Category: Brooklyn

Well, getting a voice back is nice. 😉 Hating the cold/flu season.

Saw most of the movie “Ray” on DVD – pretty good movie on Saturday. Jamie Foxx was good, so I can see how he won the Oscar. But, the ending of the movie was a little disappointing for me.

Today, I saw “Sideways”with my siblings – very funny movie. Paul Giamatti plays the sad sack Miles, a failed writer/8th Grade English teacher, who takes his best friend, groom Jack, on a one-week road trip before Jack’s wedding. They enjoy wine tasting in California wine country and golfing. But, hijinks ensue, since Jack, a soap star actor, has to sow his wild oats, and Miles gives in to lying to the local waitress/co-oneophile, Mia. Too bad that Virginia Madsen, who played Mia, didn’t win the Oscar; her monologue on the virtues of wine was great. Such a shame that Paul Giamatti wasn’t even nominated at all for an Oscar; he had strong range of angst and humor at once.

Enjoy the latest work week ahead.

P- and I differ in the way we plan trips.

I’m kind of the get-to-the-objective-at-all-costs and smell-the-roses-along-the-way-type-of-person. I have an overall theme of things I want to experience, but I don’t have a preset lists of things — I’m willing to let things be how they are.

P– is for the regimented checklist approach: 6 am at the market, 7 am at the castle, 8 am at the museum.

Both of these approaches have their merits. Itinerary from Venus will accomplish all of the compulsory checklist items in the guide book but will require another vacation afterwards. Mission from Mars will probably hit the major items in the guide book, but spend a lot more time on each one.

I hope we can come to a happy medium. I really hated the last large group tour I went on because of fighting over travel plans.

Blech – I think this cold is going around; I’m hoping I won’t lose my voice but I do sound awful, and I ought to/want to just sleep, but I can’t (cold medicine side effects are lousy stuff).

Well, some legal stuff – the oral arguments on the Ten Commandments displays in courthouses cases sounded like interesting stuff. Dahlia Lithwick of Slate.com had good, funny comments. The idea that Scalia is the honest analyst in this situation may very well be true – you kind of have to be that honest intellectually and spiritually to have the viewpoint that is essentially: “well, just shield your eyes if you’ve a problem, but this is a God-fearing country.” Umm. Okay. Not sure if I would agree with that or not, but this would be interesting to see what the Supreme Court can come up with.

Law.com had posted this interesting article (Yahoo! cross-posted, so I’m putting up the Yahoo link to the article): “Law Firms Mulls the ‘Gen Y’ Equation.” Leigh Jones of the National Law Journal reports:

Attorneys from Generation Y — those born in 1978 or later — are plenty smart and generally well educated, say firm leaders and industry experts. But these young attorneys also are lacking in loyalty, initiative and energy, so the criticism goes.

And though some associates sharply dispute the assessment, the perception is forcing managing partners to rethink their motivation strategies and their expectations for their firms’ future.

Big money at large firms may be intoxicating for young lawyers with mounds of school debt, but new associates often are not willing to make the sacrifice that those salaries demand, said Bruce McLean, chairman of Akin Gump Strauss Hauer & Feld.

“It entices people to come to big firms who really don’t want to do what we do,” said McLean, adding that Akin Gump has a “significant number” of hardworking associates. [….]

But third-year associate Moe Keshavarzi at Sheppard, Mullin, Richter & Hampton in Los Angeles said that firms with unhappy Generation Y associates are not tapping into their potential.

“I have friends who are fourth-year associates at other firms who are sitting in the library researching,” he said.

Studies indicate that young workers are less willing to put in long hours and instead are more focused on pursuing interests outside work than were their predecessors. A report issued by the Families and Work Institute in October, Generation and Gender in the Workplace, found that younger employees are less likely to be “work-centric.” The study also found that young men and women are more interested in staying at the same rung on the career ladder in order to preserve their quality of life.

With regard to law firms specifically, a study conducted by Edge International, a professional services consulting firm, found that the 25- to 30-year-old group ranked the following factors as motivators at their jobs: time for personal life; opportunities for advancement; professional growth; achievement; intrinsic nature of work; security; leadership; and being a member of a team.

“This group wants to grow professionally and advance to partnership, but not while compromising their personal lives,” said Karen MacKay, a partner with Edge International. The survey, “Motivating the Next Generation,” was sent to about 4,000 members of the law firm network Multilaw. About 800 attorneys responded.

It may be that new associates simply are more vocal about what they perceive as meaningless work, even if they are handsomely paid, said Reed Smith fifth-year associate Alicia Powell.

“After you make so much money, it’s enough,” Powell said.

[….] Generation Y workers may be too smart for their own good, which contributes to management’s perceptions, said Carolyn Martin, co-author of “Managing Generation Y” (HRD Press, 2001).

Employees in that generation, especially those in professional positions, place a high value on education, something their parents drilled into them, she said. Consequently, young associates have a low tolerance for less-than-challenging tasks that management often relegates to them, she said.

In addition, the group has a greater degree of cynicism than in generations past, she said, stemming from the dot-com failure and 9/11 terrorist attacks. The result is diminished long-term loyalty to their employers.

“They’re saying, ‘I’ve looked at the world and there’s no such thing as job security,’” she said.

I’m right at the edge of Gen Y – indeed, being between Gen X and Gen Y leaves one feeling just being in the middle a lot (like how when I was in college, the College Grad Class of ’00 were the ones who acted like they’d take over the world, and the Class of ’98 had cool slackers/protesters and my class was just… well, just us). So, this Law.com article left me feeling more than a little empathetic – I mean, what do these Big Firms expect? Loyalty to a Firm that Makes Big Moola-la-la? The Class of 00 (and pretty much the rest of us children of Baby Boomers in general) had great ambitions to make the world a better place while making ourselves feel good. The usual way of practicing (Big Firm) law just doesn’t cut it. But, then again, too many of us may are willing to go that route – so Great Cultural Shift isn’t happening too soon or too fast.

“Alias” – wow. The two part episode (or is it two serialized episodes? whichever) with the return of the series’ two favorite villains (well, besides Sloane and Irina Derevko): Sark and Anna Espinosa. Plus Crazy Plots and Crazed Characters!

In fact, it’s really cool to see Anna again – she hasn’t been on the show since Season 1 – and she’s still nasty as heck toward CIA Secret Agent Sydney (and Sydney still hasn’t gained any love for Anna either). Scene: Anna, former Soviet-Cuban agent (or Cuban/Soviet? I never quite figured which) – turned freelance – fighting Sydney in a mall over a bomb. Sydney punches her and says, “She can have the blouse” to the befuddled mall security officer (who hasn’t a clue that these were spies trying to maul each other). Hehehe.

And, the return of the crazy stuff – Vaughn facing his wife’s corpse, not an easy thing because he’s the one who killed that trecherous woman; Sark bawling over the late Mrs. Vaughn because he supposedly loved her (yeah, adultery was just one of Lauren’s sins); Sark insisting that Sydney pose as Lauren to infiltrate the bad terrorist group; Vaughn setting himself up for psychological punishment by watching his girlfriend dress up as Lauren and use Lauren’s weird Anglo-American accent. Sark doublecrossing people, as usual – aiding Sydney and Vaughn but then joining forces with Anna, and then turning on Anna by letting Sydney loose on her. Headtwisting stuff.

Meanwhile, Sloane’s not supposed to be involved in the mission against Anna; but Jack Bristow, Sydney’s messed up dad, got him involved anyway. Sloane as a father in grief – ugh, the actor playing the character is great, but the character is a slimey sort. Jack taking a chance on dragging medically- induced- comatosed Nadia out of her coma to get the info on the bomb. Trying to even figure out why Anna had shot Nadia in the first place. And, Jack lying (or lying by omission) to Sydney. And, Sloane pissed with Jack for endangering Nadia, that Jack should have informed him as a father – as a courtesy, even if there was professional justification. Jack snapping back along the lines of “Well, you mean like how I have to endure watching you endanger my daughter on a daily basis?” Yeah, Jack. That’s right.

Oh, but then Sloane told him, “Well, how can I trust you?” Umm, geez, Sloane, didn’t you get the memo that spy people aren’t, well, trustworthy? Jack only gave Sloane the silent Jack look. Ha. Great Alias stuff.

Amazing Race 7 started yesterday. Thankfully, there are a minimum of models and aspiring actors this time around. There are actually teams that have real foreign language skills! Anybody notice the free “mata de coca” drink they were giving out in front the zip line clue? It’s tea made from the leaves of the plant used to make cocaine, supposingly useful for altitude sickness. And no silly cruises or vacations this time for coming in first:

Inca dude: Welcom-me a [sic] to Cuscu, Peru!
Phil: Debbie and Bianca…… You’re Team number one! (music swells, girls scream).
Phil: Now, I’ve got some good news for you guys. As the winners of this first leg of the race…
[the girls are staring expecting some vacation package]
Phil: … you have won $10,000.
[the girls stare with their jaws dropping]
Debbie: No way! No way! Are you kidding me?
Phil: It gets better… $10,000 each, a total of $20,000.
[mad jumping up and down]

That was enough to convince P– we should try out for #8 with her sister and her sister’s husband.

No more pictures for a while — I totaled my digital camera during the last snow storm. It was either a static shock or some water, but all of a sudden there was a big flash of light and the camera started to smell like smoke. Too bad, I had gotten over 7,000 photos out of that, which was a great investment. Have to find another camera before the next trip.

As for Oscar commentary, not too much interest in who actually won, but Chris Rock showed that he can get down to business. Maybe he got himself disinvited to Oprah’s house, but anyone that can bring in the Oscars 20 minutes early is a genius. Also, a great shout-out to Brooklyn at the end!

I’m tired of snow. Really I am. Unless I get an actual day off, I don’t think the snow does for much (besides helping us avoid a drought).

Travelocity’s latest commercial – the Traveling Gnome is sounding less British. He loses his cuteness that way, even as he attempts to make us go travel more.

So, okay, I didn’t watch very much of the Oscars (because I was busy doing stuff for Alma Mater). Some great comment from Slate.com’s movie critic David Edelstein:

Hilary Swank and Morgan Freeman were gracious and touching, although Swank should not use the word “humbled” when she means “honored.” Someday I’d like to meet the person who devises the music cues, to ascertain why the orchestra sent Freeman off the stage to the strains of the theme from Star Trek: The Motion Picture (and The Next Generation). Was this a way of working in a tribute to the late Jerry Goldsmith?

I did watch the Morgan Freeman speech and thought it was great (but kind of predictable) that he won. I remembered that part where they played the Star Trek: The Next Generation theme song (for me, it is TNG’s theme song; no offense to The Motion Picture, but I saw TNG first). I was thinking why was this being played before we go to a commercial? It surely had to be to honor Jerry Goldsmith, but if you were going to do that, why not tell your viewers that that’s why you’re doing it? And, Clint Eastwood was gracious, although I felt a little bad for Martin Scorsese. He ought to win something already. (I just didn’t think “The Aviator” was it, and it wasn’t even a movie I had seen, so perhaps I shouldn’t say?).

The Oscars show was too fast – it was too strange to see it actually end before midnight. And, it made no sense to put some of the sound/technical awards nominees on stage and then other sound/technical awards nominees from the floor. It’s just silly.

NY Times article by Jane L. Levere – “Busman’s Holiday, Famous Chef Edition” – when famous chefs are traveling, they eat healthy food and food that the rest of us eat:

What do famous chefs have for breakfast when they travel? Oatmeal, mostly.

For lunch? Something light, perhaps grilled fish or an egg salad sandwich on whole-wheat toast. For a quick bite? A Whopper and fries will do nicely.

After 8 p.m., they get serious. They are adept at finding the best local restaurants, even in out-of-the-way villages, and they tuck into the foie gras and grilled turbot with gusto. But in general, they prefer simplicity at breakfast and lunch.

That early in the day, “I don’t want an intellectual meal where you have to engage your critical facilities,” said Patrick O’Connell, the chef at the Inn at Little Washington in Washington, Va. “I only wish to engage these once a day, at night. The rest of the time I like to be normal. It can be exhausting listening to your inner voice analyzing the food you’re consuming.”

Some chefs do indulge in elaborate breakfasts from time to time. Daniel Boulud, the chef at Daniel and restaurants elsewhere, prepares a fancy breakfast for his family on special occasions that includes scrambled eggs garnished with chives and grated lemon zest, accompanied by steamed Yukon gold or German Butterball potatoes, plus smoked salmon or caviar served with crème fraîche.

But for breakfast on the road, Mr. Boulud is content with granola, plain yogurt, fresh fruit, orange juice and coffee. “Granola’s much healthier than a croissant,” said Mr. Boulud, a native of Lyon, France. [….]

The chefs are equally unfussy about lunch, generally choosing sparse fare like fish or a salad, and asking for bottled water rather than a glass of wine. Why such restraint? “A lot of food with wine makes me sleepy,” said Wolfgang Puck, the chef at Spago in Los Angeles.

Others tuck unapologetically into fat-laden fast food or calorie-rich soul food. Recently, Mr. Boulud went out of his way to try the hamburger at a Los Angeles landmark, the Apple Pan; while visiting Nashville, he lined up for grits, barbecued ribs and chicken, pulled pork, collard greens and cornbread at Nick’s Famous Barbecue.

[Thomas Keller of French Laundry in Yountville, Ca.] says he used to have a weakness for Burger King’s Whopper with extra cheese and French fries, but now that he lives in California, he has switched his allegiance to the cheeseburgers at In-N-Out Burger, with French fries and a milkshake. He also favors Krispy Kreme doughnuts. “I like pretty much all junk food,” he said. [….]

Wow. What a thought – famous chefs actually liking junk food? Who’d a thunk it? And, yeah, I’d say that granola is healthier than croissants.

“American Idol” – the men and the women seemed a little less showy than they were last week. The women certainly were, anyway. They just seemed subdued, less energy. We’ll see who’s out tomorrow.

Wow – watching the first installment of the latest “Amazing Race” – quite good. “Survivors” Rob and Amber are the people you’d love to hate. Then again, why all the hating? The drive to go against them may backfire on the people. One quibble – couldn’t they make the Amazing Racers more… well, racially diverse? It’s just me, maybe. Fun tv anyway – real character building stuff.

For now, I’ll say this – Congratulations to “Million Dollar Baby.” Kudos to Eastwood, Freeman, and Swanks.

More comments may be pending. Stay tuned.

So, it’s the Oscars tonight. Chris Rock as host – so something amusing is bound to be said.

My siblings and I saw “Million Dollar Baby” last night. Well-made, but sad movie. Clint Eastwood, Hilary Swank, and Morgan Freeman were all good. Would like to see Freeman win an Oscar already (although, I think he has done more powerful work in the past). Don’t think that Eastwood should necessarily win the Oscar (as an actor or director, not sure) – but it’ll be interesting to see if the movie will be Best Movie.

I am now fully caught up on “Alias” episodes, and I shall have to say that Secret Agent Sydney’s got to be crazy to trust Evil Man Sloane (whose agenda is still unclear). But, she has serious issues about her father and her boyfriend – i.e., the episode where she’s under the influence of a powerful hallucinogenic drug has her acting out her worst fears. She attempts to kill her dad, the tragic Jack, believing that he would kill her and that he never really loved her. Then, she tries to aim the gun at Vaughn, because she (while still under the drugs) believes he would “betray” her “again,” especially since Sydney is still mad at him for having gotten married to someone else – while she, Sydney, was presumed dead. (gee, Sydney, would you rather he remained in a paralyzing mournful state, much like your father? And, I could have sworn you got over that last year). Hmm. Whatever happened to the CIA psychiatrist would had to treat Sydney, Jack, and Vaughn, to help them deal with their personal stuff? (I forget – she might have been arrested/killed/taken to jail or whatnot).

Still, the most recent episode was crazy stuff (Sydney, Dixon, Vaughn cutting off a bad guy’s finger and then pretending to have killed him, so that Sydney could save her sister’s life). We might actually be back in the ballpark of Crazy Serial Alias, rather than the lately one-plot standalone episode stuff. I prefer the serial stuff, since each episode carried over themes and character development and left one so breathless that it was fun, even if it made no sense. The standalone stuff felt like they repeated plots from other shows (like “X-Files”) – even though I do understand that “Alias” doesn’t want to rely on its serial form so much such that it milks its internal mythology to the point of destroying itself (like “X-Files” did to itself).

Enjoy the Oscars.

One of my law school friends took me on a mysterious meeting to check out “e-business” marketing opportunities. It turned out to be one of those multi-level marketing schemes, although it seems to be technically legal. However, it is an accounting mess. The independent business person has to buy $250 of stuff from themselves each month to gain points toward bonuses. The bonus is in the $40 range at that level. So, you’re paying $250 plus the startup fees to make $40. They don’t encourage marketing the product that they nominally sell, they encourage franchising the business to others. In addition, the high grossing products are not really the stuff that is sold at retail, but the franchise training stuff to continue in the business. Don’t know about this one.

Today’s NY Times , in “Appeal to Young on Pension Plan Gets the Attention of Their Elders” , Robin Toner writes on Sen. Rick Santorum’s attempt to promote Pres. Bush’s Social Security reform plan in Pennsylvania, Santorum’s home state. It’s a funny article, as Toner writes how Santorum appears exasperated in trying to get the young people to be as motivated about this as the older people:

Almost no one is a more outspoken advocate of President Bush’s Social Security plan than Senator Rick Santorum, the third-ranking Republican in the Senate leadership, who is campaigning across his state this week, trying to get young people to focus on their retirement.

Mr. Santorum argued, again and again, that the debate over Mr. Bush’s plan for private accounts was really about young people’s futures, because their benefits were at risk and because Mr. Bush had repeatedly promised that he would make no changes affecting Americans over 55.

This is a key element of the Republican strategy, creating an energized and mobilized younger generation fighting for its piece of an ownership society.

But there is a problem with that approach: retirees and those near retirement, a legendary political force, refuse to be shut out of the debate. At Widener University in Chester on Tuesday afternoon, people over 50 occupied perhaps half the seats at a forum held by Mr. Santorum and asked many of the questions – most of them negative.

At one point, Mr. Santorum looked out at the raised hands and said somewhat plaintively: “I’m seeing a lot of older hands. I’m not seeing any younger hands.”

But, later in the article Toner puts in what must have been the strangest quote of the day:

Mr. Santorum did get some support from his audiences on Tuesday. At Widener, Katherine Dombrowski, a 21-year-old junior, said she already had an individual retirement account and was “completely in support” of the idea of privatizing Social Security. “I don’t understand what everybody has against the idea of taking care of yourselves,” Ms. Dombrowski said to a smattering of applause.

Hmm. Gee, Ms. Dombrowski, did you actually think your words through before letting them out of your mouth? Isn’t it sort of against most religions to not look out for one’s fellow man? To be charitable, civil, and other stuff. I’m hardly a saint myself, but I’d hate to actually say out loud that we ought to look out for number 1 (the old me/myself/and I). And, the idea of Social Security is “Social” – that we look out for each other, particularly in the Depression era when we were in need of help. While Social Security may need reform, I’m not convinced that privatizing it is the answer. (In which case, come up with some program with a new name, because “Private Social Security” sounds oxymoronic).

Plus, a food article, by Daniel Young: French pizza, with French cheeses. Mmm. Sounds yummy:

FRANCIS CRESCI’S decision to ban mozzarella at the pizzeria he opened here in 1956 was less a matter of taste than conviction. It echoed the insistence of his grandfather, an immigrant from Umbria in Italy, that nary a word of Italian be heard in the family’s new home in Nice. The young Mr. Cresci thought his pizzas should speak either French or, like his grandfather, Nissart, a dialect with Italian and old Provençal influences.

“In every region of Europe the locals were eating foods produced on their land,” recalled Mr. Cresci, now 78. “I reckoned there was enough cheese to choose from in France.”

The nutty, buttery flavor of semihard cheeses like French Emmenthal and Cantal distinguishes much French pizza from Neapolitan-style pies made only with milky mozzarella. When the cheese is spread over a thin round of dough coated with tomato and herbs and then subjected to the relentless whoosh of heat in a brick oven, the result is a bubbling, molten masterpiece.

“C’est une pizza qui vive,” said Mr. Cresci’s son, Ludovic, who now oversees La Pizza, his father’s business. Sure enough, that pizza is alive.

Last night’s “House, M.D.” on FOX was curiously interesting. We get more inkling of why Dr. House is such a misogynist – something didn’t work out with a woman in the past (isn’t it always?). House isn’t happy when his only friend in the hospital, Dr. Wilson, ditches House’s plan to go the see a Monster Truck event (a NJ thing, I daresay, for a show that takes place in NJ). Indeed, to House’s concern, Wilson is going to see a woman (who may or may not have been The Woman in House’s life; dare we detect jealousy? Well, House forgives Wilson, saying, “Well, she’s your friend, so I can’t stop you.”). House then turns to young Dr. Cameron to be his guest to the Monster Truck event (which they maintain is NOT a date for the two lonely singletons. Right – well, she is House’s student, so to speak, so perhaps they ought to avoid “dating” in that sense).

By coincidence, my sister and I also went to Central Park yesterday morning to see The Gates (didn’t see FC and P, but it felt like everybody was there). We didn’t walk as far (from Columbus Circle to probably up to 72nd Street, west to east, and then back down again). Cold, but walking had to get the blood going.

I’m not sure exactly what would be the artistic meaning behind it (is it “have art for art’s sake”? is it mere aesthetics? if it’s mere aesthetics, because we all like to look at something pretty and reflective of light and texture, is it still art? are art and aesthetics one and the same?). Maybe the artists Christo and Jeanne-Claude just do it to let us think of what we will – we become the “artists” so to speak – we make or derive our own value of what we look at; the photographers out make photos – make their own art; and so on.

I’ll give Christo and Jeanne-Claude this much credit – I was impressed about seeing an alternative universe NYC – everybody who came out to Central Park looked happy. So many smiling faces, from people of probably every race, national origin and religion, etc. Orange (“saffron”) in winter just makes a nice warm feeling inside.

Oh, and I was telling my sister that seeing the actual Westminster Dog Show was unnecessary – Central Park with The Gates was where all the dogs worthy of being seen were. Plus, the some dogs wore sweaters and booties – a literal dog fashion show.

Then, Sunday afternoon, I went to a co-worker’s engagement party in the Lower East Side, and the bunch of us hanged out for a bit afterward. Much cake eaten.

Watched some of my videotapes today: notable viewing – “Broadcast News” (or most of it anyway, because my VCR missed the first minute or two). Quite a movie – Holly Hunter, William Hurt, and Albert Brooks, with sharp dialogue and insight, plus a romantic triangle that wasn’t too romantic. Hurt is the talented anchorman who’s lacking actual journalistic sense (more self-promotion than substance – and he knows it, which makes it feel worse – because that means he’s not as vacant as he looks); Brooks is his rival, a longtime reporter who has his eye on the anchor seat; and Hunter is the news producer in between. Brooks and Hunter are convinced that they are smarter than everyone else (and they are), but they’re so sharp, they’re rather socially inept. Hurt is smooth, but stupid and senses that he’s being put down; at the same time, he’s exploiting them and their talents as better journalists (or exploiting Hunter’s talent, anyway). Hunter (emotionally speaking) loves both guys, they love her, and all three are nuts. Oh, and network news – yeah, it’s an annoying thing, because the tv news department executives are panderers and twirps.

Hmm. And, this was a movie made in the 1980’s? Some of satire on the anchorman stuff are too right on the money. I don’t think I can look at NBC’s Brian Williams the same way again (especially when he has a passing resemblance to William Hurt’s good, serious looks and is on that journey of Big Shot Network News Anchorman).

But, at some points, the passage of time is pretty evident – when Hunter’s character catches Hurt’s character in pretending to cry in his interviewing of a date rape victim (in an attempt to pander to viewers and milk the pathos of the story), she accuses him of crossing the journalist’s ethical line – to which he responds with a blunt “well, the line is constantly being pushed and re-drawn anyway.” Boy, is that mild compared to what real life anchormen get themselves into (i.e., CBS’ Dan Rather’s fiasco with the story on George W. Bush’s National Air Guard Service).

So it goes. It’ll be back to work tomorrow. Sigh.