Donald Pittenger writes:

Dear Blowhards --

If possible, I write about artists whose work I've seen in person rather than in reproduction. That doesn't apply for George Washington Thomas Lambert (1873-1930), born in St. Petersburg of an American father and English mother, raised in Australia, studied art in Paris, spent much of his career (1902-21) in London and finally returned to Australia. One reason why I haven't knowingly seen his paintings is because much of his work is in Australia.

I fact, I'd never heard of him until I bought this book, the catalog for a show at the National Gallery of Australia.

Wikipedia, a source I usually use to link for biographical information is sketchy on Lambert, as you can see here. There is a book about him and his son and grandson who attained notoriety in other fields (see links towards the bottom of the Wikipedia entry for more information about them). For now, this link will have to do.

Here are examples of his work.

Gallery

Self-Portrait - 1907

The Red Shawl (Olave Cunningham Graham) - 1913

The White Glove - 1921

Helen de Vere Beauclerk

King Edward VII - 1910

Newcastle

Sybil Walker in a Red and Gold Dress - 1905

Important People - 1914

Miss Alison Preston and John Parker on Mearbeck Moor - 1909

The Sonnet - c.1907

A few thoughts, keeping in mind that this is based on seeing reproductions and not originals.

Given that most of the paintings shown above were done around a century ago, I find it interesting that they tend to be quirky from a psychological standpoint. They are almost the respectful society portraits and allegorical scenes one would expect of Edwardian era -- but not quite. Nor are they "edgy" in the 21st century postmodern sense -- yet there's a hint of it in some of the poses and settings.

Lambert's style is crisp, but not fussy. For what it's worth, I'm not normally much fond of "hard edge" realism. But his work doesn't fall into that category; rather, it's "painterly" -- one can see the brush strokes, particularly in the backgrounds.

A rule of thumb many painters follow is to slightly blur and strip details from most of a painting's surface, leaving sharper edges and details for a focus point. This is similar to how we see things; a small area is in sharp focus and the rest isn't quite. But note that Lambert reverses this formula in a couple of the works displayed here. Sybil Walker's face and the face of the woman to the right in The Sonnet (probably Australian painter Thea Proctor) seem smoother and perhaps a little more blurred than the rest of the surface. This contrast of sorts would be a reverse-means of focusing attention.

Later,

Donald

at January 5, 2009 | perma-link | (1) comments

Michael Blowhard writes:

Dear Blowhards --

* Libertarian Thomas DiLorenzo ranks John Tyler as the greatest of American presidents, and Abe Lincoln dead last.

* Texas Secession thinks that the U.S. is on the verge of falling apart.

* Doug Bandow wonders if the U.S. wouldn't benefit from a little "disuniting."

* Should Sean ("Milk") Penn apologize to gays for his political views?

* Jim Kalb offers some thoughts about the future of conservatism.

* Lester Hunt argues that, strictly speaking, Social Security doesn't qualify as a Ponzi scheme.

* Peter Canellos thinks (as I do) that the 1965 Immigration Act has been a major -- and much under-recognized -- shaper of our country.

* Re-read this whenever you find yourself becoming overly impressed by intellectuals and artists.

* Here's an unexpected one: a Jewish case against gay marriage.

* Thanks to The Rawness for turning up this great Thomas Sowell piece about educating minority and poor kids.

* James Grant asks why we have economic policies that punish savers.

* Dave Barry reviews 2008 in politics. (Link thanks to Charlton Griffin.) Funny line:

Obama, following through on his promise to bring change to Washington, quickly begins assembling an administration consisting of a diverse group of renegade outsiders, ranging all the way from lawyers who attended Ivy League schools and then worked in the Clinton administration to lawyers who attended entirely different Ivy league schools and then worked in the Clinton administration.

Shhh. Calm down. It's OK for Dave Barry to crack that joke precisely because he himself didn't go to an Ivy League college. Of course, had he attended Harvard instead of Haverford, Dave Barry would never have dared to crack such joke, and (needless to say) we'd never have dared to pass it along.

Best,

Michael

UPDATE: Michael Lewis and David Einhorn assess the madness. It's a terrific piece that makes matters vivid and clear in plain English, and that (to my eyes and mind anyway) doesn't collapse into partisan-politics bickering. One nice passage among many:

Rather than tackle the source of the problem, the people running the bailout desperately want to reinflate the credit bubble, prop up the stock market and head off a recession. Their efforts are clearly failing: 2008 was a historically bad year for the stock market, and we’ll be in recession for some time to come. Our leaders have framed the problem as a “crisis of confidence” but what they actually seem to mean is “please pay no attention to the problems we are failing to address.”

at January 3, 2009 | perma-link | (19) comments

Donald Pittenger writes:

Dear Blowhards --

Browsing today's (2 January 2009) Wall Street Journal, I encountered an article titled "How the Lowly Text Message May Save Languages That Could Otherwise Fade" by William Bulkeley. Its link is here. Since I don't know how long the link will hold, below are key quotes from the piece.

Can a language stay relevant if it isn't used to send text messages on a cellphone?

Language advocates worry that the answer is no, and they are pushing to make more written languages available on cellphones. ...

But companies that develop predictive text say they have created cellphone software for fewer than 80 of the world's 6,912 languages cataloged by SIL International, a Dallas organization that works to preserve languages. ...

"The idea of having your cultural identity represented in this technology is increasingly important," says Laura Welcher, director of the Rosetta Project of San Francisco's Long Now Foundation. Ms. Welcher, who says linguists fear half the world's languages will disappear in the near future, thinks at least 200 languages have enough speakers to justify development of cellphone text systems. "Technology empowers the poorest people," she adds. ...

Michael Cahill, linguistics coordinator for SIL International, says, "There are cases where texting is helping to preserve languages" by encouraging young people to write in their native tongue.

Predictive text is a technique that guesses what a word might be after a few letters have been keyed in on a cellphone. I'm not a text-messager in part because of the bother of using eight keys to represent 26 letters. While predictive text no doubt improves composition speed, I find it easier to simply dial through and leave a voicemail message if necessary. (I'll concede that a good use for text messaging is transmission of numbers such as addresses and phone numbers which sometimes can be misunderstood via voice.)

I'm all for the free market, so more power to software and communications companies that spread the use of predictive text to less-spoken tongues.

On the other hand, the business of language preservation as a kind of crusade leaves me cold, as you can read here.

So having predictive text for a minor language is potentially a big deal in its preservation.

And voicemail (by implication) isn't?

Later,

Donald

at January 2, 2009 | perma-link | (5) comments

Michael Blowhard writes:

Dear Blowhards --

I was very sorry to learn that the crime fiction writer Donald Westlake has died. He was 75, and until his sudden heart attack on Wednesday evening had been as busy and active as ever.

FWIW, Westlake was among my very favorite fiction writers ever -- and I do mean ever, as in "of all times." While the novels of his that I've read have ranged from fabulous to pretty-good, each and every one of them had a snazzy hook, a half a dozen fully-inhabited characters, a handful of fun plot twists, loads of satirical observations, and a big and mischievous spirit. Each and every one, in other words, delivered a generous heaping of talent and entertainment. And the man published more than a hundred different books!

Though I generally avoid arguing over greatness and comparing rankings and such, let me say this in anticipation of those who would protest "How can you say that Westlake was one of the greats? Which of his books would you set up against 'Ulysses'?"

• I'm not saying that Westlake was one of the greats in any for-eternity, lit-crit way. I'm saying that as far as I'm concerned he was one of the greats.

• As for the immortality stuff: Well, history will take care of it ... I won't be around to agree or disagree anyway ... And then history may, or may not, change its mind ... So explain to me why exactly I should care?

• I will argue that Westlake was an awe-inspiring talent, that he was fantastically productive, and that he consistenly kept his output at a very high level. If we can't agree on this, then let's change the subject right now.

• The point of comparison here shouldn't be "Ulysses" anyway. No disrespect meant to James Joyce -- but aren't there plenty of reasons to grant a lot of respect to Westlake as well? After all, in the time that it took Joyce to write "Ulysses," Westlake produced dozens of hooks, scads of inspired plot twists, and crowds of lively characters.

• Let's get our terms straight. Westlake wasn't playing the literary set's sacrifice-it-all-for-one-masterpiece game. He was a hyper-gifted working-class writer who entertained everyday readers for a living. No, the point of comparison should be TV series. Can an episode of "The Sopranos" really be said to rival "Rules of the Game"? Obviously not. But perhaps it can be plausibly argued that "The Sopranos" as a series deserves the respect we accord the best movies and novels. My point: It's better to think of Westlake's work not as a rival to "Ulysses" but as something with a long run, something you tune into, something you can count on to deliver a lot -- something like "The Sopranos." Which maybe we can agree is plenty awe-inspiring in its own terms, and in its own right.

• Another good comparison: P.G. Wodehouse. Both of them tremendous entertainers; both creators of huge bodies of high-quality work. Hey, isn't it one of the more pleasing developments of 20th century fiction-writing, the way that Wodehouse has proved to be one of the era's most enduring creators? So much so in fact that critics and even a few profs have taken note. (Not that you'll yet find Wodehouse on many intros-to-lit college reading lists. And why not?) How long will we have to wait 'till the higher-brow set wakes up to what a treasure we had in Westlake?
  

Best,

Michael

at January 2, 2009 | perma-link | (5) comments

Donald Pittenger writes:

Dear Blowhards --

Although I was born at the height of the swing band era, I didn't become familiar with that music until I became a teenager. That's when a Seattle radio station (KJR) began playing a lot of classic cuts.

The Wikipedia entry on swing is here. I don't agree with some of the details, including the list of bandleaders and sidemen. But that might be ignorance on my part; after all, I haven't paid a lot of attention to the history of swing since the days of my early enthusiasm.

That small matter aside, I thought I'd toss out a sample list of swing band leaders for your consideration. I have my favorite, and swing-fan readers surely have theirs. In Comments, feel free to include other bands.

For starters:

• Charlie Barnet

• Count Basie

• Cab Calloway

• Tommy Dorsey

• Duke Ellington

• Benny Goodman

• Glen Gray

• Woody Herman

• Glenn Miller

• Artie Shaw

My favorite?

Benny Goodman, of course.

Later,

Donald

at January 1, 2009 | perma-link | (26) comments

Michael Blowhard writes:

Dear Blowhards --

The New Statesman publishes a ringing and defiant defence of Le Corbusier, in my book one of the most destructive and pernicious artists of all time. The writer, Jonathan Meades, can't resist accusing those who dislike Le Corbusier of being "tectonically blind anti-modernists"; "one wonders whether they had eyes to put out in the first place."

Note the usual modernist strategy at play here: If you dislike what I like, it can only because you don't get it -- because, in other words, you're an idiot. The possibility that a person may "get it" yet dislike it anyway can never entertained; it's a simple item of modernist faith that "getting it" must equal "loving it." And does anyone have any idea what the hell Meades could mean by "tectonically blind"?

An antidote to the madness is this terrific, if too short, P2P interview with architectural theorist Nikos Salingaros about "peer-to-peer urbanism." For a comprehensive interview with Nikos, scroll to the top of this blog's page, click on "Interviews," and help yourself to a mind-blowing five-parter.

Best,

Michael

at December 31, 2008 | perma-link | (13) comments

Michael Blowhard writes:

Dear Blowhards --

* Lard: Food comeback of 2008?

* The Top Ten Food Safety Stories of 2008.

* Food Renegade shows the influence of some of the people I think of as the Good Food Guys: Nina Planck, Michael Pollan, Gary Taubes, Sally Fallon and Mary Enig ...

* People who adhere to a religion seem to develop more self-control.

* Men's Health wants you to eat some fat.

* Health guru Mark Sisson says that cutting back on sugars and taking up walking may be the best way to start getting healthy.

* Napping, the whole story.

Best,

Michael

at December 31, 2008 | perma-link | (3) comments

Donald Pittenger writes:

Dear Blowhards --

It's almost New Year's. Pretty quiet on the Web. Here too. Good time to sneak in a rant.

The subject is science and how it's misunderstood and perverted these days. For example, Instapundit called my attention to this item from a left-leaning British newspaper about celebrities not quite getting it.

And then there's Australian newspaper columnist and blogger Tim Blair who, in this post, tosses off the following jabs:

Of course, for these people -- who’d struggle to explain the workings of a simple internal combustion engine but somehow know how to reorganise the entire planet’s energy supply -- “science” includes everything from feng shui and numerology to the healing power of crystals.

Ignorance of science is something that, in principle, is curable by tweaking the educational system. One needed ingredient is a couple of hours dealing with the philosophy of science at the start of each high school level science course. More specifically, it would be helpful to present the thinking of Karl Popper, who held that science advances by disproving flawed hypotheses and theories, not by attempting to "prove" things.

I happen to agree with Popper, so therefore grind my teeth in anger and frustration when Al Gore and other Global Warming True Believers assert that their beliefs on the subject represent "settled science." Popper would contend that nothing is settled in science; the best that can be done is, by testing a variety of falsifiable hypotheses, reduce to a minimum plausible alternatives to a theory.

By making the "settled science" assertion, the Algore crowd is simply trying to stifle opposition to its political agenda. And any scientists who go along with that claim have become politicized to the point that they have betrayed their scientific calling.

Or so I think.

Commenters please note: Nowhere above did I say that scientists should never speak out on public issues. My concern is about some politicians and scientists who want to stop other politicians and scientists from speaking out on public issues.

Later,

Donald

at December 29, 2008 | perma-link | (26) comments

Donald Pittenger writes:

Dear Blowhards --

This post is intended for practicing or wannabe painters who are at the point where they're thinking deeply about color usage. Other readers are always welcome, of course.

Often mentioned in the same breath with John Singer Sargent are the Spaniard Joaquin Sorolla, who I wrote about here and the Swede Anders Zorn (1860-1920), who I dealt with briefly here. A 12-part Web-based biography of Zorn can be found here.

In brief, Zorn was a highly regarded portrait artist, one of his subjects being President Grover Cleveland. Besides portraits, he painted country scenes and an extensive series of nude Swedish girls who would be far too buxom to land fashion model jobs were they alive today.

Zorn etched and sculpted, but is best known as a painter. He began in watercolors (usually painting opaquely) and later switched to oils.

Note the palette Zorn is holding in this self-portrait. It seems to have only four colors, whereas most artists' palettes have a dozen or more placed around the edges. As best I can tell, those colors are white, yellow ochre, cadmium red light and black. Four colors: that's all -- and this set is often referred to as the Zorn Palette.

According to one source (which, to my shame, I lost because I failed to write it down before I decided to write a post on this subject), Zorn would use other reds and yellows if he wanted to change the tone or mood of a painting from what yellow ochre and cadmium red light offer. Such an alternative might be alizarin crimson and cadmium yellow light.

I haven't yet experimented with a Zorn Palette, but this painter did, and had difficulty.

Even though Zorn himself showed four colors in his self-portrait, he probably used more when the occasion demanded. For example, this article states that a person associated with a Swedish museum devoted to Zorn asserted that Zorn also used cobalt blue because more than 30 tubes of it were found among his possessions after he died. The source further stated that Zorn often painted water, which is difficult to do without blue -- one of the three primary pigment colors along with red and yellow. (Green, normally a mixture of yellow and blue could be obtained from the Zorn Palette by mixing yellow with black. A blue could be obtained by mixing black with white, though some blacks are probably more suitable for this than others.)

There is no consensus in how-to books for painting regarding palettes. At least one I have favors having black, white and a warm and cool version of each of the three primaries. Other books acknowledge that, in theory, all colors can be mixed from the primaries (plus white and black to lighten or darken) -- but the chemistry of paint ingredients makes this impossible in practice. Therefore, one should use a variety of colors because this can get you closer to the colors you want without mixing too many initial colors -- a practice that runs the risk of yielding "muddy" results.

I'm still working this out for myself. Presently I'm trying to limit my palette as much as possible to create a more unified effect. But the palettes vary depending on the effect I want to create. For example, one trial painting of a face uses alizarin crimson and Naples yellow as the basis for flesh tones and another uses cadmium red light and yellow ochre for that purpose; the former results in a bluer tone and the latter is more orange.

Your thoughts are welcome in Comments.

Below are examples of Anders Zorn's paintings.

Gallery

Mrs. Potter Palmer - 1893
This is a society portrait Zorm painted while he was in Chicago for the Columbian Exposition.

Hins Anders - 1904
An example of a non-society portrait.

Les Demoiselles Schwartz - 1889
The Schwartz sisters were pupils of Zorn while he was building his career.

Girls from Dalarma Having a Bath - 1906
Most of Zorn's Swedish nudes were painted outdoors; this is an exception.

Girl Undressing - 1893
An outdoor scene with the subject on her way to nudity.

Midsummer Dance - 1897
This country scene is one of Zorn's best-known paintings.

Later,

Donald

at December 28, 2008 | perma-link | (8) comments

Michael Blowhard writes:

Dear Blowhards --

A small-scale London-set gangster romance about a sexy young burglar (Asia Argento) who wants to go straight, and the low-key teacher (Jared Harris, Richard's son) she fastens on.

Beautifully designed and lushly shot, it's an enjoyable, if somewhat lightweight, film in the movie-dream mode of Godard's "Breathless" and "Band of Outsiders," What gives "B. Monkey" a lot of tang and makes it memorable is Asia Argento. 22 at the time the film was made, she's like nothing you've ever seen: reactive and passionate, a Wild Child who knows only how to be true to herself and do things her own way. If she recalls anyone it's such other sui generis performers as Belmondo and Brando. Props to director Michael Radford for creating such a gorgeous cinema-reverie showcase for her. Movies would be a far less interesting medium than they are if it weren't for attractive and distinctive performer-personalities, and the talented people who figure out effective ways to show them off.

Semi-related: Buy a copy of "B. Monkey." Back here I wrote about Asia's loony and fascinating first film as a director, "Scarlet Diva." Back here I confessed that I only semi-enjoyed Argento in Breillat's "The Last Mistress." Back here, I reviewed a bunch of sexy movies, including Michael Radford's "Dancing at the Blue Iguana."

Best,

Michael

at December 26, 2008 | perma-link | (11) comments

Michael Blowhard writes:

Dear Blowhards --

* Here's an hour-long video of a presentation that Gary ("Good Calories, Bad Calories") Taubes has been doing around the country. It conveys a good chunk of what he has to say in his book.

* Thanks to visitor Bill for pointing out this Michael Fumento anti-Taubes article. Taubes responds here. Fumento responds to Taubes' response.

* Jenny shoots down what sounds like a particularly stupid recent study about diabetes and diet.

* Stephan thinks that vegetable oils have played a big role in increasing obesity levels. More and more -- it's a great set of postings, and the comments on them are first-rate too. Get to know the abbreviation PUFA.

* Dr. William Davis has a hunch that a grassroots rebellion against statin drugs may be taking shape, and wonders why hospital dieticians are so often so fat.

* 10 things your gym probably won't tell you.

* Jimmy Moore notices that Krispy Kreme, Wonder Bread, and Hostess Twinkies are all struggling financially, and interviews the brilliant economist and eating/exercise guru Arthur De Vany.

* Being a vegan hasn't made Bijou Phillips a happy camper. "I'm sick and I've been sick four times since I've been vegan," she says, "and I hadn't been sick for five years before that."

* Tracy takes a look at the zero-carb diet. Funny to learn that it's also known as the FUMP -- as in "f-u Michael Pollan" -- diet.

* The recently-deceased World's Oldest Person loved bacon and eggs.

Best,

Michael

at December 26, 2008 | perma-link | (13) comments

Friedrich von Blowhard writes:

Dear Blowhards,

Yves Smith of Naked Capitalism writes a damning critique of a current NY Times article on the intimate connection between U.S. trade imbalances of the past decade and our current economic woes. While her entire piece is well worth reading, this is the kernel:

The article buys, hook, line and sinker, then- Fed-governor Ben Bernanke's depiction of so-called global imbalances (the US borrowing from abroad to fund overconsumption; Japan, China, Taiwan, and the Gulf States running significant, persistent trade surpluses and oversaving). Bernanke chose to position the problem as a "savings glut" which had the convenient effect of placing responsibility for the problem overseas, particularly on the Chinese, who kept the renminbi cheap via a hard peg to the dollar.

…As far as I am concerned, this was rationalization of a clearly unstable and unsustainable pattern. But rather than try to find a way out, or at least keep it from becoming more pronounced, Bernanke recommended doing nothing. And it was NOT a market phenomenon, but the result (on the surface, at least) of China pegging the RMB at an artificially low level. Did we explore the possibility of WTO sanctions for the currency manipulation as an illegal trade subsidy? Apparently the US was acutely aware of this as a possibility, and took great care not to give private parties any grounds for using the RMB as the basis for a WTO action. ….

So we knew we had the nuclear option in our hands, and there was no will to use it. One has to wonder if there were any threats made in private. My gut says no, given the history here….

And the New York Times buys…into the "gee, we really had no choice" party line…

She also goes on at length to quote the dissenting economist Thomas Palley who pointed out (in real time, prior to the collapse) that the “Great Moderation” on which Bernanke & company spent so much time congratulating themselves (1) was unsustainable, (2) had been taken our of the hide of the US manufacturing sector and (3) had resulted in stagnant wages for the bulk of American workers.

I, obviously, totally agree with Ms. Smith on the vast bulk of the substance of her piece. However, I would quibble with only one small point: she basically writes about this situation as a series of individual goofs or oversights made by the individuals involved: American economist-managers like Bernanke, our trade negotiators and the New York Times reporter of the piece, Mark Lander.

I think there is a painfully clear connection here.

Golly, what links Ben Bernanke, our trade negotiators and New York Times reporters?

Well, let’s see. The author of the story, Mark Landler, according to the NY Times website:

…began his career at The Times in 1987 as a copy boy and member of the Writing Program. He is a 1987 graduate of Georgetown University, and was a Reuter Fellow at Oxford in 1997.

Mr. Bernanke’s background? According to his White House website bio:

He received a B.A. in economics in 1975 from Harvard University (summa cum laude) and a Ph.D. in economics in 1979 from the Massachusetts Institute of Technology.

The current United States Trade Representative is Ambassador Susan Schwab, who according to her White House bio:

…holds a B.A. in Political Economy from Williams College, a Masters in Development Policy from Stanford University, and a Ph.D. in Public Administration and International Business from The George Washington University.

In short, all of these people – the journalist, the economist, and the government bureaucrat-lifer -- belong to the meritocratic elite, the best and the brightest, the people with SATs high enough to go to Georgetown, Harvard, MIT, Stanford, GWU. They are fully credentialed members of the New Class expertocracy. None of them has apparently ever held a non-New Class job or run their own business and depended on it for a living, and I doubt if any of members of their social circle have, either.

Is it really so surprising that they just don’t get the clear class bias inherent in our current trade, manufacturing and economic situation? Clearly, the 2-3 million jobs lost to our brilliant globalization policy (still clutched dearly to the chest of all right-thinking economists, and, of course The Economist) didn’t really matter…to the people who matter.

And, of course, criticism of this class is going to be pretty limited in a social order in which all of the authority and all of the media and, increasingly, all of the money are controlled by New Class members, popping up to block every exit like the multiple characters played by Peter Sellers in "Dr. Strangelove."

Hey, this is your world. I’m just an old fart who lives in it.

Cheers and Seasons Greetings,

Friedrich

P.S. Despite the fact that people laugh at me when I say it, it really is all connected.

at December 26, 2008 | perma-link | (13) comments

Michael Blowhard writes:

Dear Blowhards --

When Steve Sailer argued that one of the causes of our current economic meltdown has been the federal government's promotion of minority homeownership -- which, in practice, often meant backing a lot of large loans to people without any means of paying them back -- he took a lot of predictable "you're blaming the victims!", do-goodin', "anti-racist," leftie heat. (As far as I could tell, Steve was criticizing the policy, not dumping on the ethnicities of the loan recipients.) Funny and gratifying then to see that The New York Times is now acknowledging, if a bit shyly, that Steve was making a valid point. No recognition extended to Steve, needless to say. Steve indulges in a wee bit of completely justifed gloating.

What will the do-goodin', Times-lovin' lefties who dumped on Steve in this case work up their next frenzy of righteous outrage over? Any bets?

Best,

Michael

at December 23, 2008 | perma-link | (68) comments

Donald Pittenger writes:

Dear Blowhards --

Between episodes of clearing sidewalks and driveways of the ten or more inches of accumulated snow here in Seattle (of mild climate fame) I've been chipping away at a remaindered copy of this book about art patron/collector/dealer Peggy Guggenheim. She was not (until late in life when she agreed to turn over the collection) connected with the Guggenheim museums populating New York, Bilbao and other places; those were originally funded by Samuel Guggenheim, a rich member of the clan. Peggy was a "poor" Guggenheim. In other words she was rich, but not seriously so.

The biography goes into a lot of detail about her private life along with her dealings with the arts. As a result, it is stuffed with names of people she encountered, married, lived with, supported, etc., etc. There are two glossy photo sections, but in no way do the assembled pictures illustrate most of the names mentioned in the text.

So I found myself repeatedly rising from my easy chair and going over to my desktop computer to Google on various names in order to: (1) find a photograph to see what they looked like; (2) look for biographical information to supplement what was in the book; and (3) in the case of artists I'm not familiar with, see what their paintings look like. Score one for the Internet age!

According to some, the ideal is to read a text solidly embedded with links to the sorts of items I just mentioned along with other information. This is not a new concept. An example that's been around for years is Ted Nelson's Project Xanadu -- it was old news when I heard him speak at a computer language convention in 1991 and it still hasn't really gotten off the ground, so far as I can tell.

Another possibility would be a device similar to Amazon's Kindle, but with a huge internal version of something like Wikipedia or perhaps a combination of that feature with Internet linkage. For me, this is not ideal because I really do prefer reading books than Kindles.

So for now, my dashing back and forth from chair to computer works well enough, and sure beats the good old days when there was little I could do to immediately satisfy my curiosity regarding items I'd stumble over.

Later,

Donald

at December 23, 2008 | perma-link | (0) comments