Monday, January 26, 2009

Sometimes when I think of her name, and its only a game, and I need you...

I happened to mention in another internet medium that I was listening to covers of old Yaz/Yazoo songs. One of my sisters perked up and wanted copies. Here's a few versions of Only You:

Yazoo - Only You - the original, in case you were too young, too old, or didn't have older sisters whose music you could borrow.

Slut - Only You Unfortunately named band, great cover. Usually my favorite (see below)

Even in Blackouts - Only You Sometimes this one is my favorite. I like the female vocals, and the slightly folksy sound, and upbeat tempo.

Good Books - Only You - Brilliant, slow, almost goth-synth interpretation. Imagine an awesome 80s video made in Berlin in the rain with big hair and vinyl trenchcoats, and you're halfway there. My favorite if I'm in a certain 80s mood.

Freezepop - Only You - Not quite on the same level as the others, but worth including. The slight harmonization on the vocals is nice, though. Also, nice synth bridge, if you're into that sort of thing. And I know you are.

No guarantee on how long I'll keep these up, so get while the gettin's good.

Monday, January 05, 2009

The 16 things post

Normally I stay away from memes. But there's one going around on Facebook where you post 16 things people probably don't know about you (or maybe it had some other purpose originally; that reflects what it's become). Anyway, I've learned some pretty interesting things about friends I haven't seen in forever, and decided maybe I could come up with a few things to write about myself. It took far longer than I anticipated; I don't do very well at things like this, it turns out. If these are interesting to you, maybe you'll post 16 or so things about yourself in turn. I'll enjoy reading them if you do.

1) I do all my brainstorming on either index cards or on graph paper; irrespective of whether anything might need to be graphed or kept in a portable form. This was done on an index card.
2) I prefer to know a great deal about a situation; as much as can possibly be known in advance, and yet I still like to decide and act in the moment.
3) I am a connoisseur of fizzy drinks - I look for new ones to try, and keep a collection of syrups to mix my own concoctions, some of which are quite good.
4) I am more empathic than I usually prefer to let on.
5) My eyes water when it is windy. When I come inside on a blustery day I often appear to have been weeping uncontrollably.
6) I am almost never reading only one book at a time, even when I go days or weeks without sitting down to read.
7) Although physical disorganization in my workspace doesn't bother me, I am a near-compulsive information manager. Part of being a Briggs-Meyer INTP.
8) I have always viewed sports and sporting events as both arbitrary and boring, but I do enjoy a good stadium hot dog, so I don't mind attending them from time to time.
9) I prefer toilet paper to be on the roll-holder such that it is 'overhand'. I didn't ever notice the difference until I read a friend's blog post where he mentioned his preference for this, and then I started noticing and then preferring it. Maybe reading this will do the same to you?
10) I believe there is meaning in dreams, and I write them down when I can and usually call my father after a particularly vivid dream to talk it over with him.
11) #11 is classified.
12) I have no form of musical talent whatsoever except perhaps taste.
13) I keep phone numbers and other important information in a small notebook (graph paper, naturally). It turns out in this particular function I prefer analog to digital.
14) Mint toothpaste triggers my gag reflex.
15) After each of my children was born I took them in my arms and sang to them to calm them down while the doctors attended to their mother.
16) I do not like monkeys. I have had nightmares about baboons.

Saturday, January 03, 2009

New piccies.


Christmas 2008
Originally uploaded by Foucalt
Lots of new pics up on ye olde Flickr.

Wednesday, December 31, 2008

Goodreads: Outliers

Outliers: The Story of Success Outliers: The Story of Success by Malcolm Gladwell


My review


rating: 5 of 5 stars
Even better than Blink and The Tipping Point, and a totally addictive read for me - I've been laboring through 3 or 4 books without finishing one for a couple of months now, and I finished this book (~280 pages) within 24 hours of cracking it open. Not everything here is relevant to decisions I'll need to make, but as a parent, a great deal of it actually is quite on-topic. Goes to the top of my recommended books list.


View all my reviews.

Sunday, December 28, 2008

The Old Firm and the Napier Test

An interesting thing about being a clueless American living in England is that online news sites (this one came from a CNN link within Gmail) offer dastardly-sounding headlines like:

Celtic seven clear after Old Firm revenge

Sometimes I click on them, thinking (in this case) "Who are the Celtic seven?", "What were they on trial for?", "The Old Firm got its revenge? Is that the mafia or something?" etc. And then, almost inevitably, its about a sports team. The other day there was a really interesting sounding one that didn't even make any sense to me: Gayle hits 197 as Napier Test ends in draw - I thought (probably subconsciously thrown off by "Gayle") it might somehow be about a hurricane - 197 could be a wind speed, but what the devil is a Napier Test? I must know! Oh, right. Cricket. That most incomprehensible of British sports.

Bonus: Crew injured as speed yacht flips off France -those French are very sensitive to gestures made by passing yachts.

Saturday, December 27, 2008

I love wikipedia.

So I gave them some money. Maybe you should too, if you're looking for a place to be charitable this years-end.

Wikipedia Affiliate Button

Monday, December 22, 2008

A Perrenial Christmas Classic!



Oh yeah, I should mention, some parts possibly Not Safe for Work, but not in a lewd way. In kind of a Schindler's List way.

Thursday, December 18, 2008

Let's clear things up...


_MG_7433.jpg
Originally uploaded by jason hamacher
"You see, I, Jeff Wills, cannot possibly be the Batman, as so many of you have supposed, because as you can plainly see, here we are, appearing together for the first time. Let all these rumours be put to rest, once and for all..."

Friday, December 12, 2008

About getting spiritual answers

(Read comments to previous post if you're just coming to this discussion)

Knowing Coop and Josh both very well, I understand where they are both coming from. Myself, personally, I am more like Josh here. And speaking 'within the tent' of our own religion as we are here, I feel comfortable saying that although my sentiments agree with Josh, and certainly my understanding of theology is way more like Josh's than like MDH's, my religious practice and faith is likely to remain unaffected.

I have had spiritual experiences that have made it clear to me that I have a stake in and a duty towards the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-Day Saints. That is perhaps not everyone's definition of "testimony", but it's close enough to mine to be operative here.

This means that even though, like Josh, I am more likely to experience these events as a spiritual storm than as a bold confirmation of faith, my faith is that I will weather the storm, and that it will be over soon enough. In that sense, I consider myself fortunate not to be what we might term a 'universalist', for whom all things of faith depend on all other things being infallible. I don't even actually know who MDH is, but I think his or her declarations here but him or her squarely in this category. Maybe he or she would disagree, that's not really the point.

If it isn't fair to use MDH as an example, I'll turn to Coop, who I have had many long discussions on subjects like this with, spanning several decades and many campouts. He and I do not see things the same way, and I accept this about us, treasure it even. (Those of you not of our faith, or not of any faith, just assume for a moment that there are such things as spiritual promptings and personal [bidirectional] communication with the Divine). Coop believes (correct me if I misrepresent, Coop) that 10 times out of 10, if you're in tune with spiritual promptings, you will reach the same answer as everyone else who is in tune with spiritual promptings.

I, quite simply, believe nothing of the kind.I can (indeed, must) separate my belief in God and even my sustainment of the President of the Church from the decisions and day-to-day operations of the Church and from the actions or views of its members. I have to believe that I can pray and receive an answer, and Josh can pray and receive an answer, and Coop and MDH can both pray and receive answers, and each of us can get it heart-and-soul confirmed to us that we're getting the right answer, and all answers can be different. If the other point of view is a theory of Universalist Truth, call this one an idea of Emergent Truth. One is top-down, the other bottom-up.

I'm not sure I'm articulating this very well. Let's just put it out there and see what kind of holes get poked.

Tuesday, December 09, 2008

Politics and Religion, part 2

So, as I mention in the following chat exchange, I've wondered whether any good can come of further discussing the issue. And I've had additional feedback from emails and facebook messages that I've wanted to address, and I have my own sentiments on the issue, which I haven't even really expressed here. Maybe that will come in time. For now, here's a discussion I had this evening with Rob about it:

Rob: btw, you never gave us all a response to your controversial blog post
me: i know. i am a bad blogger. i've been stewing on it, and debating whether anything good can come of further discussion
Rob: i know what you mean. At the same time, i've had to have proxy arguments with megan in order to satisfy me need for further discussion (with her playing the role of your particular viewpoint)
me: did megan and i win?
Rob: no :)
once she got what i was trying to explain, she agreed with me
on the logical/moral scale as opposed to the legal arguments i was trying to make
me: we kept our tax-free status as a religion that doesn't recognize gay marriage forever even in a state that recognizes gay marriage?
btw, that's not a viewpoint i'm actually interested in defending, just one i was pointing out.
Sent at 10:20 PM on Tuesday
Rob: the main gist of my argument with her was that if you believe that the government should not impose a specific set of moral principles on it's people, then you shouldn't support prop 8...
me: or, in fact, oppose it!
Rob: if you believe the gvnmt should be dictating morallity (a perfectly valid and acceptable viewpoint), then by all means support
me: no, I don't believe they should, and so I can take NEITHER side!
Rob: i mostly took umbrage with the people who said they didn't think the gvnmt should be dictating morality, but supported prop 8
me: because if I oppose it, I am supporting the idea that moral acceptance of homosexuality be taught in public school. Which is also dictating morality.
Rob: no, no, no!
prop 8 was not a referendum to set the curriculum!
me: no, it wasn't. but it's failure to pass would have done so nonetheless.
the curriculum isn't put to referendum.
Rob: it could be, if people's concern was with what is taught in school, than that is what the referendum should have been written to disallow
in my opinion :)
which, by the way, would have been much easier to pass i bet
me: well, you're right, but of course referendums are written by the passionate, not the moderate.
Rob: true
Sent at 10:28 PM on Tuesday
me: besides, (a supporter could argue that) the referendum only legislates the centuries-old legal and cultural precedent, not any particular morality. It was not, after all, a referendum to officially recognize gays as sinners.
Sent at 10:29 PM on Tuesday
Rob: i have to argue that no one is standing up to say that gay marriage should be banned because of precedent
me: what ? that's exactly the argument!
Rob: i doubt that is figuring very prominently in most debates on the issue
me: that the 'definition of marriage' is what's being defended!
Sent at 10:32 PM on Tuesday
Rob: i don't know what you mena by that
i was refferring to precedent as an argument
and saying that is not what most people seem to care about
me: right. perhaps neither do the people defending it. but they claim what they're supporting is keeping the word 'marriage' defined as a union between a man and a woman. Which, I'm saying, is claiming that the precedent of that definition should remain.
Sent at 10:34 PM on Tuesday
Rob: yeas, they're claiming the precedent should remain, but i don't think anyone is arguing the precedent should remain BECAUSE its the precedent
the'yre arguing it based on morality, or the arguments you put forth in the blog post, which i find specious
me: ah, well their reasons for arguing it are, I will admit, not grounded in linguistic conservatism.
Rob: ok, now you're just throwing out words
me: you're the one who drew first blood with specious.

So, if I were a bit more conscientious or devoted, you would get more response on this from me in a timely manner. But I rationalize not providing that by saying to myself that it is unlikely to produce, in the end, anything but hurt feelings, as these types of things have a tendency to do when conducted over the internet. I'd love to be wrong about that, but civil internet discussion is a rare and delicate flower. Nevertheless, if you would like to comment further, I am sure you will do so with respect.

Friday, November 28, 2008

Goodreads: His Majesty's Dragon

His Majesty's Dragon (Temeraire, Book 1) His Majesty's Dragon by Naomi Novik


My review


rating: 3 of 5 stars
Although I enjoyed the book, I don't think I'll be picking up the sequels, at least not right away. I did enjoy the juxtaposition of dragon-aviators with the Napoleonic Wars, but the writing isn't all that inspiring and the plot didn't hold any surprises for me. Maybe I'll just stick to Sharpe's and Hornblower for my Napoleonic fiction and D&D for my Draconic inspiration.


View all my reviews.

Friday, November 21, 2008

Politics and Religion

Oh man. Politics and Religion. The two things you should never ever talk about with people you hardly know. And yet here I am, ready to spill some thoughts on both together. Right now I barely have any contact with US News at just about anything less than the presidential election level. So unless I go looking for it (I don't), I end up hearing most of what's going on in America from friends' blogs, Facebook statuses, Google Reader Shared Items, and the like. And so it is with some trepidation and not a little ignorance that I take an outsider's perspective on the recent events surrounding Proposition 8 in California, and the role of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints in the passing of that proposition during this last electoral cycle. In case you don't know me that well, I pertain to that Church.

First a logical exercise:
- The Proposition passed because a majority of California voters passed for it
- Mormons in California do not make up a majority. Or even 5% of the population
- Therefore "The Mormons" didn't make up the deciding vote to make this resolution pass. It was passed by the electorate.

So there's that. However I do gather that the Church was part of a coalition of churches whose public relations campaign may have changed the minds of many other voters. This has, again I gather, caused considerable ire on the part of those who would have preferred that the Proposition go the other way. I have heard tales of people spitting on old ladies on their way to worship, mailing white powder to temples, and have heard about protest signs with slogans like "Help! There's a Mormon in my bedroom!". Of course this kind of negative attention is hurtful, and of course those providing the attention feel that they have been hurt by the Church's stance on the matter. Many had hoped to have their relationships recognized legally as marriages, and those hopes have been at a minimum postponed indefinitely, and at maximum dashed entirely. The way a particular sign makes me cringe simply does not compare. Much has already been said about who is being 'tolerable' and who is not, with accusations flying from both sides, and I see no need to rehash that here (nor will I 'tolerate' it in the comments, should there be any). Like it or not, both sides of the discussion are 'persecuted minorities', the one being denied rights and the other being a scapegoat for the electorate and a 'legal' target for any amount of mockery.

In fact, the whole business is a little surreal, as far from it as I am. The weekend before Election Day, I was at the wedding of a friend, where after the ceremony was finished I spent most of the evening catching up with and having ponderous conversations with a woman who I consider a dear friend, and who happens to be gay. The same weekend I made the acquaintance of a man who I knew immediately that I valued both for his calming Quaker ways and for his quick wit. He happens to be gay, which I suspected but was never mentioned, but he knew almost from the start about my religious convictions. I wonder what subtext there may have been in our interaction that weekend that I was entirely oblivious to. None, I hope. Anyway, that's by way of saying that on my last visit to America, far more time was spent in conversation with gay friends than was spent at church. So part of the internal discussion I've been having as I hear bits and pieces related to this Proposition and its effects has to do with them, and I must admit the possibility that our friendship may be affected, though I hope not.

I do not represent the Church and do not speak for it except as an individual. But from what I percieve, the Church's stance on the issue has nothing at all to do with trying to ruin people's lives or even tell them how to live them. The Church's position has nothing to do with trying to establish laws that govern people's sexual lives, as I see it. It has everything to do with self-preservation, by which I mean that it looks to me as though the Church's concern is that if the State's definition of marriage includes homosexual relationships, there will be a legal precedent for forcing the Church to perform or recognize these marriages, which would be counter to its principles. The doctrine of the Church holds that "the man is not without the woman, neither the woman without the man, in the Lord", and the freedom to act according to this belief (for example, by refusing to perform marriages in the Church or in the Temple for homosexual couples) would be threatened if the State were to recognize and then require religions to recognize an expanded definition of marriage. As I say, I haven't been reading news reports about this, so I don't know how well-covered or how neglected this idea is. I don't even really have any idea as to its truth. But putting myself in the position of the Church, there aren't many reasons to get heavily involved in a potentially unpopular political campaign unless you have something to gain or something to defend from it. I can see nothing at all that the Church stands to gain from its vocalness on the subject. Therefore, in my incomplete logic, it must be defending something. While "the institution of marriage" or "the definition of marriage" are fine things, what the Church has to defend in the matter are its own rights to practice religion as it sees fit. Whether or not you agree that such a thing needs defending in such a manner, my analysis is that is what those who govern Church policy think is at stake.

In many ways I'm glad to be far from the issue. It is a complicated issue, one I can see both sides of and feel empathy for both. I do believe I will stay here while I see how it all plays out. Comment if you will (in fact, please do), but respect those whose convictions do not match your own.

Monday, November 10, 2008

T'beet, or not T'beet; that is the question.



Years ago, when I had time to read lots of cooking blogs, I came across a recipe unlike any I'd seen before. Going back and finding the original entry, I discover this was now more than 4 years ago - every once in a while I'd think about making this, but I never got around to it. This week I bought a chicken with the express purpose of trying it, and MAN was it good. If it sounds good to you, don't wait 4 years like I did before making it. All the ingredients are easy to get, and its a fairly simple recipe, though it does take some planning and a bit of specialized hardware. Some background:

This is T'beet, the traditional Sabbath lunch of Iraqi Jews. Jews are forbidden by religious law from kindling or extinguishing a flame on Saturday, the Jewish day of rest. Accordingly, any meal to be eaten hot on the Sabbath must be set on a fire before sundown the night before. The Jews of Europe have accomodated this imperative with cholent: a slow-cooked stew of meat, beans, and vegetables, which I find utterly revolting. My ancestors relied instead on the middle-eastern staple of rice in composing their Sabbath lunch: a stuffed chicken stewed in tomato sauce and spices and baked into a cake of aromatic basmati rice. After twelve or more hours of cooking, the rice forms a hard, delicious crust on the outside, while the rice surrounding the chicken becomes irresistably tender and absorbs all the flavors in the pot. A rice stuffing within the chicken is the most intense of all: it is heavily spiced and absorbs all the juices of the chicken as it cooks.

As you can see in the above image of T'beet deconstructed, you can have your rice three ways. The rice to the left of the chicken has hardened into a crunchy, nutty shell. At top right, you can see the pillowy rice that surrounds the chicken. At bottom right is the intensely flavored rice from the stuffing. Incidentally, a chicken cooked in this manner emerges from the oven tender enough to cut with a spoon.


Here follows my adaptation:

Recipe: T'beet
Total time to make: about 15 hours. Feeds at least 6.

Ingredients

* 1 whole chicken
* 4 tbsp olive oil
* 1 small-med onion, diced
* 1 plum tomato, diced
* 1 29-oz. can crushed tomatoes or tomato sauce
* Iraqi Jewish five-spice powder, or Dave's Experimental Mexican 5-Spice Powder (see below)
* water
* salt and pepper
* 4 cups basmati rice

Iraqi-Jewish Five Spice Powder:
*2 tsp each of ground cardamom, ground cloves, allspice, cinnamon, and turmeric

Dave's Experimental Mexican 5-Spice (untried, but I think it'd be good)
* 2 tsp each of cumin, chili powder or ground chipotle, coriander, garlic powder, and cinnamon. Plus you'll want some jalapenos, black beans, and corn to add to the rice.

Hardware:
* 5 1/2 Quart Nonstick Oven-Safe or Enameled Dutch Oven
* Medium mixing bowl or plastic ziploc to make the 5-spice in
* Tongs for turning chicken during browning
* Big plate, bigger than the top of your Dutch Oven
* Wooden or non-stick-safe spatula, not flimsy

0) Invite some guests over for lunch on the weekend, unless you need lots of leftovers or have a large family. Do this Thursday.

1) The night before you want to eat this, start by making the 5-spice powder of your choosing. Make a stuffing for the chicken from the diced onion and tomato, 3/4 cup of the rice, 3 tsp of the 5-spice, 1/2 tsp salt, and ~2 Tbsp of the tomato sauce. If your chicken came with giblets, you can dice and include the heart and gizzard (not the liver). Mix in a bowl or ziploc bag and refrigerate.

2) Adjust oven rack to lower shelf. Preheat oven to 250 degrees Fahrenheit, or about 125 Celsius. Rinse the chicken inside and out and pat dry with a paper towel. Salt and pepper the outside of the chicken generously. Place the dutch oven over medium-high heat on the stove and heat the olive oil until it shimmers. Add the chicken, breast side up, and brown on each side until golden brown, rotating with tongs every 3-4 minutes. When all sides have been browned, remove the dutch oven from heat and stuff the chicken loosely with the stuffing. It's OK if there's leftover, no need to cram it all in.

3) Put the chicken back in the dutch oven, breast side down, and return to heat. Add the rest of the tomato sauce, and add water to about 3 inches below the top of the pot. Add the rest of the 5-spice and bring to a boil, then reduce heat and simmer for 15 minutes.

4) Add the remaining rice and any leftover stuffing to the pot, pouring around the sides of the chicken so it doesn't pile up on top. If making the apocryphal Mexican variation, reduce the rice by a cup and add a can of corn, a can of black beans, and some chopped jalapenos and cilantro. Stir in the rice gently to even it out. Place the cover on the dutch oven and put it in the oven. Bake for about 14 hours or so, timing it so it'll be ready as lunch the next day.

5) Bask in the glorious baking aromas all night. In the morning, be sure to go out of your house for some reason for a few minutes so you can smell it all again when you come back in. When it's ready, pull the T'beet out of the oven and rest it on the stovetop for about 10 minutes with the cover removed. Put your big plate over top of it and invert T'beet onto the plate. With luck, most of it, including the delicious outside crusty rice, will go smoothly onto your plate. If not, use your wooden scraper or spatula to get the rest. You may want a second plate on the dinner table anyway for people to put bones on, so for now you can put the rice left in the pot there. Hopefully it looks kinda like this:



6) Serve to your family and guests. You will be able to cut the chicken with a serving spoon. Make sure everyone gets some chicken, and each of the three types of rice: exterior crust, middle rice, and stuffing rice from inside the chicken. Devour.

Thursday, October 30, 2008

Goodreads: The Man Who Was Thursday: A Nightmare

The Man Who Was Thursday: A Nightmare (Modern Library Classics) The Man Who Was Thursday: A Nightmare by G.K. Chesterton


My review


rating: 4 of 5 stars
This is a quick read; under 200 pages. Very clever and eloquent at times, farcical and dark at others. Recommended for your next plane ride.


View all my reviews.

Friday, October 24, 2008

Goodreads: Gordon Ramsay's Healthy Appetite

Gordon Ramsay's Healthy Appetite Gordon Ramsay's Healthy Appetite by Gordon Ramsay


My review


We've only had a chance to try a few recipes out of here so far, but they've all been excellent and have sparked some new ideas. Looking forward to doing a few more!


View all my reviews.