Wednesday, May 07, 2008

Maybe we're not all going to Hell after all

From today's Times, a story they should have put on the front page:

As Philippe Quint spent half an hour playing five selections, the cabbies clapped and whistled. They danced in the aisles, hips gyrating like tipsy belly dancers. “Magic fingers, magic fingers,” one called out. Another grabbed the hand of Mr. Quint’s publicist and did what looked like a merengue across the front of the “stage.”

Afterward, the virtuoso was mobbed by drivers seeking his autograph on dollar bills, napkins and cab receipts.

“It was so pleasing to see people dancing — that never happens,” said Mr. Quint, 34, a Grammy-nominated classical violinist. “These people, they work so hard, I doubt they get a chance to get out to Carnegie Hall or Lincoln Center.”

So Mr. Quint took Carnegie Hall to them, in a miniconcert that was his way of expressing a simple sentiment: Thank you.

On April 21, Mr. Quint accidentally left a Stradivarius violin, valued at $4 million, in the back seat of a cab that he took from the airport to Manhattan on his return from a performance in Dallas. After several frantic hours, the Newark police told him the violin had been found and was at the airport taxi stand with the cabdriver who had taken him home. The two connected, and the violin was returned.

“Anybody out here would have done the same thing,” said the driver, Mohammed Khalil, waving a hand at his laughing, dancing colleagues.

...

As he signed autographs, he retold the story of his lost violin and its triumphant return.

“He saw how distressed I was,” Mr. Quint said of Mr. Khalil. “He just gave it back to me and he noticed I was in no condition to go home by myself. So he said, ‘Why don’t I give you a ride home?’ I said, ‘No, no, it’s OK, I’ll take a bus, I’ll take another taxi. He said, ‘No, I’m happy to give you a ride back, because you’re my last customer.’”

As he had planned for months, Mr. Khalil retired from driving a cab the day he took Mr. Quint home.

See also the Times's excellent sidebar on known cases of valuables left in New York City cabs, including Yo-yo Ma, a 30-cent tip, and a Muslim answering the prayers of an Orthodox Jew.

My wife Kate once had the chance to intercept and play a Stradivarius, and the sound brought tears to her eyes.

The puzzle of what makes Stradivarius instruments sound so great is compelling. I'm almost sorry that one of the top researchers to tackle the subject seems to have solved it; one of his new violins, which run in the $15,000 range, beat a Stradivarius in a blind competition, as judged by dozens of professional musicians.

Is this to be an empathy test?

The case of the missing Philip K. Dick head receives an entertaining decision from Judge Andrew Guilford, also a prof at UCLA Law: (emphasis mine)
Perhaps because he had just woken up, Plaintiff lacked the total recall to remember to retrieve the Head from the overhead bin.
...
Philip K. Dick and other science fiction luminaries have often explored whether robots might eventually evolve to exercise freedom of choice. See, e.g., 2001: A Space Odyssey (a HAL 9000 exercises his freedom of choice to make some bad decisions). But there is no doubt that humans have the freedom of choice to bind themselves in mutually advantageous contractual relationships. When Plaintiff chose to enter the Contract of Carriage with Defendant he agreed, among other things, to limit Defendant’s liability for lost baggage. Failing to show that he is entitled to relief from
that agreement, Plaintiff is bound by the terms of that contract, which bars his state law claims.
...
The Court must GRANT Defendant’s Motion. But it does so hoping that the android head of Mr. Dick is someday found, perhaps in an Elysian field of Orange County, Dick’s homeland, choosing to dream of electric sheep.
I appreciate a judge having fun with a decision, although I imagine the humor is not appreciated by the plaintiff. You have to wonder whether the urge to make certain jokes in the decision had any influence on the decision itself.

There's an Isaac Asimov short story where a criminal named Stein uses a time machine to travel into the future, past the end of the statute of limitations. He is arrested, and the District Attorney argues that the crime can be charged because the statute of limitations seeks to free the guilty from an unreasonably long limbo; thus Stein, who had only a few days of freedom before his capture, can be charged. Asimov writes that when the decision is read, the state howls that the urge to make a pun surely influenced the decision, for the decision reads, in full, "A niche in time saves Stein."

Likewise, I can't pass up the opportunity to write any post that I can conceivably title "See you at the party, Richter!", "They don't advertise for killers in the newspaper", or any of several other clunky one-liners from Philip K. Dick movies.

Tuesday, May 06, 2008

Alignments of random points

Last week, Gawker had some fun with the conspiracy theory ramblings OF Mobb Deep rapper Prodigy he posted on his personal web site (in ALL CAPS, LIKE THAT ENTIRE YEAR I FIRST HAD MY DINKY NOKIA CELL PHONE AND HAD NO IDEA THAT LOWER CASE EVEN EXISTED FOR TEXT-MESSAGING). On his web site, Prodigy wanted to let everyone know about the "NATURAL ENERGY LINES THAT CRISS-CROSS THE ENTIRE PLANET," not realizing that there are competing conspiracy theories about these phenomena. Yeah, yeah, all conspiracy theories have to have competition so that they can spread by means of response to counter-claims (we see them show up as comments to random posts on this blog sometimes). The real revelation of the alternative world order came in the comments section, when someone linked to the Wikipedia article on Ley Lines to joke about the robustness of the lines-links-connections trope in conspiracy theory language. I love the explanation of the popularity of the pseudo-archaeology myth from the Wikipedia entry:
Some skeptics have suggested that ley lines do not exist, and are a product of human fancy. Watkins' discovery happened at a time when Ordnance Survey maps were being marketed for the leisure market, making them reasonably easy and cheap to obtain; this may have been a contributing factor to the popularity of ley line theories.

One suggestion is that, given the high density of historic and prehistoric sites in Britain and other parts of Europe, finding straight lines that "connect" sites (usually selected to make them "fit") is trivial, and may be easily ascribed to coincidence. The diagram to the right shows an example of lines that pass very near to a set of random points: for all practical purposes, they can be regarded as nearly "exact" alignments. Naturally, it is debated whether all ley lines can be accounted for in this way, or whether there are more such lines than would be expected by chance. (For a mathematical treatment of this topic, see alignments of random points.)

The lines-links-connections trope is a weird literalization of how conspiracy theories work: the way to assert one's belief that there's a possible (thought-based) connection between x and y is to show that there's an actual, mappable link between x and y. Preferably with a map to illustrate this literalization. The evidence for these explanations looks similar to what Luc Pauwels has called artifacts of instrumentation: "objects and effects that are generated by the representation processes themselves and that do not refer to anything in the outside world or at least not to the phenomena under scrutiny," except that they assert that the lack of obvious reference is evidence of the conspiracy. I love pseudo-archaeology (including the goofy National Treasure franchise) for just these reasons--a too strong belief in the de-naturalizing effects of mediation and the power of reading to discover them!

It's not just a twentieth-century phenomenon. In Bring Out Your Dead: The Past As Revelation, Anthony Grafton has written some great articles about conspiracy theories among Renaissance antiquarians--everything is a Popish plot--and "polyhistors." It's as though the genre of historical writing can be tweaked just so--by adding in shadowy agents or asserting "energy" connections between past and present--and the attempt to explain past events in a chronology or an argument-driven narrative of rises and falls starts to look really weird.

In the eighteenth century, Massachusetts colonial governor and founder of the Antiquarian Society Thomas Pownall was inspired by Isaac Newton's System of the World to write A treatise on the study of antiquities as the commentary to historical learning, sketching out a general line of research in the Newtonian mode to establish a grand system of history. In his introduction, he shows future imaginative systematizers how it's done:
Did we follow the seductions of fancy, and quitting the sober steps of experience, hastily adopt system; and then form a dotage on our own phantoms, dress such system out in the rags and remnants of antiquity, we should only make work to mock ourselves: or were we on the other hand to persevere in making unmeaning endless collections without scope or view, we should be the dupes of our futility, and become in either case ridiculous. The upstart fungus of system is poison to the mind; and an unintrusive mass of learning may create and indulge a false appetite, but never can feed the mind. ... All the learning in the world, if it stops short and rests on particulars, never will become knowledge. To avoid then these extreams of self-delusion on one hand, or of the false conceptions of barren folly on the other, we should keep our minds constantly fixed on the PRINCIPLE and END of our institution.

Prodigy, Fox Mulder, take note. Here's where the capital letters start to proliferate:
Nor must this analysis be made from any theoretick abstract view of things in general; but by closely following step by step the path in which nature acting leads; and by a strict induction of her laws as found in her actions. ... In this line of research conducted by this principle, he may hope to arrive at the true end of learning, THE KNOWLEDGE OF THE SYSTEM OF HIS EXISTENCE; AND AT EXPERIENCE IN THE USE AND APPLICATION OF HIS POWER TO THE RIGHT POSSESSION AND ENJOYMENT OF IT.

Following the steps of inductive investigation is the key here, for the procedure starts to eclipse the actual things being studied in Pownall's explanation of the importance of this line of study. Indeed, he insists too much that the study is based on observable phenomena and not on mere imaginative extension of Newtonian language of "cause and effect" and "power" to arbitrary objects. That insistence starts to sound mighty labored:
If there was no ground as a basis for these experiments in assorting the scattered fragments and reliques of antiquity to a Reinstauration of (at least) the knowledge of the system to which they belong; the labours of learning would be but the building (as our proverb expresses it) castles in the air: if there was no certain decided and defined course in the movements and operations of nature, all theory on which these experiments could be instituted, would originate in caprice, and must end in empiricism: but there is in nature, a system by which every being is defined in its own essence, and in its relative existence; by which that being hath a certain energy and defined extent of power, by which the direction, which those powers in motion take, is determined. This system consists of a series of causes and effects, linked together by that golden chain which descends from heaven. If then this system exists by such a series in nature, there must be in the power of man a clue, by which reason in the patient spirit of investigation may retrace back the links of this chain to the primary, if not the very first principles on which the whole depends.

The particular examples he wants to connect in a "golden chain" from the past to the present are elements of speech; origins of written language in pictures, hieroglyphics, and elementary language; ships of ancient cultures; and chariots of ancient cultures. In these particular chapters of study, there's a fascinating self-consciousness on Pownall's part about how changes in the forms and circulation of information lead to changes in past human consciousness. He's up-front about the connection between his own writing process and the possibly-hard-to-believe claims he's making about the processes of human connections in the past:
It is as whimsical as it is true, that an Author sees his work, as well in the matter as to the manner, in a different view, when he reads it in print, from that in which it appears when he reads it in his own hand-writing: he rather thinks over than reads the latter, or, if he reads, does it rather with the mind's eye than with that of the body: he reads it with reference to an accompaniment of ideas, which the copy does not actually contain: which yet the author thinks he has so explained as to accompany his reasoning. To these circumstances, not only literal errors and grammatical inaccuracies, but even some obscurities are imputable: some such the Author has found in some of the first sheets of this treatise, which have been printed a year ago, which he could wish to have corrected, but the copies were worked off, and it was too late.

The different degree of accuracy in the reasoning, with which different parts of this work are conducted, the unequal spirit of composition, in which different parts are written, are owing to the degree of painful abstraction with which the mind was at times drawn off from its subject, or to the degree of attention which it was able to exert upon it at different moments of the period above referred to.

There remains one point on which he wishes to make an apology to serious people. The ideas hazarded in some parts of this treatise may perhaps cross upon those Forms, with which serious people have been accustomed to cloath their opinions: yet as to Things, the author is, as he thinks it the duty of every good citizen to be, as serious about them, as the most zealous professor.

So perhaps the propensity of conspiracy theorists to work most colorfully in typos, koans, and caps lock is on the same wavelength as Pownall's admittedly scattershot explanation of the system of human history. The features of these types of writing repeat themselves in new forms of print, again and again, as if in some golden chain...
Blogger Katy on Wed May 07, 10:43:00 AM:
Aww, Alice, I was a fan of your all caps text messages! Bring 'em back!
 
Blogger Alice on Wed May 07, 03:09:00 PM:
In honor of Terry Francona's praise of the Captain, "that C should be bigger," I shall from here on compose all of my text messages about Jason Varitek in CAPS LOCK.
 
Blogger Katy on Thu May 08, 09:19:00 AM:
I APPROVE AND LOOK FORWARD TO RECEIVING THEM.
 

Saturday, May 03, 2008

Book table at 97th and Bway

I always check out the book table at 97th and Bway because it has the oddest assortment of books--usually ones I either own or end up buying. Of course, there are books that are more likely to be on these tables--hardcover romance novels, Dummies books, mass market editions of nineteenth-century novels, the collected John Cheever (I see this one at least once a day), and so on. But the 97th St. table has some weird, good ones. This week's notables:

Music for Torching, by A.M. Homes (great novel, I already bought a copy from the same table a few years ago)
The Curious Life of Robert Hooke: The Man Who Measured London, by Lisa Jardine (I want to know how this book ended up being discarded; it's a very specific interest)
The Singularity Is Near: When Humans Transcend Biology, by Ray Kurzweil (the previous owner realized that either the singularity is near... or it isn't)
Sister Wolf, by Ann Arensberg (a weird novel, but not bad)

What are some of the best, least likely novels you've seen for sale on these tables? Years ago, in the W. 100s, I saw a hardback copy of Up Against an Ivy Wall, the Spectator's account of the 1968 uprising at Columbia. I still regret not picking it up.

Wednesday, April 30, 2008

So the Sibylline leaves were blown about

Sven Birkerts came to Columbia last Friday to discuss literary blogging with Jenny Davidson. The afternoon was billed as a debate: Is Literary Blogging the End of Literary Culture? I hope I don't kill the form--or the culture--with this long post. First I want to talk about eighteenth-century newspapers, which maybe only a few people care about, and then I want to talk about the greatest novel of the past ten years, Helen DeWitt's The Last Samurai, so you can skip down past the poetry about newspapers to read if you're bored. Maybe blog posts can be orderly and planned for discussing how ideas work together. Or maybe not: the best laid plans...

Paul Barndt wrote a nice piece about the event for the Bwog, and I was glad that Ed Champion transcribed some of Birkerts' remarks because I kept thinking, "Marshall McLuhan said some of these things in 1962, right? I like galaxies better than elegies." About halfway through the event, Birkerts mentioned that he had been reading Eric Alterman's "Out of Print" from the New Yorker on the train down from Boston, and I thought then, "is that why he's conflating the decline of print newspapers with a general decline in reading? Aren't we talking about different things?" (Yesterday afternoon, I skimmed through Birkerts' Gutenberg Elegies and realized that I couldn't have attributed Birkerts' tone only to Alterman. The Gutenberg Elegies is an extended set of essay meditations published in 1994, with a new introduction from 2006, on the same issues of literary gatekeepers, distributed authority, and associational logic tied to the hyperlink which he discussed at Friday's event. I get the feeling that for Birkerts these terms don't get complicated by new developments so much as they get exacerbated.)

But the newspaper/novel decline narrative is an interesting conflation to make, especially when you look back at the history of print in the eighteenth century, a connection Jenny Davidson mentioned during the talk as a possible corrective to these worries about technological proliferation. I have a dream seminar in mind about the uses and abuses of the decline narrative in the eighteenth-century; we'd start with Paradise Lost, go on to the Ancients-Moderns debate, and then look at the transformation of the pastoral genre. During Birkerts' talk, I kept thinking about two long poems by George Crabbe which were Gutenberg Elegies of their own: "The Library" and "The Newspaper." "The Library" is a paean to the transformative power of books--not romances, not collections of plays, not magazines, not systems, but strong books which have the power to arouse sympathy and order thoughts. Such a remedy is needed in an age of decline, when everything is tinted by the color of elegy,
When the sad soul, by care and grief oppress'd,
Looks round the world, but looks in vain for rest;
When every object that appears in view
Partakes her gloom and seems dejected too;

For Crabbe the library is the place to look not only for the cure for this grief and gloom, but it also stores the causes of it in the multitude of inferior productions. (I know this is way too much poetry to quote on a blog, but I find the bad rhymes in the couplets hypnotic, like they really do produce ordered thinking for me, even as I'm chuckling at Crabbe's gall at finding a rhyme for "duodecimos"... OK, that's giggly thinking, not ordered thinking.):
The noblest road to happiness below;
Or men and manners prompt the easy page
To mark the flying follies of the age:
Whatever good ye boast, that good impart;
Inform the head and rectify the heart.
Lo, all in silence, all in order stand,
And mighty folios first, a lordly band ;
Then quartos their well-order'd ranks maintain,
And light octavos fill a spacious plain:
See yonder, ranged in more frequented rows,
A humbler band of duodecimos;
While undistinguish'd trifles swell the scene,
The last new play and fritter'd magazine.
Thus 'tis in life, where first the proud, the great,
In leagued assembly keep their cumbrous state;
Heavy and huge, they fill the world with dread,
Are much admired, and are but little read:
The commons next, a middle rank, are found;
Professions fruitful pour their offspring round;
Reasoners and wits are next their place allowed,
And last, of vulgar tribes a countless crowd.

"The Newspaper" is the companion to "The Library," in that the form gets blamed for destroying orderly thought with its random articles, disposability of daily or weekly publication, partisanship, scandal-mongering, and ill-considered criticism and puffing. It is the second long poem on the Project Gutenberg page, so you have to scroll down to find it. But you can take a look at the argument and the opening stanzas "The Village" and you'll recognize the voice of the poet who revels in nostalgia for a "Golden Age" (his term). I see some of Birkerts' concerns about the labor of composing well wrought prose in Crabbe's critique, as well as his fears about proliferation of lesser productions:
We, who for longer fame with labour strive,
Are pain'd to keep our sickly works alive;
Studious we toil, with patient care refine,
Nor let our love protect one languid line.
Severe ourselves, at last our works appear,
When, ah! we find our readers more severe;
For, after all our care and pains, how few
Acquire applause, or keep it if they do!
Not so these sheets, ordain'd to happier fate,
Praised through their day, and but that day their date;
Their careless authors only strive to join
As many words as make an even line;
As many lines as fill a row complete;
As many rows as furnish up a sheet:
From side to side, with ready types they run,
The measure's ended, and the work is done;
Oh, born with ease, how envied and how blest!
Your fate to-day and your to-morrow's rest,

Crabbe asks, where is the place for readers to enjoy the labor of reading and studying books when there is all this paper and instant gratification floating about:
To you all readers turn, and they can look
Pleased on a paper, who abhor a book;
Those who ne'er deign'd their Bible to peruse,
Would think it hard to be denied their News;
Sinners and saints, the wisest with the weak,
Here mingle tastes, and one amusement seek;
This, like the public inn, provides a treat,
Where each promiscuous guest sits down to eat;
And such this mental food, as we may call
Something to all men, and to some men all.

In these two poems, Crabbe blames newspapers for the decline of reading serious material. That the two would be conflated under a general elegiacal tone more than two hundred years later shows--what? The print newspaper business is in sharp decline for economic reasons that are difficult to address, but I'm really wary of connecting that problem with a general elegy for deep thinking or ordering thoughts on a printed page. Actually, I think it's really offensive to do that, and the economic issues would seem to fall by the wayside if you could make it into a decline of thinking problem.

Paul Collins and Leah Price have both responded to the NEA's annual report on reading decline narratives, and they both demonstrate the ways in which the decline narrative recurs by disguising itself as something that's diagnosing a particular moment (blogs, television, motor vehicles) but is really resurrecting an elegiacal tone which, as Crabbe put it, makes every object under study "seem dejected too."

My favorite passage of Crabbe's "The Newspaper" insists that newspapers provoke random thinking--associational thinking in Birkerts' terms--which don't approach truth or certainty. But what if this is the way print circulates in The Gutenberg Galaxy--the book, not just the idea itself, where McLuhan juxtaposes blocks of text from various disciplines just to see what happens when he makes mosaics of references:
So the Sibylline leaves were blown about,
Disjointed scraps of fate involved in doubt;
So idle dreams, the journals of the night,
Are right and wrong by turns, and mingle wrong with right.-

My point here: what if associational thinking isn't that bad? What if it's the way that lots of books--and not just blogs--are structured? McLuhan gets some amazing work out of that mosaic effect to create a field of media studies which takes up the associations which print makes possible.

You know who else works in that structure, too? Helen DeWitt. Talk about Sibylline leaves being blown about: there's DeWitt's main character in the novel, Sibylla, leaping up from her work transcribing esoteric journals onto a computer database to hunt down a reference in a book or explain a foreign phrase to her son Ludo. DeWitt quotes long passages from math and aerodynamics textbooks, film books about Akira Kurosawa, Icelandic sagas, and so on. The mosaic pattern looks less like ordered thinking than like a record of scattered thinking. Ludo wonders at one point if there's any other kind of reading and thinking after one has faced disappointment:
It wasn't all that easy to understand the book anyway, and with my father interrupting all the time it was practically impossible; what if he never stopped? What was it going to be like hearing it for 80 years? I thought of giving up and going home. Then I thought of Sibylla, jumping up and sitting down, jumping up to walk here and there, jumping up to read this book and that book a paragraph a sentence a word at a time.

At Friday's event, I asked Davidson and Birkerts if DeWitt's novel might provide an interesting lens onto the conversation about changes in meditating literatuer. I knew they both liked it quite a bit: I first read about The Last Samuari on Light Reading, and Birkerts' blurbs the back of the book, "[it] is very much the story of an education, an arduous discovery of self." DeWitt has a blog that's pretty cool, so she's perhaps an example of someone who's embraced multiple forms of writing technology. But The Last Samurai is itself a book about mediating forms of writing technology. The book was published in 2000, but I think it was written over a long span of time so there's little mention of late-twentieth century technological changes. Sibylla tries to make money by preserving old periodicals in a new digital format; in many ways, her project looks a lot like the Project Gutenberg texts I was using to retrieve and link to George Crabbe. (Indeed, the material may be just as esoteric.)

The missing link in Friday's conversation seemed to me to be about how cinema fits into our discussions of what technology has changed the ways we think about narrative, and I think DeWitt does something really amazing with that question. Whenever I'm enthusing about the book, I have to insist first that it's not related to the Tom Cruise movie and that Akira Kurosawa's The Seven Samurai is the key to the book. If Sibylla can jump up from her work in the midst of transcribing sentences, she is reverential about watching the Kurosawa movie all the way through. At one point, she tells her son, "It is shocking to stop in the middle, she said, still at least Kurosawa will never know." So what's the difference between watching the movie all the way through and paging one's way through books, only to stop in mid-sentence to check a reference in another? I think DeWitt understands in a really beautiful way the multiple forms of making one's way through a text--that it's not all about ordering thoughts, but also about disordering them to show disconnections.

One of my favorite things about the book is DeWitt's thank-you to the designer who found a Greek character set for the book "at the postultimate minute." I can't even type out some of my favorite passages from the book because I don't know how to access the character sets for Icelandic, Japanese, and Greek. (Sometimes I try to imagine this project back to the eighteenth century, when colonialists from the East India Company made prototypes of Bengali type and Sanskrit type for use in the grammars of the languages. I like to think about how those new type forms changed consciousness among the English, but also how the authors maintained the same narratives of civilization happening in stages, where the move from print to oral was a major shift now being recorded in these half-understood grammars of proto-linguistics.)

But the moment that I most wanted to bring up to Davidson and Birkerts was the part where Ludo visits his birth father and tries to make a connection through talking about his love for books. Ludo, flailing for some connection to his birth father, asks him if he ever buries books:
You could bury your books in a plastic bag a few metres down, one on each continent. Then if there was a cataclysm they'd be preserved for posterity. They cold dig them up again. he said he hadn't tried it. I said: What they should really do is bury a book in the foundation of each house. Sealed in plastic. It would help archaeologists in a millennium or so.

I'm less sure that Ludo is speaking in an elegiacal way here--what if he's trying to make associational thinking work for him as it's worked for his acquisition of so much knowledge in the past. And it doesn't really work in this scene, to heart-breaking effect. The act of reading isn't always one which makes connections between humans, it can also exacerbate distance. Birkerts seemed to be working this idea to great elegiacal effect in his book, as though this was the thing that books were supposed to do. Because they've done it for him. And they do it for me, too, and for other people who love to talk and write about books and other forms of writing. But what if writing technologies don't have purposes except for the ones that are cast on them in other forms of writing and critique, when the author's (or blogger's) tone makes "every object that appears in view" subject to another use or interpretation?
Anonymous Anonymous on Wed Apr 30, 05:27:00 PM:
Having had Sven Birkerts as a professor in college, I feel that I should have something useful to mention. All that's coming to me, however, is that he is the only professor I had who flatly refused to use email. I actually thought email would have been a pretty convenient way to communicate about...you know...writing...
 
Blogger Becca on Fri May 02, 08:09:00 AM:
Excellent post. I believe Tedra Osell has made the connection between 18th c. periodicals and blogging, but not sure where.
 
Blogger nbm on Sun May 04, 09:16:00 AM:
I must show that passage from "The Library" to my colleagues; perhaps they can use it to guide the next stacks shift they're planning. But ought not Crabbe's metaphor have noted that folios lie down -- well, they do in our library.

I think you're right to keep us focused on the recurrence of the "decline" narrative.
 

Sunday, April 27, 2008

Everything that was good about your old Texas heritage

My parents' college band gets a mention in the oral history of Willie Nelson in the current issue of Texas Monthly. From the article:
Bill Bentley,57, played drums for Lea Ann and the Bizarros in 1972. He is now the publisher of the Sonic Boomers web site and lives in Los Angeles. We played a George McGovern for President benefit in the summer of '72 at Austin's Zilker Park. Willie came on in the late afternoon, and it was still really hot, and he had [bassist] Bee Spears and Paul English, and Mary Egan from Greezy Wheels on fiddle. It was real quiet and informal. There were probably four thousand people in the audience, most of them hippies, and most didn't know who he was. He had on a black cowboy hat, and he played his first song, and it was like, 'Whoa, who's that?' His charisma was so instantaneous. Those longhairs in the audience were just completely pulled in. My feeling on that day was, that's when he saw that hippies dug him. It was ground zero for redneck rock.

James BigBoy Medlin,63, organized the music for McGovern benefit. He is a screenwriter who lives in Los Angeles. Everybody in the crowd felt like Willie was looking them right in the eye. It was like everything that was good about your old Texas heritage was suddenly coming out from this one guy's mouth and guitar, and people were just blown away. At the end he says, 'All right, we've got to go to John T. Floore's place in Helotes, so anybody that wants to go, come on down and join us.' and I swear it seemed like half the crowd was leaving. Just this parade up there following Willie.

My dad remembers the event this way: "This was the benefit where Ted claims we lent a teen-aged Stevie Ray Vaughn an amplifier, and where Bellamy nearly hit Phil Ochs in the head with a frisbee while he was up performing (possibly apocryphal, I remember Phil Ochs playing, I remember the frisbee, but I only heard Bellamy threw it many years later)."

Saturday, April 26, 2008

Inns in 18th century America

In Reason, Kerry Howley talks about the American Hotel in the 18th century:

Consider the condition of the stranger in mid-18th-century America. “Public authority,” writes Sandoval-Strausz, “was deeply invested in policing people’s comings and goings.” Innkeepers were often required to notify officials when strangers rolled into town, and transients needed official permission to stay for any length of time. In 1765 Boston hired a municipal bouncer of sorts to hunt down unauthorized visitors and send them packing.

One measure of a society’s openness to newcomers is the quality of the space it creates for them. Public houses, the inns of the day, offered a rather tepid welcome. They offered an abundance of alcohol and few rooms; when they were crowded, wayfarers might find themselves sharing a bed with a drunken stranger. One traveling Englishman complained of being “sadly tormented with bugs” while in bed. Yet, standards being what they were, he deemed the place “a good inn.”

In contrast to the humble taverns they replaced, early hotels were sweeping architectural statements.
...
The men who invested fortunes in these displays of hospitality were not just seeking to edify their fellow Americans. They were bringing symbolic heft to the political debate then raging between Hamiltonian Federalists, who favored commercial expansion, and Jeffersonian Republicans, who favored agricultural self-sufficiency. Hotel builders were almost uniformly Federalists. You could read the towering Exchange Coffee House as a structural middle finger gesturing in the direction of Thomas Jefferson.

Monday, April 21, 2008

Horace Greeley chimes in on Clinton vs. Obama

Historian David Kaiser this week compares Hillary Clinton to Richard Nixon, arguing that she is not the friend to her party that Nixon was to his. Kaiser also includes a fascinating quote by Horace Greeley (at right, in one of the two sculptures of him in New York City, this one at City Hall Park), writing about the Whig convention of 1840, where William Henry Harrison was chosen over the more partisan Henry Clay.

Kaiser means to imply that because Harrison's consensus nomination was wise, an Obama nomination would be wise too, but in my reading there are greater parallels if you consider Obama to be Clay and Clinton to be Harrison; Harrison won the big party stronghold states (today New York, California, Michigan, Massachusetts) and swing states (then and now Pennsylvania, Ohio). Clay's greater delegate support going into the nomination came largely from his victory in states usually carried by the other party in the general election (as Obama's delegate support does). And without backroom party negotiations that were never made transparent to the public, the establishment's mainstream candidate might have been bested by an outsider with more grassroots support. I think Kaiser, who supports Obama (as I do), is wrong to think this anecdote suggests the party should unite around him.

Here's Greeley:
The sittings of the Convention were protracted through three or four days during which several ballots for President were taken. There was a plurality though not a majority in favor of nominating Mr Clay but it was in good part composed of delegates from States which could not rationally be expected to vote for any Whig candidate On the other hand delegates from Pennsylvania, Ohio and Indiana said, "We can carry our States for General Harrison but not for Clay." New York and New Jersey cast their earlier for General Scott but stood ready to unite on General Harrison whenever it should be clear that he could be nominated and elected and they ultimately did so. The delegates from Maine and Massachusetts contributed powerfully to secure General Harrison's ultimate nomination. Each delegation cast its vote through a committee and the votes were added up by a general committee which reported no names and no figures but simply that no choice had been effected until at length the Scott votes were all cast for Harrison and his nomination thus effected when the result was proclaimed.

Governor Seward who was in Albany (there were no telegraphs in those days), and Mr Weed, who was present and very influential in producing the result, were strongly blamed by the ardent uncalculating supporters of Mr Clay as having cheated him out of the nomination. I could never see with what reason. They judged that he could not be chosen if nominated while another could be and acted accordingly. If politics do not meditate the achievement of beneficent ends through the choice and use of the safest and most effective means I wholly misapprehend them.
It's easy to compliment your own beneficent ends, safety and effectiveness when it's your guy on top.

Friday, April 18, 2008

CSI as anthropology

In response to Mark's comment about how CSI: is different from Law & Order in its treatment of evidence, I have a big admission to make. I think CSI: is the great science fiction show of our time. The evidence for my case is as follows.

1. The show takes place in Las Vegas, but it's shot as though it's an alternative universe where everything is neon or otherwise spookily or sleazily lit in blues and harsh pinks, like a Joel Schumacher movie from the mid-1990s (Flatliners, I'm looking at you because you are my guilty pleasure; Batman & Robin has the same lighting design and it's embarrassing).

2. I'm going to get to the silliness of the evidence-processing techniques in a second, but first I want to point out that in this lurid alternative universe, computer screens also display the most user-friendly and cross-linked databases ever imagined.

3. Mark's point about television audiences extrapolating too much from CSI: to real courtrooms was explored by Jeffrey Toobin in this New Yorker article last year. Television viewers' (and potential jurors') misguided beliefs about evidence and scientific testing are frustrating, but I'm going to argue that CSI:'s mind-boggling leaps in hard science are done in the service of the show's real interest in anthropology and ethnography. The sureness with which they coordinate information from COTUS, DNA tests, fingerprint tests, and the DMV databases are laughable, but I think they're laughable in a sci-fi-space-show-loosely-interprets-issues-of-gravity-and-sound-traveling-in-space kind of way. The show's writers stabilize evidence collection and comparison so they can do some cool stuff with figuring out how the CSIs know what they know when they're investigating groups with their own weird sets of knowledge bases and conventions for behavior. The whiz-bang DNA testing is a sideshow--a pinning down of knowns--for them to investigate unknowns in the neon-lit realms of unknowable human behavior.

4. The Vegas locale gives them leeway to do a lot of ethnographic observation on how subcultures establish alternative codes of behavior, interaction, and rituals--which often end in death. Because it's Vegas, there are always conventions for these subcultures: for little people, word game enthusiasts, gamblers who rely on probabilistic thinking which may seem alien to non-gamblers, and so on. The show often structures its stories on getting inside the ways of knowing that different subcultures generate--whether they're visiting Vegas or have taken advantage of the sprawl and fast growth of the city to create enclaves. There have been interesting episodes about magicians, vampire wannabes, Gilbert and Sullivan enthusiasts, horror-porn movie-makers, Cirque du Soleil performers, adventure sports practioners, narcocorridos fans, swingers, and lusty developers. In each of these episodes, the CSIs had to figure out how to interpret the artifacts of the procedures these subcultures perform in their rituals: secret trap doors in the magic chambers, evidence of frequent blood tests for the vampirists, genre conventions of horror-porn films, doctored maps for extreme hikers, connections between real-life events and song lyrics in narcocorridos, codes of conduct for swingers' parties, and falsified site maps that developers try to pass off as real.

The show has a fixation on strippers and fetishists. The fetishists, oddly enough, are often the limit case for the CSIs to investigate how they know what they know about bodies. I'm thinking of the episode when they find a murdered dominatrix and at first think she's been routinely tortured; they later realize that the scars from whip lashings are, well, artifacts of one subculture's codes of practice.

5. The investigators have their own methods of evidence retrieval and analysis to match up with the subcultures under study, so the shows are often about competing forms of procedure. These procedures are fetishized on the show as zoom-ins on fingerprint powder brushes, blood-spatters, and recreations of crime scenes. The artifacts of these investigative procedures have to their own aura of sureness because they are what's measuring the other artifacts. The genres of science fiction and crime procedural match up well for this reason.

Furthermore, as Ben has pointed out in this post about Doris Lessing and Lady Mary Wortley Montagu, ethnography and science fiction match up well, too, as we see in Gulliver's Travels. My stepfather, a huge fan of the science fiction author Jack Vance, has always insisted that Vance's short story "The Moon-Moth" should be assigned in anthropology classes. The story is about a bureaucrat on another planet who's sent to foreign city to observe and enforce some order; he wants to mimic the other culture's social practices so he can fit in, but he comes to realize that decoding behavior is more difficult than he thinks. Early in the story, the protagonist, Thissell, reads from the Journal of Universal Anthropology to understand the Sirenese cultural practice for wearing masks. The Journal entry reads:
Masks are worn at all times, in accordance with the philosophy that a man should not be compelled to use a similitude foisted upon him by factors beyond his control; that he should be at liberty to choose that semblance most consonant with his strakh. In the civilized areas of Sirene--which is to say the Titanic littoral--a man literally never shows his face; it is his basic secret.

Vance must be making a joke here in that title of "universal anthropology," for compare it to a few paragraphs on the problems of universalizing comparisons in Franz Boas's Methods of Cultural Anthropology:
The use of masks is found among a great number of peoples. The origin of the custom of wearing masks is by no means clear in all cases, but a few typical forms of their use may easily be distinguished. They are used for deceiving spirits as to the identity of the wearer. The spirit of a disease who intends to attack the person does not recognize him when he wears a mask, and the mask serves in this manner as a protection. In other cases the mask represents a spirit which is personified by the wearer, who in this shape frightens away other hostile spirits. Still other masks are commemorative. The wearer personifies a deceased person whose memory is to be recalled. Masks are also used in theatrical performances illustrating mythological incidents.

These few data suffice to show that the same ethnical phenomenon may develop from different sources. The simpler the observed fact, the more likely it is that it may have developed from one source here, from another there.

Thus we recognize that the fundamental assumption which is so often made by modern anthropologists cannot be accepted as true in all cases. We cannot say that he occurrence of the same phenomenon is always due to the same causes, and that thus it is proved that the human mind obeys the same laws everywhere. We must demand that he causes from which it developed be investigated and that comparisons be restricted to those phenomena which have been proved to be effects of the same causes. We must insist that this investigation be made a preliminary to all extended comparative studies. In researches on tribal societies those which have developed by association must be treated separately from those that have developed through disintegration. Geometrical designs which have arisen from conventionalized representations of natural objects must be treated separately from those that have arisen from technical motives. In short, before extend comparisons are made, the comparability of the material must be proved.

In much the same way that Ursula LeGuin's work is informed by her reading of anthropology--her father was Alfred Kroeber--Vance's story seems to be in direct conversation with Boas. Indeed, he learns his lesson about the problems of comparing his own ideas about masks-as-markers with the Sirenese manipulations of that cultural practice later in the story. Even at the beginning of the story, the comparison problem is foreshadowed to be a problem for him:
Rolver threw up his hands, stepped back. "Your mask," he cried huskily. "Where is your mask?"
Thissell held it up rather self-consciously. "I wasn't sure--"
"Put it on," said Rolver, turning away. He himself wore a fabrication of dull green scales, blue-lacquered wood. Black quills protruded at the cheeks, and under his chin hung a black-and-white-checked pompom, the total effect creating a sense of sardonic supple personality.
Thissell adjusted the mask to his face, undecided whether to make a joke about the situation or to maintain a reserve suitable to the dignity of his post.
"Are you masked?" Rolver inquired over his shoulder.
Thissell replied in the affirmative and Rolver turned. The mask hid the expression of his face, but his hand unconsciously flicked a set of keys strapped to his thigh. The instrument sounded a trill of shock and polite consternation. "You can't wear that mask!" sang Rolver. "In fact--how, where, did you get it?"
"It's copied from a mask owned by the Polypolis museum," Thissell declared stiffly. "I'm sure it's authentic."
Rolver nodded, his own mask seeming more sardonic than ever. "It's authentic enough. It's a variant of the type known as the Sea Dragon Conqueror, and is won on ceremonial occasion by persons of enormous prestige: princes, heroes, master craftsmen, great musicians."
"I wasn't aware--"
Rolver made a gesture of languid understanding. "It's something you'll learn in due course. Notice my mask. Today I'm wearing a Tarn Bird. Persons of minimal prestige--such as you and I, any other out-worlder--wear this sort of thing."
"Odd," said Thissell, as they started across the field toward a low concrete blockhouse. "I assumed that a person wore whatever he liked."
"Certainly," said Rolver. "Wear any mask you like--if you can make it stick. This Tarn Bird, for instance. I wear it to indicate that I presume nothing. I make no claims to wisdom, ferocity, versatility, musicianship, truculence, or any of a dozen other Sirenese virtues."

Presuming nothing is the problem on which the story turns.

So here's to you, CSI:, for somehow managing to not only call into question how your investigators know what they know, but also to convince juries that one shouldn't call into question those same procedures in real life.

Thursday, April 17, 2008

Making monkeys out of experimental psychologists, plus a maddening Monty Hall paradox