English Recordings

A fault line opened in European society. On one side were those keen to keep their world whole and theirs; on the other was elite opinion, insisting on the inevitability and legitimacy of the new immigration. For their part, the new arrivals, timid at first, grew expansive in the claims they made. This was odd: they had fled the fire, and the failure, of their ancestral lands, but they brought the fire with them. Political Islam had risen on its home turf in the Middle East and North Africa, in South Asia, but a young generation in Europe gave its allegiance to the new Islamist radicalism. Emancipated women had shed the veil in Egypt and Turkey and Iran in the 1920s; there are Muslim women now asserting their right to wear the burqa in Paris.
The European welfare state tempted and aided the new Islamism. Two-thirds of the French imams are on welfare. It was hard for Europeans, Caldwell writes, to know whether these bold immigrants were desperate wards or determined invaders, keen on imposing their will on societies given to moral relativism and tolerance. In Caldwell’s apt summation, the flood of migration brought with it “militants, freeloaders and opportunists.”
The militants took the liberties of Europe as a sign of moral and political abdication. They included “activists” now dreaming of imposing the Shariah on Denmark and Britain. There were also warriors of the faith, in storefront mosques in Amsterdam and London, openly sympathizing with the enemies of the West. And there were second-generation immigrants who owed no allegiance to the societies of Europe.
A study by Britain’s House of Commons of the July 7, 2005, bombings against London’s Underground caught the hostility of the new Islamism to the idea of assimilation, to the principle of nationality itself. Three of the four bombers were second-generation British citizens born in West Yorkshire. The fourth, who was born in Jamaica and brought to England as an infant, was a convert to Islam. Mohammad Sidique Khan, age 30, was the oldest of the group. He “appeared to others,” the report notes, “as a role model to young people.” Shehzad Tanweer, age 22, was said to have led a “balanced life.” He owned a red Mercedes, and enjoyed fashionable hairstyles and designer clothing. The evening before the bombings, he had played cricket in a local park.

A departure and a return: In the legend of Moorish Spain, Boabdil, the last Muslim ruler of Granada, is said to have paused on a ridge for a final glimpse of the realm he had just surrendered to the Castilians. Henceforth, the occasion, and the place, would be known as El Último Suspiro del Moro, The Moor’s Last Sigh. The date was Jan. 2, 1492.
More than five centuries later, on March 11, 2004, there would be a “Moorish” return. In the morning rush hour, 10 bombs tore through four commuter trains in Madrid, killing more than 200 people and wounding some 1,500, in the deadliest terror attack in Europe since World War II. This was not quite a Muslim reconquista of the Iberian peninsula, but a circle was closed, and Islam was, once again, a matter of Western Europe.
In his “Reflections on the Revolution in Europe,” Christopher Caldwell, a meticulous journalist who writes for The New York Times Magazine and other publications, gives this subject its most sustained and thoughtful treatment to date. The question of Islam in Europe has occasioned calls of alarm about “Eurabia,” as well as works of evasion and apology by those who insist Islam is making its peace with European norms. Caldwell’s account is subtle, but quite honest and forthright in its reading of this history. “Islam is a magnificent religion that has also been, at times over the centuries, a glorious and generous culture. But, all cant to the contrary, it is in no sense Europe’s religion and it is in no sense Europe’s culture,” he writes.
It hadn’t taken long for Islam to make its new claim on Europe. Caldwell’s numbers give away the problem: “In the middle of the 20th century,” he tells us, “there were virtually no Muslims in Western Europe.” Now there are more than 15 million, including 5 million in France, 4 million in Germany and 2 million in Britain.
The native populations in Western Europe hadn’t voted to have the Turks and the Moroccans in Amsterdam, the Kurds in Sweden, the Arabs in London and the Pakistanis and Indians in Bradford and West Yorkshire. The post-World War II economic boom, and labor shortages, brought the immigrants, and they put down roots in their surroundings. In time, labor immigration “gave way to refugee immigration and to immigration aimed at reunifying (and forming) families. . . . Admitting immigrants changed from an economic program to a moral duty.”

No such continuity problems for the return of Made in Chelsea (E4). You could have slept through most of the first two series – and indeed through most of last night's season opener – without missing a thing. Here is a show starring a bunch of posh, well-off twentysomething Londoners, who appear to be so dim they don't even realise their entire faux-celebrity existence is founded on the ridicule of their audience.
It would be reassuring to imagine that Spencer, Caggie, Hugo et al will look back in five years' time, when they have returned to being nobodies, and wonder: "What on earth did we think we were doing?" Only I'm not sure they have the self-awareness for that. Still, at least they are doing the rest of the acting profession a favour. This lot can't even portray themselves convincingly.
Money was also central to Damien Hirst: Thoughts, Life, Work (Channel 4), a fascinating documentary to coincide with the artist's retrospective at the Tate Modern. Or rather its absence was. It opened with questions about whether the diamond skull was really worth £50m, all of which Hirst neatly side-stepped. The closest he came to openness was "I didn't think Hymn was worth £1m", but otherwise Hirst seemed unwilling to engage with the commercial aspects of his work. Charles Saatchi – without whom Hirst might have remained an unknown – was only mentioned twice, in passing.
Most artists are understandably keener to discuss their art rather than its value, but with Hirst the two are hopelessly intertwined. Of all modern British artists he is the one most identified with commerce, and those who know him well insist money is much more important to him than he is willing to let on. Nor was Hirst that willing to consider which of his works were more artistically successful; surely he can't think they are all equally brilliant? I was also none the wiser whether Hirst is a one-trick pony, a chancer who has done fabulously well by talking a great game or a genuinely brilliant artist. Then that might just be the whole point.

It's the biggest TV event since ... since the new series of Mad Men aired last week. Maybe it's my age, but event TV seems to be coming round faster and faster these days. But for those who missed all the previews, the second series of Game of Thrones (Sky Atlantic), the adaptation of George RR Martin's unfinished epic fantasy septet, has just started here and in the US.
Confession time. I'm not a big fan of fantasy sci-fi. The Lord of the Rings and Harry Potter left me largely unmoved, and I've never been remotely tempted to read Martin's A Song Of Ice and Fire. But event TV is event TV and I'm not immune to hype, so if people are clamouring that it's the best thing on TV since Mad Men, then it would be churlish not to give it a go.
Now the apology. Having watched the first episode of the second series, I just don't get what all the fuss is about. Sure, it has some great actors and HBO has clearly bust the bank on the budget, but I didn't have a clue what was going on. With the opener of most second series, there is usually a a recap of the story so far, both to help those whose minds have wandered over the previous 12 months and to lure in those, like me, who hadn't watched the first. But this episode took no prisoners at all. It was wham-bam straight in there. No doubt a joy to Martin's many fans, but a stumbling block for neophytes.
I'd done a bit of homework, so I knew it was vaguely about warring factions in Westeros and that Robb Stark was one of the goodies, but that wasn't much help. Most of all, though, I felt let down by the pace. The show's fans had all written rapturously of the tightness of the scripts, the non-stop action and how it was a cross between Rome and The Sopranos but last night's episode felt ponderous. Where was the much-touted sex-and-gore quotient: the sexposition? There was barely a violent death and the first moment of gratuitous nudity arrived only moments before the end credits.
To make sure it wasn't just me being a grumpy, out-of-touch middle-aged reviewer, I forced my 19-year-old daughter to watch it with me. She didn't get it either. Nor did she thank me. My guess is that if you're already a Martin fan, then Mondays will be a night to stay in and watch TV: but for the unconverted there is little here to make you go back and watch the first series on DVD. Which is where you really need to start.

Okaaay maybe it doesn’t … Well let’s use our imagination. Perhaps you’ve grown up in a traditional Japanese household but didn’t speak Japanese and every night you did the precise motions of a Tea Ceremony. Now for those who are not familiar with the detail of a Japanese tea ceremony I urge you do take a look at this!
Then one day out of the blue you find yourself in Japan in the emperors throne room about to engage in a highly formal dance of dignitary social intercourse. Of course you might be scared, perhaps even quite cold seeing that’s you’re most likely wearing a thin layer of cloth and what some would call an ornate excuse for underwear So the moment of truth comes and you successfully go through the motions. Some would say that you are fluent in Japanese culture. Some would say you’re fluent in Tea ceremony. Some might say you are lucky. Point is …what do you say you are? This situation parallels with the subjective deeming of fluency in the language world. Either you let people lie for you or you try to define exactly what you did in a small phrase. Unfortunately in today’s world you must be “something”… “Fluent” “Beginner” “Intermediate” “Fraud” etc… Whether you prescribe it to yourself or another does it for you. Perhaps this dilemma is what creates the multitude of people whom claim fluency in 20, 30, 40 languages… It’s odd walking into the world and having to label what you are among others whom have done the same.Musicians, Fighters, Busboy, Dancer, Scholar….Regardless each title or any title one chooses carries its own burden. For example if you claim to be a musician, “Well how many songs do you know?” “What?..You don’t play an instrument?” Each title is riddled with superficial benchmarks which somehow define the validity of WHAT YOU ARE.
So this begs the question…who made these standards? Where is this SOB who learned 30 languages that makes me less of a linguist, less of a polyglot, less of person? Now I say this jokingly because I for one feed of the accomplishments of others and I am in no chest beating contest with Mezzofanti or any of my peers. Regardless…when I say I love languages I mean it. Love isn’t quantitative but rather a switch in a dark room. I got turned onto it.
So there’s a small introduction into this blog and perhaps better than a formal introduction, I was inspired to write this blog by Luca an Italian Polyglot whom probably doesn’t have as much time as he would like because of all the girlfriends he has around the world. *

I know when I see the polyglot heavyweights among us wave their imaginary claymores among the doubters and the unmotivated I start to shiver a bit…It’s quite intimidating to know one phrase of your English arsenal has been disarmed. Which phrase is this, one might ask….” You can’t“. Honestly let’s not kid ourselves, whether we are quite aware of it or not or seek it…Knowing the possibilities of anything can make one feel quite superior. So when someone tells another human “You cannot learn Chinese without living in China” “You can’t speak French in less than five years” etc etc… What does it really mean? Unfortunately we are human beings and not robots so negativity can be computed within us quite palpably …With that said, when a successful Polyglot brandishes their small army of languages they defy this phrase. Regardless some of us are more prone to this phrase because we can find a kernel of truth to it that the speaker was not aware of. The speaker says this because they are ignorant of LL methods, Negative, Propose that French, Chinese etc. is too hard to listen to or pronounce etc. Basically misinformation. What we as receivers of this negativity have to confront is the YOU. not the FRENCH, CHINESE etc. YOU cannot learn Chinese in 3 years? vs You cannot learn CHINESE in 3 YEARS.
…perhaps I cannot learn Chinese because I’m too lazy, not motivated, have a fear of speaking to strangers, racist etc etc. The list goes on. These are reasons only I would know. These are issues we need to confront when learning a language that can even precede things like materials, tutors, time management etc. When I see amazing polyglots I don’t think “Wow his Swedish, Macedonian, Turkish is so good, he must have an amazing ear for pronunciation” Rather I think “They conquered laziness”"They conquered racism” “They conquered being unmotivated”. These aspects of learning are in my opinion MUCH more difficult than mastering the Nine tones of Cantonese or the 3 genders in language etc. These men and women are so much more than that. Language learning is an everyday every thought every word kind of discipline, and to embrace it is simply beautiful. This is why so many language learners are not just successful in one aspect of their lives, they believe in the language they are learning much like they believe in prospect of fulfillment after a great meal.
Suffice to say what I want us to receive from this post is that:
1.Confront your barriers, first by identifying them. Ask yourself why YOU can’t learn X language.
2.Appreciate the worlds we can discover by learning.

What does it mean to build your potential in a language. Does it mean you learn the most off the wall colloquial vocabulary? Does it mean you practice a regional dialect tirelessly?
Actually, no. It really means studying…or rather a form of studying. For example
I study how the past participle endings change in Italian when a Direct object pronoun proceeds the auxiliary verb.
I build my potential by understanding why the endings change, I then look up some exceptions to this rule in the target language.
The difference here is that, while both are important…Potential lets you bridge a gap in understanding when you encounter this rule as you are more advanced in the language. The point here is that you do not need to “know” which which verbs are irregular or exceptions etc. What you promote is awareness. Awareness in language learning leads to amazing gains in fluency level. If one listen and reads in a language for good amount of time before being concerned with speaking, it’s guaranteed that their potential with the language’s utility will be great. Many people condemn language learning to one skill…Speaking. Its unfortunate that’s the case but when we talk about Fluency we mean “Speak like water” Flowing speech. In essence this task is not difficult to obtain if one speaks constantly, but the speech may lack substance. The ability to use the language in its multidimensional facets includes “Time spent with the language”. Exposure is great because your brain will absorb what it takes in, even if it doesn’t understand. As one progresses with a language the dots start to connect and uncover how the language exists in reality. Its important to note that language learning is 4 dimensional and if one just seeks to fluently speak in a short amount of time, their potential will be limited.
Therefore for some they might start speaking earlier but lack the grounding and intimacy of the language someone who has been reading and listening and exploring with the language might. Speaking is not a skill that should be rushed, its the fruition of being intimate with language and understanding its utility.

3. Teach someone else your target language(s). If you are fortunate enough to find a friend whom is interested in learning the same language you are then you are in luck! In my personal life I have a friend who wants to learn Italian, granted I am way more advanced than he, it really doesn’t matter. By giving teaching him simple grammatical rules or explaining word usage etc. It allows to me focus on the language and create a ramp in which I am successfully refreshing and reenforcing the language in me. This confidence is important, one should always be able to explicate what they have learned, it’s is the single greatest thing we can do in language, in my humble opinion. Whether its making pancakes, tying shoelaces etc. or how to form a past tense statement.
*Being native allows you artfully dodge the most compromising situations with expert language use (Master it if you are married!)
There are many other ways to create momentum, such as speaking to natives, setting your phone/cpu setting to a target language etc.
WE CAN CREATE MOMENTUM, let the wind of language learning push you! Your brain wants to learn and connect the dots, let’s help it without exhausting it!
Its so much more motivating to learn when you incorporate low stress, high probability success activities in your life. It would be hard to climb a mountain without some kind of momentum, there is success along the way, small ramps. Making it 1/3 up the mountain is a huge feat, so is 1/2 way. There is always a way to help yourself accomplish the hardest things in life, and they could be the most simple/non-stressful things ever.

Momentum, it’s a term that doesn’t get used much, outside the realm of physics or professional sports teams’ winning streaks. Why? Is it magic? Is it motivation? Can we even create it, or does it just happen? Whether one is aware of it or not, the most successful people in life create situations where momentum occurs. If you are attempting to surmount the mountain of language learning, it’d be nice to have a couple elevators or pass start get 200 dollars bonuses along the way! Empirically speaking when a professional skateboarder wants to elevate his height or speed he/she uses a ramp. Specifically a strategically placed ramp. In essence we as language learners have the ability to place ramps along the way too! There are ways to do this,here a some ways I try to place ramps.
1. Have pen-pals in various languages I want to learn; The point is not consider this “study-time” or a moment of intense lexical discovery. It is what it is…write back in the target language, you are more than welcome to incorporate new words etc. But you really don’t have to, it’s simply some extra time with language, no stress, no worries, simply write. 30 minutes or less, maybe during lunch make it a point to respond to an email, post a comment on a youtube video, blog, etc, in your target languages. If you only have time for one email, so be it. It’s important to make time everyday to respond to people REGARDLESS of whether its Language learning orientated. So what are you waiting for?! Stop ignoring your mother in laws emails for a lunch date with her Jane Austin book club! At the very least respond with most ornate and polite way of saying “no”.*
2. Read/Listen to basic/beginning level things in your target language. This ramp, is a small ramp but it really doesn’t take much effort. Reading/Listening something simple (beginners dialogue, common idioms, etc.) warms your brain up to the language. You can look at basic questions in the target language and answer them as briefly as you desire. “Ciao, come stai?” ” Dov’e sei?” etc. etc.Feel free to up the difficulty when you’ve exhausted certain materials. Remember this should be stress-free easy peasy.

Mr. Orlowski, the journalist, sees the Singularity as a grand, tech-nerd dream in which engineers, inventors and innovators of every stripe create the greatest of all reset buttons. He says the techies “seem to want a deus ex machina to make everything right again.”
They certainly don’t want any outside interference, and are utterly confident that they will realize the Singularity on their own terms and with their own wits — all of which fits with Silicon Valley’s strong libertarian traditions. Google and Microsoft employees trailed only members of the military as the largest individual contributors to Ron Paul’s 2008 presidential campaign.
The Valley’s wizards also prefer to avoid any confrontation with Washington.
“Dealing with politics means having to compromise and convince people of things and form alliances with people who don’t always agree with you,” Mr. Orlowski says. “They’re not wired for that.”
Increasing Acceptance
Mr. Kurzweil is currently consulting for the Army on technology initiatives, and says he routinely talks with government and business leaders. Bill Gates, the Microsoft co-founder, appears in Mr. Kurzweil’s books and often on the back flaps with celebratory quotations.
Mr. Kurzweil and Mr. Page of Google created a renewable-energy plan for the National Academy of Engineering, advising that solar power will one day soon meet all of the world’s energy needs.
Mr. Kurzweil’s 31-year-old son, Ethan, says his father has always been ahead of the curve. The family had the first flat-screen television and car phone on the block, as well as a phone that could fax photos.
“We also had this thing where you put on a hat that had sensors and it would create music to match your brain waves and help you meditate,” Ethan says. “People would come over and play with it.”
Ethan previously worked for Linden Lab, the company behind the virtual world Second Life. These days he’s a venture capitalist at Bessemer Venture Partners. A section of the bookshelves in his office has been reserved for multiple copies of his father’s works.
“A lot of what he has predicted has happened, and it’s interesting to see what he’s been saying become more mainstream,” says Ethan, who looks very much like a younger version of his father. “He has a certain world view that he feels strongly about that he thinks is absolutely coming to pass. The data so far suggests it is. He’s incredibly thorough with his research, and I have confidence his critics haven’t thought things through on the same level.”
Indeed, Ethan says, his father is almost, well, accepted.
“He is seen as less weird now,” he says. “Much less weird.”