Of Soup and Love, The First is Best

You've made it past the get-to-know-you coffee sessions, you've gone out for dinner, held hands at a movie--maybe exchanged a kiss--and now it's time to cook for them. First off, don't get the wrong idea about my rather old fashioned dating progression listed above. It doesn't matter if you're living in the 50s, or you've already snorted every powdered letter of the alphabet off their birthday suit, the point is: You've invited them over to your house for the first time--and yer doing the cooking, pal. So, you'd better buck up your ideas.

There are many things to consider here--before even thinking about what to cook and when to do it. First of all, you need to find out what they like and don't like. Find out if there are some foods they hate, or are allergic to, then proceed to step two. Now that you've got a little road map to follow, it's time to nix out some ingredients more suited for an old veteran couple that no longer care about the niceties of courtship. What I mean is, avoid food that creates gas, extreme bad breath, and potential diarrhea.

Sounds serious--but all too often a young man or woman will try to impress their date with spicy as fuck Indian food or beany Mexican, only to throw the night into a humiliating tailspin. So keep that in mind. Save the Spice Road for later. And keep it light. It is always better with any dinner party to run out of food, than to have tons of leftovers. It's also a lot less work, and in the end, it makes the cook look better. Another important consideration is to assess the relationship. There's no need for champagne and strawberries if you just met. Avoid creating an over-done scenario that makes both of you awkward. Same token: don't under-do it. Grill cheeses and pop could come off as pretty lame. So use your noggin, Kenny Loggins.

Once you have your ingredients in mind, it's important--if you do cook regularly--to choose a recipe you are familiar with. This is not the time for experimentation. Chances are, you will get flustered and run the risk of blowing the whole deal. Recipes are testy little things. They are not a perfect science, and almost always need some tweeking. So, choose a dish you know well. If you are not a cook, but still wish to delve into the romantic gesture of preparing dinner for your new fling, then plan ahead and try the recipe prior to the big night. Test it out on your buddies. Make adjustments. Get familiar with the process--and figure out how to create the dish right. Otherwise, you will show some pretty unsavory elements of your behavior--sweating and swearing in the kitchen. And, more importantly, you will come off as being indisposed and unavailable.

On the day, you should pre-prepare. Get your ingredients early. Don't forget beverages. Know where all your needed equipment is. Do your chopping and whatever else you need. Cordon off your spices and herbs for easy grabbing. Boil the water, or whatever else you need to do before the main cooking. Ideally, your date should arrive as the house is starting to smell good. Have a drink. Cooking should be done 30 minutes or so after they arrive. Maybe some cheetos wouldn't hurt. Joking--appetizers are nice though. A little time to relax is a good thing. The more prepared you are in the kitchen, the more relaxed your date will become. Remember: you may think you're nervous cooking for someone for the first time, but they could be even more nervous than you. They are the ones who have to react to YOUR food. It's kind of like that awkward feeling when someone gives you a gift. All eyes on you. And you prepare for the fake smile--the lie, "It's really really really good, seriously..." So, put your guest and yourself at ease. The more casual the affair, the less your date will feel like they have to lie to you if they hate the food.

Another important thing is to make your date feel useful without making them peel potatoes for an hour like some bastard sailor. Leave a few necessary, yet low strain jobs to make them feel like they're contributing. This is a funny one. Nobody wants to sit alone while you're flitting around the kitchen, and they don't want to stand there pretending to be learning how to cook something, and at the same point--they don't want to perform some tedious task you left unfinished. So, setting the table is a good one. A very good one; not only is it a manageable and easy task, you are giving them the authority to set the mood--hence, you are creating an atmosphere and mood together. Aesthetics are just as important as the food you are about to eat. Another good job for your date is opening the wine, or whatever you're drinking. Putting on some music. Lighting candles, etc. All very necessary--additions to the overall ambience, not missing components of your shoddy performance.

And finally, do the dishes--all the dishes, yourself. I recommend cleaning as you go to avoid a nasty pile-up in the sink, but everybody has their own style. Also, you should never clean up immediately after dinner. It's fine to clear the table and run some water over the plates, but now you should be getting on to some nice relaxing time together....provided you didn't kybosh the whole night.

The Truth May Be Out There...

There's been a lot of talk this year about governments releasing--or disclosing--their classified UFO files. And according to the milliards of sites devoted to the subject...it could be any day now, as it has been for years. Whether you're a believer or a skeptic, one thing remains to be seen: convincing evidence.

Go to any ET or UFO website and your bound to be confronted by a similar scene: Black background, neon green text riddled with typos, distracting flashing banners, and almost always some new-agey conspiracy book for sale--usually written by the website's owner. Or go to youtube and check out any of literally thousands of clips of UFO sightings, and you'll see little more than shaky, pixelated video--so shaky sometimes that it's not clear if the movement is being made by the little object in the distance or by the camera itself. Further still, are a whole other class of video made by amateur CGI designers, either attempting to make an object look as realistic as possible, or else trying to completely trick people. The latter--hoaxers in general--are the worst of the problem.

Skeptic or not, lets just pretend the government is withholding all kinds of files that could, in essence, change the way we think about ourselves and the universe at large. A global confirmation that we are not alone would most certainly shift our perspective in unimaginable ways. In short, we would no longer have the privilege of deeming ourselves the superior being of the universe. At once, we would be humbled--awed, and given new hopes for radically improving our lives on planet Earth...and perhaps beyond.

However, as long as the government conceals the truth--provided that there is something to conceal--they will continue to devalue the efforts of believers around the world. And believe me, it's an easy job to perform. It is the hoaxers, the bad websites, and the cheesy conspiracy literature that only strengthens the government's plight. The sheer lack of quality in aesthetics and writing alone are enough to undermine their efforts, making them look like hacks compared to better funded investigative reports.

It is actually quite sad really that the people out there who believe in the great unsolved mysteries share their beliefs in such an amateurish way. While their intentions may be noble, their presentation only manages to create more skeptics. And while it may be a shame that people are shallow, and only choose to trust information that is presented in a more...professionally aesthetic way, with so much information out there, we kind of have no choice but to expect a certain standard of production.

As far as video sightings and photos are concerned, it's a different matter entirely. I can imagine that if I saw a UFO today, my video capture of it would be rife with problems--even with the best equipment and a steady hand. This brings up one the greatest ironies of this whole debacle. Wouldn't seeing a UFO blow your mind completely? Would your brain not be whirling around, your heart pumping...and your camera hand trembling? And on the other hand, wouldn't having a tripod at the ready reveal a "set-up" video...a complete hoax? It would seem that it's basically a lose-lose situation as a shaky and grainy image may reflect some spontaneity and emotionally involved filming, the utter lack of clarity deems these videos immediately inadmissible. And on the other hand, a fixed HD shot of a flying saucer will at once be scrutinized for its preparedness and clarity--and deemed a hoax.

But...and this is a big but, pilots, astronauts and other government officials all over the world have said time and time again that 5 percent of these videos are "inexplicable." Tested with thermo-spectograph technology--similar to the image technology an airport may use to check if you have a fever--5 percent of these images have been proven to be "real" objects. Whether alien or terrestrial, however, remains to be verified. But again, the better the hoaxers get at generating convincing computer generated images, the further we get from discovering the truth. And additionally, the further the hoaxers are willing to go, and the deeper their pockets, even the experts become more skeptical--and more willing to call even the most convincing images hoaxes.

I think people should be responsible here. Some 13 year old punk may find it hilarious to chuck a plate off his roof and throw it on youtube as a "REAL UFO" sighting, but it is the responsibility of the viewer to shut it down by commenting on the video. There was a video that emerged 2 years ago--supposedly taken in Haiti. The first time I saw it, I literally shuddered. I couldn't believe it. It was a close up video of a massive flying saucer moving up the beach, you could hear the person filming it actually gasp. It was very convincing. But it was a viewer's honest comment that proved the video to be a hoax--noting that the palm trees in the image were identical to one another. So, on the positive side, I'm glad that there are some out there who strive to keep things real.

In the end, we will either step it up a notch and build a more mature and convincing case for the existence of alien life, or we will file the massive heap of documentation next to the Lochness Monster and Bigfoot. The choice is more ours than we think. And who knows, we may be in for an even bigger surprise later this year if the US government decides to de-classify its files. Until then, keep your feet on the ground and your eyes on the skies.  Here are a few links, both good and bad. Enjoy. The Disclosure Project UFO Evidence

Things I don't need to know about you on Facebook

I'm sure that most of us can admit to spending a little too much time scrolling up and down on facebook. For a fairly simple social networking site, with not all that much happening, it still eats up quite a bit of time. My use of facebook is pretty simple; share the odd photo, put up a video I think my friends would like, check out what's going on in town, and once in a while get turned on to something new by others. In this realm, facebook is a great thing--especially for bands or artists alike promoting a show. However, there is a darker side to facebook. A side that I would rather not know about.

Call this article harsh, but I'm sure a lot of you will agree with me in the end. There are many abuses of facebook that I find lame and kind of embarrassing. For instance, I really don't care about your breakup, what you did with your hair, and I will remove you as a friend if I'm ever invited to some lame ass Sesame Street video game where you "harvest" video crops, or role-play as some mafia hitman nerd, or take care of a virtual fish tank, or whatever. These are simple grounds for excommunication in my books.

For people out there sharing more serious status updates, I can only feel bad. I just don't get it, and it brings a whole new level to washing one's laundry in public. I guesstimate that while everyone on facebook has 200 plus friends--of which probably 30 percent could be called 'real' friends, there is certainly a little too much sharing going on. Posting your post-breakup stress to a whole community of strangers is retarded. And furthermore, divulging dirty secrets about said-ex is even worse. Write their numbers in a public john under "gives great head", diss them to their faces, but please stop telling me about it on facebook. The irony in this usually is that people don't often even want attention when they're going through a bad time. But writing it on the great wall of facebook puts others in the awkward position to comment or not to comment on it. That's gross. And while it may be comforting to receive some kind of consolation, more often than not, these types of serious facebook declarations are initially written in haste, and for the most part cause a lot of unwanted embarrassment on their part. Do yourself a favor and keep it private.

I know, I know. I'm a big jerk right? Fine..I can take that. The other thing I can't stand is all the farming and fishing and whatnot that goes on. Get this: I WILL NEVER BE YOUR CYBER NEIGHBOR. I don't care how many video acres you need on your farm. I would rather hang around with born-again Jesus freaks listening to Kenny G, and eating tea eggs.

Also, I will most definitely hide your posts if you update me about the petty events of your whole day. Like, "going to shower," or "this new douchebag rocks." You get my point. On the flipside, there are lots of things I do like to hear about. Like where you're enjoying your vacation, or the birth of a new human, or "won the lottery." Anything like that is fine. I might even "like" it.  I understand I have no right to tell people how to live their lives. Censoring these annoying posts is simple enough. That's not my problem. My problem is with exposing areas of one's life that usually end up harming that person more in the end. Just stop making yourself look like a whiny schoolgirl with a D and D addiction.

A Medicre Discovery

I don't know what it's like in the rest of the world--but here in Taiwan--it blows. I'm talking about both The Discovery and National Geographic channels. It seems as if their programming standards have fallen into an intellectual void, trading quality content for half-assed amateurish schlock.

If you're going to watch the tube once in a while, it's a hell of a lot better to watch something a little informative than it is to tuck into some bad Hollywood drivel. At least it's not such a waste of time, right? Well, in the last year I've noticed that the Discovery Channel and National Geographic have lost their edge on providing high-quality educational programs. Now, you're more likely to see yet another World War Two doc, probably some other shows introducing the newest weapons on the market, and most definitely some show glorifying the lifestyles of the disgustingly rich. If a mathematician were to convert this into an equation it might look something like this:

Hitler+Stealth Bomber+10 mile Golden Yacht= (-4 jillion brain cells)

And these are just a few examples. Mentioning some of the embarrassing travel shows with green and arrogant hosts whining about street food and pollution would require an article unto itself. I don't really want to believe there is some conspiracy out there to dumb us down, but the more I watch, the more convinced I become that these so-called "learning" channels are making sure that we get a select few things branded into our heads. That Hitler was bad, that guns are cool, and that to be truly happy one must be filthy rich.

It's not just the content that annoys and exasperates me either. It's the writing, the editing, and the overall lack of originality. Each "documentary" is written in a tired vernacular--rife with outdated buzzwords, and bland idioms. Written in the most basic high-school essay format just to ensure the viewer he knows exactly whats coming next. Though I'm just making this up, an ending bit of narration on a show about samurai swords might be something like: "It's clear that the samurai sword is definitely...a cut above the rest." I can hear it now, being said in some Californian surfer voice. Puke city. It doesn't stop there either. If you were to cut out all of the reused master shots, factor in all the commercial breaks, you'd be left with about 7 minutes of content. But for some reason--maybe a lack of good material out there--Discovery and Nat Geo are buying it all up.

In their defense, the WWII stuff can be pretty amazing, and some of the recent programs show some great colorized rare footage of the war. It's just the sheer frequency I can't get over. Yes, WWII was awful. Yes, Hitler was a demon. But, I think we got the point by now. And, you know, if filmmakers are so dedicated to exposing the atrocities of history, there are a lot of unsung tragedies that could get a little more play--if any at all.

Also, the few nature docs that do get shown all have this horror film edge to them, as if animals are these evil monsters that will not only eat us alive, but enjoy our pain. The skewed angles and the shadowy lighting chosen, coupled with dark Hollywood-esque music are sickening. In the end, it seems like Discovery and National Geographic are doing a better job at further alienating us from the animal world than they are in teaching us to respect it. This I don't get. This seems conspiratorial to me--too coincidental. The weapons of war, the champagne sipping bourgeoisie, the evil creatures that live in our backyards. It's getting to point where watching Cops is almost the better option.

Some News is Good News

I hate politics. I use newspapers for the crosswords, and I only watch teevee news to find out whether or not I get a day off work due to a typhoon. That said, I will not waste your valuable time with some redundant rhetoric about how news is evil, or mention Big Brother (though he is watching) or any other such nonsense.

However, two sites have recently caught my attention.  The Real News Network and New Left Media Both are great grassroots sites geared towards getting honest footage and interviews. They are donation based and therefore free from censorship.

I first found The Real News after hearing about the G20 riots in Toronto. I have since checked their site almost daily as each video deals with honest issues as presented by honest and real people. Check it out. During my lunch break, I often mess around youtube. Sometimes I type completely random things in like: "sweat-egg", or another search may be something like, "cat driving robot", etc. But more often than not, I seek out things that make me laugh. One of my favorite people to laugh at is Sarah Palin and her retarded Tea Party Movement. This is how I found New Left Media. I was at once taken in by the reporter's (Chase Whiteside or Erick Stoll) straight and simple approach. At no time do his ignorant victims realize that they're being mocked or having the piss taken out of them. In fact, his youthfulness and the questions he asks seem to put his subjects at ease--a rarity with most redneck pedants.

I recommend both of these sites for straight-up commercial free information; current and concise and clear. And if non-fiction isn't your thing you can always check out America's Finest News Source at The Onion. Here's a vid...

Nobody Knows what to Do--And It Will Happen Again

For all the botched efforts, an angry president rocking his jaw about responsibility and the environment, the media's response, the cries of outrage from residents and those watching from a distance; oil spills will happen again...and again. And the most likely candidate--once again--will probably be BP.

When this whole shitstorm went down, there was a part of me that almost rejoiced at the possibility that this could be the beginning of the end for the oil giants. That was my first thought; not the fragile ecosystems, not the ocean, not even the residents of the gulf coast whose livelihoods depend on its waters. It was to the company that all my steam was directed. And now that the oil has stopped gushing, I realize nothing has been learned, and that nothing will be changed, until we change it.

In the past week, BP's shares have actually risen. In fact, they are enjoying a 2nd week gain of around 23%, since hitting a 14 year low of $27.02 per share on June 25th. Source: The News Tribune In fact, BP remains the 4th richest company in the world--marginally trailing behind Shell, Exxon, and Walmart. Surprised? I'm not. Since when have governments or people made a difference? Corporations spend big money each year to protect their necks against the finger pointing public--which is arguably ineffectual at best. They don't care. Let me repeat that: They don't care. They can afford it. With the worst track record, and the least amount of money going into efforts to avoid spills in future, BP is on a 'grab and dash' frenzy to make all they can before the wells run dry. And it seems that nothing can stop them. Even the 60,000 barrels that were spilling out of the Deepwater Horizon each day--for around 70 days--is a drop in the bucket. Oil spills are not random catastrophe. They are part and parcel of the job. And as long as we use oil, we must live with oil spills.

The truth of the matter is that while the public's outcries may be as non-consequential to the big corporations as a mosquito bite is to an elephant, we are not as ineffectual as we appear to be. The fact of the matter is that we are the consumer, through and through. It is for our pleasure that such trouble has been made. We are the Big Mac munchers, the nicotine addicts, the boozers, the dickhead purchasers of Hummers. March the streets, burn a parked car, start a petition--you'd be better off teaching trees sign language... Boycotting is the only thing that works. We are the problem--not the pusherman. Blame him all you like, get nowhere, except maybe 16 miles per your Hummer gallon. Remember: We demand...They supply. You don't like it? Move to the city and buy a bicycle.

Photo Source: Mark Vallen's Art for a Change

Pisstaking the Bloodsuckers

Out of all the monsters and mythical creatures at our creative disposal, none has been more used in the last few decades than the vampire. There have been occasional cameos from prehistoric creatures, a few zombie movies, but for some inexplicable reason, vampires have once again won the blood-pumping hearts of the youth. I'm here to explain the hows, the whys, and essentially--the who gives a shits--about this contrived re-hipafying of a creature we should have left dead...or undead.

Strangely enough, this is not the first time writers and filmmakers have given the vampire a blood transfusion--springing them back from the dead. Spooooky, eh. The two possible reasons at work, I posit, must be the personality of the modern vampire, coupled with a rebellious youth putting dollar signs into some writer's eyes. Yes, that's right; buckaroonos.

No monster has gleaned as much empathy and empowered disgruntled teens as well as the vampire. For one thing, the modern vampire's appearance is not hindered by any unsightly feature. His face is not covered in warts--unless incidental. He is not slimy--unless incidental. He does not eat brains... In fact, most films have depicted vampires as quite desirable, seductive beings; highly educated as a result of eternal life, and usually very well dressed. They, therefore are able to win over the more mainstream portion of the conditioned hearts and minds of the youth, while still embodying a loneliness that is understood among fringey teens. Furthermore, they sleep all day and go out at night--very much in agreement with the lifestyles of the youth since the 70s. You would be hard-pressed to see teenagers aping around as trolls or ogres, unless you were to visit a frathouse or a sports bar on a Friday night.

The other reason is that dollar savvy writers have keyed into this ebb and flow of counter-culture for years now. While Anne Rice managed to sell millions of books with her Vampire Lestat series to my fellow teens in the early 90s, so has Stephenie Meyer recently with her Twilight Saga. My generation may have enjoyed The Lost Boys, Interview with a Vampire, and Coppola's redux of Dracula; but now it's all Twilight and Trueblood. It's pretty clear to see how goth and emo culture lends itself perfectly to the recent reappearance of the vampire. But it really doesn't matter. My high-school years were pre-goth; grunge was on the upswing, and while there were still lingering punks--even headbangers, marketing is marketing. 

The truth is though: Vampires are lame. "Cool, they drink blood." No, screw that; vampires are the worst monster...ever! Lookit--they are immortal but can be killed by wooden stakes! Like from a fence??!! Is that what vampire daddys tell their spawn? "Son, you will live forever, but make sure it's in a castle without a picket fence, and don't get holy water splashed in your face or it'll burn off your face, make a hissing sound, and you'll never get to bite the neck of another virgin so long as you live." I understand that every evil being or creature has some weakness, but come on. If I were a vampire, I'd just go live somewhere that didn't have any trees or priests.

Now, my main point: and it's a bit of a leap, but I can't be thinking about this crap forever....

Twilight was the not only the worst vampire movie I've ever seen, it was perhaps the worst movie I've ever seen. You are probably thinking: "that's impossible." But it is possible, you see. Some bad movies are just bad. But Twilight was BAAAAAAAAAD. And not just in a typical teenager movie kind of bad. Instead of hanging around in a cave, or flying around like in The Lost Boys, these vampires like to play baseball?? These are modern yuppie vampires? With Ikea catalogue homes? The whole thing smacked of a glorified commercial for Better Homes and Gardens.

Okay, worst part ever: The end of the movie when the boy decides to show the girl what vampires really look like. He opens his shirt and reveals this sparkly skin, and she's like....."it's like diamonds." Had I been a real vampire when I saw that, I would have stabbed in my face with a stick.

Ok, I'm done. But before I go, if you really wanna see a good vampire movie, I recommend: Vampire's Kiss, starring Nicholas Cage. Everything else is crap. Especially that 3 hour music video, Twilight.

The Donkey Rides Again

From grave to grange, the ass ascends from the ashes like the phoenix...like a baked potato left overnight in the coals, like one of those melted beer bottle ashtrays your uncle used to make by the campfire on May two-four weekend. Okay maybe that was my uncle...

For this new era of the donkey, we plan to widen our landscape a little; sure it will always remain a food blog in its conception, but I would like to include a variety of other subjects very 'loosely' related to food, if at all. Furthermore, there are a lot of issues to discuss and people I'd like to rip new assholes for, and I have really missed the catharsis in doing so. The health of my mental-brainbox depends on it As always you are encouraged to leave your comments, suggestions, criticisms, whatever you want. Heehaw.

How Hipsters and Trendazoids Fuck with my Favorite Foods

Nobody needs to tell me that the best food, art, and music were spawned in the ghettos. Every little sweet piece of enjoyment in this world has come from a reaction to oppression of some kind. What really pisses me off though is how some simple delights have become trendy—even bourgeois, as the horrendously rich, sample—then accept these random delights created by the disenfranchised, and ultimately they become overpriced delicacies. Take the Thai Papaya Salad for instance. Under ripe fruit, brine shrimp, fish sauce, chilies, lemon, peanuts and palm sugar; not exactly truffles and caviar. Green papayas are cheap—dirt cheap—why...because they are kinda “inedible” according to the natural order of things. Brine shrimp are the poor man’s consolation prize, having rowed back to his corrugated tin hovel empty handed. Fish sauce is probably a botched experiment in food preservation gone terribly wrong. Need I continue with the chili, lemon, and palm sugar…?

A Thai restaurant opened up in my neighborhood about a year ago. At this point, I should tell you that I do live in South East Asia—and not too far from the home of these “exotic” ingredients. In fact, I have two papaya trees in my yard. Ha. So, the fact that I’m being a whinging bitch about prices should tell you something. I am not in Toronto paying ten bucks for a papaya salad. However, let me continue. The main appeal of this new little shack of a restaurant was that the prices were almost “Thai” in price, and the portions American in size. Hence, it became a local favorite among foreigners and Taiwanese alike. And being familiar with the comings and goings of restaurants—we all knew that their initially generous portions would thin out a little. However, we were disgustingly shocked by the degree.

In the beginning, their papaya salad was a dish to be shared with two or three people. My guess is that it was about 2-3 Cups worth. Price: about 3 bucks American, I think. However, with this particular item, I never felt that this new restaurant was trying to lure in customers with outrageously cheap prices. I simply felt, it being a Thai owned restaurant—that they were using prices reflective of the actual ingredients used—i.e. cheap stuff. My friends and I went there for lunch recently, ordered the salad and were presented with a sad little saucer of crunchy papaya strips, a few peanuts, in a soup of liquid. The flavor was still great—that refreshing Asian marriage of sour and spicy, but after a small bite or two each there was nothing left to do except awkwardly chase a fragment or two of peanut around with your chopsticks. All in all, the portion had been cut down to around 30 percent of the original. The question is why.

There are a few other food examples that have become outrageously overpriced as a result of either their popularity or “exoticness”. One could even argue that pizza also suffered a great inflation at some time. A few good examples are bagels, milk tea (outside Asia), and the Caesar Salad. These are again cheap dishes that have frogger-ed their way up a few income brackets—and are now generally accepted as luxurious items. A good Caesar will run you anywhere from 10-20 bucks—the worst part is that we’ve been so brainwashed that we accept it.  And it has nothing to do—like the papaya salad—with the ingredients. Anchovies?? You effing kidding me? They’re the piss-ants of the sea…more commonly known as “chum”—that is, cheap fish bait.

I guess this article is just a rant. I offer no solution, folks. Well maybe one or two; if you find a good deal out there in some restaurant, keep it on the low-down, and don’t be too frequent a diner if you want to slow down their process of skimming. Try not to popularize anything. Keep the bastards guessing—the minute you become a regular, and they know your order, say “eff this, now give me the cheese toast." And never at any point compliment the chef—while they, like teachers, may be the unsung heroes of our franked little world, we must keep them producing a quality item, a decent portion, at a reasonable price. Compliments lead to complacency. Heehaw!