Today at lunch, we had a short conversation about gift-buying and gift-giving, and sara (who has no website, p’shaw!) mentioned that matt dislikes malls. I said that I would have to agree, in the context of gift-finding. I tend to regard — at least in my own mind — malls as the last refuge for gift-buying. My favorite gifts are those that, while they may not have been expensive, I know that the person who gave it to me put some thought and care into choosing it. For instance, the green and white muffler that Kelly made for me is one of my most prized possessions. The lamp that Hunter and Eve chose for us from the Swanson-Cralle gallery for our wedding I love because they chose it for us, independently (we didn’t ask for it from the wedding registry). Sara also gave us a beautiful vase from Brown County that I believe to be hand-crafted, or at least I’ll operate under that assumption.

In short, it’s the thought that counts to me. You could give me a napkin that said “Happy Birthday” on it, and I’d probably keep it forever.

kelly and i went out to ear x-tacy this eve, and i finally picked up “Viva Last Blues” by Palace Music. Came back to house, and re-filled an empty inkjet cartridge. Plugged in kelly’s old synth, and fooled around. It’s funny to see cats walk on keyboards and make god-awful sounds. Clawing at the speakers. Heh. Kelly played me music — which made me happy. She hasn’t played me a song in ages.

Inspiration hath indeed struck. I finally got the archive working. Easy access to all the news I’ve fitted for printing. Also, note the “wayback machine” dropdown. Give that a whirl.

The new Coldplay, “A Rush of Blood to the Head”, is good. The Reunion Show I could take or leave — most likely leave. Emo begat Weezer-core, I guess.

Question: Can you prosecute homosexuals for having sex?

Answer: Well, I certainly hope so! What if they start to reproduce — oh wait…

To quote the article: “Texas prosecutors argue government can and has the right to enforce public morality.” Well, frankly I find it immoral to even suggest such a notion!

Way to go Texas, you ass! (which is right next to Louisiana)

There has been a story about cell-phone related deaths floating around. This estimation that 2,600 people died last year in cell-phone related car accidents comes from a mathematical model from the Harvard Center for Risk Analysis. Their summary of the report can be found here.

It seems to me that we, as a people are more terrible than the most terrible terrorist. Our culture is own terrorism. We live sedentary lives, we eat until we die, we smoke too much, we war against drugs while we advise that everyone “have a designated driver” (btw, alcohol caused 12,000+ deaths last year in car accidents). Our government speaks of peace in the same breath that they threaten war. Jail journalists that leak information, but would you mind printing this threat to Sadaam? Thanks.

Sheesh. I can’t help but think that the same moral ambiguity that started the anti-slavery abolotionist movement in the 1800′s is being manifested now. A nation, birthed in the ideas of freedom allowed for the continuance of slaver. How do we, a nation that prides itself on freedom, cope with being so contradictory — not only to other countries, but to ourselves?

update: this just in! eat up, fatties! Meanwhile, when will White Castle make soy-burgers?

Kelly and I have quite a few driveway moments. NPR is great.

Finally, I’d like to give a shout out to Jessica for chipping in some of her no-doubt precious time to the Distributed Proofreading project. She did five pages yesterday! “It’s fun!” she said, I think.

First, let me interject a discussion najati and I had after I saw
Solaris this evening.

BenCorvus: Solaris
veggiebuddha: eh?
BenCorvus: saw it this evening
veggiebuddha: yes? where? what hw [hardware]?
BenCorvus: Solaris
BenCorvus: the movie :)
BenCorvus: you
BenCorvus: big
BenCorvus: dork
veggiebuddha: oh
veggiebuddha: lol

Now, most techies would get the joke there — but some of you, those spared from knowing that Solaris is an operating system created by Sun Microsystems, wouldn’t have. But I digress…

Anyway, I had heard that Solaris, the book was written by Stanislaw Lem, a Polish sci-fi writer of whom I had heard of, but heard little. Also, according to a colleague at work, there was also a longer, more detailed version produced in Russian during the early 70s.

What Hunter and I were faced with was a well-shot, well-scored film that wasted few frames and left those who cared to consider the film with much to discuss. Those who screened this film just too see George Clooney’s arse will be disappointed. Without saying much that will give away the film, it incites neither horror nor suspense, but something I think more valuable — thought, at least for those who care to think about what they watch.

(Click more to see the rest of my little capsule)

UPDATE 12.02.2002, 9:19AM EST: Judith Eggerton wrote me back. Read on to see her reply.
{more}
Let me first say that I find it wondefully amazing that this film made it to the screen. It’s not your typical space-drama, as Mrs. Eggerton from the Courier-Journal so wanted it to be. Soderbergh’s incarnation of this text is much more of a question to the viewer. Solaris, space, the timeframe in the future — they are all merely building blocks in a construct of a question, a riddle. The answer to this question lies truly with the viewer. Is Solaris “heaven”? Does “heaven” exist? How could man possibly define existence when all that he knows is his own? Where does Kelvin go at the end of the movie? Is he dead? Is he alive? Was he re-incarnated? All good questions, all easily answerable by any of the faiths, dogma, or mythology any of us have been steeped in.

Let me say that I have not read the book, though I would certainly like to. My thoughts and opinions are based solely on this theatrical release.

Oh, I’ve also written an email to Judith Eggerton at the Courier-Journal in response to her review of Solaris. Here my email is in it’s entirety:

[begin my email]

“Was that George Clooney’s butt or did we see a body double?”
“You expect a riveting and plausible science-fiction story when you consider the Hollywood power squad involved in making this picture.”

Some films do not need to pursue sex or action to entertain — as sometimes film may spark thought (gasp!) in it’s viewers, if they care to pay attention.

I agree in your assessment that to many this film could be considered slow, sluggish, and without the action that normally rides copilot into space. However, after viewing this film, I felt that it was less a plot-line than a construct of the viewer’s own thoughts of the universe. There are many things left unstated throughout the film, and even in the ending –things that are left to the viewing to fill in.

But then again — who goes to movie to “fill in details”, right?

All I may suggest is that sometimes — and this is rare — sometimes, movies are made not to entertain the fancies of the viewer — but to entertain the mind.

[end my email]

[begin Mrs. Eggerton's reply]

Thanks for your thoughts on Solaris.

I wish the movie had entertained my mind but it didn’t. I think it was
pretentious not profound.
Even the director appeared apologetic recently on Charlie Rose. Soderbergh
said he was exhausted from the string of movies that he’s made in the past
two to three years and that Solaris was a difficult movie. It shows.

[end Mrs. Eggerton's reply]