I just read an article in the Times the other day regarding how American schools are no longer teaching cursive handwriting. The author made two points to bemoan this loss: 1. how will kids be able to read the original Declaration of Independence, and 2. how will people sign their names?
First of all, in the interest of full disclosure, I have always despised cursive. It is an invention that came about in the mid century to replace an older "archaic" form of handwriting that was supposed to be easier to learn and easier to read. The concept was to make all handwriting look the same. Each letter was supposed to be constructed identically by each individual in such a way as to remove anything remotely individual. This means that even signatures were supposed to be non-individualistic, which of course is a legal problem. More on this a bit later.
In the seventh grade my science teacher required everyone to take copious notes and then turn in a finished notebook at the end of the term. My hand would ache and I simply could not keep up. Cursive handwriting was slow and difficult for me to master. After a few dozen pages, I realized I couldn't read what I had written. I decided to change my own handwriting. I sat down and developed a new style of written alphabet full of flourishes and interesting shapes. Then, after a week or so of honing, the curly-cues and difficult line-work smoothed out. It was a form of printing with stylized letters. By forcing myself to write in this new alphabet, and only in this new form, I completely changed the way I wrote from that day forward. Although my handwriting was eventually reshaped by tedious lettering assignments in Architectural Calligraphy, many of the letter shapes have remained in my day-to-day hand writing.
Back to the article: The Declaration of Independence is not written in cursive. It is written in a form of calligraphy where many of the lower case letters are connected to one another but many are not. It is very readable because most of the letters are simply italicized versions of present-day fonts with obvious exceptions being the letters "s", "r" and the capital "Q". Even someone who has never once seen these versions of these particular letters can figure out what the document says, just as someone in present day can understand the old word: "Congreff" even though the s's look like lower case f's. As for the signatures on the document, they are as different from each other as they are from the text itself.
This leads me to the second point of the article, that kids won't learn how to sign their names. A signature is an individual, stylized piece of writing. If the students learned cursive the way it was meant to be taught, their signatures would, in no way, be individualistic. I can recognize my own signature in a split second. Yet, my signature is really made up of those stylized printed letters and not cursive. Hand printing is still an individualistic style of writing, regardless of whether or not the letters connect to each other. The human hand will always make little movements with repetitive use that are markedly individual.
So I say, let this old form of handwriting simply die out and fade away. It has served it's usefulness and has become passe. Just as the older forms of writing have passed on, this one should be allowed to disappear. Sure, we can feel its loss, just as some are complaining about old incandescent light bulbs going away, but we shouldn't cling to it just because it may have had a purpose one time, long ago. Let it go people. Let it go.
Friday, August 12, 2011
Monday, July 25, 2011
on Evolution
Score one for science and zero for creationism in Texas. The Texas Board of Education voted unanimously to reject any creationist supplements to its science curriculum. This is quite a change for this notoriously "right wing" school board.
Evolution has been coming under attack ever since Darwin (and his predecessors) proposed the concept. The fight between teaching school children we were created by magic or we were created by a complex biological function seemed to finally come to an end with the Scopes "Monkey" Trial. Evolution won.
When I was in high school, I saw a film which tried to explain evolution. The animation presented showed a fish that sprouted legs, walked onto the beech, then became a lizard which eventually turned into a bird. The animation took about three minutes. Despite the fact the narrator said this conversion process took millions of years to accomplish, most of the other kids sitting at my table shook their heads and whispered things like, "I don't believe a fish can turn into a lizard", or "I've never seen a fish jump out of the ocean and turn into a bird". Although the biology teacher was adept at his subject, I really don't think he was ever able to fully explain evolution to these kids. And I believe he was probably better at it than the majority of teachers out there, which may explain why so little of the population understands the theory today, or even what the word "theory" actually means.
Too much CSI has dumbed down the word "theory", making it something like a shot in the dark or merely a guess. I'm not over exaggerating the importance of Darwin's theory when I state it is the underpinning of all our understanding of biology. Evolution is the umbrella process that incorporates "survival of the fittest", "natural selection", and "mutation". Without those parts, biology is relegated to "it works by magic".
So I celebrate the Texas Board of Education and hope the teachers really teach the theory so that kids can actually learn it and understand it. Otherwise in a few short years we're going to see more polls showing the American people overwhelmingly believe magic is the best way to explain our origins.
Evolution has been coming under attack ever since Darwin (and his predecessors) proposed the concept. The fight between teaching school children we were created by magic or we were created by a complex biological function seemed to finally come to an end with the Scopes "Monkey" Trial. Evolution won.
When I was in high school, I saw a film which tried to explain evolution. The animation presented showed a fish that sprouted legs, walked onto the beech, then became a lizard which eventually turned into a bird. The animation took about three minutes. Despite the fact the narrator said this conversion process took millions of years to accomplish, most of the other kids sitting at my table shook their heads and whispered things like, "I don't believe a fish can turn into a lizard", or "I've never seen a fish jump out of the ocean and turn into a bird". Although the biology teacher was adept at his subject, I really don't think he was ever able to fully explain evolution to these kids. And I believe he was probably better at it than the majority of teachers out there, which may explain why so little of the population understands the theory today, or even what the word "theory" actually means.
Too much CSI has dumbed down the word "theory", making it something like a shot in the dark or merely a guess. I'm not over exaggerating the importance of Darwin's theory when I state it is the underpinning of all our understanding of biology. Evolution is the umbrella process that incorporates "survival of the fittest", "natural selection", and "mutation". Without those parts, biology is relegated to "it works by magic".
So I celebrate the Texas Board of Education and hope the teachers really teach the theory so that kids can actually learn it and understand it. Otherwise in a few short years we're going to see more polls showing the American people overwhelmingly believe magic is the best way to explain our origins.
Monday, July 18, 2011
on Ghettos
When Robert and I, along with our friends Jeff & Corie, visited Venice, I wanted to spend time roaming around the original Ghetto, the very place where the name came from. It was an enclave of Jewish people who had been compelled to live in a particular area by the Venetian Republic. I was out of luck however, because it was a Saturday and everything was closed for Shabbat.
Forced segregation is one thing, but many different types of people purposely choose to congregate and live in a particular area. There is power in numbers, and being surrounded by people who are similar to you can be empowering and safe.
Back in the 1970's, the city of Washington D.C., our nation's capital, was predominately black. It reached a pinnacle of 71% black just before the 80's came. One area that was probably closer to 90% is the H Street area. In recent years the population has shifted and now whites have taken a slight majority at 51%. H Street is changing. The lower income levels of the population along the street has made for ripe pickings when it comes to cheap property. Recently the city tried to pass ordinances for H Street that would ban chicken wings (because they presumably draw rats and choke dogs) and would remove hair salons from future financial development funds. To most people these two proposed ordinances were racially motivated.
The city has also targeted this area for much development including new sidewalks, decorative street lamps and new street cars. The increased development meant the existing store owners' property taxes increased dramatically. Also, many of the property owners were charged "frontage", meaning they had to pay a fee for every foot of property along the street. These sudden fees and taxes have driven many stores to close. On the other hand nearly twice as many new stores have cropped up along the burgeoning way. Some of the older residents are pointing to these new stores and noting the lighter color of the new store owners' skins. Many older residents bemoan the loss of the familiar neighborhood they grew up in, or raised families in.
It provokes thoughts regarding racism, progress, development, and nostalgia. Is change always good? We would typically look at the new sidewalks, storefronts, etcetera and see it as a good thing, as progress. But what has been lost in order for this progress to be made?
The famous Castro Street in San Francisco has traditionally been home to the LGBT community for decades. I will admit that the sheer freedom I once felt, walking hand in hand down the Castro with Robert, without fear or even any adverse glances, was beyond wonderful. To be surrounded by "people like us", "our own kind" was both emotionally satisfying and thrilling. Despite the differences in political, historical, even sexual concepts, the LGBT was and is a community and you could never find it more visible than in the Castro, with a possible exception of Greenwich Village in NYC.
As the housing prices climbed along the Castro, many older LGBT residents sold and moved to other locations. The city of San Francisco has become a welcoming place, without any need for a ghetto. Gay men and women can walk down most of the city's streets without fear, most of the time. The beauty of the well kept neighborhood is attractive to families and soon many couples with young children were moving in. These families were usually very tolerant of their LGBT neighbors, and wanted to raise their children in a very diverse, open and liberal area. However, the next wave of residents were a bit more conservative. They were looking for a good, clean neighborhood with many amenities, good schools, and a terrific location for commuting to down town.
Along the Castro, for decades, one could find stores with mannequins in the display windows sporting leather harnesses, chains, clamps, tattoos, mohawks, and any number of other accouterments. The LGBT community has been marginalized by society for its sexual orientations, and thereby for its sexual "proclivities". Perhaps as a way to rebel against that marginalization, the community has embraced an "in your face" attitude about sex. As we gain more and more acceptance within the general public, we no longer have such a dire need to rebel. These storefronts are beginning to fade away on their own. However, recently some of the new families moving into the Castro have begun to complain about the displays. Citing their children's impressionable minds, they have demanded that the stores black out their windows or remove any of the "offending" items. This is an effort to "clean up" the street and make it even more family friendly.
And that is how the ghettos disappear. Should we bemoan the loss, or celebrate the progress?
Forced segregation is one thing, but many different types of people purposely choose to congregate and live in a particular area. There is power in numbers, and being surrounded by people who are similar to you can be empowering and safe.
Back in the 1970's, the city of Washington D.C., our nation's capital, was predominately black. It reached a pinnacle of 71% black just before the 80's came. One area that was probably closer to 90% is the H Street area. In recent years the population has shifted and now whites have taken a slight majority at 51%. H Street is changing. The lower income levels of the population along the street has made for ripe pickings when it comes to cheap property. Recently the city tried to pass ordinances for H Street that would ban chicken wings (because they presumably draw rats and choke dogs) and would remove hair salons from future financial development funds. To most people these two proposed ordinances were racially motivated.
The city has also targeted this area for much development including new sidewalks, decorative street lamps and new street cars. The increased development meant the existing store owners' property taxes increased dramatically. Also, many of the property owners were charged "frontage", meaning they had to pay a fee for every foot of property along the street. These sudden fees and taxes have driven many stores to close. On the other hand nearly twice as many new stores have cropped up along the burgeoning way. Some of the older residents are pointing to these new stores and noting the lighter color of the new store owners' skins. Many older residents bemoan the loss of the familiar neighborhood they grew up in, or raised families in.
It provokes thoughts regarding racism, progress, development, and nostalgia. Is change always good? We would typically look at the new sidewalks, storefronts, etcetera and see it as a good thing, as progress. But what has been lost in order for this progress to be made?
The famous Castro Street in San Francisco has traditionally been home to the LGBT community for decades. I will admit that the sheer freedom I once felt, walking hand in hand down the Castro with Robert, without fear or even any adverse glances, was beyond wonderful. To be surrounded by "people like us", "our own kind" was both emotionally satisfying and thrilling. Despite the differences in political, historical, even sexual concepts, the LGBT was and is a community and you could never find it more visible than in the Castro, with a possible exception of Greenwich Village in NYC.
As the housing prices climbed along the Castro, many older LGBT residents sold and moved to other locations. The city of San Francisco has become a welcoming place, without any need for a ghetto. Gay men and women can walk down most of the city's streets without fear, most of the time. The beauty of the well kept neighborhood is attractive to families and soon many couples with young children were moving in. These families were usually very tolerant of their LGBT neighbors, and wanted to raise their children in a very diverse, open and liberal area. However, the next wave of residents were a bit more conservative. They were looking for a good, clean neighborhood with many amenities, good schools, and a terrific location for commuting to down town.
Along the Castro, for decades, one could find stores with mannequins in the display windows sporting leather harnesses, chains, clamps, tattoos, mohawks, and any number of other accouterments. The LGBT community has been marginalized by society for its sexual orientations, and thereby for its sexual "proclivities". Perhaps as a way to rebel against that marginalization, the community has embraced an "in your face" attitude about sex. As we gain more and more acceptance within the general public, we no longer have such a dire need to rebel. These storefronts are beginning to fade away on their own. However, recently some of the new families moving into the Castro have begun to complain about the displays. Citing their children's impressionable minds, they have demanded that the stores black out their windows or remove any of the "offending" items. This is an effort to "clean up" the street and make it even more family friendly.
And that is how the ghettos disappear. Should we bemoan the loss, or celebrate the progress?
Tuesday, July 12, 2011
on Titania
Here's a quick quiz: What substance makes your smile brighter, your skin clearer, your paintings more colorful, your memory larger, and your air less polluted? The answer is Titania!
Titania is actually Titanium Dioxide. Titanium is a very tough metal that can withstand extreme heat and abuse, which is why it is the metal of choice for the space shuttle. The human body doesn't seem to reject Titanium very often which is why it is also the metal of choice for joint replacements. Titanium Dioxide is a very special substance that can be produced in eight different variables, some by adding immense pressure and some in more synthetic ways. However it is created, Titania is all around us, in most of the products we use.
Pigment White number 6 is called Titanium White, and what any painter will tell you is indespensible when creating a masterpiece. In any food where the manufacturer wants the color to really stand out, or wants white, the color is called E171, or Titanium Food Color. It is used to make plastics white, which was a huge breakthrough, allowing labels and logos to be printed directly onto plastic containers instead of making paper labels.
The sunscreen we apply to our skins, to protect us from UV light, has some zinc oxide in it which reflects the sun's rays, but mostly it utilizes Titania to block the absorption of the UV rays into the skin.
The toothpaste we use is typically white. Now this makes intuitive sense in a psychological way because who wants to brush their teeth with something black, green, or brown? However, Titania has a really wonderful quality humans have been taking advantage of a lot lately. It can take UV light and convert it to oxygen! Yep, it's an oxygen generator. This is how it turns your teeth white, as long as you can somehow guarantee your teeth are exposed to UV rays.
Oxygena is an Italian produced ceramic floor (and wall) tile that utilizes Titania in its glazing. The tiles can actually produce oxygen, making the air a bit fresher around them, again as long as they are exposed to UV light. In fact, because they produce oxygen, any pollution that has accumulated on them will easily wash away because the oxygen doesn't allow the pollution to stick. In this way Titania has been dubbed a "pollution scrubber". There's even a brand of stucco, the exterior cementitious coating building material, that utilizes Titania to "self clean" its surface. Imagine, buildings that self clean themselves, remove pollution buildup and add oxygen back into the air!
The Japanese have successfully used Titania to trap electrical impulses and create computer data memory at an extremely high efficiency level. Is there anything this substance can't be used for?
Titania uses a process called PhotoCatalysm, in other words, it uses the light energy to break apart air molecules to produce oxygen. This process of light energy conversion is being looked at by inventors as a possible source for energy production.
Titania, the miracle metal!
Titania is actually Titanium Dioxide. Titanium is a very tough metal that can withstand extreme heat and abuse, which is why it is the metal of choice for the space shuttle. The human body doesn't seem to reject Titanium very often which is why it is also the metal of choice for joint replacements. Titanium Dioxide is a very special substance that can be produced in eight different variables, some by adding immense pressure and some in more synthetic ways. However it is created, Titania is all around us, in most of the products we use.
Pigment White number 6 is called Titanium White, and what any painter will tell you is indespensible when creating a masterpiece. In any food where the manufacturer wants the color to really stand out, or wants white, the color is called E171, or Titanium Food Color. It is used to make plastics white, which was a huge breakthrough, allowing labels and logos to be printed directly onto plastic containers instead of making paper labels.
The sunscreen we apply to our skins, to protect us from UV light, has some zinc oxide in it which reflects the sun's rays, but mostly it utilizes Titania to block the absorption of the UV rays into the skin.
The toothpaste we use is typically white. Now this makes intuitive sense in a psychological way because who wants to brush their teeth with something black, green, or brown? However, Titania has a really wonderful quality humans have been taking advantage of a lot lately. It can take UV light and convert it to oxygen! Yep, it's an oxygen generator. This is how it turns your teeth white, as long as you can somehow guarantee your teeth are exposed to UV rays.
Oxygena is an Italian produced ceramic floor (and wall) tile that utilizes Titania in its glazing. The tiles can actually produce oxygen, making the air a bit fresher around them, again as long as they are exposed to UV light. In fact, because they produce oxygen, any pollution that has accumulated on them will easily wash away because the oxygen doesn't allow the pollution to stick. In this way Titania has been dubbed a "pollution scrubber". There's even a brand of stucco, the exterior cementitious coating building material, that utilizes Titania to "self clean" its surface. Imagine, buildings that self clean themselves, remove pollution buildup and add oxygen back into the air!
The Japanese have successfully used Titania to trap electrical impulses and create computer data memory at an extremely high efficiency level. Is there anything this substance can't be used for?
Titania uses a process called PhotoCatalysm, in other words, it uses the light energy to break apart air molecules to produce oxygen. This process of light energy conversion is being looked at by inventors as a possible source for energy production.
Titania, the miracle metal!
Saturday, June 18, 2011
on Gay Russians
At last year's Cleveland International Film Festival a rousing documentary was shown called "Pride" in which the narrator travels to a handful of notoriously anti-gay countries and pro-gay countries to see how they celebrate Gay Pride. Most of the film centers around Russia, Moscow specifically, and a man named Nicholai Aleksev.
In the film the narrator tries to meet Aleksev who then brings together a group of supporters at an undisclosed location. They use covert phone calls with mysterious coded messages just in case they are being recorded or the phones are tapped. They issue a statement to the media they will be organizing a protest in one location, but instead go to another location so they won't get any reporters or secret police showing up. They launch a parade that consists of only a few people with a couple signs, but the parade is over in a minute because they don't want to attract too much attention. It's very cloak and dagger. Watching the film makes one shake their head in shame at how these poor gay rights activists must live in the shadows. The film lauds Aleksev tirelessly; you simply cannot help but sing his praises. And of course we have all read stories of how Moscow wouldn't allow gay marches, etc. so the film rings very true. By the end of the film nearly everyone who was present in the earlier meeting has been arrested for "seeding civil unrest".
I made friends with Aleksev on Facebook so I could show my international support for his cause. That's when things took a strange turn. Amid the fervent supporters I started noticing some detractors, and astonishingly, some of these detractors were Russian. Before he suddenly de-friended them and erased their posts, these detractors claimed they were meeting openly in Moscow and forming distinct political movements which were gaining some traction. They claimed Aleksev was making gay rights all about Aleksev and his cloak and dagger routine was simply an act to gain international support. Aleksev brushed off the complainers as people who didn't have vision, or as simply people who didn't like Aleksev.
Last year, on his Facebook page, Aleksev claimed he was thinking about coming to America. His American fans clamored to be the first ones to welcome him. Then he dramatically claimed he would never set foot in the country because he "hates" America with every 'cell in his body'. He made a number of such statements, but his fans reassured him they would still welcome him and reminded him that American politics don't necessarily reflect the attitudes and beliefs of the people. He finally gave in and decided he would plan a trip to the United States.
Finally, Nicolai Aleksev made his voyage to the U.S., paid for in part by the Human Rights Campaign (HRC) and some Californian gay rights groups. They set up a number of press interviews and a couple of speaking engagements, selling reasonably priced tickets to sell-out crowds. Nicolai "joked" that he was going to enter the country and while at customs he would create a commotion. His American sponsors/handlers asked him not to play around in such a manner, as he could get himself thrown out of the country. He entered quietly and safely.
As he made his way across the country, Aleksev gave interviews, most of which had been previously arranged by his handlers. Everyone counted on Aleksev being extremely outspoken in his views. What they didn't count on was that his views would also be extreme in unexpected ways. His HRC handlers began to terminate the interviews and cut the press junket short, hurriedly rushing him to California and avoiding the rest of America. Rumors began to spread that Aleksev was not only fervent in his support of gay rights, but also a racist, an anti-semite, an anti-Muslim, an anti-American, an anti-anti. He seemed to dislike everyone who was not a white Russian gay male.
When he got to California, Aleksev had grown tired of being told "not to speak". On the day of the big presentation and speech, Aleksev balked and refused to go. He found a few "friends" who took him out on the town to a myriad of gay bars and venues. Then he was asked, perhaps not politely, to pack his bags and go back to Russia. Tickets were refunded. His final parting words were delivered in a couple of interviews where he claimed his HRC handlers had badly managed him, had coerced him into delivering only prepared speeches, and refused to let him have the "freedom of speech" that American's tout so much.
Upon returning to his homeland Aleksev issued statement after statement condemning America and their support of the "evil Israel state". He then said he'd been arrested by secret police and held in a prison in rural Russia, but then the next day he was on a plane to Switzerland. He claimed to be poor, yet he vacationed in Switzerland for three weeks and then moved there at the beginning of 2011. His Facebook page documents at least three separate vacations since that time. It's good work when you can get it. His Facebook page also documents his extremely anti-semitic views, not just political views on the state of Israel, but how Jews ruin the world. He pulls no punches when it comes to his hatred of Americans, Muslims, and Arabs.
Aleksev may have helped the gay rights movement in Russia, or perhaps, as other gay groups in Russia claim, he has hindered them by focusing on getting arrested and making grand speeches which only help to buoy the anti-gay rhetoric of politicians. The New York Times recently called him the "face of gay rights in Russia". This is certainly so since his is the only gay face from Russia we've seen.
In the film the narrator tries to meet Aleksev who then brings together a group of supporters at an undisclosed location. They use covert phone calls with mysterious coded messages just in case they are being recorded or the phones are tapped. They issue a statement to the media they will be organizing a protest in one location, but instead go to another location so they won't get any reporters or secret police showing up. They launch a parade that consists of only a few people with a couple signs, but the parade is over in a minute because they don't want to attract too much attention. It's very cloak and dagger. Watching the film makes one shake their head in shame at how these poor gay rights activists must live in the shadows. The film lauds Aleksev tirelessly; you simply cannot help but sing his praises. And of course we have all read stories of how Moscow wouldn't allow gay marches, etc. so the film rings very true. By the end of the film nearly everyone who was present in the earlier meeting has been arrested for "seeding civil unrest".
I made friends with Aleksev on Facebook so I could show my international support for his cause. That's when things took a strange turn. Amid the fervent supporters I started noticing some detractors, and astonishingly, some of these detractors were Russian. Before he suddenly de-friended them and erased their posts, these detractors claimed they were meeting openly in Moscow and forming distinct political movements which were gaining some traction. They claimed Aleksev was making gay rights all about Aleksev and his cloak and dagger routine was simply an act to gain international support. Aleksev brushed off the complainers as people who didn't have vision, or as simply people who didn't like Aleksev.
Last year, on his Facebook page, Aleksev claimed he was thinking about coming to America. His American fans clamored to be the first ones to welcome him. Then he dramatically claimed he would never set foot in the country because he "hates" America with every 'cell in his body'. He made a number of such statements, but his fans reassured him they would still welcome him and reminded him that American politics don't necessarily reflect the attitudes and beliefs of the people. He finally gave in and decided he would plan a trip to the United States.
Finally, Nicolai Aleksev made his voyage to the U.S., paid for in part by the Human Rights Campaign (HRC) and some Californian gay rights groups. They set up a number of press interviews and a couple of speaking engagements, selling reasonably priced tickets to sell-out crowds. Nicolai "joked" that he was going to enter the country and while at customs he would create a commotion. His American sponsors/handlers asked him not to play around in such a manner, as he could get himself thrown out of the country. He entered quietly and safely.
As he made his way across the country, Aleksev gave interviews, most of which had been previously arranged by his handlers. Everyone counted on Aleksev being extremely outspoken in his views. What they didn't count on was that his views would also be extreme in unexpected ways. His HRC handlers began to terminate the interviews and cut the press junket short, hurriedly rushing him to California and avoiding the rest of America. Rumors began to spread that Aleksev was not only fervent in his support of gay rights, but also a racist, an anti-semite, an anti-Muslim, an anti-American, an anti-anti. He seemed to dislike everyone who was not a white Russian gay male.
When he got to California, Aleksev had grown tired of being told "not to speak". On the day of the big presentation and speech, Aleksev balked and refused to go. He found a few "friends" who took him out on the town to a myriad of gay bars and venues. Then he was asked, perhaps not politely, to pack his bags and go back to Russia. Tickets were refunded. His final parting words were delivered in a couple of interviews where he claimed his HRC handlers had badly managed him, had coerced him into delivering only prepared speeches, and refused to let him have the "freedom of speech" that American's tout so much.
Upon returning to his homeland Aleksev issued statement after statement condemning America and their support of the "evil Israel state". He then said he'd been arrested by secret police and held in a prison in rural Russia, but then the next day he was on a plane to Switzerland. He claimed to be poor, yet he vacationed in Switzerland for three weeks and then moved there at the beginning of 2011. His Facebook page documents at least three separate vacations since that time. It's good work when you can get it. His Facebook page also documents his extremely anti-semitic views, not just political views on the state of Israel, but how Jews ruin the world. He pulls no punches when it comes to his hatred of Americans, Muslims, and Arabs.
Aleksev may have helped the gay rights movement in Russia, or perhaps, as other gay groups in Russia claim, he has hindered them by focusing on getting arrested and making grand speeches which only help to buoy the anti-gay rhetoric of politicians. The New York Times recently called him the "face of gay rights in Russia". This is certainly so since his is the only gay face from Russia we've seen.
Thursday, June 16, 2011
on Karma
Hindus believe that people are born into particular castes: the Brahmins or Priests, the Kshatriyas or Rulers, the Vaisyas or Skilled Tradespersons, Merchants and Minor Officials, the Sudras or Unskilled Laborers and the Pariahs "Harijans" or Outcastes. You must do the best that you can with your lot in life. If you are born a Vaisya, you can be a merchant, but be the best merchant possible, and even be a rich and successful merchant. However, you are not supposed to cross over to another caste. For instance, if you are a merchant, you are not supposed to desire to be a priest, that would generate Karma. If you accept your lot in life, be happy and don't strive to be something else, you will eliminate Karma and make your future lives better. If you live your life without generating Karma, then your next life may be in a higher caste.
This goes against the American grain. In the U.S. we are told as children that we can be anything we want to be as long as we have the will and determination. We can even become President of the United States! For many people this concept develops itself into a constant dissatisfaction with their lot in life. Let's face it, only one person, up to now always white male, gets to be the President every four to eight years. That leaves an awful lot of people who will simply not be President.
I'm not advocating giving up and rolling over when conditions are truly bad. Just think about where you are in life and ask yourself if you'll ever be satisfied. Have you always told yourself, "I'm just working at this job as a stepping stone to something higher"? Of course you have. Very few people are at the "top of their game". Once we have a supervisor position we are taught, even by our own bosses, that if we aren't shooting for upper management then we just aren't "motivated". We must always desire to "better ourselves" and "move up the ladder".
I was at a dinner a while back when a dear relative announced after all the years of trying, she was finally pregnant. Both her mother and her mother-in-law openly wept at the "miracle". It had finally happened. God had finally blessed them with a grandchild. However, not more than a couple of minutes had passed when the mother-in-law announced that twins run on her side of the family. Both of the mothers instantly burst into exclamations of how truly wonderful it would be if only they were blessed with twin grandchildren instead of just one. I was appalled. Their brief moment of happiness was immediately quashed with the instant desire for something better.
My father, as a senior retiree, was invited to take part in a project put on by the police of Eugene, Oregon. He and a group of fellow seniors would walk around the downtown malls and write "tickets" on any vehicle parked in a handicap space without a visible permit. The tickets were not-so-friendly reminders and carried no actual weight, but it scared the bejeebus out of people. My father got huge satisfaction out of it. However, once the ticketed person realized it wasn't an actual ticket, they usually threw the paper away. My father decided to start wearing a jacket which looked similar to a police uniform. He kept asking for a shirt that read "police", but of course they kept refusing him. Eventually he quit the group. Just issuing a reminder wasn't enough for him; he yearned for real power.
I think we have all, from time to time, felt inferior to others. I don't make very much money, so I feel slightly inferior to rich people. I don't have an expensive education, so I can get a bit inferior-feeling when surrounded by Harvard and Yale alumni. Of course this is ingrained into us. The colleges themselves drum the concept of superiority into their students, who are paying for the education and therefor want something in return for their money. If the student is going to spend a great deal of money, more than someone going to a "lesser" college, they want to feel they are getting the superior education. I've been in a room where people are discussing a not-present colleague and I've been absolutely flabbergasted when they say, "yes, but she went to Cleveland State", so obviously her education doesn't count for much.
All this striving, inferiority, superiority, power, yearning, is creating so much karma in the world.
My mother used to work for Key Bank. She worked and worked, put up with office politics, suffered through strategic realignments as her branch was bought and sold several times, and always she had a goal in mind: one day she would retire and take it easy, or maybe travel, or maybe take up some kind of hobby. She was never satisfied, always working for that elusive future. When my father retired early, it forced her to put off retirement for a few more years than she had planned. Then she developed breast cancer and passed away. There never was a retirement, an easy time, a travel plan, or a new found hobby. She spent her life striving for something better that never came. So much karma.
So ask yourself, "when will I be satisfied?" Is it in the future somewhere?
This goes against the American grain. In the U.S. we are told as children that we can be anything we want to be as long as we have the will and determination. We can even become President of the United States! For many people this concept develops itself into a constant dissatisfaction with their lot in life. Let's face it, only one person, up to now always white male, gets to be the President every four to eight years. That leaves an awful lot of people who will simply not be President.
I'm not advocating giving up and rolling over when conditions are truly bad. Just think about where you are in life and ask yourself if you'll ever be satisfied. Have you always told yourself, "I'm just working at this job as a stepping stone to something higher"? Of course you have. Very few people are at the "top of their game". Once we have a supervisor position we are taught, even by our own bosses, that if we aren't shooting for upper management then we just aren't "motivated". We must always desire to "better ourselves" and "move up the ladder".
I was at a dinner a while back when a dear relative announced after all the years of trying, she was finally pregnant. Both her mother and her mother-in-law openly wept at the "miracle". It had finally happened. God had finally blessed them with a grandchild. However, not more than a couple of minutes had passed when the mother-in-law announced that twins run on her side of the family. Both of the mothers instantly burst into exclamations of how truly wonderful it would be if only they were blessed with twin grandchildren instead of just one. I was appalled. Their brief moment of happiness was immediately quashed with the instant desire for something better.
My father, as a senior retiree, was invited to take part in a project put on by the police of Eugene, Oregon. He and a group of fellow seniors would walk around the downtown malls and write "tickets" on any vehicle parked in a handicap space without a visible permit. The tickets were not-so-friendly reminders and carried no actual weight, but it scared the bejeebus out of people. My father got huge satisfaction out of it. However, once the ticketed person realized it wasn't an actual ticket, they usually threw the paper away. My father decided to start wearing a jacket which looked similar to a police uniform. He kept asking for a shirt that read "police", but of course they kept refusing him. Eventually he quit the group. Just issuing a reminder wasn't enough for him; he yearned for real power.
I think we have all, from time to time, felt inferior to others. I don't make very much money, so I feel slightly inferior to rich people. I don't have an expensive education, so I can get a bit inferior-feeling when surrounded by Harvard and Yale alumni. Of course this is ingrained into us. The colleges themselves drum the concept of superiority into their students, who are paying for the education and therefor want something in return for their money. If the student is going to spend a great deal of money, more than someone going to a "lesser" college, they want to feel they are getting the superior education. I've been in a room where people are discussing a not-present colleague and I've been absolutely flabbergasted when they say, "yes, but she went to Cleveland State", so obviously her education doesn't count for much.
All this striving, inferiority, superiority, power, yearning, is creating so much karma in the world.
My mother used to work for Key Bank. She worked and worked, put up with office politics, suffered through strategic realignments as her branch was bought and sold several times, and always she had a goal in mind: one day she would retire and take it easy, or maybe travel, or maybe take up some kind of hobby. She was never satisfied, always working for that elusive future. When my father retired early, it forced her to put off retirement for a few more years than she had planned. Then she developed breast cancer and passed away. There never was a retirement, an easy time, a travel plan, or a new found hobby. She spent her life striving for something better that never came. So much karma.
So ask yourself, "when will I be satisfied?" Is it in the future somewhere?
Sunday, June 5, 2011
on Movies
Movie Review time: (warning, do give away some pertinent details of these movies which could spoil the film for you. I won't explicitly tell you the ending, but many of the details lead directly to the endings)
Over the last few days I have seen The Adjustment Bureau, Limitless, and Source Code.
The Adjustment Bureau: 3 out of 5 stars.
Matt Damon stars as a rising politician who has a chance encounter with a lovely woman that changes his mind about a speech, thereby altering his own fate. A mysterious group of men control fate, and have set up this "chance encounter". However, due to an error, he runs into the woman again and this sets off a chain of reactions in time. The Adjustment Bureau must correct the time line by keeping Damon and the woman apart. As the old saying goes, 'you cannot un-ring a bell', so Damon is rightfully aggravated and decides to fight the "powers that be".
The movie plods along through the encounters between Damon and the woman and the pace doesn't really pick up until Damon discovers what the Bureau does. Even then we must watch as Damon gets more and more frustrated. Finally the movie and the characters take off when Damon decides to fight fate. The message of self-determination versus prewritten fate is heavy handed but necessary to the plot. The Christian demagoguery is a bit overdone and by the end of the movie everyone should know what will happen or they just haven't been paying attention.
Limitless: 4 out of 5 stars.
The Hangover's Bradley Cooper stars as a deadbeat writer who's laziness and procrastination drives everything away from him. His "dealer" former brother-in-law slips him a dose of a new experimental drug which stimulates the "unused" portion of the brain, turning a deadbeat into an intellectual and financial genius. The memory call-ups seem a bit like the television show "Chuck", while the concept of the drug's side effects and waring-off symptoms is reminiscent of the novel "Flowers for Algernon".
Cooper does a pretty good job being the quasi-hipster turned into the Wall Street douchebag. The story is fairly well thought out and has a bit of a surprise ending.
Source Code: 4 out of 5 stars.
Cow-eyed Jake Gyllenhaal plays a man who must use 8 minutes of the past to stop a train from blowing up. Each time he returns to the train he gathers just a little bit more information. Of course his mission is derailed (pun intended) when he begins to care about one of the passengers and about his own mysterious past. The script is well crafted and the mysteries are layered over themselves. The big boss Ruttledge is the only down-side to the film as his acting seems stilted and amateurish. The end of the film probably creates a few more questions than it should, but time travel/alternate realities tend to do that.
Over the last few days I have seen The Adjustment Bureau, Limitless, and Source Code.
The Adjustment Bureau: 3 out of 5 stars.
Matt Damon stars as a rising politician who has a chance encounter with a lovely woman that changes his mind about a speech, thereby altering his own fate. A mysterious group of men control fate, and have set up this "chance encounter". However, due to an error, he runs into the woman again and this sets off a chain of reactions in time. The Adjustment Bureau must correct the time line by keeping Damon and the woman apart. As the old saying goes, 'you cannot un-ring a bell', so Damon is rightfully aggravated and decides to fight the "powers that be".
The movie plods along through the encounters between Damon and the woman and the pace doesn't really pick up until Damon discovers what the Bureau does. Even then we must watch as Damon gets more and more frustrated. Finally the movie and the characters take off when Damon decides to fight fate. The message of self-determination versus prewritten fate is heavy handed but necessary to the plot. The Christian demagoguery is a bit overdone and by the end of the movie everyone should know what will happen or they just haven't been paying attention.
Limitless: 4 out of 5 stars.
The Hangover's Bradley Cooper stars as a deadbeat writer who's laziness and procrastination drives everything away from him. His "dealer" former brother-in-law slips him a dose of a new experimental drug which stimulates the "unused" portion of the brain, turning a deadbeat into an intellectual and financial genius. The memory call-ups seem a bit like the television show "Chuck", while the concept of the drug's side effects and waring-off symptoms is reminiscent of the novel "Flowers for Algernon".
Cooper does a pretty good job being the quasi-hipster turned into the Wall Street douchebag. The story is fairly well thought out and has a bit of a surprise ending.
Source Code: 4 out of 5 stars.
Cow-eyed Jake Gyllenhaal plays a man who must use 8 minutes of the past to stop a train from blowing up. Each time he returns to the train he gathers just a little bit more information. Of course his mission is derailed (pun intended) when he begins to care about one of the passengers and about his own mysterious past. The script is well crafted and the mysteries are layered over themselves. The big boss Ruttledge is the only down-side to the film as his acting seems stilted and amateurish. The end of the film probably creates a few more questions than it should, but time travel/alternate realities tend to do that.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)