Jesse Aizenstat's Blog, page 6
February 28, 2013
20-somethings Want No Makeup With Their Journalism
It was in Starship Troopers, otherwise known to my generation as the best "B movie" of all time, where the commander said: "Figuring things out for yourself is really the only freedom anyone really has. Use that freedom. Make up your own mind."
Well, who would have thought that such wisdom would come from a gory Casper Van Dien movie, where mixed gender army units shoot up a strange planet filled with hostile arachnids?
No matter. Today's 20-somethings don't trust the heavy makeup journalism on CNN. We can sniff out the phonies of any Fox News panel, and are tired of listening to a bunch of PR-placed "experts" sitting in their overly air-conditioned newsroom, talking about what's happening outside. How do they know? To us, it's about traveling to the raw source of the story. The journey is the destination.
My generation wants a vicarious experience on the front lines. We relate to the anti-hero, and enjoy a host that never lets things get too serious. There's no time for a master's degree with the proper press credentials; we want to feel out the situation, get thrown out of a taxi in Yemen, tear-gassed on the West Bank, or trip out with some witch doctor in South America. That's the Edge. Experience. It cuts right through the corporate sponsor.
It's funny to watch the older generations try to figure out us 20-somethings. They think we're indifferent, lazy, and don't know what we want. But we do. And we're not impressed by cheesy gimmicks like Wolf Blitzer's thick hipster glasses. It'll take more than that to coolify CNN. We see right through that prescription.
Yes, it's an exciting time to be young and alive. The digital age has brought down the cost of creating books, blogs, and web-based documentaries, and through the Internet -- where we generally market and distribute our stuff -- we are inventing the future.
Our formula calls for scene-driven stories that unapologetically throw us into the immediacy of the situation. We hate long-winded writing in small print (though a woman who reads The New York Times is still the sexiest thing alive). And we'll sit through an annoying online ad to watch a YouTube documentary -- but it better capture the "here & now" of the story, and allow us to make up our own damn minds.
"The concrete" of this piece stems from the past few years of thinking about how my generation takes in the news. Dan Morrison's The Black Nile thrusts readers headfirst into his gonzo jaunt through Africa. The Daily Show and Gawker Media are hugely popular, and when it comes to online documentaries the Brooklyn-based Vice Magazine is leading the charge. In fact, they're coming to HBO.
So good on all of them, and lets stay hungry and foolish. Lets be the "figuring things out for ourselves" generation.
The generation that wants no makeup with our journalism.
Note: Originally published by The Huffington Post.
Well, who would have thought that such wisdom would come from a gory Casper Van Dien movie, where mixed gender army units shoot up a strange planet filled with hostile arachnids?
No matter. Today's 20-somethings don't trust the heavy makeup journalism on CNN. We can sniff out the phonies of any Fox News panel, and are tired of listening to a bunch of PR-placed "experts" sitting in their overly air-conditioned newsroom, talking about what's happening outside. How do they know? To us, it's about traveling to the raw source of the story. The journey is the destination.
My generation wants a vicarious experience on the front lines. We relate to the anti-hero, and enjoy a host that never lets things get too serious. There's no time for a master's degree with the proper press credentials; we want to feel out the situation, get thrown out of a taxi in Yemen, tear-gassed on the West Bank, or trip out with some witch doctor in South America. That's the Edge. Experience. It cuts right through the corporate sponsor.
It's funny to watch the older generations try to figure out us 20-somethings. They think we're indifferent, lazy, and don't know what we want. But we do. And we're not impressed by cheesy gimmicks like Wolf Blitzer's thick hipster glasses. It'll take more than that to coolify CNN. We see right through that prescription.
Yes, it's an exciting time to be young and alive. The digital age has brought down the cost of creating books, blogs, and web-based documentaries, and through the Internet -- where we generally market and distribute our stuff -- we are inventing the future.
Our formula calls for scene-driven stories that unapologetically throw us into the immediacy of the situation. We hate long-winded writing in small print (though a woman who reads The New York Times is still the sexiest thing alive). And we'll sit through an annoying online ad to watch a YouTube documentary -- but it better capture the "here & now" of the story, and allow us to make up our own damn minds.
"The concrete" of this piece stems from the past few years of thinking about how my generation takes in the news. Dan Morrison's The Black Nile thrusts readers headfirst into his gonzo jaunt through Africa. The Daily Show and Gawker Media are hugely popular, and when it comes to online documentaries the Brooklyn-based Vice Magazine is leading the charge. In fact, they're coming to HBO.
So good on all of them, and lets stay hungry and foolish. Lets be the "figuring things out for ourselves" generation.
The generation that wants no makeup with our journalism.
Note: Originally published by The Huffington Post.
February 14, 2013
Zack, Jesse, Sharks, and the next Pope of Vatican City
My buddy Zack in a deep Ocean Beach barrel. San Francisco's most narly beachbreak shows no mercy. Zack also designed the insert of my book.
This one was taken of me at an art show in Santa Barbara, California this last weekend.
I had two old-school buddies go to Taiwan to teach English. One of his friends, on Facebook, caught this on camera. Great White Shark!!!
Tho I'm Jewish, Armenian, and only a little Irish, I'd like to throw my hat in the ring to be the next Theocrat of Vatican City. Pope J-Stat: Commander of the Faithful!
February 4, 2013
A website called "Hipster Jew" exists
When I set out to "surf in two counties that shoot rockets at each other" I thought I'd be in for an experience that would leave me digressing: shit man . . . I've seen it all.
Well, I have not. A website named "Hipster Jew" just reviewed my book. Not exactly rocket fire, but who knew there was a hipster demographic within the Jewish community? I mean, enough to dedicated a blog and command a following? Well, here it is. And a cool cat named "Chicky" reviewed my book. Thanks brotha. Hipster on.
Well, I have not. A website named "Hipster Jew" just reviewed my book. Not exactly rocket fire, but who knew there was a hipster demographic within the Jewish community? I mean, enough to dedicated a blog and command a following? Well, here it is. And a cool cat named "Chicky" reviewed my book. Thanks brotha. Hipster on.
It’s hard to get into the publishing/writing business if you’re young and not Lena Dunham. Jesse Aizenstat succeeded while penning Surfing the Middle East only a few years out of college. It’s interest read, not only if you have a less than healthy interest in Middle Eastern politics.Click here to read on
The writing is simple, yet concise. Taken from a travel journal that Aizenstat wrote, he travels from Israel to Lebanon, documenting the difficulty and politics of the area – how hard it is to travel between countries, and how tolerant individuals are capable of being. It’s a heart warming book that gives hope to the Mid East crisis.
The book follows Jesse Aizenstat as he travels through the Middle East in search of finding waves on the lull Mediterranean sea. Along the way he tells about his time in the West Bank, how he briefly traveled with several American arms dealers, and how he covertly took part in a enormous Hezbollah-sponsored gathering. Along the way he made friends with Israelis, Lebanese, and even Saudi Arabians. He surfed the waves – big and small – and found that the Middle East has a surfing culture like none other – open to all who are willing to take the risks.
My one gripe, as a non-surfer, an East Coaster by blood and life, is that I can’t say the detail about the surf was particularly interesting. I’ve never surfed (and never wanted to – fucking sharks), but it was nice to vicariously live through him.
January 23, 2013
Aizenstat gets an iPhone5
Ladies and gents, I have to say that I am the last of my college educated friends to still use a flip phone. Well, that was till I lost mine on a surf trip in Mexico this weekend. Today I went into the Verizon store and the pimply teenager insisted I upgrade to an iPhone 5. Simply, I thought: Well, what the fuck? And so I did it.
What do you think about smartphones? Feels like it makes me a lot more connection than I would like to be. But maybe I'm just an outlandish hippie born in the wrong generation.
Aizentat gets an iPhone5
Ladies and gents, I have to say that I am the last of my college educated friends to still use a flip phone. Well, that was till I lost mine on a surf trip in Mexico this weekend. Today I went into the Verizon store and the pimply teenager insisted I upgrade to an iPhone 5. Simply, I thought: Well, what the fuck? And so I did it.
What do you think about smartphones? Feels like it makes me a lot more connection than I would like to be. But maybe I'm just an outlandish hippie born in the wrong generation.
January 14, 2013
Another cool review . . .
Another cool review of Surfing the Middle East has come in from none other than Allison Kitchen. Now, who is Allison Kitchen? I'm not quite sure. I mean, I don't know her personally. But she seems nice enough, and she got my book a few months ago before she departed for the Kingdom of Saud to teach English. Good times. From her Facebook page today. Best of luck Allison.
Yaga yaga yo!
Yaga yaga yo!
January 10, 2013
Snow in the Holy Land
From the Holy Land today, aka Jerusalem and Ramallah. The first pictures was taken by this dude I met while on a Birthright Israel trip, and the second is from this other dude I met while working at a Palestinian refugee camp in Nablus. Both guys are actually in my book.
From Jerusalem:
[image error]
From Ramallah:
[image error]
From Jerusalem:
[image error]
From Ramallah:
[image error]
January 5, 2013
Let the Army Draft the Hipsters
The following blog is my first attempt to write about hipsters. I certainly don't feel "done" by any means; I just wanted to start writing about them and here is my first piece. Now, it's time to get spicy with it.
Note: the following post is best read with Deadmau5 playing
[image error]
Note: the following post is best read with Deadmau5 playing
That’s right. Draft the hipsters for war. Demand George W. Bush return and recreationally invade another Islamic country if need be. Because nothing is more limp than this generation of American hipsters—they look down upon the mainstream ignorance, but can’t actually stand for something important.
I believe in a riot with a purpose. A Molotov cocktail with a direction.
Wear skinny gay blue jeans, but let it be a challenge to the puritan morality of Rick Santorum who thinks homosexuals are a disease.
Smoke cigarettes as a radical slant on personal liberty, but blow the smoke back at the absurdist policies of New York City where it cost $15 bucks a pack.
Snort the cocaine in that same urban metropolis, but talk my fuckin’ ear off about how President Uribe of Columbia ruthlessly killed his own people (with American guns) without addressing the real issue: that the market is you—the cocaine consumer in skinny jeans who puffs smoke and just wants more.
In our post-Vietnam era, today’s counter-culture kids are indeed called hipsters. They tend to be urban-living, and all about their individual style that seeks to break from the shackles of conformist America. They think they hold the moral high ground because they are different. But they are not. They have nothing to say.
As you can tell, I’ve been struggling with this bummer for sometime: I belong to a generation with no focus or meaning or anything at all. We’re just plain lost. Everyone’s gone insular, finding the essence of life with second hand goods, only to be worn to some Saturday near-the-park event with no narrative or purpose.
I’m longing for substance with my people. Something like the Bohemian beat in the 50’s, the anti-war hippies of the 60’s, or wherever the hell the Jefferson Starship took you in the 70’s.
Someone smart should stand up. Someone young. Someone to talk about America’s addiction to war and defense spending. Glass-Steagall. And how the trickle down theory really just means that the Republicans are pissing on you.
Healthcare with small business? Yep. Fitzgerald was right: the whole way of American life is rigged.
And of more outrage is that the hipsters are silent. They are smart and they have the education. They have the coolness and means. But what do they stand for?
Please tell me that something is spinning better than Deadmau5 with frisbee golf.
Take your ticket, man. I'm drafting the hipsters.
[image error]
December 23, 2012
Christmas reviews of "Surfing the Middle East"
Was updating the Surfing the Middle East Facebook page today and saw that someone wrote a great review--as you can see, she bought it at the "Surfing for Good" event in Santa Barbara, California last month. Click here to buy the book, and here for the Facebook fan page . . . and HERE for a really fun interview I did with J Weekly, a Jewish newspaper in Northern California.
Merry Christmas/Happy New Year!
[image error]
Merry Christmas/Happy New Year!
[image error]
December 14, 2012
Should the U.S. Secure Syria's Chemical Weapons?
[image error]
My answer is: No, I don't think we should.
The following is my thinking on the situation:
Syria has the largest chemical arsenal in the Middle East. To use them, the Assad regime relies on highly trained teams to mix the chemicals, and deliver them in rockets and missiles. In the event that some of the chemical stockpile is captured (say, by the U.S.-deemed terrorist group, the al-Nusra Front), the chances they will be able to operate such equipment is unlikely. Thus, the "terrorist reason" is of great concern, but not imminent danger.
Now, what if the increasingly desperate Assad regime uses chemical weapons? (Just this week, Assad launched Soviet-era SCUD missiles at targets inside his own country.)
The Assad government has repeatedly said that they will not use gas against the Syrian people. However, it should also be noted that they have repeatedly referred to groups within the rebellion as foreign, and it's not hard to see how semantics could be twisted and re-justified in this 20-month-old conflict with over 40,000 lives lost.
Recently, President Obama has drawn a "red line" with Assad on the issue of chemical weapons. Even Russia -- which has protected the Syrian regime, though has wavered a bit -- has advised Assad not to use them. If Assad were to deploy such weapons, he would risk losing his most powerful international backer, while emboldening NATO and other regional players to reconsider a military option. This would surely be the end for Assad -- and all signs show he's just another rational son-of-a-bitch trying to stay in power.
On the international stage, chemical weapons are seen as a major provocation. Countries tend to use them only if they can control escalation, while desperate countries fear the repercussions. In other words, Assad likely won't use chemical weapons exactly because he's weak. It's all about having the upper hand.
Historically, Nazi Germany demonstrated this by using their highly advanced nerve agents in the Holocaust, but not against the Americans or Soviets as they closed in on Berlin. Neither did the Japanese, who heavily gassed the Chinese in the first phases of the war, but went to great lengths to avoid inadvertently gassing incoming American troops.
Saddam Hussein used gas in the early stages of the Iran-Iraq war. With the Soviet Union protecting him, there was little anyone could do about it. Saddam also tapped into his chemical arsenal during the infamous Anfal campaign, where his cousin -- "Chemical Ali" -- gassed mostly Kurdish dissidents in Northern Iraq. Again, against a much weaker enemy.
Given the historical nature of when states tend to use chemical weapons, it would seem unlikely President Assad would use them now. But problems still exist.
What if something changes on the ground?
NPR's top Pentagon correspondent, Tom Bowman, outlined three options for the Obama administration in moving forward:
Pay off Assad's forces to secure chemical sites. Special Operations (with Jordan or Turkey) go in and secure these sites, though this could require as many as 75,000 troops. The United States and Israel bomb these sites, at risk of inflaming the region and unleashing the gas if not done correctly. With aerial surveillance and decent intelligence, the United States will likely know if Hezbollah, for example, starts looting the Syrian stockpile. The Syrian rebels are not likely to know how to operate Assad's weapons, and Assad has everything to loose by using them.
This is a dangerous situation with no good options. But for now, I don't see a need for American intervention. At the moment, the chemical weapons aren't going anywhere.
Originally published at The Huffington Post
The following is my thinking on the situation:
Syria has the largest chemical arsenal in the Middle East. To use them, the Assad regime relies on highly trained teams to mix the chemicals, and deliver them in rockets and missiles. In the event that some of the chemical stockpile is captured (say, by the U.S.-deemed terrorist group, the al-Nusra Front), the chances they will be able to operate such equipment is unlikely. Thus, the "terrorist reason" is of great concern, but not imminent danger.
Now, what if the increasingly desperate Assad regime uses chemical weapons? (Just this week, Assad launched Soviet-era SCUD missiles at targets inside his own country.)
The Assad government has repeatedly said that they will not use gas against the Syrian people. However, it should also be noted that they have repeatedly referred to groups within the rebellion as foreign, and it's not hard to see how semantics could be twisted and re-justified in this 20-month-old conflict with over 40,000 lives lost.
Recently, President Obama has drawn a "red line" with Assad on the issue of chemical weapons. Even Russia -- which has protected the Syrian regime, though has wavered a bit -- has advised Assad not to use them. If Assad were to deploy such weapons, he would risk losing his most powerful international backer, while emboldening NATO and other regional players to reconsider a military option. This would surely be the end for Assad -- and all signs show he's just another rational son-of-a-bitch trying to stay in power.
On the international stage, chemical weapons are seen as a major provocation. Countries tend to use them only if they can control escalation, while desperate countries fear the repercussions. In other words, Assad likely won't use chemical weapons exactly because he's weak. It's all about having the upper hand.
Historically, Nazi Germany demonstrated this by using their highly advanced nerve agents in the Holocaust, but not against the Americans or Soviets as they closed in on Berlin. Neither did the Japanese, who heavily gassed the Chinese in the first phases of the war, but went to great lengths to avoid inadvertently gassing incoming American troops.
Saddam Hussein used gas in the early stages of the Iran-Iraq war. With the Soviet Union protecting him, there was little anyone could do about it. Saddam also tapped into his chemical arsenal during the infamous Anfal campaign, where his cousin -- "Chemical Ali" -- gassed mostly Kurdish dissidents in Northern Iraq. Again, against a much weaker enemy.
Given the historical nature of when states tend to use chemical weapons, it would seem unlikely President Assad would use them now. But problems still exist.
What if something changes on the ground?
NPR's top Pentagon correspondent, Tom Bowman, outlined three options for the Obama administration in moving forward:
Pay off Assad's forces to secure chemical sites. Special Operations (with Jordan or Turkey) go in and secure these sites, though this could require as many as 75,000 troops. The United States and Israel bomb these sites, at risk of inflaming the region and unleashing the gas if not done correctly. With aerial surveillance and decent intelligence, the United States will likely know if Hezbollah, for example, starts looting the Syrian stockpile. The Syrian rebels are not likely to know how to operate Assad's weapons, and Assad has everything to loose by using them.
This is a dangerous situation with no good options. But for now, I don't see a need for American intervention. At the moment, the chemical weapons aren't going anywhere.
Originally published at The Huffington Post
