Nonnie's house has always been a sanctuary for me. Its a bit like going camping, in the absence of all of my things I am left with only what matters. A few days worth of clothes, hygiene items, a few books, my little netbook and my EDC items. It's not much, but I always find that the less I have the more I enjoy having them. I'm sure Thoreau would think I surround myself with the riches of kings, but Thoreau also dined at the table of wealthy friends.
My thoughts turn inwards when I'm here. Being in the guest bedroom where my brother formerly resided makes me miss him greatly, and at times I turn in the house and expect to see him there.. His absence creates a void that is almost tangible. However, emptying my backpack and assigning places for my sparse scattering of things has served to awaken and somewhat satisfy my desire to have my own small personal space. In this room, door closed, I can build my nest and enjoy a sense of calm. It's something that has been sorely lacking in my own home.
I'm beginning to think that I should talk to Rae about moving my office into the second room at the house, so that I can have this sense of calm there as well.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
The recipe for the perfect snack is as follows: Walk barefoot into the garden and pick a small, ripe tomato. Carry it inside and wash it off while removing the stem. Fold a paper towel into a hand sized square and place the tomato on it. Draw your pocket knife, rinse it briskly and then slice the tomato into eighths. Salt and Pepper the slices and eat them carefully off the tip of your knife. Wash down with a cold glass of water. When you are finished, wipe your knife off on the paper towel, return your knife to its rightful place and rip the towel up into the compost bin.
Serves One. This snack is best if eaten by a window.
Sunday, July 29, 2012
Streets of Fire
In 1984 there was a movie called "Streets of Fire", which was billed as a sort of "rock and roll fable". I was thinking about it this morning because my brother posted some lyrics from that movie on facebook.
Because it had elements of the 1980's and because I was a kid, I had always thought of that movie taking place in the 80's. Looking back, it was set in the 50's. Mind. Blown. Diane Lane's dress at the beginning of the movie would have been incredibly risque' in the 50's, and Michael Pare's character having those soldier skills makes more sense now.
At any rate; the wikipedia article for the movie said that it was a commercial and critical failure, which is a shame. I've watched the movie within the past five years and thought that it held up well to time and was still a decent movie. It's no Lord of the Rings, but it has its place.
Think I'll add it to my Netflix queue and watch it again.
Because it had elements of the 1980's and because I was a kid, I had always thought of that movie taking place in the 80's. Looking back, it was set in the 50's. Mind. Blown. Diane Lane's dress at the beginning of the movie would have been incredibly risque' in the 50's, and Michael Pare's character having those soldier skills makes more sense now.
At any rate; the wikipedia article for the movie said that it was a commercial and critical failure, which is a shame. I've watched the movie within the past five years and thought that it held up well to time and was still a decent movie. It's no Lord of the Rings, but it has its place.
Think I'll add it to my Netflix queue and watch it again.
Saturday, July 28, 2012
How Michael Chrichton's "Congo" Could Have Been Better
I've spent a lot of time today working on my Grandmother's yard because it's good to help out family. In my off time (which my Dad and I are taking a lot of breaks because of the stupendous heat index), I finished reading Michael Chrichton's "Congo". I mean that near literally because 300 pages in paper back is fairly short, all things considered. I liked it enough to not be disgusted with it, but the things that were wrong with it kept getting in the way of what was good about it. I think there are three ways in which it could be immensely improved:
1.) Not writing the book in anticipation of it being a movie.
This one's huge. There's a lot of "screen hogging" in the book that you can tell is written to be part of a movie script. A gorilla that smokes and drinks. The scientist is written to be somewhat bumbling and the but of coarse physical gags. The gorilla punching the "detonate" button while everyone looks on stupidly. Oh, and a few sensing charges 15 miles from a volcano makes the volcano erupt. Really? This stuff just reeks of "Make me into a movie!" and makes for a poor read.
2.) Rename the book to be "The Adventures of Captain Monroe".
Seriously. And rewrite it to be more about him; he's the most compelling character and the best written. A story about a mercenary operating in the tense geopolitics in Africa is a better story than two prop-board scientists. Monroe and his merry band of mercenaries, kicking ass and taking contracts to secure resources in a taut business war between competing industries. An African Yojimbo. Think about it.
3.) Resolve conflicts sans deus ex machina.
This is the greatest offense in the book; Michael Chrichton can't resolve plot conflicts without pulling 11th hour solutions completely out of his ass. After trekking through Africa and camping so many nights, *suddenly* there are laser defense turrets and electrical fencing for protection? Then there's the whole translating the new gorilla species language enough to basically yell "Leave bitch" over a loud speaker, and that's enough to make them go away? These are killing machines, not chihuahuas! Oh, the team is stuck in a downed airplane and surrounded by a hostile tribe, but fortunately there's a hot air balloon in there! What. The. Hell.
I shouldn't talk ill of the dead, but Michael Chrichton was NOT a good writer. His stories are entertaining at best and drivel at worst, but I wouldn't put him anywhere near Turtledove, or Stirling, or Tolkien. The guy was a hack. I rate Congo at about a 60 out of 100, on my scale, but that might be a little generous.
1.) Not writing the book in anticipation of it being a movie.
This one's huge. There's a lot of "screen hogging" in the book that you can tell is written to be part of a movie script. A gorilla that smokes and drinks. The scientist is written to be somewhat bumbling and the but of coarse physical gags. The gorilla punching the "detonate" button while everyone looks on stupidly. Oh, and a few sensing charges 15 miles from a volcano makes the volcano erupt. Really? This stuff just reeks of "Make me into a movie!" and makes for a poor read.
2.) Rename the book to be "The Adventures of Captain Monroe".
Seriously. And rewrite it to be more about him; he's the most compelling character and the best written. A story about a mercenary operating in the tense geopolitics in Africa is a better story than two prop-board scientists. Monroe and his merry band of mercenaries, kicking ass and taking contracts to secure resources in a taut business war between competing industries. An African Yojimbo. Think about it.
3.) Resolve conflicts sans deus ex machina.
This is the greatest offense in the book; Michael Chrichton can't resolve plot conflicts without pulling 11th hour solutions completely out of his ass. After trekking through Africa and camping so many nights, *suddenly* there are laser defense turrets and electrical fencing for protection? Then there's the whole translating the new gorilla species language enough to basically yell "Leave bitch" over a loud speaker, and that's enough to make them go away? These are killing machines, not chihuahuas! Oh, the team is stuck in a downed airplane and surrounded by a hostile tribe, but fortunately there's a hot air balloon in there! What. The. Hell.
I shouldn't talk ill of the dead, but Michael Chrichton was NOT a good writer. His stories are entertaining at best and drivel at worst, but I wouldn't put him anywhere near Turtledove, or Stirling, or Tolkien. The guy was a hack. I rate Congo at about a 60 out of 100, on my scale, but that might be a little generous.
No Global Arms Treaty
Well, they said that the Global Arms Treaty wouldn't impact individual owners or interfere with 2nd Amendment rights, but they also said that cell phones don't cause cancer, there were WMD's in Iraq, and that Kim Kashardian married for love. So; One Less Thing to worry about, right?
Somebody should tell this woman that employing logical fallacies in writing is a bad thing; guilt by association and post hoc ergo procter hoc. I would be incensed if someone told me that my writing was fallacious, but then again I care about such things as being logical. At any rate; not only would whatsherface seek to use any tactics necessary to undermine carry rights and to heap disdain on those who possess concealed carry permits, but her writing tacitly assumes guilt on the part of Zimmerman in the Trayvon Martin case. Bravo, Mrs. Zuckerman; who needs a court system or a bill of rights when we have you? All I can say is that it's a good thing that she is not the final arbiter of our rights.
Hooray! Our deficit is *only* increasing by 1.2 Trillion this year! I can't help but notice that the article points out that the budget deficit will be decreased to below 3% of the GDP, and yet makes no mention at all at attempting to balance the budget to income or even create a surplus to pay down the deficit, which is hovering close to 17 Trillion. This isn't exactly a *win* with me.
No joke. And, on that note; it's almost 0630 and time for my morning walk. Despite the humidity being above 90%. Why? Easy; anything you think and say you don't have the time for, you should re-phrase to be "because it's not a priority". Look at these two statements:
I can't exercise during the day because I don't have the time for it.
OR
I can't exercise during the day because exercising is not a priority to me.
See how lame the second one makes you sound? That's right; if something's important then you should be making it happen, damnit.
Tuesday, July 17, 2012
Empyting Pockets
Pocket for Android is a hell of a tool for aggregating news stories that you actually want to read from a variety of sources. It makes it pretty easy to pick up stories as you want to read them. Good stuff.
----------------------------------------------
I always find it interesting when a handful of dedicated researchers can create a model that the government cannot. Is it a reflection of having lots of data transparently available, or the result of unfettered effort? At any rate, it's good to know that some people are trying to crunch the numbers.
I'd be interested in knowing the total number of data points they used in constructing their model, and it's efficacy for 2011 predictions.
----------------------------------------------
I would like to know how the sample questions are set up. If the questions says "Do you support reducing military spending by virtue of bringing the troops home?", then most people would say yes. It seems a bit strange that more than 70% of Republicans would want reduced military spending instead of grinding the ax on social spending, but whatever.
----------------------------------------------
Ya think? Of course money is being wasted in Iraq.. It's also being wasted here. Where's the accountability report for that?
----------------------------------------------
Also not really a surprise. The real surprise to me is that the offensive in the drug war is still so staunch when all the evidence says that cracking down on it with prison sentences and such is ineffective. Not to mention the audacity of criminalizing acts which may only serve to harm that individual rather than endangering others.
----------------------------------------------
I always find it interesting when a handful of dedicated researchers can create a model that the government cannot. Is it a reflection of having lots of data transparently available, or the result of unfettered effort? At any rate, it's good to know that some people are trying to crunch the numbers.
I'd be interested in knowing the total number of data points they used in constructing their model, and it's efficacy for 2011 predictions.
----------------------------------------------
I would like to know how the sample questions are set up. If the questions says "Do you support reducing military spending by virtue of bringing the troops home?", then most people would say yes. It seems a bit strange that more than 70% of Republicans would want reduced military spending instead of grinding the ax on social spending, but whatever.
----------------------------------------------
Ya think? Of course money is being wasted in Iraq.. It's also being wasted here. Where's the accountability report for that?
----------------------------------------------
Also not really a surprise. The real surprise to me is that the offensive in the drug war is still so staunch when all the evidence says that cracking down on it with prison sentences and such is ineffective. Not to mention the audacity of criminalizing acts which may only serve to harm that individual rather than endangering others.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)