"we have met the enemy..."

go see district 9. i know, it's the big sensation. the movie makers spent next to nothing, campaigned obliquely and it shredded the box office opening weekend. the plot is not complex. aliens landed on earth and for some reason can't leave. they've been quarantined in a place called 'district 9.' in johannesburg of all places--not very subtle. but don't write it off yet. i loved this movie. the premise is pure science fiction genius. aliens have come to earth in a disc-shaped spaceship, but rather than being bent on human destruction, they are refugees.

the nerd in me became excited as soon as i saw the preview. is that a giant alien spaceship? is it hovering over johannesburg? are those humans clad in white supposed to be bad or good? is this filmed like a documentary? so many of the right questions.

from the perspective of the science fiction nerd that i am, the movie did not disappoint. the aliens and their technology (read: cool weapons) was creatively imagined. the actor portraying the main character does an excellent job. i instantly empathized with him as a very real but flawed character. he's no hero. he seems somewhat pathetic and then only interested in saving himself. one of my favorite things about this movie is that it does a wonderful job of letting all its character play to their self-interests in really authentic ways.

there are several antagonists, but all fall under the umbrella of mnu, a giant defense company, not unlike blackwater (now xe servcies). this adds another layer to an already rich story. one that increasingly reflects our own, boring, non-sci-fi lives.

i think the most difficult part of the film is the audience's ability to identify with aliens that resemble large bugs (their referred to as "prawns" in the movie). the filmmakers fight to make the audience empathize with the aliens by giving them eyes similar to our own. the dialogue style between the two species is also authentic. the humans and aliens can understand each other vaguely, but each speaks in their own language and they often misinterpret one another. again, though the subject is pretty fantastic, the way the characters operate is very believable.

throughout the film, the parallels to our own society are purposefully explicit. it is this lack of subtlety that i think makes many true science fiction movies great. this movie does an excellent job of trying to let its characters and situations play themselves out in the world they inhabit. at the same time, this is sci-fi and it's supposed to be absurd. we're talking about an alien spaceship floating over johannesburg for 25 years. things should get a little crazy. naturally, there are a lot of ridiculous explosions--buildings explode, aliens explodes, people explode, pigs explode. it is over the top. does this make the movie contradictory? yes, but as any good sci-fi film would be.

like i said earlier, it's pretty explicit from the outset that we're getting into some heavy stuff when the human-alien relationships reflect apartheid-era south africa. the documentary-style filmaking helps parallel the fantastic events of the film to our own society. the sight of burning and armored cars rumbling through the hulks of destroyed cars are too familiar to make this escapist.

the fundamental theme of the film is the "us versus them" mentality. without giving too much away, we watch the main character, who has been profiting off the status quo come to realize that he is a 'them' and not an 'us.' it's great stuff--engaging and fun to watch.

at the same time, this has me thinking alot about metaphors, particularly in science fiction. i worry that the very nature of the genre will mean that much of the weight of the story is lost on the audience. again, i love science fiction and i think that more often than not it reflects more about the society of the creator than the fantastic scenes it portrays. i fear though that in a film like this, the metaphor can become too theoretical. the film uniquely portrays a very old story: that we will always seek division over unity. that it will inevitably be easier to justify persecuting and demonizing the other side than to struggle to live together. but i guess it has me wondering that the power of that simple theme will be lost or overwhelmed by extravagant nature of the broader story. i know that it is part of the limitation of the genre. maybe that is what differentiates a simply interesting story with one that is ultimately true. the lessor story will be lost in the spectacle while the truest narrative will penetrate even the most fantastic situations. i prefer to think distrcit 9 is the latter.

who owns who?

perhaps this is mostly me fumbling to make sense of the ins and outs of everyday, but my life seems to take on themes. right now, it feels like the theme that keeps coming up is digital hyperconnectivity and anxiety. ben got the ball rolling on his blog a few weeks ago. it's definitely worth following the conversation on his blog. my contribution was the thought that with technology, like all things, we must find a balance rather than clinging to simple extremes.

then, a week ago i listened to an excellent podcast on econtalk. econtalk is my weekly chance to listen to people who are smarter than me talk about things i don't understand. actually, whether you care about economics, markets, and human social behavior or not, it's a really interesting podcast. one of my favorite traits of the show's host, russ roberts, is that he has plenty of guest who hold opinions that differ from his own and engages them in honest, tame discussion.

my like for econtalk aside, i really enjoyed a recent podcast in which roberts interviewed author mark helprin. though they ostensibly were debating intellectual copyright, about halfway through the show, they begin to discuss humans and technology. helprin makes a good point that rather than technology making our lives easier, it often forces us to bend to it, making our lives more complicated for the sake of productivity. he notes after all that has changed about this world, humans still need food, friends/family, and rest. this thought is at once obvious and revolutionary. at this moment, if the general trend in our culture is moving towards anything, it is certainly not for doing less in the name of rest. it is to utilize the latest gadgets to do as much as possible. rather than allowing us more free time, most technology seems to give us more work and more stress. check the podcast out here, i think it's worth a listen.

recently, i've been thinking alot about the role of anxiety in my own life. my worry-free external persona is often an act, covering anxiety about some of the most mundane tasks. i wonder to what extent this anxiety is exacerbated by being connected to the internet all day long. i know the ability to learn next to nothing about almost any topic has destroyed my attention span. i also wonder the extent to which knowing about something i have to do the second the email arrives creates added stress.

i know that in many ways this topic is far from new. people much smarter than i have been saying "less is more" for years. it also seems like simplicity is definitely back in style, most likely as a result of our collectively hyperconnected lives. the super nerdy sci-fi part of my mind thinks that if the world was ever going to be taking over by machines, it wouldn't look anything like the movies. instead, we would simply continue down our current path, each generation altering their lifestyle more and more to accommodate the machines. i know this is ridiculous sounding, and i don't mean it in all seriousness, but i still think it's worth puzzling over. ok, maybe it's not worth puzzling over the robot takeover (and make no mistake, they will take over). but it is worth thinking about our own dependence on machines. don't worry, i'll continue to use my computer, i may even get a fancy phone one day. so i'm certainly not refuting my earlier point about technology, like most things, being both good and bad. but the more i think about it, the more difficult it seems to find the balance between owning the computer and the computer owning you.

drama

i was looking through old emails the other day and came across and something i'd written to myself over three years ago. i had just started my first job after college. now, it seems dramatic , miserable and verbose. but because i just found out i'll continue to work at that same job for the foreseeable future, it seems fitting to put it up here. i cringed re-reading it at times--fill free to ridicule me, but in some strange way, i'm also proud of myself for actually writing it when i did. my nature is to keep things bottled up and outwardly complain as little as possible. which is obviously not the healthiest way to live life. maybe i should be writing my thoughts more often as a way of processing my life. don't worry, this blog is not about to turn into a cyber-emotion vomit session.

here it is in all it's unedited glory.

It's the sitting that eventually wears me down, day by day. Sitting in the same place all day long, yet somehow still unable to make my body stand and walk around the office. Surely at the very least I could convince myself I needed to go to the bathroom.

No.

I sit. By the slight adjustment of my left foot, I can swing the swivel chair in quick, short motions—right to left. I instinctively twist my right index finger until it pops. This is perhaps the 22 ^nd time I have performed this procedure or ritual today.

Like I said, it's the sitting that eventually makes me feel numb. My body feels as if it were asleep but its not. Unfortunately, the same can be said of my brain. Though it's more asleep than any other portion of me now. My fingers tap keys with relative precision. I only use the delete key sparingly, which usually isn't a good thing. Editing is a good thing. But that's how I got here in the first place. Editing.

Trying to type up my thoughts to a best friend, I found myself editing every word I said. For every argument I made, the counter-argument came to my mind. It was not that these 'counter-arguments' were exceptional. My primary ones were probably no better. It was that they were there. There is nothing quite so staggering as having two converse thoughts in your mind. It forces you to tiredness.

Tiredness. The phrase that seems to always be with me, making me drag my own feet below me. Why is that? i don't stay up well into the night. I walk somewhat regularly. I don't smoke that much. Barely any at all. Yet I feel like I'm missing out on something. That, by being so tired, I have succumbed to some external force applying unrelenting pressure. I can't understand it other than by association. At this moment, I associate this feeling with my current occupation.

Unfortunately, they haven't come up with a word for what I do. 'Office lackey,' is my personal term for it. I suppose like any job, it has its moments. I've found that I simply enjoy completing a task and doing it well, if I can. This is what scares me.

If I enjoy the completion of a task, regardless of the task itself, why the sluggish feeling?

I know it's not necessarily this job that continues to grind me down--though I have hoped for so long that is was this job. It is just having a job. That freedom ripped from me and hidden forever. The monotony of a daily routine so endlessly unchanging, clinked into place. Its very presence pressing out with unrelenting vigor the joys of my previous life into an afterthought. Work must now become my life.

But wait. This is normal. Everyone in the middle to upper echelon experiences this transformation, both abrupt and total, right? Had we not known that moment (most will call this higher education) free of major responsibility and time constraint, we should, in fact, be enjoying our employment all the more. Had we not known a time of plenty, the want would not seem so wanton.

I suppose.

But how much of my current job is to do with me and how much is to do with it?

This is the moment the confusion and sometimes discouragement begins to set in. What if its my own laziness? What if its the fact that I'm not being motivated? And then the inevitable question that is yet further down the path of confusion, what if its both?

If my last question, prying and unrelenting is correct, then simply getting a different line of work would have varying degrees of success--in the light of finding joy in my employment.

new media

tipped off by another blog, i began following the riots in tehran and the rest of iran via twitter today. an occasional twitterer, i have rarely followed the trends on twitter until today. after a few minutes, i was addicted. not only are users in iran reporting events there as they occur, they are also using the service to coordinate protests. i can sit at my desk and read about events literally as they happen across world, from the perspective of the people actually there. not even the 24 hour news channels can give me this. the prospect is frightening.

on one hand, i can't stop reading. that some sort of revolution may be occurring before our eyes online is amazing and hope-bearing. it seems like pundits and nerds have been toting the extra-social implications of facebook and twitter for a long time. other than the obama campaign, this is the first time the utilities have really had a major role to play in the political scene. it is exciting to witness. i hope that truth and justice prevails in iran.

on the other hand, i fear that this could be nothing more than "some weird voyeurism (no idea on the source here, i believe it is a comment on a youtube video of the protests)"--an extension of current hyper-connected media outlets. what does my ability to witness iranian intellectuals and middle class protest a dishonest and oppressive government have to do with their struggle?

in some real ways, what we're seeing in iran via twitter goes beyond 5 minute updates on CNN. the updates come from protesters in the field, not from a news correspondent or even via an interview. the protesters themselves are using the service to coordinate, allowing users around the globe to interact and perhaps even contribute in small ways. throughout the day, users have been posting proxy address that allow users inside iran to bypass government filtering.

but in many other ways, reality remains the same. though we can see the brutality of the government crushing dissent firsthand, i fear that the images will be lost amid a sea of violence that floods u.s. and worldwide audiences every day. though personal interaction in new media removes many of the alienating aspects of traditional media, i wonder what it will actually change. our skins are thick and the problems of the world seem so daunting.

this is not to say that all of new media is nothing but the same. my views on the world are shaped far more by blogs and podcasts than by traditional media sources and i consider this a good thing. but both do require the understanding that there is nothing without bias or interpretation. i suppose you at least get to chose whose filter to receive the world through.

regardless of the reaction of the witnessing world, it is certainly true that outcome of the next few days will be wholly left up to the iranians. i have no idea what will happen, but it seems like the worst thing that can happen is nothing.

update: the new york times has a good article about twitter in iran here. twitter postponed a scheduled maintenance downtime, acknowledging of the service's significance in iran.

and this is a hopeful blog post from the daily beast. excerpt: "like civil rights protestors who sang rousing hymns as they were carried off to jail, twitterers are bearing witness to what's happening around them, and calling out into the darkenss of cyberspace for confirmation."

i have a problem

the past couple weeks have been difficult.

two weeks ago i flew down to san antonio to see my grandfather probably for the last time. i don't throw that out lightly and am not even sure i want to blog about it. but there it is for now.

last week i found out that the little muscle (called a sphincter--is it a muscle?) between the top of my stomach and the bottom of my esophagus isn't working very well. when my stomach is digesting food, it allows acid back up into my esophagus, which can be really painful. it gets even worse when i sleep because lying down, the acid travels further. it's all real pleasant to imagine, i know. things started to go wrong when i noticed a persistent pain in my neck and throat around christmas. what the doctor initially thought was just a sinus infection now appears to be acid reflux disease. a trip to radiology at st. luke's confirmed it. i drank barium and the doctors x-rayed my esophagus as i swallowed. it was weird.

the main thing that this means is that i may have to be on medication for awhile and that i can eat practically nothing that tastes good. but in all seriousness, i don't think it's that bad. from what i've read, one of the biggest things i can do is to eat smaller portions and sleep with my head propped up. sadly, though sleeping with a wedge of pillows sounds comfortable, it actually isn't.

but just so you will always feel guilty enjoying yourself around me, let me tell you what i can't have anymore. no more coffee, liquor, tobacco (which needed to go anyway), fried foods, overly processed foods, tomatoes and citrus fruits, or greasy and oily foods. from what i can tell, i can still have beer in moderation, so i won't be giving up the bottle anytime soon. the craziest thing about the diet is that it mainly relegates me to much healthier food. and from what i understand, as i get better, i may be able to expand what i eat, as long as the portions remain smaller. basically, the prescription is "don't be a relentless consumer." the most difficult thing to lose has been coffee and tobacco--i need my legal addictive stimulants.

the most surprising thing about all of this was that--save the moment i wake up--missing out on caffeine hasn't been that bad. i hope to get to the point where i can have a cup of coffee and smoke my pipe every now and again, but i seem to be functioning close to normal for now. getting less jittery late in the morning is probably a good thing as well.

this will of course sound trite, but trying to shed these things over the past two weeks has made me realize the extent to which i cling to consumption for happiness. it feels like i have been just waiting for the next thing to eat, whether it be food, coffee, alcohol, movies, music or even what i could acquire from friendships. the thing that is so bizarre is that i don't typically miss any of the prohibited foods/stimulants in particular. every once in a while, i miss a giant greasy slice of pizza or fresh coffee. but mostly, i just want something in general. it seems like the thing i miss is unchecked consumption, the subject of is irrelevant.

so here's to turning new leafs, even if forced to do so.

confession

i have a confession. i publicly decry good bands that have attained popularity in a smug attempt to appear too "indie" or concerned with originality to be impressed.

i know, many of us put up some front regarding music that allows our tastes to seem somehow more informed. but a recent article from pitchfork about coldplay made me realize just how stupid and deep my hypocrisy runs (ironically, most of my snobbishness is encouraged by pitchfork).

a few months ago, my friend will asked me if had listened to the new coldplay album because he really liked it. without hesitation, i produced some lame quip that none of coldplay's songs make any sense (which is actually true, but irrelevant).

like any sane person, he responded that half the bands we listen to make no sense (if he recommends a band, i like it without fail, so he knows my music well). i think at that point i sputtered an inane response under my breath about how i was "just over their style" while i fumbled for a rational response in vain. i believe i tired to change the subject next.

what is so despicable is that i finally listened to the album (after a recommendation by another will) and liked it. of course, most of their songs still don't make sense. their thinly veiled and esoteric political statements just make me angry. but the music is still good. see, why couldn't i have said that to my friend and just enjoyed the music? 

this is just part of a wider trend in my life of making statements which sound good based on a preconceived notion of "true" art, political sensibilities, or lifestyle in general and then scrambling after the fact to find the reason behind them. why not just state up front what my personal taste is rather than perversely pretend there is empirical evidence behind it? i guess the need to feel important, original, or informed outweighs the simple pleasure of enjoying music with friends. 

it's great to have an opinion and even to have reasons for it. to portray them as anything other than taste is foolish. anyway, feel free to mock me whenever you hear self-important sounding speech.

good riddance

"and now, the end is near..."

 for years many americans had been waiting for yesterday. for my part, i have to confess to voting for the guy...twice. twice?! yes.  i was 18 in 2000. who knew anything then? the second time around, i guess i should have known better...but what option did i really have?

but anyway, this post is not a justification, but more of a farewell. let's reflect on what we're going to miss about the guy. according to him, history will bear out his decisions, so we'll let them stand for themselves for now.

here's my list of w's more redeeming qualities:

style. the guy couldn't say abu ghraib to save a million people's lives. but then, who could? he laughed like such a goof ball--he had that affable style.

consistency. even if he was sticking to the most asinine position conceivable, you knew he'd be there the next day as well. it was mostly a fault, but every once in a while, you could appreciate him for it.

no terror attacks. that he thought this was the only relevant job to his presidency was a mistake. we're still learning about the sacrifices this country is making in the name of security. but on the surface, you got to hand it to the man. hopefully, the trend will continue and we'll see that we can properly strike the balance between freedom and security. 

"regret's, i've had a few; but then again, too few to mention..."

at this point, i don't feel spouting off the litany of decisions we should be angry over. while i'm eager for our new president to take office, i fear that no one can bear the burden placed on him. but i appreciated his inauguration speech and now i just want to appreciate the moment in american history. now he'll have to really be president. let's hope that in 8 years, his list of redeeming qualities will be longer than our previous president.

speaking of 'hope,' can we put a temporary ban on that word and 'change,' too? seriously. they need some time to breathe and recover their meaning. 

in that spirit, i'll start writing about something worthwhile. last night, i threw a little new president party. i encouraged people to dress up becuase why go to a party if you're dressed up? we had a good time. here are some 'introspective' pictures from the evening. 

snow days

snow days used to mean alot in my world. now, aside from asthetic value, they mean next to nothing . even at work, they offered the promise of at least a late start--that can throw off your entire day, in a good way. 

now, snow days really do mean nothing. i get up, make some coffee. look at the dog--should i walk her? no. sit at the desk. "oh look, it's snowing. that's pretty."

unless the snow turned into freezing rain that anchored itself to the power or internet lines and the extra weight pushed them to braking point...nothing.

look at it, even the fake google weather picture looks more appealing.

elections

we're finally approaching zero hour. four years ago these nuts began announcing their "exploratory committees," which i think is the political equivalent of a debutante ball. i guess we only have ourselves to thank for paying attention.

politics is a pretty dirty business. talking about is typically the equivalent of driving a dump trunk through the celica of whatever conversation you were having. because i mentioned my candidate in an earlier post, i thought i'd go into the reasons i got behind him in this one. i even had the damn thing typed up. in the end, the dump truck was too big, even for me. i gave up. it just sounded too tired.

i've been fed up with the "election question" for a while now. i burned myself out way too early pouring over the caucus and real clear politics. by the time clinton and obama got to their third debate, the media's campaign catchphrases had become torture devices. the words "pantsuit" and "change" made me want to drown myself in one of those plastic kiddie pools. don't ask why, it just seemed dramatic.

then there was romney and mccain. one was the old guy that everybody liked to talk about as if he was already dead, praising his service to the country. the other everyone wished would play dead. do you remember when the big news story was that romney had illegal immigrants working at his house? are you serious?

yeah, that was back in february or march. i was tired of it then. my exasperation turned to anger, and i turned to apathy and cheap beer to deal with it. sadly the race went on, and sadder still, i followed it more and more. even though i'd heard the candidate positions on all the big issues, it became vitally important to read all the latest articles. why did he say this? what does the absence of that mean? how many point will that cost in the national average? those were the questions.

so instead of lambasting you with my expertly formed political opinoins, i think i'll throw all my energies into the local elections. all i know now is that we're electing a new governor and that somebody want me to vote 'yes on a,' which i'm pretty sure just puts a cap on the amount of casinos we can have and how the money is spent. gambling for education, that makes sense...

on blogging and voice

what is your desired 'voice' when you write? other than 5 pages of a half-ass sci-fi novels, i didn't do much writing before the blog world took over. and i don't really think i can count lame history papers on the spanish armada or why eisenhower was really a genius for letting the ruskies take berlin...

the more i write on blogspot, the more i've been thinking about the idea of voice. i know from the two literature courses i've had over the age of 18, that a writer's voice is typically pretty specific. kind of like its audible counterpart. the thing that drives me crazy about this concept is that there is a voice i want to have and voice that i actually have.

but my desire is subliminal. typically, this is how it works. walking down the street (more likely, sitting on the couch), i hatch an idea that sounds interesting to me. at that moment, i begin to imagine how i would write the post with my desired voice. my desired voice is a casual genius. an offhand observer of the world, he's sharp, but never overbearing. he knows the game has been going on for years, so he's naturally cynical, but not depressed--he realizes the value of humor. he has a ready knowledge and wisdom about nearly everything and can candidly discuss any subject intelligently. but since he doesn't need to impress you, he feels comfortable talking about whatever subject interests him at the moment, no matter how trivial. since he is such an amazing person, whatever interests him is going to be damn interesting to his readers.

then, i actually sit down to type up a post. what comes out is shockingly different: trite, random, insular, and all around hastily written. i usually get distracted or bored toward the end of my posts and cut them short out of laziness. as much as i'd like to think of myself as a great undescovered writer, blogging his way to relevance, i'm just like the other 99% of the people with blogs--a self-absorbed nerd with spare time.

but why is it so hard to be honest? if i know i'm not the writer i want to be, why can't i at least set out to be turthful? it would seem far simpler to write from my own perspective than from the artificial one.

i'm guessing this is where those who actually know something about writing chime in and say something about why it's so difficult to be a good writer because of the difficulty writing the truth. i'm not exactly sure what the saying is, but isn't there something that says that all beauty is truth? i think so.

i just realized lewis has a great quote on this and found it here.

Even in literature and art, no man who bothers about originality will ever be original: whereas if you simply try to tell the truth (without caring twopence how often it has been told before) you will, nine times out of ten, become original without ever having noticed it.

C. S. Lewis