Why didn’t he get up and elbow him back?
And why is his teammate just asking the ref for a foul, as if that is what matters? Why didn’t he at least push mcgrady back? And if you really just get a foul for elbowing someone in the chest, he should throw a punch. I can’t stand this instance of Asian passivity.
Houston / Architecture / Life
Part of me is very nostalgic for the time that I spent in Houston. I guess this building is “kitch,” but for me, in the context of Houston, it seems besides the point to play the “this is good architecture, this is bad architecture” game. That kind of posturing seems out of place in a city where the weather is beautiful 90% of the time. If people who use the building enjoy it, if it serves it’s function well, if some people who are not as architecturally cultured think it’s nice for them, then maybe in a city like Houston that is precisely what such a “loosey-goosey” word like ”beauty” means.
Really what I want to do is to open all the windows in my parents Brooklyn apartment and to blast this as loud as possible.
Mitt Romney’s TV is always turned to Fox in all the pictures I’ve seen of him in his hotel room, his bus.
John Dickerson wonders why Paul Ryan needed to twist so many facts when his speech was effective enough without them.
I wonder what Paul Ryan thinks about the claims he makes in his own speech. If he and Romney only watch Fox, does he actually blame Obama for the closure of the auto plant? Or is it a deliberate manipulation of the truth? If so, is he just a brazen liar? A good actor? Or maybe he is just so convinced that Obama is the devil incarnate that it doesn’t even matter?
I hate the language of “I’m sick of playing politics.” That’s what everybody does, but if everybody is sick of it, then how come the situation is the way it is? It’s like high schoolers saying “I don’t friend people on Facebook, I only accept friend requests.” But literally everybody says this, and if that were really the case, nobody would have any friends on Facebook.
“My design process never starts or finishes. I am always hoping to find something through the mere act of living my daily life. I do not work from a desk, and do not have an exact starting point for any collection. There is never a mood board, I do not go through fabric swatches, I do not sketch, there is no eureka moment, there is no end to the search for something new. As I live my normal life, I hope to find something that click starts a thought, and then something totally unrelated would arise, and then maybe a third unconnected element would come from nowhere. Often in each collection, there are three or so seeds of things that come together accidentally to form what appears to everyone else as a final product, but for me it is never ending. There is never a moment when I think, ‘this is working, this is clear.’ If for one second I think something is finished, the next thing would be impossible to do.”
Karen Peris, The Innocence Mission:
“The natural world is often where I can see more of God and less of me. And that’s one reason it is ever present in the songs, because I have an inclination to write about escaping from introspection, to picture myself running into the centre of a windy or snowy day and being made clean and new. We live in a mid-atlantic state where we have the most dramatic seasonal changes. It’s really the thing I love best about Pennsylvania. My memories seem to be divided sharply by season; the fall memories are the most vivid but also the most mysterious.
I don’t know that we are losing touch with the rhythm of the seasons. So many people I know feel this same tremendous anticipation at the start of each season, a feeling that everything is beginning, but also of being reconnected to the past because of memory being triggered.”
Rem Koolhaas, in response to “What is your biggest regret in your life?”
“That’s a private matter and therefore not one I will answer.”
There is no real connection between these three quotes. I like Rei Kawakubo’s quote because it is a glimpse into what I believe is true artistic freedom. I mean, what kind of great fashion designer doesn’t sketch? It sounds like she just lives her life, and in her daily life she experiences small moments of inspiration.
I like Karen Peris’ quote because there is a kind of honesty in her religion. Somehow The Innocence Mission makes God simple and beautiful. She’s unashamed, but it isn’t in an ugly or forceful way. For her, God is about renewal, about something mysterious that is found in nature. God is the Fall, God is the memories that Fall brings, God is the hope in the beginning of each season.
I loved Rem’s quote because it was sincere. I was at the lecture, and was totally expecting some made up or insincere answer to this question. But as always, Rem’s kind of brutal honesty is the most beautiful.
First, thank goodness that this series exists. When I was in elementary school I would get annoyed because Charlie Rose would be on right before Batman, but now, there are few things better on television.
What I take some issue with in this episode is their easy dismissal of the stigma that depression has today. Even with the understanding that depression is clinical, that there are literal problems in the circuitry of the brain that cause depression, there must be some acknowledgement of why there is a stigma. Personally I think the stigma has something to do with how successful one is whether it be in their profession, their romantic life, or their social life. It’s true that highly successful people are still susceptible to depression, but it seems far more likely that the loner, the recluse, the single drop-out living in his parents’ basement, is suffering from depression. Even within the episode itself, all the people at the table acknowledge that “character counts.” What I haven’t articulated well is that I believe there is still a kind of tension between what is literal and what is psychological, that having fewer friends or an unsuccessful career probably make one far more likely to be clinically depressed, and these are things that do carry a stigma with them.
As is obvious, I am not the best at expressing my thoughts. It’s all a work in progress.
I turned on the TV and this episode of “Reba” was playing on ABC Family. What I find a little strange about this channel that if it sells itself as a “family” channel, I’m confused why every show is about sex, sex, and marriage after high school. Of course, this is strange from my personal perspective, but maybe this is precisely what “family” means for many people. To be overly-simplistic, maybe every show is really about sex, sex, and marriage. Even when the 700 club or the Ed Young show comes on, its not unlikely that its about sex, dating, marriage, divorce, cheating, temptation (read porn).
There were some things that I appreciated about this show. First, I was thinking about the style of this kind of show (the laughtrack, the jokes that aren’t funny, the exaggerated personalities, the impossible situations, bad acting, etc.). I wonder whether all of these stylistic qualities could be adopted for a show that was better, or, more serious. It would be very similar, say, the same kind of living room set, the same glossy lighting, the same use of the laughtrack, but the themes would be different.
Secondly, in the above clip at around 1:50, reba (the redhead) confronts the woman who her ex-husband married (the blonde). It was an interesting mixture of this over-the-top style and a more serious topic (the hurt that reba feels about the situation). I found these seconds interesting because there is a tension between the serious aspect of the scenario and the jokey-funny-stylistic part. At first, the blonde plays into her character by thinking that reba wants to talk about menopause. Second, both of them are interrupted by a parade of children led by a symbol-banging clown. Sure, the episode kind of ends with a cheesy ending, but as an outsider, I found this scene interesting, almost as if it were both hyper aware and hyper unaware of its foolishness. What I liked is that these serious topics aren’t dealt with seriously, or, they aren’t really dealt with at all. I recognize that this is probably not deliberate, that I am reading too much into it, but just because this scenario may not be deliberate doesn’t mean that the scene doesn’t have interesting parts.
An interesting clip from 1990. At around 9:50 the White Nationalist says that he is amazed people in New York actually believe in racial equality, that they speak about equality “with a straight face.” I recently happened to watch an episode of “Celebrity Ghost Stories” on some random cable tv channel, and came away wondering something similar, that is, how there must be people in America today that watch this show and actually believe it. (As a note, “Celebrity Ghost Stories” is very poorly produced, and the ghost stories rely on the cheapest and most predictable visuals combined with voice overs by B-rate celebrity have-beens.) To me, the idea that something can be so obvious to me while the opposite so obvious to another is a little troubling. I mean, how do you reconcile this? Do you try to be impartial or “fair” by saying something like, “Well, there are two opinions, and because I know that I am partial I should recognize that maybe the opposing opinion has just as much of a chance of being correct?” But this seems silly, because even if there are two opinions, it does not then mean that both have an equal likelihood of being true. For example, if two people are arguing about the sum of 1 and 1, the person who argues that the sum is 2 is correct and the person arguing otherwise is definitively wrong. And if this is the more logical approach, by what criteria can you measure success of whether or not Jews are controlling the government or whether ghosts really are haunting this musician that I’ve never even heard of?
It is my nature to be cautious, and I firmly believe that the Internet needs to be approached with the utmost carefulness. It’s newness and the speed of its development, the lack of government regulation and oversight, and the documented fact that thousands of advanced computer operations track, record, and distribute information about our every keystroke has made me always cautious of deliberately putting something of my own on the Internet. The Internet is forever, and even though in the future I may wish to delete this blog, I know that within seconds of posting any entry everything will be saved and backed up on multiple servers located on different continents, backed up every few minutes.
But I realized recently that the fact that the Internet is forever does not have to mean that I have to take on the difficult and futile attempt to remain anonymous. If I write something stupid, people should understand that I see myself as an evolving person, that I openly acknowledge the fickleness of my morals, values, and beliefs. But all of this should not preclude the expression of one’s current opinions, even if they may be shown to be foolish later on.