Among the tips: "avoid eye contact" and "put your pride aside." Mysteriously omitted, however, is the suggestion that people simply not drive.
Then again, that's no guarantee either, especially in St. Louis. Just ask Loop entrepreneur David Salvato. He walks a lot -- especially from the sandwich shop he owns near the intersection of Delmar and Skinker boulevards to his confectionary a few blocks west. On his treks, Salvato must utilize the marked crosswalk that runs from the Foot Locker on the north side of Delmar to the Tivoli Theater on the south side.
Salvato knows the law -- specifically, that vehicles must yield to pedestrians in crosswalks, and not vice versa -- and he's not afraid to flaunt it. "If I just stand there I'm never going to get across," he reasons. "It's like a game of chicken: They're either gonna hit me or not, but I'm pretty much ready to jump out of the way."
His fearlessness does not always please motorists, however. "So many people have jumped out of their cars and threatened to beat me to a pulp, it's pathetic," says the self-proclaimed World's Greatest Sandwich stacker -- though why he opts to serve his mayo and mustard in little packages continues to elude Unreal. "Somebody tried to have the police arrest me. It was a guy with paint cans in the back of his truck that flew to the front [when he slammed on his brakes]."
Salvato's not the only one to have noted locals' disregard for pedestrian rights. Not long ago the U. City Police Department ran a sting operation at the Tivoli crosswalk in an effort to change motorist behavior.
"We had an officer or two dressed in civilian clothing with an unmarked car parked nearby," reports Sergeant Shawn Whitley of the UCPD. "The officers would proceed to the crosswalk area. If a vehicle did not stop or yield properly, the vehicle was stopped by the unmarked vehicle and given a warning for future reference. We gave warnings the first week. The second week we issued a fair amount of summonses."
Salvato thought highly of Unreal's preferred technique -- feign a dash into traffic, then slyly reverse course as brakes squeal -- but Whitley stops short of endorsing the "jab step" method. "I understand that as a pedestrian you become frustrated," says the sarge. "It's not against the law to do the jab step -- but it wouldn't be smart."
Six to One
Washington University researchers Joshua Brown and Todd Braver recently made headlines when they published the results of a study indicating that a region of the human brain might account for those "gut feelings" folks sometimes get.
This news sent a shiver straight down Unreal's spine. On our way home from Fairmount Park's simulcast room the other day, we asked Jeeves to steer the Caddy over to the brainiacs' lab.
Unreal: Explain in one-syllable terms what you found.
Joshua Brown: We wanted to see if there's a part of the brain that monitors our own behavior, our own actions, to see if we're making a mistake. In the past, some other researchers have found that there's a part of the brain called the anterior cingulate cortex. People have talked about this as an area that becomes active when you're faced with a difficult decision.
Our work shows that it's not so much that this part of the brain is detecting that you're conflicted about something, but rather that [the brain is] detecting the likelihood that you may be about to make a mistake, or your behavior is risky, and the course of action is likely to have adverse consequences. In the media, it seems as though people have latched onto this idea of the "sixth sense." But I'd be careful with that, because there was nothing paranormal involved in our study.
Mmm-hmmm. What impact might this have on, oh, the occasional dabbler in parimutuel wagering?
Well, the question is: How sensitive are people at picking up when they're likely to make mistakes? Suppose you have experience betting on horses. If you're betting, what this part of the brain keeps trying to figure out is: What's the risk? What's the likelihood that I'm going to make a mistake, that I'm going to lose if I bet on this horse?
We think this part of the brain picks up on subtle cues [regarding] the likelihood of making a mistake or some kind of unpleasant consequences. So things slow down, make you a little more careful -- you may get a "gut feeling." If you bet on horses that lose, there may be a subtle pattern. That's what this part of the brain would be looking for: It's something that predicts that if you bet on this horse, you're going to have unpleasant consequences.
And to think -- all this time we've been writing it off as indigestion!
LOCAL BLOG O' THE WEEK
Author: The Mad "Chef"
About the blogger: Understandably reticent about divulging too much personal information, the blogger identifies himself like so: "I've been working as a 'Chef' for the past 10 years in a local Grocery chain. Recently bittered by the whole gourmet/carry-out concept, I've decided to publish, online, about my job and the people I work for."
Recent Highlight (March 8): On this Friday there was raw fish and chicken sitting in water, in separate containers, in a prep sink (not being held at proper temp, cross contamination). No one in the kitchen was in any big hurry to either put these items back in refrigeration or cook them, seemed they were not even aware that this was reason for concern. From what I could tell, someone was also prepping cauliflower at this same prep sink area. I say this because there was a container, uncovered, of cut cauliflower sitting on the edge of the sink and whole heads sitting next to it, as well as, on a prep table in the middle of the room. This is contamination waiting to happen, if it hadn't already.[...]
One of the associates grabbed some wings that had been hanging in a basket over the fry grease for who knows how long, put them in a container that had been used for this at least one time before, poured sauce on them, shook them up, and took them out to the Salad Bar. Never checked the temp on one thing....a million questions I would have asked as a manager and have in these situations. I work for the same company as them, so I have opened my mouth to this manager, to merchandiser, to God, etc. I'm laughed off, told that it ain't really that bad........I'd be scared to eat at this place and I have on the same uniform as they do, I think it is a reflection of the entire organization when I see this type of behavior......I don't think I'm the only one.... .
Know of an Unreal-worthy local blog? Send the URL to email@example.com.
Shoot for the Star
Paul Hennessey believes he discovered buried treasure in the otherwise insufferable 2001 film Pearl Harbor. The jewel, says Hennessey, came by way of Josh Hartnett, whose yeoman effort rescued the film from the botched work of more well-known thespians Ben Affleck and Cuba Gooding Jr.
A novice screenwriter from southern Missouri, Hennessey wants Hartnett to play the leading role in Flames, which tells the tale of a 1942 nightclub fire that killed 492 people. So determined is Hennessey that he placed a half-page ad in the alternative newsweekly in Hartnett's hometown of Minneapolis.
"I've been trying for almost 3 years to get a script to you that will probably win you the award for Best Actor in the Academy Awards and the SAG (Screen Actors Guild) awards," reads the ad, published in City Pages. "However, it's been a real struggle because I am an UNKNOWN. I don't know anyone in the business...this is a last resort."
Reached by phone in his double-wide just outside the town of Alton, the budding screenwriter says his $990 investment has yet to yield pay dirt.
"I need a pretty big star," the 59-year-old retiree confides. "Someone who can bring in a producer with enough money to make the film."
Ideally, he says, he'd cast the singer Jewel as Hartnett's romantic interest. But that's another long shot, and right now Hennessey is determined to concentrate on the Hartnett angle. "I sent off an express-mail copy of the script this morning to a woman who's friends with Josh," he reports. "She's going to give it to him this week."