This Week In Vexillology #35

This Week In Vexillology, we're heading down to Central America for the first time and we're kicking things off with Nicaragua!  Sadly, most Americans probably remember Nicaragua more for the Reagan Administration funding the Contras fighting against the Sandanistas than anything else (oh and there was a horrific earthquake back in '72--  baseball star Roberto Clemente was on his way down there to deliver relief supplies when his plane crashed.)

But it's not all bad news from Nicaragua--  when this flag was adopted they were harboring aspirations to revive the Federal Republic of Central America (also known as the United Provinces of Central America which lasted from 1823-1838) these aspirations are reflected in the symbolism on their flag. (It's also reputedly a beautiful country as well- I've never been, but I'd sure like to go someday.)

This flag was adopted September 4th, 1908 for national and civil usage- and apart from the text around the arms of Nicaragua in the center of the flag, it's identical to the flag of the United Provinces of Central America.  The triangle in the center contains five volcanoes (at the bottom of the triangle) which represent the five original member states of the United Provinces.  The Cap of Liberty (and I know it looks like a red blotch more than anything else and I'm sorry for that) represents the national freedom and the rays of the sun and the rainbow above it are symbolic of the bright future.   The 'America Central' in the text around the arms in the center recalls the United Provinces of Central America again...

Ladies and gentlemen, put your hands together for Nicaragua!  And remember, until next time, keep your flags flying- FREAK or otherwise!

I'm Queasy About This And You Should Be Too

The Supremes have had a busy week.  DOMA was struck down.  Prop 8 was overturned. And a key provision of the Voting Rights Act of 1965 was overturned on a 5-4 vote, outraging people across the country.

Article 5 required nine states with a history of discrimination at the polls to clear any changes in polling places and voting laws with the Federal Department of Justice.   A county in Alabama sued, arguing that these were especially burdensome requirements they were placed under and in a 5-4 vote, The Supremes agreed.

I'm queasy about this and you should be too- and here's why:

First,  I'm not going to argue that Article 5 was flawed.  At a certain point it needed to be either revised by Congress or phased out entirely- Congress had the opportunity to do that not to long ago and passed and The Supremes said as much in the majority opinion.  If Congress wasn't going to change this formula/rule to keep up with changing racial mores/attitudes of the country, then the whole damn thing had to go.   That may seem like throwing out the baby and the bathwater just to slap Congress but the Court's Conservative bloc had been widely expected to gut something.  And so they picked this.

But here's the deal:  we've still got a ways to go, racially speaking.  Let's be honest about that.  We're a long way from what we were in 1965 but we're nowhere near the point where checks like this can be done away with.  This decision opens up the possibility of all kinds of shenanigans- none of them good ones.

Burdensome voter ID laws, gerrymandering- all could conspire to create a perfectly nauseating voter suppression machine.  Article 5 wasn't perfect but it was a check against such shenanigans and now it's gone.  I'm very, very queasy about this and you all should be too.

Gerrymandering is a crock of shit.  States should be required by law to use an independent redistricting process- and if Democrats want to tell me that it's just Republicans who use it to their advantage, I want to point out that they do too.  Just look at how good GOPers are doing in California these days.  And while I'm not against voter IDs per say, if the government can't automatically send you a postcard with an ID number once you turn 18, then that's voter suppression, plain and simple.   There are people who genuinely can't just stop what they're going and run on down to the DMV to get a photo ID.   There are people who to put food on the table and work real jobs.   If access to these IDs is universal, easy and free then fine- let's implement them to stop the apparently crippling plague of voter fraud that's sweeping the nation.

But access won't be universal and easy and free, will it?  And gerrymandering will undoubtedly continue.   And so, this decision remains a very bad, bad thing.  I'm queasy about this and regardless of your political affiliation, you should be too.  Our right to vote is being manipulated.  Pass the Tums.

The Newsroom Season 1: Some Thoughts

About a year ago, I reviewed the pilot episode of The Newsroom which, much to my delight had appeared on YouTube for free.  It was the return of Aaron Sorkin to television, though this time he went with HBO instead of a network and I wasn't all that impressed by it.

A year later, I snagged the rest of the first season from iTunes and gave them a watch to see if my somewhat dubious reaction to the pilot episode would be justified by the rest of the First Season  I was left, like so many viewers of this show, with mixed feelings.  I think you either really love it, really hate it or get fascinated by the potential trainwreck unfolding in front of you.   So, in no particular order- some thoughts:

1.  This could still wind up being a trainwreck but there's also flashes of real potential here- this show could grow and become a classic or at the very least Sorkin's biggest televisual success since The West Wing. 

2.  I forgot how much I like Jeff Daniels.  This show is a pleasant reminder of how good of an actor he is.

3.  I'm not a huge fan of the way the female characters in this show are written.   Mac (Emily Mortimer) spends way too much time hung up on her leftover baggage from her relationship with Will (Jeff Daniels) and I'm supposed to believe that supposedly one of the best producers in broadcast journalism can't figure out how to send a damn email- not once, but twice?  Her character deserves more depth and in general, deserves better.  Ditto Maggie.  (Allison Pill)  She's portrayed as vapid and way too hung up on relationships.  (I could care less about the pseudo love triangle between Maggie, Jim and Don.)  The one exception to this is Sloan (Olivia Munn.)  She's intelligent, competent, beautiful and needs to be given far more to do on this show that she has been.  Either she needs more screen time or Maggie and Mac need better writing.

4.  I wasn't a fan of the show's gimmick of being set two years ago-  I saw all that news and I really don't need to see it again as Mr. Sorkin thinks it should have been reported but there's interesting times ahead.   If the premise of the show is 'reclaiming the 4th Estate' and 'informing the electorate' it's going to be interesting to see if Sorkin and Company take whacks at the failures and foolishness of things like Occupy with the same vigor they went after the Tea Party*.   I think that more than anything will determine the success or failure of this show-  if they're not willing to whack the Left for their failings then this will turn into little more than pornography for Progressives.   But if they are serious about the shows premise it could get interesting.

5. How this show handles Aurora and Newtown will be interesting  (see point #4 for more.)  If Will (Jeff Daniels) is really a Republican from Nebraska, he should be pro-gun.

6. It's not all porn for Progressives though.  There's an interesting episode where a gay, African-American Santorum aide (just go with it) takes will to task for reducing his identity as a human being to just one thing, namely his sexuality.  It's a rare counterargument to the very lefty notion of identity politics and a powerful one at that.  Same goes for the episode where the gang tries to land a debate for the Republican candidates and want to make it a real debate.  (They don't get the debate, naturally.)  The scene at the end where the two GOPer henchmen watch how ridiculous the debate on CNN actually is (a Johnny Cash or Elvis question is asked) is telling.**

7.  The coincidences need to stop.   Jim can't just happen to have a big sister who works for BP and Maggie's roommate can't just happen to have gone to high school with Casey Anthony.  The odds are insanely long for one of those things actually happening-  two, it's just unrealistic.

8. Neal (Dev Patel) needs more to do.  And he needs to stop talking about Bigfoot.  It's dumb-  the fact that he's an internet whiz needs more play because that's where news is going.  (The Arab Spring episode was nibbling around the edges of this, despite giving the topic and the importance of the story little more than a surface scratch and sniff.)

9.  Things get considerably less tiresome in the back half of the season with the NSA/phone hacking storyline.

10.  Sam Waterston is amazing.  He's especially good when his character is more boozy than normal.

*I think there's a certain commonality between the Tea Party and Occupy.  In the wake of the economic collapse, people were pissed and they reacted in very different ways on a grassroots level.  Both movements have their good points and their bad points and if this show can stick to their premise of 'changing the news business' and take whacks with vigor at both sides where needed, I'll be impressed. Consistency goes a long way with me- even when it comes to a fictional television show.  I don't normally agree with Glen Greenwald but I respect the guy because he slapped Bush The Younger for his expansion of the surveillance state/drone policies and he's doing the same to Obama with equal glee.  Consistency matters.

**More useful debates could have helped the Republican Party immensely in 2012 to thin out the clown car a little bit. Mittens had the money to ride it out and did so but it was too late and an (at least to me) eerie parallel to 2004 resulted.

#25: Become A Father

Kids,

It's been a long time since I posted an update for my overly ambitious bucket list of things to do before I turn 30 in September- I know I won't hit all of them.  Running a 5k may remain out of reach for awhile longer.  Ditto for knocking off all 50 states or going back to Europe- and you know what?  Right now, tonight, I don't mind one bit- because today I knocked off number 25 on the list and it feels pretty damn amazing right now.

The Missus and I have always wanted to adopt at some point.  We thought we would knock out one the old fashioned way and maybe adopt further down the road- but a miscarriage and a couple of rounds of Clomid convinced us to move things along.   So we took a class and had a home study done, never thinking that less than a year later, we'd have a kid placed with us.

Three weeks ago now, we got an email asking if we'd be interesting in a 1 1/2 year old boy who might become available after a court hearing the next week.  Of course, we said yes!  A 1 1/2 year old was like hitting the adoption jackpot for us- it was exactly what we had dreamed of and wanted for so long. Then, silence.

That silence freaked me right out.  The Missus can attest that I pitch the occasional nutty about things but this one lead to a Major League Nutty.   What was going on?  What was the deal?  When we were going to know?  Were they just going to call us and say 'hey, we're on the way now so get ready!'  That uncertainty was horrible.   It's strange but the more I think about it, the more I realize that my job as a Dispatcher seems to be intertwining itself with my personality more and more.  When I go to work and the phone rings or someone pulls a traffic stop, there's always that moment, that split second of uncertainty before you get a grip on what you're dealing with.  Is the caller hysterical?  What's going on?  Is the driver wanted?  All the possibilities run through your mind in a split second and then...  then you're fine.  Once I know what I'm dealing with, I can wrap my head around pretty much anything.

But then finally- we got word that they'd like to schedule an interview for the Missus and I.  Then we had the interview last Thursday.  And last Friday, we got a call.  And today, he arrived.

You can't plan for everything of course- that part of the great adventure of parenthood has already been made clear to me- but once I knew he was on his way, then, kids, it was game on.  Crib, clothes, toys, books, car seat (checked by not one, but two Captains down at the Department- a fact that made me smile even more when the Social Worker revealed today that she had gotten lost and had gone to the police station to get directions and had been escorted to our house by the Chief of the City PD.  1 1/2 and a lot of positive interactions with Law Enforcement already!  I like it!)  He liked the cats, he liked the small dog and once he discovered that the big dog loved Cheez-Its as much as he did, he made a new best friend.  (And I changed my first poopy diaper.   The Missus has that moment photographed somewhere for posterity.)

Once he smiled at me, it was pretty much game over.   And although we're probably going to have some bumps in the road ahead as he gets used to all the new things he's got in his life now, I love this little guy so much already.  I want to be in his corner.  I want him to have all the opportunities and possibilities that he can in this life so he can make the most of whatever he wants to be.

And now, The Cigarillo is fast asleep and the only thing I can think of to describe this wonderful day and this wonderful feeling is this:

Amazing.

Oh, Immigration Reform...

It's back and it seems to be getting close to some kind of a vote in the Senate.  Whether it passes in the House is another matter entirely--  the fact that the Farm Bill went down in a shock defeat this week should send a loud, clear message to the House Leadership that they better have their ducks in a row if their going to bring Immigration Reform to the floor.

To be honest, I'm less than optimistic about this becoming law.  Doing anything has becoming something of a struggle for the legislative branch these days (though the executive branch isn't exactly covering itself with glory either) and immigration reform is big.  It's so big that back in the day when Bush The Younger tried to get something done on this issue, he got nowhere- and he was a GOPer.  (And sure enough, it's got a growing chorus of detractors on the Right--  Bill Kristol*, Mickey Kaus and this guy who compares it to the Panama Canal Treaty Redux.  Apparently giving the Canal back is another reason to hate Jimmy Carter, I guess.)

Being a legal immigrant myself, I can attest to just how effed up the immigration system actual is.  One lovely trip back from the UK it was just us kids transiting back through to the US.  The siblings went through the nice, easy, relatively painless US line, while legal immigrant me had to go through the 'foreign and therefore suspicious line' with my UK passport.  The convo went something like this:

INS Agent (Who Looked Constipated and Possibly Lobotomized):  What is the purpose of your visit to the United States?

Me (Overly Cheerfully):  I live here!

INS Agent (I really think their senses of humor are surgically removed):  How do you do that?

Me (Overly Cheerful- still- trying to be charming):  I'm a legal resident.

Well that's when she flipped through my passport, looked at my Green Card and says the words that every teenager travelling sans parents wants to hear...

INS Agent:  Well this isn't valid.

Me (Now Shitting My Pants):  Wha-whaaaat?

INS Agent:  You should have had this renewed with a new picture when you turned 14.

Me (Poo Now Running Down My Legs, Piss Possibly To Follow):  Well nobody told us that.

After some tense moments and eyeballing my siblings now safely on the other side of passport control and giving me quizzical looks like 'what's taking so long, man' the INS Agent reluctantly decides to let me back in, telling me in no uncertain terms that I need to get that taken care of.  Happily, my parents decided to take the plunge and get their citizenship a couple of years later, taking my still under 18 freckled behind along with them so I never need to talk to the INS ever again.

But that's how effed up the system is and it's definately in need of reform because when I said that no one had told us to do that, I really meant it.  No one had told us to get my picture updated.  Had my parents been told that, they would have- and I remember way back in the day taking trips to Omaha to get fingerprinted for our Green Cards and still further back they had some truly assinine rule where you had to get your VISAs renewed at the nearest consulate outside the country- hence the many trips to Montreal we took when we still lived in New Hampshire (and why Mother Cigar still pines for that fair city today- sometimes.)

So to me, the question of reform isn't really an issue.  It's pretty fucked up.  We should fix it.  Where I get queasy/annoyed is that the debate always centers around illegals- usually from Mexico and as Hispanics/Latinos are a large and extremely important voting demographic the question ceases to be about how to make an immigration system that works and becomes a mad dash to try and lock in as many Hispanic/Latino votes as possible.  Here's where I come down:

1.  As China and India become more prosperous, the best and brightest from those countries- and other countries too but especially those countries are increasingly staying home.  Why go through the painful process of trying to get legal status in America when you can increasingly get well paying jobs and a good life at home?  Part of our competitive edge as a nation isn't just making the best and brightest shine here at home- it's attracting the best and brightest from around the world.  Our effed up immigration system is making us lose the race for innovation.  This is a problem.

2.  The Illegal Hating Crowd makes me tired.  I don't see white Americans lining up to work on a kill floor of a meat packing plant or scrubbing toilets for pittance on the dollar.  Illegals are here, they're doing work and whether a bill passes or not, they will still be here.  Their lack of status leaves them open to abuses by all kinds of companies.   This too, is a problem.

3.  It's freaking expensive to become a citizen.  Like $1500 or so. It's probably topped $2K by now...  if you don't want illegal immigration, you need to incentivize legal immigration.  Personally, I think if you get a Green Card (which should be easy to get) and keep your nose clean for eight years (i.e. pay taxes, no felonies, etc, etc) then you should get a postcard in the mail offering you citizenship.  Check yes and you get papers to fill out and a citizenship test to take or better yet make the whole damn process paperless and put it online! (If the US Government can find every male turnining 18 and remind them to register with the Selective Service, they can do this.**)

4.  If it makes people better to try and secure the border, then fine.  Let's build a fence-  what the hell, right?  It's only thousands of miles long- no way anyone could slip through it.  Oh and are we going to do the same to Canada?  It's never going to be completely secure.  (GOPers:  if Homeland Security admits that they can't totally secure the border, will you abolish the Department of Homeland Security?  I mean, securing the Homeland is sort of essential to what they do and if they can't do it, then why keep them around?  Just asking...)

5.  I'm in favor of a guest worker program that provides a pathway to citizenship.  It makes sense...  again, every time someone foams at the mouth about people taking jobs, I always want to ask just how many white people are out there picking advocados?

Some form of the above five points is what I'd like to see.  Do I think I will see it?  Probably not...  though if it fails, Senator Rubio has just spent an awful lot of political capitol on this.  If he can't deliver then while it might be too early to totally write him off for 2016, it won't improve his prospects any.

Undoubtedly then, the status quo will continue.  Just like always.

*Apparently this is another one of those bills they want to pass first and then read afterwards.  I've decided that if I ever have the pleasure to be elected to Congress and one of these bills comes along I'll try and bury an amendmant declaring some random day to be J. Walter Weatherman Day and making it a Federal Holiday- that way when the gargantuan, unread bill passes and J. Walter Weatherman Day becomes law I can hold a press conference and say:  'And that's why you always read a bill before passing it.'  (Sorry.  I've been watching a lot of Arrested Development lately.)

**You know for all the talk about marriage equality and ending Don't Ask, Don't Tell and putting women in combat positions, it's still bullshit that only MEN have to register for the Selective Service.  Anyone else think its time for the Sisterhood to rise up and smash the patriarchy in the groin a bit?  Your move, feminists.

This Week In Vexillology #34

Get out your atlases and prepare to figure out just where this country is, kids because this week, we've got Tajikistan!

A former Soviet Republic, Tajikistan won independence in 1991 but was the last of the Soviet Republics to adopt a new flag a year later in 1992--  the current design was adopted on November 24th, 1992 for national and civil usage.  The red, white and green stripes are the same stripes that were used as the flag of the Tadzhik Soviet Socialist Republic (that flag was adopted in 1953.)  

Communist influences still remain strong...  the red in the flag still represents the flag of the old Soviet Union.  The white represents cotton, one of the country's main exports and green represents the other farm produce grown in Tajikistan.   The crown and stars stand for Tajikistan's state sovereignty as well as friendship between all nations and "the unbreakable union of workers, peasants and the intellectual classes of the republic."

It's capital is Dushanbe...   which fans of 80s Cold War comedy will remember as being a key destination for the protagonists in this classic movie:

So get your groove on, kids and put your hands together for Tajikistan!  And remember, until next time- keep your flags flying.  FREAK- or otherwise!

And Then There Were 2 (School Scenarios)

The list is shrinking...  the Iowa City School Board narrowed the possible development/facilities scenarios down to 2 last night:

Scenario 1D:

Use Hoover Elementary as 'swing school' and then retire it; use the Theodore Roosevelt Educational Center as a 'swing school' and then retire it; restore Longfellow and Mann elementaries; rebuild Hills Elementary on site; build three new 500-student elementary schools; build a new high school; keep all comprehensive high schools between 1,400 and 1,600 students; additions and renovations at existing schools.

Scenario 4C:

Use Hoover Elementary as 'swing school' and then retire it; retire Hills and Lincoln elementaries; restore Longfellow and Mann elementaries; build three 500-student elementary schools; build new high school; keep all comprehensive high schools between 1,400 and 1,600 students; additions and renovations at existing schools.

Either way, it looks like Hoover is going to close but looking at the possibilities I think if I was a betting man, I'd put my money on Scenario 1D.  While the article I linked to above mentions the possibilities of future growth down in Hills, I don't think the school board should necessarily make a decision based on that.  However, if they do decide to shut Hills Elementary and then ten years down the road, Hills is booming like North Liberty then they're going to look silly.  Plus, they've been talking about shutting down Hills Elementary for years and the Hills parents- give them tons of credit- they're organized, vocal and they show up to fight for their school.  I'd bet on them again.

Closing Hoover does open up the land for future expansion by City High (which I'm forced to admit is probably a good thing)- Longfellow and Mann need some lovin' and I can see arguments both for and against closing Hills and Lincoln Elementaries- but I also think that the more schools we preserve, the better off we're going to be. (Especially if we're doing this because we're over capacity in so many places and need more buildings to grow the district.) I'd prefer the scenario where only one school closes as a posed to three for that reason.

Either way, it looks like we're still getting three new elementary schools and a new high school.  The interesting question is going to be where they put them all.

Enough With The Symbolism

The City Council passed a resolution officially banning red light cameras and the use of drones in Iowa City last night- because, of course, our airspace is so crowded with drones we really needed to crack down on them.  It's being hailed a unique ordinance (and possibly the first of its kind in the country) and has gotten play on Reddit and elsewhere on the Interwebs but here's the kicker, kids:  it's a completely useless waste of time.

Of course, you could argue that completely uselesss wastes of time are what the City Council does best.   Somewhere around the City Limits (I always remember seeing the one on Highway 6 coming in from Coralville by Carver-Hawkeye Arena) there might still be signs informing visitors to our fair metropolis that we are, in fact, a nuclear weapons free zone.  Because in the mid-to-late 80s the Pentagon was, of course, looking to lodge an ICBM under the west lawn of the Pentacrest.   I think we also might be a Tree City USA, because of course, those other cities just hate trees- they hate 'em.

But, hey, this is what the City Council does.  It may look like a victory for the scrappy coalition of libertarian/anti-authoritarian types that put a kybosh on building a new jail and have been banging on the red light camera drum for months now, but it's really not- and I'm not the first person to point this out.  We'll have red light cameras eventually-  just when the State DOT gets around to issuing guidelines for them.   I'm sure the same thing will happen with drones as well- though it might be a few years before that becomes enough of an issue for the State DOT to start thinking about it. 

This is a fig leaf, a symbolic waste of time and I hope opponents are ready to saddle up again, because rest assured, this issue, at some point, will be back.

So I've decided that we need to stop doing this symbolic bullshit.   Do actual things that benefit actual people and maybe you'll convince me that the government has a use beyond keeping the streets peaceful and putting out fires.  (And just in case you think I'm hating too much on the City Council, keep in mind this is a national phenomenon as well: the House just passed a late-term abortion ban that hasn't a hope in hell of becoming law- they knew that and did it anyway, thus increasing their already boundless appeal to that ever-so-important demographic of women voters.  They've tried to repeal ObamaCare umpteen times with no hope of success.  That the GOPers want to repeal ObamaCare isn't a problem for me- it's the fact that I haven't been told what they're replacing it with that is.   I don't find that 'MERICUH HEALTH POWER! NO SOCIALISM! is an acceptable solution and neither should anyone else.)

Enough with the symbolism already.

This List Is Whack

Once upon a time about a year ago, the staff at LA Weekly compiled this list of the Top 20 Worst Bands of All Time and it's still causing social media outrage a year later, as NBC News noted today in what must have been either an extremely slow news day or another day of scandals that they don't want the American public informing themselves about.

But here's the kicker:  I read this list.  And it's either a list designed to provoke outrage (which is entirely likely, given the reaction) or it's an entirely ill-concieved exercise altogether.  I mean, first of all, most of these lists are totally bogus anyway-  taste, in anything- whether it's books, movies or even types of pizza is an entirely subjective thing.  The bands/artists I like don't have to be the bands/artists that you like.  Viva la difference!  Variety is the spice of life!

Yet having said that, I have to say:  this list is totally whack.  (I suppose by dissecting this I'm also pushing more social media/internet traffic LA Weekly's way which could compound the problem, but, I don't really care.)

Let's consider this list- from 20-1 as LA Weekly intended:

20. Spin Doctors:  Not a bad start to a list of the supposed worst bands of all time, but really, aren't these guys only known for two songs?  I'll admit 'Two Princes' is a fairly awesome piece of 90s schlock but 'Pocket Full of Kryptonite' isn't really all that bad- though I didn't know John Popper of Blues Traveler used to be in this band.   Verdict:  Acceptable

19. The Raconteurs:  Um, ok?  It's Jack White and his buds.  Haven't exactly heard a lot of their music...  Verdict:  Unimpressed.  Try again, hipsters.

18. Oasis:  Did you pick Oasis for the family drama bullshit or just because?  I don't think they're the greatest band ever but when they're not trying to strangle/shank each other the Brothers Gallagher produce decent to good music.  Verdict:  Fail.  Not on this list.

17.  Phish:  Can honestly say I've never devoted forty five minutes of my life to listen to one of their songs.   Verdict: Unimpressed.  As if stoners are going to care what you think.

16. 4 Non Blondes:  First epic fail of the list--  first of all, they had one hit and it was a good hit,  Don't be hating on 4 Non Blondes.  Verdict:  Fail.  One hit wonders don't really count.

15. Pretty Ricky:  Who?   Verdict:  Fail.   I have no idea who these people are.

14. Foreignor:  Second titanic fail of the list.   Verdict:  Get away from me, hipster douchebags.  You know not of what you speak.  Fail.

13. Wings:  Don't hate on Paul McCartney.  Verdict:  Fail again.  Because you don't pick on The Beatles.  YOU DON'T DO IT.

12. Fleet Foxes:  Who?  Verdict:  Fail.  See #15 for more.

11. Red Hot Chili Peppers:  At this point, I decided that if #14 didn't point to LA Weekly being a domain of hipster douchebags, this entry does.  Verdict:  You suck and you're so, so wrong.  Fail.

10. Pussycat Dolls:  This entry I agreed with.  Not bad.  Verdict:  Acceptable.

9. Rush:  Seriously?  You're going to offend Canada just because you can?  This is a dick move- and it's totally untrue because, well, Neal Purt.  End of discussion.  (P.S.  You put Rush on this list but not Creed?)  Verdict:  Aboot as much of a fail as you can get, eh?  Hosers.

8. Hootie and the Blowfish:  That's right, assassinate my childhood, you bastards.  Personally, I think Darius Rucker needs to quit doing the solo country thing and reform Hootie.  There'd be enough crossover appeal to go places.  Don't penalize a decent band for one crappy video featuring Dan Marino.  Verdict:  Fail.  Just, fail.

7. Pearl Jam:  Really?  Verdict:  Fail.

6. Black Eyed Peas:  Oddly enough, I could agree with this.  Maybe not as high as number 6, but I'm down with them making the list just on the strength of 'My Humps' alone.  Verdict: Acceptable.

5. Animal Collective:  Who?  Verdict:  Fail.  See #12 and #15 for more.

4. Sex Pistols:  Invalid.  Yes, John Lydon is kind of a dick but really, they only had one album and it was a pretty damn important one for punk in general.   Verdict:  Fail.

3. LCD Soundsystem:  Listen, I'm not a techno freak by any stretch of the imagination but I object to this one.  LCD Soundsystem is a decent band and they've already packed it and dissolved themselves so again, Verdict: Fail.

2. Eagles:  Seriously?  No.  Verdict:  Super Epic Fail.

1. The Dave Matthews Band:  Herein lies the titanic failure of this list...  music snobs love to hate DMB and while I'll agree they sound so 90s these days and not necessarily in a good way, they weren't actually that bad.  Putting DMB on top of this list is such a hipster dick move, it's practically cliche at this point- especially when bands like O-Town, 98 Degrees, The Backstreet Boys not to mention Creed didn't make the list.   Verdict:  I disagree.  Fail.

I would agree with maybe three out of the twenty bands on this list...  which means if I'm grading LA Weekly's list, I'm giving it a whopping 15% which is an epic, epic fail.

So kids:  agree or disagree?  And- who would you nominate to such a list?  Leave your answers in the comments if so you desire.

Bookshot #64: The Perks of Being A Wallflower

What a melancholy little book this is. Written as a series of letters to an anonymous friend, The Perks of Being A Wallflower tells the story of Charlie, a lonely, awkward teenager that's just beginning high school. One of his friends from Junior High, Michael committed suicide, his brother is heading off to college and Charlie is starting high school with no friends and an awful lot of baggage.

Taking place over the course of one school year and into the summer beyond, the reader gets to see Charlie make two, cool, hip, older friends Sam and Patrick, connect with a teacher who sees his passion for books and talent for writing, Bill, and get his first girlfriend, Mary Elizabeth and experience the usual collection of awkward horror and heartache that comes along with being a teenager.

I struggled with this book. There were many things that I loved about it- the early 90s setting, the musical references (lots of references to The Smiths... which seems appropriate enough given how depressing this book could get in parts) and the books! I loved that Charlie spent the year reading through books that his English teacher kept giving him- I loved watching him react and think about the different books (On The Road, To Kill A Mockingbird and The Fountainhead to name a few) and I could readily identify with Charlie's awkwardness- especially with the ladies.

But there's something not quite right about Charlie and the further you get into the book, the more you realize that this isn't just your usual teenager awkwardness/coming of age angst. I caught myself wondering if Charlie had some form of autism at several points during the book. And then I wondered if he could be gay (or just generally conflicted about his sexual identity) but it gets annoying towards the end. Stephen Chbosky* (the author) teases the reader with several possibilities while building the tension and putting poor Charlie's mental state through quite the wringer and it bothered me because by that point in the book, I was rooting for something good to happen to Charlie. And if not good, then I was at least hoping he could find a little corner of his high school where he could be content.

The payoff though put all of Charlie's awkwardness into context and the end of the book does find him in a much better, healthier place than when he started out.

And having written all of that, I still find myself somewhat conflicted about this book. I think had I read this in high school, I would have identified with the characters in this book far, far, more than I did with Holden Caulfield in Catcher In The Rye (my feelings towards Catcher have mellowed with age-- back in high school I thought Holden was a whiny little rich boy pissant... having re-read the book not that long ago, I found that a lot of what he said about people being phony rang surprisingly true.) The awkwardness and social anxiety- not to mention the general struggle to figure out just what the hell is going on when you're in high school is something I instantly recognized in this book.

Having said all that, I think Perks got a little dark for me towards the end. Charlie's mental state drops beyond the usual teenaged angst and struggles into areas that you don't expect. The brilliance of the book, I suppose is that Chobsky makes you care about these characters enough to be genuinely worried about Charlie and rooting for him to get better but I think the power of the message about the awkward melancholy of being teenager gets lost a little in Charlie's struggle for stability- and that bothered me a little.

Overall: A tightly written, readable book, The Perks of Being A Wallflower is a beautiful, touching, melancholy story that gets lost in its own melancholy a little too much. That said, I still found it to be an enjoyable read. I'd give it a solid *** out of ****

*Interestingly enough, Chbosky went on to write the screenplay and direct the film adaptation of this book. Haven't yet given the movie a viewing.

'Man Of Steel' --A Review

Superman is back.

I know Man of Steel is getting some mixed reviews in certain quarters but I don't why.   This was a genuinely engaging, fantastic, epic movie that I think ranks right up there with Spiderman 2 and X-Men 2 as a classic of the genre.   I think part of the mixed reaction stems from the fact that this is a reboot--  anyone who's been alive in the past, oh I don't know, seventy years or so has a passing familiarity with Superman's backstory.  We saw it Richard Donner's 1978 Superman, we saw it in the very odd, overly introspective Superman Returns.  We saw ten seasons of it with Smallville- so it's a story that everybody knows. (Alien world is doomed, child sent to Earth, grows up in Kansas, flies, becomes hero, etc.)

Handled incorrectly, the backstory could have doomed this reboot from the start.  But a more extensive prologue on Krypton sets the stage and gives us the foundation for the motivations of the movies main bad guy, General Zod (Michael Shannon) in his conflict with Jor-El (Russell Crowe.)  Ethereal crystalline structures and gigantic floating heads are nowhere to be seen and Krypton is depicted as an insular, isolated society where everyone is genetically engineered to serve a specific role in society.  Krypton's resources have run out and with the planet's core destabilizing, the planet is doomed.  Jor-El and Lara (Ayelet Zurer) decide to have a child the old fashioned way (for the first time in centuries) and  send the kid to Earth to grow up, be safe and avoid the implosion of Krypton.

Director Zack Snyder takes a left turn once we get to Earth- showing Clark (Henry Cavill) growing up via flashbacks, interspersed with his behind the scenes heroics as a driftless loner who keeps to himself as he struggles to figure out his identity, why he is who he is and what he's doing here on Earth.  When the US Government stumbles onto a mysterious anomaly in the Arctic ice, that brings him into contact with enterprising journalist Lois Lane (Amy Adams) who unravels his story and figures out who he is- of course, this is just in time for General Zod and his merry band of Kryptonians to show back up and demand the return of Superman. (They get thrown in the Phantom Zone at the beginning of the movie but Krypton's destruction shakes them loose again.)

With Earth under threat and Superman genuinely not sure about where he fits in (can he trust the human race?  Or should he trust Zod?) he decides to take a gamble and cast his lot with the human race and protect Earth-- the epic battle that follows provides a fitting finale to the return of one of the most formidable superheroes around.

Man of Steel has finally, successfully revived the Superman franchise- that alone is an achievement.   Not that Superman Returns was a bad movie...  it was just...   I don't know.  Odd.  And while Henry Cavill isn't given all that much to do other than stare and brood in the first half of the movie, he fits comfortably in the role by the end of the movie.   He certainly makes more of an impression than Brandon Routh did in the role.  Michael Shannon's portrayal of General Zod gives Superman a worthy opponent and Kevin Costner and Diane Lane are perfectly cast as Ma and Pa Kent.  Lawrence Fishburne shows up as Lois' boss, Perry White and Christopher Meloni, Harry Lennix and Richard Schiff also show- plus there's a double shot of Battlestar Galactica vets as Alessandro Juliani and Tahmoh Penikett who also appear.

The Superman-as-Jesus metaphor which seems to show up from time to time is decidedly less important than it was in Superman Returns, which I liked.  (I mean, there's a scene in Superman Returns where he ends up falling out of the sky in a perfect Jesus pose which is a bit to 'brick to the back of the head' for me.)  Instead, more emphasis is given on Clark's struggle for identity and self-discovery as he comes to terms with the fact that's very, very adopted and he's not from Kansas-  which I think makes this Superman more relatable- I certainly felt more connected to the character in this movie than I have in any other iteration of Superman- whether on film or television.

Overall:  This goes a long way to erasing the weirdness of Green Lantern and establishing a DC counterpart to Marvel's burgeoning movie universe.  Man of Steel re-establishes the character of Superman and leaves all the usual suspects (Clark Kent, Lois Lane, etc) on the verge of going all kinds of interesting place.  I was actually left wondering what they were going to do for the sequel- which is the first time I've actually thought that about a Superman movie.  My Verdict: **** out of ****.  

P.S.  Now that Superman's back, can someone please get serious about a Wonder Woman movie?  It's high time for a female superhero to get a shot in the spotlight- and Wonder Woman is established enough that she could carry a franchise.  That's something that Marvel doesn't have so readily at hand.

This Week In Vexillology #33

Break out the vodka and caviar kids, because this week, we're going to the land where the flag salutes YOU!  That's right...  it's the Russian Federation!

Adopted for National and Civil usage on August 22nd, 1991 the Russian tricolor has been around and kicking since the end of the 17th Century, when Peter The Great adopted a variation of the Dutch tricolor for Russia's ships: a horizontal tricolor of white, blue and red that was officially recognized in 1799. The colors and the tricolor design have had a major influence on many of the flags of Eastern Europe-  especially during the 19th Century when many of these countries looked to Russia to help freeing themselves from the Ottoman Empire, especially.   They're now considered pan-Slavic colors. 

After the Russian Revolution of 1917 all former flags of Russia were abolished and replaced with the red flag with the yellow hammer and sickle.  As a Soviet Republic, Russia added a blue vertical bar near the hoist.  When the Soviet Union collapsed in 1991 all the former flags of Russia, including the present one were restored.

So slam that vodka, suck that caviar and give it up for the Russian Federation!  And until next week, keep your flags flying.  FREAK- or otherwise.

This Week In Vexillology: A Flag Day Special Edition

It's FLAG DAY!  I completely forgot until The Missus left for work in jeans and a patriotic plaid shirt and hair tie (the fine folks she's working with for clinical today get to watch The Help and do other fun things- hence, her casual clothes.)   But that got me thinking:  what should This Week In Vexillology do for Flag Day?

First, a primer:  for those peeps that don't know, today celebrates the adoption of our very own Stars and Stripes as the flag of the United States in 1777 by the Second Continental Congress.  It took until 1916 for Woodrow Wilson to establish it as a holiday- but even now it's not an official Federal holiday- though towns have held annual parades going as far back as 1909 and some states (New York and Pennsylvania per Wikipedia, the Font of All Knowledge) recognize it as an official state holiday.  So celebrate the Stars and Stripes.  If you have an American flag and the means to fly, do so proudly today.

Second, so what do I intend to do in this space for Flag Day?  Well, talk about some flags...  specifically, I want to talk about the flags of the three states where I've lived so far in the United States:

The Cigar Parentals landed in New Hampshire way back in the mid-80s with little old me in tow- Father Cigar was doing some post doctoral work at Dartmouth and the original idea was to stick around  for a year or so and then head back across the pond to Old Blighty.  Nearly three decades later both the Cigar Parentals are still here. 

Crazily enough, according to the Wikipedia page for Flag and Seal of New Hampshire, this was voted as one of the ten worst flag within the United States and Canada (63rd out of 72) in a 2001 survey of the North American Vexillological Association.  For the life of me I couldn't tell you why.  A lot of state flags are little more than a state seal slapped onto a blue background- this one has a seal that's interesting, bordering that's aesthetically pleasing and overall doesn't look that bad.

But to brass tacks:  the design was adopted in 1909 and uses the Seal of New Hampshire which was adopted way, way back in 1775 and depicts the USS Raleigh- one of the first thirteen warships sponsored by the Continental Congress for the then new American Navy- being built in the stocks at Portsmouth, New Hampshire.  

Next up, it's not heaven, it's Iowa:

In 1987, the Cigar Parentals and I rolled into Iowa City on a blisteringly hot August day, unloaded our Akita, Tencho and our then cat, an irritable Persian by the name of Madame Fufu Ming and then went to Mazzio's for some pizza.  When we came back, Fufu had just finished delivering a littler of kittens while Tencho hovered protectively nearby. 

That 2001 survey from the North American Vexillological Association I mentioned above?  It ranked Iowa 42nd out of 72 flags of US States, Territories and Canadian Provinces for design quality. The flag of Iowa bears a passing resemblance to the French Tricolore- and that turns out to be by design, as the red, white and blue in the flag stand for French Louisiana- which Iowa used to be a part of.  The flag was adopted in 1921 but approved by the Iowa State Council For Defense (um, ok...) in 1917 and I can't talk about Iowa's flag without giving a shout-out to Mrs. Dixie Cornell Gebhardt of Knoxville, Iowa- who designed the flag in 1917.   The bald eagle in the center is holding the state motto of Iowa, which was taken from the state seal.

Finally, the Medium White North- Minnesota:

The motto on the flag, L'Etoile du Nord or The North Star was retained from when Minnesota was the northernmost state in the Union (though eyeballing Google maps, thanks to a little chunk of Minnesota that sticks up north of the Lake of the Woods, I believe they're still the northernmost state in the Lower 48.)  The state seal is wreathed with white moccasin flowers.  The three years reference different points in Minnesota's history:  1819 the founding of Fort Snelling, 1858 statehood and 1893 the adoption of the state flag.   The 87 circles around the seal represent Minnesota's 87 counties and the 19 stars in the white symbolize Minnesota being the 19th state admitted to the Union.

The current design was adopted in 1957 and the state seal in the center was altered in 1983.  Oh and the North American Vexillological Association?  They rated Minnesota's flag as one of the ten worst flags... so apparently, if we move somewhere else at some point in the future, I should pick a state with a flag that's got a better designed according to the NAVA. (Though, given the level of detail of the symbolism of Minnesota's flag, I don't think it's all that bad.)

So there you have it, kids.  Have a Happy Flag Day and remember until next time- keep your flags flying!

#WriterProblems: How Much World Building Is Too Much World Building?

Kids,

I got my first round of comprehensive feedback on the novel from an editor friend of mine and, as I had enthusiastically requested, he had given it an incredibly detailed read and had incredibly detailed feedback for me.  And you know what?  I didn't get (that) bummed out about it at all.  I think there's a tendency out there to read full critiques back from people and think 'oh shit, now I'm at square one again' but I never fell into that headspace because the majority of the feedback I got was useful.

I love useful criticism.  Granted, I've now got oodles of tweaking and polishing to do before I release this thing into the big wide, world but the feedback I got confirmed what I'd been convinced of all along:  the bones of this story are solid.   There's just a random sixth digit that I might need to lop off and maybe a vestigial tail that needs ground down and some meat needs to be added here and there but there's a solid core there.  I'm close.  I'm so close that I can taste it and therefore, I will perservere, continue and keep going until you, my would-be readers, get to read the finished product.

But today, I'm confronted with a new problem- one that writers of genre fiction especially might be familiar with:  How much world building is too much world building?

This has been a problem for me in the past:  I get bogged down in paragraphs of content that soon turn into pages of backstory and alternative histories and I feel like my characters and my story get buried by it.  And I have this almost visceral distaste for big, lengthy, italicized openings that set the stage and let the reader now every minute detail of the universe they're about to step into.  That feels lazy to me and I feel like I can write better than that.

But then a new problem becomes clear:  if you don't raise the curtain on your world right from the get-go, you're lifting it slowly throughout the book- and that can be confusing for your readers but if you can pull it off, then I think discovering the world that you've created as a reader reads the book could also bring a little extra sweetner to the table and make your book that much better.

I'm a big fan of the idea of starting a book in medias res and then letting the reader catch up as they go along.  That's got risks attached to it (if the reader gets confused or lost or if, heaven forbid, they think your story doesn't make sense) but I also think if you can pull it off it could be awesome as well.  An exciting chance for the reader to really dig in and explore the world that you've created.

But I throw it out to you kids:  how much context is too much context?  How much of a world do you need to build for a reader to buy into it?  And given a choice, do you prefer to assemble the puzzle of the world of any given book yourselves or do you want the curtain fully raised to know exactly what you're getting into?

thinking deep thoughts
Tom

Whiskey of the Month #9: Tennessee Honey

I'm shamelessly plundering Father Cigar's stash this month (it's easy to do when he's in Italy) and I thought I'd purloin a dram of Tennessee Honey and start the summer drinking season off right.  While I admit I haven't tried every honey whiskey out there (Rebel Reserve's Honey Whiskey has been looking mighty tasty of late but I think I'll be holding out for a new single malt towards the end of the summer, so stay tuned) but I think of the ones I have tried, Tennessee Honey is probably my favorite.

Why?  Well, it's easy to drink.   A lot of people are turned off by whiskey's smell and even the taste (I think both are the best parts, myself) but with Tennessee Honey, you get something rare: a balance between the sweetness of the honey and the flavor of the whiskey that makes for an exceptionally smooth and eminently drinkable whiskey experience.   You can throw this into any glass you have handy and get happily pickled on your porch, no problem.   Throw in some ice to have it on the rocks and you have a perfect refreshment for a hot summer's day.

Now, to business:

Color: A perfect shade of golden honey.

Body: I'll freely admit I haven't actually taken a whiff of too many honey whiskies--  I'm usually busy guzzling them down, but the initial impression gives you a nice wave of sweetness- but what flavor of sweetness is hard to pin down.  There's honey, to be sure-but I think my overall impression is one of caramel/toffee more than anything else.

Palate:  This reminds me a little bit of Drambuie- another honey based liqueur that's traditionally used in Rusty Nails (I tended to make mine heavy on the Drambuie- and if memory serves, I committed what many would consider an unforgivable sin with my first legal purchase of alcohol by using a bottle of 12 Year Old McCallan to mix them with.)  The viscosity, however is not as thick and syrupy as Drambuie- but its not watery either-  it's pretty well balanced between the two extremes.

There's an underlying taste of nuttiness to this that I can't quite pin down.  I keep wanting to say walnuts, but it's very subtle.  While the body suggests toffee, I would say caramel comes to the forefront with the palate- and the harshness of the Jack Daniels is very evident.

Finish:  I have yet to taste a whiskey that warms as satisfyingly as this one does.  This goes down easily and smoothly and warmth follows from the top of your head to the tip of your toes.  

Overall: If there's a better honey whiskey out there, I have yet to taste it.   This one isn't too sickly sweet and balances the flavors of the honey and the Jack Daniels perfectly.   While I may not be a regular drinker of Jack (the one large bottle high above my bookshelves is courtesy of our friend, the Rainbow Wahine who left it here after a very, very long and memorable weekend) I can safely say that if I found a bottle of Tennessee Honey as big as the empty huge-ass handle of Jack I've got gathering dust above me, I'd buy it.  This stuff is that good.

Bookshot #63: Kitchen Confidential

I should have listened to The Quiet Man.   He would always tell me, back in our undergraduate days that I should take a non-fiction writing class and I never managed to get around to it.   After reading Kitchen Confidential, I now wish that I had.

I also have to thank Chef Bourdain for lending a hand in digging a grave for an idle dream of mine- that of opening my own bar or restaurant.  Well, maybe it's not totally buried- but whether Kitchen Confidential is a little embellished or not, I was left with the impression that Bourdain strives to give the reader a remarkably clear eyed honest view of how the restaurant business works- and more to the point, how much time, hard work and effort people put into it to succeed. 

Starting with Bourdain's first oyster (on a trip to France as a child) Kitchen Confidential takes the reader on a wild ride from a rootless existance at Vassar to the kitchens of Provincetown, where Bourdain gets his first experiences cooking in a restaurant and where he gets motivated to be the best he can possibly be.  (Apparently, telling this guy he can't do something is like catnip to him-  he proves willing, throughout the book to run through various metaphorical brick walls to prove people wrong.)  

Dropping out of Vassar, he gets into the Culinary Institute of America and upon graduating in 1978, embarks on a wild ride through the New York restaurant world- working at some good restaurants, some bad restaurants, some shady restaurants- he enjoys an interlude in an Italian restaurant before ending up at Les Halles.

I think the secret to the success of this book is Bourdain's writing style. It's hard to describe but there was something about the way he tells the stories that he does that always made me want to keep reading. And I read this book quickly- very, very quickly partially because it was just that good and partially because I always wanted to see what was going to happen next. His descriptions of food, the hilariously profane, salty atmosphere of the various kitchens that he's worked in over the course of his career all seemed to conspire to make the world of restaurant business seem exotic and alluring while at the same time thoroughly turning the reader off from the business.

But it's not all crazy shenanigans with Bourdain. He dispenses practical advice as well (metal rings to make your food taller to amaze your friends, invest in some good solid knives, never eat fish in restaurants on the weekens) and the ultimate strength of this book lies in his ability to turn his acerbic wit onto himself as well- a chapter late in the book, 'The Life of Bryan' takes a look at hard working chef Scott Bryan, who, unlike Bourdain, had spent his career working hard and making all the right choices which really illuminates an underlying theme of the book: namely that the restaurant business can be tough, but if you work your ass off, you can find success.

Overall: Bring on Medium Raw! I love Bourdain's writing style, I love this clear, unflinching look at the restaurant business and I loved this book. **** out of ****.

The Inconvenience Should Be Theirs

This quote has been bugging me:

“I think it’s important to recognize that you can’t have 100 per cent security and also then have 100 per cent privacy and zero inconvenience,”

(Of course, the President was the one who said it.) But the fact that he said it bothers me and the fact that this is the choice we apparently have to make in this day and age bothers me more. I'm conflicted, I really am. I'm just supposed to trust that the government isn't going to use this information for nefarious purposes? Let's leave aside my libertarian leanings and look at this from an agéd hippie point of view: what the hell happened to not trusting anyone over thirty? Why should we trust the man? Why did we Occupy Wall Street? Why the vote for hope and change? We were promised hope and change and got a whole plate more of the same and lame excuses.

A lot of things slipped past in the aftermath of September 11th and people didn't care enough. At the time, faced with a massive security failure that had lead to a horrific terrorist attack, the Patriot Act looked... extreme but not unreasonable. Now, it's become clear that moment was the moment where Bush the Younger swung for the fences and started rolling the Executive Branch back to its pre-Watergate power days and President Obama should have started rolling it the other way- but more power is more power. And while Dems might things that more power for GOPers is a bad thing, there's no doubt that they like it plenty while GOPers get nauseous at Dems with that much power.

Either way, there's too much power.

I think I'm moving towards the notion that 100% security isn't worth it if we compromise our principles to get their. Freedom, democracy, the Constitution- they matter more. 100% privacy is probably unreachable unless you want to live in the desert and not use the internet at all and pay for everything with cash. (After this week, I'm starting to wonder if the off-the-gridders might have a point.) As for the inconveniences, 100% of it should be borne by the government. Protecting the Homeland shouldn't be impossible but it should be a hell of a lot harder than it's proven to be.

This Week In Vexillology #32

Drag down that dusty box of VHS tapes from the attic, plug in your VCR and pop in The Gods Must Be Crazy because this week, kids, we've got Botswana!

Originally known as British Bechuanaland it achieved independence in 1966 and its now known by it's Setswana name, Botswana.  (Interestingly enough, Botswana has also been one of the most stable, prosperous and consistently democratic countries in Africa-  how often do you hear about Botswana?) It's flag was adopted on September 30th, 1966 for national and civil usage and it's one of the most unique flags in Africa.

Why?  The national flag has neither the colors of the dominant political party nor any of the traditional pan-African colors (red, green and black.)  Instead, it draws its colors from the idea of pula or life-giving rain, something that's vital in a country that is prone to droughts.   The two sections of blue in the flag represent rain and water-  the blue also represents life. The black stripe bordered (my fancy pants reference book says 'fimbriated' but let's call things what they are:  it's bordered in white.  You know it, I know it, we all know it.)  The black and white symbolize the harmony of the people and the idea of the African and European populations of Botswana living together in peace.

You know, the Top Gear Botswana special was pretty good too, but the last time I watched The Gods Must Be Crazy, I think we rented it from Hagen's.  (Iowa City peeps will fondly remember that wonderland of VHS-dom.)  And really, I should probably know more about Botswana than this.  Luckily, I at least know what their flag looks like now.

So until next time kids, keep your flags flying.  FREAK or otherwise...

Arrested Development Season 4: Some Thoughts

1. It's Arrested Development. Of course you have to watch it more than once.

2. But, if it's your first viewing, stick with it. The early episodes seem very uneven but gradually, everything swings into focus quite nicely- usually in ways that you don't get until a few episodes down the road.

3. I like television shows where the characters grow and evolve over time. Season 4 takes these characters and puts them through the wringer... some grow, some brush up against maturity and others stay more or less the same but by the end of the season, all of these characters are in some very interesting places.

4. Tobias (David Cross) just about steals the whole damn season. Gob (Will Arnett) comes in a close second.

5. Wish we could have seen more of Buster. (Tony Hale.)

6. Mad props to the writers for working a crazy sorority chick reference into Maeby's big speech in her episode. (So much win there.)

7. Portia De Rossi's face didn't bother me. It looked a little strange in her first episode but after that, she just looked like she normally did.

8. Terry Crews, Maria Bamford and Isla Fisher are all amazing guest stars.

9. Why hasn't someone given Jessica Welter an Emmy yet?

10. I'm game for a movie or another season of this- this is fascinating puzzle of interlocking narratives and like a seven layer dip of jokes that you can just keep digging into with every viewing. GIVE ME MORE!

Scandalmania Continues

I voted for President Obama in 2008. Four years later, I didn't vote for him and I'm becoming increasingly thankful that I didn't. (I didn't vote for Mittens either.) But things are getting ridiculous. Given the current state of Congress, I was hoping, hoping beyond hope that the White House could maintain some semblance of competency but apparently they can't do that either.

The IRS Scandal continues... some people might shrug it away and say 'well everybody's used the IRS to harass their political opponents.' Fantastic. But it doesn't make it OK. If Nixon did it and that wasn't OK, why is it OK when President Obama engages in similar shenanigans? And I'm sorry, the whole 'I had no idea what was going on' isn't exactly comforting either. How can you not? If something that widespread went down and you didn't even hear so much as a whisper, then maybe the GOPers are right. Maybe the government is too big.

But today, today it's been revealed that Verizon has been handing over oodles of phone records to the government.

Seriously?

Look, I'm not naive. I assume that the National Security Agency has something, some quantum computing device that enables it to sort through random shit on the internet and do things that would probably make us collectively s--t our pants if we knew the full extent of them. I think the general happiness of the public is centered around maintaining the illusion of privacy which means that if they're going to do things like this, they shouldn't get caught.

But they did get caught. The only question is: what, if any consequences will result?

UPDATE: Sigh... no one is listening to our phone calls? Somehow I don't find that all that comforting Mr. President. Now that the illusion of privacy is gone, I don't see how you can possibly defend this level of domestic surveillance. But they're going too... and I'm sure something will 'appear' to get cancelled but make no mistake about it-- this is going to keep right on going, whether we want it to or not. We just won't hear about it.

Albums2010 #63: The Heist

By now, everyone who is breathing has heard the song 'Thrift Shop,' that unusually bouncy, funky ode to the Goodwills and the Salvation Armies of our lives.  The first impression I had of the song were good.  It entered your brain and left nothing but a barrage of good feelings behind it.  You couldn't help but dance to it.  The funk inspired hook to the song (horns, oboes?  Not even sure what that noise is except that it's funk-aaaay) is awesome.

So it's a pleasant surprise to find that the rest of Mackelmore and Ryan Lewis' debut album, The Heist is just as promising as their debut single.  It starts off with a bang--  'Ten Thousand Hours' is intelligent, upbeat, name checks Malcolm Gladwell and Basquiat and gets your attention immediately.  Mackelmore doesn't pander or talk down to his listeners.  

He follows it up with the awesome, hand clapping, foot-stomping track 'Can't Hold Us' which is getting plenty of radio play at the moment even though they've done something truly weird to it that I don't like.  (The album version is better.)  There's also a decent amount of variety mixed in as well-  especially with the powerful anthem for equality 'Same Love.'

Then, then there's 'Wing$'.  Just when you think you're wrapping your head around what this album is all about, Macklemore comes out of left field and hits you with an introspective meditation on consumerism and how obsessed we can be about material goods.   It's mind-blowingly good stuff and just one of many surprises that are hidden away on this album.

Overall:  This is intelligent rap at it's best.  I don't think Macklemore is in the business of pushing boundaries or doing crazy shit like Kanye, but he won't pander to his audience.  If you don't know who he's name checking, look it up.   Hailing from Seattle, he's a major fan of the Mariners (that gets mentioned a time or two) and he brings the best of intelligent, independent hip-hop roaring into the mainstream.   I can't wait until his next album.

You Already Know:  'Thrift Shop', 'Can't Hold Us', 'Same Love'
You Should Get To Know:  'Ten Thousand Hours', 'White Walls', 'Bom Bom', 'Wing$'

Bookshot #62: Where The West Ends

I think if I could figure out how to be a travel writer and make a living that way, I would.  And books like this don't help matters (neither do re-runs of Anthony Bourdain's No Reservations- but that's beside the point.)*  I can think of no job that would be more awesome that travelling the world and writing about the crazy, random, wonderful, odd, dangerous things that you see along the way.

And Michael J. Totten makes that old idealistic itch of mine itch that much harder because he's a good writer.  (This post from way back when about the Ghost City of Cyprus bumped Cyprus up to one of my bucket list destinations.  So did that paper I wrote back as an undergrad dissecting the Cyprus Conflict- a fascinating, fascinating subject that I knew nothing about.) 

Where The West Ends chronicles his journeys through a variety of countries, starting in Iraqi Kurdistan and Turkey and winding up through Albania and Serbia before heading over to Georgia and the Caucuses and then Romania and finally Ukraine.  Totten and his occasional travelling companion and buddy Sean drive into Iraqi Kurdistan like it's nothing-  on a whim, in fact, just to find out what's going on.   They drive into Kosovo and nearly end up in a dangerous Serb neighborhood of Pristina.  They meet American soldiers, Albanians that love America and President Bush.  They encounter hostility in the usual places (Serbia) and find love for America in places you wouldn't expect (Albania and Romania-  both, apparently, ridiculously pro-American.   As is Kosovo.  I believe downtown Pristina has a statue of President Clinton, while Albania threw up a statue of Bush the Younger.  That's right.  Bush the Younger...   he probably doesn't have a statue in the United States for cryin' out loud, but he's got one in Albania, by golly.)

Totten ventures into the Caucuses, visitng Georgia in the midst of the Russian invasion (and hops a taxi out to the Russian occupied town of Gori--  and almost manages to get there too before turning around and beating a hasty retreat back to Tblisi.)  And finally, the book ends with a trip into Ukraine- ostensibly to check out the areas around Chernobyl, though as it turns, they don't make it there and instead end up taking a long, lonely trip down to the Crimea, where they really discover where the West ends.

To be honest, these 'dispatches from abroad' especially where The Balkans are concerned have been around forever.   Rebecca West's Black Lamb, Grey Falcon probably remains one of the definitive books exploring what was then the country of Yugoslavia, but Robert Kaplan has dabbled here as well, with the excellent Balkan Ghosts-  so Totten is travelling a path that's been fairly well travelled before, though I'd say his writing style lends a certain realism to his adventures.  He's not painting a broad canvas or pretty metaphors of blood soaked mountains or haunted plains (Kaplan called his book Balkan Ghosts and there tended to be something ethereal about his writing in that book.  Not to say that it wasn't well-written--  I enjoyed it immensely but it didn't drop you into the back seat of the car travelling throughout this region the way Totten does.)  No, Totten brings you along for the ride- which makes Where The West Ends compulsively readable and enjoyable to boot.

This is the kind of foreign correspondant**, 'you are there' type of journalism I love.  With so many networks cutting back on actual, real live foreign correspondants, it's awesome find someone who's willing to actually go to some of these messed up places and give you his best perspective on what's going on on what some of it might mean. 

Overall:  Totten is one of my 'must read' commentators on the Interwebs.  If I see a link to an article of his float by, I click on it.  He's an excellent writer, a straight shooter, a guy who's interest seems to be in informing you of facts on the ground- not analysis.  He hearkens back to the old school foreign correspondant journalism of times past and this book, like so many of it's ilk aways makes me want to travel to some of these places-  just so I, like him, can see it for myself. My Verdict:  **** out of ****.

*Turns out that while No Reservations may be gone from Netflix (at least I can't find it.)  Kitchen Confidential was available for Kindle.  I'm already 36 pages in.

**Foreign correspondant is another job I'd love to have.  Along with, weirdly enough, Air Traffic Controller.

2,906 Miles Update #6

I'm just going to say it: I've officially fallen off the wagon. I held on long enough to complete Couch to 5K earlier in the year and then between relatives visiting and birthdays and this, that and the other thing it just all went to hell in a handbasket. I know that's a cheap rationalization for being lazy about it- so I decided I was going to take a run at hitting the pavement to complete Couch to 5k outside... (after all, if I'm going to run a 5k, I should probably get used to the idea of running outside, right?)

Well, naturally as soon as I did that, I fucked up my feet somehow. So that slowed me way down... a little experimentation and some arch supports later I was back in business. Then we went on vacation. And now, we're back from vacation, I'm just plain exhausted and I need some motivation to get back out there and get back on the horse. I don't want to end the year right back where I started. The Missus has started at Title Boxing-- one of these days (sooner rather than later, I hope) I'm going to go down with her and give it a shot. And yes, I'm going to get back out there and start running again.

My current weight? Probably climbing. I really don't want to know. I need motivation and a boot up my ass but I'm going to get back on the horse.

As of 4/1/13: 166.03 miles in

Miles Added: 69.56

So we're now 235.59 miles in, which means the map now looks like this:

 

Onwards and upwards!  I'm gonna get back on this horse and kick this in the ass!

This Week In Vexillology #31

Grab yourself a bottle of nice Chianti and starting boiling the water for some gnocci kids because this week, just for the Cigar Parentals, we've got Italy!

Adopted for national usage from June 18th, 1946, this tricolor was, of course, influenced by the French tricolore and was brought to Italy by Napoleon during the Italian Campaign of 1796-  at first the bands were horizontal but the vertical tricolor was introduced in 1798 but was only used until the fall of Napoleon in 1814- and was reintroduced when the new Kingdom of Italy was formed in 1861.  After World War II, when the monarchy was ended the arms of the House of Savoy were removed and the present design of the flag was adopted.

To be honest, tricolors aren't my favorite flags.  They're pretty boring but they've usually got a hefty amount of history behind them and the Italian flag is no exception, becoming a symbol for freedom and unity during the long struggle for Italian unification known as Il Risorgimento- led by amongst other people the famous Giuseppe Garibaldi.  (The process of Italian reunification is an incredibly messy, complex story that even I don't know that much about.  It's hard to believe that the idea of a united Italian State not even two hundred years old.)

So ciao bella, kids!  And give it up for Italy!  And until next week, keep your flags flying-  FREAK or otherwise.

Big News, Sports Fans...

Kids,

For I don't know how long, I've been writing.  I wrote in elementary school, I wrote in high school- for my U.S. Literature class junior year, I churned out a sixty page, single spaced novella that had to have been a god awful mess (and to be honest, I'm not even sure my teacher read it.  She just gave me the A.)  Last year, I go back through the pages and pages of concepts, half-written fragments and bloated chapters and began the long process of binding them all together to try and make a novel out of them.

What I ended up with was about 120,000 words.  They weren't really what I would call a cleaned up, ready to publish story yet-  so then I began the longer process of cleaning up my pile of words and a couple of months ago, I finished what I could, for the first time, actually call a complete novel.

I gave it to a few select people to read... (The Quiet Man, The Missus and the Cigar Parentals amongst others) and once they're all done and I've got all their feedback, I'll be ready for one final polish and then...   then I'm going to publish it.   Those last five words suddenly seem very, very scary to me (suddenly, it's all so real.  Aaaaaaaah...)  but I believe in this story that I've written, I believe in the characters that I've created and whether you like it (I hope you will) or hate it-- I think it's only fair that I let other people read it.

I've got a Facebook page (like my Facebook page!!):

https://www.facebook.com/TomNixonAuthor

And you can follow me on Twitter:

https://twitter.com/churchillscigar

So stay tuned in the coming weeks...  I'll have a title reveal, a cover reveal- a final release date to announce!

Thanks for joining me on this ride...
Tom