On Rain

The rains have finally come to Tucson and as always their much needed water also brings mayhem and destruction. I ended up stranded at work for about 2 hours when the rain all of a sudden poured down in a mighty deluge obscuring all vision and rendering umbrellas and windshield wipers useless. I would have been SOL in a car so riding home on my bike was literally suicidal; aside from the high winds and raindrops that feel like little fists, the Tucson bike lanes double as storm drains. But it gets better, the woefully inadequate drainage system meant that the sidewalk was also submerged after a few moments. One of my coworkers regarded my reluctance to bike home in those conditions as foolish, claiming "a little water never hurt anyone". This was of course before some poor guy tried to bike across the street and was knocked down by a wave from a semi.
That aside, when you're not stranded because of the rain or suffering from power outages, the monsoon season is an amazing spectacle to behold. The awesome power of the rain itself is astounding, as is its quick and brutal nature. It unleashes its might upon the earth, uprooting trees and turning major streets into impassable rivers, then stops as quickly as it started. It may even rain heavily while the sun is still shining brightly, or the rain may pour relentlessly on one side of a house while the other side remains utterly dry.
I have been in over twenty countries and about ten states but I've never encountered rain that smells as good as here. Even the sound of rain isn't as good as it is here. Everywhere else is used to it, the grass and trees expect the rain and take it for granted. In the desert, the very ground rejoices in creaks and hisses as it slakes its thirst. Though it is blessed with overabundance it cannot consume all the water at once and the rest is washed away where it will all be soaked up by the desert floor many miles away. Other places are frequently visited by rain clouds which gently and delicately shower the landscape. Rarely is there lightning or thunder in these places. Thor was the mighty lightning god of the Vikings but he clearly never displayed his true strength in Sweden. His arsenal can, however, be realized in Tucson where giant arcs of lightning stretch across the sky and bombard the ground relentlessly while thunder rumbles around you constantly; each clap replaced by a new one before subsiding. In these moments, all the science of lightning and the dry safety of one's home is forgotten as the storms instill awe and humbling admiration of the forces of nature.

Mystery and Horror

The Princess of Burundi by Kjell Eriksson. Murder mysteries are not my cup of tea so I can't really compare it to anything else in the genre, but overall it was a good read. The main reason for me reading it in the first place was because it takes place in Uppsala. There is that nice subtle satisfaction of being able to visualize exactly where one of the characters is in a certain scene. Little things like the person who found the body lived in Feifei's apartment complex or the killer walking past the theater where I saw Harry Potter. That didn't happen nearly as much as I had expected, though, since most of the story takes place in the industrial sector of Uppsala which is evidently very shady and dangerous (by Swedish standards, I assume). The reason I never spent much time there was because it was literally on the wrong side of the tracks; I almost never ventured south of the train station except for my residence permit or capoeira. According to the book there are two Uppsalas: the academic, clean one (where I spent almost all my time) and the uneducated, brutish and gritty side full of immigrants and thuggish high school dropouts. That said, I do kind of wish I had made time to go visit the southern part of Uppsala, just to appreciate the town I love that much more. But anyway, the characters were an interesting bunch, again they live in an Uppsala I am not familiar with though the personal issues they dealt with were much like those of the Swedes I did talk to.

The Descent with Shauna Macdonald and Natalie Mendoza. Ah, now here's a good horror movie. Gets you with the gore, the jump factor of monsters suddenly appearing, the psychological terror of the situation and it leaves you wondering what actually happened at the end. Props to the director on all counts. Now as for the underlying themes and messages in the film, one can go on and on in many different directions. I'll just throw in my opinion that the fact that it is an all female cast is very important especially when considering the mostly male monsters they are fighting. But rather than going for the beeline militant feminist "men are monsters and women are trapped in a man's world" theme I think it warns against this very concept. When it becomes a matter of life and death, the women become more and more monstrous themselves until their own behavior and actions become worse than the monsters they are fighting (who are, from their perspective, only trying to survive against hostile creatures in their home). It's not unlike the question of whether or not female combatants are really more vicious than their male counterparts or if it's only because of the contrast of the peaceful, nurturing female archetype.
I also must mention the blooper reel was quite funny, particularly since you don't get many funny moments in horror movies. Had I watched the opening bit of the blooper reel before the rest of the movie, I would never have been able to take the monsters seriously.

And two interesting facts:
-the MVD at Broadmont can give you a new driver's license within ten minutes of you walking in the door.
-Cops on bicycles use their handcuffs to lock their bikes.

Evolution's Starfish

Blindsight by Peter Watts. Yet another excellent read from one of my favorite authors. The plot and concepts would be scary on their own even if Watts hadn't done his homework and based nearly all of it on real data. The book is a bit dense in the technical jargon and I admittedly had to read it with my browser on Wikipedia just so I could figure out what the hell the characters were talking about. The thought that went into some of the ideas that were very prevalent in the book is surprisingly detailed and the exposition of one aspect in particular is so fascinating in and of itself that it might merit a movie.
There were aspects to it that reminded me of Ian McDonald's Evolution's Shore, (which I regret not having written a review of) particularly the notions about alien thoughts and some aspects of the physiology, not to mention the whole unstoppable alien thing. But whereas McDonald's story is cautiously optimistic, Blindsight has a burningly calm pessimism which can only be described as 'Wattsian'. Just as a final comparison, I enjoy how Watts described the aliens, even though he laments how he "crapped out on the whole unlike-anything-you've-ever-seen front" as opposed to McDonald's once-too-often claim that the aliens were utterly indescribable.
There were a couple of interesting parallels to the Rifters trilogy which make me wonder about what Peter Watts is like in person. I suspect he secretly wanted to be a psych major in college given the degree to which the plots and character development in both the trilogy and this book hinge on cutting edge theories about the mind. He especially seems to like sociopaths. If Watts is as pessimistic as his writings suggest I would probably not be able to stand an intellectual discussion with him, which is rather saddening. Lastly, according to his website's timeline, Blindsight does not take place in the same continuity as the Rifters trilogy. But the settings are sufficiently far apart chronologically where it could be possible. Not to mention there's a single, wonderfully sly quote that hints that they might be part of the same microcosm.

Randall can kiss my ass.

Transformers with Shia Labeouf and Peter Cullen. The naysayers will say nay and forever hate upon Micheal Bay for sins of the past, but I liked this film a lot. The action was definitely not lacking in any form, the balance between human screen time and robot screen time was struck rather well. The only major flaw I can see is the lack of character development of the Transformers, especially the Decepticons. Now granted, Megatron has never been the most subtle and complex character, but a deeper look at his personality would have helped quite a bit. The plot was not as shabby and hard to follow as some people think (I am referring to Slate who guffawed at how unnecessarily obvious the expositions were and then complained about how they didn't know what was going on) but it is entirely independent of previous Transformers franchises so you don't have to be a fanboy to get what's going on. There were several things I did not expect which happened in the movie, namely the human body count, which as Keith pointed out was simply unheard of in previous Transformer incarnations. I was pleasantly surprised by how not helpless the humans were in the movie. Seeing A-10's and F-22's duking it out with Decepticons was pretty sweet, I gotta say. Yes, there were some cheesy lines thrown in that were very blatant nods to G1, but if they weren't there you'd secretly wish they were. It is a summer blockbuster movie and as such you can't expect a deep and profound plot or a mind warping psychological thriller. It's a very well done movie for what it is and I'm definitely excited about the eventual sequels.

King

1408 with John Cusack. A very nice scary movie. The people next to me seemed to disagree, but I think people nowadays think horror movies aren't any good unless you have things jumping out at you every eight seconds or show someone ripped apart with power tools. It was more psychologically terrifying and used the jumping moments to augment the fear rather than relying on them exclusively. What I thought was a very nice touch was one particular scene where Cusack's character is trapped on a ledge on the outside of the building simply because that's almost exactly like a recurring nightmare I had as a child. But as Keith observed, Stephen King presents everyone with their nightmares and if he hasn't yet, he just hasn't gotten around to it. The statement near the end of the movie that it's all a matter of free will was especially chilling. The only thing I was left wondering was how much of what happened in the room actually happened and what was an illusion caused by the room. The ending seemed to answer the question but a lot of the stuff on the tape would still suggest it wasn't all real.

De är lustiga att se...

Due to the awesomeness of my first Midsummer last year, I have decided that this is a holiday worth celebrating no matter where you are. I did have to alter the act of celebrating this day, though, mainly because no one else would give a damn enough to have a proper party on a Thursday but also because the day that the sun is up the longest is traditionally condemned in Tucson rather than celebrated. As a result, the fun times that were had were coincidentally at and around the same time and I retroactively declare them to be Midsummer celebrations.
Things of note from a Arizonan Midsummer:
-Judging from the number of kids from Sabino, I'm going to have to hang out at O'Malley's more often.
-There are at least two completely different ways to make a Polar Bear.
-One can still have a good time camping even without hot dogs or a fire.
-It's a sad thing when most people's idea of camping involves an RV.
-The forest rangers' device for putting out campfires would be a big hit at pool parties.
-People are more uncomfortable talking about the night sky than they are about sharing racy stories.
-Truth or Dare becomes Truth or Truth when too dark to see meets too drunk to walk.
-My brother and I are apparently the only two people on Earth who eat eggs over hard. (and a thank you to Keith for introducing me to the arguably best way to cook eggs)

And in honor of Swedish Midsommar, a series of photos from my year abroad that for various reasons didn't make it into the collection the first time around.

Fjortisar

One of the things I've noticed in my interactions with my coworkers is how I have not changed so terribly much from high school. In high school, for the most part, quality social interactions with was difficult with many people. I figured it was because I was socially inept (which I still may very well be) and not that it was any fault of theirs. This was slightly less so my freshman year of college and my sophomore year it seemed to vanish entirely. Of course that might have just been because I was in another country and half expected things to go back to the way it was once I got back to the U of A. And as it turned out my first semester was nearly all GedEd classes full of freshmen and my social skills were just like they were in high school. The next semester then brought classes all but devoid of freshmen and my ability to talk to people magically improved again. The people at work are no exception to this trend, the majority of them are either still in high school or just graduated and getting to know them and talk with them has been slow work. And even then I get the unshakable feeling that it is only my age that keeps them from ignoring me entirely.
I won't make some sweeping dismissive claim that every awkward or failed social interaction in my past is a result of the other person being a high schooler but it does seem there is a pattern here. While I still have a long way to go before I'm the confident socialite I'd like to be, I think it's fair to say that high schoolers/college freshmen and I tend not to mesh well even when I was younger.

Pirates of the Caribbean 3: At World's End with Johnny Depp and Keira Knightley. I went in to the theater expecting very little since I didn't enjoy the first one very much and was unfortunately not surprised by the outcome. As I understand it, whatever your feelings on the second movie were, it will be exactly the same for the third. So while it was agreed that rescuing Jack Sparrow was way too easy, it was ultimately necessary because focusing on one plot line for too long would have crowded out all the other ones they insisted on including. One positive thing I will say is that I was wary of them bringing back Barbossa but not making him a central character, but was glad to see that he was given lots of due screen time. All of the characters were given their fair share of screen time, actually. I guess the best thing you can say about the movie is that it allows for a lot of character development but at the utter expense of plot structure.

Girl with a Pearl Earring with Scarlett Johansson and Colin Firth. The plot itself is interesting but nothing spectacular; the fact that the created a movie as a backstory for a painting was pretty cool. The truly amazing thing about this movie is the visual composition where nearly every scene can be paused and might serve as a photograph or painting in itself. The film is incredibly beautiful and the depiction of Holland is very archetypical, especially the clothing. Honestly, the film would be worth seeing even if there were no audio, the visuals are that good. I should also mention that Scarlett Johansson is much prettier than the girl in the original painting.

Ass up!

We went tubing down the Salt River on Sunday in a rather poorly planned fashion. All would have been well if not for the forgotten fact that you can't buy alcohol on a Sunday before 10AM. This led to us being separated as half of us continued on to the park to get the tubes while the other half stayed behind to get the beer once it was 10. This of course led to the other group being unable to park at the entrance and due to the po-lice they weren't even able to drop people off by us while they found a parking spot. Flash forward to 3 hours later, all is resolved by patience and a little faith in everyone's respective abilities to meet up at the top of the river. Not exactly the best way to start out my first time on the Salt River, but the next 5 hours were quite worth it.
It's really kind of strange, I had this image of us all floating down the river all relaxed and peaceful, leisurely drinking our beers as we coast along. That lasted about 10 minutes. Then our raft of tubes caught up with everyone else, the river picked up and hijinx ensued. Due to lack of space (I'll leave it at that) we couldn't fit any water bottles into our cooler so the only liquid available was beer, which made everything more interesting. The whole experience was really fun, more than I had suspected; I was never bored for even a moment. I'm also rather surprised how little everyone was sunburned afterward. Save for right above my knees and my feet, I was just fine. And one poor girl who had a little too much to drink was looking pretty lobsterrific by the end of the day but evidently was just tanned afterward.

STFU

One of my pet peeves that's been coming up lately is people who don't know when to keep quiet, or at least not shout as loud as possible. My first clear memory of this problem was in high school when I made some quiet joke to someone about someone walking by. The ditz replied very loudly "I don't get it!" and despite my attempt to quiet her down, when she got the joke she happily cried, "Oh I get it! You're saying he's...!" I don't think there was anyway for the target of the joke to have not heard it. And I'm positive the two weren't friends, so there was no reason for her to do it deliberately, she was just a moron.
I find myself encountering this again at work; when I notice an attractive female customer, I honor my manly duty and make sure the nearest male coworker has the opportunity to check her out as well. But some people don't get the rules here. One coworker, a thuggish Mexican, has a complete inability to control his volume, so that when I discreetly direct his attention to a hot girl he'll loudly (perhaps vulgarly) agree with me so that the girl, indeed most of the restaurant, knows what we were talking about. Needless to say, I've stopped pointing them out to him.
So if you're going to be a loudmouth, you'd better be prepared to miss out on what everyone else notices around them.

No Hope

Hope's End by Stephen Chambers. A borrowed book which naturally came recommended. Unfortunately I didn't like it all that much. It's a fairly good effort considering the source (a then college sophomore) but objectively it's kinda dull. The setting seems interesting but it doesn't really make the story by itself. A dystopian future society on another planet that has regressed to Medieval technology where reading is forbidden by the Church. The author I think was trying to be too clever in his exposition, very deliberately coy about things to the point of being obnoxious. Constant reflections by the main character regarding strange artifacts with cryptic writing like "Campbell's So" Oooo what could it be!? The characters are not the most compelling either. There are a couple of badass female characters who are mysteriously attracted to the main character who has a knack for delivering lines that would make Anakin Skywalker blush. He also is frequently hit on the head hard enough by rocks and sword hilts to be rendered unconscious for a rather long period of time (generally when it's convenient for him to get from one setting to another without having to write how he got there) yet suffers not ill effects. I'm no doctor but I think repeated blows to the skull like that would at least make sword fighting difficult. I guess they just build 'em tougher on that planet. Though his quality dialog might be explained by being a little punch drunk. None of the characters are very well developed or likable, so when they die you don't really care, though you're very blatantly prompted to by the author. And while the author constantly drops hints about what the colony's founders were like and what they believed in it wouldn't kill him to give a little back story of how or why they left Earth. Given how unpopular their ideologies are it seems unlikely they would just be allowed to leave or that they would have enough voluntary followers to create a colony.

Art

Couple of stream of consciousness ideas that just came up. The phenomenon of surfing the web, copying and pasting links and emailing them to people is wholly contingent on the modern era. The only thing close to a historical analogy would be sitting in a library going through books, documents, encyclopedias and albums, writing down the articles or tracing the illustrations then putting them in an envelope and mailing it to a friend. And that's not including multiple recipients or forwarding YouTube videos.
Also, flowering plants only started appearing around the time of the dinosaurs. Imagine if that little evolutionary experiment hadn't worked out. How many foods, concepts or metaphors would no longer exist? Just on the poetic/aesthetic aspect, how would civilization have coped? What would Van Gogh have painted? Roses wouldn't be red, violets wouldn't be blue, there would be no sugar to be sweet and you know the rest.
And how would aliens with no sight organs create art? Would it all have to be tactile? That limits them to portraits and still lifes since they wouldn't be able to create a recognizable representation of a landscape. Would they regard paintings as some kind of abstract form of koan? Like maybe the way the paint is situated on the canvas is symbolic of the place where it was painted or a general pattern of paint represents a cloud. They'd sense the paint but couldn't understand how it represents a landscape. That said, they may very well have some other form of long range sense we do not comprehend and have developed art based around that sense. What, then, would we make of that?

Spindelmannen! Spindelmannen! Does whatever a spindel....kannen?

Spider-Man 3 with Tobey Maguire and James Franco. Yeah, the reviews are sadly accurate this time. I wanted to like this movie, I really did. And there are certain parts I really empathized with, especially since Spider-Man has always been my patron superhero. The movie is too long, suffering from the common affliction these days of directors getting so full of themselves they forget that it is possible, nay, preferable, to tell a story in under three hours. Eliminating the Sandman entirely would have made the movie shorter, the story better and everything generally less cluttered. I liked Harry Osborn quite a bit in this movie, though the big fight at the end was just dumb. Fantastic Four dumb. I didn't like MJ very well this time, I understand her difficulties and how Parker was being a little too self-absorbed but she was being such a girl about it all. Plus she's dating Spider-Man, she knew what she was getting into. Cut the guy a little slack, he can't always be there for you. That said, Parker was being kind of a jackass, even before the black suit. People in the reviews bitch about how Tobey Maguire was the wrong choice because he can't pull off evil, just creepy. I counter that Parker is inherently so good that even when his dark side is brought out it's still not actually evil. And it's only because it's skinny little Peter Parker that makes his behavior creepy, if it was Flash Thomson it would have looked better. And while his whole emo style was just plain silly, my favorite part of the movie is his slick moves with the ladies (and their varying reactions).

In other news, I went to the doctor to have my sore throat checked out. They use a tongue depressor, a stethoscope, write me a prescription and *poof!* I'm all better. THAT'S how going to the doctor should be!

4D

I'm done with the semester! I'm amazed as everyone generally is how quickly the year has gone by. Yes, it is trite to mention it but I'm genuinely surprised by it. Especially considering how long my stay in Sweden felt. It was only a little longer than a normal academic year but it felt like forever, which is why I suppose I was not really upset to leave Sweden as I felt I had gotten adequate time to experience it.
Why is that, I wonder? Time is supposed to fly when you're having fun and I've never had as much fun over a year as in Uppsala. If anything, it should have gone by even faster than in the US. Maybe it's analogous to the missing time when one works too hard only to look up from their books and find it's 3AM. Uppsala was definitely low stress so that phenomenon never occurred. The class schedule might have had something to do with it as well. In high school you had all your classes every day and so my base unit of time was the day since no matter what, something was due the next day. Freshman year of college, my class schedule was different every day with some classes meeting only once a week. This resulted in me changing my base mental unit of time to the week since I could afford to not do homework for a class the night it was assigned. Experiencing only weeks instead of days would definitely make the year fly by a lot quicker. In Uppsala I had classes every day (or evening, in this case, which might add another factor to my sense of time) but the academic week was shorter so while there was always something due the next day, my week ended on a Wednesday. So not only did I experience time in days again, I had more weekend days to enjoy my experiences. Also worth considering is the possibility that experiences themselves might contribute to my perception of time. High school seemed like an entire lifetime but then again the multitude of experiences, even if they weren't scintillating, made it seem longer than it actually was. Freshman year of college kinda sucked so maybe its uneventfulness made it just run together. Uppsala, of course, was nearly constant waves of new experiences and ideas so it felt like more was accomplished. Then again, it might just be as simple as I experienced my stay in Sweden as a contiguous year and not split into two different semesters.
Whatever the cause, I'd like to know how to duplicate it. As much as I enjoy zipping through boring classes weeks at a time, I wish I could slow down sometimes and experience a day, a week, a year like it is meant to be experienced.

It burns!

At this moment I'm suffering from the pollen saturated air in Tucson but nevertheless had every intention of writing about how much I had missed the desert in the springtime. Even though the sun is blinding, oppressively hot (and it's not even July) and everything is covered in thorns, it's just so beautiful. It's something I had really missed in Sweden, not to say that I didn't absolutely love Sweden in the spring, but the nature of the, well, nature is completely different. There's no way to compare the two nor a way to combine them. Plus, the scent of the desert in the spring is so compelling but I don't quite know how to describe it. It's spicy, but I don't know if that's just the collective scents of the cacti in bloom or maybe the pollen in the air burning my sinuses. Oddly enough, while some people were near literally incapacitated by their allergies in Sweden, I was perfectly fine. I wonder if you get an immunity to pollen you're not used to and the pollen you are normally exposed to eventually finds your weakness and destroys you.

Ook Ook!

Friday I skipped work to go see a lecture at the U of A by Jane Goodall! I kinda felt bad for leaving them high and dry, but it's for the greater good. I wonder if they think I called in sick cuz of 4/20... Anyway, the lecture was very eloquent and inspirational and most definitely worth seeing. She was talking about her research and claims being an uphill battle since all of the "erudites" at Cambridge insisted that only humans had personality or emotions. As a result Goodall's findings were utterly groundbreaking. She, of course knew well before observing chimps that animals had emotions and personalities and her dog was her living example. And since anyone who has a pet (be it a salamander, rabbit or dog) knows full well they at least have personality and the mammals have emotion, the conclusion must be drawn that the erudites of Cambridge were the stuffy British lords with spectacles, twirly moustaches, tobacco pipes and never owned a pet in their lives. Incidentally, she is likely the only person in the world capable of greeting a university lecture hall in customary chimpanzee fashion without looking silly.
Also, from the footage of her doing fieldwork in the 60's, she was a cutie in her day.

And congratulations to Mr. Kissel on winning Teacher of the Year!

Darmok

Wisdom Sits in Places by Keith Basso. A required reading but very well written and entertaining. It concerns the value of places and place names in Western Apache culture and why they have a strong connection to the land. While the Apache reasons might not necessarily be the same for other tribes it might explain the stereotypical American Indian obsession with land. First off, place names are considered to be direct quotes of the ancestors and to mispronounce them or abbreviate them is considered disrespectful. Second, the names are things like "Water Flows Down On A Succession Of Flat Rocks" and are meant to paint a descriptive picture of the place so that even if you hadn't been there you can imagine it just the same. Also, some places are so named from the view at a particular spot which they were originally viewed. The best example I can think of is the two light colored vertical strips on the Catalina Mountains in a depression that looks like a giant shoe print look like a 19 to me. But if you're further west, it looks like an 11. Most importantly, parables are told in context of those places and a moral lesson is then forever associated with that place and whenever you see, walk by or even hear the name of the place you are reminded of the moral lesson. This is why Apaches don't like to move from their land, because they will no longer have these very real reminders and they may forget to be a good person.
This also explains their cryptic dialogs with one another. As all Apaches know these stories and where they happened, they can reference the stories and talk about some moral issue without directly stating it. Think of it like constantly quoting movies to get your meaning across, you really need to understand the origins of the metaphors to effectively communicate in Apache.
I also learned from the book and subsequent class lectures on Apache culture that they are the most frustratingly passive-aggressive people ever and by Western standards (no, scratch that. By European, Asian, African and Middle Eastern standards) they're downright unfriendly. In the book, there's some young woman who is acting too much like a Whitewoman at a ceremony and is thus being disrespectful. Rather than mentioning that she's going against tradition in a subtle way, this old lady tells a story about how some stupid Apache tried to act White and in doing so almost betrayed another Apache, to all the people at the ceremony while the girl is right next to her. Gah!
The most bizarre thing is that Apaches make Whiteman jokes where they imitate how they think we speak and act. And naturally EVERYTHING we do offends them. Whites call people "friend" too easily, Apaches only use it for people they've known pretty much all their lives. Asking how someone is or how they're feeling is an invasion of privacy. Saying something like, "Look who's here!" is considered offensive because it's obtrusive. Calling someone by their name is rude. Physical contact such as handshakes, hugs, slaps on the shoulder are not welcome. Telling a guest to "Come on in. Make yourself at home." is considered bossy. A rapid-fire series of questions like "Can I get you something? Beer? A sandwich?" are also rude because you haven't given them time to stop and think about the answer. Calling attention to one's appearance (i.e. nice boots or something) make Apaches feel uncomfortable. Plus eye contact is considered aggressive. Just stop to think about all that. Those are some of the nicest things you can do as a host, but would all be rude and offensive to them.
They make jokes where they do all of the above and then end with "Whitemen are stupid."(incidentally Whiteman evidently means anyone that isn't Indian) All I have to say is they should thank their lucky stars it was Whites who colonized the New World. If Frank's and Feifei's moms are any indication they would have gone nuts with how polite and effusive the Arabs and Chinese are.

Zzz...

Sleeping Dogs Lie with Melinda Paige Hamilton and Bryce Johnson. A dark comedy with a moral is really the best way to describe it. It raises good questions that are generally glossed over in most movies: is complete honesty the best policy? And do your loved ones really have a right to know everything about your past? The movie was pretty good all around especially considering how small scale it was. My only gripe is how utterly screwed over the main character gets, but that's just cinema and the brutal dark aspect of the film. As I thought about it, there are really several messages one can take away from the film: the first is obviously don't assume honesty is always a good thing and don't assume you can handle the total truth. The second is the idea of forgiveness, one really shouldn't hold people's mistakes against them, especially if it's from a time before you knew them. That said, are there things that cannot be forgiven? Both in the sense of being unable to put down the mental weight of a grudge and also the inability to shake an idea from your mind no matter how much you want to forget. And third, perhaps the one no one wants to hear: should one police one's own behavior if they think they will regret it or have it come to bite them in the ass later? I have a feeling most people who read this blog are of the "No regrets. Your past is what makes you who you are. Time heals all wounds." mindset so bear with me. Are there things you shouldn't do (I'm talking about things you could go either way on, not stuff you know you want to do because it makes you happy) because having that in your past is a liability to your future relationships? It doesn't even have to be something horrendous, but just enough to scare away someone in the early stages of a relationship. And for those that would reply with, "If they can't handle who I am, then they weren't right for me anyway" I'd say you've missed the first two lessons.

Word of the Day: Bricolage- a construction made of whatever materials are at hand; something created from a variety of available things. A piece of makeshift handiwork.
I wonder if it's related to brickabrac.

Hen Mei Rong Xing!

About a month ago, some Asian guy stopped by Beyond Bread and after ordering his food somehow got into the conversation of jobs. He said he worked at a sushi restaurant and was about to suggest the cashier (a Mexican gangsta) do the same, when he realized he would probably not go well in a sushi restaurant and should set his sights on another kind of establishment.
What struck me about the conversation was the acknowledgment that certain races are given preferential treatment in the restaurant industry. I don't mean the usual discrimination of all non Whites, but how ethnic restaurants will hire people of that ethnicity to gain a measure of authenticity and avoid other ethnicities to maintain credibility. One of my favorite examples is a sushi restaurant in Stockholm owned by a Chinese family. As long as the average White person can't tell the difference they keep their authenticity. Which brings me to my main rant. Yesterday Frank and I went to get Chinese takeout from a place we had never been to before. We ordered boba tea and I ordered kung pao beef. The boba tea was absolutely horrid; the tea was bitter with nearly no fruit flavoring and the tapioca had a texture bordering on crunchy. After disposing of our drinks, we went home and tried the dinner. Normally when one has peanuts in Asian food they're raw and then fried, which gives them a nice flavor and texture which is still clearly peanut but not something you're really used to. Not this time. This kung pao had roasted peanuts sprinkled very generously on top. The most peculiar thing was the subtle yet distinctive taste of the peanuts, which is only found on Planter's products.
WTF mate? Who the hell do they think they're fooling? Was the old Asian man behind the counter even Chinese, I wonder? At the very least they weren't following any "ancient Chinese recipe" that's for damn sure.

One of these things is not like the others...

First thing's first: Muddy Bug rocked last night! I was genuinely impressed, though not surprisingly, they sound much better live than with the speakers on my laptop.

And Happy 19th Birthday to Stephanie!

Yesterday, per the suggestion of my adviser, I paid a visit to the Career Fair at the U of A. Honestly, I have no idea why she sent me there. Naturally, I figured the employers for anthropologists would be pretty hard to find and that it would mainly be business and hard science majors. Turns out the only thing even resembling a job opportunity for anthro majors involves working with the mentally unstable or meth addicts (note not recovering meth addicts) . I was most definitely out of place there; not only was I not the right major, I wasn't actually looking for a job, I didn't have a résumé and I wasn't dressed in a suit and tie. Oh no, while everyone is dressed to impress, focusing on a singular goal, rattling off 1 minute interviews at the people running the booths, I'm meandering through "exciting opportunities" and "leadership builders" with a McLenin's shirt. Ironically, I had the feeling people were paying more attention to me than the "goal getters" and "team players" that were trying to catch their eye.
Awash in corporate clichés, I departed after what was at most fifteen minutes. I left with that feeling you get when you walk out of a movie theater wondering why everyone else around you loved the movie you just tolerated. Sure, it was keyed to a certain type of major, but why would my adviser tell me to go? Had she never been to one before? Maybe she was deceived by the ALL MAJORS signs which were as abundant as the corporate catchphrases being recited. At the end of the day, one question remained nagging me: do corporations really ONLY want leaders? That word seems to be the key to a successful interview or accepted application. Do they really want 20 million people in the workforce all thinking they should be telling everyone else what to do? Is there no room in the job market for a highly trained and devoted employee with aspirations of leadership?