Sunday, October 08, 2006

A Theory of Fun

The Long Zoom

Published: October 8, 2006

Most eras have distinct “ways of seeing” that end up defining the period in retrospect: the fixed perspective of Renaissance art, the scattered collages of Cubism, the rapid-fire cuts introduced by MTV and the channel-surfing of the 80’s. Our own defining view is what you might call the long zoom: the satellites tracking in on license-plate numbers in the spy movies; the Google maps in which a few clicks take you from a view of an entire region to the roof of your house; the opening shot in “Fight Club” that pulls out from Edward Norton’s synapses all the way to his quivering face as he stares into the muzzle of a revolver; the fractal geometry of chaos theory in which each new scale reveals endless complexity. And this is not just a way of seeing but also a way of thinking: moving conceptually from the scale of DNA to the scale of personality all the way up to social movements and politics — and back again.

Skip to next paragraph
Illustration by Melvin Galapon

Ways of seeing Will Wright designed Spore so that each level of the game would have a different aesthetic -- from the primitivism of an early video game or action toy to the beauty of photographs from outer space.

It is, by any measure, a difficult way of thinking, in part because our brains did not evolve tools to perceive or intuitively understand the scales of microbes or galaxies. You can catch glimpses of the long zoom in special-effects sequences, but to understand the connections between those different scales, to understand our place in the universe of the very large and the very small, you have to take another way in. To date, books and documentaries have done the best job of making the long zoom meaningful to mass audiences, starting with the Eames Brothers’ proto-long-zoom “Powers of Ten” documentary of the 70’s, which took the viewer from the outer cosmos to the atoms spinning in the hand of a man lying by the lake in Chicago. But a decade or two from now, when we look back at this period, it is more likely that the work that will fix the long zoom in the popular imagination will be neither a movie nor a book nor anything associated with the cultural products that dominated the 20th century. It will be a computer game.

The designer of the game happens to be both the most famous and most critically acclaimed designer in the young medium’s history: Will Wright, the 46-year-old creator of the blockbuster hits SimCity and the Sims. When I visited with Wright recently, he was sitting in a greenhouselike office on the roof of an anonymous-looking complex in Emeryville, Calif., a few miles west of Oakland, where his studio is based. For the first few minutes of our meeting, Wright was having trouble with the atmosphere of the game, which is called Spore. He was trying to explain how some players will be able to create entire galaxies populated by artificial life forms when the game is introduced sometime late next year. He had pulled up the highest level of Spore — where the player gets to create and colonize a new planet — to demonstrate the way in which the game simulates the complex dynamics of ecosystems and food webs. But before he could colonize the planet, he had to cultivate an environment hospitable to life by heating up the surface or cooling it down and by adding moisture. Unfortunately, Spore’s planetary simulator —- like our own atmosphere — is vulnerable to the inconvenient truths of runaway feedback loops; as Wright added a little heat to his planet, it quickly spiraled into a molten fireball. And so our conversation lurched to a halt as Wright tried to get the right balance.

“O.K., now we’re finally cooling off,” he said, clicking furiously on his computer screen. “The temperature’s going down, so we can get more water in here. Oh, now we’ve got way too much atmosphere.” While adjusting the planet, he paused long enough to say: “It’s kind of like that labyrinth game where you’re rolling the ball around the maze, trying to drop it in the hole. Except we’ve got these inertial effects, where your planet starts heating up, and you’re trying to slow it down, but you get these runaway greenhouse effects.” He turned back to the screen. “O.K., our temperature’s pretty good; our atmosphere’s pretty good. Now let’s see if we can add water.”

This atmospheric balancing act is emblematic of Wright’s whole career: hitting that elusive sweet spot between difficulty and accessibility, between highbrow concepts and lowbrow diversion. If he can get the atmosphere-building tool to work, it could be both an addictive game-play element and, at the same time, a hands-on lesson in the dynamics of atmospheric systems. The challenge here is, ultimately, a smaller version of the larger challenge that faces Spore. No one doubts that the game will be the most ambitious work in the history of this new medium, whenever it is released. But for it to succeed as a game, it can’t just be complex. It also has to be fun.

If anyone can pull it off, it’s Will Wright. This is the guy who made the urban planning simulation SimCity into one of the all-time top-selling games in history. There is probably no one alive who has a comparable track record of combining arcane scientific theories and compulsively addictive entertainment.

But even Wright hasn’t tried to simulate an entire universe before.

I got a first glimpse of Spore six years ago, when I visited Wright to talk to him about the Sims Online, the networked version of the massive international hit, the Sims. We talked about the Sims Online and his general design philosophy for an hour or so, and then he cut off our conversation abruptly and said, “Let me show you something else that I’m really excited about — but you can’t write about it yet.” He then proceeded to show me a sequence of animations that looked, to my eyes at least, like the trip-out special-effects sequence at the end of “2001.” I had no idea what I was even looking at. It wasn’t at all clear where the game was or if it was a game at all.

Spore has progressed mightily over the past six years — an eternity in game-development time — though an official start date has yet to be set by its producer, Electronic Arts, the world’s largest game maker. “What you’re doing in Spore is layer by layer creating an entire world that at the end of the day is entirely yours: the creatures, the vehicles, the cities, the planets,” Wright explained. Those layers map onto different spatial scales that you advance through as you play: cell, creature, tribe, city, civilization and space. (As in most traditional games, once you have completed a level, you can always go back to it. A skilled gamer might be able to reach the highest level after 30 hours of play, but like all of Wright’s creations, the game has no definite ending.) As you begin playing Spore, you take on the role of a single-celled organism, swimming in a sea of nutrients and tiny predators. This part of the game has a streamlined, 2-D look that harks back to classic games from the 80’s like PacMan. Once you have accumulated enough “DNA points” or “evolutionary credits,” you acquire the use of a feature called the “creature editor,” and things start to get really interesting. You assemble a new life form to represent yourself using an almost comically intuitive tool. If you have the technical chops to assemble a Mr. Potato Head, you can build a creature in Spore. You start with a basic body type wrapped around a standard skeleton, and then you can pretty much do whatever you want to it: stretch it out, condense it, add seven asymmetrical legs and one pincer, give it eyes on both sides of its head or wrap a polka-dot skin texture around it. I’ve seen creatures designed as exact replicas of the Care Bears, and I’ve seen creatures that look like H.R. Giger’s sketches for “Alien.”

Once you have assembled your creature, you deposit it in a functioning ecosystem, a computer-generated world populated by plants, food, water, weather, predators and prey. At first you guide a single creature, instructing it to forage, hunt, drink, sleep, mate; your strategy evolves depending on the needs of your creature and the opportunities and threats presented by the environment. As you struggle your way through this early stage, you earn more DNA points that allow you to add new attributes to your creature — like humanlike intelligence — and eventually graduate to the next level, where you control a group of creatures that form a primitive tribe, augmented by simple tools. (Wright showed me a tribe bonding around a campfire, playing drums and dancing, before heading out for a communal hunting expedition.) At this point, the player moves from questions of basic metabolism to social dynamics: Is your tribe a band of warriors or a peace-loving commune? Is it intent on exploiting new technologies? Or does it focus on low-tech social camaraderie?

When your tribe has reached a sufficient level of sophistication, it will begin to form cities, and the player shifts to issues of trade and commerce or constructing roads and buildings. All the while, decisions made at earlier stages of the game continue to shape the current stage: adopting a carnivorous lifestyle in the creature stage changes the activities available to your subsequent tribe; a tribe of warriors will have a harder time building alliances with other cities when it reaches that stage. Eventually, you ascend to a United Nations-like perspective as you try to unify an entire planet divided between rival civilizations. Once you successfully pass from the “clash of civilizations” stage to the “end of history,” the game grants you that ultimate in Hegelian rewards: a spaceship. And then you’re off terraforming other planets and exploring an entire universe teeming with Spore life.

The different levels of Spore call for radically different styles of game play, each a subtle tribute to a canonical game of the past that influenced Wright. There is an elegance to those allusions, but as a game design strategy, it’s a risky move; most games don’t force you to juggle different genres. “When I looked at each scale,” Wright said, “the game play just seemed kind of natural to me: at the cellular level, you’d be PacMan; at the city level, it’d be Populous. I was worried about that, because mixed-genre games don’t do that well. But eventually we just decided to break the rules, and the genres would just be a kind of landmark that the players would recognize.”

To date, Wright has publicly demonstrated Spore on four occasions. Three of them were major game-industry conferences, all of which have triggered a frenzy of online analysis and debate. (Video clips of those demos have been downloaded hundreds of thousands of times on YouTube.) But for people who still think of game design as the province of nerds and arrested adolescents, Wright’s most striking public demo came earlier this summer in San Francisco during an onstage conversation with the musician and artist Brian Eno in front of a thousand rapt fans gathered at the Herbst Theater. The two men riffed comfortably onstage, talking about “generative” art that evolves in unpredictable ways, often determined by the audience and not the original creator. Eno played one or two examples of his generative compositions, and Wright showed off a few levels of Spore.

“We’ve both been working on similar lines,” Eno said recently on the phone from his Notting Hill studio when I asked him about the connections between his work and Wright’s, “and I suppose we’ve converged. Instead of making fixed definitive things that we put out into the world, I think we’ve both decided that it’s much more interesting to make things that even we can’t predict.”

One explanation for the widespread interest in Spore is the gaming industry’s recent troubles. Sales have been uneven, and the best-seller lists are stacked with franchise hits, games whose basic conventions were established years ago, like the Madden football series, the controversial Grand Theft Auto titles and Wright’s own Sims franchise, which has thus far spun off more than a dozen sequels and expansion packs. When you factor in the moral panics over violent gaming emanating from Washington, it makes for a somewhat depressing time to be a game developer. Spore promises an escape from this bleak present: the game itself is about as violent as a cartoon version of Animal Planet, which should come as welcome relief for an industry tired of public attacks on Grand Theft Auto as a corrupter of youth.

Another factor in the hype is Wright’s extraordinary track record. His original breakthrough game, SimCity, released in 1989, helped inaugurate an entire genre of gaming: the “god game,” in which the player supervises a bustling and multifaceted system, managing resources, juggling different objectives. Visit the racks at a game store and you’ll see dozens of titles that descend from Wright’s original design for SimCity, games that let you manage a railroad empire or an amusement park or a zoo. (There are at least three games currently on the market that let you recreate Ancient Rome.) The Sims — released in 2000 — narrowed the god-game vista to the realm of the living room and the neighborhood. It went on to become the best-selling PC game of all time, in part because it attracted an unusual number of female players. Instead of allowing you to create the civic infrastructure for a vast metropolis, the Sims let players explore the more quotidian decision-making of home economics: paying the bills, buying furniture and appliances, cooking dinner for the kids. It is one of the resounding paradoxes of the game industry that its all-time best seller consists largely of performing household chores.

The sales history for the Sims is, of course, part of the reason that so many people are following Spore so closely. Since its introduction, more than 70 million copies of the original game and its spinoffs have been sold, generating $1.6 billion in sales. (The biggest Hollywood moneymaker of all-time, “Titanic,” grossed $1.8 billion worldwide.)

But Spore — which will reportedly cost about $20 million to develop — promises to be more than just a blockbuster diversion. As Wright’s appearance with Eno suggests, the game perhaps deserves to be seen as a work of art first and foremost, a way of seeing and making sense of the world. If it succeeds, it may be in part because of the way its long-zoom perspective resonates with this particular moment in time. “I don’t know if we’re thinking about ‘powers of 10’ more, but we definitely bump into that perspective now in all kinds of cultural contexts,” says the game designer Ralph Koster, who wrote one of the best books to date about games and culture, “A Theory of Fun.” “But Will has definitely been thinking about it. There was always something powers-of-10-ish about SimCity. And way, way back in SimEarth” — Wright’s 1990 game — “there was a window that would pop up and say, ‘This key reserved for future expansion for putting your SimCity into your SimEarth.”’

“It’s funny how many people, average people who aren’t science buffs or hard-core gamers, get the elegance of the theme — the powers of 10 idea,” Wright told me in his Emeryville office, having finally given up on creating a viable atmosphere. “Everybody has a different take on it: for some people, it has a religious theme; for others, it’s awe at nature and science. But everybody seems to understand that it’s a valuable perspective, and it’s a perspective that they like to have. In a way, what I’m trying to do is connect the almost inconceivable universal scale to the deeply personal, because what you do in the game is deeply personal.”

The long-zoom perspective is one of the key ways in which Wright’s work dovetails with Eno’s. Their talk in San Francisco was sponsored by the Long Now Foundation, an organization created to facilitate thinking on immense temporal scales: a thousand years or beyond. (The “long now” is a coinage of Eno’s, and the group’s most famous project to date is the Clock of the Long Now, an engineering marvel designed to keep time for thousands of years.) “One of the things that’s obviously been happening for the past 100 or 200 years,” Eno told me, “is that the range of our experience has greatly expanded: we can see much smaller things and much bigger things than we ever could before. But we can also start thinking about much longer futures and much deeper pasts as well. That really makes a big difference to us as humans, because on the one hand it makes us realize that we’re very powerful in that we’re able to comprehend and see all of this universe. But it also makes us seem so much less significant. We’re a tiny blip on a tiny radar screen. I think this is a feeling that people are trying to come to terms with, the feeling of where do we fit in all of this.”

And arguably the best way to come to terms with that feeling is to explore those different scales of experience directly, to move from the near-invisible realm of microbes to the vast distances of galaxies. Of all the forms of culture available to us today, games may well be the most effective at conveying that elusive perspective, precisely because they are so immersive and participatory and because their design can be so open-ended. “I wanted to make a game that would recreate a drug induced epiphany,” Wright told me. “I want people to be able to step back five steps, five really big steps. To think about life itself and its potential galactic-scale impact. I want the gamers to have this awesome perspective handed to them in a game. And then let them decide how to interpret it.”

The idea of a video game’s tackling such complex subject matter may strike some readers as surprising, but in truth staggeringly complex games have long appeared prominently on the gaming best-seller lists. One of the most lucrative franchises in the history of computer games is the Civilization series, which lets players recreate the entire course of human economic and technological history, experimenting with different political and legal systems, exploring alternate time lines of scientific development. The collaborative worlds of hugely popular, networked online games like World of Warcraft have evolved entire economies and social systems that mimic the complexity of small nation-states in the real world. Spore may be more ambitious in scope than these games, but its two most important innovations lie elsewhere: in its system for generating user-created creatures and in the way it allows players to share their creations with others.

Conventional game development follows a predictable pattern: the game designers decide which objects and characters will inhabit the world of the game, and then animators create computer models for those objects and characters, which are then inserted into a game in a fixed state — an animation of Tiger Woods swinging a golf club or James Bond reaching for a gun or a character in the Sims taking out the trash. But Spore’s open-ended approach to creature design fundamentally broke that system. Before I met with Wright, Spore’s executive producer, Lucy Bradshaw, gave me a tour of the Spore studio and introduced me to a barefoot, speed-talking “technology fellow” named Chris Hecker, who had helped develop Spore’s unique animation system. Hecker had a perfect one-liner for the technical hurdles the team faced: “The question is, How do you do animations for things you’ve never seen before?”

The solution Wright and his team hit upon revolves around something called “procedural animation,” a way for the game designer to model certain key behaviors — walk, run, grab, fight — without necessarily knowing anything about the basic body type of the creature itself. If you design a creature with five legs asymmetrically scattered around its body, the Spore animation engine will figure out how such a creature would walk. To demonstrate the adaptability of the system, Hecker pulled up a collection of a dozen Spore creatures on his monitor, each with a strikingly distinct body architecture. The initial image was comical enough: it looked as if the bizarre Cambrian-era fossils that Stephen Jay Gould“Wonderful Life” had been reassembled for a police lineup. Some looked like slugs, some like spiders, some like extras from “Where the Wild Things Are.” wrote about in

And then Hecker hit a key, and they all, miraculously, did a back flip, each in its own decidedly idiosyncratic way.

But surely, I asked, given the open-ended, no-two-creatures-alike nature of the editor, there are going to be some creatures that have body types that won’t perform certain actions? Hecker and Bradshaw nodded emphatically. They know that a certain percentage of their users will be building creatures deliberately designed to foil the procedural animation system. Those creatures won’t likely be “fit” in a traditional evolutionary sense, in that they will be less skilled at collecting food or avoiding predators. But they will be perversely satisfying to players keen on exploring the boundaries of the Spore architecture. Hecker pulled up a new lineup to demonstrate a clapping animation that included a creature whose cranium is so inconveniently located that clapping forces him to slap both his hands against the side of his head. It looked like slapstick comedy of the highest order — vaudeville meets “Monsters, Inc. ”

“Our philosophy is,” Bradshaw said, “if it’s going to break, it should break funny.”

The procedural approach has another fringe benefit, one that helped bring about Spore’s other major innovation. Characters and objects can be compressed down to incredibly small files. An entire planet in Spore — teeming with plants, weather and creatures — takes up about 80K of memory. By comparison, a typical song on your iPod is about 50 times larger. You could download an entire galaxy of Spore planets before you could download all the tracks on “Dark Side of the Moon.”

That small file size is crucial to the way the game allows players to share their creations with other players in the Spore universe. As you work your way through the Spore levels, your creatures are automatically sent back to the central Spore file servers, where they are then used to populate the worlds of other players. This approach was directly inspired by Freeman Dyson’s notion of Panspermia — the idea that life on earth may have been seeded via meteors carrying microscopic “spores” of life from other planets. (Dyson’s concept is also the origin of the game’s title.) When you land on a new planet in the game’s final stage, it may be teeming with multiple exotic species, all of whom have evolved separately on other computers around the world, guided by the tastes and imagination of complete strangers. But these creatures will, crucially, have lives of their own once they have found their ways onto your machine. They will not be controlled by other players as you interact with them on your screen. Once they have migrated to your computer, they will act autonomously, based on the procedural animation and artificial-intelligence algorithms of the Spore software. By the same token, the creatures that you have lovingly brought to life will spread throughout the alternate universes of other Spore players, struggling for existence on their own, independent from your direct control.

In this respect, Spore breaks decisively from the fastest-growing genre in gaming today: the so-called massively multiplayer networked games — like World of Warcraft — where thousands of players share a single persistent virtual world, interacting with other players via their onscreen characters. (Interestingly, Wright’s only foray into massively multiplayer design — the online version of the Sims that launched in 2002 — was a flop.) When you visit a bustling town center in a multiplayer game and see hundreds of characters sharing the space, you are intensely aware that each of these onscreen characters is being controlled from moment to moment by a live, sentient human somewhere in the real world. The social element is very much in the foreground of the experience. Spore flips that model on its head. Instead of a single shared world with millions of active participants, Spore promises a million alternate worlds, each occupied by a single player. You will meet creatures invented by others, but ultimately you are alone in your own private universe. Wright calls Spore “massively single player.”

It remains an open question whether this model will take hold with today’s players, who are increasingly used to the social dimension of online play. “I’m obviously biased toward the online worlds,” Koster said, “but the fact that I’ll never encounter someone else’s galactic empire that actually has some human brain behind it depresses me a little, because that would be awfully cool — especially with the scope and scale we’re talking about with Spore.”

When you visit the Spore studio in Emeryville, the largest open room looks, at first glance, like a standard well-financed Bay Area software company: the double-height loft-ceilings, the bean-bag chairs slung around an oversize monitor, the barefoot employees. But the art strung up on the walls suggests that something different is being concocted here. There are beautiful renderings of imagined Spore planets that demonstrate the range of aesthetics possible in the game: a lush, organic world called Shittake Moon; a surreal globe called Crabclaw with landmasses shaped like giant crustaceans. Everyone’s desk is populated by plastic action figures of Spore creatures, manufactured in-house by Wright’s employees using a 3-D printer that can generate a physical toy in a matter of minutes from a computer model. (Electronic Arts is investigating the possibility of selling customized Spore critters in toy stores as a side business.)

As Bradshaw, the executive producer, gave me a tour of the office, I found myself being reminded of something, but for a few minutes I couldn’t quite put my finger on it. And then it hit me: the general feel of the place reminded me of my son’s kindergarten classroom, with its walls covered with renderings of imaginary worlds and creatures and its shelves filled with toys designed to teach and entertain at the same time.

When we finally made it up to his office, I asked Wright about the educational side of his game. “The big underlying theme is creativity,” he said. “We want to prove to the players that they can make these really cool things that they never thought they could make. It’s the computer as an amplifier of your imagination.” Like all of Wright’s games, Spore is likely to attract a broad range of age groups. A tech-savvy 7-year-old could easily obsess over the game, as could a mid-50’s reader of Jared Diamond or E.O. Wilson.

Of course, some of the content of Spore is fanciful. The “DNA points” that players accumulate have no real-world analogue, for instance, and thus far no one — that we know of — has been able to grow a life-sustaining environment on a lifeless planet. “I’ve had a few people ask me if I think Spore will help teach evolution,” Wright said, “and the ironic thing is that, if anything, we’re teaching intelligent design. I’ve seen a few games that relied on evolution — I’ve even designed some of them — and it’s just not as fun.” But, of course, there’s one crucial way in which Spore breaks from intelligent design. The universe of the game is not dominated by a single, all-powerful creator. It’s a universe governed by a million intelligent designers, each unleashing his or her creations to be fruitful and multiply, to conquer and befriend, to fly spaceships and fashion planets.

Despite the fictions, many of the themes of Spore are immensely valuable ones, particularly in an age of environmental crisis: the fragility of life, the connection between micro- and macro- scales, the complex networks of ecosystems and food webs, the impact of new technology on social systems. Spore’s players will get to experience firsthand how choices made on a local scale — a single creature’s decision to, say, adopt an omnivorous lifestyle — can end up having global repercussions. They will detect similarities between one level of the game and another, the complex balancing act of global trade mirroring the complex balancing act of building a sustainable environment. And traveling through a simulated universe, from cells to constellations, will, ideally, make them more curious about the real-world universe they already inhabit — and show them that they have the power to shape that universe as well.

“What’s very interesting about games,” Eno said, “is that they let you begin thinking about possibilities when you’re young enough to incorporate them into your life. So I think a game that says to people, You can make things that then have independent lives, that’s already quite an amazing idea. And then these things can interact with other people’s objects — that’s quite a grown-up idea.”

It occurred to me as I wandered through the halls of the Spore offices that a troubled school system could probably do far worse than to devote an entire, say, fourth-grade year to playing Spore. The kids would get a valuable perspective on their universe; they would learn technical skills and exercise their imaginations at the same time; they would learn about the responsibility that comes from creating independent life. And no doubt you would have to drag them out of the classrooms at the end of the day. When I mentioned this to Eno, he immediately chimed in agreement. “I thought the same thing,” he said. “If you really want to reinvent education, look at games. They fold everything in: history, sociology, anthropology, chemistry — you can piggyback everything on it.

“But my wife made a good point when I was talking about this the other day. She says it’s important for kids to do boring things too. Because if you can find excitement in something boring, then you’re set up for life. Whereas if you constantly need entertainment, you might have a problem, because life is full of things that aren’t entertaining. So I think I’d have three days of Spore and two days of obligatory Latin.”

Steven Johnson is the author of “Everything Bad Is Good For You.” His new book, “The Ghost Map,” about an epidemic in Victorian London, will be published later this month.



Check Out My Other Blogs (click on blog name to go there) = / 1.3rd Eye Blog / 2. Favorites Blog/ 3. Vita Excolatur (Living Well ...) Blog/ 4. Humor Me Blog/ 5. News and Current Events Blog/ 6. Consider This ... Blog/ 7. Consumer Warnings Blog/ 8. New Orleans Pentimento Blog/ 9. We Constant Gardeners Blog/ 10. Chaillot Family Blog/

Wednesday, October 04, 2006

Aging Well

The New Age

Old but Not Frail: A Matter of Heart and Head


Published: October 5, 2006

Mary Wittenberg, the 44-year-old president of New York Road Runners, is a fast, strong and experienced runner. But she races best, she says, when she runs just behind Witold Bialokur. He can run 10 kilometers, or 6.2 miles, in less than 44 minutes and he is so smooth and controlled.

Skip to next paragraph

The New Age

Betting on Longevity

This is the third article in a series looking at the science of aging. Other articles will explore who ages well and why. The articles will remain online at nytimes.com/aging.

Multimedia

Frail or Hearty?Video

Frail or Hearty?

“He’s like a metronome with his pacing,” Ms. Wittenberg says. “I am often struggling to keep up with him and it’s a good day when I do.”

While Mr. Bialokur’s performance would be the envy of most young men, he is not young. Mr. Bialokur is 71.

It is one of the persistent mysteries of aging, researchers say. Why would one person, like Mr. Bialokur, remain so hale and hearty while another, who had seemed just as healthy, start to weaken and slow down, sometimes as early as his 70’s?

That, says Tamara Harris, who is chief of the geriatric epidemiology section at the National Institute on Aging, is a central issue that is only now being systematically addressed. The question is why some age well and others do not, often heading along a path that ends up in a medical condition known as frailty.

Frailty, Dr. Harris explains, involves exhaustion, weakness, weight loss and a loss of muscle mass and strength. It is, she says, a grim prognosis whose causes were little understood.

“It means that some people spend a long time in a period of their life where they have lost function,” Dr. Harris says. “People find that very distressing, and there is a tremendous health care cost.”

Now, though, scientists are surprised to find that, in many cases, a single factor — undetected cardiovascular disease — is often a major reason people become frail. They may not have classic symptoms like a heart attack or chest pains or a stroke. But cardiovascular disease may have partly blocked blood vessels in the brain, the legs, the kidneys or the heart. Those obstructions, in turn, can result in exhaustion or mental confusion or weakness or a slow walking pace.

Investigators say that there is a ray of hope in the finding — if cardiovascular disease is central to many of the symptoms of old age, it should be possible to slow or delay or even prevent many of these changes by treating the medical condition.

A second finding is just as surprising to skeptical scientists because it seemed to many like a wrongheaded cliché — you’re only as old as you think you are. Rigorous studies are now showing that seeing, or hearing, gloomy nostrums about what it is like to be old can make people walk more slowly, hear and remember less well, and even affect their cardiovascular systems. Positive images of aging have the opposite effects. The constant message that old people are expected to be slow and weak and forgetful is not a reason for the full-blown frailty syndrome. But it may help push people along that path.

Still, it is a view that can lead to blaming the victim, and some scientists at first resisted it. Now, though, more and more say they have been won over by an accumulating body of evidence.

“I am changing my initially skeptical view,” says Richard Suzman, who is director of the office of behavioral and social research programs at the National Institute on Aging. “There is growing evidence that these subjective experiences might be more important than we thought.”

The Walking Test

Eleanor Simonsick’s initiation into the unrecognized debilitations of aging came with a research study she helped set up. The question was whether older people who are relatively vigorous are also longer-lived. As an epidemiologist at the National Institute on Aging, she thought it was time to ask that in a rigorous way.

So she and her colleagues recruited 3,075 apparently healthy people in their 70’s who said they could walk a quarter of a mile with no trouble and climb a flight of stairs. Each was asked to walk up and down a corridor 10 times, for a distance of a quarter mile, maintaining their pace and not stopping to rest.

A quarter of them could not do it. And it was not just a matter of age. The average age of those who could do it was 73. So was the average age of those who could not. Dr. Harris explained: “I believe most people can amble. But we were asking them to walk as quickly as they could without stopping. That’s what people couldn’t do.”

Some walked so slowly, with tiny steps and labored cadences, that the researchers told them that they could stop because it was clear that they could never finish. Others Dr. Simonsick added, “just said: ‘I’m done. I’m sitting down.’ ”

“It’s very sad,” she added. “It’s not like we put them on a treadmill and cranked it up. You get the sense that they are simply deconditioned.”

The problem became worse. “In the first two years, a third of the group that could walk the quarter mile said they were beginning to have difficulty,” Dr. Harris said. “We thought, ‘Oh, this is impossible.’ ”

But it was real.

The researchers published their data in the May 3 issue of The Journal of the American Medical Association, finding that being unable to walk a quarter mile within five minutes portended troubles. For each minute beyond five, the risk of dying in the next four years increased by a third, the risk of having a heart attack increased by 20 percent, and the risk of having a disability increased by half.

Those who took more than six minutes for the quarter-mile walk had the same risk of dying or having a heart attack as those who could not walk the distance at all, and the effect was independent of age.

That led to the next question. Could teaching people to walk farther and faster prevent their growing so weak they could hardly walk?

Dr. Jack Guralnik, acting chief of the laboratory of epidemiology, demography and biometry at the National Institute on Aging, hopes it can. A new pilot study that he helped direct found that, with training, people could walk faster, improve their balance and more easily rise from a chair. Now he wants to expand that study to explore whether such training helps people retain their ability to walk and improves their health.

Richard J. Hodes, director of the National Institute on Aging is intrigued.

“It would be an extremely expensive study,” Dr. Hodes said, adding that its costs have not been added up. But, he said, if training could keep just 10 percent to 20 percent more people mobile, “I’m sure billions would be saved.”

Staving Off Frailty

Dorothy Bower, 78, used to take walks around the grounds of her assisted living residence in Wilkinsburg, Pa., near Pittsburgh. But no more. In the past six months, Ms. Bower says she has lost her energy. “I make it down the hall and to the dining room,” she says. “I have the feeling that if I worked at it I would get better, but it’s hard to get the motivation to try harder.”

“It is enough of an effort as far as I’m concerned to get to the door of our room,” Mrs. Bower says. “That takes me about five minutes.”

Mrs. Bower’s problem is frailty, doctors say. It is increasingly common as people age, and its symptoms — losing muscle mass and strength, feeling depleted, walking slowly, losing weight and doing less and less in a day — go together, says Dr. Linda Fried, a geriatrician and epidemiologist at Johns Hopkins who defined and characterized the syndrome. “They are all connected and form a vicious cycle,” she says.

Gerontologists say the full frailty syndrome is uncommon until people reach their 80’s, but its likelihood increases rapidly from then on.

For example, the Cardiovascular Health Study, a national study of more than 5,000 participants 65 and older, found that 9.5 percent of those 75 to 79 were frail. Among those 80 to 84, about 16 percent were frail, and nearly a quarter of those 85 to 89 had the frailty syndrome.

“I would say all 100-year-old people are frail,” said Dr. Anne Newman, a professor of epidemiology and medicine at the University of Pittsburgh. “Most 90-year-olds are frail. And some 80-year-olds are frail.”

Dr. Newman and her colleagues wondered what could be causing frailty in some but not others. They thought of undetected cardiovascular disease. The idea was that blood flow to the heart or muscle or brain could be impeded even if a person had had no overt signs of cardiovascular disease.

It was a new way to think about cardiovascular disease and a new way to think about aging, Dr. Newman said. “With frailty,” she said, “the slowing of gait, the loss of muscle strength, we had chalked up to being totally nonpreventable.”

When Dr. Newman and her colleagues examined participants in the Cardiovascular Health Study they saw evidence that their hunch seemed right. Participants with obvious disease who had congestive heart failure or a heart attack or stroke, for example — were likely to be frail. But those with no symptoms but partly blocked blood vessels seen on scans and other tests were nearly three times as likely to be frail as healthier people. And they became disabled — unable to care for themselves — about five years earlier than people without cardiovascular disease at the start of the study.

The researchers emphasize that cardiovascular disease is unlikely to be the sole cause of frailty. Severe arthritis or osteoporosis, for example, could make people slow down and set the cycle in motion. Strokes, heart attacks, cancer or any number of illnesses could bring on the frailty syndrome. But in explaining frailty among seemingly healthy people, the findings on cardiovascular disease made sense.

“With a lot of people, slow walking is due to poor blood flow in the legs,” Dr. Newman says. “Then their muscles atrophy.” And reduced blood flow to the brain, she says, can make people feel sluggish and depleted and unable to move quickly.

Cardiovascular disease may be why Mrs. Bower became frail. For 60 years, she says, she has had diabetes, a disease that damages blood vessels. So even though she has not had a heart attack or a stroke, blood flow to her muscles, heart and brain may be impeded, researchers say.

If they are right about frailty, Dr. Newman and others say, then the condition may be prevented or delayed by not smoking and keeping cholesterol and blood pressure levels low and by staying active.

But, the researchers add, their finding may be good news for today’s middle-age people who had the advantage of drugs to control their blood pressure and cholesterol levels before serious damage to blood vessels set in. And many are more active than their parents were when they were middle age.

Dr. Newman, for one, is optimistic.

“I think there will be less frailty and I think it will be delayed,” she says.

Overcoming Stereotypes

At 79, Dr. Robert Butler, still works 60 hours a week. He is president and chief executive of the International Longevity Center, a research and education foundation in New York and a professor of geriatrics at the Mount Sinai School of Medicine. He says he expects nothing less of himself, attributing his vigor in part to his luck in having excellent health and in part to something more subtle. He never bought into the pervasive stereotypes of old age.

Dr. Butler noticed the problem when he was a medical student. He recalls the private names doctors had for the elderly like crock and old biddy. In the decades since, he says, attitudes among doctors and the general public have not really changed. And, he adds, the stereotypes have an effect. “My experience with older people is that they certainly do get cowed by this,” he said.

But how much, and to what extent people get cowed surprised even researchers. It is hard to avoid seeing or hearing demeaning depictions of the elderly. There are greeting cards that make old people the butt of jokes. There are phrases like “senior moment” to describe a memory lapse. Then there are the ways older people are treated. For example, researchers find that people use “elderspeak,” speaking louder and using simpler words and sentences when talking to old people.

Still, when Becca Levy, a psychologist at Yale University, began her work on stereotypes’ effects on the elderly, she was not sure that she would find anything of note. She had examined the area with a study finding that older people in two cultures with a positive view of aging, China and the deaf Americans, fared better on memory tests than older people in the general American population.

Such studies are tricky, though, because there can be hundreds of differences between cultural groups, and something else could be responsible for the memory differences. So Dr. Levy and her colleagues decided try a method that was used to study the effects of stereotypes about race and gender. The idea is to flash provocative words too quickly for people to be aware they read them.

In her first study, Dr. Levy tested the memories of 90 healthy older people. Then she flashed positive words about aging like “guidance,” “wise,” “alert,” “sage” and “learned” and tested them again. Their memories were better and they even walked faster.

Next, she flashed negative words like “dementia,” “decline,” “senile,” “confused” and “decrepit.” This time, her subjects’ memories were worse, and their walking paces slowed.

Thomas Hess, a psychology professor at North Carolina State University, came to a similar conclusion about the effects of stereotypes of aging.

In his studies, older people did significantly worse on memory tests if they were first told something that would bring to mind aging stereotypes. It could be as simple as saying the study was on how aging affects learning and memory. They did better on memory tests if Dr. Hess first told them something positive, like saying that there was not much of a decline in memory with age.

But, Dr. Levy wondered, were there long-term effects of believing the stereotypes of aging? She found a study that could provide answers, the Ohio Longitudinal Study of Aging and Retirement. The two-decade-long study included 1,157 people, nearly every resident of Oxford, Ohio, who was 50 or older and was not suffering from dementia. And it had questions about beliefs about aging.

It turned out that people who had more positive views about aging were healthier over time. They lived an average of 7.6 years longer than those of a similar age who did not hold such views, and even had less hearing loss when their hearing was tested three years after the study began. The result persisted when the investigators took in account the participants’ health at the start of the study, as well as their age, gender, and socioeconomic status.

Some like Dr. Suzman were swayed, but Dr. Hodes urges caution. As provocative as the data may be, he notes, the studies cannot tell for sure what is cause and what is effect. It may be that people who had negative attitudes about aging somehow knew that they were not really well.

Dr. Hodes confesses that in this case indirect studies may be the best that can be done. To obtain direct evidence would require randomly assigning some participants to keep hearing negative comments about themselves as they age and others to hear positive things. “How ethical would that be?” he asks.

If it is true that perceptions of aging affect memory, behavior and health — and many researchers are betting that they do — that may bode well for today’s middle-age people, Dr. Levy says. They may not be quite so willing to declare themselves old when they reach their 60’s and beyond and they may be less likely to believe the stereotypes of old age.

Still, Dr. Levy and others say, it can be difficult to resist the pervasive stereotypes of aging. Many people may accept them without realizing it.

“Then they become a self-fulfilling prophecy,” Dr. Levy said.

But not for people like Dr. Butler or Mr. Bialokur, who managed to escape that trap. Others, too, say they have thrived simply by ignoring the stereotypes.

Anita Vazzano, who turned 75 on Aug. 9, says she just does not give old age much of a thought. A widow who lives alone, she still works, taking a bus each day from her home in Bensonhurst, Brooklyn, to her office in Manhattan. She knows many people become weak and frail when they grow old, but that is not her, she says. “It has to happen someday, but that day is so far off,” Mrs. Vazzano says.

She knows the stereotypes. She has seen the offensive greeting cards. And she hates them.

“If I was old,” she says, then catches herself and laughs. In her view, she adds, old age, “is not going to happen for a long time.”



Check Out My Other Blogs (click on blog name to go there) = / 1.3rd Eye Blog / 2. Favorites Blog/ 3. Vita Excolatur (Living Well ...) Blog/ 4. Humor Me Blog/ 5. News and Current Events Blog/ 6. Consider This ... Blog/ 7. Consumer Warnings Blog/ 8. New Orleans Pentimento Blog/ 9. We Constant Gardeners Blog/ 10. Chaillot Family Blog/

The Incredible, edible EGG

The Minimalist

Eggs Take Their Place at the Dinner Table


Published: October 4, 2006

IT symbolizes fertility and beauty, and it has an unrivaled simplicity of form. It represents one of the most perfect of foods, from just about every standpoint: nutrition, flavor and versatility. And it has an unrivaled ability to stand alone or to contribute to other dishes.

Skip to next paragraph
Andrew Scrivani for The New York Times

What, no toast? Hard-cooked eggs meet dried chilies, tomatoes and onions.

Readers’ Opinions

Forum: Cooking and Recipes

Andrew Scrivani for The New York Times

Poached eggs take on the color of their winy broth, and are topped by croutons.

What it doesn’t represent is dinner.

Meet the still underrated egg, everybody’s favorite breakfast food in a world in which people eat a real breakfast once a week. The egg, the cheapest form of complete protein you can find, at about a dollar a pound. (Eggs cost less outside of cities, where a dozen are still a buck; more if you go organic or really local, which are both good options.) The egg, which people are suddenly jumping for in upscale restaurants even though they can’t conceive of having it for dinner at home, except in an emergency. The egg, a surprising choice.

Maybe it’s too downscale. “Our consumption of eggs peaked in 1945,” a point at which meat was in relatively short supply because of the war, said Don Bell, emeritus poultry specialist for the University of California Division of Agriculture and Natural Resources. As meat became more widely available, egg consumption, Mr. Bell said, “dropped by around three eggs a year until about 12 years ago, when it started climbing again.”

Or maybe it’s fear about cholesterol. And then there’s salmonella, the reason health officials recommend not serving “undercooked” eggs — the way they taste good — to young children, the elderly, pregnant women and people with weakened immune systems.

All that aside, we have come to reappreciate the egg at dinner. That’s partly thanks to the popularity of salade lyonnaise, a pile of greens with bacon and a soft-cooked egg on top, and partly thanks to chefs in what seems like every restaurant in town who have begun offering soft-cooked egg in one form or another.

Bill Telepan of Telepan puts a couple of barely cooked eggs on top of a bed of roasted, crushed and sautéed potatoes and covers them with a mound of roasted peppers and parsley. He says he was inspired by two coddled eggs in a martini glass at Wallsé (where they were served with salt and bread, period).

David Chang of Momofuku puts his slow-cooked eggs on top of many dishes, including his famous shrimp and grits. Wylie Dufresne of WD-50 builds a soup around soft-cooked eggs, which he serves in Parmesan broth with crisp chickpea noodles. “It’s not a real stretch,” Mr. Dufresne said, “but it’s delicious.”

You can make these same kinds of eggs at home and put them on top of almost anything. For the basic soft-cooked egg you want what Escoffier called an oeuf mollet, essentially no more than a six-minute egg.

Lower extra-large eggs into simmering water for six minutes (maybe five and a half for large, six and a half for jumbo), then remove them and plunge them into ice water. (The sudden drop in temperature creates a vacuum between the shell and the membrane, making peeling easy.) You can then refrigerate or peel them; to reheat, lower the peeled egg into very hot water (not boiling, but nearly) and let it sit for a few minutes.

In the most uncomplicated way, this is the restaurant egg that chefs are crazy about.

What this and most egg recipes have in common are specific but easily learned cooking techniques and a stark simplicity.


As a matter of taste, it is a near universal truth that eggs must not be overcooked. Even a hard-cooked egg must be carefully timed (put in cold water, bring to a boil, turn off the heat, cover, and wait no more than nine minutes, please, before plunging into cold water), and there are few things worse than overcooked scrambled eggs, nor more common.

Scrambled eggs should be done following the technique Jean-Georges Vongerichten (a disclosure: we write books together) uses for his famous soft-scrambled eggs topped with spiced whipped cream and caviar. Combine the eggs with butter or other fat in a cold saucepan and cook, stirring, over medium-high heat until the mixture begins to thicken and curdle; if the mixture begins to stick on the bottom, remove it from the heat for a moment and continue to beat, then return it to the heat. The eggs will eventually become creamy, with small curds all over — not unlike loose oatmeal — and they’re ready. Cooking any longer at this point is disastrous.

In most other cases, the key is low heat, gentle cooking and, usually, whites that are cooked so they are no longer runny with a yolk as soft as you can manage.

Cooking eggs with other ingredients is equally fantastic, and produces fast, intriguing results, suitable for main courses or appetizers. I cannot get enough of eggs poached in red wine, though sometimes I think a simple combination of red wine and stock is even better; serve this with a salad or a light pasta dish for a more filling meal. Spicy scrambled eggs are an international staple, often seen as street food; these are incredible on their own, and perhaps even better piled into a burrito, teamed with rice and beans.

I like a good custard, and cannot understand how they became dessert-only items (though quiche is essentially a custard in a tart crust). If you combine eggs and cream or milk, and pretty much whatever else you like — I’m suggesting cheese in this recipe, but anything from cooked greens to chopped cooked bacon to roasted and chopped poblanos could go in there — then bake slowly, in a water bath, you will get flan-like custards that make incredible first courses at fancy dinners. To make the presentation even more stunning, line the ramekin with a parboiled cabbage leaf before adding the custard.

Finally, there is the eggs-as-meat-style main course of hard-cooked eggs simmered in tomato sauce. Though the main recipe here is Mediterranean, and you often see this preparation in southern Italy (it’s good over pasta), it is equally well known in India, where it is served with chapatti or other bread, and where the spicing is more assertive and the results even more surprising.

But they’re no more surprising than the idea of eggs for dinner in the first place.



Check Out My Other Blogs (click on blog name to go there) = / 1.3rd Eye Blog / 2. Favorites Blog/ 3. Vita Excolatur (Living Well ...) Blog/ 4. Humor Me Blog/ 5. News and Current Events Blog/ 6. Consider This ... Blog/ 7. Consumer Warnings Blog/ 8. New Orleans Pentimento Blog/ 9. We Constant Gardeners Blog/ 10. Chaillot Family Blog/

Monday, October 02, 2006

Children

Enjoy

The Price of Children

This is just too good not to pass on to all. Something absolutely positive for a change. I have repeatedly seen the breakdown of the cost of raising a child, but this is the first time I have seen the rewards listed this way. It's nice.

The government recently calculated the cost of raising a child from birth to 18 and came up with $160,140 for a middle income family. Talk about sticker shock! That doesn't even touch college tuition.

But $160,140 isn't so bad if you break it down. It translates into:

* $8,896.66 a year,

* $741.38 a month, or
* $171.08 a week.
* That's a mere $24.24 a day!
* Just over a dollar an hour.


Still, you might think the best financial advice is don't have children if you want to be "rich." Actually, it is just the opposite. What do you get for your $160,140?
* Naming rights. First, middle, and last!
* Glimpses of God every day.
* Giggles under the covers every night.
* More love than your heart can hold.
* Butterfly kisses and Velcro hugs.
* Endless wonder over rocks, ants, clouds, and warm cookies.
* A hand to hold, usually covered with jelly or chocolate.
* A partner for blowing bubbles, flying kites
* Someone to laugh yourself silly with, no matter what the boss said or how your stocks performed that day.


For $160,140, you never have to grow up. You get to:

* finger-paint,
* carve pumpkins,
* play hide-and-seek,
* catch lightning bugs, and
* never stop believing in Santa Claus.


You have an excuse to:
* keep reading the Adventures of Piglet and Pooh,
* watching Saturday morning cartoons,
* going to Disney movies, and
* wishing on stars.
* You get to frame rainbows, hearts, and flowers under refrigerator magnets and collect spray painted noodle wreaths for Christmas, hand prints set in clay or Mother's Day, and cards with backward letters for Father's Day.


For $160,140, there is no greater bang for your buck. You get to be a hero just for:
* retrieving a Frisbee off the garage roof,
* taking the training wheels off a bike,
* removing a splinter,
* filling a wading pool,
* coaxing a wad of gum out of bangs, and coaching a baseball team that never wins but always gets treated to ice cream regardless.


You get a front row seat to history to witness the:
* first step,
* first word,
* first bra,
* first date, and
* first time behind the wheel.


You get to be immortal. You get another branch added to your family tree, and if you're lucky, a long list of limbs in your obituary called grandchildren and great grandchildren. You get an education in psychology, nursing, criminal justice, communications, and human sexuality that no college can match.


In the eyes of a child, you rank right up there under God. You have all the power to heal a boo-boo, scare away the monsters under the bed, patch a broken heart, police a slumber party, ground them forever, and love them without limits. So, one day they will, like you, love without counting the cost. That is quite a deal for the price!!!!!!!

Love & enjoy your children & grandchildren!!!!!!!


Check Out My Other Blogs (click on blog name to go there) = / 1.3rd Eye Blog / 2. Favorites Blog/ 3. Vita Excolatur (Living Well ...) Blog/ 4. Humor Me Blog/ 5. News and Current Events Blog/ 6. Consider This ... Blog/ 7. Consumer Warnings Blog/ 8. New Orleans Pentimento Blog/ 9. We Constant Gardeners Blog/ 10. Chaillot Family Blog/

Sunday, October 01, 2006

Paris at Night

Paris la Nuit

Ed Alcock for The New York Times

The Louvre and its pyramid entrance, thronged by day, are a romantic and private setting at night.


Published: October 1, 2006

BY day, the Pont Royal, in the middle of Paris, is little more than an unremarkable stone bridge streaming with motorists making their way from the Left to the Right Bank. At night, though, this 17th-century structure is transformed into a platform of visual seduction.


Ed Alcock for The New York Times

A quiet moment on the Île St.-Louis.

Ed Alcock for The New York Times

The Champs-Élysées is at the center of this view from the Arc de Triomphe.

As you stroll north across the Seine, the imposing facade of the Louvre dominates the foreground. To the right, in the distance, the gently lighted towers of Notre Dame and the dome of the Institut de France, home of the Académie Française, suddenly appear through the trees. To the left, you can make out the outline of the vast Tuileries Garden, locked tight behind iron gates and shrouded in darkness. Farther on, the illuminated curves of the Grand Palais’s glass roofs beckon. From behind, the twin clocks of the Musée d’Orsay burn bright; the tip of the Eiffel Tower peeks through.

Then, as you approach the end of the bridge and look up, you catch a glimpse of Jean-Baptiste Carpeaux’s small sculpture on the Flore Pavilion of the Louvre, with its laughing, naked nymph. It is a moment of magic. You look around. No one else seems to notice — and at that moment, no matter the weather or your mood, the city seems to be yours.

Late-night Paris belongs to the stroller, the idle walker with no purpose except to roam. There is always beauty to be discovered, and perhaps even adventure and love. “The night suggests, it does not show,” wrote Brassaï, the 20th century’s best-known photographer of Paris at night. “The night disquiets and surprises us with its otherness. It releases forces within us which by day are dominated by reason.”

That’s true because nighttime Paris operates on different levels. There is a constant interplay between the permanence and grandeur of monumental Paris and the serendipity and surprise of intimate Paris.

Paris is, after all, a small city, only 40.5 square miles — slightly smaller than the Bronx and much smaller than London, Madrid, Berlin and Rome. Eleven miles wide, almost six miles long, Paris can be walked from one end to the other in hours. Even Paris, Tex., is about the same size as Paris, France. Yet Paris has perhaps the densest population of any major city in Western Europe. By day, its streets are clogged with too many people in a hurry. Traffic snarls the intersections and circles. Shoppers lead with their elbows at the bargain stalls in front of the Galeries Lafayette and Printemps department stores. Bicyclists compete with motorcyclists to frustrate even the most determined pedestrians.

At night, though, the streets empty, the pace slows. Inhibitions evaporate. The later the hour, the fewer the people, the better. I started strolling at night in the late 1970’s as a correspondent for Newsweek, hopelessly fantasizing that one day I would finish a doctoral dissertation on Louis Sébastien Mercier. Mercier was the ultimate 18th-century wanderer and the first real street reporter of Paris. His best-selling 12-volume “Tableau de Paris” deciphered the habits and customs of everyday Paris in the years before the revolution. “This city,” he once wrote, “eternally rivets the gaze of the entire world.”

Mercier was fascinated not by the city’s monuments but its inhabitants — its police and prostitutes, its street vendors and beggars. If he were strolling the Pont Royal today, he would focus on the scene below, on the bank of the Seine.

There, a group of homeless people has pitched two dozen camping tents in a neat row. One recent night after midnight, all was still, except for the silhouette of one man hanging his laundry on a clothesline strung between trees. Bathed in the yellowish glow of the streetlights, the encampment looked like a tiny, peaceful village.

But then, the Seine has the power to romanticize even the darkest sides of city life. Because of its current, it perpetually shimmers with strips of light reflected from traffic lights and stoplights. It is also narrow — the Thames and the Danube are wider — which gives it a manageable scale and a feeling of safety.

The river’s many bridges serve as a magnet, for both visitors and Parisians. I can hardly remember ever walking over a bridge at night without seeing couples in passionate embrace. Maybe that explains why even the hokiest movie scenes on the Seine never seem completely absurd.

There’s that scene toward the end of the film “Something’s Gotta Give” when Jack Nicholson, thinking he has lost Diane Keaton, stumbles out of the Grand Colbert restaurant and past the Hôtel de Ville to find himself reflecting on life midway across the Pont d’Arcole. “Look who gets to be the girl,” he laments out loud to no one in particular, turning teary-eyed. Ms. Keaton suddenly pops out of a taxi to proclaim her love.

An even better Paris-at-night-along-the-Seine scene comes at the end of “Everyone Says I Love You” when Woody Allen and Goldie Hawn, their characters divorced long ago, dance on the bank of the river beneath the Pont de la Tournelle. This is not just any dance. This is Fred and Ginger topped with Peter Pan. What woman wouldn’t want to be Goldie Hawn at that moment, in her strappy high-heeled pumps and perfect flowing, long-sleeved black cocktail dress, her strawberry blond hair ever so slightly windblown, literally floating on air?

Indeed, Paris at night has the irrational power to trigger the imaginations of even ordinary folks. There are always Parisians who leave open the window shutters of their living rooms, allowing passersby to peek inside. The often high ceilings and tall windows offer glimpses of crystal chandeliers and fanciful moldings and projections about the lives of the inhabitants. What are they serving for dinner? And do they sleep in canopied beds?

So the real secret to Paris’s beauty at night can be described in one word: light.

In some cities, lampposts are designed to light only the sidewalks and streets, so that surrounding buildings recede into darkness. In much of Paris, however, streetlights are attached to the sides of buildings, highlighting the curves and angles of the structures themselves.

Much like an ordinary-looking woman who turns beautiful in candlelight, unremarkable buildings in Paris glow. Architectural details that are lost by day suddenly proclaim themselves. My 16-year-old daughter, Gabriela, passes Le Bon Marché department store every day to and from school. But walking home in the dark after soccer practice one evening, she suddenly saw something different: the store sign and upper windows framed in an eerie light. She later shot it in black and white for her photography class.

Even the most jaded walkers are never bored. As I strolled with a French foreign ministry official after dinner one evening, we found ourselves in front of the Madeleine church, whose Greek-temple design and imposing scale makes it a nighttime showstopper.

But it was another church that caught the ambassador’s eye. Looking up the Boulevard Malesherbes, he spotted St.-Augustin, a gray 19th-century eyesore by day. “Ahh!” he proclaimed. “Even the ugly St.-Augustin looks beautiful at night.”

Lighting the monuments, churches, bridges and public buildings of Paris is not left to chance. The project to adorn the Eiffel Tower with 20,000 flashing lights (they dazzle for 10 minutes every hour on the hour until after 1 a.m.) cost $5 million and involved 40 mountaineers, architects and engineers who had to endure high winds, raging storms, pigeons and bats.

An entire lighting division in City Hall is responsible for choosing the design, style, color, intensity and timing of the lighting for nearly 300 structures.

And there are even two separate “schools” when it comes to the science (or is it art?) of lighting the city’s public buildings. There is the Paris school, a holistic approach that bathes a structure in a warm, even glow. The Conciergerie, the one-time medieval prison on the Île de la Cité, and Palais Garnier, the extravagant 19th-century opera house, are lighted this way.

Then there is the Lyon school, a pointillist approach that uses small spotlights to highlight the elaborate decorations and details of buildings for more drama. The balconies and niches of the Hôtel de Ville, Paris’s City Hall, and the Pont Alexandre-III, with its candelabras, cupids, sea monsters and other elaborate decorations, are lighted in the Lyon style.

The city turns off the lights on most public structures at about 1 a.m. It is a Cinderella moment in which suddenly, they seem to disappear. The bridges and banks of the Seine, still lighted by streetlamps, take on a muted, more distant look.

THE seasoned stroller, then, is familiar with the rhythm of both natural and artificial light. That’s the best way to see one of the hidden gems of Paris in the evening, the perfectly proportioned, 16th- and 17th-century square courtyard at the east corner of the Louvre known as the Cour Carrée.

Accessible through archways from each of its four sides, it offers an oasis of calm in the heart of Paris. Peeking through each of the archways from inside the courtyard, the visitor can see the Louvre’s brightly illuminated pyramid on the west, the St.-Germain l’Auxerrois Church on the east, the Rue de Rivoli on the north and the Institut de France on the south.

But the courtyard closes at 10 p.m. The lighting system is undergoing renovation, so the only light comes from beyond the walls, or the few lighted offices of the Louvre or perhaps from the moon. You must sit on one of the cool stone benches for several minutes before your eyes adjust to the darkness

If you’re lucky, Nicolas Lemaire will be playing his cello near the pyramid under the west arch.

Music-making is banned from the inner courtyards of the Louvre, but the security guards make an exception for Mr. Lemaire, a professional musician, as soon as the museum closes. The archway makes for a tiny, acoustically perfect concert hall that amplifies the sound. “There is hardly an auditorium in all of Paris with such a beautiful sound,” Mr. Lemaire, 44, said at the end of an all-Bach concert. “There’s something very spiritual about playing here.”

There are countless other discoveries while navigating Paris after dark: on the Left Bank, the narrow Rue Mazarine, which ends in a covered archway opening out onto the Seine and a view of the wooden pedestrian bridge known as the Pont des Arts; the sudden appearance of the Eiffel Tower at the end of the Rue Monttessuy; the dome of the Invalides from a picnic blanket on the lawn of the esplanade; the Champs-Élysées from the top of the Arc de Triomphe; the colored neon of restaurants and cafes from a perch on the steps of the Opéra Bastille. (Sometime seeing at Paris at night isn’t totally voluntary. As the Métro shuts down at 12.30 a.m., those who cannot afford a taxi often have to make it home under their own power.)

Beauty doesn’t necessarily mean quiet, however. On weekend evenings throughout the year, the Champ de Mars, the vast lawn in front of the Eiffel Tower, for example, is clogged with hundreds of visitors.

In warm weather, families take picnic baskets and coolers, and dine on the lawn. Young people party. In France, drinking alcohol in public is allowed, and the drinking age is 16, which means that a lot of drinking goes on.

There are no public toilets, so designated bushes give some cover. There are also, my teenage daughters tell me, peeping Toms, drug dealing, hashish smoking and the occasional mugging and purse snatching. The neighbors living in the elegant private houses nearby are driven mad by the music — particularly the bongos. The police, who are out in force, seem to see and hear little.

In the end, what makes Paris so special at night is more than its physical beauty. Even more memorable, perhaps, are the encounters with Parisians who revel in their own experiences with the city.

One recent Friday evening, I went walking with Dominique Bertinotti, a deputy mayor, through the Fourth Arrondissement, the district she administers that covers much of the Marais, the Île St.-Louis and half of the Île de la Cité.

On the Rue des Barres, she pointed out a private garden through a wrought-iron gate of a building under renovation. On the Quai d’Orléans at the tip of the Île St.-Louis, she shared one of her favorite night-time views: the flying buttresses on the back of Notre Dame visible through the trees,and lamented the addition of Eugène Viollet-le-Duc’s spire to the cathedral in the 19th century.

On the Rue du Temple, she led me into Le Latina, a Spanish- and Portuguese-language movie theater-bistro-art gallery. We climbed up a flight of stairs to a small dance floor where tango music was playing.

A pair of aging women dressed in black and sensibly heeled dancing shoes owned the floor. They seemed to be a couple. They also seemed as if they had been dancing the tango together forever.

ELAINE SCIOLINO is chief of the Paris bureau of The Times.



Check Out My Other Blogs (click on blog name to go there) = / 1.3rd Eye Blog / 2. Favorites Blog/ 3. Vita Excolatur (Living Well ...) Blog/ 4. Humor Me Blog/ 5. News and Current Events Blog/ 6. Consider This ... Blog/ 7. Consumer Warnings Blog/ 8. New Orleans Pentimento Blog/ 9. We Constant Gardeners Blog/ 10. Chaillot Family Blog/