The main reason destination honeymoons were invented, aside from obvious ones like When Else Will We Get To Go To Hawaii, is that it provides a plausible excuse for the happy couple not to go to church the next day. Because, of course, that just Would Not Do. I'm not sure if there's a socially recognised standard for the acceptable lag time after which it is appropriate to appear in public again, but it seems that a week would allow ample time for the snickers to have died down. My theory is that the Sunday wedding phenomenon has taken hold as a clever way to dodge both the heathen approach of not going to church and the tactless faux pas of turning up too soon and having everyone glance away and pretend not to wonder what you were doing last night.
I love eating bountiful feasts at lavish wedding receptions, and I always maintain that you can skimp on the wedding decorations, because no one (except the ten chums who stayed up all night to decorate your palace for you) will notice how many sprinkles of confetti adorn each centerpiece, but what the guests will take away with them is a solid impression of the food. But I know it wasn't always this way, and I'm a bit nostalgic for the old days when cake, nuts, and punch were the standard, because that allowed for more leeway on the guest list. I remember getting invited to a lot of weddings when I was a child, and I'm sure the lack of fanfare on the food front had something to do with it. Weddings are getting more expensive, and the unhappy side effect is that kids don't get invited to weddings as much. I guess, in short, I love to go to weddings. I love great food at receptions, but I'd rather get invited to a wedding and eat cake and punch than not get invited at all.
These thoughts and many others swirled through my mind tonight as I capered about town playing the Wedding Registry Scavenger Hunt. Ooh, look! This perfect punch bowl - which is beautiful, meaningful, and in my price range - was on the registry when I checked earlier, but it's mysteriously gone! What nimble fellow player, racing against the clock, beat me to this prize?? All shall be revealed at the buffet/feast/punchbowl tomorrow!
Friday, August 22, 2008
Monday, August 18, 2008
Stuff and nonsense
Last week I came across this website, and have been mulling over The Story of Stuff ever since. It's about a twenty-minute video, and well worth watching, although I don't appreciate the political potshots which the narrator takes toward the beginning.
(I don't necessarily agree with her assumptions about the limited amount of resources or 'our fair share' of the planetary pie. I guess it comes down to a fundamental difference in worldview - an atheist/evolutionist will see things in the light of chance and survival of the fittest, in which we'd better play the best with the cards we've been dealt, while I believe that God gave us this earth to take dominion over, and provided the resources needed to sustain life in His image. So I'm a little irritated by her trite statistics about the percentage of polluted waterways and the square miles of Amazon rainforest chopped down every day. Treating the water supply and the forests as a finite resource, the draining of which is exacerbated by a growing world population, instead of as a renewable resource that simply needs to be managed better, is a typical alarmist cliche. I am sure that there is irresponsible logging going on out there, but coming from Oregon, where the logging industry is a mainstay and the loggers, realising and respecting this fact - and not wanting to work themselves out of a job - consistently replant at or above replacement level, I tend to resent the all-too-common assumption that cutting down trees is synonymous with trashing the planet.)
Back to The Story of Stuff. Once I got past her alarmist propaganda, I found the rest of the video gripping and enlightening. I am astounded by the notion that our current economic model of rampant consumerism was a deliberate scheme, concocted and constructed according to plan. Apparently the economic advisers of the Eisenhower administration, in drawing up a blueprint for the American economy coming out of the post-war boom, envisioned a long-term model of ever-growing prosperity and expansion, industrialisation and consumption. They developed a shift in the consumer mentality by the precise implementation of planned obsolescence and perceived obsolescence.
Planned obsolescence is when things are designed to be thrown away, so the consumer always has to keep coming back for more. You can see this principle at work with the obvious disposables such as paper goods, diapers, and the like. (Prior to WWII, disposables were almost unheard-of; cloth diapers, personal care and linens were the norm.) Nowadays, we've moved so far away from that notion that we even have such ridiculous 'convenience' items as disposable mops, toilet scrubbers, and, apparently, BBQ grills. (?!?)
More subtle is the planned obsolescence of poor quality goods purporting to be reusable but so cheaply made that they will break often enough to keep the consumer buying and buying again. It's all a cleverly orchestrated balance between having the goods break quickly enough to ensure a steady demand while lasting just long enough to ensure that the consumers will not lose faith in the product. Our expectations have been re-programmed, and we no longer hope for the durability and quality from long-term goods that were the norm a generation or so ago. Hence the very true expression, 'They just don't make them like they used to.' No, and it's no accident.
Perceived obsolescence is simply the cultural pressure to buy a new one, even if the old one isn't broken or dysfunctional. This is the driving force behind fashion, sleek newer cars, bigger houses, and the like. Surely some scientific improvements come with time, but for the most part, the need to buy new stuff is merely imaginary.
The whole thing is very, very annoying to me.
(I don't necessarily agree with her assumptions about the limited amount of resources or 'our fair share' of the planetary pie. I guess it comes down to a fundamental difference in worldview - an atheist/evolutionist will see things in the light of chance and survival of the fittest, in which we'd better play the best with the cards we've been dealt, while I believe that God gave us this earth to take dominion over, and provided the resources needed to sustain life in His image. So I'm a little irritated by her trite statistics about the percentage of polluted waterways and the square miles of Amazon rainforest chopped down every day. Treating the water supply and the forests as a finite resource, the draining of which is exacerbated by a growing world population, instead of as a renewable resource that simply needs to be managed better, is a typical alarmist cliche. I am sure that there is irresponsible logging going on out there, but coming from Oregon, where the logging industry is a mainstay and the loggers, realising and respecting this fact - and not wanting to work themselves out of a job - consistently replant at or above replacement level, I tend to resent the all-too-common assumption that cutting down trees is synonymous with trashing the planet.)
Back to The Story of Stuff. Once I got past her alarmist propaganda, I found the rest of the video gripping and enlightening. I am astounded by the notion that our current economic model of rampant consumerism was a deliberate scheme, concocted and constructed according to plan. Apparently the economic advisers of the Eisenhower administration, in drawing up a blueprint for the American economy coming out of the post-war boom, envisioned a long-term model of ever-growing prosperity and expansion, industrialisation and consumption. They developed a shift in the consumer mentality by the precise implementation of planned obsolescence and perceived obsolescence.
Planned obsolescence is when things are designed to be thrown away, so the consumer always has to keep coming back for more. You can see this principle at work with the obvious disposables such as paper goods, diapers, and the like. (Prior to WWII, disposables were almost unheard-of; cloth diapers, personal care and linens were the norm.) Nowadays, we've moved so far away from that notion that we even have such ridiculous 'convenience' items as disposable mops, toilet scrubbers, and, apparently, BBQ grills. (?!?)
More subtle is the planned obsolescence of poor quality goods purporting to be reusable but so cheaply made that they will break often enough to keep the consumer buying and buying again. It's all a cleverly orchestrated balance between having the goods break quickly enough to ensure a steady demand while lasting just long enough to ensure that the consumers will not lose faith in the product. Our expectations have been re-programmed, and we no longer hope for the durability and quality from long-term goods that were the norm a generation or so ago. Hence the very true expression, 'They just don't make them like they used to.' No, and it's no accident.
Perceived obsolescence is simply the cultural pressure to buy a new one, even if the old one isn't broken or dysfunctional. This is the driving force behind fashion, sleek newer cars, bigger houses, and the like. Surely some scientific improvements come with time, but for the most part, the need to buy new stuff is merely imaginary.
The whole thing is very, very annoying to me.
Wednesday, August 13, 2008
Love a rainy night
'Good thing I didn't mow,' said Michael.
'Good thing I didn't water the tomatoes,' said I.
And we sat and continued to read our respective books, very pleased at how well our procrastinating had paid off.
'Good thing I didn't water the tomatoes,' said I.
And we sat and continued to read our respective books, very pleased at how well our procrastinating had paid off.
Sunday, August 10, 2008
Wooden silverware
Six years ago today I met the man of my dreams.
Five years ago yesterday I married him.
My, how fast the years have flown.
Five years ago yesterday I married him.
My, how fast the years have flown.
Friday, August 08, 2008
Somehow trendy
Despite having no cable, we now have one more thing in common with the average American household, thanks to a good internet connection and the wonderful site known as Hulu: we are dedicated Office fans.
I'd heard of the show here and there, and about a month ago we started watching it. We quickly became hooked, pulling too many late nights in a frenzied effort to get all caught up with the past four seasons before Season Five starts next month.
Some of my favourite quotes:
'I'm not superstitious. Well, maybe I'm just a little stitious.'
'This office is cursed! Have any of you desecrated an Indian burial ground recently?'
'We are all about customer service, while machines are about trying to murder people in their cars in a lake.'
'Myth: three Americans die every year from rabies. Fact: Four Americans do.'
It's pretty quirky, and it takes a bit of getting used to. Or maybe not. We liked it right off the bat. I hate laugh tracks, so I'm very proud of this show for standing on its own.
I'd heard of the show here and there, and about a month ago we started watching it. We quickly became hooked, pulling too many late nights in a frenzied effort to get all caught up with the past four seasons before Season Five starts next month.
Some of my favourite quotes:
'I'm not superstitious. Well, maybe I'm just a little stitious.'
'This office is cursed! Have any of you desecrated an Indian burial ground recently?'
'We are all about customer service, while machines are about trying to murder people in their cars in a lake.'
'Myth: three Americans die every year from rabies. Fact: Four Americans do.'
It's pretty quirky, and it takes a bit of getting used to. Or maybe not. We liked it right off the bat. I hate laugh tracks, so I'm very proud of this show for standing on its own.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
