contention
On various issues of current affairs I've said nothing because I had nothing to add to what was already being said. But now that many saids have been had, I find a few vacant spots in the argument.
On the topic of Jeannette Ng's Campbell Award speech (video of the speech; prepared text, longer than what was delivered but omitting a few choice words), I'd say she's absolutely right in her description of the tone that Campbell set, but rather than being negative, that's just the set-up: she's mostly there to celebrate the "wonderful, ramshackle genre" that has grown up in JWC's despite. (And to say a few words about the current strife in Hong Kong, her native city. Hello? Anybody want to comment on that? Not that I've seen.)
I have some doubt that "fascist" is really the mot juste for Campbell's unique form of toxicity, which as argumentation (that is, apart from what he imposed on the magazine) is best described as trolling, but the word "fascist" has been used a lot more loosely than this for a long time now, and Ng was going for rhetorical effect, not a substantive argument. I certainly do not wish to join those (some of them here) who want to niggle about dictionary definitions, some of which exist only in their own heads.
I haven't seen it pointed out that Campbell's toxic political and social views were well-known and much denigrated at the time. His impact on the SF field tended to be internalized, but he expressed himself in editorials in ways that not only provoked argument, they were intended to. As I said, he was a troll. But by the time he died, even twenty years earlier, the field itself had moved beyond him and ASF was considered a backwater by many. Awards were named in his honor despite this, not because of it; it was felt that the good he also did as editor, which was mighty, outweighed the controversies. But maybe by now the balance has changed. Here's Campbell's biographer, Alec Nevala-Lee, a year ago, saying maybe it has.
What do you know, an article on cultural appropriation in which it's my culture being appropriated, so at last I get to have an opinion on this. Do I mind non-Jewish actors playing Jews on stage? Not at all, if they can do the job, and some can. I'm more concerned about an accurate portrayal, and even Jewish writers or actors can fail at this: either because of lack of skill, or lack of knowledge of the specific culture, or a conscious decision to water down their work for greater salability. That's what matters. Admittedly it's odd to find a whole play about Jews with no Jewish actors in it, but Falsettos is specifically a Jewish-American play and this is a London production, so the constraints on finding actors suitable for the parts are different and tougher than they would be in New York.
And an article on Trump's insults of Jews. Interesting, but stopped me short at the statement that "Jews do not believe in a Messiah in human form." We don't? That's the exact opposite of my understanding, but I'm not a theologian and could use some help here.
Article on Confederate history in California. It's true: most of the state's office-holders in the 1850s were Southern Democrats with typical views. What the article doesn't mention is the attempt to split the state in 1860; when this is mentioned, the reason is rarely revealed: it was to reclaim the southern part of the state, which was the most pro-Confederate part, for slavery. And that's why Congress, after the South left, never acted on it. However, the article is wrong in saying that Confederate Corners was a town. It's a country crossroads with nothing but a gas station. When I worked in Monterey and stayed in Salinas, I drove through it twice every day and never heard that name. Denounce it and remove it, yes, but don't oversell its importance.
More miscellanea to close tabs on: Good leftover article on how the Moon landing was accomplished.
An adaptation of the Mueller report "so you'll actually read it." I haven't gotten around to it.
On the topic of Jeannette Ng's Campbell Award speech (video of the speech; prepared text, longer than what was delivered but omitting a few choice words), I'd say she's absolutely right in her description of the tone that Campbell set, but rather than being negative, that's just the set-up: she's mostly there to celebrate the "wonderful, ramshackle genre" that has grown up in JWC's despite. (And to say a few words about the current strife in Hong Kong, her native city. Hello? Anybody want to comment on that? Not that I've seen.)
I have some doubt that "fascist" is really the mot juste for Campbell's unique form of toxicity, which as argumentation (that is, apart from what he imposed on the magazine) is best described as trolling, but the word "fascist" has been used a lot more loosely than this for a long time now, and Ng was going for rhetorical effect, not a substantive argument. I certainly do not wish to join those (some of them here) who want to niggle about dictionary definitions, some of which exist only in their own heads.
I haven't seen it pointed out that Campbell's toxic political and social views were well-known and much denigrated at the time. His impact on the SF field tended to be internalized, but he expressed himself in editorials in ways that not only provoked argument, they were intended to. As I said, he was a troll. But by the time he died, even twenty years earlier, the field itself had moved beyond him and ASF was considered a backwater by many. Awards were named in his honor despite this, not because of it; it was felt that the good he also did as editor, which was mighty, outweighed the controversies. But maybe by now the balance has changed. Here's Campbell's biographer, Alec Nevala-Lee, a year ago, saying maybe it has.
What do you know, an article on cultural appropriation in which it's my culture being appropriated, so at last I get to have an opinion on this. Do I mind non-Jewish actors playing Jews on stage? Not at all, if they can do the job, and some can. I'm more concerned about an accurate portrayal, and even Jewish writers or actors can fail at this: either because of lack of skill, or lack of knowledge of the specific culture, or a conscious decision to water down their work for greater salability. That's what matters. Admittedly it's odd to find a whole play about Jews with no Jewish actors in it, but Falsettos is specifically a Jewish-American play and this is a London production, so the constraints on finding actors suitable for the parts are different and tougher than they would be in New York.
And an article on Trump's insults of Jews. Interesting, but stopped me short at the statement that "Jews do not believe in a Messiah in human form." We don't? That's the exact opposite of my understanding, but I'm not a theologian and could use some help here.
Article on Confederate history in California. It's true: most of the state's office-holders in the 1850s were Southern Democrats with typical views. What the article doesn't mention is the attempt to split the state in 1860; when this is mentioned, the reason is rarely revealed: it was to reclaim the southern part of the state, which was the most pro-Confederate part, for slavery. And that's why Congress, after the South left, never acted on it. However, the article is wrong in saying that Confederate Corners was a town. It's a country crossroads with nothing but a gas station. When I worked in Monterey and stayed in Salinas, I drove through it twice every day and never heard that name. Denounce it and remove it, yes, but don't oversell its importance.
More miscellanea to close tabs on: Good leftover article on how the Moon landing was accomplished.
An adaptation of the Mueller report "so you'll actually read it." I haven't gotten around to it.