Z.Monkey’s Blog

I little while ago the Scientist and I rented The Libertine with Johnny Depp. The story follows the extraordinarily debased life of the Earl of Rochchester (John Wilmot) 1647-80. I really wont go into it much (the poem below pretty much outlines the character). The only reason I bring it up is that I read through 3 or 4 of his poems for my Brit Lit course. I had thought the movie was a little over the top but after reading the poems I think it was pretty accurate. Here is one of the shorter ones entitled “Song”:

Love a woman? You’re an ass!
‘Tis a most insipid passion
To choose out for your happiness
The silliest part of God’s creation.

Let the porter and the groom,
Things designed for dirty slaves,
drudge in fair Aurelia’s womb
To get supplies for age and graves.

Farewell, woman! I intend
Henceforth every night to sit
With my lewd, well-natured friends,
Drinking to engender wit.

The give me health, wealth, mirth, and wine,
And, if busy love entrenches,
There’s a sweet, soft page of mine
Does the trick worth forty wenches.

The other poems were much more lewd, but this one shows his selfishness, his disdain for women and marriage, and his love for drink and young boys (I thought the page reference was fitting).  At the end of movie (his life), when he is dying of the French Pox Rochester “finds” God.  Which, I suppose, is supposed to be a moral lesson.  Perhaps, ‘A life without God (religion) is a life of sin’.  I have not found it so…

For more poetry of this sort click here.

I finished up reading Christ our Lord: Out of Egypt by Anne Rice, and I can’t say that I enjoyed the experience.

First off, the writing style was tedious to get through. I am pretty sure the author was trying to make it sound like writing style of the authors from that period. But all the text she read were translations and all you have to do it read a set of VCR instructions or dan resignation letter to know that translations often sound a little off. The only biblical translation that I’ve read that even makes an attempt at anything other that ‘accuracy’ is the King James Version. [Example]

The story was written from the viewpoint of young Jesus (vs. Young Frankenstein which is much more amusing). I guess the whole idea was to highlight the human part of Jesus but still make him appear divine. She did this by making a really winnie kid with superhuman powers and knowledge. To get material for this Rice referenced the Infancy Gospel of Thomas, one of the few surviving gospels (not destroyed by the Catholic church) that deal with Jesus as a child… and had Jesus kill some kid. But in her version Jesus ‘knew’ what he did was wrong and hide behind his mother (then raised him from the dead). In the Gospel of Thomas… well read the section:

IV. 1 After that again he went through the village, and a child ran and dashed against his shoulder. And Jesus was provoked and said unto him: Thou shalt not finish thy course (lit. go all thy way). And immediately he fell down and died. But certain when they saw what was done said: Whence was this young child born, for that every word of his is an accomplished work? And the parents of him that was dead came unto Joseph, and blamed him, saying: Thou that hast such a child canst not dwell with us in the village: or do thou teach him to bless and not to curse: for he slayeth our children.

V. 1 And Joseph called the young child apart and admonished him, saying: Wherefore doest thou such things, that these suffer and hate us and persecute us? But Jesus said: I know that these thy words are not thine: nevertheless for thy sake I will hold my peace: but they shall bear their punishment. And straightway they that accused him were smitten with blindness. 2 And they that saw it were sore afraid and perplexed, and said concerning him that every word which he spake whether it were good or bad, was a deed, and became a marvel. And when they (he ?) saw that Jesus had so done, Joseph arose and took hold upon his ear and wrung it sore. 3 And the young child was wroth and said unto him: It sufficeth thee (or them) to seek and not to find, and verily thou hast done unwisely: knowest thou not that I am thine? vex me not.

Why make Jesus so sensitive? I guess it has something to do with making more human. But aren’t kids cruel? Has Rice never seen Nanny 911? Could you really punish a kid who could kill you with a prayer? I bet he’d be unruly.

I could probably go on for a while, but that’s enough. It was a good thing that the book was really short, because I don’t think I could have gotten all the way through it otherwise. Maybe the book disappointed me because I don’t believe any part of Jesus was divine… or that there is a divine but who knows? I wouldn’t bother with reading it.

My comments on the authors notes: This part was probably the most interesting part of the book as it briefly goes over her leaving the church, coming back to the church, and her interest in making the settings for her books as historically accurate as possible (which was one part of her book that did shine). But she argues against the idea that the gospels were written about 50 years after death of Christ (around 30 CE) simply because there were no references to the destruction of the temple in any of the gospels. Well it took me about 3 seconds to find Mark chapter 13.

(1) As he was making his way out of the temple area one of his disciples said to him, “Look, teacher, what stones and what buildings!” (2) Jesus said to him, “Do you see these great buildings? There will not be one stone left upon another that will not be thrown down.”

I wonder what that’s an allusion to?

So I just finished reading Upton Sinclair’s Dragon Harvest, which, as it turns out, is just one book in a long series of 11 or 12 other books. The only inkling I had that this book was part of a series was the end when I said to myself, and possibly to Heidi, “[Expletive]ing [Expletive]. That is not an [Expletive] ending. [Expletive]” But I’ll get to that later. The book stands on its own quite well, so if you want to read it you don’t have to bother reading the first book, whatever it may be.* Anyway, to the review!

I would highly recommend this book. But not because of the main character who is very difficult for me to like. Lanny Budd is aristocratic American who spends his time buying and selling expensive pictures, and spying on the rich people who buy and sell them (for Franklin D. Rosenfeld Roosevelt). While this does end up getting some useful information, such as the date the Wehrmacht will invade France, but the whole point is to show case the attitudes of the rich and powerful (While one can never be sure if these attitudes are correct they are more than plausible, especially given the current tax cuts for the rich). Lanny is also a closet socialist. He acts like a rich person and feels guilty about it, but I don’t think he’d be able live without excessive amount of wealth. This is why I don’t really like him, but besides that…

The story is good. It gives an interesting and complex view on how the second World War started. It goes into the treaty of Versailles, the rise of the Nazis, the political interactions between England, France, Germany and the U.S., and even tries to look into the minds of the leaders of those countries. It all comes down to the idea of ‘Class over country’. All the powerful (rich) families in these countries are frightened of the Bolsheviks (and their many infestations: unions, socialist, democrats, e&c.) and are willing to do pretty much anything to stop them. Or so the story goes. The book also pokes fun at Adi Schicklgruber’s following of the occult (Lanny delays the invasion of Poland by bringing him a fake psychic) and many of the other rich and powerful.

Generally, this book is entertaining even when it is trying to be educational. I would strongly recommend this book to those of you who would like to read something informative but not dull. I may try and pick up some of the other ones in the series to see if they are all as good (I hear the first one won a Pulitzer).

*I looked around and found a little bit more about the series (or at least the Simon Publishing republication of the series). The jerk thought it’d be a good idea to split each book in twain, print them as paperback and charge $30 bucks a pop for them. So if you want to buy the set be prepared to pay $660! Or by them used… they have been in print since the 50’s (mine cost $1!).

The
Lanny Budd Series; a total of 7,340 pages, covering world events during
the 1941 - 1953 period. Often called “the greatest historical novel of
the 20th century.”

1. World’s
   End I & World’s End II (193131313X);
2. Between Two Worlds I
   (1931313024) & Between Two Worlds II (1931313148);
3. Dragon’s Teeth I
   (1931313032) & Dragon’s Teeth II (1931313156);
4. Wide is the Gate I
   (1931313044) & Wide is the Gate II (1931313164);
5. Presidential Agent I
   (1931313059) & Presidential Agent II (1931313180);
6. Dragon Harvest I
   (1931313067) & Dragon Harvest II (1931313202.);
7. A World to Win I
   (1931313075) & A World to Win II (1931313229);
8. Presidential Mission I
   (1931313083) & Presidential Mission II (1931313245);
9. One Clear Call I
   (1931313091) & One Clear Call II (1931313261);
10. O Shepherd, Speak! I
    (1931313105) & O Shepherd, Speak! II (1931313288);
11. The Return of Lanny
    Budd I (1931313113) & The Return of Lanny Budd II (193131330X).

Or at least it is when it was taught to me in High School. It was always so dry. I had only one teacher who taught history in such a way that made it interesting and from her class come my only High School memories of American history. I remember learning about the New Deal, FDR and the TVA (include environmental impacts, both good and bad). Interestingly enough, this teacher taught the remedial history class and requested that I be placed in the advanced history class. The advanced class a struggle, not because the course work was difficult but because I was in a constant battle with the teacher. My first paper for her was returned 3 or 4 times for revisions; I finally returned a clean copy of the original paper and was given a B+. I’m still not sure what she was trying to prove. Anyways.

I did end up with a B.A. in History but not in American History. My first history class in college was a Gen. Ed. course in World History and part of what made it so interesting was the question, ‘Why’. For example, the professor, whenever we started a new section, would ask the political and physical environment the culture lived in. Fine but after we (or I. I’m not sure anyone else ever spoke up in the class) told him he’d always ask why these were important. The answer always revolved around the idea that no one lives in a bubble. People’s lives are constantly conflicting with our natural environment and other people.

I never thought of American history as being made up of conflict. This book helps explain why. To sum it up, teachers teach from textbooks most often because it easiest and textbooks are piles of trash (at least history text books). They do not have any conflict and they are blatantly euro-centric, which makes them unrealistic, boring (would you read a suspense novel with no suspense?) and offensive to people of non-European decent. They can also be seen as offensive to women, poor people and religious minorities (Catholics, Jews, Atheists, e&c.).

The book starts by poking holes in 12 major text books; exposing blatant lies, misquotations, lack of quotations, misrepresentation of facts and suppression of the minority. An example from a favorite period of my own, is the representation of Helen Keller as a hard working cripple who succeeded in overcoming her physical disabilities, here’s what I would take as an example of what a text book might have. But the author Loewen asks is what about the rest of Keller’s life? What about when she realized that the majority of blind people were poor and that most, if not all of them would never received the education and help she did? What about her political activities? Loewen goes on from there to talk about Columbus, Indian relations, the Civil War, Racial relations and how modern history is simply not taught (did you ever get to the end of a text book?).

The book ends with an attempt at figuring out why text books are so bad and how bad text books affect students. This was probably the most pertinent part of the book but I found it the least interesting. After seeing how American history is being mistaught it is easy for me to see a need to change it, but then again there have been several attempts to make the teaching of biology a farce too so maybe defending the teaching of truth is necessary. Teaching lies can only make people more distrustful which can only have a negative effect on society.

I would recommend this book to anyone who wants a good read on American history (as a great deal of it is dealt with in the book) or who is simply interested in figuring out what they missed out on because of High School.

Now I finished this book a week or so ago so this will not be as descriptive as it could be but here goes.

Reading ‘The 13 1/2 Lives of Captain Blue Bear’ reminded me of reading Roald Dahl’s ‘The BFG‘ (the Big Friendly Giant not the Big Fucking Gun) or at least it style did. It kind of reads like a kids book (it even has pictures!), though it has some comedy intended for adults. Time has erased all examples except for one biblical reference; one of the species of demons inhabiting Atlantis is called Gogmagogs. Odd, I know but I found it amusing. But for the most part these allusions are pretty hidden so they don’t distract from the main draw of the book, distraction. The book is insane (if you could not tell from the cover or the title… though the title is misleading. He is neither a Captain nor does he die once during the book). It is narrated by Bluebear whose narrative style does an good job of making this insanity seem almost mundane. It is natural to live in a perpetual tornado or watch a battle of wits between an intelligent element and a seven brained scientist riding partially tamed darkness. But in the end the book is not that memorable. I recommend reading it if you are in the mode for an amusing distraction and, if the rating from American Idol are correct, a lot of people are.

So Heidi pointed out this album to me because I was much amused by the music in Life Aquatic. I am sure that those who know me realize that I like this album because it is basically a collection of damn good Bowie covers. I like Bowie. I like damn good covers. What can you do?

For those who have seen the Life Aquatic you know the music I am talking about, for those who have not seen it many of the songs are popular David Bowie songs sung in Portugese with an acoustic guitar acomp, accomn, acompnt… a guy on the guitar. That’s it. Tis Good.

You may recall that I am taking a course that is supposed to improve the way I supervise peoples. In case you do not, look here. Today (now yesterday) was the second installment of this course. Like I may have said before I feel that writing about this course will make the shit talked about stick in my head. So I feel justified in writing about it at work. I’ll try to make this quick and painful… -less, -LESS!.

The day was divided into two parts (1) the hiring process (screening candidates, interviewing, not discriminating) and (2) reviewing employee performance. Each will be addressed separately.

Now the first half of the day (1) was pretty straight forward but useful. The whole time I was like, ‘yeah that makes sense’ or ‘I guess I kind of knew that’. One of the main things I learned was to create a matrix or table with all candidate and all desired skills (not education though because you cannot require education because it discriminates against Bill Gates). This makes it easier to compare each candidate and protects you from discrimination lawsuits… unless, of course, you do discriminate, at which point I would recommend burning the paper. The matrix technique can be used for both choosing people to interview and choosing the person to hire. Then you interview the person. You should come in prepared (holy shit!) with questions designed to get specific past examples of the skills you want in the employee. Basically the idea is that past performance will probably tell you a lot about future performance (i.e. if you were a dickhead, you will probably stay a dickhead). We were also give a list of questions that were discriminatory and a second list of questions that were not, so that we wouldn’t ask stupid things like, ‘Do you have children who will hinder you from working hideous amounts of overtime?’. There was a video! Finally, save all paperwork involved, including notes on candidates; if you are sued you have to prove that you didn’t discriminate. (In case you were wondering much of the morning was spent on possible ways to discriminate, which is the reason it kept coming up in this paragraph.)

Then the second half of the day (2) was given to a topic that I know nothing about. Reviewing people’s performances. I have never really been reviewed and I have never reviewed anyone. Some people would say that this is a good thing as it means I will not get fired and will not have to fire anyone, but that’s crap. Firing is a long process which has to be documented (verbal, written, probation, termination! or something). The review is supposed to give the employee an idea of where to go based on how they have performed in the past. In this section they talk about employees need clear job descriptions, clear goals, and a clear way of evaluation. Once this is in place reviewing should be easy because you can say, ‘According to this predefined system you are an idiot. How do you think we can remedy this?’ Now, during this entire section I was a little perturbed. I do not have a clear job description… hell I wrote my job description and I did not know what I was getting myself into! I do not have any really goals; I cannot make goals for myself (ask Heidi) and no one here will make them for me. Plus there is no evaluation system here. I do not know if I am doing what is expected of me or not. Then I realized that I am doing the same thing to the people who work under me. Great. How to fix that? Come up with a clear job description. Keep tabs on how everyone is doing (good work, bad stuff, project ongoing and completed, testing proficiency, e&c). Anything else?

During both an interview and a review it is possible to have some difficult situations so remember this: you are in charge and you are right so own everything you say (’I think you are a dickhead’), and ask open-ended questions that get specific answer or force the employee to come up with the solution. Basically, lead the employee into saying what you want them to say, that way they have to agree with you. Manipulation! Use your hands!

P.S. I am attempting to use a trackback. Wish me luck!
P.P.S. I hope that I can continue to amuse Dan with my inane ramblings.
P.P.P.S. Is the login thing really killing all the comments? Let me know by phone if necessary.
P.P.P.P.S. I didn’t really read through this and I stopped to have a conversation during it so forgive any bad grammah.
P.P.P.P.P.S. Sorry for the dearth of links.

I just finished reading through
the first part of Marcel Proust In Search of Lost Time, Combray (Found
in the book Swann’s Way). When I
originally found the book wandering through the not so local bookstore; I was
struck by the opening couple of pages during which the Proust describes falling
asleep while reading. The topic is
completely mundane but the style is exquisitely detailed. “Sometimes, my candle scarcely out, my eyes
would close so quickly that I did not have time to say to myself ‘I’m falling
asleep.’ And, half an hour later, the thought that it was time to try to sleep
would wake me up…” (p. 1) This sums up
the work: mundane and exquisite.

The story of Combray revolves
around the narrator’s childhood in the title town of Combray. We learn about his mother, father,
grandmother, aunt and cousins, and some of their neighbors. But the story is not what makes the book
stick in ones mind; rather it is the fluidity of the author’s style. He jumps from one topic to another, as if he
were leaping from one Lilly-pad to another chasing the light as it sparkles
across the surface of a pond. The
slightest sense releases a memory that changes the direction of the story. There is the last section of Part I of
Combray (a part that Lydia Davis, translator and introducer, would call
quintessential Proust) when the taste of madeleine (cake) in tea stimulates the
narrator’s memory. But it is just a
feeling that there is something hidden beneath the surface; after battling to
restore it, the memory only returns after the narrator surrenders. The memory is of Combray, of which we soon
learn a great deal. (pp. 46 & 47)

But the story is not about
Combray rather it is about the narrator as a boy. We do not learn about this hypochondriac aunt but how he
perceives her (and her madeleine). We
do not learn about the road to Guermantes but how the river and flowers found
at its side inspire his imagination.
Everything in the town reflects the boy and is exaggerated by the boy’s
limited scope; his aunt has always been bedridden, and the town of Guermantes
exists in name only for he has never followed it to its end. His is a child’s view of the world. Everything is small; everything is
personal. The reader is not required to
question why things are, why his grandmother walks in the rain or why the
family eats lunch early on Saturday.
Things are as they are and one only has to look around to find beauty
and comfort.

Though not everything is
comfortable for the boy. There is also
the irrational fear that comes over him every night, when he wonders if his
mother will kiss him goodnight. If she
did not come he would lay away starring at the images the night-light would
project on the wall. All goodness and
happiness would vanish from his world. But
this fear is relegated to the darkness, and vanquishes with the sun every
morning.

The book also appeals to on a
more personal level for I feel there seems to be a kinship between the author
and myself. In one section the boy
fantasizes about meeting a noblewoman and being brought to her court, but he
dream is incomplete:

She would make me
tell her the subjects of the poems that I intended to compose. And these dreams warned me that since wanted
to be a writer someday, it was time to find out what I meant to write. But as soon as I asked myself this, trying
to find a subject in which I could anchor some infinite philosophical meaning,
my mind would stop functioning, I could no longer see anything but empty space before
my attentive eyes, I felt that I had no talent or perhaps a disease of the
brain kept it from being born. (pp. 176 & 177)

The frustration that, when it
comes to important things (at least personally) there is no vision, no driving
force outside of a desire to be good at something. Quite often, while reading this book, I would find myself
relating authors meandering mind to my own.

This is one of the strong points
of the work. It forces ones own mind to
wander. Reading this book is like
falling asleep while reading. As you
read through the pages you mind wanders and you create your own version of
Proust’s world with you at its center.
You find yourself rereading sections not just because the style is so
captivating but the memories that bubble forth while reading them send your
mind elsewhere. This work is a reminiscence for both the author and the
reader.

Okay today I started with a career development course. There will be 6 more weeks of this so I hope you enjoy this. :p

The first seminar/class was basically an introduction followed by a basic introduction to different personality types courtesy of Myers-Briggs. Before the start of the class we had to take the Myers-Briggs personality test (if you want to take on go here or here). Now I think that whole purpose of this exercise was for us to become aware that there are different types of people because they did not tell us how to determine different personality types (without a test) or how to interact with these different personality types. I guess it is another one of those be sensitive to other people things. If you are interested my results were as follows:

Another way to look at this is:

Here is a description of me:

ESTP: Good at on-the-spot problem solving. Like action, enjoy whatever comes along. Tend to like mechanical things and sports, with friends on the side. Adaptable, tolerant, pragmatic; focused on getting results. Dislike long explanations. Are best wiht real thing that can be worked, handled, taken apart, or put together.

Or:

ESTP: “Promoter”. Action! When present, things begin to happen. fiercely competitive. Entrepreneur. Often uses shock effect to get attention. Negotiator par excellence. 13% of the population.

If I had been a little be more intraverted I could have been this:

ISTP: “Artisan”. Impulsive action. Life should be of impulse rather than of purpose. Action is an end to itself. fearless, craves excitement, master of tools. 5% of the population.

Master of tools?! I missed out.

Okay, so, like I said earlier, I have started reading the Daily Kos. Yesterday, Bush gave a speech that irked me and this post pretty much sums up my feeling on the subject (which I is why I like to read the site). I thought I would share. It seems that fighting abortion is the only way this administration can seem compassionate. It has done nothing good for the majority of the country, even if most of it either does not know it or does not care.

The book that I am reading is forcing my mind to think about current events. Many of the ideas the Victorians struggled with (existence of God, purpose of God, purpose without God) are ideas that many people still struggle with. One of the more interesting points the author makes is that for all extents and purposes the ‘clockmaker God’ (God as the creator) has died and needed to die for society to continue to advance (i.e. have science). While I do not think that this God is quite dead (’D-E-D, dead’) I do agree that it needs to die. The fact that people believe that God is active in this world allows people to avoid active thought and put forth old prejudices as truth. While there can be a god it needs to be more of a paradigm and less of a monarch. Of course, many people want God to give them a purpose and to make them special (i.e. judea/christian tradition states we were created in God’s image and that we inherited the Earth). Suck it up. You are an (pseudo-) intellegent ape.