 |


 |
|
 |
 |
 |
 |
|
 |
 |
Earlier this evening, I was in Macy's department store. I'm not proud of it, but I'm not ashamed, either. We happened to be at The Domain, my wife wanted to stop into Macy's, so we went in. The first thing I noticed was that the smell of perfume or cologne or something was almost impenetrably strong. So much so, I swear, that the back of my throat started burning. As if that were not enough of a warning, there was one display that convinced me that I was particularly maladapted for the Macy's environment. Next to a stack of women's blouses, a sign read: Ruffled Peasant Tees - $29 It is refreshing, I suppose, that Macy's feels free to use the word "peasant" in a purely descriptive, non-pejorative way. There may be some easily-offended types out there who would decry the use of "peasant" by a upscale retailer or their stereotypically upper-middle-class patrons. Personally, I've never been a fan of the word police (you can imagine the self-loathing I'm struggling with right now), so I'm not going to bust Macy's for being politically incorrect. But seriously- $29 dollars for one "peasant" t-shirt? Ruffled or not, at $29, that one shirt represents almost a month's income for your typical 21st century peasant. Don't get me wrong, Macy's can charge whatever they want for their clothes, but have they no sense of irony? Surely, reasonable and accurate, non-pejorative connotations of "peasant" in this sense would include all of the following: serviceable and satisfying; perhaps rough and unpolished, but not shoddy; lacking unnecessary or impractical adornment; and inexpensive Might I suggest this substitution: "Ruffled Poser Tees - $29 Current Mood: amused
|
 |
 |
 |
 |
|
 |
 |



 |
|
 |
 |
 |
 |
|
 |
 |
Just when you thought the Dark Lord was gone forever, he pops back up again. The former Vice President is exercising his right, as a private citizen, to criticize the current administration. Specifically, he thinks it is a bad idea to close the Guantanamo Bay detention camp, and restrict interrogation techniques to the Army Field Manual. Let's take a moment to savor the use of the phrases "former Vice President" and "private citizen" with respect to Dick Cheney. At around 3:09 in the clip above, he asserts that the Obama administration is returning to a "law enforcement" model to combat terrorism. Although he doesn't say it explicitly, I believe he's making the distinction between prevention and reaction. The weakness of law enforcement that one has to wait for the crime to happen, but declaring war on terror means one can prevent the attack. The first problem with this argument is that it is completely incidental to the morality of so-called enhanced interrogation- we've fought wars in the past without accepting those techniques as legal and justified. But the real problem isn't one of utility, it is that we have to become the bad guys to maintain our security. We can tell ourselves that what we're doing isn't so bad, and it gives results (although the results are classified, so we can't really know that). But that's bullshit- hiding behind the phrase "enhanced interrogation" is a polite way of saying that we're compromising our principles. We're basically saying that torture is wrong, unless we really need to, in which case, we'll call it something else. If waterboarding isn't a crime anymore, why was it ever a crime? What's changed about waterboarding? The stakes are higher now, I hear someone say- we're now facing an existential threat. Even if I accept that, the implicit assumption is that, in the face of a big enough threat, principles are flexible, right and wrong are negotiable, and evil is in the eye of the beholder. Isn't that exactly the kind of thinking that leads eventually to terrorism and suicide bombers? And when the threat is gone, will it be just as easy to decide that that waterboarding is wrong again? Once you're one of the bad guys, fighting other bad guys isn't a war, it's a gang fight. None of the good guys or innocent bystanders are rooting for either gang to win- they're just hoping to avoid stray bullets. Surprisingly, former Vice President Cheney mentions the Oklahoma city bombing while he's disparaging the law enforcement model. I find this ironic, given that Timothy McVeigh is currently rotting in jail, whereas Osama bin Laden's whereabouts remain unknown. Current Mood: annoyed
|
 |
 |
 |
 |
|
 |
 |


 |
|
 |
 |
 |
 |
|
 |
 |
I saw two great music events this weekend. Saturday night the lovely Whimsy and I went down to Fiddler's Hearth (great venue, where the old Bennigan's used to be across from Threadgill's downtown) and saw The Pine Beetles play an outstanding show. For once we saw the whole thing, which means I didn't miss any of the songs of theirs I really like. They cover a song written by Pops Bayless (of Shorty Long and The Asylum Street Spankers) called Kiss Me that is perfectly evocative of the tin pan alley sensibility. Of course, I'm speaking as someone with no training as a musician, music theorist, music historian, or ethnomusicologist. But I know what I like.  Another thing I like is Jonathan Coulton, particularly when surrounded by a room full of nerds and geeks, many of whom were hopped up on Red Bull. JoCo always does a great show, but his material gets much better when Paul and Storm warm up the crowd and sing back up. The new material and the covers he did tonight really made the show fantastic, so much so that I didn't miss some of the songs he didn't play tonight. JoCo and Paul and Storm played a cover of "Birdhouse In Your Soul" that was outstanding- almost the equal of the "Sweet Caroline" cover they performed at the Cactus Cafe two years ago. Current Mood: amused
|
 |
 |
 |
 |
|
 |
 |




|
 |
|
 |