The Phantom of Broadway

First. How is it almost Friday? What the hell? I only have a week more of work left. Damn. They ain't kidding about time and flying.

On Monday evening (it's been the kind of week where I am writing about something that happened on Monday, on Thursday) I fulfilled a lifelong goal of mine: see The Phantom of the Opera on Broadway. For a little context: The Phantom of the Opera was the musical that introduced me to musicals. My parents used to play the original Broadway recording in our house fairly frequently (apparently it is also my mom's favorite musical, which I only just found out. But that would explain the year my parents went as Christine and the Phantom for Halloween. And the lots of playing of the soundtrack. But I digress), and even as a very young child (like 5 or 6), I would dress up in blankets and dance (more like flail) around to the titular song. While I was growing up, my parents would periodically take me to see professional productions of the show when it would be playing in San Francisco. For a long time it was my favorite musical, and even though that has been replaced by Les Miserables (as evidenced by the obscene number of different versions of the soundtrack that currently exist on my iPod, including the obscure "concept" soundtrack done entirely in French), it still holds a special place for me as a show. I remember that when the movie version came out while I was in high school, I was legitimately obsessed with it for a year. Kind of like the way people are obsessed with Harry Potter or (shudder) Twilight. Actually, fittingly at least from a personal standpoint, the guy who was playing the Phantom in this production, Hugh Parano, made is big Broadway break as Marius in the original Broadway production of Les Miserables. Connection! (in an isolating age...)

Anyway, since in addition to my personal love of the show, it is also basically a New York City institution (it's been running for 25+ years now), I felt that I could not not take up the opportunity to see it. My real dream would be to see the original production with Sarah Brightman and Michael Crawford; since they stopped being part of the cast back when I was in elementary school, however, that was never going to happen. But seeing it on Broadway is a must. I never do this otherwise, but I even splurged $10 for one of those glossy program things.

I was surprised that for a Monday evening show, the line was already long and queued up at 7:20PM for an 8:00PM curtain. This is sort of what everything looked like as I waited to get in:

Outside the Majestic Theatre, where the show plays. With Signage

The show was very well done. The singing was top-notch, and I think that the guy playing the Phantom, really pulled off the emotion of the well. And he kind of sounded like Crawford, actually. The lady playing Christine had a ridiculously strong voice. I don't recall hearing one botched note. The set was also very well done, although the show pretty much looks exactly as it did when it first opened in the 1980s. In fact, I think most of the production side-- set, costumes, blocking, etc.-- are pretty much the same, or at least very similar, to that used in the original production. But, considering people have an expectation as to what "the Phantom" on Broadway is, I suppose that is not very surprising. The one thing I was slightly disappointed about, though, was the chandelier crash: it was kind of weak. I know, I know, 1980s technology. But you think they could update the technology at least once in 25 years, without detracting from the "vision." The crashes in productions I have seen in San Francisco, were a lot more epic (or at least a lot more drawn out-- in those productions, the chandelier literally hung over the audience then crashed onstage; here, the chandelier was barely over the orchestra, and crashed pretty much straight down). You know where they didn't skimp on the technology? Pyrotechnics. Holy crap dude. On a couple of occasions I had to actually shut my eyes, lest I burn my retina.

The other geekishly cool thing about this production for me, was the fact that the guy playing Raoul (aka loverboy) is a native of Los Gatos, California-- basically my hometown. The cutesy downtown is literally ten minutes from my house, and I have spent a lot of time there over the years. I don't know about other people, but I always find it cool when people from "the old country" aka the Bay Area pop up in the most unexpected places, particularly high-profile unexpected places. I thought it was cool that there is a very good chance that he went to Los Gatos High School, a place I have been to on a number of occasions and can picture in my mind. Even though Raoul is not my favorite character (I am and have always been solidly Team Phantom), I did think having this kind of connection was pretty awesome. Almost as awesome as the time my boyfriend and I went to see a national tour of South Pacific only to see a guy who had been in my boyfriend's college acting class for three years, actin' it up like a boss in a not-ensemble or minute role. For five minutes, I actually considered going around back to meet the actors after the show (apparently you can do this), and use this random coincidence to establish rapport. But I didn't. Instead, I took pictures of the outside.

Illuminated signage of the Phantom's trademark mask

Less epic illuminated signage of the Phantom's trademark mask

You know what wasn't cool about the production? The goddamn audience members. In all my years of going to all levels of theatre-- professional, regional, college, high school, community, children's-- I have never witnessed more appalling and disrespectful behavior. People all around me were talking, whispering, popping--not just chewing, popping-- their gum, flashing their little cell phone lights, crinkling wrappers or jostling idk, Tic-Tacs, throughout the entire show. It really took way from the experience and an ability to "be in" the show, and was supremely annoying because I had waited so long to see this on Broadway. I won't say it "ruined" my experience, but it made it significantly less enjoyable than it otherwise could have been. And it was just blatantly rude. Seriously, are people these days raised in barns? Do they have no respect, not just for their fellow audience members, but for the actors performing onstage? In a word, I was pissed. I did end up angrily "shushing" people a couple times, and shooting a few dirty looks when they *still* insisted on acting like assholes, but on this one I maintain that I was thoroughly in the right. Is it really so hard for people to just be considerate? Honestly, my boyfriend's kid sister, who is nine, displays a hell of a lot more common sense, respect and maturity when she goes to a production, than half the people seated around me. It's just sad. I am seeing War Horse on Saturday; one can only hope that the audience will display more basic decorum than these people did. I implore you all who are reading this: please, when you go to a theatre production (or a movie, or a comedy routine, or whatever),please, please show a little common decency and make as little noise as humanly possible. And if you really must do something noisy or distracting (like answer an important call or text), please momentarily step outside the auditorium. People will thank you and be eternally grateful for it. Alright, rant over.

Anyway, in honor of my having completed my goal of seeing Phantom on Broadway, I give you a YouTube clip of the titular and most famous song from the show:

Music video from 1980s featuring Sarah Brightman as Christine and Steve Harley as the Phantom. Apologies for the poor quality. Interestingly, if you listen carefully, the words in this are slightly different than those in the actual musical

For those of you interested in seeing the show (and I highly recommend it), it plays at:

The Majestic Theatre
245 West 44th Street
New York, New York

Typically, 8:00PM performances are on Monday, Wednesday, Thursday, Friday and Saturday. 2:00PM matinee performances occur on Wednesdays and Saturdays. On Tuesdays, performances are at 7:00PM. There are no Sunday performances. But do check the schedule before purchasing your tickets.

More information regarding the show and tickets can be found at the official website or at the Broadway website. Discount tickets can also be found at Broadway box.

The Dark Knight Rises

About the only thing of note that I did this weekend, was to go see The Dark Knight Rises.

Dude. It was So. Good. Very much darker than the last two-- even The Dark Knight. I was skeptical that the movie could top the previous movie, but in many ways I think it did. They really pulled out all of the stops, including a cameo by Liam Neeson. Without going too much into it (so I don't allow for spoilers), I also appreciated that there was a nod to the French Revolution, once Bane's plan is under way. And they definitely have given up trying to pretend that Gotham is a combination of New York and Chicago-- they were definitely going for straight-up New York. Namely, having very prominent and obvious shots of the ongoing construction of Freedom Tower, aka the new World Trade Center tower, kind of killed any kind of illusion on that front.

The one thing I was confused about though, was the ending. Without going too much into it, it was definitely left pretty open, considering that all those involved in the movie says that TDKR is the last of the Nolan Batman movies. Well, Man of Steel is coming out next year; maybe they are trying to pave the way for an Avengers type superhero combo movie (my boyfriend, who is way more into comic book heroes than I ever was, has mentioned on occasion that DC Comics has its own Avengers-like, namely The Justice League). I would be surprised, given the Avengers' popularity, if they don't start trying to do something like that. Why else the Spiderman reboot like 6 years after the last one?

At any rate, I want the box set of Nolan's Batman when it comes out for Christmas.

I did manage to get some interesting snapshots before the movie. I went to the Regal Theatre at Union Square, but surprise surprise, they were sold out until the 6:15PM showing (this was at 3:00PM), so I got to hang out for a while. I didn't know that Union Square was such a happening place. I'd been there before on a number of occasions, and had never seen as much as I saw today. Namely, Occupiers, Hare Krishnas, a rag-tag street fair of sorts with artist booths. I actually even bought a canvas for $20. What can I say, I am a sucker for street art, and have a new apartment to decorate. I also got a cool shot of the Flatiron building; in an effort to avoid really awkward panhandlers on the subway, I got off on the wrong stop, one stop north of 14th street/Union Square. I don't know what neighborhood it was, but it was really nice, and suitably bougie. And lo and behold, I stumbled upon the Flatrion building. I am starting to suspect that randomly stumbling upon well-known if not straight-up famous things in New York, is a fairly common occurrence... Pictures are below.

Upwards shot of the Flatiron Building

A shot of some of the artist stands alongside Union Square

Foodtruck-topia, alongside Union Square

Hare Krishnas. I didn't want to get too close when taking the shot-- because that's awkward-- so it is kind of hard to see

In the lobby of the theatre, I saw that the battle for the hearts and minds of the New York soda-drinking public is still raging

And for all of you out there who, like me, have epic '90s nostalgia: "Welcome to Goodburger, home of the Goodburger, can I take your order?" I didn't know one actually existed. Ah, the 90s. A much simpler time. Anyone else wish we could go back? But there is no going back, I am afraid

Finally, I feel like I should briefly address my post from the other night. I wish I could feel more empathy for people. But I always wished, and hoped, that people could be good, and just...live and let live. That's all I've wanted, that's all I have ever wanted. But more and more, people are unwilling to do that. There is just so much ugliness in the world; at times I've tried to shield myself from it, at other times I have tried to speak out against it, often in less-than-sugarry terms. And I have been shouted down for it, because people often don't want to hear such things. But I am also a firm believer in near-unqualified freedom of speech (namely, anything that isn't inciting or directing violence, or the proverbial shouting fire in a crowded building). Because unless we have the freedom to express ourselves, even if in unpopular or "offensive" ways, then we are not free as a society, as people. And it doesn't matter if the person trying to make you temper your speech is your government, your boss, or your family. It is one of the dearest freedoms we have. And the reason I am so uncompromising about it, why I take it too its logical extreme, is because the moment you let someone cow you down to be quieter, you start down the slope that ends where we all lose our voices.

I suppose too that I have never really related well to people; who knows why that is. I just could never seem to fit in with most people, so my cadre of friends has always been small. Perhaps I held people to too high of a standard and, being disappointed, withdrew myself from them. So I have always been something of a lone wolf. And then to just see the pointless crap people put each other through-- I feel a need to attack, to speak out. Maybe someone will listen. Can't it all just stop? Can't we all just get along and mind our own businesses? I think I grew up in a large bubble, and going to college, then out into the world, starting pay attention and read the papers, plus just some of my interactions with people over the years, shocked, but mostly, disappointed me. I have known many good, solid people in my life. People I would trust with my life, people I would sacrifice everything and anything for. I know within people, most people, there is a capacity to be good, and to take the higher ground. But so many don't. So many mire in the gossip, the opportunism, the nastiness. I wish I could stop shouting everyone down, but as a person I feel I can't, because there is so much wrong. But in my disappointment, in my constant fighting, I've felt the human warmth that I should feel, slowly drain away, for all but a few people I really consider my friends and family. I have started to keep to myself more, because in my sadness, there is nothing that I see in the world that surprises me. Perhaps I could, and should, stop paying attention, stop the fighting, external and internal. But what's the point in that? The bad stuff doesn't just go away. At any rate, even if I do that, I doubt I will understand people or fit in with them any better. I do however, find it immensely sad. I can feel myself changing, like a spell in an old story or movie that slowly turns someone's heart cold, into stone. You can feel it happening, but you can't stop it.

I took down my Facebook page to stop dealing with people who would attack me, yes. But I also took it down because in my speaking out, I became and am angry. There are people on Facebook with whom I was friended, who knew me before I got to this point. I am sure that they have seen enough, but honestly, I would rather them remember me the way that I was, namely normal and feeling and nice, particularly to those I love and loved. They don't need to see me now. And perhaps I can return to them one day the way that I was, but that day is not today I am afraid.

I, Misanthrope

I have decided to stop fighting the fact that I am a misanthrope.

Even from a young age, I always tended to prefer the "antagonist" or "flawed heroes" in stories. I found the goody-goody types annoying, and if they weren't just out-and-out evil for no reason, I quickly identified with these "darker" characters because they were the only honest ones-- the only ones to point out the hypocrisy of the so-called pretty-boy heroes or Pollyanna princesses in distress. When I was 11 or 12, one of my favorite characters was Daria, from the MTV show by the same name. I appreciated and identified with her cynicism, because it was honest. And Dr. House from House, is pretty much my definition of awesome.

I think initially, I was at one point genuinely personable and naive and willing to give people the benefit of the doubt. But then I started interacting with them. I think the tragic events of the last day in Colorado, just proves my point. I might be called maladjusted or mean or imbalanced because of this, but is a world in which I cannot even go to the theaters without fearing that my "fellow man" might shoot me, a world that I really want to "adjust" or conform to? Is that one that I really want to accept? These bouts of violence are obviously extreme, and not everyone is crazy. But even in the everyday: people gossip, people judge, people try to use whatever influence they have over you-- be it a relationship, monetary, numbers-- to get you to do and think as they do. And if that doesn't work, often they resort to out-and-out force. Whether it is two guys beating the crap out of each other, or the passive-agressive "office politics," it just doesn't seem that species homo sapien sapiens is a very agreeable species. Today at work, we listened to a whole talk where the guy giving it explains how it is a very common practice in Russia for business people-- or really anyone who has a little money-- to bribe the government to drum up a sham criminal prosecution against someone with whom they have a dispute. Nice.

Also telling is the number of highly-educated, influential and profound thinkers over the years who were self-avowed misanthropes, or at least displayed misanthropic tendencies. Jonathan Swift. Sartre. Kurt Vonnegut. Mark Twain. Heiddeger. Oscar Wilde. Jane Austen. Hell, even Albert Einstein famously said, "Only two things are infinite, the universe and human stupidity. And I am not sure about the universe." Considering the intellectual prowess of that list, I think that is at least strong circumstantial evidence that I am not wrong in coming to this conclusion about people generally.

A poignant example of what I am talking about, both in its substance and in the context I found it in-- namely, abandoned on the street being stepped on in the rain-- is this sign I saw when I was walking home. It is rather telling.

But rather then rant and vent, I am posting videos for you all that are much more entertaining than listening to me whine. They express my frustration in a way I never could, because it is no longer socially-acceptable to tell people off, no matter how much they might deserve it. Courtesy of Youtube. I unfortunately cannot claim credit for their creation; whoever did compile this, is awesome. Enjoy!

200 of the best movie insults of all time

Incidentally, I deleted my Facebook account. Technically it is only de-activated, but so long as I don't sign on to it for 14 days, it will be permanently deleted. As you may have gathered, I am not shy about sharing my opinion, regardless of what people think, and did so frequently on my Facebook. I got tired, however, of constantly defending myself from peoples' mindless drivel, in replies to things I posted, on my own wall. So, I shut it down. This probably won't help my readership on this blog, considering that much of the traffic comes from the link that was on my Facebook page. Oh well.

And finally, since I like quotes so much, I think I will end with a few from famous people, relevant to tonight's topic:

“Imperfection is beauty, madness is genius and it's better to be absolutely ridiculous than absolutely boring.” ― Marilyn Monroe

“Happiness in intelligent people is the rarest thing I know.” ― Ernest Hemingway

“I will not let anyone walk through my mind with their dirty feet.” ― Mahatma Gandhi

“Those who mind don't matter, and those who matter don't mind.” ― Bernard M. Baruch

“I wrote the story myself. It's about a girl who lost her reputation and never missed it.” ― Mae West

And finally, another gem from the incomparable Marilyn Monroe:

“When it comes down to it, I let them think what they want. If they care enough to bother with what I do, then I'm already better than them.” ― Marilyn Monroe

An Evening in "Conversations with Contemporary Artists"

I actually did something interesting today after work. And saw another side of life. For those of you who didn't know, I was an Art History major in college (also a French major, although even though I declared that major first, it kind of became my secondary major, mostly because I was better at Art History), and so, although I chose a different life path (for now anyway; who knows if I'll end up being one of those mid-life career change people. I kind of have a hunch that I will, and may end up returning to the Art History fold), I am still interested in the world of art and visual culture, and try to keep at least a foot dipped in that pond, so to speak. Hence my trips to major museums in New York.

So, about a month ago, I found out that the Guggenheim Museum does these speaker series, "Conversations with Contemporary Artists." I thought that this would be a very cool event, since it would give me an opportunity to hear from and learn about artists currently working. I spent a lot of (in fact, all) my time in college studying art and visual culture from the past; kind of by the nature of how these things go, and the time constraints on a college course, the latest period I go to was the mid-1900s. And most of the research and on-my-own-time research and "looking into" of artistic areas, was ancient art and visual of culture, mostly of the ancient Near East and Egypt. Because that is my primary interest. But, this means that, other than a trip to the Pompidou Centre in France, I am very clueless about the current state of artistic production, who any of the bigs names are, etc. I am essentially stuck in the (way) past, so I thought it would be a good opportunity to educate myself. And, there was the added bonus of the cost of attendance being free, courtesy of my being a student. One of the few good things about being a student and having the magic Student I.D., is that I can still get in a lot of places at reduced-cost, or my favorite cost: nothing.

The artists in question were two working photographers, who are apparently very active and well known in the field. Full disclosure right now: of all the areas of visual production, photography is the one I know the least about. I never took a class in it, and have never really followed it the way I have other areas of artistic production. So I fully believe that these people are well known, just not to me. It was a moderated discussion with and between the two photographers, one British and one Dutch (who also apparently know each other from being in the field, prior to this. Not surprising, I guess), conducted by the Senior Curator of the Guggenheim's photography collection. The two artists were: Rineke Dijkstra, a female Dutch photographer who specializes in portraiture, and Paul Graham, a Brit who works primarily in Realism-type photography (he very explicitly rejected the term "documentary" in a response to a question that kind of bordered on a rant, which he admitted).

The talk was pretty interesting. It started with about 10 minutes for each artist to show slides of some of their work, and talk a little about it. Rineke seems to specialize in portraiture of I guess I would say "shy people." She herself, for someone who is apparently very well-known and highly regarded, is actually still quite demure-- Paul was ribbing her a bit about the fact that she still gets nervous asking people to be in her photos, and is just kind of non-forceful, introvert (which was a contrast to Paul's very extrovert personality)-- and she was saying that this comes out in her work, in that she usually picks as subjects not the most flamboyant people out on the street, but just everyday people, and usually not people who specifically ask her to be photographed. Paul specializes in series photography. Namely, he goes out into the world, and takes a series of photos of a moment in time, say a guy mowing a lawn. As he explained it, he wants to take photography away from the "melodrama" of subjects that it can sometimes go towards, and wants to create a sense of the passage of time-- not a lot of time, maybe 10 or 30 minutes-- in his photos. So each "work" is really a series of like 6 or 7-ish photos of different sizes and shapes, of the same subject over a few minutes.

Mostly it was interesting to hear about works from the artists themselves. As an academic in the field, you can kind of get bogged down in the theory and interpretation of a work or body of work, based off of your reading of a piece, or others' reading of the piece, or all of the above. It was kind of refreshing to hear answers to the "why" and "what" from the sources themselves (oh how I wish, as a law student now, I could do this with the Founding Fathers re: the Constitution). And actually, there was a little bit of tension that arose out of this. Namely, the moderator (and later, during a general Q & A, some of the audience members) seemed to ask them questions on certain things about their work, predicated on certain assumptions the moderator had or articulated to the artists, and sometimes the artists' response actually countered some of those assumptions. For example, in her introduction of Rineke, the moderator expressed Rineke's... I won't say work, but I guess general subject matter... in a kind of relation to the Dutch tradition of portraiture. But in one of her responses to one of the questions, Rineke stated that it was not until she was an adult-- and after she started working-- that she even went to the Rijksmuseum, which houses a lot of that traditional Dutch Masters work (and which I have actually been to). Granted, Rineke studied art at school in The Netherlands, so I think it would be wrong to say that she is not informed by or working within a Dutch artistic tradition. But it doesn't seem that her foray into photography, and portraiture in particular, was in any kind of direct response to, or line from, the Dutch tradition of portraiture. So it was moments like that which made the evening interesting, because it brought to light-- and sometimes contrast-- the divergences between art theory or history and art practice, what motivates artists to create what they create.

After the talk, there was a reception in the lobby. Not coincidentally, this talk is lining up with a mid-career retrospective of Rineke Dijkstra's work currently being shown at the Guggenheim. So, they had the gallery in which her stuff is being shown was open for viewing. I took a look at her work, which are very large portraits of one or a couple persons against a pretty neutral background. In particular I looked at the Beach Portraits, which were a series of portraits she took during the 1990s of people at beaches around the world. They were definitely good photographs-- better than I could ever hope to do-- but, full disclosure, I wasn't seeing what made them stand out. Like, why them? Why are her portraits, as opposed to another working, trained photographer's, so well known or considered important? I guess this is one of the main reasons I have never really been able to get into photography as much as other areas of art; it is hard for me to see what separates a good photo from a great photo, or an artistically important photo, from just an artistic photo. I suppose it might make more sense if I knew more about the genre, but from an admittedly more outsider perspective, I wasn't seeing whatever the "it" about her work is. Again, not trying to say her work was bad or that she is not a legitimate photographer, because clearly she has talent and is a very good photographer. I am just not understanding the line between a good photographer and a great one.

So, that was my cultural experience for the evening. It was interesting mix of people. The Guggenheim-- probably not unsurprisingly-- is located in the Upper East Side, across from Central Park. So there were a lot of people who I could guess were probably some kind of art-scene boosters: older, middle-aged or above, well-to-do society people. And then there were the people my age, "artsy" types (I only ever studied art, as to my disappointment I am not artistically-inclined) who are probably the people that will actually be doing photography. And some people clearly knew others in the crowd, and were chatting it up afterwards.

Unfortunately, photography of the event was strictly controlled, so all I have are a couple of photos I took of the program.

Program for the "Conversations with Contemporary Artists" series at the Guggenheim

If you are in the greater New York City area, and interested in attending this series, more information can be found here: http://www.guggenheim.org/new-york/calendar-and-events. All "Conversations with Contemporary Artists" occur at the Guggenheim, 1071 5th Avenue, NY, NY. They are generally held after-hours.

On an unrelated note, on the ride home from the Guggenheim tonight, I saw the following poster in the subway car:

The poster says at the bottom:All those extra calories can bring on obesity, type 2 diabetes, and heart disease. Call 311 for your Healthy Eating Packet

In case you have been living under a rock, the city of New York, pushed mostly by Hier Mayor Bloomberg, is considering a ban on sodas and other kinds of surgery drinks over a certain size. This has lead to all Hell breaking loose, as the city is pretty evenly divided between the "health problems are caused by sugar and we have to pay for it with tax dollars so we should be able to control it" people, and the "what the hell is the government doing dictating what kinds of food people can eat, and in what quantities" people. If you have been paying any attention at all to my blog, I think you can guess which side I come down on.

But anyway, the battle for the hearts and minds of New Yorkers has begun, through what else, advertising. This particular ad is sponsored by the City of New York (you can tell because it has the stylized NYC logo that all public city stuff has attached to it), particularly Mayor Bloomberg's office. I can only imagine what a "healthy eating propaganda packet" is. And the other day, when I was seeing Rock of Ages, during the pre-show First-Look "entertainment," there was an ad narrated by a guy with a vaguely tough-guy Brooklyn accent, saying to the effect of: New Yorkers are tough, we do our own thing, we don't let anyone tell us where to live, when to sleep, how to live, so why are we letting the mayor tell us what we can and cannot drink? Accompanied by nice shots of different parts of New York, and different New Yorkers. As you can imagine, this was paid for by various beverage companies-- actually, I think some organization that is like a trade group or interest group for the beverage industry, comprised of the different companies.

All I have got to say is, wow. There are many problems in New York, the country, and the world, and this is what Bloomberg and everyone are fighting over. Wow humanity is sometimes a profoundly stupid race of beings. But, as I have always said, politicians like to focus on immediate, fairly minor, and generally quickly or easily resolvable/decidable problems, because they then don't have to really focus on the pressing, longer-term, and complicated problems, but can still look like they are "doing something." Oy.

So, that's it for tonight. Expect more posts this week, as I actually have a fair amount going on.

Weekend of Chill

What kind of day was today? The kind of day where I don't eat dinner until 9:45PM, because I didn't leave the office until 9:00PM. And then I was at this restaurant in Little Italy, and kept getting "ciao Bella'd" by the male waitstaff. I can't tell if it was subtle quasi-pickup line, or if it is just an Italian thing.

Luckily, this weekend was not like today. First, I slept in really late. Like really late. But, considering I work long days (like today, although this was *way* longer than normal) perhaps it is just my body getting what it needs on the weekend. Stock up for the next week or whatever. But, since each day, between waking up late, and putzing around getting ready, I didn't really leave the apartment until 2:30PM each day. So I couldn't do anything epic or touristy that took several hours. Which, frankly, was fine. It's nice to have a relaxing day.

Saturday I walked around the West Village/Greenwich Village, because it was not a neighborhood I had yet been to. And, it was *Borat voice* very nice. Lots of boutiquey shops and little bars and cutesy restaurants, everything of course overpriced. I could definitely tell it is another place where the other half lives. And I really liked it. Because let's face it, I have stupid expensive tastes. I did manage to find some new brown (leather!) flats for not that much (sale!) at one of these boutiques. I had been looking for a pair because the brown flats I have now-- which are a very useful thing to have, btw-- are a couple years old and have seen better days. I also *might* have had a slice of cake as the first thing I ate in the day. I was walking down the street, and saw a line out the door at this one bakery. I figured if there was a line like that, it must be a thing, and I should try it. So I got in line, got my slice of lemon cake, and went and sat on a park bench. The bakery is Magnolia Bakery, and apparently, as I learned after, it is a thing. The case was super moist and crumbly, but I do think it could have been a bit more lemony in flavor. But all and all, a nice slice of cake. And it was very pleasant to sit on a bench in a little park in a neighborhood square, eating cake, relaxing and people-watching. I did a lot sitting and relaxing and people watching. At this square, at another park/square thing in the neighborhood, at a fountain along the water on the west side (very pretty seeing the sun set over the Hudson, looking on to New Jersey. That was my favorite part of the day, just sitting there and relaxing as day turned to dusk). This is pretty much what I did when I wasn't walking around, just seeing what was there.

I also managed to pick up another decor item for the apartment. I went to this store that was like furniture and household accessories, called MXYPLYZYK (seriously. And no, I don't know how to say that). It was definitely my style: more modern than not, but with a bit of quirk. Like higher quality and more legit versions of the type of style of things you might see in the household stuff section of Urban Outfitters. I ended up buying a small decorative vase that I think will go well with what little color scheme there is (all my furniture is dark brown or black), and help bring more color into the place. I felt awful though. I was looking at this set of three bowls (kind of Asiatic in style, like rice or sauce bowls). I was kind of drawn towards them because they had owls on them, and it's kind of a thing with my sorority. If you aren't in a sorority, you definitely won't understand, so just take my word for it. They were in these boxes, which had their fronts exposed, stacked one bowl on top of the other, with some cardboard between. Stupid me, I thought that the bowls would be somehow tied down or secured in their packaging (I guess from a lifetime of growing up in California, where everything is secured as much as possible because, earthquakes). Well, they weren't and I ended up dumping two of the ceramic bowls out. I managed to catch one, but the other smashed to the ground and shattered. So, I ended up with two owl bowls to boot. The guy discounted the price to reflect the lesser bowl, but I still felt terrible. I didn't mind picking up the extra bowls-- it was right, considering I had just smashed one and the set was now ruined in terms of selling to someone else, and they are relevant to my life-- but I just felt so stupid and embarrassed and sorry. But the owner and the associate were just really nice about it. Like really nice about it, and were reassuring me that it was fine, didn't even raise any voice or anything. So that was appreciated, because I am pretty sure that as I was signing the receipt, my hand was shaking a bit. So yeah, in conclusion: if you are in New York, you should totally check out MXYPLYZYK, not only because they have cool stuff, but because the owner and his staff are good people.

The other thing I learned about the West Village, is that it is basically New York's answer to the Castro in San Francisco, and Boystown in Chicago. Except-- to my surprise, given NYC's history-- not as extreme. So that was interesting. I think I may have found the original Stonewall bar. The Stonewall thing was New York, right? Not San Francisco? I should know this having grown up in the Bay Area, but I forget things like this easily. So, it was fun and quirky in that way, too.

To end the day I decided I wanted to see a fun movie. So I decided I wanted to see Rock of Ages. Unfortunately, it was only playing at a theatre in Times Square (seriously, why do I always inevitably wind up back in Times Square?). So I had to fight the touristas. But it was worth it: the movie was very entertaining, was surprisingly good (since I had not seen, but was nonetheless skeptical, of the musical) and had like a solidly legit cast (Seriously: Mary J. Blige, Alec Baldwin, Paul Giamatti, Russell Brand, and of course Tom Cruise). And was a genuinely "feel-good movie." After Tropic Thunder and now this, it is official: Tom Cruise is at his best when he is playing batshit, mildly self-parodying roles. Although, given what's gone down in Tom's life as of late, there was something unintentionally poignant about the role he played in the movie. You'd have to see it though to see what I mean.

Sunday was even less adventuresome. I headed up to the Upper East Side, got some lunch at a Thai place, and headed over to Barnes and Noble. I've decided that I need some reading material that isn't caselaw or stupid internet news articles. So I picked up like five, wildly different books: Ernest Hemingway on War, Seven Gothic Tales by Isak Dinesen, A Battle for the Soul of Islam, A Farewell to Arms, and The History of the World According to Facebook. Again, wildly different. Then, I took myself over to Central Park, found a bench (actually, a couple benches, since I was at this one, but the weird line dancing and music that was going on about 10 yards away finally drove me to find a quieter, more secluded place), and read. Read the Facebook book first, since it was humorous and a quick read. Then started in on A Farewell to Arms (also, definition of some kind of stereotype (dunno which one): reading Hemingway in Central Park. It's like what female protagonists in Edith Wharton novels do, except for the fact that they probably aren't reading Hemingway because it was either too early yet, or he was a contemporary of that time period). It was so nasty and muggy out on Sunday (to the point of, standing outside for five minutes made me sweat like I had just run five miles) that honestly, sitting and reading was about all one could do without feeling like death.

That was basically my day on Sunday. I was out on the Park for a couple hours, then walked around the Upper East Side for a little while. Note: I love the Upper East Side. Which is a problem, since I saw in a realty office window a listing ad for a 2-bedroom apartment in the neighborhood, renting for $18,000 per month. So... the French should be happy: I also ran into the French Embassy, which is at like 5th Ave and 77th-ish street, right across from Central Park. So pretty much the most expensive real estate in New York. And it isn't exactly small. Your French tax dollars at work!

Below are some pictures I took while at Central Park. Until next time. Actually, I should have lots of updates this week, because I have having kind of a busy week-- things almost every night after work. So thank god my emergency stay-late-at-the-office happened tonight, and not another day.

View of Turtle Pond from Belvedere Castle, Central Park

Belvedere Castle, Central Park. Apparently it was built in 1868/69 as a lookout tower, and was converted into an observatory for the National Weather Service at the turn of the 20th century. Yay for incredibly Victorian Age

Balcony at Castle in front of stone steps leading down to pond

France. Actually kind of literally, since it is the Embassy and Embassies are technically small slices of sovereign soil in a foreign land. Even though it is sitting on some of the most expensive real estate in New York

Also, I checked lilmonsters.org. Lexi still isn't listed as having been adopted. I don't know if it is because they just haven't updated the site, or because the guy decided not to adopt her. I hope it is the former. But if it is that latter, I so wish I could take her with me to Chicago. She deserves a good home. I am still so sad about the pet policy at my building. I kind of wish I had thought about looking around more for a place that allows doggies. But, it is pretty much exactly what we were looking for in every other way: was the right price, location, etc.

But I still want doggie. :(

When You Know There is a Void in Your Life that Can't Yet be Filled

I stumbled upon Lexi again today. Pretty much ever day after work, unless I am meeting up with someone, or stayed too late at work, I go straight from work to Washington Square, where I enjoy the cuisine provided to me courtesy of NYU and my meal plan. From there, unless the weather is crappy (rain), I walk the mile or so back to the dorm I am in. Streets in NYC run pretty much on a grid, North-South, and East-West. So, I know several different streets I can walk down will eventually get to my cross-street. I usually walk down this very nice street that gives me a scenic jaunt through SoHo, but even that gets boring when you do it every day. So a few weeks ago, I decided to mix it up a bit, and walk down a different street. On that afternoon, I ended up passing an adoption fair for doggies that was being held in front of a PetsMart. There was this very sweet dog in one of the pens, a little over a year old. Name was Lexi, and was black mix between a lab and a dachshund. Pretty much the most adorable thing, ever. And so sweet. I carefully reached my finger out in a knuckle (which is the correct way to approach a strange dog, btw), and she just started licking it gingerly. Poor thing was rescued from a shelter that was going to put her down because she had heartworm. But, this group rescued her and, through donations, have funded her medical care (this I learned through the volunteer at the time).

Well, today I walked down that same street again, and again ran into the adoption fair (I guess it is semi-regular; I have gone down that street at other times, but it hasn't always been there). And Lexi was again there, and again happily licked my finger when I stuck out my knuckle. I am happy to report (via the volunteer on duty) that Lexi's treatment has finished, and she is cured of the heartworm. Such a sweet dog. Apparently, someone is interested in her, so hopefully in the next day or so she will go to a good home. Which is the best possible outcome.

I am not going to lie, though, that my heart broke (and is still breaking) a little that I can't be the one to give her-- or any of the other absolutely sweet dogs that were out there-- a good home. I just think it is profoundly sad how many otherwise fine, gentle, sweet and perfectly loving dogs are in shelters or rescue groups-- or worse, are put down, because there is no home for them, through no fault of their own. Unfortunately, my boyfriend and I just signed a lease (more on that later) for an apartment that doesn't allow dogs (they do allow cats, but cats make my boyfriend stop breathing. Apparently, the dog-ban is relatively recent, too, like within the last 18 months, or so reviews of the building-- which were mostly positive-- seem to indicate). It would be hard because I travel around a lot because of school breaks and things, but I know that if I could find the right place, I could give a dog a good home. Even if it is a little small, an apartment's got to be better than a shelter. And I am such a better person when I am around dogs, and animals in general. Although I would say I am nice and loyal and friendly to those I like and are my friends, in general I am kind of a distant and intolerant person towards those I don't know. I think I do this as some kind of defense mechanism; in reality, I think I am naturally inclined to be sensitive and overly-empathetic. If I let all the crap that goes on in the world affect me, it would destroy me. So, I build walls. I'd just rather not deal with it. Apparently, when I was an infant, my pediatrician said that I was a "very good-natured" baby. Sadly I am afraid that did not last long. Or maybe it was that I was naturally good-natured and naive abut the world, willing to give people the benefit of the doubt, and then people, whether through what I witnessed myself, or heard about, in their behavior just kept disappointing me and my faith in them, to the point that I am completely jaded and have lost most faith in most of my fellow man. Whatever it is, I am guarded, somewhat of a grump, and can turn off my natural empathy or sympathy like one switches off a light, if needed.

But all of that goes away the moment I see an animal, particularly "pet" animals like cats, dogs, rabbits, etc. There is just something about them that is soothing and calming. Perhaps because, in their animal nature, they don't judge the way people do, or do the crap that people do. They have faith in their keepers and are willing to trust, which is hard to find anymore among my homo sapien brethren. And all the emotion I wall myself off from in the day-to-day, finds its way back again. I feel again, I become calmer and less stressed, and happier. I become more human around animals than I do around other people. So, I become a better person. I feel like I could only be helped by having an animal, a doggie. Perhaps it would help me become human again around my fellow people, and not just around the people I have deemed my friends, etc. And I could give a good home.

Unfortunately, it does not look like it is to be. Am not going to lie, was super sad about it, and even teared a bit on the way home (my inability to keep it together probably not helped by the fact that it was 8:00PM on a Friday after long day and week of work). But this is exactly what I mean: I become a much more feeling person.

Below is a picture of Lexi. The organization with which she is housed (hopefully not for much longer) is called Little Monsters, and it is based out of NYC. New Yorkers, if you are looking for a pet, please consider adopting. Their website is: www.lilmonsters.org. And if not from them, then from another rescuer organization. And just in general, if you would like a pet, please consider giving a good home to a rescue. They need us and, honestly, from what I can see of the world, we need them. And if you do have a pet, please have them fixed. It is just so sad the number of living animals that lose out on a chance to live because of irresponsible owners.

Lexi. Not a very good picture because she is all black, and it was dark and overcast today (and also after 8:00PM)

And yes, in other news, my boyfriend and I found an apartment for this fall/next year. It is located about 10 minutes north (by car) from the downtown area in Chicago. It is located literally next to a grocery store, and the 147 express bus to downtown. And, if Lake Shore Drive is screwed up, it is located three or four blocks from the Red Line. So my commute will be pretty easy and direct. And it is a much nicer, bigger place in a very nice pre-war hi-rise, for a lot less money (particularly since we will be splitting the rent). It's basically perfect, except for the fact that they don't allow dogs. We move in around the 20th of August. I imagine pictures will be up when I finally move everything in and decorate the place. If only they allowed dogs...

To somewhat remedy the situation of lack-of-animals in my life, I just signed up to be a volunteer at PAWS Chicago, a local rescue group, to help socialize and take care of the dogs during adoption fairs. I have to do community service for Northwestern Law anyway, and even if I didn't, I would still sign up for this. I think a lot of my freak-out about law school and life, was due to that fact that I spent all of last year doing school and nothing but school. I socialized casually and went out with people, sure. But all my structured activities were either: class, studying, or duties relating to organizations that I am part of at school. I think it will be healthy (mentally if not physically) to get away from all that in a structured way a few hours a week. Doing something else completely not related to that part of my life. Having worked at my job this summer, I like the work and find actually *practicing* law interesting. I am just not to thrilled with the school part (and not because of anything Northwestern does or doesn't do. All things considered, I think they are a school that tries to make law school suck as little as possible. I am just over school as a general concept. But you knew that, and why, already from other posts). So I think it will help to find something to take me away from it every week for a while.

So, that's my post today. As of yet have no plans for the weekend.

In Memoriam

I got-- again-- a late start today. But it was (a bit) cooler out than it has been, so I decided to do something I have been meaning to do, but hadn't yet gotten it together to do: I went down to the September 11, 2001 memorial. The memorial plaza is surrounded by construction of the new World Trade Center buildings, so for safety reasons the city is currently regulating how many people can visit at a time; in order to go, I had to make a reservation ahead of time. My reservation was for 5:30pm, the earliest time available.

I headed down to the financial district a couple hours early, because I knew that there were some other 9/11-related spaces near there that I could visit before my scheduled time. One of those was St. Paul's Cathedral. St.Paul's is a very, very old Episcopal cathedral, located right across from the WTC site. It has an interesting history. Dating to the pre-Revolutionary War era, the cathedral-- mostly by chance-- has laid witness to some of the defining moments of American history. During the Revolution, after the Brits had captured lower Manhattan, a fire broke out in what is now the financial district. To save the cathedral, the residents of the area spent all night taking buckets of water from the Hudson, and dousing the exterior, so that it wouldn't catch fire. And they saved it. After the Revolution, when George Washington was inaugurated as the first President, he came and attended a service at the Cathedral. A reconstruction of his presidential "box" is still housed in the interior. And when Sept. 11 happened, the Cathedral transformed into a command center of sorts for those who were working rescue and recovery. For 9 months, until the site of destruction had been cleared, the Cathedral provided food and shelter to those volunteers who were working 12-18 hour shifts trying to, at first find survivors and remains, and later clearing out the debris. The edges of the interior of the Cathedral, display many artifacts and memorials dating to around that time.

The Cathedral also houses a small cemetery, which is fascinating. The most recent tomb probably dates from the late 1800s; most are from the mid-1800s or earlier. Several tombs date from before the Revolution. In fact, there are several tombs marked as belonging to Revolutionary War veterans. I am ever the history buff, and just in general find cemeteries interesting and oddly peaceful. I have always liked cemeteries, actually. Maybe I am just weird like that. The sad thing is, a lot of the information on the headstones have washed away with time; now, they silently lay witness to someone whose identity has been lost to time. Anyway, below are photos from St. Paul's.

View of the right side of the cemetery

Translation from the French inscription: "E.M. Bechet, Sieur de Rochefontaine. Dedicated himself to the military career, where he long distinguished himself. He served under the Count de Rochambeau during the American campaign, gloriously ended in 1782 by the surrender of Lord Cornwallis, which ended that war. Louis XVI in 1792 named him ADJUDANT GENERAL of the Army of St. Domingue. After the death of the King, he entered into service of the United States as Colonel, until he retired in 1798, to enjoy in friendship a reputation well deserved, and a repose well worthily merited."

Resting place of a French veteran, J. Francis Vacher, d.1837, of the American Revolutionary War

"Erected to the memory of George Frederick Cooke, 1756-1812, by Edmund Kean of the Theatre Royal, Drury Lane, 1821. Three kingdoms claim his birth. Two hemispheres pronounce his worth."

Another view of the cemetery, protected by the shade of a grove of trees

The following are photographs from the 9/11 Memorial, and around the World Trade Center site and construction. Other than to tell you what these pictures show, I am not going to say anything more because, really, what else is there to say?

American flag and 9/11 remembrance posters on the side of some of the construction of the new World Trade Center buildings

South Tower memorial pool with cascading water

Names of the United Flight 93 victims. All the names of 9/11 victims are etched in a bronze edge that traces the perimeters of both tower memorials

View of the construction on and surrounding the Freedom Tower, built in place of the old World Trade Center towers

North Tower memorial pool and waterfall. These pools are in the exact imprint of where the Twin Towers used to stand

Lone flower laid in memoriam at one of the names of the victims

"Patricia Ann Cimaroli Massari and her unborn child"

I had sat down on one of the benches in the memorial plaza, to think and take it all in. I happened to look up, and this is what I saw. Rising anew from the memory of those lost

The steeple of St. Paul's Cathedral. It has seen it all, and has kept standing through the ages

Coming out of the memorial, I was reminded why I am entering the career I am. This memorial-- with all those names of lives lost-- should not have to exist.

Never Forgotten

Photo by stealingsand on Flickr, licensed under Creative Commons

Escaping the Heat in a Concrete Jungle

Who knew standing around looking at art all afternoon could be so tiring?

So, in case you haven't been following the news, out here on the East Coast (and apparently Chicago, too), it has been freakishly hot. All the time. To the tune of, it will still be 88 degrees F at 10:00pm. Today, it probably was hitting near 100 degrees F. I knew this in advance, so made the executive decision to have an "indoor" day today. And by "indoor," I mean "indoor" with lots and lots of air conditioning.

As is par for the course on the weekends, I got a late start-- around 11am. This was made later by the fact that I had to make an unplanned trip to the Apple store in SoHo, because last night to my delight I found that my Mac charger had completely crapped out and I had to get a new one. All I have to say is, thank god for Apple Care extended warranty. Saved me $70 on a new charger. The trip to the Apple store did start the day off on a weird note: the guy behind the counter remembered me from four years ago. Apparently, this guy had briefly been in my freshman year French class, before he dropped the class. But I guess he remembered me, because apparently when we had talked at some point during French, it came out that we were both from the San Francisco Bay Area, and we both worked out at the same health club, Courtside. So, it's a small world after all. What are the odds? Shoutout to RB at the SoHo Apple store: I am dutifully impressed with the longevity of your memory, because I definitely did not remember this at all. But then, my memory is sort of like that blue fish in Finding Nemo. So... that happened.

So, to escape the heat, I spent most of the afternoon in the Metropolitan Museum of Art, aka the MoMA. Throughout my art history studies (and really, before that due just to its aesthetic qualities), aside from ancient art and society, I have always found modern art, from post-impressionism onwards, to be very compelling, and so much more interesting than a lot of the artistic styles that came before it. So I was really excited to go to the preeminent museum in America for modern and contemporary art. And, even though I was only able to be there for three hours, I got to see a surprising amount. I didn't get to see the photography section, or any of the special exhibits. And I didn't go to the fourth floor, which houses modern art from post-impressionism until roughly the World War II period. Since I have seen a lot of works from those eras, I wanted to see more pieces from the mid-20th century onwards, as I feel like these periods are kind of given the shaft in a lot of major museums that have to house artworks representing the span of centuries. So, I had not been exposed to them as much.

It definitely challenged my conception of what can be called art. As an art history major, and as someone who likes and appreciates modern art for what it tries to do in each of its manifestations, I feel that I am fairly liberal and open-minded when it comes to seeing the artistic and creative value of a work that at first glance may not seem "artsy" enough. But even I think that some of the stuff was really pushing it. There was one piece that was literally a bag of cat litter propped up against the wall. I understand that it may have been trying to make a statement about the line between everyday objects and "art," and perhaps trying to study how an object's placement in say, a gallery, versus a home, changes how we view things as being or not "art." I get that. The problem is, it's already been done. It's not an original idea, it is not exposing a question not already asked. If you need proof, I refer you to R. Mutt's (a pseudonym) Fountain-- you know, that ceramic urinal that was entered into an art show as a sculpture. That is almost 100 years old. That's why I think a lot of the more contemporary stuff that was shown, was bordering on (or crossed into) non-art: the creation of the pieces didn't require "talent" as we traditionally think of it to "do" art, and this lack of "technical" value to the art was not made up for by some new question or angle to explore. A lot of it seemed re-hashed ideas from 50 years ago.

I sometimes wonder where "art" and visual culture as a discipline and practice is these days. It seems that for a long time-- certainly in the 20th century-- there were defined "movements" of artistic production, or "styles" such as abstract expressionism, or Cubism, or Surrealism. And it wasn't so much a name given to these groups after-the-fact, by historians. Rather, their members seemed self-conscious and purposeful in this creation of new styles. I don't see that as much in contemporary art. It seems a lot more to be, a lot of people doing their own thing. I sometimes do wonder what this means for the evolution of art production going forward. One area that does seem promising, is video/audio art. Of all the contemporary art from the last twenty years, the most compelling pieces were those that used video and/or sound; although, in some ways, those videos without sound-- just moving image-- were more effective and provocative. Perhaps this is where art is moving-- off of the canvas and onto the screen. Which is not surprising given how much our society is now plugged into little screens. Although, I do wonder if we won't lose something by having advancement in visual production take place digitally, rather than on a tactile, 3D surface.

After visiting the MoMA, I went and did the other thing that is quintessentially "New York," at least if you are a tourist. I went to the Empire State Building, to go to the observatory. Now, aside from the observatory, just getting up top is an experience in and of itself. They have all these roped-off lines that snake you through the 80th floor, where all the ticket offices are located. Not only do they have the ticket booth and airport-like security, but as you snake back and forth, for several minutes, you are treated to a mini-exhibit on the creation of, and pop-cultural significance surrounding, the Empire State Building. Then, as you continue to make your way through the perfect specimen of Art Deco design, you get your picture taken against a green screen, upon which they will project the background of the building and Manhattan. It's kind of like being in a line a Disneyland.

I got up the 86th floor, which is where the main observatory deck is located. I have to say that the view is stunning. It was a little hazy today, so the views weren't as clear as they could have been, but nonetheless impressive. The weird thing was, though, that I didn't feel like I was up all that high. Maybe it was from all the hype, but I expected to feel way more airborne than I did. And I do know that I was, in fact, significantly above street level, but it didn't feel that way. And ditto when I went up to the 102nd floor, where they have a mini-observatory (for an extra fee, of course), the "highest in Manhattan." Maybe it was just me, but I didn't feel like super-ridiculously-high, even though I don't think I have ever been as high as 102 floors in any other building. Anyway, below are some pictures of the view from the 86th floor, as well as one from the main entrance. Enjoy!

Lobby of the Empire State Building. Art Deco mural showing the building against a stylized map of the tri-state area

Southern view of lower Manhattan and financial district

View of the Upper East Side, with the Chrysler Building in the foreground

Partial bird's-eye view of Central Park, peaking between uptown buildings

After the Empire State building trip, I headed to dinner, and back to uptown, so I could see my boyfriend's-- and and this point, really, my friend-- perform at this place on 53rd St and 2nd Ave in Manhattan, called Tomi Jazz. Allegra is someone my boyfriend has known for a long time, and I finally got to meet her when I got to New York, as she has been living her since graduating New England Conservatory. She is a jazz singer, and quite talented. It was a nice, low-key venue, and sitting for a couple hours while listening to some mellow, pleasant music was just the perfect end to a hot day during which I spent most of my time on my feet. If you are interested in good music (which you should be), the following link is for her website: http://allegralevy.com. Below is a snapshot I took of the sign board outside the venue, advertising her gig for the evening. I am also adding her website to the list of permanent external links that I keep on this blog.

Allegra Levy at Tomi Jazz

And finally, even though it is not at all related to anything I have discussed in this post, I am including an adorable video of "Panda Dogs." I am not going to try to explain it here; the website http://www.pandadog.org/ explains it better than I ever could.

Because everyone needs some "awwwwwwww" before going to bed

Independence Day Post of, "Awwwwwww"

Today is the Fourth of July, and I have been quite thoroughly enjoying my day off. I took advantage of the whole not having to get up for work "thing" today, and got quite the late start. It was wonderful. But because I got such a late start, I was looking for something I could do that would only take a couple hours. So, I decided to do something that has been on my NYC "bucket list," and went to the Central Park Zoo. It was absolutely amazing and adorable, so much so that I didn't mind the sweltering heat. There was a regular zoo, and a petting zoo. PS: Petting zoos are pretty much the best things, ever. It was a great was to have a relaxing holiday and day off.

But rather than have you all listen to me blabber on, I am going to let the cute critters speak for themselves, at least in pictures. Below are some photos of the cuties that I took while there. Some photos are better than others; the animals, it seems, were the smart ones, trying to stay out of the heat (unlike their human counterparts). Hope you enjoy!

Warning: Ridiculous cuteness ahead

A puffy Puffin! These lil dudes had the right idea: stay in the water

Poor polar bear. He was probably miserable in today's heat

Mongoose: The Animal that Kills Cobras. For such a BAMF animal, he cure is a cure lil critter

Turtle from the Southwestern United States

Lemur: Straight-up Chillin'. Like a Boss.

I don't know what kind of tropical bird this was, but he was very big, and very handsome

More Lemurs! Lemur Lemur!

This was at the petting zoo. I believe it is a bull. Dude was big

Sheep! On a hot day like today, it must suck to have a permanent wool coat...

I got to feed some hyperactive goats. They are bigger chow-hounds than the dogs I have owned. Jumping up, crawling all over each other to get treats from the tourists. I wonder if they get fat from all the snacks fed to them?

In conclusion: Zoos are awesome. I wish I had fluffy, furry animals in my life. Maybe not these animals, because they are, ya know, wild, but they turn me from kind of a grump, serious person, into a giddy 5-year-old. Not a bad way to spend the day at all.

If you are interested, the Central Park Zoo is located at:

64th Street and 5th Avenue, New York, New York. You can also access it from within Central Park. General Admission for adults is $12 (or $18 if you want the "4D" theatre pass), $7 (or $13 to add the 4D ticket) for children 3-12. General admission will get you into the Main Zoo and the Tisch Children's Zoo. Summer hours are 10:00a.m.-5:30p.m. daily, open 365 days/year. About 2- 2.5 hours should definitely be enough to see both the main zoo and the children's petting zoo.

I really like Central Park. It is just a very calm, nice area. As much I love NYC and big cities, it is nice to have a respite from the concrete jungle and the go-go-go it entails. It is nice to be able to see forest-type animals live in the ponds and lakes that have been created for them. And, it's just so pretty. All the old stone bridges and things, designed back in the day where people really took the time to make intricate sculptures, brick facades, all to make a very picturesque, tony atmosphere. It is very nice.

I also love the Upper East Side, at like Park/Madison/5th Aves and ~90s-50s street. It's so clean, and the buildings are all like old,stone or brick Empire or Victorian-style apartment houses. And for the buildings on 5th Ave, they have a great view of Central Park, being right across from it. I am sure, however, that those apartments and condos are tres cher. Like, I am thinking they pretty much cost this:

and a

Images by illuminator999 on Flickr, licensed under Creative Commons

Alas, I am afraid my tastes are too expensive for my own good. I will probably have to get some stressful-yet-high-paying job so I can keep up with myself.

So, that was about it for today. The sun is going down, and they just did the fireworks over the Hudson River, which I was able to see from my dorm window, so that was nice. I thought about going, but I didn't want to fight the crowds, plus from being out all day in the sun I am tired and a little dehydrated, so it was best for me to stay where it is air-conditioned. I should find dinner, but I ate kind of late today anyway. Will probably just stay in, maybe get takeout.

And finally, since it is Fourth of July, I thought ending this post with the following would be suitably appropriate, because it is a July 4 holiday classic, and just so epic, and so good:

President's Speech from Independence Day, copyright 20th Century Fox, 1996

Damn. Now I really want to watch that movie. Hulu? Anyway, I hope you all have had a happy and safe Fourth of July!