskScience:

The universe is not expanding into anything. Our brains are not well equipped to visualise this, and trying to simplify it to an ‘everyday’ picture is not really practical, as the simplifications are so important.

I have disparaged reddit before solely on the basis that I distrust groups, no matter the quality of the individuals. The herd is not to be trusted, despite the appearance that it can tap into greatness. I say “appearance”’ because it is only realized by the will of a few incredible individuals – those free souls that are able to bring noise to the quiet and the desperate.

Such thinking becomes problematic when one comes across discussions like such as that which spawned the above quote. Someone, with an earnest desire to make sense of a complex topic, asked the reddit community to help them understand what was on the other side of space. In fact, many people got involved and there were numerous pieces of fruit to admire and taste. That is to say, it was fruitful. What is so wrong with making our phrases bloom?¹

I have been a cynic for a long time and online for even longer, but I am just now starting to warm to Internet communities. Yet another instance where it is nice to be proven wrong. As I learn more about the world around me (both the natural and the constructed), I become aware of how much more there is for me to discover. Or, as jasontimmur put it: “this just goes to show me there are so many questions I haven’t even thought of.”

That is to say, what is the problem with flowery language?
↩

Telos Realized

Steven Ray Orr — Sun, 11 Mar 2012 23:20:00 PDT

Geoff Dyer for The New York Times:

It went from being a new and unread book to one that was very evidently used and read. I left it lying around for a few days, enjoyed looking at the transformation it had undergone, struck by the mysterious transfusion of knowledge in which this object had played such an important — and historically tried-and-tested — role. The changes wrought upon the book were fairly discreet but, at the risk of projecting my own feelings of satisfaction at having made it to the end, I am tempted to say that it looked fulfilled.

All things have a telos, an end towards which they strive. eBooks are raw information meant only to be consumed, but physical books exist to be projected upon by the reader and then altered through the experience of being read. It is possible to develop a relationship with a book, because both parties are changed through the process. There a pleasure in such relationships, be it ownership and possession or the joy of transformation, and it for this reason that the physical book will take a long time to disappear.

(Via Matt Thomas)

[Citation Needed]

Steven Ray Orr — Thu, 08 Mar 2012 22:47:00 PST

Some people for The Wall Street Journal:

The lack of a new name quickly became a hotly debated topic on the Twitter website. “Let’s be honest, the name “The New iPad” is already a $10 billion mistake, black eye on the Tim Cook era, and it’s an hour old,” read one typical post.

If you are going to quote someone for your story, you tell the readers from whom you got the quote. “Twitter” is not sufficient detail to be considered your source; the individual that made the tweet is. In this case, it happens to be @douglas_blake, but I had to search that out myself. If a quotation adds detail to your story, if it helps make your point, if you simply want to use another person’s words you give them the credit.

It is such a simple thing to attach a name and a link to a quote or to include a “via”/”hat tip” when someone else pointed you towards something interesting. It is not even the matters of plagiarism or infringement that particularly bother me; it is a matter of politeness and a way of giving thanks for catching your interest or, in my case, for providing inspiration.

I guess, in that vein, I should redo the link from the top of my post, if only because they lead me somewhere: Suzanne Vranica and Jessica E. Vascellaro for The Wall Street Journal.

(Via The Morning News)

"If you don’t go, you don’t know"

Steven Ray Orr — Wed, 07 Mar 2012 23:11:00 PST

Christopher R. Graham for The Morning News:

Tomorrow my left arm won’t go above the shoulder and I’ll have to turn my whole body to look left or right, but on the ride back to town I’m actually annoyed that the only visible signs of crash are medium scratches on my left arm and shin.

Our scars are our stories worth telling.

It turns out that a person can barrel-roll fast enough to not actually feel like they’re rolling at all. It’s disorienting, like your body is whirling around a stationary mind. Plus, in retrospect, I’ve discovered a blank space in my memory between hurtling forward with a starboard list and tumbling in this strange disembodied way after crunching my face, neck, and shoulder into gravely softness. The impact is like a memory unattached to any actual sense experience.

Nostalgia

Steven Ray Orr — Wed, 07 Mar 2012 21:56:00 PST

R.M. for The Economist:

As we grind through the Republican primary process, it seems like the debate over morality in America has less to do with moral outcomes and more to do with a vision of how society should look based on idealistic remembrances of how things were.

An ideal that may never have existed at all. It is a desire for nostos: a return to some place that we think of as home, “back home to a young man’s dreams of glory and of fame”.¹

It is a sugar coating placed over old memories that make the past seem sweet, regardless of their substance. We moralize our own histories until they become founding myths that we believe are necessary for the creation of proper character.

(Via The Morning News)

Thomas Wolfe, You Can’t Go Home Again.
↩

Decision 2012 - Russia

Steven Ray Orr — Sun, 04 Mar 2012 22:34:00 PST

Vladimir Putin was just elected to another term as President of Russia, despite having been barred from running again in 2008. This was made possible due to language in the Russian constitution that prevents one from serving more than two consecutive terms. While this was little more than a careful reading of the legislation, the outright manipulation came during Putin’s brief four-year stint as Prime Minister (read as: President) when the current president, Dmitry Medvedev, put forth an amendment that changed the length of presidential terms from four years to six starting with, yes you guessed it, Putin’s third term.

The puppet-President Medvedev will most likely become the new Prime Minister (read as: uh… person in suit?) when Putin steps down. At which point, I would guess that Putin will get rid of the bicycle built for two that he and Medvedev have been riding for the last four years and replace it with something much less cumbersome. Maybe a jet plane or a bomber sub, because nothing says ”I’ve gotten over that annoying semblance of democracy” like vehicles that can be easily equipped with nuclear weapons.

Anyone Can Play

Steven Ray Orr — Sun, 04 Mar 2012 20:37:00 PST

Dan Steinberg for The Washington Post quotes Patrick Burke:

We want the day to come when it’s not a story when an athlete comes out, when athletes are only judged by how they can help their teams win.

This project is going to be very difficult and met with a great deal of outside criticism, but the Burkes are likely right that this particular rot needs to be dealt with first at the core – especially when “faggot” is the most common insult hurled during an NHL hockey game, when players in the big professional sports leagues wait until they retire to come out, when the very notion of “coming out” is still a subject for popular discussion.

This is a first step and simply that, but there has never been a journey that has made it anywhere without one.

(Via Janni Aragon)

The Beekeeper

Steven Ray Orr — Sat, 03 Mar 2012 23:13:00 PST

Megan Paska, a backyard farmer and rooftop beekeeper:

Being a beekeeper has given me a real sense of purpose. That’s my religion, that’s what keeps me sane, that’s what keeps me connected to the world and I need it. If I don’t have that, I am lost. This is the first time in my life where I’ve felt absolutely like I’m on the right path.

The Beekeeper is the third video by Made by Hand, a project which “aims to promote that which is made locally, sustainably, and with a love for craft”. There is a beauty in the work that they do, drawing out honest portraits of people who have found their passions. With each video that I watch, I find myself envying the storytellers and the subjects because both parties get to be artists. They accept that which calls to them and throw themselves into it.

There can be no greater purpose than that.

"That piece of land was not worth all those lives."

Steven Ray Orr — Sat, 03 Mar 2012 09:01:00 PST

Susanna Rustin interviews Roberto Herrscher and Tony McNally, veterans of the Falklands war:

More veterans have killed themselves than were killed in the war, and that was more than double the number of British soldiers. I think I have escaped more or less complete. I’ve had nightmares, but nothing like what you went through, and many Argentines. And in our case, we were not heroes, we had lost a war.

There have been too many wars for us, as a species, not to realize that the costs are paid unto the survivors tenfold. Those left behind share their scars with those left untouched and societies are forever changed. Wars transform us to the point that we are no longer the same country that fought in them. We, in choosing to fight, lose something of ourselves.

That wars are sometimes necessary, that we are called to fight on behalf of the weak or the frail, does nothing to lessen the shift that comes from violence. We are harmed when we must harm another and should do everything in our power prevent it.

Poetry in Leasing

Steven Ray Orr — Fri, 02 Mar 2012 14:24:00 PST

Bert Stratton for The New York Times:

At cocktail parties, I say, ”I’m a landlord”. People hate that. Everybody hates landlords. That’s because nobody paid rent as a child. Renters think apartments should be free, like the wind, rain and baby food.

(Via The Morning News)

Feathers and Wax

Steven Ray Orr — Thu, 01 Mar 2012 23:29:00 PST

Ross Andersen for The Atlantic:

If there were two planets: one of them is teeming with life, but it’s not habitable because it’s methane or sulfur based life, and the other is an Eden with an oxygen-nitrogen atmosphere and only eighty percent our gravity, so everyone would be a superman, and they’re in opposite directions, where would we go if you had to pick one? To us, proliferating the human race must always come first. We would go to the Eden and not think twice about it.

I would give up almost anything for the opportunity to touch the stars. It is a goal unto itself and worthy of achieving only to be done. I am Icarus reborn; the earth is my Crete; and the boundless infinitude of space replace his skies over an endless sea.

Realizing the dream of space is worth any number of broken hearts.

(Vladimir) Putin on the Ritz

Steven Ray Orr — Thu, 01 Mar 2012 12:26:00 PST

Markus Brauck and Matthias Schepp for Spiegel Online:

The filmmaker manages to establish considerable intimacy with the prime minister, who is aiming to once again become president, but without being taken in by him. He also manages to break through the facade that Putin might have been hoping to present. Putin plays the tough guy, while Seipel shows that there is a certain weakness and sadness to always having to play this role.

There are few people who would dispute that Putin is the most powerful person in Russia – although many may disagree on the legitimacy of his authority – but strength does not guarantee happiness and force does not ensure love. It is easy enough to imagine the loneliness that comes with his style of leadership although such imaginings are usually reserved for post-politcs memoirs or whispered stories behind closed doors. Rare is the opportunity to actually be witness to powerful leaders in moments of privacy.

Not that I pretend to pity the man. He is a brutal dictator pretending to wear the trappings of a democrat, trappings that he is increasingly showing open disdain for. I have not yet decided whether it is worthwhile to acknowledge that he is a human being, capable of joys and sorrows, just like the rest of us, but until I come to some conclusion on that, I will continue to marvel at instances of unexpected honesty from heroes and villains that set themselves as greater than the rest of us.

(Via The Morning News)

eBook Rambles

Steven Ray Orr — Wed, 29 Feb 2012 23:18:00 PST

Nicholas Carr, on offering an electronic version with every book purchase:

Buy the atoms, get the bits free. That just feels right - in tune with the universe, somehow.

I am a reader and I love books. My favorites are love stories, not in content, but in their character, their form. The way in which a book will age through use is a testament of the reader’s love.

Each book and every bookshelf is a biography of the owner. If you were to explore mine, a great deal would be revealed. The obvious: science fiction, Stephen King, and political theory dominate my history; and the aesthetic of a collection is more important than strict organization.¹ The odd: Twilight sits upon a stack of feminist thought; at least four Bibles line the shelves, amidsts athiest manifestos and Christian scholarship; and there is an Atari 2600 gathering dust and taking up precious space.

And then the books themselves, holding more than the author’s intended words with stories added by each reader: God Emperor of Dune is dog-earred on every third page²; Twilight has been defaced, all red pen and hate³; and numerous novels are bookmarked with old receipts or gum wrappers, indications of unsuccessful attempts.⁴

Occasionally, visitors will inquire, awe-struck, “have you read all of these?”. That question strikes me as a particularly mad one, akin to asking whether I have watched all the shows on my television. My library is as much a to-do list as it is a display. Old books stay, just as old friends do, and new ones wait until their contents need to be revealed.

There is something rather silly about my attachment to paper and ink, especially when one considers how ruthlessly I mocked those who would not make the switch to digital music, but awareness of my hypocrisy does nothing to alleviate it. I will not give up the physical book; I cannot rid myself of the ability to flip through it, picking out defects and memories alike, tugging at the strings of the person created through the experience of the book.

Electronic books can likewise shape and change the reader, but I have been unable to recreate the same visceral nostalgia that imperfect paper holds. Perhaps this stubbornness is a sign of getting older, of becoming stuck in my ways, but the truth of the matter is that I want nothing more than to carry around entire libraries in my pocket. I yearn to easily search via keyword or phrase. I get excited thinking about the ability to copy, define, and annotate texts all within the actual medium of the message.

It is the future and I want to be a part of it and yet, at the same time, I find myself resisting the urge to develop an eLibrary. Nicholas Carr offers a way out for those like myself whom are rooted in the old ways: buy the atoms, get the bits.

If only it were that easy.

(Via John Gruber)

This is not entirely true. My bookshelf may not be at all easy for an outsider to grasp the methodology to my sorting, but that is not the purpose. The shelves exist to showcase and store my books in such a way that allows me to access them with ease. If you want to know where a certain book is, ask.
↩
At the portal, one Fish Speaker guard whispered to another: “Is God troubled?”

And her companion replied: “The sins of this universe would trouble anyone.”

↩
“Heteronormative” in capital letters across an entire page, as an example. A word that doesn’t exactly flow out of the pen. Eventually one develops a shorthand for these things.
↩
The Kite Runner has been half-finished for two years. At this point, I have resigned myself to being out of the loop on that one.
↩

Web Necessities

Steven Ray Orr — Sun, 26 Feb 2012 10:29:00 PST

Minimal, regarding advertising:

The first thing I do when I install a new OS is to install ad blocking plugins for the browser, along with script blocking and flash blocking. I know this might hurt the site’s owner, but [forget] it. If I am paying for content I want content, not ads.

Minimal, you just made it incredibly easy for me to quit reading your blog, despite the fact that I have enjoyed almost all of your content up to this point.

I am positive that you, on a regular basis, visit many sites that you do not pay for. How I can be sure of that? Because that is the way the Internet works. Advertising is a necessity for many websites, either to offset the cost of hosting or because there is not a viable alternative. John Gruber is able to sustain himself entirely based on advertising–although he prefers to call it “sponsership”, but if it walks like a duck and talks like a duck…

And it is not a bad thing, particularly because it is well-executed and deliberate. The advertising that comes from Gruber is clean, hand-picked, and unobtrusive. Being subject to that is how I pay for reading his website and most websites.

Your frustration is that advertising has, in many cases, started to outweigh content and I agree that is a problem, but the solution is not to block every ad. Stop going to the websites that cannot get it right or, if you feel strongly enough about it and would like to see them succeed, do not hestitate to contact the content providers and tell them.

You are smart; you have a vision for the future of the Internet; and you have a voice. Stop complaining and start building the Internet that you want to see.

Au Revoir

Steven Ray Orr — Thu, 23 Feb 2012 23:26:00 PST

Scott Sayare for The New York Times:

With nary a kiss to the hand nor tears of parting, the French government this week bids adieu to “mademoiselle.”

In a memo addressed to state administrators across France, Prime Minister François Fillon ordered the honorific — akin to “damsel” and the equivalent of “miss” — banished from official forms and registries.

While I think that this is a symbolic win at a time when there are more pressing battles to be fought, there is reason enough to celebrate — if not as a feminist victory than a personal one: I have never been able to say “mademoiselle” without making a fool of myself.

(Via Feministing)

Zelda Doesn't Need Saving

Steven Ray Orr — Tue, 21 Feb 2012 22:29:00 PST

Tevis Thomson, regarding The Legend of Zelda:

The point of a hero’s adventure (and Zelda is the hero’s adventure in gaming) is not to make you feel better about yourself. The point is to grow, to overcome, to in some way actually become better. If a legendary quest has no substantial challenge, if it asks nothing of you except that you jump through the hoops it so carefully lays out for you, then the very legend is unworthy of being told, and retold. Death and punishment for failure are not outdated old-school notions, too demanding for the new eggshell generation.

We played two different series, Tevis, that happened to share the same name, and little else. You are old school. You come from a background of games that could beat you. You revel in the challenge and celebrate your successes because they feel earned. I do not fault that even if I do not share in the sentiment, because our experiences were not the same.

Let me tell you about my journey through the Zelda series.

The Legend of Zelda was the first time I came to realize that heroes could be made instead of simply existing and here, in this game, there was a potential for heroism, but such an end was not guaranteed. It took drive; it took practice; and it took luck. Link was a boy unsure of his capability and thrust into a world that did not care about him. It existed regardless of his actions and would continue to do so if he did not survive. The world was made empty as if by an apocalypse, but there were still hints of the realm left behind that could be discovered and explored. From this, I learned that there are secrets and that they will open themselves to you if you seek them out. It is was in this game that I learned the values of curiosity and persistence.

Link’s Awakening showed me that my choices affect me first, but spread outward to the world at a startling pace. I remember finding out the difference between an act of trust and being forced to follow the only voice amidst darkness. I learned that actions have consequences and that bad reputations, once earned, are nigh impossible to change. Acts of violences, acts of cruelty are remembered long after the high of the moment has passed. Awakening also taught me the importance of dreams, both those that come with sleep and those we aim ourselves towards. It was here that I learned that the stories that we tell ourselves are as important as those that we experience.

Ocarina of Time taught me that friendship is a commitment connecting two people; that love is not an emotion, it is an effort; and that we can be bound, painfully and permanently, to our efforts. Within this game there was such a notion as fate, although it never clarified whether destiny is truly predestination or simply action compounded upon layers of mythology. I found out that there is no difference in value between grand deeds and simple ones for it will always be a worthy act to help those unable to help themselves.

Majora’s Mask helped me to understand that time is precious and there is never enough of it to do everything that you desire. Here I discovered that success is not measure of skill, but of preparation and of determination. I also discovered that evil exists in this world, although it is not only found at the throne of a cruel king—evil can be entered into unaware.

It is true that the point of a hero’s adventure is not to make you feel better about yourself. The point is to grow, to overcome, to in some way actually become better and through Link’s adventures, I have been made better. I have learned about the world and I have discovered myself. That is the purpose of narrative: we tell ourselves stories in order to live. That is as true of video games as it is of novels or poetry or television. Difficulty is a measure of those stories, yes, but just as it is true that there is no more inherent nobility in Moby Dick than in The Adventures of Huckleberry Finn simply because the latter is more accessible than the former, there is no more greatness in a hard game over an easy one.

I play video games to experience them and to see the ways in which they can alter me. I always have. Video games, like any narrative form, are lessons from which I discover myself and the person that I wish to be. The legend of Zelda is the person who is left behind once the controller is set aside and the console is turned off. That is how they restructure our consciousness and captivate our very being.

Tevis, you love the Zelda and there is no denying that you are a fan—likely much more-so than I—but I would not, for all the rupees in Hyrule, trade my experience of that universe for yours.

(Via The Cut)

Friday Night LEDs

Steven Ray Orr — Sun, 19 Feb 2012 23:05:00 PST

Eric Elias explains why iPads are not allowed on the football field:

The point is proven, technology would, as in other industries, render the current status quo inept and inefficient.

I, for one, welcome our robotic, football overlords.

(Via Hacker News)

Bad Teacher

Steven Ray Orr — Sun, 19 Feb 2012 21:13:00 PST

Lee Bessette for College Ready Writing:

My desire to be paid what I am worth does not make a bad teacher. Being ambitious does not make me a bad teacher. Caring about the larger issues facing higher education does not make me a bad teacher.

There are numerous problems with our academic systems—both lower and higher education—but teachers like Lee are not one of them. We want our educators to be the best and they should be paid their worth. There is no reason to attack those who choose to teach despite the lack of money in the profession nor should we malign those who seek solutions to the difficulties that face our educational institutions. Problems are solved by those who show up not those who shut up.

(Via Janni Aragon)

Conservative Affirmative Action

Steven Ray Orr — Sun, 19 Feb 2012 10:13:00 PST

The DailyKos quotes Rick Santorum:

Just like we have certifying organizations that accredit a college, we’ll have certifying organizations that will accredit conservative professors. If you are to be eligible for federal funds, you’ll have to provide an equal number of conservative professors as liberal professors.

How will they define “conservative” or “liberal”? Party affiliation would be the easiest measure, although it would not necessarily be as accurate a metric as voting history would be and if we are going to ignore civil liberties we shouldn’t do it halfway.

Rick Santorum is a crazy person. He frequently suggests policies such as this one, either because he has not had the forethought to plan them in advance or because his advisory team has absolutely nobody capable of criticizing his terrible ideas. Either way, the man has absolutely no place in any position of power – political or otherwise.

Pitmasters

Steven Ray Orr — Sat, 18 Feb 2012 19:12:00 PST

Katy Vine for Texas Monthly

For those in the habit of fetishizing foodstuffs – other recent objects of fancy have included the cupcake and the macaron – Texas barbecue represented an incomparable thing of beauty. It was authentic, geographically unique, and exquisitely simple, yet inscrutably difficult to cook well.

Artistry is not confined to the arts. Such works are possible anywhere an expert is found whom is capable of navigating a task in such a way that others cannot help but watch in awe. Aaron Franklin and the Mueller family are masters of the southern barbecue in much the same way that Katy Vine is a master of story craft. She expertly draws out the tale of these men, building them up as more than mere cooks.¹

It is always helpful to be reminded that there is beauty to be found in skilled work of all kinds and not simply from words on a page or actors on a stage. There is an artistry that can be found well beyond the finer arts, if we remember to look for it.

(Via Austin Kleon)

Although, truth be told, it falls apart somewhat towards the middle when she attempts to build Aaron’s story around the power of social media, because she gives up on the narrative thread that she had so carefully woven. I suspect she felt that the Twitter aspect was too significant to ignore, but it hardly feels as if it belongs in this story.
↩

Post-Literate Politics

Steven Ray Orr — Wed, 15 Feb 2012 09:40:00 PST

Wendy Kaminer for The Atlantic:

A phrase like “freedom of liberty” doesn’t need to make sense; it need only convey attitude and invoke emotion. And, to be fair, Santorum’s point is clear … he favors freedom and liberty.

Politicians should not strive to simply be poets. Their words should be deliberate and their meanings clear. To do otherwise is to unseat themselves as the authority upon which we can rely. Granted, Rick Santorum is hardly a source that I would give creedence, but he should attempt to be the standard upon which his supporters can place their faith.

Great political oratory can be poetic, but it must first be honest lest it fails its primary duty: to inform the people.

"The call to prayer has subsided"

Steven Ray Orr — Tue, 14 Feb 2012 23:03:00 PST

Nathan Deuel for The Morning News:

Week by week, year by year, this is the life we’ve chosen, and we’re trying to do it all without getting burned.

I am building a list of writers that I envy and would, without hestitation, point to as masters of the craft. Nathan is, of course, on that list. Finish that book, Nathan, so I can give you money in exchange for your words on paper.

Unrested Thoughts

Steven Ray Orr — Tue, 14 Feb 2012 22:08:00 PST

Laura Miller for The Chimerist:

I prefer to fall asleep while reading, an excellent way to avoid those nocturnal thoughts that can suddenly jerk you into wretched wakefulness. On chilly nights, I love to pull the covers over everything but my head and read a book propped up against a pillow until I drift off.

While I agree with Laura on the benefits of the iPad as an eReader, I do have one point of contention: “those nocturnal thoughts that can suddenly jerk you into wretched wakefulness”. I would much prefer a night of fitful sleep filled with the half-mad thoughts of an addled brain than what dreams may come of a proper rest.

Those unrested thoughts allow me into the undiscovered catacombs of my mind. Those places are hardly ever explored, because we spend so much time caught up in our conscious selves. I am not saying that it is a matter of productivity or genius. Sometimes it is just fun to wander.

(Via Liz Danzico)

How Not To Advertise

Steven Ray Orr — Sun, 12 Feb 2012 22:09:00 PST

Brent Simmons:

They’re filled with ads and social-media sharing buttons — and more ads. And Google plus-onesies and Facebook likeys. And also more ads. Plus tweet-this-es. Plus ads. (And, under-the-hood, a whole cruise-ship-full of analytics. The page required well-more than 100 http calls.)

I know. You’re shocked, right? Shocked that advertising is happening on these premises.

Step One: get readers.

Step Two: keep those readers.

If you do anything that interferes with step one or step two, you are doing it wrong,

Bound

Steven Ray Orr — Sun, 12 Feb 2012 17:56:00 PST

John Davidson, for The Morning News:

I didn’t leave the courthouse that day excited about having the scoop on a big story. The truth of it all made me want to quit, to get away. I wanted to call the parents and tell them that printing the truth would not change anything, it would only harm their daughter and provide newspaper readers with some twisted form of entertainment. But now I had to write the story. This family had taken me into their trust and asked for this. No matter how much I thought it would harm their daughter and their family, I was bound.

There was a time when I seriously considered journalism as a vocation. I thought that there was a nobility to truth telling and that journalism was as much an art form as any other style of storytelling.

John’s piece serves as a reminder that I would be incapable of such writing, of transforming the terrible honesty of reality into sheer banality. The idea of this story is enough to horrify me. How is it possible to accept such events as normal or commonplace? And the notion that I would be capable of showcasing them to the public at large without some combination of tears and fury?

That was not the life that I wanted. I believe that our society faces enormous obstacles on the way to utopia and I believe that the only way to overcome those difficulties is through direct, upfront communication, but contemporary journalism does not serve that role. As long as the news is exhibited as a sanitized version of information entertainment, it can not be a method by which we rise up beyond ourselves. John’s “Demands of Cold Blood” reminds us why by showing us how news should be.

Disconnected

Steven Ray Orr — Fri, 10 Feb 2012 15:18:00 PST

Anonymity is an interesting tool. It provides a screen behind which we are able to hide so that our actions and words can occur without fear of reprisal. It is not a new thought to suggest that the Internet is a medium wherein such secrecy is not only permitted, but encouraged. Pseudonyms are the default handles by which we identify ourselves on most websites. Facebook and Google+ demand honesty from their users—at least, in nomenclature—but such policies are hardly the norm.

There has always been a disconnect between my various web presences. Part of this is the convenience of throw-away identities in situations where the time necessary to register would be more effort than the comments that I am making are worth. A quick message of approval or an offhand comment on a story gains nothing by connecting my identity to them – particularly if I am not attempting to become part of a broader community. This version of myself is inconsequential to my web identity and is more akin to applause after a show than to actual communication.

Another version of myself, and one that is much more significant, is Steven Ray Orr and is tied directly to this site. Here I attempt thoughtful, careful consideration of whatever is on my mind, be it television, politics, or writing. When I join discussions online, I often connect those personas directly to this website as a form of giving credence to what I am saying. In fact, by using my real name I am stripping away the protections of anonymity to show how strongly I stand behind the words and ideas that I am advocating. Right or wrong, everything on this website is my own thinking and I would not be ashamed for anyone to read it.

There are other places where my focus is elsewhere. For a while, I tried to play with different forms of narrative and was thankful to keep those in anonymous spaces, because I judged them to be failures. I have a Flickr account that I do not advertise, because the freedom to keep my amateur photography apart from the artwork that I am proud of. And then there is my Twitter account.

I want to start with a clarification: this is not an apology for my tweets or the things that I say in that space. While the content of my account is often vulgar, rude, or downright offensive, the placement of it is deliberate: those who follow me are well aware of what to expect. Likewise, it is not meant to be directly associated with this website, because the calibre of discourse is dramatically different.

If you were to treat my twitter account with the same degree of seriousness that I hope this website is treated, you would forced to conclude that I am an asshole. And I am not pretending otherwise. But my twitter account is in a space where other people come to in order to find humor, if they so choose.

The problem is that this distinction has never been made clear. This site has long had a prominent link to that twitter account although I cannot recall as to why I made such a decision. So I have now made more clear the difference between “Steven who would like to be taken seriously” and “Steven who is interested in getting laughed at”: that twitter link directs to a new account that I have set up for a more serious discourse.

Twitter is one of the places that I visit online to disconnect from myself and I am not sorry for that. But in attaching that identity to this one, I made a mistake by giving the impression that the two spaces were to be treated as one. For that, I apologize.

We Are Flawed Characters

Steven Ray Orr — Fri, 10 Feb 2012 12:38:00 PST

Lionel Shriver for… wait, what? for the Financial Times?¹:

Sometimes you simply cannot bear the company of an author’s characters, who inspire the same claustrophobic desperation to flee as overbearing dinner guests, and in that case you should read a different book.

Our scars are our stories worth telling. This is as true of characters as it is living, breathing people. We are scared and we are flawed and we are broken. Anyone seeking perfection from their storytellers will be disappointed, because we are as imperfect as our readers and it is not possible for our subjects to be anything but a reflection of those blemishes.

If you find yourself falling in love with Ondaatje’s Hana or Franzen’s Berglunds, it is not because they are perfect, but because you see yourself in them. Their weaknesses are our weaknesses and that is how they manage to find a place in our hearts. If they do not, if we find ourselves unable to bear the company of these characters, we move on from them. We close that book and move on.

This seems wrong. Financial Times running an article on the nature of developing characters in writing? Not that I should complain as I will take my writing advice where I can get it, but I am also a big believer in the importance the names that we choose to use. Case in point: if I ever let Dave Morris or Wes Lord start posting on here, you will know that I have jumped the shark on StevenRayOrr.com.
↩

Touch: [1-1] Seams

Steven Ray Orr — Tue, 07 Feb 2012 22:32:00 PST

Andy Greenwald for Grantland:

What is television writing, really, other than the art of manufacturing coincidence?

We want to be made to believe that these coincidences are anything but; that serendipity on screen is possible. We want writers so skilled at their craft that we forget that they were ever involved in the process. We want perfection.

Touch fails, not because of the ineptitudes of Kiefer Sutherland or the sheer ridiculousness of Danny Glover, but because it does not permit us the coming together illusion of incident and accident. Every instance of happenstance feels carefully constructed as the premise of the show demands it must be and we, as viewers, are supposed to marvel at the skill with which the writers have crafted this story.

And perhaps we do watch agape at these machinations, but the cost of cleverness is too high. We writers are not meant to be seen. If the seams of our stories are exposed, we have failed in our craft.

Metaphorical Diarrhea

Steven Ray Orr — Mon, 06 Feb 2012 23:55:00 PST

If you have ever wondered why no project ever meets its completion date, read this posting by Michael Wolfe on Quora:

I make a mental note that we are out of toilet paper and need to stock up when we hit the next town. We turn the corner: a raging river is blocking our path. I feel a massive bout of diarrhea coming on…

"It needs blood to pump"

Steven Ray Orr — Mon, 06 Feb 2012 23:30:00 PST

Director Nicolas Refn was interviewed by Todd Gilchrist:

Filmmaking is very sexual, because it’s about working with your collaborators as intensely as a sexual experience, figuring out what the other person likes, needs, and can contribute to the emotion that you’re trying to build.

If filmmaking is lovemaking then novel writing is masturbation. It is all simply a matter of finding ways to get the blood flowing to right places.

"Life finds a way"

Steven Ray Orr — Thu, 02 Feb 2012 23:05:00 PST

Caleb A. Scharf, for Scientific America:

If there is one single piece of information you should take away from the recent flood of incredible exoplanetary discoveries it is this: Our universe makes planets with extraordinary efficiency – if planets can form somewhere, they will.

As our knowledge of outer space grows more vast, it becomes obvious that this universe cannot possibly be home to merely one planet containing the seeds of creation.

There will come a day when it will be considered absurd to claim that we, on earth, are the only life that exists. The earth is not flat, nor does the universe revolve around us, and, given enough of a canvas to work with, life will most certainly find a way.

Perfection, In All You Do

Steven Ray Orr — Thu, 02 Feb 2012 22:28:00 PST

Tom Downey, for The Wall Street Journal

Obsessive—some might say insane—pursuit of perfection, in coffee and cuisine, clothes and comforts, isn’t unusual in Japan.

I have a tendency to only commit myself to pursuits that I am good at and to, in private, practice at those actions until I feel confident enough to showcase them. If I do not succeed—by my own definition—then it is back to rehersal, to training. Or, if I feel that the effort required is not worth the outcome, I give up.

This is not something that I regret. Granted, I have very little to showcase and prove myself with, but that is not the point. Perfection, absolute and total perfection, is the aim. I am nowhere near that mark now and I may never reach it, because there is always more to learn.

But for now, the trying is enough.

"4Chan is for nihilists"

Steven Ray Orr — Tue, 31 Jan 2012 23:46:00 PST

Farhad Manjoo, for Slate:

In many ways, Reddit is a more accessible, less vulgar version of 4Chan, the meme-spewing online redoubt of the Web’s most vicious trolls … Redditors aren’t just in it for the lulz. While 4Chan is for nihilists, Reddit users get wrapped up in the political fights of the day. In 2008, the site became the Web’s most pro-Obama destination that wasn’t funded by the campaign itself.

Is there a more apt descriptor of these two sites?

The Transforming Aspect

Steven Ray Orr — Tue, 31 Jan 2012 23:15:00 PST

Mark Edmundson, for The Chronicle of Higher Education:

I liked the transforming aspect of the game: I came to the field one thing—a diffident guy with a slack body—and worked like a dog and so became something else—a guy with some physical prowess and more faith in himself.

This entire piece is fantastic, but the conclusion reached regarding the dual-nature of sports is true of most things. Technological revenge. All technologies contain with them the capacity for both utopia and apocalypse.

It is so rarely the tools or the technologies that are at fault, but the manner in which they are utilized that is to blame.

Laughter and Effort

Steven Ray Orr — Tue, 31 Jan 2012 22:31:00 PST

David Hill, for The New York Times:

Everyone in comedy may be a wounded loser, but not all wounded losers can do comedy. Besides, if they did, who would sit in judgment and, if all goes well, provide the laughs?

I came to this realization about comedy, as an art form, a long time ago. I enjoy making people laugh, but I have never been able to differentiate between a joke that will succeed and a joke that will fail – unless it is after the telling, and even then I cannot be sure.

Success is not a measure of talent, but of effort, of focus, of determination. Innate ability simply changes the starting point, but, in order to succeed, work still has to be done. Which is why I respect any comedian (or artist) that is able to do well, even on the most amateur levels.

There are only so many hours with which we are able to commit ourselves to improvement and occasionally, after going to a stand-up night or watching my favorite comics¹ perform, I consider refocusing myself to attempt an open mic. Then I read pieces like David’s and am reminded that it is a commitment. Much like poetry. Much like improvised theatre. Much like writing. I cannot possibility be good at all those things and then add comedy with the amount of effort that I have to give. In fact, I am not good at most of those art forms as is. There is only one that I would consider boasting about and, even then, I am still in the earliest stages of it.

So, instead of expending energy on another art form simply because I admire those that are capable of doing it well, I will sit back and admire those that do well. Artists have to perform to someone and art for artists just feels wrong.

At the moment, Louie C.K. and Anthony Jeselnik. Is this a faux pas? I would say that they are similar, but that may be due to the fact that they both make me laugh.
↩

Self-Overcoming

Steven Ray Orr — Wed, 25 Jan 2012 20:45:00 PST

Joseph Ledoux, for the New York Times:

The capacity to fear … is pretty universal among animals. But anxiety ― an experience of uncertainty ― is a different matter. It depends on the ability to anticipate, a capacity that is also present in some other animals, but that is especially well developed in humans. We can project ourselves into the future like no other creature.

Our capacity to believe in a world unlike that which we see and touch. It is this which allows us to create a better world, to plan for events unthinkable, and to alter our surroundings with tools and constructs that transform the very definition of a human being. It will be the key to our ascension into utopia – a future so impossible that we cannot yet see it in our lives. We can only just barely begin to imagine what it would be like.

Is the cost of such ruminations the possibility of anxiety? It would seem that this power to project ourselves forward holds as much opportunity for dismay as it does joy. If we are to use this gift that humanity has been given, we must also overcome its drawback: the worry that we will be unable to transcend the events of our pasts. We, the human being, is that which must be overcome.

Schtolenfünken

Steven Ray Orr — Wed, 25 Jan 2012 18:27:00 PST

Elisha Cooper, for The Morning News:

Schtolenfünken is the German word that describes the feeling of letdown and disappointment that occurs when people we think are good (cyclists) do bad things (steal my wheel), and yes, I made the word up.

It is absolutely no surprise that I look forward to every essay that Elisha writes. Crawling is a collection of pieces written about his experiences in the first year of fatherhood and, although outside of my normal genre, will be on my bookshelf soon enough if only because I have complete faith in his abilities as a wordsmith.

Idle Thoughts on Harm

Steven Ray Orr — Sun, 22 Jan 2012 13:16:00 PST

Scott Madin:

I actually don’t care whether anyone is offended. Offense is a vague, amorphous concept, and it is completely subjective, as my friend pointed out. Anyone can claim to be deeply, mortally offended by anything, and it may very well be true; even if it’s not, there’s no way to dispute it.

It runs deeper than the question of honesty. We should, whenever possible, take people at their word especially when it comes to harm. But Scott is right in his disdain of the concept of offense, because it is without the impact or the danger of harm. Offense is as shifting as the unstable pillars of emotions and opinion.

I have long stopped concerning myself with offending people, much as I have stopped focusing on the changing the opinions of those who are not interested in conversation, those who are offended by the beliefs of others, or by their very existence.¹ I will waste no energy on them. I will spend no time changing myself to ensure that they are satisfied.

Where I run into trouble is the point at which offense is categorized as harm, because it is a mistake akin to declaring opinion as fact. It is crying wolf, although that analogy is suspect. What are the consequences of such declarations? Does crying offense burn social or political capital? Will I trust you less if you conflate offense with harm?

The Pope recently said, “[gay marriage] policies which undermine the family threaten human dignity and the future of humanity itself”.
↩

"Even the mighty can lose heart"

Steven Ray Orr — Thu, 19 Jan 2012 23:03:00 PST

Maggie McKee, for New Scientist:

New calculations suggest that Jupiter’s rocky core is dissolving like an antacid tablet plopped in water.

The work could help explain why its core appears smaller and its atmosphere richer in heavy elements than predicted.

(Via The Morning News)

"Soccer is boring"

Steven Ray Orr — Thu, 19 Jan 2012 20:44:00 PST

Brian Phillips, for Grantland:

Assuming we follow sports for something like entertainment, what do we get out of a game for which the potential for tedium is so high that some of its most famous inspirational quotes are simply about not being dull?

We watch for the moments of poetry.

I suspect that a soccer fan and a Sedins fan share DNA – specifically that which allows one to enjoy the subtle transformation of chaos into order; the way by which a team coordinates their efforts into a perfect demonstration of the sport. Such instances do not come often, but when they appear they are worth all the build-up.

(Un)Errata

Steven Ray Orr — Thu, 19 Jan 2012 10:31:00 PST

Molly Ball, for The Atlantic:

Rick Perry has been a dead candidate walking for weeks, but just after 11 a.m. Thursday, he’s set to make it official that he’s out of the presidential race.

Come on, Rick Perry! Are you kidding me? I just apologized for accusing you of dropping out of the race and you drop out of the race?

This is just going to destroy all of my credibility.

FNL Recap: [1-1] Tested

Steven Ray Orr — Wed, 18 Jan 2012 23:58:00 PST

We all learn, at a very young age, that we pay for our sins with blood. The pain that comes with time teaches us that we likewise pay for our successes. But if we walk unerringly, with clear eyes and full hearts, we cannot lose.

I write. That is how I experience the world and it always has been. But in Dillon, Texas, they live in anticipation of the next friday night when darkness will fall and the only lights for miles will be pointed toward a 120 yard stretch of field. They live for football.

This is the world of Friday Night Lights, but do not mistake this for the making of heroes. It is the transformation of youth, of children into human beings. They will realize that their lives as children are something that must be surpassed; that these experiences, the joys and the sorrows alike, are a bridge to something greater and, if they are ever to reach that plateau, they will have to overcome themselves.

Perfection is the starting point for Friday Night Lights. These boys. This team. This town. They are perfect from the first moment that we are brought into their grace. And, in the another moment as a boy decides to be a hero, they are shattered. These boys. This team. This town.

Friday Night Lights is not a story of rebuilding. That which they were is gone. That which they were to be will never be. Instead, this is the story of something else, of something greater. This is the story of a team that could not lose.

Scranton Elm Disease

Steven Ray Orr — Wed, 18 Jan 2012 22:41:00 PST

Andy Greenwald, for Grantland:

The American Office, quite rightly, differentiated itself from the outset: In the New World, the workplace wasn’t a sad metaphor for the crushed dreams and dreary reality of adulthood. Rather, it was an allegory for family, the screwed-up group of misfits one gets stuck with and learns to, if not love, then tolerate.

Minutes unto hours. Hours to days. Days to weeks and weeks unto forever.

The Office was always about the people whom we chose to love when the only other option available was hate them. It was a world that we watched and enjoyed because we could see shades of ourselves within it; those subtle elements to the characters that caused flickers of recognition. Jim and Pam were people that we believed we could be, if only we found it in ourselves to care about the family that our jobs chained us to.

These things were true, but anyone watching the most recent season will attest to the painfully obvious truth that they are no longer.

Some blame the departure of Steve Carell; or the introduction of James Spader; or the promotion of Ed Helms. But these incidents have absolutely nothing to do with the disappointment that comes at the end of each episode of The Office. That is to say, these are simply leaves falling from a tree; one that has, from the roots upward, long since been rotted hollow. If we look carefully, we can still catch glimpses of the beauty that once was, but it becomes harder with every passing episode as each worthy moment that is eked out comes at the expense of the The Office’s heart: we have stopped being able to love these people.

Somewhere along the way, the characters became the butt of jokes instead of the ones telling them. The people that we were supposed to love, the people that were supposed to remind us of our own lives, they transformed into sad and twisted caricatures of themselves. No one can love a parody of themselves.

Andy Greenwald’s piece asks if the office can be fixed, only to conclude that “it might be time to put it down”. He is right. The Office is a tree that has long been dead. We have been mistaking the faded greenery for life or, more foolishly perhaps, we have hoped that it was the autumn process and the beginnings of a rebirth. But a day is rapidly approaching when even the most stalwart of Office defenders have to admit that the show should be allowed to finally end; that the tree should be cut down to make room for new growth.

Personally, I think that actually happened a long time ago, back in April of 2009. When Parks and Recreation premiered.

Relax

Steven Ray Orr — Tue, 17 Jan 2012 22:09:00 PST

Dave Morris, at TEDxVictoria:

Improvisation is a process. It is a way of making a thing. It is not a product that I can give or show you. What I do is improvise… theatre, or hip hop, or explosive devices.

What do I do?

I sell computers. If the need arises, I can twist this do-ing into something that sounds more impressive or official or makes me appear to be “superior”, but the very core of the task that I spend most of my time doing is selling computers.

This is not where I imagined myself after university and it certainly is not where I imagine myself to be ten years from now. There are things that I would like to do with my life that have absolutely nothing to do with Apple computers or how to fix an iPhoto library.

Most people fall into this at some point in their lives. We allow work to be the way by which we define ourselves: “I am a computer salesperson”. But where I clock my 40 hours to get a paycheque does not define me any more than the bed in which I clock another 40 hours. I need money to live in the same way that I need sleep. These are two of the rules of this game.

The part that I have forgotten, the part that Dave Morris’ Way of Improvisation has reminded of, is that getting caught up in the rules is the only way to lose.

I am going to die one day.¹ Whether I get a good sleep every night. Whether I work my 9-5, Monday to Friday. Eventually, despite following all the rules, I will cease to exist. That game is unwinnable.

No, the game that I am currently losing is the one that I have chosen for myself. The game that I call “being Steven”, where I am defined not by where I work, but by what I choose to do. Selling computers is a rule in that game and, for now, I am following it. But writing this blog?; penning my novel?; eking out scraps of poetry?; spending free time with the people I care about? These are the parts of the game that matter, that are play, that are how I “win”.

Thank you, Dave, for reminding me the way of improvisation. For reminding me that I get to choose the process by which I experience the world around me and that I should choose one that fulfills and satisfies me.

Presumably. This is one of those facts that is unknowable. The only way in which it can be proven is for me to die, at which point I will no longer be around to accept the evidence.
↩

The Loss of Urgency

Steven Ray Orr — Tue, 17 Jan 2012 18:58:00 PST

Steam, the Kindle and Netflix are three radically different technologies – the first is a digital distributor for video games, the second is an electronic book reader, and the third is a movie rental service – but they all suffer from the same technological revenge: a loss of urgency. They are technologies designed with the intent to give one instantaneous access to media. Whenever a user wishes to read a certain book or watch a specific movie, all that is required is a few easy clicks: Steam has over 2,000 games within its catalogue; there are 300,000 books available for access on the Kindle; and Netflix has fifty-five million DVDs to ship or stream to its subscribers. These are technologies of access: they allow the user to easily and quickly view specific media at the discretion of the user.

Compare this with stone and mortar libraries or Blockbusters – distributors who force users to compete for access to the same products – and it becomes easy to view the technologies of access as allowing their users more freedom. They provide users with more options, more choices. Inherent to this freedom, though, is a form of technological revenge.

From the moment of revelation where it is understood that one can view anything whenever one desires, technologies of access are transformed into tools of procrastination: the user no longer has any need to read The Man Without Qualities today, because one’s Kindle will always be able to access it later; it is unnecessary to watch Barton Fink now, as one can simply order it on Netflix at another time. Access allows users the freedom to choose both what they want and when they want it, but instant access gives the user more freedom to actively choose not to do something.

Armchair Journalism

Steven Ray Orr — Tue, 17 Jan 2012 00:39:00 PST

Thesis: Obama kept the War on Terror going in order to keep unemployment numbers down.
Evidence: None whatsoever. Wait, no. I woke up in the middle of the night and wrote it on a receipt that was on my bedside table.
Conclusion: Obama kept the War on Terror going in order to keep unemployment numbers down.

There. Can I be a journalist now?

Errata

Steven Ray Orr — Mon, 16 Jan 2012 23:59:00 PST

Speaking of irresponsible journalism, I made a comment on January 3rd:

Rick Perry has already suspended his campaign, which comes as a surprise to absolutely nobody. Both Michele Bachman and Jon Huntsman should do the same.

This was incorrect. Not that I am backtracking on my point that Bachman and Huntsman have no place in a presidential campaign: they do not and I am pleased that they took my advice in walking away. Unfortunately, it turns out that Rick Perry did not actually withdraw from the Republican primaries.

Boy are my cheeks red.

When Rick Perry said that he would, ”return to Texas [to] assess the results of tonight’s caucus [and] determine whether there is a path forward”, I made an assumption on Governor’s behalf: that he and his campaign staff had not lost their damn minds.

Rick Perry is not going to be on the Virginia ballot; he will likely be removed from the Illinois ballot; and he is currently polling 5th in South Carolina, Florida, and Nevada, only barely surpassing Jon Huntsman who has already dropped out and endorsed Romney. At this point, the only way that Rick Perry will gain the republican nomination is if Mitt Romney, Ron Paul, Rick Santorum, and Newt Gingrich are all caught partaking in naked mud-wrestling in a giant vat of tapioca pudding. And even then, Ron Paul might be able to spin it in his favor.¹

Perry’s campaign is over. It does not matter how well he does in the debates. It does not matter if he manages to make Romney appear to be a monster who eats kittens. Even if a minor miracle were to occur and Romney were unable to secure the nomination, there is nothing that Perry can do in time to be on the ballot against President Obama. Romney and Paul are the only snowballs that have not yet melted into puddles of slush. And neither of them have anything to gain by choosing him for vice president.

But just because I know it, does not mean that Rick Perry knows it and so he has forced my hand: Governor Perry, I formally apologize for suggesting that you had suspended your campaign after being absolutely slaughtered in the Iowa caucus. It was wrong of me and I am sorry for any damaged that my blog caused to your campaign.

I guess.

I imagine the press conference would go something like this: “While I do personally endorse the tapioca Slip ‘n Slide, it is not a national concern and each state must be allowed to legislate the matter as they see fit. Regionalism is the only way out of the crisis that our nation has fallen into. Vote Ron Paul in 2012!”
↩

Journalists ≠ Scientists

Steven Ray Orr — Mon, 16 Jan 2012 22:50:00 PST

Sharon Kirkey, for Postmedia News:

Results of a new study suggest people who cannot control, cut back or stop their use of the Internet have abnormal white matter structure in the brain similar to what is seen in cocaine and crystal-meth addicts.

No.

Stop it.

Just. Stop it.

What do you mean when you say “the Internet”? Are we talking about the habit of getting caught up in Wikipedia or TV Tropes? Do you mean the sharing sleeping kitty .GIFs? Is accessing your Dropbox folder the same Internet-based task as playing Farmville for ten hours straight? How about having a Skype conversation with your partner from whom you are away for months at a time?

I have not read the entire study as there are portions of it that require knowledge that I do not have, but the study itself is not my problem;¹ I am bothered by the media coverage. More specifically, I am frustrated with the notion that this paper has introduced some incredible revelation to the medical or psychological community.

This study is preliminary and the only conclusion that can be drawn from it is that more studies will have to be undertaken to determine anything. The authors are well aware of this and stated so within the section titled “Limitations of the Study”. The only place that I was able to find that bit of information was within the paper itself. The media reports also conveniently ignore that the study places marijuana and alcohol exposure on par with “Internet abuse”. Why? Because it goes against the stereotypical narrative that “Internet people” are somehow defective or ill.

I do not deny that there are behaviours one can exhibit via the Internet that are harmful and even addictive – it may have to be taken on faith that I know better than some regarding the ease with which one can cross the line separating healthy and harmful habits – but most of the media has made no effort at all to acknowledge that “Internet addiction” is not truly a diagnosis and instead is a symptom of existing conditions.

It is lazy journalism and it is irresponsible. Are those responsible aware of this? Of course they are. The media regularly saturates us with sensational stories that have little support and even less backing. It is done because the immediate payoff is huge and there are almost no consequences for deceit.

This is how science works: theses are tested and retested. Papers are written and analyzed. Results, methodologies, limitations are all examined, criticized, and examined again. The authors of this paper are doing their job by submitting the paper to be critiqued by their peers. Other studies will be undertaken. Flaws will revealed, resolved, and then removed in the next attempt. New methods will be attempted.
↩

On Elections, Generally Speaking

Steven Ray Orr — Fri, 13 Jan 2012 11:27:00 PST

Harrison Mooney, for Puck Daddy:

Plus, it’s a democratic system, so it’s bound to reward stupidity and invite subversion.

This is a point that I have written on for years and Harrison includes it as a throw-away joke in a post talking about the NHL All-Star Game.

Which is why he makes money blogging and I do not.

Ferme le Bouche

Steven Ray Orr — Wed, 11 Jan 2012 23:16:00 PST

Vahan Panikian Outremont, for The Montreal Gazette

I can’t wrap my mind around how a group of millionaires, pushing a circular object on a sheet of ice with sticks, can bring our country to this point.

Are we seriously talking about what language one man speaks to another man while shoving a puck into a net?

(Via Puck Daddy)

Crab Mentality

Steven Ray Orr — Tue, 10 Jan 2012 23:25:00 PST

The Democrats have spent the last twenty years – minimum – demonizing their allies in an attempt to succeed at extremely short term goals at the expense of any meaningful long term strategy. It is the liberal way. Much like with spoiled children and ice cream, the left wing would rather have their particular flavor of democracy or none at all. It takes a special kind of madness to hold a loaded gun to an entire political party and shout, “either everyone agrees with me or the Republicans get to run the country”.

Despite this, Democratic candidates are still able to ascend to the presidency. Barack Obama did it in 2008 with “Yes We Can” and Bill Clinton in 1992 was helped along by Ross Perot’s third party run. It is obviously not a strict rule that Republicans are more successful politicians, but I would argue that they have consistently had an significant advantage: unity. Republicans are, primarily, interested in maintaining the status quo which has allowed them to band together in the fights against communism, civil rights, equal marriage, and gender equality. Their opposition to change has permitted them to agree with each other more readily, because “no” requires few qualifiers.

Democrats strive for utopia, which demands a complete overhaul of existing social, political, and cultural institutions, but they radically disagree on the best methods to employ and on the roadmap to follow. This can be blamed on the “me first” attitudes of nearly every major democratic lobby group.

Still, this seems to be a perfectly natural viewpoint, as we are best able to enjoy our successes the sooner that they happen, and the Left has been following it for years with some successes. So why should proponents of same-sex marriage care about ensuring the fairness of affirmative action? Why does a pro-choicer need to champion taxation based on the veil of ignorance?

The answer is simple: we cannot achieve utopia if we do not advocate for each other. We must be each other’s keepers.

And, finally, we return to the topic of presidental primaries. Over the last five years the Republican Party has forgotten this creed and, by doing so, has created the half-mad political hydra that has taken the form of the Republican primary contest. Whether this is viewed as a positive or negative will depend entirely on personal politics, but before the Left proudly declares this to be a predictor of their own future success, consider that the Democratic Party has been driven by politics of individualism for decades.

And exactly what do they have to show for it?

Presidential Nomination: New Hampshire

Steven Ray Orr — Tue, 10 Jan 2012 21:04:00 PST

Mitt Romney ran the table.

Honesty in the Arcade

Steven Ray Orr — Mon, 09 Jan 2012 23:52:00 PST

Tycho, from Penny Arcade:

Gabriel’s problems are different than mine. We take the same drug for different reasons, and I would never presume to speak for him. I know only the most rudimentary version of his experience because he can’t talk about it, even now. That makes it sound exotic and exciting, like the baroque psychosexual furnace that might propel an international assassin. I doubt it’s that exciting in practice; in fact, it’s probably debilitating in some way. But that’s how this idea is generally presented: madness as a supernatural power source, as opposed to a seemingly inviting bowl of oatmeal interspersed with occasional hot glass.

Even I buy into this idea, and I should fucking know better. But if this chemical is mediating my responses - if it’s adjudicating stimuli in some way - is there something true about it? I don’t know, actually. You can spend a lot of time thinking about it, though.

Sometimes we speak with openness and honesty about that which pins us down, motivates our actions, or that which terrifies us. It is a reminder that we are, even our heroes, only human. There is bravery here and it is to be applauded.

And envied.

Krazy Hockey League

Steven Ray Orr — Mon, 09 Jan 2012 18:48:00 PST

Rick Westhead, for The Star:

Gun-slinging owners, mandatory overnights in remote team bases, sometimes before home games, and even planting illegal drugs on high-priced players whose team owners want to stop paying is all part of life in the wild KHL, a hockey league that, high-profile warts notwithstanding, has quickly established itself as the second-best in the world outside the NHL.

I can only imagine that the third-best national hockey league involves child soldiers and dirty bombs. While I can appreciate the drive some players must have to play, the horror stories are enough to make me reconsider traveling to Russia – let alone trusting my career (or my life) to their mad hockey barons

The Canucks Beat

Steven Ray Orr — Sat, 07 Jan 2012 01:49:00 PST

While we are on the topic, Harrison Mooney is the best Canucks beat writer out there today – hell, he may even be the best hockey beat writer. If you are a Canucks fan, check out Pass It To Bulis and if you prefer to keep up with the entire NHL, look for everything that he writes on Puck Daddy.

Psychic Hockey Twins

Steven Ray Orr — Sat, 07 Jan 2012 01:32:00 PST

Harrison Mooney for Puck Daddy:

They’re not at the level of a Gretzky, Lemieux, or even a Crosby, but do you honestly expect that the NHL will yield another pair of identical twins that have more chemistry than a biography of Robert Boyle because they’ve never played apart in their lives? Seriously, once in a lifetime.

I like to remind people that I am from Saskatchewan: a prairie boy by home and heart. The West Coast may be where I was raised, but long, drawn out sunsets and wide, open plains call to me. Home is powerful. We are driven from it; we are called to it; and we try, for our entire lives, to return to it. All that aside, I have no interest in the Winnipeg Jets, because the hockey that they play can hardly be said to be impressive.¹

From time to time, I dare to call myself a hockey fan although I have started to be more precise and declare myself a Canucks fan, but even this may prove to be a falsehood in a few years, as this team that I have grown to appreciate transforms into the next iteration. This is my first time investing energy into a sports team and I do not know if my interest will flow from the Sedin-Canucks to the generation that follows.

The measure of a talented hockey player has little to do with respect or adoration – although their achievements thus far should merit them some of the former, at least and, in fact, it has. There is no trophy for “best psychic duo”, but back-to-back Art Ross wins is as close as it comes. It may be that the disrespected-Sedins narrative that we, as Canucks, frequently tout is, as most narratives are, constructed. Perhaps by the media, looking for a story. Perhaps by the fans, looking for excuses. I will not deny that there is some truth to it, but good fictions are built upon an interpretation of some facts.

Regardless, Henrik and Daniel Sedin do not need to be viewed league-wide as wizards on skates. It is enough for me that they are incrediblely talented at what they do and that I am fortunate enough to be able to watch them. If you choose not to enjoy them or wish to malign their accomplishments, be my guest. It is your loss.

I will be sitting down to the next game with Harrison Mooney and the thousands of other fans who recognize that these are once in a lifetime players. And I would not miss it for the world.

Consistently, that is. I won’t deny that there are aspects of the Jets’ game that are impressive. You don’t get the second best Home record in the league without doing some things well.
↩

Presidential Nomination: Iowa

Steven Ray Orr — Tue, 03 Jan 2012 23:03:00 PST

In the case that you are wondering about the results of the Iowa Republican caucus:

Rick Santorum has 6 delegates
Mitt Romney has 6 delegates
Ron Paul has 4 delegates
Newt Gingrich has 1 delegates
Rick Perry has 1 delegates
Michele Bachmann has 0 delegates
Jon Huntsman has 0 delegates

A candidate will need 1,145 to win the nomination. Long road ahead and so forth. Still, there is some depth to the results of this incredibly boring political “vote”.

Rick Perry has already suspended his campaign, which comes as a surprise to absolutely nobody. Both Michele Bachman and Jon Huntsman should do the same, although it is likely that Huntsman will stick around to see if his recent surge is anything more than an anomalous blip.

Rick Santorum is happy with first place in Iowa, although he should not be: his campaign has neither the national drive nor the funding to be able to succeed on a larger scale. This is a case of winning a battle that has absolutely no bearing on the overall war. His only hope at continued success will depend on gaining the support of all remaining stragglers: Perry, Bachmann, and Huntsman – even then, both Mitt Romney and Ron Paul will much stronger bases in many of the upcoming battleground states. New Hampshire’s primary on Saturday will likely blow all the wind out of his campaign especially when Paul and Romney launch attacks on him. It will force him to combat those ads with money that he does not have to spare, in the hopes that it will sustain him long enough to stay afloat instead of allowing him to take advantage of the Iowa results.

Mitt Romney will have a small measure of satisfaction with a tie for first place. While he would have loved to sweep the state, his campaign was more focused on ensuring that neither Rick Perry nor Newt Gingrich were able to gain any significant momentum early on in the process. He will probably win the New Hampshire primary by a significant margin which should help him pull support away from Gingrich in both South Carolina and Florida. If he can manage a win in one or both of those primaries, it is going to make his February lead-up to Super Tuesday much easier.

Newt Gingrich has to hope that Iowa is not a predictor of South Carolina or Florida – two states that he currently leads, much as he did Iowa until mid-December. Now his campaign claims to be moving onto New Hampshire, a state that Romney is going to take by a landslide. He should reconsider and move onto primary states in which he can win. Overtaking Ron Paul for second place might provide him with some personal satisfaction, but it will most certainly cost him in later battlegrounds.

Meanwhile, Barack Obama threw a party and talked about the economy. And, I guess, won the Iowa Democratic caucus too. If that counts for anything.

On Blow-drying One's Genitals

Steven Ray Orr — Wed, 28 Dec 2011 01:01:00 PST

Ross Beeley, for McSweeney’s:

Does the courage to do this in public come with age? Perhaps it’s something a young man like me can’t understand. But you, you are on in years; gray and spotted like a ham in a paintball fight. Your scrotum reminds me of boardwalk taffy. Maybe you’ve been building up to this day your whole life and I’m witnessing the birth of a phoenix.

Madness and poetry. Beats the hell out of my attempt.

The Spaces Between Us

Steven Ray Orr — Mon, 26 Dec 2011 00:07:00 PST

Melissa Bollow Tempel, for RethinkingSchools.org:

Gender is not a subject that I would have broached in primary grades a few years ago. In fact, I remember scoffing with colleagues when we heard about a young kindergarten teacher who taught gender-related curriculum. We thought her lessons were a waste of instructional time and laughed at her “girl and boy” lessons.

My job is also about preparing students to be a part of our society, ready to work and play with all kinds of people. I found that teaching about gender stereotypes is another social justice issue that needs to be addressed, like racism or immigrant rights, or protecting the environment.

This is what education should be. And, while we are on the topic, this is why teachers need to be paid more.

How to Fail at Screenwriting

Steven Ray Orr — Sun, 25 Dec 2011 23:07:00 PST

Justin Halpern, a writer for Shit My Dad Says and How to Be a Gentleman:

I was ecstatic, and hopeful that this show would gel and become a hit. Instead, we were pulled off the air after two episodes. It felt as if my wife had turned to me the instant we’d finished having sex and said, “I want to have an abortion.”

I have a lot of respect for writers involved in television or movies. They choose to pin their success and failures on an entire team of people, any of which are capable of sinking the entire project. Even worse, triumphs are so rarely attributed to the writing team and they often become scapegoats when something is not working. When writing a novel, you are responsible for your own greatness with regards to the project itself – although any number of people can screw up your fame, especially those unwashed, plebeian masses who would not recognize genius if it trampled over their cars during rush hour.

Best of luck to Justin. I certainly do not have what it takes to invest my energy in those undertakings and have the utmost respect for those who do.

Even if they are responsible for Shit My Dad Says.

Not Enough Jesus

Steven Ray Orr — Sun, 25 Dec 2011 22:05:00 PST

David Ng, for the LA Times:

Former Alaska Gov. Sarah Palin is once again targeting the Obama administration, levelling a critical glare at the official White House holiday greeting card for not emphasizing Christmas.

In a time of political deadlock when our elected officials can barely agree on the compass directions, let alone economic or social issues, the most substantial criticism that the ex-Governor can level at the President is “not enough Jesus”.

It is hard to express the full width and breadth of my contempt for Sarah Palin. I would have an easier time putting aside my frustration if the media stopped treating her as if she were an actual politician or reasonable human being.

Occupy is not a Humanism

Steven Ray Orr — Sat, 24 Dec 2011 13:25:00 PST

Susanna Rustin, for The Guardian:

The Occupy movement’s claim to speak for the 99% and against the 1% is a “bit strange”. Millions of people in the west, and not just investment bankers, are in the 1% if wealth is reckoned globally.

It is all about where we draw our lines; whom we choose to consider equals and whom we choose to overlook. Occupy is a movement unconcerned with global economic inequality, because it is still rooted in capitalist notions of property and ownership.

Occupy should stop pretending to be a humanist movement. To declare that their struggle is about the basic rights and freedoms is not only naive, it is also untrue. The protest is about democracy or the lack-there-of. The United States is no longer a democratic country, if it ever truly was; it, like many nations, has become a plutocracy where the dollar has more say than the vote.

The real rallying cry of Occupy is redistribution of wealth for reason of democracy: more people than not want rich people not to be rich.

The only problem is that when you put it like that Occupy starts to sound facile.

Subtext or Regular Text?

Steven Ray Orr — Thu, 22 Dec 2011 22:00:00 PST

Iain Broome, for Write for Your Life:

You’re a writer, right? And you’ve got your own blog about writing? Of course you do. Everybody is and everybody does. So you need a profile. You need to spread the word about your work. You need to do social media. Or something.

Self-awareness is a terrible virtue. Iain has it in spades.

"You should have been more arrogant"

Steven Ray Orr — Tue, 20 Dec 2011 23:20:00 PST

Regarding the Netflix price “hike”, Doug Aamoth for Time:

“But it’s the principle!” everybody screamed, their arms flailing like wet noodles. Yes, the company that brings you affordable entertainment needs to add more entertainment, which makes it marginally less affordable than before. That’s how these things work.

In the last three months alone, Netflix has, for the price of a single date night, allowed me to watch: Luther, Sherlock, Lie to Me, Life, Jericho, Firefly, and The Usuals. Of course, that is just my recent television history and completely fails to take into account the numerous movies that I would have likely skipped. Plus Fawlty Towers and Torchwood are on the way.¹

Technologies of access are the next best thing to magic, but the only way that the future works is if we take part. Stop complaining and get on board with it.

Maybe to Canada. Just like with Amazon, the worst part about Netflix is being Canadian.
↩

Profiling

Steven Ray Orr — Mon, 19 Dec 2011 23:34:00 PST

Nicholas K. Peart, for the New York Times:

For young people in my neighborhood, getting stopped and frisked is a rite of passage. We expect the police to jump us at any moment. We know the rules: don’t run and don’t try to explain, because speaking up for yourself might get you arrested or worse. And we all feel the same way — degraded, harassed, violated and criminalized because we’re black or Latino.

This goes on the list of experiences that I can never share in. I am ashamed to live in a society where this is even remotely normalized.

Hardcover Judgment

Steven Ray Orr — Sun, 18 Dec 2011 23:49:00 PST

Helen DeWitt talks about hardcover books:

The readers who have bought the book early on are doing more than buying a book: they are sending a message, via our friends at Nielsen Bookscan, to publishers who might think of publishing the author’s next book.

I love books: reading, owning, scribbling in, dog-earring, carrying around, recommending, loaning out. And yet, despite this affection, I do not buy hardcover books.

Stephen King’s 11/22/63 is a story that I have eagerly awaited for months, but is not on my bookshelf despite having been released in early November. Eventually, the paperback version will come out and that is when I will then buy it. Hardcover books are not easy to carry around; they are more difficult to curl up with under a blanket or casually read next to a fireplace; and finding space for them on my overflowing shelves is harder.¹²

If it were money alone, I might reconsider my stance (although I know many who would not – as, Farhad Manjoo points out, buying more books is better for the consumer and for the economy), but I am not interested in lessening my joy as a reader to support a business model that is not rooted in providing the best experience possible for its customers. And that is what it comes down to: the customer.

The onus cannot possibly be on consumers to keep afloat industries that cannot support themselves. While there are hard times and poor economic climates, capitalism is not designed for businesses that require exceptional customers to support them.

The Internet is fundamentally changing the manner by which people come to the written word. I do not have the information to support this thesis, but I suspect that hardcover book sales have been dropping steadily in the last twenty years and the rise of the eBook is speeding that decline along. The cost and the convenience of a paperback will keep it around longer. If publishers insist on measuring the success of a book by the number of hardcover copies sold, I suspect that the industry is in trouble. Profit will have to be found elsewhere.³

Publishers have to change their methods. If this sounds at all like I am pleased by such machinations or eager for another industry to undergo a massive directional shift, consider: I would like to publish one day and by loudly shouting about the death of the hardcover, I am also expressing frustration that my own path to success will be that much more difficult. In the end, it is going to be writers that will suffer the most during any such change. The final result may be a much better situation for authors and would-be authors. I have no idea, but I know that it is going to be absolutely terrifying to find out.

For whatever good this will do Helen, next time I am in a bookstore I will be picking up a copy of Lightning Rods. And it will be in hardcover, despite my misgivings, because you asked, but there is a very good chance that it will be the last hardcover I buy.

(Via The Morning News)

I need more bookshelves, you say? Indeed. I also need more space for those bookshelves.
↩
This is not to say that hardcovers are completely without merit. Many of them look nicer than their softcovered cousins.
↩
Maybe I’m wrong. Maybe the publishing industry can look to music as an indicator of the future: eBooks are mp3s, paperbacks are CDs, and hardcovers resurge as with vinyl records. I suspect that this analogy is false, if only because I think that I am inflating the market for vinyl.
↩

Operation Arctic Blast

Steven Ray Orr — Sat, 17 Dec 2011 23:59:00 PST

Kevin Underhill, for Lowering the Bar

Two ways to go in that situation: (1) admit it was a mistake or a bad decision, and fix it; or (2) insist that yes, there is an entirely valid purpose for incorporating an Arctic Blast Sno-Cone machine into your anti-terrorism plan.

I am not going to pretend that we shouldn’t be wary of wasteful government spending, but if Homeland Security officials can’t have a Sno-Cone whenever they desire, does that not mean that the terrorists have won?

(Via Ben Brooks)

The Post-Ironic Revolution

Steven Ray Orr — Sat, 17 Dec 2011 23:46:00 PST

Spencer Moreau, for McSweeney’s:

Where’s your sense of adventure and militant, vaguely anarchist anti-patriotism?

Just go read the whole thing. I am often overwhelmed by the quality of writing on McSweeney’s and Spencer’s piece is no different.

Christopher Hitchens, 1949-2011

Steven Ray Orr — Thu, 15 Dec 2011 23:22:00 PST

Zach Weinersmith, on reddit:

When you are speaking, it’s not enough that you be right. You have to be eloquent, logical, practiced, and polished. The reason Christopher Hitchens stood out among atheist speakers (even good ones like Dawkins or Tyson) wasn’t just his command of facts - it was his strength in philosophy and literature and poetry.

Put another way, be poets.

Truth has little to do with accuracy and everything to do with the ability to be sung. Regardless of your opinion of his arguments, it cannot be denied that Hitchens was a master of oratory and wordcraft. We are fortunate that we have not lost his speaking or his writing, but today we have lost an incredible mind.

Conservative Politics in a Nutshell

Steven Ray Orr — Thu, 15 Dec 2011 17:05:00 PST

Governor Mitt Romney:

[President Obama] means what he says when he says he wants to fundamentally transform America. There’s nothing wrong with America that needs transforming. I want to restore America. I want to turn around America. I want to keep America America.

The most fundamental belief of the Republican Party and many conservative ideologies is that they believe this society to be the best of all possible societies; this government to be the best of all possible governments; and this country to be the best of all possible countries. It is the greatest of follies to see ourselves incapable of error. Political disfunction is permitted, because anything else is believed impossible.

(Via Yoni Appelbaum, for The Atlantic)

Authority and Property

Steven Ray Orr — Tue, 13 Dec 2011 23:56:00 PST

Caleb Crain, for The New Yorker:

I find it hard to imagine myself plumply saying “No” to a police officer’s request, even if the request seems less than fully justified. The incident reminded me that the police have no authority except insofar as they are enforcing the law.

I do not accept Caleb’s premise that the systems that came before worked any better than the system we have now – although that is not to say that we are living within the best of all possible societies. Inequalities of race, of sexuality, of wealth exist a thousand-fold.

Still, the connection that he traces between police and propery is an interesting one. I am not convinced that I have enough economic background to be able to understand the arguments behind it, but the premise is worth putting some more thought into.

Maxims and Arrows

Steven Ray Orr — Sat, 10 Dec 2011 00:50:00 PST

Christopher Hitchens, for Vanity Fair:

However, one thing that grave illness does is to make you examine familiar principles and seemingly reliable sayings. And there’s one that I find I am not saying with quite the same conviction as I once used to: In particular, I have slightly stopped issuing the announcement that “Whatever doesn’t kill me makes me stronger.”

Hitchens is not so much taking on Nietzsche as he is taking on the “facile maxim” – contemporary usage of a proverb that has been stripped of all original context or meaning. When read as an assault on super-masculine notions of “no pain, no gain”, Hitchens’ piece is an excellent, if somewhat somber, exploration of disease as an obstacle to be avoided altogether instead of a trial by which we are forged into something greater.

It is a good read, but I am more interested in salvaging Friedrich Nietzsche from baseless criticisms, if only to help make way for stronger critiques. As such…

”Was mich nicht umbringt macht mich stärker”¹ comes from a work called Twilight of the Idols; more specifically, from the first section: “Maxims and Arrows”. The stärker is but one in a multitude of such aphorisms. They can be taken as advice or words to live by, but Nietzsche is careful to warn us of their sharpness and velocity. These are not simply words strung together; they are arrows, strung upon a bow, drawn taut, and launched.

One of the difficulties in understanding Nietzsche comes from his tendency to subvert traditional language. He will use words in ways and with meanings that do not necessarily map just to their common definitions.² This can be frustrating when attempting to make sense of even his most basic ideas, let alone off-handed comments or isolated concepts.

In this instance, Nietzsche uses the word “stronger” and does not bother to explain himself. His arrow is slung and we have but the point to focus on until much later in the work:

Great men are necessary, the age in which they appear is accidental; that they almost always become masters over their age is only because they are stronger, because they are older, because for a longer time much was gathered for them.³

Strength, as Nietzsche defines it, has nothing to do with physical prowess and everything to do with the measure of time. Ten is stronger than nine, a woman of fifty is stronger than a woman of thirty, etc. It appears that Nietzsche’s claim is an obvious truth instead of a profound maxim: if something does not kill us, it does not kill us. Put in this context, we can rephrase the stärker: whatever does not kill me makes me older.

And with that, Nietzsche welcomes us back to familiar, nihilistic territory.

“Whatever does not kill me makes me stronger.”
↩
Interestingly enough, stärker appears to be used in music to mean an increase in volume, to make louder. There may be no significance to this at all, but it is difficult to ignore when one knows the value that Nietzsche placed upon art and music. I really am going to have to learn German if I want to keep studying this stuff, if only because I do not entirely trust existing translations.
↩
Twilight of the Idols, 44.
↩

Fine Lines and Fine Liars

Steven Ray Orr — Fri, 09 Dec 2011 01:17:00 PST

Syrian President Bashar al-Assad speaking to Barbara Walters:

“Every ‘brute reaction’ was by an individual, not by an institution, that’s what you have to know. There is a difference between having a policy to crackdown and between having some mistakes committed by some officials. There is a big difference.”

The problem with such excuses is that the state must be held accountable for the actions of its police and military forces – even rogue actors – otherwise it becomes easy for corrupt leaders and democratic dictators to hide their misdeeds behind a body of lies.

This, I suspect, is a quandary that President al-Assad understands better than he would have others believe.

Peacekeeping

Steven Ray Orr — Wed, 07 Dec 2011 23:58:00 PST

Dominic Tierney, for The Atlantic:

The notion of outlawing contact with Iran is one of those ideas that at first glance sounds merely awful – and then upon reflection, seems truly dreadful.

Diplomacy is one of the many tools by which peace is kept. If you remove diplomacy, all that remains is ignorance or war. While I can understand and appreciate the sentiment of “you ignore me and I’ll ignore you”, elementary school taught me that such tactics just get you beat up.

And I hope that I don’t need to comment on the ridiculously futile notion of keeping the peace by waging a war…

The Modern Prometheus

Steven Ray Orr — Tue, 06 Dec 2011 22:55:00 PST

Frankenstein is a story that has informed the human drive to science, to progress, and to enhancement. While Mary Shelly’s best known work may not inspire the creation of any specific technology, it does form the basis of how human beings view their technologies through fear.

The terror of the monster that Victor Frankenstein creates has nothing to do with the actual being itself; it is a creature of frightful appearance, but that is hardly impossible to overcome – consider, for example, the ugly and the deformed of today and this becomes easier to understand. Instead, the terror of the modern Prometheus is that it is a Creation without purpose; a technology that has been invented simply to exist.

When Prometheus came to give man fire, he introduced to us the notion of human enhancement. The gift of fire informs us human beings that we have the capability to be better than we are: Prometheus gave us technology. Since him, we have viewed the ultimate purpose of technology as enhancement of the human being. It becomes possible for us to create cell phones so that we can better our communication skills; to build houses so that we can enhance our protections; and to discover medicines and cures that allow us to live healthier and for longer.

The fear that comes from Frankenstein’s monster is that it introduces a completely new dynamic to the relationship of humans to their technology; it transforms us from creatures with the capacity for progress into actual divine beings. No longer must we be subservient to anything. Enhancement is for mere mortals; it is the realm of the Gods to Create. It is not the “abhorred devil” himself that causes us to fear him; it is that he serves as a representation of what we, as a species, have become by constructing him. We have assumed the role of Gods and, as our own histories and origin stories tell us, we know that eventually all creations fail to live up to the expectations of their Creators.

iNewspapers

Steven Ray Orr — Tue, 06 Dec 2011 21:58:00 PST

Justin Williams, on iPad Publishing:

Reading no longer has to be a solitary experience. These devices should make it easier for to share the content we love with the people we love.

The only publication that I read on my iPad is The Guardian. Overall, I have very few complaints about the app, but the inconsistency in sharing is one of them: some stories can be emailed or linked out and others, at what appears to be random, cannot. I assume that this has something to do with iPad-only content and, as much as I love my iPad, this is a mistake. Sharing is the whole purpose of the Internet, if not our mobile devices.

"Mass is the thing that gets in the way"

Steven Ray Orr — Fri, 02 Dec 2011 10:40:00 PST

Joseph Brean, for The National Post interviews Professor Frank Close:

If it is right, it is probably the greatest instance of serendipity ever to befall science, and the biggest science story of the last hundred years. If it is wrong, it is just another experiment that did not work out.

Ah science, constantly on the precipices of greatness and disregard. Scientists dream, just as we all do, of overcoming their heroes or, if not supplanting them, at least standing side-by-side with them as equals. Is it possible to match Newton under the tree or Einstein in the patent office? And, even if it is, can it be done in a laboratory or at a particle accelerator?

Such questions ignore the quality of the deed itself and focus wholly on the poetics. Do we wish to do great deeds or to be remembered for them?

History's End

Steven Ray Orr — Wed, 30 Nov 2011 22:34:00 PST

Kevin Boyle, for the New York Times:

There’s a dark strain of bigotry and exclusion running through the national experience. Sometimes it seems to weaken. And sometimes it spreads … fed by our fears and our hatreds.

We have a tendency to focus on our differences instead of the similarities that connect us. Race, gender, sexuality. We construct these walls to separate ourselves from each other; it is not enough to be human, you must be human like me. I wonder if this comes from a notion that we see ourselves as the pinnacle of human possibility.

An Open Letter to the Individual Attempting To Make My Acquaintance Via An Email That Was Miscategorized As Spam

Steven Ray Orr — Wed, 30 Nov 2011 00:30:00 PST

My Dearest Charlotte Gustman:

I would like to begin by thanking you for your letter. When I checked my email this evening, I was expecting little more than a note from my mother and, if I was so fortunate, a video of a kitten waking up. While I did receive both (my mother is doing quite well, thank you for asking. And, worry not, the kitten video has been included for your viewing enjoyment), your email was the most pleasant of them all.

If I may offer a compliment, I must say that your email starts rather strongly by inquiring as to my sexual exploits and whether I had the opportunity to engage in intercourse with Eastern European women. Then, knowing me to be a simple North American boy and that I was unlikely to have had the pleasure, you asked whether I would be interested in such an international foray with the underlying implication that you, in some way, could facilitate it. I confess that, at this point, I had assumed that you, Charlotte, were offering yourself to me.

As such, I was delighted to hear that you were in America. While I am unable to cross the border and actually enter the United States, the notion of your proximity was quite arousing. I wondered whether I would be able to convince you, my new Russian friend, to travel to the Great White North in order to satisfy my curiosity about women from abroad. It was a romantic fantasy, but I did not believe it to be a hopeless fiction as you seemed earnest in your interest.

Imagine my surprise when, upon continued reading, I discovered that you, Charlotte, have a penis and were looking for a sexual partner to use it upon. I understand that gender is a complicated notion and if you identify as female I fully support you. That being said, I cannot help but feel somewhat betrayed. You were not open and upfront with me about the status of your genitalia and, because of that, there has been a misunderstanding and my original fantasy was shattered. Granted, I must assume some responsibility in this matter – I should have known that Charlotte is the second most common European name and, translated from Russian, means “human being with a penis.”.

Still, it is my opinion that you should have been more forthcoming. On a medium as anonymous as the Internet, the onus can hardly be on me to identify the genitalia of every potential sexual parter that approaches me. If we had met in person, I could forgive you for staying silent as it would be a moot point and, even if it were somehow not, it would be my responsibility to request clarity on the matter. Furthermore, I cannot be expected to know the complexities of the Russian language. I am, after-all, reading this in English and you should have to learn to be fluent in it before attempting correspondence on this side of the Internet.

While I appreciate that you, a newcomer to America, are interested in finding a mate and potential life-parter, I do not believe that I will be able to open my heart to you and fill that void in your life. The betrayal is too fresh, the wound still too deep. Perhaps, with time, I will be able to find a way to love again. If that time comes and you are still interested, perhaps we will find each other again. I do, after all, have your particulars and should have no difficulty in renewing this correspondence.

As such, I will not be visiting the website that you recommended in our correspondence. I believe that a clean break would be best, if there is to be any hope for us in future.

You are a beautiful creature and I appreciate the time that we had together. Remain strong and I am sure that you will find someone who is able to stimulate and fulfill you as you had hoped I would. Enjoy your time in America, Charlotte.

Sincerely,
Rockin69erGuy@hotmail.com

Glengarry Glen Moncton

Steven Ray Orr — Tue, 29 Nov 2011 23:03:00 PST

Weh-Ming Cho, with a Kijiji ad:

You gave it your best shot. You tried to shovel by yourself and I respect you for that. I did it, my parents did it, some of my best friends did it. But deep down inside, we all wanted to murder that neighbour with the snowblower who was finished and on his second beer while you were still trying to throw snow over a snowbank taller than you are.

So, here we are. You could murder your neighbour, which could ensure that you won’t need to shovel a driveway for 25 to life, but there are downsides to that too. What to do?

There is an art to the plant and pitch. Weh-Ming knocks it out of the park while trying to sell a snowblower. Thus further inforcing the notion that if Kafka were born today, he would have spend his nights posting idly on 4chan or reddit.

Focus > Talent

Steven Ray Orr — Tue, 29 Nov 2011 22:05:00 PST

Jeff Atwood, for Coding Horror:

Reading self-help advice from other people, however well-intentioned, is no substitute for getting your own damn work done. The sooner you come to terms with this, the better off you’ll be.

The key to self-help is helping yourself. It is somewhat like writing: if you are doing anything but actually writing, you are not writing. Yes, there is helpful material to be had on the topic, but there is a distinct line between research and distraction. It is incredibly easy to cross that line without intention or awareness.

I am starting to think that success has more to do with an ability to focus than with any other trait.

How To Lede

Steven Ray Orr — Tue, 29 Nov 2011 21:11:00 PST

Emily Brennan, for The New York Times:

Ronnelle Adams came out to his mother twice, first about his homosexuality, then about his atheism.

Talk about a strong lede (on a story I wouldn’t have caught otherwise).

(Via Matt Thomas)

"Frequency of performances"

Steven Ray Orr — Tue, 29 Nov 2011 18:20:00 PST

Steve Macone, for The Morning News:

Someone who has performed twice to thunderous laughter isn’t a comic any more than someone who throws a few good punches is a boxer. But somebody who has performed three nights a week for the last six years but fails to get laughs regularly, or even at all, is considered a bad comic, rather than not a comic at all.

You are what you are doing: standup on the stage and you are a comic; put pen to page and you are a writer. It is impossible to separate the actor from the act, but this reminds of the difficulty in definition. I am a writer only in-so-far as I write and, sometimes, I need to be reminded of this simple truth.

You are not what you have done; you are what you are doing.

"Wherever polygamy exists"

Steven Ray Orr — Thu, 24 Nov 2011 09:04:00 PST

Justice Robert Bauman, upholding the constitutionality of Canada’s polygamy ban (emphasis mine):

In my view, the salutary effects of the prohibition far outweigh the deleterious. The law seeks to advance the institution of monogamous marriage, a fundamental value in Western society from the earliest of times. It seeks to protect against the many harms which are reasonably apprehended to arise out of the practice of polygamy.

At least we’re being honest about it.

There is a subtlety to the ruling. Justice Bauman has decided that polygamy, as an institution, is inherently harmful. Once such a conclusion is reached, there are no options available: polygamy is a freedom that must be restricted as empowered the Limitation Clause.¹ Any attempt to overturn this ruling will have to first disprove that polygamy is intrinsically tied to harm.

Still, it is interesting that the prohibition is against polygamous marriage. Unless I am misreading the judgement², it is entirely possible to engage in multiple partner relationships and have children with the various spouses without breaking the law – as long as it is done outside of the conceit of state-sanctioned marriage. Justice Bauman is, essentially, declaring that it is not polygamy, but polygamous marriage that causes harm.

While we are on the topic, there is another institution that has been allowed to flourish despite proven harm “to children, to society, and to the institution of monogamous marriage”³: divorce. We should get on banning that horrible practice as soon as possible.

“The Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms guarantees the rights and freedoms set out in it subject only to such reasonable limits prescribed by law as can be demonstrably justified in a free and democratic society.” - Canada Act 1982 (U.K.), 1982, c. 1. s. 1
↩
I will happily admit that I do not know enough about this topic to be an expert. My suspicion is that polygamy is defined in a broader sense than monogamous marriage and it may be that the prohibition is on de facto marriage.
↩
Justice Bauman, Reference re: Section 293 of the Criminal Code of Canada, 2011 BCSC 1588, c. 1. s. 5
↩

Unpleasant Bedfellows

Steven Ray Orr — Tue, 22 Nov 2011 21:38:00 PST

Tonight, at the Republican National Security Debate, Newt Gingrich said something startling:

I don’t see how the party that says it’s the party of the family is going to adopt an immigration policy that destroys families that have been here for a quarter-century. I’m prepared to take the heat in saying, “Let’s be humane in enforcing the law without giving them citizenship, by finding a way to create legality so that they are not separated from their families.”

It is rarely the popular choice to point out hypocrisy within your own party – particularly if you are running to be the presidential nominee for that party. Still, there is a refreshing sanity to Gingrich’s immigration points tonight as if he decided, for just a moment, to speak as a human being and not as a politician.

In order to deport the eleven millon illegal aliens that are currently living in the United States it would require a military force that would rival those of Nazi Germany and Soviet-era Russia. Coincidentally, these are last two countries to have attempted mass deportations in recent history and, thanks to them, we added new words to our vocabulary: Gulag and Holocaust.

It is easy enough to spew jingoistic sound bytes when problems are framed as matters of national security, but complexities emerge when strategies are examined through the lens’ of history or of humanity. I do not believe there will ever come a time when Americans, Democrat or Republican, will stand by and watch as millions of their neighbours are displaced and killed.¹ These are not the ideals that founded the United States and they are not the ideals of modern America.

When a politician talks about the deportation of illegal aliens, they are scoring easy political points on an issue that they will never have to follow through on and the Republican Party will likely continue to do so as long as the voters respond well to it. Perhaps there will be a short-lived debate on this before Newt Gingrich fades into the next news cycle, but it was nice to hear a candidate speak openly and honesty about the hypocrisy of the Republican Party.

And before you cry fowl against comparisons to the Final Solution, can you possibly imagine such a process being even remotely peaceful? I would not quietly be torn away from my life and home. Would you?
↩

Not Lupus

Steven Ray Orr — Mon, 21 Nov 2011 20:15:00 PST

Angela Watercutter interviews John Sotos, the medical technical adviser for House:

To get a male hormone to trigger this physiology, I just didn’t see any way that was possible. I couldn’t throw in a sentence or two to fix it. There was no way we could substitute something else. So I just swallowed hard and said, ‘We’re just going to have to take our lumps on this.’

I fell out of love with House about the time that the writers started making fun of transgendered people, although there are still shades of brilliance within it. Expertise is not the reason for that. House simply needs to be believable enough for the layperson.

We enjoy watching Dr. House and his antics because he is a magnificient bastard. The “medicine” is simply filler.

(Via 512 Pixels)

"We were young and it was beautiful"

Steven Ray Orr — Sat, 19 Nov 2011 22:17:00 PST

David Hill, for McSweeney’s:

I’m not sure why it was so important to keep the park occupied. I just know that when I heard the cops were coming to shut it down, I wasn’t ready for it to end yet. Evidently neither were the rest of these people, here cheering at sunrise like the Yankees just won the pennant. Me and James and the rest of these folks, we couldn’t know for sure, of course, but we figure that this right here is what power feels like. This is what it must feel like to win.

And we touch, finally, on the goal of Occupy: power, both real and imagined – the elusive notion of dominion. It is dominion over their lives, over their happiness that these protesters want, the power to control their own destiny. They seek feathers and fabric; they seek aluminum frames and aerofoils; they seek wings with which to fly as they imagine others do.

Absolute freedom is the right that we took when we followed two thieves out of an orchard and it is the right that we gave up when we escaped the state of nature. Our democracy is not the structures by which our freedom is realized; democracy is that by which our freedom is constrained.

I have been critical of the movement for a number of reasons – some of them still valid – but I have decided to stop decrying their methods. They have proven to be peaceful enough, certainly more-so than those watching over them. Am I still uneasy with the occupation of Foley Square and Zuccotti Park? Yes, but if now is not the time, then when?; if here is not the place, then where?

A Child Was Raped

Steven Ray Orr — Thu, 17 Nov 2011 22:42:00 PST

Charles B. Pierce, for Grantland:

It no longer matters if there continues to be a football program at Penn State. It no longer even matters if there continues to be a university there at all. All of these considerations are trivial by comparison to what went on in and around the Penn State football program.

This has become more than a question of whether Joe Paterno or Penn State did everything in their power to protect children. We, as a people, failed those children when we allowed them to be abused and we failed them again when we did not stop the man responsible. The civil and criminal charges are punishment, but their more important function is a reminder to society of our duty to each other and a threat to those who would break our social contract.

We cannot hide this behind football coaches and scholastic reputations. A child was raped and we, as a people, must not forget it.

I Miss Communism

Steven Ray Orr — Thu, 17 Nov 2011 20:47:00 PST

Nicole Pasulka, for The Morning News:

Closing a bank account is one of many small ways to reject the privileging of property over people. I’ll admit it’s kind of inconvenient not to use Chase anymore—this afternoon I had to roll my change before depositing it. But I’m optimistic.

This is the revolution that Occupy advocates? Pulling money out of big banks in an attempt to hit them where it hurts?

I miss communism.

From Hate to Love

Steven Ray Orr — Tue, 15 Nov 2011 17:23:00 PST

Susan Schorn, for McSweeney’s:

I don’t know why I was surprised when the election of a black President drove our country stark raving insane. I really should have seen that one coming.

Post-racial America is a utopian ideal. It is the future that we hope for, if not for ourselves, then for our children – a future in which we have realized Dr. King’s dream of a nation wherein all people are judged by the content of the character. Color, creed, and gender become cosmetic in favor of dedication. It is the ultimate acknowledgment that we are all, from the marrow in our bones to the surface of our skin, human beings.

The problem is not racism; it is not sexism; it is not bigotry. These are symptoms of the disease, not the disease itself. The truth, despite my claims to the contrary, is that I am as much a part of the problem as the Ann Coulters or the Pat Buchanans of the world, because I share their disease: hate, that simple emotion that separates us from each other and keeps us from utopia. The difference between them and I is a matter of direction, a question of whom we aim towards, but it is the taking up of slings and arrows that is the problem, not the target.

I know that hate cannot drive out darkness, that only love can do that, but I do not know how to get myself beyond my hatred. I have not learned how to prevent my rage when I hear Ann Coulter speak. If I cannot master myself, how can I expect her to? How do we get from hate to love?

Defining Our Terms

Steven Ray Orr — Mon, 14 Nov 2011 23:58:00 PST

The whole point of morality is that it is the personal metric by which we measure ourselves. We are bound by it only in-so-far as we view ourselves bound by it.

Law is the standard by which we all must adhere to in order to remain political actors. We earn the right to participate in society by following the law and, with that, we are also offered an opportunity to shape and influence the law.

We should try not to conflate the two.

Where the Buffalo Roam(ed)

Steven Ray Orr — Mon, 14 Nov 2011 23:14:00 PST

Robert Krulwich, for NPR

Why, when he came upon a grand specimen, maybe the last of its kind, why did he look at it and think only, “Ah, this will be a great sculpture”?

With a name of William Temple Hornaday I expected great things, but a burning passion for taxidermy was not one of them.

He also wrote a book: Our Vanishing Wild Life: It’s Extermination and Preservation. In it, he calls the preservation of nature “one of the foremost duties of the men and women of to-day … Every possible means of preservation,–sentimental, educational and legislative,–must be employed”. The exception, of course, being when talking about entire herds of buffalo. Those should be shot and taxidermied en masse.

(Via The Morning News)

"The great sorrows of my life"

Steven Ray Orr — Sun, 13 Nov 2011 00:49:00 PST

Michele Catalano, for American McCarver:

They would have said grand things about you, Joe. You would have been written about as nothing but a legend, a god among men. A good man.

But that’s all changed. And it changed in one instant, in one singular moment in 2002 when circumstances called for you to fulfill a moral obligation to not only a ten year old boy but society at large and you failed to fulfill that obligation.

Every one of us has an obligation to protect those unable to protect themselves. It is this promise that binds our society together. We are all responsibile for each other and we cannot shy away from that duty simply because it would be difficult or inconvenient. To do so is to declare our personal well-being a greater priority than that of the group; to say that our interest in following the law and morality of society extends only so far as it does not hinder us as individuals.

And even if that were not the case, it would still be wrong to ignore the suffering of a child, to do nothing – football, media, and politics aside. Joe Paterno already knows this and will have to live with his choices for the rest of his life.¹ Unfortunately, he is not the only one.

“This is a tragedy. It is one of the great sorrows of my life. With the benefit of hindsight, I wish I had done more.”
↩

The Importance of Hog Futures

Steven Ray Orr — Sat, 12 Nov 2011 00:43:00 PST

Willy Staley, for The Awl:

Ultimately what the McRib says about us as a society is perhaps worse than any conspiracy theory about pork prices. The McRib, born at the end of the Volcker Recession, a child of Reagan’s Morning in America, has been with us on and off over the last three decades of underregulated corporate growth, erosion of organized labor, the shift to an “ideas” economy and skyrocketing obesity rates. The McRib is made of all these things, too.

I have never particularly understood the McRib or why McDonald’s would bring such a novelty item into their production chain. It seemed so out of line with the original company that Ray Kroc founded. Willy helps clarify the matter with economics.

The entire article is excellent, but it most staggering when you realize that there is such a concept as “hog futures” and that McDonald’s is, single-handedly, able to control them. There is nothing coincidental about there being a McDonald’s in every Walmart.

(Via The Morning News)

"Brilliant albeit in an evil way"

Steven Ray Orr — Thu, 10 Nov 2011 23:29:00 PST

Duncan Davidson:

Never mind that the governmental cost for building all those roads and the individual costs of consumers buying gas and maintaining cards is probably much larger in aggregate than the savings. Walmart didn’t have to pay it, the perceived prices were lower, and it’s as easy enough to ignore the rest as it is to let spare change build up in your sock drawer.

Are the shortcuts we take actually solving problems or simply passing them on for someone else to deal with?

Introduction to Economics

Steven Ray Orr — Tue, 08 Nov 2011 21:40:00 PST

Joyce Miller, for McSweeney’s:

Trickle-Down Economics is when poor people who die from obesity and no healthcare are liquefied and fed intravenously to their young, like in The Matrix. It is a government subsidized program and is perfectly legitimate.

This is the way that Reaganomics works and nobody can convince me otherwise.

Failure to (Re)Produce

Steven Ray Orr — Tue, 08 Nov 2011 07:19:00 PST

Paul Ford, for The Morning News:

We don’t tell many people about what we are doing. When we do some say: “Well, it must be fun trying.” Or: “Are you sure you’re doing it right?” I laugh with them; after all, how many times have I said something insensitive while trying to be funny? I don’t talk about the large doses of medicine that I inject into my wife’s buttocks that cause her to inflate like a hormonal balloon. Nor do I discuss how intimacy itself has become such an awkward, uncomfortable thing that it’s scheduled on a Google Calendar named “LadyStuffings” with events that show up in pink.

It tells you how self-centred and incapable of empathy I must be when, upon reading this piece, I considered it a metaphor for writing.

The Worst Form of Governance

Steven Ray Orr — Mon, 07 Nov 2011 23:54:00 PST

Christopher Bird, for Torontoist:

People use fences and street signs because there simply aren’t bike posts to satisfy the demand for locking points. A law that penalizes people for not using bike posts will not solve this problem.

But it’s more than the law itself. It’s the fact that, when presented with the problem of there simply not being enough bike posts to handle bike traffic, Team Ford’s solution was to propose laws which can only serve to discourage cycling.

How does that saying go? Toronto is the worst city in Canada except all those other cities.

The Map is Not the Land

Steven Ray Orr — Mon, 07 Nov 2011 22:08:00 PST

Robert Fisk, for The Independent:

I asked him once why the Great War was fought. “All I can tell you, fellah,” he said, “was that it was a great waste.” And he swept his hand from left to right. Then he stopped wearing his poppy. I asked him why, and he said that he didn’t want to see “so many damn fools” wearing it.

This year, I will not be wearing a poppy. It is a distorted symbol: a representation of remembrance that is devoid entirely of the experience itself. How does a replica of a flower pinned to a lapel serve to honor, or even acknowledge, the memory of those who made the ultimate sacrifice?

I am reminded of the American flag pins that presidential candidates are forced to wear while campaigning, as if the illusion of patriotism is sufficient evidence of actual patriotism. We wear poppies at this time of year as an accessory to represent our remembrance – an accessory that we must be reminded of on our way out of the grocery store or while in line at the bank – and, like all representations, it is not the same as that which it simulates.

The map is not the land; the poppy is not remembrance.

Politics or Theatre?

Steven Ray Orr — Sun, 06 Nov 2011 19:17:00 PST

Molly Ball, for The Atlantic:

There’s the world in which Romney is running – the world of a serious, conventional, unexciting campaign. And then there’s the world where Cain is running, where you don’t need a TelePrompter because there’s not much to remember – you’re basically making it up as you go along.

Are we here for politics or theatre? Lincoln would likely remind us that trying to have both is a bad idea.

Roses in December

Steven Ray Orr — Wed, 02 Nov 2011 11:57:00 PDT

At The Guardian, Steven Hepburn ponders praying for non-believers:

If religion did not speak to the deepest sighs and longings of the human heart then it would be as well not to speak at all. Of these sighs few are more profound than those offered up for the death of one we love.

As the last remaining vestiges of summer slip away and fall begins to touch the trees, I find myself thinking about my grandfather.

He was a man I did not get the opportunity to know, although I fiercely hold onto the few memories that I have: pipes that I am not sure I ever saw him smoke; hugs from a Lazy-Boy that engulfed my entire body; watching him play Pac-Man on an old Atari. Each memory trickles through my mind, bringing forth other drips and it is not long before those few recollections become a flood of remembrance that abruptly returns me to the night that he passed away.

Closure is a concept that I have never understood. How can something ever be over? No matter how much time there is between his death and the now, I will forever be shaped by that 2am phone call. Closure implies an ending, that something has finished, but our lives do not work in that way. Our shape is forever evolving, being added to by the experiences that we face and people that touch our lives. There can be no closure with regards to my grandfather, because he is not gone–he is as much a part of my being as my hands are.

“God gave us memory so that we might have roses in December” and so that I might have my grandfather in the fall of 2011.¹ The feel of his scratchy beard, the sound of his booming voice from across the house, the smell of his tobacco stained skin. These are what get left behind. His body was just the way that those memories were passed onto me.

All Souls’ Day is coming to an end and Catholics have come together, not to mourn those gone away but to acknowledge that their community is greater than the sum of those present. Likewise, with myself. January is approaching and, as always, my thoughts will return to my grandfather, not as a morbid recollection, but as an acknowledgement of the man who came before me and who, forever, will be a part of the man that I am.

James Matthew Barrie
↩

Ann Coulter is Racist

Steven Ray Orr — Tue, 01 Nov 2011 11:20:00 PDT

Sean Hannity had Ann Coulter on his show tonight:

That’s why our blacks are so much better than their blacks. To become a black Republican, you don’t just roll into it. You are not going with the flow. You have fought against probably your family members, probably your neighbors, you have thought everything out and that’s why we have very impressive black people in our party.

Ann Coulter is crazy. She is a crazy, angry racist.

That is it. Normally, I reserve this space for a more nuanced examination of a topic or an event, but I have no stunning political insight here nor do I have any intention of carefully taking her argument apart. On this, there is no eloquence or poetry. All that I have left is my disappointment that Coulter is given a platform to openly spew her hateful nonsense.

The Call for Scientocracy

Steven Ray Orr — Mon, 31 Oct 2011 18:45:00 PDT

Gwyn Morgan, for The Province:

Politicians and regulators frequently come under intense pressure from ill-informed groups opposing commercial ventures even when it’s abundantly clear there’s no evidence of a discernible impact, environmental or otherwise.

The problem is not that politicians cave to populist pressures. Our elected officials should create policy that matches the thoughts and views of the electorate, because that is how we know that we are still living in a democracy. The problem that Gwyn has is with the electorate itself.

Whether it is the merits of “smart meters” or rewriting the tax code, most individuals lack even the most basic understanding on the topics in order to come to a reasonable conclusion. This is not unusual. There are only so many hours in the day and we cannot dedicate each to the pursuit of knowledge, let alone the pursuit of the minutiae that is required to make policy choices. Our contribution to society comes in another way. Informed decision making is the duty of our politicians and the job that we entrust them with when we vote for them.

Yet, whether is it an active distrust in our political leaders or simply a desire for direct participation, our politicians are no longer permitted to be the decision-makers. Instead, the public–either at large or simply in large enough groups to be heard–demands consultation on subjects that they know almost nothing about. This is the process of democracy; individuals taking part in decision-making.

What Gwyn is really arguing for is requiring proof of knowledge before one is permitted to partake in the political sphere. Can’t name all the candidates? Then you’re not allowed to vote. Can’t come up with valid arguments for and against both sides of a referendum? Then you’re not allowed to vote. Replace “vote” with “lobby” if you like, but the results are the same: scientocracy, not democracy.

"I've got 99 problems..."

Steven Ray Orr — Fri, 28 Oct 2011 00:26:00 PDT

More idiocy from Dahlia Lithwick:

Mark your calendars: The corporate media died when it announced it was too sophisticated to understand simple declarative sentences.

Her piece is written as a manifesto for the already converted and normally such preaching serves no purpose beyond self-satisfaction. Forutnately for us, it is also filled with laughable nonsense for the rest of us to enjoy.

I particularly enjoyed her ultimate paragraph, wherein she, rather firmly, pats herself on the back:

By refusing to take a ragtag, complicated, and leaderless movement seriously, the mainstream media has succeeded only in ensuring its own irrelevance. The rest of America has little trouble understanding that these are ragtag, complicated, and leaderless times. This may not make for great television, but any movement that acknowledges that fact deserves enormous credit.

The Occupied Manifesto

Steven Ray Orr — Thu, 27 Oct 2011 23:52:00 PDT

Dahlia Lithwick, for Slate, provides us with an Occupy Manifesto:

What the movement clearly doesn’t want is to have to explain itself through corporate television. To which I answer, Hallelujah. You can’t talk down to a movement that won’t talk back to you.

Do you know who else wants an explanation from Occupy Wall Street? The 98% who aren’t there, but whom OWS claims to represent. Take a wild swing at how that explanation is going to get to us. I’ll even give you two more guesses after you say, “our website” and “our blog”.

If OWS and Dahlia want to decry the mainstream media and pretend that it is effective to shout into a crowd of tents and picket signs, so be it, but that is no more a political action than masturbation is sex.¹

It is not about coming up with “simple solutions”; it is about governing. It is about making the decision to become political actors and take part in the process of change, instead of simply declaring that change is necessary. You want accountability and to have your jobs back? Great, tell me how. You want to feed your children? Come up with a solution for doing it.

But the problem is not that OWS has no ideas or goals. It is, at the core, a democratic movement and so it suffers the same fate as all other democracies: fragmentation. Occupy Wall Street is a rallying cry for every marginalized group and minority opinion. Everything is represented, from legalizing marijuana to repealing the death penalty to electoral reform.

Those interested in politics will recognize this as the reason that liberals consistently lose elections. Conservatives, for the most part, are content with the status quo and would much prefer for as little change to happen as possible. Liberals view the present as flawed and desire to change it, but are unable to agree on how to best do so and end up attacking their allies in an attempt to become the dominant opinion. This is, obviously, a simplification of the problem, but the point is clear: liberals are their own worst enemy. This is equally true of the Occupy movement–whether they call themselves liberal or not is irrelevant, because this is the nature of democracy (which has little to do with capital “D” Democrats).

Oh, and one last thing. On the topic of blowing off the mainstream media, protesters should take a page out of Orson Scott Card’s Xenocide:

It’s no sin to speak to the unbelievers in the language of their unbelief.

No, it’s not.
↩

Obvious Names

Steven Ray Orr — Thu, 27 Oct 2011 23:33:00 PDT

Over at Minimal, a plea for obviousness:

My mind is filled with the complexities this world throws at me all the time. I don’t need to make it even more complicated by having to start searching for what a product does because it is not clear from its name.

I am lazy and do not want to have to work any harder than I have to. This tendency towards idleness includes choosing which apps I use. It has always seemed that Google understands this very well: Gmail. Calendar. News. Reader. Wallet. Scholar. I have always appreciated their stance on name schemes.

So what the hell is Google+?

Drive, Revisited

Steven Ray Orr — Wed, 26 Oct 2011 21:50:00 PDT

Alex Doenau, over at Batrock, shares his thoughts on Drive:

By turns minimalistic and over the top, Drive asks many questions that don’t need the answers they don’t receive. Ultimately, who cares where the Driver came from? Who cares where he’s going? All he needs is to drive, and we were fools to ever have thought otherwise.

The Driver is our gunslinger, full of calm and violence. There is no conflict in this duality. He is simply a man aware of the full measure of himself.

Drive is meant to envelop, each piece full and overwhelming. Alex describe is as “a film that you can swim in”, but I would take it further: Drive is a film that you can drown in. Scene after scene pulls air from your lungs, because it is so easy to forget to breathe when your trying to absorb the entirety of the film. And, make no mistake, this film is huge in both tone and scope.

I wonder what Nietzsche would think of the Driver.

I Keeping Meaning to Read Faust

Steven Ray Orr — Tue, 25 Oct 2011 22:58:00 PDT

Imagine, for a moment, that your name is Robert Leroy Johnson – in your hands is a guitar that you can not play worth a damn, but you want nothing more than to be able to make its strings sing–and you walk, completely alone, through the crossing of two dusty roads. You are underneath an endless prairie dusk. The moon is nowhere in sight and the stars are too faint to be anything but specks amidst blackness; light is being pulled away from the sky, trailing the long-gone sun over the horizon.

You pick idly at the out-of-tune instrument, struck by the sheer loneliness of the night and you are desperate to have anything fill that empty silence. “Early this morning,” you sing, with all the confidence of a man alone, “when you knocked upon my door”. “Early this morning,” you sing once more, “keep knockin’ on my door. And I said, ‘Hello Satan’“.

And suddenly, the sound of your voice is blown away from your own ears by a wind that is out of place in this calm, summer night. All warmth slips out of your skin and is replaced with an icy chill.

You open your eyes and, in front of you appears a perfectly tailored, faultless suit and–for an instant – it stands, empty, but, of course, this can only be a trick of the twilight. And, as if succumbing to reality, a man appears within it. He does not belong in his dress coat or tie. His hair is short, but going off in every direction; his beard is patchy and uneven; and his eyes are sunken deep behind days without sleep. But all of this you could accept as real, if not for his maddening smile, his cheshire-like grin.

He talks and you listen, but you cannot piece together into sentences the words that he is saying. His voice is a cacophony of syllables and stresses, pitches and phonetics. You try to harder to catch the sounds, desperate to make out something recognizable when, like an angel from the Bible – out of nowhere – you hear a question, “do we have a deal?”

Your head nods of its own accord and the man reaches his hand out–his fingers dancing to a song that you cannot hear. Immediately, you understand and give him the instrument that is, in your hands, little more than a noisemaker. He mutters, entirely to himself, “onetwothree” and sings with a voice as broken as yours on a guitar so out-of-tune that it could never match any melody. It is concert of discord and you briefly wonder if this is the sound angels make when they cry.

This is how deals with the devil are made: you fall into them, completely unaware, unable to stop yourself. You get what you want, even if you don’t know what you’re asking for.

But so does he.

"We can’t all be Snooki"

Steven Ray Orr — Tue, 25 Oct 2011 17:03:00 PDT

MightyGodKing, in a conversation with himself, on the meaning of Anonymous:

You have summed up the “Shakespeare didn’t write Shakespeare” argument quite neatly. By which, of course, I mean you have demonstrated that it’s really just a bunch of classist garbage spun forth by people who don’t want to admit, for whatever reason, that the greatest writer in the English language was basically just some nobody.

I haven’t seen Emmerich’s latest attempt at cinema and nor do I intend on going out of my way to do so, but MGK perfectly sums up my feelings on the various Anti-Stratfordian arguments: poppycock.

Plus, Shakespeare in Love already had the final word on the secrets of the Bard and it has the Best Picture Academy Award to prove it.

The Measure of a Life

Steven Ray Orr — Mon, 24 Oct 2011 11:42:00 PDT

Earlier this week, Deborah Orr¹ wrote a piece for the Guardian where she claimed “the transfer of prisoners tacitly acknowledges” that “an Israeli life [is] really more important than a Plaestinian’s”.

I could not quite place what about Deborah’s article bothered me until I read Michele Pollak’s brief response:

It is not Netanyahu who chose to release 1,000 Palestinians in exchange for Shalit – certainly, Netanyahu would have rather had a one-for-one exchange. Rather, it is Hamas who demanded 1,000 Palestinians in exchange for one Israeli. If anyone is equating one Jewish life as being worth 1,000 Palestinian lives, it is Hamas.

No relation. Unless there is.
↩

Don't Buy a Smartphone

Steven Ray Orr — Fri, 21 Oct 2011 00:00:00 PDT

Robert Seaton doesn’t like his phone:

I’m a geek – or a nerd or a technologist or what-have-you – and my life is fundamentally centered around interactions with computers, but here’s the thing: I don’t really a give a shit about my smartphone.

Then don’t get one.

This is my whole argument: if you do not find iOS or Android phones to be useful, don’t use them.

Robert’s problem–and it is entirely legitmate–is that he has no interest in the social aspects of a smartphone, but I am confused as to why he got one in the first place. A phone, especially a smartphone, is a social device and should be treated as such. It should not something you try to code on or do extensive web browsing on. It is not a MacBook and, more importantly, it is not trying to be.

I have an iPhone 4 and I love it, but I use it to tweet, tumblr, text, and take calls. I don’t write blog posts on it, though I may throw something into my “ideas” text file. I don’t extensively read on it, but I do skim feeds and put articles in my Instapaper queue. I don’t code on it and I know better than to try. The iPhone is an excellent social computer that happens to have some other functionally built into it.

Robert is correct that “the desktop and laptop markets, they’re going to go the way of the workstation (and the dodo)”, but he is mistaken on what is going to replace them. I have said this before: it is not the smartphone, but the tablet that will replace our laptops.

I don’t think that you wanted a smartphone, Robert. I think you wanted a tablet.

The Role of Satire

Steven Ray Orr — Wed, 19 Oct 2011 23:03:00 PDT

I doubt that I will ever link to a reddit thread again, but in a discussion about Jon Stewart and the role of the Daily Show, chass3 had a thoughtful comment:

Satire challenges through humor. The best satire, though, the most artistically valid, insightful, and meaningful satire, will challenge something that YOU hold. I guess a distinction needs to be made between Juvenalian satire and Horatian satire–Jon Stewart is Juvenalian to the core, and Juvenal, like Donne, Swift, Orwell, and Kubrick, are out to make you uncomfortable in something that you believe. Absurdity isn’t out there, it’s in everyone and everyone’s behavior. If watching the Daily Show for years hasn’t eroded our faith not only in power but in yourself, you’re not paying close enough attention to yourself.

If reading that fails to give you the vapors then there is a fundamental difference in our brain chemistries. It is the reason that I moved from studying English to Political Theory without missing a beat. For me, art and politics have always been intertwined.

There was a time when the process of democracy motivated action and inspired me towards politics, but that earnest hope and belief in the system has disappeared. I do not watch the Daily Show anymore, because it stopped being funny a long time ago–although that has nothing to do with Jon Stewart or the show itself, I am simply unable to separate the humor from the honest and terrifying satirical truth: our democracy has been shattered.

This it has nothing to do with most of the nonsense that we are hearing from the Occupy movement. The problem that Stewart makes clear is that there is no longer political discourse on anything but the most basic, local levels and this system that we claim is democracy falls apart without open, honest, sincere dialogue.

It is not the talking that is important; democracy is, fundamentally, about listening.

Hedonism or Laziness?

Steven Ray Orr — Wed, 19 Oct 2011 22:41:00 PDT

Meagan Fisher with a lesson learned from her root canal:

If I could stop favoring short term gratification over long term happiness, I could resolve most of the problems in my life.

It’s not like people haven’t been telling me this my whole life. It’s not like this isn’t obvious to most people. But it’s a principle I’ve never really lived.

She is right, obviously, though I wonder if I am taking away a lesson from her at all or if I am simply appreciating the sentiment. After all, this post has been in my queue for months and I still haven’t booked an appointment with my dentist. Confession: I don’t even have a dentist anymore.

In the battle between my sweet tooth and getting scolded by professionals, Cherry Blasters always win.

(Via Garrett Murray)

Susanna Rustin, Poet-Journalist

Steven Ray Orr — Tue, 18 Oct 2011 00:15:00 PDT

He talks about journalism with a joy and sincerity wonderful to hear for a fellow journalist toiling away in an organisation battling multimillion-pound losses in a British media landscape poisoned by the cynicism of some of its owners. Since I don’t want to think he’s not telling the truth, I believe him.

Rustin is a poet and, for this piece at least, Khanfar is her subject.

He describes the mosque as a crucial part of village life. “Yes, I am a practising Muslim and I go to mosque whenever I have time – not every day, as you see. For me, Islam is a moral reference point, a source of inspiration to work collectively with people, to love people and to help them, to concentrate on universal values of mercy, co-operation and tolerance.”

She is one of those journalists who deftly pulls apart a person through an interview and is able to piece them back together better than they were before. Susanna Rustin is a writer who makes me want to write. From me, there is no higher praise.

The Arab Republics

Steven Ray Orr — Mon, 17 Oct 2011 22:49:00 PDT

Susanna Rustin’s excellent interview with Wadah Khanfar:

“But the west should be patient with us, democracy will not come in six months or six years, and in the west it took centuries, so let us also have a little bit of time to get used to it. Some of the opposition leaders in Egypt were released from jail after the fall of Mubarak so don’t expect them to behave like polished diplomats.”

Western democracy is not the beacon of perfection that we claim it to be. The many years and wars that we have had amongst ourselves have not come close to resolving our commonwealth.

The Arab Republics are still trying to fly with paper wings and here we are, with cardboard glued to our arms, wondering why they they are not keeping up. We struggle in the wind and sky, but declare that ours is the way to soar; this is the arrogance of the Occident. Our path is but one of many.

Democracy is coming to Egypt. It may not the same democracy that we think best and it will not come easy, nor should it, but, with minds such as Khanfar helping to lead the way, there is a great deal for the West to learn from these new republics.

Primaries Are Stupid

Steven Ray Orr — Sat, 15 Oct 2011 11:38:00 PDT

From The Associated Press:

“President Obama has failed the American people by failing to secure the southern border,” said Bachmann. “I will secure that border and that will be job one.”

That’s Rep. Michelle Bachmann, at an event meant to (attack / ignore) Governor Rick Perry, attempting to manuever passed Herman Cain, the recent (flavor of the month / crazy person / front-runner), in the polls for the (impending / January 3, 2012) Iowa caucus that the (front-runner / dark horse) for the Republican nomination, Governor Mitt Romney, is (ignoring / not ignoring / investing large amounts of time and money) because he has (no support / a strong support base) in the state.

The entire open primary process was, at some point, a useful mechanism for determining the most viable candidate. There was a time when nominations were set by men who sipped on bourbon and chain-smoked cigars in the back rooms of some gentlemen’s club. It may not have been democracy, but, by God, it got things done. Now, with our newfound democratic process, candidate selection has turned into an eighteen month cage match where the winner is simply the last still standing. And, as an added bonus, there is a giant firepit next to the cage that the candidates pour money in some sort of desperate attempt to stay on their feet for “just one more primary”.

The argument is that this makes for a stronger candidate in the next election; everything that can come out, will come out in these primaries and whomever remains afterwards has, somehow, become invincible. I imagine that those who believe this would also drink the blood of unicorns and subscribe to the “if it does not kill you, it makes you stronger” newsletter.

There is a romance to this notion, but it is not true. Politicians will say anything to get themselves nominated and then ignore their pledges once they arrive at the general election. This is no surprise, as this process occurs again during the general election too. Our politicians lie to us! What a terrible, terrible revelation that us innocent babes have learned; whatever will we do?

Primaries encourage candidates to make outrageous promises that are simply not possible and we need to have less of that, not more. The notion that one “campaigns in poetry, but governs in prose” needs to be abolished. Politics is hard and, no matter how vehemently a politician may claim, there are some things that cannot be done. Oil independence will not happen overnight; some wars need to be fought; and there will never, ever be a fence or a wall between the United States and Mexico.

Protest Politics

Steven Ray Orr — Tue, 11 Oct 2011 23:44:00 PDT

Ian David at Spreading Santorum discusses the key difficulty facing Occupy Wall Street:

It is actually pretty easy to get a bunch of people who are mad and feeling disenfranchised together to complain about what’s wrong. It’s a lot harder to come to a consensus about specific policies to take to improve matters. That takes hard work.

Put another way, “what’s next?”.

The Occupy movement has rallied the troops and an audience that is listening; it is time to stop tearing down walls and start to create something. It’s time to govern.

A Matter of Definition

Steven Ray Orr — Tue, 11 Oct 2011 21:27:00 PDT

Democracy does not award you with everything that you want. It does not mean that your children get Christmas presents; it does not mean that you deserved your college education or that your student loans should be forgiven; and it does not mean that you have the right to occupy–peacefully or otherwise–a park, a street, or a city.

You are not, through democracy, entitled to all that you desire. More importantly, you do not get to have this anarchy of yours at the expense of my democracy.

Gathering Pieces

Steven Ray Orr — Sun, 09 Oct 2011 14:57:00 PDT

Bryan Cranston speaks to Alex Strachan about the humanity of Breaking Bad:

“My goal is to convey this man as a real human being,” Cranston said, “so that he’s susceptible to the temptation. He is vulnerable at times — unknowing, strong, weak. So I wanted to be able to completely portray this man as a human being, so that I can play him and audiences will embrace that. Not to condone what he’s doing but to say, ‘I know this man. I feel what he’s doing right now is real.’ ”

I have been meaning to write about Breaking Bad for a long time now. The season will end tonight before I get around to it, but Cranston–unsurprisingly–cuts straight to the core of why the show is excellent.

"On the other hand..."

Steven Ray Orr — Sat, 08 Oct 2011 13:54:00 PDT

Bill Eccles comments on the latest update the iPod Nano clock:

The minute and hour hands’ motions emulate that of a geartrain. That is, they, too, move with each tiny tick of the second hand, just as a real watch does. The motion is beautifully imperceptible, just like a real watch. It’s stunning.

Apple’s attention to detail is incredible. They strive for perfection in every experience of their devices. If you want to use the Nano as a wristwatch, it will be the best possible wristwatch that Apple can make it.

(Via Shawn Blanc)

"There's only voting against"

Steven Ray Orr — Wed, 05 Oct 2011 23:09:00 PDT

The Torontist provides their official endorsement for the upcoming Ontartio election:

So, even though we are hard-pressed to do aught but sigh at the prospect of McGuinty or Horwath and cannot bring ourselves to endorse either of them, we will instead provide an undorsement. Thus, Torontoist officially endorses Not The Tories. If a PC candidate has a shot at your riding, find whoever is most likely to defeat them, and vote for that candidate: Liberal, NDP, even Green (if you happen to live in the riding of Unicornland, where we understand the Greens are running strong).

While I am not exactly satisfied with politics in British Columbia, at least I can be thankful that I am not stuck in the madness that is Ontario’s provincial election.

Steve Jobs, 1955-2011

Steven Ray Orr — Wed, 05 Oct 2011 16:40:00 PDT

Steve Jobs’ commencement address at Standford University:

Remembering that you are going to die is the best way I know to avoid the trap of thinking you have something to lose. You are already naked. There is no reason not to follow your heart.



Why is 'coalition' a dirty word?

Steven Ray Orr — Tue, 04 Oct 2011 23:17:00 PDT

Chris Selley, for the National Post, has a suggestion for politicians and the c-word:

All any political leader needs to say is something like this: “We intend to win a majority, but in the event of a minority result we would be open to any sort of discussions whatsoever with other parties in order to make the legislature function properly. Any leader who tells you otherwise is fibbing. And that’s the last I’m saying about it.”

If only. Unfortunately, Chris misses the mark on one of the key problems with the formation of coalition governments: who leads? For starters, someone must be willing to sede power to one of their political opponents in order for the whole process to begin. Neither Mr. Hudak nor Mr. McGuinty would be willing to let someone else become premier while they played second fiddle. What would motivate their coalition-mates to be any better?

Before suggesting that politicians should be motivated by a commitment to functional legislature, consider that Canada has survived and operated under a number of minority governments–including three of the last four parliaments. Majority governments allow parties to pass almost any legislation that they see fit, while minority governments must gather support from their political adversaries in order to govern at all. Why, Chris, is this a bad thing? I thought that one of the keystones of the democratic process was communication and collaboration between opposing viewpoints.

Okay, so I’m being disingenuous. The underlying suggestion in Chris’ article is that a coalition would provide the same security and functionality as a majority government. This is pervasive misconception in Canadian politics: that simply forming a coalition somehow marries vastly differing ideologies and allows individuals that argue with each other on an almost perpetual basis to become staunch allies.

The truth is that both Mr. McGuinty and Mr. Hudak are willing to form coalitions, although they are not necessarily being dishonest when they disavow the very notion. If either of them are unable to secure a majority, there will be two options available: either force a new election, until one party gains a majority, or form a minority government that will, at every legislative instance, require the cooperation of members of the opposition parties. It does not matter whether it is ever formally declared; each legislative vote creates a coalition between the minority government and the opposition parties that vote with them. Thus, there is no more stability in a formal coalition than in a minority government. Every vote requires the same level of agreement between the parties involved.

I think that it is time we stopped using the word coalition, but not because it has become a dirty word that politicians throw at each other; it simply no longer has any significant meaning in Canadian politics.

"Fumbling around in half-light"

Steven Ray Orr — Mon, 03 Oct 2011 16:48:00 PDT

David K. Shipler, more eloquently than I stated yesterday, discusses the importance of justice:

So, why bother to bring the guilty man in for a fair trial? For thorough truth-finding, one could say, or to uphold the pageantry of constitutional justice, which is a crown jewel of our democracy. To lend unquestioned legitimacy to the ultimate sentence, even if it is death, so the world does not look upon America with repugnance. To keep the trappings of civilized order so that we do not become a vigilante state.

President Obama has an obligation to safeguard the lives of American citizens, but–and this is just as important–he is likewise bound to “preserve, protect and defend the Constitution of the United States”.¹ To enact justice in the shadows is contrary to the very idea of a constitutional republic; absolute power is the tool of a tyrant, not a democrat.

(Via Conor Friedersdorf, for The Atlantic)

The United States Constitution: Section II, Article 1
↩

Justice in Shadows

Steven Ray Orr — Sun, 02 Oct 2011 21:03:00 PDT

Adam Serwer, for Mother Jones, on the assassination of Anwar al-Awlaki:

What we’re talking about here is not whether Awlaki in particular deserved to die. What we’re talking about is trusting the president with the authority to decide, with the minor bureaucratic burden of asking “specific permission,” whether an American citizen is or isn’t a terrorist and then quietly rendering a lethal sanction against them.

The war on terror made madmen into villains and mere criminals into masterminds. These savages¹ beat at us with their sticks and they, managing to strike a blow that caught us off-guard, made us bleed. Our response was not a calm, thoughtful reaction to their action. We, in our fear and anger, lashed out and cried that these criminals were the gravest of threats and, more importantly, we declared them to be but tiny cogs in much greater machinations. In that singular act, they were men transformed from barely civilized creatures into the very idea of terror.

A human being can be killed; it is even possible to eliminate entire groups, no matter how elusive or pervasive. But how would it ever be possible for us to defeat terror?

And worse, when we do manage to catch one of these terrorists–either before they can act or after their deeds have occurred–we do not mete out justice as deserving of the criminal. Their acts are too evil and vast to be judged by our courts. Again, men transformed. We have made them evil embodied instead of criminals and, thus, they are beyond justice. We allow no prosecution to occur and so their crime, which violated the very order of our civilization, goes unpunished and–worse–unresolved.

Justice does not occur simply to punish the criminal. Justice occurs to restore order to society–to civilization itself–and to remind us all that we have our places within that society. A criminal does not break the law, they break themselves against the law. Judgment, when distributed from our established legal system, restores them.

We pretend that laws can protect us and that punishments will deter crimes, but laws do not have built in obedience and there are no punishments great enough to prevent every wrongdoing. Inevitably, one individual will abuse another. Theft, rape, murder. With their actions, criminals cause harm that cannot be erased. It is pretended that justice (with all her blindness) will heal these wounds. But justice is not vengeance. It does not exist to make the wounded feel well again. It is there to maintain the social contract: that unspoken agreement between citizens and the state that declares us all to be bound by the same rules.

(Via Ta-Nehisi Coates)

If you take offense to the idea that these men were savages, understand that a singular comment does not necessarily generalize outward to an entire collective.
↩

Full Disclosure

Steven Ray Orr — Sat, 01 Oct 2011 23:06:00 PDT

Back in what I will refer to as the “Golden Days of TechCrunch”¹, Mike Arrington offered a full disclosure “update to [his] investment policy”. This little nugget was found in the comments:

Ben Metcalfe: I think the disclosure was the right thing to do here. But just to confirm - do any other TechCrunch staff participate in investing or advising startups, and/or hold interests in startups? I guess a confirmation of any and how this policy extends to them would be appreciated. And probably useful for everyone.

Michael Arrington: MG has a religious love of Apple and thinks they do no wrong, ever. Other than that, I don’t believe there is anything to disclose. Obviously many guest posts have conflicts but are noted. Some of our more random contributors may have investments or advisor shares but we’re clear with them on our policies.

MG Siegler: I just bought a new iPad Smart Cover. Great investment. Consider it disclosed.

Awesome, no? Consider this the full extent of my thoughts on Arrington’s new venture, Uncrunched.

Also known as April 2011.
↩

Terrence Malick, Alchemist

Steven Ray Orr — Sat, 01 Oct 2011 22:31:00 PDT

From Dana Stevens’ excellent Slate review of The Tree of Life:

Watching the asteroid that will kill off the dinosaurs hurtle toward the atmosphere, we think, “There was a moment when this happened,” and are awed.

The middle section of the film, in which we follow Jack’s childhood in a series of fragmented memories from birth until about the age of 12, is as astonishingly precise a rendering of the way the world looks to a child as I’ve seen on film.

Yes.

Game On, Vancouver

Steven Ray Orr — Thu, 29 Sep 2011 23:57:00 PDT

Cam Charron for Nucks Misconduct, reflecting on the Boston Red Sox ‘collapse’:

So, what did we learn? That the 2011 Red Sox are the biggest chokers of any team in Bill Simmons’ lifetime? Nope. We learned that no matter how much money you sink onto players or analytics, the game still has to be played, and for this reason, it will never cease to be interesting.

Money is a powerful motivator and past performance is a fairly reliable measure of future performance, but, no matter how much money is involved and how well your team has performed before, it can all be for naught if the game isn’t played well. It is not a matter of anything so fickle as love or fate; it is a matter of sport.

What matters is the game that is being played in the right now. All the goals that were scored prior, all the home runs, all the touchdowns. None of that matters anymore, because every single game starts with the same score: 0-0. And if you can’t beat the team in front of you in the right now, then all your past successes are meaningless.

That is what keeps fans coming back to their favorite teams, regardless of whether win records and past performance: the game still has to be played. The results are not set in stone so we bring ourselves, our hopes and our prayers, into the sport. We can hope, beyond hope, that our underdog will overcome and we can pray, beyond prayer, that our favorite will stay strong.

I do not follow baseball with any fervor so it was not until last night that I understood the recent string of losses by the Braves and the Red Sox, but I found myself in front of the TV watching these teams struggle to win their most important games of the season, the games being played in the right now. If they could win this game, the one being playing on this field, it would not matter if these teams had fallen from greatness. They would, if only for the briefest of times, been heroes.

The Red Sox ‘choked’; the Braves ‘choked’; the Vancouver Canucks ‘choked’ in Game 7 of the Stanley Cup Finals. They lost and history may never let them forget that, but the teams have to, because the past is always prologue. The most important game is the one they are playing right now.

On October 6th, the Canucks face the Penguins in their first regular season contest since they ‘choked’.

The past is prologue. Focus on the game in front of us, on the right now.

Game on, Vancouver.

Cure for the Common Writer

Steven Ray Orr — Tue, 27 Sep 2011 22:14:00 PDT

Seth Godin has a helpful tip for struggling wordsmiths:

Writer’s block isn’t hard to cure.

Just write poorly. Continue to write poorly, in public, until you can write better.

I agree with the sentiment: just write. Put pen to page and make words appear. Do this until your hand hurts and you do not want to write anymore. Then write some more. Show everyone even if you are ashamed of it. Show them because you are ashamed of it.

(Via Shawn Blanc)

What's Next?

Steven Ray Orr — Tue, 27 Sep 2011 19:46:00 PDT

Shawn Blanc reminds us what is coming on October 4th:

The iPhone 4 is the completion of what Apple originally set out to build when they launched the iPhone in 2007. This current model is the last page of this chapter, and I believe the next iPhone will be the opening of a new chapter for the iPhone.

What’s next?

Science is Not Built for Speed

Steven Ray Orr — Mon, 26 Sep 2011 22:45:00 PDT

Eric Randall, for The Atlantic:

Physicists spent their weekends walking back media hype over an experiment that at first glance seems to disprove Einstein’s famed theory of relativity.

But behind this defiant preaching of scientific processes and shorts-eating, there perhaps lies another motive for wishing away the results: throwing out relativity would mean a whole lot of work for scientists who would literally and figuratively need to re-write the book on modern physics.

No. A thousand times, no.

Responsible scientists understand what the term “theory” means and are well aware that some of the most strongly held notions of how the universe work may not be correct. The reason that the scientific community is demanding caution has little to do with personal pride and everything to do with the manner by which scientific theory is created.

One study, one experiment, one result does not a theory make (or break, for that matter). Testing must be rigorous. It must repeated ad nauseam and then it must be repeated again, long passed the next news cycle. Science moves slowly. It does not come out as a press release before the paper and its results are objectively examined.

So no, Eric, lots of physicists are not nervous about the speed of light, because CERN’s neutrinos are but a single data point. Bring a thousand and perhaps scientists will start to get worried.

For a good, skeptical look on whether the speed of light has been broken, check out Phil Plait’s post yesterday on Discover Magazine’s Bad Astronomy blog.

Anti-Feminism Sci-Fi Bingo

Steven Ray Orr — Mon, 26 Sep 2011 21:03:00 PDT

On MightyGodKing, John Seavey writes:

We were bouncing around the idea of what ‘Empire’ might look like if Leia was actually treated like the strong, fearless, intelligent woman she was in the original ‘Star Wars’, rather than the Ice Princess Who Just Needs A Big Strong Man To Tell Her What To Do in ‘Empire’.

Feminism, for whatever reason, seems to get under people’s skin. On a number of topics, I can step back from my personal thoughts on the matter and can understand the reasoning behind all sides of an argument, if not the conclusions that are reached. Not so much on feminism.

I call myself a feminist, but there are times when I find myself staring, completely confused, at the arguments people have about it. Do I think that women get the short straw in much of contemporary film and literature? Of course. When I can have an hour-long conversation about Oscar-worthy actors this year and have trouble thinking of a single leading woman, there are significant gender issues that need to be resolved.

At the same time, I can not seem to bring myself to care about the notion of Princess Leia as an empowered, feminist icon or the portrayal of women in Nolen’s Batman movies. It is not, necessarily, a matter of disagreement. John’s version of Leia seems reasonable enough. Likewise, I can not really argue that Nolen’s Bat-women are strong (or even likeable) characters.

That being said, I just do not seem to care.

Analyzing literature and criticizing it for not being feminist enough. It is all too academic for me (and I am saying that as an academic myself). It gets us nowhere to look at a thirty year-old film and say, “see, that’s sexist!”, and going one step further by telling me why doesn’t get us much further, because the problem isn’t Star Wars. ‘Empire’ is a symptom. The problem is within Hollywood itself.

To his credit, John does more than simply complain about where ‘Empire’ went wrong; his post is about righting ‘Empire’ while still capturing the soul of the movie. He makes some excellent points and I am sure I would enjoy watching the movie as he would write it. But feminists do not benefit from fan fictioning out our own versions of the movies we loved before we came into our own as thinking creatures. Feminists need to do more than talk about their manifestos; feminists need to write them. Those who have the gift of language need to take up their pens and do more than edit; feminists need to write their heroes to life and show them off to the world, on the page and on the screen.

So what’s the point of all this? Truthfully, it started off as a defensive (but respectful) rant where-in I proclaimed that I still enjoy watching ‘Empire’ as it is¹ and I am tired of being made to feel bad because of that. But after letting it sit for a while, I have decided that is not entirely honest. The reason that I found myself frustrated comes from John’s penultimate sentence: “The fact that they didn’t do this isn’t a reflection of some insoluble plot conundrum, it’s a reflection of laziness and a reliance on stereotypes of female behavior on the part of the writers.”

A reflection of laziness.

I am in the process of writing something fairly significant. I am quite proud of what I have done and I hope to, one day, get it published. But nowhere in this work, planned or already written, is there a character that I can point to and say, “see, that’s my manifesto. There is what I believe.”.

It is not a matter of possibility. The fact that I have not written such a character is not a reflection of some insoluble plot conundrum, it’s a reflection of laziness. And I need to be better than that.

So, thanks John.

(Also: do check out his personal blog. He does good things with words, almost always about comic books. If you are into that kind of thing.)

Kind of. In general, the Star Wars movies do not really hold up to the idea of the Star Wars movies. Just like the Cube movies. Sigh.
↩

The Space Obligation

Steven Ray Orr — Fri, 23 Sep 2011 17:39:00 PDT

Stephen M. Hackett talks about the embarassaing state of NASA:

While NASA’s shuttle program may not have been everything it as supposed to be, it is hard to disagree with these guys that the shuttle is better than nothing.

I am a romantic. I think that venturing into the unknown should be undetaken for the act of discovery and that we should shine light into darkness, if only to discovery that there is nothing there.

A few years ago, I wrote the piece that is below. I had intented to turn it into the prologue of something bigger and grander. That never happened. Instead, it has sat, ignored, in my writing folder. Hackett’s post reminded me of it and I’ve decided that to share put it out into the world rather than keep it to myself.

The Space Obligation

When we were children we looked to space, to the planets and the stars, and to the worlds beyond our own. The vast charted continents of Earth were meaningless to us, because they had already been seen by pryring eyes. On our planet, there was nothing alien. We wanted the stars because anything was possible beyond them.

This drive is what has fueled all of humanity’s ventures into space: from Icarus’ doomed flight, to the Apollo missions, to the Hubble Space Telescope. There is a need to explore that goes beyond the mere search for knowledge and answers. It is a calling so deep-seeded within our very DNA. To be human is to yearn for the undiscovered country; to see that which no one else has seen; to be where no one else has been. We live in the finite so we look to the stars for a glimpse at the limitless.

It is that desire which called us all to the Icarus Project. Here we continue his dream of reaching for the stars and flying far beyond the limits of the ordinary. We wish a chance to touch infinity and become a part of something greater than ourselves.

Today, those wishes finally become a reality. This marks the next stage of a fifteen year project that represents countless lifetimes of hard work, dedication, and a dream for humanity. Today, the Icarus II will fly.

Our mandate is simply: to explore. Like Magellan’s attempt to circumnavigate the globe; like Shackleton’s Antarctic adventures; like Armstrong and Kennedy’s steps on humanity’s pathway to the stars. We have touched our moon and the Red Planet, but there is a universe full of planets that we have not yet laid our hands upon. The Icarus II seeks to change that.

First, the Icarus II will complete a grand tour of the solar system. A seven year mission that is only possible because of a once-in-a-generation alignment of the planets. Six self-sustainable pods–able to make their own respective journeys back to Earth–are attached to the Icarus. At each planet, a pod will be launched with two astronauts and they will make first journeys of their own: to the terrestrial fireballs of Mercury and Venus, to the ice satellites of Jupiter, to Saturn’s moon-planet Titan, and, finally, to the gas giants of Uranus and Neptune. We do not know what will be learned from exploring these heavenly bodies, but we do know that it is a task that we have been called to.

And while the pods make their headlong way home to Earth, the Icarus II and its twelve remaining astroanuts will point themselves towards the Alpha Centauri system and become the first human beings to leave behind the light of our Sun.

From there, the Icarus II will truly begin to explore the uncharted. It will go where no probe has explored and it will see that which has not yet been seen by the human eye. The purpose is to discover. To that effect, there is no return date scheduled for the Icarus II. No point in space where the journey is to stop. The astronauts will chart their own path through the stars and become caretakers of their own destiny. We consider this to be the only true way to explore the stars.

There are those who accuse us of being romantic dreamers; of being escapists, so fed up with the troubles of home, that we seek to leave behind a planet when it needs most to be united. And, perhaps, rightly so, with the Earth in such dire straights. From the economic wasteland of the Americas to the Sino land wars to the forgotten spans of Africa, humanity is rushing madly towards self-extinction and the Icarus Project burns supplies that could be better spent on solving such conflicts.

But what we do is not for personal benefit. We act in the name of all humanity. Now, more than ever, it is necessary to dream. Humanity must believe that there is a future worth going to. It is not enough to survive; we must also flourish. So the Icarus II takes to the stars to reignite the fire in our hearts. We desperately use resources because we are racing against the clock. We want to give the world a reason to live, not just a reason to survive; a reason to drive our souls.

So today, with the the flight of the Icarus II, we dream and we hope that all of humanity will join us in discovering the beauty and wonder of the unknown. There will be no secrets; what we see, all will see. What we discover, all will discover. This is a journey for all of humankind and our entire civilization will be made the better for it.

Lowercase "D" democrat

Steven Ray Orr — Thu, 22 Sep 2011 22:43:00 PDT

Anil Dash on Twitter:

Serious question: If U.S. society has decided the death penalty is just, why don’t we get called to executioner duty, as we do to jury duty?

For the same reason that you were not called to serve in the Iraq War: most of the individuals in our population are incapable of committing such an act.

I believe that it is not just our own children who are innocent. I believe that armed forces are a necessity in this global community. I believe that those nations that are able to, have an obligation to be the world’s police force. And, despite all of these beliefs, I could never be a soldier or take another life in that manner.

There is no shame in this conflict between understanding the costs of our civilization and having a willingness to pay those costs ourselves. I am a democrat and democracy does not ask that each of us commit the deeds and sins of our body politic, just that we all be equally responsible for them.

We are not called to executioner duty, because we are all, as citizens, already held accountable for the murder of one that has been deemed–by our system of governance, flawed as it may be–to be a threat to our body politic. That is how democracy works.

Cheap Political Theatre

Steven Ray Orr — Tue, 20 Sep 2011 23:01:00 PDT

L. Ian MacDonald for the Montreal Gazette:

I enjoy a story about wasteful government spending as much as the next reporter, and I’ve spent many hours poring over expense reports, but I’m having a hard time getting angry about the chief of defence staff’s flights.

When I first heard about this nonsense, I rolled my eyes and ignored it. It was a non-story. General Natynczyk, who runs our entire Canadian Forces, used a government Challenger jet to get from one point to another. What were the events that he was traveling to-and-from? Football and hockey games? Catching the Calgary Stampede? I don’t care, because that that does not get to the why of his appearances.

The chief of defence is not able to simply go home after long day and relax. He, at all times, required to be at the ready. We do not ask this of him. We demand it. So when he flies a state-of-the-art jet that allows him to get him places faster, we should be be thankful we have such a tool at our disposal. It isn’t a matter of comfort or privilege; it is a matter of efficiency.

If the NDP wants to attack wasteful government spending, I say go for it. Let’s start with the MPs and work our way up. But to start by attacking the man who runs our Forces for doing the job that we demand of him? It is cheap political theatre and our politicians, on both sides, should be above that.

Drive

Steven Ray Orr — Tue, 20 Sep 2011 00:24:00 PDT

Dennis Lim’s New York Times interview of Ryan Gosling paints him as exactly the kind of man I pictured after seeing Drive:

Mr. Gosling said he doesn’t get recognized that much: “You just have to hang out in places that are more interesting than you are.”

“Do you think it’s too much?” Mr. Gosling said. “It would be nice to have time in between for people to forget one character and accept another.”

Actors, true actors, are an incredible breed. Their particular type of genius is one that I can appreciate as a writer, but will also never really understand. When I put pen to page, I am not stepping into someone else’s skin. All of my writing is, no matter the topic, a facet of myself. Acting, though, requires a completely different mindset: the ability to, despite whomever you may be, become another individual.

What I mean to say is that Drive is a fantastic movie.

Secret Conservative Death Camps

Steven Ray Orr — Mon, 19 Sep 2011 23:37:00 PDT

I like reading the National Post’s Full Comment section although I must confess that I’m not as big a fan when they just post a series of Christopher Hitchens essays.

Still, Kelly McParland had an excellent piece–dripping with sarcasm that many of her commenters do not seem to understand–on Stephen Harper’s plans for the next Parliament:

Stephen Harper finally has the moment we’ve been waiting for, the one where he whips out the file with the Top Secret stamp and the padlock on the cover, produces the key from his pocket and reveals to the world his Hidden Agenda.

It’s kind of hard to campaign against Stephen Harper by saying, “he will, gradually and without much fanfare, do exactly what he says that he will”. Especially difficult when most Canadians can’t be bothered to muster any sort of emotional response to his last five years as Prime Minister. Baring a scandal or some major political realignment, I think that Harper will stay Prime Minister until he decides to retire from politics.

Integration

Steven Ray Orr — Mon, 19 Sep 2011 21:12:00 PDT

Pagan Kennedy of the New York Times relays her “first” cyborg experience:

I was not aware of blinking or moving the muscles of my face. The phone seemed to have merged with my body, to be as much a part of me as a finger or toe. I found myself laughing. I couldn’t stop saying, “This is freaky.” And it was.

Kennedy’s article is excellent on a number of points, but there is one where she gets it dead wrong:

For years, computers have been creeping ever nearer to our neurons. Thousands of people have become cyborgs, of a sort, for medical reasons.

There is no “of a sort”. We are, almost all of us, already cyborgs. Neural implants and machine-based telepathy are not the defining attributes; it is, instead, the connection that we have with our tools. No longer are computers devices that we use, they have become a facet of our own being. Our very understanding of ourselves and, indeed, our very capacity for thought is directly connected to these things that we are not physically entwined with.

It is true that those with mechical and electrical replacements to their bodies are, in a manner of speaking, different than the rest of us, but that difference is akin that of owning a motorcycle over a station wagon. Both users are still, fundamentally and unarguably, human beings.

When our devices cease to merely be tools and, instead, become necessary aspects of ourselves, we are no longer human beings. We are a new species altogether, distinct and separate. We are cyborgs.

(Via Matt Thomas)

"The future is a verb"

Steven Ray Orr — Sun, 18 Sep 2011 23:30:00 PDT

Alan M. Webber, for The Christian Science Monitor, writing about “the Apple effect”. He explains the most important insight Apple has had about PCs:

The computer is a thing, but what people want is not a thing, but to do things.

Computers used to be for nerds. In those days, we stood around comparing megahertz and megabytes. We raced to overclock our machines while we argued about front-side buses and hardware-acceleration. We vehemently debated OpenGL versus DirectX. We didn’t just use computers, we knew them.

I imagine, in my more romantic moments, that this has been the genesis of most tools that have become commonplace.¹

It is impossible to deny the importance of computers in our society. They are everywhere and most households have, at least, one. No longer are these devices limited to the nerds. And yet the dialogue around computers is still rooted in the same technospeak that it always has been.

Why is that still the case?

Your average user does not care about their hard drive RPM or the number of cores in their processor. They aren’t interested in the difference between solid state memory and traditional hard drives. The two most important aspects of a computer have become storage capacity and battery life.

Gone is the early era of the PC, where people bought computers to have computers. Those users still exist and are still buying computers, but they are the extreme minority. Now, everyone wants to have a computer. Not to have a computer, but to have access to this amazing new tool.

People want to send photos of their children to relatives around the world. People want to read the news–not just one side of it, but every side. People want to Skype; they want to Facebook; and they want to tweet.

Apple’s success has everything to do with recognizing these desires and playing into them. The very first text you see on the iPad homepage is, “Thinner. Lighter. Faster. FaceTime. Smart Covers. 10-hour battery.”. Nowhere in their advertising do they talk about processor speeds or megabytes of RAM, because those numbers don’t mean anything. That is the old way of thinking about personal computers.

This understanding is why the iPad is the only tablet on the market that consumers are interested in. It is Apple’s actualization of the concept that “technology alone is not enough”. And that is Apple’s most important insight.

It is easy enough for me to picture young men and women, gathered around a gasoline powered motorwagen, talking for hours about the merits of four-wheeled automobiles over three-wheelers. It is a pleasant fantasy.
↩

"A terribly hard thing."

Steven Ray Orr — Sat, 17 Sep 2011 14:50:00 PDT

Pat Robertson is not a man for whom I have any respect. He has said a great many hateful things, declaring his interpretation of morality as the absolute truth, to an audience that looks to him for guidance and answers. But recently, he has been criticized by fellow Christians for comments he made about struggling with the conflict that arises between the vows of marriage and the need for companionship amidst the death-like grief that occurs with dementia. He said that he did not know:

That is a terribly hard thing. I hate Alzheimer’s. It is one of the most awful things, because here’s the loved one—this is the woman or man that you have loved for 20, 30, 40 years, and suddenly that person is gone. They’re gone. They are gone.

This is an ethical question that is beyond my ken to tell you. But I certainly wouldn’t put a guilt trip on you if you decided that you had to have companionship.

He someone who, like the rest of us, is trying to understand the universe and the struggles that we, as human beings, face within it. This is the purpose of liberalism–not the breaking apart of Christian morality in order to excuse a hedonistic lifestyle–but the attempt to come to terms with the questions that are not easily answered by faith alone.

(Via William Saletan’s excellent Slate post, “The After-Wife”)

The Tree of Life

Steven Ray Orr — Fri, 16 Sep 2011 23:45:00 PDT

I wanted to be loved because I was great; A big man. I’m nothing. Look at the glory around us; trees, birds. I lived in shame. I dishonored it all, and didn’t notice the glory. I’m a foolish man.

Terrence Malick’s movies are about the conflict that arises when we come to understand that we are never that which we aspire to be and in that realization is both damnation and salvation. The most terrifying aspect of childhood is discovering that our parents are, in fact, human: that our father was once a boy and our mother was once a girl, both of them filled with the same tendencies that we are beginning to discover in ourselves.

The Tree of Life moves slowly through a childhood and takes careful steps in and out of an entire lifetime as a boy realizes that there is no startling transformation into a man, simply the steady march of time that is filled with half-understood lessons, fleeting happinesses, and many regrets.

Each moment in this movie takes its time, pulling us through the scenes as if we, too, were children and every second stretched out to infinity. We can all recall the endless summers of our youth and how, as we age, time begins to slip through our hands faster than we can even grasp what we are seeing and feeling. With The Tree of Life, Malick, for the briefest of times, returns us to the days of innocence when we were still perfect creatures, unbroken by the harshness of the world around us and the even harsher burden of being alone with ourselves.

And it is beautiful.

Coffee's for Closers

Steven Ray Orr — Wed, 14 Sep 2011 22:43:00 PDT

Microsoft did a demo of Windows 8 this week. The tech bloggers are putting in their two cents on what it means for both the computer and the tablet industies. Lots of voices taking every side of the matter. Lots of voices that I skipped in my feed reader this week.

Why?

Because I don’t care. Until Windows 8 or Metro actually makes it out into the wild and onto devices that I can touch, it may as well the PADD or a sonic screwdriver.

Apple can keep 10% of the total PC marketshare. That won’t bother me in the slightest, because I’ve used OS X and I’ve used Windows 7 and I know where I stand on the matter. Apple makes high quality products that I’m happy to pay for and I will continue to be happy to pay for them.

Microsoft has a long way to go before they regain my attention and it won’t come from tech demos or product announcements. It’ll come from putting Windows 8 into my hands and wowing me with it.

Winners ship. That’s all there is to it.

Laptop 2.0

Steven Ray Orr — Mon, 12 Sep 2011 22:50:00 PDT

In his latest article on “winning” the mobile phone war, John Gruber includes a footnote that he has discussed before on The Talk Show:

I think fundamentally, tablets like the iPad are simply portable computers. Tablets are a segment of the computer industry, not an industry unto themselves.

The notion that the iPad is just a big iPhone has started to disappear as the general public begins to find more uses for this new device. Lately, I have not heard as many people asking whether it can be used a phone. Instead, the questions are more geared towards the laptop functions that it replaces: “can I do a powerpoint presentation?”, “what is the most effective way to takes notes?”, “how well does it work for media on vacation?”.

People don’t want to use it as an oversized phone. They want to use is a portable computer.

Tablets are to laptops as laptops were to desktops.

"We're having that right now."

Steven Ray Orr — Mon, 12 Sep 2011 21:52:00 PDT

On The Atlantic, Major Garrett recalls a moment from the Tea-Party Debate:

Romney pressed. “Do you still believe Social Security should be ended as a federal program as you did six months ago when your book came out and returned to the states? Or do you want to retreat from that?”

“I think we should have a conversation,” Perry responded.

“We’re having that right now, governor,” retorted Romney. “We’re running for president.”

It is far too soon to tell who the Republicans are going to nominate for the 2012 Presidental Election. Truth be told, I’m not close to a point where I care–and I have studied this stuff and written papers on the topic. When you get down to it, I have serious doubts that starting the debates this early will result in a net positive for any of the candidate.

But, every now and then, there are comments and quips, like Governor Romney’s, that elevate the discourse ever so slightly above monkies flinging feces at each other.¹

I feel obligated to mention they’re not yet running for President. Technically, they’re running for the nomination to run for President. Not as smooth a sound-byte though…
↩

".3 watt-hours per search"

Steven Ray Orr — Sat, 10 Sep 2011 14:07:00 PDT

Kristina Grifantini for Technology Review, writing on the topic of Google’s carbon footprint:

Google uses 260 million watts continuously across the globe, the company reported on Wednesday. This is equivalent to the power used by all the homes in Richmond, Virginia, or Irvine, California (around 200,000 homes), and roughly a quarter of the output of a standard nuclear power plant.

(Via @ZachWeiner)

What is Journalism?

Steven Ray Orr — Fri, 09 Sep 2011 18:58:00 PDT

My personal favorite answer comes from a discussion on Google+, particularly Meg Tufano’s suggestion:

What about journalism being the first draft of history?

It may not be right, but it sure is poetic.

Death Knell

Steven Ray Orr — Fri, 09 Sep 2011 18:33:00 PDT

Jeff Jarvis wonders how there can be professional standards in an industry as utterly divided as jouranlism:

The question of what is and isn’t journalism is one that journalists ask. It has nothing to do with the questions the public asks. And the journalist’s job, supposedly, is to answer the public’s questions. Disconnect, eh?

This apparent disconnect is important and it occurs in many disciplines, but that doesn’t mean everyone wants to read about it. Consider politics, which is rooted in political theory, which asks “what is political?”. That question can lead to others “what is government?” and “how do you define a human being?”.

Already I’ve lost half of my audience. Not because they aren’t intellectuals or because they are incapable of answering those questions, but because they do not care.

And why should they?

Those are questions that political scientists ask each other for fun and we are interested in the ideas within the questions because how we answer them defines our self-perceptions. This is likewise true of members of the press when they ask themselves “what is journalism?” or choose to attack others for their “unprofessional” behavior.

It doesn’t matter if the public treats the question (or the answers, for that matter) with indifference. The purpose of the question is self-definition, not social enlightenment. Over the last few years, we have seen this debate play itself out in various arenas, but the core issue that it all ends up being about is the same: new-media and traditional-media are (at least) two completely distinct entities that fundamentally disagree with each other on the nature of journalism.

It may not be a discussion that the public wants to hear–and, thanks to the magic of closing the tab, they don’t have to–but it is a discussion that the industry itself needs to have. The New York Times needs to fight with TechCrunch, because that debate is going to lead to self-definition. It may not be the case that we will ever see an NYT editor like Mike Arrington. That is a perfectly acceptable situation, as long as the Times understands their reasons for avoiding it (for the record, “what we do would be impossible without a strong editorial hand,” is an acceptable response and an enlightening one).

There were a lot of conversations this week about new-media and ethical reporting. Some of it was true, some of it was inflammatory, and some of it was completely unnecessary. But I think that Jeff Jarvis is an incredibly bright mind leading the discussion away from the trivial and towards the significant. If you’ve any interest in the role of journalism in a web-based world, you should check out the discussions on his blog and on G+.

Discounted AAPLs

Steven Ray Orr — Thu, 08 Sep 2011 20:01:00 PDT

Dirk Schmidt for Asymco, writing on about the resignation of Steve Jobs and its effect on AAPL stock:

Apple investors are becoming more comfortable with Tim Cook running the company as the negative cumulative abnormal returns diminish and turn into positives ones when he is appointed CEO.

It really feels quite nice when intelligent people use charts and numbers to sum up notions that you’ve been trying to articulate for days. Now, instead of finding a way to say it myself, I can simply point you to Asymco’s much more detailed analysis.

Journalistic Ouroboros

Steven Ray Orr — Thu, 08 Sep 2011 18:46:00 PDT

Paul Carr writes about the New York Times writing about TechCrunch writing about TechCrunch:

Ceding control to the Huffington Post will be the death of everything — the voice, the swagger, the “fuck you” attitude — that makes TechCrunch great; and I’m not going to stay around to watch that happen.

I haven’t been following the CrunchFund saga with any sort of rigor, so I don’t have a particularly thorough analysis. Maybe it was a bad idea for Mike to name his venture fund after his tech news enterprise. Perhaps the New York Times should focus more on journalism and less on writing about other journalists. And maybe Arianna Huffington shouldn’t have fired the guy whom everyone at TechCrunch seems to respect.

Lots of “maybes” in the affair.

There is one certainty on which we can all agree: these stories have led to far too many accidental page views of the Huffington Post. If Mike really is gone from TechCrunch, maybe he can get a new job redesigning the giant, bloated mess that is the Huffington Post website. We can only hope…

Greatness

Steven Ray Orr — Tue, 06 Sep 2011 22:43:00 PDT

Mike Evangelist shares a memorable experience with Steve Jobs:

It was one of my proudest moments at Apple; to be part of a company that lets its heart guide its actions. I know now, more than ever, that the company is built that way because of Steve.

I don’t know where Apple is going to go in the next decade as there are many different directions that $76 billion dollars can take the company. I do know that Tim Cook will lead the way and his footsteps will be his own. On some ventures, he will succeed outright and on others, he will stumble. Anyone who expects otherwise is a fool. Absolute perfection has never been a requirement for greatness–else we would have forgotten all of history’s geniuses long ago, including Steve Jobs.

If Tim Cook can match Steve’s tenacity and his desire for success–that is not just to say stock valuation or number of units sold, but in creating the best possible product–then he will do right by Apple and we will continue to see the company lead the technology race. This will be as much up to Tim Cook as it will be to the many brilliant minds who also work for Apple and I have the utmost of faith in that they will continue to impress.

But I am more curious as to what we will see of Tim Cook and whether he will rise to his own greatness. The coming years will tell, as we begin to hear stories about Tim like those that are being revealed about Steve.

My guess: we ain’t seen nothing yet. The best of Apple is yet to come.

(Via minimal mac)

"All the rest..."

Steven Ray Orr — Mon, 05 Sep 2011 20:28:00 PDT

MG Siegler reminds us that TechCrunch will never be the New York Times:

But ultimately there is only one thing that matters: information. People don’t care how they get it, just that they get it. If they don’t think they can trust it from one source, they’ll find another way to get it. It really is that simple.

Burning Cyborg

Steven Ray Orr — Mon, 05 Sep 2011 00:43:00 PDT

Duncan Davidson explains why he turned away from Burning Man:

If you want to show a photograph you’ve made at Burning Man in public, the contract stipulates that you have to get permission not only from people in the photograph, but from Black Rock City LLC. Furthermore, if your camera can capture video–and what camera these days doesn’t–you have to register it and have it tagged.

Welcome to the 21st Century.

As more of us become cyborgs, enhancing our awarenesses with various technologies, the boundaries between that which we are able to perceive with our physical senses will collide with that which we are permitted to experience with our digital senses. Eventually, as our use of technology becomes a dependency on technology, this collision will become a major point of contention in our society. For now, Duncan has the option to separate himself from his camera and leave photographer-Duncan behind.

How long before that is no longer a convenient separation?

How long before that is no longer a possible separation?

Eventually, we will look back on the current debate about the dangers of social media and scoff at the perceived threats. Technology is fundamentally changing what it means to be human and the consequences of such rapid transformations will alter our societies in ways that we can only begin to imagine.

This Tweet Brought To You By...

Steven Ray Orr — Sat, 03 Sep 2011 16:24:00 PDT

Peter Kafka at AllThingsD warns of coming changes to the Twitter-verse:

Coming to some of you, in about a month: Ads in your Tweetstream, from Twitter accounts you don’t follow.

Twitter is steadily trying to increase the number of places where advertisers can get their message across, without spooking users who generally think of Twitter as an ad-free zone.

About damn time.

Twitter needs a revenue stream. They have needed a revenue stream from day one, but decided that developing a strong user base was more important than making money. Now they have 200 million users and are valued in the multi-billions, but are not collecting anywhere near the amount of money they need to in order to be an actual business.

I have often thought that I would be happy to pay for my Twitter account, if only because @Rayke and @phyllisstein are there, but offering my money and actually paying up are two different things–not to mention, getting everyone to pay up as well. How much of my hard earned money would I be willing to give to Twitter? If Twitter, tomorrow, disabled tweeting for anyone who would not pay a $10 monthly fee, what would happen? $5? $1?

No matter what the amount, many users would leave. Most casuals and even some of the regular twits would find another way to get their thoughts out into the world, 140 characters at a time. Twitter is a blogging platform. It is a convenient way to casually express thoughts, but there are other platforms that offer similar services.¹ If Twitter moves too quickly or overtly, there will be an exodus and someone else will pick up those who Twitter pushed away.

Advertising may not be the silver bullet and, no matter how well it is done, there are going to be those who take offense. It will be unfortunate when Twitter loses users in order to make money, but that is a natural consequence of ignoring the business aspect of a web company.

(Via Watts Martin)

Hey tumblr, where is your revenue model?
↩

Social Clutter

Steven Ray Orr — Thu, 01 Sep 2011 23:28:00 PDT

Sit down and count the number of social websites that you connect with on a regular basis. Of course, Facebook is at the top, but that is certainly not the only one. Some of the obvious others are Twitter, Tumblr, and whatever blog platform that you currently use. Throw in anything that allows you to communicate with other users, even if that is not the main attraction, and we add in YouTube, Flickr, Last.fm, and Instagram.

Is it any surprise that linking efforts such as about.me exist? Our social existence has become confused to the point of clutter, even if you ignore that some users have multiple identities and that each platform has its own standards for usernames and passwords. While there is an argument to be made about the consequences of social fragmentation on the psyche, I am speaking of a much more commonplace difficulty: contact.

Each new platform, as wonderful and transformative as it may be, makes this problem worse, not better. Another tool is created that adds some amazing feature to our lives, but it also comes with it another username with which we are to contact other users. Another tool is invented that I have to activately check and manage if I want to actually receive whatever messages people are trying to send to me.

It is possible to connect most of these services with an email address so that I can receive a message on, say, Facebook and be notified at steven@stevenrayorr.com, but emails from a service titled “X mentioned you on Twitter!” or “You have a new Facebook message” are not a solution. Prioritizing them is difficult. Sorting them is all but impossible. And directly replying via email may not even be an option.

Do not abandon your social media. That is not my message. Instead, make use of each service within the boundaries for which it is ideal. Or, as Khol Vinh requests:

Until there’s an unequivocally better solution … if you want to reach me, just send me an email.

'T'

Steven Ray Orr — Tue, 30 Aug 2011 23:02:00 PDT

Andy Rutledge is a designer who is one of those capital ‘t’ Talented individuals and when he writes, it is often with all the same force of a lightning strike:

When and if someone tries to lead you away from responsibility you must immediately recognize it for what it is: corruption. Expediency is not something toward which to aspire or with which to find accord. Avoid it in favor of what your values make clear is right. But be careful of how you characterize your values: If you are true, it’s a lie unless you are ever true. If you are responsible, it’s a lie unless you are ever responsible. If you have integrity, it’s a lie unless you avoid compromise and corruption at every step. If you offer value, it’s a lie unless your character describes you as entirely reliable.

Andy is demanding of himself nothing short of constant vigilence; a perpetual commitment to honor the ideals that he believes to be captial ‘t’ Truths. He values, above all else, the agreement he has made with his partners and co-workers. How many of us could say that we likewise live, unerringly, in line with our own personal moralities?

As technology advances and we grow in our ability to transform the physical into the digital it becomes ever more possible for us to overcome the barriers that once made the world so vast: words that used to take weeks or months to travel the distances between cities can now be shared in real time; we are but a Google search away from the complete works of Shakespeare, of Joyce, of Poe; and with a few keystrokes, we can explore the Cappella Sistina and marvel at The Last Judgement of Michelangelo. With the internet, convenience becomes the norm for our society and we begin to expect our entire life to follow suit.

That desire for expediency is dangerous, if only because it encourages us to focus on the end result instead of the process itself. This is not to say that you should eschew all material pursuits, but instead a reminder that how you achieve your goals is as important as what your goals are and whether they are ever realized. This becomes more obvious when you honestly analyze your objectives and realize that you have misfired completely. ¹

Your personal integrity matters. It matters almost more than anything else in the world, for if you lose yourself you’ve lost your ability to bring value to your relationships and work. Never let someone lead you away from your integrity; not for money, not for experience, not for affirmation. If your integrity has a price, you never had it to begin with.

And in case you were curious, this is not a preachy manifesto aimed outward. Andy’s post hit particularly close to home and to publish is to publically admit just how close it was.
↩

"That beast astray"

Steven Ray Orr — Mon, 29 Aug 2011 21:25:00 PDT

AAPL stock quickly recovered from its minor dip, as if the market decided that the loss of Steve Jobs the CEO is not the same thing as the loss of Steve Jobs the genius. More poetically, Jean-Louis Gassée makes the same observation for the Monday Note:

Seeing he could no longer ”meet [his] duties and expectations as Apple’s CEO”, Jobs kicks himself upstairs and becomes Chairman, director, and “mere” Apple employee. In a distant future, I see him haunting the circular hallways of Apple’s Cupertino spaceship, the Commendatore hunting the clock punchers and damning the linear thinkers straight to Hell.

(Via John Gruber)

Twitter Didn't Start the Fire

Steven Ray Orr — Sun, 28 Aug 2011 23:34:00 PDT

Christian Fuchs writing on the UK Riots:

Calls for more police, surveillance, crowd control and the blames of popular culture and social media are helpless. It is too late once riots erupt. One should not blame social media or popular culture, but the violent conditions of society for the UK riots. The mass media’s and politics’ focus on surveillance, law and order politics and the condemnation of social media will not solve the problems. A serious discussion about class, inequality and racism is needed.

The cause of these riots cannot be boiled down to a single action nor can the communication tools that were used be held any more responsible than liquor stores or gas stations. Is it possible that social media made it easier for the rioters to execute their plans? Of course. Likewise, lighters make it easier to turn gasoline into flame, but I did not hear Prime Minister Cameron denouncing Bic.

Blaming Twitter or BlackBerry Messenger makes for an easy and sexy headline, but doing so obscures the social, political, and economic reasons behind the riots.

(Via sea love)

We the People

Steven Ray Orr — Sat, 27 Aug 2011 12:41:00 PDT

In 2004, George W. Bush was re-elected President of the United States and half of the country lost its mind. In 2008, Barack Obama was elected President and the other half of the country lost it mind. And, more relevant to my life, yesterday voters of British Columbia decided that it was in everyone’s best interest to throw away millions of tax dollars.

This is the unfortunate reality that we live in, although we generally refer to this flavor of reality as democracy. The problem with a democracy is that, from time to time, the majority will disagree with your personal choice and elect a candidate or pass a referendum that runs counter to your individual beliefs. In such a situation, there is no legitimate recourse: you have lost.

Oh sure, you can attack the process with many different arguments: “the voter turnout was low”; “the referendum was phrased poorly”; “the campaign was misleading”. You may even be correct on any or all of your points, but, at the end of the vote, all of that is moot. Being right has no place in a democracy.

Our civilization is founded on the principle that we, the people, are best suited to championing our own fate and the manner by which it is determined what we, the people, are thinking is an opt-in vote by a certain subset of the people. This is the system of governence that we advocate around the world, loudly proclaiming its virtues over this style of tyranny or that form of communism. We do this even knowing that, at the end of any one election, a significant portion of the population is going to be disappointed by the result.

This is not to say that democracy is bad or that an individual tyrant would suit us better. It is a reminder that elections and referendums are the processes that govern our society and sometimes, in an election, your candidate loses. That does not make it any less your decision or make you any less responsibile for the result. We choose to live in a democratic nation, so we choose to be accountable for the decisions of the whole.

Creating A Flop

Steven Ray Orr — Fri, 26 Aug 2011 00:12:00 PDT

Sean Hood, one of the writers of the recent Conan the Barbarian remake, writing on Quora:

One joins a movie production, the same way one might join a campaign, years before the actual release/election, and in the beginning one is filled with hope, enthusiasm and belief. I joined the Conan team, having loved the character in comic books and the stories of Robert E. Howard, filled with the same kind of raw energy and drive that one needs in politics.

It is incredibly easy to forget that, no matter how terrible a movie is, there are real, living human beings behind it. Human beings who worked hard to make it happen. Human beings who may have, at some point, thought that they were creating the “next big thing”. I can confess to that same feeling only to reach the abrupt, terrifying conclusion that the work you did was barely passable and not even remotely close to genius.

Reading Sean’s painfully honest account of the stages of a failed project is almost enough to make me want to watch Conan, just to support him.

Almost.

(Via io9)

Eulogizing

Steven Ray Orr — Thu, 25 Aug 2011 18:53:00 PDT

Mike Monteiro on twitter:

As much as I admire everything Steve Jobs has done, I don’t believe in writing eulogies for the living.

Steve Jobs is not leaving Apple and he is not dead. He will continue to play an important role with the company that he built and, later, rebuilt. I do not know if he will speak at the iPhone 5 keynote, but he will certainly be involved in the process. As he will be involved in the future of the company for as long as he can be. This is not the resignation of a man intent on quitting while he is ahead. It is the realization that, after thirteen years as both the heart and face of Apple Inc., something has got to give.

This is not the end of Apple and it is not the last that we have heard from Steve Jobs. So let’s save the eulogies for the dead.

Jack Layton, 1950-2011

Steven Ray Orr — Mon, 22 Aug 2011 22:10:00 PDT

Writing for the Torontoist, Christopher Bird gives his hail and fairwell to Jack:

Jack Layton has passed on, and the Canadians who loved him and admired him feel rudderless. Who will lead the NDP in Parliament now? Who will be the voice of opposition to Conservative policies now? Who will inspire us to work for a better Canada now?

All of these questions are understandable. They are all also self-indulgent and a little silly, and Jack would be the first person to tell you that (although he would be awfully polite and friendly about it). Were Jack here right now to answer those questions, he would simply say in answer to each of them: “you will.”

Super HD iPad Pro 3000

Steven Ray Orr — Thu, 04 Aug 2011 02:06:00 PDT

iPad Pro. iPad 2 HD. iPad 3.

Call it what you will, Apple will not be releasing a new iPad this fall.

Consider:

Price

The iPad 2 with a hi-res screen has no place in Apple’s current pricing scheme.

The 64GB 3G iPad retails for $829. The 64GB MacBook Air retails for $999. The iPad Pro will not be cheaper than the high-end iPad.¹ It will not be more expensive than a MacBook Air. Either A: Apple is doing a price drop on the “normal” iPad and making room for the iPad Pro or B: there is no iPad Pro.

Demand

Our store just started to receive sufficient iPads that we can actually keep them on the shelves at my store. It took four-and-a-half months for that to happen. Granted, we are education Canada and not retail USA, but as Dan Frommer mentions on SplatF: “supply and demand are finally in balance for the first time since Apple started shipping the new iPad in March”.

The latest we would see Apple release a new or updated product is October. After that, it will not be arriving until the 2012. Were a new iPad to arrive in the fall, it would arrive less than three months after the supply started meeting demand. Come the holiday season, there are still going to be people who are interested in the existing machines.

Schedule

The newest generation of the iPhone comes out this fall. They are overhauling iOS for the iPod Touch (3rd and 4th Generation), the iPhone (3Gs, 4, and 5), and the iPad (1 and 2). They are also likely going to revamp their iPod line in some way.² Finally, Apple has not forgotten about the Mac Pro.

That is a busy enough schedule that something is going to be left behind. And I am ignoring the possibility of two, distinct models of the iPhone 5; the obvious push that Apple is making with the Apple TV; and iCloud. Now we are putting a new iPad on that massive pile too?

Apple is possible of meeting such a release schedule, I fail to see how it would be in their best interest.

Back in February, John Gruber made some suggestions at Apple’s roadmap for the Next Six Months:

iPad 3, shipping in September, announced at the annual iPod event. Running iOS 5.1, same as the next-generation iPod Touch.

How could Apple release a third-generation iPad just six months or so after the second one? Maybe it won’t be an actual next generation model. Maybe it’s more like an iPad 2.5, or iPad 2 Pro — a new higher-end model that sits atop the iPad product family, not a replacement for the iPad 2 models (which, of course, haven’t even been released yet).

Sure, it differed from Apple’s traditional release schedule, but his reasoning was sound and he has always had a knack for knowing Apple, so it stuck. The idea transformed from the idle thoughts of a prominent tech writer to a certainty within the Apple rumour mill. Hell, I had customers suggest to me that they were holding off for that very reason.³

Then came the iPad 2 with a supply unable to come close to meeting the demand for the entire duration of Q3. Apple held off on announcing a new iPhone at WWDC, instead making it the summer of Operating Systems. And the white, polyurethane Macbook was discontinued.⁴ All of this came and went, but the tune has remained the same: we will see a new iPad before the leaves finish turning.

At the time, I agreed with the post John Gruber made back in February, because he made sense at the time. Now, I disagree with it, because the situation has changed so dramatically. Even Gruber has changed his roadmap:

Apple still can’t make the existing iPads fast enough, and none of their competitors on the market seem to be making any dent in the market. So even if Apple could do a retina-display iPad this year, I’m not sure there’s any reason they should.

So where the hell is the rest of the tech industry?

“No, they will not offer a 16GB WiFi model.”
↩
“I am content with the designs as they stand. Maybe a memory jump coupled with a slight price drop. Or not. The iPod, which revitalized Apple as a company, has already peaked.”
↩
“These are regular people and not Apple nerds. When they start talking about something, it has gotten pretty big.”
↩
If you do not think that this point is directly related to discussions about the iPad, think about why Apple would get rid of a product that still managed decent sales: they were eliminating a confusing product that no longer had a place in their family of laptops.
↩

Musings (9)

Steven Ray Orr — Fri, 22 Jul 2011 14:56:00 PDT

I love the way Mass Effect 2 does saves. You know, without making me watch a “saving screen” for thirty seconds. Dragon Age 2 too. Go figure, Bioware takes the things that work from one game and then adds it to another.

Too bad, I still have to deal with loading screens of doom. Developers, I demand from you a task to undertake during these mandatory loads. Have it be some kind of optional mini-game that isn’t absolutely essential and provides an almost insignificant benefit. Hell, make it the mining thing that people seem to hate. Anything. I understand that loading screens are still a reality for video games–I don’t fault the technological limitations–but I should never have to pull out my iPhone or iPad while I’m playing your game.¹
Someone tell me that Damages gets better after the first forty minutes. Please. I don’t think that it’s bad, because Glenn Close is awesome. But it doesn’t seem like the incredible show that everyone te-HOLY SHIT! IS THAT A DEAD DOG?!

But dead dog aside, the last ten minutes of episode one put everything in a radical new context, forcing the viewer to completely re-evaluate the character of Patty and every action that she has taken from the very first scene onward. Damages does a number of things right in the first episode. Anyone who wants to learn something about character-building or storytelling would benefit dramatically from watching.
In other news: Breaking Bad. Shame on you, if you don’t watch it.
If your app requires that that I sign up for some new service on the very first screen in order to use it, I’m just going to delete it without bothering. Yeah, Netflix, Facebook, and Dropbox can get away with that behavior. That’s because it’s Netflix, Facebook and Dropbox, dummy. Either you use those already or you should. Reeder gets a pass, because Google Reader is a necessity for me. PlainText/ShopShop are primarily Dropbox-based, so see the above point, dummy.²

Yes, I’m talking directly to you, Spotme.
Damn you, Avery Edison and your damned terrible puns.
New rule: you don’t get to use the phrase, “separate the wheat from the chaff” unless you can define “chaff” without a Google or Wikipedia search.

Yes, we all understand what the metaphor means, but we don’t understand the original term anymore. It is a metaphor long dead and we should strive, in all we speak and write, to avoid such devices.

Sure, we can make this a conversation about patience and the dangers of a society that demands instant and constant entertainment, if you really insist, but that is the easy conversation. I’m talking about the creation–or enhancement–of a fulfilling immersion environment. I’m talking about more than just a desire to be amused. I’m talking about Dragon Age as an experience instead of just a game. The goal that we should be striving towards is more than simply showing off a story and demanding memorization or quick reflexes; the ideal is a transformation of the player through the experience of the game.
↩
And, more importantly, don’t require it in order to actually do anything with the app. This is an important lesson for all app developers. Also: it wasn’t easy to find that website via Google Search. SpotMe, your own web page isn’t one of the top ten results. For the name of your app, “SpotMe Payments”. Sadface.
↩

Musings (8)

Steven Ray Orr — Fri, 24 Jun 2011 23:12:00 PDT

I think that I should find a job where I get on sinking ships¹and bail them out by being awesome. Kind of the opposite of George Clooney from Up in the Air. So, George Clooney in Michael Clayton or, I guess, him from The Men Who Stare at Goats.
Super 8: Not your grandparents E.T.
I have a terrible habit in video games: hoarding. Whether it be ammo, money or consumables, anything that my characters find is saved for the moment of absolute crisis where the need to so great that to hold anything back would mean failure. Needless to say, this extremity never actual occurs: it is but utter fantasy. A game designer cannot cater entirely to the madness of a hoarding mindset lest all others be left behind. Knowing this does not prevent me from saving every dollar, rare candy, and power node. The worst part: this behavior isn’t limited to Dead Space and Red Dead Redemption. I currently have one free Cineplex movie tickets, three free “large coffees”, and who knows how many Groupons.²
Joel Courtney³ would make be pretty awesome in Ender’s Game.
My Big, Fat, Gypsy Wedding offends me. Actually, let’s make that easier: everything on TLC offends me.
Prettify* is exactly the wrong type of website for me to get hooked on. I gain zero productivity from it and, in fact, get lost in the archives for hours on end, three am rolls around I’ve downloaded dozens of wallpapers that I probably won’t ever get around to using. They’ll take up disk space until I randomly find that folder, wonder why kept all those images, and then delete it. So, you know, go check it out and then get angry at the productivity-killing bastard who runs it.
I still really liked Snow Crash, but I prefer my subtext to be, you know, sub.
I Am Number Four is Twilight with aliens. Also: it should have Samuel L. Jackson as the main villain. Best line from the movie: “We don’t love like the humans. With us it’s forever.”

metaphorical ones, obviously. I’m not so good with the swimming thing.
↩
I guess I should get on those Groupons soon. I’m curious about the consequences of all those existing deals when the company finally disappears. The individual companies are probably on the hook for them…
↩
The actor, not the serial killer.
↩

Musings (7)

Steven Ray Orr — Sat, 11 Jun 2011 17:04:00 PDT

Games like Portal 2 make me wish Valve had a bigger impact on the industry. For example, making Mirror’s Edge instead of DICE.¹
This, right now, is the future that science fiction promised us.
Heinlein’s Stranger In A Strange Land: “nine times out of ten, if a girl gets raped, it’s at least partially her own fault”. Sometimes, I am reminded that we should acknowledge artists as a product of their time and not, necessarily, hold them accountable for views that, today, are radical or offensive. Other times, I think Heinlein was just an asshole.
Google is shutting down their Google Translate API. It’s probably my fault: “Due to the substantial economic burden caused by extensive abuse”.
Having had a long time to think about it, I’ve decided that Joseph Gorden Levitt’s “paradox” line in Inception is still the only part of the movie that I hate.
On a flight from Toronto to Vancouver, one of my seat-mates was an elderly woman whose only piece of carry-on luggage was a violin.² At one point³, she asked the stewardess for an extra soda because “[her] blood sugar was low” and then, when the stewardess left, she gave it to me: “I just wanted to see if I could get one”.
I’ve been trying to come up with a list of my top video games. This has been quite the trying process as each time I think I’ve finished my list, electrons fire me off into some long-forgotten game or gaming memory that adds yet another to the list. At this point, I now have three categories: Top 10, Honorable Mention, and “Damnit, I should have put more effort/time into that game, because it was awesome and I think it deserves to be on my Top 10, but I can’t be sure”. Still working on what to call that third category…
The latest entry in my commonplace book: “Either the victors must judge the vanquished or we must leave the defeated to judge themselves”.⁴
The folly of youth may be that it deems itself invincible, but the folly of age is that it deems itself impotent.

I should mention that I actually liked Mirror’s Edge, but it was a game where what it managed to do right was overshadowed by the glaring flaws. What EA actually released would probably only serve as a tech demo for Valve…
↩
I feel that you need to know this piece of information in order to better understand my experience: she wore Skullcandy Lowriders.
↩
Somewhere between Dickinson and Glendive, for the curious.
↩
Justice Robert H. Jackson
↩

Musings (6)

Steven Ray Orr — Sun, 08 May 2011 15:54:00 PDT

If a movie is on Netflix and I have a Netflix account, is it cool for me to just torrent a higher-resolution version of it? No, you say? Well that’s just damn confusing. Also confusing is that I can search “Louis CK” on Netflix and come up with three results, but two of them are “Unavailable”. Well, gee Netflix, thanks. I appreciate that you’re telling me what I can’t have.¹ It would be somewhat understandable if you were telling me that they will be available sometime soon, but you’re not. Instead, you’re just operating as a very limited version of IMDb. In the States, “unavailable” has something to do with there not being a physical copy, but we don’t have anything but Instant Watch here. Maybe the American site and the Canadian site draw from the same database. In which case, stop it.
Dole’s definition of “Lots-o-Cherries” is seriously lacking (See Here). Del Monte’s “Very Cherry” knows how it should be done (See Here).
Asimov writes one hell of a detective story.
re: Endgame: Bobby Fischer’s Remarkable Rise and Fall–from America’s Brightest Prodigy to the Edge of Madness : why do we insist on referring to people’s lives as rises and falls? They are people, not waves. The book itself is an in-depth study of both the boy and the man who young-Steve admired for his genius, but didn’t really understand. The paranoia and anti-Semitism that plagued his later years was always confusing: was madness the cost of his genius?² Endgame helps set the record straight, clearly drawing the line between the madman that Bobby Fischer appeared to be and the mildly paranoid asshole that he actually was.
Thanks Mark for introducing me to Triangle. Terrifying to watch by myself in the dark, but it’s a fantastic movie that does a lot of things right. But don’t watch any trailers or do any reading about it. Just go watch it. Hell, even ignore the poster too. And since I mentioned it, you should read Mark’s blog. If only because he has good taste and points me towards a great deal of the universe that I would otherwise ignore.
One day, I’ll be able to unplug the headphones from my iPhone and put them into my iPad while keeping the same song playing.

If I wanted a filmography for my search, I’d head to IMDb or Wikipedia.
↩
This is a whole ‘nother topic: Would Lincoln have been Lincoln without his melancholy?; would Eliot?; would Cohen? Depression is romanticized as simply a side effect of genius. I haven’t decided my thoughts on this yet. I have decided that we need to stop declaring that people “suffer” from depression. It is an illness. Let’s treat it like one.
↩

Vancouver Doesn't Want You, Joe O'Connor

Steven Ray Orr — Mon, 02 May 2011 19:30:00 PDT

Apparently, Vancouver is hurting for fans these days. At least, that is the story as Joe O’Connor of the National Post seems to see it as he proclaims that he has no desire to support the proudly Canadian Canucks.

Fortunately for us, the Vancouver Canucks have fans aplenty. We have fans to boo every missed call, cheer every strong shift, and celebrate every chance to prove ourselves in overtime. We have fans whose memories go back further than the last time Luongo lost a big game, who know that Kesler leaves everything on the ice even if he doesn’t score, and who admire the wizardry of the Sedins who have started to shape this franchise. We have fans who love these players from the fragile bones of Sami Salo to the grit of Raffi Torres to the manic speed of Mason Raymond. We have fans who admire Mike Gillis’ shielding of his team. We have fans who love the Green Men, hate Vince Vaughn, and are impressed by the President’s Trophy.

We have fans who remember the magic of Trevor Linden, who know what it means to ”pass it to Bulis”, and who mourn the tragedy of Luc Bourdon. We can’t help but recall the following years, in descending order of importance: 1994, 1982, and 2007. It was our fans who cried out first and loudest against Todd Bertuzzi; our fans who knew Luongo would make Team Canada proud; and our fans who brought meaning to Towel Power.

We have fans who have weathered the many storms of forty years and fans who barely know their history beyond this last year. We have fans who believe that this is our time (but will continue wave our towels proudly, even if it is not). We have fans who love this team and love this game. Joe O’Connor, we are all Canucks and we’ve got room for many more, but we don’t need more fans and we certainly don’t need you.

App Review 1 [Books]

Steven Ray Orr — Fri, 29 Apr 2011 02:25:00 PDT

It is no secret that I am a huge fan of my iPad. At work, I’ll often mention that it has been out of arm’s reach maybe half a dozen times in the ten months I’ve owned it. While the device itself is fantastic, the reason that I’ve become so enamoured with my iPad is because of the plethora of Apps available. And in honour of picking up my iPad 2, I’ve decided to sit down and give reviews for everything that is currently on my iPad. Each review will be posted in the App Store and I’ll include a rating from 1-to-5 stars.

iBooks
Category: Books
Developer: Apple Inc.
Rating: * * * * *

As an avid reader, iBooks might be the primary reason I’ve come to love my iPad so much. Reading with it is easy. Swiping or tapping to flip pages makes sense. I can easily change the brightness or font (and font size) on the screen. I can easily track my progress within a chapter or a whole book. OR I can hide all of these features with a simple tap. Bookmarking is useful for saving your place while sticky-notes and highlighting both help mark significant portions (and are automatically added to a “Bookmarks” table of contents).

The ability to search for books and sort into collections has made keeping a eBook library manageable. I can now keep separate shelves for different genres or purposes. To make it even more useful, I’d love if I could easily link books in a series so that they didn’t have to be named chronologically in order to keep them together.

Shakespeare
Category: Books
Developer: Readdle
Rating: * * * *

What iBooks does for reading books, the Shakespeare app does for plays–specifically (and obviously) Shakespeare’s plays. It breaks them down, act-by-act and scene-by-scene, keeping it easy enough to follow the script. Scene breakdowns. A full-fledged search. Easily manipulatable, like iBooks, it’s my go-to for everything of the bard.

Note: I haven’t upgrade to Pro and I don’t see myself doing it any time soon: some random portraits; a glorified quotes section; and scansion, which I’m not ashamed to admit that I don’t recall enough of high-school english to know about. The high cost ($9.99) for what I see as a limited feature set is what keeps this app from being perfect.

Bible
Category: Reference
Developer: LifeChurch.tv
Rating: * * * * *

I’m not going to pretend to know all the books of the Bible, let alone chapter-and-verse. But I’m a writer and sometimes I need (read: want) to get down to the particulars. This app has every earthly translation out there which is a reference-junkie’s dream. Again, like iBooks or Shakespeare, easily searchable. Again, easily manipulatable. And, again, broken down.

Comics
Category: Books
Developer: comiXology
Rating: * * * *

Coming to comics later in my life than seemed entirely appropriate to be reading comics, I thought I had maligned myself to keeping up on the particulars through Wikipedia and catching the occasional “important” release. Fortunately for me, Comics gives me an opportunity to read and collect, without having to explain myself to anyone but myself (and whoever happens to be reading over my shoulder).

I can’t tell you whether Comics reinvents the comic book experience. I can’t tell you whether something about the nature of comic books is lost in the translation. What I can tell you is that this app gives me as much freedom as I want to enjoy the beautiful artwork and well-written stories–and then re-enjoy them without fear of staining them with chocolate milk.

The only reason this app doesn’t get full marks from me is because, after some update, it went and deleted all the comics that I purchased. They’re easy enough to get again, so I don’t particularly mind and I assume that it doesn’t happen every update–I confess to having dropped off on reading comics lately, in favour of catching up on my reading.

Marvel Comics
Category: Books
Developer: Marvel Entertainment Rating: * * * *

Hey look. It’s Comics app from comiXology except it has Marvel’s library. Four stars, only because I approve of comiXology’s app and this is the exact same app. If the library sucks, at least you can enjoy what’s there.

Stanza
Category: Books
Developer: Lexcyle Rating: * * * * *

Honestly, choosing between Stanza and iBooks isn’t about anything more than favouring the app that I used first. I liked the bit of Stanza that I played with, but I didn’t see any particular reason to choose it over iBooks. It has a bit more functionality in formatting and a bit easier to determination your location in the book, but also certainly more function over form. If iBooks up-and-disappeared, switching to Stanza wouldn’t be a problem for me to use instead.

Musings (5)

Steven Ray Orr — Mon, 11 Apr 2011 01:57:00 PDT

The best part of Castle is figuring out which ridiculous cliche they happen to be using this episode.
Some people don’t understand what a Shame Dinner is. For them, there is no explaining.
Tiger Woods is an impressive golfer.
Dear Rogers: I should be able to access my Rogers account information between the hours of midnight and six am. Does someone really need to mention that this is 2011 and that 25% downtime is not acceptable?
Season Four of Burn Notice is doubleplusgood. Introducing a new member to the cast to shake things up? Boo-yah! That is, until it all blows up.
The poster for Along Came A Spider looks remarkable similar to the poster for The Bone Collector. Not so much with Men of Honor.
No, Netflix. I refuse to rate The Net starring Sandra Bullock. I just refuse.
While we’re on the topic, I haven’t determined whether Netflix is incredibly good at predicting movies for me or if I am completely indifferent towards my own tastes. Regardless, the ability to turn off The Game after half hour without feeling movie-renter’s shame is pretty awesome.
Delicious Library 2 allows me to methodically categorize and sort my entire book collection. This allows me to A: impress people with my large my book-penis is and B: feel shame because I don’t have as many books as I wish I did.

BSG Recap: [0-0] Genesis Recalled

Steven Ray Orr — Wed, 30 Mar 2011 01:19:00 PDT

Battlestar Galactica is a story about coming to know your gods and the consequences of such revelations. It is about the conflicting ties that bind–duty versus blood, faith versus family, and staying human versus staying alive–and it is about the costs of choosing sides. The show serves as a reminder that there are not always “right” choices, but knowing that doesn’t absolve you of your sins. It only brings them to light, revealing the cracks in your heroic facade.

But this story opens with the past:

Humanity had grown weary of mortality–not just the limits of a finite life, but of the smallness of the divinity that sparked within them. To begat is not to create–it is merely replication. It is a meager imitation of divine power and, as humanity saw it, no true power at all. To overcome themselves, humanity sought an act of creation and thus were born the cylons.

How long was Eve in the Garden before she hungered after forbidden fruits? I wonder whether she took as long as the cylons did to tire of the rules that bound their existence. When children rebel, they must be disciplined, but humanity’s will was not strong enough to simple force the cylons to leave: blood and sweat matched oil and rust. With no other powers at their disposal, humanity punished their children with death. Rather than compound sin against sin until one side won, the cylons fled to the stars; pilgrims in their very own Mayflower and Speedwell.

In the days and weeks after the war, the Twelve Colonies told themselves that they would never forget the cylon lesson: don’t reach too far lest you dare think yourselves worthy of Creation. Or, put another way, know your place in the universe. Don’t stray too far off the sidewalks. Color inside the lines. And don’t ever assume a role that you were not meant for.

The problem with lessons is that time only has one direction and the further we get from our experiences the more that we forget. It has been forty years since the cylon war ended. Forty years of peace–or peace as much as can be found when more than two people gather. Forty years since anyone had to die for our hubristic, “let there be light”.¹ Forty years and the will to avoid past mistakes became the will to improve on the mistakes of the past. Forty years to tell ourselves that the cylons were the failures, not us.

For a time, the cylons allowed us our delusions. For a time…

“Are you alive?”

I’m not going to pretend that everything in Battlestar Galactica is poetry. Yes, there was genius and beautiful tragedy in it. Yes, there were moments of brilliance. But it also had terrible moments: there is an episode that taught me writer’s block is something that we all go through. The difference between theirs and mine? I’m allowed to say, “this one isn’t good enough. Let’s hide it in that drawer of stuff that I’m embarrassed to have written. Or better yet, burn it and forget it, because fire strips away flesh and sins alike.”

It came at the right time in my life: I was questioning god (or God, or gods, or Gods. Whatever variation suits you best and offends you least); I was wondering what it meant to be human and alive and “good”; I was trying to understand the difference between stories and myths. There are episodes that bring anger (The Woman King, 3-14), joy (Unfinished Business, 3-9), disappointment (Litmus, 1-6), and tears (The Ties That Bind, 4-3; Sometimes A Great Notion, 4-11; oh hell I may as well admit it, most of season four). I watched Lost because the plot was interesting and it was fun to piece together the puzzle. I watched Battlestar Galactica because it helped me understand my place in the universe.

I guess this is a retracing of those steps; returning to a story that was significant. Because this is not a test and I am not being graded, I doubt I’ll go through every little detail. If it isn’t important to me, I probably won’t talk about it. This is as much a chance for me to ramble as it is a chance to rewatch a show that I love. I can’t promise that it will be clever, intelligent, or poetic. Hell, I can’t even promise that it will be good. It is a springboard. That’s all.

Most of them will be long walls of text. If you’re not into that kind of thing, you probably want to skip ‘em. Most of them will involve some sort of discussion about politics or religion or ethics or some other topic that a Humanities major could write an essay on. If you’re not into that kind of thing, you probably want to skip ‘em. And I don’t plan on keeping any sort of regular schedule. If you’re not into RSS feeds, you might want to look into ‘em.

Otherwise, <insert cliched² line of dialogue from the show that vaguely relates to either new beginnings or fresh starts or something about finding your way>.

“The more literal translation of Genesis 1:3 is along the lines of, “let light be made”. It is a divine command regardless, but there is a significant difference: does God create the light or does he force it to reveal itself? Willing something into willing itself…”
↩
“Is cliched even a word? It looks like it shouldn’t be.”
↩

Musings (4)

Steven Ray Orr — Wed, 09 Mar 2011 14:09:00 PST

Today, I saw men on the sidewalk with giant panes of glass–which they then dropped onto the street, shattering them as if it were some slapstick comedy routine. They did not seem amused.
The Director’s Cut of Watchmen is not very good. Occasionally studios get it right. Occasionally.
Unstoppable really can’t get me to care about the movie. But I sure do love trains. Choo-choooooooo!
My job is to take the clever things Wes says and strip them down into 140 characters and then steal them for my tweets.
Asimov’s Foundation series really goes downhill. The first couple of books are excellent, but by the time I got to the last, I was utterly disappointed.
I don’t think that I’m a movie buff. Not yet, anyway. Maybe this is the year that I’ll manage to see all the Oscar contenders, but not if they make Precious 2. If the cool kids don’t like me for that, I can accept that.
Joshua Radin puts on a good concert. But he did ask us to do this whole rhythmic clapping thing for the music video and I screwed it up, so Vancouver probably won’t be in the music video. I ruin everything.

Musings (3)

Steven Ray Orr — Tue, 01 Feb 2011 04:09:00 PST

The ethical questions that arise from a multiverse are pretty interesting: if there’s a world where I will do the wrong thing, why shouldn’t I do the wrong thing? Solve and show your work.
Point Break has one of the top five best movie openings of all time: Keanu, shotguns, surfing, barrel rolls, and James Cameron was executive producer. Johnny Utah reporting for duty. This statement may later be redacted due to overexcitement at the idea of the movie Point Break.
I’d probably rather have been one of the Beatles than one of the Rolling Stones, but that’s because I think that the Stones all came out the other side a little bit crazy.
Being a hockey fan in overtime appears to cause more stress than happiness. Need more empirical data–perhaps with a team that does better in sudden death than the Canucks.
Apple is apparently having a dinosaur week in the App Store. I approve.
If I prefer Roseanne to The Cosby Show, am I racist?
The Social Network > True Grit < The Fighter < The King’s Speech
The elliptical machine confuses me a little bit. Am I running? Am I biking? Either way, the ones at my gym have iPod docks. That’s the future, everyone. iPod docks in everything!

Musings (2)

Steven Ray Orr — Mon, 17 Jan 2011 04:19:00 PST

The Fighter is the best movie I’ve seen in the last year.
The main reason I would make a terrible scientist is because I still think of simple things–like hearts beating or gravity–as magic. Knowing how they work doesn’t mean that they aren’t magic.
Dave Morris once offered to buy me a coffee. We walked to a Starbucks. He ordered his usual in Starbucks-language, which I don’t really understand, but has something to do with two shots of espresso. I ordered a caramel macchiato. He made fun of it. Now I feel self-conscious whenever I order anything that has whipped cream on it.
The Golden Globes do not interest me. The Academy Awards do. I have no clue what makes this the case.
I think getting hit with an airbag would hurt a lot.
Watching True Grit reminds me that I want to see more Westerns.
I like the idea of a social piranha.

Inception: The Beautiful Illusion of the Dream

Steven Ray Orr — Sun, 02 Jan 2011 04:50:00 PST

No idea is simple when you need to plant it in somebody else’s mind.

If you read the following post, I will spoil Inception for you. So if you have any plans to see it, stop reading now.

I don’t know if every culture has placed significance on dreams–endowing the unconscious with powers of insight or foresight–but it certainly is a major facet of our society, even if we don’t acknowledge it as a spiritual experience. In fact, we’ve worked pretty hard to strip the mysticism from dreams, assigning their meaning to the realm of psychology: the ultimate hidden aspect of humanity can be concretely defined as the id.

The world of Christopher Nolan’s Inception is not a profound rejection of modern dream interpretations, but the inevitable end-point of a society that endows the id with supreme importance. The crux of Inception’s setting is the acknowledgment that dreams are mirrors to our souls and, accepting this as fact, the plot becomes driven by the question of whether there is more to dreams than mere reflection: is it possible for dreams to be the instruments of creation? Or, as it is introduced to us by Mr. Saito, is inception possible?

Within the film, there is no wondering behind this question. While the characters may–and, if briefly, do–doubt it, the audience must take as fact that inception is possible, else the story would fall flat. This the most significant point that must be acknowledged in order to eke any meaning out of the movie. The possibility of inception establishes an important rule for the story: there are no reliable viewpoints. It is not possible for us to tell the difference between the simulation and simulated. If one character can have their understanding of reality altered in order to attain some predetermined end, any of the characters could likewise be manipulated. The trick to inception, we discover, is convincing the subject that an idea is their own–or better yet, legitimately bringing about the circumstances wherein they can actually come the idea themselves.

From here, one can posit any number of theories: perhaps Cobb is the one facing inception and the team is working towards his salvation; maybe Cobb never escaped Limbo, instead accepting that there is no difference between a dream and reality; or what if the story takes place entirely in Maud’s mind? These possibilities, while interesting, are without basis because we have nothing that can tell us which point in the film is the baseline reality with which to begin all of our positing from.

Walking away from the movie, we ask ourselves whether the top fell. We do so because we believe in the idea that there are totems that can help separate dream from reality. We wonder because we want to feel resolution. We want to know whether Cobb has finally returned home or if he has created a limbo where it does not matter. This question, while seeming significant, ignores the key behind the entire movie: we cannot trust any of the characters, including our hero, Dominic Cobb. So what does this mean about Inception? What is Nolan trying to get across with the movie?

Believe it or not, he’s actually using the movie to reject the entire premise of his movie. Dreams are not powerful. The only strength that they are capable of comes from interpretation. It is a realm of absolute subjectivity, where even the author can be wrong. Do you want the story to be about the rescue of Cobb from his wife? Find the parts of the movie that prove your claim and go with it. Do you want the movie to be about how Cobb murdered his wife and, unable to cope with the act, retreated into his own personal hell? So be it.

The truth is that it doesn’t really matter if the top falls, because that is not something that Nolan shows– and even if he did, we can’t accept it as an absolute truth. From then on, how we view the ending and the significance of his totem is a matter of personal identity, not of fictional resolution. It is about the journey that the viewer has taken through the universe that Nolan has created; it is who we have become through watching it and what we choose to take away from the movie.

Dreams feel real while we’re in them. It’s only when we wake up that we realize something was actually strange.

Musings (1)

Steven Ray Orr — Sat, 11 Dec 2010 16:43:00 PST

Cyborg: (n.) any biological entity that uses artificial means or technology to enhance some natural capacity of that entity
Robots can’t have souls. If they do, they’re not robots anymore.
Justin Bieber does not need to be in 3D. Regardless of your opinion of the kid as an artist, it seems like an exercise in Hollywood excess.
Michael Jackson does need to be in 3D.
Isn’t it messed up that dinosaurs now fuel the planet?
Something doesn’t have to be logical to be true, but it helps.
I have no problem giving my personal information to FourSquare, FaceBook, Safeway, Mastercard, or my bank, but I refuse to approve government surveillance of me sending emails with pictures of cats eating cake.
The word “multitudes” should be more commonplace.
I’m not sure what to do with this yet, so it goes here: “The day the world ends, I’ll miss you.”

Twilight: The Pitiful Preface

Steven Ray Orr — Wed, 21 Apr 2010 16:24:00 PDT

I’ve never given much thought to how I would die – though I’d had reason enough in the last few months – but even if I had, I would not have imagined it like this.

Apparently, our nameless, faceless Narrator has not given much thought to the topic of death. This seems rather odd since Twilight is a book about vampires and werewolves.

… Whoops. SPOILER ALERT: Twilight is about vampires and werewolves.

The reason our Narrator is now thinking about death is because she is going to sacrifice herself for true love–a true love who, I suspect, is the very “sauntering hunter” that is about to kill her. But since our preface doesn’t go any further, we’re suppose to be left with an unresolved tension: Oh nose! Will our unknown hero escape? I guess the only way to find out is to read on!

You’d think that a preface of less than 150 words wouldn’t be able to aggravate me. You’d be wrong.

See, stories that begin in media res are usually done so to get the reader excited. Essentially, you’re giving them a reason to turn the next two hundred pages. So the start of your story has to hold some tension. Meyer attempts this with our Narrator informing us that she’s about to die and, by-golly, she doesn’t regret anything. While I appreciate the sentiment, this creates a major problem for the reader: if our Narrator doesn’t care about dying, why the hell should we?

With death taken out of the equation, what other possible reasons are there for us to turn the page? Fortunately, our Narrator does give us another hook: “when life offers you a dream so far beyond any of your expectations [blah blah blah]”. We’re supposed to read on to discover more about this incredible dream. That dream could be anything! Ahh tension! Glorious, glorious tension.

Unless, of course, you’ve read the blurb on the back: “Stephanie Meyer introduces Bella Swan and Edward Cullen, a pair of star-crossed lovers whose forbidden relationship ripens against the backdrop of small-town suspicion and a mysterious coven of vampires. This is a love story with bite.”

Our Narrator’s dream is love. With a vampire. Fair enough. I didn’t exactly pick up Twilight expecting The Life of Pi. But our Narrator immediately informs us that she doesn’t really care that her love story is about to end: “I couldn’t bring myself to regret the decision … it’s not reasonable to grieve when [life’s wonderful dream] comes to an end”.

Compare this with Michael Ondaatje. He is a master of building tension through a lack of information. The English Patient starts off with another nameless, faceless Narrator. We aren’t directly told anything about her, but we are immediately given a reason to care about her and the story: a mysterious man whose entire body has been burned. We care about this Narrator because she cares about something; we want to know more about this man because she wants to know more about this man. Meanwhile, our Twilight Narrator doesn’t care about anything! Note to all authors: apathetic characters inspire apathetic readers!

Finally, I feel obligated to point out that a preface is a note from the author, usually in which the creation of the book is discussed. Orson Scott Card tends to include these. Stephen King is notorious for using them, although he’ll often call them “Introductions” instead. A prologue provides an entrance into the story. It gives the reader a taste of what the book is going to be about, raises a few questions that will be answered, and is supposed to encourage further reading. Stephanie Meyer (and, more unusually, her editor) seem to believe that a prologue and a preface are synonymous. While this doesn’t necessary mean that Twilight is going be an awful experience, I’d like to think that the people involved in creating and publishing books put more effort into their works than just “OMG! VAMPIRES! PUBLISH!!!!111”.

Watchmen: I bought a stopwatch, does that count?

Steven Ray Orr — Tue, 10 Mar 2009 01:37:00 PDT

On Friday night, a comedian died in New York. Someone knows why. Down there… somebody knows.

23 years ago the Watchmen comics were released. Alan Moore told us a story about heroes; about their motives, their dangers, their imperfections. And through-out the graphic novel we see the phrase “Who Watches The Watchmen?” crop up again and again. This goes back to Plato’s Republic and the question of how to build the Ideal City. People throw their trust behind the police and behind Nixon because of a lie, told by those in power, that gives them the “right” to rule. They watch over us do so because they are better than us.

Moore’s Watchmen, although heroes, are not better than us. They are broken men and women. The Comedian is a womanizer, a murderer, and a rapist. Doctor Manhattan is hardly human anymore, only attached to the rest of us through the Silk Spectre. Rorschach is a borderline sociopath who sees the world in absolutes (silly Rorschach. Only Sith deal in absolutes). Ozymandias is the King-figure, alone and ultimately responsible. He represents the same authority seen in President Nixon. And the second Nite Owl is an impotent shadow of his former self, a man without purpose or power. None of them are Superman. They are flawed. And, yet, we find ourselves loving them anyway.

There is a lot more that I could say about Watchmen the graphic novel. But I’ve seen the Watchmen movie a few times now and that’s what we’re here to talk about. Be aware, there will be spoilers within. If you haven’t seen the movie or read the graphic novel, I will probably ruin them both for you. I suggest going and doing both right now, don’t worry. The Internet will be here when you get back. Otherwise, scroll on brave reader.

SPOILERS BELOW

It should be obvious to you that I loved the Watchmen graphic novel. And starting off with that is a good a point as any. You see, there are people who hated Watchmen. People who thought it pretentious, artsy, pseudo-philosophic bullshit. And that’s fine. Everyone is allowed their own tastes. But if you hated Watchmen the graphic novel, you shouldn’t go see the movie. It is that simple. If you’re one of those people, no amount of praise I give will change your mind. You may as well stop reading here, as you’ll just find something to be angry about.

And to the die-hard fans, I hate to break it to you, but changes were made. This is not a scene for scene replication of the graphic novel. Veidt’s ultimate plan is cosmetically different, but serves the same purpose. Some lines are alter, either in who spoke them or when they’re spoken. And from the rabid fan-boy perspective, I have a hard time understanding why we didn’t see Hollis Mason’s death or why Rorschach didn’t burn Gerald Grice.

But to make a successful movie, change was necessary. There is too much in Watchmen to fit into a feature length film and not enough to realistically turn it into two or three. While incredibly interesting, the Tales of the Black Freighter is not essential. The same can be said of Veidt’s history. And The New Frontiersman. So, while my inner fanboy may cry out in terror with a million voices, the movie-goer in me suddenly silences them. Because Watchmen is a good movie.

Yes, a good movie. Clocking in a few minutes shy of three hours, Watchman is a satisfying experience from beginning to end.

We start with an opening montage (set to Bob Dylan’s “The Times They are a-Changin’“) that throws us into an alternate version of 1985; one where costumed heroes exist, where a science experiment gone wrong creates a walking god, where the Vietnam War was won by America, where the Cold War is warming fast, and where Nixon is serving his fifth term as President.

From here we are introduced to the Watchmen. Of them, I always thought Rorschach and Dan Dreiberg were the heroes. Jackie Earle Haley and Patrick Wilson definitely manage to fill the giant-sized shoes of the characters. Jeffery Dean Morgan, as the Comedian, manages to balance on the edge of being an asshole and being charismatic. Everyone else plays their role well enough, not standing out when sitting back is required.

I do have to say that the movie has stunning visuals. The costumes, the sets, the digital effects, everything creates a style that is both an homage to the comic as well as stands by itself. It all looks impressive including Doctor Manhattan in all his glory.

Which brings up another point. Watchmen is rated R. And for a number of reasons: gore, violence, nudity, attempted rape, animal cruelty, implied violence to children. Some have complained that this is the “sexing up” of the comic, just to sell it to a mainstream audience. To which I retort: what kind of violence would you prefer? You didn’t see every drop of blood in the comic, but it was there. And in some cases, it was there a lot. They broke bones, they smashed skulls. As for the sex? It was there too.

(As it turns out, I’ve got a lot to say about the violence and sex in Watchmen. So at some point, I may post something about it. But until then, I’ll keep it simple. Rorschach’s pursuit of justice, Dan and Laurie’s violence, the Comedian’s monstrous nature, Doctor Manhattan’s inhumanity, and Veidt’s ultimate plan are all juxtaposed against each other. They’re all dealing with the brutality of their world in different ways. I think the comics did a better job of it, but I think that the movie tries to do the same thing albeit in a different way. And maybe it succeeds?)

Now was Watchmen perfect? Gods no. For starters, the music made me crazy. “99 Luftballons” has absolutely no place in… actually, anywhere. “The Sound of Silence” was just bad. The only two that I seem to be okay with in retrospect are “Hallelujah” during the sex scene, for sheer hilarity. And “All Along the Watchtower” because that may be my favorite Bob Dylan song. Otherwise, the person involved in adding music to the movie needs to be openly made fun of at parties. Which is an interesting conundrum, since the person who did the sound editing needs to be praised.

Crappy music at a few points is really my biggest problem with it as a movie. Sure, as a fan I can get upset over countless changes and lines and oddities, but what’s the point? After 23 years, this movie finally got made. Of course there were going to be changes, but for it to be as close to the comics as it is… That’s an impressive feat. Zack Snyder should get some serious kudos from fans. And from the general public. Watchmen, somehow, manages to both appeal to both the die-hards and the newbies.

I know this meager corner of the blogosphere ain’t much, but to Zach Snyder as well as the cast and crew of Watchmen… Thanks. You made this nerd’s day.

“Jon, wait, before you leave… I did the right thing, didn’t I? It all worked out in the end.”

“‘In the end’? Nothing ends Adrian. Nothing ever ends.”

(For the record, if you don’t trust my opinon on it, here’s the opinions of some people I trust. Alex of Batrock thought the music was awesome, the ending sucked, and didn’t like that The Island was missing (something I didn’t like either, but felt was unnecessary for the movie). The Rampant Coyote was glad to have seen it and will never see it again. Dave at Critical Hits liked it. And he likes that liked it differently than he did. Kaedrin and I see eye-to-eye on this being the best possible movie made of Watchmen. We might disagree on what that means exactly though And, to make this a game of “one of these things it not like the others, Roger Ebert proudly displays his nerd cred by loving it.)

Left 4 Dead: Dialogue Synchronicity

Steven Ray Orr — Thu, 12 Feb 2009 19:24:00 PST

If I had to pick what kind of apocalypse came about, I would choose “zombie plague” with no hesitation. I hate the undead. They are the bane of my existence. Or, at least, they would be if I could find them. Which is as natural a segue-way to Left 4 Dead as will ever occur.

Valve has a wonderful habit of releasing excellent games. They also have a habit of taking forever to release them. Why? Because they only put their name on a polished product. They want to be sure people will enjoy it. How do they manage this?

Play-testing. Hours and hours of play testing. With Half-Life 2 they gathered data on where the players died and used it to determine if some areas were unfairly difficult. Or pointlessly easy. Of course, this is just one instance and one use for that data, but I just want to bring up the point that a lot of work goes into making a Valve game fun.

While the play-testing that went into L4D is obvious in the game play, another area where it shines is the audio. Other folks have talked about the genius of the Audio Director. And they’re right to give credit to the music system of L4D. It procedurally generates music on the fly, based on dozens of in-game variables which provide important cues to the player as to what events will happen next. From the “there’s a witch” music to “here comes the horde”, Valve has given the player a reason to keep the in-game audio on. And they certainly deserve credit for it.

But I’m here to praise the dialogue. I know, you’re asking “Of all the things to talk about, why that?”. Because Valve has done something I have never seen before. And it’s brilliant.

If you’re simply playing alone and listening to the character banter, you might grin at the occasion witty quips (“You know what I don’t hate? I don’t hate this…”). Where the brilliance comes from is in multi-player:

You’re playing Death Toll with three of your buddies. After surviving a nasty horde, you’re all limping your way to the next safe area. A couple of you are on the verge of death and you’re prepared for a few tense minutes. In the distance, you can see a health pack sitting on a table. Before you can mention it, the character-voice of Louis shouts, “Medkit!”. Suddenly, you hear the familiar growl of a hunter. Pressing the voice-chat key, you shout “Hunter!” and half a second later, the Zoey-voice relays the same thing.

While everyone’s eyes scan ahead for the hunter, nobody notices when Bill gets dragged by a smoker. Your buddy playing Bill shouts, “Help! A smoker’s got me” at the same time as the Bill-character. Louis spins around, unloads a few shotgun blasts into the smoker. The Bill-player says, “Nice shooting” and the Bill-character says, “Nice shot, kid”.

This sort of dialogue synchronicity often happens in L4D with players and characters closely echoing each other. Does every line match up? Of course not. But it happens often enough to mention it.

Now sure, some of you are thinking “big deal”. And you’re right, in the grand scheme of things, dialogue synchronicity isn’t a vital component of a game. But it points to the amount of work that Valve puts into their products. Somewhere along the way, someone recognized that gamers were saying a lot of similar phrases at specific events. And they decided to add in this minor detail. Something they didn’t need to do to create an excellent game, but did so because they knew it would be cool for the player.

And that’s why Valve will always be one of the top game developers: their focus on creating the fullest, most entertaining product possible.

The Saga of Dune: Take 2. With Role-Playing.

Steven Ray Orr — Sat, 10 Jan 2009 23:21:00 PST

Over on Man Bytes Blog, the Round Table Discussion topic for January has been revealed. This month we’ll be answering the question: “What would your favorite piece of literature look like if it had been created as a game first?”

To do that we must set the WABAC machine to 1940, when a young man named Frank Herbert is 20 years old and has an idea for a story he would like to tell. It is set in the deep reaches of space on a planet called Arrakis. He shares it with his friends and they have their own visions of characters and stories to be told within this Dune-world. Thus, decades before Dungeons & Dragons sees the light of day, Frank Herbert sits down to be Dungeon Master for the Dune role-playing game.

The World

Arrakis is one of the planets in the Known Universe. There are hundreds of them, all with their own stories and peoples. But Arrakis is special. It is a desert planet, where surviving from day-to-day is often a battle itself. The only reason for colonization of such a harsh would is the spice melange, an amazing drug that has become essential to the lives of billions. It is here where the Dune role-playing game takes places and Herbert’s story lives to be told.

Combat

The Dune RPG needs various combat systems. We need rules for hand-to-hand, for gun-play, for las-guns. And all of these, although cool, aren’t really interesting or specific to Dune for us today. Any number of other role-playing games already have ways of covering them. But Dune has something unique; the sacred spice melange. It adds centuries to normal lifespans. It connects the various planets in the universe, as it is a catalyst for interstellar travel. Neither of these are terribly interesting from a rule-creation system.

Spice can be used to instill prescience or glimpses into the future. Even those who take the bare minimum of the addictive drug gain strange prophetic dreams. In extreme doses it can unlock super-human powers: blinding speed, incredible mental facilities, ancestral memory.

Immediately the connection to magic is seen. But it needs to be more than just spells. The spice is dangerous and abusing it on simple whims can kill. To that effect, I look to the d20 Call of Cthulhu system of Sanity. Except instead of losing their minds at the horrors of the Mythos, a character could become trapped in the visions of the future and be unable to act in the world. Or one of their ancestors, unwilling to stay dead, would overpower their mind and assume control. Death, too, would be a possibility. Some, like the Bene Gesserit, are less likely to succumb to these dangers, but their powers would be weaker. Others would gain incredible abilities, but walk a fine line between human and abomination.

Careers

In Dungeons & Dragons there are a number of races and classes to choose from to build your character. In the Dune universe, everyone is (mostly) human.

First we have the fremen. The warrior people who come exclusively from the vast deserts of Arrakis. They are able to survive indefinitely in the sands. They are masters of melée combat, trained from birth to be fierce fighters. A fremen needs no weapon to be dangerous, but when you see one with a crysknife beware, for their blades always see blood.

Next are the Bene Gesserit. Seen by all as witches, they are an order of women who manipulate the human race from their own goals. As well, they are masters of the spice, able to do the unbelievable thanks to it. In addition, their years of training have made them the unseen masters on the battlefield. The only way you will know you are fighting a Bene Gesserit is when their knife is already in your back.

One could also be a member of the various noble Houses. Each one is different, masters of their own set of skills. The Harkonnen avoid direct combat, but are dangerous from afar. In hand-to-hand the Atreides are almost as deadly as the fremen. With a number of Minor and Major Houses, nobility would be a very customizable career path.

The Ixian Confederacy would be a choice for those who don’t wish to put their own bodies in harms way. These men and women are easily bested in combat. Instead of spending years training their bodies, they chose to become masters of technology. As such, they create weapons and machines that do their dirty work. Even with the ban on thinking machines, there are rumors that some Ixian technologies come close to conscious robots, able to think for themselves.

Finally, there are the “servants” of the Dune universe. The conditioned Suk who, in exchange for imperial training, are unable to cause harm. Most common are the Suk doctors, able to work miracles with the injured or sick, in exchange for their truly Hippocratic oath. While a Suk would never hurt someone themselves, they do not avoid wars or battles. As such, properly trained Suk are often sought after for various battlefield jobs.

Characters

The Dune story is about the Paul Atreides and his transformation from noble son of a failing House to Muad’Dib, Emperor of the Known Universe. Right away, this is a problem. While a book can focus on a single character, an RPG must make each player feel important. No longer can Paul be the Kwisatz Haderach if the remaining characters are not equally powerful. Thus, Dune must become a story about a group of heroes…

First is Paul Atreides. He is a young man caught between two worlds: the noble, political life of his father and the mystical life of his Bene Gesserit mother. Unable to choose, he straddles that divide. He sees himself as the fulfillment of centuries of prophecy.

Next is Stilgar. The wild fremen, knowledgeable in the ways of the desert. He has spent his entire life protecting his people from the Harkonnen. One day he may find himself leading the fremen, but for now he works with the ragtag group of survivors of House Atreides on the principle that “the enemy of my enemy is my friend”.

Princess Irulan is heir to the throne of the galactic empire, but also a Bene Gesserit sister. She was originally a spy, seeking to gain control over Paul Atreides and stabilize Arrakis for the sisterhood. She falls in love with Paul and betrays both the Bene Gesserit and her father. Now she works for House Atreides in an effort to make up for her past, as well as remain close to Paul.

The loyal Swordmaster of the Atreides, Duncan Idaho. He has protected the members of the House for many years. Viewing the Duke Leto’s death as his fault, Idaho keeps Paul close to his side. The man has a single flaw, his weakness for the Lady Jessica, Paul’s mother.

And finally, Dr. Wellington Yueh. A Suk doctor who is bound, through intense psychological conditioning, to do no harm. He has always worked for House Atreides, but when the Harkonnens captured his wife, he turned on his friends. It is he who betrayed the Duke Leto and forced House Atreides into hiding. When the Baron Knowing he will never be forgiven if he is discovered, Yueh works with the Atreides to kill the Baron Harkonnen.

The Story

Now we have a bunch of motivations and goals for these characters. Overall, they want to return House Atreides to power. So we’ve got a campaign. Unfortunately, Frank Herbert had his own plans which were shot to hell when his players picked their characters. Originally he wanted a metaphorical story that spoke to the dangers of empire and power. Both the Emperor and Baron Harkonnen would fall because of their very desire to rule over people. Herbert wanted spice to be a metaphor for foreign oil and to show our addiction to it was dangerous. That analogue is lost with melange as a source of magic. Here is the way I imagine that Herbert would try to tell his Dune story.

The campaign starts off with the various characters living their lives on Arrakis. Yueh’s betrayal is the beginning, but it quickly turns into an all out battle when the Harkonnens attack and overwhelm the Atreides. Paul discovers the death of his father, Irulan recognizes that the Harkonnens are bolstered by her father’s troops, Idaho feels he is responsible for not foreseeing the attack, Yueh’s wife is brutally executed by the Harkonnens. Together they escape into the desert, taking refuge with Stilgar’s people. Unfortunately, in his time away from the fremen, his leadership position has been stripped of him. He, too, is now an outsider.

The early campaign would be all about the group discovering their place in this new environment. They would have to prove themselves worthy of the fremen’s friendship. Paul’s mother, the Lady Jessica, would be the only exception. Her Bene Gesserit sisters had, long ago, planted certain religious prophecies among the fremen. These prophecies were designed to help a Sister in case she was ever forced to live among the desert people. She becomes the connection between the group and the fremen.

The group would have missions to steal spice from Harkonnen, both for personal use and for the fremen. They’d be asked to keep the prying eyes of both the Emperor and the Baron away from the sietches by attacking cities. Meanwhile, Jessica would spread further prophecies about a group of “fallen nobility”. As the group members showed themselves to be strong allies, they would be let into the fremen fold. The spice users in the group would start to receive visions of a terrible future: a universe torn apart by war, entire planets eradicated, billions dead, and humanity on the verge of extinction. Eventually, the entire fremen people would begin to have dreams of that same future. Jessica would begin making plans to prevent it, starting a religion based on a Golden Path for the future, with the Atreides group at the center of it.

As Jessica begins to obsess with discovering the future, we see Herbert’s original intentions for Paul: ecological issues, empire, water, the dangers of the future, fundamentalism. Meanwhile, the group gets to experience the burdens of heroics, the notions that evil and good can be cut from the same cloth, that sacrifice is a necessary hurdle. And we also get to see some personal resolutions. Stilgar sees the thriving fremen. Yueh sacrifices himself to kill the Baron, saving his friends (the player then takes on the character of Gurney Halleck). Duncan helps Jessica, showing her how to return to the “now”. Irulan thwarts her father’s plans to place the Harkonnen Baron on the Throne by marrying Paul. And Paul returns House Atreides to a place of power.

And that’s where the first campaign would end… The fremen would be spreading across the universe, preaching the word of the Golden Path. The Emperor and the Harkonnens would be fugitives, seeking to escape the Atreides sword. The Bene Gesserit would no longer have a tight grip on the future of the human race. For a brief period, the universe would be safe. But this would not be the end for the characters. There are still many stories to be told about them. After all, there is Duncan and Jessica’s child who shows signs of abomination. There is the Bene Gesserit alliance with the surviving Harkonnens and the spice-hungry Spacing Guild, who all seek to remove the Atreides from Arrakis.

The saga of Dune is far from over…

Game of the Year [2008]: My Opinion Counts Here

Steven Ray Orr — Thu, 01 Jan 2009 05:40:00 PST

It has been a good year for video games. Not for the industry, sure. But I’ve enjoyed myself. And since it is New Year’s Eve, it is time to make a list of some of those games.

Single Player

Most of my game collection is single player. I don’t really play well with others. So the solo experience of a game has to enthrall me. It’s why I think the Halo games are lousy. And why I prefer Grand Theft Auto to Call of Duty.

There were a number of good ones this year. GTA4 really was a blast. But for a solo game to really be worthwhile I need to be able to pick it up a month later and still have fun. Yes, GTA4 did a lot of cool things that I enjoyed, but I’ve got no reason to pick it up again.

I will pick up Fallout 3 again. Sure, the game has buggy parts and the writing is all kinds of horrid, but F3 is fun. There is a huge world to explore. V.A.T.S. makes the combat interesting and is unique to the game. And after I beat it once, I started over again. And will do so again a few months from now.

So, Fallout 3 is my Single Player Game of 2008.

Multi-player

The year I spent in Engineering was a waste of my time. Fortunately, most of that time was really just spent playing Super Smash Bros on the N64. So when SSB Brawl was released this year, I thought I would get into it. Except I haven’t. It was fun with certain people, but that was where the major appeal was. Likewise with the Gears of War series or Mortal Kombat vs DC. Sure, they aren’t awful, but there isn’t anything there for me outside of the social aspect.

When thinking about that, I almost gave Rock Band 2 the top spot. And if you’ve played it, you know why. The game is a fantastic party game no matter who you’re with. But one game edged it out.

I love killing zombies. Some might say it is an unnatural love. But Valve doesn’t think so. Valve knows what I need. And Left 4 Dead is it. L4D puts everything together into a fantastic game. It manages to work on a number of different levels. Which is why Left 4 Dead is my Multi-player Game of 2008.

Visuals

At some point, we’re going to have the “games as art” talk. I promise I won’t be too pretentious, but it needs to happen. Fortunately for you, that is not what this category is about. We’re talking about the visual merit of games.

I don’t play games because they look pretty. Lots do, but I rarely notice it until after the fact. Story captures me first. Only two games managed to be exceptions this year.

Spore was an awful game. It tried to be five different games and didn’t succeed in any of them. Which is too bad, because Spore’s Creature Creator is fantastic. And the game almost deserves my coveted visuals award… Almost.

Braid was a little game that filled big shoes. It was a short independent title that changed my opinion on “indie” games. From the scenery to the characters to the effects, everything in the game was interesting to look at. I think I’ll be keeping an eye out for anything else David Hellman (the artist) does.

Obviously, Braid is my Visual Game of 2008.

Audio

This category almost went to Braid. It was as simple as a coin toss between it and Left 4 Dead.

Horror is a hard genre to score. Valve could have used a very generic soundtrack that kinda fit most scenarios. It would have been okay and nobody would have faulted them for it. Instead, Valve decided to have an Audio Director. It would be a program that acted differently for each player. And it would play certain musical cues based on various environmental factors, the presence or absence of specific creatures, and events in the game. They weren’t even focused on whether you actively listened to it. Instead, they wanted to provide something that would help give you subconscious clues as to what was occurring in the game world around you.

It seems silly typing that, but they pulled it off. The way music is done in L4D is enough for my praise alone. Fortunately, they also have four fantastic voice actors who really drive the game. They sound legitimately scared/happy/hurt or whatever the game requires them to be. The only (very minor) complaint I have is that the voice actor for Bill was also the voice talent for Father Gregori in Half-Life 2. I mean, hell. Yes. That character was awesome entirely because of the man behind his audio, but it throws me off every time I hear him. I constantly expect the crazy shepherd to start ranting about his flock…

All in all, the game is a fantastic example of how music/audio should be done. Not just in a horror game, but in a game in general. For that, Left 4 Dead is my Audio Game of 2008.

Story

The story isn’t the meat of a game for some. Which is fine. World of Goo doesn’t need a complex plot to be awesome. But there is also much more to story than just the general plot. The script and dialogue is vital. Shamus at Twenty Sided has already talked about how Fallout 3 failed in this regard, so I won’t harp on it any further.

Within the story category is also believability. Both in characters and in the general world. I don’t mean that everything has to take place on Earth in 2009. But it does have to take place in a way that makes sense. If you create a universe and then contradict the rules of that universe, you’ve just hurt your story. Same with characters. I will let people get away with a lot in their games, but a person who doesn’t follow any realistic pattern of behavior? That’s idiotic.

Which brings me to the game that had the best story for 2008. A game that is so filled with idiocy that it makes me laugh to put it on here. But the game established a world, made the characters, and then crafted them believably. And it did so in a way that poked fun at… well… everyone.

I’m talking about Forumwarz. They describe it as “a browser-based RPG about Internet Culture”. And they should have added “and everything that is wrong with that culture”. It is a very clever, well designed satire of a world I spent a lot of time in. From the script to the characters to the dialogue to the consistency. I wouldn’t have thought of this game if it hadn’t been on Kotaku’s Goaties nominations. But the game really is a perfect example of how story can be managed.

And that makes Forumwarz my Story Game of 2008.

Independent

There are those (like Jay Branson) who have been fighting the good fight for independently developed games. But indie games have it pretty tough. Without the backing of a big publisher, they don’t have the finances to get in the door and they don’t have a large team to help do the work. Yet they’re still expected to turn out polished, intelligent games that nobody has thought of.

And yes, I expect that. There are people who give indie games a free ride because they’re indie. I don’t. I have no problem spending $20 on an untried team, but if you’ve made a bad game I will tell people. I may not have a big soapbox to stand on, but at least my friends will know. Don’t feel bad, indie developers. I don’t just do this for your games. I also do it for crap like Mirror’s Edge or Spore.

Fortunately, this year had a number of awesome indie games. Glancing over the this year’s Independent Games Festival Winners and I see a lot of fantastic work. Audiosurf was, from my understanding, cool. Desktop Tower Defense is an addiction I may never be free of. World of Goo blew me away with how awesome the work of two individuals could be. Braid and Castle Crasher both made it to X-Box Live and succeeded (incredibly well, as I understand it).

World of Goo happened to with for Design Innovation this year. It also won my cold-hard cash. And I can’t think of an indie game that work as well, in every way possible, as World of Goo.

So, congratulations 2D Boy. Some random guy on some random blog just named World of Goo my Indie Game of 2008.

Game of the Year

2008 was a good year for my X-Box and PC. And most of the games I mentioned deserve praise for giving me something fun to do when I wasn’t work my ass off. But to name any one of them as Game of the Year would be silly. I mean, Braid was probably my game of September. GTA4 for some other month. And I went through six or seven weeks of Forumwarz awesomeness. But none of them really fit my “top spot”.

Which is fine. I have enough trouble deciding my favorite color, let alone a game that was superior to all others. Sure, it is anti-climatic to end a Game of the Year list saying “all games are awesome”. But nothing stood out so far above the ground to be definitely named the winner. Maybe 2009 will come with it some incredible gaming experiences. Maybe the latest Wii title will revolutionize the entire industry and make me reconsider gaming as I understand it.

But that’ll be 2009. And that’s too far into the future to consider.

So, thanks gaming industry, for a 2008 worthy of at least one blog post.

Fallout 3: Post-Apocalyptic Fun

Steven Ray Orr — Wed, 26 Nov 2008 00:29:00 PST

War. War never changes.

You know, except when it does.

Fallout 3 was made by Bethesda Software. They, for the memory impaired, created Oblivion. Some have accused F3 of being Oblivion with guns. That, I think, misses the target. The difference between the two games is one of awesomeness. That is to say, Fallout 3 awesome. And there was no guarantee that it would be. After all, after the nuclear holocaust one could easily say “Oh, there isn’t a lot left of the world” and have vast empty spaces. Sure, it would be pretty, but I don’t really know if that is the world to be playing a video game in.

Now yes, the Capital Wasteland it takes place in is the post-apocalyptic D.C. area, but it certainly isn’t empty. Scattered around the area are hundreds of people trying to survive. From the relative ordinary such as Big Town (where a rag-tag group is barely surviving) and Agetha (who likes the violin) to the downright insane like The Family and Andale. Not to mention everything in between.

You don’t have to come across it all and won’t if you strictly follow the game’s main plot. In fact, the storyline of Vault 101 should take about ten hours and show you only a dozen of the locations in the game. Yes, those places have some interesting bits (I especially liked Liberty Prime: “Communism equals failure”), but the game doesn’t come into its own without some random exploration of the Fallout 3 world.

Which brings us to a point I can’t come to terms with. My problem with Oblivion was that the world was too open. There was too much to do and not enough focus. Strange, then, that I’m praising the same aspect of F3. I can’t entirely explain it, except to say that Oblivion never captivated me and Fallout 3 did so constantly.

Fallout 3 isn’t perfect.

The writing sucks. I try not to waste my time with poorly written books. I hated The Happening because of the stilted dialogue and flat writing. And Fallout 3 may be just as bad as M. Night Shyamalan.
The game is buggy. Companions have no difficulty following you on a flat plain, but moving over debris makes them lose their mind. Sometimes the graphics will spasm (first time it happened, I thought I might be having a stroke). Enemies can disappear, fly, and teleport.
It is a sandbox game that nudges you to follow the main plot, only to completely end the game once the main plot is over.
It isn’t Fallout 2.

But even amidst all these imperfections, I found myself having fun. I had fun for many hours and got to see a lot of the game that Bethesda designed. And, like many of the games in my collecton, I’m done with it. I don’t know how many hours I logged on it. Somewhere around 40, I’m sure. So I spent some time with enjoyment and Bethesda got my money.

Sounds like a win-win to me.

D&D: So what if I do?

Steven Ray Orr — Fri, 21 Nov 2008 15:49:00 PST

The real world, while cool, has nothing on my fantasies. No, I’m not referring to the latest spread in Sports Illustrated. what I’m talking about is the world of Dungeons & Dragons. Normally, I’m weary of speaking about it, because the stigma of role-playing is still around today, but this is my blog and it’s going to be a happy place.

Even though decades have past since the prime of the major controversies surrounding D&D, some of the reactions I get when I mention my “role-playing thing” astound me. Sure, there have been some instances where I’ve been surprised; I met my best friends in high school by overhearing a conversation on non-weapon proficiencies. But such instances are rare. More often, I find myself on the receiving end of strange looks and muffled laughter. It has been 27 years since Mazes and Monster, 26 since B.A.D.D., and 24 since Dark Dragons, but RPGs have not entirely escaped the fear-mongering of their history.

I don’t play D&D to escape from reality. I don’t play because I can’t make “real” friends. I don’t play because I’ve made a pact with the devil. These misconceptions come from completely mistaken notions of what D&D is about. One could not play through a session or read the books and come to these conclusions. Because playing D&D is about creation.

The very first act all players undertake is to build a character. These characters can be anything you dream of. While there are some rules, they serve to guide, not restrict. From there, you move into the real meat of an RPG: the game-play. Together, with a group of friends, you write a story. The Dungeon Master narrates, but everyone is involved in the details. After a night of play, half a dozen people have come together and made something. And there are groups that do this on a weekly basis. How many people can claim they do something similar? How many people really use their creativity and build something awesome once a week? Or even once a month?

Now I will grant that some horrible things have occurred while playing various role-playing games. Kids have killed each other while acting as their characters. People have used D&D and other such games to share views that are either hurtful or bigoted. The problem in these situations is not Dungeons & Dragons, but the people playing it. Just as Thomas Dixon’s books about White Supremacy don’t mean that all books are inherently racist, a few negative instances don’t point to a flaw in RPGs.

Don’t worry. I’m not trying to convert you to playing D&D. But I do think that it’s time people stopped cracking wise about my hobby. I’ll have fun my way. You have fun your way. And we’ll ignore each other like God intended. Sound good?

The Dark Knight: What now?

Steven Ray Orr — Wed, 19 Nov 2008 18:01:00 PST

Batman Begins was good. Christopher Nolan reboot the series successfully, giving us the first good Batman movie. The Dark Knight was better. Obviously, Heath Ledger knocked it out of the park, but it was a solid package deal that exceeded the massive expectations set before it. But what happens next? Batman III is obviously being talked about, but there might even be more expected of it than there was of The Dark Knight.

Eckhart coming back as Two-Face? I vote not likely, since the character DIED (feel free to argue otherwise, but you’re wrong). Play with the Scarecrow some more? I can’t imagine that working. And I don’t think that Johnny Depp could live up to the role of the Joker. The basis of the next Batman cannot come from Nolan’s established history; it will have to be drawn from the rest of the Batman mythos.

Catwoman? Already been done well. There might not be anything new to do with her. The Penguin? He’s a mobster and the mob has become, especially since the Joker took it as far as it could go. Bringing Ra’s al Ghul back in a way, using his daughter. It would be an easy way to add a female character to an increasingly male-dominated cast. I don’t think that there is enough to the character of Clayface for a movie to based on. We could go through Batman’s entire Gallery of Villains, but enough about what won’t work…

If Mr. Nolan is reading this, I’ve got some plans for him that I (in my infinite wisdom) think would make for an awesome third (and final) Batman movie.

For starters, the Animated Series had an awesome character that was based around the Joker: Miss Harley Quinn, at the psychiatrist who went mad after working with the Joker. Make her a copy-cat who tries to live up to his legacy, but is sloppy and gets caught early in the film (similar to the Scarecrow in The Dark Knight). The new character would give a taste of the same sort of chaos without having to live up to Ledger’s performance. My personal favorite for the role would be Summer Glau.

One of the villains I hear tossed around a lot is the Riddler. I think the appeal for him is because he is so similar the Joker as a crazy-man. Obviously, that would be a massive failure. But he could work if you played on his love for puzzles and made Edward Nygma into a private detective who has been hired to catch Batman. While the Gothem Police as entirely reactionary (Batman acts, they respond), E. Nygma would play against Batman’s crime-fighter role and lay a trap. He would create the persona of the Riddler and fake heists in order to learn more about who Batman is before setting the ultimate Bat-trap. For some reason, I can’t see anyone but Jude Law in the role.

My final idea is my favorite, but finding the right actor for the role could be difficult. I have always been a fan of Bane, the man who broke the Bat. The Bane of Batman & Robin was a horrible rendering of the character. Bane is supposed to be incredibly strong, but also incredibly intelligent. In the Knightfall storyline, Bane was able to deduce Bruce Wayne’s secret identity. With Batman III, we could see Wayne becoming increasingly more careless with nobody left to live for and the constant struggles with the Gotham P.D. taking their toll, Wayne finds himself unable to live up to hiding his identity. After all, with Rachel Dawes gone, there is nobody left who can be hurt because of him (witty line from Alfred goes here). Bane picks up on all of the scattered clues, goes after Bruce and catches him weak. This would be after a particularly bad fight with a special forces squad designed to take Batman out. And, just as in the comic, Bane breaks Wayne’s back.

Of course, the movie couldn’t end there. So during the rest of the action, we would need another character. Someone who could play the same role as Jean-Paul of Knightfall or Terry McGinnis of Batman Beyond. We’re not looking for a Robin, because that character doesn’t yet with with Nolan’s mythos. Instead we’re looking for someone who can take up the role of Batman. In Batman Begins, Wayne said, “A man is just flesh and blood and can be ignored and destroyed. But as a symbol… as a symbol, I can be incorruptible, everlasting”. Batman, the symbol, is more important than Bruce Wayne will ever be. Bane can break Bruce Wayne, but if the mantle can be passed on to someone else, then the symbol of Batman can live on and be the hero Gotham City needs.

Wouldn’t that be a good way to end Nolan’s series? It would give us an ending to the story of Bruce Wayne (who has, really, been what the Nolan’s Batman movies have been about. Yes, it is a Batman movie, but Wayne is the main character). It would also give us an open-ended feeling. “More things will happen, after this movie”. So, Mr. Nolan, if you would like to steal my idea and make a movie about it, I would be okay with that.