Half Man, Half Estonian :: JOURNAL of Siim Sikkut [entries|friends|calendar] Siim Sikkut [ website | My Website ] [ userinfo | livejournal userinfo ] [ calendar | livejournal calendar ]

Live8 [03 Jul 2005|04:07pm] [ mood | content ] [ music | Paul McCartney and U2 - Sgt. Pepper's Lonely Hearts Club Band (live from Live8) ] Yesterday was a great day to remember because a great concert event took place - Live8. (see an article about it - here). I am not sure how many of you have seen clips or know much of old Live Aid from 1985, which was a revolutionary and spectacular event at the time. It featured many of world's top-notch artists on the same stage, both after each other and at the same time (which creates some unique, once-in-a-lifetime performances) - and for a good cause. The principle held again. Lots of splendid music was played on stages across the world yesterday in order to draw attention to world's poverty despair. You can see the live feed from the concerts HERE. Starting on Tuesday, the whole event should be available song by song and artist by artist on demand on the same AOL site. I will add that link then. Currently, you can see a short CNN clip of concert highlights here. Here's a list of who performed. Some highlights: U2, Madonna, Sting, Coldplay (and many more in London); Placebo, The Cure, Craig David (et al in Paris); Faithless, Audioslave, Green Day (Berlin); Duran Duran (Rome); Jet, Neil Young, Deep Purple (Canada); Björk and Good Charlotte (Tokyo); Stevie Wonder, Bon Jovi, Dave Matthews Band, Jay-Z and Black-Eyed Peas (along with others in Philadelphia). The most memorable and most longed-for appearance was without a doubt the one of Pink Floyd in London. They have not been together since 1981 and reunited for this one event only!!! Make sure to check it out. And also see this rocking rendition of Beatles' "Sgt Pepper's Lonely Hearts Club Band" by Sir Paul McCartney and U2, which kicked off Live8. Most importantly, though, go and sign the online petition for G-8 leaders about reducing Third World debt, increasing aid and creating a just trade regime. You can do it HERE. Millions have already done it, but every signature matters - so add yours if you care about the world. For more info on the background of the problem and event, see these articles and also these video clips. 7 comments|post comment

back in EST [08 Jun 2005|10:40am] [ mood | curious ] [ music | Isaac Hayes - Walk on By ] A lot has happened since I wrote anything here the last time. I have finished my thesis, graduated from Princeton, arrived back to Estonia - where I will stay for some time now. In July, I will start working for the Estonian Ministry of Finance namely. My job will be in the state budget department, where I will be working on main national economic strategies (i.e. strategic planning). In the meantime, before I have something else to say :), you can check out a few things. Today, the main Estonian daily newspaper Postimees ran a feature story about me - because I should be the first Estonian of the post-soviet era who has graduated from Princeton; and (moreover) because I returned to home after school (which many graduates do not do). The story is in Estonian only and can be viewed here. A few months ago, the same newspaper ran an article on the issue of young Estonians studying abroad and returning home. I got a chance to explain my thoughts on the matter, as well - and this story is here. Finally, you can check out the official Princeton website articles about our graduation events: Baccalaureate, Class Day, Commencement. Make sure to check the news media photos link!! 3 comments|post comment

not bad [28 Feb 2005|02:25am] [ mood | satisfied ] [ music | Basement Jaxx - Broken Dreams ] Hey, I got all the Oscar predictions right except for the Cinematography one. Not bad at all :) Highlights from the Oscars: - Chris Rock's opening speech When I first heard that he is gonna be the host, I was not impressed. But he rocked! He was out there and in a good way. The reason why he turned out to be a good choice is because he ripped it all apart and made fun of everybody, no limits. His comments on Bush were especially hilarious! - CHARLIE KAUFMAN GOT AN OSCAR!!! - Morgan Freeman's and Clint Eastwood's acceptance speeches. Nice, reserved, thoughtful. And ah yes - Jorge Drexler's acceptance speech was the coolest. He just got there and sang a few lines from his song that got him the Oscar. Props for originality. - The fact that Morgan Freeman got a standing applause upon acceptance. That was long due. - Penelope Cruz and Salma Hayek presenting together :) - Sidney Lumet's honorary award The final winners' list is here. As someone mentioned during the ceremony, this year featured many films that nobody in the major studios had been willing to make for years and even then agreed hesitantly, as well as with little budgets. Several of these movies became to be the biggest of the year: Million Dollar Baby, Sideways, Ray for example. I think it was a well-deserved spit in studio bosses' face and should become source of consideration for corporate Hollywood. They agree to make so much crap each year, for "commercial" considerations. But good movies always sell better in the end. And they are good!! post comment

siim's guide to the oscars [26 Feb 2005|11:24pm] [ mood | chipper ] [ music | Basement Jaxx - Romeo ] Life has been hectically busy for the longest time, since thesis work is going on. Hence the complete lack of posting. I felt compelled to write about Oscars though - as they will be presented tomorrow. AND - I still have not written anything about the year 2004 in movies. Here are the predictions, aka how Oscars will go, and also my opinion on how things should be :) 1) Best Picture Million Dollar Baby will win, although Aviator looks high up there as well (I hope it will not win). Sideways ought to win, if you ask me. 2) Best Director Clint Eastwood will win and deserves it from this list. Scorsese has done much better than Aviator in the past, and was not given a trophy then. It is not right if this guilt makes him the winner now. However, Mike Nichols is the one who REALLY should win - and he was not even nominated. Bad Academy, very bad Academy. Nichols did the most marvellous job of putting Closer on the screen with all its complicated personalities and intertwined web of relations. He made a movie that looks and feels like a play on screen. I have never seen anything like this before. 3) Best Actor Jamie Foxx will win and deserves to win. He was Ray. 4) Best Actress Hilary Swank will win and deserves to win. 5) Best Supporting Actor Morgan Freeman will win. But Clive Owen is the one who should take the award home. His Larry was SO intense, yet also deep. 6) Best Supporting Actress Cate Blanchett will win probably. But Virginia Madsen or even Natalie Portman should. 7) Adapted Screenplay Sideways - no further explanation needed. Wins and rightly so. 8) Original Screenplay Eternal Sunshine of the Spotless Mind - no further explanation needed. Charlie Kaufman finally gets one, and Eternal has definitely been his best so far. 9) Best Song The only reason I included this here was because this year's nominees all suck and big time. Who the f**k would choose Shrek 2 or Polar Express or Phantom of the Opera softie nonense songs in a year, where you had Mick Jagger & Dave Stewart's "Old Habits Die Young" (Alfie); Beck's "Everybody's Gonna Learn Sometimes" (Eternal Sunshine); Jon Brion's "Monday" (I Heart Huckabees); Damien Rice's "The Blower's Daugher" (Closer) and any of Seu Jorge's remakes of classic David Bowie songs in Portuguese and with an acoustic guitar (Life Aquatic with Steve Zissou?!?!?!??!!!!? F**k. Sorry for cursing, but this is how strongly I feel about the musical worth of nominated songs - I do not even care who wins. The 5 songs I picked were songs which were essential parts of respective movies, completed the picture. That is what Best Songs should do - and be good at the same time. Oh, out of these Jagger & Dave Stewart's "Old Habits Die Young" is probably most appropriate. 10) Best Documentary Born into Brothels. Deserves it, too. 11) Best Foreign Film The Sea Inside - mostly due to Javier Bardem. 12) Best Animated Feature The Incredibles. By far the best animated film I have ever seen. Especially cool, when you have been superhero cartoon/action film fan as a kid. Deja-vu. 13) Cinematography The Passion of the Christ probably. But I hope that A Very Long Engagement ends up as best. It had the coolest stuff. 14) other categories who even knows or cares about them? I do not hold opinions there. Hence, I will simply skip over. This is my prediction for what has been called one of tightest and toughest Oscar races in years. Tomorrow's the night. I will be back next week writing about the year 2004 in movies - in my critical opinion :) post comment

first publication [09 Dec 2004|12:28pm] [ mood | happy ] [ music | Jimi Hendrix - Machine Gun (live in Fillmore East; Dec 31, 1969 2nd show) ] I got my first official and meaningful publication. IR journal Diplomaatia, Estonian equivalent of Foreign Affairs in terms of national reputation and relevance, featured an article of mine in the December issue. The article can be read here - but only in Estonian :) It was called "Europe needs Turkey". I argued in it that Europe has to adopt a strategic approach about the prospects of Turkey's EU accession. Strategically thinking, Europe needs Turks for security reasons. Thus, EU leaders should say "Yes!" to starting accession talks with Turkey in the summit next weekend. Otherwise, Europe will be much worse off. Thus, it was essentially a longer opinion-piece (like FA-type articles are). It was based on my spring JP. Now that the "door is open" I hope to write more in the future! P.s. In other news, I am finally heading for home. Will be in Estonia for a month - just relaxing. This term has been long. 3 comments|post comment

my price, supposedly [24 Nov 2004|10:28am] [ mood | blah ] [ music | David Gray - White Ladder ] I'm worth $2,236,112.16 (€1,858,209.20)! How much are you worth? Thanks to Kathy for link. 3 comments|post comment

YEAH! [20 Nov 2004|01:31pm] [ mood | hopeful ] [ music | Beck - Milk and Honey ] What Classic Movie Are You? personality tests by similarminds.com But: What Famous Leader Are You? personality tests by similarminds.com Notice the contradiction in me? I prefer to be an Easy Rider though. post comment

most random fortune cookie msg ever [16 Nov 2004|02:02am] [ mood | peaceful ] [ music | Jimi Hendrix - Foxey Lady ] I hosted a Chinese food study break for my zees tonight, and naturally there were fortune cookies involved (they came with rest of the food). Here's what I got: "Your love of gardening will take on new meaning in your life." WTF?!?!??! What is it supposed to mean? Is it random or what? Especially since I have no love for gardening whatsoever - even quite the contrary. Confucius really screwed up this time :) 1 comment|post comment

Eesti ajud [14 Nov 2004|10:12pm] [ mood | gloomy ] [ music | Duran Duran - Ordinary World ] Katrin Oja on kirjutanud tänasesse EPLi arvamusloo pealkirjaga "Ajuvaba Eesti" nn ajude äravoolu probleemist. Ta toonitab, et Eesti inimestel ja riigijuhtidel/ametnikel on vaja aru saada probleemi olemusest ja tõsidusest. Muidu muutubki me riik "ajuvabaks" ehk targad eestlased lähevad valdavas enamuses ära välismaale ja jäävadki sinna. Loo moraal on selles, et meie riigil on vaja rakendada meetmeid ja investeerida vahendeid, ahvatlemaks välismaal õppivaid ja töötavaid andekaid eestlasi tagasi kodumaale tulema. Või siis vähemalt Eestiga seotuks jääma ning oma kogemusi/teadmisi vahendama ja Eesti heaks rakendama. Oja sõnutsi on meil vaja "töötada välja Eestile sobiv mudel ajude äravoolu peatamiseks või kompenseerimiseks." Artikli ainuke puudus on selles, et kirjutaja tõstatab probleemi - aga ei paku välja konkreetseid lahendusvariante. Sellest aga ei piisa. Kasvõi mõne lausega oleks võinud kirjeldada mõne teise riigi poolt kasutatud meetmeid või "mudelit." Või siis midagi täiesti uut genereerida. Mis on tarkade inimeste äramineku põhjuseks? Oja sõnades: "ühiskonnas levinud väiklased väärtushinnangud ja ebameeldiv suhtumine teistesse inimestesse ning töötegemisse; teatud erialade madal arengutase ning vähesed investeeringud teadusesse; võimaluste vähesus ja aeglane elutempo." BINGO!! Lõpuks ometi on keegi välja öelnud, et Eesti inimeste ja ühiskonna väiklus on eemaletõukav faktor!! Kui mina olen mõtelnud asjaolude peale, mis mind sunniksid välismaale jääma ja seal oma elu elama, on just see esimese ja peamisena minu jaoks arvesse läinud. Mina jaoks on tagasitulekuga seotud suurim oht selles, et mul võib olla võimatu ennast kodus teostada ja midagi asjalikku korda saata, kuna teiste sealsete inimeste arusaamad elust, ühiskonnast ja (Eesti) arengust on oluliselt piiratumad võrreldes minu nägemusega. Mis takistab minu ideede ja isikliku potentsiaali rakendamist. Ma tunnen kohati juba praegu, et 4 aastase äraoleku ja kardinaalselt teistsuguse (st mitmekesisema ja laiaulatuslikuma) hariduse omandamise järel on mul vahel vägagi raske kodumaisel poliitilisel ja sotsiaalsel tandril olevat ratsionaalselt seletada ja mõista. Veel raskem oleks siis sellega kaasa minna või töötada. See viimane muidugi ei ole vajalik, ja on isegi ebasoovitav. Kuidas siis muidu ühiskonnad muutuvad kui progressiivsete vastutöötajate mõjul :) Kuid kui seda väiklust ümberringi liiga palju, väsivad ka kõige progressiivsemad meist. Mis mõtet on üksi rabada? Lihtsalt ülla missiooni nimel ka ei saa kogu aeg tegutseda. Ma siiralt loodan, et ma ise sellise väsimuseni jõudma ei pea ning üritan teha kõik, et seda vältida. Kuid nagu ütlesin - oht on olemas. Olen Katrin Ojaga igati nõus, et "ajude äravool" [mulle on see väljend muide väga vastukarva: paneb mind sõna otseses mõttes hallolluseid üle riigi piiride voolamas ette kujutama] on üks peamisi Eesti tulevase arenguga seotud probleeme ja riskitegureid. Kuigi ma ei oska siiski ennustada, kui suurel määral ta reaalselt arengut piirama hakkab. Asi selles, et üheltpoolt on Oja poolt loetletud tegurid kaalukad. Kuid ma ei ole nõus, et Eestis on võimalusi tingimata vähe. Esiteks, võimalusi on alati võimalik ise genereerida, kui neid parasjagu niisama pakkumisel ei ole. Need, kes välismaale välja murdnud on, peaks sel alal eriti tugevad olema - harjunud võimalusi endale looma. Teiseks, pigem on Eestis just sellepärast tore, et võimalused on otsapidi suuremad. Kuna meil on väike riik, on seal oluliselt kiiremini ja lihtsamalt võimalik hakata midagi mõttekat ja sisuliselt olulist (mitte niisama tööd) tegema. Nt USAs kuluks sellise ülestöötamise peale aastakümneid, hulk karjääriredelil ronimist ja paraku ka sisutühja tööd. Eestis on meie riigi nooruse ja rahvaarvu väiksuse tõttu lihtsam "ligi pääseda." Minu jaoks on olnud see üks peamisi motiveerivaid tegureid, miks tahan tagasi tulla. Mina tulen peale tagasi, kuna tunnen, et Eestis on mul rohkem võimalik midagi ära teha, muutumises ja arengus kaasa rääkida kui kuskil mujal. Muidugi, meie väiksus võib sellistele võimalustele peatselt piiri ette seada. Et ühel hetkel ma tunnen, et pole kuskile enam areneda (mul endal). Ja muidugi on endiselt olemas see väikluse tont, mis olemasolevad võimalused pelgalt nominaalseks kahandada ähvardab. Kuid ma tahan siiski proovida. Ja usun, et minusuguseid on veel. See aga ei tähenda, et riik ei peaks ülalkirjeldatud meetmeid kasutusele võtma. Neid on alati vaja, sest tarku inimesi on alati vaja ja eriti väikses riigis. Mida rohkem neid on - seda parem. 2 comments|post comment

some more tests [12 Nov 2004|10:15pm] [ mood | blank ] [ music | Jimi Hendrix - Pali Gap ] Some more test results, once I started on this path in the last post. These ones are from BBC site. What is my millionaire potential? My score: 21 "You're in the top group - score 17 - 25. You've got top-dollar millionaire potential. You're careful with your money and have a healthy attitude to it. You're hard-working and determined to be successful." Am I perfectionist? I scored higher (usually by 1 point) than other test-takers in each category. But most notably in: - Personal Standards - my 4 against average 2 "Setting very high standards for yourself and criticising yourself according to how well you achieve them." - Organisation - my 5 against average 2 "Your tendency to be orderly." How sensation seeking am I? My total sensation seeking score is 31 out of 40 - Thrill and adventure seeking - I score 10 out of 10 "This consists of items expressing desires to engage in sports or activities involving some physical danger or risk such as mountain climbing, parachute jumping, scuba diving, speeding in a car, etc." - Experience seeking - I score 7 out of 10 "This descibes the desire to seek new experiences through the mind and senses by living in a nonconforming life style with unconventional friends, and through travel." - Disinhibition - I score 9 out of 10 "This describes the need to disinhibit behaviour in the social sphere by drinking, partying and seeking variety in sexual partners." - Boredom susceptibility - I score 5 out of 10 "This indicates an aversion for repetitive experience of any kind, routine work, or even dull or predictable people. Other items indicate a restless reaction when things are unchanging." I wonder how that last one came out so low :) I would rate that as highest myself. post comment

my kind of jobs [10 Nov 2004|08:00pm] [ mood | full ] [ music | Lauryn Hil - Everything is Everything ] I did not feel like reading philosophy, so checked a few Estonian jobsearch sites out. I got to find myself a job in spring after all, although do not really need to think about it now. So, to procrastinate some more, I took a job-match test in CV-Online. The results are here. 5 most suitable jobs for me are: Upper (top) management - 88% match Marketing and Advertising, Manager - 78% Information Technology, Manager - 78% Engineering, Manager - 72% Education/Training - 71% 5 least suitable jobs: Banking and Insurance - 34% match Customer Services - 34% Sciences/Research - 33% Recruitment - 31% Finance (accounting, audit) - 31% That is pretty much the result I have gotten in whatever career or job-match tests I have taken since 7th grade. Born manager and leader :) Also, remember that I was the Fieldmarshal in Keirsey's personality sorter. We'll see how it all turns out with employment, though :) post comment

[05 Nov 2004|05:20am] post comment

one vision of the world you should be familiar with [05 Nov 2004|04:53am] [ mood | enthralled ] [ music | Tori Amos - Little Earthquakes ] Today I attended without any doubt one of the most captivating and challenging lectures of my life. Thomas P. Barnett was in Princeton, talking about his "The Pentagon's New Map." He is a military analyst, a strategist. His "brief" as he calls it, powerfully presents a VERY far-reaching and innovative vision of the world and American role in it. To put condense the argument to its bare essentials: Barnett argues that world is divided into two (or rather three) groups of countries [see this map]. There is the 'functioning core' or core, which encompasses all countries who parttake in globalization; share its rules, norms and benefits. And there is the 'non-integrating gap' (simply gap) or countries who have shut themselves or become excluded from global connectedness. (There also are a few 'seam' countries on the borders between the two core and gap). "Disconnectedness defines danger," as one of Barnett's mantras goes. Gap is the source of all major international threats and conflict in our world, mostly due not to being enmeshed like others. Core countries do not or will not engage in war, because they have too much to lose - they are too connected. (As a side-point, he notes that nuclear age effectively rendered great power conflict impossible and unplausible). This new security paradigm has played itself out in the past decades, as all major military activity has been focused in the gap. This is the way it has to be, and will need to continue to be, argues Barnett. To secure the world, the gap needs to change and eventually vanish. But diplomacy will not do to avert threats, as fundamental internal change is needed in the countries under question. An active forceful engagement is needed. America needs to lead this process. The United States has two roles to play in this century: be a rule-setting and enforcing Leviathan, and a System Administrator. I.e. United States needs to lead the world in turning the gap countries around by toppling the regimes who foster disconnectedness and then rebuilding the societies. That is a full-time commitment, and will take a long time. But the U.S. is the only country capable of leadership in this regard, and moreover - it has a moral responsibility for it. Barnett points out that the U.S. military is currently unprepared for this role, and he points out changes that need to be implemented. Most of all, he argues for dividing the military forces into two: the Leviathan force (what we consider military now) and System Administrators (nation-builders). Barnett also maintains that military (and America in general) has been and still is unwilling to engage in such a role. However, 9/11 has put things in focus and has been making the U.S. realize that it needs to take "real ownership of strategic security in the age of globalization." The post-9/11 policies and events (like war in Iraq) offer proof in point. In conclusion, the three foreign policy guiding principles for the United States should be: 1) increasing core's "immune system capabilities" to deal with and respond to threats (and 9/11 type events); 2) working with seam states to set up a barrier or firewall for the core - to secure the latter more; 3) shrinking the Gap. So, Thomas Barnett offers an operating theory of the world and an American military strategy based on it. The reason why I was so thrilled about this lecture, and still am, is threefold. First, the theory and the arguments are very bold and striking in their nature. Even upon the first encounter with it, I knew that I was hearing something extraordinary - whether I would agree to it or not. The conceptual reach and challenges it poses forms the primary value of Barnett's vision. Second, the theory is a rather elaborate and extensive one. Trust me, the description above is a very simplified and short one. The theory includes very much and tense argumentation. Third, Barnett's presentational style was very engaging. The lecture was more like a sales pitch for his case, carried out with help of an entertaining Powerpoint presentation and in shrewd language that was pinned with humorous remarks and phrasing. Barnett's ideas are starting to have more and more impact in D.C. and military circles, at least he has been talking there more and more. Supposedly even Cheney has been briefed about the theory. Barnett himself is already being considered as one of the most influential contemporary strategists, as the Pentagon's New Map vision is (and will increasingly) shaping views by igniting debate and consideration. Theory's controversial, yet well-thought and -argued nature guarantee this. Whether one agrees to it or not, the theory is groundbreaking. It is an absolute must-know for anyone knowledgable and interested in foreign policy and our current world affairs. Indeed, you do not have to buy the vision. There are several points in the theory where questions and arguments can be raised. [I will not do it now, as it is currently too late an hour for this]. But you should be familiar with it, as you will be encountering it. Thus, read the book titled exactly as the lecture: "The Pentagon's New Map." Some have called it already "probably the most imporatnt book of the decade." You can also read the condensed, first version of the theory in 2003 Esquire article. And/or you can watch and hear an extended version of the lecture as it was broadcasted over C-Span. Indeed, I would urge you to see the presentation even if you read the book or article - either through the broadcast or by going to Barnett's site. He has posted the "storyboard" of the book which includes presentation slides and also his comments and notes. The slides illustrate the argument very well. A few other sources will be useful: - A Washington Post article about the influence Barnett and his theory are having in D.C. - A few decent, structured and argumented critiques of the book: here, here, and here - A popular-style outcry but not an elaborate argument against the theory - Last, but not least - the man's weblog. There he offers the "The Back Story of the Pentagon's New Map" of how the theory was born, and points out supporting evidence from new daily world events. p.s. if you think that Barnett is another hawkish Republican, he actually has been voting Democrat :) p.s.s. talking about lectures and speeches... I have boasted about this several times in this journal before, I think, but we are treated to some very intriguing lectures and speakers here in Princeton. I keep being amazed by it. Consider next week: Richard Clarke, Robert McNamara, Salman Rushdie will be here. Isn't it great? post comment

starting the year [01 Sep 2004|06:27am] [ mood | sleepy ] [ music | Al Green - Tired of Being Alone ] Hey all, I am back at school. And this is how I am starting my senior year: figuring out what kind of thinker I am. The results: I am an Intrapersonal thinker. Intrapersonal thinkers: - Spend a lot of time thinking about and trying to understand themselves </li> - Reflect on their thoughts and moods, and work to improve them </li> - You understand how your behaviour affects your relationships with others </li> Other Intrapersonal thinkers include Sigmund Freud, Gandhi, Grahame Greene. Careers which suit Intrapersonal Thinkers include Psychologist, Teacher, Pilot, Child care worker, Explorer, Drama therapist. [personal comment: not my ideal careers though :)] Find out about yourself. Also, read about the different thinking styles - very light, but interesting read. Will be back with much more in this new school and blogging season. P.S. Wanna know what else I found out? That my brain is more female than male :) How about yours? Thanks to Matu for the link! 2 comments|post comment

how to get and see in 4 dimensions [12 Jul 2004|05:11pm] Trust me, this is cool: http://www.nanotechweb.org/articles/news/3/7/4/1 post comment

a bit of history [11 Jun 2004|10:14am] For all interested in international relations, here is a bit of history to see: Old "buddies" meet again. Gorbachev says his farewell to Ronald Reagan. Taken from Postimees. For a complete slideshow of Reagan's funeral, see here. post comment

rubriigist tasub teada [04 May 2004|09:23pm] [ mood | exhausted ] [ music | Jäääär - Jalutades neljal noodil ] seoses nüüdse Eesti kuuluvusega ELi riikide sekka, soovitan sul vaadata neid kahte saiti: - välismaale reisimisest - Siseministeerium - välismaal töötamisest - Välisministeerium äkki tuleb kasuks. 1 comment|post comment

by the way [03 May 2004|01:19am] [ mood | sleepy ] [ music | Leonard Cohen - Sisters of Mercy ] I remembered another question that people often ask me, but only in US. Question: what is the size of Estonian territory - what US state can it be compared to? I actually looked it up recently and now finally know how to reply. Answer: our territory does not compare very well to any US state's. Estonia with its 17,400 square miles lies inbetween Maryland (12,407 square miles) and West Virginia (24,231 square miles). No good equivalent exists - although in Europe, it is almost as large as Denmark. random note: Estonia is larger, territory-wise than 9 US states: MD, HI, MA, VT, NH, NJ, CT, DE, RI. And of course larger than DC. information taken from this site. 1 comment|post comment

I am European [03 May 2004|01:06am] [ mood | cheerful ] [ music | Beethoven - Ode to Joy (as is appropriate) ] Again for those who do not know yet (and I would want to mention it anyway :)) :: yesterday, Estonia officially acceded to European Union. my country is a member of EU now and I am a European citizen. people have talked about it a lot, especially back home, but this is one of these moments where we know that we live history. especially us, Estonians, should know that. EU membership means that we have struggled back into the ranks of first rate nations. although much still remains to be done and even parts our European integration are yet to be carried out (e.g. adoption of euro in a couple of years), and although people will continue leading their everyday lives for a while pretty much the same as on Friday, everything has fundamentally changed. and I am not exaggerating when I say it. in the last couple of days, I have been reading Slavenka Drakulic's "How We Survived Communism and Even Laughed". it essentially is a book about the lives of women under the Communist rules in Eastern Europe, but it also is a reminder of how our life in general was like then in all its frustration, hopelessness and emptyness - and how none of us would like it to be again. EU accession means that we have completely broken away from this past of living under Soviet rule and there is no way back (at least not to this :). from May 1, 2004 we are completely free and courageous to believe again that we have a better future ahead [as Drakulic writes the lack of such belief was the main source of disappointment in and failure of Communism]. we naturally had a similar belief in 1991 already when Estonian independence was restored, but future then promised to be shaky. well, we survived it. now we can make the best of it. these are elevated thoughts, I know. but I really do feel relieved and happy at the same time. it all just means so much for my little country and nation; also to my generation and myself. our world and possibilities are much larger now. post comment

let's break this down [29 Apr 2004|02:10am] [ mood | energetic ] [ music | AC/DC - Can't Stop Rock'n'roll ] people have asked me too often in my life "who's your favourite artist" or "what is your favourite movie" or so. I have always trouble answering them, cause there are so many artists or movies that I like A LOT. leaving anyone out always seems to be unjust for others :) so, this post here is a definitive statement. if you find it excessive, nevermind. it's just that I actually bothered to sit down and figure out whom I really do like. of course, there still are many left out. but they do not quite make it to this level thus. note - these are not necessarily in ranking order, although probably the more favourite ones were remembered first. ARTISTS:: Jimi Hendrix, Depeche Mode, Portishead, U2, Bruce Springsteen, Chemical Brothers, James Brown, David Bowie, AC/DC, Led Zeppelin, Neil Young, Bob Marley, Radiohead, Lenny Kravitz, Eric Clapton (and Cream too), Bon Jovi, Guns'n'Roses, Aerosmith, Rammstein, Queen, Sting (and The Police too), Talking Heads, Coldplay, Dave Matthews Band, Leonard Cohen, Tori Amos, Marvin Gaye, James Brown, John Lee Hooker, Otis Redding, Donnie Hathaway, Tom Waits, David Gray, Peter Gabriel, Talking Heads, Madonna, Outkast, Garbage, Moby, No Doubt, Massive Attack, Morcheeba, The Strokes, Isaac Hayes, Vladimir Võssotski. ESTONIAN ARTISTS:: (a separate category in my mind) Jäääär/Jääboiler, Tõnis Mägi, Vennad Urbid, Ruja, Genialistid, Jaan Tätte, Propeller, Singer Vinger, Ultima Thule MOVIES:: Pulp Fiction, Oh Brother Where Art Thou, American Beauty, Amelie, Austin Powers 2: The Spy Who Shagged Me, Black Hawk Down, Big Lebowski, Monty Python and the Holy Grail, Down With Love, City of Angels, Story of Us, Adaptation, High Fidelity, Fight Club, Lock, Stock and Two Smoking Barrels, Gone in 60 Seconds, Reservoir Dogs, Kill Bill I, Four Rooms, Matrix (first only), Apocalypse Now, Bad Boys (I and II), Zoolander, Anger Management, Pink Panther, Dr. Strangelove, South Park: the movie And not to mention: James Bond or 007 movies (Connery and Brosnan ones in particular) and Robert de Niro movies. TV SHOWS:: Monty Python's Flying Circus, Band of Brothers, The Office, Fawlty Towers, Mr. Bean, Blackadder (WWI era in particular), Simpsons, South Park, OZ. if somebody asks me something along these lines again, then I will just give them the url here. post comment

navigation [ viewing | most recent entries ] [ go | earlier ]