THERAPY FOR POETS (A THEORY CORNER COMIC)

I'm not scheduled for a new post today but I just stumbled on this comic I made a while back and I couldn't resist putting it up again...right now.  Be warned: it's a little hard to follow, and there's some misspelled words (but the word "Commics" is deliberately misspelled). It's about what happens when a hard-core realist like Joan Crawford joins a group therapy session for poets. 

CLICK TO ENLARGE:







.

THE LATEST ASTRONOMY PHOTOS

Well I guess everybody's already heard of the problems encountered by the Philae lander when it landed on the comet last week. It's in a shadow that prevents its batteries from charging up sufficiently. Things might improve when the comet veers closer to the sun in the months ahead but for now information gathering is minimal.

 Even so we're still getting good data from the parent ship, the Rosetta orbiter. So far the data seems to support the argument by some that the Earth's oceans did not come from collisions with icy comets. Our oceans seem to lack sufficient quantities of a trace element that's thought to be contained in cometary water.

BTW, why do so many comets contain surfaces that look like they were smoothed over with a palette knife?

Above, Mimas...a moon of Saturn. It's thought to consist mostly of water ice with a small amount of rock, making it a sort of huge, dirty snowball. A recently detected wobble is believed to indicate an internal sea of liquid water. Does this add another moon to the list of possible sites for life? Probably not. The moon just barely holds together.

Thinking about Mimas reminds me how much has changed in planetary science in the last few years. Do you remember all those TV documentaries about the so-called Goldilocks Zone?  Well, that may be an obsolete concept now. Liquid water is assumed to exist on certain internally heated moons of Saturn and Jupiter, which are way outside of our own Solar System's Goldilocks Zone. Even rogue gas giants that exist between stars might conceivably contain moons with liquid water.



Here's something I didn't know about til I just saw a TV documentary about it: our galaxy is in the final stages of a collision with a dwarf galaxy named "Sagittarius." As I mentioned in an earlier post, we're already slowly absorbing two dwarf galaxies called The Magellanic Clouds, but with few noticeable effects so far. Not so with Sagittarius. Sagittarius has had a big impact on us.

In 2011 astronomers announced that our galaxy may not always have been a pinwheel. Our spiral arms might have been created by brushes with Sagittarius, as shown in the simulation above. If so, that was good luck for us because it drew the material that made up our sun from the toxic radioactive environment closer to the galactic center.

Above is a nearby flat galaxy seen edgewise.  Our own galaxy is thought to be similarly flat, perhaps because of the influence of Sagittarius.

The collision is nothing to worry about. It's been going on for a long time and it's effects may have mostly played out. I say "may" because Sagittarius is thought to contain unusually large amounts of dark matter which have now been dumped into our galaxy with unknown results.

We continue to learn more about the super massive black hole (SMBH) in our galaxy's center. Here's (above) a computer generated picture showing the gravitational lensing effect of that black hole on the surrounding space.

Currently our SMBH is surrounded by a large spinning gas cloud. After a period of relative calm our central black hole is evidently feeding again, voraciously.

Our central black hole is amazingly powerful. Here we are, far out on a spur on a spiral arm and we're orbiting Sagittarius A Star...that's the name of our central black hole... at a speed of 500,000 miles per hour!

'Just one more picture and I'm out of here. Those tadpoles in the center of a nearby nebula (above) are thought to be new stars in the process of forming. That's a more rare event than I'd previously thought. Our galaxy is older than most and most of the star formation that's going to occur here has already been done. That's actually a good thing because a galaxy full of new stars would be intensely radioactive and hostile to life.


 

CHRISTMAS PRESENT IDEAS / CALDER

 When family Christmas gifts come to mind my thoughts turn to the sculptor, Alexander Calder. I wonder what kind of gift would push our house farther in the direction of Calder's home in rural France. Don't get me wrong. I try to get something uniquely suited to the person I'm giving it to, but in some cases Calder influenced things fit the bill. 

I've never given anybody an interior door, but it would make a nice gift, don't you think?

Wow! What a clutter! I wonder if Calder actually cooked in his kitchen? Anyway, there's a few good ideas here. It looks like Calder bought pots and pottery for the way they'd look on his wall.

I like the way Calder hangs pots. A hanging iron pot rack (above) would be a nice gift. I also like the way he made lights out of pie plates and baking forms. 

Yikes! The man is even more messy than I am. He has good taste in some of the details, though.

The items above are all from Etsy, but Ikea has stuff like this too. I'd say some of these things are Calderesque.

Calder loved indoor plants. Plants make a great gift, especially if they're exotic and easy to take care of.

ARE CARTOONS FOR KIDS?

Roberto asked me to comment on the notion a friend of his has that cartoons are only for kids. The implication is that if you're an adult and still like animation then there must be something wrong with you. I want to be able to say that the very idea makes my blood boil but the truth is that I feel nothing but pity for the poor soul who said it.

It's as if he'd admitted to an impairment like having a club foot or an artificial limb. It's as if he confided that he doesn't see what others find appealing about fundamental things like art or music or comedy. You're filled with wonder that nature distributes its gifts so unevenly. You hear someone say a thing like that and you instantly want to find the poor invalid a comfortable chair and a bowl of soup.

For me animation is one of life's simple pleasures and its amazing that some people are so resistant to it. Some people don't like swimming or hiking or playing with a dog. Some people are absolutely mystified about why their friends like Shakespeare. All those beautiful thoughts about The Seven Ages of Man or going Once More Into the Breach leave them cold. I don't think you can argue someone into liking things like that. You just have to marvel at the incredible diversity that exists in the world.

Oh, and the other point about cartoons being for kids. Lots of cartoonists are going to disagree but...well, yes...they actually are for kids. What's wrong with that?

They're obviously for adults too...think of Fritz the Cat and Heavy Traffic... but unless someone acquired the taste when they were young, it's doubtful that they'd become enthusiasts later on. You had to have been exposed to exciting cartooning, in print or on film, when you were young and still had an imagination.

 For me the best audience for animation has always been kids. Kids are kinetic. They watch cartoons while jumping on the couch punching pillows. They guffaw when a gag is funny, they cry when the hero's in trouble...like the little girl in the video above. Contrast that with adults whos reactions are so understated that you'd need a microscope to find them. Why would an animator waste his time on an audience so rigid and insensitive?

For me the best black and white Betty Boops were great cartoons for kids, the garter  gags not withstanding. Ditto the best Clampett cartoons. Ditto Space Madness and Stimpy's Invention. Ditto Tex Avery and the best Goofy sports cartoons. Ditto the best parts of Three Caballeros. They're for kids and adults as the Good Lord intended.

'Nuff said.

BTW: I stole the video from Cartoon Brew.

A STRATEGY FOR OLD AGE

Believe it or not, one of my heroes used to be BF Skinner (above), the famous behaviorist. His ideas seem dated now, but back in the day I read a few of his books including the one on old age. I was in my early 20s and it gave me a lifelong interest in the subject. Now I find myself only a decade or so from having a practical interest in it and not just a theoretical one. I can't wait to read the book again to see if it holds up. 

Anyway, I have my own strategy for dealing with those problems when the time comes and I thought I'd talk about it here. 

Well, I'm most concerned about lifestyle. What kind of old guy will I be? Will I be envied by others for my hipness or be pitied because I'm a doddering old whatzzit? Of course I'd like to be envied and for that I have a two-pronged solution. First I'll get a nice tailored suit and do the whole suave thing. My role model will be the World's Most Interesting Man in the beer commercial. 

The other half of the time I might try my hand at being an eccentric. I'm not naturally inclined that way but it's possible that I'll grow into the part like so many people do. I picture myself with a small hat, a beard, maybe a unibrow...and I'll slurp my soup.

Maybe I could become a sort of handyman and fix things around the house.

If eccentricity is something you can steer like a boat then I think I'd like to be an opinionated eccentric like John Barrymore in "Twentieth Century." Here (above) he says, "What do you know about talent? What do you know about theatre? What do you know about genius? What do you know about anything you, you...you BOOK KEEPER!?"

Of course at a certain time of life I'll have to stop thinking about young women.

I'll have to learn to appreciate women who are my own age.

I'll also have to discipline myself so I don't criticize people when they do something dumb. They think you're crazy when you do that and I'll need their forbearance when I do something dumb myself.

I've had to abandon some of my earliest plans. When I was a kid I considered being a vigilante in my extreme old age, ridding the world of obvious over-the-top criminal types who do unspeakable things.

All these years later that doesn't seem like such a good idea. If I get addled, how will I know who the criminals are? I'd leave a trail of dead crossing guards and baby sitters.

I also considered becoming a heavy drinker and a cigar smoker in my extreme old age. After all, what would I have to lose? But that wouldn't work either.

I guess if I knew the exact day of my demise I could arrange to have a few sybaritic months beforehand, but nobody knows that. What if you inflict all that cognitive impairment on yourself then live another 20 years? It reminds me of what Yogi Berra said: "If I had known I'd live this long I would have taken better care of myself." 

So what does that leave? I have serious things I want to accomplish but what will I do for recreation? As it happens so often, Basil Wolverton shows the way (above). I'm an artist so I'll take up painting. I'll paint my older friends.

I'll try different styles. I could fill a garage with this stuff. Someday it'll all end up in a thrift store and become much valued by punk rockers.

I got this drawing (above) off the net. It gives me confidence that if my line quality deteriorates I can just adapt to whatever the new bad drawing thing is.

That's all I have to say about this, but I'll add that Skinner is no longer in my Pantheon of heroes. I had an experience with his conditioning theories that resulted in demerits for the master. I'll blog about it sometime. I still like the guy though, and I don't regret that I was influenced by him.

P. S. Mike started to read this and put it down because he thought it was depressing. I don't see why. It's about a problem to deal with, just like anything else. It's just hard to think originally about the subject because so little's been written about it. Here's (below) a link to one of the rare articles. I don't agree with the author, but he's made a good conversation starter.

http://www.theatlantic.com/features/archive/2014/09/why-i-hope-to-die-at-75/379329/

MAO'S GREAT FAMINE

It seemed appropriate on the eve of Veterans' Day to reprise this book review I wrote way back in 2011. A member of my family is in the military and this is my way of thanking him for the sacrifices he made to keep people like me safe from fanatics like Mao. The book review:

 

I just started "Mao's Great Famine," a history of Mao's Great Leap Forward (1958-1962). The author, Frank Dikotter, estimates that at least 42 million Chinese were deliberately starved by Mao in this period. Estimates by other writers range from 30 million to 70 million. Well, that beats Stalin, Hitler, and Pol Pot, by a long shot. The last time I looked (years ago) The Guinness Book of World Records listed Mao as the greatest mass murderer in history, and if Dikotter is right, then I guess he was.

Apparently Mao believed that he was the greatest living Marxist theoretician, but he needed Stalin's aid, so he kept the bragging to a minimum as long as Stalin was alive. When Stalin died in 1953 Mao looked around for a dramatic demonstration that China was the true home of communism, and what he came up with was a plan to industrialize the country in just a few short years.

To accomplish this he bought a bunch of obsolete old factories from the Russians, and promised to pay for them with Chinese grain. The problem was that there wasn't enough grain for the Chinese, let alone for the Russians. Grain was seized from the already strapped peasants and sent out of the country. Peasants who resisted were treated as counter revolutionaries. Lots of them starved.

Factories require iron and steel, so Mao collected most of the country's pots and pans, tools and farm implements so they could be melted down. How, you might ask, were the peasants supposed to cook their food? The answer is, they weren't. Government canteens were set up, and you got your meals there. If you didn't meet your farm quota that day (maybe because your tools had been seized), you didn't get any food. Lots of people starved because they were barred from the canteens.

Even if you got the food, it was a mixed blessing. All along the distribution lines thieves drained grain from sacks and substituted sand. By the time the sacks got to the canteens they contained a good portion of sand, meaning that the soup everybody got was pretty gritty.  Then there was the question of how the soup was served. The kitchen worker could ladle from the watery top of the kettle, or the denser bottom, depending on how much he liked you. If he didn't like you, you could starve.

Farming on the collective farms was a nightmare. Peasants were rounded up and taken to freezing fields where they were expected to dig furrows for planting, only they had no metal tools. Too few furrows meant no canteen. Lots of people died from exposure, exhaustion and hunger.

Then there was the prosperity parties. It occurred to Mao that all the killing might depress the morale of the people who were still alive, so to bolster their spirits he declared a week-long (I think it was a week) national party where the canteens disgorged their supplies, and everyone was required to overeat. Lots of photos were taken of happy peasants pushing away food when they just couldn't eat any more. Unfortunately the aftermath of the parties was even greater starvation.

Mao is said to have remarked that there'd be plenty of grain for the Chinese if they had half the population. Maybe he killed off so many people that the remainder finally had the necessities of life, I don't know. A Maoist on the internet claims that the population tripled during this time, that everybody was happy, and that only gangsters and imperialists would criticize the sensitive poet and father of his people. You be the judge. Anyway, the respite after The Great Leap didn't last long. Later Mao would start The Cultural Revolution, with all the loss of life that would entail.

The book:

http://www.amazon.com/Maos-Great-Famine-Devastating-Catastrophe/dp/0802777686/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1299893964&sr=8-1

Here's (above) the author.

RE-THINKING TOMORROWLAND (EXPANDED)

Of all the possible futures envisioned by architects the one that appeals to me most is the one in which the world has been reforested. It would be a high tech world with all the modern innovations, but one in which nature would never be far from our front door.

Utopians disagree about the nature of this urban forest. Lots of people want to see concrete skyscrapers sticking out of tended gardens a little like the one above. That's not a bad way to go, and it would be a big improvement over what we have now, but I'd like to see some towns try a different look.

 My own taste is for a mixture of tended gardens and of primeval, wild, old-growth, urban forest. I don't mind pushing aside branches every once in a while. It's probably a wildly impractical idea, but I wouldn't mind being one of the people who try it.

These towns would be home to free-roaming wild animals.

Don't ask me how that could be made to work. Figuring out the "how" is somebody else's job.

What would the houses and sidewalks look like in such a town? Maybe something Arthur Rackhamish, like this (above).

This (above), by the way, is one of my all-time favorite landscape photos. It's a thought-provoking picture that really is worth a thousand words. You might want to enlarge it.

 Rackham's illustrations show a fondness for wild, scraggy forests.

Most artists favor the sentimental Romantic forest (above) where trees look cute, like something out of a Disney film. Not so for Arthur Rackam.

Rackham took forests as he found them. They're not easy to traverse, and they don't exist for our sake; in fact, it's not at all clear how man fits into them. They're a mystery, an enigma, a place where gnomes and mythological creatures might be plausible..

I think about things like that when I'm in the treehouse at Disneyland. Now that would be a great house to live in, but it would require a colossal old growth tree and there aren't many of those these days.

Here's a more modest ground-level house, surrounded by wild, stringy foliage. It still has the Rackham touch.

Of course this Utopian town requires creeks and rivers that would be well-stocked with fish.

Kids' walk to school would take them through beautiful caves.

Uh-oh. It's a traffic jam (above). Roads in the town are narrow and nature is always close by. I don't envision cars covered with moss like the one in the foreground, but I like the idea of narrow streets in the verdant jungle. I like the idea of leafy tunnels.

Most people would find it easier to use public transportation instead. Within the town that would be provided by miles-long roller coasters (above) that wind their way up and down through the forest.

Maybe the Disney people should build a green town like this in Tomorrowland. After all,  we're all headed for a green future.

My ideal town would contain several rope bridges.

Maybe a Chinese bridge, too. I don't know if the style would fit in, but what the heck.

Would the town have an airport? Yes, a small one. Something very high tech. The idea is to cobine very high tech with very low tech.

With stewardesses, too!