Happy Birthday, Grandpa!

What I Watched -- Avatar

Again, I ask: what was all the fuss about? The movie world was all a-twitter (literally and figuratively) with buzz about the wonders of this movie.

I will start out with the best thing: the CGI is amazing. Even on my little, old school TV, the picture was crisp incredibly detailed. Really, more detailed than it should have been, actually; it seemed a little overdone. But a visual field trip, nonetheless.

Now the worst thing: the story was totally unoriginal. Seems sort of odd to say that, considering that the movie is about 8-foot-tall blue creatures called the Na'vi who live on a planet called Pandora. But it seemed to me that there were some very obvious copycat moves taken from other movies that are similar somehow:

- Apocalypse Now: Jake Sully, Avatar's main character, keeps track of his interactions with the Na'vi via a video diary. His narration is terribly reminiscent of Captain Willard's voice-over recounting of his travels up the Nung River. Same style of speech, same meter, same forlorn attitude.

- Lord of the Rings Trilogy: practically identical stories. In LOTR, Sauron is the evil lord who is trying to get the one ring and control the world. There are a number of clans -- humans (the two main crews are from Rohan and Gondor), elves (from Rivendell and the woodland realm), hobbits, dwarves, wizards, and any number of wild creatures. In the end, they all come together to defeat Sauron in an effort save their collective cultures.

In Avatar, the humans are the bad guys who are trying to mine for the valuable and appropriately named mineral Unobtanium, the biggest deposit of which is under the (also appropriately named) Hometree. The whole thing devolves into an "I will destroy your society" campaign. So the Na'vi do exactly what the characters in LOTR did: they seek out other clans like them to join in the fight against the humans. (One of these clans is the "Horse People." Rohirrim, anyone?) And they all fight together to try to save themselves.

Oh, and the Na'vi ride wild animals. And there are flying, bird/pterodactyl-like creatures.

The Na'vi in Avatar are very similar to the elves in LOTR. And also, in some ways, to Native Americans. They live as one with nature; they hear the trees talk; the land is precious to them for what it is, not what it's worth.

And let's not forget the man/machine-emerging-from-a-flaming-vehicle nod to Terminator 2: Judgment Day.

At least I have to give James Cameron credit for pirating from good movies. He could have picked Dude, Where's My Car? instead, but he restrained himself. (Thanks, James.) On the whole, aside from a few misplaced political references which were so blatantly trying to make a point that they really broke up the flow of the movie, it was enjoyable to watch. But I'm sure glad he lost Best Picture to Kathryn Bigelow; her movie was much, much better.

But will you read it?

A lady came into my bookstore the other night, to buy The Procrastinator's Handbook: Mastering the Art of Doing It Now.

Don't get me wrong; I admire her for trying to correct her flaws. But this particular flaw begs the following questions: if her problem is really so bad that she needs to buy a book to tell her how to fix it, will she actually read the book? And even if she does, will she implement its suggestions?

And only tangentially, I wonder how long she was thinking about buying a book about procrastination before she actually did it.

Does anyone know where Montcoal, West Virginia, is?

PC Warning: parts of this post may seem insensitive. I mean no disrespect; I'm just trying to put some things in perspective.

Yesterday, Mom sent me a link to this article: Relatives Fear the Dead Oil Rig Workers Are Forgotten. 11 rig workers were killed in the wellhead blowout on the Deep Water Horizon.

I can see how, after enormous media-saturated events like 9/11, the Sago Mine Disaster in 2006, and the countless recitations of the number of dead and injured soldiers being sent home from the Middle East, the families would expect to receive a little bit more attention due to the death of their relatives.

However, there are two things I am left to wonder about:

First, at a time like this, do you really want media attention? Wouldn't you want to spend this time with your family, unmolested by outsiders sticking a camera in your face?

And second, 29 miners were killed at the Upper Big Branch Mining Disaster in West Virginia, which occurred only 15 days prior to the rig explosion. What about their families? Don't you think they feel forgotten? At least people are still talking about the oil spill. I've heard nothing about the miners and their families lately; the only mention I've heard of Massey Energy (the mine owner) lately is in the same sentence with BP and TransOcean, by way of a reference to poor workplace safety standards.

What I'm Reading Now -- In Other Rooms, Other Wonders

As best as I can tell, In Other Rooms, Other Wonders, the "debut novel" of Deniyal Mueenuddin, is not actually a novel. It seems to be more a collection of short stories with some overlapping characters, a la Olive Kitteridge.

This is another of the books I heard about on NPR which sounded interesting enough for me to give it a try. The author is Pakistani by birth, but attended school in the US. He got his law degree and lived here for some time, as I understand it. He returned to Pakistan to address some issues his family was having with their land. Those encounters provide inspiration for many of the stories (again, as I understand it).

I hope I can finish it in the 2 weeks allowed by the library....

Words Women Use

I have thus far refrained from posting random e-mail forwards that I get. And for the most part, I will continue to do so (refrain, that is). This one, with a few minor edits of my own, seemed so on-point/useful/instructive/helpful, that I thought I would share. I'm doing it for the greater good.

(1) Fine
This is the word women use to end an argument when they are right and you need to shut up.

(2) Five Minutes
If she is getting dressed, this means a half an hour. Five minutes is only five minutes if you have just been given five more minutes to watch the game before helping around the house.

(3) Nothing
This is the calm before the storm. This means something, and you should be on your toes. Arguments that begin with nothing usually end in fine.

(4) Go Ahead
This is a dare, not permission. Don't do it!

(5) Loud Sigh
This is not actually a word, but is a non-verbal statement often misunderstood by men. A loud sigh means she thinks you are an idiot and wonders why she is wasting her time standing here and arguing with you about nothing. (Refer back to #3.)

(6) That's Okay
This is one of the most dangerous statements a woman can make to a man. That's okay means she wants to think long and hard before deciding how and when you will pay for your mistake.

(7) Thanks
A woman is thanking you, do not question, or faint. Just say you're welcome. Unless she says "thanks a lot," which is sarcasm; she is not thanking you at all. Do not say "you're welcome," because it will bring on #8).

(8) Whatever
This is a woman's way of saying F--- You! (The verbal counterpart to #5.)

(9) Don't worry about it, I got it
Another dangerous statement, meaning there is something that a woman has told a man to do several times, but is now doing herself. This will later result in a man asking 'What's wrong?' For the woman's response refer to #3. And #1.

I hope you all have found this post instructive, and have learned something from it. If not, please refer to #8.

What I Watched -- Empire Records

Ahh. There's nothing like a classic mid-90s teenage angst movie. As those movies go, this one is awesome. So awesome, in fact, that I watched it a hundred times in the mid-90s.

Seeing it again this weekend was interesting, both because it now seems much more teenager-y than it did when I was actually a teenager (as with most things designed for that age group), but also because the version I saw included a number of scenes that had been cut from the original DVD release. Many they had been wise to do without all those years ago. Other scenes, especially the ones about Lucas and Joe, actually add something of minor substance to the movie.

Joe is a has-been drummer who now manages a record store (a la High Fidelity) and a crew of rowdy employees, Lucas among them. Lucas (ever the Zen philosopher) is closing the store one night, realizes Joe is in negotiations to turn the store into a franchise of a major chain store due to money problems, and takes all the cash in the safe to Atlantic City -- where he promptly loses it. The rest of the movie is the falling apart and coming together of the employees, their friends, and the kid who tries to rob the place, in an attempt to save Empire Records ("open 'til midnight") from becoming a Music Town.

In watching it, look for early Liv Tyler, Ethan Embry, Robin Tunney, and Renee Zellweger (who didn't look quite so strange then). Also stars Anthony LaPaglia as Joe, Maxwell Caulfield (of Grease 2 fame) as the autograph-signing and terribly vain Rex Manning, and the even-then-strange-looking Debi Mazar.

We are dumber than a colony of ants

Yesterday I was listening to an archived episode of Radiolab. It's a really neat show on WNYC (podcast downloadable via iTunes) about all sorts of curiosities in life. For example, I listened to one a while back about the War of the Worlds phenomenon. Did you know that the Orson Welles radio broadcast was not the only one to cause mass hysteria? Basically to find out if they could recreate the situation, radio stations in Santiago, Quito, and Buffalo gave it a shot. And they all succeeded! And we're not in the 1930s anymore, Toto.

But I digress. That is just one example. The show I was listening to yesterday was about emergence, or the idea that order can come out of totally unplanned and uncoordinated actions. And even though it totally does not contribute to my ultimate question, I will tell you about this, because it's interesting. Did you know that there are fireflies in Thailand who, without any guidance from any sort of leader, will all start blinking in sequence? It's true!

Similarly, though, and relating to my question, are ants. As individuals, they are stupid. The scientist they interview said she would watch ants fighting over a twig, because ant A wanted to go one direction, and ant B wanted to go the other direction. So they both went nowhere, and just played tug-of-war with the twig. So, they were stupid. The whole group of ants, on the other hand, was amazing. They appeared totally organized and set up a colony. (Think of each individual ant like a neuron in your brain. No single neuron contains the blueprint for an entire thought, but somehow all the neurons come together, and there is your brilliant idea. As with ants, no single ant creates the blueprint for the entire colony, but somehow all the individual ants come together, and a colony is born.)

The same is true for bees. Even though there is a queen, she's not like the Queen of Hearts, giving orders and shouting at subjects and throwing people out of Wonderland. No, the queen bee's job is basically just to make baby bees. And the job for the male drones is to be flying sperm missiles. They mate mid-air with the queen and then fall out of the sky, dead. But the point is, there is no one directing traffic, telling the queen when to fly or telling the drones which one is the queen, or telling them how to do their business. They just each do their own thing, and then - BAM! - they have a colony. Totally on their own.

Then there's the adage "a person is smart, people are dumb." Except that sometimes the exact opposite is true. Like the college class which was asked to guess the number of jellybeans in a bowl. No one, not even the smartest student, was terribly close to the actual number. But the average of everyone's guesses? Pretty darn close. The same is true when people were asked to guess the weight of an ox. No one was terribly close. But the group average: 1987 pounds. Actual weight: 1988 pounds. Not bad. So what have we learned from this? An individual may be way out there, but a lot of way-out-there individuals might actually be pretty close to right.

And this, folks, is the genius of Google. (Yes, I just linked to Google. Again.) The Google guys harness the power of the totally random, stupid, out-there website inquiries made by individuals. Every time you do a Google search and then click on a link to a web page, that page gets a vote. It moves higher in the list. Pages that have a lot of votes have, in turn, increased voting power for their outbound links. That is to say, an outbound link to Website X from the highly-rated Website A is better for Website X (counts as more votes) than an identical outbound link to Website X from the poorly-rated Website Z.

But this is where we differ from ants. And where my question FINALLY shows up! People learned how Google works, and started to manipulate it -- we are cheats and spoilers. Individuals wanting to improve their own ranking will "advertise" by posting a link to their own page in the comments section on a highly-rated website (news websites, popular blogs, etc.). People are only out for themselves, and don't really care that they are mucking up the collective wisdom of the group, mucking up Google's ability to return accurate results to our search inquiries, and mucking up our ability to mine the Internet for information.

But what's worse, is that sometimes people don't even have the motivation to benefit themselves (e.g. for advertising). Sometimes, people just do this to make a statement or to mess up everyone else, with no greater goal in mind.

Ants don't do that. Even though sometimes they do stupid things like fighting over a twig and going nowhere, they don't do destructive things that totally muck up the works just for the sake of doing destructive things.

I propose this: let's collectively, all of us, try to be ants.

Happy Birthday, E!

Hooray for bowling! What time should we meet?

Happy Birthday, L!

Can't wait to see you for dinner!

The Drunkard's Walk -- Take 2

It's true, I finally finished it!

I learned a lot about dead mathematicians (most of them European), who occupy the first 80 pages or so. They include Cicero, Galileo, Gerolamo Cardano, Blaise Pascal, Jakob, Johann, and Daniel Bernoulli, Gottfried Leibniz, and Isaac Newton. With a little Greek philosophy courtesy of Zeno thrown in for good measure. The history was fascinating, a bit in the style of Bill Bryson's A Short History of Nearly Everything. Once that portion of the book ends, though, things get confusing.

The subtitle tells us that "randomness rules our lives." However, what follows the history lesson is a hundred-page explanation of why things which we think are random are, in fact, not. A good chunk of the second half of the book is devoted to the history of statistics, and a good portion of that is devoted to the discovery and application of the normal distribution and standard deviation (aka the Bell Curve).

It was tough getting through the middle pages of the book, for two reasons. First, the concepts are complicated. Mlodinow does a good job of simplifying them, but I have a terrible memory for everything, and especially for complicated ideas. Someone who does not share this charming flaw of mine would probably have better luck wading through this stuff. Second, I was asking myself, "Isn't this supposed to be a book about randomness? Why are we talking about how everything conforms to this standard deviation? Shouldn't the purpose be to show that the data points are all over the chart?" Confusion ensued.

Finally, though, getting on towards page 200, we get back to the idea of randomness. Discussing Einstein's discovery of the microscopic movements of molecules: "much of the order we perceive in nature belies an invisible underlying disorder and hence can be understood only through the rules of randomness." Now maybe we're on to something. The randomness which rules our lives is microscopic? Really? I doubt it, therefore I am still confused. So I continue reading....

As a nice bookend to counter the history early on, Mlodinow zooms out at the end of the book to take a macroscopic view of this alleged randomness. As examples, he looks at fund managers' ability to improve portfolios and movie producers' ability to pick box office smashes. "But in all aspects of our lives we encounter streaks and other peculiar patterns of success and failure. Sometimes success predominates, sometimes failure. Either way it is important in our own lives to take the long view and understand that streaks and other patterns that don't appear random can indeed happen by pure chance. It is also important, when assessing others, to recognize that among a large group of people it would be very odd if one of them didn't experience a long streak of successes or failures.... In the scientific study of random processes the drunkard's walk is the archetype. In our lives it also provides an apt model, for like the granules of pollen floating in the Brownian fluid, we're continually nudged in this direction and then that one by random events. As a result, although statistical regularities can be found in social data, the future of particular individuals is impossible to predict, and for our particular achievements, our jobs, our friends, our finances, we all owe more to chance than many people realize."

Ah-ha! Now we have it!

I guess I can see, if I look hard, how all of his complicated math-y/science-y background leads up to that conclusion, but it seemed a bit excessive to me. Or maybe I just don't understand it well enough to know how it all ties in. But at least the book ends on a high note:
"What I've learned, above all, is to keep marching forward because the best news is that since chance does play a role, one important factor in success is under our control: the number of at bats, the number of chances taken, the number of opportunities seized. For even a coin weighted toward failure will sometimes land on success."

Some other random interesting thoughts that don't really contribute to my discussion, but are cool:

- Quoting Francis Bacon regarding the confirmation bias: "The human understanding, once it has adopted an opinion, collects any instances that confirm it, and though the contrary instances may be more numerous and more weighty, it either does not notice them or else rejects them, in order that this opinion will remain unshaken."

- On how little things can change our lives: "In complex systems (among which I count our lives) we should expect that minor factors we can usually ignore will by chance sometimes cause major incidents." These are the things which we notice only in retrospect. Seems like a simple point, but it's so true!

- Discussing the goal of creating vodkas as neutral, flavorless liquors: "Lest I be dismissed as a tasteless boor, I wish to point out that there is a way to test my ravings. You could line up a series of vodkas and a series of vodka sophisticates and perform a blind tasting. As it happens, The New York Times did just that. And without their labels, fancy vodkas like Grey Goose and Ketel One didn't fare so well. Compared with conventional wisdom, in fact, the results appeared random. Moreover, of the twenty-one vodkas tasted, it was the cheap bar brand, Smirnoff, that came out at the top of the list. Our assessment of the world would be quite different if all our judgments could be insulated from expectation and based only on relevant data."

As an aside, I was reading the hardcover version of this book. There were probably two dozen places where the publisher (Pantheon) left off words at the ends of lines. There's just an blank space where the word belongs. That was annoying. But thankfully mom had filled most of them in when she read it before me. And hopefully Pantheon fixed that problem when they printed the paperback version! Also, sometimes it was oddly punctuated. Just a comment.

Blinded by the lights

The other day, J and I were driving from Seamus McDaniel's to Ted Drewes. It was after dark, and I was looking out the passenger side window. Most everything was dark, and the lights that were on -- front porch lights and such -- were pretty dim. Then we passed by a small side street, and there was a car sitting a little ways down the street with its headlights on.

I couldn't make myself look away fast enough; before I knew it, I had looked right into the extremely bright headlights. And for just a few seconds, maybe five or ten, I had a splitting headache.

So my question is this: why does that happen? I know that your pupils shrink as the amount of light increases, but is that what makes your head hurt? Or is it the optic nerve?

Well, whatever the answer, it is not fun. So make sure you look away faster than I did!

Field Trip!

Last Wednesday, S and I played hooky (sp?) from work. Well, we did some work in the morning. We had to go to Hillsboro, to help out a client at the Jefferson County Courthouse. So we decided, since we had to go such a long way in the morning, that we would take the afternoon off and have some fun.

View Larger Map

(Apologies for the poor picture quality -- I didn't have my camera and was using my phone.)

We went to have lunch at Crown Candy Kitchen. I had never been there before! I got The Big Cheese, a four-cheese grilled cheese sandwich, and let me tell you, it was delicious. S got the Heart-Stopping BLT, and we split both. Good move -- you get to taste more that way!

I had heard, however, that the real reason to go to Crown Candy is for the ice cream. I had mine in the form of a chocolate malt, which, despite its enormity, I drank all of! There was quite an extensive "Malts and Shakes" menu; the website doesn't do it justice (and neither did my phone):

(Also they spelled separate wrong!)

From there, we headed downtown to the City Museum, where I had also never been! (It was a big day of firsts.) The museum is basically found objects, made into art/playground. It's hard to understand until you see it, but there's lots of visual excitement, and lots of stuff to climb on. My take on the City Museum is this: you will have the most fun if you either (1) go with a six-year-old, or (2) are willing to act like a six-year-old. I was in the latter group, and it was awesome! (Word to the wise: I would not recommend this museum if you are claustrophobic, because often you find yourself stuck at the end of a tunnel and having to squeeze through a very small space (designed for a six-year-old) in order to come out on the other side.)

These are about an inch across!

There is also an aquarium within the museum, with lots of fish, alligators, lizards, and turtles. This one was quite friendly with the visitors:

And these two were quite friendly with each other!

And, last but not least, there's Bad Eye. We had him in a tank in our office (it's a 110-gallon tank!), but he got too big and was crowding out the other fish. So we paid the City Museum to give him a place to live, and now he's an example to other people: "Don't buy these fish as pets!"

All told, it was a lovely day away from the office, and now I can cross two more things off my lifetime to-do list!

Do I smell like a basket of fruit?

Please, tell me honestly. Here's why I ask: I realized the other day that I use what seems to me to be an inordinate number of fruit-scented bath products. Behold:
Juicy Green Apple shampoo
Refreshing Tangerine conditioner
Luscious Pink Grapefruit soap
Pear Vanilla lotion

And those are just the ones I use daily. That does not include fruit notes in perfumes, hair products, etc.

What I Watched -- An Education

John Dewey said that "Education is not preparation for life; education is life itself." The reverse is also true: life is, as the title says, An Education. And so it was for Jenny, the 1960s suburban London schoolgirl whose life is changed by an encounter with a stranger on a rainy day.

That stranger is David, a charming and sometimes creepy older man who, for reasons that we can probably all guess, is interested in sixteen-year-old Jenny, played by relative newcomer Carey Mulligan. David exposes Jenny to a life she could only have dreamed of before, where money means nothing and a girl can do whatever she wants. Carey does a wonderful job juxtaposing the different aspects of Jenny's personality. For example, there are some scenes where Jenny possesses the self-awareness and conviction that you would expect of someone twice her age -- someone more like David's age -- and other scenes where she so clearly needs and even desires the guidance of a parent or teacher. Though there are moments where Jenny is too young or inexperienced to know what is going on in David's life, she knows something is, and she's going to decide for herself whether that something is acceptable to her.

This movie is both fantastic and a little bit disturbing, for reasons I haven't quite put my finger on yet. Just one of those ones that you keep thinking about even after it's over. In any case, I'd recommend it.

P.S. Keep your eye out for a special guest star, playing the headmistress of Jenny's school.

P.P.S. Remember how much I loved Lisbeth Salander, the title character from The Girl with the Dragon Tattoo? Well, IMDB reports a rumor that Carey Mulligan is going to play her in the upcoming English-speaking version of the movie! Here's hoping the casting rumors are true!

What I Watched -- Rashomon

The St. Louis County Library is doing a Classic Foreign Movie series, and L and I went to see Rashomon on Tuesday. Turns out that I don't think I've ever seen an Akira Kurosawa movie before, although Ran and Tora! Tora! Tora! have been on my to-watch list for quite some time.

Rashomon, set in 12th century Japan, is the story of the rape of a woman and the murder of her samurai husband, told from four different points of view. But the catch is this: you don't know, and never find out, what really happened in the woods that day. The stories come from the wife, the murderer, the dead samurai (through a medium), and a woodcutter who happens upon the scene.

The most interesting issue that arises in this movie is one of truth. Who is telling the truth? Who is lying? Maybe they are all telling the truth, but from their own points of view? Is one person right? If so, are the others then necessarily wrong?

Warning: there is not a lot of plot to this movie. You just keep seeing the same stuff over and over. Don't watch it when you're sleepy.

Fairfield

Last weekend, J and I went to Fairfield for a visit. I spent about four and a half years living in FF when I was younger; the last time I visited was 10 years ago this month. So, I figured it was about time for a visit. Plus, my good friend L, who also grew up there but now lives in Boston, was back for the weekend to see her parents. It was a good weekend to go, except that it was rather cold and blustery. But can't think of a better day to sit drinking coffee in a used book shop, can you?

But, back to the beginning. We stayed at a B&B called the Seven Roses Inn, and it was charming as can be! Bob and Connie, the proprietors, were quite welcoming. We arrived on Friday afternoon, and were shown to a room with a bed that made me feel like a princess!

Our Room

Stairs to our room

The TV/Sitting room

The Dining Room

The Music Room

The Library

First things first, J and I drove by to see my two old houses!

Fairfield does a "First Fridays Art Walk" on and around the town square, and it just so happened that we were there on the first Friday of the month. This month's theme was "An Acre of Art," so there were lots of gallery shows and the like. We met up with L to wander around for a bit. And by "a bit," I mean we made it approximately 1/8 of the way around the square before we got hungry and decided we needed to eat.

Since the last time I was in Fairfield, a bar opened up near the movie theater called the Red Rock. Above it is a restaurant called Top of the Rock, which is really good! That's where we went for dinner. I had pasta, and was so starved that I ate the entire hugenormous pile of it. That, of course, made me full and tired (it had been a long day), and I decided some sleep was in order.

Saturday started with an amazing breakfast cooked by Connie: apple pecan french toast with maple syrup, sausage, a bowl of fruit, hot tea and orange juice! Wowzers! It was delicious. And pretty -- I wish I had taken a picture, but I was too busy eating. Sorry. We met up with L again, this time at Cafe Paradiso. We chatted for an hour or so, then all parted ways: J went to run 12 miles, L went to Iowa City with our old friend A, and I wandered around the square and poked around in the shops. I really didn't have a plan for the day other than to do that, and it worked out perfectly. I found lots of little things to buy!

Two of my favorite places were the At Home store (a kitchen and sundries shop), and The Chocolate Cafe (need I say more?). It wasn't until J and I caught up with each other after his run (haha) that we found, with the help of a friendly store clerk, the Revelations Used Book Store and Cafe. And holy cow is it incredible. It goes on forever! It's just room after room of used books! And food! And coffee! And tables and chairs! It's a good thing I didn't find it earlier in the day, or I might not have gotten to see anything else!

Some other things I saw:

The back wall of the new Civic Center

Courthouse Clock Tower

Veterans' Memorial

The old bank building - which I love!

The FF Water Tower

The old library building -- they just don't build like this anymore!

The town square

We also took a trip a bit out of town, stopping at the MUM campus and nearby village. We met up with L and A for dinner at the India Cafe, and then went for some drinks at the Red Rock (apparently it's the only place in town).

Sunday morning breakfast was scrambled eggs, delicious bacon, the usual fruit, OJ, and tea, and also lemon poppy seed muffins! We made a brief stop at L's dad's new house south of town, and then headed home for the Mother's Day festivities. And we saw plenty of the Iowa countryside along the way!

Happy Birthday, J!

How does it feel? Seamus's tonight, I assume?

Special Thanks to E!

E ordered me Architectural Digest, one of my favorite magazines, and the first one came yesterday! I'm so excited!

I subscribed to it for a number of years in college and when I lived in DC, but I got behind on my reading, so didn't renew my subscription when it expired. And now it's been years, and I'm starting all over again!

Thanks, E!

What I Watched -- Alive Day Memories

When Mom was here taking care of K after her surgery, she ordered a bunch of Netflix movies. This one came after she left, but K watched it, and recommended that I watch it before shipping it back to Mom in NC.

Whew, it's intense. It's a documentary of sorts -- a series of interviews with vets returning from the Iraq War with various types of battle scars. There are missing limbs, disfigured limbs, shrapnel wounds, blindness, and (of course) PTSD. Each interview provides background on how the injury occurred, the recovery process, life today, and thoughts about the war and the military. Every story is different; every soldier has a different outlook. But they are all an unabashed reminder of what the men and women in our military risk every day.

We would all do well to remember them and their sacrifices.

My computer is mocking me!

Does anyone else find it incredibly patronizing when Windows asks "Did you forget your password?" when you attempt to log in and mis-type?

Shut up you stupid computer! What the heck do you know?

Spoilers abound

I am listening to St. Louis On The Air right now, and Don Marsh is interviewing Anna Quindlen. They were talking about her newest book, and Don said something to the effect of "I don't want to say too much about it, because I don't want to give away the ending." Anna agreed, and commented that she had recently been somewhere where she announced the following: "Everyone knows at the end of Anna Karenina that she [xxxx SPOILER xxxx]. And I saw a woman in the audience with a horrified look on her face, and I realized I had just ruined Tolstoy for her!"

Here's the thing, Anna. Because you just said, on air, what happens at the end of Anna Karenina, you also just spoiled it for everyone listening who has not read it. Including me. Didn't you learn your lesson the first time? Here, I'll help: stop announcing what happens at the end of books!

I don't want to hear from those who know

Guess what I did last night. Nevermind, don't bother. Because if you don't already know, you'll never guess.

I went to a Pearl Jam concert! J is perhaps the world's most enormous PJ fan (and by that I mean he loves them a lot, not that he's enormous). He has been a Ten Club member [that's the PJ fan club] since forever. Ten Club members get the first crack at pre-sale tickets based on their seniority as members (with a bit of a lottery thrown in also -- it's complicated), and J got seats in the 12th row, center! It was pretty amazing, not gonna lie. On this chart, we were on the floor about midway between Sections 101 and 118, or thereabouts, with the stage across the end of the floor in front of Sections 119-126, basically right in front of us!

We started out the evening at Maggie O'Briens. (Shouldn't it be Maggie O'Brien's? Maybe they just think it looks funny with two apostrophes.) They had a pre-party, collecting canned goods for charity and raffling off PJ posters, shirts, etc. I got there after that was over, but J and I stayed there at the bar for a little bit. Special thanks to K for the ride! Even though we almost died. Twice.

After a break at the bar, J and I took a walk to Scottrade in time to see some of the opening act, which was called Band of Horses. They were pretty good, but I didn't know any of their music at all. I especially liked that the lead singer was wearing a cowboy hat even though they're a rock band. Also they're from Seattle, as is PJ.

Then the real fun started. As I have never been to a Pearl Jam show before, I feel a little bit underqualified to comment on the quality of the show vis a vis previous tours. (For what it's worth, J seemed quite satisfied with the show, especially since they played some songs that are rarely played live. The critical review was good also.) I can say, however, that the music was rockin' (there were about 1000 speakers hanging from the ceiling) and there was crazy crowd energy. The band played a long set, and two encores (one of which included Baba O'Riley)!

Now, something you should know about me is that I know the words to approximately one Pearl Jam song, which is consequently my favorite Pearl Jam song. Which they played! Woohoo! I could even sing along. (Rearviewmirror, thank you for asking, which you can experience either live or in studio - studio version is shorter, of course.) I recognized probably 6 or 7 other songs, and maybe knew some of the words from their refrains (Jeremy, Daughter, Even Flow, a few others).

Pearl Jam's new album is called Backspacer. They were on Saturday Night Live a couple months back, and did two of their new songs: Unthought Known and Just Breathe. I liked Just Breathe the first time I heard it. For those who don't know, much of their music is what I would call angry (J would call it passionate. Whichever). Anyway, Just Breathe is much more ballad-y, and it's awesome. In fact, I think it has joined Rearviewmirror in my list of top two favorite Pearl Jam songs ever. And I'm even learning the lyrics. Well, last night at the show, they played both of the SNL songs. So far I'm batting 1.000 when it comes to hearing my favorite songs live!

A problem with hearing songs that you don't know is that it's hard to distinguish them from one another. Obviously all of Pearl Jam's music has similar musical qualities. That's what gives continuity to a band's output (and makes it possible for Pandora/the Music Genome Project to predict songs that you've never heard but are likely to enjoy). Unfortunately, my lack of familiarity with much of PJ's music meant that I was unable to identify the distinguishing characteristics in a number of the songs they played. It's not that they weren't there; it's just that I don't know them. J, however, more than made up for my deficiencies by acting out practically every song played, hand motions and all. Such was his level of excitement, and it was matched by most everyone seated near us.

All in all, I'd say it was a good show. And I'd go again, if Ten Club pre-sale tickets are available :-)

I'm on the upswing

For those who were concerned for my failing health, I have been moved out of the ICU and am feeling much better. Knock on wood.

Now I just have to get over this (as my manager said) Lauren Bacall-esque voice I have going on.