Lost in the Wild

by Conroy

Rescue helicopter in action

A couple of days ago my girlfriend and I decided to take advantage of the holiday weekend and warm weather with a long hike. I chose a well-regarded but lightly trafficked trail (according to the on-line guide) on the western portion of Liberty Reservoir. All was well until my usually reliable sense of direction failed me and I picked a wrong fork, leading us on a circuitous and incorrect loop. 40 minutes later, and much to my girlfriend's consternation, we ended up back at the same fork. At least we didn't have to backtrack, or so I optimistically noted. Further on, and with wet feet after an improvised stream crossing, we faced another choice, go straight or turn right. I chose straight - wrong again - and we ended up staring across 200 yards of water at the bridge where our car was parked. Rather than backtrack 20 minutes up a steep hill to the other path, I suggested we bushwhack around the reservoir and pick up the trail nearer the end. My girlfriend had moved on from irritated to miserable and I faced a mutiny. We backtracked, and the rest of the decisions on the hike were made more democratically. We (or I) were saved from any other wrong turns by following two hikers, clearly familiar with the correct path, that we spotted about a hundred yards ahead of us on the trail.

What should have been a two-and-a-half hour hike lasted closer to four hours. We had wet feet and I had an angry girlfriend, but we made it out and my mistakes were pretty quickly forgiven (I think). Fortunately, we were hiking in suburban Baltimore, and we were never in any danger. My cell phone had coverage, and we were never more than a mile from houses and roads. Still, I had silly visions of us lost, going in circles, being trapped by darkness. These thoughts led me to ponder something that has bugged me for years: people getting lost and rescued from the wild.

---

You hear stories in the news about hikers being rescued after getting lost, climbers never found after long searches, or sailors rescued from adrift sailboats. These stories get plenty of coverage because of the dramatic aspect of people lost and time running out for a successful rescue. The adventure and tension draws people in. However, should these types of search-and-rescue missions even be launched? At times I've felt, perhaps hardheartedly, no. 

Say it Aint So

by Conroy

Armstrong celebrating 7 Tour victories - were they all legitimate?

Lance Armstrong is one of the most successful athletes in history. After recovering from near fatal testicular cancer, he won the Tour de France, by far the most visible and prestigious (and rigorous) cycling stage race, a record seven times in consecutive years from 1999 through 2005. In the process, he rose to international fame, and became a hero and inspiration to many, including this blogger. Along with his rising fame came an impressive growth in the Lance Armstrong Foundation, which has raised awareness for cancer, provided support for survivors, and raised more than $300 million for cancer research. This impressive legacy may soon be severely tarnished.

As reported this past week in several articles and tonight on the weekly news show 60 Minutes, yet another series of accusations has been leveled at Armstrong by one of his former teammates. Tyler Hamilton claims that Armstrong cheated, doped in cycling lingo, by using performance enhancing drugs (PEDs) to win at least some of his "Tours". Armstrong has denied these claims. Hamilton's accusations are just the latest in a long list.

Almost from the conclusion of his first Tour victory in 1999, there were whispers that Armstrong's performance was "unnatural". After all, he was less than two years removed from intensive cancer treatments, including chemotherapy. When he returned he was physically different, thinner but an immensely strong climber and a powerful time trial-er. Some, especially among the cycling community in France, thought the story was too good to be true. Through his following Tour wins, the suspicions continued. Armstrong worked with Italian trainer Michele Ferrari through 2004, who was connected to distributing banned substances to riders. Armstrong denied any knowledge of these activities. After his final Tour victory in 2005, allegations were circulated that frozen "B" samples of urine from the 1999 Tour, supposedly matching Armstrong's rider code, tested positive for the EPO, which ups red blood cell production (and therefore increases aerobic performance). Questions over the chain of custody in the intervening years and the fact that "B" samples are meaningless without the corresponding "A" samples, which were disposed of after 1999, lessened the impact of these allegations.

Where to Travel Next?

by Conroy

The breathtaking Amalfi Coast of Italy

With summer almost here, my girlfriend and I are discussing vacation options. In addition to a few near-by short-term trips already planned, we both want to go somewhere far away and new to us. That led me to thinking more constructively about all of the places that I want to go. I’ve thought about these vacations before, some many times, but never actually put them down in writing. And let’s be honest, with the breadth of places that I want to visit and the scope of some of the trips, it’s going to take a well-thought-through plan to make it happen. I’m not fortunate enough to have an unlimited travel budget or endless vacation days, so I have to be smart in prioritizing my list and combining destinations if possible. 

I’m sure this will be an evolving process, but the first step is to list where I want to go and what I want to see. Below is that list, with destinations grouped into potential one to two-week vacations. For completeness I’ve also listed the places that I’ve already visited. After all, you can’t know where to go next unless you understand where you’ve been. Also, the list is of places and not events. I’m sure it would be unique to say, go to the Tour de France, but I don’t think I’d travel for that purpose alone.

Travel and Adventure

A quick aside. I know many people who are indifferent to travel, or at least travel to distant or foreign destinations. Not me. I find the experience of big vacations to be a great adventure. Thinking about vacations is enjoyable, the planning and anticipation leading up to the trip even more fun, and actually going is great.

If you feel the same way, do you ever ask yourself why traveling is so exhilarating? I can give two reasons. First, the world is big and fascinating (I hope readers of this blog know this perspective of mine by now). I read so much in books, magazines, and other writings about the world’s histories and cultures. I see places and events in television, films, and photographs. This stimulates my interest. I want to take the next step and travel to what I read about and see in media; to be surrounded by a new place. On previous vacations I’ve found myself giddy with excitement when I first arrive, so eager to start exploring.

The Cobb at Lyme Regis with the Undercliff in the background

A good example: several years ago I vacationed in London but made a special point to take a side trip to Lyme Regis, a small town in Dorset on the English Channel coast. Why go there? Well it was the setting of one of my favorite novels, The French Lieutenant’s Woman, and home to book’s author, the great John Fowles. The book and writer drew me in; I wanted to see it for myself. I went to Fowles’ house – this was a year before his death – though he didn’t like visitors so I merely strolled by, walked out onto the Cobb that features prominently in the 1981 film adaptation, and meandered back in the Undercliff wooded preserve above the town where much of the critical action takes place. It was a very worthwhile and enjoyable trip and subsequent readings of the novel have been enhanced as a result.

The second reason, and harder to articulate, is what I term the places the haunt me. I use the term in the context of being captivated not scarred. For whatever reason, some places captured my imagination in a deep and visceral way when I was young. There’s more to this than just travel, and I’ll write broadly about what I mean in a future post, but a good example is Australia. Even since I was very young I wanted to go down under. I did in 2006, and Sydney, Uluru, the Great Barrier Reef, the landscapes, and people were all that I thought they would be.

Where are the places you would like to visit and why? What would you like to see and experience in person? What places “haunt” you?

Hope and Disappointment

by Conroy

Forgive me some philosophical musings, but a couple of recent events have rekindled a line of thinking.

[Note an important caveat, the following post is based mostly on my thoughts and observations, not from my experience. This is a critical distinction.]

Ten days ago, to modest fanfare, Prince William, the future King of England, married Kate Middleton. Yesterday, another celebrity couple's marriage all but ended when Arnold Schwarzenegger and Maria Shriver announced their separation. They have been married for 25 years.

On reading the news today, I couldn't help but contrast these two marriages because it brings up a central dilemma that has dominated my adult thinking: how can you be sure that a marriage will succeed? I've never been married, so I can't attempt to answer that question. And I won't write about what I don't know. Instead, think about all the hoopla surrounding the Royal Wedding.

I'm sure much of the attention in Britain and the rest of the world is the result of the princess/fairy tale nature of this type of (rare) wedding, but that aside, in many ways this event differs only in scale from most other weddings. After all, weddings are accompanied by large celebrations. Perhaps the largest celebrations the bride and groom will ever experience. I see weddings as an occasion for celebration because the wedding, representing the marriage, is a great symbol of hope. As I've written before, hope is that intrinsic human ability to see better for the future. Marriage at it's core is about hope. The belief that you have found lasting love, happiness, and companionship in someone else. That there is someone you can share your life with. That your marriage will succeed.

Divorce is the opposite; a disappointment, indeed the greatest of disappointments.The realization that love, happiness, companionship do not last forever. I choose my words carefully here, divorce isn't the greatest tragedy, worse things can happen, the death of a loved one for instance, but I doubt anything can ever be as disappointing.

I find it deeply unsettling that such antithetical perspectives, the highest hope and the deepest disappointment, are so intimately attached to marriage. Most of the people we know are, have been, or will be married at some point. And we all know marriages that have failed. What does this teach us? What guarantees are there that a happy wedding day won't lead to a discouraging split? Surely, relationships are doomed without dedication, work, loyalty, trust, and many other similar behaviors and attitudes. But is that enough?

By most estimates,  somewhere between 40% and half of American marriages end in divorce. One could reasonably assume that a sizable proportion (10-20%?) of those marriages that don't end in divorce would be described by one or both spouses as unsatisfying for one reason or another. So half or more of marriages fail. That's a depressing statistic.

---

Nevertheless, I'll get married. I have hope that marriage can succeed (I only have to look to my parents for the finest exemplar of marital achievement). The same hope that captivated the world watching William and Kate. Disappointments like divorce are part of life, but they can't, and more accurately, they won't stop us from reaching for the better.

A Long Time Coming

by Conroy

On Sunday, May 1, 2011, Osama bin Laden, terrorist and mass murderer, was killed in a targeted raid by American Special Forces at a compound near Abbottabad, Pakistan. To quote President Obama, "justice was done." It was, and it was a long time coming.

The death of bin Laden at the hands of American soldiers is a huge event, and in the past two days the coverage has been expansive. There will undoubtedly be exhaustive talk in the days and weeks ahead about the affects on Al Qaeda, the larger fight against terror, reactions in the Middle East and the rest of the world. I'm not a foreign affairs expert, and I won't pretend to have any special insights into what this event means, but I do feel compelled to share some of my initial thoughts:

•  America has waited almost ten years for this result. I remember clearly thinking in the weeks, months, and then years after 9/11 that bin Laden must surely be found and brought to justice. But so very frustratingly, he wasn't. When the news broke on Sunday I was shocked. After all this time the thought of finding bin Laden, let alone swiftly eliminating him, had faded from my mind. I doubt my reaction was unique. I was gratified but not overjoyed by the news. Again, I doubt my reaction was unique.

• I'm glad that bin Laden was killed outright in this operation. I hate the thought of a long public trial where bin Laden may have been afforded a venue to preach to his followers and continue his "holy war" against the United States and the Western World. Further, I'm glad his body was buried at sea, leaving no martyr's grave site.

• As always with shadowy missions like this, there has been doubt or skepticism expressed by some about the authenticity of bin Laden's death. Some want more proof than has so far been provided. Perhaps additional documentation will become available, but there is no doubt that the operation and results are authentic and have been thoroughly verified.

• Isn't truth more remarkable than fiction? This operation was something out of a movie, a long-term CIA intelligence mission resulting a highly precise operation against the world's most wanted man carried out by an ultra elite unit of special forces soldiers. The culminating events followed in real-time by high ranking military and civilian leaders half-a-world away. This story must be made into a movie. I hope that if it is, the filmmakers stick to the facts; I guarantee it would make for fascinating viewing.

• I find it highly suspicious that our "allies" in Pakistan were entirely unaware of the bin Laden living in a large mansion, in a sizable city, in the immediate vicinity of the Pakistan Military Academy, and only 30 miles from that nation's capital, Islamabad. I doubt my suspicions are unfounded.

• Someone will take over the leadership of Al Qaeda. Perhaps that person, or persons, will be a capable, motivated leader. I hope not. I hope that Al Qaeda will prove to be irrevocably undermined by the demise of bin Laden. I hope dispatching the most visible face of international terrorism will dampen the energy that fuels the hatred, violence, and destruction that the civilized world despises. I hope this is another in a long series of successes in the War on Terror.

One Million Steps

by Conroy

I'm declaring my intention to take 1,000,000 steps over the next 100 days. That's an average of 10,000 steps per day, which is just under five miles of walking or more than eight miles of running (your running stride is longer than you walking stride). This is a daunting challenge. To achieve it I'll have to cover well over 500 miles on foot, more than 35 miles per week. Why do this? Well before I explain that, let's consider personal fitness.

Fitness is Work

It seems every other television commercial and website advertisement has something to do with fitness. Whether that be dieting, weight loss techniques, or some novel exercise regime. Perhaps in an America obsessed with weight, this is natural. Obesity is an epidemic problem in the United States, with over 74% of adults being classified as overweight - easily the highest percentage of any Western nation. The increase in obesity, in America and other developed nations, is a result of numerous behaviors, from less active lifestyles to increased caloric intake. Regardless of the cause, obesity is a major public health concern. It is my adamant belief that this doesn't need to be so.

There’s an awful lot of public discourse about how to treat obesity. You can read stories about city councils banning trans-fats from restaurants to school boards dictating allowed foods for school lunches. These approaches won’t make one bit of difference. No, reducing obesity and improving physical fitness, like all major personal changes, comes from within each individual.

With diligence I think most people can adopt a lifestyle that leads to a manageable healthy weight and a strong, fit body. I'm not a dietitian or personal trainer, but I have set physical fitness as a personal priority and I've gained a few insights over the years.

Bad Cover Version

by Conroy

No one has ever improved on a Beatles original

I’m issuing a challenge to readers. Find one example of a cover of a Beatles song that is better than the Fab Four’s original. I am confident you will not succeed. But if you think you find one, send me the example (with Youtube or other links if possible) and I will recognize you on this blog.

The culture of contemporary music, more so than any other art, embraces imitation. Musicians regularly perform the songs of other musicians. In fact, a generation or more ago, it was very common for several artists to cover the same song. There are many examples of the cover version of a song being far more popular than the original. For example, Rod Stewart had a big hit with “The First Cut is the Deepest”, certainly more than Cat Stevens did with the original. Some songs are hits in both the original and cover versions. Creedence Clearwater Revival had a hit with “Proud Mary”, but the cover by Tina Turner was probably even more successful.

The fact that covering other musician's work is common in music provides us with an opportunity to directly compare artists, something rare in art. Listening to all these covers has led me to a conclusion: the better artist will almost always perform the better version of a song. This is why I issued the challenge about the Beatles. After all, if they are the best band of modern music, and that seems to be the general critical and popular consensus (one this blogger shares), then their version of a song should be better than anyone else's version of the same song. Fortunately, when it comes to the Beatles we can test my assertion. They covered a lot of songs in their early period and they have been covered continuously since they started recording music.

Most people have heard “Twist and Shout”, the last song off the Beatles first album, Please Please Me. It’s a classic, but it is also a cover. The original was recorded by the Isley Brothers and was a hit. One listen reveals that the Beatles version vastly improves on the original with greater energy and a famous one take vocal performance from John Lennon. The examples go on, I even think the Beatles version of “Long Tall Sally” rivals Little Richard’s howling track. What about the other side, an example of a popular cover of a Beatles song that doesn’t stack up to the original?

What's in a Name

by Conroy

I promised to cover the esoteric and mundane on this blog, and I don’t know how much more mundane I can get than to discuss professional sports team names. Have you ever asked yourself how teams get their names? Today marketing is a major factor, and owners and team management spend plenty of time and money in picking a name and logo. When the Supersonics moved from Seattle to Oklahoma City they also changed their name, making sure they made just the right choice for their new home.  A long time ago names were probably chosen with a lot less scrutiny than today. In the end though, nicknames are set and it can be fun to note the peculiarities and coincidences that result. And hey, in the modern sports world of shifting rosters, changing ownership, and relocating teams, what else is a long-time fan really cheering for besides the nickname and uniforms?

Is this name as menacing as the poem that inspired it?

I’ll concentrate on the four major team sports popular in America, football (NFL), baseball (MLB), basketball (NBA), and hockey (NHL).

Cities

Baltimore’s two professional sports teams are the Ravens (NFL) and the Orioles (MLB); both bird names, a minor coincidence. The Orioles migrated to town in 1954. Before that they were the St. Louis Browns. The Ravens flew into town in 1996. Before that they were the Cleveland Browns. What are the chances of two teams with the horrible names of ‘The Browns’ relocating to Baltimore?

In Chicago there are the Bears (NFL) and the Cubs (MLB). There’s also the Bulls (NBA). Makes sense that Chicago has a stock exchange with all those bears and bulls running around. In Miami there are the Dolphins and Marlins (one a mammal and one a fish, but both majestic). Houston has the Astros (MLB) and the Rockets (NBA); they really took to the city’s space industry (the Astros are the  renamed Colt 45s). 

I like how Detroit claimed the two biggest cats, Lions (NFL) and Tigers (MLB). In Jacksonville there is the Jaguars (NFL). Unfortunately, no team is named the Leopards. Though there are two teams named the Panthers (see below).

The Perfect Climate - Part 3

by Conroy

To read the first two parts of this climate series, use these links:
The Perfect Climate - Part 1
The Perfect Climate - Part 2

"...[Detroit's] winters are cruel - January temperatures average 24.7 degrees - and Americans do seem to love warm weather. Over the last century, no variable has been a better predictor of urban growth than temperate winters."

     - Edward Glaeser, The Triumph of the City

The cold is one reason people continue to flee Detroit

This excerpt from Glaeser's wonderful new book supports the argument that I have been making in my climate rankings. That is, that the warmer the weather, and especially the warmer the winter, the better.

In Part 1, I presented my climate formula and the ranking of all U.S. metropolitan areas. In Part 2, I provided some commentary on these rankings. I received many comments from readers in support of cold locations that ranked low on my rankings. I even received vehement arguments from residents of Barrow, Alaska and Leadville, Colorado extolling the virtues of these very cold climates. Of course these perspectives are totally valid, but my argument remains that most people prefer warm to cold. My intuition told me that U.S. demographic trends substantiated this assertion, and the expert analysis of Glaeser supports it even further. Still, it's worth testing my intuition and Glaeser's statement with facts.

Here is a list of the ten metropolitan areas that have see the largest net increase in population since 1950 along with their climate score and associated rank among the 30 largest metropolitan areas:

[Note the population changes are approximate because the Census Bureau has changed the definition for metropolitan areas multiple times since 1950.]

(population change in thousands of people / climate score / rank out of top 30 metro areas)
1. Los Angeles, CA - 8,530 / 37.1 / 3
2. New York, NY - 6,190 / 4.3 / 20
3. Dallas, TX - 5,790 / 18.0 / 12
4. Houston, TX - 5,090 / 29.5 / 6
5. Miami, FL - 5,000 / 44.9 / 1
6. Atlanta, GA - 4,830 / 16.6 / 13
7.Chicago, IL - 4,100 / 1.3 / 25
8. Phoenix, AZ - 4,070 / 21.0 / 11
9. Washington, D.C. - 4,040 / 9.0 / 18
10. Riverside, CA - 3,800 / 21.3 / 8

People continue to move to "warm" Dallas and other Texas cities

Seven of the ten cities on this list can be described as "warm" with mild winters. The only three on the list that have cold winters are New York, Chicago, and Washington, D.C. (and Washington occasionally experiences mild winters). It makes sense that New York and Chicago would be on this list because of their size and economic importance. Washington ranks because of the massive growth of the federal government since World War II.

But consider the other seven cities on this list. Only Los Angeles ranked among the ten largest metropolitan areas in 1950. Now five of these cities do with Phoenix and Riverside ranked 12th and 14th, respectively. If current trends continue, these two cities will probably rank 10th and 11th within this decade.

Surely there are more than just climate factors driving the growth of these cities. Dallas, Houston, and Atlanta all have the reputation as business-friendly, job-rich regions. But the correlation of warm temperatures to population growth is compelling.

Men in Space

by Conroy

A few weeks ago I was at the Kennedy Space Center at Cape Canaveral, Florida. Only days before, the long delayed final mission of Shuttle Discovery had ended with a successful landing in Florida, but already Endeavor was on the launch pad, surrounded in its pre-launch sheath. The Endeavor launch, scheduled for April 19 (weather and mechanical integrity permitting of course), will be either the ultimate or penultimate flight of the Space Shuttle Program depending on some final Congressional budget decisions. This is the end of an era for American manned space flight.

The Shuttle Program has been ferrying humans to an from low Earth orbit since 1981, and is ending because the shuttle fleet (or what's left of the shuttle fleet) is aging and shuttle missions are expensive. Once shuttle flights end, NASA will rely on the Russian Soyuz rockets and space craft for transport to and from the International Space Station. It is hoped that in the near future, commercial spacecraft will be available for low Earth orbit missions. We'll see what the next few years bring, but at this point in time, with the preeminent symbol of both NASA and manned space flight soon to be a piece of history, we can ask ourselves what next for NASA? On an even broader scale, what next for the story of men in space?

No More Cars

by Conroy

Will all London streets be this empty in 2050?

There was a story out today that the European Commission, the executive body of the European Union, is considering banning cars from urban centers by 2050. Such a proposal is both wildly unrealistic and terribly misguided...fortunately the story isn't true. What the European Commission is actually proposing is to eliminate diesel and gasoline powered cars from European cities by mid-century.

This idea is both reasonable and worthwhile. Eliminating traditionally powered cars - and replacing them with cars that use "cleaner" technologies - makes both environmental and economic sense, assuming of course that alternative energy approaches are fully realized. Electric cars are inherently clean and draw power from the electric grid, and ultimately power plants, which are far easier to "clean-up" then individual cars and trucks. Other technologies like hydrogen fuel cells promise even cleaner energy, but this technology has a long way to go before it is affordable and can be applied to personal transportation.

A Change in the Air

by Conroy

Djokovic celebrates a win over Nadal at Indian Wells

The last time I wrote about tennis on this blog, Roger Federer had just defeated Rafael Nadal to win the prestigious year-end ATP World Tour Finals. The win capped a great late season surge by Federer and seemed to set the stage for 2011, another year to be dominated by Nadal and Federer.

The Other Year-End Result
Just a week after that result, tiny Serbia, a nation that had virtually no tennis presence as little as five years ago, won the Davis Cup, tennis' annual national team competition. The victory over a powerful French team in front of a rabid Belgrade audience captivated the Balkan nation. The victorious players became national heroes, flying the flag for a country seeking outlets for a brimming national pride. Leading Serbia, and winning all seven of his singles matches over the four rounds of the competition, was Novak Djokovic.

Word Play in Bullet Park

After reading Conroy's post about the mot juste, I decided to run a search on my Kindle for narthex, one of the words that Conroy identifies as being part of the specialized vocabulary used to describe castles and churches. My hope was to see it used in the context of a story, and I was pleasantly surprised to find it in Bullet Park, a novel by John Cheever. The passage in which it appears, quoted below, showcases Cheever's mastery. He often chooses not merely le mot juste, but le mot musical; when he writes of the "sound of the priest's voice in the vestarium," we hear the alliteration and marvel at Cheever's skill in using just the right word in just the right place. And by drawing from the "system of terms" appropriate to a church—pew, font, narthex, vestarium—Cheever places us inside of one:

This division of Nailles’s attention during worship had begun when, as a young boy, he had spent most of his time in church examining the forms captured in the grained-oak pews. In certain lights and frames of mind they seemed quite coherent. There was a charge of Mongol horsemen in the third pew on the right, next to the font. In the pew ahead of that there appeared to be a broad  lake—some body of water—with a lighthouse on a peninsula. In the pew across the aisle there was a clash of arms and in the pew ahead of that there seemed to be a herd of cattle. This lack of concentration did not distress Nailles. He did not expect to part with his flesh or his memory in the narthex. His concerns in church remained at least partially matter-of-fact, and on this winter morning he noticed that Mrs. Trencham was carrying on her particular brand of competitive churchmanship. Mrs. Trencham was a recent convert—she had been a Unitarian—and she was more than proud of her grasp of the responses and courtesies in the service; she was bellicose. At the first sound of the priest’s voice in the vestarium she was on her feet and she fired out her amens and her mercies in a stern and resonant voice, timed well ahead of the rest of the congregation as if she were involved in a sort of ecclesiastical footrace. Her genuflections were profound and graceful, her credo and confession were letter-perfect, her Lamb of God was soulful, and if she was given any competition, as she sometimes was, she would throw in a few signs of the cross as a proof of the superiority of her devotions. Mrs. Trencham was a winner.

At the beginning of the passage, we learn that when Nailles was young, he would pass the time in church transforming random, mundane patterns seen in the grain of wooden pews into iconic boyish imagery. In the latter part of the passage, we watch him transform Mrs. Trencham into a burlesque of sanctimony. And here we see more specialized vocabulary put into play; we learn of Mrs. Trencham's disingenuous amens and mercies, her genuflections and credos, her confessions and Lambs of God. These terms—together with a couple of striking phrases ("competitive churchmanship" and "ecclesiastical footrace")—heighten the bathos of the scene. This is diction at its best.

There's a Word for That...

by Conroy

It should hardly surprise that a blog writer would love language and words, but you know what subset of this topic really interests me? Terminology, or the system of terms that belong to a particular subject. Let me give you an example.

Leeds Castle - not so simple as it looks

Recently I was flipping through the channels on my TV and came across a show about castles. I don't know much about castles, I've visited a few during vacations in Ireland and England, I've seen a bunch in movies, and they're an iconic part of medieval history, but still I don't know all that much. Nor, to be completely frank, am I all that interested. I always found the castles I visited to be cold and dark. Not very pleasant places to spend time, let alone live. Nevertheless, the show drew me in. Why? Because it featured a description of all the parts and features in classic castle design supported by real world examples. I love this sort of thing. Sure, most of us know about the moat built around some castles, but did you know that the mound that a castle was frequently built on is called a motte? Or that the open courtyard area is known as a bailey? You might know about dungeons, but did you know the underground dungeon reached by trap door is known as oubliette (or less elegantly a starvation hole)? How about some other castles features like the squint, narthex, and finial?

I bring this up because I think there's a certain joy to being able to use the exact right word to describe an object, idea, or concept. Sure I could write that castles often included an enclosed passage between the main entrance and the nave of a church, but isn't it more interesting and informative to note that this passage is called a narthex?

I'm sure most people use specialized terminology everyday in their work and other activities. Think about some of the terminology associated with your occupation. Using the right word is often essential to effective communication. Using the wrong word can lead to confusion and mis-communication. In addition, using specialized terminology demonstrates a familiarity and understanding of a subject that often needs to be expressed for reasons that go beyond simple necessity. You may not understand all of the jargon your doctor is saying to you ("myocardial infarction" instead of "heart attack"), but you get a certain confidence that at least he knows his trade. [At the same time, specialized terminology and jargon can be intimidating to a layperson. In my experience you should avoid jargon if possible and be clear in explaining terminology to someone unfamiliar with the subject and/or details.]

I like English because as a language it is so word friendly, including a vocabulary of more than a million by some counts. And English speakers have no reticence in borrowing terms from other languages. For instance, the exact right word is the mot juste, a term English took from French. Well I'll strive to use the mot juste in my writing. If I ever have to write about castles, I'll be off to a good start.

---

To give another example of the terminology associated with even seemingly simple systems, consider just a sampling of the terms associated with basketball (timely because the NCAA Tournament began today):

shot clock, air ball, three-pointer, alley-oop, assist, backboard, backcourt, ball fake, screen, bank shot, baseline, pivot foot, bench, shot, backdoor cut, rebound, brick, center, forward, guard, dribble, dunk, fast break, field goal, foul, free throw, halftime, jump shot, layup, over-and-back, front court, pass, run, swingman, technical foul, block, three-point play, travel, turnover, offense, defense, foul line, mid-court, sixth man, referee, sideline, paint, key, flagrant foul

As a casual fan you can overlook the myriad terms associated with the sport, but each term has an exact meaning in this context.

Perhaps you can take a few minutes to think of the wide terminology used in other everyday activities and items (cooking, your car, exercise, etc.). What's the difference between a car's fender and quarter-panel? In food preparation, how does a scraper differ from a spatula?
.

Build it Tall

by Conroy

The iconic spire of the Chrysler Building

When I was a little kid I was awed by tall buildings. I thought skyscrapers were the coolest thing (along with bridges, tunnels, dams, etc.). Little surprise that I became a civil engineer. Perhaps a little surprise, or irony, that my career has been focused on transportation, close to the ground. Anyway, back in my youth I never asked myself why we built these tall, expensive, monumental structures. An economist will explain that in dense urban environments, where land is in great demand and therefore expensive, building high makes economic sense. Certainly this is true. But I doubt the pharaohs were thinking of economics when they built the great pyramids in Egypt, or that cost was on the mind of the designers of the Chrysler Building, or that economic investment was the real impulse behind the building of Burj Khalifa (Burj Dubai). No, the real reason these iconic structures were built, along with the tens of thousands of other "great" buildings erected by man, was not for economics or any other practical reason, the reason was, is, and will always be: wonder.

Ask yourself how you react when you see a tall building, or long bridge, or high dam. Do you find yourself staring at these creations of man? At our achievements in engineering? We build higher and higher, span greater distances, dam massive rivers, tunnel under water and through mountains. Man has built countless churches, cathedrals, and mosques to the glory of God. But maybe, also, for the glory of himself. Is it a masculine impulse? Perhaps. Are our great buildings absolutely necessary? Perhaps not. But like anything else, great achievements arise from great ambition. And who wants to live in a world where our imaginations don't reach toward the sky?