Oh for the love of God

January 4, 2010 § Leave a comment

This is entirely off-topic, but: the Winter Olympics in Vancouver are coming up next month.  And this is Canada.  In Canada, we expect to win every gold medal on offer in international hockey.  We do win a lot.  Just not in men’s international hockey.  At least not in the Olympics, with only 2 in the past 60 years (1952 and 2002).  In 2006, Canada bombed out of the Olympic men’s hockey tournament in most embarrassing fashion.  Anyway, I digress.  For this year, Pepsi and Hockey Canada have teamed up to commission an “official” chant for the fans.  Yes, that’s right, “they” want to tell “us,” the fans, what to chant at a hockey game.  The chant, moreover, is so godamned lame it’s not even funny: “Eh! O, Canada Go!”  It’s being test-driven at the World Junior Hockey Championships in Saskatoon right now.  One word: Awkward, try saying it yourself.  Go on.  Seriously, an “official” chant for the fans.  One coming from a marketing campaign.  I can’t even begin to tell y’all how much that depresses me.

Transit-City

January 4, 2010 § Leave a comment

I just came across this blog, an appendage of the Transit City site.  It’s a kind of French-language version of Geoff Manaugh’s BLDGBLOG, run by a chap named François Bellanger, a Parisian sociologist.  OK, I must admit, M. Bellanger has entered my consciousness because he has made use of my review of Chip Jacob & William Kelly’s Smogtown: The Lung-Burning History of Pollution in Los Angeles in a post of his own.  Tune in later, once I get a chance to read and digest more of Transit City, I’m sure it will become a mainstay.

U2

December 12, 2009 § Leave a comment

I just want to say apropos of nothing, that I am completely blown away that U2 would spend $3 million to build themselves a temporary outdoor stadium at the recently disused Hippodrome-de-Montréal.  More than that, that they would offer tickets for as low as 30$.  And even more than that, that this temporary stadium will seat up to 80,000 people and that U2 sold out two shows on 16-17 July 2010 in next to no time (and no, I don’t have tickets).  As the Irish say in such moments, Jay-sus!  Up to 160,000 people for two nights to see U2.

One of my students last week tried to argue that U2 were a spent force as a rock band.  Apparently, dude was wrong.

I wish I could tie this to some commentary on the strength of the Irish diaspora in Montréal, or something like that.  But sometimes, well, a cigar is just a cigar.  So, instead, I present you with this video, tying U2’s classic “Sunday Bloody Sunday” back to its original meaning, Bloody Sunday on the Bogside in Derry, Northern Ireland, on 30 January 1972.

Congrats, That’s How to State the Obvious

December 7, 2009 § Leave a comment

Congratulations to the US EPA, which has just determined that greenhouse gases are a threat to humans.  It depresses me that it took Obama’s election for the EPA to come to this conclusion.

In related news, over at the CTlab’s Review, I have a review of a book entitled, Smogtown: The Lung Burning History of Pollution in Los Angeles, by Chip Jacobs and William J. Kelly, posted.

From Monkwire to Kikobor

December 7, 2009 § Leave a comment

My partners-in-crime over at the Complex Terrain Laboratory, Mike Innes and Eric Randolph, both have new(ish) blogs up, offering the world their own particular take on things.  Mike’s is called Monkwire, and offers up his take on issues pertaining to security and sanctuary.  Eric, formerly our London dude at the Lab, has since relocated to India, attempting to channel his ancestors in their movements from the UK to the subcontinent.  Eric’s blog is called Kikobor, and there he “concentrates on issues of security, international relations and general goings-0n in the subcontinent and beyond.”

Remembering the Montréal Massacre

December 6, 2009 § 1 Comment

On 6 December 1989, a lone gunman burst into the École Polytechnique de Montréal, part of the Université de Montréal, and opened fire.  He targeted women specifically.  He was upset that “feminists” had ruined his life.  For his delusions, 28 innocent people were shot, before he turned the gun on himself.  In the first classroom he broke into, he separated men from women, then shot all 9 women, 6 of whom died.  Then he wandered the hallways, the cafeteria, and another classroom, targeting women, shooting another 14 women, and 4 men.  All 4 men survived, of the 24 women who were shot, 14 died.  All this within 20 minutes.

I was 16, living in suburban Vancouver when this happened.  I remember the shock.  I couldn’t fathom then, and I still can’t, how someone could open fire in a school, let alone, to kill women for being in school.  These 14 women died because they were just that: women getting an education.  I have never been able to wrap my head around that concept.  It doesn’t make sense to me.  It didn’t in 1989 and it doesn’t in 2009.  The Montréal Massacre is one of those transformative moments in my life, it is deeply embedded in my view of the world.  It was a shocking, terrible event.  And despite all of the school shootings since in both Canada and the USA, this is the one that is, to me, a horror story.   Every 6 December, I remember watching the chilling news footage in the living room back in BC, I remember trying to understand why this had happened, my mother and I both horrified.  And every 6 December, I find myself asking those same questions over and over.  I still don’t have an answer.

But what particularly upsets me about 6 December is that the shooter’s name lives on, in infamy, of course, but nearly everyone of my generation, we were all affected wherever we were, know his name.  I refuse to utter it, print it, post it, etc.  I do not want to remember him.  Diane Riopel, who taught at L’École Polytechnique in 1989, and narrowly missed meeting the killer, echoes this sentiment: “We have given him enough publicity. Out of respect for the victims, the killer should be completely anonymous.”  I don’t think Hell exists, but when I think of him, I hope it does.  I don’t think anyone can name all 14 women who died.  I certainly can’t.  They’re all agglomerated as “the victims.”  The shooter maintains his individuality in death, but the 14 women he martyred lose theirs.  All we seem to know is that they were engineering students.  But what else about them?  What were their dreams?  What did they plan to do with their lives when they finished school?  What books did they read?  Where did they hang out with their friends?  All of this, I wonder about every year at the anniversary.  And I have no idea what the answers to these questions are.

These are the victims:

  • Geneviève Bergeron (born 1968), civil engineering student, age 21.
  • Hélène Colgan (born 1966), mechanical engineering student, age 23.
  • Nathalie Croteau (born 1966), mechanical engineering student, age 23.
  • Barbara Daigneault (born 1967), mechanical engineering student, age 22.
  • Anne-Marie Edward (born 1968), chemical engineering student, age 21.
  • Maud Haviernick (born 1960), materials engineering student, age 29.
  • Maryse Laganière (born 1964), budget clerk in the École Polytechnique’s finance department, age 25.
  • Maryse Leclair (born 1966), materials engineering student, age 23.
  • Anne-Marie Lemay (born 1967), mechanical engineering student, age 22.
  • Sonia Pelletier (born 1961), mechanical engineering student, age 28.
  • Michèle Richard (born 1968), materials engineering student, age 21.
  • Annie St-Arneault (born 1966), mechanical engineering student, age 23.
  • Annie Turcotte (born 1969), materials engineering student age 20.
  • Barbara Klucznik-Widajewicz (born 1958), nursing student, age 31.

Lunatic Fringe

December 4, 2009 § 1 Comment

[UPDATED: 5 DECEMBER]

A long time ago, in a galaxy faraway, there was a Canadian band called Red Rider.  And they had a big hit in the early 80s with a song called “The Lunatic Fringe.”  It’s not such a bad song, really.

The lunatic fringe is alive and well in Montréal this week, according to the Montreal Mirror. American aboriginal activist Splitting the Sky will be in our fair city.  I have never really thought of him as out there, despite his claim to fame being an attempt to enact a citizen’s arrest on George W. Bush in Calgary.  Anyway, on Saturday night, he will be speaking at the Centre Saint-Pierre on rue Panet; his topic is that 9/11 was an inside job.  This is from the Mirror’s story:

Sky says the former president, his vice-president and their shadowy allies were convinced they could get away with blowing up the World Trade Center, murdering thousands of innocents, engaging in two ruinous wars and earning the enmity of the world in order to gain access to distant oil and gas fields in faraway and difficult to access seabeds. Telltale stock trading prior to the attacks and an impending, potentially costly lawsuit against WTC owners over asbestos are just parts of his case, he says.

“I have conclusive evidence” that will expose the conspiracy, he says. “I’ll be exposing all the corporations, all the players, and charging the real terrorists. The war on terror is bogus.”

All I can say, is please.  9/11 was a lot of things, and the Bush administration does appear to have been negligent about reading intelligence reports prior to the attacks, but an inside job?

UPDATE:

Even The Gazette is getting in on this, promoting Split the Sky’s talk, as well as his legal woes stemming from his attempt to enact a citizen’s arrest on W. in Calgary.  He’s on a tour to fund his defence, apparently.  The talk is being hosted by the Montreal 911 Truth Group.  I especially like their creation of a swastika of bullets with the British, American, Israeli, and NATO flags on it, as the header for an article asking whether Montréal is the next terror target.  Apparently, according to these people, Mossad was going to carry out a 7/7-style terrorist attack in the Montréal Métro.  Included is a typical crackpot explanation of why Mossad (and the Canadian government) would want an attack on Canada:

The government will not stop the next terror attacks planned for Canada, because they are intimately involved with the masters of false flag terror, the Isrealis.

Pro-Israel Zionists placed by treasonous Canadian politicians now hold important posts in Canada’s Parliament(the Isreali allies caucus), Supreme Court, and the CBC.

Other Israeli agents own media monopolies, like CanWest Global, which always stresses the pro-Israel side, and conspires to swindle Canadians with War on Terror propaganda. They actually want a terror attack on Canada, so they can pour on even more propaganda for Israel inspired wars.

But, fortunately for us, the conspiracy theorists are here to save us.  Ugh.  Please.

On Language

December 3, 2009 § Leave a comment

Russell Smith has an interesting column in today’s Globe & Mail about mistakes in the English language, when the wrong word is used, and the resulting innovation in language.  He makes a convincing argument, I must say.  And it’s a funny read, too.  Essentially, he argues that malapropisms can lead to new meanings, and, in some cases, welcome meanings.  For example, he presents us with some examples:

How many times, for example, have you heard someone say that she was “on tenderhooks”? She means tenterhooks, of course – the hooks on the tenter, the device that stretches canvas. Such a stretching would make one anxious and eager for the feeling to end. But there is another, perhaps even more painful image that comes from “tender hooks” – the juxtaposition of the sharp hook and something tender, such as flesh. This is a particularly poetic image because it is the hook itself that is tender: This is the kind of impossible metaphor that surrealist poetry is built on.

Or:

Similarly, when I read that someone’s hair is “tussled,” I can never be really sure whether it’s a simple misspelling of tousled (rumpled) or a clever play on to tussle or fight – a coiffure that’s been roughed up, you might say. When people say they want to “curve their appetite” I know they mean curb, but an interesting idea comes up: the appetite as line to be bent into the desired direction. I also like the overlay of meaning in “boast your confidence.” It comes from boost, of course, or possibly even bolster, but the new connotation of vanity amps up the phrase a little.

He then talks about “eggcorns”, when we use words incorrectly.  An eggcorn is apparently a more creative malapropism.  Like, for example, Cold Slaw, instead of coleslaw.  Or Jade Goody’s famous declaration that she didn’t want to be an “escape goat.”  And so on.

Balderdash.  Whatever.  Smith clearly has not spent a lot of time marking undergraduate papers.

I see malapropisms and eggcorns and I kind of worry.  For example, my students oftentimes write that they “should of” done something, rather than “should have.”  Or they use “than” instead of “then.”  They don’t know the difference between “they’re”, “there”, and “their.”  Or “where” and “were.”  This kind of thing worries me.  Call me old fashioned, call me fussy, whatever.  I believe literacy matters.  And I get concerned when I come across the sorts of malapropisms I come across marking the average paper.

Language works because it is a universal coding system used by speakers of that language.  English-speakers, for example, have a general, universal, understanding of what words mean.  We see words and we understand their meaning, we then decode them in order to understand what we are reading or hearing (or speaking or writing).  There are times when abbreviations are necessary, such as txting or when we leave short notes for spouses, partners, lovers, roommates, and so on.  But these usually accord to a universally-agreed upon system as well.  These universally-agreed upon codes are central to communication, of communicating ideas to one another.  If we cannot communicate, well, the downside to that is rather obvious, I would say.

And so, when my students display a fundamental misunderstanding of the language they speak, it concerns me.  Especially when they are 19 or 20 years old.  I read too many sentences like this one: “He than thinked of another solution.”  Or “He as did a new program.”  These are real sentences I read today in marking a stack of papers.  The first one, of course, was trying to say “He then thought of another solution.”  The second, harder to decode, meant, “He created a new programme.”

Certainly, it is my job to help students learn these basic facts of communication, but I don’t think that CÉGEP is where they should be learning this.  These are basic laws and facts of the English language I understood long before I finished high school.  Raising a generation of people who are not fully fluent in their native language is a terrifying thought.  Especially when you think about all of the fights and arguments we get into over the course of our lives due to a miscommunication, a word used incorrectly, or heard incorrectly.

Griffintown Graffiti

November 27, 2009 § Leave a comment

Check this out: Griffintown Graffiti.

On the Mark

November 17, 2009 § Leave a comment

I’m not entirely sure where this site comes from, but The Mark is a new current events/news site heavy on the analysis, and staffed, it seems, by a group of scruffy urban hipsters.  All power to them.  This site is worth a read and following in the future.

At any rate, there is a section on The Mark that looks at the future of the city in the 21st century.  It has become pretty much commonplace to refer to the 21st century as the urban century; the world’s population recently passed the tipping point and we are a predominately urban species now.  Of course, in the industrialised west, this mark was reached in the 20th century.  Canada, incidentally, was one of the first predominately urban nations in the world.  The Mark’s section on the future of the city is hosted by former Vancouver Mayor, and Premier of British Columbia, Mike Harcourt, and has brought together a pretty impressive array of news and analysis on Canada’s cities, as well as analysis on our collective future.  Worth checking out.

Where Am I?

You are currently browsing the Uncategorized category at Matthew Barlow.