Pope Benedict, in a riveting 131-page document, reaffirmed many of the stodgy outdated principles by which Catholics are supposed to live. Among other things, he reminded Catholic politicians that they are expected to aid the Church in its opposition of abortion and gay marriage. He also chimed in on the "painful situations" of remarried Catholics. Instead of getting remarried, which implies a sinful consummation of said marriage, he urged the divorced faithful to "commit themselves to living their relationship ... as friends, as brother and sister."
Obviously Benedict didn't get to be pope without being an intelligent man. He no doubt wielded significant political prowess in the secret meetings that eventually produced the white smoke a couple of years ago. So the man who formerly served as Pope John Paul's head theologian is no dolt.
He does, however, seem to be in denial.
His call for Catholic politicians to "support laws inspired by values grounded in human nature" seems terribly ironic coming from someone who, theoretically, is still a virgin. Talk about going against human nature. Catholics can talk all they want about how unnatural homosexuality is. At least they're having sex. I would contend that it is more "unnatural" to abstain from sex your entire life and then use the highest and loudest pulpit possible to make judgments about "values grounded in human nature." His views are not grounded in reason, much less human nature.
Benedict either 1) has had sex and is having a Ted Haggard episode, attempting to assuage his overwhelming guilt by implicating everyone else; or 2) has been so cloistered his entire life that he long ago abandoned any notion of his own human nature and easily mistakes his high intellect for Holy approval.
The same same kind of hate-filled counterintuitive and counterproductive speech can be heard coming from Protestant pulpits too, of course. For me, it just provides additional confirmation that those people who, in 2007, still talk of the immorality of homosexuality and the "painful situation" of remarried people are not the loving, thoughtful, and compassionate people that they claim to be.
Just as people find religion (or no religion) outside of your rules, people are going to find love outside of your rules. People don't fear you anymore, Benedict, and when given a choice (as all free-thinking people have), choosing love will always trump the guilt that you are selling. Religion can do alot of good, as can the Church. Don't you have bigger fish to fry? Call me crazy, but sitting in your golden city casting judgement seems like a terrible waste of time and resources. Many of the people whose steadfast alliegence to thier faith lends you what legitimacy you have left are among the poorest, most disinfranchised and oppressed people in the world. While I'm sure that your reminder to the faithful that they speak Latin during mass gives these people considerable comfort, a little more attention to their physical and political plight might do a little more good.
Wednesday, March 14, 2007
Sunday, March 11, 2007
Of Hate and Basketball
My Dad and I today at the Big 12 Mens Basketball Championship game in OKC
Because it was raining and cold in OK* and we were unprepared, we spent an hour or so searching for a couple of light jackets. As a result, I was forced to face the ugly convergence of two of my most hated entities: Wal-Mart and Oklahoma. It was scary. The people were not quite right. They moved rather slowly, had an unusual affection for processed cheese products, and seemed very fascinated by the display of "belly fat" pills. Since I hadn't entered a Wal-Mart in about 18 months, I didn't think it wise to venture too far into the belly of the beast, but I'm certain that the young children working in the meth lab by the McDonald's were doing just fine. I left hurriedly without buying anything.
Anyway.... I survived Wal-Mart and we went on to the game, which was GREAT. Kevin Durant, who by this time next year will have been named NCAA Player of the Year, and will be watching the 2008 NCAA Tourney on his bazillion foot yacht, was great too. He couldn't miss (in the first half), and Texas was cruising to a blowout (in the first half). In the second half and overtime (yes, overtime), things worked out a bit differently for UT. Kansas won a nailbiter and received a top seed in the tourney.
Enough about basketball and my hatred of the land of meth and casinos. I'm off to ruin my bracket. If you want to join in on the fun, go here: http://pick-wisely.mayhem.sportsline.com/. Just email me for the password.
*It was only cold and rainy in OK, not in Texas. I am wise enough to attribute this not to some sort of "occluded front," but to the same meteorological phenomenon that resulted in the constant rain cloud over the Addams Family's house. Somehow, the earth is pointing out to us via wierd weather patterns those people who don't really belong here. Oklahomans, like the Addams Family, are here only because we tolerate their existence because they can be entertaining at times (Kings of Leon, Flaming Lips, etc.)
Wednesday, March 07, 2007
Cheney Should Go, Really, but Not Like This
Ok. Scooter's guilty. If an independent prosecutor can't find someone (anyone) in the current administration guilty of lying, he would merely be proving himself to be neither independent nor a prosecutor. But kudos, Mr. Peterson. Though this wasn't an attack on the president himself, and was merely at times an absentia trial for Cheney, you didn't allow it to get ugly or too political. Though you weren't able to bring down one of the bog dogs, you were able to implicate them beyond defense in the public's eye.
Many now see the damning look into the Bush Whitehouse that the Libby trial provided could punch Cheney's one-way ticket back to Wyoming. Since Cheney is the type of guy who would set up his closest political aide to be his scapegoat for a horrible sin that was lost and overshadowed by myriad of other sins, I doubt that he's they kind of guy that would easily step down from his mighty perch.
Unfortunately, I think that the only way that he will leave office early is if he is forced out by an official investigation in Congress. This would require enormous political capitol on the part of the Democrats, because they would need serious support from the other side of the aisle to give the investigation any teeth. So, even if the planets were to align properly, any serious discussion of pre-war intelligence would require the Dems to abandon any serious legislation regarding our current "strategy" in Iraq.
As much as I'd love for Cheney to turn in his badge, I don't think that the country can afford the lengthy distraction that his investigation would necessitate. And while Bubba W has earned his own investigation, that too would prove to be a disastrous waste of time.
Ken Starr may have just been doing his job back in the day, but both parties spent entirely too much time and money to embarrass one man. Bush and Cheney committed actual crimes, but it would exacerbate their crimes even further to ignore the war they created to punish them.
So, Senator Schumer, put away your dagger and your mascara. Stay away from the cameras a little bit longer and fight the good fight, if you can.
Many now see the damning look into the Bush Whitehouse that the Libby trial provided could punch Cheney's one-way ticket back to Wyoming. Since Cheney is the type of guy who would set up his closest political aide to be his scapegoat for a horrible sin that was lost and overshadowed by myriad of other sins, I doubt that he's they kind of guy that would easily step down from his mighty perch.
Unfortunately, I think that the only way that he will leave office early is if he is forced out by an official investigation in Congress. This would require enormous political capitol on the part of the Democrats, because they would need serious support from the other side of the aisle to give the investigation any teeth. So, even if the planets were to align properly, any serious discussion of pre-war intelligence would require the Dems to abandon any serious legislation regarding our current "strategy" in Iraq.
As much as I'd love for Cheney to turn in his badge, I don't think that the country can afford the lengthy distraction that his investigation would necessitate. And while Bubba W has earned his own investigation, that too would prove to be a disastrous waste of time.
Ken Starr may have just been doing his job back in the day, but both parties spent entirely too much time and money to embarrass one man. Bush and Cheney committed actual crimes, but it would exacerbate their crimes even further to ignore the war they created to punish them.
So, Senator Schumer, put away your dagger and your mascara. Stay away from the cameras a little bit longer and fight the good fight, if you can.
Tuesday, March 06, 2007
Where Have You Been?
Ok, so I'll admit it, my last post was a long time ago and was written from my sister's house after consuming quite a bit of alcohol (after all, it WAS New Year's Eve). Quite a bit has happened since then. I'll do my best to avoid the messy details, though they will no doubt trickle out piece by piece.
I was unemployed pretty much the entire month of January. While I thought that I could never get bored, what with all of the books, magazines, newspapers, and daytime tv at my dispoal, boredom set in about the third week. So, between the oppresive boredom, the blinding red glow of my checking account balance, and the blunt encouragement of a dear friend (Dude, get a job!), I decided to do just that.
So, to my student loan-paying father's unspoken chagrin, I am now waiting tables (again). My recent return to the service industry has been an incredibly humbling learning experience for me. Even though I was not making enough money to warrant it, I developed this sense of superiority while working at the Council. I somehow started to believe that a desk + business cards + wearing suits = success. The truth? My bosses now are pretty irritating, but they don't call me at home or curse at me. I don't miss the happy hour bitching sessions either. Regardless of what my plans for the near future are, when it comes to my job, I think I traded up. What's really interesting is that it will be my current job waiting tables that will provide for me the means to move abroad, not my job at the Council.
There is much to say about what has gone down in the last couple of months. They have truly been some of the most instructive, self-revealing, and emotionally wrenching weeks that I have ever experienced.
I'll be writing more now, and they won't all be this boring and diary-esque. I promise.
I was unemployed pretty much the entire month of January. While I thought that I could never get bored, what with all of the books, magazines, newspapers, and daytime tv at my dispoal, boredom set in about the third week. So, between the oppresive boredom, the blinding red glow of my checking account balance, and the blunt encouragement of a dear friend (Dude, get a job!), I decided to do just that.
So, to my student loan-paying father's unspoken chagrin, I am now waiting tables (again). My recent return to the service industry has been an incredibly humbling learning experience for me. Even though I was not making enough money to warrant it, I developed this sense of superiority while working at the Council. I somehow started to believe that a desk + business cards + wearing suits = success. The truth? My bosses now are pretty irritating, but they don't call me at home or curse at me. I don't miss the happy hour bitching sessions either. Regardless of what my plans for the near future are, when it comes to my job, I think I traded up. What's really interesting is that it will be my current job waiting tables that will provide for me the means to move abroad, not my job at the Council.
There is much to say about what has gone down in the last couple of months. They have truly been some of the most instructive, self-revealing, and emotionally wrenching weeks that I have ever experienced.
I'll be writing more now, and they won't all be this boring and diary-esque. I promise.
Monday, January 01, 2007
2006 - 1, Travis - 0
OK, 2006, you got me. You really kicked my ass. Anyone who got to know me during your ruthless reign has seen more of the pensive, downtrodden, self-consumed me than the me that I believe that I am. It seems as though those were the only parts that you allowed me to show. Well, 2006, you're history. 2007 is here now, and so far (since I've been kind of inebriated the entire year), we're off to a good start.
Now I know that I made some pretty crazy decisions while you were around, 2006, but I think 2007 can handle them. Under your watch, I abandoned some pretty serious commitments (marriage, employment, etc...), but I think that 2007 will prove itself more than capable of handling all the fallout from the damage that you've seen me through. Even though I greeted 2006 with open arms, a good(ish) job, and a somewhat coherent life plan, I can't help but feel (perhaps out of desperate necessity) that having abandoned all of these upon entering 2007, I'm still destined to come out ahead.
Since you will likely be remembered by many as the year that cemented Democratic control of the Congress (and the country??) for years to come, I will give you the benefit of the doubt. You won the battle, 2006, but I will emerge from this heap and win the war. You hide and watch.
Now I know that I made some pretty crazy decisions while you were around, 2006, but I think 2007 can handle them. Under your watch, I abandoned some pretty serious commitments (marriage, employment, etc...), but I think that 2007 will prove itself more than capable of handling all the fallout from the damage that you've seen me through. Even though I greeted 2006 with open arms, a good(ish) job, and a somewhat coherent life plan, I can't help but feel (perhaps out of desperate necessity) that having abandoned all of these upon entering 2007, I'm still destined to come out ahead.
Since you will likely be remembered by many as the year that cemented Democratic control of the Congress (and the country??) for years to come, I will give you the benefit of the doubt. You won the battle, 2006, but I will emerge from this heap and win the war. You hide and watch.
Tuesday, December 12, 2006
The Silent Majority
During a recent (slightly heated) conversation in which everything political was put on the table for discussion – from the Cuban Revolution and the “natural” democratization of Latin America in the 1980s to the shortfalls of Reagan’s domestic policy – the role of religion in American politics inevitably came up. Since the faith of our current president provides much of the explanation, if not the motivation, for the vast majority of his policy decisions, it was a natural transition.
What was striking, however, was the unwillingness of the gentleman with whom I was (heatedly) speaking to discuss religion with the same tit-for-tat exchange of facts and ideas with which we had just discussed politics. He did agree with my statement that unquestioned dogma is most dangerous when applied liberally to politics. But that was as far as he would go. The conversation took a quick and decisive turn back to politics.
If one claims to be a person of faith, and readily acknowledges the perils of dogma-infused political positions, but refuses to openly discuss their faith (which, they admit, forms the basis of their political outlook), what separates them from the dogmatic people (usually Arab) whom they criticize? Very little.
What makes the study of political science possible is the fact that all of the forms, history, key players, etc of politics are fair game. Certain ideas are considered more radical than others, but none are considered too sacred for discussion because of some allegedly inherent personal nature of politics. If one is bold enough to espouse political views, it is assumed that they reached these views through some degree of reading or observation. Even if this person’s political views are merely the adopted views of others or the regurgitation of some radio show or biased media outlet, conversation should make this readily apparent. The fact that they exposed their particular political position makes them vulnerable to criticism and responsible for their own defense.
Espousing religious beliefs, however, does not demand the same responsibility of its adherents. It should.
In the course of the discussion mentioned above, I realized that my worldview and the worldview of the gentleman with whom I was talking differed greatly. More important than the fact that there was a difference, is where the difference began. Because one’s view of religion determines how one views the end of life, the ethical responsibilities of human beings, and myriad other ideas of immense importance, it cannot help but be the greatest determining factor in one’s politics.
If religion is such an important player in the world today, providing motivation for President Bush and Islamic fundamentalists alike, shouldn’t its merits be more defendable, and its adherents less defensive? I think so.
Obviously there are plenty of religious people that are more than willing to debate and discuss their respective faiths until all involved parties are blue in the face. The three monotheistic faiths are, unless practiced in the most watered-down forms, ultimately incompatible, and are also equally defensible, given the standard of evidence and the role of faith. This being the case, those people willing to discuss or debate (or murder, bomb, terrorize) to the death, will continue to do so to no end. And even though all of the talk of religious pluralism makes me warm inside, it is more disingenuous than realistic given the incompatibility and close proximity of the world’s religions, especially considering what is at stake.
What was striking, however, was the unwillingness of the gentleman with whom I was (heatedly) speaking to discuss religion with the same tit-for-tat exchange of facts and ideas with which we had just discussed politics. He did agree with my statement that unquestioned dogma is most dangerous when applied liberally to politics. But that was as far as he would go. The conversation took a quick and decisive turn back to politics.
If one claims to be a person of faith, and readily acknowledges the perils of dogma-infused political positions, but refuses to openly discuss their faith (which, they admit, forms the basis of their political outlook), what separates them from the dogmatic people (usually Arab) whom they criticize? Very little.
What makes the study of political science possible is the fact that all of the forms, history, key players, etc of politics are fair game. Certain ideas are considered more radical than others, but none are considered too sacred for discussion because of some allegedly inherent personal nature of politics. If one is bold enough to espouse political views, it is assumed that they reached these views through some degree of reading or observation. Even if this person’s political views are merely the adopted views of others or the regurgitation of some radio show or biased media outlet, conversation should make this readily apparent. The fact that they exposed their particular political position makes them vulnerable to criticism and responsible for their own defense.
Espousing religious beliefs, however, does not demand the same responsibility of its adherents. It should.
In the course of the discussion mentioned above, I realized that my worldview and the worldview of the gentleman with whom I was talking differed greatly. More important than the fact that there was a difference, is where the difference began. Because one’s view of religion determines how one views the end of life, the ethical responsibilities of human beings, and myriad other ideas of immense importance, it cannot help but be the greatest determining factor in one’s politics.
If religion is such an important player in the world today, providing motivation for President Bush and Islamic fundamentalists alike, shouldn’t its merits be more defendable, and its adherents less defensive? I think so.
Obviously there are plenty of religious people that are more than willing to debate and discuss their respective faiths until all involved parties are blue in the face. The three monotheistic faiths are, unless practiced in the most watered-down forms, ultimately incompatible, and are also equally defensible, given the standard of evidence and the role of faith. This being the case, those people willing to discuss or debate (or murder, bomb, terrorize) to the death, will continue to do so to no end. And even though all of the talk of religious pluralism makes me warm inside, it is more disingenuous than realistic given the incompatibility and close proximity of the world’s religions, especially considering what is at stake.
Friday, December 01, 2006
An Open Letter to Carson Daly
Carson, I’m sorry. Apparently you’ve been begging for scraps from Leno and Conan’s late night table for five years now. For all but about three weeks of those five years, I have considered you kind of a tool. It was in the last month or so that my insomnia kicked in and my bootleg cable limited my wee-morning viewing options to either your show or John Hagee’s “Fat-man Christian Variety and Repentance Hour.”
Expecting to see nothing but cheesy humor, average guests, and selections from Mariah Carey’s “party shuffle,” I was pleasantly surprised to see that your celebrity and musical guests were at least adequate, and sometimes very good. You also seem quite aware that you are not funny.
This is fine because your show doesn’t depend on you being funny. You only have 30 minutes to burn, so there’s no need for Conan-esque skits or Lenoian sidewalk trivia games. Perhaps this is why your guests are so entertaining. Or maybe I’m completely wrong and your guests only seem entertaining in contrast to you.
If this is the case, then any living, breathing person that owns a suit can do your job. I know that the same holds true for my job, but I don’t get paid millions and millions of dollars to be a jackass. I have to do it pro-bono.
Bitterness aside, you are most likely not the tool that I once thought you were. You are, at worst, terribly boring. At least you (or your producer) have decent taste in music and a knack for picking out relatively obscure but oddly interesting guests for your insomniac viewers to watch as they fade in and out of consciousness.
So Carson, I hope that we can put our past behind us. As long as you don’t start thinking that you’re funny and keep the good music coming, all will be well in the late night universe.
Rainbows and kittens,
T
P.S. We’re all convinced now that your ties are not clip-ons. You’re a grown up. It’s ok to wear your tie like an adult.
Expecting to see nothing but cheesy humor, average guests, and selections from Mariah Carey’s “party shuffle,” I was pleasantly surprised to see that your celebrity and musical guests were at least adequate, and sometimes very good. You also seem quite aware that you are not funny.
This is fine because your show doesn’t depend on you being funny. You only have 30 minutes to burn, so there’s no need for Conan-esque skits or Lenoian sidewalk trivia games. Perhaps this is why your guests are so entertaining. Or maybe I’m completely wrong and your guests only seem entertaining in contrast to you.
If this is the case, then any living, breathing person that owns a suit can do your job. I know that the same holds true for my job, but I don’t get paid millions and millions of dollars to be a jackass. I have to do it pro-bono.
Bitterness aside, you are most likely not the tool that I once thought you were. You are, at worst, terribly boring. At least you (or your producer) have decent taste in music and a knack for picking out relatively obscure but oddly interesting guests for your insomniac viewers to watch as they fade in and out of consciousness.
So Carson, I hope that we can put our past behind us. As long as you don’t start thinking that you’re funny and keep the good music coming, all will be well in the late night universe.
Rainbows and kittens,
T
P.S. We’re all convinced now that your ties are not clip-ons. You’re a grown up. It’s ok to wear your tie like an adult.
Thursday, November 30, 2006
It's not just me, right?
Do you ever see someone and think, “What a tool,” and then realize that his/her dress/behavior/jokes/hair/etc are frighteningly similar to your own? If so, and if you’re anything like me, your immediate reaction is “oh, but I would really make that sweater/shoes/ pair of glasses sexy.”
Who am I kidding? I mean, really?
This is the same kind of judgmental attitude coupled with self-denial that in junior high resulted in my placing a “TV is bad” sticker on a wall that would eventually house a TV. This is tantamount to calling someone on your cell phone to tell them that you are now completely off of the “grid.”
Blind rage combined with an underdeveloped sense of direction can certainly result in some embarrassing ironies (Michael Richards’ claiming to be Jewish, for example). Luckily, if you have a sense of humor and a willingness to acknowledge your own ability to think and do stupid things, yesterday’s embarrassment can be today’s funny story.
Who am I kidding? I mean, really?
This is the same kind of judgmental attitude coupled with self-denial that in junior high resulted in my placing a “TV is bad” sticker on a wall that would eventually house a TV. This is tantamount to calling someone on your cell phone to tell them that you are now completely off of the “grid.”
Blind rage combined with an underdeveloped sense of direction can certainly result in some embarrassing ironies (Michael Richards’ claiming to be Jewish, for example). Luckily, if you have a sense of humor and a willingness to acknowledge your own ability to think and do stupid things, yesterday’s embarrassment can be today’s funny story.
Wednesday, November 29, 2006
A Few Morsely Morsels
“I’d start a revolution, but I just bought a hammock”
- Zach Galifianakis<>R>
*************************************************************************************
An ExxonMobil executive complained to me yesterday about the pollution in Tokyo being worse this time of year because of the weather. I mentioned that Santiago, Chile suffers from the same problem. He replied, “Ahh yes, but Tokyo has significantly more cars though.”
This particular gentleman and I are quite aware of our differing opinions on climate change, global warming, etc.
*************************************************************************************
This article, of course, picked out selections from Ahmadinejad’s latest letter to Americans. You know, sometimes he makes some pretty good points. Unfortunately he spends most of his time scaring the shit out of Israel, so we’re never going to be able to take him seriously.
- Zach Galifianakis<>R>
*************************************************************************************
An ExxonMobil executive complained to me yesterday about the pollution in Tokyo being worse this time of year because of the weather. I mentioned that Santiago, Chile suffers from the same problem. He replied, “Ahh yes, but Tokyo has significantly more cars though.”
This particular gentleman and I are quite aware of our differing opinions on climate change, global warming, etc.
*************************************************************************************
This article, of course, picked out selections from Ahmadinejad’s latest letter to Americans. You know, sometimes he makes some pretty good points. Unfortunately he spends most of his time scaring the shit out of Israel, so we’re never going to be able to take him seriously.
Tuesday, November 21, 2006
Clever Like a FOX
FOX interrupted the Simpsons this weekend with a flashy promotional piece for their fancy Tuesday primetime lineup. They wanted to make sure that I knew that both Standoff and House would be all new this week. What was interesting about this particular promo piece, however, was the intermittent interjection of the comforting phrase, “you’re never alone.”
At first, this struck me as odd coming from a television network. But then I realized that this was precisely the sentiment that the network hoped to convey to its viewership.
What FOX really wants to instill in you is the following:
Rest assured. If you find yourself being held hostage by some maniac in the greater Los Angeles area, Ron Livingston (of Sex & the City fame) and Emily Lehman (of Standoff fame) will briefly put aside their inconvenient and awkward love affair to save your life, and will do so in just under 60 minutes (including commercials).
Or, if you’re a hypochondriac:
Don’t worry. If you find yourself afflicted by some random disease, a drug-addled Hugh Laurie (of Blackadder fame) will refuse to dress like an actual doctor while gladly spraying you with some experimental medicine. He will then immediately pinpoint the super-rare ailment that is currently afflicting you. The he’ll take more drugs while confidently wielding his cane.
Essentially, fat America (I include myself in this slam) can breathe a sigh of relief because Rupert Murdoch’s designer-clad problem-solvers are on the case.
The bigger question, I think, is how much do we, the American TV-watching public, look to television for comfort and friendship. Now, I understand that this should be a question relegated to absurdity, but honest observation will, I think, prove otherwise.
Take FRIENDS, for example. I know of several people who, by the end of the 10 season run, felt a sincere connection with the six characters. These people are not social degenerates or chronic introverts who look exclusively to NBC for their social interaction. Since FRIENDS was universally popular, it could easily be used to relate other FRIENDS viewers. Now, don’t think that by talking about “these people” in a distant third person that I am putting them down in any way. I have shows that I relate to and enjoy, too. I pride myself for having developed a keen “Seinfeldian” outlook on life, and tend look down on those who are not as highly evolved.
So, in case you find yourself lost (I know, I like that phrase, too), all I have illustrated thus far is that people a) watch TV, b) they like it, and c) they talk about it after they see it. As irrelevant and useless as this might seem, you’re right.
Irrelevant, that is, until you meet someone whose sole means for interaction with other human beings seems to be whatever they happened to have watched on television the night before.* Granted, TV is often entertaining and sometimes interesting. I watch a lot of it. But one has to be aware of how often one’s conversation starts with “Oh my god. You should have seen it. Last night on…..”
I think that FOX ultimately wants to remind people that they “are not alone” because they hope to be that one thing that stands between the public and absolute loneliness.
“I know I’m not out with friends right now, but I am by no means alone. I mean look, Ron Livingston is right here in my living room. I can’t wait to tell everyone at work all about it. They’ll be so interested.”
*Yes. I still have a short-term memory. I do recall writing something about a “Seinfeldian” outlook on life. I maintain that this outlook was formed over years of observation and conversation with fellow Seinfeldians. I think that my outlook on life would have developed just as well without Seinfeld, just perhaps not as rapidly or acutely. It’s kind of like those people who followed the Grateful Dead around the country. Just because Jerry Garcia formed a band and took a liking to pot didn’t automatically cause all of those people to adopt an affection for tie-dyed clothing and Winnebagos. They were already willing and able. They just needed a namesake.*
At first, this struck me as odd coming from a television network. But then I realized that this was precisely the sentiment that the network hoped to convey to its viewership.
What FOX really wants to instill in you is the following:
Rest assured. If you find yourself being held hostage by some maniac in the greater Los Angeles area, Ron Livingston (of Sex & the City fame) and Emily Lehman (of Standoff fame) will briefly put aside their inconvenient and awkward love affair to save your life, and will do so in just under 60 minutes (including commercials).
Or, if you’re a hypochondriac:
Don’t worry. If you find yourself afflicted by some random disease, a drug-addled Hugh Laurie (of Blackadder fame) will refuse to dress like an actual doctor while gladly spraying you with some experimental medicine. He will then immediately pinpoint the super-rare ailment that is currently afflicting you. The he’ll take more drugs while confidently wielding his cane.
Essentially, fat America (I include myself in this slam) can breathe a sigh of relief because Rupert Murdoch’s designer-clad problem-solvers are on the case.
The bigger question, I think, is how much do we, the American TV-watching public, look to television for comfort and friendship. Now, I understand that this should be a question relegated to absurdity, but honest observation will, I think, prove otherwise.
Take FRIENDS, for example. I know of several people who, by the end of the 10 season run, felt a sincere connection with the six characters. These people are not social degenerates or chronic introverts who look exclusively to NBC for their social interaction. Since FRIENDS was universally popular, it could easily be used to relate other FRIENDS viewers. Now, don’t think that by talking about “these people” in a distant third person that I am putting them down in any way. I have shows that I relate to and enjoy, too. I pride myself for having developed a keen “Seinfeldian” outlook on life, and tend look down on those who are not as highly evolved.
So, in case you find yourself lost (I know, I like that phrase, too), all I have illustrated thus far is that people a) watch TV, b) they like it, and c) they talk about it after they see it. As irrelevant and useless as this might seem, you’re right.
Irrelevant, that is, until you meet someone whose sole means for interaction with other human beings seems to be whatever they happened to have watched on television the night before.* Granted, TV is often entertaining and sometimes interesting. I watch a lot of it. But one has to be aware of how often one’s conversation starts with “Oh my god. You should have seen it. Last night on…..”
I think that FOX ultimately wants to remind people that they “are not alone” because they hope to be that one thing that stands between the public and absolute loneliness.
“I know I’m not out with friends right now, but I am by no means alone. I mean look, Ron Livingston is right here in my living room. I can’t wait to tell everyone at work all about it. They’ll be so interested.”
*Yes. I still have a short-term memory. I do recall writing something about a “Seinfeldian” outlook on life. I maintain that this outlook was formed over years of observation and conversation with fellow Seinfeldians. I think that my outlook on life would have developed just as well without Seinfeld, just perhaps not as rapidly or acutely. It’s kind of like those people who followed the Grateful Dead around the country. Just because Jerry Garcia formed a band and took a liking to pot didn’t automatically cause all of those people to adopt an affection for tie-dyed clothing and Winnebagos. They were already willing and able. They just needed a namesake.*
Tuesday, November 14, 2006
My Impending Unemployment
So, in two months, I will most likely be unemployed and in a foreign country. I quit a job that, other than the usual complaints (demanding boss, too much work, too little pay, etc), isn’t really that bad. I have a decent apartment, a newish car, and a good group of friends here. Why would I up and move to a foreign country with no job and plenty of bureaucratic, linguistic, and professional barriers in place to keep me from finding one? Since I have to sell, parcel out, and move all of my earthly belongings, and then dive into the unknown, am I not risking a whole lot? Aren’t the stakes ridiculously high here?
Yes. The stakes are incredibly high.
If you watched The Office last week, you may remember the dilemma facing the awkward characters in that great show. The people who work in one of the offices featured in the show thought for a while that the office was going to be closed. After it was revealed that their office would not, in fact, be closed, one of the characters said something to the effect of
"Wow. So much for moving to Costa Rica and learning how to surf. I guess that there will be plenty of time for Costa Rica…..when I’m 60."
This is precisely why there is so much at stake. It will always be easy to stay where it’s comfortable. Complacency is never difficult. I have never lived more than 10 miles away from I-35. Trust me, it’s not difficult.
I may fail at this. I may get down there, completely freak out, not learn the language, not get a job, and have to come right back. That is a very real possibility. I’m trying very hard to prevent that from being the case, but I know that it is certainly well within the realm of possibility. It may even constitute a great majority of that realm.
What I do know is that at 24, I don’t need to spend more than two years at this job. If Argentina isn’t right, at least it’s not wrong. Staying in Dallas is easy. Staying in Dallas would be wrong.
The stakes are incredibly high here because if I don’t get the heck outta Dodge, I just might become Festus. (I love a good Gunsmoke reference) As funny as he may be, nobody wants to be Festus.
Yes. The stakes are incredibly high.
If you watched The Office last week, you may remember the dilemma facing the awkward characters in that great show. The people who work in one of the offices featured in the show thought for a while that the office was going to be closed. After it was revealed that their office would not, in fact, be closed, one of the characters said something to the effect of
"Wow. So much for moving to Costa Rica and learning how to surf. I guess that there will be plenty of time for Costa Rica…..when I’m 60."
This is precisely why there is so much at stake. It will always be easy to stay where it’s comfortable. Complacency is never difficult. I have never lived more than 10 miles away from I-35. Trust me, it’s not difficult.
I may fail at this. I may get down there, completely freak out, not learn the language, not get a job, and have to come right back. That is a very real possibility. I’m trying very hard to prevent that from being the case, but I know that it is certainly well within the realm of possibility. It may even constitute a great majority of that realm.
What I do know is that at 24, I don’t need to spend more than two years at this job. If Argentina isn’t right, at least it’s not wrong. Staying in Dallas is easy. Staying in Dallas would be wrong.
The stakes are incredibly high here because if I don’t get the heck outta Dodge, I just might become Festus. (I love a good Gunsmoke reference) As funny as he may be, nobody wants to be Festus.
Friday, November 10, 2006
Where's the Outrage?
You may think that my most recent post is rediculous because instead of being happy about a week that sent Rummy, Santorum, and Mehlman to monster.com, I found some obscure races in Dallas and Ellis Counties to bitch about. I'm sorry. I'm usually the silver-lining guy.
I just can't muster it this week.
A friend sent me this article and things haven't been right since. I know that we have all read articles similar to this before, but please try to read it and not be angry.
I dare say that it’s impossible.
I just can't muster it this week.
A friend sent me this article and things haven't been right since. I know that we have all read articles similar to this before, but please try to read it and not be angry.
I dare say that it’s impossible.
What a week
Where to start…..
Among all of the good news this week is the great news that the wise people of Pennsylvania kicked renowned homophobe Rick Santorum out of the Senate. Now if Oklahoma can wake up and get rid of Tom Coburn, perhaps the Senate can leave the constitution alone and have a meaningful discussion about Iraq. But, since my oldest sister and a handful of good bands are among the few good things to come out of Oklahoma, I’m not holding my breath. (This is the state, after all, where I witnessed a shop-vac being used as a toilet.)
While the national political picture looks better, voters in Dallas and Ellis County rejected two great candidates for county judge. Margaret Keliher was defeated by Democrat Jim Foster, who has never held elected office. It’s a shame, because as the self-described “Mayor of Dallas County,” Keliher had a sincere concern for international issues—something that Dallas’ current mayor doesn’t care to be bothered about.
In Ellis County, the GOP’s unwavering and unlearned followers reelected anti-environmentalist and Joe Barton yes-man Chad Adams instead of former Waxahachie mayor Chuck Beatty. Turnouts like these prove (again) that straight-ticket voters are at best naïve, and at worst destructive. (See the Dallas County DA race, for example.) Just because Dubya and his crew have made some big messes, doesn’t justify voting straight Democrat in LOCAL RACES. And just because you think that Dubya can do no wrong doesn’t mean that the right guy (or gal) is always riding an elephant.
With Rumsfeld gone and possibly facing charges, it looks like Tony Snow’s alleged warning that “this is not a time for floating ideas” might (hopefully) be the last breaths of an Administration in denial.
What’s really interesting about the charges being mounted against Rummy, is that it appears not to be all for show. Among those listed at possible defendants in the TIME article listed above is John Yoo, the man given the responsibility to provide the Administration’s intellectual and legal backing for torturing POWs. Since it seems that public opinion, if not (I assume) 99% of ethicists and John McCain are in the majority in saying that torture is wrong in any situation, perhaps these trials could (read: should) get some traction. I know that the US’ longstanding policy of “do what we say, not what we do” will certainly be called upon, thereby preventing Rummy from doing hard time for Abu Ghraib. And that’s too bad.
Among all of the good news this week is the great news that the wise people of Pennsylvania kicked renowned homophobe Rick Santorum out of the Senate. Now if Oklahoma can wake up and get rid of Tom Coburn, perhaps the Senate can leave the constitution alone and have a meaningful discussion about Iraq. But, since my oldest sister and a handful of good bands are among the few good things to come out of Oklahoma, I’m not holding my breath. (This is the state, after all, where I witnessed a shop-vac being used as a toilet.)
While the national political picture looks better, voters in Dallas and Ellis County rejected two great candidates for county judge. Margaret Keliher was defeated by Democrat Jim Foster, who has never held elected office. It’s a shame, because as the self-described “Mayor of Dallas County,” Keliher had a sincere concern for international issues—something that Dallas’ current mayor doesn’t care to be bothered about.
In Ellis County, the GOP’s unwavering and unlearned followers reelected anti-environmentalist and Joe Barton yes-man Chad Adams instead of former Waxahachie mayor Chuck Beatty. Turnouts like these prove (again) that straight-ticket voters are at best naïve, and at worst destructive. (See the Dallas County DA race, for example.) Just because Dubya and his crew have made some big messes, doesn’t justify voting straight Democrat in LOCAL RACES. And just because you think that Dubya can do no wrong doesn’t mean that the right guy (or gal) is always riding an elephant.
With Rumsfeld gone and possibly facing charges, it looks like Tony Snow’s alleged warning that “this is not a time for floating ideas” might (hopefully) be the last breaths of an Administration in denial.
What’s really interesting about the charges being mounted against Rummy, is that it appears not to be all for show. Among those listed at possible defendants in the TIME article listed above is John Yoo, the man given the responsibility to provide the Administration’s intellectual and legal backing for torturing POWs. Since it seems that public opinion, if not (I assume) 99% of ethicists and John McCain are in the majority in saying that torture is wrong in any situation, perhaps these trials could (read: should) get some traction. I know that the US’ longstanding policy of “do what we say, not what we do” will certainly be called upon, thereby preventing Rummy from doing hard time for Abu Ghraib. And that’s too bad.
Friday, October 27, 2006
DTS Halloween Costumes
After the release of Rick Warren’s Purpose-Driven Halloween, many believers are again celebrating Halloween. Shunning their usual means of celebration, they are this year embracing more traditional Halloween celebrations.
So, as a service, John-Michael and I devised a list of what should be the most popular costumes among students of Dallas Theological Seminary.
10. Vessel Created for Destruction
Terracotta pot with “Destroy” stamp
9. Scale Model of Old Testament Earth
Flat, one continent, very few animals
8. Post-Rapture Christian
Store-bought zombie costume
7. Kirk Cameron
Brillo-pad hair and a squeaky voice
6. A TULIP
Feel free to omit the ‘L,’ I did
5. Bride of Christ
Tammy Faye Baker-esque makeup
4. Catholic Jesus Kit
Giant Saltine Cracker
3. Jerry Falwell Sumo Champion
Normal sumo costume with Falwell mask
2. Body of Christ
Shirtless, stitches on both sides
1. Spanish Missionary
Carry around a trident and a bag labeled “syphilis”
So, as a service, John-Michael and I devised a list of what should be the most popular costumes among students of Dallas Theological Seminary.
10. Vessel Created for Destruction
Terracotta pot with “Destroy” stamp
9. Scale Model of Old Testament Earth
Flat, one continent, very few animals
8. Post-Rapture Christian
Store-bought zombie costume
7. Kirk Cameron
Brillo-pad hair and a squeaky voice
6. A TULIP
Feel free to omit the ‘L,’ I did
5. Bride of Christ
Tammy Faye Baker-esque makeup
4. Catholic Jesus Kit
Giant Saltine Cracker
3. Jerry Falwell Sumo Champion
Normal sumo costume with Falwell mask
2. Body of Christ
Shirtless, stitches on both sides
1. Spanish Missionary
Carry around a trident and a bag labeled “syphilis”
Thursday, October 19, 2006
ELECTION DAY STILL A LONG WAY OFF
by Molly Ivins
All newspaper editors want to know what their readers like. If you would like to read this feature in your local newspaper, please do not hesitate to share your enthusiasm with your local newspaper editor.
RELEASE: THURSDAY, OCTOBER 19, 2006, AND THEREAFTER
Stunning coincidence. The verdict in the long-running trial of Saddam Hussein in Iraq is now due two days before our congressional elections in November. Astounding. How ineffable. Sometimes you know the Republicans have just lost the rag completely. This week, Dick Cheney said to Rush Limbaugh regarding the Iraqi government, "If you look at the general, overall situation, they're doing remarkably well." The vice president also acknowledged there's some concern because the war wasn't over "instantaneously." We have now been in Iraq just one month shy of the entire time it took us to fight World War II. Seventy Americans dead so far in October. Electricity in Iraq this year hit its lowest levels since the war started. What infuriates me about this is the lying.
WHY can't they level with us? Just on the general, overall situation. Put me in the depressive Dems camp. We always look good going into the last two weeks, until we get hit with that wall of Republican money (though I do think Ohio is beyond political recall at this point for the R's). Of course, both sides always complain about unfair advertising, but I must admit that almost all political advertising strikes me as ludicrous and I don't notice the D's looking simon-pure. A little shading, a little emphasis here and there -- I'm hard to shock on political ads, but I do get more than miffed when they take the truth and just stand it on its head.
For example, if ever there has been a friend to Social Security it would be Rep. Chet Edwards from Waco, Texas, a D loyal to the FDR, LBJ and government-exists-to-serve-the-people tradition. So what are the R's attacking him on? Not supporting Social Security. All this kind of thing does is render political debate completely meaningless. The argument now is that D's have a seven-point structural deficit going into any election. I see the problem, I just have no idea what the actual numbers are.
Let's start with the easy end, the Senate. From the book "Off Center" by Jacob S. Hacker and Paul Pierson, as recently quoted by Eric Alterman in his blog: "The mismatch between popular votes and electoral outcomes is even more striking in the Senate. Combining the last three Senate elections, Democrats have actually won 2.5 million more votes than Republicans. Yet now they hold only 44 seats in that 100-person chamber because Republicans dominate the less populous states that are so heavily overrepresented in the Senate. As journalist Hendrik Hertzberg (of the New Yorker) notes, if you treat each senator as representing half that state's population, then the Senate's 55 Republicans currently represent 131 million people, while the 44 Democrats represent 161 million people."
OK, we all know about the small-state advantage in the Senate. How did the People's House get so far out of fair? Paul Krugman explains: "The key point is that African-Americans, who overwhelmingly vote Democratic, are highly concentrated in a few districts. This means that in close elections many Democratic votes are, as political analysts say, wasted -- they simply add to huge majorities in a small number of districts, while the more widely spread Republican vote allows the GOP to win by narrower margins in a larger number of districts."
I should also point out that Democrats used to pack minority voters into the same districts when they drew the redistricting lines because of simple racism. Minority candidates need more votes to win, as polling consistently shows them several points ahead of where they actually finish because some people still cannot bring themselves to vote for black politicians even if they agree with them. For instance, race is a factor this year in Harold Ford's Tennessee Senate contest -- even though political people keep pretending it's not. I'm the one who has been writing for two years that the American people are fed up with the war in Iraq and with the Bush administration's lies and incompetence.
I'm the one that keeps beating the Washington press corps about the head over how out of touch it is. I'm the one who has been insisting there's a Democratic tide out here, and that the people are so far ahead of the politicians and the media it's painful to watch. So how come I'm not thrilled? Because I watched this happen two years ago -- same rejection of the Iraq war, same disgust with Bush and Co., same understanding Republicans are for the rich, period, same polls showing D's with the lead going right into Election Day. And the same geographic gerrymander and same wall of money in the last two weeks. I'm not close to calling this election, and I'm sure not into celebrating anything yet.
To find out more about Molly Ivins and read features by other Creators Syndicate writers and cartoonists, visit the Creators Syndicate web page at www.creators.com.
COPYRIGHT 2006 CREATORS SYNDICATE, INC.
Originally Published on Thursday October 19, 2006
All newspaper editors want to know what their readers like. If you would like to read this feature in your local newspaper, please do not hesitate to share your enthusiasm with your local newspaper editor.
RELEASE: THURSDAY, OCTOBER 19, 2006, AND THEREAFTER
Stunning coincidence. The verdict in the long-running trial of Saddam Hussein in Iraq is now due two days before our congressional elections in November. Astounding. How ineffable. Sometimes you know the Republicans have just lost the rag completely. This week, Dick Cheney said to Rush Limbaugh regarding the Iraqi government, "If you look at the general, overall situation, they're doing remarkably well." The vice president also acknowledged there's some concern because the war wasn't over "instantaneously." We have now been in Iraq just one month shy of the entire time it took us to fight World War II. Seventy Americans dead so far in October. Electricity in Iraq this year hit its lowest levels since the war started. What infuriates me about this is the lying.
WHY can't they level with us? Just on the general, overall situation. Put me in the depressive Dems camp. We always look good going into the last two weeks, until we get hit with that wall of Republican money (though I do think Ohio is beyond political recall at this point for the R's). Of course, both sides always complain about unfair advertising, but I must admit that almost all political advertising strikes me as ludicrous and I don't notice the D's looking simon-pure. A little shading, a little emphasis here and there -- I'm hard to shock on political ads, but I do get more than miffed when they take the truth and just stand it on its head.
For example, if ever there has been a friend to Social Security it would be Rep. Chet Edwards from Waco, Texas, a D loyal to the FDR, LBJ and government-exists-to-serve-the-people tradition. So what are the R's attacking him on? Not supporting Social Security. All this kind of thing does is render political debate completely meaningless. The argument now is that D's have a seven-point structural deficit going into any election. I see the problem, I just have no idea what the actual numbers are.
Let's start with the easy end, the Senate. From the book "Off Center" by Jacob S. Hacker and Paul Pierson, as recently quoted by Eric Alterman in his blog: "The mismatch between popular votes and electoral outcomes is even more striking in the Senate. Combining the last three Senate elections, Democrats have actually won 2.5 million more votes than Republicans. Yet now they hold only 44 seats in that 100-person chamber because Republicans dominate the less populous states that are so heavily overrepresented in the Senate. As journalist Hendrik Hertzberg (of the New Yorker) notes, if you treat each senator as representing half that state's population, then the Senate's 55 Republicans currently represent 131 million people, while the 44 Democrats represent 161 million people."
OK, we all know about the small-state advantage in the Senate. How did the People's House get so far out of fair? Paul Krugman explains: "The key point is that African-Americans, who overwhelmingly vote Democratic, are highly concentrated in a few districts. This means that in close elections many Democratic votes are, as political analysts say, wasted -- they simply add to huge majorities in a small number of districts, while the more widely spread Republican vote allows the GOP to win by narrower margins in a larger number of districts."
I should also point out that Democrats used to pack minority voters into the same districts when they drew the redistricting lines because of simple racism. Minority candidates need more votes to win, as polling consistently shows them several points ahead of where they actually finish because some people still cannot bring themselves to vote for black politicians even if they agree with them. For instance, race is a factor this year in Harold Ford's Tennessee Senate contest -- even though political people keep pretending it's not. I'm the one who has been writing for two years that the American people are fed up with the war in Iraq and with the Bush administration's lies and incompetence.
I'm the one that keeps beating the Washington press corps about the head over how out of touch it is. I'm the one who has been insisting there's a Democratic tide out here, and that the people are so far ahead of the politicians and the media it's painful to watch. So how come I'm not thrilled? Because I watched this happen two years ago -- same rejection of the Iraq war, same disgust with Bush and Co., same understanding Republicans are for the rich, period, same polls showing D's with the lead going right into Election Day. And the same geographic gerrymander and same wall of money in the last two weeks. I'm not close to calling this election, and I'm sure not into celebrating anything yet.
To find out more about Molly Ivins and read features by other Creators Syndicate writers and cartoonists, visit the Creators Syndicate web page at www.creators.com.
COPYRIGHT 2006 CREATORS SYNDICATE, INC.
Originally Published on Thursday October 19, 2006
Monday, October 16, 2006
Seattle: The Home of Classic Rock
Ok, as previous posts have made abundantly clear, I am lazy. It is for this reason that I have not reinstalled by satellite radio receiver after removing it to use in another car in September. This, combined with the current NPR pledge drive, and the fact that I have grown a bit tired of the Gnarls Barkley CD currently in my deck (150 or so consecutive listens will have this effect, regardless of the CD’s quality), resulted in my resorting to terrestrial radio for the latter half of my nine-minute commute this morning.
Out of nostalgic obligation, I tuned to KZPS, the classic rock station on which I grew up. The station has since been bought out, of course, by Clear Channel.
The Devil has yet to purchase an iPod, so He has purchased, via Clear Channel, every terrestrial radio station within his jurisdiction to ensure that he never misses the latest from Rob Thomas, Diddy, or Hoobastank)
To my horror, following an unsuspecting John Mellencamp song was Nirvana’s cover of Bowie’s “Man Who Sold the World.” Are you KIDDING me? Bob Seger’s career must be spinning in its grave knowing that it is losing airtime to a band whose leader is not even alive, much less still touring and creating music.
Since when does a song recorded in 1993 count as “classic rock?” This is precisely the sort of negligence that is creating the horrid musical homogeneity rampant in radio today. If mainstream radio can’t even be depended on to expose people to the Stones, the Beatles, Clapton, and the Who, what hope can we have that the masses will be exposed to Duke Ellington, Wes Montgomery, Miles Davis, Buddy Guy, Bob Wills, Jerry Garcia, Neil Young, The Doors, Bob Dylan, Merle Haggard…..
Perhaps the fact that these quality artists are not spoon-fed to the masses is what makes finding and delving into them so very sweet. I did not, after all, discover and learn to appreciate good music from the radio. My sisters and brothers-in-law really impressed on me the value of good music. Sandra introduced me to the Beatles; Paul to the Stones, Cream, Junior Brown, and M. Ward, among others; Dani to Todd Snider, Arrested Development, Miles Davis, and the Gourds, among others; and Sean to Neil Young, Public Enemy, the Skatalites, Jane’s Addiction, and Lenny Kravitz, among many others.
My fear is that the songwriters of tomorrow will, considering Nirvana as a “classic” artist worthy of replication, be both “stupid and contagious” with their music. If the likes of Rob Thomas and Ludacris continue to churn out lyrical and musical drivel, I suppose the best that I can hope for is that the feeling of the discovery of quality bands will become even sweeter by contrast.
While top 40 subscribers are certainly in danger of a white-bread music collection, there are a lot of idie rockers facing a similar peril. If one spends all of one’s time consumed by the next emerging artist, finding vain satisfaction in their appreciation of even the most obscure bands, one is certainly running the risk of listening to purely sub-par music. Thanks to our vigorous consumer market, most quality music does find itself on some sort of label. It’s when the major labels sign no-talent hacks like Fuel, Eve 6, and Matchbox 20 that we are reminded that the best music still lies somewhere under surface, safe from Clear Channel’s watchful eye. It is this subterranean search that makes finding new music so great.
For those of us who really appreciate music and take it seriously, it is through listening to, sharing, and writing about quality music that will guarantee its survival. As long as Mariah Carey outsells M. Ward, the major record labels will have no reason to be concerned with diversity or quality.
Out of nostalgic obligation, I tuned to KZPS, the classic rock station on which I grew up. The station has since been bought out, of course, by Clear Channel.
The Devil has yet to purchase an iPod, so He has purchased, via Clear Channel, every terrestrial radio station within his jurisdiction to ensure that he never misses the latest from Rob Thomas, Diddy, or Hoobastank)
To my horror, following an unsuspecting John Mellencamp song was Nirvana’s cover of Bowie’s “Man Who Sold the World.” Are you KIDDING me? Bob Seger’s career must be spinning in its grave knowing that it is losing airtime to a band whose leader is not even alive, much less still touring and creating music.
Since when does a song recorded in 1993 count as “classic rock?” This is precisely the sort of negligence that is creating the horrid musical homogeneity rampant in radio today. If mainstream radio can’t even be depended on to expose people to the Stones, the Beatles, Clapton, and the Who, what hope can we have that the masses will be exposed to Duke Ellington, Wes Montgomery, Miles Davis, Buddy Guy, Bob Wills, Jerry Garcia, Neil Young, The Doors, Bob Dylan, Merle Haggard…..
Perhaps the fact that these quality artists are not spoon-fed to the masses is what makes finding and delving into them so very sweet. I did not, after all, discover and learn to appreciate good music from the radio. My sisters and brothers-in-law really impressed on me the value of good music. Sandra introduced me to the Beatles; Paul to the Stones, Cream, Junior Brown, and M. Ward, among others; Dani to Todd Snider, Arrested Development, Miles Davis, and the Gourds, among others; and Sean to Neil Young, Public Enemy, the Skatalites, Jane’s Addiction, and Lenny Kravitz, among many others.
My fear is that the songwriters of tomorrow will, considering Nirvana as a “classic” artist worthy of replication, be both “stupid and contagious” with their music. If the likes of Rob Thomas and Ludacris continue to churn out lyrical and musical drivel, I suppose the best that I can hope for is that the feeling of the discovery of quality bands will become even sweeter by contrast.
While top 40 subscribers are certainly in danger of a white-bread music collection, there are a lot of idie rockers facing a similar peril. If one spends all of one’s time consumed by the next emerging artist, finding vain satisfaction in their appreciation of even the most obscure bands, one is certainly running the risk of listening to purely sub-par music. Thanks to our vigorous consumer market, most quality music does find itself on some sort of label. It’s when the major labels sign no-talent hacks like Fuel, Eve 6, and Matchbox 20 that we are reminded that the best music still lies somewhere under surface, safe from Clear Channel’s watchful eye. It is this subterranean search that makes finding new music so great.
For those of us who really appreciate music and take it seriously, it is through listening to, sharing, and writing about quality music that will guarantee its survival. As long as Mariah Carey outsells M. Ward, the major record labels will have no reason to be concerned with diversity or quality.
Thursday, October 12, 2006
The World According to MTV
There were a couple of nights this week that I couldn’t get to sleep, so I did what any other person in this situation would do—I watched TV. Because I have bootleg cable and no remote control, when I watch TV, I tend to watch a single channel for a long period of time. On these particular nights, that channel was MTV.
I am proud to say that as a gainfully employed 24 year old, I am no long in their primary demographic. It seems to me that most of their original programming and music videos are targeted at the 14 to 21 year old range. Fourteen year old boys and girls watch shows like “Two-a-Days,” which depicts the drama of a highly successful high school football team in Alabama, in order to confirm that their quarterback/cheerleaders/cocky wide receivers are in fact better/prettier/cockier than those on TV. Only those currently in high school (or living vicariously through their high school-aged children) can really relate to this show as I believe it is intended. That is not to say it is not entertaining. It is. In that “if they only knew that life doesn’t end at homecoming” kind of way.
The meat of MTV’s wee-morning programming is music videos. The more I watch these videos, the more I tend to agree with Beck adage, “MTV makes me want to smoke crack.” I don’t bring this up to offend anyone who has an actual crack addiction. I mean this to offend anyone to actually enjoys these music videos, for they are horrible.
Not horrible in the James-Dobson-says-it’s-evil-so-I-must-avoid-it horrible, but poorly made and lacking in substance originality—much like the music they are meant to celebrate. After observing these horrid productions and other MTV offerings, I made a note of what I had learned about the world:
1. If I see a cute girl across the room at a club, all I have to do wink at her and she’ll follow me outside and dance around in her bikini (which she is wearing at all times) behind a convenient sheer cloth. Though she is wearing a bikini, all I must remove before going to the beach is my hat.
2. Women wear nothing but bikinis.
3. If I am a pompous overrated self-promoting rap mogul, a bikini-clad woman will wake me up every morning, regardless of who else might be in my bed.
4. Rich people have rooms in their houses that use cash for carpet.
5. Girls change clothes at least 10 times during any 4 minute period—especially if there is a song about empowering women playing in the background.
6. It’s ok to star in a video about being a strong, independent woman not getting by on looks, and then star in one in which two of your five outfits are made primarily of strategically-placed lace.
7. If I have a really nice car, women will dance all over them in bikinis.
8. It’s ok for grown men to wear nothing but jeans and football jerseys.
9. “News” is comprised solely of a behind-the-scenes look at the making of the latest Beyoncé video.
10. If it doesn’t happen in Laguna Beach, it doesn’t matter.
I am proud to say that as a gainfully employed 24 year old, I am no long in their primary demographic. It seems to me that most of their original programming and music videos are targeted at the 14 to 21 year old range. Fourteen year old boys and girls watch shows like “Two-a-Days,” which depicts the drama of a highly successful high school football team in Alabama, in order to confirm that their quarterback/cheerleaders/cocky wide receivers are in fact better/prettier/cockier than those on TV. Only those currently in high school (or living vicariously through their high school-aged children) can really relate to this show as I believe it is intended. That is not to say it is not entertaining. It is. In that “if they only knew that life doesn’t end at homecoming” kind of way.
The meat of MTV’s wee-morning programming is music videos. The more I watch these videos, the more I tend to agree with Beck adage, “MTV makes me want to smoke crack.” I don’t bring this up to offend anyone who has an actual crack addiction. I mean this to offend anyone to actually enjoys these music videos, for they are horrible.
Not horrible in the James-Dobson-says-it’s-evil-so-I-must-avoid-it horrible, but poorly made and lacking in substance originality—much like the music they are meant to celebrate. After observing these horrid productions and other MTV offerings, I made a note of what I had learned about the world:
1. If I see a cute girl across the room at a club, all I have to do wink at her and she’ll follow me outside and dance around in her bikini (which she is wearing at all times) behind a convenient sheer cloth. Though she is wearing a bikini, all I must remove before going to the beach is my hat.
2. Women wear nothing but bikinis.
3. If I am a pompous overrated self-promoting rap mogul, a bikini-clad woman will wake me up every morning, regardless of who else might be in my bed.
4. Rich people have rooms in their houses that use cash for carpet.
5. Girls change clothes at least 10 times during any 4 minute period—especially if there is a song about empowering women playing in the background.
6. It’s ok to star in a video about being a strong, independent woman not getting by on looks, and then star in one in which two of your five outfits are made primarily of strategically-placed lace.
7. If I have a really nice car, women will dance all over them in bikinis.
8. It’s ok for grown men to wear nothing but jeans and football jerseys.
9. “News” is comprised solely of a behind-the-scenes look at the making of the latest Beyoncé video.
10. If it doesn’t happen in Laguna Beach, it doesn’t matter.
Tuesday, September 26, 2006
Ramadan 101
or those of you who let the beginning of Ramadan pass without notice, you are most likely unaware of which actions might cause you to break this holy fast. I find this list quite interesting, and I will allow it to speak for itself.
I do question, however, (at the very least) the logic behind number one. How is it that someone could “forget that one is fasting” for long enough to have “sexual intercourse?” It also seems to provide an exception for the involuntary viewing of porn. I find that very confusing and a little troubling.
RAMADAN – What does not break fast
From Madinah Masjid of Carrollton
1. If one forgets that one is fasting and eats, drinks or has sexual intercourse, or has a nocturnal emission while asleep or emits semen involuntarily by looking [at something sex ] (though it is totally haram to see such things)
2. If one applies tincture of iodine or some ointment [even if their tint or smell is noticed in one's saliva or urine].
3. If one vomits a mouthful involuntarily or vomits a little voluntarily.
4. If water goes into ones ear or dust, smoke or a fly goes into one's throat through one's mouth or nose involuntarily or if one cannot prevent the smoke of others cigarettes from going into one's mouth and nose.
5. If after rinsing one's mouth one swallows the wetness remaining in one's mouth together with one's saliva.
6. If one puts some medicine in one's eye or even if one feels its taste in one's throat.
7. If a fasting person swallows his saliva, his fast will not break. Bleeding from an injury in the mouth from taking a tooth out, or blood coming from the stomach to the mouth does not break a fast or an ablution. When one spits out or swallows his blood coming from mouth, if the saliva is greater than the blood, that is if the saliva is yellow in color, his fast is still not broken. If a mouthful comes to the mouth and goes out of the mouth, both are broken. It is seen that, when a tooth is extracted if there is much bleeding, the fast is not broken when one spits it out. When one is not fasting, one's ablution is not broken when one swallows it. Neither of the two is broken if the blood is less than the amount of saliva.
8. Using antimony (surma) or cosmetics for one's beard, moustaches, face, smelling flowers, musks or Lotions will not break one's fast.
I do question, however, (at the very least) the logic behind number one. How is it that someone could “forget that one is fasting” for long enough to have “sexual intercourse?” It also seems to provide an exception for the involuntary viewing of porn. I find that very confusing and a little troubling.
RAMADAN – What does not break fast
From Madinah Masjid of Carrollton
1. If one forgets that one is fasting and eats, drinks or has sexual intercourse, or has a nocturnal emission while asleep or emits semen involuntarily by looking [at something sex ] (though it is totally haram to see such things)
2. If one applies tincture of iodine or some ointment [even if their tint or smell is noticed in one's saliva or urine].
3. If one vomits a mouthful involuntarily or vomits a little voluntarily.
4. If water goes into ones ear or dust, smoke or a fly goes into one's throat through one's mouth or nose involuntarily or if one cannot prevent the smoke of others cigarettes from going into one's mouth and nose.
5. If after rinsing one's mouth one swallows the wetness remaining in one's mouth together with one's saliva.
6. If one puts some medicine in one's eye or even if one feels its taste in one's throat.
7. If a fasting person swallows his saliva, his fast will not break. Bleeding from an injury in the mouth from taking a tooth out, or blood coming from the stomach to the mouth does not break a fast or an ablution. When one spits out or swallows his blood coming from mouth, if the saliva is greater than the blood, that is if the saliva is yellow in color, his fast is still not broken. If a mouthful comes to the mouth and goes out of the mouth, both are broken. It is seen that, when a tooth is extracted if there is much bleeding, the fast is not broken when one spits it out. When one is not fasting, one's ablution is not broken when one swallows it. Neither of the two is broken if the blood is less than the amount of saliva.
8. Using antimony (surma) or cosmetics for one's beard, moustaches, face, smelling flowers, musks or Lotions will not break one's fast.
Friday, September 22, 2006
A Proposition for Venezuela
Dear Venezuela:
We will trade you one Dick Armitage for one Hugo Chavez. The way I see it, you like leaders that hate the United States and want to do it harm. Who has revealed the identities of more CIA agents and done even further damage to our reputation in the Middle East, Dick or Hugo?
Hugo’s rant got way more press than Dick’s assorted blunders ever do, so obviously we’re just more interested in the relatively harmless words of a Latin American leader than the actually harmful words of Dubya’s advisors.
We know that Hugo left the United States very shortly after delivering his tirade, but please let him know that he is more than welcome to return. We will gladly send you our Dick in return.
We think that would be an even exchange.
Puppies, rainbows, and kittens,
The United States
We will trade you one Dick Armitage for one Hugo Chavez. The way I see it, you like leaders that hate the United States and want to do it harm. Who has revealed the identities of more CIA agents and done even further damage to our reputation in the Middle East, Dick or Hugo?
Hugo’s rant got way more press than Dick’s assorted blunders ever do, so obviously we’re just more interested in the relatively harmless words of a Latin American leader than the actually harmful words of Dubya’s advisors.
We know that Hugo left the United States very shortly after delivering his tirade, but please let him know that he is more than welcome to return. We will gladly send you our Dick in return.
We think that would be an even exchange.
Puppies, rainbows, and kittens,
The United States
Thursday, September 14, 2006
I want to be a civil rights leader when I die
In case you were able to go all day without hearing the news and shedding a tear or “pouring some liquor,” yesterday marked the 10th anniversary of the death of Tupac Amaru Shakur. I found out from the hub of all hip hop news—NPR. What shocked me about NPR’s coverage of this “story,” was the airtime that they gave Tupac’s mother and the others involved in the Tupac Amaru Shakur Foundation for the Arts and other charities set up in his name.
You should have heard her talk about her son. About the 9 foot tall bronze statue of Tupac (in a three piece suit and cross necklace, or “Jesus chain”) that stands in the middle of the Foundation’s expansive grounds. About how complex, conflicted, and misunderstood her son was. About how NPR had to play snippets of the same song four or five times because the rest of his songs were ripe with foul language or explicit topics. Oh wait. That last one wasn’t mentioned.
What really riled me up was how everyone seems to have forgotten what he was actually all about. In ridiculously sharp contrast to the comparisons to Malcolm X and MLK Jr. that several people affiliated with his Foundation were making, Tupac was obsessed with the violent gang culture that eventually did him in. Anyone who has seen the 2 hour VH1 Behind the Music about the whole east coast/west coast rap wars will remember the footage of Tupac grinning widely while brandishing a fistful of cash under the watchful eye of Suge Knight. I think that his mother is guilty of misunderstanding who her son was and what it is he represents.
I am not putting Tupac down here. I just want his legacy to accurately reflect who he was. I listened to him quite a bit during college and readily admit that he was a talented guy. Nobody before or since has looked as tough as Tupac while wearing a denim vest. After all, I modeled my own “Thug Life” tattoo after his. My beef here is the comparisons with Malcolm and MLK. His mother even spoke about her hopes to coordinate the efforts of the Foundation with Nelson Mandela’s work.
As soon as that happens, I’m going to suggest to Bill Gates that we merge our fortunes and coordinate our philanthropic activities.
Today marks the 50th anniversary of the end of segregation in the Mansfield ISD. To hear people like Tupac being, as one NPR pundit put it, “repurposed” for this generation, I fear that those of us who weren’t around to hear MLK speak or ride a bus across town to a school in a different neighborhood, will cease to appreciate what kind of person it actually takes to motivate people to do good and bring about positive change. Let’s listen to Tupac’s music, but not follow in his footsteps.
Tupac and MLK were both killed by guns—Tupac because of his violent lifestyle, MLK because of his resistance to hatred. There’s no need to “repurpose” someone like Tupac when there are so many good people out there to follow.
You should have heard her talk about her son. About the 9 foot tall bronze statue of Tupac (in a three piece suit and cross necklace, or “Jesus chain”) that stands in the middle of the Foundation’s expansive grounds. About how complex, conflicted, and misunderstood her son was. About how NPR had to play snippets of the same song four or five times because the rest of his songs were ripe with foul language or explicit topics. Oh wait. That last one wasn’t mentioned.
What really riled me up was how everyone seems to have forgotten what he was actually all about. In ridiculously sharp contrast to the comparisons to Malcolm X and MLK Jr. that several people affiliated with his Foundation were making, Tupac was obsessed with the violent gang culture that eventually did him in. Anyone who has seen the 2 hour VH1 Behind the Music about the whole east coast/west coast rap wars will remember the footage of Tupac grinning widely while brandishing a fistful of cash under the watchful eye of Suge Knight. I think that his mother is guilty of misunderstanding who her son was and what it is he represents.
I am not putting Tupac down here. I just want his legacy to accurately reflect who he was. I listened to him quite a bit during college and readily admit that he was a talented guy. Nobody before or since has looked as tough as Tupac while wearing a denim vest. After all, I modeled my own “Thug Life” tattoo after his. My beef here is the comparisons with Malcolm and MLK. His mother even spoke about her hopes to coordinate the efforts of the Foundation with Nelson Mandela’s work.
As soon as that happens, I’m going to suggest to Bill Gates that we merge our fortunes and coordinate our philanthropic activities.
Today marks the 50th anniversary of the end of segregation in the Mansfield ISD. To hear people like Tupac being, as one NPR pundit put it, “repurposed” for this generation, I fear that those of us who weren’t around to hear MLK speak or ride a bus across town to a school in a different neighborhood, will cease to appreciate what kind of person it actually takes to motivate people to do good and bring about positive change. Let’s listen to Tupac’s music, but not follow in his footsteps.
Tupac and MLK were both killed by guns—Tupac because of his violent lifestyle, MLK because of his resistance to hatred. There’s no need to “repurpose” someone like Tupac when there are so many good people out there to follow.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)