3/25/10

Looking for the Right Way to Write: Back to Pen and Paper

I wrote this by hand. Well, not this exactly, but a different version of this which I then typed out for all to see. I guess I could have scanned my original and uploaded it as a PDF or something. Actually, that wouldn't work, no one would be able to read a word of it. Even I struggle to read my own handwriting. How sad is that?

We are slowly losing the ability to write. Not in theory, but in practice. Sure, everyone can still "write" in the way that putting thoughts into words into sentences into paragraphs is "writing". But no one actually puts pen to paper anymore. It is popular, though, to praise the counter culture trend which boasts of the benefits and intimacy of the long hand letter writing process. "Nothing is better than getting a handwritten note in the mail", explains the every-person who just wrote a letter and felt good about it. You know what else feels good? Getting the information in said letter to its recipient in less than a couple of days. Yes, the USPS does a great job, but the system of tubes that we have named the internet crushes our loyal mail-people. Split second vs few days: it is no contest. There is no Romanticism about an email, however, so people will continue to wax poetically about the methods of the past.

Will email ever be looked at in a similar nostalgic way? We are headed towards a world where email becomes the slow dinosaur. Connections are even faster now. Why send an email when you can text or tweet or SMS or Facebook message or use any of the other countless instant gratification methods of communication? When I am aging into my autumn years will I set my grandchild upon my knee and say "Son, in my day any man worth his grain would take the time to sit down and craft a thoughtful email. Nothing is more rewarding that opening up a new message which just hit your inbox. Those were the days". 


Share/Save/Bookmark

3/22/10

NCAA Tournament Performance Rankings: Complete First Weekend

So how's your bracket? Yeah, me too. But is it all that bad to blow up your bracket if the tournament is so completely enthralling? I would gladly lose two of my Final Four teams in the first weekend (which I did, thank you Kansas and Villanova) if I was rewarded with the action of this past weekend. What this shakeup does result in is a reconfiguring of favorites and certain matchups. Today's write up begins with the Sweet 16 pairings (featuring the overall performance rankings in parentheses), followed by the individual by-day rankings of each team from Day 3 and 4, the conclusion is the complete 64 team rankings (One note, of those which made the Sweet 16 only Purdue is ranked outside of the top 16 performances. An argument could be made for dropping Michigan State out of the top 16, but for now, they remain at 15).

(For a more entertaining look at the first weekend, please click here)

Sweet 16 Match-ups:

(1) Kentucky v. (5) Cornell

(2) Syracuse v. (12) Butler
(3) Duke v. (17) Purdue
(4) Kansas State v. (8) Xavier
(6) West Virginia v. (7) Washington
(9) Ohio State v. (11) Tennessee
(10) Northern Iowa v. (15) Michigan State
(13) St. Mary's v. (14) Baylor


Share/Save/Bookmark

3/20/10

NCAA Performance Rankings: Day 2

Ranking the NCAA Teams:

While Day Two of the tournament was not nearly as entertaining as Day One, it did provide for some spectacular performances. The first list ranks the 32 teams from yesterday only. The second list is all 64 teams from the first round.

Day 2:
  1. Syracuse (23 pt win over Vermont)
  2. Duke (29 pt win over Arkansas Pine Bluff)
  3. Pittsburgh (23 pt win over Oakland)
  4. West Virginia (27 pt win over Morgan State)
  5. California (15 pt win over Louisville)
  6. Cornell (13 pt win over Temple)
  7. Texas A&M (16 pt win over Utah State)
  8. Ohio State (17 pt win over UC Santa Barbara)
  9. Xavier (11 pt win over Minnesota)
  10. Missouri (8 pt win over Clemson)
  11. Georgia Tech (5 pt win over Oklahoma State)
  12. Maryland (12 pt win over Houston)
  13. Gonzaga (7 pt win over Florida State)
  14. Michigan State (3 pt win over New Mexico State)
  15. Purdue (8 pt win over Siena)
  16. Wisconsin (4 pt win over Wofford)
  17. New Mexico State (3 pt loss to Michigan State)
  18. Wofford (4 pt loss to Wisconsin)
  19. Oklahoma State (5 pt loss to Georgia Tech)
  20. Florida State (7 pt loss to Gonzaga)
  21. Clemson (8 pt loss to Missouri)
  22. Siena (8 pt loss to Purdue)
  23. Houston (12 pt loss to Maryland)
  24. Minnesota (11 pt loss to Xavier)
  25. Louisville (15 pt loss to California)
  26. Utah State (16 pt loss to Texas A&M)
  27. Temple (13 pt loss to Cornell)
  28. UC Santa Barbara (17 pt loss to Ohio State)
  29. Morgan State (27 pt loss to West Virginia)
  30. Oakland (23 pt loss to Pittsburgh)
  31. Vermont (23 pt loss to Syracuse)
  32. Arkansas Pine Bluff (29 pt loss to Duke)


Share/Save/Bookmark

3/19/10

NCAA Performance Rankings

Ranking the NCAA Teams:

After 12 hours of excellent, intense, entertaining basketball, here is how the teams fared based solely on their performance yesterday. Keep in mind that a losing team (say, Marquette) can be placed above a team that won (say, Villanova). This is a completely subjective rankings system derived entirely from what I saw with my own eyes. Please let me know where I made mistakes:
  1. Kentucky (29 pt win over East Tennessee State)
  2. Kansas State (20 win over North Texas) 
  3. Ohio (14 pt win over Georgetown)
  4. Butler (18 pt win over UTEP)
  5. Kansas (16 pt win over Lehigh)
  6. Washington (2 pt win over Marquette)
  7. Baylor (9 pt win over Sam Houston State)
  8. BYU (7 pt 2OT win over Florida)
  9. Wake Forest (1 pt OT win over Texas)
  10. St. Mary's (9 pt win over Richmond)
  11. Tennessee (3 pt win over San Diego State)
  12. New Mexico (5 pt win over Montana)
  13. Murray State (1 pt win over Vanderbilt)
  14. Marquette (2 pt loss to Washington)
  15. Northern Iowa (1 pt win over UNLV)
  16. Texas (1 pt OT loss to Wake Forest)
  17. Old Dominion (1 pt win over Notre Dame)
  18. Florida (7 pt 2OT loss to BYU)
  19. Villanova (3 pt OT win over Robert Morris)
  20. Robert Morris (3 pt OT loss to Villanova)
  21. San Diego State (3 pt loss to Tennessee)
  22. Notre Dame (1 pt loss to Old Dominion)
  23. UNLV (1 pt loss to Northern Iowa)
  24. Vanderbilt (1 pt loss to Murray St)
  25. Sam Houston State (9 pt loss to Baylor)
  26. Montana (5 pt loss to New Mexico)
  27. Lehigh (16 pt loss to Kansas)
  28. Richmond (9 pt loss to St. Mary's)
  29. UTEP (18 pt loss to Butler)
  30. Georgetown (14 pt loss to Ohio)
  31. North Texas (20 pt loss to Kansas State)
  32. East Tenn State (29 pt loss to Kentucky)
Complete first round rankings coming tomorrow with blurbs for each team.

GRM
Share/Save/Bookmark

3/18/10

Quotations: The New F-Word

Every man is a damn fool for at least five minutes every day; wisdom consists in not exceeding the limit. -Elbert Hubbard

Quotations have become the "f" word of the literary world. They can be used in almost any situation and nobody really thinks twice. Think about all the different sentences you have crafted in the past which featured the vulgarity of the "f" word. Surely it has been a verb, noun, adjective, adverb, pronoun, title, etc. It was also most likely used to convey such emotions as anger, happiness, apathy, sorrow, etc. It is the Swiss Army Knife of words, if you are ever at a mental loss just throw out a couple f-bombs to buy some time.

Very quickly, quotations are seeping into every foreseeable avenue. Competing studies have shown that society both writes more and writes less than previous generations, I will lean towards the former conclusion. While people may not be crafting epic letters with the skill of a true wordsmith as our Elizabethan brethren did, there are more circumstances in which the written word is used. It is almost never really the "written" word anymore, but instead the "typed" word. The act of putting pen to paper is not important, the putting of thoughts into words is. Twitter, Facebook, text-messaging and email have become the most common forms of communication (besides, you know, talking) and all of these methods involve placing word after word together to make a coherent statement.

Sometimes, though, it is difficult to come up with the best words. To be fair, enough people have lived and recorded statements in human history that someone, somewhere has probably captured what you are trying to say better than you. At some point, C.S. Lewis was pondering the importance of friendship, just like you might be after an important moment when a pal comes to your aide. C.S. Lewis is smarter than you and me and he has the ability to put his thoughts into words better than you and me. So when C.S. is quoted with saying, "Friendship is unnecessary, like philosophy, like art... It has no survival value; rather it is one of those things that give value to survival.", it can replace whatever jumbled mess you would have thought of. So instead of thinking more, you drop a quote-bomb on your Facebook page.

Share/Save/Bookmark

3/15/10

Quick Fix: Expansion and the NCAA Tournament

There has been a growing sentiment in sports circles concerning expansion of the NCAA Men's Basketball Tournament. The opposing sides can be summarized as those who do not want to meddle with a "perfect" event and those who think more is better. A common push is a move to 96 teams (an increase from the current 65 team set-up). You could spend all day listening to arguments from both sides and not come to a conclusion. There are merits to both retaining the current form and to expanding.

By staying at 65:
  • the regular season has more meaning
  • conference tournaments have impact
  • more drama surrounding the "bubble"
  • brackets are easy to fill out

By expanding to 96:
  • more teams with opportunity to compete
  • less debate surrounding the "bubble"
  • more chance of early round upsets
  • more spots for mid-majors

In terms of my personal opinion, I believe that expansion could be good, but an expansion to 96 is the worst case scenario. Here is why:
  1. 96 teams will still leave room for argument over who's in, who's out. The bubble issue remains.
  2. The regular season and conference tournaments would become even less meaningful than they are now. The drama would be removed almost entirely.
  3. Mid-majors would most likely not be helped. The extra spots would ensure more teams from the power conferences get in.

With this said, I am pro-expansion. I am pro-super expansion. Others have brought similar ideas to the table, but I believe I have a complete answer. The NCAA should expand the tournament to include all teams...sort of.

Share/Save/Bookmark

How I Felt Like a Number...But Didn't Mind (PART TWO)


Part Two (continued from this post on Friday)

I knew this was the environment in business. Nothing was going to surprise me. But I let my guard down and let the company convince me that they had too much invested in me. I couldn't be considered disposable. What about the $75,000? This is why I dreaded the call to the corporate office to report my resignation. I shouldn't have.

I called in to my responsible party at the corporate headquarters. He answered like a customer service representative at Verizon. 
Hello, Mr. McBride, how can I be of service today?
I explained that I didn't think it was in the best interest of either party to continue our working relationship (then I cringed waiting for the hammer to drop).
Oh, I'm sorry to hear that. (Pause) Well, for my records I need to ask what the reason is for your resignation?
I explained that I felt like I was not the right person for the position and that I couldn't see myself working in this capacity for the next five years (Now I was going to get it. He was going to yell at me for taking up all of their time and resources. How could I have not known this before they spent $75,000 on training me?).
OK, I will note that. The next thing I will need is an official letter of resignation. Could you email me this within the next hour?


Share/Save/Bookmark

3/12/10

How I Felt Like a Number...But Didn't Mind

Part One (Look for Part Two on Monday)

I worked for a company for six months. It took two and a half minutes to erase me from their records.

For all the feelings running through my mind in the week and a half after quitting my job, the biggest shock was just how meaningless I really was to my previous employer. I do not live in a fantasy world in which I expected any sort of celebratory party held as my farewell, what I had expected was a slight bit of friction as the ax was brought down on my career. The resistance never came. Quitting was as simple and cold as ordering a new couch from IKEA. Actually, it was substantially easier, as I didn't have to figure out what a duktig, oslo, billy or kassett was. What is the Swedish word for 'quit'? Hmmm. 

My employer had made claims almost weekly about the quality of their training regiment. Tops in the industry. This I do not debate, they clearly put time, money and other resources into training. At one point, a home office employee threw out a figure (Something like $75,000) which the company attached to each new trainee. Get through the entire program and that will be the price tag to the company. Wow! They must truly believe in my abilities, I am empowered. New trainees were given equipment, provided with extensive industry training and nurtured at the corporate headquarters for two weeks. I was part of the next generation of financial professionals. I was believed in. I was an investment.

After six months of being told how important I was, I guess I began to believe it a bit. This was one of the biggest things holding me back from making the move earlier to leave. I held out longer while I knew that I was eventually going to be leaving the company solely because I did not want to let everyone down. I was sucked in by the corporate culture. If I had known how the detachment would have actually played out, I would have left upon the first inclination of doubt.

Let me make this clear: Your company does not care about you. Do not listen to what they tell you. You are only as important as the office equipment, the network technology or the air conditioning system. Employees (Especially those at the lowest level) are not people. They are cogs in the system. The plan is generally for a small percentage of these plebes to become "valued employees". Most will fall by the wayside at one point of another and nobody will bat an eye.

My generation gets a poor reputation for not being loyal to a company. The days of working for the same institution for an entire career are over. Generation X killed that idea and my generation is piling the cement on its grave site. But are we really to be blamed? Have young employees become less loyal based on inherent personality traits or do we understand the cold nature of business more thoroughly? Sports often times acts as a barometer for society, many times these comparisons are inane. In this case, however, I think it is a proper comparison. Athletes of past decades were drafted by a team and would go on to play their entire careers for that team. Free agency, powerful sports agents and a less barriers between the boardroom and the locker room have led to new generations of athletes who are loyal to one thing only: themselves. I doubt anyone who is entering the workforce today or tomorrow or in the next few years has the intention of staying at the same company which hires them. This just will not happen. At some point, the company will need to cut back on employee costs and the relationship will end. On the other end of the possibility spectrum, there will come a point when a better position opens at a different company and the relationship will end. Whether the company ends it or the employee ends it is beside the point. 

The sooner that both sides of the worker-employee relationship realize that there is no loyalty, the sooner everyone can go about working and living their lives as they should. Workers should not view their role at a company as their entire lives. They are people first, employees second. Employers will continue to treat their workers as numbers, but this shouldn't bring with it any hard feelings. Let's keep this relationship casual, no one needs to get married to their jobs.

GRM

Share/Save/Bookmark

3/11/10

The Sickness of Change

I have been cursed.



This is what happens when you upset the fabric of the universe; when you do what you aren't supposed to do; when you break free from the line you are supposed to be on. In a way, the higher powers of the world attempt to slap you back into order like a unruly boy scout. This is where the pain comes from. The simplest part of any act is the act itself. Trouble always finds the person in the 'pre' and 'post' stages. Doing is not hard. Unless the doing is something that is hard (e.g. Running a marathon), but it generally isn't. Pre-action minds are filled with doubt, nerves, anger, fear, doubt and nerves. Post-action is filled with, well, that's what I'm dealing with now. The post-action fall out.

I have been cursed.

Dateline: Monday Morning. As first reported here, I quit my job

Dateline: Monday Afternoon. Phone call to my Mom who seems much more interested in my acquisition of health insurance. My response, "Mom, I'll figure it out, don't worry". Cue foreboding music indicating that this might be a moment of foreshadowing. 

Dateline: Monday Night. Second half of my recreational soccer match. As to heed my Mom's warnings, I play the game while favoring my previously injured right ankle. All seems well until the dreaded turf monster leaps up and grabs my healthy ankle. Boom, rolled ankle. I take myself out of the game and nurse my already bloating ankle.

Dateline: Tuesday Morning: The ankle is still in pain, well, both ankles actually. To make matters worse (Read: much worse) these conditions have been joined by what seems like a simple hangover headache. My first reaction is that this is odd as I did not have much to drink the previous night (The soccer team had imbibed at a local public house), but I took some painkillers anyway. What was the worst that could happen? I was in pain. I wanted it killed.


Share/Save/Bookmark

3/10/10

Update 03/10/2010

I need to get some quick updates out of the way today. Please bare with me...

1.) A giant 'Thank You!' to everyone who has sent well wishes, encouragement, congratulations and any words my way in regards to my decision to quit my job last week. It has been a wonderful surprise to hear from so many who care about me. I hope you all continue to follow the blog for further updates.

2.) I have been accepted to write a blog for the Chicago Tribune's network (ChicagoNow). My writing there will be quite different than what is normally found on Right After Left. The blog is titled 'And Then What?' and is focused entirely on the goings on in Chicago through the eyes of someone who is just getting comfortable (Read: Me). The posts will be shorter than the typical post here. If you know anyone in the Chicago area or you yourself are interested in Chicago information, please check it out here.

3.) If you find any of the information on this page interesting at all, please take the time to either post a comment, retweet the article or sign-up to receive email updates (Check out the new feature in the upper right hand corner). It goes a long way to help me know what kind of content is popular.

4.) I am always available in some sense to be contacted. Email me here. Follow me on Twitter. Whether it is just a quick hello, a link to a useful article or a request for a guest post, I am all ears.

Thank you again for checking in with my writings here on Right After Left, the traffic numbers have been a pleasant surprise. I understand that not everything I write is going to appeal to everyone, I just hope that once in awhile you are entertained. Expect the posts to slow slightly on this site in response to my new gig with ChicagoNow and with my continued efforts to finish my first attempt at a book (Aiming to have 80,000 words by April, then begin to edit). This might come as a welcome change for some of you who have commented that I write too much on this site. I should be settling in to approximately five posts a week here.

Keep the feedback coming. 

GRM

Share/Save/Bookmark

3/9/10

In Your Dreams

Only a few things are guaranteed to make me shut my brain off and immediately stop listening to someone:

1.) Use of the word "myriad", instead of more reasonable alternatives such as "many" or "a bunch"  
2.) Any use of the the phrase "Oh, that is so like (insert friend's name)", or its even more evil cousin "Oh, that is so us!"
3.) The retelling of dreams

That last one is the biggie. It is the one thing that almost everyone in the world does that honestly pisses me off. I have no use for the misadventures you had in your imagination land last night. I can't stand it. What is the response this person would be looking for? I am clearly not a psychologist or some sort of professional dream analyst. You are not going to get anything out of this conversation and neither am I. Casual dream retelling (CDR) may possibly be the biggest time waster in modern humanity, with the Twilight Saga coming in a close second (Just kidding, Pattinson is dreamy...that's OK for me to say right?...I have to go).

Now that I have that out of the way, let me tell you about this dream I had last night. 


Share/Save/Bookmark

3/8/10

Olympic Judges Hate Avatar, Love The Hurt Locker

As I mentioned going into the weekend, I had my choice for the Best Picture Oscar but it came with a qualification. I had not seen all the nominees. I hadn't even seen the two films considered front runners for the prize. Well, I couldn't face the possibility of, come Sunday, having to admit to not seeing the best movie made in the past year. Moreover, I wanted to be able to complain with a clean conscience if The Hurt Locker did not win. What this means in a roundabout way is that I finally saw Avatar (To be fair, this also had much to do with the box-office behemoth being relegated to the cheap theaters after a historic run at the real theaters. Sidebar: Why have we as a movie going public accepted the fact that there is a $3.00 surcharge for 3D movies? Is it worth $3.00 to be able to see the bugs flying right at us? There are no other variable pricing models in movies. Wouldn't it make more sense to pay extra for a film with a giant budget, or one that last over two and a half hours, or one with tons of special effects? Why stop at a 3D surcharge? Let's make everything variable. This is not a good trend). While I made my choice clear earlier, I am now able to defend my statement that The Hurt Locker was the best movie made this past year and deserved the awards it received yesterday.

My mind was as close to being made up about Avatar as possible before even heading into the theater. I only wanted to see it for cultural relevance, so I could be part of the conversation. It was going to be cheesy, it was going to draw too heavily on graphical demonstrations, the story was going to be bad, it was going to be too long, I was not going to like Avatar. For most of Act One, my expectations were being met. One thing struck me as particularly strange (Looking back at this point) and this was just how often parts of Avatar reminded me of other movies. For Act One, the memories of Dances With Wolves was at the front of my mind. Tell me which movie I am summarizing: Injured soldier finds strange new people, at first is pushed away but then is overwhelmingly embraced. Yeah, I'm not sure either. As Sam Worthington went through the same "meet the natives" montage as viewers have seen in countless other movies, I almost fell asleep. I am not just saying this for effect. I almost actually fell asleep in the first hour. Thankfully, the action picked up come Act Two.


Share/Save/Bookmark

3/7/10

Public Talking Points: The Destruction of Opinions

I find it strange how some opinions transform into accepted fact. No one knows how this happens or at what point it happens, but it certainly does happen. The normal course of events is that a group of (vocal) people form an opinion on a certain subject and they make this point clear in many ways. Usually, these people are considered "experts". What follows is the uninitiated, who take the experts' opinion as fact, adopting the same viewpoint despite not having arrived at the same conclusion. From one opinion, a fact is spawned. A tell-tale sign that this phenomenon is occurring can be found in the casual references thrown around by laypeople:

Maybe it is a shoe salesman who, while in conversation, mentions something along the lines of: "The Hurt Locker should definitely win for Best Picture, its portrayal of the war was so spot-on"
Maybe it's your coworker who you overhear saying "Radiohead is just such a transcendent band, I love their new stuff. It's so good."
Or maybe it is your sister who says "Obama the candidate was so much more effective than Obama the President."

No one even bats their eyes when statements like these are uttered. The problem is that most likely the shoe salesman has never been to Iraq, your coworker hasn't even heard the entire Radiohead album and your sister could not make followup point to back up her Obama point. Much like politicians are given talking points before going on the Sunday morning interview shows, everyday people have their own now. Listen to enough experts and your mind is made up for you. 


Share/Save/Bookmark

3/5/10

The World as a Rubik's Cube

Often times when I have a clear mind, one without pressing thoughts, I slip into a daydream of alternate realities (Stay with me). It always fascinates me, for example, how many things in our world seem common place  to us all now but are relatively new developments. The idea that the internet did not exist during my parents' childhoods is hard to imagine. The iPod is less than ten years old. Boxing and horse racing, only a few decades ago, were the biggest sports in the world and now they are almost non-existent. In the movie industry alone, there have been more than four different format changes alone. The world changes quickly and does not look back.

During one particularly spaced-out haze, I began to envision history, events, discoveries and culture as a Rubik's Cube. The world as it is today is much like the completed cube (We currently live in the blue section) with each of the nine blue squares representing a specific element of culture. The other sides (The red, yellow, orange, green, white sides) represent other times in history. Our cube is in order now because everything is where it is supposed to be. But imagine if we made one move. What if we slid the middle section clockwise once? Now all the sides would contain foreign elements. Assume that the middle section represents "people". It represents the famous, the spectacular, the great minds, the politicians of each era. When twisted, the shuffle would result in a reordering of who was important when. 


Share/Save/Bookmark

Do We Need the Postal Service?

You've heard the whispers:

Mail delivery to be cut on Saturdays
Stamp prices to shoot up
Mailmen to be replaced by robots*

*I get mixed up sometimes between what happens in my dreams and what I read. Bear with me.

Imagine for a moment that we are discussing any normal business, look at the facts:
  • $13 billion in debt this year
  • Projected $238 billion deficit by 2020
  • 36,500 retail locations (Double McDonald's, triple Starbuck's) 
  • 15% projected drop in demand within the next decade
If this was the GAP, if this was Subway, if this was Barnes & Noble, certain moves would happen immediately. Jobs would be cut, locations would be shut down and a complete reorganization would be needed. But the US Postal Service is a public utility, so business as usual isn't going to fly.


Share/Save/Bookmark

3/4/10

Cooking is Irrational - Part Two

*In Part One yesterday, I looked into the economic irrationality of cooking meals at home. Today, I make the case for cooking. Enjoy.*


Part Two


This irrationality can mean only one thing. No one thinks their time is worth anything There must be some other benefit to cooking at home which leads millions of people to prepare meals every day despite the clear reasons not to. I never used to understand this phenomenon. I would be rather angry, actually, after my hard work toiling in a kitchen would be slurped up in a fraction of the time (At least chew the food, geez!). Slowly, I am becoming a different person. I am adopting a different mindset.

Throughout college (Read: My main cooking period up until this point), my schedule was always rushed. Classes led to gym time led to meetings led to meetings led to sleep. Somewhere in there was a three to four meal allotment (Usually four, I'm a big dude). This left approximately seven and a half minutes to prepare each meal and four and a quarter minutes to eat the meal and clean up. As a result I would often use paper plates and plastic silverware to ensure a speedy removal of waste. Most meals would be one pot creations (Example: boil water in pot, add noodles to pot, drain water from pot, heat sauce in pot, eat noodles in pot). No meals had any sense of work within them. It is very clear when a dish is thrown together in under ten minutes as opposed to one which is thought through and developed over an hour or more. You can taste the difference.


Share/Save/Bookmark

Why the US Men's National Soccer Team Will Never Succeed

USA vs. Canada for the Olympic Gold Medal in Men's Hockey was a great game to watch, this is certain. But what led to these two nations meeting in the final game? Further, why are the same countries usually dominant in certain sports? The Norwegians dominate cross country skiing. South Koreans are typically great speed skaters. Chinese athletes take most of the diving medals (In the Summer Olympics). The United States can boast of a far-reaching dominance which can infiltrate any sport. More so than any other country, our athletes are afforded the opportunities to be great in whatever they would like. They are almost never at a disadvantage. It happens occasionally, however. Canada is much better at hockey than the US because it is so much more pervasive in their culture. Only a few states in the States have the same cold weather environment which breeds hockey greats. Children raised in most portions of the country are never even exposed to hockey in a recreational fashion. Some could argue that Chinese athletes will consistently be better in the "precision" sports because they have less regulation on training limits and rules. The social reflection of a country's sporting strength speaks directly to their national identity. South America and Africa sent (almost) no representatives to the Winter Games. The Nordic countries are non-factors in the Summer Games. 

Much can be explained through this analysis and a simple look at the country-sport correlation. What happens when you look at arguable the most simple game on Earth; the most widely played game on Earth; the most popular sport on Earth? What accounts for country's varying levels of skill when it comes to soccer? No longer can it be as simple as weather or training regiments. Over the course of hundreds of years the playing field should more or less even out. But this does not happen. The same countries, year after year, are the top national teams. The same countries produce the best players on a consistent basis. It doesn't make much sense.


Share/Save/Bookmark

3/3/10

Valentine's Day and The Marriage Ref: What it Means

On these pages I have defended the merits of a celebrity obsessed culture (see: In Defense of Celebrity), so this next statement may come off initially as hypocritical:

Movies like Valentine's Day and television shows like The Marriage Ref the worst things in entertainment.

Let's start with Valentine's Day. I have no problem with chick flicks. Often I find them to be quick and fun trips into the fantasy of true love. They can be cute, they can be funny, the can even be endearing at time (Good example: The Proposal; Worst Example: Bride Wars). No, these are not the films which are going to change the way anyone looks at the world, but this is not their intent. If I am in the right mood and mindset, I can enjoy most chick flicks. Even further, similar films which feature star-studded ensemble casts like Valentine's Day (ie. A Lot Like Love, He's Just Not That Into You) were fine. I left the theater/my living room feeling no better or worse than when I started the films. They were demonstrations in mediocrity. But they did manage to achieve some things which Valentine's Day could not, they at least seemed to a.) have a script that was looked over at least once b.) feature performances which appeared to be rehearsed c.) create characters which managed to seem slightly real and d.) wrap up the many stories semi-coherently. Valentine's Day was quite possibly the worst movie I can remember seeing. Even using the term movie is an injustice, it is more like a clip show of a terrible series you have never seen.


Share/Save/Bookmark

Cooking is Irrational - Part One


Part One (stay tuned for Part Two, which is much more abstract) 

Economics is based, fundamentally, on one principle: Rationality. Or, more simply, that man makes decisions upon well reasoned thoughts after weighing the costs and benefits of each alternative. Within the economic/mathematical framework, this idea is 'proven' based on the following type of example:
Steve is at a cupcake store. He is very hungry and wishes to have a delicious blend of sugar and cream topped with unholy amounts of toppings. He notices that the specials for the day feature three different choices, all for the uniform price of $3.99 (It is a rather fancy boutique-type cupcake store). His choices are: Red Velvet cupcake, Double Fudge cupcake and Key Lime Pie cupcake. With everything else being equal (ie. price and how each cupcake is displayed), Sam has a very simple choice to make. In his mind, whether he knows it or not, he is forming the basis for a rational decision. He is assigning a level of utility (Read: benefit) derived from each cupcake. Only Steve knows how much he likes each type of cupcake. He comes to the conclusion that:

Utility (Double Fudge) > Utility (Key Lime Pie) > Utility (Red Velvet)


Share/Save/Bookmark

3/1/10

Quitting As the First Step

I just quit my job.

Really. Like fifteen minutes ago. I stepped out of my boss' office after a thirty minute meeting and left without a job. Now the following thoughts are running through my head:

1.) What the hell is wrong with you? Have you seen the unemployment numbers? You are insane.
2.) Man, am I relieved.

This change was a few months in the making, but really it can be traced back to high school. Let's take a look at the 'path' take by hundreds of thousands of wide-eyed young people starting when they are a mere 17 or 18 years old.

Junior Year (high school): Begin testing periods to qualify for college (I did well SAT:1320 ACT:31)
Senior Year (high school): Make final decision on university (Bowling Green State University, a fine school)
Freshman Year (college): Choose major (Sports Management)
Sophomore Year (college): Change major (Accounting and Finance, dual major)
Junior Year (college): Find internship (a well-known personal finance firm)
Senior Year (college): Begins job search (job fairs, websites, networking)
Post-Graduation: Find job, STAT! (...)
Early Career: Do the hard work which will pay off later (See below)


Share/Save/Bookmark

2/25/10

Probability, Percentages and Poor Reasoning

The Weather Channel reports that your town has a 70% chance of precipitation tonight. RottenTomatoes.com reports that Valentine's Day has a 17% rating. The Doctor reports that you have a 25% chance of living beyond your 30th birthday. These are all things you hear all the time (well, hopefully all except the whole chronic illness thing). What do they mean? You know what it means.

It's probably gonna snow, Valentine's Day sucked and I'm not going to be living a long life. That's what it means. 

Does it though? Not entirely.

1. 
The world is full of probabilities and percentages. Americans especially need quantifiable ideas like this. It is the reason Rolling Stone (an American media creature) gives albums and movies ratings on a star system. It is also the reason a foreign publication, like NME, does not. Both magazines could have the same opinion of the album. Both could even use the same exact words for their review. At the end of the NME review, cries of "Tell me what your review was!" would be heard from Boston to San Diego. "Give me a star rating or don't rate it at all!" The internet has allowed for the indulgence of this ratings world. Metacritic and Rotten Tomatoes work as aggregate rating instruments compiling individual reviews from across the entertainment landscape. The visitor is given an easy to understand number which represents the merit of the work. Rotten Tomatoes works on a percentage basis. They determine whether each individual rating is positive or negative and then tally each side. After some simple math, we can see very clearly that Valentine's Day (17%) is a bad movie and Crazy Heart (92%) is a good movie. I shall now go see Crazy Heart. I will never see Valentine's Day. Here's the problem, that 17% is not like a grade on a paper. It is not as if Valentine's Day get good marks in 17% of the ratings criteria (ie. good landscaping, two characters are well developed, everything else is terrible so this equals a 17%). All this number means is that out of a hypothetical 100 reviewers, 17 gave it a positive review. Isn't this a much more positive way to look at it? The chances that any one individual will like this movie depends on a multitude of different factors. All I do know is the chances I personally like this movie is not 17%.


Share/Save/Bookmark

Vampire Weekend

Much has been written about the non-threatening tunes of the New York Upper West Side band, Vampire Weekend. Just this past week, they claimed the number one record in all the land with their sophomore effort, Contra (you can listen to the entire thing, for free, at the band's website). This followed the critically acclaimed self titled debut. You can lump me in with what seems like the rest of the world as a big fan. My first listen to Cape Cod Kwassa Kwassa and A Punk, in 2008, was a delight. The sounds were arranged differently than what I was used to; the lead singer (Ezra Koenig) sounded fresh with an accent of unfamiliar origin; the pace was quick and unaplogetic. This was fun music with an intellectual underpinning. 

By now most know the basics of the band's story. Formed while all members were still attending Columbia University. Self-made band with no outside interference. Melting pot of Western, African and miscellaneous influences. Rise to acclaim quickly as their music was embraced from coast to coast. The story needs no further musings from myself.

What I am more interested in is why this particular band rose above the indie-hype machine. What makes this young band catch on more universally than similar acts? MGMT had similar reviews, developed in New York and an built a full indie following. But while MGMT is relegated to being nominated 2 years late for a proposterus Best New Artist Grammy and their album tops out at #38 on Billboard, Vampire Weekend blows them away nationally and sells 120+ thousand records in their first week. What separates these seemingly similar bands? 


Share/Save/Bookmark

I Heart the Tea Party

The movement has been criticized as racist. The movement has been criticized as crazy. The movement is led by some outrageous figures. The movement is fueled by hyperbole and half-truths.

The movement is the American Tea Party and I love it.

-----
Perhaps I should explain myself at this point before I lose anyone who is actually reading this (as you know, 'teabaggers' cannot read, so if you are reading this you do not agree with my last statement. Give me a minute).

I voted for Barack Obama in 2008. I still agree with much of the Democratic agenda, however I am not a declared member of any political party. Neither party gets everything correct and I prefer to be in my own independent camp so I can form my own opinions. Overall, my opinions trend Democratic. 


Share/Save/Bookmark

Fixing the NBA

I just got done reading Bill Simmons' latest column on ESPN.com about fixing the NBA (A fan-friendly solution to fix the NBA) and, for the most part, I agree with him. His main arguments deal with the economic situation and problems which are undoubtedly going to lead to a work stoppage of some sort (outrageous contracts for role players; guaranteed contracts for too many years; season ticket and overall ticket prices; etc.). These are points aimed at an audience interested in the inner workings of the world's top basketball league. I have an idea which might speak more to everyone else who simply enjoys the NBA on a casual level, but nonetheless would be interested in a better product.

American sports in general suffer from two major problems which are inherently linked:
1.) Regular season games do not carry much importance.
2.) Teams have no incentive to finish in the middle of the standings as opposed to last place, this leads to teams "tanking" (not trying) at the end of the season

These same problems are not found in European sports or, more specifically, the English Premier League (EPL). It is by no means a stretch to compare these two leagues and they will provide the foundation for the argument moving forward. First, some basic information about the composition of the two organizations highlighting the important parts.


Share/Save/Bookmark

Say What You Want, Just Not About Us

Media outlets are walking on thin ice these days. Here is the dilemma:

Talking heads have become news makers and are no longer just vessels for pushing information.

If you accept this as true, the next step is to understand that other talking heads are going to run into instances when they need to speak about their fellow brethren. Suddenly the media outlets become nervous. For some reason they turn into self-conscious teenage girls laughing along when the barbs and jabs are directed elsewhere, but shattered by anything aimed in their direction.

The most topical example is the Tony Kornheiser suspension. Kornheiser is a well-known sports radio personality and co-host of the immensly popular daily sports banter-fest Pardon the Interruption. Both of Kornheiser's outlets are part of the bigger ESPN world. A world which is becoming all encompassing. A world which leaves all other sports outlets impotent. 

The Anatomy of the Kornheiser Suspension

The infamous quote from Kornheiser (02/16/2010):
Hannah Storm in a horrifying, horrifying outfit today. She’s got on red go-go boots and a catholic school plaid skirt … way too short for somebody in her 40s or maybe early 50s by now. She’s got on her typically very, very tight shirt. She looks like she has sausage casing wrapping around her upper body … I know she’s very good, and I’m not supposed to be critical of ESPN people, so I won’t … but Hannah Storm … come on now! Stop! What are you doing? … She’s what I would call a Holden Caulfield fantasy at this point.


Share/Save/Bookmark

2/23/10

Google News Explains the Public vs. Private Dilemma

In the political world, almost all issues come down to the same, single difference in opinion. One side wants less governmental involvement and the other side wants more governmental involvement. Strip away the nonsense and this is the ideological divide that keeps people on their own side of the aisle (talking American politics in this post, but the same idea is almost universal). Extrapolate this out a bit and what are are left with is one simple question:
Who do you trust to manage the world around you, public (governmental) forces or private (business) forces? 
Ask anyone this question and their political leanings will flow out. Too bad there is no easy answer or else our problems would be solved.

Something interesting happened when I loaded up Google News this morning (02/22/2010). What I saw in the top two headlines was symbolic of the ugly side of both private and public forces. Say what you will about either methodology, there have been countless aggravating stories which make you just hang your head.


Share/Save/Bookmark

The Dream NBA Playoff Scenario

Time to peer into the crystal ball and look ahead a couple of months until the start of the NBA Playoffs. The first round will kick off on April 17th and here is how I hope things end up.

Eastern Conference
(1) Cleveland vs. (8) Miami
What it will take?: Cleveland is going to lock up the number 1 seed with no problems, the complication could be Miami falling to the eight seed. Luckily, they did nothing at the trade deadline and could drop below Charlotte.

Why would it be appealing?: Would you like an entire series of LeBron vs. Wade? Yes, please. These are two of the most competitive guys in the league. I feel like Cleveland would most likely make short work of Miami, but there would be the chance that the two mega-stars would push each other to levels we haven't seen from them yet.

(2) Orlando vs. (7) Toronto
What it will take?: Orlando will be fighting off Boston and Atlanta for this second seed. They have the advantage currently, Boston is falling and Atlanta is middling as well. Toronto is playing well right now and are locked into the fifth spot. It isn't out of the question that they fall to seven as the bottom of the Eastern conference is a jumbled mess.


Share/Save/Bookmark

Moon: Review

Moon has received a fair share of praise and yet many have never heard of the plucky little film from David Bowie's little boy. The sci-fi drama is a pure vehicle for its (only) star, Sam Rockwell, which plays out like an extended interpretation of a Twilight Zone-esque feature. I mean this in the best way possible. In a world of blockbuster, CGI-enhanced films, Moon stands as a nice reminder that the best sci-fi films focus on well-paced, well-written stories, not in over the top special effects.

Twitter Pitch: Company draws energy from dark side of moon. Only one employee. Themes: isolation with new technology, corporations mistreating workers.

Rewatchability: When a story is drawn out over the course of a film, like it is in Moon, it detracts from the fun of each additional viewing. I would gladly watch the film a few more times simply to pick up on certain plot twists which become more apparent when the credits finally roll. After my third or fourth viewing, I feel like the charm of Moon will be gone.

Time Limit: Moon clocks in at brisk 97 minutes. I would not complain about the pacing, but I must admit that around the 80 minute mark I checked my watch. With only one character the plot begins to slow near the end before the climax.

When to Watch: The mood of the film is rather dark (as you might assume being based on the dark side of the moon). An overwhelming sense of existentialism begins to set in as the story progresses which might make you reconsider your place in the world. If it's a rainy night and you are in a calm mood, Moon will suit you well.

When not to Watch: Do not watch if you are in a gregarious mood because it will bring you back down to Earth (pun intended). Might not be good for an already depressed mood, a lonely person or someone in a long distance relationship.

Share/Save/Bookmark

Dear John: Review

You know what to expect from Dear John. The structure is just like any other love story film. Act 1: star crossed lovers fall in love. Act 2: circumstances prevent easy relationship, they struggle to endure. Act 3: the resolution. This film has not strayed much. Yes, they add some elements which make it seem new and different (the inclusion of special needs characters and September 11th), but overall it is rehashing similar themes. To make matters worse, Channing Tatum and Amanda Seyfried do not inspire the audience to hope for their relationship. They just aren't likable. And neither is the film. 

Twitter Pitch: Take another book from author of The Notebook, get dude from G.I. Joe and girl from Big Love. And make sure there's a rainy kiss scene.

Rewatchability: Almost zero. I have never understood the appeal of re-watching a love story. The best parts of the movie come from the unknown twists in the relationship, if you know how the characters' lives are going to progress how do you enjoy it. Action movies have impressive explosions, comedies have jokes, thrillers have parts you might miss. Dear John is like any other story in its genre, it's a fine movie but it moves slowly and has nothing I would want to see again.

Time Limit: I looked at my watch around the 1:30 mark. No problem with the length, although there were a couple of montages which basically served the same purpose. The final time clocks in right under two hours and could have been more tightly done in 1:45-1:50.

When to Watch: The best time to watch Dear John would be on a rainy day with your boy/girlfriend. You will not leave this film with a wonderful feeling so make sure you are either with a friend (if you are a girl) or with your partner.

When NOT to Watch: If you are a girl and your boyfriend is leaving for the military soon or you are in a relationship with someone in the military, don't watch the movie. Screw it, don't watch this if you are in any long distance relationship.



Share/Save/Bookmark

NASCAR is China

Glenn McBride is no NASCAR fan. A couple of times a year I find myself watching a race due to the Egg Roll Theory*. I just can't find the appeal. Watching the action may be more exciting for car buffs (something I could not be farther from) or speed freaks, but for me it just seems repetitive and dull.

*The Egg Roll Theory: There are certain things that a person believes they should like despite evidence proving otherwise. They continue trying said thing occasionally with the same poor reaction, just hoping to like it one day. For me these items include: Egg Rolls (of which the theory is based), olives, classic movies of yesteryear and NASCAR to name a few.


Just over a week ago, NASCAR held its self-proclaimed 'Super Bowl of Racing' in the Daytona 500. As much as I would like to write about how silly it is to kick off your sport's season with its climactic event, I will save this for another day. Instead, I want to draw attention to what NASCAR has become. The sad realization I came to after digging only a couple levels into the structure of the car behemoth is that NASCAR is run much like a state organization. This became painfully true after the nauseatingly poor coverage of the race last Sunday.

For most who watched, the Daytona 500 was a disaster. Multiple delays, lasting past the hour mark, were caused by a pothole on a portion of the track. You can't make this kind of stuff up. The ratings show that some 30 million people watched some part of the NASCAR showcase, so there is no debating whether the 500 is a major sporting event. Unfortunately, NASCAR has not administered itself like a major sports league. The push has been so strong from everyone involved in NASCAR to tell the world that they are the fastest growing sport in America; that they will be the next major sport; that they will be the number two (behind the NFL) before we know it. Well, NASCAR, turns out you are in no way ready to take that step (and you are getting passed by MMA within your own demographics, you know, with the meatheads).


Share/Save/Bookmark

2/19/10

The Tiger Press Statement Scorecard

Come on media-sphere, did we need to pull out the complete arsenal of coverage for the Tiger Press Statement (Do not call it a Press Conference. Conference implies interaction. This was just a statement)? Yeah, I get it, local NBC/CBS/ABC affiliates aren't showing high quality programming at this time. No one is going to miss the Price is Right or the Rachael Ray Show or The People's Court. Well, stoners will be angry, but let's just say this wouldn't be considered a vocal minority (too lazy). So instead, at 11:00 AM Eastern Time, Eldrick "Tiger" Woods appeared in front of the backdrop from the local Chuck-E-Cheese to read a prepared four page statement. Three months of speculation, hyperbole, tabloid blowouts led up to a media judgment day. I'm not sure what the excitement was about. Tiger has never been a dynamic speaker, his popularity is tied solely to his aggressive and successful work on the golf course.

Why not judge the Tiger Press Statement on the terms he is used to. Stop trying to use the normal celebrity approach. Let's go to the scorecard:

Hole #1: Pre-Statement Handling: Par 4
Tiger's Score: Par
There is no shortage of handlers and press experts with their hands in the Tiger-pie. If I were judging the entire time from the incident to this statement, it would assuredly score an 8 or so. There was no reason why this event could not have been held months ago, unless there was actual damage to Tiger's face. Just focusing on the past few days, from the time the event was announced, the handlers have been grinding their gears. First, announce event, then explain the format, then release a sanctioned photo of the star running to demonstrate his continued good shape. Tiger fails to get the birdie on this hole because of the backlash for how neutered they tried to make the guest list (more on this in a bit).


Share/Save/Bookmark

2/16/10

Taco Bell: Falling Off the Chuck Wagon

I hate to go off on a rant again (seeing as though yesterday I was not too kind to We Are the World: 25 for Haiti), but there are only so many times I can watch the new Taco Bell commercial without going insane. Of course, I am referring to the Charles Barkley ad named "Poem" which debuted during the Super Bowl (click here for my overall take on those particular commercials) and has been seemingly running on a constant loop ever since.

I thought nothing would be able to top the Gap Singing-Kids commercial in my least favorite, most addicting, idiotic corporate songs. Sadly, Taco Bell has done it after only a couple months. Here are the lyrics, in all their glory:

The five buck box, it rocks, it rocks

It rocks for a meal, with lots and lots
It rocks for a jock
It rocks for a fox
It rocks blocking shots on guys with dreadlocks
What comes in this box, this box that rocks?
A cheesy Gordita Crunch to munch.
We are sweet for Burritos Supreme.
A Crunchy Taco and a Cinnamon Twists.
Both on the list, and wait let me think, an ice cold drink.
That is lots and lots in just one box.
And its only five bucks.
And that’s why it rocks.


Share/Save/Bookmark

We Are the World: 25 Years Better?

There are only a few moments in time that represent such a perfect storm of entertainment. Elvis on The Milton Berle Show. The Beatles on The Ed Sullivan Show. The Micheal Jackson - Lisa Marie Presley kiss on the MTV Video Music Awards.

On Friday, another moment was chiseled in time on this Mount Rushmore. We were all lucky enough to be given the We Are the World: 25 for Haiti remake (song begins at 1:06). As I watched it for the first time, I immediately understood the significance of the event. It was all just too good to be true. The subsequent twenty or so views have left me with some thoughts.

* I find the entire effort from everyone involved with the We Are the World: 25 for Haiti project genuine and completely respectable. Please do not take my comments to be in any way against the cause and the resulting proceeds for the relief effort. It was truly a treat to have so many great artists come together for an important cause.

The original performance was a seminal moment in pop culture, aid work and society as a whole. The ensemble cast was breathtaking. The production of the video was spine-tingling. The actual performances were terrific. Sadly, 25 years passed by and the new version lost its way somehow. 

1.) The Lineup

The original busted through your stereo or TV with the following artists before the first chorus: Lionel Richie followed by Stevie Wonder followed by Paul Simon followed by Kenny Rogers followed by James Ingram followed by Tina Turner followed by Billy Joel.


Share/Save/Bookmark

2/13/10

Fixing the Olympics

The 2010 Winter Olympics open tonight in Vancouver. You are excused if you are either unaware or uninterested in this worldwide event. There is no argument that the Olympic movement is a fantastic force for global unity, sportsmanship and hope (as well as terrible fashion). From the inception in ancient Greece, to the current form, our lives have all been improved by the workings of the Olympics. As our world grows further connected, it is less interesting to see mixed walks of life competing in the same arena. We have channels now that show these sports all year round which makes some of the events less interesting. Time for the International Olympic Committee (IOC) to take a step back and head off some problems before they present major obstacles for continuing success.

I still love the Olympics (as millions of others do to, the ratings are still outrageous) and I will watch as much as possible these next two weeks. Some changes are sorely needed, however, to make these events better. Luckily, I have some suggestions (You listening, Jacques Rogge?)

1.) Settle on the lineup

At the heart of the Olympics are the sports, without them we have nothing. So it would make sense that we get the list of events settled before fixing anything else (drug testing being the possible exception). The IOC is responsible for approving the official list of sports. Not surprisingly, there have been many, many changes over the years including the additions and subtractions of well known events. For example, baseball and softball were removed from the Summer games moving forward after 2008 (Sadly, we also have to now live without tug of war being in the games). To make everything as successful as possible, it will require a process of removing some events in addition to switching others between Summer and Winter.


Share/Save/Bookmark

KGB: A Study in Non-Rational Behavior




While watching the Super Bowl last week, the following commercial from kgb (Yes, they keep the company name lower case, I immediately do not like them). My friends and I are all 22 and 23 year olds so we were familiar with the service they provide. In brief, kgb takes text message questions (Any question) and provides an answer, at a cost of $0.99. A couple of months ago, a few of us were at a bar without an wireless connection and we needed an answer. This gave us a chance to see if this kgb thing worked. They came through. The service works just as described with a quick, precise answer being provided immediately (We needed to know what was the name and age of the Dos Equis Most Interesting Man in the World). Worked like a charm; never even considered using it again. This led us to this question on Sunday, how exactly could kgb make enough money to support a Super Bowl commercial (going rate of $3 million)? We are headed towards a world in which we will always be connected to the internet. Most phones released now have some sort of connection and these are only providing a more complete, full functioning experience. Networks are getting faster and covering a larger area. It would seem like now would be the worst time to push a service like kgb. Let the investigation begin.

First thing I didn't know about kgb: it is an acronym (Knowledge Generation Bureau). Please do not confuse it with the real KGB, the Soviet intelligence unit, as this may lead to some problems. Problems involving your "disappearance" in the middle of the night, if you get my drift. While kgb is the name of the company, it is not the center of the business. I'll let the official summary from the kgb website explain their structure (highlights added):


Share/Save/Bookmark

2/10/10

How Much is Too Much?

How do you consume your news and information?
Has this changed in the last year/three years/decade?
Do you feel overexposed?

I am inclined to think that the responses to these questions will be all over the place. Personally, I consume news in almost all of its forms; the way I consume changes on an almost weekly basis; and yes, I do feel a bit overexposed to it all. 

Almost since my first time logging on to the World Wide Web (I miss calling it that), I have been searching for my comfort zone in terms of taking in the details of the world around me. The problem is news outlets are a shape shifting mass which does not allow you to put it in a defined area (much like the Smoke Monster in Lost or B.O.B from Monsters vs. Aliens). One quick example: less than a year ago, no one was Twitter-ing. Today every anchor, outlet, blogger and man on the street has a Twitter handle. Even if you had found your style of consumption and were comfortable with how it worked, you are now faced with this new medium. The Twitter value debate is one for another day, but it is impossible to say there is nothing missed by not being on Twitter. There are simply ideas and trends which explode on Twitter and do not make it to the mainstream media (or it takes a different shape or is delayed. Remember when the Tiger Woods story hit over Thanksgiving? Twitter was the first to know).


Share/Save/Bookmark

A World Without Mirrors

I have been fascinated by mirrors for a great time now. Not that I am alone, the mirror has been the focus of various movies, books, songs, etc. The concept of seeing into a device which shows some sort of "alternate world", which is in fact reality, is borderline psychedelic. It is not until you start to actually think about mirrors that they become more than background noise. Once you have wrapped yourself around the idea of a mirror, take the next step and imagine the world with no mirrors. Yikes.

To make this quick journey, we must first understand what we are talking about. Almost monthly I ask myself the same question and then always fail on the followup research. What exactly is a mirror (and no need to get smart, I mean how does it work)?  It is not a material that naturally occurs. There are no Great Mirrored Plains in Togo (we can wish, though). No Mirror Canyon. No Mirror Lake (oh, wait, yes there is, but that's different). So what are mirrors and how do we make them? It is really an unbelievable concept if you step think about it. Man has created a substance which can create a true reflection of himself. Wow. Good job early generational people (and, no, I'm not counting you cheaters who put water in a bowl to create a reflection, I'm talking real, manufactured mirrors). This is no history or science lesson, so as to not bore anyone a mirror is simply glass coated in reflective substance which sends light, and more importantly the image, back at its viewer (for much, much more, enjoy). 


Share/Save/Bookmark

Grammy's 2010

Just some random thoughts and questions which came to mind watching the 52nd Grammy Awards

  • Opening Performance with Lady Gaga featuring Sir Elton John
    • Lady Gaga seems to be in a battle with Beyonce to who can show the most vaginal cleavage
    • Lady Gaga has become the go-to performer of our time right now. She may not have the best songs or the most lyrically pleasing voice and she is certainly not the best piece of eye candy, but whenever she performs, no one looks away.
    • I love the fact that Lady Gaga does not worry about looking good. She can be covered in ash or blood on a major broadcast without a care. Simply interested in the performance.
    • Elton John hasn't lost a step and continues to be the homosexual spokesman musically. There seemed to be an honest mutual respect between the two performers.
    • Couldn't help but think back to Elton's performance with Eminem. Whenever he makes an appearance it has both musical and social importance.

  • Stephen Colbert
    • Never changes his style not matter the performance. This is what makes him great. Whether it is the White House Correspondents Dinner or doing a tour of Iraq, he plays his character perfectly. The iPad segment was the funniest moment of the night by a large margin.

  • Song of the Year
    • The way I understand it Song of the Year is for the writing of the song. If this is true then how does "Single Ladies (Put a Ring on It)" win? 
    • A quick excerpt: 
      I got gloss on my lips, a man on my hips
      hold me tighter than my Dereon jeans
      acting up, drink in my cup
      I couldn't care less what you thin
      k

  • Green Day performance 
    • Coming soon to Broadway: Green Day's American Idiot! Oh, wait, scratch that exclamation mark. This is nothing to be excited about. What would "Dookie" Green Day think of what we saw here tonight? For shame. 

  • Best Country Album 

  • Beyonce performance: 
    • Doing her best Marilyn Monroe impression, which is nice and all, but did we need the crotch grab? 
    • Rhianna wants her rated-r look back. 
    • Do you think that guy who was lifted up by Beyonce's touch and then pushed down happy with his career? 
    • Enjoyed the mash up of "If I Were a Boy" and Alanis Morissette's "You Oughta Know". Girl power!

  • Good to see Seal again

  • Pink 
    • At first I was disappointed because we all saw this Cirque Du Soleil performance at the MTV Awards months ago, but this was much better. This incorporation of the acrobatics was much more genuine and actually added to the aesthetics of the song. The MTV Award performance felt more like a gimmick, this was special.

  • Best New Artist 
    • I have a problem with this category. How exactly do you qualify as a "new artist"? MGMT's critically acclaimed album "Oracular Spectacular" was released in January of 2008. The Silversun Pickups has their first hit on the charts in 2007. To make things worse, neither of these two won. Instead, a band fronted by Kevin from last season's Top Chef took home the award. Madness!

  • Black Eyed Peas performance
    • Thank you for showing us what Muslim women will look like in 20 years (no image available, but check out the back up dancers). 
    • I like to look a current songs and think about what their Oldies chances are. Do you honestly expect the song to be played on 2000's radio in 25 years? It is usually a toss up, but "I've Got a Feeling" is simply a wonderful pop song which will have us dancing for years.

  • Lady Antebellum 
    • Good job Grammy producers, nothing kills the energy from the Black Eyed Peas' performance quite like a slow jam from Lady Antebellum

  • Best Comedy Album
    • I bet Patton Oswalt is embarrassed to be included in a category with Kathy Griffin, Weird Al and George Lopez. Good win for Colbert.

  • Don't know why it sounded strange, but I expect Ringo Starr to be introduced as something different than just "multiple Grammy winner".
 
  • Record of the Year:
    • Happy for Kings of Leon and their omnipresent song "Use Somebody". Even happier that one Followill family member stayed sober enough to give a somewhat understandable acceptance speech

  • Jamie Foxx performance
    •  I'm gonna blame this entire performance on the alcohol. It seems like the idea was put together by Girl Talk, too many jumbled songs put together

  • Ke$ha seemed thrilled to be presenting with Justin Beiber
 

  • Best Rock Album 
    • Green Day wins, but it's kinda like when Gonzaga wins the WCC. The other nominees included a Clapton Live album and AC/DC!?

  • Taylor Swift
    • I'm sorry, I am not a Taylor Swift hater, but Stevie Nix will always swing circles around her. This pairing made Taylor seem out of her league. It's gotta be a great feeling to have a legend sing one of your songs, though.

  • Smokey Robinson, Celine Dion, Usher, Jennifer Hudson, Carrie Underwood  perform Michael Jackson's "Earth Song" 
    • So this is what 3D TV will be like? Thanks for the headache CBS. You can take me off the pre-order list.

  • Michael Jackson's kids on the Grammy's 
    • My brain just exploded. I can't imagine what those kids have been through. Had to watch it a couple times just to wrap my head around it. The whole thing gave me a creepy Olsen twins vibe. This is not the last we have seen of these two. 

  • Bon Jovi performance
    • I demand an explanation as to why we have been cheated out of years of Bon Jovi Grammy performances? 2010 and they make their first appearance? This is inexcusable. They sure made up for it with what felt like a 20 minute set in which they sounded much more country than Taylor Swift. 
    • "Living On a Prayer", what a fantastic pop song?

  • Rap/Sung collaboration
    • 1.) This is a category? 2.) "I'm On a Boat" was nominated for a Grammy? 3.) Can't decide which is more confusing.

  • Dave Matthews Band performance 
    • Dave reminds me of Tom Hanks. Not only in terms of looks, but in terms of professionalism. Any chance the band gets to play they are consistently entertaining and bring something to the show.
    • Also good to see Ruben Studdard got a job again in the horn section (check out the video when it is posted).


  • Best Female Vocal Performance: 
    • Beyonce wins for "Halo". It is her year, as proclaims the National Academy of Recording Arts and Sciences. 

  • In general, I am a sucker for montages. For some reason if you put pictures or video to a coordinated set of music, I will watch and be enthralled. The Grammy "In Memoriam" is, for the most part, a very classy part of the show. I cannot understand, however, when people clap for certain people who have passed away. It turns into a high school pep assembly with the most popular kids vying for the most crowd reaction. It's sad that all those honored could not just have their moment in silence from the crowd.

  • Eminem, Drake and Lil Wayne performance featuring Travis Barker on drums 
    • I am not generally a fan of rap performances, let alone an ensemble performance. I find that most often these regress to sloppy mixes of verses and choruses with the rappers going from one side of the stage to the other. Not much going on and the lyrical stylings are not crisp. That's why this performance blew me away. It doesn't hurt that Eminem and Lil Wayne are probably the best lyricists right now, but the x-factor was Drake. Wrapping the entire performance around his song gave structure to the other performers. Drake has his moments and he hit his points well, but it did seem as though he was deferring to his elders. I would have argued this was the best performance of the night if only I could have heard all of it. CBS chose to silence more of the words than I can remember. Maybe the Eminem and Lil Wayne were not laying off the explicit content, but it did take away slightly from the flow of the performance. For those at the event, I would imagine it was amazing.
    • Travis Barker is the coolest guy in music
    • Quentin Tarantino is the lamest guy in entertainment, he tried way too hard during his introduction of the performance.
    • Loved Lil Wayne's t-shirt which proclaimed that we should all "LISTEN TO LIL WAYNE"

  • Album of the Year
    • Nominees
      • "I Am...Sasha Fierce", Beyonce
      • "The E.N.D.", the Black Eyed Peas
      • "The Fame", Lady Gaga
      • "Big Whiskey and the Gru Grux King", the Dave Matthews Band
      • "Fearless", Taylor Swift
    • I thought this was a three person race. Dave Matthews Band was thrown in to satisfy the rock contingent, but had no chance of winning. The E.N.D produced a few hits, but was not as strong as "Elephunk". In third place, I thought Taylor Swift would not win. She wrote a wonderful album and was a bright star in the otherwise sad young, overproduced star landscape (which includes the Jonas Brothers, Miley Cyrus and their ilk). But this is a grown up category featuring two clearly superior albums. 
    • What will we remember 2009 as in main stream music? Who was in our social conscience more often? Who shaped the radio and Internet music streams in a greater way?
    • I argue Lady Gaga did more this year than any other artist and the songs from "The Fame" dominated our ears. Others could argue their case for Beyonce. 
    • The Winner? Taylor Swift. Everyone likes a fairytale, whether the ending fits or not. 

GRM for RAL


Share/Save/Bookmark

Depp & Burton

With the upcoming March release of the Disney 3D version of Alice in Wonderland, we are yet again witness to a Tim Burton/Johnny Depp Film. Why do these two continue to work together? Let's take a look at some data for the answers.

*Rotten Tomatoes scores used to evaluate ratings

Johnny Depp's Overall Average Rating: 67%

Johnny Depp's Average Rating in Tim Burton Films (6): 83.67%
  • Edward Scissorhands (1990) - 90%
  • Ed Wood (1994) - 90%
  • Sleepy Hollow (1999) - 72%
  • Charlie and the Chocolate Factory (2005) - 82%
  • Corpse Bride (2005) - 82%
  • Sweeney Todd (2007) - 86%

Tim Burton's Overall Average Rating: 83%

This shows us how it is in Mr. Depp's interest to be involved in the Alice in Wonderland project. Why does Mr. Burton continue to use Johnny Depp if there is no discernable increase in the quality of the films he makes? To the box office numbers...:

Tim Burton's Average Box Office: $99,176,828

Tim Burton's Average Box Office with Johnny Depp: $182,611,658
  • Edward Scissorhands (1990) - 90%, $86,024,005
  • Ed Wood (1994) - 90%, $5,887,457
  • Sleepy Hollow (1999) - 72%, $206,071,502
  • Charlie and the Chocolate Factory (2005) - 82%, $474,968,763
  • Corpse Bride (2005) - 82%, $117,195,061
  • Sweeney Todd (2007) - 86%, $152,523,164

*The box office figures mean less to Depp as he is now a consistent draw. The figures are skewed in regards to career average. Burton continues to be all over the place on the box office draws.

Add all this up and you have the two reasons why Tim Burton and Johnny Depp have worked together 6 times, going on 7. Oh, and then there is this (from Wikipedia) 
(Depp) has referred to working with Burton as "coming home", and he wrote the introduction to Burton on Burton, a book of interviews with the director, in which he called Burton "...a brother, a friend,...and [a] brave soul"

I guess they like each other, too.

GRM

Share/Save/Bookmark

In Defense of Celebrity

Grammy night just passed and with it comes the inevitable backlash. I came across many views formed from the same root that looked similar to the following Tweet:
"Grammy's totally sucked this year. Mainstream music is lame, it's all just American Idols and Jonas Sisters."

I hope the Jonas Brothers are not too hurt by this comment, I hear they are fragile. Turns out there has been quite the counter culture formed in response to the growing insta-celebrity culture we have formed. The "haters", as they shall be known from here to forth, seem to gain some sort of pleasure from explaining, bluntly, that our movie stars, tv shows and musicians who have become famous are frauds and non-deserving parasites. Hey, whatever gets you going, that is your own thing. What I don't really understand is the anger by which these views are spewed.

Billboard Doesn't Know
Take a look at the Billboard chart right now. Go ahead, this post isn't going anywhere and they have pretty colors. Ok, we good? Great, so anything pop out at you? Depends on your age:
Under 16: all your favorite artists are represented. The world is good.
16-21: like most of the artists, think that some are not fairly reresented
21-25: where are my indie/underground artists? this list is a joke.
Post 25: i miss U2

As a representative of the 21-25 year old demographic, I do not listen consistently to most of the artists on these "Hot" lists. But you see, I understand the more important fact behind the list. Billboard does not care for my opinion. I am not the target. They care what the popular music is based on the younger, iTunes downloding, mall-going, money spending members of society are listening to. The radio station producer is not stupid by any means. There is a reason why Ke$ha is played on a constant loop. If they were flooded by angry calls everyday demanding not one more note of "Tik Tok" be played, then it would happen in an instance. This never happens though. Radio play works much like anything in society, by the laws of supply and demand. If there is no demand for Ke$ha, there is no supply of Ke$ha. It is why no one makes pagers anymore. 

So angry counter culture man, who are you mad at? It is often misplaced at the big corporations like the radio stations or the institutions giving out awards. Instead, though, they should be mad at society for demanding "bad" music. 

Society is Wrong

A new catchphrase has been invented recently where someone will tell a story of their friend who likes the Jersey Shore and reads US Weekly then adds "this is why the world hates America" to the end. This is to indicate that our obsession with fake celebrity is in some way a detriment to global political debate. Honestly, people think that our love for Snooki and the Situation puts us at a disadvantage in the world. 

Fortunately for America's sake, this is quite untrue. Our top export is, and will continue to be, culture. Go anywhere in the world and you will find it difficult to avoid the Americanization of culture. Now this has generated a backlash, but it is not the content of the culture simply that we have pushed our culture everywhere. We could be sending the greatest technology and life saving procedures into every household and still see a backlash. The celebrity obsession is clearly not an American issue, which means counter culture man has to step up his argument and complain that society is wrong. 

"You watch Top Chef?"
Sure do. 

1967 would have been terrible
The end of the road for our counter culture spokesman leads to only one place. He is resigned to the fact that we live in a cookie cutter world which shoves mainstream garbage down his proverbial entertainment throat. But, wait, a minute. What is mainstream? Where is this stream? Who is making you watch/listen/read what you are complaining about? This is the point of contention which confuses me so. This is the era of the free spirit. You can have your 1960s and 70s. They have free love and experimentation. We have complete freedom of choice in terms of EVERYTHING. The idea of mainstream is dead (or dying quickly). Jumping back to music for a second, not only can we access (almost) any song we want instantly (for free most of the time) but we can design our own radio stations, have our friends tell us what they are listening to, speak directly to our favorite bands, watch concerts in real time streaming or whenever we want. You could go the rest of your life listening only to neo-goth-metal if you wanted to.  Try doing that during the so called peak of music culture. 

This idea applies to all areas of the mainstream. The stream has been diverted into countless tributaries and offshoots. I can only speak for myself, but you can keep your culture time machine, I love today.

My point is that we have never been more in control of what we decide to do. If you disagree with who is most famous, don't even acknowledge them. Look away. Turn the dial.

Celebrities, we need you!
We have determined that there is nothing wrong with our culture. In fact, it is the best it has ever been simply due to the choices we have available. Now we can shift our focus to the most important thing in the world, why we need celebrities.

I have already ran long on this post, so I will keep this short and try to tie it all together. We live in society which is fragmented to a dangerous degree (kinda like how Lord Voldemort in Harry Potter endangered his soul by separating it into too many Horcruxes or when the NHL expanded into 17 more cities than they needed to). A slippery slope has appeared. Yes, we can make our world look and sound like we want it to. Often, though, this comes with isolationary qualities. Our neo-goth-metal friend is in trouble. He may be a wonderful person to talk to in regards to the new fads within the neo-goth-metal circles, but how does he connect on any level to the secretary working behind the desk or the taxi cab driver or the coworker with three kids. And what if the secretary is consumed by wedding shows or the taxi cab driver listens to nothing but classical Hungarian composers and the cowoker with three kids reads only Danielle Steele works. A disconnect is clear.

Enter celebrities. The glue of our society. As a celebrity grows larger in the cultural conscience they have the ability to draw more people together. People who may have never had anything to talk about. Aside from weather, what else is a more common or easy conversation starter than a glance at the tabloid pages? Did you hear they are making a fourth Spider Man movie? I hear the Who is playing at the Super Bowl. Do you watch Mad Men? Jon Hamm is just great, don't you think? 

It would be hard to find a common point on the intersecting circle of neo-goth-metal, wedding shows, Hungarian classical music and Danielle Steele, but I would be comfortable sitting them all in a room and asking them what they thought of Tom Cruise. They will all be familiar, and familiarity breeds togetherness.

The One Where I Defend Things I Hate
Do I like that Pauly D gets $10,000 to DJ for a night or that J-Woww can demand thousands for just coming to a club? No, no I don't. Do I spend my time watching Keeping Up With the Kardashians? Nope. But I have an understanding that some things make a certain group happy. More power to these networks who have found a niche covering what seems like meaningless daily routines. 

I used to be the counter culture spokesman that we have been analyzing. Then I realized the power of celebrity and the ability that we have to pick our own entertainment. The only wasted time is the time spent telling someone they are wrong to enjoy something.

No excuse me, I have a Project Runway marathon to get to.

GRM for RAL


Share/Save/Bookmark