Friday night I went to see the San Jose Ballet perform Swan Lake. It was fine, costumes were lovely (though I hated the bad guy's full get-up), music was good, crowd was supportive, etc. Alas, I also spent the evening fighting an insane desire to clear my lungs. I thought it was latent asthma, a reaction to dry cleaning chemicals, something unusual like that, but many hours later, after I'd used up half of David's stash of cough drops during the performance, I could not deny that it was much more mundane--I had the flu. The following few days are a blur. I tell you all this in advance of my next comments, because I cannot attest that the views expressed herein are not simply the result of a prolonged fever haze....
Yippee for me that I was lifelessly bundled on the sofa this rainy day weekend, because both Michael Clayton and Harry Potter arrived to visit me!
Contemporary drama Michael Clayton fit my mood particularly well, with its stark stylings and straightforward suspense. The eponymous character, played by George Clooney (as if you didn't know), is a fixer with a law firm. Among other problems on his slate, he's trying to rein in a colleague whose manic behavior threatens an important case for agribusiness client U/North. The movie's cast is solid, and though primary story centers on Clayton, others are given depth enough of their own (Tilda Swinton, Sydney Pollack, and Tom Wilkinson are, as always, very good). In hindsight it seems like dialogue was minimal, action was too, but it felt like a lot was going on. Lucky for me, because I couldn't have handled more complexity than this at the time. The pace is deliberate, the clues reinforced thoughtfully without a hammer, and there's not a whiff of sappiness. Recommended for patient drama fans.
Harry Potter and the Order of the Phoenix kept me entertained while my teeth chattered--that's saying something, right? Here Harry is a moody, lonely, self absorbed teenager. Back at Hogwarts after an isolated summer and averted expulsion, Harry believes that Dumbledore is ignoring him. He's personally witnessed the return of Voldemort, but few believe him. And he knows the new Defense Against Dark Arts (DADA) instructor is tormenting him (Imelda Staunton is fantastic as the evil Umbridge). All Harry wants is to help out with the growing underground movement to fight, which is what he eventually does by breaking the rules and training an army of students in DADA (no, not dada). Good stuff, right? Okay, the scene changes were too jarring in many cases for my addled brain, and I was lucky to have read the book so I could fill in many explanatory details that were left out, but the adaptation seemed overall very successful. And the look of this movie was wonderful, much better than most of the previous incarnations (Cuaron's Prisoner of Azkaban laid the groundwork for a darker Harry Potter world quite nicely). I also liked casting of Luna, minimal appearance of Hagrid (sorry, Hagrid fans), and flashback footage which added cohesion to series. Recommended as a must see for followers of story, and a much better entry for those new to the series than the last film.
Finally, I would be remiss without mentioning the Oscars. I thought this year's clothes were unexceptional (see what I care about?). I discovered that Ryan Seacrest is pretty funny. I thought Jon Stewart--who I like--used too many political jokes (hello, this is a movie awards show. Mix it up!). Amy Adams singing is a million times more charming than Kristen Chenoweth singing. My favorite moment was when the folks who starred in the lovely Irish indie film Once won for best song. Seriously, after that, I didn't care who won. And that's not just the Nyquil speaking.
February 27, 2008
February 22, 2008
Follow my rules
Not that you asked, but...
I am by nature a rule follower. From childhood on, when I've observed rule breaking, I have tended to get rather holier than thou in my response. Fortunately with age I have developed a healthier co-attitude. I now recognize that sometimes rules are dumb or ill-conceived, and that common sense dictates a different--and reasonable direction. I also see where it's in breaking the rules that big breakthroughs are occasionally made (though this last one is very risky, and I am also by nature risk averse). Anyway, my righteous indignation still burns deep, and occasionally an issue arises that brings the fire to the surface.
As my friends and regular readers know, I am an Obama supporter. I'd like to think that my reaction to the Clinton campaign's comments and actions with regard to the Michigan and Florida Democratic primaries has little to do with partisanship. I don't honestly know. What I do know is that the continued sound bites on the subject are irritating me, because I see someone breaking the rules for their own political gain.
Here's the deal: the Democratic parties in Michigan and Florida moved up their primary election dates without permission of the Democratic National Committee (the whys and hows of this is subject for a whole 'nother blog, but suffice it to say, this is as it has always been--state groups report to national). The DNC told Florida and Michigan Dems that if they chose to go ahead and hold a primary, no delegates would be used from their states. The various candidates at the time of this decision were given option of removing name from Michigan ballot as part of the DNC's ruling. Almost all did, presumably in the name of party unity, including Edwards, Richardson, and Obama. At the time, Clinton was the clear front runner and she opted not to remove her name from ballot. No such request was made of the candidates in the case of Florida's ballot, although they did agree to basically not campaign there. When primary election day came, Clinton "won" (56% in Michigan and 50% in Florida). Florida included Obama and Edwards on the ballot, who received 33% and 14% of the vote, respectively. In Michigan, it was a choice between Clinton and three likable-but-very-minor candidates; given this slate, 40% of Michigan Democrats selected Uncommitted.
What irks me is how Hillary Clinton has continued to pull for the two states' delegates to count in the Democratic Convention (even today). I totally understand where any competitive person would want to gain an edge, but in this case I think it's the wrong approach. Argue that the decision not to count delegates is a silly way to "punish" states for moving up primary date without national's permission--absolutely! Talk to people in the state (now that primary is over) about their worthiness of being heard in general--all true! But don't try to change the rules after the fact.
I am by nature a rule follower. From childhood on, when I've observed rule breaking, I have tended to get rather holier than thou in my response. Fortunately with age I have developed a healthier co-attitude. I now recognize that sometimes rules are dumb or ill-conceived, and that common sense dictates a different--and reasonable direction. I also see where it's in breaking the rules that big breakthroughs are occasionally made (though this last one is very risky, and I am also by nature risk averse). Anyway, my righteous indignation still burns deep, and occasionally an issue arises that brings the fire to the surface.
As my friends and regular readers know, I am an Obama supporter. I'd like to think that my reaction to the Clinton campaign's comments and actions with regard to the Michigan and Florida Democratic primaries has little to do with partisanship. I don't honestly know. What I do know is that the continued sound bites on the subject are irritating me, because I see someone breaking the rules for their own political gain.
Here's the deal: the Democratic parties in Michigan and Florida moved up their primary election dates without permission of the Democratic National Committee (the whys and hows of this is subject for a whole 'nother blog, but suffice it to say, this is as it has always been--state groups report to national). The DNC told Florida and Michigan Dems that if they chose to go ahead and hold a primary, no delegates would be used from their states. The various candidates at the time of this decision were given option of removing name from Michigan ballot as part of the DNC's ruling. Almost all did, presumably in the name of party unity, including Edwards, Richardson, and Obama. At the time, Clinton was the clear front runner and she opted not to remove her name from ballot. No such request was made of the candidates in the case of Florida's ballot, although they did agree to basically not campaign there. When primary election day came, Clinton "won" (56% in Michigan and 50% in Florida). Florida included Obama and Edwards on the ballot, who received 33% and 14% of the vote, respectively. In Michigan, it was a choice between Clinton and three likable-but-very-minor candidates; given this slate, 40% of Michigan Democrats selected Uncommitted.
What irks me is how Hillary Clinton has continued to pull for the two states' delegates to count in the Democratic Convention (even today). I totally understand where any competitive person would want to gain an edge, but in this case I think it's the wrong approach. Argue that the decision not to count delegates is a silly way to "punish" states for moving up primary date without national's permission--absolutely! Talk to people in the state (now that primary is over) about their worthiness of being heard in general--all true! But don't try to change the rules after the fact.
February 14, 2008
Mad Libs!
Remember Mad Libs, those silly fill-in-the-blank stories we used to play as kids? Did you know you can play online? There are lots of versions, but I'd recommend these two: Check out "Mad Libs on the web" for three classic wacky insert-a-word stories (watch out, once you start it won't let you stop until you give every word required). Or go visit Mad Glibs. Mad Glibs has the usual generic stories, like a personal ad or nursery rhyme, as well as pop culture--new lyrics for Smelly Cat or Hakuna Matata--and even some classic lit. Perfect lunchtime entertainment.
Poesia - Poetry
A bit of poetry for all you enamored Valentines out there. It's by Pablo Neruda.
Happy Valentine's Day pursuits to you and yours. :)
You are here. Oh, you do not run away.Nice, huh? It's from "Every Day You Play" in Twenty Love Poems and a Song of Despair. Here's the complete poem in Spanish and translated into English.
You will answer me to the last cry.
Cling to me as though you were frightened.
Even so, at one time a strange shadow ran through your eyes.
Now, now too, little one, you bring me honeysuckle,
and even your breasts smell of it.
While the sad wind goes slaughtering butterlfies
I love you, and my happiness bites the plum of your mouth.
How you must have suffered getting accustomed to me,
my savage, solitary soul, my name that sends them all running.
So many times we have seen the morning star burn, kissing our eyes,
and over our heads the grey light unwind in turning fans.
My words rained over you, stroking you.
A long time I have loved the sunned mother-of-pearl of your body.
I go so far as to think that you own the universe.
I will bring you happy flowers from the mountains, bluebells,
dark hazels, and rustic baskets of kisses.
I want to do with you
what spring does with the cherry trees.
Happy Valentine's Day pursuits to you and yours. :)
February 08, 2008
Titles
My Peculiar Aristocratic Title is:
Her Grace Lady Michelle the Talkative of Pigotts Sty,
Most Noble and Honourable the Prohibited of Withering Glance
For a random title generator, I think it did eerily well. Get your own peculiar aristocratic title.
Last night David and I huddled around the laptop to watch The King of Kong: A Fistful of Quarters on DVD (Why watching on a laptop? Because we are currently in possession of not one, but two non-functioning DVD players. Maybe Tomminy Tivo intimidates them?) Anyway, King of Kong starts off kind of slowly, and early on it just seems like a history of the arcade game variety of the Uber Geek species. But then it turns into a near-infuriating but compelling human drama centered on two men's claims to World Champion status on the game of Donkey Kong. And my description still doesn't do justice to the oddness of the flick. Naturally I recommend it.
February 05, 2008
Torture
Today's one of those days when I understand people who take advantage of every opportunity to deride President Bush and his administration. I'm not a Bush fan, but I'm also not a fan of fighting fire with fire or strict party loyalty, thus I tend to maintain (I hope) a respectful tone. But further confirmation that our stupid government did in fact use waterboarding on prisoners (after saying they had not) has upset me--and driven me to call our elected government "stupid". Clearly I am worked up. :)
It's not the news leaking out that upsets me; there have been plenty of previous stories on the subject, though not all were widely shared or lent credibility. What upsets me most are that we the United States of America (a) knowingly and willingly tortured people in our custody, and (b) reneged on the Third Geneva Convention (read text here), an honorable and important international agreement, thus contributing to our declining world image. This is an upset which has been burbling for a while. Argh!
Here are a few articles on Bush administration's history of alternately protecting and denying our use of torture, including water boarding:
* Human Rights Watch called on Bush to account for possibly ordering torture, Dec 2004.
* Bush could bypass new torture ban - Boston Globe, Jan 2006.
* Top US official denies 'torture' - BBC News, March 2006
* White House denies Cheney endorsed 'water boarding' - USA Today, Oct 2006
And a few comments on Bush Administration's discussion of torture:
* Eugene Robinson vented his frustrations over Bush's refusal to reject the use of torture in September 2006, in the Washington Post.
* Tom Engelhardt of The Nation blogged in Sept 2006 about how the media and Bush administration obfuscate (my assertion) torture through manipulation of language.
It's not the news leaking out that upsets me; there have been plenty of previous stories on the subject, though not all were widely shared or lent credibility. What upsets me most are that we the United States of America (a) knowingly and willingly tortured people in our custody, and (b) reneged on the Third Geneva Convention (read text here), an honorable and important international agreement, thus contributing to our declining world image. This is an upset which has been burbling for a while. Argh!
Here are a few articles on Bush administration's history of alternately protecting and denying our use of torture, including water boarding:
* Human Rights Watch called on Bush to account for possibly ordering torture, Dec 2004.
* Bush could bypass new torture ban - Boston Globe, Jan 2006.
* Top US official denies 'torture' - BBC News, March 2006
* White House denies Cheney endorsed 'water boarding' - USA Today, Oct 2006
And a few comments on Bush Administration's discussion of torture:
* Eugene Robinson vented his frustrations over Bush's refusal to reject the use of torture in September 2006, in the Washington Post.
* Tom Engelhardt of The Nation blogged in Sept 2006 about how the media and Bush administration obfuscate (my assertion) torture through manipulation of language.
[T]he general rule of thumb of the mainstream media...refers to such "techniques" as "abuse" or "abusive practices" but not usually as "torture." This, it seems to me, is a media "technique" that just might be worth correcting. Torture is regularly named as such only when the President denies that we do it or that he ordered it....I won't go beyond calling our present government stupid because it is election day, the time for us to exercise the privilege of voting. (You may be surprised to discover voting is not a right granted by the Constitution). We have a civic responsibility to take charge of the direction we want to see our government headed in. The fewer people get involved, the more those who are involved can yield power. I leave you with a few cynical tidbits to contemplate on this Super Tuesday.
What luck for the rulers that [people] do not think.All of the above are Hitler quotes, by the way. It's time to think and VOTE.
The victor will not be asked afterwards, whether he told the truth or not.
No amount of genius spent on the creation of propaganda will lead to success if a fundamental principle is not forever kept in mind. Propaganda must confine itself to very few points, and repeat them endlessly. Here, as with so many things in this world, persistence is the first and foremost condition of success.
February 02, 2008
Puppies!
I'm all about the fun stuff today. At some point during the Super Bowl you should switch over to Animal Planet. Why? Because Puppy Bowl IV is on! At any given time, eight puppies crowd a miniature football field strewn with play toys and a water dish (including hidden water-dish-cam) and all you have to do is watch and try not to squeal and coo too much.
The New York Times wrote about this adorable, growing hit:
P.S. At one point there was a Bernese and a Westie on the field together. I took it as a good opportunity to see how our imaginary (aka "sometime in the future") pets would get along. Oh dear. Let's just say the Westie (named Jackson) ran many rings around the Bernese (named Colt). Jackson was such a rambunctious player that he won the favor of the fans who voted him #1 in the Viewer's Choice MVP.
The New York Times wrote about this adorable, growing hit:
There is commentary, by Harry Kalas, the legendary N.F.L. and Phillies broadcaster, who in this case says things like: “He’s at the 20, he’s at the 30! O.K., now he’s back at the 20, the 10.” There are M.V.P. and viewer’s choice awards. And there is a referee to call the action, such as it is, and deal with what the show refers to as “puppy fouls.”Puppy frolics, burlesque kitties, and pointless scoring. I am so there.
“The puppies are running around, playing with squeak toys, mock footballs — whether they realize it or not, some of them do make touchdowns,” Ms. Toporoff (Exec Producer) said. Still, no points are kept.
And censors need not worry: there are no wardrobe malfunctions during the kitten halftime spectacle, in which 15 or so cats climb on and play with toys. This year’s version is more sparkly, with falling confetti and a background of silver streamers. “We took more, like, a burlesque approach,” Mr. Schechter said.
P.S. At one point there was a Bernese and a Westie on the field together. I took it as a good opportunity to see how our imaginary (aka "sometime in the future") pets would get along. Oh dear. Let's just say the Westie (named Jackson) ran many rings around the Bernese (named Colt). Jackson was such a rambunctious player that he won the favor of the fans who voted him #1 in the Viewer's Choice MVP.
February 01, 2008
Endorsements
By the title you might think I am going to head off on another political tirade. But you would be wrong. This is a consumer endorsement. And lest that statement make you wonder whether you've somehow begun reading another blog instead of mine, I would reassure you that you're safe with me.
Borrowing from the Bard...
I come not to bury occasional consumerism, but to praise it.
I often tirade against consumerism, but really what I loathe is blind consumerism or economic materialism--buying stuff because it's cheap and available, because you think it will make you happy, not because you need it. Those of us who call mainstream society home are encouraged through emotionally loaded advertising to believe we do indeed need lots of stuff. I am as susceptible as anyone to the clever marketing appeals (even people like me are marketed to, which cracks me up). What is an advertising-skeptical, wannabe back-to-nature type to do? Running away and hiding doesn't sound all that fun (I'd miss my family and my Tivo amusements, among other things to be named later). My solution is to consciously purchase products that are good quality, good for me, and do so in a minimalist way that I think is good for all of us. If you are a conscious shopper, too, then I have a few recommendations.
Some of the products I use and would recommend to others are commonly found. Egg Beaters can be used for a quick morning scramble--such as with Morningstar Farms vegetarian breakfast links--or used as the coating for French toast; my other breakfast fave is oatmeal, preferably using Bob's Red Mill thick rolled oats. For bubbly occasions I adore Martinelli's various sparkling ciders. Others of my favorites are not so easily located in stores, such as indulgences like Kodiak Cakes' Big Bear whole wheat brownie mix (someone agrees!) or Mother's Natural Peanut Butter Bumpers cereal. I'm terribly sad when a product I love disappears (such as happened with Veggie Pockets, made by the Hot Pockets people). Thankfully I am rewarded on occasion when good natural products gain a foothold in grocery stores everywhere, such as happened with natural peanut butters (Smucker's even make a handy stirrer now!) or the Annie's line of mac-n-cheese (check out the Shells & Alfredo or for a real throwback-to-childhood treat, the Bernie O's).
But I posted today to share my endorsement of a dishwasher detergent: Cascade 2-in-1 Action Packs with Dawn. I've read reviews that point to the expense, the need to handle them with dry fingers (this technology actually won an award), and inability to measure out smaller loads (it's one size fits all), but the cleaning power is never disputed. These suckers give me a clean dishload like no other detergent I've used. And since I am a sale-coupon combo shopper, and I always wait for a full load anyway, the price was not an issue for my initial 90-pack tub. You might point out that I was manipulated into buying in the first place (ads and coupons are quite timed, I realize), but the end result in this case was discovering a product that works extremely well. That is a good reason for product loyalty, IMHO. Love it!
So my end message is reminiscent of the adage to students about studying smarter not harder. Don't buy bigger, buy better. Or maybe it works better this way: It's not how much you buy, but how well you buy. Clearly marketing isn't my thing. :)
P.S. Check out this fascinating article on product loyalty entitled, "Consumers mistake familiarity with superiority". And if you've never heard of the anti-commercialism group AdBusters, then go check 'em out now. The spoof ads are worth viewing, even if you don't agree with the group's agenda. And finally, I encourage you to contemplate simple living.
Borrowing from the Bard...
I come not to bury occasional consumerism, but to praise it.
I often tirade against consumerism, but really what I loathe is blind consumerism or economic materialism--buying stuff because it's cheap and available, because you think it will make you happy, not because you need it. Those of us who call mainstream society home are encouraged through emotionally loaded advertising to believe we do indeed need lots of stuff. I am as susceptible as anyone to the clever marketing appeals (even people like me are marketed to, which cracks me up). What is an advertising-skeptical, wannabe back-to-nature type to do? Running away and hiding doesn't sound all that fun (I'd miss my family and my Tivo amusements, among other things to be named later). My solution is to consciously purchase products that are good quality, good for me, and do so in a minimalist way that I think is good for all of us. If you are a conscious shopper, too, then I have a few recommendations.
Some of the products I use and would recommend to others are commonly found. Egg Beaters can be used for a quick morning scramble--such as with Morningstar Farms vegetarian breakfast links--or used as the coating for French toast; my other breakfast fave is oatmeal, preferably using Bob's Red Mill thick rolled oats. For bubbly occasions I adore Martinelli's various sparkling ciders. Others of my favorites are not so easily located in stores, such as indulgences like Kodiak Cakes' Big Bear whole wheat brownie mix (someone agrees!) or Mother's Natural Peanut Butter Bumpers cereal. I'm terribly sad when a product I love disappears (such as happened with Veggie Pockets, made by the Hot Pockets people). Thankfully I am rewarded on occasion when good natural products gain a foothold in grocery stores everywhere, such as happened with natural peanut butters (Smucker's even make a handy stirrer now!) or the Annie's line of mac-n-cheese (check out the Shells & Alfredo or for a real throwback-to-childhood treat, the Bernie O's).
But I posted today to share my endorsement of a dishwasher detergent: Cascade 2-in-1 Action Packs with Dawn. I've read reviews that point to the expense, the need to handle them with dry fingers (this technology actually won an award), and inability to measure out smaller loads (it's one size fits all), but the cleaning power is never disputed. These suckers give me a clean dishload like no other detergent I've used. And since I am a sale-coupon combo shopper, and I always wait for a full load anyway, the price was not an issue for my initial 90-pack tub. You might point out that I was manipulated into buying in the first place (ads and coupons are quite timed, I realize), but the end result in this case was discovering a product that works extremely well. That is a good reason for product loyalty, IMHO. Love it!
So my end message is reminiscent of the adage to students about studying smarter not harder. Don't buy bigger, buy better. Or maybe it works better this way: It's not how much you buy, but how well you buy. Clearly marketing isn't my thing. :)
P.S. Check out this fascinating article on product loyalty entitled, "Consumers mistake familiarity with superiority". And if you've never heard of the anti-commercialism group AdBusters, then go check 'em out now. The spoof ads are worth viewing, even if you don't agree with the group's agenda. And finally, I encourage you to contemplate simple living.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)