Power Word: Blog

Playing for Change's "Stand By Me"

2008-10-31T17:38:00.000-04:00

On Stupidity and Elections

2008-10-24T17:09:00.002-04:00

It's a common refrain, but I've been hearing it more and more of late from the American politics people at my Ph.D. program: American voters are stupid. They make poor decisions, they support parties and politicians who manifestly do not advance agendas that would help them. They elected Bush. What's the matter with Kansas, anyway?

And of course, the common response to these points is to throw one's hands in the air and shrug.

Now, I can certainly appreciate the frustration. I think certain voters have been making idiotic statements about how it was the Democrats that were ruining the country for the past eight years (nevermind that Republicans controlled all branches of government). However, I can't go along with the idea that Americans are dumb (at least when it comes to voting). There are a lot of smart people out there, certainly smarter than me in their own areas of expertise, and definitely more knowledgeable about the matters that affect their lives directly.

So, I want to claim that Americans are dumb, I have to include myself in that measure. The more I get into this Ph.D. program, the more I am convinced that people don't know all that much more about the consequences of political decisions. Sure, I may know more than the average person about the debates, facts, and theories surrounding a political question. But that doesn't mean that I necessarily know more about who will ulimately make a better president, whether a particular decision will turn out for the best.

It's like forecasting the weather. Sure, it helps a lot to have more information. But that doesn't mean you're going to be right. And so I'm wary of painting other Americans as stupid without recognizing my own limitations.

Jet Man

2008-09-27T23:50:00.003-04:00

I hate to dumb down the blog with popular video, but I think this is the neatest thing. If only I could combine these wings with an exoskeleton or something... are mechs right around the corner?

Spicy Eggplant

2008-09-06T22:14:00.007-04:00

Here's a decent slap together eggplant dish. It's based on a recipe my sister-in-law likes to make, though I've made a few strategic alterations. For example, she like to cook the eggplant with dried chili peppers and spices like anise. I prefer fresh pepper to the dried, and I can do without the anise, so I leave it out. She also prefers to cut the eggplant into large flat pieces, whereas I think cubing it makes things easier and cuts down the cooking time.

Of course I'm keeping things pretty simple here. It could be fun to experiment by adding cilantro or other fragrant herbs, or some other meatier vegetables like mushrooms, squash or zucchini. Try it out.

Ingredients:

Three long Asian eggplants
one large juicy tomato or two small tomatoes
2 long green peppers (Found in Asian markets. Are these wax peppers? Experience shows that the heat in these things can vary substantially, so watch out)
one medium onion
sichuan pepper corns
small hunk of ginger, about the size of the first knuckle on your ring finger.
two to three cloves of garlic
Scallions. There should be enough to give you two hand fulls after you dice them up.
Shanxi mature vinegar (chencu) or white vinegar or cider vinegar
Lao Chou--dark soy sauce
optional mushroom essence (granules)
salt
cooking oil
wok

Precook:

Cut up the eggplant into small pieces. I prefer to cut them into small cubes, but you can also cut them into thinnish half-dollar sized rounds and then slice the rounds into halves or quarters. Throw the cut eggplant into water, and let it soak while you prepare everything else.
Dice the onion
Dice the scallions
Wash and slice open the hot peppers. Take out the seeds and remove the stems. Slice each individual pepper in half, flatten it out onto the cutting board, and then cut them diagonally into thin small rings or thin ribbons.
Dice the tomato, and set it aside in a bowl along with the seeds and the juices that gushed out when you cut it open.
Mince the garlic and ginger separately. Keep them separated.
Throw the soaking eggplant into a colander and let it drain out for a few minutes.
Carefully rinse the sichuan peppers under cool water.

Cook it up:

Throw two tablespoons (or even more if you can take it) of oil into the wok and turn the heat all the way up.

Put the ginger, green peppers, and sichuan peppercorns in first. Let them sit for a couple of seconds and then stir them up for another 20 seconds or so.

The onion goes in next. Stir the onion in with the hot peppers for about 40 seconds before piling the eggplant on. Put all the eggplant in, make sure you mix it in well, and take a breather. Eggplant can take a while to get going, but you'll need to keep an eye on it. If you let it sit for too long without stirring, it will burn. You want to keep everything moving inside the wok. What you're looking for is for the eggplant to begin to look wet or wilted, as if it has finally begun to absorb the cooking oil. If your eggplants have purple skin, they may begin to turn green.

Now it is time to toss in your cut tomato and your garlic. Mix it in well again, and keep stirring as you wait for the tomato to cook down.

You'll know when the eggplant is just about done. The tomato and eggplant chunks will be completely cooked down and there will be a sizable amount on broth down at the bottom of the wok. As you reach this point--it will be a few minutes after adding the tomatoes--throw in a half teaspoon of the mushroom essence if you have it, a teaspoon of salt (or more to taste), a small splash of soy sauce for color (Keep it small. This isn't Kikkoman; a little goes a very long way), and a splash of vinegar--say, twice as much vinegar as soy sauce. Just before you are ready to take the eggplant out of the wok, throw in half your scallions, fold the mixture a couple times and then empty it out onto deep serving dish. Throw another handful of scallions on top for garnish.

Serve with quality white rice.

This dish goes well together with stir fried dark greens and cheap red table wine.

When they read this...

2008-09-01T23:43:00.002-04:00

Do you think they regret sounding like the way they do? Or do they not even notice?

I like pools, though I would expect them to make it a bit smaller.

Buyer's remorse?

2008-08-25T21:23:00.003-04:00

One thing I am absolutely certain of is that Hillary Clinton wouldn't sit by and let a weak Republican candidate run his pickup truck all over her campaign.

September is almost here. Drop the freaking hammer already. Sheesh.

New Used Laptop

2008-08-15T13:17:00.005-04:00

As it turns out, I'm going to be inheriting someone's laptop this weekend. This makes three computers for a household of two. The question is: what do I do with it? I'm thinking that I'll format the hard disk and turn it into a Linux machine. I'll then dedicate it purely to internet and minor word processing. Hopefully, the newly uncluttered hard disk will keep the computer fast.

I was previously thinking about doing the same to one of the two laptops that we already have, but I was too lazy to sort through and back up the data on the hard disk. Now I can completely bypass that potential hassle by working on computer #3.

Before going through with any of this, does anyone have any other suggestions of what I can do with a potentially creaky computer? Am I getting the most out of the computer with a format/Linux install?

Speaking of Chinese accomplishments...

2008-08-12T17:43:00.002-04:00

Hobs forwarded this over to me. A nice interface I think for my Popo's favorite piece of art. It doesn't look like it at first, but it's a great segue for testing whether or not her grandchildren remember World War II.

I'm trying to find those one-wheel carriage things I keep hearing about.

Olympic Fever

2008-08-12T10:25:00.003-04:00

Much of the world is currently in the throes of Olympic fever. The pageantry, the athletics, and of course, watching your country in the medal race.

But, you know what? I'm just not that interested.

I'm sure part of this is my anti-China bias. But the more I think about it, the more I realize that I've lost interest in the Olympics more generally. The jingoism gets to me for one. And then there's the fact that my youthful dream of being an Olympic swimmer will never come to pass (although the 41-year old athlete with two kids is making me reconsider this).

But I've been far more interested and concerned with the war between Georgia and Russia than I am with Team America, Team China, or Team Korea (which is surprisingly high in the early medal count right now - good for them).

Anyway, I want to call your attention to this article. Tim Wu discusses the non-Chinese media (I refuse to call it Western because, let's be frank, this kind of coverage isn't limited to just the "West") and whether it's being too harsh on China.

Now, I agree with much, if not all, of what he's saying. Just because the Chinese have put in a lot of hard work to prepare for the Olympics doesn't mean it should be immune from criticism, particularly if all that hard work was geared towards cleaning up their treatment of laborers, minorities, or the environment. And as a good friend of mine said, if China wants to be a leader on the world stage, it's got to be able to accept the criticism. Just because you're great doesn't mean you're faultless, and it's perfectly legitimate for people to point out your faults (they do it all the time to the U.S., EU, and Russia. Indians do it to themselves.)

However, I think there's also something to the Chinese complaint. It's difficult to separate legitimate criticism from a wider cultural disdain, but I think some of the reporting falls into that. Of course, there is the gap between Chinese expectations and everyone else's reporting, driven in many ways by the high expectations that the CCP set for both itself and the rest of the world. But, while I may dislike China, I think our criticisms must be tempered with this recognition of all its people have accomplished in the past 30 years (as well as being mindful of all its people destroyed in the 30 years before that).

The criticism is getting tied up with the jingoism, and I draw a line there. It's fine to point out (massive) faults in the system and history, but the arguments are stronger (and sometimes more chilling) if they're grounded in a more rational assessment of the country.

I own too many books, y'know?

2008-08-06T22:03:00.004-04:00

I missed a chance to post not-filler. Alas.

Also, now that I recognize scenery music so often used on This American Life as being from Philip Glass's score for Mishima--a fact both obvious and unexpected--I can't hear it without picturing someone committing seppuku.

And because I want it on dvd and when I think of Glass I think of Nyman and I was on youtube, Prospero's Books:

You're kidding, sir!

2008-07-29T10:21:00.004-04:00

Chengora asked me my opinion on this slate piece about action scenes in movies. He further sent me this:

Interesting analysis. I was going to post a comment about martial arts movies, but the analysis already takes that into account. I wonder if the central focus of guns in action films set in more modern times requires more cuts in order to obtain the most visceral part of a fight. Whereas in martial arts movies you can do a close up of a face to establish the character's emotional state, then zoom out to a full body frame - in both cases you still have a sense of emotional/personal expression. I don't know if you can do that with gunfights, where the individuals are performing a much more limited set of actions.

To which I say, kidding, yes?

The gunfight, tension filled, is the hallmark of the western, the action genre of western cinema. Real gunfights take seconds, less than minutes certainly, they've always been extended so you can cat and mouse it, so you can linger on their faces. Heck, Once Upon a Time in the West is 60% extreme closeup, or some other exorbitant ratio.

That said, the post wanted to talk about fighting more than just action, and non-martial arts (this includes boxing) has typically ignored the skill part, endorsing showing mainly the physicality of fighting (ideally), and sometimes just the effort of it (grunting a lot). Some of this comes from a professional wrestling like obsession with big immovable men in their action stars--so much so it's interesting that they pin point Bruce Willis, the only action star out of the 80's to be built like a fit man, instead of a, well, professional wrestler.

I think it's funny that Bourne Ultimatum is such a high watermark, since that's the Bourne movie that conceded it's shaky cam aesthetic with a capoeria inspired fighter. You don't add that style in film if you aren't conceding to aesthetics, to the appreciation of the body and skill.

I think the piece finished with a very good fight, with Cronenberg's set piece in Eastern Promises. Possibly though, the other true fight on film is the one in Casino Royale, in the bathroom. The graceless but skilled killing of another person, in particular contrast in the most glamorous of movie franchises. If anything, the Bourne movies fetishize the skillful killer more than any other. It disorientates exactly when death is going to be inflicted.

Yowch.

2008-07-10T17:05:00.002-04:00

A month and a half. This is insulting casual disregard for even the low bar of mediocrity is appalling...

On a sidenote, I think the New Yorker cartoonists' blog proves that they are funny, but normally not allowed to be.

King City Vol. 2 is being posted...due to the well documented woes of Tokyopop.

And I hear that in the next Harvest Moon you can ride an ostrich (which you presumably raise for eggs). Japan, you know my every weakness.

Onwards!

Primary Colors

2008-06-02T11:05:00.001-04:00

I’m an Obama supporter, but only lately come to the game. Up until the whole gas tax thing, I was perfectly fine with either Clinton or Obama getting the nomination. But that move (and the whole combined ticket thing) solidified my sense that Clinton panders too much and is greedy for power, rather than the public good.

And Saturday’s shenanigan’s demonstrated that amply. I can certainly understand why Clinton’s doing what she’s doing. But having Democratic Party members shouting “McCain in ‘08” is just plain bad for the party and the prospects for a real renunciation of the many mistakes made during the Bush years.

So, here’s a message for all the Clinton supporters (who also read this blog – surely a hefty number). First, this nomination contest is an internal election for a private organization. The DNC doesn’t need to count your vote if you didn’t follow their rules. There was no vote fraud, no manipulation. You knew going into primary booth that your vote wouldn’t count. You gambled that the state party could stand up to the DNC, and you lost. This is an apt time to use the Chinese phrase “huo gai”, or “You deserve it.” In 2000, people went to the ballot box thinking that it would. That makes this an entirely different ballgame.

Second, this whole talk about “reassigning” votes. You’re assuming that people who voted for Clinton support Clinton, and the DNC is undermining the will of the voters by giving Obama a higher percentage than he deserves. That’s only partly correct, but you’re forgetting a cardinal rule of elections. Elections are contests between the people on the ballots. So in Michigan, a vote cast for Clinton was not a vote against Obama. To have that, he would need to actually have been on the ballot. After all, the will of the voter could easily have been “Well, I can’t vote for my candidate, so I might as well vote for Clinton.”

Now, of course in Florida, Obama was on the ballot. But then, it wasn’t an even contest. From all the elections that my organization has looked at internationally, there emerges a simple rule. When you can’t campaign, name recognition wins. And at the time, that clearly went in Clinton’s favor.

Democratic elections (small “d” ones) are hard. They require a lot of different elements to be balanced and respected: campaign time, equitable access to fundraising, equitable positioning on the ballot, etc. You can’t pick and choose the way the Clinton people are doing and still proclaim yourself on the side of democratic elections. It then just becomes a means to obtain power, and that’s exactly why Clinton turned me off.

When I Grow Up...

2008-05-20T12:58:00.002-04:00

A lot of changes happening for me this coming summer. I'm quiting my job in a month's time. I'm moving to New York City right after that. I'm starting a Ph.D. program in the fall. And just before that, I'm going to propose to GF.

So, I'd love to get some input on what I should do for the summer. Duvall has suggested something fun like volunteering at a museum. GF has suggested that I do something that will advance my academic network (volunteer research). A coworker has suggested that I:

Write short articles everyday or week and try to get them published. Also, start a blog to house them all.
Tutor kids.
Help old ladies cross the street (or just something related to old people).
Work with illegal immigrants using language skills.
Assist a presidential campaign.

She came up with all this in the span of about five minutes. Needless to say, she didn't want to do her work.

So, what do you all think? My fallback is temping, which I'm perfectly happy with. I do want to stay in NYC and hold to a 9-5 or so schedule as much as possible, as this is GF and my chance to finally live together. And we're getting a Wii for some quality time together.

Old Friends

2008-05-14T11:56:00.002-04:00

Turns out, being checked out at work has its advantages. Otherwise, I would never have been bored enough to discover that Fafblog has returned.

Fafblog - The best source anywhere for snarky politics and pie.

Political Reading

2008-05-14T10:19:00.002-04:00

Since I'm completely checked out at work (even though I shouldn't be), I wanted to share some great political articles I've been reading. I often pick these up from www.aldaily.com.

Thunder from Tibet - An excellent article on the protests and violence in Tibet in March.

Obama on Zionism and Hamas
- Obama's thoughts on Israel and the U.S. in the Middle East more generally.

Confessions of a Sweatshop Inspector - Great look at the methods of ensuring corporate social responsibility.

Time to Let Go?

2008-05-03T23:16:00.002-04:00

All the recent discussion of Tibet and today's primary in Guam got me thinking. Isn't it time for the U.S. to formulate a general plan to let the colonies go? What I mean by "colonies" is our Pacific and Atlantic islands, Puerto Rico, Hawaii, Guam, American Samoa etc...? Of course, in prinicpal I would probably be willing to part with sections of the southwest, and I have always considered sections of the midwest to be expendible. Why not take the Dakotas, Montana, unpopulated sections of Wyoming, and other rather unimportant states and just give them back to the Native American populations who lay claim to the land?

Anycase, in the case of the islands, I suspect there would be quite a few logistic hurdles to pass before we can cut them free. First, every one of those places is heavily dependant on the US for direct economic aid. We would probably have to continue supporting these territories long after they formally declare Independence. In places like Hawaii with significant non-indigenous populations, rights of the "foreign" population would have to be guaranteed up to a certain point after Independence. Also, complicated legal issues like real estate holdings, business interests, and other claims of ownership would have to be clarified over a long period of negotiation.

Nevertheless, I don't see the US losing out on much in the giveaway. Key military installations could probably be maintained via special treaties. In return, the US gains a better moral standing in the world and has greater legitimacy as a non-colonial power.

Not meaning to bum-rush China...

2008-04-22T11:59:00.005-04:00

but this particular happening came up during my morning crawl through comic news. It's not terribly surprising, but I'm always astonished how wholesale copying can be now, at least James Fry and the Stephen Glass and the like made stuff up--this is like that Opal Mehta nonsense with Mad Libs plagiarism. Not exactly lazier, I guess, since printing and layout is resource consuming. But damn. It reminds me that I have a friend who was based in Hong Kong for a while, as a lawyer, and looking to work in China specifically with intellectual property, but didn't stay for, amongst other reasons, the complete lack of IP law/enforcement/basis of trying that specialization in China right now.

But in the midst of all this pent-up bad Chinaness, I wanted to point to a Slate piece (which I can't find right now, but I will) that put should put some of their development in context (which, I'm sorry, I can't resist, is not something the Chinese media is every involved in doing). Namely that while the process of modernizing China is inarguably flawed , this is an undertaking that has dragged the largest mass of humanity out of poverty ever. The scale doesn't excuse the Reign of Terror style of politics that has often emerged, but likewise it's an achievement on its own merits.

Actually, I mostly think that economic development, Communism (not that they're really so Communist anymore) did force the leveling of gender rights in China. I doubt it's equal, much as it isn't in the U.S., but given the extremely male-centric culture there's been a lot down for women's rights by China. Whether this will progress into a leadership and advocacy role when the economic gains by such moves aren't so obvious (or even develop into self-awareness of it) is in question. Imagine if the Edison Chen stupidness had provoked a discussion about the obviously skeevy at best(consenting adults aside) fact that a popular and influential male star took advantage of his position over more than half a dozen women, and will likely be the only one with a career after.

Or if instead of responding to the U.S. State Department's annual list of human rights violations, China responded with not a relatively week list of America's own, but statistics about the millions they can raise out of poverty? I mean, when Chinese achievements aren't "scientists" scraping off the Intel logo off microchips.

Oops, sorry, can't help it.

It's all so stupid

2008-04-20T19:15:00.005-04:00

I was planning to write a big post about Tibet this week, but now that I'm sitting down and writing it, it just seems like such a lame thing to do. The whole situation is just so weird and bad. Early in March, some Tibetans were arrested for a peaceful protests around Lhasa. On March 14th, violent ethnic riots erupt. Ethnic Tibetans were the main instigators of the violence, smashing Han and Hui stores and killing a few people.

Pretty bad, right? The thing is, that's not even the beginning. A few western media outlets picked up the story; several quoted sources (free Tibet groups), falsely blaming ethnic Chinese people for the violence. CNN and several French and German sites stupidly used cropped images of police arrests (the Tibetan rioters in the back ground were cut out), and images of police brutality from India and Nepal, which were attributed in the stories to China. Many of the western media outlets focused on China's history of brutality in the region, glossed over the fact that Tibetans were the instigators in this most recent violent outburst, and generally stuck to their talking points about China, human rights, and Tibet.

Now the fun begins. Overseas Chinese students-- the only mainlanders with access to western media stories because China at that moment was in total media blackout--were outraged at the shoddy reporting in western media and began a wide internet protest campaign. This website was created, among others.

The free Tibet folks, seeing an opportunity to grab the media spotlight, staged protests during China's Olympic tour in Europe and USA. They were violent, and they seemed to go out of their way to alienate by attacking elderly and disabled torch bearers. Western media outlets dropped the ball again by highlighting the protesters and "ominous-looking" Chinese security, and by deciding not to interview Chinese relay participants.

This has only increased Chinese outrage against the media, and western media in general. There have been violent blockades of the French chain, Carrefour, in China. Videos like this are easy to find.

There's so much going on here: hack journalism, angry nationalism, politics (come on, backing out of the opening ceremony is such a lame pointless move), oh yeah, and there is also the issue of oppression, which, while being constantly shoved to the front, often falls back out of sight.

Where to begin?

Senioritis

2008-04-09T17:31:00.003-04:00

As I'll be joining the ranks of the unemployed in June, I've completely checked out of work. Instead, my days are filled with surfing of weird and interesting stories on the web. Sadly, the ones that have captured my attention are the whole Mormon splinter group cult thing, the related issue of forced marriage, the pro-Tibet/pro-China protests, and (on a lighter note) trying to figure out if it's a good idea to build a Tivo (doesn't look like it. Hey, NYC people - what are the cable providers up there?).

Being the political junkie that I am, I'm going to discuss the pro-Tibet/pro-China issue. I've already talked about the limitations on having a rational discussion about the situation in Tibet: no reliable information. But what's really surprised me are the pro-China protesters in the U.S. Granted, it seems like many of them are from China (the interviews have lots of foreign students, but I think that's just of function of it being San Fran). However, I can't help feeling a touch of sadness over the fact that they still believe the PRC line, despite massive evidence to the contrary. For example:

The Olympics shouldn't be political. Please - they've always been political. If they weren't political, then China shouldn't be using it to showcase its global emergence. The entire route was specifically designed TO BE political, like stamping PRC sovereignty over Tibet and Xinjiang.

Support for the PRC. I can certainly understand that people want to support their culture, etc. But, the pro-Chinese demonstrators go further. They support the PRC government. At least with many of the Arabs I know, they are proud of coming from a long culture, but recognize and denounce the human rights abuses, corruption, and general venality of political leaders in the Middle East. The pro-Chinese protestors don't display any of this self-reflection. Granted, some of this is probably just reaction to a perceived outsider critique of China. But honestly, this quote from a student? "The Chinese people are very peaceful. They wouldn’t do what they are accused of.” Come on, man. The Chinese have been doing that to others and to each other for thousands of years. Where's the rational perspective?

China has been helping Tibet. Similar to the last point. Fine, China invests a lot in Tibet. But looking at this purely from an economic perspective is idiotic. It's about politics and power: who gets the money, can Tibetans practice their religious beliefs, what about the side effects of a depressed economy for a certain group of people and second class status in their own territory (like drug use)? I understand that people in China don't get the information to acknowledge these issues. But pro-Chinese in the U.S.? In the wake of the riots, it's impossible to believe that they were carried out by a small "clique" of individuals. Those were massive, widespread, and expressed great frustration with the economic and especially cultural degradation by the PRC. At the least, there needs to be some sense of humility about this, that economic investment hasn't been particularly successful, and that Beijing has given something of a raw deal to minorities.

Ah, that was cathartic. Now, if only the pro-China protestors would read this.

Nothing but respect.

2008-03-31T20:37:00.001-04:00

for this.

It's not a working transformer costume, but it's the same in spirit.

I take back every mean thing I've ever said about China...

2008-03-26T18:28:00.002-04:00

its tendency to confuse scarcity with quality, its passing familiarity with the normal definitions of quality, the nonexistence of the concept of intellectual property, its cultural self-aggrandizement and entitlement, its normally crap swipes...

All is forgiven. Re: Dave's Long Box post.

God, shameless commerce really is your best side, huh?

Bioshock

2008-03-25T11:11:00.006-04:00

Lots of posts, I know. I just finished Bioshock over the weekend. It was fun, and the setting was certainly atmospheric. However, I can't see why the game won awards for its story, more than its setting. The moral choices were pretty stark (SPOILERS - save the Little Sisters or kill them), and your choices ultimately weren't that consequential, except that it gave you one of two different endings. But, the limited moral choice aside, the biggest issue I had was that Bioshock was not so much a story-driven game but an exploration of recent history. Ken Levine gave an interview recently on why stories in video games suck, and he revealed that a remarkable amount of Bioshock's story was left on the editing room floor. It was condensed from a span of months to a single day. And that leaves the player out of some pivotal events in Rapture's "history", and instead he/she is left with picking up audio recordings of what happened. It is an exercise in - at best - piecing together what happened, rather than participating in the events.

And that hamstrings the emotional kick of the game. The audio recordings alone did get me to sympathize with certain individuals or revile others. But the foregoing the opportunity to interact with these people, either as events were going on or in the aftermath, was a narrative and emotional waste. Instead, you’re just left with shooting a bunch of psychos.

But I don’t want to be too harsh. Bioshock was good, and it had some excellent moments of set-piece story underpinned by a light layer of philosophy. But the story never matched the atmosphere. And the fact that Bioshock is renowned for its story is more an indication about the story state of narrative in video games, rather than a positive recommendation for the game.

Tibet and Taiwan

2008-03-25T10:56:00.003-04:00

Some of this is coming a little late, but hey, I was hiking through mud while carrying a debilitating stomach bug.

Anyway, one of the obvious big pieces of news are the riots in Tibet. I can't add any additional analysis to what's already out there, but one question floating in the blogosphere did pique my interest. Namely, can you have a meaningful dialogue with the opposing side given the restrictions on information? I think it's clearly impossible with the rabid bloggers that have been unleashed on the Chinese side. However, I hold out hope that other Chinese netizens are willing to acknowledge that things in Tibet have not gone well for Tibetans, that their history is filtered, and that they don't have access to all the resources that people in the West do.

This is probably a fool's hope. But, I do wish that the Chinese government would recognize that democracy and free speech/press is typically a moderating force. With increased dialogue on the issues comes (ideally) increased respect for the other side. Now, they probably recognize this and want to stir up nationalism. But ultimately that's a failed policy. The anti-Japanese riots several years back are a clear indication of this: eventually you lose control, and that is ultimately constricting on the government's freedom of action.

Now, Taiwan. Obviously, I'm disappointed with the result. But this is a good time for the DPP to take stock and institute the internal reforms that people have been grumbling about for at least two years. However, even beyond this, I'm more disappointed with the analysis coming out of the State Department. They love the fact that the KMT won, and they should. But I don't think they realize the extent of Taiwanese nationalism - the feeling among Taiwanese that they should decide the country's future and no one else. None of this "the 1.3 billion Chinese will decide" crap: that's clearly not in keeping with international law.

But the fact that this feeling is widespread and strongly felt is an issue for the U.S. This election didn't change the political sentiment on this issue: it just kicked it down the road a bit. The U.S. still has to find a way to meaningfully resolve the Taiwan Strait issue in such a way that it doesn't allow China to threaten more U.S. interests. Even more, the U.S. needs to find a moral, democratic solution to the tensions. Economic inducements only go so far, and you only need to look to Tibet to see that.

Travels in Peru

2008-03-21T17:37:00.007-04:00

So, got back from Peru a week ago. You know, I didn't enjoy this trip nearly as much as the one to Turkey. It could have been the week-long stomach bug I was battling, but I think that should be offset by all the glorious meat and ceviche (which probably gave me the stomach bug) that we ate.

No, I think the issue is large group travel. That's right, GF and I went on a tour group. Well, that is if you count 80 Wharton students a tour group. What I missed from Turkey was simply the chance to explore on our own, to meet native peoples and get lost in foreign cities. Because all that provides a much deeper experience and understanding of a country/place.

For example, we spent days exploring various Incan ruins and, of course, the Machu Picchu/Inka trail. But it was only when the two of us went to a museum on our own that all the various architecture, artwork, etc. finally started crystallizing into a coherent history. Similarly, we spent five days in Cuzco and only two in Lima. But I feel a much stronger understanding of life in Lima because it was primarily just the two of us walking around. No 80 person group of Americans to ward off interactions with local Peruvians.

Anyway, obviously none of this is groundbreaking, but I think it's firmly put me off of this kind of travel. GF, on the other hand, acknowledges the problems, but counters with the fact that we stayed at luxurious, high-end hotels at a fraction of the original cost. She also seems a bit less bothered with "understanding the local culture" thing, although that's probably because she reads the guide book diligently. Needless to say, if one of us is already going to do the reading, why should I? (Guys, don't take that advice.)

We don't want no european decadence!*

2008-03-19T13:13:00.010-04:00

Eliot Spitzer has taken a tumble and, at least before the financial business this week, the NY media engines has revelled in a having a new topic outside of the Democractic primary campaigns--a nice break I actually. Curiously, I was more surprised (shock is too strong) than coworkers and the like about the situation. I don't think of myself as a prude (so I guess the real shock to me is the realization that I'm not the go-to cynic in every conversation--there was a time I'd have laid bets on that certainty) but no one seemed terribly surprised. Mind you , it could certainly be that one of those reflexive "Oh, that always happens things. Aren't they always?" Which is obviously not true, or else, well or else there'd be more stories. But there aren't, because I don't live in Rhode Island.

So anyway, it's nice and all that some quarters are taking this opportunity to talk about the true effects of prostitution. The results in Sweden of the legalization of selling sex combined with the criminalization of buying sex on trafficking, and prostitution rates in general being especially interesting. Some of the commentary touched upon this article by the inestimable Martha Nussbaum, which if you read, you will see focuses greatly on prostitution an how the laws and enforcement reflect other things, but begins with the trope of the American among sophisticated Europeans wondering about American prudery. Why for are we lingering on the prurient when there is so much more to discuss?

Well, beyond the fact that we in New York are one of the few cities with vibrant enough daily papers to have the need to for some tabloid fare, so obviously there's inches to fill, he was the freakin' attorney general elected on a reform campaign. Not by a little bit. It is possible that the reaction is less about the sex, then about the hypocrisy. Also, the sheer stupidness of a former prosecutor laying out the trail that he did. Not all laws are moral, but breaking the law usually isn't. **

Also in the past week, there was also the release of Funny Games by Michel Haneke. I think the AV Club lays out the most generous and informative take on it. I'm pretty sympathetic to these sorts of art stunts, and after seeing Cache (which I consider one of the finest films I've ever seen), I have a great deal of respect for the director, with a generosity of spirit I don't think I'd extend to either Lars Von Trier (pretentious European provocateur) or the genre related if not intellectually (or only disingenuously) torture porn and ultraviolence these days. Maybe Oldboy gets a pass, but god I hate locked room stories. Long exposition aside, a comment mentioned the fact that even if the movie were a success in the manner Haneke intends, that is as an indictment of the audience as complicit in violence in our culture, he'd probably think that we as Americans liked it because of the torture. So to the continent that created this and other insightful fare like Irreversibleah I say back off. We get it. You aren't that smart. Or we don't, like everyone else. This business is only slightly more annoying than the Americans don't have passports cliche.

But in the interests of equal time, I say it has been fascinating to see the likes Naomi Watts promoting arthouse fare on Leno and the like. And follow it on to Funny Games review itself, but alright. Maybe we don't get it.

*I don't actually care about European decadence.

** Edited to fix stupidity.

I'm deeply conflicted...

2008-03-12T12:10:00.002-04:00

It's a thrill to see Jackie Chan and Jet Li together for the first time (though honestly, their styles kinda clash). It wasn't till the middle of this trailer that I realized that this was an American production (there's another version that reveals this as Neverending Story in China much more explicitly). I'm a bit fearful that this'll be Bulletproof Monk again...ah well, I'll probably still l see it. It won't be worse than House of Flying Daggers right? Right?

Also, Tan Dun--so over. Please get someone else. Use that fellow that Johnny To uses. Heck, get Johnny To some of that big Hollywood money and import his style. I like the actors from Asia too, but if you can't get them to commit to more interesting projects, then start pulling in the directors. We don't need no Edison Chen.

On this, the 101st post...

2008-03-07T15:42:00.003-05:00

I bring you what I bring you best.

I want one of these.

These are neat. I linked to the source, but this is where I got it, and the banner ads at hobby blog embarrass me.

A bit older, but Jim Steranko's hair in this romance comic is fabulous. I keep staring at it.

And an oldie but a one-I-just-read-so-it-interests me. Namely in the comments.

RIP Gary Gygax

2008-03-04T16:16:00.004-05:00

It would be remiss not to note the passing of Gary Gygax, wanted to write some adventures for the leaders of their armies in their tabletop wargames, and wouldnn't it be fun if they went on adventures in between the wars, and rescued towns, and princesses, and fought dragons? He created Chainmail with Jeff Perren, which evolved into Dungeons & Dragons (with Dave Arneson), advanced and otherwise, and begat so much of what I, and so many others, used to create and enjoy inspiring, fun, stupid, smart, and all other kinds of worthwhile stories.

Thanks for everything.

Annoying Politics

2008-03-04T09:33:00.003-05:00

I’m still working my way through Bioshock, so more on that and a response to Duvall’s post later. It’s engrossing, although I’m not sure that it quite reaches the level of “games as art.” Nevertheless, it’s an interesting exploration of Objectivism and where it all falls apart. Question: do gamers generally find Objectivism more appealing?

Anyway, this post is about the ’08 Election. A couple sound bites/positions have annoyed me to an unusual degree, and I thought I’d rant here.

Flip-Flopping – We all remember this: Bush supporters who lambasted Kerry for being a flip-flopper on his Iraq War vote. Granted, it was a politically brilliant sound bite (for Bush).

Fast forward four years, and many of those same Republican supporters are being asked about Romney and his flip-flopping. Perhaps it's the media echo chamber, but the majority of responses from Romney supporters have been “He flipped the right way, so I’m fine with that.”

Which of course means that going back on your opinion is not the horrible thing that Bush makes it to be. These guys don't care about flip flopping: they care about ideological agreement. What gets me is that they just can't admit that. It strikes me as dishonest, or perhaps self-deluding/denial.

Barack “Hussein” Obama – This has been in the news more recently. Slate had an article about it, where Republicans were calling attention to Obama’s middle name and essentially saying “We’re not trying to send a political message. We’re just calling him by his name.”

Sure. And Fox News was a model of journalistic ethics when it ran the madrassa issue (I’ve been to Obama's school, by the way. It’s gorgeous.). The issue I have with this is that it taps into something ultimately nasty and destructive in American politics (or really all politics) - the need to exclude what's different. It's exactly why we've been so unsuccessful in the War on Terror: the U.S. simply cannot work with or deal with individuals when they cast them as an undifferentiated, sometimes incomprehensible group.

And when you stoop to calling out a candidate's name because you want to draw negative associations with Islam, you appeal to and empower those instincts. I'm glad John McCain rebuked that radio talk show host. But I only expect more of this from the 527s as the campaign progresses.

Anyway, for something a little more fun, check out this blog.

This is why blogs exist

2008-02-29T17:18:00.005-05:00

I want share the fact that every time I see a wil.i.am produced video supporting Obama, I want to change sides. God, they're like Apple commercials or something.

I have half a mind to start a facebook group called "wil.i.am made me switch" except it would increase my involvement in facebook beyond my accepted copyright-infringing board game playing.

I won't sully this virtual ground of intellectual discourse and items of marginal interest by actually linking to the videos, you can find it if yourselves if you like. Dipdive or some shit.

Still filler...

2008-02-28T14:11:00.004-05:00

So obviously, I continue to lie about my involvement with this blog. But work feels like work even when I'm not working. Yes this is a link blog item, but let me say I never expected to read something like this on a major gaming gossip site--a smart article about sexuality and juvenile sexuality in video games that doesn't spend all its time mired in preemptively defending itself from charges that it wants to take everyone's cheesecake frosting or equating boobs with adult material. It's one of the smartest thing ever on one of these sites really ever. Possibly the only flaw being that as the writer's expertise/interest seems to be Chinese cinema, all the examples come from there. Already one or two of the thicker set in the comments section think it's a comment on just one national culture, and not gaming culture generally.

Without delving into what the approach to narratives should be in video games, the sooner characterization in games matures past sexuality = thongs--though, first things first, we need to go by adult = sex--the sooner we can all collectively sneer off the folks who try to rationalize porn trading cards in Witcher as being character building.

It's interesting, I think, how the fact that this sort of discussion is so rare shows how much the study of video games is. It's still mostly concerned with defining what a "video game" is and the admittedly big task of figuring out the mix interactivity, game, and narrative . . . in essentially expanding the vocabulary of how you talk about games. It's so much in its infancy it hasn't even come up with pretentious term for itself yet, like "interactive novel" or vide0 games* or something.

More or less, there are a lot of John Woos, a few John Fords** out there in gaming, maybe even a Spielberg, but no Hitchcock. Which is me trying to say, conventions in games aren't common enough (mostly a strength of gaming actually, that they can be so varied) that the master manipulators work in genres of games instead of narrative genres) that we have designers playing with audience expectations just yet.*** That self-aware design cycle might've begun in adventure gaming (if adventure gaming was even half as healthy now as when Sierra was churning out franchises it might've even gone past jokes) but mostly, not enough examples of manipulating audience expectation. I don't actually like audience manipulation, it turns into cheap shocks usually, but when you're meta enough to start designing that way, that's when gaming will have really matured.

Chengora, I invite you to finish Bioshock and tell me if I'm wrong.

* You have to see the zero, and know that Art Spiegelman wants adult comics to be called comix, by the way, or it's not funny.
** Sid Meier/Miyamoto in Zelda mode
*** Penn and Teller don't count.

I am a big fat liar, sincerely hcduvall

2008-02-26T10:21:00.002-05:00

Content tomorrow.

I can hardly review something properly if I read it months ago, right?

It's going to be the first volume of Crossing Midnight, incidentally.

New Routine

2008-02-18T21:56:00.003-05:00

If you really want to lose weight, cut fat, slim down, and enhance your cardiovascular fitness, there is really nothing better and nothing easier than running. Better than swimming, better than stair climber, and better than those radial things the housewives always use that the gym. I say this out of experience, not because I read it in the literature.

That's why its such a shame to live in this paved city. Not even the parks have unpaved running paths, and the longterm impact that all that pounding has on your knees, hips, and lower back probably more than makes up for the shortterm cardiovascular benefit you'll get by running here.

At the end of last year, with my sedentary job and somewhat careless eating habits, my waistline was getting out of control. In high school I stayed steady with a 30 inch waist. It moved up to 31 inches in college, and after several years of computer terminal jobs, I'm now at 32 inches. My pants have been steadily "shrinking" this year, bringing me close to 33 inches in November, so I had no choice but to put my foot down.

I had been maintaining a solid strength-weight routine for over a half year as of January and registered modest, incrimental strength gains becuase of it, but it did nothing to improve my heart health or slim me down. A super cardio/diet routine was in order, and running was out of the question because of the hard pavement, crowded sidewalks, and start-stop traffic lights around my house. I also counted out the treadmill becuase it's so horribly boring, and it is also bad for your hips. Swimming would have been a good backup option if there was a pool nearby--and there is not.

My only remaining recourse was/is the torturous stair climber. No doubt, it is an effective contraption and it can deliver a solid concentration of exercise. But in my opinion, you spend more energy wearing out your legs on the stair climber than you do increasing your heart rate, which makes it feel more like a strength routine than a cardiovascular one. Also, it hurts a lot, and it feels like you suffer twice as much to burn the same number of calories as you would running.

Mentally, any kind of machine is punishing. Unlike running outside or swimming laps, you cannot tailor your pace to your mood. You lock yourself in for a certain time and a certain difficulty, and you can't deviate from it. It is boring too, and there is little to distract your from your work other than the crap news or thinking about how much your legs hurt, yikes.

Flash back to six years ago: I was in pretty bad shape. I didn't exercise and was pretty reckless with my diet. On a whim, I decided to start running in the morning on a dirt track near my apartment. Within two months, all of the fat just melted off my body, and the whole process just seemed effortless. Unlike now, there was never a sense of forboding or dread when I started to run. I just did it. When I felt tired, I backed off, and I turned it on when I felt great. It was easy to add variety to the routine by running up stairs and doing sprints. Also, when I ran, I could zone out, look around, plan my day, and otherwise distract myself, and the workouts would always seem shorter than they actually were.

I guess there is nothing really left to say other than I wish there was more dirt in the city, more running surfaces than the concrete sidewalks, and more grass. It would be a lot easier for me to stay healthy if there were.

Narrative in RPGs

2008-02-08T11:37:00.002-05:00

It's been ages since anyone's written, but Duvall tells me he's got a post coming up. So, in the interest of restarting this thing, I'd like to discuss something that's been on my mind. No, not the election, although a post on that may come soon enough.

No, I've been thinking about RPGs, specifically this roundtable discussion. I never really played the classic computer RPGs like Ultima, becoming engrossed in the genre during Black Isle's heyday of Icewind Dale (ID - only okay), Baldur's Gate (BG - grand and epic, but a little trite), and Planescape: Torment (PT - probably one of the finest examples of narrative).

But, as the roundtable discusses, they just don't make RPGs like they used to. Something has gone out of the narrative and immersion. American cRPGs are beginning - in my mind - to resemble Japanese ones. You're dropped into the middle of events, and you're essentially a glorified gopher. Your tasks focus on picking up the 3, 4, 8 fragments needed to put the magic weapon back together, complete the ingredients to your spell, save the world. But you have little choice in the matter, and your actions don't mean anything as a result. As important, the worlds feel "artificial:" they don't feel lived in, as if they persist both before and after your character.

And I think one of the main reasons for this drop in immersion is technology. Sure, graphics in the past few years have made a tremendous leap. The Infinity engine has nothing on the Aurora engine. But text used to play an enormous role in these games, mostly because the engines couldn’t produce the effects that were needed. Pretty lights? Sure thing. Big explosions? Check. Emotive effect through facial animation that can keep up with your dialogue choices? Uh oh.

But that was okay. Well-written text created immersive environments and effective narrative when combined with the literally thousands of characters that inhabited the BG and PT games.

With the newer technology, designers have opted for fewer characters and fancier graphics, thinking that tech can potentially substitute for the emotional content that came from narrative. But – to cite just one example – when you enter cities in Oblivion, do you notice something missing? That's right: people. The world outside may be vast and fun to explore. But the cities are sparse and lifeless affairs, because there is no background to explain WHY you should become the head of the fighter’s guild, why your choice is meaningful beyond the swag that you receive.

I think the strongest analysis in the roundtable is that RPGs have become, in effect, single player MMORPGs. No real background, no real narrative, no “world.” Which is why I’ve been finding myself getting into shooters. The best – Half-Life 2, Call of Duty 4 – tie your actions into a larger narrative much more effectively than many recent RPGs, and they do it with a variety of content and gameplay (it also helps that guns are just that much better from a first person perspective). They are immersive: nowhere near PT, but better than NWN1. But they don’t set themselves up as needing to create a coherent world.

So, RPG makers, craft a narrative that gives meaning to my choices; make me care about a character’s relationships, not about leveling up; immerse me a rich history. Give me worlds again.

Intelligence

2007-12-05T09:52:00.000-05:00

Enough has been said about the latest National Intelligence Estimate's findings on Iran in the media, and there's enough in there to cast lots of (deserved) doubt on Bush's policies. But the biggest issue for me is not that Iran doesn't want nuclear weapons: I still suspect that they are pushing for some kind of nuclear program. Rather, it's that Bush's past positions make it incredibly difficult to pursue the only remaining policy option with international support: work through the IAEA.

Ahmadinejad is correct: Iran has a right to use nuclear power for energy, and Tehran's rationale for pursuing nuclear energy makes a certain economic sense. But he's wrong in a critical way: Iran cannot pursue nuclear power unless it declares its production sites and allows international inspectors unfettered access to those sites. This was always been the sticking point for me. Tehran could have gotten nuclear power through the existing international system. But why didn't it? If their intentions were peaceful, there's nothing stopping them.

But unfortunately, Bush has made hay about taking a "strong" stand against Tehran, which has forced it to eschew the carrot side of any negotiations. The U.S. could easily and clearly have said, "We respect your right to nuclear power, but you have to comply with existing international rules." Instead, the threats of war have muddled the message and American credibility, and this latest NIE report casts a further cloud over the President's objectives. It's made it much harder now to work with the IAEA and other countries to find a solution to this mess, and that clearly hurts the American position both right now and in the longer term.

F-Cubed

2007-12-03T12:45:00.001-05:00

My co-worker introduced me to the term F-Cubed or "Forced Family Fun." Think of those nights when your parents forced you to play board games with them.

Well, it pretty much sums up my trip to Italy. We had gone about 10 years ago to northern Italy, and this vacation swept up Rome and Naples. In that intervening 10 years, however, I have discovered that I simply don't like skipping lunches to run from location to location - treating the country as a repository of historic places to see - eating dinner, then conking out somewhere between 8-10 pm.

Sadly, my sister is of the hyperactive, must-see-the-sights kind of person, although tellingly "sights" does not include actual people. So, while I saw an overwhelming amount of churches (I think there's some religious rule by which I am now Catholic), I didn't actually have a conversation with any Italians while with my family. And unfortunately, my parents are getting old, so they pretty much have to fall asleep after dinner. All of which meant early rising, lots of walking, little sampling of the food, and even less sense of what the places are actually like.

All of which made Italy an only okay trip. Rome was gorgeous, and I loved Bologna, mostly because I was not with my family and visiting a friend there. Another notable event was going to a resort town on the Mediterranean coast. As is often the case in resort towns in non-resort seasons, the local industry gets a little desparate. Thus, I forced my sister to stare at me, rather than the guy desparately foisting himself onto a hooker in his tiny car.

Then there was being racially profiled by a Neapolitan cop. The previous night, two Philippino men were picked up for drug running and money laundering. The cop thought my dad and I may be part of that ring and asked for ID. I pulled my driver's licence out of my wallet, to which he asked "What's in the wallet?" and "Who's money is that?" Really, what did he expect me to say?

So, in sum, Bologna was great, Rome was nice but superficial, and Naples sucked, except for the food.

Applications

2007-11-09T11:26:00.000-05:00

I'm done with my Ph.D. applications!

Well, that's only mostly true. I still have one or two things left to fill out (oh, FAFSA, the bane of my existence). But, all the application fees are in, and I don't have anything left to send to schools except recommendations.

Now, back to drinking.

Politics By Other Means

2007-10-02T15:22:00.000-04:00

So I just got two PC games: Company of Heroes and World in Conflict. Both excellent real time strategy (RTS) games, and each is nothing short of emotionally draining. Lots of explosions, a visceral feel to the combat, and generally compelling story lines.

And most important for me, no resource micro-management. While something about RTS always appealed to me, I hated the "generate masses of peons to gather raw materials" design. This was mostly because I could never devote the time or effort to learn all the hotkeys required to build a specific building or perform actions. In other words, I could never "actualize" my economy. Games devolved into a series of scrolling around the map, pausing the game, hunting and pecking for a build order, and repeat. More often than not, the result was that my peons were quickly killed in all kinds of horrible ways.

I understand where these games were trying to go. The economy obviously lays the foundation for military choices, and a good RTS will have the player make interesting economic decisions that affect their military options later down the road. But too often - for me at least - the games just get bogged down in a mindless game of digital "gopher". This always left me wondering where the real focus of the game was: warfare. It was like I had to bore myself for hours just to get that five minutes of desparate payoff. And of course, my failure at economy building was eventually a failure on the battlefield, especially as I couldn't hotkey unit orders and have them come directly to the fight. The learning curve is far too steep for a casual player.

Which is why these two games are wonderful. WiC is the "purer" of the two, eschewing all resource gathering and superficially similar to the Panzer line of games (which are also fun). The beauty is that, while you may have no resource gathering, you are fundamentally concerned with resources. You get a steady supply of points, up to a certain level, and you have to spend them on just the right mix of units to win. If your unit dies, the points a credited back to you, although it does a little while for them to be available for use.

CoH makes things even more meaningful. Again resource acquisition is non-existent: you get steady supplies from key points that you hold. But you have to fight for those points, which neatly folds your military decisions into your economic ones. The point is not just to eliminate the enemy, but decide where you want to eliminate them and what can be gained from it.

All this frees up the player to concentrate on the action. They do say that soldiers worry about tactics, generals about logistics. But frankly, if logistics is that boring, I'd rather be a grunt. And besides, modern militaries take their time when planning their economic and political foundations. If I want that, I'll play Civ.

In other nerdiness, Wesleyan students be proud. Now, I'm off to play flag football.

Cracking

2007-09-25T11:44:00.001-04:00

So on my recent trip to Taiwan and Indonesia, I picked up various kinds of electronic equipment for friends and for myself: a microSD card, a reader for said card, a portable hard drive. This being Asia, invariably there were stands nearby selling all kinds of pirated DVDs, music, and video games. (On one of the occasions, I was wearing a suit, so it was a little weird walking through.)

I'm not going to talk about the benefits and evils of pirating. I'll make one quick comment and one long observation. First, quickly, Taiwan has really cleaned up its piracy issues. I remember several years ago walking along the night market outside my grandma's house as seeing DVDs everywhere. Nothing now.

Second, and longer, the experience in Indonesia especially got me thinking about some recent developments in video games. It's very difficult to copy-protect DVDs - sooner or later someone cracks it. But I wonder whether the recent trends of online play, constant updates and upgrades, and occasionally half-finished game releases aren't in some way tied to anti-pirating efforts. On several of the games, I saw disclaimers (in English, surprisingly) that you could not use the DVDs to play online. In addition, the ones where that was possible (I haven't obviously tested whether this is true) appeared to be older games that came out a minimum of 1-2 years ago.

And the reason online play is blocked is because the game developers can constantly check up on the legality of your copy. Most cracks to play games illegally require invasive changes to the executable file or core game files. That kind of thing is pretty easy to suss out. Similarly, constant file updates also make it very easy to catch crackers and force them to reinstall. Cripple your initial release just enough, string out your updates long enough, and you'll likely get all the people who were going to purchase the game to do so legally.

So, how plausible is this? I'm sure it's not the only reason behind buggy releases and constant updates with limited tweaks. But it could very well be a contributing factor to why certain types of games - especially single-player, offline ones - are increasingly being packaged with specific online features.

Crunchiness and Granola

2007-09-17T04:24:00.001-04:00

I've just come back from the cultural/spiritual center of Java, and while I can't say that I've learned any more or crystallized my thoughts on Indonesia, I did discover a few things about myself. For example, there's a reason I don't backpack anymore. It was all fun when I was in India and maybe even a little after I started working in Taiwan. But comparing my hotel room to the places where some of the Westerners I met were staying - well, there was no comparison. I was invited back to their place for some drinks (remember, it's Ramadan, so alcohol is hard to find) and quickly came to the conclusion that I would not be spending the night there under any circumstances. The fact that my 3-star hotel room was all of 300 meters away really wasn't an important factor in this decision, and I realize how much I've grown to enjoy my creature comforts. Like an actual seat on the toilet.

Also, I've become more firmly convinced in my disinterest - bordering on distaste - of Western tourists looking to find themselves in the spiritual centers of Asia. Yogjakarta (shortened to Yogja and pronounced "jog-ja") has loads of Hindu, Buddhist, and historical sites, as well as a cultural asthetic marred only by the commercialism that has crept in because tourism is a primary driver of the local economy. As a result, you get lots of people doing the extra-crunchy granola backpacking thing, something which - while I respect it - I'm not sure how much it's based in a realistic understanding of the people's lives.

I suppose that's partly the point - you go to these places to escape the rigors and stresses of the world. But at some point, I do wonder whether the travelers are mistaking the spirituality and "hush" lent to a location by virtue of it being a past religious center with the spirituality that in some sense should emanate from the people living in the location. It's hard for me to square the spirituality of the location with, say, the commercialism I mentioned earlier. So, India never struck me as the spiritual place that many of my friends thought it was, except in the Tibetan monasteries, where spiritualism was a way of life (the human element joining with the location). The same was in Yogja.

All of this is really me trying to say that multiple times, I felt very old. In a far different place than a lot of the college and post-college kids I met: much more firmly established and far less able to join in their conversations about things that, frankly, didn't seem at all interesting to me. This was even the case with some of the older individuals I met there. It makes me wonder about my time backpacking, and whether I was really as idealistic, perhaps even naive, as the individuals I met.

As for the city itself, it's a very pretty place with some great sights to see. The Borobhudur temple in particular is quite simply massive, and a monumental achievement for the Buddhist religion. I'll post pictures when I get back to the U.S. But like any heavy tourist spot, there were innumerable touts and people looking to sell overpriced handicrafts. This was a great contrast to Turkey, and I found myself longing for a place that is firmly used to the idea of tourists. So, as GF and I are planning a vacation next summer after I quit, it's a race between Southeast Asia and a Mediterranean tour. I think you know which one I'm going after.

And one thing I forgot to mention last time. Indonesia needs to cut off about three "0" off its currency. It's nice being a millionnaire, but the 9500:1 exchange rate - and the fact that things cost at least some multiple of 100, if not 1000, pre-tax - means that you get very large and unwieldy bills in your wallet.

Notes from Abroad

2007-09-13T23:55:00.001-04:00

Just thought I'd share a couple of observations from my time in Indonesia. Since I've largely been shuttling between meetings, hotels, and restaurants, I don't think I have the best impression of the country, but - with that major caveat - here goes:

I've never seen worse traffic in my life. My coworker here gave an excellent piece of advice: always use the bathroom right before you go somewhere else. You never know when you'll get another chance. It took us 15 minutes to get to one meeting prior to rush hour. It took an hour and 15 to get back. That's happened EVERY DAY, without fail, on almost all the streets.
That said, aside from cars, Jakarta is nowhere near as crowded as I had thought. Like LA, there's no city center, so you don't get that crush of people in particular areas.
Also, the streets are very clean. The air is often terrible, but I have seen very little litter on the ground.
There's something of an identity crisis going on, despite the fact that everyone keeps talking about (and I'm going to butcher this spelling) panchasila - which is kind of like a national philosophy. Even so, I don't know how many people have really embraced the ideas of pluralism and diversity, enough so that they can celebrate their commonalities amid a strikingly diverse range of people, cultures, and languages.
And finally, there's a crapload of malls over here.

I take off for Java's cultural center tomorrow, so I'll hopefully have more insight later.

Why Save Craptown?

2007-09-08T22:18:00.000-04:00

I spent a lot of time this week trying to catch up on the New York Times, which since we began subscribing about a month ago has turned into an intimidating tower of reading threatening to take over our living room. Anyway, last week there was this story about a mill town in New Hampshire called Berlin that's dying. Apparently paper milling is disappearing as an industry in the United States and its dragging Berlin down the drain with it. (Who makes paper now? Brazil?) With no industry and a rapidly dwindling population, the town is desperate to save itself and has therefore cooked up two new industries to attract and retain residents-- a prison and a off-roading truck park. I don't want to make light of the Berlin's new industries. Prisons have to go somewhere I guess, and why not in the middle of nowhere. But clearly, when you're counting on an SUV park to save your town, you've reached the point of desperation.

My question is: why bother saving the town at all? Why not let nature take its course and let the town die. Couldn't this just be better in the long run? Pull down some of the houses, dig up the concrete, bulldoze the strip malls and give the whole piece of land back to nature. Or give it to a Native American reservation.

Let it go. Its dead. Why is there this obsession with keeping this crappy town alive? There are thousands of dead end towns across this country, and, quite frankly, we don't need them. They take up space and occupy land that would just be better used in an ecosystem.

Any thoughts?

802

2007-08-29T20:26:00.000-04:00

That’s the number of items rated on my account in Netflix. It’s a tally not so much from enjoying rating things (though click click refresh is a easy way to burn time and I do enjoy it), but the hope that whatever recommendation algorithm lurks behind may leads me to something interesting. Of course, with the inherent limitations of 5-star rating systems, the internet’s grade inflations, etc…

As I am of the anal and tedious sort, I’d like a two tier rating system for the quality of work and enjoyment factor. For example:

Willow: 2, paint-by-numbers serial; 5, Mad Martigan earns undisguised love
Lost in Translation: 4-5, good notes from the WKW class, great Bill Murray; 1, accomplished craft in the service of solipsism earns outright disgust

Well, maybe I do enjoy being judgmental more than most (and that’s why I’m anonymous on the internet). But Izicmo has mentioned something more useful. She advocates for the addition of a 2.5 rating. It’s meant for compelling mediocrity (Born Into Brothels, great kids, great story. Also, the Rough Guide to Poverty) or weakly received craft (Behind the Sun, possibly the prettiest movie ever. Thin as a sliver).

But all that’s a massive tangent bulking up the one item I wanted to blog. After you return something to Netflix, if you haven’t rated it, the website will ask you to rate the sucker and get two recommendations. The first result seems to actually be tied directly to the rating, the second's relationship probably being more diffuse usually results in a generic rec. I returned the first disc of Freaks and Geeks and gave it a 2 when asked.* Thusly, computron said, seek ye Red Dwarf and Band of Brothers. The first is pretty spot on, sloppy black humor being something of the opposite of Apatow’s verve. I decided to like and love the thing instead, but sadly failed to note what should’ve been my heart’s desire (Sunset Boulevard is the agreeable second pick). No, not 40-year-old Virgin. I did note what hate wrought. What am I guaranteed to love with the certification of hate to 70’s high school misfits? This. Ha!

* It’s well made, and has a lot going for it (even as I think it’s obvious why it didn’t hit). Man was I bored.

Good Riddance

2007-08-28T08:55:00.000-04:00

I'm not a religious man, but Thank God.

For whatever reason, the flouting of the rule of law has become a real issue for me, such that I was considering not voting for any candidates in the last election because they all supported some legislation stripping FISA of any oversight power. That, combined with the frankly disgraceful search to find some kind of legal justification for the conduct at Guantanamo, black sites, and Abu Ghraib, makes me really glad to see the major architects of these policies kicked out.

They serve the law. You forget that, and you forget the idea
of justice.

Now there was an interesting discussion on Gonzales' resignation yesterday on the NewsHour. However, what really got to me was the comments of a conservative legal theorist - and the general lack of remorse by anyone within the administration or its supporters about Gonzales' blatantly inappropriate actions. The commentator was arguing that Gonzales should be supported for really reorienting the Justice Department on an "anti-terrorism" footing and essentially blaming the Democrats for dragging Gonzales' name through the mud.

This misses several things:

You don't want your Justice Department to be on an anti-terrorism footing. That's for the military to handle. It involves pre-emption. It involves lack of evidence. It is not a judicial process: it's a mode of war. And while investigation into terrorist cells is necessary, the procedures to do that should be kept under the rule of law for fear of damaging civil liberties. After all, what will you do in the absence of these protections? Offer reparations to victims of government abuse? There have been no reports of that happening. Provide apologies? From this administration? And that is the exact problem. The role of war is political: it seeks political ends for political purposes. The role of law is social and systemic. It is meant to be above politics and provide a framework for participation. Once you start confusing that, as Gonzales, Yoo, and others have done, you've completely missed the point of the law.
Many Republicans were calling for Gonzales to step down, and many Republican appointees were contradicting Gonzales' statements.
The anti-terrorism bit, even if valid, wouldn't apply to the firing of U.S. Attorneys. What does that have to do with anti-terrorism? If the firing offenses weren't conduct or performance-related, then what was the issue? Anti-terrorism doesn't cover this scandal, and no one should feel any sympathy for Gonzales screwing himself over in his testimony.

This all goes to the separation of the political and the legal. Gonzales and all the "loyal Bushies" (Goodling, etc.) made the mistake of thinking they serve the President. They don't. They serve at the pleasure of the President. But they serve the law. You forget that, and you forget the idea of justice.

Don't Drink That Water

2007-08-24T08:49:00.000-04:00

Elizabeth Economy has a fascinating article on China's environmental crisis and its impact on the economy. Doesn't mention the 50-mile long benzene slick that went to Russia, but it points out that levels of certain heavy metals along the Guangdong cost are 2000 times the regulation limits, the shrimp catch has declined 90 percent in the last 15 years, and around 190 million people suffer from respiratory illnesses.

It's all pretty staggering stuff, but there's relatively little hope that the Chinese government - both in Beijing and especially in the local areas - will take the necessary steps to ensure not just one-off improvements, but a long lasting system of monitoring and evaluation. The economic incentives just aren't there. A case in point: one factory owner said he was ignoring environmental regulations because the upgrade would equal 15 years worth of penalties. And while the central government is concerned about the environment, they're even more concerned about economic development. Unfortunately, that's just not the political environment for protecting the natural one.

EDIT: Additional articles and multimedia on the subject from the New York Times can be found here.

Beck: Mongolian Chop Squad

2007-08-21T19:21:00.000-04:00

That’s better than any opening lines I could come up. Beck: Mongolian Chop Squad is a manga cum anime that exemplifies the breath of the import flood of Japanese-created diversion that has my homegrown sorts of entertainments offsides lately. In brief, it’s coming of age time for Yukio (aka Koyuki), as an encounter with the bizarre dog Beck finds hi befriending its owner, Ryuusuke Minami. And adventurous hijinks later, in a band named after the dog. And what about Ryuusuke’ss sister Maho? See, interest piqued.

A pretty great premise I think, for a serial of any sort. I’d opted not to pick up the manga before as the art wasn’t for me, but read an interview* with the editor that talked about adapting it to an inevitable anime. A hard sell with manga, what with audio not being a sense that pages can convey, but the music seemed chosen with care—and the 30 volumes (6k+ worth of pages, probably) got compressed to one(!) season. Worth a shot.

And it does have a lot going for it. The characters are rounded, and the story grows naturalistically, if slightly cramped at times. I imagine a smoother revelation of the Olympic class swim coach also being a rock fan and guitar teacher, but maybe it’s just awkward because Yukio learns guitar in one summer, or one episode. But I’m happy not to read the 6 volumes it probably took. It pulls off a pretty hard feat of not being a melodramatic and subdued anime. There’s a moment when Koyuki is having a phone conversation with Ryuusuke early on in their relationship, and maybe because the latter was raised in America (or Holland, I can’t tell) he asks Koyuki not to add –kun and just say it suffixless. He says it’s because he doesn’t want to sound like a kid, and of course he’s all grown up, and Koyuki sits on the stair with the phone silently for a bit, and smiles. And if you know using a name without attachments indicates the closeness of family or lovers in Japan, it’s a pretty sweet scene.

Mind you, pauses don’t always work. Paul Gravett says that the financial constraints of Japanese cartoons sometimes makes animation less than fluid, and quiet moments could just be the studio being cheap. (He says cheap moments can have gravity actually, but I’m of the mind they’re just cheap here). So when longhaired figures mutter things sullenly in the rain, their eyes are covered by sulkiness—well, whatever, they’re teenagers, let’s let that go. The problematic part is the engrish (see: intro song). It’s one thing to have “Coko” instead of “Coke” and the cringe inducing “41nd street” or Ramonne Johnny—trademarks being what they are—but since they decided to “hit in America” and opt for lyrics in english, the misuse of language starts being a liability. The manga can’t do it, but here the music should be a star and not a misfire. I can ignore them in the joyful bop of the intro, but end of the day, some of the music sucks. “Full Moon Sways” (typing this out, I made a little vomitty sound).

Could be that this is just cultural misapprehension, or lack of effort—which is frankly a global game—but they don’t need to be complete sentences. Just you know, make more sense.**

In general, they sound like cheerful grunge, though doubtless the future holds more grand stylistic experiments with blues or punk, which I'm terribly frightened of. (Cowboy Bebop integrated music well, too, but “Real Folk Blues” was neither folk or blues--and that was the succesful anime. Samurai Champloo and Furi Kuri are a mite more successful. ) I don’t think the creators were shooting for the jovial Pearl Jam sound they ended up with in the Beck proper, but they seemed influenced by the biggest bands of the nineties mostly. (Ideally, I think they should go for a cleaner Dinosaur Jr., personally).

Well, I say it's worth watching.

* I’ve lost the link to it.
** I also question the use of foreigners for two incidents of gaijin related tomfoolery in four episodes: One a dangerous encounter with drunk marines(?); another two propositioning tourists (possibly it’s about the angry teen girl, but I dunno), but that might be a bit of national pride on my part. And as always, foolishness abides. Though the first scene is about more than plain idiocy.

Having a Good Time at a Bad Movie

2007-08-20T20:59:00.000-04:00

I saw Rush Hour Three last weekend. Yes, the same movie the New York Times called "soul-crushingly bad" or something to that effect. Yeah, it was. But luckily I was able to enjoy it with the use of Ninja mind control techniques. I know what you're thinking. There's only one white man in America who knows the way of the Ninja, and that man is American Ninja, Stephen Hayes.

No, there is another. Me. And I use Ninja mind control to watch Jackie Chan's Hollywood productions. Here's how it works. Ten minutes before the movie starts, you need to free your mind of all thoughts. ALL THOUGHTS. You can't think about anything more complicated than sitting there and/or deciding whether or not you want to go to the bathroom. Any stray memory, emotion, or shopping list, is something that you may subconciously compare with the movie. The movie will not come out of that comparison favorably.

"Did Jackie Chan try to speak jive in the last scene? It is gone."

It goes without saying that you need to empty your mind of all preconceptions. Any hopes or fears you have about the movie will taint your perceptions when you begin to watch it. You need calm. Crystal clear empty calm.

Don't think. Feel. When the movie comes, you should be in such a mind state that you will not be guessing what happens next and will not think about what happened even 10 seconds before. Experience each second as it happens. Don't follow the plot. Every scene should feel unique and new. Did Cris Tucker sing and ham up for the camera five minutes ago, and now he's doing it again and again? It doesn't matter, becuase those previous scenes are gone. Gone. Gone from your mind and gone from existence. With your Ninja mind, each Chris Tucker lip synch is new, fresh, and vital. Did Jackie Chan try to speak jive in the last scene? It is gone. Already forgotten. Characters go to France for no logical reason? That would bother you if you were watching the plot, but you are a Ninja and have no need for plots.

See how easy it is? When I came out from Rush Hour Three, I didn't feel frustrated or angry. I felt liberated. If was the liberation of the Ninja. I recommend it to you.

A word from our sponsor*

2007-08-20T14:24:00.000-04:00

Well, I haven't really gotten to what I wanted to get to lately...if it means anything to you three, I've finished the freelance assignment, so we're back in intermittent business here as well. To trumpet and herald the possible return of posts, I bring you something that's here because, to the best of my knowledge, it has never been remotely covered here despite inspiring the blog's name.

Announced at the best reason to go to Minnesota, GenCon: AD&D 4th Edition. It's got rules changes!

But much more importantly, it is Wizards of the Coast incorporating online play, which is ample reason for me to point out the real highlight of the article. Ladies and gentlemen, if it's not online, we're in meatspace. Couldn't have dreamed of a better term myself.

*Edited to make more sense. The whole post that is. I maintain that within 24 hours, wholesale changes may happen without notice to fix things. After that, they aren't mistakes. They are stylistic twitches that make things more better.

In the Incubator

2007-08-16T18:29:00.000-04:00

So, I've been mulling this issue over for some time, so this post is a little dated. Anyway, Washington, DC recently bid farewell to another scion of spin. I had once been asked why politics in the U.S. was so polarized. At the time, I (naively) said it could be the collapse of the Cold War consensus, or perhaps the fact that, with the proliferation of interactive communications technology, the ability to disseminate and enforce message has increased dramatically. That has led to a hardening of political identities, as pundits have been quick (kind of) in using the new media. And of course, there's Penny Arcade's take.

But now I understand the error of my ways. It's not some grand sociological or demographic shift. It comes down purely to the country-dividing and, indeed, soul-corrupting anti-Christ that is Karl Rove. And I must admit that the slew of biographies that have recently emerged have been a fascinating look into his personality, particularly this piece in the Atlantic. The explicitly divisive nature of his politics and strategy, and the impact that has had on the country, is astounding.

All of which makes me wonder why really hard-core conservative Republicans feel that it's the Democrats who are splitting the nation. And not just in hallmark issues like Iraq. No, I'm (or actually, they are) talking about No Child Left Behind and tax cuts. Those bills were pretty much steamrolled over any opposition or, really, meaningful discussion and debate, and it's astounding to me that they feel that there is no room to compromise or just talk things over.

While obviously partisanship has long predated Rove, I think what gets to me is not that the level of partisanship, but the nature this time around. This administration has a curious unwillingness to face the realities of their policies and politics more generally, and it's amazing that they can keep claiming victory when all the signs point to...well, not victory at least. And for that, we can thank Rove, who has been a master of tactical political surprise, even as he leads the nation and the President down to partisan hell. And it's that inability to admit mistakes which, I think, fuels this feeling among the conservative base that it's everyone else's fault. Which is surprising since so many Republicans talk about personal values, responsibility, and owning up to your faults.

Anyway, I really, REALLY want to be able to blame everything on Rove. But that would be wrong. Well, inaccurate more than wrong. It's not completely his fault, but I am not sad to see him go.

Don't Trust the Government

2007-08-05T21:20:00.000-04:00

Essentially, that's the whole message of the Bourne Ultimatum. Several images, as the New York Times review recounted, were reminiscent of Guantanamo, and I got chills from hearing David Straitharn talk casually about "rendition" (although I don't think many people heard it for some reason). All in all, slick set-up and choreography of action sequences that really makes you believe Jason Bourne is plotting everything out ten steps in advance, even while dodging punches.

"It puts me in the mood
to go puke."

But my one substantial disappointment from the second movie (also directed by Paul Greengrass) is present in the third (and final?). That man really needs to get a steadicam. As an avid consumer of martial films, I've come to expect steadier camera work so as to appreciate the nuances of the fight itself. Yes, I can certainly understand why directors think a shaky camera "puts you in the action". But they're wrong: it puts me in the mood to go puke. That of course detracts from my appreciation of the scene and overall plot. And the best fight scene in the movie was the one where the camera is held much more steadily than in all the others to allow the audience to witness the brutality of the fight (this was also emphasized by the lack of music). This is in contrast to, say, Children of Men, where there was certainly "shaky camera" work and you felt like you were standing right next to Clive Owen. But the long shots and wider frame mitigate the motion sickness.

But I don't want to go too far here. All in all, a solid movie with a nice, though simplistic, political core.

stupid nerds.

2007-07-31T11:34:00.000-04:00

I like to avoid link blogging and said like filler, but I also like to waste time today, so...Dirk Deppey at the Journalista blog had an entry today (under comics culture) that referred back to a New York Times article that is the very definition of filler for the paper which discusses nerdiness as an expression of hyperwhiteness and nerds as specifically "refusing to exercise the racial privilege upon which white youth cultures are founded." Some of the weaknesses in that vein of argument are in called out in Deppey's piece. I'm personally trying to figure out if I've misread my childhood and becoming a nerd was some sort of active rebellion as opposed to a defensive posture. And while joining any group while young is partly a defensive move, I don't recall "I want to be a nerd" being a rallying cry the way even preppies might have had it. Of course, that means that every exclusively white youth culture is either an absorption of African-American culture or a rebellion from absorbing it.

I'm especially thrilled that this racial reading of subculture (not inherently a bad mode to be) involves deracinating Asians as a group (oops). Possibly, our nerdlike cultural typing has either having been absorbed as whiteness or is not counted outright. I know our nation discusses race in black/white primarily...but you spring up from California with this stuff then you got to cast a wider net. I'm sure I'm leaving folks out too, but then, I haven't written a book yet. So, filler, and embarssing academia. Awesome.

EDIT: Someone other then me's actually coherent response to the article.

In Dubious Battle

2007-07-26T11:20:00.000-04:00

So, for Duvall, Jonny, and I, this article might strike a chord. Of derision. I trust that at the least it will inspire snickering.

An Old New Yorker Comic

2007-07-25T21:43:00.000-04:00

I find myself thinking about this one New Yorker comic a lot recently. Two people are walking down the street, with one of them shivering and saying "I feel like I've just been Googled." Well, in the interests of narcissism, I tried Googling us.

Obviously, there's us. Then there's Warren. Then there's a Chinese girl called Marylu whose page is down, but you can find it cached. Her cached page is apparently the closest description of our site from the search results. "Three collaborators blogging about love, democracy, and Chinese labor." (By the way, Marylu, if you're around, it should be four collaborators - and thanks for your interest in the blog).

Edit: re: Duvall's comment, I will modify my meaning on this last line:

In general, it was a little weird googling the blog itself. I mean, I've certainly googled my own name, but there was something surreal about seeing our names in the virtual lights. Or really, not seeing it up there.

ciencia del cohete

2007-07-24T13:00:00.000-04:00

August 10th

Food and Sleep

2007-07-21T16:55:00.000-04:00

If there was one moment when I could say that I felt like I was finally beginning to settle back into my USA life, it would have to be the day I got my gym membership. That was back in March. At that time I had been working for a month, I was basically finished setting up my apartment, and I really needed to settle into some kind routine that was completely unrelated to work. Exercise was a good bet for me because I have always been interested in physical fitness, and I know how to set up an intro routine having been in and out of shape about a dozen times over the last 15 years.

With my longish commute in mind, there was really no way for me to combine a strength and an endurance program. I only have 45 minutes of time to spend every morning, so it had to be one or the other. The lack of runable parks around here made my decision easy. I joined a gym and began a strength routine.

Now, three months later my results have been frustratingly modest at best. Sure, I went through the initial two-month surge. Most exercisers see significant gains throughout the first few months of exercise because lazy muscles respond to just about any stimulus. But, three months in I have already plateaued and I don’t see myself breaking through it. Why the pessimism? Because I know that my intensity is not the problem. Even though I hate it, I have been able to drag myself out of bed every morning at 6 am to go throw the plates around for an hour. The real culprits in my overmodest gains are my uneven diet and sleep patterns.

Sleep is a panacea for many ills and it can really hurt you when you can’t get enough of it. If you are trying to exercise (or sit through boring lectures), then don’t expect to improve unless you can get enough sleep. This was a serious problem in high school when I suffered from insomnia. I remember then hitting a certain exercise wall that I couldn’t go past. The problem I’m facing now is that I can’t go to bed early enough. 10 pm should be my absolute ceiling for bed time, but I’m lucky if I can be in bed by 11pm. Not only does this make getting up at 6 am bloody murder, but it just sucks the life out of a workout and it kills recovery. While recovering from a strength workout, every hour of sleep is precious. If you can’t get enough sleep, then your body cannot keep up repairing the damage that you are doing to it. This is when you plateau and you notice your strength gains start to dip.

My dietary habits have not been so hot either. I tend to make three good healthy meals for myself every day Monday through Friday. Sound good? It isn’t. There should be at least five meals a day to keep my insulin levels fairly even and my metabolism up. But frankly, I can’t keep up. One solution would be to split my lunch in two, eating part of it around 10 am and the other part around 2 pm, but my work schedule does not really allow for this. What happens is I end up tanking three large meals a day, and this has not been beneficial to my waistline at all. Also, weekends have proven to be killers with frequent trips home and meals out. As tasty as it is, Mexican food is a fat bomb and Chinese restaurants use too much oil (I am not singling out Chinese restaurants. Most restaurants up the oil/fat content of their food to make it taste better. I just happen to eat Chinese a lot.) Even at home, I tend to snack around on sweet things on the weekends. We still have a full cake in the freezer that I haven’t touched. That’ll have to go somewhere soon. We also have honey-covered almonds, candy, chocolate, and other stuff just sitting around. When I go home, my mom unloads this junk on us and temptation is too much to refuse.

So that’s the way it is. Strength gains are hugely reliant on consistent diet and sleep. Does this mean that you need to measure your food out with a measuring cup? It sure does. Otherwise you end up eating too little, not recovering, and wasting an hour in the gym.

Well, what else is there to say other than life improves with better time management. Something I definitely need to learn.

Incredible Rats

2007-07-19T21:17:00.000-04:00

What can I say? After a month or more of not writing, Duvall's inspired me to pick up the electronic pen again. That, and I'm a bit tipsy.

Anyway, I've been meaning to write this post for some time, but my thoughts don't seem to coalesce meaningfully. GF and I saw "Ratatouille," which was absolutely great. Excellent animation, which then recedes as you get absorbed by the plot. As a sign of all this, I actually felt hungry after seeing a movie about rats in the kitchen.

But, I was wondering if the director, Brad Bird, was softening on his somewhat Objectivist tone laid out in "The Incredibles." There, the catch phrase was "when everyone is special, nobody is", which is oddly depressing for a Disney venture (except for the fake ending at the end of Pirates 3 - which, by the way, don't see). In Ratatouille, the phrase is "anyone can cook", but as none other than Peter O'Toole intones, the meaning is not that anybody can cook. Rather, it's that truly great cooking can come from anywhere.

A softer tone to be sure. But I wonder if Brad sells the power of learning and practice too short. After all, the "natural endowments" of the brain are increasingly being shown to be a product of application and hard work, not "natural" abilities. But Bird tends to cast these things as significant, but perhaps not important. *spoilers* Remy, the main rat, has a natural gift, it is implied. But the female sous chef - who has worked her ass off to get where she is - is several times upstaged by Remy or him controlling his human puppet. And while I don't doubt that genius can be a matter of inspiration, it's also very much a product of knowing enough to do something with that inspiration.

Which is not to say that I didn't find the movie compelling, funny, and entertaining. And yes, I choked up a little at the penultimate scene. But, what is Bird thinking? What is going in his head? How has his thinking evolved between these two movies? And what does this bode for the third? I like his movies because he doesn't pander to the Disney crowd. It's no original Transformers movie, but it's a far cry from Cinderella. I don't want him to lose his edge, but I'd certainly like him to be a bit more introspective about what his message is and the wider context it plays in. That may be too much for a cartoon, even one being directed by as skilled an individual as Bird, but it is one thing which, for me, would move his films from "good for adults, but you can take your kids to it" to "good for both kids and adults."

Slumming in Shanghai

2007-07-19T16:03:00.000-04:00

I never truly grasped how much puff there is in newspapers until I started reading them regularly. If mistake reading a trend piece looking for news, I mostly shrug, with the occasional shake of the head at a particularly poorly constructed segue. Now it’s evident that the advent of blogging that diarylike pieces has provided a new arena for fluff to appear. The New York Times is running some sort of series about people making homes in foreign countries, a interesting enough start point.

Not so much for the commentary about China or Shanghai, (despite the red state label)—though the broker stuff is kinda interesting to me—I was struck by this piece. Well, by about a page of this piece, before I got bored and skimmed the rest. I’m struck by the weird blinders on the writer, the lack of self-awareness combined with the sense that the writer is thoughtful. And don’t mean her interaction with China, and I actually don’t want to discuss China in this post, but the strange dissonance in the article.

She’s moving out of New York, tired of boutique shops on Bleecker and the $20 hamburgers.* The fear of terrorism is certainly real, but a good of her motivation to move seems to be related to escaping being surrounded by conspicuous consumption, even while marveling at the ease for finding a 2k sq. foot space plus for 1,500 a month (a couple hundred less than per capita in China). The experience of finding her newly renovated rented family house in old middle class neighborhood (the sort getting plumbing while developers force out tenants) with an oven, ac and heater is likened to finding a $150 a month apartment in New York back in the day. I tell you I can find an apartment in Shanghai right now for $150. It might come with a bucket.

So she’s leaving New York to Shanghai to escape conspicuous consumption, and I wouldn’t begrudge that, and I know this Home and Garden**, but what the hell? The theme in the piece that keeps coming is the energy in the new gold rush Shanghai is like living in early 70s New York. Target audience or not, what kind of dissonance is required to decide that's a good notion? Now, I didn’t live in New York in the seventies, but presumably she’s excited for the economy to bottom out and all the attendant crises. Much to look forward to. But her neighbors are thrifty and not wasteful. And the middle class and poor, they live near by. And I guess living next door to that might assuage whatever ill-defined (not even necessarily necessary) guilt she might feel.

Anyway, good luck to Shanghai, hopefully not actually beginning to feel the greatness of New York in the seventies, or it has an absolute shit decade to come.

* There is that foi gras burger though that’s bound to be more than twenty, but I still don’t know where to get a $20 burger other than in hotels.
** There’s always the occasional article about young people happy to be independent in soho and with the parents paying for freshdirect.

A dog, a pig, a chicken, and a horse. And not one of them makes money.

2007-07-13T17:31:00.000-04:00

I've been playing Harvest Moon: Magical Melody of late. You play a m/f new landowner in Flower Bud village (I suggest the river estate and farming for income first, livestock's not worth it). And then you proceed to farm, mine, fish, or what have you. Or, there's some boondoogle about ressurecting the Harvest Goddess or something--but growing corn, that's where it's at. It's video game farming, more or less as close as I'm going or wanting to get to that sort of exertion.

You make money by shipping items, and what you ship attracts people and businesses to the village. Ship ore, a blacksmith might come, and so on. The trouble is, people move out if they're not happy or get no business. But you are the lone supplier and customer it seems. I spend all my time watering crops, brushing my animals, and giving gifts to the lovely ladies of the village (in hopes of getting married and getting farm help). And the fisherman, the mayor, the atelier(!). And mean, androgynous Jamie. Only Woody the old woodsman seems happy enough not to move away.

I feel put upon. Why am I alone, the economic lynchpin of this whole town? Responsible for everyone's emotional well being? Isn't there some sort of incentive zoning the mayor could pull? Can't the people form a bridge club? My horse doesn't even pull a plow, and I got fields to water too. A scrappy, young go-getter like myself should be off to the big city, but all the opportunities there are related to crime or raising fighting cocks. Ah well, the big city's just not ready for me yet.

Extremely Loud and Incredibly … Awesome.*

2007-07-04T00:33:00.000-04:00

Transformers is awesome.

While I think it's clear the notion of giant robots fighting should either be elicit a grin (possibly a serious, silent nod first, followed by grinning) or a look with a whiff of disapproval, I will attempt to say something that adds up to a "review".

Transformers is about...no this going to get stupid really fast. Giant robots fight and punch each other. Forget the plot, it's serviceable. It's got ignorable holes. It makes more sense than Final Fantasy. The action scenes provide enough kinetic excitement. They're not easy or sequential, per se, but I didn't find the action scenes hard to follow. In fact, the direction was otherwise pretty clear to me. I mean, I've never watched a whole Michael Bay movie till this one (5 minutes of Armageddon made my head hurt), but it was fine to me. Maybe he had to hold shots longer so ILM would have a stable scene to play with?

My niggling comments, bad: Weak Australian hacker, overly expository interlude to "explain things" between the "blowing things up". A jarring Apple product placement (seriously, pentagon laptops aren't going to be macbooks)...rampant product placement throughout actually. A couple lazy lowbrow jokes too many.

My niggling comments, good: Surprisingly good robot design. More than just punching fighting. Enough insider jokes and lines (not enough cheering at "Roll out!" with my crowd, to my mind). Hits the PG-13 sweet spot well. All the actors are involved enough to act, and not just pull paychecks (Star Wars prequels, I mean you).

"Significant" comments: Boy, that conclusion is kinda weird. If it's weak, its only the very, very end--but still. Shia LaBeouf (his build suggests his teenager playing days are over) is good throughout. The sign of a fine actor to me is pulling off stupid, stupid lines. And "My friend Optimus Prime" is a pretty stupid thing to say. He does it well. And professional voice actors like Peter Cullen (Optimus) are just light years ahead of celebrity voices, seeing as they can grunt in character.

I still feel like most of this immaterial. You'll know whether you like it from the trailer alone. Is this a arrested development kid thing? Like wanting to own a monkey? It's not the apotheosis of thirteen-year-old boy awesomeness that is Chronicles of Riddick, but...

Transformers: Less awesome than Riddick, awesomer than anything else this year. That's a pretty fair calculation, I think.

Quick alternate take:
The Allspark...always Allspark, never Cube shouldn't so definitively be destructive. Dumb robots should be created, instead of evil ones. Megatron should've gotten it and become more powerful, evolving into say...uh...UltraMegatron (not, not Galvatron, shut up.) but the fusion would be incomplete. The Autobots would defeat him in his Super Saiyan mode, with everything blowing up. Right now, since Optimus clearly has not hesitation about killing Decepticons, the confusion at the end is dumb. The aborted self-sacrifice is meaningless, since it's not the logical option.

Also, no making out on top of sentient beings. Creepy.

* Yes, that was the Slate Summary Judgment headline. But I'm making it affirmative, so it's mine, right?

Pandora, the shirt I wanted was taken.

2007-06-27T20:00:00.000-04:00

So, I attended a Pandora meetup last week, Pandora being the internet radio service that’s grown out of the music genome project that studies songs, assigning scores among 400 different “genes” to sort of stamp out what the qualities of a song are. It’s a mechanism for finding recommendations based on what you like, rather than genre expectations or cultural approval. They built it into a radio system where you plug in an artist or song that you like, and then play songs that are qualitatively similar.

A bit (the whole meet up was basically a “town hall” meeting led by Tim Westergren, one of the founders) went toward explain the selection process, which is the sort of gear shifting that interests me. Since the genes are rated, there’s score to a song. So the next song may be the next closest in score. If all but one gene is the same, the different one...ehh...rhythmic vocalizations*, will define the distance. A song with the score of 5 may be followed by one that’s equal except for a 3 in a gene, rather one euqal except with a 9. And there’s weight to the genes as well, so a song 5 apart on vibrato might still be played before another one that is only 2 apart, but on the tempo scale—changes in tempo being much more significant (the most significant, actually). A neat business that means you might hear a lot of Celine Dion (the most thumbed down artist), whatever you might think you like.

Interestedly, “era” is a gene, and means that song selections gravitate toward a 20 year spectrum from the jump off. That’s a little off to me, since it seems like a non-musicology oriented classification to have—maybe it’s used to account for the variance in production values of the years.

I’ve enjoyed the system, and think it’s worth a shot for those who want to sample something close to what they like. I discovered my love of No Doubt and Gwen Stefani—‘cause really, that’s just New Wave isn’t it? Sadly, no Duvall approved “dumb lyrics” +/- system has yet to be implemented.** The site itself may be robust enough to a have a community, for those into that sort of thing, though I wonder how many presences people can maintain. Anyway, Pandora is pretty big. It managed 400,000 faxes in three days, the fasted inundation of Congress ever, after a call to arms regarding recent RIAA royalty shenanigans and internet radio. A fact both impressive and sad (as Westergren noted), since it means the most people get riled about is when you threaten their free music.

Learned other things: its on an value-added advertising business model, random recs is an interesting idea that executes poorly, as is computer listening (Pandora has 50(?) full time trained listeners quantifying songs). Then I dodged a thunderstorm.

Didn’t get the nice looking shirt (for the best, I don’t need more shirts), but got a nice hat, though. You know me and hats.

* I’m making shit up.
** No, Pandora, I do not like Ashlee Simpson. Stop it.

Reading list: Yotsuba&!

2007-06-18T11:00:00.000-04:00

Yotsuba&! is the perfectest comic ever. If you do not think so, your heart has been replaced by a shriveled up turnip.

* EDITED TO ADD: On a related note, there's a new action figure. If you follow the links, I actually think the old one is better. Better yet, there should be a plush. Not that I'd get one, mind you...

Stanook of Stanooklyn

2007-06-15T12:08:00.000-04:00

After reading hcduvall's post on Civil War, I started thinking, "what other things piss me off?" and I immediately thought of the The Stanhattan Project. A few days ago, I found out about this outreach done by Marvel in the early 90's as a result of a conversation about Brian K. Vaughn. Now, I have nothing in particular to say about Vaughn. I think he has a great deal of talent and would have probably become a successful writer no matter what. But the way in which he broke into comics was particularly of interest. Vaughn was a sophmore at NYU studying dramatic writing when he came across the Stanhattan Project. Basically, at the time, Marvel was introspective enough to realize that there was an unhealthy amount of overlap between the writing staff and editorial staff. And like all incestuous relationships, the product was suffering. So, from what I've gathered from a few lazy google searches, they assigned two Marvel editors to NYU, with the express goal of finding new young talent, trained in diverse areas. Vaughn was a direct outcome of this program (where they would initially just script already paneled and inked pages). And I'd say he's one heck of a find.

So, I guess what I'm saying is, the Stanhattan Project sounds awesome. What the heck happened to it? Are the editors too busy drawing pin-ups for alternate covers? I make the case that comics are even more of an incestuous old boys club nowadays, and the cynical half-literate social commentary that Civil War thought itself to be aside, every major title seems to be suffering for it. I feel like I've been bouncing up and down with my hard-earned dollars in hand, just begging the doors to open every wednesday morning, and then walking away unable to buy a single thing. How is pit ossible for a company to continually push away a customer that is looking for every excuse to buy their product?

Alternate takes: Civil War

2007-06-13T15:00:00.000-04:00

Civil War (for those of you who aren't Danny Don't) was Marvel's last event crossover where a disaster amongst superpowered beings prompted the US gov't to enact registration laws--an arguable "realistic" idea and really a pretty good one for a story. So all the superfolks line up for and against, and this being about superheros, punch their way to resolution. Along the way, Captain America starts recruiting sociopaths, Iron Man connives like Lex Luthor, Venom gets pupils, and I ponder who're the idiots who had to approve Clor. Basically, a good idea executed even worse than expected, which is to say, clumsier than having the drug czar's daughter in Traffic sell herself to the representative young/black man/inner city menace, who thankfully didn't talk jive like drug dealers in 21 Jump Street. Actually, Civil War's not that bad if you think of Tony Stark as Rhett Butler and Steve Rodgers as Scarlett O'Hara..."Frankly, Captain America, I don't give a damn." Spider-Man is Ashely and Reed Richards is codependent Mammy.* Except, I guess, the South wins.**

Anyway, it's just been revealed to much fanboy whinging, that instead of Loki or Iron Man himself, the whole fracas might've been instigated by the shape-shifting other known as Skrulls. A pretty weak idea. In the course of lamenting it, though, a Newsarama commenter describes the bad idea in the form of what I think is a great idea.

Suddenly, Skrulls!

If I was one of those folks with inclination, I'd photoshop a fake Broadway sign with that phrase, lights around it like 42nd Street or Ziegfeld Follies. I know it'd be hard in comic book form but Marvel should sure as hell make its next crossover a musical if it can.

* This might not make sense if you've read the book or watched the movie, of which I've done neither. It amuses me though.
** Until the Hulk, representing the economic and industrial might of more developed North, smashes. World War Hulk indeed. My next rpg character's gotta be named Sherman Hulk.

Big Brother is Watching...

2007-06-08T11:34:00.000-04:00

Running off various conversations and perusing Boingboing, I've been wondering about the scope of privacy with all the new technology that is emerging. And the debate is getting shrill on both sides. You have people who don't ever want their pictures taken and posted, even if they are in a public setting. And you have others who contend that this first group are a bunch of wackos who don't understand technology and its penetration. And of course, tied up in all this is something of the debate over open source, DRM, Google scholar, and copyrights.

I don't have any clear answers on this, only a few observations. First, I'd love to see how Japan handles it. Second, I have to admit that the shrillness on the pro-tech, pro-open source side (for extreme lack of a better description) seems to me more galling than the other anti-tech side, if only because they've already accepted the increased influence of technology, but don't really understand why people get squeemish about it. It's that lack of empathy to a pretty understandable human reaction that I find disturbing.

Third, the pro-tech side seems to feel like measures to opt-out of programs like Google Streetview are sufficient. If you have the ability to get out of these things, then you shouldn't really complain. But I don't think that's enough. In basic photography, it's considered good etiquette that, if you take someone's picture (where they are clearly identifiable), you should ask them if it's okay for you to use it. Now, there's some question as to whether you do this before or after taking the shot, etc., but you are using someone else's image, which they may or may not be cool with. Simply as a respect matter, it's a nice thing to do.

The issue with opting out when you start discussing advanced technology is one of knowledge and accessibility. When shooting a movie or a photo, you can usually make immediate contact with the individuals to ask them for permission. At the very least, it is easier to make a good faith effort, because people are more likely to notice what you're doing. But with these other techs, it's difficult to know when you're online. In the same way that the recent Supreme Court case on gender discrimination was horribly decided, it seems galling that someone be reasonably expected to know when their images or identity are placed on something as vast as the internet and take legal and moral responsibility.

And this goes to an interesting question, not simply between the rights to property versus religion versus speech, but what we mean by public and private. Can we meaningfully "switch hats?" Do different protocols apply when we, say, run to the shops versus when we make political speech? To a certain extent, yes, in that political speech is governed by the first amendment, whereas running to the shops is governed by property. But to any observer, figuring out what is public and what is private is difficult to know, the moreso when you have the boundary of advanced technology taking the place of meetings and interactions between individuals.

In the end, my political sensibilities fire up. There is certainly a danger on the anti-tech side of too much privacy, of an inability to disclose anything for fear of embarrassment. This applies especially, I think, to government action and oversight, and you'll find no one more supportive of monitoring of public actions and roles. But, in the impulse to "democratize" (again, so not the right word) that is given by the Internet, the push against monolithic controls and eavesdropping which is such a common refrain amongst "Web 2.0 or 3.0"-ers must be tempered with the knowledge that "Big Brother" is not always a single organ. There can be just as much tyranny of the group, or just simply lots of individuals, as there is tyranny by one body. Just as there is a chilling effect when one group takes it upon itself to interfere excessively with other peoples' business, we have to be concerned about the stifling of expression and creativity if everyone is watching everyone else, particularly in public spaces. We watch celebrities because we are attracted to their public personas, but at the same time, most of us know enough not to want to have to constantly be putting up those personas. That's an issue that requires much more thought than is presented by the polarized debate.

Knocked Up

2007-06-05T12:21:00.001-04:00

All I can say is "Go see it." Not quite as funny as "The 40-Year Old Virgin", but still hilarious.

Pa-pri-ka!

2007-06-01T18:30:00.000-04:00

Satoshi Kon's Paprika is a frequently beautiful movie about dreams, neurotic ones and others, but mostly controlling dreams. Specifically how they exert their own influences on the people who carry them. Plot: there's an invention (the DC Mini), created by a childish genius (Tokita) that allows people to enter each others' dreams and...well...just share them really. Actually controlling them, like lucid dreaming, is a pretty nebulous concept here. Perhaps one can coax insight from them instead. Some of the prototypes go missing, and while there are beneficial unauthorized uses of such things (as by Paprika, the instinctual therapist), suffice to say there's some dangerous circumstances when dreams are let loose; ambition and dreams mix uncontentedly. There's also a cop and an unsolved murder, and the chairman of the board, who doesn't seem to like any of this. And along the way Kon may show you a parade (probably no less fantastic if you happen to recognize some of the mystical creatures within).

The spectacles onscreen are entertaining and fun, but don't overwhelm the pretty straightforward ideas that presented, and which actually don’t collapse after a glance.* Quite the rare thing in anime. Kon is telling a story about creativity itself and the people who traffic in it. All geniuses are creative people, whether artists or scientists, and share the same drive. Its quite a refreshing thing to see the trappings of modernity not as something dehumanizing—harmony and well-being as being possible within modernity. Paprika has neither the abject simple wonder of technology of say, Steamboy, or fetishing as with Oshii or Shirow, or just retrograde, luddite thinking (anything in feudal French costume). Hayao Miyazaki probably sits somewhere between in this (he’s just melancholy). I’m sure one who spelunk further and other themes than that, like the connection between dreaming and movies that gets its own airing out, but I haven’t unpacked all the imagery just yet.

The most pleasant surprise to me, I will venture to add, were the women in the movie. That Dr. Chiba and Paprika are fully-realized people. Paprika has pretty traditional ideas about sex, but mature and respectful ones. And the women are active in the story. And as opposed to men with breasts and guns, they are adults.

It’s a movie about movies while not being about just this movie. It's about things Satoshi Kon has thought about before (and had more than one conversation about). It doesn’t lecture, and it entertains, and it’s warm and imaginative. That's more than you get most days, and not in your summer blockbusters.

*Oh Ghost in the Shell 2, you are the dumbest, boringest cyborg story ever made. Pretty though.

fast zombies vs. slow zombies

2007-06-01T18:26:00.000-04:00

Slow zombies are the slow, horrible encroachment. Damp things you can't stop. Slow zombie movies are about life without your brain. Being dead in your body or your mind. That's useful metaphoring right there.

Fast zombies are pouncy, like smelly sabertooth tigers. Or big roaches. Fast zombie movies are slasher films. That's panic, not dread.

Slow zombies rule.

Last one from me today

2007-05-29T11:52:00.000-04:00

After a long drought, it appears that I can't stop posting. So, last one from me. A great article in the NYTimes about new products designed to improve earning capability and basic tasks in developing countries:

http://www.nytimes.com/2007/05/29/science/29cheap.html

See the actual exhibit here:

http://www.peoplesdesignaward.org/design_for_the_other_90/

Turkey redux

2007-05-29T11:20:00.000-04:00

I just finished Snow by Orhan Pamuk, a writer whom everyone says is "narrating his country into existence", or something like that. Evidently, a lot of people are reading this book, although I got it because GF gave it to me as a present.

It's a remarkable work, both for its immediacy as a political novel and the intimacy with which the grandly political is made insular and personal. There were a lot of dimensions to this book, but they cut along the lines of Islam versus secularism, radical Islam versus the West, city versus rural, poverty versus affluence, happiness versus unreasonable expectations, and love versus love. All well reflective of the social divergences I saw in Turkey when I was there two months ago. And given the recent protests, somewhat common knowledge now in the world more generally.

Which leaves me wondering several things about the book. First off, there was a line at the very end where a character asks the author (also named Orhan) to include his statement that readers shouldn't believe anything Orhan writes about them. That's not a real question, but something that leaves a pall over all my questions. Second, I wonder how genuine the conversations are, how reflective they are of what a secularist and an Islamist would say to each other given the chance. Because the interactions/discussions portrayed in the book oftentimes startling in their brutality, duplicity, and general lack of awareness. Pamuk (the real author) seems to place most of this onus on the Islamists, so I wonder how genuine this portrayal is or if it is a sign of his political sensibilities. In either case, the fifth chapter or so when the Director for Education is shot is an illuminating look into Turkish Islamism, or at least Pamuk's understanding of it.

And finally, was I supposed to hate all the characters about 3/4 of the way through? At that point, I wanted to throw up my hands, go to Kars (the setting for the novel), and straighten them all out, if only because a solution seemed so blindingly obvious. But, then I think Pamuk wanted readers to feel that way, because it sets up some greater tension and meaningful disappointment later on.

But overall, a great read, especially for knowing more about the tensions in a really interesting (and strategically important) country. Can't wait to read "My Name is Red."

Pirates 3

2007-05-29T10:51:00.000-04:00

The short version of my review: it sucked. Not as badly as #2, but that's really not hard, since the second was a 2-hour trailer for the third.

Now the longer version. It was nice to see some of the various storylines coming together, but the missing element in all this was the interests each of them had in their...whatever it was they were doing (mostly screwing each other over - and btw, spoilers ahead). It wasn't clear, for example, why Orlando wanting to save his father necessarily goes against Keira Knightly. Or what the hell Jack Sparrow was after (immortality? legendary status?). As a result, you didn't get the banter or witticisms that came from Jack playing off all the characters against each other in the first and to a lesser degree the second.

Action was fine, and there were some really cool shots, but the lack of motivation for the characters really inhibited things. I think a big inhibiting factor is that no one has really ever made a successful naval battle shine on the screen (please correct me if I'm wrong, as I'd love to see it). It all boils down to what happens on deck, or in the tight framing of two ships going at it, but you don't get the grand sense of what's happening in the wider battle. Truth be told, this is probably the case in larger land battle films, but the particular nature of naval warfare (separate ships and all) makes it hard to film. I guess one could go the Alexander the Great-route (the movie with Colin Ferrell), but that style was just terrible.

Now, the ending. I actually liked the ambiguous nature of the ending, and how Will Turner and Elizabeth Turner (married in the middle of a naval battle in probably one of the worst contrived scenes ever made) could only see each other every ten years. It was much better than the saccarine tales where everyone lived happily ever after. But Duvall has sent me to

http://pwbeat.publishersweekly.com/blog/2007/05/29/pirates-of-the-caribbean-at-exhaustions-end/#more-2620

where I discovered that that was not, in fact, the ending. I would have vastly preferred the nominally more "heart-wrenching" ending, if only because it suits my sensibilities of responsibility and adulthood better, and it's a nice way to round off the series. But of course, that closes off the possibility of Pirates 4, which, unfortunately, I'm sure someone will drag me to see.

*sigh* The series started out with such promise, but it pulled a Matrix in the end.

T Minus 10

2007-05-16T22:00:00.000-04:00

Izicmo and her classmates at SVA just finished their first year, and have put on a show that I heartily endorse to those interested in graphic design (the thesis show is probably a good bet too). They're about social issues as toylines, in attractive packaging and done with more than occasional wit. Even the weakest ones have one or two items that are contenders for great ideas.

The good, the bad, and the not quite there as general categories are pretty much universal amongst most observers*. But final rankings end up may be exercises in taste, and it’s in the nitpicking that all the interesting talk happens.

My own contributions to such discussions are influenced by one of the quirks in my thinking, my faux-laymanism (what a terrible sounding –ism. I’ll replace it later.) Basically, there are a few exhibits that are middlebrow—as a category, not a pejorative. Meaning, hot topics the way “racism is bad” and “babies are cute” are hot topics. Nothing no one can’t get behind. I don’t mind that, though the thing is, if you present me a topic that don’t think I’m an expert in (as in virtually anything)**, and I think of something I don’t hear/or see commented on or considered, or in this case presented, then I think you didn’t try too hard. I’m pretty accepting of earnestness these days, just not lazy thinking. That’s pretty much what middlebrow is to me…anything I go with “yeah, and?” to. Still, I feel a little guilty when my judgment is more or less a huffy "not as smart as me."

My other tweak, and this is probably obvious, is that I prefer concept over execution, such that marginally different things, like the dim idea crappily executed, I find better than the no idea beautifully rendered. (I gather that the one I took as a dim exhibit may also have been a no idea one. But you got to give the participants authorial intent, or else you’re playing inside baseball—which isn't really part of this exercise and is playing off personality rather than work). So your reach can exceed your grasp, if you’ve got the nerves to talk something interesting. At least it'll be interesting.

I’m purposely not being too specific about the exhibits, because, well, there’s nineteen of them and I’m lazy and if you can you should see for yourselves. And if comic reviews are kinda awkward without pics, then this is an even steeper hill unless I turn it into a Slate shopping guide or I'll have to focus on one. May'be I'll try (oooh, another one for the wishful thinking bucket). Anyway, my criteria doesn't necessarily give you the best of graphic design (communication as creative problem solving?), but I do think my favorite of the exhibition, “Lone”, happens to be the most successful one too. Great execution coupled with subtle concepts. It should be a contender for everybody’s best, if not favorite.

If you folks check it out, look out for "Lone", the vinyl siding costume, the foie gras duck backpack (even if hanging them on the ceiling fan is a misfire), and the slutty virgin mary***, and give “Gloomy” time to grow on you.

* Of the sophisticated crew I was with. The rest of you unless I know you or you agree with me are all philistines.
** Except the Guardians of the Galaxy. I even wrote letters. One even got printed.
*** Bit of a gimme. But then, given the persistence of the Madonna/Whore thing, blunt is probably best.

filler

2007-05-16T21:03:00.000-04:00

I picked up Nova #2 today, because I felt consumery and I wanted to read something where post-Civil War Iron Man, oh how far you've fallen, and another character didn't talk like doofs. Other than Speedball looking like Spawn...when did Venom get eyeballs?

bloglines + Heroes + filler

2007-05-15T13:55:00.000-04:00

For those three of you who may read this,* may I direct you to several of esteemed content providers on the right? I should've when I added them, but am a fool.

Geoff Klock analyses comics and pop culture with intellectual rigor and discipline. I can only do that for things I don't. Recommendations are much cooler than snubs. Therefore Geoff Klock is much cooler than me, despite the villainous moniker.

Warren Peace reviews lots of promising comics. If they're good he'll tell you. And if they're not he'll tell you also. And he uses a scanner. So he blogs text and pictures practically everyday, which leads me to suspect he's a supernatural creature of some sort, or at least has one in his service.

Clean Plate Club catalogs places with good food in New York City. That probably makes it the most useful of the lot. And it's witty too.

Memes provides Hobs the space for Hobs to pontificate without my rude interruption. Actually thats not true, but it'd doubtless be a good thing if it were true.

And I don't think this merits its own post, so here it is, stuck to the bottom of the shoe: I saw part of Heroes last night, and I must say, I didn't realize that a full third of the people seem to have emo haircuts. And then I watched Volver and processed four thoughts: Penelope Cruz is really pretty. Pedro Almodolvar is really good. His sense of proportion regarding the beauty of pure emotions and personal responsibility (emotional concessions to social mores) seems off. (see also: Talk to Her) I would kill for wallpaper like the patterns that appeared during the credits.**

***

* Ahh, I'm behind on my reading list posts, huh? Naruto and Mushishi: not done. Bleach: coming up. I wonder how often I can change the template in a simulation of progress--or use these filler posts in a simulation of content production.
** Not a human being. Probably, just any animal you don't automatically anthropomorpize. I might maim though; I liked the patterns that much.

***EDITED TO ADD SAID CREDITS FROM THE INTERNET'S NO.1 SOURCE OF COPYRIGHTED MATERIAL

Purchases

2007-05-09T17:57:00.000-04:00

Every so often I get the buying bug, and that mostly means I pick up a video game or some books or - lately - components for my computer. And because I'm cheap, I agonize over every purchase: is this worth it? Do I really need this? How much will I really enjoy this? Wouldn't I be better served by just listening to more NPR? blah blah blah

To give you a sense of scale, I spent months selecting components for my PC (Duvall can attest to this) and, after living in my new city for over two years, I have only just gotten an Internet connection after much debate. My life has improved immeasurably because of it.

In the interests of letting you take part in this angst, I have a question. My current buying bug is focused on getting a DVD burner for my computer. I already have a DVD player, but sometimes I wonder whether it would be nice to play a CD and a movie at the same time. I would only really use the burner to copy some files on a DVD, which I could probably do at work. But the idea of having two appeals to me for some reason.

So, what do you all think? And if you think two players is a good thing, why? What could I do with them both?

Die Spinne III

2007-05-07T11:56:00.000-04:00

Maybe I make too many concessions to adaptations, and perhaps I didn't think the second one was much better than the first, and therefore the apotheosis of comic book movie. I liked Spider-Man 3. I thought it handled itself well, and I think it was better for all the clutter than a smoother, simpler plot--which would've involved a lot more emotional hammering (that's what I think of the second one).

All the excesses and tics of the first two are present here, after all. Dead earnestness is always required for the melodrama, and while the effects have kept on improving, the character's have always been the most important part (which is probably why I don't mind not being in costume so much). Swinging only looks cool when he's falling anyway. I'm slightly annoyed with a butler scene.* Some scenes probably needed more breathing room, but I prefer the clunky movie we got, rather than an interminable 3 hour slog. Which of course meant any draggy bits had to be shorter (than the second one again. What? did people actually like that doctor impotent thing, or the neighbor's cookie scene?). It's like a comic printed on a bad register, the colors all fall out of lines, and his hand looks like it's the jacket, but it's better for it.

>>NERD TRANSMISSION BEGINS

My degree in advanced nerd compels me to say that there ought to be at least 3 more movies: No. 4 A disabled, powerful industrialist hires a thieves to steal Oscorp technology in the hopes gaining some of the biotech. He hires Dr. Curt Connors to decipher the tech. Terrible accident caused by Spider-Man creates the Lizard, who Spider-Man needs to stop. But oh, another thief made off with the straight tech. No. 5 The industrialist Alister Smythe attacks with the Spider-Slayers, and outfits another thief with a powered suit (The Scorpion), in hopes of getting the rest of the Osborn technology. Spider-Man needs to rescue Dr. Connors, who is captured and convinced to continue the research in hopes of curing himself, even as he is asked to advance the serums for the Smythe. Smythe thinks Connors is holding out on him and doses him. Inexplicably Connors looks cured and he doses himself. In the meantime Spider-Man tracks them down with the help of the thief from the 4th movie, the Black Cat. Connors helps Smythe escape, even as he helps Spider-Man beat the Scorpion.
No. 6 Enter the Sinister Six: Kraven the Hunter appears to chase after Spider-Man for ratings for the first act, and just when he's cornered: the Scorpion, Mysterio (as Doc Ock has sadly been rendered useless), and Carnage (a failed synthesis of the Osborne serum and the symbiote also created by the gov't) at the same time, all manipulated by Smythe, the newly insane new Goblin. Venom reappears just 'cause he hates spider-Man that much, though you know he'll fight Carnage later. Only with Sandman and Black Cat, and I dunno, with someone like Silver Sable (hired to capture Kraven), will Spider-Man have a chance.

>>NERD TRANSMISSION COMPLETE

The overstuffed nature actually made it similar to my old comic reading experience. All it needed was a caption box with the editor telling you where to read scenes you missed (the novelization, as those things are usually based on a full screenplay). Spectacular to see this scene, or check out avengers number whatever to find out about the meteor that is a remnant of an inhuman battle with the fantastic four or something. Which, in the end, is probably why I seem to like this movie better than most people do. All the stories I didn't see on screen I've read and have in my head. I know all the whys and wherefores, plugged the gaps, and moved along.

* And I have fanboy complaint: the spider-sense wasn't played up much. If he looks in the right direction most of the time, it would've worked. And Venom clocking him would indicate he does sense him. You can even exposit that "you don't see me, do you?" or something. But fanboy complaints are worth as much as a blog post.

I went to edit some spacing...

2007-05-03T17:16:00.000-04:00

And just lost about 400 words out of my Hikaru No Go post.

I already miss it.

EDIT: God bless Google cache. Good for me, bad for you, my one reader, as if I ever attempted to retype it, it would probably have been shorter and more coherent.

He should have gone with Hex

2007-05-02T23:18:00.000-04:00

The other day I rented Reboot: Daemon Rising, which is the first "movie" in season 4 of the tv series (the dvd was apparently mastered improperly, so everyone sounds dreadful). I remember it fondly--it was basically action-adventure show with it's nerdage on its sleeve, even if no one remembers the pilot episode like I do, where they were threatening to emerge from the disk drive or something. . . . Anyway, I think it pulled off its animation the same way that Batman and Tron did, actually good design without muss. And by naming characters after obsolete printer systems. And there was this one, where the web is first introduced, and Scsi and Modem guest star...

In honor of its half-hours of geeky amusement, the recap of Season 3:

Reading list: Hikaru No Go, Volume 9

2007-04-27T17:06:00.000-04:00

One of the reasons for these Reading List posts is so I could work why I’m reading what I am. Like many comic fans, there’s I had a collecting phase, with bags and boards and unopened copies. There’s quite a bit of my collection that was purchased via inertia—and this reviewing process is something of an exercise in determining if I should continue to follow these series.

So one on my list that has had its position grow tenuous in the last few installments is Yumi Hotta and Takeshi Obata’s Hikaru No Go. It’s about Hikaru, a middle schooler who encounter’s the family bloodstained relic go board in the attic. When he does, he encounters Sai, the ghost of a Go master who still seeks the Divine Move. All of which is impetus for Hikaru’s natural talent and interest with Go to emerge, as he chases an early opponent who’s become a pro ahead of him. It’s obviously a collaboration, and Yumi Hotta is the writer, with Obata (best known for his work on Death Note) provides the visuals. Teamed books are common enough elsewhere, but it appears to be a rarity in Japan. And it’s a book for younger readers (<15) size="2">* Iwasaki 7 Dan’s suit is awesome. He’s wearing 70s curtains as a suit. Man, I should get a scanner or something.

** Spider-Man may have come out of the recent Civil War fracas the best because he actually had a character arc that didn’t have a downward trajectory—accepting his identity and unmasking and all that. Batman could do with a revival “now less of a jerk” arc as a corrective to his recent portrayals. Otherwise, because Spider-Man’s personality doesn’t change story to story, they necessarily have to be plot, fun new adventure oriented. Even if they haven’t been fun in a while.

Taiwan Fracas

2007-04-27T09:40:00.000-04:00

In response to a comment made in some other post, it's time to return to serious matters. Namely, Taiwan independence again.

Well, no. Really, I just have time to share this website, which lists numerous science badges. I'm pretty sure I qualify for the:

"I left the respectable sciences to pursue humanistic studies of the sciences" badge
"I can be a prick when it comes to science" badge
"sexing up science" badge
"I know what a tadpole is" badge
"somewhat confused as to what scientific field I actually belong to" badge
"statistical linear regression" badge

There may be others, but I have certainly not earned the "have violated the posterior of an animal in the name of science" badge.

Review: Sichuan Overlord

2007-04-25T22:07:00.000-04:00

Ha! Its not what you think. No, its not a review of some long forgotten Shaw Brother’s flick. This, my friends, is the premier Sichuanese restaurant of the Flushing Mall area, Queens, NY. Nestled away in a small cluster of businesses on Roosevelt Avenue, this unassuming little eatery serves up some real heat. Clearly aiming for a blue collar clientele, Chuan Ba Wang, “the Sichuan Overlord” could be easily mistaken for a typical American chop-suey joint based on it’s formal English name, the Golden Sichuan. But all jokes are off when you walk in the door. Chinese food connoisseurs will immediately notice signs of true authenticity: an indifferent wait staff focused on the basketball game on in the back of the room, a fish tanks jammed full of large barely-alive fish, and a table full of foolish laowai complaining about the amount of spice in their food.

And the food is really really good. We ordered off the Chinese-language menu and were pleasantly surprised about the choices offered, fish with pickled vegetables, spicy duck, mala fen, and all kinds of fried rice. They even had stinky tofu! Because this is a murder-free family, we strayed away from the animal dishes, but still had plenty of choices. We started with a huge bowl of mala fen and a plate of hupi jianjiao. The mala fen was peppery and intense; it had a nice rich soup, and the rice noodles has a nice gumminess to them The hupi jianjiao peppers were fried (we were hoping for grilled) but had no touch of sweetness. Clearly the chef had no intentions of cultivating a more flavor-neutral American clientele, because the jianjiao were spicy enough to burn your tongue and covered in a mild vinegar. Our main courses consisted of mala moyu, small slices of tofu-like ground firm taro jelly cooked in a numbing and spicy red soup, and our one mild dish, slivers of sponge cucumber cooked with sliced tofu, was the perfect dish to “rest on” when we needed a break from the chilies.

Don’t expect much from the service. They clearly prefer watching Tim Duncan to serving you, and they are not patient with questions, but they can be helpful in steering you to some of the more interesting spots on the menu. This is definitely not a place to go if you want to impress the ladies. But it is a nice spot to show off to your financially limited friends.

Reading list: King City by Brandon Graham

2007-04-20T17:18:00.000-04:00

This is the first volume of three by Brandon Graham, who I'm familiar with from Elevator*, a collection of short comics. I was actually pretty excited to pick this one up…which is rare lately. I missed out at first because of long, busy lines, and ended up needing to head into four stores before finding it again weeks later. But the man’s an unabashed fan of comics, and it’s always refreshing to read something where you can tell that through the work itself.

He’s got a lively graffiti-influenced style that gives off its energy without getting cluttered. Graham clearly puts down tries out every idea he comes up with—and not all in this comic, mind you. These are the ideas with legs, one presumes. And like the best outlandish ideas in the better rung of sci-fi out there, being a Catmaster isn’t Joe’s only role and Max is just drug-user (Chalk is great, by the by). Despite the energetic style, what Graham actually excels at seems to be quiet moments...probably not coincidentally the ones readers might relate to, as opposed to how you talk to your weapon cat. Unless you have a weapon cat. “Fun” as a tone seems to come first, but comedy and a little bit of something else comes out too, and without quite the attendant melodrama that tone switches bring in similarly marketed manga.**

I’m not sure the style is suitable for everything (the Cthulu-esque terror looks a bit bouncier than swollen), nothing slumps enough for every mood to be pulled off equally well, if that makes sense. And not all the crazy notions carry equal weight either, the sasquatch really seems to be there to be a sasquatch. So the wonder of it is, will the setting cohere into something more repository of Brandon Graham's ideas? As long as the characters continue to grow inside it, I can wait and see.

* I’d like a Sumo Hero to cameo…
** Still, the fact that manga ever switches moods is more interesting to me right now than a lot of other work.

Reading list: premise.

2007-04-19T22:58:00.000-04:00

I’m going to start listing what I’m reading. Presumably, I’ll cover the why’s and wherefores it’s worth reading, and why I’m continuing (when it’s a series). Neither fish nor fowl, I don’t think any of it will be good enough to be analysis, or clear enough to be reviews, but maybe it’ll evolve into something. I’m going to start with manga (even if I wouldn’t call the first one a manga myself).* Alright, from the bottom, starting tomorrow: King City.

* I’ll venture my option to say that manga needs certain stylistic twitches, which entry number one has some of, but not enough of. Book trade format should be insufficient reason to do it the way I’m doing it, but why not start with confusion?

Alternate takes: The Prestige

2007-04-19T11:55:00.000-04:00

I don't know how to make a jump on blogger, and am too lazy to find out. So here's how I would've finished the movie, written in invisible ink. Mix lemon juice to make it magically appear:

Cutter stops and waits outside the theater after delivering the Tesla machine to Angiers. Watches silently, glaring as Borden (Alfred? The one who loved Sarah?) goes in and has his scene with Angiers. Setting the fire he walks out, and Cutter is still outside, waiting for him and shoots him. Drags his body inside.The little girl inherits all, and the two/three obsessives meet like ends, symmetry in the narrative.

As it is, the movie gives a tacit nod to Borden who is at least complicit in a sadistic sort of lifestyle, even if it didn't involve Danton's ritualized nightly murder-suicides.

Alternatively, Cutter at least glares at him when handing the girl over. She can have a father (uncle really), but it's grudging.

If we stick with magic, we stick with chamberpots.

2007-04-18T22:58:00.000-04:00

I just finished Avatar: The Last Airbender (Wii flavor, of course). It was a pretty easy game, even for my limited gaming skills. Probably too easy--basically accessible and beatable for as many age groups that might pick it up. The story was pretty good, obviously fitting in the series storyline, with plenty of "Oh I know that guy" and "Those gawd-darn-hog-monkey" moments, plus all the same cast and voices, and the cell-shading looks pretty good (it's a good way to overcome tech limitations and imo overcome uncanny valley issues the naturalistic route of animation causes).

Anyway, the villain of the story creates these (pollution spewing) machines to fight the Fire Nation (the big bad of the series), but get people hurt, which is what you end up needing putting a stop to. Tech gone to far and overreaching and all that. Now, the Fire people are already the industrialists of this fantasy world, but despite industry = bad notion being a peeve of mine, I'm alright with it, because I think the series left enough wiggle room to consider the villains not the only possible representatives of these modes of thought. Game, not so much. By the end it was Stars Wars at the end. The villain, who represents the "thinkers" (their word, not mine), basically gives a rant and promises to kill everyone of the old regime. Why always the idyllic, live with magic balance of nature business foofaraa? Why always a genetic aristocracy? Or aristocracy in general?*

I'm not saying I want the equally inexplicable science/progress oriented utopia that is Star Trek, but why is the norm in fantasy always robber barons? Samurai 7 basically had mecha beaten by swords. Mind you, they trained the villagers to arm themselves with giant ballista, but that's still crossbows vs. tanks, and that only works in Civilization. Lord of the Rings had the righteous elves fleeing miscegenation, and the Incredibles had the self-made man as the villain. It's not like the guy was Dr. Frankenstein...oh wait he was. Heh.

This whole post is startlingly unfocused, but I'd really like to end it. So I'd like to know, urban landscapes in fiction manage capture some sort of complexity of it, why does it seem that pastorals are always nostalgic? Is that just how we write now?** I imagine those magical societies might invent indoor plumbing with a little more faith in industry, myself.

* Maybe China Mieville, with a dash of Marxism to go with the populism in fantasy. Just can't shake the Homeric mode, can we?
** How about, set in medieval times, MacGyver and the A-Team beat robbers and build windmills for peasants?

filler: meme

2007-04-14T12:10:00.000-04:00

While I'm pleased not to be the Doctor, or god forbid that plot device Book, this isn't much of a match. But it is a decent filler post.

Your results: You are Kaylee Frye (Ship Mechanic)

Kaylee Frye (Ship Mechanic		75%
Dr. Simon Tam (Ship Medic)		65%
Malcolm Reynolds (Captain)		65%
Derrial Book (Shepherd)		60%
Zoe Washburne (Second-in-command)		55%
River (Stowaway)		50%
Alliance		45%
Inara Serra (Companion)		35%
Wash (Ship Pilot)		35%
Jayne Cobb (Mercenary)		15%
A Reaver (Cannibal)		0%

You are good at fixing things.
You are usually cheerful.
You appreciate being treated
with delicacy and specialness.

Click here to take the "Which Serenity character are you?" quiz...

Hot and Sour Black Beans

2007-04-05T23:12:00.000-04:00

One of the problems with eating out in the United States, even in such culturally diverse areas New York, is that Middle American culinary sensibilities infect almost everything that comes out of a kitchen. What does that mean for you and me? It means that when you are served fermented black bean sauce in a “Chinese” restaurant, it tastes sweet; it means that the spaghetti you order in an Italian restaurant comes covered with canned sauce; it means that you have to cut raw jalapeno peppers into your “hot” salsa to make it spicy. Yuck.

Well, for those of us who cannot handle the gastronomic mediocrity out on the street, here’s a little something to tide you over at home. It’s been a few years since I’ve been given full reign over a western kitchen, and I am slowly, ever so slowly, rounding my western cooking skills back into shape. I discovered this recipe a few days ago when I was fooling around in the kitchen and was pleased with the result. The flavor is sour and pungent, with just enough spice to keep you awake.

Cooking time: under 20 minutes

You will need:

-12 oz cooked or canned black beans sitting in little bit of the cooking water.
-Two ripe tomatillos. If you can’t handle the pungent flavor of the tomatillos, substitute one of the tomatillos with a tomato.
-one small or medium white onion
-two cloves of garlic
-two to four jalapenos
-two tablespoons of cilantro or parsley
-cooking oil
-salt and pepper to taste.

Here’s what you need to do:

Dice the onions and jalapenos and mix them together on your cutting board. Finely chop the tomatillos, set them in a bowl, and mush them with a spoon. Heat up a dollop of oil (corn oil works for me) in a deep saucepan or wok over medium-high heat, and throw in your onion and jalapeno. You’ll need to stir your onions to keep them from burning, though I suggest letting them blacken a little bit on one side for a more rustic and smokey flavor. When you do this, you probably want to turn on the fan over your stove or you might risk choking yourself on the onion and chili smoke. Let this, your base, cook down until the onions begin turning translucent and then throw in your chopped tomatillos. Keep an eye on the tomatillos. You should see them begin to shed water, but not as much as a tomato. If your tomatillos seem a little bit too dry, add a few spoonfuls of water to the pan and stir. After the tomatillos have been cooking for a minute or so, stir in the garlic and let the tomatillos reduce for another minute. Now it’s bean time. Dump in your 12 ounces of beans and cooking liquid and stir the mixture well. When the beans begin to bubble, turn off the stove, spoon in your cilantro or parsley, add a couple pinches of salt and pepper, and fold the mixture once or twice.

Guess what. You’re Done! Enjoy your pungent black beans with warm blue corn tortillas and Columbian farmer’s cheese. Feel free to garnish with more cilantro, some shredded lettuce, and a little bit of lime.

There! A little bit of fluff to tide our blog over.

Miscellany

2007-03-27T17:15:00.000-04:00

A couple things today:

Leaving aside my disappointing view of 300, Pan’s Labyrinth was a lot of fun, although why anyone would think it’s okay to take their children to a rated R “fairy tale” is beyond me. However, there were two scenes that struck me as artificial. (Spoilers ahead) First, when Ofelia (that’s a loaded name) has finished taking the treasure guarded by the Pale Man, but then stops and eats some grapes. A genuinely terrifying scene ensues, but throughout you’re left wondering, what the hell do you think you’re doing, girl? I have read that because she was sent to bed without supper the night before, she may be simply too hungry to resist. But I would think the paintings of the Pale Man eating children adoring the ceiling, as well as the pile of children's shoes in the corner, would be enough to quell any hunger pangs that emerge.

Second, the final test, where Ofelia must sacrifice her own life to save her baby brother. There was nothing in particular that set me off about that scene, except that it was so transparently obvious what was going on, it felt tacked on. A little too easy a test for someone who would be a true believer of the fantasy. Now, as for whether or not Ofelia’s fantasies are real, I would say (and the director has as well) that they are (at least within the context of the movie), chiefly because the director did not set up a larger meaning for Ofelia’s actions, even within the fascist-democratic civil war. If it was not real, the most that could be said for her behavior was 1. it got the manifestly evil military captain to neglect his duties and 2. it was a girl coping with a horrible situation. Neither of these, however, really relates back to the central themes of the movie.

Also, Gloomy Sunday. I enjoyed it, although I might have enjoyed it even more if I knew German. Some clear instances of overacting and melodrama, but a compelling story nevertheless. Definitely worth a shot on Netflix, although perhaps not in the theater (if it’s even available). Also, I got to see both 300 and Pan's Labyrinth in theaters that serve alcohol. I have to say that's a singularly enjoyable experience.

And finally, for those with fond memories of Legos and Mario Bros., an unholy (or cool) union of the two.

Even as a young Satan worshipper

2007-03-26T11:01:00.000-04:00

...that is to say, Dungeons and Dragons role-player (Advanced, 2nd edition), I didn't go around wishing death on people.

I can't wait till these notebooks come out in the US.

Good boys (300 review)

2007-03-24T21:39:00.000-04:00

Whatever it is you think about Frank Miller’s stories, it’s what you’ll think of the movie 300. Both of them being macho, blunt forces. I won’t actually venture much of an opinion here, as I think an audience’s opinion in these sort of cases is pretty much set in stone. I had a bit more pep before seeing it, but now having done so I can’t help but think whatever I said and thought was probably overwrought, equal to the outsized enthusiasm of the movie’s fans, and their righteous indignation at the equally overbaked (though mostly fair) critical reception, but more than this movie actually calls for.

I say this much: It was enjoyable, and quite often beautiful, if awkward and uneven. Still too timid by half, though sacrificing much less to visual fidelity with the graphic novel than other adaptations have…as people seem to confuse that with being faithful to the story.*

And also I have no reason to doubt the director and filmmakers when they say they didn’t mean any sort of Iraq commentary with it. It just means they’re sort of stupid. Either they’re dim, as they were genuinely oblivious to what adding “...politicians just send warriors to their deaths…” and that sort of line adds, as well as getting all that talk about Country and Freedom and Free Men (a little cute, historically speaking, coming from Spartans) from a computer program that punches it in...or cribbing from Braveheart...and what reaction that would garner. Or they’re kinda dim, and they saw the reaction coming and couldn’t come up with anything better to say. Weak sauce, folks. **

But let me follow Jonny America’s lead and leave you folks with a discussion question that thinking too much brought up. Frank Miller probably meant it his original work more as a straight meditation of warriors and heroism, but the filmmakers added a lot of Freedom and Country and Free Men stuff—but who cares about that? ’cause who’s against that?—But why ever appropriate history to this end, if one believes a story requires as much modification (it didn’t even, really) to tell this sort, or any sort of tale? It’s not as if that many historical field fans really pop out for these things and sell that many more tickets. (In 300, there are so many visual cues as to who is evil, that even in lowest denominator it seems unnecessary.) So what out it? Are there any noncommercial benefits that makes this sort of lazy storytelling worthwhile? ***

* Bit claustrophobic too, but such are the limitations of filming green screen and indoors…you can always sort of tell. Legend had that too…which come to think of it, Ridley Scott would be pretty good for this sort of thing.

** I don’t think it’s irresponsible, per se, to make a war movie in this climate and not have anything to say, just as it’s not irresponsible to make a movie about Marie Antoinette and talk about modern ennui, but it seems foolish and wasteful, and a bit willfully oblivious.

*** I want a slightly more complex answer than “It’s easier to film.” (Lazy storytelling also being cheaper.) Probably, that’s all there is though. Well, that and the public has only a small interest in knowing history.

Taiwan

2007-03-19T17:09:00.000-04:00

I was going to write a post about Pan's Labyrinth, but I'll save that for next week after I've seen 300. Instead, I've lately come across a couple pieces/encounters about Taiwanese independence and what it means for China and the U.S. And mostly, I've been pissed with what I've read.

A number of my friends are pretty pro-China, or at least pro-the Chinese position on the issue, which disturbs me a bit because they work for various organs of the State Department. The standard refrain I get from them (and many more within the policy community, though probably not the majority) is that the DPP and other "nationalist" groups on Taiwan threaten stability in the region, by which they mean closer ties between China and the U.S.

This seems backwards to me, and it arises mostly because people within that segment of the policy community are so resigned to the fact of Chinese military aggression that they somehow see the political maneuvers of Taiwan's leaders to be threatening. The only reason a move towards independence by President Chen is threatening is because China makes it so, by pointing missiles at Taiwan which threaten quite frankly the highest value concentration of computer and image hardware innovation in the region, if not the world. And because the U.S. has a legal obligation to come to Taiwan's rescue if it is attacked. But the fundamental issue here is not that people in Taiwan want the chance to make their voices heard (that's not really threatening to anyone), but that China hasn't renounced the use of force. People in that part of the policy community take Chinese belligerence as a given, as the status quo that needs to be accommodated, rather than something that can be negotiated.

And to that extent, they typically fail to recognize how Chinese belligerence is part and parcel of its strategy. It's a curious dynamic: the U.S. essentially rewards China for its threats. Consider, whenever China sees a Taiwanese move that could threaten its hope for long-term reunification (changing the country name on passports to Taiwan, revised history books, etc.), it talks about launching missiles. The U.S. reacts not by denouncing the threats, but by admonishing the Taiwanese for their actions. China, in a limited sense, gets an international veto over Taiwanese policy, no matter the issue. When Taiwan protests Chinese actions on the same issue (like all the preconditions Beijing attaches to final status negotiations), the U.S. doesn't say anything. It's the willingness to use force that is the decisive factor here, and essentially, anything that pisses off China, no matter how idiotic or insignificant a slight, is considered to be the fault of the Taiwanese for not recognizing the "realities" of the situation.

Now, I fully understand that a move towards Taiwanese independence, given China's stated response, is a bad idea. What I don't accept, however, is blame being placed on Taiwan for the situation across the Strait, which often happens when I talk with these individuals. The Taiwanese public has full moral and legal authority (under both domestic and international law) to declare themselves independent. That has to be accepted as a baseline, I think, for any meaningful discussion of this issue. It's when people forget that, when they start blaming Taiwan for China's response, that I have big issues. It's one thing not to want a war between the U.S. and China. It's another to blame Taiwan for China firing missiles at the U.S.

Human Rights in the United States

2007-03-18T19:43:00.000-04:00

Another edition of China’s not-so-hotly-anticipated "Human Rights Record of the United States" was released early this month. The release was given its customary and cursory acknowledgment by the Washington Post, among other news papers, websites, and news aggregators. As is mentioned in all of these media sources, the release is based almost totally on U.S.-based media reports, press releases, and Human Rights organizations (many of which have been frequently criticized in Chinese media and censored), and as in the case of earlier such reports, everything is surprisingly and responsibly cited and documented with thorough in text citations.

Is there anything especially revealing inside the report? Nothing in particular. The folks at the Chinese State Department clearly busied themselves with internet search engines for several weeks, mining U.S. and international media sites for negative press about the United States. Since so much of the material came from U.S. media sources, no United States resident would find any of the information here to be fresh or new.

The Iraq War and the War on Terror was a goldmine of information for this year’s report with a year of news on secret prisons and mistreated detainees. It provided a great springboard to jump into some of China’s favorite foreign policy themes: violations of sovereignty, interfering in other country’s affairs, and hegemonism. There was also mention of the increase of U.S. internal surveillance and incursions on peoples’ rights to privacy.

Some reoccurring themes that have appeared in the last few reports such as U.S. high crime rates, racial discrimination, high rates of incarceration, sexual discrimination, police brutality, high rates of poverty, and poor healthcare coverage, return again this year.

In contrast the U.S. report on human rights in China focuses more on issues that Americans associate with human rights, addressing mostly judicial concerns including unfair trials, detainment, torture during police detainment, freedom of speech, religion, and movement, and also on things such as human trafficking. It is a long long dry read in spite of its thoroughness. Things that do not show up include crime, access to healthcare, and poverty statistics.

So what do you think about China’s criticism of the U.S.’s human right’s record? In some regards it reveals an approach to human rights very different one from the west—i.e. a focus on social stability over individual freedoms. Or is it just poor spirited tit-for-tat where they just wrote down everything they could find in the newspaper?

out of my way, narrative structure (Syriana is easy)

2007-03-16T09:56:00.000-04:00

So David Denby has this article about the team of Alejandro González Iñárritu and Guillermo Arriaga (director and writer respectively of Amores Perros, 21 Grams, and Babel), who's creative association is now ending. In the middle of this he gives basically gives a primer on past and present formal experimentation in film, and how mainstream complicated or shuffled time structure has become--in modern filmmaking, pretty much unarguably initiated by Pulp Fiction, and including Eternal Sunshine of the Spotless Mind, Adaptation, Memento, and the like. All of them playing with the abillity of film to turn all the moments in front of your eyes into "now". One more example:

"Syriana" made sense in the end, but you practically needed a database to sort out the story elements; the movie became a weird formal experiment, testing the audience's endurance and patience.

Before looping back to a point about the pair of auteurs mentioned above, basically that being their work culminated intentionally difficult liberal guilt whinging--no wait that's the audience, as foreigners they're haranguing instead. The production of Guilt Pornography, an easy avenue for mental flagellation and cleansing. The two fellows getting found out when they venture out of Mexico, joining Lars Von Trier for formal experiments mired in simplemindedness. To differentiate their puzzle box constructions holding only simple points, he mentions a new film, The Lives of Others, with apparently multiple strands, presented in chronological order, via cross-cut of the parallel lines. Complexitiy in a simpler package. And here's where I try tp return to my topic.

Wasn't that Syriana? I won't debate whether or not it was confusing to folks. But I do I recall it being multiple plotlines presented in straight chronological order, each one getting a clear segment of time, and trading off to the next one. In straight sequence. Four that I can remember: George Clooney in an updated LeCarre, Matt Damon (the speech delivery system for the never named Peak Oil theory) as an anguished then inspired advisor to Alexander Siddig, Jeffrey Wright's lawyer entering corporate shenanigans, and two boys entering a madrassa. A few small subplots: father/son relationship, strained relationship with myopic (Hollywood-style) wife, drunk dad. The purity of the future suicide bombers could not be sullied with a subplot, or properly translated instruction either. In voice they chant promising death and destruction, in subtitle aspirational cultural chauvanism.

But I'm sullying my point with my whinging. Syriana was made up of each segment lasting longer than normal (a shot, or even a short sequence), but most given equal time, and in order yet. Where's this impression of structural complexity coming from? They just threw too many balls in the air, and people lost track (got bored), and then confused. But the complexity isn't there in the structure. Probably, then, the endurance and patience wasn't there in the audience either.

*Would you look at that, 8:56 AM. Looks like blogger doesn't involve itself in daylight savings.

Hodge-Podge

2007-03-15T14:09:00.000-04:00

I'm doing it again. Duvall posts, then I post soon after, removing the craftsmanship of his words from public sight. Or something. All I have to say is: "Green"?

Two things. I was in Turkey on vacation, as Duvall mentioned. But before getting to that, I have to admit that I was kind of surprised by the whole Department of Justice/Gonzalez thing. Aren't political appointments meant to be...well, political? I heard that the main reason this has come up is because of the timing - happening in the middle of the term and all that - although of course the suspect reasonings for the firings are politically problematic. But, I don't think they're institutionally or legally problematic. After all, if you're an appointee, you serve at the whim of the president (no matter how stupid he is). The real failing here was a lack of political acumen, in that Gonzalez and Miers (and whoever else) could have done things quietly, or they could have taken a different approach ("it is our prerogative to fire within the Executive", which of course it is). Don't get me wrong though. Gonzalez is a prick, and I'm enjoying seeing him twist in the wind. But still.

Anyway, Turkey. Despite the fact that there was evidently a roiling scandal with a Turkish writer suggesting that Ataturk might be gay (he was thrown in jail for that), my girlfriend (from here on, GF) and I didn't see any protests or political gatherings, outside of an International Women's Day celebration (yeah, I didn't realize that was last week either). A couple observations:

The street cats are really friendly and, by and large, clean. GF often scratched their heads, and they proceeded to crawl into her lap for my stroking.
Istanbul is very clean. In fact, most of Turkey (what we saw of it at least) was. It was not, however, as cheap as I expected. Obviously not European prices, but we're not talking Asia here either.
GF noticed that whenever I introduced her as my "girlfriend", Turkish men would ignore her. If I introduced her as my "fiancee" (don't worry, that hasn't happened yet), they paid attention.
I can definitely see why Turkey feels that it is European. Istanbul especially has that feel of old world Europe, a certain melancholy of having lived in the shadow of former glories.
Great food in Turkey, although the cheaper places were generally better. Also, great fish, which was surprising upon first seeing that, but it does make a lot of sense.
Muezzins are very much like Jewish cantors. You would hear the adhan roll through Istanbul, as each mosque got its guy on the loudspeaker. But like cantors (the few I've met), they don't get many chances to sing for prolonged periods of time, so instead they take to drawing out every opportunity and making it as "colorful" as possible. That, and competing against each other in making the longest, most complicated musical runs that they can. On loudspeaker. Five times a day.
GF and I love borek.

Obviously, things have changed.

2007-03-15T10:22:00.000-04:00

Isn't this nice? I think this template provides structure, without constriction; color, without epilectic seizures. I did make sure to change the title color to something more annoying though.

I don't know where people get the wherewithal to codify their ruminations into coherent spiels regularily. I don't do anything and I still can't manage it. Well, here I type again, making promises for content hoping that will make it so. Let's try a weekly bag, eh?

If wishes were horses I'd have a cow.

I know you only too well...

2007-03-08T09:00:00.000-05:00

I hear that Chengora fellow is taking a trip, meaning its about time to pull some weight and post something. So..one second, coughing fit...let's have at it.

I went on a long trip recently, and had the opportunity to view a couple of the past year's near best films on a long, long ride between nations. One was The Queen: eminently watchable. Actors delivering fine performances that are explained in thick metaphoric detail or in pure exposition mere minutes later. The other was The Departed, the now best picture and Martin Scorsese's route to heavyweight title, contender no more. A great weight of expection has been lifted, and the man can now concetrate on his next masterpiece. But I have to ask...is that it?

Less than ideal circumstances: small screen, crowded on a plane, and I have a great deal of affection for the HK original Infernal Affairs. I think I've accounted for the surroundings and my biases, and this movie just didn't feel like the best of anything...an above average thriller with strangely awkward execution. (Awkward is better than predictable, but still...) This isn't too much of a surprise, the plot, which is what both versions keep, really just is above average, a good premise with one strong twist.

But let's cover what The Departed got right, and what it improved:
Boston is a much better setting than a fake, though stylish, HK underworld. It's very much a character here, and like the strong ensemble cast, it's a broad and colorful thing. The acting was the same; it wasn't always to my taste, but it was solid. Considering I liked Jack Nicholson, who has irritated me everywhere except About Schmidt, when he was asked to play someone small, the movie was a triumph. Everybody seems to get a scene where they act like a Boss Tweed cartoon, though that's true in Scorcese films since Gangs of New York, when that was relevant. And the rest of the casting was good, though Tony Leung and Andy Lau are probably better leads.* Lastly, they completely rewrote the women for this version. Since the female roles in the HK version were just vehicles for popstars, that couldn't help but be an improvement. Combining two flimsy roles meant only one piece of dead weight instead of two. The new Harvard hottie, object of triangular desire and Leo's reason to take off his shirt is still an underwritten cliche herself, so maybe that's not a improvement as much as a wash. Two ciphers = one cliche? Convinient plot spring in both versions.

And those things are all practically gimmes. How come this movie wasn't better? Or at least the same? It certainly started with stronger characters. Since the principals are so much younger than Lau and Leung, we don't have the disconnect of and stay with Leonardo DiCaprio and Matt Damon almost throughout. No interlude of Justin Timberlake playing one Leo (which really, is what HK loves).

And yet, is Leo doing pensive really ever going to be stronger than Tony sulking? And as Boston recedes as the movie chugs, and with the color and character, the plot juts up front and center. And the plot needs propulsion, which by style isn't what Scorsese's preference. The pacing in the second half just suffers for it. Scenes drag from having new exposition tied to them. There's one where Damon/Lau needs impersonates a lawyer, tricking a criminal to giving up info. And now, where the Asian cops said "Wow!" and leave it be the Americans say "Hey! He just impersonated a lawyer! That's illegal!" Well, duh. Foreshadowed twists now have signposts...for this one let's just say you don't have to actually explain all aspects of the sting. Out loud. This isn't confident filmmaking--and much as I'm praising their product by comparison, it's not as if the HK audience is that much brighter than anyone else, so that kind of dumbing down is disappointing.

In the end though, if you're not going to keep adding to it, it's all about execution. Predictably weak actresses aside, the HK version had two leads with more oomph (let's call the rest of the cast comparisons a wash), but simply more assured execution. It was less ambitious, but it just never got confused about what it wanted to do. Both versions have dumb endings that try to reassure the audience sense of right, instead of seeing through the setting they've built. Though the HK theatrical ending, if cut one scene short, would be strongest version.

I've said this before, each time I see another interesting misfire out of Scorsese (though the Aviator was boring more than interesting). He needs to relearn how to edit and cut the fat, so we see sinew and not bloat. Let the color scenes can inform just the actors, instead of everything. Or he needs to sign with HBO or something and make a Ken Burns length mini-series. Enough noble failures. Ahh well, this post took too long.

*I kept reading Mark Walhberg was good, and he was certainly entertaining and funny...but he was inconsequential, no?

Snow Days

2007-02-16T10:12:00.000-05:00

Remember those lovely winter days, huddling around the radio, waiting for the magic words to come: "[Your school] is closed today due to snow." Ah, the baited breath while the radio man announced your school's name, the resolution and elation that came with confirmation of closing, the joys of the unexpected day off, and occasionally, the hatred and bile directed at the paltry two-hour delay.

Well, Washington, DC is kind of like that everytime there's a bit of snow. In other cities, when the weatherman says "blizzard," he means something like 6+ inches. In DC, he means a dusting which may or may not stick. Of course, rampant speculation then ensues about whether the federal government will close down for the day. And when the snow does fall, citizens panic.

Now, I've heard it explained away by the fact that, because DC temperatures fluctuate right around the freezing point, snow melts and freezes constantly, forming large patches of black ice. I've heard explanations that, while DC may not be hit hard, traffic in the suburbs is thwarted by the presumable mountains of sleet, hail, and other "wintry conditions" (i.e. about 2 inches).

I am inclined to stick with my original speculation, which is that:

1. We all fondly reminisce about snow days, and the Office of Personnel Management (government HR department) enjoys allowing us to personally relive those moments.
2. People in DC are horrible drivers, which only spurs on OPM to let everyone go early.
3. Too many Southerners who just don't understand snow.

That said, this year was better than most, as OPM only let us out a little early on Tuesday and had a 2-hour delay on Wednesday. But I definitely give cars and DC drivers a wide berth as I walk around trying not to step into newly-formed frozen lakes of slush.

Be sure you hate them for the right reason

2007-02-09T23:19:00.000-05:00

There is a funny side story that accompanies the release of the Chinese movie, Getting Home. In one scene, famous Chinese comedian, Guo Degang, plays a robber who hijacks a bus. Just recently a random Chinese blogger caused an internet storm when he castigated the Guo Degang for playing the bumbling criminal role with a Henanese accent. According to the blogger, linking criminal behavior to Henanese people plays on negative stereotypes and brings shame to the Henan province. Interestingly enough, there is no link to the original post, because the Chinese censors blocked it. However, there has been no shortage of commentary on other sites. Below is a piece by Lifeweek magaine editor and uber Chinese Blogger, Wang Xiaofeng. He helps us out by summing up all of the major regional negative stereotypes in China and lays out a curious theory comparing the status of Henan people in China to the status African Americans in the United States. His opinions about the role of black people in American cinema are clearly misinformed, but it’s interesting to hear a Chinese person make such a comparison. I have heard expats talk about similar things before, but the comparisons do not hold up if you examine them closely.

Nevertheless, I can attest to the fact that many Chinese people have some pretty nasty stuff to say about Henan and its people. It is weird to observe this regional discrimination from outside the loop.

We’re All Bad People

When Getting Home was released, some people had problems with it. A group of Henan folks asked the question: does not Guo Degang’s character, a bandit with a Henan accent, do damage to people’s image the Henanese people? I think it does. So why not switch the Henan accent to a Northeastern one? Because then the Northeasterners will get upset. How about Fujian dialect? Well, I’m sure that 99% of the world’s population would not understand it, but still the Fujianese people would get upset. Sichuanese? They would have none of it either. Try Shanghaiese. But, can you actually envision a soft-tongued Shanghai guy robbing somebody? Who could possibly believe a guy like that could actually rob a bus? Then change it to English. That way all Chinese people would feel comfortable, and there would be social harmony.

China has over 30 provinces and administrative regions. The people of every region have their own characteristics. We Northeasterners for example—I’m from the Northeast so I can talk about this. All you Northeasterners who read my blog do not start bickering with me. I think that only Northeasterners who leave the region can see Northeasterners’ bad traits. You don’t notice them when you still live in the Northeast.

Anyway, I’ve said bad things about Northeasterners on this blog before. Immediately after, I find comments like this: “You think you’re cool shit. Come find me and we’ll see how cool you really are.” This is a typical northeastern chorus line. It’s implication is really: "if you come to the Northeast looking for me, I’ll send you home in a casket.” The wolf of a Northeasterner is always found on his tongue, not in his actions. If you really went looking for one of them, they would be the first to kneel down and beg for mercy. There was once a criminal detective at the public safety bureau who said, “during suspect interrogations, Northeasterners are the easiest to handle. Scare them a little and they confess right away. People from Fujian, Guangdong, and Zhejiang are a lot harder to deal with. With them it becomes a real battle of IQs. They will only confess when there is no conceivable avenue left. So I like interrogating Northeasterners. There is a high rate of success in cases involving them.” This perfectly illustrates the Northeasterner's falsebravado. Of course, Northeasterners have many other faults; for example, fake loyalty, false hospitality, a preoccupation with face, a love of bragging, all talk and no work, laziness, and male chauvinism. All of these characteristics can be applied to Beijing folks as well, though one difference between Northeasterners and Beijing people is that Beijing people would never say something idiotic like, “Come find me and we’ll see how cool you really are.” But Beijing folks also like to bluster. If you take the Yellow River as a border, you would find that all northern peoples have the same types of shortcomings. Maybe this is taking it a little too far, but northerners are brainless. Why doesn’t the economy develop in the north? A lot of that has to do with the northern person’s personality.

Henan people have given the Chinese people a bad impression of themselves, and it has become a sensitive issue, especially in regard to this movie. If you speak a few words of Henan dialect it doesn’t mean anything. If you didn’t speak in Henan dialect, would it mean anything? But people do think that speaking in Henanese means something. It seems that Henan people in play the role of the black American in Chinese society. For example, in Hollywood movies blacks hardly ever play evil characters, and are only rarely given leading roles. If the image of black people is disparaged in movies or television programs, they will protest. So, the screenwriters and directors avoid causing trouble to protect their reputations and ticket sales. This shows that blacks in America are a disadvantaged population. There are problems with their popular image, and “political correctness” has emerged to balance out the public psychology. But I think that Henan people’s problems have not gotten so severe that we need political correctness to fix them. Think about it. If Guo Degang played this role as one of our country’s minorities, it would probably not have passed censorship. [Protection of ethnic minorities] is real Chinese political correctness.

Actually, the people of many regions are stereotyped or cartooned in our popular consciousness . If you mention Xinjiang people, the first thing that comes to mind is a street full of pick pockets. When you think of Cantonese people, you imagine a people obsessed with doing business. People know that stingy Shanghai folks would quibble over half a ticket of rice (referring to collectivist-era meal tickets). Northeasterners talk too much. Beijing folks are full of shit. Folks from Mongolia (not just ethnic Mongolians) are big drunks. Fujianese people are high-tech criminals. Hunan people are evil officials, and Hubei folks are wily and crafty. The Sichuanese are violent and aggressive. Considering all of these stereotypes together, you will discover that no one of us is better than the other. Sometimes we just like to pick on others’ weaknesses and ignore our own. If I had not left the Northeast, maybe I would view the Northeasterner’s shortcomings as virtues. If I had never left, I would still imagine that Beijing people were great.

The northeast has a lot of local sayings. Why has the word huyou or “talk nonsense” become popularized around the country? This is because it is part of the northeastern personality. But we northerners did not complain about Zhao Benshan [and his portrayal of Northeasterners]. That is because we consider huyou to be a virtue. You think that the low IQ skits that Zhao Benshan acted out during the Chinese New Year TV programs were planned? They contained the essence of the Northeastern personality.
So when you Northeasterners finish reading this, don’t pretend to be threaten to me. Hunan folks, you don’t need to feel put out. We’re all bad.

Genetics

2007-02-08T08:58:00.000-05:00

Stumbled across two articles today on the impact of genes on behavior, the first on passing bad behavior to kids, the second on beauty. I have never liked these studies, in part because they rest - usually - on flawed premises and leaps of logic. After all, the mere idea of a gene is largely undefined or vague. How does it differ from, say, triplet codons or DNA? How does the genome differ from all of an individual's chromosomes? What does it add to our knowledge. Not much, except in so far as it is a holdover from Mendelian studies on heredity. It is, in a sense, a mask for old science working under the guise of the new.

And this has consequences for the studies that people conduct now. In those two pieces, sweeping claims are made about the inherited nature of certain characteristics. The first one on bad behavior, for instance, compares identical and fraternal twins and the kids they have. An interesting experiment, no doubt. But it's fundamentally flawed. It assumes that variations in behavior are largely the result of "genetic" influence, even though the experiment cannot say what actual pieces of DNA lead to what specific behaviors. There is no line of causality. And this comes out in a critical section buried at the bottom of the piece:

"According to Harden, it's possible that genes involved in risk-taking, sensation-seeking and other aspects of antisocial behavior may make parents more likely to clash, and, when passed on to their kids, make conduct problems more likely."

But once you start allowing for what is possible, once your experimentation is shoddy enough that cannot determine cause and effect, you open the door to all kinds of methodological questions. For example, from the experiment, how is it possible to tease out the effect of learning, teaching, and development as opposed to DNA, genes, and chromosomes? You simply don't know, and it's therefore the researcher taking his or her best guess as to the cause. That's not science. That's belief.

The same can be said for the second article. Our standards of beauty as evolutionarily derived. Again, a key passage:

"Our brains did not evolve with media, and many people see more media images of women than actual women."

The problem here is that humans never stop evolving, and it's odd to think that scientists with a background in evolution would consider that suddenly most or even all change mechanisms stopped once people left the African savanna. And there is the fact that the standards of beauty have altered dramatically and differ widely. Light skin versus dark, proportions of hips to chest, the list could go on and on, but sociobiologists often take samples from particular cultures or societies, which misses the variation that's out there.

We have ample examples from the past where people have assumed the "innate" nature of certain individuals. Women are biologically unsuited for certain public positions, blacks are perenially a subclass of humans who couldn't perform higher orders of thinking, etc. In modern times, all of these ideas were based on pseudo-science that did not maintain the necessary level of methodological rigor that would have culled out the influence of popular perception on verifiable theories. The new wave of biology in human behavior doesn't do much better. The methods are more compelling, but the crippling, flawed assumptions are still there.

Democracy and China

2007-02-07T11:15:00.000-05:00

I was trolling around for interesting articles today and stumbled upon this piece about China and the prospects for democracy (or lack thereof). The author's a bit strident, and underplays the importance of economic factors in the relationship between China and the U.S., but she provides an interesting argument nevertheless. And it's additional fodder for an article I hope to write on the relationship between democracy and economic prosperity.

I think one of the major tragedies of the post-Soviet, or post-9/11, world is that authoritarian regimes are increasingly able to argue that democratic practice is fundamentally destablizing and jeopardizes economic development. Russia during the 90s, the color revolutions throughout Eurasia, the backsliding of democratic institutions in Latin America, and the halting steps in Thailand, Singapore, and Taiwan allow authoritarian governments in Russia, China, and Venezuela to maintain tight political controls by terrifying their citizens with the idea of "chaos." It's stability and security over democracy, and that's a hard argument to crack.

But, I think the reasons why it must crack are the ones the author misses. She argues that,

"...the availability of coordination goods [free speech and the right to organize and protest; general human rights, such as freedom from arbitrary arrest; press freedom, etc.] affects democratization because they drastically influence the ability of political opponents to coordinate and mobilize but have little impact on the continued economic growth that is crucial for sustaining an authoritarian regime’s legitimacy."

I don't think that's correct. Press freedom is a principal channel for business intelligence (which is notably lacking in China - an important factor in the lack of large, genuinely international firms). The right to organize and protest is critical in providing the government with the necessary "input" and awareness of social concerns. At the moment, the CCP is very good at recognizing the problems out there and trying to respond to them. But that is because the government is unified behind a single vision and strategy of where it wants to go. If its intelligence channels breakdown, however, you will increasingly see a mismatch in terms of the priorities that the CCP assigns and those that the public wants. There is also the problem of externalities. Labor and the environment are in many ways sacrificed for the sake of productivity, and the problems that emerge because of that are put on either Chinese citizens or other countries. And in the end, the CCP system is simply inefficient. Why have the proactive monitoring, preventive measures, and bureaucracy if people can simply tell you what they want?

The answer, of course, is power. But to me, there is a deeper question here. Is it possible that capitalism and economic growth benefit from authoritarian regimes? Is there a positive correlation between the two? I think, academically, the jury is still out over this question. For every China, you have an India. For every Burma, you have a Bangladesh.

I think the issue fundamentally comes down to innovation. While China has avoided the post-Soviet Russia economic collapse, it's because its economy never had the cripplingly inefficient state industries that the latter had (although its banks are close), or they took measures to dismantle them. But to be a genuine world leader in the marketplace requires innovation, not just education. It requires the ability to risk capital on a grand scale and have the open space economically (and to a certain extent, therefore politically) to promote or shoot down interesting ideas. But the CCP has been very good about splitting off the economic lines of open dialogue from the political ones. They could do so with a wider space for innovation, but I am not certain.

Thoughts?