A mishmash of articles on a mishmash of topics. Trying to work on my writing skills all the time so comments are more than welcome!
Thank you for visiting.
The violent attacks being perpetrated by Israel towards its Arab citizens these past few days have been disturbing, to say the least. The last time I checked, the death toll for Israelis was less than 5 while the death toll for Arabs was hovering around 300. It does not take a genius to see the discord there. It reminds me of the war between Israel and Lebanon back in 2006 where the death tolls were equally disparate. The fact of the matter is that Israel's army, military technology, and weapons sophistication dwarfed those of their adversaries in both cases. And they are not afraid nor do they feel guilty about displaying this.
I am not saying that the border countries surrounding Israel (most notably Syria, Lebanon, and Iran) do not represent serious threats to Israel's security. But I am saying that the devastating attacks being perpetrated by Israel right now against Hamas (its own citizens) will slow progress, rather than hasten, towards a long lasting peace process between the parties, and therefore seriously compromise any chance of stability in the region for the foreseeable future.
And possibly the most disheartening aspect is the lack of an outcry from any countries. These attacks are acts of terror and need to be condemned. My guess would be that as the attacks get more intense, more countries may start to question some of Israel's actions, leaving their unquestioned support for the Jewish state up in the air. This is by far the most important area in the world in terms of its effect on global security. The major reason for 9/11 and for the continued battles between the Taliban and the US in Afghanistan is the unquestioned support for Israel by the United States. This represents one of Obama's most complicated, important, and consequential foreign policy files. All eyes will be on the new president (whose election for many Arabs around the world, represented hope for the future) to see exactly how he reacts publicly once he takes office to this ongoing seemingly never-ending conflict.
In my post, “Three Reasons for Raptors Optimism”, I laid out a few good (or so I thought at the time) signs at the start of the season that seemingly indicated a high playoff seeding and possibly a trip to the second round of the post-season or farther. I don't especially like to admit when I'm wrong but, in this case, my predictions have not quite panned out as I thought they would.
(Quick note that I am not suggesting that they blow this team up (figuratively, of course). The season is only a quarter of the way done, they are still getting used to playing for a new coach, and they have shown enough flashes of good play to not yet let our panic get out of hand. It is easier said than done to play like they have shown all the time, but it should be possible.)
Let's review my old list:
The swagger of Jermaine O'Neal
In the post, I argued that arguably the first “enforcer” in a Raptors uniform since Charles Oakley would bring some much needed grit, toughness, and aggressiveness to a team often labeled as “soft”. O'Neal's numbers have been admirable and he did string together five straight double doubles. He has been a presence in the paint, both altering and blocking shots.
But he has had injury issues, starting with him banging up his surgically repaired knee and ending with a sprained shoulder. He has missed a significant number of games because of this. Moreover, his toughness is not really rubbing off on his teammates. Aside from Bargnani throwing Vince to the floor like he was a candy wrapper, the Raps defence has been laughable at times.
I am a proponent of the fact that this game is predominantly about talent, but passion, hard work, and intensity can be almost as important to winning games. Players have made themselves careers in the NBA based mostly on hard work and intensity. On the flip side, no player has ever had an elite NBA career without talent. The Raps need to play with passion on both ends of the floor. We have seen that when they do this, they are successful. However, so far, neither J.O or Triano have managed to make that happen on a consistent basis.
Chris Bosh
I wrote that Chris Bosh entered the season with a new sense of purpose and intensity on both ends of the floor. If the first week of the season was a microcosm of an NBA season, he likely would have won MVP. But after that first week in which he was named NBA Eastern Conference Player of the Week, he tailed off. His 30 point games were turning into 12 pointers. His 14 rebounds were turning into single digit totals. And he was becoming less willing to drive it to the hole. All in all, this team rises and falls with Chris Bosh and if he is not going at full speed, the team suffers. And that's what we have seen.
Calderon
Calderon has been going well actually. Last I checked, he was top 3 in the league in assists, with a stellar as usual assist to turnover ratio. He has a very reliable jump shot and for the most part, does not take unwarranted shots. He is a calming steadying force for this team and one need only watch Roko or Will run the offence to see the difference.
He has missed some games which has been disappointing. One silver lining in those dark days was the realization (if it wasn't already obvious) that the backup point guard situation is next to nothing and that more PG insurance may be needed.
All in all, the Raps have played far below their expectations. That was the danger when Colangelo boasted that this was the best Raptors team “on paper”. That likely created a wave of high expectations for this group and the fact is, they have not delivered. It is still early and they have showed signs. They just need to bring it for 48 minutes and the Ws will start coming. Or maybe my optimism (as well as others) was unwarranted, in which case, I'll stop making predictions. Nah, I'll never do that.
So I am about halfway through the book "The War Within" written by Bob Woodward.
He is the author of many political readings, including "Bush at War" and "All the President's Men", as well as the associate editor at The Washington Post. He is probably best known for his critical role in uncovering the Watergate Scandal as well as his detailed and personal accounts of the Bush administration. People often say that he is the journalist who knows Bush the best, having conducted almost 11 hours of interviews with the man himself.
I aim to give you some feedback on the book as I progress my way through it. It is a highly detailed (and highly critical) account of the Bush administration vis-a-vis the war in Iraq between 2006 and 2008. It provides the reader with a behind the scenes look into the different misunderstandings, disagreements, tensions, and conflicts between all those involved. This includes the usual suspects, aka Bush, Rumsfeld, Powell, Rice, etc. But it gives equal weight to the huge and integral role played by all the military leaders. The hierarchy is sometimes hard to fully grasp and the list of actors involved sometimes seems convoluted and confusing, but this is more than made with the highly intimate feeling that one gets from reading it.
It is predominantly made up of scenes between important actors from the government and the military on their goals and strategies for success in Iraq. Reading these tetes à tetes brought two things to mind:
A) How does Mr. Woodward manage to be a witness to these high profile meetings?
B) The odd sensation that I was eavesdropping on the President and that I should have a red dot on my forehead.
It paints a grim picture of a group of politicians and generals trying to put together a plan that will topple a government, bring security and democracy to a country, whilst at the same time winning hearts and minds. This picture portrays these decision makers as disjointed, cobbled together, uninspiring, and clearly lacking the ability to come to a clear consensus.
Here is an example of the intense intimacy that is felt when reading this book. It starts with a private conversation between the President and Army General George W. Casey Jr. which happens on quiet veranda with a couple of cigars in the warm Baghdad dusk. Here's an excerpt:
Casey studied Bush's face, now wrinkled and showing its 59 years, the right eye slightly more closed than the left under graying, full eyebrows. The general had pushed for a drawdown for two years...
"I know I've got some work to do to convince you of that," the general said, "but I firmly believe that".
Bush looked skeptical.
"I need to do a better job explaining to you" why winning means getting out, Casey said.
"You do," Bush replied.
So I am almost completely certain that Woodward was not on that veranda that evening. So how does he know what was said between these two men? Honestly, it doesn't really matter to me. But the fact that you can read conversations of such a high importance between highly important people really gives the reader a rare treat into the insight, discussion, and procedures that go into decision making on the highest level.
So I am a huge fan of Stewart and Colbert. And so should all of you. I remember a recent Rolling Stone cover with the two of them on the cover displaying "The two most trusted names in news". While they are, for the most part, comedians, there is no doubt that the two possess keen political intellects and have a powerful influence on the political views of America's youth. Stewart always ends his shows with a guest, who is oftentimes on the other side of the political spectrum. He is always respectful and polite in these "debates", and also always seems to wipe the floor with his opponent. And with Colbert, you can just tell that he understands right-wingers because if not, he wouldn't be able to impersonate one so convincingly.
Anyway, perhaps more on them later but I wanted to post Jon Stewart's take on the Canadian crisis. Pure gold!
So I'm sure that this has already traveled substantially across cyberspace but I wanted to post it anyway. The reason for this is because it's awesome!
A man responsible for the death of so many innocent Iraqis as well as US soldiers finally gets a taste (albeit not even close to proportional) of his own medicine. I wouldn't imagine this happening if the president was not so close to his exit day (and will therefore start to minimize his official state visits), but it just shows the intense ire that is felt towards Bush, who has turned Iraq upside down and has spiraled it into a seemingly never-ending civil war.
Seriously, how many of you would love to do this? I bet if they held a worldwide contest with ten open spots to launch a couple shoes at the outgoing president, more than half the world would enter! By the way, apparently throwing shoes at someone is a long held Iraqi custom that is used to display disdain and rage. It is interesting to note that many anti-Saddam Iraqis flung their shoes at the Saddam statue once it came down back in 2003. Apparently, they don't much like the new guy either.
Wikipedia says:
The shoe represents the lowest part of the body (the foot) and displaying or throwing a shoe at someone or something in Arab cultures denotes that the person or thing is "beneath them." Showing the bottom of one's feet or shoes (for example, putting one's feet up on a table or desk) in Arab cultures is considered an extreme insult. Examples include Iraqi citizens smacking torn-down posters of Saddam Hussein with their shoes, and the depiction of President of the United StatesGeorge H. W. Bush on a tile mosaic of the floor of the Al-Rashid Hotel's lobby, forcing all visitors entering the hotel to walk on Bush's face to enter the hotel.
Call me cold. Call me out for wanting to kick somebody when he is as down as down can get but the last thing I felt while watching this was sympathy. It was more like "OK, that makes sense."
Question for all you faithful readers (i.e. me and who knows who else): If you could throw anything at Bush, what would it be and why?
I know how long you guys have been waiting for this official "Videos That Travel Around the World Post", henceforth known as the OVTTATWP. Well, the time has come.
Warning: you will see other posts that claim OVTTATWP status but be weary. These are all fakes. You've arrived at the realness.
Today, I have two. The first is of a guy named Matt who dances his way around the world. And the second is a version of the classic "Stand by Me" played by street musicians from around the world. If you're ever in low spirits, these videos are guaranteed to tug at your little heartstrings and cheer you right back up.
If anyone knows of others (and I'm sure they exist), feel free to post links.
So without further ado:
Note: a far better version of this video can be found here.
You know when you see a headline that is so unfathomable that you can't really decide whether it is fact or just taken from "The Onion" website? Well, today I saw this headline:
73 Year-Old Gives Basketball Another Shot.
Now, upon reading this, you might think that its just some geezer who started shooting some hoops down at the local YMCA because some extra free time had befallen him. But no. This 73 year-old senior citizen, Ken Mink, is a member of the Roane State Community College Basketball team. 52 years back, he attended the school as a freshman and played for the basketball team. The reasons are hazy, but he was forced to leave after one year. So now, Ken Mink is finally making his comeback and is expected to go # 1 in next year's NBA draft. That last part isn't true but I assure you that the rest is.
Check out this interview.
Highlights include:
Ken admitting that he doesn't have an iPod after receiving the requisite question, "What is on your iPod?"
Commenting on todays fashion trends as compared to his freshman days more than half a century ago
Nicknames bestowed on him by his teammates (who, by the way, have an average age of 19)
His coach talking about how Ken brings "experience" to the team
Anyway, this is obviously strange, surreal, and even possibly an underhanded attempt to get the media's attention. I can't imagine him getting any significant playing time down the stretch. When you watch the video, check out Ken participating in the running drills with his young, virile teammates. I think he has man boobs! I mean, I could even score on this guy!
Anyway, a fun and interesting story. And if his and his team's goal was media attention, well, they got it alright. How about top story on the New York Times website. Here's the link.
I found this op-ed piece written by none other than Bill Ayers. Name ring a bell? He's the "terrorist" who Obama "palled around with".
This is for sure one of the most interesting pieces I have read in a long time. The most interesting topic that he addresses comes near the end of the article, where he articulately describes the "guilt by association" culture in the United States. Apparently, having a relationship of any kind with somebody equals shared values. Rather than paranoia setting in, relationships with different types of people should be seen as leading to a more varied, cosmopolitan, and understanding view of our world. He writes:
The dishonesty of the narrative about Mr. Obama during the campaign went a step further with its assumption that if you can place two people in the same room at the same time, or if you can show that they held a conversation, shared a cup of coffee, took the bus downtown together or had any of a thousand other associations, then you have demonstrated that they share ideas, policies, outlook, influences and, especially, responsibility for each other’s behavior. There is a long and sad history of guilt by association in our political culture, and at crucial times we’ve been unable to rise above it.
And then a bit later:
Demonization, guilt by association, and the politics of fear did not triumph, not this time. Let’s hope they never will again. And let’s hope we might now assert that in our wildly diverse society, talking and listening to the widest range of people is not a sin, but a virtue.
Sam Mitchell, now the ex-head coach of the Toronto Raptors, was swiftly replaced last week by the then assistant coach Jay Triano. Apparently, winning "coach of the year" does not give one much job security these days. All in all, the decision was not a surprise, given Colangelo's obvious and understandable desire to install someone of his own choosing as well as the pitiful week the Raptors had just prior to the falling axe. In this climate of constant coaching changes, Mitchell should not have been that surprised either. Coaching is equally about keeping your players motivated as it is about Xs and Os. And the recent trouncing by the Denver nuggets demonstrated a huge lack of both, with the former being the higher cause for concern.
Here's a clip: (highlights include a refreshing JO speaking about personal responsibility as well as Triano trying to turn Hassan Adams into an all-star!)
Triano, the first Canadian born coach to ever coach in the NBA, will inherit a no doubt talented team with an equally no doubt roster with many holes. The most glaring of these is the backup point guard situation with two unproven, often confused looking, frustratingly inconsistent PGs in Will Solomon and Roko Ukic backing up the solid Jose Calderon. They are weak on the wings, with Anthony Parker possibly the worst starting 2 in the league. They have an aging ex-all star in Jermaine O'Neal with a scary history of serious injuries.
But given all that, Calderon and Bosh are all-star calibre. Bargnani is showing some serious signs that he's here to play this season. Joey Graham has been perhaps more good than bad. And O'Neal (if he stays healthy) can be a tenacious rebounder and intimidating presence in the post. I heard the other day that altered shots are better for the defensive team than blocked shots because they result more often in defensive rebounds while blocks often give the ball back to the team on offense. And JO has the ability to consistently alter shots.
So it is up in the air as to how this team will perform under the tutelage of a "new" face. My prediction is a playoff berth without home-court advantage and perhaps another first round exit. But it is early and there is a game today. And we all know how one game can change peoples minds. Especially the acute minds over at realgm.
It's like calling up your ex to be friends after a messy breakup. Or contacting an old enemy when you're in a bind. Or burying the hatchet with an old rival.
Whatever the metaphor, the ex-rivals of one of the most fiercely contested primary battles are now teammates. Today, Obama nominated Hillary Clinton to the post of Secretary of State, basically meaning that she will be the face and voice of US foreign policy. In one of the most heavily scrutinized posts not named President, Clinton may now see Obama's vice-presidential snubbing as a blessing in disguise. I mean, noone can argue that Clinton will now have more influence and sway than Biden, who is essentially there to break ties in the Senate. Obviously, Biden will continue to have the President's ear, but Clinton will be the spokesperson for US international activity. Think of how much media coverage Ms. Rice got in her time as Secretary of State. Possibly as much as Mr. Bush himself.
Obviously, this is a very shrewd political move for Obama. It shows his willingness to leave the past the past and move on. Clinton is one of the most recognizable and trusted characters in US politics, and her nomination gives the Obama team instant “starpower”. I can't wait to see all the editorial cartoons about this partnership.
In addition to this, for those who strongly supported Clinton during the primaries, it will serve to take some of the sting out of Obama's victory over Americas favourite first lady. Clinton was especially popular amongst women, and many saw the primaries as an extremely rare opportunity (and one that will not likely be replicated for some time) for a woman to be a legitimate contender and maybe even the favourite in a US presidential election. But then in came Obama with his charismatic, passionate, and fiery public speaking (not to mention his arugula lettuce and his chai tea lattes). He wooed the crowd into submission and instantly became the “sexy” choice. The Obama train gained steam and eventually left Clinton and her many diehard supporters in the proverbial dust.
This nomination is likely an olive branch to those very Clinton supporters who remain crushed by her defeat and who became even more incensed when she was passed up for the Vice-Presidential nomination. Personally, I think I like the choice. My only concern would be that their political ideologies vis a vis foreign policy are quite different, with Clinton a bit more to the right, highlighted by her support for the Iraq war. But, in the end, its the Presidents' party and he can do what he wants. Advisers are there to do just that, advise, and in the end, the President always has the final word. This provides me with a certain level of comfort, because OBAMA IS INCAPABLE OF MAKING A BAD DECISION. I say this in jest obviously, but also in reference to the wildly high expectations bestowed upon the skinny Chicagoan.
OK. Two things. First off, I realize that this is a horrible excuse for a post. Secondly, I understand that videos like this are a dime a dozen on the net (as well as pretty much any other video imaginable). In response to the first, more posts are coming soon I hope. And to the second...well, you'll understand. It's pretty fucking cute!
Will she ever get a break? Even two weeks after her harmful participation in the election, she is still in the news. Sure, a post-mortem or two on her embarrassing role in the McCain campaign is justified but apart from that, there's not much reason to continue dissecting the Alaska governor, unless its to announce her newest foray into the American talk show scene. Now wouldn't that be a more fitting spot for her, given her obvious intellectual deficiencies coupled with her irrefutable "charm"?
Are they trying to promote her intelligence?
Now I know that it may seem hypocritical to say we should stop talking about her whilst doing just that, but I had to share this great piece from the New York Times. And it definitely seems like Palin herself does want to slowly fade away from the US consciousness, given her recent media blitz, from Larry King to Wolf Blitzer. She wanted to, justifiably, defend herself from some McCain advisors who ramped up attacks on everything from her thinking that Africa is (shudder) a country to her not knowing who is part of NAFTA. Both are inexcusable, and she has a right to explain herself.
However beloved she is in the eyes of many Americans (mostly loonies), it is clear that she does not have the vision, intellect, and experience needed to be anything more than what she is right now. She is rife with charm, looks, and personality but if she decides to run for the highest office in 2012 (something many believe will happen), here's hoping that Obama runs the floor with her. And then finally, we can stop talking about this relative unknown. That is, unless she takes over for Letterman or Leno. I must admit that if this were to happen, I might sneak a peak.
As a partial aside, it is clear that her and Obama both represent the American Dream and the concept that anyone can become President. But at the same time, I find it interesting that while one represents intellect and temperateness, the other just scares you. I guess the lesson is that while anyone can become President, not everyone should.
I managed to see this incident in real time last night.
First of all, I'd like to congratulate Ron Artest for NOT punching a fan, player, coach, or mascot in the face. Way to keep things under control Ronny. See below for Artest at his lowest (and most crazy). No suspensions or fines have been announced yet, but I envision maybe a game apiece for Barnes and Alston. Check out my main man Steve Nash get shoved hard to the floor by TMac (best angle is at the 1:56 mark), followed by Shaq tossing TMac to the floor, and then somehow managing to shove the entire fracas a few feet. He's big huh?
Some quotes:
Shaq: "Somebody pushed Steve so I had to take care of my little man. It wasn't nothing serious, though, just a push and shoving match." (Gotta love it)
TMac: "The big fella pushed the heck out of me." (Heck?! Did he really just say that?)
Anyway, this was the main event in a game where the end result from the 2nd half on was never really in question. It did pique my interest though.
Question for all you readers: What is your most memorable sporting memory, controversial or otherwise?
Off to work on a dreary and rainy day in Montreal. Low energy today, but those salads aren't going to make themselves. Be back soon.
The reviews that have come rolling in for “W”, the Oliver Stone biopic about America's 43rd president, were disappointing. People complained that it lacked bite, that it was too episodic, and that it did not live up to the reputation of a maverick director such as Stone. We have come to expect from the man at least one hyper controversial, highly memorable, and risqué scene. While this film may not have delivered that (the fist fight between Bush Sr. and Jr. coming close), I found myself fully engaged from start to finish. And I think that the immaculate casting, from Rove to Cheney to “W” himself, was the main reason.
From the first scene involving Bush and his entire team of policy advisers whom we have come to know so well huddled around the Oval Office, the movie captivated me. It just felt so real.
Richard Dreyfuss played Dick Cheney to a fault, with his manipulative ways and his overall sense of evil and mischievousness on full display. Something about him standing up leaning against the door while the rest of the team sat around on couches during the first scene, showed his (dare I say) maverick ways.
Karl Rove was played by Toby Jones, a total unknown to me going in. But something about his facial features and his delivery gave the viewer the clear impression that not only was he evil and conniving, but that this was all he had in his life and in the end, was an extremely sad and lonely character.
Condy Rice didn't say much but the resemblance between the soon to be ex secretary of state and Thandie Newton was uncanny.
Jeffrey Wright turned in a powerful performance as the least hawkish of the hawks (and an Obama supporter to boot), Colin Powell. His passionate displeasure with the Iraq war plan in the war room was a scene to behold. Note: for the most part, the film told a story and did not take any clear stance on the issues. The exception to this was the introduction of sappy piano music during Powell's eloquent refusal to agree with the hawks that Iraq was the country to invade. Clearly, Stone was trying to invoke a positive relationship between Powell and the audience. We all know how, in perhaps the most disappointing moment in Powell's political career, he eventually played an integral part in the selling of the war. And here, once again when Stone recounted it, the audience could feel his pain and ashamedness.
James Cromwell played the part of Bush Sr. One of my favourite actors, he portrayed the 41st president as a highly conflicted character, often having to take sides with one of his sons. By the end, politics had seemed to take a tremendous on not only him, but his family.
And finally, Josh Brolin was a great choice for the man himself. While it may not be the hardest impression to pull off, Brolin did it without seeming too caricatural. He succeeded in portraying an extremely stubborn man, one who does not bend or break, and everything from his physique, to his dress, to his down-south accent, to his snicker, and to his “man's man” persona were spot on.
One thing I noticed about this character was that, (whether it was the burger at the barbecue or the ham and cheese sandwich/cheetos lunch with Mr. Cheney), a clear relationship was made between the man and his consumption. Perhaps his gluttony was meant as a symbol of his haste, his overall lack of sensibility, and his inability to think through issues in a logical fashion. I truly felt that Stone was trying to say that “W” ate like he lived his life: with reckless abandon. Remember in Kill Bill 2, when you couldn't take your eyes off David Carradine preparing the sandwich? In very much the same way, my attention was drawn to Bush's devourous eating habits. And while I'm not sure exactly what Stone was going for with this, there is no question that it was a recurring theme.
Anyway, I could go on. Barbara and Laura Bush were both extremely well cast as well. Tony Blair, Jaques Chirac, and Vladimir Putin all show up for quick cameos.
If not for the immaculate casting, this film would have been merely satisfying. In other words, its well worth watching, if only for this reason.
On another note, maybe there are some reasons to ACTUALLY miss Bush. Oh, and the video is funny too.
It was the 7th game of the season for the Toronto Raptors while the reigning NBA champs were playing their 8th. A Tuesday night game. The playoffs are miles away.
Yet nobody could have predicted this level of intensity, passion, and moxy. One only needed to look at Kevin Garnetts (rather annoying) attempt at intimidation by trying to coax Calderon out of his rhythm to realize that this was more than an early season game. There was some real feeling behind it and it was felt not only by the players and the coaches, but everyone in the arena as well as everyone watching from home. For the record, I'm lovin' it! Sure beats the snoozer of a win over the lowly Bobcats on Sunday afternoon.
And don't get too excited, but I am stating for the record that tonight could be a (very) early sign of a possible...dare I say the "R" word? That's right folks. Rivalry.
I'm sure that not many of the Celtics players or fans have forgotten Calderon's amazing game-ending three point play last season (scroll down to check it out). Could this have been part of the reason for the jawing between him and Garnett? My prediction would also be supported by the fact that Bosh is currently making that jump to superstar status while Garnett is sort of being ushered out of it. A chance for Bosh to match up with one of the best power forwards in the game. And a chance for Garnett to show the young kid that he's still got it. This just adds another layer to the story.
I'm not saying it's going to happen. But don't be surprised to see some serious sparks if these two teams meet in the playoffs. The new beasts of the East? We'll just have to wait and see if the Raps are up to the challenge.
The Ryder Cup ended on Sunday afternoon with another lopsided US defeat, ending in the exact same deficit (18.5 to 9.5) as two years ago on US soil when the Ryder Cup was last held. It was a clear drubbing, with the Europeans winning every session, including the Sunday singles, which have historically been dominated by the US. That makes Europe the winner of five of the last six Ryder Cups, not to mention the last three. And if it were not for an historic and unprecedented comeback by the US in 1999 in Sunday singles, you would have given Europe the last six Ryder Cups. Even more demoralizing for the team that boasts the top three golfing talents in the world in Woods, Mickelson, and Furyk, Europe has pulled off two thorough thrashings of the US in the last two Ryder Cups, making Sunday singles a mere formality.
As an aside, the US was victorious in the most recent edition. You think Boo Weekley wasn't pumped up?
Anyway, back to the article...
Rudy Tomjonovich once said of his Houston Rockets: “Never underestimate the heart of a champion”. It was clear from the first tee ball that the Europeans were looser, more relaxed, and more “into it” than the US. The Europeans play the Ryder Cup like the Americans play majors; with passion, focus, and heart. Conversely, the Americans play the Ryder Cup like it’s a two dollar skins game; with disinterest and aloofness. When Greece (absent of any NBA players) beat the likes of Lebron, Wade, Carmelo, and Bosh at the World Basketball Championships this past summer, they displayed a much higher level of team chemistry, camaraderie, and once again, heart. They came together as a team in the same fashion as the Europeans come together for the Ryder Cup. It is one of life’s puzzles why the US (with clearly the most raw talent) usually does not fare well in the Ryder Cup as well most international team competitions. Here are a few theories as to why.
The US is grounded in the power of the individual. Their constitution for example makes far more mention of individuality than collective prosperity. They pay less taxes, meaning that less wealth gets re-distributed, which is another sign of their “go it alone” attitude. It is not uncommon in Europe for income tax rates to flirt with the 50% mark, leaving a lot of extra money to be redistributed to those who need it most. It may seem silly to compare tax rates and sporting outcomes, but the analogy is clear. Many countries in Europe enjoy spreading the wealth, believing that an egalitarian society produces the best society. America has always been about the freedom to pursue individual personal wealth, with little or no limits set. Could this “team-first mentality” in European society help to foster a team first mentality on the golf course, the hardcourt, or the soccer pitch? And could this focus on the individual in American society be a hindrance to the performance of American sports teams? Potentially. Just think of American sports coverage.
Baseball coverage often fixates on home run tallies; who’s got the most, when is Bonds going to break Babe Ruth’s record, etc. Golf focuses on the majors and the player of the year race. Basketball focuses on scoring leaders and MVP’s. This is not to say that sports analysts in the US don’t speak of team play, but they do seem to spend a lot of time discussing individual accolades. Conversely, in Europe, when analysts speak of soccer (football to them), it’s often with an emphasis on the team effort. Think of how well the US does in the Olympics, which are mostly individual efforts. Now compare that to American results in international team events such as soccer, golf, and basketball.
Something doesn’t add up.
I also believe that no matter what the Americans say, Europe treasures the Ryder Cup more. I truly believe that the Ryder Cup for the Europeans is right up there, and possibly more important to them than winning majors. For the Americans, it is no contest. I don’t care what the Americans say, they would much rather win a US Open or a Masters than a Ryder Cup.
It is obvious that the US struggles with team sports. On paper, they should win every Ryder Cup, and they should win the gold medal game whenever they hit the hardcourt. Instead, the US has dismal records recently both in the Ryder Cup and in international team competition in general. Chemistry goes a long way. Heart goes a long way. And the passionate will for your team to win is vital. For now, I think it is safe to conclude that team success is not as important to the US as it is to Europe, the ultimate team player.
OK, I admit it. I wrote this one awhile ago. But I'm going to post it anyway. The story is a little out of date but will always be relevant.
In the wake of ex-NBA player John Amaechi announcing that he is gay, Tim Hardaway said some things that he shouldn’t have. His comments were hateful, ignorant and biting.
For those of you who aren’t familiar, here’s a clip:
For one of the great point guards of the game, the punishment came swiftly and decisively. Hardaway was promptly fired from his job as an NBA analyst, banned from the All-Star Game in Vegas, and was suddenly in everybody’s bad books. Hardaway’s reputation will forever be tarnished. Decades and decades of hard work, of being an outstanding player and teammate, and earning respect for his work as an NBA analyst after his playing career; all of this was thrown away in a 2 minute homophobic rant.
NBA players have always and will continue to censor their words. They are often afraid to speak what is truly in their hearts and minds, afraid of controversial comments that will create a public backlash and could have some severe consequences. What happened to Tim Hardaway will only make that fear more palpable.
Just like politicians and celebrities, athletes feel a lot of pressure to watch what they say. In this new technological age, gossip can spread even faster. In the same way that politicians will always “say the right thing” to clamor for votes; and celebrities will rarely say anything controversial so as not to jeopardize future movie roles; athletes must also bite their tongues in the interest of self-preservation. Instead of votes or movie roles, athletes watch what they say so as to stay on the good side of the media, of the fans, of the coaching and management staff, and last but not least on contracts and endorsement deals. I am definitely not insinuating that the bulk of NBA athletes agree with Tim Hardaway’s comments, although there are likely a few. I am simply saying that one has to take the comments of NBA players with a grain of salt, because you can never be sure what is driving and motivating them.
Tiger Woods is a good example. He is Nike’s dream client. A recognizable face, an astonishing game, intensity and charisma on the golf course, and interviews that will make you fall asleep. If you watch these interviews, he usually will say some variation of the same thing every single time. Even when faced with tough questions that may result in some controversy, he will cleverly sidestep it in order to not take a side. This is what Nike wants. Controversial comments such as Hardaway’s alienate large segments of the public. Nike wants Tiger to stay neutral so as not to alienate anybody, hence selling more products. Tiger feels that if he helps Nike sell more products, then they are more likely to keep him as a client. See how it works?
This is why for all of the politically correct, seemingly tolerant, and accepting comments by NBA players in the wake of Amaechi’s surprise announcement; one has to wonder if some of these players are only thinking about the bottom line. If they are carefully weighing their words.
Let me make myself clear once again. In no way am I saying that all of the lovey dovey talk is a hoax. I truly believe that many NBA players would openly accept a gay teammate, especially those who come from large, diverse cosmopolitan cities where differences are celebrated and embraced. Amaechi has been quoted as saying that he thinks a city like Toronto would openly accept a gay NBA player. I read a very touching and heartwarming story about Andrei Kirilenko (still playing for the Jazz), who was teammates with Amaechi when this story happened.
It was New Years Eve, and Andrei was hosting a party. Clearly sensing something in Amaechi that others may not have, he sent him a text message that Amaechi later said “brought tears to his eyes”. The message read “Please come, John. You are welcome to bring your partner, if you have one, someone special to you. Who it is makes no difference to me.” Amaechi already had plans and couldn’t make it, but he still sent Andrei a $500 bottle of champagne for his kind gesture. I truly believe that there are many other current NBA players whose reaction would mirror Andrei’s.
Conversely, I also feel that there would be many NBA players whose reactions would be more like Hardaway’s than Kirilenko’s. The US (and Canada) still has a lot to work on in terms of accepting people who are different. Racism and homophobia continue to be chronic problems in many parts of both countries. Moreover, the NBA locker room (not that I’ve ever been in one) is likely a place of alpha-male machismo. Not exactly the ideal environment for a gay person to co-exist.
Amaechi was not a superstar. He never won a ring, and he was never the top player on his team. But he has taught us something. He has taught us that all types of people play this game. And that even in modern society, there still exists some pressure among NBA players to hide any sort of gay or effeminate behaviour (otherwise Amaechi would have come out while still in the league).
And Hardaway's words have also taught us something. They have taught us that we have a long way to go in our society towards respect and tolerance. They also present a conundrum. If NBA players were hesitant to appear homophobic in the public eye before Hardaway’s comments, then they must be seriously scared now in the post-Hardaway world. So therefore it is near impossible to gauge how an openly gay NBA player would be accepted if every NBA player now just spouts stock answers.
To be honest, I truly don’t see a current NBA player coming out of the closet in the near future. Don’t bet on it happening. There is no doubt in my mind that a gay man concealing his sexuality among a group of alpha males could possibly be morally destructive. Therefore, I would sincerely hope that a gay NBA player would have the courage and conviction to come out while still in the league. And while I’m hoping, let’s hope to see him accepted by his teammates for who he is.
Up until this aquisition, the Raps were often written off as a good jump shooting team with little to no toughness. Pundits were constantly (perhaps with good reason) labeling them as “soft”. Defensive toughness is the kind of thing that allows teams to leave the realm of pretenders and to enter the world of contenders. During the off season, they finally aquired it. Once a truly elite power forward, he has regressed in the past few years while undergoing surgery on his leg. Armed with a fresh start as well as a healthy leg, O'Neal has something to prove to his detractors who mostly see this when they think of him. The “Malice at the Palace” was clearly an unnecessary and scary incident, one that will always be a black eye for NBA league marketers and gave Mr. Stern fits. Yet after the brawl, nobody would dare label the Pacers a “soft” team. O'Neal acted with brashness, to be sure, but he did stand up for his teammates. We have never had a figure like O'Neal in the low block as well as in the locker room, and – if he stays healthy- will give this team a defensive presence unprecedented in Raptors history, as well as some much-needed toughness and swagger. And you can be sure that, if confronted by the same situation in Toronto that happened in Detroit, he will show a tad more self-control. Check out this vid for a more mature, yet no less motivated Mr. O'Neal:
Expect him to be a defensive anchor, a big rebounder, a solid shot blocker, a scoring threat, and perhaps most importantly, an enforcer.
A Recently Turned Bonafide Superstar in Chris Bosh
For the past 2-3 years, Chris Bosh has been an elite power forward in this league. He has always had the conditioning, the quick first step, a reliable jump shot, the leadership qualities, and a work ethic to be envied. But something seems a little different this time around and we have his integral play in this summers US Olympic teams gold medal campaign to thank. Not only was Bosh an important piece of this summers “Redeem Team”, but he started every game, was integral as a communicator on defence, as a consistent threat on offence, and was rewarded with high praise from the Kobes and Lebrons of this world. This experience (and plays like this) have done wonders for the confidence of Bosh. He seems to have more of a bounce to his step, is vastly improved in terms of self-confidence, is displaying more vocal and effective leadership, and has clearly become far more relevant defensively. Basically, he and the rest of the world finally realize just how good he really is. Now we can all add the words “bonafide” to precede Chris Bosh the superstar.
Expect him to play like one this year.
Just for fun, here's a taste of Chris Bosh the comedian:
Lack of Tension and Ego at the Point Guard Spot
Nothing undoes a team quite like infighting and conflict between teamates and/or coaches. TJ Ford, notwithstanding his impressive skills and quickness, was a piece that needed to be moved. The “PG 1A and 1B experiment” (i.e. minute-sharing between Ford and Calderon), while effective for so long, finally lost its legs when Ford publicly sulked about being replaced as the starter. Coming in off the bench and doing his best impression of He Who Shall Not Be Named was too much of a chemistry killer to be worth keeping around. One of them had to be moved. The decision was made easier by Calderon's apparent team-first attitude, his wildly efficient statistics, and his on-court chemistry with Mr. Bosh. Fast forward to the present, we now have Jose Calderon as the face of the position, readying himself to show his teammates, coaching staff, and fans around the world what he can do with the added responsibility. Numero Ocho has suddenly become Numero Uno.
Expect him to average a near double double in points and assists and make a serious run for his first ever All-Star spot. Oh, and hopefully, we'll see a bit more of this:
Paying attention to political events in the last decade or so, one cannot help but notice something strange and disconcerting about American (and Canadian at that) election time. One would not be going out on a limb to say that elections are predominantly about image. It is about casting one's candidate in a way that will appeal to, and ultimately propel the maximum number of citizens to get out and vote. Over the years, elections have become more and more about image and less and less about actual policies. You know, those ideas, plans, and strategies the candidates have for running the country if elected. The important stuff, right?
Recently, what with the onslaught of our senses from Youtube and the news, citizens are usually only privy to certain sound bites, oftentimes not lasting longer than 10 seconds. This reality is partly due to the fact that the candidates (perhaps partially rightly so) don't expect much out of their citizens. They feel that sound bites will affect us more given our ever-shortening attention spans. It is also a strategy being used by the candidates themselves, because it allows them to make a strong impression on their citizens without really doing or saying anything substantive. Sarah Palins “joke” about the difference between a pit bull and a hockey mom allowed her to show off her grit, determination, and sense of humour. Obama's “yes we can”speech, followed by a music videofeaturing an assortment of B-list entertainers allowed him to paint himself as a beacon of hope and change. George Bush saying that “we're gonna smoke em out” showed the country that they have strong, brave, and decisive leadership at the top running this thing. John McCain constantly reminding people that he was a POW. By the way, if I were pressed to say whether this was a detriment or an advantage, I'd probably say the former. Wouldn't you? The point is that these moments remain etched in peoples minds, and for better or worse, have huge impacts on whose ticket they punch come election day. Charlie Sheen said in “Wall Street” that “life comes down to a few moments”. What a great way to also describe US politics. Unfortunately, people will often cast their ballots based on a “few moments” that succeed in defining a candidate for them.
Nobody likes long and drawn out explanations. People tend more for the snappy, to the point, and often frustatingly vague sweeping statements. For some inexplicable reason, pragmatic, sensible, and intelligent speeches are too much for many. People get bored. These moments, unfortunately, do not win elections. These moments often lead the candidate to be labeled “elitist” or “overly-intellectual”.
Which leads me to the crux of this piece: Are these bad qualities? The quick answer is, they shouldn't be. But unfortunately, in one of the most personally disappointing developments in elections, they often are. Intelligence in terms of understanding the ridiculously complex international social, cultural, and economic system should not only be sought for, but it should be mandatory. Being president is not an easy job and requires a keen intellect at the very least. Therefore, it is unfortunate that elections are being decided with large swaths of the population believing that intelligence and sophistication are, in fact, poor qualities for the leader of the free world to have. These people love their leaders decisive, down to earth, and “just like you and me”. I don't know about you, but I am not ready to be president. Neither are my friends. The reason why we hold elections is so that we can elect the most qualified person for the job. Not so that we can choose someone "just like you and me". So how could a presidential candidate who reminds you of “your good buddy Joe”, is a down to earth decisive “straight talker” possibly be something you look for in a leader? I mean, isn't decisiveness just a euphemism for hard-headedness, for stubborness, and for quick (and therefore potentially flawed) decision-making.
Nobody likes a labourer. Many Americans (i.e. Bush 2004 supporters) want somebody who has the ability to make decisions immediately, somebody who “will not blink”. Many of them clearly do not see the logic behind the idea that a carefully formulated, well thought-out, rational, pragmatic, and tempered response to an issue will more likely than not, yield a more positive outcome for all. Stephen Colbert once told Bush that he was like him because they both spoke “from the gut”. Clearly not noticing the sarcastic nature of the whole ordeal, Bush laughed along. But little by little, he realized that Colbert was in fact attacking him for making decisions that not only affect the citizens of America, but the world as a whole, “without blinking”. Sarah Palin, in her now infamous interview with Katie Couric, used those exact same words. The dogma that has defined America for the past 8 or so years has been one that says that compassion, intellectualism, and dragging ones feet are a sign of weakness and therefore, unpatriotic. The idea that we cannot, nor will we ever show weakness to our enemies has been a cornerstone of recent US political activity. Personally, I would take a pragmatic solution, (one that is actually based on the realistic current international climate rather than losing face), from an elitist intellectual sophisticate who sips Chai Tea Lattes over one from someone who may be more “decisive” in his thinking anyday. Let's hope Americans agree with me this time around.
What does the average person think of when he/she thinks of France? Great food? Great wine? Beautiful varied scenery? A certain relaxedness among the populace?
All of these things being true, the one that will be examined here is the last one. In this respect, when compared to most of the other modern western industrialized nations (and possibly the entire world), France is truly unique.
I have lived in France for almost a year now. I worked with them at a ski station in the Alps for six months during “la saison d'hiver”. I ate all my meals with them, spent most days at work with them, hit the slopes with them, and of course, our “soirees” were all spent together. They came from all over the country, from as far north as Eperleques, to the Bretagne region, as well as many scattered across Southern France. They all had their own unique stories. There were women, men, teenagers, young adults, as well as punks, preps, goths, hippies...the whole gamut. But in spite of all of these differences, they held one thing in common:
A high held appreciation for “living the good life”.
None of them let work dictate or dominate their lives. They did not live to work, but rather they worked to live. This approach to life seems to manifest itself across the entire country. It is almost primordial. And one could argue, uniquely and quintessentially French.
Here are a few examples:
The French receive more vacation time than the vast majority of modern nations. A nation-wide minimum of 5 weeks paid vacation a year is granted to each and every working French citizen. Compare these to 2 weeks in the States and in Japan.
Sundays, out of a desire and a need among them to spend time with loved ones or to simply relax, are pretty much always dead. Save for a few restaurants, large supermarkets which can be open Sunday mornings, and a small collection of others, everything is closed. While this can pose inconveniences for others, a day of real rest must do wonders for mental health and give one time to slow down a little bit to “smell the roses”. Sundays in France are often spent by crowding the whole family around the table for a huge lunch, likely followed by some siestas. I heard from one friend here that his family's sunday lunches could last up to 6 hours on end!
Most stores will close for 2-3 hours during the afternoon. This gives the French a relatively luxurious afternoon break to eat a healthy and balanced lunch, rarely lacking the glass of rose and the espresso. It is a common concern among doctors that many people simply eat too fast. This can cause stress and bad digestion. Maybe the French have it right taking their time, discussing, laughing, and savouring every bite and taste. It sure beats eating at the desk!
French people tend to retire much younger than most of the world. For example, currently, SNCF workers are consistently retiring in their early 50s with a full pension including all the benefits to boot! This gives many french people even more time after their working days to vacation, relax, and basically to enjoy life after work.
35 hour work weeks in France are not just common; they're the law! Currently, it is illegal to work more than 35 hours a week in France. Additional hours do not necessarily translate to additonal pay so there is no incentive to go over the limit. I once met somebody who, because he worked over 35 hours a week before the law was instilled, is now able to recuperate those hours. This basically means that 31 hour work weeks became the norm for him! One of the most impressive things about this phenomenon (unique to France) is that as research has shown, productivity per hour in France is higher than it is in the States. One can surmise from this that when they are working, they are truly working hard and efficiently. But when they are off, they are truly off, not wanting to be bothered with anything that will even remind them of work.
I could go on. Maternity leave is very generous. Doctors will often recommend patients to take a fairly long break off work in order to fully recuperate at their own pace. Nothing is rushed in France.
A picture perfect example would be one that I witnessed myself with my own eyes. I was walking down a market street near Sarlat, France around lunch-time a couple of weeks back. My aunt stopped to admire (and possibly purchase) a tablecloth.
“How much is this?” she asked, clearly showing interest in a purchase.
This was the storekeepers reply: “I'm sorry. It's lunchtime right now. I was just going to sit down at the table. Please come back in 2 hours.”
A bit stupefied that she would not delay lunch for a few minutes to make a sale, the only words my aunt could find were “Bon Appetit.”
Sometimes, I think the French have it right. They have struck a delicate balance between work and leisure. Between the grind of personal goals and responsibilities and the desire to simply enjoy life, to relax. The best thing about this balance is that it actually works. And even better, it is contagious. I know I'm starting to take longer lunch breaks. I mean, what's the rush?
So it's been about 5 days since we touched down in Morocco. So I figured it was time to get some of my thoughts down on paper. We have been extremely busy, always in the process of either visiting something or planning our next move so free time has remained a luxury.
We arrived at the airport of Marrakesh at around 10 pm Morocco time and went directly to our hotel. Having already read about the culture, I knew that bargaining was not only suggested, but you were a full out sucker if you didn't get yourself into the game. But we were tired so we accepted the first price that the taxi driver offered. About 7 euros each so nothing too excessive. Our day was FILLED with public transportation so when we finally touched down (my first time on African soil, by the way), we were pretty wiped.
The people
Let me tell you that of all the countries that I've visited (quite a few), I would put Moroccans at near the top of the list in terms of friendliness. I'm not naive. I do realize that their nicety is often spurred on by their desire to make a buck, but I rest convinced that they are a kind, open, hospitable, and warm hearted people. We have been in Morocco for only 5 days and have already been invited into the homes of strangers 3 times! While I did read about this traditional Moroccan hospitality, it was a pleasant surprise to actually experience it. This, I cannot say for any other country that I've visited:
The Japanese were extremely helpful and friendly with offering directions (usually accompanying until arrival) but never was I invited into a Japanese home.
The Chinese that I worked were also very helpful, but in the 2 months I spent there, working with them, eating with them, and going out for drinks with them, did I ever see one of their homes.
One of the Visits
The prettiest site so far would have to be the Cascades d'Ouzoud, one of the most beautiful waterfalls I've ever seen and definitely a must see if you ever come to Morocco. I would even go as far to describe the area as 'video game-like', specifically one of the levels from Mario Kart 64. We took the trail from our Ryad to go check out the waterfall from various viewpoints.
The waterfall zooms down to a river where (unless you want to go swimming in arguably dirty water) the two banks are inaccessible from each other. The only other and far hygienic option is to take one of the boats manned by a Moroccan, who will charge you about 10 dirhams (1 euro) for the 30 second trip. We took the boat to the other side, started up the trail, and after about 15 minutes of hard uphill climbing, we were lost. We seemed to had lost all of the tourists and the only life around were the magot monkeys and probably snakes (which we didn't see thank god). We kept walking in the hopes that we would stumble across someone and finally came across a Berber house. Using my limited knowledge of the people and culture here, the Berbers are a group in Morocco that are often relegated to Berber villages given that they do not receive all of the advantages that the rest of Moroccans receive. They are given the short end of the stick.
Anyway, we asked the first person we saw and she immediately invited us in to see drink a tea and see their traditional Berber home. We sat down on deteriorating woven stools. The mother served us mint tea, bread, and butter and we spent the next 15 minutes enjoying our tea and swiping at bugs. Not much was said given the mother's lack of French or English, but I think everyone felt at ease nonetheless. Now living in a traditional house like that is something that I would have some difficulties with, given my relatively prosperous upbringing. But seeing the way that the poorer rural population live in Morocco was very interesting. We saw the daughter (who spoke French fluently), the father (who spoke French very well), and the mother (who spoke maybe 3 words). Oh, and they had about 5 goats.
After the tea, the father invited us into his 'room' to smoke with him and watch his Arabic music videos. Seriously, I didn't even smoke but his videos reminded me so much of Borat! The mustachioed, suit toting Arab men singing their traditional songs was enough to plant images of 'my wife!' and shitting in plastic bag in my mind. He smoked his hash (very common in Morocco), and we watched his video in silence. After that, he led us all the way back to our Riad. We didn't say a word the entire trip which lasted about 10 minutes over some fairly treacherous terrain. Oh, and he was in bare feet.
And perhaps most surprisingly, he didn't ask us for any compensation for his directions. Having already been assaulted by vendors in Marrakesh; having payed for a impromptu tour of the medina by someone who just started walking and talking with us; having been ordered to pay a few dirhams after taking a picture of someone; this family was a pleasant surprise. Authentic Moroccan hospitality!
Another little word on the people. Despite all of the aggressive selling; despite the gentleman who asked me adamantly to pay for a picture I had taken; and despite each outdoor restaurant at Place Jemaa El F'na literally grabbing us and stopping just short of putting our butts IN the seats; I have never felt physically threatened by any Moroccan and from all that I have seen, I am convinced that they are a warm and friendly people by nature. But who just want to make a buck like the rest of the world.
Allez! C'est parti! Voila, mesdames et monsieurs, mon premier blog en francais. Soyez patients et comprennent que je vais faire les fautes d'ortographes etc. Mais c'est bon pour moi de pratiquer la langue qui m'a apporter ici; qui m'a donner beaucoup de plaisirs et qui m'a frustre a la meme temps pendant les dernier six mois.
La, on vient de quitter Marseille. C'etait une ville que j'avais vraiment envie to voir. Je crois que c'etait a cause de mon ancienne enseignante de francais a Nice qui a parle avec beaucoup d'enthousiasme de Marseille. En bref, elle nous a dit que Marseille etait, dans plusieurs de sens, le contraire de Paris. Paris (pas tout les quartiers) est plutot bourgeois; Marseille, acceptante. Paris est hyper tourisitique. Pourtant que Marseille devienne plus et plus touristique, elle reste la ville des Marseillais. Elle nous a aussi dit avec beaucoup d'energie que Marseille est une ville qui bouge. Elle voulait dire qu'a Marseille, le niveau de la culture, de la musique, de la poesie, de la creativite en general est tres sophistiquee.
J'ai bien aime la ville. Avant de venir, j'ai entendu de pal mal de monde que c'etait une ville violente, avec les jeunes hors controlles. Pourtant, j'ai dit que je vais me joindre avec les jeunes et les aider a bruler les voitures des flic (en rigolant, bien sur). Mais j'etais surpris. Jamais a Marseille est-ce que j'ai senti en danger. Tout le monde qu'on a demande pour les conseils etait tres prêt a nous aider. Les calanques etaient tres jolies! On a marche pour environ 6 heures. C'etait vraiment trop et on etait completement creves a la fin. Je vous jure! Mais, on avait pas le choix. Vu que quelqu'un nous a laisse la sans voiture, on avait une seule route a prendre pour s'en sortir. Six heures plus tard et juste quand stock d'eau existait plus, on est arrive.
Le lendemain, on est alle au match de foot au Stade Velodrome. Apres avoir passe plus que 6 mois en France, je me suis rendu compte vite fait que la France (et l'Europe) etait obsedee par le foot. Par rapport au basket, c'est un sport nul mais quand meme, j'aime bien. Dans ma ville au Canada, Toronto, elle vienne d'avoir un equipe de foot, Toronto FC. Je suis alle a quelque matchs l'ete derniere et vu que Toronto est un peu rempli par les immigres d'Europe, naturellement, un equipe de foot les ont attire, mais d'une force! Chaque match est rempli. Les fans, ils preparent les banderoles. Ils chantent les chansons. Ils lancent les trucs a les visiteurs. Ils mangent et boivent sur le parking avant le match. Ils voyagent avec l'equipe pour les soutenir. Bref, ils ont apporter l'esprit de l'Europe avec eux. Le match au Velodrome avait beaucoup des meme trucs, mais beaucoup plus prononce. Premierement, il y avait 60,000 personnes au lieu de 12. Il y avait plus de banderoles et les chansons etaient beaucoup plus organise et bruyant. L'atmosphere dans le stade etait incroyable. Laisse tomber! C'etait enorme! Une chose que j'ai trouve bizarre etait le fait qu'ils ont pas servi du tout l'alcohol! Bizarre! Il ont du avoir quelques incidents de violence qui etaient accentues par l'alcohol. C'est pas grave. On a bu les pastis apres le match pour 2 euros chacun.
Donc, voilà. Premier essaie en francais. Ca ne va pas etre le dernier.
I watch a lot of films. Inevitably, I watch a lot of bad films. However, every now and then, one will come along that impresses me so much that I simply cannot stop playing it over and over in my head. A film that really hits me hard. This is a rare phenomenon and I felt compelled to write about my last experience with it.
The film, “Into the Wild”, concerns a young recently graduated guy who, fed up with society and all its hypocrisies, decides to take off on his own, actually into the wild. He meets many people along his journey, with all of these events culminating with him alone in the middle of nowhere in Alaska. The film was written and shot by Sean Penn, (sometimes a little too “Hollywood Liberal” for me) who does a fantastic job. The shots of the wild north, of the glances between characters, of the writing on the screen of the man's journal, and of the incorporation of the soundtrack into the film is something to be lauded. Eddie Vedder (frontman of Pearl Jam) wrote the majority of the songs with the film in mind, and it is safe to say that I would not be writing this had Mr. Vedder not been involved. His music and lyrics bring the movie to life and give it an isolated yet human feel. Could not have been scored better.
It is hard to say why this movie affected me in this way. Maybe it is because I sometimes feel like the main character does; sick of fake smiles and handshakes, pressures of life (both social and professional). There must be many people with these feelings, but in this film (based on a real story), our main character does something about it. Rather than adapting, he invents. Rather than tolerating, he redefines himself. Rather than living up to the expectations of his family, he creates his own.
It is truly a beautiful and touching film from start to finish. Although a tad long (almost 2.5 hrs.), the time will fly by. I was enthralled with the scenery, the characters, and the fusion of all that with the potent songwriting. I have Eddie Vedder as much to thank as I do Sean Penn. So, my friends, go “into the wild”. You may even go native.
To foreigners all over the world, the French can mean a whole lot of things. The mere mention of the word is enough for some people (for better or worse) to form a sharp image in their heads. Try these on for size:
These, my fellow audience, are nothing but ignorant stereotypes. Even for people who have visited France (usually just Paris) could conceivably come home with these stereotypes more strongly ingrained in their psyches. Sure, French people eat a lot of baguettes! Sure, there have been some highly influential French philosophers “a l'epoque”! Sure, there are some French snobs! As if there are not these types everywhere across the world! And yes, my friends, even Canadians!
International media (predominantly American, let's face it), portray the French as in love with themselves and stuck in their own French culture, not even bothering to look elsewhere. Need some examples? Almost every animated Disney movie has one. The candle and Gaston in Beauty and the Beast for example. The Simpsons, South Park among others do a fine job as well of including a French stereotype every now and then. Sure, Canadians, Brits, and many others suffer from the same preconceptions but I submit that the French have it worst. As the French say, these are “les conneries”!
For someone who has been in France for 6 months, a little bit all over, and (most importantly) someone who has met many different French people from all over this great country, I can tell you all that the stereotypes are mostly entirely made up. Some examples and attempts at quelling them:
The French are “inward looking”
I suppose that many groups are guilty of this but again, the French are unfairly portrayed as the kings of self-adulation. Of the French people that I have met here, there have been a majority who either have travelled extensively, or plan to. All over the world and for long stretches of time. New Zealand, Scotland, Canada, Japan, and Congo to name a few. This is made perhaps more impressive given that the welcome for French people around the world (mostly speaking about the States) would not be characterized as “warm” or “with open arms”. Not only do they travel a lot, but I have found that, to a large degree, they sincerely care and stay informed about global events from all over the often troubled and conflicted world. They are not constantly looking inward to their accordions and baguettes but rather conversely, outward.
The French don't respect the non-French
OK, this is slightly connected to the previous topic but worth a little discussion. Basically, all of the French people whom I have met (who come from all over France usually minus Paris) are supportive, helpful, warm, funny, and welcoming. They often understand what it is like to be a foreigner in a foreign land and often try to aid these people along their way. There were some who warned me upon deciding to come to France that the people would not be welcoming, that they would be so engrossed in their own French lives that they wouldn't care a lick about me. I am here to say that this has turned out to be quite the opposite.
So the question begs. Why this negative, sometimes harsh portrayal of France from many (not all) people across this world? Are they jealous? After all, France does boast a varied climate, great food, a strong socialist like government, varied scenery from the Pyrenees Mountains to the Mediterranean Sea to the French Alps. Would you leave here? And yet they do, and it is something that is not often enough discussed and acknowledged.
I am sure that many of you have run into this problem before. After all, many many jobs require of you a lot of um sitting around? Looking pretty? Helping people every once in awhile? Well, for me, this "once in a while" has turned into little to nothing today. Oops, just got a phone call. That alleviated my boredom for approximately 28 seconds. But seriously, my jobs not bad. I get to practice my french all the time which is really helpful. If I was vacuuming or cleaning toilets, my french skills would remain pretty stagnant. And I also look pretty damn flashy in my suit! Anyway, not sure if anyone reads this (haha) but a big hug to everyone out there! Spread the love! YES WE CAN! Haha. I'm a fan of Obama. A plus!
