July 2001 Archives

One ape to rule them all.

I just saw the Planet of the Apes and the only thing I can think of to say is, huh? I consider myself of above average intelligence and a true lover of cinema but I just don't get a lot of things about this movie. I didn't get how Tim Burton can keep making such poor films. I don't get how anyone could see this movie as an improvement upon the original (even though it isn't supposed to be a remake). I don't get what happened to Mark Wahlberg's acting ability that he showed in Boogie Nights. And I especially do not get the ending of this movie, and like I said I think I am reasonably smart.

Just to be clear, I did not think that this version of Planet of the Apes was a good movie. It didn't have the character development, strong storyline, or superb special effects needed to find itself in that category. I am not one of those critics that needs every film I see to be superbly written, or of epic scale, or be spoken in a foreign language to garner my praise, but I am someone who needs a little more "entertainment" for my movie dollar than what Apes was able to provide.

Is that a wallet in your pocket or are you happy to see me?

Although there is obviously so much more I could say about race relation in the U.S. I am going to close out this week's discussion with a link to the photographs of Charles Moore's from the "Civil Rights era" (as if it has ended or something). "Seldom, if ever, has a set of photographs had such an immediate impact on the course of history."


Switching now from a very important topic to one that is very frivolous... a while back, years ago actually, I switched from carrying my wallet in my back pants pocket to carrying it in the front. I cannot remember the exact circumstances that caused me to make this change, but I think it had to do with it being harder to pick-pocket when I was traveling abroad.

As it turns out, I can never go back to my rear wallet wearing practices. It is simply too inconvenient and uncomfortable to have that thing sitting back there on my ass. In addition to the added security and accessibility that carrying my wallet in the front pocket affords, it also is much more comfortable. My questions are then, how is it that so many people carry their wallets behind them? How did the practice begin? And why would anyone want their jeans to get that "wallet mark" worn into them?

Many people say racism is

Many people say racism is about how people are treated. If that is the case then I think I am alright as I don't think I really treat people all that differently based upon their race (at least not in ways that matter much). What worries me, however, is the idea that racism is more in how we think. Unfortunately, I still think about people of color differently; here's what I mean:

If I meet a black person, I always have a thought in my mind that I don't want them to construe anything I do or say as being prejudicial. In my mind then, I am constantly aware that that person is black (at least until I know them well enough to forget that). I don't like that nagging awareness. I don't want it to matter and I don't want my actions to be altered based upon those thoughts. This being the case, I tend to do things like smile at black people on the street more than I do to white people, or make a greater attempt to converse with people of color than I do with their white counterparts.

I don't like these things about me. I feel tremendous guilt about being this way, but I don't know how to combat these thoughts. This is not to say that I think I am abnormal in some way, because I feel that most "non-racist" people tend to have similar thoughts, although that could just be me projecting on the rest of the population.

I can at least feel good knowing that I care and I try, which is far more than I can say for the many ignorant hate mongers out there. One interesting thing about the link in the previous sentence is that it is the actual site of real short-wave radio show that is broadcast in over 50 countries. Their tagline "Bringing American-Style talk radio to 50 countries around the world!" could, perhaps, be modified slightly to be more accurate: "Bringing American-Style ignorance, insensitivity, and hate to 50 countries around the world!"

Um... I'm gonna need you to go ahead and come in tomorrow. Yeah.

Is it coincidence that ABCNews ran an article yesterday about the sometimes racially charged environment that we call America? Well, yes, but does its timeliness not underscore the fact that I have my pasty white fingers on the pulse of the nation? I think it may.

The article brings to light that some small gestures and comments can be construed as racist or at least insensitive to many. Here are some of the examples they gave: Long haired white women may unknowingly insult nearby black women as they can perceive the action as a slight on their own hair, or (as in the classic scene from Office Space) how reaching over and locking your car door when you see a black man at an upcoming intersection can be sending a clear message to him that he is to be feared.

The overarching question then, is are we too sensitive about race in this country? I think the answer to that depends upon the color of your skin. Whites may tend to say yes, however most lack the perspective to know what racial discrimination is even about. Blacks, Hispanics, and those of Asian decent experience discrimination and prejudices every day. The effects of all of those questions, fearful glances, and overt actions take their toll on a person and forever change them. Few white people (particularly white men) in America have experienced these types of feelings and so they may simply shrug off the cries of the minorities as them merely being angry or not letting go of the past; a past that, unfortunately for those being judged and put down, far too often mirrors their present.

In a not-so-recent episode of

In a not-so-recent episode of Oprah (actually from 1992) the studio audience was part of an exercise; an exercise that they were not told about. It was all part of the fun on the Oprah show as former school teacher turned diversity trainer, Jane Elliott performed the exercise she first did with grade school students in 1968.

This is how it went: Everyone was asked to be to the show 2 hours early. When they arrived, they were sorted based upon the color of their eyes. Brown-eyed folks were sent in to a catered room where they were seated and given breakfast, while those with blue eyes were made to stand while waiting. As the brown-eyed people filed in to the show, the blue-eyed folks were told that they must wear green collars or be forced to leave. The Oprah staff was told to act courteous and helpful to those with brown eyes and rude and condescending to those with blue.

When the show began Jane Elliot was introduced as having discovered previously unknown links between scholastic aptitude and eye color and was there on the show to talk about her findings that blue-eyed people were generally lazier, slower to learn, and rude.

As the show progressed the people with blue eyes grew increasingly agitated and angry with what they saw as unfair treatment and were soon yelling in true daytime talk show style. The surprising thing is was how the brown-eyed people began yelling and putting down the blue-eyed ones simply from the suggestion that they were not as good as them.

This show obviously uncovered some facets of prejudice and discrimination that these people weren't ready for; and some that I was not aware of (or closer to the truth), or hadn't thought of in some time. In light of this new consciousness I am experiencing, I have decided to make a couple post this week that have a theme along these same lines.

Today has not been a

Today has not been a good day. Between our servers getting hacked, a worm virus getting dropped on us, and a SSL certificate expiring and thus taking down hosting services I am about at the end of my rope with technological advancement.


I finally got around to seeing A Thin Red Line and was surprised by how beautiful the film was. It was both visually stunning and introspective. If this film had not come out in the shadow of that other WWII movie I think people would have thought much more highly of it. Sure this film wasn't as technically stunning or make you feel what it was really like to be in the heat of a battle - but it didn't try to either; preferring rather to concentrate on the human condition as a compliment and foil to the natural world. As a "story" I felt that Red Line delivered more powerfully that Private Ryan even though it did so in a more disjointed way.

Camping in Minnesota in the

Camping in Minnesota in the height of summer isn't all it's cracked up to be. Sure there is the fresh air, the campfires, and the being closer to nature, but there is also the inescapable heat/humidity and the nearly as inescapable mosquitoes and horse flies. I have heard that camping in the mountains doesn't have these sort of trials and tribulations. Damn the mountains, damn them all to hell!


Microsoft likes to improve its products. That is probably true for most companies. Why is it that Microsoft's improvements are always viewed as evil somehow? The new version of IE (6 Preview) is no exception. From a visual design sense I really do not like some of the new "improvements" such as the Auto Image Resize - how is a designer supposed to keep any integrity in her design if the browser allow this type of image manipulation? And I don't really like the idea of all these new icons (Smart Tags & Auto Image Resize) and menus (Image Toolbar) showing up on sites I create. Full support for DOM 1/CSS 1 is a big plus however (but weren't they supposed to have that in 5? I am not sure what to think yet. Are these enhancements more of a pain? Do they add value to the user? The LemurZone sure doesn't think so.

On a somewhat related note:

I used to be so impressed with the CSS and HTML resources available at the MSDN site Microsoft had, and the site in general. Now they went and changed it all and I can't find anything, plus it is way slower now with al their fancy, smancy rollover effects, etc. I can find info on MSHTML, though, thank god!


Speaking of god. I remember my first day that counted. Good times. 27 million people who classify themselves as atheists, agnostics, freethinkers, and secular humanists - that number seems really low. Does this include people who just don't know? What about those that don't care? What about those that go to church once a year and say they believe in god but really have no idea what that means?

Why do these "Freethinkers" need a organization like this? Why this "Day that Counts"? I always thought that even though our currency says "In God We Trust", our judicial system makes us swear on the Bible, and our Pledge of Allegiance speaks of "One nation under God" that America was pretty secular. Most people I know are pretty much secular even though they may say they believe in something.

The site claims that we are on the verge of getting slapped with a "Religion Tax" where we will be paying taxes to "fund faith-based social programs across the country." The site goes on to say that many states and cities "are using public money to operate so-called 'faith-based partnerships' with religious organizations." and that the "federal faith-based office czar John DiIulio declared that Americans...should pay for the physical maintenance and operation of houses of worship, so they may expand their religion-based social outreaches."

First off, there is a federal faith-based office czar? What is that? Second, I don't mind paying for social programs, but I may mind paying for the social programs that could be run by religious groups. Why? Because I don't think religious groups always focus on the correct problems. For example, a group using funds to educate youths on sex and disease may omit certain viewpoints on the use of contraception, or add undue guilt on young folks for partaking in such activities. I don't think religious guilt or partial dissemination of information is the best use of my tax dollars.


Don't have your mother to pour you that glass of orange juice in the morning? Now you can wear your vitamin C. (or at least in 2002 you will be able to)

There may be some reasons to ban football but...

...these are not among them:

• Footballs used to be made out of real pigskin. PETA and other animal anti-cruelty groups should oppose these most despicable objects. They represent death in more ways than one.
• People watching football eat unhealthy foods, especially teenagers.
• Football artificial turf is not environmentally green. It merely gives the illusion of being a natural sport. Football is in reality most unnatural, and deadly.
• Football scoreboards cause eyestrain, therefore further making football an unhealthy and unnatural sport.
• Football fields are not metric. Another instance of American foulness and ignorance.
• Most football insignia and mascots are politically incorrect and designed to promote hatred of other races or animals. There we find that the Deadly Sport really thrives on hatred.
• Boys playing football are encouraged to slap each other on the butt. Here's an article about a town that requires a license to dance, because "Dancing is one of those things that entices. It imitates sexual contact."
• The football industry lures even the smallest children into violence, by selling nerf footballs.
• The football leagues have resisted every common sense effort to design a safer football. They persist in using bi-pointed forms, which not only can make someone blind, but has obvious phallic symbolism.

In fact, these are much more likely, the tongue-in-cheek ramblings of a crazy Frenchman, than sound reasons against football.

From this page at this site www.footballkills.org by the Citizens United Against Football. [source: Camworld]

Everything in its right place

After hearing about this show and seeing Jason's account of it I felt incredibly left out. First to be graced with smashing good looks and then being able to attend a Radiohead concert in Oxford, damn that Jason leads a charmed life. He has inspired me both to get a haircut and endeavor to try to get tickets for their sold out August 1st show in Chicago.

Inmate tosses poo, gets meal

Inmate tosses poo, gets meal at McDonald's.

On a related note:

Since 1950, Americans alone have used more resources than:

1. everyone who ever lived before them
2. the combined Third World populations
3. the Romans at the height of the Roman Empire
4. all of the above

Answer: d. All of the above. Since 1950, Americans alone have used more resources than everyone who ever lived before them. Each American individual uses up 20 tons of basic raw materials annually. Americans throw away 7 million cars a year, 2 million plastic bottles an hour and enough aluminum cans annually to make six thousand DC-10 airplanes.

[Source: PBS.org]

Before entering the theater this

Before entering the theater this evening to see the new Kubrick/Spielberg movie, A.I. a friend (who I would link to if their site was even quasi static rather than fully so) mentioned a review that stated that both Kubrick and Spielberg fans would be sorely disappointed with this film because it was like neither of the respective filmmakers other great works. I whole-heartedly disagree. The film had the pacing and eccentric characters of a Kubrick movie paired with the fanciful story and gushing ending characteristic of Spielberg's works. Does this mean it was a great Kubrick/Spielberg movie then? Well, no. But it was ever so close.

I thought that the movie was very close to being what I thought it should be. Not what I thought it should have been when the movie started, but what I thought it should have been when it ended. Unfortunately, the movie went about 20 minutes too long, and right past the place I thought it should have ended; past the point it should have left the viewers with.

I will wait a couple weeks before I comment on this further to avoid spoiling anything for any of you.