Half-hearted squeeing

According to urbandictionary.com: Squee is A noise primarily made by an over-excited fangirl, however it has spread rapidly and is now widely spread among the web community.

What does this have to do with anything? Well, "squee" is a word often used by the recappers at Television Without Pity, one of the best television sites on the tubes.

I'll give you a practical example from the recap of last night's episode of The Office:

But then the camera car slows way down, and we watch Pam ducking her head over the steering wheel, and then Jim getting in the passenger seat, and Pam and Jim kissing. And if there's any more dialogue before the commercial, I can't hear it over the sound of North America squeeing.

What's that, you say? Pam and Jim are together? Well, yes. Teranu, why aren't you more excited about this?, you ask. Aren't you a huge Pam/Jim fan? Don't you want them to end up happily ever after?

Yes, that's the thing. I want them to end up happily ever after. I don't want them to break up, get back together, break up, get back together, etc. for the next 3 seasons. Them getting together now means that something awful is going to have to happen to them, otherwise their relationship will no longer be an interesting part of the show. So, although I did squee when I saw Pam and Jim together, it was a half-hearted squee. Honestly, I was kind of excited to think that perhaps Pam and Jim were just friends for now; and then, after we found out that they were together, I thought it would have been good if Pam and Jim had been able to keep their relationship a secret from everyone--the camera crew, the viewers, and the rest of the office--for at least half of a season. Then, when we did find out that they were actually together, we could have the retroactive happiness of knowing that they'd been together since August.

Other than this development with Pam and Jim, the rest of the episode was great. Dwight killing Angela's cat was hilarious; I'm glad Karen is gone; Kevin cracks me up; and I'd like to see more of Kelly and Ryan--it will be fun to see them each post-break up. Part of why I was excited to think that Pam and Jim weren't quite together was that it would bring the office dynamic closer to the way it was at the beginning of the American series. And things were closer to that dynamic last night than most of last season--the proof was that my husband laughed out loud at least 5 times, after getting irritated with the show and mocking it most of last season.

I'd like to leave you with this thought about Pam and Jim from the recap at Television Without Pity:

Oh, man, I just cannot conceive what kind of horrible apocalypse the writers are cooking up to get these two apart eventually. I mean, if either cheats on the other, the fans are going to be burning TV producers in effigy. Seriously, the only way this ends is with Pam and Jim married, or one of them dead. You read it here first!

Oh, and I'd like to apologize for not posting much recently...School has started, and it turns out that I actually have work that needs to be done. Who would have figured?

Thought-provoking memorials

While I was in Berlin, I visited the Memorial to the Murdered Jews of Europe, which is just south of the Brandenburg Gate. It's the size of several city blocks--4.7 acres--and it's simply covered by enormous concrete slabs. The slabs are all the same width and length, but their height varies from about 6 inches to over 7 feet tall. There are no words. There is no plaque, explaining the meaning of the stone slabs. There isn't even a sign in on corner, explaining what the memorial is for. It's just there.


I was really impressed by this memorial. The size, color, and material of the concrete slabs gives the memorial a weight, a gravitas, if you will, that makes the place quite solemn and even sacred. The design allows visitors to walk in between the slabs, letting them feel as if they are a part of the memorial. And often, this participation can be quite unsettling--the slabs are tall enough that you can lose sight of the edges of the memorial, or lose contact with those you came to the memorial with. It's disconcerting.

Perhaps even more importantly, it allows visitors to figure out for themselves what they think the memorial means. The lack of direct labels on anything allow people to openly interpret what they think something stands for, yet the scale and solemnity of the memorial steer their thoughts in certain directions. It's a memorial that will stay with you, keeping you wondering, for weeks to come.

This is a similar to how I felt when I visited the Vietnam War Memorial in Washington, D.C. It's so different from all the other memorials, and so subtle about being a memorial, that it really made me think. And I felt greater reverence there than I did at any of the other nearby memorials.

In his slide essay about the Spire of Dublin, Witold Rybczynski argues much the same thing, saying that since the Spire is open to interpretation, it is more meaningful to those who see it. He also points to the memorial for the World Trade Center disasters as a memorial that doesn't live up to its potential--it is too literal of a representation to really affect people and challenge them to think. I think this is really unfortunate--the disaster of September 11th affected so many people in so many different ways, that creating a memorial with a fixed, definite meaning denies the reality of that day for many. I would like to see more open meanings in national memorials--the chance for the viewer to become an active participant in the event, where the memorial provides a set of questions and the viewer is forced to figure out for him or herself what to think about these questions. Simple tributes are a fitting and nice way to memorialize something, but memorials such as these discussed above are the ones that truly stay with you, that even have the power to change you.

The problem with Britney

I admit it. I used to be a big Britney Spears fan. I own her first three albums--and this when I was listening to her right when downloading stuff from Napster wouldn't get you in trouble. I even watched Crossroads (albeit on an airplane where that was the only thing to watch).

The last few years, I've realized that her music is crap (and quite possibly has always been crap, although I'm not quite ready to admit that yet) and that the craziness of her personal life is simply too distracting to take her seriously as a musician. I really don't care about who she's sleeping with, who's going to get custody of her kids, or what her hair actually looks like. I think the things that she wears are absolutely hideous, but if she wants to, again, who really cares?

And so even though she headlined the VMAs on Sunday, I didn't even take the time to tune in, because I didn't care. I was surprised, however, on Monday to read how simply awful she was. This was her big chance. She was onstage at a major awards show, poised to show the music world that yes, she was back and better than ever. Anyone with half a brain would realize that if you mess this up, you're done. But according to anyone who covered the event, she just tanked.

So I had to watch the video for myself. Here it is:



There were two big complaints about Britney's performance:
1. She was woefully out of shape and it really showed.
2. She was lazy, not matching her lip-synching to the music and not putting any energy into her dance moves.

I'm not going to say a whole lot about the first. For someone who has had two kids, she looked great. I can honestly say that if I have that figure after I've had any children, I will be quite happy. However, I have no plans now or ever in the future to prance around on a stage in boy shorts and a bra. Especially when 19 years olds who have never even considered having kids are writhing around on stage next to me. Not a good frame of reference.

But I don't think it's fair to blame this all on Britney. There are plenty of female musicians who have kids and dress sexily on stage, even if they aren't quite as thin as they used to be. I would look to her costumer, and her publicist, and her agent, and ask them, "Why didn't you guys catch this? Why didn't you dress her in something that is provocative, yet doesn't accentuate her unflattering aspects? And can't someone find her a wig or extensions or something that doesn't look like it's been dragged through the dirt by a cat?" Come on. This is the headline act for the VMAs, and no one watched this performance in advance and had the authority to make some constructive suggestions about costuming? I don't believe that for a minute.

But what I will hold Britney responsible for is her complete lack of energy throughout the performance. One of the things that I like about her as a performer was her crisp dancing, as well as her ability to make simple motions dramatic. She's also been very good at pushing the envelope during live performances--stripping, large snakes, kissing Madonna--she always was doing something to get her audience's attention. And her performance on Sunday had none of that. She looked lethargic, her movements were sloppy, and her performance was just the same thing she's always done.

For comparison, check out this video from the 2000 VMAs, where she covered the Stones' "Satisfaction" and performed "Oops! I Did It Again." Here, she's full of energy, her dancing is crisp, and she really shocks her audience when she pulls off that suit. I can still remember watching it in my dorm room at college with my friends--all of us were sitting there saying, "Is she seriously doing this?"



Now, we're asking the same question--"Is she seriously doing this?"--but for all of the wrong reasons. Britney, either care about what you're doing, or get off the stage, and let us watch someone who does.

Tote bags and more

So recently, I've gotten on this kick where I'm trying to use cloth tote bags to take home groceries instead of using new paper or plastic bags every time I go to the store. I'm kind of picky, though. I don't just want any tote bag--I want cool tote bags. So that one that you got from the security data management seminar at work is completely out. Don't try to give it to me. I'll give it back.

Here is my collection of bags thus far:

I have two bags that I got from my sister-in-law in Germany. Germans are big on using cloth bags for groceries, often making you pay for paper or plastic if you don't bring your own bag. The two I got are identical, and both have a frog kissing a turtle, surrounded by a rainbow, with the words "Schuetzen unsere Umwelt"--which means, "Protect our environment." It's cute, it's classic, and it has words in a foreign language on it. Definitely cool.

My favorite one, though, is a cream-colored bag that just says [Onyxia Hide Backpack] on both sides in green letters. It's simple, it's understated, and very few people will know what it's talking about. Very nerdy. Very cool.

And so that's it, for now. It's enough to get me about $50 worth of groceries, give or take. I'm keeping my eye out for a few more, though. The one that I currently want is this one:
Yes, that's right. "Republicans for Voldemort." It makes me giggle every time I see it (no offense, Jack :) ). And what makes me laugh even harder is that you can get it as a onesie for babies as well.
Let's just say that I'm really tempted.

Vacation pics!

Ok, here are a few of my favorite pictures from our recent trip to England and Germany:

In Penzance (England), we visited St. Michael's Mount, a castle/monastery built on an island. The island is really close to shore, and you can walk to it when the tide is out. So we did.
Perhaps our favorite part of the trip was our visit to Tintagel (also in England), where we stayed at this tiny youth hostel right on the edge of the cliffs. Kids under 3 weren't allowed to stay there, because they might fall off the edge. Honestly. There were picnic tables, then 2 feet, then cliff. It was awesome.

After we went to England, we spent 6 days with my brother and his wife in Berlin, which was quite different from hiking in the British countryside, but also very cool. One of the things I enjoyed the most was how much variety there was in the city. New buildings were right next to old, different architectural styles were sprinkled throughout the different neighborhoods--and it worked. The city doesn't seem jumbled or a hodge-podge, but instead a living, evolving organism. The Fernsehturm (TV tower) that is in the former East Berlin is one of the architectural icons of the city that I was most impressed by.It was an amazing two weeks, but it's nice to be home, too...even if it means I have to go back to work.

World's. Best. Video.

I know that I may have posted this as "Video of the Week" at some point in the past, but I really think that it deserves its own post. I've been a fan of this song/video for quite some time, and it's been out long enough for there to be parodies of it (like this one).

Before I say anymore, you need to watch the video for yourself:



Why is this video so great? I'm not sure the video on its own is a classic, but with the song, it definitely is. I think it's primarily for two reasons:

First, the song is awesome. It's catchy, it's singable, and it's funny. My brother actually played it at his wedding reception, and some of his wife's aunts and uncles--who didn't even know the song--thought it was a great song and got up to dance. Now that's a good song.

Second, it references pop culture icons that are slightly nostalgic for those of us who are in our 20s-30s. Transformers. Star Wars. Chuck Norris. It's the same reason that those clip videos of 80s cartoon theme songs are so popular--it's fun to revisit the popular culture that was around when you were younger.

Anyways, watch the video. Learn the song. Share it with your friends. And love it.

The Aristocats

I'm currently in the process of uploading all my vacation pictures to my computer, so hopefully, I'll have them for you in the next day or two. In the meantime, I thought I'd briefly post about the movies that I saw on the flights to and from Europe.

First of all, I have to say that movie technology on airplanes has really improved. Instead of just one movie showing on common screens, now, you have a small screen in front of you where you can select from 30 different choices. Not only that, but you can play them whenever you want, and even pause and rewind. No more wondering what happens to Britney Spears at the end of Crossroads just because you fell asleep!

I watched 4 movies total in between my two transatlantic flights: Shrek the Third, Ocean's 13, Someone Like You, and The Aristocats.

Shrek the Third was ok, but not as good as either of the first two. The introduction of the Arthurian story for new material was fun, but part of me is starting to think that maybe Shrek needs to pull his act together, stop scratching his ass in public, and be slightly more dignified every once in a while. He doesn't have to change who he is, but he could learn to adapt to different social situations more readily.

Ocean's 13 was a lot of fun--much better than Ocean's 12, I think. The return to the big-scale casino heist worked really well, and there were quite a few good laughs. I'm planning on renting this one again to watch it on a slightly bigger screen.

Someone Like You was a pretty typical chick flick. Ashley Judd, Greg Kinnear, and Hugh Jackman all star in it, and it was enjoyable, except for the ending kiss, which looked as if the two stars were trying to bite each other, rather than kiss. C'mon folks. Make me believe that you're in love.

I watched The Aristocats because I saw it as a kid, but hadn't seen it for maybe 20 years. I was curious. And of the movies that I saw, this was the one that made me stop and think the most.

For those of you who haven't seen it in a while, it's the story of Duchess and her three kittens, who live with a wealthy noblewoman in Paris. The noblewoman is going to leave her entire fortune to her cats, and once the cats are gone, to the butler. The butler gets greedy and tries to get rid of the cats, so that he can get the money first. Duchess and her kittens end up in the French countryside, far away from home. Thomas O'Malley, the alley cat, helps them return to Paris, where they thwart the evil butler. Thomas and Duchess fall in love and live happily ever after.

As with many older Disney movies, some of the animal characters are noticeably supposed to be a particular nationality. There are British geese, a Chinese cat, and, of course, Thomas O'Malley. He's clearly supposed to be Irish, which is an interesting juxtaposition to the high-class, French Duchess. It's scary that a seemingly innocuous, classic kids' movie about animals is actually teaching children to think about different nationalities in terms of wealth and class.

The other really interesting thing that struck me about the movie was where the kittens came from. Duchess is this genteel, high-class, cultured cat, yet she's clearly a single mother. I'm definitely not saying that single-mothers can't be high-class--far from it. But the movie was made in 1970, and it's set in 1910, and there is NO mention of a father for the kittens. Ever. Not even that there once was a "Duke" cat, but he got hit by a carriage or something like that.

This marked lack of any mention of a father really makes you wonder who he is. Did the Duchess have a one-night stand somewhere along the line? Because if she did, that would be a pretty radical thing for both the class/time period of the setting, as well as when the movie was made. Or was she bred with a neighbors cat? If that's the case, why not have them marry? My most interesting speculation is that there is perhaps past history between Thomas and Duchess, which would explain one of the kitten's intense desire to be an alley cat, as well as the fact that he looks a lot like Thomas (the rest of the plot of the movie doesn't really back up this theory, though).

More about my actual trip later this week!