Good Reason

It's okay to be wrong. It's not okay to stay wrong.

Category: art (page 5 of 6)

Three/four colour illusion

It’s almost time to get going on my Linguistics 102 class, ‘Language as Cognitive System’. It’s about brain, language, and perception. What better way to start than a fascinating optical illusion. Your eyes tell you that the big swirly lines are alternately blue and green. But your eyes are mistaken. They’re really the same colour. If you’re not convinced, pull down the file to your desktop and zoom in on it until the context is gone and the two colours merge into one.

Our visual system — indeed our human brains themselves — are pretty amazing devices that work pretty well most of the time. They work by showing us a view of reality not as it is, but close enough to be useful to us. Optical illusions exploit the bugs in our system.

This has a certain degree of relevance to me right now. I’m visiting with my family. They’re True Believers™, who rely on ‘spiritual experiences’ for evidence of their religious beliefs, which they are convinced cannot be wrong. This optical illusion is compelling evidence that our experiences, convincing though they seem, can be illusory.

Daniel font sightings

It’s fun to stay at the YMCA, but if it’s the Quebec YMCA, there’s an extra bonus: they use the Daniel font on their website. I think my handwriting looks quite nice in French.

If you’re a fan of fantasy, you can find Yataghan on the cover of ‘Fall of Thanes’ by Brian Ruckley. In fact, it would appear to have been used on all three books in the “Godless World” trilogy. Now there’s a title I can get behind, although I hope he doesn’t mean that in a godless world there’s constant combat and it’s always cold.

Is there an owl on the American dollar bill?

Owl-spotters: Have a look at a US simolean, and see if you can spot the owl.

I noticed this item on Tom Ellard’s site, and I was intrigued. I happened to have a nice crisp US dollar bill in my possession, so I set my scanner to ‘insane’ setting (19200 dpi), and here’s the scan. Click to enlarge.


So… is it an owl? I don’t know. To me it looks like a place where a bunch of curlicues intersect. The ‘head’ has three holes in it, which to our human brains might look like two eyes and a nose (or beak). And maybe a couple of bumps for ears. Too bad the corresponding pattern on the other side of the bill is covered up.

What’s more interesting to me is why most people who have a web page on this topic are either loopy about Masons, Jesus, or the Illuminati. I suppose if you’re spending your nights looking for sinister symbolism in money, you’re heading for one of two options: John Birch meetings, or muttering to yourself in bus stations. Not much difference, really.

Problem solved!








A brief typographic tour of Collins St, Melbourne.










Patmos mushrooms are primo

Reverend Smith, creator of the Brick Testament, has finally gotten up to Revelation.

It’s surreal to see the beasts with the six wings and and eyes all over. Seeing them depicted makes me think, “I believed this?”


The greatest part for me was how Jesus was depicted. You will remember, of course, from your reading of Revelation that John says Jesus had eyes like fire, and a double-edged sword coming out of his mouth. Well, so it is here. Like, every time Jesus appears, there’s that sword!


Wonder if he has a hard time making himself understood. Perhaps he just has exceptionally clear diction.

HBO v LDS: ‘Big Love’ to show fragment of boring religious ceremony

Trouble brewing.

HBO’s Depiction Of Mormon Ceremony Upsets Church

The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints Is ‘Appalled’ at the TV Series

The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints is angry over an episode of HBO’s hit series “Big Love” that the church says is in “appallingly bad taste.”

An upcoming episode of “Big Love,” which chronicles the lives of a fictional polygamist family, is reported to be depicting an endowment ceremony, one of the most sacred rituals of the Mormon Church.

HBO has apologised.

“Obviously, it was not our intention to do anything disrespectful to the church, but to those who may be offended, we offer our sincere apology,” read the statement.

It’s one of those apologies like “Sorry you got mad” or “Sorry you’re so touchy.” Except in this case, it’s “Sorry, but we’re running the episode anyway.”

Does it seem strange that the LDS Church is objecting to people knowing the details of ceremonies which, according to them, contain the truly great things that all people need to know for salvation? Okay, that’s not really fair. They just want people to see the temple ceremony with the appropriate “context”, by which they mean the kind of context where you join the church and pay them lots of money over years and years. That kind of context.

Here’s the issue: the LDS Church has (don’t take this wrong) occult practices. I don’t mean ‘occult’ as in ‘satanic’ like people sometimes do. I mean ‘occult’ in an earlier sense: ‘occult’ meaning ‘hidden’. Many 19th century movements, religious and otherwise, taught that the really great truths were held in reserve for those who were initiated into the mysteries. The Masons and the Rosicrucians, the Gnostics and the Theosophists, all used this strategy. Joseph Smith plumped for it too in later years, for better or worse. But of course, secret knowledge has a way of getting leaked in the 21st century. How reasonable is it to expect the mysteries to stay hidden in the Information Age?

I understand the Mormons wanting to control their Endowment ceremony. After all, they wrote it. But it’s not reasonable to expect everyone else to share their concern.

Yataghan appears on cover of Dragonmaster

Usually it’s the Daniel font that gets all the attention, but another of my fonts has been popping up lately — Yataghan. It’s gothic and snaky.

Yesterday at the bookstore, I noticed that they decided to use it for the Omnibus edition of Chris Bunch’s book, Dragonmaster. I must say, it looks quite imposing in all caps like that. And the review quote — ‘a banquet of blood and thunder’ — looks suitably dagger-like in the lower case.

You’re welcome to download Yataghan and use it for anything you want. Just try not to harm anyone, okay?

God, Milk

We’re a day late on the Oscars thing in Australia, so I’m only just getting to the videos.

I was moved by the acceptance speech of Lance Black, who won Best Screenplay for Milk. He grew up in the Mormon church.

Here’s a transcript of the relevant bit, for those of you who can’t do video.

“I heard the story of Harvey Milk and it gave me hope. It gave me the hope to live my life openly as who I am, and that one day I could even fall in love and get married.

“I want to thank my mom, who has always loved me for who I am even when there was pressure not to.

“But most of all, if Harvey had not been taken from us 30 years ago, I think he would want me to say to all of the gay and lesbian kids out there tonight who have been told that they are less than by their churches or by the government or by their families, that you are beautiful, wonderful creatures of value, and that no matter what anyone tells you God does love you and that very soon I promise you, you will have equal rights federally across this great nation of ours.

Thank you and thank you God for giving us Harvey Milk.”

I grew up as a straight kid in the Mormon church, and they gave us heaps of guilt just over playing with ourselves. I simply can’t imagine what he must have gone through as a gay teenager.

Black’s comments are laudable. If they make some gay person feel like they’re all right despite the attempts of religious bigots to convince them otherwise, then well done. Suicide averted. But there’s a bigger problem here: Black is trying to mitigate the effects of religions without challenging their authority. By taking god as a given, Black unwittingly gives tacit legitimacy to religions as potential sources of moral guidance. In fact, they have no more moral authority than anyone else, and most likely less because of their immoral actions.

It comes down to the whole God thing. Black somehow knows that this mysterious being ‘god’ loves gay people. How does he know that? Is it possible that god really disapproves of them, or perhaps even hates them? How does he know that God ‘gave’ us Harvey Milk? If Satan exists, why didn’t he give us Harvey Milk as a way of deceiving us and making us into homos? Does Black have some magical conduit to heavenly knowledge? If it’s possible to get revelations from a god, how do we know Black has the right idea, and not those nice men in suits that we see in General Conference?

I was re-reading this article again, an interview with Carol Lynn Pearson. She’s a Mormon poet, playwright, and actor. With her one-woman show, Mother Wove the Morning, she’s worked to bring Mother-in-Heaven out of the periphery of LDS doctrine. She’s also an advocate for gay Mormons.

It’s the question Carol Lynn Pearson hears just about every time she appears in public. She heard it again last weekend, during an audience discussion that followed a packed-house performance of her play “Facing East” at Theatre Rhinoceros.

How, one woman asked, could Pearson justify her own membership and involvement in the Mormon church?

Pearson, a slim, forthright woman of 67 who wears her silvery white hair jauntily short, nodded along as the question was posed. “I love the Mormon community,” she responded, “and I have a unique opportunity to build bridges.” A number of her church ward leaders, Pearson noted, had attended the opening of “Facing East” the night before. “They’ve been nothing but supportive,” she said. “I believe the Mormon heart is a good heart. I feel comfortable with my role in the Mormon church.

That was before the LDS Church’s involvement in Proposition 8. I wonder if she still feels ‘comfortable’ being linked with a church that claims divine support for inequality and prejudice. Yes, she seems to do some good, but does she need to do this from inside the organisation? Is she not, in fact, attempting to help those who suffer, while providing a way for them to remain connected to the church that is dishing out the suffering?

There are two approaches you can take in this kind of conflict: reject religion, or attempt to transform religion into something less authoritarian.

The transformative approach is tempting, especially for religious liberals. You get to stay in The Bubble, where it’s comfortable (even though you take some knocks from the orthodox believers), and you get to imagine that someday… some beautiful day… your religion will change from conservative authoritarian to liberal democratic — perhaps even gay-friendly! And you can play a part in this magical process just by making occasional comments in Priesthood Meeting. And then the Millennium comes, and Jesus tells you that you were right all along, and everybody gets a pony.

Needless to say, I think the other approach — to reject religion — is the right one. We need to recognise that there probably isn’t a god, that religious organisations have no special authority to dictate the terms of morality, and that actions like Prop. 8 are signs of their all-too-human origins. This view has the benefit of being true.

I have this disturbing thought that keeps popping up: What if things had gone differently for me, my deconversion somehow hadn’t happened, and I was a believing Mormon in the middle of this Proposition 8 mess? Would it have been a deal-breaker for me? Would I have had the fortitude to recognise the signs of man-made prejudice? Would I have realised that it was time to get out? Or would I have kept making excuses for the Church, like some abused spouse? Would I have imagined things would change… eventually? (We let Blacks have the priesthood, after all! Well, black men.) Would I have fallen back on my old rationalisations: that the Lord is in control, but he allows his servants to make mistakes? Would I have privately disagreed with the Brethren, and fancied myself courageous for doing so?

I worry that, even confronted by an ugliness of this magnitude, I would have remained a liberal Mormon. Dependence on others for your opinion conditions you to be a coward, and I was very well-conditioned. And so I probably would have continued to give my time and my money to an organisation that was actively working against my values, and cared nothing for (in fact, actually disdained) the views of people like myself.

Now, outside the Church, I am free to speak out against injustice and duplicity without having to step carefully around ‘criticising the Brethren’. I get to live a moral, fulfilling life, without the moral conflict of trying to hold two opposing sets of opinions simultaneously.

The LDS Church will carry out actions like Prop. 8 whenever they wish, whether you are a member or not. But if they count you as a member, they do these things with your support. Something to think about.

Film Board of Canada shorts

I’ve just discovered the film archives of the Film Board of Canada. Not only have they served as the inspiration for a great band name, they’ve been behind some great short films. Some of them I’ve seen before, and I’m very pleased to have found them again.

The Big Snit

People in relationships really know where all the hurts are. Here, a game of Scrabble becomes all-out war between Mr and Mrs Snit. But there are funny moments here — the voice of the cat is a touch of genius. Favourite moment: Mrs Snit says, “Do you have to keep sawing on the table?” and Mr Snit stops sawing long enough to holler, “I”M NOT!” But they’ll get it back together and remember why they loved each other in the first place, and when they do, there’s a comfort that could make a nuclear war seem barely noticeable.

Blackfly

You think flies are bad where you are? Try living in Ontario. At least, that’s how this folk song has it. I’d still say they’re worse in Australia. Catchy chorus, though.

Hunger

I was especially glad to find this one. I remember seeing this with my Dad when it first came out in 1973. There was a screening in the Kennedy Library at EWU (but then it was EWSC). It was so visually arresting that I never forgot it, and have still remembered the basic plot even though I was six when I saw it. Some amazing early CG work, especially considering the state of computer animation at the time.

Neighbours

I’d only ever heard about this one. The film uses stop-motion animation to show a conflict between two neighbours that escalates into something unexpectedly savage.

A lot of these films, like ‘Hunger’ and ‘Neighbours’, address dark human tendencies like war and racism, but by examining how they play out at the level of our individual desires. They do this with lightness and humour, and a kind of high-minded earnestness that seems refreshing but anachronistic today. Imagine: perhaps someone thought these problems could be beaten in our lifetime.

Older posts Newer posts

© 2024 Good Reason

Theme by Anders NorenUp ↑