• sara reads the feed

    SRF #7: Theoretical currency, radical love, and dying presidents

    Sometimes I just kinda don’t sleep. I’m more of a Wake Up, Stay Awake person than a Never Fall Asleep person, which is what I’d prefer anyway. It’s not great to be awake at 3:30am because my hips hurt and I can feel my body working on digestion, but I really love passing the eff out because my eyes won’t stay open at 9pm. I don’t know, I just really love it.

    I’m tired but Not Tired Enough so I’m sure I’ll do a morning nap in a couple hours.

    Meanwhile I’m at my standing desk again, and if I keep writing these posts from my standing desk, they will invariably have intros about my hip/back pain.

    Maintenance of this site is a big part of its appeal for me, because I really just love internet puttering. Doing updates is fun. Honing the UI is fun. I’ve had opportunities to launch quite a few personal sites over my life now and I just don’t get tired of it.

    Yesterday I noticed that I kept getting fraudulent account signups. I locked comments to accounts only in order to limit my reliance on comment spam filters, and because I’d rather not talk with people than moderate a comment section. But fake emails, I hadn’t done anything to prevent. I nearly broke the whole thing yesterday installing plugins on a live site (lol) but we made it through. So far the new CAPTCHA is stopping bot signups. My obscurity is stopping human signups, but human interaction isn’t always desirable anyway.

    ~

    A fascinating read about currency from Noema. The opening salvo about childhood commerce is hilariously relatable, but from the perspective of a world-builder, accounts of historical currency habits is my favorite.

    Lydia, a kingdom in modern-day Turkey, created what many historians consider the first coins: lumps of blended gold and silver stamped with a lion. The idea spread to Greece, where people started exchanging their goods for coins in public spaces called agoras. Money soon created alternatives to traditional labor systems. Now, instead of working on a wealthy landowner’s farm for a year in return for food, lodging and clothes, a person could be paid for short-term work. This gave people the freedom to leave a bad job, but also the insecurity of finding employment when they needed it.

    Aristotle, for one, wasn’t convinced. He worried that Greeks were losing something important in their pursuit of coins. Suddenly, a person’s wealth wasn’t determined by their labor and ideas but also by their cunning. […]

    He wasn’t alone in his distrust of commerce. In mythology, Hermes is both the god of merchants and of thieves. Meanwhile, the Bible tells the story of Jesus overturning the tables of moneychangers and merchants in a Jerusalem temple. In the early days, as is true today, commerce implied exploitation — of natural resources and of other people. (The Incans, on the other hand, built an entire civilization with no money at all, just a complex system of tributes and structured specialization of work.)

    I love history framed to affirm my preexisting worldviews. Living in a currency-free post-scarcity society is currently not an issue of resource availability, but politics and logistics. We could handle the latter. The former remains an issue.

    That’s also why we can’t have money which expires, but this suggestion from a 19th century economy autodidact did seem to have a clever idea.

    Silvio Gesell proposed a radical reformation of the monetary system as we know it. He wanted to make money that decays over time. […] “Only money that goes out of date like a newspaper, rots like potatoes, rusts like iron, evaporates like ether,” Gesell wrote in his seminal work, “The Natural Economic Order,” published in 1915, “is capable of standing the test as an instrument for the exchange of potatoes, newspapers, iron and ether.” […]

    In 1898, the Argentine government embarked on a deflationary policy to try to treat its economic ills. As a result, unemployment rose and uncertainty made people hoard their money. The economy ground to a halt. There was plenty of money to go around, Gesell realized. The problem was, it wasn’t going around. He argued that the properties of money — its durability and hoardability — impede its circulation: “When confidence exists, there is money in the market; when confidence is wanting, money withdraws.”

    Money hoarding is absolutely an issue. In a fantasy society I developed, I removed any ability to pass wealth between generations of family, which is almost like expiring money on a longer scale. It wouldn’t be as economically stimulating on a short scale. It’s mostly meant to limit the growth of families with more power than others.

    I like the expiry thought. You’d have to pair expiration of currency with vigorous regulations to ensure it doesn’t just mean poor people lose their money after a while, as rich people navigate laws required to easily refresh it (like spending money within the family to just circulate it). Money laundering would be so tempting, and it favors those with preexisting connections.

    I’m not familiar with the magazine this article comes from, and I like to search for slant when I’m reading something new. Especially if I like it so much. This comes from the Berggruen Institute. Although I’m not going to be going through that wall of text right now, there are a lot of nonsense buzzwords on their Wiki article, and the apparent wealth of the organization makes me super skeptical of their influence. That doesn’t mean the article and/or magazine itself are entirely incredible; I’m just suspicious of any organization involving so much money. I’d take these conjectures more seriously from people who didn’t succeed at our current system.

    ~

    Paywalled article here on Washington Post (but if you come across an eight foot wall, you should just search for a 12ft ladder) about the impact of losing affirmative action on two young students’ Ivy hopes: a boy who is white, and a boy who is Black.

    ~

    NPR: One woman’s controversial fight to make America accept drug users for who they are

    Harm reduction is a big deal and this is a wonderful cause to fight. Addicts are not Just Addicts; they are humans, our neighbors, the person writing this blog post, family members, friends. Although I have never gotten into hard drugs, my fight against alcohol and involvement in mental healthcare has given me nothing but love for addicts.

    It is controversial, and I get why. The propaganda surrounding drugs in America is very strong. More than that, America has an incredibly punitive culture. Lots of the country thinks you may as well die if you can’t bootstrap.

    Plus, drugs are scary. Losing people to drugs is a horrible tragedy. People aren’t prepared to handle it, much less approach it with open-hearted love, but that’s what we need: radical love for our neighbors. All of them.

    ~

    Also NPR: As Democrats stay divided on Israel, Jewish voters face politically uncertain future

    What about registered Democrats who believe that all the civilians involved in a conflict on both sides are being absolutely wrecked by a couple awful rich dudes in power? And absolutely nobody can possibly win in this war except for arms dealers and power brokers, which does not mean a win for people anywhere? So we have to start by stopping the war, period, and sorting out our fn priorities as a species? Please put me down as pro-human, anti-war, in every single conflict, no matter how glib it sounds.

    Nobody dying in this has chosen the no-win scenario these groups have been locked in for generations. There are a couple people who could choose to stop the killing right now. Normal Folks versus Cruel Tiny Ruling Class are the sides I care about. The Democratic Party is such a massive institution that they couldn’t possibly care what I care about.

    (Yesterday I wrote “speaking loudly against such asymmetric warfare seems obvious from where I stand” like symmetric warfare would be any better. Today I’m feeling spicier.)

    A ceasefire does not look likely right now.

    ~

    I guess I’m only rehashing NPR this morning: As Biden celebrates his birthday, candles on the cake are adding to the problem

    I predict that they will replace Kamala Harris as his VP for the second term, but still lean on Joe Biden, and very quietly run on the idea that the VP could take over as president if Biden doesn’t see his 86th birthday. There hasn’t been public talk about the Dem VP, afaik, so I can’t begin to guess who they’d vet; I’m never good at guessing these things. Dreamy philosopher, yes. Smart analyst, no.

    I kinda don’t care how old Biden is at this point because it feels like everyone in Washington is as old as he is and it doesn’t matter, they really don’t care about what people want, the system is not designed to give us what we need. I’m just slowly going crazy, don’t mind me.

    I’ve been watching Old Animals die the last few years and I notice that natural death has a prodromal period of months or years. Dying of age is a PROCESS. Biden doesn’t look like he’s in prodromal death (falling over is a risk for everyone at this age) so if the doctors give his guts the all-clear, I’d reckon he’s fine. My great-grandma was great until a fall when she was ninety-two years old; my kids’ great-grandparents are still kicking through their nineties and have only started showing the age since maybe 2020.

    Is anyone morbidly curious to see what it would look like to have a president die of age in office? What’s the funeral like for that?

  • sara reads the feed

    Sara Reads the Feed #6

    I forgot how the day vanishes when I make myself leave the house. I’ve hardly crocheted a thing. A shame, but I went to the Nevada Museum of Art, and that helped reinvigorate me. I felt so creative after seeing such great exhibits.

    Do you ever feel like you’ve got no control over what comes out of your mouth? I know I’ve always had a hard time with it, but I’ve gotten worse since I started isolating in the pandemic and continued maintaining it. Going to the museum is one of many efforts to get me out of the house. I’m trying to practice.

    But there is my mouth, just saying things like I am a robot, while the little human pilot in my brain screams “Noooo!” ineffectually.

    All it takes is saying one thing I meant to keep locked behind my teeth and then I’m a bundle of quiet neuroses all chained up on the inside, terrified I will say something inappropriate again.

    I’d rather battle my silly impulses somewhere with interesting art. I took nine-year-old Sunshine and he had fascinating observations. I wouldn’t trade it for a thing. But I would like to go again, maybe alone, and spend a while actually reading the exhibits, and doing some sketching. ~

    ~

    Twitter link: Mr. Beast spent a full week buried alive for his latest video. I wish that I did not have any opinions or awareness on this matter, but Sunshine cares, so I care. Vaguely.

    If being buried alive for the bleeding cancer that is Mr. Beast’s viral machine is a metaphor, it’s way too on-the-nose. I wouldn’t bother writing that into a book.

    ~

    OPB: Washington scientist brings new hope to dying coastal sea star.

    Hodin started the captive breeding program at Friday Harbor because he saw a potential solution in the remaining pycnos that demonstrated resilience against the disease.

    “We lost somewhere around 90% of the sunflower stars, which is hundreds of millions of animals,” Hodin said. “As horrible as that is, what that suggests is that the ones that didn’t die probably had a little bit of resistance. And if two of those stars breed, we think that their offspring are likely to be even more fit in response to the disease.”

    The goal of the program is to raise multiple generations of stars that are more resistant to wasting. Many of the stars will eventually be released into the wild and begin a gradual process of rebuilding their populations.

    This is an interesting remedy for a terrible problem. The article is a great read about sea star husbandry, if that kind of thing rustles your jimmies.

    ~

    Variety: ‘I’m Loud, I Know How to Organize’: How Women Became the Backbone of the WGA’s Strike Captain Network

    Renard was impressed at how much the general public paid attention to Hollywood’s summer of strikes. “I’d tweet, ‘We need water’ and we’d get five deliveries of water just from people who lived in L.A.,” she said.

    This strike was successful thanks to the kind of community action we’ll need moving through the next few years of the labor movement…and beyond, I hope.

    ~

    Huffpost reports that boat-pummeling orcas won’t be deterred by heavy metal. TBH that usually gets me in more of a smashy mood, too.

    I’m still Team Orca, man.

    ~

    NBC News: The White House is sending different message to pro-Palestinian and pro-Israel Americans. The letters do not conflict but highlight different parts of Biden’s policies as relevant to each audience.

    I know they’re walking a tight rope here. I can wish for better while understanding there might not be better in this situation. Speaking loudly against such asymmetric warfare seems obvious from where I stand, but boy do I stand a long way from the crux of it. I’m doing a lot of reading and trying to learn and understand.

    ~

    Ars Technica reports that OpenAI might not be booting Sam Altman, actually. Oops?

  • sara reads the feed

    Sara Reads the Feed #5

    I woke up in almost as much pain as yesterday, but at least I figured out what hurt me. Apparently dropping it to the floor and trying to twerk like Megan Thee Stallion without a warmup, or a recent history of exercise, or her glorious butt, is a really good way to flare up old injuries I KNOW THAT I HAVE. Yet I really thought I could do that.

    My worry at first was that I was getting sick (the pain was in so many regions, I thought it was inflammation ache), but no…my arms just hurt from vigorous crochet, and I broke my hips because I’m not Megan Thee Stallion, STILL. The hot girl life is brutal. Clearly this means I should twerk on the floor more, not less.

    The pain makes it really difficult to work at my standing desk, but at this point, I’ve made it near-impossible to convert from standing to sitting. I make myself sit somewhere else in the house so I’m incapable of hiding in my office for hours at a time.

    Still, I might have enough tolerance in these creaky thirty-something hips to get through reading my feed. I did it twice yesterday so it’s only 100-something articles to filter through. Let’s take a look…

    ~

    Ars Technica: Globalism vs. the scientific revolution

    There’s a new book talking about science which tries to decenter it from Europe.

    Poskett waits all of one paragraph before declaring it a “myth” that science’s origin involved figures like Copernicus and Galileo. Instead, he places it not so much elsewhere as nearly everywhere—in astronomical observatories along the Silk Road and in Arabic countries, in catalogs of Western Hemisphere plants by the Aztecs, and in other efforts that were made to record what people had seen of the natural world.

    Some of those efforts, as Poskett makes clear, required the organized production of information that we see in modern science. Early astronomical observatories boosted accuracy by constructing enormous buildings structured to enable the measurement of the position of heavenly bodies—hugely expensive projects that often required some form of royal patronage. Records were kept over time and were disseminated to other countries and cultures, another commonality with modern science. Some of this activity dates back all the way to Babylon.

    The author of the article seems skeptical that anything before European Science is Actual Science.

    His definition of science is even broader (and probably on even weaker ground) when he refers to things like an Aztec herbalism manual as science. Is there any evidence that the herbs it described were effective against the maladies they were used to treat? Finding that out is definitely something science could do. Yet it would require scientific staples like experiments and controls, and there is no indication that the Aztecs ever considered those approaches. Poskett’s choice of using it as an example seems to highlight how organized knowledge on its own isn’t enough to qualify as science.

    You heard it here first, guys. If modernish European guys couldn’t rationalize their way through it, then the things the Aztecs knew where wrong. Ok buddy.

    ~

    A nuanced review of Alan Wake II from Jessica Conditt on Engadget. I found the first game clunky enough, but I did finish it. I’d rather play a shooter than a mystery game, honestly. Trying to balance the two of them in my head doesn’t sound interesting.

    ~

    Emptywheel: Judge Rules Trump Had the Purpose of Inciting Insurrection on January 6.

    Perhaps the most interesting aspect of Wallace’s ruling is that she found, over and over, that Trump’s side did not present evidence to fight the claim of insurrection. Trump’s legal expert, Robert Delahunty (who contributed to some of the most outrageous War on Terror OLC opinions), presented no definition of insurrection that wouldn’t include January 6. Kash Patel presented no evidence to back his claim that Trump intended to call out 10,000 members of the National Guard. Trump presented no evidence that criminal conviction was required before disqualification. There was no evidence presented that Trump did not support the mob’s purpose.

    This feels like “no shit” territory, but nothing about the obviousness of Trump’s fascist movement prevented him from reaching the insurrection itself. So. This is why I could never be an actual journalist or fancy legal brain person: I see things with my eyes and I just get annoyed we have to prove the thing we know. Society, man.

    ~

    This comic about bouldering from The New Yorker is cute. It accurately catches the effect of picking up a rock climbing hobby, too: you will alarm everyone by trying to climb on a lot of things.

    ~

    Al Jazeera: Famed Roma activist Gelu Duminică on challenging stereotypes and changing the dictionary definition of the word ‘gypsy’.

    This is one of those racial slurs that a lot of Americans still do not realize is a racial slur.

    ~

    Engadget: SpaceX loses another Starship after rocket explodes during test flight.

    ~

    Great review of Ijeoma Oluo’s new book, Be a Revolution, from Publisher’s Weekly.

    ~

    I’m so glad Iman Vellani has such a healthy attitude toward the box office for The Marvels.

    “I don’t want to focus on something that’s not even in my control, because what’s the point? That’s for Bob Iger. [The box office] has nothing to do with me. I’m happy with the finished product, and the people that I care about enjoyed the film.”

    I get such Annoying Baby Sister energy from her, and I’m speaking as the Annoying Baby Sister. Her interview with Seth Meyers was adorable.

  • sara reads the feed

    Sara Reads the Feed #4

    My whole body hurts. What did I do this time? I’m thirty-five years old. For all I know, I committed the cardinal sin of turning the wrong direction too quickly.

    I’ve been taking it easy on my hands/arms by limiting crochet for a few days and mostly just starting to weave a strap for a bag. I got stuff to do leatherworking, which I’m excited to start on, but I wanna finish this one slow detailed bag I’ve got going first.

    I’m going to curl up and turn off after this. Hopefully my hips will forgive me for whatever sin I committed after I pray to saint tylenol.

    ~

    Variety: Disney, Lionsgate, IBM and More Pull Ads From X After Elon Musk’s Antisemitic Remark

    The new round of Madison Avenue exits comes as the White House and the European Commission also took a hard stance against X on Friday. “We have seen an alarming increase in disinformation and hate speech on several social media platforms in recent weeks, and X is certainly quite effective of that,” the Commission said in a statement. A White House statement on Friday said that “We condemn this abhorrent promotion of antisemitic and racist hate in the strongest terms, which runs against our core values as Americans.”

    Much less significantly, I’ve stopped posting personal content on X and now do my train-of-thoughts elsewhere, like here and Bluesky.

    ~

    The USDA adjusted the plant hardiness map. I’m not in an area that has seen significant change between 2012 and 2023. How about you?

    The shifts in the Midwest and Northeast are jarring. And Florida. And Texas. Okay, I guess it’s most of the country. Oof.

    ~

    Ars Technica: Measles rises globally amid vaccination crash; WHO and CDC sound the alarm.

    Didn’t this surge around 2014 too? I remember that specifically because that’s when my second baby was born. I can’t imagine vaccine resistance has improved since then, unfortunately.

    ~

    Sympathy for our Russian friends. Al Jazeera: Russia seeks to outlaw LGBTQ movement as ‘extremist.’ Y’all can’t catch a break, can you?

    ~

    Emmet Asher-Perrin at Tor dot Com is not impressed by The Ballad of Songbirds and Snakes.

    The Ballad of Songbirds and Snakes takes an unfathomable amount of time setting up key points of relation to the originating trilogy, often in a manner so obvious that it winds up comical. There are mockingjays all over District 12, and Snow doesn’t seem to like them. Lucy Gray sings “The Hanging Tree” at several portentous moments in the film, and possibly also wrote it? Look at all the imagery and symbolism!

    Also from Tor.com: a short fiction bundle. Yum.

    ~

    NPR: Why Trump’s authoritarian language about ‘vermin’ matters

    It’s not that I don’t want people to discuss what an authoritarian he is. I do. I’ve just seen so many people mention this language usage, yet I can think of a million authoritarian actions he actually performed during his presidency, and we don’t talk about most of them. Avoidance as a symptom of shared trauma? Too overwhelmed by the sheer volume of nonsense we suffered to pick it apart?

    We already know the majority of people don’t want this guy. But enough want him to jump on the system’s cracks until they snap. I’m not sure what we’ve done to bolster the integrity of our elections. We still have that electoral college. We’re going to see how rugged American democracy is in 2024.

    But okay, yes, let’s talk about his authoritarian language.

  • resembles nonfiction

    In Defense of Being a Snooty Crank

    I don’t often love movies, TV, or books earnestly. It does happen occasionally – my obsession over Scavengers Reign is intense – but I’m someone who gets the most enjoyment out of critical dissection.

    I’ve grown up in an era of American anti-intellectualism where I can’t go five steps without meeting disdain for anything with literary aspirations, and people often defend stuff *for* being brainless rather than despite it. Sympathy for the palliative effects of mindless media should subsume other concerns. Hence, folks have always said that if you don’t like the popular thing, you are [insert various insults here]. Elitist? Sexist? A jerk? Whatever.

    With these influences, I used to think my preference to engage with media critically is because I’m a big snooty crank who doesn’t want people to have fun.

    The experience is a little more complicated.

    With recent autism diagnoses in the family, and seeing neuropsychologist analyses of the exact pathology of our brain miswiring, it’s become obvious how much of my disability is social. Humans are social animals, so disrupting social functions (like emotional regulation, filtering one’s language to be appropriate, and bonding with a social group) is kind of a big deal, and it manifests in multitude ways.

    You might have already noticed my vocabulary trends over-formal or -complicated on one end of the spectrum; on the other end, I can get extremely crass, un-punctuated, and messy. I switch based on the tone in which I intend to speak rather than situational appropriateness, which I find difficult to meter.

    It also means that I struggle to “hook into” popular things. Something that is very popular socially (say, Taylor Swift) will generally clear a bar on quality where there’s no big criticisms to be made on craft, so it’s easy to fall in love with the work because everyone you know loves it. It’s fun! Everyone’s having a good time!

    Because my personal tastes skew esoteric, and I can’t feel part of any in-group, I don’t get pulled into the fervor. And then I get frustrated because everyone is talking about something I can’t genuinely enjoy.

    With repeated exposures to something popular – Barbenheimer, the TikTok book du jour, American football – I find it difficult to avoid having *any* opinion about something that was not intended for me, does not appeal to me, and sometimes is overtly offensive. Billions in advertising dollars have been spent to make sure that certain things remain in my face.

    Likewise, the conversations are omni-present. The internet water cooler always wants to talk about something I don’t like, and I live on the internet water cooler. Nobody likes having something they love criticized. But as a social animal, any sort of social interaction is better than none, even if it’s a bit antipathetic.

    I’d live and let live if all that stuff would let me go. There are fewer places to escape these advertising machines than ever. It makes me wonder if I belong on the internet at all anymore, sometimes.

    ~

    Another fun feature of autism is moral rigidity. Also, a rigid adherence to rules, which may or may not be rules that anyone other than the autistic individual is familiar with.

    One of my Special Interests is the intersection of media analysis with social justice. I believe fiercely that stories are one of the oldest social technologies that humans have, and must be wielded consciously for the good of humanity; I take my art very seriously. I’d prefer to think of myself alongside the likes of radical author-activists of previous generations than think of myself as a content creator for the internet.

    While I want to entertain foremost (since that’s core to the technology), I also have a whole lot to say, and I find that I say it best in fiction. I like people. Humans are my favorite animals. I hate systems and hierarchies. I want to help other people see how the problem is always a ruling class, not the individuals, and how working together can save us.

    I receive negativity expressing these ambitions, too. Because every feisty opinion I share *feels* like it’s In Defense of Humans, Opposed to Hierarchies, I’m always baffled and wounded by the reactions and find myself incapable of communicating context effectively.

    Somehow, this does nothing to discourage me. My brain has welded together art and morality. I’m wired to love this much more than I would love acceptance.

    It also means I have a negative reaction to media with lower ambitions, sometimes. I don’t mean that the project aspires to be simpler. I mean lower ambitions, like making a project so bland as to appease a fascist model. I mean putting no hint of soul into something humans spent hours of their lives creating, and will spend hours more consuming.

    When people are Just Having Fun with the Popular Thing, it’s pretty offensive that I would be Mister Buzzkillington about it because I think the creator has (say) a painfully white heteronormative lens in subservience to the capitalist machine of advertising.

    I get why people don’t like that I do that! I don’t love it either.

    And yet here we are.

    ~

    These priorities have put me into a place where I can sometimes *love* media that is badly made, in poor taste, and broadly disliked, but somehow interesting to me. But might have nothing good to say about something very popular that treads extremely dull ground.

    Sometimes, I can jump in on bandwagons by engaging critically. It allows me to pick apart a given piece of media and say, “These parts work for me. These parts don’t. This is why.”

    The effort it requires to tease apart creator intent and execution, meaning and impact, and all those other elements that go into a finished product–that can be fascinating to me regardless of the finished product. Every single story has a story behind it. No movie is produced in total isolation; no book is published without cultural influence and without responding to some call from another book.

    Which might help answer the question nobody was asking: “Why do you have such developed opinions on something you don’t like?”

    Because reaching the opinion is the entertaining part. Sometimes the *only* entertaining part.

    But hey, I’m enjoying the thing you’re enjoying, too. Just from a different angle. Isn’t that kinda nice?

    ~

    The cover of the book Twilight, for no particular reason.

    Sometimes something I find terrible for xyz reasons will be *so* interesting that I’ll get hooked and become a Hate-Fan.

    I could write essays about the terrible things I’ve loved before.

    Venom 2: Let There Be Carnage, I’m looking at you.

    Hate-fanning might not be ideal, but I see no harm in the practice with healthy boundaries. Getting wrapped up in the criticism is no good if the criticism makes you feel bad.

    We’ve got a toxic outrage culture surrounding pseudo-criticism right now, especially on YouTube. If you want to talk about places that eviscerate low-intensity media in bad faith, you can go type the name of any movie starring a woman and “review” into the search bar and catapult yourself into algorithmic Hell.

    Toxicity is great for clicks. It’s really bad for your soul.

    Well, my soul anyway. I’m basically just a weird lil crochet mummy these days. I don’t want anything but good vibes in my zone.

    I defend the ability to find joy in dissecting media. I don’t defend being aggressive about it, or any part of the algorithm machines to which the internet is enslaved, but I defend the value in taking an intellectual approach to all the art we engage with. An intellectual approach should never delegitimize the emotional approach; we don’t harsh others’ mellows, kinkshame, or diminish folks for enjoying something no matter how problematic it might be.

    There is a difference between “this is a terrible, racist movie” and “everyone who loves this movie is terrible and racist,” and we’ve completely lost that nuance in the clickbait era of the internet.

    There is room for grouchy, snooty, intellectualist cranks like me.

    Having an opinion isn’t a big deal. You know, with boundaries.

  • sara reads the feed

    Sara Reads the Feed #3

    I’m currently getting my dopamine pathways hijacked by writing movie reviews, but I also love rewatching movies in quick succession. So what do I do when I watch something like 9 to 5 once, write a review, and then watch it again the next day? My initial review was sort of a recap, so going into the meatier themes that made me love the flick seemed about right.

    I’ve been having my dopamine pathways hijacked and re-hijacked a lot lately. Earlier this year I got hijacked by a project in Adobe InDesign; that was knocked out of place by an abrupt obsession with crochet on July 31st; I was seized by an interactive fiction project in September that I now have minimal motivation to finish; modding Skyrim took over my dopamine pathways when I lost the novelty of drawing dragon flong.

    Hence I do recognize that my desire to write movie reviews, and blog posts in general, especially the kind you’re reading right now, is just another rollercoaster ride for my poor stupid golden retriever dopamine pathways.

    Since we’ve established this relationship is frail and will vanish at the drop of a molecule, let’s get into the RSS reader.

    ~

    Her Hands, My Hands read one of the urban fantasy classics, First Grave on the Right. Great commentary.

    Is it a classic if it was published 13 years ago? It was everywhere 13 years ago. But that was the beginning of my career, and that feels like old-timey days now.

    ~

    RBmedia released a list of the bestselling audiobooks of the year.

    ~

    I wonder if deciding to remove dog meat from South Korean menus is as good as it sounds, or if it’s a complicated expression of the increasing Westernization of the region. I’ve never eaten it. That would be insane from my cultural perspective. Is it from theirs? I wonder what is lost when a traditional food source is banned.

    That said, despite my frequent threats to turn my French bulldog into French onion bulldog soup, I still like dogs better than people and I’m not sad to think of more living dogs.

    ~

    Why are Millennials still attached to American Girl?

    Parts of this article seem like they might be worthy of consideration, particularly when the opinion comes from outside the article.

    Brit Bennett, in her 2015 Paris Review essay on Addy, asks, “If a doll exists on the border between person and thing, what does it mean to own a doll that represents an enslaved child who once existed on that same border?” Such complexity, even uneasiness, was how the brand thrived.

    But other parts of the article get my eyebrows lifting.

    Almost all dolls prepare girls to perform womanhood. Baby dolls ready them for mothering; Barbies for being sexual objects. Rowland’s twin innovations—a multifaceted, highly detailed consumer universe paired with a doll that was herself a girl—invited girls to perform themselves.

    I never once mothered a baby doll in my life, but my baby dolls used to make out with other baby dolls in the closet a lot. My Barbies were up to some weird brainwashing scheme. I really, really don’t think I’m unusual in this experience. One weird assumption like this makes me disengage, honestly.

    Maybe it’s as simple as the fact that everyone loves nostalgia, American Girl dolls are easier to buy once you’re a grownup, and some Millennials are at the point where we can get fancy frivolous things for ourselves.

    Since I mostly played with 12- and 18-inch fashion dolls as a kid, the sheer size of American Girl dolls was the main source of my interest. They take up a lot of room. I ended up buying a custom boy American Girl for my kid when he was small and the creepy thing lurks in a closet somewhere.

    ~

    Karen Gillan still hasn’t managed to escape Steven Moffatt’s writing.

    ~

    Swedish dockworkers are refusing to unload Teslas at ports in broad boycott move.

    I love this for them.

    ~

    Very specific rules around breastfeeding videos mean they can be monetized on YouTube again. I don’t even know how to start unpacking the levels of Bothered I am about this whole entire subject. I breastfed for over six years straight between two children. There’s a major rift in intergenerational knowledge surrounding breastfeeding which communities are still trying to heal. So yeah, folks need videos to help them. But we still have to get really specific about what kind of videos can get compensated for views, just in case there was some nipple and someone might be able to fetishize that? Oh, and make sure there’s a child in the shot. That helps somehow.

    I hate tech companies. I miss nursing.

    ~

    So…Hugh Grant as an Oompa Loompa is another one I could pick apart for days.

    The origin of Oompa Loompas is not as some random magical orange humans. (link is a PDF)

    In his 1964 book Charlie and the Chocolate Factory Roald Dahl depicts the iconic Oompa-Loompas as African Pygmy people. […] In Dahl’s 1973 revision of this text he depicts the Oompa-Loompas as white.

    Cocoa’s production is troubling, so there’s some cognitive dissonance in seeing a wealthy English actor pout over someone stealing his cocoa beans.

    Not to mention that changing Hugh Grant’s proportions means they didn’t cast a little person. Here’s a statement made in regards to a past movie:

    A rep for “Little People of America” tells TMZ, the entertainment industry should be actively casting little people.

    The rep adds, “This means both casting people with dwarfism as characters that were specifically written to be played by little people … and other roles that would be open to people of short stature.”

    I’m not sure how many people were actually at risk of seeing yet another Willy Wonka movie, but I’m not, and this doesn’t change the maths.

  • image credit: 20th Century Fox
    movie reviews,  resembles nonfiction

    Five Lessons from Nine to Five (1980)

    Aside from providing us with one heck of an ear worm, Nine to Five remains equally relevant forty-three years after it hit movie screens. Well, maybe not as relevant in regards to the sheer volume of perms, but we forgive the Eighties. (Banner image credit: 20th Century Fox)

    So much could be said about the enormous talent of the actresses leading the ensemble. Lily Tomlin is so good at doing that thing where she looks harmless while murdering you. Jane Fonda’s physical comedy gets me cackling every time. And Dolly Parton. Oh, Dolly, Dolly, Dolly… The word effervescent was surely coined to describe the way she fizzles like the inch of air above a fresh pour of Coke.

    The three of them together are so talented. There’s no excuse for the volume of entirely un-feminist thoughts I have in their direction. But I am basically a useless sapphic who will find excuses to praise any cast led by women (I’m just being honest here), so what really gets me revved over Nine to Five is the politics. Those juicy, delicious politics.

    You could only get such a powerful, radical message befitting THE Jane Fonda if you drape it in enough silliness to pass muster. Like Chaucer, Nine to Five is here to show us a thing or two while having fun. Labor reform driven by the working class has never been such a hoot.

     

    1. Don’t believe the lies that divide us.

    At first, Parton’s character is isolated by rumors she’s mistress to the boss. It’s easy to believe a woman so beautiful is easy, right? That lie is spread by her boss, who likes the appearance of masculine virility and doesn’t give a crap about a married working woman’s reputation, much less her dignity.

    Doralee is being predated by Hart, but he’s stripped her of any protection she might enjoy from coworkers. It’s a shame because Violet also rankles at his harassment. Only once they let the walls down and realize they’re on the same team can they get up to the good shenanigans.

     

    2. Bravery is contagious.

    Nobody likes working in a miserable place, afraid of being noticed by the boss, constantly on edge in fear of a verbal dressing-down. Small missteps can mean major upheaval, like losing one’s entire job for holding the wrong conversation. On a day-to-day basis, everyone is just trying to get along and pay the bills.

    Yet as soon as one person throws down with the boss, she meets another willing to do the same, and another. Our three heroines can be braver after seeing the bravery of one another. And they’re admired by other coworkers for this, too.

    The instant they connect and start talking, they get stronger.

     

    3. Women (and labor) should stand in solidarity.

    Every woman in the movie is pretty rad, aside from the pick-me Roz, who commits a mortal sin: she is not on Team Women. She is the eyes, ears, nose, and throat of The Boss. Like Marthas and Aunts, she serves to enforce an abusive status quo, hoping it will earn her favor.

    Roz busts the faintest hints of a union by getting a woman fired for discussing salaries in the bathroom. She also reports our heroines to the boss. Still, the worst the other women do to Roz is help her get a French lesson.

    You can learn a thing or two about narrative approval from this. The screenplay itself totally lacks misogyny. Hart’s wife is a genuinely nice person who has her whole heart in an undeserving place. She praises Doralee’s beauty and expresses such gratitude for the flowers. Too bad Doralee seems to stay with her husband because I was feeling the vibes between the two of them.

     

    4. A more livable workplace benefits everybody.

    The movie wasn’t spinning tall tales with those memos showing the many benefits of workplace support, like day cares. Accommodations for flexible schedules make it easier for people with disabilities, families, or a life outside work (the audacity) to contribute productively. And yeah, this kind of thing shoots productivity through the roof, which businesses should love.

    A world where people have jobs that respect their humanity is beneficial to the people and the jobs.

    Yet the bosses in this movie rankle against such measures. Clearly it’s not statistics they’re worried about. They like having the power.

     

    5. Cruelty isn’t the entire point, but it’s a lot.

    Getting to act cruel is one of the rewards of a system that provides few pleasures. Does Hart really seem happy to you? Has all that money left him contented? I mean, does a happy man have reason to dread his wife, assault his secretary, and plan his schedule to avoid his life outside work? No, Hart has leapfrogged up the hierarchy specifically because he likes the sadism. He is bettered by trying to make others worse.

    Masculine power plays are razor-edged veils for deep insufficiency.

    You’ve probably seen a boss act like that at some point in your life.

    Beautifully, gorgeously, 9 to 5 also reminds us that punching up isn’t cruelty. Threatening the man who sexually assaults you with a gun isn’t cruelty. Hanging a sexist, egotistical, lying, hypocritical bigot from your garage door opener when he misbehaves isn’t cruelty. And that might be the greatest lesson of all.