Zapp!

It is really dry and electric tonight. Everything I touch gives a little shock. And when I went around purposefully rubbing my feet on the carpet after watching Fly Boys there was enough charge that my extended finger would produce faint sparks of some 6-7cm in length and violet in color. My hair stood on end as if I had touched a Van de Graaff generator. I don't mean a little bit of my hair stood up a bit, my head looked like dandelion ready to release its seeds into the wind. While building up a charge I could hear a bit of noise from my finger discharging into the air with a faint hiss. This is a normal part of living in Colorado in the winter.

Is This Something New?

2 measures Whiskey
1 measure Cherry liquor
1 measure Vodka
4-5 measures sharp ginger ale (Vernors) or ginger beer.

Sweet, but a bit sophisticated. It doesn't taste cloyingly sweet as far too many mixed drinks to. The ginger and the cherry flavors combine to make something new.

The Cat Came Back

I remember seeing this on Channel 12 (one of the two local PBS stations) when I was a little boy. It was hilarious little animation then and it is still funny now. The Cat Came Back... possibly not for cat lovers.

Interpreting Velvet Goldmine

What does this song actually mean? I've heard repeatedly that it was originally about making out with another guy and got toned down before it was released as a B-side without Bowie's permission. But where is the evidence? I've never been able to figure out where this assertion started.

Going to the lyrics as actually released isn't particularly compelling one way or another. I have come up with a sort of gay interpretation, as you can see, but it isn't particularly gay. It could be things other than making out with a guy.

You got crazy legs, you got amazing head

Okay, this could be about someone giving really good fellatio, but it could just as easily be anything else. And it isn't as if women cannot give 'head'. Or it could be about someone with a pretty face expressed in a inarticulate way.

You got rings on your fingers and your hair's hot red

You got wit from my tongue, name on the sun

I gotcha going to my breast

Cause you're the only one, who uses school to pleasure

Nothing else particularly gay here. I can't even figure out what "uses school to pleasure" might mean. Gets lots of sex at school?

You make me act real gone, you make me trawl along

I had to ravish your capsule, suck you dry

This could mean sucking on another guys penis. I think this line and the one following are the most open to a gay interpretation.

Feel the teeth in your bone, heal ya head with my own

This is what I'm talking about. Bone is a pretty common euphemism for a penis and someone playfully biting and then healing with his own? Sounds pretty gay to me.

Why if I don't have you home, we'll have to fight alone

Hang all together

The only thing I can figure is the last two lines are about "us against the world", nothing particularly gay about that, though it could be.

CHORUS

Velvet goldmine, you stroke me like the rain

Stroking could be about stroking a cock, but it could be just nonsense. I mean what exactly does Velvet Goldmine mean?

Snake it, take it, panther princess you must stay

Take his penis? Possibly, but again what does the rest of it mean?

Velvet goldmine, naked on your chain

Got nothing.

I'll be your king volcano right for you again and again

I could see volcano being about ejaculation.

My velvet goldmine

You're my taste, my trip, I'll be your master zip

Sounds like pure nonsense lyrics made up because the rhyme and sound vaguely dirty without actually meaning anything.

I'll suck your hair for kicks, you'll make me jump to my feet

Long haired guy or a girl?

So you'll give me your hand, give me your sound

Let my sea wash your face, I'm falling, I can't stand

Oooh! put your mink on

CHORUS Repeats

Shoot you down, bang bang

Did he change his mind here and 'shoot down' his friend about having sex? Or is it about shooting in another sense?

CHORUS Repeats

Blogging for Choice

Given today's anniversary in America I think it is a good idea to post about my views on abortion.

I am pro-choice with next to no reservations. I think that if a woman wishes to have an abortion it is fine if she is doing it for either health, wealth, or purely selfish reasons. To me it does not matter because I view abortion as a third or fourth chance to decide not to have a child rather than the ending of a life. This does not mean that I think that pregnancy should be viewed without value or that no wrong has been done to a person who has been forced to get an abortion or given a miscarriage. But it emphatically is not murder or even a homicide.

If a potential mother is so selfish that she would have an abortion just because it is a little inconvenience as it is alleged by anti-abortion people I say it is good that the mother has an abortion. Imagine a child being raised by such a theoretically selfish person or the genes that may be passed on. No, far better for society and children to make abortion easy to get. Not that I believe that more than a few percent (at most) of women seeking abortions are such sociopaths or psychopaths.

I do not know if any of the women I know socially has had an abortion. No one has told me about their experience, but I am convinced of the usefulness of abortion to improve society and the lives of the women who have them by the statistical studies of the legalization of abortion.

I think it might be desirable to have some regulation of abortion to reduce or prevent the problems associated with unplanned genetic editing. For example the selective abortion of girls (as is reported as happening in China and India) or the more theoretical choice to abort fetuses on the basis of having or not have specific genetic traits. Not that I think it would be a bad idea to abort fetuses with defects, necessarily, but it should be considered carefully on an individual and societal level. And forbidding or outlawing might not be the best response either. Perhaps counterbalancing incentives would be a better response. But the first thing to do in this regard is to gather information about reasons given and the actual traits of aborted fetuses, the knowledge of the father, etc... Discover if there are any problems first and legislate carefully (only if required) afterwards.

New Phone

I now have Sanyo SCP-7050 instead of my old silver Samsung. So far I'm mildly pleased. For one thing it seems rather rugged unlike my old phone which had developed a crack in its case. No camera or the other functions that I would never use, so that's good. I've also figured out how to customize its functions how I want them to work so I can avoid accidentally sending text messages. I still don't get text messages. They seem to cost more than an actual phone call and a quick phone call gets things done so efficiently rather than laboriously typing out a message or a reply.

My old phone also had gotten its contact list corrupted somehow, so I did not transfer things right over. I figured instead that I would transfer one after another if the phone number turned out to be correct. Plus I skipped a number of people who are perfectly nice that I will probably never call again like Chelsea Quinn Yarbro, I only had her in there for convention business back in October after all. And acquaintances with who I never really clicked or never see anymore went into my gmail contact list rather than being transferred.

So I find that I have 29 actual people in my phone. A fair number I suppose. Of those I call nine of them with some regularity. I suppose then I ought to say that I have nine friends, so I guess I don't have more online accounts than friends. (I hope.)

Best Professional Artist Nominations, Draft 1

John Jude Palencar, he did the cover of The Ivory and the Horn among others last year. He's usually called upon as a dark fantasy illustrator. I've noticed him doing covers of H.P. Lovecraft collections very often, but he's also done covers for books from Connie Willis (Impossible Things) to Charles de Lint (Waifs and Strays). All that is in the past, so why this year? He has a book out full of his illustrations (Origins: The Art and Illustration of John Jude Palencar) republishing his earlier works that may have been missed by nominators and his inclusion in Spectrum 14 clearly show he is both a professional who has 'paid his dues' but is still producing very good art. (However I am open to arguments that he should be bumped down my list as I have not seen a clearly 2007 standout work from him, still my first choice for now.) His website, but I did not notice anything specifically from 2007 there like the cover of The Ivory and Horn (that link is to a review with a thumbnail rather than Amazon).

Todd Lockwood is my second choice. Mostly he does typical fantasy gaming art. But some of his pieces really do stand out. And he even has the recent ones helpfully arranged on his website for perusal. I think of those Mongoose stands out among the fantasy ones. Yes, it has blasters, but it looks like pure fantasy to me and good creative fantasy at that. I wish that Midnight Tides was 2007 rather than 2006 so I could use it as my nominating example, what a beautiful composition.

David Bowers, I'm nominating him on the strength of Leda and the Swan. It is not exactly my cup of tea, but it seems pretty good as fantasy art goes. I know, I don't exactly sound enthusiastic. I got him from the Professional Artist Recommendation Page. He stands out from many of the others as more technically skilled. And it appears to be recent unlike with so many artists that I cannot figure out when a work was published.

Before you write to me saying "What about $artist?" read the following paragraph and think about it.

Bob Eggleton has won eight Hugos. That's not a reason avoid nominating him. I would argue that it would a reason to nominate... if his art was really standing out at head and shoulders above that of his peers. But it doesn't. It has not gotten worse, but it does not stand out as clearly superior to other professional artists or from his own work. If anything I see a bunch of his stuff that appears to repeat what he's done before. There isn't a work that I've seen (correct me on this if I'm wrong) that jumps out saying, "THIS MUST GET A NOMINATION!" Similarly I would not nominate Donato Giancola, Jim Burns, Michael Whelan, or Don Maitz who between them have every Hugo statue in their category for that last 27 years. Similarly there are a lot of other good artists out of there that I think "deserve" a Hugo who have not done anything outstanding recently. If you can't point to something (even a physical something down at the bookstore) that we can point to as a reason he or she deserves a Hugo it isn't going to work out.