"The great irony of communication is that we individually struggle so
ardently to be noticed and be heard, but once that has been
accomplished, we are struck with terror and wonder at what actually was
heard."

"Whatever I may find, I must seek it here."

Eilonwy bowed her head. "You have chosen as you must, Taran of Caer Dallben."

"Nor will I gainsay you," Dallben said to Taran, "but only to warn you.  The tasks you set yourself are cruelly difficult.  There is no certainty you will accomplish even one, and much risk you will fail in all of them.  In either case, your efforts may well go unrewarded, unsung, forgotten.  And at the end, like all mortals, you must face your death; perhaps without even a mound of honor to mark your resting  place."

Taran nodded.  "So be it," he said.  "Long ago I yearned to be a hero without knowing, in truth, what a hero was.  Now, perhaps, I understand it a little better.  A grower of turnips, or a shaper of clay, a Commot farmer or a king - every man is a hero if he strives more for others tyhan for himself a lone.  "Once," he added, "you told me that the seeking counts more than the finding.  So, too, must the striving count more than the gain."

"Once, I hoped for a glorious destiny," Taran went on, smiling at his own memory.  "That dream has vanished with my childhood; and though a pleasant dream it was fit only for a child.  I am well-content as an Assistant Pig-Keeper."

A shadow of sorrow passed over Taliesin's face.  "There are those," he said gently, "who must first learn loss, despair, and grief.  Of all paths to wisdom, this is the cruelest and longest.  Are you one who must follow such a way?  This even I cannot know.  If you are, take heart nonetheless.  Those who reach the end do more than gain wisdom.  As rough wool becomes cloth, and crude clay a vessel, so do they change and fashion wisdom for others, and what they give back is greater than what they won."

All the art of living
lies in a fine mingling
of letting go and holding on.
-Henry Ellis

In an effort to increase global eccentricity, I will now take questions and answer them to the best of my ability.  If you push the right buttons, you might even squeeze an Albanism out of me.  Although I don't plan on excluding any questions, I will mention that my "expertise" lies in the following:

Batman
Spelling (not to be confused with Tori Spelling, who just had a baby)
Baseball
Physics (limited to engineering, and limited to mechanics)
Jo Momma
Chinese cooking
Pharmaceutical Automation
Nintendo
Being devil's advocate

Your question does not have to refer to the above categories, I just figured I'll throw them out there.

Have at it.

Excellent question.  The British are geographically undefined.  They have no real home of their own.  One can be British whether s/he is living in Australia, China or the Death Star.  What defines the british is their culture.  Since this is their only source of identity, they are very protective of their culture. To do so, they hold on to the three pillars of British Tradition - Tea (which they technically stole from India), Accent, and Inbreeding.  Without these things, British culture would not survive, period.  Having just two of the three is insufficient.  Without the third, Britons lose their British status (Membership is revoked upon discovery).  Because they hold onto this tradition so tightly, Grand Moff Tarkin can maintain his British accent despite living in a galaxy far, far away.

On that note, it is also important to remember that Grand Moff Tarkin lived a long time ago.  It is narrowly speculated that the historical records of his life predates even the British empire, leading some to suspect that the high officers of the Empire may have been the original founders of Britain.  King Arther may actually have been a sith.  Excaliber, may have been a light saber.  And the lady of the lake could have been none other than Lady Lumiya.  Theories of how this could have happened abound.  More research is being conducted as we speak.

If you're asking about how much is too much [to use in Chinese cooking], then I would say that Chinese cooking doesn't use MSG.  Sure, you may think that what you get at the takeout place is chinese, but it isn't (Capital C) Chinese.  It is an inferior form of Chinese that borders on being Japanese.  No, if you want to make real Chinese food, I would not add MSG as a standalone additive to whatever you are making.  Using premade sauces that has MSG in it is somewhat debatable, depending on the quality and the manufacturer of the sauce.  If you purchase any premade sauces made by Lee Kum Kee and use them in your cooking, this is acceptable.  If you purchase any premade sauces from any company that looks suspiciously western (especially british), I would not try it.  Not only will it spoil your food, it will also infect your soul.

If you're asking about how much is too much [for your health], then I would direct you to Wikipedia, a bastion of exotic and uncited information.  According to wikipedia, "the FDA has classified MSG as a 'generally recognised as safe,' or GRAS, substance." It also goes on to explain that "MSG could spike blookd plasma levels of glutamate" and that "high levels of glutamic acid caused damage to the brains of infant mice."  There is much debate surrounding whether or not this is a problem for humans.

What is known is that MSG is a form of salt.  And salt, as we know, is good for the heart.  Just kidding.  We Chinese love our salts, much more than we love our sweets.  There is a reason why Chinese people suffer from so much heart disease - our love of salt is killing us.  The best and safest course of action is to avoid MSG if it is unnecessary.  Don't add it to your food as a standalone additive.  If it comes in a sauce from a reputable company, it is acceptable, but do not overuse it.  And if you're a big fan of the ramen noodles, consider halving the soup package, or abstain from drinking all of the soup.  Too much salt in any form is not good for you.

This message is from the National Alban Health Association (NA HA!)

Disclaimer:  Some of my answers to these questions employs the use of subtle humor disguised as racist attacks.  They do not represent the beliefs and opinions of Alban Inc.  They are for entertainment purposes only.  Use of racist statements, while effectively funny in the right venue, can also be very offensive when it is misunderstood.  Be careful not to make racist comments when talking with your friends, especially in public.  Also, I do not hate the british.

The most underrated Nintendo game (cartridge)?  I think one of the best games I played on the original Nintendo was Bubble Bobble.  You can play it two players and it is my earliest memory of multiplayer fun.  My friend Jason brought it over to my house one time, and the first time we played it, we went so long that my head hurt afterwards.  I don't remember how long we actually played, but it was a marathon and definitely a first.  It's a bit of a puzzle game and was very difficult.  It's hard to explain well, but I suppose you can look up information on it here.  We made it up to level 98 (out of 100) on that day, and we were never able to get that high again.

The best Nintendo package/cartridge has got to be the original Zelda.  I still remember when I first opened it up, totally expecting a grey cartridge.  Instead, I found a shimmering golden idol, commanding my awe.  It was beautiful then.  It is still beautiful now. 

Posted 3/23/2007 2:42 PM by ChrisRusso

Disclaimer:  if you ask a geeky question, you're going to get a geeky answer.

I would like to preface my answer to this question with the tagline from the movie Aliens Vs. Predator (which, coincidentaly, has a direct to video sequel, starring the younger sister of our mutual friend),

Having said that, here's how I think the fight will go down.

It's a steel cage match.  No holds barred.  10 rounds.  Fight to the death.

The fight begins with a staredown.  Chuck Norris shoots fire beams out of his eyes, while Jack Bauer bends over and shoots lightning out of his arse.  The two beams meet in the middle and create a cacophony of synergy and explosions.  The fireworks go on for half an hour, while the crowd enjoys the show, with no side gaining a clear advantage.  Just then, Bauer sees his zombiefied ex-wife in the audience, and is so filled with rage, he tears out one of his ribs and spears her right  through the heart, ending her undead life.  As he leaps in triumph, Chuck Norris takes advantage of his momentary lapse of focus and shoots his fire beams to the now bleeding abdomen of Bauer.  This plan backfires, however, as blood erupts from Bauer's chest like a Disney fountain and rains all over Norris, burning his face.  Norris is temporarily blinded by this acidic blood, which allows Bauer to maneuver behind Norris to perform the classic, "neck-snap from behind move."  Norris senses that he is in mortal danger, and flexes his biceps, causing them to explode. 

Out of his right arm flies out the Texas Rangers, dressed in cowboy gear, with guns a blazing.  Out of his left arm flies out the Texas Rangers, led by none other than Sammy "No hablo ingles" Sosa, who is duel-wielding a baseball bat and a pulled pork sandwich.  The collective Rangers commence to beat on Bauer, backing him into the corner of the cage.  Bats, bullets and BBQ sauce are flying everywhere.  At the opposite corner of the ring, Norris watches with glee.  Suddenly, Bauer explodes out of the dog pile, sending Rangers flying everywhere.  He opens his mouth, and out comes the four Horsemen of Apocalypse, armed with shoulder mounted missile launchers that shoot exploding lightsabers.  They charge in to do battle with the Texas Rangers. 

Bauer looks up at Norris, as a wry smirk crosses both their faces.  They observe this battle with mild interest until Famine touches Sammy Sosa, reducing him to a form so gaunt he makes Urkel look big.  This enrages Norris, who now explains that Sosa was his training partner when he was tutored under Master Roshi.  Grieved by his death, Norris reaches deep down into his soul to find the core of his strength that he has never discovered before.  He grasps this strength with his mind and begins to pull it out of his core, greatly increasing his power as he does so.  14 episodes later, with uninteresting backstory filling in, we come back to Norris who is now powered up to Super Saiyan 3.  With his ankle length golden hair now whipping around his body, he rises up into the air, drains the power of the sun and creates a concentrated spirit bomb the size of a small moon.  Maniacal laughter escapes his lips as he hurls it down at Bauer.  Bauer, mysteriously choosing not to dodge the spirit bomb, decides to stand and take it like a man.  He grips it in both hands, laughing maniacally himself as he attempts to control its power, even as it melts the skin off his face and hands.  After a few tense moments, he blinks, and the spirit bomb explodes, shattering the earth into a million pieces.  Bauer and Norris are propelled by this explosion in opposite directions, travelling a thousand light years before they even regain control of their trajectory.  For the next thousand millenia, they hunt each other throughout the universe, destroying all known life forms that stand in their path.

bubble bobble is not underrated. just about everyone i know
acknowledges it as awesome. the most underrated NES game would have to
be Burger Time. Climbing ladders, avoiding hot dogs, onions and
pickles, and making giant hamburgers to complete levels, its
Ham-tastic! also when i mention it, people say, "huh? whats that? never
heard of it" securing its underrated status.

Posted 3/24/2007 9:28 AM by ChrisTheMagnif -

Bubble Bobble is underrated because it is hardly remembered in normal conversation and is never talked about anymore.  The fact that people remember it when it is mentioned is a testament to its goodness.  Hamburger Time was undoubtedly a great game as well.  It just doesn't have the same appeal and longevity as bubble bobble. 

Posted 3/24/2007 9:30 AM by ChrisTheMagnif

Have you ever heard the phrase, "I laughed so hard I peed my pants?"  Well, here's a newsflash for you:

Angels don't wear pants.

But, on the bright side, angel pee is not the same as human pee.  Angels eat from the tree of life, and therefore, their pee still has excellent nutritional value.  This is the real reason why scientists say, "Where there is water, there is life."  Without angel pee, the earth would be a dead and desolate place. 

I will let you figure out where manna from heaven comes from.

Posted 3/24/2007 10:39 AM by eusisms

Who was the hot date I took to my high school prom?
1)  No one.
2)  Becky Pizzatola
3)  Tamara Strete
4)  Jo Momma

(Jo momma is just a "your mom" joke.)

Yes, we use Lee Kum Kee over here.  In the world of Chinese sauces, they are Microsoft and I am Apple.

Posted 3/25/2007 11:37 PM by KalynALaMode

Envy implies that there is something about you or your possessions that is somehow desirable to me.  Let me make this clear as pie, there is nothing about you, your outdated computer box, or your odiferous bodily chemical weapons that I envy in the slightest.  Thank you.

Posted 3/27/2007 10:51 PM by guatz

It's spelled judgment.  What happened to the "e?"  Jack Bauer shot it through the i and said to the remaining e, "U better run, little one.  Run and tell all of your vowel friends that their time is up.  The next time I see you, you'll be full of o's and Jo Mama will be screaming 'a'."  And as that little e ran away, Jack said to himself,  "Jack Bauer doesn't need vowels, he wills things into existence by his thoughts alone."

What 5 games and why would you include in the videogame canon?Posted 3/28/2007 12:44 PM by ShadesChild

Honestly, I can only comment on Nintendo at this time.  To expand it to all games would be quite a massive undertaking and require a lot more thought.  With that honest remark in place, I can go on to dishonestly claim that no other gaming system matters.  Nintendo revolutionized video games, and they continue to do so today.  If any games belong in Canon, they must have come from Nintendo - I mean that as a statement, not a rule.

Tetris - There is no greater puzzle game that has ever won the hearts of millions of people.  Tetris is solely reponsible for the monster grip the Gameboy has on the hand held portables marketshare today.  Although many other games have been made for the game boy since, those software designers would not have made an effort to make games for the gameboy had it not been for the prevaling presence of gameboys in millions of homes.

Super Mario Brothers 3 - Super Mario is classic, but it also came with every Nintendo.  Super Mario 2 was really fun, but also queer.  It was an experiment, a departure from the original, and in my opinion, it does not represent the Mario brothers series.  Super Mario 3 is what really cemented the Mario franchise and continues to be considered one of the best mario games today.

The Legend of Zelda - Introduced action adventure RPG in a big way.  I don't recall anything like it before Zelda.  Sure, there were RPGs, like Dragon Warrior, and I believe Final Fantasy had not made it to the US at this point, but they weren't the same as Zelda.  The text based battles of Dragon Warrior, and the randomly assigned damages through FF battles were nothing more than simulated tabletop RPGs battles with a GUI.  Zelda required hand-eye coordination and motor dexterity skills.  It separated itself from the pack by role playing a character and simultaneously demanding physical skills.  It also introduced groundbreaking technological advances, including a vast world, open ended gameplay, scrolling capabilities, and an autosave system.
N.B. Some of this was plagiarized from the Zelda wikipedia entry. 

Contra - The first multi-player, side-scrolling shooter that did everything right.  To this day, shooter games still borrow from the elements introduced in Contra (1 hit kills, spread guns, laser guns, weak spots on enemies, etc.)  I still even remember the code that will allow you to start of the game with 99 lives (up, up, down, down, left, right, left, right, B, A, select, start.)  This practice of having a built-in game cheat may not have begun with Contra, but Contra forced videogamers to develop memory skills like never before.

Metroid - Metroid was groundbreaking in that it was a nonlinear game.  The player would start off with very little capabilities, but grow stronger through powerups throughout the game.  With the powerups, the player could go back to explore areas that previously were unreachable.  This greatly increased replayability and played on a person's sense of nostalgia.  Metroid was also a leader by employing a female protagonist during an era when the protagonist was almost always men.  It also was the first to use passwords to save and restore games.

Now, if I were to just list 5 games that revolutionized gaming, I would probably have to go with the following 5:

Super Mario Brothers - Side scrolling platformer.
Mario 64 - Pioneered 3D gaming.  Games have never been the same again.
Metal Gear Solid - Led the onslaught of stealth games, such as Tenchu, other Metal Gears, and Splinter Cell.  Also turned games into a cinematic experience.
Castle Wolfenstein - Grandfather of all first person shooters.
Warcraft 2 - It's not a console game, but it really got the ball rolling for RTS games.

Of course, this is all debatable, but it's 1:43 in the AM, and I am tired.  Dispute if you must, but rest in the knowledge that you are wrong.

...Blessed be the name of the Lord.

The greatest need of the human heart is the need for love - to be loved, and to be free to love others.  Receiving and giving love are the hallmarks of our humanity.  In order to be whole as human beings, we must be able to receive and release love.

What is love?  Many definitions can be made, but I suggest one that involves giving to someone beyond what one is getting in return.  Love involves giving beyond oneself - it means putting another's need ahead of one's own.  Love is the freedom to see beyond oneself in order to behold another, not as an object of personal need, but as one worth of love.

If we are honest, most of us have defined love in terms of our own need.  We give to others based on what we perceive we will get from them.  If another offers us attention or significance or pleasure of whatever kind, we will give in order to get what we need.  Our commitment to care is deceptive.  The appearance of intense and impassioned love may actually be an effort to ensure that what we need isn't taken from us.  What motivates us?  Perhaps our need for love is greater than our freedom to love.

Another definition claims that: "Love is patient, kind, doesn't envy or boast, is not proud.  It is not rude, it is not self-seeking, it is not easily angered, it keeps no record of wrongs. Love does not delight in evil but rejoices with the truth.  It always protects, always trusts, always hopes, always perseveres.  Love never fails..." (1 Cor 13:4-8).

Many of us would admit that our love for others doesn't exactly mirror the above definition.  If anything, we become impatient, unkind, self-seeking and angry when our sources of love and security are threatened.

And they often are.  If honest, we must admit that human sources of love readily disappoint us.  Contrary to the biblical version, "love" fails us as frequently as it delivers, be it from a friend, a parent, a pastor, a spouse, a lover, an employer, a brother, or a sister.  By "failure," I mean that no one loves us perfectly; no one individual can bear the weight of our need for love.  As we become aware of the other's limited humanity, the illusion of love burns off.  We see our noble pursuit of "Love" has been little more than a vain attempt to find security.  And we are left alone to face our brokenness.

That is often the beginning of love's freedom.  Alone, we long for a love that is deeper and truer than what mere humans can offer us.  "What a (wo)man desires is unfailing love" (Proverbs 19:22).

--Andrew Commiskey, Cross Current booklet, pg 1.  Emphasis mine.

Today was the first night of Cross Currents.  It's an 8 week program at my church.  I went through it the last time is was available in November, and it was an experience I will keep with me for a long, long time.  I was asked to be an assistant leader for this time around, and I am honored to have that opportunity.  When I heard the men in my small group share their testimonies tonight, I couldn't help but feel a little overwhelmed and underequipped.  I am the youngest guy in the group.  I am the only one unmarried.  And these guys barely know me.  And yet, here they were sharing their life stories with me.  Amazing.

It's going to be a good golly miss molly of an 8 week ride.

I picked up Thomas Merton again.  I skipped a couple of chapters, and went to ascetism.  It seemed appropiate at the time.

"Nothing that we consider evil can be offered to God in sacrifice.  Therefore, to renounce life in disgust is no sacrifice.  We give Him the best we have, in order to declare that He is infinitely better.  We give Him all that we prize, in order to assure Him that He is more to us than our "all."  One of the chief tasks of Christian asceticism is to make our life and our body valuable enough to be offered to God in sacrifice.

Our asceticism is not supposed to make us weary of a life that is vile.  It is not supposed to make our bodies, which are good, appear to us to be evil.  It is not supposed to make us odious to ourselves.  An asceticism that makes all pleasure seem gross and disgusting and all the activities of the flesh abominable is a perversion of the nature which God made good and which even sin has not succeeded in rendering totally vile.

The real purpose of asceticism is to disclose the difference between the evil use of created things, which is sin, and their good use, which is virtue.  It is true that our self-denial teaches us to realize that sin, which appears to be good from a certain point of view, is really evil.  But self-denial should not make us forget the essential distinction between sin, which is a negation, and pleasure, which is a positive good.  In fact, it should make that distinction clearly known.  True asceticism shows us that there is no necessary connection between sin and pleasure: that there can be sins that seek no pleasure, and other sins that find none.

Pleasure, which is good, has more to do with virtue than it has with sin.  The virtue that is sufficiently resolute to pay the price of self-denial will eventually taste greater pleasure in the things it has renounced than could ever be enjoyed by the sinner who clings to those same things as desperately as if they were his god.

We must, therefore, gain possession of ourselves, by asceticism, in order that we may be able to give ourselves to God.  No inspiration of the Spirit of God will ever move us to cast off the body as if it were evil, or to destroy its faculties as if they were implacable enemies of God and could never be educated to obey His grace.  He Who made our flesh and gave it to our spirit as its servant and companion, will not be pleased by a sacrifice i n which the flesh is murdered by the spirit and returned to Him in ruin.

...

For no man can become a saint merely by hating himself.  Sanctity is the exact opposite of suicide."

 

Regarding my last entry, that meeting did not happen.  He has been unavailable ever since.  I will continue to keep an eye out for him.  However, I was able to meet with someone else that night.  It was a good talk, and I had thought that we made good progress - he agreed with me to come to men's group - but on the night I was supposed to pick him up to attend, he emailed me and told me he had decided to play soccer instead.  I was pretty heartbroken, knowing that this brother needed to go to men's group, and that the spiritual opposition to his growth was so strong.  But I know that my God is greater than he who opposes us, and therefore, I am pacified and committed to simply pray more.

The Esplanade at night in Singapore.  See it at sunset here.

I have said before that "beauty is meant to be shared."  My compulsion to share beauty is so strong and irresistable that I sometimes wonder if there is a basic, fundamental quality of beauty that necessitates that it be shared.  I also wonder, without biblical or theological foundation, if a small part of God's desire to create man was so that He could share love and beauty with someone other than himself, so that there would be a greater (as in more, not better), aggregate joy.  I can't help but feel that this is the case, even if the sharing of love and beauty was only a side thought in the creation of man.

The sudden resurgence of this line of thought can be attributed to a xanga site that I subscribe to.  The xanga-er periodically posts up a picture (or more) followed by a quote.  Nothing more, nothing less.  It is simplistic in format, but the format accentuates the significance of what is being posted.  The simplicity of the post allows me to appreciate the beauty of the pictures and the beauty of the quote associated with it.  I sit back and wonder every time it is updated.  NaraeKim.  Be sure to hit "next 5" at least 3 or 4 times to get a broader glimpse to the depth of the posts.

I feel that more often than not, we lose sight of beauty in this world because we forgo the simple things.  People are looking to increasingly complex plans, devices and ideas to excite them - and they are not wrong in doing so; there is as much beauty to be found in complexity as there is in simplicity.  I only want to point out that many people are becoming so fixated on the complex that we forget the simple.

I am guilty of it myself.  Oftentimes at night, I catch myself stunned at the beauty of the night sky, and then subsequently wondering how long it's been since I last took time to admire the beauty of the stars and the heavens (being in "sunny" Binghamton doesn't really help either, since it's almost always overcast.)  But some things are hard to miss.  Every time the sun sets, I try to peek out the hallway window to see what colors will be revealed that day.  Whenever I go hiking with Russo, I almost always stop at a babbling brook just to listen to what it is babbling about.  Just last Friday, I had the opportunity to go to a live orchestral performance.  I had forgotten how beautiful that music is.  At the end of the night, my shoulders were sore from all the applause I had given.  (I'll leave it to you to decide if this was indicative of the quality of the performance or the quality of my health.)

I think there is great beauty in simplicity.  The same part of my brain that enjoys the perfect, still surface of a lake also enjoys the beauty of a modestly dressed woman.  It is also the same part of me that enjoys a Wii (as opposed to an Xbox 360 or PS3), or organizing a "dumpling night," where everyone sits around the table making dumplings by hand and telling stories.  Absolutely, I believe that less can sometimes be more.

I once commented to a friend on her xanga entries.  They were short, but the meaning behind the words she chose reached far beyond the screen.  She called it "compact brilliance."  I called it amazing.  The subtleties of her language and expressions spoke so much deeper and more personally to me than a more verbose entry of similar content ever would.  Oftentimes, I sit here at the beginning of a xanga entry, trying to emulate the same artistry that she composes in her writing, only to be frustrated by my lack of talent.  I suppose a lot of my xanga entries fall to the wayside because I am unable to find the words.  This entry on sharing beauty, for instance, has been in production for almost a year now.  I am relieved that it is finally seeing the light of day, though it is nowhere near the quality of beauty that I had hoped for in my head.

I think that last paragraph should be categorised as an aside.  I had more to say, but I must have forgotten it all.  Hope you all have a wonderful day.

I just completed a 150 question modesty survey over the weekend.  Their goal, I believe, is to facilitate dialogue between men and women regarding modesty and what can be stumbling blocks to men.  The majority of the questions asked in this survey had to do with clothing, jewelry and makeup, with only two or three questions asking about posture and poses.

My discussion question for today is, how important is modesty to you?  What do you consider to be modest or immodest?  Is modesty relevant to society anymore?  Lastly, how does modesty apply to men and women today?

In related news: Go see ChrisRusso's 4th annual romance debate.
In somewhat related news: Greekphysique is blasting eharmony regarding potentially immoral advertising promises and the dangers implicit in looking to an online dating service to solve the "I'm single" problem.
In totally unrelated news: I decided, on a whim, to learn how to use my left hand. That is, I am practicing to become ambiguous.