Off on a tangent

Then again, maybe it's not the artists' faults if they just follow what's become a standard form.  Shrug.  We are not alone in that, look at resumes and cv's and academic journal articles.  (Sure, I suppose there should be some standard, but why is it that one?  And once you know it, why can't you bend it?)  The last of these gets my biggest scorn, if they made them readable (i.e., didn't throw in a bunch on unnecessary, and I might add, at this point, meaningless, words-nothing wrong with the format itself) the average person might actually wade through and read them.  And if we could go to the source for the information, we might be better off and more informed than having to have the science (or whatever) translated and dumbed down for us by someone who probably has a bias or a word limit.  Seriously, think about that.  Sure some of the formulas might be difficult to understand, but the general concepts, the hypothesis, the findings and the possible implications should be readable, but as it is, they tend to get buried in unnecessary verbiage.  Every time you go through a translation/re-interpretation, you lose content.  Was it important? Maybe, maybe not, but someone else just made that decision for you.  (This is similar to an issue I have with not teaching handwriting; our country's founding documents are handwritten.  The average citizen should be able to read these for themself.)  (John Oliver made a joke about how boring talking about Net Neutrality was, and that's true for a lot of policy and science.  It doesn't need to be, but it often is.  We get too bored to pay attention, and then decisions are made that affect our lives, for better or for worse.)

I might be done now.  I'm not as articulate as I'd like to be, still I think it's important.

Here's a profile shot of a cute goat for putting up with me.  (There are birds nesting right outside my window, in the roofline, I can see a blur of flight and hear the chirps as I write this.)

Picture of a goat, May/L Herlevi 2014