I've been thinking lately about art.  My dorm room last year was modestly decorated at best and I hope to improve on the shabby cinder-block aesthetic this year.  With that goal in mind, I've been googling some of my favorite artists and otherwise wondering the internet in search of beauty.  I plan on finding some cool pictures, some of artwork, some of my own creation, and using the Rasterbator to turn them into oversized posters.  And when I say oversized, I mean huge enough to take up a wall, if I so desire.  These are some of the pictures in the running at the moment, though I'll continue my search off and on for the next two months.

(download)

http://www.time.com/time/specials/packages/completelist/0,29569,1999770,00.html

The list of the "Best Blogs of 2010" is a hodge podge of things I'm familiar with, things I've heard of, and new (to me) discoveries.  PostSecret and The Oatmeal have been staples of my internet diet for quite some time now.  They're the sort of website I don't need to check every day, but rather every so often, when I have five minutes to kill.  They fill a nice little niche, along with a few web comics, specifically XKCD.

Of the many blogs that have wormed their way into my consciousness while failing to make too great of an impression, Cake Wrecks, Shit My Kids Ruined, and Pitchfork made the list.  I don't really see the need to visit Cake Wrecks more than once (I have plenty of my own baking incidents to remember) but a friend of mine (whose mother is starting her own business as a pastry chef) absolutely loves it.  It has its audience; I'm just not a member.  Shit My Kids Ruined is also worth a look, but clearly appeals to parents and not the children who cause the chaos.  As one who has matured beyond the shit ruining stage relatively recently, I hesitate to show my mom the site, as it may bring up too many family stories I'd rather forget.  But I'd certainly point it out to a friend's mom, assuming my friend has a sense of humor and doesn't take to revenge.  Pitchfork is also a decent blog.  The only reason it isn't being added to the list of sites I frequent is that I prefer not to know too much about things I'm consuming.  This trait manifests itself through my reluctance to read nutrition labels, my ignorance of where my clothes were made, and now, my ambivalence towards an otherwise fantastic blog.  I simply prefer my music mixed with a healthy dose of ignorance.

Among the discoveries, my favorite, by far, is Double X.  It is smart, well-written, and often funny.  Double X focuses on news and publications of interest to women.  I was highly skeptical of this description at first, as women tend to be quite a conglomeration of disparate groups, if I do say so myself.  However, the blog wisely limits itself to targeting women likely to be on the internet reading any blog at all, thus narrowing their demographic to a more manageable size.  Still, within that group are a lot of variances to be dealt with.  Double X's appeal is that it also contains a lot of variation.  The team of writers churns out several posts a day, aiming some at feminists, others at mothers, conservatives, liberals, movie-goers, or TV watchers.  The blog's aesthetic is simple yet pleasing, and not at all distracting from the information.  My biggest criticism is that I could not for the life of me find a way to subscribe to the blog.  After several minutes of searching, the feeling that I must just be missing it began to grow, and I gave up before that feeling morphed into the idea that I am foolish.  

After reviewing Time's list of the "Best Blogs of 2010", I am relatively pleased with the blogs they recognized.  The overrated blogs were called out for it, and the more noteworthy got their props.  However, this list has the same problem that most such lists have: timing.  The list was published at the end of June, not even half-way through the year.  What will they do if the writer of one of the blogs goes bat shit crazy between now and December, thus drastically affecting the good to crap ratio of the blog?  Will they print a retraction?  I'd love to see that blurb, apologizing for prematurely calling a blog worthy.

http://michaelpollan.com/articles-archive/opium-made-easy/

This article was posted on givemesomethingtoread.com recently, and it piqued my interest for several reasons.

First, the article itself was published April 1st, 1997.  I'm not entirely sure how or why it got dredged up from the murk of days gone by, but it did.  The article was fascinating, not just due to its content, but also as a period piece.  The world has changed a lot since '97.  When that article appeared, I was six years old.  If I had read it then, it would have led to a lot less comprehension and many more awkward questions than resulted from reading it now.  

The focus of the article was the effect of the War on Drugs on the cultivation of the opium poppy in the United States.  I haven't heard any recent reports on gardeners and their homemade drugs, but then again, I'm far from up to date on the latest news in the horticultural biz.  Instead, the current news on poppies is their growth in Afghanistan, where they are a major cash crop.  You don't hear about SWAT teams raiding people's backyards, because the government is busy burning crops overseas.  While Pollan's experiences could be regarded as old news, they are better understood as a part of the government's politically driven attitude to drugs.

"Opium Made Easy" is also interesting because of the change in policy it describes.  Towards the end of section 8, a comparison is made between the modern War on Drugs and Prohibition in its time.  While alcohol was frowned upon, opium use, often in the form of laudanum, was common.  Throughout history, different drugs have gone in and out of fashion as culture's definition of morality changes.  Today, caffeine, alcohol, and tobacco are common while users of other drugs.  However, our current definitions are changing, as stricter laws regulate tobacco and medicinal marijuana is legalized.  Who can tell what substances will fall in or out of vogue in the future?

Finally, I found Michael Pollan's tone throughout the piece to be the most interesting facet of the article.  He seemed genuinely fascinated with the material, but out of a general curiosity, rather than an interest in illicit substances or laws regarding horticulture.  He began his poppy project to see if it could be done, and its scope grew as a response to what he learned.   This approach to gardening particularly appeals to me, though as an approach to life in general.  Several times Pollan attributes his interest in growing the ungrowable to the nature of gardeners.  However, I think it is merely the gardener's symptom to a greater sense of curiosity.  It is that same feeling that drives science and exploration.  I could see myself deciding to grow a troublesome plant, just to see if I could, rather than because that plant or horticulture held any particular allure.

Having read "Opium Made Easy", and thus absorbing the criminalizing knowledge, I don't think I'll be attempting to grow any poppies any time soon.  That impulse was beaten by the description of the crack down on growers.  However, I might consider my own adventure in horticulture, hopefully staying on the right side of the law.