Snarkiness Abounds

No Rock 'n' Roll Fun link to this article in something called the Riverfront Times.

The article is a list of ten people who've done their bit to make Rock that much less than what it could be. I did try to avoid linking to this as it's a list -- that laziest of magazine articles, Q Magazine seems to be almost entirely made up of them nowadays. What's more it's a list of opinions by someone I've never heard of, let alone read, before, so I don't quite know what his angle is. Added in to that is the fact that, being an American list, I'm not as familiar with some of the people in the list as the article seems to assume.

However this is all redeemed by one small thing. The title:

The Ten Most Hated Men in Rock (Besides Sting)

Wishing the Days Away

Via Ron Gilbert's Grumpy Gamer site I found this page: Jay is .... It's a weblog devoted mostly to finding online flash and shockwave games (and some written in DHTML and javascript, check out Lemmings in the "Classics" section, but only when you've got a lot of free time on your hands). There's some really great stuff here. In the recommended section on the site Chasm and Samarost, in particular, are well worth playing right to the end.

Just Because It's A Tautology Doesn't Make It Wrong

For quite some time I've checking out The Top 10 Conservative Idiots on the Democratic Underground. I've not mentioned it before because it's American and politics, two things that far too many other blogs cover. I'm pointing it out now because this week's is spectacularly vicious and spot on and mostly for this entry:

Karl Rove
Karl "Bush's Brain" Rove made some bizarre pre-Convention comments on the subject of terrorism, demonstrating that he has absolutely no concept of the conflict in Northern Ireland whatsoever. "This is going to be more like the conflict in Northern Ireland," he said, "where the Brits fought terrorism, and there's no sort of peace accord with al-Qaida saying, 'We surrender.'" Hmm. Is it just me, or did Karl Rove just compare the Irish to al-Qaida?

It manages to sum up so much in so little.

Dunciad

Bryan-Mitchell Young over at Popular Culture Gaming links to an article in Gamespot (of all places) called Redefining Games: How Academia is Reshaping Games of the Future. It's about studying games design, not actually games design itself but the study of how games are designed, specifically computer games. They even have a word for it: Ludology.

This seems like one of those great areas of research, you get to play games, or watch people play games, and then talk about it afterwards. It's more rigourous than that, though being a study in it's infancy it seems you can get away with quite a lot of stating the obvious. For instance, I can't find it at the moment, but, somewhere on the Game Studies site I think, there's an article that points out the world Lara Croft inhabits is designed specifically for her alone and that the objects in that world are bound by the games rules to be certain sizes and certain distances apart. As an insight I find this logical, deep and yet trivial. It's something you know, but never think to articulate. Once you do, though, you do tend to notice it in games. Return to Castle Wolfenstein tries hard to look like a place that could be real, but, even ignoring the placing of switches, barrels, extra ammo, etc, the spaces within it are designed to provide balanced gameplay. As real world architectural spaces they probably don't work or if they do it is a secondary consideration to the primary one of providing just enough cover.

I hope Ludology progresses to become a more recognised and respected discipline as I think it can be capable of providing some interesting ways of looking at how and why we play computer games. The Gamespot piece is a better introduction to this than I have space for, but manages to have one of its interviewees shoot himself in the foot.

Still, Frasca, all practical notions aside, agrees on the importance of developing more game research departments, such as Stanford's and Georgia Tech's, in other universities. "Many gamers may think that university professors studying games should get a life, but I have a challenge for these players: Wouldn't it have been much nicer if you spent hours in college discussing Zelda rather than a boringly long story about ancient Greeks? Would it be great to spend hours in school dealing with an art form that truly speaks to you, such as games, and less about paintings or sculptures that are hundreds of years old?" Frasca considers the importance of studying the classics but asserts that today, "Will Wright and Miyamoto have more cultural influence than Shakespeare and Homer, because they are alive and well, and because they speak to us."

Let's look at Frasca's first question: "Wouldn't it have been much nicer if you spent hours in college discussing Zelda rather than a boringly long story about ancient Greeks?" Skipping lightly past the loaded "boringly long", I'd still have to answer "no". Or, at least, "Nicer, perhaps. More interesting or useful? Definitely not." The Illiad is a story that's lasted for centuries and has recently been made into a movie. It may be long and it certainly has its boring parts (the endless lists of the leaders and their men and how many ships they brought isn't exactly riveting) but it still has things to say about rage and pride and ideas about manliness and all that sort of thing that means it is still relevant today (along with being satisfyingly bloody in the non-listy parts). Zelda, I don't know about because I had a PC, a Playstation and then an X-box, plus, as far as I can tell, not having the right hardware to test it, Zelda seems to be an incredibly cute role-playing game. Two things that would put me off even trying it.

What Zelda has to say about the great themes of mankind, I'm not sure, but the walkthrough for The Legend of Zelda includes such stirring quests as "Get the Wooden Sword" "Purchase the Blue Candle" and "Buy Bait".

Then there's Keats who had this to say about Chapman's translation of Homer:

On First Looking into Chapman's Homer:

Much have I travel'd in the realms of gold,
And many goodly states and kingdoms seen;
Round many western islands have I been
Which bards in fealty to Apollo hold.
Oft of one wide expanse had I been told
That deep-brow'd Homer ruled as his demesne:
Yet did I never breathe its pure serene
Till I heard Chapman speak out loud and bold:
-- Then felt I like some watcher of the skies
When a new planet swims into his ken;
Or like stout Cortez when with eagle eyes
He stared at the Pacific -- and all his men
Look'd at each other with a wild surmise --
Silent, upon a peak in Darien.

There is poetry about Zelda on the Internet but, as yet, I've not been brave enough to read it.

Frasca goes on to say "Will Wright and Miyamoto have more cultural influence than Shakespeare and Homer, because they are alive and well, and because they speak to us." He also complains later that people have trouble taking games studies seriously. To quote Mal Reynolds: "My days of not taking you seriously are certainly coming to a middle". According to About Bernard Levin has this to say about Shakespeare's influence on language (not theatre or storytelling or plots just the language):

If you cannot understand my argument, and declare "It's Greek to me", you are quoting Shakespeare; if you claim to be more sinned against than sinning, you are quoting Shakespeare; if you recall your salad days, you are quoting Shakespeare; if you act more in sorrow than in anger, if your wish is father to the thought, if your lost property has vanished into thin air, you are quoting Shakespeare; if you have ever refused to budge an inch or suffered from green-eyed jealousy, if you have played fast and loose, if you have been tongue-tied, a tower of strength, hoodwinked or in a pickle, if you have knitted your brows, made a virtue of necessity, insisted on fair play, slept not one wink, stood on ceremony, danced attendance (on your lord and master), laughed yourself into stitches, had short shrift, cold comfort or too much of a good thing, if you have seen better days or lived in a fool's paradise - why, be that as it may, the more fool you, for it is a foregone conclusion that you are (as good luck would have it) quoting Shakespeare; if you think it is early days and clear out bag and baggage, if you think it is high time and that that is the long and short of it, if you believe that the game is up and that truth will out even if it involves your own flesh and blood, if you lie low till the crack of doom because you suspect foul play, if you have your teeth set on edge (at one fell swoop) without rhyme or reason, then - to give the devil his due - if the truth were known (for surely you have a tongue in your head) you are quoting Shakespeare; even if you bid me good riddance and send me packing, if you wish I were dead as a door-nail, if you think I am an eyesore, a laughing stock, the devil incarnate, a stony-hearted villain, bloody-minded or a blinking idiot, then - by Jove! O Lord! Tut, tut! for goodness' sake! what the dickens! but me no buts - it is all one to me, for you are quoting Shakespeare. (Bernard Levin. From The Story of English. Robert McCrum, William Cran and Robert MacNeil. Viking: 1986).

But, I guess, on the face of it Wil's still alive and putting out expansion packs for The Sims so I guess he's having more influence.

I'll Be Guilty The Rest Of My Life

Over at the London News Review there's an article in their music blog called "There are no Guilty Pleasures". It's a reaction, in part, to a sudden surge of nostalgia for a lot of naff records that, mysteriously, we all know the words to. Anyway, Alan at ACME makes most of the good points about this, so there's no need to rehash it.

Just one more thing, though. In the ACME piece there is a link to an article in the Times by a bloke called Bob Stanley, it's called "...So stop faking it" and seems to be saying that, far from being guilty pleasures, this is the music we really like. There is something in this, not much, but something. The article, however, is more infuriating than insightful, especially when it comes to "[people] claim Tom Waits [is] some kind of genius on the vine rather than a lousy fake drunk who would embarrass Dean Martin." At which point you realise what the problem with the article is. The problem is Bob doesn't know what the fuck it is he's talking about.

Tricks of the Trade

The Morning News has an article about the "secrets" of various professions. Some of it is generally, and genuinely, useful:

Graphic Designer

If you have a client who is unable to approve a proposed design without putting her stamp on it, just put an obvious error in the proposal: a logo that’s too large, a font that’s too small, or a few judiciously seeded typos. The client requests the change and feels she’s done her part—and your design, which was perfect all along, sails through to approval.

Some folks over at Metafilter have decided to try and add some of their own (and argue the merits of "Handyman" over "Mechanic"). Again there is some enlightening stuff here:

Waiter: Kneel down at the table when saying "hi" to be at eye level with the patrons; this makes them feel like you care. Stand back up when taking their order; this makes them feel like you're professional. Bring candy with the check. If the pay with a credit card, use their name, as in "Here's your check, Mr. Idiot." Make physical contact, like quick taps to the arm or pats of the shoulder. For instance, if they point to the menu as they order (many mouth-breathers will do this) place your hand on their shoulder and lean your cheek towards theirs so you can look at their menu and see what their pointing at, as if it wasn't a job requirement to have every word memorized. Smile. Alot. Laugh at their stupid fucking jokes. Don't stack dishes up your arm like you work at a diner: use a tray. Always tell someone who agonizes over the wine list that he made an excellent choice; especially if he's on a date.

Anybody who orders white zin will not tip; chalk this table up as a loss and spend your time with the tables likely to pay you. If someone asks you for a wine recomendation, the formula is age = price of bottle. You will kill yourself for the first few days trying to keep track of people's kids in an attempt to make the parents happy so they give you a good tip. Anybody who brings their kids to the resturaunt is too cheap for a babysitter and therefore certainly too cheap to tip well. They will give you a line like "sorry my stupid brat is such a stupid fucking brat, but its so hard to find a good babysitter." This is bullshit. Some people will drink lots of water as a way to punish you, because they are passive agressive assholes. Leave the pitcher on their table, as an act of passive aggressive defiance. Memorize the specials. People eat that up, for some reason. You will ring 5-10% more just by memorizing the specials; its unbelievable. Make a recomendation and a non-recomendation: "The duck is good, but I wouldn't serve the seviche to my dog." This makes people think you care.

Anybody tipping less than 15% clearly needs the money more than you do; the kind thing to do is to tell them so and give them their "tip" back. Not only is this charitable, but it sets an example for your other tables. As the waiter, you are the ringmaster, the cattle herder. Its important to keep the flock in line.

Now I'm pretty sure the dining experience differs from country to country, but, if these are the secrets of American waiters, eating out in the US must be particularly shitty. The first paragraph is, essentially, how to be a phony mate, the second is about justifying how much of an arsehole you can be and the third makes it clear that it's all about the money. So, to recap, to be a waiter in the US you must be a fake, money-grabbing wanker. Great.

I'm not going to have a go at all of this, but here's a look at some of the things that are just plain wrong:

Possibly it's my Englishness, but if a waiter started patting me or putting their hand on my shoulder I'd be tempted to stab him through the eye with the no doubt stale breadstick he'd just brought to the table to show that he was willing to go that extra metre.

"If the pay with a credit card, use their name, as in "Here's your check, Mr. Idiot."" May after the third or fourth time you be to a place this would be OK, but showing off your ability to read -- well you've had to memorise the specials, so there is some doubt about this -- and mispronounce names isn't going to get anybody any repeat business.

"Laugh at their stupid fucking jokes." The chances I'd be telling you a joke are pretty low, I've not come to the restaurant to entertain you. If you overhear one of my jokes then you're obviously evesdropping and not working, and I don't give a flying fuck if you laugh or not.

"As the waiter, you are the ringmaster, the cattle herder. Its important to keep the flock in line." As a customer I'm happy if the waiter shows me my table, takes my order and brings my food. The night is about me and my companions, not about the inferiority complex of the person serving us. I really couldn't care less what your issues are. As the waiter if you believe you are the ringmaster you are sorely mistaken, those bad tips you're getting should surely tell you that.

Free Games

I've forgotten where I got this link from now. But, as a compact list of freeware (and some shareware, I think) it's pretty hard to beat as it seems to have all the good stuff and very little of the bad.

There's a fair range of game-play on show too. From text adventures to first-person shooters.

Casting Awry

A fun little article from the Guardian about movies that were nearly so very different. Some (most?) of these stories you've probably heard before, and Mark King (surely not the old Bass Slapper) doesn't add a great deal to them. Linked to almost entirely for this bit:

[Stuart] Townsend [recently fired as Aragorn] told the Irish Times: "I'm glad because it left me free to do another big studio movie, Queen of the Damned, which was wonderful to do."

It also left him free to do the League of Extraordinary Gentlemen, too.

Small personal note: Sorry about the brief posting hiatus, but I've been sick. Just a head cold, really, but I had to spend three days in bed.

Maths "Expert" + Slow News Day = WTF?

Expert calls for optional maths

"Maths is jolly important for some people but it's a minority," he told BBC News Online.

"We pretend it's very important for everyone, but it's not. It's a very technological world and the average person is not going to need it.

"They need to know how to add up, but they won't need quadratic equations in the rest of their life.

"On the whole children don't see maths as relevant and many have learned all the maths they need by the age of 11."

Ignoring for the moment the use of "jolly"...

What is this person? A bored 12 year old? "Siiiir... If I'm never going to use maths outside of school why should I learn?"

Surely the point of maths beyond any vocational use (and school should never be purely about that) is to teach abstract logical thinking. There's no other subject that teaches it. Even science is practical rather than theoretical (as it should be at that stage).

Maths, in essence, gives a student a set of tools with which they can solve a range of problems. Those problems involve the selection of the correct tool and its correct use. On a superficial level people almost never do use quadratic equations in real life, but the skills learnt in solving them are used all the time, especially as, as this expert points out, we are living in a technological world. Saying maths is just about giving students the ability to add up is simply appalling.

Pasta Joke

Those wacky Italian-Americans are at it again:

To millions of moviegoers around the world, Robert De Niro is the epitome of the Italian man.
But the tough guy image and parts in blockbusters such as The Godfather II have not endeared him to some Americans of Italian descent.

Yesterday, it emerged that an influential Italian-American organisation had appealed to Silvio Berlusconi, asking the prime minister to cancel Italy's plan to award De Niro honorary citizenship.

I'm assuming that it still holds true that Americans don't do irony, so this bunch asking a gangster to not honour someone for making gangsters look good is serious.

"He has done nothing to promote Italian culture in the United States. Instead, the Osia [Order of the Sons of Italy in America -- really] and its members hold him and his movies responsible for considerably damaging the collective reputations of both Italians and Italian-Americans," the group said.

If that reputation is for being over-sensitive whiners then that's probably a good thing.

Let's face it gangsters are interesting. They are people outside the law who live by their own rules, at least that's the romantic notion of them, in real life I would expect organised crime to be vile and code-of-honour free.

The romantic view, though, is fascinating because it allows film-makers to explore all facets of human experience while still being able to present the protagonist as, in some way, principled.

Italians aren't the only community with gangsters and even De Niro played a Jewish gangster (albeit called Noodles), it just happened that they were high-profile enough (inept?), with characters like Al Capone and Lucky Luciano, that they became part of the public consciousness. It's not Bob's fault that people think of gangsters as Italian, it's the Italian gangsters.

So, while the association is unfortunate (and I wonder how many of Osia have tried to benefit from the connection in some way or other¹) it also happens to have helped make some great art, along with quite a lot of execrable stuff too, so why not celebrate that?

[1] You know conversations like "The Sopranos? Terrible program, completely unbelievable... But, confidentially, that bar over there... Full of made guys. True. Vinnie the Hat's in there all the time."