Things that have been annoying me lately on the Globe and Mail website.

1. Anti-union comments:
This started a while back and continues even now: Rabid Torontonians and "helpful" members of other municipalities and/or countries offer suggestions like "Let's be Reagan...just fire all of these lazy morons and hire new garbage collectors" or "How about we publish the addresses of the union members and dump our trash on their lawns!" I am not sure if these people are just perilously ignorant of how a union works, or genuinely misanthropic.

Let's get something straight: I am not unionized; I have no agenda in favour of or against unions. But there's a world of difference between a unionized worker and the union itself. If you don't like the way or the fact that a strike is happening, you can complain about the union. You can complain about the union captain, who called the strike. But you never, ever antagonize the people who belong to that union, because they are not calling the shots. A union works because all of its members agree to take collective action to defend their interests. When a strike is called, the union only has power when everyone goes on strike...not just fifteen guys who feel like taking a break. To work when others stop is more or less treason. So how dare these high-handed elitists who are angry about having to drive somewhere to dispose of their trash scorn the union members for doing what has been commanded of them?

2. Anti-health care comments:
Another one that's been raging for awhile, ever since Obama announced his plans for reforming US health care. Nobody believes Canada's healthcare system is perfect. We struggle, we know that. But seriously? Stop using us as your poster child for how socialized medicine can go wrong. Ask any Canadian (well, outside petrodollar-flush Alberta) if they'd rather trade our system for the American one. You will get a firm and resounding NO from the overwhelming majority. We are proud of our universal health care; we don't care to be told we shouldn't be.

3. Antivaccinationists/conspiracy theorists:
I've heard enough from just about every party on the H1N1 issue...vaccine makers, government officials, the WHO (incidentally, an organization I feel would benefit from transforming themselves into the band The Who), scientists, doctors, etc. But the people who are talking the loudest and in the most grating tones are the antivaccinationists and conspiracy theorists who are clogging up the comments page with their declarations of the imminent danger of influenza vaccines.

Some people like to point to the Guillain-Barre syndrome episode of the 1970s (as if medical and vaccine technology hasn't changed AT ALL in nearly 40 years). Others just like to foam at the mouth about how Big Pharma is trying to subdue us all with mind-control drugs. Seriously, what is it about a pandemic that brings all the crazies out of the woodwork? I'm not saying we need to be handing out Tamiflu and other antivirals like candy; I'm saying people need to shut their mouths. Get the flu shot, don't get the flu shot, I don't really care. But stay the hell away from me if you choose not to be vaccinated.

4. This:

"Researchers at the University of Oxford cautioned about the broad use of anti-viral drugs to treat children 12 years of age and younger suffering from seasonal flu. They found anti-viral drugs have little or no effect on asthma flare-ups, ear infections or bacterial infections in children."

Really? The antivirals weren't working?

Maybe it's because none of that shit is caused by viruses!

Asthma is an autoimmune response brought on by triggers such as pollen, smog, and exercise. Bacteria are by far the most common source of pain-causing middle ear infections, especially in children. And should ANYONE be surprised that antivirals do a bad job of curing bacterial infections? Really, Oxford? Really?

5. Anti-Globe and Mail comments:
So you don't like the Globe. You think it's reporting frivolous trash not worthy of even Page Six mention. Excellent. HOW ABOUT YOU STOP READING IT, THEN.

Wafergate

Canada's latest and greatest political conflagration:

Stephen Harper, while attending the funeral of former Governor-General Romeo Leblanc, supposedly accepted the host from the priest, and tucked it into his pocket. The host is considered the body of Christ, and is therefore meant to be eaten immediately, not treated disrespectfully (see: Toronto Archdiocese's director of communications Neil MacCarthy: "We never throw Jesus out."), so I can understand why this would be a big deal - if it had actually happened.

Here is the sum total of the physical evidence we have that Stephen Harper doesn't know how to behave at a Catholic funeral:
a) After a moment of uncertainty, he accepted the host from the priest and held it for approximately two seconds.
b) The camera stopped filming.

So this comes down to eyewitness accounts: there are a handful of people who say Harper did put the host in his pocket, and a handful who say he did not; that he it ate like he was supposed to. Somehow, out of this, we've managed to create an enormous furore, with some members of the Catholic community calling Harper's behaviour "scandalous".

Really? This is what we're turning into a political scandal? A religious faux pas whose occurrence we cannot even verify? This may be a good example of why many people find Canadian politics boring and petty.

I F*@%^ing Hate the Theatre

I am a university student. I love reading. I subscribe to the Globe and Mail. I like to consider myself well-educated...but I would much, much rather see a movie than go to the theatre.

Yesterday, as part of the Fringe Festival (and I really do endorse the idea of the Fringe), I saw a play. And it was terrible. The premise (a new take on the classic story of Little Red Riding Hood) seemed promising...until we found out that the "new take" was French structuralism. Cue endless pontification by the characters, incomprehensible metaphors from the very French and frankly psychopathic Monsieur Woolf, and, worst of all, endless references to the idiosyncrasies of obscure French structuralism theorists! (And, to the smug literary jerks students sitting behind me, laughing at every joke like it was Russell Peters doing an impression of his father, shut up. Everyone knows you didn't understand the play either.)

Let me clarify: Reification? Signifiers? Existentialist expressions of zero? NONE OF THAT SHIT BELONGS IN A COMEDY!

I'm not going to name the play because I don't want to single it out...let's face it, there's so much bad theatre out there, there is no reason to pretend the terrible-ness of this play in particular was extraordinary or unusual.

This brings me to my next point: movies.
As I've mentioned, I'm pretty sure I'm well-educated, at least compared to most others my age, and yet? Most theatre does not appeal to me. Theatre just tries too hard a lot of the time. It tries to tackle big topics and big crises, to be somehow more real than real life, to leave a lasting message with the audience, to show off how much smarter and more refined and more sophisticated it is than the crass popular media.

The problem with this mindset is that the popular media are so called because they are liked by many. Multi-million-dollar movies produced by big-name filmhouses are designed specifically to appeal to as many people as possible - that's how they make their money. When I watch a movie, I am fully aware that I am being manipulated by the sound track, the special effects, the imagery, and the dialogue, into having certain feelings...and I'm okay with that! I watch movies to be entertained: movies that I enjoy are successful in entertaining me and others because they were specifically engineered to be liked by a broad range of people.

Theatre, beyond obvious mass-appeal shows such as Phantom of the Opera or musicals, doesn't seem to share this goal. Rather than skilfully eliciting desired responses from the audience through the story, acting, and technical aspects, much of theatre seems to be designed to confuse, condescend, and betray. That's why I'd prefer to watch Made of Honor over Man of Mode.

A Livent Lecture Series?

Drabinsky and Gottlieb, who single-handedly proved that even doddering old guys can still rip you off, cooked the books at their failing Toronto theatre company not once, not twice, but every single quarter for six years to hide their decreasing revenue. Some people might call this creative accounting; the federal government prefers to call it fraud. They were arrested and charged accordingly, and now their lawyers have apparently decided that, instead of jail, it would be a good idea for Gottlieb and Drabinsky to give lectures to university students.

Of course, the Crown immediately dismissed it out of hand, for some crazy reason like "We don't let people who repeatedly manipulate their financial accounts get out of fraud charges by giving lectures on the 'discipline of the craft'".

But let's not be too hasty here:

In prison, the two gentlemen will likely face aggressive guards and inmates, restricted movement, lots of time confined to a cell, gangs, drugs and riots.

In the lecture hall, they'll be exposed to rampant texting, the slack faces of the stoned/hungover/drunk, an endless parade of latecomers who are neither apologetic nor quiet, temperamental slide projectors and sound systems, and a sea of open laptops indubitably all cruising through Facebook and Twitter, ready to deliver a different type of verdict on them in a few short lines of text:
"wtf who duz this guy think he is? im sooooooooo bored! y do i even come to this class?!?!!"

The lectures are starting to sound more and more like a serious punishment to me. Frankly, I think Gottlieb and Drabinsky are better off going to prison.

A set of haiku, in honour of my bicycle seat

Oh seat of my bike:
Touched with my hand, you feel soft;
My butt disagrees.

Lean forward, lean back:
No position is comfy.
I ride home in pain.

Thanks to the seat nose
all chance of reproduction*
is lost to me now.



*http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bicycle_saddle#Crotch_pressure

Bill 44

Oh, God love Alberta. Alberta, like my sister and her country music, "brings the hick" to this place.

So, after staying up, like, WAY past their bedtime, the members of the Alberta legislature voted in, by a wide majority, Bill 44. Its mandate? To require teachers to notify parents, in writing, of upcoming lessons that will involve information about sex, sexual orientation, or religion. Then, if parents feel the content is objectionable, they are free to withdraw their children from that lesson.

...What the hell?

And, as a real kicker, this was all done under the auspices of the provincial charter of Human Rights. As in, parents have a human right to pull their kid from school. What kind of human right is that?

It was the Conservatives (big shocker right there) who pushed the bill through, so, naturally, it's the right-wing Christians who are largely its backer. They're afraid of controversy, of new information diluting their children's beliefs; their solution is to remove controversy from the curriculum by ensuring their precious children never have to hear anything that might shake the foundations of what "universal truths" mommy and daddy have already sown in their fertile young minds.

This is ridiculous, and I say that as a Christian. Christians have never been shy about controversy. The man we follow and call Saviour was nailed to a cross! Our whole religion is founded on controversy, so what's with the sudden revolt against it?

Some parents are happy about the bill for reasons other than their religious beliefs. They believe it is their responsibility to teach kids about sex, morality, etc. Frankly, they're wrong:
Teachers are held accountable for what they say. They follow a series of guiding principles, created by the Board, detailing what is and is not appropriate to say. If they do say something inappropriate, they say it to twenty-five sets of little ears, and you can bet some of those kids go home and yell, "Mom, guess what the teacher said today!" That's why teachers who want to keep their jobs can't say things like, "Jewish people are bad" or "Gays should burn in hell" or "All Christians are right-wing nutjobs". Parents, on the other hand, have no such check or balance in place against them. They may say even, fair-minded things to their kids anyway, but for the sake of children whose parents might tell them things I can't even say in a public forum, let's leave some of the teaching of these touchy subjects to a civil servant who won't be instructing their children on picketing funerals or denying the Holocaust.

Ignorance--it's the gift that keeps on giving!

The British National Party

Because I'm hopelessly nerdy and possibly English, I receive The Guardian in my feed reader (as opposed to, you know, any newspapers from the country in which I actually reside). I was listening to a Guardian podcast a few days ago, and heard that the British National Party, the far-far-far-right federal party, had captured a significant number of seats in some former Labour strongholds. Naturally, I decided to check out their website, and WOW am I glad I did.

To be honest, it's probably one of the best-designed party websites I've ever seen, British or Canadian. From the nav bar to the very clear platform policies, there is no mistaking who the party is or what they stand for. The problem is, what they stand for is, well, primarily the protection and preservation of "Britain's indigenous people" - aka, whites.

Then, of course, there's the push to bring back corporal punishment for "petty criminals and vandals". Really? Their solution to rising violence and civil mutiny is spankings, or a couple turns with the Strap?

Next, they turn to defence: apparently, the same nation who entered World War I in defense of Belgium, following Germany's broken promise not to invade the neutral country, now has much more important things to do than participate in "meddling ‘peace-keeping’ missions".

And did you know white Britons are "second-class citizens" in England? So who exactly constitutes the first class, then? Frankly, I can't think of any country where white people are treated as second-class citizens. White people the world over are treated to their own affirmative action or "positive discrimination" every day. That's why the average white still makes more money, lives in a better neighbourhood, has more education, and is better represented in the government than the average individual belonging to any other ethnic category.

I find it particularly interesting that the BNP refer several times in their policies to the removal of "politically correct" language and double-speak from schools, the workplace, and law enforcement. It seems to me that a political party based entirely on a thinly-veiled platform of xenophobia would, by necessity, have to use that kind of language to defend themselves.

But hey, we're talking about the fascists here, and we know what a history of good planning and political integrity the fascist movement has always maintained.

Oh, and check this out. I laughed.
For a very long time.

Great.
So, because the person who made me get this blog in the first place then announced that 95% of all blogs die within a year, or something like that, I've been guilted into firing this one up again.
The good news is, I have a list of topics I want to cover. So, I can promise at least one update per week. I can't promise it will be exciting or hilarious, but it will be written.

That is all.


Actually, on another note, I just attempted to download GoogleChrome. What I got was the BSoD. Another quality product from the Google family!

HARMONIZED SALES TAX

"Harmonized sales tax" is probably the most spectacular April Fool's Day prank I've seen in years...too bad it's an actual tax policy.

We started talking about it yesterday as part of a general discussion of Canadian politics. I wasn't sure what "harmonized" meant, but it sounded nice. Well, as it turns out, "harmonized" is just a weasel word for "tax grab"!

The province has taken the liberty of combining GST and PST into a single (therefore "harmonized") sales tax, claiming it will be simpler and lead to more tax rebates for the lowest-income families, blah blah blah.

What it really means is that we'll now be paying PST as well on everything we currently pay GST on. Because I'm a student, my two greatest purchases are food and books--neither of which I've previously ever had to pay PST on! (Admittedly, most of my groceries are zero-rated--that is, the taxes are applied at a rate of 0%, meaning I'll continue not paying tax on them.) But seriously! How did McGuilty get away with this?!

And the best part? The memorandum published to explain the tax rules for food under GST and HST includes the following policy statements:

P-79R The Supply of Fondue Chocolate, P-81R Tax Status of De-Alcoholized Wine, P-213 GST/HST Status of Certain Ice Cream, Ice Milk, Sherbet, Frozen Yoghurt, Frozen Pudding Products, P-224 Meaning of Catering Services, P-232 Meaning of "Other Arrangements of Prepared Food", P-240 Application of GST/HST to Products Commonly Described as "Dietary Supplements" and P-241 Meaning of "Other Similar Snack Food" Under Paragraph 1(f) of Part III of Schedule VI to the Excise Tax Act.

Any government that has a policy statement about the supply of fondue chocolate is either brilliant or hopeless.

MUSICIANS:

I am an artist who does not create art.

This is not my phrase, just a very good description of my life to date.
In fact, I may be worse than an artist: I am a musician.

Artists struggle to create something outside of themselves. But art is easier to recognize than music. Some pieces of art are derided as being "too abstract" or "too modern". But we can understand that colours on canvas, pencil on paper, metal or stone carved to shape, are kinds of art. We may think they're worthless, but we understand that they are art.

Music is not the same. Music that is not recognized as music is just noise. We struggle too, to create something outside of ourselves, and 99% of us will never succeed. Even a child can create art; it takes a gifted hand to create music. I have been a musician for fourteen years, and all I have to show of my own work is an eight-bar chord progression. Nothing else. Music is so hard to come by that we are forced to replicate the works of grand masters when our own efforts to create fail.
And though the music of our grand masters is indeed formidable, it is not our own. We cannot even make it our own when we play it: our interpretation is not judged by its own merits--it is determined to be successful or unsucessful depending on how faithful we were to the composer's intentions, on how well we emulated their style. Horowitz, Zimerman, Rubenstein, Yundi...everyone has their favourite, and their favourite is inevitably the performer they believe has most closely presented the piece "the way it was meant to be played".

Painters do not spend their lives reproducing Mona Lisas and water lilies, and being praised for their adherence to the original. They strike out on their own, experimenting, showing the world what they see. But our lives are much worse as musicians, because we overwhelmingly cannot show the world what we hear.

THE VIOLIN:

Ryan Mills' thoughts on violins:

Do you have a Stradivarius? No. Oh. So does it even have those S-shaped holes?
--Those are F-holes, Mills.
Really? They look like "S"s to me. Doesn't S stand for Stradivarius? You know, his name used to be Tadivarius. He changed it to Stradivarius because of the holes. The S-holes.

Why I love biology:

There are just so many questions to ask!
"How exactly did they hold the toads' mouths shut?"
"Why did they take them out on a battleship to torture them?"
"So if we eat parasites, I won't have allergies?"
"How can I use gene manipulation to grow myself a sixth finger? No, really. I need it to play La Campanella."

Well, shut my mouth wide open!

So...
The Dvorak experiment failed. Well, failed for now. I just couldn't adapt fast enough...although Dvorak has left its own peculiar handprint on me.
It really is much, much more efficient, and as a consequence I still have to fight the urge to type "the" as "kjd", the corresponding Dvorak keys.
Anyway. This summer. Rumour has it that Mavis Beacon teaches Dvorak.

Also, I'm going to New Orleans now. Peace!

DVORAK--DAY TWO:
Forced brevity due to lack of profiency with Dvorak layout.
Am getting pretty good with the home row, though.
aoeu-id-htns

Where has the semicolon gone?

5:22PM:
Current WPM: 11
I don't think I'll be ready by tomorrow. But I can definitely feel the improved efficiency, even going this slowly. Dvorak is much more intuitive than QWERTY.

Hello, neglected blog!
I promise to use you more now.

DVORAK:
I've decided to learn how to use the Dvorak simplified keyboard. I switched my keyboard settings and made myself some key caps with adhesive labels. Very high-tech, I know.
These words I'm typing are the last I will type (hopefully) on a QWERTY keyboard. I expect the learning curve for Dvorak will be very steep, but hopefully the longterm benefits will outweigh the costs.
For the record, according to an online wordcounter widget, my average WPM is only about 80 on a QWERTY keyboard (although writing awkward words like "QWERTY" certainly doesn't help me type any faster.
I don't have class tomorrow (Thursday), but I do have a class on Friday at 12:30, which is when I'll be needing to take notes on my laptop. It is my goal to be able to type fast enough in Dvorak simplified to keep up in that class.

HOUR ONE:
I can't seem to find any of the keys I want. Even the apostrophe has been moved. Current WPM: 8.