Mitch Wagner's Blog

About the season opener of "Dexter"

We watched the season premier of Dexter last night. We've been letting them pile up on TiVo, but now it's time to break into the pile.

One of the many things I like about this show is the way it deals with the moral choices Dexter makes. Other cop shows show cops taking justice into their own hands -- and celebrate it. It's an old, and ugly, TV-cop-show myth, that the law exists to protect criminals, and if only we let the cops beat confessions out of suspects, the streets would be safer and the country would be a better place. You can see that theme acted out on several times a week. NCIS played with it Tuesday night; cops denied a suspect a right to a public trial and gloating about it afterwards. Ha, ha! Sworn officers of the law subverted the Constitution! Isn't that terrific?!

Dexter also shows a cop (or, rather, a forensic scientist) taking the law into his own hands. But it doesn't flinch from the moral choice involved.

The appeal of Dexter is partially the appeal of vampire stories. Conscience is a burden, makes it difficult to give bad guys what they deserve. But that's not a problem for Dexter -- and fictional vampires -- they're powerful and free of the constraints of conscience. Great scenes in vampire stories and Dexter are when the killers go after bullies and brutes.

Each of the first two seasons of Dexter shows Our Hero tempted to break his own moral code, and run wild. Each of the seasons also shows Dexter confronting some false belief about his own nature. In the first season, Dexter learns he had a brother. In the second season, we learn (but I'm not sure Dexter did) that Dexter's foster father Harry lied to him -- Dexter was not born a serial killer whom Harry taught to channel his uncontrollable passions. Rather, Harry made Dexter a serial killer. I expect we'll see some kind of similar revelation in this season.

The first episode was kind of slow. I'm optimistic it'll pick up; the first seasonal installment of episodic TV novels like Dexter, or The Wire, or The Sopranos are often slow, as are the episodes in the middle of a season, but it all pays off.

About the season finale of "Mad Men"

A friend wrote: "Don is a guy that's really good at something he's not quite sure he believes in."

I don't think that's "supported by the text," as the English majors say. In no way do we see that he has stopped believing in advertising.

Nor does that fit my mental picture of Don. I think advertising is the only thing he believes in. Advertising and appearances.

He appears to be the dashing, debonair Don Draper, and not Dick Whitman, farmboy, unwanted whore's son, and Army deserter.

He appears to have a lovely, loving wife and the perfect family.

That's what he believes in.

Clearly, that stopped working for him when Betty threw him out -- but we don't know what his solution will be. He seems to have found a solution that involves him going back to his old life and job, but we don't know what that solution is. The road to redemption would be to take all those appearances and make them real. But I don't know how interesting that would be for television.

Julie pointed me to this very good episode recap and analysis of Mad Men,, which says Pete confided in Don because Pete felt a little loyal to Don. I don't see that. Pete is a weasel, loyal to no one but himself. He was hedging his bets, is all. And wisely too, as it turns out, because I expect the Brits are going to kick Duck to the curb. "Yes, Pete has grown up," TV Guide says. Yes, he's a grown-up weasel now.

I need to re-think whether it's a good idea to get involved in political arguments

To some extent, I see it as civic duty to try to persuade others to my beliefs, and to engage in discussions.

On the other hand, political arguments make me unhappy. I usually end up arguing with people I like, and I don't like arguing with people I like.

Maybe I should stick to donating to causes I support, occasionally speaking my mind, but otherwise keeping my mouth shut.

I will be very glad when this election is over. I hope Obama wins, of course, but I'll be glad when it's over. (Although I fear this'll be like 2000, and it'll just drag on and on and on forever.)

Doing our part to advance the cause of bigotry and superstition

I just got an e-mail from the group backing "No on 8."

Proposition 8 is the measure on the California ballot to ban gay marriage, voting 8 down would effectively uphold a recent California court decision making gay marriage legal. So the "No on 8" group is actually saying "yes" to gay marriage. With me so far?

According to this e-mail, opponents of gay marriage are sending letters to donors to "no on 8" threatening to publicize their donations unless the donors also donate an equal amount to the campaign to block gay marriage:

"Were you to elect not to donate comparably, it would be a clear indication that you are in opposition to traditional marriage. You would leave us no other reasonable assumption. The names of any companies...that choose not to donate...to ProtectMarriage.com...will be published.

...We will contact you shortly to discuss your contribution."

A local TV news station confirms the report.

Well, I certainly like to do my part to advance the cause of democracy. I know that the opponents of gay marriage are very, very busy. It's a lot of work to set back the clock of justice 50 years, spread superstition and fear, tell lies about your opponents, and promote bigotry. Not enough hours in the day to do it all.

So I'll save the "Yes on 8" people some trouble and out our household (so to speak):

Julie and I donated to the "no on 8" campaign, and we support the right to gay marriage.

There! No need to blackmail us, we've outed ourselves. Happy to help!

P.S. I thought about attending the North San Diego County Protect Marriage Meetup and saying, "I think it's wonderful what you people are doing! Protecting marriage! Gay marriage, straight marriage, all kinds of marriage!" But I'm too lazy.

Where are you from?

Career blogger Penelope Trunk writes about a wedding in the family of her new SO, whom she calls "the farmer." She talks about the difficulty she has answering the question "where are you from?"

Usually, saying I'm from Madison gives me a rash. Not a visible one, but maybe like a brain rash or something. So usually I say I'm from New York City.

(Side note: This is a good lesson in resume writing here, really. Because this is not a lie but not the first truth that comes to mind, but I always feel like it makes me look good, which is how you should look at a resume.

The farmer, by the way, thinks that it's a lie. He thinks I should say I'm from Wilmette. Which is the town I grew up in and haven't lived in in 25 years, and the last time I was there I wasn't even living in a house but in a mental ward because I was so insanely bulimic. But he still thinks Wilmette is the right answer.

I ignore that. I am the resume expert, after all.)

I have a similar problem. During our recent visit to Santa Fe and Albuquerque, Julie and I encountered a lot of people making smalltalk, who'd ask us, "Where are you from?"

The answer, for me, is complicated. I grew up in New York, specifically Long Island, specifically East Northport, which is a village in Huntington Township. That is where I consider myself to be "from" -- except I love New York City too, and lived my early childhood in Brooklyn, and have many happy memories of that. So I'm "from" New York City and Brooklyn, too.

However, I moved out of the New York metropolitan area 16 years ago, and then Julie and I got together and we moved to San Francisco 15 years ago, and then San Diego 11 years ago. And I've come to think of San Diego as home,

Julie has her own history to struggle with when asked that question: She was born and raised in Columbus, and is a proud Buckeye, but even before she met me she lived in San Diego, Laguna Beach, and the Boston Area.

However, people making smalltalk don't want all that information -- they just want to know where you're from.

I noticed on our New Mexico trip that Julie has a simple solution:

PERSON MAKING SMALLTALK: "Where are you from?"
JULIE: "We live in San Diego."

Which is a satisfactory answer, and the one I'll use from now on. Always the same words: "We live in San Diego."

Although, actually, we don't really live in San Diego -- we live in La Mesa, a suburb outside of San Diego. But "We live in San Diego" is the best answer. And we do live in San Diego County.

People asking questions often don't want the complete answer, they just want a good-enough answer, even if the good-enough answer feels inadequate to the person answering the question, especially when the question is simple and seems like it should have a simple answer, but the actual answer is a bit of a hairball.

Stephen King talks about dealing with his neighbors in the small town where he lives. When he encounters people around town and they ask him, "What are you working on, Steve?" he always responds, "I'm taking a break." Because, he says, he's learned through trial and error that's the only answer that will satisfy them.

(Unfortunately, I read that article years ago and can't find the link.)

Now I need to think of an answer to the question: Where do you get ideas for your articles?

About last night's episode of "Chuck"

Looking at the title -- "Chuck Versus the Cougars," I thought the episode was going to be about something COMPLETELY DIFFERENT: Chuck is assigned to infiltrate a group of predatory wealthy divorcees in their 40s and 50s who've had a lot of plastic surgery.

"Mark Ratner" was the name of the engineer that Nicole Richie was married to. That was also the name of the nerdy kid in Fast Times At Ridgemont High who was in love with Jennifer Jason Leigh.

Fast Times was based on real people -- the screenwriter, Cameron Crowe, spent a year researching life in a San Diego high school. Ratner was based on a guy named Andy Rathbone, who later on became the author of many of the Windows for Dummies books. He still lives here in San Diego. I've exchanged e-mails with him a couple of times, never met him. Sarah's high school in the show was, of course, in San Diego.

I thought they did a good job making up Sarah as a teen-aged nerd.

And now we know some things about Sarah's background, and we've opened a few more mysteries. I expect we'll see Sarah's father before the end of the season.

Wonder if we'll ever find out about Casey's past. He was great in this episode.

Product placement in science fiction

io9 looks at product-placement in science fiction. They're talking about movies and TV. But my favorite example is in a book, Citizen of the Galaxy, by Robert A. Heinlein, where a crewmember of a starship centuries in our future goes to a country fair on a faraway planet, where he is served a beverage that the salesman swears is made using the ancient, legendary recipe for Coca-Cola.

TVGal & "The Office"

TVGal was on her honeymoon for two weeks and didn't watch a minute of TV. We didn't watch any TV during our 12-day vacation, except for the presidential and vice-presidential debate (and even there we switched it off immediately after, didn't stick around to listen to the blithering pundits).

She writes about The Office:

"I love what Amy Ryan is bringing to the series as Holly. It was a savvy move to give Michael a love interest that is similarly goofy but also rooted in a little bit more reality. So far the series is doing a better job this season of tempering the outlandish, cringe-inducing moments of the show with believable moments."

I think the show goes over the top when Jan, Michael's ex, puts in an appearance. All the other characters, even the jerks like Michael, have mitigating characteristics that make them likable. Except for Jan. She's just a bitch.

About this week's episode of "Mad Men"

Watching this week's episode of "Mad Men," I said, "Don is thinking about disappearing again, like he did when he got out of the Army and buried Dick Whitman and became Don Draper." Julie was all, like, "Duh." She figured it out right away, last week. I don't see how he can do that, though -- the show is, after all, called "Mad Men," and not, "Adventures Of The Man Formerly Known As Don Draper."

Don is a tragic figure because he's ashamed of his childhood and lied to cover it up -- but it was never necessary. Even in 1963, the farmboy son of a whore and one of her johns can rise in the advertising profession, 1963 is a long way after Horatio Alger.

He's also a tragic figure because he behaves with perfect integrity in all his relationships with women. He is the perfect husband and the perfect boyfriend. Problem is, you kind of have to pick one (well, outside of poly or open relationships, and those don't exist in the world of Mad Men.)

Is Anna in love with Don? Of course she is. She thinks having a bum leg (or is she an amputee?) makes her more unattractive than it actually does. Then again, maybe in the world of Mad Men, it is exactly as unattractive as she thinks it is.

Betty is mostly sympathetic, but she's got a cruel, spiteful, vindictive streak she needs to deal with.

This week's anachronistic moment: Locking your children in the closet is an acceptable means of discipline! Then, if you have second thoughts, buy them an expensive gift!

The other anachronistic moment: Joan tries to get on top during sex, and her fiance thinks this is some kind of exotic Kama Sutra shit and it freaks him out. Then, later, he rapes her and she doesn't even seem to realize that's wrong.

Loved the illustration in Peggy's Popsicle ad. That just ain't right.

So what if he is a Muslim?

Gen. Colin Powell:

I feel strongly about this particular point because of a picture I saw in a magazine. It was a photo essay about troops who are serving in Iraq and Afghanistan. And one picture at the tail end of this photo essay was of a mother in Arlington Cemetery, and she had her head on the headstone of her son's grave. And as the picture focused in, you could see the writing on the headstone. And it gave his awards--Purple Heart, Bronze Star--showed that he died in Iraq, gave his date of birth, date of death. He was 20 years old. And then, at the very top of the headstone, it didn't have a Christian cross, it didn't have the Star of David, it had crescent and a star of the Islamic faith. And his name was Kareem Rashad Sultan Khan, and he was an American. He was born in New Jersey. He was 14 years old at the time of 9/11, and he waited until he can go serve his country, and he gave his life.

View the original photo as part of the New Yorker slide show, Service

Via Scalzi.