Thought of the morning: political party affiliate organizations (like the Stonewall Democrats or the Young Democrats) need a better means of naming their subdivisions. If there are national organizations such as the Stonewall Democrats and the Young Democrats, then the Stonewall Young Democrats should probably be termed a “partnership” between the Stonewall Democrats and Young Democrats of America, not an affiliate of an affiliate (or a caucus of a caucus) of a political party. It makes better sense to visibly, vocally partner where your interest groups’ interests intersect.

With Google+, Facebook and Twitter all doing brand pages now, I wonder if it’s now time to create a “follow/like/add our brand page” icon that is agnostic to all such services like the Feed icon and the Share icon.

Right now, the more popular symbol is the + sign (on FB and Twitter). Problem is that I don’t know which agnostic word I would use to describe the action of “follow/like/add”. “Subscribe” is already taken by feed readers.

Awful. Jamiel Terry, openly-gay son of anti-abortion asshat Randall Terry and Georgia resident, died in a car accident near Lilburn, Gwinett County tonight. He came out in an editorial for a newspaper, resulting in his father disowning him.

Oh, and Randall wants to solicit donations for Jamiel’s headstone. According to JoeMyGod, Randall can afford countless anti-abortion ads throughout this country, but he can’t afford a fucking tombstone for his son. PIECE. OF. SHIT.

Uganda-Tanzania War – 33rd Anniversary

Interesting anniversary today: Today is the 33rd anniversary of the beginning of the Uganda-Tanzania War, in which Idi Amin declared war against Tanzania and sent troops over the Tanzanian border, Tanzania retaliated by mobilizing a paramilitary force and fired Russian Katyusha missiles into Uganda, and Gaddafi got involved in another military misadventure.

Libya under Muammar Gaddafi sent his own troops, including the so-called “Islamic Legion”, into Uganda to support Idi Amin, but they were soon on the front line against the Tanzanians and Ugandan anti-Amin exiles as Amin’s forces retreated.

After the Battle of Lukaya in which hundreds of lives were lost on both sides, the war was more or less an Amin-Gaddafi strategic retreat, and Amin fled Uganda on 10 April 1979; Gaddafi’s troops would flee into Kenya and Ethiopia shortly afterward.

Tanzanian troops stayed as peacekeepers until shortly after new elections were held, but Tanzania had to foot the bill without external support (the then-OAU condemned Tanzania’s invasion). It would not get out of the debt resulting from the war until Uganda paid off the last of Tanzania’s debt in 2007.

The current president of Uganda, Yoweri Museveni, is a veteran of this war. Gaddafi, who was a major ally of Idi Amin, was killed in Sirte, Libya, after 42 years of rule and international misadventures like this.

Timothy Leary once said “Everyone gets the god they deserve”. If “god” can be paraphrased as “highest collective ideal and hope of which we can only fulfill a part before we may realize that it’s someone else’s highest, most contrived ideal and hope and not one’s own”, do we really deserve such an ideal? Do we really need to satisfy the petty desires of an anthropomorphic, personified idea? And can ideas think for themselves?

Retreating Towards, and Away From, Outer Darkness: An Overview of the Gothic and Sublime in Frankenstein

Harry Underwood
Monica Young-Zook
HUMN 2111H
9/11/2011

Retreating Towards, and Away From, Outer Darkness: An Overview of the Gothic and Sublime in Frankenstein

If one were to seek through some of the watershed works of fiction of the centuries since the Renaissance for a depiction or evocation of the Gothic and the Sublime, then one would not go wrong to glean through Mary Shelley’s Frankenstein, a novel which helped to define modern horror fiction for future generations. Two of the most pre-eminent, perceivably-Gothic elements of Frankenstein are the sensations of personal – and interpersonal –  retreat and isolation which accompany the leading characters throughout the story. Frankenstein makes use of picturesque imagery to describe the natural world, using it as the backdrop to a fantastical, but innately-human drama of fear, isolation and destructive inevitabilities.

Both Frankenstein and the humanoid monster which he partially constructed from portions of dead bodies spent much of the story fleeing or attempting to escape from their problems or crises. Frankenstein sough to retreat from the death of a loved one, eventually finding himself mired in the creation of a living creature before he realized that taking care of a “monster” was not something that he desired or intended. The monster, who was left to fend for itself, found itself hard-pressed, but unable, to interact for long with human society, and was forced to retreat from the outer periphery of society in which he was permanently confined. However, their paths repeatedly crossed, and every rejection which was visited by Frankenstein upon the monster was returned with a spiteful, proxy gesture against his loved ones.

The primary result of this shared, parallel predilection toward lifelong retreat is sorrow over continuously-dashed self-interests. Frankenstein travels to England with his childhood friend Clerval in order to seek some respite from his troubles before pursuing his ultimately-aborted task, only for Clerval to be murdered. He seeks to be married by his beloved Elizabeth, only for his wife to be brutally murdered by the monster. From the monster’s perspective, it has also endured numerous violent rejections by humans frightened by its visage in spite of its pleadings for humanization and integration into society as well as its rescue of a little girl from drowning. The normalcy and self-esteem which both seek seems to flee from their grasps at every possible chance.

Another result of this sense of continuous retreat is the increasing mental instability which sets the two characters up for spectacular loss. Frankenstein is repeatedly driven away from the possibility of normalcy by both the persistent pursuit by his creation as well as the raw anger over the deaths of his loved ones, but is also mentally driven away from the idea of long life with them and towards the zealous need to protect them from the monster’s clutches. The monster, who repeatedly demands for Frankenstein to fulfill his obligations as creator and is continuously drawn to Frankenstein in an unrequited love, is eventually drawn to the idea of killing Frankenstein’s loved ones as a matter of revenge for his spiteful abandonment. This climaxes in Frankenstein’s crazed pursuit of the monster to the Arctic, a snowy desert of ice which can hardly spare habitation to most human beings.

Finally, two of the most important contributors to the sense of the Gothic in Frankenstein is the ignorance by those who are not “in the know” of what is proceeding in the lives of both Frankenstein and the monster. Frankenstein, as a member of a respected Swiss family, is hardly suspected by members of his family or the general public of being the sort of person who would create such a “monstrosity”, and he allows such a myth to persist, intentionally for his protection, but ultimately contributing to his ruin because of his retreat from society. The life of the monster is by no means held to the same regard, as it is not considered a human being or worth the same life as that of a human being; indeed, as Levine writes, “the monster’s isolation derives not so much from his actions as from his hideousness” (Levine 1979). The non-understanding of the situation by the public is present throughout the novel, and only contributes to the sensation of inner and external isolation on the edge of existence.

This retreat from sanity, from “normalcy”, into the outer darkness or periphery of human existence is a classic Gothic element in modern horror fiction. According to Saliba, “the setting of the gothic story is at some point within impenetrable walls (physical or psychological) to heighten the victim’s sense of hopeless isolation (Saliba 1980).” Such walls, taking the form of the violent misunderstanding of the human public toward the monster, certainly prohibit the monster from reintegrating into human society or ascertaining friendship of any sort, and such walls prohibit Frankenstein, as the creator of the monster, from living in comfort and mental clarity with his family.

The horror which Frankenstein felt in his growing isolation from the world of the living also grew throughout the novel with his retreat from “normalcy”, perhaps looming even larger than Frankenstein’s own more-recognizable horror over the creation of, and his own hatred for, the “daemon” which pursued him relentlessly. This fear of isolation and loneliness, emotions which more readily plagued the monster, also constitutes much of the more sublime qualities of the story; both are eventually engulfed by this sensation of horror at where their lives have led them and lose whatever chance that they may have had at attaining self-worth. This is symbolized best by the two main characters’ flight to the Arctic, the edge of European-explored or inhabited existence whereby Frankenstein tries, in vain, to face his “daemon” for a fight to the death; instead, he meets his sickly and tormented demise on a stranded, ice-logged ship of would-be explorers, and Frankenstein’s monster makes a resolution to end his own life at a place where no humans may find him.

That same horror resulting from growing isolation also intersects with the sublime beauty of sparsely-inhabited environments. The woods which are traversed by the monster away from the most prying of human eyes allow it to perceive and overhear the goings-on of the least of European humanity from a distance. The mountains of the Alps which Frankenstein traverse evoke his growing inner disconcert with his role as creator of a monster. The traversing by the two main characters of the Arctic, a barely-settled ice desert region of the world, reflects the distance away from human society which they had traversed over time: how Frankenstein had been whittled down by fate to a shadow of his former self who only sought to kill his creation, and how the monster had been reduced from an initial attempt at restoration of humanity from the sting of death to a purveyor of death upon living beings.

This intersection of the Gothic element of retreat and isolation with the sublime, harsh beauty of sparsely-inhabited environments such as the forest, mountains or tundra makes for the strengthening of the narrative. It also reflects, in the words of Mishra, “the compulsion toward our own ends (in death) (Mishra 1994)” which characterizes much of the novel: a man and a work of his design ultimately clashing for no other reason than sheer gut instinct and revolt, ultimately wearing each other and each other’s senses of humanity down to nothing, ultimately destroying themselves after all other alternatives and diversions have been ignored, dismissed, exhausted and abandoned in the world of the “truly”-human. Frankenstein, as a novel, is testament to this fusion of the Gothically-tinged human drama with the stark beauty of the natural world’s wonders.

Works cited

Shelley, Mary. Frankenstein. New York: W. W. Norton, 1996.

Levine, George. “The Ambiguous Heritage of Frankenstein.” Levine and Knoepflmacher (1979): 3–30.

Mishra, Vijay. The Gothic Sublime. Albany: State University of New York Press, 1994. pp. 255-256.

Saliba, David R. A Psychology of Fear: The Nightmare Formula of Edgar Allan Poe. Lantham, MD: University Press of America, 1980, pp. 27-28.

Those who are disturbed or appalled by the GOP applause for the death penalty las night might want to come up with more empirically-based arguments for why it is wrong to cheer for death other than it being “cruel”, “hard-hearted”, “depraved”, “un-Christian” or “bloodlusty”. Explain your opposition to such approval in a way that an atheist can understand and parse. Don’t appeal to unfounded and fickle “moral” sentiments.

On Daric Rawr, Tom MacMaster and myself

 Again?

Another gay person who is victimized by persecution of some kind, only to be realized as a straw-person, a non-existent fictional character, a humanoid creature with too-"human" feelings and expressions of emotion?

Really, where does all that emotion go? Where do the memories go? If technology becomes that advanced in the far future, will even our sense of touch, skin upon skin, be just as suspect in its provision of false feelings of intimacy as the long series of emails, the pictures, the words?

 
Where does it all go?
 
Yesterday’s revelation of Gay Girl in Damascus as the Georgia resident Tom MacMaster dealt quite a bit of a blow to all who took an interest beyond just a "oh, well, hope she gets out" stage. 
 
A girlfriend in Montreal finds out that her long trist with a gay girl in the heady, violent urbanity of Damascus was all just hot air. 
 
A woman in London whose pictures were misappropriated may be looking for a lawyer in the case that MacMaster and his wife, Britta Froelicher, ever return to British soil from their current vacation in Istanbul.
 
Hundreds of pro-democracy activists are sideswiped and angry after this deception on such an international platform.
 
All this while Assad’s troops continue to cannibalize his country’s own citizens. All this while LGBT rights activists continue to worry over the status of fellow LGBTers in West Asia. 
 
And the validity of anonymity and pseudonymity continue to be dealt further body blows by the like of MacMaster, Froelicher and, as mentioned previously, Daric Rawr. 
 
It is a sort of modern-day version of Armistead Maupin’s The Night Listener.
 
It’s already doing damage to certain websites, such as LezGetReal, where Tom (as "Amina") had been allowed to publish several items regarding LGBT rights in Syria and West Asia. The editors of the site, Paula Brooks and Linda S. Carbonell, waxed apoplectic by the time that they realized that they had been severely hoaxed, so much so that Carbonell penned both an emphatic rejection of MacMaster’s un-apologetic "apology" and her own apology to the website’s readers. 
 
Furthermore, the website which first announced its own narrowing of the identity of the "Gay Girl", Electronic Intifada, made its own claim that LezGetReal’s Paula Brooks may be just as fake as "Amina Arraf", to which Linda and Paula responded angrily, claiming that they both have to work under pseudonyms in order to not harm their employment statuses as workers in the federal government.
 
Again, we’re back to square one.
 
Again, the issues of using pseudonyms in order to protect ourselves from scrutiny of whatever type we may find unwelcome.
 
Again, pseudonymity and anonymity are dealt further hits in viability because of its abuse.
 
Sometimes, I’d rather post under my real name in this blog, even though I don’t post much to it anymore. I have another, more business-y blog to which I post sometimes.
 
This handle which I use was conceived in the early 2000s, although I don’t know exactly how I decided that "rayne" would be a good first name. The origin or meaning still eludes me. 
 
I understand, of course, that if I mix the two up, I may jeopardize my employment prospects, or I may be perceived as a crazy, obsessive person who has a long, lurid, weird history that is recorded in the long memory of the World Wide Web under various pseudonyms and email addresses.
 
But I  know that, at some point, I should be a bit more courageous about facing my own history and earlier immaturities from 2004 onward, and not be afraid of what others may think. 
 
I’m interested in shedding my pseudonymity at some near future point, and maybe share a bit more of myself with others, at least to show that I do have a history of evolution, of adaptation, of increased rationality, of multiple facets and aspects.
 
I can still keep the pseudonyms, and maybe acquire more,  but I want to do a full disclosure of myself, perhaps so that I can create a new personal blog and start afresh.
 
I don’t want to stay in the mentality of unapologetic deception to the people with whom I communicate, not even to protect myself. 

You know what? Fuck it:

 
My name is Harry C.D. Underwood, I am 23 years old, I am openly gay, I am a senior at Macon State College and I live in Warner Robins, Georgia. 

Historical revision fetish

 On several adult fantasy fiction sites, I’ve read a number of fiction works which feature "re-writes" to history as either a core part of the storyline or a side-benefit to the storyline. 

Essentially, be it through anthropogenic or unintentional means, the characters are affected in some way by a gradual series of revisions of their pasts, usually without noticing the effects and believing that they have always been their transformed selves.

A subset of this trend, the "suggestion", incorporates the main characters trading suggestions which project their desires into a revision of each other’s pasts, again without the affected character being knowledgeable about the prior state of their lives or bodies. 

Within transformation fiction and the related transformation fetish, the idea that one of many "pasts" can be grafted into the individual character as a fact of the individual’s existence is enthralling for, if I assume, many readers, while it may give others pause or a sense of dread which parallels the post-Korean War paranoia concerning mind control and brainwashing by government intelligence services.

One could call it, in the truest sense, a "historical revision fetish".