Eau de random

A little while I (God a’mighty, but this sounds poncy) went to Holt Renfrew to buy my cologne. Let me explain: it’s not that I seek out things from Holt Renfrew — in general I never shop there as I find it far too pretentious and the customer service, if you don’t reek of money, is terrible — but I happened across an article online that said this one was great and I did need a new one and they only happen to sell it at Holt Renfrew and I didn’t want to spend time comparing fucking colognes and so I just went and bought it aaaaaaaaand Ikindoffeellikeawankernow.

Anyramble, I went to pick some up. The guy there tried to do the upsell — ooh, we’re almost out, do you want to buy two? — but I declined. The first one lasted me a year. He suggested, then, that I take one of their sample bags so I could pick something else I like. I said fine and jammed it in the bag. When I got home I realized he’d thrown about 20 samples in there. Oy.

But hey, never being one to pass up a little scientific experimentation, I decided to try each one for one day, just to see if I like it. I reach in blindly, take out a bottle without looking, wear it for the day to see if I smell like a fancy girl and then see what it was when I get home. Maybe I’ll discover something that’s not awful that can be purchased a different store.

So far Wood by Dsquared (I think…I may have the brand and company mixed up) is okay, but the Bulgari something or other I wore today smells as if I gorged on flower petals and orange juice and then threw up on my shirt.

So that’s a ‘no’ then.

"[O]nly slightly more pleasant than doing housework."

There’s a line in the movie 500 Days Of Summer where (don’t worry, I’m not really giving anything away here) one of the characters suggests a more honest message for the inside of a “Congratulations on your new baby” greeting card should be “I guess we won’t be hanging out as much anymore.” Funny. True, too.

Nellie and I are at that age where most of our couple-y friends are having kids. We’re pretty fortunate in that a) we still get to see them, and b) very few of them — and none of those closest to us — ask us when we’re going to start having kids. Good thing, too; I never know quite what to make of that question. Does it imply that the inquiring party is really anxious for us to reproduce so that they’ll be able to relate to us? Or that they simply can’t think of anything non-childcare-related to ask us? I suppose it could be both, depending on the person. In any case, the answer is “probably never.”

So, why is that?

A few weeks ago the Maclean’s cover story — “The Case Against Having Kids” — listed anecdotes and evidence for abstaining from kids, including the following:

  • “[A]mong people 55 and over… the childless by choice are more content, have higher levels of well-being and are less depressed.”
  • “[T]he salaries of university-educated women plateau after childbirth and then drop, while fathers’ incomes are unaffected.”
  • “Daniel Gilbert, who holds a chair in psychology at Harvard and is the author of the 2006 best-seller Stumbling on Happiness, reports that childless marriages are far happier.”

Both those stats have to be qualified. The 55-and-older study subjects who have a ‘good’ relationship with their children are happier than those who don’t, although the article doesn’t point out whether they’re happier than those without children. As for the second point, procreation is linked to income as well as education, though the article doesn’t state which link is stronger. In any case, these are just broad stats…they’re not reflective of the choices each person makes when thinking about having kids.

I can’t comment on the following, as it seems to do with the so-called biological imperative — or lack thereof — that I only hear referenced in the case of women:

Many women knew they didn’t want children as children, a claim backed by research in The Childless Revolution that explores the notion that the impulse not to have children is genetic, like being gay. Most were clear-eyed that the choice required a new anchorage. “Children were not a way of ensuring happiness or endowing my days with meaning,” the poet Lorna Crozier writes. “That hard task was mine alone.” The American author Lionel Shriver, who never wanted children, writes in “Separation From Birth” that her greatest fear “was of the ambivalence itself”: “Imagine bearing a child and then realizing, with this helpless, irrevocable little person squalling in its crib, that you’d made a mistake. Who really, in that instance, would pay the price?”

Interesting, certainly, but in my case I’m pretty sure it’s not biological. I’m not even sure wanting children is biological. I think there are plenty of people who want to have kids, to raise them, to have families, to teach a new generation. I also think there are plenty of people who do it because they think they’re supposed to. It’s what you do. You grow up, you get married, you have kids. I suspect the former are the ones who, when they pass 55, are more likely to have good relationships with their kids. The latter, I imagine, are more likely to be among these folks:

In 1975, Ann Landers famously asked readers: “If you had it to do over again, would you have children?” Seventy per cent of respondents said “no.”

I would never criticize someone for wanting to have kids. Some of the quotes in the article suggest parents are environmental terrorists for introducing another body into the earthly mix, but I think that’s a pretty big stretch. If people come to a conscious and informed decision about wanting kids, as our friends did, then I have confidence the kids will be raised well and the parents will be richer for it. But then there’re the hordes of people have kids out of some sort of imagined life stage obligation. The same thing happens with other big decisions in life — buying a house, getting married — and quite often it all works out. But in general, I would think that doing something you don’t necessarily want to do is setting you (and your kids) up for failure, and it strikes me as odd that other people are incredulous that I haven’t already taken this leap with them.

So here’s why we haven’t had kids: we just don’t feel the need. I don’t feel as if my life would be augmented by having a child — and I freely admit I may be wrong about that…parents are fond of telling you that you don’t know what it’s like to be a parent until you are one — and I don’t feel the guilt of our parents’ generation whose post-war mentality made child-bearing an act of National imperative. I enjoy my life a great deal, and have enjoyed it more as each year passes. Some parents have called me selfish for thinking that way, but far more have looked us dead in the eye and told us that have kids will ruin your life. I think both statements are nothing more than projections or rationalizations of that person’s personal feelings and regrets. I think that each individual, and each couple, has to decide whether they want kids, and whether it makes sense for them.

And hey, it’s okay that we won’t be hanging out as much anymore. We completely understand, and think you’re doing a great thing. We’ll find ways to entertain ourselves, come play with them now and then, and eventually be the cool uncle and aunt who buy them beer and condoms.

Kidding. Ha ha.

Seriously, though, beer and condoms are fine, but we’re not buying anybody cigarettes.

The guys dressed in brown are just ridiculous

I’m sorry I haven’t been blogging more lately. I have interesting topics lines up, really I do, but Wii Sports Resort is sucking up ALL MY GODDAMN TIME!!!!!1! More specifically, level 19 of the Swordfighting showdown. I cannot beat it. I got to 94% once, and have never gotten that close again. I’ve been hurling a lot of curse words in general direction of the TV/Wii, and am constantly on the verge of throwing the Wii remote through my window in a fit of anger.

Your regularly scheduled blogging will resume once I figure out a way to kill all these cartoony little bastards. Stay tuned.

In which I enter my mid-30s

Well that was a pretty good 34th birthday, considering it was in the middle of the week and I was at work for most of it. Nellie surprised me with two presents in the morning (Wii Sports Resort, which I can tell is going to be hours of swordfighting & wakeboarding fun, and a fancy new Hugo Boss jacket). At the office some folks took T-Bone and I out for lunch, and other co-workers had a cake in the afternoon. I got some good news at work (which I shall keep to myself) then came home and played the Wii for a while while Nellie cooked us up a ginormous Cumbrae’s steak. We paired it with the bottle of Eclipse we got at L’Acadie earlier this month and ate while we caught up on Durham County. After some happy birthdays phone calls (how quaint) we had a quick video chat with my brothers and sisters-in-law since they’re all in one place right now.

Back to work tomorrow morning, which sucks, but that’s the price I pay for using up all my vacation on France and Nova Scotia. Happy non-birthday, rest of world!

No noose is good noose

I hate neckties.

I own several, and will employ one on rare occasions, but generally I will do my very best to avoid wearing one. My reasons are three-fold:

  1. They’re uncomfortable. Not the ties themselves, I suppose, but the shirt collars which have to be buttoned tight in order to facilitate the tying of the tie. By hitching up my neck and then tying a knot (albeit a stylish one) around my adam’s apple I feel as if I’m trying to commit very languid suicide.
  2. They’re useless. I wear suits to work most days. I feel comfortable in them, but not just because I like how they look. A good suit and dress shirt both protect and breathe, so on -40 days I don’t feel cold and on +40 days I’m much cooler than I should be considered I’m wearing three layers. On top of all that, they’re functional (lots of pockets) and very easy to wrangle in the morning…just grab a bag out of the closet and presto. Ties, on the other hand, serve no useful purpose. They’re only for decoration. Combine with with my previous point about discomfort and they’re no better than the fancy-but-painful shoes that I tease Nellie for wearing sometimes.
  3. I like the no-tie look. I like the dress-up of a suit and the dress-down of no tie…suits can be casual, you know. And hey, it works for Clooney. Not that I’m fit to carry the man’s dress socks, style-wise, but if he does it I think I’m on pretty safe sartorial ground to take the same approach.

Nellie likes to give me a hard time about not wearing a tie with my suits. What does everyone else think? Is it okay to go tie-less with a suit?

Millennials = goddamn phonies

Spotted at Maclean’s: a NY Times article about today’s teens’ reaction to Catcher In The Rye.

“The Catcher in the Rye,” published in 1951, is still a staple of the high school curriculum, beloved by many teachers who read and reread it in their own youth. The trouble is today’s teenagers. Teachers say young readers just don’t like Holden as much as they used to. What once seemed like courageous truth-telling now strikes many of them as “weird,” “whiny” and “immature.”

Julie Johnson, who taught Mr. Salinger’s novel over three decades at New Trier High School in Winnetka, Ill., cited similar reactions. “Holden’s passivity is especially galling and perplexing to many present-day students,” she wrote in an e-mail message. “In general, they do not have much sympathy for alienated antiheroes; they are more focused on distinguishing themselves in society as it is presently constituted than in trying to change it.”

Amen, today’s teenagers. I didn’t identify with Caufield when I read the book, even though I felt desperately as if I was supposed to. I just wanted to punch him.

Soon, my pretties. Soon.

I’m depressed.

One year ago today Nellie and I were in the Rockies, hiking the Iceline trail (from which we took the picture you see up there) and eating at Truffle Pigs and preparing to head up to Lake O’Hara. I get heartsick every time I think about that trip, and how I’m over 3,000 km away. I’m very much looking forward to our trip to France this fall, but god I wish I could be back in BC right now.

More: all my posts from that trip, and the rest of the pictures.

Venn mega

Some people understand something better when it’s explained to them in words. Personally, I prefer to see a picture. More specifically, I like charts.

Scott Adams (of Dilbert) wrote about this topic yesterday, prompted by a bit he saw on Bill Maher’s show.

The other night on Bill Maher’s show he held up a pie chart showing the percentage of U.S. corporations now controlled by the government. It was a tiny slice, more of a line than a wedge. Bill’s point is that we’re not on the verge of becoming socialists. That was an interesting graphic and very powerful for his argument.

What prompted me to write this was an email GB sent me today, a Venn diagram in Lifehacker I’d seen a few days ago and forgotten to star in Google reader (and thus forgot where I’d seen it):

The Venn diagram may be my favourite chart type. My favourite Indexed cartoons are Venn diagrams…

…and one of my favourite tshirts is this one from Diesel Sweeties:

Of course, charts of any flavour can do a good job of conveying lots of information in a tiny package. Last week I wrote a whole blog post about three good charts. Two weeks ago I made my own chart to illustrate the ideal conditions for emptying my PVR. I subscribe to feeds like The Economist’s daily chart and Flowing Data ’cause there’s always something interesting in there.

I very nearly drew a chart to explain how useful charts can be, but that seemed redundant. And overly geeky.

I'm off the case

Tonight I began the long, onerous task of removing my roughly 250 movies from their cases and jamming them into a giant CD wallet. This is the second phase of the great media pack-up. Back in February I finally ditched all my CD cases, though they and the original CDs had been boxed up and sitting in a closet for four years. Now it’s the DVDs.

The plastic DVD cases will be…I dunno, thrown out, I guess. While I’m entirely used to seeing them out and occupying yards of shelf space, Nellie thought they were ugly. I suppose she’s right. They’re just hunks of plastic. I don’t know though, I’m worried that without the ability to scan a shelf and see something that jumps out at me, I’ll just stop watching these. For the most part I own only movies that I’d want to see over and over again; how will my viewing habits change now that they’re out of sight? I grew up in a place where books, movies and music occupied every inch of the (rather formidable) shelf space in our living room, not to mention the books covering pretty much every other flat horizontal piece of wood in the house, so it feels weird for me to put them away.

I suppose at some point when I get around to procuring a media server I’ll buy myself a giant hard drive and start ripping these films and TV series, and watch them that way. I’m not quite there yet; not that I don’t like the technology, just that I haven’t felt a strong need to do so. Nor have I just seen it as a logical extension I’d already taken, as I did by streaming the music files I’d already made the ‘master copy’ of my music.

The books, I suppose, will be the last to go. Again, I have nothing against eBooks, I just haven’t had any incentive to switch so far. Besides, I think Nellie’s soft spot for having books on the shelves is almost as big as mine.

On an unrelated note: anybody need a couple hundred empty DVD cases?

Balancing the scales of my life. And the ones under my fat ass.

Another 3 mile run this morning. Two 3-mile runs in less than 12 hours, after an absence of god knows how many weeks, has made my legs a little sore, but nothing I can’t handle. I don’t need to do much for the rest of the night, aside from walk to The Phoenix to see Mogwai. That’s tonight; tomorrow is another Hot Docs screening, followed by yet another on Thursday. Busy week, and I don’t think I’ll be seeing much of home.

It should  be a good test for me, actually. Clearly I need to try a new pattern since the current one is leaving me, well, fat. I am now 45 pounds overweight, and the heaviest I’ve been since…let’s see, since the 23rd of forever. The pattern’s a familar one, harking back to my Delano days when my weight last peaked: work crazy hours, go home, eat something terrible, get up early the next day, repeat. The increase in working hours gets the better of me, as I lose both the energy for exercise and the patience to eat something healthy. If it were happening for one or two days at a time, that would be one thing, but I’ve just accepted the fact that a 12-hour work day is now the norm.

So what happens to the rest of that day? If you take away boring crap like getting ready for work, commuting, taking out recycling, blah blah blah that still leaves about 9.5 hours. I sleep about 6.5 hours per night, so I have 3 left to play with. So that becomes the crucial eighth of a day in which to get shit done, and therein lies my conundrum. Here’s what’s left to do in the day:

  1. Eat
  2. Watch TV
  3. Read
  4. Blog
  5. Exercise

Those things are in approximate order of priority. Now, before you accuse me of being a shit husband, I do spend time with my wife, but Nellie’s hours are just as bad as mine (if not worse) so it’s not as if she’s sitting at home on the couch at 5:15, sighing and lonely. The first two items on the list are spent together. They are usually also combined into one exercise, sadly.

Why that priority? Well, eating is obvious, though my eating habits aren’t the best when time gets tight. But one thing at a time. Watching TV isn’t a real priority, except that it’s one of the few things I get to share with my wife, and the few shows that I watch I really like and if I don’t watch them that night it’s unlikely I’ll be able to catch up later. The PVR helps, but I still watch the same amount of TV in a given week, so it’s moot. Anyway, I watch maybe 2-3 hours a week, so TV’s only eating into about 30 minutes a day.

The next three are the root of the problem. See, I have this obsessive need to keep up to date with my interests. And I have a lot of them. According to Google Reader I scan about 500 news items each day from my 200+ news feeds. Throw in a few daily-read sites, the 85 people I follow on Twitter, and the omnipresent books and magazines, I spend a lot of time consuming information. I like to do this. I feel compelled to do this. I have news feed categories for books, economics, entertainment, friends, humour, movies, music, news, politics, opinion, photoblogs, sports, tech, toronto, travel and TV, and I like knowing about all of those things. But you can imagine what happens: by the time I finish reading this stuff, and then blogging about something…that’s it. I’m done.

So I’m faced with a trade-off: exercise for an hour a day, but read less or stop blogging. Alternatively I could find a job that requires less hours, but I don’t see that happening. I like my job and don’t think I’d be happy unless I was in a job like this one, so…here I am. I’m back to eating into the obvious time sink: information consumption. If it means spending as much time exercising my body as I do exercising my mind, that’s probably not a bad thing. But feeling like I’m getting dumber…that’s not going to be a good feeling for me.

So back to why this week is a good test: if I make sure to run each morning, my commitments during the week (which I usually keep free due to the afore-mentioned compulsion) will keep me away from the computer at night and I’ll see whether hitting the ‘Mark All Read’ button on thousands of news items makes me break into a steady twitch.

Now if somebody could rig up a way for me to attach a netbook to the front of a treadmill and let me click my way through my feeds, then I’d have somethin’…