30,000 Year Plan, Part II

From time to time there are creeping signs that I am gaining some teeny-tiny modicum of notoriety. It used to worry me. But rather than fight it, I've incorporated it into something I call "The 30,000 Year Plan." The idea is that if I continue doing what I'm doing and work hard at it, in 30,000 years, I will be as famous as Angelina Jolie is right now.

I'm eight years into the plan, and Proof #8 that I'm on track is a letter of mine quoted and published by an ESPN columnist (under "Reader Comments" here).

He did take some liberties with the content of my letter, so here it is in its entirety:

Gregg,

Your stance that rich universities should spend more of their endowments could easily apply to the world's major religions.

How many hungry could be fed if the Pope sold off all the riches of Vatican City and put them to Christian uses? How many homeless could be sheltered if Sun Myung Moon spent money on that instead of enriching his family? How many dying could be cured if the Salvationists bought life-saving drugs instead of sending money back to London headquarters?

Religions are not required to report the size of their "endowments," so direct comparisons are difficult. But given some of the excesses seen in many of the larger religions -- as well as their much longer time in existence -- we can safely assume the big guys have lots of money. In fact, I'd suggest that their "endowments" dwarf Harvard the same way that Harvard's dwarfs smaller universities.

So given your stance on colleges/universities, can we assume that you will soon call on the leaders of major religions to begin using their accumulated capital for the betterment of human beings?

- Scott

PS. I'd like to believe the best of you, Gregg. Please don't take a pass on this question just because you are religious.

Just further proof that I existed here in the early 21st century (documented for ever and ever by Google.com, I'm sure). 29,992 years to go, Angelina -- I'm hot on your trail!

- Scott

PS. Here is the past proof that The 30,000 Year Plan is for real.

Proof #7. A picture of me dressed as the Riddler appeared at Boston.com to celebrate the release of the latest Batman movie, The Dark Knight. (Note: they keep changing the list order, so you'll just have to scroll through them to find me.) My costume was one of the few home made ones, and I still own most of it, so I'm all set for Halloween every year! Until I get the mid-life beer gut.

Here are some past indications of my burgeoning fame:

Proof #6a. In February 2008, I was featured in Smith Magazine's online publicity blitz for a book of six-word memoirs. In fact, they pretty much just published an email I sent, so in a way, I was the *author* of that article -- no offense, Rachel :)

Proof #6b. And of course, the reason for the feature on me was that I had my six-word memoir and accompanying drawing published on its own page in an actual book, Not Quite What I Was Planning. I've had multiple requests for autographs and had one person tell me that if I could do 20 more drawings like the one in the book, she could get me a gallery showing. I was flattered, of course, but it took me a month to do the one they published, and as I stated in the other article, it was very tough to do.

(Side note: my father had some poetry published in a book, but he had to buy a bunch of copies to ensure his inclusion. And it became clear after the fact that the "publishers" simply collected money from a lot of people who wanted their poetry published and then distributed the book back to them. So I guess I'm one step ahead of my dad -- but just a very, very small step.)

Proof #6c. Also associated with the release of the book, there were multiple sitings of my memoir and image on the web. NPR featured it (along with others in a picture gallery) on their Talk of the Nation blog, Boing Boing had it on their page of cool new things, it was all over the blogosphere (Ward Six, Moving from Me to We, something called Wishbone Clover, even the Washington Post baseball notebook), and lastly, it was featured in a journal where I worked.

Proof #5. I had an article published on the well-respected web site, Coldhardfootballfacts.com. It detailed how bad the NFC was versus the AFC, and was the first piece that they received from one of their readers that the decided merited being published by them.

Proof #4. I've had several letters published on the Boston Globe, most notably about malpractice insurance, the current war in Iraq, and the Patriots rules about ticket resale.

Proof #3. I have been elected a delegate to the state convention of a major political party four years running. No big deal to do it once; but to be re-elected three more times and to wield some actual local clout is the big deal here.

Proof #2. At Super Bowl XXXIX, my brother and I were interviewed for an article in the local Jacksonville paper. And despite my brother's worries, I did indeed make it back alive in plenty of time to see the Patriots beat the Eagles!

Proof #1. In November of 2003, I had an article published in the Boston Globe detailing why Bill Belichick was a better head coach than Bill Parcells. Believe it or not, there was still a debate at the time. Now, of course, everyone knows that I was right -- but I'll let my words do the talking and leave the bragging to others.

I will keep you updated on how things are going with the plan. If you continue to read this blog, perhaps in fifteen-hundred years or so you will begin to see the wisdom of my slow-and-steady approach.

- Scott

Book #7: The Brief Wondrous Life of Oscar Wao

Seventh book I read since May of 2008:

The Brief Wondrous Life of Oscar Wao by Junot Díaz

Geeks rejoice! This book has dozens of references and speaks to your angst growing up. In fact, it was so geeky that I missed half of the references myself. It's the story of a cursed family from the Dominican Republic, told through the eyes of many involved parties. It's fun to follow the action, and contains more than its share of (perhaps made up) history about the DR.

- Scott

What is the Globe Afraid Of?

Today's Boston Globe has an idiotic piece by right-winger Jeff Jacoby (link), in which he extolls the wonders of Sarah Palin's performance at last night's debate. In their talkback section, there are numerous people bashing Jacoby. And many of them seem surprised that the Globe writer would defend Palin, given how poorly she actually did.

I wrote a short note to that talkback section, expressing wonder that anyone would be shocked by Jacoby's article. Anyone who reads his stuff on a regular basis knows he is neither a conservative nor a Libertarian. He is a right-wing Republican suck-up, who totes the party line about 99% of the time, deviating just often enough to allow him to claim indepenence.

All of that notwithstanding, the Globe did not allow my post to go through. I tried twice, but it did not show up either time. Which got me to wondering, what is the Globe afraid of? I know it wasn't blocked for offense or language reasons -- after all, someone got through with "Dude, put down the crack pipe!"

Perhaps as a media outlet with a liberal reputation they want to make sure people continue to believe that one of their columnists is a conservative. Maybe they are afraid if people actually looked at what Jacoby writes, they'd realize that the Globe has an all-but-official employee of the Republican Party writing on their Op-Ed page. Or it might be that they don't want the motives of their columnists questions.

But for whatever reason, they seem afraid to post what I wrote. And just so it is out there for all to see anyway, here is the gist of what I wrote (I can't do it word-for-word, because I don't have the post, the Globe does):

"It surprises me that anyone on this board is shocked that Jeff Jacoby exposed himself as a Republican stooge.

He and everyone else knows that Wall Street greed is to blame for the current economic crisis, yet Jacoby recently tried to blame 15 year-old laws passed by -- surprise -- Democrats.

He claims to be a conservative, but toes the party line on the Patriot Act and spying on American citizens.

And though he sometimes pretends to be a Libertarian, he stood on the sideline cheering while George W. Bush doubled the national debt and oversaw the biggest expansion of governmental power since the 1940s.

Any regular reader of Jacoby can only come to the conclusion that he is a Republican suck-up masquerading as a journalist/columnist. He is Rush Limbaugh with better writing skills; nothing more."

Doesn't seem like it was all that terrible, does it? So maybe you can tell me what the Globe was worried about. I'm at a loss to explain it.

- Scott

What I Love about The Dark Knight

Hey all,

Just a quick post about what I really enjoyed about The Dark Knight movie, currently in release. If you read my recent post about my 10 favorite movies, it was the only 2008 contender (it's currently #18). Frankly, it surprised even me that it was that high up. I'm not really one of those front-runner, fashion-over-substance guys. But there it was, higher than a thousand other award winning movies I've seen.

Here are some of the reasons why.

***SPOILER ALERT -- If you are one of the seven people who hasn't seen this movie, there are spoilers throughout this post. So please drop what you are doing and get to your local theater before you come back!

1. For the most part, the writing is excellent. Most super-hero movies skip the nuances of language that make a lively script, all in the name of simplified lines that don't distract from the action.

The Dark Knight avoids those traps with an out-standing Joker and dialogue that moves both the story and the characters forward. One of the best examples is Batman's admonition to Harvey Dent: "You'd leave a man's life to chance?... He's a paranoid schizophrenic, former patient at Arkham, the kind of mind the Joker attracts. What do you expect to learn from him."

Not only does the scene reveal Dent's love for Rachel (in his desperation to save her) and foreshadow his eventual turn to evil, but it explains the Joker's unending supply of fresh henchmen and also makes clear that Batman will not to stoop to the Joker's methods to fight him. Pretty good for a few quick lines.

I also loved the hospital scene with the Joker and Dent, was impressed with the added "s" that morphed the message on the side of the truck into "Slaughter is the Best Medicine," and I promise to follow the Joker's advice -- "If you're good at something, never do it for free."

But the most writerly turn of phrase was when Rachel's voice-over said "If you lose your faith" just as the camera showed Harvey Dent with half his face blown off. "Faith" sounds so much like "face" (in fact, it's how a person with a lisp would pronounce "face"), there's just no way it was an accident. Good stuff from the Nolan brothers.

(Note: some of the speeches at the end are a little tedious, which is why I liked the writing "for the most part.")

2. Heath Ledger's portrayal of the Joker is as good as everyone says it is; maybe even better. He could end up with a posthumous Oscar, but that don't mean a thing. More important is his creation -- a complex, riveting, masochistic, sadistic, and sometimes sympathetic psychopath, who speaks the truth often enough that everything he says makes you pause and wonder.

His assurance that, "I'm not a monster, I'm just ahead of the curve" speaks to the impotence of traditional police work in the face of destructive, winner-take-all criminality. Batman himself proves that the Joker is right by breaking the law in order to bring the Joker to justice. And no matter which story you believe about his scars (if you believe either of them), you know something or someone seriously screwed him up, and he never hesitates to do the same to whomever stands in his way.

Ledger's lip-smacking is creepy in a Jabba the Hutt sort of way, and when he says, "Well hello beautiful," he sweeps his hair to the side like silent stars used to twirl their mustaches. The slightly bent frame, sadistic laughter at the pain of his henchmen, the sheepish looks whenever someone calls him crazy or a freak -- they all bespeak of a disturbed individual who's out to prove everyone else is just like him.

Oh, and that dialogue. I could watch and re-watch the scene where he goads the cop in the holding cell. Excellent writing with unparalleled delivery. A character much scarier than any science fiction monster.

3. The story was a superb interweaving of three character arcs -- Batman, the Joker, and Harvey Dent. Batman thinks he's destroying the mob, but is stymied by the Joker because he can't understand him (and in fact, never does). The Joker knows he's more ruthless than the mob, and reinforces his image of people by getting Batman and Harvey to question their principles. And in the end, Harvey becomes Two-Face, the perfect random criminal to carry on while the Joker is up in the air.

A movie with just Batman and the Joker would never have come off, because neither of them would give in. So bringing the Harvey/Two-Face plot line into the picture was the perfect way for the Joker to think he won and Batman to hold on (barely hold on) to his sense of being good. And even though he didn't do anything wrong, in the end, Batman is a Gotham City outcast -- just as the Joker predicted. But it was Batman's choice, which gives him a way to believe that the Joker was still wrong and he's right.

Pretty interesting stuff.

4. The guys making the current Batman movies put together a very good documentary about the psychology of the Batman villains. What they didn't look at is how The Dark Knight takes a serious nod from fairy tale mythology.

In traditional fairy tales (real ones, like the Brothers Grimm -- not the sanitized/Disney-fied versions), nature is to be feared and ultimately either conquered or avoided. The woods, mountains, rivers, oceans, unknown roads -- they usually represent evil, uncertainty, destruction, randomness, and chaos.

OTOH, good is often represented by a benevolent person, a walled city, a farm, or just being at home. In other words, the good is where people assert control over the unpredictability of a random and uncaring nature.

In The Dark Knight, the Joker declares himself an agent of chaos -- which is what people in fairy tales fear. And his random destruction has people living in fear of the every day. No one is safe and no one feels safe, not even mobsters who used to control all of Gotham. And Batman clearly represents man's attempt to re-assert control over a force of nature that refuses to give in.

These themes give the mythology of Batman its cultural touchstones, subconsciously bringing to mind ideas as ingrained as the survival instinct itself. And by combining that mythology with the intricate criminal psychology of the villains that have been developed over decades of graphic novels, The Dark Knight is the first of the Batman movies to present such a fully formed and textured thematic tapestry to the silver screen.

5. The Dark Knight has no opening credits, the first movie I've seen since Apocalypse Now to eschew them. And more than just a device, it is a signal that the movie thrusts you into another reality and won't let you go until the closing credits. The action starts about 30 seconds into the movie, and doesn't let up until it's over.

6. I love that annoying whine the comes up as the movie begins. It sets the audience on edge and is repeated multiple times when the Joker is about to enter. Sort of like when they put the sound of bees in the background of The Exorcist -- just to make people subtly uncomfortable.

7. The idea of Batman imposters just cracks me up, but also seems reasonable and predictable. After all, the hero-worship of a fictional Batman is nearly a religion all to itself. Imagine if Batman was actually real -- there would be imposters everywhere!

That is all for now. I hope you enjoyed the movie as much as I did; but if you didn't, c'est la vie.

- Scott

Book #6: The Sun Also Rises

Sixth book I read since May 2008:

The Sun Also Rises by Ernest Hemingway

The principals are wealthy world travelers, which makes it less accessible than other Hemingway books. And the "big secret" of the book is well known and the topic of multiple drug company ads now -- so it isn't quite as titillating as it probably was in 1926. Worth the read, but if you haven't read the next book in this list, I'd start with A Farewell to Arms instead.


- Scott

Book #5: A Farewell to Arms

Fifth book I read since May 2008:

A Farewell to Arms by Ernest Hemingway

I found this more compellng than The Sun Also Rises. The story itself was probably a lot more shocking in its time, given that the hero is a war deserter, but the reality of war and its effects on us are important to consider even now. His prose is spare and accessible even today and is particularly effective in descriptions of battle and survival after the desertion.

- Scott