Brad Nelson
Administrator
עַבְדְּךָ֔ אֶת־ הַתְּשׁוּעָ֥ה הַגְּדֹלָ֖ה הַזֹּ֑את
Posts: 12,261
|
Post by Brad Nelson on Jan 9, 2020 13:04:01 GMT -8
I’ve been watching a ton of pretty decent documentaries on CuriosityStream. I think I’ve already got my $20/year money’s worth. I just watched a fairly excellent documentary on Frank Lloyd Wright. Wright was, of course, a bit of a moral leper. And I think the outer styles of his building tend to lack charm. But almost without exception, the interior of the buildings are stunning. His very last project was the Guggenheim museum, built and designed in 1959 when Wright was in his nineties. (Both inside and outside are very interesting). It’s curvaceous design was a stab at the monolithic boxes that defined the skyscrapers going up at the time. I’m more of a fan of the idea of Frank Lloyd Wright than of Wright himself. Yes, he did some lovely stuff. Yes, he was innovative. Yes, he was highly influential. And, yes, one could say that he ushered in modern architecture. I don’t dispute any of that. But his houses are show pieces, not necessarily places that one would be comfortable living in (except as show pieces for parties and such). They were pieces of art. Wright even (usually or often, I don’t know) designed the furniture for the homes he designed. And he gave the homeowners strict style standards — such as no hanging drapes in front of the windows of pictures on the walls. Apparently he would even return anonymously to some homes and rearrange the furniture.
That’s the art world. The creative and boundary-breaking can be fun to look at. But you might not (except for the prestige factor) necessarily want to live in one of his houses. That’s my opinion, and it’s never really changed much over the years even as I’ve learned a bit more about him. One of his most famous buildings (probably the most famous) is the Falling Water house:   I have to admit, this was is pretty cool (inside and out) although from what I’ve read elsewhere, maintenance of this house is a challenge. |
|
|
|
Post by timothylane on Jan 9, 2020 13:38:45 GMT -8
Ayn Rand was a big admirer of Wright, and Howard Roark of The Fountainhead was based on him. Wright appreciated the praise, but the admiration wasn't mutual. It will probably come as no surprise that he was a socialist, not a capitalist. Never mind who paid for his buildings. One might say that Roark was a Wright who understood that.
|
|
Brad Nelson
Administrator
עַבְדְּךָ֔ אֶת־ הַתְּשׁוּעָ֥ה הַגְּדֹלָ֖ה הַזֹּ֑את
Posts: 12,261
|
Post by Brad Nelson on Jan 9, 2020 15:13:34 GMT -8
There’s another interesting connection that I wasn’t aware of until I saw this documentary. Apparently his Ennis House was used in the movie, Blade Runner.   More views here. It’s imposing, even ugly, on the outside but is rather stunning on the inside. It is based roughly on a Mayan temple. And from that top photo, it looks as if it was used in “Game of Thrones” as well. |
|
|
|
Post by timothylane on Jan 9, 2020 21:37:38 GMT -8
The second link mentions that the Ennis House was the house (or at least the exterior) used in the oddly named House on Haunted Hill. (Despite the title, it was the house that was haunted, not the hill. I wonder if they were quietly trading on the name of a book that came out that year, Shirley Jackson's The Haunting of Hill House, even though the stories have no connection to each other.)
|
|
Brad Nelson
Administrator
עַבְדְּךָ֔ אֶת־ הַתְּשׁוּעָ֥ה הַגְּדֹלָ֖ה הַזֹּ֑את
Posts: 12,261
|
Post by Brad Nelson on Jan 15, 2020 11:34:21 GMT -8
On CuriosityStream that had a very interesting 3-part series on the internet that is presented by Derek Muller (I’d never heard of him): DigitsIt’s well worth a watch and well worth doing a free trial of CuriosityStream. Although Edward Snowden might be a bit much for some to take (he is just one of many who has a few things to day), they do some good work in regards to the privacy issues presented by the internet, and particularly mobile phones. There’s a WIFI-free space in West Virginia called The Quiet Zone. This is a 13,000 square mile areas that covers the eastern half of West Virginia and is for the benefit of the Green Bank telescope. I’d never heard of this and found that aspect quite interesting. They interviewed the kids there and they had no problem living without phones. And it was a stark contrast when they switched over to a view of a city outside the zone where everyone (even walking across crosswalks) had their heads in their phones. It’s just bizarre behavior and it was likened as an addiction, which I think it obviously is. This 3-part series is a good overview of the creation of the internet, where it is now, as well as the negative security and social implications of it. |
|
Brad Nelson
Administrator
עַבְדְּךָ֔ אֶת־ הַתְּשׁוּעָ֥ה הַגְּדֹלָ֖ה הַזֹּ֑את
Posts: 12,261
|
Post by Brad Nelson on Feb 13, 2020 9:12:48 GMT -8
I still think Curiosity Stream is the best twenty bucks I’ve ever spent on a streaming channel. That’s not twenty bucks a month but for an entire year. I watched a good two-hour documentary on Napoleon’s invasion of Russia: Napoleon: The Russian Campaign. It was well done for what it was. It used live actors in small groups to give you a feel for the various sides and their attitudes. It was very detailed but always interesting. I’ve never read a book on the subject. And, in retrospect, I realize I knew relatively nothing on the subject. This documentary filled in a lot of blanks. As one reviewer said, “A little light on military aspects, but a good light history of the subject.” |
|
|
|
Post by artraveler on Feb 13, 2020 9:24:45 GMT -8
I have subscribed for about 6 months and your correct about the value for the bucks. Some of the docs are not well made but still informative, and some of them are from PBS so there is a PC context, mostly global warming and how you are personally responsible for the potential death of 7 billion people. However, that excepted there is good information to be acquired. I will keep it until I run through everything interesting.
|
|
|
|
Post by timothylane on Feb 13, 2020 10:36:18 GMT -8
I don't know if they go into this, but the French had plenty of problems even in the summer, partly because of the Russian scorched earth campaign. Sickness rates were already heavy, which is why Napoleon only had about a third of his army when he fought at Borodino. His combat losses hadn't been very heavy yet.
The winter, of course, was a shock to the French, especially when it started snowing in October as they fell back on Smolensk. Another problem was that, between both sides foraging and Russian scorched earth, they were falling back along a food-short line of retreat. The option of retreating through an undevastated area was foreclosed after the Battle of Maloyaroslavets, even though it was more or less a drawn battle.
The winter wasn't always as bad as they thought, though. Retreating from Smolensk, Napoleon burned his bridging train because it was a cumbersome thing to carry along under those circumstances, and he wouldn't need it to cross deeply frozen rivers. This proved an embarrassment when he found that a bit of a warm (or less frigid) spell meant that the Beresina wasn't iced over and he needed to improvise a bridge -- while at the same time fighting Russian troops behind him as well as across the river blocking his retreat.
He lost about half his fighting force there, but managed to break through and continue his retreat. But the Battle of the Beresina was technically a French victory, if a rather pyrrhic one. But one can understand why there was hardly anything left when he finally reached East Prussia and linked up with MacDonald's force retreating from Riga (as far as they got in their advance on St. Petersburg). That's when the General Yorck, commander of the Prussian forces with MacDonald, disobeyed his official orders by not only making peace with the Russians but switching sides.
Not many people know that one of Prussia's great military heroes got there via disobedience and technical treason. The feckless King remained an official ally until the French forces abandoned Berlin.
|
|
Brad Nelson
Administrator
עַבְדְּךָ֔ אֶת־ הַתְּשׁוּעָ֥ה הַגְּדֹלָ֖ה הַזֹּ֑את
Posts: 12,261
|
Post by Brad Nelson on Feb 13, 2020 11:17:48 GMT -8
Woohoo! You were there even before me. GMTA. (Great Minds Think Alike)
Yes, some are better than others. And there’s a lot of 11-minute filler documentaries. Actually, some of these are interesting even if they are rather short.
I must automatically filter out the PC nonsense. For example, I’m now watching a documentary on using muons to try to find hidden chambers inside the pyramids. I’m sure they could make this PC or steer it towards global warming if they wanted. (Free the muon! They’re being exploited!) But so far this has been free of nonsense.
As was the documentary on Napoleon in Russia as well as at least a couple dozen others I’ve watched. But when it comes to the nature documentaries, then you sort of just have to hold your nose. However, on the “loss of habitat” point which comes up a lot, I don’t find that PC as much as it is just a regrettable reality. I really like that so much space had been set aside for nature reserves and they could certainly do more.
Like you, I’ll plow through the material for a year via my annual subscription and see if I simply blow through all the good stuff or if they rotate new stuff in there. I do think I’ve seen some new stuff rotated in already. But it’s hard to keep track.
There is so much garbage out there, I feel real good about advising people to put their money here. This kind of stuff will raise your intelligence, not destroy it. And, at least for me, I find a lot of this stuff thoroughly fascinating.
|
|
Brad Nelson
Administrator
עַבְדְּךָ֔ אֶת־ הַתְּשׁוּעָ֥ה הַגְּדֹלָ֖ה הַזֹּ֑את
Posts: 12,261
|
Post by Brad Nelson on Feb 13, 2020 11:57:02 GMT -8
The documentary is a pretty good overview, including the scorched earth (as well as scorched Moscow) strategy. Yikes.
The nuts-and-bolts military aspects are a little weak. But they do cover some of it. One of the most surprising aspects is Napoleon’s escape from behind the river Berezina (Battle of Berezina) as he is trying to escape back to France, hotly pursued (and almost completely encircled) by Russian and Cossack forces.
I’m not sure by this example if it wasn’t so much a case of Napoleon being smart as his opponents being dumb. Napoleon knows that there is a large Russian force on the other side of where the bridge (now burnt) once was. But in the meantime, he’s learned from a captured local that there is a ford just a couple miles away. So he decides to build two bridges at the ford: one for the soldiers and one for the cannons and heavier wagons.
At the same time, he undertakes the task of building a bridge where the other one has been burnt by the Russians. This is simply a ruse. And I’m sitting here watching this and screaming at the TV, “Don’t you know that this is Napoleon you’re dealing with and that he might be planning something clever in order to pull his chestnuts out of the fire?”
The Russians have him exactly where they want him. But for lack of even the barest military assessment of possible moves by Napoleon, he (and, just as importantly, the core staff and braintrust of his army) gets away. Amazing.
Any megalomaniac (Alexander, Hitler, Napoleon) seems destined to push things until they are destroyed. And Napoleon’s venture in Russia was clearly a case of this. As with Hitler, he didn’t seem to have much of a plan but a big ego and lots of bluster.
So he’s sitting there inside the Kremlin and he’s won absolutely nothing. He has no plan other than that his bluster would supposed to cow Alexander into submission. But as this documentary noted, at least he had brains enough to know he couldn’t stay where he was. But it was a little late for such insight for the majority of his forces.
By rights, it should be as offensive to have a brand of Hitler brandy on your sideboard as it is having a bottle of Napoleon brandy. It’s funny how all this works.
|
|
|
|
Post by timothylane on Feb 13, 2020 12:48:57 GMT -8
I don't recall the exact phrasing, but Wellington observed that a conqueror (like Napoleon) is like a cannon ball -- he must be keep going. He just can't stop on his own. Alexander the Great didn't, Napoleon didn't, Hitler didn't -- and except for Alexander dying young of some sort of illness, they were stopped by massed opposition.
Brilliant victories are the result of brilliance (or sometimes foolhardiness and luck) on the part of the victor and idiocy on the part of the loser. I recall a book on strategy that I read as a teenager (by Bernard Brodie, I think) which noted that a Cannae requires both a Hannibal and a Terrentius Varro just as a Second Bull Run requires both a Lee and a Pope. (Grant was rather lucky that way, so often facing the likes of Pillow, Floyd, Pemberton, and Bragg in the West.) So it was for Napoleon in many of his battles, including the Beresina. There's no way he should have been able to escape that trap.
|
|
|
|
Post by kungfuzu on Feb 13, 2020 13:11:49 GMT -8
One thing that is interesting about Alexander is that his soldiers stopped him from fighting their way across India to the Bay of Bengal. Many had been fighting with him for 20 years and were in their 50s and even 60s, apparently. Enough was enough.
Nevertheless, when he turned back to the West, he chose a different route than the one he had taken to reach India. It was on this route that his army suffered terribly due to lack of water. It was also in an assault on one of the cities on this route that Alexander was badly wounded by an arrow, I believe in the chest. It would seem he was greatly weakened by this and his health never quite recovered.
I believe one of the reasons Julius Caesar was so admired from the Renaissance on is that he knew when to stop and return to Rome. He was a great general, but a greater politician. Interestingly, as hard as he was, he did not go around slaughtering his political enemies. He refrained from having a number of these disposed of, which considering how they later assassinated him, was a mistake.
|
|
|
|
Post by timothylane on Feb 13, 2020 13:41:19 GMT -8
Julius Caesar wasn't a conqueror in the same sense as Alexander or Napoleon, though he did conquer Gaul. Most of his fighting was against Pompey and his supporters in the civil war that followed the crossing of the Rubicon. Even Gaul was sort of his area of concern as a consul and proconsul.
|
|
|
|
Post by artraveler on Feb 13, 2020 14:51:15 GMT -8
Caesar looked at it as his duty to pacify Gaul. His commentaries are full of Caesar doing this or that, always at great speed. And, Caesar was magnanimous with his enemies. He could have slaughtered his way from Italy to the English Channel and back, but he made allies where he could and most of the Gallic tribes ultimately decided that acceptance of Roman rule, on a national basis, was better than fighting the legions year after year.
If you need dictators to start off your empire you could do much worse than Caesar and Augustus.
|
|
Brad Nelson
Administrator
עַבְדְּךָ֔ אֶת־ הַתְּשׁוּעָ֥ה הַגְּדֹלָ֖ה הַזֹּ֑את
Posts: 12,261
|
Post by Brad Nelson on Feb 14, 2020 8:57:17 GMT -8
There’s also a very good documentary about recent efforts to explore inside The Great Pyramid: Scanning The Pyramids. You can also find a DVD on the subject for $16.31. I don’t know if it’s the same program. But if you wanted to watch it, you might as well do an annual subscription to CuriosityStream for twenty bucks. The documentary is about a 2017 project called ScanPyramids. (Brief Wiki info here.) Using there independent detection techniques, they found something they call “The Big Void.” It could be another Grand Gallery. But apparently they have 99.9% certainty that it’s there. And apparently the latest tests show that it is indeed likely another corridor. Wiki says they’re going back in 2020 with a newly developed muon detector. I’m assuming that will give them better resolution. You can watch a video that gives you a light overview at ScanPyramids.org. There are reasonable expectations that they could find storerooms of scrolls that writings elsewhere hint at. This really is an exciting thing and a big deal.  |
|
|
|
Post by artraveler on Feb 14, 2020 9:13:30 GMT -8
Right, is the one where they find Obi Wan Kenobi was here written on the wall?
Seriously, there is some interesting information about early Egyptian history but I thought the entire thing could have been done in about 1/2 hour. My experience is that since most of these docs were made for TV that they tend to fill time making up 51-60 minutes. Often the narrator/star is some obscure Phd from University of Podunk in Silesia.
|
|
Brad Nelson
Administrator
עַבְדְּךָ֔ אֶת־ הַתְּשׁוּעָ֥ה הַגְּדֹלָ֖ה הַזֹּ֑את
Posts: 12,261
|
Post by Brad Nelson on Feb 14, 2020 9:59:48 GMT -8
Ha! Would that ever be cool. Or what if they found an obviously alien language all over the wall, complete with little pictographs of machines that seem to be levitating the rocks. Oh, that would be gloriously funny, ironic, and, of course, fascinating. For sure, this documentary was spread out. They have two versions on CuriosityStream. One is an extended version. That’s the one I watched. Basically we could tell the story thusly: The Japs positioned an array of photographic plates inside various portions of The Great Pyramid and let them bake in muon particles for a few months. They developed them and then (using computer models) deduced that a fuzzy patch in the data was a cavity. Some other used some different techniques, but it amounted to the same thing: Deducing that there is another open space in the pyramids. One used another particle detection technique from outside the pyramid and another used thermal imaging. I wasn’t going to comment on this because it’s really not complimentary. But much of the video was about dealing with the Egyptian bureaucracy that controls access to the pyramids. Many appear to be clowns. There. I said it. Anyone who has watched any documentaries over the years that were set in Egypt would have come across the pompous Zahi Hawass, who (as listed now in Wiki) is the former Minister of State for Antiquities Affairs. Okay. Let’s be fair. The European powers fairly looted Egypt. Arguably there are more non-stone treasures sitting in England and France than are left in Egypt. One can make a good case that this “looting” actually served to preserve these treasures from home-grown looters who would just have melted everything down. So, yes, Egypt really does need to have a hand in the process. But it is very clear in this video that Zahi Hawass has no more of a scientific grip on the techniques being used by the Japs and others than I do. But they have to genuflect to this guy and jump through his hoops. And it was hilarious, and more than a bit surprising, to see some push back (subtle sarcasm) from one of the researchers in this regard. At the end of the day, Zahi Hawass and the committee overseeing such things did give the green light to these groups of researchers. Maybe I’m a little harsh. But like I’ve said, I’ve seen this Hawass guy on film for years and he’s always seemed a bit out of place….but likely fulfilling a very necessary functionary. But it also leaves one with the impression of Thank god the Europeans and Japs stuck there nose in because the Egyptians themselves are just relative cavemen. |
|
|
|
Post by artraveler on Feb 14, 2020 10:07:09 GMT -8
Will Cuppy said, "in the spring the Nile River rises and covers Egypt with water, when the Nile recedes Egypt is covered with Egyptologists"
|
|
Brad Nelson
Administrator
עַבְדְּךָ֔ אֶת־ הַתְּשׁוּעָ֥ה הַגְּדֹלָ֖ה הַזֹּ֑את
Posts: 12,261
|
Post by Brad Nelson on Feb 14, 2020 11:45:12 GMT -8
LOL. A good saying. And they think entry to the new staircase (or whatever) they found is right behind the chevron shown below.   Here’s a sketch from 1808:  How they (and I’m not sure who it was) found that entrance to begin with must be a good story. And this has all the makings of being another Tut-like story. The entrance to Tut’s tomb was cleverly disguised under the rubble of a tomb above it. Here we have a the chevron that clearly shows that it must be an entrance of some kind. And what could be more logical than to look underneath it. And they do find an entrance underneath where the tourists (although this looks like a model) are pictured. But to think that they might have pulled a trick and put one right behind those huge chevron stones is certainly cause for thinking there might be yet some treasure to find. Unless, as some pessimists think, it’s just an “access tunnel” or something utilitarian like that. You never know. |
|
Brad Nelson
Administrator
עַבְדְּךָ֔ אֶת־ הַתְּשׁוּעָ֥ה הַגְּדֹלָ֖ה הַזֹּ֑את
Posts: 12,261
|
Post by Brad Nelson on Feb 14, 2020 11:49:00 GMT -8
Apparently they have moved the entrance. So I don't really know what the hell is going on:  |
|
