Some Thoughts on a Gute Reise

After school was over I had the opportunity to travel around (mostly) Northern Europe for a little while to meet new people and see new stuff. On the itinerary: Riga, Copenhagen, Stockholm, and Munich. Here’s a quick recap of the trip.

Riga

Riga is ice cold. If you travel there in December at three in the morning after attending a huge, free-alcohol, school-sponsored party, and then you walk around the city with wet feet gazing at the Baltic-gothic churches and architecture, you’re sure to get sick as a dog.

And so it was with me, wasting away much of my time in the fetal position in my bed in the hostel. Luckily, I was only guest staying in the hostel for the three days I was there, so others were spared my hacking, shivering, and whining. Plus, it was a fairly good environment in which to involuntarily spend time. The kitchen, all shiny and clean and advertised on HostelWorld as “the best kitchen in Riga,” was not a disappointment. Nor was the staff, who offered me biscuits and insider tips on the best pharmacies to visit in Riga.

Since I was the only one in the hostel, I took turns watching movies and television series with the complete rotation of workers. One pleasantly sarcastic Latvian girl --when the movie was paused, she would always say “hurry up, you’re missing it”-- and I watched about 8 hours straight of Dr. House. I told her through my sniffles and coughs that a medical drama/comedy was a good program for me to watch because at the end of the night I would have assimilated enough med-talk to be able to diagnose myself.

The one major thing that I DID have time to see in Riga was the Occupation Museum, which I found to be both sobering and inspirational. I also thought a more appropriate name for this museum would have been the Latvian National “Please Leave Us the Fuck Alone!” Museum.

Its purpose was basically to highlight the many downsides of hosting an occupying force in your country. For instance, I learned that the occupying guests almost always overstay their welcome: brutally suppressing any nationalist spirit or sign of criticism, sending dissenters to Gulag-esque labor camps, and almost never taking their shoes off at the border before coming into the country. Some guests.

In particular, the museum chronicled Latvia’s occupation first by the USSR around 1920, then by the Germans during WWII, and then again by the USSR until relatively recent times.

The highlight was looking at all the cool knick knacks and objects of art that the political prisoners made while imprisoned. Not just shivs and that sort of fare, but beautiful chessboards, furniture, and clothing.

Copenhagen

In Copenhagen I used Couchsurfing.com to find a couch to sleep on. It was kind of short notice, but luckily a woman named Linda was nice enough to take me into her house for a couple nights.

It was my first time using Couchsurfing, and I found it to be the height of cultural exchange.

The first night she made me a very traditional Danish Christmas meal (smeared black bread), played me some Danish pop music (Supine?) and laughed at my Danish pronunciation. And the next night I made American “Macaroni and Cheese,” played some blues on her piano, and marveled at her accent-free English. She was also kind enough to take some time out of her day and give me a walking tour of Copenhagen. That’s the big benefit of a site like couchsurfing, the personal connection with someone who knows the city and is willing to teach you about it. That’s tough to find at a hostel.

Plus, you might even meet other couch surfers in addition to your host. For instance, the second night a doctor from Tanzania named Wilson stayed with Linda and took the two of us out to a birthday party one of his Danish friends was having. Another great Danish experience.
A party, some new friends, a walking tour, and traditional food. Who could ask for more?

Stockholm

After Copenhagen it was on to Stockholm, where a friend of mine named Catia was staying for a couple of nights. This was great for a couple of reasons: 1) Catia is a good-souled and interesting human being and 2) when we hang out we speak exclusively in German.

Since I only had about week left to completely master ever single facet of the German language, and was currently still struggling with the difference between 17 and 70, a bit of practice was welcome.

Since neither of us are actual German masters (Catia is a native French speaker and I an English one) the results are somewhat hilarious. I’m sure for native German speakers it’s like listening to six-year olds blabber on. And that’s exactly what it’s like for us too. But that’s also the fun of it, the challenge of communicating. And armed only with smiles, a limited vocabulary, and childlike declarative sentences, we persevered and faced that challenge.

As far as sights and activities in Stockholm, we decided to go to the Nobel Prize museum. The national art museum might have been fun too, but we’d both seen Van Gogh sunflowers or Gauguin Polynesians before; the Nobel Museum, on the other hand, was something unique to Stockholm.

I still haven’t quite made up my mind about it. The museum was not only incredibly small, but it was also home to surprisingly few historical objects. A handful really. Some slippers from physicist X, a beaker from chemist Y, that sort of thing.

Luckily, there was a pretty cool temporary exhibit that took up about half the floor space of the museum. It dealt with how Ingmar Bergman (non-Nobel Laureate, but Swede, and one of Woody Allen’s idols) staged the productions of 5 Nobel prize-winning playwrights: Eugene O’Neil, Albert Camus, Luigi Pirandello, Harry Martinson, and a Swedish feller' named Par Lagerkvist. The exhibit was composed of, among other things, a bunch of great photos of Bergman in action by photographers who I’m sure are of great importance to people who know about that sort of thing.

Another highlight was the “Listening” section, where guests are invited to listen to acceptance or other speeches from past laureates. This was very cool.

There was a great little American section are where one could listen to post WWII American Nobel Laureates Ernest Hemingway, William Faulkner, and Toni Morrison. I had never heard Hemingway or Faulkner speak before. I was a bit surprised to hear Hemingway speaking almost exactly as he writes: in short, clear sentences (e.g.-- “My next book is about X. I hope it is good.”). I also very much enjoyed being exposed to Faulkner’s Southern twang and surprising modesty.

In contrast, I had heard Toni Morrison speak before. As always, I found her to be a very talented speaker with the odd gift that, as soon as she begins to speak ,the audience finds itself with the strange urge to begin weeping immediately for the pain and beauty of the human condition. It’s almost like a superpower. Admittedly, it’s not as cool a superpower as what Professor Xavier has, but probably cooler than whatever Jubilee does.

Munich

In Munich I stayed with another Couch Surfer named Florian who saved me from a hostel at the last moment. Florian gave me a little walking tour around the gates, churches, and squares of Munich and then I spent the rest of the day at the Pinakothek der Moderne (tons of Max Beckman and a great design and jewelry section). Later that night the two of us had a great dinner with 4 other couchsurfers (above) at a guy named Christian’s place.

That’s another one of the beauties of couchsurfing, the spontaneous hospitality. I wasn’t staying with Christian, but had met him at a couchsurfing meeting the previous night in Munich. After about two minutes of chatting he immediately invited me over for dinner the next night.

After dinner we drank Becks and red wine until well into the morning and eventually agreed on how to solve at least 30% of the world’s problems.

It was another great couchsurfing experience.

Amsterdam

Right now I am in Amsterdam for two days before heading home to the United States. My hostel is a bit dirty and the staff isn’t particularly friendly, but there’s wireless in my room and some interesting old hippies are here so I guess it’s a wash.

I’ll let you know how it goes. Then it’s back to Iowa. Hope to see you soon!

Iowa City Keeps on Winning

In case you missed it, UNESCO just designated Iowa City as an official "City of Literature." Here's the U of I press release. As of now, there are only two other cities in the world that have received a similar designation: Edinburgh, Scotland and Melbourne, Australia.

And if that doesn't impress or inspire you, check this out:





Go Hawks.

Language Acquisition 101: Or, Becoming Germanick

So last week I completed my first wave of finals here in Germany. WTO, Venture Capital, EU Law, Comparative Intellectual Property. Check, check, check, and check.

Now, after a feverish week of studying and test-taking (4 days straight of early-morning exams), I have an entire week off. Many in the exchange group are traveling and enjoying themselves. I have decided, somewhat masochistically it turns out, to remain here in Hamburg and take intensive German classes for 4 hours a day.

The class itself is one of the more diverse collections of people you’ll find outside of a meeting of the General Assembly of the UN. In our group of 10 we have representatives from: Albania, Poland, China, Croatia, Mexico, Brazil, Britain, Kenya, and the US of A.

The people are friendly and the peer environment supportive and non-judgmental.

The teacher/student dynamic, however, is a bit different.

It’s not so much that he points out our plentiful errors, which, fair enough, is kind of what we pay him to do. No, it’s that he sees every mistake as a reason to mock us mercilessly with some sort of long stand-up routine.

Mercilessly.

To give an example of what I mean, imagine you are a non-native, limited-ability English speaker. You are trying to say that the boy “was running” around town, but you make an error and say “the boy was runny” around town.

That's mildly funny right? Sure.

Now imagine that the teacher, even though he is perfectly aware of what you mean, looks at you incredulously.

“Runny? The boy was runny?” he says, a faux-confused look on his face. “Like, he was a liquid? What, was he melting? Was he some sort of alien or mutant or something that had special powers and could turn his body into liquid?”

You quickly correct your error, but the class has begun to laugh at his outlandish examples, encouraging him.

“Was he like some sort of snail-man who oozes snail goo all over the place?” He continues, pointing at you and gathering steam and doing his best impression of what a snail-man would move and speak like. “Hey, everybody, look at me, I'm half snail, half man! Does this creature even exist? Who knows? Apparently Nick thinks he does. Nick literally thinks that there is a creature out there that is half snail, half man. Don't you Nick?"

He pauses and looks at you, as if he expects a real answer, and you nod wordlessly and hope he begins to start mocking someone else soon.

This, as far as I can tell, is his method. I have mixed feelings about it.

On the one hand, it’s cheap and mean and dehumanizing.

On the other hand though, I’m starting to think it might be kind of brilliant. It might even be the best way possible to learn a language: one humiliating mistake after another.

Take law school, for example. The only way I can ever guarantee that I will remember something from class is if I screw it up. Or I suppose if someone else screws it up. I still remember a kid in 5th grade running out of class crying because he couldn’t remember the answer to a question about the human body (answer: tibia).

And that’s the point. You know all those memories that make you catch your breath in shame or embarrassment when you think about them? These tend to be instructive memories. And there’s this place in your brain where those memories are all indelibly recorded in high-definition to be replayed for the rest of your life. I think ideally, you need to get all your language mistakes into that part of your brain to succeed.

This is the Bob Knight school of language acquisition. And though the Bob Knight philosophy never really worked for me in basketball (it caused me to freeze-up and become erratic), I’m hoping it will be more effective in this field.

So, Mr. Professor Man, I’m going to put my faith in you. I’m going to trust that you know what you’re doing and that you are, like Bob Knight, a professional. Go wild. Next time I misuse the dative, pick up a chair and throw it against the wall. Next time I misconjugate a routine verb, call me an asshole, punch me in the gut and storm out of the classroom. Seriously, do it. You’ve got my blessing. The more outlandish and memorable the better.

It’s the only way I’ll learn.

A Poet and Don't Even Know It

This article is awesome.

Hart Seely from Slate went through three Sarah Palin interviews, pulled a few statements verbatim from them, lumped them into stanzas and then called them poetry.

The concept seems pretty straight-forward, but the results are beautiful.

Keep in mind, this isn't just a cheap shot at Palin for not being the most informed or clear candidate. I think this same process could probably produce amazing results for any politician (or any person for that matter). But I do think that Sarah Palin has the ability to be a really prolific poet if she keeps at it.

Here is one of my favorites. Especially note the deft use of repetition in the first stanza and the intentional ambiguity of the last line.

Absolutely brilliant.

"Outside"

I am a Washington outsider.
I mean,
Look at where you are.
I'm a Washington outsider.

I do not have those allegiances
To the power brokers,
To the lobbyists.
We need someone like that.

(To C. Gibson, ABC News, Sept. 11, 2008)

Check out the article for more great hits like "On Good and Evil" and "Befoulers of the Verbiage."

Tips For Playing Scrabble in Guanajuato

The Basics

Here’s the setup. The only board we have was found at a rental house, so we have to make do. It’s a Spanish board with Spanish tiles, so all English and Spanish words are acceptable. If there is a challenge of an English word, we will search in the official scrabble tournament word list online. If there is a challenge of a Spanish word, we will use the nearest Spanish/English dictionary that’s handy.

After challenges have been made, it is requisite that all players at the table sound off on how arbitrary/stupid/ridiculous it is that the disputed word is/isn’t a playable word. If you’ve been drinking heavily (which you will have been) please act especially outraged at the injustice of it all.

Choosing a teammate

If you are playing on teams, plan ahead when picking your teammate. In a sense, this is a bit like picking a vice presidential candidate; you should have someone that shores up your weaknesses and complements the ticket. If you are not a Spanish speaker, make absolute sure that you have someone who speaks (or more importantly, writes) it well; if you’re completely drunk, select someone who voluntarily refrains from the bottle; if you’re illiterate, choose someone who has experience with letters and words. You get the idea.

If you have failed to complement your inadequacies with superior talent, don’t fear. Played at a rather European pace, games in Guanajuato can last upwards of three hours, meaning that either you or your teammate will probably have lost interest and left the table long before the game’s completion.

Point values

Be careful of the point values on the tiles. While q may be an extremely potent letter in English Scrabble, due to the relative ubiquity of q’s in common Spanish words (que, querer, queso, etc), its influence in this game has been halved. It is now worth only 5 points.

On the other hand, get an “ll” and you’re in for a treat. It’s worth 8 points and may be used as simply two l’s in English.

A final note on tile usage, the ñ may be used simply as an “n.” This rule, though established by ample precedent in previous matches, will also surely be disputed a number of times throughout the game.

Bonus Points, First Category

The basic rule is that any sex-related word is automatically doubled. Of course, what constitutes a sex-related word is a perpetual bone (sex related word?) of contention.

In order for a word to be considered a “sex-related” there must be an official table roll call. Though there is no hard and fast rule on this, at a table with 8 players, 4 votes is usually the de minimis standard that one must reach in order to be awarded double points. A rule concerning the quorum necessary for a vote to take place has never been officially established.

If at all possible, avoid dual-usage words such as “date” or “bed.” Usually, someone will say something like “Feb. 17th is a date, that’s not sexual.” This will be followed by a dispute and various lobbying efforts in an effort to secure votes. Instead, try to stick with words like “coitus” (the opening word for one of our games) or “whore,” which generally do not allow for more than one legitimate meaning.

Before you play your word, make sure you have thoroughly formulated your argument for why it should be considered “sex-related.”

I ran into this problem playing the word “roadies,” which I claimed was both a seven-letter and sexual word. Though I won over several votes quickly, I ran into a stiff resistance from people familiar with the distinction between groupies and roadies, and ultimately lost the case. "Anus" was also shot down after a lengthy discourse on the fine differences between its nominal (anus) and adjectival (anal) forms.

Note to the world: this is what happens when you get a bunch of lawyers together to play an otherwise civil board game.

Remember, though the match may seem good-natured and friendly, at its heart it is an example of board-game-realpolitik at its most vicious and unforgiving. In all likelihood, the “goodwill” of your opponents is probably based on shady political alliances or some sort of long-term, self-serving strategy.

Thus, even if you feel like you have a word that is unquestionably “sex-related,” it might not fly. This is especially ture if the game is tight. This means that your opponents are more willing to sacrifice good sportsmanship and the respect of their peers for their sweaty quest for victory.

Be aware of this and form alliances early on.

Bonus points, Second Category

In addition to sex-related words, one other category of words will be selected as having double point value. This category will be chosen according to the night the game is played on. If it is the night before your academic finals and you should be studying, double points will be awarded for words concerning international transactions. If it is the last night of the NBA Finals, sports words will be awarded double points.

For example, playing the word “pathetic” would be sports-related because it aptly describes the performance of the L.A. Lakers and, especially, Kobe Bryant (sorry Ryan) in their final match against the Celtics. "Rejoice" and "smug" would also be acceptable words because they were illustrative of my reaction to that lopsided victory.

And yes, if you can play a word that is both sex-related and sports-related, (“balls” for instance) you will be awarded quadruple points.

Of course, the holy grail of point combinations would be playing a seven letter word (+50 points) that is sex-related (x2), sports-related (x2), and falls on a triple word score (x3). I think a strong argument could be made that the word “ballers,” if appropriately played, would fall into this category.

Parting Thoughts

That should give you a pretty good start. And don’t be afraid of all the rules changes. Equipped with these tips and just a little bit of self-confidence, you’ll be able to go out there and show all those lawyers how the game is played. Just remember, you’re a baller.

It is Unfathomable That Any Doubt At All Lingers Anywhere as to the Total Rightness of Me

One of the things that I love about reading pages upon pages of legal opinions from law textbooks. . . .Ok, the ONE thing that I like about reading pages upon pages of legal opinions from law textbooks, is that you start seeing the same funny language over and over.

For example, here are seven sentences that I found in one night of reading that say essentially the same thing:

1. It is uniformly conceded that. . .
2. It can scarcely be doubted that. . .
3. There can be no doubt that. . .
4. It is well-established that. . .
5. It cannot be contended that . . .
6. The conclusion is therefore inescapable. . . .
7. (My favorite) The general correctness of this statement cannot be doubted. . .

I love it. Doesn’t get much more forceful and authoritative-sounding that that. Often times when I’m reading I’ll just nod along and say to myself, “God, I wish I could have doubted that, but I’m shackled. . .it’s WELL ESTABLISHED.”

It’s really a pretty brilliant strategy of argument. In fact, I wish I would have discovered this tactic as a young boy when I found myself engaged in vicious, no holds-barred arguments with my older brother:

Brother— Let’s watch MTV
Nick—No, let’s watch Full House. (Go on, judge me if you will).
Brother—MTV is better.
Nick—MTV? You must be joking. It is unanimously conceded, and cannot seriously be doubted, that Full House constitutes a higher quality level of television programming. The fact has been well established and does not admit serious discussions to the contrary.

Does everyone see the overwhelming force of that argument? There’s nothing my brother could have done but hand over the controller and start writing fan mail to Uncle Joey. It CAN’T fail.

For those of you who get into arguments at home with your spouses, friends, parents, rivals, etc., here’s a little cheat sheet so you can play along at home.

1. Take one of these words: uniformly, comprehensively, globally, unanimously, solidly, unconditionally (or other similar adverb),
2. Add one of these words: admitted, conceded, granted, accepted, acknowledged, recognized, agreed, (or similar past participle)
3. Throw on the phrase “It is. . .” to begin the sentence. . .

And Presto. . . you’re a Circuit Court Judge!

For those of you who spurn courtesies and prefer to infuriate and/or demean your adversary, try the more negative “Bill O’Reilly” variations. Here’s just a few to get you started.

1. It would take a fool or a simpleton to postulate that. . .
2. Idiots often maintain that. . .
3. Only a really big stupid asshole would ever argue that. . .

(Note: for maximum effectiveness, try yelling “Shut up” as loud as you can immediately upon finishing your thought).

So next time your girlfriend/boyfriend/wife/spouse wants to argue, just let them know that what you think, indeed, the absolute correctness of your thoughts and ideas, simply CANNOT be doubted. It’s well established.

Trust me, they’ll LOVE that.

A Futile Attempt to Break the Language Barrier

I met with my language buddy today to speak for 1/2 hour before enslaving myself to an essay for the remainder of the evening.

Here is an exchange that we had in English at the end of our meeting which I thought was kind of humorous:

Me: "Thanks for speaking with me today."

Buddy: "Thank you too."

Me: "Next week I'll be sure to bring my A-game."

Buddy: "What does that mean?"

Me: "Um, I wasn't too alert today, I was making all sorts of mistakes. Next time I'll do better."

Buddy: "Oh, I see."

We had just spent 1/2 hour speaking in Spanish. Sure we made all sorts of mistakes and pauses and searched around for very basic words, but there was very little miscommnication between us. Then, in switching back to English, which we have both spoken since birth, I immediately say something that is totally incomprehensible to her.

Go figure.

That Law Dic is a Bit Wordy

One of the things I don't like about law school is the way it restricts the way I express myself. Given, these restrictions are self-imposed, and probably due mostly to a certain degree of neuroses, but they exist nonetheless.

Allow me to explain. As a non-law student, I think I typically peppered my speech, as many people do, with law related terms and phrases.

For example, two years ago I might have been involved in a conversation like this with a friend:

Friend: Yeah, so the old lady was on my case again.

Nick: Really? What was it this time?

Friend: I forgot to pick up some garlic salt at the grocery store like two months ago and she's finally getting around to pointing out my admitted failure.

Nick: That's a shame. You'd think some kind of statute of limitations had run on that.

Friend: I wish.

HA! And that would be a perfectly acceptable conversation for pre-law school Nick Gregory to have because a phrase like "statute of limitations" is widely used and has made its way into the social vernacular of America.

But fast forward to now. Now, I would feel incredibly uncomfortable saying that exact same thing in a similar social context. In fact, if one of my law school friends said something like that, I'd probably think something like this: "Does everything you say or do have to be about law? Is that it? Have you no other means in which to express yourself? Experiences from which to draw from? Insights with which to convey your wisdom?"

And then I'd walk away thinking "what a prick."

And that's basically the problem I have. The use of law related terms by people uninvolved in the study of law is all fun and games and can often be quite appropriate. But the use by people actively studying the law lends an obsessive quality to those same terms, as if every minute of their waking life must be dedicated to legal-speak.

Today, here's what a similar scenario would look like (dramatization, not based on real events):

Friend: The old lady is accusing me of flying to Nicaragua every week to use drugs and be promiscuous.

Nick: What kind of evidence has she offered in support of this claim?

Friend: Evidence? Oh, I see, you're going all lawyer on me now.

Nick: What word would you want me to use? I think it's quite appropriate and a word that I've probably used freely since about the age of 11. Plus, you used the word accuse, that could probably be considered a law word too.

Friend: Whatever. Prick. Thanks a lot for the help.


Because I fear disapproval and hostility, I'm going to avoid this certain-to-happen scenario. And, in an odd counterintuitive twist to immersing myself in the law, I'll actually be using commonly uttered legal terminology less than I would before law school. Because I don't want to be a prick.

And, as we all know, being a prick, well, that would just be criminal.