Alesund, looking west from the local mountain Aksla, before the fire.  Everything in the image was destroyed in the night of January 23, 1904.  Like most Norwegian towns of the time, Alesund was built entirely of wood, and with a west wind fanning the flames, the whole town was leveled, with 10,000 people left homeless.  The city was consquently rebuilt in stone and brick in the Jugendstil (Art Nouveau) style. 

Oblivious to events in my own part of the world, I spent yesterday out and about, first at the L.A. Center of Religious Science and then breakfast at Kate Mantilini's with Jack and then I had an entertaining afternoon on the east side with new friend and fellow blogger Adrienne Crew, co-author with Peter Kuhns of "Blogosphere: Best of the Blogs" which I recommend to all visitors to the Land of Blog, "where everyone is famous to fifteen people" as Scott McLemee notes in a recent article on blogging in the Arts Journal.

When I finally returned home I had e-mails from concerned friends on a distant coast asking whether I was ready to flee and if I could see smoke from my Juliet balcony.   First of all, I think it's important in life to always be prepared to flee, so I went to the window and indeed I could see smoke on the horizon so I turned on the local news in time to watch Castle Kashan in Malibu, the home of [Princess] Lilly Lawrence, daughter of the Iranian Oil Minister under the Shah, collapsing in a fiery crescendo [the castle not the Princess].  Fireman were able to rescue a few cherished items, including a portrait of the Princess's father.  The Princess was quoted in the press this morning saying she was not more devastated by the loss of her home and its contents because her parents had taught her "not to become too attached to her possessions."  Wise advice from the former Oil Minister of Iran under the Shah, wouldn't you agree?

Now I was going to post about the film "Rendition" which I saw Saturday with D. and G. at the Dome, but I cannot give an objective review since I only went to see it because of the subject matter (U.S. government-approved torture in foreign prisons of U.S. prisoners, held without charge or legal representation) and of course because Jake G. is in it.  As I've said before, I worry that the success or failure of a film on an important topic will affect the serious discussion of the issue -- Hollywood's aim to create a satisfying sense of "closure" [catharsis] with a film often has the unintended side-effect of bringing closure to the issue: 

"Rendition?  I saw that movie."
"No no no no, not the movie, this is a serious matter.  The government can make you or your loved ones disappear, throw a hood over your head and the next thing you know you're  --"
"Jake looked so hot.  Smokin."
"No no no no, this is something we need to address, something that --"
"Who's that squinty guy, the one who was in Jarhead with Jake, tries to help Reese, what'shisname?"

Dear Reader, do you see what I mean?

But as D said to me afterward when I began to fume: "Dude, it's just a movie. It's not a documentary."
He and G. agreed they had not cared for it much. 
"I'm just glad I'm not the one who picked it," G. observed wisely.