I just spent the last hour getting my ass kicked by some GRE math review. I understand the point of these sample sections is to beat you up a little so you’re ready for the real test, but when they actually do more to confuse you than help you relearn the concepts, I begin to wonder if I’ve spent my money wisely on materials.
In the time between when S. left for work and a sister-in-law showed up to give me a few hours to study, M. and I watched the last half hour of Purple Rain. If you haven’t noticed, the movie is on VH1 constantly these days, no doubt in an attempt to capitalize on the release of the 20th anniversary DVD and cheapos like me who don’t want to buy it. I don’t think M. is quite ready for some of the scenes, even in the edited version, but it’s never too early to introduce her to some of the seminal music of my life. She was notably impressed by the majesty of the title track. She played along with me as I made the hand signs during “I Would Die 4 U”. She really liked “Baby I’m a Star”, mostly because of the “Baby, baby, baby, baby” lines.
She did have some concerns about the acting and fashion, though. I explained to her everyone looked so strange because the movie was made two decades ago. I pointed out she’ll be a college junior (Or sophomore if she got my academic genes) in two decades. Also, the movie took place in Minnesota, not exactly a hotbed of couture. I think she understood. As for the lack of acting prowess, I proposed that some movies get their strength not from the performances of the actors, but from the mood, the feel, and especially in Purple Rain’s case, the power of the music. Sounds this good can make up for a multitude of sins. She argued, however, that a movie should be judged for the merits of all its elements, not just on the strength of one or two aspects. This is clearly a conversation she and I are going to continue for many years. As long as she gets the music, I’ll be happy.
And I bet a few of you thought this was going to be a political post after seeing the subject line, no?
I added a post last night that doesn’t appear to be available for viewing. I’ll check it out and hopefully get that added again this evening.
Day: September 30, 2004
I know you’re all dying to hear what I think about the debate that’s been dominating discussion in this great land of ours. I shall not disappoint you: I think it was scandalous how Major League Baseball has treated the city and fans of Montreal over the past ten years. Make no mistake, Montreal in all honesty does not deserve to have an MLB team. However, the governing body of the game has done little over the years to make it easier for a team to succeed in the game’s oddest market (Different economy, different culture, different language). Beginning with the 1994 strike that kept one of the most talented teams in recent memory from getting an opportunity to play in the post-season, nothing good has happened to the Montreal Expos. The owner that kept them afloat moved on when the game couldn’t solve its labor problems. A new owner quite literally ran the team into the ground only to be given a primo deal to buy the Florida Marlins (which he may soon move to New Jersey if he has his way). Meanwhile, the league has run the team for the last three years in the biggest conflict on interest in the history of professional sports. A franchise that had cranked out as much talent as anyone for ten years was suddenly left with only a few decent players and little chance of retaining them. All the while, they were held out like raw meat to cities hungry to snatch up a team of their own. Finally, Washington, DC gained the honor this week of giving baseball yet another chance.
Why does any of this matter? Didn’t I just say Montreal probably doesn’t deserve a team regardless of what MLB has done to them in recent years? It matters because the league basically killed a franchise and no one objected. They couldn’t get a big money owner in Montreal. However, someone in DC, Virginia, Portland, Las Vegas, or some other city would probably be willing to shell out the money for ownership all while getting tax dollars better spent on schools, road, or law enforcement from local governments for a fancy new stadium. What happens when there is no longer Wal-Mart money behind the Royals, the team continues to play poorly, and Kaufman Stadium only gets 12,000 fans a night? Who’s to say the league won’t step in, make things worse than they are, all the make sure Mark Cuban or some other billionaire buys the team and moves them to New Orleans? What if ownership in Oakland gets sick of playing at the Coliseum and the Giants’ claim on the San Jose market? Will MLB make sure the A’s franchise withers up and nearly dies so that the baseball hotbed of Charlotte gets a team? Cities need to lose their franchises fair and square, not with the assistance of the sport’s governing body.
It’s time for regime change. Bud Selig, probably the worst commissioner in the history of professional sports, needs to go.