Today was the opening day at Wimbledon and Safin's opening round match against Fognini did not disappoint. After going up an easy two sets, Safin suddenly found himself face-to-face against his own inner demons, allowing Fognini to extend the third set all the way to a tie-break. Once again, we are fascinated with Safin, the troubled perfectionist. Safin, who plays some of his best tennis against the toughest opponents, and some of his worst when he only has to play against himself, exhibits all of the hallmarks of the classically gifted student who is not challenged often enough to develop his or her full potential. What Safin really needs at this point, is not a better coach, really, but more likely a sports psychologist who can help him "let go".
Darren Cahill made an intereting comment about an episode in which Safin came to have dinner with Andre Agassi. Safin, fresh from defeat, was hoping to hear some words of wisdom from the older tennis champion. Unfortunately, as Cahill recalls Agassi stating afterwards, the two grand slam winners spent the evening talking past each other. This is sounds fairly reasonable, as Agassi was brought up with a rather mechanistic approach to tennis (right down to the memorization of how many steps it was from one point on the court to another), that allowed him to develop a strategy based on returning balls, making high percentage plays, and outlasting the competition. Safin on the otherhand, was encouraged to make something out of every shot, and early on in his career, had the talent to pull it off. Agassi was taught to defend, Safin attack. No wonder the two couldn't understand each other.
In two days, Safin meets Novak Djokovic, and both are at the opposite ends of their career spectrums and promises to be highly entertaining. It only remains to be seen which Safin shows up . . .
Monday, June 23, 2008
Monday, May 26, 2008
Half-Nelson
Half-Nelson was featured in our afternoon Kino session about a week ago, and it prompted some of the following discussion, but first a brief synopsis for anyone not familiar with the premise: The film stars Ryan Gosling as an inner city teacher who befriends Drey, one of his students (played by Shareeka Epps). Gosling is also the school's girl's basketball coach, an aspiring author, and drug addict. In fact, the moment of "befriending" occurs when Gosling's student catches him smoking crack in the locker room. It turns out that the girl, who's father is gone and mother works all the time, actually knows Gosling's connection, who was responsible for Drey's brother being jailed and is now taking an active interest in the welfare of the family.
Having known many teachers through our friendship with Sean Marchetto, over at www.explodingbeakers.blogspot.com , we found Gosling's portrayl of a young, idealistic, teacher quite true-to-life, despite his seemingly fantastical crack-habit (which we are afraid to wonder just how pervasive such things might be), in a way that is very akin to Richard Burton in Look Back In Anger, as suggested by Lucy, from the knitting site www.goodgrieflucy.blogspot.com.
1. Gosling, with his focus on Hegelian dialectics and their Marxist connotations, reveals himself in as a believer in the possibility for social change. This seems reinforced by his parents, aging hippies, who constantly remind him of their efforts to change the system. As we said, we know many contemporaries who found themselves questioning the system in the early 1990s and rather than going for more overt politcal agitation, ended up in the teaching profession as a way to affect change.
2. However, the school system demonstrates that it is not as open to immediate change as one might think. To begin with, there is the official curriculum, which is a legally binding document and a teacher who does not follow and fulfill the curriculum can face official sanctions. Second, the school is an institution with a life of its own, one that seeks to subsume it's constituent parts. Many of Gosling's co-workers have long since abandoned their outward activist stance, and have settled into something of a humdrum ease.
3. The days are long. When Gosling is done teaching, we see him coaching girl's basketball. A coffee-break conversation with a co-worker leads to the revelation that Gosling is a long way from his dreams of teaching by day, and working on his novel by night. As a way of consoling him, his colleague offers, "There's always summer".
4. One of the initial comments on Gosling's characters' drug use associated it with perhaps his frustration at his lack of writing prowess. The image of the author or artist who needs a little "help" with "inspiration" is fairly typical and so the thought was that day-to-day teaching was so draining that Gosling turned to drugs to perhaps fire himself up for writing. However, we soon learn that Gosling's character has a history with drugs, leading to the comparisons with Burton's self-destructive angry young man from the 1950s. Again, we can infer from Gosling's classroom talk that he does not believe that political change is possible without a social change occurring first, a process that can take decades. Later in the movie he makes the statement to the effect that "A man acting alone is nothing", which leaves him in a rather frustrating position, that of a man acting alone in front of classroom trying to deal with social forces much larger than himself, and knowing full well the futility of his actions. No wonder he's on drugs.
Of course, there's a huge effort to redeem himself and demonstrate what one man can do acting alone in his relationship with Drey that provides the bulk of movie's plot. We chose not to comment on that aspect, as it is covered in most reviews of the movie, but rather to focus on an aspect of teaching that we don't usually see.
Having known many teachers through our friendship with Sean Marchetto, over at www.explodingbeakers.blogspot.com , we found Gosling's portrayl of a young, idealistic, teacher quite true-to-life, despite his seemingly fantastical crack-habit (which we are afraid to wonder just how pervasive such things might be), in a way that is very akin to Richard Burton in Look Back In Anger, as suggested by Lucy, from the knitting site www.goodgrieflucy.blogspot.com.
1. Gosling, with his focus on Hegelian dialectics and their Marxist connotations, reveals himself in as a believer in the possibility for social change. This seems reinforced by his parents, aging hippies, who constantly remind him of their efforts to change the system. As we said, we know many contemporaries who found themselves questioning the system in the early 1990s and rather than going for more overt politcal agitation, ended up in the teaching profession as a way to affect change.
2. However, the school system demonstrates that it is not as open to immediate change as one might think. To begin with, there is the official curriculum, which is a legally binding document and a teacher who does not follow and fulfill the curriculum can face official sanctions. Second, the school is an institution with a life of its own, one that seeks to subsume it's constituent parts. Many of Gosling's co-workers have long since abandoned their outward activist stance, and have settled into something of a humdrum ease.
3. The days are long. When Gosling is done teaching, we see him coaching girl's basketball. A coffee-break conversation with a co-worker leads to the revelation that Gosling is a long way from his dreams of teaching by day, and working on his novel by night. As a way of consoling him, his colleague offers, "There's always summer".
4. One of the initial comments on Gosling's characters' drug use associated it with perhaps his frustration at his lack of writing prowess. The image of the author or artist who needs a little "help" with "inspiration" is fairly typical and so the thought was that day-to-day teaching was so draining that Gosling turned to drugs to perhaps fire himself up for writing. However, we soon learn that Gosling's character has a history with drugs, leading to the comparisons with Burton's self-destructive angry young man from the 1950s. Again, we can infer from Gosling's classroom talk that he does not believe that political change is possible without a social change occurring first, a process that can take decades. Later in the movie he makes the statement to the effect that "A man acting alone is nothing", which leaves him in a rather frustrating position, that of a man acting alone in front of classroom trying to deal with social forces much larger than himself, and knowing full well the futility of his actions. No wonder he's on drugs.
Of course, there's a huge effort to redeem himself and demonstrate what one man can do acting alone in his relationship with Drey that provides the bulk of movie's plot. We chose not to comment on that aspect, as it is covered in most reviews of the movie, but rather to focus on an aspect of teaching that we don't usually see.
Friday, May 02, 2008
Cognitive Surplus
This just floated our way via the web, and gives us a different spin on or theories of the consumption of university education. Below, Clay Shirky is speaking of television watching as a way of dealing with a "cognitive surplus", or as he admits, the surplus of time that post-WWII workers experienced when they were finished working for the day. You can almost hear Adorno whispering in the background . . .
Sunday, April 27, 2008
On the Study of Popular Culture
As a further clarification, where we find value in the study of popular culture, is in the act and intent in it's creation. Our preference is to treat an article of popular culture in terms of the ideas or values that it was intended to convey or reflect. As a secondary area of research, we are interested in how various audiences have expressed their reaction to these items, however, we find that these expressions are all too often limited to mere consumption, and these consumption patterns are of considerable less interest than the acts of creation themselves.
Before advancing further, for us, the study of popular culture is decidedly different than the study of mass culture or commercial culture. Our roots are in the so-called counterculture, based on political dissent and acts of artistic creations. We recognize that any material study of the counterculture in terms of the intellectual development and value-expression is difficult because of how quickly the counter-culture became subsumed in a mass, commercial culture (think especially of "grunge"). However, it must be noted than in going back to the fundamental roots of bohemian, beat, hippie, and punk cultures, the emphasis was on being first, identity and material culture second. A study of punk makes this most dramatic and highlights the problems and confusion. The early drama of punk was about performing, not recording, and this became evident in some of the notable problems that several groups had in translating their performance into the recording studio.
The advent of industrial production methods of objects of art and folk culture, leading to the development of mass objects of consumption (mass culture), devoid of individual craft identity, has led to individual workers looking for emotional and artistic expression outside of their normal work routines. We want to juxtapose these countercultural goods made for private expression, with those goods made for public consumption. In fact, part of the problem with studying a counterculture that has become commodified (as happens to almost all of them) is the blurring that occurs between these public and private roles.
Before advancing further, for us, the study of popular culture is decidedly different than the study of mass culture or commercial culture. Our roots are in the so-called counterculture, based on political dissent and acts of artistic creations. We recognize that any material study of the counterculture in terms of the intellectual development and value-expression is difficult because of how quickly the counter-culture became subsumed in a mass, commercial culture (think especially of "grunge"). However, it must be noted than in going back to the fundamental roots of bohemian, beat, hippie, and punk cultures, the emphasis was on being first, identity and material culture second. A study of punk makes this most dramatic and highlights the problems and confusion. The early drama of punk was about performing, not recording, and this became evident in some of the notable problems that several groups had in translating their performance into the recording studio.
The advent of industrial production methods of objects of art and folk culture, leading to the development of mass objects of consumption (mass culture), devoid of individual craft identity, has led to individual workers looking for emotional and artistic expression outside of their normal work routines. We want to juxtapose these countercultural goods made for private expression, with those goods made for public consumption. In fact, part of the problem with studying a counterculture that has become commodified (as happens to almost all of them) is the blurring that occurs between these public and private roles.
Wednesday, April 23, 2008
The Consumption of Post-Secondary Education
The last few evenings Sean Marchetto has been hanging around our office, clearly agitated (one might say consumed) by an idea that has generated some interesting ideas. They're not completely thought out, or fully developed by any stretch of the imagination, but we simply want to capture them here. This is also cross-posted to Marchetto's own Exploding Beakers blog.
Let us begin by acknowledging that the following rests somewhat on the ideas of Thorstein Veblen, Theodor Adorno, and Max Weber. You would also be correct to guess that the conversation revolves around "class", ie. "working-class", "middle-class", and "upper-class", though such labels bring to mind specific occupations and our talk deals more with social outlooks, values, or beliefs, independent of specific occupation.
To begin with, we believe in the value of studying popular culture. We believe that popular culture is an important vehicle for the exchange of ideas. We subscribe to the Journal of Popular Culture, although we are increasingly disappointed with the approach that the journal is taking to the study of popular culture. For years though, we have been unable to describe just what it is that makes us unsatisfied with it. Perhaps now we are a little closer.
Thorstein Veblen is noted for his ideas about the consumption pattern of social classes, specifically that people tend to follow their social betters. For example, in the nineteenth century, the houses of the rich had large rooms for receiving guest, while middle-class homes developed the parlour. Working class structures attempted to mimic this to the best of their abilities, given their often cramped floor space. Or, take kitchenware. The upper classes, it is assumed, eat meals off of expensive plates, and many families (of middle and working-class status) have special dinnerware (china) that they save for "fancy" occassions, where family members are dressed up, and elaborate, and sometimes expensive, food is served.
There is a crucial difference in the consumption trends between the social classes though, and that is the degree to which each class is able to make their wealth "work", that is, function as capital. For working-class families, much of the wealth is tied up in the family home, and generally not available as ready capital. Middle-class families tend to be to convert some of their wealth into capital in the form of stocks, bonds, etc., while the upper-class is assumed to have ready supplies of capital on hand not just for stocks, bonds, but also for business start-ups and such.
According to Theodor Adorno, there is also a difference in the relationship of these groups to popular culture. If we allow the division of popular culture into so-called "high-brow", tending to carry with it moral messages, or intellectual overtones, and "low-brow", popular culture that tends to satisfy emotional needs, it is generally assumed that the upper-classes favour popular culture that is "high-brow" and working classes favour "low brow", with the middle-classes enjoying a spectrum of both. Adorno was also one of the first to articulate the belief that popular culture (or what we might term "mass commercial culture" as opposed to "folk culture" both of which tend to be wrapped up in "popular culture"), could also function as a method of pacifying the working classes. Later writers on consumption, such as Conquest of Cool author Thomas Frank, and even in his own way, John Leland, author of Hip: The History, have suggested that richess of popular culture's emotional experience and the desire of novelty on the part of the working-classes, are effective ways of bleeding off wealth from that same class.
At it's heart, this kind of argument rests on the same sort of self-denial premise that Max Weber put forth. The so-called middle-class thrives under capitalism because capitalism reward self-denial in favour of disciplined investment. The working-class on the otherhand, fails to "get ahead" because it is too interested in self-pleasure. This is also typically the premise behind many of our rags-to-riches stories.
So, our question becomes, do these two social groups have different viewpoints on the purpose of post-secondary education? We would argue that there are (at least) two different social groups present in post-secondary institutions, those who view it in terms of self-denial and self-investment, and those who do not. To reference Veblen, for this second group, post-secondary education is not seen as a utility, but as a social goal attained by higher social classes. The proliferation of courses dealing with topics of popular culture, that treat it as an area of relativistic meanings and interpretations (a sort of atomizing of the audience) and not as the basis of praxis, enable post-secondary education to be consumed as novelty items and effectively bleeding off the wealth of students and student families.
Thus, the attainment of post-secondary education has generally been seen as one of the most effectives of social mobility, but we are increasinly wondering whether or not this remains the case, and whether more and more courses about popular culture are in fact undermining this effectiveness?
Let us begin by acknowledging that the following rests somewhat on the ideas of Thorstein Veblen, Theodor Adorno, and Max Weber. You would also be correct to guess that the conversation revolves around "class", ie. "working-class", "middle-class", and "upper-class", though such labels bring to mind specific occupations and our talk deals more with social outlooks, values, or beliefs, independent of specific occupation.
To begin with, we believe in the value of studying popular culture. We believe that popular culture is an important vehicle for the exchange of ideas. We subscribe to the Journal of Popular Culture, although we are increasingly disappointed with the approach that the journal is taking to the study of popular culture. For years though, we have been unable to describe just what it is that makes us unsatisfied with it. Perhaps now we are a little closer.
Thorstein Veblen is noted for his ideas about the consumption pattern of social classes, specifically that people tend to follow their social betters. For example, in the nineteenth century, the houses of the rich had large rooms for receiving guest, while middle-class homes developed the parlour. Working class structures attempted to mimic this to the best of their abilities, given their often cramped floor space. Or, take kitchenware. The upper classes, it is assumed, eat meals off of expensive plates, and many families (of middle and working-class status) have special dinnerware (china) that they save for "fancy" occassions, where family members are dressed up, and elaborate, and sometimes expensive, food is served.
There is a crucial difference in the consumption trends between the social classes though, and that is the degree to which each class is able to make their wealth "work", that is, function as capital. For working-class families, much of the wealth is tied up in the family home, and generally not available as ready capital. Middle-class families tend to be to convert some of their wealth into capital in the form of stocks, bonds, etc., while the upper-class is assumed to have ready supplies of capital on hand not just for stocks, bonds, but also for business start-ups and such.
According to Theodor Adorno, there is also a difference in the relationship of these groups to popular culture. If we allow the division of popular culture into so-called "high-brow", tending to carry with it moral messages, or intellectual overtones, and "low-brow", popular culture that tends to satisfy emotional needs, it is generally assumed that the upper-classes favour popular culture that is "high-brow" and working classes favour "low brow", with the middle-classes enjoying a spectrum of both. Adorno was also one of the first to articulate the belief that popular culture (or what we might term "mass commercial culture" as opposed to "folk culture" both of which tend to be wrapped up in "popular culture"), could also function as a method of pacifying the working classes. Later writers on consumption, such as Conquest of Cool author Thomas Frank, and even in his own way, John Leland, author of Hip: The History, have suggested that richess of popular culture's emotional experience and the desire of novelty on the part of the working-classes, are effective ways of bleeding off wealth from that same class.
At it's heart, this kind of argument rests on the same sort of self-denial premise that Max Weber put forth. The so-called middle-class thrives under capitalism because capitalism reward self-denial in favour of disciplined investment. The working-class on the otherhand, fails to "get ahead" because it is too interested in self-pleasure. This is also typically the premise behind many of our rags-to-riches stories.
So, our question becomes, do these two social groups have different viewpoints on the purpose of post-secondary education? We would argue that there are (at least) two different social groups present in post-secondary institutions, those who view it in terms of self-denial and self-investment, and those who do not. To reference Veblen, for this second group, post-secondary education is not seen as a utility, but as a social goal attained by higher social classes. The proliferation of courses dealing with topics of popular culture, that treat it as an area of relativistic meanings and interpretations (a sort of atomizing of the audience) and not as the basis of praxis, enable post-secondary education to be consumed as novelty items and effectively bleeding off the wealth of students and student families.
Thus, the attainment of post-secondary education has generally been seen as one of the most effectives of social mobility, but we are increasinly wondering whether or not this remains the case, and whether more and more courses about popular culture are in fact undermining this effectiveness?
Tuesday, April 22, 2008
Salt Spring Island Coffee Company
When is a coffee company more than just about the coffee? Typically when it's a megabrand like Starbucks or Tim Horton's where it's as much about the image as the coffee. However, for the past week or so we've been enjoying British Columbia's Salt Spring Island Coffee - Sumatra Dark Roast. Like many micro-roasters, Salt Spring is trading as much on their coffee as they are information about their coffee - 100% Organic, 100% Fair Trade, and they claim, Carbon Neutral. However, what has really intrigued us (almost as much as their coffee), is the company's website and the range of interactive spaces it provides, from an official blog to a carbon neutral quiz.
The coffee itself has proven to be surprising mellow. We've talked about the distinctive flavour of certain other brands that we've enjoyed, such as Moak, Kimbo, and particularly Illy. The Salt Spring though was by far one of the most subtle beans we've experienced. As an espresso shot, it had none of the aggressiveness that we typically look for, much more suited to lattes and cappuccinos (which tend to be much more muted by the presence of milk). A refreshing and welcome change of pace.
The coffee itself has proven to be surprising mellow. We've talked about the distinctive flavour of certain other brands that we've enjoyed, such as Moak, Kimbo, and particularly Illy. The Salt Spring though was by far one of the most subtle beans we've experienced. As an espresso shot, it had none of the aggressiveness that we typically look for, much more suited to lattes and cappuccinos (which tend to be much more muted by the presence of milk). A refreshing and welcome change of pace.
Sunday, April 13, 2008
What to tell them at your next intervention
Courtesy of Life Hack - but why would anyone want to give up the world's favourite, legal psychotropic drug is beyond us.
Put that gun back in that holster, bub
So we have disagreement on yeaterday's encounter with the Michael Jackson fan. Some of us feel that it is a mistake to equate the two listening experiences. The first counter-argument runs as follows:
1. We do not know for sure that the listener of Michael Jackson's "Thriller" was experiencing it as nostalgia, nor specifically as nostalgia for life in the 1980s.
2. Feelings of nostalgia for the feelings of a particular time and placed evoked by a piece of music, is not the same as an appreciation of a particular piece of music's ability to evoke those images and feelings. Granted, there is an undertone here that engaging in criticism is more valid than engaging in nostalgia.
This might seem a bit like a hair-splitting endeavour to save face, as if listening to the Descendents and Michael Jackson are of different aesthetic value, but (enter the second argument):
1. The casual listener's appreciation of music rests on either an enjoyment of well-crafted pop elements, such as melody (Michael Jackson's not called the King of Pop for nothing you know), or else because the initial listening of a song is linked in memory to specific episodes of personal or shared cultural experiences. A "hit" occurs when many, many people find resonance in the same song at the same time. Some theorists explain the rise and fall of hits as being related to the songs larger cultural resonance, while a few see it more in terms of the capitalist underpinnings of radio and other media.
2. Songs that never become hits are trickier, because a listener's first encounter with them may be well after their initial release. While they undergo the same sort of experiences as noted above, the emphasis is often on the personal as opposed to group experiences (unless the song is re-released, think "Unchained Melody" from the Ghost soundtrack). Furthermore, these experiences may be linked to more contemporary events, and not those surrounding it's initial release (thus, "Unchained Melody" evokes Jr. High, the age most of us were when Ghost came out, and not so much 1955 when it was first performed, nor 1965 when the Rightous Brothers recorded its' most famous version, and certainly not 1977 when Elvis sang it weeks before his death).
If one is to suggest an aesthetic superiority to a piece of music, then the "superior" listening experience is to be had by the song with the ability to engage in novel pop constructions, evoke personal as well as group nostalgia, and reveal insights into the larger cultural moment in which it was constructed.
Given how much of this is dependent on the listener's ability to develop a context for listening to a piece of music, one cannot truly state a universal merit to a particular musical piece, only a personal one.
1. We do not know for sure that the listener of Michael Jackson's "Thriller" was experiencing it as nostalgia, nor specifically as nostalgia for life in the 1980s.
2. Feelings of nostalgia for the feelings of a particular time and placed evoked by a piece of music, is not the same as an appreciation of a particular piece of music's ability to evoke those images and feelings. Granted, there is an undertone here that engaging in criticism is more valid than engaging in nostalgia.
This might seem a bit like a hair-splitting endeavour to save face, as if listening to the Descendents and Michael Jackson are of different aesthetic value, but (enter the second argument):
1. The casual listener's appreciation of music rests on either an enjoyment of well-crafted pop elements, such as melody (Michael Jackson's not called the King of Pop for nothing you know), or else because the initial listening of a song is linked in memory to specific episodes of personal or shared cultural experiences. A "hit" occurs when many, many people find resonance in the same song at the same time. Some theorists explain the rise and fall of hits as being related to the songs larger cultural resonance, while a few see it more in terms of the capitalist underpinnings of radio and other media.
2. Songs that never become hits are trickier, because a listener's first encounter with them may be well after their initial release. While they undergo the same sort of experiences as noted above, the emphasis is often on the personal as opposed to group experiences (unless the song is re-released, think "Unchained Melody" from the Ghost soundtrack). Furthermore, these experiences may be linked to more contemporary events, and not those surrounding it's initial release (thus, "Unchained Melody" evokes Jr. High, the age most of us were when Ghost came out, and not so much 1955 when it was first performed, nor 1965 when the Rightous Brothers recorded its' most famous version, and certainly not 1977 when Elvis sang it weeks before his death).
If one is to suggest an aesthetic superiority to a piece of music, then the "superior" listening experience is to be had by the song with the ability to engage in novel pop constructions, evoke personal as well as group nostalgia, and reveal insights into the larger cultural moment in which it was constructed.
Given how much of this is dependent on the listener's ability to develop a context for listening to a piece of music, one cannot truly state a universal merit to a particular musical piece, only a personal one.
Saturday, April 12, 2008
Sometimes the glittered glove is one the other hand
The carefree weather in Calgary today, we found ourslves spending a fair amount of time outside. As mentioned in our twitter post this morning, some of us gathered at the office to watch the light-hearted Cole Porter adaptation of Taming of The Shrew, Kiss Me Kate, as an antidote to a late night viewing of the autobiographical and somewhat gritty A Guide to Recognizing Your Saints. Dito Montiel's recounting of growing up in a dead-end New York neighbourhood in the 1980s, raised some eerie similarities for some of us, who grew up in NE Calgary during the same time frame and virtually all of the cultural reference points came from New York.
Later, while leaving our office, a passing car was overheard playing Michael Jackson's "Thriller". A smile crossed our lips as we initially began to think about the anachronism of the 1983 hit song, how out-of-touch the driver of the car was - but before we could say anything to each other, we stopped. Not only had we just been furiously rehashing our own lives during the 1980s, but had followed this up with an extended discussion on the merits of the Descendents 1985 album I Don't Want to Grow Up, as being indicative of West Coast adolescent suburban life (and also, however good the band and the album were, perhaps guilty of creating much of what is wrong in contemporary "pop punk" - but more on that in other post).
So really, crank the Thriller, 'cuz we're no better.
Later, while leaving our office, a passing car was overheard playing Michael Jackson's "Thriller". A smile crossed our lips as we initially began to think about the anachronism of the 1983 hit song, how out-of-touch the driver of the car was - but before we could say anything to each other, we stopped. Not only had we just been furiously rehashing our own lives during the 1980s, but had followed this up with an extended discussion on the merits of the Descendents 1985 album I Don't Want to Grow Up, as being indicative of West Coast adolescent suburban life (and also, however good the band and the album were, perhaps guilty of creating much of what is wrong in contemporary "pop punk" - but more on that in other post).
So really, crank the Thriller, 'cuz we're no better.
Friday, April 11, 2008
I Drank Your Milkshake. I Drank It Up!
Know what we're saying?
Techcrunch has perhaps the first (to us at least) manifestation of the cultural impact of There Will Be Blood and it's made us chuckle. Especially the image at the end.
Tuesday, April 08, 2008
Brand City?
This weekend we had the delightful opportunity to have a cup of coffee with local musician Aaron Booth and his family. Booth has a new CD, available here, but ours was a social visit, and in the course of our conversation, Booth mentioned that he felt Calgary, as a city, was more brand conscious than others. This comment resonated with us.
Surely, everyone feels that their city is somehow unique, and we are no exception in our belief that there is an aspect to Calgary missing from other cities. At least, an aspect that we feel is worth investigating. In terms of demographics, Calgary exists in an intriguing location as a magnet for migration. One of the factors "pulling" newcomers to the city for the past thirty years has been the allure of riches. Literally. The promise of Calgary has been the promise of employment, supposedly higher wages, and the opportunity to create a better life (largely in terms of material prosperity). If you can hear a voice whispering "What happens in Calgary, stays in Calgary", you might not be too far off the mark. Very little has been done in terms of reflecting on who such a promise attracts.
Booth's comments led us to wonder how much the promise of personal re-invention plays in the decision to move to Calgary. We feel it is easy to believe that someone to whom personal re-invention rests at least partially on the promise of increased wealth, would be very eager to demonstrate this new identity through the display of wealth. As corporations move increasinly to branding consumer goods as part of a lifestyle, the consumption of brands can be seen as an integral part to communicating this new social identity. Just think about the battle of coffee consumption, Starbucks and Tim Horton's conjure up very different customer images.
The risk here is that it would be easy to divide the city's population into native-born (or naturalized) citizens and newcomers. Supposedly, one could suspect that the native-born citizens would not feel the allure of personal re-invention based on increased wealth as much as the newcomers, otherwise the native-borns would leave for parts unknown but of greater promise. This would help to explain the partial successes on local, non-chain brands, such as Higher Ground, one of Calgary's longest-running independent coffee houses, standing two doors down as it does, from a typically packed Starbucks.
Surely, everyone feels that their city is somehow unique, and we are no exception in our belief that there is an aspect to Calgary missing from other cities. At least, an aspect that we feel is worth investigating. In terms of demographics, Calgary exists in an intriguing location as a magnet for migration. One of the factors "pulling" newcomers to the city for the past thirty years has been the allure of riches. Literally. The promise of Calgary has been the promise of employment, supposedly higher wages, and the opportunity to create a better life (largely in terms of material prosperity). If you can hear a voice whispering "What happens in Calgary, stays in Calgary", you might not be too far off the mark. Very little has been done in terms of reflecting on who such a promise attracts.
Booth's comments led us to wonder how much the promise of personal re-invention plays in the decision to move to Calgary. We feel it is easy to believe that someone to whom personal re-invention rests at least partially on the promise of increased wealth, would be very eager to demonstrate this new identity through the display of wealth. As corporations move increasinly to branding consumer goods as part of a lifestyle, the consumption of brands can be seen as an integral part to communicating this new social identity. Just think about the battle of coffee consumption, Starbucks and Tim Horton's conjure up very different customer images.
The risk here is that it would be easy to divide the city's population into native-born (or naturalized) citizens and newcomers. Supposedly, one could suspect that the native-born citizens would not feel the allure of personal re-invention based on increased wealth as much as the newcomers, otherwise the native-borns would leave for parts unknown but of greater promise. This would help to explain the partial successes on local, non-chain brands, such as Higher Ground, one of Calgary's longest-running independent coffee houses, standing two doors down as it does, from a typically packed Starbucks.
Wednesday, April 02, 2008
Earth Hour in Calgary
Lucy, from Good Grief Lucy, was the first to share the results from Canada's participation in Earth Hour with us, and frankly we are a little surprised and disappointed by the whole thing. Canada.com has published an article here, with firmer numbers. With one critical exception, power consumption during Earth Hour last week dipped in a range of 2 - 7 %, depending on the community. Not necessarily significant results, but definately something to build on and indicative of grassroots support for conservation movements.
In Calgary however, energy consumption rose - as if people wandered around their houses actually turning lights and appliances on.
What is extremely disturbing about this is not so much that energy use increased, suggesting that perhaps few people participated in the event. Calgary does have a sizable environmentally aware community, one that actually translates into fairly strong Green Party results. So the question becomes, if we assume that this small minority actively worked to lower energy consumption during Earth Hour, then how much energy does the average Calgarian use? Remember, Calgarians have the highest carbon footprint in Canada, and one of the highest in North America.
Good grief indeed.
In Calgary however, energy consumption rose - as if people wandered around their houses actually turning lights and appliances on.
What is extremely disturbing about this is not so much that energy use increased, suggesting that perhaps few people participated in the event. Calgary does have a sizable environmentally aware community, one that actually translates into fairly strong Green Party results. So the question becomes, if we assume that this small minority actively worked to lower energy consumption during Earth Hour, then how much energy does the average Calgarian use? Remember, Calgarians have the highest carbon footprint in Canada, and one of the highest in North America.
Good grief indeed.
Sunday, March 23, 2008
Coffee Update: Micro-roasting
It is by coincidence perhaps, that the closing of one of our favourite coffee shops on Edmonton Trail, Blends, brings with it our our introduction to two smaller coffee concerns, Cochrane Coffee Traders, and Molise Coffee, of Vancouver's Falesca Importing. That Blends roasted and sold its own coffee beans was not unusual, though it was one of our favourites, and its demise has led us to go looking elsewhere for fresh beans.
In an economic age that is increasingly putting a premium on product information and individuality, the rise of what we might call "micro-roasters" might be seen as inevitable. Like micro-brewing, the creation of small scale coffee companies, set to sell and distribute their own coffee within a limited geographic area is an evolution of a consumer market dominated by large scale chains. As coffee drinkers look to carve out their own personal, local, and regional identities, companies like the Cochrane Coffee Traders will emerge to serve the high-end, socially consciencious crowd (our East Timor dark roast promised not only to be Fair Trade, but also bird-friendly).
If the CCT represents an emerging coffee company, then the Molise brand of Falesca can be seen to be a more mature offering. Having started roasting their own beans in 1983, Falesca's products can now be found throughout Western Canada, whereas one can only find the CCT in a limited number of coffee shops. For our part, we enjoyed the CCT dark roast to the Molise Medium Roast Super Bar Espresso.
We've provided a link to an article on fair trade coffee and the Cochrane Coffee Traders from Fast Forward Weekly, as we were especially pleased to see the closing comments about attempts to develop consumer awareness of the geographic taste and characteristics of different beans.
In an economic age that is increasingly putting a premium on product information and individuality, the rise of what we might call "micro-roasters" might be seen as inevitable. Like micro-brewing, the creation of small scale coffee companies, set to sell and distribute their own coffee within a limited geographic area is an evolution of a consumer market dominated by large scale chains. As coffee drinkers look to carve out their own personal, local, and regional identities, companies like the Cochrane Coffee Traders will emerge to serve the high-end, socially consciencious crowd (our East Timor dark roast promised not only to be Fair Trade, but also bird-friendly).
If the CCT represents an emerging coffee company, then the Molise brand of Falesca can be seen to be a more mature offering. Having started roasting their own beans in 1983, Falesca's products can now be found throughout Western Canada, whereas one can only find the CCT in a limited number of coffee shops. For our part, we enjoyed the CCT dark roast to the Molise Medium Roast Super Bar Espresso.
We've provided a link to an article on fair trade coffee and the Cochrane Coffee Traders from Fast Forward Weekly, as we were especially pleased to see the closing comments about attempts to develop consumer awareness of the geographic taste and characteristics of different beans.
Saturday, March 22, 2008
The Ghosts That Haunt Us (Richard Nixon Lives)
One of our favourite historical eras is the French Revolution. We're always up for a good book, essay, or even movie (really, we're afraid to admit that we'll even find time for Sofia Coppola's Marie Antoinette) on that tumultous period. In fact, one could almost say that we find it inspiring, as it has proved to be a fertile ground for historical analysis.
This time around, the cause for review came from Charles Savage's book Takeover: The Return of the Imperial Presidency, examining political efforts by post-Richard Nixon administrations to expand presidential power in the United States. Savage's treatment of this phenomena reminded us of a similar experience in Revolutionary historiography.
One of the enduring problems of studying the French Revolution has been attempting to fix an end date to the Revolution. Napoleon himself once declared the Revolution over, while some historians speak of French Revolutions in the plural. For our purposes here, the problem is the revolutionary/counter-revolutionary ebb and flow that French society experienced as conservative and liberal elements traded power over three decades, each attempting to undo some of the work of the other. Some sort of concilliation and consensus did not occur until the reign of Louis Philippe, the so-called Citizen-King, which attempted to merge the interests of the surviving Bonapartists, Jacobins, Girondins, Bourbon Monarchists, and Phillipe's own Orleanist groups. Louis Phillipe marked the final consolidation of the revolution, and the end of his reign, could effectively be said to mark the conclusion of the Revolution. Unfortunately, this unity came at the expense of his own popularity, as his government was overthrown in favour of Louis Bonaparte in 1848, some sixty years after the original Revolution.
Similarly, Hunter S. Thompson once described Richard Nixon as a unifier, on the same grounds that Americans were all united in their anger towards him. Perhaps it would be wrong to blame Nixon entirely for the sheer depth of illegality surrounding White House corruption, in the same sense that Louis XVI cannot be blamed entirely for the long-running structural weaknesses that plagued France on the eve of the Revolution. As Savage explains, virtually every Cold War president since Truman had sought to expand the ability of the president to act without having to refer to Congress, chief of amongst these, revolved around conducting war and declaring war, in response to perceived communist threats. The Constitution of the United States clearly separated these powers between the President and Congress, and events like the Korean War, Bay of Pigs, and especially Vietnam, would see different administrations employ all kinds of tactics to evade congressional oversight, ultimately leading to the so-called "secret wars" conducted by Nixon in Laos and Cambodia. In the aftermath of Watergate however, it was revealed that Nixon had been deceiving Congress in domestic matters as well, involving domestic intelligence gathering and the undermining of liberal-minded government insitutions, giving full scope to the term, "imperial presidency".
So what does this have to do with the French Revolution? As much as the Revolution was a specific response to conditions in France, it was also an ideological manifestation, and much of the turmoil experienced during the later decades stems from the tug-of-war between different ideological factions, a contest that would dominate French politics in one way or another for almost half a century. In the same way then, the Nixon presidency also had its fair share of ideologues who supported a president free from Congressional intervention. The Unitary Executive Theory, as it was called, held that the separation of powers articulated in the U.S. Constitution made it unlawful for Congress to create agencies capable of interfering with the President's ability to execute law. Following Nixon, the Supreme Court found that this theory was an improper interpretation of the Constitution, giving Congress an open hand at reigning in Presidential perogatives.
As with the French Revolution however, rival idealogical factions did not disappear the moment they were out of power. Supporters of Unitary Executive Theory from the Nixon administration continued careers in and out of politics, many finding homes in the Reagan-Bush administrations, where they often worked to scale back the restrictions to presidential powers. Chief among these was Dick Cheney, who served under Nixon, Ford, Reagen and Bush, before becoming vice-president under the current Bush. Unlike the Revolution, where we can clearly see the ebb and flow of these sides before they come to some sort of consesus, Charles Savage's book documents the extent that the Bush-Cheney administration have been able to return to Nixon-like levels of presidential control. In fact, Bush's signing statements, closed-door meetings, undisclosed foreign prisons, have all gone beyond Nixon.
This time around, the cause for review came from Charles Savage's book Takeover: The Return of the Imperial Presidency, examining political efforts by post-Richard Nixon administrations to expand presidential power in the United States. Savage's treatment of this phenomena reminded us of a similar experience in Revolutionary historiography.
One of the enduring problems of studying the French Revolution has been attempting to fix an end date to the Revolution. Napoleon himself once declared the Revolution over, while some historians speak of French Revolutions in the plural. For our purposes here, the problem is the revolutionary/counter-revolutionary ebb and flow that French society experienced as conservative and liberal elements traded power over three decades, each attempting to undo some of the work of the other. Some sort of concilliation and consensus did not occur until the reign of Louis Philippe, the so-called Citizen-King, which attempted to merge the interests of the surviving Bonapartists, Jacobins, Girondins, Bourbon Monarchists, and Phillipe's own Orleanist groups. Louis Phillipe marked the final consolidation of the revolution, and the end of his reign, could effectively be said to mark the conclusion of the Revolution. Unfortunately, this unity came at the expense of his own popularity, as his government was overthrown in favour of Louis Bonaparte in 1848, some sixty years after the original Revolution.
Similarly, Hunter S. Thompson once described Richard Nixon as a unifier, on the same grounds that Americans were all united in their anger towards him. Perhaps it would be wrong to blame Nixon entirely for the sheer depth of illegality surrounding White House corruption, in the same sense that Louis XVI cannot be blamed entirely for the long-running structural weaknesses that plagued France on the eve of the Revolution. As Savage explains, virtually every Cold War president since Truman had sought to expand the ability of the president to act without having to refer to Congress, chief of amongst these, revolved around conducting war and declaring war, in response to perceived communist threats. The Constitution of the United States clearly separated these powers between the President and Congress, and events like the Korean War, Bay of Pigs, and especially Vietnam, would see different administrations employ all kinds of tactics to evade congressional oversight, ultimately leading to the so-called "secret wars" conducted by Nixon in Laos and Cambodia. In the aftermath of Watergate however, it was revealed that Nixon had been deceiving Congress in domestic matters as well, involving domestic intelligence gathering and the undermining of liberal-minded government insitutions, giving full scope to the term, "imperial presidency".
So what does this have to do with the French Revolution? As much as the Revolution was a specific response to conditions in France, it was also an ideological manifestation, and much of the turmoil experienced during the later decades stems from the tug-of-war between different ideological factions, a contest that would dominate French politics in one way or another for almost half a century. In the same way then, the Nixon presidency also had its fair share of ideologues who supported a president free from Congressional intervention. The Unitary Executive Theory, as it was called, held that the separation of powers articulated in the U.S. Constitution made it unlawful for Congress to create agencies capable of interfering with the President's ability to execute law. Following Nixon, the Supreme Court found that this theory was an improper interpretation of the Constitution, giving Congress an open hand at reigning in Presidential perogatives.
As with the French Revolution however, rival idealogical factions did not disappear the moment they were out of power. Supporters of Unitary Executive Theory from the Nixon administration continued careers in and out of politics, many finding homes in the Reagan-Bush administrations, where they often worked to scale back the restrictions to presidential powers. Chief among these was Dick Cheney, who served under Nixon, Ford, Reagen and Bush, before becoming vice-president under the current Bush. Unlike the Revolution, where we can clearly see the ebb and flow of these sides before they come to some sort of consesus, Charles Savage's book documents the extent that the Bush-Cheney administration have been able to return to Nixon-like levels of presidential control. In fact, Bush's signing statements, closed-door meetings, undisclosed foreign prisons, have all gone beyond Nixon.
Saturday, March 15, 2008
Electioneering
It's been awhile since we posted, but that's not to say we haven' t been busy. In fact, the office of The Daily Wenzel has been awash in new music, and our afternoon kino series has been as productive as ever, with a viewing of Nick Cave's screenwriting debut, The Proposition. However, what has kept us from posting has actually been the results of the recent Alberta Provincial election. We had hoped to offer some sort of insghtful commentary on the meaning of the election, but have recently come to grips with the fact that such a thing will take months, if not years to analyze properly.
One of the things that we would like to examine is the electoral boundaries. Calgary and Edmonton each have roughly 1/3 of the electoral ridings. With approximately a million people in each city, this means that the remaining 1/3 of predominantly rural ridings (Red Deer, Lethbridge, and Medicine Hat, the next largest urban populations, each have two ridings) have a combined total of one million people? Have we really grown so much outside of the cities?
What is clear is that at the moment, the province is caught up in all sorts of demographic trends. Our earlier prediction that recent immigration to Calgary and changes in housing prices, has caused Liberal support to increase, and more importantly disperse throughout the city. We have yet to see exactly how this is playing out provincially though.
However, one needs to be very careful when talking about Liberal or Conservative support, since voter turnout was at its lowest point ever, something that is especially troublesome when the media was perhaps the most inclined as it has ever been to change. Earlier we made the comment that the Calgary civic election, with its faux David Bronconnier (returning mayor) vs. Ed Stelmach (unresponsive premier) battle for responsibility over the mismanagement of Calgary's growth. At the time, we said that Bronconnier's re-election could either be viewed as Calgarians blaming Stelmach for the city's problems, or else, the voting population of Calgary (again an election featuring a record-low voter turnout) being quite content with whatever regime is in power so long as the money keeps coming in, leading us to wonder what $110 oil will bring.
What worries us most though about the low voter turnout is that there is not much discussion over who is not voting. Generally speaking, it is assumed that the poor and the young do not vote. However, in Calgary (and we suppose Edmonton, or any other Albertan area experiencing an influx of people), the question really needs to be asked, to what extent do the new arrivals participate in the political process? How many Albertans failed to vote because they could not provide proof of the residency requirements - remember, Calgary shamefully has thousands of working homeless. Also, remembering the stories of the increasing outflow of workers from Calgary and Alberta this summer, workers and families selling their now doubled or tripled in value homes and moving back to Saskatchewan or further east where the housing prices have yet skyrocket, or else never really could establish themselves with Calgary's new cost of living.
To extrapolate, to what extent is the low voter indicative of a growing population that does not consider Calgary (or Alberta) home? a population that does not, or cannot, engage with the social fabric of the community around it? a community within a community? Such a thing would be disasterous for a city and a province that already has a lacklustre record in dealing with disadvantaged communities.
One of the things that we would like to examine is the electoral boundaries. Calgary and Edmonton each have roughly 1/3 of the electoral ridings. With approximately a million people in each city, this means that the remaining 1/3 of predominantly rural ridings (Red Deer, Lethbridge, and Medicine Hat, the next largest urban populations, each have two ridings) have a combined total of one million people? Have we really grown so much outside of the cities?
What is clear is that at the moment, the province is caught up in all sorts of demographic trends. Our earlier prediction that recent immigration to Calgary and changes in housing prices, has caused Liberal support to increase, and more importantly disperse throughout the city. We have yet to see exactly how this is playing out provincially though.
However, one needs to be very careful when talking about Liberal or Conservative support, since voter turnout was at its lowest point ever, something that is especially troublesome when the media was perhaps the most inclined as it has ever been to change. Earlier we made the comment that the Calgary civic election, with its faux David Bronconnier (returning mayor) vs. Ed Stelmach (unresponsive premier) battle for responsibility over the mismanagement of Calgary's growth. At the time, we said that Bronconnier's re-election could either be viewed as Calgarians blaming Stelmach for the city's problems, or else, the voting population of Calgary (again an election featuring a record-low voter turnout) being quite content with whatever regime is in power so long as the money keeps coming in, leading us to wonder what $110 oil will bring.
What worries us most though about the low voter turnout is that there is not much discussion over who is not voting. Generally speaking, it is assumed that the poor and the young do not vote. However, in Calgary (and we suppose Edmonton, or any other Albertan area experiencing an influx of people), the question really needs to be asked, to what extent do the new arrivals participate in the political process? How many Albertans failed to vote because they could not provide proof of the residency requirements - remember, Calgary shamefully has thousands of working homeless. Also, remembering the stories of the increasing outflow of workers from Calgary and Alberta this summer, workers and families selling their now doubled or tripled in value homes and moving back to Saskatchewan or further east where the housing prices have yet skyrocket, or else never really could establish themselves with Calgary's new cost of living.
To extrapolate, to what extent is the low voter indicative of a growing population that does not consider Calgary (or Alberta) home? a population that does not, or cannot, engage with the social fabric of the community around it? a community within a community? Such a thing would be disasterous for a city and a province that already has a lacklustre record in dealing with disadvantaged communities.
Sunday, February 24, 2008
A Piece On Criticism
We saw this piece on the role of criticism in the form of gaming journalism and were surprised by the nature of both the article and the discussion that followed it. Note how one of the respondents even brings in the work of anthropologist Clifford Geertz in terms of the work and function of the critic.
In general, we feel there is a difference between the focus of a critic and a reviewer, and agree with the author Costik in terms of the difference between these two activities (even though some of the respondents disagree on terminology). Too often our media, and because of it, our more media dependent citizens, operate ahistorically. Costik's article, we feel, is a good introduction for all would be critics.
In general, we feel there is a difference between the focus of a critic and a reviewer, and agree with the author Costik in terms of the difference between these two activities (even though some of the respondents disagree on terminology). Too often our media, and because of it, our more media dependent citizens, operate ahistorically. Costik's article, we feel, is a good introduction for all would be critics.
Tuesday, February 19, 2008
Espressin' It?
We once heard a particular cup of Kimbo referred to as "robust and sexy, like something down near dockyards," a questionable description at best, however we did wonder what sort of comment the drinker would have had for the following:
Monday, February 18, 2008
Education Leaves It's Mark
Some recent postings by our friends over at Exploding Beakers has left us wondering. The current posts centre around notions of play and "unsupervised spaces" in schools. One of the sources of inspiration for the posts was an earlier one of our own, referencing a childhood game called "Murderball", as part of our own interest in what children do when adults are not around, and just how omnipresent parents are starting to become.
However, what is interesting is the choice of "unsupervised spaces" and the knowledge that Exploding Beakers main contributor, Sean Marchetto (a frequent contributor here too), has like us, read Hakim Bey's lengthy poem The Temporary Autonomous Zone, an influential underground piece based around pirate utopias (to read an online version, or something else by Bey click here). In The T.A.Z. Bey searches for areas of the world where the run of the mill rules governing day-to-day living are suspended in favour of more spontaneous, exuberant forms - one would be forgiven for thinking of the Burning Man festival in a way, a place where traditional leaders and rule-enforcers are noticably absent or weakened.
While Marchetto was still a CJSW DJ hosting The Twelth Ave Paylot in the mid-1990s, he would often reference Bey, but we are very surprised to see some of theses ideas creeping back around in Marchetto's work with educational structures. To us, it illustrates just how deep and easily assimilated certain ideas are, that they can sink to the bottom of our consciousness and lie dormant for over a decade, only to resurface in completely different contexts and attached to different companion structures.
Fascinating.
However, what is interesting is the choice of "unsupervised spaces" and the knowledge that Exploding Beakers main contributor, Sean Marchetto (a frequent contributor here too), has like us, read Hakim Bey's lengthy poem The Temporary Autonomous Zone, an influential underground piece based around pirate utopias (to read an online version, or something else by Bey click here). In The T.A.Z. Bey searches for areas of the world where the run of the mill rules governing day-to-day living are suspended in favour of more spontaneous, exuberant forms - one would be forgiven for thinking of the Burning Man festival in a way, a place where traditional leaders and rule-enforcers are noticably absent or weakened.
While Marchetto was still a CJSW DJ hosting The Twelth Ave Paylot in the mid-1990s, he would often reference Bey, but we are very surprised to see some of theses ideas creeping back around in Marchetto's work with educational structures. To us, it illustrates just how deep and easily assimilated certain ideas are, that they can sink to the bottom of our consciousness and lie dormant for over a decade, only to resurface in completely different contexts and attached to different companion structures.
Fascinating.
Fly to London for a Party?
In response to our earlier gushing about the series of DJ podcasts being released by London nightclub Fabric, there was a suggestion that perhaps the strong Canadian dollar, coupled with upcoming cheap spring charter flights, might make a weekend trip to the UK feasible.
While we were intrigued by the idea, in the same way that we were interested in the logistics of summer shopping trips to nearby American cities like Seattle or Las Vegas that purported to take advantage of the exchange differentials between US and Canadian currencies and prices. We were reminded of a recent interview with Thom Yorke of Radiohead, where he discusses the ecological impact of air travel. It's a theme that we heard last fall from George Monbiot as well.
However, the good folks at Dopplr have shown that there doesn't seem to be any real fear at present. The social network is geared towards travellers and their blog has several different interesting (and colourful) charts showing membership travel patterns.
While we were intrigued by the idea, in the same way that we were interested in the logistics of summer shopping trips to nearby American cities like Seattle or Las Vegas that purported to take advantage of the exchange differentials between US and Canadian currencies and prices. We were reminded of a recent interview with Thom Yorke of Radiohead, where he discusses the ecological impact of air travel. It's a theme that we heard last fall from George Monbiot as well.
However, the good folks at Dopplr have shown that there doesn't seem to be any real fear at present. The social network is geared towards travellers and their blog has several different interesting (and colourful) charts showing membership travel patterns.
Thursday, February 14, 2008
If Charity Begins At Home, Can Sanctions Too?
Federal Liberal hopeful and former astronaut Marc Garneau, floated the idea today that Canada should impose trade sanctions on countries that refuse to reduce their greenhouse emissions. This made us wonder, can the sanctions begin with Alberta?
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
