The Literary Salon

Why World Cup 2010 was a terrible disappointment

2010-07-26T14:11:00.000-04:00

Another world cup has come and gone, and at this point I'm usually going through serious soccer withdrawl symptoms--after all, there were 64 high profile matches over the last 30 days, more than one usually sees in an entire year. However, this time I'm not really feeling the same sense of sadness I usually feel when a major soccer tournament ends--in fact, I'm almost glad the World Cup is over. Why this blasphemy, you ask? It's because this has been without a doubt the worst major soccer tournament I've ever seen. I've seen every World and Euro Cup since 1994 (94, 96, 98, 2000, 2002, 04, 06, 08, 10), and only the 2002 World Cup was even close to being this bad. Most friends of mine who watch soccer more than once every 4 years tend to agree with me, but for those who may still be unconvinced, here is why I feel 2010's edition was the worst, in no particular order:

1) Big teams flopping: Italy had literally its worst world cup performance ever, and the French comedy troupe managed to score 1 goal. England was not only disappointing, but, except for about 20 minutes, absolutely excruciating to watch: their game against Algeria should be a contender for most unwatchable soccer game ever at a world cup. Argentina gets embarrased 4-0 in the quartefinals. You know something is wrong when one of the best teams in the world gets smashed to bits. Brazil never really played to their potential, and seemed to completely lose it in their final 30 minutes in the tournament. Even Holland never came anywhere close to playing as well as they could, and Spain for the most part played a very conservative style that was frankly boring to watch most of the time (if you don't believe me, try watching any of their last 4 games, all 1-0 wins, even against teams like Paraguay). The only team that was actually good was Germany, who oddly lost in the semis.

2) Similarly, lack of quality games: out of the 64 matches played, of which I managed to watch about 54, only 7 or 8 were actually watchable. Most games were either snoozefests (Brazil-Portugal, any of England's games) or one-sided blowouts that were finished by halftime. I agree with Nigel Reed of the CBC on this one: most teams even AFTER the round robin played not to lose.

3) Similar to the above, lack of goals. Now, I'm not one of those sports fans who argues that soccer is boring because there are few goals. I've seen plenty of 1-0 or 1-1 matches that were edge-of-your-seat exciting. However, this is the 2nd lowest scoring world cup in history--only WC 1990 had fewer goals. I think the goal dearth is symptomatic of the excitement level provided by most matches this year.

3) Host nation disappointing: I doubt anyone seriously though South Africa would do very well, but 2010 marks the first time in the history of the world cup that the host nation failed to get past the round robin. For whatever reason, tournaments seem to suffer when the host nation doesn't get far. Even the USA in 1994 (a memorable one) at least made it to the knockout stage. At the last world cup, which was IMHO a great one, the host nation Germany made it to the semifinal, losing in a thrilling match to Italy, the eventual champions.

4) Star players flopping: Lionel Messi, C. Ronaldo, Kaka, Wayne Rooney, Van Persie, etc etc. The list goes on. These are the best players in the world, and they were sadly either invisible or dreadful to watch. Did Rooney forget how to kick a ball? Thankfully we had a few upstarts who managed to impress, including Muller and Ozil of Germany, and the veteran Forlan of Uruguay. Otherwise, I can't remember another tournament at which so many top notch players just failed to show up.

5) Jabulani: yes, at the beginning of every tournament I can remember, players always complaining about the new ball that has been developed, often arguing that it is too light or unpredictable. However, I think this time the players and coaches had a legitimate beef. Even weeks into the competition we saw countless shots from the best players in the world go sailing miles high. NASA even tested the ball and found that it was unpredictable when travelling over 60 MPH. Perhaps the altitude at some of SA's stadia exacerbated the problem.

6) Officiating: I can't for the life of me remember a tournament that had such appaling refereeing. Yes, referees make bad calls in soccer, and yes, there were a few matches in 2002 in which the referees were bribed. However, nearly every match at this world cup had at least one major blown call--offside goals, obvious goals that weren't counted (sorry Lampard), penalties not awarded, obvious dives not punished (Iniesta in the final, among others), etc etc. I don't think there's a single argument left against video replays in soccer. Even the 900 year old dinousaur Sepp Blatter, FIFA's president, is actually considering it now. You know something is seriously wrong when he wants to change something.

6) VUVUZELAS!! I watch soccer fairly often, so I'm not unaccustomed to horns and such blaring during a game. It must be said, though, that the vuvuzelas almost single-handedly ruined this world cup. Whoever thought that having 50000+ horns that crank out over 100 decibels would improve the game should be arrested--the same person must have also thought that hearing a swarm of bees going through a blender for 90 minutes is pleasurable. I feel sorry for the players and fans in the stadium, and of course viewers everywhere. On two or three occassions I heard some singing and chanting from the crowd, and I remembered how enjoyable it is to be able to hear thousands of people singing and oohing and aaaahing in unison. Again, I don't ever remember something like this ruining the viewing experience of a soccer tournament. Ban the vuvuzela please, or I will break every single one in half!

Thank You, America

2009-07-04T01:34:00.000-04:00

On this, the 233rd anniversary of the independence of America, I thought it appropriate to share some thoughts on why I think everyone should be thanking America today, despite the popularity of hating it. In lieu of a detailed and potentially boring essay, I provide the following succinct list:

1) Innovation: America leads the world by far in terms of technology and innovation. The next time you say you hate America, think twice as you use your Mac, PC, Cell phone, Ipod, Facebook, or Internet. The world has its problems now, but American innovation will likely be the solution to them.

2) Arts: though some pretend to be snobs, nearly everyone, including those in countries hostile to the USA, watches and enjoys Hollywood films. How many people saw Dark Knight? Star Trek? Star Wars? This is to say nothing of music, most of which is (or tries to be) American. In fact, people in the Middle East WANT to be American; they may hate the politics, but they love the culture.

3) Opportunity: America remains the land of opportunity. Despite what hypocritical, PC leftists maintain, the fact is that it is the first Western country in the world to elect a black president (yes, he's half, but he's visibly black). Not only that, but he came from a disadvantaged background: he was raised by a single mother who had to use foodstamps occasionally. In what other country in the world is this possible?

4) Last but not least, peace and stability: yes, this may sound strange, and I admit the USA isn't perfect, especially on foreign policy. But, and trust me on this one, you want the USA to remain the world's only superpower for as long as possible. You DON'T want a world run by China or Russia. Despite its flaws and occasional human rights violations, America is the lesser of all evils, and it has in place a system of checks and balances to ensure that such violations do not continue very long.

Death of the Apostrophe

2009-02-23T00:07:00.003-05:00

I completely agree with this well written, incisive, and witty piece from the National Post. Yes, it's about apostrophes, but the author expatiates on how it is a symptom of something bigger.

Favourite Quotes

"Then, there are proud philistines who feel that whatever they don't know, doesn't matter. For them, the proof that something isn't important to know is that they don't know it. If it did matter, they would know it, and since they don't, it doesn't. 'What did you say that writer's name was -- Ibsen? Never heard of him. Can't be very important.'"

And,

"In ancient Greece, young Demosthenes wanted to be an orator. Since he stuttered, he is said to have trained himself by placing pebbles in his mouth. If the tone-setters of our age stuttered, they wouldn't bother with pebbles. They'd abolish public speaking."

I'm not sure whether I'm getting more conservative, but I find that the National Post is the only paper usually worth reading: their articles and especially editorials are much more interesting than those of the other papers in this country, even if I disagree with them.

V-day

2009-02-12T11:49:00.002-05:00

Well, it's that time of year again. In case you're wondering, no: this is not another rant from an angry single man; it's a bit more philosophical, so read on.

If I were a woman, and my significant other gave me a flowers and a box of chocolates on February 14, I would actually be offended. First, I would ask, why are you getting me a gift when that's what everyone else is doing on that exact same day? Second, if you're going to give a gift, be a little bloody creative: get your significant other a painting, a book, a ride in a horse drawn carriage, or cook that person a special meal, etc, etc.

I'm not saying people in relationships shouldn't give each other gifts or do nice things for each other, but it is really irritating that people do the same things on the same day because Hallmark tells them to. Am I the only one who thinks this is insane?

Every day should be Valentine's day: you should let the other person know he or she is appreciated as often as possible. In the same way, you shouldn't wait until Mother's Day to call your mum or do something nice for her; every day should be Mother's Day.

That's it. V-day is one of those times I'm actually kind of glad to be single.

Orwell would be rolling in his grave

2009-01-27T16:15:00.002-05:00

Classic ultra-liberal nonsense here

As an ex-smoker, I sympathize with smokers and non-smokers alike. If someone doesn't want to breathe in second hand smoke, that person shouldn't have to, although most people are unduly paranoid about second hand smoke, which, by the way, has not been conclusively linked to cancer or other ailments.

I do, however, have a problem with draconian/babysitter governments that impose these hypocritical measures. Tobacco is legally grown and sold North America, and the government makes a very hefty profit from it. In the province of Ontario, more than 60 tp 70 percent of the cost of a pack of cigarettes is tax.

So, the government makes a killing from this legal product, and now that same government is telling people they can't use it even in their own homes. If that isn't idiotic hypocrisy, I don't know what is. Either shut the hell up and let people use this product, or shut the hell up and simply ban it; you can't do both!

Update

2009-01-27T16:04:00.002-05:00

All two of you may be wondering where I've been and what I've been up to. To be completely honest, teaching and thesis work keeps me more than busy, with hardly any energy or care to spare for something like blogging (that, and my life isn't that interesting).

I did, however, return from two weeks in Europe, which marked my first trip to that continent I'd read and heard so much about. I went to a conference on Adam Smith @ Oxford (yes, that one), which was fantastic--so much so, that the organizers want to include my piece in an upcoming collection of essays. Needless to say I felt vindicated after months of ball-busting labour, and I didn't refuse their kind offer. The piece will appear in the upcoming special edition of The Adam Smith Review, which should be coming out near the end of this year. More on that as details become available.

I used my mostly university funded trip to visit relatives in England and Germany. I stayed with my English relatives, who lived in the middle of nowhere (near Seaton/Exeter), for 3 days, and 5 days in Frankfurt, Germany, with my other ones. I also took a trip with my cousin to Berlin for 2 days, which was probably not as fun as it should be since I got a nasty European cold that lasted nearly a week.

For the first time in my life, I had a digital camera with me. Now it's just a matter of uploading all those photos, which I will do eventually (probably on Facebook and or Google Photos). Stay tuned.

For now, it's back to teaching 1st year Drama and Poetry, a fun yet very time-consuming assignment, and trying to finish a first chapter of the thesis, which so far is progressing fairly well. I hope to have this current chapter done by the end of the term, which would be right on schedule.

Brief Rant on Copyright

2008-12-01T20:10:00.000-05:00

If a company ceases to publish a book (or a video, etc), then that company forfeits its copyright of said item. Why companies that do this maintain copyright is one of the dumbest (if not the dumbest) things about copyright law today. In fact, what we have now is a form of communism.

The Split Infinitive

2008-11-27T14:13:00.002-05:00

I was recently reminded of a hotly debated grammatical issue: the split infinitive. Before you sigh and think to yourself, "great! another nobody telling us why we should not split infinitives," don't fret: I'm actually defending the construction. I happen to think that dogmatically arguing against splitting infinitives is pedantry. Allow me to explain.

First, what is the split infinitive? Very briefly: the infinitive form of verbs in English, unlike any other language I know of, is always to + verb (to run, to walk, to eat, to type, etc). Inserting a word, usually an adverb, between the two and the root verb is what is known as the split infinitive (to boldly go is perhaps the textbook example).

Here's why it is NOT wrong.

The split infinitive did not become a "problem" until the nineteenth century. In other words, no one noticed it until then. English writers have been splitting infinitives since at least the thirteenth century, and many of the best eighteenth-century writers did so as well. To argue that the split infinitive is just plain wrong betrays an ignorance, whether deliberate or not, of the history of the English language.

Now let us examine the construction ahistorically, that is, its use at the present time.

I do not advocate splitting infinitives for the hell of it. However, there are times when consciously avoiding the split infinitive can result in awkward, unidiomatic or, worse, obscure constructions. Take a look at the following example, which I have taken from Burchfield's edition of Fowler's Modern English Usage:

In not combining flatly to forbid hostilities.
In not combining to forbid flatly hostilities.

Compare with the following construction which has a split infinitive. It is clearer and more natural:

In not combining to flatly forbid hostilities.

Constructions that attempt to avoid the split infinitive at all costs can sound affected as well as obscure:

She wants honestly to marry that man.

To sum up: there is no reason why the split infinitive is wrong. There is nothing in the DNA of the language that forbids it (whereas you simply cannot say I has candy). If it is possible to preserve the infinitive without a loss of naturalness or meaning, then by all means do so, but don't feel you have to, despite the prevailing sense that it is simply wrong.

2008-11-17T19:36:00.002-05:00

Yes, I know I've avoided this blog for quite some time. I don't get paid to do this, and the thesis and teaching are keeping me very busy.

I know this guy through a friend. Future Shop: please give him the gift certificate.

Liberal Thoughts

2008-09-16T11:46:00.003-04:00

I consider myself neither a Liberal nor a Conservative, though I share views with both parties. Personally, I feel that anyone who labels him/herself a "Liberal," a "Conservate," a "Democrat," or whatever, has not done much thinking.

It looks like the Conservatives will win another minority, which probably says more about the disaster that used to be known as the Liberals than anything else.

I'm not a fan of Dion or the Liberals, but if they want to win, they should follow this one piece of advice: make gas prices an issue! I'm amazed that no leader, except maybe Jack Layton, has even mentioned the insane and exponential rise in gas prices, not to mention the obvious gouging that is going on. The Liberals will win many votes if Dion only says "if you vote for us, you will pay less at the pumps." It's that simple.

Pictorial Goodies

2008-09-13T10:23:00.004-04:00

I've been blogging less and less lately owing to my increasingly busy schedule. On top of the thesis, I teach now, so I barely have time to do anything else.
Instead of the blog, I find my self (I never thought I'd say this) on facebook more. It's just easier.

Here are some funny pics I found this morning. Neither of them are NSFW, though the latter is very suggestive and very wrong. 1 & 2

Res Ipsa Loquitur

2008-09-04T12:49:00.003-04:00

I'm back from the T-dot feeling somewhat refreshed, getting ready to teach for the first time on Monday.

In the meantime, this is one of the most disgusting yet family friendly pictures I've ever seen in my life

These are Krispy Kreme Bacon Cheesburgers. I'm not one to shy away from unhealthy, tasty food (I like cheesburgers and krispy kreme donuts), but I can't even look at this pic without feeling sick.

Olympian thoughts

2008-08-13T13:40:00.003-04:00

As most of my friends know, I don't (and can't) really care about the Olympics anymore. I find that I lost interest after the cold war, since back then there was a sense of East versus West. The one exception to this is Men's hockey during the winter olympics: I actually prefer olympic hockey to the NHL since it's cleaner and more graceful.

One thing about the Olympics that makes no sense to me, among other things, is the medal count. China and the USA are invariably the top two finishers, maybe alongside Russia, but this should come as no surprise since they are also the most populous, with 1 billion and 300 million people respectively. If China were to win a thousand medals, would that really be impressive? Not if you ask me.

I think the medal count should reflect populations: a medal count that was done per capita would be far more illuminating. So, if the US were to win 30 medals, that means they won one medal per ten million people. If Canada won 10, that would mean a medal per every three million, which sounds more impressive. Make sense?

Bibliosexe

2008-08-13T13:31:00.003-04:00

A very entertaining, informative, and witty post from cracked.com for those who need a reminder of just how insane the Old Testament is. I have to say that, apart from some of the more brutally boring books (Numbers, Leviticus, etc), the OT is actually a fairly entertaining work of literature. I wouldn't be surprised to hear that the entire porn industry was influenced by the Bible (in fact, I just found out that the first porno film ever made, El Sartorio, a silent Argentine film from about 1907, features the Devil!)

It reminds me of something my pious grandma said: she reads the New Testament, but says "what's the deal with the OT? Everyone sleeps with everyone!"

There is no shortage of Christian/Jewish apologists who, like their Muslim counterparts, try to justify the really bizarre or even offensive sections of their holy texts. I think most intelligent people in these religions freely admit that these texts do indeed have some fu$%ed up parts, and say that the times in which these books were written were very different from ours. Of course, this starts a slippery slope: if some parts of a holy text you believe in are clearly wrong or corrupt, why isn't all of it? Just a thought.

Sit-coms, laughing, and all that

2008-08-08T12:06:00.002-04:00

I remember having a brief discussion with a fairly intelligent classmate of mine in my final year of undergraduate studies (about 4 years ago). We were both English students, but being the omnivores that we were, we discussed other matters as well, including media studies.

My peer brought up the issue of what I would call, for lack of a better term, heterodoxical loopholes. Simply put, it is a technique used by sit-coms writers for at least the past 25 years. Writers, for whatever reason, often wished to include social commentary in some episodes. However, the way in which they did this is ambiguous at best. This is best explained through the use of some examples.

My friend used an example from the classic sit-com Cheers, during an episode of which one character (I believe the one portrayed by the then attractive Kirstie Alley) utters enlightened remarks on the rights of homosexuals, which, given that this was the early 1980s, would have been heterodoxy. Such remarks on a popular sit-com would be perceived as progressive and enlightened. However, there is a catch: the character uttering such sentiments is often of questionable constitution. The character is often a likeable member of the regular cast, but one whom we, the audience, never take very seriously.

I have culled but two more examples, the second of which I saw last night:

On the popular kids/teen show Saved by the Bell, we have the militant feminist Jessie Spanos, who is portrayed as undoubtedly the most intelligent of the group. Especially in later episodes, she is often seen advancing a feminist agenda bemoaning sexist attitudes in just about everything--in other words, a hyperfeminist. Keep in mind that this program aired during the very early 1990s, when feminism was only beginning to enter the mainstream. Though the writers might be lauded for including socially relevant commentary in a program, especially one aimed at viewers ages 10-16, the viewpoint of the show itself is ambiguous. Though Jessie champions women's rights, etc, her character is not one we take very seriously: she is portrayed, despite her native intelligence, as somewhat extreme and crazy. Thus, we never really take her very seriously. The question, then, is: what is the program actually promoting? Is it genuinely espousing feminist ideas, or, given the questionable character of their mouthpiece, is it subtly mocking those very ideas?

Last night I watched an old episode of Seinfeld (online, of course), called "The Bris." In it, distant friends of Jerry and Elaine have a baby, and they wish to have him circumcised. The only voice of dissent on the matter is Kramer, whose arguments against circumcision are, to any reasonable person, irrefragable. He argues that it is a barbaric practice, and that the argument that "it's tradition" simply does not hold water: after all, sacrificing virgins to appease a god used to be tradition, but we do not do that anymore (this is Kramer's actual example, though one can easily think of dozens more).

Kramer's arguments are sound, but it is not a little curious that the mouthpiece of these ideas is not Jerry, not Elaine, not even George, but the likeable yet kooky and unstable neighbour, Kramer. Does this compromise the otherwise sound arguments against circumcision? That is a matter of debate, but it is a very clever way of creating an heterodoxial loophole. One can argue that the character who utters such ideas is irrelevant, that the ideas stand on their own. Conversely, one can argue that, by pretending to advance such ideas, the program (given the context) actually implicitly mocks such arguments. Thus, dissent, no matter how intelligent, is always already compromised.

One can invoke Mikhail Bakhtin here: are these sitcoms genuinely polyphonic or monologic disguised as polyphony?

*************************

This brings me to another related idea I have been thinking of for some time: the laugh track. I haven't done much research apart from quickly searching some databases, so I cannot say whether this has been written on, though I would be genuinely surprised if no one had already done so.

I am thinking here of what I would call the ideology of the laugh track. The laugh track's main purpose is, of course, to tell the audience when to laugh, which seems fairly innocent. I don't want to sound like a neo-Marxist, but I can't help but think of Althusser's ideological state apparatuses. To simplify my argument, I claim that the laugh tracks, by telling you when to laugh, also tell you implicitly to accept or reject certain ideas/ideologies. Thus, to use the previous example: if Kramer's cogent remarks are followed by a laugh track, that signals the audience to follow the collective laughter and ridicule the ideas just presented. If you happen to disagree, then you are immediately considered an outcast. It seems odd that the laugh track was a capitalist, not a communist, invention.

The question of whether or not media influences behaviour remains hotly contested. However, I find myself agreeing with the findings of Gerbner et al from (if memory serves) the late 1980s. They did not believe for one second that if a child witnessed a murder on TV that he would then go and kill his friend. However, Gerbner's study, the first and so far only longitudinal one on the subject, found that exposure to certain programming over a long period of time, especially during one's formative years, can indeed influence ideology, if not behaviour.

These are just scraps of ideas I thought I would jot down. Maybe I will turn them into something one day.

By the way, it's funny how odd sit-coms can be without the laugh track. I remember seeing some episodes of MASH when I was younger that didn't, for whatever reason, include the laugh track. It seemed palpably eerie, much like walking down a deserted downtown street that is usually bustling.

On Libs and Cons

2008-08-02T15:13:00.003-04:00

The previous post reminded me of yet another pet peeve I have, and that is perceived levels of ignorance among people espousing certain political ideologies.

Typically, at least among the socially conscious, conservatives are branded as ignorant hicks, which they usually are. However, liberals can be just as ignorant, often irritatingly so. The only difference is, and this is what kills me, that liberal ignorance is politically correct and therefore ok, whereas when a conservative is so, he's just another ignorant conservative. Liberals will often defend religions or ideologies they know nothing about.

I find the distinction between liberal and conservative is somewhat passe: nowadays, liberals can seem conservative, and vice versa. The distinction is perhaps less moribund in the US, but even there one can see it: McCain is (or was) a leftist Republican, whereas Hilary Clinton is a right of centre Democrat.

Chris Rock was right: it makes no sense to call oneself a liberal, or democract, or whatever. In my opinion, any person who brands him/herself a liberal or a conservative, or what have you, is clearly not a thinking person.

Religulous

2008-08-02T14:54:00.003-04:00

Last night, against my better judgment, I watched a very interesting debate that aired on British television concerning faith-based schools and their role (if any) in free, secular societies. It is an hour long piece, the first part of which you can see here. One of the speakers against faith based schools is none other than Richard Dawkins, who earned more of my respect, but more on that later.

The totalitarian logic of Catholics and Muslims has really bothered me for some time, and I'm amazed that I haven't written on it yet. Lest I ramble on for countless pages, I will attempt to offer my pithy proof that their logic is twisted and absurd.

A Catholic will say that his religion teaches that life is precious, and is therefore against abortion; a Muslim will argue that Islam forbids representations of Muhammad. No problems there (forgetting for the moment that Muslims have always had their own representations of Muhammad. Take a look at Ottoman manuscripts or a marketplace in Tehran and you'll see what I'm talking about).

The problem is when these religious people take their individual beliefs and attempt thrust them into the public sphere, universalizing them. It is not enough for a Catholic to say that abortion is wrong, in their eyes, but that this is what everyone, including legislators, should believe, and the same goes for the above mentioned Muslims.

Not only is this problematic for its own sake, but their logic is selective and absurd. Isn't it odd that you never hear Muslims (or Jews) telling non-Muslims (or Gentiles) that they shouldn't eat pork, or Catholics telling non-Catholics that they shouldn't eat meat on Fridays? However, when it comes to bigger issues, such as abortion, this is exactly what they are doing! When a Catholic tells you that you should not believe in abortion and that it should be illegal, or when a Muslims tells you that you, a non-Muslim, are forbidden to make any depictions of Muhammad, they might as well tell you not to eat meat on Fridays or pork, respectively. They are taking one aspect of their own faith, however small, and thrusting it on non-believers. This is what pisses me off.

On this note, I suggest that C.S. Lewis's Mere Christiantity become required reading for ALL religious people. Among other things, Lewis's book deals with the role of religion in a modern, secular society. He makes the very clear point that one's individual religious beliefs needs not always be reconciled to the laws of the land. Lewis offers the example of divorce (though today, one could use gay marriage, abortion, etc), and says that, if you are a Catholic who believes divorce is wrong, there is no reason why a state law legalizing should make you lose any sleep. If it bothers you, then you don't get divorced, but don't stop anyone else from doing so! Here too is the same problem as above. Thus, if your faith forbids eating pork, drawing Muhammad, or getting divorced, then don't do any of those things, but don't expect everyone else to follow you.
-----
Richard Dawkins earned my further respect by taking on a (rather poor) Muslim apologist on the program. Dawkins several times asked the cleric/educator "What is the penalty for apostasy in your faith", which interlocutor refrained from answering until the end of the program when he was put on the spot. He was talking out of his ass and being a little cocky until Dawkins pretty much shut him up with this one question.

People, usually ignorant yet well-intentioned liberals, ignoring the elephant in the room really piss me off!

Note: the title of this post is taken from the title of Bill Maher's upcoming documentary. It was slated to come out this month, but I just found out that it probably won't be released until October. I seriously doubt the doc will teach me anything I don't already know, but it should be entertaining, so I will probably watch it for free.

Taco Hell

2008-07-30T10:40:00.003-04:00

The following image is from this morning's Holy Taco. The poll in the right hand side had me rolling in the aisles:

FYI, both are flattering pictures of their respective subjects. I've seen Coulter resemble a mummy at times.

But seriously, it's a tough one. Coulter probably has an age advantage, so lookswise, she's slightly better off. However, for personality, etc, one has to favour Ms. Huffington. I saw her recently on the Bill Maher show, and she seems like a lovely person. Given her age, she ain't bad lookin neither!

My one hesitation with Coulter is that I think she's a total idiot. Once in a blue moon, when the planets are in alignment, I actually agree with something she says, but otherwise, I honestly think she does not hear 99% of what she says. I may actually find interviews with her and use them in my upcoming essay writing class as exemplars of logical fallacies.

Conclusion: who would I rather "be with"? I would have to say Huffington.

Nostra-damn-us

2008-07-29T12:17:00.002-04:00

Given my increasing level of insanity, I am susceptible to random thoughts. Last night I thought of the once famous Nostradamus for the first time in years.

I was introduced to the putative prophet (more like bad poet) over a decade ago through a documentary on him, narrated by Orson Wells, entitled The Man who Saw Tomorrow. As with all other Nostradamus programs, they claim that he had actually predicted everyting from Napoleon, Hitler, the Iranian Revolution, and everything in between. Of course, one can retroactively "prove" that any text, even Moby Dick, predicted such events.

The doc was created in 1980, and they used some of Nostradamus's quatrains to interpret some specific future events. It's worth seeing whether any of those were true.

Of course, you have nutjobs like John Hogue, an "expert" on Nostradamus who also looks eerily like him, making predictions, and then disappearing when they aren't realized. A few years ago I saw him on TV discussing the figure of Mabus, the supposed third Anti-Christ. Hogue, using some magical anagram formulas he made up on the spot, argued that Mabus is none other than Sadam Hussein. Well, Mr. Sadam, he dead!

Nevertheless, I think the video made predictions based on some quatrains that are not entirely without merit. First, they claimed that sometime in the near future (post 1980), there would be a worldwide famine, the like of which had not been seen. This didn't come true, BUT there was a massive famine in Africa during the mid to late 1980s.

Even more interesting is Nostradamus's supposed prediction of World War III. He claimed it would be caused by one Mabus, a dude from the middle east wearing a blue turban. The film's dramatization depicted an Arabic looking man wearing a blue turban firing nuclear missiles on New York City in the year 1999. This would start the third (and last) world war, which is to last 27 years.

As ridiculous as it seemed, something similar, though not as extreme, occurred: 9/11. Guys from the middle east, following a guy in a turban, attacked the "New City". Though this hasn't started WW III, it could very well be that the new world war is the "war on terror." Perhaps the whole business in Iraq, Afghanistan, etc, that is going on now is the third world war.

This post requires a huge disclaimer: I don't believe in Nostradamus, and votaries of the man often make him say things he did not. His quatrains were random, poorly written, encrypted passages which require heavy interpretation. There was one putative quatrain circulating on the internet a few years ago, which supposedly proved that Nostradamus himself predicted 9/11. However, thirty seconds of research revealed that the quatrain in question was actually an assemblage of unconnected passages from Nostradamus's corpus, with some new words thrown in. Perhaps it's easier to say that the makers of the documentary predicted something like 9/11?

Here is one of the significant passages in question:

At five and forty degrees, the sky will burn,
Fire approaches the great new city,
Immediately a huge, scattered flame leaps up.

The "new city" is often interpreted as New York, so you can see how the interpretation game works. Other, more serious, scholars argue that the new city referred to here and elsewhere refers to a city in France, Nostradamus's native land. I could be wrong, but I recall hearing that the planes that attacked the WTC in NYC approached at a 45 degree angle. Whatever it means, NYC is NOT on the 45th parallell: this is somewhere in Canada.

Oh, I almost forgot the last sentence in the quatrain, which even the Orson Welles documentary omits: When they want to have verification from the Normans. Res Ipsa loquitur.

This reminds me of the utter nonsense of the "Bible Code," promulgated a few years ago. The author (whose name escapes me) argued that the Bible actually predicted many major world events, including the "assasination" of Princess Diana. If you actually read the author's method, if there is one, you will see that, far from being a code, it is nothing more than a game of finding random words and letters to support pre-existing predictions. Some very clever people who wanted to discredity the author used his own method and "proved" that Moby Dick also predicted the assassination of Princess Di.

The lesson is that you can make anyone (any text, etc) say just about anything, and this is never easier than with a hack poet who lived five centuries ago. In my first published paper, I argue (among other things) that Roman Jakobson, the famous 20th century linguist, does just this: by citing some of what X says, and omitting other things, he often makes X say the opposite of what he actually did.

This post is going nowhere fast, so I will stop.

High Life

2008-07-28T11:10:00.002-04:00

Recently, I was did some research on the cost of living, especially that of western Europe compared to North America. Turns out that the cost of living in Canada, and even much of the US, is much, much lower than Europe and Australia.

Here is a related piece that should make those caffeine consumers in us happy. Ironically, perhaps, Moscow is one of the most expensive cities in the world.

Night at the Movies

2008-07-23T21:19:00.003-04:00

After not having seen a film in a few weeks, I finally sat down to watch one tonight: Smart People.

The film was not so bad as it was disappointing. Instead of giving a review, however, I will merely pose the following question:

Am I the only one who finds pseudo-independent films portraying depressed, pseudo-witty white people not a little passe and boring?

Speaking of films, I haven't seen Dark Night yet as I'm waiting for the dust to settle before seeing it. From what I've seen and heard, it's one of the best movies in years. Can't wait, especially since the offerings from the film industry this year have been fairly poor.

Browser Update

2008-07-19T12:20:00.002-04:00

I recently lauded the newly launched Mac Safari browser for Windows. After about a week of use, I have reached some conclusions:

The browser is great, when it works. It is by far the most lightweight browser, and is aesthetically pleasing since it renders pages nicely. However, it has some problems:

1) Memory leak: although Safari starts off by using up no more than about 10-15,000 K of RAM (sometimes less), I found that when I visited certain webpages, my CPU would load like crazy for no apparent reason, which would increase the RAM usage exponentially. This would occur even after the page in question had finished loading.

2) Safari is undoubtedly the least stable browser I have used. Occasionally it will freeze inexplicably or, as mentioned above, load like crazy for no apparent reason.

3) Finally, the browser has compatibility issues. I use my browser for almost every conceivable internet application (videos, blogging, etc), including conducting research. I found that I could search academic databases fine, such as the MLA database, but that for reasons that are unclear, Safari could not open the sites of journals, much less the articles themselves.

As just about every well-known browser has issues, I decided to look into some lesser known candidates. Last night I downloaded two browsers most people have probably never heard of: Avant and K-Meleon, the latter of which I am using right now.

I have only used the two browsers for less than a day, so I will reserve judgment until further trials are conducted. So far, however, both seem quite good, especially K-Meleon. Here are some of its advantages:

1) Lighweight: as I'm typing this, K-Meleon is taking up a mere 28,000 K of RAM, less than half of what Firefox uses.

2) Compatibility: so far I have noticed no compatibility issues. I've been able to browser a vast array of pages without a hitch, and I've also been able to access journal articles online.

3) Built-in features: Firefox's biggest claim to fame, in my opinion, is it's AdBlock add-on, truly a gift from the heavens. K-Meleon has a very simple AdBlock option built in, which works very well, but sometimes too well. That is, it will sometimes block "false positives," pictures or links that it perceives as ads but really are not.
K-Meleon has one amazing feature that not even Firefox has: optional flash blocker. If selected, the browser will stop all flash applications on a web page, which you can activate if you wish. This is great since nine times out of ten, you don't want to see those apps anyway.

Before you conclude that I'm a communist, I'm not: I don't mind unobtrusive ads, but I draw the line when they give me seizures. These types of ads not only ruin the browsing experience but DO slow it down as well.

I have not used Avant as much, but it seems ok so far. It is even more lightweight and does come with a built-in adblocker. However, the latter isn't very effective: I still see those annoying and ubiquitous "get laid tonight" ads in the sidebar.

Lest one thinks that I have flip-flopped, I would like to paraphrase a quote from George Walker's anti-Jacobin novel The Wanderer (1798): To say that my opinion has changed from yesterday only means that I am wiser today than I was yesterday.

On a side note (pun intended), I have added a new application in the sidebar that tells me (and readers) whence people come to this blog. It seems like a huge invasion of privacy, but I can assure both of you that it's merely to satiate my curiosity.

Enjoy.

Postmodern Postmortem

2008-07-17T22:07:00.002-04:00

This is tantamount to beating a dead horse, but such stories never cease to make me shake my head and laugh simultaneously.

By the Numbers

2008-07-16T09:44:00.002-04:00

I'm often fond of hyperbole and use it myself whenever possible.

I'm still wondering about this one, though.

Safar(i), so good

2008-07-14T12:09:00.002-04:00

I have previously argued for the merits of the Firefox browser, and how it is infinitely better than the standard Internet Explorer which, for reasons I'll never know, still commands approximately 75% of the market share (on PC).

However, I have become somewhat weary of the browser, especially since version 3 was released a few weeks ago. Don't get me wrong: it's a powerful browser that has many great features, and the addons, most notably AdBlock, enrich ones browsing experience.

However, Firefox is still a memory hog. Immediately after Firefox opens, it already takes up no less than 60,000 K of RAM, even if it isn't doing anything. The longer it stays open, the worse it gets. I also noticed that, despite the claims of the Firefox team, the browser can be slow at times, especially with certain pages. I would argue that fewer people would use the browser were it not for the great addons.

I have since discovered a new browser: Safari. This browser has been around for quite some time on the Mac, and was released for Windows recently. I have used it for about a week now, and here are my findings:

Safari is by far the fastest browser on for the PC I have tried (I also have tested IE, Firefox, and Opera). I have never seen a browser load pages as quickly. As far as resources go, it is the most lightweight, often taking up as little as 8,000 or 10,000 KB of RAM. It is also probably the most attractive browser I've seen. I've been using PCs my entire life, but, whatever be the faults of Mac, it is aesthetically superior.

I have so far found few faults with this browser. It doesn't seem to be able to multitask very well: it supports tabbed browsing (I tab like crazy), but especially if you are dealing with content rich sites (videos, etc), it doesn't like it when you have more than one or two loading at once. The browser occasionally hangs for a few seconds, but I have a hunch it is the barrage of advertisements intended to overwhelm you into submission that is doing this more than anything else. Unfortunately, Safari does not (yet) have an adblocking apparatus. I haven't had any problems yet, but I can't say for certain how safe Safari is.

The bottom line: if you want a lightweight, lightning fast browser, get this.

Speaking of software, for a year or so I was using MSN lite as my messaging client. This is MSN but without the annoying ads or hidden software that gets installed on your computer. I found that even this lite version was remarkably inefficient: even after signing out, I noticed MSN was taking up no less than 20,000 K, which is far too much for a program that isn't doing anything.

There are a few alternatives to MSN that most people probably aren't aware of. I have tried a few of them, including Miranda, Pidgin, and Trillian, and I find the latter to be the best overall. Trillian is just as good as MSN, if not better, and it is faster and more efficient. Right now I am signed off, but the program is still running in the task bar, and it is taking up only 1,500 KB. It is a lightweight alternative that has many neat features, and I highly recommend it. Pidgin and Miranda also work well, but they leave something to be desired. Miranda is incredibly fast and lightweight, and works great if you only chat and do nothing else. Pidgin appears more lightweight than Trillian, but surprisingly, it takes up more RAM.

I hope this post has been useful for at least one person. We live in an age of abundant free software, most of which works far better than default programs. Why stick with something you don't like if you aren't stuck with it?

Literary Anecdotes, vol ?

2008-07-14T11:58:00.003-04:00

For my current research on Adam Smith, I was looking at his reception among the mid-eighteenth century Germans, notably Herder and Lessing, both of whom were the only ones for a long time who viewed Smith's moral theory with a mind to aesthetic applications. Lessing's Laocoon, an aesthetic treatise, has been available in English for over a century now, but most of Herder's works are still unavailable to non-German speakers. In fact, I read one of his works in which Smith is mentioned, and this was only translated into English for the first time in 2006.

I don't know much about Johann Gottfried Herder, but I know this: holy shit he wrote a lot!! The standard edition of his works, Samtliche Werke, consists of no less than thirty two volumes, which is even more remarkable since he only lived to the age of 57.

Here's the amusing bit: not sure if this is an apocryphal story, but apparently the editor of the gargantuan edition of Herder's works, Bernard Suphan, eventually committed suicide. It is entirely possible that his job had at least something to do with this as he stood on a huge pile of these works to hang himself.

Somnium Arbionis, vol. II

2008-07-10T11:56:00.002-04:00

Last night I had my most vivid dream in quite some time, though characteristically f#$%ed. This is odd since I did not take any Melatonin, which often produces vivid and very strange dreams. The dream seemed, however, a fairly coherent one, which is unusual for me, but I can only remember episodes that seemed to have a seamless logic which now escapes me.
As most of the episodes will be meaningless to everyone given their private symbolism (though it would make for a good postmodern poem which no one else would understand), I will present the one episode that remains the clearest in my memory. I know of at least one person whom this should interest, given the subject matter. Comments in [] are my own attempts at rationalizing what I saw or heard.

I saw myself at what appeared to be either a T.S. Eliot Museum/exhibition of film, which is odd in itself since he's not one of my favourite writers, nor do I know much about him. I recall picking up a small, hardcover volume resembling those small, blue Oxford University Press hardcovers from the 1960s. This one had a hologram, resembling that of a magic 8 ball, of a skull on the back [there was a magic 8 ball character on a Venture Bros episode I saw two days previous]. Then I found myself standing at some sort of podium, reading the book, and then noticed a very, very thin stream of light which emanated from Eliot's (presumably) grave, was approximately a few hundred feet away situated at about 1 o'clock from my position, which was directed to my face, but it wasn't blinding. This was more like a Special Effects thing rather than a natural phenomenon, and it seemed a deliberate part of the exhibition.

From what I can remember next, I and many others were watching a film by/about Eliot (I think) in a venue that resembled the Bytowne cinema in Ottawa, an independent theatre that seats approximately 150-200 people. I then remember becoming incensed because some people, especially those in front of me, were "propping" themselves using additional chairs. This upset me, who was now sitting on the ground and unable to see the screen well. Just before I got up to voice my displeasure, a woman in the far back yelled something like "what's the point of having a chair if you're not going to use it?", to which I replied with a loud "Thank You." One of the guilty parties in front of me said something justificatory, to which I replied, "yes, but I can't see." He then said something like "use a magnifying glass," to which I replied sarcastically, "yeah, so I can see the guy's ass!" (this elicited some laughter from the audience). What is stranger is that I appeared in fact to have some telescopic device in my hand, which I only noticed just as I was offering my retort.

Though I think psychoanalysis and much of what Freud said is total BS, I would love to hear his interpretation. Better yet, I think I would rather hear what Jung would have to say, since his interpretations are often far more contextual and nuanced.

Res Ipsa Loquitur, the cute version

2008-06-30T11:36:00.003-04:00

And This Year's Greatest Douchebag Award Goes To...

2008-06-29T13:32:00.002-04:00

This guy.

http://view.break.com/527579 - Watch more free videos

I do, however, admire his directness and chutzpah. I too have absolutely no patience for games.

Euro Quickie

2008-06-26T10:56:00.002-04:00

I'm off to watch the last semi-final (sniff) between Russia and Spain in a couple of hours. This is the first time Russia has made it this far since the collapse of the Soviet Union. Spain also hasn't made it this far in 24 years. Should be a good one.

I refused to predict this one as it will be perhaps the most unpredictable game of the tournament. I'm thinking Spain will narrowly win, but I wouldn't be at all surprised if Russia wins 1-0. Let's go with the latter and see what happens.

Sundries

2008-06-23T14:13:00.002-04:00

The Italy Spain game yesterday wasn't the greatest of the tournament, but not the worst either. Congrats to Spain for not choking for once. Russia vs. Spain promises to be a feast of attacking football/soccer. I must admit that this tournament has been very unpredictable and full of drama. Without a doubt this is the best Euro tournament I've seen since I started watching it in '96 (My God, has it been that long?)

-----------------------------

McDonald's Diet?

This man lost weight by eating only McDonald's for 6 months. Sound bizarre? Yes it does, but when you see what he actually consumed, it's just another case of Captain Obvious striking again.

------------------------------

Just found out George Carlin, the legendary comedian, died yesterday. He was not my favourite comic, and some of his acts sound more like sermons than stand-up comedy. However, one cannot deny his massive influence, not to mention remarkably long and successful career. I just saw his latest act ("It's Bullshit, and it's bad for ya") only four months ago, in which he was, at the age of 70, still as energetic and irate as ever.

Carlin will be missed. RIP.

Euro / Firefox at last

2008-06-22T11:13:00.003-04:00

I had a feeling Russia might pull off the upset yesterday, but I had no idea it would be such a convincing victory. I kinda like Holland, and didn't want to see either team lose, but such is the nature of the beast.

As my friend so astutely said, "The loud crack at 5 pm yesterday was the sound of people jumping off the Holland bandwagon." Well said.

Not only has Spain made the same mistakes as Holland, Portugal and Croatia (i.e., they flew past the round robin, were never tested, and rested their players), they are perhaps the worst chokers in the sport when games actually mean something. The teams that win are always the ones who start slowly, and Italy are notoriously slow starters. Today's result? 1-0 or 2-1 Italy.

-----------------------

Firefox 3 was finally released a few days ago (I'm writing this post with it, in fact). Not sure if it's substantially better, but it's free and still beats the pants off Internet Explorer.
No, I do not work for Firefox: it's just a better browser, plain and simple.

(Scale) Breaking News

2008-06-21T09:56:00.001-04:00

This just in: Of all countries, Australia has officially overtaken the U.S. as the world's fattest nation (per capita, of course). I really didn't see that coming.

Now back to the Euro.

The Euro/Too Hard to Spell?

2008-06-14T02:36:00.003-04:00

Sorry, both of you, for the lack of posts: since I returned from Scarberia I've been busy catching up on the Euro tournament.

At this point, I'm not going to make any further predictions: it's just too damn unpredictable, which is partly what makes it interesting. I will only modify my earlier predictions thus:

Germany will make it to the quarterfinals because they're group is incredibly weak. However, if they face a decent team, like Portugal, they will get smashed.

Spain is looking on form, but they are notoriously fast starters who never finish (ignore the innuendo of that sentence).

At this point, I'm tempted to say Holland or Portugal will take the whole thing, but who knows?

--------------------------
This video is a classic case of res ipsa loquitur. Key quote: "Do they even make hardcore dictionaries anymore?"

The Euro

2008-06-06T12:50:00.002-04:00

I'm in Scarberia this week visiting family. It's a little boring, but my 19 month old nephew keeps us busy.

I'm looking forward to the kickoff for Euro 2008 tomorrow. The tournament is not as attractive or global as the World Cup, but given the international dearth of soccer, especially in this part of the world, I'll take it.

Not many soccer fans I know are particularly excited about this event, probably because no teams look particularly impressive. I've already chatted with a couple of friends, and we have made some predictions.

My friend, J.C., argued that Portugal and Germany will both do well, and Spain may finally do something. I'm inclined to agree with this assessment: I think Portugal is by far the best team this year; Germany is decent, but not championship calibre. Spain has the best team they've had in years, and they finally have a good striker in Torres. I doubt they will win, but they may get far this year.

My friend Jamie suggested that Russia will be the dark horse of the tournament. No one has payed attention to them: they've been quietly preparing with Guus Hiddink, one of the most successful coaches in soccer history. They may very well surprise by getting far, something they have not done in ages.

In addition, I have a feeling that one of the hosts, Austria or Switzerland, will surprise us. Granted, neither team has a particularly illustrious record, but host countries typically get farther than expected. Austria lacks experience at the international stage, so my bet is on Switzerland to make it to the semis.

Neither Italy nor France will do much this time around, and I think the Czechs will be disappointing.

But who knows?

Sex and the City, and I'm not talking about the show

2008-06-02T01:32:00.003-04:00

That's right: I'm referring to the movie.

This may come as a surprise to those who know me personally, but, for reasons I can't comprehend, I watched the newly released Sex and the City film today (there's no way I would pay to see it, of course).

Instead of boring you with a pedestrian review, I'll direct you to Anthony Lane's (thanks to Dr. J for the link). Lane is always witty and insightful, though I can't say I understand or agree with him all the time.

[Spoiler Alert, but the movie is fairly predictable, so no need to worry]

Despite this, I find that Lane nearly always has one sentence in his review that has me laughing out loud and agreeing at the same time; it is an accurate, witty, pithy, humorous, and economical assessment. This talent of Lane's is shared by very few writers past or present (George Orwell comes to mind). I still vividly remember what he said about Star Wars III when it came out in 2005: "The general opinion of “Revenge of the Sith” seems to be that it marks a distinct improvement on the last two episodes, “The Phantom Menace” and “Attack of the Clones.” True, but only in the same way that dying from natural causes is preferable to crucifixion."

Lane's best writing in his review of Sex and the City consists of the following three sentences:

"It’s true that Samantha finally disposes of one paramour, but only with a view to landing another, and her parting shot is a beauty: “I love you, but I love me more.” I have a terrible feeling that “Sex and the City” expects us not to disapprove of that line, or even to laugh at it, but to exclaim in unison, “You go, girl.” I walked into the theatre hoping for a nice evening and came out as a hard-line Marxist, my head a whirl of closets, delusions, and blunt-clawed cattiness."

I concur completely (especially the Marxist bit), and I don't think it could be said any better.

This brings up the problematic topic of irony in the movie/show, something that may or may not be deliberate, and is probably lost on most of the target audience, but that is a post for another day.

Bullshit!

2008-05-25T12:53:00.003-04:00

Last night I watched a few episodes of Penn and Teller's Bullshit. In case you haven't heard of it, it's an informative and humorous program: picture Mythbusters with passionate cursing and, instead of urban myths, societal/political/religious myths.

The duo attempt to expose the bullshit (hence the title) of certain practices, etc. Topics range from the predictable Bible bashing to the more original and interesting environmental hysteria.

Alluc.org has some episodes, though I don't know what proportion these ones represent.

One particular episodes was especially enlightening for me: recycling. Yup, that's right: recycling is, to a certain extent, bullshit. Turns out it costs a whole lot more and, in some cases, is actually detrimental. They cite the piece, "Eight Great Myths of Recycling," along with its author as corroborating evidence. If nothing else, this piece should be a great icebreaker at cocktail parties.

Their piece on environmental hysteria was also very informative. Not only are most radical "environmentalists" clueless potheads, but they have spread much misinformation, probably in an attempt to be heard. Did you know, for instance, that there are more trees in the world now than eighty years ago? Did you also know that, contrary to popular belief, landfills are not running out? It would merely take a 100 square mile landfill to contain all the trash the U.S. will produce in the next century. Turns out that what we were told about recycling as kids turns out to be false.

At times it seemed to me that the show is espousing a conservative ideology, but there is definite evidence to the contrary: the show, after all, bashes the Bible and the notion that prostitution should be illegal, so the underlying politics of the show, if any, is difficult to pin down.

Like Mythbusters, their modus operandi is hardly beyond reproach. In one episode, for instance, they debunk conspiracy theories, such as the famous 9/11 one, the Kennedy assasination, and the Moon landing. What bothered me is that I have seen respectable and credible people question the standard moon landing narrative, but Bullshit turns to one rural American wackjob as a representative of the theory that the moon landing was faked. That's hardly balanced.

The Gospel of George

2008-05-24T13:51:00.002-04:00

10 tips for Hard Working by George Costanza.

Simpsons Stole Some Serious Stuff

2008-05-23T20:17:00.003-04:00

The Simpsons is well known, among other things, for its countless allusions to other cultural productions (movies, celebrities, literature, etc, etc). The show has also become a source of allusions itself, and has entered the cultural vocabulary.

However, I discovered today that the Simpsons, for the first time, as far as I know, plagiarized a joke from another show.

I was watching an episode of Saved By the Bell: The College Years ("The Rave") today (please don't ask me why), and at one point Zack Morris complains that a warehouse he thought abandoned had suddenly become not so abandoned. After relating this anecdote, he mutters, "Stupid economic recovery!"

Most of you will probably recognzie this line from the far more popular Simpsons. In the episode in which Homer fakes kidnapping Larry Burns, C.M. Burns's son, an identical scene occurs: while evading the law, they both run into what appears to be an abandoned warehouse. However, as they enter it, they are alarmed to discover that the warehouse is full and bustling with employees and machines, to which Homer exclaims, "D'oh! Stupid economic recovery".

Just to set the record straight, the Saved By the Bell episode aired in early 1994, whereas the Simpsons episode aired in November of 1996, over two years later. Given the quality of the writing on the Simpsons, I had originally assumed that the joke originated with that show, but the dates clearly don't check out.

It is quite possible that this joke was taken from yet another cultural production (show, book, article, etc), that I'm not aware of. Any ideas?

This raises a legal question: are (very brief) jokes copyrighted? I seem to recall another even more manifest example of this phenomenon when I saw a B or C list comic (possibly Carlos Mencia, but I'm not sure) copy verbatim a fairly lengthy joke Bill Cosby made famous about 25 years earlier. So far as I know, no legal action was taken.

Soccer Update

2008-05-21T23:33:00.002-04:00

I watched the Champions League final, the most prestigious tournament in Europe, today with a couple of friends who actually watch soccer (more on that later). One of my friends was understandably heartbroken by Chelsea's loss in the penalty shoot out.

In case I haven't said so before, the penalty shoot out is bullocks!

Man U played well, but the last 60 minutes or so were definitely Chelsea's.

To all you wannabe Manchester United "fans" out there: bugger off! You never even watch soccer, much less know it, so don't support a team you never f@#% watch!! Man, that pisses me right off.
Of course, it's easy to hop on the bandwagon of the winning team. Every four years, I see people who know nothing about soccer suddenly becoming "experts" on the subject, and they invariably "follow" one of the two bandwagon teams: Brazil or England.

My friend J.C. (not Jesus Christ) devised a simple test to determine which one of your peers is a bandwagon hopper, and its genius is in its simplicity: simply ask the suspected bandwagon hopper to name 3-4 players (aside from Beckham, who isn't a real player anyway) on the team they ostensibly support. 99% of the time, they will be speechless. I hate these f@#% people!

Finally, some good news!

2008-05-20T11:49:00.003-04:00

Looks like my hard work has paid off: I'm going to get published!

I submitted an article on Roman Jakobson (the 20th century linguist) to Neophilologus, a respected Dutch journal, a few months ago. I received the email this morning informing me that it has been accepted (pending some bibliographical tweaking).

So I didn't waste most of last summer working on this.

Humorous 18th Century Anecdotes, vol. I

2008-05-18T14:42:00.002-04:00

I was reading Peter Martin's biography of Edmund Malone, the last great 18th century editor of Shakespeare (in many ways, also the most important). However, I only wanted to share a humorous line with you from the book, nothing more.

While working on his edition of the works of Dryden, Malone came across a manuscript. However, the handwriting was so bad that, according to Malone, 'the sagacity of an Oedipus is requisite to decypher every second word' (p. 230).

The next time you come across particularly unintelligible handwriting, feel free to use the above.
This is why I got into the 18th century :-)

Turkish Rambo

2008-05-17T11:24:00.002-04:00

This has to be the greatest movie ever made. How the AFI missed it, I'll never know.

Be sure to check out Turkish Star Trek, which is infinitely better than the original.

Back to the Future, then the Past, then...

2008-05-16T00:12:00.002-04:00

Tonight I watched what is probably my favourite movie of all time for maybe the 5th time.

It may seem cheesy, but, for me at least, this film is profoundly nostalgic, and it leaves me with that warm, fuzzy feeling that is desperately lacking these days.

Among other things, the film reminds me that the 80s was a generally optimistic decade. Starting in the 90s, we entered the age of irony and pessimism. That reminds me: I hate the baby boomers! Why? Because they had it all: they grew up in the golden age of America (50s); had free love and drugs in the 60s; did coke and disco in the 70s; made money during the real estate boom. By the time the world went to hell in the 90s, they were too old to care (I must credit Dennis Miller with this analysis).

The mind-blowing experience of Marty meeting is parents as teenagers still gets me everytime I watch the film. Wouldn't it be great if we could all go back and see what our parents were really like?

As I watched the film tonight, I was started thinking about how much the world has changed in the years since the film was released in 1985. The differences between 1955 and 85 are obvious, but oddly enough, in the 23 years since the film came out, not much has changed. We have cellphones, computers, portable music players, etc, but earlier forms of those devices existed back then. If Marty (or Doc) came to the year 2008, it wouldn't look all that different from 1985. Unlike the the span between 1955 and 1985, there have not been any epochal or monumental changes between 1985 and now. I'm not saying this is a bad thing, just something to consider.

Poor Michael J. Fox: he was one of my favourites growing up, and now he's plagued with Parkinson's. That hurt me as much as finding out that Christopher Reeve (Superman) got paralyzed back in 1992. If what I have said about our current zeitgest, which originated in the 90s, is true, then their fates are somewhat symbolic manifestations of it.

Edward Said said wrong things

2008-05-12T17:05:00.003-04:00

Today I finally acquired my copy of Ibn Warraq's Defending the West: A Critique of Edward Said's Orientalism from Amazon.ca. I rarely buy new books, especially hardcovers, but I read Warraq's Why I am Not a Muslim (published years befre 9/11, in case you were wondering), and I appreciate his efforts, so I wished to support his latest enterprise financially, although I am, in the words of Falstaff "as poor as Job."

I admire Ibn Warraq because he tackles issues which are currently taboo. Thanks to Islamofascists (which are not all Muslims, just the ignorant and insane ones) and ignorant Western liberals, certain myths about Islam have been allowed to proliferate. Warraq's mission seems to be the undermining of these myths, for insance, that Islamic civilization and/or theology are sunshine and lollipops and beyond reproach.

In his latest monograph, Warraq points his gun on Edward Said's very influential Orientalism, which more or less founded the study of Post-Colonialism. It also set the tone for much of it, that is, the topos of East/Orient as victim of Western machinations. Warraq takes issue with many of Said's more theoretical/philosophical points, but he also demonstrates how Said made several historical gaffes. For instance, Said wrote that Islam first spread to Asia Minor and then Northern Africa. Of course, this is simply not true as Northern Africa was Islamicized as early as the 7th-8th centuries CE.

As his title suggests, Ibn Warraq wishes to defend the West from the rancour of such critics as Said. He demonstrates that the Orient (whatever that means) has been historically as bad as the West (slavery, empire, etc). For whatever reason, we in the West tend to this of ourselves as evil, whereas the Orient was simply unblemished. Warraq also wishes to demonstrate that Orientalism, as it was founded and developed during the 18th and 19th centuries, was not always inextricably bound with imperial interests (as an example, Warraq points out that Said completely ignores German and Hungarian orientalists of the period, and that neither of those nations had a vested interest in the Orient).

I'm expecting a very interesting and relatively quick read, as Warraq has a talent for providing a wealth of data and argument without giving the reader a headache. His prose is always very clear without a hint of pretension, which is a welcome relief (to be fair, Said himself is very readable, which is one reason why I do respect him).

Of course, given that Warraq's thesis and material is not politically correct (very little these days is, anyway), the academy will probably never hear of it. If, however, this is a subject that interests you, I highly recommend picking up a copy of his book. If you do, the next time you meet someone at a party who raves about Said, that person will have some powerful intellectual competition.

The Customer is Often Wrong

2008-05-06T19:40:00.002-04:00

I wake up each day thanking the Deity that I no longer work in retail.

This piece is a very intelligent, common-sensical deconstruction of the notoriously inaccurate adage "the customer is always right." In fact, the author demonstrates how observing the adage can actually be detrimental for businesses.

As always, captain obvious strikes, but I suppose that obviousness eludes most people. Running a business, like driving, is mostly common sense, which I'm sad to say is not so common. In my many years of retail service, though I had very few problem customers, I made it tacitly clear that my level of service would diminish as a customer's rudeness, often unprovoked, escalated. The problem is with managers, who will usually bend over backwards to satisfy the most unreasonable customer, leaving their employees feeling useless and powerless. It's also amazing how few managers would ever condescend (in the 18th century sense) to say a simple "good job tonight" to an employee. Unbelievable.

This reminds me that I must write my long awaited piece on how communism is far from dead since it still lives on in the retail sector. Simply put, despite appearances to the contrary, retail businesses often (if not always) operate using a Communist, not capitalist, underpinning.

------

Here's another classic that I read about 7 years ago on writing college papers. It no longer rings true for me, but it sure did at one point in my life not too long ago.

Saturday High at the Movies

2008-05-05T12:54:00.002-04:00

Harold and Kumar:
Escape from Guantanamo Bay

It's been four long years, but the sequel to Harold and Kumar go to Whitecastle finally came out last month. I saw it on Tuesday night, the same night of my move, so I was somewhat tired and wired when I saw it.

I won't go into a needlessly long-winded review as most people have already made up their minds about the H & K movies (you either love 'em or hate 'em). I have to say that, although the sequel was decent, the first one is much better. However, this fact is probably owing to factors beyond the film's control, namely that the first film set the bar (and expectations), and the ubiquitous and incessant previews showed about half the jokes. The sequel also lacks the charm and freshness of the original, but again, that is a burden virtually every sequel must contend with.

In short, if you liked the first one, you will most likely like this one, though not quite as much.

For the record, following my viewing of the first film about 3.5 years ago, a few friends and I made the trip to Detroit, MI (worst city I've ever seen) from Windsor, ON, to visit the then legendary Whitecastle. To put it simply, I'm not surprised that such places don't exist in Canada because they must violate every health regulation in the book. Without the slightest hyperbole, I can confidently say that Whitecastle makes McDonald's look like gourmet food by comparison. As if this weren't enough, there was a sign at this particular location in the parking lot which read [sic]: "No drug deals". Charming.

I've been off comps for a little less than a week, and though I haven't recovered from that monster, I need to make up some RA hours from last term and begin my correctorship for a friend/prof. I was very fortunate to get the latter, so no complaints here. I will probably begin my thesis proposal in late May/early June. Being ABD is going to take some getting used to.

Super Happy Fun Time

2008-05-04T14:01:00.003-04:00

I realized this might be a year or so late, but I recently discovered a site in which you can create your own South Park character. You can create one to look like you. This is the best I could come up with so far:

Have fun

Finally

2008-05-01T15:16:00.002-04:00

It's been a busy week, so here's what happened:

-I wrote my final, major comprehensive exam (18th century). I thought I did well but was nevertheless nervous about the results. Turns out I did very well on the written and destroyed the oral, so needless to say, I was pleased as punch about that. Now I'm officially ABD (All But Dissertation). I still need to keep reminding myself that I don't have any pressing reading, etc. Anyone who has done comps (at least in an English department) knows how brutal the process is.

-I finally moved into my new place. Call me picky, but I'm thrilled that I'm out of cracktown. My new place is also ten times better in every conceiveable way: it's bigger, quieter, nicer, etc, etc. It really would take me about 200 pages to explain everything.

I'm probably going to go into caveman mode for the next week to reboot my system.

Updates

2008-04-27T09:51:00.003-04:00

Well, I finally wrote my long awaited Major Comprehensive exam on Friday. I will most likely find out sometime this evening if I passed. If so, then I will need to go to an oral defense tomorrow, which is almost a formality by this point.

The exam was four hours long, and to be on the safe side, I had my first Red Bull during it. Not sure it did anything, but I did feel some heart palpitations and increased nervousness/jitteriness (then again, that could just be me). After I had finished writing the exam, I was very disoriented: I wandered around the department aimlessly for about an hour. I think the part of my brain responsible for syntax and semantics is somewhat dormant now, which should explain some irregularities in my writing.

I'm moving to a better place/area in two days! I can't wait.

Here's an hilarious treat I found last night: it's a tool that translates your normal, adult text and translates it into the idiom of a typical, retarded 12 year old online user. Go ahead and try it.

Juno what I'm talking about?

2008-04-19T15:41:00.002-04:00

Humorous lampoon from our friends at Cracked.com on the highly overrated Juno. Reminds me (again) that in many ways the 18th century (my century!) is probably the closest to our own.

For the record, I thought the film was half-decent and amusing, but to this day I cannot understand the hype surrounding it.

Extras Extras

2008-04-11T11:57:00.002-04:00

Some of you have probably already heard of the television show Extras, which I only started watching last week (online, of course). The main actor is Ricky Gervais, whom most of you will recognize from the UK version of The Office.

After a couple of episodes, I've really gotten into it. The closest analogue I can think of to this show is another favourite of mine, Curb Your Enthusiasm. I find that Extras is like the latter, except it is more British (read: dry) and less Jewish. Also, I find the awkward or uncomfortable moments in Extras are even more acute than in Curb. The latter's tone is usually fairly light, which probably diffuses much of the awkardness, whereas I've caught myself literally wincing or covering my eyes during some moments of Extras.

www.alluc.org has links to the episodes. Check it out.

It's not me, it's you[r books]

2008-04-08T13:58:00.002-04:00

Humorous article from the NY Times on relationships and literary taste.

What do you think of this? Does it ring true?

I personally think it's a mixed bag. Aristotle said that friends (and by extension, I suppose, significant others) have all things in common, but this need not be true. I have good friends whose musical and literary tastes I do not share, but that does not make us any less friends. In fact, I strongly believe that some difference in taste is necessary, otherwise things can get quite boring if you agree on everything.

For me, the impetus behind one's artistic predilections is key. In other words, if the person is passionate about literature or music at all, then that is a good start. It would, however, be difficult to reconcile differences that are completely opposed. It may be a problem if, say, one's favourite writer is Shakespeare, while the boy/girlfriend's is Dan Brown or another hack writer. For me, what is important is that the person in question likes any substantial or intelligent literature (broadly defined), not that we have identical tastes.

In case you're wondering: No, my significant other need not love Adam Smith, Samuel Johnson, Alexander Pope, or their ilk; an appreciation for good writing or ideas would be nice, though.

Crazy Wisdom

2008-04-05T14:04:00.002-04:00

I learned something last night: I came across Drukpa Kunley, a 15th century Buddhist monk from modern day Bhutan.

All that you really need to know about him is that he is remembered for enlightening people, especially women, using somewhat unorthodox methods (hint, his "flaming thunderbolt" is exactly what you think it is). Even today, five centuries after his death, people in Bhutan worship phalluses (his in particular) and they will even paint phalluses on their doors in an effort to ward off evil spirits.

Oh, he was also notorious for drinking lots of "chhaang", a Tibetan beverage very similar to beer. If I'm not mistaken, he taught that getting drunk and having crazy sex were the best ways to transcend the evils and hypocrisies of the world. Somehow I think Siddhartha Gautama, otherwise known as Buddha, would be shaking his head.

Why don't they teach this stuff in history class?

Res Ipsa Loquitur, vol. ?

2008-04-03T12:13:00.003-04:00

Courtesy of Break.com

A Tale of Fifty Cities

2008-04-02T21:56:00.003-04:00

According to the magazine Canadian Business, I currently reside in the best place to live in Canada. I do like this city, but you wouldn't think it was the best after living where I have for the last year, i.e., the heart of darkness, AKA Cracktown. It's especially embarrassing since Parliament Hill is about a ten minute walk away. Tsk, tsk.

On that note, I just found out today, after a long and nerve-wracking two weeks, that I've been approved by the managment company renting out my prospective apartment. I'll be moving back to the area I first lived in when I came to O-town. I move in about 26 days, probably the day after my comprehensive exam, so it's going to be an interesting end of the month! Call me picky, but I look forward to living among relatively normal people again (again, call me picky).

(FYI To Dr. J: I'm currently looking at the reception and use of the Bard in the 1790s vis-a-vis the French Revolution for an RAship . Interesting stuff).

"Taken out of Context"

2008-03-28T12:28:00.003-04:00

That string of words infuriates me, especially since I've been hearing it a lot owing to the Reverend Wright fiasco (for those who don't know, he's Barack Obama's former minister, and has been shown uttering incendiary and offensive language and sentiments).

Apologists of the Reverend, like some Islamic apologists who try to defend what is really untenable, repeat this phrase mechanically and peremptorily. The phrase has pretty much become a "get yourself out of anything" card.

Given my linguistic and theoretical training, as well as my interest in linguistics/deconstruction (Derrida and Fish come to mind), I acknolwedge that context is an often overlooked part of the chain of signification. Even when we do not think there is a context, there is, as Fish reminds us in his (in)famous "Is there a text in this class?".

However, I have yet to see a single apologist for Reverend Wright or other causes actually back up their statements and enlighten us as to just what the words mean in context, or at least what that context is. A recent example where the context argument was valid was a speech Pope Benedict made in Germany about a year ago. The Pope was accused, by people who never read or heard the speech, of being anti-Islamic because he said something about the lack of logic in Islam. In this case, his words were definitely taken out of context: the Pope opened his speech by quoting from (I believe) a medieval theologian, who was quoting a (supposed) debate that took place between the Byzantine emperor and a Muslim leader on the question of logic and faith. The Pope was asked to apologize for something he never said.

The context argument would work for Reverend Wright only if something similar happened. If he was being ironic or humorous, for instance, the context argument would apply. If he prefaced his remarks by saying something like "Some people say 'God Damn America,'" and someone removed the first part, then the context argument would apply.

The phrase has always been used in irritating ways, but it seems you can't turn the news on now without hearing it. I don't know what I'll do if I hear it one more time.

By the way, for those who recall the Don Imus fiasco: was what he said really that bad? I sure don't think so, even though it was foolish of him to say something like that. Nevertheless, I'm sure Imus's relative lack of skin pigmentation has something to do with him getting fired.

TV Time

2008-03-23T17:43:00.002-04:00

As I don't have cable, it is a little difficult to follow what is going on in the world of television (usually not much, anyway, and I refused to pay for cable when 99% of it is absolute garbagio!). However, one of my favourite comedians, Lewis Black, was recently given his own show, The Root of All Evil, which has so far only seen two episodes.

Most will recognized the irate comedian from his "Back in Black" segment on John Stewart's The Daily Show. If you like politically incorrect, irreverent, irate humour/rants, Black is your man. The show airs Wedesdays @ 10:30 (PST, I believe) on Comedy Central.

So far I've seen two episodes, and although the show elicits laughter and is amusing, its one major flaw is that there simply isn't enough Lewis Black. Another reviewer said he would prefer to see thirty minutes of "Back in Black," and I'm apt to agree with him. Until then, I will watch the program, until it probably gets pulled after six episodes because twenty billion people didn't tune in (that reminds me: most good shows of the past wouldn't last half a season in this age of unabated and unparalleled greed).

2008-03-21T15:08:00.001-04:00

A collection of unintentionally sexual images from the comics of the past. The first one had me rolling in the aisles.

mmm, Good Rant

2008-03-18T12:58:00.001-04:00

This is Foamy's best rant in quite some time

More Sins?

2008-03-13T12:22:00.004-04:00

That's right.

On Sunday, the Vatican updated its 1,500 year old list of the seven deadly sins, though I do not know how official they are (as far as I know, Pope Benedict has in no way given his sanction to it).

The list differs slightly depending on the source, but here it is:

Genetic Modification
Experiments on Humans
Drug abuse/Taking Drugs
Polluting the environment
Contributing to widening the divide between rich and poor/Social Injustice
Excessive/Obscene wealth
Creating poverty

Of course, being secular, I disgree with the first two new sins, and I think many will agree that the Church itself is guilty of #6 (why wealth itself should be a sin boggles the mind, unless it is indicative of another sin).

I'm no hippie, but I do my best to protect the environment (I take reusable bags with me when I go grocery shopping, and I use energy efficient light bulbs), so I think #4 is perhaps the best one there.

#3 reads "Drug Abuse," though another list simply said "Taking Drugs." I think it's pretty safe to say that the latter was intended. Otherwise, about 99% of the population of the industrialized world, including most of the Catholic Church, are condemned to hell.

I read one funny comment on a message board somewhere: (paraphrase) "Why didn't God mention any of these the first time around? Oh wait, the list is written by a bunch of celibate weirdos. "

I'm no fan of the Catholic Church, but at the very least, I applaud the impetus behind this new list. This is a step in the right direction, and demonstrates that there are at least some in the outdated Church who wish to address the needs of a changing world.

(A post only soccer fans will get)

2008-03-11T17:37:00.003-04:00

This just in: Ibrahimovic and especially Cruz are the biggest wankers in the soccer world.

Update: Mancini doesn't know what he's doing. How Inter are doing so well in Serie A boggles the mind. Why he never plays Recoba, who scores every time he's on the pitch, I'll never know.

Old Guys Scrap, and other noteworthy items

2008-03-11T10:52:00.003-04:00

Every few years, there comes a video that is not only funny, but make your saw drop in disbelief. This is the newest of those videos.

(Hint: It's funny when old white guys scrap) Rated G.

In other news, I'm going to watch the 2nd leg of the matchup between FC Internazionale and Liverpool either on my illegal chinese desktop TV or on a chinese stream online (commentary is in chinese, but it's free). Inter's going to have a tough time getting the 2-0 result they need just to tie things up.

I'm also this close (holds thumb and index finger barely apart) to getting a new place outside of cracktown. It's not the ideal place, but very respectable, especially compared to what else I saw. The price is also very reasonable considering the area. Will give updates on that as and when they happen.

Snow again

2008-03-06T12:12:00.000-05:00

Someone up there really loves torturing me.

I Hate Snow!

2008-03-05T10:34:00.002-05:00

That's right.

I know most people out there dislike the cold but don't mind (or even like) snow. I, however, am the complete opposite: I prefer cold (within reason) to god awful annoying snow. Here's why:

-Cold doesn't prevent you from doing much apart from having picnics. Snow, on the other hand, ruins everything. When you wake up in the morning, you rarely say "oh gee, it's -20 outside; it's gonna be a bad day." Rather, you probably think "oh great, 15 cm of snow."

-Cold simply doesn't get in the way. On other hand, snow causes accidents, slows everything down, needs to be cleared, and ruins one's mood (especially mine).

You may be asking, "hey assclown: if you hate snow so much, why don't you move somehwere warmer?"
First, I am in no position to move financially, economically, spiritually, mentally, or physically. Second, despite what I have said above, I actually need cold. I absolutely hate snow, but I need to live in a part of the world that gets cold sometimes. It is for this reason that I could not live in, say, LA (oh yeah, that and also the crass consumerism, pollution, and crime). Unfortunately for me, a jesting God has placed cold and snow together.

I must qualify my rant above: I don't absolutely hate snow. I kinda like it when there is some snow off to the side. When it's out of the way and within reason, it can be nice, but under no other circumstances.

Sings that you are too drunk

2008-03-05T10:29:00.000-05:00

Funny list, some items of which apply to me

Moses, maaaan

2008-03-04T12:41:00.001-05:00

Interesting and funny, but steers conspicuously clear of the religious implications.

(Embarrasingly) New Link

2008-03-02T23:00:00.002-05:00

I've mentioned to this site before, but I can't believe it took me over two years to realize that I had not linked to it in the sidebar.

www.illwillpress.com (Home of Foamy the Squirrel)

For those of you who like rants but don't like to read, or, prefer them with the addition of voices and animation.

Happy 297th

2008-03-01T16:48:00.003-05:00

On this day in 1711, Joseph Addison, along with his friend Richard Steele, launched The Spectator, the first periodical in Britain to be published daily. Though the paper itself is forgotten by all but 18th century scholars and geeks, the name has lived on to our time: there are at least two papers in the Anglophone world that I know of with the same name, one of which is based in Hamilton, Ontario.

Apart from its publishing landmark, Addison's contributions to the periodical, which comprises the bulk of what was published, set the standard for polite, refined, middle-class observation and writing. If for nothing else, Addison was remembered by posterity for his style, which was considered ideal. To paraphrase Doctor Johnson's judgment, Addison's style was refined yet not ostentatious, and common yet not vulgar.

Though Addison is remembered for little else, he also wrote the highly successful drama Cato, which was performed in 1710, but was partially completed at the age of 16. The play was so popular that George Washington kept a copy with him during the Revolutionary War and read it out loud to his soldiers before battle.

Unfortunately, Addison died at the age of 47, fairly early even by 18th century standards. For much of his life he was an MP, and thus did not spend much time on literature. He had a gift for poetry but rarely exhibited it. Perhaps his best work was yet to come.

On an entirely different note, I'm pleased that it's finally March: though this winter is not the coldest I can remember, it has been the snowiest and most annoying. I'm also pleased because I'm about 5 weeks away from finishing this onerous ordeal, otherwise known as comprehensives, and just under 2 months away from moving away from crack central, so things are looking up.

New Site

2008-02-23T15:13:00.002-05:00

Every once in a while, I come across a site that merits a link. This latest one was brought to my attention by The Flakey Girl Next Door. I know at least a couple of you will enjoy it.

http://stuffwhitepeoplelike.wordpress.com/

To be fair, the blog more accurately refers to "yuppies," not white people in general. The posts are hit or miss, but I find if a particular post is not funny, that it is at least accurate.

Comic Genius

2008-02-23T02:24:00.003-05:00

This may be a little late, but Tourette's Guy has made my semester pass by far more easily so far. There are many videos, especially compilations, online on Youtube.

For the benefit of the discriminating reader, I have handpicked what are, in my estimation, the best clips. For best results, I recommend watching them in the order in which I have set them. Note: NSFW due to coarse language

This one is my personal favourite, which is best viewed after some familiarity with Tourette's Guy. It starts about 30 seconds in.

Note: I know not everyone will find this funny. Though I am a purist in many respects, I do admire creative cursing, especialy when it is indicative of great energy.

If you find yourself hankering for some more Tourette's Guy, search for him on Youtube. As far as I know, the main site (www.tourettesguy.com) has been shut down because the main actor died about eight months ago. As far as I know, he either didn't really have Tourette's, or he did but was exaggerating the symptoms since the uncontrollable swearing is in fact rare.

V-day (Valentine's Day)

2008-02-14T19:04:00.004-05:00

Sounds ominously like D-day.

As tempting as it is, I'm not going to rant about this day since most of my reasons are as clicheed as the cliches they seek to denounce.

I will, however, for the benifit and edification of readers, link to this interesting article a friend sent to me. It is a book review in French, but it essentially argues that the monogamous couple is an historical accident which owes much to Christianity.

One does not have to be Michel Foucault to understand that many of our courtship rituals and even familial structures are historically contingent. Marx himself believed that the family, presumably the 19th century working class nuclear one, was an ideological production (Marx himself was very conservative when it came to family). I'm not sure how true this, but there is probably at least a grain of truth to it. Monogamous, married couples did exist in the classical world, for example: Socrates, for instance, was married, but this did not prevent him, or others like him, from having recreational, casual relations with younger men.

I think, however, it is safe to say that our culture, especially now, places a greater emphasis on monogamy than ever before.

Wow, that's angry!

2008-02-14T16:22:00.003-05:00

I've been known to rant, and that has given me a taste for it in others. A few months ago, I linked to Maddox, whose rants are deadly, accurate, and funny.

Today, I discovered another gentleman ranter, except his rants are in video format. It must be said that he lacks the bite and wit of Maddox, but I do appreciate angry humour when the target is apt. His title is "Angriest Man Alive," a title I myself bestowed on Maddox. Time will tell who's angrier.

Tonson's miscellany

2008-02-12T02:01:00.001-05:00

I experienced my worst ever computer crash over the weekend. I got not the blue screen of death, but the black screen of death, and it said "Error loading operating system," which it would repeat after restarting. Ultimately, I had no choice but to format and reinstall windows. The good news is the harddrive is fine, but I lost everything. Fortunately, I didn't lose anything utterly indispensable, such as a thesis!

I was not a little miffed that I lost my comps notes for this term on the 18th century novel. However, all was not lost: believe it or not, there are programs out there that can possibly recover files, even after a harddrive has been formatted! I suppose this is why harddrives are often used as evidence during inquiries. A friend told me that whenever he disposes of a harddrive, he actually destroys it. In unscrupulous and trained hands, much private/sensitive data could be gathered.

This was a good wakeup call for my thesis, which I will start around April. I'm backing up anything indispensable twice over henceforth.

On the lighter side of the news:

Funny collection. I thought the one for that annoying "Classmates" ad was very accurate. You know, these annoying assclowns:

Of course, I use Firefox's Adblock addon, so I don't see most annoying, epilepsy-inducing ads anymore.

Update: Almost exactly two years ago I posted what became the famous "Angry German Kid" video. According to cracked.com (assuming their usual irony is absent here), the video is a fake: a (relatively) sane German kid made the whole thing up following a video game controversy in Germany.

Back to comps for me. The good news is I'm done reading a ton of 18th century novels and have now moved on to Prose, which will be followed by Poetry and Drama. I'm more familiar with these texts and there are far fewer of them, so my remaining comps reading is "relatively" light (I use the word very carefully).

I started watching The Last Temptation of Christ online tonight, and I will watch the second half tomorrow. So far it's decent, but it is a strange movie. Maybe it'll all make sense at the end.

Res Ipsa Loquitur, vol. VI

2008-02-06T12:20:00.000-05:00

This picture had me laughing hysterically. The caption is very apt

!Spoiler! I think I've seen this image before, minus the swastika. My guess is the dude was wearing a shirt with the ancient Hindu symbol , which the Nazis adopted and modified because it looked cool, and someone merely photoshopped it.

By the way, the swastika is a very ancient symbol, and I just found out that its use was fairly widespread. The word itself is Sanskrit

Make your own pop star

2008-02-05T22:25:00.000-05:00

I may already have blogged about this some time ago, but it's just too good to pass up. The clips is about a year old, and it comes from a 2006 documentary called Before the Music Dies, which I just heard of today for some reason. Much of this should come as no surprise to many of us, especially those disposed to cynicism, but I couldn't believe the bit on the pitch-correcting software.

Enjoy

Grad School

2008-02-02T13:28:00.000-05:00

I've had this feeling before, and I'm sure I'm not alone.

Better Late Than Never and Critical Insights

2008-02-01T12:31:00.000-05:00

I'm about 3.5 years late, but I finally watched the film Sideways last night. On the whole, I'd say it is an amusing film, but incredibly overrated.

This brings me to my next point: I absolutely loathe film critics, with precious few exceptions. Most of the time I remind myself that there is no accounting for taste and that people are different. However, what really grins my gears is the (near) unanimously encomiastic reception of certain films, which renders me a tad suspicious about the whole enterprise.

Apart from Sideways, the following recent films are all vastly overrated: Little Miss Sunshine, Superbad, and Juno. Are any of these bad films? Certainly not: I enjoyed them, but I simply cannot understand the universal praise the have received. When nearly every critic hails a half-decent film as the greatest thing since sliced bread, I begin to wonder.

Perhaps the best example of the bunch is Superbad. I like Judd Apatow's films (40-year-old Virgin is one of my favourite comedies of all time), so I watched and enjoyed Superbad, enjoying it for what it is: a raunchy teen comedy. I was surprised when I saw all the positive reviews the film garnered, especially since critics don't seem to like such movies. I've certainly seen better made or funnier comedies get completely trashed by critics, so I was (and am) a little suspicious.

As one critic who agrees with me on Sideways astutely observed, the positive reviews of the film say less about the film and more about the psychologies of critics. In the case of the latter film, one can chalk up its success to its appeal to critics who perhaps saw a bit of themselves in Paul Giamatti's character. But the appeal of Superbad to these same critics boggles my mind. In conclusion, I wouldn't be surprised if there were some secret relationship between certain directors or studios and critics, because the whole thing makes no sense.

In case you haven't noticed, I don't give a f@$ rat's ass about the biggest waste of time on earth, i.e., the Oscars. I'm no film buff, but it's funny how no one seems to remember recent winners (Brokeback Mountain anyone? What the hell was that, by the way?). The Oscars represents everything I hate about everything, and it's become more of a joke in recent years.

(Rant over, and it's not as vitriolic as I would have wished. )

New site and Simpsons

2008-02-01T11:35:00.001-05:00

First, here's a funny site I discovered this morning. Don't ask me what the name means because I don't know. Here's a particularly funny and, for the most part, true article. It's funny how our lives are filled with "types" as opposed to complex characters.

I watched the most recent episode of the Simpsons yesterday ("That 90s show"), and I must say I was very impressed. I was one of the many people who would say that the Simpsons is finished and hasn't been funny in over a decade. However, after viewing some recent episodes, I've come to the conclusion that the Simpsons really deserves credit. For a show that's been on the air for nineteen (count 'em, nineteen!) seasons, it is still usually quite good. Conversely, Family Guy has been on the air for a mere six years and is, in my opinion, finished, though I'll still watch it from time to time.

I was having a discussion with a couple of friends the other night about the film Dazed and Confused, a high school 1970s film. Without knowing much about the film, I guessed that it was made during the early-mid nineties, which my friends disagreed with. When we discovered that it was actually made in 1993, my friends asked how I knew it, and I told them that sufficient time must elapse for a generational nostalgia to take hold. For example, Happy Days took place in the 1950s but was made in the late 70s, and the successful That 70s Show debuted in the mid 1990s. All this is to say that in a few years we will witness nostalgia for the 90s, and the Simpsons episode is indicative of this shift. I went to high school in the 90s an outcast, but I find myself thinking of the period with some fondness (that may have something to do with comps).

In addition, this episode was an hilarious satire on the excesses of liberal, post-structural thought, and it takes some jabs at academia in general, which I certainly enjoyed and can think of at least one other person who would get a kick out of it. For instance, when Marge asks her professor if he think that Western scientists have marginalized the contributions of those in the third world, he replies "the answer is, OF COURSE!".

To view the episode, follow this link. Enjoy.

Hyponatremia

2008-02-01T11:25:00.000-05:00

I thought this was just an urban legend, but it does happen. I feel bad for the guy.

Videos du jour

2008-01-30T11:03:00.000-05:00

Couple of funny videos I saw today:

Nearly every guy has been here before.

Funny video about Google Maps that's funnier than it sounds.

I'm off to Carlton in a few hours to see Peter Balakian.

Old Kids on the Block/Blast from the Past

2008-01-28T10:40:00.001-05:00

Jumping on the "old washed up bands reuniting" bandwagon, there is talk that New Kids on the Block (NKB) may be reuniting.

The success of the recent Spice Girls reunion was no doubt an impetus, but the two groups are totally different, and I think an NKB reunion, as charming and nostalgic as it may seem, would be disastrous. Here's why:

-The Spice Girls were popular less than a decade ago. NKB disappeared nearly 20 years ago! To put it into perspective, NKB was popular when I was in Grade 4!

-The Spice Girls consist of four (semi)-attractive women, and can therefore still appeal to a large audience. A boy band consisting of washed up forty year olds is nothing short of creepy! The Backstreet Boys attempted a reunion about 2-3 years ago. If memory serves, they released a single and disappeared, but unlike NKB they had time on their side.

Still, this piece of news very much qualifies as a blast from the past. Makes on feel old.

Update

2008-01-25T10:52:00.000-05:00

Looks like Starshmucks, I mean Starbucks, is in trouble

In a not unrelated story, in an effort to curb off incipient insanity as much as possible, I've been watching a movie almost every night (thanks to the Internet). This will sound funny, but I saw You've Got Mail for the first time the other night. The film first came out in 1998 (damn, I was in high school!), and it seems charmingly nostalgic ten years later. Here are a few of the quintessentially 90s elements in the film that made me feel old:

-Dial up modems! Remember those? As my friend says, that's back when dinosaurs roamed the earth.
-AOL. Who the heck still uses AOL? Really.
-Chatrooms/email. Back in 1998, the internet/email was still new to most people, and I remember going to random chatrooms was the thing to do. Do those still exist? I think Instant Messaging software took over that role.
-Starbucks is featured prominently in the film. This is before they became ubiquitous but right around the time they started becoming so.
-Last but not least, the story involves a mom n pop bookstore in NYC closing its doors owing to the arrival of a "Fox Books" giant. Something very similar occurred in Toronto at about that time: Chapters and Indigo, back before they merged, were pretty much making smaller independent shops close their doors back in the lat 90s and early 2000s. Something similar probably happened in the states, most likely with Barnes and Noble.

The film was half decent, but I noticed something odd. First, one could argue that the film is nothing but an allegory for big business' usurpation of smaller ones, in which case, it paints the message that it's inevitable and ok. I'm not even a Marxist and I can easily write a Marxist critique of the film.
Apart from that, it was ironic that there was such heavy product placement in a film that is seemingly anti-corporate. Starbucks, IBM, and AOL get prominent product placement. I also found it ironic that Meg Ryan's character, the owner of the threatened small business who complains of the evils of big corporate stores ruining America, gets her coffee at Starbucks.

One of the few movies I will ever recommend is the little known Cashback. Very briefly, imagine a less dark, funnier version of American Beauty, whose attempt at profundity actually makes sense, and it doesn't try too hard. The film has its flaws and rough spots, but this can be forgiven since the director is a rookie (Sean Ellis). The camerawork, by the way, is stunning.

TGIF? More like IFHM

2008-01-15T13:32:00.000-05:00

Imagine a place like this actually existed. Note: a tad NSFW

The Ratings Game

2008-01-14T17:49:00.000-05:00

I just watched the 2006 documentary This Film is Not Yet Rated on Google video (bless online video sites!). The doc is an expose of the MPAA's (Motion Picture Association of America, hereafter referred to as film fascists) arbitrary ratings "system". In sum, the film demonstrates that a shadowy body of unknown American citizens determines the ratings of films, and that anything deemed objectionable to these people will be slapped with an NC-17 rating, which effectively restricts the film's audience, exposure, revenue, etc.

I was reminded of this by, of all things, a student essay I graded just before the holidays. In an otherwise fairly mediocre essay, the student had a very interesting section on the V-chip. If you haven't heard of it, it is a device parents can install on their televisions to block out, say, all R-rated programming. Seems harmless, right? Despite its apparently innocuous intentions, the V-chip, as well as the MPAA, perpetuates the dominant ideology.

How does it do this? Think about it for a moment: a very violent war movie in which people are graphically decapitated (or, think Sin City) receives an R-rating, but a film discussing homosexuality, even if it is devoid of any explicit sexual content, gets slapped with an NC-17. Thus, though even if one were to admit that both films are objectionable, the rating tells us that something is more objectionable than something else.

Incidentally, the Europeans have a sensibility opposite that of North Americans: many European films display overt sexual acts, etc, but it is only the violent movies that receive the most restricted ratings, whereas in this part of the world, it is the complete opposite (Note: I'm not making this up, but the MPAA considers any sexual position other than missionary and woman-on-top aberrant!)

I wonder what Roland Barthes would have to say about all this.

I just received word today that Neophilologus, a Dutch journal, received my article today, so fingers crossed on that one. Now, I must get back to Tome Jones (no typo).

Update

2008-01-08T10:31:00.000-05:00

Well, after a long, two week stint in TO, I'm back in O town (a friend of mine suggested calling it "The Big Maple," which I like very much).
Visiting parents/back home is nice, but two weeks was a bit much. I think from now on I will stay for a week max, but I knew that I couldn't stay for very long next Christmas owing to the conference I now must attend in January 2009.

I wanted to write a post about just why I hate the holidays so much, but these same holidays took a chunk out of me, so I have lost that negative energy. Maybe one day I will write on it.

Funny story: I had been back in Ottawa for less than 24 hours when I was offered fellatio for the second time in a month, which is odd since for eight months, I never saw anything like that. This time the offer came from a less than attractive woman sitting down with her friend. She asked me my name and what my background was, to which I of course gave misleading answers (I used to tell people I was Phrygian for kicks; maybe I should do that again). Why I stopped in the first place is beyond me: perhaps because I'm an amateur anthropologist and am curious about these things. In any case, when I told her I was Italian (which I'm not), she then proceeded to remark on the peculiarities of Italian male genitalia, undoubtedly in an effort to arouse me (generally, she was talking dirty). The whole thing was kinda sad because I've never been more turned off in my life.

After repeatedly assuring her that I was flatted but not interested, she appeared to become a little incensed, and then I went away on my business. On my way back home about 30 minutes later, I saw her and her friend walking, and the woman who had tried to seduce me said "there he is" in a not unfriendly manner. To this I waved, and then she said "thank you." I'm fairly certain she was a crackwhore, but she was corpulent, a rare combination indeed.

Let's just say I'm looking forward to moving out in May. In the meantime, I have to worry about my major comprehensive exam in the 18th century. So far I'm off to a decent start.

That's all for now.

Priests Brawl at Jesus' Birthplace

2007-12-28T20:04:00.000-05:00

The headline needs no correction or modification.

Irony, anyone? I've always thought religious people are kinda kooky.

Update

2007-12-23T12:31:00.001-05:00

I'm off to TO today and will return on January 6. See you all in 2008, which is already looking like a better year.

Blast from the past, vol. III

2007-12-23T12:29:00.001-05:00

Here's an interesting bit of royal and televisual history: it's the Queen's first televised Christmas message from 1957. Enjoy

I've heard of Stockholm Syndrome, but...

2007-12-20T14:14:00.000-05:00

I was having a drink with the prof I TAed for this term (cool guy), and he mentioned something very bizarre. Apparently, there is a phenomenon in psychological circles known as "Paris Syndrome" which causes a small percentage of tourists to Paris to suffer from shock or even hallucinations. Interestingly, and as far as I can tell, it only affects the Japanese. The syndrome is caused no doubt in part (if not in whole) by the discrepancy between idealized images of Paris and the reality tourists are struck with.

I've never been to Paris myself, and I hope I do go someday, but most people I know who have gone came back with less than flattering things to say about it.

Reminds me of Oscar Wilde's witticism on the superiority of art over nature, which is very apt in the current context: the whole of Japan is a pure invention. There is no such country, there are no such people.

Ten Years Have Passed, with the Length of Ten Long Winters

2007-12-19T16:26:00.000-05:00

I just found out that this week marks the tenth anniversary of the passing of Chris Farley, who was taken far too soon from us. (I can't believe it's been ten years already).

I remember watching and actually enjoying Saturday Night Live back in the early-mid 90s when he was on the show. Here's one of my favourite Farley sketches.

Farley's humour was neither clever, nor urbane, nor ironic. His was a "pure" humour, and he made it look so easy.

Miss Belgium Does Not Speak Dutch

2007-12-19T10:47:00.000-05:00

Can you believe it? I mean...Gah! What's the world coming to?

I am, of course, being ironic. In all fairness to those who booed her at the Miss Belgium competition, however, Belgium is about 66% Flemish (a dialect of Dutch) speaking.

Real Life Family Guy

2007-12-16T15:07:00.000-05:00

It isn't even winter yet, and already I've seen more snow fall in the past two weeks than I have in my entire life in Canada. Today's no exception, so in the absence of much going on, here's something amusing: people who look like Family Guy characters. For the record, Meg and Peter are spot on.

Res Ipsa Loquitur, vol. V

2007-12-15T11:11:00.000-05:00

No comment

Damn Kanties

2007-12-13T13:35:00.000-05:00

A somewhat whacky yet humorous anti-Kant campaign ad, which is not surprisingly funded by the Friedrich Nietzsche for president organization.

In case it weren't obvious, anyone who finds this remotely funny is a total geek.

Lost Dog

2007-12-13T13:25:00.000-05:00

This is incredibly mean, but also very clever (rated PG-13)

Click here

Tired of Being Asian

2007-12-13T13:23:00.001-05:00

Apparently, someone thinks there's a demand for this:

Only in New York

2007-12-12T15:09:00.000-05:00

Here's a delightful set of pictures, depicting things that one would only find in NYC. I'm sure at least one reader will find it amusing. Here's my personal favourite:

Tonson's Miscellanies, vol. ?

2007-12-12T01:56:00.000-05:00

Here's a neat quote from the 18th century sage Joseph Addison (this was when Johnson was a toddler):

What sunshine is to flowers, smiles are to humanity. They are but trifles, to be sure, but, scattered along life's pathway, The good they do is inconceivable.

This is more or less my practice. Though I may not genuinely mean it when I ask a cashier how they are doin', nevertheless, as one who had the misfortune of working in retail for years, I know how much of a difference it can make in one's day (the logic is very much like Kant's categorical imperative).

Quite Brilliant

2007-12-10T11:28:00.000-05:00

Never thought I'd say this, but if I caught someone cheating thus I would probably reward them with bonus marks.
But seriously, this is something to keep in mind the next time I'm invigilating an exam.