Disclaimer

I go to a lot of effort to make sure I give other people proper credit when I borrow their ideas, stories, images, etc. Please give me that same courtesy.

All posts dated prior to July 30, 2009 are taken whole or in part from my more extensive MySpace blog. If you have a MySpace profile feel free to send me a friend request to get full access to my blogs there.

MySpace Tracker

August 27, 2009

Pirates, Crichton, Spielberg, and Koepp: Who Could Ask for Anything More?

I just so happened to stumble across this article regarding a project to make a movie.

Not just any movie. A pirate movie.

And not just any pirate movie, but one based on a book by Michael Crichton (being published posthumously).

And not just any adaptation of a Crichton novel, but one with a script possibly written by David Koepp (adapted Jurassic Park and The Lost World) and produced -- possibly even directed -- by Steven Spielberg.



Here's a description of the novel:

The Caribbean, 1665. A remote colony of the English crown, the island of Jamaica holds out against the vast supremacy of the Spanish empire. Devoid of London's luxuries, Port Royal, its capital, is a cutthroat town of taverns, grog shops, and bawdy houses. In this steamy climate, life can end swiftly by dysentery — or dagger. But for a daring soul like Captain Edward Hunter, this wild outpost in the New World can also lead to great fortune, if he abides by the island's code. In the name of His Majesty King Charles II of England, gold in Spanish hands is gold for the taking and the law of the land rests with those ruthless enough to make it.

Word in port is that the Spanish galleon El Trinidad, fresh from New Spain, is awaiting repairs in nearby Matanceros. Heavily fortified, the impregnable Spanish harbor is guarded by the bloodthirsty Cazalla, a favorite commander of King Philip IV. With the Jamaican governor's backing, Hunter assembles a crew of ruffians to infiltrate the enemy island and commandeer the galleon and its fortune in Spanish gold. The raid is as perilous as the bloodiest tales of Matanceros legend, and Hunter will lose more than one man before he makes it onto the island's shores, where dense jungle and the firepower of Spanish infantry stand between him and the treasure.

With the help of his cunning band, Hunter hijacks El Trinidad and escapes the deadly clutches of Cazalla, leaving plenty of carnage in his wake. But the danger — and adventure — are only just beginning...


The book will be released November 24, 2009. The movie is still in the very earliest phases.

August 24, 2009

What is a Woman?

This is a question I've been asking myself since the Caster Semenya gender scandal gained popularity last week.

It's interesting, being a woman and suddenly asking myself what makes me think I am a woman. Or what makes me classify other women as women.


Is it our long hair?
Certainly not, since many men wear their hair long and many women wear theirs short.


Is it our curves? The indentation at the waist, the full breasts, or the pouting lips?
Happily, I think not; otherwise, I (and many popular models) would not be considered women because of our nearly flat chests and lack of any real curviness. Then, too, are those who've undergone cosmetic and gender reassignment surgeries: Are they more womanly than I am because a doctor enhanced or completely altered the shape and nature of the body parts that Nature and God assigned them?

Is it purely genetic composition, perhaps chromosomal markers, that designate gender? I wouldn't think so for two reasons: 1) gender is more of a social label, whereas sex refers more to scientific classification by chromosomes; and 2) as the above article points out, some "women" don't have standard female chromosomes. We may think of the definitions of the sexes as always being XX or XY, but there are variations where an individual has an extra chromosome -- possibly XXY -- making it more difficult to classify them.

What is it then that makes a woman a woman? I'm tempted to say that it is one's ability to conceive and bear children (since it's the one thing a male can't do), but this has the obvious flaw in that many women, for one reason or another, cannot have children.

This also raises the possibility that maybe, just maybe, we shouldn't define gender as strictly one or the other, black-or-white; being a female isn't merely a lack of male characteristics or the possession of characteristics males lack. Indeed, there's something more.


Photo from the Huffington Post website.


Other questions come to mind as well: Why does it matter whether Caster is a woman? And why is this athlete's gender suddenly being questioned?

It seems the IAAF is so interested in Caster because the athlete is so much faster than other opponents in recent races and has even been breaking her previous records. That this would be so remarkable is confusing to me, since at 18 her body continues to grow, and I'm sure many of these changes would result in increased strength and speed, especially when combined with proper diet and a rigorous training routine.

So what, then? Is it really so odd for a female athlete to demonstrate superior abilities? Or do we prefer that our top female athletes be model material?

I won't even begin to suggest, as many people in the article suggest, that race would be a factor. Babe Didrikson was American, white, and of Norwegian descent -- yet her gender was questioned for years because of her dominance of sports, even putting many prominent male athletes to shame.

So now I think we're getting somewhere. It's not because Caster's black or poor that makes anyone question her gender. It's the combination of her athletic ability and -- let's face it -- downright unfeminine appearance.

But if she were merely unfeminine would we question her gender, or would it even be such a big deal? Heck, I don't think she's very feminine, and in fact I myself question whether she is a woman because of the way her body is storing muscle and the fact that she could use a shave. But it seems that some people (including her competitors) only question it because she is so freakin' talented.

What does this tell us? Well, it tells me two things: 1) society isn't very comfortable with unfeminine women, and 2) there is an idea (even among female athletes) that women cannot compete at the same level as men.

As a woman, I find both deplorable. Then again, I think all sports and athletic competitions should be coed, anyway. I've always thought that smacked of discrimination to separate male and female athletes.

And now we come back to my original question: What is a woman? The only honest answer I can give is that a woman is whatever she makes of herself. If she can only be a woman by possessing stereotypical physical traits, then more power to her. If reproducing is what makes her feel like a woman, then have at it.

As for myself, I'm off to perform my Suzie Homemaker routine -- minus the pearls, heels or makeup, but with lots of punk rock and some accounting lesson reviews to boot.

August 21, 2009

Untitled Love Poem

**DISCLAIMER: I did not write this. Someone wrote it for me years ago, but he didn't sign it, so I'm not sure exactly who it was (as if I've actually had that many suitors in my life). I came across it today while sorting some papers and thought I'd share it.**



Untitled Poem:

Deep into that hazel Abyss,
I cry out for the imprisoned one!
The one who has chained herself
From the outside.

Those terrible monsters made
Her invert & lock out life's beauty.

Ooh, how I long for her presence...

Maybe if she only knew
That I will protect her from the New Monsters,
And how I will nurse her when
She is sick, pity her when she is poor,
And love her when she is unloved!
-- Anonymous

August 17, 2009

Was Witty Headline Disrespectful?

The headline ("Human Torch" Had Issues Burning Inside) could have been worse. At least she wasn't accused of perjury in the attempted murder suit, in which case...

...I think you knew where I'm going with this one.

I'm all about comedy and satire and general bad taste from sources like The Onion, but when we're talking about a legitimate news source? It's fine in some cases, like when a local news agency expresses the local population's disapproval of government overstepping its bounds. Particularly in the headline I just referenced, many were outraged that an elderly woman had been arrested for urinating behind a bush when she realized she wouldn't make it to the bathroom in time. The headline, in this case, served as a public reprimand to government officials who'd gone too far.

But in the earlier headline I mention, this was a horrendous act. Countless people watched a woman burn to death, and many people were hurt in the process of trying to help her. To make matters worse, she may have set herself on fire intentionally.

Yes, the headline caught my attention. Yes, I smiled as I registered the wit involved. Does that mean I approve of a legitimate news agency using it? No. It only diminishes their integrity, and identifies NBC Miami as yet another pseudo-journalist organization more interested in ratings and advertised support than in creating thought-provoking, relevant news.

Please, leave the witty headlines to smaller news publications, satire papers, and bloggers.

WANTED: My Ideal Employer

Recent college graduate (Bachelor of Business Administration with concentration in Accounting) seeks employment. Ideal employer will be a quiet, rough- to good-looking, moody male (though female would also be acceptable) possessing a quick wit and ample appreciation of...well...me...and all the talents I have to offer.



I am interested in an all-around assistant position working for a private detective, lawyer, writer, etc. Desired tasks include those associated with conducting witty banter, as well as general secretarial, administrative and clerical functions; in addition, with my education I can easily fill general bookkeeping, accounting, and tax preparation functions as well. I am a very flexible employee and am eager to assume multiple positions in order to provide the best possible service to my employer.



The environment should be reflective of a small, run-down office, perhaps behind a bar, restaurant, or some other completely unrelated business. Dialog should be scanty to nonexistent at times, with bouts of drunken outbursts or my employer seeking advice on how he should be performing his job. Conversations about how I am too gorgeous, intelligent, and witty to be tied to one man should occur on a weekly basis, though drunken advances should be kept to a minimum since I am, in fact, tied to one man.



Travel should be infrequent, though I am willing to accompany my employer on occasional fact-finding, surveillance, or research-related excursions. Hours are strictly limited from 8am-5pm Monday-Friday, though I am willing to accept phone calls (preferably of a drunken, random, and complimentary nature) at all hours; and when able, I am willing to do occasional work outside of my specified hours at time-and-a-half pay plus compensation for babysitting expenses.



All interested parties are encouraged to respond immediately.

August 3, 2009

Book vs. Kindle

Well, the internet effectively killed the CD and the noble history of the album; now the Kindle (and any competitors that emerge in the near future) is attacking books, which reigned supreme as the primary mode of recording information for millenia.

Thankfully, Green Apple Books is here to monitor the fight-to-the-death as it erupts around the world, pitting father against son, brother against brother, brick-and-mortar book retailer against major global-internet-seller-and-destroyer-of-time-honored-cultural-traditions.

I'm sure you can tell where I stand on the issue.

Without further ado, to follow are the first four of a reportedly ten-part series:


"Where's the book?"


The guy with the book will not be reading alone tonight!
"I never needed a doctor's note for a book!"




"I like to read in bed and I like to sleep in bed."

July 31, 2009

Inspiration for an updated Home Alone

According to the Birmingham News, two young men in the Birmingham (that's Alabama) area targeted homeowners in upscale neighborhoods based on when they updated their FaceBook accounts that they'd be out of town.

I can see it now: an updated Home Alone where the crooks are lured by the McCallister family's FaceBook announcement that they're all going to [insert popular family vacation destination here] for their summer vacation. Unfortunately, one precocious child is left behind. The real kicker is that Macaulay Culkin will either reprise his role as eight-year old Kevin McCalister, or he can return as the father (either a grown-up Kevin or taking on the role of the original father while the beloved child character continues his pranks and signature shocked expression) who sees the other side of the family drama as he is now the father of an abandoned child. If he plays a grown-up Kevin, we could even get a touching Hollywood moment where the father and son make one final trap for the crooks, thus ensuring a parent-child bonding experience that was absent at the beginning of the movie.

*sighs* It's a great cautionary tale about the dangers of making your profile -- and thus your life -- too public on the internet. Because if you're not careful, Hollywood can -- and will -- bring Home Alone back to punish you for your ways.

July 28, 2009

Oh, Alice!

The trailer for Tim Burton's Alice in Wonderland is finally available on IMDB at http://www.imdb.com/video/imdb/vi4240966169. The release date is set for March 5, 2010.

Here's a trailer for the upcoming adaptation entitled Malice in Wonderland, which still has the vague release date of "some time in 2009":




In this version of the tale, Alice is an American student studying in England who is hit by a cab and wakes up in a very different world.

Also rumored to be released in September 2009 is Malice in Lalaland. It's not for everyone, of course. It might not even be for me. Then again, it might...

The following educational short was released last year:




In the preceding film Ed Watkins draws on Matt Ridley's The Red Queen Theory and its assumptions on sexuality, psychology, biology, and evolution and combines it with an Alice in Wonderland theme to explain the relationship between parasites and hosts. The Red Queen Theory is itself based on the character in Through the Looking Glass because of her statement of how it was necessary for them to run so fast just to stay in the same place (similar to how we constantly reproduce and evolve/adapt in order to recombine genes and maintain the stability/survival of our species, or so the theory goes).

It's true that there's an adaption of Lewis Carroll's stories every five years or so, but with so many coming out in such a short period, this is certainly one of the best times for someone to cultivate their obsession...er, I mean interest...in all things Alice.

July 23, 2009

Monster Mash

Some experts are actually calling it monster lit (try here, here, and here for starters), but I like Gabe's suggestion of "monster mashup" and feel that a more accurate description would be mashup monster lit, or perhaps monster mashup lit (now that has a nice ring to it!). After all, monster lit could refer to so many types of literature involving monsters, but there's no mistaking what a mashup involves.

What am I talking about, exactly? Oh, it's this new trend where authors (and soon Hollywood) take public domain stories and throw in zombies, vampires, and all sorts of other creatures to turn classic novels into all-new sci-fi, thriller, and horror tales.

The genre really took off with the publishing of Pride and Prejudice and Zombies this year, but it's certainly not the only title available (or soon to be available) on the market.

Unfortunately, there are also a lot of "re-imaginings" of history and classic novels -- but with zombies, demons, and other monsters thrown in for good measure -- getting lumped in with these mashup monster lit pieces. Examples include A.E. Moorat's Queen Victoria: Demon Hunter, which to my knowledge does not contain any mashups of actual novels; it just recasts Queen Victoria as "an ass-kicking killer of evil creatures." The thing is that these mashups take a lot of work and skill that's quite different from simply rewriting history or writing a quirky new sequel that picks up where a classic left off (though I certainly don't mean to minimalize the effort put into such books as QVDH, since no writing process is truly "simple").

If this writing process took no talent/effort at all, then you wouldn't get Austen and classic literature fans raving about these new books. So, kudos to companies like Krisostomus for relegating these other books to historical fiction and to Publishers Weekly for lumping them in creepy fiction and other such categories, where they belong.

(Actually, I want to take back that comment about these other books "simply" rewriting history; they do what all good historical fictions do, which is to take real people or events and add in imaginary characters or events to create a new story. In fact, I'm looking forward to Grahame-Smith's next book, Abraham Lincoln: Vampire Hunter.)

But the fact of the matter remains that those books employ different writing devices than the mashups, so maybe I'll compile a different list of those other books later.

Here's a list of monster lit mashups, complete with descriptions and links when available:

Already Available

The War of the Worlds Plus Blood, Guts and Zombies by H.G. Wells and Eric S. Brown, published by Coscom Entertainment; available since 4/30/2009. Earth's inhabitants find themselves facing not only the newly arrived Martian invaders, but legions of their own undead compatriots as well. Considering Mr. Brown's extensive list of books in the horror genre, particularly regarding zombies, I'm surprised this one hasn't gotten more popularity, and so far as I can find is the true "father" of mashup monster lit (unless I can find an older book by a more respected author, of course).


Pride and Prejudice and Zombies, by Jane Austen and Seth Grahame-Smith, published by Quirk Books; available since 6/01/2009. Characters from Jane Austen's original novel face zombies when a mysterious plague brings Meryton's dead back to life. Keep your eyes peeled, because a deluxe edition will be available in November; according to the website, it features many more illustrations and "30% MORE...ultra-violent zombie mahem [sic]." You can read excerpts of the book here.

Adventuresof Huckleberry Finn and Zombie Jim: Mark Twain's Classic with Crazy Zombie Goodness by Mark Twain and W. Bill Czolgosz, published by Coscom Entertainment; available since 07/10/2009. I glanced over the first few pages of this book in the preview on Amazon's website, and I was not impressed; the mashup author seemed to have recast all the black characters as zombies, which made me nervous as to the racial connotations involved. On the other hand, this in itself was a genius device since the passage where the widow talks about mulattoes ends up describing her reaction to the usefulness of those who were merely half-zombie. Hopefully the plot thickens (so they say) as the story advances.

Coming Soon

Sense and Sensibility and Sea Monsters, by Jane Austen and Ben Winters, published by Quirk Books; release date 9/15/2009. More of Austen's characters interact with otherworldly creatures; in this version of the tale Colonel Brandon is a sea monster. You can find a more detailed description, with excerpts from the book, here.

Iam Scrooge: A Zombie Story for Christmas, by Adam Roberts, published by Golancz; release date 10/2009. It's unclear from the description whether this is a true mashup or a mere retelling of the classic Dickens novel; however, because it seems to contain so many of the original characters and plot points (even going so far as to suggest that Tiny Tim's mystery illness was part of the zombie plague) I'm including it here.

Well, and that's pretty much it for now, but hopefully I can find more titles soon; unfortunately, so many aren't available to read yet, and I really don't want to classify any as mashups when so many, on closer inspection, are actually sequels or retellings.


Links:
http://poesdeadlydaughters.blogspot.com/2009/03/monster-lit.html
http://www.wunderkabinett.co.uk/damndata/index.php?/archives/1704-Monster-lit-Jane-Austen-vs-Predator-vs-Zombies.html
http://www.tor.com/index.php?option=com_content&view=blog&id=14550
http://www.myspace.com/summitplanet
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mashup_(music)
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pride_and_Prejudice_and_Zombies
http://www.kriso.ee/Queen-Victoria-Demon-Hunter/db/9781444700268.html?id=4ZfS4TvT
http://austenprose.wordpress.com/2009/06/11/jane-austen-goes-paranormal-%E2%80%93-author-janet-mullany-chats-about-austen-and-vampires/
http://poesdeadlydaughters.blogspot.com/2009/03/monster-lit.html
http://janitesonthejames.blogspot.com/2009/07/which-pride-and-prejudice-and-zombies.html
http://www.publishersweekly.com/article/CA6568141.html
http://www.nytimes.com/2009/04/14/books/14arts-MOVEOVERJANE_BRF.html
http://www.amazon.com/Worlds-Plus-Blood-Guts-Zombies/dp/1897217919/ref=sr_1_3?ie=UTF8&qid=1248375412&sr=8-3
http://www.myspace.com/esbrown4
http://irreference.com/pride-and-prejudice-and-zombies/
http://irreference.com/pride-and-prejudice-and-zombies-deluxe-heirloom-edition/
http://irreference.com/pride-and-prejudice-and-zombies-chapters-1-3/
http://www.amazon.com/Adventures-Huckleberry-Finn-Zombie-Jim/dp/1897217978/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&s=books&qid=1248375412&sr=8-1
http://irreference.com/sense-and-sensibility-and-sea-monsters/
http://www.guardian.co.uk/books/2009/jul/15/austen-sea-monster-mashup
http://www.amazon.com/I-Scrooge-Zombie-Story-Christmas/dp/0575091541

July 21, 2009

Never Trust a Corpse

Here's the trailer for I Sell the Dead:






Starting August 11th you can get more details on the movie from Fangoria.

Also, I hear there will be a new Twilight Zone movie.

Oh, happy day.

July 8, 2009

Wednesdays -- Not Just for Humping Anymore




http://i54.photobucket.com/albums/g116/emiesmom/Week/wednesday1star.gif

Apparently not everyone looks forward to Wednesday as the mid-point of the work-week anymore, according to a study in the journal Social Psychiatry and Psychiatric Epidemiology.

The study, conducted by Augustine Kposowa (University of California Department of Sociology) and Stephanie D'aura, studied suicide rates from 2000-2004 all over the United States. The goal was to find any relationship between "temporal" factors like day of the week and season of the year.

Surprisingly, the study found a much higher incidence of suicide on Wednesday (24.6%) than any other day of the week -- in fact, they were 99% more likely to occur on Wednesday than on Sunday!


Here's an actual chart from the study:



As you can see, Wednesday suicides are almost double nearly every other day of the week. Why is that?

Kposowa suggested in this MSNBC article that work stress may play a heavy role in this trend. I mean, think about it: you're on your third day of this damn commute, your annoying coworkers (not to mention that one particular crazy bitch who keeps pissing you off), your asshole of a boss...and don't even get me started on the kids and their last minute projects, after-school sports/band/glee club practice, parent-teacher conferences, etc...bills that are due before payday...that spouse/significant other who just won't pick up his pants off your livingroom floor and expects you to get his good shirt drycleaned for an important meeting tomorrow -- never mind the fact that you have projects of your own...

...Okay, I'm getting off track here, sorry...

The point is that everything seems to come to a head on Wednesday, of all days (and certainly not on Mondays, which is typically the most depressing day in the songwriting world). And the weekend (and any hope of a reprieve from it all) still seems so far away. So for someone who's already thinking about suicide, this overwhelming stress can be all it takes to push them into action.



http://i177.photobucket.com/albums/w202/AmberBytchbucket/thirsty%20thursday/thursday.gif

Why the sudden drop on Thursday? Well, I think that's pretty obvious if you accept the assumption mentioned above. By Thursday you've survived most of the week. Just one more day to go, and heck -- if it's really that bad, you can just start your weekend early.


How the internet and technology are fucking with suicide
trends

This study showed some major deviations from previous assumptions and findings regarding suicide trends. The first, of course, is that traditionally suicides were found to occur more frequently on weekends.

The second trend is that, contrary to previous findings that suicide rates increase in the winter, this study saw that -- if any seasons stood out at all -- suicides were lowest in the winter and highest in the summer.

Again, a chart pulled straight from the study:


No, the steadily increasing obesity rates aren't causing people to take the easy way out in avoiding swimsuit season.

Why, then, are suicides lower in the winter than in summer?

Again, Kposowa has a theory: email, social networking sites, and all those other annoying technological advances that intrude on my life (and yours too, no doubt) actually help people maintain a sense of connection with the outside world. They feel less isolated during those months when no one's going out because it's too cold. And where does everyone go? Why, straight to MySpace and other social networking sites, of course!

The same theory holds true for the weekend -- all those lonely people flock to social networking sites from Friday evening to early Monday morning, where they find mutual comfort in the cold, unloving arms of the internet and the artificial, asocial interaction it provides.

How this will impact your social networking comment postings

Don't put away those sexy images just yet, and don't abandon your pursuit of a really sweet sexual harassment lawsuit, folks.


http://i229.photobucket.com/albums/ee42/ApacheLee2k/hump_day.jpg

This is just one study -- one single study that refutes years of research on suicide trends. Yes, this could indicate a new trend in suicidal tendencies, but more studies are definitely needed before we replace those sexy hump day images with suicide hotline notices.

Which is a shame, because I'd rather see some creative suicide prevention comments.


Just because it's Wednesday...

Hey, call me if you get lonely,
ok?


Links from the blog:
http://www.springerlink.com/content/d236q44ut3582v91/fulltext.html
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/31780455/ns/health-mental_health/?ns=health-mental_health
http://www.cdc.gov/obesity/data/trends.html

July 6, 2009

Gaffney, SC: Serial Killer Capital of the World?

No, not hardly. They're only on their second string of serial murders in less than a half century.

Of course, not many people are aware of that, what with all the media frenzy surrounding the recent bout of celebrity deaths and political scandals. North Korea launches missile tests like crazy and Iranian clerics denounce the election, yet this major international news is barely noticed as the media continue to report that Michael Jackson is still, in fact, quite dead (This man is no more! He has ceased to exist!) and that -- big shock here -- politicians cheat on their wives and misappropriate funds.

I guess, then, there's no chance of any real coverage of a string of murders in a town of less than 13,000 people.

Not even if they had two murders during all of 2007 and absolutely no murders in 2006? Why, they've had more murders in the past two weeks alone than they did over the past several years.

Even more interesting is the fact that this is not the first time this tiny town has been the scene of a string of murders that met the FBI's definition for a serial killer. In 1968 police arrested a man named Lee Roy Martin, aka the Gaffney
Strangler
, who murdered four people and had even begun taunting police and the local papers with letters promising he'd kill more if he wasn't caught. He later died in prison (or did he? -- http://www.switchplates.netfirms.com/).

Maybe if this new killer were strangling his/her victims the media wouldn't be able to ignore it. This would be far too sensational -- a copycat serial killer. It's the stuff movies are made of...maybe the illegitimate child of Martin, or perhaps a split personality of a victim's sister who could never quite process what happened.

*sigh* This should be a huge story. CNN, Fox News, MSNBC, and countless AP, Reuters, and local news agencies should be camped out in Gaffney...interviewing "witnesses" to the current murders and the ones from 40 years ago, confusing the facts, reporting on every tidbit of gossip or conjecture they can get their hands on, frightening the townsfolk even more than they already are....

...then again, maybe it's better this way. The killer doesn't get the attention he's likely after and what little is actually reported has been verified and isn't just the latest gossip "reported here first." Yes, let these people suffer through this in peace. The FBI is involved, as are local law enforcement. They're not alone.

For some interesting coverage on the Gaffney Strangler:

Lee Roy Martin

Sister of Gaffney Strangler victim

Coverage on the July shootings:

Murder Timeline

Links to the latest news

More breaking news updates

The Gaffney Ledger

Armchair detectives following the recent murders



Update!!
Authorities believe they killed the Gaffney Shooter. My work, it seems, is done.

June 9, 2009

Eagle vs. Shark (2007)

Eh, it was another one of those indie movies about socially awkward people experiencing some fairly daily events. Nerds fall in and out of love, seek revenge on bullies, deal with dysfunctional families, etc.


http://media.apn.co.nz/webcontent/image/jpg/Eagle230.jpg

It had some God-awful hilarious moments. I probably wouldn't have watched it normally if it hadn't been for the fact that I needed a movie just interesting enough to get my mind off a recent trauma, but boring enough that I might not care if I fell asleep before the end.

Luckily, I didn't fall asleep and managed to stay up for all the awkward goofiness. And unlike with some movies in this same vein (Napoleon Dynamite is one that comes to mind), I stayed interested enough in other people's trivial lives to forget about the horrors that had just befallen my petty life.

You might be wondering what could possibly have happened in my boring little life that could leave me so upset...

It was a spider.

For those of you who aren't aware, I used to have a pretty strong fear of spiders. When I was a teenager it probably could have been classified as a legitimate phobia, as my fear of spiders and almost any bug that bites or stings did severely impact my life. Luckily, I worked through a lot of that, and I only mildly embarrass myself if a bee or wasp flies near.

As for spiders, we've established an uneasy truce: if they stay out of sight, I won't worry about them. I won't do preventative spraying (I hate chemical pesticides), but if a spider comes out in the open he is fair game.

The other night I saw a spider on my bedroom wall. It was just a few inches from where I was laying, reading a book. The damn thing caught me off guard and I froze just long enough for him to escape. When I pulled my bed away from the wall I didn't see him, but I did find a very fresh spiderweb (I spent two days last week moving every piece of furniture in my room to ensure I'd vacuumed everywhere and removed any pests before I moved into my mom's basement). I sprayed thoroughly behind my bed and set out to find something to get my mind off of how many other spiders might be lurking just out of sight, when I found this movie.

Now, here's the thing I want you to understand. One spider would not likely elicit this kind of paranoia from me; I have been killing, on average, close to a spider a day since I moved back to my mom's house. These range from small spiders to ones so big that you can hear them walking and they make an audible "thud" when they hit the ground.

I've been on edge for weeks. To lighten the situation I've made jokes. The first spider I killed was one of those gigantic ones, and I've been saying that he was the leader of the group and the subsequent spiders are minions dispatched to avenge his dishonorable death. He's sent big guns to intimidate me, stealthy ninja assassins, and even child soldiers like the tiny one I found in my blanket the other night. There was even an "aerial assault" as some strange flying bug has set up residence in my room (I'll get him eventually, too).

Eh, what's a girl to do? We live in a rural area, so spiders are a pretty common occurrence here. To make matters worse, this is just one of those times of year when we see more of them in the house than usual. As I unpack, clean and rearrange in the basement, I'll gradually get rid of them, though I'll probably end up flushing many more out into the open in the process. It's the way things go. In the meantime, I'm glad I have premium movie channels and a growing DVD collection so I can wile away the hours watching goofy, off-the-wall movies like Eagle vs. Shark to get my mind off the problem at hand.

May 12, 2009

Truth and Responsibility [OR] The Cult of Parenting

There's something bothering me right now, so I'm taking a few precious moments away from my packing to get this off my chest.

And no, it's not the radioactive green color of my poop. I think I've just been going overboard on the Lucky Charms lately. Damn those delicious marshmallow clovers!!

No, there is actually something else on my mind right now.

It's the amount of power people give children. I just don't get it. I don't assign any fault to nonparents, like my dad (yes, I do consider him a nonparent, and we'll likely get into that at a later time), who just don't understand anything about raising children because they've never taken this task on day-in and day-out and simply lack the wisdom that comes from the full-time parenting experience.

Nonparents are perfectly entitled to be baffled by the mysterious ways of child development. A little education might do you good, but some lessons can only be learned through experience. It's not your fault. Really.

No, it's the amount of power parents are willing to give their children that concerns me so much right now.

I've seen some parents who seem to be afraid of their children. How can you be afraid of something so much smaller than you? To be fair, it's not really a physical fear, so much as it is an emotional one. C'mon, folks! You set the rules, and it is up to you to require obedience. You are not your child's friend, so don't seek their approval. Children need boundaries and discipline, and they will only abuse and take advantage of your weak parenting.

Other parents worship their children. We've all seen those doting parents, like Cartman's mom, who think their children can do no wrong. Or the parent who (erroneously) thinks their child is somehow "better" than the rest because this particular offspring possesses some (non)unique talent, such as intelligence, athletic ability, or beauty. They parade their child around like some kind of trophy, demanding special allowances be made for their "special" child, and end up creating a monster in the process.

I'm certainly not arguing that children have an inherent tendency toward evil that needs to be beaten out of them or constantly monitored to keep in check. No, that smacks too much of religious fundamentalism.

The idea that children are all pureness and light is just as ludicrous. This is what has me so worked up right now: the parents of these so-called "Indigo Children." These parents believe their children have some kind of special power (in extreme cases) or that their children are somehow evolved beyond normal humanity (in more typical cases). Take a look at this description of what an indigo child is.

Excuse me, but what they describe is simply a spoiled brat. This is the result of raising your child without rules, boundaries, limitations, etc; they think they are above rules and don't understand why they should be applied to them.

I tend more toward John Locke and his philosophy of the tabula rasa ("blank slate"). Children are born with few tendencies toward anything (obviously, there are some behaviors like alcohol abuse or depression which we may be more prone to through genetics); it is environment, especially the influence of caregivers, which shapes the way children learn and develop.

This is not to say that we have no control over what type of people we are, of course. But as children we are largely shaped by our parents or other primary caregivers, and as we become adults we make decisions for ourselves and become the people we are. This is the very reason why we are raised by adults and eventually move out on our own; in the beginning we lack the wisdom and common sense to make responsible decisions on our own, and it is the responsibility of the parent to impart their wisdom and teach us the lessons we need to become adults. Yes, it is possible to learn these lessons on your own, but that is a much more difficult task, and many people fail without the proper preparations provided by parents and other caregivers.

Sheesh, talk about consonance. Try saying that last sentence three times fast.

Children who are never taught right from wrong, who are never taught about personal responsibility and accountability, who aren't required to show respect for others, etc, do not usually "grow" into these things. More often than not, they grow up to be amoral monsters who don't understand the harm they inflict on others with their selfish ways. In many cases, they do not seek specifically to hurt people; they simply don't understand the effects of their actions.

They may not possess the magical powers of little Anthony, but they can be every bit as dangerous to those around them.

Children who are taught early on the "why's" of right and wrong, personal responsibility toward self and others, and who are held accountable for their actions, on the other hand, will often grow up to be responsible, respectable adults -- or at least, they will be as children until they grow up and choose otherwise.

I simply don't understand how misguided parents can be. I don't understand this willingness to relinquish control to someone who cannot begin to match your experience and wisdom, to let them control your life.

Maybe, had these people chosen not to follow their children, they would have eventually joined a cult. Such is their insatiable need to find meaning in something outside themselves.

Even at my worst a few years ago, when I lacked any motivation to shape my life, I still didn't let my children control me. I have always been a strict disciplinarian (if anything, I have become a more laid-back parent as I've taken more control over the rest of my life). The changes I made in my life were not made because of my children alone; had they not been in my best interests as well, I would not have made them. Yes, I make decisions concerning my life in regard to how they affect my children, but their concern rarely overrides my own.

Yes, my children place limitations on my career choices, where I live, who I can date, who is willing to date me, what car I drive, how I spend my free time, etc. On the other hand, I could just as easily have had abortions or given my children up for adoption; I may still have eventually made similar decisions to those I've made as a parent, with or without my amazing children.

But the choices that come with having children were also beneficial to me, so I chose to keep them and raise them with all the love and discipline I can give. In the end, I'm happier with things this way. My career path may not be exciting, but it is reliable and interesting enough. I consider the safety of my home and car more than I did in the past, which is always a good thing. I spend less time drinking and smoking pot, and doing things that are healthier and more worthwhile -- another plus.

And, oh no, I'm pickier about the guys I date because I shouldn't expose them (my children, that is) to unnecessary harm! Oh, some guys who are too selfish or immature are automatically repelled by motherliness! Eh, so I have better built in screening. Big deal.

Please, don't get me wrong. I love my children more than anything. Through raising them I've learned many wonderful things and grown personally in ways I probably could not have without them. My children are unique and special, but so are all living things; therefore, my children are just as bound by the rules as everyone else, and they deserve the same love and commitment to preparations for adulthood as any other child.

My point, of course, is this: Parents who let their children control them are creating monsters. Parenting is a great responsibility, and one which should be carefully considered before jumping headlong into. Those who aren't up to the task, who aren't strong enough to set limits, who are so weak and looking for guidance that they are willing to surrender themselves to the supposed superiority of their own children, ought to pass. Maybe you should consider a dog, cat, or better yet a fish. Something that won't survive you and end up perpetuating your misguided behavior. The last thing society needs is even more self-absorbed, amoral nit-wits hell-bent on shaping the world and its rules to suit them.

April 12, 2009

Attachment in the 21st Century

I hate becoming emotionally invested in a show. You never know when you'll turn your TV on one day and -- POOF! -- no more favorite show.

All that time spent becoming emotionally involved in the characters -- wasted. All those hours following a plot, with all those twists and turns -- wasted. Hours invested in a show, when you could have been doing something else: reading, writing a soon-to-be bestseller, creating art, walking, finding true love, or even just watching a different show -- wasted.

And what do you have to show for it? Maybe your own theories on what could have happened next. Your hopes and dreams for the characters. Your "perfect" ending never realized.

Or maybe, just maybe, all you have is regret. Regret that you put so much effort into something that was doomed from the start. Regret that so much time can never be recovered.

Let's face the facts, folks. We all know that the average show has a very short shelf life now. Gone are the days of shows that began when we were youngsters and ran on long enough for our children to enjoy new episodes with us (okay, The Simpsons is one exception, but that show's a rare breed). Most shows are lucky to run more than a season or two nowadays, and executives are so quick to cut a show as soon as interest starts to wane.

The precarious relationships we make with our shows has not improved with all the advances in technology, either. Through satellite, cable, and even the internet we can watch shows thousands of miles from where they originated, and you have the potential to continue to follow your show no matter how far away you move. You can even enhance your relationship with your show through "exclusive" content online that isn't available on TV.

You still run the same risk that your favorite show will be canceled way too soon, but at least you can enjoy it to the fullest extent possible while it lasts.

That's all well and good, but what if you aren't blessed with the latest technology? What if all you have is a lousy set of rabbit ears? Reception comes and goes depending on the time of day and weather patterns. Your show might be available to everyone except you because of those damn, ancient rabbit ears! Static again, instead of that favorite show! Squiggly lines or interference from other stations instead of those beloved characters!

Then there's the wait. Did you miss something important? Will you even recognize your show if/when you see it again? Will the network executives demand that a key character be written out because they aren't popular enough, or cancel your show in favor of a newer, shallower one?

It's a risky world out there, folks. I've been burned too many times by awesome shows gone bad or ended before their time. True, I've had the good sense to walk away once the writing was on the wall, but by that time I'd usually endured more than my fair share of flat jokes, empty story lines, and cookie-cutter scripts.

Occasionally a show will give me every indication that this is the show for me; the one I've been waiting for all this time, and it's so good that there's no way it could ever be canceled. The writing is too good, too snappy, and the characters are so fresh, honest, and original that interest will never fade. Then, after a week on vacation or getting caught up in mounds of homework too many weeks in a row, I switch on my TV and am completely surprised by what I see: the show I remember is no longer there. The characters are so different, or the storyline is so perverted from its original form that -- if it is even the same show (since occasionally it's simply not on air anymore) -- it is completely unrecognizable now. *sigh* Screwed again by an overly materialistic society and media, both so obsessed with vanity and youth that at the first sign of trouble they bail on a perfectly good show.

Don't they understand that even an awesome show will have its lulls? Don't they know that (as with many other things in life) a show's popularity will have peaks and valleys? Sometimes what begins as a comedy will take a dramatic turn, but you just have to roll with the changes and have faith that the audience will continue to love and appreciate the show for all its good qualities.

Maybe I'm old-fashioned, but I can't idly watch a show here and there. If I'm going to devote any time to a show, I want it to be the real thing. Something with substance. Something that can last. Something that will be around long enough to introduce my children to one day. I can't keep doing these one-night stands and casual relationships with shows that won't stick around; it just isn't in me.

What's worse is that every once in awhile, I find a great show but I'm afraid to commit. Every time I try to watch I keep asking myself if this is really worth it. I've become so full of doubt and distrust that in the end, no matter how good that show is, I just can't enjoy it. All those other shows in the past have ruined me and try as I might, I just can't shake those bad feelings.

I'm tired of holding back. I want to find a show that I can open up to and truly enjoy. I want a show that's original. One that excites me. One that's going to be around tomorrow, and the next day, and the day after that. I want a show full of wit. One that's smart and sassy, and maybe even a bit racy. Okay, one that's more than a bit racy; hell, I want a show that pushes all the boundaries. One that makes me laugh. One that teaches me new things. One that opens my mind to things I never thought of before. I want a show that makes me look forward to turning on my TV, instead of making me cringe as I wonder whether it'll even be on next week, or if I should get out before I become too emotionally involved.

In short, I want a show that I can fall in love with and know that it will always be there for me.

March 22, 2009

A Snippet of Something I'm Reading

From Love and Mr. Lewisham, p1 (introducing Mr. Lewisham's character):

"He was called 'Mr' to distinguish him from the bigger boys, whose duty it was to learn, and it was a matter of stringent regulation that he should be addressed as 'Sir'.

He wore ready-made clothes, his black jacket of rigid line was dusted about the front and sleeves with scholastic chalk, and his face was downy and his moustache incipient. He was a passable-looking youngster of eighteen, fair-haired, indifferently barbered and with a quite unnecessary pair of glasses on his fairly prominent nose -- he wore these to make himself look older, that discipline might be maintained."


I could go on, but that's a good stopping point; otherwise I'd end up copying the entire thing.

incipient moustache
quite unnecessary pair of glasses

I wish more authors today wrote like this. *sigh* I absolutely love H.G. Wells.

Other books you may know by him:
The Time Machine
The Island of Doctor Moreau
The Invisible Man
The War of the Worlds

A few you should know, but probably don't:
The Wheels of Chance
A Modern Utopia
Ann Veronica
The New Machiavelli
The Shape of Things to Come

Complete list of his works, according to Wikipedia.

Read. Culturalize yourself. Enjoy.

No, that's not a real word. I just made it up. But if we keep using it, it could be one day. Such is the beauty (and downfall) of our fluid language.