IF I was a major league manager, and I was going to set my pitching rotation up for a seven-game World Series, and I could arrange them any way I wanted to (regardless of how they had pitched in the previous series), here's how I'd do it:
First, I'd only use my best three pitchers. The 1987 Minnesota Twins (http://www.baseball-reference.com/player_search.cgi?search=1987+Twins) won the World Series using only three starters (Frank Viola, Bert Blyleven and the immortal Les Straker.) This minimizes the use of my two worst starters, and gets the greatest number of starts for my three best pitchers. It runs the risk of fatigue, but it's the World Series.
The next part is what I have been doing some thinking about: How best does one arrange the top three starters in a seven-game series. Instinctively, you'd think it would be Number one guy in games one, four and seven, number two guy in games two and six and number three guy in games three and seven.
Noe that no matter how you do it, the top guy pitches three games, and next two pitch two each. However, I don't want my number three starter starting game six or game seven. If I get that far (and many series do) I want my best guys at the end, and I want my worst guy to start the least meaningful games. Can this be achieved?
Yes! The rotation would go like this: 1, 3, 2, 1, 3, 2, 1.
Why does this work? The ace gets three starts (games one, four, and seven). The second best guy gets his starts in game three and game six. This means the third-best pitcher pitches games two and five.
Why is this an advantage? Well, assuming the ace wins game one, there isn't as much pressure on the number three pitcher to win game two. It's not a bad start to a seven game series to split the first two games, especially with your best two pitchers coming up. Even if he loses, you are down 2-0 with the best two pitchers in the next two games.
In the worst game five situation, team is down three games to one. In that case, things are pretty bad anyway.
The best case, it's up 3 -1, and that means it doesn't really matter how well the third starter pitches, because your two best pitchers are coming up and they only have to win one game between the three of them.
Any other combination of wins and losses at game five merely continues the series with the best two pitchers left for the last two games.
What about the 1987 Twins? They followed a 1-2-3 sequence. They used Viola (their ace), Blyleven (their number two) and Straker (their number three) in sequence. They won anyway. Viola was the loser in game four, but he won games one and seven. Blyleven won game two, but lost game five. Straker wasn't around for any decisions, but the Twins split his starts, losing game three but winning game six.
So, each pitcher lost a game, but the Twins won the World Series because Viola won twice. Therefore, the most important piece of the puzzle may be having a dominant pitcher and making sure he pitches as much as possible. The rest is all scraping around for a small matchup edge.
What got me to thinking about this -- a long time ago -- was Pete Schourek. He started game four of a five game playoff series in 1998 between the Boston Red Sox (his team) and the Cleveland Indians. Facing elimination, manager Jimy Williams could have pitched Pedro Martinez, one of the most dominant starters that year, instead of Schourek, whose record was below .500 for the season.
He picked Schourek, using the logic that the team had to win both games anyway, and Schourek was going to have to pitch in one or the other. Williams was going to save Martinez for game five when he would have an extra day of rest.
It didn't work. Schourek lost, and Martinez never got the chance to win the decisive game
I always thought this was kind of silly. In a short playoff, a manager should go with the best pitcher he has today and worry about tomorrow's game tomorrow. So, the logical question is: What is the best way a manager could use his pitchers to avoid a dilemma like that and (here's the key) have the two best starters available for key games?
My solution may not be perfect, but it's a plan. I promise to use it the next time I am managing in the World Series.
Tuesday, July 31, 2007
Harry Potter
I started reading the new Harry Potter book. I am desperately trying to finish before someone blows the whole story for me.
So far (page 20) so good.
So far (page 20) so good.
If I were John Edwards ...
... I'd show up at the next nationally-televised presidential debate with a flat-top haircut.
But, heck, if I was on national TV, I might do that even if people weren't making an issue of my $400 haircut.
Whattya think about dredlocks?
But, heck, if I was on national TV, I might do that even if people weren't making an issue of my $400 haircut.
Whattya think about dredlocks?
Saturday, July 28, 2007
Pug Davis
I really should stop posting links, but this is interesting:
http://www.sugarboukas.com/PD
It's (I think) an e-comic called "Pug Davis." I don't know if it's been published anywhere on paper. Worth checking out, if only because of the unique art.
http://www.sugarboukas.com/PD
It's (I think) an e-comic called "Pug Davis." I don't know if it's been published anywhere on paper. Worth checking out, if only because of the unique art.
Elwee and the Tree Weasels
Boy, YouTube has a wealth of things, like Kricfalusi Mighty Mouse episodes.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vpNNduExImk
Here's the Elwee and the Tree Weasels episode. Why is that 20 years later, this stuff never fails to amuse me?
And what the hell is that in Sandy Bottomfeeder's mouth?
And, why all the relish?
Here's a bonus: an old favorite:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dKm3Ol1EqYU&mode=related&search=
Yeaaahh? Well put me down. Gotta finish my theme song.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vpNNduExImk
Here's the Elwee and the Tree Weasels episode. Why is that 20 years later, this stuff never fails to amuse me?
And what the hell is that in Sandy Bottomfeeder's mouth?
And, why all the relish?
Here's a bonus: an old favorite:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dKm3Ol1EqYU&mode=related&search=
Yeaaahh? Well put me down. Gotta finish my theme song.
The Fantastic Four
Here's an oldie but a goodie. If you ask me, the 1967 cartoon show is the best version of the FF so far.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cMQj8NCey1A (Part one)
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QgMuJ6LW7I4 (Part two)
No guarantees how long the link will stay active.
By the way, the voice of Galactus is the same guy who played Lurch in "The Addams Family," I think.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cMQj8NCey1A (Part one)
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QgMuJ6LW7I4 (Part two)
No guarantees how long the link will stay active.
By the way, the voice of Galactus is the same guy who played Lurch in "The Addams Family," I think.
Thursday, July 26, 2007
Wednesday, July 18, 2007
Dog fighting: Awful or Horrifying?
Below is a link to the federal indictment of Atlanta Falcons quarterback (for now) Michael Vick. It describes in detail the allegations regarding the dog fighting charges against him.
http://msn.foxsports.com/id/7035302_37_1.pdf
http://msn.foxsports.com/id/7035302_37_1.pdf
Harry Potter and the Movies That Won't End
General thoughts on Harry Potter (The whole schmeel, not just the new movie):
I like Harry Potter, for the most part. I really enjoyed the first two books, which I read together sometime in late 1999 or early 2000. They were clever and although allegedly written for children, they had skillful writing, intelligent characters and exciting plots.
The third book came out, and I quickly bought it. It started feeling a little bit like formula to me: introduce Harry’s mean uncle and aunt, show how miserable he was with them, whisk him away to Hogwart’s School of Magic and foreshadow an eventual climactic battle with the evil wizard Voldemort and put Harry and his friends in some mortal danger to give the book an exciting climax.
After a while, though, all the books started blending together.
By the end of the third book, I couldn’t remember what happened in each one. I still can’t. I think he fought a giant spider in one, and I remember the fight in the Ministry of Magic from the latest movie because I just saw it. Other than that, I couldn’t tell you what happened in each one. They all blend together.
As every reviewer has so far stated, the first two movies slavishly followed the books. To me, however, the screen versions seemed to be mostly exposition with some situations that showed us who the characters could do followed by a rushed climax and an overhanging threat of eventual grave danger.
The books didn’t seem this way, probably because author J. K. Rowling has a lot more room to pace the story. But the movies seem to spend all sorts of time introducing things rather than putting them in motion quickly.
What occurred to me today is that the movies taken in sum (maybe the books, too) are just like they are individually: Lots of exposition and character introduction leading to the real climax in the last movie. Maybe they will be magnificent if watched consecutively in one sitting. (You try it first. I am not dumb enough to carry out all my grand ideas.)
We’ll see when the last book comes out later this week, but Maybe Harry Potter VII will feature a constant stream of action, with all the characters who have been thoroughly introduced finally going into action in a giant, cellulose chess board.
Maybe they’ll change the movie title to, “Harry Potter and the Destruction of All Life As We Know It.”
I like Harry Potter, for the most part. I really enjoyed the first two books, which I read together sometime in late 1999 or early 2000. They were clever and although allegedly written for children, they had skillful writing, intelligent characters and exciting plots.
The third book came out, and I quickly bought it. It started feeling a little bit like formula to me: introduce Harry’s mean uncle and aunt, show how miserable he was with them, whisk him away to Hogwart’s School of Magic and foreshadow an eventual climactic battle with the evil wizard Voldemort and put Harry and his friends in some mortal danger to give the book an exciting climax.
After a while, though, all the books started blending together.
By the end of the third book, I couldn’t remember what happened in each one. I still can’t. I think he fought a giant spider in one, and I remember the fight in the Ministry of Magic from the latest movie because I just saw it. Other than that, I couldn’t tell you what happened in each one. They all blend together.
As every reviewer has so far stated, the first two movies slavishly followed the books. To me, however, the screen versions seemed to be mostly exposition with some situations that showed us who the characters could do followed by a rushed climax and an overhanging threat of eventual grave danger.
The books didn’t seem this way, probably because author J. K. Rowling has a lot more room to pace the story. But the movies seem to spend all sorts of time introducing things rather than putting them in motion quickly.
What occurred to me today is that the movies taken in sum (maybe the books, too) are just like they are individually: Lots of exposition and character introduction leading to the real climax in the last movie. Maybe they will be magnificent if watched consecutively in one sitting. (You try it first. I am not dumb enough to carry out all my grand ideas.)
We’ll see when the last book comes out later this week, but Maybe Harry Potter VII will feature a constant stream of action, with all the characters who have been thoroughly introduced finally going into action in a giant, cellulose chess board.
Maybe they’ll change the movie title to, “Harry Potter and the Destruction of All Life As We Know It.”
Monday, July 16, 2007
Inventory issues
Sorry if I am loading up with too much long stuff. I am clearning up the inventory of stuff I had that I felt needed an audience. I'll try to mis it up and post some shorter, silly stuff in the near future.
I only have a few more inventory items that I can post. I am trying to pick things that either aren't terribly timely or are interesting even if dated.
I only have a few more inventory items that I can post. I am trying to pick things that either aren't terribly timely or are interesting even if dated.
Courthouse again (the last time for a while, I promise)
This was my response to a letter that appeared in the Advertiser-Tribune, something like two days after I wrote the last post. The original letter had 17 reasons to save our courthouse. My response is called ...
17 Reasons (Not) to Save Our Courthouse:
1. The ground floor always has been of use. It held various county offices, including Judge Thomas Spellerberg’s courtroom, office and jury room, plus the public restrooms, and it is elevator accessible.
1. And, that courtroom was considered inadequate by every official and juror who served in it. Judge Spellerberg kept comment forms in his office to send to the commissioners that almost all listed “courtroom is too small” as one of the comments. Judge Steve Shuff moved out of it as soon as possibly could.
2. Security is a simple matter: Close all but one main entrance, install a metal detector and post a security guard.
2. True enough. It was already being done. However, there are still lots of windows and doors on the first floor that would allow access to someone with nefarious intentions.
3. Space required for modern office equipment (copiers, computers, etc.) makes housing all county offices in one building an impossibility.
3. Right again, but what does saving the courthouse have to do with that? Either way, the county will find enough space for its operations. The question is which is more efficient and, ultimately, cheaper for the county and its taxpayers? The fewer buildings, the better.
4. Additional county buildings house multiple offices:
4. This is not a reason to keep the existing courthouse. It’s simply a fact.
5. Our courthouse has ample county parking lots: A) Annex Building; B) former county commissioners building; C) county commissioners building; D) Juvenile and probate court building; E) RTA building/CSB building; F) Job and Family Services building.
5. True enough. By this standard, so would a new one. Again, not a reason to keep or rebuild.
6. Our courthouse is located on two-way South Washington Street.
6. And one-way Court Street, and one-way Jefferson Street and one-way Market Street. A new one also would be located along the same streets.
7. Environmental regulations require removal and proper disposal of any hazardous material — whether our courthouse is restored or destroyed.
7. Again, that’s not really an argument to keep the existing courthouse. It’s just a fact.
8. Our courthouse already is connected to the Annex for heating and cooling; is constructed of natural insulating materials (thick stonewalls); was designed as fireproof and constructed as durable for hundreds of years.
8. A reasonable argument, until you realize how leaky the windows are. Even if the building is renovated, it would have the same windows and doors in the same places. The renovation might be more efficient than the old building, but it wouldn’t be as efficient as a modern one.
9. Restoration plans show the elevator moved from the central stairwell and handicapped accessible; “large hallways” already are handicap accessible.
9. A new courthouse would be REALLY handicapped accessible. Nyahh.
10. By a very narrow margin a tax increase that would have paid for restoration was rejected. Citizens did not vote for demolition. No official polling or ballot proposal has ever been offered citizens concerning preservation versus destruction.
10. However, citizens voted not to renovate. This probably does not indicate a desire to let it sit empty and rot, so the only alternatives are keep using it as it is or build a new one.
11. Our courthouse is the only remaining E.E. Myers designed county courthouse in the nation. The four remaining preserved and restored Myers courthouses function as state capitol buildings.
11. But, it is not in its original state. The original clock tower is gone, for one. It’s actually a mixup of bizarre styles. E.E. Myers would probably want it torn down after seeing what’s been done to it. I don’t know if anyone has asked him about it, though.
12. The Annex, hastily and erroneously erected atop contaminated soil (previous site of oil storage tanks), now requires additional funds to conform to environmental standards. Where are the reports of U.S. Environmental Protection Agency testing? Haste does make waste!
12. Is anyone talking about putting up a new courthouse in haste? The Annex had a construction deadline to meet because of insurance money. A new courthouse would not.
13. When our courthouse is restored, there will be one secure main entrance for taxpayers, judges, lawyers and visitors.
13. Didn’t we do this in number two?
14. Renovation, alteration, and relocation of all county offices to a warehouse-style structure would be cost prohibitive and ludicrous.
14. Don’t you think it would be nice if all the county buildings matched the new Wal-Mart?
15. Communities with preserved/restored historic courthouses report revitalized downtown areas and increased tourism revenues. Counties that destroyed their historic structures regret their decision, citing among many reasons: a depressed downtown area, diminished tourism and the inability to erect buildings with the same durability, longevity, quality of materials and workmanship. Many buildings built today have a life span of about 30-40 years.
15. I know you are but what am I?
16. As of June 14, the “Save Our Courthouse” Tiffin Historic Trust petition to our commissioners has received in excess of 1,000 signatures, following the “courthouse rally” held on a cold, cloudy Saturday morning.
16. Where were those 1,000 people during the election to pass a tax to renovate the courthouse? See point 10.
17. Parking accessibility? See No. 5.
17. So, this isn’t 17 reasons. It’s actually 14.
P.S. Unlike the publicly printed statement of one of our current county commissioners, I and thousands of Seneca Countians do care about our heritage, our history and historic structures which stand as visible connections with our past and tangible links for our future generations.
P.S. I’d love to preserve the heritage of the county and its history, but I don’t think county employees should have to work in a historical dump. The courthouse should be replaced, with a modern structure. The 1880’s design and the neglect of the last 50 years makes it unusable. The beauty it may have had has long been destroyed, and it’s time to build something new that Tiffin can be proud of.
17 Reasons (Not) to Save Our Courthouse:
1. The ground floor always has been of use. It held various county offices, including Judge Thomas Spellerberg’s courtroom, office and jury room, plus the public restrooms, and it is elevator accessible.
1. And, that courtroom was considered inadequate by every official and juror who served in it. Judge Spellerberg kept comment forms in his office to send to the commissioners that almost all listed “courtroom is too small” as one of the comments. Judge Steve Shuff moved out of it as soon as possibly could.
2. Security is a simple matter: Close all but one main entrance, install a metal detector and post a security guard.
2. True enough. It was already being done. However, there are still lots of windows and doors on the first floor that would allow access to someone with nefarious intentions.
3. Space required for modern office equipment (copiers, computers, etc.) makes housing all county offices in one building an impossibility.
3. Right again, but what does saving the courthouse have to do with that? Either way, the county will find enough space for its operations. The question is which is more efficient and, ultimately, cheaper for the county and its taxpayers? The fewer buildings, the better.
4. Additional county buildings house multiple offices:
4. This is not a reason to keep the existing courthouse. It’s simply a fact.
5. Our courthouse has ample county parking lots: A) Annex Building; B) former county commissioners building; C) county commissioners building; D) Juvenile and probate court building; E) RTA building/CSB building; F) Job and Family Services building.
5. True enough. By this standard, so would a new one. Again, not a reason to keep or rebuild.
6. Our courthouse is located on two-way South Washington Street.
6. And one-way Court Street, and one-way Jefferson Street and one-way Market Street. A new one also would be located along the same streets.
7. Environmental regulations require removal and proper disposal of any hazardous material — whether our courthouse is restored or destroyed.
7. Again, that’s not really an argument to keep the existing courthouse. It’s just a fact.
8. Our courthouse already is connected to the Annex for heating and cooling; is constructed of natural insulating materials (thick stonewalls); was designed as fireproof and constructed as durable for hundreds of years.
8. A reasonable argument, until you realize how leaky the windows are. Even if the building is renovated, it would have the same windows and doors in the same places. The renovation might be more efficient than the old building, but it wouldn’t be as efficient as a modern one.
9. Restoration plans show the elevator moved from the central stairwell and handicapped accessible; “large hallways” already are handicap accessible.
9. A new courthouse would be REALLY handicapped accessible. Nyahh.
10. By a very narrow margin a tax increase that would have paid for restoration was rejected. Citizens did not vote for demolition. No official polling or ballot proposal has ever been offered citizens concerning preservation versus destruction.
10. However, citizens voted not to renovate. This probably does not indicate a desire to let it sit empty and rot, so the only alternatives are keep using it as it is or build a new one.
11. Our courthouse is the only remaining E.E. Myers designed county courthouse in the nation. The four remaining preserved and restored Myers courthouses function as state capitol buildings.
11. But, it is not in its original state. The original clock tower is gone, for one. It’s actually a mixup of bizarre styles. E.E. Myers would probably want it torn down after seeing what’s been done to it. I don’t know if anyone has asked him about it, though.
12. The Annex, hastily and erroneously erected atop contaminated soil (previous site of oil storage tanks), now requires additional funds to conform to environmental standards. Where are the reports of U.S. Environmental Protection Agency testing? Haste does make waste!
12. Is anyone talking about putting up a new courthouse in haste? The Annex had a construction deadline to meet because of insurance money. A new courthouse would not.
13. When our courthouse is restored, there will be one secure main entrance for taxpayers, judges, lawyers and visitors.
13. Didn’t we do this in number two?
14. Renovation, alteration, and relocation of all county offices to a warehouse-style structure would be cost prohibitive and ludicrous.
14. Don’t you think it would be nice if all the county buildings matched the new Wal-Mart?
15. Communities with preserved/restored historic courthouses report revitalized downtown areas and increased tourism revenues. Counties that destroyed their historic structures regret their decision, citing among many reasons: a depressed downtown area, diminished tourism and the inability to erect buildings with the same durability, longevity, quality of materials and workmanship. Many buildings built today have a life span of about 30-40 years.
15. I know you are but what am I?
16. As of June 14, the “Save Our Courthouse” Tiffin Historic Trust petition to our commissioners has received in excess of 1,000 signatures, following the “courthouse rally” held on a cold, cloudy Saturday morning.
16. Where were those 1,000 people during the election to pass a tax to renovate the courthouse? See point 10.
17. Parking accessibility? See No. 5.
17. So, this isn’t 17 reasons. It’s actually 14.
P.S. Unlike the publicly printed statement of one of our current county commissioners, I and thousands of Seneca Countians do care about our heritage, our history and historic structures which stand as visible connections with our past and tangible links for our future generations.
P.S. I’d love to preserve the heritage of the county and its history, but I don’t think county employees should have to work in a historical dump. The courthouse should be replaced, with a modern structure. The 1880’s design and the neglect of the last 50 years makes it unusable. The beauty it may have had has long been destroyed, and it’s time to build something new that Tiffin can be proud of.
Seneca County Courthouse
Maybe some people who read this will care about the Seneca County Courthouse. This is a letter to the editor I wrote a few weeks ago that turned into a column that never got sent to any editors, so I shall post it here.
As a longtime Seneca County resident, I have long had an opinion about the Courthouse’s fate — tear it down. The current discussion about saving the building is misguided and far too late.
For five years I went to the Courthouse every day, or almost every day. As I entered, I was confronted by steps that were in such bad shape that, with my clumsiness, I was only one slip away from an embarrassing, and possibly injurious, wipeout in full view of downtown Tiffin.
I also faced an elevator that usually took you to the right floor, but not always.
I faced steep steps inside that gave my legs a solid workout as I went up and down from floor to floor (At least with the steps I knew where I’d end up.). And, that was just to get into any given office or courtroom.
Now, these items could all be repaired during a renovation project. But the point is the access routes into the building were designed with the 1880’s in mind. The elevator that was installed later didn’t help matters, because it didn’t really work and took away whatever beauty the inside corridors were designed to have.
What can’t be repaired is the 1880’s way the rooms in the courthouse are divided. There are many small rooms, with load bearing walls placed all around so it would be very hard to actually create a lot of larger, more modern work spaces.
The county needs two full-sized courtrooms because the population, the number of criminals and the number of possible offenses has grown considerably since the 1880s. There’s almost no way to make that happen in the existing building, and there’s certainly no good way.
Do the preservationists remember Judge Thomas Spellerberg’s basement courtroom, the one downstairs in which the gallery was so small the public had to set outside and watch the proceedings on a closed-circuit television camera? I do.
Do they remember that courtroom barely had enough room for 12 jurors who sat with their backs right up against a curtain that covered a vault door? I do.
Do they remember that even the first floor courtroom used by Judge Steve Shuff, after he took over from Spellerberg, was still too small for use as a courtroom? I do.
Finally, the workers in the courthouse were squeezed into small office spaces. They had to face cramped working conditions, an electrical and wiring system cobbled together long after the building was built and a workplace that had no central air conditioning. The building was simply not built for modern operations — especially electronics and the power, telephone and Internet lines they require.
No renovation could provide a comfortable, efficient and safe workplace. The building simply was not designed to be used in modern ways.
So, even with renovation, I see continued problems in accessing the building, more problems in conducting trials (a courthouse’s main purpose) and even more problems in continuing to perform routine courthouse work in the everyday environment as more people, more paperwork and more electronics get crammed into the same tiny offices.
I have not touched on security, the heat during trials that made the upstairs courtroom almost unbearable during the summer months (it was either live with the heat or strain to hear testimony over the roar of the fans or the window-mounted air conditioner), or the lack of adequate space for juries to conduct their deliberations.
A new building could be designed to meet the modern needs with modern spaces, modern heating and cooling and modern wiring.
In a letter in Thursday’s A-T, the writer lays out the totals for a 2001 projection of the cost of renovating the Courthouse, noting it would be cheaper at those rates to renovate than rebuild. What she misses is twofold: One, the costs have most certainly increased since 2001, and, two, the probable cost overruns in renovation combined with the increase in price means the cost to demolish and rebuild the courthouse is likely similar to the cost of saving the original building.
Absent from the discussion is the commissioners could call for the building to be an elegant new feature of downtown Tiffin. A new courthouse doesn’t have to look like a building in an office park. They could create something that, while housing modern operations, has a stately quality to compliment the other buildings in downtown Tiffin.
Face it: The existing building isn’t all that great, anyway. It is a hodge-podge of styles without its original clock tower. After looking at Wyandot and Hancock’s courthouses, Seneca County’s is, frankly, underwhelming.
The discussion should no longer be about whether we should save the courthouse — the decision was made, and it was the right one. The discussion should be how to build a new building that reflects the community and brings pride back to downtown Tiffin.
As a longtime Seneca County resident, I have long had an opinion about the Courthouse’s fate — tear it down. The current discussion about saving the building is misguided and far too late.
For five years I went to the Courthouse every day, or almost every day. As I entered, I was confronted by steps that were in such bad shape that, with my clumsiness, I was only one slip away from an embarrassing, and possibly injurious, wipeout in full view of downtown Tiffin.
I also faced an elevator that usually took you to the right floor, but not always.
I faced steep steps inside that gave my legs a solid workout as I went up and down from floor to floor (At least with the steps I knew where I’d end up.). And, that was just to get into any given office or courtroom.
Now, these items could all be repaired during a renovation project. But the point is the access routes into the building were designed with the 1880’s in mind. The elevator that was installed later didn’t help matters, because it didn’t really work and took away whatever beauty the inside corridors were designed to have.
What can’t be repaired is the 1880’s way the rooms in the courthouse are divided. There are many small rooms, with load bearing walls placed all around so it would be very hard to actually create a lot of larger, more modern work spaces.
The county needs two full-sized courtrooms because the population, the number of criminals and the number of possible offenses has grown considerably since the 1880s. There’s almost no way to make that happen in the existing building, and there’s certainly no good way.
Do the preservationists remember Judge Thomas Spellerberg’s basement courtroom, the one downstairs in which the gallery was so small the public had to set outside and watch the proceedings on a closed-circuit television camera? I do.
Do they remember that courtroom barely had enough room for 12 jurors who sat with their backs right up against a curtain that covered a vault door? I do.
Do they remember that even the first floor courtroom used by Judge Steve Shuff, after he took over from Spellerberg, was still too small for use as a courtroom? I do.
Finally, the workers in the courthouse were squeezed into small office spaces. They had to face cramped working conditions, an electrical and wiring system cobbled together long after the building was built and a workplace that had no central air conditioning. The building was simply not built for modern operations — especially electronics and the power, telephone and Internet lines they require.
No renovation could provide a comfortable, efficient and safe workplace. The building simply was not designed to be used in modern ways.
So, even with renovation, I see continued problems in accessing the building, more problems in conducting trials (a courthouse’s main purpose) and even more problems in continuing to perform routine courthouse work in the everyday environment as more people, more paperwork and more electronics get crammed into the same tiny offices.
I have not touched on security, the heat during trials that made the upstairs courtroom almost unbearable during the summer months (it was either live with the heat or strain to hear testimony over the roar of the fans or the window-mounted air conditioner), or the lack of adequate space for juries to conduct their deliberations.
A new building could be designed to meet the modern needs with modern spaces, modern heating and cooling and modern wiring.
In a letter in Thursday’s A-T, the writer lays out the totals for a 2001 projection of the cost of renovating the Courthouse, noting it would be cheaper at those rates to renovate than rebuild. What she misses is twofold: One, the costs have most certainly increased since 2001, and, two, the probable cost overruns in renovation combined with the increase in price means the cost to demolish and rebuild the courthouse is likely similar to the cost of saving the original building.
Absent from the discussion is the commissioners could call for the building to be an elegant new feature of downtown Tiffin. A new courthouse doesn’t have to look like a building in an office park. They could create something that, while housing modern operations, has a stately quality to compliment the other buildings in downtown Tiffin.
Face it: The existing building isn’t all that great, anyway. It is a hodge-podge of styles without its original clock tower. After looking at Wyandot and Hancock’s courthouses, Seneca County’s is, frankly, underwhelming.
The discussion should no longer be about whether we should save the courthouse — the decision was made, and it was the right one. The discussion should be how to build a new building that reflects the community and brings pride back to downtown Tiffin.
If this be ... BLOG!!!
So, I just hadda ask myself: What would I blog about if I had a blog?
I tried to start one once, you know. I even had a Web address and everything. The problem was, the site wouldn’t let me in to update it. (And, I have to update immediately after I post, because that’s when I always find the typos. Typos, incidentally, were always the first thing I always found upon opening the morning edition of the newspaper with a story by me.)
So, what can I blog about?
Comic books? An easy natural subject for me.
Movies? Maybe sometimes.
Music? I like listening, but I doubt I have a deep enough knowledge of the subject to be interesting.
Random things that come into my head? Maybe, but I absolutely hate reading random things typographically vomited upon a page because the writer can’t think of anything better.
Politics? Nah. I can make fun of politicians, but who am I to opine of George Bush’s immigration policy or debate intellectually whether John Kerry or Mitt Romney or a spawning salmon is a bigger flip-flopper? (I’d probably vote for the salmon, but Romney is catching up fast.)
My perspective on life? It’s too easy: Always take the way out of the building that allows you to drink from the most water fountains.
Strange things that happen to me? It would offer a wealth of material, but I’d have to vet it carefully to make sure I wasn’t descending into minutiae. (I cut myself shaving today used to be my running joke. I don’t want it to be a daily blog entry.)
The best blog I have read is Mark Evanier’s. (http://www.newsfromme.com/) He talks about comics, Hollywood, creative people, politics (a little), television, and things that happen to him. That’s what I’d like to do, to be honest. But, he’s already doing it. All I could do, really, is copy what he does poorly.
I have tried to read other blogs, some even by people I know. Some of them aren’t updated enough. Some are just boring. The fake “Planet Tad” blog in MAD is pretty funny, though.
The trouble is: Who will read the darn thing? People I know? Well, then, that’s one audience and one set of expectations. People I don’t know? Then, that would free me up to re-invent whatever crap I want to. (Sort of like the Beatles suddenly becoming Sergeant Pepper’s Lonely Hearts Club Band.)
By the way, I am getting so sick of people who spend all their time making pop culture references. I just made one there, didn’t I? The point in making them is they have to be a. relevant, b. general enough so most people get them and c. enlightening, or d. funny. The fourth option cannot happen without the second. See, if I type the words, “The jolly, candy-like button,” a bunch of people will laugh their butts off. But, people who have not watched that episode of that show will have to clue what that means. So, I should strive to avoid too many obscure, look-how-smart-I-am pop culture references. (This paragraph’s possible titles: “Why Dennis Miller Sucked on Monday Night Football,” or, “I Was Ready for Some Football.”)
I really don’t want to begin too many blog entries with “I’m so sick of …” If I don’t pick something worth picking on, who really cares, anyway?
I’d love to blog about life in Tiffin or Fostoria, Ohio, but I don’t live there any more, and I’d hate to offend people most of the rest of my family have to live with.
(If you really must know, I say rip down the Seneca County Courthouse, and replace it with a replica of the Ohio State House. How to pay for it? Use the Way-Back Machine at the Seneca County Museum to go back in time and drill for oil in 1840 in Jackson Township. Bring back the oil, and at $75 a barrel, it will only take about 500,000 barrels or so to pay for a really nice courthouse.)
So, I guess if I had a blog, this would be about what it would be like. Hopefully, with more coherent, longer entries about some subjects and some short-quick-hitting things that pop into my head.
It might be fun to write – and to read – at that.
I tried to start one once, you know. I even had a Web address and everything. The problem was, the site wouldn’t let me in to update it. (And, I have to update immediately after I post, because that’s when I always find the typos. Typos, incidentally, were always the first thing I always found upon opening the morning edition of the newspaper with a story by me.)
So, what can I blog about?
Comic books? An easy natural subject for me.
Movies? Maybe sometimes.
Music? I like listening, but I doubt I have a deep enough knowledge of the subject to be interesting.
Random things that come into my head? Maybe, but I absolutely hate reading random things typographically vomited upon a page because the writer can’t think of anything better.
Politics? Nah. I can make fun of politicians, but who am I to opine of George Bush’s immigration policy or debate intellectually whether John Kerry or Mitt Romney or a spawning salmon is a bigger flip-flopper? (I’d probably vote for the salmon, but Romney is catching up fast.)
My perspective on life? It’s too easy: Always take the way out of the building that allows you to drink from the most water fountains.
Strange things that happen to me? It would offer a wealth of material, but I’d have to vet it carefully to make sure I wasn’t descending into minutiae. (I cut myself shaving today used to be my running joke. I don’t want it to be a daily blog entry.)
The best blog I have read is Mark Evanier’s. (http://www.newsfromme.com/) He talks about comics, Hollywood, creative people, politics (a little), television, and things that happen to him. That’s what I’d like to do, to be honest. But, he’s already doing it. All I could do, really, is copy what he does poorly.
I have tried to read other blogs, some even by people I know. Some of them aren’t updated enough. Some are just boring. The fake “Planet Tad” blog in MAD is pretty funny, though.
The trouble is: Who will read the darn thing? People I know? Well, then, that’s one audience and one set of expectations. People I don’t know? Then, that would free me up to re-invent whatever crap I want to. (Sort of like the Beatles suddenly becoming Sergeant Pepper’s Lonely Hearts Club Band.)
By the way, I am getting so sick of people who spend all their time making pop culture references. I just made one there, didn’t I? The point in making them is they have to be a. relevant, b. general enough so most people get them and c. enlightening, or d. funny. The fourth option cannot happen without the second. See, if I type the words, “The jolly, candy-like button,” a bunch of people will laugh their butts off. But, people who have not watched that episode of that show will have to clue what that means. So, I should strive to avoid too many obscure, look-how-smart-I-am pop culture references. (This paragraph’s possible titles: “Why Dennis Miller Sucked on Monday Night Football,” or, “I Was Ready for Some Football.”)
I really don’t want to begin too many blog entries with “I’m so sick of …” If I don’t pick something worth picking on, who really cares, anyway?
I’d love to blog about life in Tiffin or Fostoria, Ohio, but I don’t live there any more, and I’d hate to offend people most of the rest of my family have to live with.
(If you really must know, I say rip down the Seneca County Courthouse, and replace it with a replica of the Ohio State House. How to pay for it? Use the Way-Back Machine at the Seneca County Museum to go back in time and drill for oil in 1840 in Jackson Township. Bring back the oil, and at $75 a barrel, it will only take about 500,000 barrels or so to pay for a really nice courthouse.)
So, I guess if I had a blog, this would be about what it would be like. Hopefully, with more coherent, longer entries about some subjects and some short-quick-hitting things that pop into my head.
It might be fun to write – and to read – at that.
Saturday, July 14, 2007
Harry Potter
If an obsessive Star Trek Fan is a "Trekkie," should an obsessive Harry Potter fan be called a "Pottie?"
Should I write comic books?
Here's a few issues worth of ideas for Fantastic Four comic books I came up with a few months ago. I hate to put all this stock writing out there, but any joke you haven't heard is a new joke.
1st Issue:
Dr. Doom decides there’s no point in attacking the FF any more. While unwilling to admit defeat, he is disgusted by the stalemate he always achieves with Reed Richards. So, he decides to turn his attention to his country, Latveria, and become a monarch. So, he starts running his tyrannical small claims court, and bankrolls a small cottage industry for the people to work. Of course, it’s his product, and only he can suggest improvements – not that the original wasn’t superior, you understand. The little cottage industry develops, and soon is a recognized world leader in the product.
All of a sudden, one day, he is advised by his people that Reed Richards has patented a product that renders Latveria’s useless. Naturally, Doom kills this advisor, falls into a rage and concocts a plan to kill the FF again.
This plan is very different. He realizes he can’t shoot the Baxter Building into space, nor steal the Silver Surfer’s power cosmic, nor can he lure them to his castle to kill them – none of that worked, anyway. He decides to go back to an old plan, though. He sends a cleverly disguised Doombot to infiltrate the building and destroy the FF from inside.
2nd Issue:
The FF hires a new maintenance man/janitor. Reed is happy to find someone who is capable of doing the job with all the hard work it entails, especially when some of his research goes wrong, or when Ben gets a little too enthusiastic in the exercise room, which of course happens as soon in the middle of the conversation. Reed and the janitor head for the gym, and find Ben cursing at the cheap workmanship in the exercise equipment as it lies in piles of rubble all over the floor. He tells Reed he is going out to a diner to get a hamburger.
Naturally, the janitor is a Doombot. Nobody can tell, and none of Reed’s instruments can detect it. The only person who can tell is Reed’s daughter, Val, who cries every time she sees the janitor. Val and Sue enter the gym after hearing the huge crash, and Val cries when introduced to the new janitor.
In an aside, Sue tell Reed she just got a letter from Agatha Harkness, who said she is again living in her old mansion, and would love to see the family and the new baby. Both are happy to hear from her, but remember the problem that followed her when she was Franklin’s governess.
The janitor goes about his job, eventually planting little defects in Reed’s work. This is Doom’s way of disorienting Reed so that he won’t see the larger picture. It also plays to Doom’s ego to be messing with reed’s inventions. Reed naturally is confused when his inventions don’t work like they are supposed to, and digs himself into his lab to figure out what went wrong.
The big clue happens when Sue and Val pass the janitor in the part of the building where he shouldn’t be. Val cries like nobody’s business, and Sue becomes suspicious. She makes the janitor’s skin invisible and sees there’s a Doombot below. She uses her force field to blow the robot apart, and hits the alarm to call Reed.
Reed analyzes the memory banks of the Doombot, and realizes what it has done. The Doombot has triggered the door to the Negative Zone to blow up, opening a passageway to that other dimension that could destroy the building, the city, the plant, and maybe the universe.
3rd issue
Reed searches and finds the device, just after it blows up, and opens the door. Reed was able to reduce the effects enough that his back up system kicks in to contain the Negative Zone.
Everyone is relaxing, and contemplating the next move, when a little light blinks on at the Negative Zone monitor. For the brief moment the portal was open, the monitor received a clear distress signal from inside the Negative Zone. It appears there are a number of creatures marooned on a planet which is about to be hit by a giant asteroid.
Reed ponders for a moment whether to go after Doom, or help the creatures in the Negative Zone. He decides that Doom can wait, especially since time moves a little slower in the Negative Zone, and they may be able to complete the rescue mission and still head off to confront him in a timely manner.
So, they head off to save the people inside. Reed tells Ben to stay behind to watch the kids, because Sue’s force field and Johnny’s ability to fly may be more essential to this mission. Ben harrumphs, but Reed assures him it should be routine, and besides the children need him in case Doom should attack again. If there’s an emergency, Ben can turn the kids over to HERBIE, the robot babysitter, and head in to help.
Ben complains, but grabs Franklin and asks him if he’s ready to get his butt whooped in Madden football while they watch the Negative Zone monitor.
Reed, Sue and Johnny get into a space vehicle built specially for the Negative Zone, and head in. They cruise to the small planetoid, which is almost the size of an asteroid. They scour the surface for the small group of people, and find them living near some mountains. Reed sees their space craft. It definitely crashed, but it looks like it’s been abandoned for a long time. More like years than months. Reed notes that the distress signal is awfully powerful for such a beat-up ship.
The FF craft lands and the people gather around. As the FF climb out, they are greeted with some clubs and slingshots and are knocked unconscious. Actually, they are faking, and Sue is protecting them all with force fields. Reed wants to know what these people are up to.
They pretend to wake up a little later, bound, in front of a giant molten mouth. Reed looks off in the distance, and sees that this is no planetoid, it’s a life form, and the stranded people are there to lure food for the planet. One of them tells him they have been there for decades since their craft crashed, luring food for the planet, which in turn keeps them alive when it is properly fed. He apologizes to Reed, but tells him he has to do this to keep his people alive.
The three members of the FF are being carried to fiery pit, and several of the inhabitants work to move the space vehicle to feed it to the planet. As they are carried along, Sue and Johnny nod at Reed, as if they know what the plan will be.
Ben and Franklin are loading the game when the Negative Zone alert comes. Ben sees what is happening, and summons HERBIE. He uses his flying cycle to go into the Negative Zone.
He arrives just as the rest of the FF is lowered into the lava pit.
4th Issue:
Recap of the previous issue, as Ben arrives, sees the other team members bound and lowered into the lava. He starts tearing up the little encampment and the people who live there to get to the other members.
Reed Sue and Johnny rise out of the lava easily enough, as Sue’s force field protects them, and Johnny absorbs the heat.
Reed apologizes to Ben for panicking him, but assures him they were never in any real trouble after they woke up. The inhabitants surprised them, Reed says, but were too crude and unsophisticated in their attacks to really do them any harm.
Meanwhile, the encampment where these people live has been completely destroyed by Ben as he raged through the crowd.
1st Issue:
Dr. Doom decides there’s no point in attacking the FF any more. While unwilling to admit defeat, he is disgusted by the stalemate he always achieves with Reed Richards. So, he decides to turn his attention to his country, Latveria, and become a monarch. So, he starts running his tyrannical small claims court, and bankrolls a small cottage industry for the people to work. Of course, it’s his product, and only he can suggest improvements – not that the original wasn’t superior, you understand. The little cottage industry develops, and soon is a recognized world leader in the product.
All of a sudden, one day, he is advised by his people that Reed Richards has patented a product that renders Latveria’s useless. Naturally, Doom kills this advisor, falls into a rage and concocts a plan to kill the FF again.
This plan is very different. He realizes he can’t shoot the Baxter Building into space, nor steal the Silver Surfer’s power cosmic, nor can he lure them to his castle to kill them – none of that worked, anyway. He decides to go back to an old plan, though. He sends a cleverly disguised Doombot to infiltrate the building and destroy the FF from inside.
2nd Issue:
The FF hires a new maintenance man/janitor. Reed is happy to find someone who is capable of doing the job with all the hard work it entails, especially when some of his research goes wrong, or when Ben gets a little too enthusiastic in the exercise room, which of course happens as soon in the middle of the conversation. Reed and the janitor head for the gym, and find Ben cursing at the cheap workmanship in the exercise equipment as it lies in piles of rubble all over the floor. He tells Reed he is going out to a diner to get a hamburger.
Naturally, the janitor is a Doombot. Nobody can tell, and none of Reed’s instruments can detect it. The only person who can tell is Reed’s daughter, Val, who cries every time she sees the janitor. Val and Sue enter the gym after hearing the huge crash, and Val cries when introduced to the new janitor.
In an aside, Sue tell Reed she just got a letter from Agatha Harkness, who said she is again living in her old mansion, and would love to see the family and the new baby. Both are happy to hear from her, but remember the problem that followed her when she was Franklin’s governess.
The janitor goes about his job, eventually planting little defects in Reed’s work. This is Doom’s way of disorienting Reed so that he won’t see the larger picture. It also plays to Doom’s ego to be messing with reed’s inventions. Reed naturally is confused when his inventions don’t work like they are supposed to, and digs himself into his lab to figure out what went wrong.
The big clue happens when Sue and Val pass the janitor in the part of the building where he shouldn’t be. Val cries like nobody’s business, and Sue becomes suspicious. She makes the janitor’s skin invisible and sees there’s a Doombot below. She uses her force field to blow the robot apart, and hits the alarm to call Reed.
Reed analyzes the memory banks of the Doombot, and realizes what it has done. The Doombot has triggered the door to the Negative Zone to blow up, opening a passageway to that other dimension that could destroy the building, the city, the plant, and maybe the universe.
3rd issue
Reed searches and finds the device, just after it blows up, and opens the door. Reed was able to reduce the effects enough that his back up system kicks in to contain the Negative Zone.
Everyone is relaxing, and contemplating the next move, when a little light blinks on at the Negative Zone monitor. For the brief moment the portal was open, the monitor received a clear distress signal from inside the Negative Zone. It appears there are a number of creatures marooned on a planet which is about to be hit by a giant asteroid.
Reed ponders for a moment whether to go after Doom, or help the creatures in the Negative Zone. He decides that Doom can wait, especially since time moves a little slower in the Negative Zone, and they may be able to complete the rescue mission and still head off to confront him in a timely manner.
So, they head off to save the people inside. Reed tells Ben to stay behind to watch the kids, because Sue’s force field and Johnny’s ability to fly may be more essential to this mission. Ben harrumphs, but Reed assures him it should be routine, and besides the children need him in case Doom should attack again. If there’s an emergency, Ben can turn the kids over to HERBIE, the robot babysitter, and head in to help.
Ben complains, but grabs Franklin and asks him if he’s ready to get his butt whooped in Madden football while they watch the Negative Zone monitor.
Reed, Sue and Johnny get into a space vehicle built specially for the Negative Zone, and head in. They cruise to the small planetoid, which is almost the size of an asteroid. They scour the surface for the small group of people, and find them living near some mountains. Reed sees their space craft. It definitely crashed, but it looks like it’s been abandoned for a long time. More like years than months. Reed notes that the distress signal is awfully powerful for such a beat-up ship.
The FF craft lands and the people gather around. As the FF climb out, they are greeted with some clubs and slingshots and are knocked unconscious. Actually, they are faking, and Sue is protecting them all with force fields. Reed wants to know what these people are up to.
They pretend to wake up a little later, bound, in front of a giant molten mouth. Reed looks off in the distance, and sees that this is no planetoid, it’s a life form, and the stranded people are there to lure food for the planet. One of them tells him they have been there for decades since their craft crashed, luring food for the planet, which in turn keeps them alive when it is properly fed. He apologizes to Reed, but tells him he has to do this to keep his people alive.
The three members of the FF are being carried to fiery pit, and several of the inhabitants work to move the space vehicle to feed it to the planet. As they are carried along, Sue and Johnny nod at Reed, as if they know what the plan will be.
Ben and Franklin are loading the game when the Negative Zone alert comes. Ben sees what is happening, and summons HERBIE. He uses his flying cycle to go into the Negative Zone.
He arrives just as the rest of the FF is lowered into the lava pit.
4th Issue:
Recap of the previous issue, as Ben arrives, sees the other team members bound and lowered into the lava. He starts tearing up the little encampment and the people who live there to get to the other members.
Reed Sue and Johnny rise out of the lava easily enough, as Sue’s force field protects them, and Johnny absorbs the heat.
Reed apologizes to Ben for panicking him, but assures him they were never in any real trouble after they woke up. The inhabitants surprised them, Reed says, but were too crude and unsophisticated in their attacks to really do them any harm.
Meanwhile, the encampment where these people live has been completely destroyed by Ben as he raged through the crowd.
Another oldie but a goodie
This is from about a year ago, too. But, it will help to fill the pages:
What makes a person a writer?
This is a question many writers themselves have tried to answer. Perhaps there are a series of smaller questions to answer in the process of finding out.
I have heard it said that writing is like, um, going to the bathroom. When it’s time, a writer has to do it. He has limited control over the process. I have never really bought that theory, though.
I just saw a movie about the singer/poet Leonard Cohen. I really knew very little about the guy, except that my wife, Hallie, loves his deep, deep voice.
During the documentary, a whole bunch of people, including Bono and The Edge from U2, talked about how Cohen’s words affected them so powerfully. Bono said something about his writing exploded with colors and textures he had never seen before.
Cohen takes a long time to write anything. He revises it and revises it until it’s just right for him. Even so, there are those songs or poems that even he admits never came out right.
For contrast, how about Bob Dylan? He seems to write in the moment always trying to capture some ethereal now, whereas Cohen is always reflecting on something that happened in the past.
There is a clear difference in approach, but both men are singer-songwriter-poets. What makes Dylan write, and is it so different than Cohen’s inspiration?
Ring Lardner and J. D. Salinger tell their stories in distinctive voices, much like Cohen’s or Dylan’s.
Salinger captured the mind of the teenage outcast Holden Caulfield in “The catcher in the Rye” a decade before Dylan and Cohen were writing songs about being outcasts.
Salinger’s work is a lot like Lardner’s, except that Lardner had a different sense of voice. He wrote stories in the form of a baseball player’s letters home to his friend Al. It was said that Lardner’s writing captured the American voice like no other.
Ray Bradbury, a very different writer from the generation after Lardner, talks about the joy of writing. He talks about writing a story every week for his whole life.
He talks about the joy of reading, too. He waxes nostalgic about how the books he has read take him to places he could never go. Certainly, Bradbury’s imagination does that for his readers, taking us to places like Mars and to events like sinister carnivals and even inside the minds of people.
A college professor once said that Alfred Hitchcock understood the human mind like no other person. Hitchcock is not a writer in the traditional sense, but is a storyteller in much the same way as the others. He “wrote” with the visual images that moved in narrative form across the screen.
How about a comics writer like Will Eisner, who draws his inspiration from writers like Lardner and films like Hitchcock’s? He tells stories visually in narrative forms, too, only he uses his drawings to propel the reader across the page.
For all the people who were praising Cohen, there’s just as many, and maybe more, who will praise the others listed here. And, there are so many more writers out there who are beloved for their creativity.
What makes people love a certain writer, I think, is that he or she opens the reader’s mind to something they want to let in. The key is the reader’s complicity. What makes a certain book appealing at one time of life may render it uninteresting and useless before or after.
So, what makes a writer?
A writer is a person who is willing to put down on paper those things that make him a human being. For a reader, a writer is someone with whom they have something in common — a shared experience or a shared belief or a shared image.
There are a lot of us readers out here looking into their worlds for insight into our world. We should welcome their vision.
What makes a person a writer?
This is a question many writers themselves have tried to answer. Perhaps there are a series of smaller questions to answer in the process of finding out.
I have heard it said that writing is like, um, going to the bathroom. When it’s time, a writer has to do it. He has limited control over the process. I have never really bought that theory, though.
I just saw a movie about the singer/poet Leonard Cohen. I really knew very little about the guy, except that my wife, Hallie, loves his deep, deep voice.
During the documentary, a whole bunch of people, including Bono and The Edge from U2, talked about how Cohen’s words affected them so powerfully. Bono said something about his writing exploded with colors and textures he had never seen before.
Cohen takes a long time to write anything. He revises it and revises it until it’s just right for him. Even so, there are those songs or poems that even he admits never came out right.
For contrast, how about Bob Dylan? He seems to write in the moment always trying to capture some ethereal now, whereas Cohen is always reflecting on something that happened in the past.
There is a clear difference in approach, but both men are singer-songwriter-poets. What makes Dylan write, and is it so different than Cohen’s inspiration?
Ring Lardner and J. D. Salinger tell their stories in distinctive voices, much like Cohen’s or Dylan’s.
Salinger captured the mind of the teenage outcast Holden Caulfield in “The catcher in the Rye” a decade before Dylan and Cohen were writing songs about being outcasts.
Salinger’s work is a lot like Lardner’s, except that Lardner had a different sense of voice. He wrote stories in the form of a baseball player’s letters home to his friend Al. It was said that Lardner’s writing captured the American voice like no other.
Ray Bradbury, a very different writer from the generation after Lardner, talks about the joy of writing. He talks about writing a story every week for his whole life.
He talks about the joy of reading, too. He waxes nostalgic about how the books he has read take him to places he could never go. Certainly, Bradbury’s imagination does that for his readers, taking us to places like Mars and to events like sinister carnivals and even inside the minds of people.
A college professor once said that Alfred Hitchcock understood the human mind like no other person. Hitchcock is not a writer in the traditional sense, but is a storyteller in much the same way as the others. He “wrote” with the visual images that moved in narrative form across the screen.
How about a comics writer like Will Eisner, who draws his inspiration from writers like Lardner and films like Hitchcock’s? He tells stories visually in narrative forms, too, only he uses his drawings to propel the reader across the page.
For all the people who were praising Cohen, there’s just as many, and maybe more, who will praise the others listed here. And, there are so many more writers out there who are beloved for their creativity.
What makes people love a certain writer, I think, is that he or she opens the reader’s mind to something they want to let in. The key is the reader’s complicity. What makes a certain book appealing at one time of life may render it uninteresting and useless before or after.
So, what makes a writer?
A writer is a person who is willing to put down on paper those things that make him a human being. For a reader, a writer is someone with whom they have something in common — a shared experience or a shared belief or a shared image.
There are a lot of us readers out here looking into their worlds for insight into our world. We should welcome their vision.
An oldie but a goodie (maybe)
I wrote this about a year ago after going to see the movie "A Scanner Darkly." It's kind of me puking prose all over the computer screen, but it's something to start this thing.
This is a column about going to see “A Scanner Darkly.” It’s not about the movie itself, although I’m sure that will crop up as I continue.
Having just moved to Louisville, it took me a while to figure out where the second-run theaters were. In fact, I never did find any. My wife, Hallie, did it for me.
She grabbed me upon my return home from work on Friday night, with news that she had found a dollar theater. Not a second run theater that showed movies for $2.50 or something, but an honest-to-goodness dollar theater.
We checked the address on the Internet and learned the place wasn’t Kentucky — it was on the Indiana side of the Ohio River. We hadn’t been to Indiana very much since we moved — our realtor told us he never had any reason to go to Indiana even though he had lived in Louisville for some 40 years — and thought this might be a good opportunity to take a look at what was over there.
So, we went. We saw a sign for a Cracker Barrel at which we thought we might east supper. But, after much driving around and becoming acquainted with the southern Indiana countryside, we didn’t find the restaurant and settled instead of Bob Evans.
The area at which we were driving around, exit four on Interstate 65, was fascinating. It looked like an area that had achieved a lot of growth 20 or 30 years ago, and developers are trying to revitalize it now.
The mall — with the dollar theater in back — looked like the Toledo, Ohio malls that were built with I was a kid in the early 1970s or before. It had four corridors with three anchor stores and one main entrance and no discernable food court.
(Newer malls all seem to have food courts. The name implies to me that the food is on trial and we are all judges. If mediocrity was a charge, food court food would be a habitual offender.)
Next to the mall was a huge Bass Pro Shop, the kind of store that is becoming a destination for outdoors types. (In Michigan, there’s a similar store called Cabella’s that draws people from Sri Lanka, I think.)
There’s also a few other newer stores in the area, and the next exit, exit five I think, has all kinds of new development, like a new Target, a new Wal-Mart and some new restaurants.
There was a motel being torn down, right down the street from a Best Western that looked like it was built in the early days of interstate highways and still was in good shape. There was a brand new Hampton Inn and a new Outback Steak House in the same area.
What I saw was an area in the midst of redevelopment.
It was fascinating to see the old strip-malls and free-standing stores along the highway and right behind them a huge new sign and a brand-new building for Dick’s Sporting Goods.
There were three movie theater buildings around the mall. One was closed and looked like the movie theater behind the Findlay Mall that I went to as a young child. The second, the dollar theater, looked newer than that one, maybe built in the 1980s as an attempt to add more screens.
In the next block over from mall, with the Bass Pro Shop and the Dick’s Sporting Goods, — and with the new Target and other stuff on the next road over in the background — was a yet-to-open new theater being built that looked like the modern theaters with all the glitz and lights and so on.
Hallie and I proceeded to the dollar theater. It was obvious the owners weren’t putting much money into it.
There were a lot of people there, from all ages. There were a lot of teenagers and some parents with smaller children.
But, while the theater was once bright and colorful, it had been allowed to deteriorate and was kind of dingy.
For example, in the men’s restroom, there were five urinals that would not flush, and one toilet that wouldn’t stop flushing. Hallie told me the women’s restroom was in about the same shape.
The screening room itself was pretty out-of date and looked like it hadn’t been maintained with a lot of care. It was one of the few places where I have actually checked my chair to make sure there was nothing wrong with it before I sat down.
In an odd sense, it was a good place to see a movie like “A Scanner Darkly.” It’s a very dark movie about a future in which Bob Arctor, an undercover cop, is trying to bust a ring of dealers of “Substance D.” In the process, we see how Arctor gets hooked on the drug, how it ruins the lives of all his junkie friends and the cops who are trying to investigate them.
Much of the movie takes place in Arctor’s house, which once was a bright, shiny home he shared with a wife and two daughters, but has become a run down flop house for his drug-abusing buddies.
So, I thought it was very fitting to see “A Scanner Darkly” in the theater — and an entire shopping area — that was getting run down and in the process of being renovated and/or replaced.
The developers are one step ahead of Arctor, though — they are working to revitalize the area. Arctor was getting more and more paranoid as he watched his life crumble down around him.
(One note: I’d strongly suggest reading the book before seeing the movie. I read the book two years ago, and I still got a little lost in the movie’s complexity as I tried to remember the plot. It’s a powerful indictment about of drugs, drug users and a war on drugs that sometimes makes the problem worse.)
This is a column about going to see “A Scanner Darkly.” It’s not about the movie itself, although I’m sure that will crop up as I continue.
Having just moved to Louisville, it took me a while to figure out where the second-run theaters were. In fact, I never did find any. My wife, Hallie, did it for me.
She grabbed me upon my return home from work on Friday night, with news that she had found a dollar theater. Not a second run theater that showed movies for $2.50 or something, but an honest-to-goodness dollar theater.
We checked the address on the Internet and learned the place wasn’t Kentucky — it was on the Indiana side of the Ohio River. We hadn’t been to Indiana very much since we moved — our realtor told us he never had any reason to go to Indiana even though he had lived in Louisville for some 40 years — and thought this might be a good opportunity to take a look at what was over there.
So, we went. We saw a sign for a Cracker Barrel at which we thought we might east supper. But, after much driving around and becoming acquainted with the southern Indiana countryside, we didn’t find the restaurant and settled instead of Bob Evans.
The area at which we were driving around, exit four on Interstate 65, was fascinating. It looked like an area that had achieved a lot of growth 20 or 30 years ago, and developers are trying to revitalize it now.
The mall — with the dollar theater in back — looked like the Toledo, Ohio malls that were built with I was a kid in the early 1970s or before. It had four corridors with three anchor stores and one main entrance and no discernable food court.
(Newer malls all seem to have food courts. The name implies to me that the food is on trial and we are all judges. If mediocrity was a charge, food court food would be a habitual offender.)
Next to the mall was a huge Bass Pro Shop, the kind of store that is becoming a destination for outdoors types. (In Michigan, there’s a similar store called Cabella’s that draws people from Sri Lanka, I think.)
There’s also a few other newer stores in the area, and the next exit, exit five I think, has all kinds of new development, like a new Target, a new Wal-Mart and some new restaurants.
There was a motel being torn down, right down the street from a Best Western that looked like it was built in the early days of interstate highways and still was in good shape. There was a brand new Hampton Inn and a new Outback Steak House in the same area.
What I saw was an area in the midst of redevelopment.
It was fascinating to see the old strip-malls and free-standing stores along the highway and right behind them a huge new sign and a brand-new building for Dick’s Sporting Goods.
There were three movie theater buildings around the mall. One was closed and looked like the movie theater behind the Findlay Mall that I went to as a young child. The second, the dollar theater, looked newer than that one, maybe built in the 1980s as an attempt to add more screens.
In the next block over from mall, with the Bass Pro Shop and the Dick’s Sporting Goods, — and with the new Target and other stuff on the next road over in the background — was a yet-to-open new theater being built that looked like the modern theaters with all the glitz and lights and so on.
Hallie and I proceeded to the dollar theater. It was obvious the owners weren’t putting much money into it.
There were a lot of people there, from all ages. There were a lot of teenagers and some parents with smaller children.
But, while the theater was once bright and colorful, it had been allowed to deteriorate and was kind of dingy.
For example, in the men’s restroom, there were five urinals that would not flush, and one toilet that wouldn’t stop flushing. Hallie told me the women’s restroom was in about the same shape.
The screening room itself was pretty out-of date and looked like it hadn’t been maintained with a lot of care. It was one of the few places where I have actually checked my chair to make sure there was nothing wrong with it before I sat down.
In an odd sense, it was a good place to see a movie like “A Scanner Darkly.” It’s a very dark movie about a future in which Bob Arctor, an undercover cop, is trying to bust a ring of dealers of “Substance D.” In the process, we see how Arctor gets hooked on the drug, how it ruins the lives of all his junkie friends and the cops who are trying to investigate them.
Much of the movie takes place in Arctor’s house, which once was a bright, shiny home he shared with a wife and two daughters, but has become a run down flop house for his drug-abusing buddies.
So, I thought it was very fitting to see “A Scanner Darkly” in the theater — and an entire shopping area — that was getting run down and in the process of being renovated and/or replaced.
The developers are one step ahead of Arctor, though — they are working to revitalize the area. Arctor was getting more and more paranoid as he watched his life crumble down around him.
(One note: I’d strongly suggest reading the book before seeing the movie. I read the book two years ago, and I still got a little lost in the movie’s complexity as I tried to remember the plot. It’s a powerful indictment about of drugs, drug users and a war on drugs that sometimes makes the problem worse.)
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)