Accidental Blogger

A New Page On The Blog

Fellow blogger Elatia Harris of 3 Quarks Daily recently suggested that I should display all my art work in one place on the blog. Agreeing that it is a good idea, I have created a new page for the purpose. There are not many more paintings or sketches that I plan to post beyond what has already been published. So the archiving is pretty near complete - possibly a few more additions to come. As and when I publish a new painting here, I will add it to the list.  Please see the entire Virtual Exhibition under Special Pages.

Canine Options

"Need a friend? Get a dog." 

This morning a newspaper article and a friend's pictorial email got me thinking of dogs.  The companionship of animals has therapeutic effects on us - easing of loneliness, lowering of blood pressure are known benefits. Those of us who spend time with animals know that very well. Nursing homes and hospitals are increasingly using dogs and cats for the palliative effects of their presence on the health of their residents and patients. A new research study published in the March issue of the Journal of the American Medical Directors Association shows that for the benefits to accrue, it doesn't even have to be a real dog! So reports the aptly named Tim Barker in St. Louis Post-Dispatch.

ST. LOUIS — First, horses were replaced with cars. Then carrier pigeons were put out of work by radios. Now it's dogs who may need to look over their shoulders. They have reason to worry, according to a St. Louis University study that pitted a robotic canine against the real thing in a contest to see which was better at relieving the loneliness of nursing home residents.

In a final analysis likely to shock dog lovers — lovers of real dogs, that is — the two creatures finished in a virtual tie.  Among the shocked dog lovers is the study's author, Dr. William Banks, a professor of geriatric medicine at St. Louis University.

"I kind of assumed the live dog would do better," Banks said.

It doesn't make it any easier knowing it was his own dog, Sparky, a 35-pound, sandy-red, floppy-eared pooch, who failed to outdo the robotic Aibo, which was made by Sony until 2006.  And it's not like Sparky was a novice in this arena. The 9-year-old animal is a trained therapy dog. He's been taught to make people feel good.

"He's a pro," Banks said. "He's got this incredible personality."

But it wasn't enough to overcome a hairless robot programmed to mimic the behavior of real dogs. It barks, wags its plastic tail and learns basic commands. It can even chase a ball.

"It's really frightening," Banks said. "Whoever engineered the behavioral software — they must have some insight into the human psyche."

If you don't have time for a real dog and can't afford a robo-dog, how about going into the backyard and creating your own? (thanks to my friend Linda for the pictures of the floral doggies )

Barack Obama Is Not An American!

Dignitaries on visits to foreign countries donning local garb is not a new thing. They do it to show respect and solidarity with their hosts. A picture of Senator Obama in traditional Somali dress was published recently and has caused a bit of a stir. Matt Drudge of the Drudge Report who first published the picture, says that the photo was circulated by the Clinton campaign. No one really knows what purpose it served. But it is widely believed that if the Clintonites are indeed the source, it may be an attempt by the Hillary camp to make Obama look suspicious (remember his Muslim name?) or at least ridiculous - something like Michael Dukakis in a tank. Hillary Clinton denied during last night's debate that her campaign is the source of the photo. But if indeed the photo did originate there as Drudge claims it did, the words of one Hillary supporter may prove to be far worse than the deed.

To "Apu" Or Not To "Apu?"

"Walk like an Egyptian."  And talk like an Indian?  Or a Chinese, Arab or Zulu?  When does artistic license with foreign cultures add to the authenticity of a dramatic endeavor and when does it descend to the level of second rate mimicry?

A good friend, an Indian American, has shared with me a somewhat disconcerting personal experience. He and his family recently attended a school function where videos of students staging dramatized versions of stories from different parts of the world were shown to visiting parents. It just happened that the class in which my friend's young son belongs, had picked an Indian story set in India. Much to his surprise (and the embarrassment of the child), my friend discovered that some of the children in the Indian play affected a stereotypical Indian accent. Now, please understand that the characters in the play are NOT Indians speaking in English but rather the translation of a story which occurs in India in a time and place where the characters would in "reality" be conversing in their native tongue.

Last summer when The Simpsons, the movie was released, heated discussions erupted about the character Apu and the stereotype of Indian Americans that he personifies. There is no doubt that Apu's persona is highly exaggerated and his accent is over the top - very few Indians speak like that.  But everything about The Simpsons is exaggerated and over the top. The opinion of Apu among Indian Americans (and their British counterparts) was divided. Some felt that in an outrageous comedy where all the characters take a beating, Apu is no exception. Others felt that the depiction of all the cringe-worthy stereotypes of an ethnic minority group even for comic effect perpetuates the stereotype and mocks an entire community. 

Whatever one thinks of Apu, the case of The Simpsons is not identical to the one my friend experienced at his son's school. There is an important difference. Apu, an Indian immigrant, whose native language is not English, actually speaks English in the show. The characters in the school play are not supposed to be speaking English in the original setting - they do so only in translation. The accent, even an exceptionally exaggerated one, can be considered a "natural" part of the Apu character.  But that is not the case for the actors of the school play. Convincing accents by actors are often a very fine part of drama. But one needs to know where they are applicable.

Having grown up in India and learnt English there, I have an accent that is distinctive in America. But  my children sound "natural." (They have an accent when they visit India!)  In  movies about Indian (and British) Americans, it is common to find actors playing Indian born characters speak English with an accent and their kids sounding like locals.  But if you staged a dramatized version of an Indian epic in English and had the characters utter Apu like accent and inflection for the sake of authenticity, it would be ridiculous. To put it in perspective, imagine the Royal Shakespeare Company's actors laboring with heavy Scottish accents in Macbeth and speaking lilting Italian English in the Merchant of Venice.

So, why the confusion?  Why don't people get it? I blame Disney.

Hitler For Hope and Clever for Change

Barack Obama's name is an issue in the minds of some voters. Say Barack HUSSEIN Obama loudly and often, it is bound to conjure up some not altogether wholesome images in people's minds. Hussein = Saddam, Obama = Osama and don't forget that Barack rhymes with Iraq. No wonder his political adversaries are targeting Obama's name more frequently than his record as a legislator.  The Clinton campaign has done it and I have no doubt that right wingers will not miss a single opportunity to remind Americans of Obama's un-American name. If Obama is the Democratic nominee, wait till the real fun begins when his name will become as much a campaign theme for the Republicans as war and taxes. Even Jon Stewart found reasons to joke about it during last Sunday's Oscar ceremonies.

Obama seems to have anticipated the handicap of his own name when he wrote:

I'm talking about something more substantial. It's the hope of slaves sitting around a fire singing freedom songs; the hope of immigrants setting out for distant shores; the hope of a young naval lieutenant bravely patrolling the Mekong Delta; the hope of a millworker's son who dares to defy the odds; the hope of a skinny kid with a funny name who believes that America has a place for him, too.
—Barack Obama, The Audacity of Hope (2004)

But what if his name was not Muslim sounding but something else -  scary like Hitler and Frankenstein, inspiring like Boldness and Clever, fiercely martial like Admiral, Britainwar or Bombersingh?  How would Americans choose? Well, voters in the northeastern Indian state of Meghalaya, have a long list of candidates with interesting names to choose from. [Thanks to Dean for the pointer]

Think Barack Hussein Obama has it rough campaigning for president with a name like that? The Illinois senator has nothing on Frankenstein Momin. Or Billy Kid Sangma. Or Adolf Lu Hitler Marak.

The three men are among dozens of others with equally colorful names who are competing for legislative seats in Meghalaya, a remote northeast Indian state, on March 3. There are about 60 seats up for grabs, 331 candidates vying, and no shortage of unusual names.

There's Britainwar Dan, Admiral Sangma and Bombersingh Hynniewta -- all ready for battle.

There's Laborious Manik Syiem and Hilarius Pohchen. Boldness Nongrum and Clever Marak. Even a Tony Curtis Lyngdoh.

Meghalaya ("Abode of the Clouds") is a state of 2.6 million people. It's predominantly Christian -- but hasn't always been.

When the indigenous tribes first converted to Christianity, the locals named their children after the missionaries who preached to them. Subsequent generations started favoring words and names they were familiar with but didn't have a good understanding of.

Prashant Naik, the chief electoral officer of the state, told CNN that a candidate's name matters little to the electorate -- because so many voters and politicians themselves have peculiar ones.

"You have Australia, you have New Zealand, there's even a Thailand," Naik said. "I don't think that should matter in how people vote."

It certainly hasn't in Hitler Marak's case. He has been elected to public office before, with one of his stints as forestry minister.

"Maybe my parents liked the name and hence christened me Hitler," he once told the Hindustan Times newspaper.

" I am happy with my name, although I don't have any dictatorial tendencies."

Internet Ethics: Blame The Machine?

In 2005 I came across a blogging event whose unfolding I followed with some interest. (see here and here). I was relatively new to the world of blogging then and Leiter Reports was one of the few sites I read regularly and carefully. I followed the controversy there and at other sites that Professor Leiter had linked to in his article. Posting under the pseudonym Juan Non-Volokh (JNV), a law professor criticized one of Leiter's opinion pieces on Volokh Conspiracy, a legal academic blog. The blogger justified his anonymity by stating that he didn't wish to jeopardize his upcoming tenure by making his poltical opinions public.  (Please read the two linked posts at Leiter Reports if you want to understand exactly what happened.)

If you got behind the wheel while drunk and had a wreck, would you blame your own lack of judgement, your car or the alcoholic beverage you consumed?  The answer is pretty straightforward but I am confident that there are quite a few people out there who would lay the blame on their automobile, the booze, the bartender ... anything and anyone but themselves.

Our surroundings influence our behavior and some of the most profound changes in our day to day lives are brought about by technology. Technology doesn't just affect our physical world. Our cultural and ethical standards too must adapt to its unexpected and rapid advances. Instances of changes in our habits at home and work brought about by innovations in science and technology are as numerous as the ethical and cultural debates surrounding the constant re-evaluation of our long held values, mores and norms necessitated by those changes.

I wish to focus on just one small and somewhat trivial aspect of the technology driven world - the conventions and courtesy of anonymous or pseudonymous publishing on the World Wide Web.  For better or worse, when I jumped headlong into the blogosphere, I decided to use my real name. I took the risk despite the fact that given my unfamiliarity with the medium at the time, the likelihood of making mistakes and embarrassing gaffes was real. However, sticking to common sense rules of old fashioned public discourse and avoiding unnecessary personal commentary have helped keep things neat and clean for the most part. All A.B. authors who subsequently joined me also chose to use their full real life names (except Joe, who uses only his first name) to post their opinions here. Using our real names and knowing that strangers as well as our friends and family may be reading (some of my friends, younger and older relatives, ex-students and many of their friends read this blog), we consider it prudent to avoid discussing intimate details of our own lives. Personal anecdotes are utilized only to shed light on the topic at hand. For the same reason even when we address provocative topics, the language employed on A.B. is PG-13.

Anonymous or pseudonymous blogging allows a blogger to feel fewer restraints. Not that anonymous blogging always amounts to maniacal rants but it is far easier to be reckless under the cover of anonymity than it is when publishing under one's true identity.  Blogging or any other public pronouncement has an element of performative posturing. We don't just express our opinions, we also try to convince and impress our readers.  Even that theatricality can be exaggerated by anonymity.

Hillary Emotes

In a performance worthy of Oscar Sunday, at a campaign rally in Providence, RI, Hillary Clinton mocked Barack Obama for his "immature and unrealistic" promises of hope and change.

Ralph Nader Announces Presidential Run

Consumer advocate Ralph Nader who is seen widely by the Democratic Party as the man who tilted the balance toward George Bush in the  Bush vs Gore 2000 fiasco, has thrown his hat into the ring for the 2008 presidential race.  The already interesting contest on the Democratic side, now threatens to become even more interesting. Or, will this be one time too many for Nader? Will his dedicated base ignore him this time?  (Nader's campaign website here)

WASHINGTON -- Ralph Nader said Sunday he will run for president as a third-party candidate, criticizing the top White House contenders as too close to big business and pledging to repeat a bid that will "shift the power from the few to the many."

Nader, 73, said most people are disenchanted with the Democratic and Republican parties due to a prolonged Iraq war and a shaky economy. The consumer advocate also blamed tax and other corporate-friendly policies under the Bush administration that he said have left many lower- and middle-class people in debt.

"You take that framework of people feeling locked out, shut out, marginalized and disrespected," he said. "You go from Iraq, to Palestine to Israel, from Enron to Wall Street, from Katrina to the bumbling of the Bush administration, to the complicity of the Democrats in not stopping him on the war, stopping him on the tax cuts."

"In that context, I have decided to run for president," Nader told NBC's "Meet the Press."

Nader also criticized Republican candidate John McCain and Democrats Barack Obama and Hillary Rodham Clinton for failing to support full Medicare for all or cracking down on Pentagon waste and a "bloated military budget. He blamed that on corporate lobbyists and special interests, which he said dominate Washington, D.C., and pledged in his third-party campaign to accept donations only from individuals.

Nader also ran as a third-party candidate in the 2000 and 2004 presidential elections. He is still loathed by many Democrats who call him a spoiler and claim his candidacy in 2000 cost the party the election by siphoning votes away from Al Gore in a razor-thin contest in Florida. Nader vociferously disputes the spoiler claim, saying only Democrats are to blame for losing the race to George W. Bush.

Blow Hot, Blow Cold

Was last Thursday's debate in Texas Hillary Clinton's swan song? 

To her longtime friends, Senator Hillary Rodham Clinton sounds unusually philosophical on the phone these days. She rarely uses phrases like “when I’m president” anymore. Somber at times, determined at others, she talks to aides and confidants about the importance of focusing on a good day’s work. No drapes are being measured in her mind’s eye, they say.  ...

..... “We talked recently and she sounded totally resolute, totally in it until the end, and in typical style she just isn’t getting into regrets,” said Susan Thomases, an old friend of Mrs. Clinton and a former aide to Mr. Clinton. “Hillary is not a fatalistic person — this is no woe-is-me woman.”

Mrs. Clinton has, though, increasingly sought to keep her fate in perspective. In her debate in Texas on Thursday with Mr. Obama, she delivered what some viewers saw as a valedictory — but what she said was a simple expression from the heart — when she spoke warmly about the race and her rival.

“I am honored to be here with Barack Obama. I am absolutely honored,” she said. “And you know, whatever happens, we’re going to be fine.”

She found herself explaining on Friday that the remark was not meant as some sort of farewell. Yet to some friends, she is in fact acting differently; to others, the situation has become simply heartbreaking. When Mr. Clinton said last week that his wife had to win in Texas and Ohio, it was not only the first public admission by a senior member of her circle that her candidacy was on the line, it was also a moment that deepened the feeling of shock felt by some of her supporters.

So, is Clinton signalling her departure from the Democratic race?  Hard to believe if you heard her in Ohio today.

CINCINNATI — Hillary Rodham Clinton angrily accused her Democratic rival Saturday of deliberately misrepresenting her positions on NAFTA and health care in mass mailings to voters, adding, "Shame on you, Barack Obama."

Clutching two of Obama campaign mailings in her hand for emphasis, the former first lady said, "enough with the speeches and the big rallies and then using tactics that are right out of Karl Rove's playbook."

Obama defended the mailings as accurate and rejected Clinton's complaint as a political ploy. He said that despite her current criticism of NAFTA, she supported the trade agreement when it passed during her husband's administration.

"You can't be for something and take credit for an administration ... and then when you run for president say that you didn't really mean what you said way back then. It doesn't work like that," he said to cheers at a rally in Akron.

The long distance clash erupted as the two Democrats campaigned separately across Ohio, one of two big states with primaries on March 4.

Clinton's frustration was evident as she criticized Obama in unusually strong terms _ a few days after ending a nationally televised debate by saying she was "honored to be here with" him in a historic race between a black man and a woman.

She said by his actions, Obama was giving "aid and comfort to the very special interests and their allies in the Republican Party who are against doing what we want to do for America."

"Meet me in Ohio," she said. "Let's have a debate about your tactics and your behavior in this campaign." The two are scheduled to debate next Tuesday in Cleveland.

Take Action

I am writing this as a follow up to Sujatha's post below.  Readers can leave a note of protest against such inhumane and unethical treatment of animals here.  Also, if you wish, please make a donation to the Humane Society to help with the campaign against cruelty to all animals, including factory farmed animals used for meat, milk and eggs.