Tuesday, August 8, 2006
Mad Mel

In the latestof a long series of celebrity meltdowns, Mel Gibson was arrested last week and charged with a DUI. In course of being arrested,Gibson became belligerent with the officers and began spouting anti-semitic remarks, including "The Jews are responsible for all the wars in the world" and asking the arresting officer "Are you a Jew?"

Predictably, there hasbeen a firestorm of media attention surrounding this. It isn't the first timeGibson has been accused of anti-semitism. When "The Passion of the Christ" was released, some Jewish groups felt it laid the responsibility for Christ's death on the Jewish people.After "The Passion" became a huge box office success, the accusations of anti-semitism stopped gettingmedia attention. It makes one wonder why. Just because something is popular, that means it can't be anti-semitic?

I'm reminded of"Braveheart." A gay character is murdered in the movie in a manner that horrified gay rights groups, but the complaints were no longer given any attention after the movie became a financial success. It went on to win several Oscars.

Since being arrested, Gibson has released two apologies and reached out to the Jewish community. But when one makes bigoted remarks, especially a high profile celebrity of Mel Gibson's caliber, it should take more than saying "I'm sorry" to set things right. If he got away with saying such a thing, it would send a terrible message.

What makes no sense is that before his arrest, Mel Gibson was producing a mini-series about the Holocaust with HBO. The network has since cancelled the series, saying it was inappropriate to continue with it after Gibson's remarks. But if Gibson is such an anti-semite, why was he making the mini-series in the first place?

Mel Gibson's father is an outspoken Holocaust denier. Ido believe that the father is not necessarily the son, but a man's father casts a strong shadow on him. In his everyday life,Mel Gibson may have suppressed the influence of his father, but it surfaced while he was in his cups. That just speculation on my part; I don't claim to have more of an insight into this than anyone else. It will be interesting to see, however, if Gibson can redeem himself for this. He was a beloved movie star for more than twenty years, and he may have lost it all in a single night.

I once lived in a town wherea member of the local school boardlobbied to have The Diary of Anne Frank removed from the school library. His reason was that he didn't believe the Holocaust really happened. I remember that every time I hear someone say they don't think anti-semitism is a problem in the modern world. This incident with Mel Gibson just shows that the twenty-first century isn't immune to the predujices that have haunted all of human history.

Posted by Robert Williams 2006-08-08 00:23:52

Wednesday, July 26, 2006
On My New Story

Some of you may notice I just posted a new short story on sffworld. It's called "The Man Upstairs." It isn'ta science fiction or fantasy story, just regular fiction. But being a primarily sf writer, I feel I can post it here alongside my other works.

All of my novels are sci-fi, but I like to experiment with my short fiction. To me, it's all about variety, as those of you who have read the stories posted on my website know. And I'm not alone here. Isaac Asimov himself sometimes ventured into fantasy, and Orson Scott Card has an entire series of historical novels set in biblical times.

In writing this particular story, I found myself with mixed feelings about my protagonist, Richard, alternating between compassion and frustration. I'll let you decide for yourself, but still, I hope the story will give some of you pause to think about the Richards of this world. I know it did for me.

Posted by Robert Williams 2006-07-26 20:53:57

Friday, July 14, 2006
A Nightmare & Dreamscape Come True

When I was a kid, I read a Stephen King short story called "Crouch End," about a couple lost in a haunted London suburb. It was just the kind offreaky, psychological story that Stephen King specializes in, the kind of story that gets into your head and starts ripping stuff up with its claws, drooling and giggling. I remember thinking at the time, Man, someone should make this into a movie!

Well, as you can tell by the banner ads here on sffworld, someone has. The TNT network to be precise, and along with it they have adapted a bunch of other Stephen King stories to the small screen in the form a four-week long mini-series that started airing yesterday. The series is entitled Nightmares & Dreamscapes after King's short story collection of the same name. This is a little inaccurate, since some of the stories come from King's other collections Nightshift, Skeleton Crew, and Everything's Eventual. I am willing to forgive this little inaccuracy, since it might be interesting to see how these short films showthe evolutionKing's writing over the years, from the hotshot new author of Nightshift to the established god, nay scion, of popular fictionthat published Everything's Eventual a few years back.Of course, the real way to experience that evolution is to read the books, but those of us who have read them mayreceive a little special insight.

Last night's episode kicked off with "Battleground," starringWilliam Hurt, presented without commercial interruption by the good people of the Hyundai corporation. I won't give away too much of the plot, other than to say King that himself has indicated that the story is a kind of hommageto a Richard Matheson story entitled "Prey." Interestingly, "Prey" was made into a TV movie as well, in a little collection called Trilogy of Terror. It was about a woman who received a mysterious package that contained an African Zuni fetish. Don't ask me what that is, 'cause I don't know,other thanit's one ugly little m*therf*cker. Anyway, the doll the comes to life andstarts chasing the womanaround her apartment in a sequence of high-camp unrivaled in television history. I'll let you rent the video to find out how it ends.

TNT's version of "Battleground," understands this. If you look carefully, you will see that same Zuni fetish doll sitting on a shelf inWilliam Hurt's apartment. Want to know an even bigger connection? The teleplay for "Battleground" was written by Richard Christian Matheson, the son of the very same author whose story inspired King. Pretty nifty, eh?

The second episode, presentation, story, whatever, is none other than "Crouch End," the story that scared the bejesus out of me when I was kid. Unlike "Battleground," it isn't quite as good as the story. I found the couple's chattering a little annoying, and it doesn't contain many of the elements in the story that made it so disturbing. (The only other story of King's that got to me more than that one was "1408.") That said, it is a lot better than most Stephen King film adaptations, which tend to be either really good or really awful.

So far these seem pretty good. The mini-series has rather a Twilight Zone or Outer Limits feel to it. I hope the quality stays up. Next week is "Umney's Last Case" and "The End of the Whole Mess." (Shouldn't they have done that one last?)

Posted by Robert Williams 2006-07-14 00:32:33

Tuesday, June 27, 2006
An Inconvenient Issue

Al Gore has just released a film about global warming entitled An Inconvenient Truth. In it, he discusses some of the evidence for global warming and traces the history of his campaign to educate the public on it.

I haven't yet seen the film,but this does provide an opportunity to blog some of my own opinions about global warming. I'm in no position to get all judgmental, I drive a car like everybody else, but the priviledge of having a blog is that I can write down my thoughts if I want to and no one is forced to read them.

A subtle point that is rarely brought up in this argument is that the Earth is already under a greenhouse effect. The existing carbon dioxide and methane gases in the atmosphere already have a warming effect upon the Earth that also modulates its climateand average temperature. The point believers in global warming bring up is thatadding more greenhouse gases to the atmosphere will increase its average temperature and cause climate changes.

Despite having all those big words in it, that paragraph is actually an oversimplification, which should give you a pretty good idea of what a complicated issue this is. Just as people are pumping large amounts of carbon dioxide into the air, plants are absorbing it out of the air. Experiments have already shown that as you raise the amounts of CO2 in the air, plants grow faster and absorb larger amounts of carbon dioxide.

This something the people who don't believe in global warming like to point out. They also point out that the Department of the Interior is saying we have more forests now than we have had since the 1920s, so all this worrying is unnecessary.

First,neither forestsnor carbon dioxiderecognize national boundaries, so even if the U.S. has more forests now than it did eighty years ago, this says nothing about the forests for the rest of the world, especially the rain forests of South America and Africa, which are far more important at modulating the amounts of greenhouse gases at a global level than the forests of the U.S.

Second, I question this assertion of the Department of Interior that we have more forests now than we did in the 1920s. I'd like to see what their definition a "forest" is. Wal-mart's parking lot has trees on it. That doesn't make it a forest.

Third, when the rate of CO2 production surpasses the rate that the plants absorb it is when the problems start.

Skeptics of global warming also point out, correctly, that we only have about 150 years of weather records, and no records that chart long term weather changes that occur naturally. They also point out that there are ice core samples taken from both polar regions showing higher levels of carbon dioxide in the distant past. Also true.

Neither of these things prove that it isn't happening. Of course they don't prove that it is happening either. Also, waiting 150,000 years to see who's right isn't an option for most of us.

So what to do? We have had some very extreme weather recently, Hurricanes Katrina and Rita, for instance. And we know a greenhouse effect is real, just by looking by our neighbor planet Venus. Its surface is hot enough to melt lead. Yes, it's closer to the Sun, but it also reflects 70% of the light it receives from the Sun due the clouds of sulfuric acid in its upper atmosphere. It is also even hotter than Mercury, which is closest the planet to the Sun. This is because Venus has an extremely dense lower atmosphere of carbon dioxide, which absorbs most of the heat that reaches it. Venus is a case of global warming gone haywire.

That will never happen to Earth, but it is a good model to study global warming. Planetary astronomers could provide a good insight into this subject.

The technologyfor vehicles and industrial machinesthat have low or no carbon dioxide emissions is long past due. It can't be good for our health to breathe all this air pollution, and that is reason enough. If we solve that, then hopefully the issue of global warming will become moot.

Posted by Robert Williams 2006-06-27 02:46:07

Wednesday, June 14, 2006
Welcome Back, Coulter

Unless you've been living under a rock for the past few weeks, you've probably heard of whatright-wing firebrand Ann Coulter has said about the 9/11 widows. For those of you who prefer to avoid anything that even mentions her name (and I commend you for doing so), Coulter states in her new book, cheerfully entitled Godless, that she has neven seen anyone enjoying their husbands' deaths so much. She asks, "How do we know these men weren't planning to divorce these harpies before they died?" She refers to the group of five women who pushed for an investigation into the security lapses that may have led to the attacks as "The Witches of East Brunswick," after a town two of the women are from.

The reason for Ms. Coulter's ire? She states the women have unfairly maligned President Bush and criticizes them for doing a commercial for John Kerry during his presidential campaign in 2004. One should mention the Congressional investigation the women pushed for revealed several security lapses in the Bush administration, including the now-infamous pre-9/11 memo stating an attack by Bin Laden inside the United States was probable.

As predicted, sheer hysteria has erupted on the cable news programs, which are already run by a pretty hysterical bunch as it is. Since I can't stand those shows, I can't really say much about the content of their "discussions," I only know I can't channel surf from Food Networkto the SciFi Channel without seeing Coulter's name splattered all over the screen.

In interviews, Coulter presents a calmer exterior, stating that it is unfair that conservatives can't respond every time their liberal nemesis presents a victim of the attacks toprop uptheir own agenda. Therefore, she feels justified in calling those widows witches and harpies.

This kind of nastiness is not confined to conservatives. Plenty of liberals say equally inflammatory things. Since this is politics, no one has suggested that anyone respond in a calm, reasoned manner, using logic to defuse wrath. None of these politicos who accuse others of being "godless" adhere to the Christian ethic ofturning the other cheek. Both Republicans and Democrats justify their vitriol by saying "The other side does it too!" As if that is an excuse for the pain they cause in the people who have to listen to them. One cannotreprimand a member of one party on their hate-filled rhetoric without them accusing you of favoring the other party, like a spoiled child whining that their sibling isn't being punished too.

What Coulter does not mention is that her book sales had begun to slip after her previous book, How to Speak to a Liberal (If You Must), and she needed to say something controversial to givesales a boost and keep her face on TV. Nothing more to it, for her anyway. She just loves to have people talk about her, and I suppose I've been suckered into it as well, just by posting this blog.

Something else to mention though. Some definitions, courtesy of Webster:

Harpy: a grasping, quarrelsome, or shrewish woman

Witch: a woman regarded as ugly, vicious or malicious

Sound like anyone you know?

Posted by Robert Williams 2006-06-14 01:56:17