Intent is a fascinating subject

Whilst driving from seeing a renal consultant to work today, a journey of some 90 mins my brain of course decided to wander on matters other than navigating the well worn route being driven. I was looping around the issues associated with "intent".

All sorts of stuff comes out of thinking about it.

For instance, if one says something ... "I intend to do X" and then goes and does "Y" did they really intend to do "X" or did they really intend to do "Y" all along? If so, then does that define the word hypocrite ?

If I say "I intend to trust everything to God" and then go and buy insurance, then I am not trusting that God will look after me. Am I a hyprocrite? Probably.

Is a wedding vow really along the lines of "Do you intend to be faithful to spouse?" and the fact that so many marriages end with infidelity cited as the reason for divorce an example of our ingrained hypocrisy? Is it ok to not do something that you intended to do?

What is the difference between

1. "I intend to do X"

and

2. "I will do X"

??

It seems ok to break the first but not ok to break the second. Am I smoking drugs again on this? :-)

Your thoughts please on this fascinating (to me) can of worms you have opened !

In the Apollo 13 movie, as their space craft begins its uncertain journey home, Captain Jim Lovell (Tom Hanks) asks his imperiled crew, “Gentlemen, what are your intentions? ...

+++

Yes I think that 4am is the quietest time in most places in the UK also. But I'm so aware that it's all relative to where you are, I think more globally now - and with God how can you ever feel lonely anyway :-) Plus, I suspect that all of our ancestors (in the human sense - not necessarily our childrens children, but anyone's childrens children) are studying us. On the drive today - once I was looped out on "intent" - it seemed natural that there will be so many googlezillion humans in the future that each of us with be a project for - I dunno - say a whole planet. This planet studies the life of Bagwell -- looking back through time at every moment of his existence - in a read-only fashion of course - like his life as we might watch a DVD, they cannot interact with you for reasons of causality. Seems obvious to me that this will happen, the maths is good to do so.

Okay so I'm nuts.

Intentionally Intent

You wrote:

Hmm interesting. Maybe this is another one of my hang-ups with organized religion, it's too intentional for my tastes, it's a good job that God is above all religions :-)

You've had a pretty bad experience with "organized religion," haven't you? I can't say I blame you ... I've not been all that impressed myself.

Frankly, I've come to dislike the term "religion," and I don't use it in reference to myself. "Religion" to me means ritual and ceremony. There's nothing inherently wrong with ceremony ... but it's just way too easy to allow a supporting actor like "ceremony" to take center stage.

That said, a completely unstructured faith is probably equally as difficult to navigate.

So what's the answer?

I haven't a clue.

Loneliest Time of Day?

I've oftened pondered this question -- what is the loneliest time of day. I suspect it varies from person to person, but for me it's between the hours of about 2:30am and 4:00am. That's when the world seems to shut down. Along about 4:00-ish the world wakes back up.

Each year, when we go to close my cottage, we drive all night long. The traffic is fairly robust until midnight or so, and then it starts to taper off. But around 3:00am is when it gets eerie. I've driven miles on Canadian freeways where I was the only one -- nobody behind me, nobody in front, nobody coming from the other direction. Then, as I said, about 4:00, 4:30am things start picking up again.

But for that hour or so it's the loneliest.

Cucumbers

I love the darn things. In the last few months I've discovered -- or rediscovered? -- how good the things are. One of my favorite snacks now is a cucumber sandwich -- sliced cucumbers, a bit of mayo and a slice of cheese. When I want more of a meal, I'll fry an egg and put it on there.

Years ago, when my family moved from the city to the country (that was 1969 for those who wish to count the years), we planted a garden on our newly acquired country land. We laid in 70 tomato plants and something like 15 or 20 cucumber plants. My, oh my, oh my ... did mother nature produce a bountiful crop. We couldn't eat the tomatoes fast enough ... many rotted on the vine. Our dog at the time loved to wade into the garden, pick a tomato, and then go eat it on the grass somewhere. But the cucumbers were the amazing thing ... bushels of them. My grandmother pickled as much as she could. We gave away tons. And still, cucumbers everywhere.

Why do I mention this? Because yesterday for lunch I had a tuna sandwhich with cucumbers.

This is serious bloggin' going on here ... serious stuff indeed.

Best Laid Plans

You wrote:

Interesting, may I ask why you are glad that you did? Maybe God intended something else for you but you used your will to thwart his plans? The point I am making is along the lines of the best made plans of man go astray -- perhaps we should not try to bend something to our will? Who knows, perhaps you and/or the Mrs would have met someone else (or not) and have been even happier? Isn't intent potentially a doubled-edged sword?

I was operating from a broader framework of Biblical understanding -- and this was before I was a professing Christian. As you know, I was divorced once before. One of the things I carried into my second marriage from the wreckage of my first was the notion that marriage is more than a convenient relationship between two people. I hadn't yet come to the understanding of it being a convenant made before God, with God. But I did have a sense -- divine insight? -- that if I were to marry Lisa that I had to first consider very carefully the gravity of the commitment. I really did do some soul searching prior to marrying her.

During our period of trouble, there were many places where I could easily have walked away and been perfectly justified in doing so. But again and again I kept coming back to a vague sense of commitment, and I don't mean to use that word in a way that conveys merely obligation. Had you asked me at that time, I wouldn't have been able to tie it directly to the notion of a convenental relationship between me, Lisa and the Lord. But perhaps that's what was given me to get us through that patch so we can be where we are now.

* * *
I took no offense to your comment about presentations. :-)

I've been thinking about my presentation style, and what I do relative to what the consultant guy the other day was talking about. I use humor, but never the "here's a joke" variety, and never to start the presentation. That's way, way too risky -- and particularly so for someone who's nervous to begin with. (Which is why I feel the consultant guy's pitch was overplaying the humor angle too much.) There is nothing worse that a failed joke, and it'll suck the lifeblood out of a speaker. The pros can shake it off, but a newbie will be rattled to the bones. Better, I think, to avoid that until the person has come to figure out what humor they can deliver comfortably.

For me, that's a measured dose of self-deprecating humor. For example, I will admit to embarrassing techncial mistakes I've done -- spending two days debugging a problem that turned out to be something really simple and trivial. But even that I measure out carefully. I sometimes crack small jokes about some shortcoming of the IBM product, but it's always about some trivial, peripheral thing ... never a core element of the product. I never joke about Microsoft or other competitors -- too risky.

The better advice for newbie presenters would be, I think, to err on the side of gracious humility. Don't try to be a rock star; don't try to be a funny-man. Just be sincere and helpful. It's a hard-hearted person who rejects that from a person.

* * *
I can't for the life of me regain my sleep patterns after being in China for a week. Ever since coming back I've been waking up at midnight and not being able to get back to sleep. Tonight was the same story -- asleep at 10:30pm ... awake at 1:00am and now it's 4:30 and I'm still up.

When you come to the U.S. for an extended stay -- one week or so -- and then go back east to the U.K, do you have trouble re-adjusting?

Intentionality :-)

You wrote:

8 years ago now I had to work very hard -- intentionally and deliberately -- to keep the marriage afloat. I'm thankful I did. It taught me the value of intentionality

Interesting, may I ask why you are glad that you did? Maybe God intended something else for you but you used your will to thwart his plans? The point I am making is along the lines of the best made plans of man go astray -- perhaps we should not try to bend something to our will? Who knows, perhaps you and/or the Mrs would have met someone else (or not) and have been even happier? Isn't intent potentially a doubled-edged sword?

Hmm interesting. Maybe this is another one of my hang-ups with organized religion, it's too intentional for my tastes, it's a good job that God is above all religions :-)

PS. In my previous post I was referring to the over-use of humour in presentations an indication that the presenter is looking for approval ("I don't know my stuff so I'll crack some jokes") - not related to your good self of course, who does know his stuff deeply.

Intent

I'm not so sure I agree with your position on "intent." The example you provided -- the person on a business trip who intended to be faithful to his wife but ended up not being faithful -- is really a failure of intent. Or, it makes me wonder if they really had the intent to begin with.

I believe what Dallas Willard is getting at with the inclusion of the word "intent" in his definition of love is akin to what Jesus was getting to in Matthew 5:46-47:

If you love those who love you, what reward will you get? Are not even the tax collectors doing that? And if you greet only your brothers, what are you doing more than others? Do not even pagans do that? (Matthew 5:46-47, NIV)

Loving those who love you is a non-intentional, reflexive thing. Loving those who hate you is hard. It doesn't come naturally. It certainly requires intent. I can't do it ... not yet, anyway.

My point -- and I believe Willard's as well -- is this: it's possible for me to by chance act for the good of another. But it's a dicey game. Better to deliberately consider the commitment and perform intentionally than to not and hope things work out okay. Too many marriages today fail, I believe, because people go into them and operate within them without the clear intent to work to make it successful. I speak from some experience -- 8 years ago now I had to work very hard -- intentionally and deliberately -- to keep the marriage afloat. I'm thankful I did. It taught me the value of intentionality.

Is that a word? :-)

Incentivize! :-)

Presentations

I don't really like presentations, either going to them, or giving them. What ever really comes of them? Usually nothing important. A lot of good presenters are clearly (and in some cases desperately) seeking approval from their audience. I used to be like that but don't care that much anymore, I guess I found the acceptance/approval that I was looking for :-) The trouble is that on this "emperor is not butt naked" merry go round we find ourselves on we are expected to stand up and present - these days before I start I give a wink and a nod to my descendents who are about to watch me make a fool of myself.

+++

To me the problem with Mr Dallas' definition of love *is* the use of the word intent. It's a common get-out clause used by Christians and non-Christians alike

"Well I did intend to do X but I ended up doing Y".

If for example - on a business trip - you end up getting drunk and sleeping with another woman does that mean that you do not love your wife? By Dallas' definition the answer is "no" you still love your wife - because you never set out to be unfaithful, your intention was to be faithful, even though you ended up eating the chocolate cake (sorry to be mixing those metaphors!)

Whereas in actual fact I believe that it would mean that you did not love your wife, otherwise how could you do it?

I don't think I could "cheat" on my daughter under any circumstances, but have I ever met a woman where, given the right circumstances, I would not lie to her, perhaps only a white one? I doubt it.

The thing between a man and a woman, or between a man and Jesus, is a different type of "love" compared to that between a parent and a child in terms of honesty, well it is for me anyway. If we were really honest and open with Jesus would we do the things we do? No, we'd be off preaching his word to the unwashed masses.

For my attempt at defining love see my post on New Years eve 2005:

Love to me is when the other persons happiness is more important than my own, I'm not sure that love can be fully expressed when there is sex involved, which is the opposite to what most people would say. But I think physical relations detract from love rather than enhance it. Okay I know this is an unpopular view, but I think it's backed up in part by The Bible. At least that bit was innerant :-) Love is part and parcel with missing someone when they are not around. Love can be whatever you define it to be, but it's always a positive thing, positive being relative of course. Hmmm, I realise I failed to define love. It's a configuration of mind ... a welcome sensory imput ... a positive thing.

"Great Technical Presentations"

Yesterday at SHARE I attended a "personal development" session titled, "How to Give a Great Technical Presentation." It was given by a guy who apparently has a consulting business that helps people and companies be more effective speakers and such. Overall it was fairly interesting. I learned a few things. The speaker also confirmed many things I already knew about giving presentations.

One thing I picked up and will use is the tactic of turning OFF the Powerpoint display when I want to draw the attention of the audience back to me to emphasize some point. With a blank screen people have nowhere to focus but back on the speaker. He used black slides in his presentation at key points to do just that. Clever ... I like that.

I had some disagreement with his emphasis on humor. I'm all for humor in a presentation, but it has to be humor that is easy and natural for the speaker, and it has to be appropriate for the setting. Those are nuances I'm sure the speaker yesterday knew, but he didn't point them out in the presentation.

Finally, he was pointing out that non-Powerpoint things can be used for visual aids. To demonstrate, he used Lego blocks to demonstrate the architecture of the iSeries system. It was effective, I'll admit. But it's also something you do only if you're certain the audience will accept that. I've been in more than a few situations where had I broken out a set of Lego blocks I would have been kicked out of the room. Props like that can be perceived as condescending and trivial by some.

Mediocrity

Nope, not yet accepted it. Still fighting it hard. :-) and :-( simultaneously.

Definition of Love

I was listening to an MP3 on Christian Discipleship and the speaker -- Dallas Willard -- used this definition for love:

Acting with intent to do what is right and good for the object

He made it a point to sharply distinguish that from "desire." His example was chocolate cake. He says he does not love chocolate cake. He does not intend to do what is right and good for the chocolate cake. He intends to eat the chocolate cake. That's desire.

He points out that society today horribly confuses the two. I believe he's correct.

I know there can be lots of discussion around the words "right" and "good."

Desire and love can intersect, can they not? Is it not possible for me to both love my wife and to desire her? I would think so.

I like his inclusion of the words "with intent." I believe that is central to the concept he's trying to convey here.

Durka Durka Mohammed Jihad! Sherpa Sherpa Bak Allah

Those hurricane pics you posted a while back turned up on the urban legends site as "Real photos, inaccurate description"

http://www.snopes.com/photos/natural/storm.asp

+++

My vacation was - well - just marvellous. 14 nights with my daughter (a new record) - we stayed in hotels and holiday camps around the UK - two small hiccups in that I lost my credit card at one point (d'oh) and also got a flat tyre (or tire you write). As you may recall from a previous missive the STUPID GERMAN CAR that I have does not have a spare so we had to call the rescue wagon out. After 90 mins it turned up and began to load my VW, after 91 mins a second rescue wagon arrived from an entirely different company. Katherine vidoe'd everything and you can hear her muttering "idiots" over the scene - who did she learn that from then? So now I have guilt. It is not good to be back at work, but it's a living.

+++

Death of business travel? According to Google Earth there are quite a few private airfields in the USA, why don't you form a networking website for them, like a "park and ride" or a "park and fly"? The alternative is to lube up for the hand that is coming to search your orifices at the airport.

I agree with what you are saying about the loony left attacking the soft targets, which are invariably the middle-class, white male Christians. In the UK for example we are the group most hounded for child support, because we are the most likely to pay. I have never missed a payment for my daughter, and always pay much more than the state mandates, my daughters half sister on the other hand has a middle eastern muslim father and he has never MADE a payment and doesn't bother to see her at all. Admittedly this is one data point but it's not untypical (atypical?) from what I read, and see.

Anyway I am glad that China was an ok trip for you, is the Chinese food there as good as in the UK? Do folks still carry the Mao Black Book?

+++

50 funniest comedies - you have to see Some Like It Hot and The Apartment. Both of those movies are in my all time top 100. By coincidence , Katherine and I watched GroundHog Day during our vacation. She loved the idea of gaining knowledge about a person (through meeting them) and then using it to gain some kind of advantage - the next day when the person meets you for the first time but you know lots about them and they think you're wonderful - Godlike.

Then she was a little nervous that she was stuck in a Groundhog Day - but I assured her that most probably she was not.

One recent movie that has to be on such a list is Team America - World Police. For me, this is probably the funniest movie ever made. The protagonist puppet "Gary" walks up to the door of the terrorist stronghold he is trying to infiltrate, in "disguise" - dressed in a western leather jacket and jeans, but with a "valmoricafied" face (with black cotton wool stuck haphazardly to it) and has to "act his way in". Too funny.

Note: I was talking to an American who kept using the word "incentivize" - I asked him why he did not use the word "incent" for the same purpose> He had no answer and he carried on using "incentivize" - what a waste of 5 characters and so inelegant.

EVERYONE has seen Trading Places !

I realized that the 70/30 nature vs nurture split was only arrived at after raising the test subjects on the Earth. I go back to Heinlein's book and ask what would the difference would be in two identical twins raised by different species? Having said that, Tarzan was still an ok guy so I dunno maybe 70/30 is close to being correct :-)

+++

SOA - is it something that will last - or will it be gone gone gone by say 2010?

+++

Humiliation - I believe that one needs just enough self respect to know how to treat others as they wish be treated, no more or less. Many have much more - an unhealthy self respect, this often leads to exploitation, social classes and financial wealth. If we were really to follow the teachings of Jesus we would give up our self respect much more than we do, but we don't do we?

+++

Have you accepted your mediocrity yet?

Back from China -- Death of Business Travel

I am safely back from China, though the logistics of my return flight were less than successfully executed. But I'm home. I'm off to Baltimore tomorrow.

As you no doubt know, additional travel restrictions have been imposed. I read that on flights from the U.K., laptop computers are not permitted in carry-on. Here in the United States, we are not permitted to carry any "liquid or gels of any type or form" on board. Unless one wishes to purchase all one's toiletries at their destination, that means all luggage is now checked.

Of course, how an explosive device made of liquid or gel is any safer in checked baggage as opposed to carry on is a mystery to me. Perhaps their concern is that someone could manually ignite a flammable liquid or gel, whereas in checked it would require a timer device or remote detonation device which presumably would be caught in security screening.

To that I offer you the following:

• On my trip to China I carried with me a Cisco VPN device and a small NetGear 10/100 Ethernet switch, along with a 25' coiled length of Ethernet cable. Nobody so much as asked about that stuff.
• At LAX my flight from there to Tucson was subject to what must have been an experimental screening process whereby every passenger's carry-on was searched. Tucson is a city of retirees and old people ... and the flight reflected this. Imagine the sight: 80 year old white women having their handbags searched for liquids and gels.
• One gentleman on the flight to Tucson had no carry-on baggage at all. Smart man. He was waved through with hardly a passing glance. I thought, "Is it not possible he has some liquid or gel substance hidden in his socks? Or somewhere on his person?" But of course body searches is a different realm from baggage searches, so it's not considered.
• While all this was going on, the flight at the next gate was not subject to such close scrutiny. There I witnessed two very nervous young men, of middle-eastern origin it appeared, traveling together, given hardly a second look as they boarded their flight. What made me think they were nervous? They tried to board the plane during "pre-boarding" ... and were turned away. They stepped back only two feet and continued to wait right up next to the boarding station, rather than stepping away 10 or 15 feet as any other person would do. They fidgeted.
  

The terrorists have won. Our deeply-entrenched sense of "inclusiveness" and "understanding" has provided the trojan horse in which the Islamic terrorists have deftly exploited. The answer is not to screen everyone, but to screen only those who pose the highest risk. But they are not. Instead, the authorities here are so afraid of charges of "profiling" that they focus instead rather heavily on middle-aged white men so they have "cover" to defend themselves against the charges. I know this from personal experience ... after 9/11 I was subject to a more-than-random frequency of supplementary searches. How much more than random? In the two months following 9/11 I flew perhaps 12 times. I was pulled aside all 12 times. I watched most minorities scoot by without any searching at all.

The answer is simple: Young men from middle-eastern extraction are the highest risk category and should be subject to extreme scrutiny. After that, other risk factors can be taken into account: young males (18 - 25), young men with beards (Muslim men generally do not shave), young men not traveling with women and children.

Note: I'm well aware that some terrorists have been women, and I'm well aware that in the sick, depraved mind of the Islamicism a child can be utilized as an instrument of death. The issue is focusing on the highest risk first, then as resources permit focus on the marginal risks.

If they simply clamp down more and more on what can be brought on board a plane, the terrorists will simply focus on what's left -- and anything can be made dangerous. I'm sure the Islamic Terrorists would love to see the various airlines go out of business as more and more people opt not to travel.

Other solutions to air travel are available. As air travel becomes more difficult, it becomes easier to justify those other solutions.

Off to China

I'm at the Crowne Plaza hotel right next to LAX. My flight for China leaves in a few hours. The weather looks okay. But I am, as always, nervous. And I have a cold that seems to be getting worse. Wish me luck!

50 Funniest Comedies

This is from some magazine, and is in chronological order, rather then "best to least-best." I've indicated my quick summaries. (No comment means I never saw it.)

• SAFETY LAST (1923)
• THE GOLD RUSH (1925)
• THE GENERAL (1927)
• DUCK SOUP (1933)
• IT HAPPENED ONE NIGHT (1934)
• A NIGHT AT THE OPERA (1935)
  
• MY MAN GODFREY (1936)
  
• THE AWFUL TRUTH (1937)
  
• BRINGING UP BABY (1938)
  
• HIS GIRL FRIDAY (1940)
• A CHUMP AT OXFORD (1940)
• THE BANK DICK (1940)
• TO BE OR NOT TO BE (1942)
• ROAD TO MOROCCO (1942)
• THE MIRACLE OF MORGAN'S CREEK (1944)
• THE LADYKILLERS (1955)
• BIG DEAL ON MADONNA STREET (1958)
• SOME LIKE IT HOT (1959)
• THE APARTMENT (1690)
• DR. STRANGELOVE (1964) -- I like this very much, but I think George C. Scott is the real reason this was a great movie. Peter Sellers was good, but Scott stole the show.
  
• A SHOT IN THE DARK (1964)
• THE PRODUCERS (1968)
• MASH (1970) -- I watched this on TV a little while back. It still works, but it definitely carries with it the 1970 "feel" to it.
  
• SLEEPER (1973) -- I saw it way back when, but not since. I recall it being funny to my 14-year-old brain. I suspect I would find it less so now.
  
• BLAZING SADDLES (1974) -- Has many classically funny moments. The humor can be somewhat adolescent at times, which is why I loved it in the 1970's. It's a bit dated now.
  
• YOUNG FRANKENSTEIN (1974) -- I never saw what was so great about this.
  
• MONTY PYTHON AND THE HOLY GRAIL (1979) -- The first time I watched this I fell out of my seat and could barely breathe for laughing so hard. I've since seen it maybe 10 or 12 times. The humor is a bit thin now, but it does stand up as a classic movie.
  
• THE SUNSHINE BOYS (1975)
• ANNIE HALL (1977)
• NATIONAL LAMPOON'S ANIMAL HOUSE (1978) -- They did such a fine job projecting this movie back to the early 1960's college setting that it doesn't get old. I can still watch this and enjoy it.
  
• HEAVEN CAN WAIT (1978)
• THE IN LAWS (1979)
• THE JERK (1979)
• AIRPLANE! (1980) -- Another movie with some classic moments. I can still watch it, but it tends to drag a bit now. The scene with Barbara Billingsly talking "jive" will endure forever.
  
• CADDYSHACK (1980) -- I like this, but not as much as some others. I don't think this is as "classic for the ages" as others.
  
• PRIVATE BENJAMIN (1980) -- I saw it, but have forgotten it. Enough said.
  
• MY FAVORITE YEAR (1982)
• TRADING PLACES (1983) -- I mentioned this in my prior post. Okay, but not great.
  
• NATIONAL LAMPOON'S VACATION (1983)
• THIS IS SPINAL TAP (1984) -- Stands the test of time as being one of the more clever and smart comedies. I've seen it too many times to still find it fresh, but the cleverness of it does not pale in my eyes.
  
• A FISH CALLED WANDA (1988) -- Okay. Not much more in my eyes.
  
• GROUNDHOG DAY (1993) -- I saw this for the first time earlier this year. I found it to be rather un-funny, and with a powerfully dark underlying message. Others claim it's an uplifting message, but I didn't find it so.
  
• AUSTIN POWERS: INTERNATIONAL MAN OF MYSTERY (1997) -- Another that was entirely unique and clever.
  
• THE BIG LEBOWSKI (1998)
• THERE'S SOMETHING ABOUT MARY (1998) -- I can only take so much of Ben Stiller.
  
• RUSHMORE (1998)
• BEST IN SHOW (2000) -- This is a great movie ... the humor is very, very subtle. I really enjoyed this. I doubt I could watch it a dozen times, but for a first-time watch it is truly clever.
  
• ZOOLANDER (2001)
• WEDDING CRASHERS (2005)
• THE 40-YEAR-OLD VIRGIN (2005) -- I shouldn't have, but darn it, I laughed uncontrollably over some of the lines in this.

One movie many like but I hated was "Meet The Parents," with Ben Stiller and Robert DeNiro. There was cruelty for the sake of humor I could not easily take. Another in that genre is "The Family Stone," which some say is "dark," but I find simply unpleasant.

Trading Places

Did you ever see the movie with Eddie Murphy, Dan Akroyd and Jamie Lee Curtis? I believe one of the central plot lines of that movie was the "nature vs. nurture" issue. The two rich brothers placed a $1 bet that on-the-street bum Eddie Murphy could, in fact, be transformed through environment and not need to rely entirely on breeding.

I believe there are certain things are genetically controlled. For instance, I doubt I would ever be able to become a person generally disposed to a sunny outlook on things. I can force that outlook for short periods of time, usually as a show, but inside my view of things is almost always rather bleak. I envy those who have the sunnier outlook ... it must be much easier! :-)

* * *
I am in pre-flight nervousness on my way to China. I'm only going for less than a week, yet I have myself worked up into a lather thinking it's for longer and I need to plan for every known provision. I am the silliest traveler of all time.

* * *
How was LegoLand? What else have you done?

Phenotype Genotype

Gunter A Schultz asked:

So ... my question to you ... where would you fall on that scale? What do you think contributes most to the ultimate outcome of a person ... nature or nurture?

I've looked into some of the research behind environmentalism vs heritability and modern University Psychology syllabi still refer to the material of Bouchard and McGue (1981).

The reason I looked into this is because my daughter and her half sister are so different that it made me rethink the effect that genetics has on us, before that, I like you was very much more in favour of the environment playing the strongest role, probably from reading Heinlein's Stranger In a Strange Land - now however I am not so sure.

Anyway the results of the above authors are summed up in the following charts (starting at page 21)

http://ibgwww.colorado.edu/~carey/p4102dir/slidesdir/HGSS_Chapter21_BellCurve.ppt#21

In fact, for the purposes of our particular question here chart 25 is the most useful I think:

http://ibgwww.colorado.edu/~carey/p4102dir/slidesdir/HGSS_Chapter21_BellCurve.ppt#25

The decimal fractions indicate likeness. So if a numerical column has a "1.00" in it, then two candidates (taking the questionnaire-test) would be said to be the same person.. Identical twins raised together are said to be 86% "self" and identical twins raised apart are 72% self. They give a great example of two identical twins separated at birth, one raised in a trailer becomes an alcoholic depressive, the other one raised by loving parents in a rich family with everything going for her -- yes you guessed it -- ends up an alcoholic depressive. For me these data points are interesting but it's these coupled with the observation of my own eyes of my two that leads me to guess that we are roughly speaking 70% dominated by our genes and 30% by our environment.

+++

I love your moon bomb idea and the letter that you received from The US Govt ! What a wonderful piece of memorabilia to keep (what did the first response from them say? I wonder what else you will find as you digitize your past :-)

Do you know that the Earth and Moon revolve around a common point called the Earth-Moon Barycentre (EMB)? It's the centre of mass of the Earth-Moon system (imagine the Earth and Moon on opposite ends of a see-saw, the barycentre is the place on the see-saw where the fulcrum is placed so that the see-saw has zero rotation about the fulcrum). The EMB is within the body of the Earth, about 1700km below the surface, 1700km coincidentally being the radius of the moon :-)

I wonder if a 1m width cable of carbon nanotubes could do the job? Maybe, now I will need to investigate the tensile strength of carbon nanotubes!

+++

I told my daughter about "lies to children" and what it meant (ie. not the "lies" she thought of - but "simplifications") and she asked me to just tell her everything how I believe it to be without simplifying things for her. I said ok and to ask me any question, she asked "Where does pee come from?" (kids!) I told her the full version and after about 30 seconds mulling she said, "OK, you can keep telling me lies-to-children". Priceless!

+++

Today we returned to Legoland !

Moon Bomb

I'm sure I told you how, way back in high school, me and several other dateless geeks drew up plans for a "moon bomb" -- the moon tethered to the earth, with the earth winching in the moon and dropping it smack on the Moscow. We couched the whole thing as part of a science club project and submitted the plans to then President Jimmy Carter. Our submission was done under the pseudonym of "Gunter A. Schultz."

Well, here's the response we finally got back from the U.S. Department of Defense. It's quite humorous:

Page 1
Page 2
Page 3

I wish I still had my "blueprints" ... it was famously silly. I proposed a 1 meter cable stretching from an anchor point somewhere in Nova Scotia. The 1 meter specification was simply a round number. There was absolutely no engineering that went into this effort at all.

Can you imagine Mr. William J. Perry writing this three page response to a bunch of pimply-faced teenagers?

Nature vs. Nurture

Over on my favorite political website -- www.nationalreview.com -- they were having a debate amongst themselves about the degree to which parenting influences children. One contributor, John Derbyshire (English by birth; American citizen now) argued strongly for the majority influence of genetics; Jonah Goldberg took up the position in favor of parenting.

I would agree that genetics will determine the essential makeup of a child -- certainly the physical characteristics such as hair color and eye color -- but also things such as the general disposition (quiet and shy; outgoing and personable). But there is a question of the character of a child that is, I think, forged by the environment.

I malign my parents much at times, but one thing I know for certain is that my father provided me with a strong work ethic, as well as a sense of integrity. Had I been raised by a motorcycle gang bent on lawbreaking, I doubt I would have picked that up.

So ... my question to you ... where would you fall on that scale? What do you think contributes most to the ultimate outcome of a person ... nature or nurture?

SOA Epiphany

The "SOA for Dummies" book made a point that now seems obvious but hadn't before -- that the whole notion of the ESB is really function on top the existing network. For me, that's rather eye-opening ... it suggests that the "Enterprise Service Bus" is not so much a transport-layer technology as a command-and-control technology that runs on top.

You're probably reading this and thinking, "You have a keen grasp of the obvious, Bagwell."

Yeah, well ... :-)

I'm a slow learner, as I said.

Humiliation

I don't recall the exact circumstances this occurred to me, but somewhere I heard someone use the term "humiliation" in a way that implied the normal meaning:

n 1: state of disgrace or loss of self-respect 2: strong feelings of embarrassment [syn: chagrin, mortification] 3: an instance in which you are caused to lose your prestige or self-respect; "he had to undergo one humiliation after another" [syn: mortification] 4: depriving one of self-esteem [syn: abasement] (www.dictionary.com)

It seems to me that the root of the term "humiliation" must be "humility" ... or "to be humbled." And it struck me as interesting that we hold the term "humiliation" to be so negative when the Bible holds being humble as an exhalted state.

Uncertain Reaction

To be honest, I'm not sure what to make of your last post. It's almost as if you were saying that we are part of the universe and part of the eternal thread of time ... and in that we should have no fear.

Maybe I'm just too literal-minded. Or perhaps I'm so deeply creased by cynicism I can't see much beyond my immediate surroundings. I don't really know.

The Litany Against Fear

Frank Herbert, author of the Dune novels, loved his wife very much I think. She took a long time to die of cancer, during that time Herbert wrote Dune. Perhaps it was his wife's condition that led him to elevate the religious sect of women in Dune (The Bene Gesserit) to such great heights. They had this saying they used when they were scared:

"I must not fear.
Fear is the mind-killer.
Fear is the little-death that brings total obliteration.
I will face my fear.
I will permit it to pass over me and through me.
And when it has gone past I will turn the inner eye to see its path.
Where the fear has gone there will be nothing.
Only I will remain."

When the hope is gone there is more than just fear left. There is an understanding that everything you are, everything you are made of has been around for the entire existence of the Universe, and that everything you have done can be seen by all of our future descendents. Each of us who die will be like martyrs - it will be such an uncommon occurence to have actually died. And our childrens childrens children ... will remake us. Fear not, I do not believe that any of us will be lost and you can't get out.

Poor Willy Loman

I'm not as much a fan of the theory of natural selection as are you ... on the scale between genetics and environment, I favor environment a bit more. In other words, I'm not so sure that conditions in my upbringing aren't more a factor in this than my genetics.

In the category of "When Life Gives You Lemons ... Make Lemonade," my cautious nature provides a positive upside: by carefully considering all the details and nuances I generally come to a pretty good understanding of things. Unfortunately, my conclusions are usually finalized days after the customer has already gone with my competitor. But darn it, the conclusion is pretty sound. :-)

* * *
I am not good at crisis management situations for the same reasons. The worst conceivable job for me would be "duty manager" for the crit-sit desk.

* * *
It is raining hard and steady here in Tucson ... a good soaker. It rained much the same yesterday, and later in the day I went for a motorcycle ride out into the back country. What I saw astonished me -- huge "lakes" of standing water; "rivers" flowing through their normally dry riverbeds. What I want to know is this: Where does that water ultimately go? Does it get absorbed into the underground aquifer before it reaches a permanent river?

The water management issue here in the desert southwest fascinates me. I believe that the water present is precious. I do not believe it is in as short a supply as is sometimes suggested. I believe there is a bit of "conservation psychology" at work, which is fine. It's needed ... I see some pretty outrageous examples of water waste.

* * *
The "SOA for Dummies" book arrived ... it's actually a subset of the bigger book: a marketing teaser to buy the bigger version. But it's still very good. I'm generally not a fan of the "Dummies" books. They often write in six pages what could be better summarized in one paragraph. But this book does a fair job. I will probably style my "Intro" presentation around the main concepts offered in this book.

* * *
Report on your travels and adventures in the coming weeks! Tell me was "Lies to Children" you perform. :-)

Death of a Salesman

You wrote:

"If the customer says "X" and I don't understand what they mean by "X," then pretty much everything else they say will be lost."

I got to wondering why this is the case. My thoughts are along these lines:

Assumption: You Bagwell are a bunch of cells that evolved through natural selection.

Following on from that, perhaps in your ancestry, a looooong time ago, one of your ascendents (sic) had a mutated gene (or set of genes) that caused him or her to behave very carefully .. to understand every single aspect of an occurrence before moving on. This gave your line a slight advantage because you remained in safe places and were less exposed to danger, through understanding.

Fast forward to this crazy world we live in, where really there is no danger and food is plentiful. Perhaps you don't do well in those positions where a thick skin and an ability to not notice detail (brushing past valid objections in a sales environment is rewarded) is because you have a "think skin" as opposed to a "thick skin" ?

John McEnroe

After John McEnroe retired from the game of tennis, he earnestly tried to make it big as a rock musician. He failed, quite spectacularly. I read in his autobiography that he got quite depressed about this, so his wife told him something along the lines of:

"Look John, God gave you the talent to be the greatest tennis player on Earth -- now you want to be the greatest rock musician too? John, it doesn't work like that."

My point is that you can't be great at everything, don't take on too much (I don't these days) -- you are great at many things, rejoice in that.

Accepting My Mediocrity

I'm coming to a realization that I'm struggling to assimilate fully into my being -- I am not an extraordinary person. I say that not to fish for compliments, but rather because by comparison to others, particularly in our technical world, I fall far short of their abilities. It's not a question of studying more, or working harder ... I simply don't have the ability to fully grasp complex technical architectures. Pieces of it, yes. The whole enchilada? No.

"That's normal." You might say. Well, perhaps. But somewhere in my psyche I've held this notion that one day I might be considered "extraordinary." I cling to that notion to stave off a sense of insecurity, I suspect. But the conclusion of my own mediocrity has become inevitable, and it's a bitter pill to swallow.

Am I blessed in my present state? Most assuredly. Do I really want to be a high-flying DE, harried by 30 ST windows open at once? Nope. So what's my problem?

This:

If [not extraordinary] then [worthless and therefore vulnerable]

Stupid, isn't it? But that's how my mind works.

In the movie "Moonstruck" (which is my favorite) there's a theme that's echoed by two of the characters (Nicholas Cage playing Ronnie Cammareri, and Vincent Gardenia playing Cosmo Castorini). The two comments were:

• "One day a man comes to realize that his hope for his one dream is gone" (Cage)
  
• "It's a bad day when a man wakes up and realizes his life is built on nothing" (Gardenia)

That's me ... I'm coming to wake up to this realization.

The marriage counselor my wife and I visited back when we were in our rough patch said that there were only two primary emotions: fear and hope. Lose the hope and all that's left is fear.

I know ... our hope is Jesus. I know that intellectually.

I'm still working on knowing that intuitively.

Lies to Children

That was a fascinating article. I mostly agree with what was said, and I agree with the general proposition of crafting explanations based on partial truths. I've tried explaining this to others who build presentations and workshops that the human mind has trouble absorbing facts if it doesn't have a contextual framework in which to place the facts. I don't believe I'm alone in this belief -- I've heard the same thing from others.

For a child, their contextual framework has to be very limited. For example, the distinction between mass and weight is difficult enough for me to grasp let alone a 6 year old. The concept of the heft of something (for lack of a better substitute word for mass or weight) is based on how hard they have to strain to lift it. To them, mass=weight ... same thing; and the notion of gravity having something to do with weight but not mass is just fuse-blowing stuff. Want to watch a child's mind spin? Ask them how much the earth "weighs." The concept of lifting the earth is utterly foreign. The answer you'll get is probably "a lot!" And that'll probably be based on an extrapolation -- my backpack is very heavy; my bed is much bigger than my backpack, so it must be even heavier; my house is bigger still; the earth is way bigger ... therefore, a lot.

Note: I wonder if kids grasp the concept of density. A big block of foam weighs almost nothing. Would a small child who hadn't yet experienced it think they could lift it? I doubt it.

I have a real learning disability in this regard -- if I can't place some new fact in context, I will stop learning anything else that comes along until I get that one point. Honestly, I've lost whole classes because of some point offered at the beginning I didn't get.

That also explains why I do so poorly at sales or consulting. If the customer says "X" and I don't understand what they mean by "X," then pretty much everything else they say will be lost.

And my problem of late is that so much of what's coming my way is new -- I have almost no contextual framework to hang things on. So I'm stumbling about.

Who Moved my Blackberry?

We might have to read this book which comes recommended by a colleague.

+++

Martin Lukes: Who Moved my Blackberry?
by Lucy Kellaway

This novel is a pitch-perfect satire of corporate life in the 21st century. The utterly unloveable Martin Lukes blunders his way through 12 eventful and yet essentially pointless months in the office, trying to follow the entreaties of his life-coach, Pandora, to 'Strive and Thrive!'

Lukes's proudest contribution is inventing the concept of 'creovation' - 'half creativity, half innovation'. 'If the stonemasons building the flagship St Paul's cathedral in London had been a bit more creovative, they might have come up with something less of a cliche than a bog standard dome!' he tells his boss.

+++

My daughter has been studying The Vikings at school and assures me that they lived in monogamous relationships, but perhaps that is just what a Christian School tells nine year olds? (See (my hero): Professor Ian Stewart and his "Lies To Children" statement http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lies-To-Children)

Flower Power

San Francisco is a very nice city ... I believe it is second only to NYC in terms of tourism here in the United States. It is a city that has a dark underbelly, though ... like Las Vegas, I can sense it. It's interesting ... the "darkness" I mention takes different forms, and it's something I can't quite describe. New York is different from Vegas, which is different from San Francisco, which is different from Seattle. When I was last in Seattle I was struck by the empty loneliness of the place. There were lots of people, but I had a general sense of emptiness there.

* * *
I look back on the 1960's "flower power" stuff here in San Francisco and I have to smile. How utterly naive. It never occurred to them that if the whole world sat around in the park, smoking dope and strumming on a guitar ... there would be no food, no housing, no park.

Years ago I was dating a girl who was somewhat of an environmentalist. One night on TV there was a story of some group of people down in Tennessee "living out in nature" in some semi-communal style. They were sitting around campfires and strumming guitars. She sighed. "Wouldn't it be great if everyone did that?" I looked at her and at that moment I knew our relationship was doomed. "If everyone did that," I said. "The air would be a lot more polluted and there'd quickly be no forests or woods." She gave me a dull look. She didn't comprehend.

I met my lovely bride a short time later while on a business trip to Tampa, Florida. My bride is anything but dull and naive. She is ruthlessly practical ... and cute!

* * *
The wireless service here in my hotel is not very good. It drops the connection too frequently. I'm not using my Sprint wireless EVDO (or whatever it's called) thingy.

* * *
Here in the hotel there's a book on the shelf above the desk called, "The Compact Book of Facts." I was reading it this morning and came across a timeline of major battles throughout history. One that was listed was the "Viking" raids, which got me thinking about another book I read that provided a fictional account a Viking raid on a village. If indeed the Viking men were raised to be such fierce warriors, then they must have had much if not all the tenderness and humanity wiped out of them. How else could they sweep into a village and run their swords through small children, and split women open with their axes?

But this got my mind thinking in another direction -- if they were that brutual in general, was it possible they were similarly brutal within the confines of the tribal relationships? Did they have wives, or was childbearing a community thing? If wives, was there a tenderness between them? Or was the woman essentially an outlet for sexual aggression. Can you imagine the act of "lovemaking" in that setting?

"Are you going to San Francisco?"

Scott McKenzie? Flowers in your hair? :-) Ah, the summer of love.

+++

I love San Francisco, it's my favourite US city, I''ve been there once, in 1998. I did all the touristy things - saw Alcatraz on perhaps the only sunny day of the year, saw the seals on the pier, played chess with the hobos down by the cable car station (boy what a bunch of piece swindlers!)

I still think I owe my well being to a street walker of all people. I was staying down by Fishermans Wharf and, being a Beatles fan, I had gone in search (on foot) of Haight-Ashbury - not realizing that it was quite a walk. On my way back I was walking through somewhere to the west (I think) of Russia Hill. It was dark and the neighbourhood was clearly not safe - it felt foreboding anyway. So I hear "hey white boy, where you going?" from across the street, and this young black girl came up and started propositioning me. I carried on walking and she fell in step, I asked how she was doing and just chatted to her. I made sure to tell her about my wife and child (going for the don't orphan my kid approach!) She walked me thru a gang of 10 or so "home boys", and I think because we were chatting and seemingly getting along they didn't mug me. At the end of the long street she said "don't you be walking around these parts at night white boy". I made it back to the hotel safely and learned my lesson!

+++

It wasn't a joke - I actually did detect some talent in The Shaggs, especially in the rhythm section - I'm glad Cobain had that album in his top 100, for Cobain was a musical genius, for me he understood how to convey emotion within a tune, and boy did he have tunes.

+++

Why do we have to promote our good deeds? Wouldn't a good manager go out of his way to actually see what you did? I guess they don't do that.

+++

I imagined that Jesus drew some "power runes" (symbols) on the ground cross this line if you are sinless. Everyone knows that they are lost when they cross the line don't they? Do you think education was at such a standard back then that these folks could read words like "theft," "lust," "lying," and "false witness"? Maybe, I dunno. This is just the sort of thing one needs to send a camera into space for. Send a powerful camera instantaneously (though a wormhole) to a point approximately 1970 or so light years away from Earth and get it to take a picture of what Jesus wrote. For right now, that point in space is where the light from Jesus' writing in the sand on that day actually is. How far away is that? It's 1/7,106,598 th of the way to the edge of the known universe. The Good News has a long way to travel :-)

Interestingly from the perspective of "The Good News" it has been everywhere. If you travel at the speed of light then all distances are zero, and time stands still, so you're not actually going anywhere, for there is nowhere to go.

+++

Were I there we could discuss this over a guiness and a fine seegar. Safe travels my friend!

The Shaggs

Do you really see some elemental talent in their music, or were you just making that up? I ask because apparently Kurt Cobain listed their album in his top 100 favorites. He too may have been saying that for comic effect. I think they're pretty bad, but my ear for music is not well trained.

* * *
Based on my reading of the Shagg's website and their song list, I'd guess they were fairly fundamentalist Christians. Their #3 -- "don't throw stones" -- is related to Jesus' "Judge not or you too will be judged," as well as the story in John 8:1-11 of the woman accused of adultery. Jesus challenges those who would stone her that he without sin should be the first to throw a stone. They all walk away, of course, leaving the woman and Jesus.

Two notes about all this:

• That passage in John 8:1-11 is famous for several things, one of which is the intriguing little detail about Jesus stooping down and writing something in the dirt with his finger. My man R.C. was recounting this story and speculated on what Jesus wrote in the dirt -- though fully admitting we can't know because it isn't offered in Scripture. Sproul said he imagined Jesus stooping down, looking from man to man, knowing what was in each man's heart, and writing things like "theft," "lust," "lying," "false witness." I like that bit of speculation. It's a powerful image.
• One of the most frequently ignored aspects of that story comes at the very end. Many people are fond of pointing out that Jesus forgave the adultress. Few read on to where Jesus commands her to "go now, and leave your life of sin."

* * *
Regarding the different levels of guilt ... I think it's a learned thing at the conscious level. Deep inside it's a God-given thing, but at our conscious-awareness level it's a learned thing. I think that over the past 20 or so years the notion of "guilt" has been diminished considerably. Nobody is "at fault" or "guilty" of anything. Now, that does not mean they don't "feel" guilt somewhere deep inside, but it's less likely they'd recognize it as such and know what to do with it.

Again, R.C. Sproul was lecturing on this and he was making the point that the question "What do you do with your guilt" is one that surely will stop people in their tracks. I completely disagree -- I imagine most would say something along the lines of "What are you talking about?" or "I don't feel guilty about anything."

A society that has no sense of guilt or shame is a society that has no boundaries on behavior.

* * *
In the business world we're told to sing our praises because that's supposedly what managers use to differentiate the productive from the unproductive. Unfortunately, as you point out, some falsely claim excellence, where others fail to cite true excellence. If I were to boil it down, it all comes down to insecurity and fear. Some fear their own failure and will do anything to deny it; others fear being caught out as a liar and understate their achievements.

I fall into the latter camp.

* * *
It is a beautiful day in San Francisco today. Sunny, clear and warm but not hot. I wish you were here.

Philosophy of The World

I was quite impressed by The Shaggs music in actual fact - there is some off beat talent there I would suggest - thanks !

Plus. I was glad to see them list their philosophy as:

1. Never judge others until you've walked a mile in their footsteps.


2. Do as Thumper's parents say: If you can't say anything nice, don't say anything at all.


3. People who live in glass houses shouldn't throw stones.


4. Live by the golden rule: Do unto others as you would like others to do unto you.

Not easy to achieve any of those. #2 is potentially too relative, I mean how does one agree on what is meant by "nice" ?

#3 is interesting, I would summarise it as "if you are guilty of something then don't attack others doing the same thing and try to make them feel guilty". This leads to an interesting point, "why do some people feel different levels of guilt?" and "why do some people have different expectations to other people?" Is it just a phenotypical response (what your are taught) or is there a genotypical element in there? I would say the latter but I'm not sure.

When someone says "I am a good mother" (for instance) what does that say about the person? Some folks are happy to be good at something but would never say it out loud, it's evidenced by their actions. I know two people that say "I am a good mother" and in my estimation the opposite is true in both cases. I do my best as a father but it never seems to be good enough.

Yet, in the business world we are told to sing our own praises, we can't just do the job and be recognized for it, we have to actively market ourselves. Some of us are very good at this and get rewarded (financially) and some decide not to bother. It's linked to your gibberish comment re that InfoCenter - in my opinion things are way out of whack - I wonder when we will all wake up and say "Hey, the emperor is butt naked!!"

+++

A good face for memories: this can mean at least two things a) you are famous or b) there is something about the way you look that is instantly recognizable, perhaps "jug ears" or "broken nose" or "piercing blue eyes" etc.

Meaningless

On the WebSphere V6.1 InfoCenter site, under "What is New":

Extensible communication services

Increase your return on investment and improve the flexibility of your business by making application services more reusable and accessible to new users, in new ways.

Honestly ... that's gibberish.

Does anyone really believe a sentence like that is of any real value?

Names and Faces

You asked:

Would you say that you have a good memory for faces or more of a good face for memories or neither?

I'm not entirely certain I understand the phrase, good face for memories. Can you help me there?

As for my memory ... I can generally remember a face. I can't recall a name to save my life. At SHARE and elsewhere ex-students come up and say "Hi!" And I'm left to apologize for not recalling the name, but I always say I recall the face.

The Shaggs

You wrote:

Any other artistes that I should listen to?

I say Yes!

Most emphatically, yes!



The story is the father of these three young ladies scraped together enough money back in the late 1960's to get them into a recording studio. The album went nowhere (and you'll know why when you listen to a cut), but years later they were "rediscovered" by a disc jockey who wanted to have a little fun. Over the years they've apparently reconciled themselves to the slight mockery made of their music and now take it somewhat in stride.

You can read their story here:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Shaggs

To listen to their most famous cut -- "My Pal Foot-Foot" -- you can go here:

http://www.shaggs.com/

Click on the crude drawing at the top of the page to listen to the song. But brace yourself. It is ... oh, how to put this? ... quaintly bad.

Their official website is:

http://www.theshaggsonline.com/

* * *
When I was in college all these years ago, there was a contest sponsored by the student newspaper to submit an entry for the "worst album of all time." This album won that competition, though I did not submit it.

Note: My friend and I submitted a Gordon Jenkins album called, if I remember, "Manhattan Tower." Gordon Jenkins is famous for arranging many of Frank Sinatra's hits. He was a very gifted musician. Unfortunately, that particular album -- Manhattan Tower -- was all syrupy and quite silly. Good music; poor theme.

Bart Sells His Soul

... to Milhouse of all people - that has to be one of my favourite episodes .. *now* the Iron Butterfly song makes sense, I knew I'd heard it before. "In The Garden of Eden" :-)

And as penetance for a lie the children had to say:

Where my soul will be chopped into confetti and strewn upon a parade of murderers and single mothers.

So politically incorrect - I wonder what Bob Geldof would say?

Note: Bob Geldof of Boomtown Rats and Live Aid fame now fights in the UK for fathers who have been forcibly separated from their children.

+++

Now I have been listening to best of The Allman Brothers Band and I am really enjoying it. Everyone in the UK will know "Jessica" as it's been playing on our TV's as the theme tune to every snooker sports show since time immemorial.

Any other artistes that I should listen to?

+++

Another one of my favourite Simpsons episodes is in season eight when Lisa finds the buried "Angel" on a shopping mall construction site - did you see that one?

+++

Would you say that you have a good memory for faces or more of a good face for memories or neither?

Mañana Banana.

Hammond Organ Redux

You wrote:

Green Onions - Booker T and The MG's
A Whiter Shade of Pale - Procol Harum
That's What I Say - Ray Charles
Fix You - Coldplay (only coz it's a great song - the hammond is merely ok)

Yes! ... certainly the first three (I'm not familiar with Coldplay songs). The song "That's What I Say" is a stunning example of what I'm talking about. Another example from the 1960's is the intro riff to Sinatra's "That's Life."

When I was in my early adolescent years -- and by that, I mean the roughtly 10 to 14 year age range -- I didn't really have much access to radios, record players or tape machines. I had one of those "portable" cassette players ... you know, the kind that had the big piano-like buttons where you had to push "rec" and "play" at the same time to record something. I had four cassette tapes:

1. Deep Purple -- Made in Japan
2. Steppenwolf -- 16 Greatest Hits
3. Iron Butterfly -- In a Gadda Da Vida
   
4. Mountain -- Best of Mountain

Of those four, the first three used the Hammond organ somewhat extensively. I can't think whether Mountain did (Mountain did the song "Mississippi Queen" -- a great rock song, in my books ... I love the rhythm guitar in that.) It was probably by listening to those tapes over and over again that I developed the affection for the Hammond.

Steppenwolf in particular made use of it. I'm at a loss right now to say which one used it "best" or "most," but I know in my memory there's organ in alot of their songs. And I think one of the band members from Iron Butterfly was a trained church organist. Of course, by playing "rock and/or roll" he'd gone over to the dark side. :-)

Note: Being a fan of The Simpsons, surely you get the reference there with "Rock and/or Roll?" Also, please tell me you recall the episode where Bart substitutes the sheet music for "In a Gadda Da Vida" for the Sunday morning hymn. I can't recall finding anything more funny than that. :-)

I would tend to agree with you that the early 70's penchant some bands had for extended jam sessions certainly fit the Allman Brothers. In the TV show I was watching the guy who discovered and produced them talked about how the record company executives had fits over the long tracks, which were so uncommon in that day on vinyl. But it was great to listen to if you were a free-wheeling, drugged-out hippy standing out on the lawn, swaying about.

Catholicism

You wrote:

Talking about kneeling, it's now a sin to do so in Church. I mean, how are people going to get their beauty sleep now? These people are crazy nuts, see here. Another blow for organized religion, it's a good job that God is above all religions wouldn't you say? :-)

Unbelievable.

This is one of the reasons I struggle to have much respect for the Catholic religion. I use the term "religion" there intentionally ... I believe for many Catholics, they view all the trappings of their rituals as critically meaningful in and of themselves. To me, that's what religion is all about -- rituals, ceremony, things. There's nothing wrong with ritual ... it can be very powerful ... it just can't be allowed to be the central thing. And Catholicism is, in many ways, all about the ritual. So much so that many Catholics -- certainly some of the ones I've met -- adhere to the ritual out of obligation and fear with nearly no understanding of Jesus at the middle of it. My brother-in-law is an example of this ... near as I can figure, he has no faith, but he was raised Catholic and on certain days of the year he makes a pilgrimage to church, goes through the ritual, and somewhere in his mind believes that was of some value.

My problem is I've been shaped as a relatively stern Calvinist. :-)

The Hammond Organ

Yes I too love this instrument, in fact I have a hammond plugin to my piano software, which means I can turn my piano into a hammond at will. So what are your fave hammond tracks? In addition to Me and Bobby McGee? I'd go for :

Geen Onions - Booker T and The MG's
A Whiter Shade of Pale - Procol Harum
That's What I Say - Ray Charles
Fix You - Coldplay (only coz it's a great song - the hammond is merely ok)

Billy Preston did some great keyboard work on The Beatles "Let It Be" album, especially with "Get Back", but I'm not sure if he used a hammond.

+++

I didn't much get into The Allman Brothers - in my head they are in the same category as The Grateful Dead, which is probably incorrect. Interminably long jam sessions, great if you are playing but ... I'd rather be playing than in the audience. I like Skynard better but I'm only really familiar with "Freebird" and "Sweet Home Alabama" - the latter is a prime example of triple lead guitar playing, and a song which I very much like, my daughter likes it too after hearing Marge Simpson singing it in one episode of The Simpsons. Triple lead is very common with modern bands due to overdubbing techniques, they don't actually have three lead guitarists, they just record another guitar track and add it to the song. There is true triple lead and there is also something I could call "two-lead reinforcement" - this is where you play a lead and then over-dub record it again, being as true to the original lead as possible, you can never get it exactly the same and the differences lend gravitas to the original lead - a very common trick these days.

+++

I heard that about Frank Sinatra, but I heard it slightly differently in that the orchestra had to work really hard to see where Frank was going and accomodate, but your description from Quincy Jones sounds more feasible. I never knew Quincy worked with Frank, I had him down as a Motown Man, a producer for Michael Jackson in particular.

Sidebar: Listen to the start of "Don't Stop Til You Get Enough" by The Jackson 5 for true production genius from Quincy, that song explodes out of the blocks.

And now, the end is near;
And so I face the final curtain.
My friend, I'll say it clear,
I'll state my case, of which Im certain.

I've lived a life thats full.
I've traveled each and evry highway;
And more, much more than this,
I did it my way.

Regrets, I've had a few;
But then again, too few to mention.
I did what I had to do
And saw it through without exemption.

I planned each charted course;
Each careful step along the byway,
But more, much more than this,
I did it my way.

Yes, there were times, I'm sure you knew
When I bit off more than I could chew.
But through it all, when there was doubt,
I ate it up and spit it out.
I faced it all and I stood tall;
And did it my way.

I've loved, Ive laughed and cried.
I've had my fill; my share of losing.
And now, as tears subside,
I find it all so amusing.

To think I did all that;
And may I say - not in a shy way,
No, oh no not me,
I did it my way.

For what is a man, what has he got?
If not himself, then he has naught.
To say the things he truly feels;
And not the words of one who kneels.
The record shows I took the blows -
And did it my way!

In the past we've discussed how we both like "The Summer Wind" (who hasn't known the one that got away?) "My Way" is a classic that people want to hear everywhere I go. It's one of those "rising up" songs the way Frank sings it, which is a great interpretation. Everyone wants to do it "their way", just look at teenagers, it's what humans always struggle for, it's part of our illusion of freedom. It's probably anti-Christian if you really think about it - "I did it my way, not God's way". At the end of life as the singer faces the final curtain (the finality of it possibly meaning no afterlife), he's not saying "I repent forgive my sins" he is saying "I rely on myself and kneel for no-one". Do you think the song is anti-Christian in any way or that it just ignores Christianity? (Or something else)

Note: "Or something else", the elusive third option, or "c" ; that, as I have said before, is missing from C.S.Lewis literature. Without "c" you are left with just my options, wouldn't you say?

Talking about kneeling, it's now a sin to do so in Church. I mean, how are people going to get their beauty sleep now? These people are crazy nuts, see here. Another blow for organized religion, it's a good job that God is above all religions wouldn't you say? :-)

+++

Giving up motorbike riding as a child is on the way ... now there are at least two possible reasons for this

1. Motorbike riding is expensive and takes away $$$ and new kids cost money
2. Motorbike riding is dangerous and you could orphan your new kid

#2 is definitely true, I mean just look at what happened to The Allman Brothers lineup.

So when the dutch responder said:

That's bollocks

I kind of agree with you, it was more of an "it's a shame" sentiment than calling the poster an idiot, but my guess is that he was also suggesting that the original poster had

a) Not thought things through completely
b) Was being bullied by institutional feminazism - ie. being forced to do something that he didn't want to do by the wife/partner

I suspect that the ducth guy was thinking (b) - possibly due to some bad experience he has had himself with women in this area - and is telling the woman invloved that it's rubbish to suggest the man should give up his sport for the arrival of a new kid. Ok it costs, but not THAT much for something the man enjoys, and getting out of bed in the morning is dangerous anyway. PS. What are you giving up Mrs? :-) That's my guess of where the dutchman was coming from. Did you think that at all?

Bollocks

An interesting study in words, translations and reaction today in the the motorcycle discussion forum I belong to. Here's the gist:

• One member writes that he's having to sell his bike because his first child is on the way
• Another member from Holland writes, "I hear that story alot, and I think that's bollocks!"
• First member writes back calling Holland member a freeloading socialist
• Thread goes to hell in a hurry after that.
  

That got me wondering ... I wonder if the Dutch guy's use of "I think that's bollocks" was interpreted by American as:

That's bollocks --> That's bullsh*t --> You're an idiot

While it was really intended to be more like:

That's bollocks --> That's bullsh*t --> It's a shame

Not knowing the nuances of the phrase "That's bollocks," I'm not sure. You've not seen the entire context, but what would you say ... is there merit to my theory?

More on the Allman Brothers

From the show tonight -- they considered themselves a band with three lead guitarists. Not a lead and two rhythms, but at times three leads. I had absolutely no idea how that would work musically. It's akin to Townsend saying that in The Who, Keith Moon was really more like the keyboard player, while Entwistle played lead on his bass and Townsend held down rhythm with his chords.

Frank Sinatra

I think the song "My Way" is Frank Sinatra's "signature song." From what I understand, that song was written to be a slow song, sung in a note of somber resignation. Well, that just wasn't Frankie's way of singing that song, being that he was Rat Pack and all. So he turned it into a defiant anthem of self actualization.

More than "New York, New York," that song "My Way" is Frank Sinatra's song.

* * *
My favorite Frank Sinatra story: I was watching a show on Frank, and they were interviewing Quincy Jones, who produced several Frank albums. Quincy said that before Frank came into the studio to record, he (Jones) had to instruct the session musicians to pay absolutely no attention to Frank ... pay all attention to Jones and his conducting. The reason, Jones said, was that there was no telling where Frank would come in and go out of a phrase. So Jones and the orchestra would produce the framework and Frank would fill it in, interpreting as he went, coming in on the half-beats, trailing notes a hair past where they should have ended. All in that fashion that made Frank like no other singer.

I love Frank Sinatra songs. Not all -- many are dreck -- but the ones that succeeded did so brilliantly.

My favorite: The Summer Wind.

Layla

I learned something new tonight. I was watching a show on the roots of "Southern Rock" on one of the cable channels here, and they were covering the origins of "The Allman Brothers Band." Here's what I did not know -- Duane Allman played with Eric Clapton on most of the tracks for "Layla and Other Love Songs." At the very end of "Layla" you hear what sounds like birds chirping -- that's Duane Allman. He produced that by wearing a small glass bottle on his fret hand ring finger; a kind of slide (or whatever it's called).

I love the song "Whipping Post." What an opening bassline! And I love the song "Melissa."

What are your thoughts on "The Allman Brothers?" How about "Lynyrd Skynyrd?"

Another confession -- I love the sound of those old early electric organs on rock music. You can hear some of that on Janis Joplin's "Me and Bobby McGee."

More on Football (Soccer)

From today's National Review Online --

I have longed thought soccer is the most flawed of sports because so much hinges—often the entire game—on an event outside the course of the normal action, the penalty kick. This puts a premium on the inherently subjective calls of the referee and also creates an incentive for the ridiculous faking of being tripped, injured etc.

Hockey suffers from the same problem, although not as starkly.

Basketball too is flawed in a somewhat similar way.

Football isn't entirely clean either, since pass interference and roughing calls loom so large.

Baseball is much cleaner. The umpiring brings an element of subjectivity, of course, but otherwise the game has simple rules and the action always involves a pitcher throwing to a batter and no special action outside of that framework.

And I suppose by these standards golf is the purest of all major sports.

I would think any sport that involves human vs. human must, by definition, be exposed to some level of mediation and, potentially, subjectivity. After all, we can't depend on participants in sport to be honest and fair about fouls and rulings regarding whether something was in-play our out. Hence the need for referees or umpires.

That's why I don't think his use of golf as the "purest" of sports is perfect. That's really a battle of human vs. the course; the human vs. human element is merely a ranking that occurs after the man has fought the course. Still, golf has it's mediation -- was the ball in play or out; etc.

So I thought -- is there a "sport" that is pure by this standard ... one that needs no mediation oversight? I can't think of one. Even bowling involves a question of whether one's foot was over the foul line.

Soul in the machine

Another consensus -- or so it is reported here -- is that France had the better team, but Italy prevailed. Do you agree with that?

Yes I would agree with that wholeheartedly. But like I said, it's not about winning and losing to me, I don't like winning and losing sports because there is always a loser. When I play a game of chess I don't really care if I "win" or "lose" as long as the game is good. That's why for football the Brazillian team are so entertaining to watch. However for me the game of the championship was Germany vs. Italy -- a game the pundits will be talking about for years to come -- great soccer, end to end stuff, not too much fouling or diving.

England as usual played below their optimal ability and went out to a vastly inferior team named "Portugal" in the quarter finals. Christiano Ronaldo (even my daughter Katherine does not like the look of the Portugeuse player that got our Wayne Rooney sent off!) will not be able to play in the UK for much longer.

There is an awful joke? going around that France only lost because their key player "Zenidir Zidane" head-butted an Italian player and got sent off 10 mins before the final whistle. The joke is that Zidane is a Muslim and the Italian player Materazzi made a slight on Mohammed.

Anyway -- I am glad the Italians won as my buddy won the work sweepstake and will buy me an orange juice at the pub as a result :-)

+++

I once saw a baseball match (minor league) in Raleigh and was surprised at how much it was a family event, with kids etc. I had no idea what was going on, but I recall "we're in the bottom of the ninth" I think. Such a sport that can have a "World Series" with just American teams says a lot about what America thinks The World conists of wouldn't you say? :-)

+++

Cricket and Rugby are much better games than football according to some, but that's a UK class issue. To me, they're all the same really -- not something to get too excited about. I don't live in the physical world unless I have to and those things are very physical. One day we will all just download ourselves don't you think? And if so, what does that say about the soul? Thoughts?

Reaction to FIFA World Cup in U.S.

Not much. We seem stubbornly insistent upon not embracing your football above the high school level. Kids play much soccer here as part of growing up. But that doesn't seem to translate into any desire in the professional level.

One thing I'm seeing over and over in the various websites is how the penalty-kick format for resolving a tie is simply atrocious. One commentator wrote:

The traditional, and therefore right, way of dealing with draws/ties was to replay the match on another day. In the English FA Cup, Fulham once played 12 matches over 6 rounds. Sadly, the demands of TV schedulers have triumphed over this equitable solution.

This writer's name was Iain Murray, and he's from England. So I assume he knows something of football.

I greatly admire the athleticism of football players. They seem to have an inexhaustible supply of burst stamina. But I know nothing of the strategy, and to my eye it looks like hockey -- the advancement of the ball in the general direction of the goal, then anarchy, then the ball gets booted back upfield. The cycle then starts again.

To your eye our baseball must look equally as foreign; like to my eye cricket is inpenetrable. Interestingly, I have a co-worker who plays cricket here in the states. He's of Indian origin, and there is a big community in the Hartford, Connecticutt area.

Another consensus -- or so it is reported here -- is that France had the better team, but Italy prevailed. Do you agree with that?

Outstanding photographs

Impressive .. most impressive. The cynical side of me says that they just HAVE to be doctored, but beautiful nontheless.

Question: Is beauty in the eye of the beholder or is there some standard of beauty that is universal?

Also I never got back to you on your other set of pictures from Atlanta aquarium - did you take those? The one of the jellyfish is well ... simply amazing! Reproduced here without permission ...

Jellyfish have always fascinated me, they don't seem to have a distinction between "inside" and "outside" .. I guess that they are not derived from a blastocyst.

Pictures from Katrina

I received an e-mail today with pictures that it was said were taken in Magee, Mississippi as the eye of the hurricane came and passed. I have to believe that's true, though some of these pictures are simply unbelievable. Given today's digital manipulation capabilities, it's hard to say whether they're real or not. But if they are ... wow.

You Never Knew Me

Thanks for your musical posts - I haven't really listened to Magazine's "The Correct Use of Soap" album since my late teens. It is so good. I never knew my life would turn out like the song that is the title of this post, but it did! It's crazy how such a young Howard De Voto could pen this track. Maybe reincarnation? Perhaps he gained the knowledge to write his songs in a previous life?

I don't want to turn around
And find i'd got it wrong
Or that i should have been laughing all along
You're what keeps me alive
You're what's destroying me
Do you want the truth or do you want your sanity ?
You were hell
And everything else was just a mess
I found i'd stepped into the deepest unhappiness
We get back
I bleed into you
Thank god that i don't love you
All of that's behind me now
Still seems to be above you

I don't know
I don't know whether i ever knew you
But i know you
I know you never knew me
I don't know
I don't know whether i ever knew you
But i know you
I know you never knew me
Do you want to?

Hope doesn't serve me now
I don't move fast at all these days
You think you've understood
You're ignorant that way
I'm sorry, i'm sorry, i'm sorry
I'm sorry i can't be cancelled out like this
We had to kill too much
Before we could even kiss

I don't know ...

I might be inspired to get my guitar out again :-)

A Day In The Life

Hmm ... is "art" in general "important"? I guess to some it is, usually to the types of humans that have filled the lower echelons of Maslau's hierarchy, in that they aren't wondering where the next meal is coming from, people like us. Maybe art is important to all if it can contribute to social change? But this of course assumes that "social change" is important to all.

Having said that, "A Day In The Life" is a fine piece of work IMHO. My interpretation is that it is probably the pinnacle of The Lennon & McCartney & MARTIN partnership for a number of reasons.

1. That fine piano chord at the end :-) Three pianos - George Martin was on piano A, John on piano B, and Paul on piano C, at the prescribed moment they all together hammered down on that crashing E chord and held it. It goes on for some time, a minute later you can hear the dying embers of it, they had to turn the mikes up and you can even hear the air conditioners working in the Abbey Road studio. But I jest, this is just a good ending.



2. There are no harmonies in it, so suggests a departure from their early days to their more "serious" stuff.



3. John wrote a song with a beginning and an end, but with no middle, that was Paul's bit. And just like "We Can Work it Out" - which was similarly constructed - represents the juxtaposition of John's pessimism with Paul's optimisim. A mixture that quite accurately reflects the state in which most people seem to find themselves in.



4. The George Martin scored orchestral build-ups could not be produced by a computer - even now. They are very analog in nature, not random but just, well, human, quite terrifyingly so I would say. For instance, compare it to something that borrowed heavily from it, the big C chord you hear at the start of some DVD's/movies that have THX sound. This noise is generated by a 20,000 line C program, and you can tell that it's digital in nature (it too is a great noise).



5. The song was banned. The naughty line "I'd love to turn you on" probably did more to bring on the Flower Power Drug age than any other song.



6. The fondness with which George remembers John when talking the viewer through thie recording of this track on the Beatles Anthology DVD set. He has teary eyes and a wistful smile as he play's John's count-in, instead of "1-2-3-4" it's "Suger-plum fair-ie, suger-plum fair-ie ...." and John's voice is well - angelic - I think this is the only word to describe it. He always claimed to have built in vibrato :-)

+++

For underrated/unknown songs, nobody has ever heard of "Temptation" by New Order. The first time John Peel heard this song he freely admits that he openly wept. It's one of the greatest songs ever made, some classic lines such as "Tonight I think I'll walk alone, I'll find my soul as I go home" and "Bolts from above hit the people down below, people in this world we have no place to go". A good summary of the human condition again. Bernard Albrecht's guitar playing meshes so seamlessly with Peter Hook's fretless bass, it's just very syncopated. They weren't so good live though. Another underrated album is Magazine's "The Correct Use of Soap".

+++

I can't recall that Who song, I'm not a big fan of The Who to be honest, I reckon that they were overrated in general for tunesmithing, but technically very good. Blasphemy I know. One song that winds me up no end is "Uptown Girl" by Billy Joel. Maybe anything by Billy Joel. "Middle of the road" in general winds me up. For me, Dire Straits only get away with it because Knopfler is such a good guitarist and the tunes are plain good.

+++

I asked my manager about overhead of employees and in the UK they use a 2x figure, so if you earn 100K per year your cost to the company is allocated at 200K per year. 200+ gallons of water per day seems way high. There is so much hydrogen and oxygen in the Universe that there really should not be a shortage of water. Another good reason to make spaceships to go get the stuff?

+++

Guessing based on cynicism usually a good way to guess !!?? Have faith brother :-)

Why Phoenix Exists

This is "Roosevelt Dam," a dam that holds back the water that makes up Roosevelt Lake, which provides water to a very thirsty Phoenix:

My lovely bride and I took a drive up there over the weekend just to see something new in our state. Roosevelt Lake is a fairly good-sized resevoir, though I don't have the exact specifications for it in my head. The dam was made taller about ten years ago so the level of the water and the capacity of the resevoir could be increased.

I learned recently that the unit of measure for water used for large-scale water management issues is something called an "acre-foot" of water. That's one acre one foot deep of water. According to Wikipedia, that works out to 325,851 U.S. gallons. What's interesting is that the display write-ups at the resevoir indicated that an acre-foot was what a family of four uses in one year.

That struck me as odd.

So I did the math:

• 325,851 gallons / 365 days = 892.7 gallons per day for the family of four
• 892.7 gallons / 4 = 223.175 gallons per person per day

That number is extremely high for ordinary human consumption. So what I figure is that the claim an acre-foot is what "a family of four uses in a year" is really a planning number that factors in non-consumption uses as well -- watering the lawn, filling the pool, and probably commercial and industrial uses as well. It's a way to handle the allocation of "water rights" based on an assumption about population. So it's a little like a "fixed cost allocation" -- your and my "salary overhead burden" is something like $250K, though neither of us makes anywhere near that. But our "overhead burden" includes benefits as well corporate fixed cost allocations that need to be factored in somewhere.

I read that the Colorado River provides 15 million "acre-feet" of water a year, which is allocated between California and Arizona. I've often wondered why, if water is truly scarce in Arizona, why there isn't more of a push to conserve or a pricing structure that penalizes usage above some limit. There is neither -- no real push to conserve and a price/gallon less than what I paid in Washington D.C.

Why the difference? A theory -- the allocation between California and Arizona was settled some years back after decades of litigation. What I may be seeing is the effects of a "use it or lose it" mind set. California is insatiable. It might be that Arizona is concerned that consistent under-usage of its water rights might result in a reshuffling of those allocations.

Just a guess. But a guess based on cynicism, which is usually a good way to guess.

It's My Opinion and I'm Right

Okay, along the same lines as the "Signature Song" question, here's another:

Name a song (or songs) that you feel best illustrates how your view of the song widely diverges from the popular sentiment about the song. That could either way -- a song popularly held as great that you don't think is very good; or a song popularly held as awful that you think is under-appreciated. Most importantly, explain why you chose the song you did.

I'll give you an example: the song Baba O'Reilly, by The Who, is often considered to be one of the better songs on the "Who's Next" album. The open synthesizer riff and the defiant vocals are supposed to add up to a great song opening for a great album. But my problem is I don't think that song is all that good, to be honest. It's definitely not the weakest Who song of all, nor is my least favorite song on that album. It's simply that my opinion of that song is quite a bit different from what I perceive is the popular sentiment about the song.

I don't much care for the song because I don't like anthemic songs -- "Teenage wasteland / it's only teenage wasteland / I'm wasted!" -- it seems to me to be rather short of the significance others feel the song conveys. And I believe the opening synthesizer riff is too long.

Another example -- and this will get your hackles up -- I've never found the song "A Day in the Life" by the Beatles to be as great a song as others make it out to be. I see no particular pattern to the lyrics (a common fault, not only the Beatles, particularly for that era, though "I Am The Walrus" surely ranks up there as one of the sillier sets of lyrics ever). And I've heard some speak of the final piano chord with such reverence you'd think they believed it was some kind of special revelation or something. In this case -- and perhaps the same with Baba O'Reilly -- what I'm doing is rejecting the perceived importance of the song.