This will be a stream of consciouness on this topic. But I have been incubating this thought all day and I need to be rid of it :().
Blackberry, etal: 1) Do not be a worker ant and pull it out while one is walking across the street. It's what desperate worker ants do; 2) Do not pull it out when one is having a conversation. It's rude! and des classe; 3) Do not check it every 5 mins. (every half an hour OK), unless, one's livelihood depends on it like a thread. How sad.
Bathroom Break: Do not say, "I have to go pee." Just say, "Excuse me" and leave and come back.
Jokes: Never laugh at one's own joke(s). It's too self congratulatory and middle class.
Clothes: Always get them tailored. Tidy up.
Shoes: Never wear something that takes more than 5 mins. to break it in. In Summer, never wear flip flops unless one is on sand or near a body of water (preferablly, near the Meditteranean) and NEVER on concrete (OK: heels, flats, espadrilles, sandles). For the gentleman, shoe trees at home always, and never purchase a sole that is thicker than half an inch. One is driven, not walked.
Shirts: For gentlemen: Always collared and never a pocket. One does not take notes, others take notes.
Watches: Never quartz. It's cheating. Must always be Swiss crafted. Blancpain, Vacheron, Breugeut.
Date(s): Gentleman: Always pay the whole thing even when one knows that it's a loss from the beginning. Ladies: Gesture to pay.
Drinks: Ladies: Keep up with the gentleman. And if the gentleman, per chance, blacksout before you do (happened to me twice in 3 yrs.), discreetly, offer him another drink or narcotics.
Taxi: Gentleman always opens the door and never lets the lady walk more than 4 blocks.
Bring it on!
Tuesday, June 23, 2009
Thursday, May 28, 2009
One's Nature
Is it possible to change one's nature, and if so, how much of it? On one side of the argument, Nietzsche proclaims the philosophy of "becoming" i.e. one should and can always and continually try to improve upon one's flaws and shortcomings until one becomes an "ubermensche" (i.e. super man). Flaws and imperfections, he says is like a mountain that beckons to be climbed and conquered and he says that this can and must be done. On the other hand, Galen Strawson, a modern British philosopher posits that, basically, we are who we are and fundamentally, we can't really change who we are just as Hydrogen can not simply mutate into Carbon. In fact, Strawson extends his argument further and proclaims that there is no free will because, in effect, we do what we do based on who we are and that our actions are fated to be borne out of our nature. He further extends his argument by saying that once free will (personal choice) is expunged from life's equation, concepts like morality and ethics, in the absence of free will, no longer exists or applies to our actions.
For example, much to Strawson's chagrin, Hitler's behavior was not immoral or unethical. Since Hitler by nature (or natural proclivities), according to Strawson, was who he was. Others, with a more humane and compassionate proclivities can claim him to have been a monster. But to Hitler, he was not making any immoral decisions. Because he was acting out of his nature. This reminds me of the parable of the scorpion and the frog. One day, a scorpion wanted to cross the river to get to the otherside. A conviently placed frog offered to be a good samritan and take him to the otherside as long as he wasn't going to be stung. The scorpion gratefully accepted Mr. Frog's offer. But half way across the river, Mr. Frog felt a sharp pain, a sting! in his back and said, "why did you sting me? Now, we are both going to drown!" The scorpion replied, "I'm sorry! But it's my nature!"
Personally, I see truth in both positions. Per Nietzsche, I can see how one can change for the better, as long as the person wants/wills it and has the discipline to change. But I wonder how much of this is theoretical vs. practical? Strawson would argue that if a person, by nature, has the capacity, the will, and the discipline to change, by nature, they can. But if a person, by nature, is incapable of fundamental changes, the best that that person can do is to make adjustments since one can not mutate one's nature. For example, a constant procrastinator will most likely remain a constant procratinator. So, I see validity in both arguments; but with one exception... a catalyst.
I believe that behaviors, the symptom of one's nature, can be modified with guidance or by situation (most effectively, involuntarily). I can think of two examples from the top of my head: 1) a spendthrift person who has always been spendthrift (a carefree spender) may go through an excruciating time in their life where they lose their job, their house, their access to credit, etc. and after having gone through that hellish experience, decides to never have that happen again (re: Scarlet O'Hara: "As long I live, I will never go hungry again!" as she clenches Tara's soil), and once they are back on their feet, begin to moderate their spending, their view of life (e.g. realize that life is full of unexpected, good and bad surprises and rainy days), and begins to save and become, gladly, more mindful of their level and magnitude of consumption i.e. becomes a level headed person. 2) a libertine who has lived always with a devil may care attitude who squanders his or her life in the sole pursuit of pleasure, once diagnosed with a terminal disease, bedridden, and the priest on the way, who somehow escapes death and gets a new lease on life, will most likely and gladly, begin to appreciate the preciousness of life and would think twice before squandering his life away again in meaningless pursuits. Suddenly, he would want to hold onto life as long as he can. Eats healthier, exercises, tends to his relationships with friends and family, and looks forward, gladly, to a more meaningful, productive, and long life.
In conclusion, I think that the vast majority of people really can't change (some do of course (like those people who lose 10s of lbs. because they are fed up with being obese). But the exceptions do not make it a rule) either because they lack the will or the sustained discipline. But I also, unequivocablly, believe that people can change, dramatically and gladly, if their situation forces them to change. Net net, change is hard when it's voluntary. But it is easier, if it's involuntary. Albeit one may have to go through hell and back. Actually, perhaps, voluntary change is in the end, less painful?!
But this whole thing about. "Hey, it's America! You can be whatever you want to be. Just decide and work hard to get there with positive thinking, no excuses, and a bounce in your steps!" I buy it (the optimism, "yes, we can!") and simultaneously, I don't buy it (human nature is very difficult, I dare say, nearly impossible to overcome without a catalyst).
In the end, I admire people who can change for the better voluntarily. It's a hero's journey and it's what indeed does separate the wheat from the chaff.
Why not me?
For example, much to Strawson's chagrin, Hitler's behavior was not immoral or unethical. Since Hitler by nature (or natural proclivities), according to Strawson, was who he was. Others, with a more humane and compassionate proclivities can claim him to have been a monster. But to Hitler, he was not making any immoral decisions. Because he was acting out of his nature. This reminds me of the parable of the scorpion and the frog. One day, a scorpion wanted to cross the river to get to the otherside. A conviently placed frog offered to be a good samritan and take him to the otherside as long as he wasn't going to be stung. The scorpion gratefully accepted Mr. Frog's offer. But half way across the river, Mr. Frog felt a sharp pain, a sting! in his back and said, "why did you sting me? Now, we are both going to drown!" The scorpion replied, "I'm sorry! But it's my nature!"
Personally, I see truth in both positions. Per Nietzsche, I can see how one can change for the better, as long as the person wants/wills it and has the discipline to change. But I wonder how much of this is theoretical vs. practical? Strawson would argue that if a person, by nature, has the capacity, the will, and the discipline to change, by nature, they can. But if a person, by nature, is incapable of fundamental changes, the best that that person can do is to make adjustments since one can not mutate one's nature. For example, a constant procrastinator will most likely remain a constant procratinator. So, I see validity in both arguments; but with one exception... a catalyst.
I believe that behaviors, the symptom of one's nature, can be modified with guidance or by situation (most effectively, involuntarily). I can think of two examples from the top of my head: 1) a spendthrift person who has always been spendthrift (a carefree spender) may go through an excruciating time in their life where they lose their job, their house, their access to credit, etc. and after having gone through that hellish experience, decides to never have that happen again (re: Scarlet O'Hara: "As long I live, I will never go hungry again!" as she clenches Tara's soil), and once they are back on their feet, begin to moderate their spending, their view of life (e.g. realize that life is full of unexpected, good and bad surprises and rainy days), and begins to save and become, gladly, more mindful of their level and magnitude of consumption i.e. becomes a level headed person. 2) a libertine who has lived always with a devil may care attitude who squanders his or her life in the sole pursuit of pleasure, once diagnosed with a terminal disease, bedridden, and the priest on the way, who somehow escapes death and gets a new lease on life, will most likely and gladly, begin to appreciate the preciousness of life and would think twice before squandering his life away again in meaningless pursuits. Suddenly, he would want to hold onto life as long as he can. Eats healthier, exercises, tends to his relationships with friends and family, and looks forward, gladly, to a more meaningful, productive, and long life.
In conclusion, I think that the vast majority of people really can't change (some do of course (like those people who lose 10s of lbs. because they are fed up with being obese). But the exceptions do not make it a rule) either because they lack the will or the sustained discipline. But I also, unequivocablly, believe that people can change, dramatically and gladly, if their situation forces them to change. Net net, change is hard when it's voluntary. But it is easier, if it's involuntary. Albeit one may have to go through hell and back. Actually, perhaps, voluntary change is in the end, less painful?!
But this whole thing about. "Hey, it's America! You can be whatever you want to be. Just decide and work hard to get there with positive thinking, no excuses, and a bounce in your steps!" I buy it (the optimism, "yes, we can!") and simultaneously, I don't buy it (human nature is very difficult, I dare say, nearly impossible to overcome without a catalyst).
In the end, I admire people who can change for the better voluntarily. It's a hero's journey and it's what indeed does separate the wheat from the chaff.
Why not me?
Wednesday, April 22, 2009
iPhone 2009
iKnow :) that I havent posted a blog in awhile. But that's probably because: 1) I havent really had anything I thought worth saying; 2) I've been spending more time on Facebook as an outlet; and 3) I go through phases from compulsive to abandonement.
Anyway, the iPhone. I think I'm going to get it when the new version comes out in June. The 3 main reasons that I didn't get it so far are: 1) Everyone has it and I hate jumping into something everyone has/does. It's sheepish; 2) I thought, at least to me, that it's bulky and slightly too heavy; and 3) I have been with Verizon for almost 15 years now and it's hard to sever that tie. It's one of the longest 'relationships' that I have had. Btw, I don't think that I own or have anything in my apt. that old.
BUT the more and more that I see some of my friends use the iPhone, the more I want it. The convenience of it all is winning me over. 1) Surfing the internet is as easy as surfing on a PC (bloggin from it will be just as easy too); 2) One can jump to Facebook and post things in seconds; 3) there are fantastic apps. like Shazaam (e.g. if one is at a bar or a lounge and wants to know what they're playing at the moment, one just clicks on the Shazaam app. and within a minute, the app. tells you what song it is and you can just download it from the iTunes store if one wants it. Instant gratification! It's so American in that way.) and there are games, guides (e.g. Zagat), tip calculator, etc. that are either free or at most $5.99.
I still like my phone with a qwerty keyboard since 95% of the time I text vs. actually talking and a physical qwerty is convenient. Nevertheless, the overall convenience of the iPhone seems to me now pressing and insurmountable.
So, when the new iPhone comes out in June, I am most likely going to get on the bandwagon. I can't wait!
Anyway, the iPhone. I think I'm going to get it when the new version comes out in June. The 3 main reasons that I didn't get it so far are: 1) Everyone has it and I hate jumping into something everyone has/does. It's sheepish; 2) I thought, at least to me, that it's bulky and slightly too heavy; and 3) I have been with Verizon for almost 15 years now and it's hard to sever that tie. It's one of the longest 'relationships' that I have had. Btw, I don't think that I own or have anything in my apt. that old.
BUT the more and more that I see some of my friends use the iPhone, the more I want it. The convenience of it all is winning me over. 1) Surfing the internet is as easy as surfing on a PC (bloggin from it will be just as easy too); 2) One can jump to Facebook and post things in seconds; 3) there are fantastic apps. like Shazaam (e.g. if one is at a bar or a lounge and wants to know what they're playing at the moment, one just clicks on the Shazaam app. and within a minute, the app. tells you what song it is and you can just download it from the iTunes store if one wants it. Instant gratification! It's so American in that way.) and there are games, guides (e.g. Zagat), tip calculator, etc. that are either free or at most $5.99.
I still like my phone with a qwerty keyboard since 95% of the time I text vs. actually talking and a physical qwerty is convenient. Nevertheless, the overall convenience of the iPhone seems to me now pressing and insurmountable.
So, when the new iPhone comes out in June, I am most likely going to get on the bandwagon. I can't wait!
Wednesday, April 8, 2009
Tuesday, April 7, 2009
On Gay Marriage
First off, let me say that I am a 'straight' guy. But I am all for gay marriage. I didn't always think this way. In fact, up to a couple of years ago, my thinking was that same sex unions should only be called civil unions with all the rights of a marriage. But without granting the word 'marriage.' The word 'marriage' I concluded then has a sacred connotation, and thus, the institution of marriage with the sacrement of the church should only apply to a hetrosexual union on the basis of religious tradition which has lasted for close to 2,000 years.
But then I thought: 1) nowhere in the Bible does it say that people of the same sex can not be married; 2) the Bible, which is supposedly inspired by God, was nevertheless, written by men, who are by nature flawed and subjective and there's also the histrocity aspect of the Bible, that is, what they wrote depended alot on the times in which they wrote and the prevailing mores of those times just as slavery was the norm in Roman times and the same in America in the 17th and 18th century; 3) the Bill of Rights, clearly states that we have inalienable rights among which are, life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness. The ban on gay marriage violates the latter two rights.
So, I reversed my opinion on the entire matter. All people: gay, straight, handicapped, ethinicities, etc. are all human, and therefore, the inalienable rights apply to all.
I still believe that marriage is sacred. It is a solemn oath and duty once the bond/the covenant is made. But I don't believe that the principles and the sentiments of and for the sacred comes from the Church alone. In fact, the Church, in many ways is a flawed institution, not all but many. People interpret the Bible as they deem right. Thus, we have the diaspora of denominations and offsprouts within the denominations. Why should their interpretation of the Bible trump any other human interpretation of morality.
People should rise above religion and instead behave compassionately, empathetically, sympathetically, rationally, and spiritually.
Kepler, Corpernicus, and Galilleo were all excommunicated by the Church because they observed and said that the earth rotates around the sun vs. the other way around. The Church, based on one verse from the Book of Joshua stoodfast to the view that the sun rotated around the Earth and thus any other view was considered heresy. Then in the 20th century, the Church apologized for its error.
The one and only thing I like about the Bible is the love that Jesus extended to all people (except for the hypocrites like the Pharisses and the Seducces whose egos eclipsed compassion).
So, cheers! to Iowa and Vermont for choosing love and reason over hate and dogma.
But then I thought: 1) nowhere in the Bible does it say that people of the same sex can not be married; 2) the Bible, which is supposedly inspired by God, was nevertheless, written by men, who are by nature flawed and subjective and there's also the histrocity aspect of the Bible, that is, what they wrote depended alot on the times in which they wrote and the prevailing mores of those times just as slavery was the norm in Roman times and the same in America in the 17th and 18th century; 3) the Bill of Rights, clearly states that we have inalienable rights among which are, life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness. The ban on gay marriage violates the latter two rights.
So, I reversed my opinion on the entire matter. All people: gay, straight, handicapped, ethinicities, etc. are all human, and therefore, the inalienable rights apply to all.
I still believe that marriage is sacred. It is a solemn oath and duty once the bond/the covenant is made. But I don't believe that the principles and the sentiments of and for the sacred comes from the Church alone. In fact, the Church, in many ways is a flawed institution, not all but many. People interpret the Bible as they deem right. Thus, we have the diaspora of denominations and offsprouts within the denominations. Why should their interpretation of the Bible trump any other human interpretation of morality.
People should rise above religion and instead behave compassionately, empathetically, sympathetically, rationally, and spiritually.
Kepler, Corpernicus, and Galilleo were all excommunicated by the Church because they observed and said that the earth rotates around the sun vs. the other way around. The Church, based on one verse from the Book of Joshua stoodfast to the view that the sun rotated around the Earth and thus any other view was considered heresy. Then in the 20th century, the Church apologized for its error.
The one and only thing I like about the Bible is the love that Jesus extended to all people (except for the hypocrites like the Pharisses and the Seducces whose egos eclipsed compassion).
So, cheers! to Iowa and Vermont for choosing love and reason over hate and dogma.
Friday, April 3, 2009
Ode To Manhattan
As much as I complain and bitch about Manhattan and how many low lives that I find here at any moment, I must forfeit my complaints from time to time.
It is true that I am sure that 98% of the people that I see and have encountered here are peasants with accompanying low forehead and flip flops and all, I don't think that there is another city on this planet, that in absolute terms (#s), that has as many interesting and diverse group of people.
Other than S.F., New Orleans, Chicago, London, Paris, Honolulu, Sydney, Barcelona, Montreal, Monte Carlo, and Hong Kong, I can't imagine living anywhere else. Nowhere else (I would think) has the same level of energy, diversity, and modernity.
In Manhattan, there is nothing that one can not have. Food, shopping, clubs, lounges, hotels, people, culture, and possibilties.
It's true that if one does enough of it, it does become a routine and routines can become boring. But we Manhattanites have the choice to not participate amidst all of the choices at any given day and night. What other cities (besides the aforementioned) can one say this about? Manhattan ranks on top.
S.F. would be the closest to this. Plus it has the better weather and better access to nature. Kudos to S.F. But may the gods bless Manhattan. My Salome; my sweet toxic love.
It is true that I am sure that 98% of the people that I see and have encountered here are peasants with accompanying low forehead and flip flops and all, I don't think that there is another city on this planet, that in absolute terms (#s), that has as many interesting and diverse group of people.
Other than S.F., New Orleans, Chicago, London, Paris, Honolulu, Sydney, Barcelona, Montreal, Monte Carlo, and Hong Kong, I can't imagine living anywhere else. Nowhere else (I would think) has the same level of energy, diversity, and modernity.
In Manhattan, there is nothing that one can not have. Food, shopping, clubs, lounges, hotels, people, culture, and possibilties.
It's true that if one does enough of it, it does become a routine and routines can become boring. But we Manhattanites have the choice to not participate amidst all of the choices at any given day and night. What other cities (besides the aforementioned) can one say this about? Manhattan ranks on top.
S.F. would be the closest to this. Plus it has the better weather and better access to nature. Kudos to S.F. But may the gods bless Manhattan. My Salome; my sweet toxic love.
Saturday, March 14, 2009
Chinese Dandy
This is from the NY Times, an excerpt from an article concerning bribery in China. Thought it was amusing.
----------------------
With the public increasingly aware of government corruption, there has been talk of creating a national register to track the family assets of all government officials, in the hopes of weeding out bribe-taking relatives.
The problem is that officials in China appear to be addicted to European luxury brands.
In January, a land confiscation official in the southwestern city of Chongqing was sentenced to 13 years in prison for accepting kickbacks. The government confiscated 200 pairs of luxury shoes, 100 luxury suits and a luxury car.
At his sentencing in January, the official, Ding Meng, expressed no remorse about his expensive tastes.
He even scolded the prosecutor for her poor taste in fashion. “You’re a woman and you don’t even wear better luxury shoes than me,” he sniped. “Maybe you can spend $25 and buy a tube of shoe cream.”
----------------------
With the public increasingly aware of government corruption, there has been talk of creating a national register to track the family assets of all government officials, in the hopes of weeding out bribe-taking relatives.
The problem is that officials in China appear to be addicted to European luxury brands.
In January, a land confiscation official in the southwestern city of Chongqing was sentenced to 13 years in prison for accepting kickbacks. The government confiscated 200 pairs of luxury shoes, 100 luxury suits and a luxury car.
At his sentencing in January, the official, Ding Meng, expressed no remorse about his expensive tastes.
He even scolded the prosecutor for her poor taste in fashion. “You’re a woman and you don’t even wear better luxury shoes than me,” he sniped. “Maybe you can spend $25 and buy a tube of shoe cream.”
Tuesday, March 3, 2009
Why I am glad that I am not a woman
Men hunt, gather, sleep, fuck, and eat. It's been so for 50,000 years. With women, it's alot more complicated.
First off, there's menstruation. From 13 to 45+ (an entire generation), women bleed for a week every month. How annoying and inconvenient! To add insult to injury, they get cramps and bloat. Once my ex-gf, had such severe cramps that I almost ended up calling an ambulance because she was in such pain. It was really shocking. To further add to the injury, as if that isn't enough, the hormonal impact on their emotions is equally taxing to them. It's basically a week of toruture every month. (Fortunately, there are now birth control pills that alleviate this situation. But not all women are or will be on it.)
Secondly, a woman's worth in society is primarily based on their outer beauty. It shouldn't be. But in general, it is. This observation of social dynamics is not a prescription but a description. Outer beauty is, however, perishable and has a very short shelf life. And I think that women, instinctively understand this primitive but realialistic condition. This is why they worry so much about how much they weigh and demand perfect high and lowlights for their hair. A proper shampoo and conditioner are a must also.
Third, the biological clock. Women have them; men don't. Without a single exception, women who I have known start to act alittle differently starting around the age of 28. They become obsessed with marriage around this time. Is this a generalization? Yes, in general, from my experience, this is the case. Are generalizations bad? Yes, if they are without merit or evidence. But as cliches contain kernels of truth, generalizations are not always bad because they are generalizations as long as there is some truth to the generalization. So, women feel the press of time more than guys. The only pressure that guys have about time is regarding death. But this happens only after a man is about 50 whereas for women, the fear of time catching up to them occurs at 28. They start thinking, "Oh my god, I'm almost 30 and I'm going to be an old maid!" It's a near death experience.
Many women nowadays, distract themselves from this fear by focusing on their career. But that only delays the fear until they are around 34-35 when they too (as VP of Marketing, etc) realize that love, marriage, and children are more meaningful than the rat race. They obtain status and have people working for them and have arrived at power. But then, they, quite rightly realize, that all of that is meaningless compared to being a loving (and beloved) wife and mother. Tick toc tick toc tick toc... the meter is running.
Now, even when one gets married, there's a fairly significant chance that they'll get screwed over. The more powerful (in looks, status, or money) the man who she marries, the more options that the man has in every sphere of life. The divorce rate is about 40%. So, if a woman happens to be one of the 40%, that's a bad scenario. She is no longer 25 and because she has been busy raising kids, her resume is 15 yrs. old. Very difficult to get back in the workforce and it's a completely different lifestyle from changing diapers and watching daytime soap operas and going shopping vs. 9 hrs. of work and dealing with corporate politics. Fck!
[There are some women who are 'successful' no matter what (e.g. Oprah, Martha Stewart, JK Rowling, Condoliza Rice, etc.) But exceptions do not make it a rule.]
I'm glad that I'm not a woman. We have to work our asses off like a mule at times. But the alternative, that is, being a woman, is much harder.
I adore women and my life is richer because I'm with them and they with me. They appreciate and notice details, care more about others' feelings, are more responsible than guys, and just as intelligent or more so than guys are because they have a higher sense of intuition. But damn, it's tough to be a woman especially in the 21st century. More opportunities now, yes, but biology stays the same.
The meter keeps running.
[On a positive note though more women than ever before can have and are having a more fulfilling life and can have it all-- a first rate education, a job or a business that engages them, a wonderful husband and a great family.]
First off, there's menstruation. From 13 to 45+ (an entire generation), women bleed for a week every month. How annoying and inconvenient! To add insult to injury, they get cramps and bloat. Once my ex-gf, had such severe cramps that I almost ended up calling an ambulance because she was in such pain. It was really shocking. To further add to the injury, as if that isn't enough, the hormonal impact on their emotions is equally taxing to them. It's basically a week of toruture every month. (Fortunately, there are now birth control pills that alleviate this situation. But not all women are or will be on it.)
Secondly, a woman's worth in society is primarily based on their outer beauty. It shouldn't be. But in general, it is. This observation of social dynamics is not a prescription but a description. Outer beauty is, however, perishable and has a very short shelf life. And I think that women, instinctively understand this primitive but realialistic condition. This is why they worry so much about how much they weigh and demand perfect high and lowlights for their hair. A proper shampoo and conditioner are a must also.
Third, the biological clock. Women have them; men don't. Without a single exception, women who I have known start to act alittle differently starting around the age of 28. They become obsessed with marriage around this time. Is this a generalization? Yes, in general, from my experience, this is the case. Are generalizations bad? Yes, if they are without merit or evidence. But as cliches contain kernels of truth, generalizations are not always bad because they are generalizations as long as there is some truth to the generalization. So, women feel the press of time more than guys. The only pressure that guys have about time is regarding death. But this happens only after a man is about 50 whereas for women, the fear of time catching up to them occurs at 28. They start thinking, "Oh my god, I'm almost 30 and I'm going to be an old maid!" It's a near death experience.
Many women nowadays, distract themselves from this fear by focusing on their career. But that only delays the fear until they are around 34-35 when they too (as VP of Marketing, etc) realize that love, marriage, and children are more meaningful than the rat race. They obtain status and have people working for them and have arrived at power. But then, they, quite rightly realize, that all of that is meaningless compared to being a loving (and beloved) wife and mother. Tick toc tick toc tick toc... the meter is running.
Now, even when one gets married, there's a fairly significant chance that they'll get screwed over. The more powerful (in looks, status, or money) the man who she marries, the more options that the man has in every sphere of life. The divorce rate is about 40%. So, if a woman happens to be one of the 40%, that's a bad scenario. She is no longer 25 and because she has been busy raising kids, her resume is 15 yrs. old. Very difficult to get back in the workforce and it's a completely different lifestyle from changing diapers and watching daytime soap operas and going shopping vs. 9 hrs. of work and dealing with corporate politics. Fck!
[There are some women who are 'successful' no matter what (e.g. Oprah, Martha Stewart, JK Rowling, Condoliza Rice, etc.) But exceptions do not make it a rule.]
I'm glad that I'm not a woman. We have to work our asses off like a mule at times. But the alternative, that is, being a woman, is much harder.
I adore women and my life is richer because I'm with them and they with me. They appreciate and notice details, care more about others' feelings, are more responsible than guys, and just as intelligent or more so than guys are because they have a higher sense of intuition. But damn, it's tough to be a woman especially in the 21st century. More opportunities now, yes, but biology stays the same.
The meter keeps running.
[On a positive note though more women than ever before can have and are having a more fulfilling life and can have it all-- a first rate education, a job or a business that engages them, a wonderful husband and a great family.]
Friday, February 27, 2009
$28.3 Million Chair
Oh, totally worth every penny. NOT. FYI- It's from the YSL estate auction by Christie's last week.
Thursday, February 26, 2009
Perniciousness of Religion
I'm gonna stick to Christianity alone for this one. But all religions except Buddhism and it's derivatives (e.g. Taoism, Zen), to me, are pernicious (i.e. dangerous).
Firstly, what is the core dogma of religion? Faith. What is faith? It's the suspension of reason and it's stead, belief becomes fact. What happens when belief triumphs over reason? Well, for one thing, you get appx. 700 years of the Dark Ages when human progress actually stopped and people went back to the stone age and later, people who said that the Earth rotated around the Sun were burned at the stakes or excommunicated. You also get the Taliban who will not allow girls to goto schools and behead those who are infidels. [You also get George W.]
Second, this whole Christianity business is NOT new. Horus, an Egyptian god (centuries before Christ), was born in Dec. via virgin birth, had 12 disciples, had his trials in the desert, died and was resurrected on the 3rd day. The same for Mithra, a god (a derivative of Sol) that the Romans worshipped right before Jesus came on the scene. It goes on and on. Btw, none of the New Testament gospels (aka God-spells) were written by an actual eyewitness and all of the gospels are different from eachother. The earliest one having been written roughy 30 years after the death of Jesus, and the rest, about a hundred years after. Continuing on... Why do we have bunnies for Easter? It's because the Persians celebrated the Goddess of fertility named Ishtar and the bunnies represent the fertile return of Spring during their Spring festivals. It goes on and on. I once took Graeco-Roman religion class at college and the professor kept saying, "during the Jesus movement..." so and so happened. I was offended by his description of the only son of god. But then after a few years of my own personal study and research, I realized that he was right. This whole resurrection and salvation business came long before and many many times before Jesus.
Third, can anyone in their right mind believe in a talking snake, putting on all of the animals on a boat before God wiped out the human race?, a man inside a big fish, bringing down the walls of a fortress by blowing on bugles, etc. What's the difference between these stories vs. mother goose, jack and the beanstalk, and Santa Clause.
Forth, many of our founding fathers thought that religion was pernicious as well. Thomas Jefferson, Benjamin Franklin, John Adams, etc. all considered religion to be dangerous institution that stunted the minds of men. They even wrote about it. Heck, even George Washington, when he was sworn in laid his hands on the Masonic Bible vs. the King James Version.
I heard the most shocking survey recently that most Americans (about half) do not believe in evolution because God created Adam and Eve, not monkeys that became human. We were one of the very few industrialized nations that has such high percentage of people who reject a scientific fact such as evolution.
Fifth, there is no concept of the original sin in the Bible (anywhere). It was created by the Catholic church to scare people into joining the church so that they can have more people to control and to collect more revenues for their pompous institutions including for their wardrobes, palaces, ceremonies, lifestyles, etc. Btw, the Pope, there's nothing in the Bible that requires a Pope. Peter was 'the rock,' the foundation for the movement (per the Book of Acts). But that's it. The ten commandments: the first 3-4 commandments are to love the Biblical god and no one else, "for I am a jealous God." What a jealous God? I don't get it.
Anyway, I understand why people need to believe in a God. It makes life simpler for them (they don't have to think. The Church can think FOR them). Plus, afterall, is this life all that we have? Surely, there must be something beyond this life! Something more sublime, meaningful, and just! So, it's comforting as well.
So, a Jew, 2000 years ago comes to Earth on a suicide mission and dies for our sins so that we can goto heaven if we believe in him (and no one else) and if we are 'born again' through Baptism. Hmmm. Well, I was Baptised twice. So, I guess I'm good. My name is on the list when the door guy up on the pearly gate (I think his name is Jesus or Michael? Don't know who'll be working the door that nite) asks me, "You on the list?" I can say, "Yup. Frederick Kwon. I RSVPd twice!" Response: "Yes, I see your name. Come right in." I'll ask, "How is it in there?" He'll say, "It's awesome! You get to pray and sing to the Almighty all day and nite forever. Believe me, the whole virgin pussy thing that the Muslims get at their place... way over-rated."
P.S. Now, don't get me wrong. I don't discount the slim possibility of a deity of some sort or conscious energy that organizes life and death and the Physics of 'sin' (i.e. one's bad deeds eventually come due for payment and bites one on the ass) and I don't believe that everything is coincidence, afterall, the universe is so vast (actually, infinite) and at the same time, so infinitesmal, that there has to be some room for, dare I say, even 'intelligent design.' Moreover, I do love what Jesus stood for, that is, compassion and love, and I especially like the Surmon on the Mound. But all the rest of it... the fish stories (i.e. Jonah, multiplying fish and bread for the masses), Armageddon, talking snake, a god who makes a bet with satan and makes his follower suffer through murder of all his children, gives him boils then says, "hey kimosabe, we're chill now, OK?" (Book of Job), etc. etc.
... please.
Firstly, what is the core dogma of religion? Faith. What is faith? It's the suspension of reason and it's stead, belief becomes fact. What happens when belief triumphs over reason? Well, for one thing, you get appx. 700 years of the Dark Ages when human progress actually stopped and people went back to the stone age and later, people who said that the Earth rotated around the Sun were burned at the stakes or excommunicated. You also get the Taliban who will not allow girls to goto schools and behead those who are infidels. [You also get George W.]
Second, this whole Christianity business is NOT new. Horus, an Egyptian god (centuries before Christ), was born in Dec. via virgin birth, had 12 disciples, had his trials in the desert, died and was resurrected on the 3rd day. The same for Mithra, a god (a derivative of Sol) that the Romans worshipped right before Jesus came on the scene. It goes on and on. Btw, none of the New Testament gospels (aka God-spells) were written by an actual eyewitness and all of the gospels are different from eachother. The earliest one having been written roughy 30 years after the death of Jesus, and the rest, about a hundred years after. Continuing on... Why do we have bunnies for Easter? It's because the Persians celebrated the Goddess of fertility named Ishtar and the bunnies represent the fertile return of Spring during their Spring festivals. It goes on and on. I once took Graeco-Roman religion class at college and the professor kept saying, "during the Jesus movement..." so and so happened. I was offended by his description of the only son of god. But then after a few years of my own personal study and research, I realized that he was right. This whole resurrection and salvation business came long before and many many times before Jesus.
Third, can anyone in their right mind believe in a talking snake, putting on all of the animals on a boat before God wiped out the human race?, a man inside a big fish, bringing down the walls of a fortress by blowing on bugles, etc. What's the difference between these stories vs. mother goose, jack and the beanstalk, and Santa Clause.
Forth, many of our founding fathers thought that religion was pernicious as well. Thomas Jefferson, Benjamin Franklin, John Adams, etc. all considered religion to be dangerous institution that stunted the minds of men. They even wrote about it. Heck, even George Washington, when he was sworn in laid his hands on the Masonic Bible vs. the King James Version.
I heard the most shocking survey recently that most Americans (about half) do not believe in evolution because God created Adam and Eve, not monkeys that became human. We were one of the very few industrialized nations that has such high percentage of people who reject a scientific fact such as evolution.
Fifth, there is no concept of the original sin in the Bible (anywhere). It was created by the Catholic church to scare people into joining the church so that they can have more people to control and to collect more revenues for their pompous institutions including for their wardrobes, palaces, ceremonies, lifestyles, etc. Btw, the Pope, there's nothing in the Bible that requires a Pope. Peter was 'the rock,' the foundation for the movement (per the Book of Acts). But that's it. The ten commandments: the first 3-4 commandments are to love the Biblical god and no one else, "for I am a jealous God." What a jealous God? I don't get it.
Anyway, I understand why people need to believe in a God. It makes life simpler for them (they don't have to think. The Church can think FOR them). Plus, afterall, is this life all that we have? Surely, there must be something beyond this life! Something more sublime, meaningful, and just! So, it's comforting as well.
So, a Jew, 2000 years ago comes to Earth on a suicide mission and dies for our sins so that we can goto heaven if we believe in him (and no one else) and if we are 'born again' through Baptism. Hmmm. Well, I was Baptised twice. So, I guess I'm good. My name is on the list when the door guy up on the pearly gate (I think his name is Jesus or Michael? Don't know who'll be working the door that nite) asks me, "You on the list?" I can say, "Yup. Frederick Kwon. I RSVPd twice!" Response: "Yes, I see your name. Come right in." I'll ask, "How is it in there?" He'll say, "It's awesome! You get to pray and sing to the Almighty all day and nite forever. Believe me, the whole virgin pussy thing that the Muslims get at their place... way over-rated."
P.S. Now, don't get me wrong. I don't discount the slim possibility of a deity of some sort or conscious energy that organizes life and death and the Physics of 'sin' (i.e. one's bad deeds eventually come due for payment and bites one on the ass) and I don't believe that everything is coincidence, afterall, the universe is so vast (actually, infinite) and at the same time, so infinitesmal, that there has to be some room for, dare I say, even 'intelligent design.' Moreover, I do love what Jesus stood for, that is, compassion and love, and I especially like the Surmon on the Mound. But all the rest of it... the fish stories (i.e. Jonah, multiplying fish and bread for the masses), Armageddon, talking snake, a god who makes a bet with satan and makes his follower suffer through murder of all his children, gives him boils then says, "hey kimosabe, we're chill now, OK?" (Book of Job), etc. etc.
... please.
Sunday, February 15, 2009
Monday, February 9, 2009
Sunday, February 1, 2009
Amazon Speed
Forgot to blog this earlier. A few days ago, I purchased a couple of items from Amazon. And being pound foolish but pennywise, I of course picked the Free Shipping option with delivery window of 5-9 days which from my experience has been actually about 4-5 days from order to delivery. Well, this time, the sucker arrived the very next day. I was amazed when my doorman said, "Fred, you have a package." I said, "Really? I'm not expecting any packages today." Then he pulls out a box with an Amazon logo. I said, "This can't be. I ordered something mid-afternoon yesterday and I didn't do next day shipping." I was puzzled.
I opened the box when I got upto my apt. and lo behold, it's the stuff I ordered less than 24 hrs. ago! So, I checked the receipt to see if I accidentally pressed the wrong delivery option. Nope. Free delivery.
I couldn't believe it. Cheers to Amazon. I'm glad that I've purchased from Amazon since the year of their inception. What a wonderful American company.
I opened the box when I got upto my apt. and lo behold, it's the stuff I ordered less than 24 hrs. ago! So, I checked the receipt to see if I accidentally pressed the wrong delivery option. Nope. Free delivery.
I couldn't believe it. Cheers to Amazon. I'm glad that I've purchased from Amazon since the year of their inception. What a wonderful American company.
Saturday, January 31, 2009
The Strange Case of Mr. Y
For the past 3 weeks, I had befriended someone who I had known for years on the party circuit. I would see Mr. Y once so often, on and off at various events and parties. But we had never hungout outside of those activities. But then on New Year's Eve, I ended up at the SubMercer and saw him and we struck up an interesting conversation and we started hanging out.
So, once a week since then, we've texted and went out to some events. He's in his mid to late 30s, tall, almost handsome, a good talker, but not a good dresser. I liked his interesting and insightful observations of people and nite life in NY. I agreed with most of everything he said and our conversations were very engaging and well paced. I thought to myself, do I have a new friend here? Afterall, we thought alot alike and he was drama free.
He invited me to events every week since New Year's Day and would even call me up every few days and we would chat on the phone. Chatting on the phone is very rare for me. 98% of the time, I like to simply text. But our conversations were so interesting and since he too was a night owl, I was fine with it. Now you maybe wondering, is he gay? Afterall, I'm quite the catch in that community. Asia boy. But no, he is definitely straight. We would often talk about the girls that he is dating or trying to date. He would even send me emails with their pictures so that we can grade them from 1 to 10. [Note: They were all Asian and 6s. He thought they were 8s. I plead illiteracy when it came to Asian girls.]
Anyway, after 3 weeks of this and increasing amicability and comfort level, I thought OK, this guy may be a new friend. Then something strange and fckd up happened on Thursday.
He invited me to a TV industry party (he's not in that industry) at Greenhouse. I really didnt feel like going. 1) I've been there now 4 times in the past month and the novelty was wearing off and 2) It was between 8-10. Way before midnight. So, evenafter I got ready, I told him, "I'm ready. But I don't know if I want to go." He just texted back and said, "Hot party. Come now." At this point, I've known the guy long enough to know that we have similar tastes and we've been to all the spots in Manhattan, so we know whats good or shit. So I went down to Greenhouse.
As I was arriving, he called me and said, "There's a huge line outside. Just goto the side door and say that you're with _____. I'm on the VIP list and I told the guestlist girl that you were coming. So, just by pass the regular line. I'm on the VIP list." He actually used the word VIP several times during the 3 min. convo. I thought that was kindda strange. It was like someone saying I went to Harvard. Harvard. Harvard. Harvard. Did I mention that I went to Harvard?
Anyway, I get inside and I find him. He's with an FOB Korean girl who I had seen once before. Mildly attractive. But not my cup of tea. We exchange pleasantries. Then later on at the bar, he asks me, "Hey Fred, can you give me $10, so I can buy her a drink? They have a $50 minimum on credit cards." This is after, the previous time when we were there and he asked me for $40 which he promised to payback the next time he saw me. Fortunately, the FOB decided to stick to tap water. So, we hungout there for about an hour. The crowd was shitty. Not the regular Greenhouse crowd. It was very bridge and tunnel. So, we decided to go to RDV early.
RDV is the latest tough door and I had only gone to it once before (last week) with Barbie. As we approached the door, he says, "Stand back a few paces. Let me and the girl break the ice." So, I figured, fine. One does have to be strategic when one is not yet a regular. He was there twice before. So neither of us were regulars yet. It takes about 3-4 visits within a span of a month in general to become a regular. Then when we were all finally at the door, he asks the doorguy the strangest thing, "Is the bartender working?" Jordan looks at him and says, "Now, that's a wierd question. No. We're not open yet. We'll be opening at 11. What's the bartender's name?" Mr. Y says, "I dont know." I whisper in his ear, "Nicholas." I knew because I make it a habit to get the bartenders' names when I first visit a place just in case I need to use it before I become a regular. Then Mr. Y says to Jordan, "You remember me dont you?" and Jordan says, "No." Anyway, we all get in despite the awkward moment. But the fckn place is not even opened for another 15 mins. So we walkout and tell the other door guy that we''ll be back. Then we end up going to the Gansvoort Hotel rooftop for what I thought would be for 20 mins. before we headed back to RDV.
Then out of the blue, he asks me while staring at the SoHo House, "Are you a member of the SoHo House?" I said "No. I had the opportunity to be one of the Charter members because I know one of Charter members who wanted me to join 6 yrs. ago. But I wasn't sure how it would be so I passed on it." Which was the truth. Then he says, "Norwood. That's a better one. You should join that." I said, maybe. Personally, I would only want to be a member of the Metropolitan Club (they go pheasant hunting and have lots of black tie events and is really high level vs. these new commers like the SoHo House or Norwood), NYAC, or the University Club. All are old school clubs unlike these new kids on the block.
Then here's the shocker, Mr. Y says, "Well, you're not adding any value here." I was flabbergasted. Say what? I just brushed it off thinking he's just joking. Then the FOB girl, he's "date," who can barely speak English tells him, not knowing what he just said to me, "I go home now. Have to finish homework. Test tomorrow." Mr. Y soon departs with her. Leaving me alone for RDV without apologizing for his comment nor for his unscheduled penis-driven departure. I thought it was an assholish move. But, I figured fck it. He wants to get laid. Fine. Fortunately, I had 2 girls soon to join me who were good enough for RDV.
When I get to RDV 20 mins. later, I get a text from him. "Hey, this girl. I don't think it'll work out. She's too traditional." I text back, "Who knows. Probably." Then 15 mins. later I get another text, "I'm at Southside. I just walked right in. It's pretty good here." Southside, FYI, is the only tough door that I've heard of that I haven't been to yet so I was interested in what he had to say about it.
To make this already long story short now, when I asked him what kind of people were there, he says, "I've already told you. Don't waste my time by making me repeat myself." So, I reread one his previous texts. Embedded in one of them were two words, "Rich Hipsters." So, that was that. I thought. Then the ugly head of a "God-complex" reared itself from Mr. Y. He kept going on about me not staying pace with him and wasting his time etc. This went on for 30 mins. while I was waiting for the girls to show up at RDV. I was besides myself. How does it go from a budding friendship into pure unadultrated insults in a nanosecond? He even went as far to say, "I'm working now so I cant give you therapy unless you pay me $150/hr." and started calling me names. Btw, he wasn't even drunk. He only drank 1 open bar vodka and rest of the 2 hrs. he just drank water.
Needless to say, my final message to him was, "Good luck turd." I havent spoke to him since. I was hurt for a day or so then became angry and disgusted. I concluded that even if he were to apologize profusely or give a good reason why he said all of those things, I can never be friends with someone so narcisstic and volatile. I deleted his number from my phone. Crazies are a dime a dozen in this city, I don't need to have one in my life. Been there, done that.
P.S. It's surreal though how a person seems so harmless and nice on the surface. But deep inside, there's a demon just waiting to eat the flesh of others when the cage opens. It's disgusting and sad. Turd.
So, once a week since then, we've texted and went out to some events. He's in his mid to late 30s, tall, almost handsome, a good talker, but not a good dresser. I liked his interesting and insightful observations of people and nite life in NY. I agreed with most of everything he said and our conversations were very engaging and well paced. I thought to myself, do I have a new friend here? Afterall, we thought alot alike and he was drama free.
He invited me to events every week since New Year's Day and would even call me up every few days and we would chat on the phone. Chatting on the phone is very rare for me. 98% of the time, I like to simply text. But our conversations were so interesting and since he too was a night owl, I was fine with it. Now you maybe wondering, is he gay? Afterall, I'm quite the catch in that community. Asia boy. But no, he is definitely straight. We would often talk about the girls that he is dating or trying to date. He would even send me emails with their pictures so that we can grade them from 1 to 10. [Note: They were all Asian and 6s. He thought they were 8s. I plead illiteracy when it came to Asian girls.]
Anyway, after 3 weeks of this and increasing amicability and comfort level, I thought OK, this guy may be a new friend. Then something strange and fckd up happened on Thursday.
He invited me to a TV industry party (he's not in that industry) at Greenhouse. I really didnt feel like going. 1) I've been there now 4 times in the past month and the novelty was wearing off and 2) It was between 8-10. Way before midnight. So, evenafter I got ready, I told him, "I'm ready. But I don't know if I want to go." He just texted back and said, "Hot party. Come now." At this point, I've known the guy long enough to know that we have similar tastes and we've been to all the spots in Manhattan, so we know whats good or shit. So I went down to Greenhouse.
As I was arriving, he called me and said, "There's a huge line outside. Just goto the side door and say that you're with _____. I'm on the VIP list and I told the guestlist girl that you were coming. So, just by pass the regular line. I'm on the VIP list." He actually used the word VIP several times during the 3 min. convo. I thought that was kindda strange. It was like someone saying I went to Harvard. Harvard. Harvard. Harvard. Did I mention that I went to Harvard?
Anyway, I get inside and I find him. He's with an FOB Korean girl who I had seen once before. Mildly attractive. But not my cup of tea. We exchange pleasantries. Then later on at the bar, he asks me, "Hey Fred, can you give me $10, so I can buy her a drink? They have a $50 minimum on credit cards." This is after, the previous time when we were there and he asked me for $40 which he promised to payback the next time he saw me. Fortunately, the FOB decided to stick to tap water. So, we hungout there for about an hour. The crowd was shitty. Not the regular Greenhouse crowd. It was very bridge and tunnel. So, we decided to go to RDV early.
RDV is the latest tough door and I had only gone to it once before (last week) with Barbie. As we approached the door, he says, "Stand back a few paces. Let me and the girl break the ice." So, I figured, fine. One does have to be strategic when one is not yet a regular. He was there twice before. So neither of us were regulars yet. It takes about 3-4 visits within a span of a month in general to become a regular. Then when we were all finally at the door, he asks the doorguy the strangest thing, "Is the bartender working?" Jordan looks at him and says, "Now, that's a wierd question. No. We're not open yet. We'll be opening at 11. What's the bartender's name?" Mr. Y says, "I dont know." I whisper in his ear, "Nicholas." I knew because I make it a habit to get the bartenders' names when I first visit a place just in case I need to use it before I become a regular. Then Mr. Y says to Jordan, "You remember me dont you?" and Jordan says, "No." Anyway, we all get in despite the awkward moment. But the fckn place is not even opened for another 15 mins. So we walkout and tell the other door guy that we''ll be back. Then we end up going to the Gansvoort Hotel rooftop for what I thought would be for 20 mins. before we headed back to RDV.
Then out of the blue, he asks me while staring at the SoHo House, "Are you a member of the SoHo House?" I said "No. I had the opportunity to be one of the Charter members because I know one of Charter members who wanted me to join 6 yrs. ago. But I wasn't sure how it would be so I passed on it." Which was the truth. Then he says, "Norwood. That's a better one. You should join that." I said, maybe. Personally, I would only want to be a member of the Metropolitan Club (they go pheasant hunting and have lots of black tie events and is really high level vs. these new commers like the SoHo House or Norwood), NYAC, or the University Club. All are old school clubs unlike these new kids on the block.
Then here's the shocker, Mr. Y says, "Well, you're not adding any value here." I was flabbergasted. Say what? I just brushed it off thinking he's just joking. Then the FOB girl, he's "date," who can barely speak English tells him, not knowing what he just said to me, "I go home now. Have to finish homework. Test tomorrow." Mr. Y soon departs with her. Leaving me alone for RDV without apologizing for his comment nor for his unscheduled penis-driven departure. I thought it was an assholish move. But, I figured fck it. He wants to get laid. Fine. Fortunately, I had 2 girls soon to join me who were good enough for RDV.
When I get to RDV 20 mins. later, I get a text from him. "Hey, this girl. I don't think it'll work out. She's too traditional." I text back, "Who knows. Probably." Then 15 mins. later I get another text, "I'm at Southside. I just walked right in. It's pretty good here." Southside, FYI, is the only tough door that I've heard of that I haven't been to yet so I was interested in what he had to say about it.
To make this already long story short now, when I asked him what kind of people were there, he says, "I've already told you. Don't waste my time by making me repeat myself." So, I reread one his previous texts. Embedded in one of them were two words, "Rich Hipsters." So, that was that. I thought. Then the ugly head of a "God-complex" reared itself from Mr. Y. He kept going on about me not staying pace with him and wasting his time etc. This went on for 30 mins. while I was waiting for the girls to show up at RDV. I was besides myself. How does it go from a budding friendship into pure unadultrated insults in a nanosecond? He even went as far to say, "I'm working now so I cant give you therapy unless you pay me $150/hr." and started calling me names. Btw, he wasn't even drunk. He only drank 1 open bar vodka and rest of the 2 hrs. he just drank water.
Needless to say, my final message to him was, "Good luck turd." I havent spoke to him since. I was hurt for a day or so then became angry and disgusted. I concluded that even if he were to apologize profusely or give a good reason why he said all of those things, I can never be friends with someone so narcisstic and volatile. I deleted his number from my phone. Crazies are a dime a dozen in this city, I don't need to have one in my life. Been there, done that.
P.S. It's surreal though how a person seems so harmless and nice on the surface. But deep inside, there's a demon just waiting to eat the flesh of others when the cage opens. It's disgusting and sad. Turd.
Wednesday, January 28, 2009
Gauche or Rive Gauche?
Hopefully, this will be one of my last comments, if not the last comment, about facebook. As you know I joined FB last Thursday after 3 years of resisting MySpace and Facebook. I resisted because everyone was on it. But, now, I joined it because everyone (save Pierce) is on it. Makes sense, no? It's a nice, passive way to have a window into the lives of my nonblogging friends. I still find it, as I expected, a plebian and sophomoric site. It's basically for kids. Very puerile. But I didn't want to be out of touch or feel like a Luddite. As Jason Bateman in American Psycho said, "I want to fit in." So, there you go.
Anyway, I've been on it about 3 times a day :(). It's still a new toy for me and I like playing with it. I plan to ease off on it by this weekend when the novelty wears off as all new novelties wear off on me (except, exceptional new friends).
So, yesterday, I sent an email request via FB to a gal pal of mine who I know fairly well and have a good friendly relationship with (I see her at least twice a week) to change her profile picture. Because 1) she looked like some biker chick and 2) when displayed on my 'friends' thumbnails, only her ass shows up. I suggested that she update her picture that more appropriately reflects her age and elegance. And I emailed her via FB vs. posting it on her wall which can be viewed by the public. I was discreet and I also thought that it was a reasonable corrective request.
What's the response I get? "Freddy, I've been meaning to. But How dare you?! Perhaps, Facebook is not a good thing for you to have." Note: She, nevertheless, changed her picture profile. I was shocked. I thought, hmmm, was I being an ass? Was my tone assholish? So, I reviewed the message that I sent. It said, "_____, can you change your profile picture? You are more elegant than what is reflected on your profile pic. You look like a biker chick." Well, perhaps, I should have left off the biker chick part. But overall, I thought that the message was reasonable and innocuous.
So, I was alittle bit hurt. To those who know me, I'm actually one of the nicest guys there is. I have a big heart and I even sometimes cry when I watch CNN and see the people in Africa sucking on rock for dinner.
Pursuant to her response, I sent her 2 emails to apologize and to let her know that I meant no insult or harm and promised to be more nice. But in return, that she grow a tougher skin.
Personally, as I've stated (blogged) earlier, a few months ago, I welcome constructive criticisms as long as they are reasonable, true, nonmalicious, and nonselfish. For I feel that I am a better me when someone, especially, those who I have known and know me pretty well take the time to correct me. Because I know that they are correcting me out of love. But it appears that some people can't handle any corrections.
Frankly, sometimes I correct my friends when it's appropriate, when a flaw emerges, to see how they handle criticism. It's a test in a way. It gives me a glimpse into their character, their core, so to speak. It's a test of character. I don't want to be around weak people. I like people with healthy ego, self esteem, and vitality.
Case in point, Barbie has corrected me as a friend on a few occassions when I misspelled things, etc. Very minor stuff. But I welcomed it. Conversely, a year ago, when she gained a few pounds (which is rare) and I didn't say anything until she lost it, she told me, "Freddy, I want you to tell me when I gained weight." Now, obviously, I'm not (never) gonna go there :). But I liked her openness and her inner strength for saying that. That showed me character.
I want to be a nice guy all of the time. But I don't want to be a nice guy all of the time. So help me god.
[P.S. All is well that ends well. She emailed me back after reading my follow up emails and apologied for her over reaction. Apparently, one of her friends yesterday was picking on her about something and when she woke up this morning and saw my message, it was just bad timing. So, she is open to suggestions/corrections. Cool.]
Anyway, I've been on it about 3 times a day :(). It's still a new toy for me and I like playing with it. I plan to ease off on it by this weekend when the novelty wears off as all new novelties wear off on me (except, exceptional new friends).
So, yesterday, I sent an email request via FB to a gal pal of mine who I know fairly well and have a good friendly relationship with (I see her at least twice a week) to change her profile picture. Because 1) she looked like some biker chick and 2) when displayed on my 'friends' thumbnails, only her ass shows up. I suggested that she update her picture that more appropriately reflects her age and elegance. And I emailed her via FB vs. posting it on her wall which can be viewed by the public. I was discreet and I also thought that it was a reasonable corrective request.
What's the response I get? "Freddy, I've been meaning to. But How dare you?! Perhaps, Facebook is not a good thing for you to have." Note: She, nevertheless, changed her picture profile. I was shocked. I thought, hmmm, was I being an ass? Was my tone assholish? So, I reviewed the message that I sent. It said, "_____, can you change your profile picture? You are more elegant than what is reflected on your profile pic. You look like a biker chick." Well, perhaps, I should have left off the biker chick part. But overall, I thought that the message was reasonable and innocuous.
So, I was alittle bit hurt. To those who know me, I'm actually one of the nicest guys there is. I have a big heart and I even sometimes cry when I watch CNN and see the people in Africa sucking on rock for dinner.
Pursuant to her response, I sent her 2 emails to apologize and to let her know that I meant no insult or harm and promised to be more nice. But in return, that she grow a tougher skin.
Personally, as I've stated (blogged) earlier, a few months ago, I welcome constructive criticisms as long as they are reasonable, true, nonmalicious, and nonselfish. For I feel that I am a better me when someone, especially, those who I have known and know me pretty well take the time to correct me. Because I know that they are correcting me out of love. But it appears that some people can't handle any corrections.
Frankly, sometimes I correct my friends when it's appropriate, when a flaw emerges, to see how they handle criticism. It's a test in a way. It gives me a glimpse into their character, their core, so to speak. It's a test of character. I don't want to be around weak people. I like people with healthy ego, self esteem, and vitality.
Case in point, Barbie has corrected me as a friend on a few occassions when I misspelled things, etc. Very minor stuff. But I welcomed it. Conversely, a year ago, when she gained a few pounds (which is rare) and I didn't say anything until she lost it, she told me, "Freddy, I want you to tell me when I gained weight." Now, obviously, I'm not (never) gonna go there :). But I liked her openness and her inner strength for saying that. That showed me character.
I want to be a nice guy all of the time. But I don't want to be a nice guy all of the time. So help me god.
[P.S. All is well that ends well. She emailed me back after reading my follow up emails and apologied for her over reaction. Apparently, one of her friends yesterday was picking on her about something and when she woke up this morning and saw my message, it was just bad timing. So, she is open to suggestions/corrections. Cool.]
Tuesday, January 27, 2009
Facebook II
After a few days on Facebook, I kindda like it. I've been going on it everyday. Many people that I know are on it and the ones that I want to connect with are now connected to and me to them and some post comments everyday and I get an automatic feed of their comments as soon as I go into Facebook. It's a nice, passive way to keep up with friends. Unlike asmallworld, it actually has some utility.
Here's a bit of a mystery though. There are people that I have lost touch with that I forgot and those that I have managed to successfully not be in touch with who have invited me as a friend. Some, I have accepted and some I have not. How did they know that I joined Facebook? How were they alerted that I joined Facebook? Since I can't imagine them searching for my name coincidentally as soon as I joined Facebook.
Btw, in 2000, there were at least a handful of these social networking sites. TheGlobe.com and Sixdegrees.com being the most recognized ones back then. But after the internet bust (aka version 1.0), they all closed shop. Same thing with YouTube. I in fact interviewed for a company called iClips.com which did, back then, what YouTube does now. It's interesting that those companies failed while these carbon copies of those endeavors 6 years later are multimillion, multibillion dollar companies.
Here's a bit of a mystery though. There are people that I have lost touch with that I forgot and those that I have managed to successfully not be in touch with who have invited me as a friend. Some, I have accepted and some I have not. How did they know that I joined Facebook? How were they alerted that I joined Facebook? Since I can't imagine them searching for my name coincidentally as soon as I joined Facebook.
Btw, in 2000, there were at least a handful of these social networking sites. TheGlobe.com and Sixdegrees.com being the most recognized ones back then. But after the internet bust (aka version 1.0), they all closed shop. Same thing with YouTube. I in fact interviewed for a company called iClips.com which did, back then, what YouTube does now. It's interesting that those companies failed while these carbon copies of those endeavors 6 years later are multimillion, multibillion dollar companies.
Thursday, January 22, 2009
I finally buckled and joined today. The reason, good and bad, is that everyone is on it. I really don't get Facebook though. Albeit, I'm gonna give it a fair trial and see for sure what I really think in a month or so. Their MO (modus operandi) is about staying connected to people you know, knew or just met. I get that part (especially, the fact that they want to cash in on that). But, for me, there's a reason why I haven't stayed in touch with some people. There are alot of people that I don't want to stay in touch with (new or old). The people who I want to stay in touch with, I stay in touch by phone, text, email, blog or in person. So, having these 5 channels of communication are sufficient for me. Call me traditional or orthodox if you must. I'm good with that.
I have very few friends despite being quite social, sociable, and charming. I like to pick and have small number of people who are significant to my life. I guess though, for many, that quantity can be a quality in itself. It's good for their self esteem that they know so many people and put them on Facebook as a certification of their popularity. But I don't consider someone I just met at a club, lounge or a bar who wants to connect and connect with as friends unless they are instantly exceptional either by their beauty, mind, or personality.
I prefer to designate people as friends after I get to know them for awhile. If we're consitently on the same page and have good times (drama free and fun), they are my friends.
My friends are those who I can speak with who can finish my sentence in mid sentence because we are from the same litter and they know exactly what page, paragraph, and sentence I'm on.
People choose their careers, books, wine, friends, foods, spare time, etc. carefully because time is precious. How much more so then that one should choose one's freinds even more carefully.
I don't get people who have more than 10 (max. 20) friends on Facebook (or in life). Most to all Facebookers have 200+ friends. BUT then again, perhaps, Facebook is a book of faces, a scrapbook of people one knows or met. This, to me, is meaningless, like keeping a scrapbook of receipts. But it maybe meaningul to others. The one other utility or value that I see is that, unlike me and a handful of my friends who blog, Facebook is the only way that they 'publish' anything (thoughts, events, etc.). So, Facebook does give me a window into those people who I enjoy who do not blog.
[Needless to say, that now that I'm on Facebook. My presence there will probably be non-existent. Only time will tell.]
I have very few friends despite being quite social, sociable, and charming. I like to pick and have small number of people who are significant to my life. I guess though, for many, that quantity can be a quality in itself. It's good for their self esteem that they know so many people and put them on Facebook as a certification of their popularity. But I don't consider someone I just met at a club, lounge or a bar who wants to connect and connect with as friends unless they are instantly exceptional either by their beauty, mind, or personality.
I prefer to designate people as friends after I get to know them for awhile. If we're consitently on the same page and have good times (drama free and fun), they are my friends.
My friends are those who I can speak with who can finish my sentence in mid sentence because we are from the same litter and they know exactly what page, paragraph, and sentence I'm on.
People choose their careers, books, wine, friends, foods, spare time, etc. carefully because time is precious. How much more so then that one should choose one's freinds even more carefully.
I don't get people who have more than 10 (max. 20) friends on Facebook (or in life). Most to all Facebookers have 200+ friends. BUT then again, perhaps, Facebook is a book of faces, a scrapbook of people one knows or met. This, to me, is meaningless, like keeping a scrapbook of receipts. But it maybe meaningul to others. The one other utility or value that I see is that, unlike me and a handful of my friends who blog, Facebook is the only way that they 'publish' anything (thoughts, events, etc.). So, Facebook does give me a window into those people who I enjoy who do not blog.
[Needless to say, that now that I'm on Facebook. My presence there will probably be non-existent. Only time will tell.]
Tuesday, January 20, 2009
Stop It
Ran into this on Amazon while I was searching for a book that I lost (probably pilfered by my ex. She never read. But she loved my books. I think it made her feel smart by just having them, especially, without my permission.) called "Leisure: The Basis of Culture" by Josef Pieper that I wanted to repurchase if it's still in print (note: not available on Kindle. So, I have to go 'old school' and actually have to pay tax and wait 5 days for delivery vs. 1 min. tax-free 'whispernet' download).
Sandisk 4GB Secure Digital SD HC Memory Card (SDSDB-4096)
Other products by SanDisk
Amazon.com
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
List Price: $99.99
Price: $6.59
You Save: $93.40 (93%)
Get outta here. What? Really? 93% off. Nah. For real? Fckn A. That's less than a cost of pack of cigarettes. That's 3+ hrs. of videos at 10 megapixels or about 20,000 pix.
What next? The orgasmatron for dollar ninety nine in the bargain bin at K-mart?
Sandisk 4GB Secure Digital SD HC Memory Card (SDSDB-4096)
Other products by SanDisk
Amazon.com
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
List Price: $99.99
Price: $6.59
You Save: $93.40 (93%)
Get outta here. What? Really? 93% off. Nah. For real? Fckn A. That's less than a cost of pack of cigarettes. That's 3+ hrs. of videos at 10 megapixels or about 20,000 pix.
What next? The orgasmatron for dollar ninety nine in the bargain bin at K-mart?
Monday, January 19, 2009
MLK Jr. Day
I remember that a few years ago, I was taking the subway downtown and was standing in front of two girls in their 20s who were sitting in front of me who were having a conversation. I couldn't help overhearing them and one of them said, "I have Martin Luther day off tomorrow." and the conversation kept going and moved on. I was laughing inside. Martin Luther? Why, that was about 5 centuries ago (1500s). He was the father of the Reformation who penned 101 protests against the Catholic church who posted it on the door of a cathedral in Germany. She's getting a day off for Martin Luther? That's phenomenal!
I know that she meant Martin Luther King Jr. Nevertheless, I was just amazed by her major slip and on top of that her friend didn't even correct her. They just swam through the rest of the conversation. Blind leading the blind.
It's amazing how so many people don't know basic history. I once quizzed someone, "when did we send a man to the moon?" and she said, "sometime in the late 1800s."
Last week, I was outside Mercury bar having a smoke and talking with one of the regulars and he mentioned that he was going to Greece for 3 months for a vacation. I said, "Nice! What cities and islands?" He rambled some off then stopped and said, "all of them." I said, "cool." Then this girl who was listening to us asked, "where is Greece?" Unfckn believable. I wanted to say, "It's next to the moon. Please do not breed!"
I know that she meant Martin Luther King Jr. Nevertheless, I was just amazed by her major slip and on top of that her friend didn't even correct her. They just swam through the rest of the conversation. Blind leading the blind.
It's amazing how so many people don't know basic history. I once quizzed someone, "when did we send a man to the moon?" and she said, "sometime in the late 1800s."
Last week, I was outside Mercury bar having a smoke and talking with one of the regulars and he mentioned that he was going to Greece for 3 months for a vacation. I said, "Nice! What cities and islands?" He rambled some off then stopped and said, "all of them." I said, "cool." Then this girl who was listening to us asked, "where is Greece?" Unfckn believable. I wanted to say, "It's next to the moon. Please do not breed!"
Kid's Names
I have reduced it to the 2. Boy and Girl.
Abigail and Jasper.
After thinking, Alexandra, Alexander, Bartholomew, Cornelius, Candice, Davide, Mortimer, Phineas, Nick, Idaho, Virgine, Max, Twila, Luke, Mark, Matthew, John, Achilles, Wolfgang, Genghis (Genghis Kwon, get it?:), Kublai, and Daisy.
Abigail and Jasper.
After thinking, Alexandra, Alexander, Bartholomew, Cornelius, Candice, Davide, Mortimer, Phineas, Nick, Idaho, Virgine, Max, Twila, Luke, Mark, Matthew, John, Achilles, Wolfgang, Genghis (Genghis Kwon, get it?:), Kublai, and Daisy.
Sunday, January 18, 2009
New Winter Olympic Sport-- Plane Ditching
Requirements: One commercial/passenger dual engine aircraft; either Boeing or Airbus. At least 155 passengers in all including, staff, patrons, and infants. Must have at least 3 infants and 5 elderly people.
Method: Bird, birds, or flock of birds: alive, sucked into the engines at no more than 10,000 ft. altitude. Both engines must explode in midair. Land on river adjacent to a city with no less than 8 million inhabitants. 5 mins. maximum time alotted for the exercise.
Difficulty: Increases with: 1) number of passengers above 155, especially infants and drag queens; 2) # of casualties (zero is better than 100 casualties. Hey, it's the Olympics, a family show); 3) # of people who throw their red cross blankets off before they are recovered by a ferry who say, "I'm going to Disneyworld!"
Point System: Maximum 10 pts. Just like in Gymnastics.
Method: Bird, birds, or flock of birds: alive, sucked into the engines at no more than 10,000 ft. altitude. Both engines must explode in midair. Land on river adjacent to a city with no less than 8 million inhabitants. 5 mins. maximum time alotted for the exercise.
Difficulty: Increases with: 1) number of passengers above 155, especially infants and drag queens; 2) # of casualties (zero is better than 100 casualties. Hey, it's the Olympics, a family show); 3) # of people who throw their red cross blankets off before they are recovered by a ferry who say, "I'm going to Disneyworld!"
Point System: Maximum 10 pts. Just like in Gymnastics.
Saturday, January 17, 2009
Feeling Wilde
I was in a mood for some of Wilde's epigrams and observations and plucked a few that I liked from Wikipedia. I know that my dear readers do not approve of me having outsourced content landing on my blog. But from time to time, I feel that like posting pictures and youtube videos, it serves a purpose and it's often easier than being original. Many of these, I did or do know by heart. But some, I'd never seen. Then there are a few I inserted from memory that were not in Wiki.
Let's start with this, I think it's an appropriate intro. (It's not an epigram. Probably a fragment from a short story). "Over the piano was printed a notice: Please do not shoot the pianist. He is doing his best." :).
Here's the day's batch. Not in any order nor categorized (nor in quotes):
Consistency is the last refuge of the unimaginative.
No proper gentleman ever has the slightest idea what the balance of his bank account is.
Hard work is simply the refuge of people who have nothing whatever to do.
We are born in an age when only the dull are treated seriously.
As long as war is regarded as wicked, it will always have its fascination. When it is looked upon as vulgar, it will cease to be popular.
I can resist everything except temptation.
Education is an admirable thing. But it is well to remember from time to time that nothing that is worth knowing can be taught.
In old days books were written by men of letters and read by the public. Nowadays books are written by the public and read by nobody.
Those whom the gods love grow young.
Youth is wasted on the young.
To love oneself is the beginning of a life-long romance.
Selfishness is not living as one wishes to live, it is asking others to live as one wishes to live.
Kelvil: May I ask, Lord Illingworth, if you regard the House of Lords as a better institution than the House of Commons?
Lord Illingworth: A much better institution of course. We in the House of Lords are never in touch with public opinion. That makes us a civilised body.
I never travel without my diary. One should always have something sensational to read in the train.
The only thing that one can believe is the incredible.
If I am occasionally a little over-dressed, I make up for it by always being immensely over-educated.
I love talking about nothing, father. It is the only thing I know anything about.
Lord Goring, Act I
Fashion is what one wears oneself. What is unfashionable is what other people wear.
Lord Goring, Act III
The only possible society is oneself.
Lord Goring, Act III
To love oneself is the beginning of a lifelong romance.
Lord Goring, Act III
Lord Robert: Ms. Cheveley, how do you manage to look so young all of the time?
Ms. Chevely: By making it a rule to only surround myself with charming people like you.
Lord Robert: May I introduce to you my dearest friend, Lord Goring. The idlest man in London.
[Note: I have asked a few friends of mine to introduce me in such a manner to new people. I believe that, for me, it's the most complimentary salutation and introduction befitting a dandy.]
[Note2: Once I was hanging out with my then friend and supremest dandy, Ike Ude, publisher of aRude: Index of Style magazine, an artist, an aesthete, etc. on Sunday, all day, talking fashion, philosophy, science, and the arts (we're quite well read), and he got a phone call around 10pm by some woman who asked him, what he's been upto all day. He said, "Something quite radical my dear. Absolutely nothing." I smiled. Then I remembered one of Wildes quotes (not listed above.) "It takes character to endure the rigours of indolence" and another, "Industry is ugly."]
I feel that people are too scheduled and busy these days and have become drones and automatons. Simply put, less butterflies and too many bees and worker ants in God's good garden. It's a bit disheartening. Albeit, I must admit that there is value to industry, discipline, focus, and results. But effort should be deployed to proper ends: income (from a profession that one finds joy or bliss in or a talent that can be monetized), adventure (new places, people, experiences), and self-cultivation (of the mind, body, and soul).
Let's start with this, I think it's an appropriate intro. (It's not an epigram. Probably a fragment from a short story). "Over the piano was printed a notice: Please do not shoot the pianist. He is doing his best." :).
Here's the day's batch. Not in any order nor categorized (nor in quotes):
Consistency is the last refuge of the unimaginative.
No proper gentleman ever has the slightest idea what the balance of his bank account is.
Hard work is simply the refuge of people who have nothing whatever to do.
We are born in an age when only the dull are treated seriously.
As long as war is regarded as wicked, it will always have its fascination. When it is looked upon as vulgar, it will cease to be popular.
I can resist everything except temptation.
Education is an admirable thing. But it is well to remember from time to time that nothing that is worth knowing can be taught.
In old days books were written by men of letters and read by the public. Nowadays books are written by the public and read by nobody.
Those whom the gods love grow young.
Youth is wasted on the young.
To love oneself is the beginning of a life-long romance.
Selfishness is not living as one wishes to live, it is asking others to live as one wishes to live.
Kelvil: May I ask, Lord Illingworth, if you regard the House of Lords as a better institution than the House of Commons?
Lord Illingworth: A much better institution of course. We in the House of Lords are never in touch with public opinion. That makes us a civilised body.
I never travel without my diary. One should always have something sensational to read in the train.
The only thing that one can believe is the incredible.
If I am occasionally a little over-dressed, I make up for it by always being immensely over-educated.
I love talking about nothing, father. It is the only thing I know anything about.
Lord Goring, Act I
Fashion is what one wears oneself. What is unfashionable is what other people wear.
Lord Goring, Act III
The only possible society is oneself.
Lord Goring, Act III
To love oneself is the beginning of a lifelong romance.
Lord Goring, Act III
Lord Robert: Ms. Cheveley, how do you manage to look so young all of the time?
Ms. Chevely: By making it a rule to only surround myself with charming people like you.
Lord Robert: May I introduce to you my dearest friend, Lord Goring. The idlest man in London.
[Note: I have asked a few friends of mine to introduce me in such a manner to new people. I believe that, for me, it's the most complimentary salutation and introduction befitting a dandy.]
[Note2: Once I was hanging out with my then friend and supremest dandy, Ike Ude, publisher of aRude: Index of Style magazine, an artist, an aesthete, etc. on Sunday, all day, talking fashion, philosophy, science, and the arts (we're quite well read), and he got a phone call around 10pm by some woman who asked him, what he's been upto all day. He said, "Something quite radical my dear. Absolutely nothing." I smiled. Then I remembered one of Wildes quotes (not listed above.) "It takes character to endure the rigours of indolence" and another, "Industry is ugly."]
I feel that people are too scheduled and busy these days and have become drones and automatons. Simply put, less butterflies and too many bees and worker ants in God's good garden. It's a bit disheartening. Albeit, I must admit that there is value to industry, discipline, focus, and results. But effort should be deployed to proper ends: income (from a profession that one finds joy or bliss in or a talent that can be monetized), adventure (new places, people, experiences), and self-cultivation (of the mind, body, and soul).
Thursday, January 15, 2009
Lagerfeld On...
the global recession and it's impact on Chanel (per NY Times article, 'In the Lap of Luxury, Paris Squirms', 1/14/09). I luv his fantastic bravado. He is a resolute dandy through and through (last paragraph of the article below.)
-----------
And for Mr. Lagerfeld, cutting back his own spending at Chanel is not part of his “new modesty” strategy. He said he is not being forced by the private company’s owners to bend or adapt because of financial constraints. “We have no budget, we do what we want and throwing money out the window brings money back in through the front door,” he said. “The bottom line is that I don’t deal with the bottom line. The luxury in my life is I never have to think about it.”
-----------
And for Mr. Lagerfeld, cutting back his own spending at Chanel is not part of his “new modesty” strategy. He said he is not being forced by the private company’s owners to bend or adapt because of financial constraints. “We have no budget, we do what we want and throwing money out the window brings money back in through the front door,” he said. “The bottom line is that I don’t deal with the bottom line. The luxury in my life is I never have to think about it.”
Sartorial
The reasons why I've always been sartorial (and introspective while I emanate):
1) My grandmother: She was my grandfather's (on my mom's side) concubine #3 of 6. Old school. I don't know since I've never asked whether or not she was educated. But she always had a sense of class, decorum, style, wisedom, and real estate to be monetized. She was/is quite elegant. Not a cat on a hot tin roof or rouged. She reminds me of Queen Elizabeth. Very soft spoken, flawless complexion, classy, rive gauche. I remember that when I was 7, she told me, "We love you. No matter what, just become a good human being." I did't know what she meant then. But I know now... be yourself and treat others the way you want to be treated. The golden rule. How divine and classy is that?! Anway, when I was a kid, a toddler. She always bought me the best clothes. Always high level, jackets, pants, shirts, sweaters, and cardigans and always great colors. Blood red, sometimes Crimson, navy blue, royal blue, or Emperor yellow. I started to learn the noble colors and fit and it has stayed with me to this day (I hope) and I shall stick with it;
2) My girlfriend in college: Her dad was the head of the Asia Bank and she did alot of 'candy' :) (she was a great bad worldy influence) and was always dressed to kill (skirt, stockings (with garters), and heels (perfect ankles)). I had a 1.9 GPA that year and was put on academic probation that year. But after 3 yrs., caught up, and graduated on the Dean's list with 3.6 GPA. But no Phi Beta Kappa. Fck it. Who cares. Ended up doing M&A at Merril. Almost got Goldman. But that's another story). I was the concubine #1 in that relationship. She always (except maybe twice) came back home to me. She made me into her image. Brought me up to date. Bought me a ton of threads so that we would be the most impressive couple this side of the pond and we were;
3) Tom Dineen: My dearest friend. He got me into ascots (Turnbull & Asser of course) and single malt scotch when we got out of college and before he went to study at Oxford. He always had a tweed jacket on for every class and his vocabulary was/is second to none. There were no nuances left unbare. One of the most refined fellow and friend I know. We were roomates for a year and as he saw me blasting Depeche Mode watching TV, he said, "Fred! Why don't you put your brain to use and read a book!" That was supreme advise and I read everything from Emerson to Theosophy and the Occult (an ancient science that was not part of the curicculum at Columbia. It was an enforced additive to my education on top of Homer, Plato, Nietszche, Schopenhauer, Heidegger, etc. that I had (and had to) read in college.);
4) Peacock: I was watching a National Geographic segment on birds once (many several years ago) and saw a peacock. More specifically, a male peacock. The female peacocks had no color. Most of them were either white or grey. But the male peacocks were donned with the most precious colors (in order to attract the females.) Then I thought. Hey, these are just birds. Pretty low down in the food chain. I'm on top of the food chain! and I will not allow these birds out do me in the area of beauty. I decided to be evenmore elegant;
5) The Great Gatsby: I only saw the movie. Never read the book. For shame. But the movie enthralled me. Most specifically, when Daisy Buchanan visits Gatsby in his house (mansion) and goes to his bedroom and Gatsby opens up his armoire and starts displaying his shirts and starts throwing them up in the air until the entire bedroom was covered with his shirts. "My man in London, sends me the swatches every season." Then Daisy grabs one of the shirts in the air and starts to weep and says, "These are the most beautiful shirts that I have ever seen." All the colors of the rainbow and beyond. Sorbet. The very next day, I went to Ascot Chang's where Bush I got his shirts made. Got my self measured and put 7 shirts on order (with detacheable collars). My French blue, Egg yolk (Imperial Mandarin) yellow, salmon pink, mint green, eggshell white, etc. all arrived. But it was hard to find a shop that had collar studs. Went to Bergdorf, Barneys, Saks, Paul Stuart. None of them had a single collar stud. The only place that kept the ancient accessory was... J.Press. J.Press only had 4 locations: Cambridge (Harvard), New Haven (Yale), New York (Columbia), D.C. They skipped Princeton for some reason. I wish that they hadn't.
Anyway, to make the long story short (otherwise, I can pen an entire novella on the topic and bore people to tears), that's the abridged history of my sartorial influence. It's good to trace back the genealogy. It's comforting to know and write down how I got here and whence I derived my aesthetics. It's like a personal archaeological dig. Strata 1,2,3 etc. Move aside Indiana Jones :).
Now. I'm gonna do a little blurb on watches since I'm on the topic of sartorial. "A watch should not only tell time. But who you are." I saw this once in an ad in the British GQ and it stuck with me. My belief was/is as follows... watches per age range: in a gentleman's 20's- a Rolex (to kick things off); then in one's 30's- a Patek Phillipe (a proper marriage watch. The woman gets the 3 carat Tiffany's emerald cut and the gentleman in exchange gets the Patek. Not to mention, the mother of his offspring); 40s-- a Blancpain; 50s- a Vacheron; then 60 til grave- a Breguet.
Sartorial to the end. From cradle to grave. A gentleman.
[P.S. Clothes alone do not make the man (any asshole can buy a Brioni or a D&G :). It only gets him half way there. To be a gentleman, I believe, one must be a Caesar with a heart of Christ. In other words, money alone doest not make a gentleman. But style AND character... a divine native (or cultivated) constitution. Actually, it has alot to do with breeding and upbringing.]
1) My grandmother: She was my grandfather's (on my mom's side) concubine #3 of 6. Old school. I don't know since I've never asked whether or not she was educated. But she always had a sense of class, decorum, style, wisedom, and real estate to be monetized. She was/is quite elegant. Not a cat on a hot tin roof or rouged. She reminds me of Queen Elizabeth. Very soft spoken, flawless complexion, classy, rive gauche. I remember that when I was 7, she told me, "We love you. No matter what, just become a good human being." I did't know what she meant then. But I know now... be yourself and treat others the way you want to be treated. The golden rule. How divine and classy is that?! Anway, when I was a kid, a toddler. She always bought me the best clothes. Always high level, jackets, pants, shirts, sweaters, and cardigans and always great colors. Blood red, sometimes Crimson, navy blue, royal blue, or Emperor yellow. I started to learn the noble colors and fit and it has stayed with me to this day (I hope) and I shall stick with it;
2) My girlfriend in college: Her dad was the head of the Asia Bank and she did alot of 'candy' :) (she was a great bad worldy influence) and was always dressed to kill (skirt, stockings (with garters), and heels (perfect ankles)). I had a 1.9 GPA that year and was put on academic probation that year. But after 3 yrs., caught up, and graduated on the Dean's list with 3.6 GPA. But no Phi Beta Kappa. Fck it. Who cares. Ended up doing M&A at Merril. Almost got Goldman. But that's another story). I was the concubine #1 in that relationship. She always (except maybe twice) came back home to me. She made me into her image. Brought me up to date. Bought me a ton of threads so that we would be the most impressive couple this side of the pond and we were;
3) Tom Dineen: My dearest friend. He got me into ascots (Turnbull & Asser of course) and single malt scotch when we got out of college and before he went to study at Oxford. He always had a tweed jacket on for every class and his vocabulary was/is second to none. There were no nuances left unbare. One of the most refined fellow and friend I know. We were roomates for a year and as he saw me blasting Depeche Mode watching TV, he said, "Fred! Why don't you put your brain to use and read a book!" That was supreme advise and I read everything from Emerson to Theosophy and the Occult (an ancient science that was not part of the curicculum at Columbia. It was an enforced additive to my education on top of Homer, Plato, Nietszche, Schopenhauer, Heidegger, etc. that I had (and had to) read in college.);
4) Peacock: I was watching a National Geographic segment on birds once (many several years ago) and saw a peacock. More specifically, a male peacock. The female peacocks had no color. Most of them were either white or grey. But the male peacocks were donned with the most precious colors (in order to attract the females.) Then I thought. Hey, these are just birds. Pretty low down in the food chain. I'm on top of the food chain! and I will not allow these birds out do me in the area of beauty. I decided to be evenmore elegant;
5) The Great Gatsby: I only saw the movie. Never read the book. For shame. But the movie enthralled me. Most specifically, when Daisy Buchanan visits Gatsby in his house (mansion) and goes to his bedroom and Gatsby opens up his armoire and starts displaying his shirts and starts throwing them up in the air until the entire bedroom was covered with his shirts. "My man in London, sends me the swatches every season." Then Daisy grabs one of the shirts in the air and starts to weep and says, "These are the most beautiful shirts that I have ever seen." All the colors of the rainbow and beyond. Sorbet. The very next day, I went to Ascot Chang's where Bush I got his shirts made. Got my self measured and put 7 shirts on order (with detacheable collars). My French blue, Egg yolk (Imperial Mandarin) yellow, salmon pink, mint green, eggshell white, etc. all arrived. But it was hard to find a shop that had collar studs. Went to Bergdorf, Barneys, Saks, Paul Stuart. None of them had a single collar stud. The only place that kept the ancient accessory was... J.Press. J.Press only had 4 locations: Cambridge (Harvard), New Haven (Yale), New York (Columbia), D.C. They skipped Princeton for some reason. I wish that they hadn't.
Anyway, to make the long story short (otherwise, I can pen an entire novella on the topic and bore people to tears), that's the abridged history of my sartorial influence. It's good to trace back the genealogy. It's comforting to know and write down how I got here and whence I derived my aesthetics. It's like a personal archaeological dig. Strata 1,2,3 etc. Move aside Indiana Jones :).
Now. I'm gonna do a little blurb on watches since I'm on the topic of sartorial. "A watch should not only tell time. But who you are." I saw this once in an ad in the British GQ and it stuck with me. My belief was/is as follows... watches per age range: in a gentleman's 20's- a Rolex (to kick things off); then in one's 30's- a Patek Phillipe (a proper marriage watch. The woman gets the 3 carat Tiffany's emerald cut and the gentleman in exchange gets the Patek. Not to mention, the mother of his offspring); 40s-- a Blancpain; 50s- a Vacheron; then 60 til grave- a Breguet.
Sartorial to the end. From cradle to grave. A gentleman.
[P.S. Clothes alone do not make the man (any asshole can buy a Brioni or a D&G :). It only gets him half way there. To be a gentleman, I believe, one must be a Caesar with a heart of Christ. In other words, money alone doest not make a gentleman. But style AND character... a divine native (or cultivated) constitution. Actually, it has alot to do with breeding and upbringing.]
Monday, January 12, 2009
Wednesday, January 7, 2009
NorthFace Facebook Pumas
A decent Winter jacket brand, a popular social site, great sneakers. Everyone has one or is on one though. So why would I ever want to own one of these or be on one of these like everyone? Why would I ever want to be everyone? I have never been and will never be everyone. I can't and won't do it. By definition, and in effect then, I am an iconoclast, and resolutely, me. Oh, silly ME :).
[I'm not a Luddite though. I do have a cellphone and I blog.]
[I'm not a Luddite though. I do have a cellphone and I blog.]
Dressing Up
I really don't get people who don't dress up when they go out. I'm talking, for the gentleman, a jacket and trousers, and for women, dress and heels (Yes. Even in the dead of Winter. Get an overcoat that falls to the shin! Unless there is a blizzard. At which point, tights and boots shall suffice. And gentlemen, under these conditions you MUST hail a cab while she is indoors. So that the lady is never under the harsh elements for more than 5 seconds. She is precious from head to toe.) Is that too much to ask for? All that I see most of the times are t-shirt, a hoodie, and jeans jeans jeans.
Now, I must admit that often times I wear jeans too. They look fine and are quite rugged and comfortable. And alot more now than ever before, I've accepted women wearing jeans if they have a nice figure. But all of this aside, why do the vast majority of the people dress so down and shabby?!
To me, dressing up shows creativity, style, and individuality and often one's socioeconomic status. It's a signaling mechanism that tells people what tribe you are from and with.
On a practical level, it also widnens one's choice of venues as well. You dress like crap, you will end up sauntering in crappy joints. The tough doors will never allow you in unless you are a model. Well, what's so great about those tough doors? They're pretentious! Well, what's wrong with tough doors? They often (not always) filter out the loud amateurs and that's a pleasant thing.
I love dive bars much as the next guy or gal and one can go dressed as one pleases. T-shirt and jeans. Fine. Whatever.
But if you get bored of the dive bar and the mediocre bar and the mediocre lounge/club. It sure is nice to have the option and the possibility to move upstream to a higher level, less common, less mediocre places.
So, in general, I like to be with people who dress up to go out whenever we go out. Because then the sky's the limit and choices abound. It's like being able to play the entire orchestra from percussion to wind to strings vs. being stuck in one section of the orchestra.
[Live chromatically not monotone.]
Btw, when I go out, I'm dressed up 99% of the time (jacket, trousers, chelsea boots, and sometimes ascots), not only for the practical reasons aforementioned. But I feel that I owe it to myself to treat myself with the highest respect with my god given gift of taste and style and to look presentable to others, and most importantly, to myself.
Also, because most people dress like shit, I feel that I have no choice but to not join in on that zombiehood. I will remain civilized, cognizant, human, individual and vital and fight off the 'free-range humans' (as Hannibal Lechter so correctly described most people) every step of my life. Sometimes, i wish I were a cannibal. So I can eat them as Hannibal did... free range humans in their shirt and jeans.
Now, I must admit that often times I wear jeans too. They look fine and are quite rugged and comfortable. And alot more now than ever before, I've accepted women wearing jeans if they have a nice figure. But all of this aside, why do the vast majority of the people dress so down and shabby?!
To me, dressing up shows creativity, style, and individuality and often one's socioeconomic status. It's a signaling mechanism that tells people what tribe you are from and with.
On a practical level, it also widnens one's choice of venues as well. You dress like crap, you will end up sauntering in crappy joints. The tough doors will never allow you in unless you are a model. Well, what's so great about those tough doors? They're pretentious! Well, what's wrong with tough doors? They often (not always) filter out the loud amateurs and that's a pleasant thing.
I love dive bars much as the next guy or gal and one can go dressed as one pleases. T-shirt and jeans. Fine. Whatever.
But if you get bored of the dive bar and the mediocre bar and the mediocre lounge/club. It sure is nice to have the option and the possibility to move upstream to a higher level, less common, less mediocre places.
So, in general, I like to be with people who dress up to go out whenever we go out. Because then the sky's the limit and choices abound. It's like being able to play the entire orchestra from percussion to wind to strings vs. being stuck in one section of the orchestra.
[Live chromatically not monotone.]
Btw, when I go out, I'm dressed up 99% of the time (jacket, trousers, chelsea boots, and sometimes ascots), not only for the practical reasons aforementioned. But I feel that I owe it to myself to treat myself with the highest respect with my god given gift of taste and style and to look presentable to others, and most importantly, to myself.
Also, because most people dress like shit, I feel that I have no choice but to not join in on that zombiehood. I will remain civilized, cognizant, human, individual and vital and fight off the 'free-range humans' (as Hannibal Lechter so correctly described most people) every step of my life. Sometimes, i wish I were a cannibal. So I can eat them as Hannibal did... free range humans in their shirt and jeans.
Sunday, January 4, 2009
Music Appreciation
That's what the class was called at my alma mater. At Columbia, all Freshmen had to take the 'Core Curriculum.' It was composed of 2 semesters of Literature Humanities (from Homer's Illiad to Doestoevsky's Brothers Karazmov), 2 semesters of Contemporary Civilization (from Plato's Republic to Sartre's Existenstialism), 1 semester of Art History (from cave paintings and Palenque to Warhol), and 1 semester of Music Appreciation (from Gregorian chants to Weber). It was the best education that anyone could ask for or prescribe. The scales fell off my eyes and I became a civilized human being. Thank you Columbia! The football team never won a single game while I was there for 4 yrs. (Except the last homecoming game against Princeton. Thank you Princeton!). The quality of education was second to none. The only schools that were harder to get into than Columbia back then was Harvard, Yale, Princeton, Stanford, and CalTech. [Damn. If the SAT weren't so fckn early in the morning. 9am for a 3 hr. test. Come on. That's farmer Bob hours! My mother had to drag me out of my bed that morning too as she did for all of my teen years. "Mom, just 2 more minutes. I'm getting up!"] Now, only Harvard, Princeton, and CalTech are more 'selective.' None of them had or have the 'Core.' They're softcore porn :).
Anyway, this morning, for some insane reason and twist of soul, I woke up craving for some classical music. Mozart's Requiem came to mind and I played it on my iTunes, speakers full blast.. Lacrimosa. Shamefully, Mozart was the only classical music that I had on my iTunes. I ripped it from a CD that I had a few years ago. All of my classical music were bought on CDs and they are in storage now (about 30 CDs). It's a shame. Because from time to time, the only music that can placate my soul is classical music. It fortifies me and makes me feel civilized again.
Music appreciation was a 8:30am class. Every Tuesday and Thursday from 8:30am to 9:50am. It was divine. I looked forward to going to that class eventhough it was so early in the morning. I would walk in there with my notebook (back then notebook computers weren't invented yet :()) and I would plop it down on the desk and close my eyes. Students slowly started droning into class while the music was piping through the small classroom with a east-facing window as the sun broke in. We had a great professor. I lucked out. He never made us memorize dates and we never had a test or essays, just 3 quizzes. The key to getting an 'A' in that class was showing real appreciation for the music... meaning.. sincerely kissing the professor's ass. He was a great guy. I got an 'A'. Mostly because, I really did appreciate the music.
So, this morning, after I listened to my Mozart, I went onto the iTunes store and started digging for more classical music to download on my iTunes. To my satisfaction, all of my classical music inventory in my mind came back to me. I was thinking and browsing, Strauss, Schumann, Lizst, Bartok, Ravel, Debussy, Beethoven, Chopin, Schoenberg, Bach, Grieg, Barber, Holst, etc. etc.
I'm so glad that I was and am educated in the Humanities and my loving parents foot the whole bill. Back then it was appx. $38K a year. Now it's appx. $58K a year. Wowaweeewa. Sex explosion :()!
You know... when I hear nowadays about how America needs to have more math and science in schools, I roll my eyes. Fine. Do it. But the Indians and the Chinese out number us and those drones will always outnumber us in that area. Sure, do it. Why not. But for me, I think that our strength is in creativity. Think Apple. We need the worker ants... the engineering nerds to put the circuits together and do the plumbing. But at the end of the day, what wins is the humanities... our humanity stamped on the circuits. The rest of the world will catch up (most have already) and surpass on tech things. But who can surpass us in music, movies, love, and freedom?! (except the Italians, the Spaniards, and maybe, the French.) The real stuff that life is made of and the stuff that people all over the world aspire to.
I hate to say it because it sounds so American. But America is the greatest nation on earth. That's why so many outsiders come here to live and/or visit. We're not perfect by any means. (e.g. I think that the Americans work too hard and too many of them think only of money, position, and status). But compared to rest of the world, this is where it all happens and can happen.
Btw, when I say 'America,' I mean Manhattan. It's ridiculous. But I really can't imagine people in America living outside of Manhattan or San Fran (maybe L.A.). Note: New Jersey is NOT America. They're outsiders to me as well. So loud and dumb.
Back to the iTunes store :).
Anyway, this morning, for some insane reason and twist of soul, I woke up craving for some classical music. Mozart's Requiem came to mind and I played it on my iTunes, speakers full blast.. Lacrimosa. Shamefully, Mozart was the only classical music that I had on my iTunes. I ripped it from a CD that I had a few years ago. All of my classical music were bought on CDs and they are in storage now (about 30 CDs). It's a shame. Because from time to time, the only music that can placate my soul is classical music. It fortifies me and makes me feel civilized again.
Music appreciation was a 8:30am class. Every Tuesday and Thursday from 8:30am to 9:50am. It was divine. I looked forward to going to that class eventhough it was so early in the morning. I would walk in there with my notebook (back then notebook computers weren't invented yet :()) and I would plop it down on the desk and close my eyes. Students slowly started droning into class while the music was piping through the small classroom with a east-facing window as the sun broke in. We had a great professor. I lucked out. He never made us memorize dates and we never had a test or essays, just 3 quizzes. The key to getting an 'A' in that class was showing real appreciation for the music... meaning.. sincerely kissing the professor's ass. He was a great guy. I got an 'A'. Mostly because, I really did appreciate the music.
So, this morning, after I listened to my Mozart, I went onto the iTunes store and started digging for more classical music to download on my iTunes. To my satisfaction, all of my classical music inventory in my mind came back to me. I was thinking and browsing, Strauss, Schumann, Lizst, Bartok, Ravel, Debussy, Beethoven, Chopin, Schoenberg, Bach, Grieg, Barber, Holst, etc. etc.
I'm so glad that I was and am educated in the Humanities and my loving parents foot the whole bill. Back then it was appx. $38K a year. Now it's appx. $58K a year. Wowaweeewa. Sex explosion :()!
You know... when I hear nowadays about how America needs to have more math and science in schools, I roll my eyes. Fine. Do it. But the Indians and the Chinese out number us and those drones will always outnumber us in that area. Sure, do it. Why not. But for me, I think that our strength is in creativity. Think Apple. We need the worker ants... the engineering nerds to put the circuits together and do the plumbing. But at the end of the day, what wins is the humanities... our humanity stamped on the circuits. The rest of the world will catch up (most have already) and surpass on tech things. But who can surpass us in music, movies, love, and freedom?! (except the Italians, the Spaniards, and maybe, the French.) The real stuff that life is made of and the stuff that people all over the world aspire to.
I hate to say it because it sounds so American. But America is the greatest nation on earth. That's why so many outsiders come here to live and/or visit. We're not perfect by any means. (e.g. I think that the Americans work too hard and too many of them think only of money, position, and status). But compared to rest of the world, this is where it all happens and can happen.
Btw, when I say 'America,' I mean Manhattan. It's ridiculous. But I really can't imagine people in America living outside of Manhattan or San Fran (maybe L.A.). Note: New Jersey is NOT America. They're outsiders to me as well. So loud and dumb.
Back to the iTunes store :).
Thursday, January 1, 2009
12:30PM
Got home at 12:30 this afternoon. I guess I must have had an OK NYE afterall :).
That's the interesting thing about Manhattan. If you have lived here long enough, there's no need to plan. Things either happen or don't.
Happy 2009 to all of my lovelies. It will be a great year!
That's the interesting thing about Manhattan. If you have lived here long enough, there's no need to plan. Things either happen or don't.
Happy 2009 to all of my lovelies. It will be a great year!
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
