Walt at Random

A funny thing happened this month at Amazon…

Balanced Libraries: Thoughts on Continuity and Change sold a few copies–not quite one per weekday, but close, very close.

That’s the first time the book’s sold more than 10 copies in one month since November 2007. (One copy sold at Lulu as well…) It’s the most copies it’s sold in one month since I made it available on Amazon.

I’m not sure why it’s happening, but I’m delighted. I think it’s still a good, worthwhile book, and worth the $29.50. (The Lulu version has a slightly truer cover and cream paper instead of bright white–but it’s hard to argue with free shipping from Amazon, and the CreateSpace/Amazon version is just fine and does have an ISBN.)

In case you love tracking “best seller” status, I seem to be at around 350,000. Hey, being anywhere in the top million is an improvement…

I’m an old friend. I’ve been using FireFox as my primary browser for a long time. I even cope with the continued print discontinuities–the blog pages that I can’t print out from FireFox but have to go to IE for.

But there’s a problem. It’s a nuisance, but part of browser improvement should be to remove nuisances.

Namely, you seem to believe that I don’t ever actually intend to shut down FireFox unless I’m shutting down my computer.

See, I’m given to clicking on this red X up in the upper right corner of the browser window, when I don’t feel any need to be on the internet. (I know, I know: That’s heresy: “Don’t feel any need to be on the internet”)

And every so often–more frequently of late, you complain about that. You bring up a box saying that you’re sorry that FireFox terminated unexpectedly, and wonder whether I’d like to send a failure report.

It didn’t terminate unexpectedly. It terminated because I told it to.

Several times, I added a message to that effect and invited a response, and sent in the “failure” report.

Number of responses received: Zero.

Fixes made to the program so that it lets me shut it down through a generally-accepted method (or is the red X now a bad thing to use): Zero.

Big deal? Not really–but it slows me down just a little, as there’s this pointless dialog box, and if I’m shutting down the computer in an orderly manner, it’s an extra step.

You know, I hear IE8 will close what’s left of the gap between FireFox and IE; IE7 closed a fair amount of it…

Yours,

A slightly irritated long-time user who’s talked up FireFox to others…but not lately.

Yes, I know, some of you hotshot Word users/bloggers have known about this for months.

Yesterday, I tried Word2007’s “blog template” methodology for the first time–where you “register” your blog (as long as it’s one of the major programs, for which Word has APIs), then prepare the post in Word, attach categories from your blog’s category list, and publish it.

It worked–like a champ, and with absolutely clean HTML, maybe a little cleaner than WordPress’ own HTML. More to the point, it doesn’t swallow paragraph breaks, and you can work in the comfort of Word (if you find Word comfortable). (The blog template includes a “type title here” area and a set of styles appropriate for blog posts.)

As it stands, that’s nice. The editing space is much more wide open, Word offers occasionally-useful grammar tips, Word has the whole set of search-and-replace stuff, etc., etc.

But there’s another option: Publish as Blog. So I tried that this time. I added Disc 12 to the Word document for the second half of the 50 Movie Pack Western Classics, a document that will become part of the next Cites & Insights, then highlighted Disc 12, copied it to a new Word document, switched to my “web template” for that (the template I use for the HTML versions of C&I essays–all of C&I’s styles, but using typefaces that everybody should have), and clicked on Publish to Blog.

Shazam. It brings up the text with the blog template (overlaid with your existing styles), prompts for a post title, offers to insert categories–and it’s done.

You can see the result. Bring up the post as a separate page and View Source. You’ll see that there’s more HTML cruft than in the first test post, which as far as I can see has absolutely no excess HTML–but it’s not bad at all. The cruft comes from my Web template, to be sure, and you can see that from the spacing (I recently added one pica indents on both sides to all of the Web styles, so the on-screen rendition would have a little white space). Although I did click on Edit on the post, I made absolutely no changes to the HTML whatsoever. What you see is what Word sent directly through the WordPress API.

OK, I’m impressed. Will I switch to Word for all my W.a.R. writing? Probably not; somehow, there’s a different “feel” to creating a typical post directly in the blog. But when I have a complicated piece, or when I’m repurposing part or all of another document…you betcha.

OK, so the song doesn’t appear in any of these movies—but the writer, Dale Evans, does. Given that, given that all four movies star Roy Rogers, and given that this wraps up the set, somehow the title seems appropriate.

My Pal Trigger, 1946, b&w. Frank McDonald (dir.), Roy Rogers, Trigger, Gabby Hayes, Dale Evans, Jack Holt, Sons of the Pioneers. 1:19.

This odd item purports to tell the story of how Roy Rogers got Trigger, with some voice-over narration and pretty clearly aimed at kids. Gabby Hayes plays a very different role: Not only isn’t he Rogers’ sidekick, he’s a rancher and owner of Golden Sovereign, a great golden palomino, and becomes Rogers’ enemy. Why? Well, Rogers wants to breed his horse (not Trigger) with Golden Sovereign. Hayes will have nothing to do with it (he only wants to breed Golden Sovereign with his own horses)—but the horses have other ideas, getting together on their own. Through a plot involving a nefarious neighboring rancher and casino owner, a wild stallion and some remarkably bad shooting, Golden Sovereign winds up dead, Roy Rogers winds up blamed for shooting him—and Rogers’ horse winds up pregnant with Trigger.

Now here’s where things get a little strange, or maybe I just don’t know recent history. First, our hero Roy Rogers, the whitest of all white hats—and playing Roy Rogers—jumps bail, flees the state, breaks into a barn (and fights the owners to stay there, since his horse is foaling) and hides out for more than a year. Second, the movie appears to be set in contemporary times—lots of cars and, oddly, apparently-legal casinos in Colorado (but this was 1946, way before casino gambling was legalized)—but somehow it would never occur to anyone to remove the bullet from Golden Sovereign to determine whether it’s a rifle bullet or pistol bullet, which would also have proved Rogers’ innocence. Naturally, it all works out in the end. Apparently, this was Roy Rogers’ personal favorite of his many movies—and probably the most personal of his movies. It does have fairly subtle acting, actually—and the bad guy isn’t pure evil, which is unusual.

Good stuff, despite the oddities. We get Dale Evans (as Gabby’s daughter), who suits the movie well. We get the Sons of the Pioneers, although not singing with Rogers. It’s a good print most of the time. This is the full-length version, not the 54-minute chop job. It’s sort of an odd Western, but I’ll give it $1.50.

Cowboy and the Senorita, 1944, b&w. Joseph Kane (dir.), Roy Rogers, Trigger, Mary Lee, Dale Evans, John Hubbard, Guinn ‘Big Boy’ Williams, Fuzzy Knight, Hal Taliaferro, Jack Kirk, Sons of the Pioneers. 1:18 [0:51]

Roy and companion hear about a kidnapping as they come into a town mostly owned by one affable gent, Craig Allen, and naturally offer to help—but one of the posse spots Roy’s companion, “Teddy” Bear (Guinn Williams) playing a slot machine (more legal casinos—my history must be faulty) with a slug that turns out to be from the kidnapee’s bracelet (which he picked up along the trail into town). So, naturally, they assume Roy and friend are the kidnappers, and Roy and friend flee. They find the “kidnapped” girl—Chip—in the hills. She’s fled for reasons that never seem quite clear. Anyway, that little mess resolved, her older sister—played by Dale Evans—is about to sell their apparently-worthless gold mine to the Allen, who’s also her fiancée. (He’s supposedly buying it as a favor to the older sister, to pay for the kid’s education, and plans to mine for manganese) But Chip’s sure her father buried a box in the mine, and it’s important to her.

Well, sure enough, the box is important, there’s a false wall in the mine, and…well, everything just barely turns out OK, including lots of stunt mine-wagon riding. A fairly typical B Western, but with a good party sequence added including some fancy dancing and singing. I saw a much shorter version than the original, apparently the 51 minute edited version. I’d imagine the other 27 minutes would help! Apparently the first time Dale Evans and Roy Rogers appeared together in a movie. Good print overall. I’ll give it $1.00.

Bells of San Angelo, 1947, color. William Witney (dir.), Roy Rogers, Trigger, Dale Evans, Andy Devine, John McGuire, Sons of the Pioneers. 1:18 [1:15].

This time, Roy Rogers is a border investigator on the (Texas?)-Mexico border and friends with the people in San Angelo (on the Mexican side). Something funny’s going on—and, specifically, locals from San Angelo are turning up dead, shot for stealing silver from the U.S.-side silver mine.

And, in a parallel plot, Western writer Lee Madison’s coming to town and Roy’s disgusted, saying his novels are trash. When the bus arrives, there’s no man named Lee Madison on it—and when the woman on the bus overhears Roy’s comments, she comes up with a different name to play along. Shortly thereafter, the stage from the bus station to the lodge is held up by a lone masked gunman who’s really out to give Hamilton a scare—and who apologizes to the woman (who notices a Texas Ranger’s ring on the gunman’s finger).

The twist here is interesting—it’s not the usual mining story. The silver mine is worthless—but it connects to a long-abandoned Mexican silver mine. That mine’s also played out, but silver’s a lot cheaper in Mexico than in the U.S. So, you got it: They’re “mining” smuggled silver. As the plot progresses, lots of people get shot, Lee (and by now Rogers knows it’s her) gets nabbed by the bad guys, and in a final confrontation, the fact that he finally read her book Murder on the Border saves the day. (Hamilton is played by Dale Evans—who else?) Andy Devine plays a funny sheriff who also turns out to be landed gentry.

Good plot, well played, good music. Some surprisingly realistic fight scenes, leaving the actors bruised. This is the full version, albeit missing a few minutes. Unfortunately, much of the time the focus is soft, suggesting digitizing problems. That and some choppiness in the print prevent this from getting more than $1.25.

Under California Stars, 1948, color. William Witney (dir.), Roy Rogers, Trigger, Jane Frazee, Andy Define, George Lloyd, Wade Crosby, Michael Chapin, Bob Nolan and the Sons of the Pioneers. 1:10 [1:12].

First we get a typical Western fight scene—then the director yells “Cut.” The movie’s over, and time for Roy to go back to the RR Ranch—where, this time, Andy Devine is Cookie, the cook and general factotum. (The Sons of the Pioneers are ranch hands/cowboys, and Cookie’s hired a bunch of relatives as well—including a young woman, a cousin who’s the new horse trainer.)

Where do we go from there? Some scoundrels are trying to round up wild horses on Roy’s range, to sell them to the government for meat and skins. Roy’s boys run them off, and we find that the bad guys are working for the town’s old horse trader, Pop Jordan—and the lead bad guy has a cute stepson with a thieving dog and a limp. Somehow, the stepson winds up at Rogers’ ranch and gets a job of sorts—and the horse trader figures that horsenapping Trigger for a healthy ransom is a faster way to make a buck than rounding up or rustling horses.

Well, in the process of horsenapping, one of the bad guys shoots another—and the sheriff says Roy can’t pay the ransom, since murder’s involved. So they try to set a trap for the outlaws. It doesn’t go perfectly, but in a fairly complicated final 10 minutes (involving double-crossing among thieves, naturally), it all works out. Oh, and Cookie—who has an awful voice—proves himself to be a good songwriter (the title number). So we end with Roy and Cookie—and the kid, who will get the operation he needs to walk properly—on their way back to Hollywood. Naturally, several full songs during the process.

OK, it’s not great acting, but the plot’s pretty good, the scenery’s fine, the print’s usually good, the sound’s good (although occasionally a little hollow) and it’s good “metaWestern” fun. I enjoyed it. (The reported run time on IMDB is two minutes less than the actual DVD run time, which makes no sense.) A little on the short side for a full feature, so I’ll give it $1.25.

Doncha just hate test posts? Well, in this case, I really need to see how well Word 2007’s Blog Post feature works, since I’m writing a PLN article about blogs and wikis.
Modified: H1 clearly doesn’t work very well…but otherwise, it’s a winner.

Here’s quoted material.

Here’s a second-level heading.

• One bullet point.
• Another bullet point.

A link to PLN.

---

A little followup –done in WordPress, but I’m beginning to think that might not happen as often…(and that glitch with paragraphs vs. linebreaks just wouldn’t happen in Word).

I was aware of a “publish as blog” option in Word2007, but hadn’t actually tried it (guessing, perhaps wrongly, that I’d get the same CSS overload that I’d get with a direct copy-and-paste). That may be wrong, and I’ll have to try that later.

Meanwhile, I now realize that there’s also a blog template for creating new posts–and it works extremely well with standard blogging software. Once I registered the blog (basically provided the URL and knew it was a WordPress blog–there are several other software options), it’s pretty seamless, including bringing up my existing set of categories and bringing up my home page if desired.

And it’s producing minimalist HTML–almost precisely what WordPress itself would produce from the Visual editor. Except, of course, that you’re writing and editing in Word–which I find a whole hell of a lot more user-friendly. (I assume Google Docs will do this. Will OpenOffice? As transparently as Word does?)

OK, count me impressed. I could easily see using Word for all or most new posts. Now, about converting a Word document (which for me means a heavily-templated document) to a blog post: Well, we’ll have to see.

Now, back to the “blogs vs. wikis” article I’m writing…

For some reason, I thought it was time to say a word on behalf of the Royal New Zealand Navy, the maritime arm of the New Zealand Defence Force.

That word is now said. Oh, and betting is both fun and tricky…

Last week, I posted this piece, asking who’s doing newspaper columns–and, better yet, archiving the columns on the library’s site (or somewhere) and maybe even mirroring the columns in a library blog.

I asked the same question on PUBLIB.

There have been a few responses. I will, as promised, create a Library Success Wiki page with the responses, probably do a roundup post here, possibly turn that into a Cites & Insights article (or part of an article)–and, depending on the set of responses, possibly make a PLN article out of it.

But I could sure use a few more responses! I don’t see doing the various roundups until some time in early September, so if you know of examples–your own or someone you can send email to–I’d love to have them by Friday, September 5, 2008. Send them to waltcrawford at gmail.com or just append them as comments here or on the original post.

Thanks!

Dichotomize! That seems to be an even more common cry than Plagiarize–but Tom Lehrer never wrote nearly as amusing a song on dichotomies. (Or if he did, I missed it.)

Silly me. I thought the black-and-white crowd was declining a little, but maybe I’m wrong.

Latest instance? The specifics aren’t terribly important, but had to do with Twitter. The person writing said that people writing about Twitter fall neatly into two groups:

1. Those who haven’t used it and fear it.
2. Those have tried it and use it regularly.

Woopsy. Here comes one of quite a few members of the excluded middle to say, It just ain’t so.

I’m not the only liblogger who’s tried Twitter and found–not that “it’s awful” or that “it’s useless” but that it doesn’t work well for me for now.

But, you know, it makes a much stronger case for Twitter as a universally wonderful thing if you simply assert that the only people who don’t like Twitter are people who have never tried Twitter.

I’m trying to think of anything for which that statement would be true: That is,

The only people who don’t like X are those who have never tried X.

Oxygen in breathable concentrations, I suppose. Food as a general thing. Beyond that…not so much.

I’m similarly amused by things for which it is proclaimed that you’ll either love it or hate it. Particularly since, for most of those things, my reaction is somewhere between Meh and It’s OK.

(And a quick shoutout to Randy Travis–and Wayland Holyfield and Verlon Thompson, who wrote the song, albeit “in” not “of”)

---

Quick update: Since I didn’t link to the particular instance, this isn’t really necessary–but the dichotomizer in question admitted it was an overstated dichotomy. The point this person was really trying to make: Those who actively dislike and fear Twitter haven’t tried it. I’m not sure that’s true either, but it’s at least a narrower dichotomy.

A few months ago, I wrote a post updating the situation with Mill Creek, the company whose mining of the public domain has been keeping me on the treadmill for some years now with its well-priced “50 movie pack” collections. Part of that post mentioned Mill Creek’s larger bundles–first, a fair number of 100-movie packs and then, the ultimate (so far!):

250-movie packs

There were then (and still are) four of them. I don’t believe any movies appear in these monster boxes for the first time; they’re bigger sets of movies also in other smaller sets. They’re also, according to what I read, in fancier packaging: foil “collector’s boxes.”

And Amazon sells them for $50 (or $49.95). That’s twenty cents a movie.

So, late last week, I bit. I ordered a set that appears to be called:

Mystery Collection 250 Movies

It arrived yesterday. Here’s what you get.

• The box is indeed a colorful foil-printed box, about 7.7 inches wide, 7.7 inches tall, and 5.5 inches deep. Mostly pictures of some of the more important stars with names of a few (Basil Rathbone, James Cagney…) and, on the back, in very small type, an alphabetical listing of all 250 movies with one star from each–from Affair in Monte Carlo (Richard Todd) and Algiers (Charles Boyer) to Woman on the Run (Ann Sheridan) and The Wrong Road (Helen Mack). Oh, and under “250 movies” on five sides of the cover is “On 60 Double Sided DVDs!” Here’s a link to the product site, with the front cover and total length (324 hours 59 minutes)–and, for each movie, a link to a title page that includes production details and, usually, a picture and a synopsis.
• But that box seemed bigger than it should be. So it is–unfortunately. It really is a “collector’s box”–with some cardboard spacers for the real box. That one’s a black near-cube (mine slightly marred, but who cares?),  5.5 inches square by 5.7 inches high, with a hinged top to reveal the contents.
• Those contents being, to be sure, 60 coated-cardboard sleeves, each with the synopses of the movies on the sleeve’s disc–Side A movies on one side of the cardboard, Side B on the others. (Just like the 50-movie packs, although those seem to have different colors for each sleeve; this one has 60 identically-colored sleeves.)
• The order? Certainly not alphabetical by title (as on the box). Initially, at least, it seems to be by detective or series where that makes sense. Disc 1–oh, and Mill Creek now correctly spells “Disc” with a “c” both on the discs and the sleeves (they used to use a “k” on the sleeves and a “c” on the discs)–has six relatively short Bulldog Drummond movies. Disc 2 three Dick Tracy and one The Shadow. Disc 3 another The Shadow, one Mr. Moto, and two Mr. Wong. Discs 4 and 5, eight Sherlock Holmes (not all Basil Rathbone). After that, it’s mostly singles…and lots of them.

Well, that’s at least two years on the treadmill…even though there are a few repeats from other sets I’ve watched (14 out of the 250, I think–including some first-rate films).

I won’t repeat the suggestion–that a library could start a “leave one, take one” casual-circulation DVD collection with two or three of these–and it may or may not make sense. If it did, I think three of the four 250-movie packs would make great starters and offer 180 circulating items. (The Horror pack may need a little thought: It tends toward the R level at times, I think.)

Good stuff–and effective use of the public domain.

<hr />

<b>Clarification:</b> While “effective use of the public domain” correctly characterizes much (most?) of what’s on Mill Creek Entertainment sets, MCE itself never claims that its sets are entirely public domain, and in some cases certain items <b>could not</b> be public domain, and must be licensed, presumably at very low cost.

Calm down. It’s a food post.

Our local weekly had brief notes on all the candidates for council this fall–an unusual election in which there are no sitting councilfolk running for re-election.

One (of quite a few) apparently moved to Mountain View fairly recently, and this person has a complaint.

Namely, that downtown Mountain View doesn’t have diverse dining choices.

Now, if you’ve been in downtown MV–which I’ll take as being Castro Street and two blocks either side of Castro–this may seem like an odd complaint. Just from memory, I know of:

• Several Chinese restaurants, mostly region-specific, with one or two pan-Chinese.
• Several Indian restaurants at various price points.
• A couple of Thai restaurants.
• Several Vietnamese restaurants–some Pho places, some not.
• Some Japanese restaurants
• At least three good Mexican restaurants (probably more), various cuisines
• At least three Italian restaurants
• A couple of mediterranean places–at least one halal kebab grill, at least one mostly-Greek
• A good brewpub with an expansive menu–burgers, excellent fish, salads, what have you
• An “Irish” pub and an adjacent “Irish” nightclub
• A good “East coast” pizza place and a good California pizza/calzone/grill place
• A very-high-end California/continental restaurant.
• A fairly high-end fish place
• A tapas & large-plate place
• And I’m sure I could go on for a while. I believe there are at least 80 restaurants in the six-block stretch.

Ah, but there was another sentence explaining what this person meant by “diversity.” She said there weren’t enough places serving traditional American food.

And, you know, I think I know what this person means by “traditional American food”–and it is indeed in short supply in downtown MV, although readily available with a minute or two’s driving, to such an extent that snobbish San Franciscans delight in claiming that the Peninsula has nothing but this kind of restaurant.

What we don’t have in downtown MV:

• Denny’s
• IHOP
• McDonald’s
• Burger King
• Sizzler
• Macaroni Grill
• Applebee’s
• Cheesecake Factory
• Olive Garden
• Chili’s
• and all the rest…

Not saying anything negative about those, but it is true: Castro and adjacent streets are low on chain outlets, other than (of course) overpriced over-roasted coffee places (both Starbuck’s and Peet’s).

Too bad the candidate doesn’t come out with her true platform: “Downtown Mountain View needs more Chain Restaurants! We need more predictable food!”

Somehow, it doesn’t sound like a winning platform. There are loads of these chain outlets all around downtown–but the more distinctive places seem to be doing just fine in the heart of downtown. I have problems feeling bad about that.

So you’re going to start a library blog–not a new books blog or an events blog, but a director’s blog or a blog about the library, what happens there, etc. (Which could and should include events, but I’m not talking about the semi-invisible blogs that just feed library home pages, beneficial and efficient as those blogs can be.)

Followthrough

I’ve heard the suggestion that, if you’re going to start this kind of blog, you should be ready to do 52 800-word essays a year–that is, one solid essay a week. Let’s pull that size down to 650-700 words and, depending on your circumstances, the frequency down to 26 or 12 essays a year. The essays don’t all have to be by one person, but there does have to be follow-through: A commitment to get the blog off to a good start and keep it going for at least a year or two.

Note: I am not talking about “sustainability.” I’m not saying you need five years’ buy-in.  I’m talking about enough commitment so that it looks like a genuine effort by the library. Initiatives without followthrough are almost doomed to failure, and if they’re public initiatives, they make the library look foolish.

Great idea–but take it one step further

So here’s the next step: If there’s a local paper (a community weekly, for example) why not propose this as a column?

That’s not either/or. It’s both.

With a lot of luck, your blog will reach one audience. If you get a column, it will reach another audience–and for many community/local papers, it’s a huge audience within the community. The two audiences overlap, but they’re not identical.

Naturally, you’d cross-promote: Mention the blog in the column and vice-versa. You might not run all the blog posts in the column (fixed length is usually a given in newspaper columns).

The library story and more

This is about telling the library story–how your library serves your community, how you transform people’s lives, the pressure points, big stories, small stories, amusing incidents…

Who’s doing it?

This is really as much a question as a suggestion.

Who’s doing part or all of this?

Parts:

• Doing a column in the local newspaper.
• Archiving the column on your library’s website
• Mirroring the column in a library blog.

Of course, if you do the first and third, the second is more or less taken care of.

Let me know

If you’re doing this–or thinking about it–let me know. Send me the URL for the archived column and/or the weblog’s name and URL, and the name of the newspaper. If you’re doing the first and second, but not the third (yet), send me that info as well…

If I get at least two responses, I’ll build and maintain a page on the Library Success wiki–and I’ll probably write about it at the PALINET Leadership Network.

Which, of course, provides the inspiration: Jamie LaRue’s long-running column in the Douglas County News Press. LaRue doesn’t mirror the columns in his fairly new blog, myliblog–yet.

Oh, and if you’re thinking of doing such a column or blog but wonder whether you’ll run out of ideas to write about…well, you know, if we can identify a group of people who are doing this, you can use one another as inspiration. That’s certainly true for LaRue’s Views–I can think of dozens of columns there that could inspire similar (but local) columns elsewhere.

So: Doing a column? Archiving it? Blogging it? Leave a comment here or send me email–waltcrawford at gmail.com

Cites & Insights: Crawford at Large 8:9 (September 2008) is now available.

The 26-page issue (PDF as usual, but HTML versions of the individual essays are available using the links below or at the C&I home page) includes the following five essays:

Bibs & Blather: Projects and Rejects

40% less self-indulgent than the five-part post! Some new information! Otherwise, it’s largely the same material. If you feel you already know all this, skip right on over to:

Perspective: Updating the Book Discovery Projects

Microsoft dropped its project–and in the process released all limits on 300,000 scanned books and gave the scanners to its partners. That and lots more in this multipart roundup.

Perspective: On Conferences in a Time of Limits

Why do we go to conferences–and will conferences change significantly thanks to high travel costs? Some semi-informed musings and non-predictions.

Old Media/New Media

Are print newspapers really dying? Does the news revolution make us better informed? Can you really make a living from the long tail–and is that tail extending, or is the head thicking further? And, of course, a few notes about ebooks and ebook readers.

Retrospective: Pointing with Pride, Part 5

This set of notes includes my own version of an ALA URL (and I’m sure those will all get better real soon…) and the Best. Issue. Ever.

Ah yes, back to those golden days of yesteryear…or, actually, back 36 years to two spaghetti westerns, 70 years to yet another one-hour B flick (this time a propaganda flick for the Boy Scouts to boot) and, in between, a young Lloyd Bridges and a not-quite-so-young Randolph Scott (and even less young Edgar Buchanan).

Grand Duel, 1972, color (Il grande duello). Giancarlo Santi, dir., Lee Van Cleef, Horst Frank, Peter O’Brien/Alberto Dentice, Marc Mazza, Dominique Darel. 1:38 [1:28].

It’s a spaghetti western-and maybe that’s almost all I need to say. Good production values and color: Check. Odd, sometimes interesting background music: Check. Lots of long showdowns but even more shootings and other action scenes: Check. Moral ambiguity throughout-no white hats and black hats here (in this case, the black hat is worn by the presumed hero): Check. Plot, if you can follow it, mostly to tie together the showdowns, shootings and action scenes: Double check. Little enough residual value that nobody would have bothered to renew this 1972 flick’s copyright: Check.

So it boils down to how you feel about Lee Van Cleef and the other “stars”-and how you feel about spaghetti westerns in general. Some remarkable combinations of acrobatics and shooting as the second (“Peter O’Brien”) evades capture or death while flying through the air. The print’s pretty good (except for the missing ten minutes). For me-well, it could have been a lot worse, it could have been a lot better, leading to a middling $1.

It Can Be Done…Amigo, 1972, color (Si può fare… amigo). Maurizio Lucidi (dir.), Bud Spencer, Jack Palance. 1:40 [1:38].

I’m not quite sure what to make of this one. Before the title, we get Bud Spencer’s and Jack Palance’s names, arranged in a circle, rotating. Spencer’s character, Coburn, is a huge beefy type who seems gentle enough and somehow keeps getting into trouble-well, he is a sometimes horsethief. He typically deals with trouble by staring, slowly putting on a pair of glasses, and then pounding his opponents into the ground-almost literally. They punch him a few times, then he either hits two opponents’ heads together or hits them over the head and they go down.

He’s somehow involved with a kid whose uncle is taking him to a western town-but the uncle gets bushwhacked and, when Coburn finds him dying, gives Coburn an envelope to pass along to the kid. The envelope turns out to contain $50 (a lot of money) and the deed to a run-down house just outside town. Meanwhile, there’s Palance’s character, Sonny Bronston, a fast-shooting eccentric who runs a group of female entertainers (in, apparently, more than one tradition of that word) and who’s after Coburn. Why? Seems Coburn sullied the virtue of Bronston’s sister (a case of mistaken identity)-and now Coburn needs to marry her so she can be an honorable widow (since he’ll get shot as soon as he gets married.

Ah, but that’s just a fraction of the plot. The town’s priest is also the sheriff and judge and generally doesn’t want Coburn around-and apparently has designs on the kid’s house and land, for unclear reasons. There’s a strange guy who eats dirt-and who starts paying people $2 a bucket (only one bucket per person) for dirt that he tastes. Which pastime leads him to the kid’s place. There’s lots more plot, and it mostly winds up with a remarkable six-minute free-for-all: No bullets fired (lots of guns fired, but all blanks), lots of fists, and mostly Coburn putting people out of action.

It felt as though I was joining a conversation that was partway through. The odd title refers to one of Coburn’s saying. The plot line between Coburn and Bronston seems to go back quite a ways. It’s a spaghetti western, to be sure-but it’s also a comedy and actually pretty decent. It’s also a decent print (missing just a minute or two), a fair amount of fun, and with a lot fewer killings and shootings-only one, as I remember. I’ll give it $1.25.

Abilene Town, 1946, b&w. Edwin L. Marin (dir.), Randolph Scott, Ann Dvorak, Edgar Buchanan, Rhonda Fleming, Lloyd Bridges. 1:29.

Oh, the farmers and the cowmen can be friends… Oops, wrong state, and the songs in this one are dance-hall numbers. Still, it’s cowboys on one hand-in this case, the bunch riding herds into Abilene from Texas in 1870-and the farmers on the other-in this case, homesteaders wanting to settle down. One side of the street in Abilene is full of saloons, dance halls and gambling dens; they’re hot for all the money the drunken cowboys spend when they finish a run. The other side is shopkeepers and what there is of an actual town-and they’re terrified of the cowboys. In the middle-why, there’s the Marshal, who wants the town to survive, and an amiable and wholly corrupt Sheriff (Edgar Buchanan), who just wants to avoid having to do anything and seems mostly there for an odd sort of comic relief.

Somehow, it seems a little simplistic. The cowboys are wholly sociopathic, as ready to shoot anyone as to say Hi, given to burning out any homesteaders-and, when they stampede the herd over newly-erected fences, they do so in a manner apparently intended to kill as many people and do as much damage as possible. The homesteaders, of course, are all peaceful types who just want to make a living-although it’s noteworthy that the first barbed wire they string is directly across the cattle trail. (Ah, but Lloyd Bridges makes a fine young leader for the homesteaders.) And the Marshal’s enlightened: The day of the big showdown, after he enforces “lights out” in all the saloons and stands by as the frustrated cowboys break down the doors and basically trash the places while getting drunk for free, he’s only too happy to see his sort-of-lady’s own hall destroyed…so he can get her out of those evil dance clothes and into an apron where she belongs.

Were the range wars really this black and white? Fortunately, I wasn’t there. The print’s pretty good, and Randolph Scott cuts a handsome if inscrutable figure. I’ll give it a charitable $1.00.

Tex Rides with the Boy Scouts, 1937, b&w, Ray Taylor (dir.), Tex Ritter, Marjorie Reynolds, Horace Murphy, ‘Snub’ Pollard, Charles King, Forrest Taylor, Beverly Hill Billies, White Flash. 1:06 [1:02]

Part propaganda film for the Boy Scouts–it begins with a three-minute newsreel-style encomium for the organization–part B western with a twist or two. It starts with Tex Ritter riding along with not one but two sidekicks-Stubby (Murphy) and the oddly white-faced Peewee (Pollard)-and, naturally, singing to the sounds of a hidden orchestra. They stop at a shack with a mining company “Private Property-No Trespassers” sign, which is of course their cue to get off and stand around until someone shoots the hat off Stubby’s head as a gentle warning. So they mosey along to a Boy Scout encampment, which they naturally join.

Oh, that’s just the beginning. The gimmick here is fairly clever in a stupid way: Stage a train robbery, stealing a million dollars in gold bullion, and hide it at a phony gold mine-after all, you can always cash it in as being from the mine once people forget about the robbery. (After all, lots of gold ore is 100% pure and has U.S. Mint stamps, right?)

One subplot involves a stereotypical Chinese laundryman, accent and “no tickee, no washee,” who as a sideline buys gold nuggets at very low prices-which is how the gang covers incidental expenses. Another involves the cute older sister of one Boy Scout, who’s also the downtown employee of the mining company, but of course is wholly innocent-and naturally gets involved with Tex. There’s even a barn dance. Ritter’s acting this time around is passable.

The bad guys here are pretty bad: The leader shoots down a Boy Scout who might have heard something. So maybe it’s OK that Tex’s posse guns down most of the gang as they’re fleeing for the border-except for the leader, who Tex beats up in a fistfight. (Heroes never actually shoot anybody in these flicks.) This might get $0.75 for second-rate silliness-but the print’s choppy in the wrong places, damaged in general and the soundtrack’s not very good, lowering it to $0.50.

I’ve been reading some comments about public libraries and VHS. Interesting all (including those from people who seem to think that DVD is a passing fad and the durable ol’ VHS is really what counts)–but there’s one odd subrefrain.

Namely, all those people who just can’t afford a DVD player, so it’s important that libraries keep VHS around.

To which I have to say…Huh?

I know we’re in tough times, I know lots of people have very little income…

I also know that DVD players start at $18. That’s for new players, not Goodwill specials.

$18.

What we’re using at home? $0. Safeway was giving away a couple hundred over a weekend to celebrate the remodeling of the local store. It sat in our garage until our old Sony player’s laser gave out (the first DVD player we ever had, so it was probably 8-9 years old). We hooked it up as a little joke until we purchased a Proper Player.

It’s been the better part of a year, maybe more, and we’re unlikely to replace it until we go big-screen. In some ways, it’s more advanced than the Sony was–and apparently good enough quality that, as we discovered on our recent cruise, Holland America purchased a few thousand to go with the flat-screen TVs in their cabins. (The current equivalent seems to sell for $30 or so, but an $18 Coby looks an awful lot like our CyberHome.)

What am I saying here? That DVD players are now such a commodity item that they’re really not much of a barrier for people who want to get movies and other videos for free from their libraries.

No, I’m not advocating dumping your VHS collections. That’s a local decision. I am saying that trying to maintain such collections–quite apart from being literally impossible for newer material–is really hard to justify. Heck, you could probably buy a fleet of cheap DVD players for what it would cost to try to replace videocassettes and just hand them out as needed (no, I’m not suggesting that you do that either).

Oh, by the way: If you do have patrons for whom $20 is a real hardship…well, they’re in trouble come next February. There’s a $20 difference between the typical price of a digital:analog converter and the $40 government coupon they can get (if they know enough to ask for it, if they have access to the internet, if, if…). Without that converter, they’re not going to have any TV next year. (Government decision. Different discussion.)

What’s that you say? They have cable, so they’re covered? Well…if they have cable, they can afford a DVD player.

The story so far:

• As I was slogging through the slough of despond, lacking inspiration and the desire for perspiration, I got the word: Nobody else will walk it for you, you have to walk it for yourself. Or “follow your bliss.” Or do stuff if I really care about the results–life’s too short to do stuff you don’t care about (unless you’re getting well paid for it or it’s essential to life and health).
• Returning from Anaheim with blue skies, twittering birds and a bright future ahead, I decided to carry out one big project where I really am interested in the results–and where I believe I can put together a package that others will find interesting and useful, maybe enough for some of them to pay $29.50.
• Clearing away the decks somewhat, I identified a probable reject–a case where the only plausible way to do the study would be up-front funding, and I see no likelihood of that happening. And one of my favorite bloggers and thinkers pointed out some good reasons that the previous part of this reject was largely a failure.
• In the penultimate episode, we went over actual sales for the two library blog books–an exercise in transparency that’s probably a stupid idea in its own right. (I would add four different self-portraits to that post, but why bother?)

We conclude this exciting enervating story (which I might tame somewhat when turning it into a Bibs & Blather for the September 2008 Cites & Insights–and if that link works, then you’re coming to this post late) with:

---

Part the Fifth: In which, referring all the way back to Part the First, we consider how “doing what you care about” might affect the future of Cites & Insights.

Remember when Cites & Insights was all about personal computing?

That’s a trick question. It was never the case that C&I was “all about personal computing.” The informal definition in the first issue was “Libraries, Media, Technology & Stuff.” I’d estimate that the first issue was roughly half PC-related, half otherwise.

PC-related material dwindled over the years, partly because the field just got less interesting–but more because there were other topics I was more interested in.

In Part 1, I noted that I’ve pretty much given up on censorware–recycling a handful of printouts in the process because I just don’t see much point in discussing them.

Looking at the “current list” of recurring sections (in C&I’s About page), here’s what I think as total word count nears two million (probably the December issue):

• Trends & Quick Takes hasn’t really been about trends (or just about trends) for a long time. It’s not going away, to be sure; mini-perspectives are convenient, and this “miscellaneous” placeholder even more so.
• I haven’t actually reprinted a disContent column in quite a while, but I’d like to start again–but certainly not until I complete the Retrospective series.
• Most everything else seems safe enough–although interest ebbs and flows. I continue to care about relations between old and new media (and in that context ebooks/ebook readers have reappeared), I think some net media issues are fascinating, Making it Work still matters… But there is one exception, or maybe it’s four:
• Copyright. Sigh. I just don’t know. I did something in this issue, and something three issues ago, and I’m not sure my heart was in either one. There hasn’t been a “term & extent” section in a year–or a “fair use and public domain” section in more than two years. I won’t say copyright coverage is going to disappear–but it might seem that way, except for the possible special case.
• What about new areas? They emerge, perhaps slowly–and sometimes only as a series of Perspectives. That’s probably a good thing. (I’m inclined to believe that some of the best issues of C&I have been entirely Perspectives, most of them not directly traceable to a standing section.)

As for C&I itself–well, I do note that 2008 may be the first year that it’s “only” a monthly–but most issues are a bit on the long side. I wouldn’t attach much significance to either of those facts.

You know how a good novel or movie has to have a strong, satisfying ending?

Well, this five-part post clearly doesn’t qualify.

I’m not going to come up with any clever ideas to harness my supposed “thousand fans” by offering “freemium content.” I thought I might have staggering changes to suggest in C&I, but that’s not the case–and, frankly, dropping copyright would put me in good company of late. (It just gets discouraging…)

---

Thus endeth the saga of Projects and rejects--for now, at least. I’ll try to clean this up (and make it significantly shorter) before reusing it in Bibs & Blather…

Now, off to write the December disContent, or work on ten more liblogs, or…well, given this summer cold, or just take a nap.

[A note in closing: If any or all of this five-part post seems even more disjointed and distracted as usual, I haz an (invisible) excuse...I was trying to multitask, chatting at LSW Meebo while preparing the posts. It's not much, but it's all I got.]