From Newsgroup: rec.arts.sf.fandom

THE MT VOID
02/27/26 -- Vol. 44, No. 35, Whole Number 2421

Editor: Evelyn Leeper, evelynchimelisleeper@gmail.com
All material is the opinion of the author and is copyrighted by
the author unless otherwise noted.
All comments sent or posted will be assumed authorized for
inclusion unless otherwise noted.

To subscribe or unsubscribe, send mail to
evelynchimelisleeper@gmail.com
The latest issue is at <http://www.leepers.us/mtvoid/latest.htm>.
An index with links to the issues of the MT VOID since 1986 is at <http://leepers.us/mtvoid/back_issues.htm>.

Topics:
Apology about Double Email Last Week
Middletown (NJ) Public Library Science Fiction Discussion
Group
Picks for Turner Classic Movies in March (comments
by Evelyn C. Leeper)
Ray Harryhausen Films, Part 03 (THE 3 WORLDS OF GULLIVER,
THE MYSTERIOUS ISLAND) (film comments
by Evelyn C. Leeper)
BATTLE OF THE BIG BANG by Niayesh Afshordi and Phil Halper
(book review by Gregory Frederick)
Smear Campaigns (comments by Evelyn C. Leeper)
Orwell and Socialism (letter of comment by Gary McGath)
This Week's Reading (PROOF: THE ART OF SCIENCE OF
CERTAINTY) (book comments by Evelyn C. Leeper)

===================================================================

TOPIC: Apology about Double Email Last Week

Last week my email reader on my Mac was having trouble connecting
to my ISP, so I didn't get a copy and it looked as though the MT
VOID hadn't gone out. When I re-sent it, and it still didn't
download, I realized that the first one had probably gone out just
fine. And indeed after a few hours, the connection was restored
(with no action on my part, so we know whose fault it was :-( ).
[-ecl]

===================================================================

TOPIC: Middletown (NJ) Public Library Science Fiction Discussion
Group

March 5, 2026: THE MARTIAN CHRONICLES (1980 TV mini-series)
& novel by Ray Bradbury
<https://archive.org/details/bwb_O8-CZL-512/page/n5/mode/2up>
[Note: The film is based on only the first 1/3 of the book.]

I think what is being shown is the first of the three episodes of
the mini-series, "The Expeditions", which is why Charles says,
"The film is based on only the first 1/3 of the book." [-ecl]

===================================================================

TOPIC: Picks for Turner Classic Movies in March (comments
by Evelyn C. Leeper)

Well, for the horror genre, I would have to recommend CRONOS,
which Mark described as "a cutting-edge art house monster movie"
and "a film of stylish images and delightful subtle humor." It was
also Guillermo del Toro's first feature film; his career has gone
on to include eight Oscar nominations with three wins, and five
Hugo Award nominations with one win.

[CRONOS, Saturday, March 21, 12:00 AM]

But I also have to point out the great Billy Wilder films TCM is
featuring in March: THE APARTMENT, THE LOST WEEKEND, SOME LIKE IT
HOT, THE FORTUNE COOKIE, and SUNSET BOULEVARD, as well as a very
early Wilder French film, MAUVAISE GRAINE (1934) (which I have not
seen).

[THE APARTMENT, Sunday, March 8, 1:45 PM]
[THE LOST WEEKEND, Tuesday, March 10, 8:00 PM]
[SOME LIKE IT HOT, Thursday, March 12, 5:45 PM]
[THE FORTUNE COOKIE, Saturday, March 14, 5:45 PM]
[SUNSET BOULEVARD, Sunday, March 15, 3:30 PM]
[MAUVAISE GRAINE, Saturday, March 21, 2:00 AM]

They are also running two classic Robert Flaherty "documentaries",
or rather "docufictions" (NANOOK OF THE NORTH and MOANA: A ROMANCE
OF THE GOLDEN AGE), since it turns out that a lot of the action
was staged, and the people were not always who Flaherty claimed
they were. Still, the films were a major breakthrough in cinema,
so worth watching, even as you keep in mind their artificiality.
(Back in the day, when we were in college and dinosaurs roamed the
earth, NANOOK OF THE NORTH was a standard film for cinema classes.)

[NANOOK OF THE NORTH (1922), Saturday, March 21, 12:15 AM]
[MOANA: A ROMANCE OF THE GOLDEN AGE (1026), Saturday, March 21,
1:45 AM]

Other films of interest:

SUNDAY, March 1
10:45 PM All That Jazz (1979)

MONDAY, March 2
10:00 AM Logan's Run (1975)

TUESDAY, March 3
1:45 PM Being There (1979)
4:00 PM My Favorite Year (1982)
8:00 PM Around the World in 80 Days (1956)

THURSDAY, March 5
6:00 PM The Picture of Dorian Gray (1945)

FRIDAY, March 6
12:00 AM Seven Days in May (1964)
2:15 AM The Fog of War (2003)

FRIDAY, March 6
8:15 AM Yojimbo (1961)
8:00 PM For All Mankind (1989)
9:30 PM 2001: A Space Odyssey (1968)

SATURDAY, March 7
12:15 AM Marooned (1969)
2:30 AM Forbidden Planet (1956)
6:45 AM Mighty Joe Young (1949)
8:30 AM Jungle Book (1942)

SUNDAY, March 8
11:00 AM Guys and Dolls (1955)
1:45 PM The Apartment (1960)

MONDAY, March 9
10:00 PM The Artist (2011)

THURSDAY, March 12
11:45 AM The Train (1964)

FRIDAY, March 13
7:45 AM Topper Takes a Trip (1939)
11:15 AM Woman in the Dunes (1964)
8:00 PM Field of Dreams (1989)

SATURDAY, March 14
6:00 AM The Great Dictator (1940)

SUNDAY, March 15
7:45 AM What Ever Happened to Baby Jane? (1962)
3:30 PM Sunset Boulevard (1950)

MONDAY, March 16
8:00 PM The King of Comedy (1982)
10:00 PM The Nutty Professor (1963)

TUESDAY, March 17
5:30 PM Finian's Rainbow (1968)

THURSDAY, March 19
4:00 AM Green Mansions (1959)

SATURDAY, March 21
12:00 AM Cronos (1992)
3:30 AM Picnic at Hanging Rock (1975)
10:00 AM Tarzan's Savage Fury (1952)

SUNDAY, March 22
1:45 PM Cabaret (1972)

MONDAY, March 23
9:15 AM Kismet (1944)

THURSDAY, March 26
2:15 PM Black Orpheus (1959)
8:00 PM Psycho (1960)

SATURDAY, March 28
10:00 AM Tarzan and the She-Devil (1953)

MONDAY, March 30
12:15 AM Nanook of the North (1922)
1:45 AM Moana: A Romance of the Golden Age (1926)

[-ecl]

===================================================================

TOPIC: Ray Harryhausen Films, Part 03 (film comments by Evelyn
C. Leeper)

THE 3 WORLDS OF GULLIVER (1960): THE 3 WORLDS OF GULLIVER makes
more use of Harryhausen's technique of combining multiple layers
of action. In his stop-motion work, Harryhausen could put live
action both behind and in front of his animation. Here it is used
more to put different layers of live-action in such a way as to
make the Lilliputians smaller than Gulliver, and the
Brobdingnagians larger.

(Peter Jackson developed a slightly different technique, using
forced perspective and split screens, to have hobbits and dwarves
sharing the frame with men and elves.)

There is some stop-motion work, but this is a step down from 7TH
VOYAGE OF SINBAD.

And while based on GULLIVER'S TRAVELS by Jonathan Swift, it uses
only two of the four sections (the third world is our own), and
removes anything unsuitable for a G-rated film(*). For example, in
the film Gulliver puts out the fire in Brobdingnag by pouring a
cask of wine(?) or beer(?) into his mouth and then spitting it
onto the fire. (In the book, for those who haven't read it,
Gulliver used the liquid *after* it had passed through his system.
That makes more sense, because spitting an alcoholic beverage on a
fire seems like a bad idea.)

(*) THE 3 WORLDS OF GULLIVER predates the rating system, but there
still was the question of the Production Code and approval by the
MPAA. Effectively, a film like this marketed as being a "family"
film, could not include a lot of what was in the novel.

THE 3 WORLDS OF GULLIVER did continue a couple of signature
elements that started in THE 7TH VOYAGE OF SINBAD: the score by
Bernard Herrmann, the crayon drawings under the title credit
sequence, the use of color, the dropping of an opening narration.

Released theatrically 16 December 1960.

Film Credits:
<https://www.imdb.com/title/tt0053882/reference>

What others are saying: <https://www.rottentomatoes.com/m/three_worlds_of_gulliver>


THE MYSTERIOUS ISLAND (1961): This is loosely based on Jules
Verne's MYSTERIOUS ISLAND. I say "loosely" because Verne's novel
had no giant creatures and no women, while it did have a stranded
convict (who appears in the film only as a skeleton and a diary).

I should note that this was one of my favorite books when I was in
junior high (a.k.a. middle school), which was partly because it
was one of the few books we owned. (However, we were heavy users
of the libraries--school, town, and base.) I read and re-read it
until it literally fell apart. (Another book I read and re-read
was Franz Werfel's STAR OF THE UNBORN. My reading habits were
peculiar, to say the least.)

Anyway, Schneer wanted to do the book because it was apparently
the most requested book in bookstores, and I suppose the island
setting brought to mind KING KONG and its creatures. That KING
KONG was an influence can be assumed from the scene in which the
sailors cross a log bridge: the bridge and its surroundings are
almost an exact copy of a similar scene in KING KONG.

Ironically, the orangutan Jup from the novel is *not* a character
in the film.

This film clearly places Nemo's adventures in Verne's TWENTY
THOUSAND LEAGUES UNDER THE SEA before the American Civil War, yet
that novel is quite explicitly set after the Civil War. Verne was
very critical of Wells's "unscientific" science, yet his own
chronology was sloppy (and some of his science equally spurious,
such as firing a spaceship with passengers from a cannon, and
having them survive).

In any case, the Nautilus in THE MYSTERIOUS ISLAND is clearly
inspired by the Nautilus in Disney's 20,000 LEAGUES UNDER THE SEA
(1954).

Released theatrically 21 December 1961.

Film Credits:
<https://www.imdb.com/title/tt0055207/reference>

What others are saying: <https://www.rottentomatoes.com/m/1014592-mysterious_island>


[-ecl]

===================================================================

TOPIC: BATTLE OF THE BIG BANG: THE NEW TALES OF OUR COSMIC ORIGINS
by Niayesh Afshordi and Phil Halper (book review by Gregory
Frederick)

BATTLE OF THE BIG BANG is a 2025 popular-science exploration book
of modern cosmology that examines some of the deepest questions in
physics; not just what the Big Bang was, but whether it really was
a singular beginning at all. Through historical context,
interviews with leading scientists, and explanations of
cutting-edge theories, authors Niayesh Afshordi and Phil Halper
invite readers to confront the mysteries that lie at the edge of
our understanding.

Currently most astronomers and cosmologists do not believe there
was just an initial singularity which started the Big Bang off
creating our Universe and that there was nothing before that
event. They are creating theories which explore what may have
happened before the Big Bang.

The book is praised for offering a comprehensive overview of many
alternative cosmological theories from bouncing or cyclic
universes to multiverse concepts and speculative ideas involving
extra dimensions or black holes acting as cosmic seeds. This
breadth gives readers a sense of just how unsettled and vibrant
current debates about the universe|!s origins really are.

The authors Afshordi and Halper successfully convey the wonder and philosophical depth behind cosmology, helping readers appreciate
not only the science but also the human curiosity driving it.

On the negative side; the book can feel overly dense or abstruse,
especially for those without a strong background in physics. Some
readers admitted that certain sections "went over their head," and
that the flow of ideas could be overwhelming.

The book is an ambitious and thought-provoking work that
challenges the reader to reconsider established cosmological
narratives. It excels in breadth and intellectual curiosity,
offering a panoramic view of where science currently stands on one
of humanity|!s most profound questions. However, its density and
occasionally uneven narrative pacing mean it will likely appeal
most to readers who already have some interest in physics and
cosmology or to those who are willing to grapple with complex
ideas without shying away from technical detail. [-gf]

===================================================================

TOPIC: Orwell and Socialism (letter of comment by Gary McGath)

In response to Evelyn's comments on George Orwell's comments on
socialism in the 02/20/26 issue of the MT VOID, Gary McGath writes:

[Evelyn wrote,] "Basically, Orwell is saying that we need
contrast. Just as we don't appreciate health unless we have
experienced illness, or satiety until we have known hunger, a life
with no difficulties would not result in happiness. (Elements of
this appear in the probably apocryphal early life of Siddhartha
Gautama (the Buddha). So Orwell concludes, '[The] real objective
of Socialism is not happiness. Happiness has hitherto been a
by-product, and for all we know it may always remain so. The real
objective of Socialism is human brotherhood.'" [-ecl]

When socialism speaks of human brotherhood, it means the treatment
of people as units in a mass. It's presented as "Share equally
with your brothers," as if all of society were a gigantic family.
Family relations, of course, don't scale up into the millions. All
these brothers have to be directed. Perhaps by a family council?
But that too would be impossible in practice; people don't have
the time or knowledge to make decisions for everybody. So a ruler
or ruling class is inevitable. It doesn't have the knowledge
either, but it has the power. People have lots of different ideas
about what's best for the "family," most of them having a lot to
do with their particular interests. Inevitably, the "brothers"
have to do what those in power tell them to. At best, it's clumsy
and inefficient. More often, average people find themselves with
little control over their lives. And not much happiness. [-gmg]

Evelyn adds:

Not only do family relations not scale up into the millions, but
even on the small scale they are often not ideal. When Tolstoy
said, "All happy families are alike; each unhappy family is
unhappy in its own way," he clearly recognized the existence of
unhappy families. [-ecl]

===================================================================

TOPIC: Smear Campaigns (comments by Evelyn C. Leeper)

I am watching "Great Presidents" from Great Courses, which was made
in 2000, and in talking about the campaign of 1800, the professor
read some of the things people wrote and said about Jefferson, such
as:

"Should the infidel Jefferson be elected, the seal of death is that
moment set on our holy religion."

and

"Murder, robbery, rape, adultery, and incest will be openly taught
and practiced, the air will be rent with the cries of the
distressed, and the soil will be soaked with blood and the nation
black with crime."

And then the professor said, "Imagine anyone, even the most
negative politician today, resorting to that kind of smear and
that kind of hyperbole."

"Imagine"? Does the phrase "eating the pets" ring a bell? [-ecl]

===================================================================

TOPIC: This Week's Reading (book comments by Evelyn C. Leeper)

PROOF: THE ART OF SCIENCE OF CERTAINTY by Adam Kucharski (Basic
Books, ISBN 978-1-5416-0669-2) is so annoying at times I wanted to
throw it across the room.

On page 13, for example, he writes, "Euclid also specified
self-evident axioms that needed no proof, such as "the whole is
greater than its part." I immediately thought of infinite sets,
and sure enough, on page 45 Kucharski writes, "According to Cantor
... there are as many positive whole numbers as positive even
numbers. The whole, in other words, is not always larger than the
part." And on page 47 he introducing the Banach-Tarski Theorem,
which showed that the whole could be *smaller* than the part.

But on page 13, he didn't say "Euclid also specified *what he
thought* were self-evident axioms that needed no proof, such as
"the whole is greater than its part" (emphasis mine). No,
Kucharski himself was calling this axiom self-evident. This makes
him, I think, the equivalent of an unreliable narrator.

And then, on page 63, he completely departs from our world into an
alternate universe when he claims that in 1969 the Constitution
was amended to prevent such laws as the World War I Sedition Act
of 1918. In our universe, the Constitution was not amended at all
in 1969, and none of the amendments after World War I have
anything to do with free speech. There was a Supreme Court
decision in 1969 (Brandenburg v. Ohio) that ruled such laws
unconstitutional, but that is not the same thing as amending the
Constitution.

Is Kucharski's goal to demonstrate that someone saying something
doesn't constitute truth, or even evidence? [-ecl]

===================================================================

Evelyn C. Leeper
evelynchimelisleeper@gmail.com


God was able to create the world in only seven days
because he had no installed base to consider.
--Andy Finkel

--- Synchronet 3.21d-Linux NewsLink 1.2