StefanClaypool.com

Ben Mink's Foreign Exchange

2009-01-18T13:22:00.002-06:00

It's never been re-pressed on vinyl or released on CD, but Ben Mink's Foreign Exchange has quickly become one of my favorite albums. Released in 1980, it is a magnificent, genre-defying mixture of bluegrass, progressive rock, and virtuoso jazz bound together by Mink's mastery of a multitude of stringed instruments. Best known for his collaborations with k.d. lang and for producing the Barenaked Ladies album Maybe You Should Drive, the Canadian Mink has also recorded with Rush on their albums Signals and Snakes & Arrows. His work on Foreign Exchange can be seen as a predecessor to both his work with lang and an influence on later artists such as Bela Fleck and the exceptional early work of Dave Matthews. It's a rare piece of music, difficult to find but absolutely worth seeking out. Highly recommended.

Beer Review: Orval Trappist Ale & Samuel Smith Oatmeal Stout

2009-01-01T21:44:00.002-06:00

Two more beers for you tonight, starting off with Orval, a Belgian Trappist Ale. Brewed within the Abbaye Notre-Dame d'Orval monastery, Orval Trappist Ale is notable for its distinctive brewing process, which includes dry hopping and wild yeasts. Orval is sold solely to support the monestary, much like Chimay, but unlike many other Belgian beers, it has a relatively low alcohol content - only 6.9% ABV. Although highly regarded among beers, Orval struck me as being a little too weak to really compare to the other great Belgian beers I've been lucky enough to sample. Its flavor struck me as decidedly understated, lacked both the magnificence of Chimay and the distinctiveness of the Saison Dupont I enjoyed last night. At best, Orval might be considered a good introduction to Belgian ales for those of you whose previous beer experience has been confined to dull American lagers. The seasoned beer drinker might want to give it a shot, but for me personally, it was a one-and-out experience.

On the other hand, the Samuel Smith Oatmeal Stout is simply a magnificent beer, worth every penny you'll pay and more. Originally billed as a nutritional beverage, the oatmeal stout was occasionally given to lactating mothers and was renowned for its health benefits during the late nineteenth century. But when the 1800s gave way to the 1900s, oatmeal stouts simply disappeared, the victim of changing tastes and morals. It wasn't until 1980 when Samuel Smith's Brewery became the first in the world to resume production of oatmeal stouts, and even though there have been many imitators, the first remains the best. (The Wolaver's Oatmeal Stout, brewed in scenic Middlebury, Vermont, ranks a close second.) The Samuel Smith Oatmeal Stout is a beast of a beer, notable for its richness and its unique scent, as well as its strong but not overpowering flavor. It's a complex beer, best enjoyed slowly in the company of friends. Highly recommended and easily available, this beer is a meal fit for a king in and of itself. Enjoy!

New Play

2008-12-31T22:39:00.002-06:00

Check out 3737, my final project for Playwriting I and my first full-length one-act play. It's posted in the portfolio section. Hope you enjoy.

Beer Review: Saison Dupont & Kulmbacher Eisbock

2008-12-31T22:12:00.002-06:00

Beer number one for the evening was the Saison Dupont, a Belgian farmhouse ale with a fruity flavor and very slight bitterness that jumps out of its bottle with gusto. For a bit of history, a Saison is a farmhouse ale, traditionally brewed in the winter to be drunk during the summer. The Saison Dupont ranks eighteenth on the top fifty beers list from which I've been working recently, and although I'm not sure I'd rank it so highly, I definitely support its presence on the list. I've never seen a beer pop like this one, and as I poured it into the tall Pilsner glass, it foamed like a rabid dog, but went down easy and left a great little aftertaste. Certainly not the best Belgian ale you can find, but if you're looking for something a little different from the usual fare, its certainly worthwhile.

The second beer of the evening was number two on the list, the Kulmbacher Eisbock. The world's first and most highly acclaimed ice beer, the Kulmbacher Eisbock was discovered by a stroke of luck when, according to beer legend, a young brewer's apprentice accidently left a barrel of of bock beer outside on a cold Bavarian night, only to be discovered the next spring broken open, but with a rich, concentrated brew left behind. This is a big, malty beer with a deceptive scent. When I cracked the bottle, I remarked that I thought it would definitely be a sipper of a beverage, akin to a Thomas Hardy, but I was shocked at how easily it went down. Again, I'm not sure if I'd rank it at number two on the top fifty beers of all time, but it definitely deserves to be up there. Additionally, this marks my first foray into authentic German beer, and I can't imagine a better way to start. Zum Wohl!

Batman: Too Scary?

2008-12-29T21:45:00.001-06:00

Damn You, Batman from Those Aren't Muskets! on Vimeo.

Beer Review: Murphy's Irish Stout & Rogue Shakespeare Stout

2008-12-29T20:11:00.006-06:00

I've got a couple of recommendations for you this evening, beginning with the Murphy's Irish Stout. If you know one Irish beer, it's Guinness Extra Stout, but if you know two, then you know Murphy's Irish Stout as well. Murphy's is brewed in Cork, Ireland, and like its Dublin counterpart, is notable for the inclusion of nitrogen, rather than CO2. Tonight's particular Murphy's was poured straight from a can (!!!) and injected with nitrogen via the legendary widget, which can also be found in cans and bottles of Guinness. Murphy's has a nice, creamy head that starts the drinking experience off smoothly. Imagine a root beer float after the ice cream has been melted and you'll have an idea of the consistency of head we're talking here. The body is full and dark, but not bitter. It goes down shockingly smooth, leaving a pleasant, slightly chocolate-y aftertaste. A delicious beverage.

The Rogue Shakespeare Stout, on the other hand, is one of the biggest, bitterest son of a bitch beers I've ever had, and every sip is better than the last. Brewed by Rogue Ales of Oregon, the Shakespeare Stout is an in-your-face beer that dares you not to love it. Lightweights will bristle at its overwhelming bitterness, but for anyone ready to love a beer for its ballsiness, this is welcome treat. A man's beer if there ever was one, the Shakespeare Stout is blacker than a steer's tuckus on a moonless prairie night, and bears the name of the Bard with pride, as evidenced by the not-Shakespeare declaring solidarity with his beer brethern that adorns the bottle. Rogue has quite a few other brilliant beers as well, and you can bet that you'll be seeing a few of them in this space in the near future. Until then, do as Shakespeare advised, and drink up, because a good beer is a terrible thing to waste.

Sean Avery Is a Joke of a Human Being

2008-12-29T14:56:00.003-06:00

Take a gander at that fellow to the right. Who is he? French fashion model? German modern artist? The new face of Calvin Klein? No, that's Sean Avery, (hopefully) ex-NHL hockey player. Doesn't quite look the part? Well, that makes a good deal of sense. Avery doesn't behave like a regular NHL player. That would be beneath a self-proclaimed "fashionhorse" like him.

Avery achieved a measure of fame recently over comments about ex-girlfriends dating other hockey players. Suspended for six games, he returned to the Dallas Stars only to find that his teammates didn't want him around anymore. He's currently being locked out of the League by an organization that would rather pay him money to sit at home than have him put on a Stars jersey and pretend to represent them. Unreasonable? Not when we're talking about Sean Avery.

Avery is notable for being the namesake of "The Avery Rule." During a Stanley Cup Playoffs game last season, Avery decided that his time would be best spent standing two feet away from opponent goaltender Martin Brodeur, facing him, and waving his arms and stick wildly in an attempted distraction right out of an epileptic disco. Officials were stunned. Players were embarrassed. The following day, the appalled NHL management issued a statement ruling that Avery's behavior was punishable under the League's definition of unsportsmanlike conduct, perhaps in an attempt to protect him from making an ass of himself in the future.

The great Don Cherry described Avery thusly: "I've known this kid since he was about 16 years old; Once a jerk, always a jerk." Truer words may never have been spoken, and Avery continues to make a joke out of himself around the League. His aspiration, it seems, is to turn the NHL into the sort of sideshow that the NBA has long since become - one where colorful personalities and a degernate culture supercede sportsmanship and quality play. Keep in mind that the NHL is the only major sports league in the United States to present an annual award for sportsmanship and gentlemanly conduct - the Lady Byng Memorial Trophy. Sportsmanship is an integral part of the NHL's identity, and furthermore, extends throughout the hockey world. One of the greatest joys I found in playing hockey for several years was that it is in many ways designed to breed character and respect in its players. Clearly, there are exceptions to this rule, including Sean Avery.

Sean Avery does not understand that the NHL is not his own personal sideshow, nor does he seem to comprehend that there is no place in professional hockey for the sort of unprofessional antics that fly in the NBA and the NFL. He is now right where he should be - off the ice and away from the game, with no team rushing to pick him up. He is an embarressment to the game of hockey, and I hope that he has a grand time in the fashion world, just as long as he stays away from the NHL. Sean Avery is a joke of a human being. Tell your friends.

Beer! And Why It Represents the Pinacle of Man's Accomplishments

2008-12-26T16:15:00.005-06:00

Among the more pleasant surprises I received at Christmas this year is an out-of-print book by Stuart A. Kallen entitled The 50 Greatest Beers in the World. It's a comprehensive analysis of a wide range of beers from all over the world. I've read through the first ten (and was delighted to find two of my all-time favorites, Delirium Tremens and the Samuel Smith Taddy Porter ranking in at numbers one and seven, respectively), and it got me thinking about the place of beer in the world, and specifically in American society. The conclusion at which I've arrived is that beer is indisputably the absolute pinacle of all of man's accomplishments, and that Benjamin Franklin was right he said, "Beer is proof that God loves us and wants us to be happy."

And yet for a variety of reasons we here in the United States have denigrated this most tasty of beverages, forcing it to the bottom of our cultural palate and praising instead the richness and variety and damn social and intellectual MAJESTY of its far inferior bastard cousins, wine and liquor. Spitting in the face of the brilliant men and women, including some magnificent Belgians, who have blessed this planet of ours with such a rich and wonderful beverage that even the Greek Gods of Old might put down their nectar and say, "Pour me a beer, dove," (for you see, doves were, according to Homer, the Greek equivilent of damn good bartenders - but I digress), Americans have consistently sought a beer that possesses that mythical "drinkability," which is in reality nothing more than a water-like quality, most often found in water. We seem to have missed the point that beer in and of itself is a rebellion against the flavorless "drinkability" of water, and in doing so, we have given it the unglamorous status of Drink of the Stupid Masses. Let's be perfectly honest; when one thinks of American beer, one thinks of Budweiser, and when one thinks of Budweiser, one does not think of high society.

By contrast, the arrogant tastes of wine and the sharp, numbness-inducing flavors of liquors have firmly established themselve as the desired sensations of The More Intellectually and Socially Advanced Members of Our Society. After all, there's nothing like a drink so unappealing that professional tasters can't even bring themselves to swallow it or a hateful libation that can only arouse pleasure by beating certain neurological functions into submission to really signify just how classy a drinker is. I mean, they may be drinking just for show, but at least they're not drinking beer!

The truth is that not only does beer have the widest variety of any of the fine members of the alcohol family, but it is also the beverage of choice for individuals looking for subtlety in their drinking experience. The techniques involved in brewing truly fine beer are unparalleled, and truly appreciating beer requires that one takes takes the time necessary to truly taste it.

The concept of chugging or "shotgunning" a beer is physically and psychologically terrifying to me. Good beers must be savored, and only good beers are worth drinking. Think about it: would you buy and drink the cheapest possible wine? Or what about bargain-bin scotch? Yet that is what good, honest, God-fearing, tax-paying Americans are doing every day, because they have not been properly educated on what constitutes a damn fine beer.

This is all a roundabout way of saying that I've decided that I will now on StefanClaypool.com be posting a review of every beer that I taste. So begins my soon-to-be-famous Beer Review! And tonight we'll begin with this evening's tasty beverage of choice, the Old Rasputin Russian Imperial Stout.

The Old Rasputin Russian Imperial Stout is brewed by the North Coast Brewing Company of Fort Bragg, California. A rich, creamy, mountain of a beer, it is distinguished by its pitch-black body and high alcohol content. Old Rasputin is 9% alcohol by volume, and you can taste every bit of it. The first sips were a bit more subtle than I expected, although that might be due to the age of this particular bottle, but any doubts I had were quickly washed away with that first big gulp. The explosion of flavor is immediate and almost overwhelming. There's a slightly burnt and smoky flavor to the beer, but it's not so strong as to overwhelm the smoothness of the beer - a mistake that has killed many a mighty stout for me. Old Rasputin maintains its wonderful flavor from beginning to end, and concludes with a nice final gulp that you can feel all the way down to your stomach. Highly recommended!

Still Alive

2008-12-09T14:38:00.001-06:00

Continuing to work on project for this space. Stay tuned.

Mega Man 9 is What Videogaming Should Be...

2008-11-27T13:05:00.002-06:00

... 8-bit, side-scrolling, simple to understand, and incredibly difficult. It's a wonderful throwback to the days before fancy 3D graphics, long and ponderous cinematics, pretentious overblown storytelling, and the hard-to-play-but-easy-to-beat philosophy of game design had taken over the industry. We need more games like it - who doesn't want to see another truly 2D Mario game on a home console? And how about a new Sonic - you know, one that's actually fun to play? Hopefully this little project will inspire game companies to engage in little nostalgia trips of their own.

Thank you, Capcom, for teaching us how to fall in love all over again.

An Update?!?

2008-11-06T11:38:00.000-06:00

Don't panic, it's nothing major. The original script to the Mr|Tots production of Death Ray X! is now up in the portfolio section. Enjoy!

Marillion

2008-10-28T18:18:00.004-05:00

There may be no band working today that is as fundamentally unique as Marillion. Every lyric is poetry, every song is wonderful, every album is a masterpiece. And what they do for each album is so stunningly different than any other band that I've ever heard that I can't bring myself to classify it. They're one of those precious few acts that completely defy genre, not because they're trying to, but because what they're doing is so characteristically them that to lump it into a category like prog-rock would completely neglect the intricacies of their music.

I just finished the band's latest album, Happiness is the Road, and while I'll need a couple more listens before I really figure out how I feel about it, right now I think it's one of their strongest efforts. It's a brilliant piece of work, and felt to me like sort of a bizarre fusion between two previous efforts, Marbles and Brave. I'm just blown away and can't wait to listen to it again.

With one exception, every member of the band is talented but not mind-blowingly good at what he does. Steve Rothery is a wonderful guitarist, Pete Trewavis is a wonderful bassist. Ian Mosley is a fine drummer and Mark Kelly is a great keyboardist. But what makes them special is the way that they fill each others gaps. No one is trying to show off, but everyone is doing exactly what he needs to do in order to create a listening experience that leaves the listener stunned.

The exception, of course, is Steve Hogarth, who is perhaps the most wonderful vocalist working today. His voice isn't the best I've ever heard, but I can't think of anyone who sings each line with as much raw passion as Hogarth. I'm generally pretty dismissive of band members who just sing, but Hogarth gets everything out of his voice that he possibly can. He's an absolutely incredible vocalist, and his voice acts as a fifth instrument. It never overpowers the music, but often gives it that little boost that it really needs to become more than just run-of-the-mill awesome.

What I think puts the band over the top for me is its power to elicit an emotional response from each listening - the sort of response that the vast majority of artists hope to get just once in their career. Remember how you felt the first time you heard Pet Sounds? How it grabbed you by the heart and soul and left you with a different appreciation of music? Remember the first time you heard Abbey Road or Remain in Light or Animals? How each of those albums wrenched this raw emotion from you? Well, Marillion does that with every album on every listen, or at least it does with me. They make the music I want to listen to when I'm happy and that I need to listen to when I'm down. I can't explain why or how they do it, but somehow, someway, they have tapped into the very definition of what music should be and I can't stop listening to them.

If you're searching for new music, I can't give any band a stronger recommendation.

Writing Again

2008-08-16T16:11:00.001-05:00

It's difficult to find the time to write when working full-time, but having gotten some rest, I'm finally managing to get the creative juices flowing again. I was up until 3 AM last night getting some work done, and I'm feeling pretty good about where I'm at creatively. I'm still feeling my way around the project I want to devote this space to, but I should make a decision soon.

Pondering New Projects

2008-08-12T16:57:00.002-05:00

So I've been thinking about what I could put here for my new content, and I think I've got it narrowed down to two: a four-part noir mystery or a three-part science fiction story. I'm outlining both, and will have the first part up within the month.

New Work Coming Soon

2008-07-31T14:04:00.000-05:00

Fiction pieces to be posted some time next month.

Davie Bowie Will Never Die!

2008-07-27T16:22:00.006-05:00

Late last spring I was having a conversation with a couple of friends shortly after the death of Charlton Heston. The topic eventually turned to music, and we began to discuss the inevitable wave of death that would soon sweep over the music world. Since so many of the great musicians burst onto the scene in the 1960s, it only wagers that most of them will die within the same five-to-ten year period at some point down the road. It's horrifying to think that we'll be deprived of so many talented individuals in such a short time frame. However, it's not something that I have trouble accepting.

What I have trouble accepting is that David Bowie will die.

I don't know what it is that makes it impossible to comprehend Bowie dying, but my friends agreed that of all the great music icons, he is the one that it's impossible to imagine not having anymore. Paul McCartney, Mick Jagger, Jimmy Page, Roger Waters, and the rest are all going to go at some point, and their musical contributions to the world will long be appreciated. But Bowie is something else, something entirely different. Consequently, it's tough to imagine a world without Bowie.

I think one obvious key to Bowie's appeal is that he's remained a consistently brilliant musician over a forty-year period, without the extended slumps that most musicians go through. I've listened to the man's entire catalog, and while there are certainly periods I prefer to others, there is nothing in it that I'd call anything less than enjoyable. Contrast that with McCartney, who went through his "ebony and ivory" phase and still hasn't produced much memorable in the last twenty years, or with Page, who hasn't come close to achieving the sort of brilliance since the fall of Zeppelin that he did when they were together, or with Waters, who followed "The Wall" with the painful and depressing "The Final Cut" and has wallowed in mediocrity ever since. But Bowie continues to produce excellent music in nearly every genre, as he has for forty years.

That may be another reason why it's so hard to imagine losing Bowie. I was thinking about genre the other day, specifically how Bowie and Zappa approached it so differently. To Zappa, genre was a restraint, to be mocked and broken. His music defied genres. Like a mad scientist, he would grab fragments of each and stitch them together before blasting them with a surge of musical genius. But to Bowie, genre represented an opportunity. It was a chance to redefine what he did and step into a new musical space where old rules didn't apply. Whereas Zappa's philosophy was to work outside of genres, Bowie embraced them. He then made quite simply the best music of that type available. Neither philosophy is necessarily better than the other, but it's interesting to examine the differences between the ways two musical geniuses approach(ed) what most people can't see beyond when creating their art.

And when Zappa died, a lot of that anti-genre point of view died with him. It continues through his son Dweezil; through Mike Keneally and Joe Travers; through Umphrey's McGee; and through other artists who heard him in their younger days and were inspired. But it's becoming rarer and rarer to see someone breaking free of genre-imposed restraint. And in a world without Bowie, we may see it become rarer for artists to dance between genre's the way he does. We will certainly see it become rarer for artists to succeed in various genres the way he does. Is a world without Bowie a world where the walls that separate musical styles become impenetrable? It's possible.

The third and maybe most important reason why it's so tough to imagine a world without Bowie is, I think, his image. Now you might be thinking, "What image?" And you have a point. Bowie is nothing if not a chameleon, and his image today as the skinny guy in the nice suit is a far cry from the coke-fueled Thin White Duke, or the pop icon of the 1980s, or the unforgettable Ziggy Stardust. But it's the essence behind those various identities that makes Bowie what he is. Bowie has cheated musical death countless times, leaping from one phase to the next with no hesitation. He is in a constant state of reinvention. David Bowie doesn't die - he changes.

Which is why it's so hard to believe that one day we will indeed live in a world without Bowie. Bowie isn't supposed to die. He's supposed to reinvent himself and come back and continue to rock. And God willing, he'll keep doing that for years to come and let us keep pretending that David Bowie will never die.

So, What Do You Think?

2008-07-26T18:18:00.001-05:00

Nice, eh? And new content will be coming later in the weekend.

Epic, Sweeping Changes in the Near Future

2008-07-21T09:48:00.003-05:00

Here is your warning/tease for the day: epic, sweeping changes are in store for StefanClaypool.com. As you may have noticed, I've prioritized other sites over this one, and in order to justify further updates to this page, I feel I need to really refocus myself and determined what StefanClaypool.com's purpose actually is. First and foremost, there will be a new appearance, with other changes to follow. Standby for awesomeness.

In Which I Comment on What Exactly I've Been Doing For the Last Month

2008-05-10T14:10:00.002-05:00

Hi, everybody! (Hi, Dr. Nick!) Yes, despite the rumors that you've been hearing, I'm still alive and still well and still deep within the clutches of the Middlebury curriculum. This has been far and away my most difficult academic semester, and I'm expecting my GPA to take a bit of a hit. Current predictions for grades: one B+ or A-, two B's, and one B-. It's a damn shame, but its what I get for taking two of the hardest courses the Econ department offers at the same time. Fortunately, next semester should be both easier and more fun. I'll be taking a senior seminar on Monetary Theory, a senior seminar on Chinese social issues, and then classes on TV in American culture (which I'll be taking with Smith, Bestor, and Kofi) and a class on playwriting. I'm planning on doing the playwriting program for both semesters, meaning that by the end of next spring, I'll have completed a hundred page, three-act play. Go me! I've also figured out where I'll be living next year, finally. Bestor, Kofi, and I got a really nice three-person suite in the Ross townhouses. It's two-storied, has cable, a full kitchen, a big-ass commons room and bedrooms that are plenty big. It'll be great, and the fact that we've got the space means that we can have a) parties and b) LAN-parties all next year. Huzzah.

More importantly than any of that nonsense, I found out that this summer, starting on May 27th, I'll be working for the Republican National Committee in Washington D.C. I got accepted to their Eisenhower Internship Program, and will be doing my part to help elect John McCain our next president. I don't know what devision I'll be with yet, but I applied to both the Finance Division and the Communications Division (go broadcasting!), so we'll see. I also got my living arrangements sorted out, and will be in an apartment about a mile away from the White House, real close to Georgetown. It'll be a blast.

I've been watching Lost obsessively, and have developed several of my own insane theories to contribute to the greater Lost Insane Theories Pool. One of the things that has struck me about the show is how invested I've become in some of the characters, to an extent that I really didn't even experience with Buffy or Galactica. Specifically, the Desmond-Penny relationship has totally got me. Regardless of everything else that happens in the show, the one issue that trumps all others for me is that Desmond and Penny HAVE to end up together. They have to. Of everything that is happening on the Island, including all the SPOILERS time traveling and teleporting and immortality and pirate ships and Faraday and sorcerers (Penny Arcade has it so right) END SPOILERS the Desmond-Penny story is just such a classically beautiful romance that I can't help but want it to succeed, and if it doesn't, it just might break the show for me. So, Cuse and Lindelof, if you're reading, keep that in mind.

The third Mr|Tots season came to an end last Saturday, and it was a bittersweet, emotional evening. Saying goodbye to Derek and Jessie on-air was tough, especially with all the energy they've put into the show over the last couple of years. I've gotten to know them really well through radio, and they're two of my closest friends. It's not going to be easy going on without them, both at radio and at college, but they're two people that I absolutely refuse to lose touch with, and I know they'll be back someday. All of you should head over the Mr|Tots web site through the link in the sidebar and listen to their final performances.

I guess I've started to think a little bit more about my own belief structure lately. It's been really fascinating to chart my own development, from a hardcore bitter cynical antisocial atheist (that's junior year of high school) to a more balanced, semi-romantic smiling individualist with no tolerance for bullshit, a strong moral compass, and a belief in a rational universe. I think the key decision that I made at some point over the last few years was that I decided to cut through philosophy instead of wade through it. Basically, anything that I decided would not change my behavior got cut. Practical application became king. Systems of thought that relied entirely on the abstract got weeded out, and I started down a course that really emphasized self-improvement and the pursuit of happiness by my own standards. I think that most philosophies, generally speaking, are rhetorical masturbation where people try to trap each other and themselves in logic-traps. I don't like that, because I believe very strongly that there is a right way of doing things and wrong way of doing them, and that it's not very hard to see the difference in most cases.

I can't say how to see what's right and what's wrong - it's some bizarre combination of logic and intuition, and God knows I can't account for why most people have so much trouble with it. But if I had to venture a guess, I'd guess this: most people try to consider everything simultaneously. They think that there are one hundred different viewpoints on a subject, and so they have to consider one hundred different viewpoints at the same time when making any decision connected to that subject. And they're so petrified by these viewpoints, which they see as all equally valid, that they can't make the decision. I think you need to think about the viewpoints and then have the courage to say, "Well, viewpoints one through ninety nine are wrong" and dare to believe in viewpoint one hundred. Ultimately, I think what it might boil down to is having the logical skills to reason through different viewpoints, and then the courage to committing to one of them above all others - a sort of logical intuition, if that makes any sense. And I really believe that if two people honestly reason through the viewpoints, honestly analyze them without preconception, and then both have the courage to make a decision, then they'll both make the same one and the right one. I guess that most people would say that that's a naive perspective on philosophy and right and wrong, but it makes sense to me, and it's how I live my life.

I guess what it all comes down to is this: for me, happiness is being able to make a decision and believe in it. That's a very important thing for me, and it's something I aspire to. And I feel perfectly justified, when presented with examples like, "Well, Hitler believed in his decisions," with responding by saying, "Yes, but Hitler was wrong," and believe in that. And quite honestly, I don't know how to live any way other than that. And right now, because of that, I'm pretty happy. With all the challenges that I have to deal with in life, I'm pretty happy. So I think it's working pretty well for me. After all, what's the point of living if life is self-imposed misery? Why do that to yourself?

Of course, I don't think that most people agree with me. I get the feeling a lot of the time, especially at a place like Middlebury where relativism, cynicism, and nihilism are the three kings of belief, that I'm looked down at as kind of a naive, intellectually-underdeveloped lightweight. That bothers me, mainly because I hate the fact that being miserable, self-loathing and indecisive has become synonymous with being wise. How does that happen? Since when does being incapable of reasoning something out and making a choice count as a plus? And yet apparently, the fact that I like life and believe in meaning makes me an idiot.

That's pretty twisted. But I still believe that I'm on the right side of the argument. After all, the great accomplishments of history didn't come about because someone said, "Well, I guess it doesn't matter." And that's a good thing to think about.

To summarize, I've changed, and I think for the better.

On the Recent Lack of Updates

2008-04-14T15:45:00.003-05:00

Sorry about the lack of updates, guys, but being a Middlebury student, while undeniably enjoyable, does have its fair share of disadvantages, not the least of which is the almost complete lack of free time. I've been nutso busy this semester, and it's only going to get worse over the next month. I'm planning frequent updates for the summer, though, so stay tuned.

Umphrey's Tribute to Star Wars

2008-03-30T12:19:00.002-05:00

For those of you who are interested, the latest Umphrey's McGee podcast (that's #61) contains an amazing musical reference to Star Wars during the song Hurt Bird Bath. At around 52:52, Joel (the keyboardist) plays the "Binary Sunset" theme from Episode IV during an improv jam, and fricking nails it. It's subtle, but it caught my finely-tuned nerd ear instantly. Fantastic. I can't wait to see these guys next week.

On Vacation

2008-03-23T17:14:00.002-05:00

I'm home again, and it couldn't have come at a better time. I finally caught the bug that had been going around campus, so I'm hacking like a madman. I might have the Black Lung. On top of that, I've finally managed to adjust to the Middlebury workload again, and I needed a few days to unwind after that ordeal.

I've just finished rereading Starship Troopers, and also plowed through The Sandman Companion. For those of you who haven't read The Sandman by Neil Gaimen, you should stop reading this and go buy all ten volumes right now. It's spectacularly mind-blowingly good, like on the level of Watchmen. In fact, functioning on a thematic level, I prefer Sandman. I love Watchmen, of course, but I came away from it contemplative. I came away from Sandman inspired. That's not to say that one's a better work than another, but my personal tastes run more towards Gaimen's work.

I'm working on some other things now. I'm going to read Nineteen Eighty-Four for the first time, and I'm going to follow that up with Milton Friedman's Free to Choose. I'm also working on a couple of new writing projects. I've spent so much energy writing for radio these past few years that I really want to break out and get back to prose. I'm outlining a project, but I don't think I'll post more than a couple samples of it here, mainly because I'm considering trying to get it published if it comes together nicely. We'll see if it gets to that point.

Gonna go rest up, take some medicine, and watch Lost.

On Pessimism, Routine, and Adulthood

2008-03-20T17:34:00.000-05:00

What is it about pessimism that people find so appealing? I'm surrounded constantly by this sort of depressed nihilistic sentiment that I just can't wrap my head around. Maybe it's just a college thing, but everywhere I look, I see people who seem to think that being born was the worst thing that could have happened to them. I'm not talking about the outwardly depressed, mopey goth kids either. Just having a casual conversation with many people, including many people that I know and care about, reveals a deep-seeded disenchantment with the world that I just don't get.

The impetus for this column was a comment by one of my friends that all beliefs, and indeed, life itself, are based primarily in routine and repetition, and that it is through this repetition that we define existence. When we accept these things and don't have a problem with our gray, formless existence, we become adults. And as I heard my friend say this, I couldn't help but wonder why in the world someone would embrace this belief. The thesis that life is all repetition and routine doesn't register with me. Yes, we are in many ways creatures of habit, but only someone with no aspirations allows routine to define him or her. In fact, the great moments of human history are the moments when routine is broken. Repetition is rarely what defines us. In the eyes of history, at least, the moments when we break away from the norm are the moments that make us who we are.

But what about in our own eyes? Here we enter more subjective territory, as each individual places a certain value on his or her own existence that is more or less unaffected by the opinions of others. I can't speak for anyone else on this, so I'll speak from my own experience, and try to make some reasonable extrapolations from that.

The truth is that I don't define my life by my routine. The fact that I wake up in the morning, shower, eat breakfast, go to class, eat lunch, go to class, do homework, have some free time, and go to bed is not what defines me or my character. I'm not a calendar-based individual. What distinguishes me as an individual are my passions, my dreams, and my aspirations. Take this blog, for instance. As any long-time reader will tell you, updating this blog is not part of my routine. But I define a certain portion of myself by what I write here, because it helps me understand my character and my thought process. It also helps me focus on the things that I care about, and has been instrumental in developing my political and social philosophy. Does the fact that I don't update it once a day or once a week or once a month mean that it's not an important element of me?

Or take music, for another example. I'm a drummer, but I haven't played my drum set more than three days in a row for the last three years. The fact that I'm in Vermont, far away from my equipment and besieged with work, prevents me from actively participating in that activity. But I still consider drumming an important part of my personal character. It's something that defines me as a person. How does the fact that I don't engage in it regularly change that?

On a personal level, I don't believe that my routine shapes me or my character. And honestly, while some might argue that repetition shapes many people, I highly doubt that a whole lot of them believe that it defines them personally. I don't think that my friend who made the comment believes that he/she is defined solely by the monotony of everyday life. And if routine doesn't define us as individuals, how does it define us as a race? This is why I have trouble accepting the thesis that routine and repetition are the signature elements of our species.

Adulthood, then, is not accepting the belief that we're all creatures trapped by this tragic pattern. I'd argue that adulthood is the realization that we're defined primarily by our own passions and our own desires, by our own wants in a general sense. From that, we can accept that despite what pessimists would tell us, we do not have a "place" in the world, so to speak, because our "place" is flexible and changeable. We define our "place" based on the lengths to which we go to achieve our goals. That's when we are truly adults: when we realize that we define ourselves.

The great men and women of history are not the ones who allow themselves to be trapped in a routine, are not the ones who accepted that as the defining factors of their existence. They are the ones who pursued their goals and achieved them, pessimists be damned.

Watchmen

2008-03-07T11:08:00.002-06:00

I've been having an on-again off-again argument with several of my friends lately about Zack Snyder's upcoming adaptation of Alan Moore's Watchmen. My position is that most of the material released thus far has looked solid, Snyder is saying all the right things, the script looks pretty good, and I really liked what the director did with 300, so I'm cautiously optimistic. Most of my friends hate the idea of the adaptation altogether, and seem to think that the piece should exist only on the page. That's legitimate, but I like the idea of a Watchmen film because it brings Moore's story and ideas to a group of people outside the comic book world, and it brings people outside the comic book world to Moore's original work. If nothing else, the film will make more people read Watchmen. On top of that, I like what I've seen so far, and given Snyder's track record, I don't see a reason to sour on the film just yet. (Again, I loved 300.) It's true, Watchmen on screen could be a colossal disappointment. It could also be one of the greatest superhero films ever made, and one with true crossover appeal. I'm hoping, and am cautiously optimistic, that we'll get the latter.

Starship Troopers

2008-03-03T09:34:00.002-06:00

It's only now as I'm reading it again that I realize how great an impact Heinlein's Starship Troopers had on my moral, political, and social belief structure. The first time I went through it, I was eleven years old, and was not fully equipped to understand the material, but as I read it now, I'm seeing things in the text that I've been saying in conversations for years. Sure, there are a couple of things that I'm not entirely down with (not a big fan of the railing against the concept of natural rights), but for the most part, I'm lining up with what Heinlein is saying, not only in text but in tone as well. For instance, there's a great passage where a student asks her professor why parents didn't paddle their children in the twentieth century. The teacher responds;

"I don't know [...] except that the time-tested method of instilling social virtue and respect for law in the minds of the young did not appeal to a pre-scientific pseudo-professional class who called themselves 'social workers' or sometimes 'child psychologists.' It was too simple for them, apparently, since anybody could do it, using only the patience and firmness needed in training a puppy. I have sometimes wondered if they cherished a vested interest in disorder - but that is highly unlikely; adults almost always act from the conscious 'highest motives' no matter what their behavior."

The pure unadulterated disgust present in Heinlein's tone is stunningly similar to my own. That's just one example, yes, but honestly, I can't believe the impact this book had on me, and I didn't even know it.