text:
Tuesday, April 20, 2010
Bomb news and burrito burps: a dialogue between Seth Abramson and Gene Tanta on "dissidence as entertainment"
A dialogue between Seth Abramson and Gene Tanta on Linh Dinh & "dissidence as entertainment"
Seth Abramson:
Hmm... a poetry that simultaneously "shuns context" and "imitates television." I wouldn't have thought a poetics that does not merely elevate the demotic but literally evaporates everything *but* ephemeral culture could be said to "shun context," unless -- aha! -- "context" is defined in the most limited and limiting way (un)imaginable. In fetishizing popular culture for the sake of skewering it we are already conceding defeat -- we are saying (like so many of those "pseudo-Marxists" that Linh mentions) that poems themselves -- not merely "American poetry," but actual individual poems -- are incapable of remaining oblivious to materialism. Either that, or they simply *can't*, because, as Linh says (seemingly without irony) we need to sell our books, man!
Sheesh. I'm just about prepared to light out for American Metarealism once and for all. If the Russians could do it 30 years ago, why can't we here in the States? It seems an end-around on both materialism (realism) and this new "conceptual" poetry which is in fact merely the New Symbolism -- a new way of thinking in the old way, that is, figuratively (Goldsmith's "The Day" as merely an embodied metaphor for -- well, take your pick!). Only Metarealism offers an entirely new form of discourse -- a discourse which cannot be read either solely literally or solely figuratively, cannot be tamed or co-opted because of its very hybridism, but *must* be taken on its own terms, as a permanent transformation of both the literal and the figurative (leaving neither intact while not, like flarf, engaging in any purely destructive impulse, cf. Kasey's recent statement to the effect that this time Dadaism is going to *really* make it hurt). - S.
Gene Tanta:
"What to make of a poetry that constantly pivots away from itself?"
Yes, we are deprived (depraved?) of holy (wholly) absence. Culture industry up the wazzu. Without the silence to think, we are bombarded with bomb news and burrito burps. What is an ethical culture maker to do? Shared literacy? Online education via Facebook? A publishing house on every desk?
Seth Abramson:
Gene, I think the key word there is "ethics." There is an argument to be made -- Badiou would do it -- that flarf, for instance, is "unethical" (which Badiou would express by calling it, in his terms, "ethical" or "[Western] ethical") because it identifies an a priori Evil, Culture, and in so doing, and in proceeding from that single over-determined premise, generates a framework for Art which can only (re)produce the same Evil it so despises. The conception of "ethics" embodied by, say, flarf -- which would likely term itself "amoral" as a means of escaping this debate altogether (nice try!) -- is one in which there is no possibility of transformation. It is a dead end that revels in its dead-endedness, a form of action (or inaction) which is (in common parlance now) "unethical." Art certainly need not be "ethical" in the sense of its explicit politics -- but in terms of concept and concept/function, yes. What is needed is a means of speaking which engenders a revision of the existing framework, not merely martyrdom upon it. Flarf is not that means of speaking, nor is so-called "conceptualism." These merely re-entrench (Badiou might say) the common Kantian worldview that Evil is our starting point, not Good, because -- presumably -- it is something "we can all identify" and thus work from. What if, say, metarealistic language is actually a Good, a higher mode of (ethical) functioning, that individuals in disparate circumstances (e.g., in Soviet Russia, in contemporary America) can work *toward*, and which can take individual circumstances (ours in the U.S., others in developing nations, &c) and transform them through Art without destroying what makes them something other than... well, a reification of the totalitarian universal-generic? - S.
Gene Tanta:
"What is needed is a means of speaking which engenders a revision of the existing framework, not merely martyrdom upon it."
Seth, I agree, however, an important function question is: how to start work (writing or organizing or dis-organ-izing) without a commons' named enemy (that sublime object of desire, that fatted calf of credit)? How can art transform its reader? If you mean, by "materialistic language" the, uhm, "actual" material of syntax, word choice, semantic gesture (it's hard to stay away from the mimetic properties of language ain't?), I actually agree. My AWP talk was about how, actually, one of Linh Dinh's poems ethically (and aesthetically) implicates its readers.
Identity politics claim: as an immigrant, I have more of a material sense of language than native speakers. Hah aha h. Is that how you mean "material" or do you mean it in some sort of Marxian dialectic way about class?
... continued in the comments boxes for this post!
24 comments:
- Henry Gould said...
"Art certainly need not be "ethical" in the sense of its explicit politics -- but in terms of concept and concept/function, yes. What is needed is a means of speaking which engenders a revision of the existing framework, not merely martyrdom upon it."
This is interesting, Seth. But I think the Russian Acmeists (Gumilev, Mandelstam) got there before the Russian Metarealists.
Gumilev proposed a meta-ethical-aesthetic term he called "chasteness". In a nutshell, chasteness = "respect the inherent dignity and integrity of things as they are (esp. human beings)". This translated into respect for historical culture, language, poetry. The poem has its own distinct integrity and value-in-itself : but only insofar as it reflects and participates in this larger normative ethos.
Such an attitude can be viewed as simple conservatism. But what is normative is not necessarily traditional. The Acmeists searched for a bond - an analogy - between aesthetic equilibrium and ethical rightness.
Wrote about this a little further over here :
- April 20, 2010 at 12:20 PM
- Seth Abramson said...
Hi Gene,
My apologies for not responding to your last query earlier -- I was swamped with work yesterday and couldn't come back to this until now.
I'd like to say, first, that I'm skeptical of much of Badiou (believe you me!), so I don't mean to act as apologist or interlocutor here. But one aspect of this (I feel distinctly French) view of ethics is that it gives us an entirely new way to envision both the Subject and Good and therefore ethics -- unlike a more traditional (cf. Levinas) view of ethics, which fetishizes a necessarily bounded Other, and leads to forms of art which do likewise (e.g. flarf's view of Culture as fundamentally an echo-chamber; conceptualism's view of the author, contra Foucault, as being at least coherent enough a corporeal figure to [huge quotes here] "subvert" by testing the terms and boundaries of authorship rather than literally transforming the term itself at the level of paradigm [not "Who is an author?", for instance, but more like, "Author who?", a territory which I'll concede, with his gene-related projects, Christian Bok is approaching]), a Subject-centered view of ethics is inductive rather than deductive. And the premise is that our conception of Good will be likewise. Flarf and conceptualism have made evident that they come to us with the sword; what we need is an aesthetic that not only comes to us with plowshares but intends to, with that instrument, work a farmstead that lies forever over the next horizon and is in practice unreachable. We need a poetry without bounds.
The Other always remains bounded rather than infinite; the Subject can be imagined, and I admit some Romanticism here, as infinite, and Badiou does so with his idea of the human as always-already Immortal (though I quibble over whether Badiou conveniently ignores psychological suffering, including shame, dishonor, and guilt; it is surviving a physical ordeal, he says, that makes us Immortal rather than animals, but does the psychological suffering of the human animal ever end, is it ever "survived"?). In any case, what would a poetics of Immortality look like? Certainly it would not be merely realism -- that is bounded and binds us once again -- nor, again, figurative, as figures are rhetorical instruments caught within the confines of the very rhetorical framework that both breeds and houses them. E.g., I consider the simile entirely dead and the metaphor at least half so. They are capable of co-opting because they are designed, themselves, to co-opt.
- April 20, 2010 at 2:35 PM
- Seth Abramson said...
An unbounded, inductive poetics would have to be, definitionally, impossible. I mean to say we will know it, and know that it serves the present purposes (yearning) of Art, when we discover that it is, at base, impossible. Impossibility means an infinity of striving, and only by advancing in this way are we able to a) move ever closer (but, cf. Zeno, never arrive) to a perpetually (self-)(re-)generative rendering of capabilities of any Subject, and b) undermine entirely every existing framework by moving around rather than through any single one of them. And yes, I'm imagining Art as lock-step with Subject here -- this is why I say I'm only jumping off Badiou, as Art is not itself his primary concern -- so to re-envision the Subject is to re-envision Art, and to re-envision ethics is to re-envision the function of Art.
Metarealism is, of course, impossible in practice. Not merely or even primarily because there's no metaphysical "realm" (e.g. an accumulative dimension beyond the dimensions we can perceive or measure mathematically) but simply because its very hybridism renders it in a permanent state of what we might call "contingency" or "emergence." Flarf and conceptualism, whatever they are, are not contingent or emergent spaces in the sense I'm using those terms now -- just as they read "context" in the most narrow, deductive terms imaginable, they express any contingency we might find within them in a way that is always rooted in what is (even Christian wants to implant generative, poetry-producing chem-stuff into material organisms of the "real" world). So when I say contingency I mean 100% contingent, a space that not only does not but cannot -- can never -- exist, and therefore which we can and must only ever strive toward. And when I say "emergent" I mean it in the Monistic (Eleatic) sense that portends actual oblivion -- i.e., metarealism cannot finally be said to "emerge from" anything because, like the Monistic view of the universe, it ultimately is a Singularity without beginning or end. It cannot be measured, it merely (at best) is. Metarealism may be instantly (as in, in the illusion of "an instant") said to have been "born" of two parents -- literal and figurative narratives -- but part of its Singular lifespan (and thus an always-already feature of it) is that it transforms its parents into non-existence; it subsumes them and becomes unlike them and untranslatable as/between them. A metarealistic poem can be "read" literally or "read" figuratively but where it lives neither realism nor figure holds sway. It is unbounded and yet may be personally sought-after; it is therefore Subject-driven, inductive, generative rather than destructive (it transforms but does not destroy that which breeds it), and thus offers a hope of leading us toward an inexpressible Good that is always over the next hill. It frees us to make that journey.
- April 20, 2010 at 3:02 PM
- Seth Abramson said...
So, now to answer your question -- to even say "how can art transform reader" (or let us say, as for purposes of looking at Subject it's better to do so, "how can art transform writer") is to presume, in essence, that art precedes either reader or writer. (Agamben makes this same mistake of temporality in presuming that the exceptions to laws are preceded by the laws themselves; in fact, they are born simultaneously). It is only when we conjoin Art and writer -- when we see the two processes as co-equal -- that either can move beyond any existing framework. Otherwise Art is always moving against the framework of People (e.g. flarf's critique of Culture), or People are always moving toward Art (which path Modernism has already explored to more or less its conclusion).
So I'm saying we actually don't need a common enemy. We need to operate enemy-less for a while. It's like the story from the Talmud of the man lost in a wood who finds another man in the middle of it and presumes that he (this stranger) can surely lead him out. "Friend!" He says, "I've been wandering here many days, and as you've come here I presume you know the way out, will you show me?" The stranger smiles sadly and says, "I'm afraid I, too, am lost -- all I can tell you is that the way I have come is not the way. Come, let us find the way out together." A horribly simplistic story, but the idea is that all is ahead and none is behind -- we do not consult a map for reference (e.g. Culture), we are not "led" (e.g. on a journey to discover the final boundary-marker of "authorship," with "authorship" functioning as sought-after locale here), there is no precedent (for those wondering, American Metarealism doesn't exist -- there is no such school -- though my hope is that will soon change). For all their rebelliousness flarfists and conceptualists are always in a state of being "led" by concepts (and frameworks) they've fetishized.
So I meant materialism in the Marxist sense, not in the sense of textuality. If Linh writes a poem that "implicates" his readers we are still bounded by the Subject/Other relationship; we have not reached the point where the Subject and the Other agree neither has found the way out of the woods and both must seek it together. We might say Subject, taken literally, is the "real," and the Other, taken figuratively (as s/he/it must be, because even Levinas does not presume it is finally "attainable" to render the Other as "real" as the Self, indeed he actually posits the near-elimination of Self toward that end, there being no way, he seems to suggest, for Self and Other to co-exist and both be fully realized), is, natch, "figurative." How do we get the real and the figurative, Subject and Other, to walk together? Metarealism is one possible answer to this; flarf and conceptualism are, instead, merely more of the same, and unless one is extremely happy with what is that failure is self-provingly unethical. And a fatal flaw. Res ipsa loquitur.
- April 20, 2010 at 3:10 PM
- Seth Abramson said...
P.S. I said Art goes "lock-step" with the human -- and I believe any plausible construction of ethics requires this, as the two are born together and (in theory) could only die in the same instant (reading "ethics" as a series of processes and not a series of conclusions) -- and in that sense I do think we could as easily reconfigure the transformed realism/figure duality embodied (in my theory) by metarealism as either Subject/Other (real/figure) or Subject/Art (real/figure). --S.
- April 20, 2010 at 3:15 PM
- Henry Gould said...
I've only read a little bit of Levinas, Seth, but as I understand him there is no imbalance or disequilibrium between self & other. The Self originates & becomes who s/he is, by way of a prior (to everything) relationship with this Other, who is neither "bound" or limited, as you say, nor fully knowable. This relationship of Persons does seem to offer some sort of ground for substantiating or affirming "what is", whether in art or life.... thus Levinas' affirmation of Celan's poetry, for example...
- April 20, 2010 at 3:24 PM
- Seth Abramson said...
To clarify, I'm saying -- not Levinas -- that the Other is bounded, in the sense that consciousness is the only unlimited space and we cannot enter the consciousness of the Other. Levinas uses a semantic trick here, I feel -- he says we see the Infinite in the Other by way of simultaneously suggesting we cannot access the Other and that the Other is limitless. But it is only by abandoning a Subject-driven analysis that we can make this latter claim -- which abandonment I'm unwilling to engage in. Hence I say the Other is bounded in the view of the Subject -- to say that we recognize in the face of the Other that we cannot place a bound on the Other intellectually is not to say we don't react to the Other, emotionally and even biologically, as a bounded entity. Levinas wants to have his cake and eat it, too, I feel. But on occasion theories do have consequences -- they get "applied." And in applying Levinas we must consider both of the view of the Subject and of the Other and the actual capacities of each in practice.
As to imbalance or disequilibrium between Subject and Other, I think I'd have to disagree there also -- to the extent Levinas posits that the Subject cannot resist the draw of the Other when the two are face-to-face absolutely bears on the agency of the Subject and the nature (or grade) of the Subject-Other relationship. It cannot be said (cf. Levinas) that ethics are Other-defined (indeed, arguably pre-Subject!) and yet this does not privilege the Other over the Subject as to ethics.
I think a Subject-driven analysis has been so pushed out by Levinas that what we are always in danger of doing is reading Levinas through the presumptions of, well, Levinas (again, a deductive rather than inductive approach) -- and a paradox.
- April 20, 2010 at 3:36 PM
- Henry Gould said...
I see your point in the 2nd paragraph, but I guess I would say that a relationship which actually constructs or constitutes the reality of subjectivity might just as well be described as "balancing", rather than being in disequilibrium....
I don't know Levinas well enough to get into a deep conversation with you about it... just my off-the-cuff reaction might be, that an assent to Levinas' concepts might not necessitate "abandoning a subject-driven analysis", as you say. The notion that the human self is dependent on a prior relationship with an other/self would certainly have an impact on our analysis of selfhood, but I don't see how this requires its abandonment...
- April 20, 2010 at 3:59 PM
- Seth Abramson said...
I think the larger concern is whether emphasis on the Other is in itself constructive of an ethical Subject in the long-term -- e.g., Gene speaking about a poem of Linh's that "implicates the reader." Or, we might equally speak of any poem, poetry, or poetics that relies on an existing dualistic framework as problematic (whether that framework be man/woman, poet/reader, irony [i.e. Representation of Culture/Culture], colonizer/subaltern, and so on).
It's funny, by the way, if you go to Harriet right now you'll see flarfists and conceptualists more or less seeming to concede everything I'd said here -- only implicitly, of course. The conceptualists accuse the flarfists of looking toward/at the Platonic (and also suggest that they're Kantian, which is exactly the specific set of principles Badiou is asking his readers to read him against), and the conceptualists (seemingly without irony or self-analysis) refer to their project as "allegorical." Hmm -- thus we have the flarfists as obsessed with working off/from some fanciful notion of the "real" and the conceptualists as employing, as I said, figurative speech (or better said: figurative speech-engines). I said Goldsmith's "The Day" is intended to function as an embodied metaphor for (take-you-pick), but substitute "allegory" -- another figural gesture -- and there we are, the concession that absolutely nothing in either flarf or conceptualism is actually going to change the framework one jot. That means there's a shelf-life in both instances, and seems to support the assertion that American Metarealism is (to crib from Burt) "The Next Thing." ;-)
Be well,
- April 20, 2010 at 4:24 PM
- Gene Tanta said...
Hi, Seth:
"We need a poetry without bounds."
Ah, sweet utopia of my various nostalgias. When is poetry (properly improper) ever local or staid? This is why we have prose (especially "critical" (versus "creative") peek-a-boo prose like mine that thinks at the speed of grave gesture). At what speed, poetry? Wherefore, poetry? Who speaks for poetry and how dare he essentialize? And who dare question the critic's right to create (and thereby abolish that romantic rag and bones shop of the heart called lyric)?
"They are capable of co-opting because they are designed, themselves, to co-opt."
On language as gadfly. Socrates was judged to drink poison because his judgments poisoned young minds to think outside of the fashionable Greek paradigm. How can failure fail better? It is a crisis of the imagination (and a political judgment) to denounce the craft elements themselves for our limits to communicate with them, no? To cease to desire language (that is, to cease to want to communicate with others) is antisocial and to be beyond suffering (dead (to the world)). A subject walking with an object must be mute and blind to each other outside of their differences as subject and object. The differences (what constitutes us) between subject and object wafts in and out of the signification of breaths and scribbles. When is thinking a time waste?
"In any case, what would a poetics of Immortality look like?"
How can we have a utopia without essentializing the other (however we aestheticize or represent him)? This is a good question because it erects before us the paradoxical edifice of fashion: to fit in or to fit out? Am I fit or unfit? Am I having a fit or fit to have?
Moving through points (penetratingly) leads to progress (and arriving) and progress is dangerous to those arrived upon. However, progeny is delightful not least because they forward a vision and a certain gene-pool. Western mentality can be figured forth as the thrust of progress. The trust of progress. The rust of progress.
I obviously mistook your "metarealism" for my "materialism". Meta-contingent striving will get us no where: but what's the hurry? My understanding of how I use the phrase "mind the gap" (Derridian deconstruction) points me to the vitality of living and thinking the position of becoming as one (the Left) more ethical than (the Right) which might be said to be a thinking of the position of a knowable ontological or fundamental noun-being (the leap of tradition into its own arms).
"It [the Singularity of being outside or above the "real"] cannot be measured, it merely (at best) is."
At worse, it isn't. The figure is real. The figure is unreal. The joke (irony or the ambivalence of ambiguity (cross-dressers of the world unite)) makes the point better than the pulpit.
"It is only when we conjoin Art and writer -- when we see the two processes as co-equal -- that either can move beyond any existing framework."
No they can't. Yes they can. Progress is a more egregious (and painful) misunderstanding of the spatial-temporal union than the errors of precedence or heritage.
It seems to me, any version of positivism (however contextualized in the history of subject-object relations) will lead to evil (the socially named radical other). Vanessa Place's idea of "radical evil" is Biblical in the proportions of its narrative bounded-ness. How can failure fail better?
- April 20, 2010 at 5:32 PM
- Gene Tanta said...
It seems to me, any version of positivism (however contextualized in the history of subject-object relations) will lead to evil (the socially named radical other). Vanessa Place's idea of "radical evil" is Biblical in the proportions of its narrative bounded-ness. How can failure fail better?
"I said Art goes "lock-step" with the human -- and I believe any plausible construction of ethics requires this, as the two are born together and (in theory) could only die in the same instant…"
The dream of form is that play (innovation with material) could occur (in psychological time, if we like) outside of social construction, or outside of the socially organ-ized body (go figure), or outside of the political, or outside of the lyrical ego, or outside of the bourgeois conception of life-style and me-time at the spa or at the ball-game.
In sum, the question I took away from attending the 3 sessions in the New Orleans ACLA conferences on Conceptual Righting (or is it WC? after Duchamp went to the bathroom to take a piss on the art world): why does the signature (biography) matter to "uncreative" writing?
In addition to this, what made the discussions interesting for someone like me who is interested in "gaps between" is that CW entertained (at least while I was in the room quipping "is CW post-racial?") the dissident idea that critics can be creative ("intervention" is the term in Art History) and makers can be critical thinkers.
The more transient friction between the subject-object, the more opportunities those who move around have to witness themselves as others experience them. Ethics on the half-shell.
- April 20, 2010 at 5:33 PM
- Seth Abramson said...
Hi Gene,
You're right to say it is still possible for poetry to be "improper" within its (narrow) context, for it to cross boundaries on the two-dimensional map it has been wont to use for centuries. Yes, it can be naughty that way -- flarf is, as they say, a whoopie cushion. The idea of creative criticism is an old one and less naughty -- I'm not sure what you mean when you ascribe to "dissidents" a view both Matthew Arnold and (somewhat more recently) Harold Bloom long ago adopted. The creative valence of criticism is a given, I think. Arnold, no rebel he, went so far as to say poetry is impossible without the critic -- critics literally initiate the stream we fish from. But the "critics" I presume you're associating with CW are not "critics" in the traditional sense but a degraded one; Arnold is no great hero of mine but the place (face?) he created for the critic is a far mightier one than the painted one CW wears in the King's Court. The creative critic creates the conditions under which Art is possible; a destructive critic compels us toward those conditions in which Art is impossible. The "progress" narrative you decry (which cannot be "utopian," as it would seem odd to apply a location to a process, as adjective or otherwise) is powerful because it always favors possibility -- not conclusion -- over impossibility. CW is not a poetics of possibility. Nothing ever written by the "bards" (ahem) of CW has ever made that claim, to my knowledge.
You ask, "How can failure fail better?" It can't: failure is a terminal condition. Creating grades of failure is a parlor trick; okay, perhaps not in politics, which is relativistic, but who essentializes Art by saying it too must be a relative measure of a negative quality/quantity? What you call "craft elements" I call instruments devised by humans to serve a purpose -- the metaphor is not an inalienable right, it wasn't brought by the stork, it isn't a product of the supersensible. It is a rhetorical device. Like a drill is a hole-making device. Metaphors produce rhetoric. We can no more break through the "limits" of metaphor than a drill could drive me to the airport. But let me emphasize that what I'm advocating is precisely the opposite of non-communicative or anti-social -- in fact the theory is that current discourse is so degraded (the metaphor no longer holds its water) and therefore we must take the courageous action, in the interest of society and communication, of forging ahead to new means of discourse. Not new means of representation -- that's the old way, that's rhetoric, that's figure, or that's realism. I am talking about discourse. To say that subject/realism "walking with" object/figure is like two men walking alongside one another mute and blind is to again use deductive logic to start from a framework/narrative of "wholeness" and then posit that if metarealism "transforms" realism and figure it can only be to degrade both -- because otherwise they exceed their current bounds (which under such reasoning is abhorrent!). I am speaking of the blind becoming supersensible in perception; I am speaking of the mute becoming the poets of a new discourse.
Thinking is not a waste. Only thinking in circles. As to "How can we have a utopia..." the answer is first, we can't, and second, we mustn't, it would be horrible. But to seek progress rather than regress does not "essentialize the other" because it transforms the Other from what it is with the very same force it transforms the Subject. I am speaking about beyond Other. And beyond Subject. There can be no essentializing because there is no one to essentialize. What remains is discourse -- not just the talkers themselves. And that's mostly what we are getting now: talkers.
- April 20, 2010 at 11:03 PM
- Seth Abramson said...
I do not believe moving leads to arrival, or that progress leads to arrival. King said "the arc of history bends toward justice," he didn't stand at the pulpit and predict, like Nostradamus or a leprechaun, where that arc was going to land and when. It doesn't land. "On" anyone or "in" anywhere. Have you considered that poetry is one of the least desirable linguistic vehicles for enacting change? That to the extent we are discussing politics rather than Art (which you will say are inseparable, and I and Adorno will say only because we chose to make it so) my question is why poetry is efficacious political speech, given the alternatives? Of course it can be done well; it can be effective; but to say that it is (ever) the most efficacious form of political action is -- to this former public servant -- unthinkable.
I trust neither "progress" (which I take merely to be re-envisioning capabilities) nor its opposite. But it's not a matter of trust, as it's not a matter of deliverance -- it's a matter of necessity. We must not stand still. We must not destroy. We must not winnow existing discourse rather than discover new terms for new discourses.
I don't know why you say I am "thinking of the position of a knowable ontological or fundamental noun-being (the leap of tradition into its own arms)" as might/does The Right. I said immortality was unachievable -- that we must pursue it because it is unachievable? So in my discourse there is not only no "position" but no "knowable" and no "fundamental" (that is a "down"-trope rather than an "up"-trope) and no "noun" and no "tradition"...I couldn't be farther from the position you seem to be ascribing to me? "Singularity" in Monistic terms is merely a way of speaking about that which lies outside perception -- which belies perception, because it has no beginning or end. By conceiving of "Singularity" as a destination you are still thinking through Aristotle. I am speaking of philosophers older than Aristotle; I am saying that nothing is outside the Singularity, for the purposes of this theory, including us (we can't even conceive of it as Singularity because that would require that we can step outside it using mind over matter, cf. Kant).
- April 20, 2010 at 11:06 PM
- Henry Gould said...
For a substantial "poetics of Immortality", see great book by theologian Hans Kung - Eternal Life?<
There are more things in heaven and earth, Horatio,
than are dreamt of in your philosophy.
- April 21, 2010 at 8:16 AM
- Gene Tanta said...
"The "progress" narrative you decry (which cannot be "utopian," as it would seem odd to apply a location to a process, as adjective or otherwise) is powerful because it always favors possibility -- not conclusion -- over impossibility."
Hi, Seth: I "decry" the progress narrative and the ideology that wrote it in. If we don't like the figure of placeless-ness of utopia, we can call it Romantic idealism. The thrust is the same: missionary, forward, colonial, positive, progress of civilization, etc. It is both good and bad: and it is relative because we live in a time where multiple cultures have value.
"We can no more break through the "limits" of metaphor than a drill could drive me to the airport."
Lovely metaphorical analogy! It reminds me of Comte de Lautreamont's famous saying: "Plagiarism is necessary. It is implied in the idea of progress. It clasps the author's sentence tight, uses his expressions, eliminates a false idea, replaces it with the right idea."
"Thinking is not a waste. Only thinking in circles."
Where are you heading? Modernism is full of graded failures? What is an absolute failure? The void: but even the void looks back at you. Failure can be a nuclear mushroom column or a poor composition structure for a life-drawing class. What do we idealize as we move toward the warm arms of our beloved functions? And who benefits by our idealizations? Do we care? (I'm channeling a bit of Kent Johnson here).
"I am speaking about beyond Other. And beyond Subject."
How can you? Is not any meta-position cutely unethical? How does "one" induce without an exterior position/place/face? I ask these question somewhat rhetorically, because I actually agree (to the extent that a mortal can understand Derrida's poetry) that there is nothing outside the text. For instance, you are no more and no less than text to me (since we _are writing_ to each other).
"It doesn't land. "On" anyone or "in" anywhere."
"We didn't land on Plymouth Rock, my brothers and sisters - Plymouth Rock landed on us!" Malcolm X
"Have you considered that poetry is one of the least desirable linguistic vehicles for enacting change?"
Why did Churchill use "If we must die" to rally troops? Never mind how McKay died penniless in the great city of Chicago. Do you speak for the desire of the masses? I guess, in part, all theory thinking does speak for the desire of the masses since it must generalize to sex-up its project and findings or else it seems pedantic or academic.
No, poetry is not the most efficacious form of political action. However, we have to be careful when we presume we are free to choose when and what art objects are political because we do not fully control our "selves" (the unconscious, zeitgeist, normative paradigms, various ideologies, and so on). Is the unconscious inductive or deductive in its "logical" functions?
"I couldn't be farther from the position you seem to be ascribing to me?"
I was not calling you a fundamentalist. Why would you think so? I actually think we are saying the same thing with different analytical predilections and figures of speech. We are thinking about the possible (hardly new!) for poetry. It is the proscriptive position of the critic that I'm trying to lampoon and queer through my silly wordplay.
I question the mystical dispensation of material relations between the subject-object. For how can we have an ethics in ether?
Will the erasure of the tropes for the Other, erase the differences between us or erase the Other? Sometimes our most progressive ideas (Übermensch) turn out to be our darkest nightmares (racial eugenics).
Thanks for thinking with me. I'm enjoying it,
- April 21, 2010 at 11:35 AM
- Seth Abramson said...
Hi Gene,
It sounds like I misunderstood some of what you said, sorry about that.
I worry I'm not expressing myself well -- which is not to use that usual ploy of saying, "You would see it my way if it weren't for my damn inarticulate tongue!", as that's really beside the point, but that I actually think I'm commingling too many ideas and not presenting them as the sequence I think, together, they represent.
I'm thinking Olson is a starting point. Poetry is more expansive when the poet "stays inside himself...is contained within his nature," rather than trying to write into -- which always turns into writing "against" -- an external world. But of course Olson was too much the egotist -- much too much the egotist -- to consider how Projectivism might represent a first step toward redefining rather than merely celebrating the Subject. But the danger of writing against an externalized universe is very real -- and is the same kind of danger Badiou is speaking about. To write against the world, rather than inside the self, is to reason deductively -- to carve out exceptions and clarifications from a series of observed phenomena. The poetry becomes descriptive, phenomenological. That not only diminishes the Other (cf. Craig Santos Perez beginning several successive sentences on Harriet last week with the unironic phrase, "White poets don't want..."), but also embraces Subject in exactly the way Sartre particularly was concerned about. The Subject is either defined by/through the Other (being-for-others) or else vainly attempts to inhabit some idealized, perfect-but-unattainable function (as in being-in-itself). So as Olson warned, writing into the external world both dooms us to a bounded, purely descriptive poetics and also (via Sartre) a sense of Subject that is likewise bounded and entirely descriptive. For Badiou, and frankly for the CW folks, Kant's way is likewise a danger -- confronted with the sublime Kant merely concludes that the imaginative mind has power over matter via the supersensible and therefore (voila!) we can do away with the terror the Monists felt about false perception and the Singularity of All Things.
I think what Badiou is implying (were he speaking of Art) is that an externalized, realist, materialist poetics a) glorifies the Other as capable of defining the Subject, b) nevertheless bounds the other as a loci for either suffering or the judgment of suffering (intellectually infinite, perhaps, but not experientially so, even if the Other achieves the state of Immortal in Badiou's very particular [non-literal!] reading of that term), and c) through deductive reasoning both keeps existing frameworks intact and always defined Good in terms of Evil rather than on its own terms. So, when I note that I see much figurative language as actually doing the same work as realism (say, imagism) -- to "see" the external world more clearly, with figure merely an instrument aimed at the same end -- I'm seeing both modes as potentially dangerous. OTOH, the danger with Olson, again, is an egotism in the poetry itself (Maximus! Gloucester! a powerful "I"!) which is merely an attempt to more forcefully assert the Subject within its current external context.
- April 21, 2010 at 2:15 PM
- Seth Abramson said...
How can poetry exceed its function? How can humans exceed their function? How can a Subject be truly self-defined -- not merely in terms of Other, or in terms of external, perceived phenomena, or even using Kant's magic-trick of rendering the supersensible sensible (and thus bounded) through acts of imagination? When I say I'd like to think beyond Subject and Other I mean beyond that dichotomy -- Badiou is envisioning, I think, both a) a world of only Subjects, and b) a Subject that is forever open-ended and incomplete. Speaking of "progress" is merely a way of visualizing that lack of completion -- speaking it.
The question, I guess, is whether we can speak through Subjectivity rather than, through various sleights of hand, about it. To actually "embody" Subject qua Subject rather than describe Subject from the remove of either Art or Other (this sort of removal even Frank O'Hara expressed concern about in his much-lauded mock-manifesto).
I am suggesting that to do any of this requires a new trope -- what Epstein calls "metabole." This trope aims at a new form of discourse, metarealism. In a contemporary poetry course I'm taking now I've been speaking of poetry (we were discussing Guest today) which can simultaneously be read literally or figuratively -- which is a bad way of putting it, because someone says, invariably, "Yeah, but the literal reading is strained," or "Yeah, but the figurative reading falls apart in this part of the poem," to which the response I want to give is, EXACTLY. Metarealism is truly its own discourse, it truly transforms rather than destroys its parents realism and figure, because we can see the (no pun intended!) genes of both parents but we could never truly confuse metarealistic dicourse for "merely" literal or figurative speech. The resistance to reading language as neither literal nor figurative is stunning -- I'm not even sure the reading process is accessible to any of us yet, we are always straining back toward more conventional modes of speech (and thus reading).
So when I speak of "progress" I mean the illusion of movement created by permanent contingency in the space between literal and figurative, matched with a propulsive desire to speak not against existing frameworks but entirely around them -- which creates a differential form of writing and reading that may or may not be any kind of forward "progress," as that sort of pejorative is really immaterial at this level of analysis. Romantic idealism can be cast many different ways -- today I think it is more likely to be seen as "emergence" and contingency than any sort of benighted belief (a la Olson, or Kant) that merely through perception we can be self-actualized. I think current thought would say that kind of self-actualization is impossible, the question is far more whether human consciousness is an organic entity or one that proceeds according to a form. The Romantics were skeptical of form even as their poets wrote in it; after WCW, we can now be skeptical of writing consciousness into a form either aesthetically or conceptually.
In thinking of progress as "missionary, forward, colonial, positive, progress of civilization," you are deducing possible negative connotations of the word from how it has been misused, abused, misapplied, bastardized. I'm constructing the term inductively, from the ground up -- I realize some will say this is impossible (e.g. Derrida!) -- but the point is simply to rethink progress, contingency, emergence, Subject, Other, and so on entirely. To disassociate these terms from the framework that forces us to work deductively in discussing what they could possibly mean for human development.
- April 21, 2010 at 2:18 PM
- Seth Abramson said...
Modernism's very conception insured a series of graded failures. Any poetry founded on mastery of craft is fetishizing form (and the past, and citation, &c &c) in such a way that every act is merely a different kind of failure because of course "mastery" is an illusory utopia anyway. "Mastery" is not a void, though -- because the Masters do look back at us. The "void," in its true sense, cannot be anthropomorphized the way you say -- it does not look back, it is only the poets who have wished it to be so and made it into a saying that at first blush seems empirical. But in fact the void has no beginning and no end, and therefore no means to measure movement, and therefore no means to say what it does or does not do. It becomes the Monistic Singularity. It -- as I said -- "is," and merely "is," and no more can be said (and perhaps not even that, as only Kant's trickeries allow us even to say it "is"). But Kant was on to something in this sense at least, just as the Monistic philosophers were -- there is a supersensible. There is the terror we feel in knowing there is a supersensible. The question is whether we close down all possibility of narrative in the face of that (the Eleatic School) or run for the cover of figurative language (Kant) or avoid speaking of it altogether (realism, materialism). I am suggesting we can attempt to speak it even if we can't speak about it. What that requires is a language that cannot exist, in a space that does not exist, using reading skills (powers of perception) we don't yet have. Only then can the thing be said to be even a mockery of the supersensible.
Does "idealizing" (if this simply means placing value in thinking about) the supersensible come with a cost? Yes -- which is why politics has always retarded the development of poetry as Art and why it would be nice if we could all allow that poetry has always been a possible but never necessary or sufficient means of political action. We can only say that Adorno's "autonomous art" has negative political consequences for the subaltern if we presumed -- and why would we? -- that poetry ever had any hope of rescuing the subaltern in the first place. It does not and never did. This is why Badiou says politics is only one sub-category of ethics -- he would probably say Art is another, which is another way of saying politics and Art can be divorced. We could discuss how to fight for justice in myriad ways -- I did it for many years in the particular construct of the American legal system, but there are innumerable others -- but to treat poetry as a vehicle for politics is something we do for our own sake, not poetry's.
So when you ask, "Is not any meta-position cutely unethical?" I say "Yes! -- but only if we presume poetry owes a duty to politics, such that taking a metarealistic approach to poetry 'breaches,' in legal terms, that 'duty.'" As I'm not sure I see that duty, I don't see that breach. But then again, unlike many poets I don't think poetry is life or death -- I think people are more important than poetry and have said so countless times to anyone I've ever spoken to about poetry -- and I think it's poets' apprehension that they're not good for anything else (like fighting for economic and social justice without poetry) that makes them decide to bend poetry for political purposes. To poets I say, "You can do more than write poetry! Much more!" I think it's an incredibly unambitious approach to one's own lifetime to say that, as I write poetry, I can only use poetry to achieve that which seems to me important to achieve (e.g. economic and social justice). (Not saying you're saying this, Gene, just making a broader point.)
- April 21, 2010 at 2:22 PM
- Seth Abramson said...
To be clear -- because you quoted Churchill -- I did say that poetry can be used for political ends, simply that it will never be the most efficacious method. That Churchill once spoke in poetry in a political context does not mean he either had to or that there wasn't an even more effective way. Nor, incidentally, does it mean the poetry thus employed would have to have been written with political intent -- Adorno views Celan as writing autonomous art and yet "Death Fugue" makes me weep more than any other poem on the subject it (via volition or otherwise) addresses. So we have to distinguish between the writing of poetry and the uses to which written poetry can be put. Again, trying to infuse the writing process with politics could easily be seen as a desperate attempt to lend poetry political efficacy (and agency) rather than conceding that writing a poem instead of, say, voting is a half-assed way of enacting political change whoever you are and however you write.
You say, "all theory thinking does speak for the desire of the masses since it must generalize to sex-up its project and findings or else it seems pedantic or academic." I say, "all political poetry does speak for the desire of the masses because it has unnaturally bent poetry and the processes that produce and read poetry toward that end in order to better justify and obscure the incompetence of poets in any realm other than the literary."
I agree with most of what you say regarding politics and the Subject/Other as political rather than merely philosophic dichotomy -- I would just say that poetry is not necessarily the natural airspace for that discussion. Personally, in my own poetry I'm very interested in how rhetoric gets deployed -- as poetry and rhetoric were, at the birth of each, actually indistinguishable, and I believe there is a form of "pure rhetoric" possible which is not instrumental (persuasive of an end) but rather metaphysical (autonomous persuasion). But one reason it's possible to work through this in poetry is because rhetoric is not a mere instrument of language but a form of discourse -- just as the metaphor is a form of discourse but, as with rhetoric, one with a terminal limit. Metarealism would not have such a limit, though it could certainly use autonomous rhetoric as a means of distinguishing the (small "s") singularity of its discourse -- i.e., using one presently unacknowledged form of discourse (autonomous rhetoric) as a means to heighten the authority and gravitas of another (metarealism).
- April 21, 2010 at 2:24 PM
- Henry Gould said...
Seth : WTTW : charge less per billable word. Or figure the other option.
- April 21, 2010 at 10:12 PM
- Seth Abramson said...
Hi Henry,
Guilty as charged -- that was a little much, I admit. I just got overexcited about the topic; I wasn't trying to overwhelm with language, honestly.
- April 21, 2010 at 11:24 PM
- Gene Tanta said...
"…but the point is simply to rethink progress, contingency, emergence, Subject, Other, and so on entirely."
I wish you luck with your utopian project. However, I think there is not pause in the Romantic idealist trek toward fleshing out the link to mythical origins. There is no ontological pause for our magical intervention to alter the usage of terms like "progress". You cannot step in the same lexicon twice.
"I think it's poets' apprehension that they're not good for anything else (like fighting for economic and social justice without poetry) that makes them decide to bend poetry for political purposes."
This seems like a fair psychoanalytical observation to my mind but Plato did not cast out the poets from the Republic because they were merely lazy or good-for-nothings but also because poets and artists pointed or acted out alternatives (via the imagination). There is nothing more dangerous to established power (political life and death) than choice (which is what the imagination performs in multiple and playful and caustic and chaotic ways).
A poem may (and certainly doesn't have to or have to be the best way, I agree) question the use or power or legitimacy of voting. Our idealized poet might scream from beneath the snapping furls of some red banner, breast exposed: "Voting makes a shallow joke of representation (the voice can utter two words: yes/no). Voting is where the mimetic project is striped of connotation: voting is the robber of poetry from language. Voting is an illusion of choice for the dupes of comfort."
- April 22, 2010 at 2:51 PM
- Gene Tanta said...
Hi, Seth:
I think I understand your point: Kantians and the CW patrons of the possible, are "misguided" (who guides us all, right?) because the sublime and our "uncreative" chance or mechanized or formulaic responses MAY all BE illusions. Immediately after understanding this, we are drenched in the dyad of the real-unreal. So it seems, you say, that some are right, those terror-filled Monists who have the proper trembling disposition to KNOWING and some are wrong, those Others (Kantian sublime aficionados and CWers as the probing phallus of the Avant-garde) who settle for the superficial titillation of chance pleasures and chance failures.
Why is awe better than error-practices? The first is reverent and the second irreverent? The first (big) Other-centered and the second humanist (all post-humanist activity is still anthropocentric because the Ipad is made to fit in your lap (use-function)).
Re: Olson, the rumor in the bathhouses of new Rome runs that he stole his best ideas (open field, etc) from Williams. It seems the biggest egomaniacs strive for objectivity, purity, godhead.
"Speaking of "progress" is merely a way of visualizing that lack of completion -- speaking it."
Yes, but we need a new figure of speech because "progress" is so problematic for people who suffer from its application in the humanist traditions weather "The Church" or "International Human Rights" or "Bringing Civilization to the savages" or "Public education" etc.
And here is my vision: we (writers who think and strive to think independently of fashion or doctrine) suffer (it's a condition) from a failure of imagination. Just like the FBI on 9/11; just like the "truth commission"; just like CW and Flarfists alike. That we have no better or more critical word for the function of "yuppie" is a sad indication of this failure of imagination. Our failure is a failure of vocabulary, a failure of writers to make new language that is fit to the purpose of critical and creative action.
We can stand in all the awe we can stand (and I think living in Romantic-deconstructive negative capability is powerful work and may be our best response to our imaginative failure or failure of imagination) but we still have to stand up, and we have to stand up with others, in the now. Time complicates positivist narratives: so we try to ignore time so we can live our lives rather than die our deaths. I think it's the right choice; but I think the reflective life matters more then the unreflective life to those we realize that form-content or time-space or brain-mind are not split. The binary is an Aristotelian lie and we have the Socratic Method to deconstruct it, if only we'd use it in our academies.
Resisting a figurative OR literal reading of a text is a good way to think of "minding the gap" since, really, if we think about it: seeing all textual meaning as unsettled is the point of reading carefully and toward a deconstruction of authority (or singularity of source). Of course, such playful unsettling of the comforts of the heretofore stable text gives us gas reflux.
Who wants to think critically about the aesthetics of their ethics (where the ego enters the social contract and if this promenade makes the ego look fat)?
- April 22, 2010 at 2:51 PM
- Seth Abramson said...
Hi Gene (and Henry),
It's been wonderful to speak with you and to hear your thoughts (including these last ones)! Thanks so much for dialoging through all this with me -- it's been extremely interesting! (And thanks to Don for providing the venue!) Best wishes,
- April 22, 2010 at 5:19 PM


text:
+34 936.633.141
Are you a privat person? You want to buy one luxury tie? Visit the Pietro Baldini Store
QualityOur products are guaranteed according to the European tie and neckerchief manufacturing and distribution regulations. Our aim is to offer you a maximum quality product adapted to your budget.
ServiceIn AGS Tie Solution, we are constantly renewing our tie, Pashmina neckerchief and scarf collections and we offer quality products for your corporate gifts, while also guaranteeing its exclusiveness. This will be an added value in terms of strengthening your Corporate Identity.
Copyright © tiesolution.com
Clients hotline
+(44) 2033 931 887
+(44) 2033 931 887

subset: commoncrawl


text:
Evening classes canceled Feb. 7, 2018. Learn more.
Home | Academics | Our Schools | Conservatory of Performing Arts | Conservatory News & Features
Major: DanceMinor: Public relations and advertisingInternship: Doug Varone and Dancers Company, New YorkExpected graduation: Spring 2013 Hometown: Buffalo Grove, Ill.
I'm responsible for two big projects this summer: putting together a press kit to advertise for the upcoming season, and researching the cost of advertising and production specs in various print magazines. I'm also in charge of updating the website, writing email blasts and assisting in keeping track of incoming donations.
Last summer, I had the opportunity to complete the Doug Varone and Dancers Summer Intensive. I knew my next step in my training should be to learn more about the public relations components for a dance company, so I applied for this internship. It's a perfect fit to combine both of my interests.
It's hard to pick just one aspect of the internship. I love coming to work because there's so much positive energy and the people that work for Doug Varone are wonderful. I get to see the company members come in and out of the office and perform on stage. Everyone here has done a great job to help make this a positive experience.
Being a dancer is my passion. Having the chance to work on my craft every day is such an exciting learning process.
This internship combines my love for dance, and my interest in public relations. I get to experience what goes on in a professional company and make contacts with talented artists.
I am so grateful to have the opportunity to learn from such talented individuals.
Photo provided by Mike Canale Photography
Directions to Campus
Faculty & Staff |
Current Students
Online | News | Calendar
| Directory | Library | Give
Site Map | Contact Us | Directions to Campus | Careers at Point Park | Privacy Policy & Legal Statement
© Copyright Point Park University | 201 Wood Street Pittsburgh, PA 15222-1984 | 412-391-4100


text:
Three months after the fourth quarter ended, Wall Street is still trying to get a handle on how fast the U.S economy grew at the tail end of 2013 and now we'll finally find out.
The government initially reported in January that the economy expanded at a rapid 3.2% pace, only to cut its estimate to a more modest 2.4% a month later. Now the Commerce Department is expected to revise gross domestic product closer to its original mark. Economists polled by MarketWatch project GDP will be lifted to 2.8% in the government's third and final tally.
The reason: higher health-care spending. Outlays on hospital services surged by an annual rate of 15% in the fourth quarter, based on the latest government numbers. That's much higher than Commerce originally estimated.
What does it tell us about the economy in early 2014? Unfortunately, not much. Growth has slowed in the first two months of the year and economists predict GDP will taper off to 1.6% in the first quarter.
The spike in health-care spending, meanwhile, might just be an offshoot of the advent of the health-care law commonly known as Obamacare. So the burst of spending might not last long, and that's not a bad thing, either. The U.S. already devotes a larger share of its spending to that category than any other in the world.
Wall Street will also keep a close eye on weekly jobless claims. They have drifted lower over the past month and are near the lowest levels since the end of the Great Recession in mid-2009. Usually that's a sign of an improving labor market, but job creation has been weak since December.
In any case, economists polled by MarketWatch forecast claims will stick close to last week's level of 320,000. The GDP and claims reports will be released at 8:30 a.m. Eastern.
At 10 a.m., the nation's top real-estate trade group will unveil its pending home sales index for February. The index rose slightly in January but was 9% below its year-earlier level, reflecting a slowdown in home sales. Higher mortgage rates, rising home prices and a brutally cold winter have restrained sales so far in 2014.
It is another busy day on the Fed front. Cleveland Fed president Sandra Pianalto is due to speak at 8:30 a.m. Eastern, followed by New York Fed President William Dudley discussing financial crises at 2:30 p.m.. This evening, Fed Gov. Daniel Tarullo will discuss regulating foreign banks.
– Jeffry Bartash
Follow Jeffry on Twitter @jbartash
Follow Capitol Report on Twitter @capitolreport


text:
MU Extension > calendar
Professional development events
Strong Women, Healthy Hearts (Cass) (Session 16 of 20)
Wednesday, April 24, 2013, 9:30 a.m. to 10:30 a.m.
MU Extension Center201 West Wall, Harrisonville MO map...
This 10 week program is for women 4o years and older who are primarily sedentary. This program helps participants build up to 30 minutes of daily walking. There is also a focus on heart health -- class activities include nutrition and food connection for protecting the heart.
callthe MU Extension Center @ 816.380.8460
Susan Mills-Gray, firstname.lastname@example.com and Exercise Physiology, MU Extensionphone: 816-506-3338
Add event to your compatible iCalendar such as Microsoft Outlook or Apple iCal.
© 1993
to 2015 Curators of the University
of Missouri, all rights reserved, DMCA
and other copyright information
University of Missouri Extension is an equal opportunity/ADA institution.
University of Missouri Extension
© 1993
to 2015 Curators of the University of Missouri, all rights reserved


text:
With the Billabong Pro Jeffreys Bay utlizing a couple of fabulous surf days at the beginning of the waiting period, it was a weekend off for the world's best men, a time to drink in the balmy weather, indulge in a bit of traditional African sightseeing, and ready oneself for the business end of the contest.
Some great showings over the first couple of rounds, some highly anticipated clashes living up to expectation, the top seeds all advancing, yet a few shock second round results adding to the intrigue of this years J-Bay edition.
Although wearing the red singlet, Adriano de Souza was anything but the favourite heading into his first round clash with Jordy Smith, however the Brazilian title aspirant continued his great form in a tight tussle.
Andy and Bruce Irons don't often meet this early, and along with Oz rookie Daniel Ross, they delivered an entertaining spat. Bruce was certain he'd lost and chucked his jersey at Andy while he headed for a hot shower, Andy having to suffer the indignity of not only returning little bro's singlet, but having to tell the waiting media that the heat winner had left the building.
To his credit the three times ASP World Champion conducted this side act with great humour, the sign of a man at ease with himself and his surroundings.
The heat of the round, of the event so far, was Taylor Knox, Joel Parkinson and Nic Muscroft. The surfing reflected the pulse the guys experienced. Joel and Nic surfed well, but Taylor blew doors in this heat, his best J-Bay display since finaling with Kelly Slater in the inaugural championship in '96.
In the free surfing enjoyed on a great practise day, Taylor was the standout and carried the form into the Main Event. A perfect 10 by past winner Parko, featuring four sublime barrells, bridged the gap, but Taylor's 19.70 was in the great beyond.
Reigning ASP World Champion Mick Fanning and lethal rookie Dane Reynolds waged a beautiful war. Fanning lifting as only he can to take the red jersey, while Hawaiian wildcard Granger Larson would be better for the experience. I could see why a lot of crew would include Dane Reynolds in their Billabong Pro JBay fantasy mix, the guy looks born to surf the place.
Last years finalists, Taj Burrow and Kelly Slater, surfed within themselves to post comfortable wins, while South Africa's Royden Bryson and Hawaii's Fred Patacchia showcased the kind of form that could carry them deep into proceedings. The first seven heats of Round 2 went with the red jersey, the surf offering up clean as a whistle 3-5' Supers, more then enough for the lads to strut their stuff.
In an inspired performance, Durbanite Travis Logie upset the wagon by blasting Timmy Reyes out of contention. The goofy-footer definitely hit and held the high notes in this encounter, while Timmy, whose silky style is taylor-made for the fabled J-Bay, never quite got into top gear.
Dayyan Neve and Tiago Pires laid down one of the best combined performances. This year, Tiago has consistently put in some big scoring heats, only to be pipped by an opponent lifting their game to a new plateau, in this case, the ever improving Neve.
The boilover was the Heitor Alves/Dane Reynolds showdown. Although Reynolds drew hoots for his on-rail slashes, it was the Brazilian goofy-footer who put in the whole enchilada, combining impeccable wave choice and positioning with a sustained vertical backhand attack. It was nearly unthinkable that Dane Reynolds was out, he looks like a winner out here, but that's exactly what went down.
The Aussie grinder Mick Campbell put in a bellringer to oust Damien Hobgood in their all backside stoush, the ever-dangerous Campbell looking to turn a so far lackluster campaign around at the midway point of the tour.
Luke Munro underlined a scratchy heat with one scintillating ride, netting a 9.33 to put an end to Ben Dunn's African campaign. And to round out the day ,Jordy Smith racked up the rounds highest, an 18.60, to put Brazilan veteran Neco Padaratz to the sword.
It's a good thing the guys have some recovery time on their hands, for a glance down, the Round 3 heat draw sees some wild encounters. It will be like the plains of the Sarengeti come game day, the weakened and the stragglers will be picked off by the big cats, while the injured and frail will become prey to the scavenging hyenas and jackals.
The weather is just too nice for winter, but with a cold front rounding the Cape as I write, we are drying the steamers and booties for a chilly onslaught of waves and weather. The water warmed several degrees overnight, and this should assist performance levels. When Billabong founder Gordon Merchant arrived 3 weeks ago he reported the water a frigid 11 degrees Celsius.
As the main party paddled out through the key hole a week ago, it was up to a reasonable 15 degrees, but I tell ya brother, a couple hours under that exposure not only makes the feet and hands non-functionable, but it shrinks the nether regions horribly. So with the water getting up to about 18 degrees it will allow the lower back to perform without the need for anti-freeze.
This is such a special place, not only for the wave but just the whole J-Bay deal. Put it this way, in the glamour stakes, as far as pointbreaks go, J-Bay is a looker, and although it is a hell journey from pretty much anywhere, one reeling line down the Supers racetrack is worth three anywhere velse.
So yeah, here we sit, eyes scanning the southern horizon for the first sign of an impending cold front, a good portion of the Top 16 still way in contention, the guys readying for what will surely be a battle of attrition. There are many scenarios and connotations, the Billabong Pro J-Bay representing a pivotal point of the 2008 Dream Tour.
For the ASP World Title aspirants, it is a must to come out of here with a winning dividend, for the middle order it is make or break as far as either comfortable commitment to the ASP World Tour exclusively, or making the hard decision to enter the fray on the energy-sapping ASP WQS as it gears up for the torrid next phase. And of course, for the tail-enders, it is an opportunity to knock out a big gun and establish a reputation and some much needed mental momentum.
Do not miss this next webcast exchange. It may only be the third round but there are some absolute gems amongst the pack, and if J-Bay turns it on, this will be a spectacle.
All the best to the last 32 warriors.
Source: ASP World Tour


text:
by Len Lear
Foodies all over the Delaware Valley know the neon names Stephen Starr, Marc Vetri, Jose Garces and Georges Perrier, but one name that is not so well known despite being every bit as deserving of superstar status is that of Luca Sena. A modest, self-effacing entrepreneur who has not sought the spotlight and who routinely deflects praise onto those around him, Luca, 61, nevertheless has an immigrant success story that's as inspirational as any in the Delaware Valley restaurant industry.
Sena was born in Naples, Italy, as the son and grandson of restaurant owners. When he was nine years old, his first job was delivering coffee and espresso to neighborhood offices in Naples. As he got older, Luca moved up the ladder to washing pots and chopping vegetables. All seven Sena sons and daughters helped out in the family restaurant, and Luca insists that "I did not mind doing any of the chores except for chopping onions. That was the job you got if you had done something wrong."
When he was 21, Luca came to the U.S. with his father, Carlo. After two years here, the father and son had earned enough money to bring their mother and a brother and sister here from Italy. Luca's dad worked as a chef at Geno's Italian Restaurant, which at the time was one of the city's best. Meanwhile, Luca tried a succession of other jobs — photographer's assistant at the Bernard Aronson Photo Shop, teenage party producer in South Philly, signage maker, construction worker and air conditioning installer and repairman.
"When I came here, I did not speak a word of English," said Luca. "I just thank God for the United Way because they offered very good classes in English. I also took English classes at Temple University and Southern High School. And fortunately, I love to read, so eventually I was able to learn English."
In 1973 Luca's parents informed him that they were planning to move back to Italy. "My dad always worked for himself in Italy, and he just could not get used to working for other people here. He was very independent. So he told us that the only way he would stay in this country would be if we opened a family restaurant here. As a result, we did decide to open a restaurant to keep dad and mom here. That was La Famiglia, which we opened at 8 S. Front St." (La Famiglia, which is still in business after 38 years, "is still the best Italian restaurant in the city," according to a recent editorial by Philadelphia Magazine publisher Herb Lipson.)
In 1990, the young man who could not speak a word of English when he came here opened the Penn's View Hotel and Panorama Ristorante at Front and Market Streets. "I felt that the only thing center city was missing," Luca explained, "was a small European-style hotel with a great casual restaurant — the kind of place you find when you get lost in a town in Italy. This was an abandoned building at the time, and I had to borrow a lot of money to turn it into a hotel. Everybody thought I was crazy." The boutique hotel started out with 27 rooms but now has 51.
Another Sena family jewel that stays under the radar is Le Castagne, which serves contemporary Northern Italian cuisine at 1920 Chestnut St. ("Delicious food on a par with…La Famiglia," according to the Zagat Dining Guide.) But in June of this year, Luca opened what might be his most ambitious project to date. He partnered with John Poulos, whose family owned the Snow White Diner at the southwest corner of 2nd and Market Streets for 60 years, spending 18 months and millions of dollars on a massive transformation of the diner property into Revolution House. The new restaurant can seat about 144 in several rooms, including a gorgeous second floor outdoor patio with a great view of the Ben Franklin Bridge and Old Christ Church.
Unlike the other Sena restaurants, which offer strictly Italian menus, Revolution House has a mid-scale combination of Mediterranean dishes, comfort food, traditional American favorites, salads, sandwiches, Neopolitan pizzas, even some Asian fusion choices. The executive chef is Luca Sena, Jr., the owner's handsome son who learned his craft at the family's restaurants as well as at Franco's in East Falls and on City Line Avenue.
During our visit last week to Revolution House, the dishes that stood out the most for us were one of the better versions we've tasted of babaganoush, a traditional Middle Eastern dish of roasted smoked eggplant mashed with garlic, lemon and olive oil ($6); lasagna "cupcake," a really innovative combination of mozzarella lasagna topped with a warm ricotta "icing" and very fresh-tasting marinara sauce ($7), and a sublime "4 Seasons" pizza topped with pristine San Marzano tomatoes, mozzarella, cooked prosciutto, mushrooms, zesty Calabrian salami and artichokes ($15).
Revolution House is open seven days a week for lunch (brunch on weekends) and dinner. For more information, call 215-625-4566.


text:
Thursday, May 07, 2009
More envelope patterns
On Flickr, there is an entire pool dedicated to Security Patterns. If you have pictures, you could add them to this pool. There is also a great collection of pictures in a set called "Security Envelope Project" where she collected envelopes to make buttons.
I got a photo from Joycelyn (Bookclasp.com) showing a collection of envelopes she has been saving.
Judy, who reads my blog, showed me some things she has been making with security patterns. She mentioned that the collaged birds in her work are a tribute to her late Grandmother who used to call her blue parakeets, her little bluebirds of happines. That's certainly a wonderful use of envelope papers! Judy, thanks for allowing me to share these pictures.
Fellow B.E.S.T member, OliveArt, has been using envelope security patterns too. She combines the different security patterns to make new patterns. These books also have envelopes for the pages!
I recently purchased this set of buttons from Janick, of Neawear on Etsy. This is not very typical of Janick's work (she does fabulous wall art!), but I found these little envelope buttons buried in her shop so I grabbed them.
Some other things I've seen on Etsy:
Matchbook notebooks by girlindustries
Alphabet magnets by bloodandgold
Gift tags by swirlyarts
Wrist cuff by bettydeath
Let me know if you have envelope security pattern collections or art projects that you want to share. I'd love to see pictures!
6 comments:
- Merry said...
Oh wow, I will now look at envelopes in entirely you light. Thanks for sharing all the links.
- 1:12 am
- Swirlyarts said...
Oh fabulous! I love security envelopes and have some unusual ones that I am saving - not sure what for but.... Thanks for showing off my tags!
- 3:21 am
- Sugee Andersyn said...
Wow those are amazing.
- 4:15 am
- Elissa said...
Since you wrote this post, I started collecting security envelopes. I actually pawed through my paper recycling to recover discards. I can't believe I never really looked at the patterns before - they're quite interesting. I always welcome the opportunity to stop and study the beauty of the common object. Thanks!
- 6:13 pm
- Rhonda said...
Thanks Merry, Swirlyarts, SugeeAndersyn, and Elissa!
Swirlyarts, I too have a couple of different patterns set aside...and I don't know why exactly :)
Elissa, I'm glad you have discovered the intrigue of the envelope patterns! Have fun with them :)
- 8:53 pm
- chris martin said...
Black Envelopes suggest luxury and high quality even sophistication. Black envelopes are stocked in 6 sizes but also offer a window version for the most popular C5 black envelope.
- 2:26 am


text:
SOURCE: AnyMeeting
January 22, 2013 11:37 ET
Influxis and TokBox Join Small Business Web Conferencing Provider for WebRTC Event to Be Hosted by Chapman University
Influxis and TokBox Join Small Business Web Conferencing Provider for WebRTC Event to Be Hosted by Chapman University
HUNTINGTON BEACH, CA--(Marketwire - Jan 22, 2013) - AnyMeeting (http://anymeeting.com), a leading provider of web conferencing for small business, today announced that the AnyMeeting WebRTC Hackathon will be held at Chapman University on Saturday, January 26th. Influxis (http://influxis.com), a live streaming and real-time application hosting provider, has signed on to be a sponsor of the event along with TokBox, creators of the OpenTok video platform, who announced support for WebRTC back in August of 2012.
"As an online meeting platform that focuses on ease of use and no downloads, we're excited about WebRTC's direct contribution to what we do, which will clearly allow us to further refine and simplify our product," said Costin Tuculescu, president and CEO of AnyMeeting. "We also felt that it was very important to involve Orange County universities in this event to showcase the level of talent that's sprouting up in our community."
WebRTC, short for "Web Real Time Communications," is a specification and open framework for the web that enables real time communications in the browser. It includes the fundamental building blocks for high quality communications on the web such as network, audio and video components used in voice and video chat applications.
The event is open to software engineers, designers, product managers, marketers and entrepreneurs interested in coming together and working on building a new project, product or service involving WebRTC in an intense 12 hour hack session. There is no cost to enter and a grand prize of $5,000 will be awarded to the winning team.
Hosted by Chapman University's Schmid College of Science & Technology, in partnership with the Ralph W. Leatherby Center for Entrepreneurship and Business Ethics, and Chapman's eVillage, the hackathon encourages students, prospective students and alumni throughout Los Angeles and Orange County to participate.
"We are pleased to partner with AnyMeeting and its sponsors Influxis and TokBox to host this event," said Michael Fahy, Ph.D., Associate Dean of the School of Computational Sciences. "It is a great opportunity for our students and alumni to apply their knowledge and skills to the development of a potentially revolutionary new technology."
"With entrepreneurship and innovation as driving forces behind the Leatherby Center, supporting a Hackathon that brings multi-disciplinary students, alumni, and members of the community together to collaborate is in perfect alignment with our goals," Christopher Buckstein, Director, eVillage, Leatherby Center for Entrepreneurship and Business Ethics, Chapman University, said.
UC Irvine's Donald Bren School of Information and Computer Sciences and California State Fullerton's College of Engineering and Computer Science are also promoting the event.
For more information visit: http://anymeeting-hackathon.eventbrite.com
About AnyMeeting
Based in Orange County, California, AnyMeeting pioneered the small business web conferencing market in 2009 with a completely free, full-featured and easy-to-use web conferencing service tailored for small business. Since then, it has grown to more than 250,000 small business users of both its free ad-supported service and low-cost ad-free options. Designed specifically for small business, AnyMeeting offers a complete web conferencing and webinar service built on the company's proven Software as a Service platform. Meeting hosts are able to invite up to 200 attendees per meeting with no time limits, and enjoy a full range of features including integrated video conferencing, screen sharing, presentation sharing, recording and social media integration. AnyMeeting is the best choice for small businesses, independent professionals and just about anyone who can benefit from online meetings. Current investors include Tech Coast Angels, Pasadena Angels, Maverick Angels, Sand Hill Angels and Keiretsu Forum. For more information, please visit www.anymeeting.com.
About Chapman University
Consistently ranked among the top universities in the West, Chapman University provides a uniquely personalized and interdisciplinary educational experience to highly qualified students. Our programs encourage innovation, creativity and collaboration, and focus on developing global citizen-leaders who are distinctively prepared to improve their community and their world. Visit us at www.chapman.edu.
About Influxis
Influxis provides professional media server, network, and support solutions to companies who want to use the latest in streaming and real-time communication technologies. With over 10 years of media streaming experience, Influxis' capabilities include a global media server network with large-scale CDN capacity, expert hands-on technical and development support, turn-key collaborative video applications, screen sharing, peer-to-peer streaming, HTML5 video transcoding, WebRTC solutions, and custom cloud infrastructure. To learn more, visit www.influxis.com or ics.influxis.com.
About TokBox
TokBox, a Telefónica Digital company, develops and operates the OpenTok Video Platform, enabling the addition of live group video communications into online and mobile websites, apps and services. The scalable, customizable platform gives users the creative freedom to develop any video interaction, from one-to-one chats to large-scale broadcasts.
The first platform to incorporate support for WebRTC, OpenTok caters to enterprises, entrepreneurs and developers with scalable APIs and apps. OpenTok has been used to add video communications to more than 70,000 services by companies including Major League Baseball, Diet Coke, Ford, Doritos, Bridgestone and Double Robotics.
TokBox is headquartered in San Francisco, CA. For more information please visit tokbox.com.
Media ContactAnyMeeting, Inc.
Chris Bechtel
714-890-3008 Ext. 113 email@example.com
Media ContactAnyMeeting, Inc.
Chris Bechtel
714-890-3008 Ext. 113 firstname.lastname@example.com
See all RSS Newsfeeds


text:
Recently saw Connie Mariano on The Daily Show, and now I have a hankering to buy her book, The White House Doctor. She served as the family physician in the White House for a part of the first Bush presidency, the entire Clinton presidency and part of the Dubya presidency.
She seems to have a dry sense of humor, and gives a peek into something I knew nothing about. I guess it's totally logical, if you stop to think about it, that the President would always have a doctor no more than a few feet away. But I never really imagined there'd be someone whose job it was to follow the President everywhere 24/7. And what that would be like.
It sounds fascinating. And I'm also kind of fascinated to see how much she can really share. I mean, isn't there doctor-patient confidentiality? Don't administration staff sign NDAs?
Anyone out there have this book? What's the word?


text:
Our Babe of the Day Jessica McCoy Just Graduated College, But She Already Has a Ph.D. in Hotness
Jessica McCoy is a rising star in the swimwear modeling world. Speaking of rising, you may need to take a cold shower after checking out her Facebook or Model Mayhem pages. The 22-year-old model from Irvine, Calif. has already been photographed for several automotive shows, but we figure that even staunch gearheads had to be reminded that there was a car in the pictures with her.
A recent college grad, McCoy loves various sporting activities, like volleyball, softball, lacrosse and hula hooping. If she ever posts a video of herself hula hooping, it may redefine the term viral video.


text:
At Fujitsu Technology Solutions we are pinning our hopes on the future. We are meeting tomorrow's requirements to ensure the success of our customers today - with innovative and high-value IT products, IT infrastructures and service offers. We stand for our special sense of responsibility toward our customers, our employees and our environment. Acting responsibly is not just an empty promise for us, but the consequence of our objectives and thus a commitment for us, with which we approach our customers and partners - not only today, but also tomorrow.
In a rapidly developing branch of industry Fujitsu Technology Solutions is today setting new trends and making an impact with our technologies and solutions of tomorrow.
We have the future in mind and need people with vision.
What do we have to offer you? An unique, multi-facetted range of products and tasks, trend-setting strategic future-oriented topics, such as Mobility and Dynamic Infrastructures as well as ideal started and promotion opportunities.
Are you ready to take a step into the future with us?
Our vision - "Understanding you better - serving you best" The objectives we have set as a company, and the way we want to set ourselves apart from other vendors, are best expressed by our corporate vision: "Understanding you better – serving you best". This means providing our customers with optimal support through a better understanding of their specific requirements. We are going to concentrate on closeness to our customers – with the commitment to listen, to analyze their needs, and to supply them with the best solution.
What do we offer? We expect a lot from our employees – and in return we are also willing to give a great deal to our employees. It goes without saying that this also includes:
Ways of joining Fujitsu Technology Solutions There are several ways to join Fujitsu Technology Solutions. We work placement positions and student jobs as well as entry-level positions for professionals. Find out which is the right approach for you and send off your application today!
Everything about your application The application process at Fujitsu Technology Solutions is via our online job site. Applications are sent to our Recruiting Manager. If your profile suits us and you have aroused our curiosity, we will invite you to an interview. . If your profile does not suit the position you would like, but could be of interest for other departments, we will forward the application accordingly if you agree. If we do not have a vacancy that meets your qualifications and requirements, you will receive feedback from us. All applications are of course treated confidentially.
We want to make the application process as easy as possible. Our online job site provides you with information about the current vacancies at Fujitsu Technology Solutions. You can apply for the job of your choice by simply clicking directly on our online form. We would also ask you to attach a personal letter as well as your curriculum vitae. Please note that in some cases the location of the advertisement is not identical with the location of the workplace. More information is in the respective job description. We recommend you to change the search criteria accordingly and either look for the function or for the various locations. We look forward to meeting you and wish you every success.
Share this page


text:
Signal & Spectrum AnalyzerSpectrum analyzers, signal analyzers and modulation analyzers, from handheld to top class models
Every signal analyzer, spectrum analyzer and measuring receiver was designed to meet customer requirements.
All Rohde & Schwarz signal and spectrum analyzers, from basic value and handheld models to benchtop instruments up to 85 GHz, set standards in accuracy, RF performance and usability. We support performance-oriented, cost-conscious users during the development, production, installation and servicing of RF systems.
For production and monitoring systems, we also offer specially designed remote controlled ultra-compact spectrum analyzers that require minimal rack space.
R&S®FSW signal and spectrum analyzer
Setting standards in RF performance and usability
- R&S®FSW8: 2 Hz to 8 GHz
- R&S®FSW13: 2 Hz to 13.6 GHz
- R&S®FSW26: 2 Hz to 26.5 GHz
- R&S®FSW43: 2 Hz to 43.5 GHz
- R&S®FSW50: 2 Hz to 50 GHz
- R&S®FSW67: 2 Hz to 67 GHz
- R&S®FSW85: 2 Hz to 85 GHz
R&S®FSWP Phase Noise Analyzer and VCO Tester
High‑end analysis of signal sources and components
- R&S®FSWP8: 1 MHz to 8 GHz
- R&S®FSWP26: 1 MHz to 26.5 GHz
- R&S®FSWP50: 1 MHz to 50 GHz
R&S®FSMR Measuring Receiver
All-in-one calibration of signal generators and attenuators
- R&S®FSMR3: 20 Hz to 3.6 GHz
- R&S®FSMR26: 20 Hz to 26.5 GHz
- R&S®FSMR43: 20 Hz to 43 GHz
- R&S®FSMR50: 20 Hz to 50 GHz
R&S®FSVR Real-Time Spectrum Analyzer
Discover the unseen
- R&S®FSVR7: 10 Hz to 7 GHz
- R&S®FSVR13: 10 Hz to 13.6 GHz
- R&S®FSVR30: 10 Hz to 30 GHz
- R&S®FSVR40: 10 Hz to 40 GHz
- R&S®FSVA4: 10 Hz to 4 GHz
- R&S®FSVA7: 10 Hz to 7 GHz
- R&S®FSVA13: 10 Hz to 13.6 GHz
- R&S®FSVA30: 10 Hz to 30 GHz
- R&S®FSVA40: 10 Hz to 40 GHz
R&S®FSV Signal and Spectrum Analyzer
Signal analysis at its best
- R&S®FSV4: 10 Hz to 4 GHz
- R&S®FSV7: 10 Hz to 7 GHz
- R&S®FSV13: 10 Hz to 13.6 GHz
- R&S®FSV30: 10 Hz to 30 GHz
- R&S®FSV40: 10 Hz to 40 GHz
R&S®FPS Signal and Spectrum Analyzer
Compact and fast for automated tests
- R&S®FPS4: 10 Hz to 4 GHz
- R&S®FPS7: 10 Hz to 7 GHz
- R&S®FPS13: 10 Hz to 13.6 GHz
- R&S®FPS30: 10 Hz to 30 GHz
- R&S®FPS40: 10 Hz to 40 GHz
R&S®FPL1000 Spectrum Analyzer
Experience high performance wherever you take it
- One instrument for multiple applications
- Solid RF performance
- Fully portable
- Intuitive user interface
R&S®FSL Spectrum Analyzer
High-end functions in an extremely lightweight, compact package
- R&S®FSL3: 9 kHz to 3 GHz
- R&S®FSL6: 9 kHz to 6 GHz
- R&S®FSL18: 9 kHz to 18 GHz (overrange 20 GHz)
R&S®FSC Spectrum Analyzer
Professional spectrum analysis – compact and cost-efficient
- R&S®FSC3: 9 kHz to 3 GHz
- R&S®FSC6: 9 kHz to 6 GHz
R&S®FPC spectrum analyzer
Unexpected performance in entry class
- Frequency range from 5 kHz to 1 GHz, upgradable to 2 Ghz or 3 GHz with keycodes
- Tracking generator and independent CW signal generator
- Built-in VSWR bridge
- One port vector network analyzer with Smith chart display
HMS-X Spectrum Analyzer
Entry level class starting from 1.6 GHz
- HMS-X: 100 kHz to 1.6 GHz
- HMS-X with HMS-3G: 100 kHz to 3 GHz
R&S®Cable Rider ZPH
Expect fast, expect efficient
- Frequency range from 2 MHz to 3 GHz/4 GHz, upgrade via keycode
- DTF, return loss, VSWR and one-port cable loss measurements
- Ideal for field use: 9-hour battery life, 2.5 kg (5.5 lb), backlit keypad, fast boot time, non-reflective display, small form factor, ruggedized housing (IP51)
R&S®ZVH Cable and Antenna Analyzer
For more efficiency in the field
- R&S®ZVH4: 100 kHz to 3.6 GHz
- R&S®ZVH8: 100 kHz to 8 GHz
R&S®FSH handheld spectrum analyzer
Where mobility counts
- R&S®FSH4 models .04/.14/.08/.18: 9 kHz to 3.6 GHz
- R&S®FSH4 models .24/.28: 100 kHz to 3.6 GHz
- R&S®FSH8 models .04/.14/.08/.18: 9 kHz to 8 GHz
- R&S®FSH8 models .24/.28: 100 kHz to 8 GHz
- R&S®FSH13 models .13: 9 kHz to 13.6 GHz
- R&S®FSH20 models .20: 9 kHz to 20 GHz
R&S®Spectrum Rider FPH handheld spectrum analyzer
Small form factor to handle big tasks
- Base Unit: 5 kHz to 2 GHz
- R&S®FPH-B3 option: 5 kHz to 3 GHz
- R&S®FPH-B3 and R&S®FPH-B4 option: 5 kHz to 4 GHz
R&S®VSE Vector signal explorer
Desktop signal analysis
- Support of R&S®FSL / R&S®FPS / R&S®FSV / R&S®FSVA / R&S®FSW / R&S®FSWP / R&S®RTO / R&S®FPL1000
- Control of multiple instruments from one PC
R&S®FS-K96 OFDM Vector Signal Analysis Software
For Signal Analyzers and Oscilloscopes from Rohde & Schwarz
- User-definable and standard-independent OFDM demodulator
- Wizard with a step-by-step guide for easy setup of the configuration file from a captured signal
For Signal Analyzers and Oscilloscopes from Rohde & Schwarz
- User-definable and standard-independent OFDM demodulator
- Wizard with a step-by-step guide for easy setup of the configuration file from a captured signal
- Measurement of the distortion behavior of amplifiers, mixers and transposers and also direct control of the required measuring instruments, such as signal generators and signal analyzers, via IEC/IEEE bus, LAN or USB
R&S®EVSG1000 VHF/UHF Airnav/Com Analyzer
Efficient servicing of air navigation and communications systems
- High-precision analysis of ILS, VOR and marker beacon ground systems (in line with ICAO Doc 8071 and ICAO Annex 10)
- Analysis of air traffic control communications (ATC COM) signals
R&S®EVSF1000 VHF/UHF Nav/Flight Analyzer
Efficient flight inspection of terrestrial navigation and communications systems
- Precise, reproducible analyses on ILS, VOR and marker beacon ground systems (in line with ICAO Doc 8071 and ICAO Annex 10)
- High measurement rate, at 100 data records/s
R&S®EVS300 ILS/VOR Analyzer
Precision level and modulation analysis for ground and flight inspection
- Extremely fast (100 measurements per second)
- Synchronization via GPS, trigger and remote interfaces
R&S®EDS300 DME/Pulse Analyzer
Precise distance and pulse analysis for ground and air measurements
- High-precision measurement of DME and TACAN systems on the ground and in the air
- High-precision measurement of all signal parameters and detailed pulse shape analysis
R&S®EDST300 TACAN/DME Station Tester
Maintenance checks and signal-in-space analysis on TACAN and DME stations
- Designed for commissioning, testing and servicing pulsed terrestrial navigation systems
- Ideal for wired and field measurements on TACAN and DME ground stations
More Information? Please contact us.
Please note the following successor product(s):
Please note the following successor product(s):
More Information? Please contact us.
Please note the following successor product(s):
Please note the following successor product(s):
Please note the following successor product(s):
The Worldwide Spectrum Allocations wall poster is a powerful tool to quickly reference while you work. It includes:
• Over 45 points of interest
• Various spectrum bands
• Frequency ranges from 1kHz to 300 GHz.
• Color coded for ease of use
Only available in the US & Canada.Request your FREE Poster Today!


text:
Crisp and fragrant, mildly sweet and the color of liquid sunshine, the lemon liqueur known as limoncello is a simple combination of lemons, sugar and alcohol, but its intense citrus flavor makes it so much more than a sum of its parts. Native to southern Italy, where it is enjoyed as a postprandial digestif, limoncello has been popular in the citrus-growing regions along Italy's Amalfi coast for more than a century. Commercial brands are easy to find, but for a fresher-tasting liqueur, a homemade limoncello is well worth the effort.
2 750-milliliter bottles of 100-proof vodka
2 cups water
2 cups sugar
12 medium lemons with bright, fragrant skins
Microplane grater or serrated vegetable peeler
A one-gallon glass jar for infusing
Large bowl or jar for mixing
Resealable bottles for the finished product
Step 1
Gently wash and dry the lemons. Remove the lemons' yellow zest, taking care to avoid the bitter white pith. This is best accomplished with a Microplane grater made especially for zesting citrus, but you can also use a sharp, serrated vegetable peeler. If necessary, use a paring knife to shave any remaining pith from the strips of yellow peel. Save the zested lemons for another use.
Step 2
Place the zest in the glass jar and add one bottle of vodka. Seal tightly and let the mixture steep—shaking it daily—until the peels lose their color and the liquid turns bright yellow and very aromatic, at least two weeks.
Step 3
Strain the infusion through a double layer of moistened cheesecloth into the clean jar or bowl, being sure to squeeze the last drops of intensely flavored liquid from the peel. Add the second bottle of vodka.
Step 4
Combine the sugar and water in a saucepan over medium heat and stir until the sugar is completely dissolved and the syrup just comes to a boil. Remove from heat and let cool.
Step 5
Add the syrup to the infused vodka. For cloudy limoncello, add the syrup while still slightly warm.
Step 6
Using the funnel, pour the liqueur into sterilized bottles, seal tightly and let rest at least one week. Additional aging will result in a smoother marriage of flavors.


text:
Fleet Owner is part of the Business Intelligence Division of Informa PLC
This site is operated by a business or businesses owned by Informa PLC and all copyright resides with them. Informa PLC's registered office is 5 Howick Place, London SW1P 1WG. Registered in England and Wales. Number 8860726.
Every month, FleetOwner magazine features the news and stories that are important to you.
Sign up for the Fleet Owner Newsline newsletter.
Enter your email above to receive messages about offerings by Informa, its brands, affiliates and/or third-party partners, consistent with Informa's Privacy Statement.


text:
The Caves, 25 minutes on the Bruce Highway travelling north of Rockhampton, sounds a rather fascinating place to visit and it is! This is the home of the Capricorn Caves. They are above ground and with wheelchair access, they are popular with all. There is something about an above ground cave, as it can dilute that fear associated with claustrophobia.
There are daily guided tours of these caves which were first discovered in 1882. Mid-December to mid-January, during the Summer Solstice, there is an extra special treat, with the sun's rays penetrating deep into the caves. There is a good old character-type pub on hand, along with cabin and camping facilities.
Note: Information on listed products and services are provided by the operator and were correct at the time of publishing. Rates are indicative based on the minimum and maximum available prices of products and services. Please visit the operator's website for further information. All prices quoted are in Australian dollars (AUD).


text:
Solutions for Your Industry
Mitel Education Solutions for Schools and Universities
Mitel provides technology to help teachers and students at schools and universities communicate effectively in today's multicultural and global environment.
Mitel Solutions for Financial Services
The global financial services market is going through challenging times. Competition, growing regulatory pressure, and heightened risks from external forces have never been greater.
Government Communication Solutions
Mitel's communications solutions help governments meet those challenges by reducing communication complexity, integrating disparate applications, and tying communication services directly to business processes.
Professional Services Communications
Excellent communication is at the core of every successful professional services firm, practice, and agency.
Retail Communication Solutions
Every retailer is unique. Each must address issues in ways that fit their business models and their operations.
Healthcare Communication Solutions
Get the efficient, cost-effective communication you need to deliver high-quality healthcare.
Hospitality Communications Solutions
Good communication is at the heart of every successful hotel. Mitel hospitality customers enjoy scalable, reliable communications, optimized to meet the needs of their industry.