I recently received a Facebook friend request from Iosif Vissarionovič Džugašvili Stalin.
Yes, I'm aware: alter egos are proliferating on FB; it's become a miniature version of the Internet with trolls and even viruses running amok. Everybody can have a second joke profile, it seems.
Still, who knows? Maybe it WAS Stalin. People come back. The rumour in this case was that the Iosif Stalin page was created by a bunch of Italian students. And, you may know what happened in one of Umberto Eco's novels -- a bunch of academic types fed a hodge-podge of classic conspiracy theories into a computer...and they became true.
So my first reaction was to become frightened. Besides killing 40 million in a detached, banal manner, this guy probably started the whole tradition of polonium ingestion and brutality that persists to this day in Russia. He's the kind of guy who's not smart enough to invent a gas chamber but will get envious when he hears someone else has done it and takes it out on everyone around him -- before maybe stealing the gas chamber for his own use.
I checked Stalin's page. Yup, born in 1953. Information on secondary school attended. A pretty avuncular looking official portrait as his profile pic, exactly what Stalin would choose. the silly moustache, the hair that has coincidentally always struck me as Reaganesque (sorry, Reagan), the trick of the eyebrows and creases making the eyes appear halfway intelligent. Not much "progress" in the FB profile sense of the word.
I checked the names of his 12 friends. The names (Strauss, Fusfus) sounded like a pack of fellow travellers and existentialist professors.
My next reaction was to get angry. A friend request from Stalin - how dare he? It had that "my-reputation-precedes-me" air of many a FB friend request and didn't even include a personal message. Here's this guy who slaughters hundreds of thousands of my countrymen by proxy, and now wants to be my FB friend in his afterlife -- without so much as an apology or an explanation about how he found Jesus or something. Maybe we're too connected these days; Stalin couldn't be that obtuse or brazen as to approach an Estonian with a request, could he?
I went to the Friend notifications and saw that there was no "Decline" button. There was only an "accept" and "ignore". It would have to do. I "ignored" him. I nearly broke my mouse ignoring him. It was like Eli Roth in Inglourious Basterds, the guy with the baseball bat. I went into a frenzy of total disregard for Stalin.
**
I had second thoughts about my slaying of Stalin. After all, I was a believer in "there is nothing to fear but fear itself" -- and I don't think highly of revenge as a concept, either.
Of course, an online "friendship" with Stalin would have been hard to explain away to most of my contacts. But everybody's got one black sheep among their FB friends -- it's one of the first rules of Facebook. (Stalin would stretch the definition, admittedly.)
It would have given me access to post on Stalin's wall. I could write whatever popped into my mind, things like "hey, bro, last weekend was cool, we got to do Ukrainian mixed grill again".
I could upload Picasso's portrait of Stalin and tag Stalin in it, just to pester Stalin.
And of course, I could expose Stalin in the ultimate way, by suggesting Hitler to Stalin as a Facebook friend. That would be the big question: a possible online reconciliation with Hitler. Smart money is that four little years (1941-1945) and another 20 million are no impediment. It doesn't change the fact that, for Stalin, Hitler was role model and maybe even the love of his life. Stalin would accept Hitler's invitation in a heartbeat.
I searched Facebook for Hitler. But Hitler wasn't on Facebook! Other than a viral clip of Bruno Ganz playing Hitler as fake funny subtitles flashed. How unfair. Stalin had a fan page -- obviously there long before his profile -- with thousands of fans. "Other Public Figure." But no such page for Hitler. And no profile page. Was there a FB ban on Hitler pages or something? I Googled Hitler in Facebook. No, nothing on a ban, as far as I could see.
This wasn't fair to Stalin. Stalin could be friends with Idi Amin, Enver Hoxha and Mao, but not Hitler? Not that I cared about what was fair to Stalin, but if he wasn't able to consummate his deadly embrace with Hitler in cyberspace, the results could be catastrophic!
I entertained the explanation that the Hitler profile page and fan page must have been relegated to some special closed section of Facebook. Stalin's page should be there, too.
So I reported the Stalin page as miscategorized.
Then I got angry that I had merely reported the page as miscategorized. Stalin deserved worse.
So I reported him again on general principle for inciting hatred.
Just in case it was a fake page, I reported it as a fake page.
I had now reported Stalin three times to FB.
**
My friend says I did a bad thing, something that could get the Italian undergrads in trouble with Facebook. My friend says Stalin should be allowed to have a page, so people can mock him. I understand his logic. But what I did is the only way to beat him back underground. People had to wait over 70 years - way too long - for him to finally die, and it's way too dangerous to let him start going viral like this.
Stalin isn't the Comte de Germain or Cagliostro, folks. He's Stalin. You don't want Stalin living for hundreds of years in cyberspace, or bad things will eventually begin to happen. Maybe even to your personal data. Trust me on this.
So if you see Stalin on the social networks in a way that's clearly not like Bruno Ganz in that Hitler clip (i.e. funny) or historical, report him as inappropriate. Let's see if we can beat him down.
Saturday, February 6, 2010
Tuesday, January 26, 2010
City of Good Food guest blog exclusive coming up; Ilves legacy speech
When Obama was inaugurated, Tartu blogger Mingus offered hope and couscous at his home -- sort of a gesture of goodwill from one president to another, you might say.
What does Mingus preside over? Well, many things, but chiefly the state of food criticism in Tartu. There are only really about two rites of passage in Estonian culinary life. One is being "outed" by your friends to the magazine Oma Maitse, who send a crack team of writers and photographers to your home to sample your cooking. And for food professionals, there's getting your restaurant or kiosk reviewed in City of Good Food.
Last weekend, I finally had a chance to do the one thing better than accompanying Mingus on his weekly beat, and that was eating couscous (and many other things) in Tartu at Mingus's place with his family. The idea was to incorporate these traditions by reviewing Chez Mingus...au Mingus, except without the photographs. Stay tuned for the result -- on Mingus's blog. All I can say for now is that hope may now be a scarce commodity in January 2010, but if there's one thing that might rekindle it, it could be that lemon and green olive couscous.
**
While waiting for Obama's big announcement about the iTablet, we recently got a surprise here in Estonia. Estonian President Toomas Hendrik held forth for close to 4,000 words of his own at a media conference. Entitled "Quis custodiet ipsos custodes?" and taking the form of a dialectic with himself, it had all the trappings of a "legacy" speech, something for the presidential library perhaps, notwithstanding the fact that the president told everyone at the beginning to take the bulk of his comments as those of an ordinary (if slightly more demanding) citizen and media consumer.
The topic was democracy and the free press and trust in democratic institutions, but basically it was a hour-long tongue-lashing of the press for losing sight of what (to Ilves and a posse of media theorists from different eras) should be their proper role. Apparently media should not be absolutely free after all, but should be engaged in an intricate dance with the government with its own ritualistic rules. I've never been fond of such an approach; it seems like statism. For me, the media IS the watchdog. And "who will watch the watchmen?" can ultimately be answered in four words, not 4,000: "You and me both."
In any case, given that Postimees dutifully published Ilves's words unabridged in the opinion section (they spilled over on to the next page, almost bumping the other columnists), I'd say his own institution is safe for now. Whether Ilves's re-election is safe is another story.
But to be fair, you have to read between the president's lines. Somehow, even though all of the local geopolitical winds seem to be blowing in the right direction (the euro, NATO contingency), and even "gas supply and payment problems" have not emerged in the coldest winter in 20 years, there's a sense of danger building. Russia is gearing up for a propaganda offensive. Ukraine has somehow been stolen back, in broad daylight, with none of us even sleeping. It's similar to the way Latvia is still majority Latvian and people there are gloomy about whether the future of the language and the nation is that iron-clad. Although Ilves closed by warning that a homegrown dictator like Päts might take over if the press doesn't get its act together and behave more judiciously -- Päts often seems like the #1 bogeyman -- "Russia resurgent" was never far from his mind. It's like that Siberian high pressure system that has brought a big chill to Estonia for most of this month. No one is quite sure what makes it possible; you can only see a couple days ahead. Nothing is safe, and our own funnymen and critics can be our own downfall.
And after initially put off by the thought of a 4,000-word speech (OK, presentation) I actually found myself liking the fact that we have an eloquent president worthy of Lennart Meri, who is not below quoting Juvenal but is not above explaining what the quotations mean -- in Estonia's case.
What does Mingus preside over? Well, many things, but chiefly the state of food criticism in Tartu. There are only really about two rites of passage in Estonian culinary life. One is being "outed" by your friends to the magazine Oma Maitse, who send a crack team of writers and photographers to your home to sample your cooking. And for food professionals, there's getting your restaurant or kiosk reviewed in City of Good Food.
Last weekend, I finally had a chance to do the one thing better than accompanying Mingus on his weekly beat, and that was eating couscous (and many other things) in Tartu at Mingus's place with his family. The idea was to incorporate these traditions by reviewing Chez Mingus...au Mingus, except without the photographs. Stay tuned for the result -- on Mingus's blog. All I can say for now is that hope may now be a scarce commodity in January 2010, but if there's one thing that might rekindle it, it could be that lemon and green olive couscous.
**
While waiting for Obama's big announcement about the iTablet, we recently got a surprise here in Estonia. Estonian President Toomas Hendrik held forth for close to 4,000 words of his own at a media conference. Entitled "Quis custodiet ipsos custodes?" and taking the form of a dialectic with himself, it had all the trappings of a "legacy" speech, something for the presidential library perhaps, notwithstanding the fact that the president told everyone at the beginning to take the bulk of his comments as those of an ordinary (if slightly more demanding) citizen and media consumer.
The topic was democracy and the free press and trust in democratic institutions, but basically it was a hour-long tongue-lashing of the press for losing sight of what (to Ilves and a posse of media theorists from different eras) should be their proper role. Apparently media should not be absolutely free after all, but should be engaged in an intricate dance with the government with its own ritualistic rules. I've never been fond of such an approach; it seems like statism. For me, the media IS the watchdog. And "who will watch the watchmen?" can ultimately be answered in four words, not 4,000: "You and me both."
In any case, given that Postimees dutifully published Ilves's words unabridged in the opinion section (they spilled over on to the next page, almost bumping the other columnists), I'd say his own institution is safe for now. Whether Ilves's re-election is safe is another story.
But to be fair, you have to read between the president's lines. Somehow, even though all of the local geopolitical winds seem to be blowing in the right direction (the euro, NATO contingency), and even "gas supply and payment problems" have not emerged in the coldest winter in 20 years, there's a sense of danger building. Russia is gearing up for a propaganda offensive. Ukraine has somehow been stolen back, in broad daylight, with none of us even sleeping. It's similar to the way Latvia is still majority Latvian and people there are gloomy about whether the future of the language and the nation is that iron-clad. Although Ilves closed by warning that a homegrown dictator like Päts might take over if the press doesn't get its act together and behave more judiciously -- Päts often seems like the #1 bogeyman -- "Russia resurgent" was never far from his mind. It's like that Siberian high pressure system that has brought a big chill to Estonia for most of this month. No one is quite sure what makes it possible; you can only see a couple days ahead. Nothing is safe, and our own funnymen and critics can be our own downfall.
And after initially put off by the thought of a 4,000-word speech (OK, presentation) I actually found myself liking the fact that we have an eloquent president worthy of Lennart Meri, who is not below quoting Juvenal but is not above explaining what the quotations mean -- in Estonia's case.
Monday, January 18, 2010
DECONSTRUCTION: Hating
This week, many articles were published in the liberal or mainstream press to enlighten people about the fact that Haitian history may just be a little more complex than Toussaint L'Ouverture standing at a crossroads in a Jacobin mask with a guitar and making a deal with the devil, then the devil coming up from hell seven generations later. Well, that's the jazzed-up version of Pat Robertson's theory -- I can't bring myself to quote his ravings directly. It begs to be melded with Marley, Delta blues and Haile Selassie into a silly musical. What is irredeemable is that apparently Robertson thinks the Haitians should have rendered unto Napoleon what was Napoleon's and accepted their lot to live and die as slaves.
The problem (with a few exceptions) is that so many of the pieces that set the record straight are offensive or patronizing in their own way. This suggests that people like Pat Robertson are indirectly more dangerous than their racist pulp fictions. They serve as an advance diversion, drawing off the most energetic liberal protests. Then the smoke clears, but the emphasis is still not in the right places.
Not if pieces like this are any indication. "So, how'd Haiti get to be so poor?". Even the subheading is wrong-headed. "Once France’s richest colonial possession, earthquake-hit Haiti is one of the poorest countries in the world." It is not even remotely relevant in this context to say that Haiti was rich or thriving. The French stuffed the place full of slaves like they were force-feeding one of their geese. They imported African slaves and ran an agricultural sweatshop under brutal conditions. There is no economic comparability here; it is as appalling as the notion that if you are not paying workers salaries or providing for them that your enterprise is more profitable or successful. To say this was Haiti Fleuri, even in a headline, is just wrong.
Next, we are told, things got off "to a bad start" -- now who could have imagined? -- after these slaves decided that they would rather be treated as human beings. Immediately we are told of the revolution's reactionary excesses: "Dessalines's rule was short, violent and populist."
We then are told "a nation forged by a slave revolt set a terrible precedent in a world heavily dependent on slave labour and France persuaded Spain and the US to join it in an economic embargo." Fair enough. But "terrible"? Maybe "unwelcome". In any case, for the most part there generally WAStrade between the US and Haiti, but what really is significant is that the US failed to recognize Haiti politically for 60 years. Even Thomas Jefferson, one of the more decent Founding Fathers (apart from his own personal failings) refused. Ouch.
The American occupation in the 20th century gets awfully short shrift, except for that "a period of stability followed". As it always does, including in Iraq. Oh, and "the introduction of chain-gangs to improve the country's infrastructure was deeply unpopular in a country founded by slaves." Oh really? You think?
Then of course the classic post-colonialist pattern. The local Batista/Pinochet/Saddam takes over over - Duvalier. Yes, he had the Americans' blessing, the article says. But this is nothing new or scandalous.
Finally, in a separate section, we are told that deforestation is rampant. Oddly, this is not tied in with the chronological narrative, leaving open the question of where oh where this deforestation could possibly come from. Global warming? Actually, it all kicked off with the artificial overpopulation introduced by the French in the slavery era and snowballed.
Of course, no article about Haiti would be complete without a reference to voudou, the evil religion. Not like Santeria or other forms of syncretism in the region, which are more palatable. Or Carnival in Rio - hey, good times! Even David Brooks of the NYT declared that it spreads a message that "life is capricious and planning futile." What else can we add? People are more temperamental and lazy the farther south you go. Catholicism makes people passive while not being sure if they're saved or damned makes people work harder. Correlation or causation?
Of course, the Haitians are damned if they do and damned if they don't. They stage the world's first successful rebellion against old white males, half a century before Liberia, and they're accused of not being passive enough. But if they are realistic about the duplicitous nature of foreign involvement, then they are accused of thinking that life is capricious and futile.
The problem (with a few exceptions) is that so many of the pieces that set the record straight are offensive or patronizing in their own way. This suggests that people like Pat Robertson are indirectly more dangerous than their racist pulp fictions. They serve as an advance diversion, drawing off the most energetic liberal protests. Then the smoke clears, but the emphasis is still not in the right places.
Not if pieces like this are any indication. "So, how'd Haiti get to be so poor?". Even the subheading is wrong-headed. "Once France’s richest colonial possession, earthquake-hit Haiti is one of the poorest countries in the world." It is not even remotely relevant in this context to say that Haiti was rich or thriving. The French stuffed the place full of slaves like they were force-feeding one of their geese. They imported African slaves and ran an agricultural sweatshop under brutal conditions. There is no economic comparability here; it is as appalling as the notion that if you are not paying workers salaries or providing for them that your enterprise is more profitable or successful. To say this was Haiti Fleuri, even in a headline, is just wrong.
Next, we are told, things got off "to a bad start" -- now who could have imagined? -- after these slaves decided that they would rather be treated as human beings. Immediately we are told of the revolution's reactionary excesses: "Dessalines's rule was short, violent and populist."
We then are told "a nation forged by a slave revolt set a terrible precedent in a world heavily dependent on slave labour and France persuaded Spain and the US to join it in an economic embargo." Fair enough. But "terrible"? Maybe "unwelcome". In any case, for the most part there generally WAStrade between the US and Haiti, but what really is significant is that the US failed to recognize Haiti politically for 60 years. Even Thomas Jefferson, one of the more decent Founding Fathers (apart from his own personal failings) refused. Ouch.
The American occupation in the 20th century gets awfully short shrift, except for that "a period of stability followed". As it always does, including in Iraq. Oh, and "the introduction of chain-gangs to improve the country's infrastructure was deeply unpopular in a country founded by slaves." Oh really? You think?
Then of course the classic post-colonialist pattern. The local Batista/Pinochet/Saddam takes over over - Duvalier. Yes, he had the Americans' blessing, the article says. But this is nothing new or scandalous.
Finally, in a separate section, we are told that deforestation is rampant. Oddly, this is not tied in with the chronological narrative, leaving open the question of where oh where this deforestation could possibly come from. Global warming? Actually, it all kicked off with the artificial overpopulation introduced by the French in the slavery era and snowballed.
Of course, no article about Haiti would be complete without a reference to voudou, the evil religion. Not like Santeria or other forms of syncretism in the region, which are more palatable. Or Carnival in Rio - hey, good times! Even David Brooks of the NYT declared that it spreads a message that "life is capricious and planning futile." What else can we add? People are more temperamental and lazy the farther south you go. Catholicism makes people passive while not being sure if they're saved or damned makes people work harder. Correlation or causation?
Of course, the Haitians are damned if they do and damned if they don't. They stage the world's first successful rebellion against old white males, half a century before Liberia, and they're accused of not being passive enough. But if they are realistic about the duplicitous nature of foreign involvement, then they are accused of thinking that life is capricious and futile.
Thursday, January 14, 2010
LAUGHAGAINISTAN: 3D!
INT: A large American stadium. Five Nighthawk helicopters are descending over centerfield. Instead of groomed turf, the outfield has been transformed into a barren area of sand, stones and tall brown grass. It is the set for what will be a series of filmed messages from the President of the United States, designed to gently prepare other nations for a policy shift. To increase psychological impact, the clips are being shot using the new beta single-camera 3-D technology, developed by two Estonian brothers.
DIRECTOR: (shouting over the helicopters): Take one. Yemen landing. Ready and...let's roll!
(One of the five Nighthawks touches down, awkwardly teetering on its landing struts. It steadies itself in the arid artificial landscape. A marine clambers out and turns to assist US President Barack Obama, who is wearing a dark suit (by de Paris) and tie (Armani) and a combat helmet (USMC) The marine salutes Obama. Obama salutes. The helicopters ascend and Obama gives a thumbs up to the aircraft.)
(Obama removes helmet and turns toward the camera. He walks slowly through the tall outfield grass, holding the combat helmet in the crook of his index finger)
OBAMA: Hello, I'm Barack Obama. I'm here to talk to you today about something that is facing our nation -- and yours. Let me be clear: this is not something that I sought. When I first took this job, one year ago...
(Camera cuts to two technicians sitting at a monitor behind a movie camera and wearing 3-D goggles. The picture on the monitor shows that the waving grass is in focus but Obama is blurry.)
CAMERA OPERATOR #1: Crap. I think we have to cut.
CAMERA OPERATOR #2: He's already orating.
CAMERA OPERATOR #1: We still need to cut.
CAMERA OPERATOR #2: I'm not interrupting the President, are you crazy? You call it in.
OBAMA: ..., and I never imagined that a year later, I would be walking through the tall grass, on an unannounced visit, by your leave....
CAMERA OPERATOR #1: Well, I'm calling it. (Into headset): Um, camera's on the fritz. Could you tell the President to, uh, take it again from the top?
(The director of the clip is sitting in a cordoned-off area in the bleachers, wearing a headset, surrounded by writers, consultants and White House staff, including Chief of Staff Rahm Emanuel. All are wearing 3-D glasses)
DIRECTOR (listening intently, absent-mindedly): Not now, please. (snaps to attention) What? You're not getting any of this? (Looks over at Rahm Emanuel, who is signalling a slashing motion across his throat). All right! Cut!
OBAMA: ... today we face extreme challenges of an unprecedented kind...
DIRECTOR: Mr. President. I'm sorry, sir, we have to take it from the top again.
OBAMA: (stops walking) Did I go on too long? Is this the infield already?
DIRECTOR: You were fine, sir Just a camera problem, sir.
OBAMA (lighting cigarette): OK. So do I put this helmet on again? Or just start my spiel over?
DIRECTOR: Mr. President, actually, I'm going to have to ask you, sir, to take it from before you start your oration. We have to get into the helicopter again. It has to be one seamless take.
OBAMA: I'm not sure my life insurance policy covers that. (Laughter from aides)
(Marine One descends, teeters from one strut to the other, then settles into the rocky dust, raising a cloud. Obama stubs out the cigarette in the sand, puts on his helmet and boards the chopper.)
OBAMA: All right, but next time we're sending a drone with an audiotape. Seriously. (The chopper ascends.)
DIRECTOR: All right, take two, ready and...let's roll!
OBAMA (as before, clambers out of helicopter behind marine, removes helmet, is saluted by the marine, and nods): Hello, my name is Barack Obama. I apologize for being here in your country today on an unannounced visit to tell you about something important that is going to happen here -- and soon. Let me be clear: when I first took this job a year ago today, I didn't imagine...
CONSULTANT (in the bleachers area): Wow, is he ad libbing?
DIRECTOR: Looks like it.
CONSULTANT: This is the best part of this job. The listening.
DIRECTOR: Tell me about it. This is costing someone here ten thousand dollars a minute, but it's worth every penny right now. Are we good down there?
CAMERA OPERATOR #1 (over headset): Not really.
DIRECTOR (into headset): Why?
CAMERA OPERATOR: Still blurry.
DIRECTOR: Still blurry?
CONSULTANT (cranes head to speak into director's headset): Are you getting the audio, at least? Do you hear what he's saying?
CAMERA OPERATOR: I'm getting audio, and I'm getting tall grass waving in the wind in 3-D. But the President's still a total blur.
DIRECTOR: Is the 3-D screwing it up? I knew this single-lens thing couldn't work.
CAMERA OPERATOR: No, no, it's fine. Everything was working earlier today. I think it's the auto-focus or face recognition that's fouled up.
DIRECTOR: Cut. Mr. President, I'm sorry. Apparently there are still technical difficulties with the camera.
OBAMA: Well, let me be clear on this: I'm not getting in that chopper again. (Lights a cigarette, walks over to the camera operators with a gaggle of Secret Service men following). Let's see what's going on. So what's the problem? Can I help?
CINEMATOGRAPHER: I'm not sure, Mr. President. I apologize. This is a brand new 3-D camera. We borrowed it from James Cameron just yesterday. It was working well earlier today, but it's very complex.
OBAMA: I've heard about this camera. First 3-D camera ever in a single unit, right? Estonian-made?
CINEMATOGRAPHER: You're well-informed, Mr. President. You know about movie cameras?
OBAMA: Absolutely nothing. But here's what I would suggest: have you called Mr. Cameron?
CINEMATOGRAPHER: Well, he actually hasn't seen the camera yet. It was in the box when he, uh, loaned it to us. The Secret Service picked it up.
OBAMA (puts on a pair of 3-D goggles): Let me take a look. As I said, I don't know about optics, but interfaces I can work with. And, if I know anything about the Estonians, which isn't much, the programming will be solid. (Looks over the technician's shoulder at the monitor). It's in playback. How do I get into viewfinder mode?
TECHNICIAN: Well, you...
OBAMA: Can I ask you to scoot over a bit? Thanks. (Hits a few keys) Ah, found it. Let's see. Real-time signal processing is on. Wow, look at that, 3-D and no latency at all. Yep, there we go. Where's Rahm? Ah, there. Rahm, would you run into the outfield? Pretend you're going after a long fly ball.
(Rahm runs out on the field.)
Keep on going. Run, Rahm, run! Well, look, it's tracking Rahm fine. He's not moving fast, of course. Rahm, you can stop. You were called off by the catcher. (Obama stands up, takes off 3-D goggles, fishes for a cigarette). OK, let's do the same thing with me. I'm going to run out there and you see if the camera tracks me.
ADVISER: Mr. President, I really think that...we're on a tight schedule.
RAHM: (returning, panting) Mr. President. She's right. Let's leave these things to the pros.
OBAMA: Nonsense. (Lights a cigarette) I fixed the drones last month, didn't I?
CINEMATOGRAPHER: Incredible! The President fixes missiles, too?
ADVISER: He did some troubleshooting. I don't know if I'd say 'fix', but they're more accurate now. (Pulls Obama aside) Mr President, a word. These people are in total awe of you. Let's save them some embarrassment. You know and I know what's wrong with the camera. Let's give them a few minutes to come up with something to save face.
OBAMA: What the hell are you talking about?
ADVISER (in an undertone): Well, you know. The race thing.
OBAMA (extremely loudly): The race thing? What? Have you lost your mind?
ADVISER: It's obvious the camera doesn't pick up your face. It picked up Rahm. It must not pick up black people.
OBAMA: puts hand to deeply furrowed forehead) Do you have any idea how ridiculous you sound? (turns to the film people) I apologize for this profusely. My adviser is feeling quite ill.
As for your camera, gentlemen, let me be clear: it is a wonderful piece of equipment, a true marvel of technology. I can find no inherent fault. The problem, which I was quick to detect whilst I was at the controls, was that the macro mode was enabled, reducing anything beyond a few yards blurry. However, with a few keystrokes, I took macro mode off. (Blows a perfect smoke ring)
Make no mistake: I do recommend you use manual mode. But for that, you will need to read the manual.
(Applause breaks out)
Now, if you'll excuse me, we have work to do, and a message to get out to the people of Yemen. (He flicks the cigarette away coolly and walks out into centerfield -- in 3-D.)
DIRECTOR: (shouting over the helicopters): Take one. Yemen landing. Ready and...let's roll!
(One of the five Nighthawks touches down, awkwardly teetering on its landing struts. It steadies itself in the arid artificial landscape. A marine clambers out and turns to assist US President Barack Obama, who is wearing a dark suit (by de Paris) and tie (Armani) and a combat helmet (USMC) The marine salutes Obama. Obama salutes. The helicopters ascend and Obama gives a thumbs up to the aircraft.)
(Obama removes helmet and turns toward the camera. He walks slowly through the tall outfield grass, holding the combat helmet in the crook of his index finger)
OBAMA: Hello, I'm Barack Obama. I'm here to talk to you today about something that is facing our nation -- and yours. Let me be clear: this is not something that I sought. When I first took this job, one year ago...
(Camera cuts to two technicians sitting at a monitor behind a movie camera and wearing 3-D goggles. The picture on the monitor shows that the waving grass is in focus but Obama is blurry.)
CAMERA OPERATOR #1: Crap. I think we have to cut.
CAMERA OPERATOR #2: He's already orating.
CAMERA OPERATOR #1: We still need to cut.
CAMERA OPERATOR #2: I'm not interrupting the President, are you crazy? You call it in.
OBAMA: ..., and I never imagined that a year later, I would be walking through the tall grass, on an unannounced visit, by your leave....
CAMERA OPERATOR #1: Well, I'm calling it. (Into headset): Um, camera's on the fritz. Could you tell the President to, uh, take it again from the top?
(The director of the clip is sitting in a cordoned-off area in the bleachers, wearing a headset, surrounded by writers, consultants and White House staff, including Chief of Staff Rahm Emanuel. All are wearing 3-D glasses)
DIRECTOR (listening intently, absent-mindedly): Not now, please. (snaps to attention) What? You're not getting any of this? (Looks over at Rahm Emanuel, who is signalling a slashing motion across his throat). All right! Cut!
OBAMA: ... today we face extreme challenges of an unprecedented kind...
DIRECTOR: Mr. President. I'm sorry, sir, we have to take it from the top again.
OBAMA: (stops walking) Did I go on too long? Is this the infield already?
DIRECTOR: You were fine, sir Just a camera problem, sir.
OBAMA (lighting cigarette): OK. So do I put this helmet on again? Or just start my spiel over?
DIRECTOR: Mr. President, actually, I'm going to have to ask you, sir, to take it from before you start your oration. We have to get into the helicopter again. It has to be one seamless take.
OBAMA: I'm not sure my life insurance policy covers that. (Laughter from aides)
(Marine One descends, teeters from one strut to the other, then settles into the rocky dust, raising a cloud. Obama stubs out the cigarette in the sand, puts on his helmet and boards the chopper.)
OBAMA: All right, but next time we're sending a drone with an audiotape. Seriously. (The chopper ascends.)
DIRECTOR: All right, take two, ready and...let's roll!
OBAMA (as before, clambers out of helicopter behind marine, removes helmet, is saluted by the marine, and nods): Hello, my name is Barack Obama. I apologize for being here in your country today on an unannounced visit to tell you about something important that is going to happen here -- and soon. Let me be clear: when I first took this job a year ago today, I didn't imagine...
CONSULTANT (in the bleachers area): Wow, is he ad libbing?
DIRECTOR: Looks like it.
CONSULTANT: This is the best part of this job. The listening.
DIRECTOR: Tell me about it. This is costing someone here ten thousand dollars a minute, but it's worth every penny right now. Are we good down there?
CAMERA OPERATOR #1 (over headset): Not really.
DIRECTOR (into headset): Why?
CAMERA OPERATOR: Still blurry.
DIRECTOR: Still blurry?
CONSULTANT (cranes head to speak into director's headset): Are you getting the audio, at least? Do you hear what he's saying?
CAMERA OPERATOR: I'm getting audio, and I'm getting tall grass waving in the wind in 3-D. But the President's still a total blur.
DIRECTOR: Is the 3-D screwing it up? I knew this single-lens thing couldn't work.
CAMERA OPERATOR: No, no, it's fine. Everything was working earlier today. I think it's the auto-focus or face recognition that's fouled up.
DIRECTOR: Cut. Mr. President, I'm sorry. Apparently there are still technical difficulties with the camera.
OBAMA: Well, let me be clear on this: I'm not getting in that chopper again. (Lights a cigarette, walks over to the camera operators with a gaggle of Secret Service men following). Let's see what's going on. So what's the problem? Can I help?
CINEMATOGRAPHER: I'm not sure, Mr. President. I apologize. This is a brand new 3-D camera. We borrowed it from James Cameron just yesterday. It was working well earlier today, but it's very complex.
OBAMA: I've heard about this camera. First 3-D camera ever in a single unit, right? Estonian-made?
CINEMATOGRAPHER: You're well-informed, Mr. President. You know about movie cameras?
OBAMA: Absolutely nothing. But here's what I would suggest: have you called Mr. Cameron?
CINEMATOGRAPHER: Well, he actually hasn't seen the camera yet. It was in the box when he, uh, loaned it to us. The Secret Service picked it up.
OBAMA (puts on a pair of 3-D goggles): Let me take a look. As I said, I don't know about optics, but interfaces I can work with. And, if I know anything about the Estonians, which isn't much, the programming will be solid. (Looks over the technician's shoulder at the monitor). It's in playback. How do I get into viewfinder mode?
TECHNICIAN: Well, you...
OBAMA: Can I ask you to scoot over a bit? Thanks. (Hits a few keys) Ah, found it. Let's see. Real-time signal processing is on. Wow, look at that, 3-D and no latency at all. Yep, there we go. Where's Rahm? Ah, there. Rahm, would you run into the outfield? Pretend you're going after a long fly ball.
(Rahm runs out on the field.)
Keep on going. Run, Rahm, run! Well, look, it's tracking Rahm fine. He's not moving fast, of course. Rahm, you can stop. You were called off by the catcher. (Obama stands up, takes off 3-D goggles, fishes for a cigarette). OK, let's do the same thing with me. I'm going to run out there and you see if the camera tracks me.
ADVISER: Mr. President, I really think that...we're on a tight schedule.
RAHM: (returning, panting) Mr. President. She's right. Let's leave these things to the pros.
OBAMA: Nonsense. (Lights a cigarette) I fixed the drones last month, didn't I?
CINEMATOGRAPHER: Incredible! The President fixes missiles, too?
ADVISER: He did some troubleshooting. I don't know if I'd say 'fix', but they're more accurate now. (Pulls Obama aside) Mr President, a word. These people are in total awe of you. Let's save them some embarrassment. You know and I know what's wrong with the camera. Let's give them a few minutes to come up with something to save face.
OBAMA: What the hell are you talking about?
ADVISER (in an undertone): Well, you know. The race thing.
OBAMA (extremely loudly): The race thing? What? Have you lost your mind?
ADVISER: It's obvious the camera doesn't pick up your face. It picked up Rahm. It must not pick up black people.
OBAMA: puts hand to deeply furrowed forehead) Do you have any idea how ridiculous you sound? (turns to the film people) I apologize for this profusely. My adviser is feeling quite ill.
As for your camera, gentlemen, let me be clear: it is a wonderful piece of equipment, a true marvel of technology. I can find no inherent fault. The problem, which I was quick to detect whilst I was at the controls, was that the macro mode was enabled, reducing anything beyond a few yards blurry. However, with a few keystrokes, I took macro mode off. (Blows a perfect smoke ring)
Make no mistake: I do recommend you use manual mode. But for that, you will need to read the manual.
(Applause breaks out)
Now, if you'll excuse me, we have work to do, and a message to get out to the people of Yemen. (He flicks the cigarette away coolly and walks out into centerfield -- in 3-D.)
Sunday, January 10, 2010
Silent era coming back
Back on April Fool's Day 2008, I envisioned a scenario where in the future, online news site readers would get a monthly quota of comments linked to their national ID card, and could buy more. We're not there yet -- "pay as you go" freedom of speech has not arrived -- but the clamps are tightening. As of January 1, one daily, Eesti Päevaleht (www.epl.ee), requires readers to sign in with their ID card before commenting. You don't need to be too paranoid to come to the conclusion that anything you will say on epl.ee will become part of your permanent record and stored in a large drive somewhere. Obviously this fear can be countered by the old argument that if you're honest, you have nothing to fear. After all, it's hard to paint this as a traditional restriction on freedom of speech -- no one is saying "you can't say stuff". But they are saying: "Stuff can only be said by YOU". There is something ominous, dampening and humiliating about being carded for expressing your mind. Even the whole business of trying to get your computer to read the ID card is not necessarily easy.
It would be nice if the epl.ee policy could be dismissed as a not very successful experiment in a desperately competitive market, a quaint effort by one gatekeeper (certainly not superior to other papers) to re-invest the medium with a cachet of respectability. And indeed, certainly it has not been successful -- in ten days, the public discussion has completely evaporated on epl.ee with the exception of a few in-house people and shills trying to get something going.
But the thing is, it's not just epl.ee. The movement to ban anonymous comments has been accompanied by a great amount of pamphleteering by a group of people it would not be unfair to describe as ideological zealots -- Ilmar Raag, Anvar Samost, and so on, clutching manifestos arguing for the end of trolls and the dawn of a new age of ethics. A one-soul, one-identity, one serial-number policy. There are literally reams of tracts online justifying the decision. It's all a bit much. The people who brought you the end of comments on EPL seem to want a broader cultural revolution where all anonymous commenting on news sites is ended. Probably it's the only way epl.ee could be successful -- as long as there are free-for-all comment forums, people will gravitate there, not to epl.ee.
The timing for snuffing out public dialogue on epl.ee is undoubtedly poor, on the background of perceived political disenfranchisement, in the middle of a recession, with a Reform government that seems afraid to lose power, and unemployment increasing. Sentiment against involvement in Afghanistan is high -- another inconvenience for politicians, including the President, whose empty platitudes about "fallen heroes" are routinely mocked in online comments sections of Estonian newspapers. Devaluation fears have not gone away...or rather, they have tbeen transformed into the conventional wisdom that when Estonia finally switches to the euro, it may not be at the current 15.646 kroon peg. To the establishment, it could be argued, online comments sections are a dangerous nuisance, a place for radicals to gather, spread fear and dissent with impunity. Journalists' articles themselves are often sloppy these days, and comments sections are often better-informed. Almost every other comments section I see includes a correction of fact "phoned in" by a reader.
**
Is the fear of anonymity and unknown avatars justified? Is anonymous commenting really impoverishing discussion or turning newspapers into a bathroom stall?
Sure, there are pragmatic and idealistic arguments against anonymity, too. First of all, news sites have their own asses to cover, as it were.The Supreme Court ruled last year that they can be held responsible for what posters post.
Libellous comments are hard to police. I do understand the concern about individual reputations. It's easy to pass off hurtful statements in a sneaky way, or to repeat hearsay. Take the Supreme Court case, which concerned Vjatsheslav Leedo, a ferry owner who was accused falsely by a commentator of dumping prostitutes overboard on the Saaremaa line. He sued successfully and the website had to pay damages, but the damage was done. Statements can be nested in many ways to blemish a person's reputation or restaurant. People argue how many hookers there were -- after all, they were forgotten women no one cared about -- and the thing can get out of control. Of course everyone knows Leedo didn't dump any prostitutes; if indeed he hasn't stopped beating his wife, maybe she planted the story about the dead hookers?
The above is a extreme joke, of course. No one has any idea what was really claimed about Leedo because it has been scrubbed so thoroughly from the public record. Personally, my anonymous avatar thinks he's a major asshole for being so hung-up about his reputation -- as another blogger might say, "ur doing it wrong if you get trashed in a public forum". It could well have been that the original offensive comment was something on the order of "LEEDO IS AN ASSHOLE", perhaps in all caps. Always a good debating strategy -- screaming your opinion makes it more compelling, doesn't it.
But this brings up an important point. Perhaps other people's experience is different, but although the comment forums are often derided as offensive to the maximum degree, I have never seen a comment on an Estonian site that is truly vile and repulsive -- I have never been even close to hitting a "report" or "complain" link -- whereas I can go to the movies at Coca-Cola Plaza and see Antichrist, which is probably far worse than anything that has appeared, even on delfi.ee. I don't see anything that's truly persuasive. On Postimees, the audience can "thumbs up" or "thumbs down" comments. This is a sort of vox populi that keeps things a bit real.
So I really don't see the spectres that other people see. I don't think Internet comments have the capacity to galvanize or radicalize our thinking and incite mass hatred. Not in a place like Estonia, which is highly rational-minded. I think trolls are not that clever. It can't happen, unless the troll is also moderator. People aren't stupid.
Can I prove it? No. But can the other side prove that anonymity can lead to radical thought-mobs running around with conceptual firebrands? No.
**
Of course, maybe I overestimate Estonia. I continue to suffer from this notion that Estonia is a libertarian, laissez-faire, intellectualy cool place where people don't get too hung up about perceived insults and salty language. Or monuments. I want Estonia to be a hip, progressive experiment. This is delusional. The truth is Estonia it has clearly distanced itself from such a direction and grown to be a rather serious and grown-up country. Alcohol is becoming frowned on in more and more settings. The Royalist Party is no longer playing jester in parliament. The headiness of the 1990s is long, long gone. Some of the humour is gone. (Not all -- Rein Lang, the minister most associated with the movement against anonymous comments a few years ago, onceshowed up at a party appeared costumed as Hitler. Clearly he has a sense of humour! Not one shared by you or by me, but still, a perhaps telling streak of impishness.) But po-faced political correctness is on the upswing.
The country's leading satirist Andrus Kivirähk recently released a collection of pieces writing under the nom de plume "God" and some people were miffed, even though it was just a reprint of pieces that had already appeared in the newspapers.
The topic of Kivirähk brings up an interesting question. If Kivirähk wrote a "God" piece for Päevaleht and wanted to reply to a reader in character, he could not do so. First, of course, he would have to jiggle his ID card in the slot and (if he's using a Mac) make sure Firefox downloads the right certificates, and then...finally the witty riposte from "God" would appear...well, under Andrus Kivirähk's real name. Another one of Kivirähk's characters would have a tougher time: Ivan Orav has a double strike against him, being dead and fictional...
I'm sure there's a solution for this -- to allow "God" to have a say without issuing him an ID card. But still, what a colossal drag. The hubris of these serious people who think they can resolve the problem of broken eggs by walking on eggshells...it's hard for me to take.
It would be nice if the epl.ee policy could be dismissed as a not very successful experiment in a desperately competitive market, a quaint effort by one gatekeeper (certainly not superior to other papers) to re-invest the medium with a cachet of respectability. And indeed, certainly it has not been successful -- in ten days, the public discussion has completely evaporated on epl.ee with the exception of a few in-house people and shills trying to get something going.
But the thing is, it's not just epl.ee. The movement to ban anonymous comments has been accompanied by a great amount of pamphleteering by a group of people it would not be unfair to describe as ideological zealots -- Ilmar Raag, Anvar Samost, and so on, clutching manifestos arguing for the end of trolls and the dawn of a new age of ethics. A one-soul, one-identity, one serial-number policy. There are literally reams of tracts online justifying the decision. It's all a bit much. The people who brought you the end of comments on EPL seem to want a broader cultural revolution where all anonymous commenting on news sites is ended. Probably it's the only way epl.ee could be successful -- as long as there are free-for-all comment forums, people will gravitate there, not to epl.ee.
The timing for snuffing out public dialogue on epl.ee is undoubtedly poor, on the background of perceived political disenfranchisement, in the middle of a recession, with a Reform government that seems afraid to lose power, and unemployment increasing. Sentiment against involvement in Afghanistan is high -- another inconvenience for politicians, including the President, whose empty platitudes about "fallen heroes" are routinely mocked in online comments sections of Estonian newspapers. Devaluation fears have not gone away...or rather, they have tbeen transformed into the conventional wisdom that when Estonia finally switches to the euro, it may not be at the current 15.646 kroon peg. To the establishment, it could be argued, online comments sections are a dangerous nuisance, a place for radicals to gather, spread fear and dissent with impunity. Journalists' articles themselves are often sloppy these days, and comments sections are often better-informed. Almost every other comments section I see includes a correction of fact "phoned in" by a reader.
**
Is the fear of anonymity and unknown avatars justified? Is anonymous commenting really impoverishing discussion or turning newspapers into a bathroom stall?
Sure, there are pragmatic and idealistic arguments against anonymity, too. First of all, news sites have their own asses to cover, as it were.The Supreme Court ruled last year that they can be held responsible for what posters post.
Libellous comments are hard to police. I do understand the concern about individual reputations. It's easy to pass off hurtful statements in a sneaky way, or to repeat hearsay. Take the Supreme Court case, which concerned Vjatsheslav Leedo, a ferry owner who was accused falsely by a commentator of dumping prostitutes overboard on the Saaremaa line. He sued successfully and the website had to pay damages, but the damage was done. Statements can be nested in many ways to blemish a person's reputation or restaurant. People argue how many hookers there were -- after all, they were forgotten women no one cared about -- and the thing can get out of control. Of course everyone knows Leedo didn't dump any prostitutes; if indeed he hasn't stopped beating his wife, maybe she planted the story about the dead hookers?
The above is a extreme joke, of course. No one has any idea what was really claimed about Leedo because it has been scrubbed so thoroughly from the public record. Personally, my anonymous avatar thinks he's a major asshole for being so hung-up about his reputation -- as another blogger might say, "ur doing it wrong if you get trashed in a public forum". It could well have been that the original offensive comment was something on the order of "LEEDO IS AN ASSHOLE", perhaps in all caps. Always a good debating strategy -- screaming your opinion makes it more compelling, doesn't it.
But this brings up an important point. Perhaps other people's experience is different, but although the comment forums are often derided as offensive to the maximum degree, I have never seen a comment on an Estonian site that is truly vile and repulsive -- I have never been even close to hitting a "report" or "complain" link -- whereas I can go to the movies at Coca-Cola Plaza and see Antichrist, which is probably far worse than anything that has appeared, even on delfi.ee. I don't see anything that's truly persuasive. On Postimees, the audience can "thumbs up" or "thumbs down" comments. This is a sort of vox populi that keeps things a bit real.
So I really don't see the spectres that other people see. I don't think Internet comments have the capacity to galvanize or radicalize our thinking and incite mass hatred. Not in a place like Estonia, which is highly rational-minded. I think trolls are not that clever. It can't happen, unless the troll is also moderator. People aren't stupid.
Can I prove it? No. But can the other side prove that anonymity can lead to radical thought-mobs running around with conceptual firebrands? No.
**
Of course, maybe I overestimate Estonia. I continue to suffer from this notion that Estonia is a libertarian, laissez-faire, intellectualy cool place where people don't get too hung up about perceived insults and salty language. Or monuments. I want Estonia to be a hip, progressive experiment. This is delusional. The truth is Estonia it has clearly distanced itself from such a direction and grown to be a rather serious and grown-up country. Alcohol is becoming frowned on in more and more settings. The Royalist Party is no longer playing jester in parliament. The headiness of the 1990s is long, long gone. Some of the humour is gone. (Not all -- Rein Lang, the minister most associated with the movement against anonymous comments a few years ago, once
The country's leading satirist Andrus Kivirähk recently released a collection of pieces writing under the nom de plume "God" and some people were miffed, even though it was just a reprint of pieces that had already appeared in the newspapers.
The topic of Kivirähk brings up an interesting question. If Kivirähk wrote a "God" piece for Päevaleht and wanted to reply to a reader in character, he could not do so. First, of course, he would have to jiggle his ID card in the slot and (if he's using a Mac) make sure Firefox downloads the right certificates, and then...finally the witty riposte from "God" would appear...well, under Andrus Kivirähk's real name. Another one of Kivirähk's characters would have a tougher time: Ivan Orav has a double strike against him, being dead and fictional...
I'm sure there's a solution for this -- to allow "God" to have a say without issuing him an ID card. But still, what a colossal drag. The hubris of these serious people who think they can resolve the problem of broken eggs by walking on eggshells...it's hard for me to take.
Thursday, January 7, 2010
Nanny state vs. common sense
Common sense scored first this week. Kuku Raadio reported that doctors in Estonia will no longer be issuing excuse notes for schoolkids, meaning that if you're a parent and lie about your kid being sick, it's on your conscience -- doctors won't do your lying for you. That sounds about right and it certainly frees up doctors' schedules for more important things. It's an old Soviet idea that has finally been retired.
Unfortunately, on a separate news item, the nanny state struck right back. Apparently the government can order ISPs to block everyone's access to certain websites -- in this case European online casino websites who haven't sought a license from Estonian authorities. My reading of this is that the Gambling Act and the tax board come before Estonians' constitutional rights.
Personally, I would never gamble real money online (what, in the middle of a recession?), but I find this mechanism outrageous. Can they really do that? So if I wanted to, maybe even if I went through a proxy, I could not check out one corner of the Internet -- one part of the sum of the world's public online information?
How many times in the course of my work have I had to visit sites that may be dubious or immoral (SMS loan providers, escort services, realtors, banks), if only for terminology or legal background, or just to see what a certain menu heading is in the industry? Plenty of times.
Unfortunately, on a separate news item, the nanny state struck right back. Apparently the government can order ISPs to block everyone's access to certain websites -- in this case European online casino websites who haven't sought a license from Estonian authorities. My reading of this is that the Gambling Act and the tax board come before Estonians' constitutional rights.
Personally, I would never gamble real money online (what, in the middle of a recession?), but I find this mechanism outrageous. Can they really do that? So if I wanted to, maybe even if I went through a proxy, I could not check out one corner of the Internet -- one part of the sum of the world's public online information?
How many times in the course of my work have I had to visit sites that may be dubious or immoral (SMS loan providers, escort services, realtors, banks), if only for terminology or legal background, or just to see what a certain menu heading is in the industry? Plenty of times.
Monday, January 4, 2010
Notes on the year in food
It was a pretty good year in food.
First and most important, my belly stayed full. I hope the same was true of you and yours. The global food crisis of 2008 did not recur or spread to more affluent countries. I remember back when bread riots were taking place in Cairo that year, the West had some problems of its own -- we're so codependent sometimes -- Sam's Club ran out of rice! But I guess that was a one-time hitch in the supply chain; nothing like that happened again. Somehow, although it's like a game of Twister, computers and financial markets keep our interlocked agriculture sectors vital, even as GMO monocultures take a victory lap. Industrial, hardly sustainable...but alive.
Estonian stores (based on my experience in Tallinn) offered an ever-widening assortment of food. Sometimes culturally-specific comfort foods were hard to find, but that is true everywhere. It's hardly worth complaining about items like corn masa and chipotles not being available, because in fact, less specialized exotic produce like limes and mangoes are currently cheaper than they have ever been (20-30 EEK/kg).
Wonder of wonders, staple food prices even started falling late in the year, after months of false promises about deflation.
Developments like the opening of a farmer's market (albeit a bit tourist-oriented) in central Tallinn mirrored trends in the West -- more power to fresh local food.
*
A survey indicated that local ethnic Russians eat more vegetables than Estonians. Based on simple observation, it seemed both nations were eating a little lower on the food chain, at least judging from the popularity of Mediterranean diet items in the larger cities and in the more educated classes.
Some vegetable categories are still problematic. Dark green leafy vegetables are under-represented (with the exception of broccoli, which is everywhere).
Where's kale, for example? You may know kale -- the crinkly bitter-tasting brassica that's often used as a garnish in North American restaurants and is presumably discarded by most diners. It happens to be the world's most nutrient-dense food, certainly cost-wise, and as far as I know it will practically grow in the snow. Like Swiss chard and a number of other dark greens, it's not available in Estonia. I've seen just about everything in Estonia, even Starbucks frappuccinos (despite the lack of Starbucks outlets), but never kale or chard. Kind of surprising when you consider Estonians eat more the average amount of beets. What happens to the leaves? Biomass, I suppose, like the kale garnishes.
Of course, our property in the countryside this summer was a jungle of nettles and ground-elder, which are just as tasty, and we could easily grow radishes for the greens -- but it would be nice if there were more bulk greens while we're confined to the city in the winter. A nice kale stew was always a mainstay back in the States, either laced with bacon or not.
**
As far as raw salads go, it's a riot of leaves. The yellow Chinese cabbage that has been serving as lettuce since 1991 and looks like it is grown underground is finally giving up the ghost. Its elegant sister bok choy is moving in, but not into the salad bowl.
Rucola and baby spinach are widely available these days, and Romaine is almost ubiquitous, along with most common herbs, usually in little plastic pots (wonder how many people plant them?) but you have to be careful that you're getting a good deal. In winter, the basil and lettuce really get puny, to the point where you can count the number of leaves on your fingers. The standard green-leaf lettuce gets a shade paler, and the price goes up. Romaine is often wilted. NOP, a neighbourhood grocery-cafe in Kadriorg reliably had excellent fresh greens, even lamb's quarters and radicchio, at competitive prices.
*
If there were any other downsides, they were tied to general depressing trends (the state of the fisheries) or pet peeves. With some items, a case can be made for pure practicality. Even though they're also culturally a bit unusual, I don't understand why nut butters are hard to find, for example, especially in pure, unprocessed form. I mean, you can't always eat cheese or cold cuts, pate or its poor dodgy relative, saiakate. Peanut butter is close to a nutritionally perfect convenience spread as can be, especially for the age 2-18 contingent, but wasn't always available this year. I guess I should be thankful it is stocked at all.
Accessories like heavy-duty Zip-Loc freezer bags should by all rights be stocked, but I haven't seen them.
**
I didn't see any veal in supermarkets this year. Ethically I suppose that's fine, but that means one fewer alternative to pork. Pork can be easy to cook and tasty, but I don't support it. As we say on Facebook, It's Complicated with me and pork. Then again, one of the best things I ate this year was a kamararulaad or head cheese made by the söökla in the town of Vastseliina.
**
Eggs (unlike chicken) are now available in various degrees of omega-3-enhanced, free-range and organic, with the most expensive ones more than 80 kroons a dozen. On a largely irrelevant side note, eggs are the one thing that is often hard to find for me in supermarkets. They often aren't filed under dairy or the mayonnaise and cheese. I am giving out a prize of an Estonian dozen (10) eggs to anyone who can identify the location of the eggs at Pirita Selver.
**
Fresh fish sections seemed to be poorer this year. A couple times cod came in at dumping-level prices, but I never understood where it was from or what was wrong with it, even after eating it.
Cheaper white fishes like pike and flounder were usually available, along with more pricier whitefish and perch. Salmon and its pink relatives continued to dominate visually but were rarely dirt-cheap this year. Generally, industrially farmed tilapia and pangassius seem unstoppable.
I had a fantastic experience with fresh grilled Baltic herring (räim) with a sprinkling of kosher salt at a local maritime festival in Viimsi. As good as any sardines in Greece or Italy. More restaurants should feature this as a starter.
**
Estonia gets a really bad grade for food additives, unfortunately. There's unlikely to be much movement on trans fats after comments by the First Lady on this topic generated a strong opposite reaction. Although "no preservatives" appears on many labels (often where there would be no reason to use them), use is endemic in some categories of food. It is still nearly impossible to find any marinated fish not embalmed with E211 (the probably carcinogenic sodium benzoate). Boo. Cheese with nitrates is also a pervasive problem. You have to read the labels, the rule of thumb is that cheeses with "Saaremaa" in the name are OK, containing only CaCl2 but no nitrates. Nitrates are simply not OK for kids, in my opinion, because of what they turn into when browned. Same is true for cured meat (except for the new smoked five-day smoked meat (viiepäeva suitsuliha) -- they almost always contain E250 or E251. It was strange to hear of people in the countryside paying many thousands of kroons to get well water tested for traces of fertilizer...and then offering their kids fried bologna for lunch.
**
Tallinn Central Market (keskturg) tended to have a wider selection of fresh deep-sea and other fish, but I had a disappointing mushy baby trout experience there, which kept me from returning, so I'm not really up to date there.
Infrastructurally and experientially the central market is still stuck in the Soviet era, but it has good product. For things like organ meats, go there. I wanted chicken livers and I couldn't find them in any of the supermarkets, even frozen (though there were all sorts of frozen pig organs) but there was plenty of excellent chicken liver in the marketplaces.
**
Yuppification and gentrification of the food chain continued. I measure this by the Kaubamaja Index -- how far do I have to walk into Kaubamaja's ground-floor supermarket before I get to the actual grub, as in victuals, as in food that's not in a designer bottle or single-serving package. Around 15-20 metres.
Sometimes gentrification was confusing, as some stores have a health food section and a yuppie delicacy section, with some overlap.
The excellent Vertigo Restaurant launched its brand of foods, centred around expensive bread. But if there's two things I tend to avoid, it's expensive bread; the other is bread with pieces of meat baked into it (lihaleib).
Premiumization tends to be an inconvenience for me. We go through a lot of canned tomatoes and puree. Stockmann had 400g cans for years and they cost 10 kroons but then I guess someone got the idea that Stockmann's customers might fancy Italian organic tomatoes at 20 kroons a can. Apparently they were right. Maybe they taste twice as good. But there was no reason for Stockmann to really continue to carry too many 10-kroon cans. This has made Pomi Tetrapaks the most cost-effective option at 15 kroons. But that's all for the better anyway, from what I read about chemicals leaching from metal cans.
*
Finally, although this is not a restaurant review, here is the obligatory coffee review. The best coffee I had was the double espresso at Kehrwieder cafe, for instance the one at Apollo bookstore in Solaris. It's not very well-known that every establishment's coffee has a special character, with subtle variations, even in psychoactivity. The cup design adds to the full experience. If you've ever drunk coffee -- black americano, not a latte -- from a clear glass and found it to be somehow lacking or weaker-tasting, you may understand what I'm talking about. Inevitably, the good Apollo experience should be contrasted to the coffee at the other bookstore cafe in the competing Rahva Raamat in Viru Keskus. It's a fine cafe, but perhaps it is the hard-to-hold white cups -- the coffee tastes like pencil shavings. Vello once mentioned the cups in Baltlantis as well. If you poured the Rahva Raamat coffee into one of the low, glazed ceramic Apollo-Kehrwieder cups, it might taste less like graphite, but it's not completely certain.
Coffee prices tended to drop from 25 to 20 EEK in the city and from 20 to 15 EEK in outlying areas. Tried the famous Kükita coffee on the Tartu-Tallinn highway and I couldn't see anything special about it, but it did get me to where I was going.
First and most important, my belly stayed full. I hope the same was true of you and yours. The global food crisis of 2008 did not recur or spread to more affluent countries. I remember back when bread riots were taking place in Cairo that year, the West had some problems of its own -- we're so codependent sometimes -- Sam's Club ran out of rice! But I guess that was a one-time hitch in the supply chain; nothing like that happened again. Somehow, although it's like a game of Twister, computers and financial markets keep our interlocked agriculture sectors vital, even as GMO monocultures take a victory lap. Industrial, hardly sustainable...but alive.
Estonian stores (based on my experience in Tallinn) offered an ever-widening assortment of food. Sometimes culturally-specific comfort foods were hard to find, but that is true everywhere. It's hardly worth complaining about items like corn masa and chipotles not being available, because in fact, less specialized exotic produce like limes and mangoes are currently cheaper than they have ever been (20-30 EEK/kg).
Wonder of wonders, staple food prices even started falling late in the year, after months of false promises about deflation.
Developments like the opening of a farmer's market (albeit a bit tourist-oriented) in central Tallinn mirrored trends in the West -- more power to fresh local food.
*
A survey indicated that local ethnic Russians eat more vegetables than Estonians. Based on simple observation, it seemed both nations were eating a little lower on the food chain, at least judging from the popularity of Mediterranean diet items in the larger cities and in the more educated classes.
Some vegetable categories are still problematic. Dark green leafy vegetables are under-represented (with the exception of broccoli, which is everywhere).
Where's kale, for example? You may know kale -- the crinkly bitter-tasting brassica that's often used as a garnish in North American restaurants and is presumably discarded by most diners. It happens to be the world's most nutrient-dense food, certainly cost-wise, and as far as I know it will practically grow in the snow. Like Swiss chard and a number of other dark greens, it's not available in Estonia. I've seen just about everything in Estonia, even Starbucks frappuccinos (despite the lack of Starbucks outlets), but never kale or chard. Kind of surprising when you consider Estonians eat more the average amount of beets. What happens to the leaves? Biomass, I suppose, like the kale garnishes.
Of course, our property in the countryside this summer was a jungle of nettles and ground-elder, which are just as tasty, and we could easily grow radishes for the greens -- but it would be nice if there were more bulk greens while we're confined to the city in the winter. A nice kale stew was always a mainstay back in the States, either laced with bacon or not.
**
As far as raw salads go, it's a riot of leaves. The yellow Chinese cabbage that has been serving as lettuce since 1991 and looks like it is grown underground is finally giving up the ghost. Its elegant sister bok choy is moving in, but not into the salad bowl.
Rucola and baby spinach are widely available these days, and Romaine is almost ubiquitous, along with most common herbs, usually in little plastic pots (wonder how many people plant them?) but you have to be careful that you're getting a good deal. In winter, the basil and lettuce really get puny, to the point where you can count the number of leaves on your fingers. The standard green-leaf lettuce gets a shade paler, and the price goes up. Romaine is often wilted. NOP, a neighbourhood grocery-cafe in Kadriorg reliably had excellent fresh greens, even lamb's quarters and radicchio, at competitive prices.
*
If there were any other downsides, they were tied to general depressing trends (the state of the fisheries) or pet peeves. With some items, a case can be made for pure practicality. Even though they're also culturally a bit unusual, I don't understand why nut butters are hard to find, for example, especially in pure, unprocessed form. I mean, you can't always eat cheese or cold cuts, pate or its poor dodgy relative, saiakate. Peanut butter is close to a nutritionally perfect convenience spread as can be, especially for the age 2-18 contingent, but wasn't always available this year. I guess I should be thankful it is stocked at all.
Accessories like heavy-duty Zip-Loc freezer bags should by all rights be stocked, but I haven't seen them.
**
I didn't see any veal in supermarkets this year. Ethically I suppose that's fine, but that means one fewer alternative to pork. Pork can be easy to cook and tasty, but I don't support it. As we say on Facebook, It's Complicated with me and pork. Then again, one of the best things I ate this year was a kamararulaad or head cheese made by the söökla in the town of Vastseliina.
**
Eggs (unlike chicken) are now available in various degrees of omega-3-enhanced, free-range and organic, with the most expensive ones more than 80 kroons a dozen. On a largely irrelevant side note, eggs are the one thing that is often hard to find for me in supermarkets. They often aren't filed under dairy or the mayonnaise and cheese. I am giving out a prize of an Estonian dozen (10) eggs to anyone who can identify the location of the eggs at Pirita Selver.
**
Fresh fish sections seemed to be poorer this year. A couple times cod came in at dumping-level prices, but I never understood where it was from or what was wrong with it, even after eating it.
Cheaper white fishes like pike and flounder were usually available, along with more pricier whitefish and perch. Salmon and its pink relatives continued to dominate visually but were rarely dirt-cheap this year. Generally, industrially farmed tilapia and pangassius seem unstoppable.
I had a fantastic experience with fresh grilled Baltic herring (räim) with a sprinkling of kosher salt at a local maritime festival in Viimsi. As good as any sardines in Greece or Italy. More restaurants should feature this as a starter.
**
Estonia gets a really bad grade for food additives, unfortunately. There's unlikely to be much movement on trans fats after comments by the First Lady on this topic generated a strong opposite reaction. Although "no preservatives" appears on many labels (often where there would be no reason to use them), use is endemic in some categories of food. It is still nearly impossible to find any marinated fish not embalmed with E211 (the probably carcinogenic sodium benzoate). Boo. Cheese with nitrates is also a pervasive problem. You have to read the labels, the rule of thumb is that cheeses with "Saaremaa" in the name are OK, containing only CaCl2 but no nitrates. Nitrates are simply not OK for kids, in my opinion, because of what they turn into when browned. Same is true for cured meat (except for the new smoked five-day smoked meat (viiepäeva suitsuliha) -- they almost always contain E250 or E251. It was strange to hear of people in the countryside paying many thousands of kroons to get well water tested for traces of fertilizer...and then offering their kids fried bologna for lunch.
**
Tallinn Central Market (keskturg) tended to have a wider selection of fresh deep-sea and other fish, but I had a disappointing mushy baby trout experience there, which kept me from returning, so I'm not really up to date there.
Infrastructurally and experientially the central market is still stuck in the Soviet era, but it has good product. For things like organ meats, go there. I wanted chicken livers and I couldn't find them in any of the supermarkets, even frozen (though there were all sorts of frozen pig organs) but there was plenty of excellent chicken liver in the marketplaces.
**
Yuppification and gentrification of the food chain continued. I measure this by the Kaubamaja Index -- how far do I have to walk into Kaubamaja's ground-floor supermarket before I get to the actual grub, as in victuals, as in food that's not in a designer bottle or single-serving package. Around 15-20 metres.
Sometimes gentrification was confusing, as some stores have a health food section and a yuppie delicacy section, with some overlap.
The excellent Vertigo Restaurant launched its brand of foods, centred around expensive bread. But if there's two things I tend to avoid, it's expensive bread; the other is bread with pieces of meat baked into it (lihaleib).
Premiumization tends to be an inconvenience for me. We go through a lot of canned tomatoes and puree. Stockmann had 400g cans for years and they cost 10 kroons but then I guess someone got the idea that Stockmann's customers might fancy Italian organic tomatoes at 20 kroons a can. Apparently they were right. Maybe they taste twice as good. But there was no reason for Stockmann to really continue to carry too many 10-kroon cans. This has made Pomi Tetrapaks the most cost-effective option at 15 kroons. But that's all for the better anyway, from what I read about chemicals leaching from metal cans.
*
Finally, although this is not a restaurant review, here is the obligatory coffee review. The best coffee I had was the double espresso at Kehrwieder cafe, for instance the one at Apollo bookstore in Solaris. It's not very well-known that every establishment's coffee has a special character, with subtle variations, even in psychoactivity. The cup design adds to the full experience. If you've ever drunk coffee -- black americano, not a latte -- from a clear glass and found it to be somehow lacking or weaker-tasting, you may understand what I'm talking about. Inevitably, the good Apollo experience should be contrasted to the coffee at the other bookstore cafe in the competing Rahva Raamat in Viru Keskus. It's a fine cafe, but perhaps it is the hard-to-hold white cups -- the coffee tastes like pencil shavings. Vello once mentioned the cups in Baltlantis as well. If you poured the Rahva Raamat coffee into one of the low, glazed ceramic Apollo-Kehrwieder cups, it might taste less like graphite, but it's not completely certain.
Coffee prices tended to drop from 25 to 20 EEK in the city and from 20 to 15 EEK in outlying areas. Tried the famous Kükita coffee on the Tartu-Tallinn highway and I couldn't see anything special about it, but it did get me to where I was going.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
