Mindfill

UPDATE

2007-02-02T10:54:00.000-05:00

I just read that it is now confirmed that the Police are reuniting - at least once. They are going to open this year's Grammy telecast. So, that puts them one step closer to a tour. I might actually have to watch the Grammys now too.

Police Squad

2007-01-28T22:33:00.000-05:00

Ok, I'll admit the title is really weak. I couldn't think of anything else that matched the subject of this post. Besides, you know me, I like to crib from movies and/or music. And somehow a Leslie Nielson movie/TV show just seems to fit me.

Anyway, the subject of this post is something I read in the lastet Entertainment Weekly. There was a section dealing with speculated (or actual) music reunions. It talked about whether the reunion was going to happen and who was involved. Apparently, the Police are reuniting for a tour! Holy cow! That's HUGE and exciting news. I have always loved the Police and thought that they were one of the most underrated bands in the history of rock. They put out some of the best songs ever and had a very short life span as a band. They also broke up right about the time I was getting into music. So I never really got to enjoy anything new from them.

I always thought they broke up because of tension between band members. That's the type of thing that will tear a band apart and keep them that way. Of course, then Sting went on to a multi-platinum several times over solo career. So the last thing I ever expected to hear was that they would ever reunite and tour again. But according to EW, that's exactly what's going to happen!

As a music nerd, I am so excited to hear this. I will bankrupt myself to get tickets if necessary. I have been very fortunate to see some of my all-time favorites in concert (some multiple times) and I would bend over backwards to see a reunited Police concert.

Obviously, this is all specualtion and grapevine reports at this point. And as the scuttled Van Halen reuniting proved to us (both times) - anything can happen. But still, I am going to remain cautiously excited at the prospects of this happening. In the meantime, I'm cueing up "Every Little Thing She Does Is Magic", "Don't Stand So Close to Me", "Every Breath You Take", and "Synchronicity" on my computer, hitting repeat, and enjoying!

Public Access?

2007-01-21T10:07:00.000-05:00

I had a little difficulty in falling asleep last night, so I was flipping channels around 2am. I came across the public access/home shopping block of channels. Normally, I zip right through these figuring I'd never watch any of them in a million years anyway. However, for some reason last night I didn't. On one of the public access channels, I saw what looked like a low-budget, filmed in somebody's backyard with their own camera, gardening show. And, for some reason, I stopped flipping and watched it for a couple of minutes.

It was at that time I realized that it was indeed a low-budget, filmed in somebody's backyard with their own camera program and it did have to do with gardening - or at least the growing of plants. It was a show on how to grow your own marijuana. It was actually pretty detailed. But the final straw was when the narrator mentioned that in order to have the perfect "grow room" you needed to surround the room with a thick curtain that you can't see through because the plants like it that way! (No mention that this would also serve to make it a little tougher for the police to see when they raid you!) Once I heard this, I started laughing hysterically. Somehow, in this age of the ultra-tight, stick a lump of coal in their ass and you get a diamond FCC, (who is, ironically enough so tight that I wouldn't have been able to utter that phrase) someone was able to slide a how-to grow marijuana show onto the airwaves. Granted, it was on a public access channel and there is, if I remember rightly, little or no regulation of public access. But still. It just struck me as very funny. I kept flipping and found that Army of Darkness was on a couple of channels away. So that stopped my flipping until I fell asleep and I never went back to the other show.

Anyway, I just thought that was funny. Maybe I'm going to have to pay more attention to those channels and see if anymore strange or interesting nuggets can be found there.

My own indecision

2007-01-20T22:50:00.000-05:00

I just started reading the novel "Indecision" by Benjamin Kunkel. For those of you who have never heard of it, here's the synopsis from Amazon.com (c/o Publisher's Weekly):

Dwight Wilmerding, the vacillating, down-market prepster protagonist of Kunkel's debut novel, gets fired from his low-level job at Pfizer and, with the lease running out on his hive-like Chambers Street boys-club apartment, lights out for Quito, Ecuador, where high school flame Natasha is holed up. Before this momentous undertaking, Dwight has been afflicted with chronic postcollegiate indecision, particularly in relationships: should he pursue a life with his quasi-girlfriend, Vaneetha? Start up again with Natasha? And what about his weird thing for his sister, Alice? As luck would have it, one of his roommates is a med student who turns Dwight on to Abulinix, an experimental new treatment for chronic indecision, which makes his South American jaunt very eventful indeed. A subtheme on the post-politicality of post-9/11 20-somethings gives the book some bite and surfaces most conspicuously in the form of Brigid, the Euroactivist who, along with the drug, brings Dwight clarity, and even hope. Annoying but accomplished, this entertaining book has screenplay written all over it, from the hot Dutch Natasha to the shambling cute Dwight—not to mention Harvard-educated, New York– literati Kunkel himself.

I mention this for a couple of different reasons. First off, since I just started reading it, I have no idea how good the book is going to be or whether or not it's going to be worth reading in the end. At this point, I can only go off of initial impressions.

Those initial impressions, however, are what's making me focus an entry on the book. So far, I'm enjoying the book. As cliche as it may sound, I can relate to the main character and to his situation. There are several thoughts within the book that resonate with me. This fact makes me all the more curious to continue reading. There is a certain pleasure taken in reading thoughts that could have very easily been written by yourself. You gain a certain clarity in actually seeing them on the page in front of you. In a way, it makes me feel happy that thoughts that I've had could be used to create a novel that is being presented for mass consumption. It's almost as if it's a sort of transferred affirmation of my own thoughts and ideas - kind of like some sort of literary group therapy.

At the same time it also troubles me. For one thing, I'm troubled that I can relate to such a character in the first place. For that matter, I'm slightly troubled that I find myself relating to a fictional character at all. But on another level, it bothers me that I'm reading these very same thoughts and ideas that I've had being expressed by another person. This bothers me because it makes me realize two things: First, someone beat me to the punch. Secondly, even though I can relate to the thoughts and ideas being expressed and wish to express similar thoughts and ideas, my own self-doubt makes me realize that I could never express such thoughts and ideas nearly as well as the author.

Therein, lies a nice little bit of insight into my innerworkings. My brain for years has wrestled with this dichotomy. On one hand, I seek out things that are interesting to me in one way or another. I want to learn more about these things in order to apply them to my own works. Yet at the same time, I get easily discouraged when I feel that I will never be able to do as good of a job as has already been done by someone else. In the end, the result is that my list of things I want to write about continues to grow and I never really finish any of them.

I bring this up because for the last few years I have been working on a screenplay. It's something I've always wanted to do. I made every excuse in the world for not actually doing it though until a good friend called my bluff on the matter. We were talking about accomplishing goals and I stated that it was one of mine. She simply looked at me and said: "Well, why don't you just do it?" (I'm hoping that last statement won't cause me to have to fork over any royalties to the folks at Nike!) I had no answer to her simple question - at least not a good one. So, I started the writing process in earnest.

Fast-forward to now and the script is still in the "under-development" stage. Sure, it's long enough to be considered done. And, it actually has a coherent story that follows a logical progression. Technically, I guess, it could be considered done. However, if you've read this far, you most likely have come to the conclusion that it is no where near a finished product. As events in my life have unfolded that would fit into the structure of the story, I want to shoehorn them in. As a result, these insertions have altered the story. Now, I'm considering a complete reworking to better capture my current ideas. So instead of being done, the screenplay is really back to square one.

Which brings me back to the initial crux of this entry. As I read this book and as I see plot points in movies and TV shows that I feel capture something similar to an idea I have for my script, I once again am faced with the double-sided coin presented above. On one hand, these similar ideas provide me with more inspiration and encouragement to place my own spin on them. Yet on the other, I feel the pangs of self-doubt creep in telling me that either I can't do as good of a job expressing that particular idea or that it doesn't even matter because it's not original anyway.

Either way, I'm left with a stalemate of indecision and underproductivity. One of these days, I'm just going to say "To hell with it" and just sit down and do it. That's what I did in the first place. So why not just do it again? (Great, more royalties to Nike!)

Appetite for Distraction

2007-01-11T23:50:00.000-05:00

So far I've made two posts in 2007 and both of them were bad music puns. I promise I'll stop eventually! Somehow I find making a pun off of a Guns N Roses album much less sacreligious than my Beatles pun though. At least it's a step in the right direction.

Anyway, the point of this post (and we all know how circuitous my routes to my points tend to be) is that I find myself far more productive when I'm distracted. I know that sounds counterintuitive. By the way, I apologize for using so many big words tonight. For some odd reason, normal language just doesn't seem to be flowing tonight and the switch in my brain is stuck on "Hey-let's-use-big-words-to-impress-the-reader" mode. (Coincendentally enough, this same mode tends to lend itself to frequent use of hyphens and parenthetical asides as well!)

As I was saying, I find that I tend to be more productive and better able to function when my brain is distracted. By distracted, I mean that my brain is occupied with thoughts of trying to get things like done, like the daily crossword puzzle or Sudoku, or even other menial tasks. When my brain is occupied in these pursuits, I am able to concentrate on the tasks at hand and I find that I'm able to accomplish them.

On the flipside, I find that when I don't have things like this to distract me I tend to focus on other thoughts that are running around in the big cavernous space that is my head. It's at these times, when I have a bad habit of mentally slipping into the abyss of negative thoughts and self-pity. Most of the time this tends to happen at night when I'm lying in bed trying to sleep. Needless to say, on those nights I don't sleep very well.

In the past, I've resorted to list-making in my head to occupy my thoughts to help me sleep. I would expound on these lists, but I don't want to reveal how much of a nerd I truly am in terms of remembering trivial facts. Those of you who know me can imagine just how truly pathetic some of these lists can be - especially those related to sports!

Oh well. For the most part, I do a pretty good job of keeping myself distracted. Every day I try to come up with new methods or even new list topics. I would tie all of this up in a concise summation, but in all honesty I forgot where I was headed. Ironically, I guess I got distracted.

(I'll give everyone a minute or two to stop groaning.....ok, there you go!)

You say you want a resolution

2007-01-02T20:17:00.000-05:00

Happy New Year to everyone!

Yes, I do realize that the first post of 2007 has a title that is a horrible Beatles' pun. Come on, like you'd expect anything else from me! But, it is the time of the year for making resolutions. I'm not one to normally make them to be honest with you. I'd like to think it's because I don't feel like there's ever anything I need to change. But it's most likely a fatalistic reaction to the realization that I probably won't keep them anyway so I just cut out the middleman from the outset.

Which brings me to this year - I figured in light of the way things have gone for me over the last few months maybe it was time to actually make a resolution or two and actually try to stick to it. So that's the plan. Who knows if I'll be successful, but I thought it would be a good idea to at least set some goals.

First off, I resolve to try to do a better job of being optimistic. I've often said that we percieve our own reality. Therefore, if we see the glass as half-full, it most likely is. And yet, I've had a hard time following my own advice in recent years. I've found myself too often sliding into my own prison of self-pity. Instead of focusing on what is going right or looking forward, I tend to focus on what isn't right or looking backwards. You can only imagine how well that's working for me. So, I'm going to try to reverse that. From this point forward, I'm going to try to be the person I never actually let myself be for one reason or another.

Secondly, I resolve to try to incorporate this new attitude into my writings. A friend of mine who reads this blog (see, there are some people that actually do) pointed out to me that my posts are "a bit gloomy." It's always been my contention that, as a writer, I tend to write better when I'm feeling "a bit gloomy." I think that's true. But I also think that's a crutch. I should be able to articulate my thoughts just as well regardless of the mental state that's producing them. So hopefully, you the reader, will be able to see the results of this.

Finally, I resolve to do a better job of keeping in touch with friends and others who are important to me. There was a time this summer when I pretty much lost all contact with all but a few people. It was my own decision. I decided, instead, to focus all of my attention on one particular person at the expense of others. As a result, I fell out of touch with several people who I consider to be important. Luckily, those fences have since been mended and things appear to be fine. But still, it never should have come to that. Besides, in recent weeks, I have come in contact with a few people who I hadn't talked to in years. Cyperspace has certainly shrunk this great big world of ours! It's been nice catching up with them, albeit rather briefly. Also, I ran into a good friend I hadn't seen or even talked to in about three years on New Year's Eve. It felt so good to reconnect. All of this made me realize that I had been negligent in my duties as far as keeping in touch and not falling off the face of the Earth. So, it's my hope that I can do a far better job on that front in the coming year as well.

Of course I am also resolving to eat better, exercise more, take better care of myself, finish my writing projects, and just be more productive overall. But I figured those are pretty much standard resolutions and not the most interesting ones. If nothing else, my pursuit of accomplishing those might just provide some fodder for this blog. Who knows, they might turn out to be the most interesting ones after all.

2006 Year in Review: Angels and Demons

2006-12-28T21:49:00.000-05:00

First off, I figure I'd better explain the title of this post. I read "Angels & Demons" by Dan Brown about a year and a half ago, so this is not a literary review of a book I recently read. For that matter, it actually has nothing to do with angels or demons or anything remotely having anything to do with heaven or hell. No, it has to do with comparing my year to that book.

Ok, here's a little more of an explanation. When I read "Angels & Demons" I'll admit I thoroughly enjoyed it. I thought the plot was interesting (probably even better than "DaVinci Code") and it kept my attention for the most part. That's the problem, it was only for the most part. In my opinion, the ending was, well, terrible. As a result, a book that I really enjoyed and looked forward to reading, was ruined by a bad ending. Instead of having a satisfied feeling after the completion, I was left with a bad taste in my mouth. It's kind of like finding out who the murderer is halfway through a mystery. No matter what else happens, the feeling of dissatisfaction drowns everything else out and forever frames your opinion.

And that in a nutshell was 2006 for me. The vast majority of the year was a well-written, intricately-plotted, engrossing story that held my attention and left me excited about the next chapter and looking forward to the dramatic and satisfying climax. Then, unfortunately, I encountered the "Angels & Demons" Effect. I was suddenly faced with a really bad ending that made it impossible to look back on the rest of the story with anything but contempt for what might have been.

Fortunately, "Angels & Demons" is going to be made into a movie following the success of "The DaVinci Code." So there is still a chance for it's story and unfulfilling ending to be tweaked and improved. As a matter of fact, the story is going to have to be tweaked as it was announced that it is going to follow the events of "DaVinci Code" chronologically instead of preceding them as it was written. Maybe the ending will be updated and improved after all. Unfortunately, a year can't be rewritten or tweaked to shoehorn it better into events chronologically.

But, as the end of this year and the beginning of a new one approaches, the chance arises to create a brand-new story - one that doesn't require any tweaking. I know it's a cliche, but the coming year is like a blank piece of paper. The good news is that I have the opportunity to craft something entirely new. I can dictate how the plot unfolds. Hopefully, I'll also be able to create for myself a better ending too.

Song o' the Moment

2006-12-15T14:19:00.000-05:00

Over at another bulletin board where I frequently post, I do a thing called the "Song o' the Week." Basically, I post the lyrics to whatever song strikes my fancy at that time. I'm a big music person (hence the multiple posts on the topic in this blog) and most of the time when I'm sitting at my computer I have my MP3 library on shuffle. So usually the songs I post come from that collection. I decided to bring my Song o' the Week over here for today because the song I posted this week has struck a chord (no pun intended...ok, maybe it was) with me. It could probably serve as my theme song at the moment. It's a song called "I'm Waiting for My Real Life to Begin" by Colin Hay. It came from the TV series "Scrubs." I'm a huge fan of the show and I've watched it since it came on the air 6 seasons ago. Now, it's on every day in syndication and I try to catch it whenever I can. Anyway, the song is not only a great song, but it comes from a great episode. So without further ado...

"Waiting For My Real Life to Begin" by Colin Hay

Any minute now my ship is coming in
I'll keep checking the horizon
And I'll stand on the bow
And feel the waves come crashing
Come crashing down, down, down on me

And you said,"Be still, my love
Open up your heart
Let the light shine in"
Don't you understand?
I already have a plan
I'm waiting for my real life to begin

When I awoke today suddenly nothing happened
But in my dreams I slew the dragon
And down this beaten path
And up this cobbled lane
I'm walking in my own footsteps once again

And you say,"Just be here now
Forget about the past
Your mask is wearing thin"
Let me throw one more dice
I know that I can win
I'm waiting for my real life to begin

Any minute now my ship is coming in
I'll keep checking the horizon
And I'll check my machine
There's sure to be that call
It's gonna happen soon, soon, oh so very soon
It's just that times are lean

And you say,"Be still, my love
Open up your heart
Let the light shine in"
Don't you understand?
I already have a plan
I'm waiting for my real life to begin

Hey heyeyeyeyey
Hey yeeeeeee
Hey heyeyeyeyey
Eeh eeh eeh eeh eh x5

On a clear day
I can see, see for a long way

On a clear day
I can see, see a very long way

O, Christmas Tree...

2006-12-11T21:01:00.000-05:00

I guess this serves as a follow-up to my last post. Anyway, I finally got my new Christmas tree out of the box. As a matter of fact, I even put it up and plugged it in. All I can say is I'm never going back to a non-prelit tree again! So it's up, deocrated, and everything. That's the problem. This is the first year that I've had an apartment that set up for a full size tree. Up until now, I've always had the little 4 foot junior trees. So I had ornaments for a 4 foot tree - not a 7 foot one. Needless to say, it looks a little sparse - kinda like the Charlie Brown tree on growth hormones! I'm trying to decide if I should just bite the bullet and get some more ornaments or not. If anyone is willing to donate, I'll gladly accept.

Of course, I know you're all wondering why, after the overwhelming positivity of my last post, I decided to put up my tree at this time. Well, there were a couple of reasons. To answer the most basic question - no, I don't consider myself to be in the Christmas spirit yet. That actually had very little to do with it. No, the reasons I decided to open the box and put up the tree were, I hate to say, much more practical.

First, whenever I saw the box sitting on my office floor unopened, I was reminded of exactly how much money I spent for the unopened box sitting on my office floor. Of course, I was also reminded of the person who persuaded me to buy it and helped pick it out which is why it was still sitting in an unopened box on my office floor. Anyway, as I realized the financial obligation that already went into it, I figured that it only made sense to get it out of the box and actually get my money's worth out of it. My dad would be so proud!

Secondly, I played Santa at a kids' playgroup Christmas party yesterday. Yep, I donned the warm, itchy, red suit and everything. In spite of the fact that the fake beard was extremely warm and pinched the side of my head and in spite of the fact that one little kid attempted to yank off said beard, which due to the fact that it was itchy and pinching the side of my head didn't seem like too bad of an idea to me, I had fun doing it. However, afterward I realized that it was awfully hypocritical for Santa to have his Christmas tree sitting in an unopened box on his office floor. So I guess you could say I put it up to avoid the feeling of hypocrisy.

See, I told you my reasons weren't exactly warm fuzzy ones. But still, I think the fact that I actually do have a Christmas tree up and lit shows great progress on my road towards the Christmas spirit. At this rate, you never know, I might actually do a little Christmas shopping too.

Happy #$%&@!{ Holidays

2006-12-06T18:47:00.000-05:00

Well, it's that time of the year again. It's the holiday season. Unfortunately, I'm just not in the holiday spirit yet. I don't mean to sound like a Scrooge, it's just I don't feel very Merry at the present time. I'm not as disgruntled as the title of this post might appear though either. I mean, it's not like I'm knocking over the Salvation Army change buckets or anything. To be honest with you, I just wanted to steal a page from the comics section and blank out an expletive with symbols. Yeah, I'm a nerd.

Anyway, I haven't started either my Christmas shopping or my Christmas decorating yet. I bought a new Christmas tree about a month ago. It's still in the box. I'm in no hurry to get it out of the box either. While I don't normally get into Christmas to the point of a total immersion, you know - holly and nog and all of that fun stuff - I do normally feel a little more festive. I guess in light of recent events, I just don't feel like it. I'm not ready to dive into the season yet.

Don't get me wrong, I love Christmas. It's just that the majority of the holiday season is designed around doing things with your significant other and/or kids. When you don't have either, you sorta feel left out.

I'm sure as Christmas gets even closer, I'll begin to feel a little more festive. In fact, I know I will. It pretty much always happens that way. You never know, I might even get my tree out of the box too. Come to think of it, I could use a little nog right about now.

Follow-up:

Speaking of Christmas shopping, I do have a little something to be excited about. I already know one thing I'm getting that I'm excited about. It also provides a follow-up to something I posted on here awhile back. In case you haven't read previous entries (and I know it's hard to since there are so many of them), this summer my beloved chair broke and I've been without one ever since. Ok, so here's the follow-up on that. My parents took the chair home to have it fixed at the furniture store where it was purchased. They took it out of the back of the truck and set it on the sidewalk outside the store to go in and talk to someone about it. When they came back out 15 minutes later, the chair was gone. Someone stole my broken chair off the sidewalk in broad daylight! Anyway, my birthday gift from my parents was a replacement chair. I picked it out this past weekend. Let me tell you, it is nice. It's overstuffed and leather. It's a very manly chair! The only problem is that it's on backorder until the end of this month. So, I'll get it, I just have to wait a little longer. Anyway, that's my follow-up and my little nugget of Christmas spirit.

The Big 3-0!

2006-11-28T23:47:00.000-05:00

Last week (Thanksgiving Day to be exact) I turned 30. Now I'm not one of those people that constantly dreaded turning 30. As a matter of fact, although I don't look forward to growing older, the thought of turning 30 never really bothered me - that is, until the big day hit. I didn't feel any different or look any different. So what was different? I had the sudden realization that where I saw myself at 30 isn't anywhere near where I actually am!

Granted, when I was a kid I thought I would either be the starting third baseman for the Reds or a doctor or even a doctor that was the starting third baseman for the Reds. Perhaps my perception of the future was a little skewed as a child, I'll concede that much. But the truth of the matter is even as I got a little older and my goals became a little (or a lot) more realistic, they are still vastly different than the current state of things.

For example, when I started college I was a pre-med major. It was my goal to be a doctor. By that time I had given up the dream of playing for the Reds. So, naturally, I thought that by my thirtieth birthday I'd either be a full-fledged doctor or at least a resident. The thought never occurred to me that Freshman chemistry was going to lower both my career goals and my GPA. As a result, I ended up changing my major and disappearing into the void of a liberal arts education. Needless to say, I'm not presently a doctor or a resident or even a liberal artist (although I'm not sure what exactly that would be!)

Apart from my career aspirations, I was convinced that by the time I hit 30 I would be married and most likely a father too. Let's face it, I come from a white-bread, "Leave it to Beaver Family", so this was a logical expectation. At least I thought it was. Now, at 30 I've accomplished neither of those. As a matter of fact, I was recently dealt quite a crushing blow in this area and now feel like I'm farther away than ever.

So what was the point of all of this? To be honest with you I'm not quite sure. I rather expected myself to come up with some deep profound meditation on turning 30. I thought for sure I'd be able to sum up the experience in some witty fashion. Perhaps, I might even be able to dazzle the reading audience with some humorous story. Unfortunately I'm unable to do any of those things. I guess it's just another example of me failing to live up to my own expectations.

I realize that this post sounds rather gloomy and cynical. That wasn't my intent. More than anything else, I just wanted to expunge some of the thoughts that have been floating around in my head for the last couple of weeks. I hope it proves to be a cathartic experience. Sometimes you just need to get rid of the bad stuff in order to move forward to better stuff. After all, 30 is just a number and you're only as old as you feel. Anyone who knows me will tell you that there are some days when I feel 15 (or at least ACT like I'm 15!). So I figure I have nothing to worry about. I guess we'll just have to see. If nothing else, I hope to at least have some good stories to tell.

A mindless post for the sake of posting

2006-11-28T17:56:00.000-05:00

Ok, ok I know I've promised in the past to do a better job of updating this thing. I also know that there is no shortage of excuses I could use in a feeble attempt to explain why I need to reiterate that I've promised in the past to do a better job of updating this thing. So, in an effort to start making good on this promise, I'm taking the easy way out and posting another post that just has to do with my newest CD I've burned from my MP3 collection. I know it's not the most interesting post in the world, but hey, it's a start. Having said that - and making another promise to actually post something new and original very, very soon - here it is.

1. Love and Memories - O.A.R.
2. Interstate - the Refreshments
3. Fall Back Down - Rancid
4. Pepper - Butthole Surfers
5. Mr. Roboto - Styxx
6. The Last Polka - Ben Folds Five
7. 8th of November - Big and Rich
8. Hero of the Day - Metallica
9. Thanks That Was Fun - Barenaked Ladies
10. Spirit of Radio - Rush
11. Never Mind the Strangers - the Saw Doctors
12. Rapid Hope Loss - Dashboard Confessional
13. You Know My Name - Chris Cornell
14. Overkill - Colin Hay
15. Girl Inside My Head - Blues Traveler
16. The Scientist - Coldplay

I'm back...sort of

2006-11-06T19:36:00.000-05:00

I know I know...I've been terrible at keeping this thing updated. I warned all of you. Of course, that last statement presupposes that there is anyone still out there who checks and reads this thing (or that there was anyone who checked and read this thing at any point!) But, since tomorrow is Election Day, I thought the time was right to recycle something I wrote at about this time a couple of years ago.

Politics As Usual?

Tomorrow is Election Day. That means for the last several months we have been subjected to a constant stream of candidates on TV, radio, in public strutting their stuff and displaying their colors like peacocks. There’s mudslinging, campaign ads, and more mudslinging. It all reminds me of a couple of spoiled brats on the playground sticking their tongues out at each other and yelling things like “Nah nee nah nee boo boo, stick your head in doo doo” or something like that. As a matter of fact, I think I saw that exact same quote in James Madison’s notes on the constitutional Convention. I think Alexander Hamilton stuck his finger in his ear and yelled “nah nee nah nee boo boo” to Thomas Jefferson, at which time Jefferson took off his powdered wig and slapped Hamilton upside the head. The modern political ad was born.

And so for the last decade or so (at least it feels that long), we have been subjected to countless ads that accuse one side or the other of doing something so vile and heinous that the other side is upset they didn’t do it first. Nothing is off -limits. Well, nothing but good taste that is.

The funny thing about politics is that both sides are guilty of a type of rhetorical hypocrisy. Even worse is the fact that they both blame the other side for it. Conservatives love to espouse values and ideals, yet they attack non-conservatives with a hatred and downright meanness historically reserved for General Sherman’s troops as they marched through the south. At the same time, liberals moan and complain that all viewpoints should be heard – except the ones that disagree with them of course.

Those are the options we are faced with as an electoral public. Go ahead, make your choice – Scylla or Charybdis? I think American politics single-handedly disproves Darwin’s theory of evolution. When this fine nation was founded, the framers of the Constitution were the most educated, intelligent and savvy group of political minds that the world has ever seen. They created a document that has served as the model for governments all over the world for the past 200+ years. These were men of such intellectual fortitude that to this day, scholars debate the intricacies of the pieces of law they created.

So what the heck happened? How did we go from Jefferson, Madison, Franklin, Washington, and so on, to the politicians we have today? Somehow as a nation we backslid from the top of Mt. Olympus into the primordial ooze. At one time we had men like Thomas Jefferson and George Washington in charge of our nation – granted, I can debate with anyone the greatness of Jefferson, let’s just say he invented the modern game of politics as we know it, but his intellect is unquestionable. Now, we have Bucky the Wonder Slug running for elected office. How did we let this occur?

In the most recent Presidential election, we had a man who was widely considered an idiot running against a rhetoric-spewing Pez dispenser. Both sides attacked each other mercilessly and slung more mud than a concert-goer at Woodstock ’99. (By the way, if you can’t keep up with the pop culture references, I will provide a companion guide. Just send me a check for $19.95, plus shipping.) Even this year in a non-presidential election year, we have a new batch of people aligning on each side to defend their turf. If they start dancing, snapping their fingers, and signing about the joys of living in America, I’m leaving! Why does all of this remind me of those junior high “elections” where you won the office by selling more candy than the other candidate? Speaking of, I think my parents found a box of M&Ms in their closet from my failed mid-80s run at class president. I ate a lot of M&Ms and never did get elected. Oh well, they melt in you mouth not your hand – that’s important to remember.

Here is where it gets really messy. As bad as I make things out to be, it’s still important for all of us to participate. I would much rather have my choice of which talking head I want to pick than to have no say whatsoever. An elected idiot is better than one that derives his power from some other source – unless, of course, there was a sword and a stone involved. Maybe that’s the answer, maybe we just need to refine how we pick our elected leaders. Instead of months of campaign ads leading up to an election, let’s have an athletic competition or a test of intelligence. Let’s get rid of the Electoral College and replace it with Jeopardy. Wow, imagine that, suddenly the fate of our nation’s government would rest in the hands of Alex Trebek.

“I’ll take Belgian Philosophers for $800…and all the delegates from South Carolina please Alex.”

Ok, maybe not. It was worth a shot. I don’t think that is exactly what the Founding Fathers had in mind either. In the end we’re stuck with what we have, no matter how bad it is. So batten down the hatches and prepare yourselves for years and years of flying mud and rapid-fire accusations. Get ready for more spots where someone looks into the camera, trashes the other side and tells you they approved of this ad. Does anyone realize that if these politicians actually did everything they are accused of doing they would be either in prison or rehab? That’s ok, it makes for good TV.

It’s not too late to just let them sell M&Ms is it?

Feel the Burn

2006-07-23T21:51:00.000-04:00

In an effort to update this thing a little more often, I thought I'd resort to the trick I used on my old website: Giving you an update of what music I'm listening to. In this case though, I thought I'd share the new CD I burned from my MP3 library. When it comes to music, I tend to get stuck on a CD or a band or even a song for a period of time. I'll listen to it almost non-stop for a period of a couple of weeks or so and then I won't listen to it again for awhile. Having said that, here's the new CD that I burned and am listening to in my car...

1. "One Angry Dwarf and 200 Solemn Faces" - Ben Folds Five
2. "Anna Ng" - They Might Be Giants
3. "Come On Eileen" - Dexy's Midnight Runners
4. "I Wanna Be Sedated" - the Ramones
5. "Down Together" - the Refreshments
6. "Trina Magna" - Blues Traveler
7. "Major Tom" - Peter Schilling
8. "Dream Police" - Cheap Trick
9. " It's the End of the World As We Know It (And I Feel Fine)" - REM
10. "Blinded By the Light" - Manfred Mann and the Rare Earth Band
11. "All These Things That I Have Done" - the Killers
12. "I Walk the Line" - Johnny Cash
13. "Laid" - James
14. "Michael D Rocking the Dail" - the Saw Doctors
15. "Hate Me" - Blue October
16. "Can't Stop" - the Red Hot Chili Peppers
17. "Big Time" - Big & Rich
18. "Afterglow" - INXS

Covered, smothered, and chopped

2006-07-22T21:19:00.000-04:00

Despite the title, this post has nothing to do with Waffle House hashbrowns. Although, they do sound pretty good right about now. Actually, this has to do with something that happened yesterday that bothered me a little. I was in a bookstore and, over the store's speakers, I heard a techno-dance-remix cover of Don Henley's "Boys of Summer." The original song is a radio classic. It was covered a couple of years ago by the Ataris. While their version wasn't nearly as strong as the original, it wasn't bad. But now, we have a techno-dance-remix version. Where does this end? Shouldn't there be a statute of limitiations on the number of times a song can be covered in a certain period of time?

Don't get me wrong, not all covers are bad. In fact, I've heard several covers that are better than the originals. For instance, if you've never heard the late, great Johnny Cash's cover of the Nine Inch Nails song "Hurt", I advise that you do so as soon as possible. The cover blows the original version out of the water. But this is the exception rather than the rule. It doesn't mean that the music industry should stop churning out covers, just that they should use more discretion in choosing which ones they do.

I've read several times that "Yesterday" by the Beatles is the most covered song in the history of rock n roll. I'm sure there are a few good versions of it floating around. But I'm also sure that none of them even come close to the original. Seriously, it's hard to improve upon the Beatles. But that hasn't stopped several bands from trying.

Maybe some people like techno-dance-remix versions of songs. I'm sure there's a place in this big world for it. But in my world, I'll take the original version any day.

Microwaveable Burritos for the Soul

2006-07-16T00:43:00.000-04:00

A colleague of mine recently called my attention to an article that basically criticized American society for “dumbing” itself down. The primary example given was that in the audience for a movie, the crowd did not get references made to turn-of-the-last-century literary characters or historical subjects. The belief of this writer was that people are so out-of-tune with literature and history because they have been “dumbed down.” Part of the blame in this was aimed at the movie industry which has been accused of pandering to the lowest common denominator many times. But, the truth is that it is far deeper than that and the movie industry – and society as a whole - is not necessarily solely to blame. There are a lot of factors that have gone into this. Also, we need to be careful not to widen the rift between the two sides and make it virtually impossible to do anything about it.

The “dumbing down” of America is not a new thing. I remember when I was in High School – back in what now feels like the Dark Ages – my American History teacher criticizing the student body for its anti-intellectualism. At my high school, and I’m sure at countless other across the country, it seemed like the kids who were smart and had a variety of interests were marginalized by the other students in favor of those that were cool and stylish, but not exactly smart. There seemed to be a gap between the two sets that widened every year. Welcome to the world of high school where class struggles played out like a John Hughes movie. Of course I would venture to guess that the kids of today have no idea who John Hughes even is.

I personally felt this pull on numerous occasions. I saw myself as a member of the first group. Even then I was into writing and literature and I have always been a big history buff. But at the same time, I was also involved in sports. I played baseball, basketball, and football. As a result, I was also thrust into the world of the prototypical jock. It was in this world where the dichotomy between the two really became apparent to me. I often found myself being pulled between two equally strong forces – those of being a member of the team and those of being a member of the intellectual class. Sometimes it created more than a few strange looks. I remember the time when I was stared at for reading Hemingway on the bus to one of our baseball games. It reminded me of the scene in the movie “Major League” where Tom Berenger’s character felt he needed to read the classics, so he reads a “Moby Dick” comic book.

I bring this up not to reinforce stereotypes of dumb jocks or snooty intellectuals but rather to provide an historical perspective on this particular issue. Anti-intellectualism has been around for awhile – it is not a new thing. Also, it is not my desire to further widen the chasm between the poles. I simply wish to explain and hopefully provide a common bridge between the two. As a person who has been there and experienced both sides, I know the tension that exists.

In an effort to organize my oftentimes chaotic thoughts, I want to discuss anti-intellectualism in three different areas: pop-culture, politics, and the work world. Hopefully, by examining each of these areas, we can bring a little harmony and understanding in that particular area. (If not, we can at least have a little fun at some people’s expense in the process!) So, without further adieu…

ANTI-INTELLECTUALISM AND POP CULTURE

To some, pop culture is the enemy of intellectualism. It is candy for the brain, providing a quick burst of non-nutritious sugar before quickly burning itself out only to leave the consumer needing another hit to avoid mental withdrawal. The abundance of reality TV shows is probably the best example of this that we have. At any given time, you can turn on the TV and see someone either trying to win money by eating something never intended for human consumption (or animal consumption for that matter, I mean, do you really think cow rectums are a delicacy in any species?) or trying to make themselves seem less desperate than they really are in order to have complete strangers select a mate for them. Welcome to the world in which we live. On the intellectual food chain, this programming is basically akin to the microwaveable burrito. Even so, it is often better to eat a microwaveable burrito than to starve.

There is, after all, historical precedent for low-brow entertainment. Most often this occurs in the form of humor. Today, you often hear people criticize movies as being juvenile or stupid. These same people deride the movie industry for producing such tripe and the American moviegoer for watching it. I have no problem placing myself on the side of those who prefer good old fashioned witty banter to poor, scatological humor any day, but, there is value in low-brow humor – well, at least in some low-brow humor. Today, the limits are being pushed farther and farther to the point where eventually these limits will cease to exist. I am not looking forward to that day. However, those that use the old standby that “they just don’t make them like they used to” need to be aware of the historical precedent that they are citing.

This precedent goes back a lot farther than most people know. I’m pretty sure that when they excavated the Pompeian ruins, they discovered the remains of what appeared to be an ancient whoopee cushion - proof that even the ancient people practiced low-brow humor. Of course this toy was made of stone, didn’t make much noise, and was a pain in the butt to use…literally. But the point is that even the great civilizations of the past often stooped to less than intelligent means to find humor.

Even the esteemed and upper-crusty British have dabbled in humor most low. Most people would agree that William Shakespeare is probably the greatest writer the world has known. Ok, so maybe he didn’t write everything that is attributed to him. Maybe he did. Either way, no one denies the greatness of the things he is credited for writing. It is important to remember though that most of his plays were written to entertain the groundlings of his theater, those of poor upbringing and education. He wrote for the consumption of the masses. It’s just that with the old Elizabethan English, it sounds a lot smarter. Heck, anything sounds smarter with a British accent. So of course, Shakespeare sounds intelligent. Try reading “The Taming of the Shrew” with a thick Southern drawl or better yet, while impersonating Cartman from “South Park.” It sounds very different. That is what made Shakespeare so great, he wrote easy to understand humor, for mass consumption, in the language of the aristocratic class. The end result was that everyone got it. Everyone that is except for the high school students of today who try to read it while watching MTV in the background. But that’s high school and that’s a whole other scenario.

Think about it, in most of Shakespeare’s comedies the humor is provided by the character of Falstaff who exemplified the commoner of the time. His shtick was to observe the aristocratic from the perspective of the everyday person and give them a good mocking. And in truth, they deserved a good mocking. But it was a low-brow shot at the unabashedly high-brow. Of course today, this would be accomplished by someone dressed like a common person smartly kicking a fancy dressed person in the royal crotch or maybe an ill-timed escape of aristocratic flatulence - same message, different pulpit. You get the picture.

For years, the Irish have been praised for their humor and wit. Probably the most revered of these wits was Oscar Wilde. Mr. Wilde made his living volleying low-brow mockery at the upper crust of society. His greatest works are stuffed with humor designed to knock the aristocracy down a peg or two. He often accomplished this through setting his works in the middle of aristocratic society and all of its splendor and having the dialogue be crude and not-so splendorous. Imagine Beavis and Butthead in tuxedos at a high-society gala and you get the point. Think of this as a microwaveable burrito served on fine china with a side of truffles.

Even our esteemed American writers have often denigrated themselves to a lower (or at least perceived lower) level in order to accomplish their goals. Mark Twain might be the most renowned American humorist. He made his reputation as a folksy, down home man of humble origins spouting pithy statements filled with wit and perception. He didn’t set himself up as a member of the cultural elite. In fact, he was more of the anti-elite. I’m guessing Twain would have been rather fond of whoopee cushions too. Hey this is my piece; I can speculate however I choose!

In the realm of television and movies, this type of humor has been around since the good old days as well. Charlie Chaplin, Buster Keaton, and the Three Stooges are all known for slapstick humor. Ok, so the Stooges usually did slap-everyone humor. But these all-time comedy greats began their careers, long before any of the MTV generation was even born. Actually, they started their careers long before the MTV generation’s grandparents were even born. I think Dick Clark was around though. The point is that these are not the products of a recently declining intellectual society.

Back to the Brits for a second, the whole reason we know of Monty Python to this day is because they were masters of poking fun at high-society in a manner stupid enough for mass consumption. You didn’t think Holy Grail was just about finding the object of Arthurian legend did you?

Currently, the longest-running non-news related TV show still on the air is another classic example of this. I am a huge fan of “The Simpsons.” This show has poked more fun at society in general than any other institution. And let’s face it, society has needed a good poking for awhile. Much like the Pythons, the humor of the Simpsons is stratified to produce multiple results. There are stupid sight gags, funny one-liners, perceptive witticisms, and social satire, all rolled into one large yellow-skinned, four fingered ball. That’s why it works. It takes the best of all worlds and gives it a noogie.

American culture has always been rugged and rough. We have always revered the common man more than the elite. That has been our enduring legacy. After all, we made John Wayne a star. On the other hand, the French, who are often praised for their elegance and sophistication, made Jerry Lewis a star. Go figure. I guess it shows that we have some standards.

The truth is that both elements of society are required. The two exist in a yin and yang sort of symbiotic relationship. In some cases, they can even help each other out. I’d be willing to bet that viewership to “Inside the Actor’s Studio” increased after being parodied on “Saturday Night Live.” So there is a symbiotic relationship between the two – both must exist. If one went away, the other would as well. If we didn’t have low-brow, then we wouldn’t have high-brow and vice-versa. People are not all wired the same. Some people find some things funny while others find it disgusting. Likewise, some people find something humorous and thought provoking, while others struggle to form a thought period. When these two are balanced just right, we can exist in harmony as a society. The key is to not swing too far in the direction of one or the other. Sadly, we do appear to be swinging a little too much toward the stupid. That is why it is essential for the non-stupid (you know who you are, if you don’t then, well, I’ve got bad news for you) to continue to strive to educate themselves and others in the ways of the non-stupid. Just remember, both have their place. Sometimes you feel like filet mignon and sometimes that week old microwaveable burrito actually looks good.

ANTI-INTELLECTUALISM AND POLITICS

The suggestion that we have digressed down some bizarre Darwinian scale of de-evolution in politics is just plain absurd. We have always been stupid in this area. For every Abraham Lincoln or Theodore Roosevelt we’ve elected, there has also been a Warren Harding or a Chester Arthur. That’s the nature of politics. Sometimes you vote for New York strip and other times you vote for that mystery meat from your elementary school cafeteria. It has ALWAYS been this way. Think about it, in 1876 we elected – well, actually the House of Representatives elected in the prequel to the 2000 election – a man by the name of Rutherford B. Hayes as President. The man’s name was Rutherford. RUTHERFORD. To make matters worse, he had a funny beard. That was over 125 years ago.

As you can see, Jessie Ventura getting elected governor of the land of Mall America was just the natural progression of things. Once we elected Ronald Reagan President and Sonny Bono a representative, we opened the door for a lot of potential strangeness to ensue. Actually, the floodgates were opened awhile ago, those guys just rode the wave through. To show you how bizarre politics can be, Jerry Springer was actually an elected official BEFORE he left to do his show. You know things are bad when you leave one line of work to enter one where you deal with alien-possessed, three-toothed, 400-lb strippers, who are sleeping with their brothers. Come to think of it, maybe the one prepared him for the other.

A lot of people cite the example of Hollywood stars making public political statements as proof that anti-intellectualism has taken over the world of politics entirely. They bemoan the fact in today’s world more people can name the “Friends” cast than the members of the Supreme Court. In today’s entertainment-driven culture, celebrities are often viewed as more important political leaders than the people who are actually engaged in the practice of politics. As sad as it may be, it too is not a new thing. In 1865, arguably the greatest political figure this country has ever known, Abraham Lincoln (duh), was assassinated by the most famous actor of the time John Wilkes Booth. Now THAT’S a political statement. Think about that the next time a Baldwin (pick a Baldwin, any Baldwin) or Streisand makes a political statement on television. I doubt they would ever be willing to go that far!

ANTI-INTELLECTUALISM AND THE WORK WORLD

Finally (mercifully) we come to this area. There are those who make the argument that in today’s high-technology, computer-driven world, we don’t need such things as knowledge of literature and history. That creativity has been replaced by productivity and utilitarianism. That’s not the case. It is true that today’s society has become more technologically advanced than any before it. The knowledge and skill required to function properly in this environment is indeed essential. But so is the knowledge of other areas as well. There is a beauty in learning about the classics. There is an excitement in learning history. These things should never be fully phased out. Once again, the key is striking that perfect balance between the two. One cannot live on one type of knowledge alone. The perfect person is the well-rounded one. Remember, your technical skill and knowledge might get you in the door, but your overall knowledge and ability to adapt to others will keep you there. Even as our society continues to shift away from the traditional realm of intellectualism and toward the cold and sterile realm of technical ability, there will always be a place for those who are enamored with the classics and remain glued to their creative ideals – they’re called waiters.

So what was my point in all of this – to be honest with you I don’t remember either. Actually, my point was that we may as a society be backsliding into some cultural morass of stupidity. We are probably appealing to the lowest common denominator instead of aiming higher. But it isn’t a new thing. We have been on this same ride for centuries. And, it’s not necessarily a bad thing. Entertainment is just that, entertaining. It is meant to entertain. If something is stupid and it makes you laugh, then it did its job. We need to be careful though that we don’t become cultural illiterates. A stupid diversion every once-in-awhile can be a good thing – stupidity as a lifestyle is, well, stupid. After all, a person can only take so many microwaveable burritos before they explode in a cloud of uncultured and ignorant methane. While I’m not sure about the Pompeians, I’m pretty sure that even ole Mark Twain wouldn’t enjoy that.

Rest in Pieces

2006-07-03T23:47:00.000-04:00

I'm sad to report that there was a death in the family today. Ok, perhaps I'm being a bit overdramatic. But still, my chair broke tonight! This wasn't just any chair either, this was my overstuffed, La-Z-Boy recliner that I've had since before I had my own apartment. It was worn in all the right places and super comfortable. I've lost track of the number of hours I spent sitting in it.

This was the chair that was the only place where I could sleep a couple of years ago when I had the flu and was coughing non-stop for three weeks. This was the chair in which I studied for every exam in law school. This was the chair in which I sat for every March Madness or Mythbusters marathon. In other words, it was put to good use - often!

But now, it's broken. I'm contemplating going to Home Depot and purchasing the requisite wood needed to fix the part of it that broke. Unfortunately, I don't think I'm handy enough to pull that off. So it appears that the chair is now a part of furniture past. I take that back, this chair was more than just another piece of furniture. It was a member of the family. Ok, maybe not.

My parents have offered to replace it with a similar chair that they purchased for their basement this past winter. I've sat in this chair. It's nice, but it's not my chair. I guess I could always bite the bullet and buy myself a new chair. But still, it just won't be the same.

So rest in peace, or in this case rest in pieces. You had a good life. Thank goodness I still have my couch.

Monet and Psychology: The Sky is Green

2006-06-24T00:07:00.000-04:00

It's been a long week and now it's the weekend, so I've resorted to recycling another one of my old essays. Think of it as a "Greatest Hits"...or something like that.

One thing I have learned is that no matter how screwed up your life is, there is always someone out there whose life is infinitely more like an episode of Jerry Springer than yours. There’s always a friend out there who has real problems that dwarf your own. This just demonstrates why the old saying – “The grass is always greener on the other side of the fence.” – is not usually the reality of the situation. It’s all a matter of perception. Our lives are, as we perceive them to be. For that reason, the “grass is greener” maxim is somewhat true. If we perceive the grass to be greener, then we will believe that it is. But in reality, it’s like a painting by Monet. When you stand at a distance, your brain tricks you into thinking that what you see is a beautiful, cohesive, image. This is “the other side of the fence.” But when you look at the image from close up, what you see is a collection of strange colorful glops of paint that more closely resemble Rorschach’s inkblots than they do any thing you’ve ever seen before. Our perceptions dictate how we see our lives versus others.

We see our own lives from so close a proximity that it is like looking through a microscope. Thus, we are left with the Monet looked upon from an uncomfortably close distance and the unrecognizable blobs of paint. Our lives look very unartistic from this range. At the same time, we are viewing others’ lives from afar. As a result, we soak in the complete, and to our brains, more beautiful image.

There is a similar concept to this in Social Psychology (I know, here I go again spewing from my psychology textbooks) called the out-group homogeneity effect. As is often the case with psychological concepts, this is a very long name to describe a rather simple concept. Psychologists, along with lawyers and philosophers, are most often paid by the word in case you’re wondering why there is a virtual cornucopia of long-winded titles for simple concepts. Since I was a psychology major and I graduated from law school, you the reader are now subjected to me also using long titles to describe simple concepts. Sorry. I’ll return to the simple concept now. The Out-Group Homogeneity effect basically means that we perceive those not in our specific group – race, gender, socio-economic background, university affiliation, whatever – as being far more similar to others not in our group than those within our group are to us. In other words, “They (fill in the blank with whatever group you’re referring to) are all the same.” We view those not within our immediate group as being vastly different than we perceive those we see on a daily basis. This is the Monet principle again. Those that aren’t in our group are perceived from a distance and the formless, shapeless, blobs of their lives, seem to run together into a beautiful, well-defined form. Those that are in our group – and most specifically ourselves – are viewed from up close and we see the ugly blobs of our lives rather than the total picture that we see of others. The end result is that we usually perceive our own problems, however minute, as far more serious than they truly are.

Granted, no one is ever going to adhere to this concept entirely, to do so would almost certainly require us to cease to view our own problems as problems, which even minor usually tend to be actual problems. Instead, we must learn to place things in their proper perspective. We must learn to view our lives as those around us do. We must be able to step back from time to time and view things from afar. There are times when our problems are the biggest problems of the day and there are times when our problems just don’t matter. We need to learn when these times are. In the immortal words of Kenny Rogers (wow, I never thought I’d ever say that!), “you gotta know when to hold ‘em, know when to fold ‘em, know when to walk away, know when to run.”

In doing so, we learn how to view our lives in the big picture and we see them as we would see a Monet. So rather than the random spots and brushstrokes of color, we see the whole beautiful picture. Then, we deal with our problems when the time is right.

Dealing with your problems leads to another psychological issue of perspective. A lot of times, our problems are problems because we perceive them as such. Therefore, we see something in our life that bothers us, and we tend to view it as a problem thus making it so. It is sometimes the case that the only reason that this is a problem is because we view it as such. In order to deal with this, sometimes we have to manipulate our perception to rid it of the problem.

Everyone has heard the old maxim that we can’t control what others think of us. We all know this to be true. Well, that is unless you work in the public relations industry or are part of the White House Press Corps. Then you are sure that you can control what others think, or at least what they should think about someone. But for the rest of us mere mortals, we have no chance at controlling the thought patterns of others in relation to their opinions of ourselves. The best we can do is to act in a way that we want others to see and allow them to believe what they will. The truth is usually somewhere in between our thoughts and theirs. Even if you act consistently with the Golden Rule in every occasion, there will be those who choose to think ill of you. So why bother trying to alter others’ opinions of yourself.

Instead, alter your own perception on things. If you do something because someone tells you to do it and you are worried that you are solely acting in that way because they control you, then convince yourself that you are doing it because you want to do it. Now, instead of them thinking they have control over you and you thinking they have control over you. They think they have control over you and you think you had fun. You can’t change what they think, so change what you think. Now obviously this has its limitations. If you go around convincing yourself that the sky is green, you won’t be well adjusted - you’ll be nuts. And others will think you’re nuts anyway, so you’re screwed either way.

So our lives are all viewed through our own perceptions. How we choose to perceive the world around us determines how we perceive our own circumstances. There are those of us who choose to view our lives as a Monet – from a distance to enjoy the overall image and the breathtaking beauty or up close where all we see is the various blotches of color with no beautiful image and nothing but chaos. This describes the vast majority of the population. Which group you fit into is up to you. But I would recommend to you this, most art museums place ropes in front of the Monets to keep the viewing public at a distance. Take a hint from them. Then again, there are others who choose to view their lives as an Escher, there are staircases leading to nowhere in particular and nothing makes sense. For those people, it might be a little more than a matter of perception, it may be a matter of medication or lack thereof. But that’s another topic for another time.

Weekend Warrior

2006-06-19T21:56:00.000-04:00

Ok, so I'm not as young as I used to be. This is a realization I've had to come by, albeit kicking and screaming. But I think I'm finally ready to admit it. For those of you that don't know, I play in an amateur baseball league. We play on Wednesday nights and Sunday mornings. Well, after yesterday's game, my body is just a little bit sore. Unfortunately, it's my legs that are the most sore. So all day at work, my walking resembled more of a pained waddle than a confident or athletic gait. It wouldn't have been so bad except that the three pregnant women in the office were making fun of me for it. Let me tell you, that is a humbling experience.

Anyway, the whole thought of getting older is a little frustrating to me. I guess I have a little bit of Peter Pan syndrome - I don't ever want to grow up. I always told myself that as long as I could do the things athletically that I always could, that I wasn't getting any older. I could show up at the baseball field, lace up my spikes, and play with no worries. No post-game ice sessions or ibuprofen cocktails needed. Unfortunately, those days are behind me and it's days like to today that hammer that point home to me.

Oh well, I guess I can always continue to act childish.

After All, Freud Was a Man

2006-06-18T17:29:00.000-04:00

Ok, so I figured it'd probably be a good idea to actually post something worth reading in this thing. But, since I don't really have anything on my mind at the moment that's pushing any of the creative buttons in my head, I thought I'd post one of my older writings. By the way, all of my future postings won't be this long - I promise. Anyway, enjoy...

For years, men have been inundated with information as to how we are to act and be. Granted, women deal with the same problem (probably even to a greater extent.) But that is not the focus of this piece. No, this piece is centered on something that I actually know about – being a man. What problems could possibly be involved in this? That’s what I’m going to attempt to make known.

Back in the Stone Age, men were far simpler creatures. They were loud and dirty and went around hitting women over the head with clubs. (Ok, except for the last part, maybe not that much has changed.) Their lives revolved around hunting and gathering. They would leave in the morning and not return home until they had hunted or gathered something for the family to eat. Basically their main concerns were which animal skin to wear and the direction of the wind. Well, that and whether they could outrun their friends in case dinner decided it didn’t want to be dinner. That was one benefit of the hunting and gathering lifestyle – one didn’t spend a lot of time sitting around the cave. Our primitive ancestors weren’t asked to do much housework.

As time progressed, men progressed as well. I know in some cases this is debatable, but for the most part it is true. Suddenly, hunting and gathering was no longer the only concern of the species. For most of the formative years of maledom, hunting and gathering was actually replaced with fighting and thus the golden age of military history was born. For centuries, brave men went off to war and fought valiantly for whatever the cause. Some of these men had a deep desire to fight and possibly die for the underlying principle for which that particular war was being fought. Still others simply wanted to get out of the house for awhile. Whatever the reason, men had advanced societally.

While there still are wars being fought, for the most part they are now left to those who make fighting and the military their job, once again shifting the burden away from men-at-large to provide the necessary manpower, for lack of a better word. This has led men to further progress away from their hunting and gathering background and more towards a sitting and watching existence. Personally, I think had cable existed in the Stone Age, there would have been a whole lot less hunting and gathering.

So what was the purpose of this historical backstory? To be honest, I have no idea. I really just wanted to use the phrase hunting and gathering a lot. That’s not a phrase that comes up in daily conversation very much at all outside of an anthropology classroom. I just thought a little branching out was in order. Oh well.

The crux of this discussion revolves more around the attitudinal shift guys have had to deal with in recent years and the sometimes fine line we walk on a daily basis in trying to balance the expectations placed upon us. Men are expected to be strong, confident, and display leadership. They are also expected to be nurturing, supportive, and understanding. While these things are not mutually exclusive, they can often tug in opposite directions. They end result is often a feeling more usually reserved for those taffy stores you see in every beachfront town on the East coast.

Before I go any further I think it is critical to point out that this is intended in no way to promote male chauvinism or any other attitude that would demean women or undervalue them in any way. For my entire life, I have been brought up with the belief that women should be on equal footing with men and I have tried to make sure I never do anything to go against that. So please do not take this in that way. I am merely trying to point out some of the things that I deal with on a daily basis as a man and I’m sure I’m not the only one.

Getting back to the task at hand (by the way, have you figured out yet, that I really have no clue where I am going with this – and that’s why we have taken a meandering path to this point?) I hope to make light of some things using personal experiences.

Men, for the most part, are called upon to perform a difficult balancing act on a daily basis. We are asked to maintain a certain level of manliness, hearkening back to our prehistorical, hunting and gathering (there’s that phrase again) days. We are also expected to balance that with the more enlightened man of the modern era. This is the man that is expected to be sensitive and share interests other than hunting and gathering. (I’m not going to say it.) In a way, this is very similar to the Freudian theory of personality. Freud espoused the idea that we have three distinct stages of development that we must go through and that we have to deal with even after having gone through them. Freud, of course, called these the “Id”, “Ego”, and “Superego”. For the purposes of this piece, think of the “Id” as the hunter and gatherer (…never mind…), the more primitive, base instinct. There is a beer commercial where a guy talks about eating ketchup packets as a meal - that would be this side. The other two represent a more highly developed stage of personality. This is the stage that is more civilized. I think the “Superego” is the side that can pick out a good wine to go with fish or something like that. Either way you look at it, Freudian theory stated that we wrestle with these stages throughout our development. And it is this struggle that forms our personalities.

Recently I had an interesting experience. I was out running some errands – ok, I was buying bread – and I started friendly conversation with the girl behind the counter. I had no purpose in this conversation other than to make the few minutes I was there buying bread a little more pleasant. After a couple of minutes of nothing more than friendly banter about some of the items in the bakery, my friendly sales clerk proceeded to offer me a bagel – on the house. Now, this gesture amounted to little more than a free $.75 gift. But it did present an interesting question in the mind of this guy. When a female in such a situation is as friendly to you as this, should you bite and ask her out?

Now, the male brain – and yes, there is such a thing – is wired with two distinctly different poles. One part is an evolutionary throwback to our hunter and gatherer, animal skin wearing, pre-enlightenment, days. That part of the brain revels in the thrill of the chase and believes that men as a right should take every opportunity like this and instigate such a hunt. Granted, this is also the same part of the brain that created the pickup line. So, it doesn’t exactly have a history of being very intelligent.The other part is that of the modern realist. This is the part that usually controls the finances and other mundane daily items. When this side kicks in, you are faced with the realization that the bakery girl is in the service industry and her job is to be friendly to customers. I remember a couple of years ago when I was eating dinner with a couple of buddies of mine at a restaurant. We had a really friendly, attractive, waitress, who my friend thought was paying special attention to him. After he contemplated out loud to me about whether or not he should ask her out, he was reminded by my other friend that “She is a waitress, she is going for a bigger tip, you idiot.” In the end, he didn’t ask, so we’ll never know. But this is the fine line we walk on a regular basis. I have encountered this several times. Being the overly cautious person that I am in this area, I tend to listen more to the realist side of my brain in such circumstances. My rule of thumb is this: “If she is in the service industry, and especially if there is a tip involved, SHE IS JUST BEING FRIENDLY!” While I have no idea if this is indeed true, it has saved me from some potentially very embarrassing moments – or so I would think.

Then again, we are guys, sometimes this practical, logical side has a tendency to be overpowered by the other more testosterony side. (That is a word, I looked it up. It’s a type of pasta eaten by really hairy Italian guys with unbuttoned shirts and large medallions hanging around their necks and wearing pinky rings…ok, maybe not) This is the side that often leads guys – and not necessarily single ones either – to leave very large tips to very attractive waitresses. I know this. I was a waiter for two summers while in college. I witnessed this many times and always got a hearty laugh out of it, especially when the waitresses would come back to the server area and talk about it. They always joked around about the guy who thought they she was flirting with him and left her a huge tip. Another thing, this doesn’t work both ways. I NEVER got a large tip for flirting with a woman at one of my tables. The only time I got a really large tip was when a kid spilled his drink all over me and the family felt sorry for me. Even with this first-hand knowledge, I still have fallen into this trap before as a restaurant patron. Let’s just say that a buddy and I left a 60% tip once for a waitress we thought was particularly attractive and particularly flirty. It would have been a little smaller but we kept upping each other in some bizarre attempt to curry more favor with her. I think at one point, he attempted to throw his watch into the pot. At the end of the night, neither one of us left with her – of course. We were a little bit lighter in the wallets and she had a nice story to tell to the other waitresses.

So that is the mental balancing act that all guys wrestle with on a daily basis. This is the Freudian progression we undergo regularly. We try to listen to both sides. A lot of times, this isn’t a problem. Every-once-in-awhile though, the cave man on the one shoulder has a tendency to scream a little louder and we revert to our more primitive selves. It’s these times that we leave a little lighter in the wallets or a little red-faced from some really cheesy pickup attempt gone awry. But it is also these times that leave everyone with a good story to tell. So instead of getting upset at how stupid we can be sometimes, be thankful for these moments. If it weren’t for these, things would be a lot more boring.

A little introduction

2006-06-18T17:23:00.000-04:00

I've had a couple of friends tell me that I needed to start my own blog. I resisted for awhile based on my own perceived laziness. But, I finally gave in and decided to dip my toes in the shallow end of the blogging pool. Hopefully, I'll do a better job of updating this than I think I actually will. I guess we'll see.