Yes, stories of the future matter. The best science fiction, as I’ve said before, is an allegory for our present-day world.
So I think it’s extremely cool that the folks over at i09 have asked a variety of well-known pundits what science fiction texts are must-reads when considering the imminent choice for president.
I would rather they asked science fiction authors or science fiction scholars, to be honest, but the responses they got actually resurrected — for a fleeting moment — my faith in punditry.
Kos, for example, goes classic with Asimov, but Glenn Reynolds of Instapundit chooses one of my new favorites, Vernor Vinge.
The list is more than just a set of recommendations, though. The real treat is to hear why each pundit considers their text “good election-season material.” Take Amanda Marcotte’s justification of Margaret Atwood’s The Handmaid Tale:
It probably sounds a little trite since it gets referenced so much, but in light of the promotion of a true-believer fundamentalist to a national ticket, I have to recommend Margaret Atwood’s The Handmaid’s Tale. It’s not just because it’s a dystopia that shows what America would be like under a Christian theocracy, but also because the book brilliantly skewers other aspects of the right-wing culture. You have the female misogynist Serena Joy that finds out the hard way that she isn’t exempt from the category ‘woman’ just because she was a stalwart soldier for the far right. You also are reminded that the conservative men who carry on about sexual morality in public all too often have their own closet full of secrets. The book is a reminder that right wing politics isn’t so much about ‘values’, but about power and control.
From the opposite side of the political spectrum, Jonah Goldberg of National Review Online actually wins big points for choosing an episode of Joss Whedon’s Angel, but unbelievably twists it into a warning that Obama’s calls for bi-partisanship are part of an evil totalitarian plot. Really.
If I were asked, I would have a difficult time choosing — but I might go with Octavia Butler’s Dawn — which, more than any text I know, describes the difficulty of coalition-building and the special qualities a true leader must have to bring divergent factions together.
As a bonus, in its look at relations between humans and an intriguing but incredibly alien alien race, it reminds us of what a sensitive, peace-focused foreign policy might look like.
Ironically, even as George W. Bush has frequently positioned himself in opposition to the Hollywood elite and liberal journalists, he might be considered our first pop culture president. According to Stephen Humphries of the Christian Science Monitor, the media has shaped his image and legacy to an unprecedented degree — and not to his advantage:
The proliferation of new forms of media – coupled with a democratization of communication that allows anyone with a modem to become a filmmaker, broadcaster, or pundit – has meant that no other sitting president has had quite so many slings and arrows to suffer. Against such a backdrop, Bush may find it exceedingly difficult to control the final narrative of his presidency.
Humphries reminds us of the countless portrayals and parodies of Bush — from songs to comedy shows to films. But the most intriguing element of the story is how Bush himself fed this frenzy by, from the beginning, constructing a “regular guy” persona. He seemed to know the importance of establishing an easily accessible image, but like so many parts of his presidency, he didn’t realize how easily he could lose control of that image.
If you look closely, you’ll even see a quote from yours truly on this point:
Bush well understood the importance of the popular-culture vote. During his 2000 campaign, he accentuated his image as a regular guy. “I don’t think it’s an accident that, for a number of years, we always heard about [Bush] going back to the ranch to clear brush,” says John Matviko, editor of “The President in Popular Culture,” and professor at West Liberty State College in West Virginia.
But that cowboy persona was turned against him by dozens of YouTube impersonators – most notably Will Ferrell – who lambasted Bush as a country yokel who “misunderestimated” the importance of elocution.
“[Bush’s] entire presidency was about the projection of an image, so the fact that there have been so many pop-culture representations of him is a logical extension of that,” says Bernie Heidkamp, a contributor to PopPolitics, an online magazine about the convergence of politics and pop culture.
I am one of those who doesn’t think that the award-winning film “American Beauty,” written by Alan Ball, is that good of a movie. I found it a little too obvious and pedantic in its attempt to unearth the not-so-quiet desperation in late 1990s suburban America. It didn’t move me.
Then came Alan Ball’s next project — “Six Feet Under” — and, putting aside a few lulls in the middle of its run of five seasons, I consider it one of the highlights of 21st-century American culture. Following in the trailblazing path of “The Sopranos,” it used the long-form nature of a television series to develop the subtleties and complexities of its characters with a literary patience and depth.
Alan Ball’s latest project premieres tonight, and from most accounts, “True Blood,” the fantastical story of vampires fighting for rights and recognition in the modern world (based on the Southern Vampire Mysteries of Charlaine Harris), falls somewhere in between the glibness and the richness of his two previous major works.
But even a blatant attempt at political allegory is refreshing, since it signals a thematic ambition that has been missing of late — with a few exceptions — on the small screen.
I’ve written plenty about the power of allegory, from Narnia to “Battlestar Galactica,” from “The Wire” to “Mad Men.” And, at least according to Alessandra Stanley of The New York Times, “True Blood” should be giving us plenty of “pop politics” to talk about:
The following is a new article by Tim Mitchell, published in the “depth” section of PopPolitics magazine. Mitchell has previously written for PopPolitics about the “Mimic” film trilogy and “Versus” horror films like Alien vs. Predator and Freddy vs. Jason. Now he tackles the technological complexities of “Dark City” — just in time for the DVD release of a new director’s cut:
The 1998 film “Dark City” will be re-released on DVD this week in a new director’s cut that features additional footage. I’ve always felt that “Dark City” never received the recognition it deserved — due in no small part to being overshadowed later by a very similar film, “The Matrix,” in 1999.
What is particularly intriguing about “Dark City” is that it combines many narrative themes specific to science fiction (aliens, space and time travel, and computer technology running amok) with elements of German Expressionism and film noir to create a narrative that provides an unique commentary on the role of technology, including cinematic technology, in the shaping of both the individual and society.
The film’s director, Alex Proyas, ultimately creates a haunting dystopian commentary on today’s media-saturated world.
It’s about time I found a good excuse to post on beer. It’s a beverage which — particularly in the form of the great American microbrew — holds a special place in my heart and, needless to say, American culture.
Unlike water or wine, beer walks the delicate line between common appeal and refinement. It is at home in a corner bar or in the bleachers but even in its blandest form and contrary to its reputation in fraternities, it rewards sipping and — as any grimacing adolescent will tell you — is an acquired taste.
And when you graduate to the products of small, craft breweries, it can, like nothing else, simultaneously satisfy the desire for simple, locally-produced nourishment and complex flavor.
Unlike wine, however, a beer’s particular reputation or the social expectations surrounding its consumption never overwhelm the moment. Sites of beer connoisseurship like RateBeer.com always end up being — except for a few snobby souls — more excuses for social connection and ways to be in touch with local communities than places of exclusion and privilege.
Through that idealistic lens I read Edward McClelland’s analysis of the rise and fall of Budweiser. McClelland uses the occasion of Bud’s sale to the big Belgian brewer InBev to offer a fascinating (if short and somewhat predictable) analysis of how the “mad men” marketing culture was able to popularize some pretty bad beer:
As a Chicago sports fan, “Take Me Out to the Ballgame” has a special place in my heart, having been popularized by Harry Caray when he announced games for both the White Sox and the Cubs.
So I think it’s pretty cool that ESPN is commemorating its 100th anniversary by having a Battle of Bands contest between competing modern versions of the song.
I think it’s even cooler that the ultimate multicultural (and multi-genre) band — Ozomatli — is one of the three finalists:
The following is a personal reflection on the meaning of George Carlin by David Masciotra, published in the “impressions” section of PopPolitics magazine:
How does one make a 14-year-old who hates high school excited about language, learning and politics? One way guaranteed to be effective is to make the entire process painfully funny.
At one point I was that kid, awkwardly stumbling through adolescence, bored by conventional classroom tactics, attempting to determine what interested me as a student and what spoke to me as a human being. Somewhere in the midst of that exploration of self-discovery, I was introduced to counter-cultural comedian George Carlin.
I’ve been wondering when this was going to become an issue.
After seven years of being treated as the greatest threat to America since Joseph Stalin, few Muslims have the energy to muster outrage over a botched photo-op. But the incident speaks to the mutual
ambivalence between Obama and Muslim Americans. As one
editor at Islamica Magazine noted, “Muslim support for Obama is akin to George Bush’s support for democracy in the Middle East. The mere association with the former will undercut the credibility of the latter.”
The Muslim-American demographic, traditionally divided between Republicans and Democrats, has moved to the left by a comfortable margin since the passing of the PATRIOT Act, the war in Iraq, and other assorted failures of this administration. Supporting Obama, however, has proved to be tricky territory. As the candidate continues to face down the Is-Obama-Muslim? question, those who actually are Muslim wish that he would, just once in a while, take a page out of Seinfeld and add “…not that there’s anything wrong with that!” Until then, they don’t see themselves welcomed en masse at his campaign headquarters.
The following is a new article by Steve Schwartz, published in the “sights” section of PopPolitics magazine. Schwartz reviews and contextualizes the “John Adams” miniseries, which has just been released on DVD:
In one of the final scenes of HBO’s seven-part miniseries “John Adams” (available now on DVD), the former president, nearing 80 years old and grieving after the passing of his wife Abigail, visits Boston’s Faneuil Hall to view John Trumbull’s iconic painting of the Founding Fathers signing the Declaration of Independence.
The truculent old man offers his verdict directly to the artist: “It is very bad history.” Adams proceeds to explain that there was no single moment where the delegates ceremoniously affixed their signatures to the document; instead, they were doing so throughout the summer of 1776, while scurrying in and out of Philadelphia.
“You would not deny the artist a certain … license?” Trumball pleads with Adams, to no avail.
“Don’t let our posterity be deluded with fictions under the guise of poetical or graphical license,” admonishes Adams.
Of course, the writers and producers took their own creative license with this memorable moment. As David McCullough wrote in his Pulitzer-prize winning biography that inspired this miniseries, “What Adams thought as he looked at this painting will never be known.”
I focus on this scene not to criticize the fabrication but to use it as a handy reference point to illustrate the virtues of this series. It serves to remind us that good history can be presented in all of its complexities based on its own merits.
The following is a new article by Tim Mitchell, published in the “depth” section of PopPolitics magazine. Mitchell analyzes how the underappreciated “Mimic” trilogy of sci-fi horror films has a lot to say about postmodern America:
Cyborg insects with embedded microelectromechanical systems (MEMS) will run remotely controlled reconnaissance missions for the military, if its ‘”HI-MEMS” program succeeds. Hybrid-Insect MEMS — a program hatched earlier this year at the Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency (Darpa) — aims to harness insects the way horses were harnessed by the cavalry. … The final milestone … will be flying a cyborg insect to within five meters of a specific target located some one hundred meters away using remote control or a global positioning system (GPS). If HI-MEMS passes this test successfully, then Darpa will probably begin breeding in earnest. Insect swarms with various sorts of different embedded MEMS sensors — video cameras, audio microphones, chemical sniffers and more — could then penetrate enemy territory in swarms to perform reconnaissance missions impossible or too dangerous for soldiers.
Not surprisingly, the article cites this project’s origin as being rooted in science fiction:
This vision of enhanced animals with electro-mechanical controllers was imagined in a 1990 novel called “Sparrowhawk,” in which author Thomas Easton imagines bioengineering enlarged birds and insects to use as beasts-of-burden. … In a HI-MEMS world, cyborg bugs would patrol, gather intelligence, penetrate secret meetings, track targets, retrieve samples and more — all predicted by Easton’s 1990 book.
While privacy rights issues are discussed in the context of a techno-insect world, the later half of the article reassures the reader that Darpa’s plan has more than a few bugs in it. “If Darpa’s track record is any indicator, then we have some breathing room before we have to start worrying whether that insect crawling on the wall is conducting unwarranted surveillance,” it states. “Only a fraction of the wide-ranging programs that Darpa sponsors are successful — at least in the way they were originally imagined.”
Reading this piece reminded me of the “Mimic” trilogy, a series of science fiction/horror films that began on the big screen in 1997 and was followed by two direct-to-DVD sequels. All three movies were loosely inspired by a short story of the same name that was written by Donald A. Wolheim in 1942. The central premises of the “Mimic” trilogy — humanity biologically manipulating organisms for explicitly human purposes and technologically altered insects infiltrating human populations unnoticed — are similar to Darpa’s cyborg bug project and other projects that focus on genetic engineering.
This article examines the “Mimic” films, particularly how the plot device of the “Big Bug” monster is still relevant to public discourse on scientific issues. In particular, concepts and issues that are specific to genetic research and their related environmental and political impacts permeate the “Mimic” films, thus making them different from their irradiated Atomic Age predecessors and worthy of unique consideration.
“Spanning the Globe to bring you the constant variety of sport; the thrill of victory and the agony of defeat; the human drama of athletic competition.”
Each week, ABC’s “Wide World of Sports” opened with the host, Jim McKay, doing this voiceover. McKay died Saturday at age 86. He was the ringmaster for The Olympic Games on American television and the host for “Wide World of Sports” for 25 of its improbable 37 years on ABC.
Over the past few days, events in the world of sport offered a fitting eulogy for Jim McKay.
The thrill of victory came into focus at several championship venues. In hockey, the Detroit Red Wings skated off with the Stanley Cup on Wednesday. This Red Wings team is arguably one of the best Stanley Cup winners of the past several decades. They were able to take very good hockey clubs and many star players and make them look very ordinary or even sub-par. They were able to dominate the extremely talented Pittsburgh Penguins for long stretches of ice time allowing them nary a shot on goal, while making them look inept on the ice. Many of these veteran players have won Stanley Cups, but the joy of victory never grows old.
In tennis, the French Open came to its conclusion offering the women’s finals on Saturday matching two young players who had not won a Grand Slam event: Dinara Safina of Russia and Anna Ivanovic of Serbia. Ivanovic had come out of her war-torn country to international tennis prominence, practicing in a drained swimming pool in the winter and, at age 11, practicing tennis in the morning to avoid NATO bombings of Belgrade later in the day. The joy of victory could be seen in the mix of a joyous smile and tear-filled eyes as the Serbian national anthem played to mark Ivanovic’s first grand slam victory.
Rafel Nadal won the men’s title for the fourth straight time, tying Bjorn Borg’s record. He did not lose a set on Sunday or in the two weeks of the tournament. Indeed, in three sets Nadal lost only four games to Roger Federer. This was a stunning and dominating performance over the man who has been called the greatest tennis player of all time. Nadal was clearly thrilled to have won this tournament and to receive the winner’s trophy from Bjorn Borg.
Perhaps the greatest thrill of victory this weekend came in conjunction with a most devastating agony in defeat.
Of all the images from Tuesday’s historic night, this simple, intimate fist pump is the most striking:
BagnewsNotes, of course, is all over it, appreciating “Michelle’s proud, private, knowing, understated, intimate and unselfconscious expression, as well as the lack of tension in each partner’s body.”
Not only does it show the Obamas and their relationships in a good light, though, it also points the way toward victory in November.
Barack Obama’s greatest asset is his likability, and the genuine affection that he and Michelle seem to feel for each other just adds to it. In a moment like the one above — or maybe in the moment immediately following it, when he turns his smile to us — the entire audience feels like we are his friends and partners, because we can see that the “real” Barack is not so different from our own confidantes. He and Michelle demonstrate an intimacy that’s infectious.
And that’s different from Bill Clinton’s Bubbha persona or George W. Bush’s “regular guy” routine — because those were more self-conscious personal performances — clearly public gestures of sorts. The moments we have between Barack and Michelle, while certainly performances on some level as well, at least feel like extensions of a private life.
Their relationship reminds me of another inspiring political couple, John and Abigail Adams:
The following is a new article by Tim Mitchell, published in the “depth” section of PopPolitics magazine. Mitchell analyzes how critically discarded “versus” horror films can tell us a great deal about how we see conflict in the post-9/11 world.
Horror is like any other genre of film: The most popular titles of a given era often gain their notoriety by striking a chord in audiences that is somehow related to the collective fears and hopes of that particular time. Along those lines, when critics associate horror films with modern social and political fears in post-9/11 America, they usually cite films of an apocalyptic nature: films that portray a community (or the entire world itself) as irrevocably unraveling at lightening speed at the hands of a monstrosity that is equal parts unexplainable, unstoppable and unavoidable.
There is another kind of horror film that complements and yet contrasts this end-of-the-world sub-genre of horror, a kind of horror film that most critics dismiss. Unlike many of the apocalyptic films, these films do not so much depict a supreme battle between good and evil, but instead plague their characters with nothing but damned-if-you-do/damned-if-you-don’t choices.
Fears of vicious attacks and random massacres are not the product of some aberration of the natural order but an honest reflection of how the universe actually works. Thus, fears of this type of world do not center on vanquishing monsters to save others so much as on just surviving in a pre-determined situation. What kind of horror film is this? The crossover film that has the word “versus” in the title — namely, “Freddy vs. Jason” (2003), “Alien vs. Predator” (2004) and the recent “Aliens vs. Predator: Requiem” (2007).
So you think sipping that mint julep today — Southern bourbon, sugar, mint and crushed ice — connects you to tradition?
Jeff Burkhart, a bartender and writer, notes that the recipe for the first mint julep was quite different:
Professor Jerry Thomas, the original celebrity bartender, took on the subject in his 1862 bartending treatise “The Bon Vivant’s Companion” (later titled “How to Mix Drinks,” with the second title perhaps the first attempt to cash in on the Bartending for Idiots concept). Thomas quoted Captain Fredrick Marryat, an English author and naval officer who visited the American South in early part of the 19th century and offered a glimpse of the classic mint julep.
“I must decant a little upon the mint julep, as it is, with the thermometer at 100 degrees, one of the most delightful and insinuating potations that was ever invented,” Marryat wrote, “and may be drunk with equal satisfaction when the thermometer is as low as 70 degrees.” He then gives a recipe that uses mint, peach brandy and “common” brandy, sugar and pineapple. So much for traditional recipes.
Breaking even further with “tradition,” this year’s Run for the Roses has its own official tequila.
Herradura is the first tequila selected by Churchill Downs for this honor, presumably because its name means “horseshoe” in Spanish. The underlying reason? Herradura is owned by the Louisville-based company Brown-Forman, and it wants to recoup some of the $876 million it paid for Herradura last year.
So enjoy today, no matter what your drink (and Burkhart offers a “new” classic mint julep recipe if you’re interested in starting your own tradition). I’ll be sipping whatever variety our hosts mix up.
Plus: On the subject of traditions, Richard Crepeau several years ago wrote this Derby reflection, “Keeping Tradition Alive,” about how the Derby absorbs and reflects our relationship with race and class.
It’s been two decades since “Pretty Woman” made prostitution seem cool — a path to self-esteem and self-empowerment — and I have rarely seen, outside of academic journals and hard-hitting documentaries, such an effective puncturing of that cultural myth as I read today in an opinion piece by Anne K. Ream and R. Clifton Spargo of the Chicago Tribune, who were inspired by the media’s recent treatment of Ashley Alexandra Dupre, the prostitute who famously serviced the former Governor of New York, Eliot Spitzer.
Of course, the glorification of prostitution began long before “Pretty Woman,” but as Ream and Spargo point out, since that film hit the big screen, the myth-making has reached ridiculous extremes — from “Pimp and Ho” nights at clubs to “Turning Tricks” pole-dancing at gyms.
And that’s not even mentioning TV shows like HBO’s “Cathouse” — “where a Nevada pimp and his ‘girls’ are portrayed as one big, happy, sexually uninhibited family.” That show and others “are an ode to the joys of being sexually serviced by women.”
I realize we need to be careful not to condemn sex workers for their choices — which are often made from a very limited list of options. But we need to make sure we don’t end up justifying a system that ultimately devastates women’s lives.
Ream and Spargo rightly note, “Our cultural fascination with and glamorization of pimping and prostitution do not make for a kinder and gentler sex trade.” And they go one to cite statistics — from 90 percent of prostitutes having been victims of childhood sexual assault to jaw-dropping mortatily rates:
A comprehensive 2004 mortality study, funded by the National Institutes of Health and conducted by the American Journal of Epidemiology, shows that workplace homicide rates for women working in prostitution are 51 times that of the next most dangerous occupation for women (which is working in a liquor store). The average age of death of the women studied was 34.
Yet somehow it’s almost conventional wisdom that prostitution, if done right, can be a savvy career move and an avenue to self-fulfillment:
Nowhere was this more clear than on a recent edition of “Larry King Live.” During an interview with Natalie McLennan, the woman who allegedly trained Dupre at the escort agency New York Confidential, King asked, “Do any hookers ever marry their johns?”
“They do!” she exclaimed, telling King the tale of a fellow “girl” who “went on a date with a client and then we never saw her again. It turns out that they met and they fell in love and she never returned. It’s a real sort of Cinderella, ‘Pretty Woman’ story, you know. Which is I think . . . just a fantastic story — ”every girl’s dream.”
For the vast majority of women working in prostitution, however, the reality is less fairy tale, more grim fable. But who wants to let that get in the way of a good story?
This is one of those dominant cultural narratives that we must do a much better job of resisting.
Get the Feed
Yes, stories of the future matter. The best science fiction, as I’ve said before, is an allegory for our present-day world.
The list is more than just a set of recommendations, though. The real treat is to hear why each pundit considers their text “good election-season material.” Take Amanda Marcotte’s justification of Margaret Atwood’s The Handmaid Tale:
Alan Ball’s latest project premieres tonight, and from most accounts, “
The following is a 
It’s about time I found a good excuse to post on beer. It’s a beverage which — particularly in the form of the great American microbrew — holds a special place in my heart and, needless to say, American culture.
The following is a 
The following is a 
It’s about time.