Imagining a world without Internet

Just last Saturday, Egypt shut down all internet communication outgoing or incoming.

http://www.nytimes.com/2011/01/29/technology/internet/29cutoff.html?_r=1&scp=1&sq=Egypt,%20internet%20access&st=cse

Of course, this is far from ‘new’ news. But I was reading more closely through this article, I began to ask myself…

1. Is internet access an inalienable right?

2. What would the world look like without the internet?

As to the first question, my conservative politics say that government regulation of public access to information is a violation of rights. And it is a censorship of not only freedom of speech form within, but the freedom to knowledge of outside thought and communication. That is a dictatorship. I’m determined to fight

And as for the second, I have a difficult time fathoming what exactly the world will look like without internet.

I mean, wouldn’t be writing  a blog post on this.

I wouldn’t even have access to information on the protests in Egypt.

My life would be uninformed. Perhaps significantly less busy, and filled with more personal interactions.
But I wouldn’t trade my life with the internet; especially during a time like this in Egypt’s history when worldwide communication is absolutely essential..

I’m not an internet junkie by any means (I know nothing of html code or of the humble beginnings of the ‘www’); but I can’t imagine a life without it. Google answers every question I have; online newspapers provide a global perspective and Facebook facilitates a more robust social life. Not to mention the fact that I often feel like my e-mail inbox is physically attached to me…

I cannot imagine.

A monstrous Austen imitation?

I’ve found one review which echoes my opinion on Pride and Prejudice and Zombies (by Seth Grahame-Smith). Although I will admit up front that I have yet to read the book, and it is late at night. But first, I’d categorize myself as an Austen reader–I’ve read all 5 novels and even taken a class on her life and works.

So, why would I hate a Pride and Prejudice novel, anyway? Well, mostly because I feel like it’s a novel from someone who is looking to write a bestseller as quickly as possible. Grahame-Smith takes huge liberties with plot and characters (Elizabeth kills people right and left and Zombies rule the pages), although it uses the original wording and structure (85% Austen, 15% Grahame-Smith). Sounds like an exact rip-off of Austen and an easy way to sell a few million copies.

http://www.newyorker.com/online/blogs/books/2009/04/jane-austen-doe.html

Am I stubborn? Do I not get the point? The author of this review references the novel’s premise as ‘an intelligent fart joke.’ Perhaps that’s my problem; I take Austen too seriously. But this is serious; you can’t just throw around Zombies in places because you think they could be entertaining–you can’t ride the coattails of Twlight’s paranormal fictional romances. What is the world coming too? Adding Zombies to the actual original novel is radically different than putting your own spin on your own Pride and Prejudice with Zombies and writing it all yourself. Copycat, anyone?

Sure, Austen may have been a dime-novel writer in her time. But I’d like to think her wit carries a great deal more intelligence than the ‘potty humor’ of PPZ. Has anyone read the book (or other books?)? What’s your opinion? Is Grahme-Smith a cheapskate, a genius, or wholly misrepresenting Austen?

ALSO: just heard Natalie Portman is going to star in the film adaptation of this novel. Whaaaat? I like her too much for this…

Drink Coffee, Run Faster

Apparently if you drink coffee before a run, you can improve your performance and speed.

I love coffee. I love running.

Just never together. On my running mornings, I almost never have coffee. It’s just too heavy on my stomach.
And I always feel the placebo effect of liquid.
But after this article (however sketch the research may be) I’m thinking that maybe I should change my habits…

http://www.nytimes.com/2009/03/26/health/nutrition/26best.html?pagewanted=1&sq=coffee&st=nyt&scp=54

CS Lewis and Sarah Palin

Should those two be mentioned in the same sentence?

This article reviews a new Sarah Palin ‘joke’: “She’s so dumb she reads children’s books!!”

I’d have to agree with this article: Children’s books aren’t just for the young (or ‘dumb’) or even the young at heart. If you’re looking for an ‘easy read’, pick up Nora Roberts or John Grisham. Enjoying a children’s book as an adult requires a cultivated taste; a desire to revisit the past from the vantagepoint of age. The other day I found myself with both A Little Princess and The Witch of Blackbird Pond (two childhood favorites) in hand, snuggled down on the couch. It’s this longing for the the simple pleasure of a moral lesson, trustworthy, reliable characters that always brings me back.

I’ll be clear; Palin may be cluelessly dumb, but it’s sure as heck not because she’s reading CS Lewis’ The Chronicles of Narnia.

I worry I may be too unclear

I believe I could benefit from this beautiful book: http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052748703766704576009540219126236.html?KEYWORDS=farnsworth+classical+english+rhetoric

My writing ‘weakness’ is that I often have too much awareness of rhetorical use. I am too flowery for clear communication. I talk in circles, and say things 5 times that could be clearly and concisely said in a few words. I wish I had the power of journalistic writing. But I am too self-conscious for it.

Perhaps a perusal of this book is a dose of what I need–with the flavor of Emerson, Shakespeare and Dickens (hah, who ever said he was concise?) thrown in.

Talking Apes?

This NPR article is absolutely, absolutely amazing. Language is fascinating. Learning Language is fascinating. Well, just read this, see what you make of it: http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=5503685

My good friend, Sara Rapp, opened my eyes to the fact that today with an organization known as the The Great Ape Trust, Bonobo apes are communicating to and with humans. Apes are moving toward being able to express feelings, to live in the world of people. Is this a sign of apes’ intelligence? The possibility for modern evolution? The genius of human instruction? Whatever it is, as Noam Chomsky has said, language is at the core of what it means to be human, and that no other animals can acquire our sophisticated grammar. There is no proof that these apes have syntax (although they do seem to get word order correct), but who’s to say what will happen if mother apes continue to teach their children this use of language?

I know I’ll be waiting with baited breath.

Beauty and the Beast: NEW MOVIE

The trailer’s a bit dramatic, but I’m intrigued. I love this fairy tale.

http://www.beastlythemovie.com/

PS: Mary Kate Olsen? Vanessa Hudgens? Beauty and the Beat? Yep, I’ll be seeing this one.