when bad thinking happens to good people...

Here's an example of the superficial thinking that plagues political thinking. The caption in the picture reads "we get to the point". But what, exactly, is the point? We know that:
1. the Middle East has oil. And,
2. the U.S. uses oil. And,
3. the U.S. has troops in the Middle East.

For many people, these three propositions somehow cohere into a necessary causal relationship, i.e. sentiments such as "No blood for oil." Now, I see how these 3 propositions are tangentially related: the word "oil" is in 1 + 2, the word "U.S." is in 2 + 3, and the word "Middle East" is in 1 + 3. And apparently, that's the extent of the analysis needed.

But every economist says that the best guarantee of cheap oil is to coddle Middle East dictators and always maintain the status quo. In other words, the best way to get cheap oil is to never interfere in the Middle East. Basically the opposite of the theory that is exemplified by this advertisement. Nevermind, that kind of thinking doesn't fit on a poster.

- dane

How do you solve a problem like Korea?

For those of us mystified by the U.S.'s apparent lack of urgency concerning North Korea's nukes, Fareed Zakaria explains that the problem is that the Bush administration can't settle on a policy towards North Korea. Should we just sit back and hope that Kim Jong Il's regime implodes (which is fairly likely, but involves patience and gives them more time to develop WMD), or should we negotiate for "peace in our time", which has two drawbacks: 1. it legitmizes the worst tyranny in the world, 2. North Korea will cheat anyway.

Either way, we can't expect much help from China, because we don't share objectives with them. China says it wants a "nuclear-free peninsula", but I suspect that, for China, the bigger tragedy would be a collapse of Kim's regime, which would mean millions of refugees streaming into China. (China: "we have enough poor people already, thank you very much.") In any event, China knows that even if North Korea has nukes, they will be pointed at the U.S. Also, because China controls North Korea's electricity, they can, literally, turn out Pyongyang's lights whenever the North Koreans get rowdy. In short, China doesn't fear nukes in North Korea, because they have tanglible influence over Pyongyang.

The U.S. has limited options in North Korea. Even if we were to go to war with North Korea, its not clear which side China would join. China's goal in North Korea is stability. Our goal is no nukes and ultimately, one Korea that looks like South Korea. Still don't know what the answer is...

- dane

Anniversary Special Issue

...a day of reckoning...

Aside from congratulating Carrie Underwood on her American Idol victory, it is the great pleasure of the Wissahickon's editorial staff to bring you our April-May 2005 Two-Year Anniversary Double Issue.

Inside you'll find...

Rethinking Strategic Ambiguity - Valerie K. Simmons on foreign affairs
"There is a War I Cannot Forget" - by Scott Armstrong
There's Romance A Brewin' - a short film by T. Isaac Gillespie
Thirsty - a poem by brooke e. sexton
photographs from our Softball Spectacular
Ted Howell gives an introduction to Saul Bellow
Dane Shelly on global and domestic politics
Adam Woods on the first two years at the Wissahickon
and "Safe Space," a poem by Heather Drew

Plus, for the first time in the history of our auspicious publication, you'll be able to comment/discuss our contents in real time, right here on "the Wissy," the official blog of the Wissahickon. Just click where it says "COMMENT" below.

...happy birthday to us...happy birthday to us...

The Buzz Continues...

New this week at Filmegeist (www.filmegeist.com) is Ted Howell's review of Star Wars Episode III: Revenge of the Sith.



In his stunning review, Ted tackles some tough questions, chiefly how did Anakin Skywalker get to be so mean?

Trust me, it's worth the visit.

--Adam

The Prequels Are Better

A fine "article" of sorts today on Rotten Tomatoes. The do this very rarely, so it's especially noteworthy:

Critical Consensus: “Star Wars” Prequels Actually Better Reviewed Than Originals

In short, the folks at RT give evidence that reviewers like the prequels better than the originals. I think the predominance of web-based reviewers, and a lack of gatekeeping, are largely to blame for this. However, it's true that critics and Star Wars have always had an uneasy relationship.

Also, I believe this is another instance of the progression of collective consciousness, and the way critics interact with the canon. Fascinating stuff.

George Lucas: Then and Now

In an effort to discern the difference between the astonishing freshness of the original Star Wars trilogy and the demoralizing staleness of the recent one, it is worthwhile to take a look at these two pictures of George Lucas:




The first picture shows Lucas, with Alec Guinness, as a young director with one hell of an idea, the pluck to follow up on it, and the willingness to let others share the load. The second reveals the epoch-making, Skywalker Ranch-owning luminary that Lucas has become. He has earned his stardom, and it is not beneficial to begrudge him the opportunity to rehash an idea hatched in the spring of his life—but we can wish that he asked for some help.

But why is Lucy so ugly?

The first preview of The Lion, The Witch, and The Wardrobe is online. Quick thoughts:
1. Tilda Swinton as the wicked witch is an inspired choice.
2. In the preview, Aslan looks like a real lion, but how will they handle the talking parts? Talking animals are always a little tricky when a movie is meant to look real.
3. Seriously, England doesn't have any cute children? Don't tell me these were hard roles to fill.

- dane

Saddam in cahoots with al-Qaeda

This obviously won't be news to those who read the news. But you still find many people parroting the demonstrable lie that Iraq wasn't connected to al-Qaeda. The truth is, Saddam provided refuge and material support to senior al-Qaeda officials, allowing them the freedom to plot and scheme.

Also, this article is another reminder why the term "insurgents" isn't nearly as accurate as "terrorists" or "jihadists". The leaders of the so-called Iraqi insurgency are mostly non-Iraqis, like Zarqawi (a Jordanian). For the most part, the "insurgency" is less about "the people" overthrowing their imperialist masters so they can rule themselves, and closer to Islamo-Fascists who see an opportunity to take control of a country and set up a safe haven for terrorism (like Afghanistan under the Taliban).

- dane

Commander-in-Chief

Geena Davis for President?



Yes, our favourite heart-throb from "A League of Their Own," has recently been cast to play Mackenzie Allen, the first female POTUS, on ABC's upcoming drama "Commander-in-Chief."

Here's the link.

Actually, Madonna was the heart-throb from "A League of Their Own."

Geena Davis is a Democrat Political Activist.

I liked this when they did it the first time, it was called "The West Wing." It was written by Aaron Sorkin, one of the noblest minds of our generation. It starred Martin Sheen, also a Democrat Political Activist. He played Jed Bartlett, the first really good POTUS since FDR.

I don't think I'm going to like this.

I'm not sure if Aaron Sorkin is going to write the new show. However, if he does, I will rescind all my comments, and remove the sack-cloth I've been wearing since he left "The West Wing."

--Adam

"Insurgents" and Teaching History

Two excellent pieces on Slate today.

The first from Hitchens, "History and Mystery: Why does the New York Times insist on calling jihadists "insurgents"? An important question, that affords Hitchens the opportunity to both get riled up and shed some light on Iraq:

In my ears, "insurgent" is a bit like "rebel" or even "revolutionary." There's nothing axiomatically pejorative about it, and some passages of history have made it a term of honor. At a minimum, though, it must mean "rising up." These fascists and hirelings are not rising up, they are stamping back down. It's time for respectable outlets to drop the word, to call things by their right names (Baathist or Bin Ladenist or jihadist would all do in this case), and to stop inventing mysteries where none exist.

Also, the beginning of a "debate" between two historians concerning the proper way to teach American history in the classroom. These email dialogs are the best regular feature on Slate, and this one has special promise.

--Ted

Yellow Journalism

Traditional media outlets definitely do not need this type of publicity anymore. It seems as though some of our most revered news outlets have been committing colossal blunders recently; the latest debacle is an incendiary Newsweek story that turned out to be patently false. That's bad enough, but now it appears that the story may have directly led to violence that resulted in the deaths of 15 Aghanis.

It is completely shocking to me that the magazine could run a story of this importance based on the word of a single source, and a dubious one at that. This is all too reminiscent of the Dan Rather screw-up with the pre-election memos purporting to show that President Bush dodged military service. Like this Newsweek piece, the Rather story was based on a single, unreliable source, yet he still led with it right before the elections! I want to know how common this is. Do major news sources routinely run stories that have shaky sources at best? It makes you wonder how many other iron-clad bits of "news" we've taken as accurate that are anything but.

--Josh

Elegy For a Deceased Rower

for Scott Laio’s family
and the people of the City of Philadelphia

Old Thomas Eakins would have certainly cried
at the daguerreotype in Sunday’s news
of the thick-thighed, sinewy oarsman who died
the day before. His body, suit, and shoes
were brought to shore aboard an official’s boat,
propelled by the unnatural horsepower
of an outboard motor. No funeral bier or float—
though thousands passed the silent half an hour.

Thom Eakins, you were there among the crowd,
admiring Scott Laio’s lifeless rower’s form
with scientific eyes—his mighty calves, his proud
shoulders, his limpid torso, his still-taut waist—
but made no sketch— for yours was just the painter’s shade.
The charcoal wouldn’t take, the drawing went unmade.

-- Adam

Scott Laio suffered a heart attack and died after rowing his team to victory at this Saturday's Dad Vail Regatta on the Schuylkyll River in Philadelphia. Click here to read about the events.

How to blog

A mildly interesting story about blogging...

Last Words

There really aren't any words...

--Josh

Dali in Philadelphia

Do come up with something better to do today than read Sanford Schwartz's review of the Dali exhibit in Philadelphia in the New York Review of Books (link), in which he comes to a number of poor conclusions.

If you can't come up with something better, read my review of Dali in Philadelphia, here's the link. If Dali is the king of shameless self-promotion, I hope I can at least be the prince.

I can't seem to understand why so many artists choose a mid- and late-life of kooky, unexceptional art, rather than retirement into cultural arbitration. Certainly Dali is guilty of this, so is Jimmy Buffett. John Updike and E.M. Forster, rather importantly, are not.

But what I really can't understand is when critics salute "the kooky period" and disregard that finest decade for the artist which stretches (usually) from an artist's mid-twenties to his/her mid-thirties. This isn't poor criticism, it's just poor taste.

Rene on Ratzinger

An excellent post on the Huffington blog contains an interview with Rene Girard, a Roman Catholic theologian whose work I studied intensively in Oregon.

Girard responds to the criticism of Pope Benedict's "dictatorship of relativism" comment, gives a simple explanation of his main theory, and says some wise things about globalization and American Evangelicals.

Girard's theory is all-encompassing, and therefore both exciting and suspicious. However, I think it brings us to a good place, considering the difference between Christianity and other religions. Girard and Benedict XVI are both to be commended for their solid stance.

--Ted

Click Here

Um, this needs no comment...

The Huffington Post

Whether it turns out to be any good is yet to be determined--but it is at least something worth seeing:

Arianna Huffington's new superblog launched yesterday. The attempt is to create an alternative to the major news sources (which is what most blogs think they're doing these days.) This one, however, is a group effort, and it boasts an impressive celebrity line-up.

Keep your eyes on it. This could be a breakthrough--or maybe it's not the right time.

--Ted

Pop Culture and Archetypes

Two fine book reviews for perusal:

Everything Bad Is Good for You: How Today's Pop Culture Is Actually Making Us Smarter

Part of me really wants to believe this is true. At any rate, it's an argument worth making. The examples from the world of television are solid, but I suspect that we are merely becoming better watchers of television, a development I would not willingly label "smarter."

The best part of this review (and, so it seems, the book itself) is Steven Johnson's accusation: that books suffer from having a "fixed linear path." If this argument held true, then the best books would be the Choose Your Own Adventure series. As we know, this is simply not the case. The fact that reading "is not an active, participatory process; it's a submissive one," is fundamentally good--the best readers are those who allow their minds to be impressed by what they read.

Fun stuff, at any rate.

EDIT/ADDITION: Malcolm Gladwell, who knows a thing or two about intelligence and how it works, reviews the book in the New Yorker:

Being “smart” involves facility in both kinds of thinking—the kind of fluid problem solving that matters in things like video games and I.Q. tests, but also the kind of crystallized knowledge that comes from explicit learning. If Johnson’s book has a flaw, it is that he sometimes speaks of our culture being “smarter” when he’s really referring just to that fluid problem-solving facility.

The Seven Basic Plots

Author Christopher Booker has been working on this monument for 34 years. As the reviewer points out, someone forgot to tell him that Jungian archetypes are so twenty years ago. This sort of "criticism" is always commendable, especially since its exciting, but the reviewer does a fine job of pointing towards the book's holes and follies.

--Ted

A Sartorial Spectacular

The Wissahickon celebrated its two-year anniversary last Saturday, May 7th, with a picnic and series of softball games at Pachella Field in Philadelphia's Wissahickon Valley Park.



China Rodriguez, whose 12th birthday it was, threw the ceremonial first pitch.



Certainly, an outstanding time was had by all. And in spite of the recent libel and slander exchanges between team captains Ted Howell and Joshua Meservey, it seems good sportsmanship managed to win the day.



To see more photos from this event, click here.

(all photos by John Vanore)

Church, State, and Guelzo

David Brooks, writing in the New York Times today (and quoting Guelzo), reminds us how important Abraham Lincoln's faith was in his decision-making as President - and how doing so is not at all a violation of church and state. This is important to remember when you hear that religious conservatives are "imposing their religious beliefs" on others. Religious beliefs are a legitimate (and probably the best) basis for morals - and what should you base your political views upon other than your own view of morality? Usually, when someone condemns a religious conservative, they are really just saying that their own religious views are better, but dress up their argument in a church-state disguise.

SOFTBALL

The Wissahickon 2 Year Anniversary Softball Spectacular
is this Saturday
May 7th
2:00 pm
Pachella Ballfield
Wissahickon Park
Philadelphia

Be there or misspend a Saturday.

Please feel free to bring the following:

-- lawn chairs
-- softball equipment (i.e., gloves)
-- chips and/or picnic side dish and/or non-alcoholic beverage to share (we are in Fairmount Park)
-- your friends

Festivities will go on as long as they have to, and we'll probably have a little after party at Murphy's at the corner of Henry and Roxborough Avenues (which is not in Fairmount Park).

Here's how to get there:

The field is located just off the corner of Henry and Livezey Avenues in Philadelphia, just a few minutes west of Henry Ave's intersection with Walnut Lane.

From I-76 (the Schuylkyll Expressway): Take exit 340A for Lincoln Drive/Kelly Drive. Follow signs for Ridge Avenue West. Merge onto Ridge Ave. and bear right at the second light to stay on Ridge Ave where it forks with Main St. Manayunk. Go uphill, and at the 2nd light (just past a custard stand) take a soft right onto Hermit St. Follow Hermit St. until it ends at Henry Lane. Turn left on Henry Lane and follow adjacent to the Wissahickon Park for a distance of 1.7 miles. At the traffic light where Henry Ave. crosses Livezey, make a right hand turn into Pachella Field's parking lot.

SEPTA: Pachella Field is accessible via the 27 bus. Visit septa.org for more details.

ANY QUESTIONS AT ALL PLEASE CALL (215) 205-5225.

We hope to see you there.

Irony, Thy Name Art Timothy Treadwell

Timothy Treadwell was a hardcore conservationist by anyone's standards. Completely dedicated to his studies of Alaskan Brown Bears, he stunned the scientific community by living in the very midst of a Brown Bear colony with nothing to protect him other than his wits and his love for the animals. Here is a great letter from Treadwell detailing his struggles to be accepted by these gentle giants, as well as the adversity he faced from fellow scientists who told him he would surely be killed. The letter is a testament to Treadwell's courage as he pooh-poohs the idea of his beloved bears ever harming him, pointing out that he is a "fully accepted wild animal-brother to these bears" and that "people who knowingly enter bear habitat with pepper spray, guns, and electric fences are committing a crime to the animal...could I look at [the bears] and tell them that I love them, that I will care for them, with a can of mace in my pockets?" Alas, Monsieur Treadwell can no longer regale us with stories of his acceptance into the Brown Bear community as he was mauled to death by his animal-brothers (and sisters, no doubt) shortly after the letter was written.

--Josh

Let the Smackdown Commence (i.e. Why You Should Join My Team, Not the Other One)

As you view the Wissy in preparation for the upcoming Wissahickon Two Year Anniversary Softball Spectacular, keep the following fact in mind:

• While there may be a number of teams fielded this Saturday afternoon, two will undoubtedly become the center attraction. One team will complete annihilate the other.

I am speaking, of course, of my team, which is as of yet unnamed.

The other (hiss) will be managed by that third-baseman of ill-repute, the slappy Joshua Meservey. (Click on the link to see a picture--you'll learn a lot about his character. He's the one in pinstripes).

If you are reading this, and have mad skills, this message is for you: "Join my team, and defeat Joshua."

If you can't catch or throw, and find yourself wondering if there will be a tee for you to hit off--then you should join Josh's team. That way, all you losers can lose together.

Seriously, folks. Check out the lineup, and tell me you don't want to be a part of this dynamite collective:

P: Adam "Smoky Joe" Woods
2b: Kate "The Red Baron" DeRosa
3b: Me (aka. "Sweetness," "Killer," "Poetry in Motion," or "The Splendid Splinter II")
SS: Dontrell Willi$ Stichter
OF: David "J for Jumping" Sweeney

As you can see, I need a 1b and some fleet-footed outfielders. I'm building my team around speed and defense--if you've got those, come on board. Just comment on this post, to let me know you're in.

Joshua: be afraid.

See you Saturday!

--Ted

Is It Getting Warm in Here?

Seems as though the global warming debate is heating up (haha) again. Robert Matthews has written an article about the alleged attempts by leading scientific journals to suppress scholarly papers that attack the idea of man-made global warming; one such paper had the temerity to state that "fewer than one in 10 climate scientists believed that climate change is principally caused by human activity." Hopefully this news won't stifle the creation of more environmentally-conscious, cinematic triumphs along the lines of 'Waterworld' and 'The Day After Tomorrow.'

--Josh

Sociological Proof: We Like Pretty Kids Better Than Ugly Ones

A brief article from the NY Times:

Ugly Children May Get Parental Short Shrift

Apparently, parents treat pretty kids better, at least in the grocery store. Here's my favorite part:

When it came to buckling up, pretty and ugly children were treated in starkly different ways, with seat belt use increasing in direct proportion to attractiveness. When a woman was in charge, 4 percent of the homeliest children were strapped in compared with 13.3 percent of the most attractive children. The difference was even more acute when fathers led the shopping expedition - in those cases, none of the least attractive children were secured with seat belts, while 12.5 percent of the prettiest children were.

Rough one. These findings are almost certainly skewed, and not worth much in the long run. But I like to read articles like this for some reason...

--Ted

North Korea -- Slave State

The o-so-close-to-being-the-best-man-of-letters-around Christopher Hitchens sounded off today in regards to North Korea, which he terms a "slave state."

Here's the link: click.

For his evidence, he gives the following photograph, taken at night to show the totality of that state's enforced curfew.

Hitchens then goes on to praise President Bush for his recent condemnation of that state, presumably using the kind of rhetoric that can get things done (e.g. when you finally start calling it "genocide").

Then Hitchens calls for all human rights supporters everywhere to demand an underground/overground railway for the transport of North Korean refugees to South Korea. Instead of demanding it, the LIBERALS need to organize it. If not, and they drag their feet, President Bush, who is laudably serious about changing the North Korean situation, may do something bold. I hope that we LIBERALS don't really have the time, the conscience, or the political clout to wait around until something happens, and then complain about how it's being handled.

Let brainstorming begin, or if it has, Dane Shelly, please post.

-- Adam