Author: ssw15

  • This week

    I will refrain from saying much more about the Star Trek series finale just yet. I thought the final two episodes were initially strong; still feel the next to last episode was strong; yet increasingly feel that the series finale was… more to be desired (perhaps I have been since influenced by the on-line message boards, or just on further reflection, or what).

    “Survivor” – funny how that show remains a compelling watch.

    This week, the tv networks decide what to renew or cancel. On my would-love-to-see-renewed: WB’s “Jack and Bobby” – but its season (?) finale was so… well, a finale indeed. But, great show. CBS’ “Joan of Arcadia” is on the bubble too – not sure how did it get to be on the bubble. It had pretty strong (well, critically, I guess; don’t know the ratings numbers) episodes. It got dark though. I’d like it to stick around. “Arrested Development” deserves to stick around.

    I think “Scrubs” is going to be around (what will NBC do?) – and maybe as to “Joey” (but just not funny enough). NBC needs help.

    Very glad that “Veronica Mars” and “House” are already renewed. I have no idea what ABC’s plans are as to “Grey’s Anatomy” – but I enjoy it. Hope it sticks around.

    Curious to know what new offerings may be in the fall. I still like the idea of tv seasons (routine is nice, in a world where routines are declining), and I don’t hate reruns (these fans of “Lost” and “Desperate Housewives” act like reruns are the bane of society; get a life and a grip and enjoy the freakin’ reruns!). I do find reality shows tiresome, but it’ll be awhile before the networks do decide to show more interesting stuff. Unless I get cable. Or buy DVD’s of my favorite (cancelled) shows. But, either ain’t happening. Oh well.

    Enjoy the work week…

  • Fonzie

    I like this interview that Tavis Smiley just did on PBS with Henry Winkler, the former Fonzie of “Happy Days.” Smiley asked Winkler how did he deal with the setbacks of his career/life (having dyslexia and avoiding the threat of being typecasted as just Fonzie), and Winkler said he learned that having a learning disability meant that he had to find new ways to learn (ok, lot of repetition on “learn”). This motivated him to become what he is today. And, then Winkler said he worked as hard as he did, because he was afraid to see himself in a “Where are they now?” tv show, so that drove him. “Tenacity and fear” said Winkler, got him through life. Hmm. Thumbs up. A life lesson indeed!

    (oh, and yes, I know he’s Henry Winkler, but I can’t help it that I still see him as Fonzie. Pardon!).

  • Goodbye to Enterprise

    Just finished watching the final two episodes. Pretty strong episodes, yet so sad. Star Trek is dead. Long live Star Trek. Live long and prosper.

  • Tuesday into Wednesday

    I once again thank my VCR(s) for doing double duty. Without them, I would not be able to enjoy the riches of the Tuesdays at 9pm time slot.

    TV Guide’s tv critic Matt Roush had mentioned this on tvguide.com – Tuesdays at 9pm (EST) is just loaded with good stuff – and it drives me nuts (kind of how Wednesdays at 9pm did it) – – – “Amazing Race” vs. “House” vs “Veronica Mars” (I really got into it as the mystery wound down) vs. “Scrubs” (I would like to watch the show, I just can’t fit it in at all – impossible. and channel-changing between commercials doesn’t satisfy, so I don’t try it at home too often, even if I try…). Argh.

    “Amazing Race” – well, interesting finale. I’ll say more later, in all likelihood. But, for now, I must say – the series needs more minority contestants (and when I say “minority” – I mean people of color, not just the interesting interplay of people of various sexual orientations and moms and best friends). The couple that won in the end were wonderfully determined and lucky and faithful – but watching them pull off that final leg of the race without money was just hard viewing. I know it’s part of the rules of non-elimination round to deprive the contestants that came last of their money and stuff, but the producers didn’t seem to feel any qualms about doing that to the African-American couple and thus having them beg for help and cash? I felt bad as it was watching the older couple go through that the previous edition of “Amazing Race,” but to watch the African-American couple go through it was heart-wrenching. It really compounded the notion of racial perceptions in (North) America (the husband asked for help to pay the cab driver just as he and the missus were yards away from the finish line, and this white guy remarked “Get a job” – ugh … ), and so it was only right and fair that they got to win in the end (they certainly were amazing competitors, putting aside all frustration to make it and they became more committed to each other). My one major criticism of the “Amazing Race” folks, I guess. More diversity will help. (Pardon my rambling).

    Oh, and I do think that this show is more revealing about relationships than, say, Dr. Phil’s show – the way “Amazing Race” put couples through the ringers…

    I managed to watch my tape of the season finale of “Veronica Mars” – this season’s big mystery is wrapped up, but implications for next season are already in place. Good stuff.

    Oh, and “House” – well, I taped it and will have to save it for later. Actor John Cho (a.k.a. Harold of the “Harold and Kumar Go to White Castle” fame) guest stars as the latest patient of the week. Apparently, his character is described as a “pervert” – umm, okay… 😉

    Speaking of diversity on television, I read this interesting article in the NY Times by Matthew Fogel about the diversity of “Grey’s Anatomy” on ABC:

    Seattle Grace is the fictional home of ABC’s latest hit series, the steamy hospital drama “Grey’s Anatomy.” Although medical shows have become the cough syrup of television – sturdy, dependable and widely available – “Grey’s Anatomy” has differentiated itself by creating a diverse world of doctors – almost half the cast are men and women of color – and then never acknowledging it.

    Perhaps there just isn’t time: the series creator, Shonda Rhimes (who helped write the screenplay for the HBO movie “Introducing Dorothy Dandridge”), has conceived Seattle Grace as a frenetic, multicultural hub where racial issues take a back seat to the more pressing problems of hospital life: surgery, competition, exhaustion and – no surprise – sex. It’s a formula that has paid off for ABC, which leased the show its most valuable post-“Desperate Housewives” real estate, where it has quickly become a surprise hit.

    “The face of America is a diverse canvas,” said Stephen McPherson, president of ABC entertainment, who as president of Touchstone Television helped develop the series. “And the fact that this show represents a lot of those different aspects, you would be silly to think that doesn’t have something to do with its success,” he said in a telephone interview.

    A lot of this has to do with Ms. Rhimes, who, as one of television’s few black showrunners (she shares the duties with James Parriott, a television veteran whose credits include the series “The American Embassy” and “Threat Matrix”), has created a show around her vision of diversity – one in which color is more description than definition – that feels almost defiantly fresh for network television.

    “I’m in my early 30’s, and my friends and I don’t sit around and discuss race,” Ms. Rhimes said on the telephone. “We’re post-civil rights, post-feminist babies, and we take it for granted we live in a diverse world.” [….]

    And even though some network executives assumed [Sandra] Oh’s hypercompetitive character would be white, Ms. Rhimes did not – in the pilot’s script she wasn’t even given a last name – so all it took was one “fabulous” audition from the “Sideways” star to christen the character Cristina Yang.

    “Of course Cristina is smart and ambitious – she’s in medical school,” Ms. Oh said, responding to what some critics have called a stereotypical character. “The reason we sustain these stereotypes is that we never have more than three lines, so the audience doesn’t get to know us better.”

    Ms. Rhimes has also worked hard to extend diversity to her show’s smallest roles. Determined not to have a program in which “all the extras are white, except the lone janitor,” she has created one of the most colorful backgrounds in television, a hospital in which punked-out bike messengers and suffering Hasidim roam the corridors. “Shonda’s only rule is drug dealers and pimps cannot be black,” said Dr. Zoanne Clack, a black writer for the show who also practices medicine. Even the episodic roles – a gay African-American, a young Hispanic couple – are multicultural. [….]

    Very interesting stuff. Of course, I think I just like the show because of the relationships of the characters and the complexity (Oh’s Cristina Yang is the stereotypical hypercompetitive one with the poor bedside manner, yet she appears to be Pompeo’s Meredith Grey’s closest friend of the roommates; the pretty model/doctor character is turning out to have compassion that may be her vulnerable flaw/greatest strength; George, the male roommate intern who has an unrequited crush on Meredith – well, is he going to get his act together?; the resident in charge of the interns – the tough short African-American female – they need to flesh her out – she has potential to be really interesting as more than the tough one; and, of course Patrick Dempsey (still cute, even if his character is sooo wrong for pursuing a relationship with an intern!).

    I’m still on my promoting Bob Kerrey kick, I guess – NY1.com’s politics section referred to this fascinating New York Magazine article analyzing Bob Kerrey, by Kurt Anderson, a fellow native Nebraskan turned New York Magazine writer. Anderson nicely notes: “[Kerrey’s] 72-hour debate with himself about the mayoralty was, it must be admitted, capricious and half-baked. Yet its very whimsy reinforced my fondness for him. Indeed, I count most of the attributes that are conflated into that invidious ‘flaky’—unapologetic ambivalence, reflexive candor, independent-mindedness, a habit for giving bipartisan offense, spontaneity, playfulness—among Kerrey’s great virtues.”

    Flaky, as I noted before, is ok.

    Enjoy the nice weather…

  • Monday into Tuesday

    Weekend reflections…

    My sis and I saw “The Hitchhiker’s Guide to the Galaxy” on Saturday in Brooklyn Hts. The website and the trailers are quite cool; the movie’s pretty good. A thumb’s up on the Ebert and Siskel scale; a grade of B — but I could push it to a B+ were I in a good mood. You don’t have to have read the book or heard the original radio show or seen the original BBC-tv show to enjoy the movie. Marvin the Chronically Depressed Robot is so cute (well, putting aside the depression stuff, which is majorly depressing) – the voice of British actor Alan Rickman! (“You could press that, but you won’t like it.” “I’m so depressed.” “Here I am, the brain the size of a planet, and they ask me to help you navigate? You call that job satisfaction? ’cause I don’t!”). There’s also more heart and sweetness to the movie than I recalled from the book (I’m one book and a half through the five book “trilogy”). I recommend the movie.

    “Star Trek: Enterprise” – well, that episode was rather – – – Star Trek: Deep Space Nine-esque, with the galactic politics in play (we are supposed to be building toward the founding of the Federation, after all); human xenophobia (“xenophobia is bad!”), bad relationship building (umm, yeah, right; Star Trek does not do romance very well, oh…). Hmm…

    Asian Pacific American Heritage Festival at Union Sq on Sunday – food, fun, and stuff. Music was all right. The amazing dancers. Everybody was more or less milling around for the guest of honor, Jet Li, who was being honored for his humanitarian work in Indonesia since the tsunami (as he was in one of the Indonesian resorts that day and he and his family had to make a run for higher ground). Well, the bigger cheers were for Morgan Freeman, who got to introduce Jet Li. After all, Morgan Freeman’s the Big Oscar Winning Actor/Cult Favorite (for “Shawshank Redemption” and possibly even for “Electric Company” for a certain bunch of Generation X’ers). Freeman and Li are starring in a movie coming out; they were at the festival for some five minutes. Oh, and I’ve a gripe about tall people – must they move to the front, as if their 6ft frames can’t allow them to see the stage? I mean, this tall guy walks right in front of me; pain in the ass! Makes me wish I were taller, but I’d blame that on genetics… Otherwise a good time was had by all.

    So it goes; nicer weather, if a bit cool temperatures…

  • Friday

    Ok, so at this hour, the on-line tv reviewers have posted their reviews of the latest next-to-last episode of “Enterprise,” but I am trying my best not to read them (since NYC’s local UPN has Yankees on TV on Fridays, no “Enterprise” until tomorrow). I can’t give in to reading the spoilers and ruin it for myself. And, thanks to Entertainment Weekly, for not giving away what will happen on next week’s series finale. I cannot bear to have it given away; I must watch to bear witness to the end of Star Trek (at least, the broadcast television version of it; I’ll have to take up reading more Trek fiction again).

    Speaking of Yankees, what the heck is with them? Losing like heck. Eh. And, what’s with the hype about Yankees’ owner George Steinbrenner’s horse going to the Kentucky derby and maybe being a Triple Crown winner? Eh?

    Mets – real close (since they had the bases loaded near the end of the 9th inning) – but they won! Yeah!

    Until tomorrow…

  • Behind on watching “Alias” episodes.

    It’s a shame I missed this – the Super Jeopardy Tournament of Champions (a.k.a. the Road to Beating Against Ken Jennings) continues – and last night, NYPD Francis Spangenberg beat out the others. He was on Jeopardy way back when, as “Frank” – the guy with the handlebar mustaches. Way cool. I was waiting to see this happen – I remembered watching when he was first on Jeopardy. Wonder if Frank will beat Ken Jennings. Well, someone has to.

    What the heck is with “The Apprentice” – the final two candidates are stuck with the idiot team members to deal with the final task. Eh? Is that wise? So the two women here have to deal with the difficult “employees” to prove their mettle to Donald Trump, but these are really lame employees. Oh well, at least either way, Trump finally gets a woman Apprentice.

    So, the business with the Freedom Tower at the World Trade Center site means that the Freedom Tower is back to the drawing board. Newsday’s Justin Davidson has a great analysis:

    What does it mean for a building to be secure? Nobody knows.

    The most obvious deterrent to terrorism would be to erect a small, forgettable, insignificant building that would make no symbolic claims. But as countless bombs at Israeli cafes and at Baghdad intersections have made clear, even that is no guarantee.

    Faced with the impossibility of preventing an attack, architects are instead learning to plan for the aftermath. They can limit the damage from a blast and try to ward off total collapse – that’s what the gridded cage of steel beams in the Freedom Tower’s now-rejected design was intended to do. They can widen exit pathways and provide more of them. Buildings can be designed to funnel people directly into the street rather than into the potential deathtrap of a jammed lobby. In these safety-first structures, smoke will vent, backup communications systems will automatically come online and rescue workers will have a separate access so that they do not have to push past the hale in order to rescue the wounded.

    But it all comes down to a game of chance. Increasing the odds of survival is not quite the same as making a building safe. Architects and planners are limited to anticipating novel techniques of destruction. They know how to keep trucks away and are learning how to design skyscrapers that might – not will – be able to absorb the blow of a plane. But they can’t forestall what they haven’t thought of.

    Danger comes in many forms, and warding it off can take counterintuitive forms. During the 1990s, the New York City Housing Authority wrestled with the problem of driving muggers, rapists and drug dealers from the forbidding, fortress-like, low-income housing projects that were fostering the very social problems they had been built to solve. The answer turned out to be glass. Rather than protecting a tower with a moat or a wall, the authority’s architects tried a windowed lounge with a card table – the sort of place where senior citizens equipped with cell phones would want to spend the day, scrutinizing visitors, who now had nowhere to lurk. [….]

    The dilemma of keeping a crowded city secure is the conflicting need to make its public spaces open and accessible and simultaneously keep the wrong people out. But no building can determine a stranger’s intentions, and it’s almost impossible to make it friendly and forbidding. Just how starkly opposed these goals are is apparent at Lincoln Center, where the open Italianate piazza huddles behind a phalanx of concrete barriers. Officials there would like to make the campus more inviting to the city beyond its travertine perimeter, but they also want it to be secure. The result is an ugly compromise.

    So will those temporary barriers eventually come down, or will they be incorporated into the structure itself? It’s the architectural version of the question Americans are asking about their country as a whole: Must an open society be a vulnerable one? There’s no answer yet, and it’s not likely that architects will provide one.

    The question of re-building – do we build big, recapture “normalcy,” admit fear, find a new normal, build a fortress to protect ourselves, keep ourselves imprisoned from what we had? (don’t build big, because it’s dangerous?). I don’t know; these are just questions.

    TGIF tomorrow…

  • Monday into Tuesday

    It’s like I can’t resist blogging…

    NY Times’ reporters report on the Right Wing Conspiracy Against PBS – or at least the attempt by the Republican chairman of the Corporation for Public Broadcasting to count how many liberal-leaning guests were on the (decidedly) liberal show of Bill Moyers. I mean, Geez Louise, if you want to get Bill Moyers on a rant, go ahead, audit the guy for who guests on his show and then accuse him of having liberal biases. At least he never denied his liberal leanings (more or less). And, oh yeah, he actually did get people like Ralph Reed and other conservative folks on his show (accusing Moyers of not being “fair and balanced”? Well, maybe he’s liberal, but he got out the stories the right leaning folks weren’t exactly covering – like the scary development of communication corporations swallowing all the mom-and-pop radio stations in the country – monopolies are supposed to be bad, as Moyers noted, but it’s not like the FCC was stopped the mess from happening; so where was FOX news on that story?).

    And, if the conservative folks in D.C. are so concerned that PBS reflect “Fair and Balanced” opinions, why not also support PBS in putting people like Tavis Smiley on tv and in putting on series that reflect America’s diversity in history and society (Channel 13, local PBS, is celebrating Asian Pacific Heritage Month in May; last I checked, the networks and cable stations haven’t exactly jumped on that bandwagon). That’ll reflect the diversity of opinion and experience in America quite well too – forget just making PBS put Wall Street Journal’s Paul Gigot; not that I have a problem with Gigot – I actually considered his opinion when he was on Lehrer newshour; but I really have a problem with how the current administration seems to be pushing PBS around.

    Ok, so I’m ranting. I just really hope the conservative extremists don’t end up hurting PBS; it’s so not right. And, besides – if the conservatives end up knocking on PBS, I have to wonder what is the matter with them – don’t they have more important things to do? I mean, really – what else on tv puts on ballets, dances, and operas and jazz, and so forth; plus silly British crap, and for free (access culture for the masses, which – admittedly – is a left-leaning idea, considering that PBS was born during the left-ish era of the 1960’s). I guess if it were up to the right wingers, we’d only listen to Rush Limbaugh or watch Bill O’Reilley (in his current incarnation, not his old Inside Edition version, when he just cared about the tabloidy-trashiness of the story, not the direction of its political spin). But, then again, what do I know about what political direction is my form of media going; I’m someone who avoids extremes – I wouldn’t and I don’t bother listening or watching left or right extreme crap. I enjoyed Bill Moyers because he didn’t make me eat the bitter and just got me to think – it was about presentation of the message – not just smacking it at you. (oh, and the man cannot retire – he was hosting some documentary the other night on PBS; salute to Moyers). Politics is crazy, especially when it thinks it can interfere with the editorial or creative control of a network that’s struggling as it is.

    Speaking of how pathetic politics is, I’m still thinking that Bob Kerrey is the better Kerr(e)y. See, Kerrey’s not pathetic (apologies to Kerrey, it’s just that the word “pathetic” is on my mind right now). Just when Kerrey got into the local news for his “Maybe I’ll run for mayor of NYC” musings (check out the amusing interview on NY1, wherein Kerrey says “No, I won’t run and no, I’m not a flake for considering in the first place”), I finished reading his book “When I was a Young Man” — his memoirs of growing up incredibly normal and average in Nebraska and then having that life altering experience during the Vietnam War. I think he is a flake (in the nice middle America kind of way; and yeah, backing away from mayoral musings like that kind of looks odd), but he’s not stupid – his dry sharpness makes him really interesting.

    Anyway — Kerrey’s book felt like he really wrote it (there were parts that made me think that an editor/ghost writer could have done better). It felt like Kerry wasn’t entirely forthcoming about what he did in Vietnam as a Navy SEAL (not like I really expect him to disclose what really happened in Vietnam; the media kind of reamed Kerrey on that score; and his Author’s notes concedes that memory is a harsh thing and his own writing about his post-traumatic stress suggests some really bad stuff happened more than his previous paragraphs let on). His writing about losing his foot and coming home bitter from the war was poignant stuff. Generally, beyond his book – I think Kerrey’s refreshingly blunt; he’s Kerrey. I hate to make it derivative, but I feel as if he’s a Democrat’s McCain – he’s not afraid to be a bit conservative, but won’t deny being a Democrat. Nothing wrong with that.

    We need more sunshine in NYC soon, or at least more consistent rain, instead of the weird on-off showers…

  • Sunday

    I watched most of “Enterprise” and its Mirror Universe Episode 2 thing. As much as I had (surprisingly) enjoyed Episode 1 (“poor Forrest bites the bullet again!”), I’m scratching my head about Episode 2. Enterprise’s Real Universe Vulcan Ambassador Soval made an appearance as Mirror Universe’s Downtrodden-2nd-class citizen Starfleet officer Soval. And, I liked his character (dignity, coolness, wow, Starfleet uniform Soval?), but there was the feeling of no-good-can-come-from-this (and nope, there wasn’t). Mirror Universe Archer became even more xenophobic, and plagued by hallucinations of Real Universe’s Archer and that Archer’s achievements (which Mirror Universe’s Archer considered to be a waste). Mirror Universe’s T’Pol tried to end the tyranny that is Mirror Archer. Mirror Hoshi Sato had some twisted tactics up her sleeve (not entirely surprising). In the end, the episode’s ending felt like “Star Trek’s Secondary Cast/People of Color Take Over.” Umm. Hmm. But, really, the way it ended for Soval, T’Pol, and the rest of Mirror Universe Enterprise’s non-human crew, it felt like an exercise in futility. Like, why give us this romp in the Mirror Universe when you only have a few episodes left?

    I came away feeling like this: Gee, I wonder what would have happened if “Enterprise” had made Forrest captain or a starring admiral (admirals never really star in the show or get to be more than recurring characters in Star Trek); had Ambassador Soval as a main cast character (and therefore get more grittier with the politics of the Federation’s creation or Earth’s dealing with interaction with non-humans); and even had more quality air time for its secondary characters (yes, I’m talking about Hoshi and Travis (who has a well-chiseled body and sometimes looks like he’d love to act if they could only give him a few good lines)). We might have had better quality Star Trek (well, unless the writers screwed it up), maybe something more Star Trek:Deep Space 9-esque, with Star Trek: Next Generation’s equal opportunity positive feeling.

    Heck, I always thought that DS9 was never fully appreciated; and its complex politics and references to an Earth in fear of war and terror would be fitting in this current age than it did back then. Oh, and the crazy soap opera ambiance of DS9 – everyone’s alienated from each other; everyone’s relationships are complex but significant, and so forth. Sure, DS9’s romantic relationships were nothing brilliant, but it was a step up than Next Generation’s. Even Voyager tried to push with the relationships on that show (well, let me not get on a Voyager rant). Had “Enterprise” played up on the positives of DS9, Next Gen, and Voyager, that would have been peachy.

    I think we’re down to the last two or three episodes of “Enterprise” now. Oh well. I won’t mourn too much really. Maybe. We’ll see.

  • Friday

    Sorry for being MIA; my so-called social life took over Wednesday and Thursday nights. Great to see you back, YC. Life in Taiwan sounds less maddening than it is in NYC…

    Wednesday night – pouring rain. But, I saw “Little Women” the musical – pretty good. Sutton Foster, the star, playing Jo March, the stand-in for the original author of the novel, Louisa May Alcott; Maureen McGovern, playing the mother Mrs. “Marmee” March. They played up the role of Prof. Baher, the German professor who falls for Jo (and vice versa). It should have played more on the ensemble aspect of the March sisters (it was very Jo-oriented, which wasn’t really the book), and took off on the whole “Jo in NYC working on her writing career and she has a vivid imagination” that I didn’t think the book really focused on that much (but it’s been years since I read it, so who am I say?). But, pretty good (and on bargain tickets, sure is great!).

    Thursday night was a nice reception held by the Alma Mater Asian alumni group; Klong, in East Village, a Thai restaurant. Good pad thai; excellent soft shell crab. Hmm. Intimate space (if a little dimly lit). Highly recommended.

    Novelist Gish Jen writes for Slate.com about the “Have You Eaten Yet?” exhibit at NYC’s Museum of Chinese in the Americas. I had seen the exhibit – fascinating stuff on the history of Chinese restaurants in the diaspora.

    But, then there’s “Dim Sum Under Assault, and Devotees Say ‘Hands Off’” in the NY Times. Keith Bradsher reports:

    A report by the Hong Kong government suggesting that eating many kinds of dim sum regularly may be bad for your health is threatening to overshadow whatever else might be worrying the people of this city.

    Practically every Chinese-language newspaper here has run a banner headline about it across its front page. Scrolling electronic displays in subway cars have flashed the news, and the report has become a topic of breakfast, lunch and dinner conversations at Chinese restaurants across the city.

    Longtime dim sum lovers are indignant.

    “The government is putting its thumb on every part of citizens’ lives, and it shouldn’t be telling anyone how dim sum should be served,” said Wong Yuen, a retired mechanic and truck driver who says he has eaten dim sum every morning for the last two decades. “People can make their own decisions. If it’s unhealthy, they can eat less. They don’t need the government to tell them.”

    [….]

    But based on laboratory analyses of 750 dim sum samples, Hong Kong’s Food and Environmental Hygiene Department found high fat and salt and low calcium and fiber in everything from fried dumplings to marinated jellyfish. The report suggested that local residents eat these kinds of dim sum in moderation, and choose more dim sum like steamed buns and steamed rice rolls.

    Regular dim sum diners should order plates of boiled vegetables to go with their meals, the report said, and should beware of some steamed dim sum for which the ingredients are fried, like bean curd sheets.

    The report came as a shock here because dim sum is a part of the culture of Hong Kong in a way that few foods unite Americans. [….]

    Dr. Ho Yuk-yin, the community medicine specialist who oversaw the government report, said no one wanted to stop such meals, but older people in particular need to be aware of the risks of relying too much on dim sum.

    Edmund T. S. Li, a nutritionist at Hong Kong University who was not involved in preparing the government report, said the findings were consistent with academic research on the nutritional content of dim sum and were especially important given recent studies on how people from this region absorb fat. Genetic tendencies toward long trunks and shorter legs mean that many people of southeast Asian descent may carry a higher proportion of fat relative to their height and weight than people of the same height and weight from northern China or Europe, he said.

    There are some hints that even without the government warning a new health consciousness is starting to spread here. In the more expensive restaurants, working women and taitais alike can sometimes be seen dabbing their dim sum with tissues to soak up some of the grease and daintily pulling away the fried exteriors of some dumplings with their chopsticks before popping them into their mouths.

    Some women – few men – even pour a little hot water, provided to dilute tea, into a small bowl and dip the dim sum in it to remove oil.

    Perhaps proving the cynical adage that it is more expensive to eat healthy foods, the restaurants that are trying to reduce the fat and the salt in their dim sum are often not cheap. One of them is the Man Wah Restaurant at the top of the Mandarin Oriental Hotel, with magnificent views of Hong Kong harbor and I. M. Pei’s Bank of China tower.

    The restaurant stopped using monosodium glutamate, or MSG, 15 years ago, and switched from lard to vegetable shortening five years ago. But Henry Ho, the restaurant’s Chinese culinary adviser, said the renunciation of lard had cost the restaurant valuable points in the city’s fiercely contested dim sum competitions.

    “A high fat content adds to the flavor,” said Kong Churk Tong, the chief dim sum chef.

    Personally, I’m of the view of common sense – eating dim sum everyday is obviously not good for you; moderation is smart; fat tastes great, but don’t be stupid about it; and do you really need some government agency to tell people this? Eh.

    Weird story in the NY Times. Carol Vogel reports:

    Takashi Hashiyama, president of Maspro Denkoh Corporation, an electronics company based outside of Nagoya, Japan, could not decide whether Christie’s or Sotheby’s should sell the company’s art collection, which is worth more than $20 million, at next week’s auctions in New York. […. H]e resorted to an ancient method of decision-making that has been time-tested on playgrounds around the world: rock breaks scissors, scissors cuts paper, paper smothers rock.

    In Japan, resorting to such games of chance is not unusual. “I sometimes use such methods when I cannot make a decision,” Mr. Hashiyama said in a telephone interview. “As both companies were equally good and I just could not choose one, I asked them to please decide between themselves and suggested to use such methods as rock, paper, scissors.”

    Officials from the Tokyo offices of the two auction houses were informed of Mr. Hashiyama’s request on a Thursday afternoon in late January.

    They were told they had until a meeting on Monday to choose a weapon. The right choice could mean several million dollars in profits from the fees the auction house charges buyers (usually 20 percent for the first $200,000 of the final price and 12 percent above that).

    “The client was very serious about this,” said Jonathan Rendell, a deputy chairman of Christie’s in America who was involved with the transaction. “So we were very serious about it, too.”

    Kanae Ishibashi, the president of Christie’s in Japan, declined to discuss her preparations for the meeting. But her colleagues in New York said she spent the weekend researching the psychology of the game online and talking to friends, including Nicholas Maclean, the international director of Christie’s Impressionist and modern art department.

    Mr. Maclean’s 11-year-old twins, Flora and Alice, turned out to be the experts Ms. Ishibashi was looking for. They play the game at school, Alice said, “practically every day.”

    “Everybody knows you always start with scissors,” she added. “Rock is way too obvious, and scissors beats paper.” Flora piped in. “Since they were beginners, scissors was definitely the safest,” she said, adding that if the other side were also to choose scissors and another round was required, the correct play would be to stick to scissors – because, as Alice explained, “Everybody expects you to choose rock.”

    Sotheby’s took a different tack. “There was some discussion,” said Blake Koh, an expert in Impressionist and modern art at Sotheby’s in Los Angeles who was involved in the negotiations with Maspro. “But this is a game of chance, so we didn’t really give it that much thought. We had no strategy in mind.”

    As Ms. Ishibashi wrote in an e-mail message to a colleague in New York, to prepare herself for the meeting she prayed, sprinkled salt – a traditional Japanese ritual for good luck – and carried lucky charm beads.

    Two experts from each of the rival auction houses arrived at Maspro’s Tokyo offices, where they were shown to a conference room with a very long table and asked to sit facing one another, Mr. Rendell said. Each side’s experts had an accountant from Maspro sitting with them.

    Instead of the usual method of playing the game with the hands, the teams were given a form explaining the rules. They were then asked to write one word in Japanese – rock, paper or scissors – on the paper.

    After each house had entered its decision, a Maspro manager looked at the choices. Christie’s was the winner: scissors beat paper.

    Bizarro World indeed!

    Hitchiker’s Guide to the Galaxy is now a movie, and it opens today! Pretty good reviews; I have to see the movie. “Don’t Panic!” and, of course, Marvin the Chronically Depressed Robot. Hehehe….

    Oh, and tomorrow – “Enterprise” Mirror Universe Part 2…