Detroit Public Schools: Don't Drink The Water!!!

If you think that certain people are by nature inferior then stories like this won't bother you all that much. But for the rest of us the truth is that no one in the United States should be exposed to contaminated water. Not only does unsafe water impact your health and life but it will also impact your future educational potential. Depending on how far back this problem has been occurring there could be multiple cohorts of Detroit public school students, mostly but not exclusively Black, who may have been impacted.

Functionally, American inner cities serve the same purpose as Native American reservations or the Gaza Strip. They are places where infrastructure and law are allowed to crumble to the detriment of the people living there. You don't have to engage in conspiracy theories. All you have to do is open your eyes and ask questions as to why these schools were allowed to reach these conditions. And why do we keep reading about these sorts of problems in certain communities. All else equal, which it certainly isn't, but were it so, children who consume or are exposed to heavy metals will on average be less able to perform cognitively in later years. They will have poorer grades and test scores. And they won't be as likely to get into college, which is often a prerequisite for a any chance at a middle class lifestyle. Fixing these problems may not be as exciting as other hot button cultural or social battles. But I think they're more important.

Drinking water will be turned off in all schools at Detroit Public Schools Community District after initial results for 16 schools showed higher than acceptable levels for copper and/or lead at one or more water sources. "I immediately turned off the drinking water at those schools and provided water bottles until water coolers arrive," DPSCD superintendent Nikolai Vitti said in a statement. Water at the 16 affected schools was shut off Tuesday. Shutoffs at the remaining schools will occur this week, Vitti said. 

Movie Reviews: Arizona

Arizona
directed by Jonathan Watson
Shooting someone in the head is not by definition, funny.

There are some people who can mix comedy and violence and have it work out ok (Tarantino and all of his copycats, certain horror movie directors, The first Hangover movie, etc). But it's a really thin line to walk. Not everyone can do it. Watson shows that in this movie at least he's unable to keep the balance. I can enjoy a well done violent black comedy. This wasn't that movie. There wasn't anything comic about the situations or most of the characters. So because there was little humor all that's left is sex and violence. There's not a whole lot of sex appeal , though the lead female character takes her top off at a (ahem) "climatic" moment for reasons, but there's a tremendous amount of violence. 

I wonder if the director or producer changed the writer's original vision. It felt like it. Or maybe I only think that because I can't imagine how anyone watched the film's final cut before release and thought that it was funny, even in a very dark sardonic way. 

This movie felt like two movies were jammed together: a serial killer film and a comic family breakup film. It briefly jumped back and forth between both styles before veering suddenly and sharply to the serial killer film. After it did that the "jokes" fell increasingly flat. Arizona tries to market itself as a satire about greed and chicanery in the real estate market, specifically in the 2008-2009 meltdown and recession.  But satire ought to be smart. Satire ought to have something to say about the subject it's addressing. Arizona doesn't have much to say. It's just a slasher movie masquerading as a black comedy. The male lead Danny McBride, does a great job playing a blustering jerkoff but his performance really belonged in another film.

Book Reviews: Jonathan Strange and Mr. Norrell

Jonathan Strange and Mr. Norrell
by Susanna Clarke

Life is too short not to everything you can. Why wait for one author to complete his magnum opus when the world is crammed with impressive authors. I had heard good things about the Clarke debut novel which was published back in 2004. I didn't purchase the book until early 2016. Obviously I just got around to reading it. I am still working on the estimated two hundred unread books in my library. This book was a serious investment in time. It took me more than a few weeks to finish. My trade softcover edition was just over 800 pages. And there were footnotes. Boy were there footnotes. 

This novel shows Clarke to be an author of both conventional stylings and unique individual ideas. Clarke's Jonathan Strange and Mr. Norrell makes definite allusions to her co-national authors who came before her such as the Bronte sisters, Charles Dickens, and above all Jane Austen-at least in tone if not subject. There might be a little Tolkien and Dunsany sprinkled in for flavor.

I thought this book was slow going for the first hundred pages. Like the older British novelists mentioned, Clarke is a very descriptive writer. She transports the reader back to Regency England/Napoleonic Era. She pays immense attention to detail. Some minutiae will be important to later plot twists and turns. The vast majority, however, is only used to set the table. If you are accustomed to writers who employ a curt and concise let's get to the action style, Clarke will either be a breath of fresh air or a struggle. She's built an alternate history that feels very very real.

In the early 1800s the English are in a funk. Napoleon is kicking behind and taking names in his European wars. The King is unfit. And magic is gone. There are still societies of magicians, but they are theoretical magicians. They argue about how magic used to be performed, which magicians had the help of fairies (elves), what happened to the greatest magician of them all, John Uskglass, and whether magic should be performed by anyone who's not a Christian English gentleman. But these men can't cast a spell, enchant an item, or do anything magical. They are like people who have purchased expensive guitars, pianos, horns, amps, and music theory books, who know all of the musician stage flourishes, but who can't play a single note of music.

Random Rants

To most people and on most days I am a calm non-confrontational live and let live sort of fellow. Life is too short to be mean or angry all the time. I'm the guy who lets people merge on the expressway or allows someone with only a few items to cut in front of me at the grocery checkout lane. But there are some people or incidents that can work my proverbial last nerve and as my maternal relatives used to say, make me "lose my religion".

1) People who park or stand in front of LARGE no standing/no parking/fire lane signs or in handicapped spaces. If I were a cop I wouldn't ticket people for most minor infractions. Often a curt warning is enough to change behavior. But it takes a special sort of contempt for the law and everyone else to park in front of a sign that states no parking just because you don't feel like walking an extra few yards to whatever store you're patronizing. If I were a cop I would ticket everyone who did that. No exceptions. Forget about being polite. I would start by asking the driver "So are you stupid, illiterate or both?"  I have and had firefighters in my family. If there is a fire they really do need access to the fire lanes. Similarly if you're not handicapped then why the hell are you parking in a handicapped space. If it's that important to you, go have a horrific car accident or obtain some condition that leaves you enfeebled. I'm betting you would trade access to that handicapped space to have your full health and mobility back.

2) Grocery store clerks who are sick or have poor hygiene.  I'm picky about what I eat and what or who I have in my home. I know that we all have immune systems that work diligently to remove anything from our body that isn't us. But I say why give your white blood cells more work to do. With age our immune systems lose a step or two. Things they would have quickly eliminated in your youth can give them a run for the money when you're older. I don't like it when I'm in line to purchase groceries and the clerk who will handle my food is having a coughing or sneezing fit, picking her nose, scratching his private parts, digging in his ear, or taking out a visibly mucus soaked handkerchief to vigorously blow his nose right before reaching out to handle the food I intend to consume. If you're sick stay home. And if you need to do some personal grooming, please take a break to do that in private in the restroom.

Queen Fredegund

Didn't I tell you no back talk?

Dark Ages Europe was no place for shrinking violets. Every five minutes or so Europe experienced a barbarian invasion, peasant revolt, plague outbreak, religious war, an ambitious uncle making a power play, or a new fancy pants declaring himself the local ruler and ordering all partisans of the previous administration to be hanged, drawn, and quartered at the new Disneyland opening. With a few exceptions nice rulers finished last. Whether in fiction or reality, it's hard for a king or queen to be good.

But even by 6th Century standards, the Frankish Queen Fredegund stood out as a take no prisoners take no s*** kind of woman who never hesitated to lay hands on people who did her wrong, who might be thinking about doing her wrong, who were related to people who did her wrong, or who just happened to cross her path when she was in a vindictive mood, which by general accounts, was most of the time. Fredegund was quite possibly the earliest archetype for the abusive stepmother/wicked Queen found in Western European folktales later collated by the Grimm Brothers.

Fredegund began her rise to power as a lady-in-waiting for a Frankish Queen. You know the thing that Kings like to do with their Queen's ladies-in-waiting? Fredegund was apparently very skilled at that, soon becoming the number one concubine. Fredegund convinced King Chilperic to divorce his wife and put her in a convent. The King assented to Fredegund's wish, but married someone else. Fredegund bided her time. Not even a year had passed before the King's new wife, Galswintha, was found strangled to death. Possibly realizing that it wasn't particularly healthy to upset Fredegund, King Chilperic finally married her. Galswintha's relatives weren't thrilled with this turn of events. They wanted to kill Fredegund and King Chilperic several times over.

Michigan Democrats Screw Up Hacking Test

We're at DEFCON 1 people!!! This is not a drill!!!! This is not a drill!!! Abandon Ship! Damn the torpedoes! Full Speed Ahead!!! I'm in charge here!!! Oh everything's ok? Never mind...

I work in the information technology profession. I am attached to financial and legal systems. One thing that is very important to do when you are testing systems or processes is to make sure that your test is coordinated or completed in a separate environment than production. In addition to that very obvious requirement, when you are testing you should let all of the relevant people know that you are testing, what you are testing and how long you will be testing. So ideally, your test should be imperceptible by your business partners and stakeholders. But in case it's not, you should communicate that the anomalies they may experience are part of a test. If you don't take these steps then your customers and business partners may experience or see changes and lose their religion. They will do things like calling your boss in a panic, escalating the "problem" to department heads or on-call production support, or worst of all, contact people like CIO's, partners, executive vice-Presidents, the IRS or other law enforcement. 

It's probably better that the last group of people doesn't know your name, if it's being mentioned along with some sort of production meltdown or apparent criminal activity. So again, to avoid all of that unpleasantness, you should let people know what and when you're testing and what the expected results are. Unfortunately the Michigan Democratic Party forgot this basic concept in its zeal to do battle against hacking.

Movie Reviews: Three Billboards Outside Ebbing, Missouri

Three Billboards Outside Ebbing, Missouri
directed by Martin McDonagh

You could view this film as a dark comedy or a drama. It shifts between both styles but so do our lives. I meant to see this Oscar winning movie quite some time ago, but made the mistake of watching other films first. When I circled back around to see this movie it was no longer available on VOD. Fortunately I ran across it on a premium channel.

You should see this movie. It was indeed Oscar worthy. The sad, beautiful, horrible thing about life is that we are all mixes of good and evil. Some of the worst people can do good on occasion while even seemingly beatific folks can reveal a dark side if you trip the wrong wire. This film makes you think about that a lot. Three Billboards... also has something to say about loss and the thin line between justice and vengeance. Anger and cruelty are not only dangerous to the objects of those emotions, but to the people who hold those emotions as well.

Frances McDormand won Best Actress for her role here. I think the award was well deserved. In this film, McDormand has a particular hardness to her features and the role she plays. I can't think offhand of too many other actresses that could have so completely disappeared into the role. McDormand's Mildred is a woman of a certain age who has been through a lot of pain and disappointment. And life has left marks on her. But Mildred is still standing. And Mildred has lost, if indeed she ever had, any tolerance for nonsense from anyone regardless of age, race, status, or sex. If you don't know where you stand with Mildred, you probably haven't been paying attention. But don't worry she has no problem spelling things out for you if you're particularly dim.