March Forth

I just read a friend's blog entry about traveling as part of a group to Albany, NY to lobby the state government there about cultural funding issues. It reminded me of getting to march on Washington on a couple of occasions, lots of years ago, once during Bush XLI (I love that we number our presidents like Superbowls.) and once during the Clinton administration. These marches concerned housing issues, something I was active in at that time. (It was a period when I had time for political activity beyond turning off the radio whenever Bush starts to speak and saying, "oh, shut the hell up already.")

 

The trips, about five hours each direction from where I live, were made on a packed school bus, the seats in which were too small for us even when we were kids with much smaller seats ourselves. My travel-mates were strangers, but like-minded ones, so the trips were pleasant enough. For some reason, I remember one trip in which the adults had brought a lot of big signs about the importance of saying no to drugs. This was fine until we made a rest-stop half way down and we all made a run to the coffee stand that would have put to shame a bus-load of desperate opium addicts parking in a poppy field. (The other irony is that I'm drawing tokes myself from a now-cold-but-I-don't-care-just-give-me-the-damn-coffee cup as I write these words. But I'm not an addict. I'm a joy sipper. I can stop any time I want to. I just don't want to, that's all.)  

 

It was energizing, this idea of being one of countless thousands marching through the streets of this powerful place, and gathering within sight of the Capitol Building to hear important speakers. Coretta Scott King was one. Richie Havens sang. So did Rita Coolidge. Others as well.

 

The first march, large though it was, got relegated to the minor media coverage heap when Bette Davis died the same day and got our front page. (For the record, I don't blame Ms. Davis for this and, in fact, am pretty sure she wasn't any happier about it than we were.) The second time we scored a little better. I really wouldn't mind doing it again sometime.

 

Another Political Item

 

One of the hazards of not writing entries more often is that the ones that do get written are overburdened with topics. Bear with me please, dear readers, on some political analysis absolutely no one asked for.

 

On the Republican side, we now know John McCain is in. I guess even Mike Huckabee saw his prospects were dwindling as we had primaries in more and more states where people wear shoes and don't marry their sisters. His pulling out of the campaign reminded me somewhat of those tv-shows where someone tells his boss, "You can't fire me, I quit!" The man was trailing in delegates to Mitt Romney, who stopped running weeks ago, for crying out loud.

 

I like McCain, and although my disagreement with him on certain issues makes it impossible for me to vote for him, he has more of my respect than all of the other candidates combined. At the same time, if he's to keep his reputation as a guy who talks straight, he's got to stop doing things like campaigning in Texas by calling the Bushes two of the greatest presidents we've ever had. Most Republicans don't even believe that.

 

And don't you love the politicians who are coming out endorsing McCain now that he's already getting the nomination?

 

Among the Democrats, it's not surprising this is looking like it will go to the convention without yet being resolved. In policy terms, I don't think there are strong differences between Obama and Clinton, and the Democratic primary system of apportioning delegates in proportion to the popular vote, rather than doing winner-take-all, practically guarantees a photo finish. The real difference between the two candidates is less what they say they want to accomplish, and more about how it looks like they'll go about trying to accomplish it. It's the diplomat vs. the street fighter. Notwithstanding any ads which, as near as I can tell, are saying that you can call Hillary on the telephone at  3:00 am, either approach has some value.

 

Hillary, now on a first-name basis with the world (like Elvis, Liza, and Yanni) seems almost Shakespearian in her complexity and inner conflicts. It's hard sometimes not to feel there are two Hillaries: the compassionate social leader with the heart and intelligence to lead a nation to great things; and the disingenuous pandering politician who stands out even among other disingenuous pandering politicians. The latter, I fear, too often forms a crust around the former, though both are present at all times.

 

I also wish she would stop speaking in applause points, raising her voice at pre-determined moments in a kind of verbal "applause-please" pose that does nothing to dispel the image many have of her as insincere. It's painful to watch. The great speakers don't do that, and never did. They just speak, knowing that if what they're saying warrants it, the applause will come.

 

Regarding Obama, the oft-heard criticism is that his campaign has achieved cult status. That he speaks well and gets people excited is somehow framed as a liability. But read any book about leadership, and you'll see that the ability to get people excited about what they're doing is among the greatest qualities anyone in a position of leadership can possess.

 

Finally, I have to ask...why is it Stephen Colbert was told he couldn't run for president because his was not a serious candidacy, but now Ralph Nader can? Is a campaign centered on astute political humor really less valuable than one based on vanity?

 

 

Sort of Political Item, But Not Really

 

I meant to write sooner about the passing of William Buckley. It would be hard to find someone from whom I differ more politically. And yet he was someone whose writing I admired greatly. Regardless of whether one agreed with Buckley's content, his skill at creating sentences of mind-bogglingly complex structure and yet making them understandable was unequalled. The man juggled subordinate clauses that had subordinate clauses and managed to keep them all in the air, never dropping one. I think of him as one of two must-read-for-their-styles writers, Peggy Noonan for her gorgeous prose being the other. 

All I Really Need to Know I Learned From Food Network

Weekend's here and with it, finally, the chance to sit in one place long enough to write. Thank you, dear readers, for your patience. (Got to warn you - this entry is a little on the long side. Thanks for your patience with that, too.) 

 

It's amazing how the study of some specific topic can sometimes yield lessons that apply to all aspects of life. With the hours I used to spend sitting on my butt in front of the computer now used for, among other things, sitting on my butt in front of the television watching Food Network, I'm finding new insights to bring to the table, metaphorically speaking. (Ok, not everything here is from Food Network, but allow me a teensy bit of license for the sake of a title.) Although I am still trying to figure out how to get people to applaud every time I put garlic into a pot, there are some other things that have occurred to me.

 

1. Get those pots heated and ready at the beginning. Rachael Ray says we shouldn't be waiting for the pots, the pots should be waiting for us. She's right. We're each in charge of our own lives. Don't let yourself be controlled by other people, circumstance, or household appliances.

 

2. Bobby Flay says don't keep standing over the grille, turning this and fussing with that - "Let the grille do its job." Don't micromanage. Surround yourself with the right resources and then make use of them so you can spend your time where it's better used.

 

3. Your mise-en-place shouldn't be limited to food ingredients; make sure the pots and other apparatus you need are in place as well. (Figured that one out for myself after one too many times of having everything mixed and then finding out the pan I need is in the sink waiting to be washed.) On any project, it really is the small details that most often trip us up.

 

4. Speaking of mise-en-place, embrace the fact that it can take longer to gather and prepare your ingredients than it does to cook them. Give this process the time it needs and you'll be rewarded. Mr. Lincoln was right: "If I had eight hours to cut down a tree, I'd spend six of it sharpening my ax."

 

5. A chef with whom I studied pie-making at a local community college taught this magnificent lesson: "I laugh when people ask for how long the pie should be baked. The pie should be baked till it's ready." People, circumstances, and pies are all different. Go at life with a pre-determined one-size-fits-all approach and the pie's not the only thing that will either get burned, or not be well done.

 

6. From the same chef I learned that part of the art of cooking something is finding a way to do it that minimizes the cleanup. Some folks have people cleaning up after them. The rest of us have to approach things in a different way.

 

7.  Reducing the amount of fat in baking recipes is good; if you reduce it by too much you can ruin the recipe. Being bad, in moderation, can be good for you.

 

8. Mario Batali once said one of the greatest cooking lessons he learned was the value of using fewer ingredients when possible. Having ingredients in one's food - and in one's life - is good as long as they add something. If they're there just so you can say they're there, leave them out.

 

9. My pies were a disaster - and trying to manage the dough for the crust was an ordeal - until I took the class alluded to a few items above and learned what I was doing wrong. Don't let your passion lead you to go off half-cocked. Take the time to learn your trade. You'll be better off.

 

10. I was appalled that the strawberry muffin recipe called for frozen strawberries and smugly insisted mine would be made only with fresh strawberries. A batch of horrible strawberry muffins later, I learned that frozen strawberries act differently in batter than do fresh ones - in this case, in ways that benefited the recipe. Don't judge people, situations, or strawberries based on preconceptions. There's sometimes more to something than is initially obvious.

 

11. Sandra Lee's "Semi-Homemade" program uses packaged ingredients in combination with some fresh ones. While it's not the way I like to approach things, she also plates and serves what she's made in wonderfully interesting and creative ways. There's something to learn from everyone, regardless of how their approach to things may differ from yours..

 

12. Bending the fingers into a claw-type shape makes it safer for holding vegetables and whatever else you're using that sharp knife on, but it was hard and fatiguing for me because I'd always stiffen my hand when I did it. I couldn't imagine doing it any other way until I watched how relaxed Rachael Ray's left "claw" hand is when she's cutting with her right. Just take a deep breath and relax. It makes everything go better.

 

13. I've learned to use plum tomatoes for anything that requires tomatoes be seeded. Since they're long and narrow, they only have to be cut in half to be seeded. Saves a few seconds over short, round type tomatoes that have to be cut into quarters to be seeded. The difference isn't much for three tomatoes, but it's quite a lot for three pounds of tomatoes. Little things can eventually add up to big things.

 

14. Food Network's website, www.foodnetwork.com, is usually the first place I go to find a recipe I'm interested in, and not just because they have so many good ones. One of their hugely helpful features is reader commentary on each recipe. "I tried this and it's the best I ever had." "This came out better when I reduced the sugar." "This recipe sucks and I'm never watching Food Network again." Feedback and constructive criticism are immensely valuable resources. Seek them. Use them.

 

15. In connection with the above, a buttermilk biscuit recipe posted by one of the network's best known chefs was rated a unanimous disaster by the user responses. Turns out there were some mistakes in the recipe, and when a corrected version was posted it received equally effusive praise as the best the various comment-writers ever had. In another recipe - I'm forgetting at the moment what it was for - honey was listed as an ingredient but nowhere in the recipe did it say to use it. Be careful - even recognized experts can make fundamental mistakes.

 

16. Looking at, of all things, an IHOP menu, I saw an item that mentioned the reason their omelettes are so fluffy is that they add a little pancake batter to the egg mixture. I tried that in my quiche filling and it gave it the lighter quality I'd been trying to get. Good ideas sometimes show up in the most unexpected places. Keep your eyes - and your mind - open or you could miss them.

 

17. When hesitant about adding more of an ingredient, or adding a completely new one to a recipe, I remember the countless times I've heard Emeril, the Babe Ruth of chefs, say something like, "What, are you afraid the <name of ingredient> police will come after you?" Don't just do things by the book. Do you know who wrote "the book?" Nobody. Experiment. Be creative. It's ok.

 

Unrelated Item:

Packing things up after class earlier this week, I realized I'd just finished lecturing to students for the better part of two hours with my shirttail hanging out in the back. It made me realize how much stress and anxiety I avoid simply by not having any sense of dignity.

I'm Not a Cardiologist, I Just Play One on Television

A news item featured by AOL caught my eye this morning. You may have seen it as well.

 

It was an article that appeared in the NY Times earlier this week about those ads that Dr. Robert Jarvik has been doing for Lipitor, the cholesterol drug. Lipitor is not only Pfizer's biggest seller; it is, according to the article, the world's best selling drug. (I assume "drug"  is, in this instance, a wistful euphemism for "legal drug.") Having cholesterol issues myself, due primarily to a genetic predisposition to eating pizza and hot dogs, the ads - more precisely, Dr. Jarvik's participation in them - held great interest for me. Though obviously a paid endorsement, this is one of medicine's most respected professionals, developer of the artificial heart, for goodness sake, not some b-list tv actor trying to pay the mortgage in between sitcom jobs. I'm not big on endorsements in general, but clearly Dr. Jarvik's would be one to take seriously.

 

While the value of Dr. Jarvik's contributions to medicine cannot be questioned, the article makes a few points that, given his high standing in the medical community, shake the foundation of credible endorsement. It turns out that while he is an accomplished researcher, Dr. Jarvik is not a cardiologist, is not licensed to practice medicine and can't prescribe Lipitor or any other medication. The ad even goes so far as to show the good doctor, as someone who himself takes Lipitor, performing athletic activities that, we now learn, were actually done by a body double. (What's the message here: take Lipitor and you, too, can get your cholesterol low enough to hire a body double?) We expect - and accept - a certain amount of misdirecting rhetoric in ads generally, of course, even those that pitch prescription medicines directly to consumers. The problem is that when the spokesman is a widely respected medical professional it would seem reasonable to expect it's because a higher standard is being followed. 

 

While some endorsements of products or even political candidates by celebrities, politicians, and celebrity-politicians are more laughable than others (coughcoughChuckNorriscoughcough), we know not to take any of them too seriously. (Ok, I'm an optimist.) We need to be able to trust doctors more than we do entertainment personalities; when we find out that Dr. Jarvik's qualifications to endorse Lipitor may be limited to his having been prescribed it by another doctor - presumably, one who is licensed to practice medicine - it's disquieting to say the least.

 

Here, by the way, is a link to the NY Times article:

 

http://www.nytimes.com/2008/02/07/business/media/07jarvik.html?_r=1&hp&oref=slogin

 

Unrelated Item:

 

On February 15, a movie called "The Spiderwick Chronicles" is scheduled to be released. I know nothing at all about this movie, but since it has the word Chronicles in the title I figure I should start getting e-mails pretty soon either telling me our children will be saved from Satan if I see it, or that the world as we know it will be destroyed and everyone (except, of course, the folks who agree to forward the e-mail to everyone they know) will be banished to eternal damnation if I see it. I'll decide what to do after I see the endorsements.

I Have No Explanation

Before anything else, dear readers, know that however important spirituality is in my life, I am not a believer in what I call smoke-and-mirrors theology: those coincidences to which people ascribe powerful religious significance. As a student of magic - the David Copperfield kind, not any kind of dark art - I've seen the powerful hold incorrect assumptions play in self-delusion. So here's my dilemma...

On January 28, 1984, a 38-year-old co-worker died suddenly from an allergic reaction to prescribed medication.

On January 28, 1985, the father of another co-worker in the same small office died.

On January 28, 1986, I received a phone call at my office telling me that Challenger exploded.

On January 26, 1987 (ok, a couple of days early), I received a phone call at work telling me my father had been shot.

Of course it's possible to pick out any date and find bad things happening. And I'm not a superstitious person. Still, it's not hard to see how this string of events - not just things, but big things, ranging from the bad to the downright catastrophic - would be enough to give one pause.

At work today I was thinking about this, about the silly superstitions that played in my brain for years after that, and how they're made to look even sillier by our having gotten past so many January 28's since then - including this year's - without incident.

Reveling in my smug delight, I encountered a co-worker who looked stunned and upset. One of our colleagues, returning to the mainland from a vacation in Puerto Rico, died suddenly on the plane. Jean had recently quit smoking and was an avid exerciser, a high-energy good humored person, and a delight professionally and personally. I don't know her age but will guess at mid-to-late 50's.

Shaking my head in shock that her sudden death happened at all, let alone today, I learned it actually happened yesterday. January 28.

As an engineer I say to myself, "You're a man of science. How can you possibly think there's a connection?" The problem is that I can't help but to follow it up with, "You're a man of science. How can you ignore data just because you don't yet know where they fit in?"

Normally, I try to bring journal entries to some logical point at the end. I am unable to do that today. And maybe that is the point.

As I said - I have no explanation.

Pop Art

While I won't comment on rumors that Tomato-Man was involved in the recent breakup of MJ and Spiderman, the responses I received - that he received, really - both here and privately are gratifying and appreciated. On the surface, it might appear he's simply the result of a budget-conscious athlete who couldn't afford steriods and human growth hormone, opting instead for injections of licopene and Miracle Grow. As is the case with most things, the truth is a lot less exciting.

First, a bit of housekeeping. Although I adapted it to Tomato-Man, the basic superhero figure used was created by a gifted balloon artist named Ken Stillman. (You can - and I hope you will - check out some of his amazing work at his web site, http://balloonmaster.com/ .)

Tomato-Man's story begins in Fort Lee, NJ, with a wonderful lady named Carmela who has a charming family-type Italian restaurant there. For the past who-knows-how-many years, Carmela (who I hope someday to make the subject of a well-deserved tribute in this space) has closed her restaurant to the general public one Sunday around Thanksgiving time and hosted a night of dinners for as many sheltered families as the place will hold in three or four sittings. The organization of the event itself is astonishing: Carmela and her equally selfless team execute the arrival, seating, serving, entertainment, clean-up and set-up for the next group with great, practiced precision. Even more impressive, though, is the genuine love and dignity that overflow from every aspect of the evening, elements generally missing from organized efforts to provide a meal to someone in need. There's music, dancing, entertainment, and everyone is young again. Words don't do it justice. If all this reads in a way that suggests I think of Carmela as an angel come to earth, it's because I do. (Looks like a bit of that tribute made it in after all.)

So what's this got to do with Tomato-Man?

For the past several years, it's been my privilege to be brought into this great event to make balloon sculptures for the folks in attendance. (My weekend profession is children's entertainment.) While the number of people there requires that the balloons be things that can be done fairly quickly, each year I try to make something big and special for Carmela herself. From one of these efforts came - you guessed it - Tomato-Man.

So it turns out that the story of Tomato-Man actually has very little to do with him, and quite a lot to do with kindness, respect, and a real-life superhero from Fort Lee, NJ. I like it better that way.

Unrelated Item 1

Memo to the press: You can stop reporting that Tom Cruise is an alien sent here from another planet for the purpose of reconnaissance preparatory to invasion. We already know that.

Unrelated Item 2

In this season of political campaigns, speechmaking and fist-pounding position asserting, I have to share this gem I came across. This was Tallulah Bankhead, campaigning way back when for FDR and against Tom Dewey. "Mr. Dewey is for unity. Next he will declare in favor of motherhood, the zipper and the telephone. Will all the candidates for disunity please stand?"

These Just In...

Item 1: It's a Crying Shame

Newly-released polls show T.O. has surged ahead to be the new front-runner in tomorrow's Michigan primary...

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cevst1mqzIE&feature=related

Item 2: Picture This

I recently came across a marvelous journal created by a lady named Krissy that has, among other things, themed photo contests. The current contest is for items beginning with or resembling the letter T, and entrants submit photos by posting them in their journals. Always ready to try a new adventure, I offer you, and Krissy, my balloon superhero, "Tomato Man." (Yes, there's a story behind it and, if ever I completely run out of things to write about, I might even tell it sometime to fill space.)

aoljurlAdd, aoljurlAdd_1

Say It Ain't So, Obama

"There is a principle which is a bar against all information, which is proof against all arguments and which cannot fail to keep a man in everlasting ignorance - that principle is contempt prior to investigation." (Herbert Spencer)

A firestorm of sorts has erupted in our church, or at least in the on-line discussion group connected to the church. One of the members posted a forward she'd received about Barak Obama that begins "This is VERY SCARY!!!!"  and that gives some pretty dire-sounding warnings: born to a terrorist radical father, raised by a radical terrorist step-father, won't recite the Pledge of Allegiance (and even turns his back to the flag and slouches while others recite it), etc. This really is scary stuff. If it's true, not only does it mean we're ready to elect a dangerous extremist to the White House (ok, ANOTHER dangerous extremist to the White House) but, even more devastating to our national security and stability, it would mean that Oprah lied to us.

Just a small amount of fact-checking (or just plain common sense) easily shows the e-mail to be just another internet hoax, passed along by yet another person convinced they're being helpful. By now I would have expected people to know that an inflammatory forward-of-forward e-mail that twice asks the recipient to forward it to everyone they know is, at the very least, highly suspect. A few important lessons come out of this:

1. There are large numbers of people who still don't know that an inflammatory e-mail that twice asks the recipient to forward it to everyone they know is probably a hoax.

2. The e-mail - and this may be the biggest lesson - dares readers to check it out on Snopes, even providing the link for it. This is really brazen since, if you click on the link, you'll find Snopes discredits the original e-mail. This really underscores the potential for a zealot - and we're all zealots about one thing or another - not to check things before passing them along as known fact, a phenomenon well known to anyone who has spent time either in a sixth grade classroom or an AOL chat room.

And do you want to know the sickest part of all this fighting? I now look forward to reading the discussion group's e-mails more than ever.

Unrelated Item 1:

In spite of how cynical the above may read to some, I've found a lot to be encouraged about these days. A woman and an African-American are leading contenders the presidency, not as radical fringe candidates running on their gender or race but simply as Americans. A major Hollywood celebrity "came out" and the world yawned and said, "what else have you got?" There's hope for us yet.

Unrelated Items 2: How's That Working Out For You?

The Britney headline-de-jour on aol news told of pills, incoherency, and a standoff with police. And that was just Dr. Phil. (I guess it was only a matter of time before someone emerged as the Al Sharpton of the entertainment world.)

Unrelated Item 3:

In the current culture of so-called divas who have dance troupes, light shows, and truckloads of stage sets - and who, if stripped of their production and made to simply stand at a microphone and sing, would barely earn a living - I'm coming to realize that Shakira is the genuine article, and a real treasure. Just thought I'd mention that.

Unrelated Items 4: Peggy's Sued

Somewhere between severely ironic and you-can't-make-this-stuff-up is a news report I just read saying that Maria Elena Holly, the great Buddy Holly's widow, and Peggy Sue Gerron (yes, that Peggy Sue) are currently at each other's throats. To Holly's "Peggy Sue" and "Peggy Sue Got Married"  can now be added, "Peggy Sue Wrote a Book," and Mrs. Holly is taking exception to some of the content. That this is sad news has nothing to do with who's right and who's not.

A few years ago I saw a PBS special celebrating Holly's too-short meteoric career and music, and it was thrilling to see people like Maria Elena and the widow of Norman Petty, Holly's producer with whom there had been some long-running legal fighting over rights, royalties, etc., coming together out of love for the music and respect for the man who wrote and sang it. I'm sure hoping something can be worked out here too.

Unrelated Item 5: This is VERY SCARY!!!!

Did you hear the one about President Bush going to the Middle East to lend them his expertise on achieving peace? Yeah, I thought it was a good one too. Be sure to forward it to everyone you know.