Home is where the remote control is!

When most people purchase a property, they become slaves to that property – working in the garden, repairing a poor garage door, or retiling the bathroom. I have not done any of the above. What I have done is become a slave to HGTV – the Home and Garden Television station in Canada. This station has it all – shows about buying a home, selling a home, redecorating a home, repairing a home, a reality show on hosting a designing show, a show on landscaping and a show on finding the right pet for your home. Ok, I made this last one up, but no doubt, in little time, the show will exist.

My fascination with the station is bothersome in that I am wasting time, but it is also incredibly gratifying to the voyeur in me. Essentially the viewer is allowed to go along for the ride, so to speak. Selling or buying a home is certainly one of the biggest decisions that anyone will make in their life. What I’ve come to realize is that so many houses are bought and sold everyday. Is it any wonder that there is a station dedicated solely to its purpose? For goodness sakes, there is a golf channel, so why shouldn’t there be a channel dedicated to our most valuable asset?

The shows themselves are wildly entertaining. They are successful, in my opinion, for four reasons:

1. Relatability: even if you have not purchased a home, it is very easy to relate to the people on the show; they are regular people doing regular things. In fact, many of the shows depict houses in such poor condition that they allow the viewer to feel good about their own shabby abode.
2. Fantasy: everyone has dreams. Not to be contrite, but HGTV honestly allows you to achieve your goals. Many of shows have inspirational ideas that you can achieve by affordable means. As a complete design virgin who wouldn’t know the difference between a chrysanthemum and a crystal chandelier, it is reassuring to watch morons bumble their way through projects and still end up with beautiful changes to their homes.
3. Opinion counts: Everyone has an opinion, and professional designers are all Howard Sterns when it comes to calling it as they see it. These designers have no qualms about telling little old ladies that the kitchen they have lived in for year’s looks more like the inside of a coffin they will be seeing in a short time. Their brutal honesty and absolute confidence in their own style may sometimes lead you to question their sanity, but will always keep you from flicking the channel. Moreover, I don’t care who you are, you know what you like – whether it is to cheer or jeer, you will tune in to watch these spaces transform.
4. Colourful hosts: Whether it is the brawny arms of Mike Holmes or the flaming personality of Colin and Justin, the hosts of shows are anything but dull. Much like WWE, these guys and gals may be hired for their expertise, but they succeed for their ability to entertain.
   

HGTV may be successful, but it also reflects the greedy and materialistic side of our society. On every single open house show, people walk around a 5-bedroom house and the first thing they have to say is “too small.” A newlywed couple without kids go on the hunt for a new home and when presented with a 3-bedroom, 2-bathroom home, complete with a garage and a backyard, their only response is they won’t have enough space for all their stuff. What stuff?!?!!? Most of these couples currently live in a bachelor apartment of 700 square feet. My next favourite complaint is how infatuated they become with price; especially the sellers. On many home selling shows, people lose out on the sale simply because they are unwilling to drop their price by $1,000. Don’t get me wrong, $1,000 is in and of itself a lot of money, but these people won’t budge. They don’t consider themselves a success unless they get that extra little money. It is bothersome that we have put so much emphasis on such material happiness that every single purchase has the potential of developing into an affront on our own self worth.

The age of innocence - Edith Wharton

Date: May 29, 2007
Recommendation: Perhaps the best romance I have ever read; mind you that is a very short list!

It has crossed my mind, while reading Age of Innocence, that a great novel is nothing more than a good story set in an interesting context. One could even argue that there are many great novels that are little more than poor stories wrapped in beautifully described settings. This, I know realize, is the appeal of Christmas wrapping paper. No matter what your gift is, so long as you wrap it in lovely paper, no one will know the difference.

The age of innocence is, quite frankly, is a love story with very little love, and lots of story; perhaps story is the wrong word as it suggests plot. The plot is fairly pedantic: man is set to marry woman A, man falls in love with woman B, man marries woman A, man tries to forget about woman B but fails, man decides to leave woman A to be with woman B, but along comes C. In this case C = child.

However, the beauty and genius of this novel is in its portrayal of upper class society in late 19th Century New York. Written in 1920, the novel harkens back to an age of innocence, when times simpler and society was strictly defined by parameters of conduct based on one’s place in the social hierarchy. It is, ostensibly, about the old school rich, prior to the dawn of nouveau rich families who will ultimately flaunt conventional rules of “society.”

“…..once more it was borne in on him that marriage was not the safe anchorage he had been taught to think, but a voyage on uncharted seas.”

A prayer for Owen Meany - John Irving

Date: May 23, 2007

Recommendation: Go deep in the count, work the pitcher, and you shall be rewarded with a 3-2 fastball down the center of the plate.

Although I have shared this graphical representation with those at book club, I am much too enamored with it not to show it again here - the y-axis is enjoyment, and the x-axis is number of pages. In blue is Book Club's first book, Midnight's Children, and in red is A Prayer for Owen Meany.

Many literate people consider A Prayer for Owen Meany their favorite book of all time. In wondering why this might be, I have decided to tabulate a comparison between Owen Meany - a Christ-like figure - and Jesus, THE Christ.

1. Book
In a fight with Irving, you can't waste 50 pages to beget anything
Winner: Meany

2. Author
God vs. Irving, since I want in at the pearly gates, better go with the big cheese.
Winner: Jesus

3. Parents
Mary and Joseph are not overly exciting, but at least Jesus seemed to like them; Owen didn't even acknowledge his parents!
Winner: Jesus

4. Career
From everything we know, Jesus was not much of a carpenter, whereas Owen could wield a pretty mean diamond saw!
Winner: Meany

5. Miracles
Not much competition here folks.
Winner: Jesus

6. Lives saved
Meany saves a handful of Vietnamese children; Jesus died to save all humanity - but since non-believers will be thrown in the depths of hell (to get orthodox on their ass), we have to deduct this from Jesus, so, a little too close to call.
Winner: Tie

7. Nightlife
Owen Meany managed to score with Hester the Molester; Dan Brown aside, what action did Jesus ever get?
Winner: Meany

8. Athletics
Jesus walked on water; Owen walked to first base, except that one time, and we know how that one turned out.
Winner: Jesus

9. Academics
Meany was accepted to both Harvard and Yale on full scholarship; Jesus went wandered the world in his formative learning years, from 12 to 30 years (he may as well have gone to York University).
Winner: Meany

10. Conclusion
Too close to call, with 4 categories each and 1 tie. We'll have to go to one last category to figure this one out.

11. Followers
Jesus had the apostles, Owen Meany had John Wheelwright - sorry little guy but 12 virgins beat 1 virgin.
Winner: Jesus, but oh so close!

Anthem - Ayn Rand

Date: May 11, 2007
Recommendation: A beach bum’s version of Atlas Shrugged

When the Modern Library released their best novels of the 20th Century, they also gave readers a chance to vote online. Needless to say, a small contingent of fans dominated the voting, skewing the results in favour of cult authors, such as L. Ron Hubbard, Ayn Rand, and Charles de Lint.

Ayn Rand had 4 of the top 10 books on the reader’s choice, including Anthem, a dystopian allegory which conjures images of 1984 meets Atlas Shrugged. Rand, by all accounts is a philosopher, who has turned to novels to propagate her ideas against collectivism and the power of the individual. Rand essentially sees the individual as the driving force behind society’s progress. Having read Atlas Shrugged, I can tell you that should you wish for an introduction to Rand’s theories, Anthem is a great place to start. You’ll get more philosophy for your buck – same great objectivism taste, 1000 less pages!


“I am done with the monster of "We," the word of serfdom, of plunder, of misery, falsehood and shame.” - Equality 7-2521 (the novel's protagonist)

O Pioneers! - Willa Cather

Date: May 10, 2007
Recommendation: The best 120-page novel you will ever read.

While reading this book, you can’t help but think of Pearl S. Buck’s The Good Earth, or even Steinbeck’s The Grapes of Wrath. O Pioneers tells the story of the Bergsons, a Swedish family that immigrated to Nebraska at the end of the 19th Century, much like many other European settlers.

Although only a novella, Cather manages to give the reader a strong attachment to the characters, not by so much what she says as by what she doesn’t say. Much like Steinbeck and Buck, Cather allows the land and soil to enrich the characters by creating context to their endeavours. The reader is left with the sense that the weaknesses of the flesh are but of ephemeral importance in comparison to the permanence of the land.

“We come and go, but the land is always here.” – Alexandra Bergson

Does a body good?

In a new segment (I know what you are thinking, how many possible topics can this jack-ass talk about), this will be the first in what I hope will be many blogs on issues of health. No, i'm not going to give you a short course on chlamydia, so don't get too excited. As many of you know, I have been taking steps towards improving my diet - it has come a long way, to the detriment of Michelena!

As the debut for healthy eating, let's consider milk. It does a body good. Not so fast rapping cow. Is milk good for you? Certainly, the milk board would have you believe so. But of course, they are a lobby group with the mandate to sell their commodity - even if it means dressing up farmer John in some hip young threads and having him skateboard around the barn. As the grandson of dairy farmers, I have always adhered to the lactose creed. But recently, I have begun questioning such tenants.

Humans are the only mammals to continue drinking milk beyond childhood. Humans are also the only species to drink milk from other species. Amazingly enough, 75% of the world's population is lactose intolerant (http://veg.ca/content/view/139/110/). In and of itself, this seems highly unnatural. Many diets around the world do not include milk as even a minor source of nutrition. Then why do North Americans drink so much of it? Well, the answer is simple, we are influenced to do so, whether correctly or incorrectly, by the corporate lobby groups and by governments. The Canada food guide recommends 2-3 servings of dairy per day.

We drink milk, presumably because it is good for strong bones. Milk is a source of calcium. The Harvard school of public health states that consuming adequate calcium and vitamin D and performing regular, weight-bearing exercise are also important to build maximum bone density and strength (http://www.hsph.harvard.edu/nutritionsource/calcium.html). A proper diet requires calcium to ward off osteoporosis. But how much calcium do you need, where do you get calcium from, and is milk really the best source of calcium?

Although the jury is out on the first two questions, milk as the most effective source of calcium is a definite misnomer. Calcium can also be found in dark green leafy vegetables, such as kale and collard greens, and in dried beans and legumes.

Food	Amount	Calcium
Yogurt, plain, low fat	8 oz	415
Collards, frozen, boiled	1 cup	357
Skim milk	1 cup	306
Spinach, frozen, boiled	1 cup	291
Yogurt, plain, whole milk	8 oz	275
Cheese food, pasteurized American	1 oz	162
Cottage cheese, 1% milk fat	1 cup	138
Baked beans, canned	1 cup	154
Iceberg lettuce	1 head	97
Canned salmon	3 oz	181
Oranges	1 cup	72
Trail mix (nuts, seeds, chocolate chips)	1 cup	159
Almonds	1 oz (24 nuts)	70
Blackeye peas, boiled	1 cup	211
Green peas, boiled	1 cup	94

Many studies of cultures outside North America reveal that as little as 300 mg of calcium are required per day. Essentially 1 serving of low fat yogurt.

The question becomes, why get your supply of calcium from milk? Consider the following:

1. milk is high in saturated fat content, which leads to high cholesterol - even "low" fat dairy products can contain up to 50% of their caloric value from fat.
   
2. milk has been linked to prostate and ovarian cancer;
3. milk has been linked to food allergies;
4. the entire dairy industry is essentially a chemical factory of hormone pumped cows.
   

The last point touches especially close to home. My uncle has a dairy farm and I have milked cows there. Whatever you think of animal rights, it is mass consumption industry. Small dairy farmers cannot compete with mega farms. These farms take away from lands that could be used for other sources, such as solar farms, wind farms, sports fields or just plain parks.

Don't take the information I have included here on face value. Go out and become informed. Find out for yourself if you "got milk", or if you just got fooled.

This side of paradise - F. Scott Fitzgerald

Date: May 6, 2007
Recommendation: Although quite good, I would suggest Great Gatsby instead

This is Fitzgerald at the beginning, before the Great Gatsby. But those who have read Gatsby will recognize the author in his depiction of youth in the inter-war years. This side of paradise tells the story of Amory Blaine, the semi-fictional depiction of the author himself. The reader follows Amory from youth through to Princeton, in to the war, through no less than 3 romances and ends with Amory's self-realization with the famous line "I know myself - but that is all-".

There are times when I greatly enjoyed the novel, but at other times, Fitzgerald seems to take on too much, and strays too far off course. Agreeably, it is difficult to create such a full character as Amory by not stretching the limits, but Fitzgerald simply seems to "gumbify" him too much!

Finally, I leave you with this. On which side of paradise do you currently find yourself? The novel's protagonist is constantly soul searching, presumably by understanding himself he will find paradise? But as we are left with uncertainty at the novel's end, I'm left with asking, what side is Amory on? And in looking at my own life, which side am I on?

Around the world in 80 days - Jules Verne

Date: April 29, 2007
Recommendation: Skip the book and take the trip!

As I was reading Verne’s imaginative novel, it was difficult not to keep in mind that it was simply fictional. Verne was decades ahead of his time, and even today, 130 years after the book was written, it is easy to picture the travels of Philleas Fogg as though it was a modern day news story.

In today’s day and age, how long would it take to travel around the world. Well, if you travel longitudinally, by plane, it would probably take a handful of days, depending on the connections. Many travel discount flight centres list prices of $1100 to by an around the world ticket. Consider that Verne’s protagist, Fogg, spent 20 000 pounds, today’s prices are pretty cheap - and you get a blanket and pillow to boot!

The Fédération Aéronqutie internationale lists the official world record for speed around the world, non-stop, non-refuelled to be an average of 550.78 km/h, which translated to a circumnavigation is about 67 hours. This record is held by multimillionaire sports enthusiast Stephen Fossett, who’s fortune and determination are probably not much different than Phillieas Fogg’s.

If we ignore airplane’s how long do you think it would take to travel around the world? Why don’t you think about that for a minute or two before reading on. I’ll give you a couple of funky picture to look at while you think it over (from the extreme ironing championships):






Are you ready for this? I have done the research, and here are the results. If we leave from London, here is a timetable:

1. London to Moscow - It's easy to travel from London to Moscow by train. Just take Eurostar from London to Brussels, a high-speed train to Cologne, then the direct sleeper train from Cologne to Moscow, taking two nights. Http://www.seat61.com/Russia.htm#Moscow

2. Moscow to Beijing - 7 days via the trans-Siberian railway. You can always take the 8 day train to Vladivostok, then the 36 hour steamer to Fushiki, Japan. Fushiki is another 5 hours by train to Tokyo. As such, you would be about 7 days to Beijing, or 10 days to Tokyo, and then on to the ship. Http://www.seat61.com/Trans-Siberian-timetable.htm

3. Across the Pacific by ship - Ok, so this is where it gets tricky. Who actually decides to take a boat across the pacific ocean? Well, very rich yatch owners, delivery and cargo ships, cruise ships and very determined world record afficianodos. Basically, from my research, it appears as though there is no commercial ship that you can take across the Pacific, unless it is a cruise package, in which case the voyage would not be direct. My solution would be to either bribe someone to stowaway on a cargo steamer, or pay someone to make a special trip just for you.

Scouring the web, I have discovered that it is about 8,400 km (5,200 nautical miles) from San Francisco to Tokyo. A sailing boat could average 7 knots, which is 8 mph. This gives you 650 hours, which is about 27 days. Between Beijing and Los Angeles would be 5440 nautical miles, which would translate to about 27 days as well.

A cruise ship would probably travel at 22 mph, but would take longer, due to stop overs. Cargo ships like taking their time, so we won’t discuss them. If you could requisition a US aircraft carrier, they go 34 mph. The US has an experiemental ship that goes 58 mph. And finally, the world speed record is the Spirit of Australia, at about 315 mph. But I doubt it has enough fuel to bring you from Montreal to Ottawa, let alone across the Pacific.

Conclusion - let’s say that it takes 30 days to cross the Pacific ocean by boat.

4. From California to New York - finally, an easy calculation. Should you take the train across America, it would take 72 hours, accroding to Amtrack. Take the train from San Francisco to Chicago, and then on to New York. LA to New York would be a bit faster, about 62 hours, as it is a little more direct.

5. From New York to London - another boat@#@$@. Good news is that there seems to be a little more transatlantic traffic - I guess that whole Titanic scare didn’t really dissuade anyone. Between London and New York, there is 3012 nautical miles. The QE2 offers 6 night travel between Southampton and New York - not to mention sumptuous meals and dancing girls to boot!

The total voyage would then take 3 days from London to Moscow; 7 days from Moscow to Beijing; 30 days from Beijing to Los Angeles; 3 days from LA to NY; and another 7 days to cross the Atlantic. This brings us to 50 days to travel around the world. I have to say that most of it seems like it would be pretty fun. Issues to be worked out with that transpacific voyage though!