It could have been truly great: the solitary moaning of a childhood Star Wars fan

I hated Star War Episodes I-III.
I haven’t been a big Star Wars fan since I was young, but I always appreciated the novelty and the sincere belief that the original Star Wars movies had in themselves. The movies were clever and exciting without trying too hard. They succeeded in drawing you into a unique and engaging world of light sabers and Jedi.
When the prequels came out we all knew the ending. We all knew that Luke was Darth’s son, and that the empire fell in the end. What those movies offered instead was a personal and dramatic story about one man. It was the story of the rise and fall of Anakin Skywalker.
The beauty of the story lies in its brutal irony. Anakin was the Savior who failed. For millennia people prophesied and anticipated his coming. He was conceived immaculately and gave up everything to serve others. Ultimately, however, it was inverted Christ symbolism. Anakin is corrupted by his need to help others, his profound love for humanity, and his incomprehensible power. Instead of transcending human nature he falls to it; and with his mighty fall he cuts down the very pillars of all that is right and good. He damns the galaxy to an eternity of oppression under a satanic emperor. His son saves the world and through his death he redeems only himself.
This story could have been deeply compelling. Instead we watched Hayden Christensen whining like a teenage who can’t get the keys to his dad’s car.
I would have made Anakin mighty. A human of tremendous dignity and valor. He would have bent to help those hurt on the battlefield, friend or foe. He would have been personal and human, but at the same time possessed of a deep and abiding love for humanity. He would have changed the face of a battle by his very presence, as if all that was right followed in his wake. At the same time he would have flaws ingrained into who he was. But we would love him all the more because he suppressed his pride and ambition. He would fight his vice. But slowly he would become frustrated with others’ weaknesses. He would see the hypocrisy of his superiors, and slowly, he would falter. Eventually, he breaks and turns on all that he once upheld. He is consumed by hatred, lust, and self love.
People would have wept to watch it. Instead Anakin was petty – worse still, he was annoying. When it came down to it we all wanted him to be evil so we had an excuse to hate his whiney attitude and his self righteous drawl. The whole series turned on us loving Anakin Skywalker, but Lucas was too caught up in his special effects.

The problem with Harry Potter

I read the famous Harry Potter series just like everyone else and I enjoyed them, but there was always something about the series that kept me from truly loving the books the way so many others did. I have recently discovered one cause of this. In the series the character Lord Voldemort is described as being evil from his childhood. It never describes an instance that has turned him this way; he just was evil from the beginning. This is probably the shallowest take on the matter of good and evil I have ever heard. Even many religions believe that the devil was a child of God before he became the devil.
And on the other end there’s Harry. Born with the love and pureness of his parents who were killed before be could talk. He is inherently pure and the only one who can stop the ultimate evil. Yet throughout the series he shows no particular goodness other than the basic decency of most humans nor does he show much talent as a wizard. Altogether a pretty naive point of view for a world famous book.

Embracing new talent.

Last Thursday I overheard a number of condescending comments on the sudden and rapid growth of the newspaper staff. The comments were few and I am sure that most did not share in the suggested opinions, but they were heard and not by few. Now I admit I am more than a little bias on this subject because a couple of my good friends have joined at the semester. However the fact remains that new talent is essential to any organization that wishes to be diverse and innovative. Putting down this talent on the contingency that you’re a sophomore,” is stifling the new and creates a social bureaucracy and that is ,in my opinion, the last thing we need.

The Best Albums of 2007

Panda Bear, "Person Pitch"
Panda Bear, a.k.a. Noah Lennox, had a phenomenal 2007. Both albums he played a part in -- "Person Pitch" and "Strawberry Jam" (below) -- were received with almost universal praise.
"Person Pitch" is the Beach Boys' "Pet Sounds" for the 21st century. Perfect melodies, washed in echoes and reverb, accompany vocals that could easily be Brian Wilson. Masterful electronic sampling and looping add another dimension to the album, and these are the elements that make "Person Pitch" transcendent.

Animal Collective, "Strawberry Jam"
"Strawberry Jam" is not only one of the best releases of this decade, but arguably the most unique. Animal Collective's developed sound is completely fresh: their songs are equal parts harmonious pop and violent electronic noise, but the result is music both accessible and ingenious.

Bright Eyes, "Cassadaga"
This is the best country album of 2007, though no one has bothered to classify it as such. Shrieking fiddles, wavering church organs, and cool slide guitar mix perfectly with Conor Oberst's ever-impressive lyricism, and the production on this album may be his most solid yet.

LCD Soundsystem, "Sound of Silver"
"Sound of Silver" is fun, energetic, get-out-there-and-go-crazy dance music, while at the same time standing as everything electro/dance isn't: contemplative, serious, orchestral, creative, and even touching at times. Of course Mr. Murphy is a killer with synths, beats, and samples -- the man is a dance music virtuoso -- but his greatness is equally owed to unique and powerful usage of guitar, piano, and (gasp!) lyrics. "Sound of Silver" singlehandedly legitimizes its own genre.

5. Beirut, "Lon Gisland (EP)" & "The Flying Club Cup"
6. of Montreal, "Hissing Fauna, Are You the Destroyer?" & "Icons, Abstract Thee (EP)"
7. Arcade Fire, "Neon Bible"
8. Jay-Z, "American Gangster"
9. Spoon, "Ga Ga Ga Ga Ga"
10. Kanye West, "Graduation"
11. Justice, "✝"
12. Peter Bjorn And John, "Writer's Block"
13. Okkervil River, "The Stage Names"
14. Jens Lekman, "Night Falls Over Kortedala"
15. Amy Winehouse, "Back to Black"
16. Menomena, "Friend and Foe"
17. Andrew Bird, "Armchair Apochrypha"
18. Feist, "The Reminder"
19. The Shins, "Wincing the Night Away"
20. The Good Life, "Help Wanted Nights"
21. Black Lips, "Good Bad Not Evil"
22. Battles, "Mirrored"
23. Akron/Family, "Love Is Simple"
24. The Hives, "The Black and White Album"
25. Page France, "... and the Family Telephone"

Not being afraid to "step outside the box"," and in essence, be yourself

I want to write a bit about being comfortable with your own self, and being happy with who you are. Sounds cliche, I know. I was very appalled the other day while sitting on the "Senior bench" at good ole' Viewmont High School, one of my friends came up to greet me. As she was walking, it was quite plain to anyone who noticed (which I'm sure no one did) that a group of girls, along with one other boy looked at my friend and quite obviously, observed her outfit. They pointed, and rudely laughed with one another, and sadly, my friend saw. When she turned to look at them, they simply looked away, pretending that they hadn't just two seconds before, been mocking her outfit.

Okay. Now, how old are we? I was very offended, but worse, my friends feelings were very hurt. Which brings me to a more important point. Who do people think they are? It's really sad that A. people get enjoyment out of criticizing others and B. they even give a crap. We're older now. Most of us have applied and gotten into colleges, we are making plans for the future, and I'm willing to bet that a lot of Viewmont's poplulation really could care less what fellow students are wearing and/or doing. Yet, there are still these pathetic "cliques" that simply cannot seem to grow out of their, how shall I put it? "Junior High Phases."
All I want to say is that people need to grow up. We do indeed have some interesting people at our school. But everyone is unique. There should be no set "style." Really though, great for you if you know all the latest trends and insist on only shopping at department stores. Well done! I truly hope that you feel very good about yourself as you get ready for school each day and look in the mirror and say, "Man, I look good in my two hundred dollar jeans!" But guess what? It does not matter. You can wear whatever you want! Everyone has there own style, whether it be "high fashion" clothes, or maybe an ensemble put together from thrift stores, or maybe you prefer to wear red lipstick to school everyday or you want to spike your hair into a mohawk. Who gives? Do whatever you want! If you are comfortable in your own style, that's really all that matters. It has taken me a really long time to learn that, and I hope that everyone can learn it eventually.
Wear what you want and be whoever you want to be! Because trust me, you will make the world a lot more interesting if you are who you want to be, not who the world, or rather Viewmont High School wants you to be.

Federal Bill Fails to Recognize Roots of Economic Crisis

With the U.S. economy rapidly spiraling downward amidst fears of a recession, U.S. Congress has recently reach a “bipartisan” accord to give 150 billon dollars to 116 prospective consumers, oxymoronically claiming the title of a “growth” package. Normally some witty and convoluted metaphor would pervade the duration of this article, but for the sake of clarity albeit the intellectual arrogance avoided, I will cut directly to the proverbial chase.

This new U.S. fiscal policy fails fundamentally to address the roots of the mortgage crisis and instead stakes a façade of government action for almost the express purpose of the election scene in place of economic sense. To reference a common colloquial phrase, it is “Too little, too late.”

Quite simply, the U.S. consumer is paying the value of under priced risk experienced in the global economy with the rapid economic development of China, South Korea, and India, countries that essentially exploited low-paid masses of workers with the technology of the West to pump out light consumer goods. Not only did this trample underfoot the realistic extrapolation of inflation rates, but led to a vast reservoir of income unmatched by consumers in the West, leading to more subsequent savings than investment, as this drive of innovation reached blood-cult worthy intensity and proportion. The three dollar shirt at Wal-Mart produced in Bangladesh became a staple in the U.S. consumer diet, consequently accelerating the rates of innovation experienced in the global economy in these nations. However, statistical data in global savings shows only a slight increase in net value, which seems to indicates that these savings intention were largely tempered by declining investment intentions in the developed world. A recent Canadian Bank study concluded that this is the primary causal factor in the decline of long-term global interest rates.

Demand within the previous U.S. housing market was fueled by the assumption of rising prices, a complex that facilitates the development of most asset-based price bubbles. If demand had not been met, most homes would have been financed with longer fixed rate mortgages versus the innately popular adjustable low-interest rate ones. This premise essentially created a pre-eminent inflationary dilemma during the past several years when the Federal Reserve preserved low interest rates in the threat of acerbic and potentially devastating depression of home value, subsequently affecting the dollar. Rather than the monetary situation tightening as was expected with a hypothetical increase of long term interest rates, the rates declined and stagnated even with increased intervention from federal entities. Although a potential deflation crisis was avoided, the dollar rate and home values have continued to plunge almost to the point of figurative terminal velocity.

This readily denotes that domestic corporations have effectively lost control of long term interest rates in conjunction with asset prices moving increasingly dissonant from short term values. One particular chilling example is the purchase of foreign currency by Japan and China to stabilize its value to preserve their investments, values that exceed over 500 billion dollars. In a doomsday scenario, when Japan stopped creating an artificial buffer around currency when domestic investment was at viable stake, the dollar value should have crashed. Instead, after economic tremors and gyrations, the U.S. economy remained virtually unchanged, a stunning testament to the depth of these global markets, whose value is closing in on 100 trillion dollars, far outstripping the resources of central banks. Constrained by the potential inflationary impacts of expanding their balance sheets to counteract these forces, central banks are further hindered by lowered international trade barriers. Their ability to augment currency value in conjunction with national governments is almost undisputedly gone on an international scale.

To surmise this situation in several words, national governments have lost major control over their long term economic viability. The new bill is not sufficient enough to spark consumer spending, and fails to recognize the influence of foreign markets. Instead, realistic value in the housing market will have to be ascertained independently for the crisis to subside.

-Jared Andersen (in case the diction didn't give it away)

the politics of cultural identity

At a time when national polling is a pretty scrutinized science, we are allowed a glimpse of certain psychological phenomena we would otherwise not have access to. I'll try to keep this both short and cerebral: the politics of cultural categorization and typology are notions so ingrained in our collective psyche not only as Americans, but humans, that those who create these molds receive little no scrutiny. That's a bad thing. My criticism is twofold; not only are the implications their conclusions flawed, but the methodology by which they reach these conclusions, too, are pretty messed up.

While being aware of public opinion is an absolutely essential component to a healthy republic, the media attention, and thus necessarily the attention of political candidates, focused on them is absolutely ri-freakin'-diculous. It seems as though every decision is coldly calculated on public opinion, rather than either common sense or normality. If candidates/public officials spent less time catering so heavily to popular preferences about semantic issues (see: Mitt Romney) and more focusing on their stances on specific policies, we would be substantially better off.

Allow me a caveat/rant here: this notion of political capital is the biggest bunch of fecal matter since the Cowboys' Superbowl hopes. It's turning into the next "tipping point," "paradigm shift," of "perfect storm." Bush's constant insistence, not only throughout his election campaign, but also during his tenure as president, that he was going to "spend that there political capital like a coralled mare in heat" are quite vacuous (see: GWB senior). First, one does not "spend" capital--one would "invest" it. Bush's presidency, analogous to his approach to "political capital," has been one based on the shortsighted approach of spending when you don't have it. Kenny Rogers and Dubya both "got to know when to hold 'em, know when to fold 'em."

Back to the pseudo-point. The way polls are brought about in the first place are not ok either. The static identity that they cast on each of their categorized subjects is symptomatic of the generalizing typical (no pun intended) of thought that takes into account different groups. This method of thought completely ignores the intersectionality of different groups, or the principle that often a member of one minority group is also a member of another. For example, a young black woman is substantially more likely to be a member of a lower income tax bracket/below the poverty line as well as a single mother. Because she only gets one vote in a certain poll, she can never be truly represented accurately. This skews poll results of different voting blocs to the point where they are pretty much meaningless, except for semantic reasons, which are apparently supreme important to those gunning for their party's nod for the presidency.

The Real Problem With The Legal System

I've noticed a few distinct problems with the way that punishment is dished out in America, most of these problems aren't the fault of the government, rather, they are the fault of the parents. These problems snowball and eventually result in the overcrowding of our prisons, or at least that's the way that I see it. The problem starts during elementary school when kids bully other kids on the playground, whenever one of these incidents come about almost invariably the parents of the bully will deny that anything occured saying that their little angel wouldn't be capable of doing such a thing, thus no real punishment results from the process. This then continues into junior high, and high school, all the time the misbehavior of the youth in question just becomes more and more drastic, this is due to the fact that they are never punished for what they do. I saw a prime example of this Thanksgiving weekend when a group of teenagers caused a raucus by Dick's Market, and got away with it, in fact the parents of the kids in question even threatened to sue over something that was clearly the fault of their respective children. This behavior then continues into the adult world where their crimes becomes even more drastic, and then their parents can't shield them from the hand of justice.

hey.....

video.google.com/videoplay?docid=5547481422995115331

The primary cause of my anxiety

Tomorrow is January's halfway point. Plenty of resolutions have been broken, cabin fever has inspired me to take up treadmilling and most notably, the 2008 presidential nomination process is in full swing.

The two most noted states' days have passed, with four different candidates each taking home a first-place prize: Barack Obama and Mike Huckabee in Iowa and Hillary Clinton and John McCain in New Hampshire. Tomorrow is the Michigan primary, much anticipated as the event, yet unrealized, that may actually break up the field of contenders in the jam-packed Republican competition.

The five candidates with any real chance remaining in that party are Huckabee and McCain, as well as Mitt Romney, Rudy Giuliani and Fred Thompson. Each has pursued a different strategy to winning the nomination. Huckabee hopes to find support in the Rust Belt and southern states where his evangelism and populism resonate. Thompson, running as perhaps the most traditionally conservative--but woefully uninspiring and incompetent--candidate is pursuing a similar strategy. Most agree McCain, after winning New Hampshire, needs to win either Michigan or South Carolina or both. Giuliani is less orthodox: he is staking a lot on winning bigger states like Florida. And finally (I didn't forget, don't worry) Romney is in a similar position to McCain: needing a win in Michigan to really be seen as viable.

A little word on tomorrow before I cut to the chase.

Because the Michigan Democratic Party frontloaded its primary to tomorrow, the national party organization stripped it of its delegates. That means that whoever wins the Dems' primary tomorrow (it will, by all counts, be Clinton) will not receive any delegates, votes of support at the national convention, where the nominee is officially chosen. This has inspired many Democrats to come up with creative ideas on whom to vote for. McCain is particularly popular with independents who may choose to vote in the Republican primary (Michigan is an open primary, so it's easy to cross-vote).

But many Democrats are much more ingenuous. Knowing that a Romney win tomorrow is the result most likely to prolong the constipated Republican nomination process, many of Democrats have decided to vote for him in an attempt to minimize what may anyway be a Romney victory, not to mention the prospect of letting the Republicans rip each other apart until the summer while an already-coronated Democratic winner is gaining support from across the entire party. http://slate.com/blogs/blogs/trailhead/archive/2008/01/11/machinations-in-michigan.aspx

Now, that's not nearly all of the prognostication to be spoken of for tomorrow. But it should do. I hope so, at least. After myself succumbing to it, I think it necessary to urge everyone to not give in to shallow horse-race journalism. I'd like to think I've said all that needs to be said on the topic for at least one day. This kind of reporting--on the campaign, who's winning, who's losing, and otherwise instead of on candidates themselves or the efficacy of their policy stances--is dangerous in its failure to substantively educate.

Yesterday, the Deseret News ran a story http://deseretnews.com/article/1,5143,695243664,00.html entitled "62% say Mitt's still in race." This is one of the more egregious examples. 1) This is flagrant in its desire to report only how Mitt Romney is doing, nothing more. 2) Horse-race mentality is bad enough, but the DNews doesn't bother to get experts pontificate on all this vacuity like many organizations feel the need to, but instead just polls Utahns, who I'm not sure have any idea what people in Michigan are thinking. 3) It's another Mitt Romney story above the fold on page 1. Maybe Joe Cannon should just put old conference talks on page 2 and get it over with. Today's front page is "Romney revs up motown voters."

As potential voters, or at least informed citizens, try to look beyond this kind of coverage. It's because most people don't that tomorrow will still matter for Democrats, simply because the winner will get press, but no delegates. This election isn't about who's winning in South Carolina.

If you're interested in gaining a little insight on with whom you most align, spend some time on http://electoralcompass.com/ or http://myelectionchoices.com/, or maybe just read a little bit. Something not about a primary.

Have a heart? Then donate

Several times a year, students have the chance to save up to three lives in roughly 30 minutes. The beauty of it is that all you need to do is sit in a chair and squeeze a rubber ball. Yep, that's it. You even get to miss class for it, and you can grab some free oreos and fig newtons when you're finished. Yet so many of us, most of us, pretty much all of us, don't bother to donate blood when the opportunity comes knocking. Instead, we sit in class and shudder as we look at the kid next to us, sporting hot pink medical tape on his elbow, and give the classic, lame-o excuse: "I'm afraid of needles."
I've got news for you--most people don't like needles. Most people who donate blood don't like needles. In fact, most of the people who do like needles are in jail or drug rehab.
Face it like a grown up: you haven't had a neurological procedure involving spinal cord or brain between 1972 and 1989. You don't work in a abattoir (you probably don't know what that is. Neither did I, but it's not as exciting or as scandalous as it sounds). You've never had Ross River fever. You haven't slept with someone who has lived in the Isle of Man or Whales in the past 12 months. Creuzfelt-Jakob Disease does not run in your family. Give up and give life. You don't have an excuse not to donate!
In a worst-case-scenario, you might hurt a little and you could get a bruise. I survived the worst donating experience possible, but heck, the eight-inch, tri-color bruise was fun to show off! And lo and behold, it went away, and I'm a perfectly happy and healthy seventeen year-old once again. Nine times out of ten, you'll donate without feeling anything but the initial prick. But in the rare case that the donation process doesn't go ideally, you aren't going to die. But someone else awaiting blood donation might if you choose to hold back.
The truth is rarely pure and never simple, but blood donation is one of those occasions where it is both. The excuses high school students make for themselves are ridiculous. Granted, a handful of us may have medical conditions. I'll take that. But plain-old fear of being poked is irrational, immature, and unfounded. Stop making excuses, and do what you can to change the world.

Utopianism

So, over christmas break I read a book titled, The Uglies. It was basically about a Utopian society that gave everyone an operation at the age of 16 that made them beautiful. "Big eyes, full lips, no one fat or skinny."

The story is about a girl about to turn sixteen, the age everyone recieves their operation, who decides to run away to join other rebels who have decided to remain, "ugly" and keep their own faces.

The book touches on a lot of todays issues, such as dependancy on oil, plastic surgerys, and also many issues we deal with as a teenagers.

However The Uglies Author, Scott Westerfeld said in an interview:

Uglies isn't about dire warnings, it's about thinking things through. The more we think about this stuff, the better our choices will be. But here's my cautionary tale: I have a gorgeous friend who has a really big nose. When she was sixteen, she desperately wanted surgery to make her look more like everybody else. Fortunately she kept her own face. Because these days everyone agrees that though she'd be cute with a cute little nose, she is totally striking and sexy now because of her fabulous schnoz. Don't forget, a few decades ago girls who were "too tall" were given drugs to slow their growth. Now it rocks to be tall. My main advice is: stick to make-up, clothes, hair dye, and minor piercings when you're young. Everything else is way too permanent.

So, I was wondering if anyone else had read it and what they thought?