So I'm sitting at Mccarren right now, waiting to get on the plane back to the LA. The trip was a lot of fun, but, unfortunately, I barely made it three hours in Event #39.
I was very happy with how I played. I consistently got my money in way ahead and made good, timely steals. Unfortunately, variance picked a bad time to rear its head.
I began around noon with $4500 chips along with the other 2700 entrants. My first table was pretty soft, but that didn't stop me from getting involved in some big pots pretty quickly. Within the first rotation I picked up AKo and raised from LP to 3x (150 as blinds began at 25-50). I got two callers, a late position guy and the small blind. The flop came down 3 low/mid spades. I had the K of spades, so with that and overcards, a cbet was certainly in order. The late position caller folded but the small blind called. The turn was the Queen of hearts. Check, check. The river was the fourth spade, a 7. The small blind led for about $750. Knowing that I could only be beat by the Ace of spades (but also knowing that a raise would only be called by that Ace), I called. A4, Ace of Spades, I lost 1/3 of my stack. Ouch.
After another rotation, it was folded around to me in the small blind, where I looked down and saw a lovely KK. Wanting to build a pot, I raised to 200. The big blind called and the flop came 10-10-9. I thought this was a pretty good flop for an overpair but certainly vulnerable to draws, so I cbet 2/3rds pot and was called. The turn was a blank four. My initial instinct was to fire again to protect my hand. But something stopped me. When the big blind called on the flop it was pretty quick. I had a feeling he didn't think I was that strong. The board was hard to hit and my raise was from a steal position. Even though there were some bad river cards for me if he checked behind, I thought it might be better to go for the check-raise. I did, he obliged, and I quickly moved in, not thrilled to get all my chips in 15 minutes into my first WSOP event(!)
After he tanked, I started to root for a call. Obviously a ten would have snapped me. At that point I figured he had a draw, a small pair, or maybe a 9. He waited forever before folding, and told me that he had 9-7. I dragged a big pot and was up to about 5k. Soon after this, the dealer informed us that we would be the first table in the huge room to break (table breaks were planned ahead of time). Disappointing, as I'd liked the table. After a few more hands we were all moved, and I sat down in seat 7 of a different table not too far from where I'd started.
I ended up playing the first hand I was dealt, pocket 4s. A player raised in middle position and I called from the Cutoff. We were still at 25/50, so we were deep enough to set mine. The player on the button directly behind me also called, the blinds folded, and we saw an Ace high flop 3 handed. I missed my set so I was planning on folding pretty quickly. Oddly, the pre flop raiser checked. I checked too and the button quickly checked behind. The turn was a 7. Again, the pre flop raiser checked. Now I realized this was a good steal opportunity. There was no way an ace or strong hand checked twice here. So I fired and the button and pfr instantly folded. Easy money.
After that, I didn't see too many playable hands for awhile. I watched the table closely and tried to pick up on the dynamics between players and their individual styles. On my right was a small woman with glasses who, it quickly became apparent, was a bulldog. Throughout the time I was at the table, I saw her reraise quite a bit and take down some big pots. I was glad she was on my right(!) At the same time, on her right was the pre flop raiser from the 4s hand. He was raising virtually every hand from middle and late position. It was annoying, but exploitable. I figured I'd be in some pots with him at some point, but simply couldn't get good enough hands to take advantage at this point.
After a few more rotations, the player two to my left opened from early position for 3.5x, his standard raise, even though the rest of the table had been opening to 2.5. I was in the big blind, and it was folded around to me. I looked down and saw a lovely sight: pocket kings! Now I tried to figure out the best way to make money on the hand. I ended up flatting for two reasons. First, I reasoned that the raiser would (correctly), see a 3bet from the big blind into an early position raiser as VERY strong. Unless he had a VERY big hand, at least JJ+ or AK, he might be able to get away pre-flop. At worst, he could call and then escape on many flops. Secondly, I was concerned that if an Ace came off I could end up playing a big pot out of position against a raiser very likely to have an Ace in his hand.
The flop came down queen high with no flush or straight draws. The raiser cbet into me about 2/3rds pot. I paused for awhile, checked my cards, pretending to consider folding, then repopped him 3x his original bet. He quickly moved all in for 2800 more. I had him covered by a little over a thousand and quickly called. He turned over AQo. Of course I then turned over my KK and he immediately went white and said to me "nice hand!" I wasn't feeling so confident however, as with most of my chips in, even though I was pretty far ahead, he was hardly dead. I think I was about a 4:1 favorite at this point with him drawing to 5 outs. I said loudly "the hand isn't over yet!" The turn was a jack. The river.... another queen. BAM. I was down to 1300 chips.
I was shellshocked, of course. My opponent apologized profusely for the beat, which was gracious, but I told him not to worry, as I'd gotten exactly what I wanted in that spot. I got my money in a huge favorite and since I hadn't repopped him pre, I got why he thought AQo might be good there. That's exactly what I wanted him to think. So I couldn't really complain, but now I was hurting. Before I'd splashed around in a few smaller pots, stolen some blinds here and there. Now I was suddenly in short stack mode with thirteen big blinds and visions of not even making the first break were going through my head.
I fought valiently to keep my spirits up and stay focused. Only four hands later I picked up AQo in late position and opened to 300, almost 1/3 of my remaining stack. I got called by the button, a european looking guy who wasn't very active but looked like he knew what he was doing. The flop was just awful, 9-8-5, two spades (no spade in my hand). Cbetting (or shoving) seemed like suicide. Once I bet I would be committed and even if I were ahead I couldn't be far ahead! Sadly, I didn't see any option but to check/fold and give up. It left me with ten big blinds, which at least gave me a chance to get my money in better than that.
After this hand I went utterly card-dead for what seemed like forever. It was immensely frustrating, as I wanted to get back in the game and steal some pots. Still, I had to remain focused and not take silly risks yet. I still had enough big blinds to wait for a good spot, and with the slow structure of the tournament (hour levels... at this point about halfway through level 2, 50/100), I did have the time to be a little more careful. After playing fold-em poker for what felt like forever, it was folded around to me in late position and I looked down and saw... two aces!
I wasn't waiting for Aces. I'd planned on getting my money in with any pair as the open raiser and most pairs as a re-raiser, AQs+ and maybe some other hands depending on the situation. For example, if I saw a spot where I could triple up with a hand likely to have good equity like J10s or 76s, I might have grabbed it. Instead, I got the aces. Now, after waiting that long for anything, I didn't feel raising was the right play. I only had ten big blinds, so any reasonable player would see that I intended to commit myself on nearly any flop. I settled on limping, which wasn't an easy decsion by any means, since slow-playing KK had cost me such a big pot. Nevertheless, it seemed like the best chance I had to double up. I limped, no one raised, the small blind completed and we saw the flop 3 ways. J7x, two diamonds. The small blind led out for about half pot and I pushed over him fairly quickly. I figured he probably had a flush draw, or, hopefully, top pair, and wanted to either end the hand now or get it in ahead. He had a 7 with no FD, though he caught one on the turn. Fortunately, I held on the river and now I was up to a walloping 2100 of my original 4500 stack.
Very soon after the first break hit. We had half an hour. I decided to go back to my hotel room, which was a good brisk walk away from the convention center where the tournament was being held. I did so for a few reasons... first, I'd brought Janessa's Ipod to keep me loose, but it was totally dead, so it needed charging. Janessa was at the spa so I couldn't yet ask her to do anything about it. Second, I realized that running back and forth would be good for me, because it'd keep my blood flowing and keep me loose after sitting for so long. So I went back and carefully thought out a plan for the next hour. When I went back the blinds would be 75/150, leaving me with 13 or so big blinds. A very awkward stack size. I remembered that this stack size was potentially ideal for re-stealing loose raisers, and resolved to use this information to my advantage.
It didn't take too long for me to get the chance. Our aggro raiser mentioned before opened for the 200th time in a row from middle position soon after we returned. I looked down to find J10s in the small blind. I paused. Although I knew this was an ideal re-steal spot, I was still a little nervous about executing it, knowing that it was essentially a semi-bluff. Still, poker is about risk, and I needed chips. I couldn't get a much better spot than this, and J10s played pretty decently against a steal range. So I shoved. The big blind instafolded and said "Good luck." The original raiser hemmed and hawed and tanked. I felt sure he would call me and that he was deep enough to do so and sat there very nervously until he finally mucked. I breathed a huge sigh of relief, though I said aloud, "I wanted a call but I guess I'll take this." I don't know if I convinced anyone but it felt tricky ! (LOL).
Now I had a little over 3000. Not great, but a little room to manuever at least. Only a few hands later our intrepid maniac raised again to 400, 2.5x. I looked down to see AJo in the cutoff. I am not normally fond of calling raises with this type of hand, even in position, but given how wide the raiser's range appeared to be and that I had position on him, I decided to take a flop and see if I could either hit it or out play him. The big blind also called. The flop came down jack-7-2 rainbow. It was as dry a flop as you can imagine, and clearly I was either way ahead or way behind. The bb checked, the raiser cbet about 2/3rds pot and now I had a decsion. I was short enough that a reraise would commit me to the pot, and even though the board was dry, I would obviously hate a Queen or King on the turn or river, so calling didn't seem like the best option. Still, I had a player behind me who might have something worth playing. I tanked for what felt like forever (probably to the other players too!) before pushing in. I reasoned that he probably didn't have top set since I had a jack in my hand, that two pairs were very unlikely given the board, and that because of how loose a raiser he was pre-flop, I was ahead so much of the time that I had no other real option but to move in. The big blind folded and the original raiser snap-folded, looking very frustrated. Since I figured I might want to play back at him again, I flipped over my AJ and told him "I'm not bluffing you," dragging a good pot.
Now I was up to over 4k again, and I felt great. I'd weathered a very challenging storm to get back into contention. I now had enough chips to really play poker again. I got involved in some more small pots and generally was doing pretty well, until an amazing donk made himself known to the table. The gentlemen on my left got involved in a big pot with a guy in seat one. I hadn't watched the whole hand but on the turn he shoved all in on a 7-8-10-5 board with two spades. Seat one tanked, and seemed ready to fold, but surprisingly he called, turning over Q9. Queen high with a gutshot!! 4 outs to what turned out to be a set of 8s. Holy crap! This nut had basically called of his whole stack with a gutshot...which...he HIT. Jack on the river. Unreal!
The whole table was stunned. When seat one got up for awhile we all commented and joked about the play. It was crazy. Several hands later, the aggro guy opened small and the aggressive woman next to him moved in over the top of him. Amazingly, seat one, in the big blind, coldcalled both raises. When the hands were turned over, there could no longer be any doubt this guy was a world class retard. He had pocket 4s. The original raiser had Aces and the woman next to me had 10s. The original raiser was short, so I mentioned to the woman that at least she had a good side pot. Predictably(?) a 4 flopped, no one caught up, the original raiser was eliminated, and the woman next to me took a big hit to her stack. A player near me confided that he had folded a 4 meaning this guy had 1-outted his way to a bigger stack(!)
Well, obviously he became the focus of the table, playing too many hands too aggressively but managing to get lucky a lot of the time, though losing occasionally. I raised his earl yposition limp once from the button and he immediately overshoved. He re-popped the woman next to me several times stating that he didn't like being bullied. The woman insisted "I'm not bullying you sir," but that did not seem to placate him. A little later, with her in the big blind, he open raised from mp. She mucked 10-6s (which I inadvertendly saw over her shoulder) and he proudly flipped over 2-3o.
The very next hand I was in the big blind when nutball open limped and a player in late position behind him limped behind. I looked down to find AJo. Not my favorite hand, strong in this situation, but not fun to play out of position. The blinds were still 75/150, so I raised to 800. The donk moved in pretty quickly and the late position raiser folded. I felt sick. He had me covered, and the thought of bouncing out of my first WSOP with AJ was not a good one.
At the same time, I knew that I was probably ahead and that this might be my best chance to get a sizable stack. I slumped my head on the table grinding it into my arm. A crying call certainly. Someone near me said "Good luck" and I said "Thanks, I'll need it!" Someone else said, "No, you won't," and the donk rolled over A8o. I was a little relieved he didn't have KQ or something like that where it was basically a flip, but still wasn't ready to feel good until the hand was over. An ace flopped. The turn was a blank. The river was a by-now predictable 8 and I was done.
Obviously I was stunned. It took me a good thirty minutes to really get my head back. It had been a crazy 3 hours. I'd gotten my money in consistenly ahead and played some of the best poker of my life. I'd stolen pots, made a blind-blind steal, picked off bluffs, played through an extremely challenging short stack situation and fought back, and generally was in A-game mode nearly the entire time. Still, I was railed before the second break in my first WSOP event. It hurt, I'm not going to lie.
I took solace in two important facts. First, as I said, I played the best poker of my life and it was on the biggest stage yet of my young poker "career." That was and is immensely satisfying. I wanted to see if I could play in those situations and thrive. I did. That felt nice. Secondly, I was still in Vegas until Sunday, my wife was around, and I could still have a lovely time. We in fact did just that.
We had dinner reservations at Gaylord, an Indian restaurant in the Rio, for 7pm, which was around when I'd figured the dinner break would be. We decided to get tickets to see Penn and Teller that night and make a date night out of it. It turned into a wonderful evening. P&T were awesome and worth every penny of the $85 tickets. We had an amazing dinner at Gaylord, split a nice bottle of Pinot and enjoyed the rest of the evening.
The other thing we did a decent bit of was railing. We wandered through WSOP and saw a bunch of great players. As soon as we walked into the spectator room we nearly walked INTO T.J. Cloutier. Wow, that man is HUGE. We then saw Men, "The Master" Nguyen playing a cash game nearby. Very cool. It turned out that TWO final tables were going at this point. A stud 8 table and an NLH one. The Stud8 table featured Jeff Lisandro and... Doyle Brunson! We looked but didn't see Doyle. A break was taken soon after we came in so we figured he was probably in the bathroom. Anyway, the final tables at the Rio are open to all to watch. They are in enclosed areas but the spectator seating is open, and there is a nice porch overlooking them that you can watch them from. At this point we didn't see much.
We walked over then to an area where the limit 2k event was being played. There were only about 45 players left, Hellmuth and Negreanu among them. We didn't see Phil, but Daniel was present and loud. We watched him play for a bit until the dinner break hit and he ran out, twittering as he went. Again, cool
Later, before dinner, I checked the live updates from the WSOP page and saw that Doyle was down to a short stack and almost out. We rushed down and made it just in time to see his last two hands. It was simply amazing seeing Doyle play at a WSOP final table. The highlight of my trip, without a doubt! Later we saw Greg Raymer in the hallway, though I didn't approach him. We watched a bit more of the final table action in the 8 or better tournament after P&T, and saw Lisandro survived and was 3 handed - he ultimately won the bracelet, though we didn't wait around to see it. We did get to see Matusow come in and rail him which was pretty cool too. Also, the night before I'd seen Humberto Brenes walking around and had managed (somehow!) to resist the urge to yell HUMBERRRRTO! at him.
All in all, a great trip. I was disappointed I'd run so bad, obviously, but Janessa and I had a ton of fun anyways. There's always next year. I am planning on putting some savings together to try to play several events next year, including, hopefully the main event. That's my trip report, and I'm sticking to it.
Sunday, June 21, 2009
Friday, June 19, 2009
This Wkd: Vegas & WSOP Event #39
| 2009 40th Annual World Series of Poker | ||||
 | ||||
No-Limit Hold’em (Event 39) | ||||
| ||||
Rio Hotel & Casino - Saturday, June 20, 2009 to Monday, June 22, 2009
Yup, off I go to take a stab at this thing. I figure it's about time I try, and so I'm off tonight. Janessa and I are staying at the Rio. She'll enjoy a lovely spa experience while I toil away at the tables in search of treasure! I am pumped. |
Tuesday, May 26, 2009
The New Star Trek Film - A Clue for Lost Viewers Inside?
I went to see the new Star Trek film last night. Thankfully, I was warned off wasting the $5 extra for the fake "IMAX" screen.
I'm a big fan of Star Trek, love the original series and was addicted to the next generation when it originally aired. In the past few years I've been re-watching Trek occasionally when it airs on TV Land and enjoying it again. So you would think I might be offended by the concept of a 'reboot' of Star Trek in the manner done in this film. Not so.
I have long believed that the greatness of the original series, not replicated since in any spinoff, even the Next Generation, was the fantastic juxtaposition of characters, specifically the amazing three-way relationship of Kirk, Spock and McCoy, but also the contributions made by the other members of the crew. Spock's logic, McCoy's emotion, and Kirk's brutish dynamic strength were almost a perfect Ego-Id-Superego confluence. Better still, the excellent writing and acting involved in the creation and development of the characters and their relationship with each other made for terrific chemistry.
Of course, the thirst for exploration and aventure and succeeding in high pressure situations were also key components of Trek's appeal, and I don't mean to understate them here. I do think, however, that without the depth and contrapunture of the characters, the show wouldn't have succeeded nearly to the extent it has.
The new Star Trek film, manned by J.J. Abrams, aptly captures the essence of the characters in the original series. Much has been made about the new "Kirk" acting nothing like Shatner, and this is true, he doesn't. Nevertheless, his personality and actions do make you think of James Kirk, albeit, a younger version. The essence of Kirk survives, and I think that's all that matters. It's too much to expect a new actor to step into the larger-than-life shoes of Shatner, and besides, Kirk is not about Shatner, he's a character played by Shatner, and this movie proves that these two entitites are separable.
Zacahry Quinto is of course, amazing, as young Spock (I'm still convinced someone saw him on "Heroes," thought he'd be an amazing young Spock, and from there developed the picture). Quintero has much less pressure on him than Chris Pine because while Leonard Nimoy's acting as Spock will forever associate him with the character, the nature of Spock and of Vulcans casts a smaller shadow for Quinto to operate in. Also, Quinto is simply a fantastic actor.
The rest of the cast inhabits their roles admirably. Most notable for me were the always terrific Simon Pegg as Scotty and Karl Urban as Bones. Urban was terrific. The scene in which his character is introduced begins with him speaking off-camera, and it is at least a full minute before he reveals that he is McCoy. Nevertheless, I knew exactly who he was from the moment I heard his voice and what he was saying. Terrific job. Simon Pegg was so great, I wish they could go back in time and have him replace James Doohan. He's a BETTER Scotty! Eric Bana is also wonderful, if barely recognizable, as Nero, a Romulan bad guy.
So, besides J.J. Abrams, what's the connection to "Lost" I mention in the title of this blog?
(SPOILER ALERT)
The film's main conceit is that, 130 years from the time the film takes place, an old Spock fails in an attempt to save Romulus, the home planet of the Romulans from destruction. Bana's character Nero blames Spock, and the two travel back in time through a black hole, though they end up 25 years apart. Trying to find Spock in Starfleet, Nero attacks a federation vessel, which turns out to be the ship James T is about to be born on, and one that is commanded by his dad George. George is killed saving James T and the Mom.
Flash forward twenty years and 45 minutes of the plot and Nero draws the federation into another trap, which only Kirk realizes. To torture Spock, Nero destroys Vulcan and makes him watch the destruction so that he will feel what Nero felt when Romulus burned ...er was destroyed. Oh yea, Spock has now appeared in the past, though Nero bans him to a nearby winter planet which looks a little like Hoth. After being banished from the Enterprise via shuttlecraft, Kirk finds old Spock there, old Spock explains the above, and also states that Kirk's dad had been alive and had been the main inspiration for Kirk's entry into Starfleet. Time travel contradictions and illogic seem to fly, until Spock suggests an answer: the time travel caused an alternate reality.
When Nero went back in time and changed the past, he created an alternate reality separate and apart from the one he began in. In this alternate reality, Kirk and Spock's lives are different, but they still have the opportunity to work together - which they ultimately do. Spock makes up some story about why he can't see young Spock or blah blah blah end of the universe. Later old Spock meets young Spock and explains this to him, essentially implying that although he and young Spock are 'the same,' they are actually different, albeit very similar, entitites. This is the reason that old Spock does not seem to remember the conversation with young Spock.
Time travel? The ability to change the past and its effect (?) on the future? Aren't these staple "Lost" issues, particularly in this season? I submit that the Abrams direction is not a coincidence. The alternate reality theory is the only clean way to explain the time travel conceit. That is to say that it is the only explanation that doesn't result in painful mental gymnastics when considering time travel as a narrative device.
If entering into the past, or the future, creates a new branch on the tree of time, the idea that the characters are experiencing their present in the past or future is not contradictory, because the 'past' or 'future' are not really 'past' or 'future' but present. Moreover, any and all concerns about changing the past and the effect it would have on the future, and hence, presumably, on characters from the present now in the past, become moot. The Back to the Future 'disappearing from a picture' time travel stuff goes away, which is good, because while it worked great in that trilogy, its a theory of time travel narrative that's full of holes and questions.
So when Jack and the rest of the Losties go into 1978, they actually enter another reality rather than the 1978 that they know. In that new reality, there is no future yet, and the acts they take can directly change the 'future' and make it different than what they have experienced without causing a brain-cramping contradiction and without deleting their own past. In essence, then, the Island is not so much a bizarre place where the rules of time do not apply, so much as a bizarre place where the rules of time and space do not apply.
This has many implications, obviously, the most striking one being that even if the Losties can detonate the bomb, contrary to Jack and Sayid's wishes, it will not reboot their lives and erase the past several years.
Moreover, the 'alternate reality' line offers a possible explanation for the appearance of 'dead' characters to Hugo and other characters. In one reality they are dead, in another they are not, and the Island provides a way to communicate between these realities.
Just a few thoughts.
I'm a big fan of Star Trek, love the original series and was addicted to the next generation when it originally aired. In the past few years I've been re-watching Trek occasionally when it airs on TV Land and enjoying it again. So you would think I might be offended by the concept of a 'reboot' of Star Trek in the manner done in this film. Not so.
I have long believed that the greatness of the original series, not replicated since in any spinoff, even the Next Generation, was the fantastic juxtaposition of characters, specifically the amazing three-way relationship of Kirk, Spock and McCoy, but also the contributions made by the other members of the crew. Spock's logic, McCoy's emotion, and Kirk's brutish dynamic strength were almost a perfect Ego-Id-Superego confluence. Better still, the excellent writing and acting involved in the creation and development of the characters and their relationship with each other made for terrific chemistry.
Of course, the thirst for exploration and aventure and succeeding in high pressure situations were also key components of Trek's appeal, and I don't mean to understate them here. I do think, however, that without the depth and contrapunture of the characters, the show wouldn't have succeeded nearly to the extent it has.
The new Star Trek film, manned by J.J. Abrams, aptly captures the essence of the characters in the original series. Much has been made about the new "Kirk" acting nothing like Shatner, and this is true, he doesn't. Nevertheless, his personality and actions do make you think of James Kirk, albeit, a younger version. The essence of Kirk survives, and I think that's all that matters. It's too much to expect a new actor to step into the larger-than-life shoes of Shatner, and besides, Kirk is not about Shatner, he's a character played by Shatner, and this movie proves that these two entitites are separable.
Zacahry Quinto is of course, amazing, as young Spock (I'm still convinced someone saw him on "Heroes," thought he'd be an amazing young Spock, and from there developed the picture). Quintero has much less pressure on him than Chris Pine because while Leonard Nimoy's acting as Spock will forever associate him with the character, the nature of Spock and of Vulcans casts a smaller shadow for Quinto to operate in. Also, Quinto is simply a fantastic actor.
The rest of the cast inhabits their roles admirably. Most notable for me were the always terrific Simon Pegg as Scotty and Karl Urban as Bones. Urban was terrific. The scene in which his character is introduced begins with him speaking off-camera, and it is at least a full minute before he reveals that he is McCoy. Nevertheless, I knew exactly who he was from the moment I heard his voice and what he was saying. Terrific job. Simon Pegg was so great, I wish they could go back in time and have him replace James Doohan. He's a BETTER Scotty! Eric Bana is also wonderful, if barely recognizable, as Nero, a Romulan bad guy.
So, besides J.J. Abrams, what's the connection to "Lost" I mention in the title of this blog?
(SPOILER ALERT)
The film's main conceit is that, 130 years from the time the film takes place, an old Spock fails in an attempt to save Romulus, the home planet of the Romulans from destruction. Bana's character Nero blames Spock, and the two travel back in time through a black hole, though they end up 25 years apart. Trying to find Spock in Starfleet, Nero attacks a federation vessel, which turns out to be the ship James T is about to be born on, and one that is commanded by his dad George. George is killed saving James T and the Mom.
Flash forward twenty years and 45 minutes of the plot and Nero draws the federation into another trap, which only Kirk realizes. To torture Spock, Nero destroys Vulcan and makes him watch the destruction so that he will feel what Nero felt when Romulus burned ...er was destroyed. Oh yea, Spock has now appeared in the past, though Nero bans him to a nearby winter planet which looks a little like Hoth. After being banished from the Enterprise via shuttlecraft, Kirk finds old Spock there, old Spock explains the above, and also states that Kirk's dad had been alive and had been the main inspiration for Kirk's entry into Starfleet. Time travel contradictions and illogic seem to fly, until Spock suggests an answer: the time travel caused an alternate reality.
When Nero went back in time and changed the past, he created an alternate reality separate and apart from the one he began in. In this alternate reality, Kirk and Spock's lives are different, but they still have the opportunity to work together - which they ultimately do. Spock makes up some story about why he can't see young Spock or blah blah blah end of the universe. Later old Spock meets young Spock and explains this to him, essentially implying that although he and young Spock are 'the same,' they are actually different, albeit very similar, entitites. This is the reason that old Spock does not seem to remember the conversation with young Spock.
Time travel? The ability to change the past and its effect (?) on the future? Aren't these staple "Lost" issues, particularly in this season? I submit that the Abrams direction is not a coincidence. The alternate reality theory is the only clean way to explain the time travel conceit. That is to say that it is the only explanation that doesn't result in painful mental gymnastics when considering time travel as a narrative device.
If entering into the past, or the future, creates a new branch on the tree of time, the idea that the characters are experiencing their present in the past or future is not contradictory, because the 'past' or 'future' are not really 'past' or 'future' but present. Moreover, any and all concerns about changing the past and the effect it would have on the future, and hence, presumably, on characters from the present now in the past, become moot. The Back to the Future 'disappearing from a picture' time travel stuff goes away, which is good, because while it worked great in that trilogy, its a theory of time travel narrative that's full of holes and questions.
So when Jack and the rest of the Losties go into 1978, they actually enter another reality rather than the 1978 that they know. In that new reality, there is no future yet, and the acts they take can directly change the 'future' and make it different than what they have experienced without causing a brain-cramping contradiction and without deleting their own past. In essence, then, the Island is not so much a bizarre place where the rules of time do not apply, so much as a bizarre place where the rules of time and space do not apply.
This has many implications, obviously, the most striking one being that even if the Losties can detonate the bomb, contrary to Jack and Sayid's wishes, it will not reboot their lives and erase the past several years.
Moreover, the 'alternate reality' line offers a possible explanation for the appearance of 'dead' characters to Hugo and other characters. In one reality they are dead, in another they are not, and the Island provides a way to communicate between these realities.
Just a few thoughts.
Wednesday, April 15, 2009
Jack Bauer Power Hour
What do you call 24 Star Kiefer Sutherland's Intense Workout Program?
Jack Bauer's Hour of Power.
Did you hear about Kiefer Sutherland's new radio show with a Big League Ball Player?
Jack Bauer and Joe Mauer's Sports Hour
Did you know Jack Bauer once made a show about hippies? It was called
Jack Bauer's Hour of Flower Power.
How does Jack Bauer like his bread?
Jack Bauer cooks with Rice Flour.
What do you call a quick Wetnap to the face?
a Jack Bauer Power Shower.
Did you hear about Jack Bauer's new show on Food Network? It's called
Jack Bauer's Sweet and Sour Chicken Hour.
I really need a life.
Jack Bauer's Hour of Power.
Did you hear about Kiefer Sutherland's new radio show with a Big League Ball Player?
Jack Bauer and Joe Mauer's Sports Hour
Did you know Jack Bauer once made a show about hippies? It was called
Jack Bauer's Hour of Flower Power.
How does Jack Bauer like his bread?
Jack Bauer cooks with Rice Flour.
What do you call a quick Wetnap to the face?
a Jack Bauer Power Shower.
Did you hear about Jack Bauer's new show on Food Network? It's called
Jack Bauer's Sweet and Sour Chicken Hour.
I really need a life.
Wednesday, April 1, 2009
Why living in LA Rocks or Why April Might Reduce Me to Smiling Exhaustion
April figures to be the craziest month.
It just works out that there are no less than 5 awesome events I'm headed to this Month, starting tonight - with live appearances from people in comedy that I love. How awesome is living in the LA Area? Looking out my window and looking at this schedule...pretty freakin awesome.
First up, tonight, April 1st:
Reno 911! LIVE A Benefit for Planting Peace
As described on the site:
Observe and Report with Seth Rogen and Jody Hill Live in Santa Monica
April 7.
This is a sneak preview of Seth Rogen's new mall cop flick "Observe and Report" at the Aero Theater in Santa Monica which features a live appearance and Q&A by Seth Rogen himself( my double!) and Jody Hill, the director of this and previously, of "The Foot Fist Way." What else can I say but....SWEET. The Aero is an amazing place. They frequently have cool ass movies with Q&As from famous directors and actors in those movies. Among the people I've seen/met at the Aero... Mel Brooks, Dennis Hopper, Carl Reiner, Savage Steve, and many more...and now Mr. Rogen...Woot!
April 10.
It's Always Sunny in Philadelphia - Paley Center Panel Discussion with the Cast
Got these tickets before I booked the below, but still psyched. Sunny is one of my favorite shows ever, and getting to see the whole cast talk live about the show will be a treat.
April 18
It's Always Sunny in Philadelphia - The Nightman Cometh LIVE
Wow, this figures to be an even bigger treat- a live, two-night only performance of "The Nightman Cometh," the musical written for the final episode of last season. Need I say more? I dropped some bank to get these sold-out tix, but I'm sure it will be worth it!
April 26.
Unplugged & Unwigged - Spinal Tap and A Mighty Wind Live
Those three brilliant guys, Christopher Guest, Harry Shearer and Michael McKean who were Spinal Tap and also the folk band in "A Mighty Wind" perform songs from both live, out of costumes. I love Spinal Tap (who doesn't?) though "A Mighty Wind" was not my favorite Guest movie by a long shot...still a cool concept - and great for my old ass who probably won't make it out to see Spinal Tap in full costume and moshing glory
What a month!
It just works out that there are no less than 5 awesome events I'm headed to this Month, starting tonight - with live appearances from people in comedy that I love. How awesome is living in the LA Area? Looking out my window and looking at this schedule...pretty freakin awesome.
First up, tonight, April 1st:
Reno 911! LIVE A Benefit for Planting Peace
As described on the site:
Appearing live The RENO 911! Deputies (Tom Lennon, Robert Ben Garant,
Kerri Kenney-Silver, Niecy Nash, Cedric Yarbrough, Joe Lo Truglio and Ian Roberts) Nick Swardson, Matt Besser,
Andy Daly, Dave Holmes, Rob Huebel, Nick Kroll, Paul Scheer, Chris Tallman, Matt Walsh, Rainn Wilson, PLUS A
SPECIAL SEASON 6 PREMIERE SCREENING.
Pretty awesome, a lot of my favorites appearing, especially excited
about Joe Lo who I have a strange mancrush on... :)
Observe and Report with Seth Rogen and Jody Hill Live in Santa Monica
April 7.
This is a sneak preview of Seth Rogen's new mall cop flick "Observe and Report" at the Aero Theater in Santa Monica which features a live appearance and Q&A by Seth Rogen himself( my double!) and Jody Hill, the director of this and previously, of "The Foot Fist Way." What else can I say but....SWEET. The Aero is an amazing place. They frequently have cool ass movies with Q&As from famous directors and actors in those movies. Among the people I've seen/met at the Aero... Mel Brooks, Dennis Hopper, Carl Reiner, Savage Steve, and many more...and now Mr. Rogen...Woot!
April 10.
It's Always Sunny in Philadelphia - Paley Center Panel Discussion with the Cast
Got these tickets before I booked the below, but still psyched. Sunny is one of my favorite shows ever, and getting to see the whole cast talk live about the show will be a treat.
April 18
It's Always Sunny in Philadelphia - The Nightman Cometh LIVE
Wow, this figures to be an even bigger treat- a live, two-night only performance of "The Nightman Cometh," the musical written for the final episode of last season. Need I say more? I dropped some bank to get these sold-out tix, but I'm sure it will be worth it!
April 26.
Unplugged & Unwigged - Spinal Tap and A Mighty Wind Live
Those three brilliant guys, Christopher Guest, Harry Shearer and Michael McKean who were Spinal Tap and also the folk band in "A Mighty Wind" perform songs from both live, out of costumes. I love Spinal Tap (who doesn't?) though "A Mighty Wind" was not my favorite Guest movie by a long shot...still a cool concept - and great for my old ass who probably won't make it out to see Spinal Tap in full costume and moshing glory
What a month!
Sunday, March 29, 2009
Home Roasting is Easy and Cool
Unroasted Green CoffeeSo as my recent blog entry indicated, I've become something of a specialty coffee fanatic lately.
Well, recently I decided to take the leap from buying roasted beans to buying green beans and roasting them at home myself. Why would I do this?
1) Freshness. Beans start to decay in quality within 24 hours of roasting. Roasting your own beans thus gives you the maximum control over timing for freshness.
2) Flexibility. Roasting your own allows you to roast small quantities of beans at a time. If you feel like roasting more, depending on your device, this can be pretty easy. Small quantities ties into freshness - if you never roast more than 3 or 4 days worth of coffee at a time, you're unlikely to lose much on the flavor end of things. Another thing here is that you can switch between coffees quickly and easily because green coffee stores so well.
3) The Process and Ritual. Simply put, I find it geeky cool to watch green coffee go through the chemical reactions in roasting which transform it into something to brew 4 or more hours later. I really enjoy watching the beans slowly change color and expand. When I later grind and brew the beans there's an integration of process tantamount to ritual which makes me feel more connected to the coffee than I otherwise do. The only thing left to do is to grow and pick it myself. Well, don't think I haven't considered it, but its pretty hard to do properly outside of tropical climes.
4) The COST! Green coffee beans are, on average, half the price of roasted coffee. This can really add up fast. What's more, my roasting unit, the West End Poppery, cost me about $40 on ebay. The other components I am using, two colandors, a wooden spoon, an empty soup can, a fan, a spray bottle, and a small kitchen scale, cost me even less than that.
5) Time. Of course it takes longer to roast coffee than to get it preroasted, but the time investment is minimal really. It takes me under 10 minutes to do each batch, making doing it every three days or so, or at minimum, on the weekends, very practical, especially in light of the benefit.
So how come a lot more people don't do this?
Socialization. It wasn't more than 100 years ago that home roasting was extremely common. It took mass production of coffee and a concentrated advertising effort by mass producers to dissuade the public from roasting their own.
Also, I think a lot of people think its harder than it really is. Listen folks, if *I* can do it, anyone can. I'm the least handy, practical guy around. Really, you can't fuck this up too bad.
I highly recommend Ken Davids book on this subject Home Coffee Roasting: Romance and Revival. Below are pictures of the transformation the green coffee pictured above goes through during the roasting process, from unroasted to uberdark oilly roast. (I realize the pic is cutoff, click on it for full view).
Tuesday, February 10, 2009
Beyond Peets: My Palate's Magical Journey into the Specialty Coffee Realm (or the Joy of Inconvenience)
It's been awhile since I blogged, so some quick thoughts before my subject for the day:
1. Can someone please remind the Republican Party they lost the election? Obama has a mandate and is actually trying to work with you, the more you fight the worse you look. McCain even had the gall to propose his own stimulus plan. John, I know you're old, but did you forget so soon that you lost, and lost BIG? And tax cuts? Really? How do you even say this bullshit with a straight face?
2. A-rod lied, the Yanks died. Seriously, I don't really care much about this story but since I am a Yankees fan, I thought I should comment briefly. I've been listening to Joe Torre's new book via Audible lately, and am not far in, but am being reminded of why the Yanks were such a magical team from '96-2001. The big reason? Everyone played to win and didn't give a damn about individual stats. No one on those teams was ever a huge offensive star, they won because they played the right way. I hated the A-Rod trade from day dot. I loved Soriano and hated that we gave him up. No matter what you think about A-Rod, this steroids thing, along with Giambi's steroids probelms, is something of further a validation of the 96-01 teams--until Jeter admits using steroids that is. (I'm sure he didn't but, Jesus is anyone safe anymore?)
3. The NBA - its FAAAANTASTIC. Seriously. I am a huge fan of the NBA and grew up on Bird, Magic, and of course MJ. It took a long time for the game to recover from losing MJ, but I think we can finally say things are back on track. With five legitimate title contenders (four if Jameer Nelson's injury torpedoes the Magic season) - the game is back to a terrific excitement level. If you're not watching, you best start.
4. Got myself a Wii, and its is awesome, even if my Wii Fit Age is like 82.
Now on to the subject at hand.
Anyone who knows me at all knows I love coffee. I've been repeatedly called a coffee snob by Janessa, my friends, and just about everyone in my life. That's ok with me, in fact I kind of like it.
The truth is though, I wasn't really a coffee snob. At least not a serious one. Fortunately, that's changing.
A few years ago, a friend at work introduced me to three key ideas which awakened a love affair with coffee. First, he explained the importance of fresh grinding beans for each pot, probably still the #1 most important factor in obtaining quality coffee. Second, he introduced me to the French Press, or Plunger Pot, which I've used to this day to produce thicker coffee with more body and character. Third, he introduced me to Peets Coffee, a wonderful company from Berkeley that is credited as the "Godfather" of the Specialty Coffee Movement.
Peets is famous for extremely dark roasts of coffee. I soon discovered that I loved their coffee and became a "Peetnik" which meant I had a recurring order. All that I ordered were their French and Italian Roasts, pretty much every two weeks for the past few years. The coffee was always sent fresh from the roaster and since I ground it fresh and prepared it well the cup quality was always outstanding. I was so happy with this coffee that I stopped giving coffee much thought other than getting a quality burr grinder and a stainless steel french press (both of which are HIGHLY recommended!).
All this until, ironically, I happened to be at a Peets up in Berkeley in December. We were visiting the Bay Area to see Janessa's family for Christmas and spent some time up there visiting friends. We happened upon a Peet's coffee tasting on the street. Three french presses, three varieties of coffee and a whole new experience. I was entranced by the Major Dickasen's Blend, and ordered it for my next recurring order. It was fantastic. This got me thinking, what else was out there? My next order was a limited edition roast of Sumatra Blue Batak.
This was sublime coffee. I was blown away. The texture of this coffee was thick like the others, but the body was so much more complex. I could literally feel my tongue encased in the coffee, experienced the multiple sensations that the brew produced on my palate, and had a bit of an epiphany.
I had no idea just how sophisticated, subtle and savory coffee could be. What had I been missing by limiting myself to a "roast" and not exploring specialty beans and other roasts? As it turns out, a hell of a lot. I bought two wonderful books on Coffee from Amazon: The Joy of Coffee by Corby Kummer, and Coffee: A Guide to Buying, Brewing and Enjoying by Kenneth Davids. From these books I learned fascinating things about the history of the coffee bean, about all stages of the coffee process from growing to roasting, about the many varieties of coffee worldwide and about the qualities that typified certain regions.
Intrigued, I made a beeline to Terrior Coffees, a company run by George Howell, the owner and operator of Coffee Connection, a sort of East-Coast Peet's, who was extensively profiled in The Joy of Coffee. Howell was personal friends with the owner of a Costa Rican coffee estate called "La Minita" reputed to be one of the world's best coffees. I ordered 12 ounces of that coffee and paid as much for second day shipping as for the coffee itself (the better to be closer to roast date as possible!) - but it was worth it.
Unlike Peets, the roast was much more mild. The beans were smaller and were visibly different than the Peets beans I'd seen. The coffee itself was to date the best coffee I have ever had. Pure, light, sparkling but with body, an incredibly well-balanced drink that I cannot recommend enough to anyone who loves coffee.
Suffice it to say, I am presently in something of a "tasting tour," ordering coffees from all the world's major regions that are highly rated to establish a baseline for my palate. Yesterday I ordered Kona Coffee from Hawaii, from a company called Hula Daddy for a premium ($60 a pound!), and I'm targeting lots of other coffees for the months ahead.
I did receive one more order from Peets recently - a hugely expensive Jamaican Blue Mountain ($40 for a half pound). It is an incredible cup of coffee, but I was put off for the first few cups. The reason, I suspect, is the roast. Having never experienced the benefits of a quality roast other than Peets I did not know what I was missing. I finally understood some peoples' reactions to my coffee preferences. That said, after a mild adjustment period, it was back to tasting wonderful, and I am sure I will continue to order from Peets, though not on a Peetnik Recurring basis.
All of this has led me down some interesting paths. Obsessed with the purity of coffee fresh out of the roaster (the taste difference is astonishing) - I am shopping around for home roasters, and am planning on trying to roast some green coffee of my own soon. Even if I don't do it often, I feel that seeing the process will be fascinating and that I will learn a lot from it, so I'm excited.
So that's the first part of the title. What about the second part? The Joy of Inconvenience?
Simply put, the taste difference between freshly roasted, freshly ground, freshly brewed coffee from quality beans and the vast majority of coffee consumed in this country is almost immeasurable. Despite this fact, nearly everyone I talk to who enjoys coffee insists that grinding beans before brewing or using a french press is too time consuming to be worthwhile.
To be clear - I understand their perspective. I know that some people really are too busy to regularly go through the ritual I do prior to enjoying my morning coffee. Nevertheless, I feel confident that if more people took the time to find out what they are missing, they would somehow find time to get it done. I guess that's where the "snob" thing happens. The simple truth is, once you taste a cup of real coffee, you can't go back to the swill served in most establishments in this country, its really not an option, if the quality matters to you.
In any event, I strongly believe that my "lengthy" coffee ritual (start to finish maybe 7 minutes, tops, with another 3-5 to clean the pot) is well worth it because, as I have said, the flavor and character of the coffee is fundmentally superior to other methods. It's not even close. Another benefit of the ritual is that it makes the coffee drinking feel more important to my day, it helps me to appreciate the coffee and gives me a sense of order that I welcome.
Here's my main point. Things are too easy in this Country. Modern conveniences are amazing and I am by no means a luddite. Starbucks sets a floor for coffee quality, that while low compared to my standards, is still high compared to much of the country. The problem isn't the conveniences, its our attitude towards these conveniences. Things being easy means we don't have to think about them, they just are the way they are. There is a fundamental disconnect between process and product that benefits consumerism but hurts our critical thinking skills.
As long as we accept the way things are as right, we have neither the will nor momentum to make positive change, both in the world and in our individual lives. That deadening of our minds is certainly the intent of advertising and mass consumer culture, and while it is fantastic for business I fear that it is awful for democracy. Just because something is easy, doesn't mean it is right. Conversely, just because something is hard, doesn't mean it is right. The trick is to look at things critically and determine what's best for you. My contention is that people generally just accept what's easy for them to accept because they're lazy, whether it be bad coffee, beef (how many people who eat beef would do so if they had to kill every cow themselves? how many if they knew what was actually involved in the fucked-up beef industry, the torture and mistreatment of animals and intense contribution to climate change?), bad entertainment and shitty politics.
People are willfully ignorant, and their ignorance costs them their ability to enjoy the pleasures of life on a daily basis. It's sad. So, as a very small step in working out this problem I propose the joy of inconvenience: try the long way of doing something now and again, it might be better, it might not, but you'll never know until you investigate for yourself. Who knows, you may discover a whole new world of pleasure and sophistication you didn't even know existed, like I did. Or, at the very least, you will wake your mind up from its constant slumber for just a few minutes, which is better than nothing.
--Rob
1. Can someone please remind the Republican Party they lost the election? Obama has a mandate and is actually trying to work with you, the more you fight the worse you look. McCain even had the gall to propose his own stimulus plan. John, I know you're old, but did you forget so soon that you lost, and lost BIG? And tax cuts? Really? How do you even say this bullshit with a straight face?
2. A-rod lied, the Yanks died. Seriously, I don't really care much about this story but since I am a Yankees fan, I thought I should comment briefly. I've been listening to Joe Torre's new book via Audible lately, and am not far in, but am being reminded of why the Yanks were such a magical team from '96-2001. The big reason? Everyone played to win and didn't give a damn about individual stats. No one on those teams was ever a huge offensive star, they won because they played the right way. I hated the A-Rod trade from day dot. I loved Soriano and hated that we gave him up. No matter what you think about A-Rod, this steroids thing, along with Giambi's steroids probelms, is something of further a validation of the 96-01 teams--until Jeter admits using steroids that is. (I'm sure he didn't but, Jesus is anyone safe anymore?)
3. The NBA - its FAAAANTASTIC. Seriously. I am a huge fan of the NBA and grew up on Bird, Magic, and of course MJ. It took a long time for the game to recover from losing MJ, but I think we can finally say things are back on track. With five legitimate title contenders (four if Jameer Nelson's injury torpedoes the Magic season) - the game is back to a terrific excitement level. If you're not watching, you best start.
4. Got myself a Wii, and its is awesome, even if my Wii Fit Age is like 82.
Now on to the subject at hand.
Anyone who knows me at all knows I love coffee. I've been repeatedly called a coffee snob by Janessa, my friends, and just about everyone in my life. That's ok with me, in fact I kind of like it.
The truth is though, I wasn't really a coffee snob. At least not a serious one. Fortunately, that's changing.
A few years ago, a friend at work introduced me to three key ideas which awakened a love affair with coffee. First, he explained the importance of fresh grinding beans for each pot, probably still the #1 most important factor in obtaining quality coffee. Second, he introduced me to the French Press, or Plunger Pot, which I've used to this day to produce thicker coffee with more body and character. Third, he introduced me to Peets Coffee, a wonderful company from Berkeley that is credited as the "Godfather" of the Specialty Coffee Movement.
Peets is famous for extremely dark roasts of coffee. I soon discovered that I loved their coffee and became a "Peetnik" which meant I had a recurring order. All that I ordered were their French and Italian Roasts, pretty much every two weeks for the past few years. The coffee was always sent fresh from the roaster and since I ground it fresh and prepared it well the cup quality was always outstanding. I was so happy with this coffee that I stopped giving coffee much thought other than getting a quality burr grinder and a stainless steel french press (both of which are HIGHLY recommended!).
All this until, ironically, I happened to be at a Peets up in Berkeley in December. We were visiting the Bay Area to see Janessa's family for Christmas and spent some time up there visiting friends. We happened upon a Peet's coffee tasting on the street. Three french presses, three varieties of coffee and a whole new experience. I was entranced by the Major Dickasen's Blend, and ordered it for my next recurring order. It was fantastic. This got me thinking, what else was out there? My next order was a limited edition roast of Sumatra Blue Batak.
This was sublime coffee. I was blown away. The texture of this coffee was thick like the others, but the body was so much more complex. I could literally feel my tongue encased in the coffee, experienced the multiple sensations that the brew produced on my palate, and had a bit of an epiphany.
I had no idea just how sophisticated, subtle and savory coffee could be. What had I been missing by limiting myself to a "roast" and not exploring specialty beans and other roasts? As it turns out, a hell of a lot. I bought two wonderful books on Coffee from Amazon: The Joy of Coffee by Corby Kummer, and Coffee: A Guide to Buying, Brewing and Enjoying by Kenneth Davids. From these books I learned fascinating things about the history of the coffee bean, about all stages of the coffee process from growing to roasting, about the many varieties of coffee worldwide and about the qualities that typified certain regions.
Intrigued, I made a beeline to Terrior Coffees, a company run by George Howell, the owner and operator of Coffee Connection, a sort of East-Coast Peet's, who was extensively profiled in The Joy of Coffee. Howell was personal friends with the owner of a Costa Rican coffee estate called "La Minita" reputed to be one of the world's best coffees. I ordered 12 ounces of that coffee and paid as much for second day shipping as for the coffee itself (the better to be closer to roast date as possible!) - but it was worth it.
Unlike Peets, the roast was much more mild. The beans were smaller and were visibly different than the Peets beans I'd seen. The coffee itself was to date the best coffee I have ever had. Pure, light, sparkling but with body, an incredibly well-balanced drink that I cannot recommend enough to anyone who loves coffee.
Suffice it to say, I am presently in something of a "tasting tour," ordering coffees from all the world's major regions that are highly rated to establish a baseline for my palate. Yesterday I ordered Kona Coffee from Hawaii, from a company called Hula Daddy for a premium ($60 a pound!), and I'm targeting lots of other coffees for the months ahead.
I did receive one more order from Peets recently - a hugely expensive Jamaican Blue Mountain ($40 for a half pound). It is an incredible cup of coffee, but I was put off for the first few cups. The reason, I suspect, is the roast. Having never experienced the benefits of a quality roast other than Peets I did not know what I was missing. I finally understood some peoples' reactions to my coffee preferences. That said, after a mild adjustment period, it was back to tasting wonderful, and I am sure I will continue to order from Peets, though not on a Peetnik Recurring basis.
All of this has led me down some interesting paths. Obsessed with the purity of coffee fresh out of the roaster (the taste difference is astonishing) - I am shopping around for home roasters, and am planning on trying to roast some green coffee of my own soon. Even if I don't do it often, I feel that seeing the process will be fascinating and that I will learn a lot from it, so I'm excited.
So that's the first part of the title. What about the second part? The Joy of Inconvenience?
Simply put, the taste difference between freshly roasted, freshly ground, freshly brewed coffee from quality beans and the vast majority of coffee consumed in this country is almost immeasurable. Despite this fact, nearly everyone I talk to who enjoys coffee insists that grinding beans before brewing or using a french press is too time consuming to be worthwhile.
To be clear - I understand their perspective. I know that some people really are too busy to regularly go through the ritual I do prior to enjoying my morning coffee. Nevertheless, I feel confident that if more people took the time to find out what they are missing, they would somehow find time to get it done. I guess that's where the "snob" thing happens. The simple truth is, once you taste a cup of real coffee, you can't go back to the swill served in most establishments in this country, its really not an option, if the quality matters to you.
In any event, I strongly believe that my "lengthy" coffee ritual (start to finish maybe 7 minutes, tops, with another 3-5 to clean the pot) is well worth it because, as I have said, the flavor and character of the coffee is fundmentally superior to other methods. It's not even close. Another benefit of the ritual is that it makes the coffee drinking feel more important to my day, it helps me to appreciate the coffee and gives me a sense of order that I welcome.
Here's my main point. Things are too easy in this Country. Modern conveniences are amazing and I am by no means a luddite. Starbucks sets a floor for coffee quality, that while low compared to my standards, is still high compared to much of the country. The problem isn't the conveniences, its our attitude towards these conveniences. Things being easy means we don't have to think about them, they just are the way they are. There is a fundamental disconnect between process and product that benefits consumerism but hurts our critical thinking skills.
As long as we accept the way things are as right, we have neither the will nor momentum to make positive change, both in the world and in our individual lives. That deadening of our minds is certainly the intent of advertising and mass consumer culture, and while it is fantastic for business I fear that it is awful for democracy. Just because something is easy, doesn't mean it is right. Conversely, just because something is hard, doesn't mean it is right. The trick is to look at things critically and determine what's best for you. My contention is that people generally just accept what's easy for them to accept because they're lazy, whether it be bad coffee, beef (how many people who eat beef would do so if they had to kill every cow themselves? how many if they knew what was actually involved in the fucked-up beef industry, the torture and mistreatment of animals and intense contribution to climate change?), bad entertainment and shitty politics.
People are willfully ignorant, and their ignorance costs them their ability to enjoy the pleasures of life on a daily basis. It's sad. So, as a very small step in working out this problem I propose the joy of inconvenience: try the long way of doing something now and again, it might be better, it might not, but you'll never know until you investigate for yourself. Who knows, you may discover a whole new world of pleasure and sophistication you didn't even know existed, like I did. Or, at the very least, you will wake your mind up from its constant slumber for just a few minutes, which is better than nothing.
--Rob
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)