Reading list: Hikaru No Go, Volume 9

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

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:

1. "I left the respectable sciences to pursue humanistic studies of the sciences" badge
2. "I can be a prick when it comes to science" badge
3. "sexing up science" badge
4. "I know what a tadpole is" badge
5. "somewhat confused as to what scientific field I actually belong to" badge
6. "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

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

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.

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

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.

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

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

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

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

...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)

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

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

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)

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

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:

1. 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.
2. 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.
3. 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.
4. 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.
5. 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.
6. 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.
7. GF and I love borek.

Obviously, things have changed.

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...

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

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

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.