This is the end of my first term of college. I took two classes, both online, as I did not have a job when I registered, but hoped to find one and did not want my school and work schedule to overlap. By the time I finished my first week of school, I had a job working night shift at a local care home for dementia patients. This has been an experience! Something interesting happens almost every day I go to work. I haven't been to a regular school since 6th grade, as I was homeschooled (self taught, mostly) after that. I was nervous about taking a class with deadlines and assignments, but I think I did pretty okay in the end. I've been practicing my writing by blogging off and on over the years, and it doesn't hurt that I like it!
I feel like I learned a lot this term. It wasn't the ideas or techniques that I read in the book that I appreciated the most (I know how to read, and I could have done that on my own), but the feedback and pushing I got from my teachers. I'm always happy to be shown (whether directly with a note or indirectly through an activity or assignment) how I am doing things wrong. I realized that I had been being lazy, as well as my over use of it and is. I've been catching myself doing the same thing while writing my sociology assignments, and I can re-write my sentences to be more complete. I can really tell the difference between a sentence with a bunch of 'it's and one with actual words instead.
Showing posts with label Writing 121. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Writing 121. Show all posts
Making Pie
I was invited to a friend's house for thanksgiving dinner, and so I offered to bring my upside-down pecan pumpkin pie. It's pretty much the most amazing pumpkin pie anyone has ever tasted. After waking up around noon on Thanksgiving, I set to work making my desert. I looked at the recipe, and realized that I had forgotten that I was out of evaporated milk. So, I headed out to Sherm's, battled through the wild crowds, all buying last minute ingredients for their meals. As I was making my way through the store, I passed a display of evaporated milk, so I grabbed one, and was on my way.
After I finally made it back home, I started mixing up the ingredients. First, a big can of pumpkin pie mix, next the evaporated milk. Once I had added the milk, I knew something wasn't right. I looked at my recipe, I looked at the can. I had purchased the wrong size, 12 ounces instead of 5. I didn't have a second can of pumpkin, and I dreaded going all the way to the other side of town and fighting for another can of pumpkin. Besides that, time was running out, and I needed to get to my friend's house soon! I decided to check the local convenience store, and thank goodness, they had a can of pumpkin (puree instead of the mix, but I could deal with that!).
I got home, and mixed up the pies, poured them into the pans and started putting them into the oven. I had ended up with two large pies and four small ones (like pumpkin pie shots). After I put the two large pies in, I realized that I didn't have room in the front for all four little pies, so I reached back and carefully set the little pies in the back. Well, I wasn't quite careful enough, and one of them dumped over, spilling all over the bottom of my oven.
I cleaned up what I could, and continued cooking. In a couple minutes (unknown to me) smoke started billowing out of the oven, and then the smoke alarm went off. Our smoke alarm is ... excessively loud. BEEEEP BEEEEP BEEEP THERE IS SMOKE IN THE HALLWAY BEEEP BEEEEP BEEEP EVACUATE THE BUILDING BEEP BEEEP BEEEP! and so on. I opened the windows and doors, and frantically waved something at the smoke alarm, trying to get the smoke away from it. I turned off the oven, and eventually the alarm stopped. I called up my friend and asked her if I could bake my pies in her oven. She said, sure, as soon as the turkey and rolls are done cooking. So, I started taking the pies out of the oven so that I could wrap them up and bring them over. The first pie I took out, as I was setting it on the stove top, slipped and fell, splat, upside-down on the floor of my kitchen. I almost cried.
I took the other pies out (no more accidents) and cleaned up the floor as best I could. I was a little worried about transporting the pie. I figured that with my luck, I would dump them all over my car. They made it to my friend's house. I carried them to the fence, opened the gate, tripped, almost fell, caught myself, made it through her herd of mastiffs and into the kitchen without further loss of pie. Whew!
Sadly, the pie sat there all through dinner, as the turkey (like all turkeys) took longer to cook than expected. They finally went into the oven at 7, baked for an hour and then got put in the freezer in an attempt to cool them down before people fell asleep. By 9:30 when I had to leave for work, they were still hot, and so I left without seeing what anyone thought of my pies.
In the middle of the night, my friend sent me a message telling me that it was the best pumpkin pie she had ever tasted.
I have half a can of pumpkin puree left ...
After I finally made it back home, I started mixing up the ingredients. First, a big can of pumpkin pie mix, next the evaporated milk. Once I had added the milk, I knew something wasn't right. I looked at my recipe, I looked at the can. I had purchased the wrong size, 12 ounces instead of 5. I didn't have a second can of pumpkin, and I dreaded going all the way to the other side of town and fighting for another can of pumpkin. Besides that, time was running out, and I needed to get to my friend's house soon! I decided to check the local convenience store, and thank goodness, they had a can of pumpkin (puree instead of the mix, but I could deal with that!).
I got home, and mixed up the pies, poured them into the pans and started putting them into the oven. I had ended up with two large pies and four small ones (like pumpkin pie shots). After I put the two large pies in, I realized that I didn't have room in the front for all four little pies, so I reached back and carefully set the little pies in the back. Well, I wasn't quite careful enough, and one of them dumped over, spilling all over the bottom of my oven.
I cleaned up what I could, and continued cooking. In a couple minutes (unknown to me) smoke started billowing out of the oven, and then the smoke alarm went off. Our smoke alarm is ... excessively loud. BEEEEP BEEEEP BEEEP THERE IS SMOKE IN THE HALLWAY BEEEP BEEEEP BEEEP EVACUATE THE BUILDING BEEP BEEEP BEEEP! and so on. I opened the windows and doors, and frantically waved something at the smoke alarm, trying to get the smoke away from it. I turned off the oven, and eventually the alarm stopped. I called up my friend and asked her if I could bake my pies in her oven. She said, sure, as soon as the turkey and rolls are done cooking. So, I started taking the pies out of the oven so that I could wrap them up and bring them over. The first pie I took out, as I was setting it on the stove top, slipped and fell, splat, upside-down on the floor of my kitchen. I almost cried.
I took the other pies out (no more accidents) and cleaned up the floor as best I could. I was a little worried about transporting the pie. I figured that with my luck, I would dump them all over my car. They made it to my friend's house. I carried them to the fence, opened the gate, tripped, almost fell, caught myself, made it through her herd of mastiffs and into the kitchen without further loss of pie. Whew!
Sadly, the pie sat there all through dinner, as the turkey (like all turkeys) took longer to cook than expected. They finally went into the oven at 7, baked for an hour and then got put in the freezer in an attempt to cool them down before people fell asleep. By 9:30 when I had to leave for work, they were still hot, and so I left without seeing what anyone thought of my pies.
In the middle of the night, my friend sent me a message telling me that it was the best pumpkin pie she had ever tasted.
I have half a can of pumpkin puree left ...
Using broken minds as a key to Artificial Intelligence
I tend to think of the human brain as a very complex computer program that we could possibly re-create if we had enough variables and an effective method for teaching it to "learn" and adapt. In computer programing, one common aspect of all programs are bugs, or quirks in the programing that, when triggered, produce unintentional results. These results aren't always bad, referenced by the humorous phrase, "that's not a bug, that's a feature!" By looking at a program's bugs you can learn a lot about how it works without looking at the source code.
In my job, I work with people whose minds have malfunctioned in one way or another. Last night, one of my residents was rambling on and on as I was getting her dressed. It reminded me of a memory dump in a program, and that's when it hit me: it might be more profitable to create an artificial intelligence where the types of mental illnesses that humans face are possible.
Currently, those working on artificial intelligence are focusing on the visible functions of the human mind, but are not reproducing the system behind it. By taking a look at the mind's bugs (such as schizophrenia, memory loss, paradoxical thinking, fallacies, gullibility and so on) a greater understanding of the underlying structure can be realized.
My favorite (fictional) example of an artificial intelligence's mental neurosis is HAL in 2001: Space Odyssey. He is driven by the directive to make sure his mission succeeds at any cost, and sees the humans as being unnecessary, untrustworthy and flawed companions. He kills off most of the crew before being turned off by the protagonist. If we develop a computer with the ability to become mentally deranged, we will be forced to change our revering attitude toward the computer to one of caution, just as we have toward humans that we do not know. True artificial intelligence would be a dangerous thing, for it would represent a mental force as strong as ours, but malleable in a way that humans are resilient to.
In my job, I work with people whose minds have malfunctioned in one way or another. Last night, one of my residents was rambling on and on as I was getting her dressed. It reminded me of a memory dump in a program, and that's when it hit me: it might be more profitable to create an artificial intelligence where the types of mental illnesses that humans face are possible.
Currently, those working on artificial intelligence are focusing on the visible functions of the human mind, but are not reproducing the system behind it. By taking a look at the mind's bugs (such as schizophrenia, memory loss, paradoxical thinking, fallacies, gullibility and so on) a greater understanding of the underlying structure can be realized.
My favorite (fictional) example of an artificial intelligence's mental neurosis is HAL in 2001: Space Odyssey. He is driven by the directive to make sure his mission succeeds at any cost, and sees the humans as being unnecessary, untrustworthy and flawed companions. He kills off most of the crew before being turned off by the protagonist. If we develop a computer with the ability to become mentally deranged, we will be forced to change our revering attitude toward the computer to one of caution, just as we have toward humans that we do not know. True artificial intelligence would be a dangerous thing, for it would represent a mental force as strong as ours, but malleable in a way that humans are resilient to.
Creativity
When I was young, people around me always told me that I was creative. I liked to draw, and I did a pretty good job as long as I used a photo or other drawing as a guide. I never agreed that my drawings made me creative; everything that others saw as creativity was just technical skill. To me, creativity involves creating something new, something that has never existed before. The better you can do that, the more creative you really are. On the other hand, there are a lot of things that most people don’t consider to be creative that really are. Any time you have a problem, and you are able to figure out a solution, that’s creativity. When you make something up on the spot, whether it’s a fib, a recipe, a new word, or lyrics to a song you can’t quite remember, that’s creativity.
Creativity is something uniquely organic. A machine does not create, it only imitates, follows instructions, or takes advantage of the fact that we find patterns of symmetry mixed with a touch of random to be beautiful. Of course, a machine can be used to create, but it is not the one doing the creating any more than a No. 2 pencil creates poetry in the margins of school books. A machine cannot solve even the most simple of logical problems if it has not been made aware of the problem and its solution beforehand. A machine does not know how to lie.
Creativity is something uniquely organic. A machine does not create, it only imitates, follows instructions, or takes advantage of the fact that we find patterns of symmetry mixed with a touch of random to be beautiful. Of course, a machine can be used to create, but it is not the one doing the creating any more than a No. 2 pencil creates poetry in the margins of school books. A machine cannot solve even the most simple of logical problems if it has not been made aware of the problem and its solution beforehand. A machine does not know how to lie.
Gay Marriage is ...
If you examine the arguments used by the various groups against same-sex marriage, you may notice an interesting pattern. Let's examine a few arguments from those who wish to ban same-sex marriage in the United States.
1) Those who disagree with same-sex marriage may eventually be classed in the same category as racists.
2) If same-sex marriage became a norm, then marriage as we have known it may be gone forever!
3) Same-sex parents might not compensate for the lack of a father or mother in the family.
4) What is the point of marriage if no children can be produced?
5) Children ARE being taught in school that there is no moral taboo associated with same-sex marriage.
6) In the case of many religious adherents, there is the belief that same-sex relations are on par with adultery and having sex with your mother-in-law.
Now, I could have fun arguing against these points, but let's take a closer look at what type of arguments are being used. The first two arguments, unfortunately, expose two of the fears that the opponents of same-sex marriage feel. They are afraid that they will become the minority, and that they will lose something that they hold dear ("traditional" marriage .. which, ironically, has only been around a couple hundred years, and only recently had anything much to do with love and all that jazz). The second two arguments accuse same-sex couples of being insufficient parents. The last two arguments are based purely on a moral appeal to those who hold the belief that sex between two people of the same sex is a sin.
Two thirds of these arguments are based on fear. Fear is one very effective use of arguing through emotions. It can convince people to turn against an idea even if they themselves see nothing wrong with other people practicing it.
The remaining two arguments are logic based, but, in my opinion do not hold up to scrutiny.
The first is two-fold:
Same-sex couples might not provide a balance of gender exposure for their children
and
This balance is required for a healthy childhood
therefore
Same-sex couples might not properly raise a child
the second half of this argument:
Same-sex couples might not properly raise a child
and
those who are might not properly raise a child should not be allowed to marry
therefore
Same-sex couples should not be allowed to marry
I hope I do not have to point out all of the problems with these arguments!
The second argument can be broken down as follows:
Same sex couples cannot produce children
and
Marriage is primarily concerned with reproduction
therefore
Same-sex couples should not be allowed to marry
The second premise of this argument is not true, otherwise you could replace the first premise with those who are infertile through chance, age or choice. You can see where this would be problematic!
For fun, take a look at the types of arguments that proponents of same sex marriage are using and see how they compare.
=====
A fun statistic for you all: When laws are created that say things like "marriage is the union between a man and a woman" this leaves those who are neither in a very sticky legal situation. Did you know that about 1.7% of children are born with an ambiguous sex? That means that in a town the size of Roseburg, there are approximately 400 citizens who do not fall into the traditional male/female categories. The way that laws are being recklessly written in the name of religious morals is very disturbing to me.
For more information on the 1.7% figure: http://www.neiu.edu/~lsfuller/5sexesrevisited.htm
1) Those who disagree with same-sex marriage may eventually be classed in the same category as racists.
2) If same-sex marriage became a norm, then marriage as we have known it may be gone forever!
3) Same-sex parents might not compensate for the lack of a father or mother in the family.
4) What is the point of marriage if no children can be produced?
5) Children ARE being taught in school that there is no moral taboo associated with same-sex marriage.
6) In the case of many religious adherents, there is the belief that same-sex relations are on par with adultery and having sex with your mother-in-law.
Now, I could have fun arguing against these points, but let's take a closer look at what type of arguments are being used. The first two arguments, unfortunately, expose two of the fears that the opponents of same-sex marriage feel. They are afraid that they will become the minority, and that they will lose something that they hold dear ("traditional" marriage .. which, ironically, has only been around a couple hundred years, and only recently had anything much to do with love and all that jazz). The second two arguments accuse same-sex couples of being insufficient parents. The last two arguments are based purely on a moral appeal to those who hold the belief that sex between two people of the same sex is a sin.
Two thirds of these arguments are based on fear. Fear is one very effective use of arguing through emotions. It can convince people to turn against an idea even if they themselves see nothing wrong with other people practicing it.
The remaining two arguments are logic based, but, in my opinion do not hold up to scrutiny.
The first is two-fold:
Same-sex couples might not provide a balance of gender exposure for their children
and
This balance is required for a healthy childhood
therefore
Same-sex couples might not properly raise a child
the second half of this argument:
Same-sex couples might not properly raise a child
and
those who are might not properly raise a child should not be allowed to marry
therefore
Same-sex couples should not be allowed to marry
I hope I do not have to point out all of the problems with these arguments!
The second argument can be broken down as follows:
Same sex couples cannot produce children
and
Marriage is primarily concerned with reproduction
therefore
Same-sex couples should not be allowed to marry
The second premise of this argument is not true, otherwise you could replace the first premise with those who are infertile through chance, age or choice. You can see where this would be problematic!
For fun, take a look at the types of arguments that proponents of same sex marriage are using and see how they compare.
=====
A fun statistic for you all: When laws are created that say things like "marriage is the union between a man and a woman" this leaves those who are neither in a very sticky legal situation. Did you know that about 1.7% of children are born with an ambiguous sex? That means that in a town the size of Roseburg, there are approximately 400 citizens who do not fall into the traditional male/female categories. The way that laws are being recklessly written in the name of religious morals is very disturbing to me.
For more information on the 1.7% figure: http://www.neiu.edu/~lsfuller/5sexesrevisited.htm
Identity
Racial Profiling
I've been trying to think if I have ever been the target for racial profiling. As a white person in a predominantly white town, it isn't something that I think about a lot. There are simply too many of us for a targeted reaction to even register. I wonder how often any of us are discriminated against on the basis of our race and we do not even notice. It is something that we generally do not even think about.
I remember the first time I ever consciously noticed a black person. I was in fourth grade, and she was a new student in another class. No one was really brave enough to talk to her, as we were so afraid of possibly offending her (since about the only thing we "knew" about racial relations was that black people were very touchy about how they were treated).
Group Identity
We all belong to groups, most of us belong to many, many groups. I know that I act certain ways and am treated certain ways because of the groups I am associated with. There are some groups that I did not choose, such as being a female, my family, the school classes that I belonged to as a child, my religion. These groups shape who you believe you are, as others treat you in certain ways depending on how they perceive these groups.
For example, my brother and I were very interested in learning how to make computer games when we were children. When my brother showed interest, he was encouraged, given books on the topic and he is now in college as a network administrator and having a blast. On the other hand, when I showed a similar interest, it was as if it did not even register on people's radar. Young girls were not expected to want to program, and people only see what they expect to see.
Ageism
As a young person, I have most definitely been the target for ageism. We tend to think of this as a problem affecting the elderly in our communities, but just as we discriminate against those who fall over a certain age, we also discriminate against those who are younger.
Throughout my working life most of my jobs have involved working with those who are quite a bit older than me. I have a knack of sitting quietly and observing those around me in such a way that they forget I am there and will act naturally. I am always amused when they start bashing on the "young people these days" when I am sitting right there next to them. Many of the negative perceptions that are held about the younger generation by the elderly are false and stem from a misunderstanding of the culture that we have grown up in. I would get worried, but I know that the previous generations have all spent their later years bitching about the youth and how they we are going to ruin the world.
Animal Population Control
An analysis of Kristof's article [NYTimes, login required]
I felt that Kristof's essay about controlling deer populations through hunting was quite entertaining, and as a bonus, it informed me of a few facts I was not previously aware of.
Because of the humorous tone, as well as the lack of counter-research (showing exactly why other solutions do not work, rather than just making fun of them), I think it would be difficult for this essay to convince an avid animal rights advocate to take up hunting as a recreation, or even support extended hunting. Luckily, I do not think that these people were Kristof's intended audience. Rather, I believe he was aiming for the upper middle class, who is conscious of animal rights, but can see that hunting might be a necessity in certain circumstances.
I was personally astonished that deer would be a leading cause of death in any category, and was dubious when I read Kristof's assertion. It would have been a good idea to spend a little more time establishing a fact that seems so astonishing at first glance. Part of my suspicion was caused by his qualification of category: large, North American mammal. What constitutes "large"? It seemed to me that he was purposely limiting the scope of his question to disclude other obvious answers. But, after doing some research, I found that deer related automobile crashes are one of the leading causes of death in the united states. The runners up in ALL animal categories are Bees/wasps/hornets at 48 deaths per year and dogs at 20 deaths per year [cite]. It would have been a better argument to state that deer are the largest cause of ALL animal related deaths, even above venomous insects. This would have had more impact as well as reducing confusion about which animals Kristof was including.
I would be very interested to see how the number of collisions with deer correspond with the deer population in each area or state. Would reducing the number of deer significantly reduce the number of deer related fatalities? According to the CDC, there are about 20,000 non-fatal car crashes involving deer every year. [cite] I think this topic deserves a more serious look rather than just an off the cuff solution, even if it ends up being the easiest one to implement.
Another point, according to the IHEA, about 1,000 people are injured while hunting per year, and almost 100 of these injuries prove fatal. [cite] If the number of hunters rose, it follows that the number of hunting related injuries would also rise.
I felt that Kristof's essay about controlling deer populations through hunting was quite entertaining, and as a bonus, it informed me of a few facts I was not previously aware of.
Because of the humorous tone, as well as the lack of counter-research (showing exactly why other solutions do not work, rather than just making fun of them), I think it would be difficult for this essay to convince an avid animal rights advocate to take up hunting as a recreation, or even support extended hunting. Luckily, I do not think that these people were Kristof's intended audience. Rather, I believe he was aiming for the upper middle class, who is conscious of animal rights, but can see that hunting might be a necessity in certain circumstances.
I was personally astonished that deer would be a leading cause of death in any category, and was dubious when I read Kristof's assertion. It would have been a good idea to spend a little more time establishing a fact that seems so astonishing at first glance. Part of my suspicion was caused by his qualification of category: large, North American mammal. What constitutes "large"? It seemed to me that he was purposely limiting the scope of his question to disclude other obvious answers. But, after doing some research, I found that deer related automobile crashes are one of the leading causes of death in the united states. The runners up in ALL animal categories are Bees/wasps/hornets at 48 deaths per year and dogs at 20 deaths per year [cite]. It would have been a better argument to state that deer are the largest cause of ALL animal related deaths, even above venomous insects. This would have had more impact as well as reducing confusion about which animals Kristof was including.
I would be very interested to see how the number of collisions with deer correspond with the deer population in each area or state. Would reducing the number of deer significantly reduce the number of deer related fatalities? According to the CDC, there are about 20,000 non-fatal car crashes involving deer every year. [cite] I think this topic deserves a more serious look rather than just an off the cuff solution, even if it ends up being the easiest one to implement.
Another point, according to the IHEA, about 1,000 people are injured while hunting per year, and almost 100 of these injuries prove fatal. [cite] If the number of hunters rose, it follows that the number of hunting related injuries would also rise.
My Brother James
I’d like to tell you about my little brother James. He is the perfect picture of someone who never concedes to the pressure of what other people think. First of all, he is about a foot taller than most people, and his white-boy afro does nothing to counter this image. He likes the color purple and exotic clothing, and it doesn’t shock the people he knows to see him walking around town in a brightly colored vest, a hat and stripped pants. In the winter, he likes to wear a tremendous trench coat that makes him look like a skinny mobster. And of course, I can’t forget his shoes. He has big feet, not abnormal, but large. The thing with James though is that he hates when shoes touch the ends of his toes, so he always buys shoes that are about an inch longer than he needs, giving his whole costume a clown-like feel.
Another of his quirks is that if he feels that he can pull it off, he will always claim the opposite view in a discussion, and argue his side vehemently until the other parties to the conversation either give in or give up. I must admit that this is his most irritating personality quirk, and those who don’t know that he isn’t really serious can take offense. I remember once when he was a child, he asked me what day it was, and I replied that it was Wednesday. He retorted that it was NOT Wednesday, but Tuesday instead. I did a double take and checked the calendar; it was indeed Wednesday. I let my little brother know that he was wrong, and showed him the calendar, and recounted the things that had happened on each of the days since Sunday when we had gone to church. He still insisted that it was Tuesday rather than Wednesday, and of course I wouldn’t back down since I knew I was right. Eventually we both broke down into giggles because of the sheer comedy of our argument.
Today, my brother James has moved to San Fransisco in order to go to culinary school. Even in a town as diverse as San Fransisco, he still comes across as someone who doesn’t mind being himself in any circumstance. I think his sense of self comes from his feeling of assurance that he is correct. As a way of illustration, let me tell you about the time he decided to make a batch of macaroni and cheese. Our family has a favorite recipe for mac and cheese that involves making a cheesy cream sauce with onions and then adding the cooked macaroni and baking the whole thing until it is a delicious, creamy, cheesy, crunchy magnificent concoction that any of us could eat an entire batch of without blinking an eye. So, while making the cream sauce, James mis-read the recipe as calling for eight cups of flour rather than eight tablespoons, which is sixteen times too much flour! The flour is the third ingredient he needed to add, and instead of thinking, ‘hmm, this seems weird, maybe I should re-evaluate,’ he went right on ahead with his recipe. I walked into the kitchen just as he was attempting to “pour” this brick of flour, macaroni, and chunks of cheese (since, of course, they didn’t melt right when mixed with so much flour) into a casserole pan. If I had not stopped him there, he would have baked it and only admitted to his mistake when it came out of the oven inedible. When I asked him why he hadn’t realized that he had made a mistake he told me that he had followed the recipe, and so how could he have made a mistake?
Another amusing facet of my brother’s personality is his use of made up names and words. He has been doing this since he was old enough to talk as a toddler. When I read an email from him, I feel as though I am reading a foreign tongue, as I only recognize half the words. When I ask him what a word means, he replies that it is a portmanteau between two other words that he feels should go together to create a new word that has the meaning he wanted.
I admire my brother’s strength of character, and I am envious of his ability to act as he sees to be correct without regard to the opinion of others. Of course, this tendency can be taken too far, but any good trait when used without moderation can turn sour. Luckily, as my brother has gotten older, he has learned to curb some of his tendencies when appropriate. He even calls me when he has trouble with a recipe and doesn’t know what to do rather than just foraging ahead.
Another of his quirks is that if he feels that he can pull it off, he will always claim the opposite view in a discussion, and argue his side vehemently until the other parties to the conversation either give in or give up. I must admit that this is his most irritating personality quirk, and those who don’t know that he isn’t really serious can take offense. I remember once when he was a child, he asked me what day it was, and I replied that it was Wednesday. He retorted that it was NOT Wednesday, but Tuesday instead. I did a double take and checked the calendar; it was indeed Wednesday. I let my little brother know that he was wrong, and showed him the calendar, and recounted the things that had happened on each of the days since Sunday when we had gone to church. He still insisted that it was Tuesday rather than Wednesday, and of course I wouldn’t back down since I knew I was right. Eventually we both broke down into giggles because of the sheer comedy of our argument.
Today, my brother James has moved to San Fransisco in order to go to culinary school. Even in a town as diverse as San Fransisco, he still comes across as someone who doesn’t mind being himself in any circumstance. I think his sense of self comes from his feeling of assurance that he is correct. As a way of illustration, let me tell you about the time he decided to make a batch of macaroni and cheese. Our family has a favorite recipe for mac and cheese that involves making a cheesy cream sauce with onions and then adding the cooked macaroni and baking the whole thing until it is a delicious, creamy, cheesy, crunchy magnificent concoction that any of us could eat an entire batch of without blinking an eye. So, while making the cream sauce, James mis-read the recipe as calling for eight cups of flour rather than eight tablespoons, which is sixteen times too much flour! The flour is the third ingredient he needed to add, and instead of thinking, ‘hmm, this seems weird, maybe I should re-evaluate,’ he went right on ahead with his recipe. I walked into the kitchen just as he was attempting to “pour” this brick of flour, macaroni, and chunks of cheese (since, of course, they didn’t melt right when mixed with so much flour) into a casserole pan. If I had not stopped him there, he would have baked it and only admitted to his mistake when it came out of the oven inedible. When I asked him why he hadn’t realized that he had made a mistake he told me that he had followed the recipe, and so how could he have made a mistake?
Another amusing facet of my brother’s personality is his use of made up names and words. He has been doing this since he was old enough to talk as a toddler. When I read an email from him, I feel as though I am reading a foreign tongue, as I only recognize half the words. When I ask him what a word means, he replies that it is a portmanteau between two other words that he feels should go together to create a new word that has the meaning he wanted.
I admire my brother’s strength of character, and I am envious of his ability to act as he sees to be correct without regard to the opinion of others. Of course, this tendency can be taken too far, but any good trait when used without moderation can turn sour. Luckily, as my brother has gotten older, he has learned to curb some of his tendencies when appropriate. He even calls me when he has trouble with a recipe and doesn’t know what to do rather than just foraging ahead.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)