And the Oscar goes to... "SHMETAMORPHOSIS"

Jack Feldstein's film in brilliant neonism. When a bug bursts into Super-Therapist, Berthold Krasenstein's office, Krasenstein is well aware of the Kafkaesque challenges ahead... or is he?!? BTW, you may notice that Berthold sometimes resembles ME, and that's because it is me (sometimes) in neonised fashion. Enjoy...

Do you like your steak rare or stangy?

What's in a name?
I understand, to a point, when people write something down and then re-read it incorrectly. That recently happened to me when I was leaving my telephone number. It ends in a "1" but the person on the other end of the phone must have written something resembling a "7" and it took her about 4 attempts of me saying "one" to confirm the number was correct. At least she confirmed the right number and didn't presume she'd got it correct immediately. It was this same person who was put off by my use of the word convoluted. It reminded me of the Seinfeld episode where Elaine's on the subway on her way to a lesbian wedding:

Woman: I started riding these trains in the forties. Those days a man would give up their seat for a woman. Now we're liberated and we have to stand.
Elaine: It's ironic.
Woman: What's ironic?
Elaine: This, that we've come all this way, we have made all this progress,
but you know we've lost the little things, the niceties.
Woman: No, I mean what does 'ironic' mean?
Elaine: Oh...

After convoluted, she said "what?" and I used the word "complex" instead. It was far easier than getting into the definition of the word, and a synonym, incomplete as it was, had to be sufficient.

But the essence of today's shtick is that of a name. I recently made an online order. I used only forms on the company's website and used my full and proper name (I have the order confirmation email as exhibit A). There was a kerfuffle about my order which had nought to do with nomenclature - the order was shipped and the recipient (in the USA) had not alerted the right party that a package would arrive for me. This was promptly rectified and then the UPS parcel returned some days later, marked to the attention of GARY STANGY SLEZAK. I have never had a middle name and I have never really wanted one either. Furthermore, would I have chosen Stangy?
This hilarious oversight - or insertion - reminded me of the various spellings of my surname. The brief list as follows:
• Slick

• Slovak

• Sellick

• Sentak

• Slezac

• Sellak

• Selzak

• Slezzak
and my all-time favourite
• Steak

So, I understand errors and although 2 syllables my surname's potentially confusing. However, the creation of a name where none existed previously is rather bizarre. Thomas Putnam (whom Goody Proctor wished a fart upon) talked of his name being all he has, and cannot have another. Well, I am in the same boat - no middle name... ever. And no Steak as a surname too, please!

In other wordly news, I was at a meeting where the word chasm was used. It was a metaphor (i'm not into geology or tectonic movement at the moment) and quite the appropriate one in the context, but the learned person pronounced chasm with a "ch" as in "chase". It was hideous and reverberated in my head for hours. This reminds me of a line of Demetri Martin: I'm going to open a store called Chasm. We're going to be just like the Gap, but way bigger.

And here's today's Demetri quote, unrelated to any of the above:
I heard this guy say "Man, I need to get some R&R" I was like "Wow, this guy's tired. He doesn't even have the energy to say Est and Elaxation."

استمتعت

Phlegmington and traditional mealtime

The cold winds of Flemington racecource swept The Rails where we had our vantage point for the race that stop a nation. Perhaps it's the race that stops a notion/emotion/annotation/etc, but in any case, it did stop my metabolism kicking in and the flight home and subsequent day the air of flu was about.

I still can't work out why horses, known as much for their glue-like properties as their racing prowess, manage to have the status of "the sport of kings". They may be majestic animals, but quite the regal animal they are not.

Equine does not, to me, evoke royalty. Perhaps the "traditional souvlaki" nexus with horses (and other similar edible beasts) was more suitable, especially in the public arena (where I feared to tread thrice during the day) of Flemington.

I feel the need to go home. My throat's starting to annoy me and the flu could be close by. I hope the stunning melbourne weather doesn't impact upon endeavours to return to the desk on the morrow.

And finally a Mitch Hedberg quote for your entertainment:
I order the club sandwich all the time, but I'm not even a member, man. I don't know how I get away with it.

Summertime and the grammar ain't easy

Balagan with the recent time change?
No, I'm not so concerned about the changing of the clocks. Au contraire, i'm for it (bondi beach after work is quite the incentive to implement summer time). I care not if Queensland has no interest in moving in line with other states. I am even unconcerned with sleeping patterns being out of whack.

It's the grammatical concerns tied in with the change which haunt me. Read on:

1. Daylight savings [plural?]
2. Daylight saving's [singular, possessive]
3. Daylight savings' [plural, possessive - j'en doute]

Is the genetive required? What does DST really stand for? Where should the apostrophe go if it is to go somewhere? Methinks it's (2) above, but I really cannot tell. Is it a saving of daylight, savings of daylight or some other shrewd and mayhap incorrect grammatical construction which itself may be flawed?

I know, I'm asking myriad questions without an answer, but I'm actually unable to locate a solution which bodes well with me. The BOM believes it is singular and only now have I learned that the change in time has an effect on statistics the BOM uses. However, this does not deem the grammar issue complete, nor can it be put to bed (I hope to address the issue in a later post).

I did have similar disdain around 2000. I could not, and still cannot, fathom why that year was special. If things occurred years beforehand it was easy to say. Eg, "We travelled in 1997." And for years after MM it was as facile, eg, "in 2004 I travelled to Portugal and Sweden." Why, oh why, must 2000 be put on a pedestal. Eg, "in the year 2000 Sydney had the olympics."
Woooptie freakin' dooo. The millennium has the poetic licence to have "the year" before the number... I don't think so.

I went to a seminar today and a presenter managed to pepper his talk with the following words:

• louche
• egregious
• mendacious
• ignominious
• interstices

Now, don't get me wrong, they're words (I like words) and they're good (for want of a better word), but I think he was having a go at pomposity. It reminded me of Woody Allen's Small Time Crooks. A fun film with great NY vibe, but what can be said as merely a recent film of his. It's a good film, but not a great film (& then Gertrude Stein punched me in the mouth).

Have a fun Movember (click here to sponsor Josh in his facial hair growth charity).

I used to play sports. Then I realized you can buy trophies. Now I'm good at everything. -- Demetri Martin

And finally, my moment of Zen: