Here's an interesting article on "Topsy Turvy" and its use of "The Mikado." The article goes into great deal about Gilbert and Sullivan's intentions with the opera and seems to get it right. But why question Mike Leigh's use of the opera? It seems obvious to me that it was a crucial time in Gilbert and Sullivan's partnership and that's why he chose it as the subject.
As for the racist aspect, the opera certainly has that in it. But Leigh doesn't hide from that. The movie offers up the musical without comment. He expects his audience to be smart enough to make up their own minds about the musical and its political intentions, aspirations or unintentional messages.
And Leigh makes it explicitly clear in the movie that England at this time was a very racist place, that racism was not only accepted but was considered common sense.
I just don't see the problem. The movie tells the story of how it was. The director obviously loves Gilbert & Sullivan, but he doesn't give them any free passes. I think the director expects you to make up your own mind without any heavy-handed politicizing.

Here's the classic tale of the exploding whale. You'll need Quicktime to enjoy the blubber blast.

Looking around on the Web, I just realized that Tuesday is the 25th anniversary of the Jonestown mass suicide. So let's see what Jonestown linkage we can find. This one is first up at Google and seems to be created by a former Peoples Temple member. Looks like it has a lot of info. Here's a conspiracy theory about the events that transpired in Guyana. Here's the FBI's version gathered from the Freedom of Information Act.
Here are the lyrics to Concrete Blonde's song "Jonestown." (For some reason, I can't find lyrics that include the words in the third line of the second verse. Odd.)
Anyway, spend a little time on it and I'm sure you could find a lot more.

How could you not read a story that starts like this: "Large groups of screaming women passing dildos between their legs may sound like a scene straight out of a porno movie, but it is actually a sight that is becoming more and more common in suburban homes nationwide."
I'm also curious how a newspaper allowed the phrase "cock rings" to appear in its pages. (I would also be surprised if "f-ckerware" got into my paper.)

Attention: If you go to Yale don't drink from the water fountains. I'll only warn you once.

I've never seen a story so monumentally stupid. It's a guide to watching TV, starting with "1. Take the TV schedule and chart your viewing. You wouldn't wander into a movie theater without knowing what you're going to see. "
Who needs this? Is there anybody who looks at that box in their living room and is not quite sure what they should do with it? (Link via the great TMFTML.)

Here's a really interesting reflection by Jay McInerney on Raymond Carver as a writing teacher. The article makes me want to go back and read more Carver stories (which I do all the time, anyway.)

Flannery O'Connor wrote your book. Not much escapes
your notice.


Which Author's Fiction are You?
brought to you by Quizilla

Wow, I'm Flannery O'Connor. It works for me, although I've only read a few of her stories ... and she's a woman ... and she's Southern. Still, can't complain.

Short interview with Michael Moorcock on his character Jerry Cornelius.

I should be writing my novel right now. I'm not, because I'm a filthy, filthy procrastinator. Bad me. I'm up at 16,024 words and I want to be at 18,000 by the end of the day. So I'd better get to it. The lack of posting continues at Weirdwriter.

I have soft spot in my heart for gentle manatees. It's always sad to hear they are dying at increased rates. It doesn't help to be slow moving, gentle creatures in waters infested with humans.

I took one of those obnoxious quizzes everybody takes and then puts a link to on their blog. (You know, like the Kaiju quiz I put on a month or two ago.) This one tries to determine what religion is right for you. I got Mahayana Buddhism, which is weird, I always thought I would be a Theravada Buddhist. You just never know.

This article at Slate is spot on about what was right about "The Matrix" and wrong about the sequels. Meanwhile, Roger Ebert has gone crazy. He likes the film, he hates the film, his sister, his daughter. He thought it was pretty, so he'll forgive all the other details.

Well, I saw The Matrix Revolutions, and I now realize the Wachowski Brothers have never seen a metaphor they didn't want to beat into the ground until it cries for mercy.
Here is what's good about it: It is exciting. Lots of beautiful battles and escapes and visions. And the message is not a bad one, if overly sappy and drawn out and hammered on again and again and again (and if I seem to be hammering that home, well I learned it from the Wachowskis.)
What's bad about it: It's drawn out. It could have been chopped by a half-hour. I don't mind sitting through a long film, I just don't want the same things to flash before my eyes over and over.
Keanu Reeves and Carrie-Ann Moss still have no chemistry. Nobody liked their "love" scene in "Reloaded" and I never liked the ending to the original "Matrix," though I could (barely) stomach it. But so many scenes between them is absolutely dependent on that chemistry and it's just not there. I blame this on Keanu Reeves, just because I want to.
Oh yeah, and the symbols were WAY TOO OBVIOUS. Not just the ending either. I loved the Merovingian and his wife in the first one, but in this movie, they just spell out what he's supposed to be. You know Trinity goes through hell to meet them, they're both dressed in red, etc etc.
And then there's the Train Man, or whatever they call him. He plays the same role as the Key Master in "Reloaded," a huge walking plot device. Ugh.
Enough, I was disappointed. The action scenes are still good. The message isn't all bad. But the movie disappointed in a major way.

Here's an entertaining account of Lou Reed's Book Party. Apparently, Lou Reed has a small dog and Salman Rushdie likes all of Martin Amis' stuff.

Fascinating post at Forager 23: J.R.R. Tolkien vs. Robert E. Howard. I'm particularly interested in this at the moment because I'm writing fantasy for Nanowrimo, but it has always been an issue I think about. Tolkien and Howard were my introduction to fantasy and my inspiration to be a writer. By necessity, the story I'm writing is more Howard than Tolkien (I didn't spend anytime creating a world; instead, I work episodically, trying to think up the wildest thing possible while I'm writing, a much more Howardian style of writing.) Be sure to read the comments on that post too, they add much to the discussion.

And you can hear the sound a herring makes here: New Scientist.

Scientists say they have figured out what the mysterious sounds herring makes are:
"But a team from the University of British Columbia in Vancouver say the noise matches bubbles coming out of a herring's anus."

FARK.com is running an interesting thread on what part of the body is your state? Of course, this being Fark, people have taken off in all different tangents. Here are my favorites for Connecticut:
Connecticut - We're bigger than Rhode Island
Massachusetts is the alcoholic rich uncle, and Connecticut is his gay boyfriend.
Connecticut -- The state that owns you...so please return to work so we can go back to sipping cocktails by the Sound.

OK, that's it. One man-nipple blog item too many. (That last entry comes from the excellent Twinkle Twinkle Blah Blah Blah by the way.) I have to go to work, my day has been eaten by Nanowrimo. See you.