Thursday, 21 April 2011

Here are three notable events from today:

1. The professor passed back our “draw the House of Usher” assignment. Before doing that, though, he showed each student’s artwork on the overhead projector. The first drawing he showed was phenomenal; the house was exactly as I pictured it, the drawing was skillfully down with shadows, perspective, and great detail. It appeared to have been done in chalk (or peharps just those fancy-schmancy pencils). My first thought upon seeing this was, “Crap, these classmates are talented!” Alas, that was the best one of the bunch. The others ranged from simple, geometric, haphazardly drawn pictures (that I imagine were created in the five minutes prior to class) to quite a bit better than mine.

Oh – and as promised, here’s mine:

Check out those eyes on the curtains, man! That’s my piece de resistance. The text doesn’t exactly say that there are eyes on the curtains (it says the windows themselves were shaped like eyes), but I interpreted this via the Salvador Dali segment of Hitchcock’s Spellbound (and if you don’t know what I’m talking about here, you really need to rent Spellbound), and it apparently impressed the Professor enough to where he pointed them out to the class when my picture was displayed on the screen.

2. I wrote THIS ARTICLE concerning the bullshit prediction of the Rapture coming on May 21^st. The article was, today, selected for MinnPost’s Blog Cabin. The proprietors of that site scan many, many local websites everyday and choose the post they feel is most read-worthy. So, today, they picked mine. Good for me.

3. This evening, my wife and I watched the film The King’s Speech. It was a rather good flick. I mean, the story wasn’t particularly amazing, neither was there any edge-of-my-seat moments, but for a historical drama, it was really good. Like many historical dramas, it suffers from assuming the viewers have a deep knowledge of the time and place they are being immersed in, but I don’t think that negated the good points. In fact, the best aspect was the acting. Colin Firth, who played King George VI, was completely believable; there was no point when I thought, “This guy doesn’t really stutter, he’s just playing a guy who stutters.” He deservedly was awarded the Academy Award for Best Actor. Of course, he did have an unfair advantage (not that I mean to diminish Firth’s performance, because he did deserve the award) – and that is that the Academy looooves to give Oscars to actors who portray real people with disabilities.

Don’t believe me? I’m sure there’s a comprehensive list out there somewhere, but here’s a top-of-my-head listing of people who were nominate for acting Oscars for portraying real disabled people:

Daniel Day-Lewis, My Left Foot (quadriplegia)

Patty Duke, The Miracle Worker (blind and deaf)

John Hurt, The Elephant Man (Proteus Syndrome)

Russell Crowe, A Beautiful Mind (schizophrenia)

Judi Dench, Iris (Alzheimer’s)

Geoffrey Rush, Shine (schizoaffective disorder)

Jamie Foxx, Ray (blind)

James Franco, 127 Hours (amputee)

Tom Cruise, Born on the Fourth of July (paralysis)

Jon Voight, Coming Home (also something requiring a wheelchair)

Harold Russell, The Best Years of Our Lives (limb deficiency)

Russell’s performance is particularly noteworthy – he didn’t have to act like a man who had no hands, because he really is (was) a man with no hands!

Of course, if there are no historical people to cull from, the Academy will look to fictional characters, such as Jane Wyman’s portrayal of a deaf woman in Johnny Belinda, or Dustin Hoffman in Rain Man, Peter Sellers in Dr. Strangelove, Jack Nicholson in As Good as It Gets (or One Flew Over the Cuckoo’s Nest), Hillary Swank in Million Dollar Baby, or Tom Hanks and Gary Sinise – who both portrayed disabled people in Forrest Gump – or even Kevin Spacey, who portrayed a man pretending to be disabled in The Usual Suspects.

I think AnnaSophia Robb has a good shot at getting the Oscar nod next January:

Friday, 22 April 2011

Today I let a co-worker borrow all my beer brewing equipment (well, not all my equipment – I kept my bottles).

Do you know how often I let people borrow things? Pretty much never. So, I guess this is a big day for me.

I have a problem with letting people borrow stuff, and it’s not just because I don’t want people to borrow stuff (because, in fact, I often do). My problem is that most people – closest friends included – just don’t seem to have the wherewithal to return stuff. I could list off the books, DVDs, and CDs that I’ve lost to people over the past 25 years as well as who borrowed which thing and then, however inadvertently, never returned it.

I practically cringe when people ask to borrow stuff, hoping that they’ll forget they asked if I let some time go by or change the conversation. And the reason is because this leads to the other problem, wherein I have to remind the person constantly. They keep forgetting, I keep reminding. I just end up looking like the bad guy, even though I was the one who was, essentially, robbed. Once, back in 1988, a friend asked to see a book that I had brought to school one day. He wanted to see if for a few hours, and he promised to give it back at the end of the day, when we saw each other getting on the bus. Problem was, he left early that day because he was sick. The next day, I asked him for my book back. He forgot it at home. Same thing with the next day, then the next day, then the next day. I never saw that book again.

Another time, back in 1999, I brought in a U2 CD to work. A co-worker asked if she could bring it home overnight. I let her do it (saying no to things like this is also perceived as jerky). The next day she forgot it. I reminded her everyday, but she kept forgetting – even after she put in her two-week’s notice to quit. Finally, on the last day of her employment, I asked if she brought the CD. She said she didn’t, but that she promised she would bring it on Friday when she returned to pick up her last paycheck. I said, “Well, see that you do, otherwise you’ll have to write me a check for $18.” She looked at me incredulously, as if I was the biggest asshole who ever lived because I dared to request payment for an item she stole from me. She returned on Friday… and my CD was with her. With her, actually, it was easy, because I didn’t care if she thought I was a jerk or if she didn’t want to be my ‘friend’ anymore. Usually the situation is a bit stickier.

So why allow someone to borrow my beer brewing equipment? Two reasons:

First, I got into beer brewing in part because someone was kind enough to allow me to borrow their equipment. So, I guess I owe it to someone else now, in some kind of Karmic manner, to pass on what was given to me. Oh – and yes – I am completely hypocritical in this manner: I don’t let people borrow my stuff, but I have no qualms about borrowing items from other people whenever I feel so inclined. My only defense is that I return items – sometimes even after the borrower has forgotten that I borrowed the item. (I don’t forget.)

Second, beer brewing equipment is a “big” thing. Unlike a CD or a book, it takes up a lot of space, and it costs (relatively) a lot of money. It would be difficult for the borrowee to neglect to return or reimburse me for the item at some point in the future.

I guess the take away lesson from this is that you probably shouldn’t ever waste your time asking to borrow a book on my shelf, but if you need to use my car for a week…have at it.

Tuesday, 19 April 2011

So, as the dust has settled after the lay-offs at my job, I have now found myself in possession of  a Galilean Thermometer. This is one of those devices that, like Newton’s Cradle, Mechanical Puzzles, Ant Farms (all of which have been on my desk at one time or another), and Magic 8 Balls (which has never been on my desk due to it being created by Satan), has come in to the popular culture as a way of saying, “I like crap sitting on my desk, but it has to be nerdy.”

One problem with the thermometer is that the numbers hooked on to each bulb are nearly unreadable. I have to be within two feet of the bulbs in order to read them. Would it have killed the manufacturer to print the numbers in a different color from the disc they are on? Also, since the bulbs are free-floating, there’s nothing compelling the numbers to face the “right” way; they are often parallel to my line of sight and, thus, impossible to read. If I try turning the whole thermometer, the bulbs remain stationary, and the discs are no easier to read.

But here’s the bigger problem: this thermometer is absolutely no fun inside a perfectly climate-controlled building. According to the device, it is currently 76 degrees in the building, a value which has remained unchanged in the seven years I have worked in close proximity to it.

I’m thinking of bringing the thermometer home, where our fluctuating kinetic energy (due to opening windows and turning down the heat at night and not having central air) all would conspire to give the little bulbs some action.

…But, we all know what happens when fragile glass objects are displayed in our home.

Wednesday, 20 April 2011

So, I need to register for class today. Of course, I definitely will sign up for a class for the upcoming fall semester (which runs, roughly, from Labor Day to Kwanzaa), but I’m also considering signing up for a summer class (which runs, roughly, from Jill Biden’s birthday to Independence Day).

“Hey,” you ask, “why haven’t you ever signed up for a summer class before?”

“Hey,” I answer, “that’s a great question.”

The thing is, the tuition reimbursement my employer offers is not infinite. This differs from the cost of tuition at Hamline which, essentially, is infinite. Basically, I can take two courses per reimbursement calendar (which, inexplicably, runs from December 1st – November 30th). As you’ll recall, I did not take a class in the fall of 2010, as I was still helping out around the house while Isla configured her neck muscles and my wife reassembled her uterus.

Therefore, the year running from December 1, 2010 – November 30, 2011 is one in which I will only have taken one class. Yes, yes, like I said, I will sign up for one for the fall, but since that one runs until Hanukkah, it will be counted towards the December 1, 2011 – November 30, 2012 year.

So, I’m trying to decided if I can fit in all the work that’s likely to be required. Since the summer course only runs about a third the lengh of a fall or spring course, the work is compressed into less time, and I have to find more time available to do the work. One option is to not sleep, which is a great idea (on the surface), because I have long lamented slumbering as a waste of time, and this might give me the impetus I need to forego this wasteful habit. Another option is to do my homework in the car, whilst commuting to and from work. I’ve done that before, with surprisingly stunning results, so that might be the best option.

One class I am considering is titled “Women in Literature,” which sounds like a combination of my two favorite things in life (not to be confused with “Film and Beer,” a class that combined my two second-favorite things in life). So I’ve emailed the professor, requesting a syllabus so that I can gauge the workload. To my delight, she promptly responded with a course schedule that, among other things, included a film viewing. Holy crap! This might be the best class EVER (assuming I can show up with beer).

Saturday, 16 April 2011

So, despite what I had guessed, I actually had time to complete the book Proofiness. I finished reading it this evening and, I gotta say, it’s the best book I’ve read this year.

The author (Charles Seife), spends much of the book discussing elections. It’s here where counting, statistics, polls, and politics all converge to create some crazy numbers.

Seife discusses the 1936 election – in which one magazine claimed to know (to within 0.5%) the outcome of the election. They claimed Governor Alf Landon would win. Yeah…he didn’t win. He only recieved ~35% of the popular vote. How did the pollsters make such a huge mistake? Seife points out that even though their margin of error – their statistical error – was very low, they had neglected to factor in their systematic errors. In fact, that’s one of Seife’s points: when you read or hear about the results of a poll, you invariably hear about the accompanying “margin or error.” Yes, that’s nice, but what’s more important it taking into account statistical errors.

Predictably, Seife also devotes space to the whole “Dewey Defeats Truman” prediction, and the razor thin margin between Bush and Gore. What was surprising, however, was Seife’s chapter on the Franken vs. Coleman election. He goes into detail about the mathematical wrangling that took place, how certain ballots were contested and why, and why Minnesota does, in fact, have a very good set up for voting and for recounts. Seife notes that such a minor difference in totals would have totally baffled most other states. He also points out that such a small difference is beyond our ability to count. Counting, after all, is just another form of measuring, and all measurements have an inherent inaccuracy. Seife concludes that the Minnesota Senatorial election (and the 2000 Presidential election) should’ve been decided legally: in cases of a tie, lots are to be drawn.

Here’s a funny thing: did you know the Senatorial race lost one vote to Lizard People? It’s true, and Seife includes an image of the ballot to prove it. Basically, some voter decided to write-in “Lizard People” for every position on the ballot. The voter also dutifully colored in the oval next to the words “Lizard People.” Except in one case: Senator. There, the voter wrote in “Lizard People,” but colored in the oval for Franken.

Naturally, Franken’s camp declared that to be a vote for their man. “Not so fast,” said Coleman’s camp: the voter clearly meant to vote for “Lizard People.” Franken then argued that the oval was colored in next to his name and, therefore, even if the voter meant to vote for “Lizard People,” election officials can only count who the voter actually did vote for.

But then, Coleman pointed out that Minnesota law states that if a voter writes in a candidate, then they have voted for that person – regardless of what else they do on the ballot. Franken then countered that, while that may be true, “Lizard People” is not a person, it’s clearly plural, rendering the write-in invalid and thus counting the ballot for Franken. But Coleman pointed out that “People” is a real last name, and there is no way to determine if, somewhere, there is a person named Lizard People and that – in the opinion of the voter – is the best person for the job.

Sunday, 17 April 2011

Today I took Owen to yet another birthday party. It had, after all, been over two weeks since his last birthday party, so he was due for another one. This time, we ventured over to Pump It Up.

We had been to a Pump It Up once before – though I don’t think Owen has any recollection of the event (he was only 2). Man, it’s a loud, wild place. As you can imagine, Owen was a bit overwhelmed at first. The birthday boy had invited over 20 of his friends, and they were all excitedly jumping around and screaming even before the party ‘officially’ began.

Owen later said that he wants a birthday party at Pump It Up. I’m not so sure about that. For one thing, it’s gotta be quite pricey (especially when you include food and gifts for all in attendance, as this boy’s family did). But more importantly, I don’t really care for how orchestrated the whole thing is. When we showed up, for example, we were directed to put our gift into a big box that was later ferried to the party room. I didn’t like the idea of not being able to give the gift to the birthday boy ourselves. Also, the whole thing was tied to closely to the clock. First the kids had to watch a video, then they had to go, single file into one room, then another room, then another room. When it was time to eat the food, they were repeatedly told to sit down. When the birthday boy was opening his presents, everyone was trying to speed him along because they had to clear out the room for the next party.

I told my wife that maybe we could do that when Owen is older but, for now, I like his birthdays to be more laid-back affairs with family and friends.

Monday, 18 April 2011

Today, as I was driving home from work, U2’s song “Desire” came on the radio. It’s definitely a superb driving song: it’s got a fast, moving beat that doesn’t let up – it’s no wonder the song exhausts itself in less than three minutes.

Anyhow, as I was singing along, a car full of young ladies pulled up beside me with their windows rolled down. They were singing and clapping to the very same song. My windows weren’t rolled down, but they must’ve noticed my lips lining up to the words of the song, because they deliberately tried to get my attention and then, when I looked over at them, they waved their hands in the air excitedly, as if we had just made some sort of U2-connection. Then I plowed into a truck. Just kidding.

Anyway, they sped on down the road and veered east when I headed south. All I could think was, “Man, I’m so cool.”

Also today, I watched to movie Zombieland. I’m not, as a rule, a fan of the whole zombie subgenre, but I must admit that this was a very fun film. I enjoyed Columbus’ “rules,” especially, and how they were visually inserted into the film at various points. As you may recall, I read Night of the Living Trekkies last year, and I found that to be quite the page turner. So, who knows? Maybe I am getting into zombies.

Friday, 15 April 2011

So, first, I received a PowerPoint presentation today. It was titled “Memorial Reminder.” Not sure why I was included on this email…I know full well when the Memorial is scheduled, and thanks to years of indoctrination, I don’t think I will forget its appearance every full-moon-following-the-vernal-equinox each year. For those who don’t know, the Memorial is the one holiday that Witnesses do observe (though they are loathe to term it a ‘holiday’). It’s basically their version of Mass – a morbid meeting (on top of all the other meetings) in which wine and bread gets passed around to everyone in attendance. Lest that sound too exciting, bear in mind that almost no one (<0.01%) partakes of the comestibles.

Anyway, I thought I’d share some of the Power Point slides with my loyal readers here:

Okay, here’s slide #2, and all I gotta say is…CREEPY! God knows EVERYTHING about me? And that’s supposed to make me feel good? Does he know I have a nose hair that’s been itching me all day? Does he know that I just scratched my genitals? Why does he know these things? Why does he want to know these things? Like I said, CREEPY!

So now he even knows things about me that I don’t know about myself: he knows how many hairs I have on my head. Again, why? And, CREEPY! As a supplemental question, where does my head end and my neck begin? I mean, I think something like that could make a radical difference in the number of hairs that are on my head.

But here’s what’s really bizarre about this slide: he knew me even before I was conceived! Holy shit! That means he foreordained that my parents would get together and copulate on the night that they did. Weird. Why was it so important to him that my parents reproduce – especially considering my parents had a lousy marriage that ultimately ended in divorce? And if he knew me before I was conceived, does that mean he knew everyone…even…Hitler! And did he know the babies that resulted from rapes? ‘Cause, wow, he should’ve done something about that. And did he also know all the fetuses that were conceived, but ultimately miscarried? Why did he want to fertilize eggs, only to abort them? Damn, God has committed a lot of abortions in his time. I sure hope Congress tried to defund God.

So, the only reason why I’m not offended by this slide is because I have a standing SOP that stipulates I never get offended about anything. However, if I was to get offended, I would say this slide is offensive.

Look at the first (mis)quote: “And I brought you forth on the day you were born.” Um…no, Jehovah, you didn’t. My mom carried me in her womb for many months, and she – not the doctors, not the nurse, not my dad, and certainly not any fictitious characters – delivered me into the world. Having attended the births of both of my children, I find this (mis)quote to be insulting to women like my wife who, with much effort and pain, “brought forth” new life.

Now look at the third and fourth (mis)quotes: “I offer you more than your earthly father ever could…for I am the perfect father.”

Huh. That’s funny. I don’t remember Jehovah doing jack shit to pay for my food, clothing, education, or medical care when I was growing up. What I do remember, however, was my father working long hours, often on the weekend, often with two jobs, battling traffic, injuries, health problems, and lousy bosses, just to pay for our crappy cars, our mobile home, and our hand-me-downs. My Dad is far from “the perfect father,” but he did (and does) a helluva lot more than Jehovah. (For one thing, my “earthly father” actually talks to me – and that makes him way superior to Jehovah regardless of any other trait.)

Now here’s an interesting slide. For one thing, it directly contradicts the previous slide: He will give me the desires of my heart only if I delight in Him? What does that mean? And, anyways, in the previous slide, he just said he wants to lavish his love on me simply because I am his child. So which is it: Does he want to do stuff for me by default, or do I have to cough up some ‘delight’?

The slide also claims that Jehovah can do for me than I can possibly imagine. I love statements like this because they are so easily testable. I can imagine that Jehovah can make $100 appear out of thin air and land on my keyboard in the next minute. Let’s see if it happens.

…

…

…

…Hm. I guess that statement is false.

Here are some statements I don’t even have to test; I already know they’re false. Again, Jehovah, stop demeaning my “earthly” (i.e., “real”) father: you never comforted me in my troubles. The slide also claims that God is close to me when I’m broken-hearted. Huh. That’s funny. Because, in the past, when I would sincerely pray to God requesting his help, he didn’t do Jack Squat. He didn’t even pat me on the head and say, “I’m sorry, I wish I could make it better,” like my earthly father did. He must’ve been too busy counting my hairs.

Okay, I could write a book about this slide. But for now, I’ll just say this: If you know me personally, and you happen to have children, please don’t think that “giving up” your children will somehow impress me and make me love you. Instead, just invite me out to lunch or a movie, or send my wife and I a card on our anniversary. Thanks.

…Sorry, I’ll be taking my son – my earthly son, who I have no thought of “giving up” – to a birthday party. Also, I’ll be busy counting his hairs.

Also, best video this week. Representative Crowley (D-NY) is now one of my favorite congressmen. In case his style looks slightly familiar, it’s ’cause he’s copying ‘Weird Al,’ who, of course, was spoofing Bob Dylan.

Wednesday, 13 April 2011

Four people from my (former) department were laid off today. This brings the total number of people in that department from 15 on Monday, down to 9 today. Wow. They’re a vanishing breed.

My new job is in the packaging department. To clear up the misconception everyone seems to have about this: No, I am not working in the receiving dock nor am I working in shipping. When I say “Packaging” I mean the housing that the medical devices are directly stored in. If I worked for a condiment company, it’s kind of like I just stopped testing the mustard and will now test the mustard bottle.

Yes, the containers also need to meet rigorous specifications.  Think of it this way: it does little good for the FDA to regulate, say, Advil, if the Advil can simply be poured into a pick-up truck and dumped off in Target Pharmacy’s parking lot. The bottles that contain the Advil need to meet certain stress, impact, shear, temperature, permeability, air pressure, and cosmic radiation considerations. Okay, so no one’s said anything to me about the danger of cosmic radiation on catheters, but everything else I said was true.

Thursday, 14 April 2011

I received my copy of So Beautiful or So What in the mail yesterday. I’ve gotta say, the packaging is, well, beautiful. It’s a triptych featuring three sleeves: one on the left, one in the middle, and one on the right. The one on the left houses an envelope with a guitar image on it. The CD is inside that envelope. The center sleeve houses a booklet, with another picture of the exploding DNA on the cover. The booklet has all the lyrics and a two page write-up by Declan MacManus.  The sleeve on the right houses an envelope with a microscope image on it (very appropriate – as it connects both the the DNA on the cover and the idea that what’s in this envelope will give fans a closer look). There’s a DVD inside that features a live performance and a making-of filmlet. I haven’t checked out the DVD yet.

The album is very reminiscent of Simon’s last two albums – You’re the One and Surprise. In fact, I’d say this album is a combination of the best of both of those two. Overall, it’s a little too laid back for my preference, but not as laid back as You’re the One. The sounds and lyrics reminded my of Surprise, though there were a few things that made me think “Yep, this is the guy who created Graceland” – such as when he sings about  a “bomb in the marketplace.”

Simon continues with his two favorite themes again: the limits on communication, and the sense of isolation we can sometimes feel in the presence of new people, places, and technologies. There’s more of an air of mortality and finality here than in earlier works which, I guess, is to be expected from someone who’s been in the business for 50 years and is nearly 70 years old.

There’s also an instrumental track named “Amulet” (the shortest track on the album). This was a pleasant surprise that I almost missed (it is, of course, not given any space in the lyrics booklet). I can’t recall any instrumentals in Simon’s other solo work.

Overall, I enjoyed the album. It’s a little earlier to say for sure, but I think I like it better than There Goes Rhymin’ Simon, One Trick Pony, You’re the One, and even The Rhythm of the Saints. It is, of course, not as good as Graceland. Probably on par with Surprise or Still Crazy After All These Years.

And now that I’ve said that, you should be able to score pretty admirably at THIS QUIZ.