Today seems to be the day on which I give myself some meme time.

This time, fugney infected me with the meme.

Is sex without love a sin?


The questions posits the construct of "sex without love" as a transgressive activity which must meet with the approval of the patriarchy in order to be "confirmed"¹ as trangressive within the arbitrary limits of the acceptable. The physical activity of sex with or without love is carefully, if arbitrarily contextual, limning the essentialist nature of the three letters "S-E-X" as reified masculinity. This is a narrative of subjugation.

( more )

The Guardian reports: "Phillip Reeve wins the Grauniad Children's book prize." The point to note is made in the opening line of the article:

"The Grauniad children's book prize - once given to Philip Pullman for the first volume of his…trilogy - today goes to another writer for the triumphant completion of an even more ambitious project, a quartet."

It seems that literary merit¹ is measured by the number of volumes that an author produces in his² series. This is a radical insight, for it boldly challenges our thoughtless use of conventional criteria such as style, wit, skill, originality and acuity. An insight of such importance demands a revolution, but revolutions only happen when new principles are applied to old thoughts. For this reason, the existing Western Canon must be re-evaluated and pretenders on those flawed lists must be cast into utter obscurity. There will be controversy and resistance; horrified cries of all hues will be raised. These skeptics, mired in their habits of thoughts, bogged down by tradition, would do well to remember the wisdom of the subtle Mongolian Empiricist³ Hulagu Khan:

Though experience be our only guide in reasoning concerning matters of fact; it must be acknowledged, that this guide is not altogether infallible, but in some cases is apt to lead us into errors.

Naturally, this will only be a prelude to hacking them in half with a battleaxe, burning down their homes and stealing their horses. Historically, critics have always been dealt with in this way, and it is only by following past traditions that we can ensure a safe, terror free and predictable future.

Although the reputation of many writers will be severely damaged in the new critical regime, Shakespeare will continue to be a well regarded, if minor, writer. Unfortunately, time has destroyed works in a series that could have propelled Shakespeare into the company of the truly great. In particular, there appears to be no record of the eleven “Night” comedies.⁴ In the view of scholars like Eddie Izzard, the missing plays might well continue clues that would resolve the question of whether Shakespeare was, in fact, a woman dressed as a man.

Joseph Conrad, on the other hand, will be relegated to a deserved obscurity. A fanatical defender of Conrad might suggest that, perhaps, Lord Jim, Chance, Heart of Darkness and "Youth" are all part of a series, since they all contain Marlow. This argument can be easily dismissed. The necessary and sufficient conditions for identifying a true literary series are length, frequent repetition and undifferentiated characters. Conrad’s lack of skill shows in his inability to satisfy even one of these criteria. His psychological characterizations are the weakest part of his writing. Every character in a Conrad story thinks, feels and behaves differently. It is an unfortunate fact of the writing trade that multiple points of view are often necessary. But basic standards of due care that the writer owes to his readers require that, at the very least, all characters of the same gender and moral inclination should think and act alike. Conrad fails to fulfill this basic obligation. Complexity merely provides the illusion of depth. The wise know better. Enlightenment is found in the simplicity of cardboard cutouts and strawmen.

We throw down old idols and raise up their successors. Conrad has receded into darkness, but Terry Goodkind comes to take his place. A deep thinker, he has internalized the worldviews of two great writers of the 20th century- Robert Jordan and Ayn Rand. His Sword of Truth series shows no sign of ever ending. Each successive novel and character in the fantasy series has a pleasing sameness to them. The characterization is masterful and memorable, with a major character delivering a passionate plea for the lavish use of torture as a natural consequence of the principles of Objectivism. Magnificent and it is all about war.The Guardian has, in a short sentence, penetrated to the heart of the mystery of literary creation, lanced the abcess that was Conrad and replaced it with the life-saving stent that is Goodkind.⁵


1. Merit is directly proportional to ambition. The more ambitious you are, the more things you feel that you merit.
2. It is well known that women do not have the concentration to produce such extended works of art as, say, the magisterial Wheel of Time. They are too busy sniffing and tossing their braids.
3. Hulagu Khan’s empire included most of southwest Asia.
4. The twelfth in the series is a critical examination of the place of female transvestites in society.
5. Yes, I know what I’m doing to the language. I am implementing the principles of Objectivist torture.

To honour the forthcoming third anniversary of the Iraq War, I think we should add a new collective noun to the English language: a conspiracy of Muslims.

edited in response to rparvaaz's post.

I just saw this headline on MSN: Salman Khan sent to prison.

I wonder. I think it's more logical to state that he was sentenced to one year in prison. The sentence will be initiated when he's sent, and the sentence will be completed when the period is finished.

Sometimes, the unbearable fatuousness of the living amazes me. So The Week has just come out with a massive survey of young people in India. In the section on religious beliefs, one of the questions was "Is God [note capitalisation- judeo-Christian influence alert!] male or female?". 51 per cent say "male", and 28 per cent say "female". I have the following observations to make:

a. This is an incredibly stupid question to ask in a polytheistic culture, in which we have male, female and hermaphrodite gods.

b. It seems reasonable to assume that most of those who responded to the question fall into two classes: i. The vaguely/strongly monotheist. This includes people who might be polytheistic, but have this idea that Someone's Really in Charge of all those gods and demons running/flying around; ii. The reflexive question-answerers.
To the first category, I pose one question: so what do you think God does with his/her dangly/tucked away bits? Does s/he process waste matter? What if the Big Bang was really a Giant Fart? For the reflexive question-answerers, I have one question: why are you such a useless waste of oxygen?

Also in The Week's supplement, a quotation from the Executive Director of Talwalkar's Gym. "Delhiites have good genetics". You twit! Delhiites are not a race! They are merely people living in the city of Delhi. Do you even know what a city is?

There's an interview, in [you guessed it] with HD Kumaraswamy, the new Chief Monster of Karnataka. This is what he has to say: "Ideas like secularism and communalism should not come in the way of development". False dichotomy, Mr. Kumaraswamy, and a dangerous creed.

Edited in response to prashantr's response

I was deeply shocked to read this diatribe against Zinda.

The author of this piece merely displays the self-hating rancour that we've come to expect from pseudo-secularist Communist Bongs. They put sugar in their dahi and listen to Rabindra Sangeet. What would they know about culture and fillums? Their "greatest" film director was actually a well-known author of children's fiction!

Sanjay Gupta was making a point in making Zinda. The East Asians stole an entire religion from us-Buddhism. We are merely reclaiming our culture. Chan-Wook Park is a product of his country's history and culture. And that culture owes everything to India. It is a sign of the greatness of India and Indians that, rather than demanding acknowledgement from the world of its debt, we graciously appropriate the fruits of our cultural children from all over the world and make it our own. Bharat Mata is the proud mother that hangs up the doodlings of her children next to her expensive works of art. We did not whine when those bloody Mohammedans stole our zero and sold it to the goras for oil. Instead, when the goras came up with machines running on zeros [and 1s- also stolen from us by the Mohammedans], we joyfully accepted this gift and used it for the greater glory of Bharat. No longer did we have to shamefully admit that hard-working, much-abused Mallus were pouring millions of dollars into the country for many decades. We could now rejoice in the wealth of desis in suits! But I digress. The point is: did we grudge the gora's use of our zero to enslave and loot the world? Can a mother ever grudge her child's achievements? No, but she can live off the proceeds and grow fat and rich and go on a lot of phoren jaunts-just like our IT professionals. This Gupta-hating Bong, who is apparently working in technology in the US, does not realise that he is doing the same thing that he accuses Gupta of!

Or he would be, if it was true that Gupta copied Oldboy. In making this allegation, this fellow, and many others, are maligning both Chan-Wook Park and Sanjay Gupta. I've met a lot of Koreans, and I can assure you they have the greatest admiration for India and her cultural influence on the world. All you mean-spirited critics don't realise that Chan-Wook Park has realised this. Oldboy was his guru-dakshina to the master- Sanjay Gupta. Many have pondered the meaning of the octopus-eating scene in Oldboy. In fact, this was Chan-Wook Park's respectful suggestion to Sanjay Gupta about what Gupta was supposed to do with his dakshina. The guru was meant to grab hold of Park's movie, suck all the life from it, and spit it out. And this is exactly what he has done. The title, Zinda symbolises this act; Gupta has drained away the vivid pulse of Oldboy.

Indian ads are very strange. There's one about some kind of hair removal cream for women. This chick decides to get married in the next ten minutes, and then barrels down city streets in a sports car while simultaneously removing hair. Not the strongest endorsement of road safety that I've seen.

Then there are two ads for Titan, starring Amir Khan. He's jobless, so he starts a business to do...exactly nothing. But it hires women based on the watch they wear: hires them to do...exactly nothing. The entire purpose of the exercise appears to be so that he can fake an MBA certificate degree. This is morally reprehensible and undermines our educational system. You can complete a legitimate MBA and be a fraud- and a superbly paid one at that.

Fraud, hair removal, reckless driving...all these are symptoms of the irreversible moral decline of our great nation and its ancient culture. I say it is time for us to go back to our roots. Women should stop wearing jeans and start wearing mini-saris; Hindu men should be encouraged to shamelessly display enormous paunches; none of this Christian, western "fitness" nonsense. In fact, this concept of "sports" is a Christian plot to undermine Bharat. We should stop giving coverage to any sportsperson's achievements and focus on their brazen display of legs instead to show people the evils of this threat to our national pride. If we have to have sports, they must be traditional, pure Indian sports like kushti, in which nearly naked young men roll together in the mud.

Bollywood films should not make movies about love, partnership and committment, and should adhere to pure Indian values and dances involving dozens of well oiled and scantily-clad young women gyrating their hips.

Jai Hind!

This strategic brief will provide an overview and certain recommendations relating to the direction and future of the use of torture by the United States.

It seems that Senator McCain's anti-torture bill is likely to be ratified. The Bush administration appears to be increasingly isolated on the issue. This isolation reflects a lack of long-term strategic thinking within the White House. The pain industry is being seen, not in economic terms, but in qualitative terms such as "laws" and "human rights". Arguably, such a point of view represents a major departure, on the part of the current administration, from an approach towards human rights that, hitherto, has been firmly grounded in economic considerations. This approach is fundamentally flawed. An elementary analysis of the relevant stakeholders and an application of the concepts of core competence all point to one conclusion: outsource the United States' torture needs to India. Such collaboration would bring long-term benefits to both economies, with the potential for cooperative research and development in a wide range of civil society suppression services. Instinctual decisions based on emotions like "compassion" and "disgust" will only lead to sub-optimal decisions. The argument here is for a rational and analytical approach regarding the use of torture. The ultimate objective should be the development of a reproducible and efficient business model of terror and control based on new market research paradigms.


The Stakeholder model of the pain industry: Analysis and issues

A superficial analysis would include the following stakeholders:

a. The Presidential administration
b. The legislative bodies; that is, the Senate and Congress
c. Law enforcement agencies
d. The media
e. Businesses

As will be shown, this analysis does not extend far enough. Before that, however, certain related, and important, issues will be dealt with.
Peripheral stakeholders include the people of the United States and, of course, the targets of any attempts at pain infliction. It must be noted that, while these are indeed stakeholders, they are so only by proxy. For example, the people can be influenced by sending a clear, strong message of hope about torture through the media; the people’s influence, in turn, is exercised through the legislature. Therefore, the interests of the people can be formulated and catered to, by these two stakeholders.
The subjects of torture are a different issue entirely. The common presumption is that torture is a one-way transaction; that only those who inflict torture benefit in some way from it. In reality, this is far from the case. The effective delivery of pain infliction services relies on anticipating the needs of the ultimate consumer- the individuals undergoing torture and, in a mutually beneficial transaction, catering to those needs. For example, the tortured subject might be deprived of sleep, or possibly his or her fingernails. But these are merely the subject’s wants. What the subject needs is an end to suffering. This need is addressed through a mutual process of negotiation in which the tortured provides a full confession to those inflicting the torture. The importance of this paradigm shift in thinking about torture can be grasped by studying the case of the Sony Walkman. The implications for Sony were huge; this lesson applies equally to the current discussion.

Finally, some might say that the judiciary is also a stakeholder. As the case of John Gilmore demonstrates, this is no longer the case. The judiciary’s relevance to the legal system is reducing. This trend can be expected to continue. In any case, most of the pain industry's activities are extra-legal in nature, and therefore not subject to judicial oversight.

Issues

Clearly, the foregoing analysis does not take into account the challenges posed by globalisation. The issue is the use of torture by the government. The demand for torture is derived from the government strategic mission of control. Seen in this light, international terrorists, with their substitute service offering of chaos, offer a very serious global challenge. The situation is analogous to the challenge posed by low-cost short-haul carriers, such as Ryanair, to ground transport, such as high-speed trains and buses. Like Ryanair, global terrorism presents a manouverable, highly flexible competitor offering a substitute service that is hard to beat because of low fixed costs and capital investment and the outsourcing of all but the core functions to independent vendors. The core functions of murder and intimidation as part of an overall political vision are executed by a cadre of highly motivated personnel.

This suggests the way forward for the US government: to focus on its core competencies and outsource the unpredictable, non-core functions that could be executed at lower cost by more specialised service providers.

The case for outsourcing

Studies indicate that the costs of incarceration and enforcement in the United States are escalating. In addition, the cost of running effective torture chambers, with proper quality and control and lean production techniques, such as just-in-time confessions to coincide with political crises, could potentially be prohibitive. Given the specialised nature of the equipment and personnel required, this cost can quite reasonably be expected to escalate even further. Also, even if the US government contracts the jobs out to private firms, Corporate Social Responsibility codes could erode the brand value of these contractors and raise difficulties in their access to capital. This could, ultimately, have an impact on the quality of the services offered.

Finally, it must be noted that the United States has had a long tradition of outsourcing torture. Therefore, building internal organisational consensus within the administration will not be an issue.

Why India?

India is, of course, the first name that comes to mind when mentioning the word “outsourcing”. There are far more compelling reasons to select India as the pain-dispensing hub of the world.

Market research organisations focused on the torture industry, such as Amnesty International suggest that India’s paramilitary forces have a fine, blemished record of human rights violations. This forms a readily available pool of torturers from which to fulfil US needs. It must be noted that India is also a democracy. Therefore, local talent also has the experience and capabilities in evasion, judicial manipulation and cover-ups that are readily transferable to the democratic experience of the United States. The stigma of associating with unsavoury dictatorial regimes will also thereby be avoided. Torture in a demoncracy is undoubtedly more palatable.

Low-cost, high-quality labour is not the only reason to go to India. Given the many shared enemies and the proximity of Afghanistan and Pakistan, supply chain issues will also be simplified. Note that ample morphic and genetic material is available for experimentation into advanced, markless techniques such as direct nerve induction. The development of such a Pain Through Nerve Induction [PATNI] system could also provide lucrative domestic revenues, replacing the traditional bride-burning industry. The talent to develop these systems are available locally. It would also have the effect of reducing the overall crime level in India, since the crime would not be provable. In addition, firms such as JP Morgan are investing heavily in financial analysts in India, demonstrating that the Murders & Executions industry is thriving.

The challenges, as might be expected, are regulatory. India, unfortunately, has a Constitution promising basic rights to its citizens, and a Human Rights Commission, as well as several obstructionist citizen's agencies. Therefore, it is essential to provide an extra-constitutional area for the industry to expand without restrictions. The recommendations of this investigation are, therefore, as follows:

a. Establish a Special Executions Zone [SEZ] that will be declared law-free. This can be achieved by way of [Indian] Constitutional amendment that will make it illegal to have laws in the SEZ. Bihar appears to be the most attractive investment destination in this regard, since the vestiges of the legal system in that area can be easily excised.
b. In order to rapidly grow the industry, invest in freelance Russian consultants. Given the strong Soviet links to India, finding interpreters to mediate the process will not be an issue.
c. Collaborate with the India government to jointly provide tax breaks and other incentives to the Brutality and Pain Outsourcing [BPO] industry.

Utterly ignoring beatzo, I've decided to come up with a meme today

She was given to parrhesia. "Forgive me", she said, "But my velleity implies delegation: I make the wish, you make the effort". This makes sense, for women enjoy displays of accismus; failure to interpret and comply merely leads to many nycthemerons of grief. Men need to learn parisology, or perish.


The challenge. Take between 4-7 words from any one week of A Word a Day and come up with a story/observation/commentary of 50 words or less. The only other criterion is that the piece has to stand on its own.

Passed on to: whomever, if any, wishes to take it up.

I just got a new phone. One the ringtones, labeled "Verdi" is actually the opening of Mendelssohn's lyrical Violin Concerto. First they butcher a great work of art by converting it into a ringtone, then they mislabel it. I've set the "Verdi" piece to be my ringtone, since I refuse to let my hatred for mobile phones die.

Pavements: Public bogs for dogs in Paris and men in London.

Something I wrote last night, after a particularly boring party.

1. A quiz is a test of logic, knowledge and the ability to make happily inspired connections between apparently unrelated facts. Googling is a test of Google.

2. Googlers are like retriever dogs. Throw 'em a question, and they retrieve an answer, lay it at the quizmaster's feet and pant for approval. I'd rather be human.

3. Suprisingly, they seem to be unable to answer questions that can't be googled. This would suggest that they've traded their brains away for a [free] search algorithm. This does not make business sense. Or any sense. Ever.

4. Their ability to resist temptation equals that of Cthulhu faced with a blood sacrifice.

5. A Googler is like a mentally challenged superhero. Everyone knows who he is, but he doesn't know that everyone knows.

6. A Googler isn't like a superhero. Googlers don't have cool superpowers like glowing eyes or the ability to hurl giant fireballs over vast distances. Heck, they aren't even green, just dull.

7. A googler on an online forum is like a shabby and unwanted present from a favourite relative in your house. It's unpleasant to have it around, but one is too polite to actually throw it in the trash, where it belongs.

8. Googlers are just not very bright. This makes them servants of Phil, the Prince of Insufficient Light.

9. As a corollary to (8) above, googlers are simply not evil enough to become servants of the Dark Lord. No Nazguls or proto-Nazi helmets for them. The rest of you must submit to the Dark Side. Resistance is useless. All your base are belong to us. And so on.

10. Incompetent googlers invoke the Lord's name in vain.

I ask the decade-old question: can games be too realistic? Now, don't get me wrong here, I have no objection to over-the-top gore. Ages ago, nothing pleased me more than to turn on iddqd and hack into demons with a chainsaw. I cackle with demented glee every time I see people with garden hoses for veins in movies, displaying their high blood pressure. But I was recently playing the beta of SWAT 4, the ultra-realistic soon-to-be launched game with an eponymous theme. The demo comprises the first level of the game[ a hostage rescue situation], and a mission generator, played on the same level, in which you can crank up the morale of the enemy- which means they won't ever give up, no matter how many rounds of "non-lethal" pellets you use- and also increase their numbers to insane levels.

Here's the problem. I work with a team of 4 bots; given the numbers, eventually 3 [or all] of them are injured. That is when the training I had on the savage battlegrounds of the Vadrigar kicks in. I stop asking people to put their hands up, I give no warning; in short, I begin to resemble a Brazilian death squad, more than a member of SWAT. I kill the suspects, I kill my team, I kill the hostages and, if anyone is alive after that, I amuse myself for a while. There's a scoresheet that pops up after every game, and I always seem to incur massive negative points for "unauthorized use of deadly force" and "unauthorized use of force". I'm sure the game is remarkably accurate, a fine simulation of real-life situations and so on. The mission generator, however, allows you to set up situations in which you have to shoot at sight- but still retains the same scoring system. What is the point? It seems to take the whole fun out of shooters. Often, I do things by the numbers; and a number that I particularly like is bodycount.

Among other news: I recently re-viewed the Usual Suspects.

It is my candidate for best movie of 2004, along with Eternal Sunshine of the Spotless Mind. The tagline of the movie is: " A Romantic Comedy. With Zombies". And so it is. The story centres around Shaun and his quest to reunite with his girlfriend. Shaun is a loser, whose idea of a romantic dinner is toasties at the local pub, and if that wasn't enough he is also burdened with a liability: Ed, a childhood friend who is so clueless, that he probably already qualifies as one of the Living Dead. Our hero breaks up with his girl, and, in the morning after the inevitable self-pitying binge, wakes up all hung over. As he wanders the streets of London in search of Coke and flowers for his mum, he utterly fails to notice that a large proportion of the populace has turned into flesh-eating Undead. To cut a short story shorter, Shaun, his mum, Ed, Shaun's ex and a couple of the ex's flatmates decide to make their way to the Winchester[the pub] for protection. Alon the way, they deal with their numerous personal Issues, engage in unintentionally witty conversation and assault hordes of zombies with a fine variety of sporting and garden equipment.

If it sounds like the zombies are merely local colour, that is only as it should be. The problem with putting zombies in a movie is that they are limited as actors. Can't emote, the poor things, their ravenous canniabilistic hunger drives all but the Quest for the Gory Entrail out of their drooling heads. At the same time, the movie manages the remarkable feat of sticking faithfully to the classic zombie movie conventions. The small party gets whittled down one by one, secrets come out in moments of stress, and Shaun tearfully whacks his mum after she gets bitten by a zombie[that is how the virus spreads]. And yes, you do get scared: all the banter and spectacular displays of gormlessness feeds your fear. The acting's brilliant too. I loved Shaun's stepdad. He is a [step]father of the overachieving-being-harsh-to-be-kind school. Shortly before he turns into a zombie, he reconciles with Shaun in a truly funny, but touching scene.

In case you haven't got it yet: WATCH THIS MOVIE!

Well, I finally got around to seeing it. And found myself faced with an interesting paradox. The movie is sometimes overwhelming in the theatre; in fact, a friend of mine, quite literally, had a fit: the boxing montage scenes got to him. Viewed in the mind, and in retrospect, however, it seems cliched, overdone and irredeemably bombastic. I realize that command over cliche is one of the important skills that a director should have; any Tarantino movie bears witness to that fact. Eastwood uses our familiarity with boxing movie cliches to get us to focus on the darkness and the gritty surroundings. This is all very well, but to what purpose? None that I could see. The lighting and sets become substitutes for any true exploration of the darkness, fears and weaknesses at the heart of this movie's characters. Hillary Swank is white trash who has had nothing and, with approaching middle age, will never have anything. Do we see this in the character? No; it's all brought out in the trailer park where she was born and the diners in which she works. Eastwood is a man who has failed at everything, and is well past middle age. Do we see this in the character? No; it's all about the shithole that he owns and the shitheads who frequent it. Jackie Brown is a far better exploration of these issues; and it is an incurably cool movie as well.
In the end, I found myself immersing my sadistic self in the sheer brutality of the boxing scenes. I enjoyed that, but I never expected, or wanted that form of enjoyment from this movie. The Million Dollar Baby isn't dark, it is dull. It has all the artificial toughness that a 5'o'clock shadow gives a man. Say it ain't so, Clint.