Today, I attended the first day of a two day workshop on negotiation. We started with the Prisoners’ Dilemma: You and another suspect are arrested and your sentences depend on whether the two of you inform on the other or not. If neither of you informs on the other, both of you get 2 years. If both of you inform on each other, you both get 20 years. If only one of you informs on the other, the informant goes free and the other gets a life sentence. The goal is to minimize the amount of time for your sentence. The question is whether you inform on the other suspect.
Many of the people in class wanted to know more about the other suspect, presumably to get a hint as to what he was likely to do. One participant specifically wanted to know “is he rational?”
The instructor offered no insights into the soul of the other suspect and instead forced us to make our choice. He then went around paring people together. First we had a few rounds of random pairings with no ability to change. Then he would pair people and let them change their answer based on the pairing. Finally, he picked someone and let her pick the other suspect.
The results were scattered. I, like many others, ended up getting 20 years. Somebody got out free. And two people managed to keep their mouths shut and only had to spend 2 years in jail (this result was met with applause).
The instructor then took a survey and in total, about two-thirds of the class elected to inform on the other suspect.
I have read about the Prisoners’ Dilemma before, so it was no surprise to me that the mathematically correct answer is to inform on the other suspect because no matter what they do, you are better off. The instructor illustrated the point with one of the externs by removing the mystery: if the extern knew that the other suspect informed on him, the extern agreed that he would inform so as to serve 20 years rather than a life sentence; likewise, if the other suspect did not inform on him, the extern agreed that he would inform so as to get out free rather than serve 2 years. Even still, the extern maintained that if he didn’t know what the suspect was going to do, he would not be an informant.
Rather than trying to convince the extern (or the class) that this position was clearly irrational, he used it to illustrate that we all have a natural negotiating style that falls along a spectrum from competition to cooperation.
Competitors strive for an individual win: they view negotiation as a zero-sum game where and the goal is to get as much as possible for yourself by taking it away from the other person. By contrast, cooperators look for joint gain: they try to be inventive and expand the value to be divided between the parties. The danger for competitors is that they will not be able to reach a deal. The danger for cooperators is that they might have been able to get more for themselves. In most negotiations, there is overlap with the two approaches; first trying to expand value, then trying to get as much as possible for yourself.
The Prisoners’ Dilemma illustrates a situation that calls for a purely competitive approach. In that environment, those that cling to a cooperative approach do so at their peril. Such individuals may choose not to change, but must recognize that they are making a choice and be prepared to live with the consequences.
In the afternoon, we discussed how competitive bargaining generally works.
First, the parties each take a position. Then they take turns making concessions and that get closer to each other in a type of dance. In this dance, each concession tends to be about half the size of the one that preceded it and takes about twice as long to be made. The end point is usually the midpoint between the first two reasonable offers. As a result, the outcome of a particular negotiation is often the result of the first two opening moves.
Beyond this scientific formulation, there is a subtle art to the dance. The opening offer and counteroffer must provide enough space to dance; if either of them are too close to the end goal, there won’t be room for the expected back and forth. Furthermore, the steps themselves should be deliberate, and drawn out enough, so that the other side appreciates the level of resistance and hesitation. The goal is to reach a deal where both sides are happy that they have maximized what they could reasonably expect to receive; concessions that are too quick or too drastic frustrate this purpose because they signal that more could have been acquired.
The irony of this is that taxpayers often view tax litigation in this context and assume that the government’s assertion of a tax liability is merely an invitation to start dancing. Unfortunately, for many tax issues the government is bound to follow the law which results in an all or nothing proposition: either the government is right and it takes everything or it isn’t and it takes nothing: the difference between striking out and hitting a home run, to mix a metaphor about mixed signals.
I’m looking forward to tomorrow’s discussion on cooperative bargaining, a new dance, and more dilemmas.
Thursday, June 5, 2008
Thursday, May 22, 2008
Crime Fighter
Most people (including my girlfriend’s father) hate lawyers. In an attempt to simultaneously maintain longstanding convictions and welcome me into the family, he decided to give me, or rather my occupation, a new name. Instead of referring to me as a lawyer, he suggested that since I work for the government, I should refer to myself as a “crime-fighter.”
In my mind, crime-fighter is practically synonymous with super-hero; and as someone that grew up with comic books, role playing games, and Saturday morning cartoons, this appealed to me immensely.
I was having trouble coming up with a name for my super-hero self until Jenny found it. She was at a graduation celebration when someone tried asked after me, but couldn’t remember my name. Instead of using my given name, they named me Angus for my red hair and a beard. After some mental gymnastics, Jenny caught on and was able to give the update, but in the process recklessly extended the circle of people that know my secret identity.
With a name like Angus, it seems hard to avoid a super-hero costume consisting of Kilt (bold, but not too flashy), Sporran (the highland equivalent of Batman’s utility belt), and Dirk (in case I need to fight any knife-wielding super-villains). For a little extra flash, I like the idea of wielding the Bag-Pipes-of-Justice. And in homage to Popeye, I like the idea of eating haggis for strength or berserker rage, depending on the situation. To disguise my identity, I could take off my glasses and put on a hat (like Superman in reverse).
Super heroes often represent the duality of life with their super-selves ordinary alter-egos forced to occupy the same body. Lawyers too occupy a similar duality: trusted advisor and guardian of justice, juxtaposed with the greedy charlatans of so many lawyer jokes. It is hard to hold such duality in the mind without giving each its own name. Clark Kent and Superman, Bruce Wayne and Batman, and now Gavin and Angus.
In my mind, crime-fighter is practically synonymous with super-hero; and as someone that grew up with comic books, role playing games, and Saturday morning cartoons, this appealed to me immensely.
I was having trouble coming up with a name for my super-hero self until Jenny found it. She was at a graduation celebration when someone tried asked after me, but couldn’t remember my name. Instead of using my given name, they named me Angus for my red hair and a beard. After some mental gymnastics, Jenny caught on and was able to give the update, but in the process recklessly extended the circle of people that know my secret identity.
With a name like Angus, it seems hard to avoid a super-hero costume consisting of Kilt (bold, but not too flashy), Sporran (the highland equivalent of Batman’s utility belt), and Dirk (in case I need to fight any knife-wielding super-villains). For a little extra flash, I like the idea of wielding the Bag-Pipes-of-Justice. And in homage to Popeye, I like the idea of eating haggis for strength or berserker rage, depending on the situation. To disguise my identity, I could take off my glasses and put on a hat (like Superman in reverse).
Super heroes often represent the duality of life with their super-selves ordinary alter-egos forced to occupy the same body. Lawyers too occupy a similar duality: trusted advisor and guardian of justice, juxtaposed with the greedy charlatans of so many lawyer jokes. It is hard to hold such duality in the mind without giving each its own name. Clark Kent and Superman, Bruce Wayne and Batman, and now Gavin and Angus.
Thursday, May 8, 2008
Inner Animal
My first memory of using a camera was when I was 11. I was in fifth grade on a class field trip to Catalina Island. The only picture I remember taking was of water in a shallow cave. When I got home, the camera and film got packed away. To my knowledge it has never been printed.
Knowing what I know now, familiar with the camera’s voracious need for light, I am virtually certain that the picture would have been awful: dark with no clear subject to guide the eye through the picture.
There is no shortage of books (or websites) to teach people the technical aspects of how to use a camera (shutter speeds and aperture) or the artistic aspects of how to take a better photograph (use a plain background, move in close, and put your subject off center).
This kind of information is important, but it is just the beginning. Photography, like any other art, is about finding a way to express yourself, and that takes practice.
I got my first digital camera in 2003. I had just graduated from law school and my parents got me a Canon S400 point-and-shoot for my birthday. It was beautiful to look at, easy to use, and it took good pictures. It was not without its limitations: close up pictures were often blurry, indoor pictures were suffered from flash blowout, busy backgrounds were rendered in sharp, districting focus. Even so, it was fun to take pictures, lots of pictures.
My favorite subjects are people, but while I appreciate posed portraiture, I prefer pictures with a little more personality: posed, but animated.
Fortunately, my family indulges me, willing to follow directions like: big eyes, big hands, stick out your tongues, you’re a moose. I didn’t learn to summon inner animals from a book (or a website). I learned it from Kendra. During one of our first photo shoots, Kendra put her hands up to her head like antlers and she was transformed into a moose. It was an instant success and has been repeated many times for my amusement.
In addition to the moose, Kendra also has an inner Giraffe (one arm straight up in the air, hand bent over forward to form the head, pinky and pointer up to form the horns).
She also has a Tyrannosaurs Rex. Contrary to the Hollywood version with its hunched-over stance and menacing jaws, Kendra’s version emphasized the tiny arms (elbows bent to the chest), and moves with exaggerated steps followed by bounding leaps (perhaps closer to a Velociraptor) until it is within range to deliver the signature evisceration by tickling someone’s tummy with the tiny arms.
I think inner animals are very funny. They also help people loosen up and take better pictures.
Not everyone likes having their picture taken, including Jenny. But unlike others that mask their distaste under a thin venire, she graciously agrees to play along (as she puts it, she has gotten better at ignoring me). Still, until recently, she had trouble finding her inner animal.
After a few false starts, copying the giraffe, experimenting as a tiger (a Princeton Tiger to be precise), we finally found it: a yap dog. It is basically an inverted moose (hands down for floppy ears like a cocker spaniel) that says “yapyapyapyapyap.”
It is Genius. It is the kind of photograph that isn’t featured in books, but it has personality, it is art, and it makes me smile like I’m 11.
Knowing what I know now, familiar with the camera’s voracious need for light, I am virtually certain that the picture would have been awful: dark with no clear subject to guide the eye through the picture.
There is no shortage of books (or websites) to teach people the technical aspects of how to use a camera (shutter speeds and aperture) or the artistic aspects of how to take a better photograph (use a plain background, move in close, and put your subject off center).
This kind of information is important, but it is just the beginning. Photography, like any other art, is about finding a way to express yourself, and that takes practice.
I got my first digital camera in 2003. I had just graduated from law school and my parents got me a Canon S400 point-and-shoot for my birthday. It was beautiful to look at, easy to use, and it took good pictures. It was not without its limitations: close up pictures were often blurry, indoor pictures were suffered from flash blowout, busy backgrounds were rendered in sharp, districting focus. Even so, it was fun to take pictures, lots of pictures.
My favorite subjects are people, but while I appreciate posed portraiture, I prefer pictures with a little more personality: posed, but animated.
Fortunately, my family indulges me, willing to follow directions like: big eyes, big hands, stick out your tongues, you’re a moose. I didn’t learn to summon inner animals from a book (or a website). I learned it from Kendra. During one of our first photo shoots, Kendra put her hands up to her head like antlers and she was transformed into a moose. It was an instant success and has been repeated many times for my amusement.
In addition to the moose, Kendra also has an inner Giraffe (one arm straight up in the air, hand bent over forward to form the head, pinky and pointer up to form the horns).
She also has a Tyrannosaurs Rex. Contrary to the Hollywood version with its hunched-over stance and menacing jaws, Kendra’s version emphasized the tiny arms (elbows bent to the chest), and moves with exaggerated steps followed by bounding leaps (perhaps closer to a Velociraptor) until it is within range to deliver the signature evisceration by tickling someone’s tummy with the tiny arms.
I think inner animals are very funny. They also help people loosen up and take better pictures.
Not everyone likes having their picture taken, including Jenny. But unlike others that mask their distaste under a thin venire, she graciously agrees to play along (as she puts it, she has gotten better at ignoring me). Still, until recently, she had trouble finding her inner animal.
After a few false starts, copying the giraffe, experimenting as a tiger (a Princeton Tiger to be precise), we finally found it: a yap dog. It is basically an inverted moose (hands down for floppy ears like a cocker spaniel) that says “yapyapyapyapyap.”
It is Genius. It is the kind of photograph that isn’t featured in books, but it has personality, it is art, and it makes me smile like I’m 11.
Monday, April 21, 2008
Secret Social Security Trust Account
I’m back in South Carolina for the Financial Investigations Seminar. After attending, and being favorably impressed by, last month’s Grand Jury Seminar, I have high hopes. The format this time is different: we are seated at tables, rather than stadium seating. We have been assigned to tables to ensure diversity. At my table, we have two Assistant United States Attorneys, someone from the FBI, and someone from the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, and Firearms (ATF). In the room there is even more diversity, including police officers from various states, a few Drug Enforcement Agency (DEA) agents, someone the Department of Energy and someone else from the ultra-secret National Security Agency (NSA).
In addition to students, each table has a facilitator. We have Matt from the Office of the Comptroller of Currency (OCC), the governmental agency in charge of regulating banks. During one of the breaks, Matt mentioned that he spends a significant amount of time testifying in court against people trying to pass off fraudulent financial instruments. One popular “theory” is that the government has a trust account for every individual which corresponds to their social security number. Most people wait until they retire to start drawing money from the account, but by filling out certain paperwork, you can access those funds at any time to pay debts (such as taxes) that you owe the government. This is utter BS and trying to pass off such fraudulent financial instruments is a felony.
We start off with the regular introduction to the area and to the instructors as well as an overview of the course: analyzing financial information is a good way to understand criminal activity and find assets to seize.
Then something amazing happened: we took a break.
I have been to lots of training classes, both in private industry and in government. Typically they take the approach that training is expensive, so to justify the expense they try to maximize the amount of information they provide. This more-is-always-better approach makes as much sense as drinking from a fire hose if you are really thirsty. The brain, like the stomach, can only take in so much and then it needs time to digest. If you don’t take breaks to digest, the body takes one of two approaches: stop taking in new material, or expel some of the old material to make space for new material. Both are bad. This class avoided the mistake by getting to the point and then taking a break so that we could digest the material.
Throughout the day we never went much more than an hour without taking a break and as a result, I felt focused and attentive throughout the day (even with the 3 hour time difference). Another thing they did was vary the presentation from straight lecture, to video clips, to breakout sessions. The breakout sessions were particularly helpful because each table had the facilitator to keep them on track.
The presenter started with a discussion about different types of financial information: public records (real estate transactions, court records, and Internet searches) which are available to anyone, restricted records (DMV records, utility bills, trash collection, and various law enforcement databases) which can be accessed by law enforcement agencies upon request, and restricted records (telephone records, credit card receipts, bank records, or company files) which require a subpoena or a search warrant. Then we watched a short video of government agents going through the suspect’s trash for clues (the stinkiness of the garbage becomes a running joke in the videos). Then we break into groups to brainstorm about (a) specific examples of assets, liabilities, income, and expenses, and (b) the documents used to track/support each of those things. For example, a house is an asset, and ownership is recorded on a deed which can be found at the county recorder’s office.
We also discussed that it is important to conduct the investigation covertly, especially in the early stages when you don’t know how the parties are related and who is involved with the criminal activity. In one example, a bank loan on a car, for more than the car is worth, may indicate that both the buyer and the seller are engaging in suspicious activity.
After lunch, we discussed techniques for organizing the case information. Graphical presentation is helpful, but it need to be clear and organized. When it is done well, it is amazingly powerful. There was also a discussion of several products on the market to generate such presentations, which I found amusing since (a) the government is not going to buy me new software and (b) even if I bought it, I am prohibited from installing it on the computer.
We also discussed how to prove income. This is a straightforward process if you have bank statements (deposits = income). It is also possible to prove income indirectly by assuming that income is either used to accumulate assets or pay expenses. Thus, income is essentially the increase in assets from the prior year plus the expenses for the current year. They gave us a practice problem, and instead of using round numbers that we could add and subtract in our heads, they gave us more realistic numbers and gave everyone a calculator. After running the numbers it turns out, that at least hypnotically, crime does pay.
We closed with a discussion that if you have a transaction over $10,000 with a bank, broker, or casino, they have to report the transaction on a Currency Transaction Report (CTR). If you pay cash for something over $10,000, the business has to report the payment on Form 8300. If you move over $10,000 in cash in or out of the country, you have to complete a Report of International Transportation of Currency or Monetary Instruments (CMIR). Finally, if you do something suspicious at a bank (such as a series of deposits just under $10,000) the bank submits a Suspicious Activity Report (SAR). Former New York Governor Elliott Spitzer was caught paying for prostitution because of an SAR.
I believe in training, and I believe that it should be done well. Before my training with the Department of Justice (DOJ), I would always leave thinking that someday I would be in a position to become a trainer and improve the system. Now I think that I would like to be in a position to become a trainer to participate in a system that works so well. I am pleased to attend and look forward to more in the future, even if it means that I have to wait until I retire to access my secret social security trust account.
In addition to students, each table has a facilitator. We have Matt from the Office of the Comptroller of Currency (OCC), the governmental agency in charge of regulating banks. During one of the breaks, Matt mentioned that he spends a significant amount of time testifying in court against people trying to pass off fraudulent financial instruments. One popular “theory” is that the government has a trust account for every individual which corresponds to their social security number. Most people wait until they retire to start drawing money from the account, but by filling out certain paperwork, you can access those funds at any time to pay debts (such as taxes) that you owe the government. This is utter BS and trying to pass off such fraudulent financial instruments is a felony.
We start off with the regular introduction to the area and to the instructors as well as an overview of the course: analyzing financial information is a good way to understand criminal activity and find assets to seize.
Then something amazing happened: we took a break.
I have been to lots of training classes, both in private industry and in government. Typically they take the approach that training is expensive, so to justify the expense they try to maximize the amount of information they provide. This more-is-always-better approach makes as much sense as drinking from a fire hose if you are really thirsty. The brain, like the stomach, can only take in so much and then it needs time to digest. If you don’t take breaks to digest, the body takes one of two approaches: stop taking in new material, or expel some of the old material to make space for new material. Both are bad. This class avoided the mistake by getting to the point and then taking a break so that we could digest the material.
Throughout the day we never went much more than an hour without taking a break and as a result, I felt focused and attentive throughout the day (even with the 3 hour time difference). Another thing they did was vary the presentation from straight lecture, to video clips, to breakout sessions. The breakout sessions were particularly helpful because each table had the facilitator to keep them on track.
The presenter started with a discussion about different types of financial information: public records (real estate transactions, court records, and Internet searches) which are available to anyone, restricted records (DMV records, utility bills, trash collection, and various law enforcement databases) which can be accessed by law enforcement agencies upon request, and restricted records (telephone records, credit card receipts, bank records, or company files) which require a subpoena or a search warrant. Then we watched a short video of government agents going through the suspect’s trash for clues (the stinkiness of the garbage becomes a running joke in the videos). Then we break into groups to brainstorm about (a) specific examples of assets, liabilities, income, and expenses, and (b) the documents used to track/support each of those things. For example, a house is an asset, and ownership is recorded on a deed which can be found at the county recorder’s office.
We also discussed that it is important to conduct the investigation covertly, especially in the early stages when you don’t know how the parties are related and who is involved with the criminal activity. In one example, a bank loan on a car, for more than the car is worth, may indicate that both the buyer and the seller are engaging in suspicious activity.
After lunch, we discussed techniques for organizing the case information. Graphical presentation is helpful, but it need to be clear and organized. When it is done well, it is amazingly powerful. There was also a discussion of several products on the market to generate such presentations, which I found amusing since (a) the government is not going to buy me new software and (b) even if I bought it, I am prohibited from installing it on the computer.
We also discussed how to prove income. This is a straightforward process if you have bank statements (deposits = income). It is also possible to prove income indirectly by assuming that income is either used to accumulate assets or pay expenses. Thus, income is essentially the increase in assets from the prior year plus the expenses for the current year. They gave us a practice problem, and instead of using round numbers that we could add and subtract in our heads, they gave us more realistic numbers and gave everyone a calculator. After running the numbers it turns out, that at least hypnotically, crime does pay.
We closed with a discussion that if you have a transaction over $10,000 with a bank, broker, or casino, they have to report the transaction on a Currency Transaction Report (CTR). If you pay cash for something over $10,000, the business has to report the payment on Form 8300. If you move over $10,000 in cash in or out of the country, you have to complete a Report of International Transportation of Currency or Monetary Instruments (CMIR). Finally, if you do something suspicious at a bank (such as a series of deposits just under $10,000) the bank submits a Suspicious Activity Report (SAR). Former New York Governor Elliott Spitzer was caught paying for prostitution because of an SAR.
I believe in training, and I believe that it should be done well. Before my training with the Department of Justice (DOJ), I would always leave thinking that someday I would be in a position to become a trainer and improve the system. Now I think that I would like to be in a position to become a trainer to participate in a system that works so well. I am pleased to attend and look forward to more in the future, even if it means that I have to wait until I retire to access my secret social security trust account.
Monday, April 14, 2008
Tip Toe Through the Tulips
In 2006, I went with my parents to Descanso Gardens. It was around Easter and the tulip display was amazingly colorful. Jenny agreed to go with me to see if it had the same magic this year.
We drove over to Descanso on Saturday morning. I wanted to go early because (a) it is cooler, and (b) the light is softer. Cameras, especially digital cameras, can only record a limited range of light. When light is soft, there is less difference between light and dark, so the tonal range can be captured more completely. As the sun rises and the light gets harsher, the difference between light and dark is magnified and the photographer must choose which end of the spectrum will be faithfully preserved, and which will be sacrificed.
In my memory, tulips bloom in mid to late April. This may be true in some other part of the world, but in California, tulips seem to bloom in March. Being off by 3 weeks is not fatal; there are still tulips in bloom, but we have missed them at their prime.
Jenny and I walk the grounds, admiring a display about being eco-friendly (lawnmowers and leaf blowers are much worse than I would have guessed), the last gasps of the tulips, a koi pond with fish the size of my calf, the Fern Forrest (there is a nice bench for sitting), a large rock with 10 or so smaller rocks stacked on top of it, an art class making sketches at the Japanese Garden, and a plant sale (I almost got a hanging succulent for my apartment).
After the garden, we go back to Jenny’s house in time to meet up with her brother and his fiancée. We are a little early for lunch, so we play Rock Band while Jenny labors over her goal of a painting-a-day during the month of April.
I have played Rock Band before and I find it surprisingly fun. I rotate through the 4 instruments (guitar, base, drums, and vocals) to see if I have improved with the passage of time. I remain reliably competent at guitar and base (on easy) and questionable at best at the other two. By contrast, Jenny’s brother is a virtuoso, and with the right setup is able to sing and play guitar at the same time.
As an added bonus, Jenny and I take turns as band manager, taking pictures of the band.
By playing with the flash to bounce the light off walls and avoid harsh glare, I am impressed with the quality of some of the shots (when I first got a digital point-and-shoot camera, the rule of thumb seemed to be that anytime the flash went off, the picture was probably ruined.)
After rocking out all over Western Europe, we decided to go to lunch at Santoro’s, a local sandwich shop. Jenny had anticipated this trip and the collected coupons printed out on the back of Ralph’s register tape: $5 for any sandwich/any size, chips, and large drink (this is a remarkable deal since a small sandwich alone would be more than $5). The line snaked around inside the store.
I had pastrami and it was delicious. Jenny had also made a point that they serve really good ice with their drinks. This seemed strange until I tried it and she was right.
After lunch, we played some more Rock Band and then Jenny and I went to Costco for supplies. We were inspired to recreate the rosemary-bread-grilled-cheese-sandwiches that Jenny had earlier in the week. We also toyed with the idea of making fresh strawberry ice cream.
By the time we got home, time was not on our side for making ice cream, so we contented ourselves with the grilled cheese, some leftover tomato soup, and sliced strawberries, while watching the Darjeeling Limited starring Owen Wilson (it was good, but I’m surprised that it got 68% on Rotten Tomatoes).
It was a long day, but a great day. I’m glad I got to spend time with Jenny and got to know her family a little better. And now I know that tulips bloom in March, not April.
Gavin
We drove over to Descanso on Saturday morning. I wanted to go early because (a) it is cooler, and (b) the light is softer. Cameras, especially digital cameras, can only record a limited range of light. When light is soft, there is less difference between light and dark, so the tonal range can be captured more completely. As the sun rises and the light gets harsher, the difference between light and dark is magnified and the photographer must choose which end of the spectrum will be faithfully preserved, and which will be sacrificed.
In my memory, tulips bloom in mid to late April. This may be true in some other part of the world, but in California, tulips seem to bloom in March. Being off by 3 weeks is not fatal; there are still tulips in bloom, but we have missed them at their prime.
Jenny and I walk the grounds, admiring a display about being eco-friendly (lawnmowers and leaf blowers are much worse than I would have guessed), the last gasps of the tulips, a koi pond with fish the size of my calf, the Fern Forrest (there is a nice bench for sitting), a large rock with 10 or so smaller rocks stacked on top of it, an art class making sketches at the Japanese Garden, and a plant sale (I almost got a hanging succulent for my apartment).
After the garden, we go back to Jenny’s house in time to meet up with her brother and his fiancée. We are a little early for lunch, so we play Rock Band while Jenny labors over her goal of a painting-a-day during the month of April.
I have played Rock Band before and I find it surprisingly fun. I rotate through the 4 instruments (guitar, base, drums, and vocals) to see if I have improved with the passage of time. I remain reliably competent at guitar and base (on easy) and questionable at best at the other two. By contrast, Jenny’s brother is a virtuoso, and with the right setup is able to sing and play guitar at the same time.
As an added bonus, Jenny and I take turns as band manager, taking pictures of the band.
By playing with the flash to bounce the light off walls and avoid harsh glare, I am impressed with the quality of some of the shots (when I first got a digital point-and-shoot camera, the rule of thumb seemed to be that anytime the flash went off, the picture was probably ruined.)
After rocking out all over Western Europe, we decided to go to lunch at Santoro’s, a local sandwich shop. Jenny had anticipated this trip and the collected coupons printed out on the back of Ralph’s register tape: $5 for any sandwich/any size, chips, and large drink (this is a remarkable deal since a small sandwich alone would be more than $5). The line snaked around inside the store.
I had pastrami and it was delicious. Jenny had also made a point that they serve really good ice with their drinks. This seemed strange until I tried it and she was right.
After lunch, we played some more Rock Band and then Jenny and I went to Costco for supplies. We were inspired to recreate the rosemary-bread-grilled-cheese-sandwiches that Jenny had earlier in the week. We also toyed with the idea of making fresh strawberry ice cream.
By the time we got home, time was not on our side for making ice cream, so we contented ourselves with the grilled cheese, some leftover tomato soup, and sliced strawberries, while watching the Darjeeling Limited starring Owen Wilson (it was good, but I’m surprised that it got 68% on Rotten Tomatoes).
It was a long day, but a great day. I’m glad I got to spend time with Jenny and got to know her family a little better. And now I know that tulips bloom in March, not April.
Gavin
Wednesday, April 9, 2008
My Sister the Writer
My sister Kendra is getting ready to go to graduate school in Iowa to learn how to be a professional writer.
She is starting to write a novel about the relationship between women and their hair. Her new blog can be found at http://twentyought.blogspot.com/.
The working title is "Until it Grows Back." I have suggested that she change the title to one of the following:
- Blood, Sweat, & Shears
- Deb on Hair
- Hair Apparent
- Hair Majesty
- Hair Me Out
- Hair to Please You
- Hair to Stay
- Hair Today
- Hair We Are
- Just Cut Loose
- Shears to YouThe Final Cut
- The Hairport
- Upper Cuts
And my personal favorite: Mane Attraction.
Bonus points for anyone else that wants to contribute.
Gavin
Monday, April 7, 2008
Meet the Parents
I invited Jenny to come to Ojai and meet my parents. Ojai is a small town of about 8,000 people, up the coast about an hour and a half from Los Angeles. Coincidently, it turned out that she already had plans to be in Ojai that very same weekend to celebrate her brother’s engagement to his longtime girlfriend.
I pick Jenny up on Saturday morning and drive up the 101. We arrive at my parents’ house in time for brunch, which consisted of fresh fruit and pocket pancakes (think crepes cooked into balls).
After brunch, I play the part of chili apprentice. My father does not cook much, but with chili he is an artist. His philosophy on the subject borders on the paradoxical: add spices to taste, but not so much that you can taste the spice. This is particularly important when adding unusual flavors, like chocolate.
After eating, we settle down for an afternoon of playing games. We start with Bananagrams (think scrabble without a board or the strict rules). For some reason, my father doesn’t like to play, but he will sit next to my mother and advise her. He is helpful, but somehow still doesn’t seem to give her an unfair advantage.
To include him more directly, we switch to playing Apples to Apples, where the goal is to match the noun cards in your hand with the adjective card on the table. The judge then picks the best match and the winner gets a point and the role of judge moves to the next person. Although the options are limited by the cards in your hand, my father does very well.
In games like this, my mother has the sense not to be too confined by the rules. She respects the general structure of the game, but will openly lobby the judge for her selection or trade cards with others. If she did this to win, it would be weird or unsportsmanlike. But she does it to remind us that this is just a game, and it as with any game, is important to have fun. I am very pleased that Jenny seems to appreciate and enjoy this approach.
After Appling ourselves silly, it is time for Jenny to go join her family’s celebration. I walk her over to the future in-laws and agree to come in and join them for the pre-party. I recognize Jenny’s brother and soon-to-be sister in-law, but everyone else is new, including Jenny’s father.
As we are sitting around the living room, getting to know each other, they learn that I am a federal prosecutor and that I met Jenny on eHarmony. While meeting people online has largely lost its stigma for the younger generation, it seems to make the older generation is still a little uncomfortable with the idea of finding love in cyberspace.
In response, we try to make up a new story for how we met. After a little bit of brainstorming, we settle on the following: Jenny was called for jury duty and I was the prosecutor on the case. Knowing that her beauty would distract me during trial, I used a preemptory challenge to dismiss her from the jury, but got her phone number on the way out of the courtroom. I like this story because it can be further embellished by adding to the questions in voir dire, such as “are you single?” and “what do you like to do for fun?”
Somehow it seems fitting to have a fictional story for how we met to go with the fictional agency that approved our relationship.
Gavin
I pick Jenny up on Saturday morning and drive up the 101. We arrive at my parents’ house in time for brunch, which consisted of fresh fruit and pocket pancakes (think crepes cooked into balls).
After brunch, I play the part of chili apprentice. My father does not cook much, but with chili he is an artist. His philosophy on the subject borders on the paradoxical: add spices to taste, but not so much that you can taste the spice. This is particularly important when adding unusual flavors, like chocolate.
After eating, we settle down for an afternoon of playing games. We start with Bananagrams (think scrabble without a board or the strict rules). For some reason, my father doesn’t like to play, but he will sit next to my mother and advise her. He is helpful, but somehow still doesn’t seem to give her an unfair advantage.
To include him more directly, we switch to playing Apples to Apples, where the goal is to match the noun cards in your hand with the adjective card on the table. The judge then picks the best match and the winner gets a point and the role of judge moves to the next person. Although the options are limited by the cards in your hand, my father does very well.
In games like this, my mother has the sense not to be too confined by the rules. She respects the general structure of the game, but will openly lobby the judge for her selection or trade cards with others. If she did this to win, it would be weird or unsportsmanlike. But she does it to remind us that this is just a game, and it as with any game, is important to have fun. I am very pleased that Jenny seems to appreciate and enjoy this approach.
After Appling ourselves silly, it is time for Jenny to go join her family’s celebration. I walk her over to the future in-laws and agree to come in and join them for the pre-party. I recognize Jenny’s brother and soon-to-be sister in-law, but everyone else is new, including Jenny’s father.
As we are sitting around the living room, getting to know each other, they learn that I am a federal prosecutor and that I met Jenny on eHarmony. While meeting people online has largely lost its stigma for the younger generation, it seems to make the older generation is still a little uncomfortable with the idea of finding love in cyberspace.
In response, we try to make up a new story for how we met. After a little bit of brainstorming, we settle on the following: Jenny was called for jury duty and I was the prosecutor on the case. Knowing that her beauty would distract me during trial, I used a preemptory challenge to dismiss her from the jury, but got her phone number on the way out of the courtroom. I like this story because it can be further embellished by adding to the questions in voir dire, such as “are you single?” and “what do you like to do for fun?”
Somehow it seems fitting to have a fictional story for how we met to go with the fictional agency that approved our relationship.
Gavin
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
