Stray Thoughts & Ruminations

Couldn't Have Said It Better

2009-11-16T15:41:00.002-05:00

Creations & Conflicts

2009-11-12T21:32:00.003-05:00

When I was a teen, I spent a number of Saturday evenings watching campy Frankenstein movies on TV. Strangely enough, I’d never actually read Mary Shelley’s classic book. I can now report that I’ve corrected that oversight and, in addition to having seen many (but certainly not all) of the Frankenstein movies, I've read the book that spawned the films. As I read Frankenstein, I was struck by some parallels and contrasts I saw between that story and the Genesis account of creation. As I sat down to write this post, I was also struck by a connection I perceived between Frankenstein, Genesis and the Conflict Model of family relationships (also often specified as a model of parent-child relationships), as elucidated by Steven Pinker.

I’ll begin by considering Frankenstein and Genesis. Obviously, Victor Frankenstein, the fictitious creator, is analogous to God, and the monster, the created being is analogous to humankind. Another analog exists between the relative appeal of Frankenstein/God and the created beings. Frankenstein is brilliant and well-loved, and God, of course, is perfect and lacks nothing. In contrast, Adam, Eve and the monster are all flawed beings who unwittingly offend their creators. As the Genesis story goes, Adam and Eve offend their creator when they disobey him; up to that point, the threesome got along just swell. Unfortunately, Adam and Eve learned, after the fact, that the only way to retain their creator’s favor was to obey him without fail. Victor Frankenstein’s monster offends his maker the moment his eyes blink open. The poor sod never had a chance to win his creator’s favor – Frankenstein was repelled by his creation at the instant he gave it life, a revulsion that he nursed and carried with him for the rest of his life. Yet another analog exists between the responses of the creators to their creations: God banishes Adam and Eve from the Garden of Eden, cursing them to fend for themselves in a world that suddenly has been rendered harsh, and Frankenstein abandons the being he created to fend for himself in a strange world populated by people who treat him harshly.

There are, of course, some points at which the similarities break down. For example, Frankenstein never felt any affection for his creation; from the moment the monster opened his eyes and drew breath, Frankenstein sought to destroy him. At several points in the story, the monster begs Frankenstein to make some provisions for him. Finally, he begs for a mate, so that he will not have to spend his entire life alone. Having learned from his brutal experiences that no human being will ever accept him, the monster seeks a companion like himself with whom he can spend his life (similarly, after Adam fails to find a suitable companion in the animal kingdom, God creates Eve to be his companion). Frankenstein breaks down and promises to provide a female companion for the creature. Shortly afterwards, partway through the completion of the task he finds deeply repulsive, he reneges on his promise and destroys the female creature. Consequently, the monster is doomed to live in isolation until the day he dies. In the Frankenstein story, creator and creature will never be reconciled. In contrast, the Genesis story holds that God and humankind can be reconciled, but only at tremendous costs. The humans have to offer repeated animal sacrifices to atone for their wrongdoing and/or appease God’s wrath. (Jumping ahead several centuries - God eventually takes the pressure off the humans and offers the ultimate perfect sacrifice to himself.)

If you google “Frankenstein as cautionary tale,” you’ll find some interesting applications of Shelley’s tale. Some say that humans are cautioned not to “play God” by delving too deeply into scientific inquiries. Others say that it cautions people against judging others on the basis of appearances. Still others say that it’s a cautionary tale against bad parenting. On this view, Victor Frankenstein is, to say the least, a dead-beat dad. This last caution brings me to my final point of discussion, the Conflict Model of family relationships. Steven Pinker has popularized this view in some of his books. One writer summarizes this view thus:

Pinker points out that since a parent shares 50% of his or her genes with each offspring, in evolutionary terms the investment in each should be equal (all other things being equal). But if I am one of those offspring, I share only 50% of my genes with each sibling, but 100% of my genes with myself, so it is in my best interest to suppress parental investment in my siblings and to promote parental investment in myself. Pinker hypothesizes that this may lead to a child’s behavior that, indirectly, helps prevent or delay the parents having another child.

According to Pinker, this behavior is unconscious; it’s just something that’s built into animals’ genetic makeup. Thus, parents and children, and siblings, are always in conflict over the distribution of finite family resources. That being the case, they don’t always share the same goals. In fact, their goals often conflict.

It’s intriguing to look at the Frankenstein and Genesis stories in light of this theory. Victor Frankenstein’s goal was to avoid, then later destroy, his creature. He pursued his goals of glory and scientific accomplishment without giving any thought to the responsibilities that his success in creating a new life, indeed, a new form of life - a species - would entail. When confronted with his responsibility, he fled from it. The creature’s interest, initially, was to get Frankenstein to care for him, or to at least make some minimal provision for his comfort. When Frankenstein failed to do even that much, the creature then shifted his goal toward revenge. It goes without saying that when both parties in a conflict are hell-bent on destroying each other, there is little to no possibility that the parties will live happily ever after. (Spoiler alert: Frankenstein does not have a happy ending). Similarly, the Genesis story tells us that God created human beings for his glory, but humans are inclined to pursue interests of their own devising. Assuming that the creator/creature relationship is analogous to the parent/child relationship (the process by which parents create children is one of nature's wonders), Pinker's Conflict Model fits both the Frankenstein and the Genesis stories. Frankenstein and his monster pursue obvious cross-purposes throughout Shelley's book. Similarly, God and humans aim at contradictory ends in Genesis: God wants humans to be obedient; humans want to be independent. I'll push the theory's application a step farther and note that Cain's murder of Abel (recorded in Genesis) is sibling rivalry writ large, a tendency that is often seen in nature when stronger offspring kill their weaker siblings. All of this is in keeping with a scientific model positing that living beings, even humans in close relationships genetically and affectionately, act in their own self-interests far more often than not.

Genesis, one of the best-known pieces of religious literature in the world, has been around for millennia. Frankenstein, one of the best-known pieces of English literature in the world, has been around for a couple of centuries (it was published in 1818). The Conflict Model of family relationships is the literary and theoretical newcomer; its existence can be measured in decades. I find it fascinating that a contemporary scientific theory can be used to examine the interpersonal complexities portrayed in two pieces of literature rooted in vastly different cultures. I also find it interesting that longstanding literary insights into human nature comport well with contemporary scientific theories. Such reciprocity speaks well for the utility of both science and literature as methods of exploring our humanity and our world.

Quick Photo Post

2009-11-02T20:52:00.002-05:00

Dave and I got back from our trip to Louisiana late last night. I've barely had time to look at the photos I took. In fact, I haven't looked at most of them yet, but I'll share three tonight.

First, this is one I took of Joshua on Saturday morning, at the pre-game rehearsal. This was held at the Indoor Practice Facility (aka Indoor Football Field).

Next, these are two photos I took of Mike, the school mascot, on Sunday morning.

We had a great time and I know I'll have more photos to share soon. Stay tuned.

Heroic Dog

2009-10-12T18:18:00.000-04:00

Take a look at this video of a dog fighting heavy traffic to rescue another dog that had been hit by a car.

Let's see Lassie or Rin Tin Tin do that!

Reproductive Privacy Not OK in OK

2009-10-10T12:24:00.003-04:00

Think Progress published a chilling post recently:

Huffington Post reports that "Proponents of the legislation claim that women should not be concerned over their privacy since no names or "personal information" will be reported." As Amanda Terkel noted in the TP piece above, that claim is a crock. The screen of confidentiality provided by that questionnaire is less than paper-thin. The information collected via that questionnaire, combined with local knowledge held by nosy bystanders, could easily enable people to inquire into the reproductive histories of women they know.

The Center for Reproductive Rights (isn't it weird that such an organization even exists?) has been following this situation for awhile. According to the Center, this is just the latest of Oklahoma's attempts to restrict access to abortion services. This law is crafted to intimidate both the women who seek abortion services and the doctors who provide such services.

The challenged law...addresses at least four distinct subjects: it redefines a number of abortion-related terms used in the Oklahoma code; imposes a ban on sex selective abortions; establishes new requirements for doctors who perform abortions or treat patients who have had abortions to report extensive, detailed patient information to the State Health Department; and creates new responsibilities for the Health Department, the State Board of Medical Licensure and Supervision, and the State Board of Osteopathic Examiners relating to gathering and analyzing abortion data and enforcing state laws concerning abortion.

The new law makes abortion risky for women who don't want to be exposed and doctors who have to figure out how to work within awkward boundaries, and cumbersome for state boards charged with enforcing the laws. Addressing just one point, the prohibition against abortion as a method of sex selection, CRR attorney Jennifer Mondino notes that,

The sex-selective bans in effect limit access to abortion because it may chill doctors from providing the service. It's difficult for a doctor to determine the reason why a woman is having an abortion. So it's yet another hurdle for doctors who are simply trying to provide a legal safe service. The legislature has chosen to pass this law rather than doing something that may actually combat a problem that may or may not exist in Oklahoma.

What anti-abortion activists don't seem to understand is that oppressive laws won't prevent women from having abortions; they'll simply drive the activity underground, as it was before 1973 (in the USA). Intimidating laws don't save babies, they harm women. But, hey, maybe they're just the sort of women who deserve to be harmed.

Or, maybe they're not.

A Democrat Representative Talks Tough on Health Care

2009-10-01T18:31:00.000-04:00

It's about time! Rep. Alan Grayson of Florida had some hard-hitting things to say to his fellow Congresspeople. First, up - Grayson's explanation of the Republican party's health care plan:

Republicans were offended by Rep. Grayson and demanded an apology. This is what he had to say:

Let's give a hand to Rep. Alan Grayson.

Blooper

2009-09-20T18:38:00.000-04:00

It's a pity that church signs don't come with spellcheckers:

Sea Gull Spat

2009-09-13T20:46:00.001-04:00

Betcha didn't know that sea gulls have little spats, just like people do. Here's the proof:

Maybe I should start a career in tabloid journalism!

OBX5

2009-09-11T13:25:00.001-04:00

The Unveiling

2009-09-10T11:18:00.009-04:00

As a followup to yesterdays' post, I'm going to show you the cartoons that outraged Muslims around the world and, in one case, inspired a conspiracy to commit murder.

I caution you to think carefully before you read any further. What you're about to see may cause dizziness, blindness, kidney and liver disorders, digestive difficulties, skin rashes, eternal damnation or - even worse - make you wet your pants.

Are you still here? Okay - don't say I didn't warn you. What appears below is the complete set of cartoons as originally published in Denmark:

If you're still reading (and your pants are dry), and you're up to taking yet another risk, this is what I consider the funniest cartoon in the set:

NB: I am not liable for damages to your eyesight, internal and external organs, soul or clothing incurred by the reading of this post.

Yale University Press Caves In

2009-09-09T14:25:00.000-04:00

Yale University Press has removed from an upcoming book, The Cartoons That Shook the World, twelve cartoons that Muslim extremists deemed offensive.* Some of you may recall that, just over a year ago, Random House elected not to publish a book entitled, Jewel of the Medina, because they feared Muslim backlash. That book was published by Beaufort Books, a small publisher that proved to have a much stronger spine than the big boy on the bookseller's block. Is it too much to hope that a small publishing house will publish a supplement to Cartoons that actually includes, you know, the cartoons?

These decisions disappoint and infuriate me. They disappoint me because publishers, particularly a university press, should have the intestinal fortitude (aka, guts) to stand up for free speech and a free press. If nothing else, it's in their own self-interests to do so - no need to worry about censors if one is willing to censor oneself. They infuriate me because decisions like these tell extremists that, if they throw temper tantrums and get violently nasty, then the rest of humankind will accede to their demands, no matter how unreasonable or oppressive those demands may be.

We in the west like to talk big about what we've fought for and how much we've accomplished. If we stop fighting for things that are worth fighting for - like freedom of expression - then we will lose those things to extremists who are willing to fight and die for nonsense. And, once we lose those freedoms, the chances are that it won't be long before we're not accomplishing anything worthwhile anymore. The USA is supposedly fighting terrorism and extremism in the Middle East, at least in part, to protect our freedoms (unless I missed the latest pronouncement about what we're trying to accomplish over there this week). I've got news for the people who continue to waste precious financial, material and human resources in those wars, and to those who continue to justify that waste: if we willingly surrender our freedoms right here at home, just because some people may be offended by what we say or do, then we've already lost those wars. There's no need to fight "them" over there, because "they" won't have to bother coming here - they've already beaten us. Or, to be more precise, we've beaten ourselves.

**********

* If nothing else, this seems to be a marketing fiasco: who in her right mind is going to read a book about controversial cartoons and their effects, yet settle for not seeing firsthand what all the brouhaha was about?

OBX4

2009-09-09T10:19:00.001-04:00

The storm front is moving out and the weather is getting better here in OBX. I got down to the beach with my camera yesterday afternoon and came away with lots of wave action and animal antics.

I took this one in the morning, while conditions on the beach were still pretty rough.

I took these in the afternoon.

I've also got some critters for the animal lovers among you.

Unfortunately, I didn't get any photos of the black lab that was running headlong into the waves, bobbing up and down and thoroughly enjoying himself. I spoke briefly with some of the humans in his pack and we all agreed that the dog was having a grand time.

Speaking of grand times, the sun is coming out, so I'm going to get ready for some quality beach time.

OBX3

2009-09-08T13:41:00.000-04:00

I don't know if you've been tracking the weather in these parts. The weather has been frightful since we arrived at the campground on Sunday night. We had heavy winds and rainfalls for nearly two days. The rain finally stopped around 8:00 or so this morning. The winds have settled down somewhat, but it's still pretty windy out there. Dave and I got down to the beach for a few minutes before brunch. I'll post two of the photos I took here.

The first one was experimental. Since the wind was blowing, I set my camera at a slow shutter speed to catch the movement of the grass and played with multiple exposures. Then, I played with the lighting and coloring. This is what I came up with - I was trying for an ethereal, impressionist effect.

I also took some high speed shots of a series of waves as they broke on the beach - more experimentation. The idea here was to capture waves in motion. You'll probably have to click on the photo to get a better look at what I was trying to do.

That's all I'm going to post for the moment. I'm going to wander back down to the beach before it rains again.

OBX2

2009-09-07T11:52:00.003-04:00

Dave and I saw several of these birds yesterday. I think this is a brown pelican. Does anyone out there know for sure?

UPDATE: A bird-watching friend and a US forest ranger both confirmed, via emails, that this is a brown pelican.

OBX1

2009-09-06T21:08:00.001-04:00

Dave and I arrived at the Outer Banks today. Today's travels included two ferry rides. The first one, from mainland North Carolina to Ocracoke Island, took about 2.5 hours. After a short drive up the island, we took another ferry from Ocracoke to Hatteras Island, where we are staying in a campground on the oceanfront. The ocean is a little more than 100 yards (and one short climb over a sand dune) from our campsite. Yeah, tough life, but someone's gotta live it. Here are some of today's photos. I haven't edited all of them yet, I just figured I'd take a break from editing and start posting them.

This is the approach to Ocracoke from the Pamlico Sound, which separates the Outer Banks islands from the mainland. The lighthouse in the background is the historic Ocracoke Lighthouse. Unfortunately, we didn't get a chance to walk on the lighthouse grounds because there was no place to park our camper.

This is Dave driving the camper off the ferry at Ocracoke.

These are some of the sea gulls we saw today. Dave saw a school of dolphins, but they got away before he could shoot them. I was in the camper at the time, so I missed them completely.

Happy Birthday, Joshua!

2009-09-05T20:12:00.001-04:00

Today is Joshua's 19th birthday. Since he chose to attend college halfway across the country, I'll have to send his birthday greetings through cyberspace.

Happy Birthday! Enjoy your special day with your friends down in Baton Rouge!

Reach Out

2009-08-29T10:20:00.008-04:00

Some of my - how shall I put this? - more chronologically advanced readers may recall AT&T's "Reach Out" advertising campaign from the 80s and 90s. If you need something to jog your memory, watch the video, then keep reading.

I don't know if any of you have noticed it, but the phrase "Reach Out" has become a cliche in the USA. As I prepared breakfast this morning, I saw a flyer from our Congressman on the table. It's a good flyer with great information about the services the Congressman and his staff provide for their constituents. The part that made me gag was near the bottom of page 5, in a textbox entitled, "7 Tips for Working with Congressman Connolly's Office." Tip #4 opens with the phrase,

Reach out early...

I hate the phrase, "Reach Out!" It's so- cutesy, warm fuzzyish, New Ageish and fake. It reeks of faux intimacy. And, I hear it all the time. I'll be on the phone with someone from a job placement center, and that person will inevitably say, "I'll reach out to XXX and see if he's interested in the position you have open." What's wrong with saying, "I'll call XXX...?" Or, if I'm speaking with someone whom I haven't heard from in a month or so, she or he will say, "I just wanted to reach out to you and find out...." No one in the HR field calls, writes or contacts anyone. Instead of doing such mundane activities, we supposedly "reach out" to people. And now, I can't just call, write or contact my Congressman and his staff; I'm supposed to "reach out" to them too.

I don't mean to be rude to Congressman Connolly or HR professionals or job applicants, but, frankly, I have no desire to be bosom buddies, BFFs, or pals with any of them. I'm interested in conducting business in a professional manner with them. To do that, I will write, call, or otherwise contact them. What I most certainly won't do, is "reach out" to them.

An Inside Look at American Health Care

2009-08-25T21:34:00.002-04:00

For those of you who don't know much about the American health insurance industry (which politicians, pharmaceutical companies and insurance ~~deniers~~ providers misleadingly called our health care system), I offer a link to an insightful glimpse of what it's like to navigate through that ~~system~~ industry.

Shoe on Other Foot Still Poor Fit

2009-08-21T12:21:00.003-04:00

You may recall that some churches held what they called a Pulpit Freedom Sunday during last year's presidential election. Many people - including me - decried this as an inappropriate intrusion of religion into the political arena. People had similar concerns when Saddleback Church hosted a presidential forum.

It seems that the shoe is now on the other foot. Two days ago, President Obama held a conference call and a webcast with over 140,000 religious leaders across the USA to urge them to encourage their congregations to support his health care plan. I am calling this out as an inappropriate intrusion of politics into the religious sphere. I say this even though I support health care reform.

These two events are opposite sides of a coin, or mirror images of each other. Religious leaders should not use their pulpits as forums from which to preach their political preferences, and presidents should not use their office as a forum from which to push their policies as religiously correct positions.

Yes, religious people vote their consciences, as do non-religious people, but they should not let the religious foundations of their positions dominate public discourse. They should appeal to the public on secular grounds, not religious ones. Similarly, presidents should not appeal to the religious sensitivities of a select contingent of their constituents to garner support for their political positions. They should appeal for support of their policies on secular grounds alone. President Obama (in what can only be construed as an act of political desperation) committed an egregious act of spiritual abuse yesterday by implying that religious adherents who don't support his plan may not be acting according to the dictates of their religions.

Perhaps those religious people who supported Pulpit Freedom Sunday and other intrusions of religion into electoral politics will now have a better understanding of why those behaviors were wrong. Just as importantly, I hope that President Obama - who, as a Constitutional scholar, clearly should have known better - will also learn, sooner rather than later, why his behavior was wrong. The ill-designed shoe of religio-politics fits both feet equally poorly.

The Republicans Have Lost Their Minds

2009-08-20T14:25:00.017-04:00

The political climate in the USA has gotten vicious since Barack Obama's election. In fact, it's gotten even worse than that since his inauguration. Dave has already written a couple of posts about the nonsensical health care reform "debate" that is underway right now, and Jonathan has weighed in on the issue too.

Sarah Palin, the inarticulate, pathetically parochial former beauty queen, former vice-presidential candidate (thankfully) and former governor (again, thankfully) has drawn deeply upon her resources of scary rhetoric to voice her opposition to Obama's proposed Public Option health plan. Instead of making a reasoned argument (yes, I know, she appears to be incapable of doing this, so it may be an unfair expectation on my part, which is all the more reason why she should exit the national political scene ASAP), she spoke emotionally of "Death Squads" that would, given half a chance, judge her Down Syndrome child as unworthy of life.

In addition to spouting scary rhetoric, complete with comparisons of the Obama administration to the Nazis (you really must check out this video - Barney Frank's response is priceless), some right-wing gun nuts have been toting their firearms - including assault weapons - to town hall meetings at which the president addresses citizens about his plan. Are these people crazy? Given this country's morbid history of presidential assassinations and assassination attempts, what compels these jerks to think that town hall meetings about health care are appropriate places to parade their 2nd amendment rights?

To top it off, I learned today that Senator David Vitter of Louisiana (what were Louisianans smoking when they elected, then re-elected this man?) has added his unique contribution to the American health care "debate" (it's difficult to type that word without choking, as what is occurring is most certainly not a debate in any meaningful sense of the word). He opposes a public health care option in the USA, but supports the re-importation into the USA of cheap, subsidized drugs from Canada. Why?

"My ultimate goal," Vitter explained, "is to use that (re-importation) to cause that (pricing) system to collapse."

The way his idea works is that, if large numbers of Americans buy cheap prescriptions drugs from countries like Canada (in which the government subsidizes some portion of drug costs), then those subsidy systems will be overwhelmed into insolvency. Of course, the more likely scenario is that Canada's

government would very quickly crack down on re-importation, cutting off the supply to the Yankees.

Senator Vitter's opposition to government subsidized health care is so vicious that he opposes it in other countries, as well as in the USA. What a creep! What utter arrogance!

Too many Republicans and Republican supporters have surrendered their minds to blind hatred and unreasonable fear and their insanity is seriously damaging living conditions across the country. The USA desperately needs health care reform and desperately needs to have a reasoned discussion of how to bring that about. Instead of participating constructively in such a process, Republicans and many of their supporters abandoned reasoned discourse long ago. Sadly, their idiocy is going to have dire consequences for 307 million Americans.

Gone With the Wind - Part Two

2009-08-11T20:25:00.008-04:00

Finally, at long last, I've uploaded and edited the photos from the final few days of our vacation. As Dave has already mentioned, we spent some time in Charleston, South Carolina, before returning home.

Charleston is not a major setting for Gone With the Wind. Its primary significance to the story is that it is the ancestral home of the charming rascal, Rhett Butler (definitely one of the sexiest male characters ever to grace both a novel and the big screen).

Our hotel was in the historic district, just around the corner from this Confederate Museum. The admission was only $5, and the collection of Civil War artifacts was pretty decent.

We also spent some time walking around the city. The College of Charleston, founded in 1770, has one of the most beautiful campuses I've ever seen. The Rotunda is the site of the outdoor graduation ceremony. In lieu of caps and gowns, graduands wear formal white gowns and white tuxedos. Classy! Also, notice the graceful "Welcoming Arms" staircases (I prefer the curved ones below, as opposed to the squared ones in the photo above). Male graduands exit the building and enter the courtyard from the left staircase, and female graduands enter from the right.

It must be terribly difficult to toil away in an office in a building like this every day.

Rainbow Row, which is adjacent to The Battery, is lined with colorful homes.

A typical Battery mansion:

Another view of the Battery - don't miss the heron - we saw quite a few of them on our trip to Fort Sumter:

One of many seagulls we saw on the way to Fort Sumter:

Thus concludes our Gone With the Wind vacation. Now that we've gotten a good overview of the city, Dave and I are looking forward to going back again, sometime, and exploring the city in more depth.

Gone With the Wind - Intermission

2009-08-01T20:33:00.007-04:00

You may recall that Gone With the Wind is a very long book. The movie is also long, about four hours. The movie has an intermission shortly after Scarlett flees from Atlanta and returns to Tara. Dave and I didn't flee from Atlanta, but we did leave the city a few days ago. On our way home, we headed to the east coast and spent a night in the quaint little town of Beaufort, South Carolina. The name is pronounced BYEW-fort, not to be confused with Beaufort (BO-fort), North Carolina.

Beaufort has been featured in several movies. Two of these are The Prince of Tides, and Forrest Gump. The author of The Prince of Tides, Pat Conroy, grew up in Beaufort, and the South Carolina portions of the book are set there. Forrest Gump is set in Alabama, but some of the southern scenes were filmed in Beaufort. I first heard of Beaufort when my mother and I saw a movie called, Conrack, back in the mid-70s. That movie was based on another Pat Conroy book, The Water is Wide, which I read after seeing the movie.

Dave and I stayed in a beautiful little hotel called The Rhett House Inn.

This was our room:

As we walked back to the hotel after supper, we saw a lovely sunset over the bay:

The next morning, as we ate breakfast on the porch, I took this picture with my cellphone camera:

After we finished breakfast, we packed the car and headed north to our final Gone With the Wind destination.

Gone With the Wind - Part One

2009-07-30T16:11:00.017-04:00

When I was a teen, Gone With the Wind was my favorite book. Since Dave and I are traveling through GWTW country this week, I'm christening this vacation as the Gone With the Wind Vacation.

If you're familiar with the story, you'll know that most of the action in GWTW takes place in Atlanta. I spent some time downtown seeing things that Scarlett O'Hara never would have imagined. I began, not far from Five Points (which is mentioned frequently in the book), at Centennial Olympic Park.

As you can see, this set of fountains is fashioned after the five interlocking Olympic rings. When it gets hot, children love to cool down in the water.

In addition to the fountains, the park houses a couple of playgrounds and a series of small waterfalls. All in all, it's a great place to relax.

After hanging around the park, I went over to the Georgia Aquarium. I took this photo especially for Jonathan, who absolutely detests alligators and crocodiles. Truth be told, I'm not crazy about them either.

I was also impressed by the rich colors of the starfish, urchins and whatnot.

The colorful Lionfish is not native to the American seaboard. Since it's natural predators are not in these waters, it's been causing ecological havoc up and down the Atlantic seaboard.

In contrast to the unpleasant story of the Lionfish, I have the heartening story of the Robust Redhorse Sucker, which was believe to have gone extinct in the late 19th century. It was rediscovered in southern US lakes in the early 1990s, and efforts are being made to stabilize the population, as they are still a fairly rare species in danger of extinction.

I have no idea what this one is, but I love the bright colors, so here it is.

Jellyfish are always interesting too.

I'll conclude the photos with some Whalesharks and a Beluga Whale.

In addition to sightseeing, Dave and I have enjoyed some fine dining experiences. One night, we joined a number of his business colleagues for dinner at Twelve, where we both enjoyed very nice beef dinners. On another evening, we joined a handful of his colleagues for dinner at Canoe. Dave ate his rabbit with relish, and I feasted on pheasant.

Thus concludes my account of the first half of our Gone With the Wind vacation. Stay tuned for Part Two, coming soon.

Prejudices Past and Present

2009-07-22T23:23:00.002-04:00

Prof. Henry Louis Gates, Jr., an eminent African American scholar at Harvard University, was arrested last week on charges of disorderly conduct and racial harassment. Yes, you read that list bit correctly - Prof. Gates was charged with racially harassing the man who thought he was breaking into his own home. And the disorderly conduct? He got angry and yelled at the police officer who thought he was breaking into his own home.

The comedy of errors began when Prof. Gates had difficulty opening his jammed front door. Consequently, Gates "opened his back door with his key and tried unsuccessfully from inside his home to open the front door. Eventually, Gates and his driver forced the door open from the outside...." A white woman passing by observed this activity and called the police to report a possible break-in. Up to this point, the story isn't too bad: a woman sees activity that looks suspicious and reports it to the police.

I have to wonder, though, what made her suspicious? Was it the fact that Prof. Gates was a black man trying to enter a home in a neighborhood that - I'll take a wild guess, here - is not predominantly populated by black people? Would she have responded the same way to a white man trying to unjam that same door? I'll never know the answers to those questions, but they're questions that every white person in the USA should consider soberly.

Moving on, the suspicion of unlawful activity was reported, and the police dispatched an officer to the scene to investigate the claim. Unfortunately, the police officer they sent appears to have attended Charm School with Genghis Khan. The long and short of it is that Gates and the officer had words, and the officer over-reacted by arresting the professor. The Cambridge police made the right call and dropped the charges yesterday. Still, it was an ugly chain of events, and one can't help thinking that race played no small part in the ugliness.

President Obama commented on the incident this evening:

What's been reported though is that the guy forgot his keys, jimmied his way to get into the house. There was a report called in to the police station that there might be a burglary taking place. So far, so good, right? I mean, if I was trying to jigger into -- well, I guess this is my house now, so... it probably wouldn't happen. But let's say my old house in Chicago. Here, I'd get shot.

But so far, so good. They're -- they're reporting. The police are doing what they should. There's a call. They go investigate what happens.

My understanding is, at that point, Professor Gates is already in his house. The police officer comes in. I'm sure there's some exchange of words. But my understanding is, is that Professor Gates then shows his I.D. to show that this is his house and, at that point, he gets arrested for disorderly conduct, charges which are later dropped.

Now, I don't know, not having been there and not seeing all the facts, what role race played in that. But I think it's fair to say, number one, any of us would be pretty angry; number two, that the Cambridge police acted stupidly in arresting somebody when there was already proof that they were in their own home; and, number three, what I think we know separate and apart from this incident is that there's a long history in this country of African-Americans and Latinos being stopped by law enforcement disproportionately. That's just a fact.

... [W]hen I was in the state legislature in Illinois, we worked on a racial profiling bill because there was indisputable evidence that blacks and Hispanics were being stopped disproportionately. And that is a sign, an example of how, you know, race remains a factor in the society.

That doesn't lessen the incredible progress that has been made. I am standing here as testimony to the progress that's been made. And yet the fact of the matter is, is that, you know, this still haunts us.

And even when there are honest misunderstandings, the fact that blacks and Hispanics are picked up more frequently and often time for no cause casts suspicion even when there is good cause.

And that's why I think the more that we're working with local law enforcement to improve policing techniques so that we're eliminating potential bias, the safer everybody is going to be.

It's been less than a year since the American presidential election campaign was marred by racism. To bring the matter closer to home, I hear people of several ethnic backgrounds express a variety of ethnic, racial, religious, gender and other prejudices every day. I hope I don't express any such things myself, but, to be honest - I probably do sometimes. I'm still trying to unlearn a lot of what my culture has taught me about race, gender, religion, etc. It will be a lifelong battle that will require me to constantly measure myself as I am against the self that I want to be, and to keep striving to reach that ideal. If Americans are serious about living up to our national ideals, we all must wage similar battles - individually and corporately - to remove both past and present prejudices from our lives and society.

Ballgame Lawsuit Settled

2009-07-18T12:07:00.005-04:00

You may recall a post I wrote a couple of months ago about the God Bless America lawsuit that was filed against the New York Yankees. A fan sued the Yankees for not allowing him to go to the washroom during the playing of God Bless America during the seventh inning stretch.

The case has been settled. The Yankees have paid the plaintiff $10,001.00, plus his $12,000.00 attorney's fees, and they no longer have a policy restricting movement during the seventh inning stretch.

P.S. - Does anyone besides Dave and me think it's strange that the plaintiff's lawyer got more money than the plaintiff did? Just sayin'...