We shouldn't call it a celebration

I spent the afternoon at the Detroit Institute of Arts and their current exhibit of Van Gogh in America. The artist, who died in 1890 at the way too soon age of 37, did not set foot in America. The framing story of the exhibit is this artwork first being scorned, then embraced by American art museums and American collectors. The timing of the exhibit is because now is 100 years since the DIA was the first American museum to buy a Van Gogh. The purchase was criticized because so few people could make sense of the artist and his art. He was just too modern. Van Gogh as modern seems strange – we’ve seen Picasso, and Pollock. But his work, and that of his contemporaries, no longer went for accuracy in reproducing a scene and that was revolutionary. A show in 1928 that included Van Gogh’s work and one in 1935 that was exclusively his work and that traveled the country turned public perception of the artist. The last room of the exhibit includes a video of scenes from the Vincente Minnelli film Lust for Life, a biopic of Van Gogh’s life. This video criticizes that movie for portraying it subject as a “tortured genius” – that his artwork was a result of his mental anguish. That is not correct. Yes, Van Gogh did spend time getting treatment for mental illness. But his letters to his brother Theo show his desire and ability to create art were done through careful and deliberate steps. Alas, the Minnelli film still colors our perceptions of Van Gogh. I finished the book Winter’s Orbit by new author Everina Maxwell. It is both a gay romance and science fiction – and I like both of those. Prince Kiem of Iskat is thought of as the most disappointing of his generation of forty cousins. He is called before his grandmother the Emperor and is told he’ll have to give up his playboy ways because tomorrow he must marry Count Jainan of Thea. Iskat and Thea and a few other planets are to sign a Resolution in one month. That Resolution requires a marriage between an Iskat prince and a Thean diplomat. The marriage is the next day because it is the day after the end of the one month of mourning of Taam, who was Jainan’s previous partner. The wedding is not much more than the two of them signing the marriage contract. That night is awkward because Kiem assumes his new partner is still mourning and Jainan assumes he’s being rejected for being unworthy. Yeah, these guys are bad at communicating. The Auditor in charge of assuring all aspects of the Resolution are proper is taking way too long to agree the marriage is proper. And the palace Internal Security has flagged Jainan. The whole thing smells of cover-up. Figuring out what is being covered up takes our lads that whole month. That does give them time to fall in love before those trying to do the cover-up put them in grave peril. How much the humans of Iskat and Thea differ from earth humans of today is not explained. Jainan and Kiem are given only sparse descriptions of height and skin color. So one wonders about orientation and gender identity. Kiem admits to bedding both men and women. Jainan keeps his mouth shut. We do get another glimpse because men wear some sort of amulet made of wood and women wear one made of flint. Nonbinary characters wear neither. Does that imply men and women have become hard to tell apart? Or is the convention a handy way to alert another person to preferred pronouns? Since Kiem’s bisexuality is not remarked on does it imply a large portion of the population is also bisexual? That aspect of the story isn’t explained, it just is. In the decades that I’ve been reading science fiction magazines at one point an editor explained that a good science fiction story includes some new feature of science that is critical to the story. He used the example of an old Western story given a new setting and replacing bullets with lasers. But the new story is essentially no different than the Western. I felt much of this book is the same. The fancy wristbands central to their work and communication aren’t all that different from a smartwatch. This federation of planets could just as easily be a federation of nations on one planet (I felt Lois McMaster Bujold’s Barrayar series – and I’ve read and enjoyed them all – had the same issue). It isn’t until we’re 85% of the way through the story that we see a technology that is both something we don’t have now and critical to the story. Even with this quibble I enjoyed the story. While in a bookstore yesterday to buy the latest issue of Analog Science Fiction and Fact magazine I saw a book with two young men on the cover. It is Self-Made Boys: A Great Gatsby Remix by Anna-Marie McLemore. The description says it follows the outline of F. Scott Fitzgerald’s original with the difference that both Nick and Jay Gatsby are transgender. The six online reviews declare it to be wonderful. But since I didn’t care much for the original (and avoided the DiCaprio movie) I won’t be buying this one. A little note on that page says this book is part of the Remixed Classics series. A search brought up: A Clash of Steel a remix of Treasure Island in which the lead pirates are a lesbian couple. Travelers Along the Way a remix of Robin Hood with a lesbian couple, though this is about the Crusades and not Nottingham Forest. And Teach the Torches to Burn a remix of Romeo and Juliet, in which the lovers are gay (won’t be released until next August) – the lovers of the original are already doomed because of the hatred of the two families so I’m not interested in a huge scoop of homophobia on top of it. I didn’t check out the details of the remixes of Little Women, Wuthering Heights, Jekyll & Hyde, Secret Garden, and Pride & Prejudice. I will agree it is important for us in the LGBTQ community to see ourselves in some of the literary classics. I suppose it is good business to supply such versions. Just don’t expect my dollar. Recently Niece declared that Pride & Prejudice & Zombies is much more interesting than the original. I haven’t read it, nor have I read classics updated with vampires and werewolves. I downloaded Michigan’s COVID data, updated two days ago. I didn’t report on the numbers a week ago because election day delayed timely updating. As of two days ago the peaks in new cases per day for the last few weeks are 1910, 1503, 1551, and 1183. Yes, the data is going in a good direction. A predicted increase with new variants hasn’t yet hit Michigan. I’ve been hearing Michigan’s data is no longer capturing the whole picture. Those doing home tests aren’t reporting cases to the state. So I considered looking at other sources of data, such as sewage sampling. Michigan provides that data, but through maybe a hundred individual sampling locations and without any composite data. Alisa Chang of NPR spoke to Lauren Frayer stationed in Mumbai about the United Nations estimating the world now has 8 billion humans on it. While the population growth of China and India may be slowing, the growth in Africa is not. I’m puzzled and annoyed that the UN is calling this a celebration. I suppose, as Andrea Wojnar, the India representative for the UN Population fund, says, we should celebrate people living longer and that there is a decline in maternal and infant mortality. But the world can’t handle so many people. Some say it can, but climate change and a scarcity of water (implying a future scarcity of food) show our world can’t. And rapid population growth (did we add a billion people in just 15 years?) means there are too many women with a lack of education and a lack of family planning – generally unempowered. There is also the problem that the population growth is mostly in poorer countries while the countries with declining population have much higher rates of consumption and environmental damage. Today marks the 15th anniversary of when I started publishing this blog. This is post 4979. There have been almost 340,000 page views since the system has been keeping track starting in June 2010. By the time I started posting I had already spent three years writing up LGBTQ news alerts to send to family and friends. That was prompted by the first same-sex marriages in Massachusetts.

It might be better to do away with the court altogether

The event Beyond Van Gogh will be in Detroit for another ten days. I saw it today in my second attempt. My first attempt to see the event was at the end of August, six weeks ago. In preparation I checked the parking around the TCF Center where the event is held. The center’s website says they have four parking areas. The biggest is the roof. Because of the sun and heat in August I wanted something under a roof, such as under the center. The second was blocked by a closed road. The third was for monthly passes only. The fourth had traffic cones across the entrance. So I went to a nearby parking structure. It said credit card only, but it wouldn’t read my card. I tried a second card and it wouldn’t read that one either. The attendant said it’s not your card, it’s the machine. Sorry, you can’t park here today. He directed me to another structure around the corner. That one allowed me to pay cash. I walked the length of the TCF Center (and it’s a big place) to get to the exhibit. Once I got there I was told the exhibit was closed because of computer failure. A server had stopped working at 7:30 that morning. All booking is done online so the woman explaining it all told us how to reschedule or ask for a refund. I complained that I had to pay for parking. She suggested I ask the parking guys for a refund. Of course, they didn’t agree. I wrote an email saying I wanted to reschedule. I also complained about their terrible contingency plans – they could have told me well before I left home – and asked for a refund for parking and miles driven. They refused the refund. I next thought of going in mid September. I’m glad I didn’t switch my ticket to then because that was the week my car was in the shop for a new alternator. And this event doesn’t give refunds if you don’t show up. Earlier this week I switched my ticket to today. The weather was cool and overcast, so parking on the roof was fine (though $5 more). And I went down the elevator to the event. I’ve been calling it an event because it isn’t a show in the usual sense. The first room has a series of panels about Vincent Van Gogh’s life and career, including several jobs he tried before becoming a painter. Much of the text was from letters he wrote to his brother Theo. The panels used his paintings as background. There was a second room of swirling color I was told was on a five minute loop. It didn’t look to be from his artwork, so I didn’t stay long. The third and final room was large with images projected on the walls, pillars, and floor while music played (I recognized the tune “Starry, Starry, Night” though it didn’t play when the Starry Night painting was displayed).This was on a loop about 35 minutes and was essentially the event. There weren’t many places to sit, though not many people. I claimed one end of a bench and watched from that position. Of course, the images were taken from his paintings. But it didn’t cycle through static images. Many were animated in some way. A portrait’s eyes would blink and the head move a bit. If the image included plants we would watch the plants grow. A scene would be sketched, then filled in with color. One scene would dissolve into another. In a scene with lots of flowers swirling petals would float over the scene. We were told we could take pictures (though no flash) so I had my camera ready and took about a dozen pictures. In this case I think it appropriate to see some of the other people in the room to offer a sense of scale. I think those projection screens were 25 feet high.

This last one is of Starry Night. Before the painting was projected those swirls were animated.

The exit was, of course, through a gift shop. I didn’t buy. While downtown I took an opportunity to walk along the Detroit Riverwalk for my exercise for the day. Joan McCarter of Daily Kos reported it looks like Moscow Mitch blinked – a little bit – in his position on raising the debt ceiling limit. He had said if a bill to raise the debt ceiling limit isn’t done as a budget reconciliation bill (Democrat only) he and the rest of the Republican senators will veto it through the filibuster. Two things may have changed his mind. First, the number of Republicans getting squeamish about a possible global financial disaster. Second, Sens. Manchin and Sinema saying they are willing to repeal the filibuster for these types of bills. The reason why this is a tiny concession is because Mitch will agree to a debt raising bill that will last only three months. It keeps Democrats from passing a bill that would remove the debt ceiling as a political weapon. And it keeps the filibuster. Even so, Democrats are bragging that Mitch “caved” as Elizabeth Warren put it. McCarter also wrote that a survey from the Annenberg Public Policy Center at the University of Pennsylvania asked people if the Supreme Court started making a lot of rulings that most Americans disagreed with, what should be done? 34% chose “it might be better to do away with the court altogether.” This gives strong permission for Biden and Congress to expand the court. McCarter wrote:

What Elie Mystal says: "Court expansion is the preferred constitutional solution to a Court that oversteps its mandate or thumbs its nose at the will of the people." Court expansion dilutes the power of the new Federalist Society majority, appointed not for their judicial experience or integrity, but for their willingness to participate in advancing a fascist vision for the U.S. What Mystal also says: "As the Court prepares to merrily set everything on fire this term, Democrats are looking at the constitutional fire extinguisher and thinking, It says we can only break the glass in case of an emergency, and we're not sure burning our constituents' rights at the stake qualifies." They've got to get over that, just like they have to get over thinking getting rid of the filibuster is a radical idea (which, by the way, they'll have to do to expand the court and save everything, anyway). With more than one-third of the country thinking the court is worthy of dissolution, using this option to save the institution (and the country!) is a no-brainer.

David Neiwert of Kos wrote about the effect of numerous stories of terrorism in the news over the last several months.

Many may seem minor or of limited interest and often are only covered locally and regionally. Yet cumulatively, these stories have a profoundly toxic effect, manifesting one of the subtler ways that the conspiracism/disinformation industry undermines democracy and our social stability. ... Yet this drumbeat has its own kind of terroristic effect. Most terrorists act out violently as a way of undermining the larger social and political order, a means of persuading the public that civil authorities are incapable of keeping them safe and providing security. It’s powerfully effective for right-wing extremists because creating an atmosphere ripe with fear is a proven way of inducing authoritarianism among the general public as a psychological response. As these lesser incidents accumulate—especially when they begin happening with greater frequency—they have the same effect on public sensibilities.

A Twitter account named Film the Police LA posted a video of an anti-vaxx protester ranting that of course we don’t see homeless people sick with COVID in the streets. A homeless person said it’s because he’s vaccinated. Aga responded:

And it's so sad that no energy goes from them to actually help the homeless but they are happy to use the homeless to advance their agenda.

To which Furry McMemes replied:

That's why they don't want to help the homeless, because there goes their scapegoat, there goes the one thing that makes them feel better about their miserable lives.

I wrote about this several days ago, here’s a take from Leah McElrath:

I’m currently struggling with coming to terms with the fact that the following idea might be a myth: “The arc of the moral universe is long, but it bends toward justice.” The question I keep coming up against is: if it *is* a myth, does that change how we should act? WDYT?

That last is: What do you think? Some of the replies ... first from Colleen Wilson:

It probably is a myth. We should still act as though we believe it. It’s not a description, or a prophecy. It’s a challenge.

Or aspirational rather than descriptive. Vanessa Sax:

That arc is purported to be a mechanism of fate, but we must remember that the moral arc toward justice is driven exclusively by the will of those who refuse to let it be otherwise.

Moti Rieber:

I don’t think it’s a myth, but the way we’ve always heard it that it would bend basically by itself, almost as a form of evolution. Now I think it only bends if we bend it.

Susan:

I think it’s true. The problem we have is understanding what “long” means. For me four years is a long time. For justice to prevail it might take a very long time.

Wendy Bell:

It is not that it bends. It’s that it is being bent by someone. I find it helpful to focus less on the arc itself than on those who are trying to bend it.

Michael Harriot tweeted an image of a sign that (hopefully) doesn’t actually exist:

Attention Customers and Employees: We are required by law to inform you that we discriminate on the basis of race, color, creed, gender, religion, ethnicity, nationality, sexual orientation, or “gut instinct.”

Harriot added:

What if we let employers, banks, courts etc discriminate as much as they want, as long as they publicly disclose it? This way, whites get their privilege, Blacks can “opt out”+go elsewhere & no one has to fix systemic racism! What? It’s literally the argument for school choice.

Those with some historical perspective know that the “go elsewhere” part is to somewhere much inferior.

Animated Van Gogh paintings

I saw Loving Vincent this afternoon, a fascinating film. The fascination isn’t so much with the story, rather with how the movie was made.

The guy in the title is Vincent Van Gogh. The events take place a year after Vincent’s death. Since Vincent wrote lots of letters he became friends with postman Joseph Roulin. The postman has one last letter to Vincent’s brother Theo, but it came back undeliverable. So he sends his son Armand to deliver it in person, or find out why. Armand ends up in the town Auver-sur-Oise, where Vincent had been both a good friend and a patient of Dr. Gachet and where Vincent had died of a gun wound. While waiting for the doctor to return from Paris Armand has a few days to talk to the locals to try to find what happened. They tell their stories in flashbacks.

At the end of the movie we are told that Vincent created 800 paintings in his eight years as an artist. He managed to sell … one. His art supplies were provided by Theo. He is now considered the father of modern art.

On to how the movie was made. It is essentially Vincent’s paintings come to life. All of the characters are ones that he had painted and the movie recreates those paintings and animates them. The 90 minutes of film mean 65,000 frames. All of them were hand painted. The scenes of Armand were painted to imitate Vincent’s originals and are quite colorful. The flashback scenes are in black and white and are of a different style of painting that almost looks photographic. The credits list 131 painters.

The live actors performed before sets that looked like Vincent’s paintings or before the standard Green Screens. The live action frames then became a guide for the animated frames.

The official movie website says there were 898 different shots in the film. This resulted in 898 paintings. As the scene proceeds the shot is painted over for each successive frame. That way the background doesn’t pulsate because the brushstrokes of one frame don’t match with the next (unless it is depicting rippling water or windblown wheat). However we do get that pulsating on the characters as they move.

Watching Van Gogh paintings come to life is a wonderful way to spend 90 minutes.