Jane Austen was a notable gap in my reading knowledge that I finally filled in the past month. Erin got me a Barnes and Noble collection of her works for Christmas, and so far, I’ve read Sense and Sensibility and Pride and Prejudice.1The book has seven novels and is huge. I got both of these as ebooks from the library. Once I picked up on Austen’s voice and tone—a few pages into Sense and Sensibility, I had to search “Is Jane Austen satirical?”—I was sold. I adore Austen’s sass and snark and social satire. These two books are self-aware romance novels that are still relevant today, particularly Pride and Prejudice.
Eephus is a new independent film by Carson Lund, and I had the pleasure of seeing it on Saturday at Cinestudio in Hartford.1This was the perfect venue: a one-theater, non-profit cinema on a college campus in New England. The movie is superb and deserves all the praise it’s received. I’d liken it to an alternative take on The Sandlot, where instead of reliving the magic of youthful summers and dynamic friendships of boys, it’s a funny and somber reflection on the twilight years of adult baseball and the particularities of male relationships that rely entirely on weekend activities. I’d love to have it as a double feature against The Sandlot and force the emotional whiplash.
The film is a beautiful and reflective portrayal of a single autumn day at a local baseball field that means everything to the men there and nothing to everybody else. It has every character you would expect to comprise two haggard recreational teams and is a perfectly exaggerated version of my experience playing in similar leagues over the last several years.
I already want to watch it again. It’s a triumph of independent filmmaking and a unique love letter to baseball.
1
This was the perfect venue: a one-theater, non-profit cinema on a college campus in New England.
I gave Claude (3.7 Sonnet) the same prompt I provided ChatGPT two years ago: Write a short article in the satirical style of The Onion, titled “Optimistic AI Just Happy to Be Here”.
I also went back to ChatGPT to see how it has improved.
Claude’s attempt.ChatGPT’s attempt.
This test encapsulates why I’ve stuck with Claude as the LLM I choose to pay for a few months at a time. It has an uncanny sense of style that ChatGPT entirely fails to capture. I found Claude’s article entirely believable and legitimately funny. It addresses my complaints from two years ago—it attributes quotes to individuals rather than nameless people with a title, and doesn’t hit us over the head with any of the jokes. It plays it straight, shares the story, and makes us laugh.
ChatGPT has slightly refined itself but still suffers from being too on the nose with its humor. SunnyBot-9000 is obviously an optimistic robot. That’s a case of nominative determinism if I’ve ever seen it. Compare that to Claude’s creation of IRIS-7, where the running gag is that nobody understands how this bot’s mien came to be. ChatGPT also leans heavily into LLMs’ potential inaccuracies, making it feel like it was written two years ago. Hallucinations still occur, I’m sure, but it’s not what it was upon release. Claude focuses on the tasks’ relative drudgery, which I find more compelling. The happy idiot of ChatGPT’s creation could be refined, but on a first pass, it’s rather dull.
Interestingly, they both used the same rough setup about deleting/resetting the LLM, which it then took in stride. While the punchlines were different, they both landed.
I talked about the characteristic ending of articles from The Onion in my post two years ago, and ChatGPT failed spectacularly yet again. It at least puts the sentiment in a direct quote from the bot, similar to Claude, but hoo-boy, is it objectively not a funny ending. It has the trappings of something that could be funny, but there’s no flair or subversion of expectations. It keeps pounding the same nail of “Live, Laugh, Love” with no unique edge.
ChatGPT has certainly improved compared to two years ago, but it’s impressive what Claude was able to churn out. Heck, Claude even got the rough formatting of “CAPITALIZED CITY NAME—” that begins every Onion article. ChatGPT couldn’t be bothered.
I recently wrote about feeeed and decided to highlight a few more niche apps I’ve been enjoying since getting an iPhone last year. These are in no particular order, but I find them all sufficiently useful and well-made to give them my official okey-dokey.
Earlier this year I read the Slough House series by Mick Herron, prompted by rave reviews of its TV adaptation on Apple TV+ and my unwillingness to dive into such an adaptation until I read the associated books.
In short, I adore this series.
I’ve always jived with wry British humor that somehow mixes a superiority complex with a dismal outlook, all while providing cutting insights into the absurdity of life which are provided via a superb command of the English language, turning phrases that I could not have conceived of. Mick Herron hits all of this precisely right with his set of outcast characters, each with glaring personality flaws that range from endearing to horrific.
These books are hugely entertaining. I read all eight available books this spring. They have the enjoyable, exciting elements of a spy thriller coupled with tremendous dark comedic elements. If you can accept that objectional characters can still be enjoyed and rooted for, then you’ve made it over the first hurdle.
The first book in the series is Slow Horses, which is the namesake for the TV show that I’ve yet to begin. Read the first two chapters of the book and you’ll know whether it’s for you.
While looking for a new book to read from the library on the Libby app, the name Octavia E. Butler popped into my head. I don’t know when she first came into my awareness, but I searched her name and there was Parable of the Sower. Its various blurbs mentioned it alongside 1984 and Brave New World. I love alternative and dystopian fiction, so I was immediately sold.
After completing Parable of the Sower and its sequel, Parable of the Talents, I’m convinced that these are the most relevant pieces of dystopian fiction for the modern world precisely because they are not hyperbolic science fiction that acts as a metaphorical warning. Instead, their story is a grounded and horrific extrapolation of economic stratification mixed with modern democratic fascism.
Two elements keep these books close to modern reality in a way that would be considered cliche or overdone were they not written in the 1990s. First, they are set in California in the late 2020s and early 2030s, so the timeline immediately makes one think, “How does this apply to my life?” There are no extreme science fiction elements; computers are mentioned, but only in ways that still feel relevant. A professor runs classes online, and kids can look up information. There are jokes about push-button home phones. It is shockingly restrained and prescient in this way, which gives the impression that it’s an alternative history book written a couple of years ago. Second, the presidential candidate who (spoiler) gets elected runs the Church of Christian America and speaks in ways that imply action among its followers but he can never be accused of specifically inciting violence. One of his campaign slogans was indeed, “Make America Great Again”. A 2017 New Yorker article emphasizes this point in particular.
These books are profound, and their subject matter is serious. Though not needlessly graphic, they include many triggering events one would imagine in a dystopian novel: disease, death, slavery, and rape. Religion and zealotry are two key themes, and these books can be viewed as a beautiful and thoughtful study into how one can justify one’s religious beliefs in a world gone mad. That would have been my main takeaway if I had read these in high school. Instead, I read them a few months before a critical election, and my impression changed; I want more people to read these books, particularly Talents, which is written so that one can fully understand the story without reading Sower.
Give them a shot. It’s heavy material but written as a series of journal entries, which makes it feel more approachable. I found them impactful, meaningful, and worth sharing.
I just finished Frankenstein, which I last read during my British Literature class in high school. It reminded me of the phenomenon of Disney retelling an old story with key details removed and altered to make it kid-friendly,1This most recently came up when running trivia for some friends a couple months ago, when I learned the original written version of Pinocchio ends with the puppet being hanged on a tree. though in Frankenstein this happens in reverse.
Every representation of the monster2Indeed, we all know Frankenstein is the name of the scientist, and he creates an unnamed monster. in popular media that I’m aware of is a green, slow-moving, large man, often with bolts in his neck. In reality, the book shows a monster who learns much about the world by observing a small family in a cottage, eventually becoming literate and quite eloquent. He also possesses superhuman speed, strength, and stamina while requiring only a limited vegetarian diet. It’s a fascinating tale that explores the concept of sin, revenge, and responsibility; most of that is lost in the classic “monster movie”.
I fondly recall the surprise I had at this in high school, and rediscovered a similar enthusiasm reading it a decade later. I wholly recommend Frankenstein to anyone who is willing to wade through flowery British prose from the 1800s.
1
This most recently came up when running trivia for some friends a couple months ago, when I learned the original written version of Pinocchio ends with the puppet being hanged on a tree.
2
Indeed, we all know Frankenstein is the name of the scientist, and he creates an unnamed monster.
I’ve watched nearly every Pixar movie. I have some I entirely adore and will happily rewatch whenever the opportunity presents. The others I still enjoy but they don’t have an ongoing impact on my life. Elemental is firmly in the second category. Its charm and inventive physical humor kept me delighted, and its role as a modern fable about immigration and racism makes it worth watching, but its story had inconsistent pacing with confusing characterization.
