It's Your Supreme Court
The Democrats are collecting questions for Judge Roberts in his confirmation hearings, and, yes, I'm looking at you, Counsellor. (Via Metafilter.)
31 July 2005
30 July 2005
Cats of the World Wide Web
No, Sarah Boxer, the reason cats feature so heavily on the internet has nothing to do with their self-referential intensely navel-gazing lifestyles, and it's certainly not their ability to ignore their owners' internet time. It's because they'll get up between you and the keyboard until you feed them. They don't like flash photography much, so that's as good a way as any to deter them or otherwise make use of their intrusion. With dogs, when they interrupt, it means you have to take them for a walk.
No, Sarah Boxer, the reason cats feature so heavily on the internet has nothing to do with their self-referential intensely navel-gazing lifestyles, and it's certainly not their ability to ignore their owners' internet time. It's because they'll get up between you and the keyboard until you feed them. They don't like flash photography much, so that's as good a way as any to deter them or otherwise make use of their intrusion. With dogs, when they interrupt, it means you have to take them for a walk.
Searching for Geppetto
The design that's been approved for the new PATH hub at the former WTC site look pretty cool, but then again, I think I'd feel like I was being swallowed by a giant, skeletal whale.
The design that's been approved for the new PATH hub at the former WTC site look pretty cool, but then again, I think I'd feel like I was being swallowed by a giant, skeletal whale.
29 July 2005
The Day Before
I finished Umberto Eco's latest, The Mysterious Flame of Queen Loana, on the train in this morning. I've been a fan since discovering The Name of the Rose, even through The Island of the Day Before, and in another way especially his essays, so when I saw the reviews of this one, I did my usual: I didn't read any more of them than enough to know that this was an "illustrated novel", experimental in applying images as part of the text. Although I did also get the impression that it wasn't particularly a success, I was very pleased just the same to get it for my birthday (thank you, M.), and by-and-large I can say I enjoyed reading it. It isn't, however, a success.
Queen Loana starts out well, as the story of a man who has lost his memory following an unspecified illness, except for everything he's ever read. This leads him, and the novel, into a search for his past through the textual evidence he's left behind growing up, at which point the novel spirals into a maniacal list-making exercise in nostalgia, unrelieved for the next two thirds of the book, at which point, having suffered a relapse, we spend the remainder reliving his childhood from the point we departed consciousness through to late adolescence, a significant portion of which was recently published as a short story in the New Yorker, where it was a lot better for the redactions.
The writing is still good, for all that, and there are moments throughout that lead to - unfortunately unfulfilled - expectations almost sufficiently thrilling in themselves, leaving me disappointed that nothing promised was ever really met. Even for fans I'd say, go ahead, buy it, if you must, but wait for the paperback. Meanwhile, I'll be more cautious next time I'm buying Eco's fiction.
I finished Umberto Eco's latest, The Mysterious Flame of Queen Loana, on the train in this morning. I've been a fan since discovering The Name of the Rose, even through The Island of the Day Before, and in another way especially his essays, so when I saw the reviews of this one, I did my usual: I didn't read any more of them than enough to know that this was an "illustrated novel", experimental in applying images as part of the text. Although I did also get the impression that it wasn't particularly a success, I was very pleased just the same to get it for my birthday (thank you, M.), and by-and-large I can say I enjoyed reading it. It isn't, however, a success.
Queen Loana starts out well, as the story of a man who has lost his memory following an unspecified illness, except for everything he's ever read. This leads him, and the novel, into a search for his past through the textual evidence he's left behind growing up, at which point the novel spirals into a maniacal list-making exercise in nostalgia, unrelieved for the next two thirds of the book, at which point, having suffered a relapse, we spend the remainder reliving his childhood from the point we departed consciousness through to late adolescence, a significant portion of which was recently published as a short story in the New Yorker, where it was a lot better for the redactions.
The writing is still good, for all that, and there are moments throughout that lead to - unfortunately unfulfilled - expectations almost sufficiently thrilling in themselves, leaving me disappointed that nothing promised was ever really met. Even for fans I'd say, go ahead, buy it, if you must, but wait for the paperback. Meanwhile, I'll be more cautious next time I'm buying Eco's fiction.
28 July 2005
A Dingo Has Cut the Wire
So Telstra admits it can’t sustain equality of service in rural areas to that of the cities. Where’s a Wichita lineman when you need one? No, seriously, what’s the problem here? Maintenance? Installation? Mobile coverage? I suppose maintenance and installation really go hand-in-hand, although the former would be the greater burden, I expect, than the latter, since the population growth seems centered on the cities. Nevertheless, even inclusive of providing enough signal relay towers the issue presents itself more as budgeting than as actual costs, not budgeting enough in order to pad other areas, like profits. This often happens in large corporations, regardless of government regulation, although that can add a layer of bureaucratic costs eating into the operation. And with thieves like Steve Vizard in the upper echelons, acting as if there just isn’t enough money that isn’t theirs, it seems as likely an explanation as any other. I don’t object in principle to the full privatization of Telstra, but without substantial competition, they need a closer eye on them than they’ve even been getting. Maybe the new guy can manage things better.
So Telstra admits it can’t sustain equality of service in rural areas to that of the cities. Where’s a Wichita lineman when you need one? No, seriously, what’s the problem here? Maintenance? Installation? Mobile coverage? I suppose maintenance and installation really go hand-in-hand, although the former would be the greater burden, I expect, than the latter, since the population growth seems centered on the cities. Nevertheless, even inclusive of providing enough signal relay towers the issue presents itself more as budgeting than as actual costs, not budgeting enough in order to pad other areas, like profits. This often happens in large corporations, regardless of government regulation, although that can add a layer of bureaucratic costs eating into the operation. And with thieves like Steve Vizard in the upper echelons, acting as if there just isn’t enough money that isn’t theirs, it seems as likely an explanation as any other. I don’t object in principle to the full privatization of Telstra, but without substantial competition, they need a closer eye on them than they’ve even been getting. Maybe the new guy can manage things better.
27 July 2005
Quitting Time
I'm surprised, and I'll bet I'm not alone, to hear that, effective next Wednesday Bob Carr will no longer be Premier. It's two years before the next election, or thereabouts, so it's a bit more sudden than his stated reason of wanting more leisure time would account for, but after 10 years, he probably is pretty jack of it. Even though I find myself disenchanted with him these last couple of years, what with the rail debacle, the desalination plans, and the attempted coup in the merged City/South Sydney councils, he's had a good run, and I hope he'll enjoy retirement. I wouldn't dismiss the idea of him going up for a Federal seat, but I wouldn't be surprised if he really does go home and stay there.
I'm surprised, and I'll bet I'm not alone, to hear that, effective next Wednesday Bob Carr will no longer be Premier. It's two years before the next election, or thereabouts, so it's a bit more sudden than his stated reason of wanting more leisure time would account for, but after 10 years, he probably is pretty jack of it. Even though I find myself disenchanted with him these last couple of years, what with the rail debacle, the desalination plans, and the attempted coup in the merged City/South Sydney councils, he's had a good run, and I hope he'll enjoy retirement. I wouldn't dismiss the idea of him going up for a Federal seat, but I wouldn't be surprised if he really does go home and stay there.
26 July 2005
You’re Fired
Shame to use that title, but it’s too appropriate to the growing trend towards the abolishment of unfair dismissal protections. Peter Costello, the man most likely to succeed Howard someday, at least for now, supports eliminating this protection for all, not just Howard’s timid exemption for companies of 100 or fewer employees. While “compassionate conservatism” was never a catch-phrase here, Howard and his ilk are members of that same neoconservative revolution that would eliminate welfare and social justice programs in favor of a return to the debtors prisons and work houses of the Dickensian era. Already it’s been shown that Australia has the worst record in the industrialized world at supporting women’s right to work outside the home, and Howard’s rhetoric and the actions of his government on child care and unemployment benefits for single mothers demonstrates their conviction that women working is immoral and the root cause of the breakdown of society. This latest development in industrial relations isn’t being contemplated by the present government, but make no mistake, it will come back on the agenda. The time to support workers’ rights is now.
Shame to use that title, but it’s too appropriate to the growing trend towards the abolishment of unfair dismissal protections. Peter Costello, the man most likely to succeed Howard someday, at least for now, supports eliminating this protection for all, not just Howard’s timid exemption for companies of 100 or fewer employees. While “compassionate conservatism” was never a catch-phrase here, Howard and his ilk are members of that same neoconservative revolution that would eliminate welfare and social justice programs in favor of a return to the debtors prisons and work houses of the Dickensian era. Already it’s been shown that Australia has the worst record in the industrialized world at supporting women’s right to work outside the home, and Howard’s rhetoric and the actions of his government on child care and unemployment benefits for single mothers demonstrates their conviction that women working is immoral and the root cause of the breakdown of society. This latest development in industrial relations isn’t being contemplated by the present government, but make no mistake, it will come back on the agenda. The time to support workers’ rights is now.
25 July 2005
Party Planning
Democrats Abroad Australia has a new website, courtesy of our former vice-chairman, Scott Forbes, who has moved back to the U.S. It’s pretty much “proof of concept” at the moment, but will provide a resource for the state chapters to organize their meetings, as well as for the national group to get the word out on events and issues important to the membership and anyone else interested in American Democratic politics. There may be a bug or two to work out, but this site will eventually fully replace the use of Meetup.org, the Yahoo.com group, and other, disparate internet efforts, giving us a robust organizing tool.
Democrats Abroad Australia has a new website, courtesy of our former vice-chairman, Scott Forbes, who has moved back to the U.S. It’s pretty much “proof of concept” at the moment, but will provide a resource for the state chapters to organize their meetings, as well as for the national group to get the word out on events and issues important to the membership and anyone else interested in American Democratic politics. There may be a bug or two to work out, but this site will eventually fully replace the use of Meetup.org, the Yahoo.com group, and other, disparate internet efforts, giving us a robust organizing tool.
Pixies
I remember when I first heard Surfer Rosa, visiting my brother in San Francisco. Like many of the groups for whom I developed an enthusiasm, they didn’t last long, although unlike others they didn’t proceed through a series of personnel changes prior to disbanding. But after a whirlwind tour, complete with “authorized bootlegs” of each show, they’re officially back together and releasing a new record. I’ll buy it, too, but not without some trepidation. It’s nearly 15 years on from when they last put out a record, and that one wasn’t so well-received by the critics. I might be better off with Frank Black’s Honeycomb instead, or waiting for the longed-for Australian tour. (Thanks, Beth, for the heads-up on this.)
I remember when I first heard Surfer Rosa, visiting my brother in San Francisco. Like many of the groups for whom I developed an enthusiasm, they didn’t last long, although unlike others they didn’t proceed through a series of personnel changes prior to disbanding. But after a whirlwind tour, complete with “authorized bootlegs” of each show, they’re officially back together and releasing a new record. I’ll buy it, too, but not without some trepidation. It’s nearly 15 years on from when they last put out a record, and that one wasn’t so well-received by the critics. I might be better off with Frank Black’s Honeycomb instead, or waiting for the longed-for Australian tour. (Thanks, Beth, for the heads-up on this.)
22 July 2005
Suddenly Thirsty
It's a big ad, all right, and now I want a beer. (Thanks to The Swanker for the link.)
It's a big ad, all right, and now I want a beer. (Thanks to The Swanker for the link.)
Why Not Iraq?
Michael Costello gets it wrong, point by point. He claims the Iraq war only marginally increases Britain and Australia’s profile with the terrorists because the U.S. was under attack since 1983 and Australians were killed in Bali in 2002, prior to the Iraq invasion. These are valid points, if not precisely within the scope of the overall situation, but he then goes on to claim that the argument is that Iraq is “the cause of the terrorist threat.” No, that’s not what anyone’s saying. We’re saying going into Iraq has increased the scope of the problem. Where we were engaged in the destruction of al Qaeda in Afghanistan, we’re now engaged in an effort that has increased the recruiting power of that bloody organization. We’re not ignoring the messages from the terrorists, their claims of struggle against “crusaders,” we’re taking them very seriously, especially since we’re hearing more of this kind of rhetoric since going into Iraq. And nobody says we’d be “safe” if we’d stayed out, just that the situation might now be different, that we might be seeing few terrorist attacks instead of more and in places they weren’t previously happening, like London. This isn’t the Cold War, and Cold War comparisons don’t hold up, including deliberately misconstruing the argument over U.S. involvement with Afghanistan during the Soviet invasion there twenty years ago. It was the U.S. pull-out that allowed the Taliban to seize control and to make Afghanistan a haven for bin Laden’s training camps and planning operations, not support for the mujahideen, even though Osama was among them then. And there’s no head-in-the-sand argument here that ignoring the terrorists will make them go away, just an honest acknowledgement that the Iraq war is indeed “fostering a new generation of terrorists,” so the logical implication is just more dishonesty on Costello’s part. The only honest part of his editorial is the last paragraph, but making the rest of the argument against Iraq into nonsense is just “utter foolishness.” But what else can we expect from the Murdoch press?
Michael Costello gets it wrong, point by point. He claims the Iraq war only marginally increases Britain and Australia’s profile with the terrorists because the U.S. was under attack since 1983 and Australians were killed in Bali in 2002, prior to the Iraq invasion. These are valid points, if not precisely within the scope of the overall situation, but he then goes on to claim that the argument is that Iraq is “the cause of the terrorist threat.” No, that’s not what anyone’s saying. We’re saying going into Iraq has increased the scope of the problem. Where we were engaged in the destruction of al Qaeda in Afghanistan, we’re now engaged in an effort that has increased the recruiting power of that bloody organization. We’re not ignoring the messages from the terrorists, their claims of struggle against “crusaders,” we’re taking them very seriously, especially since we’re hearing more of this kind of rhetoric since going into Iraq. And nobody says we’d be “safe” if we’d stayed out, just that the situation might now be different, that we might be seeing few terrorist attacks instead of more and in places they weren’t previously happening, like London. This isn’t the Cold War, and Cold War comparisons don’t hold up, including deliberately misconstruing the argument over U.S. involvement with Afghanistan during the Soviet invasion there twenty years ago. It was the U.S. pull-out that allowed the Taliban to seize control and to make Afghanistan a haven for bin Laden’s training camps and planning operations, not support for the mujahideen, even though Osama was among them then. And there’s no head-in-the-sand argument here that ignoring the terrorists will make them go away, just an honest acknowledgement that the Iraq war is indeed “fostering a new generation of terrorists,” so the logical implication is just more dishonesty on Costello’s part. The only honest part of his editorial is the last paragraph, but making the rest of the argument against Iraq into nonsense is just “utter foolishness.” But what else can we expect from the Murdoch press?
Security
More bombs in London, but two suspects arrested. That’s anti-terror law enforcement in action, although the police want more power yet. But frightening as these latest attacks were, calm and reason should prevail. Our societies have plenty of power, and not just in legal mechanisms, so great care should be taken in how we change, or if we change, our responses to hatred. International cooperation is working to good effect; let’s enhance that. Searching backbacks may seem prudent; it will certainly be an inconvenience, but there are still expectations of civil liberties to be managed. Each step we take toward infringing existing rights steepens the pitch of the “slippery slope.”
More bombs in London, but two suspects arrested. That’s anti-terror law enforcement in action, although the police want more power yet. But frightening as these latest attacks were, calm and reason should prevail. Our societies have plenty of power, and not just in legal mechanisms, so great care should be taken in how we change, or if we change, our responses to hatred. International cooperation is working to good effect; let’s enhance that. Searching backbacks may seem prudent; it will certainly be an inconvenience, but there are still expectations of civil liberties to be managed. Each step we take toward infringing existing rights steepens the pitch of the “slippery slope.”
21 July 2005
Leaps and Boundaries
Like many others, last night as I looked up at the nearly full moon, I thought briefly about the space race and Apollo 11. The promised wonders of the universe never seemed closer then, but they so much further now, despite Mars landing photos regularly updated in the pages of National Geographic. Looking at the Google map, marked for where the lunar landings were, it’s maddening that so very little of the moon was ever explored, let alone that we have no outpost there. We’ve got people holed up in Antarctica year-round, but otherwise stay as close to home as we can. The spirit of adventure and exploration seems to have shrunk.
(And look: Scotty's dead. What a strange coincidence.)
Like many others, last night as I looked up at the nearly full moon, I thought briefly about the space race and Apollo 11. The promised wonders of the universe never seemed closer then, but they so much further now, despite Mars landing photos regularly updated in the pages of National Geographic. Looking at the Google map, marked for where the lunar landings were, it’s maddening that so very little of the moon was ever explored, let alone that we have no outpost there. We’ve got people holed up in Antarctica year-round, but otherwise stay as close to home as we can. The spirit of adventure and exploration seems to have shrunk.
(And look: Scotty's dead. What a strange coincidence.)
18 July 2005
Who
I’d like to hear an actually persuasive argument in favor of a national ID card on the grounds that it would help counter terrorism. I’ve heard some people say the London bombers would have had one but that isn’t an argument against such cards, but the people saying that don’t go on to explain their thinking (if you could call it that – what’s an argument without an argument? Just orders.), so I’ve yet to hear anything particularly compelling. The idea’s been mooted in the U.S. and Britain as well as Australia more than once in recent years, and it’s usually shouted down or allowed to pass away quietly, often on privacy grounds. I do hear various authorities say that privacy’s not an issue, after all we let credit card companies collect more personal data than’s being suggested here, but that’s not terribly valid argumentation. Yes, credit card companies and other commercial ventures collect information, and we hand it over and end up on mailing lists and getting sales calls at dinner: the plain fact here is that we often don’t realize the extent and meaning of what we’re signing up for. What’s being touted in a national ID is a centralized government database of . . . essentially whatever the administration in power at the time or subsequently decides to collect. Interestingly, I have heard suggestions that in addition to my Medicare number and my tax file number and my driver’s license information (no, not yet; someday, after I’ve had the money and time for lessons), and my passport and visa, I could also have my banking and credit details encoded onto the little magnetic strip, or the embedded chip, or whatever. After the RFID-embedded passport flap in the U.S., the new Australia Card may not have an auto-detection feature, but it is already starting to sound like a lot more information than I want any government to have on file for me. I already know what the banks and others do with my personal data, what happens when the Feds have my medical history and it gets hacked, or passed along for research, or sold? Believing that bureaucracy is the principal safeguard over government-held data, can the trust barrier be overcome? Is a national ID just that one step too far closer to “papers” teutonic-accented agents will demand as they buttonhole me on my way to the train station? We had these scares over social security numbers in the U.S. when that program was initiated, and despite the abuses – retailers collecting the number illegally, for example, one of the key factors in the rise of identity theft – the effect overall has been mild enough. And what about national security and fighting terrorism? Is there really a link, or can we only expect to identify the presence of individuals or of forged documents? Will the cards include known associates? Political affiliation? Is there really any hope of these things being useful ahead of the crime? You’ll have to convince me, because right now it just sounds like another way to help reduce civil liberties.
I’d like to hear an actually persuasive argument in favor of a national ID card on the grounds that it would help counter terrorism. I’ve heard some people say the London bombers would have had one but that isn’t an argument against such cards, but the people saying that don’t go on to explain their thinking (if you could call it that – what’s an argument without an argument? Just orders.), so I’ve yet to hear anything particularly compelling. The idea’s been mooted in the U.S. and Britain as well as Australia more than once in recent years, and it’s usually shouted down or allowed to pass away quietly, often on privacy grounds. I do hear various authorities say that privacy’s not an issue, after all we let credit card companies collect more personal data than’s being suggested here, but that’s not terribly valid argumentation. Yes, credit card companies and other commercial ventures collect information, and we hand it over and end up on mailing lists and getting sales calls at dinner: the plain fact here is that we often don’t realize the extent and meaning of what we’re signing up for. What’s being touted in a national ID is a centralized government database of . . . essentially whatever the administration in power at the time or subsequently decides to collect. Interestingly, I have heard suggestions that in addition to my Medicare number and my tax file number and my driver’s license information (no, not yet; someday, after I’ve had the money and time for lessons), and my passport and visa, I could also have my banking and credit details encoded onto the little magnetic strip, or the embedded chip, or whatever. After the RFID-embedded passport flap in the U.S., the new Australia Card may not have an auto-detection feature, but it is already starting to sound like a lot more information than I want any government to have on file for me. I already know what the banks and others do with my personal data, what happens when the Feds have my medical history and it gets hacked, or passed along for research, or sold? Believing that bureaucracy is the principal safeguard over government-held data, can the trust barrier be overcome? Is a national ID just that one step too far closer to “papers” teutonic-accented agents will demand as they buttonhole me on my way to the train station? We had these scares over social security numbers in the U.S. when that program was initiated, and despite the abuses – retailers collecting the number illegally, for example, one of the key factors in the rise of identity theft – the effect overall has been mild enough. And what about national security and fighting terrorism? Is there really a link, or can we only expect to identify the presence of individuals or of forged documents? Will the cards include known associates? Political affiliation? Is there really any hope of these things being useful ahead of the crime? You’ll have to convince me, because right now it just sounds like another way to help reduce civil liberties.
Non-Abuse
On the assumption that the Navy report can be trusted, I’m most pleased to hear that David Hicks and Mamdouh Habib weren’t abused at Guantanamo. John Howard’s suggestion, however, that we mustn’t forget that the allegations against them were “very serious” – training with al Qaeda and joining that group post-September 11 – don’t excuse their treatment or, indeed, have anything to do with whether they were abused, especially, in Mr. Habib’s case, including rendition to Egypt for torture outside U.S. jurisdiction. The reports in last week’s New Yorker, where the participation of health care professionals in “breaking” prisoners, using torture-resistance training methods, was presented with disturbing corroboration from within the military, suggests that the Navy report would only ever have reached the conclusion it did, howsoever “cynical” that may be. If the methods are official practice, then they are not abuse, are they? Nevertheless, we’ve gone on from there to Abu Ghraib, and the military’s physicians and psychologists may be exceeding their ethical boundaries under new directives. This makes the report rather less than reliable as the basis on which to judge the treatment of prisoners.
On the assumption that the Navy report can be trusted, I’m most pleased to hear that David Hicks and Mamdouh Habib weren’t abused at Guantanamo. John Howard’s suggestion, however, that we mustn’t forget that the allegations against them were “very serious” – training with al Qaeda and joining that group post-September 11 – don’t excuse their treatment or, indeed, have anything to do with whether they were abused, especially, in Mr. Habib’s case, including rendition to Egypt for torture outside U.S. jurisdiction. The reports in last week’s New Yorker, where the participation of health care professionals in “breaking” prisoners, using torture-resistance training methods, was presented with disturbing corroboration from within the military, suggests that the Navy report would only ever have reached the conclusion it did, howsoever “cynical” that may be. If the methods are official practice, then they are not abuse, are they? Nevertheless, we’ve gone on from there to Abu Ghraib, and the military’s physicians and psychologists may be exceeding their ethical boundaries under new directives. This makes the report rather less than reliable as the basis on which to judge the treatment of prisoners.
13 July 2005
Compromise?
Who wants a compromise on the Patriot Act? It’s one of the worst pieces of legislation ever enacted, developed and put in place by Ashcroft to entrench intrusive police-state powers in the Federal Government, exploiting a moment of fear for a power-grab. I suppose I’ll settle for an extension – nothing permanent, mind you – but I’d rather see the whole thing expire according to its original sunset provisions.
Who wants a compromise on the Patriot Act? It’s one of the worst pieces of legislation ever enacted, developed and put in place by Ashcroft to entrench intrusive police-state powers in the Federal Government, exploiting a moment of fear for a power-grab. I suppose I’ll settle for an extension – nothing permanent, mind you – but I’d rather see the whole thing expire according to its original sunset provisions.
Ghosts
For a few years back in my first NYC apartment in Queens, I used to experience episodes of sleep paralysis. I’d have the sensation of someone sitting next to me on the bed, invisible, oppressive, although not malevolent, and I would be unable to move or speak, certain, however, that if I could do either, the spectre would leave. Usually, after what seemed an incredible effort, I would be able to move, to roll over, and the spell would be broken. Because I was sleeping in an apartment full of second-hand furniture, including the bed, wherein someone may have actually died, and where the previous tenancy of the flat may have been suspicious, it seemed perfectly reasonable to believe there was indeed some undispelled ectoplasmic entity hanging about, but I was younger then and more inclined towards such fancifulness, in addition to which, I’d never heard of “night crushers” or the old hag. The phenomenon stopped after a while and hasn’t since recurred, about the time I moved to Manhattan. Perhaps my recollection of the timing, however, is just another mental lapse, and it had actually stopped earlier, as inexplicably as it started.
For a few years back in my first NYC apartment in Queens, I used to experience episodes of sleep paralysis. I’d have the sensation of someone sitting next to me on the bed, invisible, oppressive, although not malevolent, and I would be unable to move or speak, certain, however, that if I could do either, the spectre would leave. Usually, after what seemed an incredible effort, I would be able to move, to roll over, and the spell would be broken. Because I was sleeping in an apartment full of second-hand furniture, including the bed, wherein someone may have actually died, and where the previous tenancy of the flat may have been suspicious, it seemed perfectly reasonable to believe there was indeed some undispelled ectoplasmic entity hanging about, but I was younger then and more inclined towards such fancifulness, in addition to which, I’d never heard of “night crushers” or the old hag. The phenomenon stopped after a while and hasn’t since recurred, about the time I moved to Manhattan. Perhaps my recollection of the timing, however, is just another mental lapse, and it had actually stopped earlier, as inexplicably as it started.
12 July 2005
Howard Channels Mao
Yes, it’s time for Chairman Howard’s great leap forward. Those damn baby boomers are getting older, and as they age they’re getting persnickity, demanding things like health care and retirement security. In order to ensure that every Australian does his bit (not her bit; women need to stay home and have babies), the PM is relying on a new generation of wage slaves, workers who won’t balk at working unpaid overtime or giving up some of their holidays. It’s never been clearer what he’s after, and if you haven’t guessed, it’s to reduce your pay and your ability to obtain working conditions favorable to a work-life balance. What’s the term here? Sea changer? Forget it, your country needs you.
Yes, it’s time for Chairman Howard’s great leap forward. Those damn baby boomers are getting older, and as they age they’re getting persnickity, demanding things like health care and retirement security. In order to ensure that every Australian does his bit (not her bit; women need to stay home and have babies), the PM is relying on a new generation of wage slaves, workers who won’t balk at working unpaid overtime or giving up some of their holidays. It’s never been clearer what he’s after, and if you haven’t guessed, it’s to reduce your pay and your ability to obtain working conditions favorable to a work-life balance. What’s the term here? Sea changer? Forget it, your country needs you.
11 July 2005
Work or Stay Home
I’ve seen the ACTU ads where the woman is called in to work and threatened with dismissal when she asks, “what about my kids?” I know the ads are meant to do exactly what ads usually do: manipulate my thinking over Howard’s industrial relations changes. (He calls them “reforms,” but I’m not falling for that. I’ve worked in human resources long enough to understand what he’s really selling.) Now, after the unions’ ads, the government has pitched in their own sell, with full-page advertisements in the major papers extolling the benefits and attempting to refute the claims made against their proposals. If you’ve been willing to buy the Howard line all along, or got your back up against the unions’ claims, or just don’t know what to think anymore, Ross Gitins has a handy analysis of the current state of the argument that’s worth a look. Before you sit back and let Howard’s newly increased majority go to his head, have a look. You may not suffer, but others will, and your turn may come before you know it. Block Howard’s Industrial Relations Reform.
I’ve seen the ACTU ads where the woman is called in to work and threatened with dismissal when she asks, “what about my kids?” I know the ads are meant to do exactly what ads usually do: manipulate my thinking over Howard’s industrial relations changes. (He calls them “reforms,” but I’m not falling for that. I’ve worked in human resources long enough to understand what he’s really selling.) Now, after the unions’ ads, the government has pitched in their own sell, with full-page advertisements in the major papers extolling the benefits and attempting to refute the claims made against their proposals. If you’ve been willing to buy the Howard line all along, or got your back up against the unions’ claims, or just don’t know what to think anymore, Ross Gitins has a handy analysis of the current state of the argument that’s worth a look. Before you sit back and let Howard’s newly increased majority go to his head, have a look. You may not suffer, but others will, and your turn may come before you know it. Block Howard’s Industrial Relations Reform.
10 July 2005
Tarnation
This documentary feature probably isn't going to feature in the next Academy Awards, but it probably should. Largely complied from old home-movie footage, it's a small, personal story, but nevertheless deeply affecting and wonderfully executed. Tarnation relies on imagery even more than images to convey its story, creating a sensual cinematic experience unusually in a documentary, let alone a (auto)biographical film. None of the people are otherwise remarkable, but the movie's tag line - "Your greatest creation is the life you lead" - is realized. These are remarkable people whose greatness lies in how ordinary they are. Tarnation is one of the best 90-minute movie experiences I've had in a while.
This documentary feature probably isn't going to feature in the next Academy Awards, but it probably should. Largely complied from old home-movie footage, it's a small, personal story, but nevertheless deeply affecting and wonderfully executed. Tarnation relies on imagery even more than images to convey its story, creating a sensual cinematic experience unusually in a documentary, let alone a (auto)biographical film. None of the people are otherwise remarkable, but the movie's tag line - "Your greatest creation is the life you lead" - is realized. These are remarkable people whose greatness lies in how ordinary they are. Tarnation is one of the best 90-minute movie experiences I've had in a while.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)