Mx. Chara Aznable (they/them) of Pnictogen (@[email protected])

I remember when Stanley Kubrick's *2001* was new to me—it was yet another of the films that I first saw at Caltech, and I remember seeing it at least a few times during my brief stay there—and it seemed so much more confusing than it does now. It's not that the film is a solved problem for me, but I feel as though its mysteries are actually rather neatly constrained. Kubrick's chilly technique and lack of emotional depth gives the viewer a movie that feels more like a lecture on the unknowable rather than an invitation to dive into its chaotic heart. Back then I used to discuss movies on Usenet, and Stanley Kubrick had a lot of enthusiastic fans on the 1990s Internet. Kubrick had his own dedicated newsgroup, alt.movies.kubrick (q.v. http://www.visual-memory.co.uk/amk/aboutng.html) and as it happens, if you search for my deadname you'll find some commentary I left behind on that newsgroup, bits and pieces still floating around. Luckily its seems that not a lot of 1990s Usenet has survived the general betrayal perpetrated by the #technology sector in destroying archives of old Internet writings and commentary, because jeez...I typed out some stupid shıte. But I guess that hasn't changed, has it? (cont'd)