I came across a link to this article on a LibraryThing forum. I always thought there was something aesthetically pleasing about book shelves but I must say this work of art looks rather nice. Apparently there actually are some people who shelve their books by colour!
As for me, I first need to get more shelf space before I can get really creative with my shelving policy!
IZ
Tuesday, 27 March 2007
Saturday, 17 March 2007
Art that takes on the 300!
Interestingly enough, artists of Persian descent who are not impressed with the way 300 depicts Persians have set up an online gallery with their own depictions of Persia and Persians. There are some nice paintings here and some nice photographs too. Here's an article about the site that includes an interview with its creator.
Whats interesting is that they are hoping to 'google-bomb' 300, trying to get enough people to link to the site so that people who search for 300 end up at this site, and, hopefully, get a slightly different view of history!
IZ
Whats interesting is that they are hoping to 'google-bomb' 300, trying to get enough people to link to the site so that people who search for 300 end up at this site, and, hopefully, get a slightly different view of history!
IZ
Tuesday, 13 March 2007
300
With a $70 million launch, the movie 300 is being heralded as the first blockbuster of the season. And what better movie could there be to attain such an accolade? Its an... ahem... creative re-imagining of the battle of Thermopylae in which a variety of ancient peoples fought each other on two sides that have loosely been termed 'Greeks' and 'Persians'. Here is Slate's review which i must say, I whole heartedly agree with.
Of course a quick read of the real history of the battle of Thermopylae would lead one to expect that a slightly more historically accurate movie might also have been named 300+700+5000+1000 since the battle was fought on the Greek side not just by 300 Spartans but also 700 Thespians, 5000 Greek allies and 1000 Helots - who were slaves of the Spartans. Now the story of the Helots is particularly interesting. It was death for a Helot to touch a weapon according to Spartan law but Leonidas, the Greek king armed them for battle and promised them freedom after the war. Throughout the war, Helots were armed and fought alongside the Spartans. When the war was over, the Spartans held a ceremony in Sparta where all the Helots who had fought in the war had a parade and then were massacred to a man. That was Sparta and I think those people who watch this movie and get all excited about the Spartan warriors saving civilization should keep it in mind.
Obviously the movie, like the graphic novel, is written very consciously with the Spartans identified with America, the other Greeks with other European nations and the Persians with non-westerners (post 9-11, read: Muslims). Sadly, and rather frighteningly, this attempt to shove history into a shoebox and identify with and glorify the militaristic ethos of classical civilization smacks all too much of fascism.
IZ
Edit: Yes, and just in case anyone who reads this thinks I'm too much of an alarmist and always nattering on about fascism etc. Well, here is a quote from a response to the review on Slate that I linked above:
IZ
Of course a quick read of the real history of the battle of Thermopylae would lead one to expect that a slightly more historically accurate movie might also have been named 300+700+5000+1000 since the battle was fought on the Greek side not just by 300 Spartans but also 700 Thespians, 5000 Greek allies and 1000 Helots - who were slaves of the Spartans. Now the story of the Helots is particularly interesting. It was death for a Helot to touch a weapon according to Spartan law but Leonidas, the Greek king armed them for battle and promised them freedom after the war. Throughout the war, Helots were armed and fought alongside the Spartans. When the war was over, the Spartans held a ceremony in Sparta where all the Helots who had fought in the war had a parade and then were massacred to a man. That was Sparta and I think those people who watch this movie and get all excited about the Spartan warriors saving civilization should keep it in mind.
Obviously the movie, like the graphic novel, is written very consciously with the Spartans identified with America, the other Greeks with other European nations and the Persians with non-westerners (post 9-11, read: Muslims). Sadly, and rather frighteningly, this attempt to shove history into a shoebox and identify with and glorify the militaristic ethos of classical civilization smacks all too much of fascism.
IZ
Edit: Yes, and just in case anyone who reads this thinks I'm too much of an alarmist and always nattering on about fascism etc. Well, here is a quote from a response to the review on Slate that I linked above:
This critic seems to miss the FACT that throughout history, this is the way mankind, specifically MEN are. Only in the last 40 years have those with a different sexual orientation emerged as leaders (sure it happened in real history in the past..as those civilizations fell..look it up!). Here is why. In times of reletive peace, many changes in society occur. During those times the weak tend to prosper for obvious reasons. Once they get power and start running things by their warped views, the strong tend to wake up and give the weak a literal bloodbath...and they strong will always win in this sort of contest. So it is today with the emergence of liberals (anti-war, anti-gun, anti-American, anti-free speech (except their own)), one day I assume they will get power and start an oppressive regime the likes of which America has NEVER seen. The strong will wake up and crush these limp wristed maggots easily at that time...its rather humorous to think these folks can see it coming. they are after all...the weak.Yeah, all the fascists are gathering to defend the historical accuracy and artistic expression of 300...
IZ
Wednesday, 7 March 2007
The Zokutou Word Meter!
This is a pretty cool little thingamajig. Its a counter that you can place into your posts/projects etc. It was originally designed to display the proportion of words you have written for a project but is currently being popularly used by LibraryThingers to count off books they have read in a year vs. how much they are aiming to read. This has been combined with the "50 book challenge": the challenge to read 50 books in a calender year (or 75, or 100 etc.)
In 2004 I read 25 books (cover to cover). In 2005 I read 58. In 2006 I read 87 (86 of which were fiction!) which is kind of an excessive amount. So what should I aim for this year? I reckon about 50-odd fiction books and say around 10-odd non-fiction books, so let's say 65 books this year as a tough but reachable target.
Of course the reason this is difficult is that I'm doing a lot of reading for courses/research etc. which is not cover to cover and which takes up a good deal of reading time and mental energy. In that light 65 seems kind of ambitious, but oh well. Lets see what happens.
So far I have read 18 books in 2007. My Zokuto meter is as follows:
Hmm. I wonder what other use we can put this meter to? Well if 66 days of the year have passed. Maybe we can make another meter that will allow us to show how much of my time to do the reading in has passed? The Zokuto meter would look like this:
Aha! This would suggest that I am ahead in terms of my reading goals! Cool!
I am such a nerd!
IZ
Edit: Obviously there seems to be an issue that Zokuto is having with Blogger. The meter isn't displaying properly on my post even though it looks fine in the composing window. Hmm... how odd. In order to console myself, I have added the meters to the margin on the left, below my books stuff.
In 2004 I read 25 books (cover to cover). In 2005 I read 58. In 2006 I read 87 (86 of which were fiction!) which is kind of an excessive amount. So what should I aim for this year? I reckon about 50-odd fiction books and say around 10-odd non-fiction books, so let's say 65 books this year as a tough but reachable target.
Of course the reason this is difficult is that I'm doing a lot of reading for courses/research etc. which is not cover to cover and which takes up a good deal of reading time and mental energy. In that light 65 seems kind of ambitious, but oh well. Lets see what happens.
So far I have read 18 books in 2007. My Zokuto meter is as follows:
| |
18 / 65 (27.7%) |
Hmm. I wonder what other use we can put this meter to? Well if 66 days of the year have passed. Maybe we can make another meter that will allow us to show how much of my time to do the reading in has passed? The Zokuto meter would look like this:
| |
66 / 365 (18.1%) |
Aha! This would suggest that I am ahead in terms of my reading goals! Cool!
I am such a nerd!
IZ
Edit: Obviously there seems to be an issue that Zokuto is having with Blogger. The meter isn't displaying properly on my post even though it looks fine in the composing window. Hmm... how odd. In order to console myself, I have added the meters to the margin on the left, below my books stuff.
Monday, 5 March 2007
Book: Humans
Humans turns out to be a somewhat tepid follow-up to the fascinating Hominids. The story picks up where it left off in the previous book and revolves around the growing relationship between the Neanderthal Ponter and the human Mary (technically Neanderthals are also human, but for brevity’s sake I'm using the term to stand for Homo Sapiens). Mary travels with Ponter to her world as the portal between the two alternate Earths is opened up for trade. There we get a closer look at Neanderthal society as Mary tries to adjust to its norms. Ponter also finds that he has to come to term with how his time on our Earth and his love for Mary has changed him.
In terms of plot structure and inventiveness, Humans is inferior to its predecessor. Ponter and Mary aside, the other supporting characters don’t develop at all and seem to recede into the background. None of the new characters take on three dimensions. We don’t see much of Neanderthal society that we haven’t already seen before. Even the social and political ramifications of the establishment of links between the two worlds is avoided altogether. The only plot threads with any weight are those of the love between Ponter and Mary and Ponter’s growing ambiguity about religion – a concept he had initially dismissed as illogical and even detrimental to the functioning of a well-adjusted society. These are interesting themes but neither are handled well enough to give the book the kind of depth and pull of Hominids.
This is not to say that Humans is a poor read. Sawyer’s prose is as fluid and easy on the eye as ever, and our interest in this interweaving of the two Earths carries over from the first book. The urge to discover what happens next provides a powerful incentive to keep reading. All in all, it’s a decent read and forms a bridge to the third book that is sufficiently entertaining, for the reader to want to complete the journey.
IZ
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)