I saw a hawk catch a snake today at Strybing Arboretum. The hawk first settled into a tall pine with its prize, but hectoring blue jay forced it out into another tree, where it struggled with the unwieldy meal. More shots in my SF album.
« March 2006 | Main | May 2006 »
I saw a hawk catch a snake today at Strybing Arboretum. The hawk first settled into a tall pine with its prize, but hectoring blue jay forced it out into another tree, where it struggled with the unwieldy meal. More shots in my SF album.
Apr 30, 2006 in San Francisco | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBack (0)
|
God, I love YouTube. Thanks to Bill Cross over at SportsFrog's Swamp for finding this on Daily Pepper.
Apr 28, 2006 in Music, Personal | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBack (0)
|
I'm not a parent, and my nieces and nephews aren't yet in high school, so I'm pretty much out of the loop with regard to what it takes to get into a competitive college these days. Thus my surprise at learning about the "admissions packaging" industry, represented by such groups as IvyWise, whose services start with the "Nursery School Package" and range all the way through grad school.
I fully support the idea that experienced professionals can help a kid explore and understand their interests and abilities, so that the admission process isn't simply about getting into the "best" school but about getting into the school and starting down the life path that's best-suited to that particular kid.
But the recent plagiarism furor surrounding young author Kaavya Viswanathan, an IvyWise client who's now a sophomore at Harvard, suggests that "admissions packaging" can go beyond helping a kid understand herself better in order to present herself more effectively to an Admissions Committee. These services don't just "package" people--they invent them. There can be a kernel of truth in these exercises--Viswanathan was actually interested in writing, and ultimately a book was written (although apparently by committee)--but taken to extremes, they're fundamentally phony and inauthentic.
OK, so why does a childless guy like me care? I'm never going to be an IvyWise client. I care because this isn't just about getting into college or one kid's plagiarism. It's about the fact that we are now marketing ourselves more self-consciously and at ever-younger ages, and because marketing--and packaging in particular--can have such a powerful impact, we owe it to our authentic selves and to the audiences we're seeking to reach to do so responsibly.
Malcolm Gladwell described Louis Cheskin's concept of "sensation transference" in Blink,
[M]ost of us don't make a distinction--on an unconscious level--between the package and the product. The product is the package and the product combined.
Sleazy marketers and flim-flam artists of all stripes have abused this process so thoroughly over the years that it sounds shady, a type of trickery. But nevertheless it works--as Gladwell reports, marketers have demonstrated that ice cream tastes better if it comes in a cylindrical container instead of a rectangular one, brandy tastes better if it comes in a decanter instead of a wine bottle, and margarine tastes better if it's colored yellow instead of white.
It's one thing to rely on superior packaging to transform food; it's another to use the same process to transform ourselves. I'm not railing against the practice--it's here to stay, and I'm sure it can be of real value when applied appropriately. But there's a line that separates a more effective presentation of our authentic self from the creation of an inauthentic self intended to make a more favorable impression than our authentic self ever could. And if we cross that line, and grab whatever brass ring we thought would elude our authentic self, what have we won? And at what cost?
Apr 28, 2006 in Personal | Permalink | Comments (1) | TrackBack (0)
|
In the May 1st New Yorker, Bill Buford goes to Italy, satiates his bloodlust, realizes that kitsch can be beautiful, returns to New York, and butchers a 200 lb. pig on his kitchen table.
(And if it's true, I'm particularly impressed by the fact that he transported the dead pig home from the market slung over the handlebars of his Vespa with his wife riding pillion. No mean feat, to be sure.)
My favorite pork chop recipe, adapted from Cook's Illustrated, after the jump.
Apr 28, 2006 in Personal | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBack (0)
|
Some days you feel like Brando, some days you feel like Martin Sheen.
Apr 27, 2006 in Personal | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBack (0)
|
Writer and activist Jane Jacobs died yesterday, just a few days short of her 90th birthday. She was a hero to all of us who love cities and the unique richness of urban life, who prefer walking to driving, and who believe that individuals left to their own devices will typically make a better world than top-down, bureaucratic planners. (She also deserves acclaim simply for her ability to be both an influential theorist and an effective activist while working independently, without the support of a university gig or some other cushy sinecure.)
She wasn't perfect, and I don't think all of her theories hold water, but we're all in her debt nonetheless. Her work became popular in the early 1960s, just as opposition to urban freeways began to grow in cities throughout North America. Local writers such as Allen Temko and activists such as Sue Bierman were ultimately responsible for blocking those freeways here in San Francisco, but Jacobs' writings played an influential role in the larger movement. And as I look out my window at the Panhandle, a beautiful park that was slated to be turned into an eight-lane highway running right through the heart of my leafy, tree-lined neighborhood, I'm so grateful to her and her contemporaries for their efforts.
UPDATE: Leonard Gilroy of the Reason Foundation has a great piece on Jane Jacobs in the May 2 Wall Street Journal:
Given urban planners' almost universal reverence for Jacobs, it is ironic that many have largely ignored or misinterpreted the central lesson of "Death and Live"--that cities are vibrant living systems, not the product of grand utopian schemes concocted by overzealous planners...
[Contemporary] planning trends run completely counter to Jacobs's vision of cities as dynamic economic engines that thrive on private initiative, trial-and-error, incremental change, and human and economic diversity. Jacobs believed the most organic and healthy communities are diverse, messy and arise out of spontaneous order, not from a scheme that tries to dictate how people should live and how neighborhoods should look.
She felt it was foolish to focus on how cities look rather than how they function as economic laboratories. "The main responsibility of city planning and design should be to develop--insofar as public policy and action can do so--cities that are congenial places for [a] great range of unofficial plans, ideas and opportunities to flourish," Jacobs wrote.
There's a thread running through these ideas: "messy," "diverse," "spontaneous," and perhaps most importantly, "unofficial." As I noted earlier, Jacobs believed that individuals making choices on their own will build a better world than any bureaucracy, no matter how well-intentioned, and when we act independently, without formal authority, things get messy. And that's an essential element if a city is to function as an economic and social marketplace, if it is to have life.
tag: jane jacobs
Apr 26, 2006 in Design | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBack (0)
|
Apr 22, 2006 in San Francisco | Permalink | Comments (2) | TrackBack (0)
|
I'm not sure where I first heard of The Country Girl, but I wish I could remember and give credit where it's due. It made a lot of noise back in 1954--Oscars for Grace Kelly and for director George Seaton's screenplay (based on Clifford Odets' 1950 play), and nominations for Bing Crosby, Seaton's direction, and Best Picture, as well as art direction and cinematography--but you rarely hear of it today.
Crosby's a washed-up, hard-drinking actor, Kelly is his long-suffering wife, and the outstanding William Holden is a bigshot Broadway director who gives Crosby one last chance at redemption and falls in love with Kelly in the process. The plot takes some mildly surprising twists, but it's fairly heavy-handed--it's Odets, what'd ya expect? And if this is nomination-worthy cinematography, then the Fifties were pretty lean years, visually speaking.
But the principals truly deliver the goods. Crosby is so neglected these days it's a mortal sin. Everyone from Sinatra to Satchmo to Elvis has had a revival, but Crosby--who was bigger in his day than any of them--remains woefully underappreciated. And although I'm primarily a fan of his singing, he's probably the best singing actor ever, and this is one of his best roles. Kelly's stiff, ornamental style usually leaves me less than enthralled, but I really fell for her here. And William Holden! I've never seen "Sunset Blvd." or "Stalag 17," and it's flicks like this that remind me what an ignorant fool I am.
tags: the country girl bing crosby grace kelly william holden clifford odets george seaton
Apr 21, 2006 in Personal | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBack (0)
|
Kudos to Slate for Tyler Cowen's outstanding series of "Dispatches" on New Orleans. Cowen, an econ prof at George Mason and co-author at Marginal Revolution, provides some refreshingly candid analysis of the city's post-Katrina challenges. From Tuesday's piece:
Since so many homes were destroyed, the natural inclination is to build safer or perhaps impregnable structures. But that is the wrong response. No one should or will rebuild or insure expensive homes on vulnerable ground...
Instead, the city should help create cheap housing by reducing legal restrictions on building quality, building safety, and required insurance... Once the current ruined structures are razed, governmental authorities should make it possible for entrepreneurs to put up less-expensive buildings. Many of these will be serviceable, but not all will be pretty. We could call them structures with expected lives of less than 50 years. Or we could call them shacks.
What is the advantage of turning wrecked wards into shantytowns? The choice is between cheap real estate or abandonment. The land will not sustain high-rent, high-quality real estate... If various levels of government try to mandate higher values than the land will support, the private sector will simply withdraw its participation, leaving nothing behind.
...Reducing building restrictions so developers can put up cheap housing quickly is probably the best way to jump-start recovery. For starters, cheap housing might be one means of inducing migrants—many of them Latino immigrants—who have come to the city for temporary construction jobs to stay. And as low-cost laborers settle in the city, they'll boost economic activity and pay taxes, thereby attracting corporations, service suppliers, and entrepreneurial small businesses. It would be fitting if New Orleans were rebuilt, both physically and culturally, by Latin and Caribbean immigrants. After all, the city has long been influenced by Hispanic and Caribbean settlers...
From Wednesday's entry:
The city has so far been ambivalent about the influx of new [Latino] workers. But New Orleans should embrace its new residents, since Latinos will drive the city's structural and cultural renewal and help New Orleans claim a future for itself...
In October, Mayor Ray Nagin asked, "How do I ensure that New Orleans is not overrun by Mexican workers?" The answer: Do not rebuild.
And from today:
In the realm of higher education, the cultural renewal of New Orleans is well under way. Unlike the city itself, New Orleans' universities are almost back to normal, with some creative adjustment...
So why have the universities done so much better than the city as a whole? First, the universities were never wracked by extreme corruption and bad governance. They have continued to pursue success and avoided getting snarled up in questions about who is really in charge. New Orleans must deal with politically divided federal, state, and local governments, but the universities have clear administrative chains of command, starting with their boards and presidents.
The more definite lines of accountability and authority lead to clearer priorities. The universities are focusing on what economists call their comparative advantages—the things they do better than other institutions...
The city, by contrast, has no sense of what must go and no vision of success. No leaders have articulated a vision for the city that balances the myriad competing local interests. The buck stops nowhere and many officials and citizens seem to wait for Washington to solve every problem. For any specific difficulty, the mayor blames Michael Brown, who blames Secretary Chertoff, who blames Gov. Blanco, who blames President Bush. Nobody is held accountable for failure to lead or failure to enforce the law and protect property rights. And as in any patronage system, a suggestion to cut failing programs is usually dead on arrival. The city sees spending money and delivering contracts to constituents (read: interest groups) as an end in itself....
Cowen's vision is both encouraging and depressing; the former because he proposes some innovative but concrete steps the city could take to revitalize itself, and the latter because his portrayal of the city's governing culture suggests that it's unlikely that such measures will actually be implemented.
Sigh.
Apr 20, 2006 in Personal | Permalink | Comments (0)
|
Amy and I spent last weekend at Carmel, a long-overdue getaway that we nearly canceled. Thankfully we didn't, and we spent most of Saturday at Point Lobos, a spectacular state park just a few miles to the south. It's a stunning place, rich with California's natural weirdness. Above, the "Old Veteran" cypress, clinging to a nearly sheer cliff that drops into a narrow cove. Below, cormorants atop a haystack, studiously ignoring each other. There are a few more snapshots in my Miscellaneous photo album.
Apr 17, 2006 in San Francisco | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBack (0)
|

