Trade Wars: The Stupid Continues

On Friday night, Audrey and I made a rare appearance at a house party:

It was good time, in part because we knew what side of this nonsensical referendum the other guests would be on, even though there was little talk of it. Seeing Gord Downie's final performance while chit chatting friends and strangers was moving and bittersweet, and it is hard to believe it happened a decade ago.

There was, I think, a little talk about the recent trade talks and the threat of 50% tariffs by the Orange Menace, but early Friday evening, following a three-day pause in the implementation of said tariffs, it seemed like a deal was within reach.

The next day it wasn't.

The deal was scrapped, reportedly after Commerce Secretary and Trump minion Howard Lutnick swooped in at the eleventh hour with new conditions, including:

• the ending of supply management for Canadian dairy (lol - no)
• cessation of French language labelling requirements on goods sold in Canada (ah, non)
• the right of approval for Canadian trade deals made with other countries (seriously, what the eff?)

So Prime Minister Mark Carney told our team to pack up and head home, and announced a number of things, including our own retaliatory tariffs, which other US officials have previously 'warned Canada against doing' (again, what the actual eff?).

Now I am not a Carney die-hard because, well, he is a filthy rich banker pushing some questionable legislation at times, but there is no questioning he is the right guy to have at the wheel at this moment in time, with you-know-who still stinking up the Oval Office another couple of years. Carney is objectively a smart, smart dude, particularly in regards to Economics, but more importantly, I think he honestly does have the best interests of an independent and united Canada in mind.

Any single one of those three items Nutlick brought to the table at the eleventh hour were deal-breakers, so if you think there was never any real intention of doing a deal, well, there are plenty of folks who agree with you. 

His speech regarding the breakdown in negotiations include describing the USA signature as "written in pencil," a poignant way to describe a country or at least an administration acting outside of the CUSMA agreement their own guy created in 2020. I prefer Wab Kinew's assertion that "you can't make a good deal with bad people."

And obviously this whole situation is unfortunate for a number of reason, not the least of which is this: no one 'wins' in a trade war.

But when Transportation Secretary Sean Duffy goes on camera with the fascist lickspittles at Fox News and lets a stream of abject lies pour out of his cakehole without any pushback, it underscores how far our relationship with our closest neighbout and (still) largest trading partner has fallen.

According to Duffy, Careny wiull have to come back to the table because Canada "doesn't have a military," and lives (ungratefully, I imagine) under US protection, in addition to having "record high euthanasia rates."

I'm not going to debate a guy about the morality of medical assistance in dying when he lives in a country where 14% of the population has over $1000 in medical debt and a cancer diagnosis can wipe out generational wealth even if you have insurance - our countries clearly have different priorities and I prefer ours.

But to have a US cabinet member ignore our military after 158 Canadian Armed Forces member died in Afghanistan following 9/11, to say nothing of fighting shoulder to shoulder in two world wars that they were late to the party for? 

Unforgivable.

And I mean, I really shouldn't be surprised - this same selective amnesia came into play when Canada opted out of going into Iraq for DEseRt sToRm Too: This Time It's Familial, so either we are ungrateful fair-weather friends or the other side's idea of loyalty is of the "but what have you done for me lately" variety.

So, yeah, out here, past the hundredth meridian (where the great plains begin), the elbows are going up even higher in this household, and across much of the country. Will I miss bourbon? You bet. But there are great alternatives closer to home.

The Economist described Carney's approach as "defiance," an objectionable characterization in my eyes since it implies that Trump/ the USA are to be obeyed under most circumstances, which I clearly refute. But if you go with Merriam-Webster's second definition: "Resist or withstand: To be completely unaffected by or able to hold out against an attempt or force," I am somewhat mollified.

Because these attacks have done more to unite Canada than anything outside the Olympics, and that makes us considerably more formidable. The French language exclusion item has even driven the CBC's French learning app, Mauril, to #2 on the educational apps chart!

And historically, Canada has tended to emerge from these situations largely intact, eventually, as Tod Maffin outlines here:

Canada vs. USA: The Trade War America Always Loses (History Proves It)

To sum up then: trade wars are as dumb as hatchet fights: they injure both parties and it is difficult, bordering on impossible, to clearly determine a 'winner.'

But on the other hand, dropping the hatchet or turning your back on someone still holding onto theirs might be even dumber. So what do we need right now?

"Courage - my word"

- Gordon Downie / Gordon Sinclair / Johnny Fay / Paul Langlois / Robert Baker (The Tragically Hip)

Call It What It Is

My church observed Pride Sunday today, like we've done for years. We fly the Progress Pride flag for most of June (and a lot of other times for good measure), we have a rainbow sticker on our street-facing sign and on the glass door leading into the narthex, which also contains a small display window we decorated for the occasion.

PFLAG meets in our church and has support met-ups for various groups. Because of the way Christian communities have treated people in the 2SLGBTQIA+ community, that makes some visitors apprehensive, which is completely understandable.

What is not understandable to me is how some people think they can cloak bigotry within "religious belief."

At its heart, Christianity should really be about following the teachings and examples of Christ - loving our neighbours, feeding the hungry, healing the sick, etc. We all do some picking and choosing within the tenets expressed in the Gospel - very few of us sell our belongings and give the proceeds to the poor after all - but these ideals of compassion and justice should permeate what we call Christian acts.

So see a cartoon of a person holding a shield emblazoned with a cross over her children to 'protect' them from a rainbow, with the caption, "here's to all the other faithful holding the line this month!", it makes me unreasonably angry.

So let's break it down. 

First, these people should stop quoting Leviticus unless they follow all its other prohibitions, like not trimming their beards, eating shellfish, or wearing clothes made from two different fabrics.

Next, they should recognize that most of the Hebrew scriptures about "wickedness" that they cite to make their case are not referencing two adults in a loving, same-sex relationship, but human trafficking or the sexual abuse of prisoners of war.

Homosexuality as a word doesn't enter the Bible until a particular and comparatively recent translation, the Revised Standard Version of 1946, something I only recently learned.

In fact, the destruction of Sodom and Gomorrah by the Angry Almighty in the O.T. was not due to licentiousness or sexual depravity, but because those communities refused to be hospitable and tolerated gang sexual assaults of outsiders.

Meanwhile, Jesus is repeatedly asking us to welcome the outsider. Consider how one of Jesus' most famous parables, the Good Samaritan, used the outsidey-est outsider imaginable to make his point - that all people deserve to be treated with compassion and respect.

But if you really want to make these people's heads spin, hand them a Bible and ask them to show you a verse where Jesus condemns homosexuality (for example).

Because they can't.

Because he doesn't.

You know what he does frown upon though?

Christians cozying up to power instead of standing up for the oppressed.

Hypocrites who pray loudly and publicly in Jesus' name but who support hateful laws and regimes.

And to be clear here, reasonable people can agree to disagree. I happen to feel that two adults in a loving, respectful same-sex relationship should be allowed to live free of judgement, shame, persecution, injury or death. I don't think two women holding hands in Edmonton should be spat at, but maybe you think that is just the cost of free spech. 

And if you think Matthew Shepard got what was coming to him (for, you know, daring to be an openly gay college student in Wyoming in 1998 and getting tortured and murdered for it), well, we just aren't going to get along.

And no one is demanding you celebrate or even observe Pride! Feel free to ignore it. I fail to understand how two people choosing to love each other (or trans or asexual or any other kids loving themselves for that matter) impacts anyone except them.

But when you speak to condemn these things, please do not hide behind Christianity, because there isn't anything in the teachings of Christ to justify hatred of other people. (Quite the opposite, actually!)

Please, for the sake of honesty and possibly the sake of your soul, just admit it. Call it what it is.  

You're a bigot.

Everyone else: Happy Pride!

Unprayed

I don't go to church to be disappointed in myself but it happens from time to time. Usually it is when I am reminded of the tenets of my faith and missed opportunities to apply them better, and during this past Sunday's service, that is what happened.

Most of the service was as one might expect: scriptures were read, songs were sung, and prayers were delivered. During our service, there is an opportunity to light candles of concern or celebration. Two were lit for congregations in our regions, one was lit for the death of a friend, and another was lit for the birth of a great-grandson. Of course someone lit one for the dead in Tumbler Ridge and that whole community, wishing them swift healing from the trauma their community endured. I thought about going up, but wrestled with the idea for too long and the moment was lost. 

I had first had the notion when we passed the peace at the start of the service, shaking hands with other people in the congregation and asking that the peace of Christ be with them. I shook hands with Madeline, a trans woman who started attending last fall with her partner Diamond. I know people in that community have experienced even more expressions of hatred since it was revealed that the Tumbler Ridge shooter was a trans individual, and I told Madeline I was glad to see them.

Then I shook hands with Nicole and Danielle, the couple who joined us as full members about a year ago through profession of faith, and who now look after the supplies for the post-service-fellowship. They are sweethearts and I am always delighted to see them.

But it got me thinking about the communities of faith where the four of them might not be welcome, and the unspoken prayer began to form.

A little while later we got to our reflection, which was not a sermon per se, but a brief talk by the guest invited by our Outreach Committee: Samuel Juru, the executive director of the Newcomer Centre (which was formerly called the Mennonite Center for Newcomers).

He spoke about his experiences growing up in Zimbabwe and being visited by armed government agents there after questioning those in power in a televised Q&A while a student. About coming to Canada as a political refugee, and how his first job here, despite having a degree in international relations, was unloading trucks on the nightshift.

Despite the fact that many other immigrants and refugees in his circle felt having a decent paying job and an apartment meant he had "made it", he reflected on what he wanted to do with his life, returned to school and started two decades of public service helping those trying to come to Canada to make it a better place.

It was a wonderfully personal and inspirational story, that had less to do with faith (although he related praying to God to give him Samson's strength on his first night of unloading heavy, tube-style televisions) and more to do with values, and maybe that is when it hit me:

How many of my fellow Albertans would have been indignat or even angered by the things that brought me joy that morning?

Shaking hands with a transgender woman? Greeting a lesbian couple? Listening to a black immigrant share his story about not only making a successful life with a family here in Canada but helping others to do the same?

It feels like I am continually reading the amplified grievances of people lamenting the way things "used to be," which, let's face it, were probably a pretty good time for white Christian males...but not a lot of others. 

This seems to be the banner that the Alberta separacists (no, I believe that is spelled correctly) are trying to draw people to, and in that moment of realization, a few things came into sharp focus to me:

1) sometimes, the simple act of being a wholly inclusive community of faith and providing a safe space for people is enough in itself, and

2) that being a welcoming and justice-oriented organization is going to feel threatening to some people, and

3) that impasse will be difficult, if not impossible to bridge in our current environment, and we should ask for help.

As people lined up to ask for prayers of both joy and concern, I recognized that what I should do, what I ought to say, is to go up, and highlight that impasse, and then pray - not for us but for the haters.

Pray that the Divine opens their eyes, or their minds, or their hearts, whatever requires broaching. Ask them to see a world that celebrates differences instead of fearing it, to imagine one that embraces diversity as a source of strength and not dilution. Because as entrenched as our positions might seem to be, we won't be able to move forward effectively without some of those on the other side changing their minds.

And with corporate-owned news media and billionaire-owned social media so intent on keeping us divided and antagonistic for eyes and subscriptions and likes and clicks and advertising dollars , the oligarchs and the rest of them can sit back and watch us divide ourselves, and then roll up to conquer later on.

All of this ran through my head as I struggled to pay attention to the other candle-lighters asking for prayers, but when the last one spoke, I was still there, in my seat. Unwilling to stand and make this ridiculous ask that we, as followers of not just the 'brand' but the actual teachings of Jesus, try to find it in ourselves to recognize the intolerant as fellow children of God.

And what has gnawed at my soul since then is not so much the fact that I was unable to do it; the real pain is the lack of regret I feel for not having done it.

Perhaps next Sunday...

A Rusticated Perspective

There are a plethora of musical genres encompassed by the expression "folk music" and why not; it is all music by folk, right? But at the Edmonton Folk Music Festival this year, it was country(ish) music that caught my ear the most. Which was a little surprising to me, but maybe it shouldn't have been.

Saturday was a long day for Glory and I, but we were intent on staying for at least part of the closing act, Old Crow Medicine Show. They didn't take the stage until nearly 11 pm, but opening up with two high-energy renditions of songs about cocaine, of all things, really enervated the crowd, us included. They were "Cocaine Habit":

Well, that cocaine habit is awful bad
The worst doggone habit that I ever had
Hey, hey, honey take a whiff on me

And "Tell It To Me":

Tell it to me, tell it to me
Drink your corn liquor, let the cocaine be
Cocaine's gonna kill my honey dead 

Glory was convinced that live-wire frontman Ketch Secor had to be speaking from experience due to a dynamic 110% effort that would put most pro athletes to shame, but that is neither here nor there...

In the weeks afterwards I would often prompt music from the Google Home speaker by requesting "Cocaine Habit" or Tell It To Me and then seeing what sort of selections might follow them up, a technique we call "seed music." Sometimes it would be old-timey country from my "Rusticated" playlist, at others more modern but non-mainstream artists like Corb Lund that I have listened to previously, but on occasion it would pull something delightful from way out in left or right field, or possibly underneath the bench in the dugout.

And I was surprised and delighted to find these slices of Americana incorporate all sorts of themes beyond the truck-driving and freedom-cheering that dominates C&W radio. Consider the environmental apocalypism outlined by The Devil Makes Three in "Allelu":

What will it take to have this place on bended knee 
You run to the forest, you can bet I'll burn the trees 
I will poison the water 'cause it's only getting hotter 
And we came for sons and daughters 

Hallelu

(chorus)
Hallelu, Hallelu, praise the lord and pass the ammunition too 

They say Jesus is coming, he must be walking, he sure ain't running 

Who can blame him, look how we done him, Hallelu 

Or the lament of poor choices by Billy Strings in "Dust In a Baggie", performed here at the Grand Ole Opry (wait, for real?):

I ain't slept in seven days, haven't ate in three
Methamphetamine has got a damn good hold of me
My tweaker friends have got me to the point of no return
I just took the lighter to the bulb and watched it burn

(chorus)
This life of sin has got me in
Well it's got me back in prison once again
I used my only phone call to contact my daddy
I got twenty long years for some dust in a baggie

I mean, the Opry has a long tradition of musical exceptionalism, but I was not expecting something so - I dunno, sordid? - from a genre so strongly associated with conservatism, y'know?

Before Old Crow Medicine Show took the stage at folk fest, we had our first chance to hear Nick Shoulders, probably my fave artist of the whole weekend. In addition to being a tremendous vocalist, whistler and yodeler, he also took pains to share his educate his audience about just what "country" music is, and it might not be what most of us think.

The cartoons permeating this post are from his comic-style essay "Country Music History" which I highly recommend. His position that what was once called "hillbilly music" has more of its roots in geography and poverty than it does with rurality is real food for thought.

Hearing these other "hellbilly" artists talking about the squalid underbelly in rustic settings makes me think of Albertan Corb Lund who has described his style of music as "agricultural tragic" as opposed to country, despite his upbeat and generally humourous takes on that lifestyle.

And some of the darkest musical corners appear to be in Saskatchewan, courtesy of artists like The Dead South:

My life's a bit more colder 

Dead wife is what I told her 

Brass knife sinks into my shoulder 

Oh babe don't know what I'm gonna do 

I see my red head, messed bed, tear shed, queen bee 

My squeeze 

The stage it smells, tells, hell's bells, miss-spells 

Knocks me on my knees 

It didn't hurt, flirt, blood squirt, stuffed shirt 

Hang me on a tree 

After I count down, three rounds, in hell I'll be in good company

...or Colter Wall, who sounds maybe 30-40 years older than he actually is:

Well the raven is a wicked bird
His wings are black as sin
And he floats outside my prison window
Mocking those within

And he sings to me real low
It's hell to where you go
For you did murder Kate McCannon

Of course, every genre of music has its sub-genres (and sub-sub-genres, ad infinitum) and his kind of boundary-crossing is hardly unprecedented, even within country & western music; it is amusing now to recall how Willie Nelson and Johnny Cash were once the standard bearers for "outlaw country."

But hearing twangy music that discomforts more than it typifies, and that sometimes brings an honest outsider's perspective is a great reminder that honest, heartfelt expressions don't need to be pigeonholed or boxed up - just listened to and appreciated.

Like Nick Shoulders said on stage when we saw him, "If you ever wonder why so many punks and goths and metal heads and weirdos seem to be getting into country, don't forget that the fiddle was once referred to as the Devil's instrument. This genre has its roots in rebellion and we are never going away." Or as he sings in "All Bad":

I grew a little into deafening rage 

Every hometown is a well built cage 

Be it high iron, highway or stage 

Don’t let it be all bad 

I’ve been indebted to a surgeon’s blade 

Probation officers and nerves that frayed 

Only the choiceless every gladly stayed 

Refuse to be all bad

GreeD&D and the Bottomest Line

Roleplaying games like Dungeons & Dragons have been a part of my life, on and off, since I was about 12. Like most players, I have played with multiple versions of the rules as well as completely different rulesets for different games in different settings, like Top Secret, Spirit of 77 and most recently, Call of Cthulhu.

The financial status of the multiple owners of the fabled D&D trademark has likewise waxed and waned over the nearly five decades it has been around. It was an initial success and flagship for a tiny company called TSR, who eventually sold everything to Wizards of the Coast after nearly bankrupting themselves in the late '90s. Two years later, in 1999, WOTC itself was bought by major toy and game company Hasbro. 

In 2008, Hasbro-owned WOTC released its 4th edition of the D&D rules, which, although it was a real departure in many ways from previous editions and rankled many fans, did give the game quite a bit of exposure to new audiences. Wizards did extensive playtesting for its follow-up 5th edition, published in 2014.

5E is a robust ruleset to be sure, and quite a bit of fun to play, and as a result of this and the added exposure of popular live-play shows like Critical Role (and its animated spin-off Legend of Vox Machina) on YouTube and Twitch, D&D has never been more popular. Playtesting has only recently begun for the 6th edition anticipated in 2024 (to coincide with D&D's 50th anniversary).

Even prior to the pandemic, the business side was looking solid; D&D was showing growth for its seventh consecutive year, while sister-product Magic the Gathering grew almost 30%. During the pandemic, online play of D&D increased by an estimated 86% - surely the sign of a healthy brand.

And yet, this level of sustainability and growth is not enough for some people.

New Wizards & Digital CEO (the Hasbro division that controls D&D) Cynthia Williams recently described D&D as severely "under-monetized" and lacking in the kind of  "recurrent spending" seen in video games.

And I suppose she's right; even the person running the game (called a Dungeon Master or DM) only needs 2-3 books and a set of dice to play for hours and hours if they want to make up their own adventures, and a published campaign like Tyranny of Dragons costs $50-$70 and kept eight of us online playing pretty regularly for two years.

It is a bit surprising to see a games company like Hasbro bemoaning slow growth and monetization; after all, classic boardgames like Risk and Monopoly only require one person to buy a copy for less than $50 and 4-6 players can enjoy it forever!

And a lot of D&D's cultural cachet in recent years has come from their willingness to play nicely in the sandbox with the gaming community and smaller publishers making approved content for 5E using something called the Open Gaming License, or OGL. But now a leaked copy of a new "1.1 version" of the OGL gives far more rights (and for the first time, royalties) to WOTC, and many publishers have expressed reluctance to make D&D-compatible adventures and sourcebooks if it turns out to be accurate. Still others are threatening legal action, as the new arrangement could fundamentally threaten their very livelihoods and viability as businesses.

And while many players and DMs are suggesting they too might take their polyhedral dice and play elsewhere in order to support the smaller publishers, more of them are concerned about the possibility that D&D, a game that should only require paper, pencils and dice in order to play, could in the future require an account or subscription or some digital component in order to play. Hasbro recently purchased the website D&D Beyond, an online "toolset" which features character generators, game rules and information, as well as online play experiences similar to competitors like Roll20 and Fantasy Ground. Could those online games be put at risk or shut out of future releases as well?

It's entirely too early to say with any certainty where all these changes might lead, especially the OGL - it was a leak, so it is entirely possible that they can walk it back. But with more players than ever before, a level of awareness frankly unimaginable even a decade ago, the 50th anniversary of the game looming and a big-budget motion picture coming out this March, it is truly disheartening to hear a corporate executive complaining that their goose isn't laying bigger golden eggs more often.

In the end though, I take heart that, despite the fact that I sometimes play in three different D&D campaigns within a week, there is probably already more D&D content out there for 5e than I could reasonably complete in my lifetime, and that is before I even take into consideration the huge number of alternative systems and settings that might be fun to try. 

Still, though... you never forget your first, and I would be reluctant to explore underground labyrinths without the comforting lexicanery of things like"armor class" and "saving throw," so I hope that the people at Hasbro recognize how hard Dungeons & Dragons fought, creators and players alike, to get to this point, and how quickly it could all disappear if mishandled.

WWJD? Almost Certainly Not This

Speaking personally, the most disappointing thing about American governors DeSantis and Abbott flying and bussing undocumented immigrants to Democrat strongholds in New England and D.C. isn't the cruelty or inhumanity of it, or even that they used tax dollars (perhaps inappropriately) to do so - it's the fact that almost no other Republicans have called out these reputedly Christian officials on just how out of step such an act is with their professed faith.

When we hear the name of Jesus mentioned in a non-theological context, it is often from people who claim a Christian identity but seem to practice another faith - one less about compassion and forgiveness and far more oriented to a misapplied sense of justice and its alleged miscarriages.

Whether you regard Jesus as a religious figure, historical personality or strictly a mythical being, surely there can be very little argument that he 

• preached compassion
• spoke up for the marginalized
• healed the sick
• confronted authority
• self-identified as a servant, rather than leader
• rejected political power
• rejected violence (I know, I know - "but the tables!" were any hurt?)
• was gentle
• was humble
• was patient

It has taken me a significant portion of my life to understand the true value of "love thine enemy," and the absence of any discernible love in the actions of so many who label themselves as followers of Jesus - and this includes anyone chortling over how much this escapade 'owned the libs' - really makes a person like me wonder what their faith is actually based on.

A good friend and mentor of mine recently replied to a recent lay sermon of mine that addressed a similar topic:

How about just doing what you should do for your fellow humans? How about being the example of selflessness that Jesus set himself to be? So many of the ‘born again’ or ‘evangelical movement’ seem to feel that the return to Old Testament values is the key to the whole thing. My reminder is that an Old Testament Christian is really just someone who is practicing Judaism (without the kosher laws and such) but with just as many other restrictions for everyone else. Now, there's nothing wrong with Judaism, but the difference between it and Christianity was supposed to be the word of Jesus and the love he promoted. Not much love in making a child bear a child because she’s been raped or a mother having to carry a dead or dying fetus to satisfy those who say ‘Ya never know, maybe God will create a miracle here for this one.'

(Presented with all due respect from both of us to actual practitioners of Judaism - shalom!)

I can't find it now, but a tweet I saw briefly this morning summed it up very well for me (please excuse my paraphrasing): "If whoever is in your pulpit his morning does not denounce, loudly and strongly, the cruel and dehumanizing actions undertaken by Govs DeSantis and Abbott this week in a tawdry political stunt, you need to find a new place of worship. These people know nothing of Jesus."

And even those foolish enough to defend these callous actions do so in terms of either political savviness or the fact that the 'upscale liberal' communities deserved it - no one addresses the fact that the pawns being used in this egregious drama are actual human beings. And how many of those who identify as conservative and Christian are as disgusted by this display as I am, but are too intimidated to say anything?

Even the fact that volunteers came out in droves to house, feed and clothe these people before getting them resituated in a nearby military base (with their consent) is being presented by the right-wing as privileged people wasting no time in "deporting undesirables." But in the end, I feel the reactions in D.C. and Martha's Vineyard are far more in keeping with what Jesus taught than the actions of those who brought them there.

I have all the time in the world for spiritual differences based on personal experience or interpretation, but almost none for the kind of hypocrisy we are seeing play out around this situation.

(Video: GOP Jesus)

Break-In Breakdown

I suppose I can't really call it a break-in, per se - I neglected to lock the doors on the Flex when Glory and I came back from the dog park on Sunday, so when I opened the vehicle this afternoon, I discovered the remaining contents of the glove box and console strewn across the seats.

The thief or thieves were remarkably thorough; they even pinched the zippered folio containing the owner's manual (which in turn contained my insurance and registration documents). The seat pockets were likewise emptied and the enormous sunshade for the window lay open on the floor of the back seat.

It wasn't too messy, but a quick inventory revealed that I was also missing a 10' USB charging cord, a multi-tool (from Grand Rapids Industrial Products) I got over a decade ago from Audrey's older sister and her husband, all the maps from the glove box, and my prescription sunglasses.

Surprisingly, the culprits left behind two packets of gum, all the shopping bags in the back, a Starbucks gift card and some mostly loaded McDonald's coffee cards, two pairs of gloves and a folding umbrella. They also overlooked the tiny green flashlight that clips onto a hat brim and a number of headlamps in the passenger seat pocket.

Most of the missing items are just stuff - not too convenient to be without, and easily enough replaced, but I still find it tremendously galling. Who the hell steals an owner's manual?! I am one of the few people who actually read them, as far as I am aware. And likewise the prescription sunglasses -  I hope they give a headache to whoever ends up with them.

But I am most disappointed with myself. Not for the carelessness of leaving the doors unlocked, although that grinds my gears something fierce - no, it is the fact that my anger at being burgled is intense enough that I can easily imagine visiting horrific violence upon the perpetrator.

The italicized portion below contains just some of what I envisioned, and contains some applied atavism as well as some unpleasant revelations about just what kind of person I might actually be; read on if you dare!

I imagine spotting them through the living room window on my way to bed; I step to the door, but pull my hand back before touching the door handle. Narrowing my eyes, I determine the individual rifling through my belongings is in no hurry, so I quietly rush into the bedroom and grab the police-style baton from under the bed. With 24 inches of solid, twin-handled oak in my hands, I make my way back to the front door, stopping again in order to flick off the switch for the porch light.

Quietly depressing the handle, I slowly and smoothly push open the storm door we had installed only a month ago. Stepping gingerly out on to the front stoop. the motion-sensitive light does not illuminate when I step in front of its sensor, and I quietly descend the steps.

For a fellow who dresses out at an eighth of a ton, I have surprised many people with how quietly I can move, especially when squeaky floors or crunchy leaves are taken out of the equation. I am wearing slippers with a plastic sole, but take care in my steps so as not to make any errant scratching or scuffing noises.

The pillager has their back to me and is leaning in through the passenger door and reaching across to the pockets in the driver's side door. I hear them curse after removing an umbrella and dropping it on the driver's seat. As they move back to the glove box, I move into position behind them and to their left, just out of view. A cold and cynical part of my brain has recognized the need for a viable self-defense story - "I startled him breaking into my car, constable, and when he attacked me, I defended myself..."

I raise the baton in a two-handed grip, plant my feet and yell, "Hey!" at a considerable volume. I have startled people by accident with nothing but my voice and a quiet approach, so the effect when I do it intentionally is considerable.

The thief jetks upright suddenly, hitting their head on the doorframe as they try to extricate themselves from the vehicle. Turning to face me, they see a club in my hands and raised above my head, so they instinctively raise their hands to protect their face, but I am already swinging the baton towards their midsection. They drop their arms, but too late to do more than deflect it a little. 

The baton glances off their hipbone with a sickening crack and solidly impacts their midsection. With a grunt, they start to double over, one hand clutching at their stomach, the other reaching out to grab my weapon, which is already pulling back out of their reach.

Reaching out with my left hand, I push their right arm out of the way as I raise the club above my head. I am ecstatic to have a clear shot at their face and neck as the baton makes its descent...

And I am going to stop right there.

There is a scene in Pulp Fiction when John Travolta's character Vincent Vega laments his car being keyed by an unknown individual. He goes on to say, "It woulda been worth him doin' it, just so I could've caught him doin' it."

I think a lot of us can relate to that sentiment, but I never thought of myself as that person. Threaten my wife, harm or intimidate my daughters? There is likely to be trouble, and I accept that if I followed my instincts in a scenario like that, there is real potential of my going to jail or even prison.

But the realization that I am clearly prepared to unleash a frankly disproportionate level of violence because I don't like my stuff being taken was unsettling to me. Don't get me wrong, it was kind of fun to write and there is a sliver of righteousness in my indignation and defence of property. But the reason I ended my description where I did is because I am not sure when I would stop.

Or if I would, for that matter.  

How can I talk about my faith one minute, with its ideals of grace, and justice, and reconciliation, and throw it all away the next minute because my privacy has been violated? Is that infringement worth sending someone to the hospital? Is it worth a criminal record and a reputation of violence for me? 

When a brick comes through my window a year later, do I assume it came from my thief, or dismiss it as a random incident? What about a Molotov cocktail? A neighbour's house was hit with one before we moved into this neighbourhood and it stood vacant for over a year's renovations. How much time do I spend looking over my shoulder for comeuppance?

And the thief - what if they were a teenager running away from an abusive home? A residential school survivor? Someone with severe mental health issues?

In the end, as burned up as I am about the pilfered items (the owner's manual! did you know you can get a better trade-in for your vehicle if you have the original one? grr!), my nature is to focus on gratitude again.

Gratitude that it was only stuff, and that no damage was done to the vehicle. Nothing irreplaceable was taken, and I have already replaced the registration. No one got hurt. I am grateful for many of the items that were left behind, especially that little light that clips to my hat - it's so handy when camping.

And mostly I am grateful that I didn't catch the perpetrator in the act, and perhaps put a greater tragedy into motion.

Mostly.

A Nickel's Worth of...What, Exactly?

The advance polls open tomorrow for Edmonton's municipal elections, and I am in a quandary regarding the selection for mayor. I know who I want to vote for, but I am worried about vote-splitting allowing a less-desirable candidate to waltz in. 

I was in a similar predicament in 2004 and voted my heart in that election, giving Stephen Mandel the win over incumbent Bill Smith and Robert Noce. The former I had viewed as a tired status quo, while the latter had displayed a number of weasely tendencies over their campaign. I considered voting strategically to keep a weasel out of the office, but was dissuaded by a timely column from the Journal's municipal affairs columnist (and later councillor) Scott McKeen.

At that time, I chose optimism over pragmatism, and maybe I should again - I have less than no interest in having Mike Nickel as my mayor.

Portrait by Tim Mikula

Nickel has a well-deserved reputation as an outspoken city councillor, and whose blunt and confrontational manner has seen him brought to council's attention on multiple code of conduct violations but has escaped censure every time as this requires 9 council votes. Marketing reports (described in the article linked above) show how many voters see Nickel as “says no,” “an I-told-you-so guy,” “frustrated” and “irritable,” now of which are flattering and all of which are easy to ascribe to him.

He is a hard-working and experienced campaigner, and there is no question he is winning the battle of the yard signs, at least from my perspective here on the North side. I saw him canvassing door-to-door a couple of weeks back, and hoped he would come to my step so I could speak my mind, despite my general aversion to confrontation.

He did not, but here is what I hoped I would have said to him:

Mr. Nickel, a part of me is sad you are not running for council again, as I think these bodies work best when they represent a multiplicity of perspectives. I think it is good to have someone on council who can always be counted on to ask, "but what is that going to cost?" and "where is the benefit to this?"

But a good mayor has to build a consensus out of those perspectives, and I have seen absolutely no demonstration that you possess any diplomatic inclinations whatsoever. You bad-mouth city staff and administrators and even endorse council candidates against incumbent councillors that you may end up having to work with! I can't decide if this is naked opportunism ar just short-sightedness, but neither of these endear you to me as a candidate.

If I add that to your frankly bullying and harassing ways on social media, I can't help but think you would be a bad choice for mayor.

I mean, who knows how far I would have gotten before he realized there is no way to get my vote and he walked off, at which point I might have added, "Is this the kind of interaction I can expect if you do win? To walk away from opinions you don't agree with?"

In the end, though, this discourse remains a fantasy, and my difficult choice for mayor remains.

My two favoured candidates are both former councillors (I would have a hard time voting in a mayor with no council experience). I have been a fan of Kim Krushell from her tenure of council from 2005-2013, particularly her standing up to the Kingsway Business Association (and all their money) and their dogged determination to keep the municipal airport open. 

She had my vote until former Trudeau cabinet minister Amarjeet Sohi announced his candidacy four months later. I like Sohi; prior to his council term, he was a city bus driver, and this working-class perspective is often left out of elected office. And his name recognition gives him a serious edge over Krushell, out of the public eye for almost a decade now. - in fact, a Leger poll in late July gave Sohi a significant lead, but at that time, 43% of those polled were undecided. 

A friend in the know also tells me that a private poll now shows Nickel ahead of Sohi.

So these are the horns of the dilemma on which I find myself - if my primary goal in this election is to keep the least desirable candidate imaginable out of the mayor's seat, do I:

i) vote my heart and hope many others do the same, risking splitting the vote and giving Nickel an easier path to victory, or

ii) vote strategically for the early frontrunner since I feel they would also be a good mayor?

My optimism is struggling to overcome my pragmatism, and more than anything else, I dearly wish we had preferential balloting for municipal elections.

As it sits, please feel free to share your opinions about my decision either in the comments or with me directly; at least the election isn't until October 18 so I have time to decide, if not a methodology for doing so!

Democracy Inaction

It would be funny if it weren't so tragic.

On Wednesday this past week, the unrest being fomented by the soon-to-be-former U.S. President came to a head. Following nine weeks of lies by Donald Trump about election fraud, he urged his followers to come to Washington on January 6, the day the electoral votes were being certified, a largely ceremonial function, and protest the results and a free and fair election. 

And let's be clear here - while there are obviously cases of rightfully rejected ballots here and there and reports of spurious ones getting through, there is no evidence whatsoever suggesting the kind of widespread and institutional shenanigans being alleged, despite dozens of cases brought to court by P45 and his legal team, every single one of which to date has been rejected by judges (many of which were appointed by Trump).

At the protest, Trump riled up his most dedicated supporters and directed them to march on the Capitol in order to convey 'strength' to the Senators and Representatives voting there, including the one presiding over the matter, Trump's own VP, Mike Pence.

Trump told his acolytes he would be joining them, adding to their fervour, but then beetled off back to the White House to watch things unfold.

And what unfolded was a travesty. 

Undersupported Capitol police were unable to staunch the surging crowds who physically broke into the building and wreaked havoc. The chambers were evacuated and staff and politicians moved to secure locations (and thankfully, quick-thinking staff were able to grab the actual physical elector ballots as well, or they would certainly have been destroyed, muddying the waters even further).

In addition to the uproar, disruption, vandalism and terror one might expect from such a debacle, five lives ended up being lost, including two Capitol Police officers. But as more reports and videos emerge from Wednesday's fracas, it is apparent that things could have been much much, much worse.

• A gallows was erected on the Capitol grounds, among other ominous, code-laden symbols
• A police officer was almost crushed by a door while the mob yelled "heave ho, heave ho" and trying to push their way past.
• Groups of insurrectionists roamed the Capitol building chanting "hang Pence, hang Pence."
• Multiple invaders were spotted carrying bundles of zip-tie handcuffs and tasers, suggesting there was a plan, or at least an effort, to take prisoners or hostages.

Tales are also emerging of how little time there was between the perimeter breach and the chambers themselves being invaded, and how at least one officer (a black man, facing an almost exclusively white mob, by the way), led one group of invaders away from the senate chambers, buying them valuable moments to continue their evacuation.

And although it is tempting to write the whole affair off as a farce, remember that large swathes of the ultra-right try to cloak themselves as satirical or ironic clowns in order to avoid consequences for their heinous actions under the time-honoured but only sporadically effective "just kidding, lol" defence. 

Thankfully, law-enforcement agencies seem to be taking it seriously, treating the incident as an attempted insurrection and prosecuting the individuals they can find (many of whom either made little or no efforts at disguise or willingly identified themselves.

But this is small potatoes. These people are largely idiots, whipped into a frenzy and exploited by a power-hungry demagogue. What about the instigators?

Well, Trump has been banned from Twitter (a mixed bag, since now we can only guess at what he is thinking instead of having him broadcast it nearly constantly) as well as Reddit, Twitch, Facebook, Instagram, Snapchat, and even Stripe, the e-commerce company that enables a lot of his online political fundraising.  He is also facing a potential second impeachment and there is even a slight chance of the 25th Amendment being used to remove him due to his being incapacitated.

But whatever. In all honesty, I have given up hope in Trump ever being held truly accountable, and I don't think he will be able to mount an effective re-election campaign in 2024 at this point, so it is almost enough for me not to hear as much about him due to his being so effectively de-platformed, at least for the moment.

No, I reserve my deepest ire for Trump's enablers.

Trump is, and always has been a maniacal, narcissistic and selfish opportunist - everything he has done, including inciting insurrection, was clearly within his capabilities. He is the scorpion riding the back of a frog called America.

But other people, particularly elected officials, should know better. When the riot ended and the chambers resumed their business, working through the night to certify the electoral votes and bring the horrors of this election to a final end, some of them chose to continue following the President's wishes and object to certification.

This is not because they honestly believe that there was widespread fraud in the states in question. Most of them will admit to this if asked, claiming instead that their objections are principled criticisms of election security and investigation. But in truth, it is to curry favour with a bullying leader and a populist movement that still has a stranglehold on the Party of Lincoln.

In an evening that saw these eight Senators cowering in a secure space while other people fought and in some cases died to maintain security and order, they came back into session and had the unmitigated temerity to continue their objections and to prop up Donal Trump's monumental lie that the election was stolen.

Senators Ted Cruz and Josh Hawley try to base their objections on the fact that 39% of Americans don't have faith in the results of the election. They are unwilling to accept any correlation between this figure and the fact that the President has abused his office and spread lie after lie and wasted legal argument after legal argument squawking about the supposed unfairness and statistical impossibility of his loss, all while providing zero evidence to back up his scurrilous assertions. He, and just importantly, they, have undermined faith not only in their own country's government but in democracy itself.

Thankfully, there is the potential for consequences here as well. Cruz and Hawley are now facing calls to resign, some of which come from within their own party. A petition by alumni of their law schools to have both of them disbarred gathered 500 signatures in less than 48 hours.

Hawley, a freshman Senator, appears to be getting the worst of it, accused by a former senator and sponsor of having "blood on his hands," a sentiment echoed by the Kansas City Star, among others. His pending book deal has also been cancelled by his publisher, removing a significant leg from the platform he hoped might make him a presidential hopeful in 2024. 

Meanwhile though, toadies and lickspittles who would rather have a strongman in the Oval Office than someone actually elected to the office continue to defend the actions of those contesting an election that has been settled for weeks.

Division continues, cynicism grows, and another rough beast slouches off towards Bethlehem to be born in the next election cycle. But if we can have even a smidgen of comeuppance for people like Ted Cruz and Josh Hawley, I will content myself with that, as well as with the silence once filled with Trump's tweeting.

Quarantainment

After a fairly rough week at work, I was feeling pretty low when I returned home Friday night. Thankfully both girls were free that evening while Audrey was at work, and they both thought my suggestion of watching a movie together while we ate supper made sense.

So, why did I pick Contagion?

Well, not because I thought Steven Soderbergh's 2011 film was funny, although I fully appreciated the irony of watching a movie depicting a deadly viral outbreak while more and more local action is taken against a global COVID-19 pandemic.

If you haven't seen it, I highly recommend it. It is a tightly wound thriller showing the impacts of an unknown virus among people from all walks of life, the herculean efforts to determine what it is and how to stop it, and just how easy it is for panic and misinformation to take hold and erode our social structures. An ensemble cast includes Matt Damon, Laurence Fishburne, Kate Winslet, Gwyneth Paltrow, Marino Cotillard, and Jude Law, among others, and the electronic score by Cliff Martinez is gripping and evocative. I'm not sure why it only rates a 6.7 on IMDb.

I picked it largely out of curiosity - I remember thinking it was a well-done film when I first saw it years ago but couldn't remember too much else about it. Both girls are cinema-savvy and science-conscious individuals so watching good movies with them inevitably provokes conversations and follow-up discussions, which feels wholly appropriate.

I also picked it because of my tendency to run worst-case scenarios in my imagination. As more and more disruption in our lives is felt through things like the suspension of sporting leagues, postponement of major cinematic releases and the closures of things like recreation centres, it is easy to become disheartened.

Watching dramatized unrest in the form of store lootings, house robberies, home invasions and armed forces enforcing quarantine measures, is strangely encouraging in a way. The manner in which most people have adopted reduced interaction and social distancing, and the efforts made to protect the elderly and those with compromised immune systems is quite heartening.

Having said that though, I did hear someone in the grocery store yesterday finish up a diatribe against toilet paper hoarders with, "well, I have plenty of ammunition - worst-case scenario, I'll just take what I need."

Besides a chance to recognize how much worse we could have it, Contagion has a couple of other factors in its favour for topical viewing. First, the science is pretty well done, with due care taken to make sure the procedures, equipment and language used reflect reality, even if some corners are cut in order to preserve the narrative. They re-shot a scene after science consultants identified that a medical professional would never inject themselves through their clothing.

In fact, when Fishburne's CDC official Ellis Cheever is asked about how long before a vaccine is found and distributed, he pivots right away to saying that strategies like social distancing and hand-washing are far more critical at the early stages. Sound familiar?

Secondly, it makes a point of addressing how the danger of the fictional MEV-1 virus is compounded by willful misinformation, disseminated by unscrupulous individuals for their own gain.

Dr. Ellis Cheever: We're working very hard to find out where this virus came from. To treat it and to vaccinate against it if we can. We don't know all of that yet, we just don't know. What we do know, is that in order to become sick you have to first come in contact with a sick person or something that they touched. In order to get scared, all you have to do is to come in contact with a rumor, or the television or the internet. I think what Mr. Krumwiede is uh... is spreading, is far more dangerous than the disease.

Hearing far-right talk-radio cranks try to dismiss COVID-19 as "the common cold" or "the sniffles" was bad enough, but when elected officials refer to it as "the Wuhan flu" or a "foreign virus," it's absolutely galling. Visibly Asian people in my own city are reporting facing racism and persecution on the streets and in schools due to some presumed connection to this virus; fear and paranoia don't need amplification from people who are supposed to know better.

But like the poster says, "nothing spreads like fear."

Contagion is currently streaming on Netflix (third or fourth most popular show!)  and Crave if you want to check it out. In the meantime, I am hoping to get a game of Pandemic in this afternoon...

Post Tenebrae Lux

I have a dear friend who is troubled.

Well, in truth, I probably have more than one, and I would describe myself as troubled more often these days than not, but I have a friend in particular who shared a significant concern with me.

Their fear is that society is failing, if, in fact, it hasn't failed already. They fear for the future.

I didn't press for details or evidence of this failure, because I share an awful lot of these concerns. Divisiveness is the rule of the day in not only politics but social discourse. Income disparity between the rich and poor has never been greater. There no longer appears to be any common ground at all between people wanting to defend clean air and water and those looking to secure economic prosperity. The country we once referred to as the world's surviving superpower is now tearing itself apart under the leadership of an egomaniacal narcissist and proven liar, whose devoted followers have made it clear that he can do no wrong in their eyes.

Worse still, there are people in positions of power, people who should know better, who seek to exploit these divisions and exacerbate the conflict, turning left against right, rich against poor, greens against entrepreneurs, rural versus urban, you name it.

Us against them - it's the oldest game in the book, and part one of a proven strategy: divide and conquer.

It's an almost overwhelming tide of situational terror, reinforced with almost every news report. It is easy to become disheartened, and I didn't even attempt to refute my friend's assertion about society's failure, because I couldn't.

So where do we find hope?

Is it possible to mine it from the past?

Yesterday the family and I travelled to the Red Deer Museum and Art Gallery to see the exhibit Anne Frank: A History for Today. It is a travelling exhibit from the Anne Frank House in Amsterdam and has no real historical artifacts in it per se. There are some recreations and a clever papercraft model of the secret annexe that she and seven others hiding for almost two years during the Nazi occupation of Holland before being found out.

The main focus of the gallery is a series of panels that block out a comprehensive timeline of events, the upper half depicting the rise to power of Adolf Hitler and the Nazi party and the lower half charting significant events of the Frank family - their fearful emigration to Holland, terrifying news from their homeland, the invasion of Holland, and the orders for Anne's sister Margot to report for a work camp, which prompted their seclusion.

To this day, no one knows who telephoned the police with the message "There are Jews in that house!" but all the occupants of the secret annex were arrested and shipped off to labour or death camps. Anne's father, Otto, was the only survivor.

Long after the war, devastated by the loss of his family, he was presented with Anne's diary, found after the raid at the annex. The depth of Anne's thoughts and the articulation of her feelings were a revelation to him.

I can't imagine how reading that diary must have felt, re-experiencing the growing terror of the Nazi menace from the perspective of a girl from ages 11-13. How much darker even than ours her world must have seemed.

And yet, she somehow managed to maintain a glimmer of hope, an optimistic assertion about the fundamental decency of humanity:

In spite of everything I still believe that people are really good at heart. I simply can’t build up my hopes on a foundation consisting of confusion, misery, and death. I see the world gradually being turned into a wilderness, I hear the ever approaching thunder, which will destroy us too, I can feel the sufferings of millions and yet, if I look up into the heavens, I think that it will all come right, that this cruelty too will end, and that peace and tranquility will return again.

Now, it can be argued that Anne, being a child, would have been driven by a childish naivete, a lack of guile and understanding about the real world. Or that had she known her future held betrayal, arrest, imprisonment and death, she would have perhaps renounced her compassionate outlook. Hell, the usual gang of white supremacist asshats and Third Reich apologists tried to claim she was a fictional character herself and dared famed Nazi hunter Simon Wiesenthal to find her alleged arrester (which he did).

But I don't think so. 

I don't know that this brave girl was completely indomitable, but I choose to believe she went to her fate hoping for better days for those that came after her.

And came they did. Peace and tranquility did flourish for a time, if not universally or for very long. Having grown up in the shadow of the Cold War, I feel very strongly that it was a superior experience in most measures to being a civilian in the previous global conflict.

History and the story of humanity is not rhythmic, but it is cyclical. Peace is sometimes defined by the war that preceded it and many of our successes happen in spite of our past failures, not because of them. I sometimes wonder how terrified early humans would have been at the onset of winter, wondering on the longest night of the year if warmth and greenery would ever really return. Prior to the advent of language, was there a way for the elders to convey the idea that they had seen this all before, to symbolize the notion that yes, things would get better?

At church today, we had our first Tenebrae ceremony, a sort of reverse advent, where a series of candles are extinguished, one per week over the course of Lent. The final one will be doused on Good Friday before they are all re-lit on Easter Sunday. It will be strange watching this wreath give off less light each week until it is completely dark, but watching it happen, having a hand in it, while knowing that the light will return, is a curious thought experiment, an intriguing exercise in faith.

Anne Frank's hopeful words exist not only in the diaries that survived her, or in the movies and plays based on her life. They can be found on the walls of the Montessori school she attended in Amsterdam to this day, in her own handwriting, where I hope they inspire others as they have encouraged me.

My troubled friend and I have vastly different belief systems, but I hope he is not offended to know that I am praying for him to find faith, from whatever corner it may come - faith that things will indeed get better, that light following darkness is more than likely, it is an inevitability. Times might get worse before they do, but they will indeed get better, and perhaps that peace and tranquility will impact more people, and last a little longer. 

And maybe we troubled souls can find some for ourselves, as well.

Tangled Webs - Sony vs. Marvel

With everything else in the world that there is to get upset about, it seems ridiculous and disappointing that a grown-ass man (even the namesake of this very blog's title) should exhaust any mental bandwidth or concern at all over two media juggernauts wrestling over the provenance and disposition of a made-up character originally intended to sell publications intended for children.

And yet, here we are.

Learning on Tuesday that Sony had ended their profitable and creatively successful partnership with Marvel Studios and that Spider-Man would no longer be part of the MCU and vice-versa, was incredibly disheartening to me.

It's easy to be jaded now, with the staggering amount of superhero films we've had that are not only successful but also satisfying. But prior to 2012, we'd never had a good third superhero film before. Superman III (1983) was a dud for Christopher Reeve despite two excellent prior entries, Batman Forever (1995) destroyed a lot of the goodwill earned by Tim Burton's uneven but entertaining films and X3: The Last Stand (2006) almost destroyed the franchise that had the most promising sequel of all of them, requiring a reboot five years later.

Sam Raimi's third Spider-Man film landed with a thud in 2007, having mishandled not only the main character but one of the most eagerly anticipated villains, Venom. They rebooted with Andrew Garfield in 2012, but, true to form, bolshed up his sequel so bad by trying to set up their own shared cinematic universe, they instead had to threeboot one of the most valuable and recognizable comics properties in the world.

Thankfully, someone at Sony had the sense to reach out to a studio that was doing it right, and in exchange for 5% of the profits, Marvel Studios lent ace producer and MCU mastermind Kevin Feige to serve as their chief creative influence. This also allowed MCU elements like Iron Man and Happy Hogan to appear in the Sony films and Spider-Man to show up in three MCU films: Captain America: Civil War, Avengers: Infinity War and Avengers: Endgame. The mid-credit and end-credit scenes in the most recent Spider-Man movie promised huge changes ahead for both Peter Parker and the MCU, but unless something miraculous transpires, it appears these two storylines will be pushing on independently of each other, and that is just too bad.

I mean, I understand Sony's perspective; in renegotiating their agreement, Marvel had asked for a firmer partnership, agreeing to finance 50% of future Spidey films in exchange for 50% of the profits. Sony, who now have a much-loved actor in the role and certainly best iteration onscreen yet, have been slowly building their own cinematic universe around the villains of the Spiderverse (and the 900 other characters bundled with him!). Even the movies they make that aren't very good still make hundreds of millions of dollars (ASM2 made $709M, Venom made $856M), while Into the Spider-Verse made $375M...on an estimated budget of $90M and was a critical hit besides. At this point, Sony has to be thinking that 100% x $X x ∞ makes way more sense than 50% x ($X+Y%) x ?, right?

It's going to be harder on Marvel than Sony. The MCU is now unable to use the one character who is, more than any other, the face of Marvel in their own movies. Worse still, they lose Peter Parker, the face of youthful optimism and compassion in a set of films where almost none of the other heroes have any compunction against shooting, maiming or stabbing bad guys.

Still, the timing works out all right for Marvel. If they have to move on sans-Spider-Man, they have run his initial story arc through to a dramatic and emotionally satisfying conclusion. I'm pretty sure they can still continue exploring the arc introduced in the final end credits scene with Nick Fury and...uh...those other guys. (Seriously, go see this film already if you haven't - it's great, and all the speculation over this corporate business is going to ruin a delightful surprise for you!) Plus they still own 100% of all the merchandising and toy rights as I understand it, so there's that.

Other nerds have speculated that future movies won't be able to use the high-tech suit designed by Tony Stark, but I disagree. There is no narrative need to explain where the suit came from, and besides, in the PS4 videogame, Peter Parker builds something almost as high-tech pretty much by himself and has done so in the comics as well. And frankly, if they ended up saying that both Stark suits got wrecked in FFH and Peter went old-school in the next movie (and back to a brighter colour palette!) that would be a-okay with me. I still think there is more drama to be wrought from pulling the fabric mask on and off anyhow, and I love when he pulls it half-up to eat or drink in the comics.

I will miss the potential relationship between Aunt May and Happy Hogan, but the dialogue in Far From Home revealed that this has by no means a sure thing either. The supporting cast is all still on hand, and there are more than enough villains to go around. It will be weird not having them deal with "the blip" that affected the rest of the MCU after Endgame (and called out in FFH), but since none of the core characters were really impacted by it, that's just one more thing that no one needs to talk about in a two-hour movie. Is such maneuvering stupid and unnecessary? Absolutely. But is it insurmountable for a studio whose executives are transfixed by literally billions of floating dollar signs? Not in the slightest.

I still think Sony should go back to the table and work something out with Disney and Marvel though. This maneuver has not only cost them the goodwill of a lot of movie fans, but the uproar actually negatively impacted the Sony stock a little. From a business perspective, turning your back on history's most successful producer (23 films with no bombs and overall BO gross of $22.5 billion) has to feel a little iffy, especially when you consider this is a studio whose only other major franchise is Jumanji. Men In Black International took a pounding this summer, and no one is sure what the turnout will be on next year's Ghostbusters reunion. Was a counteroffer ever made on the 50% figure? Isn't that how these sorts of things work?

Nothing is assured for Sony. They have Tom Holland under contract for at least one more film (and maybe two-no one seems able to say for sure), but they don't have the director locked in yet, they don't have the writers on a contract [UPDATED: apparently Chris McKenna and Erik Sommers are now on board], and let's face it, Sony doesn't have a good track record at this stage of the game. Are they prepared to re-cast the Webslinger for the fourth time this century if Holland decides these guys are clown shoes? I mean, a new face never hurt James Bond that much, but still, things go pear-shaped in the new arrangement and it's back to the drawing board, I am pretty sure the damages will be profound and long-lasting, and many a Sony exec will be shown the door in the aftermath.

Some have proposed that Disney simply buy Sony Pictures outright, and they could maybe do it, but their acquisition of Fox earlier this year still required government approval due to anti-trust regulations, so that doesn't seem awfully likely. Besides, no matter how well they've handled them thus far, I don't like the idea of a single corporate megalith owning the IP to all the cool nerdy stuff, it's more than enough for Disney to have Star Wars and Marvel (now including the Fantastic Four and X-Men!) in addition to their own huge stable of characters.

Until Sony drops the ball again, however, I think the MCU has seen the last of Peter Parker and his wall-crawling alter ego, and that's a sad thing for us fans. The Marvel universe is a better one with him in it, and the completeness and synergy created made both sides more appealing, more engaging, more interesting, and perhaps most importantly, less confusing than they will be from now on.

The good news is that we will still get one more Spider-Man movie with Tom Holland and that cast, so it will at least feel familiar. I don't think they will have access to the effects, costuming, and production design of Marvel, so they probably won't look as nice. I can only hope they don't try to cram all the world-building they want to do into the next film at the expense of the story and end up with a trailer for the next movie instead of a complete story that they could build upon at their leisure.

Meanwhile, the MCU is shaping up to be a very busy place over the next little while, and fans are so likely to be distracted and delighted that it is possible that Spider-Man in that context will end up being like that good friend in elementary school who moved away during the summer. You start out thinking, "It would have been cool to have him here," but those occasions come less and less often, and you only rarely wonder wistfully about what might have been.