Scar in the Lion King

Obviously, Scar is a cartoon villain. But, riddle me this: what was his name before he got the scar that became his namesake?

The read I’m getting is that Scar challenged Mufasa, and he got the scar for his pains. But, isn’t it kind of a jerk move for the community to call him Scar when he presumably had another name?

And, while we are on the topic, can Disney imagine some other form of government beyond monarchy and tyranny, one that doesn’t involve all the scraping and bowing? Between animation and Superheroes, it’s nothing but authoritarian fascism for Disney. It’s almost like these guys want you to think feudalism is the normal state of affairs and where all utopias should be placed temporally.

Is Now a Good Time to Trip on Psychedelics?

Vice.com asking the important questions. My initial reaction was, “Of course not.” And, “No,” appears to be the ultimate conclusion of the article. But, perhaps a more interesting question than it seems at first.

“It’s sometimes said that a proper trip takes three days: one to prep (especially if you follow more severe protocols around fasting beforehand), one for the trip itself, and one to come down and re-acclimatize to the rigours of reality, which are themselves these days all totally out of whack. Using the time alone to experiment with psychedelics and explore your own interiority seems like a handy idea during this bizarre period of consensual social lockdown…

…Hubbard’s insight was that cultivating comfortable environments would result in drastic, and ideally positive, shifts in the psychedelic experience itself.

The idea was codified in 1964’s The Psychedelic Experience: A Manual Based on the Tibetan Book of the Dead, co-authored by Leary, Ralph Metzner, and Richard Alpert. ‘The nature of the experience depends almost entirely on set and setting,’ they write, straight off the top. ‘Set denotes the preparation of the individual, including his personality structure and his mood at the time. Setting is physical—the weather, the room’s atmosphere; social—feelings of persons present towards one another; and cultural—prevailing views as to what is real.'”

-John Semley, “You’re Socially Isolating. Is Now a Good Time to Trip on Psychedelics?” Vice.com. March 26, 2020.

See also: Who the Fuck is SWIM?

TEOTWAWKI

living in the doom, catastrophe 
paranoia of the psychoentirety, 
a trash fire, landscape lighting 
florescent, sick room architectures 
broadcasting dead news to unwitting 
recipients, dream/nightmare remnants, 
black anxiegenic chemistries awaiting, 
reagents and catalysts, parlor 
epidemiologists and physicians, 
a confederacy of a billion clowns, 
narcissists, fascists and a mule 
turning paranoia into public policy 

mystics of the stream, waterflesh 
bubbling personal microculture, 
the best swims between the net, 
fishing, the pitiless puta, thrusts 
his smooth skinned erection towards 
the wild, the permaweird, memory-wired, 
on the float, uplifting imaginary vortex, 
against a loser's catalog: black jerseys, 
bum guns, and jack boots - stomping 
an exogenous shock, giving birth to a thin, 
grim newness, destined for the trash of civilizations 

Quarantine Double Feature: Judy followed by Judy Garland Live at Carnegie Hall (1961)

Judy, available on Amazon Prime for $2.99, followed by Judy Garland Live at Carnegie Hall (1961). The movie is an outstanding performance by Renée Zellweger that really helps in understanding why Judy Garland was such a beloved figure. Then, listening to her Judy Garland live in one of the greatest live albums ever recorded? Well, it’s not a bad way to spend a few hours.

.

Don’t Panic: The Comprehensive Ars Technica Guide to the Coronavirus

“This new coronavirus—dubbed SARS-CoV-2—is unquestionably dangerous. It causes a disease called COVID-19, which can be deadly, particularly for older people and those with underlying health conditions. While the death rate among infected people is unclear, even some current low estimates are seven-fold higher than the estimate for seasonal influenza.

And SARS-CoV-2 is here in the US, and it’s circulating—we are only starting to determine where it is and how far it has spread. Problems with federal testing have delayed our ability to detect infections in travelers. And as we work to catch up, the virus has kept moving. It now appears to be spreading in several communities across the country. It’s unclear if we will be able to get ahead of it and contain it; even if we can, it will take a lot of resources and effort to do it.”

—Beth Mole, “Don’t Panic: The comprehensive Ars Technica guide to the coronavirus.” Ars Technica. March 11, 2020.

Beth Mole’s science writing is on point. But, let’s not lie to ourselves. This idea that the United States is going to contain this pandemic is nothing short of fantasy. By May, there will be hospital crises across the country, and it will likely resurge in October after a summer lull. Best to accept this as fact.

Three Years Without Facebook, Most Social Media

Occasionally, I’ll see an article where someone talks about giving up social media or a specific service – such as Facebook – for a week, a month, 99 days, a year, or even that it isn’t possible for most people. The last may be true. If someone relies on weak ties to get through difficult times in their lives, they probably need to maintain those ties in an efficient way, such as by using Facebook.

For example, if you need to call Uncle Joe to come and pick you up when your car breaks down, Uncle Joe uses Facebook and you don’t see him much, then you probably need to be on Facebook. That’s your reality.

Another reality is that giving up Facebook is that you’ll lose friends. I tend to have a very small social circle. I have a couple of friends, and I invest a lot in those relationships. However, one of my friends lives far away, and we had moved to communicating primarily through Facebook. When I deleted most of my social media accounts back in 2017, the friendship slowly faded after.

So, there’s a price to be paid. You aren’t as connected, and it means some of your relationships will atrophy as a result.

I still maintain a few social media accounts. But, I’ve moved to a model where I do not post anything to social media and I don’t use it. I don’t browse. I don’t post. I don’t comment. On a very rare occasion, I might react or like something. But, I mostly use it so that if there’s a link to, say, Twitter in an email newsletter, I use a Twitter account using a free software app to view it on my phone. There’s no point being a zealot about it.

But, on the other end, I’ll never go back to being a regular user of a service like Facebook, which I don’t use in any form. It’s poisonous and manipulative. I miss my friend, but the cost of maintaining that relationship, and others, through Facebook was simply too high.

Looking at it after three years, I’d recommend leaving it, if you can. At the very least, try a sabbatical, so you can get a feel for what using the service is costing you in terms of your emotional well-being. Uncle Joe will still be there, if you decide log back on after a month off.

Champagne Wishes and Caviar Dreams

“I always want to say to people who want to be rich and famous: ‘try being rich first.’ See if that doesn’t cover most of it. There’s not much downside to being rich, other than paying taxes and having your relatives ask you for money. But when you become famous, you end up with a 24-hour job…”

-Bill Murray quoted in Tim Ferris, “11 Reasons Not to Become Famous (or “A Few Lessons Learned Since 2007”)“. tim.blog. February 2, 2020.

Lest you think suddenly becoming rich is going to “cover most of it”, try reading this Reddit chestnut, “You just won a 656 Million Dollar Lottery. What do you do now?” Still want to be rich?

The same applies to power. People tend to be preoccupied with attaining fame, riches or power. All of them are soul destroying if you achieve them in any significant measure.

Voting Isn’t Going to Solve Your Problems

“Every time you stay home, someone is making a decision about you, making decisions about the air you breathe, the water you drink, the food your kids eat, and how much money you bring home every two weeks. So, every time you sit out an election, every time you don’t show up because you think it doesn’t matter, someone else is happy you didn’t show up, so they can make that decision for you. Vote.”

-At the end of the video above.

Voting has a place. But, it’s a small one. There’s some measure of decision-making that goes into selecting a Representative, a Senator, or a President. But, let’s not pretend that selecting an elected official is the same as making decisions yourself. It isn’t.

Also, let’s not pretend the field isn’t rigged. Candidates are bad, representing a very narrow band of choice. Districts are gerrymandered. Election campaigns run on money, which mean moneyed interests have more say in who gets elected, more so than casting a ballot at the polls.

By all means, get out and vote. But, don’t expect voting to change much. If you want to change the world, you have to be out in it. Voting needs to go hand in hand with direct action, where you are directly making decisions that impact the world rather than selecting someone else to represent your interests.

Don’t Like, Don’t Read

“The onus was on the reader, not the author, to protect themselves with the information given. Basically, AO3 took the early fandom nugget ‘Don’t like, don’t read’ and made it policy.”

rapacityinblue, in “This Discussion.” (I’m not going to try to get my mind around how a Tumblr discussion should be cited.)

I found this discussion about Archive of Own Own (AO3) fascinating, and it made something clear(er) to me that I have not understood for a long time: trigger warnings.

When I read an article that includes trigger warnings, it is normally from a mainstream source that has largely been sanitized of content that would trigger me. So, they seem unnecessary.

I’ve never spent any appreciable time on A03, but it is clear that the content in the A03 archive has not been sanitized. And if you are browsing something where you truly don’t know what you are going to get and it is possible that it may not be what you want, it should be tagged in such a way where you can make a rough determination of whether it is something you want to get into before you start to read. If there’s a good chance you aren’t going to like it, you can tell in advance and not read it. The responsibility lies with the reader.

I spend most of my time reading sources that do not have any, or much, “triggering” content (at least for me). In that environment, I do not need a trigger warning. I am free to read everything.

I was trying to think of another example in a different media, and there are definitely films I can think of that would benefit from this kind of tagging. For example, I suggested that my wife and I watch Oldboy when it came out in the theaters. We knew nothing about it going in, and to this day, my wife won’t watch South Korean movies. It’s a movie that can “trigger” a lot of people. Others that come to mind would be Requiem for a Dream and Se7en, and a case could be made for films like The Silence of the Lambs, Reservior Dogs, and others. What would it be like to watch Superstar: The Karen Carpenter Story if you had a history of anorexia nervosa? What seems benign to me certainly may not be benign to another.

And it made me realize that most of our environments have been sanitized. We do have systems to tag content, such as when a movie is labelled “R”, Restricted. But, it is interesting that these labels are based on maturity and age. And while there are designations like “graphic violence” or “strong language” that are used in conjunction with the rating, there’s a world of difference between the “graphic violence” in Oldboy than most other films that get made. But, we don’t need a better system of tags because challenging films like Oldboy, largely don’t get made.

So, the next time someone with a conservative outlook talks about “snowflakes” being “triggered”, perhaps it would be a good time to suggest they try a double feature of Oldboy and Requiem for a Dream and see if they think these films should having something more extensive than an R rating for “for strong violence including scenes of torture, sexuality and pervasive language” or “intense depiction of drug addiction, graphic sexuality, strong language and some violence”, respectively.

See also: The reaction to Isabel Fall’s short story, “I Sexually Identify as an Attack Helicopter.”