I just got back from my neighborhood Whole Foods where I saw George Wendt, the actor known for the character Norm on 'Cheers'.
I first saw him in the deli section waiting for somebody to serve him. I had to do a second take and look a little more closely because he is much greyer now than he was 20 years ago!
Then I was two people in line behind him at the check-out. The cashier was very nice to him. What did George buy? Basically food that I would expect someone from Chicago to buy. Several bags of potato chips, beer, wine, and potatoes.
The guy behind George (in front of me) was a fawning idiot who told him how much he loved him and all of that. Once George accepted the compliment and started to ignore the guy, the guy talked to the guy behind me about knowing Springsteen, being backstage at some other concert, and very loudly announced to everybody in the checkout area that he knew people. He looked at me and sort of pointed to George like I should say something to him. Truthfully, writing about him on my blog is enough for me :)
Saturday, May 30, 2009
Sunday, May 24, 2009
Living with famous architecture
Having seen a few Frank Lloyd Wright buildings in Wisconsin, I thought it would be fun to see some of the buildings he built here in Los Angeles. The only building that is available for public viewing is the Hollyhock House. Everything else he built here in L.A. is either a private residence, or damaged by the 1994 Northridge earthquake and not safe for public viewing.
They would not let us take pictures of the house on the inside so here are a few pictures of the house from the outside:
The house is in a location with beautiful views. I can only imagine how wonderful it was when it was originally built before the urban sprawl surrounded it on all sides. It was built before the Hollywood Sign and Griffith Observatories-- two prominent icons you can see from inside of the house.
Does the house represent So. Cal. living like Wright intended? Not even close. The woman who had the house built, Aline Barnsdall, disliked the house so much that she didn't live in it and had a second home built. Though there is some wonderful craftsmanship and detailing inside the house, it feels very heavy. Plus, like every other Wright house that I have seen, it leaks bucketloads of water when it rains. And for true impracticality, the master bedroom was intentionally built where you were supposed to sleep on a fold-away futon in the corner of the room (in a multi-million dollar home in the early 1900's ?!?!). It's definitely a house for looks not for living.
The ego of architecture trumping the function of a building makes me think of my current workspace at the California Nanosystems Institute building at UCLA. It was profiled by the LA Times (read here) as innovative architecture. I have to say that some of it is beautiful to look at, but it lacks some basic function. The building is epitomized by the 'signature' cross-the-building ramping staircases that require you to cross the building while going between floors:
The staircases are great for art, but not so great for living. Not only do we have to go outside the building to use the staircases (which hang over the parking garage), but the metal stairs are shallow and already rusting in some places. The stairs aren't so bad when there are other simple stairwells available to move between floors. But unfortunately this isn't always the case and we're stuck with those 'iconic' stairs.
Truthfully, in the case of a fire or earthquake, the outdoor stairs in the building are its death trap. I would rather have a simple house with the gorgeous views than the Wright designed concrete block. And I'd rather have a simple ugly laboratory building with properly functioning A/C than the architectural icon that I work in.
They would not let us take pictures of the house on the inside so here are a few pictures of the house from the outside:
The house is in a location with beautiful views. I can only imagine how wonderful it was when it was originally built before the urban sprawl surrounded it on all sides. It was built before the Hollywood Sign and Griffith Observatories-- two prominent icons you can see from inside of the house.
Does the house represent So. Cal. living like Wright intended? Not even close. The woman who had the house built, Aline Barnsdall, disliked the house so much that she didn't live in it and had a second home built. Though there is some wonderful craftsmanship and detailing inside the house, it feels very heavy. Plus, like every other Wright house that I have seen, it leaks bucketloads of water when it rains. And for true impracticality, the master bedroom was intentionally built where you were supposed to sleep on a fold-away futon in the corner of the room (in a multi-million dollar home in the early 1900's ?!?!). It's definitely a house for looks not for living.
The ego of architecture trumping the function of a building makes me think of my current workspace at the California Nanosystems Institute building at UCLA. It was profiled by the LA Times (read here) as innovative architecture. I have to say that some of it is beautiful to look at, but it lacks some basic function. The building is epitomized by the 'signature' cross-the-building ramping staircases that require you to cross the building while going between floors:
The staircases are great for art, but not so great for living. Not only do we have to go outside the building to use the staircases (which hang over the parking garage), but the metal stairs are shallow and already rusting in some places. The stairs aren't so bad when there are other simple stairwells available to move between floors. But unfortunately this isn't always the case and we're stuck with those 'iconic' stairs.
Truthfully, in the case of a fire or earthquake, the outdoor stairs in the building are its death trap. I would rather have a simple house with the gorgeous views than the Wright designed concrete block. And I'd rather have a simple ugly laboratory building with properly functioning A/C than the architectural icon that I work in.
Saturday, May 16, 2009
Amazing!
I'm at that point in life where, unless I know the people well, I see faces that I recognize but I can't always remember where I recognize them from. Most of the time I let it go because it takes a lot of effort to remember where I know a person from in passing.
In the weekly Leggers Running Club e-mail this week, they mentioned that one of the winners (Victor) of 'The Amazing Race' is a Legger. It makes sense that a marathon runner would do well in the race since it is essentially a physical endurance race with some brain games thrown in for audience delight. When I saw the e-mail a little light went off in my head--I have seen him before on Saturday morning runs (and some races) but I never put 2 and 2 together.
Victor showed up for a run this morning and as he walked towards the group, people gave him a nice little applause and congratulations. It was really nice... or should I say, it was AMAZING!
In the weekly Leggers Running Club e-mail this week, they mentioned that one of the winners (Victor) of 'The Amazing Race' is a Legger. It makes sense that a marathon runner would do well in the race since it is essentially a physical endurance race with some brain games thrown in for audience delight. When I saw the e-mail a little light went off in my head--I have seen him before on Saturday morning runs (and some races) but I never put 2 and 2 together.
Victor showed up for a run this morning and as he walked towards the group, people gave him a nice little applause and congratulations. It was really nice... or should I say, it was AMAZING!
Saturday, May 02, 2009
Some people just look better in person
I was standing around waiting for my running buddies this morning when Bob Greene, Oprah's trainer who helped her complete the marathon, ran past me. He looked straight at me like he knew me and I waved like I knew him. He wasn't one of those focused runners who ignores the scenery. He was running by and taking it all in. He seemed like the type of guy who would say 'hi' to fellow runners as he passed them.
He was also REALLY good looking. I don't really watch Oprah, but I have seen him on the show a few times. Honestly he looks okay on the show. But he is 100 times better looking in real life. Maybe it's the fact that he was running which brings out his natural color, or the fact that studio make-up flattens peoples' skin tones. All I know is that he is one of the few people that I've seen who looks super-hot in real life and just average on t.v.
I guess he's living testimony of what good healthy living can do for you!
He was also REALLY good looking. I don't really watch Oprah, but I have seen him on the show a few times. Honestly he looks okay on the show. But he is 100 times better looking in real life. Maybe it's the fact that he was running which brings out his natural color, or the fact that studio make-up flattens peoples' skin tones. All I know is that he is one of the few people that I've seen who looks super-hot in real life and just average on t.v.
I guess he's living testimony of what good healthy living can do for you!
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)