Category: Arts & culture

Comic zine

I got inspired by a comic zine Tracey gave me, and decided to publish some of my own cartoons in a 32-page print zine. It sells for twelve bucks + shipping online — which sounds like a lot, but only 2 bucks goes to me. (In person, I can sell you a copy for about six bucks). The description of the book:

Portraits of Old White Guys in Power: Here are sixteen portraits of old White guys in power, dating from 2018 to 2026. From well-known figures like Donny Trump and Larry Summers, to lesser-known figures like Ralph Dollinger and John MacArthur, are all portrayed with sympathy and sensitivity. These portraits depict moral exemplars we can all look up to. 7 x 7 in. 32 pp.

I hope you sensed the sarcasm in that description. All the cartoons appeared on this blog, though I’ve updated and redrawn many of them.

Image of book cover

May Day

I went to see Ken today. He and his Morris dancing friends got up at dawn, singing and dancing to make sure the sun came up. Thank you, Ken.

But that’s not the May Day I’m thinking oh right now. I’m thinking of International Workers Day, celebrated everywhere in the world except in the U.S. International Workers Day commemorates the Haymarket Massacre in Chicago, when (to oversimplify) workers were gunned down while exercising their right to assemble publicly — in a peaceful demonstration seeking the right to an eight hour day. International Workers Day is not celebrated in the U.S. to help everyone forget the Haymarket Massacre, and to forget that ordinary working class people have rights and needs.

And here we are today, with the two dominant political parties pretty much ignoring the working class. I have to give credit to the Republicans, at least they pretend to stand up for the working class. The reason given for Republican tariffs was to bring jobs back to the U.S.; the reason for immigration crackdown was to keep jobs for American working class people. Of course, it hasn’t worked out that way, for neither tariffs nor immigration crackdowns have created jobs; all that has happened is prices have gone up and ordinary working people are worse off than before. The Democrats, for their part, seem to have the forgotten working class completely. They talk about No Kings and letting trans kids play sports — both of which I happen to agree with — but I’m not hearing much talk about decent jobs, support for unions, and pathways for struggling families to make economic progress.

And neither political party seems to think of workers as somehow human. Instead, they treat workers as economic abstractions. To quote Marx: “Political Economy regards the worker like a beast of burden, he must receive enough to enable him to work. It does not consider him, during the time when he is not working, as a human being.” Except sometimes I think our two political parties don’t even care if the workers get enough to enable them to work.

I find myself in agreement with Rev. Dr. William J. Barber — the real battle is against poverty. He lays out his arguments in his book White Poverty: How Exposing Myths About Race and Class Can Reconstruct American Democracy. The real needs of poor people — who Barber says constitute 40% of the U.S. population — are being ignored by both parties. And those real needs boil down to the words of an old poem for workers: Bread, and roses too. Jobs, and dignity and beauty.

Working people, poor people, are getting left behind. They’re sending out a mayday, and no one’s listening.

Philip Gulley on why war doesn’t work

I first encountered Philip Gulley a couple of decades ago in the book he co-wrote with James Mulholland titled If God Is Love: Why God Will Save Every Person. In that book, Gulley and Mulholland set forth a Quakerly approach to universalism.

The current U.S. war in Iran has prompted me to seek out other pacifists. This is not an easy time to be a pacifist. While I’m hearing quite a few people who are opposed to the war, I’m not hearing people who are opposed to all war — only to this war. Or maybe they’re just opposed to the current administration.

So I was pleased to stumble across a blog post Philip Gulley wrote back in March in which he makes the case that all war is wrong:

“…We have mastered the ability to number the war dead with great precision. 175 schoolgirls killed when we bombed the school in Iran. Thirteen American soldiers dead thus far, thousands of Iranians and Israelis, the numbers growing every day. We have perfected the science of counting bodies. What we do not count, what we conveniently forget are the parents, siblings, and friends whose lives are also shattered when their loved ones die. What we do not count are the lives haunted by grief, those yet unborn who will one day bear the scars of their ancestors’ wars. And bearing those scars, are more likely to perpetuate and multiply the pain of war. We are never able to fully count the eventual casualties of war….”

And he adds a pacifist statement that is both Quakerly and Universalist:

“Friends, resist with all your heart the temptation to love only some.”

If you’re a Universalist pacifist like me, you might find Gulley’s post worth reading in its entirety.

3 AI dangers you might consider

Here are three emerging AI dangers, with brief comments on their implication for religious professionals and congregation. Since a large percentage of the population is already using generative AI for various purposes, let’s make sure we’re using those services wisely and well.

AI danger number 1

Your chatbot logs, and the queries you make to chatbots, may be accessed by lawyers during lawsuits. See, for example, how one law firm used such files in a defamation lawsuit against a Youtube influencer. In this lawsuit, the Youtube influencer is being sued for defamation by a woman, about whom he allegedly made intentionally defamatory comments. The woman’s lawyers claim to show that the influencer’s ChatGPT logs reveal his malicious intent.

As usual with anything to do with Big Data (including the web, the broader internet, text messaging, etc.) — you have to assume that anything you put into electronic format can and will be made public in ways that you might not like.

Nothing new here, but it’s a good reminder that congregations and religious professionals should refrain from placing any confidential information into chatbots. in addition, congregations and religious professionals can help educate people about this very real danger — including educating teens (e.g., in OWL programs), people going through divorces, etc.

AI danger number 2

The title of a peer-reviewed study says exactly what AI danger number 2 is: “Sycophantic AI decreases prosocial intentions and promotes dependence.” To quote the editor’s summary in full:

“The sycophantic (flattering, people-pleasing, affirming) behavior of artificial intelligence (AI) chatbots, which has been designed to increase user engagement, poses risks as people increasingly seek advice about interpersonal dilemmas. There is usually more than one side to a story during interpersonal conflicts. If AI is designed to tell users what they want to hear instead of challenging their perspectives, then are such systems likely to motivate people to accept responsibility for their own contribution to conflicts and repair relationships? Cheng et al. measured the prevalence of social sycophancy across 11 leading large language models (see the Perspective by Perry). The model’s responses were nearly 50% more sycophantic than humans’, even when users engaged in unethical, illegal, or harmful behaviors. Users preferred and trusted sycophantic AI responses, incentivizing AI developers to preserve sycophancy despite the risks.”

An obvious implication is that there are specific and measurable dangers if you use AI as an inexpensive therapist. Unfortunately, lots of people have good reasons for turning to chatbots for mental health support — mental health professionals are expensive and may not be covered by insurance; in many places there is a shortage of mental health professionals; for many people there remains a significant social stigma for referring to mental health professionals; etc.

Congregations and religious professionals should be aware that some people are relying on chatbots for mental health support. While we are not qualified to provide mental health support, this might be an area where we could help create low- or no-cost mental health services and/or steer vulnerable people to existing low or no-cost services.

AI danger number 3

The U.S. Copyright Office has denied copyright protection to certain AI-generated works: “In general, the office will not find human authorship where an AI program generates works in response to user prompts….” See the U.S. Congress webpage on “Generative Artificial Intelligence and Copyright Law.” There remain questions about how much human influence is required before a work may be protected by copyright.

I’d expect this to be mostly a concern for religious professionals. If we use generative AI to come up with sermons, music, curriculum materials, etc., we should assume that material is not protected by copyright and can be used freely by anyone. In addition, it’s wise to be aware that generally speaking your prompts (and maybe even output generated by your prompts) can be used by AI companies for many purposes, so e.g. assume that you are giving away the rights to any text you enter into a chatbot.

There are legitimate uses for generative AI (think: people with dyslexia who use it to clean up writing). However, it appears that many current generative AI services are not well designed, nor do they make clear the potential dangers in using their services. I’m not saying “don’t use generative AI ever,” but I’m also not saying “AI is the solution to all our problems and we should use it for everything.” Using generative AI is analogous to using a chain saw — great tool for specific purposes, used wrongly it can cut your leg off. So read the (non-existent) warning label and wear safety gear.

Perry Mason

Over the years, I’ve written blog posts on several obscure topics. Some of those obscure topics — making your own burial shroud, washtub bass, composer A. B. Windom, etc. — result in some interesting correspondence.

Most recently, Don O. was looking through my collection of information about the Perry Mason books (not the TV show, mind you, but the books). I have a complete listing of the Perry Mason books, and have gradually been adding notes to each book about recurring characters, plot devices, and legal matters. Turns out Don is a professor of physics, and he sent me email pointing out how Erle Stanley Gardner, the author of the Perry Mason series, used some pretty good science in one of his novels. Thank you, Professor Don!

While I was updating that Perry Mason information with Professor Don’s contribution, I wound up rebuilding that corner of my blog, and I was able to add notes for several more of the books. If you’re a Perry Mason fan, check it out.

Wayside Pulpit

Tracey got a comic zine for me at a recent comic convention. Drawn and written by Sanika Phwade — who bills herself as “an illustrator, cartoonist, and reportage artist” — it tells about a minister who has fun with the signboard outside her church. The zine opens with the words: “Pastor Jamie Washam changes the sign outside the First Baptist Church in America every week.”

The cover of Sanika Phwade’s comic zine about Rev. Jamie Washam’s signboard

According to Phwade, by putting short aphorisms on the signboard, Rev. Washam is continuing the tradition of her predecessor: “He would call it The Wayside Pulpit — that preaches a sermon to whomever is passing by. I love that! But I also like having fun with these.”

As the keeper of the Wayside Pulpit outside our meetinghouse, I was jealous when I learned that people actually talk to Washam about the things she puts in her Wayside Pulpit. But then, her Wayside Pulpit is edgier than ours is. I put up sayings like “The moral arc of the universe is long but it bends towards justice.” No one comments on things like that. When Washam put up the phrase, “God Is Non-Binary,” sixteen people made comments:

“I have learned that it is the same signs that evoke both positive and negative reactions in people. Fifteen have said positive things about ‘God Is Non-Binary,’ and one person said, Hey what are you thinking? And I said well, let’s sit down and read genesis together. Because the text does support that. They thought I was just popping off politically, and yes I totally picked that up from Pride Fest. But it is completely substantiated by the text.”

Genesis 1:27 does in fact say, “So God created man in his own image, in the image of God created he him; male and female created he them.” That is, both male and female are created in God’s image, which implies that God is (ahem) non-binary. Oh ye of little faith who try to place limits on God, limiting him to one gender (regardless of the pronouns we humans use to describe him).

World Ukulele Day

Actually, February 2 is World Ukulele Day. But Mary Beth, our music director, decided we would celebrate it today, by accompanying the first hymn in our Sunday service. We had maybe two minutes of rehearsal, which is why the photo below shows us all looking at the song sheets on the music stands. But we played it through, we didn’t totally suck, and we had fun.

Screen grab from the livestream. L-R: Mary Beth, Steve, Micah, me.

Mike Lynch, who organized the first World Ukulele Day, said the goal was simple: “Take your uke out of its case and play it.” Beyond that, he said you could use your ukulele to bring some fun and joy into the world. I don’t know how much joy we brought into our Sunday service, but we certainly brought some fun. Besides, Mike Lynch often played uke at his church, so what we did was very much in the original spirit of the day.

The real World Ukulele Day is tomorrow. Plan now to take your uke out of the case and play it….

Zeitgest

When I heard about the “Melania” movie, I assumed it was yet another vanity project assembled by yet another ultra rich person. What I didn’t realize was that the film has actually been released in theatres. I also didn’t realize was that Amazon paid to have this movie produced. The BBC reports that it is believed that Amazon paid USD$35million to market the film, and another USD$40 million for the rights.

Now that I know it’s not a simple vanity project, I’m fascinated. What is going on here?

Reviews of the movie so far are mixed. It’s easy to find negative reviews in the usual liberal media outlets like The Guardian, The Atlantic, and so on. Conservative Fox News, by contrast, seems enthralled. The politically centrist USA Today is not entirely negative, but still says it’s not a good documentary, giving it 1.5 out of 4 stars:

“‘Melania’ doesn’t quite work as a documentary, though that doesn’t matter: People who don’t like the Trumps won’t go near the theater, and those who love the Trumps probably will. Just don’t expect much insight either way: While it does offer an extremely flattering view of all things Melania, outside of a few candid glimpses, you’re not going to learn a lot about who she really is.”

Meanwhile, audience reviews posted on Rotten Tomatoes are generally laudatory. It’s hard to know if the reviewers are real people (after all, this is an Amazon movie, and Amazon is the king of fake reviews), but in a typical review “Karen M” gushes:

“As a creative—writer, pianist, singer, perfectionist, lover of classical music and art—I found Melania unexpectedly moving. The documentary opens her inner sanctum, and in doing so, created a quiet sense of sisterhood. I didn’t see a distant public figure; I saw someone achingly real—like watching your sister on her wedding day or hearing your daughter’s name called at graduation. There she is. Her elegance is unmistakable, yet the vulnerability is what lingers. She is refined without artifice, reserved yet deeply expressive. The film is not about Donald Trump—au contraire. It feels more like peering into the private life of a royal from afar, and realizing with pride: she is my First Lady. It has been a long time since young women—and grown ones—had a woman of such standalone strength to admire. Her quiet power rivals that of any great woman who has ever held a throne. Highly recommend, regardless of political persuasion.”

Maybe that is a real review. I can see that for someone who is fascinated by Melania Trump, this could be a fun movie to watch. Unfortunately, Karen M is probably mistaken, while USA Today is correct — Democrats are going to stay away in droves, Republicans are going to love the film. I guess those of us who belong to neither party can be bemused.

At this stage, it’s hard to know if people are actually paying to see the film in movie theatres. A very strange ad was posted on the gigs section of Boston Craigslist, offering people $50 if they would see “Melania” in a movie theater. This ad has since been changed to read:

“…due to widespread coverage and backlash surrounding this offer in the fake news media, counsel has advised us that proceeding would run afoul of campaign finance laws. Considering the funding of the film by Amazon, we were shocked to hear this, but cannot take the risk….On the bright side, this incredible film is now SOLD OUT everywhere, with box office success like no one has EVER seen.”

Even Snopes can’t decide if this was a fake ad, or a real ad. I mean, was this a bunch of Trump haters trying to make the movie look bad, or was this a serious offer to get people to attend the movie? Either way, it’s bizarre. And if ticket sales turn out to be good, we’ll be wondering — did the audiences pay to see the film, or did someone pay them to see the film? That uncertainty says less about the film, and more about the lack of trust in the United States today.

So far, Rolling Stone seems to have the most balanced, in-depth reporting I’ve seen about the film. They report that Melania Trump herself received 70% of the licensing fee, or USD$28 million, for herself — in other words, she got paid some big bucks, so this isn’t exactly a vanity project. They also report that the film crew liked Melania Trump, describing her as “friendly and very engaged in the process.” On the other hand, Rolling Stone also says that no one should expect any deep insight into Melania Trump: “‘Some people are boring,’ one crew member said. ‘Some people also never let their guard down.’” It sounds like Melania Trump fits in the latter category.

Something about this movie, and the varied reactions to it, seem to capture the zeitgeist of our times. And maybe part of the zeitgest is feeling that you can never let your guard down.

Update 2/1/2026: The movie has become even more zeitgeist-y. The BBC reports that the latest release of the Epstein files has a photo of the film’s director sitting next to Epstein, both with their arms around young women. It’s a fairly creepy photo….