Gadgets

I found time to play with two new gadgets this morning: the inexpensive iMic and the not-so-inexpensive Nikon D70 digital SLR.

I woke early. The sun had just risen. I could hear the birds outside. (In the summer, we sleep with the french doors open in the bedroom, and we cannot help but be awakened by bird song; this time of year I have to strain to hear it through the doors.)

Grabbing my iBook, I headed outside to sit in my pajamas and slippers, listening to the jays and the crows and the little songbirds greeting the morning. A woodpecker peck peck peck peck pecked somewhere up the hill. I tried to record some of what I heard with my new iMic and a cheap microphone (actually a remnant from my very first Mac fifteen years ago). I need a better microphone. I was able to record some birdsong, but only faintly.

The female flicker provided the best sounds:

flicker call one (994kb mp3)
flicker call two (240kb mp3)

At one point, Nemo sauntered by to see what was up:

Nemo squeaking (84kb mp3)

It was yet another beautiful day. We spent most of it outside, working in the garden. The cats helped. Sort of.

Nemo showed his might:

Simon played mind games with Flash:

Later in the evening, Simon sat outside the library window, politely asking to be let inside:

I admit there are sections in the above photos that are pixelated. This is not a result of the camera. I’ve saved each of the above as heavily compressed JPGs. In fact, they’re set at 10% quality in Photoshop Elements.

The D70 produces digital images of astounding quality.

Expect a full review of the D70 after I become accustomed to all its features and functions. It’s an overwhelming device, and it’s going to take me several weeks (at least) to learn.

For now, here’s an example of what six megapixels can do when coupled with a large CCD. (The CCD is the charge coupled device, the actual component of the digital camera that records the image. It’s far, far more important to image quality than the nominal size of the photo produced.)

Here’s a full-size detail of the above image. (Meaning: this is the actual size at which the image was recorded. The above photo was reduced drastically to fit the confines of this weblog.)

And here’s a detail of the above, magnified four times.

This final image is a detail of the above detail of a detail. It has been magnified another four times, or sixteen times the actual recorded image size.

Given that the topmost image in this series, the one that shows Simon in the window, was reduced to a little less than one quarter sixteenth of its original size, this final detail has been magnified over sixty-four 256 times! (Or, put another way, Simon’s nose in the final photo is sixteen times as wide and sixteen times as tall as it is in the first photo. In theory.)

Not bad.

Not bad at all.

Comments


On 13 March 2005 (09:06 PM),
dowingba said:

That is impressive. Up until a little while ago, I thought 4 megapixels was the max, and I had heard people claim nobody would ever need more than 4. But earlier today I saw an ad or something for a 16 megapixel camera. Imagine how much you could zoom with that.



On 13 March 2005 (09:49 PM),
J.D. said:

The number of megapixels in the final image is only one part of the equation. It’s not much good to have a 16megapixel image if the CCD is small. The CCD is what is used to actually “grab” the light in the first place. The larger the CCD, the more light grabbed, and the higher resolution the image, regardless of the number of megapixels. What’s ideal is to have a large CCD *and* lots of megapixels. :)

Your earlier point remains essentially correct, however: film does have better resolution right now, and probably will for the forseeable future. Still, quality prints can be achieved from digital photographs, especially at 4×6 and 5×7 sizes. In theory, the D70 ought to be able to provide crisp, clean images up to 12×16 or even larger. That’s certainly good enough for me.



On 14 March 2005 (08:06 AM),
Tiffany said:

You know how much I love your cats, but I never need to see cat snot that large. :)



On 14 March 2005 (08:32 AM),
Lane said:

In my office, I have a 10×15 print from my D70, printed at 300 dpi at (www.whcc.com). I did some basic interpolation during post-processing in Photoshop. My photography-centric friends at work, upon first viewing, can not tell if it is from film or digital. If you have any questions, let me know.

Garden Science

How useful is your college degree?

I often joke with my friends who have Hard Science backgrounds, ridiculing them for not studying something more useful: a social science perhaps, like psychology. This is all ironic, of course, since there are few degrees more useless than psychology and few more useful than a Hard Science.

Sometimes my lack of Hard Science education thwarts me in unexpected ways. I have a fundamental lack of understanding about electricity, for example, meaning that when I’m rewiring the house, I’m undertaking a leap of faith. I have a poor grasp of rudimentary physics concepts. Biology is basically a grand mystery to me. I may be able to tell you all about Maslow’s Hierarchy of Needs, or to discuss the fascinating merits of Gestalt theory, but I cannot tell you where the pancreas is located.

I did take astronomy in college, for what it’s worth; yet, having astronomy as one’s lone physical science isn’t particularly useful.

Usually.

Our newly tilled garden (can you believe I tilled the garden plot in mid-February?!?) is currently completely shaded by the arborvitae hedge to the south of our lot. I’ve planted peas along the fence, next to the hedge, but I have little hope that they’ll germinate without the warming rays of the sun. When will they get the sun? We know that the garden plot received full sun during the summer, but we haven’t really paid attention to it since.

This sounds like a job for Astronomy Man!

I tried to work this out in my head as Kris and I were driving home the other night: “So if Portland is just north of the 45th parallel, that means the sun is about 45-degrees high in the sky at the Vernal Equinox, right?”

“I don’t know,” said Kris, my wife, upon whom I generally rely to answer all of my Hard Science questions. She’s not so good at astronomy, though.

“I think that’s so,” I said. “And we know that the sun ranges 46-degrees from solstice to solstice, right? The tropics are at 23 degrees north and south latitudes. That means the sun must move approximately eight degrees a month. Give or take.” — I figure the sun’s apparent trajectory must “flatten” near the solstices and “accelerate” between them — “So, in theory, the noon-day sun must sit at 22 degrees above the horizon at the Winter Solstice, and it must be at 68 degrees above the horizon at the Summer Solstice. Our garden plot is ten feet wide and is only now just in complete shade. When will it be in full sun?”

I knew how to frame the problem, you see, but then I ran into trouble. I could not determine the proper geometry formula to work out in my head. Even now, I’m not sure I have enough information. I know the approximate angle of the sun at one-month intervals, and I know the length of the shadow cast by the arborvitae on Feb. 21st, so can I determine the position of the shadows one month from now? Two months from now?

I don’t know.

But I’m going to have fun trying!

(This problem would be a whole lot easier with visual aids. This web site may help.)

Comments


On 21 February 2005 (09:54 AM),
J.D. said:

I know that after my entry on learning Latin, some of you were asking yourself, “Could this weblog possibly get any geekier?”

This entry is my way of saying, “Of course! It can always get geekier…”

:)



On 21 February 2005 (10:23 AM),
Amanda said:

To answer the question posed, a Humanities degree is not useful at all.

I need a sign that says, “Will think for food.”



On 21 February 2005 (10:34 AM),
Anthony said:

I resent the comment that this is a geeky subject (even geekier than Learning Latin, which is by implication even geekier than spending hours comparing and contrasting the merits of various imaginary superheroes).

This is a Real Subject, investigating something that affects you directly, the understanding of which will enable you to actually make better decisions about the Things that Matter.

If most people are not at all interested in such things, it is their privelege and their loss.

I am well aware that my tastes do not represent those of the average reader of this blog, but I would be pleased to see more entries like this one.

I don’t think I know how to figure that problem either(anyway, I don’t feel like trying right now), but I want to hear what you figure out.



On 21 February 2005 (10:41 AM),
Anthony said:

a Humanities degree is not useful at all.

This reminds me of a quote from Wendell Berry.

“The so-called humanities probably do not exist. But whether they exist or not or are useful or not, they can sometimes be made to support a career.”

Apparently the key word is “sometimes.”



On 21 February 2005 (11:05 AM),
Courtney said:

J.D., just cut down the arborvitae and voila! there’s the sun! You don’t even have to go to the trouble of figuring out the astronomy stuff. Then again, the arborvitae stumps are a pain in the ass to dig up. Just ask Andrew!



On 21 February 2005 (11:08 AM),
Doug said:

In a previous entry, you mentioned listening to Garrison Keillor’s Writer’s Almanac. Did you ever hear Garrison read the poem about the kid in 5th grade who mis-pronounced “Des Moines”? Do you know the title/author of the poem?



On 21 February 2005 (12:43 PM),
J.D. said:

So, Nick and I spent some time this morning puzzling all this out. We used handy trig tables to determine the approximate shadow lengths at one-month intervals, but there’s a problem with our calculations.

“Isn’t your lot on a slope?” he asked.

And it is. All of our assumptions assumed a right-traingle when there’s no right-triangle to be had. (Which is not all bad. The error is in my favor, meaning we’ll get more sun than I calculated, not less.)

We came up with a technique whereby I can measure the approximate slope of the lot (at least near the garden) in order to arrive at a more precise measurement.

“You’re just doing all this to be goofy, aren’t you?” he asked after a particularly brain-wracking calculation.

“Not at all,” I said. “This has very real implications on our garden and when we can plant things. Also, I talked with the neighbors and they said we can prune the hedge” — the hedge is on their lot, Courtney, so we can’t just cut it down — “and by working this stuff out we can figure out how much we’d have to trim it in order to get sun where we want it when we want it.”

Garden science, that’s what this is. In fact, I’m going to change the entry title to reflect this! :)



On 21 February 2005 (05:44 PM),
Paul J. said:

Arborvitae=evil
Arborvitae=yucky

KILL THE ARBORVITAE!



On 21 February 2005 (07:02 PM),
Kris said:

Boy, some very hostile gardeners out there! I agree that arborvitae is none too pretty, nor does it bloom, bear fragrant leaves, provide food for native species or turn fabulous with fall foliage. But, it does have its place. In this particular case, the neighbor’s arborvitae hedge is a welcome barrier between our yards. Since it’s theirs, and we want it there, but not overgrown, we have volunteered to give it its annual shearing. A good deal all around.
Now, don’t get me started on forsythia– I can’t stand the stuff!



On 21 February 2005 (09:46 PM),
Lane said:

Quince was the bain of my existence… I paid someone to rip out a giant ‘growth’ in my yard. Beautiful, but painful … literally. The little red flowers did not last long enough for the price of all the suckers and the rapier-like thorns.

And I like my Forsythia.



On 21 February 2005 (10:18 PM),
Dana said:

Richard Feynman said:

The theoretical broadening which comes from having many humanities subjects on the campus is offset by the general dopiness of the people who study these things…

(relurk) =)



On 22 February 2005 (10:53 AM),
J.D. said:

A quick update on my garden-based astronomy. I calculated the approximate shadow lengths for the next several months, and it seems that the area next to the fence will never get sun, which makes sense, but doesn’t mesh with what I remember from last summer.

Also, most of the garden will be in full sun by the end of April, despite the fact that none of it is in full sun now. A sizeable chunk will actually be in full sun just a month from now. Trimming the neighbor’s arborvitae will help, of course, but not as much as you might think.

Also, Nick suggested that we measure the slope of the yard, so yesterday afternoon Kris and I took a board and a level and went to work. We figure that in the 83 inches of the board’s length, the ground dropped about 4-1/2 inches. Not much of a slope (so little that I didn’t actually perform additional calculations), but enough to buy us a few extra inches of sun, probably.

I’m sorry, Anthony, that I’m not feeding you precise numbers here. I left them all at home. Suffice it to say that I worked out the precise angle of the sun on the 21st day of each month, and plotted that against the height of the hedge. I used the cotangent to find the approximate length of the shadows.

I think it would be fun for me to mark my predicted spots for the extent of the hedge’s shadow, and then to compare these predictions with reality during the next few months. At any event, we ought to note the sun’s location for future reference and garden planning…

Sidetracked

I had grand plans for the weekend. I was going to study my Latin, finish a computer repair, do my chores, and maybe go see Sideways, one of the films nominated for Best Picture. I got sidetracked, though, and very little of that got accomplished.

Kris and I have been lamenting that our new house is too big for us. We have three rooms that sit essentially unused. It occurred to me the other day that we could reduce this to only two rooms if we moved all of our books downstairs. (This would have the added benefit of removing their mass from the oh-so-scary bouncy floor in the room where they’ve lived for the past six months.)

Kris agreed that this was a keen idea, and we decided that we’d work on that in the summer, after we finish the bathroom remodel.

Only we couldn’t. Once the seed was planted, the idea grew in my mind until I found myself hauling books and bookshelves downstairs. (We saw Celeste yesterday. She helped us move into this house; she was one of the army of laborers that carried endless boxes of books up the stairs. When we told her we were moving all the books downstairs, she was aghast. All her labor for nothing!)

Once I had been sidetracked by this task, I could not stop. I even took a vacation day from work so that I could stay home today and finish the job. (And all the jobs that I neglected this weekend in favor of moving the library.)

Now that the work is nearly finished, I’m mostly pleased with the result. Things aren’t perfect. They won’t be until I teach myself to build my own custom bookshelves, but I’m in no rush to do that. Maybe next year. Or the year after.

For now, we’ve added another usable room to the house, and that makes me happy.

Here are some photos:

[photo of main wall of books]
This main wall of books &mdash literature — is where the desk used to be.

[photo of reading chair]
This chair has moved only a little, but now receives soft light from the south-facing window.

[photo of chair and desk]
This is a nice sitting area now; the desk has replaced the loveseat.

(Note that these photos studiously avoid the elephant in the room. We have a reclining love seat that used to sit where the desk is in the final photo. That love seat is still stuck in the room. We can’t get it out. It’s big and bulky, and too much for us to handle by ourselves. We’d love to get it upstairs, but that seems impossible. If any of you want it, contact us — we’ll make you a deal!)


I still haven’t told the story of my craigslist swap for a new (used) digital camera. It’s the source of all my photos recently, and I can’t decide whether I’m pleased with it or not. There are things I like about it, but I’m concerned with the photo quality. I can’t seem to get the damn thing to focus properly, and often the colors seem bright and funky. I’ll have to play with it…

Comments


On 07 February 2005 (12:03 PM),
Tiffany said:

What is going to happen to the room upstairs where the books were?



On 07 February 2005 (12:07 PM),
J.D. Roth said:

That is a fine question, one to which I do not have an answer. We left the science ficton books in there, but other than that, we don’t know what to use the room for. Kris though maybe a craft room, and that sounds keen, but we’re open to other ideas.



On 07 February 2005 (03:08 PM),
pam said:

How about a karaoke room?? It would incorporate both your love of singing and cheesy 80’s music!



On 07 February 2005 (03:33 PM),
Joel said:

Cheesy ’80s karaoke on that bouncy floor?! Better doublecheck your homeowner’s policy.



On 07 February 2005 (03:54 PM),
Courtney said:

Why not make it a “World of Warcraft” room? Nevermind, I’d never see my husband. Sigh.



On 07 February 2005 (04:24 PM),
Jethro said:

Buy a pocket bike, take it upstairs, and ride it around and around and around and around and around and around and around and around and around and around and around and around and around and around and around and around and around and…



On 07 February 2005 (09:54 PM),
Lynn said:

Collapse is covered – though I can’t say that means I condone a cheesy 80’s karaoke room.

signed…your quasi-insurance person…



On 07 February 2005 (11:21 PM),
tammy said:

I have no idea what to do with the other room. I spose you could have a kid and turn it into a nursery.

The real reason i paused to jot this note is to say how much I love the color of that red room. It’s been my favorite room from the start. I could totally sit in there all day.

Hey why don’t you open a weekend bed and breakfast?



On 08 February 2005 (06:42 AM),
Amy Jo said:

JD–

Thanks for helping us move on Saturday . . . I can’t believe you moved more books on Sunday . . .



On 08 February 2005 (06:42 AM),
Amy Jo said:

JD–

Thanks for helping us move on Saturday . . . I can’t believe you moved more books on Sunday . . .



On 08 February 2005 (08:17 AM),
sennoma said:

JD, almost all digital photos need sharpening — could that be your “focus” issue? I use unsharp mask (200%/0.3pixels for nearly everything) in Photoshop.



On 08 February 2005 (11:12 AM),
Tiffany said:

Layoff Tammy!
Why can you not respect the decisions that J.d. and Kris have made for their life?



On 08 February 2005 (04:31 PM),
Tammy said:

Tiffany, relax! Have you ever heard of teasing? Mercy! Jd has never once given me any reason to believe that it bothers him if I tease him about kids.

I totally respect their decision. People tease me about *having kids*. I don’t go around with my knickers in a twist over it. I never even thought to let it bother me. It’s all in fun.

Take a chill pill.

The Power of the Internet

Here is a plain and simple story of how the internet has changed my life. (Whether or not it has changed my life for the better is open to debate.) The following is a typical occurrence; it is not unusual.

It’s Wednesday night. Kris and I are watching the goofy-fun Alias. Sydney and Vaughn, American secret agents, are posing as Russian secret agents wanting to pose as Chechnyan agents who will pose as typical Americans so that they can detonate an electro-magnetic pulse. To wipe out the stock market.

Or something like that.

A commercial comes on — I’m not sure for what — and a melancholy poppy synth piece begins to play. I catch the following words: “And all the things I had in mind for you and me, well say something new, say something new”.

I love the song.

I get up from the futon, walk three steps to the computer, pull up google and search on the lyrics. After one misstep (caused by overenthusiastic use of quotation marks), I find five matches to my search, all relating to a Swedish band called The Concretes. Most are reviews (1, 2, 3), but one is a page entitled Your Concrete Multimedia Experience. It features mp3 snippets and bits of lyrics from several songs.

I fire up Acquisition (a Mac file-sharing program — if you own a Mac, you should own this program) and search for songs by The Concretes. Before the commercials are over, before Sydney and Vaughn can resume their surreal existence, I am playing a song by a group I had never heard of two minutes before.

This is one way the internet has changed my life.


By the way, the song used in the commercial, “Say Something New”, is okay, but not as good as I’d hoped. “You Can’t Hurry Love“, however, is outstanding. (And not the song you think it is.) I’ve posted a full mp3 copy of the song here (right-click and “save as…” if, like Jeremy, you cannot get this to play with a left-click). If you like The Concretes as much as I do, I encourage you to support them by purchasing a CD (also available via the iTunes Music Store). I plan to.

(See? This is how file-sharing works. Or should work.)

Pre-Crash Comments

On 28 January 2005 (07:38 AM),
dowingba said:

It’s not how it should work, it’s how it does work. Despite what the record companies say, it has been proven beyond any doubt that file sharing actually increases record sales. The only thing hurting sales is the record companies’ own conduct, which has caused many people to completely boycott major labels.

On 28 January 2005 (08:20 AM),
Tiffany said:

Rich and I watched the new ‘Numb3rs’ show and after 10 minutes I still could not figure out where I had seen the actor playing the math genius. IMDB.com to the rescue. He played Wednesday’s boyfriend in ‘Adam Family Values’.

On 28 January 2005 (10:57 AM),
Paul said:

With much sarcasm Paul types:

The power of of the internet? I used email to contact you this summer to tell you about a great song “You Can’t Hurry Love” by The Concretes. The internet could have allowed us to express your appreciation of the song and others like it on the new album. However, you were unable to capture that moment and I am left to read that some comercial on tv has turned you on, through some research of your own, to an “outstanding” song! Don’t worry about me, I will keep telling the ad executives to place those song snipets into the ads you see so that we can share our very similar musical tastes.

Look forward to hearing West Indian Girls and Kasabian in the future! BUT YOU DIDN’T HEAR THAT FROM ME!

Viva KEXP!

On 28 January 2005 (11:12 AM),
Denise said:

We like sarcastic Paul! (At least I do.)

The internet reunited me with my old college boyfriend, who is now my fiancée and will be my husband on April 1st.

The internet also let me plan our wedding in 3 hours. Nice.

The internet reunited me with the AWL and his better half, Kris.

The internet has also allowed me to meet great people I really enjoy whom I would not have met any other way.

AND, after being laid-off for 8 months and applying for ANY job I could qualify or over-qualify for, I finally found my job from a job-posting I found on the internet.

I sound like I owe my whole life to the internet. Not quite, but my life is a whole lot better than it would be if there was no internet.

On 28 January 2005 (11:17 AM),
Jeremy said:

The mp3 doesn’t download.

On 28 January 2005 (11:20 AM),
J.D. said:

HA!

Paul is right. For once. :)

My man is on the musical vanguard, weeding out the chaff so I don’t have to. But I hardly ever listen to what he says. (To my loss.)

For the record, here’s the e-mail he sent me on Sept. 30th, nearly four months ago:

Citizen Cope – The Clarence Greenwood Recordings (Arista/RCA) Bullet and a Target is the best song of the summer of 2004!

Drive-By Truckers – The Dirty South (New West) Alt.country done well

The Concretes – The Concretes (Astralwerks) female lead singer both sensual and tough

DJ Krush – Jaku (Sony Japan) Always good

Guided by Voices – Half Smiles of the Decomposed (Matador) Some good tracks from an old school garage band

The Prodigy – Always Outnumbered, Never Outgunned (Maverick) Up-tempo!

DJ Shadow – In Tune and On Time Live! (Geffen) He keeps remixing his own stuff and it keeps getting better!

Kosheen came on to my radar screen this year and melded powerful female vocal and electronica.

PJ Harvey Uh Oh rocks, but not as an album. listen to it shuffled into similar music.

KEXP ROCKS!!!! Please support them with a check. It’s almost like listening to iTunes in my opinion.

I think what happened here is that I listened to “Bullet and a Target”, but didn’t like it. After that I let the rest of the list slide…

On 28 January 2005 (03:08 PM),
Jenn said:

If you are on a mac with only a trackpad you can hold down the option key and click on the above link to dowload the mp3 to your desktop.

On 08 April 2005 (07:55 PM),
WF said:

What a hoot! This blog was the first thing I found when searching for that same snippet of lyrics, having seen that same commercial (it’s for Target, by the way). Very helpful… saved me a lot of research.

On 08 May 2005 (10:55 PM),
ViciousMonkeyKiller said:

Ha! Ditto to what WF said.

On 11 September 2005 (05:45 PM),
krin said:

i feel compelled to tell you that i was just sitting here, surfing the net.. when that commercial came on and i thought “i must find out what that song is.” i did a search on google and found this. ha!

On 17 September 2005 (05:54 AM),
abby said:

yay! thank you! i was just searching the same song and i didn’t even have the lyrics right! horray for the internet…now i’ll go find it on itunes :)

On 04 October 2005 (06:27 PM),
D said:

“You can’t hurry love” is in the Elizabethtown soundtrack/movie. (I’m sure Cameron Crowe had the drop on it before anyone else outside of the industry did.)

On 04 October 2005 (11:11 PM),
ardvrk said:

Wow – haven’t any of you heard of AdTunes?

http://quidnunc.org/forums/viewforum.php?f=26

Google is great, don’t get me wrong, but you can narrow your search a LOT with AdTunes, and obviously the more people use it, the better it gets.

The internet is the best thing EVER. Don’t buy into their crap that it distances people, isolates them, etc. It brought ALL of us here to this site to discuss it, didn’t it? Because of a SONG? All of us, with our different lives, with our different politics, with our different computers. All united by a song – and the internet.

Battlestar Galactica

The new Battlestar Galactica series airs on the SciFi Channel this week.

You should watch this show.

If you’re interested in science fiction — even just a little — you should watch this show.

If you’re tired of the direction the Star Trek and Star Wars franchises have taken, you should watch this show.

If you liked the old Battlestar Galactica, you should watch this show.

Basically, if you think there’s even a remote possibility that you might like the new Battlestar Galactica, and you have access to the SciFi Channel, you should give the show a try.

This new Battlestar Galactica debuted last winter as a four-hour miniseries. I didn’t watch it. It received mediocre reviews, and despite Nicole‘s endorsement, I didn’t take the time to check it out. I regret that.

Since the actual series began airing in the UK in October, I’ve been grabbing each weekly installment via BitTorrent. The eleventh episode was broadcast Monday, and I’m downloading it this very moment.

At first I was disconcerted because this isn’t so much a remake of the original series as a “re-imagining”. The creators have taken the premise of the earlier show (which aired twenty-four episodes from 1978-1979), the character names and traits, even many of the situations, and then re-adapted them to suit their purposes. But they’ve done a fantastic job.


The old Starbuck and Apollo…

The revised premise:

The cylons were created by man. They rebelled. They evolved. They look and feel human. Some are programmed to think they are human. There are many copies. And they have a plan.

The cylons, machines created to do humanity’s dirty work, rebel. After many years of war, they propose peace. But they’ve secretly planted cylon agents, agents that appear human rather than mechanical, throughout the twelve colonized worlds. They cylons launch a surprise attack, nearly destroying civilization. All that remains is a “rag-tag fleet” of ships, fleeing from the cylons, searching for a new world to call home.

I love the homages the new series pays to the old. Two original episodes have been adapted to the new series, but it’s more than that. In one episode, Richard Hatch, the original Apollo, appears as the leader of a prison riot. His scenes with the new Apollo gain additional subtext when you understand that Hatch championed the cause of a new Galactica for years, only to see his version ignored in favor of the one we have now.


…meet the new Apollo and Starbuck

The Colonial Vipers — the X-Wings of Battlestar — are still here. Starbuck still swears and smokes cigars and loves to gamble, but is now a woman. Boomer’s a woman, too. Adama (still a man) is played, most excellently, by Edward James Olmos.

The biggest change from the original is that now most of the cylons take human form. (The most prominent cylon, a beautiful seductress referred to simply as Number Six, seems to exist almost entirely in the mind of the traitor, Baltar.) The old, robot-like cylons are still around, but they play a minor role.

There’s lots to praise here. The music is subtle and atmospheric, almost haunting, not bombastic in the sci-fi movie tradition. Spacecraft obey the laws of physics. The (rare) space battles are quite different from those we’re used to seeing. Best of all, this is a show for adults; there are no annoying children to detract from the main plot threads.

And, really, that’s what we have here: a series of continuing plot threads, weaving their way through the course of a thirteen episode season. The series’ tone reminds me very much of Lost, another new show from this season.

Battlestar Galactica is not without weaknesses. The acting tends toward wooden at times, especially from the supporting player. Everyone is too earnest by half. Certain plot points are belabored beyond my ability to care (though, to be honest, the plot element I liked the least — the cylon in Baltar’s mind — paid off in a big way in a recent episode). And, if anything, I long for more robots and spacefights. The show’s creators use these elements sparingly, and perhaps that’s why they carry such weight when they actually do appear. (Sometimes this show feels like The West Wing in space.)

You should watch this show.

Comments


On 11 January 2005 (05:56 AM),
Denise said:

Kris was wrong!!!

I loved Battlestar Galactica when I was a kid, and was devastated when they took it off the air. I love this entry – in only reinforced my decision to watch the series.

When does it start for us almost geeks that wait for normal TV? I don’t want to miss it!

On 11 January 2005 (06:17 AM),
J.D. Roth said:

Hm. What a horrible oversight. It would be helpful to post the schedule, wouldn’t it. It appears that the show’s normal air-time will be Friday at 7 p.m. and 10 p.m. Pacific.

Part one of the miniseries from last year will broadcast tonight from 6-8 and again tomorrow from 4-6. The second part will broadcast tomorrow from 6-8. (Which means that for the first time since my knee surgery I’ll be glued to the telly for six hours straight: four hours of Battlestar, then Lost, then Alias.)

The first episode of the new series airs this Friday at 6 p.m., followed by the second episode at 7 p.m. Next week the series settles into its regular time at 7 p.m. and 10 p.m. on Fridays.

Enjoy!

On 11 January 2005 (06:39 AM),
Peter said:

That’s two votes for the “Kris was wrong” party. The mini series was awesome so I’m really looking forward to the series, especially after your review J.D.

BTW, the schedule for Canadian viewers is Saturday Jan. 15th at 8pm EST and repeats on Sunday Jan. 16th at 6pm EST on Space.

On 11 January 2005 (08:13 AM),
J.D. said:

I’ve posted the trailer for the new Battlestar Galactica series here. It’s a 5mb Quicktime clip. (Left-click to watch in a browser window or right-click to save to your hard drive.)

On 11 January 2005 (10:03 AM),
Lynn said:

One vote for the “Kris definitely knew what she was talking about” camp.

On 11 January 2005 (10:54 AM),
Amanda said:

Make that two.

:P

On 11 January 2005 (03:04 PM),
Michael Rawdon said:

Strangely, I don’t get SciFi in my city on cable. Yesyes, I could get satellite or something, but I don’t watch enough TV to care.

Not sure whether I’d watch the series if I did get SciFi. I enjoyed the original series as a kid – but then, I was 9. As an adult, the few episodes I’ve seen have been just plain awful. And it never interested me as much as Star Trek.

On 11 January 2005 (08:03 PM),
Courtney said:

Kris ROCKS!!!

On 12 January 2005 (08:21 AM),
jenefer said:

I probably would not have watched if you had not mentioned it, but I did watch last night and will probably watch the rest just to see where it is going. I never could get into Battlestar before. I grew up on Star Trek and saw the first Star Wars on the first day at one of the few theaters showing it. The theater is now gone, but I still have my “May the Force Be with You” pin that they handed out to the diehards. We were actually first in line!

On 12 January 2005 (09:44 AM),
Mrs Darling said:

I’m sooooo with Kris on this!

On 12 January 2005 (08:40 PM),
Paul said:

JD–Sorry I didn’t respond sooner. My school computer isn’t allowing me to respond. I’m totally with you (must be a y-chromosome thing). I loved the original as a kid. Not geeky, or I guess it is not geeky if it is something that you like.

On 12 January 2005 (08:40 PM),
Paul said:

JD–Sorry I didn’t respond sooner. My school computer isn’t allowing me to respond. I’m totally with you (must be a y-chromosome thing). I loved the original as a kid. Not geeky, or I guess it is not geeky if it is something that you like.

On 15 January 2005 (10:06 AM),
J.D. said:

Rave reviews for the new Battlestar Galactica.

On 19 January 2005 (09:44 AM),
Jim Treacher said:

I really liked the miniseries, and if anything the first two episodes were better. I find the “Earthisms” kind of jarring, but that’s pretty minor. This is the show that Enterprise has been trying (and failing) to be.

On 11 July 2005 (11:34 AM),
Gopher said:

Is the new season of battlestar galactica going to be on any other popular stations (nbc etc), besides the Scifi? In canada we don’t get that station (bummer) eh:-((((
Stargate (both series) are hard to get as well.

World of Warcraft

As you may have noticed, I haven’t had much to write about lately. Why is that? World of Warcraft, a “massively multiplayer online role-playing game”, was released ten days ago, and I’ve been playing it like a man obsessed. It’s difficult to write about life experiences when I’m not actually having any! (Well, not outside of a virtual world, that is.)

Uh — what is a “massively multiplayer online role-playing game”?

A massively multiplayer online role-playing game (or MMORPG) is the technological extension of early computer text-adventures. These text adventures evolved into MUDs (such as Northern Lights, which I played obsessively about ten years ago), which were essentially large text adventures played concurrently with scores of other online users.

A computer role-playing game is similar to the Dungeons and Dragons you might have played as a kid. (Or, if you’re a geek, you continue to play as an adult.) You create a “character”, or in-game persona, which is represented by statistics defining his (or her) strength, speed, health, etc. You control your character as he kills monsters and completes quests and gathers treasure.

These games became massively multiplayer when technology allowed hundreds — or thousands — of players to share a game world simultaneously. The orcish warrior you control is surrounded by dozens of orcish warriors and shamans and priests controlled by players in Kansas, New York, and Australia.

Ultima Online was the first major MMORPG. I thought the concept appealing, but had never played any of the Ultima games, so I passed. About five years ago, Everquest debuted, and many a geek found themselves addicted. (The game became known as Evercrack because of its addictive qualities.) MMORPGs, because of their subscription-based models, are a cash cow for games companies, yet still a value for gamers.

World of Warcraft is the latest of these MMORPGs.

Enough history! Why did you choose World of Warcraft when you’ve shunned MMORPGs until now?

The short answer is I’ve played and admired the games produced by Blizzard Entertainment — with the exception of the disappointing Warcraft 3 — for a decade. They’ve demonstrated a commitment to quality that surpasses most other companies in the industry. I especially admire two things about Blizzard’s games: the simple, intuitive interfaces; and the plain yet evocative graphics.

I wasn’t certain that I’d play World of Warcraft. In fact, up until about a month ago, the prospect was doubtful. Then, however, I participated in the open beta test. I was hooked almost from the start. I didn’t fall in love with the concept, or the interface, or the game-play. No: I fell in love with the world.

You fell in love with the world?

Nick has been playing Everquest for nearly a year. To hear him speak, World of Warcraft pales in nearly every respect when compared with the former. The quests are too easy, player’s options are too limited, gameplay is repetitive, and the graphics are too “cartoony”.

The graphics may be cartoony — I hadn’t really noticed until he pointed it out — but they’re effective. I’ve seen some of Everquest, and have been wholly unimpressed with the blatantly polygon-mapped three-dimensional figures. Everything looks like it’s computer graphics.

World of Warcraft doesn’t look like its computer graphics. It doesn’t look real (and I wouldn’t want it too), but it doesn’t look like computer graphics, either. I guess Nick’s right: it looks cartoony. But whereas Nick uses the term derisively, I use it as a compliment.

A new character starts the game in one of eight home cities. (There are eight races in the game: human, dwarf, gnome, elf, orc, troll, undead, and tauren (think minotaur).) These cities are spread out over two virtual continents, and each starting location has its own peculiar charms. The dwarves start on snow-covered mountaintops. The humans start in a peaceful forest. The orcs start in a barren desert.

But as you play the game, as you develop your character, you explore more of the world. The world is vast. The world is beautiful.

You’ve lost me. I still don’t get it.

Perhaps some examples will help.

I started as a night elf, on an island near the upper left of the world map. (Let’s forget spherical planets for the moment.) The night elves live in a dark and misty land filled with tall trees and lush vegetation. There was nothing particularly spectacular about this scenery, to be honest. Fortunately, the gameplay was addictive enough to hold me captivated until I found my way off the island.

Eventually I found a ship. Because I’m reading the Patrick O’Brian novels, I spent my short boat-ride running from bow to stern, examining the vessel, its masts and rigging. Fun, but only in a limited sense. The ship docked in a town similar to the one I’d left, surrounded by shadows and tall trees. But here, at least, there were vast stretches of coast-line. And, better yet, there were areas where I could dive underwater to explore shipwrecks (while evading the dreaded murlocks).

Then I sailed to the eastern continent. I found myself in the Wetlands, a swampy area filled with crocodiles and shambling heaps of half-man, half-plant. I ran through the swamp, then into the foothills. I ran through tunnels hewn from rock. I ran up and up and up. I paused to look behind, and it seemed the entire world stretched before me. “Wow!” I thought.

I continued to run, up the steep mountainside. I came to snow-covered regions filled with wolves and bears. “Wow!” I said: as my character ran through the snow, he left little footprints behind. I ran until I reached the dwarven capital of Ironforge. “Wow! I said upon entering the city. I marvelled at the gigantic statue at the city gates. I marvelled at the vast forge in the heart of the city, molten metal dripping from the ceiling to the floor.

This was all very impressive, but it paled in comparison to what I did next. I purchased a ride on gryphon, a giant eagle-like creature that flew me from Ironforge to the human capital. For five minutes I had no control of my character, but I didn’t care. I watched, transfixed as the gryphon soared over icy lakes, over bubbling volcanoes, past pristine waterfalls, and into the city of Stormwind.

It’s something that has to be seen to be believed.

And I’ve discovered more marvels, since: the view from the bluffs of Westfall, which overlook the sea;

the stark and barren beauty of the plains where the taurens start the game; an awesome ENORMOUS wall stretching from mountain-to-mountain, resembling the Great Wall of China;

the towering Stonewrought Dam, on the face of which are carved three dwarven heads (from whose mouths flow steady streams of water);

a vast, underground mine in which goblins are building pirate ships.

Words cannot do the game justice. This world is simply enormous, and much of it is beautifully rendered, if only in a cartoonish style. In all the hours I’ve played so far — and don’t ask me how much I’ve played — I’ve only seen maybe ten percent of all there is to see. Maybe ten percent. Probably more like three percent. Or less. The world is vast.

So you love the world. How’s the rest of the game?

I think the rest of the game is pretty damn good, too. Not perfect, but very good. (Nick disagrees. His most common comment regarding any aspect of the game seems to be, “Well, that’s not how Everquest does it. Everquest is better.”)

The interface is fairly intuitive. Things work in a logical fashion, and most options can be found where you’d expect them to be found.

(There are exceptions, however. I’m playing a hunter. Hunters may tame pets. I, like almost every other hunter I’ve encountered, have been quite flumoxed trying to figure out how to train my pet. I figured it out eventually, but it took a lot of trial-and-error.)

Combat is a major aspect of the game. It’s handled well. You can set up macros to automate commonly repeated combat actions. To prevent disputes, the first person to inflict damage upon a monster is the person who gets to loot its corpse. To take on more difficult areas, you can group with up to four other people, forming a party.

Quests are another important part of the game. From the very beginning, one encounters computer controlled characters who give quests that provide substantial rewards. If a character has a quest available, a yellow exclamation point appears above his head. When one completes the quest, a yellow question mark appears above the character’s head.

There are several different types of quests: kill X monsters, collect X objects, deliver this item, etc. All of the quest types become repetitive after a while; it would have been nice had Blizzard been able to develop others. Maybe in a future expansion…

I quite enjoy the tradeskill aspect of the game. In addition to his major profession (warrior, rogue, mage, priest, hunter, warlock, druid, paladin, maybe one or two others), a player may choose two minor professions (herbalism, alchemy, mining, ironworking, engineering, skinning, leatherworking, enchanting). There are also three “free” professions that anyone can dabble in: fishing, cooking, and first aid.

Developing these secondary professions is a sort of mini-game in the bigger game. To develop herbalism, for example, one must be every-vigilant for special plants that can be harvested for profit. The more the skill is used, the more proficient your character becomes at it. If he picks dozens of basic plants, he’ll become skilled enough to harvest more complex plants.

My hunter is able to skin large animals, and then to convert these skins into leather armor. Simple, perhaps, but fun.

Do you have any complaints about World of Warcraft?

A few, but they’re mostly minor. Indeed, many of them are quibbles. There are still some odd bugs in the game. These will probably fixed with time. Two things I’d dearly love to see are more incidental non-player characters — computer-controlled people walking to-and-fro on the roads, for example — and weather effects. (It pains me that the game has no weather; I long to see snow and wind and rain.)

There’s a lot of running in the game, especially when you’re exploring. This isn’t so much a complaint as an observation (and a warning). It took me 45 minutes the first time I travelled from my elven homeland to the human capital. Most of this was spent running.

I can’t think of many other complaints right now.

This isn’t really a review, is it? (It’s more like an ad.)

No, I suppose not. It’s not very comprehensive. How can it be? I’ve barely touched the surface of this game in the two weeks I’ve been playing it.

But I can tell you this: I love World of Warcraft. It’s the most fun I’ve had playing a computer game in, well, maybe ever. Only time will tell if the game has what it takes to join Starcraft and Civilization II on my short-list of favorite games. From what I’ve seen, though, it’ll not only make the list with ease, it’ll rise to the very top.

And this is why you’ve been rather quiet for the past two weeks?

Yup.

I’m playing on the Proudmoore server (Pacific time zone) under the name Maturin. I’m a 21st level night elf hunter, though I spend most of my time in the human lands. If any of you are playing, and have a character on Proudmoore, I’d love to group with you.

Comments

On 03 December 2004 (01:41 AM),
schmela said:

Ironic that you posted this today, as I just posted a screenshot to my weblog that my husband took while he was playing WoW this evening.

My husband is really liking the game as well. I occasionally watch over his shoulder, and it is pretty cool to see him run and fly all over. The graphics are really quite stunning. Your screenshot of the gryphon flying over the icy landscape is quite beautiful. I’ll send him over here to read your review. I think he has created a few characters…not sure which server he plays on.

On 03 December 2004 (06:43 AM),
Joel said:

I had heard that as you gain levels the quests become more complex and start to take on more of a “plot”. Is this all guff? I won’t stand for guff, you know.

On 03 December 2004 (07:13 AM),
J.D. said:

Oh, no — that’s certainly not guff, Joel. Even at low levels plots are weaved into a semblanced of a plot, which is nice. It’s these plots that redeem the repetitive nature of the quests, actually.

The game world is divided into seventy-five some large countries, or zones. Each zone represents many hours of gameplay, and each is filled with quests, many of which are interrelated.

For example, I found the area called Westfall when my hunter was level 13. Westfall is a farming region southwest of the human capital. It’s perpetually fall in Westfall (just as the game doesn’t have weather, it doesn’t have seasons). The harvest is over, but the country has been overrun by huge mechanical monstrosities that are rampaging through the fields. There are a couple of quests in which you’re required to eliminate these mechanical monstrosities.

But the large plot in the area involves a group of thieves who have been raiding the farms. What starts as a simple quest to oust the thieves from one particular farm becomes prolonged into an epic struggle to actually excise their presence from all of Westfall. There is a series of maybe a dozen quests tying this plot together, the climax of which is a raid into The Deadmines to kill the leader of these rascals.

One of the screenshots above — the one with four characters standing around on the deck of a ship — shows the conclusion of this quest, the point at which Westfall has been freed from corruption. I came close to seeing this very thing last night (close to finishing this quest), but ran out of time.

There are certain large, climactic quests, such as The Deadmines, found throughout the game. I believe these are all found at the end of a plot-line. During most of the game, you’re in the world with every other player. However, for these final quests, you and your party enter what is called an “instanced dungeon”. An instanced dungeon is an isolated copy of an area created especially for you and your group; there might be half a dozen other groups doing the exact same quest in separate instances. This model is necessary because these final quests are long, and they’re hard. My group spent ninety minutes hacking through The Deadmines yesterday, but still did not finish before I had to leave. We probably had half an hour left. (The whole thing might have gone quicker but I ran out of arrows and had to fight hand-to-hand. Then, as we neared the end, the entire party was massacred when we accidentally drew the wrath of a half-dozen pirates at the same time.)

So, I guess what I’m saying is that there are limited number of individual quest types, and that’s disappointing. However, Blizzard’s done a great job of milking these few quest types for all possible variety.

On 03 December 2004 (08:23 AM),
Amanda said:

Geek alert! Woo woo woo!!!

On 03 December 2004 (08:23 AM),
jenefer said:

Interesting that you should pick this topic today. There was an article in our local paper today covering the current GenCon in Anaheim. I am interested because Bob, my husband, was an early player and then dungeon master 30 years ago when the game started. Dungeons & Dragons is celebrating 30 years this year at the convention. As an early dabbler in D & D, I have watched as the game became less and less social over the years and the article spoke to this fact. On-line there is no verbal interchange among players and no “real” contact, as opposed to virtual contact. Every night it is a fight over the computer and the ‘games’, unless Adam is at work. Some entire weekends are spent on the computer in the clutches of the current game. I was going to say “What a waste of time”, but that is only my opinion. Bob and Adam get great enjoyment out of playing and discussing the game both with each other and friends. It is a great topic of conversation if you are involved. I would rather live in the real world or read.

On 03 December 2004 (10:28 AM),
Jon said:

I’m jealous. My home PC is not beefy enough for WoW, so there is little chance to play it soon. Sounds fun though!

I’ve been playing Warcraft III single player again after a long haitus. I really like it. I agree it is different, but I think the differences have merit.

On 03 December 2004 (11:02 AM),
dowingba said:

That’s funny. I also haven’t been writing much lately due to my recently purchased Xbox (Crystal Edition). Yes, remember our debates about computers vs console gaming? It seems we’ve inadvertantly switched sides, J.D….

On 03 December 2004 (02:03 PM),
NO Scott said:

JD or anyone – do you guys have any reviews or know people who play City of Heroes? I am thinking about getting it for Christmas.

On 03 December 2004 (09:06 PM),
Lisa said:

Good grief, J.D.! Have pity on my modem!

On 04 December 2004 (03:43 PM),
tammy said:

Nick and JD, you both need kids.

On 07 December 2004 (03:38 PM),
Nick said:

Tammy, I’ll take a couple kids if they are mute and can cook and clean. Oh, and they have good jobs so they can support me.

On 06 June 2005 (08:26 PM),
Dahr said:

Plz do somehtign about ninja looting a mage just looted brain hacker from me and a warlock nin book for Quel Serra

unWired

We went to an election party last night. The group oozed Liberalism: we were teachers and government employees, we were well-educated, we were non-religious.

Our hostess had planned several anti-Bush activities (to go along with the ubiquitous unplanned Bush bashing). We took a Bushisms quiz, attempting to pick out Bush quotes from quotes of former U.S. Presidents. (Not difficult.) We whacked a Bush piñata. And for our final act of blatant disrespect (civil disobedience?) we doused a Bush effigy with gasoline and set it aflame in the street.

(Some of this made me uncomfortable. I’m not sure why. I dislike Bush, too, but I felt like we crossed a line somewhere, going beyond rational anger to irrational hatred. And this is coming from the guy who actually lit the effigy; Kris couldn’t get a match to light.)

When our anti-Bush activities were over, we gathered around the television to watch the election returns.

It was painful. And not because of the results (though those were painful, too.)

At home, before we left, I’d been glued to my computer for two hours, following Yahoo! and CNN as they tallied the early returns. Over and over and over again, I relaoded the pages, mostly to no change, occasionally to a few more electoral votes for Bush, a few more for Kerry. I felt connected. I was receiving instantaneous feedback. I had access to the information I wanted when I wanted it. How were returns in Florida breaking by county? A click of the mouse, and I had those numbers.

I took my iBook to the party, hoping to access an internet connection, either via landline or by leeching off a nearby wireless node. No such luck.

I was at the mercy of the television.

Reception was poor (no cable), and mostly we watched PBS, which seemed obsessed with ten minute segments on the historical context of this election rather than showing the election returns themselves!

The local news channels were worse: “Let’s show ten minutes of Tom Potter claiming victory in the Portland mayoral race. Who cares about that Presidential race, anyhow?”

I cared! And the fact that I was sitting there, on the couch, watching punditry without any hard data drove me crazy!

“And let’s only show the results for a half dozen races at the bottom of the screen.” Argh!

“Do you want to leave?” Kris asked, sensing my frustration. I did.

At home I lay in bed, laptop on my chest, reloading the same pages again and again and again. I watched Kerry inch closer in Ohio — “He’s within 100,000 votes now, down from 180,000!” — I watched his lead in Iowa disappear.

I was in control of the information, I determined which data was most important to follow.

Television is no longer relevant to me.


Earlier in the day, I heard an interesting piece on NPR: a commentator was discussing the most divisive elections in United States history.

He claimed that the election that most divided us was held in 1896, between William McKinley (and Vice Presidential candidate Theodore Roosevelt) and William Jennings Bryan (of Scopes monkey trial fame (or infamy)). The U.S. was coming out of a severe economic depression. Also, there was a great debate regarding the country’s growing prominence on the world stage — what role should we play?

The Presidential election of 1968 was also especially divisive, the commentator said. Race, economics, Vietnam — these ripped the nation in two. He then explained how 1932 was a contentious election year, primarily because we were in the midst of the Great Depression.

As this man spoke, I realized that these elections were spaced exactly 36 years apart. I further realized that the election of 1860 — 36 years before 1896 — was also divisive (how had it not made this commentators list?). What’s more, this current election was coming 36 years after the last instance he’d cited.

So now I’m dying to know: is this 36 year cycle a regular thing? It’s held true for 150 years, but will it continue to hold true? Will 2040 produce another election in which the country is sharply divided? And what about 1824? And 1788? Were these years of great polarization with the United States?

The older I get, the more interesting history becomes…

Comments


On 03 November 2004 (08:55 AM),
Denise said:

Ok, this is probably not going to be a popular comment…but I have to say it. Regardless of whether you support the current President or not, I feel you should respect the office. I don’t think a Bush piñata displays that respect. I find it sort of offensive, almost as much as burning our nation’s flag. It also seems very juvenile.

Mocking his Bush-isms is one thing…but hitting his likeness with a stick?

On 03 November 2004 (09:02 AM),
Kris said:

I agree, Denise, it is somewhat childish, but I feel it truly gets at the actual RAGE many of us feel for this “president”. He has done a greater disservice for the dignity of the office than anything I’ve seen in my short lifetime. Lied to Congress, lied to the U.N., lied to the American people. I love this country, and I feel extremely patriotic, but I cannot and will not hide my contempt for such a religious fanatic as George W. Bush. Here’s to four more years of the same bullshit.

On 03 November 2004 (09:03 AM),
George W. Bush said:

Once again, they misunderestimated me.

On 03 November 2004 (09:08 AM),
J.D. said:

No, I think it’s a good comment, Denise.

I mean, I really dislike Bush. A lot. More than I’ve ever disliked any other President. (I haven’t really actively disliked any other President, actually.) And I do take delight in the stupid things he says and does. And I do think he’s an idiot.

But I felt uncomfortable last night because I knew we had crossed some undefined line in my moral world. I felt what we were doing was wrong, if only to a small degree.

The fact remains that Bush has brought a lot of this emnity upon himself, however, in his casual disregard of existing policy (re: environment, etc.), his casual disregard of the world community (re: Iraq, etc.), his casual disregard of anything but his own beliefs. He’s so certain that he’s the mouthpiece of his god that I sometimes worry we’re headed for a theocracy.

I want to respect Bush, but I can’t. Not even just because he’s the President. However, I believe I oughtn’t be so openly disrespectful, you know?

On 03 November 2004 (09:08 AM),
Denise said:

And I agree with you, Kris. I think it is also offensive that Bush took us from 100% world support to almost none in less than two years. And I understand that part of the reason I am proud to be a US citizen is because people are free to express themselves.

For some reason that just left a bad feeling in my gut. And you know, I don’t think it is so much the actual act, I think it makes my heart sink because it shows just how divided our country is – as J.D. discusses later in the post. The one thing I always want is that the US stands as a united front to the world. We obviously aren’t that right now, and it saddens me. Plus, we are more susceptible when we are divided.

To rethink, that is what really makes my gut uneasy.

On 03 November 2004 (09:10 AM),
al said:

If Bush were smarter than a piñata, then I would say it’s wrong.

On 03 November 2004 (10:08 AM),
J.D. said:

Some poetry to mark the occasion…

From “The Second Coming” by W. B. Yeats:

Turning and turning in the widening gyre
The falcon cannot hear the falconer;
Things fall apart; the centre cannot hold;
Mere anarchy is loosed upon the world,
The blood-dimmed tide is loosed, and everywhere
The ceremony of innocence is drowned;
The best lack all convictions, while the worst
Are full of passionate intensity.

Fits my mood precisely.

On 03 November 2004 (03:26 PM),
mart said:

are you surprised that this nation is a bunch of crazed jesus-worshipping facist dipshits? proud to be american? hah. this whole country stinks worse and worse everyday. and unfortunately there’s no coming back from this trend. PNAC has had this dialled in for some time, this latest election merely proves that their PR has been taking hold. we’ve just told the rest of the world “fuck you, we’ll do whatever we want to…”. burning bush in effigy? man i’d burn the real guy given the chance… and i’d damn sure have a zippo as backup for the matches.

On 03 November 2004 (04:14 PM),
mac said:

Mart, why do you live in America again?

On 03 November 2004 (06:33 PM),
Joel said:

Speaking for mart (always a dangerous thing) I’d guess that it’s merest happenstance. His parents are Americans, but, having spent some formative years abroad, he identifies more with the Old and Third Worlds than with we the New.

Part of me wishes we’d planned ahead and made an effigy last night, I felt so helpless and at a loss. Man, our guy got killed. It’s funny to feel that way after such a close race, but my expectations (modest as they were) were clearly too high.

The thing about the pinata and the effigy for me, (and this may be so obvious that it’s going unsaid [and listen to me stammer and mutter, I’ve clearly lost some confidence waking up in this new america]) is that they suggest and symbolize a willingness to perpetrate physical violence for one’s cause. What would have happened if some smug neo-cons had motored by and hooted at your demonstration? Would you have shouted curses at them? Thrown a flaming bit o’ Bush? Grabbed the conveniently placed single-bit axe and…?
Of course not. We’re liberals. We may not be holier-than-though, but we certainly are wussier than.

On 03 November 2004 (07:06 PM),
Hayduke said:

Hell, burn him for real I say. You’re all just a bunch of wussy liberals anyway. Why I don’t remember y’all being so uppity 4 years ago when the fucker stole the presidency in the first place. 4 YEARS AGO was our legitimate time to take to the streets and cause some unrest. Shit, he’s had 4 years now to be the president and this time he won the ‘lectoral college and the pop’lar vote outright. Its’ too late now–he’s “entrenched”.

Liberals are a bunch of pussies, playin’ fair 4 years ago and now…TOO GODDAMN LATE!

We’re befuckered.

4 More Wars!

On 03 November 2004 (09:04 PM),
dowingba said:

This entire thread, comments and all, offends me. And I’m Canadian. Get over yourselves. The man won the election, fair and square, just as he did in 2000. If you didn’t vote for him, damn. If you did, yippee. There’s no need for a black background, as if this day is a black stain on the history of the United States. Slavery? Sure. But a man being democratically elected to the seat of President of the United States? Grow up, people. There are real issues in the world to focus on — irrational hatred of someone just because he’s a member of a different political party just isn’t responsible anymore.

On 03 November 2004 (11:00 PM),
J.D. said:

Dowingba, you make some fine points, as usual, but you’re too quick to dismiss other people’s beliefs as “irrational hatred of someone just because he’s a member of a different political party”. I don’t think anyone here hates President Bush just because he’s a Republican. If he were a Democrat and making the same decisions, we’d hate him just as much. What we object to are his decisions. Many of us object to his messianic belief system, a well-documented and scary aspect of his Presidency. You’re right that many of us are acting like poor sports, but can you blame us? Had the Kerry won the election, Republican weblogs would be filled with the same stuff.

On 04 November 2004 (05:20 AM),
dowingba said:

I certainly can’t predict what would happen in alternate realities; but I can tell you that almost every conservative weblog I read publicly took a pledge to support whomever wins the election, whether it be Bush, Kerry, Nader, or Dracula. Also, while I never took any sort of pledge, I did state publicly that I didn’t care who wins, as long as it’s a clear and decisive victory, in hopes of quelling the bitterness generated by the 2000 election.

The only campaign promise (from 2000) that Bush hasn’t kept was his promise to run a “modest” foreign policy. Obviously that promise had to be broken in the wake of 9/11. Any President acting differently would simply be failing the country they took an oath to serve. That being said, Kerry’s foreign policy is almost identical to Bush’s, so I don’t understand where the incredible amount of bitterness is coming from.

We get it, you don’t like Bush — he mispronounces words and has big ears. Damn. Fix your Democratic Party and maybe you’ll win next time. Until then, support your president because doing so is good for America. It’s what America needs right now.

On 04 November 2004 (06:02 AM),
Joel said:

dowingba said: “Until then, support your president because doing so is good for America. It’s what America needs right now.”

Um, nah.

So, I’m excited by this 36-year cycle thingy. In 1824 there was another election that was too close to call as neither Andrew Jackson and John Q. Adams won a clear plurality of votes. So the decision went to the House who selected Adams, who was actually 10 points behind Jackson in the voting. The campaign was also particularly nasty, with charges of drunkenness, criminality, and poor fashion-taste being exchanged.

On 04 November 2004 (07:53 PM),
Mom (Sue) said:

It’s interesting that the entries here are mostly on the liberal end of things (other than dowingba, who is a Canadian). It may be that conservatives are a bit afraid of expressing their thoughts here. I would say I’m on the conservative side, and I’m a bit afraid of expressing my thoughts here. :-) To boil it down to what influenced my voting, the two main things were the history John Kerry had of flip-flopping on the issues, and that I felt it was better to go with the devil I knew (Bush)than the devil I didn’t know.

Super Powers

Who’s your favorite superhero?

The other night, Harrison and I had a conversation about our favorite superheroes. He’s only five, and hasn’t been exposed to many, so he’s mainly familiar with the Big Names: Superman, Batman, Spiderman, The Hulk. None of these are his favorite, though. He has an astronomy book featuring drawings of the Justice League of America, and he likes some of the more obscure members of that group: Plastic Man, J’onn J’onnz. He doesn’t even know these heroes’ stories, he just likes the way they look.

Who’s my favorite superhero? That’s a hard question to answer. It was never Batman or Superman — I always thought Superman was pretty lame: “Oh, look: it’s God in a colored tights. Whee!” I liked Spiderman for a time when I was younger, but that infatuation was short-lived.

I can’t remember having a favorite hero. I always had favorite superhero teams. Though I preferred Marvel comics to DC, it was the DC superhero teams that I liked: Justice League of America, The Legion of Super Heroes, etc. These teams always seemed BIGGER and more important than Marvel’s Avengers or The Fantastic Four.

The one exception, of course, were the X-Men. What kid doesn’t love the X-Men? The answer in the late-seventies was “many kids”. The X-Men were a marginal group with a small but devoted following in the comic world. I came on just as they exploded into popularity, with the Dark Phoenix saga. (Issue #135 was my first X-Men comic.) For six years, the X-Men were my favorite superhero group, and my favorite comic book.

But I didn’t care for Wolverine, everyone’s favorite. I didn’t buy his mini-series. I didn’t like the subplots with his rage and his quest to find himself. I liked Cyclops, the stoic leader of the team. I liked the energy rays that shot from his eyes. I also liked Arial — Kitty Pryde — who had the ability to “phase” through matter, like a ghost. Her powers were lame, but she was my age, and cute. It’s true: I had a crush on a comic book character.

If I were forced to choose a favorite superhero, it would probably be Daredevil, the “man without fear”. He was one of my favorites when I was a boy, and one of my favorites when Frank Miller was in control. I haven’t read any Daredevil since Miller left in the mid-eighties, in fact. But based on what I did read at the time, I liked Daredevil: a blind attorney who works for the poor, whose superhero powers (radar sense, acrobatics, intelligence) are a little unique yet also very plausible. Daredevil’s a good guy. I like him.


Dana recently pointed me toward the This American Life episode about superheroes. In one segment, people are asked, which superpower would you rather have: flight or invisibility? Why?

I’d rather have flight. I’d love to be able to soar around, to see the world from above, to get away from it all. I’d also like — provided I could fly at a suitable speed — to be able to bypass traffic, to commute by air. I’d like to be able to fly for purely self-indulgent purposes. I would not use my power to fight crime.

Which power would you prefer? (And, once you’ve answered that, if you could choose a single superpower, what would it be? Or, if you have a superpower already, what is it? (For example: my superpower is the Power to Organize Objects. I can sort books or CDs or clothes or cans of soup like nobody’s business. You can’t touch me when it comes to organizing objects.))

Comments


On 29 April 2004 (09:09 AM),
Joel said:

My favorite is definitely Spiderman. He’s strong, but not that strong. His main ability is his super-agility, just dodges his opponents until something clever occurs to him. He’s also one of the few superheroes who consistently has a sense of humor. That was my big problem with Daredevil. When I was reading comics regularly, the 80s, DD never cracked wise, just ran around being tortured and noble.

Gotta go with invisibility. I don’t think this is because I’m a sneaky person, or that I want to watch women shower… hmmm… NO, it’s just that invisibility is so much more useful than flight. Especially for fighting crime: “Oh, look, there’s a guy flying up to catch me and take me to the police. Allow me to blow him away.” With invisibility, there’s no “Oh look…” moment at all, it’s just WHAM!- crook knocked unconscious with a frying pan they never saw coming.



On 29 April 2004 (09:18 AM),
Jeff said:

No question about it. The best superhero of all times was Ralph Hinkley, aka The Greatest American Hero.

A small side note about JD’s real world super powers. Like Superman, JD doesn’t use his super powers at work, lest we should discover his true identity.



On 29 April 2004 (09:33 AM),
Kris said:

Perhaps Jd could apply his superpower to his closet? Shazam~

Are super heroes a guy thing? If forced to choose, I’d have to pick Nancy Drew. She can disarm crooks with her wits and bravery, charm thugs into confessing their crimes, and stake-out secret bandit gatherings. Even better, Nancy also is skilled at ballet, voice, sailing, tennis, and is always up for a little charity work or doing a favor for someone in need. She drives a cool car, has an adoring, yet seemingly platonic, boyfriend and always knows the right thing to say in any situation. Go, Nancy!



On 29 April 2004 (10:20 AM),
Masked Avenger said:

I think we can all agree that for most men Wonder Women was there favorite super hero, at least for a little while when they where kids. I can remember JD running around the house in his costume with his golden lasso. He was just so cute.

My favorite super hero is the MASKED AVENGER for he has the power to make snotty little comments about JD and then vanish off the face of the internet.

Wait a minute, I guess everybody has that power.
Maybe I am the only one who likes to use it?



On 29 April 2004 (10:23 AM),
Denise said:

Joel – you would have to make sure your frying pan was also invisible, although a floating frying pan would be pretty mesmerizing…so it still might work.

Ah, nothing tells the truth like a brother and a wife, eh? That is too funny.

Ok – I’m going to get blasted for this, as I did in my own blog many moons ago, but my favorite super hero is Aquaman. I know, he is a lamo, and has no ‘real’ power…but he can breathe underwater and talk with aquatic creatures. I for one, with my huge fear of drowning, would love to be able to breath under water, much less be able to make whales, sharks, jellyfish, dolphins, etc. do what I wanted them to do. Plus his hair NEVER gets messed up, ever, even in the water. That is definitely a super power. What can I say – I always go for the underdog.

My super power? Super Clutter Gal – I can make a clean room cluttery faster than Wonder Woman can lasso the bad guy.



On 29 April 2004 (10:26 AM),
mac said:

what about the Wonder Twins?



On 29 April 2004 (10:35 AM),
Tiffany said:

I agree the power of invisibility is more useful at fighting crime then flight. However, I would still pick flight. Especially if I could fly really fast, I couple come home every night from my meetings, no more hotels!!
Jd, I will take on you ability to organize any day.
See you in a few hours.



On 29 April 2004 (10:38 AM),
J.D. said:

The Masked Avenger is pretty cool. He forgot to tell his origin story, though:

Once a mild-mannered box salesman, he mocked his older brother for publishing his thoughts for the world to see. “Dumb!” he cried. And then one day he fell under the sway of the evil Weblog, was sucked into Foldedspace. Now he lurks in the shadows, clad as the Masked Avenger, occasionally springing forth with a pithy comment or a clever lie!

The Masked Avenger eats a lot of Ding Dongs, likes to wear perfume, and is addicted to the Oregon Lottery scratch games. He can frequently be found skulking around beauty pageants. He likes to listen to Britney Spears.

The Masked Avenger’s greatest power is the ability to Tell Funny Stories. In this, he is only matched by one Mr. Miron (who is also a “cunning fellow”, as Tammy pointed out yesterday).



On 29 April 2004 (10:39 AM),
Lynn said:

Wonder twin powers — ACTIVATE! In form of — a great white shark! Heads up Aquaman.



On 29 April 2004 (10:45 AM),
Denise said:

Lynn, if you turn yourself into a great white shark, you would only be enabling Aquaman to control you.



On 29 April 2004 (11:27 AM),
Dana said:

Which power would you prefer?

Flight, for many of the reasons you’ve stated — commuting is the biggy, plus just the ability to be so unencumbered when moving about, free from the tyranny of urban planning and architecture…

I probably wouldn’t fight crime, as the power of flight alone doesn’t really make crimefighting any easier. I would probably talk to the fire department, though, and offer my services at ‘airlifting’ people who might be otherwise inaccessably trapped on upper floors.

…if you could choose a single superpower, what would it be?

This seems to have devolved into “which superhero do you like the best” instead of “what power do you like the best”, but I’ll play both =)

Power: If I could have a single power, it would be one of telekinesis, telepathy, or the ability to change shape (both Plastic Man and The Martian Manhunter can do this, interestingly enough). Changing Shape is probably an obvious one, if you think about it and my situation. Telepathy not so much because I want to spy on people’s thoughts, but because I think it would make it easier to make people understand one another.

Telekinesis is just pure utility, really. It’s just really handy — I complain about needing more arms all the time, and with TK that problem is basically solved =)

Hero: As for superheroes, well… It depends on the criteria. Who do I think is the neatest? Or who do I think is the most heroic? Or perhaps even who do I think is the most entertaining?

Zot! (a.k.a. Zachary T. Paleozogt) is definitely high on my list. The 2000 online “Hearts & Minds” wasn’t as good as the old ’80s series, but a lot of the charm is still apparent. Zot! left a big imprint on my psyche when I read it. If JD had a crush on Kitty Pryde (who is now called Shadowcat, by the way, having dropped Ariel some time ago), I had a crush on Zot. And Woody. Kind of like Jenny did, come to think of it.

I always found Ambush Bug to be pretty amusing, if less surreal than The Flaming Carrot. Unfortunately, a lot of it’s humor is entirely dependent on knowledge of obscure bits of comic book industry trivia, so that kind of limits it right there.

Ambush Bug started out, technically, as a supervillain, whose primary ‘job’ was annoying Superman. Most of his early appearances can best be thought of as a Bugs Bunny cartoon, with Superman in the role of Elmer Fudd and ‘Bug in the role of Bugs.

As a kid I quite liked both of the Sid & Marty Croft live action hero shows, the made-up-for-TV Isis and the Fawcett Captain Marvel based Shazam!. Sadly, the TV show never included any of the more esoteric members of the Marvel family, such as Hoppy the Marvel Bunny, nor did it really include any of the rogue’s gallery, such as Mr. Mind and the Monster Society of Evil. Amusing Trivia: Captain Marvel’s face was purposely modeled after a popular actor of the time — Fred Macmurry. Most people don’t realize that in the late fifties and early sixties, Captain Marvel was actually the most popular comic book character in print.

The Linda Carter Wonder Woman TV show (plus Wonder Woman’s membership in the Superfriends) indicated she was a major heroine, but she was kind of, well, dopey. The Invisible Jet was pretty cool, but her various abilities just didn’t hang together. I mean, Batman had ‘bat-stuff’. Aquaman had water-related powers. Wonder Woman was descended from greek amazons, was super strong, could deflect bullets with her magic bracers, had an invisible jet that responded to her telepathic commands (I suppose it was magic, although I don’t recall the Amazons being famous for having invisible transportation), and a magic rope. Riiiight. I mean, even for a superhero that doesn’t really hang together very well.

I appreciate her more now that I know a bit more of her publishing history, and because more modern authors have worked to give her a bit more depth. But still, I have trouble feeling that she’s very relevant nowadays.

I did, however, rather like the Yvonne Craig Batgirl from the Adam West-era Batman TV show. Go figure.

I quite liked the Watchmen cast, particularly Night Owl II, Rorshach, Dr. Manhattan, and Ozymandius, although after you’ve read the series it’s kind of hard to really think of any of them as all that heroic. And aside from this one work, they don’t really have a continuing presence in the Superheroic Landscape. The inspiration for Rorshach, however, The Question, did have a brief late ’80s/early ’90s resurgance, and the series was pretty good for the first 20 issues or so.

The golden age Sandman, particularly as presented in The Sandman Mystery Theater series, was also full of Pulpy-goodness.

In the Flaming Carrot-esque surreal vein, there’s the uber-obscure Flex Mentallo, Man of Muscle Mystery, who appeared in a couple issues of the ’90s ‘Existential’ Doom Patrol, and then spun off into a four-issue limited series that has never been collected or reprinted. It’s still pretty keen, but like Ambush Bug it relies a lot on a certain amount of meta-awareness of comic book superhero history. I still laugh at the varieties of Mentallium — Black, Shocking Pink, Ultraviolet, and Lamb-and-Turkey.

Unlike Ambush Bug, however, Flex Mentallo is very definitely not a parody.

The ‘mainstream’ superheroes I have a soft nostalgiac spot for, though, are probably The Fantastic Four on the Marvel side, and Superman on the DC side.

Whatever Alan Moore is writing tends to be pretty high on my list, too, though. I quite like the America’s Best Comics line he created in the ’90s — Promethea (keen Alex Ross picture) with her nifty supporting cast, like The Five Swell Guys, and the Ultra-Archetypical Tom Strong and his family are particular favorites.

Is it obvious to anyone else besides Dana when I’m baiting her?

Grrrr.

Alan Moore once described Superman as, “A man who came from the sky and did nothing but good.” Sounds kind of like God to me, eh?

Kris: Are super heroes a guy thing?

Mostly, but not as much as most people think. To wit, see Action Girl online.



On 29 April 2004 (11:52 AM),
Lynn said:

Darnit! I didn’t read that part about Aquaman’s abilities. My plot was foiled.

I liked the Invisible Girl and how you could see her because of the dashes that outlined her form. So, when I think of invisibility, that’s what I think of. Of course, I would prefer flying to being outlined in dashes.



On 29 April 2004 (01:36 PM),
Dana said:

The Masked Avenger is pretty cool. He forgot to tell his origin story, though:

Are you sure he wasn’t bitten by a radioactive mask?

The Masked Avenger eats a lot of Ding Dongs…

Which, as we all know, have inferior crime-fighting capabilities when compared to the far more widely-deployed Hostess Fruit Pie.



On 29 April 2004 (03:27 PM),
Denise said:

The raspberry-filled, powdered donuts have much more crime-fighting ability…they suck the crook in with their sugary, sweet taste and then immobilize them as they turn into a rock in the bad-guy’s stomach.



On 29 April 2004 (04:34 PM),
Susie said:

I can see some drawbacks with invisibility – especially in a sprawling metropolis. Let’s face it: people would bump into all the time. Shape-changing is definitely the better option. I think it would also come in much handier in day-to-day scenarios. Between flying and invisibility I’d go for flying from a laziness point of view. I also think I’d find the spying aspect of invisibility a bit embarrassing.

My boyfriend often extolls the virtues of Spiderman over most other super heroes on the basis that he is just a regular Joe and nothing ever goes right for him in his human incarnation, but I’m not sure that’s something I look for in a super hero. I’m not sure who my current favourite is, but as a child I had a long-standing thing for The Man From Atlantis. As appealing as the more unconventional super powers are, I think I would chose some sort of super strength that does not manifest itself in my appearance. I would use this power to fight petty crimes and vandalism and would have to invent some sort of catchphrase like the Hulk’s – just to give my adversaries fair warning (which they would, of course, simply scoff at – allowing me free reign). In fact, can I pick Beatrix Kiddo?



On 02 May 2004 (08:01 PM),
nate said:

Hah, I’m living this out right now thanks to City of Heroes. It’s been fun to create and play my own superhero concepts.

My no. 1 fave is Spider-Man, for most of the reasons already mentioned here. I’m also a big fan of The Shadow (and, I have to admit, the campy Alec Baldwin movie adaptation), thanks to his cool, Jedi-like mind powers. The Hellboy movie turned me on to the comics, which are great and wonderfully drawn by Mike Mignola. A very interesting canon there.

By leaps and bounds (heh), my favoritie supergroup is the League of Extraordinary Gentlemen (no, I didn’t like that movie, too). Mix my favorite literary genre (late 19th century) with Alan Moore and a steam-punk universe, and you have pure geek heaven for me. I own the first volume of the series in paperback form, and will get the second volume once it too comes out in paperback. Every panel is so packed with references to period literature and crime fighters, they actually released an annotated guide to the first volume. It’s great.

I tend to avoid Superman and Batman, though the recent developments of the latter are good (Gotham City is reduced to ruins after a devastating earthquake and subsequent reign of terror by villains escaped from prison). Supe is just too boring, by and large, and as far as Batman goes: being rich isn’t a superpower! Take away the Batmobile, Batboat, Batcopter, Batbelt and Alfred, and Bruce Wayne’s got jack.



On 03 May 2004 (02:35 PM),
Lynn said:

I’ve often thought that “The League of Extraordinary Gentlemen” would be a great lit course to take/teach. Of course, it would take several terms to delve into the books/heroes/authors that inspired the comic book series.



On 03 May 2004 (04:53 PM),
Joel said:

Volume II of TLoEG is out, I read it while waiting for Aimee at the mall. I give it a Meh-plus.
Nate, I slavered over City of Heroes for several weeks buy could never pull the trigger to buy it. I guess I’m still recovering from Star Wars Galaxies.



On 04 May 2004 (09:32 AM),
Dana said:

Volume II of League benefits greatly if you’ve previously read H. G. Wells War of the Worlds, not to mention The Island of Dr. Moreau. I actually really enjoyed the prologue section from the first issue, which takes place actually on Mars, mixing John Carter, HG Wells, and even C.S. Lewis’ visions, among others.

Great stuff!

If you really want to break your brain with obscure references, though, you can’t beat Top Ten, also leaping from the mind of Alan Moore. I think you’ll all agree that I’m pretty geeky, but I’ve got nothing on the combined might of Alan Moore, Zander Cannon, and Gene Ha. Every single panel has, generally, five or six references to comic books, television shows, books, or movies. Just a random example — in issue 10 or so, King Peacock goes to Grand Central, the interdimensional transport hub (think an airport).

I started to write from memory, but when I checked the online annotations (done by the same guy who annotated League) and found out I was mixing two or three panels. Still, go look at the annotations for issue #8, specifically the first panel on pages 20 and 21. Good grief.

I’m guessing City of Heroes is an MMORPG — if you’re looking for something self contained, hunt up a copy of Freedom Force. Lots of Silver Age inspired goodness.

Oh, and Nate — Yeah, The Shadow is almost always cool. Even Alec Baldwin couldn’t ruin him =) I actually liked The Phantom movie, too, which was even cheesier, if that’s possible.



On 04 May 2004 (08:57 PM),
nate said:

Dana: Oh, and Nate — Yeah, The Shadow is almost always cool. Even Alec Baldwin couldn’t ruin him =)

Ruin? Hell, Baldwin has that Shadow laugh down so good it gives me chills. Totally perfect, exactly how I imagined it (I never liked the laugh from the old radio dramas — too Vincent Price).



On 04 May 2004 (10:17 PM),
J.D. Roth said:

I’m reading a bunch of old anthologies right now, especially early Daredevil. It seems to me that Stan Lee’s writing on Daredevil is much different than his writing on the Fantastic Four of the same era. This, to me, lends credence to the theory that Kirby was actually doing a lot of the writing when they partnered. (Kirby only had a hand in a couple of Daredevil issues — he did layouts for a young John Romita; it’s strange to see Kirby compositions with somebody else’s art: big arm in the foreground but no Kirby lines!)

I must say that reading early Daredevil, and flipping through my Essential Tomb of Dracula volume 2, has made me appreciate Gene Colan’s art. I never would have liked it when I was a kid (I liked Byrne and Bill Sienkiewicz and Paul Smith — I hated Steve Ditko (still do), Don Heck, and, yes, Jack Kirby (I still don’t like Kirby), but most of all I hated generic DC art as typified by Curt Swan (and this isn’t meant as bait, Dana — I really hated it)). I don’t know much about Colan. Was he still drawing in the late seventies and early eighties. Which books? I’m anxious to get the first volume of Essential Tomb of Dracula back from Joel. (I loaned it to him on the day I bought it!) Had I known I liked Colan’s art so much, and that I’d be curious about the Dracula mythos (about which I know nothing), I would have waited to loan the book out! :)

I wonder: if I were 35 in 1980, which books would I buy? Would I still think X-Men was all that? Would I be more in tune with Tony Stark’s alcoholism problem? Would I like DC better than I did as a kid? Less?

I’ve considered choosing a few comics to buy each month, but I think I’ve decided against it. I’ll pick up a few here and there, and if something strikes my fancy, maybe I’ll buy it. I recently bought an issue of Justice League Adventures (cool story, lame cartoony art), The Flash (lame all the way around), and Green Lantern (lame naked chick and bulging muscle art, but cool story).

For now, though, I should probably stick to compilations like Marvel’s Essentials and Masterworks, or the DC Archives, or the various trade paperbacks. I’m ready to dive into Love and Rockets, too, I think. Have any of you ever read it?

Enough geeky comic book talk. It’s time to actually go read some comics (League of Extraordinary Gentlemen volume one, issue three)!



On 05 May 2004 (08:25 AM),
Dana said:

JD — Colan’s been around since the 50s. He’s one of the “Old Guard”, like Swan, John Romita (not JR Jr. — his dad), Carmine Infanto, and those guys.

I think he did some Flash back in the 60s, but I don’t know why I think that. Shrug. Or, then again, Google could prove me wrong… Lots of war comics, some Captain America, couple of Firestorm issues. Looks like he’s done a bit of everything.

if I were 35 in 1980, which books would I buy?

Hmmm.

I dunno. I didn’t really start collecting comics until 84 or so. I suspect you still wouldn’t like DC (you don’t now, for example — except for Kamandi, apparently). You’d probably be reading Marvel’s Epic, though.

Justice League Adventures (cool story, lame cartoony art), The Flash (lame all the way around), and Green Lantern (lame naked chick and bulging muscle art, but cool story)

JLA — That’s a kids book, you know, specifically a comic book version of the Justice League cartoon on the Cartoon Network. All of the DC “Adventure” books are comic books tied to the tv-show “Dini-verse” (The animated Batman, Superman, and, now, Justice League all share a self-contained continuity) and use that distinctive Bruce Timm art style.

The Flash — The Flash has had periods of being “cool”, but overall Wally West just isn’t the Flash that either Barry Allen or Jay Garrick were. I’ve never really liked him. Bah.

GL — Oh, you mean “Crab Face Guy”? I gather they modified his mask, finally. The current incarnation of GL is the least flavorful that GL has ever been. For some reason the writers of GL have slowly dismantled all of the interesting elements of the GL canon — only one guardian left, only one GL left, Hal Jordan first a super-villain, then ‘resurrected’ as The Spectre. Blah.

Now if you want real GL goodness, either watch one of the GL-centric episodes of the aforementioned JL cartoon (Hey, look! Kilowog! Tomar-Re! Kanjar Ro! Katma Tui!), or go hunt up the absolute classic “Morgo doesn’t socialize”, written by Alan Moore. That Tomar Re — such a kidder!



On 05 May 2004 (08:50 AM),
J.D. said:

JLA — That’s a kids book

I’m not sure how one makes this distinction. And, yes, it’s quite obvious that all of the “Adventures” books are based on the cartoons.

Justice League Adventures doesn’t have a story exploring sexuual orientation like the issue of Green Lantern I bought, but the story was of a similar level to both the Flash and Green Lantern issues. Its quality was better than either of the other two. It’s just he artwork I didn’t like, but I could become used to it with time.

Leafing through the comics racks, I have no interest in anything X-Men anymore. It used to be one of my favorites, but now there’s just too much. It’s overwhelming. And, from what I can tell, it’s all soap opera-esque.

I should point out that I hate the Marvel tendency toward what looks like computer-assisted art. I hate the glossy paper they print on. The books themselves are unappealing, so I’m less likely to purchase them.

Some of the DC titles have the same problems, but others — including the ones I bought recently — are printed on a standard papery-feeling paper and have traditional pencil and ink artwork. I’m always going to prefer this format. And, what’s more, these books are cheaper than the others.

All this having been said, I still prefer anthologies and compilations. More bang for my buck in a longer-lasting format. And if I’m going to buy single issues, they’re usually going to be from smaller companies or independents: Action Girl, Powers, Alan Moore stuff (yes, I know it’s technically DC0, etc.

I’d love to see Marvel compile some of their old Western comics. I’d buy that compilation in an instant. It amazes me that some of my favorite compilations recently have been non-superhero: Sgt. Rock, Conan, Tomb of Dracula, Howard the Duck, etc. I want to see more of this stuff. It’s what I think helps stretch what comics are…



On 05 May 2004 (08:51 AM),
Dave said:

I read a relatively large number of comic books, primarily because a) I borrow them from JD, and b) the Multnomah county library does a pretty good job of stocking them on the shelves. Usually they’re the anthology type of books. One the I read just recently really typified the objection that I have to most recent comic books. “Ultimate Spiderman”, of which I’ve read vol 4 and vol 6, encompasses early Spiderman. It looks to me like it’s much more closely based upon the movie than on the past books. The stories are good, the art is decent and it does a good job of capturing the “essence” of Peter Parker.

So why does reading it make me feel uncomfortable? Mary Jane Watson gets thrown from the Brooklyn Bridge by the Green Goblin, not Gwen Stacy. She’s rescued by Spiderman and lives (not dies like Gwen Stacy). Spiderman’s secret identity is known by Mary Jane and by SHIELD. Nick Fury is a 35 year old black (Asian Indian?) guy (but still with an eye patch) who’s pressuring Peter to become a SHIELD agent when he graduates from highschool, etc.

The same thing, from what I’ve seen, is happening in the X-Men titles. Since when was Wolverine the key to the X-Men, the founding operative? Answer- never. But in the newer books, just like in the movies, he’s very much the key to the group. So much for Cyclops and Beast, much less people like Colossus.

It seems like a lot of the historical aspects of the heros are simply being re-written. Granted, this will need to occur just simply because the characters are pretty static but the world is changing around them. Things need to change. I recognize that it’s not particularly plausible to have Nick Fury still hanging around after having served in WWII. On the other hand, there are a lot of good stories and history that seem like they’re being left behind. I feel guilty about supporting that by reading the newer books. On the positive side of things, at least the newer stuff is fairly good, generally speaking.

As for choosing my power, I think I’d choose telepathy. In my line of work it would be very useful.



On 16 July 2005 (01:44 PM),
ron gregory said:

How did the cartoon character Underdog,get his super powers ?

Host Hunt

I’ve been researching web hosts over the past several days, preparing to move foldedspace.org to one offering more space and a lower price.

What is a web host?

Foldedspace.org, and every other web site, resides on computer called a webserver. This webserver is connected to the internet at all times, allowing you faithful readers to have instant access to this site’s content.

While it’s possible for a person to host a web site on their own personal computers (a la Matt and his family of sites), there are many reasons to pay another company to do this for you.

I’ve been paying Omnis Hosting to host my web site. In the four years I’ve been with them, they’ve not altered their service packages an iota. When I signed up, it cost $17/month for 100mb of disk space, 10gb of transfer, and 25 e-mail addresses. It still costs $17 for 100mb of disk space 10gb of transfer and 25 e-mail addresses.

The foldedspace.org family of web sites has grown so that it occupies about 95mb of disk space (more if I forget to clean out the stats files, or if Denise uploads a bunch of cute pictures of Ryan and I don’t remember to reduce their size). Combined, we generate about 2gb of traffic every month. Omnis’ plan is no longer acceptable.

Take a look at what other companies offer:

Company $/mo Disk Transfer E-mail Subd.
Powweb $8 1gb 150gb 650 unl.
Citizen Hosting $8 500mb 20gb 300 ???
iPowerWeb $8 800mb 40gb 400 ???
Total Choice(a) $9 850mb 12gb unl. yes
Dreamhost(a) $10 500mb 25gb 75 15
Surpass Hosting(a) $10 2gb 30gb unl. ???
Surpass Hosting(b) $15 4gb 35gb unl. ???
Total Choice(b) $15 1gb 18gb unl. yes
Omnis Hosting $17 100mb 10gb 25 no
Dreamhost(b) $20 1.6gb 40gb 375 75

Omnis Hosting provides the weakest package of the bunch. Whenever I’ve contacted them about adding a la carte features (in other words, adding more disk space at some set fee, say $5/100mb), they’ve refused to do it. They say I need to upgrade to the next plan. Even their top plan, at $27/month, only offers 200mb of storage. A change is in order.

I’m currently leaning toward Powweb. For $8/mo, they offer quite a bit of disk space and unlimited subdomains. I also like their great help forums.

Here’s my plea to you: if you have a web site (in particular, a weblog), please share your experiences with your hosting service. Who are you with? What do they offer? How much does it cost? Are you happy with them? I’m trying to make an informed decision, and the more info I can gather, the better.

Comments


On 15 March 2004 (09:56 AM),
Lisa said:

Matt H. and I both use 1&1 hosting. They ran a potentially too good to be true deal last year (3 years free). I don’t have time to figure out what their deal is now, but they’ve been reliable so far.

www.1and1.com



On 15 March 2004 (11:02 AM),
Cat said:

I’ve been with Cornerhost for a few years now, and I’ve never had a better experience. Admittedly, the online tools are not fully developed, but it’s run by a real person who understand the needs of bloggers.

The plan list is here:

http://www.cornerhost.com/plans/

Good luck on your switch–it’s always a litte nerve-wracking.



On 15 March 2004 (12:22 PM),
Jared said:

My site is hosted off of the ISP that I work for so I get it for free. However I have seen that ReadySetConnect.comhas pretty good rates.



On 15 March 2004 (12:22 PM),
dowingba said:

Something about DreamHost that does not show up in your chart is that they offer unlimited MySQL databases, even on their cheapest (500mb) plan. That means you could use a different database for each of your “family” of weblogs, if you wanted (which would speed up the dynamic loading of comment scripts and would speed up posting entries and comments as well, and so forth).

Don’t use 1and1. I used them for a while because of their 3 years free offer (which isn’t offered anymore) and, quite frankly, they suck. They’re SQL databases (each user gets 1) are embedded in other databases and so on and so on to the point that it’s ridiculously slow and unreliable. Also they don’t offer phpMyAdmin or anything to manually edit database tables and the like, and scripts such as cgi and php don’t even work properly. Their new deals aren’t good value anyway, for what they offer.

Of all those hosts in your list I’ve used (and use currently,as you know) DreamHost, and they’ve been great so far (about a week). I’ve used 3 different webhosts in the past 6 months, and I think I can sniff out a crappy host now from a mile away.

Again, I will recommend you go look at the DreamHost support forums to find out just what kind of a company they are. I think you’ll be pleased at the honest way they run a business. They’ve been around since 1997, too, which gives added stability (they won’t just go out of business all of a sudden, for instance).

DreamHost has the most advanced control panel I’ve ever seen, also. Every option you could ever want is available. You can run PHP as CGI, edit databases, create database hosts, edit .htaccess permissions. I’m just very impressed. But I’ve only been with them a week or two so…



On 15 March 2004 (12:29 PM),
mac said:

I use Ipowerweb…But unfortunately, I don’t have any idea about if they’re good or not. I’ve never had any problems with them and they seem fairly cost effective.



On 15 March 2004 (12:43 PM),
dowingba said:

PS: I’ve said it before and I’ll say it again: Shared hosting is the equivelent of living in a dorm. It’s tolerable, but you’ve gotta get your own place if you want to ever be fully content.

Only I Have the Power to Absorb All Data

I guess that title only makes sense if you’ve been hanging around here a while (and maybe not even then)…

My new G5 has turned me anal-retentive with my data.

Ever since my first computer (an Apple Macintosh SE) in 1989, I’ve simply dumped all of my old data onto a new hard drive without regard for organization. Over the past fifteen years, I’ve accumulated a lot of data, and it takes more and more time to transfer it to a new machine. And when it’s transferred using the Dump Method, it becomes very difficult to sort through it.

With this new machine, I’ve decided to be more methodical. I am slowly transferring the data, making certain that every file is in its proper place.

Of course, all I’ve really focused on so far is music: I’ve been ripping all of our CDs into iTunes. Didn’t I already rip them all onto the PC? Aren’t all of our songs already in mp3 format? Yes, they are. But when I did that first rip, several years ago, I had no concept of ID3 tags (the header information in an mp3 file). I made sure the file names were consistent (“U2 – I Will Follow.mp3”), but I didn’t do anything with the ID3 tags.

iTunes bases its entire organizational system on ID3 tags. It’s a wonderful organizational system: very flexible, easy to search, highly customizable, and, best of all, capable of creating amazingly complex “smart” playlists. (“Make a new playlist with all of the jazz songs between 1960 and 1970 but don’t include Dave Brubeck or any song with the word Love in the title.”) Without solid ID3 tags, this is impossible.

So, I’m being anal-retentive about my ID3 tags, especially the Genre tag. Sometimes it’s tough. Into which genre does Rickie Lee Jones fall? Are Wham! pop or synthpop? Is Elvis rock, pop, or, as I finally decided, oldies? I had to create some genres to match my collection. I have a lot of old-time radio shows, so Radio is a new genre. Kris and I think of an entire subclass of music (Natalie Merchant, Alanis Morrissette (whose name I can never spell correctly), Suzanne Vega) as “Chickrock” or “Bitchrock”. I have a huge collection of pre-1930s music, and despite its actual genre, I’ve classified it all as Vintage.

Over the past several days, I’ve managed to rip 5397 songs into iTunes. That’s 21.70gb of music, which would play for 16.4 days from start to finish. And I’m only to Hank Williams. I still have all of the compilations left, and all of the classical music, and all of the electronica, and the 101 CDs that are in our CD player.


After I finish absorbing all my music, I’ll absorb all my photographs.

Initially I feared that process would be long and arduous. I intend to re-scan many of my photographs, touching them up in Photoshop Elements before transferring them to iPhoto. Apparently the newest version of iPhoto (which I have not actually looked at yet) has several new iTunes-like features that help sort photographs.

Jeff came over yesterday and we scanned in some more recent photographs of Noah (the new photographs, when I’ve processed them, will be found here). I was shocked at how quickly we were able to scan them. On my iBook, it would have taken more than a minute for each photo, but on the G5 each took about ten to twelve seconds. Holy cats! This will certainly take the drudgery out of absorbing photographic data.

When I’m finished with the photos, it’ll be time to absorb all of my textual data: college essays, old web sites, e-mail I’ve saved since 1993, poems, stories, weblog entries. It would be nice if I could find an iTunes-like application for text documents, but I’m not holding my breath. I have fewer text files than music files anyhow, so sorting everything by hand ought to be okay.


Only I have the power to absorb all data!

Comments


On 18 January 2004 (11:08 AM),
Dana said:

What, you mean something like this (which wouldn’t work for you, as it runs in emacs), or this (which is a gnome tool, but should be useable under OS X)?



On 18 January 2004 (11:26 AM),
J.D. Roth said:

Hm. Thanks for the suggestions, Dana, but neither of those are anything like what I’m looking for.

What I want is an application to organize and group text documents, much as iTunes does for music.

The main view would comprise a “library” of all of the documents, which could be easily filtered, as in iTunes, based on document title, author, creation date, type, etc. “Playlists” of documents could be created so that it would be possible to, say, group all documents about money or about music.

I really doubt there’s anything like this available. (The closest I’ve seen is xPad, but it’s only got the germ of what I’m after.) I’m half-way tempted to write something myself. It’d be a good experience…



On 18 January 2004 (11:30 AM),
J.D. Roth said:

Like this but for text.



On 18 January 2004 (01:23 PM),
Dana said:

Hmmmm. By ‘playlist’, I assume what you *really* mean is what amounts to a folder, or perhaps ‘view’, right?

That sounds a *little* like piles, which is a rumored upcoming MacOS feature. I gather piles are primarily chronological, and organized less by type than by time (although perhaps I’m wrong on the details).

It also sounds a lot like the mystery “database filesystem” which is coming Real Soon Now in some version of Windows.

Of course, you could get a similar effect by storing all your text documents in a database with appropriate meta-data (which is all that iTunes is doing, really)…



On 20 January 2004 (07:45 AM),
Joel said:

My colleague Andy is currently scrolling through one of the many humorous photoshop contests on FARK, which made me suddenly want to photoshop a version of that wonderful Fantastic Four panel that this blog references. Dana could be Reed, JD could be J. Storm, but who would be the Thing, strapped onto that terrible melty thing?



On 20 January 2004 (09:20 AM),
Dana said:

Intertwingle – An old proposal of Jamie Zawinski that never came to anything, but also sounds rather related to what you are looking for…

(And Joel, I’d much rather be Sue than Reed… =) )



On 20 January 2004 (02:25 PM),
Joel said:

Of course, thoughtless of me. And I’m very glad you didn’t want to be Felicia- the whole superhero dating a handicapped person freaks me out.