On media...
A picture's worth a thousand words, right? So what to make of In Essence's video for their song "Friend of Mine"?
I've always considered myself a Voltairean soul ("I may not agree with what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it.") It's not easy to maintain that attitude, though, when faced with the kind of "artistic" expression in the "Friend of Mine" video (click the link to see for yourself.) I take issue not with the whole video--which is, incidentally, not too shabbily shot--but with its portrayal of women.
Now I'm not going to sit here and rail against it. Instead, I prefer to ask what the director wants people to infer from the plethora of female torsos? (Each time there is a shot of a woman the shot is of her torso alone. Particular attention is given to the pubic region...) The women in this video are faceless, headless. They have been reduced to curves at most, sex organs in the least.
What is prehaps more disturbing is that this video--currently sitting at number nine on the MuchMusic Countdown--has ruffled so fe feathers. Are we so complacent that we accept the images the media spoon-feeds without question?
There's no such thing as mindless entertainment.
Any form of media must be looked at critically or, at least, thoughtfully, as each image can and does have the power to create or reinforce--implicitly or explicitly--systems of valuation.
On O.S.A.P....
Argh. Enough said.
On packing...
At least that's going well. I have less than an hour's worth left. I just need to pack up my books, D.V.D.s/videos, and toiletries (they're more or less gathered in one spot--they just need to be bagged.) I'll be set for Sunday morning's move.
On writing...
I guess it's been a pretty successful Summer as far as my writing is concerned. In about fifteen/twenty minutes, I will have put the finishing touches on my latest play. And, while I know it does still need some work, I'm infinitely more pleased with this new play than I am with the one I produced back in January. This play is a more mature, more polished work. What's more is that I'm taking more risks and I think that--above all--is an important measure of my growth as a writer. I'm really excited about this piece. If only I could think of a title!
Saturday, August 30, 2003
Wednesday, August 27, 2003
I'm "aware," scoring 86% on the Green-o-Meter. So I'm environmentally conscious. There's plenty of room for improvement, though.
Monday, August 25, 2003
you are either a record nerd or not a scenester at
all. you are the coolest of the bunch. bravo,
dude.
what type of lame scenester are you?
brought to you by Quizilla
Sunday, August 24, 2003
So I've been blogging for a year. August 20, 2002 saw me post my first entry. Has anything changed since then?
Much and, at the same time, very little.
I'm more comfortable with calling myself a "writer." The measure of success I've achieved--though still very small (a handful of poems published in a student literary journal, that one play produced)--has helped.
It hasn't entirely dispelled my fears. I still have misgivings about any apparent ability--the doubt often creeping in when a particular line here or turn of phrase there seems a little thorny. "So trite," "unoriginal"--I accuse myself. How to make the journey worthwhile, I wonder? I manage to recover my confidence most times, even if the recovery is impermanent.
I don't suppose I'd like total security, though. Security. That's a word that makes me uncomfortable. I need flux to feel alive.
And in honour of completing my first year of blogging (light-weight I am still), here's a cross-section of my thoughts (thanks to Becky for the idea!)--a peak at Natalie, neuroses and all:
- Semantics had me worried.
- Work had me down.
- Even early on, I wondered how honest I was being on this blog.
- I was the Ass of Buridan.
- I tried to work through post-break-up complications. And again here.
- Bouts of pseudo-intellectualism abounded. But that's another list on its own.
- Canada/U.S. relations pissed me off. Time and time again.
- Patriotism did, too.
- I conjured up the courage to post one of my poems.
- I answered the question "Are you hot?"
- I became consumed by my First World guilt.
- I railed against the war.
- And I enjoyed doing it all.*
See Portrait of the Woman as a Young Artist for details.
Much and, at the same time, very little.
I'm more comfortable with calling myself a "writer." The measure of success I've achieved--though still very small (a handful of poems published in a student literary journal, that one play produced)--has helped.
It hasn't entirely dispelled my fears. I still have misgivings about any apparent ability--the doubt often creeping in when a particular line here or turn of phrase there seems a little thorny. "So trite," "unoriginal"--I accuse myself. How to make the journey worthwhile, I wonder? I manage to recover my confidence most times, even if the recovery is impermanent.
I don't suppose I'd like total security, though. Security. That's a word that makes me uncomfortable. I need flux to feel alive.
And in honour of completing my first year of blogging (light-weight I am still), here's a cross-section of my thoughts (thanks to Becky for the idea!)--a peak at Natalie, neuroses and all:
- Semantics had me worried.
- Work had me down.
- Even early on, I wondered how honest I was being on this blog.
- I was the Ass of Buridan.
- I tried to work through post-break-up complications. And again here.
- Bouts of pseudo-intellectualism abounded. But that's another list on its own.
- Canada/U.S. relations pissed me off. Time and time again.
- Patriotism did, too.
- I conjured up the courage to post one of my poems.
- I answered the question "Are you hot?"
- I became consumed by my First World guilt.
- I railed against the war.
- And I enjoyed doing it all.*
See Portrait of the Woman as a Young Artist for details.
It has been a good week. A very good week. Not in terms of productivity--I didn't read nearly enough as I should have or knit nearly as often as I would have liked--but in terms of activity.
The Recap:
On Monday night, I got to spend some time with my 'lil sister. I taught her how to knit!
Tuesday morning brought a successful optometrist's check-up. No changes to my existing prescription (I need glasses to see distances is certain lights.) Tuesday afternoon/evening's trip to Windsor went well. Had nice visits with my grandparents, aunt, uncle and cousins.
I spent Wednesday night hanging out with Murph and a couple of acquaintances. We watched Gangs of New York before heading over to a favourite watering hole (Ups and Downs.)
On Thursday night, I relaxed and watched The Two Towers (sixth time total, first time on video... Ah, the perks of having a Blockbuster connection!)
I finally got around to calling my uncle about my computer on Friday. He can fix it--yay! And he's not charging me anything for labour (plus he's giving me a new video card.) Unfortunately, though, he says I'll need to buy more RAM, so I'm still looking at $70-$100 in unexpected expenses.
When I got back from my uncle's, Murph called me up and I went over to watch a movie. We rented Comedian (that documentary on Jerry Seinfeld and Orny Adams) with Murph's cute friend Shawn. Fun was had by all.
Finally, yesterday and today found me visiting with my friend and former roommate Paulina.
Phew! Who ever said that you couldn't be busy doing nothing? I'm ready for a vacation!
Oh! And the local paper finally published my letter in Friday's paper. I was beginning to think that they weren't. I tell ya, just when you start to lose faith in the locals, they surprise you.
The Recap:
On Monday night, I got to spend some time with my 'lil sister. I taught her how to knit!
Tuesday morning brought a successful optometrist's check-up. No changes to my existing prescription (I need glasses to see distances is certain lights.) Tuesday afternoon/evening's trip to Windsor went well. Had nice visits with my grandparents, aunt, uncle and cousins.
I spent Wednesday night hanging out with Murph and a couple of acquaintances. We watched Gangs of New York before heading over to a favourite watering hole (Ups and Downs.)
On Thursday night, I relaxed and watched The Two Towers (sixth time total, first time on video... Ah, the perks of having a Blockbuster connection!)
I finally got around to calling my uncle about my computer on Friday. He can fix it--yay! And he's not charging me anything for labour (plus he's giving me a new video card.) Unfortunately, though, he says I'll need to buy more RAM, so I'm still looking at $70-$100 in unexpected expenses.
When I got back from my uncle's, Murph called me up and I went over to watch a movie. We rented Comedian (that documentary on Jerry Seinfeld and Orny Adams) with Murph's cute friend Shawn. Fun was had by all.
Finally, yesterday and today found me visiting with my friend and former roommate Paulina.
Phew! Who ever said that you couldn't be busy doing nothing? I'm ready for a vacation!
Oh! And the local paper finally published my letter in Friday's paper. I was beginning to think that they weren't. I tell ya, just when you start to lose faith in the locals, they surprise you.
Sunday, August 17, 2003
It has occurred to me that some of you may want to know what I said in my last letter to the editor (the one they published last summer) since I do mention it in the most recent letter. Without further ado, here's that letter:
Sir: Enough!
In a word, this expresses my frustration with the barrage of letters regarding Mike Murphy’s recent concert reviews.
What I have found lacking in each of these letters is the understanding that a review is written to express the opinion of its author(s) alone. For this reason, Katherine Schultiess’ suggestion that Murphy “ask the people who attended the concert for their feedback” would, if implemented, defeat the purpose of having a journalist write a review. Let journalists do their jobs: surveys are best left to Angus-Reid and Statistics Canada.
More troubling, though, is that all of these letters’ authors–admittedly fans of the band(s) reviewed–assume that all concert goers (Murphy excluded, of course!) agree with their own “expert” opinion. These letters are testimony to the fact that opinions do differ. That said, allow Murphy to have his opinion; he has not berated other concert goers or infringed upon their right to formulate their own ideas.
I’m sure all of the musicians reviewed have been in their line of work long enough to understand that not everyone who hears their music enjoys it (except for maybe Nickelback who is known for not taking criticism well; just ask Matthew Good of Matthew Good Band fame and Shirley Manson of Garbage). Why should only Murphy’s opinion, as Jake Clark put it, “convince the band not to return to Sarnia”? Why would a band risk alienating all those who do buy their music to punish one man who may not?
In closing, perhaps I can clarify something further. Mr Clark found Murphy’s opinions “laughable and incompetent.” People are incompetent; opinions are not. Perhaps the word Mr Clark was searching for is “ignorant,” which both opinions–and indeed people–can be.
I can still see myself, gleefully pounding at the keyboard. Yes, I gleefully wrote that letter. People in my hometown can be such red-necked, sticks-in-the-mud. It felt good to illustrate how silly they were being (though I know I really shouldn't poke fun at others' short-comings) and support my friend Murph at the same time.
Speaking of Murph, he's coming to town this week! Hopefully, we'll be able to get a visit or two in. Tuesday's out. I have to go out of town to collect that bursary right after my early morning optometrist's appointment. But that still leaves the rest of the week.
I don't know when I'll find time to work on my play and do more of my reading....
As for reading, why is it that whenever you hear of/come across a book you really want to read, you never have time to do so? I finally saw All the President's Men the other day and it inspired me to read Carl Bernstein and Bob Woodward's book by the same name. Also on my list of books-I-want-to-read-right-now-but-can't-because-I-have-school-related-reading-to-do is a book I saw featured on Hot Type with Evan Solomon. That book--"A Problem from Hell": America and the Age of Genocide by Samantha Power--explores the issue of foreign crisis intervention on moral grounds. As a journalist who covered the Balkan wars, Power saw first hand the kind of intervention the West likes to make in cases where human rights--and lives--are threatened. Here she explores the failure to stop genocide.
Nice light reading I've picked for myself, eh?
Sir: Enough!
In a word, this expresses my frustration with the barrage of letters regarding Mike Murphy’s recent concert reviews.
What I have found lacking in each of these letters is the understanding that a review is written to express the opinion of its author(s) alone. For this reason, Katherine Schultiess’ suggestion that Murphy “ask the people who attended the concert for their feedback” would, if implemented, defeat the purpose of having a journalist write a review. Let journalists do their jobs: surveys are best left to Angus-Reid and Statistics Canada.
More troubling, though, is that all of these letters’ authors–admittedly fans of the band(s) reviewed–assume that all concert goers (Murphy excluded, of course!) agree with their own “expert” opinion. These letters are testimony to the fact that opinions do differ. That said, allow Murphy to have his opinion; he has not berated other concert goers or infringed upon their right to formulate their own ideas.
I’m sure all of the musicians reviewed have been in their line of work long enough to understand that not everyone who hears their music enjoys it (except for maybe Nickelback who is known for not taking criticism well; just ask Matthew Good of Matthew Good Band fame and Shirley Manson of Garbage). Why should only Murphy’s opinion, as Jake Clark put it, “convince the band not to return to Sarnia”? Why would a band risk alienating all those who do buy their music to punish one man who may not?
In closing, perhaps I can clarify something further. Mr Clark found Murphy’s opinions “laughable and incompetent.” People are incompetent; opinions are not. Perhaps the word Mr Clark was searching for is “ignorant,” which both opinions–and indeed people–can be.
I can still see myself, gleefully pounding at the keyboard. Yes, I gleefully wrote that letter. People in my hometown can be such red-necked, sticks-in-the-mud. It felt good to illustrate how silly they were being (though I know I really shouldn't poke fun at others' short-comings) and support my friend Murph at the same time.
Speaking of Murph, he's coming to town this week! Hopefully, we'll be able to get a visit or two in. Tuesday's out. I have to go out of town to collect that bursary right after my early morning optometrist's appointment. But that still leaves the rest of the week.
I don't know when I'll find time to work on my play and do more of my reading....
As for reading, why is it that whenever you hear of/come across a book you really want to read, you never have time to do so? I finally saw All the President's Men the other day and it inspired me to read Carl Bernstein and Bob Woodward's book by the same name. Also on my list of books-I-want-to-read-right-now-but-can't-because-I-have-school-related-reading-to-do is a book I saw featured on Hot Type with Evan Solomon. That book--"A Problem from Hell": America and the Age of Genocide by Samantha Power--explores the issue of foreign crisis intervention on moral grounds. As a journalist who covered the Balkan wars, Power saw first hand the kind of intervention the West likes to make in cases where human rights--and lives--are threatened. Here she explores the failure to stop genocide.
Nice light reading I've picked for myself, eh?
Saturday, August 16, 2003
I have been fighting the urge not to write a letter to the editor of the city newspaper lately. Really fighting it. Well, the urge has finally proven too strong. I've been provoked beyond the point of restraint.
Today's opinion pages featured a letter from a couple who believes that Bill C-250 "is in direct violation of freedom of speech, freedom of religion, freedom of expression and even freedom of conscience." Gah!
Here's my reply as to what constitutes freedom of speech:
Sir: Last summer, I wrote to you in support of Observer critic Mike Murphy’s right to exercise his freedom of speech. This summer, I find myself writing to you once again, and again I find myself concerned with the issue of free speech.
Today, though, I want to convey that this issue is not a black-and-white one, as Mike and Amy Campbell appear to suggest by their opposition to Bill C-250 (“Bill would restrict freedoms,” The Observer, Friday, August 25, 2003.)
Bill C-250 is a Private Members bill which proposes to extend to sexual orientation the same protection from hate propaganda that is given to ethnicity, race, and religion under the Criminal Code. In their current form, Sections 318 and 319 prohibit the championing of genocide and the “public incitement of hatred” towards an “identifiable group.” Bill C-250 would see homosexual, bi-sexual and trans-gendered individuals classified as an identifiable group.
Should this bill pass, it would make it illegal not to express opposition to homosexuality–as the Campbells would have Observer readers believe–but to wilfully promote hatred and violence towards homosexuals.
Bill C-250 does not infringe upon the right to freedom of speech any more than Sections 318 to 320 of the Criminal Code currently do. The truth of the matter is not that freedom of speech is absolute, but that–in certain cases–free speech can be malicious and that parties need to be held accountable for their actions.
To reiterate, as with any issue of alleged censorship, it’s not an all-or-nothing proposition.
I write, then, not to provide an answer, but to continue to problematize. When does criticism become criminal? Where–if at all–should the line be drawn?
I am curious, too, as to where these opponents of Bill C-250–these supposed watchdogs of free speech–were as media ownership in Canada fell into the hands of a few, large conglomerates. As of 2000, the largest three media conglomerates–CanWest Global, Quebecor and TorStar–controlled 66.1% of the circulation market for Canada’s 105 daily newspapers (only 3.2% of the market was occupied by the country’s 7 independent daily newspapers.) Wouldn’t the existence of fewer independently-owned media outlets affect the freedom of speech and the expression of divergent opinion?
What about the affect of a watered-down Canadian Broadcast Corporation? Our national, public broadcast corporation has had both its staff and budget cut significantly since Chretien Liberal governance began in 1993. Surely media conglomerates and C.B.C. cuts pose greater threats to free speech than Bill C-250! Where were the proponents of free speech then?
A line, apparently, has been drawn.
So... Whaddaya think? I'm not sure they'll print it (especially because of that jab at media conglomerates--the local paper is indeed owned by a conglomerate, though not by one of the big three), but at least I got that off my chest. Grrr... I mean, how can they not see the need for sexual orientation to be protected from hate propaganda?! I could have gone into the whole common good (ie. protect everyone from hate mongering) over individual freedom thing, but I thought I'd keep things pointed. Hopefully it's more effective that way.
But yeah. The real threat to free speech in Canada is media ownership. The Campaign for Press and Broadcasting Freedom is something any lover of free speech ought to check out.
Today's opinion pages featured a letter from a couple who believes that Bill C-250 "is in direct violation of freedom of speech, freedom of religion, freedom of expression and even freedom of conscience." Gah!
Here's my reply as to what constitutes freedom of speech:
Sir: Last summer, I wrote to you in support of Observer critic Mike Murphy’s right to exercise his freedom of speech. This summer, I find myself writing to you once again, and again I find myself concerned with the issue of free speech.
Today, though, I want to convey that this issue is not a black-and-white one, as Mike and Amy Campbell appear to suggest by their opposition to Bill C-250 (“Bill would restrict freedoms,” The Observer, Friday, August 25, 2003.)
Bill C-250 is a Private Members bill which proposes to extend to sexual orientation the same protection from hate propaganda that is given to ethnicity, race, and religion under the Criminal Code. In their current form, Sections 318 and 319 prohibit the championing of genocide and the “public incitement of hatred” towards an “identifiable group.” Bill C-250 would see homosexual, bi-sexual and trans-gendered individuals classified as an identifiable group.
Should this bill pass, it would make it illegal not to express opposition to homosexuality–as the Campbells would have Observer readers believe–but to wilfully promote hatred and violence towards homosexuals.
Bill C-250 does not infringe upon the right to freedom of speech any more than Sections 318 to 320 of the Criminal Code currently do. The truth of the matter is not that freedom of speech is absolute, but that–in certain cases–free speech can be malicious and that parties need to be held accountable for their actions.
To reiterate, as with any issue of alleged censorship, it’s not an all-or-nothing proposition.
I write, then, not to provide an answer, but to continue to problematize. When does criticism become criminal? Where–if at all–should the line be drawn?
I am curious, too, as to where these opponents of Bill C-250–these supposed watchdogs of free speech–were as media ownership in Canada fell into the hands of a few, large conglomerates. As of 2000, the largest three media conglomerates–CanWest Global, Quebecor and TorStar–controlled 66.1% of the circulation market for Canada’s 105 daily newspapers (only 3.2% of the market was occupied by the country’s 7 independent daily newspapers.) Wouldn’t the existence of fewer independently-owned media outlets affect the freedom of speech and the expression of divergent opinion?
What about the affect of a watered-down Canadian Broadcast Corporation? Our national, public broadcast corporation has had both its staff and budget cut significantly since Chretien Liberal governance began in 1993. Surely media conglomerates and C.B.C. cuts pose greater threats to free speech than Bill C-250! Where were the proponents of free speech then?
A line, apparently, has been drawn.
So... Whaddaya think? I'm not sure they'll print it (especially because of that jab at media conglomerates--the local paper is indeed owned by a conglomerate, though not by one of the big three), but at least I got that off my chest. Grrr... I mean, how can they not see the need for sexual orientation to be protected from hate propaganda?! I could have gone into the whole common good (ie. protect everyone from hate mongering) over individual freedom thing, but I thought I'd keep things pointed. Hopefully it's more effective that way.
But yeah. The real threat to free speech in Canada is media ownership. The Campaign for Press and Broadcasting Freedom is something any lover of free speech ought to check out.
Sunday, August 10, 2003
Wando (great-grandson of Northern Dancer [on his father's side]) won the Breeders' Stake and, since he also won both the Queen's Plate (as I mentioned earlier) and the Prince of Wales Stakes, is now the first Canadian Triple Crown winner in a decade.
Congratulations to Uncle Laurie, Gus, Team Keogh and the rest of the farm!
Congratulations to Uncle Laurie, Gus, Team Keogh and the rest of the farm!
Wednesday, August 06, 2003
I've been feeling a little headachey for the past twenty hours or so. There's the pressure that usually accompanies the headache, but no actual headache. I'm guessing that either my stupid allergies are acting up or what I'm experiencing is a residual effect from spending all yesterday afternoon cooped up in a dark basement in front of a computer screen.
I suppose I shouldn't complain. Not because I feel the need to spare anyone who may be reading this from my whining, but because I really don't have reason to complain. Yesterday afternoon was well-spent. I finally committed to WordPerfect my latest play as it stands at the moment (of course, I was revising as I went.) It's starting to, well, shape up. Excluding any re-writing I'll ultimately choose to do later, I'm about three-quarters of the way through.
In everything I write, I have vested interest. With this as-yet-untitled play, that interest is amplified. It's much more personal. Especially since a lot of the emotions I'm channeling into it are still so raw. It's going to be hard for me to give this up for direction, but I know I can do that; I did it with the last play. I don't think I hand over the main character to another actress, though. I think that, should this play (like Memoria before it) be picked up for the one act festival on campus, my return to the stage will be prompted.
I haven't acted in anything in almost five years. Sing for an audience, yes. Act, no. And I miss it. This character is a wonderful excuse for me to do what I've been missing.
And indulge my writerly control-freakishness.
Honestly, though, part of the reason why I can't see myself letting another actress play "Cass" is that I just don't think anyone else at a school without a drama programme could do her justice. And I know I could. I don't mean to sound like a braggart, but I'm a darn good actress. Consistently better than the craptacular material I usually had to work with in community theatre. What's more in this case, though, is that I know exactly what Cass is going through. I should, but not just because I created her and her neuroses. I should know what she's going through because I've felt the same sense of loss, futility, depression.
It is our ethos that is the same, though the experiences may be more dissimilar.
I just hope that--again, should the play be selected for production--the powers-that-be will allow me to play her.
I suppose I shouldn't complain. Not because I feel the need to spare anyone who may be reading this from my whining, but because I really don't have reason to complain. Yesterday afternoon was well-spent. I finally committed to WordPerfect my latest play as it stands at the moment (of course, I was revising as I went.) It's starting to, well, shape up. Excluding any re-writing I'll ultimately choose to do later, I'm about three-quarters of the way through.
In everything I write, I have vested interest. With this as-yet-untitled play, that interest is amplified. It's much more personal. Especially since a lot of the emotions I'm channeling into it are still so raw. It's going to be hard for me to give this up for direction, but I know I can do that; I did it with the last play. I don't think I hand over the main character to another actress, though. I think that, should this play (like Memoria before it) be picked up for the one act festival on campus, my return to the stage will be prompted.
I haven't acted in anything in almost five years. Sing for an audience, yes. Act, no. And I miss it. This character is a wonderful excuse for me to do what I've been missing.
And indulge my writerly control-freakishness.
Honestly, though, part of the reason why I can't see myself letting another actress play "Cass" is that I just don't think anyone else at a school without a drama programme could do her justice. And I know I could. I don't mean to sound like a braggart, but I'm a darn good actress. Consistently better than the craptacular material I usually had to work with in community theatre. What's more in this case, though, is that I know exactly what Cass is going through. I should, but not just because I created her and her neuroses. I should know what she's going through because I've felt the same sense of loss, futility, depression.
It is our ethos that is the same, though the experiences may be more dissimilar.
I just hope that--again, should the play be selected for production--the powers-that-be will allow me to play her.
Sunday, August 03, 2003
Weird. Two nights ago, I dreamt of refugees. Again. The first time it was Iraqi refugees. This time, Israeli (yes, Israeli) refugees. I'm puzzled. What is my unconscious mind trying to tell me? Too bad they don't make a Freud bobblehead, eh, Becky?
Anyway, I've been experiencing a little blogger's block lately. So, in lieu of a real entry, here are my (slightly fleshed-out) answers to a general interest survey at my favourite message board:
1) If you were going away for a month and you only had time to burn one perfect CD for your car or discman, what songs would it contain (maximum 15)?
- "How to Disappear Completely" by Radiohead;
- "Ny Batteri" by Sigur Ros;
- "Not the Red Baron" by Tori Amos;
- "Sullen Girl" by Fiona Apple;
- "Staralfur" by Sigur Ros;
- "Idiotheque" by Radiohead;
- "Pinned Together, Falling Apart" by The Dears;
- "This Night Has Opened My Eyes" by The Smiths;
- "Summer of Protest" by The Dears; and
- "The Eternal" by Joy Division.
2) If you knew you were going to lose your vision and not be able to read again, what book would you want to read (or re-read) before it happened? What movie would you want to see (or see again)? What artwork would you want to see (or see again)?
Books to Re-read - The Lord of the Rings and The Silmarillion by J.R.R. Tolkien. Mind you, I'd learn Braille and fast. I can't imagine my life without reading.
Films to Re-watch - Peter Jackson's film versions of The Lord of the Rings. If I'm losing my sight, I want those beautiful visuals ingrained in my memory.
Art to See - the Rose Window of the Notre Dame du Paris.
3) Living or dead, what person would you most like to have dinner with and why?
I'd love to have dinner with Sylvia Plath because she's always felt like a kindred spirit.
4) If you could go to (or back to) university and study anything you wanted, without financial worries, what would you study?
Linguistics. Then I'd truly be able to call myself a philologist. Having only studied English (in addition to modern usage, I've studied Middle English and I'm studying Old English as of September), Italian, French and Latin, I feel so inadequate. I feel as though I need to study the sciences behind language...
5) Presuming it would be a guaranteed success, if you could open and run any kind of small business, what would it be?
I'd want to own and operate a bookstore with my cat at my side. (Hey, I'm not the only psycho cat lover! The owner of a local gaming/hobby store brings his cat with him to work.) I'd want the store to be really service-oriented (ie. we'd specialize in choosing the perfect book for a given person's interests, favourite genre, et cetera.)
6) If you could travel anyplace in the world, where would you go and why?
Ireland and the U.K. (I'm already planning a trip for mid 2004 or 2005.) And Italy and France. I've always wanted to see the lands my ancestors left behind to come to Canada.
7) If you could live in any setting, what would that setting be?
A log cabin overlooking the Georgian Bay with a backyard that opens out into the woods.
8) If there is such a thing as reincarnation, and you had a choice about your next life, what would you like to come back as?
Honestly, I wouldn't want to come back. Now, go back in time, yes. I would love to have been in my twenties during the 1940s or the 1960s/70s. Oooh! And if I could go back to the 1960s, I'd like to be living in the U.K. Imagine seeing bands like The Who, The Rolling Stones and The Beatles at their inceptions! Other perk: I might actually be able to afford studying at Oxford then.
Anyway, I've been experiencing a little blogger's block lately. So, in lieu of a real entry, here are my (slightly fleshed-out) answers to a general interest survey at my favourite message board:
1) If you were going away for a month and you only had time to burn one perfect CD for your car or discman, what songs would it contain (maximum 15)?
- "How to Disappear Completely" by Radiohead;
- "Ny Batteri" by Sigur Ros;
- "Not the Red Baron" by Tori Amos;
- "Sullen Girl" by Fiona Apple;
- "Staralfur" by Sigur Ros;
- "Idiotheque" by Radiohead;
- "Pinned Together, Falling Apart" by The Dears;
- "This Night Has Opened My Eyes" by The Smiths;
- "Summer of Protest" by The Dears; and
- "The Eternal" by Joy Division.
2) If you knew you were going to lose your vision and not be able to read again, what book would you want to read (or re-read) before it happened? What movie would you want to see (or see again)? What artwork would you want to see (or see again)?
Books to Re-read - The Lord of the Rings and The Silmarillion by J.R.R. Tolkien. Mind you, I'd learn Braille and fast. I can't imagine my life without reading.
Films to Re-watch - Peter Jackson's film versions of The Lord of the Rings. If I'm losing my sight, I want those beautiful visuals ingrained in my memory.
Art to See - the Rose Window of the Notre Dame du Paris.
3) Living or dead, what person would you most like to have dinner with and why?
I'd love to have dinner with Sylvia Plath because she's always felt like a kindred spirit.
4) If you could go to (or back to) university and study anything you wanted, without financial worries, what would you study?
Linguistics. Then I'd truly be able to call myself a philologist. Having only studied English (in addition to modern usage, I've studied Middle English and I'm studying Old English as of September), Italian, French and Latin, I feel so inadequate. I feel as though I need to study the sciences behind language...
5) Presuming it would be a guaranteed success, if you could open and run any kind of small business, what would it be?
I'd want to own and operate a bookstore with my cat at my side. (Hey, I'm not the only psycho cat lover! The owner of a local gaming/hobby store brings his cat with him to work.) I'd want the store to be really service-oriented (ie. we'd specialize in choosing the perfect book for a given person's interests, favourite genre, et cetera.)
6) If you could travel anyplace in the world, where would you go and why?
Ireland and the U.K. (I'm already planning a trip for mid 2004 or 2005.) And Italy and France. I've always wanted to see the lands my ancestors left behind to come to Canada.
7) If you could live in any setting, what would that setting be?
A log cabin overlooking the Georgian Bay with a backyard that opens out into the woods.
8) If there is such a thing as reincarnation, and you had a choice about your next life, what would you like to come back as?
Honestly, I wouldn't want to come back. Now, go back in time, yes. I would love to have been in my twenties during the 1940s or the 1960s/70s. Oooh! And if I could go back to the 1960s, I'd like to be living in the U.K. Imagine seeing bands like The Who, The Rolling Stones and The Beatles at their inceptions! Other perk: I might actually be able to afford studying at Oxford then.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
