DgN ArG: CrT JMTs

Task One: Part C Blog Review

2006-06-29T09:19:00.000+10:00

The two design related blogs I have decided to review for this task are:

The Road to Hell: Now Paved with Innovation? by Michael Bierut
Design Observer. http://www.designobserver.com/archives/014697.html

I Love the Smell of Rubber Cement in the Morning by Ronnie Lebrow
http://ronnielebow.blogspot.com/

I have chosen to review these two blogs as they are both passionately written entries both attempting to criticise some aspect of design industry. Both entries have been written with a very personal tone, and this is what makes these blogs so compelling and thought-provoking. They allow us to see the design industry in a slightly alternative light to that of the mainstream, although each with different levels of warranted inclusions.

Michael Bierut's blog entry is a personal discussion regarding Bruce Nussbaum, assistant managing editor of Business Week, and his decision to run an unpaid competition amongst design firms to determine the eventual graphical layout and presentation design of his new publication, Inside Innovation. Essentially, this involves a number of design firms doing spec work for free, all vying to be the winning entry. Bierut discusses the implications of this behaviour on the design industry, and whether or not this so-called innovative concept will have a positive or negative effect.

Although written in a deeply personal tone, Bierut has outlined evidential quotes from Nussbaum and others in presenting his opinion. However, on numerous occasions throughout the piece Bierut resorts to hypothesizing where concrete evidence is not available, using phrases such as “we can make a safe guess”; “is plausible, I guess”; etc. These are all characteristics of King and Kitchener’s “Quasi-Reflective Thinking” Levels 4 and 5 [1].

Bierut also uses the following quote from the AIGA code of ethics to highlight how the concept of doing spec-work for free crosses moral boundaries:

“A professional designer does not undertake speculative work or proposals (spec work) in which a client requests work without compensation and without developing a professional relationship that permits the designer sufficient access to the client to provide a responsible recommendation and without compensation.” [2]

Bierut has interpreted this quote to imply that the competition run by Nussbaum required designers to carry out spec work without compensation. However, it could also be argued that in this outlined scenario, Nussbaum did not REQUEST work from the client, but rather INVITED work from the design firms to be carried out. There was no actual mandatory obligation for the designer’s to participate in the competition. Bierut himself admits that he too was approached, and was very tempted to work on this project, but for various reasons, he declined. This example is align with King & Kitchener’s Level 5 where “knowledge is seen to be strongly contextual, and any given perspective is assumed to reflect its guiding principles, values, or accepted rules of inquiry.” [1]

Following on from this point, it could also be argued that perhaps Bierut’s reason for writing the article in the first place relates to him having personal sour grapes at not being able to logistically compete with the other design firms in participating in this competition, or alternatively, perhaps that he truly is strongly against the idea of designers doing work for free. To his credit, Bierut does make his standpoint clear in this criticism, and even acknowledges Nussbaum’s competition concept as being innovative. This acknowledgement and neutral bias is an important part of criticism as “criticism is best characterized as behaviour, and it should be seen, like other behaviours, in relation to underlying motives, fears, intentions, and habits” [3]

Behaviour such as interpretive criticism, where “the interpreter-critic simply seeks to mold others’ vision to make them see as he does” [3] is typical of highly personal accounts. Such accounts can be evidenced throughout Ronnie Lebrow’s personal weblog at http://ronnielebow.blogspot.com/. Ronnie Lebrow is a professional graphic designer who grew up in an era where graphic designers where also considered artists, and had the hand-on skills to match. In the blog entry, “I Love the Smell of Rubber Cement in the Morning”, Lebrow outlines a very bitter, personal account regarding the “production line” of new generation of graphic design graduates who produce flashy results through the use of computer software and printing technologies, rather than through using now “traditional” techniques of inks, paints, burshes, letrasets, etc.

It is a very condescending, and at times hypocritical, piece of writing which rates quite low on the King and Kitchner Levels of Reflective Judgement, perhaps on a Level 3 or 4. Lebrow appears to be criticizing how with the use of computers as the new graphical design medium, the new generation are becoming homogenized, and lacking the individual skill levels that his generation supposedly possessed.

However, it could be argued that the technologies that he had his disposal when he was being trained at art college were also considered “advanced technologies” for that particular point in time. In addition, without the advent of computers and associated internet technologies, he would not be in the position where he is in today, able to establish new clients over the internet, and being able to voice his opinions to a larger community.

Finally, is it not true that because of the advent of the Internet, a gigantically large field of graphic design work blossomed in terms of web-based graphic design??

In summation, I believe that these two blogs have both contributed to the design criticism through their personal comments and attacks. Both of these blogs present the wider audience with a greater appreciation of differing viewpoints. Although at times being controversial and subjective in nautre, without these kinds of blogs our views regarding design discourse would be more mainstream and considerably conservative.

[1] Patricia King and Karen Kitchener “Levels of Reflective Judgement” http://www.umich.edu/~refjudg/index.html; http://dhc.ucdavis.edu/fh/aa/king.html
[2] Bierut, Michael. “The Road to Hell: Now Paved with Innovation?”. Design Observer. http://www.designobserver.com/archives/014697.html
[3] Attoe, Wayne. “Methods of Criticism and Response to Criticism” http://www.jstor.org/view/01492993/ap050005/05a00090/0
[4] Baker, Steve. “Flying, Stealing: Design’s Improper Criticism” http://www.jstor.org/view/07479360/ap050027/05a00100/0
Lebrow, Ronnie. http://www.lebow.ca/ronnie/

Task 1 Part B: Biennale Review #2

2006-06-29T09:15:00.000+10:00

Adrian Paci - Noise of Light (2006)

Review #2

Although perhaps not being the most alternative or far-fetched installation at the Beinale exhibition, the grand size of Noise of Light makes it stand out as boldly as the statement it is trying to make. Paci uses the sheer size of the chandelier along with the persistent industrial whirr of the generators to draw our attention to the use of power in lighting up. Whereas many of us in the Western world would take power and electricity for granted, this is not the case in less well-off regions of the world. The generators have been used effectively by Paci to represent the labour and resources that combine to produce the light- without even just one of them, we would have no radiant light at all.

Paci has used the form of a chandelier to symbolise the grandeur and opulence often associated with the First World, and the habitually imprudent use of light resulting in unnecessary amounts of wastage. Who really has the warrant to expend such copious amounts of power to light up a chandelier, when people in the Third World can barely afford to light up a single 40W light bulb? A single generator is all that it would take to last such a person an eternity, let alone 10 of them.

Paci has demonstrated his point well in Noise of Light, however, it is a little ironic that it is only through the use of such large amounts of material and energy himself, that he is able to make his statement regarding power usage and expenditure.

See also:

Adrian Paci Homepage. http://web.tiscali.it/adrianpaci/
Art Forum, May 2003. http://www.findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_m0268/is_9_41/ai_101779220
E-Flux. http://www.e-flux.com/displayshow.php?file=message_1147365440.txt
Moderna Musset. http://www.modernamuseet.se/v4/templates/template3.asp?lang=Eng&id=2544

Task 1 Part B: Biennale Review #1

2006-06-29T09:08:00.000+10:00

Adrian Paci – Noise of Light (2006)
Review #1

The whirring, oversized chandelier installation that immediately greets visitors to the Sydney Biennale at Pier 2/3 Walsh Bay is instantly recognisable as Adrian Paci’s Noise of Light. The main component of the installation is a 5m high chandelier hanging low from the ceiling of the warehouse. Below the piece lies a series of 10 generators placed in a circumferential pattern around the chandelier, each with cables leading to the main piece. These generators not only power the hundreds of bulbs that give the chandelier its glowing, radiant presence, but also give off an incessantly monotonic whirring noise.

Noise of Light is the second in a series of works by Paci, the first being Turn On (2004), a video piece that recorded a group of men in the transition from daylight to darkness. This piece was a “reflection on change and transformation, purpose and use” [1]. Paci is an Albanian born emigrant, currently residing in Italy, who is reknown for his video pieces. According to Rene Block, Director of the Museum Fridericianum Kassel, Paci is “aware of the leaks and impossibilities of our own experiencing of the most important aspects of common living, like death, encountering, narrating or sharing, and aims at approximating their realization for the viewer to raise the awareness of his/her limited perception of reality." [2]
Noise of Light aims to make us aware of the large amounts of power consumed by the act of lighting up, and the sacrifices that have to be made in order to generate electricity. We often take this precious resource for granted, whereas “the electricity supply regularly fails in Albania” [3]

[1] Radiance 05. http://www.radianceglasgow.com/visual.html. Viewed on 28/06/06
[2] Block, Rene. http://www.apexart.org/residency/paci.htm Viewed on 28/06/06
[3] Eichler, Dominic, ‘Strong Current’, frieze, issue 94, October 2005, p184.

Self-Assessment Review

2006-06-29T09:07:00.000+10:00

I found this task to be very helpful in identifying weak areas in my writing and design critism skills. I believe that the feedback received from my peers was very insightful and of a constructive nature. I already suspected where the main flaw in my original piece lay- in the long waffly intro, although I believed this was neccessary to help explain the technical terms in layman's language. however, it was only after receiving feedback from others that i realised the "exclusiveness" of the tone i had written the piece in - it really did give the impression that the greater audience were not "worthy" enough to be a powder-hound like myself. I think the biggest thing i learnt from this task was the importance of knowing your audience. Knowing their characteristics, knowledge, potential standpoint, etc, will all influence the writing style of your piece of writing, and perhaps even dictate it..

REVISED Design Criticism: Voile Split Decision Splitboard

2006-06-29T09:05:00.000+10:00

Voile Split Decision Snowboard.

There are three types of people in the world: snowboarders; skiers; and snow-haters.. I just happen to fall in the snowboarders category. I generally have little time for skiers, and even less time for those who hate the snow altogether. How one can not appreciate the intrinsic feelings of exhilaration gained when standing aloft a big-ass mountain in the middle of nowhere with nothing but metres of accumulated virgin snow lying at your feet waiting to be penetrated, and penetrated hard, I simply cannot understand. These pour souls have obviously not seen the light. Nor been exposed to the world of the ‘backcountry’.

The backcountry, or “off-piste” as is otherwise known, is any area which is not ‘groomed; by the governing ski resort. By ‘groomed’, I mean, rolled, smoothed, curated, primed, etc every morning by a big tractor-looking contraception, also known as the ‘groomer’ funnily enough.

In the backcountry, there generally is no governance or supervision undertaken by ski resort bodies. Should you decide to duck the trail ropes and head out into the alpine wilderness, you are doing so at your own risk. You leave the relative safety of groomed runs behind and enter a wide wide world of cliffs, trees, creeks, nols, rocks, blizzards, and last but not least, avalanches. Don’t expect any favours from the ski patrol when they come and haul your shattered wreck out after losing control and ploughing hip first into an unforgiving cluster of trees.

It is generally accepted that the harder you work for something, the greater the reward. This is also the case with regards to the backcountry. The more remote and hard to access a particular location is, generally the more pleasurable the potential experience. Steeper mountain faces. Deeper, fresher, untouched snow. Emotionally-overwhelming, pristine, alpine views. This is what the true backcountry powder-hound lives and dies in the pursuit of.

However, it is also in the backcountry that the ongoing debate of “Which is better: ski or snowboard?” really comes to the fore. For those unacquainted with the backcountry, it is a known fact that skis are better for getting to the remote location, but snowboards are more adept to making the most of the remote location.

Skis are easier to manoeuvre in horizontal and inclined planes than snowboards. In Layman’s terms, this means that it is easier to traverse across flat areas, or even climb slopes. This is because with the additional use of ski skins (one-directional carpet-like surface sleeve made from mohair hair that can be attached to the base of skis), the act of climbing a hill of un¬-groomed, knee-deep powder can be likened to the act of climbing up a gentle slope with the aid of a walking stick whilst bushwalking in the middle of summer.

This is naturally impossible to do on a snowboard, as both feet are strapped in, and are facing 90degrees to the forward directional plane. The only option for the snowboarder is to unstrap their boots from their snowboard, and physically lug the board up a hill, all without the assistance of poles. Imagine carrying a 10kg weight with both hands and trying to walk up a sand dune, each step you take causing your feet to sink in deep as it fights hard for grip in the soft, shifting sand underfoot. Another alternative for the snowboarder is the use of snowshoes. These are like oversized thongs which are attached to the base of your snowboard boots. They work on the notion that they give you increased surface area underfoot, and therefore you won’t sink in as much. However, they can still be cumbersome to use, are bulky, and have to be carried around when not in use.

On the other side of the equation, snowboarders actually have it easier, and can make the most of the conditions, during the descent phase riding through deep, un-groomed slopes of powder. Snowboards are much “fatter” than skis, and therefore are more naturally inclined to “float” higher in deep snow than skis. Skis plough through powder snow at a considerably deeper level, and therefore have a greater tendency to become stuck and bogged down. Oh yeah, riding a snowboard through powder looks and feels better too!

Okay, now that you’ve read all the acts, I hear you bellow out, what is the solution to this issue which so passionately affects all of us in the powder-hounding backcountry community?

A compromise of course! A compro~~~what you say?? A pair of Skis. A Snowboard. A pair of Skis. A single Snowboard. How does one compromise on that, you ask?? Well, simple…you just cut the snowboard in half, and then you get a pair of skis!

Welcome to the logic behind the design of the Voile Split Decision Splitboard. Voile have been tinkering around with the concept of Splitboard’s for almost 10 years now, but it is only with recent evolutionary changes that Splitboards have really come to the fore.

In the past, there have been concerns regarding the ‘splitting’ of a snowboard in half in relation to how the binding system would be made manoeuvrable and easy to use in harsh alpine conditions; would the torsional flex and strength of the snowboard be compromised; the durability of the product parts as a whole; and whether or not the performance in “snowboarding” mode would be comparable to that of a traditional snowboard? (see http://www.backcountrymagazine.com/split_boards.html)

Voile have employed the use of a “slider pin” system and “chinese hooks” to detach/attach the skis together and to make the binding system movable. These are briefly explained in the diagrams below, but for more information, see the instructional videos at . See also for comparisons in interface design that have been made between the Voile Split Decision Splitboard and the main competitor, the Burton S-Series .

Whilst Voile have made a valiant effort in attempting to satisfy consumer need through the use of clever, simple mechanical design, there are still a few evolutionary steps to occur before I am convinced with the durability and ease-of-use of the product.

First of all, the initial binding installation method is a complicated, time-consuming process which, even with the aid of an instructional video clip, can be very easily messed up. This is also the case with regards to the use-phase of the binding system. When you want to switch from the ski/climbing setup to the snowboarding setup, the process and multitude of parts means that, whilst it may look like relatively simple and straightforward process to perform in the ski store, when you are stuck in a -20degree blizzard with poor visibility, it is definitely easier said than done.

There is also an unnecessary exposure of primitive parts to the physical environment. The tip and tail attachment hooks have been made from some type of moulded acrylic, and simply screwed into the snowboard base. Would the use of bolted rivets not give the attachment more strength and durability? Not to mention eliminate the likelihood of screws becoming affected by changes in temperature exposure and becoming loose? Would the use of a coated metal bracket not be more weather resistant and durable than the brittleness associated with plastics?

Snowboards and skis are obviously not the most environmentally-friendly products available on the consumer market, being manufactured from wood core, fibre glass, sintered base, stainless steel, aluminium, wax, etc; put together in a heat-bend-and-glue process with the use of chemical-rich adhesives, before being finished off with the use of more environmentally un-friendly paints, glosses and sealants. They are certainly not products which you would dispose of in your suburban recycling bin when done with.

With this in mind, I must pay homage to Voile’s attempt at reducing landfill waste by also retailing the Voile Split Kit. This DIY kit allows you to cut an existing snowboard in half to make your own custom splitboard. Clearly an ingenious concept that could bring to life older, pre-loved snowboards which you had previously thought were obsolete.

However, it must also be recognised that perhaps this kit was not designed with eco-friendly considerations in mind, rather, it aimed to fill a void in the tight-budget DIY market. While this may/may not be able to be proven, the recommended retail price difference between the two products of $500 gives this theory some credibility.

As with the overall Split Decision Splitboard design concept, I must give Voile credit for developing a product that many a powder-poaching snowboarder like myself have been craving for for years. This product allows snowboarders easier access to a larger range of previously skier-dominated terrain, without compromising on the quality of the ride of a snowboard during the descent phase. Whilst I do not exactly have much time for my two-planked snow-hogging cousins, I do find it quite ironic that it is through the inspiration of the ski design that the snowboard has evolved. With a few more considered adjustments to the design of the product, I can envisage the splitboard becoming a real winner in the years to come. There’s no “split decision” about that.....

Design Criticism: Voile Split Decision Splitboard

2006-06-27T14:02:00.000+10:00

I believe there are three types of people in the world: snowboarders; skiers; and snow-haters.. I just happen to fall in the snowboarders category. I generally have little time for skiers, and even less time for those who hate the snow altogether. How one can not appreciate the intrinsic feelings of exhilaration gained when standing aloft a big-ass mountain in the middle of nowhere with nothing but metres of accumulated virgin snow lying at your feet waiting to be penetrated, and penetrated hard, I simply cannot understand. These pour souls have obviously not seen the light. Nor been exposed to the world of the ‘backcountry’.

The backcountry, or “off-piste” as is otherwise known, is any area which is not ‘groomed; by the governing ski resort. By ‘groomed’, I mean, rolled, smoothed, curated, primed, etc every morning by a big tractor-looking contraception, also known as the ‘groomer’ funnily enough. You know when you look at a map of a ski resort and you see all those coloured lines running up and down the mountain marking out the different trails you can ski/board down? Those are groomed trails. Anywhere outside/off these trails is therefore un-groomed, and considered backcountry.

In the backcountry, there generally is no governance or supervision undertaken by ski resort bodies. Should you decide to duck the trail ropes and head out into the alpine wilderness, you are doing so at your own risk. You leave the relative safety of groomed runs behind and enter a wide wide world of cliffs, trees, creeks, nols, rocks, blizzards, and last but not least, avalanches. Don’t expect any favours from the ski patrol when they come and haul your shattered wreck out after losing control and ploughing hip first into an unforgiving cluster of trees.

So you ask the question WHY would one want to enter the realms of such a wild place as the backcountry, where there is no governance, and with no governance, no safety measures? Well, quite frankly, the backcountry is where one finds the deepest, freshest, most untouched, snow. It is generally accepted that the harder you work for something, the greater the reward. This is also the case with regards to the backcountry. The more remote and hard to access a particular location is, generally the greater the reward. Steeper mountain faces. Deeper, untouched snow. Gorgeous, pristine, alpine views. NO-ONE but you. (And maybe your best friend too) This is what the true backcountry powder-hound lives and dies in the pursuit of.

However, it is also in the backcountry that the ongoing debate of “Which is better: ski or snowboard?” really comes to the fore. See, for those unacquainted with the backcountry, which I presume is the majority of you, skis are easier to manoeuvre in horizontal and inclined planes than snowboards. In Layman’s terms, this means that it is easier to traverse across flat areas, or even climb slopes. This is because with the additional use of ski skins (one-directional carpet-like surface sleeve made from mohair hair that can be attached to the base of skis), the act of climbing a hill of un-groomed, knee-deep powder can be likened to the act of climbing up a slight hill with the aid of a walking stick whilst bushwalking in the middle of summer.

This is naturally impossible to do on a snowboard, as both feet are strapped in, and are facing 90degrees to the forward directional plane. The only option for the snowboarder is to unstrap their boots from their snowboard, and physically lug the board up a hill, all without the assistance of poles. Imagine carrying a 10kg weight with both hands and trying to walk up a sand dune, each step you take causing your feet to sink in deep as it fights hard for grip in the soft, shifting sand. Another alternative is the use of snowshoes. These are like oversized thongs which are attached to the base of your snowboard boots. They work on the notion that they give you increased surface area underfoot, and therefore you won’t sink in as much. However, they can still be cumbersome to use, are bulky, and have to be carried around when not in use.

The next question I hear you ask is why do snowboarders go backcountry when it is clearly such an inconvenient thing to do?? Well, believe it or not, snowboarders actually have it easier, and can make the most of the conditions, during the descent phase through deep, un-groomed slopes of powder. Snowboards are much “fatter” than skis, and therefore are more naturally inclined to “float” higher in deep snow than skis. Skis plough through powder snow at a considerably deeper level, and therefore have a greater tendency to become stuck and bogged down. Oh yeah, and it looks better too!

Sooooo….pretty much, what I’ve been trying to say in the past 8 paragraphs is that in the backcountry, skis are better for getting to the remote location, but snowboards are more adept to making the most of the remote location. What is a potential solution to this issue which so passionately affects all of us in the powder-hounding backcountry community?

A compromise of course! A compro~~~what you say?? A pair of Skis. A Snowboard. A pair of Skis. A single Snowboard. How does one compromise on that, you ask?? Well, simple…you just cut the snowboard in half, and then you get a pair of skis!

Welcome to the logic behind the design of the Voile Split Decision Splitboard. Voile have been tinkering around with the concept of Splitboards for almost 10 years now, but it is only with recent evolutionary changes in the past years that Splitboards have really come to the attention of powder-hounding purists such as myself.

In the past, there have been concerns regarding the ‘splitting’ of a snowboard in half in relation to how the binding system would be made manoeuvrable and easy to use in harsh alpine conditions; would the torsional flex and strength of the snowboard be compromised; the durability of the product parts as a whole; and whether or not the performance in “snowboarding” mode would be comparable to that of a traditional snowboard? (see http://www.backcountrymagazine.com/split_boards.html)

Voile have employed the use of a “slider pin” system and “chinese hooks” to detach/attach the skis together and to make the binding system movable. These are briefly explained in the diagrams below, but for more information, see the instructional videos at http://www.voile-usa.com/splthdr01.html. See also http://www.splitboard.com/splitboard/split101/anatomy.htm for comparisons in interface design that have been made between the Voile Split Decision Splitboard and the main competitor, the Burton S-Series http://www.burton.com/sh/gear/products.asp?productID=8.

Whilst Voile have made a valiant effort in attempting to satisfy consumer need through the use of clever mechanical design, I still believe there are still a few evolutionary steps to occur before I am convinced about the durability and ease-of-use of such a product.

First of all, the initial binding installation method is a complicated, time-consuming process which, even with the aid of an instructional video clip, can be very easily messed up. This is also the case with regards to the use-phase of the binding system. When you want to switch from the ski/climbing setup to the snowboarding setup, the process and multitude of parts means that, whilst it may look like relatively simple and straightforward process to perform in the ski store, when you are in a -20degree blizzard and with poor visibility, it is definitely easier said than done.

There is also an unnecessary exposure of primitive parts to the physical environment. The tip and tail attachment hooks have been made from some type of moulded acrylic, and simply screwed into the snowboard base. Would the use of bolted rivets not give the attachment more strength and durability? Not to mention eliminate the likelihood of screws becoming affected by changes in temperature exposure and becoming loose? Would the use of a coated metal bracket not be more weather resistant and durable than the brittleness associated with plastics?

Snowboards and skis are obviously not the most environmentally-friendly products available on the consumer market, being manufactured from wood core, fibre glass, sintered base, stainless steel, aluminium, wax, etc; put together in a heat-bend-and-glue process with the use of chemical-rich adhesives, before being finished off with the use of more environmentally un-friendly paints, glosses and sealants. These are certainly not products which you would dispose of in your suburban recycling bin when done with.

With this in mind, I must pay homage to Voile’s attempt at reducing landfill waste by also retailing the Voile Split Kit. This DIY kit allows you to cut your own chosen snowboard in half to make your own custom splitboard. Clearly an ingenious concept that could bring to life older, pre-loved snowboards which you had previously thought were obsolete.

However, it must also be recognised that perhaps this kit was not designed with eco-friendly considerations in mind, rather, it aimed to fill a void in the tight-budget DIY market. Whether or not this is the case I do not know, however, I will give Voile the benefit of the doubt on this occasion.

As with the overall Split Decision Splitboard design concept, I must give Voile credit for developing a product that many a powder-poaching snowboarder like myself have been craving for for years. This product allows snowboarders easier access to a larger range of previously skier-dominated terrain, without compromising on the quality of the ride of a snowboard during the descent phase. Whilst I do not exactly have much time for my two-planked snow-hogging cousins, I do find it quite ironic that it is through the inspiration of the ski design that the snowboard has evolved. With a few more considered adjustments to the design of the product, I see the Splitboard to be a real winner in the upcoming years. There’s no “split decision” about that….

Tastey Response

2006-06-27T13:08:00.000+10:00

Time to respond to a few of the comments made from you kats regarding the Taste Regime profile, eh..

First of all, Juzzo, u claim that i don't play a musical instrument, but have perhaps had a go of the guitar and piano before. Well, your part-right, part-wrong. NO, I don't have the time (or patience!) to play an instrument, however, I did use to tinker around with a pair of Technics SL1200s (turntables) before i decided to sell those and to start travelling overseas instead. And the only other piece of musical instrument that i can/could play would have to be the recorder in 5th Grade..haha.. then again, i think that was compulsory for all primary school students!

With regards to recent movies which I have watched, Rochelle and Mad, you are both right. I do love my snowboarding flicks (Warren Miller's "Higher Ground" last month was an absolute rippa), and being a bit airy-fairy upstairs, I also don't mind watching a comedy at the movies after a stressful day at uni/work. I saw Cars last week which i can't recommend highly enough!

And Ben, with regards to government spending, you're right - it doesn't really rate that high on my give-a-dam meter. It's not because I don't care or anything, it's just because I honestly do not have that much free time to be reading up on BRW and the like. I do keep up-to-date with current political agendas and issues, but am not the type who sits down and calulates government expenditure and bugets finding out where they can squeeze out a few extra dollars here and there. I am a designer, not an economist.

In relation to what these responses have taught me- I honestly don't know. On the one hand, it could be said that all the respondents were really really intelligent and picked up a lot about me just by reading my responses to the 10 other questions. On the other hand, it could be said that my responses gave too much away about me. Then again, maybe I really am just a simple, easy-to-read guy with a personality and character that is easily digested. I think that because I tend to express my passions in life (snowboarding, beach volleyball, travel, etc) so forthrightly, it makes me easy to read. Whether or not this is a good thing is debatable, but at least people can kind of guess where i stand, even upon first meeting me. Having this knowledege about me will obviously help in relation to the type and intensity of criticism that can be directed at me, and how this criticism will affect me.

Task 1 Part A Q's

2006-06-19T23:24:00.000+10:00

Alrite chumps, time to get "serious" & answer sum questions aiiight:

1. Favourite Television Show in the last 2 years. How many hours television do you watch a week?

Can't go past Fat Pizza. It's fully sic bro! I have a small TV in my room, so I probably rack up on average, at least 2-3 hours everyday - a lot of it being sport & comedy.

2. What sort of camera do you have? What do you take pictures of: events, friends and relatives, things I find interesting, beautiful things?

Digital Camera. Love taking photos whilst on travels, in particular whilst in foreign countries and whilst submerged in a totally foreign culture. I try and "capture" the moment/scene/situation as best as I can so that others at home can try and grasp a little of what it was actually like to be in that place at that time. I especially love taking close-ups of people going about their own thing in their home environments, in particular the old and the young - love capturing the details in their facial expressions. On the other hand, I also love taking action, sporty shots, eg. whilst out on the slopes overlooking the scenic townships & valleys below.

3. What sort of car would you like to drive? How often would you get under the bonnet of that car?

Something sporty yet classy with a bit of grunt under the hood. The Nissan 350Z would be my choice for the moment. I'd drive it around with pride as much as i could & crank in many a road trip up & down the coast. I LOVE spending time behind the wheel of a manual car - even if it's only my mom's 1.8L Corolla..

4. Do you play a musical instrument? Which?

5. List your most favourite and least favourite type of music?

Favourite: Chill-out Trance, Progressive, Japanese Hip-Hop

Least Favourite: Opera, Classical

6. Which of the following would you visit or attend at least twice a year: art galleries, museums, public lectures, public libraries, political meetings, demonstrations or rallies?

Probably only art galleries & museums. Don't really have much spare time in my life.

7. List 4 films you have seen in the last year, from favourite to least favourite, and indicate how you saw them (cinema, video/dvd rental, video/dvd owned, pay TV, free-to-air TV)?

8. What is your favourite sport or game to play? What is your favourite sport or game to watch?

Summer: Beach Volleyball; Winter: Snowboarding. LOVE watching and playing both equally.

9. Where would like to travel to (apart from to friends or relatives)?

My ultimate dream is to be able to snowboard down every mountain worth riding in the world. Having already conquered OZ, NZ, & Japan; next on my immediate "to poach" list are Kashmir (Himalayas); South America (Argentina, Chile, etc); Canada/US; Europe; and further on down the track, the Holy Grail of "extreme" snowboarding regions, Alaska..

10.What is your primary source of news? To what extent to do you take an interest in the news

Internet & TV news. Enjoy keeping abreast of current issues. Spent a year living in Japan & saw firsthand how the government-censored propoganda crap they broadcast as "news" can brainwash an entire society. Quite sad seeing a whole generation of youth grow up with an unrealistic take on what the world is like outside Japan. I noticed a big difference between those Japanese who have travelled/spent some time overseas, and those who haven't.

11.Should the government be spending more or less funding on: tax relief, sport, the arts, the environment.

12.Which country are you from? Could you live in a country other than where you were raised for the rest of your life?

Down Under. Yes, I adapt easily to foreign cultures and contexts. There's a lot more of the world which I can't wait to explore & experience firsthand. When I arrive in the place that's "just right" for me, I reckon I'll get that special "feeling" & know it straight away. Kind of like that subconscious feeling you get when you know you've "found" your future wife. My dream location would be a place where I was a maximum of one hour's drive away from gigantic, powder-stashed mountains; as well as warm, sunny beaches with nice swell. That way i can combine my two greatest passions in life: Snowboarding & Beach Volleyball.

13.Where do you tend to meet your friends: at each other’s homes, shopping centres, pubs or clubs, cafes and restaurants, parks or exercising?

Depends on the friend & on the occasion. Generally speaking, a "night-out" with friends would include dinner, drinks, & a dance. Other friends I would meet for specific purposes, eg. gym, sport, Japanese class, etc.

Round #2

2006-06-19T13:38:00.000+10:00

arrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrgh.... that feels soooooooooooo good....

Breaking the Drought

2006-06-19T13:35:00.000+10:00

I'm now losing my blogging virginity...