Explaining Math Jokes

Explaining math jokes

So yeah I said I was gonna do it and now is the time I think (if I wait any longer I'm gonna have too much jokes to explain) IMPORTANT: I had a lot of trouble writing this because I don't really know what background to assume the reader has. So at each new explanation, assumed background changes. Difficulty of the concepts explained is in no particular order. So if there is something you don't understand, that's fine, just go read something else. Dually, if there is something you already know well, don't throw away the whole post. Though it is very possible you already know everything I'm gonna rant about lol Anyways let's get to it

geometric group theory talk but on the speaker’s slide instead of the Cayley graph of the free group on two generators there’s just loss

(link) Geometric group theory is a subfield of math that studies groups using geometry. A particular geometric thing that is often interesting to study for a given group is its Cayley graph, which roughly speaking is a graph that reflects in a way the structure of the group. My neurodivergent brain thought the Calyey graph of the free group on two generators lowkey looks like the abstracted loss meme in the original post:

Explaining Math Jokes

sooo, turns out the #latex tag is not for typography enthusiasts

(link) LaTeX is a typesetting engine and the industry standard for math. It's the thing almost everyone uses to typeset beautiful math equations and stuff on computers. If you're seriously interested in math I'd recommend you learn it. A good place to start would be Overleaf which is a free online LaTeX editor and has some tutorials on how to get started, though eventually you may want to switch to doing LaTeX on your computer directly

so a homological algebraist goes to see their therapist and says “doc, i’ve got complexes”

(link) Homological algebra is a branch of algebra that was born from algebraic topology. It has become widely used in many parts of math because of the computational power it brings. The gist of it is that people define a thing called a chain complex, that is a sequence of abelian groups (or modules, or maybe something even more general, look up abelian categories), with homomorphisms from one abelian group to the next called differentials, such that doing one differential then the next always gives you zero:

Explaining Math Jokes

If you're more comfortable with linear algebra, you can replace "abelian group" with "vector space" and "homomorphism" by "linear map". The fact that doing one differential then the next gives you zero means that the image of one differential is contained in the kernel of the next. Homological algebra is about finding ways to calculate exactly how far away we are from the image of a differential being exactly the kernel of the next. This is made precise when one defines homology groups, which are the quotient Ker(d_n)/Im(d_{n+1}). What happens in practice when we apply homological algebra is that we try to define an interesting chain complex related to what we are doing, so that the homology groups tell us something interesting about what's going on with whatever math thing interests us, and then we apply methods from homological algebra to calculate them. Any serious example of homological algebra being used is going to require a bit of math background, but two examples I can give are singular homology, from algebraic topology, and de Rham cohomology, from differential geometry (don't worry about the co-, it just means the indices go up instead of down). So yeah a homological algebraist would have complexes

If you’re not careful and you noclip out of reality in the wrong areas, you’ll end up in Hilbert’s Hotel

(link) Hilbert's Hotel is an imaginary hotel with infinitely many rooms, that is one room labeled zero, one room labeled one, one room labeled two, and so on. One room for every natural number. It reminds me of the backrooms, hence the joke. Hilbert's hotel is commonly used as a metaphor to think about how infinity behaves and how bijections work. For instance, if the hotel was full, but one new guest showed up, you could still get them a room: simply tell the person occupying room number n to move to room number n+1. Then room 0 will be empty and the new guest can stay in it. However, quite interestingly, it is possible for too many guests to show up and the hotel to be unable to give a room to all of them.

If you speak French, excellent math youtuber El jj (I heavily recommend you subscribe to his channel!) has a very good video on Hilbert's Hotel.

If you don't speak French but still speak English, here's a Veritasium video on Hilbert's hotel, and a Ted-Ed video on it.

“cats are liquid” factoid actually formalized by mathematicians as saying a cat is only truly defined up to homeomorphism

(link) Topological spaces are mathematical objects that abstract away the concept of nearness. What do I mean? Well, a topological space is a set X, together with a collection of subsets called "a topology", that in way specifies which points are "near" each other. This allows us to generalize a lot of concepts from real analysis, for instance limits: if you have a sequence of points (x_n), and they get "nearer" and "nearer" to some point x, well that point can be called the limit of the sequence. But topology also turns out to be massively useful to geometry: if I only gave you the set of points of a sphere, you wouldn't know they make up a sphere because you wouldn't know how to assemble them. But if I give you the set of points of a sphere and the correct topology on it, then you can actually know it is a sphere and do stuff with it. But as always, in math, we only consider things up to some notion of being "the same". This notion of "the same" for topological spaces is called "homeomorphism", and two things being homeomorphic corresponds to the more intuitive geometric intuition of "I can continuously deform one thing into the other without cutting or gluing stuff". For instance, a cube is homeomorphic to a sphere:

Explaining Math Jokes

Or more famously, a mug is homeomorphic to a donut:

Explaining Math Jokes

So cats only truly being defined up to homeomorphism kinda works to say they're liquid. Not math, but physicist Marc-Antoine Fardin did actual physics on cats being liquid and was award the 2017 IgNobel prize in physics for it.

i would describe my body type as only defined up to homotopy equivalence

(link) Homotopy equivalence is a weaker notion of two topological spaces "being the same". I won't go into details but I have seen it being describe as kind of like a homeomorphism, but you are also allowed to inflate/deflate objects. For instance, a filled cube is a "3d object" in a way (when you are inside the cube, you can move in 3 directions). This means it will never be homeomorphic to a 2d square because a property of homeomorphisms is that they preserve dimensions. But, the cube is homotopy equivalent to the square, because you can "deflate" the cube and squish it to make it a square. In fact, it is even homotopy equivalent to a point (you can just deflate it completely). Homotopy equivalence is weaker (more permissive) than homeomorphism, that is if two things are homeomorphic, then they must be homotopy equivalent, but not the other way around. You may ask yourself why we would care about a notion weaker than homeomorphisms that can't even tell apart points and cubes, and that's a fair question. I will provide one answer but there are definitely many more I haven't even learned yet. In algebraic topology, we are concerned with studying spaces by attaching algebraic thingies to them. Why do we do that? Because telling apart spaces is hard. Think about it: how do you prove a donut is not homeomorphic to a sphere? You'd have to consider all possible deformations of a donut and show none of them is a sphere. This is mathematically hopeless. Algebraic topology solves this by attaching algebraic invariants to spaces. What do I mean? Well we have a way of saying that a donut has "one hole" and a sphere has "zero holes", and we have a theorem saying that if two things are homeorphic they must have the same number of holes (the number of holes is an invariant). Therefore we know that a donut cannot be homeomorphic to a sphere. Usually we have more sophisticated invariants (homotopy groups, homology groups, the cohomology ring, and other stuff) that are not just numbers but algebraic structures, but the same principle remains. It turns out a lot of these invariants are actually invariants for homotopy equivalence, that is, they will not be able to tell apart homotopy equivalent spaces. This is useful to know: for instance, a band and a Möbius band are both homotopic to a circle, so you know that if you want to tell them apart, you're going to need more than the classical algebraic invariants (if you know a bit of algebraic topology and you're curious about that, this can be done by thinking of them as vector bundles, but also through more elementary methods, see this stackexchange post). Also, if you want to calculate some invariants for a complicated space, a good place to start can be to try to find a less complicated space that is homotopy equivalent to the original space (and this is often doable since homotopy equivalence is a kind of weak notion).

in ‘Murica land of the free every module is born with a basis

(link) In 1st-year linear algebra, we study vector spaces over fields. But in more advanced linear algebra, we study modules over rings, which are basically vector spaces, but over rings instead of fields. It turns out dropping the condition that every non-zero scalar must be invertible makes the algebra much more complicated (and interesting!). When a module has a basis, we say it is free, hence the joke. If this basis is finite, we say that the module has finite rank, and the length of the basis is the rank of the module (exactly like dimension for vector spaces!), hence the tag "not every module ranks the same though".

testicular torsion? this wouldn’t happen over a field

(link) Continuing on modules, modules can sometimes have what is called torsion. Let's take Z-modules, or as you may know them, abelian groups! Indeed, a "vector space over Z" is actually the same as an abelian group: any module has an underlying abelian group (just forget you know how to scale elements) and conversely, if you take an abelian group, you know that any element a is supposed to be 1a, so 2a must be (1+1)a = 1a + 1a = a + a. More generally, for any positive integer n, n.a = a + ... + a, n times, and if n is negative, n.a = (-a) + ... + (-a), n times. So knowing how addition works actually tells us how Z must scale elements. With that out of the way, take the Z-module formed by the integers mod n, Z/nZ. It is an abelian group, so a Z-module, but something weird happens here that doesn't happen in a vector space: n.1 = 0. You can scale something, by a non-zero scalar (in fact a non-zero-divisor scalar), and still end up with 0. This is known as torsion, and vector spaces (modules over fields) don't have that. So yeah, testicular torsion? that wouldn't happen over a field. Also, watch out: the notion of torsion for a module over a ring is not necessarily the same as the notion of torsion for the underlying abelian group. Z/4Z doesn't have torsion, when seen as a Z/4Z-module.

Mathematical band names

(link) For these posts, I'll be quickly explaining each band name, and i'll be including good additions from other peeps! (with proper credit of course, you can't expect a wannabe-academic to not cite their sources) (also plagiarism is bad) (if no one is credit that means I thought of the band name)

Algebrasmith, The Smathing Pumpkins, System of an Equations, My Mathematical Romance, I Don't Know How But They Found X, Will Wood and the Tape Measures (by @dorothytheexplorothy), DECO*3^3 (by @associativeglassdesert), The Teach Boys, Dire Straight Lines, n Directions, XYZ Top, Mathallica: I have nothing to explain here

Rage against the Module: if you've read the parts of this post about modules, you get it (partly inspired by the commutative algebra class I'm taking right now, I love it, but I've been stuck on a problem for some time)

The pRofinite Stones: a profinite space is a topological space obtained by some process involving finite, discrete spaces. They are usually called Stone spaces, hence the joke

Mariah Cayley: Arthur Cayley was a mathematician. It's the same Cayley from the Cayley graphs! (also Cayley-Hamilton, if you've heard of the theorem)

Billie Eigen: eigenvalues and eigenvectors are linear algebra concepts. For a given operator on a space, its eigenvalues are scalars that tell us a lot about the operator. This is not my field but I have heard in quantum physics physical quantities like mass, speed, etc are replaced by operators, and eigenvalues correspond to states the physical system can be in

Smash Product: in algebraic topology/homotopy theory, the smash product is an operation on pointed topological spaces that is interesting for categorical purposes (it gives a symmetric monoidal category structure to the category of compactly generated pointed topological spaces, if you know what that means) somebody once told me, the world is categories

FOIL out boy (by @mathsbian): FOIL is a way of remembering how to expand products that some people learn. It means First, Outer, Inner, Last. So if you expand (a+b)(c+d) using FOIL, you get ac + ad + bc + bd.

Sheaf in a Birdcage (by @dorothytheexplorothy): a (pre)sheaf is a way of assigning algebraic data to a topological space (or a generalized notion of space). A presheaf is a sheaf if the data respects some locality condition. (pre)sheaves were introduced by Jean Leray but really used by Grothendieck to completely transform algebraic geometry, and are now widely used in modern geometry (they show up to abstract the notion of "a geometric thing"). I can't explain much more as I am still learning about sheaf theory!

The Curry-Howard correspondents (by @dorothytheexplorothy): the Curry-Howard correspondence, in logic/theoretical computer science, essentially says that algorithms (computer programs) correspond to mathematical (constructive) proofs. I'm no computer scientist or logician so I'll avoid saying dumb stuff by not trying to explain more, but I know it can be made more precise using lambda calculus.

Le(ast com)mon Demoninator (by @dorothytheexplorothy): I don't think I have to explain anything here (let's be honest, if you're reading this, you probably already know what a least common denominator is), but I will say that the band name being spoofed here is Lemon Demon (Neil Cicierega's musical project) and I love his music go listen to it. Also I love the word demoninator thank you for that dottie

Taylor Serieswift (by @associativeglassdesert): a Taylor series is an infinite sum that approximates a nice-enough (analytic) function around a point. This is useful because the Taylor series only depends on the derivatives of the function at one point but can approximate its behavior on more that one point, and also because the Taylor series is a power series, so a more tractable kind of function. In particular if we truncate it, that is stop at some term, we get a polynomial that approximates our function well around a point, and polynomials are very nice to work with (this is where kinda cursed stuff you may have seen in physics like sin(x) = x or tan(x) = x comes from!)

mxmmatrix (by @associativeglassdesert): you may have heard a matrix is a table of numbers. Actually, it's much more than that. Matrices are secretly functions! In fact, very special kind of functions (linear maps) between very special kind of objects (finite-dimensional vector spaces). And if you've seen how to multiply matrices before but have not been told why we do it that way, be not afraid, there is actually an answer. The answer is that when we take some x, do one linear map f to get f(x), then another linear map g to get g(f(x)), we actually end up with a new linear map, gf. And if you take a matrix representing f and multiply it (left) by a matrix representing g, you get a matrix representing gf. This is why the matrix product is done like that: it's actually composition of functions! If this interests you, consider reading more about abstract linear algebra.

Ring Starr (by @associativeglassdesert): a ring is an algebraic structure. Take the integers. What can we do with them? We can add them together, addition is associative (when adding a bunch of stuff we don't need parentheses), commutative (a+b = b+a), we have zero that doesn't do anything when adding (a+0 = a), and we have opposites: for any integer a, we have another integer -a such that (a + (-a) = 0). But we also have multiplication: multiplication is associative (no need for parentheses again), commutative, we have 1 and multiplying by 1 doesn't do anything, and multiplication distributes over addition. Now, re-read what I just said but replace "integer" by "real number". Or "complex number". When seeing such similar behavior by different things (there are in fact many more examples that those I just gave), mathematicians are compelled to abstract away and imagine rings. A ring is a set of stuff, with some way to add the stuff and some way to multiply the stuff that satisfies the properties I talked about above. Sometimes we also drop some properties, for instance we allow multiplication to not be commutative (ab =/= ba). By allowing this, square matrices of a given dimension form a ring! Quaternions, if you know what they are, also form a ring. A lot of things are rings. Rings are cool. Learn about rings.

WLOGic (by @associativeglassdesert): WLOG is mathematician speak for "without loss of generality".

Alice and Bob Cooper: in many math problems, people are called Alice and Bob. Because A and B. Yes there is a Wikipedia page for this

The four Toposes: a topos is a kind of category meant to resemble a topological space. Grothendieck toposes are used in algebraic geometry and elementary topoi are used in logic. I can't explain more since I don't really know anything about topoises besides that they are kinda scary and that people really like to argue about what the plural of "topos" should be

Green-Tao Day: the Green-Tao theorem says that if you have a positive integer n, then you can find prime numbers p1, p2, ..., pn, such that they are evenly spaced (or equivalently, in an arithmetic progression). It's pretty neat. I have no idea how the proof goes, though. It must be pretty complicated, since it was proven in 2004.

Aut(Kast)/Inn(Kast): I'm really proud of that one. So if you have a group G, you can look at bijective group homomorphisms from G to G, or as they are more well-known, automorphisms of G. Together with composition, they form a group, called Aut(G). Now we already know of some automorphisms of G: if g is any element of G, then x ↦ gxg^{-1} is an automorphism of G (proof is left as an exercise to the tumblr). These automorphisms are called inner automorphisms of G, and they form a normal subgroup of Aut(G). The quotient group Aut(G)/Inn(G) is called the outer automorphisms of G and denoted Out(G), which is reason behind the band name.

Depeche modulo: modulo is a math word that means "up to [some notion of being the same]". For instance the integers modulo 7 are the integers but we declare that two integers a and b are the same if 7 divides a-b. From there we get modular arithmetic which you may have heard of. This kind of operation is called a quotient and is insanely useful in all branches of mathematics.

Phew! We're done with the band names. For now.

"oh you like math? what's 1975 times 7869?" well that's a great question Jimmy but to answer it first I need to construct the natural numbers. [...]

(link) So this is a post about a type of response math people get when they say they do math which is that people automatically assume this give us insane mental math power. It does not. The rest of the post is about constructing the natural numbers in the ZFC axiomatic system. I'm kinda lazy and don't want to get into all that but here's a good video by certified good math channel Another Roof about it: what IS a number? The same channel has several other videos on that same topic, go watch em if you're interested

1957 times 7869 (IF IT EVEN EXISTS) is the universal object with morphisms into 1957 and 7869

This is a joke by @dorothytheexplorothy in the notes of the previous post. The joke here comes from interpreting "times" are referring to the categorical notion of product. I'm actually not gonna explain anything here because 1) this post is taking forever to write and 2) I will probably rant about category theory in the future. Here are two videos by Oliver Lugg you can watch:

27 Unhelpful Facts About Category Theory (funni video)

A Sensible Introduction to Category Theory (serius video)

and here are two books you can use to learn more if you're interested:

Seven Sketches in Compositionality (very applied, very nice, I think easy to read)

Basic Category Theory (less applied, is a typical math book)

she overfull on my \hbox till i (5.40884pt too wide)

(link) This she on my till i joke is based on a LaTeX warning you get when it can't figure out how to typeset your document well and that leads to a margin being exceeded.

Time for the math battle reblog chain

(half of the posts are by @dorothytheexplorothy)

fuck you *forgets your group is a group and only remembers it's a set now*

So any group has an underlying set, and any group homomorphism is actually a map between these underlying sets. This means that the operation of "forgetting a group is a group and only remembering it's a set" is a functor. This is less useless than you might think, because of adjunctions.

two can play at that game *constructs a free group over this set, even bigger and better than the one I had*

So basically in lots of cases the functor that forgets some structure is (right) adjoint to some other functor. You do not need to know exactly what this means to read the rest, don't worry. What it means is basically that from the operation of forgetting some structure, we can get another operation, which adds structure, in a "natural" way. In the case of forgetting a group is a group and only remembering it's a set, the adjoint functor is the "free group" functor, that takes a set and constructs the free group on it. This idea of free objects works not just for groups but for a whole lotta stuff. See this part of the Wikipedia page on forgetful functors for some information.

oh don't get me started *abelianizes your free group, now it's just a big direct sum of Z's*

A non-abelian group can be turned into one through abelianization, which is quotienting out by the commutator subgroup. This makes sense: commutativity is asking ab = ba for all a, b, which is asking aba^{-1} b^{-1} = 1 for all a, b, which is precisely what we get when quotienting by the subgroup generated by words of the form aba^{-1} b^{-1}. Abelianization is also a functor, so it fits the theme. The abelianization of a free group is a free abelian group, and a free abelian group is a direct sum of a bunch of copies of Z.

big mistake, friend *moves over to the endomorphism group over that group and treating composition as multiplication, thus replacing it with a unital ring*

The endomorphism group of an abelian group is actually a ring (like in linear algebra, endomorphisms form a unital ring with composition as multiplication). I don't think this construction is functorial, though? (correct me if I'm wrong on that. correct me if I'm wrong on anything, really. if i'm wrong about stuff send me an ask and i'll fix it)

you fool, you fell right into my trap! *takes the field of fractions of your ring* have fun working in the category of fields! now you only have monomorphisms and your eyes to shed tears

So I thought I had the advantage here because fields are, categorically speaking, very bad. This is (I think) mainly because a homormorphism of fields is always injective (so is a monomorphism, that is left-cancellable). In fact, products of fields don't exist, direct sum of fields don't exist, a lot of categorical constructions we usually like don't exist in this category. We basically only have inclusions. I will elaborate on why I was wrong in my post here in a bit

fuckkk idk enough about schemes or whatever to get out of this! you've bested me X(

Schemes are the main objects of study of algebraic geometry. I won't being to try and explain what they are because it is very abstract and I don't even really understand the definition (yet). I just know they're algebraic geometer's analogue of a "geometric object", like how smooth manifolds are to a differential geometer.

wait actually I just realized the ring of endomorphisms of a free abelian group has no business being an integral domain, or even commutative. so I think taking the field of fractions makes no sense, and I actually lost the battle.

So the field of fractions construction only makes sense for integral domains. The name of this construction is really explicit: passing from an integral domain to its field of fractions is the same thing as passing from Z to Q, or from k[X] to k(X) if you know what that is. However I made a mistake, since the ring we were talking about is almost never commutative (much like matrices).

WON ON A TECHNICALITY LET'S GOOOOO

well played, dottie

yeah, uh, we oidified your boyfriend. yeah we took his core concept and horizontally categorified it. yeah he's (or they're?) a many-object version of himself now. sorry about your one-object boyfriendoid

(link) Oidification (also known as horizontal categorification but "oidification" sounds funnier) is a way of categorifying a concept, by turning it in a "many-object" version of itself. For instance, a one-object category is precisely a monoid, so the concept of category is the oidification of the concept of a monoid. A category where every morphism is invertible is called a groupoid, and a one-object groupoid is precisely a group. The name "oidification" probably comes from the fact that after being oidified, the name of the concept gets added the suffix -oid. So a category is a monoidoid. In fact, you can even have monoidal monoidoids. Category theory really is well-suited to shitposting huh

My advisor [...] stared into my soul and noticed I liked categories. It's over for me, i am going to end up a homotopy theorist, or worse, a youtuber

(link) Category theory has the reputation of being abstract nonsense. I don't disagree. I guess I have a slightly-above-average tolerance to category theory and algebra. This has led to a not-insignificant amount of people in my life telling me I'm gonna end up in one of the abstract-nonsense-related fields like homotopy theory, infinity-category theory, etc. The "or worse, a youtuber" part was stolen from the following quote

Research shows that when someone becomes personally invested in an idea, they can become very close-minded. Or worse, a youtuber.

-hbomberguy, Vaccines and Autism: A Measured Response (4:12)

(this video is incredible, if you haven't seen it yet, go watch it)

PHEW.

I'm done. For now. This took multiple hours to write. I hope you enjoyed this post! If you enjoyed it, please let me know! If you have any questions or want to tell me "youre doing good lad" or want to yell at me, my asks are open! Thank you for reading this far! If there is a post I talked about here you found funny, you can click on the (link) to look at the original post. Give me those sweet sweet statistics. I crave them. I NEED that dopamine hit of knowing someone interacted with my blog. ok bye

More Posts from Middlering and Others

4 months ago

the craziest part is how it ends with the prototype local hero theme


Tags
2 months ago

I'm boggled. This isn't the same thing as in the letter, is it?

A panel from Tintin in Tibet, showing Tchang's name carved into a rock in both Chinese characters and the Latin alphabet.

Thank you so much for the ask!! Good job on spotting the difference!

Posting the letter again for reference:

I'm Boggled. This Isn't The Same Thing As In The Letter, Is It?

So you're right, on the rock it reads 張仲仁 (Cheung Chong Yan in standard cantonese romanisation), while on the envelope the name is 張仲文 (Cheung Chong Man). Hergé’s real life Chinese friend is 張充仁 (Cheung Chong Yan), so the romanisation would be the same as the name in your ask. 

HOWEVER, those are just romanisations (which are less accurate but easier for foreigners to pronounce). Their actual pronunciations in cantonese (spoken in Hong Kong) / mandarin (spoken in mainland China including Shanghai) are different:

張充仁 = Tcheung Chong Yun* / Zhang Chongren

張仲文 = Tcheung Tchong Mun / Zhang Zhongwen

張仲仁 = Tcheung Tchong Yun / Zhang Zhongren 

* 'Tch-' is similar to J sound; '-ong' is OW-ng; '-un' as in under

As you can see, there’s a bit of a mix and match. But I think it makes sense to change the first word in his given name into 仲 given that the story says Chang is from HK, because we seldom use 充 in our names (perhaps more common in mainland China, not 100% sure). 

Another fun fact for you on the meanings of those given names~ 

充 = full of

仲 = still be (only in cantonese)

仁 = love for all beings/ benevolence

文 = cultured/ gentle

Both 仁 and 文 are commonly used here across different generations and genders. So I think both translations are pretty nice!!

Also, I just spotted that the stamps in the top right corner are of Queen Elizabeth II and King George VI:

I'm Boggled. This Isn't The Same Thing As In The Letter, Is It?
I'm Boggled. This Isn't The Same Thing As In The Letter, Is It?

Not so good at maintaining consistency but good attention to detail, I must say :)


Tags
4 months ago

Morten Morland (@mortenmorland) gives Nick Clegg and Chris Huhne the cartoon-test

“It’s simple, really. If a person is easy to draw, he’ll do well [in politics]. Because the likelihood is he’ll have other interesting characteristics too, which will make him appealing to journalists, thus raising the party’s profile in the media. And people watching are more likely to remember him, which is a bonus!

A quick cartoon-test shows that Nick Clegg, probably the favourite in the party at the moment, will lead the party into eternal oblivion, if elected. He is Mr. Some Bloke embodified – despite the fact that he can speak several languages.

I did a couple of quick sketches, and worringly for him, the best caricature came after I in frustration drew a lifeless mask.

People will see Nick Clegg on TV and wonder whether he’s that guy from marketing whose name they can’t recall – or someone they’ve met at All Bar One.

Chris Huhne on the other hand, is better. Not great, but better. He’s got a prominent crazy eye – a feature that he famously shares with both Maggie and Tony. His mouth is similar to that of a hamster…or a mouse, and remember, those ears will keep growing.

Between Clegg and Huhne, there really is no contest.”

In full here: http://poldraw.wordpress.com/2007/10/15/lib-dems-insist-on-having-an-election/


Tags
2 months ago

Sorrow

It is another kind of sorrow,

To watch the words that have once played with you -

Run away,

Afraid,

For they cannot bear the burden

Of your heavy heart.


Tags
4 months ago

fields of mathematics

number theory: The Queen of Mathematics, in that it takes a lot from other fields and provides little in return, and people are weirdly sentimental about it.

combinatorics: Somehow simultaneously the kind of people who get really excited about Martin Gardner puzzles and very serious no-nonsense types who don’t care about understanding why something is true as long as they can prove that it’s true.

algebraic geometry: Here’s an interesting metaphor, and here’s several thousand pages of work fleshing it out.

differential geometry: There’s a lot of really cool stuff built on top of a lot of boring technical details, but they frequently fill entire textbooks or courses full of just the boring stuff, and they seem to think students will find this interesting in itself rather than as a necessary prerequisite to something better. So there’s definitely something wrong with them.

category theory: They don’t really seem to understand that the point of generalizing a result is so that you can apply it to other situations.

differential equations: physicists

real analysis: What if we took the most boring parts of a proof and just spent all our time studying those?

point-set topology: See real analysis, but less relevant to the real world.

complex analysis: Sorcery. I thought it seemed like sorcery because I didn’t know much about it, but then I learned more, and now the stuff I learned just seems like sorcery that I know how to do.

algebraic topology: Some of them are part of a conspiracy with category theorists to take over mathematics. I’m pretty sure that most algebraic topologists aren’t involved in that, but I don’t really know what else they’re up to.

functional analysis: Like real analysis but with category theorists’ generalization fetish.

group theory: Probably masochists? It’s hard to imagine how else someone could be motivated to read a thousand-page paper, let alone write one.

operator algebras: Seems cool but I can’t understand a word of it, so I can’t be sure they’re not just bullshitting the whole thing.

commutative/homological algebra: Diagram chases are of the devil, and these people are his worshipers.


Tags
2 months ago

"Tintin, quel âge as-tu ?"

Today marks 96 years of The Adventures of Tintin, and readers have spent at least the last 78 of those years asking the same question: "How old is Tintin?"

The series is infamously coy about giving a definite answer, as was its creator, but I argue in the first part of this post that 1) there was indeed a specific intended age range for Tintin and 2) it is very much possible, using evidence from many different sources including the albums themselves, Tintin magazine, other BDs of the time, and interviews with Hergé, to say exactly what that age range was. Let me be very clear: I'm specifically making an argument about how old Hergé saw him as and how old Hergé wanted him to be seen as.

The second part is less concrete; it presents how a few scholars have interpreted the ambiguity of Tintin's age, plus some of my own thoughts about it that build on their claims. That part is less trying to find an answer to the age question and more trying to explain why his age is so much in question.

This is a long post.

I. Intent

Official sources

When asked about Tintin's age in a 1960 interview for Cinq colonnes à la une, Hergé judged that "il doit rester aux environs de quinze ans" ("he must still be around 15 years old," 0:33-0:44).

In 1962, he gave a very similar response on the Canadian program Premier Plan: "Une quinzaine d'années ? Quinze ans, seize ans, je ne sais pas, moi" ("About 15? 15, 16, I don't know"). "Donc c'est l'adolescent" ("So he's a teenager"), pursues the interviewer, and Hergé answers with a firm yes.

Nearly ten years later, in 1970, he added some nuance: "What age do I give him? I don't know... 17? In my mind, he was about 14 or 15 when I created him, a Boy Scout, and he practically hasn't budged. Let's say that he's picked up three or four years in forty years... All right, let's take the average: 15 plus 4, 19." (translation mine)

In 1979, his interviewer on Apostrophes preempted him on the age question, saying that "c'est un reporter de quinze ans" ("he's a 15-year-old reporter"). Hergé agreed: "C'est ça, à peu près" ("That's right, more or less").

Today, the official Tintin website run by Moulinsart declares him to be "Seize, dix-sept ans (dix-huit tout au plus !)," that is, "16, 17 years old (18 at most!)."

Responses to reader questions in the Journal Tintin

Early in the Journal Tintin's run, between 1946 and 1954, readers who wrote in with questions had a chance to see the responses to their letters published in the magazine each week. Supposedly it would be Tintin himself who was answering - questions addressed to him would be answered in first person, which probably only increased the urge to ask about personal details. So there were naturally many questions about his age, which provoked a range of responses.

Who was actually answering the letters? It's hard to say. But seeing as the responses were being published in the official Tintin Magazine as the voice of Tintin himself, Hergé would surely have been at least consulted on questions concerning his character, especially as the team running the magazine was still very small when it was regularly publishing responses.

The most common response was to dodge the question entirely. The stock phrases were "Qu'importe mon âge ?" and "Tintin n'a pas d'âge !" ("What does my age matter?" "Tintin has no age!").

In a small number of cases they related Tintin's age to that of his readers; an 11 1/2 year old was told that Tintin can be "l'âge que tu souhaites : entre dix et vingt ans !" ("whatever age you want: between 10 and 20!", 1953), and for a couple others, where the age of the writer wasn't listed, Tintin's age is "un peu plus que le tien" ("a little older than you," 1951) or "un peu moins que le double du tien" ("a little less than twice your age," 1950). The target audience of the Journal Tintin - as it was for the Petit Vingtième, and for comics magazines of the time generally - was 8-15 year olds.

The only definite answer that appeared with regularity put Tintin's age between 15 and 20:

J. MEUTER, Châtelineau. -- Comme je l'ai déjà dit à plusieurs de mes amis, je suis âgé de plus de 15 et de moins de 20 ans. "Le Secret de l'Espadon" est -- grâce au Ciel -- une histoire entièrement imaginaire. Bonne poignée de main.
GUILLAUME JANINE, Namur. -- J'ai tellement voyagé que je ne sais plus en quel pays je suis né. Mon âge ? Mettons quinze ans... ou un peu plus. "Jo, Zette et Jocko" paraîtront en album dans quelques mois.
VERLEYEN ANDRE, Bruxelles. -- Tous les résultats des concours ont paru ou paraîtront en leur tempps. Quant à savoir où je suis né, ma foi je ne m'en souviens plus; j'ai tant voyagé. Mon âge ? Entre quinze et vingt ans.
TINTIN, QUEL AGE AS-TU ?
C'est une question que nous a été posée des centaines de fois ! A le voir évoluer, il paraît avoir une quinzaine d'années. Et pourtant notre ami -- et Milou par la même occasion -- vient d'atteindre tranquillement -- façon de parler, bien entendu -- sa majorité. Parfaitement !
LILY PORTUGALS de Ans. -- Ta longue lettre m'est bien parvenue. Je réponds ci-dessous à tes questions. Je n'ai pas encore 20 ans mais j'ai plus de 15 ans. Monsieur Tournesol est, dans la réalité, comme le représentent les dessins de Hergé. Je crains fort que sa surdité soit inguérissable. Tu te trompes en croyant que Milou a perdu le pouvoir de la parole. Relis attentivement les dernières planches du "Temple du Soleil" et tu t'apercevras de ton erreur. Amitiés.

(TIntin nos. 19, May 8, 1947; 26, June 26, 1947; 6, February 5, 1948; 2, January 12, 1950; 9, February 27, 1947. The second and third examples also have Tintin declare that "I've travelled so much that I no longer remember where I was born," a fine example of the de-Belgicanization he underwent after the early years.)

("As I've already told several of my friends, I'm older than 15 but younger than 20." (1947) "My age? Let's say 15… or a little older." (1947) "My age? Between 15 and 20 years old." (1948) "Tintin? He has no age! Seeing him move about, he seems to be about 15." (1950) "I'm not yet 20 but I'm older than 15." (1947))

Real-life incarnations of Tintin

When the end of Soviets was celebrated with "Tintin" arriving at the Gare du Nord in Brussels, the role was played by 15-year-old Lucien Pepermans. When the event was repeated for the end of Congo, two years later, Pepermans was replaced by Henri Dendoncker, age 14. About thirty years after that, Jean-Pierre Talbot was declared Tintin's spitting image at 16 ("Same age, same silhouette, same face, same hair," reads the announcement of his casting in the Journal Tintin). He was 20 at most when Blue Oranges (released 1964) was filmed. Hergé told Numa Sadoul that he unconsciously based Tintin in Soviets on his younger brother Paul, who was 16 when it started. Additionally, Palle Huld, often cited as an inspiration for Tintin, completed a tour of the world in 44 days in 1928 at age 15 (and in plus-fours).

"Tintin, Quel âge As-tu ?"
"Tintin, Quel âge As-tu ?"
"Tintin, Quel âge As-tu ?"
"Tintin, Quel âge As-tu ?"

(Lucien Pepermans, Henri Dendoncker, Jean-Pierre Talbot, Palle Huld)

In the play Tintin et le mystère du diamant bleu (1941), which Hergé was very involved in the writing and production of, the role of Tintin was played by Mlle. Jeanne Rubens, a woman - a common theater trick for portraying young boys. He was played by a woman again in Radio Luxembourg's 1950s audio adaptations: Claude Vincent, "qui interprétait à merveille les rôles d’enfants et d’adolescents" ("who played children's and adolescents' roles wonderfully"), was the voice of Tintin. Sadly those broadcasts appear to be lost, but she can still be heard in the likely similar role of Alix.

"Tintin, Quel âge As-tu ?"

(Shared on forum-tintinophile.com, "Tintin aux Indes, ou le mystère du diamant bleu." Certainly the only adaptation that got his height difference with the Thompsons right.)

In 1959, the Journal Tintin invited readers who thought they looked like Tintin to send in their pictures; five candidates for "Tintin's lookalike" were chosen by the magazine and presented to the readers for them to vote on. The winner was a 15-year-old, and while the ages of the other contestants aren't listed, they appear to be the same age or younger.

"Tintin, Quel âge As-tu ?"
"Tintin, Quel âge As-tu ?"

(Tintin nos. 25, June 24, 1959 & 31, August 5, 1959)

Comparisons with contemporary characters

Mainstream BD in the first half of the 20th century was not particularly inventive, especially as it was contending with its relative youth as a medium, a focus on the children's market, and, especially after WWII, heavy scrutiny from both religious and secular moral watchdogs. In the specific case of the Journal Tintin, Hergé's iron-fisted artistic direction in the early years led to a high level of artistic homogeneity across the magazine, while restrictions on the types of stories that could be told (from both the threat of censors and expectations about reader interests) limited variety in plots, characters, and settings.

All that is to say that a lot of what was being published alongside Tintin in the 40s and 50s looked more or less like Tintin, and even was likely directly modeled on it, which makes it useful for comparison. The protagonists of the time can be generally divided by age into children, the "15-20" range, young men, and middle-aged men. Each category is visually distinct (comics are a visual medium!) and each results in a slightly different kind of story with different character dynamics.

Here's Tintin with a couple of the teenage protagonists that appeared alongside him in his magazine:

"Tintin, Quel âge As-tu ?"
"Tintin, Quel âge As-tu ?"
"Tintin, Quel âge As-tu ?"

(L'Affaire Tournesol (1956), p. 51; La Griffe Noire, Tintin no. 6, February 5, 1958; Les Deux Visages de Kid Ordinn, Tintin no. 1, January 2, 1957)

Hergé's no. 2 collaborator Jacques Martin created Alix (center, 1948), a Roman Gaul confirmed to be 16 in the original albums. Chick Bill (right, 1955), who in looks and narrative role is effectively just Tintin as a cowboy, is identified (by none other than Franquin) with the 15-20 age range. Some shared visual markers of their youth are a short and slight build, rounded shoulders, a round head, and a soft jawline. While all very independent, they are all three semi-accompanied by a much older man and a child sidekick.

Now, here are some examples of characters from the next age range up:

"Tintin, Quel âge As-tu ?"
"Tintin, Quel âge As-tu ?"
"Tintin, Quel âge As-tu ?"

(L'énigmatique Monsieur Barelli, Tintin no. 44, November 2, 1950; L'ouragan de feu, Tintin (Kuifje) no. 37, September 15, 1960; Défi à Ric Hochet, Tintin (Kuifje) no. 8, February 25, 1964)

Hergé's no. 1 collaborator Bob de Moor had a humor-adventure series using the same style as Hergé, but his character, stage actor Georges Barelli (left, 1950), is a grown man. Martin's second series was required by publishers to somehow be a modern AU of Alix, but Alix's counterpart, reporter in the same way that Tintin is a reporter Guy Lefranc (center, 1952), is clearly older than him. So-called reporter, really amateur detective Ric Hochet (yes, that's his name, right, 1955) is kind of an odd case; he started out a child, then looked basically exactly like Chick Bill (they were both drawn by the same artist, Tibet), then finally settled into his final form as a young man in his mid-twenties - a 1969 album places him at age 26. All three own their own cars (admittedly a moot point for Alix and Chick), and, compared to their teenage counterparts, they're much more likely to have friends and colleagues their own age instead of being supervised by someone older.

It should be clear from these six pictures that Tintin was not drawn in a way meant to make readers think he was an adult. And besides, there's really no reason to believe that Hergé, who once declared that "my primary objective is to be legible. The rest follows," would have chosen to give his main and titular character an appearance that was somehow deceptive. I'm prepared to say with confidence that Tintin looks young because he's supposed to be seen as young.

Textual evidence

For this section, I first look at a few ways that the albums actively present Tintin as a non-adult character. However, most of what follows is about showing that what happens in the albums does not contradict the argument that Tintin is intended to be a teenager. The Adventures of Tintin may be deceptively timeless, but not only is the series nearly a century old, it also was written during a time of extremely rapid and intense social, cultural, and technological change. Consequently, I want to make sure that I'm not judging the past with the attitudes of the present; in order to put the series in its proper context, I try to identify viewpoints and conventions expressed in texts created at the same time (and, when possible, by the same author) to see if a teenaged Tintin fits in with them.

In looking over how other characters refer to him across the albums, one sees that Tintin's most distinctive feature to those around him is his youth. This is, I think, more visible in the original French, where other characters address or describe him with a whole array of words commonly used for children: jeune homme, (jeune) garçon, gamin, galopin, blanc-bec, enfant de choeur, fiston, freluquet, moussaillon, (mon) petit (used as a noun), and morveux, not to mention many, many instances of characters appending "jeune" or "petit" to another word ("reporter," for instance). In English, he's variously (a) young man, (young) boy, kid, boyo, whippersnapper, wonderboy, lad, brat, puppy, young fellow-me-lad, and cabin-boy, along with liberal use of the corresponding adjectives "young" and "little." (I've collected specific panel examples for reference in another post.)

As @professorcalculusstanaccount has pointed out, there's no question of Tintin being called up for the draft as Haddock is in Black Gold; that album also contains the only example of Tintin's competency being questioned because of his age, on page 7: "So you're the new radio officer... You look a bit young to me..." (There's one similar remark, in America, after Tintin is injured in a car accident on page 6: "The poor kid..." "He looks so young...") Him not being called to war is particularly striking because Belgium historically required young men to do compulsory military service at age 18 or 19, after which they would be enrolled in the reserve army (p. 274). Thanks to a hard-to-translate joke in the original French for Emerald (below), we know that military service exists in Tintin's world and that the Thompsons have done theirs; Hergé did his at age 19, and then was called up from the reserves in 1939, interrupting the magazine publication of, precisely, Black Gold. Given his longtime anti-war stance and the peace sign sticker he wears in Picaros, though, one can easily imagine Tintin becoming a conscientious objector after it was legalized in 1964 - but by 1964, most of the series was already over.

"Tintin, Quel âge As-tu ?"

(Les Bijoux de la Castafiore, p. 37)

He also doesn't dress like an adult: the plus-fours look very childish after the 1930s, as @illegally-blind-and-deaf pointed out. He also never wears a proper hat, only a flat cap in a few early adventures, and from Temple on (that is, after 1948) he runs around in his shirt and sweater with no tie or jacket. Some of that can be put down to the importance Hergé placed on his characters being maximally recognizable, but it certainly doesn't make Tintin look any older - look at a few of Hergé's crowd scenes and compare how the background characters are dressed.

Next, he doesn't seem to ever need to shave. In fact, in the original French for Black Island, Tintin remarks that the bad guys have gotten away "à mon nez et à ma barbe," an expression equivalent in English to "right under my nose" but literally "at my nose and at my beard," to which Snowy incredulously responds "Your beard? What beard?"

"Tintin, Quel âge As-tu ?"

(L'Île Noire, p. 29)

It's true that nearly everyone who meets Tintin, including his adult friends, addresses him respectfully with the formal pronoun "vous" instead of with the informal "tu," as you typically would for someone much younger than you. However, Pierre Assouline attributes this to a dislike of over-familiarity on Hergé's part, citing him as saying that "Le tutoiement est la fausse monnaie de l'amitié" ("Using 'tu' is the counterfeit money of friendship").

(There are a few moments where Haddock slips and uses tu with Tintin, but I won't go into them here. Suffice to say that the majority of them are indeed moments where he's treating Tintin more as a child.)

Much has been made of Tintin's nonchalance about drinking alcohol as proof of adulthood, but evidence from other BDs indicates that this perception is a result of a shift away from historically looser attitudes towards drinking. Early comics for children frequently carried moralizing messages, but there's no marked moralizing present around youths drinking like there is around them smoking.

Compare, for example, the difference in tone between these two Quick & Flupke pages, where the kids are sternly warned off from tobacco...

"Tintin, Quel âge As-tu ?"
"Tintin, Quel âge As-tu ?"

(Originally published in Le Petit Vingtième nos. 4, January 28, 1932 & 43, October 24, 1935)

...Versus this gag, where Flupke's own relatives getting him drunk on New Year's over his protests is played entirely for humor.

"Tintin, Quel âge As-tu ?"
"Tintin, Quel âge As-tu ?"

(Le Petit Vingtième no. 1, January 3, 1935. "Tu es un homme et tu dois boire!")

There was even a follow-up comic at the same time the year after, in which Flupke imagines the alcohol he'll be plied with on January 1st and attempts to move to the North Pole to avoid it.

If a kid as young as Flupke is being given alcohol, then Tintin really doesn't have to be much older to be drinking as well. In fact, one might even note an echo between Flupke's reluctance to drink here and Tintin's in Picaros, when he's pressured to take a swig of whisky by Arumbaya custom (p. 34). On the other hand, since Quick and Flupke are so young, the ban on smoking is stronger for them. Tintin is old enough to occasionally be offered a cigarette, but still young enough that he always must refuse: Hergé was adamant that Tintin remain a good model because of the children who identified with him, while Haddock smoking his pipe, for example, never raised the same issue.

Beyond that, for a non-Hergé example and a later one (from 1960), here's child tennis prodigy Jari, hero of an eponymous strip in the Journal Tintin. He's just bicycled from Belgium to the Netherlands and wants a refreshment, so he goes to a drink stand and orders a beer - and no one bats an eye. Similarly, the only alcohol that Tintin orders casually, in a cafe or pub, is beer (Golden Claws p. 2, Black Island p. 41).

"Tintin, Quel âge As-tu ?"

(Jari et le Plan Z, Tintin (Kuifje) no. 40, October 6, 1960)

At the same time, this relaxed attitude has limits. Tintin won't share a friendly drink with Haddock, for example when returning to Marlinspike after an excursion (though Haddock pours two glasses anyway in Affair (p. 3)). Calculus scolds Haddock severely when he thinks that Haddock has given Tintin champagne at breakfast in Tibet (p. 4: "Vous avez bien tort de lui faire boire du champagne de grand matin, à ce garçon !…"). Later in that same album, Haddock drunkenly warns Tintin against alcohol, telling him it's "very bad for young people like you!" (p. 38).

Next, while Tintin is undeniably capable of driving a car, there's actually no indication outside of the earliest stories that he can legally drive. (A quick Google search also tells me that Belgium has historically been notoriously lax on road safety.) At no point after the first four albums - that is, after Hergé became interested in telling a story that makes logical sense, a development typically placed at Blue Lotus - does Tintin drive a car that was acquired legally, not commandeered or outright stolen. (In Soviets and Congo he buys a car; in Cigars he drives the two Rajaijah victims to the asylum, though I doubt anyone was worried about him getting pulled over in the jungle.) On the few occasions where there isn't an emergency, it's always Haddock who drives; see for example Crystal Balls or the few pages of Thérmozéro. When Tintin finally gets a vehicle of his own, in Picaros, it's... a motorbike, which one can get a license for at a younger age than for a car. And in Alph-Art, where the motorbike plays a much larger role, Haddock still drives Tintin into town (p. 25) - and then gets left in the car while Tintin investigates!

Hergé also apparently didn't think flying a plane was particularly difficult. In Jo et Zette, one of his other series, Hergé has little Jo be able to fly his father's "Stratonef" and even land it from a glide, despite only ever hearing his father talk about how to fly it. Over the course of the two-part story (Le Testament de M. Pump and Destination New-York), Jo manages multiple successful flights - more than Tintin ever does! - despite unambiguously being a child.

"Tintin, Quel âge As-tu ?"

(Destination New-York, p. 41)

And as with the cars, every plane Tintin ever flies is stolen, so whether he has a legal license or not really doesn't matter.

The same goes for his guns. In all but the first albums and Ear where, surprised in his flat, he really does pull a revolver out of nowhere, Tintin's guns are explicitly either given to him or taken from a disarmed enemy. The series doesn't make a point of him owning and carrying his own gun - just the opposite. And while it seems to us now that Tintin has a lot of firearm use for a children's comic, proficiency with guns was honestly a genre expectation for all adventure heroes of the time (just don't put a gun on your cover). For example, Chang, who from his introduction on acts like a second Tintin, wields a pistol at the end of Lotus and is even implied to be the one who makes the shot that breaks Didi's sword despite appearing even younger than Tintin. (See also the previous section of this post; Chick Bill is carrying a gun in the picture I included.) What's more, the gunplay in Tintin is actually a step down from its predecessor Totor, where Hergé's titular Boy Scout kills a man with a rifle shot to the face.

In short, Tintin is able to do a lot of things he shouldn't legally be able to do by simply not doing them legally.

The fact that Tintin lives alone isn't necessarily a mark of maturity either. It's hardly uncommon for a young adventure protagonist to be unusually unsupervised; it's effectively a demand of the genre. Hergé learned why that is from experience when he created Jo et Zette for the editor of the French, ultra-Catholic children's magazine Coeurs Vaillants, who had raised concerns about how unrealistic Tintin was. In Hergé's own (translated) words:

Zette, et Jocko. The top management of the magazine told me, "Your Tintin, you know, he's fine, we like him OK. But he doesn't earn a living, he doesn't go to school, he has no parents, he doesn't eat, he doesn't sleep... This is not very logical. Couldn't you create a little character whose father would have a job, who would have a mother, a sister, a little pet?" I had a few toys at home that I'd been using for an advertising job and, among them, there was a monkey named "Jocko." From this I created a new family, just to satisfy these gentlemen's request at Coeurs Vaillants, thinking that they might actually be right.
HERGE: It was in two colors, red and black. But it was no cakewalk! First I had to give the father a profession, a profession which would make him travel. OK, engineer could work. But in addition, this dad and mom spent most of their time sobbing and wondering about the fate of their children, who were constantly running off in all directions. So I had to make the whole family travel: it was exhausting! I gave up. Tintin, at least, is free! Lucky Tintin... It reminds me of a saying from Jules Renard: "Not everyone can be an orphan!"

(From Entretiens avec Hergé, reproduced & translated in The Comics Journal no. 250, p. 191)

Parents are a nuisance, one that Hergé was only too happy to dispense with in Tintin's case. And besides, Tintin isn't completely alone forever; with the introduction of the Marlinspike "family," not to mention Marlinspike Hall itself, during the war, he at least ends up with a home and some adult supervision, however dubious it may be at times.

As for his schooling, according to a report on the Belgian education system from 1932, education was only compulsory there (not to mention free) from ages 6 to 14. That same report records that in 1928, the number of students in the higher level of secondary education - corresponding to high school in American terms - was only 1% of the number of students enrolled in compulsory primary school. Even adjusting for the fact that primary education enrolls children for twice as long, the percentage is still a paltry 2.6%. And then the number of students in university that same year was only about three-quarters of the number of students in secondary education.

What that means is that at the time when Tintin was getting started, only very, very few people stayed in school beyond age 14. Hergé himself was one of those few, but to many of his readers in the early years, the idea that Tintin was already working at age 14 or 15 would have been not just reasonable but recognizable - especially as he has no apparent family to support him. (Not that Tintin isn't knowledgeable: judging from the number of books in his apartment, we can presume that he's quite the autodidact.) Of course public education was broadened after WWII, but by then the character was already firmly established.

As for how Tintin is already a reporter, well, Hergé freely admitted that he gave him the job just because that's what he thought was cool at the time. "Of course it was a pretext," he said on British radio in 1977. (The announcer for that interview describes Tintin as "a 16-year-old Belgian boy with a strange lick of hair, a pair of plus-fours, and a terrier." In it Hergé, questioned about the outsize success of his series, responds that for him "he [Tintin] keeps to be a little boy. Only that.") The tone of the series would be very different if Tintin were just an office clerk or a paperboy, after all - and besides, all but the youngest readers of Le Petit Vingtième would have understood that it's not a real newspaper, just a little children's magazine, so the idea of it having its own official reporter was not to be taken fully seriously.

It's important to remember that our current cultural idea of the teenager as a separate, unique stage between childhood and adulthood was largely a post-WWII American innovation - in fact, the word "teenager" only entered popular use in the 1940s. By contrast, fully half of the Adventures of Tintin (up to the first 2/3 of Crystal Balls) were written either before or during WWII. Hergé himself, born in 1907, began submitting illustrations to a magazine (Le Boy-Scout) at 14, was hired at the Vingtième Siècle at 18, created Totor and did his military service, reaching the rank of sergeant, at 19, and before turning 22 had been given full responsibility for creating and running the Petit Vingtième, gotten engaged to his first wife, Germaine Kieckens, and created Tintin. Being young looked different then.

To close this section I'll also note that, as far as I can tell, positioning Tintin as a teenager never seemed to pose much of a problem to anyone reading the series while it was actively running. Anecdotally, nearly every published source I've read takes for granted that he's an adolescent, and an exception like writer of multiple books on Tintin Renaud Nattiez saying on the air in 2016 that he thinks Tintin is at least 22 (~03:30-03:50) seems to be a uniquely 21st-century development.

TL;DR: Everything I can find indicates that Tintin was always intended to be around 15, and never older than 20, years old.

II. Interpretation

Finally, it's important to not overstate Hergé's commitment to realism. At the end of the day, Tintin can do whatever the story needs him to be able to do, because he's the protagonist of a very straightforward adventure serial. He's always been aspirational, even for Hergé himself: "Tintin is me the way I'd like to be: heroic, flawless." And yet Tintin, victim of its own success, has always been held to a higher standard of realism than its fellow comics, not to mention a higher level of scrutiny in general. Even if, as I've tried to demonstrate, Tintin's feats aren't entirely out of the range of possibility (or at least the norm for comics characters) for his time period, I'm not arguing that he's supposed to be a perfectly accurate representation of the average boy of any point in the mid-20th century. I also don't deny that he typically does act like an adult. So the guiding question here is: How can this dual nature of Tintin's - his adolescent status and adult aspects - be interpreted?

Jean-Marie Apostolidès writes that as "il unifie dans sa personne deux aspects opposés de l’existence, l’enfance et l’âge adulte" ("he brings together in his person two opposing aspects of existence, childhood and adulthood"), Tintin represents "un mythe réconciliatoire" ("a reconciliatory myth") of which the "fonction implicite est de ressouder entre deux générations une confiance brisée" ("implicit function is to mend a broken trust between two generations"). He names this type of child-adult character the "surenfant" ("superchild"), and argues that it is specific to the 20th century and the cultural shock of WWI.

For Pol Vandromme, who wrote the first book of analysis on Tintin (or on any BD), Tintin is simply a perfected version of the teenage boy, one that other teenage boys can aspire to. First, he cites as conventional wisdom that Tintin is around 15, and concludes that "c'est dans tous les cas un adolescent" ("in any case he's a teenager"). While Vandromme accepts that Tintin is presented as a teenager, he also points out that Tintin doesn't represent the experience of being a teenager; Tintin "ne présente [...] que les apparences de l'adolescence" ("only displays the appearance of adolescence") because he's so self-assured and stable, traits antithetical to "l'époque de la métamorphose" ("the time of metamorphosis") that is adolescence.

And yet "il [Tintin] demure malgré tout suffisamment proche pour que les garçons se disent qu'ils auront un jour la chance de lui ressembler, d'imiter son style de vie. [...] Ce que Tintin propose à ces garçons de quinze ans, c'est la figure achevée de leur âge. Il les venge de leurs insuffisances" ("he [Tintin] remains all the same close [i.e. similar] enough that these boys tell themselves that one day they'll have the chance to be like him, to imitate his way of life. [...] What Tintin offers to these 15-year-old boys is the perfected version of their age [group]. He makes up for their shortcomings"). Consequently, having put themselves in Tintin's place, these boys "ont l'illusion d'être déjà de la tribu des jeunes gens qui ont découvert dans leur sac de voyage les clefs qui ouvrent les portes de la fable du monde" ("have the illusion of already being part of the clan of young people who have discovered in their travel bag the keys that open the doors of the world's fable"). In plainer language, being able to identify with Tintin as an apparent peer lets teens imagine themselves as being more capable and powerful than their age allows in reality, an attractive illusion.

I'll add that the static quality of Tintin as a character that Vandromme identifies is dictated by the form of the series. When presented with a teenage protagonist in a work, the novelistic expectation is that what follows will be some kind of bildungsroman, where the events of the story will push the protagonist to change and mature into adulthood. However, I believe that it's a mistake to approach The Adventures of Tintin as a novel when it is fundamentally a serial - even late in his career, when he didn't need to do prepublication anymore, Hergé's approach to plot was still oriented around the page-a-week format. Serial characters, as a rule, change very little. Tintin gets compared to Sherlock Holmes more than once in the series, and it's also true on a meta level: Holmes has a few minor moments of character development, but he largely remains exactly the same over the course of Conan Doyle's stories, which were likewise published in a magazine. In a true serial, the status quo is god, because the main aim of the serial is to perpetuate itself - theoretically forever. And so Watson always finds a reason to return to Baker Street, and Tintin never gets old enough to think of settling down and getting a real job.

Like Holmes, Tintin does change and grow somewhat as a character over the course of the series, but also like Holmes, that growth is not a planned arc with an endpoint, as you would expect in a novel. Instead, it's just a result of Hergé himself maturing and changing. In his contribution to L'archipel Tintin, Benoît Peeters notes that "Grande est la tentation, pour beaucoup, de lire la série comme une totalité, un monument où tout signifierait" ("The temptation is great, for many, to read the series as a totality, a monument where everything has meaning"). And yet he declares that "si accomplies soient-elles... Les Aventures de Tintin se sont élaborées en l'absence de tout grand dessein" ("however polished they may be... The Adventures of Tintin were created in the absence of any grand design"), citing the testimonies of both Hergé and those who knew him at the beginning of the series. Hergé never really had a plan for Tintin as a character; he really did just put him in situations over and over again for a little more than fifty years. However, now that the series is only read in album format and serial publishing is less common, the "temptation" Peeters describes is even stronger. This mismatch in narrative expectations may be part of why modern readers might struggle to view Tintin as a teenaged character.

There's one more element to Tintin's strangeness: the world of the series was built around Tintin himself to facilitate his adventures. Vandromme recalls the fact, so obvious that it's easily forgetten, that "Tintin étant ce qu'il est et ne pouvant être un autre, infléchit l'intrigue d'une certaine manière. [...] Remplacez Tintin par le père Fenouillard et il vous faudra modifier l'album de fond en comble. Dans un roman les personnages déterminent les événements avant d'être déterminés par eux" (Tintin, being who he is and unable to be anyone else, influences the story in a certain way. [...] Replace Tintin with the father of the Fenouillards [character from a 19th-century comic about the misadventures of a French family abroad, n.b.] and you'll have to change the album from top to bottom. In a novel, the characters define the events before the events define them"). This point is especially relevant to Tintin given that the series' beginning was, to put it mildly, haphazard. Starting from Soviets, where Tintin is alone with his dog in a bizarre world where he can sneeze down a sewer grate, cut down a tree with a pocketknife, or fistfight a bear - whatever it takes to keep the plot moving - set a precedent for the character: that Tintin, and nobody else, will always triumph over whatever enemy or obstacle he is faced with.

Because it's founded on Tintin himself, there are no real adults in the Adventures, and in fact there can't be any. Preserving Tintin's Soviets-era boy hero status as the world of the series became steadily larger and more realistic created a kind of 'competency warp' where Tintin, along with his young "doubles," Chang and Zorrino, is effectively always the most capable, the master of the situation, while those closest to him who are much older (the Thompsons, Haddock, Calculus...) tend to act rather childishly. I think it's telling that the 1946 introduction of Blake & Mortimer is often hailed in terms like these: that "pour la première fois, les héros n'étaient pas des enfants, mais des adultes responsables dont la psychologie était en parfaite harmonie avec leurs fonctions" ("for the first time, the heroes were not children, but responsible adults whose psychology was in perfect harmony with their roles," emphasis mine). All the major adult characters in Tintin had been introduced at that point, but apparently none of them qualified as "responsible" or properly suited for their positions.

Apostolidès similarly notes a deforming effect: "Tintin est un adolescent qui, sans jamais entrer dans l’âge adulte, rajeunit le monde en se confrontant à lui. Au lieu que le personnage se soumette passivement au monde adulte, s’intègre dans une histoire, vieillisse et meure, c’est l’univers extérieur qui se fige dans le temps au contact du héros" ("Tintin is an adolescent who, without ever entering adulthood, makes the world younger by confronting it. Instead of the character submitting himself passively to the adult world, fitting in to a history, getting older and dying, it's the outside world that freezes in time at the hero's touch"). Not only does Tintin resist adulthood himself, he also protects others from its effects.

There are characters who escape the warp, but they must stay on the very edges of Tintin's orbit. One example is the efficient and no-nonsense Mr. Baxter from the Moon books. He has a real job: he's director of the atomic center, and every time we see him he's actually doing it. He also remains disengaged from the antics of the Marlinspike crew, often exasperated and confused by them. They don't belong in his serious space program, and he doesn't belong in their funny adventure series - hence the clash. Another (and very different) example is Jolyon Wagg. I wish I could remember where I read it, but I once saw it pointed out that Tintin and Wagg almost completely ignore each other; their only direct interaction in the whole series is saying hello to each other exactly once (Emerald p. 17). The unidentified author's point was that Wagg inhabits a world so intensely banal, so different from Tintin's - one with community organizations, salesman jobs, an old mother, an Uncle Anatole, a wife and (a lot of) children - that the two can't even come into contact. Wagg may be almost preternaturally obnoxious, but he's also a genuinely ordinary man in a way that the major characters really aren't.

Tintin must remain the sole and main driver of action, because if he isn't, the series would have to change fundamentally. That means no other character can threaten his role by being more competent and responsible than him - and so the adults become ridiculous and/or irrelevant, and Chang and Zorrino are only allowed to act for one album each. And yet Hergé created Tintin as a teenager, and suggested that a Tintin who progressed past teenagerhood would also grow out of adventure: "Il est difficile, pour un personnage comme ça, à le faire vieillir. Parce que s'il vieillit, il va avoir vingt ans, il va avoir vingt-deux ans, il va rencontrer une jolie fille, il va se marier, il va avoir des enfants..." ("It's hard to make a character like that get older. Because if he gets older, he'll be 20, he'll be 22, he'll meet a pretty girl, he'll get married, he'll have children..."). Tintin passing into adulthood, 'real' adulthood, symbolized here by settling down and starting a family, would make the series just as unsustainable as demoting him to a more technically age-appropriate role would; both sides of the tension between Tintin's youth and his maturity are required to make him a proper adventure hero for children.

And so he remained, as he remains today, the world's most competent teenager.


Tags
4 months ago
He's Like A Stress Ball To Me.
He's Like A Stress Ball To Me.
He's Like A Stress Ball To Me.
He's Like A Stress Ball To Me.
He's Like A Stress Ball To Me.
He's Like A Stress Ball To Me.
He's Like A Stress Ball To Me.
He's Like A Stress Ball To Me.
He's Like A Stress Ball To Me.
He's Like A Stress Ball To Me.

he's like a stress ball to me.


Tags
4 months ago

Generalized Golf

I have looked up nothing about golf to write this.

Let C be any topological space. We will call this the ‘course’. For any two points x,y ∈ C we have a collection S_xy of ‘shots from x to y’, where each ‘shot’ s ∈ S_xy is a path in C from x to y, which is to say a continuous function s: [0,1] → C with s(0) = x and s(1) = y. For a shot s ∈ S_xy we call x its ‘start’ and y its ‘end’. Let S denote the collection of all shots in C between any two points.

A ‘hole’ on C is a triple (t,h,p) where t ∈ C is a point called the ‘tee’, h ⊂ C is a subset called (confusingly) the ‘hole’, and p is an ordinal number called the ‘par’. For any cardinal number κ we define a ‘golf’ of length κ to be a function g: κ → H, where H is a set of holes on C. A golf g is called ‘finite’ if κ is finite and the par of every hole in the image of g is finite. We define the par of a finite golf as the sum of the pars of its constituent holes.

A quintuple (C,S,κ,H,g) defined like above is called a ‘game of (generalized) golf’.

Take a hole (t,h,p), a successor ordinal ω+1. Let F: ω+1 → S be a function such that F(0) is a shot from t, for every i < ω the end of F(i) equals the start of F(i+1), the end of F(ω) is an element of h, and no F(i) ends in h before this. Such an F is called a ‘play’. We call ω the ‘score’ of F.

A ‘golfer’ is a collection of probability spaces, which for any shot s ∈ S with start x and end y gives a probability space on the set of shots from x. This is to be interpreted as the ways in which a shot can deviate from the golfer’s intent.

Now to define the real numbers by way of games of golf on ℚ.


Tags
4 months ago
This week we continue our exploration of what numbers are, and where mathematicians keep finding weird ones. We start by asking for the area of a circle, get exhausted by Archimedes's method for finding the answer, and take a tour through the idea of limits to construct the complete field of real numbers. We resolve one of the oldest mathematical flame war topics on the internet, and finish by worrying the real numbers are just too weird to actually use.

A new post up on my blog!  Last time we talked about the algebraic numbers, and how just wanting to solve simple equations can create a ton of different numbers.  But they don’t get us everything.

So this time we start off with the idea of measurement, and wind up inventing the real numbers.  The real numbers are weird.  Real weird.  But they show up when we start asking questions about size or measurement.  And in part 3, we’ll see they’re exactly the right way to do calculus.


Tags
Loading...
End of content
No more pages to load
  • middlering
    middlering reblogged this · 1 month ago
  • longflowingpants
    longflowingpants liked this · 2 months ago
  • urlocalsupermarketofendocrinosis
    urlocalsupermarketofendocrinosis liked this · 4 months ago
  • urlocalsupermarketofendocrinosis
    urlocalsupermarketofendocrinosis reblogged this · 4 months ago
  • drmarshmallo
    drmarshmallo liked this · 4 months ago
  • jtngetabettername
    jtngetabettername liked this · 4 months ago
  • jtngetabettername
    jtngetabettername reblogged this · 4 months ago
  • platypus-platypus-platypus
    platypus-platypus-platypus liked this · 4 months ago
  • ladyofthelivingearth
    ladyofthelivingearth reblogged this · 4 months ago
  • ladyofthelivingearth
    ladyofthelivingearth reblogged this · 4 months ago
  • erynalasse
    erynalasse liked this · 4 months ago
  • xypheris
    xypheris liked this · 4 months ago
  • tousey-mousey
    tousey-mousey reblogged this · 4 months ago
  • tousey-mousey
    tousey-mousey reblogged this · 4 months ago
  • nubedeluna
    nubedeluna liked this · 4 months ago
  • chickadee-chickadoo
    chickadee-chickadoo reblogged this · 4 months ago
  • chickadee-chickadoo
    chickadee-chickadoo liked this · 4 months ago
  • monaddecepticon
    monaddecepticon reblogged this · 4 months ago
  • dumbandblond
    dumbandblond liked this · 4 months ago
  • twinkgender
    twinkgender liked this · 4 months ago
  • germax26
    germax26 liked this · 4 months ago
  • picard532
    picard532 reblogged this · 4 months ago
  • picard532
    picard532 liked this · 4 months ago
  • karpholmes
    karpholmes reblogged this · 4 months ago
  • karpholmes
    karpholmes liked this · 4 months ago
  • littleyellowfrog
    littleyellowfrog liked this · 4 months ago
  • needlesandnilbogs
    needlesandnilbogs reblogged this · 4 months ago
  • needlesandnilbogs
    needlesandnilbogs liked this · 4 months ago
  • associativeglassdesert
    associativeglassdesert reblogged this · 4 months ago
  • vinegarflies
    vinegarflies liked this · 4 months ago
  • dorothytheexplorothy
    dorothytheexplorothy liked this · 4 months ago
  • sunreyposts
    sunreyposts liked this · 4 months ago
  • sqrt-73
    sqrt-73 liked this · 4 months ago
  • algebraic-dumbass
    algebraic-dumbass reblogged this · 4 months ago
middlering - 下一站:中環。 Next station: Central.
下一站:中環。 Next station: Central.

Interchange station for a variety of parallel lines

62 posts

Explore Tumblr Blog
Search Through Tumblr Tags