Friday, November 30, 2007

9 Hours

This kind of looks like an Echochrome picture. Man I can't wait for my PS3.

Thursday, November 29, 2007

22.5 Hours

Need, more, Monster...

Tuesday, November 27, 2007

I Need More Condensed Olive Seeds To Burn

So I'm heading over to Pullman to pick some up. It sucks being out of fire.



Links not at all random but I'm just not sure how all of them aren't yet:

Corb v2.0

Justin Power: music on myspace. Now that Death Songs has died, Justin Power is out on his own and rocking it sans mandolin.

Coudal Partners are in the midst of making a new movie and telling us all about it. The latest is a five-episode movie about looking for stuff: Los Alamos and the Black Hole.

Interpreting Government Icons

Ten Godliest Gamers including a great Street Fighter bit.

Street Fighter the Later Years

Update On 2° Below

John agreed with my assessment and said it tasted too much like Fat Tire to stand out. So I think it tastes too much like Snow Plow, he thinks Fat Tire and we can both see each other's point of view. Therefore if you mix a Snow Plow and a Fat Tire you should end up with a 2° Below. My assessment stays: 3 of 5. Not bad. Not great.

Monday, November 26, 2007

Welcome Back From Thanksgiving Break

Question: Is 9:36 AM too early for a beer?

Answer: New Belgium Brewing is one of my favorite breweries on the west coast. Their new winter seasonal ale, 2° Below, is another in their line of seasonal ales. Springboard, their spring seasonal, is my favorite brew of theirs so I was looking forward to trying 2° Below. At first it tasted like a crisper version of Widmer's Snow Plow, overly malty and molassesy. But after half the bottle the hops really started to open up and the molasses receeded nicely. Unlike a lot of winter seasonals, all three tastes (threshold, body, and final) are superb. But like most winter seasonals, all three are quite different.

I give it a 3 out of 5 initially but I could see the rest of that six pack pushing it up a little higher.

Sunday, November 25, 2007

Racing Rant

My continuing complaint with the world's greatest race is a lack of variety. Last year there were two GT1 cars not American and not British despite numerous marques doing quite well outside of Le Mans itself (Lamborghini, Maserati, Ferrari, and all of Japan Super GT). Also, the Porsche RS Spyder's absence was definitely felt last year with the LMP2 category being clusterfucked by retirements. GT2 was good last year, a nice variety. But overall, there was not enough variety in marques. Now I realize some of that can be blamed on manufacturers not wanting to run expensive racing teams, but most of the blame falls on the ACO.

So 2008 they'll do better, right? Well, the list is released and let's take a look.

LMP1: There are 2 Audis, 2 Peugeots, and 2 Judds. Good mix of engines so far but only 3 chassis types.

LMP2: 2 Zyteks, 2 AERs, and 2 Porsches. Four different chassis. Better. Hope they bring an Acura on.

GT1: 3 Corvettes (2 sixes and 1 five), 2 Maseratis, 1 Saleen, and 1 Aston Martin. Better, but they need to keep it up and bring a Ferrari and a Lambo onto the ticket.

GT2: 4 Porsche 997 GT3Rs and 4 Ferrari 430s. Wow. That sucks. Where's Spyker? Panoz? BMW? Chrysler? Cadillac?

So the ACO is at it again. When are they ever going to learn that what I want is not just great racing between great cars, I want great racing and a lot of cars. Sure, GT2 will probably be quite exciting if these eight are all that are invited, but come on, how boring is that? To expand the sport of racing and get Le Mans back to the prominence it as held in the past there needs to be a ton of cars and marques on tap. I want Morgan. I want Lotus. I want Acura. I want Nissan. I want Alfa Romeo. I want Gillet. I want Jaguar. I want Cadillac. I want Bentley. I want Subaru. I want Mazda. I want Pagani. I want more cars on track but most of all I want more marques on track.

Thursday, November 15, 2007


  • The subtitles above are now linked to their respective post tags.

  • Post tags are now slowly being added.

  • I have a new blog and it is in the sidebar.

  • I realized that it has been a long time since I posted some pictures of mine so I will post some from that wonderful/horrible trip I took back to Seattle.

  • I woke up and found some chips and Jones Soda on my couch. I think it was Lu.
  • Wednesday, November 14, 2007

    House 2

    In my investigation into house I have come across a few main desires for housing: easenotease, iconnoticon, commoditynotcommodity, and appearanceprocess. This section of my investigation deals with all of these, but mostly with the fourth. Many homes are bought or sold based on appearance, "I'm a millionaire, I can't live in a trailer park!" or "That house is just another McMansion, I want something designed well." Taking the latter statement to the extreme we come upon houses that are in some ways unlivable but are designed to the nines. Based on Dillon's recommendation I've focused on Eisenman's variants to explore this issue more.


    Peter Eisenman’s Houses I-VI

    In this first batch of pre-Jungian houses Eisenman is saying that humanity and house collide in specific and separate ways. The uses are often separated in plan with walls and doors, but rather than separating the different uses with these tried-and-true elements Eisenman is trying to find separation through different means and in the meantime has to decide whether separation is needed at all.

    House I is a series of six two-story bays. The structure consists of columns supporting beams that divide the bays. The floorplans are in the shape of a separate L for each horizontal plane or texture. There are two atrium spaces and one forms the shape of an L. This seems to be unintended rather than a deliberate decision by Eisenman as House II explores that more deliberately.

    House II (above) is designed by Eisenman’s latching onto the idea of the magazine as both a vertical and horizontal element. As a result the house becomes a series of nesting Ls of air. This house still relies upon the 3x3x2 grid though. It looks like a two-level tic-tac-toe game. The house’s structure is 16 vertical posts – four on each side and four in the middle. 2-3-9-16. It becomes a 9 square grid on the outside which, when imposed onto the exterior, shows a division of space into three magazines.

    In House III Eisenman begins with the 9 square grid. Top and bottom are 9 squares while each side is six. First the house is divided into three magazines, then the grid is extracted and reintroduced at a different angle into the leftover solid of the intersections of the three bays. The corners/intersections of the grid in its original placement dictate the angle of the twisted grid. A skeleton grid is erected conforming to the original orientation and the space not used by the new cube is taken over by a second cube on the original grid. The structure is complex: basically a series of window bays progressing along two axis but using the same vertical supports. This is a nesting of magazines. The three magazines from House II are implied by skeleton frame structures but they are twisted in the new use of house space.

    So Eisenman is using generic space, not actually defining anything as bathroom, bedroom, kitchen, et cetera. This is him saying that house is devoid of meaning like all erections. We place meaning on and in them through the use of commodities. A house is an empty box until a bed, a kitchen, a sink, a bathroom, a couch, a television, et cetera are injected into its void space. The house itself is also devoid of site, designed to be injected into a site like commodities are injected into itself. So in a way this is an ideal house. A house as a house and not one filled with or created from latent meaning. But it actually is. It is created from the latent meaning of the process. Looking at these pages filled with iterations of plans and axonometrics – these are the latent content, these are the site. So it is perhaps design as design more so than house as house.

    Where House III has one corner breaking out of the original grid, House IV starts with all four corners breaking out of the grid but instead becomes a redefinition of the grid. The space Eisenman is working with now is a true cube – 9x9 grids on each side. This is not a real breaking of the grid, rather it is an addition to the grid of one more layer. It is now a three-dimensional tic-tac-toe board and the centre space is hidden. Prominence is granted the outer edges by the shifting caused by the grid’s centre becoming smaller. The magazines are now only able to be visualized as three-dimensional elements rather than two-dimensional elements. They are cubic but only occupy the air of three cubes at once. The design, though now taller than Houses I-III, retains the sense of horizontality because Eisenman cheats, he squishes the building down and elongates horizontal cuts.

    The elevations of House three start to deny the shifted grid. Because the second grid adds only one vertical element to the original grid there is no was to tell how the house is arraigned simply from the elevations.

    Up to House V the structure and the constructions generally coincided – one brings the other into being and vise versa (even in house three which has two structures). In House V though, Eisenman begins with each of the four corners breaking out of the grid but soon becomes a discussion of grid. First there is one diagonal element in plan that becomes a strong vertical element in perspective – basically the house cut in half. Then the grid and the Cube are the same but the void is at a 45 degree angle and centered: this void allows a view of the grid and the houses are placed and arraigned according to the void not the grid but the grid still defines the overall cube. Then a grid is rotated out of the original grid and the cube becomes a sort of implied double-cube. Then the cube and the grid are at odds with each other while the void and the grid agree. These views of structure, of space, of multiple grids, of overlaying patterns never develop fully into a house design. (House V begins where House IV got away from breaking the grid) House V really ghosts or implies the second square of House III but using only one element.

    Are these for the urban environment or not? No. The amount of space used for these houses and the lack of livable space do not conform to the density needs of an urban environment. Then does that make his process of design based on grid applicable if these are for living outside of city limits? Yes. Everything is on a grid. Farmland, states, counties. From longitudinal and latitudinal lines all the way down to property lines, grids overlay the environment we exist within. We cannot escape them. So is that where these Houses come from? Eisenman trying to redefine the grid? No, he uses the typical grid. Perhaps his application of the same scale grid on all six faces is new, but it is still just the grid multiplied and folded. This is Eisenman using the grid to its full potential rather than rethinking it. I don’t get that term, re-think. It doesn’t make sense to me.

    House VI starts to have more to do with Houses I and III than Houses IV or V. In House VI Eisenman examines how far away from the original grid a design can get while still implying its precedence and existence. House I called in to question structure and the necessity of columns and beams, but left them all on the grid as a way of organizing the elements and increasing confusion. House III had two cubes – did one hold up the other, did one hold up only air, was one not structural at all? House VI begins with another unresolved element of House I – the cross. The cross is blue before Eisenman flips the cross and creates a red one of the flipped one. The two crosses are now separated by space and become a cross of air. This empty cross is the basic formational element of the building and it starts to define its own grid. The house itself inverts – the staircase is green, but the staircase on the ceiling is red; the space used in one corner of the cross on the ground floor is used in the opposite corner on the third floor. The building quickly becomes the intersection of four 3x3x2 grid-cubes and the empty cross. Spaces are then inserted into where the structures and grids line up – which implies a single, overarching grid.

    Friday, November 09, 2007

    The Week's Not Over Yet

    The Divorce Papers

    Where it Was Back Then

    last night I dreamt
    they cut off your hands and feet.
    you whispered to me,
    Now we are both incomplete.

    I held all four
    in my arms like sons and daughters.
    I bent slowly down
    and washed them in magical waters.

    I placed each one
    where it belonged on you.
    "A miracle,"
    you said and we laughed
    the laugh of the well-to-do.


    (page 509 of the complete)


    Thursday, November 08, 2007

    In Memoriam Again

    Nosferatu, eine Symphonie des Grauens is one of my favorite films ever. The idea was stolen straight out of Bam Stoker's Dracula to the extent that the company went bankrupt when Florence Stoker sued and won. However, this doesn't change the fact that this film is a masterpiece. The soundtrack is pristine - you've heard it, you probably just don't know you have yet. The film makers used the advantages of the silent film format rather than letting it's lacks hinder the movie. They used subtle tricks like fast-forwarding and variable pacing flawlessly. The sets, costumes, and camera angles are pure perfection: the repetition of shapes, the symbol of the arched door echoing the symbol of the coffin, shooting shadows instead of the actors, the contrast of beauty and evil - the film is spot on.

    The original title means Nosferatu, a Symphony of Horror, and the movie still scares me. Luckily the copyright is up on it so you can download it freely and legally from the Internet Archive here.

    Wednesday, November 07, 2007

    The People's Mario

    Continuing what is becoming a week of remembrance (RIP Jeep & W.O.), today I turn to remembering November 7th, 1917. It gave us Lenin, McCarthy, Stalin, Reagan, proliferation, Ten Days that Shook the World, an alternative, and Super Mario Brothers.

    Original here.

    Sunday, November 04, 2007

    At a Calvary Near The Ancre

    One ever hangs where shelled roads part.
    In this war He too lost a limb,
    But His disciples hide apart;
    And now the Soldiers bear with Him.

    Near Golgotha strolls many a priest,
    And in their faces there is pride
    That they were flesh-marked by the Beast
    By whom the gentle Christ's denied.

    The scribes on all the people shove
    And bawl allegiance to the state,
    But they who love the greater love
    Lay down their life; they do not hate.


    Rest in Peace Young Soldier

    Part 9: An Ending

    I usually don't put a cap on things, but this is it. The Auto-Man took apart the engine and found a thrown rod. Goodbye my beautiful Jeep.

    Saturday, November 03, 2007

    Part 8: A Subaru

    We bribed him for a ride home. He drove 130 miles to pick us up, and 130 miles back. We listened to metal all the way. Discussed how "No World for Tomorrow" is the best song off C&C's new album. How cool it is that the song has a multifaceted, progressive chorus that repeats four times with different bridges in between. Then we listened to Dragon Force and wondered at the speed of their players. Metal. Lots of Metal. He is a god amongst mere mortals.

    Part 7: Architecture In Helsinki

    I am restating the fact that they are one of my top five bands of all time. Live was unbelievable. I couldn't believe that they came all the way out to Seattle and I made it to the show despite blowing up my car. There was no way I was missing that show. I am still dancing.


    Friday, November 02, 2007

    Brian Oglesbee

    So we have this new show up at the local gallery by Brian Oglesbee. His work is awesome, but walking through the first time I kept thinking of him as Man Ray the Second before I realized I wasn’t looking at crooked photographs – these are all unaltered. Where Man Ray showed us how photographs could be constructed and taught us that photographs are all lies, Oglesbee takes it a step further.

    His Water Series is so dependent on context for meaning. Each one can – and does – say its own, but only through stringing them all together did I realize that each were telling different pieces of a whole. Just like his images are composed of different parts of an/the image, each image is a part/piece of his whole. He is taking the next step from Man Ray’s “photography is a lie so let us lie” and pointing out that what we see is a lie because of our preconceptions. Seeing them most people think “Oh that’s beautiful Photoshop,” or “He is a darkroom god.” But once the realization came that his photographs are unaltered I started to question what we see. I remembered different experiences where what I thought I saw turned out to be something else. Like in Paris I swore there was a gunman on the roof but it wasn’t, it was just scaffolding. So if what we see is not truthful – not even accurate – but we still take it to be such, what does that make us?

    Part 6: Glass Candy

    If you ever want to rock your face off or dance till you pass out listen to Glass Candy. I've never seen a singer so involved with the crowd. She got down into the crowd at the Showbox. She sang while dancing in the middle of the crowd. Their music is on. Really on. The man making the beats has to be one of the best I've seen. He had that whole place rocking. On a Monday night.


    Thursday, November 01, 2007

    Part 5: Panther

    Astounding. See the live show. See it. More energy with only two members than many many bands. So this is how it went: gets on stage and screams into the microphone. Now, I'd already seen 3. below so I knew he was unconventional, but oh man, he looped that scream. Then another note looped. Then he took two drumsticks and a microphone and sampled things on the stage: the stage itself, a single drum, a block of wood, his arm, a speaker, et cetera. After about 2.5 minutes of this a drummer comes out and all heaven breaks loose. See it. Soon.


    How I Think

    Yesterday I got to think some things out and begin to define a couple of terms for our latest project. This is the unfiltered version of what I wrote down.


    Part 1: The First Try

    What does a rowhouse want to be?

    What is a rowhouse?

    •Row – A series/line/linear arrangement of things
    •House – A place for activities on all three planes of humanity
    -----oA separation
    -----oA commodity
    -----oA creation

    •A house is an erection that provides interior spaces. The house itself is a commodity but only with the addition of other commodities can all three planes of physical human existence be embraced. It is separated through a sense of privacy achieved through the sense of ownership attained through the house’s commoditization (purchase); also, the threshold allows the owner the ability to accept or reject guests – people who have no sense of ownership. A row is a series of literal or metaphorical things placed or connected generally linearly.

    What does a row want? To become a punctum.

    What does a house want? To become a place of primary use.

    What does a rowhouse want? To become a punctum of places of primary use.


    Part 2: Well that sucks. Lets try again. No bullets. No separations.

    What does a rowhouse want to be?

    The house is not a machine for living: living is much less hierarchical than that statement implies. I.e. “living” happens away from the houses as much as or more than in the house. (Living means gaining. With this definition the office, the car, the street, shoes, clothes, nature, sunlight, et cetera become machines for living.) What then is the house? A space or group of spaces that shelters. A house is a modern base – no longer military and without the depth of intimidation a military base implies. A house is more like a base camp – a static space in a larger environment. (A place for being static physically and mentally) It is as intimidating as a military base, but primarily psychologically rather than primarily physically. The house as a modern base (a base camp) allows ownership to develop and commoditization; this places importance on the threshold – it is there the owner rejects or accepts guests – those who have no sense of ownership.

    The house often contains spaces that allow movement or static (no noun form) on all three planes of humanity: —, l, and + (horizontal [sleeping], vertical [standing], both [sitting] according to Dillon); but this support requires the addition of more commodities. Is a house a stack of commodities then? Yes, but that is not inclusive enough. It is a base camp and a stack of commodities and a space(s) of shelter and static.

    A rowhouse wants to be a piece not a whole. But rowhouses want to be the punctum piece of a neighborhood or lifestyle (urban & personal scales) with a strong sense of responsibility to others for actions.


    I'm still not there yet but I will never be. I'm getting closer is all that matters and all that is important.

    Part 4: I Met A Tower Of Wine

    On the corner of University and Fourth you can catch a glimpse of Inhabit, Seattle Central Library, and Purple. The former an experiment in modular living, the middle the middle, and the latter a two level cafe with a woven steel roof and a central staircase spiraling around a tower of wine. Go for the cheese. I asked the cheese-prep chef how much he goes through nightly. He said, "An obscene amount." In the two hours we were there he prepped more cheese and more kinds of cheese than I have eaten in my entire life.