Monday, April 12, 2010

The Girl who silenced the world for 5 minutes



This is one of the best speeches I have ever heard. A perfect mix of writing and delivery.  Severn Suzuki, A Canadian 13 year old speaks at A UN conference on environment and development. 
Severn is the daughter of David Suzuki, and she is now a TV host, speaker, and environmental activist.

Severn Cullis-Suzuki on Wikipedia

Sunday, April 11, 2010

The Gordon Bombays are now on MySpace!

 Hi all!  As some of you know, I have been playing bass and singing with the band formerly known as A Bunch of Guys... it's the Gordon Bombays! And if that don't suit you, just call us the Bombay Five.
We are starting the page out with three acoustic recordings without Lucas on drums.  Sacha, Ryan, and I all sing at some point.

Sacha - rhythm guitar and lead vocals
Ryan - lead guitar, bongo and vocals
Josh - bass and reggae vocals
Geert - reggae bass and trumpet (and band artist)
Lucas - drums.

Check us out!
The Gordon Bombays on MySpace

We are also on youtube.  Here are links to three songs we performed live.
The Gordon Bombays - Horse With No Name
The Gordon Bombays - One Week
The Gordon Bombays - The Joker

Enjoy!  Look forward to better recordings with Lucas on drums. Coming soon!

Saturday, April 10, 2010

Wiener Schnitzels and asparagus

So today while I was out checking the local food market, and I found some really fresh asparagus.  I picked up a bundle and got a wiener schnitzel from the market next door.  I decided to invite my buddy Ryan so we could jam out a bit and learn some new songs, but also so we could chat food.  Just like me, Ryan has experience working in a kitchen.  So it is a really great time to be able to talk the craft.  In such a small room with only an electric element BBQ and limited table space, preparing food here is a dramatic dance performance with twists and turns, much juggling of pans.  But in the end all came out quite well.  Let me tell you quickly how I did it all.
Timing is key when preparing a dish with several steps involved.  First boil the peeled and roughly cut potatoes in salted water, adding a small bit of beef or pork stock.  Heat up the pan for the asparagus, with a small bit of olive oil and a bit of butter.  Wait until the pan is quite hot (though not so hot that it smokes or browns the butter!), and add 1/3 cup of brunoise (diced) shallots and fry briefly. In a cup, mix 1/3 cup of water with beef bouillon (or use actual beef stock).  Add this to the frying pan, put your asparagus in, and cover with a crack open.  The asparagus should only be 15-20% under the liquid.  (Optional: add a little extra butter to the pan now.)  Let it simmer for about 5 minutes, and check the softness of the asparagus with your (clean) finger.
(semi-hard) Boil 2 eggs for 9 minutes. Peel and cool them in water, then mash them in a bowl with a fork. Set aside.
As that's going, the potatoes will be ready to drain.  After drained, you must add 1.5-2 tbsp of butter (depending on amount of potatoes).  Also add some salt, fine-ground white pepper, a dash of nutmeg. Mash together.  If it is too dry add a small amount of the bouillon from the asparagus.  
Heat up a wok or large frying pan with some butter.  Add 1-2 pieces of thick, brunoise (small cubed) bacon.  Also add brunoise (diced) shallots. When the bacon and shallots are fried in the pan, add the mashed potato. Mix well and don't let it burn! Don't fry for too long, just enough to mix it well and season it with extra pepper or salt.
When the asparagus feels right, I then transfer it to a hot dish to wait for the rest.  I clean off the pan and reheat it.  This time with a little bit of butter and a little bit of olive oil. Shallow fry the wiener schnitzel (which you can usually buy prepared and breaded).
Cut a lemon in half, take off the ends, and cut a cross through the middle from the edges.  This will take out many of the seeds. This is for the diner to squeeze over the schnitzel.
As the schnitzel is frying, heat another pan (preferably a small deep frying pan or saucepan).  Add butter (clarified butter if you have it handy!). Melt till bubbling, but not brown.  Add crumbled egg, dash of salt, and a grind of pepper. Put this on top of the asparagus when you prepare the dish.  Before doing so, though, make sure you add some of the juice and the diced shallots onto the asparagus.  

Prepare your dishes on (hot) plates. Garnish potatoes with chopped parsley or chives.  Make it look nice. Clean the edges. Serve with a sweet white wine.  The half lemon is to squeeze over the schnitzel.

Take a picture and post it as a response!  And ENJOY!

Chef Josh

Thursday, April 8, 2010

Web 2.0: The New History

    Many people who read this blog probably use Facebook, Twitter, or some other online network that uses the "web 2.0" model of user action and interaction.  Consider Facebook as a map to the willing actions of each user.  This is, in the end, the most intimate documentation of history ever used.  Now our history is not only offered to us through the examination of artifacts, records and accounts often controlled by the ruling few, but instead it is offered to us through digital artifacts, accounts of the momentary thoughts, interests, and actions of individual human beings.  Social networking sites such as Facebook and Twitter go about collecting, saving, and sharing data, effectively creating a library of the lives of every one of its members. 
    So now our future actions will be directed by a historical record not chosen by a ruling interest, but by each individual member who is willing to take part in the account.  We have a record that shows the specific interests and activities of millions of individual users.  Herein lays the greatest potential of such a technology: like no other historical medium, it gives each person the chance to write his or her self into the history books.  Not to mention the possibilities that data trend analysis yields to policy makers, marketing interests, and so on.
    When used properly, to its fullest potential, it provides the conduit for a person to effectively change history, as well.  Because it is an interactive system, one can influence the actions of others, as well as form social groups and push specific interests.  Organizations are now formed between people of all walks of life, and according to the interests of the individuals.  Dog lovers unite, as do supporters of a specific political or religious group.  So not only is Facebook a medium for the historical record, it is also a medium for influence and power. 
   On a civic level, it is a  more democratic medium for finding out what citizens want than pre-Web 2.0 forms of data collection.  It could effectively give us the shape of democracy to come.  Not only is the Facebook model a good way of finding out the real opinions of the user-citizens, it is also a grounds for building social groups and a sense of community.  Already policy makers have begun to grasp the potential of Web 2.0: we see political leaders giving speeches online and even taking video-response interviews, we see facebook pages and twitters from the heads of state. Politicians are writing their own blogs, parties are building membership. 

    Watch as this new form of interaction gradually permeates all of our activities.  We will move from Web 2.0 to Life 2.0.  What we do, think and say will be shared with the world more than ever.

Thursday, April 1, 2010

On Being and Action - Part One

In the following series of blogs I will be discussing all those big questions concerning the nature of the universe and its creation, along with the nature of free will and the possibility of the existence of god(s).  Open your mind and follow along.  If nothing else, this discourse will at least give you a chance to see the bigger picture.  Enjoy, and thanks for reading.

There are two opposing forces that govern every action that takes place in the universe.  On the one hand, there is a positive, creative force by which all things come into being and increase their order and involved relation to each other.  On the other hand there is a negative, destructive force which brings the current state of things to an end and generally decreases the orderly relation of all things to other things. 

That aspect which is commonly attributed to human being alone, i.e., free will, or the will to choose, at any point, the direction of ones actions, is in fact a law that holds for all things.  Free will is seen not only in the actions of human beings, but in the will of all events of existence.  Take for instance the movement we have recently been describing as the big bang.  This movement , as we would have it, is a movement from the extreme unity of a singular entity into the ever-widening universe.  This ever-widening is like the continual expanding of a balloon: as you blow the balloon larger and larger, the patterns on the surface of the balloon continually expand.  Things move apart, patterns get wider, and fragments disperse.  If we take the idea of entropy seriously, then this expansion implicitly involves a movement toward disorder.  Not only are the patterns of the universe expanding, they are in fact deteriorating.  Patterns of the way things once were are no longer recognizable patterns.  The links between those fragments of the original unity continue to decrease.

Such a trend of the activity of the universe should be considered as an example of a negative, destructive force.  And yet, just as I have explained that such a force is always coinciding with an opposing force of positive creation, it is reasonable to imagine that the movement which we describe with the big bang theory also has its opposing movement or force.  If the movement by which all the universe follows is one of entropy, then there must also be an opposite movement: a movement by which all things move from infinite fragmentation, infinite separation, towards unity and complete organization.  If there are clear patterns in the universe which tend by a law of entropy to decrease in their organization, then there must also be some sort of movement which increases organization and moves all fragments toward a singular unity.

The way I have been discussing these opposing trends is generally cosmological: it focuses on the 'big' things of existence.  But these trends can also be seen on the level of the tendencies of living beings, whatever 'living' means in particular. Even the phenomena of life and of death could be described as two instantiations of these two sides of all action.  However, can we not see the same two trends in human activity itself?  Look at those two sides to free will: if considered in the most general terms, the choice that is to be made at every moment is either a yes or a no.  Do it, or not do it?  Make it or not make it?  And so on.  Even in those cases where there are many options to choose from, one always chooses to either go or not go in which ever direction they choose. 

Take for instance the choice to either build something up or break something down.  Such is a very basic general movement observed in the actions of human beings.  One  might choose to build up systems of value by which one brings things together and increases the "orderliness" of the things around him, or one might choose activities which lead to a decrease of order: war is a very potent example of this, for it is inherently an action which moves to decrease the order of a particular set of things.  For example, the actions of war in a particular region tend to decrease the current order present in that place.  Yet, such an example gives us an opportunity to see a possible explanation of the wider relation between these two movements.  War is always a force of destruction directed by another force: that of order.  In war, the destruction of one entity or region is always directed by an urge to increase or create the order of another entity.  When a country invades its neighbor, it wreaks havoc with the intention of benefiting the order of the invading country.  If we take this example as a indicative of a wider tendency of the universe, then we can safely assume, at the least, that any action which tends toward destruction is directed by an opposing action of ordering or creation. 

It should be noted that the way we have been describing this so far is quite one-sided, for it assumes, if you will, that the chicken precedes the egg.  We cannot safely assume that the destructive is always ordered by the constructive.  We must also consider the possibility of the opposite: that the constructive, likewise, is a movement directed by the deconstructive.  Take again the example of war.  War is not simply a willing to decrease order.  Rather, it takes huge amounts of movements toward order in order to carry out the destructive actions of war.  Armies must be organized, bureaucracies must be established, even "rules of war" are often put in place to ensure that the very effort is held within the control of the acting entity.  Tactics are developed.  And what are war tactics if not a momentary organizing of "things" for the sake of the destruction of other "things"?  We must consider the macroscopic instance of this trend.