Wahooo!!

After a long absence, Superswede appears to have returned yet again! You come and go more than Michael Jordan buddy, but you are always welcome here. I understand that you are currently in a bit of a difficult spot, and I'm not referring to your upcoming wedding. I hope things improve for you, but I hope that this means we will be seeing more of you around here for now.

Goodbye Old Friend

On Sunday, Michael Schumacher raced in the final Grand Prix of his glittering career. Last week I envisioned that this post would go along the lines of "Michael won!" or perhaps "Quick, but not quick enough." I would have then followed with an eloquent summation of the most astounding career the sport has ever seen. I even would have given a nod to some of the darker moments over the year, and believe me there were dark moments. Instead, Michael has forced my hand.

Schumi's championship prospects going into this weekend were bleak at best. If he were to claim his eighth World Driver's Championship he would have to win the upcoming Brazilian Grand Prix. That in itself wasn't all that daunting, Michael has won over ninety Grands Prix. What was daunting was that Michael's rival, Fernando Alonso would need to fail to score a single point, meaning he would have to finish the race below eighth place, or not finish at all. Alonso makes it a habit of finishing races, and a practice of finishing them in the top three. As if things weren't tough enough for Michael, his Ferrari developed a fuel pickup problem in Saturday Qualifying that left him starting the race from tenth. Michael had never won a race from tenth, although he had won one from sixteenth.

Regardless, the flag dropped on Sunday afternoon and Michael bolted to the front of the field. In four laps he moved from tenth to fifth. It look as if a miracle were about to happen. Then disaster struck, Michael dove around the Renault of Giancarlo Fisichella, but misjudged slightly. His left rear tire nicked Fisichella's front wing. The contact was enough to puncture the tire. Michael limped back to the pits and rejoined the race in twentieth, dead last. There was a fifteen second gap from Michael to the next car, and a seventy second gap to the race leader. Then the miracle occurred. Michael put the hammer down. Over the next ninety minutes fan were treated to one of the greatest displays of driving ever seen. Michael passed over ten cars on the track, and a number more through speedy pit work. Critics of F1 lament the lack of on track overtaking, but they sat silent on Sunday as Michael downed rival after rival. His final pass of the day was against the McLaren of Kimi Raikkonen, "The Flying Finn." Raikkonen blocked Michael to the inside, but Michael squeezed in, dangerously close to the wall. As the two entered turn1 they were so close together that even the daylight between their tyres was getting nervous. Eventually Michael squeezed ahead to take fourth. He didn't win the race, but his status as the most talented driver in the sport will never be questioned. That seventy second gap I mentioned was reduced to less than thirty at the chequered flag. Michael's teammate, Felipe Massa, went on to win the race. In doing so he became the first Brazilian to win his home Grand Prix since the late Ayrton Senna did so thirteen years ago.

To fully understand the brilliance of Michael's drive we need to compare his lap times with those of his teammate. It is generally accepted in F1 that a team's two drivers will receive nearly identical cars, some changes are made to suit driver preference. Before the race on Sunday both Michael and Felipe were given permission to push the engines on their Ferrari 248 F1 racing cars to beyond 20,000rpms in an attempt to secure the Driver and Constructors World Championships. They failed in that attempt, but they did set some very fast lap times. Just before his final pit stop, the point at which a Formula One car is at its lightest and fastest, Felipe Massa set a single lap time of 1:12.3. Just after his last pit stop, the point at which an F1 car is at its heaviest and slowest, Michael set a single lap time of 1:12.1, the fastest of the race. The man is just fast. In case you don't believe me yourselves, please check out the lovely YouTube tidbit below. Especially enjoy the last pass over Raikkonen.

Brazilian Grand Prix Highlights

I will regale you with tales of his brilliant career some other time.

"It is nothing to die; it is frightful not to live."

Moments ago I finished Victor Hugo's epic Les Miserables. I'm a bit at a loss for what to say about it. Several months ago I attempted to read the complete, unabridged, version and got lost. This time around I inadvertently got ahold of the abridged version. The shortened text probably accounts for why I got through it so easily, but I can't help but feel somehow cheated. Despite being familiar with the plot thanks to Broadway and Hollywood my first attempt was tainted by a modern intolerance for any content that didn't advance the story line. That was a mistake. I guess that the pre-YouTube world was more into savoring things. The richness of the full text was more easily enjoyed when Lost wasn't on at 9. That said. I finished the book, all 600 pages, and felt myself looking for more. It wasn't that the story was incomplete, I just didn't want it to end. Hugo is one of the finest story tellers I have ever encountered. The work connects with the soul on several levels. Readers who approach it looking for the revolutionary feel they got from the Broadway show will be disappointed. It was revolutionary in its day, but only those very familiar with French history will grasp it's full political implication. Today I feel that it is so much more about redemption and integrity. I think we often view our lives as being effected by crucial moments in time, which they are, but Les Miserables shows that our actions in those moments are defined by the constant dedication to our moral values on a daily basis.

As far as the characters go I felt that Jean Valjean was perfect. Hugo beautifully depicted the sinner struggling with his past sins in light of his current salvation. Just perfect. Javert was both admirable and despicable at the same time. I was contorted over him until the end. Thernardier was disgusting, yet completely believable. I found myself wondering if there wasn't a real life person somewhere behind Hugo's character. My disappointment came with Cosette and Marius. I found Cosette to be spoiled, and if we were expected to love her, incredibly underdeveloped as a character (granted, I did read the short version). As a child she is heart wrenching, but almost immediately after her rescue I lost all sympathy for her. If I were Marius I would have chosen Eponine. She came across as a much more genuine and giving person, especially when you consider the parenting she received. As for Marius? What an ungrateful prat. Jean Valjean gives him his child and his fortune and Marius can't wait to show him the door. Only when he finds out what Jean Valjean has done for him personally does he accept him. I guess rescuing the love of your life from slavery and then raising her as his own wasn't enough, eh?

In short, I was enraptured by Les Miserables. After a short visit with Augustine, Steinbeck, and who knows who else, I think I might be ready to savor Hugo's masterpiece as it was intended.

Also, please celebrate in this post as it marks my 100th.

Discovering My Hometown

Back when it was warmer out Roverine and I took a walk around town and took some pictures. While parts of the area are aptly described as "ghetto," there are some interesting buildings and other points of interest about. Here you go.

The home of a local celebrity.

Perhaps the most famous business in town. Great old building.

Never ate there, no plans to.

Maybe he's been advertising in the wrong places.

No, it didn't stop for the sign.

The train station.

And some more of that.

Like I said, "Ghetto."

Use My Word!

Several years ago, never mind how many exactly, I was engrossed with the completion of a certain academic treatise. The completion of said work had me somewhat down in spirits because I felt that I lacked the proper terminology to fully describe the chaos that surrounded the Diet of Augsburg (1530). For those of you who aren't familiar with the event, it was billed as the ultimate showdown between Charles V, Holy Roman Emperor, and Martin Luther, the indefatigable Bull of Wittenberg. The insane chaos that preceded Luther's arrival could best be compared to, but was probably far in excess of, a national political convention today. While official condemnation of Luther rang throughout the streets, secret messengers scurried back and forth in a final effort to avoid the inevitable showdown. Back room deals became commonplace. Bishops acted as pages. For a moment, the world was turned on its ear. All of this before the man of the hour, Martin Luther, even set foot into the town.
The excitement of the event is hard to deny, and cannot be ignored when addressing the life of Luther. However my friends, how was I to describe this vast spectacle within the confines of a collegiate work that was more concerned with the person of Luther than with the events that surrounded him? In the end I came to one conclusion. Necessity is the mother of invention. I created my own word.

Polympics- The chaotic jockeying for power and position that accompanies a political event.

The word suited my needs perfectly and allowed that portion of my work to be succinct, yet descriptive. After its initial usage I filed my word away in my mind, having no more apparent need for it. However, after dining with Roverine, Brechty, and Gen last night I have been convinced to share my word with the world. I have made it my goal to ensure my word's inclusion in Webster's Dictionary. I cannot achieve this goal on my own though. I need your help. Use my word! Make it popular! My argument for inclusion will be that much stronger if my word is in common usage (isn't that the Scrabble requirement?). If I succeed we can have a party or something.

What Is The Point?

The BETA swtich seems to have worked.

I was going to use my blogging time today to bless you with the latest feats of Michael Schumacher. Last week he won the Chinese Grand Prix despite trailing the leaders by over 25 seconds at one time. The old man's still got it. Today he was leading the Japanese Grand Prix when his Ferrari engine exploded. That marks Michael's first engine failure since 2000. Alas, without an engine he didn't finish the race, and without the points from the race he is all but eliminated from the World Championship. I will keep you posted.

Now on to my real topic.

Roverine and I went to church this morning. That in itself isn't unusual. What was unusual was the service. It was very focused on the Amish school shootings. Disturbingly focused. I can only compare it to services I attended after 9/11. Not only did the whole service seem like overkill, it was poorly executed overkill. Early on, all of the small children were brought to the front of the church and lined up for everyone to see. The pastor then said, in his most tormented voice, "Look at them. These are the ones that Jesus loves." I couldn't help but think, "So the rest of us are screwed?" After the service Roverine expressed a similar response. We were then subjected to a sermon pleading with us to do more for the children. The service ended with a responsive reading where the leader would read a phrase something like this, "There is violence in the world. What should we do?" Everyone would respond with, "We will do what the Amish do," followed by some bleeding heart mushy talk like "Build a barn of love. Build a barn of peace." or "Plow the fields of forgiveness." It was the intellectual equivalent of vomit. "Build a barn of love." What does that even mean?

Returning to my post title, what is the point? Why even put the effort into a service that addresses a topic that doesn't relate to the lives of your congregation, and then further alienates those attending by throwing out empty catch phrases and attempting to make them feel guilty for something they played no role in? I honestly think that, outside of the scripture reading, the only time Jesus was mentioned was when they told us how much he loved the children (but apparently not the rest of us). There was a brief respite from the onslaught when the service briefly changed topic to guilt us for not giving enough in offering (a subject that is popping up with alarming frequency). Why would I give money to support a religion that only loves children? I don't even have children!

Honestly I should be more forgiving. The church is going through a transitional period right now, and the service is normally better. It just bothers me when a service is so far from the point that it renders itself pointless. It also bothers me to see effort and potential so wasted. In response I have already made efforts to get more involved. You can't really gripe if you offer no input, right?

Hang On!

I've decided to make the jump to Beta. If you don't hear from me in two days, contact the authorities.