"In the end, I just can't shake off this damnable sense of perspective." David Mitchell's evenhandedly hilarious appraisal about the word "passionate" as corporate-speak. A reader named Tom pointed this out in the comments this morning—thanks to him for getting my day off to a good start.
In another random follow-up to a past post, I have to say that I now notice when I see books that made the readers' recommended list a few weeks ago. So, speaking of that, I wonder if the videocaster above is the same David Mitchell who wrote Cloud Atlas and The Thousand Autumns of Jacob de Zoet.
Writers really ought to change their names to something easily rememberable and friendly, don't you think? Like Hollywood stars: you might have heard that Hedwig Kiesler, Joseph Levitch, Tula Ellice Finklea, Webb Parmelee Hollenbeck, Issur Danielovitch Demsky, and Virginia McMath became, respectively, Hedy Lamarr, Jerry Lewis, Cyd Charisse, Clifton Webb, Kirk Douglas, and Ginger Rogers—or even that "Theda Bara" is (deliberately) an anagram of "death arab"—but did you know that Boris Karloff's real name was William Pratt? William Pratt—are you kidding me? Whoever came up with "Boris Karloff" is a genius. David Mitchell the novelist needs a name with Karloff-level creativity. I guarantee you that if you ask me three months from now who David Mitchell is, I won't have the slightest idea.
In a final follow-up, TOP reader Tim Bradshaw contacted Emma Duncan, the Economist Deputy Editor responsible for the "Obama vs. BP" cover, and has this to report: "Emma Duncan replied to my mail and it's fairly clear that this was a genuine mistake on her part rather than a deliberate attempt to mislead. Now it's been pointed out, she also can see the picture the way most people do. She says they will be more careful about how pictures are edited in future. So I'm happy that this was a mistake, rather than something intentional." Thanks for that, Tim.
Mike
(Thanks to Bill Bryson for the star names)
Send this post to a friend
Note: Links in this post may be to our affiliates; sales through affiliate links may benefit this site. More...
Original contents copyright 2010 by Michael C. Johnston and/or the bylined author. All Rights Reserved.
This David Mitchell is not the same one as the author of the Cloud Atlas, but a rather funny, very intelligent, gently satirical comedian often on the radio and TV in Britain. This is a very David Mitchell piece. Lovely examples.
Posted by: Hugh Look | Monday, 12 July 2010 at 12:19 PM
The David Mitchell in the 'passionate' video is well known as a comedian in the UK, notably for Peep Show, a series which is highly recommended. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/David_Mitchell_(actor)
He's not the same as the author of Cloud Atlas - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/David_Mitchell_(author)
Posted by: Craig | Monday, 12 July 2010 at 12:43 PM
And Emmanuel Goldenberg became Edward G. Robinson.
Posted by: Rob Atkins | Monday, 12 July 2010 at 12:49 PM
The guy in the video is David Mitchell, British comedian of Mitchell & Webb fame (and occasional columnist). He is not the same person as David Mitchell, British author.
Posted by: Fake_gojira | Monday, 12 July 2010 at 12:59 PM
And more confusing, Murphy's Law was NOT first stated by Murphy, but by another man with the same name!
Posted by: john robison | Monday, 12 July 2010 at 01:19 PM
It's strange; I would have classified "Hedy Lamarr", "Cyd Charisse", and "Theda Bara" as obvious example of original names that people changed away from for show business. (I mean, I would if I didn't recognize all three slightly, and hence know otherwise.)
Maybe they were prematurely adopting names that would be unique on the internet!
Posted by: David Dyer-Bennet | Monday, 12 July 2010 at 01:20 PM
"Emma Duncan replied to my mail and it's fairly clear that this was a genuine mistake on her part rather than a deliberate attempt to mislead. Now that it's been pointed out, she also can see the picture the way most people do. She says [The Economist] will be more careful about how pictures are edited in the future."
Mike, in the initial post about this you had wondered what Reuters thought of the manipulation, since they're supposed to approve any substantive manipulations of news photos they supply. According the Guardian, "The New York Times, in revealing the picture manipulation, reports that the editing upset Reuters," but I couldn't find such a reference in the Times.
Either way, I'm glad to know that Ms. Duncan modified her formerly distressing stance on the issue.
Posted by: A.M. | Monday, 12 July 2010 at 01:21 PM
We're laughing, but how many blogs, etc, have we visited where the homeboys (again, rarely women) are 'passionate about photography'? I've often wondered what they save up for their significant others/pets/tissues. IT'S A HOBBY!!!
Posted by: James McDermott | Monday, 12 July 2010 at 01:24 PM
Well The Economist cover amounts to nothing if you compare it with this story...
http://littlebrownmushroom.wordpress.com/2010/06/29/this-is-annoying/
Posted by: J Castro | Monday, 12 July 2010 at 02:01 PM
The deputy editor of the economist makes a genuine mistake with the picture on the cover ??
A mistake that really obviously changes the message that that picture sends out?
really?
Well maybe I'm just too cynical but I find that rather hard to believe......
Posted by: Koert | Monday, 12 July 2010 at 02:07 PM
David,
Exactly. And unfortunately, things being what they were then, some stage-names were to make the actors sound less Jewish, foreign, or ethnic (still going on to some extent, unless Jonathan Stuart Leibowitz just thought "Jon Stewart" was simpler and easier to remember). For example, Bert Lahr's real name was Isidore Lahrheim, and Lee J. Cobb's was Leo Jacoby. Which is part of why "Boris Karloff" for William Pratt is so interesting, because the stage name makes him sound MORE ethnic and foreign. I guess it was an advantage in his case--and might play into the same stereotypes, making him sound more like a "bad guy" like the characters he played.
When I was younger and still had ambitions to be a "real" writer, I tried to devise a pen name for myself. All I can say is that it's not as easy as it looks.
--Mike with the blase Midwestern name
Posted by: Mike Johnston | Monday, 12 July 2010 at 02:12 PM
david mitchell was also the pc in apple.uk's failed attempt to translate their mac/pc humour to old blighty. although i really liked those adverts, blighty disapproved. this was partially because robert webb, who played the mac, was usually the prat in the mitchell&webb skits. the following is a fine example: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HMGIbOGu8q0 (it's also a great pisstake on homeopathy for those so inclined)
Posted by: bloodnok | Monday, 12 July 2010 at 05:44 PM
I've known about Issur Danielovitch Demsky, for the longest time. Jews do this ALL the time:
Lou Reed - Lou Rabinowitz
Carol King - Carol Klein
Mel Brooks - Mel Kaminsky
Leon Trotsky - Lev Bronstein
Joseph Abraham Gottlieb - Joey Bishop
Betty Joan Perske, cousin of Shimon Peres - Lauren Bacall
Natalie Hershlag - Natalie Portman
Allen Konigsberg - Woody Allen
Robert Zimmerman - Bob Dylan
Jacob Cohen - Rodney Dangerfield
Joan Molinsky - Joan Rlvers
Gene Simmons - Chaim Weitz
Posted by: misha | Monday, 12 July 2010 at 06:06 PM
On the economist cover: How can you unintentionally but perfectly photoshop out a person from a photograph?
Posted by: george | Monday, 12 July 2010 at 07:18 PM
Talking of name changes, how can anyone forget Marion Morrison?
Posted by: Antony Shepherd | Tuesday, 13 July 2010 at 04:25 AM
>>How can you unintentionally but perfectly photoshop out a person from a photograph?<<
Maybe they're running CS8 in beta... 'content unaware fill' ?
Posted by: Nigel | Tuesday, 13 July 2010 at 08:26 AM
James: I have to take issue with your "IT'S A HOBBY!"
Just because people don't make their living at it doesn't mean that something isn't, in fact, their "life's work". (I'm not at all clear that everybody wants one thing to really dominate their life; but some people want it, and some people, not necessarily the same ones, get it.) Similarly, people who DO make a living at photography don't all consider it "their art" or have any real passion for it. (Given how HARD it is to make a living in photography, probably more professional photographers ARE passionate about it than in most jobs.)
Passion and money don't actually correlate very well.
Posted by: David Dyer-Bennet | Tuesday, 13 July 2010 at 01:39 PM
This reminds me of the great photographer Ralph Eugene Meatyard's strange hobby of looking up strange names in the phone book whenever he traveled. Names such as Lumy Jean Licklighter, don't ask me why I still have that in my head. My wife wants to know why stuff like that won't leave my brain after 45 years but I can't remember to do the simplest tasks when she asks :-)
Steve mason
Posted by: Steve Mason | Tuesday, 13 July 2010 at 08:23 PM
Funny koinkidink: I'm have just discovered, and am chewing through the DVDs of, a hysterical sketch show named That Mitchell And Webb Look. The show is much better than the name. And better than sketch shows tend to be. It has a number of very varied, but great rants by Mitchell.
Posted by: Eolake Stobblehouse | Tuesday, 13 July 2010 at 10:23 PM
Konigsberg is the name of a character in Cerebus the Aardvark, looking a lot like a famous film director, and having a thing for young girls.
Posted by: Eolake Stobblehouse | Tuesday, 13 July 2010 at 10:24 PM
this whole exchange is pretty funny when you keep in mind the Pentax ad top left on TOP.
Posted by: Doug Brewer | Wednesday, 14 July 2010 at 08:27 AM
Concerning the "how can you unintentionally but perfectly remove someone from a photograph" comment: I don't think there is any claim that it was unintentional (if there is it is obviously a silly claim). The question is why they did it, and specifically did they intend to deceive by doing it. I think they probably did not.
Posted by: Tim Bradshaw | Thursday, 15 July 2010 at 09:14 AM