She plays o' the viol-de-gamboys, speaks three or four languages word for word without book, hath all the good gifts of nature, knows a hawk from a handsaw, and can see a church by daylight. The rest is subject to fancy.

Pompeii and Herculaneum: Abandoned to the Ravages of Time

Peter Popham of Prospect Magazine asks:

Pompeii and Herculaneum have been listed as Unesco World Heritage Sites since 1997. So why isn’t the world’s culture policeman keeping the world’s most important Roman sites in order?

Popham details the rapid decay of two of the richest and most important archaeological sites in Italy—including the virtual abandonment by the Italian government, and the efforts of a millionaire donor to make the sorts of structural repairs that forty years of neglect—and two million tourists a year—mean to an ancient site. Less than half of the 70 or so excavated buildings are open to tourists, or even safe to enter, since they are in advanced stages of decay.

Whedon, Rimbaud, and Cicero: Introduction to the Angel Rewatch

The central question informing the character of Angel is asked during season 3, first in the episode “Amends.” Angel’s been having really bad dreams. Except they’re also teh sexy and over-the-top with all the blood and pain and dying and the—wait for it—decadence of Angel’s sordid past. So a suicidal and tormented Angel asks Buffy (BtVS, season three, “Amends”), “Am I a thing worth saving, huh? Am I a righteous man?

You can read MacAllister’s response in this introduction to a series of re-watching Joss Whedon’s Angel.

James Fallows: “If the TSA Were Running New York . . .

James Fallows at The Atlantic writes:

The point of terrorism is not to “destroy.” It is to terrify. And for eight and a half years now, the dominant federal government response to terrorist threats and attacks has been to magnify their harm by increasing a mood of fear and intimidation. That is the real case against the ludicrous “orange threat level” announcements we hear every three minutes at the airport. It’s not just that they’re pointless, uninformative, and insulting to our collective intelligence; it’s that their larger effect is to make people feel frightened rather than brave.

Read the rest here.

EFF on FaceBook’s Eroding Privacy—And Rights Grab

The EFF has published two important discussions of recent changes regarding who controls your data on Facebook; first, a timeline of the changes to the Facebook privacy statements:

Facebook originally earned its core base of users by offering them simple and powerful controls over their personal information. As Facebook grew larger and became more important, it could have chosen to maintain or improve those controls. Instead, it’s slowly but surely helped itself — and its advertising and business partners — to more and more of its users’ information, while limiting the users’ options to control their own information. Read more . . .

Earlier, the EFF’s Tim Jones noted that Facebook has deliberately created a user interface from hell, in order to make it more difficult for users to control their data:

As Conti describes it, a good interface is meant to help users achieve their goals as easily as possible. But an “evil” interface is meant to trick users into doing things they don’t want to. Conti’s examples include aggressive pop-up ads, malware that masquerades as anti-virus software, and pre-checked checkboxes for unwanted “special offers”.

The new Facebook is full of similarly deceptive interfaces.

Mind the “new” Facebook UI is so idiotic and poorly implemented and documented that I find it exceedingly difficult to share the information I want to share; there are six separate settings to modify in order to present an RSS feed on a “Wall” that is universally available, while still restricting other kinds of data.

One of the first responses users make to this kind of UI and policy is to deliberately pollute the data stream, to create false IDs, and fake metadata. This policy will adversely affect Facebook.

Slacktivist on Tim LeHaye and Jerry B. Jenkins’ Tribulation Force

Fred Clark has been doing a close analysis of the Tim LeHaye “Left Behind” books about on life after the Apocalypse for those “left behind” by the Rapture. MacAllister calls the books “post-rapture revenge fantasy,” and that’s the best description I’ve seen yet. Currently, Clark, aka Slacktivist, is up to Tribulation Force: The Continuing Drama of Those Left Behind. Tribulation Force is the second novel in the Left Behind series, by Tim LaHaye and Jerry B. Jenkins. Clark in addition to being a fine writer and blogger, holds a M. A. T. S. cum laude in Theology and Public Policy from Palmer Theological Seminary. He’s hardly hostile to Christianity, or Protestantism. In his latest entry Clark offers an analysis of pp. 192–205 of Tribulation Force, noting:

The Good Christian Dad ought to, like Rayford, pray for his daughter while distrusting her, belittling her opinions and conspiring with the man who appears to be two-timing her. The Good Christian Young Man ought to be, like Buck, stern and parental in his conquest of his intended. And the Good Christian Young Woman ought to be, like Chloe, submissive, distraught and humiliated.

You can, and should, read the entire post. Clark is reliably intelligent, caring, and thoughtful. In an earlier post on the late Evangelist Francis Schafer in which Clark traces the roots of current extreme Evangelists, Clark notes that

. . . by the 1980s, Graham had been eclipsed by new faces and very different voices with a very different agenda — men like Jerry Falwell and Pat Robertson. Evangelicalism had become fiercely partisan, polarized and polarizing. It had become more a political movement than a religious one and the dominant issue—the only shibboleth or litmus test that seemed to matter—was opposition to legal abortion.

The founding myth of this new, stridently political faith says that this politicizing arose in reaction to the Roe v. Wade decision acknowledging the legal right to abortion.

Clark demonstrates that this politicizing of the new Evangelism was in fact not inspired by Roe v. Wade. He links to a piece in Huffington Post by Francis Schaffer’s son, Frank Schaffer, author of several books on evangelism in America. Frank Wade, writing about current American extreme Evangelicism in the context of the Hutaree militia obsessive [alleged] conspiracy madness notes that “The rhetoric we in the early pro-life movement unleashed combined, with the apocalyptic fantasies of the fundamentalist evangelicals, is a deadly brew.” He sees the Left Behind books as a distinct ingredient in that “deadly brew,” and notes that the new evangelicals “have cultivated a following among the terminally aggrieved based on ceaselessly warning them about ‘the world.'” Schaffer points out that merchandising is the least of the effects of the Left Behind books, and the aggressive evangelicism they espouse as the religious Right:

Such products as Left Behind wall paper, screen savers, children’s books, and video games have become part of the ubiquitous American background noise. Less innocuous symptoms include people stocking up on assault rifles and ammunition, adopting “Christ-centered” home school curricula, fearing higher education, embracing rumor as fact, and learning to love hatred for the “other,” as exemplified by a revived anti-immigrant racism, the murder of doctors who do abortions, and even a killing in the Holocaust Museum. And now we have a cult/militia dedicated to the same idea.

This New Evangelism, as much as it scares me, does seem to be having some resistance in the under 25 crowd. As Pastor Carol Howard Merritt notes:

There are three major reasons that a younger generation is leaving Evangelicalism: pernicious sexism, religious intolerance, and conservative politics. The term “Evangelical” is a broad brush that colors a large and diverse movement, so these characteristics may not be true of every Evangelical. But as long as those in the movement allow themselves to be represented by Pat Robertson and James Dobson, then these spokesmen will continue to whitewash the entire group’s values.

In other words, many of these new Evanglists are in fact not evangelizing Christ as much as they are preaching a new world order under the aegis of the Religious Right:

For the last couple of decades, a majority of the movement began to find great power as the Christian Right. Partnering with the Republican Party, they began to extol an idealized view of the family, rallying against abortion and homosexual rights. Often the fixation on these two issues came at the expense of feeding the hungry and sheltering the homeless. Many Christian Right leaders brushed aside caring for the earth and mocked global climate change. Health care became demonized and wars glorified. So many Christian teachings became sacrificed for the Republican agenda that we hardly recognized our faith any longer. And so we left our congregations.

I’ve added Slacktivist to the blogroll under Nonfiction.

Tor has a Blog!

Long ago, around 1983, and before 1984, when I was an already devout fan of F and SF, I discovered that Tor books were a reasonable gamble; even if I didn’t know the author’s work, I had a 90% or better chance of finding anything this small publisher called Tor published. And by 1990, when I’d started learning about typesetting and book design, and my eyes started their downward spiral, I noticed that Tor books, even the paperbacks, were more legible, and just plain prettier than most other books.

For those of you who don’t know, Tor publishes Emma Bull, (Finder, War for the Oaks, Territory,) Joan Vinge, Charlie Stross, Peter Watts, Elizabeth Bear, John M. Ford (Last Hot Time), Vernor Vinge (“True Names,” Fire Upon The Deep, Deepness in the Sky), Caroline Stevermer, Sarah Zettel, Martha Wells (City of Bones, John Scalzi, Charles de Lint, Madeleine E. Robins (Point of Honour, Petty Treason).

These are authors I initially read and bought because they were published by Tor, and I trusted Tor; even if I didn’t love a book, I felt confident that I wouldn’t be hurling a Tor book at the wall for quality issues.

So I’m especially pleased that Tor has a blog!

Julie and Julia: A Meditation on Film, Julia Child, and Cooking Blogs

Even though the film Julie and Julia came out in 2009, I’ve only just now seen it. Written and directed by Nora Ephron, and based in part on the blog Julie Powell started in 2002 at Salon. I liked Julie and Julia very much. Meryl Streep is fabulous, (as usual), so much so that now I have to double-check to make sure I’m looking at images and video of the real Julia. Stanley Tucci is wonderful as Child’s spouse Paul Child. I wish there had been less of Julie the cooking-blogger (though she is well-played by Amy Adams) and more of Meryl Streep as Julia Child. As much as I admire Nora Ephron’s work, I think a film about Julia Child would have been even better. Ephron’s decision to intertwine Julia Child’s life with the story in Julie Powell’s book Julie/Julia, based on Julie Powell’s blog The Julie/Julia Project was perhaps unfortunate. The Project was a blog about Powell’s efforts to cook all 524 recipes in Julia Child’s Mastering the Art of French Cooking in a year.

As a blog, The Julie/Julia Project is less than inspired.

You can find the rest of the piece, complete with lots of food links, here.

Scientists Discover Brain’s Moral Compass . . . and It Responds to Magnets

In a study led by Dr. Liane Young of MIT, researchers have discovered that the moral compass lies in the right temporo-parietal junction of the human brain, near the surface and just behind the right ear. This region becomes excited and actively engaged when we think about other people’s errors or good deeds. Researchers using transcranial magnetic stimulation were able to disrupt the function of the area and temporarily encourage people to be “less moral.” You can read the details here.

“The Rage Is Not About Health Care”: Teabaggers and Racism

In Frank Rich’s New York Times op-ed “The Rage Is Not About Health Care ” he notes:

The week before the health care vote, The Times reported that births to Asian, black and Hispanic women accounted for 48 percent of all births in America in the 12 months ending in July 2008. By 2012, the next presidential election year, non-Hispanic white births will be in the minority. The Tea Party movement is virtually all white. The Republicans haven’t had a single African-American in the Senate or the House since 2003 and have had only three in total since 1935. Their anxieties about a rapidly changing America are well-grounded.

Rich’s analysis is spot-on, and chilling. Read the whole thing.

Byron and Shelley Excoriated from the Grave

Author Daisy Hay while

Claire Clairmont by Aemilia Curran, 1819

researching her book Young Romantics, about the Shelleys, Byron and their “tangled lives” found a fragment of a memoir by Claire Clairmont (1798-1879), Mary Shelley’s young, head-strong step-sister. Clairmont, perhaps most famous for describing Byron as “Mad, bad, and dangerous to know” was in her teens when Byron got her pregnant and then dumped her. Dr. Hay is including the fragment, written by Clairmont when she was in her seventies and looking back at her pursuit of Byron, and her journeys with the Shelleys. Clairmont says of her time with the two poets that “Under the influence of the doctrine and belief of free love, I saw the two first poets of England… become monsters.” You can read more here.