Just call me a Russkie

I recently considered applying to a fellowship in graduate school that I received an email about. It's the Dolores Zohrab Liebmann Fund, that funds a number of graduate students (primarily in the sciences and engineering) at a moderate level for a few years.

What convinced me not to apply, though, was this stipulation in the eligibility rules:

In her Will, Dolores Zohrab Liebmann stated that:
"It is my desire that no benefit from such Fellowships or scholarships be enjoyed by any person who, or institution which, supports, advocates or upholds the principles and doctrines of Communism."

Accordingly:
a) If the Candidate or the institution supports, advocates, or upholds the principles and doctrines of Communism, the Trustee reserves the right to reject the application.
b) The Trustee also reserves the right to require the Candidate to submit an affidavit, affirmed or sworn to before a Notary Public, confirming that he or she does not support, advocate, or uphold the doctrines of Communism.

Whew. What is this, the 1950s? We have to swear we're not Communists? Sounds like Senator McCarthy is chuckling from the grave.

Now, I'm not a communist, but neither am I a wholehearted supporter of unrestrained capitalism. My grandparents are proud Labor Zionists, and I have a lot of sympathy for pseudosocialist viewpoints (though I think they are often misapplied). Would that mean I 'support' some of the Communist doctrine? Probably Ms. Liebmann would think so.

Now, I understand this still exists today because it was in her will. But it just seems so... archaic. It makes me wonder what made Ms. Liebmann so opposed to Communism that this was her sole stipulation about the candidate's character or ideology.

Weird.

It's official

I'm a complete sucker for any piano-heavy music, particularly rock.

It takes me about 10 seconds of listening to stuff like this before I want to buy it.

There, I've confessed.

I want one of those floating aircraft carriers

I have so many pending posts sitting half-written in my folder that I'm not quite sure where to start, or where to find time to complete them.

Until such a time, I'll leave you with a brief review.

I recently rented Sky Captain and the World of Tomorrow, that scifi/comicy/almost animated movie from a few years ago that was a miserable box-office flop. It's been on my 'see when I'm bored' list for a while, and I had a free rental, so I picked it up.

Hmm. How to describe my reaction? On the one hand, I can see why it flopped... yet on the other hand, I had a lot of fun watching it.

In short (mild spoilers to follow), the movie looks like it's taken right out an early-20th century scifi story/comic. It is set in a 'futuristic' 1930s New York, where a journalist and her ex-lover mercenary pilot team up to find the originator of a group of killer robots that are stealing technology and resources from around the world. The film was fairly unique in that while nearly all of the sets where computer generated/animated, the actors were real and integrated rather seamlessly into the action (though they were intentionally filmed with filters to make them look more 'animated', a reversal of the usual trend).

What I really enjoyed about the movie was the sense that the creators of the film had an immense amount of fun in making it. There are little superfluous touches everywhere that point to it, from clandestine SF references to over-the-top cliches and some completely ridiculous dialogue between the two leads. It's not meant to be a movie that you watch for thinking or realism or much of anything other than escapist enjoyment.

The creators were paying homage to an entire era of SF and film-making; to airbrushed versions of 1930s New York city, to treasured mythos in early 20th century speculative literature (mad scientists, Shangri-La, etc.), to clunky robots and giant airships. The technology was completely unworkable and inconsistent - something that would normally have me complaining like no other. But it was so obviously intended to be unreal that I just sat back and enjoyed the artistry. It is similar to the feeling I got after watching Peter Jackson's King Kong; not really a good film, but one that was a work of dedication and love for a genre.

One other bit that was worthwhile was the art. As nearly every set was computer-generated, the art figured in very significantly... and was beautiful. Everything from the gritty New York to the mountain passes of Nepal to a flying aircraft carrier... all of it was lovingly crafted with an eye to detail and 'comic realism', if that makes sense.

Nonetheless, I can see why it was not successful in the box office. The plot is beyond cliched and the dialogue is ridiculously over-the-top (both intentional, I believe). I think the film would only appeal to those who are willing to look past the standards by which we usually judge movies (plot, characters, 'interest', etc.) and see the genius and care that went into the film.

In short, it's entertaining, but not really good as most films are measured. I'd recommend it for some light enjoyment, but certainly for nothing more.

Clarification

So, I posted two days ago about UNIFIL's French commander saying stupid stuff. Looks like Kofi Annan doesn't agree with him:

A spokesperson for Kofi Annan told The Jerusalem Post by phone on Thursday night that contrary to an earlier report, there was no decision to fire on Israeli planes whatsoever.

"The French units of UNIFIL have deployed with anti-aircraft batteries. The rules of engagement allow these weapons to be used only in self-defence in case a position is under imminent attack by air, no matter who attacks," the spokesperson clarified in an official statement.

"French peacekeeping forces have routinely deployed with such weapons since their peacekeepers were attacked by helicopters in Cote d'Ivoire in November 2004," the statement said.

The spokesperson also told the Post that
"any change of the rules of the engagement to allow for a more liberal use of these weapons would need to be based on a political decision by the UN secretariat and the countries contributing troops to the peacekeeping force," and added that "such a decision is not on the horizon."

Just to be honest, and all.

Welcome, readers!

Lately, I've noticed a sharp upswing in the number of 'original hits' on the site, and I know that many of my semi-frequent visitors are less-than-frequent commenters. So I thought I'd issue an official invitation to y'all to introduce yourselves. I'm hardly going to bite anyone's head off, and I'm quite interested to know who you all are, and your thoughts on my posts. Undoubtedly, all of you have perspectives on the issues I discuss that I haven't considered.

So, welcome, and feel free to stay a while!

Excuse me?!

I can't believe this.

http://www.haaretz.com/hasen/spages/775387.html

Commanders of the French contingent of the United Nations force in Lebanon have warned that they might have to open fire if Israel Air Force warplanes continue their overflights in Lebanon, Defense Minister Amir Peretz told the Knesset Foreign Affairs and Defense Committee on Monday.

Peretz said that nevertheless, Israel would continue to patrol the skies over Lebanon as long as United Nations Security Council Resolution 1701 remained unfulfilled, adding that such operations were critical for the country's security, especially as the abducted IDF soldiers remain in Hezbollah custody and the transfer of arms continue.

Over the past few days, Peretz said, Israel had gathered clear evidence that Syria was transferring arms and ammunition to Lebanon, meaning that the embargo imposed by UN Resolution 1701 was not being completely enforced.

Israel plans to inform the joint committee of representatives of UNIFIL, the Israel Defense Forces and the Lebanese Army that unless the arms transfers are stopped, Israel will be forced to take independent action, Peretz said.

So, let me get this straight. The same reluctantly-contributed force that isn't doing shit to disarm Hezbollah, stop arms transfers from Syria, has refrained from making a commitment to respond to Hezbollah rocket attacks on Israel, and in general has done absolutely nothing to fulfil Resolution 1701... is now willing to engage the Israeli Air Force in battle for overflights - not bombing, but intelligence overflights for the simple reason of keeping track of the terrorist activity UNIFIL isn't stopping.

*seethes*

Hat-tip to Sandmonkey for pointing this one out.

Fantasy that's worth something

Some time ago, I promised a commenter of mine (eddie_s) that I would try discussing some book recommendations, particularly in the fantasy/SF genres. I'm not even remotely ashamed to admit that I have a high opinion of my taste in books, and I'll gladly share my recs for the best of the best. This will be a two-part series; first, I'll discuss fantasy (of which there are much fewer good authors), then I'll tackle science fiction. Oh, and I'm not going to mention Tolkein. That should be required reading before any of this stuff.

Let's start off with some good series:

The Malazan Book of the Fallen
Steven Erikson

Rarely have I read a fantasy series of such detail, scope, and brilliance. I've found that fantasy books can be worthwhile reading through one of two ways: first, either through intricate world-building, and secondly, through brilliant characters woven into a compelling plot. Erikson manages to do splendidly at the first, and remarkably well (though not superbly) at the second. The books are long, and not for those who can get frustrated by half-explained phenomena that are only revisited half a book later, but they're definitely worth it. I wrote a post about the series in more depth back in June; read it for a more detailed recommendation. The series begins with Gardens of the Moon.

Discworld
Terry Pratchett

I'm not sure this counts as 'fantasy', but Terry Pratchett is a master of comedy and brilliant social commentary. His books are light, fun, reading, and are generally high quality (some of his early work is a bit rough, though). He has a number of story lines throughout his books, so you don't need to all of them to know what's going on - just the ones in the story line you like (there's a nice table in the Wikipedia entry that roughly orders the books by story line and topic). Read it for a light break from heavier stuff.

Taltos and Dragaera series
Steven Brust

Steven Brust is a literary genius. Of all the modern fantasy I have read, I suspect the quality of his writing is the highest. It's clever, profound, hilarious, and fun to read. That, and his plots and characters are brilliant. A big bonus is that the Taltos books are all relatively short (call it 250 pages or so) and easy to read. I'd start with the Taltos books in publishing order (Jhereg, Yendi, Teckla, Taltos, Phoenix, Athyra... uh, I think then it's Dragon, Orca, Issola, Dzur, but I'm not sure), and somewhere in there (definitely after the first three), start on his Dragaera books (Phoenix Guards, Five Hundred Years After, and the Viscout of Adrilankha books). The Dragaera books are completely different, though set in the same world - they are a parody of Dumas' wordy and swashbuckling style, are rather long for Brust (500-ish pages), and are completely hilarious - for someone who enjoys the clever use of language. I can't tell you how many times I have reread these books. (He's got some other good standalones, too, but they're a bit more specialized; ask me about them after you've finished most of his two series.)

Assassin, Liveship Trader, and Tawny Man trilogies
Robin Hobb

Robin Hobb (formerly known as Megan Lindholm) is a brilliant fantasy author who has captivated me with her characters. They are some of the most real and engaging constructs I have ever come across, and I get extremely invested in their well-being (which, given her somewhat depressing plots, are constantly in danger). I've never read her books written as Lindholm (other than Gypsy, co-written with Steven Brust), so I can't recommend those books (though I've been meaning to track them down and read them), but I've devoured everything of hers as Hobb. She wrote three interlinked trilogies all set in the same world, starting with Assassin's Apprentice and ending with Fool's Fate. I thought it was a masterpiece, and have since been lending the books out to everyone I know (to great success, and I suspect generating large amounts of income for Ms. Hobb). She's recently begun another trilogy in a different world, of which the second book was just published a month or so ago. So far, it's shaping up to be pretty enjoyable, but I'll reserve judgement until the whole thing is out. Definitely not 'epic' fantasy for those of you who like that kind of thing, but they're amazing stories.

Chronicles of Amber
Roger Zelazny

These books are short, fun, and infinitely confusing. The books are layer of plots upon plots between rival claimants to a mysteriously vacated throne where quite literally the entire multiverse is at stake. They don't end, really, since Zelazny died while the issue was unresolved. But my, oh my, are the books good.

Other series that are of interest but not quite as highly recommended:
- Tad Williams' Memory, Sorrow, and Thorn books (I personally enjoyed his standalone War of the Flowers much better, and his Shadowmarch books so far look decent, but I'll withold judgement on them until later). Oh, also his standalone Tailchaser's Song is oodles of fun.
- Robert Jordan's Wheel of Time series: I enjoyed most of the first six, but then sort of drifted off. I have the eleventh book on my shelf, but haven't bothered to finish it yet. Excellent world, but it gets lost in details sometime. Good stuff, though
- George R. R. Martin's Song of Ice and Fire; see my comments here, though I've since become even less entranced with his work
- Ursula K. LeGuin's Earthsea books - they were fun, but a bit slow... I haven't read the 'new' Earthsea books, yet
- Susan Cooper's Dark is Rising books - great series to start kids off with after reading them Tolkein, but somewhat simple in retrospect
- L. Frank Baum's Oz books - all 14 of 'em: great for kids, but again pretty simple
- Orson Scott Card's fantasy - both his standalones (Homebody, Treasure Box, Magic Street, etc.) and his Tales of Alvin Maker books. I like most of his stuff, but his books aren't really fantasy, just using that as window-dressing for a good yarn. Full disclosure: to my unending chagrin, I've never read the Alvin books.
- Guy Gavriel Kay's Fionavar Tapestry. Fun and interesting reading, but a bit cliched.

Books that will not get my recommendation, though some may be of passing enjoyment:
- Anything by David Eddings; perhaps someday I'll detail my experience reading the Belgariad
- Feist's Riftwar books - repetetive, uninspired, and poorly written
- Terry Goodkind's Sword of Truth drivel - very popular, but derivative and horribly written with exceedingly flat characters
- Terry Brooks. *yawn*
- Cook's Black Company novels. I read a few, but didn't find them exceptionally worthwhile. I guess I'm a discriminating military fantasy reader.
- Stephen Donaldson. Eh, never read his Thomas Covenant books, but I did get through his 'Mordant's Need' duology, and it was drivel. Fun drivel, I'll grant. But drivel nonetheless.
- L. E. Modesitt, Jr. Oh my, the Recluse novels were some of the worst stuff I've ever read.

These lists aren't complete; for example, I still need to read some stuff by Charles de Lint, and I've only read a handful of stories of the like of Nina Kiriki Hoffman. I'll gladly take recommendations. I've also kept out things on the dubious border of fantasy, such as China Mieville's horror/steampunk. Brilliant writing, but I don't think it fits here. Nonetheless, this is a start for those who haven't read much in the genre.

Some helpful advice

Dear person from Malaysia who came to my site after searching for 'hezbollah website',

I won't bother commenting on your interest in finding Hezbollah's website - I have, after all, looked at the Palestinian Authority's 'websites' from time to time. Perhaps you have a deep interest in understanding the psychology of Hezbollah's motivations and public relations. Uh. Perhaps.

But just a friendly idea - you might not want to use Yahoo to find it. At least use a decent search engine; you'll get results much quicker.

Also, I'm sorry if all you found here was an analysis of the Israeli side of the situation. I could, I suppose, have tried looking at Hezbollah's side to things as well - who knows, I might have even linked to their website! Just to balance things out, of course. Perhaps I refrained from doing so on the grounds that I'm not such a big fan of Hezbollah, and some of my overwhelming contempt for murderers who would hold millions of their own people hostage might have spilled out a teensy bit.

Hope you enjoyed your stay here.

Love,

wiggin

Rotzim Chibuk?

I normally don't post random links, but I can't help myself.

Free Hugs in Tel Aviv

It just made me smile. Say what you will about crazy leftists in Tel Aviv, but I secretly have lots of sympathy with their take on life... and sometimes they do things that should make everyone realize that we're all well-meaning in our methods. I also was particularly touched by the little kid in the stroller who, after one of the huggers hugged his mother, spontaneously grabbed one of the cookies on the tray in front of him and offered it to the hugger. Says something about 'natural' generosity, I think.

...that, and the music was oddly captivating. I'll need to get some music by Daniel Salomon and see if it's just a fluke or not. Anyone have any info on him? For some reason, it reminded me a little bit of Cake.

Anyways... anyone in Baltimore who wants to go down to the Inner Harbor some day and try that? For that matter, I'll probably spend some time in downtown Chicago in a few weekends... anyone there interested in going down with me and spreading some cheer? Daley Plaza would be a nice place for this, no? (hint, hint, Val)

Full Disclosure: I'm well aware about the 'Free Hugs Movement' and all but bleh, I couldn't care less about Juan Mann, I just loved the particular Israeli incarnation of it. Oh, well.

Increase your capacity by 30%!

It's funny what kind of associations relatively innocent phrases can have in today's world. To illustrate:

As many of you know, I spend obscene amounts of time in various laboratories doing mind-numbingly boring activities, so I have a lot of chance to let my mind wander. One day, I kept noticing that my eye kept being drawn to a magnet stuck to one of the cell culture refrigerators. I hadn't consciously read it, but then I gave it a look, and was startled. In big letters, the magnet proclaimed, "Increase your capacity by up to 30%!"

Needless to say, I was somewhat confused about why spammers would have gone to the trouble of making magnets... and more importantly, how such a magnet had found its way to the inside of a cell engineering lab. After all, everyone knows that scientists are particularly well-endowed. (It's all the mutagens that we and our scientific forbears work with. That, and our spectacularly good genes. I mean, have you ever seen an unattractive engineer?)

...only a moment later did I realize that the magnet was advertising a custom freezer rack service to optimize space utilization in the hideously expensive -80 degree freezers we use so much.

One wonders what their marketing department was thinking when they came up with that slogan.