Muse-worthy

Current Tunes: Sipping hot tea from a plastic mug

I think as a writer you can be either inspired by the world or you can be crushed by it. Writers are observers, everyone knows this. Writers ingest the events and people of the world and translate the experience into a new one, the most important kind of experience human beings know: the story. At least, that’s what prolific, hard-working, devoted writers do. Those are the kind of writers who get inspired by the world. So I’ve got to make a choice: Am I going to be inspired by what I see in this world or am I going to be crushed by it?

Most often I’m completely crushed by the world. Poverty, torture, deceit, subjugation, manipulation, stagnation, procrastination, alienation, it ruins the soul. It’s easily surmountable for other writers with a damn backbone, or with better health, or a more stable existence. I’d mostly like to attribute it to pure motivation; that’s what gets them through the day, the writers who succeed. But I have no motivation, so it’s not as simple, obviously.

To talk about the philosophical, moral, spiritual implications of inspiration versus despair is a topic far too long for this forum. More than that, I'm not wholly convinced I'm prepared to share my perspective with the entire Internet proper. It goes without saying that inspiration is the more suitable, more desirable choice. What else needs to be said except I do not choose it because... Well, I don't suppose I really know why.

I wanted to become a writer because it used to be a magical process for me. In middle school, I knew I could form sentences according to the rules set forth by my teachers. But it took me a few times just trying for the hell of it to find out I could actually write. It was invigorating. I miss that. Writing used to be that, instead of being a chore.

Having your creativity zapped out of you can do that, I think. I have a sinking feeling that’s what happened to me. It’s hard to stay on track. I’ve heard lots and lots of professional, well-off writers talk about writing, and they all say completely different things. They all have different aesthetic values, different processes, different environments they like to write in. It’s really fascinating, learning how these people all bend over backwards just to write a book or a novel. But, despite the broad spectrum of approaches people across genres and topics take, all of these people I’ve heard talk about writing actually do have one thing in common that they say. “If you’re really a writer, you will write everyday.”

I’m not a writer. I don’t write everyday, not even close. That bugs the shit out of me. It’s absolutely horrifying, really. I want to write everyday, though, and that’s the frustrating part. At the end of the day when I curl into bed to get my night’s rest, most times one of my finals thoughts before I drift off is “Goddammit, why didn’t I write something today?” It’s heart wrenching. It’s depressing. It’s disgusting. It’s intolerable.

So why don’t I just buckle down and write everyday? The plain fact is I willfully allow other, less important events and activities to take precedence. These things override writing because they are safer, they are easier. I freely admit I avoid failure through the most common avenue traveled: I simply do not try from the start. I cannot fail if I do not try. I cannot be forced to confront my weaknesses if I do not put forth any effort. And as a consequence, I resign to mediocrity.

Distractions make it so much easier to continue this cycle of behavior, too. “I can start writing tomorrow. For now, I’ll play Xbox.” Then I sit lifelessly in a chair staring lost and alone into a screen, engaged in a false event because real ones are too frightening and too consequential to even possibly be confronted.

There are lost years of my life I cannot get back. I could have written ten or more books by now if I had just taken a few minutes to sit down and think and realize that nothing I was doing at the time was meaningful or lasting. Just like nothing I’m doing now is meaningful or lasting. At least I’m aware of it now. I can do something about it.

I remember my Dead & Livejournal accounts. I wrote some really great, really fun stuff in there. I fondly remember sitting in computer labs in Tuscaloosa writing those posts, listening to music and being completely alive in those hour-long spans. I wrote lots of stuff when I was at Alabama that I’m proud of, as flawed and naïve as all that material is. I’m proud of it because I liked it. I’m proud of it because all that material, at least what I remember of it, was honest and passionate and convicted. I haven’t written hardly anything since then that I was so purely invested in. The things I write now, it’s like I’ve forgotten how to feel.

When you write, and you’re doing it correctly, you’re achieving your maximum amount of feeling. The needle is pushed beyond the edge of measurement. You sense and perceive all facets of time and space at once. Mostly through the deception lens of memory, but that's close enough to the truth to last. It stays immediate and concrete as much as it can. I want to return to that place, where the intensity of creation redlines your consciousness and puts you into overdrive. In these precious moments, through the haze of wonderment and excitement, you can briefly turn your head to the side and see the future, crystal clear.

Not Falling For This (Down Boy!)

Current Tunes: Children of Bodom – Hate Crew Deathroll

So a friend directed me to this provocative little video the other day, and my reactions were complex enough to warrant that I document them here.

He astutely informed me the women featured so prominently in this video are indeed members of some group of competitive gaming females dubbed “Team Unicorn,” who my friend asserted are associated with the Fatal1ty gaming empire. So right off the bat, make no mistake, these girls are definitely involved in major money-making. For me, that makes their intentions a little suspect.

But we’ll leave money out this. It's pretty clear what the true purpose of this clip is: eliciting erections from a host of young American males aged 16-99 who have a more than passing interest in comic books, video games, and fantasy/sci-fi literature. Which, ok, admittedly comes close to including every breathing male in the country.

Regardless, it’s pretty insulting to think that if they spend a hunk of cash on flashy costumes and retarded lens flares and a Stan Lee cameo, they’ll suddenly monopolize the attention and affection of the above-mentioned demographic. It’ll work on plenty of men, I’m sure, but I’m not falling for that. I’m hopeful there’s a right honorable contingent of men who looked at this and had the same reaction I did, but I wouldn’t be surprised if there weren’t.

Insulting us in that regard is one thing, but how about the insult this is to gamer/geek women? First off, no one in their right mind thinks a majority of geek culture girls are potential underwear models. These gals are the exception, not the rule. Which is good for them, sure, bravo. You’re physically attractive and you know who Stan Lee is. You deserve a damn trophy, don’t you?

Back in reality, by doing this video you’re just setting a bad example for young girls who are part of the culture. You’re sending a message that guys are easily manipulated, but you can only achieve that level of power and attention if you’re super-beautiful like us. What a crock. This is no different than the criticism you’ve heard before in this argument, I’m sure.

But full disclosure comes now. This is what peeves me the most about this video. I’m of mind that it’d be wonderfully fulfilling to have a relationship with a geek chick. I would love to have that kind of gal to sit around and talk to about which “Star Trek” captain was the greatest. But I don’t want it to be the kind of girl that’s being represented in this video, that says to geek women you have to dress provocatively and sing incredibly pathetic pop music (actually, its probably not them actually singing at all) to attract my attention. I want a woman smarter than that — plain and simple. And it’d be nice if those women knew that was what was really desired, not these over-sexualized scale-sized dolls.

I’d be amiss to have this discussion without mentioning “The Guild’s” cute little “Do You Wanna Date My Avatar?” video. This video was the precursor to the Team Unicorn video, and should be where I direct a significant portion of my blame to.

But disregarding the debate over whether or not a music video giving merit to having a romantic relationship with a full-fledged simulacrum is or isn't a sign of the coming Apocalypse, I really don’t have much of a qualm with “The Guild” video. Felicia Day does not strike me at all as an attention whore for this simple reason: if she was, she could have far, far more attention than she has now. She only takes roles that interest her, which from what I understand should be read as “roles that set a positive standard for geek women.” She's popular among all of geekdom, but she hasn't done a lot of mainstream material. The highest she ever ranked on the mainstream ladder was probably her two whole episodes she did of "Dollhouse." Which, you know, got cancelled.

If anything, “Do You Wanna Date My Avatar?” is a critique of gaming culture. I could probably do an extended post just explaining that.

But this filth that came from Team Unicorn is degrading, insulting, and just garbage in general. Geek and gaming culture was, I thought, doing a great job in the fight to bring the sexes onto a field of equity and respect. But material like this is regressive, with little redeeming value.

I say little redeeming value because, I’m sorry, I can’t help myself… Katee Sackhoff with red hair is a force of sexual power this world is not prepared for.

Tea Time

Current Tunes: Tom Waits – Black Market

So terribly sorry about missing a Friday post. Between working early and having to run and errand or two after work, time just slipped away from me. It had been my intention to do a “catch up post” on Sunday, but I realized I wasn’t going to have any time on Monday either to do that post, so I’m putting this post together on Sunday.

I’m not going to lie, I am absolutely fascinated by the Tea Party movement. I’m excited about it too. Not because I agree with their policies or ideology, I’m just stunned and amazed that someone is standing up and proving that a viable third party can exist in America. That’s what has me so captivated by what’s going on with the Tea Party. All I’ve heard from anyone who claims to be a politics expert or a member of the two major parties is that a third party cannot thrive, but the Tea Party is doing it.

At first glance the Tea Party is still something to be somewhat concerned about. Most accounts directly associate membership in the Tea Party with fervent religious associations and obscenely dumb ideas about President Obama’s imagined practice of Islam and/or socialist ties. That’s an understandably troublesome trend that commands some concern and reservation. Anyone with reason and common sense is right and just to question the motives and mental stability of people who prescribe to those beliefs.

To be fair, I don’t know that you can concretely state that every single Tea Party proponent is of the mind that Barack Obama is a commie muslim. The stat that gets thrown around says roughly 20% of Americans think he is a practitioner of Islam. That’s 20% of Americans though, not 20% of Tea Party members. It could be 90% or it could be 9%. I’m not sure you can get a fully accurate picture of how many Tea Party proponents will actually confess to your face that they think this. What I find fascinating is how Gallup did a little demographic research on the Tea Party and found out they somehow represent a fairly even slice of America. As is often the case, media outlets (no matter their biases) have a tendency to concentrate on the loud, radical, attention-grabbing voices in movements because that drives ratings, of course. I have to wonder how much that tendency is at play in all of this.

When it comes to addressing their ideologies, here’s a few “core beliefs” that they describe as “non-negotiable,” which is, admittedly, a bit strong. Nevertheless, they actually have a few principles I imagine most Americans would be hard-pressed to say they don’t agree with:

- Illegal Aliens Are Here Illegally
- Pro-Domestic Employment Is Indispensable
- Special Interests Eliminated
- Bail-out and Stimulus Plans are Illegal

I’ve conveniently eliminated several other of their “core beliefs” that I disagree with, but looking at these few, I don’t think these are out-of-touch, wacko ideas.

Many of their ideas center around a very basic, elementary understanding of economics, of course tending towards conservative, fiscal responsibility. Which I found most interesting because no where in the list do they mention funding unnecessary, dangerous international wars, but did emphasize the “necessity” of a buffed-up military.

The one major goal of the Tea Party isn't specifically mentioned on that site though, which I find puzzling, because it's their most positive goal. They want to vote everyone out of Congress. I wholeheartedly agree with that. Where Tea Party critics get loud, though, is when they point out they want to replace all those vacant seats with candidates they support, candidates like Christine O'Donnell. Which should surprise no one. That's how political parties work. Sure, their candidates may not be wholly qualified or the best choice, but don't scold them for just doing what political movements want to do. If they get enough votes and enough support, they get to have their way. That's democracy.

I think the most telling “core belief” listed referred to accessibility of office for, as they put it, “average” citizens. That’s probably just not the best way to word this idea. I think what they’re really trying to say is they’re tired of the financially well-off stepping into office and making decisions about what the middle and lower class have to do with their money, and that’s a reasonable concern I think. The danger here is, again, the concentration on the “average.” I don’t know about you, but I don’t want “average” people running the government. I want the smartest, brightest, bravest, most confident human beings our country has to offer sitting in political offices all around the country. It just so happens that being bright, confident, and brave often results in plenty of financial and personal success, and as such we shouldn't hold that against good people who try hard to be a responsible public official.

The basic conclusion I’ve reached about the Tea Party isn't anything new. A lot of people in America are pissed, and the Tea Party gives voice to lots of those people. I’ll take it a step further though, and this goes to my point about viable third parties: the Tea Party might have some serious flaws in their ideology, and probably has its fair share of crackpot members, but at least they're doing something.

I have no doubt there is an analogous version of the Tea Party for the Left. People who are infuriated about the war in Afghanistan, who are pissed that the Supreme Court has been a right-leaning entity for decades, who are tired of seeing the tenet of separation of church and state being trampled on week after week. This unnamed party, if it ever arises, will probably have its share of cooks too, who might say things like Bush masterminded 9/11, or is a card-carrying Nazi or what have you. But, those folks haven’t showed up yet, or aren’t motivated enough to get up and do something. I suppose you could make the argument these sort of people don’t exist, but, to me, that’s incredibly naïve.

So I say at least give the Tea Party credit for seeing something they’re mad about and trying to take a stand against it. That’s my greatest criticism of America: people in this country take things lying down far too often. In Europe, when their governments do something incomprehensibly stupid or unpopular, the people go out into the streets and bitch and bitch and bitch until the government fixes it. Which is what people should do.

Not continue to sit around on the couch drinking and watching those “Real Housewives” shows. Whilst bitching and complaining to their family members or social circle, but not actually getting up and becoming an activist.

In truth, though, how viable is the Tea Party after all? There’s lots of buzz that conservatives are going to take back Congressional control. I wouldn’t be so sure. All these victories by Tea Party candidates for the Republican nomination in these races, I wouldn’t be so quick to write these off as sure victories. If they were winning these nominations in landslides, I might be concerned. But the mainstream, average conservative candidates are still posting lots and lots of support in these races. Some of them that lose are even planning on running write-in or independent campaigns, ala Joe Liebermann. That turned out well for Joe, it could turn out well for these other folks.

Even in the case that Republicans actually do reclaim Congress from the Democrats, I have a fantastic strategy for the minority in Congress, a time-tested motto that never fails: If you can’t beat ‘em, join ‘em.

If the Republicans/conservatives/teabaggers control Congress, stall and sabotage every single bill they propose, just like they’ve been doing these past couple years. Filibuster. Go up to the podium and read David Sedaris or Chuck Palahniuk or "The People's History of the United States" until everyone falls asleep. Or just stand up there with a stereo and play Lady Gaga all day and night. Give em a taste of their own medicine. I normally stand by the usual "don't sink to their level" mentality, but sometimes dirty work has to be done.

Unless, of course, they propose a bill finally outlawing the filibuster strategy, which I say vote for it fervently. After that, win the Congress back in the next election cycle and get something done. How hilarious would that be?

The Best Authority on the Bestest

Current Tunes: The Sword – Tres Brujas

List-driven articles are not works of journalism, at all. I’m just as suckered in by these “best of” lists as anyone else, and they’re definitely a source of guilty pleasure for me, but I think VH1, that bastion of objectivity and credibility, I think finally put together a “best of” list that has completely driven me away from the concept for good.

When first presented with the idea that VH1 had done a “100 Greatest Artists” list, a little voice went off in my head, screaming how this was a horrible idea and could in no way be a fair representation of rock and roll history. I was right of course, but it had to be confirmed. I had no idea what was waiting for me, and as usual, I wish I had never even looked at the list.

Let’s start with Rage Against the Machine. I’m a fan of this band. A little bit. If you know me, this should not be news to you. RATM ranked #48 on this list. RATM ranked ahead of unquestionable legends like Otis Redding, The Doors, Rush, Tom Petty & the Heartbreakers, Judas Priest, Run-D.M.C., Elvis Costello, Little Richard, and plenty of other noteworthy artists and bands from multiple genres. I’m here to tell you, RATM’s contributions to rock and roll history can’t even possibly stack up to Little Richard. That’s just ludicrous. Let’s think about inspirations for a minute. RATM probably doesn’t happen without Run D.M.C and Public Enemy, both of whom did proto rap/rock songs with popular rock bands. Run D.M.C. and Public Enemy inspire RATM. But what did RATM inspire? Korn? Limp Bizkit? Bands that didn’t make the list at all.

Other travesties on this list involved ranking Ray Charles #43, then putting Metallica right above him at #42. Or how about Tina Turner coming in at #34, but Guns ‘n Roses (AKA the most overrated rock band in history) getting the #33 spot? I just cannot stomach the thought of ranking Tina Turner, who survived an inhumane wave of abuse and violence, below a band featuring a singer who more than once stormed off stage in a child-like temper tantrum and even once assaulted a fan mid-concert.

What was funny to me was the top 10 choices were almost completely agreeable. Almost. Prince was at #7, putting him above James Brown. I cannot even fathom any possible logic or system VH1 had to use in order to rank Prince above a guy he owes his entire career to.

Led Zeppelin fairly deserved a top 10 spot, but #4 seems a bit high. That put them just above The Rolling Stones who had the #5 slot. I don’t see how the big LZ can be put over the Stones when LZ has been disbanded and inactive for the past couple decades while Jagger & Co. continue to tour and entertain worldwide. I guess longevity and dedication don’t always translate into true appreciation, do they?

So why do magazines and TV shows thrive on articles like this? Because they stir up debate, mostly. And look at me, contributing to the cycle… Ugh. They also capture your attention pretty easily, and can be a quick way to drive ratings. Similarly, online plenty of sites will put up lists like this, a top 10 or 20, and make an individual page for every slot, so you end up clicking ten different links to their sites in an attempt to read what is really only one article. So on the surface it looks like their site is getting lots of traffic. Ingenious.

I think people look to these articles for some sort of peer evaluation, in a sad and meaningless way. Media outlets that aren’t the absolute tip-top on the authority ladder (like for music, Rolling Stone the magazine) of a subject write up of a list that they hope will get the approval of the leaders just to squeeze out a little bit of credibility. But let me tell you, VH1, that you have no damn respectability at all. You came up with the show “Best Week Ever,” which is quite an ironic title because it’s really one of the worst television shows ever. You also thought Chris Jericho, a professional wrestler, would be some fantastic authority on pop culture. I like Jericho and all, but any time he’s been on one of your specials, this insanity he calls language that comes out of his mouth causes small hemorrhages in my head.

Why can’t you and your big sister MTV just go back to playing music videos 24 hours a day? “Well,” says Mr. Corporate TV Executive CEO guy, “People don’t sit in front of the TV for an hour straight watching music videos. They consume one or two videos, then change over to something else. So our advertisers aren’t getting their money’s worth.”

There you have it.

The good news is the dominant paradigm, like it always does, is changing. Magazines are a dying media outlet. And television use is down as well, thanks to the unstoppable power of the Internet. I’m sure people’s fascination with list-journalism won’t change along with how they consume text media, as much as I wish it would. But that doesn’t mean I can’t change myself. Screw list culture. I’ve got better things to do.

Return to Form

Current Tunes: Down - Never Try

To call it a hiatus would be a misnomer, now wouldn’t it? It’s been a tad more than seven months since I put anything up here. That’s far too long. I hope you missed me of course. How silly is that to say? Of course I hope you missed me, everyone wants to be missed.

I stayed away for so long because I’m an incomplete human being, and I get overwhelmed sometimes. It’s not to say I haven’t been busy, because I have. In the time since we last met, I’ve been working a steady job, moved to a new apartment, and have completely finished my thesis, receiving my master’s degree in the process. That was a long process, to say the least. A two year commitment has finally come full circle. I’m the first person on my mom’s side of the family to ever receive a graduate degree of any kind. A personal point of pride, right?

I’m glad to be back doing this. I want to take a moment and personally thank everyone who told that they missed reading my blog posts, or poked and prodded me to get back to posting. That’s precisely what I needed to get Quantifiable Darkness up and running again: encouragement. So thank you for that.

There’s not much in the way of specific material I want to cover here at the start, but I will say a few words about what’s been on my mind the past week or so: football.

This is my favorite time of the year, no doubt about it. Every weekend there are 100 different little battles to witness, teams scrambling their way to the top, hoping for a shot at eternal gridiron glory. In football season, the weekend transforms. In other seasons the weekend is just an escape from work, but in football season the weekend becomes a thing to cherish. In football season, the weekend becomes so much shorter though; time just disappears.

That’s the dangerous part of this time of year for me…

With school done and the weight of that off my shoulders, the proper thing for me to do is use this time wisely to work on major projects. My thesis is completed, but that thesis is just the start of a book. I have so much more to do to complete that book. I have other projects I want to start on too, which includes doing some short story collections and fleshing out a sci-fi novel. Blogging on here regularly as well. Not to mention the brutally painful process of trying to find a legitimate, salaried job. There's a lot on my plate.

I can’t exhaust too much time on weekends just slopping down in front of the TV for hours on end watching football. It’ll be a tough trend to break; it’s something I’ve done for years on end. And I love doing it. But I have to remember there are more important things than football. There's a fairly simple way to combat my habit of engrossing myself in football all weekend. Usually on Sunday evenings, after the second round of NFL games get done, it begins to dawn on me that the evening is coming to a close. I almost always get this sick feeling in my stomach right around then. It's a tidal wave of guilt and shame that folds over on top of me as I realize I spent a whole day doing nothing productive. If I'm going to get things done, if I'm going to avoid wasting all my free hours on football, I think all I have to do is remember that god-awful feeling. I have to remind myself that to avoid that feeling, I have to regulate my football time and put forth a heartfelt effort to produce and create.

I have a secret love for large projects. I say it's secret because it doesn't always show through in how I act, but it really is there. I can let myself become quite engrossed in something when I want to be. This affection for real, creative involvement in something somehow gets easily overridden by other activities, and that is something I am going to work on as a person. Blogging here regularly (Monday, Wednesday, & Friday) will work towards that goal.

Gladiatorial Competition of Choice

Current Tunes: Chatter & indie tunes at Starbucks

Three days afterward and I’m still disgusted and upset over the Super Bowl. I’m thoroughly happy for the city of New Orleans, I really am. I’m thoroughly sad for Indianapolis too, Peyton Manning especially. Regardless, that was one of the lamest Super Bowls I’ve seen.

The reality may be that I’m simply coming to accept my displeasure and general apathy toward the NFL. I went to one college football game this year and one NFL game this year. The two experiences could not have been more different. At Bryant-Denny Stadium in Tuscaloosa, there’s only one money-making entity vying for your attention and it’s the University of Alabama. Even Coke takes a back seat to the unending avalanche of crimson and white media that attacks you at all angles, ingraining the Alabama faithful in their worship experience.

At the Georgia Dome though, everyone from Georgia Power to Budweiser to car dealerships and banks are competing for your attention when you come to the game. The NFL has become such a gargantuan money machine, it now takes an overwhelming amount of corporate sponsorship to keep that machine rolling. It was literally so distracting it was somewhat difficult to tell there was a game going on. That’s saying a lot if you ask me, considering how the game I went to was the Philadelphia Eagles against the Falcons, which meant the return of Michael Vick to the town he “betrayed.”

The NFL isn’t a complete catastrophe or anything, I will say in fairness. They have a lucrative business that they have marketed with extreme efficiency and power. And I don’t fault them for that at all, it’s just becoming a bit too much for me to stomach given my aversion to advertising. They know how to manage and market their stars and turn it into a frenzy for fans all over the nation. It’s a major American sport. And I do love the sport itself, but I really think I’m going to eliminate the NFL from my “I Care” column. College football presents me with the same game, often times on a much more exciting, much less predictable scale, and without the hyper-advertising world of major stadiums.

I'll still care about the NFL Draft though. The NFL draft is as big and as exciting to me as Christmas.

Hockey is ss much to blame for my recent distaste for the NFL aas anything else actually. I went to my first ever hockey game, of any level of competition, just a few weeks ago and the experience was nothing short of riveting. The game itself is only a small part of what I found so enthralling. It’s fast pace and tough attitude are very appealing to me of course, but there’s more to it than that.

Phillips Arena was maybe half full the night we went, with just as many Buffalo Sabres fans as there were Atlanta Thrashers fans. That wasn’t so particularly surprising to me; hockey has a damn hard time catching on in the south where ponds don’t exactly stay frozen over eight months out of the year. What gripped me was that despite a lackluster turnout of spectators, both teams appeared to be playing their hearts out. That spoke to me; it clearly showed me that the guys who get out there and play have to be doing it because its what they love. Hockey isn't the most popular or most lucrative sport in America right now, but these guys play anyway, and play hard. I was touched by that.

I’m certain I wouldn’t have had the same reaction if I’d gone to a game in cities like Detroit or Montreal where devotion to hockey is moderately cult-like. Or even in cities where turnout for games is bigger because they have young superstars like Washington or Pittsburgh, I probably wouldn’t have come to that conclusion either. That’s fine though.

I think I like hockey a lot. I like what it has to offer, and I’m going to learn more about it. I’m going to go out of my way to watch games on TV, more thoroughly learn the rules, and I’ll have to pick a team to start putting my support behind. I’m pretty much devoted to being a Sabres fan already, since my good friend Chris who went to the game with me is a huge fan of theirs. I’m ok with that. I do like the Buffalo Bills after all. I think I’ll have to teach myself to be a Thrashers fan too, since they’re the hometown team and all.

This newfound love for hockey couldn't have come at a better time either. The Winter Olympics start Friday and I intend to fully plunge myself into the icy splendor of Olympic hockey in the coming weeks. I'm excited enough to be crossing my fingers for some sort of Droid phone app that updates scores and results, but I doubt that'll happen. I'll just have to settle for regular old Internet surfing I suppose. What a shame...

Only thing I wonder about is to be a fan of the sport, don’t you have to actually play it? I’ve never even picked up a hockey stick. And I definitely can’t skate a lick’s worth. Maybe I could learn though. New experiences are always a good thing. Unless they kill you, like I imagine could happen to me when I trip on my own skates and fall and break my neck.

Oscar Season is Upon Us!

Current Tunes: Neurosis – Under the Surface

Well on Monday the illustrious, presumptuous, pompous, preposterous, ambidextrous Academy of Motion Picture Arts and Sciences announced their nominees for the 2010 Oscars. The countdown has begun! Over the course of the next month, the nominees, and the studios that back them will scrap and fight to the death for a chance to at a 45 second acceptance speech and a golden statue shaped quite similarly to a bowling pin.

Like any year, the nomination announcements brought with it plenty of surprises, along with just as many “duh!” moments as well. But overall, it still promises to be an exciting, competitive year, perhaps the most competitive in decades.

The main reason for that being the game-changing decision to up the list of Best Picture nominees to ten instead of the traditional five. And true to their strategy, the field consists of five quality independent/art-house choices and five flicks born of popular clamor and adoration. Ask anyone and they’ll tell you the Academy did this to get higher ratings for the show.

The population as a whole is sick and tired of seeing Best Picture go to low-budget masterpieces that they never see because their distribution deals are worth less than a bucket of sand in the Mojave. Make no mistake though kiddies, this is just appeasement straight out of the Neville Chamberlain playbook. Though I think the winner this year will be considerably difficult to pick, I still believe that old habits die hard and the Academy will continue (rightly) to throw their lot in with the lower profile films when it comes to Best Picture.

That being said, and I’m not going to bother listing all ten films, I’ll just point out the winner: “The Hurt Locker.” The day of nominations I was leaning on “Inglorious Basterds” but Katherine Bigelow’s war-time chronicle is not only considerably deserving, but it has history on it’s side. You can pretty much write Bigelow down to win the Best Director award, and more often than not the film that wins that award takes home Best Picture.

The only film I think that has a chance to upset “Locker” is of course “Avatar,” but I’m having a very, very hard time believing the Academy will go that far. I know it made boat loads of money. If there’s any reason to vote for it, that’s the Academy’s M.O. Nevertheless, can you imagine any one soul on this planet taking the AMPAS seriously after they give a Best Picture award to “Avatar” but not to “Citizen Kane?” I already don’t put any stock in their legitimacy, and I’m utterly enthralled and obsessed by the Oscars. “Avatar” is a movement, a landmark just like “The Matrix” or “Star Wars” before it. But those films didn’t win Best Picture and neither will “Avatar.”

Regardless of who wins, I’m overjoyed they acknowledged “District 9” and honored it with a nomination in the category. On the extremely unlikely chance that it actually did win Best Picture, I would be absolutely jubilant. “District 9” very rightfully picked up a nomination for Adapted Screenplay too, and I wholeheartedly believe it is the most deserving in that category. However, I expect "Precious" or "Up in the Air" to win that category, more likely "Up in the Air."

I was as well to see “The Imaginarium of Dr. Parnassus” nominated for two whole categories: costumes and art direction. Both of which make plenty of sense to me. As a generality, the absolute last thing I notice in a film is usually the costuming, and its admittedly the category I care the least about overall. Nevertheless, when I saw this film had made the list, it was perfectly logical to me. Ditto for art directors Dan Hermansen and Denis Schnegg, who previously had worked on just about no film worth note as far as art direction goes, but managed to put together a bang-up job on “Parnassus.” Between the two, I think my money might be on costumes being the more likely win for Gilliam’s latest. But the reality is, it won’t win either.

It’s sad in its own way that there’s absolutely no reason to talk about the acting categories this year. Bridges, Bullock, Mo’Nique, & Waltz. Write them down for winners. Sure bet. Take your friends’ money, go ahead. Easy way to make a week’s worth of grocery money.

Cinematography is a category they have absolutely gotten wrong every year since I can remember. I’m still fuming over “The Dark Knight” being screwed by the Academy in this category last year, and I think this year they’re primed for another big mistake. Being a moderately technical award, “Avatar” has to come out the favorite but “Inglorious Basterds” is the true owner of this statue. Yet as I stated before, the Academy never gets this right so three cheers for robbery…

One category that I’ll be especially curious to see the outcome of is sound mixing, for which “Transformers: Revenge of the Fallen” is nominated. Now, I know what most of you are thinking but hang on just a minute. Set aside the whole notion of seeing the phrase “Academy Award Winner” on the DVD packaging for a moment.

I read more than one article in the past year praising the sound work on this film, with most of these articles going to great lengths to point out the meticulous, precision sound work that was done for it. The same men nominated for “Fallen” were nominated for their work on the original “Transformers” film as well, and anyone will tell you being nominated multiple times around in this category is no small feat. Going on that, it appears to me the film quite deserves to win, but I’m sure there’ll be plenty of people who pitch a fit if it actually does.. It’ll be interesting to see what happens.

Golden Globes are a Sham, Like Always

Current Tunes: Radiohead – How to Disappear Completely

I’ve never ever liked the Golden Globes (GGs). I’ve had an psychological obsessions with the Oscars since I was like six, but I laughed at the Golden Globes even then as a travesty and I still do. Nevertheless, last night I found myself hypnotized and seduced by the evil whims of the Hollywood Foreign Press Association and watched the ceremony in its entirety. It’s spell broken now, I look back on last night and think perhaps I watched simply in hopeful yearning for the Oscars, which aren’t much more than a month away, Lords of Kobol be praised.

The most annoying aspect of the GGs I think was Ricky Gervais. I like the guy fine, I think he’s a decent enough comedian and does make me laugh. Last night I wasn’t buying it at all though. He totally did the job like a guy who only wanted the paycheck and it showed. His one good move, in my opinion, was the absolutely stinging burn he put on Mel Gibson right before the Aussie actor came out to present an award. And even then, as much as I liked it, it was still a low blow.

Overall, looking over winners of all the categories I think the GGs pretty much got nothing truly right, especially in the film categories. I wasn’t very happy with the TV results, but I will freely admit I am not an avid television watcher, and am therefore not familiar with most shows. The one I am most familiar with that was actually up for multiple awards was “House,” which came away with nothing. And I have to say in retrospect that’s probably fair, this past season of “House” has been lacking in a lot of ways compared to former seasons.

Even though I’ve never watched a second of “Dexter,” I was fairly pleased to see John Lithgow win an award for his role on that show. I think John Lithgow is one of the more underrated actors alive today, so for me I was overjoyed to see him getting some well-deserved recognition.

With lots of awards, there were winners that I just shrugged about. I didn’t necessarily disagree with their wins, but there were other nominees I would have been happier with. Like the screenplay category in film. “Up in the Air” is a fine film indeed, full of wonderful dialogue, but I think they gave the best screenplay award to Jason Reitman & Sheldon Turner because of the story of that film alone. The story though is only a part of a truly great screenplay though. I wholly believe “District 9” should have won in this category for being the total package.

The one award that was given out that I have no complaints about whatsoever is the Best comedy film award to “The Hangover.” Absolutely correct on all fronts. Generally in award season, a film picks up an award for one of three reasons: 1) It made a ton of cash at the box office or 2) The studio campaigned really, really hard for the film to win that award or 3) the film just genuinely deserves that award on a simple think like merit (imagine that!). With “Hangover” winning best comedy, I think it was likely a case of all three, at least #1 and #3.

I’m sure a good cross-section of the country is livid that Quentin Tarrantino didn’t win the best director award, but I’m sorry. If you don’t bitch about Meryl Streep winning in the best actress category again, then you can’t bitch about Cameron winning. Everyone always touts her as an absolutely dominate force among actresses, like she’s the Michael Jordan or Tiger Woods of film actresses. And she is, for sure. But James Cameron is the Michael Jordan of directors in his own right, and he’s going to be treated as such. Do you have any idea how much money he has made for Hollywood?

All the films on his resume that people adore so much, “Aliens,” “Terminator 1 & 2,” “Titanic,” and now “Avatar,” besides being very popular with a wide, wide, wide demographic of people (a demographic I have affectionately titled ‘Americans’), they make boo-koos (sp?) of money. Metric hell-tons of money. And as I covered earlier, an enormous piece of what decides whether or not you’re going to win statues come awards season is the cash you raked in at the box office. In case you’re wondering, here’s the update on that: “Avatar” is the 3rd highest grossing film domestically of all time, and 2nd highest worldwide grossing of all time. So, translate that into awards season however you like. The last guy who made this much money worldwide, he won 11 Oscars. Oh, and who was that guy? James “I Make Damn Good Movies” Cameron.

I guess the one thing I took away from the GGs is that the awards community apparently isn’t going to shy away from “Avatar” just because it’s story is less than original. Which is fine in some regard I suppose; “Avatar” is an amazing technical achievement and I wholeheartedly respect and love it as such. But let’s not kid ourselves. If the Academy gives “Avatar” the Best Picture Oscar, I’m going to have to seriously call into question their whole new “Ten Best Picture Nominations” gimmick.

Late Night Losers and Winners (Screw NBC)

Current Tunes: Isis – Carry

I don’t care much for late night TV talk shows. If there’s any one characteristic that turns me off across all forms of media it’s repetition, and repetition is the fuel of the late night talk show. Every single episode is the same. Crack jokes about what’s going on in the world, silly skits, interviewing celebrities with movies or books they want to sell, a mediocre live performance by a popular band (also selling their album), then you’re done.

I will admit to an affinity for CBS’ Late Late Show with Craig Ferguson. My appreciation for that show I’m certain stems from the fact that it is precisely devoid of many of the conventions most of the other late night shows rely on so heavily. Not to say the Late Late show doesn’t help celebrities sell movies either, because they do, and not to say they don’t have silly skits either, because they also have that. Thinking about it now, maybe I dislike the Late Late show too…

Anyway, that’s not what I’m here to discuss. There’s what’s been called a “war” going on between Jay Leno and Conan O’Brien over who gets to hold that coveted “The Tonight Show” spot on NBC, an apparently dwindling network that once held a firm grip on greatness. To call it a war is, frankly, an insult. People die in war, people get their legs severed. This is a tiff, a disagreement, a contest even. So don’t call it that anymore.

If I understand the situation right, NBC hasn’t been happy with O’Brien’s work on “The Tonight Show” and have been even less happy with the ratings of “The Jay Leno Show,” which is hosted by guess who. So their idea is to completely remove “The Tonight Show” from it’s traditional time slot and move Jay into it, pushing Conan’s show back, and by proxy pushing Jimmy Fallon’s “Late Late Show” back even further into the graveyard shift.

That, I’m sorry, seems like a relatively uncomplicated situation for me. I’m not even going to bother talking about how the situation got to this point, what happened happened and can’t change. From my vantage point, NBC simply has a surplus of talent, in essence. They have two heavyweight late night show hosts, but only one time slot to use them in. Neither is obviously in a position to retreat to hosting “The Late Late Show,” that’d be like carrying a team to the World Series then being forced to sit on the bench next season, no offense Fallon.

So, if we look at this like a baseball team, and you have one too many starting first basemen, what do you do with the excess? Well, most teams would probably trade him away. Of course there’s no “trading” per se in network broadcasting, but the principle boils down to simply choosing which all-star host you want to stick with and going from there.

Extrapolating from there, in the past few days it appears to me that NBC has made its choice and they’re sticking (I think smartly) with Jay Leno as their main man. Which leaves Conan the odd man out; sucks to be him, but that’s show business. So let him go, NBC. Let him go. Now before you start threatening to blow up my apartment for taking sides against Conan, take a deep breath. I'll freely admit I don't really like Conan O'Brien all that much. I think he's an ass. But all you folks who’ve thrown your hat in with Coco should be ecstatic. NBC is slowly dying inside.

Let’s look at the Nielsen ratings from a few weeks ago, for the week that constituted the last four days of 2009 into the first three days of 2010. In the Top 20 rated shows for that week, NBC only had three shows place. Notice anything those three shows have in common? All three of those ‘shows’ are all actually one event, the Bengals/Jets Sunday Night NFL game for that week. Besides the game itself, the other two NBC showings were the pregame show & recap show “Football Night in America.”

Basically, the way I see it is that Sunday night game would have gotten high ratings no matter what network it was broadcast on. NBC did good to move in on the NFL market a few years back when they did, but it’s not enough to hold up an entire network. And let me tell you too, most of you who know me I know you don’t really watch or care about NFL but take me at my word when I tell you NBC’s broadcasting actually is substandard to the material that CBS and Fox both do. For one, Al Michaels just bores me to death without John Madden, which I guess it's not really NBC’s fault he retired. Branching out from that though, these idiots actually have Keith Olbermann as a commentator during their pregame show. I know he used to work for ESPN and all that, but that guy is a buffoon, I’m sorry.

Moving on from NFL, tell me what good, worthwhile shows NBC has that aren’t being driven into the ground. I hear tell “Chuck” is really good; I haven’t watched it, so I’ll reserve judgment. I really enjoy my “Law & Order: SVU,” but I’m always watching reruns of it on USA, not on NBC. That show has gone on for what, like 30 seasons? It’s time to call it quits on that one. I guess NBC has “Saturday Night Live,” but that show, in my opinion, died when Adam Sandler, David Spade, and all that crew left the show. Will Farrell gave me hope, but clearly he was far too bright a star to waste on that show. I really don't see NBC as the powerhouse it used to be.

Hear me, Conan O’Brien fans, you want him to leave NBC. I don’t know if Fox will offer him anything, but I pray they do. Fox isn’t afraid to do the stuff that other people shy away from. The Fox Networks brought us “Family Guy” and “Nip/Tuck” “The Shield,” shows that I’m certain all the other major networks would have turned down in a heartbeat.

Pause it. As I’m writing this, look what I found. I’m certain that won’t happen. But by god it’s a great idea, and I love it. Conan as an Irish mobster/gun-runner on “Sons of Anarchy” would pretty much be the blockbuster “trade” of the year, to put things in baseball terms again.

Well even though I don't much like him, wherever he ends up from here I think he'll meet with a lot of success. He's obviously got a metric poop-ton of devoted, hardcore fans who'll follow him off a cliff if that's where he wants to go. And whatever happens at NBC happens. It's time to move on. And it's definitely not the end of the world that lots of people have made it out to be. Calm down.

"Parnassus" Comes to Town

Current Tunes: Fox News coverage of the Haiti earthquake aftermath

As diametrically opposed as I am to anything popular, I’m at a loss for words to explain why exactly I’ve always wanted Terry Gilliam’s films to become popular. I suppose the best explanation is how fervently I believe in his storytelling prowess. He always grasps onto challenging, expansive stories and presents them to an audience with wild gestures and a boisterous voice, like a mad entertainer on the streets, bedazzling and beguiling the passersby with tales of the unreal.

That tradition continues for Gilliam in “The Imaginarium of Dr. Parnassus,” his newest feature, and the final work of Heath Ledger. Though I doubt it will be, I could see “Parnassus” being Gilliam’s last hurrah, a final practice of his art, the last message he had for a world that never quite got what he’s really on about. Not unlike his brighter, more magical features like “The Adventures of Baron Munchausen” or “Time Bandits,” this newest venture into the haunted life of the (literally) immortal Parnassus, who is (Christopher Plummer) constantly on the run from the dastardly, mischievous Mr. Nick (played by famed musician Tom Waits). The price of Parnassus’ immortality? His youthful, vibrant teenage daughter, Valentina (newcomer Lily Cole). But perhaps he can save her from the hands of the devil, with a little help from the stranger, Tony (played mostly by Heath Ledger, with the missing pieces of the role filled in by Jude law, Colin Farrell, and Johnny Depp).

With such an overwhelming stack of interesting, dynamic actors it was pretty surprising to see such underwhelming performances in this flick. I’m particularly talking about Christopher Plummer and, sorry folks, Heath Ledger. Both performances are decidedly flat and uninspired, though I would suspect that the script is mostly to blame. Tom Waits though definitely catches your attention. His devil-in-the-flesh smirk and swagger is near-legendary. I’m not familiar with Tom Waits’ musical career quite so much, but from what I had been told he was born to play this role, and it certainly looks that way. But what does that say that a musician with limited acting ability outshines award-winning professionals like Plummer and Ledger?

So since the actors/characters fall short, the real star of the show becomes the pure imagery of the film, as it almost always is with Gilliam’s work. The stage pieces are awe-inspiring, unlike most anything you’ve ever come across. The feel and presence of this film is what carries the load for this film. Cinematography director Nicola Pecorini, who has a long history of working with Gilliam, generates some of his best work yet in “Parnassus.” Dark and dirty scenes transition into colorful, bright worlds with ease and grace, but even more impressive is how Pecorini manages to keep all the madness and chaos of the film in frame.

One thing I especially admire about Gilliam as a filmmaker is in most cases he’s always very honest with the work he puts out. He’s never afraid to be forthright and insightful about his film, and doesn’t tease you with pretentious generalities and intellectual fluff, which seems so counter-intuitive given the nature of his work. In the lead-up to the release of “Parnassus,” I heard Gilliam say over and over how he felt this was one of the more complete films he’s ever done, and given his past record I had no reason to not believe him. When he’d made “Brothers Grimm,” he was fully aware of its inferiority, but accepted it.

I have to say he’s wrong about “Parnassus.” This isn’t a complete film, truly. It’s also not his best. Which in and of itself is not a serious fault; it’s extremely rare to find a director who’s works improve consistently from one to another. The real failure of “Parnassus” has got to be plain and simply that Gilliam didn’t do anything here that he hadn’t done before. The strength and innocence of childhood. The power of imagination. Even the eye-catching visuals I mentioned before. This was all just Gilliam going through the motions again. In plenty of other directors that wouldn’t even be noteworthy, but Gilliam I hold to a different standard not just because of his unique style, but because I think he holds himself to that higher standard too. He knows he can make an artful, complex film and he knows he’s a talented filmmaker. So why should he limit himself to making the same film over and over again?

It wasn’t a bad try though. A little slow to start, and a bit difficult to understand for us Americans (unintelligible British accents abound), and certainly rough around the edges, “Parnassus” held much promise but ultimately fell short I’m afraid to say. This hasn’t stymied my faith in Terry Gilliam at all though, I’m confident he can move forward to new material and hopefully get the chance to work on a project where his main actors stay health (and alive) all throughout production.

"Forget It Jake, It's Just Chinatown"

Current Tunes: My grumbling stomach. When’s dinner?

So I’m not going to spend forever talking about the BCS game. All I have to say is the final score was 37-21. That’s a 16-point deficit. Check yesterday’s post if you don’t believe me when I said I called a 16-point victory for the Tide.

I’m not sure if everyone consciously keeps a list of films that they haven’t seen that they’re dying to finally view like I do. People should though. A few days ago, I finally knocked off the top film on this list of mine. It’s a film I’ve literally wanted to see for years but never got around to it. It might sound silly, but finally seeing this movie was just about equivalent to a major life goal, like buying your own house or something.

After watching it, then reading about so many of the things that went on surrounding the production, I have a special respect and appreciation for Roman Polanski’s “Chinatown.” I haven’t seen it as many times, and it doesn’t have quite the charm that “Casablanca” has, but I really think I have to rank “Chinatown” as good as that film is, and I almost always regard “Casablanca” as the greatest film ever made. I guess I might not ever give “Chinatown” the same label, and it’s for the worst reason: it’s just not as joyful and happy and feel-goody-goody as “Casablanca.” Anyway, enough comparison-talk.

Film is so much a product of the culture and nation from wherever it is made, like all art really. I think will film it gets a little more amplified because with film, the final result of your art is influenced so much by your perception of the world as a whole. That perception of the world is of course influenced by where you come from, how could it not be? The greatest strength of “Chinatown” is how unashamed it was to be dirty, gross, and uncomfortable. It doesn’t try to glorify the place it’s set in, it just shows it, and with a stunning amount of objectivity.

Another especially fascinating aspect of the film to me was Jack Nicholson. There’s already a mountain of commentary about Nicholson’s performance in this film, but I think my perspective is a bit unique, if I do say so myself. I’ve been a Nicholson fan for a long time. I cannot recall seeing a single movie of his that I didn’t enjoy, even if it was technically a bad film. I love his flashy, cocky, blitzkrieg approach to acting. How can you not? He’s absolutely electric.

But in “Chinatown,” I hardly noticed at all that it was Nicholson on screen. His performance is unlike anything else he’s done that I can recall because its so much quieter, so much more nuanced, so much more calculated. In films like “One Flew Over the Cuckoo’s Nest” or “The Shining” or even “Batman” and “The Departed” he’s moves and talks with such an anarchic fervor. That’s what’s made him both endure the years and endeared him into the hearts of film fans all over the globe. Not in “Chinatown” though, not at all. He totally made me believe that J.J. Gittes was a real, flesh-and-blood P.I. in Los Angeles. I would have gladly hired this guy to spy on my cheating wife; he’s so clever and composed, brave too.

I’m still soaking it all in. I’ve rarely encountered movies like this that take so much time to really understand my true feelings about what the film presented as a whole. I know that it’s good though; I know that it’s really, really good. I’m so confident of its brilliance because it easily falls into that most wondrous category of films: the ones where I wish with every fiber of my being that I could watch it over and over again as if it were the first time.

The Tradition Continues...

Current Tunes: Soundgarden – My Wave

Today’s the big day. Alabama vs. Texas for the whole can of beans. The BCS Championship. Today the big UA gets to write a whole new chapter and take home their 13th National Championship. It seems not so far a way a few years ago when we were having mediocre seasons and losing to Auburn 6 years in a row. That time is long behind us though, and tonight’s going to be the end of a long road.

Looking back further than that, I can remember very clearly being at my grandparents’ house in Tyler, Texas, on January 1st, 1993 when we last won the National Championship. I remember watching the game with my dad, in the dimly lit backroom of the house. I remember running around the house yelling and shouting multiple times throughout the night whenever Alabama made a big play.

I especially remember watching George Teague strip that ball straight out of Lamar Thomas’ hands to negate a touchdown. That’s probably one of my most fond football memories of any game, at any place, in any time. I suppose that’s not really saying a lot. After all, “The Strip” is one of the more amazing and famous moments in all of Alabama football history, and has a tremendous amount of emotional weight for Alabama fans everywhere.

That play I think was special to me because it was the first time I remember watching a play from a sports event and really going “Wow!” I’d watched lots and lots of players hit game-winning homeruns in baseball games, or last minute buzzer-beaters to win a big basketball game, but not a play like that where one guy just willed something not to happen on the field of play. I’ll remember it forever.

I hope tonight is another night like that, a night that’ll emblazon itself as another eye-popping, shout-worthy moment in the history of Alabama football.

I’m especially happy for coach Nick Saban. The whole university had plenty of reason to be excited about bringing him into lead this team to the top of the nation. However I seriously doubt anyone expected he would have led us to the National Championship after just 3 years as coach. That’s the phenomenal part about it all to me. Saban came right in here and completely turned us around and put us back on the path to success. Everyone pitched a fit about the incredibly high amount of money the university offered him to coach, but from here it looks like that money is paying off well.

Tide’ll take it home by 16 tonight. Roll Tide Roll!

Gilbert's Got a Gun...

Current Tunes: Isis - Hym

Today NBA commissioner David Stern indefinitely suspended Gilbert Arenas, the bright young star of the Washington Wizards, for bringing a handgun into the Washington locker room and purportedly pulling it on a teammate. Let me just say, way to go Mr. Stern.

I actually like Mr. Arenas, so this whole situation was pretty puzzling, and at the same time, aggravating for me. The idea of bringing a gun into the locker room of a professional basketball team just utterly stuns me. I spent the past couple of days trying to break down exactly what could possibly motivate this action, what kind of logic could have driven Mr. Arenas to behave like this and I’m short on concrete answers, but there are possibilities to explore.

Arenas has gone on the record saying he was taking the gun to the locker room to get it out of his house and away from his children. Hopefully anyone reading this can clearly see what a nonsense excuse that is. I would certainly postulate that Arenas perhaps wanted the guns nowhere near his children. That’s a noble motivation for sure. But let’s turn this scenario around a bit. Let’s imagine instead of making his money as a pro basketball player, instead he worked as a accountant at a major firm of some kind. Do you think that employer would take kindly to you bring a gun to the office, then threatening a coworker with it? I think not.

If you boil it down, there are only three purposes for a gun. The first is for sport shooting. I don’t think that’s what he hand in mind for the weapon when he brought it to the Verizon Center in Washington. The second purpose guns are usually associated with is hunting. Certainly that’s not what he took it to the locker room for either. The third and final purpose would be for protection or for offensive (read: murderous) intent. As in a combat situation. We’ve pretty clearly eliminated the other two purposes as not being likely reason for bringing the gun to the arena. And I can’t help but seriously doubt his motivation was protection, as major sports arenas these days are more secure than airports.

That’s as far as I’ll carry the speculation though; no point in going any further. I’m just so disgusted by what this guy did. Lots of commentators are pointing back to the Plaxico Burress incident and wondering why Arenas didn’t learn from that guy’s mistakes. I’m here to tell you he didn’t learn because he’s another bigheaded celebrity who thinks somehow having fame and fortune grants you membership into some imaginary club where the law does not apply to you.

I’ve heard there are accusations that he transported the gun across state lines in his car. That’s a major no-no. Even if that’s not the case, Arenas should still go to jail I think. What happens when some random janitor/maintenance worker/nutcase breaks into another NBA player’s locker, takes the gun, and then shoots up the place? That’s pretty far fetched, I’ll grant you. But far-fetched can still happen. You can’t shoot up a public sporting event if there aren’t any guns in the building. Which is why they’re not allowed in there. The stupidity of Arenas’ actions absolutely can’t go unpunished. If I had a kid, and I took him to an NBA game and I’d found out there had been anyone who’d brought a gun into that arena, from pro player to cameraman to everyday fan to corporate executive, I would be infuriated. The people of Washington D.C. should be.

'BSG' Has Taken Hold of Me / Winter Quarter '10 Begins

Current Tunes: The hum of desktop Macs in the computer lab

Sorry about missing the past two days folks. Just seemed like I couldn’t fit in time for a post. Sunday I spent all day in Birmingham with some good friends and didn’t get back home until very late, and Monday I got wrapped up in chores around the house and “Battlestar Galactica.”

That’s turning out to be quite a compelling show. I just started the first season. Like most things, I feel a significant amount of my enjoyment of “BSG” has come from the fact that I knew absolutely zilch about the show going into it. Well, I knew there were these things called Cylons. And I knew they could look like people, but they could also look like overgrown trashcans with sunglasses right out of the 80s. Other than that, I had no idea about this show. I’m enjoying it immensely. I would dare say its some of the best, most hardcore sci-fi TV I’ve seen in quite sometime.
s
“BSG” reminds me of “Lost in Space.” And by “Lost in Space” I don’t mean the campy old 60s show, but I mean the show “Lost,” but in space. A less cheesy way of putting it would be to say “BSG” is a serious examination of moral complexities and dilemmas that emerge when real, true, in-your-face survival is the only game left to play.

I’ll freely admit though, what’s really gripping me about the show is just the premise, not really the characters. There are one or two characters I’m becoming attached to, but I don’t think they’re the ones you’re supposed to be sympathetic to. I’m talking about Number Six and Gaius. Gaius I like because TV shows have plenty of sane people and plenty of insane people too, but rare is the show that can have a character who rests somewhere in the in-between. Number Six is awesome because I’m terrified of her, and that just means the actress playing that part is doing an wonderful job.

On different note, class started back this week and I’m again granted unlimited access to the school building. December was really tough, not having the school to escape to. It’s so wonderful here. If I still live in Atlanta for the next few years, and I have no reason to think I won’t, I fully intend to come here to the school weekly just to do whatever. To work, to talk to people, enjoy this incredible environment. Even now sitting here it’s so quiet. That’s just the absolute best. I don’t particularly have to, but I think I’ll come back again tomorrow. Visiting the school daily to get work done is a habit I could truly grow to enjoy.

But for now, this is my last quarter here at SCAD as a student. What a journey this has been. I want to be done (oh, how I want to be done!), but I don't want to leave either. These two years have been so valuable to me.

Bah! I'm already getting too sentimental and this quarter just started yesterday. There's a time and a place for that sort of nonsense, and this isn't it.

Saying Goodbye to Windows (Official Mac Cult Member Now)

Current Tunes: Corrosion of Conformity - Kiss of Death

Favorite activity I participated in today? I deleted the hard drive partition on my Macbook. What this means is I no longer have a Windows operating system on this laptop and it is now 100% Mac OS X. Ever since I updated to Snow Leopard on my Mac, the need to have Windows boiled down to one single service: gaming. But on further elaboration, I determined that wasn’t much of a reason to keep Windows around, so I banished that evil Microsoft product from my system forever. I don’t intend on looking back.

I’ve been playing video games for pretty much all of my conscious life. I remember getting an original Nintendo Entertainment System when I was in 2nd or 3rd grade, and that insidious little device dominated a good portion of my young life. That was the start of this behavior that’s persisted for all these years. Slowly though, as month on month has gone by, I’ve grown more resistant to the charm of video games, enough to safely say that I think their hold on me is gone. I no longer own even one console system, I’ve quit all of those foolish (and addictive) Facebook games, and now Windows is gone.

This isn’t to say that I’ll never spend another second playing video games again. I’m sure I’ll pick one up from time to time, and that’s ok. I just don’t feel myself as attracted to them as I used to be. In social situations, I think it’ll be acceptable to indulge in a little gaming time. Or even on my own, as something fun and relaxing to do to bring a little variety to the daily routine. I’m happy about this though. I’m glad I’m giving them up.

When I go to an electronics store, let’s say Best Buy, I often have this experience that I keep repeating. I’ll walk by the video game section, and I’ll see a game that appeals to me on some level, and I’ll pick it up and look at it and think to myself how I want to play it. But very quickly that feeling subsides when I think about both the financial costs of the game, and the unseen cost: the time I would spend on that game that could be spent reading, writing, learning, growing, being. I don’t know if it’s possible to completely eliminate that urge to pick up a game, drool over it, and become enraptured by the desire to play it and escape from the world inside the game. But if I could indeed eliminate those desires, that’d be nice I believe. It would simplify my life a little more.

After deleting the partition, it dawned on me I’ve completely unconsciously been devoting significant money to improving my computer experience in different ways. There was the new operating system software, which really wasn’t much money at all. I also purchased a Bluetooth mouse the other day, which should arrive in the mail next week, in order to free up one of the only two USB ports I have on the laptop. Now, after deleting Windows and going back to only one operating system, I have significantly more hard drive space. That’s almost a greater boon than the whole “no more video games” thing.

I had been meaning to delete the partition about a month ago, but I kept putting off. I kept living under this silly delusion that I still needed to hold on to Windows in case of whatever unforeseen circumstances might arrive. That was just worrying over something that won’t happen. This was just another case of me overthinking things, and letting that process bog me down and inhibit me from getting important thing done. But again, I triumph.

Free Speech Under Attack in Ireland

Current Tunes: Rose Bowl on TV

Well according to this article in The Guardian, as of today in Ireland it is a punishable offense under the law to commit blasphemy. I’m absolutely baffled. How do people in civilized nations allows laws like this to be passed? If I were a citizen of Ireland, I would be ashamed for my country, whether I was religious or not.

Well the law, which was passed all the way back in July, states that blasphemy is “publishing or uttering matter that is grossly abusive or insulting in relation to matters sacred by any religion, thereby intentionally causing outrage among a substantial number of adherents of that religion." If you look at a textbook definition of blasphemy though, you get a significantly different view of this word. The definition I found on Merriam Webster says it is “the act of showing contempt or reverence for God,” but my favorite is the 2nd definition given which simply says blasphemy is “irreverence toward something considered sacred.”

Working with that 2nd definition, you can see some disturbing psychological implications going on here. The major one for me being that the law is essentially forcing all citizens to pay reverence to major religious institutions or else pay a substantial fee. So you’re essentially making it law that all people must hold a specific opinion about religion (or at least pretend to). What’s especially frustrating too is I’m sure this law pretty much only applies to Christianity, given how Ireland is just about 100% Catholic, or comes from a Catholic upbringing anyway. I’m sure if you ran around making ‘blasphemous’ comments about Buddha or Vishnu or something no one would raise a stink, which to mean reeks of hypocrisy and shows just how invalid and prejudiced this law is.

Forget event talking about what constitutes 'offensive', you really have to ask yourself what constitutes something as sacred? The answers are near limitless. Hell, in Ireland I'm sure you could find a significant portion of the population who considers the national soccer team "sacred." Does that mean its a religious institution that you therefore can't speak offensively about?

This is a limitation on free speech though, pure and simple. But luckily, from the looks of the article, not everyone in the country is taking this lying down. My hat’s off to Michael Nugent & the Irish Atheists for combating this ridiculous law. I especially like this quote in the article from Nugent: “You would think that after all the scandals the Catholic Church endured in 2009 the introduction of a blasphemy law would be the last thing that the Irish state would be considering in terms of defending religion and its place in society.” Good call Nugent, good call.

Come to think of it, under this law it might be blasphemous to bring up the church’s past if you talk about it in any negative light whatsoever. Such an act might ‘offend’ someone, and we just can’t have that, can we? Absolutely disgusting.