The Extraordinary Tourist
Why Satanism is Dumb.
Wednesday, March 26, 2008
I was recently informed that Satanism is dumb because:
"The first rule of Satanism is to 'do what you want' therefore, if you follow any of the rules after that, that is someone else telling you what to do and not you 'doing what you want'. Hence Satanism is dumb." I don't know the rules of Satanism and I'm paraphrasing this revelation from someone who promptly declared themselves to be very smart. So smart, in fact, they thought they might inform the Satanist 'Pope' at their first opportunity.
My article was prompted because this person was very pleased with their conclusion and, at the time, I didn't want to lock horns with such a theological master. (Notice how I'm using big words like 'theological' and 'revelation' to make it sound like I actually know something about this subject - I had to look both words up just to check I was using them in the correct context by the way).
Back to the rules of Satanism (which I suspect are much like the Pirate Code and more like guidelines than actual rules). Perhaps you've spotted the flaws in this argument against Satanism?
My immediate thought was, what if you choose to follow the rest of the rules? It's your choice right? You're doing what you want to do which is follow the rest of the rules.
Taking that thought to an extreme conclusion, if 'doing what you want' means choosing to follow all the rules of Christianity, does that make you a Satanist or a Christian?
Then, I thought a bit more about the original argument. If you follow the first rule of Satanism then, technically, that is someone else telling you to do what you want therefore you're not 'doing what you want'. Hmmm... almost as weird a logic as the argument its self.
At this point of my writing, I thought I'd do some research of my own. It turns out that the first rule of Satanism (at least the one referenced above) isn't actually a rule but rather it is a major Satanic social ethic that reads like this:
"Do whatever you want as long as you harm no undeserving person"
Source: Satanic Ethics and teachings on morality in Satanism by Vexen Crabtree. The same source article above references Eleven Satanic Laws, none of which state 'Do whatever you want'. The article also states that Satanists are not bound to these laws and that there is no taboo amongst Satanists if the laws are broken. Hence, one might conclude that these 'laws' are more like 'guidelines'.
Like most people I thought Satanism is akin to 'devil worship' but, based upon my very limited reading thus far I suspect 'devil worship' is a Christian label applied to Satanists. Reading the eleven laws, they actually seem quite reasonable statements, with one or two perhaps leaning towards extreme violence if taken too literally.
In any event, I don't wish to be thought of as promoting Satanism. This article was simply to vent some thoughts I had about someone else's conclusion on the subject.
I don't profess to have any detailed understanding of theology in general and wouldn't like to prove my ignorance by stating any further poorly drawn and unresearched conclusions. Best leave that to other people.Labels: life, observation, social
Squeezing the Toothpaste: A Metaphor
Saturday, March 01, 2008
 I remember when toothpaste was sold in a metal tube. Back then, as a child, you'd cop it from Mum or Dad if you squeezed the tube anywhere but from the bottom. You could even buy special keys that would wind the toothpaste tube up from the bottom so you could get every last bit of paste - no wastage.
Then along came the plastic tubes. Finally you could squeeze anywhere and the tube would retain its shape - or so they said in the sales pitch. For the most part this was true. It wasn't as much of a problem squeezing the new plastic tube from the top. Squeezing toothpaste from the tube was now easy - or so you thought.
The thing about squeezing the tube from the top (or even the middle) is that it leaves some of the paste at the bottom. Eventually you do have to spend extra time pushing the paste from the bottom up into the top of the tube.
Not like the old days when squeezing from the bottom meant you got just the right amount of paste and the tube was always ready for the next person to use. Efficient.
Can the inefficiencies of modern toothpaste tubes be a metaphor for modern times where people often choose the easy option, not realizing that it will actually mean extra work later on? I think so.
The 'easy' option sometimes is deceptive. A little bit more thought can often reveal a better way of doing things that is actually less work.
That's why I still squeeze my toothpaste tube from the bottom (not that this works very well when others in my family don't...*sighs*).Labels: life, observation
Two Year Old Artist paints the Big Time.
Monday, December 24, 2007
 The Painting on the right is called 'Sunrise' by artist Freddie Linsky. It's an acrylic on canvas and wouldn't look out of place in any modern art gallery. Yet the artist is only two years old.
Freddie's mother, a lecturer at the Hampstead School of Art and a freelance art critic, began posting Freddie's artwork online to collector, Charles Saatchi's online gallery, passing the work off as that of a more accomplished artist. Making up plausible descriptions such as this for 'Sunrise'...
"A bold use of colour. Inspired by the 'plein air' habit of painting by Monet, drawing on the natural world that surrounds us all."
You can read more about Freddie and see images of him at work in an article that appeared on the Daily Mail web site titled, Toddler fools the art world into buying his tomato ketchup paintings.
Whilst Freddie's Mum admits it was all just for a bit of a laugh, things began to get serious when Freddie's work started to sell and he got offers to exhibit his work in real world galleries.
Now I'm must admit that Freddie's work isn't half bad. It's not ground breaking but it does have the freedom of expression that only comes with childhood. Before the realisation sets in that paintings are supposed to look like something that can be recognised (or so we think).
However, given that his mum has talked him up in such a way as to fool respected galleries and collectors into thinking he's much more established, I'd say she's probably set Freddie's career back a couple of years. Considering Freddie's two that means he's probably, at the very least, going to have to go back to using the ketchup that he began with.
Many people have the view that abstract expressionism (which is what Freddie's art is) has no place being called art. I disagree. This kind of art can be very powerful, moving and/or just plain pleasing to the eye. However, at some point we have to stop fooling ourselves into thinking that this kind of art requires advanced technical skill. It doesn't - as Freddie and his contemporaries (and he does have them - think four year old Marla) clearly demonstrate.
Personally I find creating art like Freddie's difficult because I'm find it hard to attach my emotions to non subjective mark making. It just doesn't express everything I have to say. However if you really enjoy just making those marks and gestures you can really make an abstract work seem alive.
At some point we have to admit that this kind of art is accessible to toddlers simply because they just enjoy spreading the paint around.Labels: art, observation
I'm an Adult Now. I can do anything I want!
Thursday, October 18, 2007
A common myth that teenage adults have as they start to get closer to that arbitary line of being an 'adult' is that adults can do anything they want. I'm sure millions of parents have heard from their teen, at one time or another, "I'm an adult now so I can do what I want." A statement that clearly is a childish justification for poor decision making.
Why? Because usually your teen will come out with this statement if you won't let them do something that they really want. To be fair, sometimes it's just the parents being overly protective but, for whatever reason, being an 'adult now' is a childish way to say I don't care for your concern I'm going to do what I want. (Though in that last sentence you can exchange the word 'concern' for 'unreasonable attitude' or more likely yet just insert the word 'sh_t').
Apart from the obvious physical differences the key difference between children and adults is that adults make all their own decisions. Children do make some of their own decisions and are given more and more decisions as they get closer to adulthood but making all your own decisions isn't the same as 'being able to do anything you want'.
Whilst adults do make a lot of their own decisions they can still be held accountable for poor decision making. Just ask Britney Spears who lost custody of her children due to her poor choices. All adults are answerable to the standards of behaviour that we, as a society, have agreed upon expressed in something called 'The Law'.
Of course few people know the fine details of the Law but most of us know simple stuff like treating each other with respect. Most of us also have a fair idea when we do something that breaks the law too.
Leading to the point of this article is the idea that the decisions any one of us get to make is largely affected by decisions made by other people. Decisions that are beyond our control. Things like the Law is one such example of decisions made by others that can affect our choices but I'm referring to decisions on a more local and personal level.
For example. Lets say your lawnmower is broken but you need to cut your lawn before the landlord comes over for a routine inspection of your house. You could either; 1) Not worry about cutting the lawn and wear the consequences. 2) Hire a lawnmower or, 3) Borrow the neighbours lawnmower.
Decision one, don't cut the lawn. Entirely under your control 100% your choice.
Decision two, hire a lawnmower. If you have the money and you can find somewhere that has a lawnmower available for hire then good. Another decision under your control. There's a few variables that you can't control though. If they can't be met then this decision may not be open to you.
Decision three, borrow the neighbours lawnmower. This one could be straight forward if you're on good terms with your neighbour however this decision is only open to you if your neighbour is the kind of person who would like to help you out.
You see, some decisions we have are made available to us through the decisions of others. Lets say, the last time you borrowed your neighbours lawnmower, they had to ask you for it back and you returned it with no fuel at all even though, when you borrowed it, it had a full tank.
Maybe this time you won't be able to borrow it. Your poor choices the last time you borrowed the lawnmower have lead to a situation where you no longer can make a decision to borrow it again. It's not an option, unless you have an extremely forgiving neighbour.
Being an adult who can seemingly do anything they want is not about passing some arbitary age where society says you're an adult. Being an adult is about understanding how the world works and how you can give yourself the widest possible number of choices when it comes to decision making.
In general, if you do the right thing by other people, they'll be more open and receptive to the decisions you want to make. Not only that, they may just throw in a few more options that could help you out. Doing the wrong thing will almost certainly mean fewer choices.
It's not a hard lesson to learn but it's one that so called 'teen adults' fail to grasp. They'll spend a lot of time trying to do the right thing by their friends yet fail to apply the same concept to the rest of the people in their lives.
I think I'll close this article the same way I closed the article about Britany...
"The truth is that you can get away with doing so much more of what you want simply by doing the right thing by the people around you."Labels: life, observation, social
The World Wide Pluto Conspiracy.
Tuesday, October 09, 2007
Popular YouTuber Nalts recently posted this video rant about the planet pluto being downgraded to 'dwarf' planet status. Nalts video opposes the announcement on August 24th, 2006, by the The International Astronomical Union (IAU), that Pluto would no longer retain full planetary status due its size being considerably smaller than other 'planet like' objects found in the same region of space.
You can read about the announcement in this article from Science Daily which includes an illustration of other objects, amongst them a larger object called 'Xena', that some astronomers were hoping would achieve 'planet' status.
The Nalts video jogged my memory of an article that I wrote way back in 1996 that positioned my beliefs on the question of alien life forms and whether they do or don't exist. What is remarkable about the article is that it puts forward the idea that the planet Pluto may not actually exist. Here is an extract:
Just because you haven’t seen a UFO or an Alien life form doesn’t mean they don’t exist. Most people have never seen the planet Pluto either yet we accept that it exists because we’ve all seen pictures and enough independent astronomers have actually seen it through a telescope to confirm that for us. If that was all the evidence we need then UFOs and Aliens would be fact. We’ve all seen pictures of them and there are enough independent witnesses to confirm their existence for us.
In both cases how do you know that what your looking at is truth. Just because an astronomer focuses your telescope for you doesn’t automatically mean that you’re looking at Pluto. Yes - welcome to the world wide Pluto conspiracy.
Possibility and the need for an open mind is vitally important to reaching your own conclusions on what is truth. One day in the distant future one of your ancestors could be standing on Pluto thinking “Yes, at last I have concrete proof that Pluto exists.”
Then one of my ancestors walks over and says “Pluto? no mate you ever heard of the World wide Pluto conspiracy that was uncovered in the early part of the 21st century?”
- TET, 26 August 1996.
Did I know something back in 1996 - almost exactly ten years before Pluto was down graded in August 2006? Technically, while the big rock in space called 'Pluto' does exist, it no longer exists as a planet. According to the IAU it should never have been classified as a planet in the first place based on the size of other objects found recently with more modern telescopes.
Is this just the tip of the ice berg in the World Wide Pluto Conspiracy? Is Xena working to replace Pluto as the furthest planet from our sun? Could Mercury be under threat in its newly acquired status as the smallest planet in our system? Who are these people at the IAU and why do they get to decide if Pluto can be a planet or not?
You've gotta love a good conspiracy theory no matter how spaced out!
Footnote: The above article isn't intended to be a serious contribution to the discussion. If you would like to know more about the IAU's discussions about defining just what constitutes a 'planet' then a good place to start is this article on their web site.Labels: news, observation, video
Photography and Semaphore Beach.
Sunday, October 07, 2007
Semaphore Beach, Port Adelaide, South Australia is a favorite place for Enigma and I to visit. Especially around sunset (you know the walk on the beach, kind of romantic type thing that people like). Ever since Enigma bought a professional standard digital camera (of the kind that you can attach all manner of specialized lenses to) we've used our trips to Semaphore as an opportunity to improve our photography.
I've had some training throughout my three years at art school on the technical side of working a manual SLR photography camera. Hence I know about apertures, shutter speeds, depth of field and other such technical things but I'm very rusty in applying that knowledge. I never really embraced the idea of me being a photographer even though my teacher said I had a great eye for photos.
Tackling the workings of a modern SLR digital camera can be quite a challenge. Most of the principles are the same as traditional cameras but finding your way around digital displays, menus and buttons unique to modern equipment is a task both Enigma and I muddle through together. I try to explain what should happen with the settings that we kind of work out together. Enigma does all the composition, framing and actually pushing the button to take a picture.
What makes it even harder is that Enigma's camera is able to use lenses that don't work with the cameras automatic functions. This means that we have to work out apertures and focusing ourselves. It's a bit hit and miss but thank god for the digital camera's ability to take hundreds of photos at virtually no cost (other than wearing down the batteries).
Whilst Enigma takes her photos I also carry around my point and shoot - any idiot could use - digital camera. It's fully automatic but does allow for some manual settings if you really want to get a bit arty. Mostly I leave it entirely on automatic. It doesn't have any kind of optical zoom lense (the digital zoom on it produces awful, pixelated images) so I'm pretty much stuck with having to physically move myself to frame my shots.
However something that we both learnt on our last trip to the beach was that sometimes automatic settings are the best to go with. The photo at the top of this post is one that I took of the Semaphore jetty with my basic camera. I just framed the shot so the brightest part of the sun was blocked out and the camera did the rest. Easy. How it should be. Technology working to assist creativity.
Enigma was trying out a new lense that was really struggling with the light once the sun was really low in the sky. Neither of us being that knowledgeable about lenses, we experimented with it quite a bit, until finally it just became obvious that the light just wasn't enough to get a decent picture. Even with the aperture open wide and the shutter set at a slow enough speed that was still good for hand held photography.
Noticing that my camera was still handling the light fairly well and producing well lit photos, I advised that Enigma should simply reattach the lense that came with her camera - the one that allows all of its automatic functions to work - and try that.
The suggestion worked a treat. Enigma was able to take well lit photos for quite some time after that. Even a few night shots too. Sometimes fully automatic is really the way to go. Especially if you're like us and aren't fully conversant with the settings.
More to the point. Photography is meant to be fun. If you are fighting with your camera, using manual settings, it doesn't hurt to switch back to auto for a while. Just so you can get back to the creative part of framing and composing your pictures.
Another tip I learnt during art school, that applies particularly to taking sunset photos, but is a good rule on any photography excursion. Always look behind, down and above, from your current position when taking a photo. Not all the best photos are right in front of you. Below are two examples of photos that I may not have seen if I hadn't taken a moment to look the other way. Both were taken roughly at the same time as the jetty photo above. (Note: if you weren't aware clicking on any image in my blog will usually show a larger version).
 Labels: art, observation, travel
The Trouble with Superman.
Wednesday, August 15, 2007
 I'm probably one of the last Superman fans to see the latest movie Superman Returns. I missed it in the theatres and it's taken this long for me to see it on DVD. This isn't meant to be a review but my overall impression was that the movie got almost everything right.
Brandon Routh is perfectly cast. There's enough of Reeve in Brandon's performance to say this is the Superman we remember from the previous films. There has to be because this movie is a sequel not a re-imagining of the franchise like Batman Returns is.
Kate Bosworth has been criticised for being miscast as Lois Lane. Personally I always thought Margot Kidder was not only miscast but the weakest link in all the previous films. Whilst Kate may not be the ideal Lois, in my view she's an improvement on Margot for playing the whiny, pseudo independent female lead.
Kevin Spacey is the reason I wanted to see the film. More than anything else. His performance in the movie Se7en as the twisted, moralistic, killer was so convincing that you just know Kevin would add a whole new level of evil to Lex Luthor. Much more of a nemesis for Superman than Gene Hackman's version of the character - and I liked Gene's version. Even though Kevin's appearance in Se7en was brief you have to believe that his character is capable of all the shocking murders once you meet him. Kevin didn't disappoint in Se7en and he didn't disappoint as Lex.
The script was the real let down. It was fantastic in the detail and understanding of each character but it did what all the Superman Movies before it have done. It went beyond the suspension of disbelief in resolving the story. That is the trouble with Superman.
Superman is the greatest of all superheroes. When you watch a Superman movie you expect to see things that you know are clearly impossible for any normal human being but this is Superman so you happily suspend your disbelief. In doing so you make the Superman legend seem plausible. You make Superman seem like someone who could exist.
What destroys that suspension for me is that, whilst Superman is... well... super, everything else around him is subject to the same laws of physics that we all understand. For example, in Superman III (I think) Superman freezes an entire lake, picks it up by one edge and flies it over a chemical plant (I think) fire. There is no way, even Superman could have picked up the frozen lake the way he does.
The ice wouldn't be able to support its self and would break off in his hands. To be even half way believable he would've had to have got underneath it like Superman gets underneath the Krypton island in Superman Returns.
Superman movies are filled with inconsistencies like this.
Another example is in Superman Returns when Superman puts down the shuttle plane he's just rescued, holding it at all times from the nose. Again it would break off in his hands and come down with a bigger and very jarring crash. Note later in the film when he rescues Kitty in her runaway car. Superman puts the car down, supporting it from the middle and then maintains support whilst he puts the front down and then moves to the back of the car. Much more believable.
Granted the aeroplane is a much bigger proposition but there is a fine line between what we believe Superman can do and keeping it within our suspension of disbelief.
For example, some reviewers think that Superman's use of heat vision in Superman Returns to melt falling glass before it hits bystanders on the street is really cool. Sure it is but really, what a useless thing to do. As if all the glass would fall out of the windows at exactly the same time, making it possible for Superman to melt it all in momentary fly by.
Not only that but he only does one street. What about the other side of the buildings on that street? What about the buildings on neighboring streets? Well you can't save everybody but you do what you can, right? It's only a small moment of questioning but it takes you out of the movie.
Back to Superman Returns and the big, giant gaping plot hole inconsistency that has nothing to do with any real physics but is entirely accepted as fact in the Superman legend. Kyptonite is lethal to Superman. It is so lethal that just a small rock of it will render Superman unable to even stand (as per the previous movies and I've even seen him collapse in the TV series Smallville).
This movie wants us to believe that within the proximity of an island of kryptonite (that's an ISLAND not a small rock) Superman can:- Save Lois, Richard and their son (well Superman's son apparently) from a submerged boat that he single handly lifts from out of the water.
- Lift a Sea Plane so it can take off.
- Lift an ISLAND (did I mention it was an ISLAND) of Kryptonite and fly it into space whilst having a shard of Kryptonite still embeded in his side.
Those three points alone blew it for me. All through the scenes with the ISLAND OF KRYPTONITE (it's an ISLAND for god sake - Luthor encased the crystal in Kyptonite because he wanted to make an ISLAND of Kryptonite so Superman would be rendered powerless) my head was screaming IT'S AND ISLAND OF KRYPTONITE!!!
The trouble with Superman is there is a fine line between what we believe Superman can do and keeping it within our suspension of disbelief. It is for this reason that I've never been able to fully embrace Superman as the pinnacle of what a superhero is.
Batman has always been my favorite because Batman has boundaries. Limits to what he can do that we all understand because Batman is human. Even the latest Spiderman movies never go beyond what you believe the character is capable of even though we don't really understand the physics of Spider powers.
Some day I hope they'll get someone who knows the Superman legend like Christopher Nolan knows the Batman legend. Someone who can keep Superman believable for the entire length of the film. Someone who can make Superman... well... Super.Labels: movies, observation
Online Friends: The New Trading Cards.
Monday, July 30, 2007
I'm a member of so many online social networks I've lost count. Networks such as myspace, Hi5, Flickr, YouTube, ICQ, MSN, Yahoo etc. What's common to all of them is that people will request you become their friend and then, after you accept, they'll never communicate with you again. Why?
I have a theory that people on these networks collect friends like kids collect trading cards. The more friends you have the cooler you must be. There are people on these various networks that have over 1000 friends. I bet they only ever talk directly to maybe, at a stretch, twenty of them on a regular basis.
What further reinforces this idea of friends being like trading cards is the buzz you get when someone, who you know is really popular on the network, asks to be your friend or accepts your friend request. Now you can impress people more by saying that person is your friend.
I don't have many friends on any of the networks I'm a member of because I rarely make requests to other people to become my friend. When I do it's usually because it is someone I actually know in some way and not just some random person I found in a profile search.
The majority of friends I do have are randoms. People who sent a request to me. Some day I'm going to take the time to message them to find out who they are but for now they're pretty much trading cards in my friends list.Labels: observation, people, social
The Deadly Art of Dish Washing.
Saturday, June 23, 2007
Thursday 21 June 2007...
Mother's everywhere worry about their children being out late at night. What do they get up to? Are they being safe? Will they make the right choices and stay out of trouble? Yet not a single concern is given, in fact, mothers often encourage, their children to participate in the deadly art of dish washing.
Yes, dish washing. After traveling, by road, more than half way across a country that contains more perils than a Batman movie, dish washing, the day after my return, is what floors me (quite literally). It is my number two most serious accident, in my life, right after breaking a leg skateboarding. Let me explain.
I was washing the dishes, around about midday. I had the dish cloth inside a glass, wiping around the inner rim when a piece of the glasses side breaks off. My right hand continued to turn in the glass, into the leading edge of the break, slicing deeply into the lower back of my thumb. Shi...ouch!
As you can imagine, blood starts pouring out. I'm thinking 'this isn't good', dropped the rest of the glass into the water, grabbed the dish cloth, covered the wound and applied pressure. Now what?
At that moment I hear my partner pull into the drive way, returning home from work. A minute or two later she walks into the dining area, sees me holding the dish cloth on my hand, over the sink and asks "are you okay?"
"No, I just sliced my hand open on a glass."
She rushes to get our first aid kit as my head starts to spin. Coming back, my partner has time to move me away from the sink to the serving bench, take away the dish cloth and bandage the wound (which appears to have stopped bleeding from what I saw). All the while my head is spinning and I'm trying to stay upright.
I've never fainted before. Not even when I broke my leg. I have a theory. When I broke my leg the pain was so great that my brain couldn't do anything but think 'oh my god that hurts, oh my god that hurts, did I mention that hurts?' etc. When I sliced my hand open, whilst the initial cut hurt, after that, there wasn't really any unbearable pain just blood pouring out where it shouldn't. Therefore, my brain had time to think, 'this looks really serious - if I tune out and live in denial maybe it will go away?'
I guess my partner helped me down to the kitchen floor, where I woke up, what I imagine to be seconds later, lying down. She had gone off to quickly lock up the house and phone the doctor. My head was still spinning but lying on the kitchen floor was really uncomfortable and probably very worrying. I got up walked myself into the lounge and flopped onto a couch.
By the time the doctor had been phoned, my head was starting to level out again and I was feeling a little better. From this point on I was able to walk to the car and into the doctors surgery where I had five stitches put in and a fairly impressive looking bandage applied to cover the damage. Afterwards my partner and I went out to lunch as planned.
As I'm writing this it is nearly two days after the accident. I still have my bandage on. It comes off this afternoon. In eight days the stitches will be removed. I'm okay really. Don't worry too much. I've kept the hand elevated and haven't really experienced much pain at all.
However, the trauma I experienced whilst washing dishes has scared me for life. I don't think I'll be able to go near a kitchen sink or wash another dish ever again. The memories of that fateful day are just too much to bare. Washing dishes is far too dangerous and life threatening... well that's my story anyway. Not that anyone believes me.
My partner bought one of those 'mop on a stick' type dish washing utensils so I would never have to stick my hand into a glass to clean it again. I guess she believes in the idea of 'if you fall off a horse you've just gotta dust yourself off and get right back up there and ride it again'.Labels: humor, life, observation, people
Coolgardie and the Road to Perth.
Saturday, June 09, 2007
Road Trip Day 17: 8th June 2007
West of Coolgardie is the Eastern end of the Great Eastern Highway. The road to Perth, Western Australia. When Rose and I turned into our motel last night the car headlights had picked out some curious characters across the road. Before heading off the next morning we just had to investigate.
 Rose and I have been sticking with Central Standard Time (rather than change to Western Standard Time) in order to get earlier starts. This meant we had plenty of time to have a quick wander around, what turned out to be 'Ben Prior's Park', an outdoor museum featuring many historical machines and characters from the early gold rush days of the Coolgardie region.
One such character was this prospector, A.P. Brophy and his camel 'Misery'. Brophy is remembered for claiming the world record for riding his camel 600 miles without giving it a single drink back in 1895.
There are other characters in this museum but the majority of the display is old steam engines, wagons, farming tools, cars and more. All of which form a part of a collection owned by the late Ben Prior who was a long time resident of the town.
 One particular character, who must surely be out of place, is this likeness of 'Ned Kelly' the famous Australian Bush ranger (unless Coolgardie had a copy cat bush ranger?). I suspect (though I'm only speculating) that this Ned Kelly may have been used at the BP service station across the road before being replaced by the Ned Kelly that is proudly displayed on the roof (see photo) - there is something of a likeness in their construction.
The rest of our day was taken with driving. We had somewhere around 590 kilometres to get through so the only stop we made was to have lunch at a roadhouse in Merredin.
 Since this is my last post about driving there are one or two things I like to rant about:
1. If you're a truck driver being over taken by a car using a lane specifically designated as an overtaking lane. If that car is more than two thirds past you and the overtaking lane is running out, try easing up on the accelerator just a bit. Seriously. Would it kill you to slow down just a touch so the car can finish passing safely? I know it's not that hard to slow down vehicle's that large. I should 'cause I've followed behind road trains long enough to know exactly how much time is needed to slow down just a few kilometres per hour. It's not that long at all.
2. If you're a truck driver being over taken by a car, where there is no overtaking lane and the road is narrow and has rough edges, would it kill you to slow down a bit? Especially if your rig is being bumped around by strong cross winds, would it kill you?
3. If you're a truck driver stop pushing car drivers into unsafe practices simply because you have to travel at the maximum speed for trucks at all times regardless when hauling goods long distances. Would it kill you to slow down a bit?
4. If you're a truck driver, don't go commenting on my above rants. All car drivers are reckless, dangerous and should be banned from driving. I know - you don't need to list all the stupid things we do. Just slow down a bit and maybe next time I won't nearly crash into the side of your damn truck!
The only other thing I wanted to mention was that there is a heck of a lot of 'roadkill' on the WA side of Eyre Highway. Maybe it's just because it's such a large stretch of natural wilderness? Dead kangaroos were most common but I also saw a dingo and maybe a few other animals too (couldn't tell what they were after they'd been hit. Too small to be roos though).
The sea gulls of the desert (crows) were a bit of a worry too. All along the highway there were crows on the side of the road waiting for free lunch.
Rose and I finally got to Perth and pulled into her home just as the sun was going down. It was definitely good to finally be finished travelling for a while. I'll be staying in Perth for about a week before catching a plane back to South Australia.
The trip isn't quite over yet.Labels: observation, road trip 2007, travel
Emo Spider-man what a loser.
Friday, May 11, 2007
This isn't a movie review, it's more of a movie reflection. My thoughts after seeing Spider-man 3 on the cinema screen. I'm assuming, if you're reading this then you have seen the movie. I'm not going to do any kind of story outline or worry about giving away plot details. If you haven't seen it then don't read further.
Before I get on to the movie... WTF is with the movie's official site? Trying to find a cast and crew list is next to impossible, none of the photo galleries have captions and there's precious little text to read outside of the film's blogs. It's a sad day when you have to visit sites not directly related to a film in order to get information about cast and crew. Thanks to Premiere for your great article.
I think it's time director, Sam Raimi, turned his attention else where. Spider-man, the first movie was excellent. Spider-man 2, not too bad. Spider-man 3, it's all gone back to being a cartoon. It reminds me of Joel Schumacher's catch cry on the Batman 3 and 4 sets - "remember we're making a cartoon!" A catch cry that would ultimately doom the franchise for years because Joel didn't take the material seriously.
My biggest criticism of Spider-man 3 lies in the editing. There are several sequences in this movie with a lot happening yet at many points time seems to be suspended for dialog. Case in point, the scene with an out of control crane in which Spidey rescues Gwen Stacy by breaking her fall out of a sky scraper. Cut to the ground. The crane is still out of control and Spidey is talking to new Bugle photographer, Eddie Brock about who is Spidey's official photographer. Err...crane out of control - when you have a moment Spider-man.
This kind of editing happens a lot in the final big fight sequence too. The action elsewhere appears to be suspended whilst we wait for some important dialog between the current protagonists on the screen.
The plot lines are not interwoven well at all. Everything feels to be happening one after the other rather than concurrently (like it should be) in many places.
So lets get onto the whole 'black spidey suit'. Some, unexplained, black, living alien goo crashes to earth in a meteor shower. Not only does Peter and MJ not notice the bright flash of a meteor landing (exploding!) near his motor scooter but the alien goo gets no further explanation as to it's source (and no one back at the science lab where Peter takes a sample of the goo ever questions where it came from?).
The goo when combined into a Spidey suit is meant to enhance the existing powers of the wearer through symbiosis? Okay. This is fiction so I can buy that. Why then does Eddie Brock become the 'anti-spider-man' 'Venom' with all Spider-mans powers when he wears the suit? Eddie Brock doesn't have Spider-man's abilities. Am I supposed to assume that the alien goo absorbed some of Spidey's powers and gave them to Eddie?
Throughout the film, Peter Parker wears the black suit under his street clothes and becomes 'Emo' Peter. At least that is what is implied by the 'emo style' fringe and darker wardrobe. Yet at the same time the suit is making him more confident and self assured. Very un-emo like. Worst scene. Peter Parker dancing, Travolta style down the street thinking he's the coolest thing around. It was meant to be funny (given the reactions he got from passers by) but it just made me cringe like a lame joke told badly.
Getting on to other characters. Harry Osborn (a.k.a. the Green Goblin Junior.) played by James Franco must be the most miscast character of the franchise. He's unconvincing in virtually every scene. He's got a brooding face that looks like a smacked babies behind. Bugs the hell out of me. Aside from that, Goblin and Spidey fight sequences - play it up for the computer game. Boring and predictable. Just like the Pod races in Star Wars, Episode 1. Computer game written all over it.
Sandman. What were they thinking at that particle physics lab? Even the police and their dogs got through that fence to look at whatever that particle generator thingy was? Maybe they weren't too concerned about security because the machine couldn't actually kill you, it would just turn you into a super sandman with incredible strength and an ability to fly with the wind? I hope they had a permit for that thing.
Sand "I've got to get money to save my daughter" man was the most pointless of bad guys in the film. Nice effects to create him though. How gullible is Peter Parker? Every time he was told a new version of his uncle's death he believed it without question? Sandman said he didn't mean to kill Peter's uncle. Sandman is an escaped convict who thinks turning to crime is a rational solution to raise money for his daughter (ever heard of a fund raising dinner? Getting a Job? Applying for a loan?). Everything he says must be true.
Eddie Brock doesn't strike me as the kind of guy who would go to church for any reason let alone to ask God to kill Peter. Yet he does after being humiliated by Peter Parker in the work place. He seems more like the kind of guy that would've got plastered at the nearest bar then confronted Peter in a drunken rage later in the day.
However, Venom has to be the most interesting bad guy of the whole series. Shame he's only there in the last two acts. I thought the effects to create him were spot on and incredibly menacing. Even if I don't understand why Eddie gets Spidey powers? They should have scrapped Sandman and Green Goblin and just done a Spidey/black suit/Venom film. Could've been way fiercer and far more edge of your seat.
Instead the only edge of your seat stuff we have here is various characters at various times potentially plummeting to their death - yawn. Didn't that happen in the other two Spidey films?
My final gripe for this article (I could go on) is, what is it with Spider-man's mask? In all the movies Spider-man ends up fighting without the mask on. Particularly in the major, concluding fight sequences, where hundreds of onlookers, including people that know Peter, are watching. In Spider-man 3 everyone in the crowd at the end is either taking photos or filming for the TV news. How could they not get a picture of Spidey without the mask? Doesn't the TV news own a zoom lense?
I've been knocking this movie the whole way through. I will say it wasn't a bad experience. It was worth going to see. I just hope they do a re-cut for DVD that makes the whole thing flow better. It was the editing, more than anything else, that let this film down. Everything else I can say - well it's fiction so it doesn't have to always make sense.
I'd still by the DVD for the bonus features and Venom.Labels: movies, observation
Competition with a day job.
Monday, April 30, 2007
User Generated Content changed everything. Suddenly, the corporations lost their control. No longer could they spoon feed us propaganda.
At one time filming your life for the world to see was considered voyeurism. Now it's entertainment. We all can be stars.
The loudest voice comes from those who understand the medium rather than those with the most money and resources.
Now we can talk to each other and that's dangerous.
The next person you meet could be your last.
You don't know them. You only think you do.
You meet them anyway.
Fortunately today isn't the end it's a beginning.
People getting together, collaborating. That's dangerous.
Corporations now have new competition.
Competition that isn't driven by profit.
Competition with a day job.
User generated content changed everything. We all can be stars.Labels: ideas, internet, observation, video
ANZAC Day
Wednesday, April 25, 2007
It would be remiss of me not to write a post about ANZAC day on April 25th. I would say that this day is about as patriotic as Australians get. Not even on Australia Day do we get this patriotic (in my opinion anyway).
If you're not familiar with ANZAC day, it is an Australian (and probably a New Zealand) holiday to remember all our service men and women who fought in many wars. Specifically it starts with those that fought during World War One at ANZAC Cove in Turkey.
Though I understand what ANZAC day is about and recognise its importance to Australia and its history, I've never yet attended a dawn service, watched a march of veterans or generally been involved in the spirit of the day.
Perhaps that makes me un-Australian? Maybe. The paradox is that all those service men and women fought for my freedom. My right to choose. Which includes how I choose to spend this particular day. There is no law that says you must attend an ANZAC day service. To make such a law would be a joke.
I do remember those from wars gone by. How can I not with all the media coverage this day receives? I am proud of what they achieved despite wishing that no one should ever have to go to war.
ANZAC day is safe from being forgotten. Sometimes I think those who served would prefer less of a fuss but deep down I'm sure they appreciate it.Labels: observation, people, social
Still in the Wrapper.
Saturday, April 21, 2007
What does it say about me, the fact that I have several DVDs, given to me at Christmas time, still sealed in their shrink wrap plastic? All of the DVDs are movies that I wanted, yet here I am half way through April and I still haven't opened them.
If that isn't unusual enough, I have a $50.00 gift voucher to an art supply store, given to me in October of 2006, that I still haven't spent. Even though the store is quite some distance from where I actually live, I have been in close proximity to it on a few occasions.
To add to this growing list, I have quite a number of books that I've bought, which I've never read. Not so unusual. I guess we've all done that but still, what does that say about me?
Now that I think about it, I even have computer games that I've bought and never played. Am I really so busy that I just don't have time for this extra stuff?
Do other people have this same problem? Are we all so busy that things in our life remain 'in the wrapper'?Labels: life, observation
Toddler Paparazzi
Wednesday, April 18, 2007
With all the world focussed on paparazzi, celebrity and stars playing up for the cameras my mind drew an interesting parallel that I thought I'd share.
I was sitting in a kiosk in the Botanical Gardens, Adelaide, South Australia, observing a family of about nine adults at a neighbouring table, one of whom had a young boy of about the age of 2. Not yet old enough to talk many words, still young enough to be totally adorable.
One person there was obviously his mother. I deduced that the others were probably relatives. One or two possibly grandparents? One or two others maybe... aunties?
It was the typical scene with one of the adults sitting the boy in their lap and encouraging him to ham it up a bit whilst everyone looked on eagerly awaiting his too cute reactions. Four of them had cameras.
Two were digital cameras whilst two more were camera phones, eagerly snapping away at this little chap's every giggle and gleam of the eye. Flashes going off every couple of seconds. It was like this toddler had his own personal paparazzi. Baby you're a star!
Not only did he have is own personal paparazzi but I bet he was getting the royal treatment too. Personal assistants all over the place, pushing him around in his own mobile chair, someone to clean his face if he dribbled food...I bet he even had someone to wipe his ar... well, lets not go there.
It's a funny parallel. No wonder real celebrities often behave like children.Labels: humor, movies, observation, people
If School were a Video Game.
Tuesday, April 17, 2007
"If school was a video game, many of the low achievers would have no trouble getting the high scores." This is a thought that occurred to me this morning (I don't know why, it just kind of bubbled up to the surface in my head).
Reflecting on the idea further, it is my observation that many kids that don't do so well in school are often quite good at their favorite video games. If school was presented in such a format where participating was fun and you could earn points for various levels of achievement, I think some children would have no trouble learning and might even excel.
I also wondered about those that currently can achieve great school results in the present system. Would they under perform or would they also do well if school was a video game? I'm not so sure. Would they be the new 'under achievers'?Labels: ideas, observation, social
Forgotten by my Phone Company.
Thursday, April 12, 2007
I'm sure it's not often that phone companies get complaints from customers for not trying to sell them new products and phone service plans but this is one of those rare, missed opportunities.
I have a mobile phone that is almost three years old. I'm not going to tell you the brand but it comes from a time when phones were transitioning into the age of third generation networks, colour screens and built in cameras. You know, all the cool features that makes you wonder where the 'call somebody on the phone' feature is. My phone has none of that.
My mobile phone has the old liquid crystal display. It's most advanced features are picture messaging and playing the inbuilt games. It wouldn't know what to do with a polyphonic ring tone.
Back to the point of this article. Three years ago the contract on my previous mobile phone expired. Just prior to that my mobile phone company was on the phone offering me the latest upgrade on a slightly cheaper, two year plan. The new phone would be completely free if I signed up for the plan. Great, cheaper phone bill, new handset, wonderful!
Two years later my contract runs out. I'm expecting to get the call.
"Hi, we'd like to offer you the latest, wizz bang mobile phone with all the multimedia features you need for zero dollars if you sign on to our two year plan that will be a whole dollar cheaper per month than your existing contract!"
Wonderful! Finally I get a phone that can record video with sound, take photos, connect to the internet, watch live TV and more, all whilst still being able to make and receive phone calls. The call never came.
My plan ran out and simply rolled over. I'm still paying a service fee and call costs but I'm no longer paying off the handset. I shouldn't complain too much as this literally cut my monthly bill in half at a time that I really needed money but still.
Being the video producer/creator that I am, having a mobile phone with the ability to record video would be a fantastic opportunity for creative film making.
You might ask why don't I just go out and buy such a phone. It's the principle. I know my own phone company has plans where you can get the latest phone for nothing as part of a plan.
Eventually I'll probably call them and see what they offer. However it makes me wonder. Did I not make enough calls? Why didn't they offer to upgrade my phone? I've been a loyal customer for four years at least. Doesn't that count?
Feels like I've been forgotten by my phone company.Labels: life, observation, video
Car Nerds
Tuesday, April 10, 2007
I don't know if the phrase has already been coined but if not, I'm coining 'Car Nerds' now. Car nerds are like 'Rev heads' only they know next to nothing about how a car actually works. However they can wax on for hours about what brand of rims they bought and why their car stereo has better sound reproduction than their surround sound home cinema system.
A car nerd does know a little bit about how the engine works. Specifically how the engine on their car works. They're fairly certain engines on other cars probably work the same but they don't know for sure because, what they know about car engines, they learnt from trying to get their car going again after a break down.
That's as far as it goes. Car nerds have no idea what a differential is or why you need one. At least not until they break one with their 'natural talent for accelerating to just above the speed limit in under three seconds'. They have no idea that this kind of driving puts unnecessary wear on parts that should last the life of the car.
Car Nerds spend most of their money on things they don't need to improve the performance of their car. They're particularly attracted to any product that will make their car sound louder, like exhaust amplifiers. I must confess - I don't know if that is what they're called. I just know you can get something that increases the noise of the car by adding it to the end of the exhaust pipe. Kind of like adding a bit of cardboard into the rear wheel of a bicycle so that the noise of it flicking on the spokes makes a sound like a motorbike. It's a useless piece of equipment that attempts to make a four cylinder block sound like a V8. Does nothing to boost performance.
On the subject of making the car sound louder, car nerds do this because they want their cars (i.e. themselves) to be noticed wherever they go. Then they complain about police harassment because their car got noticed by a passing cop (who knows full well that car nerds are more likely to break road rules or have dodgy cars). Car nerds think they can drive simply because they know how to do a burn out and switch lanes on the highway more times than a formula one driver.
In short, car nerds know everything they need to know about driving. Their two years of driving experience means they can drive like a blind octopus trying to make a decision about which arm to adjust the volume on the stereo with. They know everything about how not to drive a car.
It's like all the habits of the worst drivers put behind a wheel.Labels: humor, observation, people, social
Your Outlook on Life.
Sunday, November 12, 2006
My partner and I went to a local pub for a nice lunch time meal. As we were finalising our order an elderly lady, just preparing to leave with her husband, suddenly became overcome with some ailment causing her temperature to soar. She appeared to be in pain. The thought that she may even be having a heart attack crossed my mind.
Her husband was quick to act, flagging down restaurant staff for some assistance with cold cloths and things. Several people on nearby tables offered their assistance but he didn't seem overly concerned saying this was something that had happened before and that she would 'come right again' in a little while.
The staff were great in offering assistance, keeping the ladies arms and neck cool with their cloths, trying to determine exactly what was wrong and whether the lady required an ambulance (she did seem to be in a lot of pain from what I observed). She initially refused an ambulance as she was of the same opinion as her partner about 'coming right' eventually. But the staff decided an ambulance was probably a good idea because she didn't seem to be getting better.
The women really did appear to be struggling. I'm not sure if she tried to get up or whether it was just that someone suggested lying down might help, as staff helped her to lie down on the floor next to the table (it was carpeted so not too hard).
By the time the ambulance arrived she was actually coming good again, sitting up and even joking a little with concerned onlookers. All in all a good outcome.
My partner joked that it wasn't a good look for the restaurant, a customer leaving in an ambulance. I thought perhaps they should give her a sign saying 'It wasn't the food' just to ease the mind of passers by.
After lunch my partner and I went over to a local park to take photos of flowers with her digital camera. We'd only just arrived when we were approached by a women and a girl (possibly mother and daughter). They greeted us friendly enough by explaining that they wanted to give us an invitation to a function they were attending.
In that second, what little open personality I display, was violently sucked into the metaphorical bomb shelter of my inner being as the realisation hit - we were under attack by messengers from God. Well, more precisely, messengers of The Revival Fellowship. From the moment their first sentence hit I limited my responses to 'uh-huh' and not much else.
This did not seem to deter them any. My partner, who knew of my previous experience with the fear of God, wouldn't look at me because I knew she was ready to burst out laughing if she did.
I'm not going to detail this conversation either because, just as before, I was only half listening. The rest of my thoughts were preoccupied with with the hope that the two of them would stop talking soon and move on.
What struck me though, was that these two were trying to convince me that the world is a terrible place, with everyone out for themselves, not thinking of others and with little hope. The usual doomsday kind of thing that many pro-active campaigners for religion preach in order to convince you of the need to follow Jesus or to accept God into your life.
It's an argument that pales when you consider the experience of the elderly lady in the pub earlier that day. Many people around her were very concerned, despite not knowing her at all. Many of them offered assistance, as did many additional restaurant staff, even though the situation was well under control with the two staff that were assisting her.
The world is not on the decline. It's always been this way. It all depends on which events you choose to focus on and what kind of out look you have on life. In this day and age more things are possible than ever before.
Perhaps I would be more open to religion if they didn't preach that the world needs saving from all the bad things. Why don't they preach about all the good things and encourage you to join in and help to make them better?Labels: issues, life, observation, social
Ebooks, battery life, and the humble stack of paper.
Monday, August 07, 2006
The ebook, or electronic book, has not quite caught on as a cool, mass consumer product largely because of the medium used to deliver it. Namely the computer. Even the smallest of laptop computers don't quite have the convenience of that humble stack of paper, glued or stitched down one side, more commonly referred to as a regular 'book'.
Regular books come in all shapes and sizes, the most convenient of which is known as the 'paperback'. Paperbacks are just the right size to read without straining the eyes and are just small enough to take up hardly any room in a bag, briefcase or maybe even a large coat pocket. Not with standing their use as 'brain food' their durability knows no bounds. They are still readable even after being used to prop up a wobbly table or having been thrown at an annoying colleagues head (not that this happens often but it happens).
Laptops have the annoying habit of being bulky and not very hard wearing at all. Even if your laptop computer is easy to get out on the bus there is still the issues of battery life and finding room to read standing because there are no seats left at rush hour. For those without laptops well, need I mention how unportable the humble desktop computer is. Has power cord, doesn't travel more than a few feet.
Rumor has it that Steve Jobs, CEO of Apple, is banking that people will want to read ebooks on their next generation video ipods. This could make ebooks cool but seriously, even on an ipod with a larger screen size they're missing the point. You can't go too far away from a power source for too long with an ipod. Even with the one or two dedicated ebook readers that do exist you can bet your life the battery will be flat as you struggle to prioritise charging your mobile phone, laptop, ipod, psp or ebook reader.
An ebook can't emulate the satisfaction of completing a lengthy tome like 'War and Peace'. You know that book is heavy going - literally. You can see how much you've read and that you're making real progress if you're still reading a third of the way into it. There is no better feeling than the visual satisfaction of knowing you've read a book that thick from first to last page.
The problem with ebooks is, unlike music and film, words on paper is the one medium that isn't improved by being reproduced in digital format. Granted you can enhance the text with hyperlinks and search functions and even make parts interactive but once you do that...well...it's no longer a book really. It's more like a web site.
The book is the one form of communication that doesn't require any additional hardware to enjoy. You don't need to be shown how to make a book work and you don't need to remember a password to open it. A book isn't limited to one operating system. You can read a book any way you want, at any speed. You can skip words, pages or even start at the end. You can just look at the pictures or flip through the pages to get a general feel for what's inside.
Most importantly...books are affordable. Even if you don't buy new books there are hundreds of interesting books in second hand stores, garage sales and flee markets. Even the homeless can afford to read books. No power points required. No reader device needed.
It's simple and easy to understand how a book works and the content can be as simple or as complex as your tastes desire. Nothing is nearly quite so impressive as a collection of books in your own personal library. Books do not get more impressive when you can fit 50,000 of them onto a machine the size of a matchbox. Books hold fond memories for people. Many people describe their perfect day as settling down with a good book.
Perhaps I'm beginning to ramble but there is a reason why people don't read long tracts of text on a web site. Reading on a screen is not fun or easy on the eye. Screens require movement and colour to hold our attention. That's what we're accustomed to. Ebooks require you to look at a static screen for extended periods. Much longer than it takes to read a web site.
Clearly ebooks have quite a way to go before they catch on.Labels: computers, observation
Superman Verses the Super Computer.
Thursday, June 29, 2006
Watching ‘Superman III’ on the television the other night, two things stood out during the course of the film.
One was the superb effort of its star, Christopher Reeve, to maintain Superman’s credibility despite an appallingly constructed script that played more for laughs than action adventure. (It’s not hard to see why the franchise died soon after this).
The other was how dated the computer technology in the film is.
Superman III was released in 1982, at a time when computers were still gaining momentum. People knew about them but really didn’t know how they worked. Computer networks in the workplace took up whole rooms. Computers in the home were limited mostly to gaming consoles, and perhaps your classic early consumer computers like the VIC 20.
The Star Villain of Superman III is a Super Computer that can do ‘anything you tell it to do’. Having just been built, this machine first appears in the final half hour. It is huge. Several stories high, completely filling an entire subterranean cavern with wires, buttons, lights, power cables and all manner of electronic gadgets.
In today’s world, I couldn’t help but think, “if they built that now you could probably wear it on your wrist.”Labels: computers, movies, observation
|  Subscribe to
my blog feed.
|
