Tuesday, April 5, 2011
Oh, All Right, I'll Read Infinite Jest
guess I'll have to buy it after this.
Labels:
AA,
David Foster Wallace,
Infinite Jest
Sunday, April 3, 2011
Tina Fey, Honorary Contrarienne
Janet Is-She-Still-Alive? Maslin does a nice profile, er, book review.
“Only in comedy,” she writes, about interviewing for a writing job on “Saturday Night Live” in 1997, “does an obedient white girl from the suburbs count as diversity.”
Labels:
Janet Maslin,
Tina Fey
Saturday, April 2, 2011
Here, Have A Death Cookie
Possibly the most engaging thing I have read in months. And I read a lot.
“The risk you take has a feedback effect on the unconscious,” he says. “The unconscious will give you ideas and it wants you to act on them. The more courage you have when you act, the more ideas it will give you.”
The reason it is so engaging is that I recognize my own experience.
Labels:
Brain Stuff
Malcolm X Redux
There's a new book I'd really like to read, but the author's story is remarkable as well.
Labels:
Malcolm X,
Manning Marable
Friday, April 1, 2011
As Promised
VR I think I should go to Brazil. Then maybe Argentina.
Labels:
Video,
Virginia Rodriguez
Lost Love
I have cleaned up all the family photos and the CDs and put Zap Mama back into my life. Next up, Virginia Rodriguez.
Labels:
Video,
Virginia Rodriguez,
Zap Mama
Sunday, March 27, 2011
Should We Read Susan Sontag?
Maybe not. Maybe read about her instead.
“She had the death that somewhere she must have come to believe that other people had from cancer,” Rieff writes, “the death where knowledge meant nothing, the will to fight meant nothing, the skill of the doctors meant nothing.”
Labels:
David Rieff,
Susan Sontag
Sunday, March 20, 2011
For A Good Read, Try NYT
while it's still free.
But I digress.
My mouth is watering over this.http://www.nytimes.com/2011/03/20/nyregion/20turanos.html?_r=1
But I digress.
My mouth is watering over this.http://www.nytimes.com/2011/03/20/nyregion/20turanos.html?_r=1
Like many classic New York tales, the story of Mr. Kruger and his shadow family involves love, money, conflict and real estate.
It is a story of an internecine political world of favor-trading and access-peddling.It is a story of an obscure waterfront expanse of garish mansions and decadent cars, a pocket of wealth unreachable by buses and subways and unseen by most city residents.And, now, it is a story of unwanted attention.
Labels:
corruption,
New York City,
New York Times,
Politics
Beulah Land
Takes me to my knees. Every time.
Labels:
Beulah Land,
Gillian Welch,
Video
I'll Be Bouba, You Be Kiki
Tried to read all this review of the hot new brain book but, I'll be honest, it was long. So I skimmed. Basically I wanted more summary, less discursive analysis. But, as always, a lot to ponder.
Labels:
Brain Stuff
Friday, March 18, 2011
Do Not
tempt the wrath of the whatever from high atop the thing.
Labels:
God
Woulda, Shoulda, Coulda
Here's the list of things I knew I should buy. But what did I do? Oh, probably blew it on new clothes or something.
1. Netflix
2. Apple
3. Google
4. Amazon
5. Starbucks
1. Netflix
2. Apple
3. Google
4. Amazon
5. Starbucks
February's Over, Time To Pull Up My Palin Pants
After the nationally recognized Palin-free month, the LA Times gives me reason to be grateful for good journalism again.
And one of Andrew Sullivan's readers comes through with some enriching info.
So also grateful for the internet.
All of which gets me to thinking about the NYT's new paywall, which goes into effect for people like me on March 28. Already there's a Twitter account to help us circumvent it.
I wouldn't have known about the LA Times piece without Sullivan who, among other things, is what is known as an aggregator. He and his staff find stuff, then pass it along.
Which means the LAT got a whole lot of new eyeballs on that one story at least.
So, how do they monetize it? I don't think the paywall is the answer. I think, just as advertisers pay for hits, so should readers.
It's an idea that's been kicked around, don't know the ins and outs of it, although the technology is probably there.
But I'll admit it, I'd pay a couple bucks a month for what I read now, which they would automatically deduct. But not $15 a month for the NYT.
Some will, though. But probably not enough. Felix Salmon, a much-quoted financial analyst was headlined somewhere recently claiming he's done the math, and it ain't gonna work.
Maybe he's wrong and the NYT is right. Or maybe, as I suspect, the "passive-aggressive white males" in charge got hold of an idea, liked it a lot, and couldn't let go of it even when they knew it was a loser. Or maybe, more likely, they have a power structure designed to help them suppress any information that runs counter to their egos. Egoes? Can't remember.
This is how I believe the world operates.
I don't like it, but I must accept it.
Or go crazy.
And one of Andrew Sullivan's readers comes through with some enriching info.
So also grateful for the internet.
All of which gets me to thinking about the NYT's new paywall, which goes into effect for people like me on March 28. Already there's a Twitter account to help us circumvent it.
I wouldn't have known about the LA Times piece without Sullivan who, among other things, is what is known as an aggregator. He and his staff find stuff, then pass it along.
Which means the LAT got a whole lot of new eyeballs on that one story at least.
So, how do they monetize it? I don't think the paywall is the answer. I think, just as advertisers pay for hits, so should readers.
It's an idea that's been kicked around, don't know the ins and outs of it, although the technology is probably there.
But I'll admit it, I'd pay a couple bucks a month for what I read now, which they would automatically deduct. But not $15 a month for the NYT.
Some will, though. But probably not enough. Felix Salmon, a much-quoted financial analyst was headlined somewhere recently claiming he's done the math, and it ain't gonna work.
Maybe he's wrong and the NYT is right. Or maybe, as I suspect, the "passive-aggressive white males" in charge got hold of an idea, liked it a lot, and couldn't let go of it even when they knew it was a loser. Or maybe, more likely, they have a power structure designed to help them suppress any information that runs counter to their egos. Egoes? Can't remember.
This is how I believe the world operates.
I don't like it, but I must accept it.
Or go crazy.
Tuesday, March 15, 2011
Just In Case You Were Wondering
Krugman isn't worried about the economic impact. I notice he didn't mention the nukes.
So, back to Japan: I’m terrified about the possible loss of life; nervous about the disruption of world production; not worried at all about the impact of Japanese borrowing on world bond markets.
Saturday, March 12, 2011
Grim
The truth begins to trickle in.
The police chief of Miyagi prefecture, or state, told a gathering of disaster relief officials that his estimate for deaths was more than 10,000, police spokesman Go Sugawara told The Associated Press. Miyagi has a population of 2.3 million and is one of the three prefectures hardest hit in Friday's disaster. Only 379 people have officially been confirmed as dead in Miyagi.You might recognize it.
UPDATE: The Gray Lady weighs in, three days later.
...as the death toll from Friday’s earthquake and tsunami climbed astronomically
Friday, March 11, 2011
Re: Japan And What Passes For News
As a news person and just an ordinary person, I am unbelievably frustrated by the lack of coordinated, comprehensive and credible information out of Japan. I was up until 2 a.m. being mezmerized by the film and appalled by the MSNBC anchorette — yes, I said that, she's just a hired bimbo and never did figure out the time zone differential between New York and Hawaii — and thinking, well, there are probably tens of thousands dead.
This morning Andrea Mitchell — Andrea Mitchell! — asked an expert what "seismic predictions" he could make based upon what happened in Japan, trying to escalate the fear factor no doubt.
Yet no one's saying the obvious. Were all those buildings and vehicles empty when the tsunami swept them away? Yeah, right. Only 300 dead or missing? I don't think so.
It's probably policy somewhere to rely entirely upon official casualty statements and so, if the gubmint ain't saying it, it ain't happening. Then, of course, you have your lying eyes.
UPDATE: Or you can start doing the math, like the BBC.
The only "oh, the humanity" I heard was from one news anchor at KOMO, who apparently didn't read the memo.
UPDATE: Forgot to mention, somebody needs to do the math. I haven't seen a timeline of any kind so far, not even at NYT.
What time did that wall of water hit those farmlands anyway? We saw moving vehicles, so not everyone got warned in time to evacuate.
But I did learn from their one timed item that the 6m tsunami did hit Kamaishi Port at 3:21, 35 minutes after the quake. Those are the films of the boats being swept under the bridge — I assume it's a bridge — one mast snapping as the boat goes through. Yet there were people on that bridge, apparently unafraid to be there, which kind of makes me think there was room for the water roughly where there was a channel and it wasn't tumbling any vulnerable buildings, etc.
UPDATE II: Okay, somebody asked about time. Somebody at the NYT.
This morning Andrea Mitchell — Andrea Mitchell! — asked an expert what "seismic predictions" he could make based upon what happened in Japan, trying to escalate the fear factor no doubt.
Yet no one's saying the obvious. Were all those buildings and vehicles empty when the tsunami swept them away? Yeah, right. Only 300 dead or missing? I don't think so.
It's probably policy somewhere to rely entirely upon official casualty statements and so, if the gubmint ain't saying it, it ain't happening. Then, of course, you have your lying eyes.
UPDATE: Or you can start doing the math, like the BBC.
The only "oh, the humanity" I heard was from one news anchor at KOMO, who apparently didn't read the memo.
UPDATE: Forgot to mention, somebody needs to do the math. I haven't seen a timeline of any kind so far, not even at NYT.
What time did that wall of water hit those farmlands anyway? We saw moving vehicles, so not everyone got warned in time to evacuate.
But I did learn from their one timed item that the 6m tsunami did hit Kamaishi Port at 3:21, 35 minutes after the quake. Those are the films of the boats being swept under the bridge — I assume it's a bridge — one mast snapping as the boat goes through. Yet there were people on that bridge, apparently unafraid to be there, which kind of makes me think there was room for the water roughly where there was a channel and it wasn't tumbling any vulnerable buildings, etc.
UPDATE II: Okay, somebody asked about time. Somebody at the NYT.
Vasily Titov, director of the Center for Tsunami Research, said that coastal areas closest to the center of the earthquake probably had about 15 to 30 minutes before the first wave of the tsunami struck. "It’s not very much time. In Japan, the public is among the best educated in the world about earthquakes and tsunamis. But it’s still not enough time.”
UPDATE III: Or you can wait for the BBC to do the math.
ne of the worst-hit areas was the port city of Sendai, in Miyagi prefecture, where up to 300 bodies have been found in one ward alone.
Japan Railways said it could not trace four trains along the north-eastern coast. A ship carrying 100 people was also reported missing.
Labels:
Earthquake,
Japan
Thursday, March 10, 2011
Nightmare In Japan
Can barely believe the tsunami film coming in, showing cars speeding along as the wash of trash approaches.
Ten minutes later, the second wave.
Ten minutes later, the second wave.
Labels:
Earthqueake,
Japan
Wednesday, March 9, 2011
Basic Cooking For $600
Well, there are worse things to do with your Microsoft gazillions.
I have a lot of other reading to do, though, so I don't think I'll be indulging in this.
Pictures are fabulous.
I have a lot of other reading to do, though, so I don't think I'll be indulging in this.
Pictures are fabulous.
Labels:
Foodie Alert
Soup: Gonna Make Some More
With Bittman's help and inspiration.
Warning: I thought his time on the bean types was way off and someone in comments caught it, too. So follow the directions on the package, Bittman erred I think.
Warning: I thought his time on the bean types was way off and someone in comments caught it, too. So follow the directions on the package, Bittman erred I think.
Labels:
Foodie Alert,
Soup
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)


