The results of the vote are in, and it seems that Blogger will from now on be used to post in spanish. Don't expect as many posts here...
The english-language blog will continue at Vox:
http://peculiaristmindtrap.vox.com/
Thank you for your time.
Wednesday, October 29, 2008
Monday, October 27, 2008
Advance Australia Yeah!
I've written a piece for the Open Forum site, which aims to increase discussion around social and policy issues in Australia. I'm reasonably certain the article is going to get a lot of negative feedback but that's OK -- I'm still reasonably certain I am right. Anyway, click through the link and write a comment or vote it up. I dare you.
http://www.openforum.com.au/content/national-anthem
http://www.openforum.com.au/content/national-anthem
Wednesday, October 22, 2008
Why Not How
I do not need to know how the universe came to be, I only need to know why.
An analogy:
I don't really know how a book is made. I know they cut down trees, and recylce old paper, in order to get pulp, but I do not know the process required to do this.
I do not know the details involved in turning pulp into paper.
I do not know how they make the ink, or from what ingredients. I do not know how they print the ink onto the paper.
I do not know how they bind the book together. I do not know how to make the glue used, nor how to apply it so all the pages stick properly, and in the correct order.
I do not know how to make the cover, with its different paper and its different inks.
I do not know the details of where our language came from, which words are from latin, which from greek, which from french and so on.
All these things I do not know, but I do not need to know them. All I need is to read the book and learn the information within, learn why it was made what the information means to me.
If I did learn how the book was made, the entire process from top to bottom, but I still had not read it, then what use is it to me?
Posted by: JEQP
An analogy:
I don't really know how a book is made. I know they cut down trees, and recylce old paper, in order to get pulp, but I do not know the process required to do this.
I do not know the details involved in turning pulp into paper.
I do not know how they make the ink, or from what ingredients. I do not know how they print the ink onto the paper.
I do not know how they bind the book together. I do not know how to make the glue used, nor how to apply it so all the pages stick properly, and in the correct order.
I do not know how to make the cover, with its different paper and its different inks.
I do not know the details of where our language came from, which words are from latin, which from greek, which from french and so on.
All these things I do not know, but I do not need to know them. All I need is to read the book and learn the information within, learn why it was made what the information means to me.
If I did learn how the book was made, the entire process from top to bottom, but I still had not read it, then what use is it to me?
Posted by: JEQP
Monday, October 20, 2008
And English Is Back In The Schools
I'm glad to note that grammar will once more be taught in Australian schools, thanks to changes to the school curriculum proposed by the National Curriculum board...a federal government effort to get some sort of conformity of education across the states. "The board's chairman, Barry McGaw, said a renewed focus on teaching English as a language, rather than a tool for cultural studies, would help raise literacy standards for all students."
I did a rant on this last week (http://peculiaristmindtrap.blogspot.com/2008/10/i-did-learned-good-english.html). I'd like to think that rant had something to do with the change in curriculum, but reasonable logic would dictate otherwise. Still, I'm going to chalk it up as a win...
Posted by: JEQP
SMH
I did a rant on this last week (http://peculiaristmindtrap.blogspot.com/2008/10/i-did-learned-good-english.html). I'd like to think that rant had something to do with the change in curriculum, but reasonable logic would dictate otherwise. Still, I'm going to chalk it up as a win...
Posted by: JEQP
SMH
Friday, October 17, 2008
The Time Has Come!
Yes, it's time for all good Jameses to quote the Walrus. Specifically, to choose which of the three identical blogs to keep. The addresses are:
http://thepeculiarist.livejournal.com/
http://peculiaristmindtrap.blogspot.com/
http://peculiaristmindtrap.vox.com/
I'm inclined to ditch LiveJournal because I haven't yet figured out how to wrap words around images, which I've demo'd here. Apart from that the differences are minor (how you enter things into the blog, specifically HTML).
So vote! Let me know which one you like the best by leaving a comment, and the one with the most votes wins. I realise that there is probably nobody reading this at all, but on the off-chance there is it would be foolish to eliminate the site that had my only reader.
Thursday, October 16, 2008
Wednesday, October 15, 2008
Being A Decent Human, First Cent
You become a decent person when you realise that you are no more and no less important and special than anyone else, and your behaviour reflects that. If you believe your rights are more important than other people's rights you are a bully, and if you believe your rights are less important than other people's rights you are victim -- don't be either.
Everyone has the same intrinsic rights as everyone else, and while some rights take precedence over others the rights of one individual are the same as the rights of any other individual. Perhaps a better indication of whether you are a decent or selfish person is whether your behaviour shows that the rights of your child are no more important than the rights of other children. To want to protect your child to the extent that they get a negligible benefit at a large cost to others is perhaps natural, but part of being a decent person is having reason replace instinct.
Everyone has the same intrinsic rights as everyone else, and while some rights take precedence over others the rights of one individual are the same as the rights of any other individual. Perhaps a better indication of whether you are a decent or selfish person is whether your behaviour shows that the rights of your child are no more important than the rights of other children. To want to protect your child to the extent that they get a negligible benefit at a large cost to others is perhaps natural, but part of being a decent person is having reason replace instinct.
Tuesday, October 14, 2008
I Did Learned The Good English
I have started spanish classes again, and once again was reminded of the inadequacy of my english education. I mean, I really should know what "preterite" means (and before I get lots of "useful" lessons, I can find out what it means in a dictionary -- the point is I should have known when I was a kid, and that knowledge should now be automatic). It mostly annoys me because it makes it more difficult to learn another language, but there are more important reasons to teach children the rules of english.
I have little patience for people who argue that children shouldn't be taught grammar; the argument normally being that it puts a straitjacket on the language and stops it evolving. It's important to know the rules of the language to communicate effectively in the same way that it is important to know the rules of mathematics to perform addition.
It's also important to know the rules so you know when to break them. Breaking the rules of grammar because you don't know them normally makes you sound like an idiot, whereas breaking a rule on purpose to achieve a specific end is often very effective. Let me give you an example...
Perhaps the most commonly used example of bad grammar is "to boldly go where no man has gone before", citation not needed. We're then told not to split the infinitive -- which isn't a lot of use because my generation wasn't taught what an infinitive is. Anyway, my point is that in this case the rules of grammar were deliberately broken for a specific reason -- to emphasise the quality of boldness. The important point in the tagline is not that the Enterprise went somewhere, nor even that it went where no-one had gone before, but that it did so in a boldly.
Now imagine if the rules of grammar had been broken simply because the writer didn't know them: "To boldly go where no man has went before." Sounds stupid, doesn't it?
Knowing the rules of english doesn't put a straitjacket on the natural evolution of the language -- nothing can change the fact that the language will evolve. Languages evolve through popular fiction, notable people, events and places, new metaphors, new products and concepts, and so on. It doesn't evolve through blatant ignorance.
Which brings me neatly to what I suspect is the real reason behind the push for literary ignorance. Most of the people I've heard making the argument against teaching kids correct english are from reasonably privileged backgrounds, having gone to private or selective schools. They learnt correct english and it's likely their children will too. The "new, free english" policy is for the uneducated plebians and is probably supported with one intent in mind -- keep them out of university and out of good professional jobs, reducing the competition for the people who went to the "right" schools.
Even if the high school system is such that people don't need to know good grammar to do well in the HSC, once they get to university they're going to have to write essays and answer test questions and lots of other things that require using correct grammar, and if they can't do it they have to either learn fast or fail the degree.
Posted by JEQP.
I have little patience for people who argue that children shouldn't be taught grammar; the argument normally being that it puts a straitjacket on the language and stops it evolving. It's important to know the rules of the language to communicate effectively in the same way that it is important to know the rules of mathematics to perform addition.
It's also important to know the rules so you know when to break them. Breaking the rules of grammar because you don't know them normally makes you sound like an idiot, whereas breaking a rule on purpose to achieve a specific end is often very effective. Let me give you an example...
Perhaps the most commonly used example of bad grammar is "to boldly go where no man has gone before", citation not needed. We're then told not to split the infinitive -- which isn't a lot of use because my generation wasn't taught what an infinitive is. Anyway, my point is that in this case the rules of grammar were deliberately broken for a specific reason -- to emphasise the quality of boldness. The important point in the tagline is not that the Enterprise went somewhere, nor even that it went where no-one had gone before, but that it did so in a boldly.
Now imagine if the rules of grammar had been broken simply because the writer didn't know them: "To boldly go where no man has went before." Sounds stupid, doesn't it?
Knowing the rules of english doesn't put a straitjacket on the natural evolution of the language -- nothing can change the fact that the language will evolve. Languages evolve through popular fiction, notable people, events and places, new metaphors, new products and concepts, and so on. It doesn't evolve through blatant ignorance.
Which brings me neatly to what I suspect is the real reason behind the push for literary ignorance. Most of the people I've heard making the argument against teaching kids correct english are from reasonably privileged backgrounds, having gone to private or selective schools. They learnt correct english and it's likely their children will too. The "new, free english" policy is for the uneducated plebians and is probably supported with one intent in mind -- keep them out of university and out of good professional jobs, reducing the competition for the people who went to the "right" schools.
Even if the high school system is such that people don't need to know good grammar to do well in the HSC, once they get to university they're going to have to write essays and answer test questions and lots of other things that require using correct grammar, and if they can't do it they have to either learn fast or fail the degree.
Posted by JEQP.
Friday, October 10, 2008
Rivers Not Rice
The rice industry is finally looking to head north, and if they stop withdrawing water from the Murray-Darling Basin it would be one of the best things that has happened to the region. One of the things that annoys me most is when someone justifies their actions with "we have been doing it for XXX number of years", and farmers growing water-intensive crops with irrigation from a water-scarce region tend to top the list. The SMH talks about the rice industry ending its "dependence on flooded fields using the increasingly fickle Murray and Murrumbidgee rivers"...I'd use more aggressive language than that, along the lines of "the rice industry could end its gross exploitation of the damaged Murray and Murrumbidgee rivers".
Anyway, on a positive note the northern rice paddies will likely use rain-fed varieties during the monsoon season (as opposed to irrigated varieties in the south). While these produce less tonnage per hectare (Chinese farmers have produced 6-7 tonnes per hectare compared to 10 tonnes in the Riverina) the obvious advantage is that the farms are far less damaging to the natural water system. And it some point the argument against irrigated rice paddies is going to shift from "you shouldn't do that" to "it's really no longer possible for you to do that".
Australia exports 80 percent of its rice, which I suppose is good for the economy but in terms of exporting virtual water is a disaster. There are widely varying reports as to the amount of water required to make a tonne of rice -- this one (http://www.waterfootprint.org/Reports/Report16Vol1.pdf) suggests 3,000 cubic metres while the Australian National Water Commission estimates it's about 1,000 cubic metres in Australia (http://www.nwc.gov.au/resources/documents/DistilledJuly2008.pdf), or about the same as wheat. I don't know how the different numbers were calculated so I'll have to take them on face value. Accepting the Australian figure and using the 80 percent export figure, every tonne of rice produced effectively exports about 800,000 litres of water. Obviously it would be better to get that water from rainfall than from irrigation.
I notice that the National Water Commission has dismissed the idea of using the virtual water to allocate resources because "it can not provide a useful and reliable benchmark for choosing between alternative uses of the nation's scarce water resource". It provides a couple of examples, both which (along with the argument against virtual water calculations) fail because they assume that the proposal is that water allocation be decided solely on the "virtual water" calculation, when the argument is really that the amount of water used to produce something is one of the things that should be taken into account -- and where that water comes from is an integral part of the decision making process.
Anyway, on a positive note the northern rice paddies will likely use rain-fed varieties during the monsoon season (as opposed to irrigated varieties in the south). While these produce less tonnage per hectare (Chinese farmers have produced 6-7 tonnes per hectare compared to 10 tonnes in the Riverina) the obvious advantage is that the farms are far less damaging to the natural water system. And it some point the argument against irrigated rice paddies is going to shift from "you shouldn't do that" to "it's really no longer possible for you to do that".
Australia exports 80 percent of its rice, which I suppose is good for the economy but in terms of exporting virtual water is a disaster. There are widely varying reports as to the amount of water required to make a tonne of rice -- this one (http://www.waterfootprint.org/Reports/Report16Vol1.pdf) suggests 3,000 cubic metres while the Australian National Water Commission estimates it's about 1,000 cubic metres in Australia (http://www.nwc.gov.au/resources/documents/DistilledJuly2008.pdf), or about the same as wheat. I don't know how the different numbers were calculated so I'll have to take them on face value. Accepting the Australian figure and using the 80 percent export figure, every tonne of rice produced effectively exports about 800,000 litres of water. Obviously it would be better to get that water from rainfall than from irrigation.
I notice that the National Water Commission has dismissed the idea of using the virtual water to allocate resources because "it can not provide a useful and reliable benchmark for choosing between alternative uses of the nation's scarce water resource". It provides a couple of examples, both which (along with the argument against virtual water calculations) fail because they assume that the proposal is that water allocation be decided solely on the "virtual water" calculation, when the argument is really that the amount of water used to produce something is one of the things that should be taken into account -- and where that water comes from is an integral part of the decision making process.
Thursday, October 9, 2008
Young Liberals Claiming Discrimination, LMAO
Apparently the Young Liberals have prompted a senate inquiry into "systematic left-wing bias at Australian universities and high schools", which they've naturally dubbed the "make education fair" campaign to make it sound less like a right-wing witch-hunt. Anyhoo... I picked it up from an SMH article which stuck out because two of the examples given were lecturers that I've had, Wendy Bacon and Peter Manning. No-one's arguing that the lecturers aren't left-wing -- although in the case of journalism lecturers it's to be particularly expected since most print journalists I've met are left-wing to some extent or another. I think this is actually useful considering that most press releases, company announcements and other news feeds from organisations tend to have a right-wing bias. I never noticed any bias in the teaching or marking of the classes -- Wendy had a habit of fairly left-wing off-hand comments, but in lots of other places I heard people making fairly radical right-wing comments without people jumping to accusations of systemic bias.
Interestingly, Peter Manning didn't make much of an impression on me because he had managed to convince Gerard Ryle to be a guest lecturer for the course of investigative journalism, giving up any intent of propagating his own views in favour of putting an extremely accomplished journalist in front of us.
The Young Liberals seem to think that lecturers and other educators should be prevented from having an opinion so that people are encouraged to have opinions, something that I don't seem to get -- I prefer lecturers to lead by example.
I really do think this whole campaign is hypocritical -- the Young Liberals say that people need to "think for themselves" and yet anyone who expresses an opinion contrary to their own is seen as attempting indoctrination or lacking the critical facilities to think for themselves. Out of the nine examples of "bias" I read on their site three were about the opinions of other class members, who apparently shouldn't be allowed to have opinions either. Quite a few claimed to be uncomfortable speaking in class or stating their views, but when females and foreigners complained of this a few years ago they were dismissed by the right-wing as being overly-sensitive and demanding special treatment. And now the Young Liberals are demanding the same thing? In the acronym of right-wing online commentators everywhere, HTFU.
By the way, I couldn't let this particular quote from one testimonial pass: "This is the fundamental failure of left wing thinking, in that whilst conservatives acknowledge opposing opinions and choose to disagree with them, the left live in a world where non-left opinions or facts simply do not exist." I wonder if they were laughing as they wrote this? Has this person seriously not read any conservative commentary? Because most of it is about denigrating any opposing opinions ... the US conservatives are experts but check out someone like Miranda Devine for a similar tactic.
Posted by : JEQP
Interestingly, Peter Manning didn't make much of an impression on me because he had managed to convince Gerard Ryle to be a guest lecturer for the course of investigative journalism, giving up any intent of propagating his own views in favour of putting an extremely accomplished journalist in front of us.
The Young Liberals seem to think that lecturers and other educators should be prevented from having an opinion so that people are encouraged to have opinions, something that I don't seem to get -- I prefer lecturers to lead by example.
I really do think this whole campaign is hypocritical -- the Young Liberals say that people need to "think for themselves" and yet anyone who expresses an opinion contrary to their own is seen as attempting indoctrination or lacking the critical facilities to think for themselves. Out of the nine examples of "bias" I read on their site three were about the opinions of other class members, who apparently shouldn't be allowed to have opinions either. Quite a few claimed to be uncomfortable speaking in class or stating their views, but when females and foreigners complained of this a few years ago they were dismissed by the right-wing as being overly-sensitive and demanding special treatment. And now the Young Liberals are demanding the same thing? In the acronym of right-wing online commentators everywhere, HTFU.
By the way, I couldn't let this particular quote from one testimonial pass: "This is the fundamental failure of left wing thinking, in that whilst conservatives acknowledge opposing opinions and choose to disagree with them, the left live in a world where non-left opinions or facts simply do not exist." I wonder if they were laughing as they wrote this? Has this person seriously not read any conservative commentary? Because most of it is about denigrating any opposing opinions ... the US conservatives are experts but check out someone like Miranda Devine for a similar tactic.
Posted by : JEQP
Tuesday, October 7, 2008
Heart Blood, Soul Blood
The blood that comes from deep within
Heart Blood, Soul Blood,
It does not exit through the skin
but bleeds out through the eyes.
I've left my nation far behind
my conscience, even farther,
tequila, salt, and lemon rind
have meddled with my heart.
The rules of life are not defined
by physics, or religion.
The mind will leave for them to find
scraps of lessons learnt.
And now I sit upon a star
and wish upon a stair,
to grow so large that which is far
will come, and meet me here.
Posted by Ale Constantine
Heart Blood, Soul Blood,
It does not exit through the skin
but bleeds out through the eyes.
I've left my nation far behind
my conscience, even farther,
tequila, salt, and lemon rind
have meddled with my heart.
The rules of life are not defined
by physics, or religion.
The mind will leave for them to find
scraps of lessons learnt.
And now I sit upon a star
and wish upon a stair,
to grow so large that which is far
will come, and meet me here.
Posted by Ale Constantine
Sunday, October 5, 2008
Do You Remember Anything About Dumbo?
Notice: This story is written and published under the auspices of AppleSoftBM Literary Entertainment. All Trademarks and Copyrighted words and phrases used have been cleared by their respective owners. Any breach of copyright on this work will be prosecuted to the full extent of the law and physics.
The banging on my NoFale (TM) security door brought me back to full awakedness just as I was buying a ticket to slumbertown. The NoFale (TM) vidscreen showed the anxious face of my brother and I relaxed. He was always anxious about something: The GovMent (TM) was torturing this person, a corporation was invading that country ... he always seemed to find something wrong with the world. I let him in.
"Thank the good whatever," he said. "I may be in a bit of trouble." I made some Sparkling Tea fresh from the paradisiacal island of Sri Lanka (TM) and indulgently awaited his story. I was not at all prepared for what I heard next. "Have you heard of Chutzpah?"
The icy hand of panic caressed my heart. Chutzpah was an "independent underground magazine" as it styled itself, and "a dangerous attack on our rights and economy" as everyone else considered it. At least, everyone with power. Even to have heard of it was to draw suspicion as a dangerous rebel. So I said "it doesn't ring a bell" as he launched into his story. I was worried that he had gone so far as to purchase a copy from some hoodlum, but it was worse than that -- he had contributed.
"I did a series of cartoon strips about an elephant with a hand on the end of its trunk," he said, and catching the look on my face hurriedly explained it was a metaphor for the power of the common man -- a connection I couldn't make, myself.
I wracked my brains for an infringement but nothing came to mind. Ever since the "Protection of Peoples Copyright Act" was passed in 2023 almost every creative development had been through entertainment companies. These had the resources to check for any infringement by the work being created, and of course also any infringement of the work which, due to the broad wording of the act, could be almost anything. That's why independent creation was so dangerous.
I was aghast at the irresponsibility of my brother. Without the judicious help of an entertainment corporation there was no way to ensure that his metaphorical cartoons were sanitized, securitized and, above all, legalized. "And uh, is there a, uh..." I tried to delicately enunciate my question but my brother responded to the holding-terror-in-check look on my face with equal bluntness.
"Do you remember anything about Dumbo?" he asked. I was confused. Dumbo? An old kid’s word for a stupid person? Then a vague memory floated through my mind; the demented ravings of my grandfather as he wallowed in senility, about a cartoon he used to watch as a boy...something about flying? A flying elephant? Oh no...
My mind reeled and my blood flushed hot and cold. I largely ignored what my brother was saying, rambling on about writing under a pseudonym and the unfairness of the injustice system, always trying to find a way to justify his disregard for social mores and the law. Still, he was my brother, and I considered ways to hide him from a minor company. My hands clammy with sweat, I asked him which corporation he had inadvertently attacked.
"Disney."
One word chilled me to the bone. The Wonderful World of Walt Disney (TM). No-one wanted to mess with the Wonderful World of Walt Disney (TM), which was widely believed to have convinced President Jenna Bush to nuke Brazil in retaliation for ongoing infringement of intellectual property.
I walked over to the CleerVue (TM) wallglass and gazed distractedly at the advertisements hovering outside, automatically trying to see past them to the streetscape. My skin was now cool and dry, my pulse had slowed.
"Don't worry," I told my brother. "You look exhausted, have a strong drink and go to bed, get some rest." A few hours later, my brother's profuse thanks ringing in my mind and his snoring sounding in my ears, I picked up the phone and dialed the number everyone knew by heart.
"Organization for the Defense of the Authors Moral Rights and the Works Underpinning the Economy of America the Land of the Brave and Free (TM). We're here to help the public, how may I service you?" said the suave voice at the other end of the line.
"I have some important information that may interest the Wonderful World of Walt Disney," I replied, hoping it would help me avoid my brother’s fate.
Posted by: Ale Constantine
Images were adapted from images in the public domain from:
http://openclipart.org/media/files/johnny_automatic/9783
http://www.copyrightauthority.com/copyright-symbol/
The banging on my NoFale (TM) security door brought me back to full awakedness just as I was buying a ticket to slumbertown. The NoFale (TM) vidscreen showed the anxious face of my brother and I relaxed. He was always anxious about something: The GovMent (TM) was torturing this person, a corporation was invading that country ... he always seemed to find something wrong with the world. I let him in.
"Thank the good whatever," he said. "I may be in a bit of trouble." I made some Sparkling Tea fresh from the paradisiacal island of Sri Lanka (TM) and indulgently awaited his story. I was not at all prepared for what I heard next. "Have you heard of Chutzpah?"
The icy hand of panic caressed my heart. Chutzpah was an "independent underground magazine" as it styled itself, and "a dangerous attack on our rights and economy" as everyone else considered it. At least, everyone with power. Even to have heard of it was to draw suspicion as a dangerous rebel. So I said "it doesn't ring a bell" as he launched into his story. I was worried that he had gone so far as to purchase a copy from some hoodlum, but it was worse than that -- he had contributed.
"I did a series of cartoon strips about an elephant with a hand on the end of its trunk," he said, and catching the look on my face hurriedly explained it was a metaphor for the power of the common man -- a connection I couldn't make, myself.I wracked my brains for an infringement but nothing came to mind. Ever since the "Protection of Peoples Copyright Act" was passed in 2023 almost every creative development had been through entertainment companies. These had the resources to check for any infringement by the work being created, and of course also any infringement of the work which, due to the broad wording of the act, could be almost anything. That's why independent creation was so dangerous.
I was aghast at the irresponsibility of my brother. Without the judicious help of an entertainment corporation there was no way to ensure that his metaphorical cartoons were sanitized, securitized and, above all, legalized. "And uh, is there a, uh..." I tried to delicately enunciate my question but my brother responded to the holding-terror-in-check look on my face with equal bluntness.
"Do you remember anything about Dumbo?" he asked. I was confused. Dumbo? An old kid’s word for a stupid person? Then a vague memory floated through my mind; the demented ravings of my grandfather as he wallowed in senility, about a cartoon he used to watch as a boy...something about flying? A flying elephant? Oh no...
My mind reeled and my blood flushed hot and cold. I largely ignored what my brother was saying, rambling on about writing under a pseudonym and the unfairness of the injustice system, always trying to find a way to justify his disregard for social mores and the law. Still, he was my brother, and I considered ways to hide him from a minor company. My hands clammy with sweat, I asked him which corporation he had inadvertently attacked.
"Disney."
One word chilled me to the bone. The Wonderful World of Walt Disney (TM). No-one wanted to mess with the Wonderful World of Walt Disney (TM), which was widely believed to have convinced President Jenna Bush to nuke Brazil in retaliation for ongoing infringement of intellectual property.
I walked over to the CleerVue (TM) wallglass and gazed distractedly at the advertisements hovering outside, automatically trying to see past them to the streetscape. My skin was now cool and dry, my pulse had slowed.
"Don't worry," I told my brother. "You look exhausted, have a strong drink and go to bed, get some rest." A few hours later, my brother's profuse thanks ringing in my mind and his snoring sounding in my ears, I picked up the phone and dialed the number everyone knew by heart."Organization for the Defense of the Authors Moral Rights and the Works Underpinning the Economy of America the Land of the Brave and Free (TM). We're here to help the public, how may I service you?" said the suave voice at the other end of the line.
"I have some important information that may interest the Wonderful World of Walt Disney," I replied, hoping it would help me avoid my brother’s fate.
Posted by: Ale Constantine
Images were adapted from images in the public domain from:
http://openclipart.org/media/files/johnny_automatic/9783
http://www.copyrightauthority.com/copyright-symbol/
Friday, October 3, 2008
Review: Rain in the Doorway
Rain in the Doorway, written by Thorne Smith,First published 1933
This book is an astonishing piece of work, and I suspect gives a very clear idea of the ethos of the Roaring 20's, between the great wars and a few years into the great depression. The grand theme is the soul-crushingness of respectable corporate life and the gaity of irresponsible fun. A man with nothing to recommend his life is suddenly dragged through a door into a fantasy world of, well, fantasy...directorship of a massive department store, never-ending parties and loose women (who he mostly tries to run away from). Nothing goes very right, but nothing goes much worse than it would have in his old life either, which I think is the main point. I'm also a fan of the drawings which sprinkle the book -- most novels could get a boost from frequent illustrations. The book is very light-hearted and I think is summed up by a quote from Miss Honor "Satin" Knightly: "Why not salvage the gay things in life instead of casting about for gloom? There's plenty of that as it is."
I was surprised by several parts of the book, including the dedication which reads: "For Helen, Kathleen and Lillian, for whom Allah be praised". Another part that stood out was the inclusion of possibly the most annoying comment ever: "Another well meaning Kiarian had cornered the glowering major. "It isn't the heat," this man was saying, "it's the hu--"But the man never finished his sentence. The Major knocked him down with a single blow, wiped his hand with an expensive silk handkerchief delicately scented with eau de Cologne, and deliberately walked away.
There were also some political statements, and it surprises me more than it should when the trendy issues of today turn out to have been around for ages, such as:
"A person who votes one way, then goes home and acts another is not only a damn fool but also a damn fraud. Such people have no standing in this community."
"Now these furs all come from the best animals...all animals of the better class. I've often thought that if you could prevail upon elephants to grow hair everything would be much nicer. It fills me with regret to think that every piece of fur here displayed represents another step in the gradual extinction of animals whose only fault is that they have never learned how to shave."
While not an unmissable classic it's worth the read if you want to expand your literary horizons -- and happen to find it.
Posted by: James Quintana Pearce
Thursday, October 2, 2008
Five Wines Closer To Sophistication
Last night, it being a wednesday, I invited several friends over for a night of cheese-nibbling, nut-munching, and of course wine-tasting. The higher purpose was to increase our knowledge of the world's wines, and in that we were more-or-less successful. So for those of you also wanting to tread the long road to sophistication but unwilling to swill five bottles of wine for the sake of a tenuous goal, here is my review with short descriptions you can bring forth in front of friends to appear worldly:
Moscato Spumante, Sperone, Italy
The seasoned advice of Steve O. guided us in the selection of our order, based on the chance each wine had of destroying our palate for following ones. Moscato is my third-favourite type of wine, so this was my favourite of the bunch we had, but I compare it to other Moscatos for the sake of fairness. It's a passable Moscato, light and not very sweet. In this is the matter of taste most apparent, as Steve opined it was perfectly in the middle of not being too sweet and not being sweet enough. Gabo described it as like the sweet juice of pears.
Description: "Sweet and tangy, like a casual friendship with a cute girl."
Chardonnay, Brown Brothers, Australia
Brown Brothers is my favourite vineyard, and produce my favourite wine (Cienna and Cabernet) so I was unsurprised at the quality of this wine. It has a woody, white oak flavour but not too strong -- it doesn't wrap your tongue like a bespoke coffin like some do. Others suggested that the quality was because the oak doesn't hide the flavour of the fruit.
Description: "Woody and relaxed, like lounging on a wooden park bench watching pretty girls go by."
Malbec, Bodega Del Fin de Mundo, Patagonia
Malbec is apparently "a region of immense beauty with countless landscapes where the final touches of creation can be traced" according to the vineyard. From the start this wine was enjoyable, as I had a lot of fun saying "Patagonia" with a strong westie accent. Ahem. Onto the wine, I found it very hard to categorise, with Steve noting it had a bit of perfume to it and decreeing "It's a good Malbec, but it's not extraordinary". I thought it had a strong flavour, slightly fruity, and decided to use the word "cloying".
Description: "Cloyingly fruity, like a nice but libidinous girl with a crush on you, and is persistant to the point of being slightly annoying."
Bordeaux, Sichel, Médoc, France
It was at this point in the night that I was informed that red wine was not meant to be served chilled. For me, a drink should be either warm and comforting or cold and refreshing -- anything at room temperature reminds me of my own sweat. And with that delicate analogy in mind, let's talk about Médoc. I found the flavour soft and watery, but was assured the fruity flavours would come out as the wine warmed up. They did, but by that stage it was mostly gone. Karla thought it tasted of grapes, while Steve was left hanging: "I don't know, it's a very young taste...it leaves something to be wondered." For myself, the word tantalising came to mind.
Description: "Light and tantalising, like an innocent girl in a slightly translucent dress."
Cabernet Sauvignon, La Ronciere, Rapel Valley, Chile
This wine was strong, nutty, fruity and earthy, and left you felt like you'd been mugged by a bunch of grapes. Sara suggested it "tastes of blood". Probably a good one to end the night on.
Description: "Like a luscious girl sitting on your knee."
Posted by: JEQP
Wednesday, October 1, 2008
Horny Goat Weed Works -- Who Knew
Have you seen that "natural viagra", Horny Goat Weed? Apparently it works... who knew? Some Italian researchers did some lab experiments on it (purely for scientific purposes, of course) and found that if they modified a compound in the plant called icariin it blocked the erection-inhibiting enzyme as well as Viagra did...so it may not work quite so well in the plant. They didn't actually look at whether the plant actually increases desire, and there's so many off-hand jokes about Italians I could make here that I'm not going to bother, you just fill it in yourself...
Posted by: JEQP.
Reuters
Posted by: JEQP.
Reuters
Subscribe to:
Comments (Atom)