Saying It Better Than I Ever Could: Chuck Klosterman Edition

So that was a long hiatus. But I'm back! My apologies to my legions and legions of fans for being so silent for awhile. Hopefully you will forgive me and trust that I have neglected you for so long because I have been extremely busy. Yes, I know, I'm just a "lazy grad student" but even we get overwhelmed sometimes.

Anyway, in today's episode of "Saying It Better Than I Ever Could", we look to the work of Chuck Klosterman.

Now, I rather enjoy reading Chuck Klosterman, having purchased a number of his books in the last year. He speaks to my weakness for intellectual arguments about (often trivial) pop-culture phenomenon. I must confess, I often don't even know what his point is, but the journey always keeps me engaged. I find myself following along feeling like his argument is important, even if I don't know why*. And I actually mean that as a compliment.

As the beginning of this post suggests, I am not a very prolific writer. Part of the reason for this is that I am busy. Another is captured in the following quote by Klosterman:

"Sometimes writing is like talking to a stranger who's exactly like yourself in every possible way, only (you) realize that this stranger is boring as shit."

- Chuck Klosterman, "Eating the Dinosaur". Scribner, 2009.

I've certainly started and canned a fair share posts. Which is particularly weird considering I have almost no expectation that anyone will actually read what I post. But there is something unsatisfying about posting something to the internet that even I am bored by. It just seems like I'm adding to the clutter.

And I will not stand for that. My standards are higher. At the very least, my fans deserve something like this post: a mediocre piece of work piggy-backing on someone else's talent.

* I am pretty sure Klosterman wrote something in this vein about Radiohead, but I spent the last 40 minutes looking for that quote and came up empty-handed. See, I'm even doing research for these blog posts!

The Symposium on What-Now?

This was written during a 12 hour train ride from Atlanta to New Orleans on July 16.

I have been criss-crossing the continent for most of the summer, with my latest travels taking me to Georgia (the American one). For those of you who consider me a good-for-nothing layabout student, I can assure you that this voyage actually qualifies as "for business." At least part of it.

I was brought to Georgia for the Symposium on Combinatorial Search (SoCS), an annual gathering of computer scientists whose main area of research is combinatorial search. The conference took place in Stony Mountain, Georgia which is approximately 30-45 minutes from Atlanta.

This was certainly a worthwhile event, as many of the top scientists in the field were on hand to present their latest work, discuss ideas for future research, and mingle in a social setting. In some sense, this two-day event is an onslaught of combinatorial search research. Part of this is due to the nine-to-five portion of each day being consumed with podium or poster presentations of state-of-the-art research, but perhaps the most productive portion of the symposium occurs outside of this formal structured component. This is because you eat with the group, you enjoy your coffee breaks with the group, and you wind down the rest of the day with the group (perhaps over a cold pint of Yuengling). And it is during these informal discussions, that many ideas for future research emerges.

Now I'm not going to pretend that I spent 2 and a half days talking only science (the half day coming in the form of an opening reception the night before the main portion of the symposium). It was great to see Zee German again, as I have not had much of an opportunity to speak to him since he left Alberta for his fatherland. And I certainly enjoyed having an opportunity to learn about the personal lives of researchers whom I have only known through their scientific output. But the common interest of all of the people in attendance is that of combinatorial search, and so it was this topic that dominated discussion.

As a PhD student still early into this latest degree and without a thesis topic yet decided upon --- don't worry Ma, this is true of almost everyone at this stage --- such an opportunity to survey the current landscape of your field, find out what people are interested in, and bounce ideas off of top minds, is immensely useful. And it is reasons like this that such symposiums or workshops can be so valuable.

Thoughts on the way back

I was recently travelling around the US, and will be describing and reflecting on a few of my adventures. Some of these posts were actually written during the trip including the following one which I wrote on July 20th.

Oof, I've been on the road a lot recently. This is my second 12 hour train ride in 5 days, and tomorrow I will make the 7 and a half hour plane trip back to Edmonton. So it isn't quite done yet, but the end is in sight. And I must say: I'm glad. While I like to take as many opportunities as I can to travel, it can be both physically and mentally draining. And I am at the point where I need some time to recuperate.

I admit that this isn't a particularly novel sentiment. But it certainly captures my current state of mind which longs for quieter days ahead without customs agents, security checks, early morning cab rides, and being confined to a small amount of space for large quantities of time. But I'm also looking forward to not discovering a new city for a while: to just being comfortable in a place I know well around people I know well.

Killing Time before a meeting with a One Paragraph Movie Review

I try to support Canadian films when I can, but a lame movie is a lame movie. And "Gunless" is a lame movie. The plot is cliched and not really entertaining, the characters are uninteresting, the cinematography is bland, the comic-relief is not funny, and the romance is unconvincing. Even the play on American and Canadian stereotypes is eye-roll inducing. While not unwatchable, it remains lame. Go watch "Canadian Bacon" instead if you are looking for a playful and amusing take on American-Canadian relations and stereotypes.

The Only Good Twitter Accounts are Fake Twitter Accounts

I don't know about you, but I've always found the parody twitter accounts much more entertaining than any real twitter accounts. In that end, I give you the musings of Dick Balenzano, a parody of me, Rick Valenzano.

Dick Balenzano is the creation of Joe Buscemi, who decided to create a character loosely based on me. He initially had it under my name, but I decided to rename the character "Dick Balenzano" since I am hoping that people will be googling for my actual name as a way to find my research, and I do not want them to get confused.

I have contributed from time to time, but I try to write as the character, not as myself. You should be able to tell which tweets are mine (there are very few of them), and which are Joe's since mine of are almost uniformly of lower quality. It turns out it is very difficult to write as a parody of yourself.

Any way, check out the thoughts of Dick Balenzano.  I suspect that if you know me you will be entertained.

Composure

Lost Week is on a brief hiatus, but it is certainly not over. In the meantime, I want to speak about Armando Galarraga.

As you probably already know, Galarraga threw a perfect game Wednesday night. Or at least he did in spirit. On what should have been the final out of the game, Jason Donald hit a ground ball to first baseman Miguel Cabrera who was pulled off the bag by the hit. Cabrera then tossed the ball to Galarraga who touched the bag and recorded the final out. Unfortunately, the first-base umpire, Jim Joyce, didn't see it that way. In the heat of the moment, Joyce blew the call at first and cost Galarraga the perfect game.

Galarraga was just about to pump his fists when he saw the umpire's call. He was clearly excited. But when he saw Joyce extend his hands to indicate his call, he somehow kept it together. Not only did he not get upset, he simply looked amused by the situation. He then collected himself and got the next batter out.

I don't know what's more amazing: how well Galarraga pitched, or how well he managed to keep his composure. This would have been only the 21st time in baseball history that someone threw a perfect game. It is a monumental achievement. And yet he simply shrugged off Joyce's bad call.

Players blow up all the time over missed calls (or calls that they incorrectly interpret as being missed), even at times where it doesn't matter in the slightest. This was a botched call that prevented Galarraga, for at least one game, from reaching a level of excellence that is so rarely achieved. And he shrugged it off!

I had never heard of this guy until last night. Now I have nothing but the greatest of respect for this man. My hat is off to you Armando Galarraga. You may not have thrown a perfect game, but certainly you have reached some sort of pantheon of class.

(By the way, the catch by Austin Jackson to maintain the perfect game in the 9th was just unbelievable. Needs to be seen to be believed. As was Galarraga's grin immediately thereafter)

Lost Week: Pitting Bloggers of Science against Bloggers of Faith

Last Sunday night, Lost ended with a two and a half hour extravaganza. This sparked a fury of conversation between Joe and I which was interrupted by the demands of real life. Neither of us were content to let it end with that, and so we have decided to let the dialogue seep on for awhile. As there is a real void of Lost related discussion on the internet by random people, we thought we would chronicle this discussion online on this here blog. Anyway, be forewarned that we will definitely spoil many major plot points for those of you haven't seen the show and plan on doing so.

The following entry was written by Rick.

You are completely correct to point out that we come from very different approaches to the show. Obviously we have a lot of common ground having known each other for so long. But we do differ slightly in our entertainment tastes, and we did consume this show in a completely different way. When a show ended on a cliffhanger, I could simply start the next episode but putting in the next DVD. You had no such luxury as you had to stay on the edge of your seat for whenever the next episode was delivered.

And perhaps I did the show a disservice watching it in the way I did. I found that consuming it in such a compressed time-span can be a bit overwhelming considering how much conflict is thrown at the viewer.  Because of this, the never-ending onslaught of obstacles did occasionally become tiresome.

As a result, I became somewhat jaded as the seasons wore on, and while I was still entertained, I became less and less convinced they would wrap things up in any over-arching ways. Let me badly abuse a Lost-based metaphor for a second: I was the Shepherdian cynic who was perplexed by your Lockian faith in the producers of the show. I was still enjoying the ride, but I just assumed they would never be able to tie it together.

My main issue with the show was that I felt that in an effort to constantly one-up some previous level of tension and conflict, the producers felt it necessary to keep jumping from one widely divergent sci-fi thread to another. I gave up hope that they ever could achieve narrative closure, which is why I was quite content with what I got.

So where do we take this discussion? From my vantage point, the obvious question is "Where did it all go astray?" which to me is interpreted as "At what point did it become impossible to close enough loose ends?" I suspect your Lockian interpretation will instead be the much more optimistic "What are the main plots points that I needed to be addressed, and could have been if they had a little more time?"

A few final thoughts. Obviously categorizing each of us in the tiny boxes of Locke and Jack is silly. These things aren't binary, and the analogy isn't even particularly apt. I mostly just like writing the word "Lockian." Makes me feel like a big man.

In addition, there is the possibility that the only reason I am bringing up this line of questioning is because I want to point to some specific event in the show that you found bothersome, to which I can respond with "No Joe, we have to go back." After all, I am a simple man with simple pleasures.

Rick