Mountebank Blog

"There is nothing so impossible in nature, but mountebanks will undertake; nothing so incredible, but they will affirm."

Andre Norton (1912-2005)

Andre NortonThe Science Fiction Writers of America site reports that Andre Norton, “Grand Dame of Science Fiction and Fantasy,” died yesterday morning at the age of 92. She was never my absolute favorite writer, or one that I returned to very often, but I do remember some wonderful experiences with her writing when I was a kid. And that’s what she really did well…SF (more fantasy) for “young adults.” It’s a difficult audience, and she did a great job of reaching out to them. And I think that her books brought a lot of young women (as readers and writers) into a field which (especially in those days) was almost exclusively “boys’ books.” And she was a cat person, too, which is overwhelmingly common in SF circles, for no clear reason I can think of. In any case, RIP, Ms. Norton.

Herzl’s Diaries

A big argument with an anti-Semite in a thread at DSL Reports motivated me to re-read, for the first time in many years, Theodore Herzl’s diaries. A fascinating read, especially for the window into the life and emotions of an important player in an important historical moment. Especially fun because he was such a cranky, nasty, angry guy. Pretty much walking around disgusted with everyone.

Sometimes big changes happen because of noble, heroic figures, and sometimes because of irritated, obnoxious curmudgeons, who would be a real pain in the ass if you had to deal with them.

It’s also interesting that a quote posted by the above-mentioned anti-Semite, and one which is repeated on many anti-Zionist websites, purporting to be from Herzl’s diary, is completely fabricated. It would be a good example of how with selective misquoting and liberal use of ellipses, it’s easy to make someone appear to have said something completely the opposite of what he really said.

Fallen Dragon

Last week I finished Peter Hamilton’s Fallen Dragon. It’s a fun read, although it’s not as ambitious (or as successful) as his Night’s Dawn trilogy, and it’s not a start of a new trilogy (I don’t think) like Pandora’s Star (not as promising as P’s Star, either).

Fallen DragonIt’s especially fun because of the way the future military/corporate/imperialist forces work in the book as an echo of what’s going on now. The book was written, it seems, just as (or before) our occupation of Iraq was getting started, so the echo may not be directly intended, but that occupation is far from unique, and it’s obvious that Hamilton had exactly the kind of contemporary imperialism we’re practicing in mind when he wrote the book. In Fallen Dragon, hugely powerful multi-national corporations own colonies, most of which they obtain by assuming the debts incurred by other corporations. And when they own a colony, they expect a return…so the way they get it is to send in a military force to invade, occupy, and loot. Then they go away and come back a decade or so later to loot some more. They’re essentially pirates, and they act like pirates, and they excuse their piracy with very blatant commercial/economic reasoning.

Of course, because it’s Hamilton, there’s also quite a bit of pseudo-spiritual deus ex machina wonder-working. But that’s OK, since (also because it’s Hamilton) the engineering and scientific explanations work quite plausibly, and the violence is fast and furious, and the gadgetry (especially the “skin”–the best powered armor for military uses since Starship Troopers) works to full effect.

And the characters are (mostly) believable and worth following. This is primarily important in the case of the protagonist. He’s an occupier, an invader, a pirate–but with morals. We get to see (many flashbacks) why he is who he is, and how (like, I’m sure, Americans in Iraq) he’s not a pirate, not a villain, in his own mind (although many of his superiors are). Hamilton’s clearly got a lot to say. The religious/philosophical/spiritual side of that was clear in Night’s Dawn, and here we see the political, too.

Live Session Scheduled

InnovateInnovate has scheduled the live session for discussion of my article for Tuesday, 2/22, at noon. It’s right in the middle of the day, but I’m hoping colleagues, friends, anyone interested in online education or asynchronous discussion will be able to steal an hour or two (while eating lunch?) to join the discussion. You’ll be able to type your questions in, and hear me talk, and if you have a usb headset/microphone, you can even talk yourself.

I’ve participated in this kind of session before, through the Sloan-C Online Research Workshop, and other venues. While there’s always an inevitable period of “Can you hear me? No? Can you see the powerpoint slide? Yes?” it’s still kind of fun, and a good way to get some discussion going, at least introducing some concepts, for future thought and investigation.

Of course, the asynchronous option remains open–just click on “discuss” after reading the article.

Disagreeing with Dawkins

Richard Dawkins is one of my favorites, and I’m really enjoying his latest book The Ancestor’s Tale, but he does have a very big problem in an introductory chapter. The point is not at all central to his argument, and it’s really contained just in an analogy, but it’s a problem that I encounter far too often, and I would have hoped he’d be beyond this.

Frustratingly, oral tradition peters out almost immediately, unless hallowed in bardic recitations like those that were eventually written down by Homer, and even then the history is far from accurate. It decays into nonsense and falsehood after amazingly few generations. Historical facts about real heroes, villains, animals and volcanoes rapidly degenerate (or blossom, depending upon your taste) into myths about demi-gods, devils, centaurs and fire-breathing dragons.

What he’s missing here is that oral tradition (and “factual” “historical” writing, too, for that matter), is an intentional, creative, discourse. It’s literature–with a purpose and aesthetics that often have nothing to do with “accuracy.” People don’t just tell stories (or write them) about centaurs and dragons because the stories have somehow “degenerated” from the “real” events. They tell those stories because they like them.

Of course, Dawkins finishes that paragraph by saying that “oral traditions and their imperfections needn’t detain us because, in any case, they have no equivalent in evolutionary history.” And that is true. But I’m a little disappointed in him that he insists on seeing these features of oral tradition as “imperfections.” This may be a problem that’s particularly hard for scientists to overcome. It’s an unfortunate blind spot.

February/March Innovate

InnovateThe February/March issue of Innovate Journal of Online Education just came out, and if you look carefully, you’ll see a fascinating article by…me!

You do have to subscribe to read it, but it’s completely free, and (in my opinion) well worth it. Not just for my article, either. I’m very proud to be there among the other contributors. Some excellent work, and I’m glad to be in such distinguished company.

Watch for an announcement of the live interactive sessions, too!

Normally Constituted Writers

Nathaniel Martin, Assistant Surgeon on the HMS Surprise, is clearly the kind of writer I know all too well.

Martin was a thoroughly amiable man, a man of wide reading, but when he came to write he mounted upon a pair of stilts, unusually lofty stilts, and staggered along at a most ungracious pace, with an occasional awkward lurch into colloquialism, giving a strkingly false impression of himself.

And of course, to top that off, he has a very common attitude when showing his writing to others.

But it required no very great penetration to see that he was not convinced, that he still clung to his carefully balanced periods, his similes, his metaphors and his peroration. He had shown his letter to Maturin partly as a mark of confidence and esteem, being sincerely attached to him, and partly so that Maturin might praise it, possibly adding a few well-turned phrases; for like most normally constituted writers Martin had no use for any candid opinion that was not wholly favourable.

I, of course, am a “normally constituted writer!”

Judges

At one point, early on, I thought of going to law school–not to be a lawyer, but to be a judge. Somehow the idea was appealing to me.

On the other hand…

Sure, it is weak and illiberal to speak slightingly of any considerable body of men; yet it so happens that the only judges I have known have been froward companions, and it occurs to me that not only are they subjected to the evil influence of authority but also to that of righteous indignation, which is even more deleterious. Those who judge and sentence criminals address them with an unbridled, vindictive righteousness that would be excessive in an archangel and that is indecent to the highest degree in one sinner speaking to another, and he defenceless. Righteous indignation every day, and publicly applauded! I remember an acquaintance of mine literally foaming – there was a line of white between his lips – as he condemned a wretched youth to transportation for carnal knowledge of a fine bold upstanding wench: yet this same man was himself a smell-smock, a cold, determined lecher, a voluptuary, a libertine, a discreet frequenter of Mother Abbot’s establishment in Dover Street; while another, in whose house I have drunk uncustomed wine, tea, and brandy, told a smuggler, with great vehemence, that society must be protected from such wicked men as he and his accomplices.

A Dark View

Stephen Maturin in his diary…meditating on life. Not a terribly appropriate type of sentiment for a man (me) on the eve of his tenth wedding anniversary, but Maturin, like all of us, is sometimes subject to these meditations. I am not tonight, but I have been before, and will be again.

Hatred the only moving force, a petulant unhappy striving – childhood the only happiness, and that unknowing; then the continual battle that cannot ever possibly be won; a losing fight against ill-health – poverty for nearly all. Life is a long disease with only one termination and its last years are appalling: weak, racked by the stone, rheumatismal pains, senses going, friends, family, occupation gone, a man must pray for imbecility or a heart of stone. All under sentence of death, often ignominious, frequently agonizing: and then the unspeakable levity with which the faint chance of happiness is thrown away for some jealousy, tiff, sullenness, private vanity, mistaken sense of honour, that deadly, weak and silly notion.