precipitation.

a white day-after-christmas just isn't the same.

on the other hand, no work for 2 days, yay!

winter.

the sun is not dead.

happy winter holidays. the festival of lights was early this year. lunar calendars vs solar calendars.

holidays are funny things. winter holidays seem especially centered around the weather; everyone's winter holiday is about light and fattening food to get you through the dark and the cold. mmm... fried things and cookies.

disease.

i'm sick.

i'm not supposed to be sick. finals are this week! i can't get sick until after finals. bah.

i am so tired.

stupid septa left me in the sub-freezing temperatures last night for over an hour and a half.

rrg. zzz.

disappointment.

so, i discovered today that my local branch of the public library is loaning out ebooks, which work on both my sony reader and his nook. and i have an account, and an online pin and everything. so i was thinking this is kind of cool, because the actual meatspace branch is pretty tiny, and ugly, and doesn't really have much of a selection.

unfortunately, their fiction ebook section appears to consist solely of harlequin romances. which... i don't know about you, but i don't think i'd read one of them, even if it was free.

i guess it's back to the sony store. foiled again.

happy thanksgiving.

it's snowing.

snow on thanksgiving means rain on christmas. it's my own little superstition.

on the other hand, 2 1/2 lbs of mashed potatoes have been made.

zombie plants.

is it just me, or do brussels sprouts look like little brains?

they are yummy roasted, though. yay fall.

student life.

i have been awake for 24 hours.

uploaded my paper at 5:30 this morning. it's due at noon.

i hate forced drafts. i don't write drafts. the reason i didn't go to sleep last night is because the actual due date for the paper is next tuesday and i totally blanked on the fact that a stupid fucking draft was due today.

hmf.

mid-semester break.

too much thinking.

apple pie has been made.

i even managed not to cut any fingers this time. i should really spring for one of these.

welcome to fall.

it is pretty damn disgusting out.

one bit of weather that i really hate is when it is warm and yet rainy. so you either wear a jacket of some kind and stay dry-ish but swelter, or you get soaked.

seeing as i'll be in class for 6 hours tomorrow, i'm thinking i'll pick the former option, but damn. come on, weather. if it's going to be fall, it might as well start getting cold.

(and then when it gets cold, it's time to snow. take notes.)

yom kippur thoughts.

i broke my fast with hallah and butter (he bought one downtown from a jewish bakery yesterday).

and i was sitting at the table by myself and flipping though the sales flyers that come in the mail, i thought, what's the point of all this stuff compared with the simple pleasure of having bread to eat when you're hungry?

insiders.

i have to say, i am disappointed (as usual) with the evangelical christian response to the idiot in florida who apparently doesn't read his own holy book, much less the quran.

there is no condemnation.

oh, there's a bit of "please don't do this" and "this is a bad decision" but no one in the evangelical christian world is saying, "this is wrong." no one. and this is ridiculous.

the evangelical conservative right in this country has told itself for years that it's a persecuted minority (thank God it's a minority but any claim to persecution could not be much farther from the truth). they've developed this kind of insider protection instinct that is leading them, in this case (and in other cases), to not be able to call out someone on a distinctly unchristian act. christianity in general in the west has forgotten what it really means to be a minority, and the protestant arrogance that disdains the writings of the patristics has led to a skewed image of christianity's interaction with the wider world.

it's not only that, though. it's that our culture in general has developed an incapability to actually condemn or endorse anything. the "bad decision" rhetoric is impotent and ridiculous. yes, it is a bad decision to burn qurans, but even more so, it is an unchristian decision. and the inability of other pastors to call out this guy betrays christianity's own syncretism with modern individualism. one of my favourite quotes recently is from a rabbi who said, "Give me a break. Is there really a point to Rabbinic leadership if it does not come with value judgments?" any spiritual leader, anyone who wishes to think of him- or herself as a spiritual leader could learn from this.

burning qurans is wrong. it is unchristian. the end.

update: i am grateful to a friend for pointing me to this article.

false dichotomies.

i had no intention of creating nearly back-to-back posts about islam, but i read this today and just got so angry.

it was that last section that is making my blood boil:

Despite some hurtful experiences in public, Nadia is content with her decision to wear niqab and says she feels a distinct difference in how men respect her now as opposed to her earlier days of low-cut shirts and formfitting pants.

after a whole fucking column about how the hijab is not about male power over female, guess what: it is. this is just enforcing the virgin-whore dichotomy (otherwise known as "women ain't nothin' but bitches and hos"), as if the only choices of clothing a woman has is either to dress like a slut or to cover everything so they don't distract men and aren't judged by men and don't tempt men. women are only judged by their sexual availability. in this structure, men still have all the power.

when i was a freshman student taking a film course, i thought "the gaze" was feminist bullshit. it's not. the insistance on covering to avoid the male gaze just highlights it all that much more. the hijab doesn't stop men from judging you by your body and appearance, as these women unfortunately found out.

the hijab is not empowering. it keeps the male power structure in place, it enforces it, and it caters to it.

i'm not going to make a statement about wearing it or not. if you want to wear the hijab because it makes you feel closer to god, that's fine. but i reject any argument that it empowers women.

cat5-to-usb converter.

not quite what was expected.

iconoclasm.

New York City's Landmarks Preservation Commission denied landmark status Tuesday for a building at the site of a proposed Islamic center and mosque near ground zero.

i think this was a good thing.

i spent the morning of september 11, 2001 fielding frantic phone calls from my (jewish) mother, who could not determine if her uncle and brother-in-law had been in the world trade center towers when the planes hit (they weren't, although their offices were), and online with my friends, one of whom was watching the towers come down from his office window a few blocks away.

i endorse the cordoba house project (no, it's not a mosque), to build a muslim-run community center a few blocks from ground zero, because i endorse the first amendment to our constitution.

if we allow fear and prejudice to overcome the values embodied in this statement, we are, quite frankly, proving al quaeda and the rest of the radical islamists right when they say the west is anti-islam and persecutes muslims.

a lot of the debate around the cordoba house project is centered on the symbolism of a muslim project near the location where radical muslims killed something over 2000 american citizens. the "con" side of the argument says that allowing the project to go forward will dishonour the memories of those who died that day. this is dangerous rhetoric, because it insists we live in the past. instead of moving forward with dialogue and mutual respect (including for the american citizens who were muslim who died in the twin towers), they want to wallow in their grief, pick at their wounds, and generally whine about what "they" did to "us."

i am arguing is it a greater dishonour to those who died that day to insist on making their place of death a symbol of our victimization and fear of the other instead of a symbol of peace, strength, and respect for our fellow human beings. if we really want to claim any kind of victory, we should be pushing forward for the openness and interaction that the radical islamists hate so much. to oppress muslims in our own country and insist on outlawing their religion and practises is to first of all be guilty of the same intellectual violence that the radicals practise, but also to open the door for more oppression and to become victims of our own fear and therefore of the radicals themselves instead of gaining power over them. the strength of oppression is no strength at all, but panicked weakness.

what's for dinner?

this one takes advantage of a lot of the stuff in season right now.

for the kabobs:

1/2 lb meat (i used chicken tonight, but beef or lamb would work equally well. i suppose you could use turkey, but that would be pushing the authenticity limits)
1 green pepper
1 onion
1 pt cherry tomatoes
extra virgin olive oil
red wine vinegar
fresh oregano, basil, and parsley
3 cloves of garlic (i like garlic)
salt and pepper
skewers (i have bamboo, you could easily use metal. i've even heard of using the stems from the herbs)

for the rice:
1 cup uncooked rice (i used basmati because that's the only rice i happen to keep in the house)
whole cardamoms, coriander seeds, peppercorns, and a bay leaf
butter

1. cut the meat into roughly 1 inch cubes. crush the garlic and chop the herbs.

2. in a dish or plastic bag, mix together the oil, vinegar, herbs, garlic, salt, and pepper. put in the meat cubes to marinate.

3. make the rice. put a little butter in the pot you are going to use for the rice and turn the heat up to high. when the butter is melted and foamy, add the rice and stir it around until the grains are coated. then add 2 cups of water and the spices and cover. as soon as the water boils, turn the heat down to low.

4. cut the pepper and onion into 1 inch pieces.

5. thread the marinaded meat, onion and pepper pieces, and the whole cherry tomatoes onto the skewers.

6. cook the kabobs under a broiler at 400F or on a grill. if you use the grill, coat the kabobs in the marinade while cooking. i happened to use the broiler tonight, and i put some extra olive oil in the tray under the kabobs.

7. pull most of the spices out of the rice, especially the bay leaf. do not eat these. you will regret a mouthful of whole peppercorns or cardamom pods.

8. eat everything else. yay!

boom.

i continue to be amazed that my cellphone actually takes decent pictures of fireworks.

resurfacing.

i spent last week taking a class on sexuality. a semester in a week. craziness.

however i spent yesterday doing nothing, so i think the balance is coming back to my brain. we'll see what happens when all the information starts to percolate and meld with the rest of the stuff that's in there.

hopefully it will settle before my next class starts in july.

is it possible to learn too much?

a meditation on authorial intention.

or, in defense of the literary critic.

literary criticism, and especially postmodern literary criticism, seems to be defended mostly by its practicioners and roundly given contempt by everyone else. it is often denigrated as "bullshit" or, more scathingly, as the critic reading him or herself into the author's work and not reading the author.

admittedly theories like "the death of the author" do not help this perception any.

as someone who has been trained in and practises literary criticism to a certain degree, it should not be surprising that i am defending it. but i do believe it is a valid method of inquiry, and it has important things to say. it is this belief that led me to where i am today, a graduate student. i started down this path one evening, standing under a tv monitor in the lobby where i was taking registrations for a conference and listening to the opening night speaker. he was condemning literary criticsm and postmodernism in general. at the time, i was only a few years out of my undergrad, which had heavily featured these theories, and as i was listening, i realized i was muttering at nearly every pause of the speaker, "no, that's wrong." i went and expressed my disagreement with one of the conference organizers, and 4 1/2 years later, i've just finished my first year in grad school. so i'm putting my money where my mouth is ;)

anyway. we've all seen cases (or we have if we follow this kind of thing) where a critic offers an opinion about what a book is about, or what ideas or themes or philosophies it might contain, and the author says, "no, that's all wrong." depending on who you like better, usually either you come away from the debate with the idea that the critic is an idiot or the author is a petulant control freak.

i would suggest neither of these are healthy.

is it not possible that both could be right? the author certainly had an intention in mind when writing (and only living authors have the ability to defend their intention), but intention is not everything. context, context, context. the author is a contextual being. the premise of literary criticism is that that context might inject itself into the work, whether the author meant to or not, whether the author was even aware of it or not. communication is a two-way street: you speak, i receive. you cannot, however, control what i receive. you might use certain strategies to avoid ambiguity, but your context will dictate certain things to you, and mine will dictate things to me.

let us take an example. an author writes a science fiction novel. a feminist critic reads the novel and declares it to be a boorish defense of patriarchy. the author protests there was no intention to talk about patriarchy one way or another in the novel. the critic points out settings, language, characterisations, and plot devices which point to a worldview which views patriarchy as beneficial. the author complains the critic is a feminist, so he or she must be reading his or her own ideology into the critique. the critic claims that it is merely his or her background in feminist ideology shows the characteristics in the novel, but they are there regardless.

both people are probably right. we must believe the author when he or she says the intention was not there. however, his or her philosophical stance will colour the novel. someone who believes men have a natural right to rule will not (unless trying very hard or possibly as a challenge) write a novel where, say, an all-female society is given a positive assessment. there may have been no intent to include gender views in the novel, but they will be there nonetheless, simply because they are the author's context.

at this point in the debate, the ethical thing is for the critic to accept the author's assertion of his or her own intentionality, but not necessarily to back down on the critique. sadly, too often in my experience, it is only the latter that happens. this is often easier because the author is dead (in the case of the literature i analyze, often long dead), and unable to contest the critic's reading. as valid as that reading is, i still think that the critic always ought to be prepared to admit that what he or she sees may not be what the author intended. however, this often gives power to the analysis. if the author did not intend the ideology betrayed in the writing, it means that it provides, perhaps, a clearer window into the author's context, society, culture, etc, since it is unshaped by concious intention. the conclusions of literary criticism are often accurate and valid. but they should also be humble.

see? i said i would come up with something interesting to post.

finals are over.

i'll try to think of something interesting to say soon.

facebook.

just say no.

current reading.

Blue Like Jazz: Nonreligious Thoughts on Christian Spirituality
by Donald Miller

a friend lent this to me. it is... very rambly. my initial reaction was that it reminds me of a christian Catcher in the Rye. this was before i reached the spot in his book where he says he loves that book. so i guess my literary analysis skills are still up to snuff *grin*

it's a very... honest book. he's got his filters off, which is something unusual for a christian author.

no, you stupid cat, stop chewing on it, this isn't my book, i have to give it back!

spring.

passover, easter, the equinox. flip-flops. allergies. not in that order.

allergies appear to be bad this year. either that, or i have one last cold.

back to school today after two weeks off. one more paper left to write (due tomorrow).

somehow the daffodils pre-empted the crocuses this year.

yeah, that's about it. happy spring.

consumption & current reading.

for... er, the winter-gift-giving-holidays, he bought me a sony ebook reader ("touch edition" - i'd link to sony, but it's a terrible flash page). i says "holidays" because he went out and bought it something like 2 weeks before christmas, brought it home, wrapped it, and then decided i should open it two days later because he wasn't patient enought to wait until christmas. so call it my hannukah gift.

anyway. i had done some of the research and opted for the sony mostly because i spent $40 printing pdfs of journal articles for one of my papers last semester and decided that not only was the price ridiculous, but killing the trees was as well. the kindle and the nook (which wasn't out yet at the time) are both geared toward reading actual books, whereas i was going to use mine for research. and ironically, the sony was actually the most open model, handling pdfs natively (drm and no drm), word docs given word installed on the same machine, undrm-ed epub files, rentable-from-public-libraries epubs, drmed epubs, and all of google books.

it's been pretty nice, actually. i've been reading pdfs and word docs either downloaded for research or from my professors on the train on the way to class. the screen is a little glare-y, as most reviews note, but adjusting the angle slightly away from a direct light source solves the problem. i like the touchscreen, and i love being able to make notes and underline things with the included stylus.

i have also discovered that the sony ebook store carries all of jim butcher's stuff. i've been reading his dresden files for a couple years now, but he started another series recently. i broke down today and bought one. it was a surprisingly painless experience: choose the book, enter payment info into the sony reader software, and it downloads automatically. then, similar to the ipod, it authorizes your reader for the drm and transfers it over usb. i would, of course, prefer to have non-drm options, but i realize that's not terribly realistic yet, although it may be coming. i do have 12 un-drmed ebooks i got from tor's promotion a few years ago, which was an apparent success financially speaking. but since i have a sony reader, i might as well encourage more publishers to opt for sony's store over, say, amazon.

divide by zero.

so coke has come out with new "portion controlled" 7.5oz cans. this makes sense for the high-fructose-corn-syrup-impregnated beverages.

but they've also come out with 7.5oz cans of diet coke and coke zero. how do i know? we got a free 8-pack of the coke zero cans yesterday due to a supermarket promotion.

now. a 12oz can of coke zero is 0 calories. a 7.5oz can of coke zero is... yes. 0 calories. so why go through the effort of "portion controlling" a zero-calorie beverage? we switched to coke zero a while ago, because it does taste more like real coke than diet coke (ew).

but i'm a little confused by the purpose of this product. unless it's for people like me, who can barely finish a 12oz can of coke (unless i'm deydrated or eating something salty). but given the whole no-calorie thing, what would prompt me to stop buying cases of 12 12oz cans, and instead buy 8 7.5oz cans? the financial difference is miniscule. the calorie difference is nonexistant. why did they bother?

winter cookery.

it's snowing. again. another foot of snow is predicted by the end of the day tomorrow.

seriously. this is getting a bit ridiculous.

with all the snow and cold and stuff, i've been cooking things that only get cooked in winter. a chicken has been roasted, the meat is in the fridge, and stock is in the freezer (i put off writing the paper this time, so i actually got stock).

and now lasagne is in the oven. lasagne is one of those dishes that i really just can't cook in the summer. i don't know if it's the hour in the oven, or just the heaviness of the noodles and cheese. unfortunately, it means making it with dried herbs, but hey. nothing's perfect. i have my own meatless recipe that i made up a while ago. maybe i'll make this next time. if i can talk him into eating it.

snowmageddon.

12" saturday, then 21" wednesday. wow. haven't seen snow like this since i left mcgill. this is a zoomed-in picture of the golf from yesterday morning before we dug out. the antenna was almost completely engulfed.

it was nice having a couple days off... kind of like an extra weekend :) school was cancelled and i telecommuted to work.

guess i should do some homework anyway.

click the picture for my collection from the last 2 days. i got to play with the "snow" mode on my camera.

winter.

what the fucking fuck?

groundhog doesn't lie, i guess.

and i got the cars all dug out, too. i would probably love this if i didn't have a car, and a job, and wasn't in graduate school.

oh well. better get more firewood, i guess.

stupid weather.

it rained all day yesterday and now it is sunny. the air pressure has changed.

my sinuses have been attempting to explode their way out of my skull since 3am.

ow.

happy new year.

2010.

as someone pointed out last night, technically this is the last year of the decade, as there is no year 0. so save all those "top 10 of the decade" lists for one more year.

i hate being sick. this sucks.

on the other hand, i didn't get a burning candle spilled on me this year, so maybe 2010 will be better than 2009.

time to brace for winter. all the holidays are over.