An interesting introduction to the world of set designing for TV: you get 8500 square feet of space and 8 weeks during which you have to assemble a convincing (and in this case obsessively accurate) reproduction of a 1960’s office. Read more about this project at Dwell Blog - “Mid-Century Madness .” What I find particularly cool:
“All the executive chairs in cast aluminum and leather are original Time-Life chairs that were in the Time-Life building,” she tells me. “We found them at an office surplus store in Gardena called TR Trading.”
So what this is saying: basically, there are giant warehouses with awesome “old school” and authentic furniture in them. All we get here in Minneapolis is small, overpriced boutiques of mismatched mid-century pieces. An overstuffed warehouse would be a refreshing change. Anyway, talk about attention to detail:
“The typewriters are way off. The Selectric didn’t come out until 1961 and we’re in 1960. But we explain it away by saying that what the secretaries have are all prototypes that they got because Sterling Cooper is handling the Selectric advertising account.”
Anyone who calls 1 model year difference (during a period over 40 years ago) “way off” is pretty detail oriented. That said, if this is what a TV show I haven’t yet heard of goes through to make its sets, I can only begin to comprehend what a major motion picture studio brings together in period films such as Pleasantville.
In this video, a mobile phone salesman on “Britain’s Got Talent” sings Nessun Dorma. I won’t spoil the results, though you may have seen this one already.
From the “Fashion and Style” section of the New York Times comes an interesting article about… fashion: “Admit It. You Love It. It Matters.” Ostensibly, it’s an article justifying the very existence of this section of the Times. However, it comes with some very keen observations and quotes that cut to the heart of an argument I haven’t quite been able to formulate in my own busy mind:
“There is this suggestion that fashion is not an art form or a cultural form, but a form of vanity and consumerism,” said Elaine Showalter, the feminist literary critic and a professor emeritus at Princeton. And those, Ms. Showalter added, are dimensions of culture that “intelligent and serious” people are expected to scorn.
Particularly in academia, where bodies are just carts for hauling around brains, the thrill and social play and complex masquerade of fashion is “very much denigrated,” Ms. Showalter said. “The academic uniform has some variations,” she said, “but basically is intended to make you look like you’re not paying attention to fashion, and not vain, and not interested in it, God forbid.”
Having been steeped in academia for the past four years (with summers off, when I was steeped in organic solvents in a chemistry lab), I can’t do anything but agree with this observation. It’s spot on. Another quote, taking the thoughts out of my head:
“In our deeply Puritan culture, to care about appearance is like trying to be better than you really are, morally wrong,” [Valerie Steele, director of the museum at the Fashion Institute of Technology in New York] said.
Set into the larger context of the article, Steele’s quote highlights one of the sources of the knee jerk reaction against the industry. (Sidenote: If people react against fashion, I think they should direct their criticism against the incredibly warped body image and accompanying problems that are so pervasive in the modeling component of fashion.)
So, this industry can exist only because of the stable society and infrastructure that it occasionally takes inspiration from, but generally ignores completely. That doesn’t, however, justify society and infrastructure from thumbing its collective nose in return. That is, dismissing what we do not know simply because we are trying to be “intelligent and serious” is not a good enough justification for utter disdain.
Thank goodness, YouTube has finally added comment ratings; set the threshold to “great (+10 or more),” and bask in the pleasure of not being assaulted by the fallout from illiterate morons writing the first thing that pops into their heads.
I will reiterate my thoughts posted on another website: “Has anyone read the comments on YouTube? I’ve never seen a more putrid cesspool of thoughtless idiocy.”
The video of this recent test of NASA’s methane-powered rocket is a dazzling feast of color and sound. The evening sunset desert surroundings (which I am sure were chosen for their scientific, not artistic, value) provide the perfect backdrop for the futuristic looking flame. The part of the video where the rocket goes from pre-burn to ignition is absolutely outrageous. A bit about the methane rockets:
Methane (CH4), the principal component of natural gas, is abundant in the outer solar system. It can be harvested from Mars, Titan, Jupiter, and many other planets and moons. With fuel waiting at the destination, a rocket leaving Earth wouldn’t have to carry so much propellant, reducing the cost of a mission.
NASA really should publicize more cool videos like this: I think there is a significant group of people who would like an accessible window into what they do between shuttle and mission launches.
Follow a mini blog about a week-old beluga whale calf at the Shedd Aquarium’s Beluga Calf Update. This is all old-hat for the whale mom Mauyak (which means “melting snow” in Eskimo), because this is her 6th calf. I particularly appreciate Cute Overload’s commentary in their post titled My First “PPPBBBBFFFFTTTHH!!!:
Not to mention he’s got room to grow with his foldy side chub.
I believe that “side chub” is the scientific term, derived directly from Foldus sidechubeous.
We’ve all already heard it in the news already: Steve Wozniak, the co-founder of Apple Inc., was recently pulled over in California for driving at a rate of 104 mph (167 km/h) in his Toyota Prius. You may read the original article by Gary Richards at the San Jose Mercury News website: “Can Prius top 100 mph? Ask Wozniak.” Now, according to the list of speed limits in the United States, Mr. Wozniak was likely in an area where the speed limit was 70 mph, putting him 34 mph above the legal limit and therefore justifying his approximately $700 ticket. I believe Woz’s story of 104 mph (though cops do sometimes get speeds wrong, as in this recent story from my state: “Motorcycle enthusiasts question 205 mph ticket.”) I do not, however, believe Woz’s explanation.
First, let’s cast aside all the “haha, the wimpy Prius can go fast” quips, similar to those put forth by Mr. Richards, Mr. Gruber, and others. Let’s look at the facts. The United States 2007 Toyota Prius spec sheet does not supply the top rated speed of the vehicle. The European spec sheet, however, does. That speed is 106 mph (170km/h). Now, given the fact that European and American specs can differ due to discrepancies in environmental impact regulations and electronic governors, it is helpful to turn to the “HEVAmerica, U.S. Department of Energy Advanced Vehicle Testing Activity: Toyota Prius” stats, which report that the top speed reached by a US 2004 Prius after one mile of driving was 104.2 mph. Given that the 2004-2007 Prius body styles are aerodynamically identical, all having a coefficient of drag of 0.26, it is reasonable to assume that the top speed of a US Prius is something like 105 mph, giving Woz about 1 mph of headroom on his claim.
Here’s where things make less sense: Woz, in his “guilty with an excuse” courtroom appearance, declared that his scientifically inclined mind and worldly traveling of late put his mind in kilometers per hour mode. This argument has a modicum of truth in one specific situation: if one is accustomed to fixating on the interior region of the speed limit dial, where the units are kilometers. The problem is, the Prius doesn’t have a speed limit dial. It has a digital readout (image from an Edmunds Prius Gallery) of the current speed, with two digital reminders (odometer and speedometer) that the units are in miles per hour. So, yes, the car could’ve gone that speed and no, I do not believe Woz’s weak excuse.
Flat out, without a doubt, straight up, indubitably gorgeous letter pressed wedding invitations are produced right here in Minneapolis, MN by Armato Design. Watch their quick video (the one labeled “2 color job”) of the printing process, complete with fun music from the movie Amélie (the song’s called “La Noyee”). If you would like to buy some of their work straight away, Armato’s on etsy, too: http://armatodesign.etsy.com.
