I love Formals – don’t you?
December 11th, 2005 by MrLuxuryFashionGuruI had a fantastic time at the Quincy winter formal – the Snowy Soir
A few fragments from the road, travelogue, musings, keepsakes…
I had a fantastic time at the Quincy winter formal – the Snowy Soir
It’s late and I really want to go to bed so I’m going to make this quick.
At about 2.15pm today (Dec 7, Wed), US air marshals shot and killed Rigoberto Alpizar, a 44-year-old home-improvement store worker, as he ran off an American Airlines jet in Miami after allegedly indicating that he had a bomb in his backpack (which he supposedly reached into while running off the plane). He was travelling with his wife who reportedly had run after him claiming that her husband had bipolar disorder and needed to take medication. After Alpizar had been killed it was confirmed that he had not been carrying any explosive device.
The first I heard about this news was from several Americans who all expressed the same sentiment: “I feel so much safer knowing that US Air Marshals are doing their jobs to protect people from terrorists.” I was left reeling when I heard this.
The fact that the dominant popular US reaction to this incident seems to be unironic, unqualified satisfaction with the result was really quite shocking to me. Having been right in the thick of the action when a similar tragic incident occured in London in July (which I also blogged about here), I can report that the British reaction was quite different. People felt far more conflicted about the event, and many people felt even less safe afterward.
I think the difference is that Americans seem much more willing to make the following (shaky, I say) assumptions:
1) They are truly under attack and vulnerable to terrorist attacks. “Especially in airports and on airplanes.”
2) Preemptive violence is a good solution to defuse or eliminate these threats, and in fact is the only possible response. “What else can you do? If someone says the word ‘bomb’ on a plane and then runs away, of course you should shoot him to save the lives of everyone else on the plane.”
These two assumptions allow many Americans to overcome the long-standing American distrust of the government and law enforcement to say things like “Air Marshals are well-trained counter-terrorism experts who know how to correctly assess the situation.”
(Actually, according to USA Today, training for Air Marshals with “no law enforcement experience” was cut from 14 weeks to just 5 weeks before 2002, and in 2004 “the Homeland Security Department’s inspector general issued a scathing report that cited air marshals sleeping on the job, testing positive for alcohol or drugs, losing weapons and falsifying reports.” No quite so credible, if you ask me.)
More importantly, the two assumptions I listed lead Americans to do one of two things:
a) they fill in the many gaps in the available information (what exactly did the man say? Did he appear drunk or drugged? Did he appear clearly mentally ill?) to paint a mental picture where the Air Marshals did the only possible thing. (“He announced he had a bomb and then tried to run away even when the Air Marshals told him to stop.”)
b) they focus only on the existing facts and insist that this is enough to condemn this man to a quick execution and assume that no other contextual information could change their reading of the situation. “He said ‘bomb’ on an airplane and ran. That’s exactly what Air Marshals are trained to react to.”
If you ask me, I find the British response far more reasonable for its willingness to be self-reflexive about the underlying assumptions and the awareness at the time that the full facts were not yet known and that these particulars could make a critical difference to how a tragic death should be perceived. In contrast the American response seems both unthinkingly instinctive and dangerously unfounded.
*shudder*
—
Next time, I argue that African nations should not spend any money subsidizing or providing Anti-RetroViral (ARV) drugs to HIV positive individuals. Yay controversy.
I’d like to tell myself that I am secure and rational enough not to be emotionally affected by less-than-ideal grades. But then of course I would be deceiving myself.
Today I received back a paper I wrote for my International Law class several weeks ago. It was nerve-wrecking because it was long enough ago that I had completely forgotten what I had written about and only remembered the rather middling grade my first paper had received. So it was fairly gratifying (and a huge relief) that it made a good grade.
And then a couple of hours later I received the worst grade I’ve ever gotten on a response paper. Again. This TF just really detests the work I turn it. The first time I figured maybe I was misunderstanding her expectations so I put a lot more work into the second one trying to conform to her (vague) advice. A lot of good that did me. This time she just wrote, “Jason, quit blabbering” (in French) and slapped me with a failing grade. And slapped is right. For about fifteen minutes after that I was in a stunned, depressive daze (can you imagine?). Unbelievable. This woman is going to destroy my good track record with the French department and crush my little heart while she’s at it. *chin trembles* Yes, yes I know: noone likes a loser whining about his failures. I’ll just shut up now, and revert to rationality – now where’d I put my masculinity? Yes, there it is. Much better.
There must be some way to fix this. Or at least make it less bad.
—
Now all I have to do is survive this last couple of weeks and:
a) Write a killer 5-page final paper for my MIT class. I really *really* want to do well in this class. It would be so disappointing to me if I couldn’t produce good work for this inspiring professor teaching a life-changing class. Of course she has an incredibly challenging brief for this final assignment (“Pretend you’re writing a one page piece for The New Yorker.”)
b) Write a second Justice paper that impresses my TF more decisively than the first one (his request). This is going to be hard…
c) Write a second/final French paper (and perhaps two more response papers) to rescue my currently very
I feel as if every time I make a resolution to start eating better, the dining hall manages to prepare a whole slew of my favorite foods. Today I decided I was only going to get a salad, but of course the minute I walked in to get my lunch I noticed that they were serving long-grained & wild rice (so good!!), beef fajitas (mmmmn), steamed corn (which I’m developed a taste for), sausage minestrone (which took some will power to ignore) and chicken florentine (which looked fantastic but which I also managed to resist taking). Grrr. I still made myself a salad in the end (topped with some of the parmesean and pesto pasta sauce on offer)… in addition to all the other stuff I put on my plate.
—
The reason I felt I needed to substitute a salad for more substantial offerings is because I stayed up all of last night watching DVDs and eating Nutella sandwiches. And the reason I stayed up is because yesterday I accidentally took a nap from 4pm to 10pm… which pretty much threw my sleep cycle completely out of whack.
Ok, time to go to section.
Right now I should be writing a two-page response paper comparing an element of Aristotle’s theory of the “right” and the “good” with some other philosopher’s, but instead I feel compelled to write a blog entry.
What am I thankful for this semester? As of now, I am thankful that:
a) After three semesters I have come full circle with the material that interests Prof. C, and that it’s given me a new language to express and conceptualize some of the experiences, intuitions and heretofore undetected existential effects that come bundled with urban modernity. I love that I now have a sense of the vocabulary to engage in introspection and reflection under a more formalized framework that feels more satisfying in its explanative value.
b) Under Prof. S’s confident and skilful guidance, I have been given a respectable introduction to western philosophical thought in a fashion that has validated, clarified and echoed many of the things I had always wondered about or had constructed a personal morality around.
c) In what I can only view as a great blessing, I have had an extraordinarily wonderful experience in my MIT seminar, in that I have not only learnt many intrinsic truths about the world and many surprising subtleties about those truths, but more importantly in that I have added to a fairly robust personal worldview based on these findings and I now feel that I have decided what I want to do in life. That latter development is especially exciting for me. People crave structure and direction, and Prof. L. has done a remarkable job at helping me feel confident about having discovered both.
This list is of course by no means exhaustive, and life has its indignities, inconveniences and difficulties, but in terms of classes I can be happy that they have served the purposes that educators and students must wish they would serve – to inspire, to engage, to transform.
—
The long Thanksgiving holiday weekend was a Godsend. I really needed the break. However, having eaten two very hearty homecooked Thanksgiving dinners (one at Libby’s place – thankyouthankyou!) and one up in Maine with Ryan’s family (the *best* turkey I’ve ever eaten, no question!), I am now nearly three pounds heavier (eek). Actually, it may have been all the dessert pies, random drinks and candy I consumed that did it. In any case, I’m heading down to the gym, where I expect to find many other guilty students trying to redeem their pre-holiday figures.
And I got a reasonable amount of work done on the five-hour ride home too (I drove on the way up and Ryan drove us back to Cambridge)! Fancy that!
et la souffrance…. *shudder*
The fear and the suffering. And no, I’m not referring to anything more significant or less egocentric than this awful, awful, overdue, awful French paper I’m writing right now. I’ve been working at it since 6pm (it’s now close to midnight), but between 9pm and 10.40pm I don’t think I managed to write a single word. Pas d’un mot. Bleah.
Chronology of French paper:
7 Nov: Paper is due in class; I had already asked for an extension a week before (it was the week before the Dins concert)
8 Nov: I start reading for and actually writing the paper. The required length is 6-8 pages. I churn out a reasonable four pages on the theme of the soulessness of the post-war Parisian banlieues described in Christiane Rochefort’s “Les Petits Enfants du Si
When I walked into the stadium at half-time, the score was 3-21 in Yale’s favor. It took a while (and three tense rounds of overtime), but the team finally made good and asserted Harvard’s supremacy. Go Crimson!!
The capacity crowd at the Yale Bowl, taken from the Harvard half of the crowd, of course. The game took over four hours, and the sun actually set just as Harvard came back and tied the score after a dismal second and third quarters.