Hilux hijinx

What in the world is wrong with European courts lately? First a court in Italy found that six scientists were guilty of manslaughter because they couldn't accurately predict a deadly earthquake (I know that things are bad in Italy, but have they really regressed back to the 1500s. And now, a French judge ruled that ads by Toyota for their trucks and SUVs promoted unsafe behavior--like, you know, driving it offroad like they are supposed to be driven--and ordered the ads to be taken down.

Avertissment: des comportements dangereux.

I'm usually quick to criticize court decisions in the US--creating a nanny state, subverting the concept of self-responsibility, allowing a more litigious environment, etc.  And for the most part, I considered European courts to be less that and more about common sense. Well, obviously, European courts are not much better in that regard than those in the US.

French whine ... le sigh

It's always been somewhat peculiar to me when I see an American vintner label themselves as "Chateau something-something." (For instance, Chateau Ste. Michelle or Chateau St. Jean.) To me, it seems like the wineries are stretching too far and resorting to Euro-cool themes to make themselves sound more vintage and classy and I've tended to stay away from these wineries. (My reasoning: If you gotta rely on a faux, snotty French name--and you're located in Sonoma County for God's sake--ehh ... chances are your wines are overrated.)

That said, apparently the French aren't taking too lightly to these American wineries tagging themselves with "chateau" either. France has long forbidden American wineries that use "chateau" or "clos" to sell wines there, as to not confuse customers the wines from the "real" chateaux in France with the "fake" ones from the US. American wineries have responded by appealing to the European Union to remove this protectionist regulation.

Before we go on, let's take a look at the word "chateau" (or "chateaux" for plural, in French) and understand why it's so important to the French. Essentially, a chateau--in it's original sense--is a countryside castle or large manor house. Once it is encircled by a city, it is considered a palace, or palais. (Following this logic, the Palace of Versailles is known in French as Chateau de Versailles--even though it very much a grand palace, as we know the word; Louvre Palace is called Palais du Louvre.)

Chateau Citran, Bordeaux, France
December 2008

This fits perfectly in with our romanticized belief of what a wine-making chateau should look like--a grand, stately structure standing in the middle of vineyards, with rolling hills of the French countryside in the backdrop.  But in wine-making terms, "chateau" has a very specific definition, that may or may not relate to a grandiose mansion.  According to French rules, only wine from grapes grown on the property and made into wine in facilities on the property can be labeled with the name of the chateau. Perhaps an unspoken rule is that it should be French in origin as well, not just a Frenchie sounding name plucked up and slapped onto a bottle from a producer in Placer County.

Honestly, there aren't any real chateaux in the US.  There are nice countryside mansions, but chateau designates history, culture, and pedigree--a person buying wine from a French chateau, it is claimed, is buying into this history. Indeed, there are many chateaux in France that existed much longer than the US has as a country.

But does any of this matters? Can insular France really hold back the tides of globalization and international trade? Should American wineries using the chateau in their name be allowed to sell in the country that originated the word as we now know it? There is precedence to not allow it. For instance, only sparkling wines from the Champagne region can be called champagne, and only wines from Burgundy can be called by that name.

But there is the rub in all this, which I think the EU will rely on to overturn the French prohibition. The previous prohibitions are attributed to the names of the regions, not because there is some several hundred year old structure sitting on the plot of land. This is protectionism disguised in the cloak of history. The French vintners use a specific definition of what qualifies as chateau wines, but many American wineries already qualify. If more US wineries that use "chateau" toe the line with the definition and want to sell into France, would the French be OK? I doubt it.

In many cases, American wines are as good as French ones--some are better. They know this, and are rightly concerned about competition. Lifting the prohibition would be the right decision. But I'll still be avoiding US wineries using "chateau" in their name.

These time-lapsed photos of Ireland, crafted into a video, are just too amazing not to share. Follow this link.

Ireland is one of the country's I've longed to visit, for well over 10 years now. I'm sure the locals hate it when they hear tourists say this, but something about the island seems so ... mystical. The serene countryside, the mist-blanketed hills, the waves crashing against the rock cliffs, the rays of sunshine piercing through thick clouds--mix this with fantastical folklore of faeries, wisps and leprechauns. Looking at the video, how can it be described as anything other than mystical?

More than a lost dream

One of the structures I have always dreamed of visiting but fully realize that, chances are, I'd never would is the iconic Djinguereber Mosque in Timbuktu, Mali. A minaret rises above the shifting sands, unlike any others in northern African countries--wooden crossbeams, dozens of them, jut out from the four sides, and the dirt facade looks like it could crumble at a mere touch.  It's not very tall either, unlike the "Arabian Nights"-like visions of others, but one can argue that it's very striking and memorable for these same reasons.

(The minaret at Djinguereber
Mosque, unesco.org)

Built in 1327 out of mud and organic plant materiel, the mosque still serves as one of the learning centers in the country and holds thousands of manuscripts dating back to the construction of the building, on a variety of subjects including Islam, astronomy, history, and mathematics.  Additionally, the Djinguereber Mosque serves as one of the major madrassas in Mali, and really the entire sub-Saharan Africa region--it is a historical focal point of the early Islamification of the continent.  The fact that it still stands today, amid encroachment of the Saharan desert, blistering heat, punishing sandstorms, and the coming and passing of empires and colonial masters is a testament to the grandeur of what Timbuktu was.

But all this history and culture is now under attack, literally. What began as a rebellion in January by ethnic Tuareg has been usurped by Islamist militant groups who have taken advantage of a coup of the central government and imposed Sharia in most of the key towns in the northern Mali, including Timbuktu.  In the name of radical Islam, Ansar Dine and al-Qaeda in the Islamic Maghreb have since destroyed half of the tombs of early Muslim saints in Djinguereber because Malians don't practice the "right" type of (radical) Islam.

(Most Malians practice Sufi Islam, which is viewed as more tolerant with an intellectual interpretation of the religion.  Mixed with chanting, mysticism, and hypnotic prayers, perhaps it is blended with the regional culture that existed there before the spread of Islam.)

(Before and after, the taller of
the two statues, wikipedia.org)

It really is heart-breaking to see unique buildings and  historical importance be lost to time and the elements, but doubly so when they are destroyed by hands of men. These are things that can never be recovered, whether lost to time, encroaching sands, or madness and intolerance.  Northern Mali is called the "Afghanistan of western Africa," and the description is true on many fronts.  The destruction of the shrines--and possibly of the entire Djinguereber Mosque itself--is a stark reminder of the loss of the Buddhas of Bamiyam at the hands (and dynamite) of the Taliban in 2001.

It is more than my dreams and hopes that were lost. An important facet of this world and our civilization's history will soon be gone.

Bourdain actually listens to my advice!

Why? Because after my post calling for him to return to Malaysia to eat real Malaysian food instead of the weak-sauce version found in Singapore, Tony went to Penang. (He didn't heed my request to hit up my mother-in-law to show him around the food courts, though). Alright, alright, in all seriousness, I doubt Tony even knows about my blog and it's fairly certain that the episode was shot during Chinese New Year and planned some months before that, at least.

Here is a link to a video recap of his trip.

The hawker center he was at, gorging on snails, was the one I also similarly gorged at while in Georgetown. (See said hawker center on the left.) Or maybe I'm just grasping at whatever vapid, ephemeral connections possible to associate myself with Tony, the Man when it comes to wondrous travel, kooky left-wing politics and exotic eating.

Whatever the case, one thing we do share is our love for assam laksa. (See said dish to the right.)

Here are a few more links to clips of the No Reservations Penang episode:

Monkey Island (no, not the game, nerd.)
Bah kuh teh
Um ... random, obscene comments about monkeys
Snake Temple (this one is pretty damn funny)

Brain circulation

I wanted to share this article from the New York Times. It's about second generation children of US immigrants that move back to their parents' home country to start new and innovative businesses. The profiles several young people, all from BRIC countries (minus the "R"--Russia), that have traveled back and created "Creative Class" type companies, those that we more often than not associate with Silicone Valley, Austin, San Diego, or Boston.

The article introduced a term that was new to me: brain circulation. This concept moves us beyond a world that is globalized for manufactured products and ideas. People and networks are globalized. It's not merely about the brain drain of young, ambitious, well-educated away from other countries into the US anymore, but the free movement of people and their ideas (and entrepreneurial spirit) around different countries, continuously circulating back and forth and all around. Pretty powerful stuff.

Some of my friends have gone this route of back-migration, to Hong Kong, Vietnam and elsewhere. Will they ever be back to the US? Who knows; to be frank, I don't think they know either. This quote from the article sums it up:

"Ms. Tran said she did not know how long she would remain abroad. She said she was open to various possibilities, including moving to another foreign country, living a life straddling China and the United States or remaining permanently in China. "

Perhaps this says something more about the condition of innovation and opportunity in the US more than anything else. The recession in the US is casting a long shadow across the the country, in more ways than one. For young, global-minded people for whom borders are only the creation of political machinations, there is less reason to stay in the US now. And with the recovery--if you can call it that--trudging ever so slowly along, it is hard to blame them.

Upending art and culture in Qatar

Here is an interesting article about Sheikha Mayassa Al Thani's effort to basically overthrow all conventions of art and culture in socially conservative Qatar.

The stark and striking MIA
(Bloomberg News)

I won't repeat too much of what's already in the article, but to summarize, she is the 29-year-old daughter of the Qatari emir and is considered one of the most influential people in the art world. The sheikha was granted immense leeway by her father to develop the country into the cultural hub of the Middle East. This includes purchasing art from across the world and bringing in exhibits from artists globally renowned. They are to be displayed at the Museum of Islamic Art (or MIA, but not MIA--equally intriguing in their own rights but vastly different from one another ... ) though obviously not all the pieces are anywhere close to being Islamic or Arabic--Murakami, Cezanne, Bacon, or Warhol, anyone?

I.M. Pei's pyramid, at the Louvre
(www.wikipedia.org)

As with all great architecture, the building itself is a piece of art. The museum was designed by I.M. Pei of the Musee de Louvre pyramid fame (or infamy) in a modernist/Arabic style. Perhaps emblematic of the transition we are seeing in Qatar on so many levels and that Sheikha Mayassa herself is pushing.

For me, the article raises two integral points that I think will dictate the direction of life and culture in Qatar in the future. No doubt the sheikha is a moderate in a country that is--for all intents and purposes--still deeply conservative both religiously and socially (but on some levels more moderate than some of its Middle Eastern neighbors). She spent her undergraduate and graduate schooling at Duke and Columbia, respectively, and I truly believe that studying abroad in the US (though not necessarily because it was in the US specifically) influenced her views on culture, both Arabic and Western and how they are not mutually exclusive. As Rick Steves wrote in his editorial on the primacy of traveling and studying abroad: "Learning in a different culture and place allows us to see our own challenges in sharp contrast, and with more clarity, as we observe smart people in other lands dealing with similar issues."

How then can this drive toward more cultural openness that the sheikha and the royal family is apparently pushing be balanced with the conservative tenants of the country and religious leaders? Granted, it's an emirate and what the emir says goes. But that does not mean he does not need to take concerns seriously. Perhaps all that is needed is time and effort applied. Qatar (and other nations like Dubai) are already looking toward a fossil fuel-depleted future, and I think even the most conservative imam understands the realities of what that means. The broad, general goal of transitioning the country away from fossil fuels is already happening and the MIA (and all that it represents and tries to do) is a cog in that moving machine, as is hosting of the World Cup of football in 2022.

Changing a country from the inside out is all about the slow steady footsteps in the shifting sands.

Ice, Ice Coffee

Derek Thompson of the Atlantic Monthly asks: Why is iced coffee so expensive? Honestly, I had no idea iced coffee was more expensive than regular coffee. But then again, I don't drink that water-diluted, weak sauce stuff. There is supposedly a whole different process to brew iced coffee, which uses more resources and thus costs more to produce. Again--I had no idea.

However, I think most places just chill the hot coffee that they brew. They simply dump in ice to fill half the damn cup and then pour in about half of the coffee they would normally offer hot. And of course, double the price.

Yet another reason to drink coffee the true way it's meant to be drunk--hot, full-bodied, and undiluted by sugar and cream.

Follow-up: Vote-mongering politicians

To follow up on a post I made a month ago about legislation in France that would make it illegal to deny that the Armenian genocide took place. The French senate passed the bill and President Nicolas Sarkozy signed it into law, but today, the highest court in France struck it down. The Constitutional Council declared that the law was unconstitutional. Follow this link.

And unconstitutional it was. As I wrote in my previous blog, this law would've banned debate about the subject of the genocide and curbs the right to free expression. How is this any different than the restriction of speech in Turkey, where--on the flip-side--it's illegal to state that the genocide did happen?

Sarkozy and his party members in parliament have promised to reintroduce the bill, with a few tweaks to get them around the high court's decision. I'm not sure how such a law can be written without infringing on free speech abilities, but when you're trailing in the polls and desperate like Sarkozy to get whatever votes you can, you're willing to do anything.

Hidden gems, West Sacramento: Part 1

Tucked in the curves and bends of the Sacramento River, south toward the Delta, is a hidden gem of the Sacramento area: the Old Sugar Mill. The industrial buildings and warehouses--worn from time and disuse--stand amid the farm land that surrounds it and the vineyards directly across the street from it. Belying the worn, blighted look of some of the buildings is the fact that the Old Sugar Mill houses local wineries in the community of Clarksburg, just south of West Sacramento.

Wine country, Sacramento style

The Old Sugar Mill was literally an old sugar mill that dates back to the 1930s. It's since been renovated but thankfully resisted the trend to go sleek and modern. Instead, it maintains hard-knock industrial look and feel--steel, brick and cement, the old fashioned way. As odd as it may sound, a lot of weddings are held there, amid the rubble of the reconstruction going on and the industrial feel of the area.

My wife and I went to this hidden gem some months ago, on a hot September weekend. We got there early before the crowds streamed in. There wasn't that pretentious air to the place, as you'd find in a winery in a place like Napa. The staff were warm and friendly, eager to answer questions and pour libations.

Inside the main building;
the tasting rooms are
along each side.

There are eight wineries housed there, each with their own tasting room and their own style of wines. My personal favorite is Heringer Estates--located in the Clarksburg area for 140 years. Their wines are a bit pricier than the usual Sacramento-area product (to me, that means Lodi, Amador County and El Dorado County), but they are really top of the line stuff and worth the extra premium.

Make the effort to head over to this side of the river and drive south on Jefferson Boulevard. There will be no regret from this little gem, hidden among the trees and farms and the winding river.

Lost in translation

This is just too hilarious not to share.

(From Atlantic Monthly)

I'm not sure how this happened, but I assume some genius took someone's instruction to have displayed "diesel fuel in Arbic/nosmoking in Arabic" (misspellings and all) too literally instead of translating "diesel fuel" and "no smoking" into Arabic.

This is the article that I found this from, by James Fallows. He's quite the healthy traveler, and is considered an expert on China.

Pulling tea

Food is as much about the process as it is about the end product, the visual of how it is made as much as the taste. When I was in Malaysia, one of the favorite things I liked to drink--and watched to be made--was teh tarik. The name literally translates to "pulled tea" and the drink is generally known as the unofficial beverage of the country. (As an example of the great diversity and cross cultural influence inside Malaysia, teh tarik is originally a Mamak--or southern, Muslim Indian--cuisine, though it is consumed by all races.)

The drink is essentially black tea and condensed milk. Simple enough, yeah? But the way it's made is quite unique and entertaining to watch The mixture is poured back and forth repeatedly between two vessels of some type, from some height. It looks like a rubber band being pulled as it is poured. This helps mix the tea with the milk, gives it a thick, frothy foam head, and cools the liquid. It's fun to watch and even better to sip.

Check out this video. Nevermind the music.

And this one guy is getting a bit artsy with his pouring. Twirl, man, twirl with your teh!

Studying abroad is a necessity, not a luxury

I wanted to share this opinion piece by Rick Steves, the gone-everywhere-in-Europe man and of PBS fame. Take a look. The article essentially states that studying abroad should be a necessity--necessary, even, for graduation--for university students.  All the usual arguments apply--better understanding of different cultures, appreciation for those differences, better ability to live and work in a globalized world. As cliche as they are, they still ring true.

Steves calls on Congress to pass an act that would allocate $80 million to incentivize students to study abroad. While $80 million may seem like a lot in these difficult economic times in the US, it is merely a speckle of a drop of water in a bucket that is the overall budget. And the long-term benefits in terms of personal and economic growth and potential (which then goes back into the economy) far outweighs any upfront costs.

Here is a quote from the article: "Americans who want our next generation to be hands-on with the world — grappling constructively with international partners against daunting challenges that ignore political borders, working competitively in a globalized economy, and having enthusiasm rather than anxiety about other cultures and approaches to persistent problems — can get on board with the movement to help our students get a globalized education."

Hear, hear, Rick Steves.

Blàr Allt a' Bhonnaich: Redux

It seems like the Battle of Bannockburn is about to happen again in a couple of years. The Scottish Parliament (with the awesome name of Holyrood) backed the effort to call a referendum on Scottish independence from the UK. No specific timeline has been established but 2013 or 2014 has often been cited as potential opportunities to call for a vote.

Westminster has cited that the constitutional authority for devolution lies solely with them. They are OK with a referendum on the issue of independence, but want to do it "right" so it doesn't conflict with federal laws. This has put the two sides in conflict.

Putting aside the questions of whether Scottish independence is the right move and whether Scotland can sustain itself without funds from Westminster, what does it mean for the kingdom as a whole? What is there left of the kingdom, both physically and politically, when a large portion--half of the island--splits off?

If the Scottish independence referendum is successful and the country splits off, I truly think it spells the beginning of the end for the British monarchy. What is there to rule when parts of the kingdom starts peeling off? Will Wales want independence next? Will hardliners in Northern Ireland start attacks again, emboldened by their Scottish brethren?

The monarchy is an anachronism, albeit an entertaining one that brings in immeasurable amounts of funds to the state. I would like to see Scotland stay with the UK. What's the alternative--joining the EU? Sure, that worked out really well for Ireland.

Vote-mongering politicians

The lower house of the French parliament recently passed a piece of legislation that would make it a crime to deny the Armenian genocide happened. (On the flip side, it is a crime in Turkey to say that the genocide happened.) On its face, this is entirely absurd, especially for a country that essentially debated the concepts of modern democracy that the US government was built on. The government is essentially banning the ability to debate the topic and curbing the right to free expression on the topic of the Armenian genocide. And how is this any different from the oppression of free speech in Turkey?

The situation then begs the question of: Why? Why this bill again (it was introduced previously in 2006--at that time, a newspaper owner in Turkey--Hrant Dink--stated that he would be willing to go to jail in France for denying the genocide, just as he would be wiling to go to jail in Turkey for stating the events did happen)? Why at this time?

Practically, the bill serves no purpose other than to piss off Turkey. It further deteriorates relations between the two countries and threatens trade. France is Turkey's fifth largest trading partner and two-way trade is worth some $14 billion a year. Add the fact that France has been vehemently opposed to Turkish membership in the European Union (why in the world would they want to join now, anyway?), and this current row certainly doesn't help.

So what then is the reason behind this bill?

As a government relations professional (otherwise known as a corrupt lobbyist), I can step back from a debate and view things from a non-partisan perspective, understanding a situation from a purely political or policy perspective without the overbearing influence of following the party line. That said, here's my opinion of the bill.

The legislation is authored by French member of parliament Valerie Boyer. She is of the same party as President Nicholas Sarkozy, the UMP. Sarkozy is facing a tough reelection battle in 2012 and he's down in the polls. The cynical lobbyist side of me thinks that he's looking to exploit the genocide as a way to curry the Armenian vote in France. (There are somewhere between 300,000 to 400,000 Armenians in France.)

I guess politicians all over the world are the same. As Dink stated when the 2006 bill was being debated, healing the wounds of history should be left to Turks and Armenians, not vote-mongering politicians.

As a side note, the upper house of parliament is set to vote on the bill in late January.