Loud Thoughts

The Omnivore's Dilemma: A Natural History of Four Meals Michael Pollan ISBN: 978-0143038580 Pub. Date: August 28, 2007 Publisher: Penguin

In this world of evolution, the fittest survives. Surely we homo sapiens are the reigning king on top of this game. “No,” said Michael Pollan. “It is corn.” The way he described it, we human race slaves to expand the kingdom of corn. We labor hard, dispense tremendous amount of energy, even sacrifice our lives for corn to proliferate. Yes, over two third of what Americans eat contain corn-derived elements.

Mr. Pollan prepared 4 meals: one for the industrial food system, one for industrial organic system, one from an almost completely self-sufficient farm, and the last one hunted and gathered without spending any money. He traced the ingredients of these 4 meals to their origins. The book narrates his captivating journeys.

Like anyone who’s passionate about a subject, Mr. Pollan became a bit preachy from time to time. Is it wrong to eat meat? He struggled and debated with himself and rationalized that meat-consumption is not only good for the body but also “good to think.” He went religious on Polyface Farm’s lifestyle, painting almost an utopia, even when he literally killed with his own hands. The sermon on hunting was quite long. I imagine, as a person who respect nature a lot, it was a real difficult mental journey for him. He was overwhelmed when he must “dress” his prey, I think, by the gravity of actually terminating a wild life. The mushroom education, however, is fascinating. I never knew the difference between two kinds of mushroom and had no idea that the “fruit” of the mushroom is only a small part of its organism.

Yet I pondered, and eventually disagreed, on his central thesis: that small-scaled, wholly sustainable, neighborhood-only farms are best for man-kind. The utopia cannot feed 7 billion people on this earth and will become a system just for the environmentally conscious with a fat wallet.

This world needs the next green revolution to feed its growing population. Otherwise, more unpleasant, even cruel, consequences, such as food riots, war, or famine, ensue. Somehow, the “management intensive” Polyface Farm does not seen to be the right answer to, literally, world-hunger.

One thing is alarmingly obvious, Americans are literally dying eating. They are drowning in the sea of cheap corns. After reading this book, I see Americans like those foie gras producing geese. Both are fattened and slowly killed by over-eating, only Americans do it voluntarily and wastefully.

Eat less, I sworn to myself.

---

This book is widely reviewed, including one from New York Times. Check out my Delicious link.

Across the Universe Directed by Julie Taymor Pub. Date: 2007

Cross posted at http://blogs.sun.com/syw

My iPods collects 128 Beatles songs.

They have cryptic lyrics, but mysteriously beautiful, bringing tears or smiles from the heart. You can’t talk when the music is still playing; and have long buried the moment in your heart when the song ended. When the movie scene starts, they all came back.

Maybe it is a clever musical strung together with Beatles? No, that’s possible only with ABBA. This is Julie Taymor’s interpretations. Nicely done.

She was giddy talking about Paul McCartney at the pre-screening. Oprah joined her like a teenage slumber party girl. “Wow,” I thought. “The power of Beatles.”

---

我的iPods里有128首批头四的歌.

这些歌的歌词晦涩但又特特迷人，常让人泪上心头或不由心暖一笑.歌放的时候不能讲，放完了就过了。于是那感觉就被深埋心中。电影中唱起来时，又被翻起。

可能编剧心巧的用批头四的歌穿成这音乐剧吗？我想不能，又不是ABBA。Julie Taymor的心血尽在此了。而且是一佳作。

Paul McCartney看预演时就挨着Julie Taymor坐。她说到那时可真是雀跃。Oprah居然也像小女孩到朋友家睡过夜一样的跳。
批头四，真魔力不减。

	His Dark Materials Trilogy (The Golden Compass; The Subtle Knife; The Amber Spyglass) Philip Pullman ISBN: 978-0440238607 Pub. Date: September 23, 2003 Publisher: Laurel Leaf
	The Golden Compass Nicole Kidman, Daniel Craig, Dakota Blue Richards Director: Chris Weitz

Cross posted at http://blogs.sun.com/syw

Excellent books, disappointing movie. But is it possible to produce a good movie of such a richly written book? There has been two attempts to cinematize Dune; both failed too.

What an interesting concept that everyone has three parts: body, soul, and spirit. These three parts can exist independently — body can live on without spirit, soul goes to hell/heaven after body dies. Pullman made the spirit exist in the form of an animal that has to stay close to the body. When the tie between the body and spirit gets severed, two things happen: a great amount of energy releases and the person either dies or becomes very dull.

Lyra, the main character, reads the Golden Compass, an oracular instrument. That skill comes from the rare ability to intensively focused on emptiness. With that, and Golden Compass as the channel, Lyra communicate with Dust, a substance both generated by and stimulates human intellects. Human becomes more creative when exposed to Dust; the creativity also generates Dust. Apparently, multiple cultures discovered the same and created their own version of the instrument. Chinese’s I-Ching is one of them. Astrology, Tarot cards, crystal ball, and other fortune telling skills are all the same thing.

The movie ends up with incoherent fragments and under-developed characters. Nicole Kidman, however, almost perfected the role. I cannot think of a better actor for Mrs. Coulter. But maybe it is not fair to criticize the movie as a book reader. Only Lord of the Rings, after all, met my expectation as a successful adaptation. I watch Harry Potter movies mainly just to reminisce: like a quick re-read and recollection of the details.

---

同步上网于http://blogs.sun.com/syw_zh

书很好看，电影却令人失望。然而真的有可能把内容如此丰富的小说拍成一部好电影吗？有过两次拍《沙堆》，两次都败的不堪。

书中有合很有趣的概念：每个人都有肉体、灵魂和精灵三部分。各别可以独立存在－－肉体失去精灵可以继续存活，灵魂则在肉体死亡后去往地狱或天堂。在小说中精灵成动物型像，而必须常伴肉体左右。一旦肉体与精灵被强行分离，打破后释出巨大的能量，使得失去精灵的人，变为行尸走肉，甚至死去。

主角莱拉可以虚空而不忘我。这罕见的天分让她读的懂黄金罗盘。由此她能感知未知世界。通过这种能力，并藉由黄金罗盘，莱拉能够与星尘沟通。星尘既激发人类智慧，也是创造力的副产品。人类一旦触及到星尘，就会变得更加富有创造性，而创造的过程又会再次产生星尘。实际上，各文明都意识到星尘预言能力。中国的《易经》便是预言工具其中之一。星座解析、塔罗牌、水晶球，以及各种预言技巧都属于这一类事物。

影片交待不清情节，人物也不深入刻画。无论如何，妮可·基德曼的表演还是堪称完美，我想不出还有谁能把科尔特夫人演绎得更加出色。或许从小说读者的立场评论影片有失公允。想来，只有《指环王》系列电影满意。《哈利·波特》的电影只是来追忆故事情节罢了。

Definitively Maybe Ryan Reynolds and Abigail Breslin Pub. Date: 14 February 2008

Cross posted at http://blogs.sun.com/syw

What a cute movie! Romantic comedies ran out of originality long time ago. Of course, they are never meant to be. The formula includes the chemistry, the tug-of-war of characters, some situation-comedy, and just enough sappy emotion to earn this genre the alternative name of chick-flick.

Ryan Reynolds and Abigail Breslin (Little Miss Sunshine) play a divorced father and daugther. The story starts when she insisted to know his past relationships; he obliged but turned it into a game. Both the little girl and the audience kept on asking, “What next?” As the story unfolds, it gets a bit strange that a daughter can be so obsessive about her father’s past. “Why is she so into this?” A little voice inside gets louder and building up the anticipation.

And that’s the gripping part of this movie: part plot and part acting. Every characters is likeable but the little girl was the best.

Not an ordinary chick-flick.

---

同步上网于http://blogs.sun.com/syw_zh

真是部好片子！没有落入传统浪漫喜剧的俗套。当然，俗套是必要的。元素包括：心灵“化学反应”、角色间的矛盾冲突、情景喜剧桥段和足够多的煽情，是的，这就是所谓的“言情片”。

瑞安·雷诺兹和“阳光小美女”阿比吉尔·布莱斯林分饰离异的父亲威尔和十几岁的女儿玛雅。故事的起因是玛雅不停地询问爸爸过去的罗曼史，威尔无奈之下只好同意，但把它变成了一场别有趣味的猜谜游戏。引人入胜的剧情引领着观众同玛雅一起不停的追问：“后来呢？”当故事逐渐展开，你会对玛雅的行为感到不解， “为什么她对老爸的过去如此感兴趣？”困惑感油然而生，对结局的期待也愈发强烈。

这正是影片精妙所在：情节跌宕，表演精彩。每位演员都很可爱但小美女才是最棒的。

绝对不是一部爆米花电影。

User's Manual to Human Body 人体使用手册 吳清忠 ISBN: 7536046316 Pub. Date: 2006年1月 Publisher: 花城出版社

Cross posted at http://blogs.sun.com/syw.

If a free and legal version of the same book is available online, would you go to the bookstore and buy a copy with, say, 4 dollars? The answer is over a million resounding “YES.” The physical version of this book is a best seller in China (and Taiwan alike). It has sold more than a million copies. I personally bought 10 copies; friends asked me to get them a copy while I am there. The author describes a sales peak soon after publication followed by a even stronger one a couple of months later. The 2nd one was not only stronger but also diminished much slower. Words of mouths from the 1st peak readers is the only explanation.

The central theme is an alternative to our medicine concepts. The traditional medicine training see human body as a machine with complex parts. As we get old, or subject to invasion, those parts need chemical or mechanical assistances to maintain normal operations. The picture of an old, beat-up car come to mind. The engine needs tune-up, the tires need replacements, etc. Eventually, the whole thing wears down and we kick the bucket.

Chinese think differently. The body is a system that is capable of self-healing to infinity. For it to work, it requires energy similar to power-supply for computers. When the battery runs low, many parts of your computer stop working. There is no point fixing those part; re-charging the battery will restore everything to normal. In fact, if one is careful about the energy balance, immortality is quite possible.

“Heresy,” you cried. There is no scientific proof of such non-sense. Mr. Wu answered this challenge. The medicine researchers primarily learned from autopsies; there is no more energy flow in cadavers. Since Chinese tried to achieve longevity, they study those who live well and healthy, not the sick or dead.

Hmm… The nice thing about being a Chinese is that we can work with both systems. I will practice Qi control and take a Tylenol for headache too.

---

如果你可以从网络上免费下载到该书的正版，你还会去书店花大约30块钱买一本吗？一百万多人肯定。该书是中国大陆最畅销的图书之一（好像在台湾也是）。已累计销售过百万本。我一个人就买了10本送人。该书的初版即创销售记录，而几个月后的再版销售更是风潮猛烈而且更持久。首批读者的口口相传功不可没。

该书呈现了一种全新的健康理念。传统医学（西医）视人体为一部复杂的机器。当我们变老或生病，我们身体的某些零件就需要化学或者机械的协助来维持正常的机能。想一部老爷车的样子吧，引擎需要调校，轮胎需要更换等等。最后，当所有的零件都不听使唤了，我们也就到时候了。

但中医不这么认为。中医视人体为一个有自我修复能力的系统。要干活就得有能量，就好像给笔记本充电一样。当电池电量低时，许多组件便停止工作。但这并不意味着你需要修复那些组件，重新充电后一切就恢复正常。理论上讲，如果一个人可以一直保持能量平衡，那长生不老也不在话下。

你肯定会说：“胡扯”。这既没有科学依据也不合情理。但吴先生这样解释：西医学者们都是从尸检中探其究竟，但尸体已经没有任何能量了。而一直在追求长生不老的中国人，往往向那些长寿、健康的人取经，他们可都是无病无灾且充满活力的。

嗯，作为一个中国人的优势就在于我们可以兼容并包。我会勤练御气之功，当然，头疼也会吃两片扑热息痛。

Resident EvilsMilla JovovichPub. Date: 2002, 2004, 2007

I am so sorry. Unlike more sophisticated people　that watched Oscar nominees, I watch all 3 Resident Evils this weekend: Biohazard, Apocalypse, and Extinction. I feel so mindless, just like when I finished RoboCop 3, Omen 3, and Rocky 6. Sigh… No wonder they keep on producing sequels.

Watch only for, “What next?” Since the movie makers knew, they avoid answering. Instead, they fill the time with mindless killings, cheap emotions, and, once in a while, good fights.

The general story line, after watching all 3 episodes, is the sterotypical virus genetic mutation one. This time, a scientist created a virus to cure his daughter’s inability to walk. The evil management tried turning it into a bio-weapon. A greedy insider stole it. Everything went wrong and the earth is destroyed. Why is this not a ruin? Because you don’t watch these movies for the stories. Besides, I did not reveal those details designed to hook you.

Milla Jovovich is another female fighter on the silver screen. For some reasons, they have this draw on male viewers. We have Trinity, Sarah Connors, Violet, the Crouching Tiger Hidden Dragon girl (what’s her character name?), and many more. I guess their fight scenes are more pleasing to watch like dances than those masculine power displays.

Fine, Lynn. I will watch Atonement next. Geez. Enough the rolling eyes.

---

有气质的人看奥斯卡提名片。我一个周末看了三场“生化危机”。看完后心神麻痹，依稀记得像看完“铁甲威龙3”，“洛奇6”，“凶兆3”后一样。难怪他们劲拍续集，有我这种没气质的人啊。一直看下去的理由是，“然后呢？” 拍电影的当然知道，也就不告诉你。全片乱杀乱打，滥情死爱，偶有几场精彩打斗。看完三部，剧情其实简单：病毒基因突变。这回，科学家为女儿腿疾发明病毒。公司拿去做生化武器。一个内贼偷了。世界大乱，地球毁灭。我没泄漏剧情。不过你反正也不是为剧情去看的。 而且，真勾人的细节我没提。Milla Jovovich又是个银幕女侠。为什么女侠会吸引男观众呢？ 看： Trinity, Sarah Connors, Violet, 还有“卧虎藏龙”的那女子（剧里叫什么的？） 我想女侠的打斗像跳舞般好看。男大侠就是威力。

好好好，Lynn，我马上去看“赎罪”。别那眼神了。

Four recent news articles string into a follow-up story.

• New York Times reported that Marion Jones will be sentenced for 6 months for lying. She took performance enhancement drugs at 2000 Olympic competition.



• International Herald Tributes reported that IAAF (International Association of Athletics Federations, the top organization to govern track and field competitions) ruled Oscar Pistorius ineligible for Olympics. Mr. Pistorius is a double amputee. When he competes in 100 meter sprint, he attaches two Cheetah blades. IAAF clearly believes those blades gave him unfair and artificial advantages over other athelets.
  
  Personally, I think Mr. Pistorius is pretty inspiring.
• ABC reported a new protocol to treat dogs with damaged joints. The vet extracts the stem cells from the same dog, cultivates them into larger quantities, then injects the concentrated cells into the damaged joint. Few weeks later, the previously limping and inactive dog will be bouncing around like puppies.
• Lastly, New York Times reported that a research lab has grown a rat heart from adult stem cells. The lab first washed out every muscle tissues from the damaged heart, leaving only the blood vessels, nerves, etc. Then they use the stem cells to grow them back. The result is a pumping, healthy rat heart ready to be implanted.

Do performance enhancement drugs relevant when genetic engineering is thriving? If Mr. Pistorius’s legs gave him unfair advantages, what about his new heart or increased muscle, not from steroid, but from his own stem cells?

Some years from now, when I am old and frail, should I find a doctor to give me a new lease of life or wither away like all my ancestors did? The most scary part of this question is its possibility. I can feel these technologies coming and these questions will become real.

You get the story? Are we ready?

Next Michael Crichton ISBN: 978-0060872984 Pub. Date: November 28, 2006 Publisher: HarperCollins

I don’t know if I read Michael Crichton for education or entertainment.

As I scanned the paperback section of the airport bookstore, “Clever,” I thought. Michael Crichton’s book occupied not one, but three, shelf spaces. The book has three different covers: same design of a monkey and bar code, different background colors of red, green, or white. It worked. I bought a copy.

And this is a usual page turner. Gerald the parrot is the most alive and memorable character. Other are all superficially developed and stereotyped. Then again, you read a Michael Crichton for education and entertainment, not for literature.

He strongly criticized the genetic industry as greedy, anarchical, predatory, and confused. The main point is ownership of genes can people own genes like intellectual properties?

But I own my body and therefore all my genes, if genes can be owned. I then own half of my biological children’s genes too. Unless there was a mutation, they are simply copies of my genes. In fact, biological parents together own all of children’s genes.

Hold on. Grand-parents own parents’ genes, by the same logic. When they die, their properties, including the genes, are inherited by their offspring. Uncles and aunts therefore own all cousins’ genes together. If we pushed upward in the ancestry line, eventually, in legal sense, there is only one possible conclusion: the whole human population together owns the human genome.

This is fun then. If genes can be owned like properties, then genes must be owned by the entire human population, therefore genes cannot be owned by anyone. Without too much effort, one will reach the same conclusion for genes of any species.

No one owns life. How simple and blatantly obvious can that be?

---

我也不知道我读 Michael Crichton 的著作是为了学习还是为了娱乐。我在机场书店浏览平装书时，看到 Michael Crichton 的同一本书占据了三个书架的位置，就因为它有三种不同的封面：设计是相同的，都是一只猴子上覆盖着条形码，只是背景色分别为红色、绿色和白色。我不禁感叹道：此举真是聪明啊！还真有点儿作用。我就买了一本。这本书真无法释手。鹦鹉 Gerald 是其中最生动最令人印象深刻的角色。其他角色都不够深入所以难免落于俗套。再次重申，读 Michael Crichton 的书是为了学习和娱乐，不是文学鉴赏。他尖锐地批判了基因工业的几大问题：贪婪、无法、掠夺和混乱。最主要的是基因的所有权问题——人们能像拥有知识产权一样拥有基因吗？

但我的身体是我的，如果基因能被拥有的话，我身体理的基因也当然是我的了。既然如此，我亲生子女们的一半基因也是我的。因为除非发生突变，那一半是我的基因。实际上生父母共同拥有他们子女所有的基因。

等一下。依此类推，祖父母拥有父母的基因。他们去世后，他们的遗产，包括基因所有权，都会被他们的子孙继承。叔父和姨妈会因此拥有堂兄弟姐妹们的基因。如果我们通过家族血统向上追溯，最终，从法律的角度，我们只有一个结论：整个人类拥有整个人类的基因。

有趣吧。如果基因能像物品一样被拥有，那么基因的主人一定是全人类，而不是个人。不用多想，任何物种都是如此。

没有人能拥有生命。这难道不是不言自明的吗？

I am a big fan of The Economist. Read it religeously every week. But this recent article got me scratching my head. Who was the editor of that issue? This article argues that it is economically a bad decision for British businessmen to learn Chinese.

Three main points are in the article: China will dominate world market soon, Chinese are too hard to learn, and, lastly, elite Chinese professionals already speak English fluently. The return, therefore, does not justify the investment of time and energy.

Let’s say all three points are valid, would they draw the conclusion that learning Chinese is not fruitful? In a global market place, speed and information win. Isn’t it fearful that the other side know you better than you them? And, how come Brits found Chinese too hard and those elite Chinese are fluent in English? Are Chinese smarter? Work harder? Or they don’t look for excuses to do it?

I was in a meeting with an important partner in north-eastern China. The meeting went the normal way, all in English. Presentations, discussions, etc. At the end, action items taken, meeting wrapped up, and everyone shook hands. Just as the chairman of the company is walking out of the door, the CEO, who was just a step ahead of me, whispered something to the chairman. Instinctively, I said, in Chinese, “We can help. No problem. Give me about 2 weeks.” Without even pausing a step, the chairman patted my shoulder and told the CEO, “That’s it then.”

I cannot testify that Chinese fluency is required for a foreigner to function, or even succeed, in doing business in China. Can one win a foot-race with an extra 20-pound bag on the back? Sure! But not in Olympics.

How We Die: Reflections on Life’s Final Chapter Sherwin B. NulandISBN: 978-0679742449 Pub. Date: January 15, 1995 Publisher: Vintage

House is a popular TV series about a medical doctor trying to solve some very difficult cases.

Death fascinates me like life. Sherwin Nuland, a practicing medical doctor, depicted death with autopsy clarity. It is a freaky, moving, and addictive book. It is also a wonderful book to learn some basic medical terminologies; my appreciation on House is now greatly enhanced.

Except for by trauma, such as gun shot, car accident, etc., death is a process that takes a lifetime; it is not an event that terminates a person. Fearing or trying to avoid it is not acknowledging life itself. That said, there are certainly smart things to do to enhance its quality or not shortening it unnecessarily.

Note that Dr. Nuland does not believe one can live beyond the length programmed by one’s genes. It appears cells can only divide a finite number of times, organs will gradually lose their efficiency, and entropy in the system can only increase. Modern medicine has not found a way to reverse this process yet.

Dr. Nuland stopped short of promoting assisted suicide. The medical profession and institutes dispense excessive amount of resources just to maintain signs of life. Since death is a process, and not an event, there is really nothing to avoid and meaningless to catch just few more breaths.

He admitted it is easier said than done in a painful and emotional story regarding his own brother. He seemed to be trying to convince himself with those grueling chapters on AIDS and cancer death: their inevitable ugly and painful processes. Where is dignity, where is social responsibility, where is humanity, to prolong their suffering while dispensing away resources?

I rewrote my living will and checked my medical power of attorney after reading this book.