Einstein's activism against lynching apparently takes up 20 pages of his FBI "Treason File #61". There's nothing treasonous in it.
Einstein's FBI file is available on the FBI website.
Its implications are discussed in the newly updated _The Einstein File: The FBI's Secret War Against the World's Most Famous Scientist_ by Fred Jerome. I went to the book launch tonight.
Apparently, Einstein didn't just sign a letter. He actively co-chaired an anti-lynching organization, in shock and anger at the wave of lynchings in 1946 after black soldiers returned from World War II. His co-chair was noted singer and activist Paul Robeson, who was also a friend. When a singer was not allowed to stay in a local hotel --solely due to her race--- Einstein let her stay at his house. In her memoir, she recalled him fondly.
Einstein was also active ---beyond writing--- on other issues. Free speech and nuclear weapons are still debated today. But on anti-semitism and race, Einstein's opinions, while radical in their day, are common sense now.
I like knowing this side of Einstein. For me, it humanizes him.
Showing posts with label History. Show all posts
Showing posts with label History. Show all posts
Thursday, April 19, 2018
Friday, November 17, 2017
When showing why
Confederate statues constructed decades, or even close to a century, after the US Civil War? As much as I love reading about history, I sometimes wonder the point. But the mysterious case of the Confederate Statues almost feels like a mystery story. If the south wanted to honor its dead, I felt that perhaps it was right to keep the statues up.
Then I heard when the statues were erected.
Many of the statues honoring the Confederate leaders and fighters were erected half a century after the Civil War, concurrent with renewed or challenged segregation. More compelling, some confederate statues were put up during the Civil Rights movement of the late 1950s and early 1960s, almost a century after the end of the Civil War.
A half a century after the civil war? That timing makes it seem less like honoring the dead, and more about celebrating the cause. What cause? "Negro" inferiority. In other words, celebrating or supporting the tremendous suffering of human beings.
Excuse me while I vomit.
Because segregation wasn't "separate but equal"or a benign "southern culture": it was murder. Lynching was used brutally to support a system in which skin color trumped ability and character. Segregation was daily humiliation, the insulting of children, the permitted abuse of every African American. And before that, slavery : legal kidnapping in chains, the separation by ownership of parents from children, whipping.
I might be able too support a few confederate monuments IF they were constructed when white southerners were mourning their dead shortly after the Civil War. Even then, it is offensive, but I'm willing to compromise that much.
Challenge me: look up for yourself when Confederate statues and monuments were put up. Then ask yourself what it was like to be black at the time.
The study of history can be relevant to the present.
Then I heard when the statues were erected.
Many of the statues honoring the Confederate leaders and fighters were erected half a century after the Civil War, concurrent with renewed or challenged segregation. More compelling, some confederate statues were put up during the Civil Rights movement of the late 1950s and early 1960s, almost a century after the end of the Civil War.
A half a century after the civil war? That timing makes it seem less like honoring the dead, and more about celebrating the cause. What cause? "Negro" inferiority. In other words, celebrating or supporting the tremendous suffering of human beings.
Excuse me while I vomit.
Because segregation wasn't "separate but equal"or a benign "southern culture": it was murder. Lynching was used brutally to support a system in which skin color trumped ability and character. Segregation was daily humiliation, the insulting of children, the permitted abuse of every African American. And before that, slavery : legal kidnapping in chains, the separation by ownership of parents from children, whipping.
I might be able too support a few confederate monuments IF they were constructed when white southerners were mourning their dead shortly after the Civil War. Even then, it is offensive, but I'm willing to compromise that much.
Challenge me: look up for yourself when Confederate statues and monuments were put up. Then ask yourself what it was like to be black at the time.
The study of history can be relevant to the present.
Saturday, December 31, 2016
Tech allows change?
Why do histories of science discovery include biographies of
the discoverer? I found it revelatory when it was pointed out that it was new
technology related to glass which allowed the discoveries made via the
microscope and telescope. I feel
like I missed this because I was too distracted by text discussing who the
discoverers were.
I’m not saying that the lives of the scientists are not
worth studying. Discovering, via Keynes, that Newton believed in alchemy is
relevant to many questions, the fact that one scientist could do his work because
he was wealthy, that another was persecuted while others of his time weren’t
due to where he lived, is all worthy of study, for many reasons.
What I am saying is that in trying to cram everything into a
textbook, we run the risk of readers getting turned off. I was.
I was.
Most of what I’ve learned about history, and other areas,
I’ve learned despite the textbooks.
What if curious children and adults were introduced to the
story of science in another way? What if science history was framed by the
history of the technology available to the investigators, rather than by the
investigators lives?
What if telescopes and microscopes got a chapter, perhaps
the same chapter? I didn’t understand it when the ability to see inside of cells
was credited to a person rather than to a technology. The person deserves some
credit, but since the person was the focus I lost sight of the fact that it was
the technology that allowed the insight. Likewise the telescope: Galileo’s
place is secure because he used the telescope more effectively than his
predecessors, but the larger point, the take away, is that the new technology
is what allowed him to see new things.
In an era where science funding is cut, this is not an
insignificant point.
There was a Time Magazine special edition that discussed the
results of scientific discoveries. The laser, for example, led to new
audio/video tech, new eye surgery, and supermarket checkout scanners. This was more helpful for my understanding of the world, or of how science and technology can effect society, than if that discussion had been clogged with names. There was nary a one. So I could focus on the ideas, and I said, "WOW! THAT'S NEAT!"
What if a discussion of modern discoveries and theories was
framed around how the cpu --starting with the 4004, say--- allowed calculations
previously too complex and lengthy for humans to do? It’s true: in more than
one field, calculations that would have taken _teams_ of researchers _years_ to
accomplish can now be done in hours or minutes. And in field after field,
---iPhones to mass marketing to the age of the universe to cancer--- this has
made all of the difference.
If you want to study how science is done, study how the
great scientists worked. But if you want to learn how discoveries changed our
lives, focus on the technology. Trying to do both at once confused me and
discouraged me. Separating them opened the world to me.
Is it just me?
Saturday, December 10, 2016
Societal knowledge
Of course human beings continue to learn more about the world: the ancient Greeks couldn't put a human being on the moon, the germ theory of disease wasn't fully accepted by doctors until, what, a a century and a half ago?
But we also lose knowledge:
*archological sites give us new knowledge of human origins and the timing of human accomplishment. Bombs obliterate this, as was done in the first US Gulf War a quarter century ago, and more recently in Syria.
*the notion that everything is made up of atoms --which led eventually to the atomic bomb and plastics, amongst many other things--- was first proposed hundreds of years BC: but, by luck, Democritus's writings were lost, and Plato's (among others) were preserved, all by accident. What if it had been the reverse? (From Charles Van Doren's _History of Knowledge_).
*I read, somewhere, in English, that there are languages that are only spoken by a few senior citizens, that once they die, the language may too.
* So-called primitive people sometimes know that an obscure plant will treat a particular symptom. Pharmaceutical companies investigate this, and it can be the origin of some new wonder drugs. If the peoples, or the plant, go extinct, so does that knowledge.
*The Pinkerton Detective Agency protected the President of the United States before the Secret Service did. The Pinkerton detectives were also involved in a vast array of issues, from labor strikes to investigating fake psychics. So is the burning of their records insignificant?
*Which isn't as bad as the case of the massive scale of records destruction in the Chinese cultural revolution. Historians of China are at a loss: the records of earlier times were systematically destroyed.
*Houdini was one of the highest paid entertainers of his era, and remains an icon 90 years after his death. Too bad he was buried with some of his family correspondence in his coffin.
Can you think of other examples of knowledge that was destroyed, permanently, by accident or on purpose?
(Note: Source: the concept of "lost knowledge" was introduced to me by Peter Burke's _Social History of Knowledge_. I don't know if he discusses any of my examples).
But we also lose knowledge:
*archological sites give us new knowledge of human origins and the timing of human accomplishment. Bombs obliterate this, as was done in the first US Gulf War a quarter century ago, and more recently in Syria.
*the notion that everything is made up of atoms --which led eventually to the atomic bomb and plastics, amongst many other things--- was first proposed hundreds of years BC: but, by luck, Democritus's writings were lost, and Plato's (among others) were preserved, all by accident. What if it had been the reverse? (From Charles Van Doren's _History of Knowledge_).
*I read, somewhere, in English, that there are languages that are only spoken by a few senior citizens, that once they die, the language may too.
* So-called primitive people sometimes know that an obscure plant will treat a particular symptom. Pharmaceutical companies investigate this, and it can be the origin of some new wonder drugs. If the peoples, or the plant, go extinct, so does that knowledge.
*The Pinkerton Detective Agency protected the President of the United States before the Secret Service did. The Pinkerton detectives were also involved in a vast array of issues, from labor strikes to investigating fake psychics. So is the burning of their records insignificant?
*Which isn't as bad as the case of the massive scale of records destruction in the Chinese cultural revolution. Historians of China are at a loss: the records of earlier times were systematically destroyed.
*Houdini was one of the highest paid entertainers of his era, and remains an icon 90 years after his death. Too bad he was buried with some of his family correspondence in his coffin.
Can you think of other examples of knowledge that was destroyed, permanently, by accident or on purpose?
(Note: Source: the concept of "lost knowledge" was introduced to me by Peter Burke's _Social History of Knowledge_. I don't know if he discusses any of my examples).
Sunday, October 30, 2016
Hedy!
When I saw an advance workshop production of "Hedy! The Life and Inventions of Hedy Lamarr" the whole audience laughed so hard, so often, and the show won an award! So now it's being produced for two shows only. The November 9th performance is sold out! This is under United Solo/Theatre Row.
An extra performance, Friday November 11th @7:30pm has been added and there are a few seats left. Telecharge dot com or : 212-239-6200. It may be under date and time rather than by title.
Can you believe that a Hollywood star co-invented technology used in missile guidance and cell phones?
An extra performance, Friday November 11th @7:30pm has been added and there are a few seats left. Telecharge dot com or : 212-239-6200. It may be under date and time rather than by title.
Can you believe that a Hollywood star co-invented technology used in missile guidance and cell phones?
Saturday, October 22, 2016
Humor, magic, history
And now, my friends, gather round for some moments of wit from a book that, more than any other, changed my life, The Illustrated History of Magic by Milbourne Christopher. I read it first when I was twelve, in "the big people's" section of the library. And now some humor from its discussion of the 1800s :
For political reasons, the press of the day referred to President Martin Van Buren as "The Little Magician". Entertainer Signor Antonio Blitz joked that the politician was a colleague, because both "so successfully deceived the public." Van Buren pointed out that he was retired from politics, and would therefore cede the title to Blitz. Good humor. (p106)
And this from mid-century magician and pianist Robert Heller:
Shakespeare wrote well
Dickens wrote weller
Anderson was _____,
But the greatest is Heller!
Or at least the most modest.
Anderson, by the way, is the Barnum, Houdini, Trump of early/mid-century conjuring: successful in part because he went to extremes in his advertising and did not suffer from modesty, either. He allegedly put his face on pats of butter and on the pyramids of Egypt! (p 111)
At least one critic complained that Anderson relied too much on his props:
"I don't mind a man's pulling wires, but he should have the politician's skill of keeping them out of sight." The critic was comparing Anderson unfavorably with Compars Herrmann, whose greatness lay in part in his reliance on his technical skill, minimal props required. (p187)
In November of 1861, Herrmann performed at the White House. Asking President Lincoln to participate in a card trick, the President demured, passing the deck to his Secretary of War with the quip, "This gentleman shuffles the cards for me at present."(p187)
And just for fun: what magic did these magicians perform?
*Anderson was an early performer of the rabbit from a hat
*two of the magicians performed the dangerous trick of appearing to "catch" a bullet.
*two of the magicians performed "second sight" telepathy with an assistant
Last year I went back to my hometown for the first time since childhood, went to the library, and found the same copy of The Illustrated History of Magic, first edition, still on the shelf. Wow!
Of course my favorite magic quip might be too recent to be in the first edition, that of off-Broadway magician Peter Samelson: "Magic is a crime because it breaks the laws of nature."
For political reasons, the press of the day referred to President Martin Van Buren as "The Little Magician". Entertainer Signor Antonio Blitz joked that the politician was a colleague, because both "so successfully deceived the public." Van Buren pointed out that he was retired from politics, and would therefore cede the title to Blitz. Good humor. (p106)
And this from mid-century magician and pianist Robert Heller:
Shakespeare wrote well
Dickens wrote weller
Anderson was _____,
But the greatest is Heller!
Or at least the most modest.
Anderson, by the way, is the Barnum, Houdini, Trump of early/mid-century conjuring: successful in part because he went to extremes in his advertising and did not suffer from modesty, either. He allegedly put his face on pats of butter and on the pyramids of Egypt! (p 111)
At least one critic complained that Anderson relied too much on his props:
"I don't mind a man's pulling wires, but he should have the politician's skill of keeping them out of sight." The critic was comparing Anderson unfavorably with Compars Herrmann, whose greatness lay in part in his reliance on his technical skill, minimal props required. (p187)
In November of 1861, Herrmann performed at the White House. Asking President Lincoln to participate in a card trick, the President demured, passing the deck to his Secretary of War with the quip, "This gentleman shuffles the cards for me at present."(p187)
And just for fun: what magic did these magicians perform?
*Anderson was an early performer of the rabbit from a hat
*two of the magicians performed the dangerous trick of appearing to "catch" a bullet.
*two of the magicians performed "second sight" telepathy with an assistant
Last year I went back to my hometown for the first time since childhood, went to the library, and found the same copy of The Illustrated History of Magic, first edition, still on the shelf. Wow!
Of course my favorite magic quip might be too recent to be in the first edition, that of off-Broadway magician Peter Samelson: "Magic is a crime because it breaks the laws of nature."
Tuesday, July 26, 2016
Collecting "magical"
Have you ever had the feeling of joy when an awaited package arrives for you?
Can you find peace in a room of books, public or private?
Okay, so I'm talking about myself, though not only myself. About a decade ago I visited an acquaintance who graciously allowed me to visit for several hours in his home library. Some of the books were rare, they were organized, and the cases were of finely polished wood. Wow. Last week I joined a private online forum and swooned at photos of a few more acquaintances book collections, all nicely arranged in cases of finely polished wood.
As a youth I decried the commercialism of collecting, but now I'm not so sure. What I've learned with time --I am older than I used to be :) --- is that book collecting, for me, is calming. It's not just the excitement of getting a new book for the shelves, that's just the exciting part. The larger utility, if I'm not overstating, is that I look at books on shelves, mine or someone else's, with joy.
I won't go so far as to say that I advocate collecting ---I think that advocating should be reserved for things where the consequences are life and death: water shortages, starvation in the midst of plenty, and such. And I don't doubt that buying things can be done without heart, mindlessly, to numb some sort of emotional pain. And therefore be self-defeating, of sorts, even if it is not resulting in financial trouble.
But a wall full of books about a favorite subject can stir my heart, as it has for most of my life. Just because buying _can_ be self-destructive does not mean that it has to be.
And my preferred subject, mostly, is Houdini, his predecessors and successors. They were entertainers who brought joy to people, and they brought that joy by pretending ---pretending--- to defy science....
I could wax poetic, but the truth is that a bookcase full of biographies of these mostly forgotten, mostly itinerant entertainers reminds of the precious times that I have been given joy by the performance of the impossible: Ricky Jay's graceful cheating, Peter Samelson's magic as metaphor, Doug Henning's sense of fantasy, David Copperfield's magician-as-rock-star.
I'd type more, but I want to get back to reading a book I got in the mail today about the different meanings of the word "magic." And then, I'll carry it over to my bookcase and admire it next to all the others. There have been magic books for as long as there have been books, more than ten thousand of them, and what they mean has changed with the centuries. But that's a post for another day.
Can you find peace in a room of books, public or private?
Okay, so I'm talking about myself, though not only myself. About a decade ago I visited an acquaintance who graciously allowed me to visit for several hours in his home library. Some of the books were rare, they were organized, and the cases were of finely polished wood. Wow. Last week I joined a private online forum and swooned at photos of a few more acquaintances book collections, all nicely arranged in cases of finely polished wood.
As a youth I decried the commercialism of collecting, but now I'm not so sure. What I've learned with time --I am older than I used to be :) --- is that book collecting, for me, is calming. It's not just the excitement of getting a new book for the shelves, that's just the exciting part. The larger utility, if I'm not overstating, is that I look at books on shelves, mine or someone else's, with joy.
I won't go so far as to say that I advocate collecting ---I think that advocating should be reserved for things where the consequences are life and death: water shortages, starvation in the midst of plenty, and such. And I don't doubt that buying things can be done without heart, mindlessly, to numb some sort of emotional pain. And therefore be self-defeating, of sorts, even if it is not resulting in financial trouble.
But a wall full of books about a favorite subject can stir my heart, as it has for most of my life. Just because buying _can_ be self-destructive does not mean that it has to be.
And my preferred subject, mostly, is Houdini, his predecessors and successors. They were entertainers who brought joy to people, and they brought that joy by pretending ---pretending--- to defy science....
I could wax poetic, but the truth is that a bookcase full of biographies of these mostly forgotten, mostly itinerant entertainers reminds of the precious times that I have been given joy by the performance of the impossible: Ricky Jay's graceful cheating, Peter Samelson's magic as metaphor, Doug Henning's sense of fantasy, David Copperfield's magician-as-rock-star.
I'd type more, but I want to get back to reading a book I got in the mail today about the different meanings of the word "magic." And then, I'll carry it over to my bookcase and admire it next to all the others. There have been magic books for as long as there have been books, more than ten thousand of them, and what they mean has changed with the centuries. But that's a post for another day.
Thursday, July 7, 2016
A "Hedy!" experience
The inventor of your cellphone was a Hollywood star.
Called the most beautiful woman in the world,
Her name was Hedy Lamarr
From the famous Louis B. Mayer she chutzpah-ed a better contract,
but complained that her looks always did distract
in film she was a star, but in real life,
Being judged only by her looks caused her strife.
She escaped boring husbands and helped out in World War II,
performing and serving and hugging for USO,
and co-patenting a technology used by me and by you.
She meant it to save lives in the guidance of missiles
but the smart woman's invention of radio wave frequency hopping
eventually was used from cell phones to wireless online shopping.
OKAY I'm not a great poet, but I am giddy after seeing a play that I enjoyed more than any I can remember. "Hedy! The Life and Inventions of Hedy Lamarr" had me laughing almost non-stop, and thinking too, so enjoyably. It's fitting that Richard Rhodes, who could make physics a narrative, wrote a history of Hedy Lamarr and her technological contribution to the world.
It didn't come out that she was Jewish until her death, and her technological research was only declassified (?) in like 1985?
My friend Heather Massie wrote and stars in "Hedy!" I was worried that I might not like the play but I LOVED it.
The next performance is in November, so you have plenty of time to plan for it. Seriously, the audience laughed out loud through the whole performance today. And it made me think, and it wasn't even idolatry: she made some bad decisions about who to marry, and then did it again. And in addressing her life, the play addresses glamour culture, technological dependence, bureaucracy, sexism, the horror of war, the importance of self confidence. In the advance preview I saw today, Ms. Lamarr scolded a patron whose phone went off, the audience cracking up in the process. Ms. Massie's Hedy! is charming and smart.
"Hedy! The Life and Inventions of Hedy Lamarr" will be performed on November 9th, in the cool days between Halloween and Thanksgiving, in New York City.
EDIT: THE SHOW IS ON NOVEMBER 9TH. Buy a ticket. :)
Called the most beautiful woman in the world,
Her name was Hedy Lamarr
From the famous Louis B. Mayer she chutzpah-ed a better contract,
but complained that her looks always did distract
in film she was a star, but in real life,
Being judged only by her looks caused her strife.
She escaped boring husbands and helped out in World War II,
performing and serving and hugging for USO,
and co-patenting a technology used by me and by you.
She meant it to save lives in the guidance of missiles
but the smart woman's invention of radio wave frequency hopping
eventually was used from cell phones to wireless online shopping.
OKAY I'm not a great poet, but I am giddy after seeing a play that I enjoyed more than any I can remember. "Hedy! The Life and Inventions of Hedy Lamarr" had me laughing almost non-stop, and thinking too, so enjoyably. It's fitting that Richard Rhodes, who could make physics a narrative, wrote a history of Hedy Lamarr and her technological contribution to the world.
It didn't come out that she was Jewish until her death, and her technological research was only declassified (?) in like 1985?
My friend Heather Massie wrote and stars in "Hedy!" I was worried that I might not like the play but I LOVED it.
The next performance is in November, so you have plenty of time to plan for it. Seriously, the audience laughed out loud through the whole performance today. And it made me think, and it wasn't even idolatry: she made some bad decisions about who to marry, and then did it again. And in addressing her life, the play addresses glamour culture, technological dependence, bureaucracy, sexism, the horror of war, the importance of self confidence. In the advance preview I saw today, Ms. Lamarr scolded a patron whose phone went off, the audience cracking up in the process. Ms. Massie's Hedy! is charming and smart.
"Hedy! The Life and Inventions of Hedy Lamarr" will be performed on November 9th, in the cool days between Halloween and Thanksgiving, in New York City.
EDIT: THE SHOW IS ON NOVEMBER 9TH. Buy a ticket. :)
Sunday, April 24, 2016
Extremism: communism, witchcraft, politics
Communist spies! It wasn't that Salem suddenly decided that witches were no longer in their midst at the end of 1692, nor was it that United States anti-communists suddenly decided that there weren't any more spies or disloyal Americans in the mid 20th century. It was that the accusers had gone too far: in 1692, the governor's wife was accused of witchcraft, centuries later it was, in part, Senator McCarthy's accusation that war hero and American President Dwight Eisenhower was a communist. In Salem, the overzealous judge Staughton was effectively kicked off of the witchcraft court, and later Senator McCarthy was embarrassed on television and censured by his peers. Thus ended the panics, if not the belief that they had some legitimate aims.
Staughton and McCarthy were overzealous, and it was interesting to realize that some of their critics agreed that this had hurt a good cause. "Witches/communists remain a threat, but abuse of power has killed our will to fight the fight reasonably." It's not that different from environmentalists who booby trap trees that are in danger of being cut down, despite the fact that these traps could harm people, or abortion opponents who believe that God gives them the right to murder doctors. Many (most?) environmentalists, and many (most?) critics of abortion agree that extreme tactics hurt their cause. Caveat: "extremism" of the sit-in movement which desegregated lunch counters.
One of my favorite lines about the utility of extremism is from Malcolm X, who observed that the white establishment was opposed to Dr. Martin Luther King and the NAACP, but added with as much humor as seriousness, "And then the white establishment looked at me, and they proclaimed, 'Thank God for Dr. King ... and the NAACP!" The audience laughed and cheered.
Staughton and McCarthy were overzealous, and it was interesting to realize that some of their critics agreed that this had hurt a good cause. "Witches/communists remain a threat, but abuse of power has killed our will to fight the fight reasonably." It's not that different from environmentalists who booby trap trees that are in danger of being cut down, despite the fact that these traps could harm people, or abortion opponents who believe that God gives them the right to murder doctors. Many (most?) environmentalists, and many (most?) critics of abortion agree that extreme tactics hurt their cause. Caveat: "extremism" of the sit-in movement which desegregated lunch counters.
One of my favorite lines about the utility of extremism is from Malcolm X, who observed that the white establishment was opposed to Dr. Martin Luther King and the NAACP, but added with as much humor as seriousness, "And then the white establishment looked at me, and they proclaimed, 'Thank God for Dr. King ... and the NAACP!" The audience laughed and cheered.
Thursday, April 7, 2016
Ricky Jay and ancient humanity
Magic tricks and anthropology? There is currently a show at the Metropolitan Museum of Art in NYC featuring drawings with miniature writing (micro-graphy): it takes a magnifying glass to tell that the curls of a drawing of a wig actually include words, sentences. Other documents have micrography featured differently. Most are by a man who ---didn't have arms. All of that man's ephemera in the exhibit is owned by sleight of hand artist Ricky Jay.
After Peter Samelson, whom the New York Times called "a soft spoken conceptualist of sorcery", it was "Ricky Jay and His 52 Assistants" that taught me that what are too often trivially disrespected magic tricks can be performed with intellect, that my love of scholarship was not necessarily at odds with my love of fine sleight of hand and, in rare cases, love of stage illusion.
In "Ricky Jay and His 52 Assistants" Mr. Jay performed the ancient feat of the "Cups and Balls" with a script that included Latin and comparative anthropology! You know the trick: a marble sized ball is placed under an upside down cup, and reappears under another upside down cup. It was known to Seneca (tutor of the man who became the ancient Roman emperor Nero), and was also exhibited in ancient China using cups the size of small bowls, in ancient India with miniature cups. Alluding to this, and the apparent fact that these were created without contact between the countries, Mr Jay quipped in the show that "Anthropologists love the concept of simultaneous invention."
Like the fact that before the invention of monotheism, proto religions (is that the right term?) highlighted women, and featured the symbol of the bull. In Africa, Asia, and Europe. "Anthropologists love the concept of simultaneous invention."
The script of Ricky Jay's opening number in "...52 Assistants" was, appropriately, a verbatim quote from a century old book, which seemed to me poetic. Thank you, Mr. Jay.
Sources:
Cups and balls trick: see _Street Magic_ by Claflin and Sheridan
Women and the bull symbology: see _Ideas: A History..._ by Watson
On Peter Samelson, see Samelsonmagic dot com
After Peter Samelson, whom the New York Times called "a soft spoken conceptualist of sorcery", it was "Ricky Jay and His 52 Assistants" that taught me that what are too often trivially disrespected magic tricks can be performed with intellect, that my love of scholarship was not necessarily at odds with my love of fine sleight of hand and, in rare cases, love of stage illusion.
In "Ricky Jay and His 52 Assistants" Mr. Jay performed the ancient feat of the "Cups and Balls" with a script that included Latin and comparative anthropology! You know the trick: a marble sized ball is placed under an upside down cup, and reappears under another upside down cup. It was known to Seneca (tutor of the man who became the ancient Roman emperor Nero), and was also exhibited in ancient China using cups the size of small bowls, in ancient India with miniature cups. Alluding to this, and the apparent fact that these were created without contact between the countries, Mr Jay quipped in the show that "Anthropologists love the concept of simultaneous invention."
Like the fact that before the invention of monotheism, proto religions (is that the right term?) highlighted women, and featured the symbol of the bull. In Africa, Asia, and Europe. "Anthropologists love the concept of simultaneous invention."
The script of Ricky Jay's opening number in "...52 Assistants" was, appropriately, a verbatim quote from a century old book, which seemed to me poetic. Thank you, Mr. Jay.
Sources:
Cups and balls trick: see _Street Magic_ by Claflin and Sheridan
Women and the bull symbology: see _Ideas: A History..._ by Watson
On Peter Samelson, see Samelsonmagic dot com
Monday, March 21, 2016
Houdini publication!!!
Probable fraud in the roaring 1920s! A woman claimed that her dead brother (did I mention that he was dead?) could not only move physical objects, but overhear distant conversations (which is kinda creepy, if you ask me). Scientists investigated, and there were charges of sexual compromise and other betrayal. My review of The Witch of Lime Street: Seance, Seduction, and Houdini in the Spirit World was the feature article in the March 16, 2016 issue of eSkeptic, http://www.skeptic.com/eskeptic/16-03-16/
the edited weekly email newsletter published by The Skeptics Society, which also publishes Skeptic magazine. I'm excited!
Tuesday, March 8, 2016
Freedom & Oxygen (and carbon, hydrogen, nitrogen)
Freedom & Oxygen (and carbon, hydrogen, nitrogen)
Ideas can give complex topics a unity. An example from history is the contradictory interpretations of "freedom". In nature, an example (the most basic?) is the scientific discovery of the elements of life being present in the stars.
Freedom: In the US, how did slave owners write so poetically of all men being free? Compare the early 20th century phrase "wage slavery" to the late 20th century argument that the economy needs to be "free" of government interference. The idea that US history can be examined via different meanings of the word "freedom" gave me a way of unifying it, though there are other themes that can be used. (Inspiration: the books The Story of American Freedom and the stimulatingly different Patriots History of the United States, among others).
"Freedom" could be seen as the "oxygen" of democracy, but that's not where I'm going today.
Compared to "freedom", the discovery that all plants and animals live by carbon, hydrogen, oxygen, and nitrogen is more fundamental, all the more so with the more recent discovery that the same four elements are "star stuff". Biology and astronomy somehow make more sense to me now. (My limited knowledge of this is mostly from the book The Scientists by John Gribbin).
I'm not saying that US history is reducible to the above (and many more) usages of the word "freedom", nor am I suggesting that biology and astronomy are simply made of carbon, oxygen, hydrogen, and nitrogen. In US history there are varying interpretations and other themes that could be used, in the sciences the details are complex. But these two basic ideas did give me a new perspective, a new way of viewing the topics, a unity, or theme, in complex subjects.
Is there a big human idea that inspired you to see a topic of study differently? Another field with a leanse which is one of many? Or a complex field with a fact that is discovered to be fundamental?
Ideas can give complex topics a unity. An example from history is the contradictory interpretations of "freedom". In nature, an example (the most basic?) is the scientific discovery of the elements of life being present in the stars.
Freedom: In the US, how did slave owners write so poetically of all men being free? Compare the early 20th century phrase "wage slavery" to the late 20th century argument that the economy needs to be "free" of government interference. The idea that US history can be examined via different meanings of the word "freedom" gave me a way of unifying it, though there are other themes that can be used. (Inspiration: the books The Story of American Freedom and the stimulatingly different Patriots History of the United States, among others).
"Freedom" could be seen as the "oxygen" of democracy, but that's not where I'm going today.
Compared to "freedom", the discovery that all plants and animals live by carbon, hydrogen, oxygen, and nitrogen is more fundamental, all the more so with the more recent discovery that the same four elements are "star stuff". Biology and astronomy somehow make more sense to me now. (My limited knowledge of this is mostly from the book The Scientists by John Gribbin).
I'm not saying that US history is reducible to the above (and many more) usages of the word "freedom", nor am I suggesting that biology and astronomy are simply made of carbon, oxygen, hydrogen, and nitrogen. In US history there are varying interpretations and other themes that could be used, in the sciences the details are complex. But these two basic ideas did give me a new perspective, a new way of viewing the topics, a unity, or theme, in complex subjects.
Is there a big human idea that inspired you to see a topic of study differently? Another field with a leanse which is one of many? Or a complex field with a fact that is discovered to be fundamental?
Thursday, March 3, 2016
Houdini's diverse fame?
More than a hundred biographies, almost a hundred novels, ten times as many as any other magician can claim. A new novel, a new tv series, a new history book. For anyone, that would be an accomplishment, but it's extraordinary for someone who's been dead for so long. There are many explanations for the depth and longevity of magic entertainer Harry Houdini's fame. During his lifetime he repeatedly risked death and survived, which often draws a crowd. That and escape are powerful metaphors. After his death his fame only increased, apparently thanks at least in part to the efforts of his widow, a fascinating theory explored by writer and researcher David Charvet in a 1995 article which is one of my favorites of all time (just as his book on Alexander The Man Who Knows is one of my favorite biographies, but I digress). I'll have more to say about all of these topics. (On his widow's efforts, see "Bess Houdini: Did the Woman Behind the Legend create the Myth?" by David Charvet, Magic magazine, October 1995). (On the number of HH novels and bios, see the wonderful blog "wildabouthoudini.com" by John Cox)
While agreeing with all of these factors as partly explaining the power of the word "Houdini", I would like to add one that is, if less important, also less obvious and just as compelling: the stunning breadth of his accomplishments. He was not _just_ famous for his live performances, though he was famous for that. He was also an activist, author, aviator and filmmaker, and dabbled in more. He made headlines for his challenges to fake psychics, wrote about magic history, was credited with being the first person to fly an airplane in Australia, and was a movie star. Anyone investigating the history of any of these topics is going to run into his name. And, in retrospect, it makes him more interesting to me.
So indulge imagination and speculate: would Houdini be as famous today if live performance was his only medium (if you will pardon the pun)? Does anyone recall encountering Houdini in history, or remaining interested in his career, for some reason other than his live performances?
[Edited to add title...]
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)