![[info]](http://l-stat.livejournal.com/img/userinfo.gif?v=92.1){kind=small}
For many years back in the UK on was on the list to be a beta tester for the company the makes some specialist software I use a lot in my sound work. However, back in 2007 there was a long period when I was largely offline except for a bit of Wifi access while we toured the UK prior to the big move to Australia. This, coupled with changes of address and email address, meant that I had to leave the beta test programme and also that I lost touch with them (and they with me). (FYI, I'm typing in circles to avoid using the name because, part of the deal with being a beta tester is signing a non-disclosure agreement.)
This was a bit of a blow because one of the advantages of being a beta tester was a free copy of the software at the end of each programme. The software I use isn't cheap (over $500 each time) and I was just getting to the stage of needing an upgrade--but, though a sequence of events too boring to relate, I got an e-mail today asking if I want to join the team for the next release. Obviously the answer is "yes!" so, as of now, I'm using a version of software due for release in about 18 months.
Happy me!
The book on which it's based is a happy, warm story beautifully illustrated.
So why did they decide that they had to change the film to a depressing story about an abused child with a single mum? Note to screen writers: a film doesn't have to be relentlessly depressing to be "worthy".
So...to the producers: Epic fail on your part. I can see why what should have been the "family film of the year" died a rapid death in the cinemas and went to DVD and TV within months.
Why on earth do the writers always seem to think they have to script scenes where the police arrive at a work place to interview somebody to have the character casually keep working while the police talk to them? And they usually end with the person saying they have to get back to work.
Sorry, but is any normal person really so casual about a police visit and so committed to their work that they'd do this?
I realised that I keep hearing both terms in TV and films but have no idea of the significance.
"OK. I'm just going to say it.
Western reaction to Israel and the Arab states is tainted with racism.
We look at Israel and see us. Western, educated, cultured. We hold them to a higher standard of behavior and are proportionally more pissed off at them when they don't live up to our expectations because we do think they are a higher caliber people. I mean, Jews are rich, educated, elites - right? (That is both a positive and a negative depending on if you have some anti-semetism in there - which in Europe is getting pretty strong again) Israel is filled with us - and we wouldn't behave like that.
We look at the Arab states and see them as lower. We go back and forth between viewing them as dangerous animals and stupid children. We expect them to behave poorly and aren't surprised when they do. After all...what can you expect? Arabs are seen as intellectually and culturally inferior to Westerners. So when they do their (pretty much constant) human rights violations we just sigh and shrug - dangerous animal or poor stupid children who just don't know better. Arab states are filled with them - and we have low to no expectations of their behavior."
Western reaction to Israel and the Arab states is tainted with racism.
We look at Israel and see us. Western, educated, cultured. We hold them to a higher standard of behavior and are proportionally more pissed off at them when they don't live up to our expectations because we do think they are a higher caliber people. I mean, Jews are rich, educated, elites - right? (That is both a positive and a negative depending on if you have some anti-semetism in there - which in Europe is getting pretty strong again) Israel is filled with us - and we wouldn't behave like that.
We look at the Arab states and see them as lower. We go back and forth between viewing them as dangerous animals and stupid children. We expect them to behave poorly and aren't surprised when they do. After all...what can you expect? Arabs are seen as intellectually and culturally inferior to Westerners. So when they do their (pretty much constant) human rights violations we just sigh and shrug - dangerous animal or poor stupid children who just don't know better. Arab states are filled with them - and we have low to no expectations of their behavior."
I thought about this overnight then posted that I disagreed with some of what she said: I thought it generalised too much (since there are huge differences among arab states and also reflects the view of the Middle East that the US media gives more than the slightly more balanced view we get in other countries.
However, I thought a bit farther and realised that there ARE some countries that reflect what she said. Places like Afghanistan and Somalia are not far off being medieval fiefdoms, run by local war lords. Of course, this isn't restricted to Arab countries--some African states are much the same.
But are we really that much different? Western civilisation is covered with a thin veneer of sophistication, but how far away from "warlords" are we if we strip away this veneer? I'm thinking of things like urban gangs in the USA, mafias in Russia in Italy, football violence in Europe, and so on. Even looking at "democratic" politicians, how many are there to serve and how many view election as a legal way to achieve the power and status that a warlord would get by killing his enemies? Certainly the level of corruption and personal gain we see in politicians makes me think this is the case.
So, even if my LJ friend was right about our perception of Arabs, are we really all that different?
Enough anthropology. Time for a Bundy rum and coke while I stroke my white cat and advance my plans for world domination.
They're also the sweetest, most flavourful tomatoes I've ever tasted. They literally explode in your mouth the juice and huge flavours.
I asked the guy at the greengrocer if he knew any more about them but he didn't. All he knows is that they come from a local grower who just calls them cherry tomatoes.
I'd love to know more about them, maybe with a view to trying to grow some myself. Do any of my foodie/gardening friends (I'm looking at YOU, Calla!) have an idea what variety they might be? Or is just a fluke of the season that they got ripe without growing?
Cheers,
Bob
I haven't watched it in years.
The main thing that struck me is....I know it's a film but, if it's even partially accurate, were people really as naive in their dealings with the press back then? In this day of spin doctors, instant rebuttals, wire tapping and so on, I wonder if this sort of investigative reporting could happen any more. And, if it can't happen, heaven help us!
visited 66 states (29.3%)
Create your own visited map of The World
And..
visited 16 states (32%)
Create your own visited map of The United States
A fair bit of red...but still far too many places to visit and not enough time!
Bob
Back in 1906, four days before the earthquake, somebody put a film camera on the front of a tram and travelled the length of San Francisco's Market Street
Fun!
PHOTOSHOP CS5 SNEAK PEAK.
I use Photoshop a fair bit for cleaning up photos but have never worried much about keeping up to date with the latest and greatest--I have an ancient copy of the full programme and a current copy of the "Elements" (i.e. stripped down) version.
However, it it really does what this video implies, I think I better start saving my pennies. I like it!
Bob
Syndicate
