invasion.

my new, tiny apartment has something i fondly refer to as the non-kitchen.

for someone like myself who likes to cook (in order to eat well, mind you, not for the pleasures of chopping, sautéing or doing the dishes) and enjoys a well-equipped area for anything daily, it has come as a shocker to realize that a small dining table acts as my kitchen counter and that i had to extend all storage of utensils, dishes and such to my already small living area.

let me be clear: we're not talking about an open plan kitchen. it really is a nook with a sink and a half of a stove with a cupboard on top.

as i do consider my living arrangement of the moment rather temporary, i did not want to invest into custom furniture or anything disposable. ikea all around was not an option although i did pick up some beautiful things from there, too. it was, nevertheless, important to have a space that i felt comfortable living in aesthetically and functionally: i still want and need to cook even with these challenges in mind. i also did not want to give up or store away most of the items i had accumulated throughout these past years of building a home.

thus, i looked towards finnish design shop and ordered a pretty little set of muuto shelving for my kitchen-out-of-the-kitchen. when i am done with this place, they will serve well as a bookshelf or even to divide space between areas – if i get to such a grandiose apartment as to need a divider.

hay flower pots act as utensils storage. little boxes from ferm living and ikea keep order near the entrance.

it turned out to be a rather subtle invasion, after all.

moving on.

wrapping a material life in obituaries puts perspective into how things could always be more definite.

at times like these, i can be obstinate in thinking that causally explanatory traces can and must be found before turning pages in my own life. the sort of stories that make sense, have culprits, actions that lead to reactions and a sense that folds neatly into boxes.

my perseverance in trying to find meaningful paths unfolds as an almost infinite understanding that slowly eats me inside leaving behind an echo of a motion fueled only by caring and worrying. overwhelmed, things shut down around my little universe only to whisper in muddled thumps as if reminding me that there is a world outside my preoccupation.

nevertheless, in order to move on, i am trying to learn to live by the surrealism i so dearly embrace otherwise. letting the crickets walk on empty plates.

it takes an eternity to fill a box after box.

it is a relief to realize that unwrapping feels – if only ever so slightly – less of an ordeal.

it all takes time.

appeasing arch.

when it comes to instantly getting ready for an evening event, a girl cannot do without some tips: fix face only subtly to avoid the heavy look of layered make-up, add heels and jewelry to perk up an office look,... you know the drill.

although i am no stranger to running from the office to a party, it is not part of my regular routine; that is, i usually have time to pop by at home before heading out. nonetheless, i have several friends who move from daily chores to cocktail parties regularly with such grace that i can only admire their stamina and glow.

a while back stella listed her five quick tips for perking up your look for a more official rendez-vous, and although i still lack a highlighter pen from my make-up stack (how is this possible, may i ask...), i agree with them.

for stella and for yers truly, heels are essential when in need of a quick sartorial pick-me-up. but getting down to actual business we really need to consider what kind of heels are in need.

the thing is, a girl cannot do without a pair of pumps stored at the office. they are for days when you were running around and didn't feel like teetering in the morning, but have somewhere to go later on. or for days when you just thought the day would be a boring old office day and something amazing comes up unexpectedly. they also need to be a pair that you do not miss on a daily basis because they are, after all, at work.

my cool and collected friends who are used to hopping in and out of taxis running from one party to another all suggest to have a basic black pair of heels at work. to start with, that is – they have several pairs... and cocktail dresses... but the point being: you won't miss them when they're not available and they go with anything. simple.

nah, can't do. i find basic black heels an utter bore. i also hardly find them appropriate for everything. actually, to be more exact, i find black pairs that are trying to be basic utterly boring and those "almost basic" pumps often hard to combine with anything because what turns them away from "basic" and towards "almost" is usually subtle enough to limit their potential. make sense? no?

well what do i know, right?

it may be a question of schools of dress-up sensibilities: for some people the most basic items are the reliable pieces appropriate for anything, for others the most trustworthy gems of their wardrobe are wacky and tricky.

guess which school i belong to?

let me introduce you to my savior shoes: my choice is black, but anything but basic. the thing is, i often wear the simplest outfits to work and in order to lift them up to socializing level i need more than a subtle oomph.

pumps by zara.

the curvy heel works wonders. it is low enough to feel comfortable after a full hectic day, but high enough to achieve the minimum angle i go for in shoes.

have i told you about my fixation with angles in shoes? don't get me started...

moreover, it's sculptural, interesting but not bulky or offensively pretentious. it adds a certain jenesaispas to any boring tee and jeans combo i may have walked out the door in but fits equally well with my avantgarde ninja looks i sometimes feel like sporting.



the shoe is delicate enough to go with dresses, but because of the wedge, there's some bulkiness to it. the thin leather bow adds a girly touch while the crumpled side adds edge. the point is a classic almond shape.

how freakin' perfect, right? and even after several years of wear and impromptu walks through the woods, the suede looks impeccable.

what kind of pair do you – or would you – keep at work for events that require a subtle lift?

varicose crossing ahead!

everyone knows that association helps memory: by connecting new timbits of knowledge with old complexities, they merge and become parts of wholes with internal logic. additionally, when we use familiar language, widely understood as either pictures or lexis, to introduce a new set of information, it becomes easier to comprehend. therefore, the popularity of acronyms and poetry-like chant rules.

sometimes what is familiar can seem unexpected. depicting the human body as a subway map takes a notoriously difficult and complex system to a graphic standard we're all familiar with reading and interpreting. although it is very simplified, all of a sudden it makes sense – and makes me wonder how terribly subway systems could be depicted...

design by sam loman.

perhaps this was the time i could actually memorize the lymphatic system.

gnome rider.

i am often referred to as the elf by my sweetie and the reason is quite self-evident: i walk hunched over and in long, flexible paces that make me look much shorter than i actually am, i am constantly preoccupied and look a little lost and my beanies are always either pointing towards the sky or just way too deep down my forehead. hence, not yer coolest street strider.

as an example of my less than credible fashionista being, last weekend i took some time to clean and tend to my bicycle and, obviously, had a bonafide elf-look going on.

cashmere beanie by cos, scarf by bernhard willhelm, sweater by uniqlo, pants by gina tricot, sneakers by converse.

the fact that i get preoccupied with things makes me rather clumsy – i tend to fall just walking to places which is either funny or not depending on your point of view –, and i am no better behind a wheel or on some. during the years i've lived in helsinki i have not dared to ride my bike. narrow streets with cars, buses and trams is not my idea of a fun challenge and despite considering myself adventurous, i do not nestle any sort of a death wish.

however, i am about to face my fears and get on the road with my trusted old "glide deluxe". the problem is that i have no safety gear and, quite honestly, i need some. i had a fairly cool helmet some years ago – 'cool' meaning space balls lookalike – but i lost it during one of my latest moves.

i tried shopping online, but have not really lucked out. thus, i'm asking you to help this sprite get her wheels going: do you own or have you stumbled across any decent-looking bicycle helmets lately? let me know, please.

p.s. the creep that stole the skull-shaped caps from my valves, just want to tell you that you can return them by emailing me in the above-right address. thank you.

dirtee or clean?

although organic produce is something finnish grocery stores cannot boast carrying in vast amounts, we're gradually improving towards a less industrialized agricultural value-matrix. i wrote about the troubles adhering to buying organic in finland before and am not going to repeat myself here. i just wanted to tell you about a little cutesy helper that can solve the problem between skimping and splurging at the grocers.

heidi kenney creates cotton candy cute crafts that celebrate our anthropomorphic tendencies as if disney never existed. regardless of whether you'd consider her work art or not – can art be über dainty? –  her handy little pocket guide to the dirty dozen of veggies helps you decide whether buying organic instead of regular is really worth the extra cost or effort.



it will not solve all the other important aspects of ecological consumption or nutritional questions, but i still think it's pretty usable if avoiding unnecessary pesticides seems like a good idea to you.

the cheat sheet in pocket size, printable form is downloadable here.

project chanel.

last night at a xmas party the conversation turned to the issue of working out. the thing is: i don't do sports. period.

i am well aware that i should. i often contemplate the possibility of joining a gym, but remember all too well my last membership: while the monthly fee inconspicuously slipped off my account and my lazy tush hardly ever made it to the place of action, i ended my contract after counting that every single time i actually worked out cost me 120€. and that ain't cool.

the problem is not that i have not found the right type of exercise. i actually enjoy all kinds of solitary sports and i've pretty much tried everything, as well. i just cannot stick to a routine.

i wish it was a s simple as just getting off the couch and walking to the gym. i am a master of self-delusion and can argue myself out of every single decision i make. the more ironclad the promise, the more elaborate my sneaky way out of it. i know myself well and, therefore, any sort of contract-making with myself is futile.

finding motivation for exercise is where i fall. i know a workout provides endorphins and i'd feel more energetic overall. somehow the knowledge doesn't push me since i am pretty happy in my slothful state. i wish i was more vain when it comes to appearance, but seeing hideous pictures only shock me for a second. i know my body is far from perfect, but it's generally ok. hence, i conceal my shortcomings rather than try to fix them – if i was more prone to gaining weight i'd probably stroll around happily in a black, interestingly folded muumuu.

a while ago a friend recommended the gym he goes to and i half-promised to look into joining. the topic has since been raised and dropped so many times that last night i could see the look in his eyes close on desperation, as if "yeah, i know where this conversation will end... she'll say yeah, i should and will look into it and we'll be having the same conversation next month." when you realize your procrastination sounds old and bores your friends, it is definitely time to do something.

thus, we smacked the cat on the table (got to love finnish idioms) and explicitly figured out a plan to motivate me. the perfect idea started in the clever mind of another sports challenged friend: we need a price that's a significant indulgence we have a hard time convincing ourselves entitled to otherwise. moreover, her suggestion of the holy grail hit close to home: a classic chanel flap bag.

the plan was conjured (and recorded) and is as follows.

from january 2010 we both join the gym and must attend at least twice a week. only exceptions accepted are illness and travel. our mutual friend is the official observer and we must inform him after every single visit. he will record our visits in a google-calendar visible to our support teams.

after six months we both are allowed to buy ourselves a chanel flap bag of our choice. the official observer will be given a bottle of champagne whether or not we succeed. there will be a formal party to welcome the two chanels in our families and plenty of toasting. with firm arms.

since rational thinking is not motivating enough, public pressure and a shiny, outrageously expensive new bag might just about do it. that's the kind of airhead i am. i just hope i do not win the lottery before summer because knowing me i'll just buy myself out of this contract as well...

wish me luck!

damage control.

a while ago i stumbled across a book called design revolution by emily pilloton. it holds a collection of design innovations that have ended as products that empower people whether providing education, mobility, play, or energy among others.


the starting point in pilloton's book is her dedication as a designer to devote her time towards projects that actually benefit people rather than create more of the same for the already over-consuming population of the world. her claim is that most of designer ingenuity goes toward design for design's sake disregarding the reason why great design exists in the first place, that is, for the people. the perception of ethical problem-solving as she laments comes down to regarding product design as trend-guided and superficial, disconnected from human needs. self-evidently she does not start from assuming that aesthetics are secondary, in case you were wondering.

moreover, when it comes to ecological consumption we often appear content with diminishing damage; developing hybrid cars or sustainable cotton are processes that reduce the damage traditional petrol gulping cars and cotton clothing produce and hardly improve the lives or conditions of people, but just adjust the guilt levels of the already privileged. pilloton asks a serious question about aiming higher than "do no harm" as an ethical guideline and actually striving towards "embetter".

as far as i'm concerned every single entry in the book deserves its own blog post, but i'll introduce you to some of them.

water: hippo water roller. a durable container for water transport.

well-being: target pharmacy bottle. a redesigned bottle for medication that reduces the risk of confusion between family members' pills and facilitates understanding.

energy: windbelt. a more efficient, turbine free wind harvester that utilizes the flutter effect better known for destroying bridges...

education: kinkajoy microfilm projector and portable library. a solar panel operated led based projector with microfilm content for non-electrified areas.

mobility: whirlwind roughrider. a sturdy wheelchair for rough terrain providing accessibility in areas without perfect intrastructure.

food: daily dump. an inexpensive compost for organic waste reduction.

i wanted to raise another question of whether the design ethic of pilloton could be applied to fashion consumption as well: we all need clothing but could we also do good? pilloton compares design and medical solutions, and finds that solutions in product innovations are often temporary fixes that hardly ever reach for the source of a a problem. it could be argued that systematic solutions should be preferred over temporary fixes. is there a way for an ethical consumer to start acting analogically to someone seeking medical prevention? can we consume in non-band-aid ways and start creating change with and through our consumer actions?

when it comes to taking personal responsibility as a fashion consumer, stella listed her own rules of eco-awareness with fashion, and i agree with them. as anu pointed out, we all already know how to be better consumers: buy less, buy work-ethically and ecologically sound products, buy quality, buy used. that's it, and despite sounding easy, the rules are incredibly difficult to follow. perhaps that is the reason we often stop the discussion on consumer ethics there. as anu also reminded us, the effect we as consumers have for societal change is limited and much narrower than we're lead to believe.

the basic suggestion is simple: intend to buy things that not merely avoid or do less (the usual) harm, but that actually bring about improvement. taken literally this implies a radical change in our consumption since we're used to exploitation on levels that are almost impossible to comprehend.

there are obvious requirements. there's a need to educate oneself in matters of production, social realities, marketing, etc. in order to make informed decisions. as an example of fashion, consider this t-shirt from edun that combines sustainable material (organic cotton), ethical production (sustainable factories in peru) and the added benefit of fund-transfers towards those in need (15% of proceeds to benefit war child). the last could be considered a form of pill-popping fixes, but there is no doubt some medication is also needed in this world of ours, right?


without full knowledge of the production costs and the division of proceeds it is difficult estimate whether the production is fair. as i have pointed out before, merely creating jobs is not ethical if we expect people to settle for conditions we ourselves would consider unbearable.

in addition to fair labor and sustainable materials there is a need for openness of design: kamicha called for the transparent designer, i.e. the abolition of nameless designers who copy for the mass market, but are unwilling (or unable) to stand behind their work. although there is no undeniable evidence that coming forth with your own name could secure quality (those who have recently visited marc jacobs will know what i mean...), it may improve the chances of designers creating things they actually feel proud of. assuming there is a significant addition of brand extra in the price of the edun shirt, the fact remains that a tee would probably end up costing close to a 100€ if produced ethically and priced according to global equality.

as a lover of all things beautiful, i struggle with the thought of the background of my favorite objects, and as much as i'd love to invest in couture to promote the artisanship of southern europe, i must settle for the cheaper alternatives – fully aware that they do not come cheap. could we start demanding full exposure? thus, are we ready and willing to bear the costs?

a framed life.

since you've seen my pics it probably does not come as a surprise that i wear glasses. because i believe you, my dear readers, to be extremely observant and keen for detail, you must have noted that my personal style, that i'd like to consider thoughtfully complete and playful at best, is complimented by a rather boring and unsuitable choice of spectacles. let me assure you that i am well aware of it, as well.

i have worn glasses since i was 8 years old. at entering the third grade, my teacher noted me squinting and i was quickly forwarded to my mother's ophthalmologist. my first pair of glasses were bright red and completely round, and i looked like a perky little professor. quite fitting, really, since i was a walking encyclopedia at that point in my life.

since then my sight has deteriorated at a pace that vexed my parents. around my 25th bday, my eyes found peace within and the degeneration stopped at -7.5 diopters, give or take a quarter. for those with perfect eye-sight i will elaborate: the figure translates to an ability to see 15cm sharply and things turning into a blur afterwards. the limit of severe myopia is -6 and official blindness starts around -10 diopters and, thus, i am pretty much as blind as a bat.

living with poor sight means that i completely lose functionality without my glasses: i have hurt myself numerous times at public saunas and at summer cottages because i have had to take them off for some reason or another. i keep an extra pair in my nightstand drawer in case i misplace my glasses accidentally: i cannot find the lost pair without another one on. the few times i have woken up and seen the ceiling means i fell asleep with my contacts – a rather painful experience. needless to say, the option of forgetting to wear them (something i hear happens to many people...) is unimaginable.

additionally, myopia comes with other little quirks: people who work with text often develop a slight strabismus, i.e. my eye wanders when it's attempting to focus on small details. this particular foible shows in photos and adds a touch of lunacy to my otherwise immaculate [sic!] look. moreover, i also suffer from nocturnal myopia, i.e. my night vision is worse than average. another source of creative stumbling at cottages and natural environments – no wonder i love cities with bright lights so much. contacts work fine when i'm off work, but concentrating on the screen of my laptop dries my eyes and causes pain.

i am one of the fifth of young adults in finland who need to wear corrective lenses, but the severity of my condition makes me a part of a very small minority. after over two decades of myopic life i have obviously lived through all imaginative phases of self-doubt: as a child i was never teased for my four-eyes, but when i reached puberty there wasn't such a creature as the cool indie nerd with ironic glasses. hipsters came a decade too late for me. for a girl spectacles meant you were an outcast, simple as that, and my first pair of contacts created such a memorable turning point in my social life that i still remember the two weeks between ordering and receiving them as anxiety filled and revolutionary: my personal paradigm shift of turning dateable.

the newly found freedom came at a price: after overexposing my eyes to contacts in high-school, i had to stop wearing them regularly for some years. fortunately, i was going to a place where nerds were accepted: during my time at the university the glasses grew on me and became a part of my personality – so much so, that i sometimes feel naked without them.

the cultural belief that glasses make you appear more intelligent lives on strong and i have been "accused" of wearing glasses to appear smart(er). there is research suggesting pleiotropical connection between high iq and myopia, but i find explanations pointing towards other correlations more convincing. that is, children suffering from myopia tend to be clumsier and, therefore, devote their time to activities that will not injure them – nearsighted kids read rather than play ball. myopic kids don't recognize their friends from the other side of the playground and can appear socially awkward – some more time for reading, then. moreover, kids with poor eyesight tend to be seated in the front of classes. needless to say, all these correlating factors work as an explanation only if other conditions are favorable: i learned to read at four when i was still very agile and fearless, and there are theories that lengthy visual concentration early in life can also induce myopia, not the other way around.

i have definitely used the stereotypes to my advantage when i started teaching. when half of my students were older than myself, they added credibility. even presently their effect is increased respect. therefore, i understand the desire to wear status glasses at times. the reason i haven't got rid of mine has nothing to do with credibility, however, but my hesitation to let a sufficiently healthy organ be tampered with needlessly. i already know what it means to be blind, and i have no intention of taking any risks that could leave me permanently so – there aren't odds low enough to mean i could not end up the unfortunate one with damage.

glasses it is, then. as an essential everyday accessory, glasses are a signifier of personal and peer style. for someone like myself who considers fashion a play of personality and belonging, wearing (or not wearing) glasses and the choice of spectacles is no small deal. not being able to wear glasses that fit one's image of oneself is dissatisfying to say the least and absolutely horrific at worst. when larger frames appeared five years ago i keenly went to the optician and returned with similar glasses you've seen me wear here. a couple years later large frames were everywhere, but i got the ones you've seen. i didn't want to, but i had to.

why? because myopia as severe as mine limits the choices in frames – especially if you're interested in retaining a normal shaped head and eyes that do not resemble pin heads at the bottom of a glass jar. strong correction warps the entire area covered by a lens‚ and myopia is corrected with lenses that minimize everything visible behind them. therefore, the sides of the face become contracted and with a high enough frame your face ends up looking like a pear. with a jawline like mine, i haven't felt up for the challenge. minuscule eyes become more apparent the larger the lens area and ultimately disappear into the abyss of the face. nah, not up for that either...

so you can imagine how excited i was to see round frames making a comeback! round could work, look artsy and fresh on me, right? kinda like vuokko nurmesniemi whose style closes in on iconic...

right? wrong. comeback, yes; availability, nonexistent.

so i relied on my steady supplier, chanel. their frames come in sizes that are small enough for my face – yup, guess what, my face is so narrow that most frames do not fit at all, and the ones that do, i need a special order for. let's just say that specsavers is not my destination nor my price range because severe myopia does not come cheap. ever. a pair of glasses ends up costing around 750€ which means i don't purchase them on a whim.

i ended up ordering a pair of slightly larger frames from chanel's new denim line. they arrived a week ago and i have already noted another reason why larger lenses are not a great choice: my glasses weigh enough to hurt the bridge of my nose. nevertheless, i am content with them although they feel "old" already. happy or excited, nope, but alright and fine.

at times like these i just wish i could afford playing dame edna... sigh.



i'm sure i'm not alone... if you wear glasses, did you have trouble finding the right pair? how many do you have and do feel the need to change them with outfits? if you don't need glasses, have you ever considered (or do you) wear image glasses for any (tell me!) reason?

sleepygear.

fashion faux pas and tackiness are something i'm guilty of quite often: i fall in love with incredibly ugly garments and wear them to the detriment of my fellow citizens. nevertheless, my everyday essentials need to be sleek and stylish; i know many people who obtain continuous joy from quirky little personal items, but hello kitty or related cutesy or kitsch objects just do not work as part of my daily routine.

i dunno about you, but decent looking laptop cases are incredibly hard to find. the ones available in finland are either hideous – like built neoprene cases and golla that not only look awful but feel yuckily squishy to the touch – or do not come in a variety of sizes, like the fun cases by henrik vibskov. the only more hideous things in the world of laptops are actual laptop bags designed to carry your computer in addition to necessities and important papers. yuck!

still i need to carry my laptop with me everywhere. sometimes i just want to store it away safely. for a long time my main requirement for a purse was that it fit my computer neatly because it was the only protection provided. my old and significantly smaller powerbook traveled in an unused shoe pouch, but my macbook pro did not fit into one – not that it offered any cushioning in case something damaging happened. despite traveling nude for years, the good old powerbook survived incredible occurrences, such as an impromptu football match at tavastia dance floor late one evening where "the ball" happened to be my mulberry bag (that survived equally well, impeccable quality!) holding my laptop...

therefore, i was thrilled to find out about pijama, an italian firm that makes cases not only for laptops but also for other gadgets. although as an ardent appletheist i do not understand the need to prettify or protect pc's – i mean, someone aesthetically inclined would not choose a pc in the first place, right – (i am kidding, ok!) – they also nowadays offer cases for pc-users. incredibly enough by using quality wool fabrics from milanese factories combined with simple and sympathetic designs, the result is stylish and practical. i love the polka dot and pink tartan patterns, but chose a classic houndstooth for mine – very fall alexander mcqueen.


what kind of a pijama would you have your laptop going to sleep in?

demystify.

after being a teacher for several years i've had to grapple with packing vast collections of information in compact and easily graspable units. understanding complex ideas starts from bits and pieces, but once you've gone beyond the basis it is incredibly difficult to return to the basics. although my previous profession is infested with individuals who believe that the more complex you sound, the smarter you appear, i never felt at ease amongst them. abstract theory is difficult enough, even when explained with clarity, and needs as little additional jargon magic as possible. in fact therein lies a major part of the difficulty: how to expound intricate concoctions clearly. let's say i failed more often than i succeeded.

after school our primary source of information is the news. the tortuous realities of everyday life hardly frustrate less than abstract reasoning. the evolution of newsbroadcasting favors glimpses and brief details – what else could you expect from a mere ten minute tv show covering all important current global events. even the 30 minute news coverage of my childhood where every story took several minutes to unfold is a fading memory. the kaleidoscopic reality portrayed in the repetitive slogan-like storytelling of modern television news creates more of a chaotic and scattered idea of current events than seems necessary. the coverage hardly ever comes full-bodied with background and contesting interpretations; the always relevant political biases of newshouses are visible only in the selection of headlines and their wording because there just really isn't much to call 'content' anymore.

in search of depth there is the possibility offered by quality magazines and online newspapers. although adding favorites and other selection tools help, they also limit the type of information that comes our way. my background provides the necessary instruments for picking out obvious faults and relevant texts that help me in avoiding and ignoring mumbo jumbo – definitely a set neither available to everyone nor something many people value. despite this advantage, i still feel like i'm failing at keeping up with what is up in the world.

quality teaching, journalism and news reporting all share the same elements: cohesion, clarity and profundity. without a vast amount of preknowledge it is impossible to collect the essentials and regroup the tokens into a cohesive and informative package. thus, it seems obvious that in order attain profound results a teacher, journalist or reporter must hold tremendous amounts of info in addition to being able to sort the entire mess out.

the facile method is to choose a viewpoint and follow the path created by one stance. more than often the selection process becomes narrower and almost inevitably leads to a bias of some sort. it seems that to attain necessary depth for one point of view we need to pick sides. the method, nonetheless, fails in a world where multiple standpoints should be accounted for in order to attain any sort of clarity. another question altogether is the having the capability and the will to acknowledge different stances.

surely it need not be as grave as the above may sound. bias is unavoidable and somewhat necessary; life becomes much easier to handle when we realize that such a thing as true objectivity does not exist. but these postmodern fragmented realities need stories – albeit not the grand ones – and good old storytelling. we still need neat packaging and people who take the time to acquire info and stuffit for us.

while we become less auditory and more visual (anybody still listen to the radio for news?), new tools for representing complex phenomena are always welcome. while timelines and graphs are informative additions to information distribution, they always lack in representation. hence, i salute designer/animator jonathan jarvis and his new venture called the new mediators. his aim is to demystify without losing the true complicatedness of the issue he is explaining. with simple tools and temporal diagrams to provide in-depth relations he takes information graphics to the next level.

here's an example where jarvis explains the credit crisis:



obviously creating such pieces requires every bit of the understanding teaching or writing properly does – and possibly more. the time and effort needed limits the use for only a minuscule part of the baffling phenomena around us, but i do see potential here. therefore, i look forward to seeing jarvis' tools used by creative groups of researchers and journalists for exemplary information packages for the many intricate issues around us.

what phenomenon would you like to have explained?

shore lego.

i have always lived near a vast body of water and cannot imagine feeling comfortable as an inlander. the proximity of sea creates a horizon of freedom for me even at times of permanence. even a flowing river gives an impression of movement and direction in the solidity of everyday life. my relationship with water might explain the lack of affection i feel for other natural elements (on the assumption that we only have a certain amount of affective feelings to give, which is prolly faulty...); i desire very little green around me, but the reflecting gleam of h2o is essential.

despite my adoration of the ocean and although i used to sail as a kid, i don't find sailboats or other sea vessels all that interesting. i actually fear being afloat these days. (overall, i've turned into quite a wuss as i age...) nevertheless, i adore walking along the water and the visual stimuli offered by the sea. many of my home cities have been ports. strolling in the docklands and driving past harbors are very much part of my urban experience. the aesthetic of cranes and crates is as much a part of the texture of a city as are graffiti and concrete walls. all essential for me.

my fascination with shipping containers started at an early age when i pointed out that giant lego was stocked near the ruissalo island, a nature conservation area in turku. obviously, i was referring to the high piles of containers in the port of turku. i regarded them a heap of magnificent utilitarian building blocks just waiting to be arranged and rearranged according to the whims of a great lego builder. needless to say, i really really loved lego as a kid.

i still greet shores with shipping containers with aesthetic pleasure. the limited variety in stacking and colors create a soothing pattern of repetition. therefore, a dodgy shipping yard is an environment of marvel and fascinates me endlessly. to realize there are others who share my passion and actually create something with the giant lego has been exciting beyond belief.

seeing a book of lot-ek ("low tech") works for the first time actually produced a yelp on my part. embarrassing, sure, but oh, so amazing. the creative, italian originating architectural duo work from nyc and use unexpected materials to create living and working spaces. although a small firm, they've created a credible reputation for art projects – one of which took place in finland during snow show in 2004 (in collaboration with a thai artist friend, phathaiwat "top" changtrakul).

moreover, architect adam kalkin creates impressive, affordable and luxurious beyond sensibility living solutions from shipping containers. some of his works are presented here as a slide show. although his suggestions of combining traditional wooden housing with the rough'n'rumble of steel might be too underlining a contrast for some – and it certainly is for me – it definitely displays the possibilities there are with reusing these magnificent boxes.

one of my favorite projects is commissioned by the bag company freitag. they built a flagship store in zürich from 17 shipping containers. known for their tarpaulin bags and reused materials, the building is logical continuation on their part and a beautiful example of eco-architecture that uses familiar elements in an awe-inspiring way. additionally it offers the possibility of relocation and restoration of the site after the removal of the building.
the idea that even buildings can be based on ideals of recycling impresses me tremendously. the ultimate diy-project of creating a semi-permanent living-space and a home from steel containers feels relevant at this time of nomadic lifestyles. it could even offer a solution for those in desperate need of shelter – although i doubt creating material shelters for refugees or the poor comes down to lack of feasible residential solutions because slum issues (i.e. poverty) are still being "solved" by tearing down shantytowns and burning the material used for building shacks (i.e. securing poverty). but if there was a will, could this be the way?

what do you think? are shipping containers ugly bulk or fascinating material? would you consider living in such a house?

thinking outside the box.

[i edited the text below ever so slightly because of logical gaps i ignored in my turmoil of emotion. hopefully it makes more sense now.]

i have been meaning to write about some of the reasons i found academic life implausible. brought to tears today not only because i recently lost my mother to brain cancer but also because a friend of mine lost her husband and became a widower before turning 30 years old next week, i will write about one of the reasons i left my job and nowadays consider an academic career a non-option.

working in academia is all but financially secure. most research is funded with grants that individuals and research groups compete for with applications they take significant time writing. application and evaluation processes vary, but the most common standard is that each academic discipline is evaluated separately by experts in each field. i believe it healthy to assume that most applicants would deserve a grant; the reason some are left out is more often the lack of money rather than an undeserving application. my point being that many who definitely had the potential for brilliant research are left without funding. therefore, applications are written with funding in mind, often compromising intellectual desires.

the makings of a great scientist and researcher are few, but essential: the ability to grasp and handle vast amounts of knowledge and the ability to argue a point. meticulousness is also essential. the single trait most often not associated with doing research, but which is the most important, is creativity. to be a brilliant scientist you need the ability to ask questions no-one thought about before, to question accepted realities and to combine acquired knowledge in unprecedented ways. if you're pushed to compromise your ability to question, the entire process of doing research loses its appeal.

sure lots of important research battles ancient questions, but also finding new interpretations of age-old theories is definitely a creative process. it is also a passionate process. all research innovations are made by those who think outside the box. (apologies for the blah terminology...)

the trend of doing interdisciplinary work receives much official support: the future of research is visioned in novel combinations and cross-sections of traditional disciplinary fields. the problem is that researchers are extremely possessive with their fields of expertise. asking questions that are untraditional is sometimes aggravation enough, but when posed by someone trained in an altogether different field, they are received with ridicule or considered almost blasphemous even when a basic knowledge of the field is more than explicit. researchers are very territorial, to put it mildly.

mastering two different fields is obviously demanding, but not at all unheard of. nevertheless, applying for a grant with an multidisciplinary topic is more often than not directed at only one of the fields it concerns leaving the applicant hanging on the graciousness of the evaluators' understanding. fairly often they receive a review saying the research proposal is too vague or not exactly in the target group. not asking the right questions, that is. our funding system is built to support rigid disciplinary boundaries and, thus, does not offer valuable space for the much lauded interdisciplinary work. the same applies to publishing forums and conferences where multidisciplinary ideas are often shunned upon. the politics of science protect the status quo despite claims otherwise.

i am not saying that every unorthodox question is worthy of exploring. i only mean that sometimes it takes someone marginal or a complete outsider to ask the questions that will enable a field of research to take the right direction. to demonstrate i will use an example of research in an area that touches most people including myself: cancer.

finding a cure for cancer must be the epitome of medical aspirations. cancer continues to confuse, confront and convulse us regardless of the vast amount of research time and funding used to understand why our cells all of a sudden start growing uncontrollably and, ultimately, suffocate our organs resulting in death.

finding a cure for cancer surely would diminish the amount of suffering amongst people. unfortunately we're nowhere near a breakthrough big enough to count as a cure. thanks to years of research we have many forms of treatment, but mortality rates have not diminished significantly.

it took an engineer with personal grief to question the balance of cancer research favoring finding a cure over the effort put into early detection methods. i found out about don listwin in an article in wired magazine. he witnessed his mother's fatal journey with cancer. his path was not unlike my own: both our mothers were misdiagnosed until there was fairly little that could be done. his mother was given antibiotics for bladder infections until her ovarian cancer was stage IV; mine visited her neurologist regularly due to a stroke some years ago, but her complaints were not interpreted correctly until she forgot my name and an aggressive tumor the size of a tennis ball was found in her temporal lobe. like all people dealing with cancer loss, i deal the best i can, but listwin, however, a wealthy cisco executive, left the company and a few years later started the canary foundation.

it is a well-established fact that most forms of cancer, if caught early, are treatable and survival rates are high. although many small breakthroughs offer more forms of treatment, the increases in survival rates are fairly insignificantly associated with better treatments. however pre-screenings, for example the pap smear screening women for early signs of cervical cancer, have diminished mortality by over a half.

the primary reason cancer is so fatal comes down to poor detection. when reaching stage III and IV (the scale used on most cancers is I-IV), mortality rates are crushingly high. nevertheless, over 90% of cancer research is targeted at finding late-stage treatments and drug development rather than diagnosis and early detection.

listwin asked the improbable and questioned the rationale of finding more treatments instead of creating methods of screening early signs of cancer in the body. if we were able to locate the proteins cancerous cells release in our bloodstream, the already existing treatments would save many lives. being an outsider in the business of medicine, he raised his voice with the aid of money: by recruiting the best oncologists, geneticists, biochemists and so on, he has created a non-profit research group in search of a pack of screening methods for the most common and deadliest malignancies. the improbable just got more so with the knowledge that listwin encourages results that are efficient and low-cost in order for them to be widely used.

imagine if melanomas, breast, pancreatic, lung and brain tumors could be screened at a relatively low cost from the entire population. what has become a reality with the pap smear and cervical cancer could happen with the most disastrous of cancers. mistaken diagnoses could become obsolete. receiving devastating prognoses talking about months to live could become a part of the sad history of human healthcare. imagine that.

nonetheless, finding a cure is still an important goal to reach. screenings will always fail to locate all people and all tumors. but locating cancer early is almost as good as finding a cure, and we need to ask ourselves: are we chasing the right chalice?

sometimes someone from the outside is needed to halt our quest for the grail and ask ourselves whether the quest is worth ignoring all else. examples like the canary foundation prove the worthiness of bringing novel viewpoints into an established field. although my own research was nowhere near as essential as cancer research, i had multidisciplinary ambitions similar to colleagues who were regularly left without funding.

the kinds of alterations in thinking that listwin is a prime example of hardly happen with the current style of research funding and promotion. i was lucky for the entire 7 years for having continuous grants and research positions, but i did not see potential for asking the questions i wanted to. i was by no means alone with my concerns but there wasn't a philanthropist like listwin in sight. hence, my choice to leave. the kinds of it is discouraging to note that the doors of academia are not exactly open to creativity.

bring me my veg.

as a vegetarian who only in the past few years retreated to eating fish (and, yes, i consider it a form of giving up on my principles...), you’d think my daily intake of fresh fruit and veg was in order. well, couldn’t be more wrong.

you see, i’m a pasta and cheese kinda gal. i find peeling fruit a nuisance above any other and the only time you’ll see me eating fruit is as a fruit salad that someone else prepared. since i’m allergic to pineapple and apple, there aren’t many prepared fruit salads available (and why is that, huh?). so ignoring sporadic fruit juice intake, you can tick out the fruit from my diet.

with veggies i am almost as bad. i eat salads, but find preparing them too slow. my weeks alone when my sweetie’s off on work related things, i eat pasta, bread and cheese. days and days of bloatathon....

needless to say, my habits suck. the poor nutrition i get is instantly visible and the minimal excercise doesn’t exactly help. add two pots of coffee a day and you've got a disaster. my skin lacks clarity and, well, cellulite ohoy... it’s clear i know what’s wrong in my ways, but old habits die hard. i am one of those people who need an attractive and easy solution to self-induced and supported problems. hell, who doesn’t?

my university had a group for people interested in buying organic veg, but i found the offerings lacking in quality. additionally, i did not mesh too well with the hippie mindset where the produce wasn’t the primary issue but meat-eater bashing seemed to outweigh the fun with veg. then again i only tried it once and my judgment is probably somewhat distorted. hippies just create a rash on me... yeah, i know i’m a snob.



therefore, i was keen to try sis.deli+cafe’s organic weekly veggie bag. i am a fan of the place and thought their idea was great. by placing an order by sunday, you can fetch a bag filled with your weekly dose of fresh organic fruit and veg the next tuesday. the contents should be 3,5kg (500g daily) and for 25€ it did not seem too steep a price – it is organic after all.

part of the seduction of the bag for me, at least, is being introduced to seasonal produce. i am not all that familiar with what veggies are in season and i am hoping the contents would help educate my urban mind used to overflowing grocery store counters. another perk is obligation: after i have the bag, i am also bound to prepare the contents and eat them, because tossing perfectly good food away just strikes me as impossible. sound good?

our first bag came filled with oranges (fruit=hassle=yuck), large carrots (crunchy and sumptuous), a large leek, tomatoes and some green leaves (pretty and yummy)... did i forget something... hmm. in any case, it did not seem worthwhile to be honest. but i won’t give up that easy since there isn't a hippie in sight!

as i’m writing this i am munching away the last carrots from our batch. i will place another order soon and will keep you posted. anyone else tried the bag? whaddayathink?

a room of one’s own.

one of the harshest things about working freelance is working from home. forget about romantic notions of carrie bradshaw sitting cross-legged on her bed in cute underwear just tapping away – that will lead to a ”mouse arm” in no time. trust me, i know. my left shoulder has actually moved permanently (?) about an inch higher than my right one because of poor choices in working at decubitus. shame on me.

the division of time is also an issue. when at home chores are forever present and pressing. some may find the fact that you can do laundry while working great, but the downsides are apparent, as well. it is all too easy to procrastinate in your own home when you can appeal to housework needing you attention.

fortunately, coming from a large family i am used to all sorts of disturbance. i can concentrate in the middle of a heated debate or a buzzing cafe. in the past years i have worked on my laptop in restaurants and bars probably more than i ever did in my office when i had one. whenever i find it troublesome to focus on a task at hand, i go out to a restaurant. a steady level of noise helps me insulate myself from fleeting thoughts.

after starting at a new job a few months ago my positioning unfortunately did not change although i'm not freelance anymore. the company does not have an office in helsinki and the few of us working in the capital do everything from home. until this changes next fall, i’m stuck on my sofa and the restaurants in the neighborhood.

the problem is that i haven’t found a spot of choice, yet, because a reliably functioning wifi is surprisingly hard to find. i also feel pressed to leave my nook after sitting in a small busy place for a few hours: i’m taking up the space of other customers. despite being a paying one myself, i am aware of the fact that a patronage that moves is the one that brings in the profit.

therefore, i have concetrated in finding a good place at home. a home office would solve several issues, but our apartment is an attic studio above the rooftops of helsinki. there are nooks created by tilted ceilings, but no separate rooms where a desk could be fitted. the layout (not the size) of the apartment prevents a dining table, let alone a desk significant enough for spreading out work sheets. as much as i love the serenity of our home, it isn’t exactly work friendly.

lately i have spent my days sitting on a bar stool next to our kitchen window. i moved from the sofa because my arm hurt constantly. and i am thrilled with the result. the stool doesn’t appear comfy, but my shoulder pain is gone. there is plenty of light and for my more photosensitive days i can close the blinds. i have a view of the roof, chimneys and the bell towers of a church over our small terrace. it is actually quite comforting and definitely not bad as an "office" view.

what kind of an environment do you like for work?

die die die!

it all started out as a normal, rather inspiring day: i was about to run some errands and decided to wear my fairly asymmetric, but lovely vivienne westwood wool dress. as i slipped it on, i noted a hole in the hem. knowing myself, i blamed my stuffed closet where hems easily get stuck between shoe boxes. hence, sometimes delicate fabrics rip. the thought that i might have harmed it during our move occurred to me, as well. ultimately, i wasn't devastated and just gathered the hem up with some safety pins: westwood with holes is at another level compared to a flawless westwood -- the punkier the better, right? normally knee length became a rather short miniskirt, but i think it worked out fine.

off i went, ran the errands and popped into a clothing store. in the fitting room i noted that the entire garment was covered in tiny little holes. my punk attitude deserted me instantly: something was eating my precious dress!

no matter how much we like to diss synthetic fibers, they've got a perk one hardly ever thinks about: critters do not like to munch on plastic! there are all kinds of minute larvae after your shreds: the clothing moth enjoys wool and the carpet beetle will savour almost anything but has a preference for fur and wool. oh so savvily, i've filled my closets with cedar wood moth repellents, but the science behind the method is unclear to me. they smell nice, though, but obviously do not work all that well...

thankfully, we've got a sauna. i found no further damage, but i am not taking any chances. heating up the b*tards is a handy way to kill almost any kind of creepy crawler and while my meticulous search gave no clue as to who might be blameworthy, i hope the heat treatment will solve the problem. die, creepers, die!!

greased up.

imaginative people never fail to amaze me. i find myself regularly in awe with the fact that someone came up with radio waves and the microchip. i've never bought the anachronistic crap that an airplane was something which became a reality out of inevitable necessity because humans have a general desire to fly since, obviously, we don't. we actually tend to fear flying more often than not. but isn't it amazing that some people did have an urge to conquer the skies, which enables us to hop on a plane and actualize the idea of flying around the globe?

minor inventions have me equally delirious at times. for example further, a luxury hand soap made out of used restaurant grease. i kid you not: the oil used to fry french fries and calamari can be reused for biodiesel (through extracting glycerin and adding potassium hydroxide and methanol) and soap (the remaining glycerin plus some essential oils). the makers actually create a sustainable circle by taking bottles of the soap back to the restaurants that provided their oil.

human ingenuity rocks.

stained.

i have to admit that i ain't your regular domestic goddess. i'm preoccupied with projects more important than household work -- or so i want to believe -- and when it comes to solving domiciliary problems i find myself grabbing the latest cillit sh'bangbang (or whatever miracle solvent came out the latest) only to realize that it's probably really poisonous and does not perform as it did in the commercial.

in situations like these, most people grab the phone and call their mothers. the thing is, i was raised by two scientists who share my tendency to procrastinate when it comes to mundane issues like household chores. my mom and dad can kinda cook (read: we were fed as kids) and they clean regularly (read: we did not live in a pigsty), but the house was never immaculate and the meals often less than appetizing. my utmost admiration for my parents is in no way lessened by their shortcomings, but if i need help in stain removal the last number to call is mom. (dad might know, though... he's the one who sews in the family, too.)

for people like me the martha organization is an essential source of invaluable information. the organization is a sort of a stitch'n'bitch club for women who have an interest in domestic perfection. and it isn't about exclusivity because they're more than willing to share their knowledge -- even through a helpline! i mean, how great is that?

while some people apparently fail to appreciate the variability of human interests and how they promote communal well-being, i give two thumbs up to the marthas. we need people like my mother whose groundbreaking research on identifying the mrsa bacteria has helped towards finding solutions to control a significant hospital killer, but we also need domestic magicians who keep our stained stoves in check. variance is for the benefit of all!

neighborhood recommendation #2: hair salon.

finns have a flair for hair. we're brave when it comes to color and cuts and, supposedly, people in the hair trends industry love visiting helsinki for the edgy looks we go for here. how very cool of us.

courage is a double edged sword, though, because we're also very much for diy: spunky hair color out of a box is way too common a sight in the streets, especially when the tone is off and there's barely any makeup to fix the appearance. skimping on salon visits means there are roots shoving everywhere, often blonde roots leading to black ends. lamentably the requests for trendy hairdos at times outweigh the skills available and we see heads with tons of, um, "idea", but haywire implementation. moreover, there are graphic cuts with bold stripes of neon on people who seem to come from the little house on the prairie, and i'm pretty sure not all of them modeled for a hair trend show.

doing hair well is a trade, a learned skill, but also an artistry. it requires incomprehensible psychological skills: in mere minutes the hairdresser should figure out the customer's day-to-day style and preferences and apply them to whatever quality of hair s/he needs to work with. without going to clients who bring photos of celebrities and want a simple perm to create red carpet hair that should settle with a simple blow dry, we normal sensible people usually have a mental image of what we'd like to look like walking out of the salon -- and as we all know, that image is fragile and, oh, so easily shattered. i assume that i'm not the only one who's left a salon crying?

the problem with hairdressing is that what works for someone, does not work for another, and this applies to both cut and color and to the person holding the scissors. when we find the right fit, we stick to it. but the relationship is always tentative: one screw-up can ruin a beautiful thing... and the process of hesitant building of trust must begin from scratch.



nevertheless, i will recommend a salon worth trying if you are on the lookout for your perfect match. i popped in today with my dog (who instantly found a lap to rest on; see her peeping through the coverup on the customer?) at loisto which is a small establishment with a busy schedule, so book early. their philosophy is simple: they're passionate about skill and personal service. the people working are simply talented (like mv, in the pic) and the customers vary stylistically from the trendiest club kids to the family restaurant owner down the street and their common denominator: great looking hair. at a time when many hair salons try to lure in customers with extra pampering services and make a fuss about bringing you a glass of champagne (which in itself is great, in a way, but does not compensate for the end result being less than great...), loisto emphasizes the meaning of great manageable hair as a daily ingredient of a more pleasant life. the atmosphere at the shop is happy and friendly, and while the staff is definitely on the quirkier side, none of your diva scissorhands work there.

and if you enjoy people watching and tend to draw conclusions from behavior, as yours truly does, this might just be a top selling point: i have never seen a customer leave loisto trying to readjust their hair in front of a mirror before walking out... i don't know about you, but i've done it at salons before and seen people do it in other places more than i care to remember. so, go get impressed.

green cleaning.

anu wrote about how washability is a key component of what she believes good quality consists in, and i could not agree more with her. the increasingly common labeling of clothing as "dry clean only" seems unrelated to the quality of materials used or common fabrics suddenly becoming non-washable, but rather appears to result from a reluctancy to take responsibility for the garment's quality in long term use. as a consumer, i have learned to read dry clean instructions on cotton tees as do-as-you-please-but-don't-come-crying-at-our-door-if-the-seams-twist, which, first of all, irritates me and, secondly, seems totally foolish now that manufacturing techniques and materials available should have improved, especially in higher-end products.

the daring interpretation transforms into daring action on my part: i tend to wash items which explicitly state that i shouldn't. wool, silk and cotton are materials which should, in my opinion, survive water. my trusted, four-year-old tiger of sweden peacoat has been to the washer (in low temperature and wool wash) so many times i've lost count because of constant wear and, luckily, it still looks flawless. but i have not been as fortunate with everything and despite materials and technique improvements should have taken place, we all know it is not entirely true: high price neither implies quality workmanship nor material.

dry cleaning is a hassle, environmentally suspect and, in finland, also fairly expensive, which acts as a hindrance to leisure-washing motivated by mere laziness. the finnish market seems also less competitive and the biggest selling point is low price rather than other qualities of the service, whereas in new york city there is a growing business of "green" and "organic" dry cleaners. as with everything marketed as eco-friendly, the description "green" is used comfortably when even a slight ecological improvement can be displayed meaning obviously that the process or product sold to the customer may be a far cry from environmentally sound. what seems incredible is the equivocation of the term "organic": dry cleaners use it in the sense of organic chemistry (carbon based) rather than organic produce (toxin free). in the ny times article alan spievogel, the technical director of the cleaners' association, is quoted saying:

Under that standard, [--]I could clean garments with nuclear waste and I could call myself organic.

i am quite sure this sounds appalling as a marketing strategy to most of you.

despite knowing what horrible toxins are used for cleaning our everyday surroundings and the things we wear, i cannot claim my consumer choices are honestly motivated by ecological considerations. i still believe the main reasons i try to steer clear of "dry clean only" is the hassle and the price rather than toxins. i still, like many people, associate the smell of artificial fragrances with clean laundry which is one of the reasons i do not use soap nuts. nevertheless, were they more readily available, i might consider them again since they worked ok.

which brings in mind my main belief when it comes to making sound choices: they need to be easy. we're all a bunch of sloths.