Shiny Things

Philo/Poli

2011-05-12T00:43:00.000-04:00

Disclaimer: This is admittedly a generalization, which prescribes that there exists a significant number of exceptions.

I'm slowly noticing that people who didn't study philosophy like to harp about philosophy more than people who actually went to school for it. Political science majors on the other hand can't stop talking about political science, because they think it holds almost all the questions to practical life in today's society. At least philosophy majors have the sense to know that theories and ideologies aren't necessarily applicable to all facets of life. Sure, they can seem crazy, but at least they generally aren't so ignorant as to fool themselves into believing what they're studying is the meaning of life as we know it.

Futility

2011-05-10T20:07:00.000-04:00

I shake my fists at the sky

Screaming what and why

I claw at the clouds I can reach

But they mend themselves back together

Like my anger doesn't matter

Perhaps that's why

I love the rain the way I do

The sky's screaming back

In desperation and surrender

But I'm tucked inside

Dry and unaffected by its tremors

Somber

There Will Be No Catharsis

2009-10-01T02:43:00.002-04:00

Disclaimer: I was tired and strung up on the subway. This came to me. I wrote it down. Completely fictional. Don't deport me. Please. I love the U.S.A.

No on likes to believe that they are disposable.
We are immigrants.
We left the land of our mothers, because we rejected it, and the ways that our mothers lived by. We went like our fathers to a different land, a different state to inseminate and colonize, even by force, the very ways we rejected, because these new means of life are of no meaning to us. The way we have rejected where we came from, the ways of these people rule to reject us.
However, they do so not without reason. A people can never act without reason. People do not work that way. They are, as is said, rational animals.
And as animals they attacked us.
As people we will retaliate.
They've shown us how it feels to be disposable.
They've attempted disposing of our culture, our language, our god, and our identity. Our identities are worth nothing to them unless it reflects to them a replica of what they believe they portray. They want us to see in our mirrors what they believe they see in theirs.
How about we show them what we see in their faces? After all, they've never really looked upon their own true features, now have they?
Shall we show them how it feels to disposable?

Somewhere in this voracious, condense city is a bank that holds a collective database of every identity honored under this state. Very few are aware of its existence and even fewer of its mechanics. This city is swarming with people working to enhance and protect their identities. But who is the keeper of their beloved persons? As we were told time and again, this state honors no person as a person without an assigned identity. You would think these identities would be better cared for and tended to.
This city holds its money closer to its bosom than it does its people. The hatchlings follow their mother duck as the people follow suit, tugging to keep their money closer.
Paper rips. Fibers tear.
Just like that.
Stone sublimates and metal flows; wires singe in harmony as it passes.
Just like that.
Now what do they tag their identities upon? Who do they hold so close, so dearly?
Who is it they see upon their silver glasses?
Now, run with your money tucked between your toes. You've been given what you've longed for all along.
Just like that.

It isn't quite so disposable now, is it?
Rise those who remain within identities in tact.
Brother. Are you my brother? Ah well. So what will your name be? Mine will be so as well. Sister. How are you? What would you be called?
So it will be.

Just so there will be none.

Headache

2009-09-30T03:31:00.002-04:00

I have an awful headache, which I am pretty sure is Adderall related. It's possible I overdosed. It's possible I'm dehydrated. It's possible it's both factors conspiring against me. I wanted to get work done today, and even though I feel like I have the energy, I am just in too much pain to focus properly. I'm tingly/jittery/sensitive (I can't think of one term that encompasses all those factors.) and I feel nausea to the point that I suspect I may vomit. My head is clamoring and almost like a slow bleat, and reminds me of migraines, which I used to have frequently, but at a very slow pace. I drank a lot of water, but now I just feel bloated. This is awful.

So I know I probably shouldn't have taken it, and certainly not so much, but I've been too stressed, and too perpetually tired. I don't have patience for my bullshit. I really don't.

I'm not just now starting to think I may have bipolar. I've considered it before. My family has a history of mental maladies. My mother's on Zoloft. My brother spent a little while at a 'home' and used to regularly see a therapist. My father refuses treatment but the general consensus is that he is a sociopath. My father's sister lives in a mental institution.

I have even more reason to think that I have bipolar. I have a temper. Or that's what I call it. Some have said that my tantrums may get to be too much and they affect others around me. Frankly, that's often the case when I simply don't care for others around me. I get migraines. I've known that for a while. My brother and I started getting them at around the same time, and he's 10 years older than I am. Yeah, I kicked in early. Sometimes I am deathly, unexplainably tired, but then I'll perk up given incentive, but then just as easily, I'll switch back down, again, given incentive. I'll have "episodes" where I am constantly depressed or upset and just want to be left alone to fester. During these times I'll contradict myself in attempting to make sense of everything. And then I'll get stressed because I'm bound to upset someone I care about with my mood swings. The depression turns into inexplicable anger and irrationale. So I fester some more. It's a mighty cycle.

Most people don't know this about me, because I've had my whole life full of experience teaching me how to act socially acceptable. I've always been an oddball. But it's easy to learn how to conform. I did a good job. I just stopped wanting to for the most part. People I care about enough to be honest with get to see this side of me, because I find it difficult to lie to them, and ironically, they are the most sensitive to this kind of behavior, and I am most sensitive to them. You can see how this creates a problem.

-sigh-
That didn't feel "good," but I suppose it's something that needed saying. Not necessarily through this medium, but it's 3:43 am. I don't want to wake anyone up.

What do I plan to do about this mess?
Nothing at the moment.
I have too much shit to do, and not enough time or money to spend on this.
I know. Self-defeting.
What are you going to do about it?

Dan In Real Life

2008-12-28T00:50:00.003-05:00

I just finished watching the movie, and all I can think right now is that it isn't fair that people just aren't like that in real life. And I'm not saying copies of the characters' personalities, or their goofy yet made to be attractive physical features. I don't even mean their principles, because I definitely don't subscribe to them. People aren't that rational or irrational in unique and defining ways. Families aren't that functional by their own will, but due to societal pressures. Sure the idea is there, and it was a good idea at one point. And it still is. The idea of family being a first priority is still a great idea, but it doesn't fit into other factors of today's reality. And people aren't that honest with themselves that they would be able to manage such a functioning format of life.

People lie to conform, because really, who doesn't want to conform at least to some degree or other. But it's when they forget the lies from the truths about the very fundamental nuances of their personality that it all goes to shit. The movie was great, and I doubt its intention was to present such a notion to any viewer at all, but these characters were so lovable, because they felt tangible. Ironically, people like that don't exist. And if they do exist, they're hard to find, because they aren't as glamorous as the mockeries and mimicries that seem so much more abrasively original and glamorous.

Fountain Penmanship

2008-12-07T19:19:00.002-05:00

Written today, Sunday, December 7, 2008, about two hours ago
CAUTION: Content is long, about 740 words. Take time to complete, or there is very little point in attempting.

This fountain pen
Spurting forward with a liquid
No one dares frolic in
It does not shine
With the fresh clarity of fantasy
It does not gleam
With the mischief of youth
Its splashes do not sound
Of laughter or music
It falls with a muted thud
It slides like a slug
A gleaming trail on an uneven surface
A shade between green and gray
Barely the hint of color
Aged and weary
Drying to dust soon after
Not the green of glass
Nor the shade of thick, murky water
And not the grey of a dreary day
But the green of parasitic moss
And the grey of a fungal poisonous mushroom
Blended together
Under a shine seen only in the eyes
Of a disappointed, helpless and resigned child
A child by name only
But at heart something
Very possibly
Quite completely
Removed

Looking upon this fountain pen
It’s accompanying inkwell
A dull pot without a lid
To preserve its suspicious contents
Always evaporating
Into the air that you breathe
Be careful
It could be poisonous
But it never empties
Always brimming with this
Murky fluid
The fountain pen is callous but careful
Not to spill the contents of the inkwell
Onto the rough surface
Of the old wooden table

The wise aged table
Once with an inviting varnish
And a woody, refreshing scent
Now carved and discolored
Too dry to be moldy
And too sturdy to be useless

Once in a while
More often than is realized
The fountain pen forgets its place
Dipping into the inkwell
With too much vigor
Excitement is not to be found in a place such as this
Yes, the fountain pen forgets its place
And the murky fluid it is convinced is ink
Overflows from inside the inkwell
Creeping over the edge
Hesitantly sliding down
The side surfaces
Searching dearly for a hint of friction
Along the side surfaces
Of the eerie onyx inkwell
And though there may be
Inconsistencies along the surface
This fluid isn’t nearly
As friendly as water
And it slides down helplessly
Until it reaches the table
The dingy, rough
Though not splintered
Wooden table

The fountain pen stubbornly reacts
With sputtering astonishment
Absolutely every single time
It sees that the mess
Is not the grey-green color
It has resigned itself to
Upon the pieces of parchment
It acquaints itself with
No
The pool of color collecting
At the base of the inkwell
Is a splash of an unfamiliar hue
On the dulled, frayed surface
Like the trauma of female puberty in pristine hospital sheets
But this shade of red
Is not nearly as bright
It is thicker than dirty blood
It is darker than a cloudy night sky
It is a red
But a red of such blatant strength
You could only simply watch it
As it simply sits and pools
In all of its glory

Not merely is its color so striking, however
Its fragrance is majestic
Mysteriously
Pleasing
So foreign
The fountain pen can only watch
The fluid flow
Until the fragrance reaches its senses
And it can only focus on that one sense of smell
Attempting futilely to embrace it
Unmoving
Afraid it will disappear at the slightest change in movement

Meanwhile

The fluid creeps unnoticed
Right into the surface
The table breathes a sigh of life
The sneaking suspicious fluid
Seeping into the grain
Into and through the cracks
Like veins on a leaf

The fragrance disappears
The fountain pen reawakens
Only to find that nothing has changed
The same stoic inkwell
On the same resigned table
As it was just moments ago
The fountain pen, flabbergasted
Returns to the indifferent piece of parchment
Soon to forget all about it

The Red Luscious Fluid

Until the next time
It finds reason to be overzealous
And dip into the inkwell
With too much vitality
The table remains waiting
For that next time
The naïve fountain pen
Slips up and splashes
The inkwell remains sturdy
Simply allowing their antics
For this is the way of survival
This was their cycle of life
Parchment comes and goes
For reasons they care nothing about
As they remain
And inconsistently continue
On in their way

The only signs of their livelihood
The dreary ink upon those sheets of parchment
Lying among the many sheets of parchment
In this age of information

The three beings together
Indifferently
Indefatigably
And infallibly
Albeit mysteriously
Do remain.

Smells of Smoke.

2008-12-07T18:58:00.002-05:00

Written on Thursday, October 16, 2008

I love a man who smells like smoke
From burning up and out
Like campfires that struggle to light
But when lit
Bursts into flame
So bright and so strong
It burns the campers
Poking the sparks with sticks
Talking, laughing, and chiding
All the while
Because all they really want is to eat their meal
That fire wants to get lit, and bursts into flames
Maybe scorch the stick-pickers and static pokers
The hunters and the stalkers
Watching from the sidelines
Only ever watching
That big beautiful catch
But settling for the weak leftovers
Survival of the fittest
Is how animals move along
Evolve
Get stronger
And resolve

But these men who smell of smoke and ash and blood and perspiration
Move along with a force that is
Their own
Force of inspiration
Evolution does not apply
For they are not
Organic animals
They do not evolve
Due to others that are weaker
And they never resolve
Because there is time left to live longer

They are forces of nature to be reckoned with
Like the crass campfires
And the combusting volcanoes
And angry tornadoes
And disappointed hurricanes
Natural disasters that are causal to
The survivals and extinctions of the fittest and the weakest
Like rocks in the sun
And the snow caps on mountains

They live longer than the roaches baking in the garbage dumps of humans
They never perish as the sun’s flares are never enough to ignite them

Twitter

2008-06-08T23:01:00.001-04:00

Very late in delivery, but I got a twitter account. I wasn't sure how often I'd post there, and how much I'd actually enjoy the experience, so I took a while in spreading the word. I find I do enjoy it, and I use it relatively regularly.

Find me:
https://twitter.com/sighshrug

Enjoy me.

Add me.

Paddles Swing and Balls Fly at QC Game Room

2008-04-15T00:40:00.003-04:00

This was an assignment for journalism class. The assignment was to write a new story on a sports event.

Thursday, April 7, 2008, the CUNY Queens College game room was the site of an intimate, but official tournament between Ronald Dickinson, 19, and Floyd Kerr, 18. They played a game lasting longer than either of them had anticipated at the table closest to the help desk. The ball had been hit over the desk multiple times in the heat of the game, so much so that the woman at the desk thought she might suffer injury.

Kerr and Dickinson have spent the better part of their free time between classes during their college career so far in the Game Room practicing their slices and smashes, preparing for a chance to display their skills and moves, and show the other one up.

They are both freshmen and in CUNY honors. With several classes in common, they are friends during class. But at the table tennis table, their jackets come off, and with paddles in hands, they are different beings to reckon with.

During the pre-game briefing, Kerr said the game should be over within a half hour. Obviously, he thought very little of Dickinson’s skill in the game. But Dickinson was oblivious, and agreed the game would be short-lived.

The pre-game warm-up indicated that Dickinson might have an advantage in the game. Kerr is known to play very poorly under public scrutiny. There were at least 20 other people in the room during the game. Kerr struggled with his shortcomings, and tried harder to focus on his slices, as Dickinson “practiced shots.” “My smashes are a lot better with this paddle,” said Dickinson, about the battered green paddle, standard at the Game Room.

At 12:15 P.M. the game began. There were seven sets of eleven points. The first to win four sets wins the match.

Volley went to Kerr. And so did the first point. The set began evenly, but then Dickinson had the advantage with nine points to Kerr’s five. Kerr got the idea, and caught up. In the end, the set went to Kerr. Despite the uncomfortable audience, Kerr managed to put Dickinson at doubt.

The second set’s volley went to Dickinson. Again, the first point went to Kerr. Both were neck at neck for the better part of the set, and the referee called deuce twice, Kerr with the advantage first, and then Dickinson. Dickinson won this point. Kerr accepted gracefully, still confidant that he would win in the end.

For the third set, volley and final point went to Dickinson, again. Kerr got the first point, but said he hadn’t gotten his “competitive juices” flowing steadily yet. Despite Dickinson’s advantage in the game so far, with two points to his own one, Kerr doesn’t consider his opponent much of one at all. Dickinson was still oblivious to Kerr’s condescension, but at the time, he had full reason to be. He was in the lead.

Dickinson got the volley at the start of the fourth set, but Kerr got the first point. Kerr’s competitive juices were definitely flowing, because he won this set with eleven points to Dickinson’s four. Dickinson’s overconfidence from the good start has failed him, and helped Kerr’s competitive edge. Though the set was short-lived, it only just evened the score between the two.

Dickinson, spurred on by the prize of a free meal of his choice at the gyro stands adjacent to the college campus, comes back with a flare in the fifth set. He served the first shot, and won the first point. But Kerr wasn’t giving up quite so easily, as he realized Dickinson would not be quite as easy to beat as he’d originally anticipated. The game began steadily. Kerr gained theadvantage with eight points to Dickinson’s five. Dickinson came back with three consecutive points.

The game was really on then, with four deuce points to the end of this set. Beads of sweat were visibly sliding down the necks of either player. Kerr took off his jacket, though he is known for wearing it in any weather or wear, adamant about his wardrobe. Dickinson held the advantage at the second deuce point, and Kerr at the third. Dickinson held the advantage again at the fourth, and won the set.

The sixth set began at close to an hour into the game. Dickinson was proving his skill, and Kerr was forced to shed his trademark jacket in the heat of the game. Kerr served and won the first point. Dickinson had Kerr running back and forth with the intensity of his returning slices and smashes for the better part of the set, but in the end, the set went to Kerr.

Dickinson was feeling the prize lunch slowly slipping away. Kerr could care less about the prize lunch; he just wanted to beat Dickinson. Always a graceful winner and never a sore loser, Kerr intended to uphold his reputation. Dickinson was looking to improve his game, and of course the prize lunch, always a worthy cause in his mind, or stomach, for that matter.

The seventh set went to Kerr with eleven points to Dickinson’s seven.

The air, thick with stress, competition, and the force of ping-pong balls bouncing and flying off the table, finally cleared after Kerr’s win. Dickinson conceded heartily, saying Kerr was a worthy opponent.

Kerr donned his jacket once more.

The prize lunch was postponed until further notice due to lack of funds.

Dickinson laughed it off, saying it was better he didn’t win. Kerr won the game, and to him, that was a far better prize than any gyro stand lunch.

Chevy Volt

2008-01-18T17:58:00.000-05:00

Hey, anybody see that commercial for Chevy, with the guy from the WaMu commercials, talking about how it runs on battery, and how it can run however many miles without gas or something. There are kids bent over the hood listening to it 'hum'.

At the end of the commercial, in fine print, it says that it isn't available for sale along the bottom of the screen.

So the ad is just to boost the image of the company, and get people to buy the shitty machines it does have up for sale. That machine is not available yet. Its bullshit. Companies don't create and air commercials for no reason. This 'concept' of a machine is just used to gain the company attention. What...?

Also, on the site for the car, it says the following:
Information subject to change without notice. Vehicle shown is a Chevrolet Concept vehicle. Not available for sale.

The site:
http://www.chevrolet.com/electriccar/

Absolute bullshit!

Happiness?

2007-12-12T12:30:00.000-05:00

My friend and I were abducted a couple weeks ago by scientologists, and tricked into watching a short film and being subject to their scrutiny and judgment. But that's not what this entry is about. Well, not really. We watched the movie, took a survey on it, took a personality test, and then were evaluated based on our answers in the personality test. People wanted to talk to each of us individually about our answers and evaluations. She got some lady, and I got some dude. He asked me about how happy I am, or was at the time, and what I wanted to with my life. At the time, I was going through my journalism 'phase.' (Perhaps I still am, but I'm not as crazy about it as I was at the time. I'm still considering it... but, gah, this is irrelevant.) He asked me for a reason. My reason was that I've always been commended on my writing, but journalism was the first place where I'd been below par. And I told him it's because I'm good at writing, but I'm not good at journalistic writing, because it's harder to write about mundane things that aren't really of any particular interest to you. It's a challenge for me to write something when I don't want to write it. So I tell him that's my reason, and he's like "so you want to do what you don't want to do. It'll make you happy?" He's being dumb. The idea is the challenge. Completing and excelling at challenges will satisfy me. Not that I want to do things I don't want to do. It's the feeling of accomplishment.

I don't usually put much particular effort into my writing. In journalism class, I'd put more effort into my writing, and I'd get rewarded. It wasn't the opposite. Before, effort wasn't necessary, because I'd get the same grade, and so the extra effort made the grade feel less valuable. With this class, I actually had to think about what I was doing, and be significantly more lucid in my thinking and my writing. It was a challenge that I found very gratifying.

I don't think people understand understand the gratification that comes from accomplishing a goal that you set for yourself. This guy kept saying "well don't you want to be happy? Will this make you happy?" Like happiness is that simple? Happiness is just a state of being now? It's not supposed to be earned? Then they're saying the same thing drug addicts. "Just feel it, man. It feels so good." It's a state of being, but it's not simply a manipulation of thought or rearrangement of chemicals. That demeans the whole principal, and people will have no real motivation to live life, but to just 'be happy.'

Ridiculous.

Bloggers vs. Journalism?

2007-12-04T18:38:00.001-05:00

I was assigned to do my final paper in journalism on the future of journalism, which basically addresses the question of whether true journalism will survive todays technology and competition. In some articles that we’ve been assigned to read, the factors running against journalism, even said to have the capability if killing it altogether, are bloggers and search engines. Search engines steal revenue, because they advertise the same stories, They credit the original publishers, but they end up getting the profit for being more convenient to the people reading the articles. Bloggers are said to be a threat, because they have an easier route to the peoples’ trust in being so personable and direct.

To me, they have no chance of killing journalism. If it happens, due to a lack of common sense on the newspapers’ part, all will mourn the loss. Journalism, the title itself, has a lot of trust as well as criticism, but only because people trust it so much more. It is obvious that a blog is representative of only the person writing it. Without an editor or a fact checker, there should be no basis for suspicion of it being a threat. All sources are to be cited, as in an essay, if it is to have any credibility at all. Bloggers simply take the most advantage of the First Amendment. Readers of blogs must always keep in mind how reliable the blog isn’t, because any idea published in such a medium, must have a foundation. The foundation will often be found in newspapers or other organizational publishers, anyway. A blogger who quotes a blogger is creating a community or forum. So all the reader is paying attention to is opinion after opinion, or in other words, bias after bias, and readers should keep that in mind. I assume most readers do, because if that’s the case, we’ve more to worry about than just the ‘death of journalism.’

People have also complained, in blogs and publications, that search engines might bring about the ruin of journalism because they steal revenues. They do. They post the information from publication, always citing, and often linking the reader directly to the story anyway. Newspapers, maybe just their representatives, are of course angry about this, and ‘want’ Google and Yahoo! to take responsibility, and not make so much money, or rather, not more than the newspapers, because they’re the actual producers of this information. Newsflash: Google and Yahoo! are businesses. They are going to make money, and they’re going to take advantage of resources they have in one way or another. (By the way, Google uses algorithms to pick out the displayed top stories, while Yahoo! has human editors. I just thought that was interesting.)

What I don’t understand is that publications are trying to be the martyr and asking other business to please understand, we have the integrity of the journalism at stake here! Change you wicked ways! And all the while, grumbling, you thief, you, that’s my money. Publications are businesses, too. They’re making significant job cuts, and still making a decent profit. What does that say? They’re in business, too. So if they want to preserve the integrity and quality of journalism, they should play the game, which isn’t, by the way, a zero-sum game.

Consumers have moved online, that’s been made obvious. For whatever various reasons, they choose to get their information through the internet. Bloggers are only online. They don’t do it for the money. They just do it. So the websites hosting their information is making the money. Google and Yahoo! are making money, because they don’t charge extra money for supplying the same information, information that people want and find that the information is more accessible through this route and not the main route. They’ve found that the indirect route serves them more directly.

I’m a blogger. I’m not trying to be objective here. Who gives a flying fuck? It’s obvious I’m not trying to be objective or to be less biased. I’m just saying what I want to say. First Amendment, folks. I’m just saying what I want to say. You should know better than to take my word on it. If I provide information that I based my writing on, take the opportunity to enlighten yourself. Don’t fool yourself into thinking that I’m trying to educate you here. Do yourself a big favor.

Fuck, now I have to write a paper on this? How do I stretch this out in an argumentative, formal fashion.
Fuck.

Cafe Wha?

2007-11-26T09:11:00.000-05:00

Top o' the mornin' to ya.

Yesterday was quite a night, definitely out of the ordinary. I hung out with some relatives, most of whom live elsewhere. So we were all bunking at my aunt and uncle's place in Brooklyn. They decided to show us how I decent night in New York could be. They did a great job, though the fact that it was a Sunday night didn't help their situation at all. It started off slow, but it ended well.

The original plan was that we'd have dinner at their home first, and then we'd go to the Livingroom to meet up with one of her friends for some nice live music and conversation. Seemed like a solid plan. But then after we ate, we'd left too late, and arrived at the Livingroom at nearly 10. The band, Twi the Humble Feather, was just finishing their set, and we maybe heard about 3 songs. But they were really freakin' awesome, just from the 10 minutes I was able to hear. Their music was melodic, and at the same time had a great, soft beat behind it. It as odd, to say the least. I don't think I've heard anything like it before. The band consists of three guys with three guitars. I didn't hear them 'sing' but they basically made sounds with the mouth to go with the music. It's too early in the morning to be too eloquent about their music, but it was definitely amazing. I came too late to hear them announce themselves, so after the show I saw one of the guys standing around in the same area, and asked him. His name is Hektor. Friendly guy. But anyway, the music, gotta hand it to them. It was a decent start to the night, consider we had to hop around for a bit.

I went to two places afterwards, Arlene's Grocery and The Pianos. And I got a stamp on my wrist from both places. The Televandals were playing at Arlene's Grocery, but this time we were too early for the show, so we basically sat through about 5 minutes of sound check before we decided that it was too loud, and we weren't in mood for punk or anything like that. And then over to the Pianos. Also, not to our liking, both upstairs and downstairs. So we're like fuck it, we'll find someplace else. We walked around the area for a bit, as one of my aunts reminisced about her time here.

Soon afterwards, my uncle got in touch with a family friend, and we decided we'd meet him at a place called Azza. We get there in a few minutes. Upon arrival, we find that the door is locked, and the place is closed. We find a deli to hide out in, as it was a cold night. The family friend finally arrives a good 10 minutes after. He apologized for making us come all the way to Azza, and then to make it up, he'd take us some place else.

We went to the area near West 4th this time. We went to Blue Note, a really cool jazz place. We were very late, but just in time to watch Dizzy Guillespie without actually paying the cover fee for the show, so we just kind of stood in the back, near the bar, and watched the end of the set. Their solos just blew me away. Jazz has the tendency to make me want to dance. Not all jazz, just sometimes. One of the last few songs were just so sassy, and I kind of just swayed underneath my clothing, as it was pretty tight, and no one else was dancing. The solos were just amazing. They were definitely considerably skilled, and they strayed from the main theme indefinitely, but it was just so amazing to experience. I don't know if it's because I'm partial to drummers, but I definitely liked the drum solo best. Too awesome.

And then we kept walking, and nearby was the Cafe Wha. Now that place was a blast, and was a great ending to the day. The house band was playing, and mad they have some kind of energy. There was a percussionist, who also did the light show. A drummer. A keyboarder. Two vocalists, one male and one female. A bassist. And two guitarists, one of whom is their musical director. They're basically a cover band, but they make decent songs sounds absolutely amazing. There's a lot of improv involved, but it was a very good collaboration. They did a bunch of songs, but some that I remember are "A Dios Le Pido" by Juanes, "Since You've Been Gone" by Kelly Clarkson, "Last Night" by The Strokes, "Let's Go" by the Ramones, "Killing Me Softly", "I'll Be Watching You"... there were loads more, but yeah. I danced up a store in front of the stage when we first got here, for maybe about 5 songs. We left for a bit, because one of the relatives wasn't quite enjoying himself. But since the band was only going to be playing for a half an hour more, we decided to stick it out and enjoy the rest of the show. By then, I was too tired to dance, but I just kind of moved to it anyway. My eyes were blinky by then, and I just didn't want to dance. But the songs weren't really dancy songs anyway. The Spanish stuff was way more fun to dance to. I stayed up for the Strokes song, too, just because I love em.

We got home at about 4 in the morning. I slept over at my aunt's but I didn't sleep particularly well. I remember waking up a number of times, and I wasn't very comfortable. But I had a great night.

And today I have school.

Yay.

Islamists?

2007-11-14T20:26:00.000-05:00

I'm not big on participating in political debates and the such, but I'll make a slight exception on this one.

I was watching The Situation Room on CNN today. For the most part, it seemed pretty standard. Clinton, Guilliani, and so on. They brought up the drivers licenses for immigrants ordeal, and how it's been withdrawn. Here's the link the to the transcript of this episode.

http://transcripts.cnn.com/TRANSCRIPTS/0711/14/sitroom.02.html

Towards the end of the episode, Lou Dobbs comes on. I don't have anything in particular really against the guy, but the hoohaa said "Islamists." What the hell? They have a term, dude, and it's not freakin' 'Islamists.' Talk about ignorance. I mean, it may seem like I'm overscrutinizing, but the way he phrases and then uses the wrong terminology just seems demeaning, disrespectful, and directly ignorant of the actual situation.

Direct quote from the transcript is as follows.

BLITZER: Lou Dobbs is here in Las Vegas getting ready for his show in one hour. You're in Vegas. I'm in Vegas. I guess there is a presidential debate here tomorrow night. You probably heard about it, right behind us. Give us a little preview. What do you want it hear from these seven democratic candidates?

LOU DOBBS, CNN ANCHOR: How about a discussion of public education that is failing an entire generation of Americans? How about where they're going to get the money for about $1.5 trillion in investment and infrastructure, what they're going to do about border security, stopping illegal immigration, when will they end the nonsense and comprehensive immigration reform? When are they going to have a real discussion about strategy and consequences on the global war on radical Islamists? And name the name of our enemy in the global war on terror? Radical Islamist. Those are among the things I'd like to hear.

BLITZER: You've got some specific questions.

So according to Lou Dobbs, Radical Islamists are to blame for the global war on terror.

First of all, comprehensive immigration reform? And nonsense is the drivers licenses? At least it was a step. There are no other steps being taken, and if not forward, it's a step backwards, because time doesn't wait for steps to be taken. They just talk and talk and criticize the situation, but they have to address it. You can't kick them out. You can't keep them out, if it isn't already obvious enough. So integrate them gradually without upsetting citizens too much, because there will always be the radical Christianitists, right Dobbs?

Second, followers/believers of Islam are called Muslims by the rest of the world. Not Islamists. What the hell? And how does one presume that all terrorists are followers of Islam? Because some are? Have other terrorists been caught? Aren't kids going crazy and shooting up schools? This isn't terrorism? And what are they called? Shooteruppers?

Honestly. And here I expected to gain information from the news. Where's the comprehensive journalism, nevermind fair and balanced. That's a different ballpark if they're not even coherent and educated about what they're presenting.

Maybe I should reconsider my minor in Journalism and go into literature, and write plays if this is the kind of career I had in mind.

Absurd!

Shortbus

2007-10-27T00:08:00.000-04:00

A friend encouraged me to watch this movie, enticing me with a claim of quite of bit of nudity. Actually, it's not really all that much nudity, and it never suggests 'yeah, let me whack one off.'

It was definitely an interesting movie. I don't know if I'm the best person to connect to it, though. The movie's kind of about sex, but it's more about love, and sensuality, and mental connections, and emotions. It's an odd mix, and usually not my cup of tea. To me, it felt kind of like the filthier, New York version of Love Actually. I was crazy in love with that movie.

Shortbus combines the story of a variety of people, and the only feasible commonality between them is that they all spend time in this 'place' called "Shortbus." This place is headed by a crossdresser, whose sexuality is not quite defined in the movie, but he plays an insightful character. His 'home,' essentially, has many different rooms, in which many different shows, and topics of conversation arise. There's probably one 'main' character, who all of them also have in common.

This lady, the presumably main character, is preorgasmic, meaning she's never had an orgasm. And she drives herself crazy trying to reach that one great sought-after pinnacle. Well, not clinically insane, she just tries really hard, in all sorts of ways. She's married, but apparently he can't please her, but they love each other, so they don't want to sabotage their relationship. Something like that.

It's a lot of that. "How do I like sex?" "Who do I want it with?" "Who don't I want it with?" "Why do I like sex?" "Is the sex I like normal?" "What is normal?"

A lot of soulsearching. If I knew any 11-12 year olds who were mature enough for this, I'd have them watch it. Kids don't get enough credit these days, while some of them get too much. I only know one kid who could possibly handle it, but she's still about 8. I'll give her a few more years. And hey, I'm not the perv. She runs around, having crushes on almost every guy she sees. And she comes to me to talk about them, but not her sister. Whacko. Seriously, she's one of the weirdest kids I know. And so she deserves to watch this movie, when she understands all the terms involved.

Haha.

Watch it on a night that you feel lonely, and you want to curl up in a ball with something bad for you, to either keep from crying, or to cry harder. It gives you perspective. It's likely to make you feel more lonely, but you can choose whether or not you're comfortable in your loneliness.

Thank You For Smoking

2007-10-24T00:16:00.000-04:00

Let it be known that while I was watching this movie, I smoked a cigarette.

Of course the title is ironic. The whole movie was about how cigarettes are bad for you, and cigarette companies represent themselves in a way to mediate and therefore continue sales of their product. Duh. Who doesn't know, or at least suspect, this?

I thought it was a great movie, though. The main character, Nick Naylor, was a lobbyist for "Tobacco One," I think it was called. He defined the term 'lobbyist' as someone who 'mediates between two sects of society.' Something like that. Between smokers and anti-smokers. It's more like damage control, really. Everyone can readily agree now that smoke is bad for you. So many things are, but they have to be on the market for people to decide whether or not they choose cigarettes as their path to a faster death.

So he had a kid, Joey Naylor. He really looked up to his father. He traveled with him on business trips, and respected his words, took to heart what his father taught him. Good relationship. That's constant throughout the plot, so no suspense there.

There's this group of people called 'MOD,' aka Merchants of Death. Clever, I think. The group consisted of representatives originally of alcohol, guns, and cigarettes, and later adding oil, fast food and toxicity (I'm assuming. There were symbols above the latter additions.). They had pretty interesting conversations. They talk about how many people their 'products' were recorded to have killed, and how they can best provide damage control and encourage people that no, these things aren't as bad as you might make them out to be, and hell, we're not sure how bad for you they really are.

The movie was great. It plugged information to make all these things seem as bad as they really might be, but at the same time, albeit in a humorous and bubbly-sarcastic kind of way, how it's up to the user to choose for his or her self. And of course some sentimentality. Gotta leave somethin' for the kids, right? Regardless, I believe in the right to choose. Wanna drink? Drink! Smoke? Smoke! Eat? Eat everything in sight! Just don't blame it on the producers. They release commercials. They do their job. You are your very own responsibility, and if you have kids, until their hormones kick in, they're your responsibility, too. Don't presume to be so righteous.

Of course, by making a direct statement like that, I realize I'm being generous in my 'ideals,' too. Well, your choice on how much you care to listen to me. I say what I want, as do you.

Now, bring on the toxins!

MTA buses

2007-10-17T15:24:00.000-04:00

I hate MTA buses. I hate them when I'm outside them, and I hate them when I'm riding them. Equally. It's not always the drivers. They're not bad people, and if they get pissy at you, well they're just doing their job. I can't say how many times I've had to run up to buses, and they didn't close the doors before I got there. They're practical.

It's the vehicles themselves that piss me the fuck off. They're too big, and they aren't safe. How effective are seatbelt laws in New York if there are still buses going around. They don't crash, because they're so dman big, people in cars are usually scared and 'get the fuck out the way'. Who wants to be caught up in something like that? Buses make very wide turns, but even so, the people inside get thrown around. The safest people in buses are the disabled, because they basically get stapled to the bars. No one wants to face a lawsuit. Everyone else gets thrown up everywhere and on to each other. It's disgusting.

Buses are unreliable. They don't show up when they're scheduled to. They show up half as many time as they're supposed to, if you're lucky. And what's the damn point of dfferent buses running on the same route? That's stupid. Keep each line effecient, as effecient as possible.

And on top of all this crap, they're thinking raising prices? Even higher? Didn't they just raise it to 2 bucks recently? I don't want to pay that much for a shitty bus ride. Buses suck ass. I'd rather walk the way. I used to walk to work, because I'd get to work sooner if I walked, than if I waited for a bus. I don't walk to school as often, because my bag is too damn heavy, and I have to set it down somewhere.

MTA, your buses suck. Patch them up and whip them into shape. You're lucky you're a union. You can strike. What the fuck kind of public servants are you. Forget us, we're the customers. What happened to us being right? We can't 'strike.' We have things to do.

Fucking twats, all of you. And your shitty machinery. They're better off being used as levees.

Backwards

2007-10-10T21:06:00.000-04:00

A constant idea that is brought up in the Poli Sci class is the 'good political life'. It's a somewhat vague concept. It's easy to assume and understand its implications, but to get a clear picture, including any and all possible variable, is hard to imagine.

The good political life, in my opinion, accommodates the particular group of people that are held under a certain legal system. If this legal system works, and the people are satisfied, and justified in being so, than there is stability within the society. That is enough for it to be a good political life. If the government reflects the people, there is a balance. Whether or not other countries agree on this matter is irrelevant, unless there is the matter of trade. Trade would have to first be cleared with the government. But if certain societies do well under Communism, so be it. Indians live, swear, and die by the caste system. Americans would immediately disagree and object to it, but it's not their society. Why should it matter?

On the other hand, 'good political life' aside, what is a society really if the people aren't able to reflect on themselves in the first place. There are rights, and without those rights being protected, the government is a farce. I'm not advocating one group of people over another. The Bill of Rights is there for a reason. People should know their rights, take advantage of them, and at the same time, respect the rights of others. If the government decides that in certain cases, certain rights are to be withdrawn, the government is basically nullifying rights, that have already been instated, under the pretense of circumstances. The effects that come from people protecting the rights should be held under suspicion, not the rights themselves. If something someone says incites the wrong behavior of another, the guilty one is the person who committed the wrong doing. If I saw "I'm going to kill you" and I don't, what difference does it make. If she killed you for me, however, is totally on that dumb bitch's lap.

Yeah yeah, anything for the sake of National Security. I call BS. Anyone remember Sen. McCarthy? Anyone? He was supposedly looking out for the American government. But in the end, he was just a fruitcake on a power trip. And this whole thing. Democratic crusader. Iraqi war. Terrorism. So we're going to tap your wires, and you can't make the government look bad. Pssht, the government makes itself look bad. Restating the same thing doesn't make a difference, unless you count education others who didn't know about it. Constantly talking about the threat of terrorism is terrorism itself, by reminding people of its looming threat, like it's a shadow. Terrorism is supposed to create fear. That's its objective. So what's the point of getting scared or creating a sense of constant fear? Just making a dark room darker. And dude, tapping lines, searching bags. So unnecessary. So inconvenient. And obviously useless. The only thing it probably accomplished is calm down some people who were scared shitless. Not that great of an impact.

Gosh, everything is so backwards!

Funny kid

2007-10-07T10:56:00.000-04:00

My student today just decided to ask me today where babies come from.
Here goes our conversation.

Kid: What process do babies come from?
Me: (trying to avoid a more direct answer) Umm... meiosis and mitosis....
Kid: What about toast?

I just thought that was hilarious. Hope you got a laugh out of it, too.

Effusive?

2007-10-04T10:38:00.000-04:00

With all due respect...
FUCK YOU!
I'm not effusive!

Hullabaloo

2007-10-04T09:52:00.000-04:00

Werd!

I'm not the only person who says 'hullabaloo'! So does my journalism professor!

Go, Prof. McCormick!!! Woot!

... I don't think that helped my case much, did it? Considering he's like 30 years older than me and he's a professor and I'm some... kid.

Haha. That's funny.

Started New Book

2007-10-04T09:18:00.000-04:00

As the title already indicates, I started reading a new book, "Atlas Shrugged" by Ayn Rand. I don't know if it's just me, but that book, or maybe just her writing, really has the the ability to brainwash me. I was thinking very Libertarian for a while, but then I realized it, and I kind of got a hold of myself. That's kind of an odd statement to make. I really do believe her work, but I guess to an extent, because right after I accept it, I reconsider it. It's just not plausible in today's society. I can understand why she might have thought of it at the time, and in her books' premises, it's very possible, but I just can't abide by something like that, especially not for myself.

I'm temperamental, so I don't totally know what to do with myself. I have an idea, somewhat good idea, what I'd like to do, but it's still a lot more society-conscious then her ideals. It seems to me, her characters assume their rights, and assume corruption. And she assumes it's easy to be born with a purpose. Her characters are born into a lifestyle, and they either make themselves or break themselves. It's a large contrast, but a lot of things I see people considering these days aren't mentioned at all in her book. Maybe the same things took place in her age, but not to the degree that it happens today. Maybe it's because most of the people I hang out with are kids, or think like kids. Well no, not kids, adolescents. We're all technically adults, but we sure as hell don't function like adults. We're immature, in the developmental sense of the word.

Her heroes are all in the technology department, also understanding of her time. She thought what we consider today 'modern', but what about artistic endeavors? Writing, art, music.

Bleh, I think on paper, too much. Whatever.

2007-10-01T13:37:00.000-04:00

I've had English 110 today so far. Class was semi-interesting. More participation than usual, I guess. Not too eventful, as usual. But it held my interest.

We watched a documentary from PBS called "Merchants of Cool", basically 'unveiling' the conniving marketing industry. It was more funny than informative to me, just because it was so outdated, and as documentaries tend to do, ignoring many many more prominent facts. It made a big deal about Insane Clown Posse going from the underdog rebels to mainstream, mass-teen attractions. That's a really bad example. Lol. Limp Bizkit, though more popular, is a bad example, too. They're broken up and blown to dust now. Haha, Fred Durst. I'll give you something to break.

It's idea was that trendsetters ultimately make trends, because marketing analysts use these smaller trends to attract more teens, and they eventually get copied by the masses, so that the trendsetters either get lost in the crowd, or have to change themselves to 'stay original'. ICP was not mainstream, but just there on the radar. Same with indie culture. Don't fucking say Bloc Party is an indie band. They're signed onto a major label. They used to be indie, but then they hit the scene, and they became huge. It's just dumb that they're still considered 'indie'.

I got caught 'writing' in class today by a neighboring student. =P Kind of took me by surprise. But yeah, my creative work isn't going to appear on this blog. I've got a livejournal for that. Hehehe.

Enjoy your edumacation, dearies.

New AT&T Terms

2007-09-29T23:45:00.000-04:00

I just read this article.

http://www.boingboing.net/2007/09/29/new-att-terms-of-ser.html

It basically states that AT&T changed its Terms of Service, now stating that they reserve the right to terminate service if anyone bad mouths them, essentially. Violation of the 1st! Shitty corporate dickwads. AT&T has the worst fucking customer service, too. Cingular was way better before it became the new AT&T. My mom had to stay on the phone for hours, calling every day for nearly a week to get our phones replaced, and even then, they replaced our phones with shittier ones than the one we originally paid for.

Suck twat, AT&T. You guys sucked as you were. Now you're even worse. Hope you guys get jumped while whizzing in a public toilet.

A Decent Day

2007-09-28T23:15:00.000-04:00

Today has been hands down, one of the best days I've had in a long time. From morning and even now. I mean, I couldn't ask for for better.

First of all, I had to reschedule. Initially, I was supposed to go hang out at Stonybrook with the usual group, but I had a student that I absolutely had to attend to, so I missed the hangout. So instead I had the whole day to spend on myself.

Went to the MoMA in the late morn. I can't go to art museums with people. Encourages too much talking. I don't want to criticize it, which I know I will given the chance, and I don't want to hear what they have to say. I don't mind going with other people, but it's less relaxing with most people I know. But anyway, they have an awesome photograph exhibition up. Holy hell, that stuff was awesome. There were shots of people, but the nature shots were totally incredible. Just transports you to a whole new world. There were even photos of water. I thought that was my thing. That was just amazing.

And then I got hungry, so I stopped by my friend's dorm at NYU for some free food, and then headed off to see the student. She did a lot better than last time today, which is extremely gratifying. She was attentive and got stuff right. I left happy today.

Then, I took the bus, and then the train over back to 34th St. to watch Resident Evil: Extinction. You can't watch a movie like that during the day. That just doesn't do it respect. It was okay, but leaves you hanging for, I'm sure, the next installment. This is getting tedious now. I'm sure it'll be good, and I'm sure I'll go to the theater to watch it, but a 4th Resident Evil? C'mon now. It was pretty good, but it could've been better. Only an hour and a half long. I wanted to see way more of the bad guy. Alice (Mila Jovovich) barely got scratched. C'mon, no suspense? Pssht.

And now I'm participating in cultural activities, as it is quite rare of me. It's probably because I don't really have much respect for the whole idea of 'culture', but I can pay respect to a good singer. I used to sing the same sort of stuff, so it's like 'WOW' for me. SaReGaMaPa. It's like American Idol, except it's for and with Indian people. Westerners won't get heads or tails of the music, but ghazal singers have some of the most gifted, fulfilling, talented voices in the world. I know that isn't often heard from people my age, but whatever. They're fucking great. I make fun of Indian people a lot though. They're just so bad at being 'creative' sometimes, copping sooo much material from Western thought. One of their biggest movies was an Indian rendition of "Pretty Woman", no lie. I mean, there were even literal translations of certain lines in the movie. But anyway, I'm like a squealing fangirl for two of those singers. Not the most attractive guys, but oh my god, their voices are just ... so tangible. Gah, it's hard to describe. Raja and Aneek, that's who they are. I forget their names. But yeah, I'd tap that. =P There were girls on the show, but hey, if they're not as great, they're not. Personally, I usually can't stand Indian female vocalists. Too high-pitched. Gives me a headache. One was good, but she sounded so underdeveloped. Way to Western to be refined into an Indian musical voice. I mean, she's good, but she just sounds kind of weird. I wanted her to make it to top 4, but for some reason she got voted. -shrug- But oh well. Tough noogies, right?

I should go to bed.
And work on my papers.
Eh, I can do that later.

Back to the show!

Court Cases

2007-09-27T11:23:00.000-04:00

I remember when I was in... probably, maybe 4th grade, I used to be TAG and we had basically participate in a mock trial of an actual court case. I forgot what the exact case was about, but I'm pretty sure it was a Detroit newspaper versus the state of Michigan. The newspaper wanted to print articles about a power plant within the vicinity of people who may be harmed, and of course the state wasn't all in favor.

I didn't really do much during the trial. I was a Supreme Court justice. I had to pay attention to what people were saying, ask questions, and then come to a decision. It was so goddamn boring, and irritating. I think everyone assumed that the newspaper would win. Or some teacher told them 'a secret'. I don't know. But the kids just weren't trying. I mean, this is TAG. We're a bunch of nerds, officially, so usually we put in a significant amount of effort. It's not like we were lazy and wanted to watch cartoons. We skipped school to go to city hall and put on the show, and it was so ridiculously bad.

Certain kids just assumed they were going to win, so they weren't even trying to answer the questions. Oh yeah, it was the government side actually. We were kids, most of us minorities, of course the government was going to win. Duh. So the gov. lawyers just kept spitting out the same sentence to every single question we had. Each made a statement, we asked questions, they repeated lines, and that was it. The newspaper, however, actually tried to think of answers. The gov acted like all our questions were the same. The weren't. I remember being annoyed.

It's still that way, with kids my age, at least. People only try if they think they're going to lose. Well nerds, at least. That's the only time it's visibly true, when nerds battle it out. If they assume the win, they relax, feel like the work is pretty much done, relying on accepted 'laws of culture' and obvious moral stereotypes and let it go. Pretty freakin' annoying.

This happened again when I went to 'camp'. I was taking an Intro. to Logic class, and we had to pick a topic, and basically go head to head with a partner. One person was pro-topic, and one anti-topic. My 'friend' and I ended up with nuclear power. She took anti, because that was so obviously the easy way out. Typed up some shit about the WWII bombing, war war, kill kill, die die, DUH, it's bad. That sort of bullshit. I, on the other hand, had to sit and research statistics about how nuclear power might be somewhat more conventional, it's good aspects, what it can be used for on the other hand. Jesus Christ, that was a hard paper. And I was 13 years old.

When came trial time, she did the same thing. Gave the same answer, in different patterns of words, to different questions. Just made the same moral statement. Over and fucking over again. We get your thesis bitch, now detail it. It grew into a real debate, because I got pissed off at her for making fun of me for taking so goddamn long. So I really put her on the hot seat. But in the end, she got more votes than I did, but I got the teacher's vote, so HAH. Take that, Aiden. It takes enormous effort to be the underdog in this world. Enormous, especially in comparison to the more conventional majority.

Same thing when I took this NYU Law thing... I think it was called HSLI, High School Law Institute. Right off the bat, I'll say that it was interesting, and the instructors were animated and helpful, but I didn't learn much there. I new the Constitutional Law they were teaching. Criminal Law isn't much different, it's just applied to different situations, and Mock Trial was plain boring, explaining how different characters play different roles in different cases. Like this stuff isn't obvious. NYU instructors were teaching us bullshit we could learn watching TV. That's pretty irritating. But anyway, in Crim. Law, we had to do a mock trial about whether or not some hypothetical black kid. Again, the 'morally superior', the prosecutors, took it easy. I was a defendant, and had to get in their face with arguments, and this time I actually won unanimously.

But anyway, the point of this whole rant. It's fucking difficult being the underdog. It's hard fighting stereotypes and statistics, just to make a statement. It's so easy to say 'be yourself', but what if it's not the norm. Not necessarily insane, but outside what you'd regularly perceive. It's fucking annoying. Not that I'm a reject. That's not my idea at all. If someone is right, they are right, regardless of social standards. And in the same way, regardless of social standards, actuality weighs a lot more than idealism. It's just so dumb. I get why people do it. I do. But it's so fucking annoying.

This type of stupid bullshit is everywhere. It's where you live, in your neighborhood, down the corner, in your family, gossiping wenches, it's on the newspaper, it's on the news. Just people relying on what others find more acceptable, or suitable to the every day life. Get over yourself. Just because it might be 'obvious' or 'easy'.

Ridiculously annoying.

2007-09-24T20:05:00.000-04:00

I remember who the idiot I was talking about was, thanks to Prof. Theoharis. Aristotle was the dude who said that humans have to live together and create a society in order to survive efficiently. When people work together, it's easier to create a better environment for the collective, but it's harder to cater to the minorities. So majority overrules, and too bad for the rest of em. I don't mean to sound like a sore loser, but to hell with that. People can do what they freakin' want to. If the loner wants to be alone, leave the fellow alone. If the loner isn't alone by choice, tough, the dude's got make what he wants happen.

It's not necessarily always every man for himself. But it's not every man for every other person who falls into the same particular category. Why should we constantly have to 'represent our people'? That's just creating a fake stereotype. You do what you want. If a bunch of brown people happen to have the same habits, so be it. But why should one try to do something for the purpose of creating a reflection about others. Fake statistics are what bring about stereotypes in the first place. And the people who were whining about representing each other in the first place end up being the same people who whine about stereotypes. Don't blame the judges. We don't live to represent others that we have traits in common with. That just creates a mass. That's the mob theory. When people join together based on what they have in common, they are forced to assimilate what they don't have in common into the most common norm as well.

That's bullshit.

You're given an identity. And that's your responsibility. What you do with your facilities is what you represent.

... Crap, I have a journalism paper to write.

Comments

2007-09-24T15:21:00.000-04:00

Hiya.

Hey, I know a few people read this thing. A few more now than there were initially. I'd really appreciate it, and I do ask you, to leave comments. Otherwise it feels like I'm just splashing water color paints on to a glazed wall, so they just slide right off, with nothing to show for all that work but a mess on the floor. Not to imply that I'm a mess without the feedback. I'd just really appreciate it. You don't even have to make an account to reply.

Alrighty, oh brave one.

I bid thou adieu.

Two Books... And Then Some.

2007-09-19T22:33:00.000-04:00

10:30 at night, and I'm the typical jackfruit who leaves all this reading to the last day I have to read it all, because I have to know all this for class the next day. Frankly, I prefer this system over the bullshit nightly homeworks from high school. No teacher ever stuck to the rubric. Ever. It was usually based on 'intuition' on how much the kid 'should' deserve. Pompous, righteous, 'I-deserve-better-than-this' jerks. Not that there weren't the few good ones, but most of them just suck as teachers and as people. Pick one. Friend or educator. Can't be both in this world, and especially not in the ghetto neighborhood I'm in.

Anyway, I finished a few awesome books recently. The first took me a few months, because I paid extreme attention to every word. "The Fountainhead" by Ayn Rand. Great book. Great philosophy, though I do think it is way more towards the idealistic end of the spectrum. Not the altruist 'idealism' that is more popular and universally accepted, but I really don't think people can handle or live up to that kind of criticism, meaning their own. Some famous idiot once said, I forgot who exactly, that it is in human nature to want and need the support and communication of and with others. I call bullshit. I call total bullshit. It's just easier to live on a community support system. This is why today's generation, including myself, is so fucking lazy. LAZYYYYYYY. Oh my god, it's not that they 'can't' or they 'don't feel up to' looking for the TV remote. They are LAZY! I mean, so am I, don't get me wrong. I love my technology, but if I'm hungry, I'll make my own food. If I'm reading, and I need help understanding a word, I'll look it up. And then some other fuckwit up and says 'obesity is contagious.' Oh my god. What!? NO. People are just too lazy to think for themselves, so when they see their friend getting fat, they can't help but join in on the conga line to the fast food restaurant. Please, don't bullshit yourselves. You don't get fat because some one else is fat. I'm allowed to say that! I'm not some toothpick twat. I'm overweight, not obese, but visibly overweight. So stop moaning and groaning lazy, careless fucks.

I started this entry in hopes of talking about some books I read, but it turned into a rant, because I'm very tired, and I haven't been able to vent properly. People either overreact or don't react at all when I talk about this shit, so I'll leave it to whoever has the balls to actually make the effort.

Anyway... Ayn Rand is an admirable women for making the statements she's made over her lifetime, and I support her, but I won't adhere to or abide by her words. It's possible I don't have the balls for it, but it could also be that I do, and just not the temperament for it. I get pissed easily. I just don't show it as easily. Not nearly as easily. And if I were to actually live by my own rules and do exactly whatever the fuck I want for my own sake... I just don't think I have the balls nor the temper for it. I'll just combust eventually.

The other book I recently finished: "Perfume: The Story of a Murderer" originally written in German by Patrick Suskind, and translated into English by John E. Woods. Great book. Not nearly as well written as The Fountainhead. They're definitely two different levels of reading. Perfume is a much easier and quicker read, and more entertaining than thought-inspiring, as The Fountainhead wasn't. It was definitely interesting. I saw the movie adaptation this summer, and immediately got the book the same day. Movie was fucking awesome. I loved it. Mind-boggling, some scenes are. The Fountainhead is way more imaginative and, as I said earlier, thought-inspiring, which is why it took me so much longer to read. Really inspires one to be an asshole, you know? Very refreshing. The Perfume encourages individuality, to a degree, but also to keep a sense of altruism in tact, for the sake of society. But hey, it's a great read. Germans can be so gory. Talk about visionary. Woot.

Okay, so I guess this is where the conclusion would go. But this isn't an essay. And I have a lot of reading to get done. I hope the vent was helpful, both for you and I. First vent on this blog and everything, too. Knowing me, if I do actually blog as often as I proposed to initially, there might be a lot more of these. But also, as is my trend, my saying as such might have actually decreased the chances of that actually happening.

Hope you all enjoyed yourselves.

iMacs

2007-08-11T02:28:00.001-04:00

How the hell are Macs in fucking art museums. They're products. Not works of art. Oooh, they're pretty, and techy, and pretty damn useful. That makes them pretty damn good products. Not art. If they're aesthetically appealing, it's just another way to please the consumer. Putting them up in art museums, proclaiming them as art, just seems like cheap, direct advertising to me.

Macs are good. Apple rocks. Vista sucks. All that hoobaloo.

It's great technology. Not art.

The Good Shepherd

2007-08-04T01:43:00.000-04:00

Newsweek said that this movie is spellbinding, and it really is.

I thought it was amazing. But then I again, I always like these conspiring, controversial movies.

It’s about the CIA, it’s roll during WWII, and the conflicts that arise among people involved with it. Of course, people like to create problems where there may not have been one in the first place. But the controversy is what makes this movie so interesting. People knew things they shouldn’t. People who mattered weren’t given credit. They actually cut out a few scenes with John that I thought may helped the plot along, though they would have given the movie more emotionally involved earlier on.

Though this is just a movie, it is based on a true story, and it supports and reflects what I’ve believed about the government all along. Everyone has secrets, and so does the government. And I don’t blame them for it. People don’t need to know everything. The more information they are given, the more misled they will be, and the less confidence they will have in their government. What people are taught, and portray outwardly is an absolutely different matter from what they honestly believe in. When I say honestly, I mean that they’ve accepted personally, and not necessarily anything anyone else would have proof of.

It’s easier for the government to tell people that they aren’t doing much, as there isn’t much to do, rather than they’re doing a lot, and they’re still falling short. Things should be kept secret. But obviously, they haven’t been doing a good job about it. The new administration is horrible. Someone who was even suspected of having given information to the wrong authorities should have been disposed of, but as soon as it got out to the media, it became a matter of public opinion. I don’t know what happened with the most recent trail, because I don’t care to, but public opinion and public safety are two different things, and should be handled as such.

I used to root for the “non-censorship” number. That people should be allowed access to everything. But people are silly, and wouldn’t know what to do with the information, and are better off left being treated as fragile children, and the government the parent that creates monsters to frighten children away from doing wrong, and invents a gentle, safe atmosphere so the child can grow up healthy, or something close to it.

The campaign and the trailer for the movie were absolute crap. Jolie didn’t play a big role. De Niro played a big role, but very few lines. The dialogue was fucking amazing. I loved every single word. The acting, and illusions weren’t always stellar, but the movie wasn’t really about that. It was about information, and the lack thereof. The dialogue was just beautiful. i want to own the DVD and the screenplay if I can get my hands on it.

Venus Breeze

2007-08-01T12:28:00.000-04:00

Has anyone else noticed that the big leg they show on the Venus Breeze commercial isn't really smooth. Or not really as smooth as one would really want to be. It's really bumpy and you can see the hair pushing out through the pores, and considering she's a model for a fucking razor, possibly through the skin, as well.

Ew?

Jesus Camp

2007-07-26T01:05:00.000-04:00

I saw Jesus Camp. Well, I finished it today. I started watching last night, but I fell asleep. Not that it was particularly boring. I was probably tired. Tired from what, I don't know, but yeah, I was dead with about a half hour left.

It was really odd, actually. The movie I mean. It took me a while to catch on to what was going on, because I always confuse the different types of Christianity. I was raised Muslim. So you know... "Christians are bad, you don't need to know more than that. Grr." I always forget the jokes, and stereotypes and all that business. I'm pretty ignorant in this subject, I guess. -shrug- No one informs me, and I don't try too hard to be educated in it.

This movie was about the Evangelicals. It really does seem like brainwashing, maybe not in the everyday conception of it, where you get locked in a facility and are made to repeat and are punished when you go against something. But essentially, that's what it is. And they said it better than anyone else could. They're raising an army. An army of children who will in the future have the power to conduct what goes in today's society and government. They get taught songs. They get homeschooled. They are taken to camp. I mean, these children are sheltered to a very high level, and are taught only what the parents believe to be important, also probably brainwashed.

You can't totally blame them for sheltering their children. Most parents are so scared of reality, that in the long run it really is just simpler to keep them cradled in an environment that the parents personally approve of. Freedom at that age is just a word. No one is allowed even a taste of freedom before they learn speech, but even then, they are sheltered and taught only certain things. The movie really shows you to what extent these children are taught their 'calling' and how do adhere to their 'savior'. And they run a great campaign, too. That the children are the most important people in the world. It's true, too. But they use that as a way to instill their beliefs even deeper into the children. Everything else teaches people that there's much more to the world than just people, just children, than simply growing up into a person. The world gives people so much to worry about. The Evangelists give the children exactly what to worry about, what to care about, and what to focus on. All children want to feel important, and a bit like adults. The Evangelists cater to that in a very controlled fashion. Well props to their success.

I went through that, too, but of course, in a Muslim setting. I got taught what's wrong and what's right. I was definitely sheltered. I was pushed to my best. I was given responsibility and made to feel like important. I was very close to being spoiled. But I'm brown, so of course I got a hell of a lot of beatings in the mix. And I can be stubborn, and I had a mouth. So I got beat a fucking lot. But I mean, they really would've been successful. I had a Hindu friend in elementary school, but I wasn't too close to her, because I thought she was dumb, because she Hindu. I got along best with Muslims. I thought everyone who wasn't Muslim was useless and dumb, to an extent. One of my favorite teachers was Jewish though, so I guess you can't be too sheltered in a public school. The negations of my upbringing started early.

The Evangelists don't view what they do as brainwashing. They are wholeheartedly raising their children with the best intentions at heart, and with a wholehearted belief. They're trying to give children, who they believe to be the most important people though not the most experienced, the best that they can achieve. But that strong belief in children might also have bad affects. They suppress sex, and when something is put on a pedestal, they often become the same thing. A lot of them might be burgeoning some very innate, intimate feelings for these children they're putting such a large piece of their life into. And I really do believe that some of those children will be tramatized as they grow up, while others will be so strong in their brainwashing, that they will either be very successful or very miserable.

Some of the kids that the movie showed were just.... Haha. One I'm almost sure if going to kill himself. One might grow up to be a pedophiliac pastor himself. One might grow up to marry a pastor and beat her kids to a pulp if she gets that far. It's definitely thought inspiring.

I don't know if the people who made the film were of the opinion that what the Evangelists were doing were right or wrong, but the way the movie ended made me think that it was a movie to support the cause. Documentaries tend to end on a positive note, and this documentary ended on the main preacher saying that these children will grow up and do exactly what they were trained to, and she had a lot of faith in that.

Not that I'm against faith, and nor am I total Anarchist or Atheist, but essentially forcing anything for or from children, be it ideas, food or cock, is disgusting.