EveTushnet.com |
|
|
Conservatism reborn in twisted sisterhood
Archives
February 02 March 02 April 02 May 02 June 02 July 02 August 02 September 02 October 02 November 02 December 02 January 03 February 03 March 03 April 03 May 03 June 03 July 03 August 03 September 03 October 03 November 03 December 03 January 04 February 04 March 04 April 04 May 04 June 04 July 04 August 04 September 04 October 04 November 04 December 04 January 05 February 05 March 05 April 05 May 05 June 05 July 05 August 05 September 05 October 05 November 05 December 05 January 06 February 06 March 06 April 06 May 06 June 06 July 06 August 06 September 06 October 06 November 06 December 06 January 07 February 07 March 07 April 07 May 07 June 07 July 07 August 07 September 07 October 07 November 07 December 07 January 08 February 08 March 08 April 08 May 08 E-mail Me! Note: All emails will be considered for publication, with name attached, unless you request otherwise Other Eve Sites Eve's Published Journalism and Fiction Questions for Objectivists Against Therapeutic Cloning (Part I) Love in the Time of Cloning (Part II) Nietzsche vs. Eros Non-Blogs Shamed Dogan for Missouri State Rep Torture FOIA Nat'l Religious Coalition Against Torture Capitol Hill Pregnancy Center Arts & Letters Daily City Journal Dappled Things Doublethink Godspy Institute for Justice National Catholic Register Pregnancy Centers Thunderstruck Yale Free Press Daily Stops Amy Welborn Hit and Run MarriageDebate The Corner Unqualified Offerings Sicut cervus: Resources on God and homosexuality Dreadnought discussion boards "Gay sex or Jew. How come Jew won?" The Long Conversion of Oscar Wilde Gay marriage in the Church and the blessing of same-sex friendships (a response to John Boswell, but interesting in its own right) Same-sex love in the Western Church (Alan Bray) (ignore the headline, which doesn't fit what the piece says) John Heard on Augustine and love between men Ron Belgau autobiographical essay Belgau "Love That Does Not Count the Cost" "Not Exactly Natural (Stunning, Nonetheless)" (me) sequel (me) gay sublime (me) Some stars from a constellation that hasn't been drawn yet (me) In which I attend an ex-gay conference (scroll down for lots of stuff, then up for reactions) Homosexuality & the Church: Two views (mine is view #2) Courage US Catholic bishops to parents of gay children Why you should ignore Paul Cameron Some Iraqi Blogs Iraqi LGBT UK Konfused Kid LivesStrong Inside Iraq Salam Pax 24 Steps to Liberty Iraq Blog Count More Good Reads Abhay Khosla About Last Night After Abortion Agenda Bender The Agitator Alias Clio Balkinization Cacciaguida Child of Divorce - Child of God Christian Persecution Church of the Masses Cigarettes Claw of the Conciliator Club for Growth Colby Cosh Daniel Mitsui Dark October 618 Disputations Disputed Mutability Dreadnought ePiscoSours E-Pression First Things For Keats' Sake Get Religion Holy Heroes Jeremy Lott Journalista KausFiles Kelly Jane Torrance Libertas Mark Shea Marriage Junkie Megan McArdle Millinerd Monster Brains Mumpsimus Noli Irritare Leones Now the Green Blade Riseth O Joyful Light One of the Jones Boys Overlawyered Oxblog Paleo-Future Ross Douthat Scrutinies Sean Collins ShoeBlogs Stop Torture The Rat Virginia Postrel VJ Morton WaiterRant I'm Syndicated! 
|
Tuesday, August 31, 2004
JOURNEYMEN THEATER ENSEMBLE: Good piece in the 8/27 Washington City Paper about Deborah Kirby and her new theater troupe, which focuses on plays exploring religious faith. (Kirby is an evangelical Christian.) The troupe's first play was the medieval Everyman. Not all the performers are Christian; the company holds weekly fellowship meetings, but attendance is voluntary. Journeymen is struggling for cash. Sounds like a project that could use your support. Their website is here. KITCHEN CHEMISTRY: Tried some weird stuff over the weekend. Recipes were heavily modified from a pasta cookbook I got for my birthday. The verdicts: #1: Four-cheese sauce--which was really three-cheese, since I didn't have parmesan on hand. I think I was supposed to toss the pasta with chopped cheese, and add some sage leaves or something, but that sounded boring. So instead I chopped a tomato and sauteed it with thyme, oregano, basil, black pepper, and cayenne, then added the Gorgonzola, mozzarella, and Roquefort, ending up with a kind of fondue-y sauce. This wasn't bad, but the Gorgonzola overwhelmed all the other flavors. I'll try this again with parmesan and without Gorgonzola. The other drawback was that the pan was slightly harder to clean than usual, due to all the melty cheesiness. I'll be buying more mozzarella: I like cooking with it. I like how it rolls under the hand. #2: Cannellini. I just dumped half a can of Goya habichuelas blancas (which I'm pretty sure are cheap cannellini) into my pan with a chopped tomato, some olive oil, and the same herbs as before, sauteed, and poured onto pasta topped with Sargento's Mexican four-cheese blend. (I adore this packaged blend, by the way. It's odd but it works wonderfully with Italian spices on pasta.) The resulting dish was homey and filling, but did not set off fireworks in my mouth. I'll eat this again to finish off the beans, but I don't think it was better than my usual sauce. #3: Avocado, lemon, and jalapeno. I was nervous about this because I'd never dealt with an avocado before, and it intimidated me. But in the event it was exceptionally easy to cut and peel. (I don't own a peeler, but I didn't need it, as the skin came off easily once I'd cut into the flesh.) Again with the chopped tomato and the sauteeing and the herbs, this time with the jalapeno added in. Toss cooked pasta with avocado, squeeze half a lemon over it, top with sauteed sauce, top with Mex cheese. This was quite tasty, although the avocado and lemon flavors weren't aggressive enough to compete. The jalapeno was delectable. I've started adding a jalapeno to my standard sauce, mmm. I'll be buying more avocados: I think they'd work better as filling for grilled-cheese sandwiches, with tomato slices or maybe chopped onion. "VENGEANCE" SWIPES CAKE, EATS IT TOO: "A 6-foot-tall, 275-pound bearded man crashed a children's birthday party in Oak Forest, identified himself as 'vengeance,' then helped himself to a piece of cake, police said." whole thing "He felt his moral nature falling to pieces." --James Joyce, "A Painful Case" Man, I hate it when that happens! ..."APC" is the first story in Dubliners so far that has been just horribly written. No humor, just the lowing of a sad, self-pitying cow. I'm enjoying the next story, "Ivy Day in the Committee Room," much better: Nothing has happened, but at least we are getting strong dialogue and basic descriptions of persons, places, and things. Sunday, August 29, 2004
GOD, GREENE, AND GENRE: Provocative piece on Graham Greene. I definitely disagree several statements and turns of phrase, but it's still very much worth a read for Greene fans. Via Arts & Letters Daily. "Her hair would grow back, but my watch was gone." --from memory, and via The Rat; ultimately from The World's Shortest Stories of Love and Death. Friday, August 27, 2004
AND THIS TIME I MEAN IT! I said, lo these many months ago, that I would add Hugo Schwyzer to the blogroll. It happens tonight. Hugo writes mostly about gender, masculinity, and similar stuff. By his own account he is, among other things, "a progressive, consistent-life ethic Anabaptist Democrat (but with a sense of humor), a community college history and gender studies professor." "A SEPARATED SOUL": AND DO YOU THINK YOU'VE MADE THE RIGHT DECISION, THIS TIME? Um. This is a vignette, a one-shot, and I expect a lot of people will hate it. On one level it's about a woman at a conference for people who used to work in the abortion industry before they found Christ. It's also about all the things conversion doesn't necessarily change. I realize that the first level may prevent people from seeing the second. But this is the story as it presented itself to me. (PSA: If you want an actual group for people leaving the abortion industry, try the Centurions.) I hate the title, by the way, so feel free to suggest a better one. Also, the tenses are a mess, and I still don't know what I'll do about that. Forewarned &c. With the blogwatch resting on your shoulders, You're gonna need someone on your side... Hit & Run has a highly interesting and useful post on a new Egyptian liberal party. TAPPED (The American Prospect) has two good posts on Abu Ghraib-related matters: dogs and CACI, the private corrections firm that trained interrogators and just got its contract renewed. Radley "The Agitator" Balko profiles Modest Needs, which helps people over the rough spots in life. Excerpt: "Modest Needs was conceived, built and still operates on simple concept--a small investment to help an individual or a family with a utility bill, rent check or health-care invoice reaps huge rewards if it keeps its recipient employed or prevents an eviction. "So Modest Needs cuts small checks to people in short-term straits. The goal is to keep the recipient self-sufficient and off public assistance. "The average Modest Needs grant is $180, and the organization won't give any single applicant more than $1,000. But Taylor estimates that the $234,000 Modest Needs has given out since its inception has saved its recipient families about $7.7 million in possible lost income. "Modest Needs only accepts donations from private individuals. It won't take money from corporations, foundations or state or federal government." whole thing Wednesday, August 25, 2004
"SHIP COMES IN": POISON MOON, REDUX. This is the end of the rough draft of the Norse myths story. Man, what a woolly, misshapen story. It has potential! But I didn't have enough of the mechanics and backstory--the rules of the fictional world--taped down in my head before I started. So I don't think the themes I was trying to explore came through very clearly. Plus, it's overwritten to the point that it's a tic rather than a stylistic choice. Your comments on these and any other matters are, of course, encouraged. Still... I like it. It'll be good when I've had a chance to do some serious reworking of the clay. Whole thing here, last scene here. I'll start the next story by Monday, but I'm not sure which one it will be yet. I will laugh right in the face of the poison moon. ROBERT SAMUELSON VS. CAMPAIGN FINANCE REFORM: "But the truth cannot remain forever obscured. Campaign finance laws must fail at their larger aim of improving public confidence in politics and government. They breed disrespect for law, the Constitution or both. If the laws are aggressively expanded and enforced -- with more limits on contributions, spending and 'coordination' -- people will realize they're losing their rights of free speech and political association. But if the laws are laxly enforced, as they have been, they will inspire continuing evasions and harsh condemnations by 'reformers.' Public confidence suffers either way. Americans will ultimately have to choose between the Constitution and a mere law -- or watch both be damaged." more Via Hit & Run. "Reading was something Jay knew about only from books, yet he was quite anxious to experience it for himself." --Bride of Dark and Stormy Monday, August 23, 2004
"SHIP COMES IN": LIFE INTIMIDATES ART. Second-to-last section of the Norse myths story. This is all Michael all the time. It's also possibly confusing, so please let me know if you read this section and think, "Ah who a what now?!" Any other comments, questions, and criticisms are, as always, not merely accepted but welcomed. I also realized that I'd forgotten to write something without which Michael and Sigyn's actions make very little sense. So if you're reading, please do check out the end of the trial scene, since I've added the thing I forgot. Click here for story so far, here for most recent section. This will be finished very soon. IT'S AN INTERVIEW WITH TELFORD WORK! excerpts: "...I don't know whether ['The Passion of the Christ'] will have helped or hindered knowledge of Christ in the wider culture. I have no idea what unchurched Christians' long-term reactions will be. However, within evangelicalism I am a little worried about it. After the film I spent a good deal of time explaining Catholic soteriology to some very confused and distressed Protestant students. Evangelical theology is a poor theological grid for interpreting passion plays, because passion plays presuppose a participatory rather than substitutionary doctrine of atonement. Evangelical students were liable to take the hypersuffering in the film (e.g., the traditional three falls of the Fourteen Stations of the Cross rather than the single fall in the gospels) as underlining their own guilt at making Jesus suffer instead of them. "A friend of mine put his reaction to The Passion of the Christ beautifully: 'For the first third of the film I was mad at the Romans for inflicting all that punishment. For the second third, I was mad at myself for doing the sinning that had to be paid back this way. For the last third, I was mad at the Father.' This is a natural, if unusually candid, evangelical interpretation of the film. It was traumatic for my friend, and also for many of my students. They were greatly relieved to learn that Catholic soteriology reads the cross as human suffering appropriated by Jesus in solidarity with us, rather than as Calvin reads it. ... "... How would you define 'postmodern Christian'? Does the term mean anything particularly helpful today? "The term is variously construed, of course. As I define it, I consider it helpful. "Modernity was a movement to dispense with the necessity of trusting others. It is located in the aftermath of the Wars of Religion when people tired of trusting either Catholics or Protestants. Getting beyond the anxiety, hubris, and false wisdom of that age is a good thing, because it means we are getting beyond our need to make Jesus jump through our epistemological hoops. 'An evil and adulterous generation seeks for a sign; but no sign shall be given to it except the sign of the prophet Jonah' (Matt. 12:39). No wonder modernity failed! "James Wm. McClendon, Jr. characterizes continental postmoderns (Derrida, Lyotard, Foucault) as 'most-moderns,' because while they have abandoned the Enlightenment Project they are still mesmerized by its agenda of certain knowledge, propositional solidity, cultural progress, and individual autonomy. They aren't really postmoderns, at least not as much as others. I call them modernists on the rebound; having been dumped by the girl they want, they still can't get her off their minds. These thinkers have things to teach us (for instance, Radical Orthodoxy uses them somewhat fruitfully), but I can't follow their program. "McClendon distinguishes these most-moderns from true postmoderns such as Wittgenstein, John Austin, Michael Polanyi, Alasdair MacIntyre, Newbigin, Nancey Murphy, and himself because these 'Anglo-American postmoderns' really are over the girl. They are ready to go on in a world in which learning presupposes trust and offers confidence rather than airtight certainty. That's a world that is finally becoming hospitable again to the good news." whole thing (which includes a lot of intra-Protestant talk that I, frankly, don't understand). I probably found this via Camassia. THE FINAL FRONTIER: PLANETES v. 2 and 3. Just finished the second and third volumes of this ongoing, excellent sci-fi manga series. Scattered thoughts: First of all, go read Planetes. It's a messy, character-focused space exploration story that manages to almost-successfully combine episodic drama and a strong plot arc. There are some beautiful moments (the books are worth it just for the drawings of space, or for static lovelinesses like the vol 3 image of the dragonfly against the moon) and you will root for the characters. I have a couple caveats, especially about these two volumes. The first volume was divided about evenly between the three crewmembers of a ship that collects space debris--basically Garbage Truck To The Stars. I empathized with bereaved Yuri, adored fierce and down-to-earth smoker Fee, and felt embarrassed recognition when confronted with conflicted and angsty Hachimaki. The first volume is fantastic and you should go get it right now if you haven't already. The later two volumes (I think there are three more coming) focus much more tightly on Hachimaki. Some of the subplots continue (especially a nicely-done storyline about anti-exploration terrorism, which simmers for a while before bursting into the main plot) but it's mostly the story of Hachimaki and the first mission to Jupiter. The first volume's themes of isolation and the need for human connection are repeated, but I thought they were overemphasized here, over-obvious. We're being leaned on in these volumes and I don't like it. Stuff gets spelled out much more explicitly than is healthy. My other caveat is Tanabe, the love interest. 'Cause that's just about all she is. She is the Eternal Feminine, forgiving and compassionate and able to reconcile terrorist and victim with her abounding sweetness. Kill... me... NOW. Oy, but Tanabe is the kind of character I just cannot deal with, on a very basic philosophical and personal level. I think she's fake and wrong and kind of horrible. Tanabe is Nutrasweet personified. But! It takes a lot for me to recommend a book with one of those Nutrafemme characters in it. But Planetes is so good it can get away with Tanabe. These two volumes have lovely portraits of family life; sweet, quick, confident vignettes; truly awe-inspiring pictures of space; a contemporary sense of tragedy combined with a Golden Age sense of wonder; and a very funny scene with a word game that overcame all my resistance to sentiment and cuteness. Planetes is a deep and sometimes too-blatant testament to Eric Sevareid's statement, "Everything in space, von Braun said, obeys the laws of physics. If you know these laws and obey them, space will treat you kindly. The difficulty is that man brings the laws of his own nature into space. The issue is how man treats man. The problem does not lie in outer space, but where it's always been: on terra firma in inner man." The third volume is all about how you can only recover the wonder we feel at the vastness of space and the astonishing exploratory need of the human intellect once you've understood human love. There's a gorgeous scene of Tanabe and Hachimaki looking at a rocket as it sails into the night sky: Hachimaki can finally love space again, because he isn't alone. Planetes knows that this terrible human drive for the frontier, for the unknown, can be either a pathetic escape attempt or a transcendent submission to beauty. For that alone you should be reading it. Even if it weren't cheaper than American comics! JOURNALCON!: It was fun. I was hugely busy and sleepless, and so I was only able to be there for my own personal panel, on the nexus of personal blogging and professional life. But the people were great and the questions were fun. A couple superbrief observations: 1) This is the first blog-oriented crowd I've ever been in that was about 80% women. Welcome to the wild world of things that aren't political blogging.... 2) I was the bad girl: I did one journalism internship and one year-long reporting job, but I'm not sure I've ever sent a query letter, so my journalistic life has been sharply different from pretty much everyone else's. That makes my advice suspect, I should think. I do have three pieces of advice that I think apply across the board: a) Do not bother going to j-school. Just get out there and report. b) Google is smart and your pseudonym is probably not. Nobody on our panel had ever had a job, since starting their blogs, where no one had connected employee to blog. Someone will find you, so keep that in mind. Gossip is one of the most basic human currencies. c) Relatedly, be aware that these days journalism is an intriguing, philosophically rich, but sometimes crude blend of personal and political life. Many employers will view your public persona as an icon. You need to be an icon they can justify keeping on payroll. Readers (or at least editors) these days seek out vivid characters who can show how their perspective colors every action, from music preferences to voting choices. I really like the way blog-influenced journalism emphasizes the personal touch, a kind of continuity in all aspects of the journalist's life. That seems to me a necessary corrective to the fake, plastic "objectivity" (which always seems to mean conformity and conventional wisdom) that journalism sometimes affects. However, if your public, online persona incorporates aspects of your personal life that will get your employer nasty letters, you are very likely to become a liability rather than an asset. So, you know, forewarned is half an octopus. It's weird how many people need to hear this: If you worry that somebody might find your blog, he already has. 3) Every single person on my panel was a comics fan! This was too awesome. I shared the Planetes love; of which more soon. My deepest thanks to the people who finagled my spot at JournalCon--it was a great time and I wish I could have stayed. TOO OLD TO BE A CHILD STAR; TOO YOUNG TO TAKE LEADS...: Happy birthday to me! (Actually, Sunday was my birthday, aka the Feast of the Queenship of Mary, which entirely rocks.) I'm feeling really, really happy about this birthday. It feels more significant than most. The year I was 25 was, honestly, kind of horrible, for reasons entirely under my control: I made a lot of bad decisions and in turn they made me miserable. And at Mass on Sunday I realized one of the biggest reasons why. I found myself praying, "Please help me love You above all else"--and I realized I hadn't prayed that, sincerely, in a long time. I've been putting all kinds of things (some good, some neutral, some actively bad) above my love of Christ. I've been withholding huge swathes of my life from Him. If you'll allow me this metaphor, I'd been using "protection" because I wanted to keep my life the way it was; and so I was not filled with new life. So my birthday resolution is that I will change that. Let's try this again. There were some things about being 25 that were amazing (most notably the amount of writing I did), and I plan to keep those. But let's throw away this bizarre and self-damaging clinging to the old Adam, shall we? Let's do something bigger and better. Because I want to do great things. Fiat voluntas Tua. "THE TOWN THAT DIDN'T STARE": Moving piece on reconstructive surgery on WWII veterans. Via The Corner. "RAISING KEVION": Intermittently sweet, harsh, true-to-life piece from the NYT Magazine's welfare beat reporter. Must-read; if I've heard this story once I've heard it a hundred times. Via Family Scholars. Excerpts: "Nearly a decade has passed since the country 'ended welfare' with a landmark bill imposing time limits and work requirements, and low-skilled women like Jewell have entered the work force in record numbers. But low-skilled men have not. And low-skilled black men, the sea in which Jewell has spent her life swimming, have continued to leave the job market at disconcerting rates, even during the late-90's boom. In cutting the rolls and increasing work, the 1996 welfare law, and a related expansion of services, has been celebrated as a rare, even unique, triumph, and on one level it is. But with about 90 percent of welfare families headed by single mothers, it is also a lesson in the limits of a policy that is focused on one sex. Whatever it has done to put women to work, it won't really change the arc of inner-city life until it -- or something -- reaches the men. ... "A parallel story resides on Angie's branch of the family tree. She did know her father -- knew him as a drunk. 'Wanna marry my mama?' she once asked a city bus driver as a little girl. 'I want a daddy!' Still, her feelings toward her father ran so deep that she credits them for her decision, after leaving welfare, to become a nursing aide. She saw her father for the last time just before she moved to Milwaukee, and she was stunned at how sick he had become; she had to help him use the bathroom. A month later, he was dead. Taking on a caregiver's job, she said, was her way of making amends. 'I felt so guilty -- I did not do anything for him,' she said. 'I was mad at him, yeah, but . . . he was still my daddy.' ... "His idealization of the wedding extends to the marriage. The sociologist Kathryn Edin argues that poor, unmarried couples often conceive marriage as an especially exalted state -- relationship perfection -- rather than as the acceptably imperfect structure in which daily living occurs. That's certainly how Ken described it. 'Once you get married, that means she's everything in a woman you're looking for and you're everything in a man she's looking for,' he said. Jewell said much the same: 'It's just you and that person, become one.' A marriage, therefore, carries intimidating risks, none greater than the risk of your partner cheating. 'Oh, yes, yes, yes,' Ken said. 'If you're married, and she goes out there and cheats on you, that's like the worst thing in the world! 'Cause you said those wedding vows. When you get married, you say you got an inseparable bond. So if she goes out there and cheats on you, she's breaking laws and policies!''' whole thing "The warm tropical sun caressed the golden Bermuda sand where Kimberly lay slathered in cocoa butter, welcoming its embrace and wallowing in the reverie while pounds of care melted away from the thighs of her psyche." --Bride of Dark and Stormy; and also how my Sunday went, yay. Friday, August 20, 2004
"SHIP COMES IN": THOSE ENDLESS DAYS. Next section of the Norse myths story. Again, not much Michael, and much assumed knowledge of the mythos on the part of my readers. You have been warned. You'll get more Michael in the next section. Here for story so far, here for most recent section. (Note that the most recent section has slipped off the front page. It's the August 1 entry now.) This story will be complete by Monday; there are two more sections. Thank you for the days Those endless days those sacred days you gave me I'm thinking of the days I won't forget a single day believe me... LAW AND WHAT HE'S BEEN THINKING: Hey look, my father is guest-starring at Professor Jack Balkin's blog! Go, read! IRAQI PRO-DEMOCRACY PARTY: These are the Iraq the Model guys. Via Oxblog, because I've been totally remiss in my Iraqi blogwatching duties. Will make the rounds sometime this weekend. Thursday, August 19, 2004
AWWWW, ISN'T THAT CUTE? "The authors of this book are dedicated to the Enlightenment principles of rational discourse,the application of logic,and the scientific method. The data and arguments we present follow these principles. As for politics, we are committed to the separation of church and state,the rule of law, and a political culture of civility and tolerance,all of which are necessary for a healthy democracy." (link) But you know, professing one's allegiance to or defiance of the chaste goddess Reason is only the first step. The more interesting one, I find, is figuring out precisely what the goddess requires of her votaries. Wednesday, August 18, 2004
THE FIRST LINE: Magazine of short stories, all starting with the same first line. Neat idea. The current line is, "The inside was dark." POETRY WEDNESDAY: VAUDEVILLE SHALL PREACH: Auden, of course. Who could resist in this, our hour of need? (I have nothing to declare but my obsession.) First a small sharp cutting from "The More Loving One": Were all stars to disappear or die, I should learn to look at an empty sky And feel its total dark sublime, Though this might take me a little time. ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Much more to follow. I have the final symptom of English-major damage: Seeing the dedication "To Cyril Connolly" makes me cry. Am I wrong in thinking someone said that obsession is the wellspring of genius and madness? Also, if I ever have children they will memorize this. Um... and I will memorize it too, if strictly necessary. And if my children inherit an interest in the law (or lawfulness, with which I've rarely concerned myself) I think this might not come amiss. Ah, shh, are you crying again? I suppose someone is always listening. O TELL ME THE TRUTH ABOUT LOVE: There are no responses to your query. (I owe that particular search-result to The Rat, of course--let the more cultured one be her. More Auden presently as I am obsessed.) Tuesday, August 17, 2004
THESE PICTURES OF YOU: COMICS REVIEWS. Let's go! Finder: Mystery Date. Wow, I'm so conflicted about this book. First off, I am a Carla Speed McNeil completist at this point. I'm addicted to the Samuel Delany-esque Finder world. This is wonderful science fiction, extending out beyond the borders of the page; rough and weird and sprawling just like real life. It feels like McNeil is describing the Finder world, rather than creating it. But. Um. This volume feels... lecture-y. Now, that's maybe because the characters are professors and students. In real life, such people lecture. And McNeil's lectures feel relatively real. But still, I felt like I was being beaten over the head with characters' respective positions. The main character is a temple prostitute and most of the lectures involve sex in some way or another, so it's also lectures about something I've thought a lot about (I mean, it's my job), and I really didn't feel like I was getting anything new. One of the major themes of the book is the clash of expectations. And usually this is something that would immediately attract me to a work of fiction. I love seeing clashes where one character is completely shocked by what another character takes for granted. But again, it didn't quite work here. My guess is that it didn't work for me because the main conflict was a clash between two very differently-situated cultures (one positioned as "civilized" and one as "exotic") in a way I feel like I've had pounded into my head a hundred times since entering high school. And at this point, either I'm a jerk about "exotic" cultures or I'm not, but I've heard all the arguments already and seen all the lopsided conflicts in which the "exotic" cultural insider is obviously more open-minded and sensitive and questioning and whatnot than the "civilized" intellectualizing outsiders. I'm starting to think that right now I more want to see the clash of expectations within a culture--people who thought they were on the same page and only now realize that they were never even reading from the same script. Anyway, I find it hard to tell if it's that McNeil is being too exaggerated and blunt or if I'm just hugely jaded on this whole question after my Riot Grrrl years, or what. But see, every Finder book ends with McNeil's notes, and these are so utterly charming and scientifictionally pleasing that I come away with a huge love for the book. She really has this whole world in her head and it's wonderful to see. Also, her drawings are amazingly sweet and fluid. I purr at her drawings even when I'm not wildly thrilled by the storyline to which they're hooked. Plus, her characters are vivid, realistic, and lovable. Very much worth your time even though you might find yourself (as I did) growling and muttering at the page. Human Target: Strike Zones. This is really a series of short stories about Christopher Chance, who can impersonate anyone perfectly. Lovely little overwritten fables about personal identity and lack of same. I keep hanging on to this fairly predictable title because I'm obsessed with the theme (oh so Walker Percy!) and I can put up with the fact that it always has at least thirteen more captions than it needs. Someone needs to flense the captions, seriously. Anyway, it's a James Bond suspense thing with a much deeper underlying emotional current than the Bond films, so I'm into it. Powers: Who Killed Retro Girl? Probably suffered in comparison to the other titles. I resisted picking up Powers in part because of the artwork, which for some reason I didn't like. Now, I have no idea what I was thinking. The artwork is big and brassy and exaggerated and I love it, almost. (The "almost" is for the amazingly annoying, predictable reason that Oeming draws every female with the same Barbie physique and gives us several infuriating, physics-defying shots of Detective Pilgrim with her pants falling off her ass.) The dialogue is Bendis standard, which is fine, but... I dunno. I didn't feel like this comic was giving me anything I couldn't get better in (the first volume of) Alias, or even Sleeper. Seriously, what is the unique thing that Powers offers? It looks good, but I got no interest in it beyond that. Oh hey, I totally didn't tell you what it is. It's a detective story about two cops, ex-superhero Walker and rookie Pilgrim, investigating crimes committed against your basic costumed superpowered folk. "Homicide superior," as they say. Sleeper: All False Moves. I'm so in love. Okay, so at first glance, this sounds like Powers. It's basically The Superpowered Spy Who Came in From the Cold. Except he doesn't get to come in from the cold, because the only person who knows he's really still one of the Good Guys is in a coma. But it's a twisty creepy shivery spy story with superpowers. How come you should get it right now? (After you get the first two volumes, Point Blank and Sleeper: Out in the Cold.) I've got three reasons: 1) Characters. The characterizations of double (?) agent Holden Carver, his "only happy when somebody else is screaming" girlfriend Miss Misery, his boss TAO, and his friend Genocide Jones are fun and consistent and compelling. 2) Suspense. I flipped every page with intense interest, worrying about what was going to happen to our knockabout and decidedly compromised quasi-hero. 3) Ohhhhhhh, the layout. This book is such a sensual pleasure. The layout is noticeable, but simple and not showy: lots of boxes. But the boxes are positioned in such a way that you can't help but make the connections to the themes of the book: windows (frame-ups, constricted vision, limited POV), cages, organizational flowcharts, playing cards, photographs (evidence). I dug this layout in Out in the Cold and now I think I have a huge layout crush--I want to send it anonymous Valentines with soppy poetry. Also, the pages are still glossy and weirdly thick in a way that is strangely exciting to turn. OK OK, Sleeper won't change your world. But it's as good as Chandler. It's fantastic noir-spy comicsness. You want it. You really, really do. Next up: Planetes v. 2 and 3; the first volumes of The Invisibles and Doom Patrol. COSTUMED VIGILANTES: an exchange between me and Jason Spak. He gets the last word. Me: Here. Jason: What you wrote about Dahlia Lithwick pleased me. Like you, I get annoyed when lefty commentators "give[] us nothing other than personal policy-outcome preferences as a guideline for how judges should interpret the law." I read the other blog entries you linked to, and concluded that if you're on crack, one wouldn't know it from reading your thoughts on constitutional interpretation. Do you really want to come up with a counter-argument for people like Ms. Lithwick? If so, my hunch is that it will be more profitable to consider what they have to say about original understanding, than it will be to challenge them to devise a comparable theory of jurisprudence. To that end, here are three questions that I sometimes think about: 1) Like you, I tend to think bitterly of certain passages, like the infamous "mystery doctrine" in Planned Parenthood v. Casey, as policy preferences cloaked in high-falutin' language. But to some extent, aren't passages that advocate "original understanding" doing the same thing? In other words, would conservatives like "original understanding" if it wasn't helpful to them politically? See, e.g., http://www.offthekuff.com/mt/archives/001227.html 2) The Supreme Court has used substantive due process, the essential tool in every activist judge's kit, in good ways: it struck down an Oregon law that barred parents from sending their kids to Catholic school (Pierce v. Society of Sisters), and a Nebraska law that prevented kids from learning German in school (Meyer v. Nebraska). The opinions in those cases find a "right to parental control of education" that isn't in the constitution any more than a "right to abortion" is. Would conservatives really jettison substantive due process, if they knew that laws like these might be among the results of doing so? 3) Hasn't the court always been politicized? Look at the 19th century, when the Court used substantive due process to decide Dred Scott on political grounds, or the 18th century, when a conservative attempt to pack the courts with political hacks before Jefferson could do it gave us Marbury v. Madison. Me: "Do you really want to come up with a counter-argument for people like Ms. Lithwick?" Not necessarily, actually. I'm increasingly convinced that while it's possible to talk about what NOT to do in jurisprudence, it's very difficult or maybe even impossible to develop a hard and fast, bright-line theory of what TO do. Hence the "prudence" in jurisprudence, I guess. I am more comfortable about talking about what I think is definitely out of bounds than in coming up with a theory that would provide answers to all or maybe even most legal questions. It's sort of like defining art, maybe--any top-down theoretical definition is going to be inadequate, but you do need some way of talking about what artists are doing and whether it works and whether it's good. Not a great analogy, but I think it at least captures the degree of fuzziness I think is inevitable in jurisprudential theory. (All those "maybe"s and "I think"s should show how uncertain I am even about this uncertainty!) "But to some extent, aren't passages that advocate 'original understanding' doing the same thing? In other words, would conservatives like 'original understanding' if it wasn't helpful to them politically? See, e.g., http://www.offthekuff.com/mt/archives/001227.html" See, those are three different questions: a) Isn't 'original understanding' philosophical-kingship and vague disguise for personal policy preference? To this I think the answer is 'no, but.' Obviously 'orig. understanding' needs to be fleshed out. (For example, Scalia is not an "originalist" but rather a "textualist," a philosophically different beast; and not a 100% textualist at that, more of a 75% textualist. He gives a nice popularized explication of his views, with replies and his response to those replies, in A Matter of Interpretation, which youmight really like if you haven't read it already.) But one of my basic "Are you a philosopher king?" tests for judges is whether they would say that certain unpalatable policy options are forced on them by the laws. E.g. I don't think the Constitution guarantees the right to life of the unborn, even though I'd obviously like it to and I've read various arguments that it does. So I do think it's possible to be a "real" textualist or originalist (though not a 100% one, see above re impossibility of top-down theories) rather than just using that interpretive framework as a convenient disguise for policy preferences. b) Would conservatives be "originalists" (argh, NOBODY is a 100% originalist or textualist and the concepts are almost certainly incoherent just from a linguistic philosophy standpoint, but I'm going to shut up about that now) if/when that perspective doesn't serve their policy ends? It depends on which conservatives! (And maybe on which policy ends.) See above re possibility of jurisprudence against one's own policy preferences. c) What do I think of the Off the Kuff link? ...Eh, I'm not wildly impressed by it. I think it sounds like Kuffner hasn't read the extended-play version of orig/textualist claims, and is working off an oversimplified understanding of what they entail; and it's SOOOO WEIRD!!!! to say that the amendment process, as specified in Article V, is an argument for tacit amendment of the Constitution by crusading judges! I mean, I did a real doubletake on that one. "The Supreme Court has used substantive due process, the essential tool in every activist judge's kit, in good ways.... Would conservatives really jettison substantive due process, if they knew that laws like these might be among the results of doing so?" Again, depends on the conservative! I honestly do NOT know enough about the arguments in Pierce to express a judgment of it one way or the other. (Again with the fuzziness. I'm so unsatisfying!) But I can easily come up with "substantive due process" claims that would provide results I like while relying on a jurisprudential view (of the courts' role in discerning and maintaining the rule of law and the Constitution) that I find abhorrent. So yeah, I'd give up some good stuff (which we could GET OTHER WAYS, via all the traditional other tools of social movements) to restrict the courts. "3) Hasn't the court always been politicized?" Oh, sure. And doubtless always will be. The question is, though, once we acknowledge this, do we seek to get away with politicization for our own ends (git 'em girl, before they git you) or to minimize politicization, maximize public skepticism of it, and minimize the political benefits of it for any side? IOW you'll always have some level of politicization/philosopher-kingship, but I am idealistic enough to think it varies and we can through our jurisprudential theories contain it to some extent. Final thought: One helpful way to think about this is to take the perspective of the voter trying to be responsible in exercising the franchise. Can voters know what they are voting for? I go into that here. Jason: A) I agree -- wholeheartedly -- that it's "very difficult or maybe even impossible" to develop a top-down theory of judging. More to the point, it's annoying -- the kind of empty exercise that gives phrases like "ivory tower" their often pejorative ring. I thought you were trying to create such a theory in the earlier blog posts you linked to, which seemed to catalogue of levels of political influence and types of stare decisis. I'm glad to know that you either weren't then or aren't now doing so. 1)a) You mention "one of [your] basic 'Are you a philosopher king?' tests for judges . . . ." Do you really have more than one such test? If so, you should consider contacting Quizilla and creating something on-line. 1)c) I should have linked, not to Kuffner, but to the Lithwick article he cites. In it, she says that "Scalia can afford to be an originalist, only because he personally agrees with most of the moral and religious assumptions of the framers." To my mind, that's the argument (the idea that Scalia et al. mouth the words "I'm only following the framers" because they know that the framers either favor them, or favor the status quo, on issues like gay marriage) that advocates for "original understanding" and their kin need to confront. Z) I'm not sure I grasp your marriagedebate link. There usually isn't too much press when the Court construes or misconstrues the laws that regular people vote for (not that we directly vote for anything here in Pennsylvania); the real kerfuffles happen when the Court construes or misconstrues amendments to the Constitution, none of which were "voted on" in quite the way that pieces of legislation are. "SHIP COMES IN": AND THE DOORS SWING BACK AND FORWARD, FROM THE PAST INTO THE PRESENT. The next section of the Norse myths story. More domestic fighting--and Loki's murder trial. A few points and questions: 1) Yes, I know, I keep saying "Aesir" when I mean Aesir and Vanir. I'm going to fix that in the revised version. 2) I also know the flashbacks-within-flashbacks are hard to follow. Please email me if you have comments about that; it's something I'll definitely be fixing in the revised version. 3) I'm now 99% sure I have at least one of the patronymics wrong, so again, I solicit advice on them. 4) Do you hate the fact that I'm assuming a fairly solid knowledge of Norse myths on the part of my readership? I mean, I had scenes in mind that would explain the murder trial, but ultimately decided that my job was reshaping rather than retelling the myths, so there was no need to play out the scenes that you all knew would happen. Did that not work? Do we need to see much more of Balder, or of his traditional role in the mythos? (These are different questions, I know.) Anyway. That said, you can get the story so far here, and the most recent section here. There are three more sections, I think: the cave; the aftermath; and the Bitter End. Comments and criticism on everything and anything are not merely requested but welcomed. And you say you didn't do it--but you know you did, of course... LINK ROUND-UP: "The Struggle Over the Torture Memos": "At its annual meeting in Atlanta last week, the American Bar Association called for a bipartisan investigation into the Bush administration's internal deliberations about interrogation and detention that may have led to the torture of prisoners in Iraq. "At the same time, 180 prominent lawyers, judges and law professors signed a statement calling for the administration to release any remaining confidential memos relating to the treatment of prisoners and detainees. ... "But Walter Dellinger, who headed the office during the Clinton years, notes that in every administration, about 20 percent of its memos have usually remained unpublished. Of these, a small percentage include classified information and the rest involve requests for legal advice when the executive branch never took the action in question and would prefer the advice not be disclosed. "'One reason for not releasing the unpublished memos is that an administration may sometimes come up with a truly stupid idea, and a strongly worded legal memorandum can dissuade them from taking the proposed action,' Mr. Dellinger said. 'If you know the memos will be made public and could be used against the United States in court, the executive may be reluctant to ask for candid advice on matters of questionable legality, and lawyers may be reluctant to give it.'" whole thing Ramesh Ponnuru has an inspiring little piece on embryo-destructive stem cell research, here: "...The meeting with Souder did not go exactly as planned. They didn't persuade Souder to support the funding. Instead, he persuaded them to oppose it." The Old Oligarch reminds me that I'm speaking at JournalCon DC. I'm on the Saturday 10 AM panel, "Getting It in Writing: Personal and Professional Writing." "The Nyima hail their god of war as a bringer of civilization. This doesn't make sense unless you consider that the Greek god of wine and drunkenness was also considered a god of civilization." --Carla Speed McNeil, Finder: Mystery Date, endnotes Sunday, August 15, 2004
"SHIP COMES IN": THIS NEVER WAS ONE OF THE GREAT ROMANCES. Next section of the Norse myths story. In which Michael defends the marital bed and takes more photographs. Lots of cussing, for those who care. Click here for story so far, here for the newest section. Oh, and we meet Balder the Beautiful... who, as you probably know, is a significant figure in our tale. All the angry words that passed between us... OK , ON FURTHER READING, that Post piece on "Washingtonienne" is a must-read. Seriously. Click and you will see. Walker Percy couldn't have come up with this, though he would have tried. SUDAN: GENOCIDE, TERRORISM, AND AMERICA'S NATIONAL INTEREST: Transcript of American Enterprise Institute forum with William Kristol of the Weekly Standard; John Prendergast of the International Crisis Group; Ronald Sandee, Ministry of Defense of the Netherlands; Thomas Donnelly of AEI, and Rep. Frank Wolf (R-Va). Haven't read yet but plan to. Via Mark Shea. We all feel blogwatch in the dark... Dave Tepper writes about Gov. McGreevey and same-sex marriage. I think Dave's way of connecting the two is wrong, and there are major reasons for even a supporter of SSM to avoid this interpretation of events. Chris Crain and Jonathan Rauch roughly agree with Dave; E.J. Graff, Josh Chafetz of Oxblog, Sed Contra, and I (here) roughly disagree, from quite different political positions. Sed Contra on a startlingly sound piece from the Washington Post on "Washingtonienne." Draw your own connections to McGreevey's situation. Dahlia Lithwick says the term "activist judges" is meaningless but gives us nothing other than personal policy-outcome preferences as a guideline for how judges should interpret the law. I growl at this view at length here and at an oblique angle here and here (please do read all of those before replying if you think I'm on crack). Basic thesis: "[B]oth Bush v. Gore and Roe v. Wade were wrongly decided, and [] their problems, while hardly identical, are related."...Lithwick link via How Appealing and Family Scholars. "I couldn't leave America. "America is the only place where I make any sense." --Peter Milligan, Human Target: Strike Zones Saturday, August 14, 2004
"SHIP COMES IN": COMPLICATED SHADOWS. Next segment of the Norse myths story. In which Sigyn has her first two children and Michael begins a major project. Here for story so far, here for most recent segment. But iron and steel will bend and break... "I know the blood is fake, the corpses get up and go home to their families. But that doesn't make it not real." --Peter Milligan, Human Target: Strike Zones. I did mention I visited the comics shop, right? Right? Friday, August 13, 2004
"SHIP COMES IN": OTHER WICKED LITTLE THINGS. The next section of the Norse myths story. In which Sigyn and Loki begin a marriage fit for gods and monsters. A few things to note: 1) I went through and messed with the earlier segments of the story, changing some bits of prose I hated and dropping a tiny hint or two about something I just figured out about the scene at the Bitter End. 2) This new section, which includes Sigyn's wedding night, got significantly more frank than I expected. I guess R-rated? I've been sticking pretty close to Sigyn's vocabulary and locutions (though not always to her POV), so the descriptions are sometimes slightly out-of-date because that's how she would think about sex. 3) That said, I'm not satisfied with this section, and would welcome comments on whatever is or is not working for you with this story. 4) There's very little Michael in this section, but you'll get more of him in the next one, which is also the one where we meet the children. So: click here for the story so far, here for the new scene. Bridal books, engagement rings, And other wicked little things... Nervous juvenile, won't smile, what became of you? Did that swift eclipse blogwatch you? A commenter at Amy Welborn's site thinks I was too demanding in my post on gender and the "feminine qualities" discourse: "If a bunch of bishops issued a list of men's gifts, the immediate response would be 'what a bunch of self-important sexist pigs.'" But my points were these: 1) When you only list women's Special Gifts, you're talking as if women are the only gendered people out there--men are gender-neutral. This elision of men's gendered nature does a disservice to women (who are viewed as bizarre deviations from the neutral male standard) and men (who are left with no language in which to describe and discuss masculinity). And 2) That said, I dislike the "list of qualities" talk for either sex, so I would also not be wildly thrilled about a document that listed Special Manly Gifts as well as special lady gifts. My earlier post was an admittedly rudimentary attempt to come up with a more accurate way of describing gender differences and complementarities. Quoth the Maven: Really intriguing, thought-provoking post on developmental stages and the different fears that serve as threats in children's literature: getting lost, death, damnation. Via Church of the Masses. Sean Collins writes an excellent rebuttal of my uncannily and astonishingly disorganized post on New X-Men. (I also note, on rereading, that I used the word "denouement" when I meant "backstory"! Who stole my brain???) I'm still not convinced that Sean's account of the Phoenix intervention is more justified by the text than my irritated reading. (I think the sequence of events makes mine more plausible. Then again, I was also somewhat emotionally disconnected by the last volume in the series, and emotional disengagement usually warps rather than enhances critical judgment.) But it's a possible reading and a far more interesting and charitable one than mine, so when I reread the series, as I undoubtedly will, I'll reread hoping to find that Sean has convinced me: "It’s the Jean-Phoenix that makes this decision, meaning that all of Jean's life experiences, beliefs, and desires come into play as much if not more so than the Phoenix entity's cosmic concerns. And how does this new and better direction get set into motion? By Jean so loving the world (and Cyclops in particular) that she gave Emma her only beloved husband. 'Live' is her injunction to Scott (a deliberate echo-twin of The Filth's concluding 'We have love'), as she gives not just her permission but her blessing to Cyclops. Through her real, true, total love, he can put aside his grief for a relationship that was kept alive like a zombie for years out of both comfort and fear, and embrace a new, vibrant woman, a relationship with whom will provide both Scott and Emma with a wealth of potential for human growth and happiness." Sean points out that this reading, where sacrificial love makes possible--but doesn't force--new life and regeneration, echoes the Gospels; in fact, that language is very close to how I present the Gospel at the pregnancy center. Sean is definitely right about Beast's role, and I am kicking myself for not noticing it. When Will the Hurting Stop?: Another list of eleven comics that libraries should stock. Via Sean, who needs to fix the links in his posts! "Mom who smoked dodges jail time": More insanity from the borderland where divorce court meets the nanny state. Via How Appealing. "The View from Out There": What other countries' textbooks say about American history. Fascinating stuff, via E-Pression and Mark Shea. "Lourdes 2: Countercultural pilgrimage": Lovely piece from Uwe Siemon-Netto; excerpt: "There is no other spot in the world where the ill fraternize -- in the literal sense of the word -- as intensely with the healthy as Lourdes. There is no place where strapping nobles and university professors, wonderful young men and women brimming with health, cheerfully take care of the sick for 16 hours every day, often spending their nights curled up on the floor below the foot-end of their patients' beds. "Lourdes is profoundly counter-cultural. It is a mass gathering of those who affirm the 'you' as opposed to the 'me,' which is why the West's anthropocentric, anti-Catholic and in the final analysis anti-Christian elites find Lourdes so scandalous -- pointing, often dishonestly, to the kitsch that is for sale there." Via Otto-da-Fe. |