On a More Positive Note...

In light of my 2 previous ranting-angry-sweeping-generalization -skipping-purgatory-going-straight-to-Hell posts, I thought I'd say something nice.

1) Kingdom Hearts 2 kicks ass!!
2) King Kong 2-Disc Special Edition on DVD rocks!!
3) My cat is fluffy.

Cheers!

Quebec Scores Again...This Time in Infrastructure Shittiness!!

A road in a small town outside of Montreal collapsed around 1am Thursday. The "sinkhole," as it's been described, was caused by "a buildup of ice, debris, and wood in a stream that flowed under the roadway."

As a resident of Montreal, I can safely (or not so safely depending on your point of view) tell you that roads in the province of Quebec suck. And I'm not just talking about minor road problems, I'm talking about major potholes and cracks that run the length of the majority of roads in Quebec. Driving along Sherbrooke street, a primary street located in the heart of Montreal, is plagued by a series of potholes so big that if your car were to hit one, it would be disastrous to your suspension. Drivers can often be seen swerving to avoid these treacherous pits, even in the dead of winter when road conditions are already bad enough due to ice and freezing rain.

I'll concede that weather has a huge influence on road conditions. The smallest crack in the road, when filled with water, can become a ravine when that water later freezes, forcing the pavement to divide. A large portion of the blame can be attributed to these expanding cracks, but an even larger blame can be put on city workers. These workers are lazy and slow to repair such things. This is exemplified by the recent probe into the working habits of city workers, which revealed that workers can often be found taking their sweet ass time doing repairs. Some were even caught going to a bar to get a drink before coming back to finish the job.

This situation isn't terribly unusual, when taken out of context. Allow me to provide that context. Quebec, like all provinces in Canada (except Alberta), charges a Provincial Sales Tax (PST) on top of the national Goods and Sales Tax (GST). You're probably wondering what the big deal is if all provinces have this PST. Well, the kicker is that Quebec's PST is a whopping 7.5% compounded with the standard 7% GST. What does that mean? It means that your subtotal is taxed 7% GST to create a new subtotal. An additional 7.5% tax is placed on that new subtotal. In short, tax on tax. This places Quebec's taxes among the highest in the country.

One might be inclined to think that Quebec would then have the most resources at hand to deal with such minor problems as potholes. This is not the case. Instead of say, repairing roadways, they choose to spend their money elsewhere. That "elsewhere", in my humble opinion, is their continued efforts to gain sovereignty from the rest of our great country. The Parti Quebequois (PQ) insists on fighting for this deranged idea that they would be better off without the rest of Canada. And it gets better. Not only do they want sovereignty, they want to keep on using our currency. Now stop and think for a moment: does it make sense to you that an independent country would use the currency of a country from which it had just excluded itself? The answer would be a resounding NO.

I'm not really sure where I was going with this, but perhaps this last bit will clear things up. Quebec is not somewhere you would want to live. I'll say it again: QUEBEC IS NOT A GOOD PLACE TO LIVE IN. You will find yourself living in a province where potholes abound, taxes are ridiculously high, and people are so arrogant that you'll want to shove poisoned rags down their throats whenever they open their filthy pretentious mouths (on a side note: to all my friends who actually grew up here, you are all excluded from this gaping generalization).

On the bright side: Quebec is an OK place to visit, but don't even consider staying here. It would be a fatal mistake. Man, I can't wait to get the fuck outta here!

Oh Jeezus, More Trash On The Way!!

First, visit this link: American Gun.

Did you read the synopsis listed there? Now tell me that isn't simply a re-creation of Crash, but this time with guns instead of racism. It is, isn't it?

Christ, when will the preaching end? Why do filmakers insist on producing these social commentaries, all the while thinking they're actually teaching us about the impact these issues have on our society?! Can you say "Pulpit Syndrome"? (Okay, so there's no such thing as PS, but it fits, no?)

Crash was supposed to be a commentary on societal treatment of racism. A view depicting several spheres of existence wherein racism ran rampant and unchecked. It attempted to show that no matter what class you belonged to, what race you were, racism was everywhere. Which is true, to a degree. But it was unrealistic in that we don't all voice our thoughts all the time. How many of you would actually go on about the latino guy fixing your lock being a gang member within earshot of said person? Does that seem realistic to you? I sure as hell hope not because if it does I never want to meet you.

Now we have American Gun. A movie about "how the proliferation of guns in America dramatically affect and shape the every day lives of its citizens." Furthermore, it is played out in a "series of interwoven storylines". Are we seeing a pattern here? Now I'll admit that guns are a consistent problem in our society. Take all the shootings that have made national headlines over the past year, for example. But do we really need another preachy movie about how problematic they are? I find it highly insulting that they think we do. It's almost as though the people behind these so-called "films" think we need to be educated about the dangers of gun violence, that by putting such issues in films they can make a difference.

I do, however, understand the logic behind such a move. This material really ought to be presented as a documentary, much like Michael Moore's Bowling for Columbine. Documentaries, unfortunately, do not carry the same mainstream appeal as "thrillers". From a marketing and exposure point of view, a thriller will hit a much larger demographic than a documentary. Note the exception in the aforementioned example, it being that Bowling for Columbine was a major success. So the filmaker, in his infinite wisdom, decides to make a movie instead of a documentary. Right, got it.

Still, I find it upsetting that American Gun carries such a heavy parallel to Crash. Like a car drafting behind a truck, American Gun can be said to be simply riding on the success of an, undeservingly so, Oscar-winning movie. And that, my friends, is truly pathetic.

V for Very Fuckin' Awesome!

*** SPOILER ALERT ***

V for Vendetta is a non-stop adrenaline rush! There really isn't any other way to describe it. Action and drama are woven together so artfully that knowing what comes next will always be a surprise. This is a Wachowski production worth remembering (unlike those last two Matrix movies).

I might be a little biased because I had the wonderful opportunity to see this movie on opening night in the IMAX theater, but regardless of the setting this is a movie that everyone should see. It's fun, it's political, it's action-packed, it's everything a good blockbuster should be and a little more.

The story basically follows the machinations of Codename: V. V is a man, hidden behind a Guy Fawkes mask, who is determined to fight the totalitarian government established in a futuristic England. His anarchistic plotting, and subsequent recruitment of Evey (portrayed by a phenomenal Natalie Portman) lead to the eventual and long anticipated destruction of the London Parliament building.

"Remember remember the fifth of November,
Gunpowder, treason, and plot.
I see no reason why the gunpowder treason
Should ever be forgot.
Guy Fawkes, Guy Fawkes
'Twas his intent
To blow up the King and the Parliament.
Three score barrels of powder below,
Poor old England to overthrow.
By God's providence, he was catch'd
With a dark lantern and burning match.
Holloa boys, holloa boys, make the bells ring.
Holloa boys, holloa boys, God save the King!
Hip hip hoorah!"
- Gunpowder Plot Nursery Rhyme

Hugo Weaving is the man behind the mask, and he does an exceptional job. No better actor could have done the job he did in this movie. This is his second piece of work done with the Wachowski's after playing Agent Smith in all three Matrix movies. Not once in the entire movie is his face revealed, and thus he does all his dialogue from either behind the mask or cloaked in shadows. He has truly mastered his craft in that we know his emotions by the conviction in his voice and the gesturing of his body. Like actors in the old amphitheaters of long ago, the mystery and art is not in what you see, but rather in what you don't see. Mr Weaving has also infused his character with the proper balance of intelligence and skill when he is confronted by his enemies. A certain level of humour is also maintained throughout.

"Are you like a crazy person?"
- Natalie Portman as Evey

Having been first a Queen and Senator of the Galactic Federation, the fawning wife of a rebellious Jedi, and the girl who gave birth to a Wal-Mart baby, I never imagined Natalie Portman as the right actress for the role of a revolutionary. But boy did she ever prove me wrong! Natalie displays an initial level of naivete and innocence at first, she then transforms into a hardened soldier in a war that can only be fought through unconventional means. Most poignant in the movie is her time in the torture chambers of the aforementioned government. She is broken and shattered, but manages somehow to pull herself together to become the woman who would later destroy the iconic Parliament building. It's an amazing performance which displays her ability to adapt to any situation.

"Beneath this mask there is more than flesh. There is an idea...and ideas are bulletproof."
- Hugo Weaving as V

The story, adapted from Alan Moore's graphic novels, is a tale of anarchy raging against an overbearing and controlling government. One of the main themes is that of symbolism and their impact on a people. This resonates with many other hero/anti-hero characters, like Batman and Superman, and is consistent with stories of this type. V speaks of the Parliament building as more than just a building, he sees it as a symbol of the government. And he's right, there's no mistake about it. Take the Twin Towers for example, targeted because they symbolize the economic grandeur of the United States. That's why they were chosen as the targets of the September 11th bombings. Notice the prominence of dates in these two events. V's statement might as well be "Remember remember the 11th of September."

One thing I wanted to point out that really struck me is that you never see who V really is. Who is the man behind the mask? What does he look like? Is his face burned like his hands? You get a glimpse of his profile, backlit by a fire raging in the background, but you never see the features. And this is probably the best directing choice James McTeigue could have made. Like the original Alien, the art is not in what you see, but rather in what you don't see. Most people disagree with me in thinking that The Blair Witch Project was scary, but to me it was probably one of the most frightening movies of my entire life. The reason for this being that you never actually see anything. You hear plenty, but never really see this supposed "witch." And finally when you get to the end and you're waiting to see what kind of horrifying being she is, the camera is dropped and only screams ensue. Hiding V's face from the camera really strengthens the notion that an idea is more powerful than a single person. By keeping his face in darkness, you find yourself believing that he is the embodiment of his beliefs. He isn't a person, he's an idea, something that carries infinitely more power.

I want to comment briefly on the music used in V for Vendetta. Much of the score adequately underlines the action and drama happening on screen, and it also carries with it some of the darker humour used by the characters (e.g.: Rossini's "William Tell Overture" during the final scene). If you know the Wachowski's and their personalities, then you can really tell from the soundtrack that this is a Wachowski movie.

I highly recommend seeing this movie more than once, because it's just so completely loaded with material that you could never catch it all in a single pass. I know I'll be going back to see it again sometime soon...

Oscars 2006: A Perspective

You're probably reading the title and going, "Isn't this old news?" And it is. It is old news. But I now feel compelled (and better prepared) to share my feelings on the contenders. Having now seen four of the five nominees for Best Motion Picture of the Year, I have a much better perspective on why some winners deserved their trophies, and why others did not. Keep in mind, however, that I am not an expert film-critic, nor have I deluded myself into thinking that my opinion is the only one that matters.

"Here with us today is Steven Spielberg, sir I believe we have never met. Mr. Spielberg is the director of Schindler's List and Munich. Wow, Schindler's List and Munich. I think I speak for all Jews when I say, 'oh boy, I can't wait to see what happens to us next. Trilogy!"
- John Stewart, Oscars 2006

Munich was an exceptional film. Eric Bana is fantastic as Avner, the Mossad agent recruited to lead a group of men in a mission of retaliation against the Palestinians who murdered the Israeli athletes at the 1972 Munich Olympics. I'll admit that I have a very limited knowledge as to how factual, or fictional, this depiction really is, but as a member of the audience I was drawn right in. I watched in horror as Avner pursued his targets, all the while learning what it was to be human and what it was to know the true cost of war. Especially poignant was his conversation with a Palestinian while he pretended to be German. Here is this Israeli Mossad agent forced to be civil with a member of the opposing government. What really makes this scene is that only as an outsider is Avner able to provoke an intelligent discussion that does not simply end with the answer, "because you are Israeli/Palestinian." As a German onlooker, he is able to really question the motives and purpose of the war, saying to him "isn't it possible that this war is wrong? That what you believe to be right could simply be wrong?" (paraphrased from the film). This scene as well as Bana's portrayal of Avner's descent into madness as his mission slowly consumes him and everything he has come to know really made this film one not to be taken lightly.

"It's as if Perry and I grew up in the same house. And one day he went out the back door, and I went out the front."
- Truman Capote, Capote

Then there's Capote. The story of Truman Capote who wrote the book In Cold Blood, a book about Perry Ellis Smith and the Kansas family murders. Philip Seymour Hoffman does a fabulous turn as the intriguing Truman Capote, chronicling his investigation and research for his book. What I loved most about this film is that the audience gets to see all the different faces of Mr. Capote. He's a friend, a confidante, a liar, a traitor, a writer, a party-goer, and a human being, all in one. When we are introduced to Truman, he is a fun-loving and interesting character. As the film progresses, he becomes almost as much a monster as the subject of his book, who very pointedly undergoes a reverse sort of transformation in the eyes of the viewers. By the end of the film, I came to loathe Truman and in turn found comfort in the simple nature of Perry Smith. I empathized with Perry Smith and his surrender to his fate. More than anything, I hated the way Truman betrayed Perry. I hated that he lied to everyone around him, even when he knew those people could see through the facade. "I couldn't have done anything to save them," says Truman to Nelle Harper Lee to which she replies, "Maybe not, Truman. But the truth is, you didn't want to." However, this is the reason for which I would have chosen Philip Seymour Hoffman over Heath Ledger in the Best Actor in a Leading Role category. There is a transformation here that, although a little less subtle, is worthy of an award that is supposed to symbolize excellence (more on that later).

I have not seen Good Night, and Good Luck, though I can only imagine it must also be an excellent film if it was competing with the likes of these other films.

Saving the best for last are Brokeback Mountain and Crash. First we'll tackle the one who deserved it most but didn't get it: Brokeback Mountain.

"Tell you what, we could a had a good life together, a fuckin real good life. You wouldn't do it, Ennis, so what we got now is Brokeback Mountain. Everything built on that. It's all we got, boy, fuckin all, so I hope you know that if you don't never know the rest. Count the damn few times we been together in twenty years. Measure the fuckin short leash you keep me on, then ask me about Mexico and then tell me you'll kill me for needin it and not hardly never gettin it. You got no fuckin idea how bad it gets. I'm not you. I can't make it on a couple a high-altitude fucks once or twice a year. You're too much for me, Ennis, you son of a whoreson bitch. I wish I knew how to quit you."
- Jack Twist, Brokeback Mountain

Annie Proulx's tale of two cowboys who fall in love is a moving and heart-wrenching one. It leaves you feeling numb inside, there simply is no other way of describing the emotions this film evokes. The most important fact to note, however, is that it is not a story about "gay" cowboys, but rather a story about two people who fall in love and despite all their best efforts are separated by means of brute force. It is the spitting image of intolerance in our society, that others feel the need to intervene in what concerns them the least. I'm tempted to compare this to gay marriage, but we'll save that topic for another day when it can be properly addressed. Though Brokeback Mountain won three of the awards for which it was nominated, the biggest one of all was stolen from it. The reason I believe this is because Brokeback Mountain is the essence of excellence when it comes to films. This is evidenced by the exceptional (I'm running out of superlatives, can't you tell?) cinematography, the wonderfully crafted musical score, and the simple yet complex acting skills of the actors and actresses. Gustavo Santaolalla's beautiful score is heavily underlined by the theme which has three parts, each of which builds in intensity as the film progresses. The main theme, "The Wings" really grabs you by the collar and hits hardest at the core. Images showing the flat prairies, and the mountainous ranges that house Brokeback Mountain itself are perfectly captured by Rodrigo Prieto in his cinematography. Alberta was undoubtedly the best location for filming, and Mr. Prieto does a fabulous job of capturing its essence. And finally, the lead actors and actresses have all crafted superb characters that really project their emotions with true feeling. The cast leaves nothing to be desired in their portrayals of Ennis, Jack, Alma, and Lureen. All-in-all, this is a film that cannot be ignored simply because the material is "uncomfortable." It ought to have been the poster-child for quality film-making.

Which brings us to Crash. Or as Mrs. Proulx so aptly called it, "Trash." I'll admit that this was a relatively good movie. And note that I'm willing to call this simply a movie and not a film. It does not carry the distinguished eloquence of a film. Recounting the lives of various characters who, by means of physical crashes, interact with each other and learn the consequences of racism. Director, Paul Haggis, intended this movie to be a commentary on the pervasiveness of and rampant racism in our society. From a white woman crossing the street to avoid a younger black man, to a store clerk calling a Persian man "Osama." The truth of the matter is that there is no subtlety to Haggis' message. It seems that everytime an opportunity for a racist remark came up, he had the actors spew out blatantly racist lines. Now take that perspective and spin it on its head. Does anyone really act this way? Do we really say everything that we think? Society, rather than voicing its every thought, now teaches us to think before we speak. Yes, racism is present in our society, and yes it is a problem that must be dealt with, but this is clearly not a groundbreaking way to do so. If we wanted a message on how not to be racist, then this would be an ideal commercial or televised statement. But it does not take the audience and teach them something about racism. If anything, it shows them what society is not like and how we already don't behave ourselves. I have argued this point with others, and their replies are that our knowledge is limited by life in Canada. Have any of us lived in Los Angeles and borne witness to such obvious racism? Not really. I've visited L.A., and I can safely say that not all white women crossed the street to avoid black men. People did not publicly fear Chinese drivers, saying "oh my god, she might hit my car with hers!" It simply does not happen that way. But perhaps the characters portrayed in Crash are of a limited scope? Again, this is untrue. Haggis attempts to show that racism is present in all levels of society, from the rich upper class, to the hard-working middle-man. So why then is Crash considered a movie worth the golden statuette? Because it's a safe topic, and because the voters sympathize more with a movie that is close to home. Why vote for a film that actually succeeds in breaking barriers when they can vote for a movie that is more akin to a "home team?" That's why Crash won Best Motion Picture of the Year.

To end my dreadfully long perspective on the Oscar films, I would like to comment briefly on some of the other winners. La Marche de L'empereur for Best Documentary, Features is a wonderful film on the long trek made by Emperor Penguins during mating season, fully revealing their arduous and often incredible way of living. Wallace & Gromit in the Curse of the Were-Rabbit for Best Animated Feature Film of the Year is also more deserving of its Oscar over Tim Burton's Corpse Bride since it presents to us something that isn't simply The Nightmare Before Christmas with the dead instead of Halloween characters. The award that really bothers me, though, is Reese Witherspoon's victory over Felicity Huffman in Best Actress in a Lead Role. Though I haven't seen Walk The Line, I believe Transamerica would have been an infinitely harder role to play. As Bree, Felicity Huffman learned to be a woman playing a man wanting to be a woman (and eventually becoming a woman). I don't know about you, but that strikes me as really damned challenging. And she succeeds too. I won't go into why I think Transamerica wasn't nominated, because it falls along the same lines as to why Brokeback Mountain didn't win.

"My body may be a work-in-progress, but there is nothing wrong with my soul."
- Sabrina "Bree" Osbourne, Transamerica

And that concludes my perspective on the 2006 Oscars and it's nominees & winners. Thank you for getting this far, this is probably -- no wait, it is the longest entry so far.

If You Felt Nothing, Could You Save Mankind?

*** Spoiler Alert ***

Suppose emotion were eradicated. Could we prevent hate, rage, and war? This is the premise of the film, Equilibrium. A society built upon the belief that emotion is the root of all wars, governed by an elite few who decide what material consists "Emotional Content," regulated by a drug called "Prozium," and policed by a highly trained force known as the "Grammaton Clerics."

Director, Kurt Wimmer, presents the story of John Preston, a Grammaton Cleric, played by actor extraordinaire, Christian Bale. It begins with Cleric Preston as the Tetragrammaton's highest and most respected officer, and follows his transformation into a champion of the revolution that would change the utopia known only as Libria.

In Equilibrium, "sense-offenders" are tried and punished by death through incineration, or "processing." To feel is a crime and it is believed that such feelings can only lead to chaos and mayhem. That society cannot function if people are allowed to follow their emotions. Regulation of emotions is done through the drug, Prozium.

"Prozium - The great nepenthe. Opiate of our masses. Glue of our great society. Salve and salvation, it has delivered us from pathos, from sorrow, the deepest chasms of melancholy and hate. With it, we anesthetize grief, annihilate jealousy, obliterate rage. Those sister impulses towards joy, love, and elation are anesthetized in stride, we accept as fair sacrifice. For we embrace Prozium in its unifying fullness and all that it has done to make us great."

The Tetragrammaton assumes that all feelings lead eventually to war. They start with smaller crimes such as the hate crime and murder. World wars are shown to be rooted in passion, fury, and hate. Take World War II for example. Hitler's war on the Jews was the direct result of his anger towards a "lesser race," those not of Aryan descent. If these feelings had been prevented, could World War II have been avoided? Possibly, but hate is often steeped in a desire to do good, twisted though it may be. Hitler wished to create a society, a world, of "better" people and he believed that to accomplish this, elimination of those who would pollute and diminish the gene pool must be done.

Another example is that of Eugenics which is still practiced in some countries. Eugenics is the purification of the gene pool through the destruction of mutants and deviants. Consider what it would be like to believe that society's rise to perfection can only occur if deviants are purged. Life would be better if we didn't have a constant flow of sick and diseased people filling our hospitals to the point of overflowing, would it not? That those beds might better be used to help those with injuries resulting from day-to-day interactions? Precious government funds could then be spent on improving the quality of life instead of worrying about those with AIDS or cancer.

Purification of society is also depicted, granted in a more extreme light, in John Wyndham's The Chrysalids. Here, deviants are those who are very literally mutated by the nuclear fallout of the previous wars. These deviants are either killed or exiled to the "Fringes," where they can be kept separate from the remainder of society. Again, why waste resources on those who would be better off dead?

Humanity seeks to improve itself; that is the nature of mankind. So how do we do this? How can we, as a united people, find a way to make our society greater than it is, to achieve a higher state of being? Some would say that religion is the answer, that faith and belief in a power greater than our own is the answer to this question. But what of the religious fervor that drives the current wars in Israel/Palestine? Zealots are merely Grammaton Clerics, are they not? Clearly, drugs like Prozium are out of the question since such dependence on them is nothing more than a cracked and faulty pillar. So what then? I don't know the answer to this question; if I did, I might have my own revolution brewing, but alas I do not. There is no simple answer, society is simply far too complex.

As to Equilibrium's message, I think it's safe to say that we require emotions to survive. Without emotions, we see not people in search of betterment, instead we see drones who live merely to serve our own "Tetragrammaton." "It's circular. You exist to continue your existence. What's the point?" The point is emotions are not the key to a higher path; such precise and exacting answers are not solutions, they are the mistakes from which we will learn and grow.

Randomness

I don't normally use this blog for personal ranting purposes, but I feel like ranting/venting/spewing today.

Where do I start? I guess with the good news. I got 100% on my Understanding Planet Earth midterm. That's right. One hundred freakin' percent!!! Ok ok, so it's not so impressive when it's not Advanced Mammalian Developmental Biology, so sue me. You also have to consider the fact that I didn't even really study for this exam since I wrote it the day after Valentine's Day (see A Love Lost). Such craziness.

Discovered a very cool chocolate bar on St. Denis on Friday night. It's amazing how something so simple as chocolate can be turned into "chocolat" by simply presenting it in a simple and elegant setting. Add square white plates and you're set. Didn't get a chance to try to the chocolate itself but I did try a lemon tart and it was fabulous.

Everyone came over afterwards and we played a few games, watched Road Trip on TV and then they all went home. I'm now sick as a result of that night. Since everyone's had their turn with the cold, I suppose it's my turn, but I'll be damned if I'm to just sit idle and let this cold wreak havoc in my system. Not exactly sure how to accomplish this, but I'll find a way. Gonna have to disinfect everything in the meantime.

I questioned posting about Uggz boots before, but I feel it might fit in here better than anywhere else. If you own Uggz boots then you are a ho/slut/tramp (take your pick). I don't care if you bought them in some upscale New York shoe store. They're crap and you are crap for buying them. Furthermore, I've discovered that all hos/sluts/tramps who wear Uggz boots drag their feet. Now honestly, how hard is it to simply pick up your feet a few extra inches so that the whole world doesn't have to hear you scrape the soles of your hideous footwear on the ground every time you take a step?! It's so goddamned annoying! Doesn't anyone have any self-respect anymore?

Ran into two of my ex's on Thursday. I might have thought less of it if it had been only one of them, but two?! And both within the span of ten minutes. Such craziness. Maybe this is a sign of some sort. Suddenly I'm very aware of the fact that I'm single. That's not to say that being single is awful, it's just starting to bore me a little. How nice it would be if only I could find that stable, long-term, committed guy who is, to some degree, normal. If only the last one hadn't had to go to Italy... I have the damnedest luck!!

I'm slowly re-ripping all my music for my iPod. I don't have the slightest idea how to reverse the order of music transfer so that all the music on my iPod can then be put back onto my computer, so I'm just gonna have to do it the computer-to-iPod way. Damn damn damn. And of course in the meantime, I just had to find new music that has me so hooked I can't not listen to it every second I'm near my computer. Since I can't upload until I'm sure I have all my music, I'm tormented by the lack of new material to listen to while I walk.

Finally, having a little difficulty with my hair. I find that more often than not, I have bad hair days, and even my good hair days gradually decay to bad hair days. Must have something to do with that abominable wind. Most days I just go with what looks best as soon as it happens in the morning, but sometimes it takes a little more creativity to get it all set the way I want it. All of this in addition to the fact that it looks a bit like a mullet is giving me a headache. Soon it will be the length it needs to be at, but until then it's gonna be a bumpy road.

Blogs for Research

Are blogs merely the online rantings of people around the world, or is the Blogosphere more useful than that? Companies are now turning their attention to the Blogosphere in hopes of gleaning helpful information on the newest trends.

See: MSNBC's Reporting on Weblog Research

How interesting, that companies have been established to study the postings in the Blogosphere with complex computer programs designed to collect and analyze what is being discussed in what must be millions upon millions of blog entries. And why not? People of all ages post their complaints, comments, and general feedback on all manner of things in their blogs. It seems only natural that the next step in development research be in the direction of blogging.

What really stands out about Weblog Research is that individually, the opinions mean nothing. They are merely words written with a limited range, and on some occassions, blogs can become immensely popular. However, taken together, they form a rich and almost limitless source of knowledge about the likes and dislikes of various demographic groups. It is possible to take, for example, a sampling of the number of blog entries on any given subject and use that information to determine the level of interest in said topic.

I am reminded of studies done on termites and collective agents. A good example of this is termite mound construction. Each termite will go out and collect a small bundle of mud. It will then follow a path back to the developing mound and place this ball of mud on the pile. Looking at the actions of this sole creature, the collection and placement of a ball of mud means nothing in the grand scheme of things. But when used as data in conjunction with information about other termites in the colony, a complete image of how a termite mound is constructed can be formed. For academic completeness, it's worth noting that placement of the balls of mud is not random, in fact the termites place their mud balls based on the location of other mud balls and a small dose of pheromone. But you can easily see how collection of data on multiple blog entries can yield data on the Blogosphere as a whole.

With this knowledge in hand, it's tempting to think that we can sway the direction of research, but we must remember that the input into these programs comes from thousands upon thousands of users around the world. It would take a concerted effort to do this, and so all we can do is continue to write about what interests us most.