Lauren Oyler’s “The Case for Semicolons” in the NY Times Magazine is an entertaining defense of a punctuation mark that has, alas, been losing steam.

But I was struck by her use of em dashes in the articles, for I am an enthusiast of semicolons who over-uses em dashes, as do many of us. Em dashes as grammatical marks are matched only by parentheses in the permissiveness of their use, so I do not find them as satisfying as a well-placed semicolon.

I’ve been informally watching dashes eclipse semicolons and parentheses for decades now, but rest assured that no data has been harmed in this pursuit. I’d love to know if the rise in the use of dashes  — if there has been any such thing  — coincides with the influence of the Web. Are they more widely used (if indeed they are) because the rules are more lax? Because we write on the Web more like we speak? Because we’re writing more complex sentences? More poorly structured sentences? Because of Hunter Biden’s laptop?

I expect to go the grave with this question unanswered.

2 Comments »

Apryl Williams (@aprylw) is talking with Allissa Richardson about “Surveillance and Black Digital Publics”  at a Harvard Berkman Klein Center event. Here’s a paper by Apryl on the topic.

I am live blogging, and thus making so many mistakes you could plotz. Mistakes of every sort: Missing points. Getting points wrong. Paraphrasing everything, and doing so in ways that don’t match the person’s content or tone. Day dreaming for a moment and missing an entire idea. Making articulate people sound choppy in my retelling. OMG, it’s just a mess.

Allissa begins by playing some Karen memes from The View, [Here are some others – dw] and asks whether “laughter is the best medicine,” as someone on The View concluded. She raises a case, one of thousands, in which a white person’s words were taken over those of Black people. “Those days haven’t really ended.”

Apryl says there’s a long history of Black people nicknaming white people who call the cops for offenses that wouldn’t be offenses if done by white people. Before “Karen” there was “Becky.”

AR: A lot of what we’re seeing isn’t meant to be funny. There’s underlying rage.

AW: Yes, there is. It’s easier to laugh if you have some distance from it. But for the people it’s happening to, it’s horrifying. If it happened to me, I’d feel lucky to walk away alive from an encounter with the police. There’s always a possibility for a Black person that she won’t. But there’s also the idea that humor helps us cope with trauma, especially as a collective. There’s lots of research that shows that humor can help us cope with physical and emotional pain. I like to think of these memes as a collective release of stress. The memes also act as a stand-in for media reporting where otherwise there wouldn’t be any.

AW: There were memes that preexisted the Internet – coded images that have a lot of intertextuality. To decode a meme you have to be embedded in that culture.

AR: In one of the memes we just saw, you’d have to know about Wakanda.

AW: Definitely.

AR: You’ve been curating Karen memes this year. Any favorites?

AW: Shout out to [Ack. I didn’t catch the name. Sorry about that! – dw ] who helped. We have about 60,000 memes that comment on around 15 incidents. My favorite is Barbecue Becky, a woman in Oakland who called the police because a Black group was using a grill in a park. Becky was “worried” that they wouldn’t dispose of the cinders safely. In the 911 call, she is very clear that it’s a Black family, but when the dispatcher asks her own color, she doesn’t want that to be part of the conversation.

AR: That incident spawned a meme within a meme.

AW: Yes, in celebration of this resistance, the people of Oakland had a BBQ in the same spot on the anniversary the next year. And maybe the year after that.

AW: It’s very interesting that as Oakland becomes gentrified, it’s white women who want to assert themselves. Black women experience Karens everyday, which is why these memes are so important., Why can’t white women just mind their own business? Because surveilling and policing Black people is their business, and that’s the problem. They Were Her Property by Stephanie Jones-Rogers is about the myth that white women did not take part in slavery, that they didn’t own slaves. But that myth is false. Women benefited from slavery, and white people benefited from maintaining the power differential that said that Black people are “less than.” A lot of those same ideologies underlay the Karen practices: the idea that white people are superior and there should be some natural order, or Black people are born bad and deserved to be patrolled. White people are socialized via the media that Black people are dangerous, giving rise to the idea that Black bodies are a threat. White women are compelled to perform this racial fear.

AR: “Perform” harks back to Amy Cooper [who thought she was in danger from a Black bird watcher]. Are memes meant to just point something out, to punish, to organize dialogue…?

AW: Everyone who’s Black has their own way of being Black. [I missed who Apryl was talking about] took it so far, but I’m here to take it all the way. We can see that Amy Cooper was performing this danger, saying that this Black man is threatening me. A lot of the fear white women have of Black men goes back to slavery and racial perceptions of Black men as animals. We owe a big debt to the people who are creating these memes. because they’re helping us have this dialogue about “casual” racism, which isn’t really casual. And they’re often calling for restitution. Often with a meme people are saying that the person should be fired. Amy Cooper did lose her job. Permit Patty, the CEO of a cannabis company had to resign after calling the police on a Black child who was selling water bottles “without a permit”.

AR: Have you seen Asian or Latinx women engage in this type of behavior?

AW: Yes, it’s not just white women. Some people who are “white adjacent”, as I like to call them, engage in this performance because it displays power. And it reinforces the racist idea that Black women are the lowest on the social ladder.

AR: People see a meme and wonder if maybe they’re a Karen…

AW: That’s good. You should stop and ask yourself why you even think that might be the case.

AR: Where do you intellectually anchor your work in surveillance scholarship?

AW: Simone Brown did groundbreaking work on blackness and surveillance, including at the state level. Her work focuses on blackness as a key identifier and a marker of difference … a reason to surveil. And there are studies in which the tech fails because it wasn’t designed to work with Black bodies. The truth shows up in the glitches, as Ruha Benjamin says.. And even though Michel Foucault is not without problems, his work about the surveillance society resonates with me: the Panopticon. When you’re surveilled so heavily, you start to behave as if you’re always surveilled. If Black people are always thinking they’re being watched and are concerned about their safety, that means we’re never free.

A: There’s a somatic concern in how our bodies take in that stress, of doing ordinary things and being punished for them. How about Bell Hooks‘ work?

AW: [I missed a sentence or maybe two.] Memes serve as a counter-surveillance. The memes hold up a mirror, saying just as you are patrolling us, we’re patrolling you. We won’t allow you to harass and terrorize our neighborhoods. What you’re doing isn’t just casual racism. It’s harmful and should be punished. “Your’e the one wasting tax payer money because you won’t say what you’re wearing or what your race is and you’re in a park full of people.”

AR: There were women on the frontlines in the Capitol invasion. Can you talk about how white supremacy has been upheld by women?

AW: White women were very much complicit in it. Jennifer Pierce’s Racing for Innocence is not just about women standing by their men, but women upholding the idea of the patriarchy. Jesse Daniels writes that white women are invested in the patriarchy because it supports them. In American society, women represent mythological ideologies about motherhood and nurturing. In the Capitol we saw that their ethos is that when a wrong is committed they feel the need to step in, even though in this case there was no wrong. The white women felt they had to uphold those values, and white entitlement made them feel comfortable doing it and feeling that they’d get away with it.

AR: A lot of this goes back to memes expressing rage in a humorous way even though there can be real danger.

AW: There’s a Caution Against Racially Exploited Non-emergencies (CAREN Act) proposal in California that would make it a crime to make Karen calls to the police. It passed in Oregon. I spoke with the woman who got it passed there and she said she was able to do it because she did it quietly. She herself had been Karen’ed.

Q&A

Q: Do these memes do more harm than good by trivializing the behavior?

A: They raise awareness.

Q: As James Baldwin says, isn’t this a white person’s problem?

A: Yes. Racism is a white invention. But it impacts us. For us it’s a fight for liberty and sometimes a fight for life. We need white people to take up their burden.

AR: What do you say to people who say that “Karen” is a slur?

AW: Black people are not trying to say that all people named Karen are bad. For me it’s just shorthand for white entitlement. If white people take it out of context, that is a white people problem, too.

Q: Foucault’s panopticon reminds me of the time that the police came because someone reported a Black person on the premises. I’m in a wheelchair, and am often invisible. Can you talk about how we can take all of this into a space of peace? [I’ve done a particularly bad job capturing this. Sorry. – dw]

AW: Black history has to be about moving forward as well as remembering the history of oppression. Black people thrive even as white people try to limit our agency and our joy.

Q: Can you talk about the white mainstreaming and coopting of memes started by Black people? And the use of Black audio by white teens on TikTok?

AW: Let’s talk about cultural appropriation and exploitation. I’ve been thinking all year about responsible ways of studying TikTok. Black creators are making all of these great sounds and memes, but often get no credit. It’s digital blackface: people performing blackness because it’s cool, but they wouldn’t want to be Black because being Black is hard.

Q: We often don’t give the LGTBTQ and ballroom culture credit for all they’ve given us that we use online.

AW: Much of that was started by queer Black people. But we should always remember to give credit and give back to those communities. And the idea that people should be respected no matter what they look like benefits everyone, not just people in those bodies.

Q: What can be done by tech policy and practice to help activists fight back?

AW: There are so many examples of activists fighting back. E.g., people painting their faces so they can’t be identified from images of them at protests. Black technologists are calling for that same tech to be used on the Capitol insurgents; if it can be used on peaceful BLM protestors, it can and should be used on the insurgents.

Q: Are there failed memes because they pushed the envelope too far?

AW: I’m sure there are failed memes. Some are maybe too scary to be funny. And when events happen too close together, one meme can overshadow others.

What should be the role of Asian-Americans, especially in the development of surveillance tech?

I appreciate this question a lot. The myth of the model minority is really damaging; whites think of Asian-Americans as the “good” minority. There’s already a lot of research showing the racism of Asian communities. Everyone working on tech needs to take a step back and question what their project is doing.

Apryl says she has been working on the role of race in online dating, and a book should be coming out soon.

Be the first to comment »

Of course we need to accord people their rights and their dignity. But over time I have come to find dignity to be the more urgent demand.

Rights cover what a society will let people do. Dignity pertains to who a person is.

Rights are granted on the basis of theories. Dignity is enacted in the presence of another.

Rights are mediated by whatever institution grants the rights. Dignity is unmediated, immediate.

Rights are the same for all. Dignity is for the singular person before you.

You can grudgingly grant people their rights. The moment you grant someone their dignity, any resentment you had about doing so turns against yourself.

Grant people their dignity, and rights will follow. Grant people their rights and you may treat them like slaves who have been freed by law.

A world without dignity is not at peace.

Comments Off on Rights vs. Dignity

Meredith Sue Willis, the noted novelist and my sister-in-law, has made six of her novels available for free, as e-books, until April 20th.

Sue, as her family members call her, brings characters to life in just a few words. Her novels tend to be centered on places that she brings to life as well – small-town West Virginia, rural Massachusetts, even a cruise ship before that phrase conjured a plague ward.

Give ’em a try. And you well might like her free literary newsletter as well.

1 Comment »

It is fantastic that 14 Paris museums have put images of 150,000 artworks into the public domain. Go take a look. It makes the world visibly better.

But …

…The images are easily accessible one at a time for a human who is browsing. You can also click to download it, and then do whatever you want with it. But they are, apparently purposefully, difficult to batch download. That deprives us of the ability to set computers onto the images and their metadata so that they can discover relationships, and patterns of relationships, among them. That’s a lost opportunity.

I understand it’s hard for institutions to give up on the credit they deserve for maintaining these artworks. Items put in the public domain can be passed around and duplicated without any reference to the source that made them available, or even to the artist who created them. But in return, the culture gets to freely share those images, and to incorporate them into new works, which helps to preserve and extend our shared culture.

So I don’t want to be ungrateful for this enormous gift to the world. But one more step – say, an open API that enables batch download – and the world can benefit even more from these museum’s awesome generosity.

(Hat tip to Keith Dawson.)

Comments Off on In the public domain, but encumbered

Here are links to the earliest cartoons in Riochard Brody’s excellent article, “Draw Stars,” in the Dec. 30, 2019 New Yorker. (Note: Racist and other stereotypes below.)

Emile Cole, Fantasmagorie, 1908, restored. (Original)

Winsor McCay, Little Nemo, 1911:

McCay, Gertie the Dinosaur, 1914:

Max and Dave Fleischer, Out of the Inkwell: The Tantalizing Fly, 1919 (remastered):

The Fleischers, Jumping Beans, 1922 (remastered):

Wallace Carlson (Bray Studios), How Cartoons Are Made, 1919:

Wallace Carlson, He resolves not to smoke, 1914:

Gregory La Cava, The Breath of a Nation, 1919:

Joseph Sunn claymation: Green Pastures, 1919:

Wallace McCutcheon’s merging of Green Pastures with live action, in The Sculptor’s Nightmare:

Howard S. Moss stop action, Mary & Gretel, part 1, 1916:

Mary & Gretel, part 2:

Walter Ruttmann’s abstract Opus 1, 1921:

Lette Reiniger’s silhouette Cinderella, 1921:

Bryant Fryer’s silhouette Follow the Swallow, 1927:

Comments Off on Early animation

SPOILER ALERT: I’m writing this hours before the final episode and will spoil prior episodes.

Based on the end of Episode 5 of Season 8 — the penultimate episode — it sure looks like Arya is on her way to kill Dany. But that’d be a cop out. I hope GoT goes all Red Weddingon us.

The GoT is a pacifist work intent on reminding us of the cost of war. War is unpredictable at both its micro level — even obvious heroes can be killed without warning — and macro level.

At the macro level, Dany certainly seems to have lost her claim to be a virtuous ruler. But so what? GoT should not end based on what will make its audience feel good.

Dany should become the ruler of Westeros. That will require killing Jon since he’s the legit heir to the throne. After that, the script writers will do the old Towering Infernothing of deciding who lives and who dies — for God’s sake, why did they have to kill Fred Astaire? — and who makes it. If I had to guess, I’d say Sansa dies, Tyrion survives in some humiliating role, and Arya lives on as an enemy. Because GoT should not fully resolve … which, given GRRM’s pace, it looks like it never will.

[Confidence level: 12%]

Comments Off on [SPOILER] If it’s really a game of thrones, here’s how Game of Thrones should end

<rant>

Moral rights of creators are inventions grounded in a bad analogy with property rights.

If you want to maintain your “moral right” to what you’ve written, then don’t publish it.

If you publish it, you are making it public. Thank you for doing so.

You will make money from it for some fixed period — a period designed to provide you (but not necessarily Stephen King) with sufficient incentive to continue to create and publish works, but a short enough period that creative works can be assimilated by the culture.

Why put limits on the author’s exclusive right to publish? To keep culture lively. Which is the same as keeping that culture alive.

Cultural assimilation requires the freedom to talk about your work, to reuse it, misuse it, abuse it, to get it terribly wrong, to make it our own as individuals, to make it ours as a culture.

Imagine a Renaissance in which “moral rights” were enforced. Can’t.

Moral rights kill culture.

(Note that this applies to works that are published as copies. Please don’t take a hammer to any irreplaceable statues. Thanks.)

</rant>

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 2.0 Generic License.

Comments Off on Moral rights kill culture

From Sylvie and Bruno (1889) by Lewis Carroll:

“If Steam has done nothing else, it has at least added a whole new Species to English Literature!”

“No doubt of it,” I echoed. “The true origin of all our medical books—and all our cookery-books—”

“No, no!” she broke in merrily. “I didn’t mean our Literature! We are quite abnormal. But the booklets—the little thrilling romances, where the Murder comes at page fifteen, and the Wedding at page forty—surely they are due to Steam?”

“And when we travel by Electricity if I may venture to develop your theory we shall have leaflets instead of booklets, and the Murder and the Wedding will come on the same page.”

Comments Off on Lewis Carroll: Technodeterminist

Peter Brantley [@naypinya] has posted an important and succinct warning about the effect blockchain technology may have on culture: by making the mechanism of trust cheap, transparent, and more reliable, blockchain could destroy the ambiguity that culture needs in order to thrive. Peter’s post is clearly thought and powerfully put.

Pardon me while I agree with him, including about blockchain’s positive promise.

Culture is the ultimate analog phenomenon, even when it’s communicated digitally, for it is only culture to the extent to which people—we—make it our own. We understand our lives and our world through culture. If we can’t appropriate it, re-express it, and re-use it, culture simply dies.

As Peter says, blockchain could perfect the system of tracking and control, leading us further into the tragic error of thinking that ideas and culture are property. Property has boundaries and borders that can be precisely demarcated and can be defended. Culture by definition does not. Blockchain technology can further the illusion that culture is property.

While blockchain will have a positive, transformative effect on systems where trust is valuable and expensive, it almost inevitably will also be used to impose restrictions on the appropriation of culture that lets culture thrive. If so, I expect we’ll see the same sort of response that we’ve already seen to the Internet’s inherent transparency—the transparency that has simultaneously made it the liberator of culture and the surveillor’s wet dream: We will route around it with some degree of success. And we will—I hope— continue to encourage an ethos of sharing in which creators explicitly exempt their works from the system of copyright totalitarianism.

The license you adopt will be your uniform in the coming culture wars. It already is.

Comments Off on Will blockchain kill culture?