Malnutrition in Developing Countries
While I admire our good intentions, should I be just a whee bit concerned that the government is putting stuff in our food without our knowledge? (Or it could be with our knowledge and I'm just uninformed..)
Thursday, March 25, 2004
Just so you know, I'm on spring break. It's very boring. Because it coincides with my Rennaissance Art class, I've been reading "The Birth of Venus" by Sarah Dunant, a novel which is quite visibly displayed front and center in hardback in every Barnes and Noble all over America. You can't miss it. If I ever become an author I'd die to have publicity like that. It's currently #24 in Amazon.com's sales rank. Dear Lord! I'm reading a popular novel!
*faint*
It angles towards the "Girl With a Pearl Earring" crowd, except it's a bit more feminist and a bit more erotic. It's about this girl, Alessandra who's the daughter of a rich merchant and has a passion for painting which apparently is not proper for a girl of her station. She's intelligent, spirited and stubborn but not very graceful, modest or obedient, unlike her older sister (if life was like novels, older sisters through some phenomenon of medical science would always be prettier), which I guess is supposed to be a character flaw of some sort. The operative word here would be "spunky" or "plucky" or something eye-rollingly campy like that. Then she gets sent off to her arranged marriage*... blah blah... and I should mention that there's a young, sensitive and spiritual painter of few words who is employed at her house.
--
"So you think he is impervious to women?"
She snorted. "If he is, he'll be the first one I've ever met. He's just rigid with purity."
---
(sounds like a boy I know)
Chick factor on a scale of 1-10... 11.
The main character is a lot more vivid than Griet from "Girl With Pearl", but also is a lot more cliched and the product of an anachronistic "girl power" mind set imposed on another era. It's among the most politically correct books I've ever read, and this is coming from an ardent reader of fantasy, a genre that's basic appeal is historical revisionism without the pretense of accuracy.
Reviewers say "Birth of Venus" is "well-researched," (wow, that's a lot of quotes) but I'm taking an introductory Renaissance Art class and I know all this stuff already. It's not giving me any more insights into Renaissance Florence than my professor and his fifty minute narrated slide show three times a week (though admittedly he is a very good professor and it is a very good slide show.) Maybe "Birth" is well-researched for a casual read, but it doesn't seem like this woman spends her life working on this stuff, which is what separates the greatest period writers from the kinda good. My first thought goes to Mary Renault who sets the standard for Ancient Greek historical fiction, but since you guys have never heard of her (illiterate heathens!), I'll use Tolkien as an example. I know he's not a historical fiction writer, but my point still stands. I mean, these people eat and sleep and probably shit history. They're in it for a living. If you're just a "hobby historian," though there's nothing to say you can't write a good novel, in terms of richness of detail and thoroughness of research, you really can't compete.
But anyway, Birth of Venus is pretty good anyhow. It's very fast paced and not boring anywhere, and though the protagonist is cliched, she's at least very likeable. Some of the theological points are quite profound, and yes, some moments are very poignant. The author could have just pulled some cheap and easy plot or dramatic devices and she doesn't, and I respect her for that. Also, I'm halfway through and it's suddenly gotten very interesting and quite unconventional...
*An arranged marriage sounds a lot like college. As a rite of passage into adulthood, leaving your family for a strange home where you don't know anyone. Okay, without that.. having sex with a random stranger part. .. Oh yeah, and without AIM.
*faint*
It angles towards the "Girl With a Pearl Earring" crowd, except it's a bit more feminist and a bit more erotic. It's about this girl, Alessandra who's the daughter of a rich merchant and has a passion for painting which apparently is not proper for a girl of her station. She's intelligent, spirited and stubborn but not very graceful, modest or obedient, unlike her older sister (if life was like novels, older sisters through some phenomenon of medical science would always be prettier), which I guess is supposed to be a character flaw of some sort. The operative word here would be "spunky" or "plucky" or something eye-rollingly campy like that. Then she gets sent off to her arranged marriage*... blah blah... and I should mention that there's a young, sensitive and spiritual painter of few words who is employed at her house.
--
"So you think he is impervious to women?"
She snorted. "If he is, he'll be the first one I've ever met. He's just rigid with purity."
---
(sounds like a boy I know)
Chick factor on a scale of 1-10... 11.
The main character is a lot more vivid than Griet from "Girl With Pearl", but also is a lot more cliched and the product of an anachronistic "girl power" mind set imposed on another era. It's among the most politically correct books I've ever read, and this is coming from an ardent reader of fantasy, a genre that's basic appeal is historical revisionism without the pretense of accuracy.
Reviewers say "Birth of Venus" is "well-researched," (wow, that's a lot of quotes) but I'm taking an introductory Renaissance Art class and I know all this stuff already. It's not giving me any more insights into Renaissance Florence than my professor and his fifty minute narrated slide show three times a week (though admittedly he is a very good professor and it is a very good slide show.) Maybe "Birth" is well-researched for a casual read, but it doesn't seem like this woman spends her life working on this stuff, which is what separates the greatest period writers from the kinda good. My first thought goes to Mary Renault who sets the standard for Ancient Greek historical fiction, but since you guys have never heard of her (illiterate heathens!), I'll use Tolkien as an example. I know he's not a historical fiction writer, but my point still stands. I mean, these people eat and sleep and probably shit history. They're in it for a living. If you're just a "hobby historian," though there's nothing to say you can't write a good novel, in terms of richness of detail and thoroughness of research, you really can't compete.
But anyway, Birth of Venus is pretty good anyhow. It's very fast paced and not boring anywhere, and though the protagonist is cliched, she's at least very likeable. Some of the theological points are quite profound, and yes, some moments are very poignant. The author could have just pulled some cheap and easy plot or dramatic devices and she doesn't, and I respect her for that. Also, I'm halfway through and it's suddenly gotten very interesting and quite unconventional...
*An arranged marriage sounds a lot like college. As a rite of passage into adulthood, leaving your family for a strange home where you don't know anyone. Okay, without that.. having sex with a random stranger part. .. Oh yeah, and without AIM.
Thursday, March 18, 2004
At the recital hall, a beautiful sound emanated from the stage. The richness of violin, flute, clarinet and cello swelled in full and mellow notes, in subtlely textured harmony. Then the musicians stopped tuning their instruments, and the concert for contemporary chamber music began.
Contemporary music is terrible. At worse it sounds like a bunch of autistic kids who found the key to the band room; at best you can tell there's something like rhythm and notes, but it isn't anything. It's empty. If music is nourishment for the soul then this is just nothing at all.
I left (in the rain) during Intermission, while the table for the post-concert reception was set up. Lemon merangue triangles are among my favorite desserts, but I wouldn't for love nor money sit through the second half.
I did, however, pick up the pamphlet for the entire music program for this semester. There's some Bach and Beethoven to be had in April.
Thank the Lord.
Contemporary music is terrible. At worse it sounds like a bunch of autistic kids who found the key to the band room; at best you can tell there's something like rhythm and notes, but it isn't anything. It's empty. If music is nourishment for the soul then this is just nothing at all.
I left (in the rain) during Intermission, while the table for the post-concert reception was set up. Lemon merangue triangles are among my favorite desserts, but I wouldn't for love nor money sit through the second half.
I did, however, pick up the pamphlet for the entire music program for this semester. There's some Bach and Beethoven to be had in April.
Thank the Lord.
I went to listen to the seminar in the library gallery on housing prices in the U.S, because I'm an econ major and feel like bettering myself. There were many graphs in shiny ink on glossy paper. I understood the principles of supply and demand in relation to the market. The speaker finished, and opened the floor for questions, and while faculty members asked questions that I didn't understand about things like tax deductions and refinancing mortgage and monthly payments, I walked around looking at the walls of the gallery, at an art exhibition with black and white photographs from the Cuban Revolution. For being black and white photographs, these were tremendously moving, full of so much hope and exuberance of a bygone era. They're such frail and ephemeral things, and not a little sad for it since we all know how that revolution under the Havanna night and Che Guevera's pen turned out. It made me wonder who the people in it were; who they are now, who that little girl laughing under the light of the sun in a little white dress lifted and swung up in Fidel Castro's arms is, whether she's still laughing. There's a sequential pair of photos, the first one showing maybe half a dozen members of a crowd waiting for the arrival of Castro to make a speech, wearing expressions of anxious anticipation, and the next photo, taken right as Castro arrives, when such joy breaks out on the people's faces it's like the surging of a wave. There's just that moment of a temporary dream that makes it so beautiful and sad. In the meantime the seminar concluded and the audience converged on the reception table for coffee, fruit, and lemon merangue triangles.
Wednesday, March 17, 2004
Kay made his first anime music video for Hellsing, to E.S. Posthumus' "Pompeii" (apparently an opera of some sort). It's badass, and he's going to show it at Otakon. Go download it. Now.
Tuesday, March 16, 2004
Wherein Angie Reverts to Fall Semester, Freshman Year
Niall and Paul have kicked me out of Jeremy's room, after staying there for five months, without any advance notice to either me or Jeremy. We didn't know there was any sort of problem but apparently we didn't deserve to be told what it was.
Yes, I technically have a place to live, but I'm not quite sure how I'm to call it home, and in the meantime I have no cash and I've got to get myself some soap and shampoo and toothpaste because I haven't used my own bathroom since September.
Niall and Paul have kicked me out of Jeremy's room, after staying there for five months, without any advance notice to either me or Jeremy. We didn't know there was any sort of problem but apparently we didn't deserve to be told what it was.
Yes, I technically have a place to live, but I'm not quite sure how I'm to call it home, and in the meantime I have no cash and I've got to get myself some soap and shampoo and toothpaste because I haven't used my own bathroom since September.
Monday, March 15, 2004
I should also like to note for the record that Tim has an endearing assholic facade but it's rather unclear if he's really an asshole or just acting for our amusement.
Quote of the Day:
"I only ever knew one guy who died. I had this friend who died, who ran across the street to buy some cigarettes and got hit by a car. I was like, 'Idiot! Everyone knows that cigarettes kill you!' "
On Sunday, we went to the Olive Garden with Jeremy, Jose, Kay, and Eric Numberless, Jose's tagalong friend. Kay says that the food isn't authentically Italian but nonetheless I thought it was good, which just shows that I really don't care about authenticity.
I also like General Tso's chicken.
Quote of the Day:
"I only ever knew one guy who died. I had this friend who died, who ran across the street to buy some cigarettes and got hit by a car. I was like, 'Idiot! Everyone knows that cigarettes kill you!' "
On Sunday, we went to the Olive Garden with Jeremy, Jose, Kay, and Eric Numberless, Jose's tagalong friend. Kay says that the food isn't authentically Italian but nonetheless I thought it was good, which just shows that I really don't care about authenticity.
I also like General Tso's chicken.
Statement!
Watched our production of The Bald Soprano on Friday, an absurdist play by Ionesco, the same guy who wrote Rhinoceros. All the usual absurdist themes; the failure of logical deduction, the failure of language as a form of communication, failure of the ability of names as a form of identitym, people lack purpose and are alienated and don't really know each other, etc. Unlike Rosencranz and Guildenstern Are Dead, it was actually funny (or better performed at any rate). However, I find it kind of amusing that absurdist plays have a standardized set of themes in the first place.
Watched our production of The Bald Soprano on Friday, an absurdist play by Ionesco, the same guy who wrote Rhinoceros. All the usual absurdist themes; the failure of logical deduction, the failure of language as a form of communication, failure of the ability of names as a form of identitym, people lack purpose and are alienated and don't really know each other, etc. Unlike Rosencranz and Guildenstern Are Dead, it was actually funny (or better performed at any rate). However, I find it kind of amusing that absurdist plays have a standardized set of themes in the first place.
Thursday, March 11, 2004
Bram Stoker's Dracula... Spoilers Below, Punks!
Finished Bram Stoker's Dracula. Good book, and a lot more modern than Frankenstein. I love the format. Diaries of different people and newspaper clippings and other transcripts are pieced together for a cohesive narrative. This is very suspenseful and intriguing until maybe the second half of the book where all the diary-keepers finally meet each other and put together all the clues. After that, it loses a lot of momentum, and while it stays in diary format it becomes just like a novel that switches between different first person narratives. Half of the dramatic tension came from the fact that you as the reader knew exactly what was going on but the characters didn't. The ending was terrible. I haven't seen the Dracula movie but I could totally understand if they changed the ending; they open the coffin and cut off his head. The end. They don't fight him or anybody or anything. I don't care about combat that much, but they could've at least had a dramatic showdown or something. Alas, no. Well, they had a minor character nobody cares about die in a really dumb way.
Also, while the characters were likeable in their diaries, once they all get together to hunt vampires you start getting some of that terrible Victorian dialogue. The book is quite dated in many ways, from its descriptions of quaint medical procedures (like blood transfusions before the discovery of blood types), staunch belief in physiognomy which has been debunked as a science, 19th century views of the lower class, and appalling ventures about the nature of mental illness and the criminal mind. Of course people go crazy when you imprison them in horrible asylums in the middle of nowhere in padded rooms with straightjackets and no friends, family or other social relationships! Jackasses. I can excuse Dracula's cruelty because he drinks blood to survive; Dr. Seward's cruelty as a psychiatrist is harder to excuse. And who on Earth describes people they meet as being, "noble"? Nobody I know uses that word as an adjective to describe anybody anymore, unless they actually are aristocrats, which is a social status, not a character trait. And nobody I know invokes God and His righteous justice quite as often as these people do.
The most notable aspect of Victoriana is that the whole vampire thing reflects sexual anxieties, where the female vampires are described as being "wanton" and "voluptuous," while the human heroines are always described as being "sweet" or "pure." (Of course once human heroines become vampires, they too become wanton and voluptuous, which is an extremely horrifying thing for all the male characters of the novel, watching their girlfriends turn into undead sluts and whatnot). And all this with maidens dying before their wedding days (and this in Frankenstein too) and having her fiance become horribly anguished over his duty to destroy the sensual creature who has risen from the grave as a travesty of the memory of his chaste, untainted girlfriend... and by doing so, saving her soul from eternal damnation and allowing her pure and holy spirit to rest peacefully in heaven... Honor killing, essentially. Hell, if that doesn't say, "I hate my id" right there I don't know what does.
I do like Mina Murray as a female character though. Despite her Victorian tendencies toward swooning or shrieking or getting the hysterics (really, not all that often) and making melodramatic speeches on how brave the men are, she is quite strong. She's one of the most developed characters in the book, and is extraordinarily intelligent and perceptive, as well as being an organizational and logistical genius.
She also gets kudos for knowing how to use a gun.
Finished Bram Stoker's Dracula. Good book, and a lot more modern than Frankenstein. I love the format. Diaries of different people and newspaper clippings and other transcripts are pieced together for a cohesive narrative. This is very suspenseful and intriguing until maybe the second half of the book where all the diary-keepers finally meet each other and put together all the clues. After that, it loses a lot of momentum, and while it stays in diary format it becomes just like a novel that switches between different first person narratives. Half of the dramatic tension came from the fact that you as the reader knew exactly what was going on but the characters didn't. The ending was terrible. I haven't seen the Dracula movie but I could totally understand if they changed the ending; they open the coffin and cut off his head. The end. They don't fight him or anybody or anything. I don't care about combat that much, but they could've at least had a dramatic showdown or something. Alas, no. Well, they had a minor character nobody cares about die in a really dumb way.
Also, while the characters were likeable in their diaries, once they all get together to hunt vampires you start getting some of that terrible Victorian dialogue. The book is quite dated in many ways, from its descriptions of quaint medical procedures (like blood transfusions before the discovery of blood types), staunch belief in physiognomy which has been debunked as a science, 19th century views of the lower class, and appalling ventures about the nature of mental illness and the criminal mind. Of course people go crazy when you imprison them in horrible asylums in the middle of nowhere in padded rooms with straightjackets and no friends, family or other social relationships! Jackasses. I can excuse Dracula's cruelty because he drinks blood to survive; Dr. Seward's cruelty as a psychiatrist is harder to excuse. And who on Earth describes people they meet as being, "noble"? Nobody I know uses that word as an adjective to describe anybody anymore, unless they actually are aristocrats, which is a social status, not a character trait. And nobody I know invokes God and His righteous justice quite as often as these people do.
The most notable aspect of Victoriana is that the whole vampire thing reflects sexual anxieties, where the female vampires are described as being "wanton" and "voluptuous," while the human heroines are always described as being "sweet" or "pure." (Of course once human heroines become vampires, they too become wanton and voluptuous, which is an extremely horrifying thing for all the male characters of the novel, watching their girlfriends turn into undead sluts and whatnot). And all this with maidens dying before their wedding days (and this in Frankenstein too) and having her fiance become horribly anguished over his duty to destroy the sensual creature who has risen from the grave as a travesty of the memory of his chaste, untainted girlfriend... and by doing so, saving her soul from eternal damnation and allowing her pure and holy spirit to rest peacefully in heaven... Honor killing, essentially. Hell, if that doesn't say, "I hate my id" right there I don't know what does.
I do like Mina Murray as a female character though. Despite her Victorian tendencies toward swooning or shrieking or getting the hysterics (really, not all that often) and making melodramatic speeches on how brave the men are, she is quite strong. She's one of the most developed characters in the book, and is extraordinarily intelligent and perceptive, as well as being an organizational and logistical genius.
She also gets kudos for knowing how to use a gun.
Wednesday, March 10, 2004
Do Me, You Big Studly Viking Warrior!
On Friday, saw Hidalgo with Jeremy, Tim and Kay, because none of us wanted to see Passion of Christ. Much as I like the guy who plays Jesus, Jim Caviezal (who I've repeatedly been insisting is the Next Big Thing since last year when I saw Count of Monte Cristo, despite everyone being like.. who??), I don't particularly feel like seeing that movie. Too damn violent.
Anyway, Hidalgo was pretty dumb. It's about this long distance horse racer raised by Sioux Indians and who ends up being conscripted into the Union Army and taking part in Wounded Knee (where I'm sure he would've met Tom Cruise's character from Last Samurai and gotten along quite well) and feeling big walloping doses of White Guilt as he gets deeply depressed, drowning himself in alcohol, has horrifying flashbacks and needs to find himself and meaning in life, etc. Except unlike Tom Cruise he ends up in Bedouin Arabia instead of Meiji Japan, and gets called an infidel every five seconds and of course the sheikh's daughter falls in love with him because he's a symbol of western freedom and she's all oppressed by her sexist society and whatnot. I don't think there was any character who wasn't a stereotype.
"Oh, White Man! Save me from my arranged marriage!"
You know.
"Oh, White Man! Teach me about the values of individualism because we have silly accents and don't understand!"
I wanted to see a nice, sexy, enlightened Arab man in a movie for once, dammit. But in the meantime white men can continue saving everybody..
Oh yes. And apparently a great way to celebrate when you've won a 3000 mile horse race with a wounded horse is to splash around with him in the ocean.. full of, you know... salt water...
On Friday, saw Hidalgo with Jeremy, Tim and Kay, because none of us wanted to see Passion of Christ. Much as I like the guy who plays Jesus, Jim Caviezal (who I've repeatedly been insisting is the Next Big Thing since last year when I saw Count of Monte Cristo, despite everyone being like.. who??), I don't particularly feel like seeing that movie. Too damn violent.
Anyway, Hidalgo was pretty dumb. It's about this long distance horse racer raised by Sioux Indians and who ends up being conscripted into the Union Army and taking part in Wounded Knee (where I'm sure he would've met Tom Cruise's character from Last Samurai and gotten along quite well) and feeling big walloping doses of White Guilt as he gets deeply depressed, drowning himself in alcohol, has horrifying flashbacks and needs to find himself and meaning in life, etc. Except unlike Tom Cruise he ends up in Bedouin Arabia instead of Meiji Japan, and gets called an infidel every five seconds and of course the sheikh's daughter falls in love with him because he's a symbol of western freedom and she's all oppressed by her sexist society and whatnot. I don't think there was any character who wasn't a stereotype.
"Oh, White Man! Save me from my arranged marriage!"
You know.
"Oh, White Man! Teach me about the values of individualism because we have silly accents and don't understand!"
I wanted to see a nice, sexy, enlightened Arab man in a movie for once, dammit. But in the meantime white men can continue saving everybody..
Oh yes. And apparently a great way to celebrate when you've won a 3000 mile horse race with a wounded horse is to splash around with him in the ocean.. full of, you know... salt water...
Tuesday, March 09, 2004
On Thursday, went with Jeremy to a discussion by several guest speakers about whether Christianity is intellectual suicide. Jose was the one who gave us the idea to go, but he never showed up, having gone to fencing instead. His loss, really. It was rather exciting; the place was packed and with the air of people turned out expecting a fight, because of course all the Christians showed up in spades, and all the atheists showed up in spades because they couldn't turn down such a tempting call to arms. A ton of people we knew showed up, like Sam and Mike (who had actually graduated last semester so I hadn't seen him since then) and Strong Sad Eric (formerly known as Loser Eric in my blog, but he's actually a really nice guy, if socially inept, so calling him Loser Eric sounds mean.. and he reminds me of Strong Sad from Homestar Runner). These debate things are the best when every single person entering the room has his own foregone conclusion, and nobody's foregone conclusion coincides with anyone else's. Also, they had chai, so it was good.
Actually, the event was sponsored by several fellowships, so all the speakers presented the Christian point of view with intent to convert, and there were no opposing speakers. Still, I (unlike Sam, who is an out and out atheist) found that they addressed criticism pretty well, if with logical loopholes. The first speaker we had was a scientist, and a horrible speaker though an educated man. The second guy was better, presenting a hilarious parody of the modern liberal mindset which I can't say I'm not guilty of, though he tried to prove that Christianity wasn't intellectual suicide by listing a number of mentally talented Christians over the years. This is a dumb argument, because surely nobody believes that individual Christians can't excel in the sciences or arts or philosophy, it's just that Christianity as an institution makes Christians in large numbers one of the most terrible things this world has seen. For every Tolkien or CS Lewis there's a hundred rednecks, moms who do things "for the children," or medieval serfs. And surely they aren't bad people on their own and with their families, it's just when they start getting together and lighting torches and brandishing pitchforks that the world is in trouble. And this, honestly, goes for any other ideology in the world which believes itself to be the only right one; communism, veganism, football fans, what have you.
On the most part though I do respect the speakers immensely. I did talk to one of them, the second speaker, afterwards, asking him why salvation had to be obtained through Christ specifically, as opposed to any other God. His answer was that he personally believed it to be so because it was in the Bible, which he as a historian believed to be true over any other religious document. He told me to spend a long time looking at the Bible analyzing it like any other historical document and asking questions regarding its truth value. Is this well translated? Is this a good copy of the original manuscript? What time period did it come from? Who was it written by, who was it written for, and what society was it a product of? How well does it correspond with the accounts of other documents of the era? I would, like any other document, have to make a judgement using rational analysis, about whether what was said therein was historical fact.
I told this to Sam, who did the online version of rolling his eyes and asked, "Why not believe Greek myths then?"
Which is a good point, but I still do respect the speaker as the only Christian, Jeremy not withstanding, who has ever given me an answer to the question of, "Why Christ? Why should I believe in the Bible moreso than any other holy text?" with something other than the circular response, "Because it says so in the Bible."
Actually, the event was sponsored by several fellowships, so all the speakers presented the Christian point of view with intent to convert, and there were no opposing speakers. Still, I (unlike Sam, who is an out and out atheist) found that they addressed criticism pretty well, if with logical loopholes. The first speaker we had was a scientist, and a horrible speaker though an educated man. The second guy was better, presenting a hilarious parody of the modern liberal mindset which I can't say I'm not guilty of, though he tried to prove that Christianity wasn't intellectual suicide by listing a number of mentally talented Christians over the years. This is a dumb argument, because surely nobody believes that individual Christians can't excel in the sciences or arts or philosophy, it's just that Christianity as an institution makes Christians in large numbers one of the most terrible things this world has seen. For every Tolkien or CS Lewis there's a hundred rednecks, moms who do things "for the children," or medieval serfs. And surely they aren't bad people on their own and with their families, it's just when they start getting together and lighting torches and brandishing pitchforks that the world is in trouble. And this, honestly, goes for any other ideology in the world which believes itself to be the only right one; communism, veganism, football fans, what have you.
On the most part though I do respect the speakers immensely. I did talk to one of them, the second speaker, afterwards, asking him why salvation had to be obtained through Christ specifically, as opposed to any other God. His answer was that he personally believed it to be so because it was in the Bible, which he as a historian believed to be true over any other religious document. He told me to spend a long time looking at the Bible analyzing it like any other historical document and asking questions regarding its truth value. Is this well translated? Is this a good copy of the original manuscript? What time period did it come from? Who was it written by, who was it written for, and what society was it a product of? How well does it correspond with the accounts of other documents of the era? I would, like any other document, have to make a judgement using rational analysis, about whether what was said therein was historical fact.
I told this to Sam, who did the online version of rolling his eyes and asked, "Why not believe Greek myths then?"
Which is a good point, but I still do respect the speaker as the only Christian, Jeremy not withstanding, who has ever given me an answer to the question of, "Why Christ? Why should I believe in the Bible moreso than any other holy text?" with something other than the circular response, "Because it says so in the Bible."
Wednesday, March 03, 2004
Have made cup and straw kazoos with Jose, Jeremy and Niall. What you do; take a paper soda cup, after you've emptied it, wash it out, and punch a hole through the center of the bottom side with your straw, and stick your straw in partway. Clench with your teeth the side of the straw that's sticking out of the bottom and suck in air through your teeth. Tada! Cup kazoos!
Unfortunately, Jeremy and Paul, his roommate, cannot for love or money, make their kazoos work.
Jeremy is like this though; he's terrible with woodwinds. He has a bamboo flute he got at Rennfest which he tried to learn to play. It's one of those flutes which, unlike a recorder or a penny whistle, you don't blow directly into, but hold it sideways across your mouth and blow across the mouth hole, for better sound quality. Well, he can't do it. I told him that it's just like blowing across the mouth of a soda bottle to produce a low whooping sound, but apparently he can't do that either. I think this "trained incapacity" (as Sociology 101 would have it) comes from playing trombone all these years... perhaps his mouth is conditioned to only move in a certain way.
Unfortunately, Jeremy and Paul, his roommate, cannot for love or money, make their kazoos work.
Jeremy is like this though; he's terrible with woodwinds. He has a bamboo flute he got at Rennfest which he tried to learn to play. It's one of those flutes which, unlike a recorder or a penny whistle, you don't blow directly into, but hold it sideways across your mouth and blow across the mouth hole, for better sound quality. Well, he can't do it. I told him that it's just like blowing across the mouth of a soda bottle to produce a low whooping sound, but apparently he can't do that either. I think this "trained incapacity" (as Sociology 101 would have it) comes from playing trombone all these years... perhaps his mouth is conditioned to only move in a certain way.
Tuesday, March 02, 2004
Politically Noncommital Girl Strikes Again!
Went to see a screening of a documentary called Life Over Debt organized by Oxfam, an organization against global hunger that I'm kinda in. Chris (Brian's twin brother and head of the Economics Club) sprung on me saying, "You're an econ major? Would you like to be more involved in contemporary economic issues?" and I was like, "sure..." because I've lately been trying to make an effort to partake in more student events, with marginal success. Besides, I've always felt a bit guilty about being such an uninformed voter and so politically inactive. I can't even classify myself as either liberal or conservative, much less find a party or a politician to support. I didn't even vote in the Maryland primaries today. I was reminded in the morning, but then I forgot by lunchtime, and in any case, all the Democrats seem alike to me. I feel bad about this; voting is what Nick and Malex and Andrew would've wanted me to do. At any rate, the documentary, which I did remember to go to see, was about how Jamaican farmers are driven out of business by foreign corporations which sell things at lower prices, or something like that and is very anti-globalization.
I found it like Bowling for Columbine in that instead of taking the responsibility of being an objective film, it goes for emotional manipulation and cinematography instead. Not that it wasn't artfully done but I'm just saying it seemed a bit too perfect. You know, it of course must have many shots of carousing tourists (always fat and white and sunburned) with (poor, black) people working in factories, and analogies comparing foreign corporations in Jamaica to colonial slavery. Obviously many of the people representing the anti-globalization point of view had to be impassioned blacks with thick Jamaican accents while the sole speaker for the WTO had to be a bald white man with glasses who was coolly composed and well-spoken, the very epitome of a (imperialist) corporate shark. (Also he had no eyebrows. Is that freaky or what?) So whether intentionally or not, a lot of the documentary took advantage of people's guilt over being relatively affluent, or their residual white guilt over historic oppression of other cultures, or xenocentrism (where people sentimentally find other people's cultures to be more wiser, richer, and more wonderful than their own simply because it's exotic) to be emotionally manipulative regarding the issues instead of being informative about them.
The discussion following the screening was pretty much a recruitment drive for the Coalition Against Global Exploitation, a local Baltimore association. Personally I think this makes any sort of educational and informative documentary screening and discussion lose a bit of credibility as being .. well... educational and informative. Because if the impartial facts truly and rationally stood for themselves, education without proselytization would be enough to convince someone of the merits of CAGE or a similar organization. All you'd have to do is say "This screening sponsored by CAGE and Oxfam" on the posters and have a contact e-mail address. The fact that most of the "discussion" period was devoted to the logistics of joining CAGE and what they as an organization do, instead of the documentary or the issue itself, seemed rather to defeat the purpose. There was no real "discussion" because there was no real dissent- it wasn't possible to express dissent without sounding like an asshole. (I, for my part, didn't speak out at all on everything I've written here, and nobody else did.) I'm sure the people with CAGE are nice and very tolerant; it's just the nature of public groups that nobody wants to be the sole dissentor.
I don't know what I think of it really; maybe protectionism is better for developing countries to be able to develop their own enterprises. It is true that people ought to have a right as consumers to buy whatever they wish, be it local or foreign goods (which was the argument of our WTO corporate shark*), but this may not be a priority if it thwarts the growth of local businesses. US businesses based in a country ought to be subject to health and labor regulations of some sort, though obviously the idea is that these regulations will be more lenient in another country than in the US, hence encouraging investment. "Free trade zones" sound like cowpoo* to me. I appreciate the infrastructure and new technology that foreign investment provides, but it is also cowpoo that free trade provides jobs to people who otherwise wouldn't have them. This may be true in some cases but in many cases it takes away jobs by driving away local businesses by encouraging imports instead local production. Also, short-term loans to countries, with interest, is pretty dumb because they can't use that money for long term investment and just end up in debt. Obviously, we ought to stop subsidizing American enterprises that produce things for which there is no demand and instead fund the transitions of some of those enterprises into other venues.
However, I still don't think globalization is generally evil.
*Who probably isn't as much of an asshole in real life as the documentary makes him; anyone can seem an asshole in documentaries when juxtaposed with shots of mournful mothers and starving children.
*Cowpoo! Like bullshit but better.
Went to see a screening of a documentary called Life Over Debt organized by Oxfam, an organization against global hunger that I'm kinda in. Chris (Brian's twin brother and head of the Economics Club) sprung on me saying, "You're an econ major? Would you like to be more involved in contemporary economic issues?" and I was like, "sure..." because I've lately been trying to make an effort to partake in more student events, with marginal success. Besides, I've always felt a bit guilty about being such an uninformed voter and so politically inactive. I can't even classify myself as either liberal or conservative, much less find a party or a politician to support. I didn't even vote in the Maryland primaries today. I was reminded in the morning, but then I forgot by lunchtime, and in any case, all the Democrats seem alike to me. I feel bad about this; voting is what Nick and Malex and Andrew would've wanted me to do. At any rate, the documentary, which I did remember to go to see, was about how Jamaican farmers are driven out of business by foreign corporations which sell things at lower prices, or something like that and is very anti-globalization.
I found it like Bowling for Columbine in that instead of taking the responsibility of being an objective film, it goes for emotional manipulation and cinematography instead. Not that it wasn't artfully done but I'm just saying it seemed a bit too perfect. You know, it of course must have many shots of carousing tourists (always fat and white and sunburned) with (poor, black) people working in factories, and analogies comparing foreign corporations in Jamaica to colonial slavery. Obviously many of the people representing the anti-globalization point of view had to be impassioned blacks with thick Jamaican accents while the sole speaker for the WTO had to be a bald white man with glasses who was coolly composed and well-spoken, the very epitome of a (imperialist) corporate shark. (Also he had no eyebrows. Is that freaky or what?) So whether intentionally or not, a lot of the documentary took advantage of people's guilt over being relatively affluent, or their residual white guilt over historic oppression of other cultures, or xenocentrism (where people sentimentally find other people's cultures to be more wiser, richer, and more wonderful than their own simply because it's exotic) to be emotionally manipulative regarding the issues instead of being informative about them.
The discussion following the screening was pretty much a recruitment drive for the Coalition Against Global Exploitation, a local Baltimore association. Personally I think this makes any sort of educational and informative documentary screening and discussion lose a bit of credibility as being .. well... educational and informative. Because if the impartial facts truly and rationally stood for themselves, education without proselytization would be enough to convince someone of the merits of CAGE or a similar organization. All you'd have to do is say "This screening sponsored by CAGE and Oxfam" on the posters and have a contact e-mail address. The fact that most of the "discussion" period was devoted to the logistics of joining CAGE and what they as an organization do, instead of the documentary or the issue itself, seemed rather to defeat the purpose. There was no real "discussion" because there was no real dissent- it wasn't possible to express dissent without sounding like an asshole. (I, for my part, didn't speak out at all on everything I've written here, and nobody else did.) I'm sure the people with CAGE are nice and very tolerant; it's just the nature of public groups that nobody wants to be the sole dissentor.
I don't know what I think of it really; maybe protectionism is better for developing countries to be able to develop their own enterprises. It is true that people ought to have a right as consumers to buy whatever they wish, be it local or foreign goods (which was the argument of our WTO corporate shark*), but this may not be a priority if it thwarts the growth of local businesses. US businesses based in a country ought to be subject to health and labor regulations of some sort, though obviously the idea is that these regulations will be more lenient in another country than in the US, hence encouraging investment. "Free trade zones" sound like cowpoo* to me. I appreciate the infrastructure and new technology that foreign investment provides, but it is also cowpoo that free trade provides jobs to people who otherwise wouldn't have them. This may be true in some cases but in many cases it takes away jobs by driving away local businesses by encouraging imports instead local production. Also, short-term loans to countries, with interest, is pretty dumb because they can't use that money for long term investment and just end up in debt. Obviously, we ought to stop subsidizing American enterprises that produce things for which there is no demand and instead fund the transitions of some of those enterprises into other venues.
However, I still don't think globalization is generally evil.
*Who probably isn't as much of an asshole in real life as the documentary makes him; anyone can seem an asshole in documentaries when juxtaposed with shots of mournful mothers and starving children.
*Cowpoo! Like bullshit but better.
Friday, February 27, 2004
On Monday, at Jose's behest, I went with Jeremy to Latin dancing lessons. Poor marching band Jeremy cannot move his hips for love or money; he seems not to be inhibited, but just to be physically incapable of the motion. Shall put him on the stairmaster for a while and see if he learns to wiggle his butt. Won't mention it otherwise; he seems rather sad and discouraged by his lack of progress* anyway.
*Symptom of a condition commonly known as Whiteness.
*Symptom of a condition commonly known as Whiteness.
Sunday, February 22, 2004
On Saturday we were going to have an impromptu LAN party but it didn't work out because it was a bit too impromptu; no one came. Also people kept asking, "Who's coming, what are we playing?" before deciding whether to come. Because everyone was waiting on everyone else's decision, nobody made any decisions in the end. Kay was busy messing with his new computer and when we called him to invite him to our LAN party (without the party part) he asked us who was in it, and since nobody much was except for me, Jeremy and Niall (Chris didn't have a computer to contribute), he decided we weren't cool enough for him and spent the day hanging out with his other friends. There was a simultaneous LAN party in Potomac basement, but our hardware wasn't good enough for them and they ended up unintentionally excluding us by playing Unreal Tournament 2004 extensively.
Went to Wizards of the Coast at Arundel Mills today with Jeremy, Chris and Niall, since WtC retail stores are being closed. Got me some transparent pink dice and some glow in the dark ones, and got, at somewhere else, one of the Half-life expansions. Thanks to Steam, with one CD key I can play basically everything in the Half-life expansion pack including Counter-Strike and Team Fortress Classic and Day of Defeat.
Niall pushed me across a parking lot in a speeding shopping cart.
At Best Buy later on, while waiting for seats to open up in a nearby Ruby Tuesday's, we bumped into Kay, with his Other Friends, and a 19 inch computer monitor in a shopping cart, which promptly keeled over from the weight. We were sickened and left for dinner. I ordered some indeterminant yet tasty meat-with-potatoes meal and Jeremy got something fishy and uninteresting. Jeremy eats and likes any and all seafood; therefore, he is to be ignored anytime he recommends a seafood restaurant or entree. In the meantime, Niall made friends with Sam Adams. I have determined that when people get drunk it doesn't do much except make them act more like themselves (more open, and pronounced mannerisms becoming more exaggerated, etc); therefore, Niall got more Niall-esque.
Have also installed Jeremy's version of Homeworld (the first one), on my computer. Have finished the tutorial, and suck at it tremendously. Nothing else is new.
Went to Wizards of the Coast at Arundel Mills today with Jeremy, Chris and Niall, since WtC retail stores are being closed. Got me some transparent pink dice and some glow in the dark ones, and got, at somewhere else, one of the Half-life expansions. Thanks to Steam, with one CD key I can play basically everything in the Half-life expansion pack including Counter-Strike and Team Fortress Classic and Day of Defeat.
Niall pushed me across a parking lot in a speeding shopping cart.
At Best Buy later on, while waiting for seats to open up in a nearby Ruby Tuesday's, we bumped into Kay, with his Other Friends, and a 19 inch computer monitor in a shopping cart, which promptly keeled over from the weight. We were sickened and left for dinner. I ordered some indeterminant yet tasty meat-with-potatoes meal and Jeremy got something fishy and uninteresting. Jeremy eats and likes any and all seafood; therefore, he is to be ignored anytime he recommends a seafood restaurant or entree. In the meantime, Niall made friends with Sam Adams. I have determined that when people get drunk it doesn't do much except make them act more like themselves (more open, and pronounced mannerisms becoming more exaggerated, etc); therefore, Niall got more Niall-esque.
Have also installed Jeremy's version of Homeworld (the first one), on my computer. Have finished the tutorial, and suck at it tremendously. Nothing else is new.
Dorkiness
On Friday we spent a night playing Niall's Final Fantasy I based tabletop roleplaying game. It went something like this:
----
Niall: You walk into a town. It has an inn, an item shop, an armory, and a small fountain in the middle.
Me (Thief): I play in the fountain.
Niall: You, and the rest of the party (because in Final Fantasy you can't split up), are thrown out of the town. Great job.
Jeremy (Black Mage): I'd peed in the fountain as well.
Niall: To the west and north is forest. To the east is the ocean, to the south is plains.
We defeat some imps and reach a castle.
Niall: The king says, 'You must rescue my dear daughter! She has been kidnapped and is held in a cave to the west!'
Chris (White Mage): We'll save your daughter if you can aid us by providing us sufficient resources to do the job.
King: You may take whatever treasures you find in this castle.
Jeremy (Black Mage): I lift my hat, and while the king is shocked, snatch the crown off his head! That's a treasure.. and something we did find in this castle..
Niall: You attempt to snatch the crown off the king's head.. the crown stays. It has been molded to his head and his skull has grown around it.
Jeremy: Ew!
------
Later:
Niall: You encounter six wolves!
Jeremy: I take some of the food I'd taken from the kitchen and try to feed the wolves and make them friendly to me.
Niall (rolls): You manage to make two wolves your allies for life.
(we attack and kill the other wolves)
Me: I skin the corpses and carry the pelts to sell them at the next town.
----
Niall: You arrive in a vast chamber of the cave. In front of you, you see a giant lizard man holding the Princess in the air.
Jose (Fighter): Put her down now!
Lizard man: I shall never relinquish my sacrificial victim!
Chris (White Mage): How about a trade...? You give us the princess and we give you.. Angie!
Me (Thief): Hey! I'm not a virgin.. er.. *schemes* ... eh, sure, I'll be the trade.
Niall: Okay.. you trade your thief for a useless princess. The lizard man is now holding Angie in the air and licking her.
Me: I chop off its tongue with my dagger.
Niall: It takes no damage and immediately regenerates its tongue, but it's pissed off and attacks the party.
Chris: I grab the princess and run away towards the castle to get the 10,000 gold reward while the rest of you stay behind and fight...
---
King: Thank you, great adventurer, for returning my dear daughter to me.
Chris: Do I get my 10,000 gold?
King *giving it*: Yes, here you go... and your doom as well, foolish mortal!
Niall: The King shows his true form! He's a demon!
Me: And the princess?
Niall: She turns into a succubus. You, the white mage, are all alone with a bag of gold and two angry demons. The rest of the player party is not with you because you betrayed them and left them behind.
-----
We got bored of that game for a while, so then we had everyone else calculate the stats for the character another person would play. The thing was, if your stats were being calculated, you weren't allowed to speak up. For example, if you were Jeremy, you would play, in the game, a character named Jeremy who was exactly like you, with exactly the same personality, memories, skills, and experiences. However, since your 'character' is created by other people, you'd end up actually playing other peoples' perceptions of you.
On Friday we spent a night playing Niall's Final Fantasy I based tabletop roleplaying game. It went something like this:
----
Niall: You walk into a town. It has an inn, an item shop, an armory, and a small fountain in the middle.
Me (Thief): I play in the fountain.
Niall: You, and the rest of the party (because in Final Fantasy you can't split up), are thrown out of the town. Great job.
Jeremy (Black Mage): I'd peed in the fountain as well.
Niall: To the west and north is forest. To the east is the ocean, to the south is plains.
We defeat some imps and reach a castle.
Niall: The king says, 'You must rescue my dear daughter! She has been kidnapped and is held in a cave to the west!'
Chris (White Mage): We'll save your daughter if you can aid us by providing us sufficient resources to do the job.
King: You may take whatever treasures you find in this castle.
Jeremy (Black Mage): I lift my hat, and while the king is shocked, snatch the crown off his head! That's a treasure.. and something we did find in this castle..
Niall: You attempt to snatch the crown off the king's head.. the crown stays. It has been molded to his head and his skull has grown around it.
Jeremy: Ew!
------
Later:
Niall: You encounter six wolves!
Jeremy: I take some of the food I'd taken from the kitchen and try to feed the wolves and make them friendly to me.
Niall (rolls): You manage to make two wolves your allies for life.
(we attack and kill the other wolves)
Me: I skin the corpses and carry the pelts to sell them at the next town.
----
Niall: You arrive in a vast chamber of the cave. In front of you, you see a giant lizard man holding the Princess in the air.
Jose (Fighter): Put her down now!
Lizard man: I shall never relinquish my sacrificial victim!
Chris (White Mage): How about a trade...? You give us the princess and we give you.. Angie!
Me (Thief): Hey! I'm not a virgin.. er.. *schemes* ... eh, sure, I'll be the trade.
Niall: Okay.. you trade your thief for a useless princess. The lizard man is now holding Angie in the air and licking her.
Me: I chop off its tongue with my dagger.
Niall: It takes no damage and immediately regenerates its tongue, but it's pissed off and attacks the party.
Chris: I grab the princess and run away towards the castle to get the 10,000 gold reward while the rest of you stay behind and fight...
---
King: Thank you, great adventurer, for returning my dear daughter to me.
Chris: Do I get my 10,000 gold?
King *giving it*: Yes, here you go... and your doom as well, foolish mortal!
Niall: The King shows his true form! He's a demon!
Me: And the princess?
Niall: She turns into a succubus. You, the white mage, are all alone with a bag of gold and two angry demons. The rest of the player party is not with you because you betrayed them and left them behind.
-----
We got bored of that game for a while, so then we had everyone else calculate the stats for the character another person would play. The thing was, if your stats were being calculated, you weren't allowed to speak up. For example, if you were Jeremy, you would play, in the game, a character named Jeremy who was exactly like you, with exactly the same personality, memories, skills, and experiences. However, since your 'character' is created by other people, you'd end up actually playing other peoples' perceptions of you.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)