Wikipedia Wednesday: Curling

It's funny how the Olympics tend to make us watch sports we would otherwise completely ignore.  When was the last time you cared about skiing, luge, biathlon, or anything else other than hockey?

And yet, people pay hundreds of dollars to see these sports live, and go out to bars to see them with a crowd like they're special things.  That's part of the Olympic phenomenon it seems.  Perhaps the fact that they only come once every four years makes it all seem special.

There is one sport in the Olympics that's in a grey area in terms of spectator interest.  It has enough fans to get televised once in a while, but the general public is only peripherally aware of it.  Most of the people involved in the sport are Canadians, and it has a long tradition in Canada, but most of us react to it with a mix of derision and jest.

I am, of course, talking about curling.

Curling is a team sport in which stones are slid across a sheet of carefully prepared ice towards a target area. It is related to bowls, boule and shuffleboard.

Two teams of four players take turns sliding heavy, polished blue hone granite stones across the ice towards the house (a circular target marked on the ice). The purpose is to complete each end (delivery of eight or ten stones [depending on recreational or competitive play] for each team) with the team's stones closer to the centre of the house than the other team's stones. Two sweepers with brooms or brushes accompany each stone and use stopwatches and their best judgment, along with direction from their teammates, to help direct the stones to their resting place, but without touching the stones.

There are a few obvious and a few non-obvious reasons curling isn't a mainstream televised sport.  It gets a lot of criticism for not requiring a high degree of physical fitness.  Curlers certainly do not look like your typical Olympic athletes.  Canada's men's skip is a middle-aged bald man, and most of our women curlers are well into their 40's.  In fact, one of them (the alternate) is five months pregnant!  This revelation has only fuelled the fire for those claiming that curling is not a real sport, and doesn't belong in a premier competition such as the Olympics.

The reason for curling's pronounced lack of young, firm, sculpted bodies is simple: curling isn't a game of athleticism; it is a game of strategy.

Strategy in an end of curling depends on the circumstances. It depends on the team's skill, the opponent's skill, the conditions of the ice, the score of the game, how many ends remain, and whether the team has last-stone advantage (i.e. the "hammer"). A team may play an end aggressively; that is, to have a lot of stones in play by throwing mostly draws. This makes for an exciting game, but is very risky. However, the reward can be very great. A team may also wish to play an end defensively. This means throwing a lot of hits preventing a lot of stones in play. This is generally considered to be less exciting, and is less risky. A good drawing team will usually opt to play aggressively, while a good hitting team will opt to play defensively.

If you read that entire paragraph and are not confused, you're either a curler, or someone who's been watching quite a bit of curling.  Which brings me to the other aspect of curling that turns a few people off: it's a very esoteric sport, and it has always had a kind of "in crowd" mentality surrounding it.  This is probably because it is a club sport.  You pretty much need to join a curling club if you want to curl.  Kids can skate, ski, or play street hockey anywhere, but as far as I know there is no such thing as "street curling".  During my teens, my family were members of the Calgary Winter Club, which had a curling wing.  The club was very, very firmly divided into two factions: those who curled, and those who did not curl.  The curlers had their rink and their lounge, and we had everything else.  The only times I ever saw them was when they used the locker room (which, due to the non-athletic nature of the sport, was rare).

I could probably go on and on about curling jargon, but I'm hardly an expert.  I only began picking up a few terms during these Olympics, and I just barely know how to keep score.  I know that the stone has to cross the "hog" (or, the "far hog" to be more precise) to remain in play, and that the goal is to get your stone closest to the "button".  The number of stones you have in the "button" when yours is the closest is how many points you get.  If you have the last stone of the "end", this is referred to as the "hammer".  There is also something called a "T line".  I think that's the thing that bisects the "button".  My head hurts.

Back to the article!  I did learn a few cool facts about curling from the Wikipedia page.  The first one is about where the stones come from:

Traditionally, high quality curling stones are made from a specific type of granite called "ailsite", found on Ailsa Craig, an island off the Ayrshire coast in Scotland. Ailsite has very low water absorption, which prevents the action of freezing and melting water from eroding the stone. In the past, most curling stones were made from ailsite, however, the island is now a wildlife reserve and the quarry has closed. The rarity of ailsite has led to high prices for curling stones, as much as US$1,500 for the best stones. Many curling clubs use a lower-grade stone that can cost upwards of $500. There are also stones that use a disc of ailsite as the running surface attached below another type of granite. Very informal neighbourhood curling clubs with limited resources may make cylindrical "curling stones" out of concrete-filled cans or bowls.

Kays of Scotland has been making curling stones since 1851 and has the exclusive rights to Ailsa Craig granite, granted by the Marquess of Ailsa, whose family has owned the island since 1560. The last "harvest" of Ailsa Craig granite by Kays took place in 2002. Kays have said that they harvested 1,500 tons, sufficient to fill anticipated orders through at least 2020. Kays has been the exclusive manufacturer of curling stones for all three Olympics where curling has been a medal sport.

Isn't that the most charming thing ever?!?  Curling stones are so special and rare, they have to come from a tiny Scottish island!  And it's closed forever!!!  Look at how small this island is!  It makes curling feel like some kind of Tolkien story when I learn things like this.

The coolest thing about curling though?  Good sportsmanship.  They may be bald, fat, slow, pregnant, and notoriously unfashionable, but they out-class most other professional athletes when it comes to being good sports.

More so than in many team sports, good sportsmanship is an integral part of curling. For example, celebrating an error by the opposing team, fully acceptable in some sports, is frowned upon in curling. This became somewhat of a problem during the 2010 Winter Olympics. The increase in popularity of the sport led to a situation where many fans did not know curling etiquette and were cheering in inappropriate situations. Even at the highest levels of play, players are expected to "call their own fouls", so to speak, such as alerting the opposing skip if they "burned" a stone. It is also traditional for the winning team to buy the losing team a drink after the game. (This is an interesting contrast to the game of darts, where the loser traditionally buys the winner a drink by way of congratulations.) This is often referred to as the Spirit of Curling.

Isn't that great?  Even if you lose, you get free beer!  Speaking of losing, have you ever watched a total blow-out of a hockey game and wished that the losing team would just give up and call it a night so you can go home/out/to bed?  In curling, that's completely acceptable, even at the highest levels of play.

As noted above in the game play section, it is not uncommon for a team to concede a curling match after it believes it no longer has a reasonable chance of winning but before all ends are completed. Concession is an honorable act and does not carry the stigma associated with quitting, and allows for more socializing. To concede a match, members of the losing team remove their curling gloves (if they wear them) and offer congratulatory handshakes to the winning team. Thanks and wishes of future good luck are usually exchanged between the teams.

I am sold.  Not only do I intend to watch more curling, I also would love to try it.  Any sport that involves minimal athleticism and maximum good times is right up my alley.

Does anyone need a curler on their team with no experience, equipment, or beer money?  Probably not, eh?  Maybe next year.

Living in Olympic Wonderland, Week 1

Oh Miga, you little rascal!

She's been having a lot of fun this week, and so have I.  Not surprisingly, in spite of all the dire predictions, naysayers, controversy, and good ol' fashioned whining leading up to the Games, pretty much everyone I've spoken with this week has been very positive about what's going on here.

At street level, the Winter Olympics are a big fun party that happens to feature sporting events.  The main topic of conversation here is not who won what medal, or which athlete was a disappointment.  The local dialog is about where we've been, what we saw, and who we met this week.  Even those of us who haven't been to the actual games are getting in on it.

There is a lot to see and do in Vancouver right now.  A whole shanty town of tents and domes has appeared in the big empty lot between the stadiums and Science World, most of which are free and open to the public.  These are the "community pavilions", and they include exhibits from three provinces: Ontario, Quebec, and Saskatchewan.  I went into the Quebec and Saskatchewan pavilions yesterday, the latter being the best of the two (perogies and Pilsner beats a Cirque du Soleil douchebag any day).  There is also Atlantic Canada House on Granville Island, Alberta House downtown, and apparently there's a Manitoba House somewhere.  There are also plenty of international houses around the city - usually a take-over of a restaurant, bar, or community hall.  Remember how last month I whined about the Roundhouse being closed?  It has become Casa Italia, which I am told is a big disappointment (they have no food!  Come on!)

Downtown is the epicentre of Olympic fun.  I wandered up Robson on Sunday through a thick crowd gawking at street performers, artists, and various attractions, including a zipline over Robson Square.  If you're willing to stand in line for four hours you can ride the zipline for free.  That's four hours of waiting for 10 seconds of entertainment.

Lines.  If there's one experience shared by visitors, locals, ticket holders, and freeloaders in Vancouver this month, it's standing in line.  You will line up to get on the Skytrain (though this hasn't been as bad as Translink said it would be; I've not waited more than 10 minutes for a train this week), you line up to get into a venue, and you line up to get into almost all the free pavilions and exhibits (side note: if there's no line for a free thing, you can pretty much guarantee it's not worth seeing).  Whether it's worth it to stand in line for an hour or more to get into something is hit and miss.  I know two people who went to Atlantic House at different times.  One saw the notorious Ashley MacIsaac perform there, which was needless to say well worth the price of admission.  The other walked into what was essentially a beer hall with $8 pints.  Similar assessments exist for Swiss House and Russia House, the latter of which has taken over all of Science World to give everyone a rather drab preview of the next Winter Olympics in Sochi.

To quote a co-worker on this subject, "free is not always the best price."  My time is worth a lot more to me than my money, and in most cases I'm not willing to stand in a long line to get what amounts to low level entertainment.

In stark contrast to its free pavilion neighbours, Molson Canadian Hockey House charges a very steep admission ($99 for a day pass in the "Fan Zone", or $450 and up for VIP Lounge access).  The upside to this is you get a much higher quality of entertainment than at the free pavilions, free food (but cash bar, where I assume you can spend $8 on a Molson product), and no line.  I'm going to try to see Sam Roberts for free at LiveCity Yaletown tonight, but I could also see him in a much more comfortable and pleasant environment tomorrow at Hockey House if I felt like spending the hundred bucks (I don't).

All that said, the real fun in Vancouver right now has very little to do with lining up to see something for free, or spending a week's pay on Olympic tickets and other premium things.  The true excitement here is how everyone is out and having fun together, and coming together over something as simple and elegant as sport.  I stood outside Hockey House for a while on Thursday, and watched the Canada vs. Switzerland game on their big outdoor TV's (no charge to watch these).  I saw the Swiss score to tie the game in the third period, and a couple hundred people felt the same disappointment I did.  Later, those people felt the same excitement and relief when Sidney Crosby scored the winning goal in the shoot-out.    There are many moments like this happening all over the city between friends, countrymen, and people who live on the other side of the globe.

That's the best part of being in this city right now.  The usual cares of the world are nowhere to be found; instead we are all excited about the games, and enjoying the spirit of thousands of people coming together.  Best of all, the weather in the city has been fantastic (somewhat to the detriment of the events scheduled at Cypress, but that's another story).  It's an amazing time to be out and about in what is always the most beautiful city on Earth.  This is Vancouver at its best, and I feel very fortunate to be here.

Wikipedia Wednesday (late edition): Nugan Hand Bank

Corrupt, wasteful, and dangerously incompetent financial institutions are all the rage these days.  We hear about massive investment firms going under, executives getting bonuses despite destroying people's assets, and government bailouts to keep the financial sector from completely collapsing.  And yet, there is no story that really, truly, exemplifies a completely fucked up bank ...

... unless you look back to 1980 and read about the atrocity that was Nugan Hand Bank.

I know ... the name seems like it was lifted from a Kids in the Hall skit, but it was a real bank.  Granted, it was an Australian bank (which goes a long way toward explaining the name), but it was just as real as Bear Stearns or CIBC.  And yet, as I read through the article, I had to keep reminding myself that I wasn't reading the back cover of a Tom Clancy novel:

Nugan Hand Ltd. was founded in Sydney in 1973 by Australian lawyer Frank Nugan (who was reputedly associated with the Mafia in Griffith, New South Wales) and former U.S. Green Beret Michael Jon Hand who had experience in the Vietnam War (after which he began training Hmong guerillas in Northern Laos under CIA aegis, an experience alleged to account for his ties to the "Golden Triangle" heroin trade). It has been alleged that the two generally split the business: Nugan took care of tax fraud and money-laundering, while Hand managed the drug money and the international branches.

See what I mean?  Again, in case it hasn't quite sunk in yet, this was a real bank that had real customers and real investors ... investors who were soon in for a big shock.

Nugan Hand grew to be a large international enterprise.  They added a few more CIA heavies to their ranks, which apparently gave them an air of legitimacy.  Wait ... since when does being involved with the CIA make anyone or anything seem legit?

Eventually, and inevitably, the facade began to crumble.  On second thought, maybe "crumble" isn't the best word here ... let's go with "explode in a vortex of deception, panic, and death" instead.

Concerns over the bank's questionable accounting processes began to circulate by the late 1970s as investors attending annual general meetings were prevented from asking questions by the bank. These concerns turned into panic for bank investors in the early hours of 27 January 1980 when Nugan (who was facing charges of stock fraud) was found shot dead by a .30-calibre rifle in his Mercedes-Benz outside Lithgow, New South Wales. It is said that a hand-written list was found on his body with a list of substantial loans Nugan Hand had extended to various notables, such as William Colby and Bob Wilson. The following police investigation returned a verdict of suicide. Suspicions of the bank's activities grew in subsequent days as details emerged of the contents of Nugan's car (including the business card of William Colby) and news that Nugan's house and office had been ransacked by Hand and Yates and important company files destroyed or stolen.

I'm no financier, but if the head of a company I invested in refused to answer questions and proceeded to shoot himself, I'd probably call my broker and put in a sell order.  Understandably, the Australian government was a bit concerned, and called an inquest into Nugan's death and the circumstances leading up to it.  That's when things got really interesting:

The official inquest into Nugan's death in June 1980 made front-page news amid testimony from Hand that Nugan Hand was insolvent, owing at least A$50 million (and as much as hundreds of millions), including $20,000 rent on their Sydney headquarters. He then promptly fled Australia under a false identity on a flight to Fiji in June 1980, after destroying Nugan Hand's remaining records. Hand has not been seen since. It is possible that, as as a CIA operative, he re-entered the US and was given a new identity.

So, to summarize, we have one founder who shot himself in his car, and another founder who fled the country with the help of his CIA connections.  Once again ... completely real!  Not made up at all!

The going theory on Nugan Hand is that it was mainly a front for the CIA to funnel drug money to Laos where it was used to fund a war, and possibly other covert operations.  Of course, there isn't really any direct evidence to support this, and there probably never will be, but given the parties involved it's not much of a stretch.  As of today, nobody has been convicted of any wrongdoing in connection to Nugan Hand.

That all ends here and now, kind readers, for I know the whereabouts of Jon Hand, and I can ---CONNECTION LOST---

Stop Sending Me Phone Books!

An open letter to Canpages and Telus:

Dear stupid people,

Recently I have noticed that you have decided to leave large paper phone books at the front door of my suite; not the door of my building, but the actual door to my home.  Telus, I know you probably have a key to the building, but I don't imagine it was given to you for the purpose of spamming me with a massive wad of paper.  Canpages, I have no idea how you got in, but I'm sure it wasn't entirely above board however you did it.

Regardless, I'm not writing this to chastise you for scamming your way into my apartment building.  That is beside the point.  All I want is for you to stop giving me phone books.  Forever.

I still have the phone books that Telus left here before I moved in.  Would you like to hazard a guess as to how many times I have consulted them in the past year and a half?

Go on ... take a guess.  Don't be shy.  I'm going to post a nice picture I found using this cool new thing called "The Internet" ... you just push that down arrow button when you want to see the answer.

Ready for the answer?

If you guessed any number other than absolute fucking zero, you are incorrect.  I'm not exaggerating here, fellas.  There is a nice layer of dust coating those phone books on top of my bookcase.

The following year, I received a new Telus phone book.  Where is this phone book now?  Good question!  I kind of lost touch with it after I put it directly in the recycling bin.  I found it kind of odd that I received a Telus phone book having not been a Telus customer in over five years, but rather than make a big fuss about it, I opted to simply dispose of it and never give it any more thought.

Perhaps you phone book people somehow took offence to this and decided to escalate, because this year I received not only a Telus phone book, but a Canpages phone book as well.  Pretty much the only thing I want less than a phone book is two phone books.  Maybe Canpages figured that since I didn't care for the Telus phone book, they would be able to swoop in and win me over with pretty much the exact same useless product with a different picture on the cover.

I don't know why I decided to be upset by phone books this year.  Maybe because it's 2010 and the idea of owning a paper phone book seems to make about as much sense as owning a cassette deck or a spinning wheel.  Maybe I finally snapped after decades of phone book oppression.  Maybe it's simply because two phone books don't fit easily in my recycling bin.  Whatever the case may be, it's time for phone books to stop.  Permanently.

I do not want a phone book.  I have NEVER wanted a phone book, and I certainly will never need a phone book in the future.  There is no scenario I can possibly imagine in which I would need a phone book.  Believe me, I have tried.  The best I could come up with is the following list of conditions that all need to occur at the same time:

• The internet is down
• The power is out
• My Blackberry's battery is dead
• Roving packs of wild, carnivorous animals are roaming the city and preventing me from leaving my home
• A Special Ops trained sniper will shoot me if I step out onto my balcony
• A Telus employee has arrived at my home, and I need something big and heavy to hit them with

Even in that case, I'd probably much rather use a cast iron skillet or a dictionary.

Let's get real here, phone book pimps.  We all know that phone books are useless.  We all know that Google killed the phone book a decade ago.  People have been playing along every time you distribute your yellow paper spam every year so as not to hurt your feelings, but enough is enough.  We all know why you make phone books.  It's certainly not to help us find shit, because the Internet absolutely kills at that.  Let's call a spade a spade.  It's a giant wad of ads.  The entire thing is ads.  In a bizarre acknowledgement that most people are probably never going to open the phone book, you have even seen fit to put ads on the front and back covers, the spine, and even pressed into the page edges.

Fine.  I get it.  You are trying to make money like everyone else.  You're trying to ride this gravy train until your ad buying customers figure out that a total of twenty six people on Earth still use phone books, and that they may as well be giving their money to a family of racoons instead.  Until that time, if you could do me and every other semi-intelligent person on the planet a favour and just put the phone books directly in the recycling bin instead of marching them up to our homes, we'd all appreciate it.

Sincerely,

Everyone

Wikipedia Wednesday: Emperor Norton

The polite term is "mentally ill", but most people just call them "crazy".  I'm referring, of course, to those people you see in every city (but especially the one I live in) who carry on conversations with imaginary people, dress up in bizarre costumes, push around shopping carts full of doll parts (I sincerely hope those are doll parts), scream obscenities at nobody in particular, twitch, pace, and post comments on YouTube videos.  Society at large usually does its best to ignore these people and hope they will just go somewhere else.

Emperor Norton, however, was not ignored.

Though he was considered insane, or at least highly eccentric, the citizens of San Francisco celebrated his regal presence and his proclamations, most famously, his "order" that the United States Congress be dissolved by force (which Congress and the U.S. Army ignored) and his numerous decrees calling for a bridge and a tunnel to be built across San Francisco Bay (which both happened long after his death in the form of the San Francisco – Oakland Bay Bridge and the Transbay Tube).

His real name was Joshua Abraham Norton.  For a while he was a successful businessman, but when he lost all his money in a bad deal for Peruvian rice, he completely flipped and declared himself Emperor:

At the peremptory request and desire of a large majority of the citizens of these United States, I, Joshua Norton, formerly of Algoa Bay, Cape of Good Hope, and now for the last 9 years and 10 months past of S. F., Cal., declare and proclaim myself Emperor of these U. S.; and in virtue of the authority thereby in me vested, do hereby order and direct the representatives of the different States of the Union to assemble in Musical Hall, of this city, on the 1st day of Feb. next, then and there to make such alterations in the existing laws of the Union as may ameliorate the evils under which the country is laboring, and thereby cause confidence to exist, both at home and abroad, in our stability and integrity.

NORTON I, Emperor of the United States.

The above was distributed to the newspapers of San Francisco, and amazingly the San Francisco Bulletin published it (as a joke, of course).  Thus began the 21 year "reign" of Norton I, Emperor of These United States and Protector of Mexico.

He began issuing decrees, chief among them being the order to dissolve the United States Congress.  It was no longer necessary to have such a thing now that there was an Emperor, of course.  He attempted to order General Winfield Scott (a real person) to kick Congress to the curb by force.

After his decree failed, he began focusing on domestic matters.  One of the more famous decrees was to issue fines of $25 for anyone who would dare "utter the abominable word 'Frisco', which has no linguistic or other warrant."  It's hard not to agree with that.  There were even a few decrees that made a lot of sense:

For all of his quirks and regardless of the precise nature of his psychological condition, Norton was on some occasions a visionary, and a number of his "Imperial Decrees" exhibited a profound foresight. Among his many edicts were instructions to form a League of Nations, and he explicitly forbade any form of discord or conflict between religions or their sects. Norton also saw fit on a number of occasions to decree the construction of a suspension bridge or tunnel connecting Oakland and San Francisco ...

In 1919, decades after his death, the League of Nations, a precursor to the UN, was formed.  As for the bridge, someone did that too.

It's one thing to be a crazy guy who decrees this and that, but it's an entirely different thing to actually be noticed, and in most cases respected, by the people of your city.  Though San Franciscans didn't believe he had any actual Imperial authority, they did nonetheless vest him with a certain respect and credibility.

It was during one of his inspections that Norton is reputed to have performed one of his most famous acts of "diplomacy." During the 1860s and 1870s, there were a number of anti-Chinese demonstrations in the poorer districts of San Francisco. Ugly riots, some resulting in fatalities, broke out on several occasions. During one such incident, Norton allegedly positioned himself between the rioters and their Chinese targets, and with a bowed head started reciting the Lord's Prayer repeatedly until the rioters dispersed without incident.

Norton was much loved and revered by the citizens of San Francisco. Although penniless, he regularly ate at the finest restaurants in San Francisco; these restaurateurs then took it upon themselves to add brass plaques in their entrances declaring "[b]y Appointment to his Imperial Majesty, Emperor Norton I of the United States." By all accounts, such "Imperial seals of approval" were much prized and a substantial boost to trade. Supposedly, no play or musical performance in San Francisco would dare to open without reserving balcony seats for Norton.

They even went so far as to honour currency he made himself as legal tender!

He collapsed and died on a sidewalk in 1880.  He was penniless, and owned little more than the clothes on his back.  Nonetheless, he was given a funeral befitting a high ranking dignitary, which was attended by an estimated 30,000 people.

The thought of someone like Emperor Norton existing today is impossible.   I can't imagine a reputable newspaper (if there is such a thing in 2010) printing a decree from a crazy man.  If anything, a person who publishes an order to forcibly dissolve the United States Congress would probably be considered a terrorist and locked up.  If Emperor Norton were alive today, he'd be a run-of-the-mill homeless man, perhaps one of the more eccentric ones, but he certainly would not be receiving special treatment.

It kind of makes me sad that we will never see anything like Emperor Norton in the modern world.  Even if you view the treatment of Norton in San Francisco as a big joke that everyone in the city was in on, it's still a positive.  He was eccentric, and probably delusional, but he represented something we sorely lack today.  He was not loved for what he looked like, where he came from, what he built, or what he owned.  The respect for Emperor Norton was genuine; it was for his words and his deeds.

Ask a Science Fiction Character: Benjamin Linus

In honour of the final season of Lost, this month's guest advice columnist is the notorious Ben Linus.  Ben has been one of the most powerful forces on The Island, and though many may disagree with his methods (or, really, everything he's ever done) you can't argue with the results ... oh wait, maybe you can argue with the results.  Anyway, I'll stop now and get on with the questions and answers.



Dear Ben,

My husband and I are embarking on a weight-loss regime not for health reasons but for our respective careers. Although we are both "festively plump," as Cartman would say, we've been able to maintain rewarding careers, and we are great networkers.

We have this sinking feeling that we'll reach a "cellulite ceiling" as our careers progress. I think I've already been passed over on a promotion because of my size-16 frame, which is illegal but still "done."

My question is this: Psychologically speaking, is it OK to focus on weight loss exclusively for our careers? Are we demented to think that we cannot succeed because of our expanded waistlines? Will we have negative repercussions? What if we don't get that bigger job? What if things stay the same but we just happen to be thinner?

- Plump and Puzzled

Dear Plump,

I'm afraid I don't have much experience with being fat, or with having a career, but I do know a great deal about gaining the respect and trust of others.  You need to forget all about your weight problems and focus on manipulating the people involved in your career.  Fear and confusion are the best tools you have.  It may be a good idea to find the person most likely to get promoted ahead of you, and publically humiliate them.  You could also try finding the one person they care about most and imply that you are going to murder them if they don't co-operate.  Of course, murdering your rival outright is always an option, but this should be your last resort, and in some cases it doesn't even work (don't get me started).  After that, it won't matter if you're fat.  Everyone will either fear you, or be too confused to object to your rise to power.

Warm regards,

Ben Linus


Dear Ben,


I mentioned to my husband that his father needed a haircut, and then (just to be funny) I mentioned that his dad's curly hair resembles his grandma's (standard older lady) 'do. So what does my husband do, but say to his dad at Sunday dinner, "Hey Dad, some people at church think you need a haircut, because you and Grandmother have the same hairdo." Then he proceeds to say it was ME. His family is fairly unbuttoned, and his mom and grandma laughed hysterically, but I think it made my father-in-law unhappy. Obviously, now I know never to say anything to my husband that I don't want repeated. But how do I apologize? (My observation was pretty accurate.)

- Hair Police

Dear Hair,

You have nothing to apologize for.  If the man needs a haircut, he should get a haircut.  You did him a favour by pointing out this obvious and correctable shortcoming to him.  I am more concerned about your husband's betrayal.  You spoke to him in confidence.  He needs to be taught a lesson.  If you don't already have a jail cell in your basement or out-building, now would be a good time to have one constructed.  I would also get started on planning ways to undermine his relationship with his family.

Best wishes,

Ben Linus


Dear Ben,

I've been married to my husband for a few years, and we lived together before that. Early in our relationship, I went to happy hour with some co-workers and due to too much alcohol, I had an indiscretion with a co-worker. (We did not consummate the act.) Afterward, I quit my job so that I would not have to deal with the fallout. I never told my then-boyfriend, now-husband, because he always said that cheating would mean he would break up with me on the spot. We are happily married and have a wonderful child; life is good. But I still feel tremendous guilt, not just over my indiscretion, but because I wonder if I "tricked" him into marrying me. Had I been honest, he might not have married me, which would make our entire marriage a sham to him. Should I tell him now so that he knows I am 100 percent honest with him? Or should I keep it to myself because it would just create jealousy and mistrust where none should exist?

- Truth Shall Set You Free?

Dear Truth,

Some secrets, such as, for example, the fact that you may or may not have murdered one or more members of your family, or the fact that the girl who thinks she's your daughter was actually stolen from a French woman, or the fact that you are not a man who crash landed in a baloon, should never be revealed.  As for the guilt, that is something you will have to find a way to cope with.  Supressing it deep within you where it transforms to hatred and cruelty is usually the best choice.

Kind regards,

Ben Linus


Dear Ben,

My boyfriend and I have been together for more than two years. This year I thought it would be wonderful to host a dinner party and have both our immediate families meet. I invited both his parents and siblings and mine. His father decided to invite his own brother (my boyfriend's uncle), who I had not planned on having. My boyfriend's uncle is fond of guns and likes to carry at least one everywhere he goes. This makes me extremely uncomfortable, and I don't even want to have this dinner party anymore. I asked my boyfriend to speak to his uncle and let him know that weapons of any kind will not be allowed into our home, but I don't think this man will listen. He displays antisocial behavior, and truthfully, he scares me. I hate the fact that he will be in my home, possibly interacting with my family. I only accepted that he was coming out of respect to my boyfriend and his father, otherwise this is not the type of individual I would ever want to have any contact with. What can I do?

- Extremely Concerned


Dear Extremely,

If this man makes you uncomfortable, it's probably because he knows you are weak and pathetic.  You should consider yourself fortunate that he hasn't killed you by now.  If he wants to come to your dinner event, you would be wise to allow it.

However, if you manage to find some courage, it's time to start planning how you will undermine him and unseat him from his position of power.  That will not be easy, so if you intend to do this, you need to prepare.  First, get some weapons of your own.  Next, you will need to recruit some allies.  The best ways to accomplish this are blackmail, lies, and emotional manipulation.  Soon you will have a small army of followers who will gladly die defending you.  This is when you set your trap.  Welcome him into your home as a friend, wait for him to get comfortable, and wait until his back is turned.  That's when you kill him.  You will have proven your strength to your followers, and to the rest of his family.  They will think twice before opposing you.

Warmest wishes,

Ben Linus




Oh ... kay ... that's all we have room for here.  Thany-you Mr. Linus.  You can go now ... far, far away.  I hope everyone isn't irreparably creeped out right now.  I promise the next guest will be a bit less, um, scary.

Oh, that's weird.  How did that photo get in here?  I ... I think I'll just keep it there.

Wikipedia Wednesday: Vancouverism

When I first moved here, I noticed that certain things were very different from what I was used to.  Buildings, in particular, were not like buildings in other cities.  There were also no freeways, or even anything resembling a freeway (Calgary only has one freeway technically speaking, but plenty of other roads that are somewhere between a freeway and a major road).

Until recently I didn't know this was a specific style of city planning.  It's called Vancouverism.

Vancouverism is an urban planning and architectural technique pioneered in Vancouver, Canada. It is characterized by mixed-use developments, typically with a medium-height, commercial base and narrow, high-rise residential towers to accommodate high populations and to preserve view corridors.  With a large residential population living in the city centre, no expressways connecting the core to the suburbs, and significant reliance on mass public transit, Vancouver is somewhat unique among large North American cities. In part, these reasons contribute to the fact that it is consistently ranked among the most livable cities in the world.  Other cities have begun to take note of the principles of Vancouverism and have begun to incorporate this approach in their own planning directions.

Basically, there are three core components of Vancouverism:

1. High-density, mixed-use developments near the city centre.
2. Mass transit instead of freeways.
3. Preservation of view corridors.

There are tons of examples of the first one.  One Wall Centre is a Sheraton hotel for the first 27 floors, a Club Intrawest Resort on the middle three floors, and condos on the top 18 floors.  A building a block from my office has a Save On Foods, a Home Depot, and several smaller shops on the bottom, a Winners/Homesense above that, and about five or six floors of condos on top.  Next door to that is a similar building featuring a Canadian Tire and a Best Buy on the lower floors.  These developments have managed to squeeze a ton of living space and retail space into two city blocks.  Back in Calgary, all of the above would occupy half a neighbourhood.

The second one is pretty evident to anyone who looks at a map of the city.  As you can see, there are definitely freeways in the Metro Vancouver area, but notice how they all either bypass Vancouver proper (Highway 1), or abruptly terminate at its border (Highway 99).  If you want to drive into downtown, you have to take the surface streets, usually Oak or Granville coming off the 99, or Hastings or 1st Avenue coming off the 1.

In the 1960's, the big trend in urban planning was to build massive freeway systems that enabled automobile traffic to drive rapidly from downtown to the suburbs.  The reasoning was that with fast roads, traffic would move quickly and efficiently.  Anyone who's driven on a freeway in rush hour traffic knows this theory turned out to be complete bull honkey.  Urban planners assumed that traffic was like a liquid; when unimpeded, it would flow freely and quickly around the city.  In reality, traffic is more like a gas; it expands to fill the space it is given.  When driving from the suburbs to downtown becomes the easiest commuting option, two things happen: more people move to the suburbs, and more people drive from the suburbs to downtown.  Humans are, above all else, greedy and lazy, and will always take the easiest and cheapest option available to them.  Thus, big freeways in the 60's quickly translated to big traffic in the 70's and beyond.

So, to whom do we owe Vancouver's lack of freeways?  In large part, the Chinese community.  In the middle of the 20th Century, a proposal to build an elevated expressway between downtown and the Second Narrows Bridge would have resulted in the demolition of large sections of Chinatown.  The local Chinese, joined by white people concerned about the issue, protested the freeway en masse.  The result: Chinatown was declared a historical district in 1971, and the freeway plan was quashed forever.  All that remain of it are the Georgia and Dunsmuir viaducts, which run the short distance from downtown to Clark Drive.  The city never again raised the issue of freeway construction.

As for the third part of Vancouverism, the prevalence of excellent sight lines should be evident to anyone who has ever visited here.  What most people are not aware of, however, is that the visibility of the North Shore Mountains is legislated.

One principle of Vancouverism involves protecting "view corridors". Vancouver's "View Protection Guidelines" were approved in 1989 and amended in 1990, establishing height limits to protect views of the North Shore Mountains. This approach, while credited with preserving the city's scenic backdrop, has been criticized for lessening visual interest and failing to represent the city's contemporary image. In response, Council commissioned a "Skyline Study" in 1997 which concluded that Vancouver's skyline would benefit from the addition of a handful of buildings exceeding current height limits, to add visual interest to Vancouver's skyline.

Basically, the criticism was that by restricting the height of downtown buildings, Council created a situation where every downtown building was roughly the same height (about 30 floors).  This made for some nice views of the mountains, but made downtown look like a huge glass and concrete monolith.

The most notable of the aforementioned handful of buildings is the moronically named Living Shangri-La.  And guess what ... it's a mixed use building!

This month, a lot of people from around the world are going to experience Vancouverism first hand.  I wonder if any of them will take the ideas created here back to their home cities.  More than likely, they will just sit stewing in traffic on Granville and wonder why the hell the freeway suddenly ended.