Guest blog by Misty Massey on the origin of the excellent writing website, Magical Words:
http://www.ljagilamplighter.com/journal/
Be the first to comment
Filed in Wisdom
Archive for October, 2010
Wright’s Writing Corner: Guest Blog — Misty Massey on Magical Words
Posted October 27, 2010 By John C WrightSuckitude that Distorts Time and Space
Posted October 27, 2010 By John C WrightCourtesy of Pajama’s Media the an excellent summary of the recent political life of the nation: (hat tip to Prestor Scott):
During the second term of the Bush presidency people just got fed up with Republicans. They were idiots, they were no good at the whole fiscal conservatism thing (which is sort of the whole point of them), we had these wars that seemed to be going nowhere, and the economy was beginning to fail. They sucked, and people were sick and tired of them.
Thus people turned to the Democrats. And Obama.
Let’s just say they also sucked.
AMERICANS: “So, the economy is pretty bad and there’s high employment. You think you can do something about that?”
DEMOCRATS AND OBAMA: “We can spend a trillion dollars we don’t have on pork and stuff.”
AMERICANS: “No … that’s not what we want. We’d really like you not to do that.”
DEMOCRATS: “You’re stupid. We’re doing it anyway.”
AMERICANS: “That’s not going to help us get jobs!”
DEMOCRATS: “Sure it will; millions of them … though they may be invisible. You’ll have to trust us they exist. And guess what else we’ll do: We’ll create a giant new government program to take over health care.”
AMERICANS: “That has nothing to do with jobs!”
DEMOCRATS: “We don’t care about that anymore. We really want a giant new health care program. We’re sure you’ll love it.”
AMERICANS: “Don’t pass that bill. You hear me? Absolutely do not pass that bill.”
DEMOCRATS: “Believe me; you’ll love it. It has … well, I don’t know what exactly is in the bill, but we’re sure it’s great.”
AMERICANS: “Listen to me: DO. NOT. PASS. THAT. BILL.”
DEMOCRATS: “You’re not the boss of me! We’re doing it anyway!”
AMERICANS: “Look what you did! Now the economy is way worse, we’re even deeper in debt, and we have a bunch of new laws we don’t want!”
DEMOCRATS: “You’re racist.”
AMERICANS: “Wha … How is that racist?”
DEMOCRATS: “Now you’re getting violent! Stop being violent and racist, you ignorant hillbillies! And remember to vote Democrat in November.”
So the Democrats sucked. But not just plain old, usual politician sucked, but epic levels of suck where it’s hard to find an analogue in human history that conveys the same level of suckitude. It was sheer incompetence plus arrogance — and those things do not complement each other well. We’re talking sucking that distorts time and space like a black hole.
My comment: If only England had remained sane, we Whigs could have simply apologized, admitted the democratic experiment had failed, and agreed once more to swear fealty to the King. But England is in straits more dire than ours. Perhaps we can appeal to the Emperor in Rome to repeal the Rescript of Honorius, and ask the legions posted to Britain to protect the British colonies, including ours, beneath the fierce Eagles of Rome. Of course, the Imperium is rather a bit of a corrupt failure itself, so maybe we can swear fealty to Cato of Utica, and he will overthrow Caesar and his family, and restore power to the Senate, Republic and People of Rome. Except, come to think of it, that form of government encouraged widespread luxury and corruption among the Senatorial and Patrician families. Hmm. What about recalling Tarquin the Proud, and restoring the older monarchy? Well, no, that whole rape of Lucretia thing pretty much showed what the problem is with unchecked power in the hands of the monarch. Hmm. Perhaps an older generation of monarchs would serve us: we could call back Romulus and Remus, who were kindly and wise leaders, except for that whole embarrassing brother-killing-brother thing, and throwing the corpse into a plowed furrow. We could instead restore Aeneas, or perhaps Priam of Troy, or Saturn who ruled in a Golden Age. Saturn ate his infant children, and so he was in favor of a Titan’s Right to Choose. He’d fit right in to the modern political scheme!
So, no the Experiment in Self-Government and Limited Government, despite what false prophets cry, is not an experiment that fails or that can ever fail, merely because it is the only system of government that has a built in corrective mechanism. The other theories of government that have been tried have failed, because they contain all the same flaws as this one, plus they cannot be overthrown except by arms. Even in failure, democratic republics are peaceful.
No other revolution is needed except for the revolution that takes place every election cycle in the ballot box. Man is fallen, and no government by fallen man and for fallen man will ever be anything to admire: but it can always be improved, usually by a return to first principles, usually by taking seriously the ideals on which the Experiment in Self-Government and Limited Government is based.
So get out and vote. We have a black hole of suckitude to undo.
Filed in Drollery
The Argument from Honest Argumentation
Posted October 27, 2010 By John C WrightIn the comment following this article “Virtuous Pagans and Honest Atheists”, several readers have pointed out a flaw in the paragraph “Any philosopher contemplating whether there are universal moral laws soon realizes that he, in order to think about this or any other topic, is under a moral obligation to think honestly, since to think dishonestly is futile. Hence, all humans live in an inescapable web of moral duties, of which the skeptical philosopher is convinced of at least one: a duty to be honest, to think with integrity.”
The flaw allegedly spotted is the naturalist fallacy, attempting to derive an “ought” from an “is.” My argument is sound, albeit I confess the phrasing is unclear.
The word causing confusion is the word “futile.” Many read that sentence to mean that I am saying reasoning without integrity is inefficient. That is not what I mean. I am saying reasoning without reason is unreasonable, that is, not logically possible. I am using the word “futile” in its strongest sense here.
I am not saying it is “futile” (inefficient) to try to clean your car windshield with a toothbrush; I am saying it is “futile” (impossible) to add a cubit to your stature merely by taking thought.
Read the remainder of this entry »
Filed in Reasonings
Protected: Space Opera, Spiral Energy, and the Dark Side of Darwinism
Posted October 26, 2010 By John C WrightVirtuous Pagans and Honest Atheists
Posted October 22, 2010 By John C WrightThe angelically named Michael writes this formidable argument:
“Suppose that an atheist is not a moral relativist. Then he believes that there is a universal immaterial reality outside of himself, moral truth, that his character ought to conform to. Then, as a reasonable person, he must ask the question, “What is the source of this universal immaterial moral reality which I ought to conform to?” There are two possible sources: natural or supernatural agents. Supernatural agents are ruled out for an atheist, so we consider a natural origin. I claim that something cannot be created out of nothing, and I think you would agree. So we must consider the natural agent, be it human, animal, protoplasm or alien creating the universal moral reality from its own being and experience. But it is impossible for a completely natural being to have universal moral qualities without being united with a universal moral agent. On a completely natural plane, there is no human being, no animal, plant, protoplasm, etc. that is universal in genetics, and behavior, and reasoning by which to derive such a universal truth for all other beings (the atheist considers only natural causes in the agent as the source of a universal moral reality in question). Thus, by contradiction, that moral reality in question is nothing but a relative reality to the natural agent that originated it. Therefore, an atheist must be a moral relativist.”
Speaking as one who once was an atheist who is not a moral relativist, allow me with fear and trembling to pick up the hurled gauntlet on behalf of all atheist moral absolutists. I submit that an atheist absolutist is a logically permissible position, if not logically inevitable.
Read the remainder of this entry »
Filed in Reasonings
A Dream, or, the Unfinished Novella
Posted October 22, 2010 By John C WrightFor those of you who are students of abnormal psychology curious about what professional obscure midlist science fiction writers dream about:
Last night I dreamt I saw a silver ship soar down from upper space, and skim along the very upper reaches of an endless bank of fog. It was passing between the columns and towers of immense skyscrapers whose upper reaches were crowed with constellations; and I realized this was not a fogbank, but a system of storm clouds. Between the gaps in the swirled cloud, I saw, like stars, the lights and rain-washed buildings, rank upon rank descending into bottomless gloom, and I realized that the skyscrapers to either side of the moving ship were not skyscrapers, but the upper reaches of superskyscrapers. This was the planet Trantor, and a city that covered the globe from pole to pole was beneath the clouds.
I remember that the skyscrapers were ancient, weathered, cracked like yellow marble, and the monuments of winged triumph upon the cornices were green and gray with patinas of age. There was something very eerie about thousand-year-old towers half a mile high. The lights were all out: the towers of Trantor were dark and silent, because the Empire was dwindling.
Read the remainder of this entry »
Filed in Fancies
Spy Smasher! Where are you now?
Posted October 22, 2010 By John C WrightLet us return to a moment of yesteryear, when children were taught that Nazis were Bad Guys, and they were fought by valiant comic book heroes like SPY SMASHER!
For those of you not up on your Morse Code, the opening of Beethoven’s Fifth nicely taps out the letter “V” — which stands for Victory, and the antiaircraft spotlights in the background of the opening credits make that same “V” against the dark skies of lowering war! Projectionist! Give the salute and roll the tape!
Read the remainder of this entry »
Filed in Musings
Wright’s Writing Corner. Villains Full of Villainy!
Posted October 21, 2010 By John C WrightToday’s Wright’s Writing Corner is on the topics of villains.
http://www.ljagilamplighter.com/2010/10/20/good-vs-evil-writing-about-villains/
Filed in Wisdom
Wright’s Writing Corner — Relentless Cheer
Posted October 14, 2010 By John C WrightNew post up over at the Writing Corner:
http://www.ljagilamplighter.com/2010/10/13/relentless-cheerfulness/
Excerpt:
One of the side effects of being a published writer is that one has achieved something others desire. People come up and express envy that I have reached the Horeb Heights of Authordom, while they are still farther down the slope, perhaps slogging through the marshes of revisions, or mired in the Swamps of Publishing Uncertainty. I laugh and express the desire that they will soon join me. Usually, they are satisfied.
Occasionally, however, the person merely expresses more envy. Then, I pull out the big guns. I explain how I came to be where I am. I tell them about the 17 years it took from the time I began my book until it came out; about the eight years I waited, once I had finished it; about going to conventions, year after year after year, and having to face, bookless, friends whose novels had already been published. That kind of thing.
About this time, most people realize that I did not get up to the published heights by catapult. Nor did I win some kind of get-published-quick lottery. Usually, that is sufficient to assure them that all is still right with the world.
Once in a while, however, this is not enough. The person’s envy is palpable. Perhaps, they say they have been trying to get published for even longer. At this point, I try to say something helpful or encouraging. Probably, I merely say something dumb. If they seem receptive, I say something about God.
But, sometimes, I wish I could say to them was I am really thinking. If I could, it would go something like this:
“Are you relentless?
Do you live, move, and breathe writing? Do you think about it during the day, while traveling, at night, at the movies, in the shower, while dropping two hundred feet in free fall at the amusement park? (Okay, maybe there you can have a brief respite, but get right back on it at the bottom!) Do you study how to put stories together? Do you analyze and take apart everything you read or watch?
Isaac Asimov recalled the last time he truly enjoyed a book. After that, no matter how much he liked it, some part of his mind was analyzing what he read, critiquing it. That does not happen to everyone, but it might.
Are you willing to risk it?
Filed in Wisdom
The Problem of Evil in Spooky Stories
Posted October 13, 2010 By John C WrightAllow me to repeat the opening paragraphs of this article from one Leo Grin over at Big Hollywood (http://bighollywood.breitbart.com/lgrin/2010/10/09/modern-hollywoods-love-affair-with-satanism/) :
“It is the eve of St. George’s Day. Do you not know that tonight, when the clock strikes midnight, all the evil things in the world will have full sway?”
Those are words spoken by a superstitious old woman to Jonathan Harker in Bram Stoker’s novel Dracula (1897). Fearing for the outsider’s safety, she gives him a crucifix. “I did not know what to do,” Harker writes, “for, as an English Churchman, I have been taught to regard such things as in some measure idolatrous, and yet it seemed so ungracious to refuse an old lady meaning so well and in such a state of mind.”
But later, overcome with terror in the bowels of the Count’s Transylvanian castle, he has reason to be most grateful:
Bless that good, good woman who hung the crucifix round my neck! For it is a comfort and a strength to me whenever I touch it. It is odd that a thing which I have been taught to regard with disfavour and as idolatrous should in a time of loneliness and trouble be of help. Is it that there is something in the essence of the thing itself, or that it is a medium, a tangible help, in conveying memories of sympathy and comfort? Some time, if it may be, I must examine this matter and try to make up my mind about it. In the meantime I must find out all I can about Count Dracula. . . .
Over a century later, Stephenie Meyer managed to write four bestselling books concerning vampires (later translated into a quartet of popular movies) without the word crucifix appearing even a single time in her hundreds of thousands of words.
My comment: Fan that I am BUFFY and ANGEL and of much of Joss Whedon’s work, I have always been disappointed and offended at how weak, silly, inept or arbitrary the supernatural Powers of Light have been portrayed in the seasons I watched. (A confession: I gave up watching BUFFY when Spike became Buffy’s BFF. At that point, I realized that Mr. Whedon was just interested in jerking my chain, and no longer interested in telling me a witty, gripping and entertaining tale of vampire-slaying derring-do.)
I seem to recall that when Cordelia went to Heaven, she was simply bored by it, and wanted out. On the other hand, when Buffy returned from Heaven, she could not revert to normal life, because Earth seemed like Hell compared to that enervating bliss. So here in the same show are two opposing views of the Power that opposes Hell, demons and vampirism, and in the first case, it is as bad as anything Achilles in Hades laments, and in the second, it is no better than what the Buddha seeks.
The Council of Watchers in BUFFY (which I am secretly convinced is one and the same as the Council of Watchers in HIGHLANDER, and is probably run by Methos and Vandal Savage together) is the nominal good guys, but they are portrayed as ruthless, bureaucratic, and unworthy of anyone’s trust or loyalty.
In a similar vein, the angels or angelic hosts as portrayed in other spooky stories, such as the SANDMAN by Neil Gaiman, or the Alan Moore run on SWAMP THING, or even the angel in SPAWN (who is, of all absurd things, a bounty-hunter) are portrayed as being about as admirable as the Watchers of BUFFY: namely, either indifferent or harmful to human affairs, and not someone you can turn to for help, and certainly someone you would never turn to in prayer.
(I might also mention Phillip Pullman’s ‘His Dark Materials’ trilogy has the same type of evil or unappealing portrayal of Heaven, but that was deliberately written as an anti-Narnia and ant-Christian diatribe, so any similarities between these stories and his are not to their credit. Whether deliberately or not, these other tales reflect the same world-view, not unchristian, but antichristian.)
In none of the stories I just mentioned, even stories where the image of Our Lord in His suffering nailed to a cross is what drives back vampires, is any mentioned made of the Christ. Is is always an Old Testament sort of God ruling Heaven, or no one at all is in charge.
So why in Heaven’s name is Heaven always so bland, unappealing, or evil in these spooky stories?
Determining the Physical Consequences of Indeterminism
Posted October 12, 2010 By John C WrightPart of a conversation that is evidently as endless as the torments of purgatory. The souls condemned to the cleansing flames, do, however, endure the hope that those on Earth will shorten their torment by their prayers. I wonder if the muses in charge of philosophical debates have similar offices: if so, say a syllogism for us.
“So, Mr Wright, does your notion of “free will” have any physical consequences or not? Or do you want to permit indeterminacy?”
I permit what I call ‘Indeterminacy’, but this may or may not be what you have in mind when you use the word, so, to avoid ambiguity, let me impose upon my patient reader by answering at length. If this answer sounds the same as things I have said before in answer to this question, keep in mind that I am merely a clockwork man like Tik-Tok of Oz, who must answer this question the exact same way whenever someone asks it, and, despite how weary my readers are with this topic, I cannot stop myself anymore than a clockwork can stop itself.
Read the remainder of this entry »
Filed in Reasonings
No exceptions, No Excuses, No Escape
Posted October 8, 2010 By John C WrightI, for one, have always delighted in the magic car imagined by Ian Fleming, and, no, I do not mean James Bond’s Aston Martin. The image of Chitty-Chitty Bang Bang soaring on brightly colored wings has always been one to delight my heart as a child, the perfect image of freedom of the air, an image made golden by the patina of nostalgia which now tints the things of my youth.
If only George Orwell had portrayed the futuristic tyrants of England with music and laughter, costumes and gaiety, as the Big Brothers sings the songs of fond childhood memories about the omniscience of the police cameras, and how there is no escape, the parody could not have been believed. The chains binding the beloved magical car of my youthful daydreams to the ground is like a blasphemy to me.
I find this remarkably more chilling than a stern or officious warning, for the same reason that being beheaded by Jack Ketch is somehow worse if he wears, instead of his traditional black hood, a painted clown suit.
Filed in Musings
Who goes Nazi?
Posted October 8, 2010 By John C WrightI reprint here without further comment an article by Dorothy Thompson from 1942 Harper’s Magazine. I am reprinting the whole thing, because attempts to link to the archived version of the article fail, and I would not care for it to be lost.
Hattip to The Anchoress at First Things, and grandhattip to Bookworm .
Who goes Nazi?
By Dorothy Thompson
It is an interesting and somewhat macabre parlor game to play at a large gathering of one’s acquaintances: to speculate who in a showdown would go Nazi. By now, I think I know. I have gone through the experience many times–in Germany, in Austria, and in France. I have come to know the types: the born Nazis, the Nazis whom democracy itself has created, the certain-to-be fellow-travelers. And I also know those who never, under any conceivable circumstances, would become Nazis.
It is preposterous to think that they are divided by any racial characteristics. Germans may be more susceptible to Nazism than most people, but I doubt it. Jews are barred out, but it is an arbitrary ruling. I know lots of Jews who are born Nazis and many others who would heil Hitler tomorrow morning if given a chance. There are Jews who have repudiated their own ancestors in order to become “Honorary Aryans and Nazis”; there are full-blooded Jews who have enthusiastically entered Hitler’s secret service. Nazism has nothing to do with race and nationality. It appeals to a certain type of mind.
Read the remainder of this entry »
Filed in Musings
Parable of the Chessmen
Posted October 8, 2010 By John C WrightPart of a neverending conversation:
“In the column labeled ‘meaning’, I would then make an entry saying, perhaps, “King’s Pawn to King Four”. Now, I agree that this requires some sort of translation, which is not itself a physical object. In other words, I must know chess to make even this simple translation. But I need not know a whole lot of chess. Just knowing how the pieces move would be sufficient. And it does not seem to me a matter of faith to say that there is such a translation. If I move the atoms in a particular way, there is a corresponding chess move which the wooden pieces represent; I cannot see this as controversial.”
Far from being non-controversial, this is exactly the point of controversy. You are, without noticing it, brushing past not just a point, but the main point in contention, for you assume that an abstract statement which refers to no physical properties whatsoever is the same as or is translatable into a statements of physics, that is, a statement designed to refer to nothing but physical properties. You are saying A is not A.
To make this more clear, let me bring three statements to your attention, a physical, a concrete, and an abstract.
Physical: “Cylindrical object made of boxwood lacquered in gold hue standing three inches high, weighing 3 ounces, with a one inch diameter on a leather base is moved in one second from a location four inches north by northwest.”
Concrete: “Pawn made of boxwood lacquered in gold (in this game, the gold chessmen are considered the ‘black’ instead of the white, because the opposing chessmen are silver) standing three inches high is moved from its starting position four inches on a chessboard north by northwest, moving from King’s Pawn Two to King’ Pawn Four.”
Abstract: “Pawn to King’s Four.”
Read the remainder of this entry »
Filed in Reasonings
Wright’s Writing Corner: Good Good Guys
Posted October 7, 2010 By John C WrightThis week is an in-depth look at the characters mentioned in last week’s post on writing about good characters.
http://arhyalon.livejournal.com/173669.html
Examined are Nausicaa, Kenshin, Monkey D. Luffy, Harry Dresden.
Filed in Wisdom
