I like watching escapist films, but not all. I like Star Wars and Lord of the Rings (both on TV lately), and tend to tune in whenever a Harry Potter flick is on. It matters not how many times I've seen these movies: I just like watching the same scenes over and over again. Apparently, a lot of other people feel the same way, else they wouldn't keep showing them like they do. But lately I have become a little disturbed about what might be the longest-running escapist adventure series around, and the fact that NOBODY'S showing it: James Bond.
As an honest popular culture history indicator, you can't beat James Bond. The first movie, Doctor No, came out in 1962 and ever since, movie after movie churns out displaying what the producers think represents what is "cool" in society at that time, some of which hasn't stood the test of time and today seems silly, crude, or even chauvinistic.
I wonder if perhaps one of the reasons the Bond series hasn't been on TV lately is how, especially in the earlier movies, women tended to be marginalized as sex objects. I find this awkward myself, but I also realize that at the time those movies were out, a lot of this was "mainstream" in society. I can be pious and self-righteous from my politically-correct perch in 2011 about this portrayal of women, but then again I wonder which movies I currently like will be panned in similar ways twenty, thirty years from now.
I like the action, humor, pretension-to-coolness, implausible plot twists, Bond portrayals by different actors, and probably most of all, the bad guys in these movies. I also think it's interesting how the international political situation has been played out in these films over the years. Early on, China was often seem as a villainous power manipulating the two superpowers (portrayed in the movies as the Soviet Union and Great Britain, with the U.S. serving as a dim-witted-but-strong ally of the brilliant Brits). Later, China's image was cleaned up considerably.
One theme that tended to make the James Bond films relevant through time, in spite of their often (very) anachronistic social conventions, was the depiction of the villains as sponsors and perpetrators of international terrorism. For decades, Bond movies featured independent terrorist organizations often pitting the superpowers against each other to their own benefit while in the real world much of what was going on then was part of a proxy conflict between those powers. Now, we see the major countries having to deal with independent groups that remind me in ways of the Bond villains.
But that's really a side issue for me. I just like watching the James Bond movies for fun! Bring 'em back!
Monday, June 20, 2011
Sunday, June 19, 2011
Freckles
Freckles is our five-year old mixed breed dog we picked up as a puppy from Puppy Hill Farms, a local sanctuary for abandoned dogs. And yes, the lawn needs mowing!
Saturday, June 18, 2011
Arab Culture Professor and Islamophobia
I have been carrying around with me an interesting article I tore out of May 24's Independent Florida Alligator. The article, written by Michael Sykes, is titled "Arab culture professor discusses fear of Muslims". And the first word in the article is "Islamophobia".
Stephen Sheehi is the University of South Carolina professor of Arabic and Arab culture who paid a visit to Gainesville's politically far-left Civic Media Center to speak and discuss this issue. So what is Islamophobia, anyway?
According to Sheehi, it is "an irrational fear or hatred of Islam and Muslims, one of the inherent racist tropes in America."
So with this one statement I could see the speaker's own inherent bias: when speaking about America per se (as opposed to other places), racism is inherent. But how about all of those wonderful Muslim countries out there? How tolerant are they of other religions? Not very. As a matter of fact, going by the horrible sectarian conflicts going on in several of them, they aren't even very tolerant of their fellow Muslims.
Sheehan went on, "Racism is the classic American way to divide and conquer. It is a linchpin in our society, unfortunately". Generally speaking, I sadly have to agree with him on this, but only in the broader sense of prejudice (not just racism). I see politicians all the time catering to prejudicial views about people of different demographic groups, be it "race", religion, gender, sexual preference, or nationality. Every presidential election sees conservatives place on the ballots in closely contested states referenda that would restrict gay rights, with the aim of motivating "their" voters to rush to the ballots (and vote for their presidential candidate as well). There is, I believe, some pandering to bigotry concerning undocumented Mexican immigrants, although the issue is much more complex. And look at the fuss some are making at GOP presidential candidate Mitt Romney's Mormon faith! But perhaps the most glaring example of what I see as prejudicial anti-Islamic sentiment is last year's widespread public objection to the so-called "ground zero" Muslim center to be built in Lower Manhattan, with some politicians jumping in to fan the flames of anger.
So yes, there is prejudice in America. But Sheehi is full of it if he thinks that prejudice is just an American fault: it permeates all of humanity. I would respect this man more were he to balance out his criticisms of our society with criticisms of the bigotry and intolerance festering within Islamic nations. For it is from that pool of bigotry that the terrorists have emerged who are responsible in large part for generating Islamophobia in America, Sheehi's high, holy, and smug opinions notwithstanding.
Another objection I had to Sheehi's argument was his categorizing prejudice against Islam in America as being racial in nature. Oh, I wasn't aware that there was such a thing as a Muslim race. Chinese Muslims are Chinese, Russian Muslims are Russian, Bosnian Muslims are Bosnian, Indonesian Muslims are Indonesian, Arab Muslims are Arab, and so on. Where is the race in that? No, I'll tell Professor Smug what I think the three main causes of anti-Islamic sentiment in this country are:
1) Terrorism. People don't want to die and they are afraid of other people committing violent acts in the name of Islam, duh. Acts like, for example, hijacking jets and flying them into buildings! No, terrorists may commit atrocities in the name of a faith but that doesn't make the faith itself culpable, so the negative reaction, while understandable, is still irrational and needs to be resisted. But this fear isn't racial in nature.
2) The predominant religion here is Christianity, a faith that largely sees itself as exclusive and in competition with Islam for adherents. Christians and Muslims typically see each other as being in error and on the wrong side of God with their beliefs. Like it or not, this creates the phenomenon in a country, where Christianity is the prevailing religion, of widespread disapproval of a competing, aggressively-spreading faith like Islam which, like Christianity, puts a lot of stock in increasing its number. So the "phobia" here isn't racist, but religious in nature. And Muslims who object need to take an honest look at countries where Islam is the established faith and see just how tolerant these places are to competing faiths.
3) Finally, there is a basic trait of being human that tends to insulate a group/tribe/clan/society against others who would change (or appear to change) that group's ideology and traditions, or establish a sense of authority from the outside. Call it the "invading horde syndrome" if you will and maybe there is a dose of racism involved. But it isn't all race and it isn't all American, either. All of humanity displays this behavior.
So sure, people need to be more accepting of practicing Muslims in this country. And by the same token, Muslims need to be more accepting of practicing non-Muslims in other lands. Anti-Islamic sentiment is NOT primarily racial in nature and America is NOT a singularly racist nation as opposed to all of the others. Racism exists, to be sure, but those from other lands need to also display some honesty in examining how this problem festers in their original homelands as well and not go around acting as if they are "above it all". They're not.
Stephen Sheehi is the University of South Carolina professor of Arabic and Arab culture who paid a visit to Gainesville's politically far-left Civic Media Center to speak and discuss this issue. So what is Islamophobia, anyway?
According to Sheehi, it is "an irrational fear or hatred of Islam and Muslims, one of the inherent racist tropes in America."
So with this one statement I could see the speaker's own inherent bias: when speaking about America per se (as opposed to other places), racism is inherent. But how about all of those wonderful Muslim countries out there? How tolerant are they of other religions? Not very. As a matter of fact, going by the horrible sectarian conflicts going on in several of them, they aren't even very tolerant of their fellow Muslims.
Sheehan went on, "Racism is the classic American way to divide and conquer. It is a linchpin in our society, unfortunately". Generally speaking, I sadly have to agree with him on this, but only in the broader sense of prejudice (not just racism). I see politicians all the time catering to prejudicial views about people of different demographic groups, be it "race", religion, gender, sexual preference, or nationality. Every presidential election sees conservatives place on the ballots in closely contested states referenda that would restrict gay rights, with the aim of motivating "their" voters to rush to the ballots (and vote for their presidential candidate as well). There is, I believe, some pandering to bigotry concerning undocumented Mexican immigrants, although the issue is much more complex. And look at the fuss some are making at GOP presidential candidate Mitt Romney's Mormon faith! But perhaps the most glaring example of what I see as prejudicial anti-Islamic sentiment is last year's widespread public objection to the so-called "ground zero" Muslim center to be built in Lower Manhattan, with some politicians jumping in to fan the flames of anger.
So yes, there is prejudice in America. But Sheehi is full of it if he thinks that prejudice is just an American fault: it permeates all of humanity. I would respect this man more were he to balance out his criticisms of our society with criticisms of the bigotry and intolerance festering within Islamic nations. For it is from that pool of bigotry that the terrorists have emerged who are responsible in large part for generating Islamophobia in America, Sheehi's high, holy, and smug opinions notwithstanding.
Another objection I had to Sheehi's argument was his categorizing prejudice against Islam in America as being racial in nature. Oh, I wasn't aware that there was such a thing as a Muslim race. Chinese Muslims are Chinese, Russian Muslims are Russian, Bosnian Muslims are Bosnian, Indonesian Muslims are Indonesian, Arab Muslims are Arab, and so on. Where is the race in that? No, I'll tell Professor Smug what I think the three main causes of anti-Islamic sentiment in this country are:
1) Terrorism. People don't want to die and they are afraid of other people committing violent acts in the name of Islam, duh. Acts like, for example, hijacking jets and flying them into buildings! No, terrorists may commit atrocities in the name of a faith but that doesn't make the faith itself culpable, so the negative reaction, while understandable, is still irrational and needs to be resisted. But this fear isn't racial in nature.
2) The predominant religion here is Christianity, a faith that largely sees itself as exclusive and in competition with Islam for adherents. Christians and Muslims typically see each other as being in error and on the wrong side of God with their beliefs. Like it or not, this creates the phenomenon in a country, where Christianity is the prevailing religion, of widespread disapproval of a competing, aggressively-spreading faith like Islam which, like Christianity, puts a lot of stock in increasing its number. So the "phobia" here isn't racist, but religious in nature. And Muslims who object need to take an honest look at countries where Islam is the established faith and see just how tolerant these places are to competing faiths.
3) Finally, there is a basic trait of being human that tends to insulate a group/tribe/clan/society against others who would change (or appear to change) that group's ideology and traditions, or establish a sense of authority from the outside. Call it the "invading horde syndrome" if you will and maybe there is a dose of racism involved. But it isn't all race and it isn't all American, either. All of humanity displays this behavior.
So sure, people need to be more accepting of practicing Muslims in this country. And by the same token, Muslims need to be more accepting of practicing non-Muslims in other lands. Anti-Islamic sentiment is NOT primarily racial in nature and America is NOT a singularly racist nation as opposed to all of the others. Racism exists, to be sure, but those from other lands need to also display some honesty in examining how this problem festers in their original homelands as well and not go around acting as if they are "above it all". They're not.
Friday, June 17, 2011
Coffee Drinker "Outed"
I suppose it eventually had to happen: after the recent strange closing of the very popular and crowded Starbucks down the road, many of their former customers have flocked to my own favorite Starbucks at Magnolia Parke in NW Gainesville. A number of times since then, I have experienced no available indoor seating. I would walk inside, examine the situation, and then walk right back out. Today, though, I decided to go back to my old custom of sitting outside.
This is interesting today in that, earlier on, there was that obnoxious, smelly smoky haze everywhere. But now it's gone and only typical summer heat rules. That's O.K.: I'm a Floridian, no point in whining about the heat, right?
Thursday, June 16, 2011
My Run Against Adversity
Today I had a choice: play it wise and cautious with my running, or gut it out Karno-style. I chose the latter.
In case you're wondering, "Karno" is Dean Karnazes, an ultra-distance runner who has written some inspiring books on his interest and about whom I have written on this blog. His message is to run through the pain and adversity in order to achieve progress. Well, today I had some pain and adversity.
For one, the top of my left foot ached because of painful swelling caused by a shoe I had been wearing that didn't fit right. I wondered whether I should just wait a few days before running again (in different shoes, of course). For another, after I had made my decision to go ahead and run anyway, I stepped out of my front door and got a whiff of that horrid smoky haze that comes and goes due to local forest fires. It didn't seem overwhelming, so in spite of my reservations I set out on my run.
During the run, the aching never got worse, and afterwards the foot seems no worse for wear. And I think my lungs were able to hold up as well. I ran my usual distance of 7.18 miles in my usual range of time (1:06:44).
The past few runs of mine have not been pleasant ones, and I can chiefly blame the weather: hot, humid, smoky. Did you know that yesterday's official high in Gainesville was 102?! This was easily a new record, and scorching days are forecast in the near future. And the fires continue to burn...
In case you're wondering, "Karno" is Dean Karnazes, an ultra-distance runner who has written some inspiring books on his interest and about whom I have written on this blog. His message is to run through the pain and adversity in order to achieve progress. Well, today I had some pain and adversity.
For one, the top of my left foot ached because of painful swelling caused by a shoe I had been wearing that didn't fit right. I wondered whether I should just wait a few days before running again (in different shoes, of course). For another, after I had made my decision to go ahead and run anyway, I stepped out of my front door and got a whiff of that horrid smoky haze that comes and goes due to local forest fires. It didn't seem overwhelming, so in spite of my reservations I set out on my run.
During the run, the aching never got worse, and afterwards the foot seems no worse for wear. And I think my lungs were able to hold up as well. I ran my usual distance of 7.18 miles in my usual range of time (1:06:44).
The past few runs of mine have not been pleasant ones, and I can chiefly blame the weather: hot, humid, smoky. Did you know that yesterday's official high in Gainesville was 102?! This was easily a new record, and scorching days are forecast in the near future. And the fires continue to burn...
Wednesday, June 15, 2011
A Beef About Business Today
I would like to register a complaint.
When I walk into a restaurant, store, coffee shop, or any other business establishment, I have certain standards as to how I want to be treated by the staff there. As part of the unspoken contract that I want honored, I expect the employees to focus their attention and behavior on treating me with respect, showing a friendly attitude attuned to my interests regarding their business. I don't want to have to deal with an individual who wears their personal narrative and feelings out on their sleeve. It is not my "job" to sympathize with how bad a day an employee is having, nor to I have a responsibility to make an employee personally approve of me in order to be treated with dignity as a paying customer. I enter a business establishment with a friendly, respectful attitude toward those working there and with the intention of spending my money on goods, and expect reciprocal treatment. It is not my job to enhance the personal lives of employees there by making myself interesting to them or providing them a source of entertainment.
There is a basic standard of public behavior in businesses nowadays that I very rarely see practiced anymore. Sure, I get a lot of perfunctory "politeness", but it is often quashed by facial and body language that says "I don't want to be here and your presence annoys me". Also, I am sick to death of sitting in a restaurant or coffee shop and hearing the employees there loudly talk about their personal lives, or even worse, customers that they like or dislike.
I understand that good help is sometimes hard to come by these days, but is the state of general social behavior so bad in my country that we are forced with having to put up with disrespectful and unprofessional behavior in the places where we most want to be treated with respect? That's poor business!
When I walk into a restaurant, store, coffee shop, or any other business establishment, I have certain standards as to how I want to be treated by the staff there. As part of the unspoken contract that I want honored, I expect the employees to focus their attention and behavior on treating me with respect, showing a friendly attitude attuned to my interests regarding their business. I don't want to have to deal with an individual who wears their personal narrative and feelings out on their sleeve. It is not my "job" to sympathize with how bad a day an employee is having, nor to I have a responsibility to make an employee personally approve of me in order to be treated with dignity as a paying customer. I enter a business establishment with a friendly, respectful attitude toward those working there and with the intention of spending my money on goods, and expect reciprocal treatment. It is not my job to enhance the personal lives of employees there by making myself interesting to them or providing them a source of entertainment.
There is a basic standard of public behavior in businesses nowadays that I very rarely see practiced anymore. Sure, I get a lot of perfunctory "politeness", but it is often quashed by facial and body language that says "I don't want to be here and your presence annoys me". Also, I am sick to death of sitting in a restaurant or coffee shop and hearing the employees there loudly talk about their personal lives, or even worse, customers that they like or dislike.
I understand that good help is sometimes hard to come by these days, but is the state of general social behavior so bad in my country that we are forced with having to put up with disrespectful and unprofessional behavior in the places where we most want to be treated with respect? That's poor business!
Tuesday, June 14, 2011
Science Channel Show About Reality
I am not a scientist by training, not even an engineer or technician. I have taken science courses in college, though, and continue to maintain a healthy interest in it. But I don't have the specialized training needed to fully understand the cutting edge of new research, nor do I possess the extensive mathematical prowess needed to make my way through some of the branches, most notably physics. But that shouldn't keep me from writing about it, though. After all, I am affected by scientific research, for better or for worse, and also tend to share in its subsidy either directly through my taxes or indirectly through private companies (which pass on the cost of research to the customer in their goods and services).
The Science Channel is one of my favorite channels to watch. Not that I like everything on it: they seem recently to be ominously turning down the road of fiction programming, something more appropriate to the Sci-Fi Channel. But there are some really good shows on it nonetheless. The other night I saw one of these, which dealt with how today's physicists are coming up with theories and ideas concerning the basic nature of reality.
I probably am off a little with my accuracy in describing the different viewpoints I heard. But still, I was amazed at how divergent many of the top physicists were in their take on the basic nature of the universe and reality. One conjectured that, since time depends on mass to have any meaning, and that at the origin of the big bang there was a singularity which made time irrelevant, then our own universe eventually will expand and cool to the point where only massless photons are left. And thus no time, fulfilling (at least in the mind of this particular physicist) the prerequisite for another big bang to a new universe. Another physicist had a similar idea, only that it was black holes that were the spawning grounds for new universes. Renown Stanford physicist Leonard Susskind, largely known for his holographic theory that supposedly allows for information to be preserved in the event horizons surrounding black holes, postulated that there may be a holographic projection of all of our three-dimensional reality elsewhere in the universe. And then he pulled a mind-job on everyone by suggesting that perhaps what we perceive as reality around us is nothing more than a hologram.
Susskind, with his ideas, still stressed the point that it was through mathematics that he developed his theories. In fact, without this tool, scientific advancement would be very, very limited. And then another physicist came on the show to deliver the coup de grace: maybe mathematics isn't a tool that humankind has invented and developed over the centuries. Maybe instead mathematics IS the underlying structure of reality and we are gradually becoming more aware of it. Upon hearing this I felt like screaming in frustration...
The Science Channel is one of my favorite channels to watch. Not that I like everything on it: they seem recently to be ominously turning down the road of fiction programming, something more appropriate to the Sci-Fi Channel. But there are some really good shows on it nonetheless. The other night I saw one of these, which dealt with how today's physicists are coming up with theories and ideas concerning the basic nature of reality.
I probably am off a little with my accuracy in describing the different viewpoints I heard. But still, I was amazed at how divergent many of the top physicists were in their take on the basic nature of the universe and reality. One conjectured that, since time depends on mass to have any meaning, and that at the origin of the big bang there was a singularity which made time irrelevant, then our own universe eventually will expand and cool to the point where only massless photons are left. And thus no time, fulfilling (at least in the mind of this particular physicist) the prerequisite for another big bang to a new universe. Another physicist had a similar idea, only that it was black holes that were the spawning grounds for new universes. Renown Stanford physicist Leonard Susskind, largely known for his holographic theory that supposedly allows for information to be preserved in the event horizons surrounding black holes, postulated that there may be a holographic projection of all of our three-dimensional reality elsewhere in the universe. And then he pulled a mind-job on everyone by suggesting that perhaps what we perceive as reality around us is nothing more than a hologram.
Susskind, with his ideas, still stressed the point that it was through mathematics that he developed his theories. In fact, without this tool, scientific advancement would be very, very limited. And then another physicist came on the show to deliver the coup de grace: maybe mathematics isn't a tool that humankind has invented and developed over the centuries. Maybe instead mathematics IS the underlying structure of reality and we are gradually becoming more aware of it. Upon hearing this I felt like screaming in frustration...
Monday, June 13, 2011
Congrats to the Mavs
So the Dallas Mavericks were able to put away the supposedly-invincible Miami Heat four games to two in the National Basketball Association final series to claim their first championship ever. Good for them! I liked the way they worked as a team, and it reminded me of the way that the Boston Celtics played. As for the Miami Heat, they can have their superstars, for all I care. I am sick of this ongoing melodrama about the hurt feelings of their moody forward Lebron James, who apparently is of the attitude that he can just "turn it on" in a game whenever he happens to be in the mood...
Sunday, June 12, 2011
Lord of the Rings: I Have Issues
I loved reading J.R.R. Tolkien's classic three volume fantasy series Lord of the Rings, and I also love watching the three-movie film adaptation thereof. There are however some problems I have with Lord of the Rings, mainly concerning the movies.
When I sat down to watch the first movie The Fellowship of the Ring, I was very eager to see how the movie would portray my favorite character Tom Bombadil. Who, you might say, is that? Well, if you didn't read the book you wouldn't know: director Peter Jackson and his cohorts apparently thought that THREE WHOLE CONSECUTIVE CHAPTERS of the book could be dispensed with, completely omitting any reference to this puzzling character and his interesting domain, which was located between the Shire and the town of Bree. Go figure...
Then there is the matter of the great ring itself. Whoever possessed it and kept it on their person never physically aged, as neither Gollum nor Bilbo Baggins did. Once Bilbo relinquished it to Frodo, though, he quickly aged, and by decades. But with Gollum, he was deprived of it for many years but DIDN'T AGE! H-m-m...
And what about the way the movie series treated the treacherous wizard Saruman? In the first movie, he was so powerful that he could control the weather from many miles away. But once the Ents flooded out Isengard in the second movie The Two Towers, he was just left alone in his tower without any power. In the book, he escapes with Wormtongue to stir up trouble later in the Shire, something also completely ignored in the films.
The Nazgul, or "Riders in Black", never made much sense either. In The Fellowship of the Ring, they were confined by land on horseback and allowed themselves to be swept away by an enchanted elvish river. And one man, Aragorn, was able to fight off the entire lot of them with an also-unexplained short respite of time following this feat. Later, in The Two Towers and the final book/film The Return of the King, the Nazgul return but are much more powerful and imposing, flying around on their powerful demonic dragons. Yet, in a scene at the end of the movie (but not in the book), they discover the whereabouts of the ring but retreat too easily.
There is something in the films that was a bit unsettling to me, something that I had alluded to in a much earlier blog article. Did you notice that the elves, Gandalf, and Aragorn all spoke the King's English? Other "good guys" like common hobbits and dwarfs spoke in in brogues like one would find in Scotland or Ireland. But the bad guys like Sauron or the orcs? They spoke with common Cockney-like accents. This gave an elitist, aristocratic connotation to the conflict between good and evil, and I objected to that.
Finally, I object to the way that Jackson and Co. tried to get around the aforementioned three chapters that they left out of the first movie by finally reintroducing the characters of Merry and Pippin in the most improbable setting of a maze-like cornfield miles away from Frodo and Sam's starting point for their trek. They could have done better, I think.
Still, I love Lord of the Rings and consider the film version as the best thing in cinema to come out this century so far. I wonder, though, how much they are going to alter the wonderful story The Hobbit when that movie is released. I shudder at the thought...
When I sat down to watch the first movie The Fellowship of the Ring, I was very eager to see how the movie would portray my favorite character Tom Bombadil. Who, you might say, is that? Well, if you didn't read the book you wouldn't know: director Peter Jackson and his cohorts apparently thought that THREE WHOLE CONSECUTIVE CHAPTERS of the book could be dispensed with, completely omitting any reference to this puzzling character and his interesting domain, which was located between the Shire and the town of Bree. Go figure...
Then there is the matter of the great ring itself. Whoever possessed it and kept it on their person never physically aged, as neither Gollum nor Bilbo Baggins did. Once Bilbo relinquished it to Frodo, though, he quickly aged, and by decades. But with Gollum, he was deprived of it for many years but DIDN'T AGE! H-m-m...
And what about the way the movie series treated the treacherous wizard Saruman? In the first movie, he was so powerful that he could control the weather from many miles away. But once the Ents flooded out Isengard in the second movie The Two Towers, he was just left alone in his tower without any power. In the book, he escapes with Wormtongue to stir up trouble later in the Shire, something also completely ignored in the films.
The Nazgul, or "Riders in Black", never made much sense either. In The Fellowship of the Ring, they were confined by land on horseback and allowed themselves to be swept away by an enchanted elvish river. And one man, Aragorn, was able to fight off the entire lot of them with an also-unexplained short respite of time following this feat. Later, in The Two Towers and the final book/film The Return of the King, the Nazgul return but are much more powerful and imposing, flying around on their powerful demonic dragons. Yet, in a scene at the end of the movie (but not in the book), they discover the whereabouts of the ring but retreat too easily.
There is something in the films that was a bit unsettling to me, something that I had alluded to in a much earlier blog article. Did you notice that the elves, Gandalf, and Aragorn all spoke the King's English? Other "good guys" like common hobbits and dwarfs spoke in in brogues like one would find in Scotland or Ireland. But the bad guys like Sauron or the orcs? They spoke with common Cockney-like accents. This gave an elitist, aristocratic connotation to the conflict between good and evil, and I objected to that.
Finally, I object to the way that Jackson and Co. tried to get around the aforementioned three chapters that they left out of the first movie by finally reintroducing the characters of Merry and Pippin in the most improbable setting of a maze-like cornfield miles away from Frodo and Sam's starting point for their trek. They could have done better, I think.
Still, I love Lord of the Rings and consider the film version as the best thing in cinema to come out this century so far. I wonder, though, how much they are going to alter the wonderful story The Hobbit when that movie is released. I shudder at the thought...
Saturday, June 11, 2011
Title Series Format Change Suggestion
I have noticed over my lifetime (or at least my sports-following portion thereof) that for most of a sports season, there is relatively little interest among the general population. Even with initial playoffs or crucial regular-season-ending contests, the die-hard fans may get all pumped up with excitement but folks who usually don't follow sports still aren't in on what's going on. But once we get down to the final championship event(s), then suddenly interest explodes among the population. The Super Bowl, World Series, and NBA Championship Series stand out in professional sports in this regard. I couldn't get a reasonable discussion going with most people about these sports during the regular season, but come that final time in the season when it's down to two teams fighting it out for the title, then it's quite easy to talk about it with just about anyone.
As for my suggestion, I don't know what more could be done to improve professional football; college football obviously needs a playoff system to give that final game a greater sense of legitimacy. Due to the physically demanding, violent nature of the sport, football titles are decided by single games. In other professional team sports, though, a best-of-seven series is usually played. Currently, the National Basketball Association championship is being played out in a series between the Miami Heat and the Dallas Mavericks, with the latter leading three games to two so far. The first to reach four wins the championship. But why not change it so that one team, with a minimum of four series wins, must take a two-game advantage over the other in order to claim the championship? This wouldn't change a lop-sided mismatched series, which for all practical purposes needs to be finished and dispensed with. But what about those nail-biting close series, often ending up tied 3-3 with a climactic final game to decide it all? Oh, that last seventh game is a big attention grabber, to be sure. But then it's over. Imagine instead that the two teams are closely matched (like Miami and Dallas currently are) and neither has enough of an edge over the other to muster up a two-game edge. We could then go on for weeks with a great series, with one team finally winning by, say, something like a 20-18 margin.
They should drag out that final series and squeeze as much interest as possible from it. My proposal would do just that. I wouldn't recommend it for just any playoff series (remember, public interest isn't that great early on). Just for the championship series when everyone is getting in on the excitement.
Just think of all the beer commercials this would generate: we could get our economy "afloat" again...
As for my suggestion, I don't know what more could be done to improve professional football; college football obviously needs a playoff system to give that final game a greater sense of legitimacy. Due to the physically demanding, violent nature of the sport, football titles are decided by single games. In other professional team sports, though, a best-of-seven series is usually played. Currently, the National Basketball Association championship is being played out in a series between the Miami Heat and the Dallas Mavericks, with the latter leading three games to two so far. The first to reach four wins the championship. But why not change it so that one team, with a minimum of four series wins, must take a two-game advantage over the other in order to claim the championship? This wouldn't change a lop-sided mismatched series, which for all practical purposes needs to be finished and dispensed with. But what about those nail-biting close series, often ending up tied 3-3 with a climactic final game to decide it all? Oh, that last seventh game is a big attention grabber, to be sure. But then it's over. Imagine instead that the two teams are closely matched (like Miami and Dallas currently are) and neither has enough of an edge over the other to muster up a two-game edge. We could then go on for weeks with a great series, with one team finally winning by, say, something like a 20-18 margin.
They should drag out that final series and squeeze as much interest as possible from it. My proposal would do just that. I wouldn't recommend it for just any playoff series (remember, public interest isn't that great early on). Just for the championship series when everyone is getting in on the excitement.
Just think of all the beer commercials this would generate: we could get our economy "afloat" again...
Friday, June 10, 2011
Haze Reprieve Gives Way to Outdoor Run
This morning I experienced a reprieve from the stinky haze permeating the air over Gainesville when the wind shifted to an easterly direction. This gave me the opportunity to do some road running for a change, instead of the indoor treadmill. It was great to get back outside on my old course, covering 8.15 miles in 1:16:41. Of course, this was at my monotonously regular running pace!
Speaking of the haze, I reported that it is primarily due to a large forest fire (about 5,000 acres) in Levy County, adjacently to mine. But I suppose I should step out a minute from my pity party and count my blessings: Arizona has a monstrous, uncontrollable fire on its hands that is about to enter New Mexico. And there is a fire raging in Miami that is 50,000 acres in size!
But at least for my area, there is rain forecast for the next few days. But whether it will fall on that fire is problematic: don't large brush fires interact with the atmosphere and actually alter the weather, keeping rain away from them? I thought I heard that on TV once, or maybe I just dreamed it...
Speaking of the haze, I reported that it is primarily due to a large forest fire (about 5,000 acres) in Levy County, adjacently to mine. But I suppose I should step out a minute from my pity party and count my blessings: Arizona has a monstrous, uncontrollable fire on its hands that is about to enter New Mexico. And there is a fire raging in Miami that is 50,000 acres in size!
But at least for my area, there is rain forecast for the next few days. But whether it will fall on that fire is problematic: don't large brush fires interact with the atmosphere and actually alter the weather, keeping rain away from them? I thought I heard that on TV once, or maybe I just dreamed it...
Thursday, June 9, 2011
Starbucks Crowds Me Out
The Starbucks store on Newberry Road that closed down recently shouldn't be affecting me, since I had pretty much stopped going there long ago. Unfortunately, though, the customers who used to do business there have gone to other Starbucks. Including my favorite, the Magnolia Parke location. Lately, I have had repeated experiences of walking into this Starbucks with the intent of sitting inside for my coffee and some studying, and then turning about-face and walking right on out when it was apparent that all seats were taken.
That's too bad, because I have begun to frequent some of Starbucks' competitors, places that actually provide seating space for their customers.
That's too bad, because I have begun to frequent some of Starbucks' competitors, places that actually provide seating space for their customers.
Wednesday, June 8, 2011
Running Away From the Haze
The smoky haze primarily originating from a large forest fire in Levy County SSW of us has made running outdoors not a very advisable option for me. Especially when I have the alternative of running on the treadmill at my local YMCA. Monday, which started out hazy but then turned into a very rainy, stormy day for Gainesville (but unfortunately NOT for fire-ridden Levy County), I ran on the treadmill for 9 miles and felt pretty good afterwards. Today, with no rain in sight, I struggled through the haze to my car, coughed a little on the way and rushed into the YMCA holding my breath. Then I ran another 8 miles on the treadmill.
I could run on the treadmill like this all summer if I had to, but doing so makes the eventual transition to road running more difficult. I just wish that fire was gone.
By the way, I have decided at least for the immediate future to cross-train on non-running days at the YMCA with weight training and their elliptical machine. Tuesday I performed 330 reps on six different weight machines that exercised my upper body and abdomen. I used the elliptical cross-trainer for 40 minutes. Then, at home I did some work on our portable step-exercise machine. What I'd like to do is add some leg-strengthening weight training to this routine. I have heard that such training can be valuable in preventing injuries of the kind I experienced this past January (IT band).
I could run on the treadmill like this all summer if I had to, but doing so makes the eventual transition to road running more difficult. I just wish that fire was gone.
By the way, I have decided at least for the immediate future to cross-train on non-running days at the YMCA with weight training and their elliptical machine. Tuesday I performed 330 reps on six different weight machines that exercised my upper body and abdomen. I used the elliptical cross-trainer for 40 minutes. Then, at home I did some work on our portable step-exercise machine. What I'd like to do is add some leg-strengthening weight training to this routine. I have heard that such training can be valuable in preventing injuries of the kind I experienced this past January (IT band).
Tuesday, June 7, 2011
Simple Faith
I tend to look askance at organized religion. Simple religious faith should unite people, not divide them with all kinds of special rules, stipulations, and rituals. Each organized religion says they have the only prescription for spiritual growth and the "good" afterlife based on their own preciously-held rules, names, and catch-phrases. If you talk to any true believer in one, to be sure, they will tell you that behind the utterances and ritual one must "feel it" in the heart as well. Maybe, but a Christian will still insist on the rituals as the required public expression of salvation. And a Muslim will point to the phrase in the Qu'ran that converts to that religion must utter to gain favor with Allah as a true believer.
I tend to have problems with religious people who get completely entangled in their own particular faith's doctrines and subdoctrines, especially elements thereof that assign exclusivity to that religion and consign nonbelievers to suffering after death. Instead, I respect...no, I ESTEEM those who may be members or part of the culture of a particular religion but themselves practice something I call "simple faith".
Underlying simple faith is the idea that life is a mystery, and so is death. What death is like, we don't know. And if there is any special meaning or power behind our lives and our "reality", we don't know either, based on what we can detect with our senses. But if there is, then we can entertain a hope that death is a transition from one type of existence in one reality to another, and that "God", if you will, is a protector and guide to help us on our way, both in this life and thereafter. Having this simple faith can help its possessors to feel empowered to make something of their "earthly" lives with some feeling of confidence that it is meaningful and that all is not lost with death. If you want to call God whatever name your specific religion uses (or forbids), then go ahead. Just don't get hung up on names, unless of course you just have as an agenda the desire to set yourself apart from others with the aim of somehow feeling superior to them.
I tend to have problems with religious people who get completely entangled in their own particular faith's doctrines and subdoctrines, especially elements thereof that assign exclusivity to that religion and consign nonbelievers to suffering after death. Instead, I respect...no, I ESTEEM those who may be members or part of the culture of a particular religion but themselves practice something I call "simple faith".
Underlying simple faith is the idea that life is a mystery, and so is death. What death is like, we don't know. And if there is any special meaning or power behind our lives and our "reality", we don't know either, based on what we can detect with our senses. But if there is, then we can entertain a hope that death is a transition from one type of existence in one reality to another, and that "God", if you will, is a protector and guide to help us on our way, both in this life and thereafter. Having this simple faith can help its possessors to feel empowered to make something of their "earthly" lives with some feeling of confidence that it is meaningful and that all is not lost with death. If you want to call God whatever name your specific religion uses (or forbids), then go ahead. Just don't get hung up on names, unless of course you just have as an agenda the desire to set yourself apart from others with the aim of somehow feeling superior to them.
Monday, June 6, 2011
Illegal Immigration Issue
Concerning the illegal immigration issue...
Proponents of strict enforcement of American immigration laws are often hammered as being "racist" or anti-immigrant. I have read and heard countless exhortations by well-meaning people (including President Obama) who, like me, want reasonable immigration reform that is realistic and compassionate toward those here without documentation. One of the arguments I hear, though, is patently condescending: we are a nation of immigrants, those currently here without documentation are the same as all of the others who passed into this country while following the law, and if you don't like the largely uncontrolled, primarily-Mexican influx then you must be racist or at least xenophobic (and therefore in need of this patronizing rebuke).
I remember in the not-too-distant past how refugees to the U.S. from Indochina often encountered hostility from some of the "natives": they were seen as "outsiders", supposedly taking away people's livelihoods by working cheaply or setting up competing businesses. But these were admitted into the country within the parameters of immigration law, with many more never making it into the United States. To the ones opposing those refugees, a rebuke about us being a nation of immigrants would be right on target and not condescending. After all, they came here within the confines of the law and were a true continuation of our admirable tradition of enhancing our national diversity through immigration.
Now I have no doubt that there are xenophobes among those clamoring for strict immigration enforcement. They are particularly strong among those who want the millions of illegal immigrants rounded up and summarily deported, even those who have been here for many years. But I can see that those arguing for strict enforcement have some good points without automatically attributing their motives to prejudice.
It is important to provide an avenue for legal residence to those currently in this country outside the law for a number of reasons. For one, they need to be able to rely on police protection and feel that they are not under the yoke of those who would exploit their vulnerable undocumented status to their own nefarious ends. For another, this is America, dude! You know, the land of the free! And when I interact with others in this great land, I want to feel that they, like me, are free to exercise all of their constitutional rights and to hold their leaders accountable. Only with the type of reasonable immigration reform proposed by our present and previous presidents, representing both major parties, can this be achieved.
But please, let's can the condescending lectures, O.K.? I also think our national borders need to be made more secure. That doesn't make me a bigot.
Proponents of strict enforcement of American immigration laws are often hammered as being "racist" or anti-immigrant. I have read and heard countless exhortations by well-meaning people (including President Obama) who, like me, want reasonable immigration reform that is realistic and compassionate toward those here without documentation. One of the arguments I hear, though, is patently condescending: we are a nation of immigrants, those currently here without documentation are the same as all of the others who passed into this country while following the law, and if you don't like the largely uncontrolled, primarily-Mexican influx then you must be racist or at least xenophobic (and therefore in need of this patronizing rebuke).
I remember in the not-too-distant past how refugees to the U.S. from Indochina often encountered hostility from some of the "natives": they were seen as "outsiders", supposedly taking away people's livelihoods by working cheaply or setting up competing businesses. But these were admitted into the country within the parameters of immigration law, with many more never making it into the United States. To the ones opposing those refugees, a rebuke about us being a nation of immigrants would be right on target and not condescending. After all, they came here within the confines of the law and were a true continuation of our admirable tradition of enhancing our national diversity through immigration.
Now I have no doubt that there are xenophobes among those clamoring for strict immigration enforcement. They are particularly strong among those who want the millions of illegal immigrants rounded up and summarily deported, even those who have been here for many years. But I can see that those arguing for strict enforcement have some good points without automatically attributing their motives to prejudice.
It is important to provide an avenue for legal residence to those currently in this country outside the law for a number of reasons. For one, they need to be able to rely on police protection and feel that they are not under the yoke of those who would exploit their vulnerable undocumented status to their own nefarious ends. For another, this is America, dude! You know, the land of the free! And when I interact with others in this great land, I want to feel that they, like me, are free to exercise all of their constitutional rights and to hold their leaders accountable. Only with the type of reasonable immigration reform proposed by our present and previous presidents, representing both major parties, can this be achieved.
But please, let's can the condescending lectures, O.K.? I also think our national borders need to be made more secure. That doesn't make me a bigot.
Sunday, June 5, 2011
Hot Weather and Smoky Haze
The last couple of days have been stifling-hot, with temperatures climbing in the afternoon to the upper nineties. To compound the effect, a thick smoky haze from many area fires has descended upon the Gainesville area, making issues of breathing second-hand smoke from cigarettes a moot point. There is no way I am going out in this horrible weather to run, so for a while at least I am hitting the indoor treadmill at my local YMCA. Hopefully, some rain is forthcoming and we'll eventually begin to see the typical summer afternoon showers that make living here enjoyable, or at least bearable. But for now it's almost uninhabitable!
I have noticed that the haze is much worse during the evening hours, but I can now detect it throughout the day...
I have noticed that the haze is much worse during the evening hours, but I can now detect it throughout the day...
Saturday, June 4, 2011
Orlando Visit
I went with my wife today to Orlando, where she had to go to do a mandatory part of the Masters-level class she is currently enrolled in online. Melissa attends the University of Central Florida, but does the bulk of her academic work online from home. Today, though, we were in eastern Orlando at UCF. What is it about this very crowded, noisy city that makes me want to quickly return to Gainesville in a way that ultracrowded Manhattan didn't on my visit there?
I believe that my problem with Orlando is its vast, sprawling nature wholly dependent on street traffic, in combination with lots and lots and lots of people. When I let Melissa off for her class, I drove around trying to find a place to get a good cup of coffee and study. I drove through the UCF campus, where no-parking signs were everywhere (unless you had bought a permit) and some for-pay parking garages, of which I felt no desire to avail myself. So although there were some places I could have gone at UCF, I ended up passing through the campus and back out on the main highway. I found a nearby Starbucks, but every table was taken. I skipped the local fast food places like Burger King and McDonald's, which was probably a mistake. Finally after driving around for several miles, I came across a Dunkin' Donuts that was right off of Colonial Drive. It was a big place, with an even bigger crowd of customers. But I did manage to get a seat and studied some amid the enormous din there. It was awfully unpleasant, though.
If you exclude my theme park experiences there, I don't like to visit Orlando. And I don't like anything to do with driving down its congested streets, full it seems of crazy drivers. Nothing personal, but to me it is an ugly, noisy, overcrowded sprawl. Probably like Los Angeles in miniature! If you like that kind of environment, then go for it! I won't be hanging around, though...
On the other hand, to be fair about it, if I actually lived in Orlando and had roots in the area, I might have a different take on it. But just passing through as a visitor is no fun!
I believe that my problem with Orlando is its vast, sprawling nature wholly dependent on street traffic, in combination with lots and lots and lots of people. When I let Melissa off for her class, I drove around trying to find a place to get a good cup of coffee and study. I drove through the UCF campus, where no-parking signs were everywhere (unless you had bought a permit) and some for-pay parking garages, of which I felt no desire to avail myself. So although there were some places I could have gone at UCF, I ended up passing through the campus and back out on the main highway. I found a nearby Starbucks, but every table was taken. I skipped the local fast food places like Burger King and McDonald's, which was probably a mistake. Finally after driving around for several miles, I came across a Dunkin' Donuts that was right off of Colonial Drive. It was a big place, with an even bigger crowd of customers. But I did manage to get a seat and studied some amid the enormous din there. It was awfully unpleasant, though.
If you exclude my theme park experiences there, I don't like to visit Orlando. And I don't like anything to do with driving down its congested streets, full it seems of crazy drivers. Nothing personal, but to me it is an ugly, noisy, overcrowded sprawl. Probably like Los Angeles in miniature! If you like that kind of environment, then go for it! I won't be hanging around, though...
On the other hand, to be fair about it, if I actually lived in Orlando and had roots in the area, I might have a different take on it. But just passing through as a visitor is no fun!
Friday, June 3, 2011
Dallas Does It Again
A few days ago I wrote how the National Basketball Association Dallas Mavericks made an incredible late-game comeback against their playoff opponent Oklahoma City, after I had given up on the game to watch another TV show. Last night they did it again, although I was at work during the game and unable to watch. Their victims this time were the Miami Heat, their opponent for the NBA Championship series. After Miami had easily handled the Mavericks in game one, the buzz around the sports media was that the Heat were too hot for anyone to handle. And it looked like that last night, too. Midway through the fourth quarter they were easily handling Dallas, 78-63. Then the Mavs stormed back, with their stars Nowitzki, Kidd, and Terry leading the way. They pulled out their comeback with a 95-93 improbable victory, and on the road. The next three games will be home games for Dallas, so they now have a real opportunity to do damage to Miami's presumed cakewalk to the championship.
Thursday, June 2, 2011
Bummed Out on Negative Personal Narratives
I am really tired of being expected to sympathetically listen to other people as they emotionally spew out their very personal hyperjudgemental rancor about others. I don't know how to change this: these people seem totally focused on the negative aspects of certain relationships they have and tenaciously refuse to consider the bigger, more complete picture that includes the positive. I have come to the conclusion that this negativity is at best a form of manipulation of me as a hostage listener and is at worst a psychological disorder, with negative feelings and their open expression feeding on themselves and demanding more and more.
This isn't just one person, either. I see it all around me in various settings. It tends to make me more susceptible to spiritual feelings only in the sense that it appears that demons have a hold on these very negative people. All I want to do when around them is escape.
I am 54. That isn't young. I would like to look forward to my remaining future years as a time of happiness, health and positive relationships. But not around these people, the way they currently are! It matters not what shortcomings they see in others: I have only one option, which is to tune them out...
This isn't just one person, either. I see it all around me in various settings. It tends to make me more susceptible to spiritual feelings only in the sense that it appears that demons have a hold on these very negative people. All I want to do when around them is escape.
I am 54. That isn't young. I would like to look forward to my remaining future years as a time of happiness, health and positive relationships. But not around these people, the way they currently are! It matters not what shortcomings they see in others: I have only one option, which is to tune them out...
Wednesday, June 1, 2011
Spoon June
Spoon is a Texas-based multihyphenated modern-indie-alternative-rock band that has been around since the nineties. Unfortunately, I only have their music that has been released since 2002. They are very good, with strong perscussion/guitar/keyboard interaction in their songs, along with group cofounder, singer/songwriter Britt Daniels' idiosynchratic raspy voice as lead vocal. Even if you don't normally listen to this genre of music, you may have heard their 2006 hit I Turn My Camera On on a TV commerical a few years back.
I Turn My Camera On was the song that made me notice this talented and creative band. Their material, like that of Regina Spektor and Radiohead, is all eminently listenable and there are several tracks on their albums that I have come to like a lot. In fact, I have recently begun to solely listen to my collection of Spoon's music (in shuffle mode) on my MP3 player while running (succeeding Regina and Radiohead for this honor). June looks to be a month full of Spoon listening...
The following is my personal "Top 25" list of Spoon songs. Please keep in mind that I don't yet have their early albums, though. I do have Kill the Moonlight [KM], Gimme Fiction [GF], Get Nice! [GN], Ga Ga Ga Ga [GGGG], and Transference [T]. I have put the above-indicated abbreviated forms for the corresponding albums next to each song.
Here's my list:
1 My Mathematical Mind [GF]
2 The Ghost of You Lingers [GGGG]
3 Don't Let It Get You Down [KM]
4 Goodnight Laura [T]
5 Merchants of Soul [GF]
6 Someone Something [KM]
7 Don't You Evah [GGGG]
8 The Mystery Zone [T]
9 My Little Japanese Cigarette Case [GGGG]
10 I Turn My Camera On [GF]
11 Stay Don't Go [KM]
12 The Way We Get By [KM]
13 You Got Your Cherry Bomb [GGGG]
14 I Summon You [GF]
15 Small Stakes [KM]
16 Paper Tiger [KM]
17 Is Love Forever? [T]
18 The Underdog [GGGG]
19 Jonathon Fisk [KM]
20 Sister Jack [GF]
21 Well-Alright [Dark Was the Night compilation]
22 Who Makes Your Money [T]
23 The Delicate Place [GF]
24 Dracula's Cigarette [GN]
25 Tasty Fish [GN]
I Turn My Camera On was the song that made me notice this talented and creative band. Their material, like that of Regina Spektor and Radiohead, is all eminently listenable and there are several tracks on their albums that I have come to like a lot. In fact, I have recently begun to solely listen to my collection of Spoon's music (in shuffle mode) on my MP3 player while running (succeeding Regina and Radiohead for this honor). June looks to be a month full of Spoon listening...
The following is my personal "Top 25" list of Spoon songs. Please keep in mind that I don't yet have their early albums, though. I do have Kill the Moonlight [KM], Gimme Fiction [GF], Get Nice! [GN], Ga Ga Ga Ga [GGGG], and Transference [T]. I have put the above-indicated abbreviated forms for the corresponding albums next to each song.
Here's my list:
1 My Mathematical Mind [GF]
2 The Ghost of You Lingers [GGGG]
3 Don't Let It Get You Down [KM]
4 Goodnight Laura [T]
5 Merchants of Soul [GF]
6 Someone Something [KM]
7 Don't You Evah [GGGG]
8 The Mystery Zone [T]
9 My Little Japanese Cigarette Case [GGGG]
10 I Turn My Camera On [GF]
11 Stay Don't Go [KM]
12 The Way We Get By [KM]
13 You Got Your Cherry Bomb [GGGG]
14 I Summon You [GF]
15 Small Stakes [KM]
16 Paper Tiger [KM]
17 Is Love Forever? [T]
18 The Underdog [GGGG]
19 Jonathon Fisk [KM]
20 Sister Jack [GF]
21 Well-Alright [Dark Was the Night compilation]
22 Who Makes Your Money [T]
23 The Delicate Place [GF]
24 Dracula's Cigarette [GN]
25 Tasty Fish [GN]
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
