The Hobbit

I’d already done a blog on Lord of the Rings (LOTR), now it’s hobbit time.   For some reason I had tackled LOTR in print, and even digested The Silmarillion as well, but had never read this one.  With the new Peter Jackson film coming out, I decided to read the book once and for all.  I enjoyed it. 

The original 1933 book by J.R.R. Tolkien came long before LOTR was published in the 1950s.  It’s considerably shorter and warmer and casual than LOTR (Central Scrutinizer: “Hey, it’s me again.”), which makes it somewhat easier to read.

Plot:  Hobbit (Bilbo) goes on adventure with Dwarf (Thorin) and his friends, plus a powerful magic guy (Gandalf), to win the dwarves’ treasure back from the dragon (Smaug) who took it.  Along the way the group meets trolls, goblins, High elves, wood elves, spiders, eagles, wolves, and even humans.  Bilbo finds a magic ring which makes him invisible, but this upsets its prior owner, the freak (Gollum).    Bilbo talks to the dragon, and learns a weakness.   Told of this weakness, Archer (Bard) shoots down the dragon.  Dwarves refuse to share treasure with Bard.  War breaks out between dwarves, elves and men.  Goblins attack.  Dwarves, men and elves team up and defeat goblins.  Dwarves reconsider and share treasure.  Everyone goes home.  Happy ending.

The 2012 movie is part one of a trilogy to be released in subsequent eons.  Back in the 1970s, the Rankin-Bass people (responsible for such holiday classics as “The Year Without A Santa Claus”) took a stab at doing an animated film of “The Hobbit”.  This version adds some goofy music, and really makes Bilbo look like a dull tub of inoffensive goo.  The best which can be said for this effort is that it is very quick and efficient.

Jackson’s effort seems like an intense steroid injection to get “The Hobbit” bulked up to the heavier specs of LOTR.   Freeman is a substantial figure, even with hairy feet.   The biggest boost is explaining what Gandalf was up to during the brief interludes of the story where he leaves Bilbo and Thorin to their own devices, which means including characters who were in LOTR but not The Hobbit itself.   The intensity is also dialed up – yes, to LOTR spec. 

At first I was upset that “Hobbit” was split into three like LOTR instead of kept at one – until I actually watched the film, in 48 fps format – and understood what Jackson was trying to do.   I suppose ultimate judgment should be deferred until the final installment is released (and I’ve had a chance to see it) but if the first of the trilogy is any indication, I’d say I agree with both the attempt and the execution.   Huzzah!  Bully!

Gun Control Revisited

In the wake of the Newtown shootings, yet another call for “increased gun control” has gone up.  The other night, Piers Morgan got in a name-calling match with a non-NRA gun rights advocate, Mr. Pratt.  Obviously tempers are flaring left and right.  The issue isn’t guns per se, but illicit use thereof.  As yet we have no self-shooting, self-aware AR-15s lurking in school hallways, movie theaters, or other places taking out innocent bystanders.  Despite consistent liberal misperceptions to the contrary, weapons do NOT fire themselves.  Some living, breathing, conscious person has to make the fateful decision to pull the trigger.

Morgan made some remark to the effect of, US has a population of 300 million, and it has 211 (?) million guns, so how can this not be a problem?  Well, if all those guns were in the hands of sensible gun owners, that would not be a problem.  If they were all in the hands of homicidal maniacs, I’d say that would be a problem.  But it’s too simplistic to say “there are too many guns”, as if, every July 4^th, Ted Nugent flies over the country, coming down our chimneys, distributing Bushmasters and Desert Eagles to every household, even those with small children, crazy maniacs, or Obama voters.  The guns in our country tend to be concentrated in the hands of gun owners and criminals.

For the purpose of this debate, I see there being two types of potential gun owners in this country, Type A and Type B.  Type A are the law-abiding, sensible, intelligent, sane, responsible gun owners who don’t break laws, don’t shoot up schools, or otherwise cause any problems.  Type B are the others who we wouldn’t trust with guns: children, criminals, the insane, and otherwise attitude-misadjusted types.

The majority of private gun owners fall into Type A.  To the extent they use their weapons at all, it’s at ranges, safely banging away at paper targets.  Like me, they may never have actually shot at anyone in anger or in combat.

The gun control types have this image in their heads of gun owners as dangerous lunatics, cleaning their guns while naked children run around, with a fifth of Jack Daniels in front of them and a cigarette dangling from their lips, wearing a dirty wife beater and soiled boxers.  As a child, this man tortured animals.  He married his sister and beats her regularly.  And having guns around, at all, is like keeping a rattlesnake as a pet, slithering through the house.  No private citizen has any legitimate need for a gun.  To keep any kind of weapon shows unspeakably vile judgment.  Why should innocent children die so that these inbred vermin can keep assault weapons?  So goes the Piers Morgan argument.

Was Newtown a tragedy?  Certainly.  No one wants to be callous and say that these deaths didn’t matter.  They certainly matter to the parents and families of the victims.  But as dramatic and tragic as these shootings are, the fact remains that the vast majority of gun deaths in this country are due to suicides, not mass killing sprees.  Moreover, this ignores what the NRA could tell you in the National Rifleman each month:  ordinary people can and do use firearms to legitimately protect themselves and their families – far more lives saved by responsible gun owners (more so than even the police) than lost by crazy maniacs or criminals. 

The Type B’s assaulting us are not getting their weapons directly from gun sellers.  It looks like they get their weapons from Type A’s in their same household.  This woman in Connecticut knew her son was a wackjob but still kept guns in the house; appropriately she was the first victim of his killing spree.

What I, and most gun rights advocates, find annoying is this vague demand that “something should be done”.  What would that be?  “More gun control.”  Please be more specific.   And let’s be clear about this:  instantaneously eliminating ALL guns from the US is NOT a realistic option short of… I don’t know…MAGIC???   And expecting gun owners (of either type) to simply cough up their weapons?  Not going to happen.  Forget it.   We’re either going to shoot them at you or hide them somewhere.  

Fact:  Any gun control policy initiative has to take as a given assumption that no matter how hard we try to ban or eliminate weapons, it is IMPOSSIBLE to completely disarm the entire country.  Like it or not, some people are going to have weapons, and many of those people are going to be Type B’s who we’d prefer were unarmed.

So what exactly are they proposing?

A complete ban on firearms across the entire country?  This blatant violation of the Second Amendment would not withstand Supreme Court scrutiny and would require a repeal of the Second Amendment, which in turn requires more political capital than even the Newtown tragedy could elicit.  Even if, SOMEHOW, it could be pushed through Congress AND survive judicial review, it would still not do anything about the millions of guns already in circulation.  In the short term it would dramatically boost gun sales in the months leading up to its going into effect, which would seem to be somewhat counterproductive.  Moreover, even when it did go into effect, it would only prevent Type A’s from acquiring weapons.

To the extent Type B’s are getting their guns from Type A’s in the same household, I’d say some restriction on that would be the only sensible “gun control” anyone could propose.  If you’re a Type A gun owner, you have some responsibility to secure your weapons to make sure Type B’s do not get access to them.  Gun safes, gun locks, etc. are all options.  How about that business in the movies where a closet or panel opens up to reveal the guns hanging up on the wall – maybe IKEA has some ideas for that.  Let’s try a little harder to keep guns out of the hands of the wrong people, without depriving Type A’s of their lawfully and peacefully owned weapons – regardless of whether those weapons are hunting rifles or “assault rifles” with high capacity magazines. 

Another problem are Type A’s who purchase their guns legally while sane and normal, and then descend into Type B neighborhood later.  Anyone who loses their job and family and goes off the deep end could rapidly turn from a well-adjusted, normal person to a crazy disgruntled maniac in a matter of months or even weeks.  But most Type A’s tend to remain Type A’s.  I would argue that any attempt to disqualify someone from gun ownership after the fact due to such an onset of diminished capacity should put the burden on the party attempting to revoke gun ownership rather than on the party seeking to keep his/her weapons.

Some gun rights advocates, e.g. Mr. Pratt (for all his causticness and animosity, itself a reaction to Morgan’s arrogance and contempt, he is right about this point) have attracted contempt and scorn for making the following observation:  these massacres consistently occur in places where guns are prohibited.  “How can MORE guns be the answer????”  It’s as obvious to me as it was to Mr. Pratt:  If the killer knows his “audience” is unarmed, he has no deterrent.  Arming elementary school children is obviously silly, but arming the teachers and school staff is considerably less ludicrous.  But that’s a downstream solution.  The upstream solution, as noted above, is restricting the flow of guns from Type A’s to Type B’s.

Look at drunk driving: every year hundreds of people are killed in automobile accidents, either due to their own negligence or that of others.  Clearly, in the wrong hands, a car is a deadly weapon.  The same could also be said of a jumbo jet flown into the Pentagon or World Trade Center.  But no one is proposing to ban cars or air travel simply because people have been known to die of these causes.  There is no reason why guns should be any different.  It’s simply UNFAIR that innocent, responsible gun owners who have never murdered a child should be punished and otherwise held responsible for what a handful of dangerous nutjobs do with guns.  Two wrongs do not make a right. 

Finally, one possible problem is political.  A local sheriff might seek to classify his buddies as Type A’s and everyone else as Type B’s, or some similar attempt to inhibit or interfere with gun rights not based on a legitimate fear of imminent meltdown or catastrophe but rather a principled objection to private gun ownership per se, a blanket conviction that there are no “Type A’s”, period.  This “throwing out the baby with the bathwater” is the #1 fear of gun owners in the wake of Newton-type massacres.  But again, any attempt to disarm the entire country will be a messy affair.  

Gone But Not Forgotten

Hostess has been in the news lately as imminently disappearing, though I believe the brand is too strong to stay dead for long; someone will resurrect it…I hope.  Here are others which have yet to rise from the dead.

Tower Records.   I loved this record store.  The branch at Tyson’s Corner consistently had a great selection, and I got quite a few Hawkwind CDs here.  The staff were arrogant hipsters, I know, but I’d take that if it meant a better selection than what we could find at FYE or Sam Goody.  Objectively, though, it’s hard to beat Amazon’s model of online buying, especially if you’re looking for something you’d never find at Best Buy.

Borders.  My two favorites, books & music, in one place.  I’d lose myself at the Bailey’s Crossroads branch (now an Ashley Furniture) reading the Osprey Men-At-Arms books.  Borders kept them all together on a spinning rack, while Barnes & Noble spreads them out by era throughout the military history department.  WRONG!

Burger Chef.  The food itself wasn’t that special – generic burger-oriented fast food.  But they served it in these very clever boxes that opened up.  THAT was imaginative.  Each time you went, you had NO idea what the theme would be, like the Grateful Dead of fast food.

Mr Hero.  This was  a fast food place at Bailey’s Crossroads, in Virginia.  Although it looked like a franchise, it was the only one.  They served excellent steak & cheese subs with fantastic waffle fries.  The owner lost the lease, and now it’s a Quiznos.  ZZZ.

Blockbuster, Hollywood Video, Purple Potamus Video.  Most people know of the first two.  I joined the third, formerly on King Street near NOVA, because they had a naughty movie section…then never rented a single one.  Instead, I rented movies like “Repo Man” which BB & HV didn’t carry.

The Village Mall.  I came back from Paris (France) in August 1990 and looked for this in Montgomery Village.  I looked, and looked, and couldn’t find it.  Finally the CVS – formerly People’s Drug – people informed me that the Mall was gone.  It had been a very 70s place, with wooden signs, cobblestone floors, huge fountains.  I have to ask if the equivalent in Columbia is still around.

Rockville Mall.  This was in downtown Rockville near the Montgomery County courthouses.  It wasn’t too special, but it was a mall.  The 50’s era Giant down the street is closed too.

Malibu Grill & Greenfields.  These two Brazilian steakhouses, churrascarias, have gone out of business, plus the similar one in Paramus, NJ, on Route 4 at Continental Plaza, next to Riverside Mall.  These featured a flat rate for all-you-can-eat steak, which is typically delicious.  Greenfields was considerably more expensive than Malibu Grill.  The remaining chains, Texas do Brasil and Fogo No Chão, are still around, but are very expensive.

Close, but not quite.  Jack In The Box and Dairy Queen disappeared.  Jack is still in business on the West Coast, whereas Dairy Queen made a comeback in my area in recent years.

Grover Cleveland

Time to throw another curve ball at everyone.  My obsession with the late 19^th century is probably not much of a secret.  I didn’t think a blog on all the US Presidents from Lincoln to Theodore Roosevelt would be all that interesting, so I split the difference on this one.

First off, here they are:  Lincoln (1860-1865), Andrew Johnson (1865-69), Ulysses Grant (1869-77), Rutherford B. Hayes (1877-81), James Garfield (1881 – assassinated by a disgruntled gov’t employee), Chester Alan Arthur (1881-1885), Grover Cleveland (1885-1889), Benjamin Harrison (1889-1893), Grover Cleveland (1893-1897), William McKinley (1897-1901)(assassinated by an anarchist) and Theodore Roosevelt (1901-1909).

Cleveland served as mayor of Buffalo and governor of New York.  He was an upright Democrat – the only Democratic president between Lincoln and Roosevelt.  He served two non-consecutive terms, the only President to do so.  He attracted many Republicans who were fed up with James Blaine (the “Mugwumps”).  Back then, the US government had a tendency to corruption, a “spoils” system.  Tools like Roscoe Conkling and James Blaine were ideologically committed to such a system, but there were plenty who felt the stench of political manure needed be to blown away, which is how Cleveland defeated Blaine in 1884. 

Sure enough, on taking power he kept on competent Republicans rather than sweep in Democrats.  He opposed tariffs and vetoed many relief bills – this during economic depression.  He was non-interventionist in foreign policy, though he did help beef up the Navy by striking down shipbuilding based on pork rather than quality, including ordering the USS Maine (later blown up in Havana Harbor), which was itself a reaction to Brazil’s Riachuelo. 

Finally, to wrap up with two nuggets of trivia:  the rest stop on northbound New Jersey Turnpike, around Exit 11, is named after him, and I had to laugh at The Onion’s article, “Activision Reports Sluggish Sales for Sousaphone Hero”, in which the Activision spokeswoman promises that "if you score enough points, you can unlock the ultimate level: playing in the John Philip Sousa-led Marine Band at Grover Cleveland's inauguration."

Game of Thrones

Having recently trashed 50 Shades of Grey, and also having finished Dance of Dragons, the 5^th installment of George R. R. Martin’s popular Game of Thrones series of books – also a very popular HBO series - it’s time to review the latter.  Anyone seeing my Facebook posts will know that I rate GoT considerably higher than 50 Shades.

I started by watching the HBO series on DVD, finishing season 1.  My access to season 2 has been limited to watching it on my brother’s iPad at his house, as I don’t have HBO and the DVDs won’t be out until February.  So, voracious and insatiable reader that you all know I am, I started reading the books, of which there are now five.  #6 and 7 are due out in the distant future.  Don’t ask when, as Martin takes his time writing these things.  I’ll keep my comments brief to avoid spoiling anything.

Think of it as Lord of the Rings with lots of intrigue, backstabbing, and juicy sex – LOTR + Fifty Shades, in fact.  Those of you who thought hobbits prancing around Middle Earth was dull, may find much more to watch and enjoy with this show.

It takes place in a fantasy world.  The main continent is Westeros, with another continent to the east called Essos.  Control of Westeros is nominally by the king, who sits on the Iron Throne.  As the story begins, that king is drunken, pompous and lusty Robert Baratheon, of the Baratheon family.  Robert stole the throne from the dragon-oriented Targaryens, who are now exiled to Pentos, a city on the eastern continent.  Robert’s “Hand” (his executive officer) Jon Arryn has recently died under mysterious circumstances, and he promotes his good friend Ned Stark (played by Sean “Borimir” Bean) to the position.   It’s probably best to reduce the analysis to a review of the various major houses/families.

Starks.  “Winter is coming” is their motto, and the dire wolf is their totem animal.  The Starks hold the most northern territory, their home castle is Winterfell, and they are essentially the “good guys” of the series.  Ned is the dad, Catelyn the mom.  Robb is the oldest son, followed by Bran (young boy), Rickon (very young boy), daughters Sansa (spoiled, self-centered princess) and Arya (bad-ass fighting tomboy), and a bastard son Jon Snow, who is about Robb’s age. 

            The Starks are unique in this series.  Not only are they the only family who are consistently good – there doesn’t appear to be a living Stark who is anything less than decent – but they seem to be the only ones in touch with their totem animals (with the big exception of Danaerys Targaryen, see below).  They actually find dire wolf puppies, which they adopt; they also dream of being wolves, which turns out to be more substantial for Bran than the rest of them.  I didn’t see Theon dreaming of krakens, Tyrion dreaming of lions, or Renly dreaming of stags. 

Lannisters.  “A Lannister always pays his debts”, as Tyrion likes to say.  He’s the #2 son, a dwarf, also called “The Imp”.  He is easily the most interesting character in the entire series.  He’s a regular brothel customer (most women wouldn’t have him without gold) but also talks his way out of trouble and consistently has an entertaining viewpoint.  Impressively cynical but still good-hearted.

            The Lannisters are easily the “bad guys” of the series.  Twins Jaime and Cersei have a cozy brother-sister relationship – a bit too cozy.  Married to Robert Baratheon, Cersei is the Queen,– a cold, ruthless, arrogant, beautiful 1000% bitch.  Jaime is an excellent knight and warrior, but somewhat unscrupulous and arrogant, but he can’t quite match his sister or father’s evil.  They have a younger brother Joffrey (complete brat bastard), a sister Myrcella, a younger brother Tommen (both of whom are young, innocent, and pretty much just pawns on the GOT chessboard), and an archduke of evil father Tywin.  Think of him as Asmodeus.

Baratheons.  In addition to King Robert, there is another brother Stannis – kind of an unpopular stick in the mud – and the youngest is Renly, who is actually fairly cool, even he does play for the other team.  These three do NOT get along with each other. 

Greyjoys.  Up in the Iron Islands west of Westeros, the Greyjoys’ totem is the Kraken, and their motto is “we do not sow”.  They’re pretty much brutal Viking bastards who prefer taking what they want by force (“the iron price”) vs. buying it (“the gold price”).  Theon, the heir, is a ward of the Starks; although nominally a hostage, they treat him well.  He repays their kindness…well, you’ll see. 

Targaryens.  The Dragon family is the only one who can get away with incest: they typically married brothers to sisters.  By this time Prince Viserys (arrogant asshole) and Princess Danaerys (cute virgin girl) are stuck in Pentos.  Viserys sells his sister to the horse nomads, the Dothraki, in the hopes that these warriors will bring him back to the throne that Robert Baratheon stole, but Khal Drogo, Danaerys’ husband, has other plans.  The majority of the Targaryen story winds up taking place on the eastern continent, even if they were originally from Westeros.  Danaerys comes into possession of three dragon eggs, which actually do hatch by the end of book/season 1, although at this point they’re baby dragons and too small for her to ride.  By book 5 she’s become the center of attention, with no less than 3 major characters attempting to either find her or marry her.

There are lesser families which are “vassals” and “bannermen” beneath these higher ones:  the Tullys (Catelyn Stark’s family), the Arryns, the Karstarks, the Boltons, the Freys, the Ulmers, the Martells of Dorne (far southeast, desert and Mediterranean), the Tyrells of Highgarden (southwest), the Tarleys, etc.  These lesser houses shift allegiances between Starks, Lannisters and Stannis Baratheon as the winds blow, so much of the intrigue is centered on efforts of major characters to secure alliances, e.g. through marriage, from the lesser houses.  

Religion.  There seems to be three tiers.  The “Old Gods” are worshipped in “godswoods” and “heart trees”, essentially a primitive spirit worship with no tangible benefits.  The Seven are the more modern group; it’s a collection of seven different deities.  They actually have temples and priests and priestesses (septs and septas), and is the most mainstream and widely followed religion.  There is a new religion, a Red God, Rh’llor, gaining converts; their deal is fire.  Stannis Baratheon has a red witch, Melisandre, who preaches this religion and claims to see the future in holy flames.  Theon Greyjoy’s uncle Aeron is a priest of the Drowned God, a water-based religion which doesn’t seem to have any worshippers beyond the Greyjoys.

Maesters.  These are what passes for doctors and scientists.  They wear grey robes and a chain around their necks, with links of different metals representing mastery of different sciences.  They train at an academy, the Citadel, located in Oldtown, Highgarden.  There is at least one “dark maester”, somewhat of a necromancer, Qyburn, who works for Cersei Lannister.

The Wall.  North of Winterfell is a massive wall of ice which protects Westeros from various threats.  The most mundane threat are barbarians called wildings led by a “king beyond the wall”, Mance Rayder.  Although very savage with no laws, the wildings are human and have no particular magic qualities.  The darker threat are “Others”, essentially undead wights.  The wildings typically attack the Wall.  The Wall is defended by the Night’s Watch, a motley brigade of misfits and losers, Westeros’ equivalent of the French Foreign Legion.  Given the alternative of execution or “taking the black” (joining the Night’s Watch), many choose the latter option.  They can’t marry or have children, but they aren’t eunuchs and don’t exactly have a vow of chastity. 

Sex.  Sex is a major part of GOT.  Whores, maids, rape, “moon tea” (GOT contraceptive), and raunchy language and behavior are prevalent.  Marriages cement alliances and the bride has to be a “maid” (virgin). 

Again, it’s interesting how injecting sex into a fantasy story does wonders for attracting female viewers.

HBO Series.  Now that I’ve read the books I can compare one with the other.  The series takes substantial liberties with the dialogue and injects a fair amount of nudity and sex which is absent from the book, particularly Renly Baratheon’s “relationship” with Ser Loras Tyrell.  On the other hand, they are essentially faithful to the characters and plot, and the book has more than its fair share of nudity and sex anyway.

The stories are told in the third person, but from the viewpoint of specific characters, and it jumps around considerably.  Books 4 and 5 are almost, but not quite, parallel.  At this rate, the HBO series may well catch up to book 5 before Martin finishes writing book 6.  Some characters disappear and reappear later, while others….I’ve never seen an author like Martin who is so ruthless about dispatching sympathetic characters in a surprising way.  You really never know what will happen next, which makes his stories literally impossible to put down.  Of course, the rutting, whoring, raping, drinking, etc. are also part of the fun.