Whinges and Other Stuff

Time for a wee whinge! Why is it that when a new, updated, version of something arrives, although it might look slick and shiny it's never quite as handy as the older version? We used to find this phenomenon at work, many years ago when our computer programs were updated - by them as knew what they were doing - allegedly. We used to complain "Why don't they come and see how we use the flippin' system before they go and reinvent the darn thing?" I've had two experiences of a similar phenomenon this week.

Our new washing machine was installed, much the same as the old one, but now it's all electronic rather than, "mechanical" (as described to us by the sales person). I did a load of laundry straight away. Knobs and settings are similar to before. As the machine did its biz I returned to the computer, expecting to hear a familiar alarm buzzer telling me when the job was done, and ready to transfer the washing to the dryer. Nothing! Had I forgotten to adjust a setting? Research online turned up that there is no buzzer on this model to signal the end of the cycle. TSK! What a flippin' nuisance. That is something I'd have thought would be standard. It's easy to forget that the washer is washing when it doesn't make a lot of noise, easy to forget all about the wet stuff. Ah well, I got out a little alarm clock - next time I used the washer I set it for 45 or so minutes ahead. Anyway, black mark awarded to Maytag - this is not up to their usual standard of excellence. More of what's becoming known as "crapification".

Another instance of crapification: my replacement basic astrology software, to becompatible with Windows 10 has similarly frustrating omissions, especially when trying to re-size a chart to post on my blog. It used to be so easy! Now it ain't, this is the same brand, but it ain't nearly as good, nor as clear due to some pale colours which almost disappear on the screen. Alos, it's no longer possible to choose one's own colours. I don't blog on astrology very often these days, so it doesn't matter much, but it's still annoying.

I was going to do a quick astro-job on author Catherine Cookson's natal chart, after we had watched a TV dramatised version (streamed on Amazon Prime) of her novel "The Black Velvet Gown". I enjoyed the story - although it is very similar in style to many (or all) of her other novels read in my younger years. 'Nuf to say, regarding her astrology, that Ms Cookson had Sun, Mercury, Mars, and Neptune in Cancer, which made her a definite Cancer-type person - sensitive, empathetic and nurturing; this definitely comes out in her novels. She also had planets in Leo (limelight) and Gemini (communication), with natal Moon probably in Virgo (practical, organised) - but her time of birth isn't known, so can't be sure.

On the medical front - nothing to report, all remains much as was - except that it appears something has changed in rules regarding prescriptions for some pain killing medicines. Last year it was necessary to obtain a paper prescription, signed in ink by the prescribing doctor, the paper to be taken to the pharmacy in person - fax and email not allowed. It now appears that faxing these prescriptions to pharmacies is allowed once more. Less journeys to the hospital to collect prescriptions - that's good!

As regards my new (or re-found) knitting hobby, I've just finished a V-shaped shawl. It was supposed to look something like:

It turned out to be somewhat bigger than expected, though my yarn and needles were as prescribed by pattern and my natural knitting tension isn't exceptionally loose. LOL! It looks exactly like something that Riah, main character of "The Black Velvet Gown" was wearing in the north of England in 1830 something. The women wore a lot of shawls back then - or at least the costume department thinks they did. The lovely colour and subtle sheen of the knitted shawl doesn't show here - lighting not too good.

Various Goings On

The weather here in southern Oklahoma is, at last, after days of temperatures in the 80s, acting in more autumnal fashion. Today it's actually cool to cold outside - 49 degrees, windy with a storm in the offing. The trees haven't yet donned their fall colours, after a few more of these cooler nights, it'll happen.

In other news, a routine blood test on 16 October, to discover how the targeted therapy medications are affecting my blood quality, showed that the white cell count was below desired minimum - same for platelets. Oncologist told me to take a second week off the Ibrance capsules - these are routinely taken for 21 days with 7 days off each month. This time I had 14 days off. Blood test yesterday showed figures had bounced back to an acceptable level, so off I go again with the Ibrance. I'm to have a CT scan next week - to check whether much has changed for good or for ill since my last scans around 6 months ago. Not looking forward to that!



The problems I had in obtaining a refill of my pain medication last month happily did not recur this time. Our usual pharmacy has changed their wholesaler. The medications I take for pain-while-walking now come from a different generic manufacturer. I was worried that these might be even less effective than those I've been taking, but, though it's a little early to be sure, I do suspect that these might be a tad more effective.

Further afield, Brexit bumbles on...and on....and on. When, oh when, oh when will it end? The part of it all that affects me personally is the currency exchange rate, it affects my two pensions coming from the UK. The rate has been volatile for a couple or more years, diving down then up, down again etc, depending on what had been Boris Johnson's or Ms May's latest failed attempts at bringing about a deal.

In the USA the season known as "The Holidays" is almost upon us. I'm glad to be here, still, to see it once again! Hallowe'en decor has been showing up for the past few weeks in front yards - ghosties, ghoulies and long leggedy beasties, spider webs and witches...you know the drill. We now await the Trick or Treaters on 31st of the month. We had very few last year - disappointing, because it's fun to see the imaginative costumes the kids come up with, and the excitement on the faces of the littlest ones. Perhaps the custom is starting to go out of fashion, for one reason or another - safety, perhaps, and many communal organised Hallowe'en costume events. Next up: Thanksgiving on 28 November, followed by You-Know-What-mas, a month later.
Ka-ching...ka-ching!

On the knitting front, I'm using a big skein of pink "ombre" tinted yarn to make another, longer scarf. It's something I can pick up and just knit, without need to refer to a pattern. I love seeing the changing shades of pink appear, apropos of which, I noticed that my husband is reading "The Secret Lives of Colour" by Kassia St Clair. I shall read it too, when he's done with it. Back-cover blurb: "From the scarlet women to imperial purple, from the brown that changed the way battles were fought to the white that protected against the plague, from kelly green to acid yellow, the surprising stories of colour run like a bright thread through our history." Several varieties of pink are investigated, for example: Baker-Miller Pink; Mountbatten Pink, Puce, Fuchsia; Shocking Pink, Fluorescent Pink, and Amaranth. Maybe some of those will appear in my scarf.

Monday's Mumbles about Movies

On Saturday evening we watched a couple of movies via Amazon Prime. I picked them because, from the brief outline themes, neither promised beaucoup gratuitous violence, blood and guts.




Big Night (1996)

Big Night is one of those often engaging "foodie" stories. Two Italian brothers, immigrants to the New Jersey Shore, run a restaurant, The Paradise, serving fine Italian food. Primo is the chef, Secundo Maitre d'. The business is not doing well - near to foreclosure in fact - possibly Primo's wonderful food is simply "too good for this place". Another restaurateur with a business close by hears of their plight. He suggests that he should contact a celebrity and friend of his to ask that he and his entourage should visit The Paradise one evening to bring in some custom and help in spreading the word about the excellent Italian fare available.

I'll not spoil the film's theme further, but will say that, though we didn't dislike the movie, there were some weird omissions and a really iffy ending. It was nice to see Tony Shalhoub (Monk) in an early role here, and Allison Janney too (CJ Cregg in The West Wing).

The film received very good reviews - most of which I feel were way overblown - but the sight of great food can do that to some people!

The Virgin Suicides (1999)
Based on a 1993 novel by Jeffrey Eugenides, the film was directed by Sofia Coppola (in her feature directorial debut), co-produced by Francis Ford Coppola, and starring James Woods, Kathleen Turner, Kirsten Dunst, and Josh Hartnett. The film also features Scott Glenn, Michael Paré and Danny DeVito in minor roles, and a voice narration by Giovanni Ribisi.

I found this to be a rather peculiar movie. Like Big Night, above, it received excellent reviews. Perhaps I just didn't get it. Maybe I don't remember what it was like being a teenager (but actually, I do, though I was not one of five!)

I like a movie with a good plot, a twist or two, and a satisfying end. I do wonder if the famous surname of the director of this movie might have....well...influenced critics more than a tad! None of this story felt at all real, reasonable or believable to me - except, perhaps the first suicide.

Without giving away too much (as though the film's title doesn't!) the story's focus is on 5 young sisters, aged between 13 and 17, living in suburban Detroit with their loving but ultra-strict and over-protective parents. Those facts along with the title is really all you need to know, apart from continually needing to ask, "Why?"

I read around some reviews of both the novel and film later. I came across one comment which put a more metaphorical spin on the novel's, and therefore the movie's theme: "I see the suicides in this book as an expression of the often senseless loss and decay that is happening in the world around us today." Remember, too, that the story is set close to Detroit, a centre of recent loss and decay. So... watching the movie through that lens, perhaps it wouldn't seem quite so peculiar.

Escape

“Mother used to say escape is never further than the nearest book.”
― David Mitchell, Cloud Atlas

During my early to mid-teenage years I loved to read novels, or see films, about prisoners of war in Germany or Japan during World War II, and their attempts to escape. A book by Paul Brickhill, Boldness Be My Friend began my fandom of such stories, I think. I'd scour the library for similar tales, and found several.

I've wondered why I had this penchant for prisoner of war escape stories. My conclusion has been that, back in my teen years, I was feeling "imprisoned" by school and home strictures and wanted to escape myself. Or...perhaps I just enjoyed reading about the way human nature adapts, sometimes never gives up - no matter what.

Over the years I've loved, read/seen (more than once) versions of A Town Like Alice by Nevil Shute; The Great Escape; Stalag whatever; The Naked Island (that was a grizzly one if I recall correctly); Papillon (1973 version) and others whose titles I now don't recall.

At the weekend I noticed that Turner Movie Channel was showing "King Rat" on Saturday afternoon.

King Rat is a 1965 World War II film directed by Bryan Forbes, starring George Segal and James Fox. They play Corporal King and Marlowe, respectively, two World War II prisoners of war in a squalid camp near Singapore. Among the supporting cast are John Mills and Tom Courtenay. The film was adapted from James Clavell's novel King Rat (1962), which in turn is partly based on Clavell's experiences as a POW at Changi Prison during the Second World War.

https://www.rottentomatoes.com/m/king_rat

We decided to give the movie a whirl. It's an excellent, excellent film - should be much better known! There's a lot more to it than a straightforward POW movie. Escaping isn't an issue in this tale; escape would be virtually impossible due to the geographical situation of the Changi prison camp. The film examines the varied attitudes of individuals to the camp's horrendous circumstances; different psychological ways of dealing with what has to be dealt with. Acting is first class throughout, and many familiar faces (especially familiar to British viewers) pop up frequently.

James Clavell's book is now on my "to read" list - once I get through Winston Graham's 12 Poldark novels of which I'm currently in the midst. 1945 Changi, Singapore will offer quite a culture shock after so many tales of 18th century Cornwall, England!

Vital Titles

Novels, short stories, non-fiction, articles in magazines and newspapers all benefit greatly from thoughtfully chosen titles. The title becomes a "greeter" with power to attract and draw in readers, either by clear indication of what content follows, or by shrewdly thrown poetic mist which can arouse curiosity. Choosing a title is not easy, I dare say that at times it can be more difficult than actually writing the novel or article. Authors over the years have pitted their wits against the ordinary and predictable to come up with something attention-grabbingly different, yet pertinent to content.

Some authors have leaned on work of their predecessors, extracting a nugget of wisdom from finely crafted words, found to be obliquely applicable to their own piece of work. Somerset Maugham favored this method when he chose titles for The Painted Veil and Of Human Bondage, both lifted from old texts. The former from an 1818 sonnet by Percy Byshe Shelley:

Lift not the painted veil which those who live
Call Life: though unreal shapes be pictured there,
And it but mimic all we would believe
With colours idly spread, - behind, lurk Fear
And Hope, twin Destinies; who ever weave
Their shadows, o'er the chasm, sightless and drear.

The latter was borrowed from one of the books of the 'Ethica' by 17th century Dutch philosopher, Baruch Spinoza. Translated = "Of Human Bondage, or The Strength of the Emotions".

Those are both apt titles, once one is familiar with the storylines, but they presupposed a certain amount of literary knowledge on the part of the reader.

Harper Lee's famous title, To Kill a Mocking Bird came from an old proverb telling that "it's a sin to kill a mocking bird". The author used it as metaphor for the novel's storyline. It's clever, but without prior knowledge of the old proverb, or subject matter of the book, a potential reader might feel puzzled when confronted with the title on a library shelf, but it's intriguing enough to invite investigation.

A few more, old and newer, titles interestingly drawn from literature:

Band of Brothers (book and TV mini-series)

From Shakespeare's Henry V

This story shall the good man teach his son;
And Crispin Crispian shall ne'er go by,
From this day to the ending of the world,
But we in it shall be remember'd;
We few, we happy few, we band of brothers;
For he to-day that sheds his blood with me
Shall be my brother; be he ne'er so vile,
This day shall gentle his condition:
And gentlemen in England now a-bed
Shall think themselves accursed they were not here,
And hold their manhoods cheap whiles any speaks
That fought with us upon Saint Crispin's day.



No Country for Old Men (novel and film)

From Sailing to Byzantium by William Butler Yeats

That is no country for old men. The young
In one another's arms, birds in the trees
– Those dying generations – at their song,
The salmon‐falls, the mackerel‐crowded seas,
Fish, flesh, or fowl, commend all summer long
Whatever is begotten, born, and dies.
Caught in that sensual music all neglect
Monuments of unageing intellect.



Vanity Fair (novel and magazine title)

From The Pilgrim's Progress by John Bunyan

Emerging from the wilderness, Evangelist meets Christian and Faithful and congratulates them on overcoming their obstacles. Evangelist says they will soon enter a powerful enemy city where one of them will die. The narrator identifies this city as Vanity, home of a great and ancient festival called Vanity Fair, where tawdry products are traded and Beelzebub is worshipped. (HERE)



Where Eagles Dare (book and film)

From Shakespeare's Richard III

"The world is grown so bad, that wrens make prey
where eagles dare not perch". (Act I, Scene III).



From Here to Eternity (book and film)

From Rudyard Kipling's poem Gentlemen-Rankers

We're poor little lambs who've lost our way,
Baa! Baa! Baa!
We're little black sheep who've gone astray,
Baa—aa—aa!
Gentlemen-rankers out on the spree,
Damned from here to Eternity,
God ha' mercy on such as we,
Baa! Bah! Bah!



Grapes of Wrath (book and film)

From Battle Hymn of the Republic

Mine eyes have seen the glory of the coming of the Lord;
He is trampling out the vintage where the grapes of wrath are stored;
He hath loosed the fateful lightning of His terrible swift sword:
His truth is marching on.

The (Scary) Circle

Some movies are supposed to be scary, some are unintentionally so. I haven't yet decided which best describes "The Circle", currently available via Netflix. We watched it last week, and it scared me! George Orwell's "1984" seemed to be coming to life, but in slightly different guise and flavour. Remember that famous quote attributed (possibly mistakenly) to Sinclair Lewis? "When fascism comes to America it will be wrapped in the flag and carrying a cross" ? After watching "The Circle" I decided a re-phrase of that quote would be apt: "When fascism comes to America it will be wrapped in the internet and carrying a smartphone."

"The Circle" is a movie adaptation of Dave Egger's 2013 novel of the same name. It's a cautionary tale, the story of a young tech worker, Mae Holland, played by Emma Watson. She gets an entry-level job with The Circle, a powerful internet corporation based in The Bay Area, California.

The Circle stores data, unbelievably huge amounts of data: financial, medical, social, personal, about its account holders. The Circle's leaders convince account holders that collection of their data is for their own convenience and will bring about a better life experience. Open sharing is good, they are told constantly. There are no grim oppressors here, their role in this digital age is taken over by smarmy, insincere Machiavellian figures, played by Tom Hanks and Patton Oswalt.

The Circle, the original 2013 novel, was set in what was then the near future - a near future so near now, in 2018, that you can taste it! Some elements of the story are already here.

I'll not outline the story in detail, in case any stray reader might want to read the book or see the movie. There are numerous reviews around the net for anyone curious to know more. Reviewers in general are not impressed with the movie adaptation, though most do say that the theme is a good one - the adaptation for screen could have been handled better. I agree. There was something missing, for me. I found The Circle scary and prescient though, because of what I've read about today's social network websites. The movie's worst failing, I thought, was that it felt flat, in tone. Tom Hanks played the part he was supposed to play well enough, yet it's not easy to erase his long-time chat show image: a genuinely nice, good guy. A different actor in that part could have added extra edge and a brisker tone. Let's see, who can play smarmy, charismatic, but basically manipulative and...well...bad, with no ingrained "good guy" background?
Bryan Cranston? James Spader?

It's a book...it's a film...

It's a book...it's a film...(it's not Charades - just another blog post!)

IT'S A BOOK

The Long Earth, the first novel of a sci-fi series by Terry Pratchett and Stephen Baxter, and my current reading matter when offline. I'm getting towards the end of the book, enjoying it, and intending to move on to the second in the series soon. The premise of a multi-dimensional world is the main theme of the series, and when I say multi-dimensional, I don't mean half a dozen, or even a hundred dimensions, I mean millions and millions of alternative worlds, versions of Earth in a never-ending variation of modes, states, levels of development and evolution. A means of travelling between these Earths has been discovered.

This novel isn't as "laugh aloud" funny as some of Terry Pratchett's novels are reputed to be, but there's gentle humour, a touch of allegory, a touch of satire, none of it is forced.

A quote or two:

So now, he hoped, here was a chance to bring mankind back into the book-loving fold. He gloated. There was still no electronics in the pioneer worlds, was there? Where was your internet? Hah! Where was Google? Where was your mother’s old Kindle? Your iPad 25? Where was Wickedpedia? (Very primly, he always called it that, just to show his disdain; very few people noticed.) All gone, unbelievers! All those fancy toy-gadgets stuffed in drawers, screens blank as the eyes of corpses, left behind. Books – oh yes, real books – were flying off his shelves. Out in the Long Earth humanity was starting again in the Stone Age.

He quite liked the English. They tended to say sorry a lot, which was quite understandable given their heritage and the crimes of their ancestors.

And Joshua felt oddly uncomfortable, once more. A slight feeling you get when everything is so right that it might have gone all the way around the universe and come back metamorphosed into wrong.

All creatures on Earth have been hammered on the anvil of its gravity, for example, which influences size and morphology. So I am sceptical about finding armoured reptiles who can fly and spout flames.


Few bad words were said – apart from ‘Republican’, which was an extremely bad word.

Mankind isn’t really evil. It hasn’t got enough dignity to be evil.

IT'S A FILM

The Dinner, a 2017 movie curently available to stream via Netflix. It stars Richard Gere, Laura Linney, Steve Coogan, Rebecca Hall. In a word it was: disappointing. Wikipedia states: The Dinner is an American drama thriller film directed and written by Oren Moverman, based on the Dutch novel of the same name by Herman Koch.

Where to begin ? For me, there were too many irritants in this movie. Bare bones of its theme hinge upon two brothers: one is a congressman (Richard Gere, natch, in his best oily smooth silverness), the other a neurotic misanthropic school teacher (played, for some peculiar reason, by British actor/comedian Steve Coogan). The brothers meet, wives in tow, at a painfully "elite" restaurant. They intend to discuss the problem arising from their sons having committed murder. That fact is hinted, but detail is slow to come and awkwardly revealed.

That these people would choose to discuss such a problem in a public place is quite unbelievable and that is one continual irritant, which sets the scene for what might, in other hands, have been dark high farce with some moral message embedded. Perhaps that was the original intention, but, well... something went wrong.

If a pompous maitre d' reciting the ingredients of every dish and garnish on the quartet's menu in great detail was intended to provide humorous contrast to serious matters discussed at the table - it didn't, it was clunkily time-wasting and caused me to shout at the TV!

Steve Coogan imitating, or rather ripping off, Woody Allen's voice, tone and attitudes was another major irritant. The role of the schoolteacher brother would have been considered tailor-made for Woody Allen, were he a few decades younger, but that didn't give Coogan the right to copy.

The film is confusingly carved up into sets of flashbacks, supposedly related to the many courses of the dinner. Dinner? I didn't notice much actual chewing of food taking place, come to think of it.

The movie's ending, no doubt reflecting how things would have turned out in a comparable real life situation, was unsatisfying, and a further irritant.

Bearing in mind the movie is based on a respected Dutch novel, all in all, I have to assume that much was lost in translation. Husband and I sat through the movie rather than ditching it, mainly out of curiosity to see exactly where it was going. We agreed that it was a sad waste of a talented cast. Next day I skimmed a handful of reviews and found that half were positive, for reasons I had difficulty understanding, and half negative, outlining views similar to my own. Polarisation - it's par for the course these days!

Saturday & Sundry Astrological Expectations

Finely drawn characters in books and movies sometimes tempt me to surmise on their astrology. It's a fun way to exercise and strengthen the astrological muscle. Off the top of my head I recall writing posts in that vein about characters from Gone With the Wind; Little Women; A Tale of Two Cities; maybe others too.

Gone with the Wind Zodiacal Connection
Little Women
A Tale of Two Cities: Sydney Carton.

We watched the 2012 film version of Dickens' novel Great Expectations (via Netflix) this week, and it had me pondering on predominant signs and planets for one or two of the novel's main characters. There have been numerous films, mini-series, stage versions of the novel, I've seen a couple of different ones. The 2012 film packs a lot into 2hrs 8 mins, this is a nice version, but David Lean's film from 1946 still lurks in memory, which must mean that the old one had made a very deep impression.

Anyway...on to the characters' characters, astrologically speaking:

Pip ~ Though he's the tale's leading character he comes across as a tad colourless at times, when compared with the rest of the bunch. One telling characteristic of his was his early eagerness to "become a gentleman", to get away from his humble beginnings in a blacksmith's family. Sun in Leo perhaps? Yet Pip wasn't really yer typically bright Leo go-getter, not at first anyway. Leo Moon might be a better fit, with Sun in Pisces - he was always a bit of a romantic dreamer. His stroke of luck, in being able to follow his dreams, funded by an initially anonymous benefactor smells of Jupiter - in first house perhaps, or at mid-heaven.

“The unqualified truth is, that when I loved Estella with the love of a man, I loved her simply because I found her irresistible. Once for all; I knew to my sorrow, often and often, if not always, that I loved her against reason, against promise, against peace, against hope, against happiness, against all discouragement that could be. Once for all; I love her none the less because I knew it, and it had no more influence in restraining me, than if I had devoutly believed her to be human perfection.”

―"Pip" in Charles Dickens' Great Expectations

Estella ~ In childhood and beyond she was evilly manipulated by Miss Havisham, taught to grow up cold, uncaring, completely without empathy or appreciation of love, so that she would wreak pain on men: Miss Havisham's twisted method of revenge. Difficult one this. Estella would doubtless have become a quite different person altogether had she grown up away from Miss Haversham's influence, and within an average family environment. She didn't crumble though, so must have been, astrologically, made of fairly sturdy stuff. Taurus I'll guess, for either Sun or Moon, or even for both. She was beautiful, Taurus is ruled by Venus, though is still one of the sturdiest of signs.

 Miss Havisham & Pip by Marcus Stone

Miss Havisham ~ Bitter and twisted by her experience of being jilted, turned eccentric and determined to have revenge on men by grooming a young Estella to grow up cold-hearted, unable to feel any emotion. She had stopped all the clocks in her mansion, still wore her wedding gown and lived among her wedding decor many years after the event. Saturn (restriction) Scorpio (dark, obsessive), Uranus (eccentricity). How about Sun in Cancer (Cancer = known to withdraw when in danger of hurt) with Saturn close-by, Scorpio rising, Uranus in first house?

Joe Gargery ~ Pip's relative and father figure. Down-to-earth, simple, patient, generous and good-natured, hard-working blacksmith. Loved, as he would often say, "to have a lark". Capricorn Sun, Mercury in Sagittarius, perhaps.

Magwitch ~ The convict who became Pip's benefactor, after having made a fortune in Australia. Mixture of Scorpio and Sagittarius is the best I can come up with for him. His eternal gratitude to Pip, for a comparatively small amount of help when in dire need, was so profound that Magwitch must have possessed unusual depths of feeling, despite a hardened criminal background.

The Man in the High Castle

The Man in the High Castle (1963)
is an alternative history novel by American writer Philip K. Dick. Set in 1962, fifteen years after an alternative ending to World War II, the novel concerns intrigues between the victorious Axis Powers—Imperial Japan and Nazi Germany—as they rule over the former United States, as well as daily life under the resulting totalitarian rule. The Man in the High Castle won the Hugo Award for Best Novel in 1963.

I haven't read the novel, and we had resisted dipping into the TV (Amazon) series loosely based on it, until a few evenings ago. We dipped, but not very deeply. Two hour-long episodes convinced us that we didn't want to waste any more time on such a gloomy, terribly depressing, often disturbing, not to mention gratuitously violent, piece of dystopian fiction. Although there's a resistance community in the story, standing up to two ruthless authoritarian governments, without prior knowledge of outcome, a viewer can feel as hopeless as the film's characters themselves.

I did find many of the events in those first two episodes to be almost carbon copies of events in certain World War 2-type movies and novels I can recall, just changes in location, period and characters' names. In those earlier films, though, I knew that it was always going to be "alright in the end".

Main characters in the TV series: a young woman, probably in her mid-twenties and a couple of young men, also around that age would not have many memories of their world before Nazis and Japan took over. Other, older, characters had needed to adjust. Life had to go on. The terrifying sight of abhorrent iconography on buildings, flags, vehicles, along with such alien ideals being normalized is the central discomfiture.

In the TV series the USA, as we know it, is split. The eastern half, as far west as the Rockies is under rulership of the Nazis, while the west coast, and eastward as far as the Rockies is ruled by Japan. There is a rather unwisely planned (but necessary for plot growth) neutral buffer zone around Colorado and the Rocky Mountains area.

I understand that the series compares to the novel only in its broad original premise, and in names of some of the characters. P.K. Dick's original idea was an interesting concept to explore, and while the novel's style and detail must have needed some modification in order to appeal to a 21st century audience, less of the viewer manipulation I've read about in commentary would have been preferable. Viewer manipulation appears to have become the norm these days!

Though I'm unlikely to continue watching Amazon's version of The Man in the High Castle, I do remain curious as to where it seemed to be going with the plot. Rather than subjecting us to more dystopian discomfort, I spent time reading articles and commentary around the net from those who had watched the whole of season 1 and most of newly released second season. A few hints follow - beware, though - they could spoil it for anyone who plans to watch the series in future.

The I Ching is used, in the TV series by one of the more sympathetic of its characters, a Japanese official: Tagomi, the Trade Minister.

[Philip K. Dick] was enamored of the cleromancy of the “I Ching,” and in addition to having his characters in “Man in the High Castle” utilize it, he used it himself to plot the novel, in a kind of extravagant commitment to the themes of his own story.

From Variety HERE

.... reels of banned film [newsreels etc] circulating around the world, depicting alternate [alternative!] histories of what could have happened or might still happen to the world. It is not so different from movies in general — but these films are widely held to be mystical depictions that are absolutely real, not just clever fiction made by someone in the basement. To be fair, they do have chilling real elements that even Hollywood can’t quite produce. In “The Grasshopper Lies Heavy,” the reel that becomes the Magical MacGuffin of the first season, San Francisco is depicted being razed by an A-bomb, and a few of the characters see themselves and people they know onscreen, either dying or murdering others.

The first season introduced this supernatural device without, apparently, having much of an idea of where it would go.........The second season lays an interesting foundation and builds up quite a head of steam by the final few episodes — but you can feel the projector sputtering with a kind of desperation as the final hours spool out. Season 2 produces more answers and more action than Season 1 — but those answers are curiously flat, following what has been hours and hours of little more than texture. And it ends with a bait-and-switch that is both too expository and too frustrating, the exact kind of twist you hope a show will not pull.

I've read, regarding the end of the second series, that one of the more troubling aspects of the way the finale plays out is the villainization of the Resistance. (See HERE;) though a commenter at that website thought differently:

The villain-ization of the resistance was actually probably the best thing this show did. American exceptionalism almost always has full permeation of entertainment media. The idea that Americans, especially in "rebel mode" could actually be "bad" never gets explored. Yet we take it for granted with almost all other rebellions everywhere else that it can happen.

Postscript
Should any passing reader be interested to see Phlip K. Dick's natal chart and a run-down on another movie adaptation of one of his short stories, take a look at an archived post HERE.

Motley

The 10 Best Photographs Ever Taken Without Photoshop.


World Map of Y-DNA Haplogroups and possible migration routes.


Two interesting recent pieces by British astrologer Marjorie Orr:

URANUS – bright mind, pity about the split from the body.
SATURN – laughter as well as tears.

Stronger Together
Paperback by Hillary Rodham Clinton and Tim Kaine.

DO READ the COMMENTARY (unless you are a fan of this pair). There's a very long thread of comments, growing by the hour, at time of typing this! Many "reviewers" and commenters will be Trump supporters, but I'm pretty sure there are a lot of disappointed Bernie people and third party people represented too. I detest Trump as much as the next person, but I'm so tired of having anti-Trump cartoons, articles, videos thrust before my eyes, day in, day out. There's just as much wrong, in different ways, with the other presidential candidate - she's getting no quarter from me.

Anyway, as Michael J. Keeneyon commented on the featured volume, and I feel certain he's right: The comments are better than the book.

A random trio of examples:

By Daniel B.on September 14, 2016

I was going to read this book.....I really was. But just as I got started, I found myself under sniper fire, passed out, and fell and hit my head. After that I got double vision and had to wear glasses that were so damn thick I couldn't even see to read. As if that wasn't enough, I then had an allergic reaction to something and started coughing so hard I spit out what looked like a couple of lizard's eyeballs, my limbs locked up, and I passed out and fell down again, waking up only to find out I had been diagnosed with pneumonia 2 days earlier. Somehow I managed to power through it all, but it's a good thing I was able to make a small fortune on this random small trade in the commodities market (cattle futures or some such thing) and then, miracle of all miracles, a few banks offered me a few million to just talk to their employees for a few minutes - and all that really helped out because I swear I was dead broke and couldn't figure out how I was gonna come up with the 6 bucks to pay for this book, let alone pay the $1,500 for my health insurance this month. I still want to read it, but, honestly, what difference at this point does it make? I hear it sucks anyway.

By Scott Shepard on September 18, 2016

This is easily the greatest book ever written! I laughed, I cried, it became a part of me. I’m going to buy a couple cases so that this book can be in every pew at my church! It’s almost holy in what it contains!
The book lays out a vision for our country and all its people. It’s a blueprint for building a nation that flows with milk and honey.
Hillary is our deliverer!

(OK, Brazile. I wrote what you told me to write. Will you now release my child unharmed?)

By Coug Moogon September 18, 2016

This is the sleeper hit of the 2016 election season. I liked it so much I bought 400,000 cases of it at full retail price. Putting Tim Kaine on the jacket photo doing the German salute is very subtle in its messaging as well.

A tour de force.

--Lloyd Blankfein, CEO
Goldman Sachs

Warning: Rabbit hole! ~ 11-22-63, Time Travel, George Wallace, Donald Trump, et al. - & Al!

The weekend found me rolling down one of those easily stumbled into internet rabbit-holes.
(NOTE: As the post is longer than normal, with numerous links, it'll remain on top for a couple of days.)

It all started after having watched DVDs of the TV miniseries based on Stephen King's novel 11-22-63. I read and much enjoyed the novel some time ago, was keen to see how the film version stood up, so acquired the 2xDVD set. It stands up reasonably well, in fact, though some detail had to be omitted due to time constraints, even though the mini-series is 450 minutes long. Some elements, including an extra character, have been added in order to better fit the new format. The bones of the story remain easily recognisable, especially in its final turns.

Teeny-tiny nutshell of storyline: Time: the present. A single strand time portal to a certain date in October 1960 is discovered in a Maine diner. Someone decides to use it to try to stop the killing of JFK in 1963 by exiting present, remaining in past for 3 years +, changing past, then returning, having been away from present for only 2 minutes.

In case a passing reader might not want the full story "spoiled", don't read the links above. All I'll say here is that, after the mini-series ended, I was left with a question. "Why was George Wallace so bad?" I was strongly advised by husband to Google for information. This I did. Wiki has it all, also worthy of perusal, an NPR article by Debbie Elliott: Is Donald Trump a Modern-Day George Wallace?

“Sometimes life coughs up coincidences no writer of fiction would dare copy.”
― Stephen King, 11/22/63

Fork in rabbit-hole led to: George Wallace's natal chart, HERE. First glance indicates this is the chart of an unbalanced type, with awkward potential! I notice that Wallace had Moon conjunct Regulus. Regulus is what I've always thought to be the catalyst beneath Donald Trump's surprising success. I note that Wallace's time of birth at Astrodatabank, though given "A" rating is based "from memory". I suspect the time could be a bit off at 26.6 Cancer - early Leo rising would be a far better fit - this from my own experience of living with Cancer on the ascendant! Wallace had no Air in his natal chart - that's an important difference between his chart and Trump's.

A blog post at Ohio Astrology next slowed my rabbit-hole descent:
A Fire Moon in the Crowd. The blogger's take on rabble-rousers' astrology is intriguing - do take a look! Wallace is included there, along with Bernie Sanders and Donald Trump.

At this point, a random "George Wallace" link led me down yet another rabbit-hole fork, to a forum (a few do still manage to exist in this Facebook-heavy world). This forum is, I discovered, a newer version of an old-established forum taken down by its creator fairly recently, perhaps due to net fights or bad feeling surfacing, and lack of a moderator. The new forum :
Generational Theory Forum: The Fourth Turning Forum: A message board discussing generations and the Strauss Howe generational theory.

I gathered that Neil Howe, co-author of that door-stopper of a book "Generations" as well as a later volume, The Fourth Turning, once participated in the forum, as I think did the author of Horoscope for the New Millennium, E. Alan Meece (both books sit on my bookshelf). The forum offers a few good reads, though some exchanges tend to fall into the the tl;dr (too long, did not read) category, when debates arise.

The forum had no focus on George Wallace, I'd landed there due to a single mention of Wallace in a post on the forum by an astrologer. I think this link should go to the thread in question. Forum member "Eric the Green" (E. Alan Meece perchance?) had done extensive research into the natal charts of USA presidents and candidates, historically, allocating a scoring system based on various astrological factors (which I've yet to find detailed). Explanation of his system perhaps existed on the original forum now defunct. George Wallace appeared in a list:
1968: Richard Nixon 17-6*, Hubert Humphrey 11-4**, George Wallace 2-6 J (+ Mars rising)
Didn't convey much to me, but I found a few interesting items while rolling around the forum generally - having fallen down this rabbit-hole, may as well take full advantage of surroundings!

Back on surface ground, what conclusion, if any?

Having been thoroughly disoriented after reading of 1st 2nd 3rd and 4th Turnings I'd almost forgotten about George Wallace! He certainly does appear to have had things in common with Donald Trump. He drew on similar popular feelings of disenchantment with the establishment, and fears of "the other": African Americans in Wallace's time, Muslims and/or Mexicans in 2016.

SPOILER (don't read if looking forward to reading or seeing 11-22-63).
When the time traveller of Stephen King's novel returns to the present after spending 3 (or 5) years in the early 1960s, managing to prevent the assassination of JFK, he finds, to his horror, a very different city (and world) awaits him. He's told that JFK was president for 2 terms, then George Wallace was elected. During intervening years the city had been laid waste through bombing, the population left homeless, starving. We're not told detail in the mini-series, but the novel has it all, and it's pretty darn scary! The sight of what had happened was enough to propel our time travelling character back to 1960 once more, to reverse all that he had wrought.

Time itself had tried, again and again, to warn him that the past should not, could not be changed. The past had "pushed back" against change, made his task difficult, near to impossible, yet he had persevered, determined to carry out the important mission his old friend, Al of the diner, had set for him, and with the best possible intentions.

“The past is obdurate.”
― Stephen King, 11/22/63

Thoughts: why would a guy like Wallace have been elected after 2 terms of JFK? The novel has an explanation. Basically, though Republicans were determined to reverse things. Do we have something akin to that now?

The novel and film are pure fiction, of course.

“History doesn't repeat itself, but it harmonizes, and what it usually makes is the devil's music.”
― Stephen King, 11/22/63

“For a moment everything was clear, and when that happens you see that the world is barely there at all. Don't we all secretly know this? It's a perfectly balanced mechanism of shouts and echoes pretending to be wheels and cogs, a dream-clock chiming beneath a mystery-glass we call life. Behind it? Below it and around it? Chaos, storms. Men with hammers, men with knives, men with guns. Women who twist what they cannot dominate and belittle what they cannot understand. A universe of horror and loss surrounding a single lighted stage where mortals dance in defiance of the dark.”
― Stephen King, 11/22/63

That was one messy rabbit-hole!

Bookishly...

Could You Write the Great American
[or any] Novel?

By Rose Murray: Compare Your [natal] Chart to Successful Authors!


Streaming service Hulu will soon have:
"A spanking-new, 10-episode adaptation of Margaret Atwood’s seminal dystopian novel The Handmaid’s Tale."


The Mysterious Ancient Origins of the Book, an article by Keith Houston



I agree with these thoughts:

Old Books are best!...
What though the prints be not so bright,
The paper dark, the binding slight?
Our author, be he dull or sage,
Returning from a distant age
So lives again. We say of right:
Old Books are best.

~Beverly Chew, 1886


My test of a good novel is dreading to begin the last chapter.
~Thomas Helm


The oldest books are still only just out to those who have not read them.
~Samuel Butler

A Literary River

Stepping away from political chatter for a while - down a shady river. I originally intended to use the rabbit-hole analogy, but scarcely an internet rabbit-hole this, more like following the course of a winding river on a map...it might even be a shady river, and cool. Let's see!

The mouth of the river begins at a 2006 film, now available on Netflix: "The Painted Veil". Earlier versions of Somerset Maugham's 20th century novel exist, I've seen at least one other adaptation. It's a gloomy tale with mainly irritating characters, but it has survived at least three film adaptations.

Following the first bend in this "river": the book and film's title came from a sonnet by Percy Bysshe Shelley (1792-1822).

Lift not the painted veil which those who live
Call Life: though unreal shapes be pictured there,
And it but mimic all we would believe
With colours idly spread,--behind, lurk Fear
And Hope, twin Destinies; who ever weave
Their shadows, o'er the chasm, sightless and drear.
I knew one who had lifted it--he sought,
For his lost heart was tender, things to love,
But found them not, alas! nor was there aught
The world contains, the which he could approve.
Through the unheeding many he did move,
A splendour among shadows, a bright blot
Upon this gloomy scene, a Spirit that strove
For truth, and like the Preacher found it not.

The sonnet can be read in various ways, a comment at a website presenting the sonnet offered this:

Life is an illusion, and most are clueless people who play along with the backdrop provided. Shelley is playing the role of a wise man giving us the famous warning: innocence and even ignorance may be the best path to stick with, since to be wise is to suffer.

The famous “painted veil” which reveals life in line 1 can be a metaphor for many things: love (as described in line 8), death, or even truth (as described in the final line).

The sonnet was published by Mrs. Shelley in Posthumous Poems, 1824.

Searching further - this "river's" source still lies ahead. Some of the lines from Shelley's sonnet also appeared in his 1820 play "Prometheus Unbound". These words are part of a speech by Spirit of the Hour, Act 3, Scene4.

The painted veil, by those who were, called life,
Which mimicked, as with colors idly spread,
All men believed and hoped, is torn aside;
The loathsome mask has fallen, the man remains
Sceptreless, free, uncircumscribed, but man
Equal, unclassed, tribeless, and nationless,
Exempt from awe, worship, degree, the king
Over himself; just, gentle, wise; but man
Passionless--no, yet free from guilt or pain,
Which were, for his will made or suffered them;
Nor yet exempt, though ruling them like slaves,
From chance, and death, and mutability,
The clogs of that which else might oversoar
The loftiest star of unascended heaven,
Pinnacled dim in the intense inane.

Prometheus Unbound is a four-act lyrical drama by Percy Bysshe Shelley, first published in 1820. It is concerned with the torments of the Greek mythological figure Prometheus, who defies the gods and gives fire to humanity, for which he is subjected to eternal punishment and suffering at the hands of Zeus. It is inspired by the classical Prometheia, a trilogy of plays attributed to Aeschylus. Shelley's play concerns Prometheus' release from captivity, but unlike Aeschylus' version, there is no reconciliation between Prometheus and Jupiter (Zeus). Instead, Jupiter is abandoned by his supportive elements and falls from power, which allows Prometheus to be released.

So then, the river's original source is Aeschylus.

Aeschylus, (born 525/524 BC — died 456/455 BC, Gela, Sicily) the first of classical Athens’ great dramatists, who raised the emerging art of tragedy to great heights of poetry and theatrical power.

This river flows all the way from ancient Greece to the 21st century, via Aeschylus, Shelley, Maugham, and several 20th and 21st century film-makers. Yep, cool!

Booking It

If I'd read of this before it must have slipped out of memory! Ben-Hur (2016 film)

Wiki:

Ben-Hur is an upcoming 2016 American historical epic action film directed by Timur Bekmambetov and written by Keith Clarke and John Ridley. It is based on the 1880 novel Ben-Hur: A Tale of the Christ by Lew Wallace and has been termed a "re-adaptation", "reimagining" and "new interpretation" of the novel....The film stars Jack Huston, Morgan Freeman, Toby Kebbell, Nazanin Boniadi and Rodrigo Santoro.... The film is scheduled to be released on August 19, 2016 in North America in 2D, 3D, RealD 3D and Digital 3D.

Coincidentally, I'm currently in the middle of reading the 19th cenury novel Ben Hur, by Lew Wallace. I bought the book, an old library copy, at a book sale some weeks ago. I'm finding it, quite amazingly, a good read! It probably helps that I know the 1959 movie Ben Hur back to front and every which-way, it has long been my all time favourite movie. Ask me why and I don't know, because I'm not religious.

It's pleasurable to find the plethora of extra detail Lew Wallace included in his novel, most inevitably cut out from the film, due to time consideration. One difference in book and film I've come across are the ages of Judah Ben Hur and Esther. Esther is just 16 when he first meets her, well after his adventures in the galleys and in Rome. He is just a youth as the story begins, with the accidental fall of a tile - nowhere near as mature as Charlton Heston was depicted in the movie.

Wallace describes many scenes in intricate detail, his style reminds me, a bit, of Victor Hugo's in Les Miserables, and Frank Herbert's in Dune.

There's one location Wallace described in detail, The Grove of Daphne, which propelled me to Google to discover whether it was a figment of Wallace's imagination; it was not. The Grove wasn't mentioned in the 1959 movie, nor, I understand in the older 1925 version. Judah Ben Hur seeks out the Grove during a visit to Antioch (Syria), after his time in Rome. It is variously described in websites around the net, dedicated to Daphne a nymph changed into a laurel tree to escape the amorous advances of Apollo.

Here's one description

DAPHNE: A suburb of Antioch on the Orontes, according to Strabo and the Jerusalem itinerary, about 40 furlongs, or 5 miles distant. It is identified with Beit el-Ma' on the left bank of the river, to the Southwest of the city. Here were the famous grove and sanctuary of Apollo. The grove and shrine owed their origin to Seleucus Nicator. It was a place of great natural beauty, and the Seleucid kings spared no outlay in adding to its attractions. The precincts enjoyed the right of asylum. Hither fled Onias the high priest (171 B.C.) from the wrath of Menelaus whom he had offended by plain speech. To the disgust and indignation of Jew and Gentile alike, he was lured from the sanctuary by Andronicus and basely put to death (2 Maccabees 4:33-38). It sheltered fugitives dyed with villainy of every shade. It was the great pleasure resort of the citizens of Antioch; and it gained an evil repute for immorality, as witnessed by the proverbial Daphnici mores. In Tiberim defluxit Orontes, says Juvenal (iii.62), indicating one main source of the corruption that demoralized the imperial city. The decline of Daphne dates from the days of Christian ascendancy in the reign of Julian. The place is still musical with fountains and luxuriant with wild vegetation; but nothing now remains to suggest its former splendor .

From Lewis's descriptions I got the impression of a huge area of both cultivated and natural beauty, with fountains, statues, glades, etc, mystics, seers, and lots of erotic or sexy stuff going on; an ancient version of 1960's hippiedom, Summer of Love an' all that, but with a tad more erm...classical class.

Anyway, on I go, slowly relishing these old scenes. Next will come the horses and chariots, the excitement of the race with Messala, and hoped for vengance.

Awaiting the new movie version of Ben Hur, I'm not optimistic that it will improve on the 1959 version - in spirit - but it might correct one or two mis-representations and omissions I guess, or perhaps it'll just make a few more!