The modern sideshow

Each week, it seems, pictures of a new human oddity surface on Yahoo. Such interest in the plight of a result of natural human curiosity, and shows the evolution of society’s treatment of such people. In ancient cultures, someone suffering from a rare mutation might have been subject to a wide range of treatment, from worship to death, since various civilizations interpreted the appearance of such unusual deformations in their midst as anything from a curse from the devil to a blessing from God.

In the 1800s sideshows became a common sight in America, as circuses traveled the countryside, displaying “human marvels” to curious spectators. The Siamese twins Chang and Eng were two of the earliest examples, and soon afterwards P.T. Barnum made Tom Thumb the star of his famous exhibition.Sideshows remained popular for until the mid-20th century, when people suffering from these genetic oddities were finally granted dignity (and pity), rather than being mocked and humiliated.

Today, “sideshows” consist of people with extensive (voluntary) body-modification, like tattoos and piercings. The people who were once ridiculed now often live in anonymity, and/or attempt to have their problem surgically fixed. When they do decide to have surgery, it often makes world news. Their pictures are splayed across the Health or Odd News sections of popular websites, and quickly make the rounds on the internet. Often they are children, which can make it particularly heart-wrenching.

Given the absence of sideshows from general society for several decades, most of us never got the chance to see such incredible examples of genetic mishaps in person. I, for one, never would have believed it possible to have a 50lb tumor in your face or be born with two sets of facial features. I would have dismissed such claims as exaggeration or pure science fiction. But globalization and modern media have made it possible for journalists to find out about and record the existence of such extraordinary people, and provide photographic proof to the world. Hopefully making such unfortunate cases of human malformation public will give us more credulity when confronted with outlandish claims. Theories like intelligent design cannot account for people like Huang Chunsai or Lui Hua, whose bodies are far from intelligently designed. We are an animal species like any other, and are not (yet) immune to the abstruse and wretched whims of nature.

Keep reading...

The Return of the Celebrity Crush

It’s been a while since I had a serious celebrity crush. One of the earliest I can remember was Christina Ricci, followed by Sarah Michelle Gellar, Neve Campbell, and a series of other actresses whose careers peaked during my middle-school years. Like most heterosexual men, I also had an intense Jessica Alba period, as well as a brief fling with 24’s Elisha Cuthbert. In recent years, however, my penchant for developing a deep infatuation with untouchable Hollywood stars has greatly diminished. Perhaps it is because I don’t spend as much time with their images as I once did—I no longer watch TV (other than Lost and The Office), I rarely see mainstream movies, and I long ago ended my subscription to Maxim. Recently, however, I saw a mainstream movie, and it wasn’t long before I’d fallen for one of the leading ladies, Mila Kunis.

The film was Forgetting Sarah Marshall, the latest release from Superbad producer Judd Apatow’s comedic repertoire. The lead actresses in Apatow’s movies always give realistic, sympathetic performances, playing the types of girls men pine for, rather than lust after. Kunis is no exception—her Rachel is the gorgeous girl-next-door who uses words like “dude” and eases awkward moments with her casual demeanor. Basically, she’s every guy’s dream. Kunis, like other Apatow beauties, doesn’t overact or let her character become banal. Like Emma Stone as Jules in Superbad, Kunis delivers her lines with pitch-perfect self-deprecating tone.

It would be hard enough to resist Kunis’s exotic eyes or Hawaiian tan. But coupled with Segel’s masterly screenwriting, she becomes irresistibly adorable. Unfortunately (a word I use ironically, because it always amuses me when fans believe they would stand a chance to date their celebrity crush if they were single), Kunis has been dating Macaulay Culkin for over 6 years. Guess I’ll have to try forgetting Mila Kunis. Keep reading...

Restaurant Rave #1: Wildfire

As someone who enjoys eating ethnic foods (the more obscure the better), I typically avoid standard American restaurants—places where expensive steaks and seafood are served with potatoes and glasses of expensive wine. I am also the kind of person who would rather try a new restaurant each time I go out than return habitually to the same familiar spot. I am rarely so taken with a restaurant or a particular dish that I feel the need to return or recommend it to a friend. So it is particularly unusual for me to publicly extol a restaurant, especially one that is practically the definition of a classic chophouse.

But based on my two experiences at Wildfire (located outside Perimeter Mall), I do not hesitate to add it to my shortlist of favorite restaurants, and encourage everyone to try it for themselves. Minor disclaimer: The only food I have gotten thus far at Wildfire was lunch take-out, so I cannot vouch for table service. Nonetheless, given the degree of care that goes into a simple to-go order, I am confident the servers are of superior quality as well.

The dishes I have eaten are the Char Crusted Turkey Burger and Lemon Chicken Breast. Without going into the details of their ingredients, I will just say that both were cooked perfectly, and flavored with just the right balance of seasonings. The wild rice side is also delicious; mixed with peas and other minced vegetables, it tastes rich and earthy, but not oily, as many wild rice dishes tend to.

Besides the outstanding quality of the food, the attention to detail in packing the to-go order was unexpected and impressive. The main dish and side are packed in separate containers (helpful, though a little wasteful and unnecessary), and the staff thoughtfully includes a plate, plasticware and napkin, and wetnap in the bag. A loaf of onion bread with butter is also complimentary.

I cannot rave enough about Wildfire; there are few restaurants that stand out in so many categories. Follow the link below to the website, where one can find a full menu and other information.


Wildfire Website Keep reading...

Facebook Fail

This week Facebook introduced a major new feature called Facebook Chat. As if Facebook members didn’t already have enough ways to communicate with each other (messages, wall postings, etc.) they now have yet another way to waste time. And this one, I predict, is going to be a biggie.

As far as I can tell, there is no easy way to hide from potential chatters, or to opt out of the feature entirely. *CORRECTION: Users may "Go Offline," which prevents them from appearing on someone else's list of online friends.* If you’re on Facebook, you’re visible to your friends and available to chat. This poses a problem to those of us who may keep a Facebook tab open at all times, not counting on it becoming a distraction when four friends initiate a chat. Facebook long ago showed online/offline status as part of someone’s profile, but I doubt many seized the opportunity of seeing a friend online to start messaging with them. Now users can interact with each other in the moment, while on the website, much like Google Talk on Gmail.

At first glance Facebook Chat seems like a technological regression, given its similarity to AOL Instant Messenger, the online conversation mode of choice for millions of middle schoolers in the late 90s. While it does superficially resemble AIM in functionality, Facebook Chat does distinguish itself in several important ways. First, a buddy list is not necessary, since the application takes uses the built-in friends list. This eliminates the need to save email addresses, etc. Second, Facebook Chat takes advantage of developments in web design software (probably Ajax), making it possible to conduct a chat and navigate on the main Facebook page simultaneously. This eliminates the need to toggle back and forth between windows, a bit of a nuisance. Chat windows can also be neatly minimized into the bottom of the main page, and red balloons pop up to notify you of new messages.

I, for one, am conflicted about this most recent Facebook innovation. It’s helpful to be able to contact a friend instantly if they’re online, but sometimes I just want to be online in peace, and not be bothered with banal back-and-forth texts. But I am a focus group of one, and I won’t underestimate my peers’ desire to be in constant contact with each other. Facebook has probably hit a home run with Chat—but I want to be in the dugout. Keep reading...

Searchsleuthing: My new distraction

For many years internet users were unable to use common words, like and, it, or the, in their search queries. Search engines, like Google, automatically ignored these terms, known as stop words, because they tend to slow a search down. It was, however, possible to get around this possibly unwelcome elision by putting brackets or quotation marks around one’s search term. This would allow one to search for bands like “The Who” or “The The,” the latter of which must have named itself with the intention of frustrating future fans (The The was formed in 1978).

Recently, however, Google eliminated its use of pesky stop words. One might think this would have opened Pandora’s box for clever marketers, giving them the opportunity to “own” common words, by ensuring their placement at the top of search results. For some words, this hypothesis holds true. Barnes and Noble is result number one when one googles and. Other companies with claims to certain words include NBC (its show Life is first in line for this SETIesque query), CNN/Forbes is the answer to money, and good old Microsoft dominates word, the most frequently used noun in English.

Other common words turn up surprisingly modest sites. Funbrain is where one can find—it hardly needs to be said—fun. A search for the most-used action verb in English, see, brings up the home page for See’s Candies. Yourdictionary.com is puzzlingly the first result for of. And the state of Indiana has some issues with its search engine optimization. It comes up tops for in (the most common English word) but behind Indiana University with a direct search for the state’s full name.

Several non-profits manage to score first place as well. Teach For America is the lead result for for, but slips three spots when one searches for teach. One.org, a non-profit dedicated to fighting poverty and AIDS, lays claim to the loneliest number. A handful of media companies hold sway over some very powerful words. Home is The New York Times and it can be found at Slashdot. But it’s satirical newspaper The Onion that wins the biggest prize of all, the most common word in the English language (the)—already used 23 times in this post. Something called The White House is runner-up. A search for love turns up a humble Wikipedia entry (a site that dominates search results for the vast majority of nouns), while searching for sex leads one, not surprisingly, to a porn site. Surprisingly, a search for love results in nearly three times as many links as a search for sex (1.9 billion compared to 700 million).

See what your own searchsleuthing reveals—amusing surprises abound! Keep reading...