Archive for Charles Dickens

it was the spring of hope, it was the winter of despair

Posted in Kids, Travel with tags , , , , , , , , , , , on January 16, 2021 by xi'an

reading highlights

Posted in Books, Kids with tags , , , , , , , , , , , on January 10, 2021 by xi'an

A reading questionnaire I picked somewhere I cannot remember, a while ago, and filled in the lazy days after X’mas… Could have substituted each entry with dozens of others.

  1. Your first memorable reading experience : La Panthère Blanche (a pre-1960 children book about an albinos jaguar in the Amazonia I kept reading as a kid, and then I switched to compulsive bi-yearly reads of David Copperfield…)
  2.  Your hidden masterpiece : Kent’s Burial Rites
  3. An official masterpiece you could not complete : Melville’s Moby Dick (too much technical jargon)
  4. A writer you would dream to meet : Patrick Rothfuss (so that I could hear the end of the trilogy!), Karen Blixen, Victor Hugo, many others
  5. A favourite writer you would rather not meet : Louis Céline (definitely not a favourite person!)
  6. A book you would like to be the main character : Zeno in Yourcenar’s L’Œuvre au Noir (The Abyss)
  7. A book you offer by default : Ishiguro’s The Remains of the Day
  8. A book that makes you laugh out loud : Paasilina’s The Year of the Hare
  9. A book you would rather read in the vernacular : every book not written in French or English

it was the best of times, it was the worst of times

Posted in Books, pictures, Travel with tags , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , on January 7, 2021 by xi'an

the Frankenstein chronicles

Posted in Statistics with tags , , , , , , , , , , , , , on March 31, 2019 by xi'an

Over a lazy weekend, I watched the TV series The Frankenstein Chronicles, which I found quite remarkable (if definitely Gothic and possibly too gory for some!). Connections with celebrities of (roughly) the time abound: While Mary Shelley makes an appearance in the first season of the series, not only as the writer of the famous novel (already famous in the novel as well) but also as a participant to a deadly experiment that would succeed in the novel (and eventually in the series), Charles Dickens is a constant witness to the unraveling of scary events as Boz the journalist, somewhat running after the facts, William Blake dies in one of the early episodes after painting a series of tarot like cards that eventually explains it all, Ada Lovelace works on the robotic dual of Frankenstein, Robert Peel creates the first police force (which will be called the Bobbies after him!), John Snow’s uncovering of the cholera source as the pump of Broad Street is reinvented with more nefarious reasons, and possibly others. Besides these historical landmarks (!), the story revolves around the corpse trafficking that fed medical schools and plots for many a novel. The (true) Anatomy Act is about to pass to regulate body supply for anatomical purposes and ensues a debate on the end of God that permeates mostly the first season and just a little bit the second season, which is more about State versus Church… The series is not without shortcomings, in particular a rather disconnected plot (which has the appeal of being unpredictable of jumping from one genre to the next) and a repeated proneness of the main character to being a scapegoat, but the reconstitution of London at the time is definitely impressive (although I cannot vouch for its authenticity!). Only the last episode of Season 2 feels a bit short when delivering, by too conveniently tying up all loose threads.

more random than random!

Posted in Books, Kids, pictures, Statistics with tags , , , , , , on December 8, 2017 by xi'an

A revealing question on X validated the past week was asking for a random generator that is “more random” than the outcome of a specific random generator, à la Oliver Twist:The question is revealing of a quite common misunderstanding of the nature of random variables (as deterministic measurable transforms of a fundamental alea) and of their maybe paradoxical ability to enjoy stability or predictable properties. And much less that it relates to the long-lasting debate about the very [elusive] nature of randomness. The title of the question is equally striking: “Random numbers without pre-specified distribution” which could be given some modicum of meaning in a non-parametric setting, still depending on the choices made at the different levels of the model…