February 7, 2008 archive

Viet Nam – Land of the Poem Hat & the Ao Dai

nonThis essay is obviously not about the presidential primaries, domestic politics, the economy, the occupation of Iraq or foreign policy. The boomers among us will see some historical relevance. For some others it might bring back few special memories. This is a diary about a simple but elegant hat, a hat that some might consider to be symbolic of a poignant era in history, along with some additional words and photos of the flowing ao dai that is often worn together with the hat.

A change of pace here. Light reading and an attempt to provide a few eye-pleasing images and perhaps brighten your day a little bit.

The hats are traditionally known as a nón lá or a nón bài thơ. The former term refers to plain conical hat made with latania palm fronds, the latter refers to a conical hat with poetry and decoration placed between the two layers of leaves of the palm fronds. Bài th&#417 is the Viet word for poem.

huong giang 94

The conical hat is a symbol of traditional Vietnamese life. It is practical and fashionable. It’s extremely durable, very light weight and provides protection from the tropical sun and from monsoon rains. It is worn throughout Viet Nam and also appears in rural areas of neighboring Laos and bordering areas of Cambodia. It is worn by farmers, fishermen, merchants, fashion models, students, adults, children, men, women, city-dwellers and country folk. It is seen in the fields, on the streets, in the market places and in traditional ceremonies.

latania frondVietnamese conical hats are made from the dried leaves of the latania, a palm with fan-shaped fronds, layered over 16 brims fashioned from small diameter, cylindrical-shaped strips of bamboo.

Conical hats are made throughout the country. Different regions have their own versions of the basic nón design. The area around Hue, in central Viet Nam, is quite well known for its poem hats, which are light in weight yet very sturdy, and are inlaid with poems and images of well known landmarks in the Hue area. These are among the most favorite souvenir purchases made by visitors to Hue.

non la inside viewA view looking inside of the nón bài thơ (image left) shows a sampling of the inlay work. An image of the Thien Mu Pagoda (there are interesting photos of the actual pagoda at this link) can be seen in the lower left-center quadrant of the hat. Though it is difficult to see in the image, there is a poem inlaid in the lower right portion of the photo. The source of this photo is Google Images. One of the poems used is shown below along with an English translation.

The Vietnamese version of the poem below was provided by my niece. The translation to English is my own.

non la poemnon la poem eng lang

ao dai 1hoc sinh qndnMaking nón bài thơ has been a traditional craft for many generations in the Hue area. In the Phu Cam neighborhood, on the southern outskirts of Hue, many local residents engage in this craft. A large selection of conical hats for sale can be found a the main market-place along the Perfume River near the Citadel in Hue.

Nón bài thơ worn with the traditional áo dài (the pronunciation sounds like “ow yai” in the South and transitions to “ow zai” in the North) brings an aura of charm and grace to those women who wear it. Hue school girls wearing white ao dai and non bai tho have become  an endless source of inspiration for poets and writers.

The colors of an ao dai are an indication of the age and the status of the wearer. Schoolgirls usually wear white symbolizing purity. As they grow a bit more mature they begin wearing pastel shades. Married women wear patterns and darker colors.

In his 1982 novel Saigon, Anthony Grey described the Ao Dai  as  “demure and provocative…women seem not to walk, but to float gently beneath the tamarinds on the evening breezes.” It is often said that the ao dai covers everything but hides nothing.

tanya truong ao daiEvery ao dai is custom made, accounting for the fit that creates such a flattering look. Stores specialize in their production and a team of cutters, sewers and fitters ensure that the final product will highlight the figure of the wearer. Thuy, a fitter in Ho Chi Minh City, says, “To create the perfect fit, customers take their undergarments and shoes with them for the fittings.” The pants should reach the soles of the feet and flow along the floor.

Source – Things Asian

The photo in the blockquote above, on the right side, is from a collection by Tanya Truong. Her slide show with larger images may be seen here. Very nice!

More ao dai images can be viewed here including one of George W. Bush at the APEC Summit in Hanoi in 2006. I’m sure there are many other people you’d rather see in an ao dai, and there are a few others – much more pleasing to the senses, on the other end of the link.

Is Lieberman-Warner a “Strong” Climate Bill? (xposted from DKos for The Cunctator )

This excellent essay was posted at DKos on Tuesday. Its author, “the Cunctator” has registered for DD and will be here soon!

Is Lieberman-Warner a “Strong” Climate Bill?

by The Cunctator

Friends of the Earth challenged Sen. Boxer to support legislation that resembles the Democratic presidential candidates’ platforms for climate change legislation, not the Lieberman-Warner bill.

Boxer called Friends of the Earth “defeatist.” FoE responded: “We’re being realists.”

ASiegel then wrote: Boxing our way to disaster looking for an “explanation for her strong championing of the fatally-flawed Lieberman-Warner Climate (in) Security Act”.

Then Environmental Defense leaped to attack Friends of the Earth and ASiegel.

Boxer calls the committee passage of Lieberman-Warner the “greatest legislative accomplishment of my political career of thirty years”.

ED and NWF call L-W “a strong bill.” NRDC calls L-W “a very strong start.” The Nature Conservancy calls L-W “a strong starting point.”

So who’s right? Let’s take a step outside the Beltway and check in with some facts.

Is L-W a “good” bill?

The proper metrics to judge mandatory CO2-emissions-reduction legislation such as L-W are:

  1. effectiveness in reducing emissions

  2. effect on economy/society

So, how does L-W rate?

Effectiveness in Reducing Emissions

On the first, the IPCC 4th Assessment Report says that a long-term stabilization target of 2°C above pre-industrial levels is needed to have an even chance at avoiding the tipping point into catastrophic climate change.

The report also says that to achieve that target, the industrialized nations need to cut emissions to 25-40% below 1990 levels by 2020, and 80-95% below 1990 levels by 2050.

(Developing nations need to simultaneously achieve “substantial deviation from baseline” for overall reductions to be sufficient. See Box 13.7 in the 4th Assessment Report, p. 776.)

L-W is not close to either of these targets. L-W only covers 80% of emissions.  For covered sectors, it hits 1990 levels by 2020 and 65% below 1990 levels by 2050.

At Bali, the Annex I Kyoto signatories (every single industrialized nation except the US and Turkey) agreed to the IPCC targets. The EU has unilaterally committed to achieving 20% reductions from 1990 levels by 2020, and would shoot for 30% reductions if the US makes a comparable effort.

Again: Lieberman-Warner is expected to achieve 1990 levels by 2020, and 56% below 1990 levels by 2050.

So, even assuming that the legislation is well designed and will be well implemented such that the targets in the bill will be met, if by “perfect” one means “an even chance of avoiding catastrophic climate change”, L-W is not perfect in its targets.

Furthermore, its lookback and cap-adjustment provisions are heavily weighted towards short-term economic growth instead of scientific necessity or long-term economic health.

Is L-W good? Is it “strong”? ED, which did not publicly support the Sanders amendments in committee to strengthen the cap targets and lookback provisions, evidently thinks so. I’m not sure what science they’re using to come up with that result.

Similarly, NRDC has said “Effective legislation must be enacted soon to avoid a 2 degree Celsius temperature increase.” I’m not sure what science they’re using to consider L-W “effective legislation.”

Effect on Economy and Society

In this analysis, I am going to make two a priori assumptions:

  1. Catastrophic climate change would be worse for our economy and society than doing nothing

  2. some mandatory regulatory system will be put in place

In other words, I’m comparing L-W’s economic effect against other hypothetical emissions reduction programs, not against the do-nothing scenario.

There is a well-developed consensus for some of the elements necessary to a “perfect” regulatory system, following principles of economic efficiency (maximum benefit to sector-wide industry and businesses) and economic justice (job creation, benefit to poor and middle class, etc.).

These include:

  1. 100% auction of credits

  2. Auction proceeds should go into minimizing economic disruption and investing in energy efficiency, renewable energy and other emissions-reduction technology, sustainable agriculture, and international/local mitigation/adaptation

  3. To minimize economic disruption: Most efficient system is to make overall tax system more progressive (possibly improving other safety net systems like healthcare)

        1. Allocation of about 15% of auction to poorest 20% (preferably by reducing existing taxes, such as payroll taxes) protects them from harm

        2. About 6% of auction revenues sufficient to protect electricity producing sector from harm; can be phased out over time

        3. Similarly for other covered sectors

  4. Energy efficiency:

        1. Short-term emphasis should be more on energy efficiency than new-tech investment (see Architecture 2030) — free allocations to load-serving entities would block/slow this

        2. Smart grid/electranet/distributed grid should be emphasized — support for traditional power system will block/slow this development

        3. Mass transit, smart growth, high-density urban planning should be emphasized — subsidization for traditional highway system, etc. with block/slow this

  5. Technology investment:

        1. no more than $8-$30 billion over 10 years needed to spur carbon-capture and sequestration technology

        2. Subsidization of renewable energy technology should be at least on par with subsidization for nuclear, natural gas, coal, oil. Would make sense to actually be more strongly subsidized. Would make sense to reduce/remove subsidies for gas/coal/oil that aren’t emissions-reduction focused.

  6. Agriculture:

        1. Sustainable agricultural practices (high-carbon farming, local farming, etc.) should be supported — subsidies for industrial agriculture blocks/slows this

        2. Biofuels need to be locally and sustainably produced and used to have a net positive effect

  7. International mitigation and adaptation support — I’m not sure what the “perfect” system is here, but I know that, for example, the Nature Conservancy wants a real emphasis on preventing deforestation

Now, L-W is not “perfect” on any of these. In fact, it has nearly the exact opposite emphasis in most categories. Over its 4-decade span, allocates about 48% of the permits away for free, giving 22% directly to polluting entities. These giveaways are heavily frontloaded. About $350 billion is allocated to supporting CCS (also frontloaded). It lumps nuclear and “clean coal” tech with renewable energy. It allocates permits for free to load-serving entities. It allocates permits for free to state governments (guaranteed to make pricing more inefficient).

The ED and other groups like to argue that we shouldn’t make the perfect the enemy of the good. It’s also to remember that the bad is necessarily the enemy of the good.

It is possible to reform the existing framework in the L-W legislation, in my opinion, to arrive at a bill that is “good”. It certainly wouldn’t be perfect.

Perfect climate legislation requires:

  1. 100% coverage of emitters, not 75-80%

  2. Climate-positive / carbon-negative targets–actually reducing greenhouse gas concentrations in the atmosphere

  3. Transformative reform of existing agriculture/land-use policy

  4. Transformative reform of existing transportation policy

  5. Transformative reform of existing tax policy

  6. Transformative reform of existing resource extraction policy

  7. Transformative reform of existing electricity distribution policy

So the best that a single cap-and-trade policy can be is “good”. As Al Gore outlined a year ago, a comprehensive and effective climate policy merely starts with a strong cap-and-trade system.

By reasonable economic and scientific metrics, L-W is not a good bill unless you own coal and/or nuclear plants or belong to an investment bank.

How to Beat Obama: A ‘Money Plan’ for Hillary

I get emails every day.  Tons of them.  Most are from political organizations, newspapers, blogs, pollsters, and, yes, even from presidential candidates asking me for money.  Well, just as this story was breaking this afternoon, I received this email from Hillary Clinton herself


Dear JekyllnHyde,

We had a huge night last night — we won the biggest states and the most votes, and we are ahead in the overall race for delegates.  But this race is far from over.

We don’t have time to catch our breath — the next races are just three days away, and there are 10 more contests in February alone.

Let’s meet this moment with bold action worthy of those who have put their faith in us. We are setting a big goal for the next three days: raise $3 million to fund our history-making campaign.

Thank you,

Hillary

Something, though, was missing from her email: it’s a bit vanilla.  And I, like many people, prefer Haagen Daaz’ creme brulee flavor.

Petition against Tony Blair as President of Europe

Over the past 2 days, we’ve been pretty busy over at the European Tribune, launching a petition against the possible nomination of Tony Blair as Chairman of the European Council (or, as the job is likely to be known by the lazy media, “President of Europe”).

His name has been floated by French president Nicolas Sarkozy and the campaign to support him seems to have picked up strength lately. As this is a prospect that fills us with dread, some eurotribbers have decided to take action and to launch a petition to make clear that citizens across Europe are opposed to such an idea.

This is where the amazing power of blog communities comes into play: thanks to uncoordinated volunteer effort, transparently happening over various threads on ET, a text was drafted, edited, translated into 11 other languages and a website (Stop Blair!) was set up literally overnight (thanks to linca). The effort was somehow picked up by a first paper (as it were, the Financial Times, my favourite source of material to comment upon on ET) and is now getting 50-100 signatures per hour.

The full text of the petition is below. And you can help!  

Torture’s On The Table, Why Isn’t Impeachment?

Photobucket

Old School Waterboarding

On Tuesday, Bushco acknowledged publicly for the first time that waterboarding was used by the U.S. government on three “terror suspects.” Testifying before Congress, CIA Director Michael Hayden claimed the three were waterboarded in 2002 and 2003.  But, he said, nobody else had been waterboarded since.  To be frank, I don’t believe that for a second, but I have no evidence to the contrary.

Join me in Gitmo.  

Pony Party: Rats!

Gung ho fat choy!  Happy Chinese New Year!

February 7, 2008 begins the Year of the Rat.

Chinese Zodiac (wikipedia)


Rat: Forthright, disciplined, systematic, meticulous, charismatic, hardworking, industrious, charming, eloquent, sociable, shrewd. Can be manipulative, cruel, dictatorial, rigid, selfish, obstinate, critical, over-ambitious, ruthless, intolerant, scheming.

Ox: Dependable, calm, methodical, patient, hardworking, ambitious, conventional, steady, modest, logical, resolute, tenacious. Can be stubborn, narrow-minded, materialistic, rigid, demanding.

Tiger: Unpredictable, rebellious, colorful, powerful, passionate, daring, impulsive, vigorous, stimulating, sincere, affectionate, humanitarian, generous. Can be restless, reckless, impatient, quick-tempered, obstinate, selfish.

Rabbit: Gracious, kind, sensitive, soft-spoken, amiable, elegant, reserved, cautious, artistic, thorough, tender, self-assured, astute, compassionate, flexible. Can be moody, detached, superficial, self-indulgent, opportunistic, lazy.

Dragon: Magnanimous, vigorous, strong, self-assured, proud, direct, eager, zealous, fiery, passionate, decisive, pioneering, ambitious, generous, loyal. Can be arrogant, tyrannical, demanding, eccentric, dogmatic, over-bearing, impetuous, brash.

Snake: Deep thinker, wise, mystic, graceful, soft-spoken, sensual, creative, prudent, shrewd, ambitious, elegant, cautious, responsible, calm, strong, constant, purposeful. Can be loner, bad communicator, possessive, hedonistic, self-doubting, distrustful, mendacious.

Horse: Cheerful, popular, quick-witted, changeable, earthy, perceptive,

talkative, agile mentally and physically, magnetic, intelligent, astute, flexible, open-minded. Can be fickle, anxious, rude, gullible, stubborn, lack stability and perseverance.

Sheep: Righteous, sincere, sympathetic, mild-mannered, shy, artistic, creative, gentle, compassionate, understanding, mothering, determined, peaceful, generous, seeks security. Can be moody, indecisive, over-passive, worrier, pessimistic, over-sensitive, complainer.

Monkey: Inventor, motivator, improviser, quick-witted, inquisitive, flexible, innovative, problem solver, self-assured, sociable, polite, dignified, competitive, objective, factual, intellectual. Can be egotistical, vain, selfish, cunning, jealous, suspicious.

Rooster: Acute, neat, meticulous, organized, self-assured, decisive, conservative, critical, perfectionist, alert, zealous, practical, scientific, responsible. Can be over zealous and critical, puritanical, egotistical, abrasive, opinionated.

Dog: Honest, intelligent, straightforward, loyal, sense of justice and fair play, attractive, amiable, unpretentious, sociable, open-minded, idealistic, moralistic, practical, affectionate, dogged. Can be cynical, lazy, cold, judgmental, pessimistic, worrier, stubborn, quarrelsome.

Boar/Pig: Honest, simple, gallant, sturdy, sociable, peace-loving, patient, loyal, hard-working, trusting, sincere, calm, understanding, thoughtful, scrupulous, passionate, intelligent. Can be naive, over-reliant, self-indulgent, gullible, fatalistic, materialistic.

In Chinese astrology the animal signs assigned by year represent what others perceive you as being or how you present yourself. It is a common misconception that the animals assigned by year are the only signs, and many western descriptions of Chinese astrology draw solely on this system. In fact, there are also animal signs assigned by month (called inner animals) and hours of the day (called secret animals).

Click the wiki link above to find your zodiac symbol (based on the year you are born) and your “inner animal”.    Earth, wood, fire, water, and metal also modify the animal signs.  

Load more