Stan Brakhage Reader Review

I recently reviewed Stan Brakhage: Filmmaker, David James's new collection of essays on Stan Brakhage, for Senses of Cinema. The review appears here.

July 28-29, 2006: From the Temple of Justice to the Fortress of Solitude

Our last week in Olympia began with a party, our first and last in the little stucco house on Bigelow Street. The weekend was hot and dry, and a pair of trees down the street framed the Lakefair fireworks like a proscenium. They weren't so impressive as all that - or perhaps I'm jaded after NYC - but it seemed a bit like they were sending us off. Unfortunately, I didn't get any pictures. So above you see me in the new glasses Carrie found for me at the Goodwill. They look just like Opu's. And the coke-bottle lenses are quite appropriate, if only metaphorically.
I was up all night Thursday finishing my last opinion for Justice Sanders, who pronounced it "pretty good." From him, that's high praise, and much appreciated. And it was a relief to know I left him all caught up. The judge's comments are often spare, but always incisive. Looking back over what I wrote for him this year, I was pleasantly surprised to realize how much better I've gotten. On Friday, Justice Sanders took the office out to lunch, then Sylvia organized coffee and cake in the afternoon, where I took some pictures. Here you see Justice Sanders in the middle and my co-clerk Marcin Grabowski on the left.
And here you see Sylvia Campbell, Justice Sanders's administrative assistance and my savior. My absent-mindedness is legendary, at least among those obliged to put up with it (ask Carrie and my brother). And Sylvia ensured I could focus on the things I actually do reasonably well (i.e. research & writing) without stepping on any landmines. Beatification seems quite appropriate. The miracle: no irremediable catastrophes.
Luckily, we landed some excellent interns this year, starting with Troy, then Kurt, and finally Wesley Hottot, whom who see above. Wesley's a UW law student. But he's originally from VA, where he worked on the VA Film Festival the year I attended. Somehow, I suspect I met him at the party at the vast old plantation house on the mountain. But I can't be sure. In any case, I only got to work with Wesley for about a month. But it was a true pleasure, as he really cares about the cases and what they stand for, and made sure even every motion to modify was just right.
Some of the other clerks have already left, but many of those still remaining were able to attend. I didn't get a picture until the end of the party. Here you see Jessica Fogel, Grace, and Jessica from the left, and Wesley and Marcin from the right. And I close with a snapshot of Justice Sanders. Goodbye Temple of Justice. I should have cried, wanted to salute, and just walked away smiling Friday afternoon, leaving the walnut, marble, and mountains of papers behind. I miss Olympia already. And somehow I suspect I'll see it again someday. On to Alaska. Another state, another judge.

Interview with Bruce McClure

I recently interviewed filmmaker Bruce McClure for The Brooklyn Rail. We discussed how McClure makes his films, how they work, and how they've developed over the years. You can read the interview here.

Paving Georgia in Solar Cells?

Professor Reynolds is cautiously pollyannaish on the future of solar energy. An MIT professor working on "quantum dot photovoltaics" suggests we could supply all US energy needs by covering 2% of the continental US with photovoltaic systems working at 10% efficiency. But as Reynolds notes, "Two percent is a LOT of land." Indeed it is. The Truth Laid Bear figures it as, well, Georgia. And asks, "So: who's for paving over Georgia?"
Now, I'm no mathematician. And I know less than nothing about solar energy. But I thought to do some figuring myself. My (admittedly back-of-the-envelope) calculations suggest the MIT man was asking for a bit more real estate than he needed.
About 1 kilowatt of solar energy per square meter reaches the ground. So a photovoltaic cell working at 10% efficiency (which is pretty standard, apparently) produces .1 kilowatt, or about 876 kwh per year. The US uses about 3500 billion kwh a year. Which means we'd need about 3,995,443,800 square meters, or about 4000 square kilometers of solar panels to cover current energy use. The total area of the US is 9,629,091 square kilometers, of which 9,158,960 square kilometers is land. Figuring we'd only put solar cells on land, I put 4,000 square kilometers to be about .04% of the of the United States. Or rather, a hair more than Rhode Island.
That's still a lot of solar cells. But at least it sounds remotely plausible.

In re Palsgraf

Peter Lattman of the Wall Street Journal Law Blog reports on the Historical Society of the Courts of the State of New York's recent re-enactment of Palsgraf v. Long Island R.R. Co. at the Association of the Bar of the City of New York. Apparently, New York Court of Appeals judge and Historical Society trustee Albert Rosenblatt chose Palsgraf, arguably the most important case in American tort law.
As every law student knows, Palsgraf was a 1928 case with an unusual - fantastic, really - fact pattern. A man carrying a sealed box was late for his train, and the railroad workers gave him a push to help him on. He dropped the box, which landed on the tracks. Unfortunately, the box was full of fireworks, which exploded, causing a railroad scale to fall on Helen Palsgraf. When she acquired a stammer as a result of the injury, she sued the railroad for negligence.
Judge (later Supreme Court Justice) Cardozo's opinion for a 4-3 court dismissed Palsgraf's claim, finding her injury unforseeable. Judge Andrews's dissent argued proximate case is a question of fact for the jury. Despite questions regarding the honesty of its account of the events, see, e.g., William H. Manz, Palsgraf: Cardozo's Urban Legend, 107 Dick. L. Rev. 785 (2003), ultimately, Palsgraf established the legitimacy of treating the scope of tort liability as a policy question. Or rather, it provided cover for judges to decide certain questions of fact, rather than let them go to the jury.
But today's New York Court of Appeals (or rather a simulacrum thereof, consisting of New York Court of Appeals judge Harold Levine; New York’s Solicitor General Caitlin Halligan ; Roy Reardon of Simpson Thacher; Bettina Plevan of Proskauer Rose; and Judy Livingston of Kramer Dillof) is having none of it. The re-enacting panel went with Andrews's dissent, apparently concluding breach is a question of fact for the jury.
Clara of Liberty Belles is appalled at this apparent confirmation of the total victory of the tort plaintiff's bar. I'm not so sure. As I recall, Professor Nelson suggested Cardozo's opinion was something of a Trojan horse, intended to undermine the foundations of 19th century tort theory. Not unlike another justly famous case, Marbury v. Madison, establishing judicial review while ruling the government's favor.
If judges decide the scope of liability on the basis of policy, what matters is the policy, not the rule. And as we've seen, many a policy supports construing the scope of liability very broadly indeed. So, perhaps Palsgraf is properly cast as the martyr for the hordes of successful tort plaintiffs who followed.
Or, to put it more abstractly, Cardozo's opinion justifies conceptualizing tort law as a theory of harms rather than a theory of wrongs. For an excellent discussion of this distinction see Scott Hershovitz, Two Models of Torts (and Takings), 92 Va. L. Rev. ___ (2006). On Cardozo's theory, the railroad is not liable because the injury was unforseeable. In other words, it wasn't the least-cost avoider. But on Andrews's theory, the railroad might be liable, if its negligence harmed Palsgraf. In other words, if it committed an actionable wrong. While Cardozo's result may align with our intuitions in this case, perhaps its because we just don't think Palsgraf alleged a wrong (i.e. the railroad wasn't negligent), not because we think it wasn't the least cost avoider. Remember, you can be the least-cost avoider without committing a wrong.
In any case, I suspect Andrews was actually right on the law. Perhaps the Court of Appeals could have dismissed the case for failure to allege a negligent act. But if Palsgraf alleged sufficient facts to find the railroad agents acted negligently and that her injury was a but-for cause of their negligence, she was entitled to send her claim to a jury. Even today, that's no guarantee of success.
Incidentally, should the Court of Appeals decide to do another re-enactment, perhaps Lochner v. New York would be an appropriate choice. At the very least, a reversal of that 4-3 decision would be rather unlikely.

Portraits in Foolishness I

After a long, wet winter, I'm feeling rather out-of-shape. So on Sunday, I decided to take up running again, 30 minutes a day for the time being.
Anyway, on the way out this evening, I noticed a young man weedwhacking a lawn even more overgrown than ours was. And on the way back, he was filling the gas tank while smoking a cigarette. I sure hope it was a biodiesel weedwhacker, as I hear that stuff is a good deal less flammable. In Olympia, I guess you never know.

The Most Corruptingest State in the Union?

In August, I'll start working for Judge Kleinfeld of the United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit in Fairbanks, Alaska. Good thing I already proved my ethical bona fides by passing the MPRE. According to Edward Glaeser & Raven Saks, I'll be living in the corruption capital of America. In their contribution to the Global Corruption Report 2006, they measure the relative corruption of the various states using the number of federal convictions per capita. Alaska comes in first (or is that last?) with 0.643 per 100,000, followed by Mississippi (0.612), Louisiana (0.513), South Dakota (0.472), and Tennessee (0.464). The Pacific Northwest leads the pack in rectitude, with Washington at #49 (0.104) and Oregon at #50 (0.074). Maybe the rain washes off the spots?
However, you can color me (tentatively) skeptical. Now I'm no social scientist. But I'm not convinced convictions per capita is the appropriate measure. If we're looking at federal corruption prosecutions, wouldn't convictions per federal employee be a better yardstick? Using Glaeser & Saks's figure for convictions 1990-2000, and the U.S. Census report on paid civilian employment in the Federal government for 1998, I came up with the following conviction rates, which make Alaska appear a much less formidable contender in the corruption contest:

• Alaska: 0.0030
• Mississippi: 0.0045
• Louisiana: 0.0109
• South Dakota: 0.0050
• Tennessee: 0.0052

The Northwest retains remarkably clean hands:

• Washington: 0.0017
• Oregon: 0.0012

But my home state and alma mater rather less so:

• California: 0.0044
• New York: 0.0072

Still, it appears the Empire State has yet to match the glorious levels of corruption achieved in the days of Boss Tweed and Tammany Hall.

Link via Marginal Revolution

UPDATE:

Professor Tabarrok points out the conviction figures are for "government officals," not just federal employees. So I've recalculated my figures, based on federal and state employees combined (and in parentheses, just state employees). The decimal places started to get a little long, so I've moved them over four places:

• Mississippi: 12.94 (14.80)
• Louisiana: 12.82 (14.51)
• Illinois: 12.26 (14.26)
• North Dakota: 11.88 (14.47)
• Montana: 10.33 (12.56)
• South Dakota: 10.03 (12.55)
• Tennessee: 8.38 (9.96)
• New York: 8.09 (9.11)
• Alaska: 7.06 (9.23)
• California: 6.58 (7.73)
• Oklahoma: 4.70 (5.71)
• Washington: 3.08 (3.75)
• Oregon: 1.78 (2.10)

These figures still don't match Glaeser & Saks's results. They report the following results for the "Top 10" convictions per capita:

• Alaska 0.643
• Mississippi 0.612
• Louisiana 0.513
• South Dakota 0.472
• Tennessee 0.464
• Illinois 0.458
• New York 0.439
• Oklahoma 0.415
• Montana 0.414
• North Dakota 0.398

Obviously, using the number of government officials rather than population makes a difference. Apparently, Alaska and Oklahoma have a high ratio of government officials, deceptively inflating their score.

1000 Paintings

I'm a great believer in the merits of investing in artwork. Mainly because I believe the artmarket is relatively inefficient, offering exceptional opportunities for speculation. But also because I just like artwork. Unfortunately, I can't afford name brand artists. No matter, as the unknowns promise a better return.
In any case, this afternoon I came across One Thousand Paintings, the current project of a Swiss artist named Sala. Essentially, he's selling 1000 numbered paintings, priced based on the number on the painting and the number of paintings sold. Lower numbers cost a good deal more, and the price goes up as he sells more paintings. Or more precisely: "Value = 1000 - number; Initial discount: 90%; The discount will decrease by an absolute 10% for every 100 paintings sold; Min. price: $40."
As of this writing he's sold 247. I bought #878, the year the Treaty of Wedmore divided England between the Anglo-Saxons and the Danes after King Alfred the Great of Wessex defeated Guthrum in the Battle of Ethandun (Edington). Some kind of story seemed essential.
Hopefully, I made a good bet. At least the guy's a hell of a self-promoter. In art - as everything else - "genius is 99% perspiration & 1% inspiration." And plenty of artists aren't the perspiring sort. The one thing I can't figure is paying extra for a low number. Assuming the purchase is an investment, I think the market is unlikely to value low numbers more than high ones.

via BoingBoing

Marmite for the Millions

I'm a great fan of Marmite and Vegemite alike, and have been for years. So I was tickled to discover the I Love Marmite website. The cheese and cucumber sandwiches are lovely. The following poem was posted in the "Marmite Forum." And a truncated version also appears on a New Zealand tourism site. Apparently, they prefer Vegemite down there... I had Vegemite on an English muffin for breakfast this morning, with coffee. Offered one to Carrie, which she declined. I guess she must prefer this website.

The Joy of Marmite

I spread my Marmite sparingly, upon my buttered toast
Of all the things to put on bread, it's what I like the most.

Its flavour always feels warm, although it isn't hot
--Caustic like a chili sauce, it certainly is not

Approved by vegetarians, and good for your nutrition
Of what my Mum called savoury, the very definition.

Though made from lowly byproducts--leftover brewing ooze
It is so reminiscent of the finest of French stews

Such grand associations were surely what was meant
When so named by clever brewers from Burton on the Trent

Precisely what exquisite yeast do Marmite makers use
To lend such gourmet qualities to brewing residues?

I spread my Marmite sparingly, upon my buttered toast
Of all the things to put on bread, it's what I like the most.

Its flavour always feels warm, although it isn't hot
--Caustic like a chili sauce, it certainly is not

Not sour nor bitter, so subtle tasting generally,
But it has a pungent salty side which can my downfall be

For if through too much eagerness I heap it far too thick,
I will regret my foolishness, as I get nearly sick

Then for a month, or even more, I will not touch the stuff
Until my fading memory emboldens me enough

Such occasional indulgence provides an education;
The key to true enjoyment is always moderation.

-- A.R.D. Pepper, March 1993

Habeas Corpus II - Brian Frye

Hello, my name is Brian Frye I live in Kingsport, TN. I have been metal detecting for almost 7 years. I enjoy metal detecting for jewlery, old coins, and civil war relics I also enjoy shallow water hunting. My favorite areas to hunt are, old home sites, churchs, schools, civil war sites, and beachs. Ive been detecting with a shadow X2 since 1998 and I recently purchased a Shadow X5 (Both made by Troy Custom Detectors). Ive put togeather some pictures of my finds, I hope you enjoy them!

Brian Frye
W Basketball
Director of Basketball Operations

Brian Frye mans the pump panel of Engine 101.


Brian Frye
Send e-mail

BRIAN FRYE,
AE REALTY
Your Personal Real Estate Consultant