Anniversary Post: Dracula

DraculaOn this day in 1897, Bram Stoker’s Dracula was first published. Vampires have always been a problem for me. Call it the caribou problem. As you may remember, the caribou of North America were starving to death because there were no predators to thin the herd. So wolves had to be reintroduced to save the caribou from their success. But imagine if every caribou killed turned into a wolf. Very soon, there would be no caribou and only wolves and then there would be no wolves because they would all starve to death. This is the kind of thing that I think about with regard to Dracula.

I’m also not that keen on the epistolary novel. Even when Stoker wrote it, it was coming to be obsolete. Really: what is the point of it anyway? It is a literary affectation that doesn’t seem to provide much of anything in exchange. But people at the time certainly seemed to like the novel (those who read it anyway). And it is still quite popular, but I think that has more to do with Bela Lugosi than Bram Stoker.

It’s hard for me not to compare Dracula with Frankenstein. And as much as it is possible to discern a theme for the mess of the former, it does not appeal to me. In an important sense, the two novels are opposites. Frankenstein presents a monster created by the society itself. The fault lies with the society that cannot deal with an outsider. Dracula presents a monster as an external contagion; the fault most definitely does not lie with the society for rejecting the outsider.

Thus, even though Dracula appeared three-quarters of a century later, its humanity had regressed. Frankenstein is a liberal — even radical — allegory of our treatment of the “other.” Dracula is a conservative allegory about how we must be fearful of the “other.” It is a story that would be welcomed by Pamela Geller and other bigots both more and less extreme. It would be welcome by them, that is, if they understood it.

Still, Dracula is a good adventure story. And if you love the British Empire and hate Romanian gypsies, well, you can hardly go wrong. That’s especially true if you don’t have anything better to do, like drink… wine?

Happy anniversary Dracula!

Anniversary Post: Halley’s Comet

Halley's CometIt’s a little complicated, but for now, let’s just say that on this day in 240 BC, Halley’s Comet was discovered. And now that we’ve said that, let’s admit that it isn’t true. The main way that it isn’t true is that this isn’t the date it was noted. This is the date that the comet reached its perihelion — the position when it is closest to the sun. The comet was seen before and after this date.

This appearance was documented in Records of the Grand Historian, Sima Qian’s history of ancient China that was published some time around 109 BC. The reason we know it was the Halley’s Comet is because Halley calculated when the comet had come and when it would come. So we know that it should have shown up in May of 240 BC, and Sima Qian made note of a comet at that time that appeared in the east and moved north.

Interestingly, it is probably the case that this is not the first documented sighting of this most famous comet. Halley should also have dropped by for a visit in 467 BC. A comet between the years of 468 and 466 BC was noted both in ancient Greece and ancient China. But the dating is uncertain, so we can’t say for sure that it was Halley.

So happy sorta birthday Halley’s Comet!

Anniversary Post: “Mary Had a Little Lamb”

Sarah Josepha HaleOn this day in 1830, the nursery rhyme “Mary Had a Little Lamb” was first published. I’ll provide some discussion of it in a moment, but first I want to talk about it in the context of copyright law. If the law had been then as it is now, “Mary Had a Little Lamb” would have still be under copyright at the beginning of 1949. Think about that. The first American steam train was produced in 1830. That was the cutting edge of transportation. And we would have had to wait until the dawn of the Space Age before this little rhyme was considered part of the public domain. After it was written, we lived through the Civil War and then World War I and then World War II. But according to current American law, the country had only then moved on enough for the rhyme to be considered part of our shared culture. Until then, it was simply property for some corporation to use to extract rents.

It was written — to one extent or another — by Sarah Josepha Hale. Born in 1788, she lived all the way to 1879, which is one of the reasons that the length of the copyright would have been so long. It was published as part of her book, Poems for Our Children. You can find out more about her in the birthday post I wrote about her, Sarah Josepha Hale Had a Little Lamb.

So happy 185th birthday to “Mary Had a Little Lamb.” Now let’s go fix our broken copyright system!

Anniversary Post: Battle of Clavijo

Battle of Clavijo - Corrado Giaquinto (Detail)On this day in 834, the Battle of Clavijo didn’t take place. But for a very long time, people thought that it did. It was supposedly between the good Christians of Spain to expel the Muslims from the country. Over time, they realized that the battle never took place. But for centuries, people believed. It even included actual historical figures, like Emir of Córdoba. But ultimately, the truth came out. A big problem with it is that there was no mention of the battle for about three hundred years after it. It reminds me of something else regarding Christianity, but I can’t quite put my finger on it. You know: a really impressive event that everyone would have known about that supposedly included actual historical figures, but somehow is completely devoid of contemporaneous accounts? It’s just not coming to me…

Another interesting thing about the battle is that supposedly Saint James Matamoros showed up to fight back the Muslims. Matamoros was a legendary character and this is pretty much what he would always do: show up and kill Muslims. Further, he was thought to be the same person as James, son of Zebedee, one of Jesus’ apostles, and the first to be martyred (according to tradition). Those who know their Book of Revelation realize that when Jesus comes back, he is going to kick some major butt. I find it interesting that pretty much all religions are parochial in this way: God will come in and help our little group kill all our enemies. Given how undependable God is in this regard, it’s all kind of hard to take.

That’s what’s so great about the Battle of Clavijo. You don’t need to have wars where God helps you win. You can just make up wars where God helps you win. That has two major advantages. First, it makes God really dependable. Second, no war! That’s pretty great. The Iraq War could have been just a story. It would have great to teach a lesson about hubris and stupidity. Instead, we had an actual war and most people haven’t learned a damned thing.

But happy anniversary to the fake Battle of Clavijo!

Anniversary Post: Windows 3.0

Windows 3.0On this day, 25 years ago, Microsoft released Windows 3.0. It was a very big deal. You see, for almost a decade before that, Microsoft had only managed to provide MS-DOS. It was an 8086 clone of the CP/M operating system, written by 25-year-old programmer Tim Paterson. Just to be clear, all Microsoft did was buy what Paterson had written. And this may explain why for the next nine years — 2.0, 3.0, 4.0, 5.0, 6.0, 7.0, 8.0! — Microsoft hardly managed to improve it. Of course, Microsoft did manage to come out with Windows 1.0 in 1985 and Windows 2.0 at the end of 1987. They were pathetic attempts. The only thing more pathetic was that Apple (Of course!) sued Microsoft for copyright infringement — unleashing on the world the “look and feel” lawsuit. (Note: the lawsuit that started this kind of anti-freedom nonsense actually dates back to Broderbund Software Inc. v Unison World, Inc. Courts should not be allowed to rule on technology or science when they don’t understand it — which they rarely do.)

But with Windows 3.0, Microsoft had finally managed to create something that was usable. It certainly wasn’t great. And a lot of it was just that computers were more powerful by that time, so the program could work reasonably well. Even still, the earlier versions of Windows did not multitask well. But let us remember: Windows 3.0 was a program that ran on MS-DOS. It was not until Windows 95 (version 4.0), that Microsoft managed to combine MS-DOS and Windows. And it wasn’t until Windows 2000 (version 5.0) that it became a modern operating system. (For the record, Windows XP is Windows 5.1. I find it annoying that people think that Windows XP was this major release. But all they did was put a different UI on it. If you wanted to save some resources, you could make it look just like Windows 2000. Indeed, my current Windows 7 computer looks just like Windows 2000. I don’t like change.)

So there you go. You may think that I’m opinionated about politics, but clearly computer history trumps that. And that’s especially true when I’m talking about Microsoft and Apple. Bill Gates is (usually) the richest man in the world for one reason: he got the contract to provide the operating system for the new IBM personal computers. He used that advantage to stifle innovation for years. But mostly because of computer heroes like Mitch Kapor (creator of 1-2-3), Gates was able to become an incredibly rich man despite the fact that he was only hurting the industry. But it after Apple lead the way with the graphical user interface (which they stole before they started suing everyone who did the same thing), that Gate got immorally rich based upon his control the operating system that so many people used because of the great programs created by people who were not Bill Gates nor worked for Bill Gates.

Happy birthday to the first decent product that Microsoft managed to produce!

Anniversary Post: Pietà Attack

Laszlo TothOn this day in 1972, Laszlo Toth attacked Michelangelo’s Pietà. And because he was trained as a geologist, he did a lot of damage. But let’s back up a bit on this.

Toth was born in Hungary in 1938. He got a degree in geology in 1965 and moved to Australia. But he had difficulty finding work. This was partly due to the fact that his degree was not recognized there. It was also party due to the fact that he didn’t really speak English. But it was mostly due to the fact that he was crazy.

In 1971, he moved to Italy, even though he knew no Italian. But he seemed to want to get close to Pope Paul VI (also know as “the pope who looked like Jonathan Pryce”). By this time, Toth believed he was Jesus Christ. But the pope apparently never answered his letters. So on 21 May 1972, Toth entered St Peter’s Basilica and attacked the Pietà, yelling, “I am Jesus Christ — risen from the dead!”

He was wielding a geologist’s hammer. And, “With fifteen blows he removed Mary’s arm at the elbow, knocked off a chunk of her nose, and chipped one of her eyelids.” American sculptor Bob Cassilly, who was visiting, was the first to grab him, followed quickly by a number of others who managed to subdue him as seen in the photo above.

Laszlo Toth was never charged with a crime. He spent two years in a mental hospital, after which, he was shipped back to Australia where he was cared for until he died on 11 September 2012. The Pietà was completely repaired after the incident and is now displayed behind bulletproof (and geologist’s hammer proof, I would assume) glass.

Happy anniversary for this unfortunate, but somehow amusing, attack.

Anniversary Post: Great Temple Massacre

Pedro de AlvaradoOn this day in 1520, the Massacre in the Great Temple occurred. This happened while the Spanish had Moctezuma under house arrest. He had asked Cortés’ representative, Pedro de Alvarado, if his people could celebrate Toxcatl. While as many as a thousand Aztecs were celebrating the event, Alvarado went in with his men and killed them all. He then took all the precious stones and metal from their bodies. Cortés was apparently displeased and came back, but by the time he made it, Moctezuma had been murdered.

Now there are Spanish stories that supposedly explain all this. Alvarado apparently claimed that he simply intervened to stop a human sacrifice. Why doing that would require killing upwards of a thousand unarmed and mostly naked people is never made clear. It strikes me as an obvious lie to justify his theft. Plus, everything I’ve read about Alvarado indicates that he was a psychopath.

As for the murder of Moctezuma, it is usually reported as his having been stoned to death by his own people — upset about the massacre. But this strikes me as being between unlikely and impossible. Moctezuma was under house arrest. How did these angry Aztecs get to him? About the only possibility would be that Alvarado threw him out to them hoping that he could calm them. So regardless, Moctezuma was still killed by Alvarado.

Finally, I don’t want you to get the idea that Cortés was a good guy. He seems to have been a very capable conqueror. There is no reason to believe that he was especially worse than other Spaniards of his day — and he may have been better. But what Alvarado did made no long-term sense. The least you can say about him is that he wasn’t a psychopath.

So we mark this day, 495 years later.

Anniversary Post: Off With Anne Boleyn’s Head!

Anne BoleynOn this day in 1536, King Henry VIII had Anne Boleyn‘s head chopped off — after less than three years of marriage. She was a vile woman — convicted of adultery, incest, witchcraft… Wait, witchcraft?! Oh, that’s right: she didn’t do any of these things. It was just that Henry wanted to marry Jane Seymour. Boleyn had given birth to the future Queen Elizabeth I. And then she had three spontaneous abortions — all male. And Henry really wanted an male heir. So: off with her head!

What makes the whole thing worse is that Henry’s difficulties getting healthy children born were almost certainly his own fault. It’s either that, or he just had incredibly bad luck. I’ll go with “almost certainly.”

It is hard to see any king, but most especially Henry, as anything but a psychopath. Certainly, he didn’t seem to think that women had a purpose other than to pop babies out for him. But the idea that you would put someone to death just so you can move on to the next baby incubator is truly outrageous. I understand that there was politics going on behind the scenes. But he could have just annulled the marriage like he did with Queen Catherine. He was a monster.

On the plus side, Anne Boleyn: you never had to see him again!

Anniversary Post: Worms Massacre

Massacre of JewsOn this day in 1096, 800 Jews were killed in the Worms massacre. That was Worms, Germany — just in case you were wondering. Apparently, there was a rumor that “the Jews” had poisoned the town’s wells. Now where have I heard that before? Oh, that’s right: everywhere! You know, for all my displeasure with Israel, it is not hard to see why a Jewish state would be hyper paranoid. Of course, I find it kind of funny that now American Christians are big supporters of “the Jews.” Of course, they don’t actually care about Jewish people; they just think that “the Jews” must be in control of the Holy Lands for Jesus to come back and kick some major butt.

This was all part of the First Crusade. It was started by Pope Urban II to take control Holy Lands. So why were they murdering Jews in Germany? You know: any excuse to kill Jews! In 1096, it was the Catholics. But just 400 years later, Martin Luther had this to say about “the Jews”:

First, to set fire to their synagogues or schools and to bury and cover with dirt whatever will not burn, so that no man will ever again see a stone or cinder of them. This is to be done in honor of our Lord and of Christendom, so that God might see that we are Christians, and do not condone or knowingly tolerate such public lying, cursing, and blaspheming of his Son and of his Christians…

Second, I advise that their houses also be razed and destroyed…

Third, I advise that all their prayer books and Talmudic writings, in which such idolatry, lies, cursing and blasphemy are taught, be taken from them.

Fourth, I advise that their rabbis be forbidden to teach henceforth on pain of loss of life and limb…

Fifth, I advise that safe-­conduct on the highways be abolished completely for the Jews.

Sixth, I advise that usury be prohibited to them, and that all cash and treasure of silver and gold be taken from them and put aside for safekeeping…

Seventh, I commend putting a flail, an ax, a hoe, a spade, a distaff, or a spindle into the hands of young, strong Jews and Jewesses and letting them earn their bread in the sweat of their brow, as was imposed on the children of Adam.

Feel that Christian love, brothers and sisters! Actually, this is almost point by point what the Nazis did to the Jewish population up to the Final Solution. It makes you wonder, except, of course, that the Nazis were Christians.

We mark this very sad event 919 years ago.

Anniversary Post: Marshall Applewhite

Marshall ApplewhiteOn this day in 1931, Marshall Applewhite was born. I suspect you don’t know the name, but the photo on the left probably gives it away. He was the leader of the Heaven’s Gate cult and the guy who organized the group’s memorable mass suicide in 1997. I learned a lot while reading about him. We mostly have the wrong idea about Heaven’s Gate. Because of the tennis shoes and the whole thing about Comet Hale–Bopp and the spaceship that was following it, people think that it was some kind of nerd cult. But it was really just a garden variety end times belief system. Like most cults, it combined a lot of different elements, including lots of Christianity — especially from Revelation.

What I find most interesting is what these kinds of cults say about all of our searches for meaning and the ways in which our society does not provide much nourishment in that regard. I just read Neil Postman’s excellent, The End of Education. Unlike most books about education, it isn’t about “how”; it is about “why.” And in our approach education, just as in our approach to life, we don’t have much to say in terms of “why.”

The American (and increasingly the world) notion of a meaningful life doesn’t offer much. It’s pretty much what Schopenhauer discussed in The World as Will and Idea: “momentary gratification, fleeting pleasure conditioned by wants, much and long suffering, constant struggle, bellum omnium [everyone against everyone], everything a hunter and everything hunted, want, need and anxiety, shrieking and howling; and this goes on in saecula saeculorum [forever and ever] or until once again the crust of the planet breaks.” Is it any wonder that people grab onto simplistic life narratives about asceticism leading a pure existence in a science fiction nirvana?

I don’t see Applewhite as an evil man. I think he was as lost as his followers. But in a sense, they were not as lost as much of society. They rejected the hollowness of the American Dream. But they replaced it with something even more hollow: nihilism. It’s sad. Just the same, I can’t feel too superior. Until today, about the only thing I knew about them was that they died wearing Nike™ shoes. It’s a fitting, if ironic, testament to their rejection of the world that we mostly remember them for their brand loyalty.

Happy birthday Marshall Applewhite.

Anniversary Post: Louis XVI Marriage

Louis XVI of France and Marie AntoinetteOn this day in 1770, Louis-Auguste — just 15 years old — married Habsburg Archduchess Maria Antonia — just 14 years old. They would become king and queen of France, better known as Louis XVI of France and Marie Antoinette. And in 1793, they would both have their heads chopped off after the French Revolution. Should they have been put to death? Well obviously, I don’t think so. I don’t believe in the death penalty — even for Hitler or Pol Pot or that boy who bullied me in grammar school. But a better question is whether they were more deserving to die than the kings and queens who came before them. And the answer to that is certainly no.

That’s not to say that they were good people. They would ghastly. They were the kind of people that royalty have always been. As Dr Willis said in The Madness of King George, “Deferred to, agreed with, acquiesced in. Who can flourish on such a daily diet of compliance?” But the general portrayal of them as particularly horrible is wrong. They do, however, seem to have been of above average silliness without the will or ability to manage their finances. And Marie Antoinette did seem to have an understandable fondness for her mother country, Austria, which also created the understandable nationalist resentment of the French people.

But hell: they got a good two decades during which they got whatever they wanted. They lived to their late thirties. Many people at that time and place did not live as long and no one had it as good. I suspect that most people of that time would have swapped their potential long lives for four wonderful decades. So I’m not shedding any tears for them. They still shouldn’t have been killed. But there were much greater injustices done during the Reign of Terror.

Happy anniversary you kids!

Anniversary Post: Ad Extirpanda

13th Century Justice - Ad extirpandaOn this day in 1252, Pope Innocent IV issued his papal letter, Ad extirpanda. It was where the pope codified torture in the inquisition of suspected heretics. But as will be familiar to those who watched the House of Representatives pass the USA Freedom Act — it was put forward as rules to limit torture. (In the USA Freedom Act, most sources are reporting it as limiting the NSA’s bulk collection of metadata, but it is in fact codifying it.) Check out these amazing limitations on torture:

  1. No loss of life or limb!
  2. Just this once!
  3. Only if the inquisitor is really really sure!

Let me say that personally, I’m kind of pleased at this. I probably shouldn’t admit this in public, but one of my greatest fears is to have my fingers cut off. Of course, I’m even more afraid of being set on fire, and I’m sure that limited burning was just fine. But mostly, these rules are just ridiculous. Prosecutors are always certain that their targets are guilty. There have actually been psychological tests regarding this, although I’m not going to take the time to dig this up. So this just meant that inquisitors were always going to use torture. And since they could only use it once, that meant they were going to be extreme.

But what is most ridiculous about this is the first rule. They couldn’t kill the heretic with torture. But if they tortured her and she confessed, they could then kill her. It makes little sense. But it isn’t supposed to. It is just what the powerful do to make their oppression of the weak seem just.

Happy anniversary Ad extirpanda!

Afterword

This actually happened a couple of centuries later: