Mad Men and Versimilitude

I am bad consumer of modern television programming. I rarely follow blogs or read up on the shows that I am watching. Of course this means that I probably miss out on interesting conversations about these shows. But, I digress.

Slate Magazine has been running a blog series about Season 3 of Mad Men, a show I like very much. I was annoyed, however, by this comment:

"As we've discussed, this is a series that is almost comically committed to verisimilitude."

I understand the sentiment of the quote. The show demonstrates a relentless fidelity to the period, but it is a fidelity to surface and style, which ultimately strikes me as being something more aesthetic and formal than mere verisimilitude.

Not that style and verisimilitude have to be opposed to one another, but this quote comes in the context of a discussion of the dream sequence in last night's episode. To say that this move away from some kind of straight forward, realistic presentation of time and space is jarring, is to ignore the ways that the interior is already on the outside in this show. All of that surface and style is expressive of more than just dumb historical facts.

Another thing that mistaking fidelity to period details for blunt realism does is ignore the camera as mediator. There have been numerous instances where the camera has broken the frame of reality and shown us the unexpected or unusual. The camera does not present all of that detail unproblematically.

Conference Mantra

My new conference mantra is: Humility opens doors.

ALA 2009

I had a good first day of my first ALA conference. Started out at a conference orientation held by the New Members Roundtable. Did some productive networking there and gained some valuable conference going tips.

After that, I hopped on the (free) shuttle bus (okay, I waited in line then patiently got on) to head to McCormick place where the exhibits are held and the balance of action takes place. Picked up my badge and starting wandering around the exhibits.

My first "real" session wa "Libraries after 2.0," on social networking tools and libraries. The presentations confirmed many of the lessons that I've learned at the Newberry.

The central, core lesson being: use 2.0 services and tools to respond to specific needs. An initiave to get out onto the web and engage a community of users will work best when a problem is identified and a particular tool seems to fit that problem best.

The other big theme in the talks was that you should empower your community and become part of a conversation, rather than the leader or director of that conversation. This theme cooresponds the the exiom that "communities are out there and doing things without you."

Yet at the Newberry we are using 2.0 tools to respond to an institutional need, namely that our collections are obscure and under-utilized. So, I wonder how one can apply the key concepts of empowering and engaging users in the context of meeting this (very valid) institutional need.

Newberry Minute

I am up much later than I should be trying to hammer out another cut of the next Newberry Minute. I keep learning valuable lessons, but the incremental nature of the project means that I don't feel like I can benefit from them. What are these lessons?

1. Go slow!

There is no need to rush. This has led to really questionable shots of items--bad pans and tilts and so on.

2. Is the object open or closed?

I did not appreciate until this recently. But I think these short videos work best when there is a sense of working through the object. In part this is because, at least in my opinion, that it is very obvious when you are jumping back and forth between an object that is closed then open then closed again--all in the space of 30 seconds!

3. Keep all hands on the object

Another subtle visual thing that I did not appreciate is that it is much easier to cut back and forth between shots of the object and the presenter if there are hands on it. In the current video, I have a few shots of the book just sitting there, passively, surrounded by blue felt. It is very jarring to then cut to a shot of the presenter holding the object and turning pages.

In sum, I hope that I become more proficient at making these things. They are feeling a bit burdensome at the moment.

Sociability and web 2.0

I feel kind of bad for the host of one of the podcasts that I listen to you, Leo Laporte. Recently his flagship podcast, This Week In Tech, has been criticized for going off the rails, jumping the shark, and a variety of other metaphors that consumers of media hurl at their objects of adoration/derision (if I were to meld those two words together, I would end up with adorision). The criticism leveled against TWiT is that the show no longer offers substantive commentary on tech news.

I think that this criticism misses the point entirely. The people featured on the show, including the host himself, have become media personalities. More to the point, the show is really more of a document or showcase for the emerging forms of sociability that web 2.0 allows. There is a voyeuristic component to this—sitting aside and watching these personalities unfold themselves. But, I think my point is, that the personalities themselves are the substantive content.

A dry well of words

A friend asked recently if I was writing. I answered him with an unqualified "no." I say unqualified because usually I reply to questions like this with something like, "Not as much as I should," or, "Well, I've got some ideas I'm working on." But as of now, the answer is simply, "No."

That said, I read an article in the NY Times this weekend that, for the first time in a while, really made me want to write. The article, about the pain of economic contraction in Palm Beach (of all places), has a single captivating image, an unclaimed pair of trousers.

Of course, these aren't just any trousers. They were a pair of $2000 trousers that Madoff ordered before being arrested for perpetrating his enormous ponzi scheme. (There's an interesting followup article here). The pants were still hanging there at the clothiers from whom he ordered them.

This image of stasis, of an object suspended in time, to be an interesting contrast to the general sense of irrevocable change that came over many of the people who lost fortunes (or at least half of their already sizable fortunes). It is interesting how physical, inanimate objects can get stuck between two moments like this, an expression of unfulfilled potential or possibility.

The article end with a brief meditation on the meaning of the trousers:

One day the Money Men were brilliant; the next day, they were thieves. One day, cash flowed; the next day, credit vanished. One day, it seemed extravagant to buy a garment for the same price as a low-end used car; the next day, it seemed insane.

Not to bring this around too neatly, but my own creative energies feel just as bound up on the non-time, the interstitial space, between what could have been and what is.

a quotation

"The permanent mutability of the forms of life, and the training needed for confronting the unchecked uncertainty of life, lead us to a direct and continuous relation with the world as a such, with the imprecise context of our existence...One might say: fear is always anguish-ridden; circumscribed danger always makes us face the general risk of being in the world."

--Paulo Virno, A Grammar of the Multitude

Setting up the nursery

The last few days have been all about setting up the nursery. This has involved general home organization as well. Someone told me recently that I have a habit of pouring on change. This in spite of the fact that I once elevated the exact opposite into an ethical imperative--"Only take on one life change at a time." So, rather than abiding by this imperative, I am violating it wildly. As the changes mount and take on a pace of their own, I am beginning to feel that my maxim is just unrealistic.

Why unrealistic? It seems to me now, as I struggle to reflect in the midst of the push and pull of the now, that the urgency of the moment lends momentum. This is another way of saying that, when change begins, it stirs you from slumber, forces you to shake the scales from your eyes. I am in a mind-set bent on change, so welcome any and all change.

I wonder if the vacillating between rest and action, between stasis and change will stay with me most of my life, or if I will learn a more moderate relationship to change.