Column X

digresssmlOriginally published March 6, 1998, in Comics Buyer’s Guide #1268

Assorted thoughts…

* * *

Two television series noted for unanswered questions, Byzantine plot structures and wheels-within-wheels have finally overlapped each other. Consider the following bizarre coincidence:

In the recent episode of The X-Files penned by Stephen King and Chris Carter, a town in Maine is menaced by an evil doll… indicating why King is the master of suspense, since it must’ve taken a whole twenty seconds to haul out that hoary device. Even the eminently credulous Mulder, upon learning of Scully’s suspicions as to the toy’s animus, asks skeptically, “You mean… like Chucky?” Although on this series one shouldn’t rule out the possibility that we’d have a flashback to Lee Harvey Oswald with one of those dolls next to him on the Grassy Knoll saying in that little voice, “Let’s have fun!”

In any event, the slight wrinkle introduced is that the doll’s killer tune-of-choice is an endless rendition of the “Hokey Pokey.” Having been to sufficient Bar Mitzvah parties in my life, the notion that the playing of the “Hokey Pokey” could drive one to self-mutilation and/or suicide is not as far-fetched as it sounds. The “Alley Cat” has already reached that status with some, and the “Electric Slide” is not that far behind. However, personal loathing aside, there is never an explanation (or, if you will, an X-planation) given anywhere in the episode as to why this song in particular is the tune from hëll.

Maybe King or Carter hate the song, but in theory, that shouldn’t be enough. Why the “Hokey Pokey?” There’s no personal significance to it within the context of the story; it’s not like, in childhood, one of the protagonists was beaten up while the song was playing thereby establishing a personal reason for nasty associations (as one might have with “Singing in the Rain” if one were a character in A Clockwork Orange.) There’s nothing behind it, no substance. It’s just an oddity, it seems, Yet Another Mystery in a show that’s a mystery wrapped in an enigma wrapped in confusion.

Ah, but think about this–several centuries later, in “real” time as it were, Ambassador Londo Mollari will become obsessed with the “Hokey Pokey.” No reason will be given on Babylon 5 as to why that particular ditty will capture the attention of the Centauri Ambassador during the show’s first season.

He will study it for endless hours, he will try to search out the profound significance, and he will be driven to irrational fits of anger upon being able to decipher any deep, hidden meaning to it. But this is B5, after all, the series that thrives on hidden meanings. The most casual throwaway comment in season one can turn out to have unexpected hidden meanings four years later (although I’m somewhat despairing of learning what the dámņëd raven on Ivanova’s shoulder during the dream sequence has to do with anything, unless it refers to Claudia Christian flipping them the bird for the fifth season.)

Here, then, is Londo Mollari, unarguably touched by darkness, obsessed with an apparently innocuous song that was tied in to dark and fearsome killings centuries before. To say nothing of the fact that Mulder’s sister was ostensibly kidnapped by aliens… aliens who might very well be connected to Babylon 5.

Coincidence? Or is it something… more sinister?

You decide. Perhaps the truth isn’t just out there. It’s way, way, way out there.

* * *

You couldn’t pay me enough to be a teacher of current events these days. Frankly, I’m still rather fuzzy on how a mandate to investigate a failed real estate deal in Arkansas four years ago has somehow morphed into a probe into Clinton’s sexual activities regarding a White House intern.

More and more it’s coming across as if Kenneth “The Unreachable” Starr is just so fed up that he’s determined to nail Clinton some way, any way. The only problem is, the American public knew Clinton was a hound when we elected him. We chose to give as much of a dámņ about it as we do about Bill Gates’ sex life in terms of how it impacts on Windows 95, i.e., as long our computer doesn’t go down, we don’t care what else does. One’s concern about this whole business tends to be defined by how concerned one is over the notion that the president may have been willing to lie about his sexual exploits and so anxious to cover them up that he tried to get someone else to lie as well.

Is it possible? Sure it’s possible. Does it bother me? Not especially. I mean, I’m sorry, maybe it should. Maybe I should be morally outraged because the presidency should stand for something greater. But c’mon, who doesn’t lie about sex? Perhaps it’s arbitrary and hypocritical, but it’s not as if Clinton were a cat burglar on the side and he was trying to cover his butt on that score. Or, as in Wag the Dog, it’s not as if he made sexual overtures to a Campfire Girl.

Should he have lied about any possible affairs, particularly under oath? Of course not. Do I want to boot him out of office over it? Not really. If I thought his possible sex addiction was remotely relevant to his job, I wouldn’t have voted for him in the first place. If he were the president of France, he’d be elected for life by now. Besides the choice was always between Bill Clinton and George Bush, or Bill Clinton and Bob Dole. No matter who you voted for, you were going to get a stiff of some kind or other in the White House.

I mean, heck, I still think it’s Dickensian that his name is Clinton. Long time comic fans know that “Clint” is one of those names you never use in comics (Hawkeye’s ID the rare exception) because the L and I can run together to create a whole new word. Same with “flick.” It’s a rule that I used to think was silly until I was present when the powers at be at Marvel got an irate letter from a woman over a then-recent issue of Power Man/Iron Fist (I think it was) wherein a villain threatened, “I will flick you like a fly!” and the letter writer misread it.

All of the foregoing is, as noted, derived from the concern over how a teacher handles social studies these days. Even Garry Trudeau is commenting on it in a sequence that’s just beginning to run. The irony of it is that even in anything-goes cities such as New York, Newsday (and elsewhere, for all I know) pulled the strip off the comics page this week and are running it in the editorial section due to the explicit nature of the jokes. The mere presentation of the problem serves to simultaneously underscore it. When I was a kid, teachers assigned us to clip out stories that were of interest and bring them in for class discussion. Considering what most teenagers are preoccupied with under normal circumstances, I wonder if teachers even bother to hand out that assignment nowadays for fear of what they’ll be faced with.

* * *

 

I have not joined the enemy… but I’m chagrined to admit that I hedged my bets.

My laserdisc player died, so I bought a new unit that plays not only lasers, but… yes, God help me… DVDs. I haven’t purchased any of the hated little things yet… but, depressingly, I know I’m going to. How do I know? Because they’re going to be releasing a new edition of Little Shop of Horrors (the Frank Oz version, not the original Roger Corman version) that’s going to feature, among other things, the original filmed ending in which a gigantic and out-of-control Audrey II attacks New York a la Godzilla. And it’s only going to be on DVD. When I heard this, it was with the same sinking feeling as when I learned years ago that they were reissuing 1776 with forty minutes of footage cut back in, including the entirety of “Cool, Considerate Men.” That sense that said, “You have no free will. You will join us. Resistance is futile.”

Speaking of being assimilated…

* * *

Let’s see how many people I can really annoy, because I haven’t accomplished that in a while:

I love being Jewish and everything, but I’m getting sick of reading articles where various Jewish pundits shake their heads and say the Jewish peoples totter on the brink of extinction due to assimilation, intermarriage, etc. How it’s necessary for Jews to close ranks, as it were, if we intend to survive as a people.

I was thinking about this, thinking, let’s consider the history of the Jews:

First off, people keep trying to kill us in large numbers, when they’re not busy taking away our property or enslaving us. Clearly we already have a serious PR problem.

And how have we dwelt with the diminishment of our numbers? Well, let’s see:

We encourage marriage only within our dwindling population, thereby guaranteeing the kind of limited gene pool which leaves Jews vulnerable, either exclusively or in large percentage, to such genetic diseases as Tay-Sachs, Gaucher Disease, Familial dysautonomia, Bloom’s Syndrome, Pemphigus Vulgaris, and a rather nasty mutation of cystic fibrosis.

We don’t have a central religious figure telling us not to use birth control. As a matter of fact, family planning–particularly in times of limited resources–goes all the way back to the actions of Joseph in Genesis 41:50-52 who practiced birth control during the famine in Egypt. This resulted in Talmud tractate Ta’aanit 11a which observes, “We learn that a man must practice abstinence during years of famine” (although, to be fair, even the most flexible definitions of family planning still feel that a Jewish male is constrained to produce two children in line with the admonition to be fruitful and multiply.)

We have a strict prohibition against proselytizing. “Jews for Jesus” aren’t really, by definition, Jews anymore since they have publicly embraced another religion. Not only are Jews not supposed to encourage others to become Jews, but converts are actively discouraged.

With all that… for heaven’s sake, do the math.

Part of the reason that Jews are called “the chosen people” is because the fact that we’re still here when so many people have tried to annihilate us would seem to suggest that nothing short of divine intervention can explain it. But God helps those who help themselves.

Might be time for a change. Might be time to rethink things.

Might be time for a recruitment drive.

Go for a double barreled approach. First, you have a series of ads which feature high-profile, popular Jews. Dress them really sharply, with a nicely flattering Star of David pendant conspicuously featured, and sporting a milk moustache–or, even better, a full milk beard. And the slogan can be, “Got Milechdik?”, a slogan so bizarre that people will feel constrained to read the rest of the copy which sings the praises of how great it is being Jewish (you immediately get premiere status in the entertainment industry, and a free copy of The Joys of Yiddish upon joining up.) Join now, and we’ll even waive the circumcision requirements.

Then you have a second series of ads featuring such annoying people as Newt Gingrich with the copyline, “Not Jewish.” The message is clear: Don’t blame us. We didn’t have anything to do with it.

Based on the relatively minuscule Jewish population of this country, the prospect of repulsive people being Jewish is rather slim. In one stroke, Americans can distance themselves in a concrete way from individuals that they’d rather not even share a relationship to as a species, much less on a religious basis.

I mean, granted, there might be counter advertising (Jeffrey Dahmer remains something of a sore point… and I’m not sure, but with our luck the Unabomber’s Jewish) but we can handle that. I mean, hëll, the entire Ferengi race is one big Jewish parody, and we’ve withstood that okay.

And it sure beats sitting around wringing our hands while carrying with us the same kind of population-limiting rules that put an end to the Shakers (a religious order that advocated celibacy for its members, and wasn’t that a bright move.)

Wow. I’m on a roll. Next week I think I’ll talk about how the entire consciousness of sexual harassment and what that’s spawned is the worst thing that’s ever happened to women. See how many more people I can irritate.

(Peter David, writer of stuff, can be written to at Second Age, Inc., PO Box 239, Bayport, NY 11705. It’s a perversity of his that he always gets a notion to write his most inflammatory columns right around the time that the CBG ballots go out, as if hacking people off around voting time is a bright thing to do.)

 

12 comments on “Column X

  1. So were you able to get a “original ending” Little Shop before it was recalled or are you only know getting it with the blu-ra

  2. Hey, PAD, I only held out a little longer than you in regards to a DVD player. And there only because The 13th Warrior was coming out on DVD nine months before a VHS version would be available.

    I mean, you GOTTA have priorities.

  3. Weird to think there was a time when DVDs were the “enemy,” and laserdiscs were preferable.

    1. Worse in Canada. Dealers I spoke to said laserdiscs weren’t selling well because people preferred VHS as LDs could not record. So when DVDs came out, which suffered from this same lack, they flew off the shelves. And good luck trying to figure such inconsistent behaviour.

      1. I think the difference was time. size and price.

        I think LDs were just a bit too early. That was the least of their problems with most people I knew, but by the time DVDs were rolling out we were all in love with our CDs and likes the idea of our entertainment on little metal discs.

        You’re not going to buy a film on VHS and record over it, so I’m not sure where that factors in to buying a movie that’s manufacturer recorded VS recorded from TV to a blank in most arguments. The only place I see it coming in is in the availability of getting those blanks.

        If you had the VHS recorder, you could upgrade either way and keep the VHS recorder. At that point, I’d say size was a consideration (in more ways than one).

        LDs were big. They may have been thin, but they were as big around as an old vinyl record. You needed a deeper shelf and maybe more overall storage space to keep them. Some people I knew didn’t like that aspect of it.

        DVDs fit in the same basic storage area and you could fit two DVD cases into the space of one VHS tape. Slowly upgrading the collection meant cutting back on the storage space a bit or at least did in the early going.

        The other size issue was information held. LDs shared one other thing in common with old vinyl records. Halfway through you had to get up, take it out of the player, flip it over, put it back in and play side two to finish it. DVDs, like VHS tapes, had the whole movie on one side and could be played from start to finish with one touch of the button. A small issue for some, but an issue nonetheless.

        I also think price had a lot to do with it. I looked at LDs early on because you could get so many foreign films on the things that you couldn’t get on VHS if only because they weren’t region coded like DVDs are today. But at the time the price for a LD was at least twice that of a VHS if not a little more. And I noticed that a six month wait after the day of release might drop a VHS tape’s price while not doing so as often with LDs.

        DVDs came out high as well, but the prices for players and discs dropped fast. In the two areas I lived in when DVDs were first coming out and then dropping in price, I still didn’t see LDs deriously dropping i price to be competitive with VHS/DVD prices until the LD market was desperate to not die.

        And even the recordable thing changed fairly fast. I saw ads for DVD recorders fairly early on. They cost about as much as a used car, but they were there. All one had to do was look at the speed that the market was adapting to the new format and you could figure out that they would be in buying range in the not too distant future.

        And then there’s that other fun factor. I just don’t think that the studios and whatnot ever truly supported the format. If I saw ads for LDs or write-ups on LDs and LD players, it was all about how they were great for the high end film buff, but not really that great for the average movie buyer.

        Seriously, think about it. How many major TV and radio ads did you see pushing LDs and LD players? How many VHS tapes did you have that had an LD ad on it with the trailer or ad at the start of the tape?

        I have VHS tapes with short little “Buy DVDs!” ads on them. Hëll, every dámņ new release DVD I’ve bought in the last year has at least one ad telling me about how crappy my DVD is and how great Blu-Ray is. I’ve essentially got two on some because some have an ad for the new 3D home entertainment systems and, duh, you have to have a 3D Blu-Ray to play on your 3D home entertainment center.

        The studios and the industry as a whole pushed DVDs to the moon. There were fluff pieces on the TV about how DVDs would change the viewing experience when they came out with regards to both quality and odd little interactive things. There were fluff promo bits on entertainment shows about how much bonus materials you would get on a DVD VS the “bare bones” nature of VHS tapes. DVD releases were pushed a lot heavier and with bigger ad blitzes than you ever saw with LDs.

        “And good luck trying to figure such inconsistent behaviour.”

        When you look at all of that and look at both of the time periods when each of the formats respectively were introduced to the buying public combined with the industry support of DVDs VS LDs and the level of “Gotta have it!” vibe attached to DVDs VS the “Nice for high end film buffs” vibe attached to LDs?

        Not hard at all really.

      2. I can’t speak for US ads but Canada didn’t seem to really want to push it. Stores would carry players, but no discs which I questioned but never got a straight answer to. Japan on the other hand was big on it. I was trading video tapes of televised material and often ran into movies or specials or anime released in LED format. It was also very popular for the karaoke lot. As for Canada, our local library had a wall with hundreds of them with everything from the foreign stuff you spoke of to music videos to documentaries. I was a regular borrower of their material. The bit about flipping the disc over halfway through stopped being a problem with later machines which were able to read both sides without turning over. And one thing they claimed to have over VHS – durability. Tapes would wear out after enough viewings. Discs were claimed to be ever lasting. Of course, this was before they learned about disc rot, but that was years later and I believe they eventually fixed that.

      3. I don’t know about the larger cities like New York and LA, but nowhere near where I lived did I ever see them largely stocked in stores. huge stores filled with hundreds of VHS tapes and one tiny little rack in the back corner of the store devoted to the things. I don’t think I ever saw them in the local retail stores either.

        Like I said, I really don’t think the industry ever really wanted to truly push and promote the format. It was probably just the overseas market and the American collector market and film buffs that kept the things alive and possibly just barely.

      4. I just meant that DVDs are clearly superior to laserdiscs, so Peter’s 1998 hostility towards them is funny in retrospect.

        But I was the same way. When I read that they weren’t actual copies of the movies, but merely digital extrapolations, I refused to ever buy one. And I never even had a laserdisc player. But I eventually saw the error in my judgment.

        I also hated Netflix when I first heard about it, and now I couldn’t live without it. I’m often irrationally resistant to change for some reason.

  4. So, Peter, have you caved in to Blu-ray? How about 3D? I’m waiting on the Blu-ray player until I get an HDTV, at which point I’ll also upgrade to digital cable and finally be able to get BBC America in my market. Why haven’t I upgraded to HDTV yet? Long story…also boring. I am, however, buying Blu/DVD combo packages where available for movies I want to own, so I can watch one now, and the other when I upgrade my player. 3D on the other hand, I’m unlikely to ever pick up. My real world depth perception is bad enough to begin with.

  5. I recall seeing “The Muppet Movie” on laser disc when I was quite young, at a baby-sitter’s house. My family didn’t even have a VCR at the time, so the thing was pretty astounding. When I was in college, my film teacher was an enthusiastic proponent of laser discs, and the independently owned video store just off campus carried an extensive and varied collection of laser discs (though it was the only store in town that did; it also carried video game titles for rent from, I’m not kidding, every platform ever released in the US–the owner said he just never took anything out of stock so long as it was still in reasonably good, functioning condition).

  6. I finally got a laserdisc player (second-hand) near the end of their life cycle. Within the next year or so, to get movies on disc, I was having to special order. I jumped on the DVD bandwagon fairly early. As blu-ray started to hit, we knew we wanted to upgrade our TV and go to blu, so when we’d buy movies we knew we’d want in blu-ray, we’d get the “no frills” DVD and hold off to get the extras on blu. Then, as our primary DVD player began to die a couple of years ago, my mom & stepdad bought us a blu-ray player as a replacement (even though we didn’t have an HDTV yet). So, even though we couldn’t take full advantage of the picture quality, we started getting movies on blu-ray. That’s still the only blu-ray player in the house, so we tend to get the BD/DVD combo packs (or, even better, BD/DVD/digital copy combos) when available.

    The rate things’ve been going, it probably won’t be long before yet another change in dominant format (beyond 3D blu-ray).

    –Daryl

Comments are closed.