Riba Rambles:
Musings of a Mental Magpie

At the start of the year (end of last year) I replaced my laptop hard drive.

Unfortunately, this new drive runs a little hot.

I use a couple utilities to monitor my hard drive temperature, and always use a USB-powered cooling hub.

The first one I got died after a trip in checked luggage.

I replaced it with a different brand cooling system (bought at CompUSA going-out-of-business discount).

Unfortunately, that one's now having problems. It appears that there's a short in its USB cable, and unless I kink it just so, the fan goes out.

And naturally, the power cable from the other chill mat doesn't fit this one.

Speaking of laptop troubles, can somebody explain this to me (click to enlarge):

How bad is it?

Is it the kind of bad that's reparable, or does it mean getting a new hard drive?

Sometimes, the Orwellian references are just too easy:

”Freedom is not a concept in which people can do anything they want, be anything they can be. Freedom is about authority. Freedom is about the willingness of every single human being to cede to lawful authority a great deal of discretion about what you do.”

— Rudy Giuliani

After an audience member interrupted, Giuliani continued “You have free speech so I can be heard.”

As noted by the person from whom I found the quote, "well it's not like I was voting for him anyhow."

Also, have you seen the Battle at Kruger?

This battle among a pride of lions, a herd of buffalo and a crocodile was witnessed by Jason Schlosberg and David Budzinski in September 2004 at a watering hole near Pretoriuskop Camp, Mpumalanga in South Africa's Kruger National Park.

So, we're taking advantage of the forthcoming (sales)Tax-Free Weekend to finally get a shower/tub surround as a replacement for the broken tiles we've been covering with a curtain for years...

While the saleswoman was filling out some of the paperwork, I browsed idly through catalogs, and came upon a most disturbing product line.

Kohler's 'Fables & Flowers'

Looks lovely, doesn't it?.

But several items in the line actually articulate "the legend of the tulip" in words.

And what words they've chosen...

A few excerpts from the catalog:

The story that encircles Fables & Flowers Cantata lavatory rim (a shorter version appears on the floor container):

Once upon a time, a youth was enamored of a beautiful girl. Rumor reached him that his beloved had died. Mounting his horse, he galloped off the edge of a rocky escarpment, meeting death instantly. As blood seeped from his wounds, bright red tulips sprang up all around. Thus, the red tulip became a declaration of love. A tulip offered by a young man to his beloved says, 'As the redness of this flower, I am on fire with love'.

The story that encircles the toilet tank lid:

Flowers large, rich and red. Petals pointed, spidery and crazed. Blood red flames on a yellow ground. Tulips. The flower has made men mad. Captured their hearts then broken them.

The story that encircles the foot of the toilet:

Shed no tears! O shed no tears! The flower will bloom another year. Weep no more! O weep no more! Young buds sleep in the root's white core.  — John Keats

Now, I can entirely understand the desire for reading material in the restroom, but this is awfully morbid material...

Do you think people actually read before they buy, or are they just captivated by the pretty pictures?

Rather reminds me of the Shakespeare quotations for interior walls

For no good reason, this passage from Giles Milton's Samurai William about Portuguese Jesuits in late 16th Century Japan has been going thru my mind.

To assist in their prostletyzing efforts, the Jesuits in Japan were ordered to adopt certain local customs -- including those of diet:

Now, the Jesuits were also forced to eat with chopsticks, a torture for the older generation, who complained bitterly. "You must first take the sticks in one hand and tap the table with their points in order to adjust them properly," wrote one disgruntled padre. "Then you must raise the goki [large bowl] and take three morsels of rice, and then you must put the bowl back on the table. Back on the table, I say, and nowhere else." And so the meal progressed slowly, mouthful after painstaking mouthful, until all the food was consumed.

Can't you just feel his frustration?

I don't have time to sum it up in a blog post at the moment, but the actions by SixApart and LiveJournal over the past week could inspire whole new textbooks on how to torpedo your corporate reputation through mishandling social networking and Web 2.0.

Just in case any business students are looking for something to study...

Issues of venue aside, consider this another solid offering from Redfeather.

A dew-covered spiderweb on the parking lot gate; actual size smaller than my outstretched hand:

Didn't quite come out, but it's hard to judge photo quality in the bright sunlight.

I don't want to talk about buying a new car while in the car because I'm afraid if the car hears us seriously talking about replacing it, then it'll lose hope and give up the ghost that much sooner.

Crazy anthropomorphizing, I know, but I don't want to hurt its feelings...

Anybody else go thru similar contortions?

It'll be interesting once we finally start driving to dealerships, because then the gig will be up.

How many errors can you find in this news story?

Heck, how many errors or unsubstantiated suppositions can you find in this paragraph alone:

Marlowe's allegedly blasphemous play, "Tamburlaine," almost cost him a degree from Cambridge University. The damage was repaired by a note from Elizabeth's privy council, praising his service to the queen. As a student in France, he had worked for Walsingham.

On the other hand, maybe it would be easier to identify what the author got right in that paragraph...

PS: On a related note (or at least found in the same search results), the New York Ren Faire is adding a Marlowe reenactor.

Back in March, I asked for advice on what to use as a monogram, since Ian and I have no initials in common.

Thanks for all your advice.

Here's what my mother gifted us with, which looks even cooler than we could've imagined:

Thanks, Mom!

Cleopatra has always been a larger-than-life figure. Powerful. Desired by great men. Ruled by her passions.

Watching Tina Packer strut and fret her hours upon the stage, one thought predominated in my mind: this could only have been created after Queen Elizabeth's death.

Tits and Asp: Tina Packer as Cleopatra

As written by Shakespeare, Cleopatra is an exaggerated parody of the worst slanders against Elizabeth. She's dangerously capricious, weakens her generals by toying with their affections, even boxes a messenger's ears for delivering bad tidings then cozens him back with promises of riches if he pleases her by speaking ill of her rivals...

When Cleopatra insisted on “being in” the naval battles, I half expected some rude parody of the Tilbury speech.

After fifty years of queenly rule, Jacobean England really had a lot invested in promoting their manliness. [For more on this, see my longtime favorite: King James and the history of homosexuality; this play isn't mentioned, but it fits in that analysis.]

---

Historical context aside, it's a magnificent role.

Tina Packer's Cleopatra rides a dizzying emotional see-saw. But while this inconstancy is first played for amusement, it becomes terrifying as one realizes how much power can be brought to bear on one of her whims.

Her performance also reminded me of Diane D'Aquila in ART's 2005 production of Dido (review). Both played aging queens revitalized by love and facing devastation at its loss. [I'm sure some academics have researched Marlowe's influence, so I won't dwell on it in further detail.]

The production was anchored by solid acting all around, especially from the supporting cast.

Walton Wilson as Enobarbus, Tony Molina as Menas

As the soldier Enobarbus, Walton Wilson provided a steady source of plain-talking common-sense. A refreshing contrast to other characters' flowery (and often false) speech. Pompey tells him to "Enjoy thy plainness; it nothing ill becomes thee." I couldn't put it better. His description of Cleopatra's arrival was wonderfully evocative.

I've delighted in Tony Molina's comic characters in past productions, but I think this was the first time I've seen him in the more serious roles. Here he played the Soothsayer, Menas the warrior, and the serpent-bearing Clown, providing a dark and sometimes menacing presence to his scenes.

The only off note came from Robert Biggs' Lepidus. His vocal style seemed too affected in otherwise serious scenes (although it worked marvelously playing drunk in Act II, Scene 7). But that was a minor distraction.

Like the cast, the crew also did an outstanding job.

From the very beginning, they made versatile use of the minimalist set.

“If it be love indeed... tell me how much.” Antony (Nigel Gore) and Cleopatra (Tina Packer) enjoy a tender moment.

A rug transforms to a curtain and then a blanket as the story opens on a playful bedroom scene (right).

Lighting effects reinforced the sense of place. Egypt was lit in soft blues, while Roman scenes were predominantly yellow, giving them a sharper feel.

Arthur Oliver's costumes were spectacular. I wish I had bandwidth to include more images, but consider it an incentive to see the show.

Suffice it to say, all the women looked fabulous. [Tina Packer has a great figure, which her costumes really showed off!] The men wore relatively similar tunics, with rank indicated by color (Caesar in purple, others in reds or browns) and other accoutrements. I was particularly captivated by Caesar's shiny gold breastplate.

Be sure to look around the lobby during intermission. The gift shop has several costume sketches on display.

Battle scenes were represented through stylized choreography. It's a valid artistic choice (common to S&Co productions), though I tend to prefer more realistic stage combat.

Unfortunately, the story does drag a bit in the second half. It's pretty clear where the unlucky couple's tragic flaws will lead them, and there just came a point where I wished they'd get a move on.

Antony and Cleopatra is another strong offering from Tina Packer and everyone at Shakespeare & Company.

Shakespeare the Relevant by Terry Teachout, from Saturday's Wall Street Journal

For dinner Saturday night, we stumbled upon an excellent Tapas place in Worcester, called bocado.

The drinks menu included at least six different sangrias: mixed-berry, mango, watermelon, a sparkling variation, and I forget what else.

I also noticed one cocktail made with "vanilla-ginger infused simple syrup."

And that got me to thinking...

Historically, the English were the laughingstock of Continental Europe for preferring to drink wine with added sugar.

But doesn't sangria fulfil a similar function? Sweetening wines to make them more palatable?

And nowadays, fancy sangrias are all the rage.

So, who's going to bring back sugared wines?

By combining the right wines with simple-syrup infusions, one could actually make some fairly elegant and tasty drinks.

It seems like a logical outgrowth from current tastes. All it would take is the right bartender/restauranteur to give it a push.

I suspect that within five years, it could be a trend.

As heard this morning on NPR: Wisconsin Professors Plan Dual Congressional Race

As an update to this morning's entries, I remembered two other personality-test memes making the rounds.

First, the Johari window, which compares your self-assessment with how others perceive you Here's mine

Second, the Big Five or Five-Factor model. I'm not sure if I've taken one of those, but online assessments can be found at SimilarMinds.com and OutOfService.com.

Just trying to be completist about things.

Do you know of more that I should consider?

BBC News, today:

The US soldier who exposed the abuse of Iraqi prisoners in Abu Ghraib prison found himself a marked man after his anonymity was blown in the most astonishing way by Donald Rumsfeld.

Gee, where have I heard about that before?

August 2004:

ISLAMABAD/LONDON (Reuters) - U.S. officials providing justification for anti-terrorism alerts revealed details about a Pakistani secret agent, and confirmed his name while he was working under cover in a sting operation, Pakistani sources said on Friday.

February 2004:

[Assistant U.S. Attorney Richard] Convertino also accused Justice officials of intentionally divulging the name of one of his confidential terrorism informants (CI) to retaliate against him.

The leak put the informant at grave risk, forced him to flee the United States and "interfered with the ability of the United States to obtain information from the CI about current and future terrorist activities," the suit alleges.

Convertino sued John Ashcroft for "gross mismanagement" and otherwise compromising the prosecution of an antiterror case in Detroit.

One such exposure might be excusable as an accident. But this often? It begins to look like policy.

Valerie Plame, Joe Darby, Muhammad Naeem Noor Khan, Convertino's unnamed informant... how many lives have the Mayberry Machiavellians jeopardized?

PS: August 2006, a week after the liquid bomb plot:

A senior British official knowledgeable about the case said British police were planning to continue to run surveillance for at least another week to try to obtain more evidence, while American officials pressured them to arrest the suspects sooner. The official spoke on condition of anonymity due to the sensitivity of the case.

As Craig Murray pointed out, this rush probably means that "it could be pretty difficult to convince a jury beyond reasonable doubt."

Naturally, all this nattering has me thinking of other personality assessments I've taken.

Personal DNA seems to be making the rounds again, but I took that back in March 2006, with these results:	You are a Respectful Thinker
At the same time, I tried a couple Enneagram tests, which characterized me as:

Last week's Globe included an article on SpeedReading People, which appears based on the book on the same name. Flipping thru the contents, it looks like it's a way of pigeonholing people into Myers-Briggs personality types. Could be neat, but it still requires identifying sixteen types.

After leaving Lotus, I was enrolled in a career transition workshop which included a communication styles assessment called I-SPEAK Your Language. Useful stuff. Only four broad groupings, but with recognition that people may have a different communication style when stressed.

Unfortunately, tests and tools for the system appear to be proprietary to DBM, so I can't find much available publically that I can use as a refresher.

Meanwhile, our CIO has recently gotten interested in The Ten Faces of Innovation.

I haven't been able to find any online assessments, but from what I've gleaned so-far, the role which sounds like my glass slipper is: The Cross-Pollinator:

“The Cross-Pollinator draws associations and connections between seemingly unrelated ideas or concepts to break new ground. Armed with a wide set of interests, an avid curiosity, and an aptitude for learning and teaching, the Cross-Pollinator brings in big ideas from the outside world to enliven their organization...”

Any other fun or useful personality tests I should try?

Late last week, an LJ-Friend linked to this Harry Potter Personality Quiz, which adds an entertaining twist to the traditional Myers-Briggs assessment:

Harry Potter Personality Quiz
by Pirate Monkeys Inc.

The week before, I took a different Myers-Briggs test from MyPersonality.Info, which categorized me as INTP:

What I find most interesting is the way my Myers-Briggs results tend to fluctuate:

• December 2006, I took The Brutally Honest Personality Test and scored INTP*
• Back in May, I tried one from Cal State, which rated me INTJ*

So far, a 50/50 split between INTJ and INTP. INTX, some might call it.

Of course, when I first discovered Myers-Briggs assessments (about a decade ago), I was reliably INFX.

I don't have raw scores from those early tests, so I'm not certain how drastic the shift from F to T has been.

Maybe that trait has always been fairly close.
Maybe I'm more accurately described as INXX (which sounds like an Eighties New Wave group).

For the record, here are some shorthand descriptions from various interpretations:

Am I just overthinking this?

Oh yeah. I'm supposedly an “Introverted Intuitive” -- of course I am!

One of the more interesting presentations I attended @ CIL2007 was about different learning styles.
Both an overview of different schemes for describing people and a case study of how their project used them in designing a product.

If coworkers know each others' learning styles, it can improve communication within the team. [For example, if I'm style X and need to work with somebody who has style Y, we may have to make extra allowances to avoid misunderstanding and conflict. Good thing to know.]

Likewise, the speaker talked about designing their interface to be friendly to as many different learning styles as possible -- and she thought they managed to include affordances for every style except audio.

If anyone is interested, here are a few online assessment quizzes I've found to measure the various styles:

In the spirit of openness, here are my results:

Anybody else dare to share?

I deleted this passage from my previous entry because it detracted from the main point I wanted to make about J.K. Rowling.

But nonetheless, it's an interesting observation which I still want to share.

The Brustein quote about Falstaff ("Falstaff escaped from this projected morality play") put me in mind of another comment I recently read about Marlowe:

“Marlowe's Barabas [is] an initially individualized subject who quickly loses that identity as he descends into the allegorical figure of the Vice/Stage Machiavel.”

— "Looking for Christopher Marlowe" by Lagretta Tallent Lenker

In other words, when the plot demanded it, Marlowe shoehorned his characters back into their straitjackets, which is why he's considered the weaker writer than Shakespeare.

But neither Barabas nor Shylock are simple stereotypes, which is why both plays are so powerful. I found a quote by Jeffery Horowitz, artistic director of TFANA -- which staged them together in repertory:

“Marlowe's play is called a tragedy and becomes a comedy, while Shakespeare's play is called a comedy and becomes a tragedy.”

Your thoughts?

Thanks to a 2003 article by Robert Brustein (reprinted in Millennial Stages), I finally comprehend why Falstaff is such a big deal among certain scholars*

It is highly probable, as some commentators have noted, that Shakespeare originally intended Falstaff to be a Vice figure seducing the prodigal son Prince Hal from his true path, with characters such as the Lord Chief Justice functioning to show him the way of righteousness. It is also true that Falstaff escaped from this projected morality play to become the full-blooded vitalist that Bloom and the rest of us admire, while Hal emerged as a bit of a prig sharing some of his brother Lancaster's Machiavellian genes.

In other words, one of Shakespeare's weaknesses as a writer is that his characters are more vivid -- more three-dimensional -- than the plot would otherwise require.

Realer than they have to be.

Hang onto that thought.

After we finished reading Deathly Hallows, Ian wrote a post asking What is it about ... J K Rowling? [I'm excluding the George Lucas aspect because I'm not a fan of the series and can't address that part of his question.]

And I wonder whether it's something similar.

After Book Six was released, Icarus noted:

Now I for one, like to find depth and insight in Percy's situation. "It turns out that Arthur was wrong -- look, he survived Fudge and is still [employed in the Minister's office]! He must be at least competent! What strength and integrity that he didn't come crawling back, begging for forgiveness!"

And it's there. But....

The reality is, he's placed where he is because JKRs going to need him there for the next book. He's fighting with his family not because of some subtle characterisation (the portrait of a young man who's been treated like a house-elf finally standing up for himself...) but because JKR needs him mad at his family for some aspect of the plot (why belabor it for two books otherwise?).

But even if JKR only wrote these elements in service of the plot, the point remains: it's there.

As with Shakespeare, careful reading can find more depth to the characters than they need to have in service to the plot.

For example, hp_essays currently has 122 articles about Severus Snape** -- over one-seventh of all posts to the community.

And that's just one site and one character.

I've seen in-depth analyses based on close-reading for almost every aspect of the books.

Which suggests that there's something in there to find.

Is that part of her secret?

I don't know, but it's certainly one of the reasons the series has attracted so much fanfic -- because there are so many gaps readers want to fill in.

^* I mean, I find Falstaff likeable enough, but I never understood why he garnered so much gushing praise.

^** Based upon article tags. [The only topics more popular are discussions of canon and theories]

• Billboard that caught my eye: Museums10 presents BookMarks: A Celebration of the Art of the Book, starting in September.

• Eating at Joe's Diner in Lee (the establishment immortalized in Norman Rockwell's "Runaway"), Ian and I overheard a Jewish joke we'd never heard before:

How do you get rats to leave a synagogue?
Give them bar mitzvahs.

• Ever see an establishment whose very name makes you want to prank call them?
     When I spotted the sign for Five Chairs restaurant, I wanted to phone up and see if they'd accept a reservation for six.

• Other names that caught my eye included Solid Rock Farm (obviously not named on a happy day) and one that always disturbs me: Undermountain Farm Riding Stables.

• Saw a nifty sign in front of a house for sale: My Talking House. It's a very low-strength radio transmitter, broadcasting details about the home's price and features. Pretty keen. Certainly intrigued us enough to stop and listen...

By the way, I fully charged my cellphone on Friday. During the drive to Lenox, I made no calls, took no photos, sent no text messages before I turned it off when entering the theater Friday night. I didn't remember to turn it on again until Saturday afternoon, when I discovered that my battery was at 4%! Any idea what might've happened