Weekend Diversion: 1985, Part 24

This week's song is another one-week Number One hit on the USA’s Billboard “Hot 100”, the last one-week Number One of 1985. On November 30, 1985, "Separate Lives" (video up top), performed by British singer Phil Collins and American singer Marilyn Martin reached Number One. The song, written by American singer-songwriter Stephen Bishop, was featured on the soundtrack for the 1985 movie White Nights. Yes, yet another song from a movie soundtrack.

I don’t think I ever saw the film, though maybe I saw it on cable some time after it was released? If so, I don't remember it. Still, I’ve always thought that songs used for movie soundtracks should be able to stand on their own as pop songs, and I think this song does that. Being able to appreciate it as a pop song is one thing (and a rather low bar, to be honest…), but that doesn’t mean I liked this song, because I didn’t much like it. It was okay, I supose, but was too slow and ponderous for my taste, though the vocals were solid. I think that if the tempo had even been slightly, faster I’d have liked it better. On the other hand, there’s never been a year in which I liked every Number One, so, yeah.

The music video for the song was blended with scenes from the movie, but that didn’t click with me, mainly because, as I said, I don’t think I saw the movie. Still, it was well done for what it was.

“Separate Lives” reached Number 14 in Australia, Number One in Canada, Number 29 in New Zealand, Number 4 in the UK (Silver), as well as Number One on the USA’s Billboard “Hot 100” and their “Adult Contemporary” Charts.

The White Nights soundtrack album reached Number 17 in Australia, Number 14 in Canada, and Number 17 on the USA’s “Billboard 200” chart. The album didn’t chart in New Zealand or the UK, and its sales apparently didn’t receive any certifications.

This series will return in one week (December 7) with the next Number One in this series.

Previously in the “Weekend Diversion – 1985” series:

Weekend Diversion: 1985, Part 1 – February 2, 2025
Weekend Diversion: 1985, Part 2 – February 16, 2025
Weekend Diversion: 1985, Part 3 – March 12, 2025
Weekend Diversion: 1985, Part 4 – March 30, 2025
Weekend Diversion: 1985, Part 5 – April 13, 2025
Weekend Diversion: 1985, Part 6 – May 11, 2025
Weekend Diversion: 1985, Part 7 – May 18, 2025
Weekend Diversion: 1985, Part 8 – June 1, 2025
Weekend Diversion: 1985, Part 9 – June 8, 2025
Weekend Diversion: 1985, Part 10 – June 22, 2025
Weekend Diversion: 1985, Part 11 – July 6, 2025
Weekend Diversion: 1985, Part 12 – July 13, 2025
Weekend Diversion: 1985, Part 13 – July 27, 2025
Weekend Diversion: 1985, Part 14 – August 3, 2025
Weekend Diversion: 1985, Part 15 – August 24, 2025
Weekend Diversion: 1985, Part 16 – September 7, 2025
Weekend Diversion: 1985, Part 17 – September 21, 2025
Weekend Diversion: 1985, Part 18 – October 12, 2025
Weekend Diversion: 1985, Part 19 – October 19, 2025
Weekend Diversion: 1985, Part 20 – October 26, 2025
Weekend Diversion: 1985, Part 21 – November 2, 2025
Weekend Diversion: 1985, Part 22 – November 9, 2025
Weekend Diversion: 1985, Part 23 – November 16, 2025

Weekend Diversion: 1985, Part 16

Well, what do you know? This week in 1985 yet another song from a movie was top of the charts. On September 7 1985, “St. Elmo's Fire (Man in Motion)” (video up top) by British singer John Parr reached Number One on the USA’s Billboard “Hot 100”. It was the main theme for the film St. Elmo's Fire, and was the first single from the film’s soundtrack album. The song was written by Parr and David Foster, who also produced the record. The Wikipedia article about the long (linked to above) says the song “was created and edited within 24 hours”.

I remember the movie and the song, and while I thought they were “okay, I guess”, I didn’t exactly love either one. Before I saw it, I thought the film sounded almost like a sequel to The Breakfast Club. It absolutely wasn’t that of, course—it just had some of the same actors, and was one of the “Brat Pack” genre of films in that era, but that’s all the connection there was between the two films, and I knew all that before I ever saw the movie.

What I liked about the song was that it had a nice radio-friendly sound, and Parr’s voice was different enough from other artists of that era to be interesting. However, I loathed the music video—and, in fact, I still do.

The music video, was directed by Kort Falkenberg III, who devised the unusual concept with the film’s director, Joel Schumacher. It’s essentially a sequel to the film, with all seven main cast members appearing, and visiting the now burned-out St Elmo’s Fire bar. None of with is why I loathed the music video, it was the final scene, described well by the section of the Wikipedia article on the song that talked about the video. It says: “The ending of the video shows Parr singing to each individual cast member from the film before he disappears into the night, and the cast follows him.” Yeah, that just didn’t work for me. At all. I thought it was utterly silly, so much so that I thought it was “cringe” decades before that became a term. In fact, I loathe that scene so much that in reserarching this post, I initially stopped the video before the end to avoid shuddering at the sight of that scene. But, because I;m a professional I realised I needed to check to make sure that scene was still in the YouTube version. It is, of course, and I still loathe it. To each their own.

While I’ve had fun joking about all the songs from movies that became Number One in 1985, I had a thought when writing this post: In the old days, it was quite common for songs from movies to become hits on the pop charts, but now that seldom—never?—happens. These days, movie soundtracks often use pop songs by established artists, but the songs have often been released by the artist before the movie even comes out. I have no idea why movies often don’t bother with pop songs written for the movie—maybe it was to cut costs?

“St. Elmo's Fire (Man in Motion)” reached Number 4 in Australia, Number One in Canada (Gold), Number 5 in New Zealand, Number 6 in the UK (Silver), as well as Number One on the USA’s Billboard “Hot 100” and Number 2 on their “Mainstream Rock” chart, as well as Number One on the Cash Box “Top 100”. The song wasn’t certified in the USA.

The soundtrack album for St. Elmo’s Fire reached Number 90 in Australia, Number 16 in Canada, Number 40 in New Zealand, and Number 21 on the USA’s “Billboard 200”. The album didn’t chart in the UK. It apparently didn’t receive any certifications.

This series will return in two weeks, on September 21 with the next 1985 Number One in this series.

Previously in the “Weekend Diversion – 1985” series:

Weekend Diversion: 1985, Part 1 – February 2, 2025
Weekend Diversion: 1985, Part 2 – February 16, 2025
Weekend Diversion: 1985, Part 3 – March 12, 2025
Weekend Diversion: 1985, Part 4 – March 30, 2025
Weekend Diversion: 1985, Part 5 – April 13, 2025
Weekend Diversion: 1985, Part 6 – May 11, 2025
Weekend Diversion: 1985, Part 7 – May 18, 2025
Weekend Diversion: 1985, Part 8 – June 1, 2025
Weekend Diversion: 1985, Part 9 – June 8, 2025
Weekend Diversion: 1985, Part 10 – June 22, 2025
Weekend Diversion: 1985, Part 11 – July 6, 2025
Weekend Diversion: 1985, Part 12 – July 13, 2025
Weekend Diversion: 1985, Part 13 – July 27, 2025
Weekend Diversion: 1985, Part 14 – August 3, 2025
Weekend Diversion: 1985, Part 15 – August 24, 2025

Weekend Diversion: 1985, Part 15

Another week in 1985, and another song from a movie was top of the charts. Yay or nay? On August 24 1985, “The Power of Love” (video up top) by American rock band Huey Lewis and the News reached Number One on the USA’s Billboard “Hot 100”. It was written for the soundtrack for the movie Back to the Future, and was the band’s first Number One on the “Hot 100”.

I liked this song, and the movie it was part of—in fact, I have all three Back to the Future movies on DVD. I suppose I could equivocate and say I liked it in much the same way I liked other songs at the top of the “Hot 100”, but this at least is a song I own—through a compilation disc, but that definitely counts!

On the other hand, I don’t have any particular memories about this song, nor any special connections to it. That’s not a criticism or shortcoming in any way whatsoever, though, because that same thing is true for most pop songs most of the time in that era. Nevertheless, this song would be in the soundtrack of any Major Motion Picture set in 1985 that I made, and that’s actually no small thing.

The music video, however, is something that I think is completely unextraordinary: Despite some attempts to tie-in the movie, it’s really just a run-of-the-mill performance video, little different from so many others. This is one of the things that annoyed me the most about songs in this era: Music videos were a major thing back then, and presenting an ordinary performance video seemed lazy. Nowadays, of course, music videos aren’t the “thing” they were way back then, but in 1985 I was always disappointed when music videos didn’t innovate. Still, I’m also well aware that this sort of video was common in 1985, so I cut it some slack.

“The Power of Love” reached Number One in Australia, Canada (Gold), Number 3 in New Zealand (2x Platinum), Number 9 in the UK (Platinum), as well as Number One on the USA’s Billboard “Hot 100” and on their “Mainstream Rock” chart. The song The song was certified Gold in the USA.

The soundtrack album for Back to the Future reached Number 36 in Australia, Number 21 in Canada (Gold), Number 47 in New Zealand, Number 66 in the UK, and Number 12 on the USA’s “Billboard 200”. It was Certified Gold in the USA.

This series will return on September 7 with the Number One song for that week in 1985.

Previously in the “Weekend Diversion – 1985” series:

Weekend Diversion: 1985, Part 1 – February 2, 2025
Weekend Diversion: 1985, Part 2 – February 16, 2025
Weekend Diversion: 1985, Part 3 – March 12, 2025
Weekend Diversion: 1985, Part 4 – March 30, 2025
Weekend Diversion: 1985, Part 5 – April 13, 2025
Weekend Diversion: 1985, Part 6 – May 11, 2025
Weekend Diversion: 1985, Part 7 – May 18, 2025
Weekend Diversion: 1985, Part 8 – June 1, 2025
Weekend Diversion: 1985, Part 9 – June 8, 2025
Weekend Diversion: 1985, Part 10 – June 22, 2025
Weekend Diversion: 1985, Part 11 – July 6, 2025
Weekend Diversion: 1985, Part 12 – July 13, 2025
Weekend Diversion: 1985, Part 13 – July 27, 2025
Weekend Diversion: 1985, Part 14 – August 3, 2025

Weekend Diversion: 1984, Part 5

This week in 1984, yet another new song went to Number One, beginning yet another three-week run at the top of the Billboard “Hot 100”, and it was yet another song from a movie. It was the third single of 1984 to have three-weeks at Number One—though all of the Number Ones of 1984 up to that point spent multiple weeks at the top of the charts, too. On April 21, 1984, the new Number One was ”Against All Odds (Take a Look at Me Now)” (video up top) by English drummer, singer, and songwriter Phil Collins, who is also known for who work with UK rock band Genesis (which is where I first heard of him). It was Collins’ first solo song to reach Number One in the USA.

Collins wrote the song as the title track for the film Against All Odds (a film I’ve never seen), basing it on an earlier unreleased song of his. The song was the first track on the film’s soundtrack album. The song was also nominated for an Academy Award, as was the album.

I remember hearing the song at the time, and I thought it was nice enough, but it didn’t particularly appeal to me: It was a lack of liking it, not an active dislike. That’s probably my most common reaction to pop music hits, which I think is actually quite positive: It’s not been common for me to actively dislike a pop song, and there have been very few that I detested. At the other end of the spectrum, there have been relatively few I loved, more that I liked, and between the two ends of of the spectrum are all the songs I neither liked nor disliked, and “Against All Odds” is in that group. I suppose I may have felt differently about the song if I’d personally identified with the lyrics, but I didn’t. It happens.

The music video was directed by Taylor Hackford, who also directed the film. It’s like a lot of videos of songs from a film soundtrack—filled with scenes from the film, though at least it has some shots of Collins performing the song. I don’t remember the video at all, but it spent several weeks at Number One on MTV, ending up at Number 4 on the channel’s year-end Top 20. According to the Wikipedia article on the song (linked above), “Gary LeMel, music supervisor at Columbia, felt the music video on MTV increased Against All Odds' box office takings by at least US$5 million,” so there’s that. The version above is the only one that I could find on YouTube, something I've seen before with movie soundtrack songs. On his YouTube Channel, though, Collins has shared a live version that's labelled “official” [WATCH/LISTEN], and it may remain online if the one above is ever taken down.

“Against All Odds (Take a Look at Me Now)” reached Number 3 in Australia, Number One in Canada, 3 in New Zealand, 2 in the UK (Platinum), and Number One on the USA’s Billboard “Hot 100” (Gold). The movie soundtrack album reached 33 in Australia and 12 on the USA’s “Billboard 200” chart.

Against all odds, this week’s story is complete. The series will return May 12 with yet another new Number One. Will it be another multi-week run at Number One? We’ll take a look at it then.

Previously in the “Weekend Diversion – 1984” series:

Weekend Diversion: 1984, Part 1 – January 21, 2024
Weekend Diversion: 1984, Part 2 – February 4, 2024
Weekend Diversion: 1984, Part 3 – February 25, 2024
Weekend Diversion: 1984, Part 4 – March 31, 2024

Weekend Diversion: 1984, Part 4

Finally back with another new song that went to Number One, this time beginning a three-week run at the top spot. On March 31, 1984, the new Number One was ”Footloose” (video up top) by American singer, guitarist, and songwriter Kenny Loggins. The song was the title track to the 1984 motion picture also called Footloose (oddly enough…), and the first of two singles from the soundtrack (more to come about that in a couple months). The song was nominated for the Academy Award for Best Original Song, but lost out to a song from a different movie, a song that would top the charts much later in 1984 (I’ll get to that one, too). The song was Loggins’ biggest hit and only Number One in the USA.

The thing about the video above is that, like happens with so many movie songs released as pop music singles, the video doesn’t show the song as it was in the movie. The song's Wikipedia entry sums it up well::

It uses the single version and features several scenes from the film, in particular the warehouse where Kevin Bacon's character performs an unorchestrated dance routine (which was actually performed to a different song in the film itself).

Does this matter? No, I don’t think it does. After all, there are plenty of people who are well aware of the song who’ve never seen the film—like me, for example. In 1984, I was a LGBT+ grassroots activist who spent far too much time and money trying to fight off religious bigots’ political agenda, and I didn’t want to see a movie in which those attitudes were central to the plot. People seem to forget that the youths in the movie lost their bid to get dancing allowed, and the high school prom was held in a different county to escape the bigots’ jurisdiction.

At any rate, at some point I saw the video above, but that was after I’d heard the song on the radio (and everywhere else…). Still, for cultural accuracy, here’s a video of the film’s use of the song in the “Let’s dance!” ending segment:



The visual difference between the two, I think, is mainly the joyful celebration in the film, whereas the music video version is more about the movement of dance itself. They’re different, but, in my opinion, one isn’t necessarily better than the other. Of course, there’s also a subtle difference in the music tracks of the two videos, because the music video begins with a drum solo. So… there’s that, I guess.

I liked that song back in the day and still do, actually, and for the same reason: It’s a song that can make someone want to move—though not me, of course: I never dance or sing in public. Nevertheless, the driving beat and the generally optimistic melody make a feel-good pop song, in my opinion. Blake Shelton’s cover for the 2011 film remake was good, too, especially because it kept all that was great about the original, however, even though I have to admit that I found Shelton’s diction better than Loggins’ I still prefer the original. Of course, I often prefer the first version of a song that I hear, original or not, and that’s possibly true about this song, too.

The single “Footloose” reached Number One in Australia (Platinum), Canada (Platinum), and New Zealand, 6 in the UK (2x Platinum), and Number One on the USA’s Billboard “Hot 100” (Platinum).

The film soundtrack album reached Number 2 in Australia (5x Platinum), Number One in Canada (6x Platinum), Number One in New Zealand (Platinum), 7 in the UK (Gold), and Number One on the USA’s “Billboard 200” chart (9x Platinum).

This series will return April 21 with another new Number One, but there’s one more thing. This song is about dancing, and there’s a mashup from a few years ago that was made up of dancing scenes from various films, something that Kevin Bacon shared on social media at one point. So, even though though the video may be more likely to disappear than the other videos in this post, I’m including it at the very bottom, because it’s flat out fun.

Back again in three weeks!

Previously in the “Weekend Diversion – 1984” series:

Weekend Diversion: 1984, Part 1 – January 21, 2024
Weekend Diversion: 1984, Part 2 – February 4, 2024
Weekend Diversion: 1984, Part 3 – February 25, 2024

Memory reminders and personal peace

Memories are powerful things, sometimes lifting us up, maybe tearing us down, or even just helping us stay grounded in and connected to our own lives. So anything that deliberately serves our memories to us has the potential to trigger all sorts of different responses. Technology makes that more likely than ever.

Many mornings I have an alert on my iPad, telling about some photo I’d taken on that date, and they can be about literally anything, even a product I took a photo of to help me find it the next time I went to the shops. Similarly, Facebook’s “Memories” feature tells me each day what I posted on that date over the years. In the past few years in particular, those Facebook “Memory” things have often been a topic for me, and also an opportunity to reflect. Like now.

Yesterday, Facebook book showed me my post from December 16, 2017 when Nigel and I went to see the movie, “Star Wars: The Last Jedi” in Pukekohe, south of where we were living. On the same date in 2015, Facebook also showed me, we saw “Star Wars: The Force Awakens”, back when were still living in Auckland’s North Shore. I’m pretty sure that 2017 was the last last time we ever went to a see a major release movie together, but I know for certain that it was definitely the only movie we ever saw in Pukekohe.

In 2019, the third movie in the third "Star Wars" trilogy, “Star Wars: The Rise of Skywalker”, opened a little later in December than the first two—and two months after Nigel died. To this day I’ve still never seen that movie. When it opened, I was in no state to be able to even think of going to see the movie, especially because I’d never gone to a cinema by myself, and doing so in 2019, and only two months after Nigel died, would’ve been completely impossible for me. I rationalised it to myself with the fact I was too busy getting ready to shift to Hamilton, which was true—but that was really a sort of cover story I told myself. I simply didn’t feel strong enough.

I’ve still never gone to the movies alone, but I’ve thought about it in the past couple years, probably for the first time ever. Nowadays, though, the reason I don’t go by myself is simply that the amount of effort and cost required dampens down any mild interest I may have had in seeing a film (plus, ya know, Covid…). Besides, as Nigel would’ve pointed out, I’ve never been into going to see movies as much as he was.

Facebook “Memories”—like the two about the movies—never bother or upset me, though I know such things about a lost loved one can be very triggering for some people. Me, well, these Memories do remind me of what I’ve lost, sure, but I definitely don’t need any help with that. Instead, they let me remember good times, and they give me a chance to remember details I might not have thought about very often.

For me, then, these FB “Memories” let me expand and enrich whatever the presented memory is. In a sense, this makes the memories better and fuller. They do one more thing: They help me sort of check my progress on my journey.

I wish every person mourning a profound loss could feel the same positive things about something as simple as a FB “Memory”, but mostly I hope they find their own place of peace. It definitely ain’t easy, it takes hard work, and it may take a long time, but it’s definitely possible for memories to trigger smiles (and deeper memories), and not just tears. And honestly, that’s the best thing ever when that starts to happen.

For me, then, those technologically-created reminders of memories really do help me stay grounded in and connected to my own life, and whether the reminder brings me smiles or frowns, laughter or tears, being grounded in and connected to my own life is always a good thing. I’ve certainly earned that feeling.

Yep, memories are powerful things.

Weekend Diversion: Videos with homages

There’s an endless number of ways to make music videos, which makes it kind of surprising that so many seem to similar and interchangeable. But there are also videos that step outside their box a bit, sometimes with great creativity, other times for the way the video reinforces or complements the song. And then sometimes a video will recall other music videos or movies. Like this week’s videos.

First up is “1999” by Charli XCX and Troye Sivan:



The song was released in August of 2018. The music video, released in October of 2018, features a series of visual homages to music videos, movies, and TV shows from the late 1990s. They’re very well done, and most of them are obvious enough that most people will get the references if they were aware of pop culture in that era.

The song reached Number 18 in Australia (Platinum), 10 in New Zealand, 13 in the UK (Silver), and 30 on the USA Billboard “Mainstream Top 40”.

Next up is “Thank U, Next” by Ariana Grande:



The song was released in November, 2018, and the music video was released at the end of that month. It features numerous references to the movies Mean Girls, Legally Blonde, and also Bring It On. I saw the first two, so I got those references, but since I never saw Bring It On I didn’t get those. Nevertheless, I thought it was fun.

The song was a huge success, hitting Number One in all the countries I write about: Australia (2x Platinum), Canada (5x Platinum), New Zealand (2x Platinum), the UK (Platinum), and on the USA’s Billboard “Hot 100” (Platinum).

• • • • •

As I’ve said several times, a lot of the pop songs I like are ones that I first encountered as music videos, so it’s not surprising that I’d notice music videos that pay homage to other music videos, or pop culture generally. I didn’t buy these two songs, and unless it was part of some sort of compilation it’s unlikely I would—not the first time that’s been true, either. Even so, pop culture paying homage to pop culture? That’s my kind of thing.

Internet Wading for June 2019

Pop music and culture, history, interesting (or just odd) stories in the news, science, art—those are the things that get into these Internet Wading posts. And since I share a lot of pop music, why not start there?

“Hit Charade”, a 2016 story from The Atlantic talks about “the bald Norwegians and other unknowns who actually create the songs that top the charts”. The article says: “ If you flip on the radio, odds are that you will hear one of their songs.” And most of us would never know that.

When Dr. John (the stage name of Malcolm John “Mac” Rebennack died earlier this month, I read the obituary on the NBC News site and was surprised to learn that he sang the Popeyes Chicken jingle ("Love That Chicken From Popeyes"). That was one of those things I never knew, but also something that was so obvious once I knew. But, then, I seldom pay attention to music used in commercials, unless it’s a current pop song, so there’s that. Like most people, I probably know him best for his biggest hit, “Right Place, Wrong Time” [Listen to the official audio on YouTube], a 1973 song that seemed impossible to avoid—or bop along to—in its day.

What about Movies? “Remake My Day” compares movies with their remake(s). There are many ways of looking at it: What critics thought, what audiences thought, and their profitability. They also compare rankings and then divergence in opinions.

On to history! Runner’s World (appropriately enough…) published “The Surprising History of Streaking (Yes, the Naked Kind)". Because we should know our history, right?

Similarly little known history is that of Joan Jett Blakk, the story of a performer and activist who ran for Chicago Mayor and US President. A new play, Ms. Blakk for President, has opened in Chicago and tells one of the many LGBT+ stories not often remembered these days—though I do because I was still in Chicago during the first two campaigns. As the Windy City Times review puts it:

“Whether the effort was performative or real, Chicago witnessed history in the early 1990s when Joan Jett Blakk, an African American drag queen who was the creation of activist Terence Smith, ran not just for Chicago Mayor, but in 1992 ran for president of the United States.”

“The Extraordinary ‘Cookbooks’ Left Behind by Prisoners of War and Concentration Camp Victims” is about what the title suggests. It’s also fascinating.

Similarly interesting is "40 Years of New York City Captured Through a Taxi Driver's Photos”, which combines history and photography. Can’t go wrong with that.

Interesting, sure, but also kind of alarming is “When 20,000 American Nazis Descended Upon New York City”, a 2017 story from The Atlantic, about a short film (up top), about that evening. I knew about that night, and about the American “bundists”, but it’s still disturbing to see so many Americans gleefully embracing Nazism. These days it seems it could happen again.

Some science, history, and pop culture all in one! “The English Word That Hasn’t Changed in Sound or Meaning in 8,000 Years", which is both not what I expected, and fascinating all at the same time. Obscure history, science, and pop culture all rolled into one—what’s not to like?

Speaking of pop culture and history, The Atlantic’s 2016 story, “The Hot New Millennial Housing Trend Is a Repeat of the Middle Ages”, seems likely to have overstated its case a bit, but there are millennials who do similar things—just most don’t not necessarily due it to the extent or in precisely the way the article suggests. On the other hand, it’s been suggested as something that would be good for senior citizens. They might actually be more likely to embrace it.

About older people, sort of, how about ”The rise of granny panties”? “High-waisted underpants made a huge comeback”. We all needed to know that.

“Forget fast fashion: slow style pioneers on the clothes they've worn for decades” from The Guardian. There was even a Kiwi in the mix. There’s nothing I’ve had for decades (apart from a couple things from my childhood that I keep for sentimental reasons), but I do have some shirts I’ve had for maybe 15 years. They’ve lasted because they’re seasonal (I only wear them over the course of a few months), and because I take care of them. There’s an advantage in this: Clothes that one buys from a big retailer are everywhere when first purchased, but unique a year or two later when everyone else has moved on to The Next Fad. Being thrifty has fashion advantages, it turns out.

Fads are something that come and go all over the place, including, these days, in health and food. “There’s no such thing as ‘bad food.’ Four terms that make dietitians cringe”. This Washington Post story covers terms that I can’t stand, either. Don’t be get started on “detox”!

Technology is sometimes hard for people to wrap their heads around, especially if science isn't their "thing". Lately I’ve seen a lot of utter nonsense about the upcoming 5G cellphone spectrum and its supposed harm to people. Yeah, social media helping to spread disinformation and misinformation yet again. Surprise! Well, it turns out that there was one story that was actually worth reading: “Debate rages over 5G impact on US weather forecasting” from Physics World.

On another technological note, “The Catch-22 That Broke The Internet” from Wired. In early June, “Google couldn’t fix its cloud, because Google’s cloud was broken.” Oops.

Space’s final frontier—madness! I always thought it was a joke, often perpetuated by satirists, but apparently believers in “lizard people aliens” are real: “It looked like a simple domestic murder. Then police learned about the alien reptile cult.” It's from The Washington Post, so it’s apparently for real—though for a story like that, I wish it was real “fake news”. It’s kind of disturbing to know that people who believe in that are real and walking among us.

Well, maybe a real story about actual space instead: “Views From Above: The Past Eight Months in Orbit”. Earth is pretty awesome, really.

• • •

That’s it for this wading adventure. Time to get back to winter and hibernating—I mean, um, wading around.

Always look for the offensive side of life

People are easily offended these days. This is true whether their spot on the political spectrum is on the Left, Right, or somewhere in the Centre. All sides, the two ends in particular, are prone to being easily offended (usually by different things) and demanding that whatever it is that’s offending them is banned, suppressed, or censored. People really need to chill out.

I was reminded of all this today by a post on a Facebook Page for the community we live in. It was very much off topic for the page, which rarely has discussions of things that aren’t specific to our community, or maybe the wider region if it affects our community. I saw a post someone made this morning, something that had nothing to do with our community:

I was shocked to see the cartoon drawing a parallel between the cross of Christ and the personalities involved with Capital Gains Tax. Such mockery of the core of the Christian faith is only possible because we live in a democratic country and there is no danger of a backlash from Christians. I pose the question: would the cartoonist portray any aspect of Islam in an equally demeaning way? I think not. Christ himself said while hanging on the cross, “Forgive them, Father for they know not what they do.” Be thankful that the basis of Christ’s teaching is forgiveness not reprisal.

My first reaction was an unkind, “WTF?!” The only comment at that point was along similar lines:

Well said… It's a shame people are all too ready to embrace Islam but laugh and mock people who are Christians. Let's accept and respect everyone's religious beliefs as I do as a Christian.

It seemed to me that the discussion was sitting on an edge between more or less rational comments and rank islamophobia, so I chimed in. Here’s my comment in full (slightly edited for clarity):

I haven’t seen what you’re referring to, so I have no idea whether I’d think it was making a good point or a bad one, or whether it was offensive or just naff (most political memes on all topics fall into the latter category).

But your point isn’t really about that particular image, it’s about your personal offence at people being what you personally consider to be disrespectful to your version of Christianity. You absolutely have every right to have that opinion and to express it, and good on you for doing so! But that doesn’t mean your views are immune from either criticism or exempt from people expressing opposing views. That is their right, too.

As you know, there are many flavours of Christianity, and not all of them share your feeling of being disrespected. The fact people use Christian imagery to make political points is mainly because it has “cultural currency”—people know what it refers to and what point they’re trying to make. In a sense, it’s a compliment to how pervasive Christianity is that people *can* use Christian imagery and references to make a point.

The reason that people don’t generally use anything from Islam, Judaism, Hinduism, Buddhism, or any of earth’s hundreds of other religions is precisely because hardly anyone would “get” it. So, it’s not that that they’re picking on Christianity, nor are they giving more respect to any of those hundreds of other religions, it’s merely because they want to make a point people will understand.

Also, very often people making these points using Christian references are themselves Christian—though probably of a different flavour than you are. That adds another layer to this.

Finally, there *ARE* uses of religious references that are deeply offensive, and I have seen some directed at Christianity. However, the vast majority of truly offensive religious-based memes on social media attack Islam, not Christianity. I’m sure we can all agree that it’s wrong to actually attack *any* religion, or atheism, agnosticism, nontheism, or even just those who have no religion. There’s a difference between criticising ideas and beliefs we don’t share and attacking them. The first is fair game, the latter isn’t.

But your argument wasn’t about attacks, it was about use of references to Christianity that you don’t like. What I’m saying is, first, not everyone, nor even every Christian, will share your view on that. Second, the use of such references is seldom an attack on Christianity, but, rather, an acknowledgement that Christianity is pervasive, and referring to other religions wouldn’t work because of that pervasiveness. And, also that the real social media attacks are mainly against other religions, not Christianity.

Despite all that, you’re right, people ought to be more respectful of others and their different beliefs (religion, politics, opinions on Cadbury chocolates, whatever). But people will keep doing things we don’t like and that we may even find offensive. That’s life. I think that when they do that, all we can do in response is to acknowledge we all have differing views, but still try to provide a better example. You never know who’s listening, and they might just learn to do better!

A few more comments followed, some veering close to being unkind and unhelpful, plus a couple in support. The person responded, “I was not being PC – simply expressing my feelings as a committed Christian,” which I have no doubt was a sincerely held belief, but conservatives never realise they’re “being PC” when they are because they truly believe only those on the Left can be “PC”.

By this point, I wanted to see what the person had been on about, so I looked up the cartoon, acting on a hunch that I knew where it came from. I then posted another comment this evening (again, edited for clarity and to add links):

Interesting discussion! I decided to look up the cartoon in question to see what this was all about. It turns out it was by the NZ Herald's Rod Emmerson and published April 20 (I posted the link to it in a reply to my comment in case anyone wanted to see it, but so that those offended by it might be able to avoid seeing it).

I can see why certain Christians might be offended because they mistakenly believe that it's mocking Christianity, but it's not. Instead, it's actually mocking the NZ First [Party] caucus [in Parliament] because they killed the Capital Gains Tax, and the visuals are based not on the Christian story at all, but on the 1979 film "Monty Python's Life of Brian" (which, of course, certain Christians tried to ban because they said it "mocked" their version of Christianity). Specifically, it's based on the crucifixion scene in that film, where Eric Idle leads everyone in a rendition of "Always Look on the Bright Side of Life" [video above] as they all hang on their crosses.

Although I wasn't the least bit offended by the cartoon, I think it failed because it wasn't funny and/or didn't make an obvious point. Emmerson can be really, really good—and other times, well, less successful. In my opinion, this particular cartoon was weak and ineffectual, yes, but not offensive.

It's great that in a free society everyone is free to make their own decisions about what they believe, and also what they think is offensive. They can make those decisions ONLY for themselves, obviously, and if they want people to agree with them they need to make a better argument. This discussion has made clear that we all have our own opinions and beliefs, and we're all equally entitled to hold and express them.

Still, despite the strong feelings this subject can stir up, on the whole it's been a LOT more respectful than I see on most Facebook Pages, so there's that!

The discussion really was mostly civil, but I also don’t for one minute think that the conservative Christians were persuaded at all. As is so often the case, my comments were really directed at people reading the comments but not leaving a comment themselves.

In general, I don’t comment on social media posts unless I want to speak to the silent watchers of comments. My motivations are that I want to give comfort and support to those who agree with me but feel they can’t express their opinions. I also want to give people without firm opinions another way of looking at an issue, something other than what the conservatives are arguing. And, of course, it’s not a terrible idea to remind conservative people that not everyone agrees with their opinions or worldview.

All of which is, of course, why I’m blogging about this, too.

Some years ago I changed my social media commenting tactics. Rather than coming out with all barrels blazing, I instead try to phrase everything in respectful—but firm—tones so that the conservative must reply to the ideas, not the person. It’s surprising how many are incapable of doing that. Unable to avoid making it personal, they instead say nothing at all in reply. That’s fine with me—not only because such situations provide very little chance of finding common ground, but also because their silence actually strengthens my arguments by leaving them unchallenged.

In this particular case, I suspected that it was impossible to find common ground based on their initial comment, something that was confirmed hours later when they added, “To express an opinion is one thing, mockery is another,” indicating that they were insisting on defining both the limits of acceptable opinions and also what could be acceptable discussion.

Social media arguments are stupid, and discussions usually can’t really be called that because sooner or later people of differing views start arguing. All things considered, this was one of the rare exceptions to that.

People really do need to chill out, though. And they really should always look on the bright side of life. But that's a different topic.

Update – April 23, 2019: Today the same person took to our community Facebook page to complain about another NZ Herald editorial cartoon about the attack in Sri Lanka. They wrote:

Another offensive cartoon has appeared in today’s Herald, this time depicting the empty tomb and carrying the caption ‘A Resurrection’. The words appearing above the entrance to the tomb in the cartoon are ‘Sectarian Terrorism’. If this is a reference to the bombing of the churches in Sri Lanka what a dreadful parody of the resurrection of Christ. For Christians the empty tomb means that Christ has risen from the dead and is alive today. That is the central message of the gospel. The Apostle Paul said ‘And if Christ has not been raised, our preaching is worthless, and so is your faith.’ When is this trivialising of the Christian message going to stop?

This time, it didn't go well for them, and many people were quite unkind to her and really did mock her religiosity. It's fair to say that most of the negative reaction was because of how irrelevant her complaints were for that page, and I gave her several links for places she could complain to the newspaper directly. I ended up getting ad hominem attacks from someone who wanted to make it personal.

Like I said in the original post: People really do need to chill out.

New films about something that should not be

Today I ran across a piece about two new films about the “ex-gay” torture scam. It is something that should never be allowed to exist, and is increasingly being outlawed. But times are changing, going backward, so maybe it’s a good idea to talk about it in film.

The review I saw was “Boy Erased is a safe and predictable take on the horrors of gay conversion” by the University of Melbourne’s Stuart Richards and published by Australian site, The Conversation (an interesting project, by the way).

The film in the title, Boy Erased (trailer above) is based on Boy Erased: A Memoir of Identity, Faith and Family by Garrard Conley. In talking about the film Richards presents the film as being something for general audiences, to help them understand the problem with “ex-gay” torture scams. The film will be released in the USA November, but not until sometime in 2019 in New Zealand.

That description made me think of the 1982 film Making Love, which could have been a similar educational movie—except that it was apparently mostly gay men who went to see it. At the time, a friend said to me that he wished the audiences for Making Love and Victor/Victoria, which was around the same time, were switched.

In any case, the other film that Richards talked about, and felt was better, was The Miseducation of Cameron Post, which was released in the USA last August, and is now at one Auckland cinema. The US trailer:



Miseducation is about friendship, while Boy is about a family, so they are very different approaches, even if they’re based the same problem—the “ex-gay” scam.

I’ve already seen a film about this, but it was a comedy that makes the grim subject bearable. It was 1999’s But I’m A Cheerleader (trailer below).

Obviously this subject is not funny, even though a comedy film can be. What amazes me is that in 2018 we’re STILL talking about ending the “ex-gay” torture scam—and New Zealand is nowhere near the point of doing it. Maybe films will help speed that up. But, I kind of doubt it.

Mary Poppins Returns

The video above is the trailer for Mary Poppins Returns, an update of the classic 1964 film. I like the look of this trailer, which has a lot in common with the original, and some nods to it. I’m keen to see it because the first feature movie I can remember seeing was the original Mary Poppins, which my mother took to me see, then bought me the soundtrack album afterwards.

Mary Poppins Returns is due to be released in the USA on December 19, however, it’s not scheduled to be released in New Zealand until January 1, 2019. We went through a period when all major movies had a global release date, but that’s been slipping in the past few years, and we now often get movies weeks after they open in the USA. It’s a terrible mistake.

Hollywood studios want people to see their movies in the cinema, but if we have to wait to see them a couple weeks later, it is often too late because there’s no such thing as isolated markets anymore. The buzz from Americans on social media can convince some people to not bother seeing a movie by the time it opens here. But if the movie is very popular, that provides a powerful incentive for people to watch the film illegally, costing the studios money. A global release date is the sensible option in this interconnected age.

This means that since I know I’ll see people talk about the movie well before it opens here, it’s probable I won’t see it in the cinema at all. It’ll eventually show up on free-to-air TV, and that may end up being how I see it—if I can be bothered by then.

So, even though I have big sentimental reasons for wanting to see the film, regardless of whether it’s any good or not, the delayed release date may talk me out of seeing it, especially if it’s bad. But, right now, I’d like to see it. Everything is possible—when it's possible, actually.

‘Celia’ – A NZ documentary

Earlier this month, Nigel and I went to see the documentary about social justice advocate and storyteller Celia Lashlie called Celia (trailer above) at the New Zealand International Film Festival. It was the first time we’d seen a film in the NZIFF, and it was a good one to choose. A powerful film and a call to action, the film ought to be required viewing for every New Zealand politician.

The film was made by former TV journalist Amanda Millar who called the project, “the most important assignment of my life”. The film featured archival footage along with interviews with Celia in what turned out to be her very last days. Celia died of pancreatic cancer in February 2015, less than two months after being formally diagnosed.

I well remember when she came onto the public scene talking about ways of doing things differently. She argued passionately for better ways of helping people earlier, rather than waiting and allowing things to fall apart, and good kids to grow up and go to prison. The documentary summarises her salient points, and gives some idea of the passion she had for her life’s work.

Politicians’ reactions to her were varied. Some understood her message and wanted to make it work, while others resisted mightily. Most probably didn’t understand, or just wanted to take the cheapest option, as most politicians normally choose. But she called us to do better so we could be better. That work isn’t finished.

Fortunately, plenty of people are committed to advancing her work. A website, “Celia’s Army” provides hints and ideas so that people can get involved in making New Zealand a better place. Her own website also has some of her writing and more about her work.

There were a lot of good and important messages in the film, things that can help make New Zealand better. But one of the most poignant and powerful points for me on a personal level was in one of those final interviews when she said she’d planned to spend more time writing and following her creative passions, but her body called time after years of refusing to listen to her spirit’s call to follow that passion. I’m not a big believer in metaphysical stuff, but the message is important all the same: At some point we need to stop wasting time, because time will inevitably “waste” us.

There’s talk of some international distribution, and wider release in New Zealand, but it’s likely to be difficult to get a chance to see it, at least for a while. Even so, it’s well worth the effort. Celia was a remarkable woman, and Amanda Millar’s documentary does her justice.

An unusual week that was

There have been many times I’ve mentioned being busy, so that’s not an unusual thing. It’s also not unusual to be swamped with work or projects around the house. This week it was all of that, plus one more: We went out three nights this past week. That combination was very unusual—but nice.

On Monday night, Nigel and I went to a screening of the documentary Celia about Celia Lashlie part of the New Zealand International Film Festival (NZIFF) at ASB Theatre, which is down at Auckland’s waterfront. It was the first time we’d ever been to a film in the NZIFF, so that alone was a treat (though the seats were surprisingly uncomfortable).

Celia Lashlie was a former prison director who went on to become an author and social justice advocate, particularly in the area of poverty, breaking the patterns that lead children of poor families to prison, and so much more. Her approach was often confrontational, sometimes combative, and always with a ring of straightforward truth.

The film was made by Amanda Millar, a former TV journalist who I knew from her work on TV3’s versions of 20/20 and 60 Minutes. The film is very well made, but the point, of course, is Celia’s work and legacy. I think that all MPs should see the film so maybe they’ll stop doing the same thing and expecting different results.

Wednesday night we went to dinner to celebrate Nigel’s sister’s birthday. It was nice to get together with family, and to have a nice Japanese dinner. That was on Auckland’s North Shore, not far from where we used to live.

And, of course, on Saturday we went to see Celene Dion at Spark Arena, which is in Parnell, near the waterfront. That was a big trip for us, too.

The fact is, we rarely go out—even to dinner at our nearest café. There’s really no reason for that, apart from the usual (busy lives and being tired in the evening). So going out three nights in one week, and needing to drive a hour, more or less, each way, it turned out to be a very big deal.

Add to that the fact that we both worked on the garage the weekend before we went to see Celia, and I helped Nigel with a couple smaller projects during the week, and my having a work project to finish, and it was a an unusually busy week because it was in unusual ways.

Oddly enough, I was more tired today than on Monday. I’ve always heard that such things hit us two days later, not the next day, but I always thought of that as being merely anecdotal, but, if it is, it’s always applied to me, too.

It’s a new week now, and even though we’re in the middle of that week as of tomorrow, I hope to make real progress on the garage. I expect to have more to say about that soon. Once that project is done, I have plenty of others line up behind it.

First things first. And, a quieter week this week will be good, actually.

Weekend Diversion: Learning because of blogging

The thing about blogging is that to do a halfway decent job, it’s impossible to NOT learn new things. That could come as the result of wanting to know more about a topic, because of fact-checking oneself, or sort of accidentally while working on a post. All of them have happened to me many times, but today I learned something more or less by accident.

The title of my previous post, about where I think I might live if I ever returned to the USA, was a reference to a line in the song "Bali Ha'i" from the musical South Pacific. I wanted to fact-check that song, both for the spelling and to make sure that the line was actually in the song (I’ve learned from experience that these days I should trust but verify my memory).

I could have just looked up the lyrics, but instead I watched a couple YouTube videos of the scene from the 1958 film of the musical, and that’s when I learned something new.

The film—and scene—starred African American actress Juanita Hall reprising her Broadway role as Bloody Mary, which she’d performed some 900 times. However, apparently by the time the film was made, Hall’s voice had changed and she had trouble hitting the high notes. So, her singing was dubbed, replacing her vocal with Muriel Smith, who played Bloody Mary in the London production of the play. If I was into trivia about films or musicals, I might have known all that, but I’m not, so I didn’t.

The video up top is of the scene where Bloody Mary (Hall) performs the song, but the singing is actually Hall’s own (presumably taken from a Broadway cast recording). The YouTube Channel the video is from has other movie scenes with the actual actress’ voice instead of whoever was dubbed in.

Compare the version above with the original film version, using Smith’s voice:


Probably none of this is important—both actresses are long gone, after all—but I think it’s interesting, and even more so to hear what it might have sounded like if it wasn’t dubbed.

On a side note, when I was younger, I looked down on the old “warhorse” musicals like South Pacific, until I saw a stage production and realised it was really about racism, prejudice, and bigotry (I hadn’t yet seen the movie at that point). Showboat (1927), widely credited as the first modern play in Broadway musical theatre for taking on serious subjects, similarly dealt with racism and prejudice. It was actually because of being willing to look at those old shows with an open mind that I began to appreciate musical theatre in general.

But today I learned a new thing about the movie version of a Broadway show I’ve now seen produced several times, and it was all because I was writing a post about something entirely different and unrelated, really, and I needed to check a couple things.

This is a good thing about blogging, I think.

I’m willing to share

I’m aware that many of my friends in the USA are determined to avoid the hoopla on January 20 USA time when Don’s regime begins. Not everyone will be taking part in protests, and need something constructive to do. Toward that end, I’m willing to share my birthday celebration.

Because of timezones, January 21 here—my birthday—is January 20 in the USA. That day I’ll be focused entirely being the birthday boy, and far too busy to take any notice of what happens in Washington, DC. So, it occurred to me, why not share this as something for others to focus on?

Obviously, I’m not seriously suggesting that everyone actually celebrate my birthday, however, everyone can still play along. Think of it as an “Experience a Bit of Arthur’s World Day”. Here are some suggestions.

Drink New Zealand wine. Any excuse is a good one for drinking New Zealand wine. Although, since the actual swearing in part will be at 6am NZ time, it may be a bit early for me, there’s no reason others can’t enjoy it—especially since it may help one get through the day. New Zealand is particularly known for its sauvignon blanc and its pinot noir, but I also quite like New Zealand pinot gris (known as pinot grigio in other countries; although there is a difference between the two, and NZ pinot gris is mostly similar to pinot grigio), which is becoming popular and known overseas, too.

Read a New Zealand author. There are so many to choose from—far too many for me to list, but others have done so. Goodreads has a list of “Books By New Zealand Authors” along with user ratings of the books, which may be useful. Or not. Wikipedia has a plain list of New Zealand authors, which is probably not that useful. To find out more about any particular author, the New Zealand Book Council offers what it describes as “the most comprehensive collection of information about New Zealand writers on the Internet”, in searchable (and surprisingly frank) listings about New Zealand writers.

Something to watch. Okay, maybe reading New Zealand authors after having some New Zealand wine might be a bit difficult, so how about some New Zealand movies? NZ Onscreen has snippets about the “Top 10 NZ Feature Films”—in their opinion, and, no, neither the Lord of the Rings nor Hobbit movies are on the list. The last three on this list are relatively recent, and Once Were Warriors is a brutal and honest film about life among urban Māori in the early 1990s. People still talk about—and debate—the film. But Whale Rider and Boy, which also cover the modern Māori experience, may be more, um, accessible. I’d also add What We Do in the Shadows, a horror/comedy from the guys in Flight of the Conchords. It was directed by Taika Waititi, who directed Boy, and Jermaine Clement from Flight of the Conchords.

Similarly, IMDb has a listing of “The 20 Greatest New Zealand Films of all Time”, though not all are actually New Zealand films—they were made by New Zealanders or in New Zealand. Wikipedia has a long list of New Zealand films which also is made up of movies “produced or filmed in New Zealand”, so it includes the Rings and Hobbit movies, among others.

Maybe just listen. Okay, okay, after a few more glasses of a nice New Zealand wine, even a movie may be too challenging, so how about some NZ pop songs to listen to? The Australasian Performing Rights Association (APRA) has produced a list of what they say are the “Top 100 New Zealand Songs of All Time”. We actually own them on CDs of the artists, and also through CDs put out by APRA called Nature’s Best. Interested in more recent music? How about the “Official NZ Music Charts” listing of the Top 20 NZ singles. Let’s make it easy: You can even listen to the official chart on Spotify.

Those are just a few things anyone can do to play along on my birthday, and also avoid the events in Washington, DC. It’s a win/win, in other words. What can I say? I’m a giver.

Have fun!

Footnote: I really shouldn’t need to say this, but, this is a tongue-firmly-in-cheek post. I’m taking advantage of the convergence of my birthday and the hoopla happening at the same time in Washington, DC, which people really are looking to avoid, in order to promote some of the things I love most about New Zealand. And, who knows? Depending on how the next couple years go, some Americans may find the stuff in this post a sort of preparation for a move to New Zealand…

Arthur Answers, Part 5: Pop culture

Today’s questions from Roger Green are all related to pop culture. First up:

Your favorite TV shows, movies, albums – however many you want.

I’ve thought about this over the week and a half since the most recent post in this series, and I had a LOT of trouble with it: At any given time, I may only have a couple “favourites”, and the list changes constantly. Also, my list of favourites is entirely dependent on the mood I’m in at the time, how tired I am, all sorts of things like that. And if that wasn’t complicating enough, if I don’t hear a song (for example) for a long time, I tend to forget about it until it pops up somewhere and I suddenly remember how much I once loved it.

So, these are really just sort of random lists in no particular order other than the order; ranking them would be too difficult, and, anyway, pointless since it will change sooner rather than later.

TV shows: I don’t have any true favourites at the moment, however, my favourite programmes tend to be ones about home improvement/renovation. This began way back in 1979 when This Old House debuted on PBS. Over the years, I’ve learned a LOT of useful things from those shows that helped me when we were renovating our previous house, and with routine projects ever since.

So, shows I currently enjoy are Homes Under the Hammer, a BBC programme about people who buys British houses at auction and do them up; various Grand Designs programmes, various programmes from Mike Holmes, among others. I’ve enjoyed all of the Star Trek TV series over the years, and still watch re-runs sometimes. In the past, I’ve enjoyed public affairs programmes, but there aren’t any decent New Zealand ones at the moment, and we don’t get American ones (assuming there are any these days—how would I know?), and I also enjoy documentaries. But the truth is, apart from the evening news, I really don’t watch much TV anymore.

Movies: We hardly ever go to the movies any more—maybe once or twice a year. Most recently it was Rogue One, which we both enjoyed. My favourite movies have been Star Wars (the original three and the most recent; I didn’t care for the episodes one through three), many of the Star Trek movies (though I have mixed feeling about the reboot films). I enjoy films that are a bit quirky, like the New Zealand film, What We Do In The Shadows. I like some blockbusters, others less so (I didn’t like Avatar, for example). Among old movies, I enjoyed High Noon, Citizen Kane, Mr. Smith Goes to Washington, It’s A Wonderful Life, Wizard of Oz, various old movie musicals, cheesy horror and science fiction films of the 1950s, and more. In general, movies don’t need to be anything more than entertaining for me to enjoy them—they don’t have to be great art or whatever.

Albums: This is much easier for me because I listen to music all the time. In fact, it was TOO easy, so I limited it to full albums (no EPs or singles released as such), and also only albums I now have in digital format; I’ve lost and not replaced many vinyl LPs, and a few CDs that I ripped to digital files aren’t included because they’re not in my iTunes (most likely due to computer changes over the years). This is a mixed bag, but they’re all things I’d sit and listen two from start to finish.

First, some greatest hits albums I played constantly, and that led me to like the artists and buy more of their music: BowieChangesOne and BowieChangesTwo by David Bowie; Pop! The First 20 Hits by erasure; Eagles: Their Greatest Hits 1971-1975; Greatest Hits by Linda Ronstadt, Hot Rocks 1964-1971 by The Rolling Stones, and others.

Among other albums I liked: Boston Boston: My Life In The Bush of Ghosts by Brian Eno and David Byrne; Boys In The Trees by Carly Simon; Horzon Carpenters, Let It Flow by Dave Mason; Scary Monsters by David Bowie; Violator by Depeche Mode; Dusty in Memphis by Dusty Springfield; Hotel California and The Long Run by The Eagles; A New World Record and Discovery by Electric Light Orchestra; The Innocents, i say i say i say and Loveboat by erasure; At Last! By Eta James; Savage by Eurythmics; Einzelhaft by Falco; Fleetwood Mac and Rumours by Fleetwood Mac; Penthouse and Pavement and The Luxury Gap by Heaven 17; Earth by Jefferson Starship; Escape and Infinity by Journey; Autobahn and Computer World by Kraftwerk; Hasten Down The Wind, Prisoner In Disguise, and Simple Dreams by Linda Ronstadt, also What’s New; Thriller by Michael Jackson; With Sympathy by Ministry; This is the Moody Blues and Long Distance Voyager by The Moody Blues; Polysaturated by Nesian Mystik; Substance by New Order; History of Modern by OMD; Very by Pet Shop Boys; Automatic For The People and Out Of Time by R.E.M.; Cornerstone, Pieces of Eight, and Paradise Theatre by Styx; Even In The Quietest Moments and Breakfast in America by Supertramp; Songs From The Big Chair by Tears For Fears.

See? That was too easy.

Roger also asked in a later question:

OK, your reaction to the death of George Michael. The Boston Globe wrote George Michael’s work had a unique, profound effect on LGBTQ people: "This year has not just been a year in which our beloved celebrities have died, but it’s been a year in which LGBTQ people of a certain age have lost those who helped us come out and live authentic lives."

I answered this in a special post that I was already working on when Roger posted his question. But I’d I wanted to add some specific comments on role models and icons for young LGBT people: They are vital in TV shows, movies, and pop music so young LGBT people will experience them. That’s because we need to see the reality of our lives reflected, and because we need to see people like us succeeding and being visible. This is especially important in places where being openly gay, whether in rural areas or in the Southern USA, or in some country that puts people to death for being gay. To change the world, people first have to be happy within their own skin. Role models in pop culture are an important, even vital, part of that, and they matter.

There’s one more post in this series.

A ‘Summer Wonderland’

The video above is from Air New Zealand, and they describe it well: “Finally, a festive tune we can get behind here in the Southern Hemisphere”. The video is fun, and takes as its starting point the utter absurdity of North Hemisphere imagery and song lyrics celebrating Christmas in what is summer here.

The video features vocals by Ronan Keating (he has an official website), who I first knew as a member of the Irish boyband Boyzone (the band also has an official website). Since then, he’s gone on to a solo career and has also been an Australian talent competition judge. Ronan being the singer is part of the joke, since he’s from Ireland and Christmas in New Zealand is very different from what he grew up with. I thought he did a good job with his part.

The boy is 14-year-old Julian Dennison (see also his NZ Onscreen profile), a child actor best known in New Zealand for playing Ricky in the hit New Zealand film, Hunt for the Wilderpeople (film trailer below; see also the official website). Julian has been doing some small roles since Wilderpeople, including a TV commercial that’s been in heavy rotation, so he’s quite familiar to New Zealanders. He also counts us in to the song Māori at the start of the recorded version.

In the Christmas spirit, Air New Zealand made an MP3 of the song available as a free download, along with the lyrics and the sheet music, all of which is nice. I have a hunch we could be hearing it a bit this summer.

Geeky holidays

Every March, social media fills up with people wishing each other a “Happy Pi Day”. It turns out, there are others, too. Yesterday was another of those days, something I learned about today—and about other days, too.

I never paid much attention to Pi Day because it’s talked about using American date format—month/day/year. So, Pi Day is March 14 because 3/14 are the first three digits of the numerical expression of Pi. I suppose the best time to observe the day would actually be 3/14 at 16:00 (4pm), because 15:09:26.5358979, or, just before 3:09pm and 27 seconds, has a stray zero in the“09”, which would drive math nerds round the bend; better to round it.

In our part of the world, which like most countries uses the day/month/year date format, Pi day can’t exist because there’s no fourteenth month. Or, can it? I learned today that there’s actually a Pi Approximation Day on 22 July because 22/7 is the fraction approximation of Pi.

I learned about that today because my sister sent me an email wishing me a happy “Square Root Day”. One thing leads to another, of course.

So, I Googled “Square Root Day”, and it turns out that it’s an actual thing, created by a high school teacher and “celebrated on days when both the day of the month and the month are the square root of the last two digits of the year,” like, 4/4/16. The next one isn’t until 5/5/25, then 6/6/36, both of which I ought to live to see, but 7/7/49 is a bit iffy, 8/8/64 even more so, and 9/9/81 seems highly improbable—though you never know! At least Square Root Day works regardless of date format.

But the nerdy fun doesn’t stop there!

There’s also Mole Day, “celebrated among chemists, chemistry students and chemistry enthusiasts on October 23, between 6:02am and 6:02pm”. I never really studied chemistry, so this one was beyond me; I’ll let Wikipedia explain it:

“The time and date [6:02 10/23] are derived from Avogadro's number, which is approximately 6.02×10²³ defining the number of particles (atoms or molecules) in one mole of substance, one of the seven base SI units.” [Links in the original]

I recognise there were words in that explanation…

What these three days have in common is that they celebrate the fun and excitement of people who are really into math and science, and that’s great by itself. They may also help keep people aware of the science and math that’s behind every single aspect of the universe, and maybe it’ll encourage them to answer their own question, “what’s that all about?!” That’d be even better.

There are also plenty of days dealing with pop culture, like Star Wars Day on May 4 (“May the Fourth be with you”), and its corollary, May 5, “Revenge of the Fifth (a reference to Star Wars Episode III: Revenge of the Sith).

Another similar popular date is May 25, both because the first Star Wars film premiered on May 25, 1977, and also because it’s known as Towel Day, a tribute to The Hitchhiker’s Guide to the Galaxy author Douglas Adams, who died on May 11, 2001 (the significance of towels, for the uninitiated, is explained in the link). The day has since been observed as Geek Pride Day.

There are even cult literary events, some with specific days, too, like Towel Day, and also Bloomsday, held on 16 June to commemorate the life of author James Joyce, because Ulysses is set on that date (the name is derived from the protagonist of the novel, Leopold Bloom).

I’m sure there are plenty of other days observed by geeks, nerds, and fans, and probably all of us fit into one or more of those categories at some time or other, including me: How else to explain how a simple email could send me into a vortex finding out about sometimes obscure and definitely geeky holidays?

It was worth it, though.

Vlog Brothers: ‘The Myth Reawakens’

I saw the video above shortly after it was released, but hadn’t intended on sharing it (I don’t share all that many Vlog Brothers videos, even though I watch them all). What changed my mind was online reaction to Star Wars: The Force Awakens, but not for the usual reason. Also, neither the video nor this post have any spoilers.

To paraphrase the YouTube description, in this video—again, without spoilers—John Green discusses the movie in the context of the original Star Wars trilogy, and also talks about Joseph Campbell's book, The Hero with a Thousand Faces and its influence on George Lucas. That leads on to “talk about mythology, shared myths, how we assign personhood, whether wookies are people, etc.” I thought it was very interesting, as I usually do. But that’s not the reason I decided to share it.

What made me reconsider sharing this video was some of the reactions I saw online. There were glowing reactions, of course, including some total fanboi meltdowns, all of which was to be expected. The negative reactions were also to be expected, and some of them stuck me as manifestly unfair, comparing this movie to the original three in a way that, I felt, set up a false comparison.

Here’s the weird thing: As unfair as I thought some of the criticism was, in my opinion, MOST of it didn’t attack those with differing views—shockingly enough! They, like me, seemed to accept that people can have completely different opinions about this movie without assuming the other person is somehow defective or maybe mentally deficient. I wish it could always be that way, but I know it isn’t—and, in fact, outside my field of attention, it probably isn’t. That’s life. It probably helped that this movie was such a huge hit.

So, I saw this video as a sort of counter-view to some of what I thought was unfair, even though this came out before that criticism (which is why I won’t bother linking to to any specific criticism). I also saw it as expressing much of what I though about the movie, too.

When I talked about seeing the movie, I didn’t talk in any great detail about my reactions, mainly to avoid spoilers. But my reaction was pretty similar to John Green’s.

I obviously fully realise and accept that this movie—as with absolutely everything else in pop culture—is subject to Arthur’s Law:

Everything you love, someone else hates; everything you hate, someone else loves. So, relax and like what you like and forget about everyone else.

So, I share the video above not as some sort of one-upmanship in ongoing pop culture battles, but merely because I thought the perspective was interesting, because I thought it provides some balance in the discussions of the merits of the film, and mostly because it’s the closest I’ve yet gotten to discussing what I thought of the movie.

Sometimes, it’s worth reconsidering a decision on whether to share something.