Wall·E: Simply Lovely

There are love stories, and then there’s Wall·E. Wall·E is clearly the best film I have seen in 2008, and perhaps not surprisingly, it is also one of the greatest love stories I have ever witnessed on screen.

Why is the love story between EVE and Wall·E so effective?

Because in the end, with all the technical prowess and intricate animation that is evident in the film, the most important thing about Pixar’s newest hit isn’t in the complexity of its craft, but instead in its simplicity.

Don’t worry, I won’t be posting any spoilers here. (Though judging from the money it made this weekend, I’m surprised there are still people out there that haven’t seen the film.)

Wall·E’s love for EVE is not one that is based on looks or sexual desire or even the need for self-validation through the eyes of another. It’s not selfish or wrought with unnecessary drama.

Instead, it focuses on the simple, basic, and wholesome need for companionship. It is centered upon the simple notion that we, as humans or as robots, need to be reminded that we are not alone, that there is someone out there that wants to dance and watch Hello, Dolly with us on our iPods.

Our lives are filled with work and commitments (directives?) that often distract us from simple and honest human interaction. Wall·E — both the character and the film — reminds us that these raw and unfiltered personal connections are what really drive us to (as perfectly noted by the Captain) live, and not just survive.

Pixar’s amazing focus on simplicity in its love story is most evident in the guiding premise of the film: through all the trials and tribulations, all Wall·E really wants to do is hold EVE’s hand. It’s hard to argue that that isn’t the most simple, basic, but beautiful expressions of love possible.

Tonight’s party is hosted by your local public library

When I was studying at Georgetown University, our euphemism for going to the library to study was to go “out to party at Club Lauinger.” Sure, we were being facetious at the time, but in light of the changing role of the library and the librarian, I think that statement may not be far from the truth.

I only have one core message today, so I’ll keep today’s post short.

The library needs to go from a place where you access collections to a place where you access connections.

Sure, there is immense value in housing books and videos in one big building, and then letting people browse that physical media when they are in the building. There is, however, more value in letting those buildings be places where people connect with people, rather than simply the books and other titles.

The library should be a place where I can have a coffee and conversation with people who are engaging with the same ideas — and subsequently, same titles from the collection — as me. It should be a place where conversation is encouraged and not shushed, where debate flourishes, where innovation happens.

Having a meeting for a small community group? Have it at the library. Looking for someone that knows something about cooking Thai food? Meet them at the kitchen in the library. Having a wine and cheese reception for your local design awards? Have it in the foyer at the library.

Once the library opens up and starts allowing people to use it in multiple ways rather than just being a repository of information, it becomes a focal point of your community. So push the shelves aside, and start creating spaces for collaboration and creativity.

The librarian is dead. Long live the librarian.

Some of my most vivid memories from my childhood involve spending summer mornings in the library, discovering new books and great VHS tapes along with Brenda, my neighborhood librarian. Brenda would recommend new titles and would help me explore the world of information that was on the shelves in front of me.

These days, that same information is on my screen, available at the click of a mouse button. And Brenda is nowhere to be seen.

The librarian is dead.

(For the record, I’m mainly referring to public libraries here, but these thoughts also apply to academic libraries to a certain extent. I’m not sure how it applies to private and corporate libraries, as I’m not too familiar with that area.)

Another Dead LibrarianIt’s easy to call out the death of the librarian. Google makes searching for information simple, Wikipedia provides an excellent starting point — and I emphasize starting point, because too many people use it as an authoritative source rather than a place to begin inquiry — for research, and getting an answer to a question is as easy as writing 140 characters on Twitter.

If I can get good, extensive, and personalized information in a few seconds using the internet, what good is the librarian?

Aside from being the keeper of the physical institution of the library (more on that later this week), the librarian’s other roles of conducting reference interviews (to help navigate information) and sorting through collections (to help manage information) seem to be waning. Collaborative tools on the web are taking their place, with social recommendation engines and direct access to a large group of people doing most of the work that was formerly in the domain of the librarian.

So why, in my eyes, is the librarian still one of the most important players in society? The answer is simple: capacity.

Long live the librarian.

If the in-person reference interview is losing relevance because of the ubiquity of online resources, it is the librarian — a person uniquely trained in sifting through data deluge — that is best poised to be at the center of the online recommendation resources.

Librarians, after all, have a lot going for them:

  • They are trained in critical analysis of good information.
  • They have experience in filtering and searching information.
  • They are employed (read: paid) to work with information.
  • They have access to more information than simply what’s online.
  • They know how to work with people and ideas at the same time.

If anyone is ready to embrace the online world and use social tools to help others access information, it’s librarians. A librarian, by tagging and annotating online, print, and other resources, can create a massive wealth of information that can then be sorted dynamically for many uses. The reference interview, which used to benefit one person, can now be reshifted to be a reference repository where data can easily be sorted, sifted, filtered, and used for anyone’s benefit.

Ascending the throne.

What libraries need to do now is make it easier for librarians to share their work on the wider web and not just hide them behind a library login. Instead of publishing bookmarks with “cool reading lists for this month” or putting big signs on their shelves indicating good reads, libraries should instead feature librarian online resource lists as their primary offering.

One day, when people are looking for help finding and filtering information, they will turn to a librarian — whether that librarian is using Twitter or Yahoo! Answers or the library website — because of the breadth of the resources at their disposal and the depth of their experience in processing those resources.

After all, everyone needs their own personal Brenda to help you navigate the content-rich and information-dense world. The only difference is that now she’s on your screen and available at the click of a mouse.

(Photo: Another Dead Librarian by DouG!!)

Powerpoint is not (always) the enemy

These days, hating on PowerPoint is just like making fun of Paris Hilton: they’re both popular tools that everyone uses but nobody really likes.

Okay, so maybe that was uncalled for. (But true.)

Being a Keynote user for years, I’ve been known to throw a snide remark to PowerPoint users from time to time. After all, if Edward Tufte (read: genius) doesn’t like the tool, then why would anyone really want to use it?

Little did I know that it wasn’t the tool (PowerPoint) that was creating the horrible presentations, but it was the tools (clueless executives) using the tool (Powerpoint) that created the presentation atrocities.

Sleeping with the enemy

In my new day job, I sit in a cubicle and stare at a machine that uses Windows 2000 and a (very buggy) install of PowerPoint 2000. So when I recently found out that I had to make a presentation at a meeting, I was tempted to drag my Macbook Pro to work and use that instead.

I ended up using PowerPoint to make my presentation. And while it wasn’t as easy to do as it is with Keynote, I managed to create a presentation that had a narrative embedded into its images and information.

The presentation went well. I had immediate buy-in and the discussion focused on the essential message of my content rather than the specifics — mainly because I hadn’t put many specifics in the presentation but instead circulated them later in a handout.

I had used PowerPoint, and I had won. Sure, it was a bit of a battle, but using PowerPoint for another purpose than creating bulleted lists is not only possible, but the right thing to do.

If PowerPoint is not the enemy, why are so many presentations still so horrible? (Hint: the answer has everything to do with the people creating these presentations.)

Friends. Enemies. Same thing.

If you’re in a work environment that requires you to use bulleted lists in your presentations, and requires you to post all your content in your slide deck, maybe you need to ask yourself if that’s the right work environment for efficient communication.

In the end, it’s all about making that emotional impact, whether using Keynote, PowerPoint, or a whiteboard. As Seth Godin says it:

You put up a slide. It triggers an emotional reaction in the audience. They sit up and want to know what you’re going to say that fits in with that image. Then, if you do it right, every time they think of what you said, they’ll see the image (and vice versa).

It doesn’t matter what you use. Just use it right. (Get some tips on how to do that over on the amazing blog Presentation Zen.)

Of course, if you use Keynote (or 280 Slides?), chances are you’ll get it right more often than not.

Got some examples of great Powerpoint presentations? Please share them! (Because it’s much too easy to find examples of bad PowerPoint presentations.)

On preganancy pacts.

It seems to be a bit of old news now, but I was thinking about the pregnancy pact story in Gloucester, MA, and something hit me when I read the statement that the principal “found out one of the fathers is a 24-year-old homeless guy.”

This story isn’t about pregnancy. It’s not about contraceptives or sex education or Catholic sensibilities. It’s about self-worth.

I asked a few friends whether they had ever considered going out and getting pregnant just for the sake of having a child. Some of them said yes. What’s telling is that those thoughts entered their minds at the times in their lives where they felt the most alone and the most marginalized and unconnected.

The pregnancy pact problem in Gloucester is really an issue of teenage girls not having a place in their culture where they feel as though they are valuable. For them, their value now comes from being part of a group that is going through a shared experience: having a baby.

I’m not saying teenage pregnancy is wrong all the time, but I am saying that if these girls were given options, activities, and communities where they felt like they were important, their self-worth may have been at a point where joining (or even thinking of) a pregnancy pact would not be appealing.

How do we create those communities and environments?

I’m too tired to go out tonight

It’s 6:30 in the morning, and I’m staring at a computer screen.

Now, some of you may be thinking that this behavior is unhealthy. Those of you that are thinking that, of course, are night owls. See, it’s 6:30am and I’ve already showered, shaved, made and eaten breakfast, and chatted on the phone with a friend of mine across the ocean in London.

I’m an early riser.

A night owl in a world of morning people

I wasn’t always an early riser. One of my most vivid memories from high school is heading back to my dorm room as the sun rises and sleeping in until noon. College was no better. It wasn’t until I left school and started working that I realized that the most productive hours of my day were the hours before lunch.

My shift from night owl to early riser wasn’t some laborious task like Deepa Ranganathan believes it can be. Instead, I went to bed early one night having made the conscious decision to wake up early the next morning. I woke up at 6am the next day and haven’t looked back.

These days, I’m up at 5:30am and in the office by 7am. My secret for going from night owl to morning person has nothing to do with fancy alarm clocks or caffeine intakes or melatonin pills or exercise regimes. It has everything to do with intent.

The only way to really wake up early in the morning is to truly believe in your conviction to become a morning person. If you can convince yourself that you really want to wake up before the light of dawn, you will. The body is remarkable in that way.

Oh, and start going to bed earlier.

A morning person in a world of night owls

And therein lies the problem.

Waking up early and staying healthy is almost impossible when you live in a world where all the fun stuff starts at 11pm at the earliest.

I need to be in bed by 11:30pm at the latest in order to make sure I get my optimal amount of sleep. When you ask me to go dancing at midnight or go catch the late screening of a movie, please don’t be offended when I say no.

Unlike you, I’ve been up for 18 hours. I’m too tired to go out tonight.

So for those of you who are considering making the jump from night owl to morning person, heed my warning: your productivity may go up, but your social life will suffer.

Until, of course, 8pm becomes the new midnight. Then we’re golden.

For now, I’m heading out to work. After all, it is just before 7am.

Download Firefox, Set World Record

Today is Firefox Download Day, where hundreds of thousands of people around the world will download the newly released Firefox 3. If you download the browser today, you’ll be part of a Guinness World Record attempt for the most browser downloads in one day.

Download Day 2008If being part of a world record doesn’t inspire you to download Firefox, the browser improvements definitely will.

The list of updates on the new version of everyone’s favorite open-source browser is extensive. Among the big changes include a better bookmarking interface, faster speed, lower memory usage, and seamless plug-in management. And while I’ve been enjoying all those features in the betas and release candidates so far, the big selling point for me is the new awesome bar.

Allow me to explain in a few words: the awesome bar replaces the location bar so that you can find what you want quickly and easily. It does that by searching both the URLs and titles of your recently visited pages and calling up the ones you visit most. Which means, if you regularly visit Eloquation.com, just typing ‘el’ should get you what you’re looking for in a matter of microseconds. That easy.

Deb’s got a better review of how it all works on her site, but I am confident that further iterations of the awesome bar will change the way people use their browsers in the near future. If you’re ready to experience a forward-thinking shift in the way you interact with your browser, I’d highly recommend upgrading to Firefox 3 today, on Download Day.

And if you’re still using Internet Explorer, get a real browser already.

A politician’s reading list: my unsolicited recommendations

A professor once told me that you can learn a lot about people by the books they read. I’d argue that you can learn even more about people by the books they recommend for others to read.

That’s probably why I found this article in the New York Times so fascinating: earlier this month, the Book Review asked a handful of writers to recommend books for the presidential candidates. Their recommendations are varied and extensive, but provide a much deeper insight into the writer’s mind rather than the politician’s sensitivities.

I decided to take a stab at making some recommendations myself, but instead of targeting my suggestions to presidential candidates, I thought it might be more fun to try and recommend books for the current leaders of the major Canadian political parties.

(Apologies to my international readers, but hopefully you’ll still learn something about me through this exercise, if not about the political scene in Canada.)

Stephen Harper

Leader of the Conservative party and current Prime Minister of Canada, Harper is a right-wing politician and avid hockey fan, but hasn’t really been known to be very progressive on environmental issues. My first recommendation for him would be Alan Weisman’s The World Without Us, which is a book that demonstrates our impact on the world through captivating scenarios.

Harper’s government also seems to be very scared of sexuality, trying to restrict rights for same-sex relationships and raising the age of consent in the country. My second recommendation for him would be Judith Levine’s Harmful to Minors: The Perils of Protecting Children from Sex, a book that explores how the best way of raising a generation of sexually-responsible young people is by giving them education.

Stéphane Dion

Dion is an unlikely leader of the Liberal party, particularly since he was competing against heavyweights like Ignatieff, Rae, and Kennedy for the position. Even now, as leader of the opposition, Dion does not seem to be at ease in his role.

Because of his seeming apprehensiveness and because of his inability to portray himself as a great leader even within his party, I have a recommendation for Stéphane Dion that is not my own. A coworker of mine has done a lot of reading about leadership and management, and one of the books he recommends is Shackleton’s Way. The book details how Ernest Shackleton’s leadership saved the lives of twenty-seven men stranded with him in the Antarctic for almost two years.

Jack Layton

Of all the party leaders, I know Jack the best. After all, he has been living in Toronto for over 30 years and he is definitely a pro-big-city kind of politician. When I reflect on reading I would recommend for Jack, the first thing that comes to mind is Jane Jacob’s The Death and Life of Great American Cities, but I know he’s read that already. He’s a fan of cycling, so Paul Kimmage’s Rough Ride makes sense to recommend, but I have a feeling he’s already got through that too.

Time to start thinking out of the box.

Jack’s always playing second-best when it comes to Canadian politics. The Liberals and Conservatives have turned the political scene into essentially a two-party contest, so the NDP — despite holding the balance of power — always looks like the little kid trying to play with the big boys. Jack’s a perennial underdog, so for him, I recommend Joshua Davis’ The Underdog, where the author participates in competitions that are way over his head — and thrives.

Added Recommendations

I have one strong recommendation to make for all three political leaders — and, in fact, to everyone that reads this blog at all — and that is Where Hope Takes Root: Democracy and Pluralism in an Interdependent World by His Highness the Aga Khan. This collection of talks (with a forward by Adrienne Clarkson) is the perfect starting point for any discussion on civil society and democracy and their roles in shaping a better future.

I threw the question out on Twitter earlier today. Thomas Purves came back with some great suggestions for all three:

Code and laws of cyberspase by Lessig. Herodotus for the long perspective. Harrison Bergeron by vonnegut. and dawkins just in case

Mike Rotenberg made a simple but very apt suggestion:

“The Internet for Dummies” http://tinyurl.com/yx8qyw

Ryan LaFlamme brought a recommendation that is extremely pertinent to our country:

Why I hate Canadians or How to be a Canadian by Will Ferguson

So what about you? If you could build the reading lists for Stephen Harper, Stéphane Dion, and Jack Layton, what would you include?

FWB

I had a conversation with a few friends last weekend about casual romantic encounters and the ability to become physically intimate with someone without necessarily being emotionally attached to them.

It was late Saturday night, so I don’t think I was as articulate as I should have been. Which is why I hope they read this essay by Joel Walkowski. He brings up the same issues with much more eloquence than I had. For example, on transient romance:

For my generation, friendship often morphs into a sexual encounter and then reverts to friendship the next day. And it’s easy as long as you don’t put yourself on the line or try too hard.

And more, on expectations and maturity:

Maybe it’s just that we have learned nothing can compare to the perfect moment of the unexpected hookup — wet lips on the beach, lying in the sand — and so we aim to accumulate as many as possible. Or maybe we’re simply too immature to commit. That has been the rap against guys forever, but now women think the same way. With the world (and the world of sex) at our fingertips, it’s difficult to choose, to settle, to compromise.

I’d recommend reading the whole essay not only for Joel’s insight, but for its lyricism as well. And then let me know what you think of it.

Girl Power

In the early years of college, I wrote a paper about the spread of AIDS and made a pretty bold declaration:

In order to stop the spread of the disease, we need to stop focusing on drugs, treatment, protection and abstinence. We need to start empowering young women.

The paper (I can’t find it anymore) probably had a bunch of statistics to support my claim — I’m fairly sure I got a good grade — but statistics aside, the importance of young women in development has been an issue near and dear to my heart for several years.

The Girl Effect

Bronwyn Jones (my hero) recently linked to a short flash video that got me thinking this morning.

<p><em>There is embedded content here that you cannot see. Please <a href="http://eloquation.com/?p=459">go to the original post</a> to see this.</em></p>

The message behind The Girl Effect project is simple: help raise the quality of life for one girl, and you’ll be creating an impact much larger than you had originally expected.

The rationale for The Girl Effect is simple: as primary caregivers, girls have a large impact on the livelihoods of their siblings, children, and villages. Educating young girls is a solid investment for the future of any society.

The imperative surrounding The Girl Effect is simple: adolescent girls are under-represented in international aid plans and statistics. Increasing their access to education, healthcare, employment training, and basic needs is key to effective development planning.

The question asked by The Girl Effect is much harder: how do we mobilize the international community to sit up and take notice that girls are an important part of global society? Not an easy question to answer for sure, but I’m sure projects like The Girl Effect will be an important first step in bringing that awareness.

Do you agree that more emphasis needs to be placed on girls when considering international development planning? How do we make policy-makers and planners aware of this issue?