This morning I drove my wife to the station and returned home to find a small pile of leaves on the street near the curb where I park my car. It was about 9:30 in the morning, maybe closer to 10:00, and there was no one around. I parked my car, on top of the leaves (there wasn't anywhere else to park, and my "spot" is so well established you can see it when the car is gone) and went inside to eat breakfast and have coffee.
About 10 minutes later I was enjoying a fried egg bagel and hot seeped bean extract when the door bell sounds. My mother-in-law usually answers, but she was wooing the baby to sleep so I went to see who it was, expecting a delivery or mail. It turned out to be the next door neighbor who explained to me that she had been cleaning the street but had forgotten to bring her garbage bag with her. While she was fetching it, I happened to return and cover up her leaf pile and would I be so kind as too pull my car forward.
I wasn't amused by this rather odd request (it's just a pile of leaves about the size of a dinner plate) coming during my morning refueling session, but to avoid causing any neighborhood strife I complied and slipped on my sandals to move forward. As I got in the car, she reminded me to stay put once I pulled forward so I could put it back once she had cleaned up. Sheesh! So I sat there for a minute or so while she scraped the leaves up (she was 'sweeping' with a dustpan: KKKkkKKKkKkRKkkrrzzkzkkk!) and then she gave me permission to put my car back.
It wasn't a big deal and I wasn't upset, but it struck me as odd. If it was me, I wouldn't have done what she did. My wife mentioned that most Japanese would have avoided parking over the pile, an effort that wouldn't have gone unnoticed by this lady, whereby she would have thanked me profusely for not covering up her pile and she'd apologize for causing me an inconvenience. I knew that this was how it usually plays out, but when I arrived I decided that if consideration for others is really such a priority, she could have had the consideration not to scrape her leaves up in my parking spot.
But like I said, this wasn't a big deal or problem, just a quirky little experience I had with a middle-aged Japanese neighbor. I don't actually have many stories to tell because I don't deal with Japanese people outside of formal or family settings much. Behavior is circumscribed and dictated by roles in these situations, so there isn't much to talk about (athough I could explain how pissy my father-in-law gets if I don't say "Tadaima!", a set phrase that every Japanese person utters when returning home that predictably means "I'm home"). It seriously puts him in a bad mood if I don't say this. I don't know if it's a respect thing or what. It is funny when he throws his tissy fits, like when he got upset the other day when I asked if anyone else thought the TV was a little too loud. It's his house, so I shouldn't snipe, but it IS funny.
Okay, back to the dissertation. Close to 40,000 words now, about 120 pages maybe. 5 days to go.
Some idiot applied for and was apparently awarded a patent on a "Method of exercising a cat." That's right, a patent for shining an "invisible light" in the vicinity of a household feline, "selectively redirecting said beam out of the cat's immediate reach to induce said cat to run and chase said beam and pattern of light around an exercise area."
Just try and argue that we don't need to revise our patent process in the United States.
Go on and discuss this.
A quick guerrilla post to keep at least a little activity here for the next few days. I can't wait to finish my disseration. It's turning into a real crapshoot, but fuck it. I can attone for it later when I hack it up for publication.
I urge everyone to read about how absolutely horrible electronic voting is turning out to be. The concept still works, but the current implementations in this country are rot, pure plain and simple. The machines don't work, they miscount votes, they allow no oversight and absolutely no way at all to recount what happened on election day (which would be easy to remedy if the machine printed the vote on a piece of paper that went into a lockbox.
Electronic voting has huge potential if done right, but that isn't what we see right now. If anyone who reads this blog (both of you!) discovers that your precinct is going to be using these machines, you really ought to organize against it and find a way to use a paper ballot. The machines just are not ready, and we are going to see problems come the next election, I almost guarantee it. If the election is close, each side will complain that it should have gone their way, and if its a blowout, they'll complain that something went drastically wrong. Doesn't really matter what you do though, because there isn't going to be any way to check it out.
Do we really want another four years under a president that received less than half the votes cast? (Yeah I know that could happen even if all votes were perfectly counted, but its less likely without polling problems.)
And just for kicks, here is a nicely written article looking at the Zapruder film and modern society. It draws our attention to the little things that make things happen, collapsing the state vector every physical instant to create the universe we live in, yet could have happened in so many other ways.
Got something to say about this? Go toss off about it.
A few interesting results of a recent survey in England, again courtesy of Matt Drudge. My only problem with this is that it was an online survey. I don't have the link to the surveyors site and thus don't know how it was conducted, but, despite claims that it is representative, it may not be the most accurate sample. I guess it will be (or was?) printed in a Murdoch paper though, and he's pretty pro-war and conservative as a news leader.
Here we go:
The US President was branded a threat to world peace by a clear majority [of Britons], 60%, of those questioned by YouGov. More than one in three, 37%, said Mr Bush was "stupid" while 33% called him "incoherent". Only a minority saw positive characteristics in Mr Bush, with just 7% regarding him as a good world leader, 6% as articulate and 10% as intelligent.
A slim majority of those questioned opposed the visit by 26% to 21% although half did not care. There was sympathy with anti-war campaigners who plan a series of protests to mark the visit with a majority of 53% to 41% supporting the demonstrations.
For the first time a majority said Britain and America were wrong to go to war with Iraq by 45% to 43%. The question has been asked repeatedly since March and when US troops entered Baghdad in April voters were in favour of the war by 66% to 29%.
Now almost three-quarters, 73%, expected the security situation to get worse over the next few months. Only 15% believed that things would get better in Iraq with just 18% saying the country's future would be as a peaceful democracy. An overwhelming 70% thought there was little hope for the people of Iraq and that it would be a permanently unstable country.
There was little faith in the President's ability to handle the continuing problems in Iraq. Fewer than a quarter, 24%, had confidence in Mr Bush on Iraq, while 74% did not. Prime Minister Tony Blair fares only slightly better with 38% expressing confidence in him compared with 59% who did not. There was also scepticism about the "special relationship" between Britain and the US. Only a third, 34%, thought the relationship should continue as at present with Britain remaining America's closest ally. A larger proportion, 47%, said that Britain should continue as one of America's allies but be ready to pursue a more independent line. Some went further, with 14% saying Britain should no longer regard America as a close ally and should pursue its own interests irrespective of what Washington thinks.
This looks to be a blast of a movie!
Lifted directly from Drudge:
Top DISNEY executives continue to grow more and more disillusioned by subsidiary studio MIRAMAX, the DRUDGE REPORT has learned, this time over a controversial interpretation of a post-modern Santa Claus! Just weeks after releasing Quentin Tarantino's shock-samuri-slasher KILL BILL, the DISNEY family will distribute a twisted update of Miracle On 34th Street, BAD SANTA, featuring Santa Claus as you've never seen him before!Santa Claus, played by Billy Bob Thornton, is shown, drinking, sexing and robbing his way through the holidays.
One shock scene from the movie, set for release Thanksgiving week:
Santa says to a barmaid: "I'm an eating, drinking, f**king Santa Claus!"
"Prove it!" answers the barmaid.
Cut to barmaid having sex with Santa in his car outside of the bar: "F**k me, Santa! F**k me, Santa!"
The film, recently previewed by DISNEY executives, has caused complete outrage, studio sources tell DRUDGE. "Nothing appears sacred, anymore, this is just not in the spirit of Walt Disney," a top source close to DISNEY Chief Executive Michael Eisner said this weekend from Los Angeles. Of serious concern: Santa is repeatedly shown on film, in uniform, cursing in front of children. One scene features a child at a shopping mall asking, "You are really Santa, right?" Santa responds: "No, I'm an accountant. I wear this as a f**king fashion statement!"
Elsewhere, Santa Claus is shown picking up a young girl, again while in uniform, and proceeds to have sex with her in a dressing room of a plus-size clothing store at the mall! In the end, this new Hollywood Santa Claus tries to redeem himself.... but whether or not DISNEY believes MIRAMAX can, is yet to be seen....
Fleeking busy with dissertation writing, hence no likely updates for the next 2 weeks. December 1 is the deadline.
But I did discover this cool site that has some really neat images combine elements of different animals into rather acceptable chimeric forms. I don't particularly care for the mouths they've put on the kids and babies, but overall, really neat stuff. The tiger chipmunk currently at the top of the page is pretty good. Enjoy.
Even though I've lived in Japan now for over 4 years, there are naturally many many things about live here that I'm not familiar with. I learned a few things about the formal side of Japanese social life this weekend.
The Japanese preoccupation with manners and the appropriate honorofic and humble behavior are well known. The smallest actions in Japan can be employed in the expression of honor and humbleness. Last week, my father-in-law's aunt passed away at age 92. The funeral was Sunday, and I watched my mother-in-law prepare for the funeral. She had to prepare a couple envelopes with money in them. The larger envelope was for the family, the smaller for the priest who adminsters the services. Formal occasions are always hosted by the family and guests are expected to give rather substantial monetary gifts, mostly to offset the cost of hosting a funeral or wedding.
The envelopes containing the money are addressed with a brush pen. My mom-in-law first chooses a grey inked pen because it is a subtle shade; can't have harsh black ink in someone's face. The smaller envelope got a 100 yen or 500 yen coin and is given to the priest. The larger envelope (there is a standard design for these formal money-holding-envelopes) was for the paper bills. There is a sash of sorts around these envelopes, which are used at weddings, birthdays, New Years' and the like when giving monetary gifts. The sash has a bow, and the two ends curve down from the bow. However, manners recommend that for occasions that happen only once, such as weddings and funerals, the sash is turned around facing up. I had heard of this before and thought it had something to do with luck being held in the upturned space, like a horseshoe, but that apparently is incorrect.
Of course, the special funeral envelope didn't have an actual sash on it. The sashes are typically gold and red and rather gaudy, much too festive for a funeral. The funeral envelope has it printed on the envelope in a muted grey. At least the envelope my mother-in-law used today looked like that; maybe the other gaudy envelopes are used, or maybe there are gray sashed envelopes.
Then came the money itself. When giving cash in Japan, you are supposed to make sure you get crisp, clean, new, fancy, fresh bills. Many times money is given at the beginning of the year, for weddings, or for births. The symbolism of fresh money is so important that there are cash machines at the bank that will spit out fresh clean bills or change your old ones.
However, this is inappropriate at a funeral because it gives the impression that one had planned or expected the death of the deceased. Money is supposed to be worn a little bit (but not too much, mind you!!) to show that their passing was sudden and surprising and that you didn't have time to go get something fancy for them.
Now all of this isn't hard and fast law. I guess there are plenty of people who don't pay attention to this (we got some money after the baby was born that came in an envelope with an upturned sash, evidently indicating that they only expected us to have one child), and it isn't considered a major social foul if these rules aren't followed. But I was amazed at the depth of thought, the amount of symbolism built-in to all of it, and my mother-in-law's natural acceptance of it all. Whether it be a personal, cultural, or familiar failure, I have a hard time subscribing to this sort of societal expectation and obligation. But as an anthropologist, it's pretty interesting to see and experience.
Then this evening I got another glimpse of some of the things that a person can be expected to be aware of. Some friends got married last summer and are having their wedding reception this winter and invited us. The invitation comes with an RSVP postcard, self-addressed to the groom. This address includes the humble equivalent of "Mr." The part that we had to fill out had spaces for our names, addresse, and phone number, all of which were indicated with an honorable expression. Translated, it had space for "Your honored name, your honored address, and your honored phone number" but I have to say that it isn't nearly as awkward in Japanese. There actually is just a single kanji character that is prefixed to those of name, address, and number that indicates an honorific. This is actually important, because we are supposed to cross out the honorific prefix in our reply, rendering the words back to a normal, non-honorific form. And of course we cross out the humble "Mr." on the return address side of the card and write in the honorific version of sama.
Attention to this kind of stuff would wear me down, but my wife is good at it and I like the fact that we are able to be a part of continuing this traditional institutionalized system of respect and manners. It'll be interesting to see how my daughter grows up thinking about it.
Here is a nice story of someone doing something about the world, even as death drags them through the door. Gertrude M Jones used her own obituary to file a public complaint against the current POTUS, asking people who wish to provide a memorial donation to do so via support for groups seeking to oust the President in the next election. Howard Dean and Wes Clark's campaign have both noted that a few donations have come in in Ms Jones's name.
I like this lady. She was 81 when she died on August 25. I think she lived in New Orleans vicinity.
I wonder if her gravestone is anything like Royal Tennebaums?
Humans are hierarchical beings that live in worlds dominated by alpha males and in/out social groups.
When the alpha male talks, people listen.
If everyone is listening to someone, he must be the alpha male.
No one talks back to the radio or television; everyone just listens.
Hence.....
If you spent $1000 a day, one million dollars would last about 3 years (2 years and 9 months, actually). What kind of effect would living in that sort of opulence have on a person? This seems to be a reality show waiting to happen.
The rules would be something like this. The person who is the object of the show is given $1,000,000.00 and has 1000 days to spend it in whatever way they wish. At the end of the 1000 days, anything left over is thrown away. Items purchased may be kept, but if sold off later on, the money must be returned to the foundation that finances the show (i.e. you can't just sink the money into investments, then sell them off to get the cash after the show ends). This person's live is documented for a brief time (one month? two months?) before the money is disbursed, the entire period of wealth, and then 6 months or so afterwards. Other rules include no advice from financial advisors.
Initially I thought that it would be best to just give someone a million dollars and see what happens, but then realized that many people wouldn't make for interesting watching if they just used it in investments.
I don't know if I'm being sadistic here or what. Think about the possibilities. It seems like the chances of watching people self-destruct are high. But then I suppose the odds of people being smart about such an opportunity are just as good. But even with the rules, there are bound to be serious effects on how people view the world after living opulently for three years. How difficult would it be to readjust to live as a working stiff? Would friends have been lost and made? Would contestants feel better off because of the experience or not? Something in me tells me that it would be a curse in disguise...