Let me get straight to the point. I don't really enjoy social networks. Mostly, it's me, but some of it is social networks in general. Here are the reasons why:
1. They don't actually make me more social. The things I want to say don't fit into the terse format expected of tweets and status updates. This means I rarely update my status. That's part of the reason I'm blogging. I like to take the time to express my thoughts. Given the chance I'll prattle on and on and you get the idea. Well does my wife understand this. She puts up with a lot of postulating and expounding. Now that you're reading my blog so do you. Congratulations or condolences, whichever is appropriate.
2. Seeing what people are doing doesn't make me feel like I'm a part of their lives. In fact, it does the exact opposite. It makes me feel like I'm not apart of their life. Here's all the fun stuff they are doing without me. I'm glad when things are going well for my facebook friends, but it accentuates how little they are doing with me. The only exception to this is when people tag me in their posts, because they are sharing something that made them think of me specifically. Even so, part of me misses the joy of sharing those moments together. I like gathering with my friends and seeing the look on their faces as I share humorous quotes, movies, or pictures. It's so much more satisfying than a "Like" and generally more sincere.
3. I just don't care about selfies. There are so many pictures taken now that cameras are everywhere. Way too many are self portraits. They are definitely not "Kodak Moments", but just an obnoxious desire to document our faces. Social networks aren't making people social; they are exacerbating our narcisstic tendencies in a bad way.
4. I want to talk to you. I don't find interacting with people through status updates and comment sections engaging. It takes too long. I want to talk to my friends. Most of the interaction I have on Facebook is through the chat feature. I often wonder if the chat feature on Facebook is under-utilized. It's one of the better ways on the site to actually be social. And, you don't have to put your conversation out there for the entire world to see. I'm not saying you have anything to hide, but I don't publish my phone conversations. If you ever see that I'm online, feel free to say hi via chat. It's what I'm there for.
5. It is time-consuming. I spend too much time on Facebook finding out what is going on with people I care less about. It needed to be said. I don't care about most of the people I'm friends with, and my friend list is actually fairly small. Honestly, the people who know what's going on in my life don't find out through Facebook. They get it direct from the source: me. I prefer my friends to do the same. My personal opinion is that, by and large, Facebook and other social networks are for secondary friends. The people who care about you the most don't let you find out about their wedding, baby, graduation, etc. via Facebook. You hear it from them first-hand. Facebook is for everyone else. So why am I spending time on relationships with "everyone else" when I would rather strengthen those small key relationships.
6. SPAM. For a long time people would complain about forwards and junk e-mail filling their inboxes. We still have the exam same content, but now it is being passed around endlessly on Facebook. What we didn't want to put up with in our inboxes we readily accept in our timelines. It's a travesty. Plus, amidst the spam we have an endless supply of game invites and diatribes. Why do we bother?
I'm sure there are other reasons that I'm not thinking of, but they don't come to mind. Do I think Facebook is bad? Not as a tool. I think the real problem is in how we use it. We are trying to be too connected to too many people and it is having a negative impact. It has gotten to the point where not engaging this lesser form of sociality has created negative impacts on esteem. Crazy. I'm about ready to deactivate my account.
Monday, September 30, 2013
Tuesday, September 24, 2013
Musical Theater
As long as I can remember I've enjoyed being on stage. When I was about 7 years old I played a tree sprite in a school play. The older class performed a humorous version of of Robin Hood. I was jealous of the older kids, including my brother, who actually were allowed speaking parts. There were no speaking parts for kids my age, but I (perhaps naively) believed that I could perform admirably.
Likewise, in sixth grade my class planned sketches for a school assembly. I had big ideas and imagined myself decked out in a harness and wires and being lowered onto the stage as Ra the sun god. The teacher decided not to use my ideas and our sketch ended up being something much less technically challenging. And much less memorable as evidenced by the fact that I don't remember what we ended up doing.
Years later I auditioned for the high school performing arts program; I got in during my first audition. They complimented my accent and my waltz. I spent the next four years in the program. I wasn't the only freshman to find space in the program, but there weren't many of us.
The program's standard routine was a song and dance show in the fall, a musical in the spring. We also added to the school choir for various events. Realistically, we were a musical theater program. We sang, we danced, we acted. We never did Shakespeare. My fit in this group was based solely on whatever acting merit I had, because I had no talents for song or dance (despite compliments of my waltz). I think the major strength of my acting lay in my ability to memorize. I had little trouble in learning my dialogue quickly and precisely.
Anyway, there were no auditions for the fall show. As a group we would find musical numbers to fit our theme, small sketches to connect them , and then divide out the work between us. We would choreograph them ourselves and I was never required to learn more than a few simple steps.
The fall shows required auditions. Everyone auditioned and then the teachers assigned roles to everyone. I don't remember what parts I auditioned for, except for my first year. It doesn't matter though because I rarely (possibly never) got the parts for which I auditioned. Freshman year we did the show "Crazy For You". I auditioned for the part of Bela Zangler; I got the role of Sam the Cowboy. The rest of the shows were as follows:
Sophomore: Guys & Dolls--Joey Biltmore
Junior: Oklahoma--Guy named Mike who previously bought a sweet-potato pie.
Senior: Anything Goes--The Porter
My senior year I also did work as a student director/producer. It was fun, but then I went off to college. I kept intending to audition for shows, but never found the time. In my mind I directed and performed versions of "12 Angry Men" with my friends or put on "The Fantastiks". It never happened. High school seemed the end of my scripted acting career. Musical theater abruptly stopped being a part of my life.
Eventually I replaced scripted theater with improvisational comedy and continued that for eight years. It was four years since high school, but I was back on stage. Performing without a script thrilled me. There was occasionally music too. It was great to do something I loved. However, I moved and my group didn't. I tried forming a new group, but it hasn't stuck yet.
So what's my point? I've been missing the stage for the past few years. I miss rehearsals, ad-libs, costumes. I want back on stage. A month ago I grabbed the season brochure for the local "Arts on Tour". Not only have I not been performing, I haven't been attending theater either. I was hoping to see something to entice me to buy season tickets. I keep meaning too. At the back of the booklet was an advertisement for "Spamalot". I got excited! I have wanted to see Spamalot for quite some time, and here it was being done local. I'm thrilled.
Then I did some more looking. The tickets were going on sale mid-September, but the show didn't open until late January. I went to the theater group's webpage to find out more details where I happily discovered that they hadn't even cast the show yet. In fact, they were planning three workshops before auditions and they hadn't even done the first workshop. Wheels in my head started turning. I fantasized about being on stage again. I broached the subject to my wife, explaining my thought processes; this involved worries about how much time it would take and what I would have to give up in order to do Spamalot. Without hesitation she told me that if this was something I wanted to do she would support me all the way and make it work. My wife is awesome! We both know she'll be the one sacrificing for this.
Flash forward a month. I've attended two workshops, bought the soundtrack, listened to it endlessly, started going through the script. Auditions aren't until Oct. 12th, but I'm trying to get ready now. I want to be in this, and I want to be in this big. My biggest weakness is that I can't sing and Spamalot is a musical. True, it's Monty Python so the singing doesn't have to be fantastic, but it has to be passable and I'm not sure I'm even that good. So I've been singing in the car, in my office, on the walk to work. I've been singing endlessly. I've checked out several books on singing technique. I'm working on this all the time. There's not much time, but any improvement will be good.
I thought I was making progress, until this last week when I recorded myself. Needless to say, everything was bad. Not just the singing, the acting as well. And I realized it was because I was trying. I was trying to sound like the man from the soundtrack and it wasn't working. I was "acting" and it was obvious. So I've got about three weeks to stop acting and remember how to have fun. To relax and just let it happen. And I need to remind myself that I used to sing on stage all the time with improv; this isn't unfamiliar territory. I can do this.
So this is what is about to take up a major portion of my life. Be on the lookout for how well I did after the auditions.
Also, check this out:
Likewise, in sixth grade my class planned sketches for a school assembly. I had big ideas and imagined myself decked out in a harness and wires and being lowered onto the stage as Ra the sun god. The teacher decided not to use my ideas and our sketch ended up being something much less technically challenging. And much less memorable as evidenced by the fact that I don't remember what we ended up doing.
Years later I auditioned for the high school performing arts program; I got in during my first audition. They complimented my accent and my waltz. I spent the next four years in the program. I wasn't the only freshman to find space in the program, but there weren't many of us.
The program's standard routine was a song and dance show in the fall, a musical in the spring. We also added to the school choir for various events. Realistically, we were a musical theater program. We sang, we danced, we acted. We never did Shakespeare. My fit in this group was based solely on whatever acting merit I had, because I had no talents for song or dance (despite compliments of my waltz). I think the major strength of my acting lay in my ability to memorize. I had little trouble in learning my dialogue quickly and precisely.
Anyway, there were no auditions for the fall show. As a group we would find musical numbers to fit our theme, small sketches to connect them , and then divide out the work between us. We would choreograph them ourselves and I was never required to learn more than a few simple steps.
The fall shows required auditions. Everyone auditioned and then the teachers assigned roles to everyone. I don't remember what parts I auditioned for, except for my first year. It doesn't matter though because I rarely (possibly never) got the parts for which I auditioned. Freshman year we did the show "Crazy For You". I auditioned for the part of Bela Zangler; I got the role of Sam the Cowboy. The rest of the shows were as follows:
Sophomore: Guys & Dolls--Joey Biltmore
Junior: Oklahoma--Guy named Mike who previously bought a sweet-potato pie.
Senior: Anything Goes--The Porter
My senior year I also did work as a student director/producer. It was fun, but then I went off to college. I kept intending to audition for shows, but never found the time. In my mind I directed and performed versions of "12 Angry Men" with my friends or put on "The Fantastiks". It never happened. High school seemed the end of my scripted acting career. Musical theater abruptly stopped being a part of my life.
Eventually I replaced scripted theater with improvisational comedy and continued that for eight years. It was four years since high school, but I was back on stage. Performing without a script thrilled me. There was occasionally music too. It was great to do something I loved. However, I moved and my group didn't. I tried forming a new group, but it hasn't stuck yet.
So what's my point? I've been missing the stage for the past few years. I miss rehearsals, ad-libs, costumes. I want back on stage. A month ago I grabbed the season brochure for the local "Arts on Tour". Not only have I not been performing, I haven't been attending theater either. I was hoping to see something to entice me to buy season tickets. I keep meaning too. At the back of the booklet was an advertisement for "Spamalot". I got excited! I have wanted to see Spamalot for quite some time, and here it was being done local. I'm thrilled.
Then I did some more looking. The tickets were going on sale mid-September, but the show didn't open until late January. I went to the theater group's webpage to find out more details where I happily discovered that they hadn't even cast the show yet. In fact, they were planning three workshops before auditions and they hadn't even done the first workshop. Wheels in my head started turning. I fantasized about being on stage again. I broached the subject to my wife, explaining my thought processes; this involved worries about how much time it would take and what I would have to give up in order to do Spamalot. Without hesitation she told me that if this was something I wanted to do she would support me all the way and make it work. My wife is awesome! We both know she'll be the one sacrificing for this.
Flash forward a month. I've attended two workshops, bought the soundtrack, listened to it endlessly, started going through the script. Auditions aren't until Oct. 12th, but I'm trying to get ready now. I want to be in this, and I want to be in this big. My biggest weakness is that I can't sing and Spamalot is a musical. True, it's Monty Python so the singing doesn't have to be fantastic, but it has to be passable and I'm not sure I'm even that good. So I've been singing in the car, in my office, on the walk to work. I've been singing endlessly. I've checked out several books on singing technique. I'm working on this all the time. There's not much time, but any improvement will be good.
I thought I was making progress, until this last week when I recorded myself. Needless to say, everything was bad. Not just the singing, the acting as well. And I realized it was because I was trying. I was trying to sound like the man from the soundtrack and it wasn't working. I was "acting" and it was obvious. So I've got about three weeks to stop acting and remember how to have fun. To relax and just let it happen. And I need to remind myself that I used to sing on stage all the time with improv; this isn't unfamiliar territory. I can do this.
So this is what is about to take up a major portion of my life. Be on the lookout for how well I did after the auditions.
Also, check this out:
Monday, September 16, 2013
Family Togetherness
This is a list of things I think every family should own to encourage togetherness. I'll admit "every" family is a bit of a stretch, but if something on this list isn't right for yours it still might inspire you. The focus of this list is minimizing technology use. I'm not anti-technology. There are some great technological advances to bring families together. However, a lot of technology in the home discourages interaction. This list is meant to counter that trend. Being together is worth little if you're not interacting. With that caveat, in no particular order...
1. A large blanket you don't mind taking outdoors.
Rationale: An essential for 4th of July, summer concert series, and picnics. It can also be used in winter for cuddling under as a family while you watch a movie. If large enough it can be used for forts and tents large enough to fit the kids and the grown-up kids.
How I'm doing: My wife is a regular quilter. We have a plethora of blankets, several of which were intended for outdoor family occasions and they get plenty of use.
2. A picnic basket.
Rationale: Family picnics, obviously. Insulate it with a towel to keep foods warm for short periods of time. Otherwise, a basket can also pack non-food material for short family outings. And a basket with a lid can be used for surprises that you don't want to wrap, but still want to reveal dramatically. Like puppies.
How I'm doing: Despite the excess of blankets, my family is sadly lacking on picnic baskets. We have a few baskets that we use for Easter, but no lidded baskets. I hope to make this a new acquisition soon and will be scouring thrift stores for good candidates. No need to spend more money than necessary.
3. A board game that takes at least an hour to play.
Rationale: The trend today seems to be games that are quick. It's like people want to minimize family interaction. For younger children, those quick games are perfect. For older children longer games are more suitable as long as you make the time for them. Bonus: Games often teach strategy, problem solving, and important social lessons about winning and losing. If a board game isn't an option a deck of cards or two is a great alternative.
How I'm doing:I have a closet full of board games as well as a second box of games stored in my walk-in closet. I also have three decks of cards with identical backs (for larger card games), a pinochle deck, and a box of dominoes. Oh, every family needs dominoes.
4. A library card.
Rationale: A library card is the key to a good family outing. It teaches children that books are important. Oftentimes libraries also have art and exhibits. Finally, a large number of libraries (but by no means all) are built next to city parks. This can combine an educational trip with a play trip.
How I'm doing:A library card was one of the first things I got when I moved. I always have one. So does my wife. Now my oldest daughter has one too. Check.
5. A book you are reading together.
Rationale: This is really an off-shoot of the library card. It encourages literacy. It can make great discussion material for around the dinner table. Children will learn to use their imaginations. Adults will get a chance to share their favorites with their children while reliving them. Plus, you might find a new favorite. Don't just read it though. Anticipate what's going to happen next, ask younger children to summarize previous chapters, act out your favorite parts.
How I'm doing: Trina and I have often discussed reading a book as a family. We did it regularly when we were dating, but it died off when we married and had kids. We still read books to the children at night, but not a family book. This week I started to remedy that with "The BFG" by Roald Dahl. We'll see how long it lasts. The children seem to loving it though. Ask them about whizpopping.
6. Decent collection of cookie cutters.
Rationale: To be fair, Trina looked at me funny when I included this one. However, family cookie making is a classic especially at Christmas time. A decent set will have you making cookies at birthdays, Easter, Valentine's, etc. Plus, cookie cutters can be used to trace shapes and can be used with play-doh. And getting children into the kitchen will be cheaper (and tastier) than those store bought cookies.
How I'm doing: We bought a big set of cookie cutters several years ago. Not all of them are great, but they have served us well. We've added a few to the collections since then. When at our favorite kitchen supply store we sometimes look at their selection. We haven't purchased any cookie cutters from them...yet.
7. Play-doh
Rationale: Play-doh inspires creativity. You build, you design, you play. Have theme nights where all family members create something (like animals). Reenact scenes from stories. Create caricatures of the family. Remember, play-doh will not last forever no matter how well you care for it. Plus, it's fairly inexpensive. Let people mix colors. Don't plan on all the play-doh ending up back in the canisters. Build models that you expect to dry out and put on the shelves for a week or two. Make the things you see on the boxes instead of just rolling it out and balling it up endlessly.
How I'm doing:We have a few small canisters of play-doh, but we haven't sat down for some dedicated family building. Maybe next week.
8. Art supplies including Construction Paper, Pipe Cleaners, Sidewalk Chalk, Pens, Pencils, Crayons, Marker, Paint, etc.
Rationale: Art projects indoors and outdoors. Decorate your house, do puppet shows, make gifts, build toys. Really, this one deserves it's own blog written by my wife. Best bet, buy the art supplies at the beginning of the school year when they are at their cheapest. Doing art with the children makes it more likely the supplies will be taken care of and last for a long time. Plus you get to nurture your own latent (or not so latent) talent.
How I'm doing: My house is filled with art supplies of various types. We just need to be better about using them as a family. Too often I send the kids to be artsy by themselves instead of joining them in their artistry.
9. A little red wagon.
Rationale: Holding personal items (or children) on trips to the zoo, picnics, etc. It can also be used to do service projects as a family around the neighborhood.
How I'm doing: This was one of the first big "toy" purchases I made after the birth of my oldest daughter. I selected a wooden red wagon that I love. I haven't taken as good care of it recently as I used to. Some of the brackets need replaced and parts need a paint job, but it still functions. And I love it. It worked great at our recent zoo trip.
10. Sleds
Rationale: It's like a wagon, except for winter. Family time fun when the weather changes.
How I'm doing: I've had several sleds in the past, but moves with an uncertain future led to sleds being donated to friends. Currently, we are living without, but winter is approaching and maybe that will change. My kids are getting old enough to really enjoy them. Bring on the cold and cocoa.
11. Popcorn Maker/Ice Cream Maker
Rationale: I guess this brings it back to technology, but having food that you made together while you have a family night can just make things better than ever. Plus, it gives you an excuse to use that blanket I mentioned at the beginning.
How I'm doing: I own two ice cream makers (a small and a large). For my birthday about a year ago I got a hot-air popcorn popper. I love it and use it all the time. You can make microwave popcorn, but this is so much better.
I know this list isn't complete. I figure I will expand it in the future as things pop into my head, and I'd love your input.
1. A large blanket you don't mind taking outdoors.
Rationale: An essential for 4th of July, summer concert series, and picnics. It can also be used in winter for cuddling under as a family while you watch a movie. If large enough it can be used for forts and tents large enough to fit the kids and the grown-up kids.
How I'm doing: My wife is a regular quilter. We have a plethora of blankets, several of which were intended for outdoor family occasions and they get plenty of use.
2. A picnic basket.
Rationale: Family picnics, obviously. Insulate it with a towel to keep foods warm for short periods of time. Otherwise, a basket can also pack non-food material for short family outings. And a basket with a lid can be used for surprises that you don't want to wrap, but still want to reveal dramatically. Like puppies.
How I'm doing: Despite the excess of blankets, my family is sadly lacking on picnic baskets. We have a few baskets that we use for Easter, but no lidded baskets. I hope to make this a new acquisition soon and will be scouring thrift stores for good candidates. No need to spend more money than necessary.
3. A board game that takes at least an hour to play.
Rationale: The trend today seems to be games that are quick. It's like people want to minimize family interaction. For younger children, those quick games are perfect. For older children longer games are more suitable as long as you make the time for them. Bonus: Games often teach strategy, problem solving, and important social lessons about winning and losing. If a board game isn't an option a deck of cards or two is a great alternative.
How I'm doing:I have a closet full of board games as well as a second box of games stored in my walk-in closet. I also have three decks of cards with identical backs (for larger card games), a pinochle deck, and a box of dominoes. Oh, every family needs dominoes.
4. A library card.
Rationale: A library card is the key to a good family outing. It teaches children that books are important. Oftentimes libraries also have art and exhibits. Finally, a large number of libraries (but by no means all) are built next to city parks. This can combine an educational trip with a play trip.
How I'm doing:A library card was one of the first things I got when I moved. I always have one. So does my wife. Now my oldest daughter has one too. Check.
5. A book you are reading together.
Rationale: This is really an off-shoot of the library card. It encourages literacy. It can make great discussion material for around the dinner table. Children will learn to use their imaginations. Adults will get a chance to share their favorites with their children while reliving them. Plus, you might find a new favorite. Don't just read it though. Anticipate what's going to happen next, ask younger children to summarize previous chapters, act out your favorite parts.
How I'm doing: Trina and I have often discussed reading a book as a family. We did it regularly when we were dating, but it died off when we married and had kids. We still read books to the children at night, but not a family book. This week I started to remedy that with "The BFG" by Roald Dahl. We'll see how long it lasts. The children seem to loving it though. Ask them about whizpopping.
6. Decent collection of cookie cutters.
Rationale: To be fair, Trina looked at me funny when I included this one. However, family cookie making is a classic especially at Christmas time. A decent set will have you making cookies at birthdays, Easter, Valentine's, etc. Plus, cookie cutters can be used to trace shapes and can be used with play-doh. And getting children into the kitchen will be cheaper (and tastier) than those store bought cookies.
How I'm doing: We bought a big set of cookie cutters several years ago. Not all of them are great, but they have served us well. We've added a few to the collections since then. When at our favorite kitchen supply store we sometimes look at their selection. We haven't purchased any cookie cutters from them...yet.
7. Play-doh
Rationale: Play-doh inspires creativity. You build, you design, you play. Have theme nights where all family members create something (like animals). Reenact scenes from stories. Create caricatures of the family. Remember, play-doh will not last forever no matter how well you care for it. Plus, it's fairly inexpensive. Let people mix colors. Don't plan on all the play-doh ending up back in the canisters. Build models that you expect to dry out and put on the shelves for a week or two. Make the things you see on the boxes instead of just rolling it out and balling it up endlessly.
How I'm doing:We have a few small canisters of play-doh, but we haven't sat down for some dedicated family building. Maybe next week.
8. Art supplies including Construction Paper, Pipe Cleaners, Sidewalk Chalk, Pens, Pencils, Crayons, Marker, Paint, etc.
Rationale: Art projects indoors and outdoors. Decorate your house, do puppet shows, make gifts, build toys. Really, this one deserves it's own blog written by my wife. Best bet, buy the art supplies at the beginning of the school year when they are at their cheapest. Doing art with the children makes it more likely the supplies will be taken care of and last for a long time. Plus you get to nurture your own latent (or not so latent) talent.
How I'm doing: My house is filled with art supplies of various types. We just need to be better about using them as a family. Too often I send the kids to be artsy by themselves instead of joining them in their artistry.
9. A little red wagon.
Rationale: Holding personal items (or children) on trips to the zoo, picnics, etc. It can also be used to do service projects as a family around the neighborhood.
How I'm doing: This was one of the first big "toy" purchases I made after the birth of my oldest daughter. I selected a wooden red wagon that I love. I haven't taken as good care of it recently as I used to. Some of the brackets need replaced and parts need a paint job, but it still functions. And I love it. It worked great at our recent zoo trip.
10. Sleds
Rationale: It's like a wagon, except for winter. Family time fun when the weather changes.
How I'm doing: I've had several sleds in the past, but moves with an uncertain future led to sleds being donated to friends. Currently, we are living without, but winter is approaching and maybe that will change. My kids are getting old enough to really enjoy them. Bring on the cold and cocoa.
11. Popcorn Maker/Ice Cream Maker
Rationale: I guess this brings it back to technology, but having food that you made together while you have a family night can just make things better than ever. Plus, it gives you an excuse to use that blanket I mentioned at the beginning.
How I'm doing: I own two ice cream makers (a small and a large). For my birthday about a year ago I got a hot-air popcorn popper. I love it and use it all the time. You can make microwave popcorn, but this is so much better.
I know this list isn't complete. I figure I will expand it in the future as things pop into my head, and I'd love your input.
Monday, September 9, 2013
Censorship
Recently I watched three movies where the use of foul or crude language was inexcusable. Generally, the word that caused offense in these three movies was the f-bomb. I wish I could tell you that I turned off the movies instead of exposing myself to the language, but I only ended one of the movies prematurely. In that one the language bothered me and the movie bored me. A double whammy that that couldn't be forgiven or tolerated any longer. Now, I'm not going to mention which movies because I don't want the post to be about the movies. I want it to be about the language.
You see, I believe in censorship. Not government or organizational censorship, but a conscientious personal censorship. There are certain words that should not be said. We should choose not to say them. No one should force us not to say them, but as individuals we should choose to use better language. Why? Because we are part of a society and we have the desire to be considerate to those around us. Just because we have "free speech" does not mean we should feel free to say whatever we want. Words have consequences and we should consider the impact of those words on the people around us.
I have heard the argument that the use of coarse or vulgar language makes characters more realistic. Related to this is the premise that vulgar language is used in movies because movies reflect reality. The argument is flawed. Anyone who watches movies can tell they don't reflect reality. If life was like the movies the world would be a different place. This is why we have a phrase like "willing suspension of disbelief" (WSOD). Abandoning vulgar language might make characters less realistic, but application of WSOD suggests that in most cases people will be able to deal with it. So the gangster didn't drop a blue streak when he started shooting. Most people will be able to accept that. Besides, I've never associated the ability to swear as a sign of depth of character and so characters probably won't suffer for lack of four-letter words.
Another concern of mine is that movies don't reflect life, they exaggerate it. That's right! Movies exaggerate life. They take the real world and make characters more stereotypical, fights more action-packed, romances more romantic, and curse words more prolific. In this way movies can concentrate their message. The sad thing is that it doesn't end with movies exaggerating life. Life than proceeds to mimic the movies. People model their behavior on peers and popular media. As people mimic movies their languages deteriorates to reflect the model. The norm shifts. Movies exaggerate the new norm. Life mimics. The norm shifts. A cycle is created that causes the decline of everyday language. Vulgar language becomes more prevalent and acceptable.
I also believe that casually dropping vulgar language as an adjective, verb, noun or exclamation is lazy writing. A person who can't stop using vulgar language in every day speech appears illiterate (even if they graduated from Harvard). In the same way, writing inundated with four-letter words appears sophomoric. It does not take a lot of creativity to use vulgar language (ok...sometimes it does, but most people are far from creative with it's use). Cole Porter was insightful with his lyrics "Good authors, too, who once knew better words now only use four-letter words writing prose...Anything Goes." That's sad.
Some writers seem to select a vulgar word as a go to choice, inserting it randomly into sentences to give them "flavor" or "honesty". Let me tell you about "flavor". The more you are exposed to a flavor the less strength it has. The end of a lollipop is the least flavorful. Chewing gum's flavor is strongest on the first chew. A steak's flavor diminishes with each meaty bite. It's just the way the senses work. In the same way, vulgar languages loses its power the more it is used. People who are using vulgar language for flavor or honest should discourage its use. That means each individual use will have more impact. It will do the job even better. Vulgar language is more effective when it's scarce.
Because that's the thing, a lot of four-letter words (I'm thinking of one in particular) have lost meaning, because they are used indiscrimanitely to describe anything and everything. Too many connotations and a word is essentially junk. Vulgar words are falling into the literary company of words like "very", "stuff", and "things" and should be edited out in a similar fashion.
This would be a great point in the blog to drop a blue streak to make my point about impact, but I won't. Why? It would undermine the rest of my message.
The question to ask yourself is "Would removing the questionable language change the meaning of the sentence?" If not, let it go. it's not needed. If removing the language would change the meaning of the sentence then let it go, but replace it with a more descriptive word that restores the meaning. Writers might be forced to find adjectives that actually have dictionary definitions or strong nouns. They'll be on a search for Porter's "better words". It can only help their writing. A good vocabulary is essential for any writer, including the four-letter words.
And that's all I have to say on the topic. If you have a comment make sure it's profanity free. After all, the profanity laden rebuttal is obvious and immature. And it will just get deleted.
You see, I believe in censorship. Not government or organizational censorship, but a conscientious personal censorship. There are certain words that should not be said. We should choose not to say them. No one should force us not to say them, but as individuals we should choose to use better language. Why? Because we are part of a society and we have the desire to be considerate to those around us. Just because we have "free speech" does not mean we should feel free to say whatever we want. Words have consequences and we should consider the impact of those words on the people around us.
I have heard the argument that the use of coarse or vulgar language makes characters more realistic. Related to this is the premise that vulgar language is used in movies because movies reflect reality. The argument is flawed. Anyone who watches movies can tell they don't reflect reality. If life was like the movies the world would be a different place. This is why we have a phrase like "willing suspension of disbelief" (WSOD). Abandoning vulgar language might make characters less realistic, but application of WSOD suggests that in most cases people will be able to deal with it. So the gangster didn't drop a blue streak when he started shooting. Most people will be able to accept that. Besides, I've never associated the ability to swear as a sign of depth of character and so characters probably won't suffer for lack of four-letter words.
Another concern of mine is that movies don't reflect life, they exaggerate it. That's right! Movies exaggerate life. They take the real world and make characters more stereotypical, fights more action-packed, romances more romantic, and curse words more prolific. In this way movies can concentrate their message. The sad thing is that it doesn't end with movies exaggerating life. Life than proceeds to mimic the movies. People model their behavior on peers and popular media. As people mimic movies their languages deteriorates to reflect the model. The norm shifts. Movies exaggerate the new norm. Life mimics. The norm shifts. A cycle is created that causes the decline of everyday language. Vulgar language becomes more prevalent and acceptable.
I also believe that casually dropping vulgar language as an adjective, verb, noun or exclamation is lazy writing. A person who can't stop using vulgar language in every day speech appears illiterate (even if they graduated from Harvard). In the same way, writing inundated with four-letter words appears sophomoric. It does not take a lot of creativity to use vulgar language (ok...sometimes it does, but most people are far from creative with it's use). Cole Porter was insightful with his lyrics "Good authors, too, who once knew better words now only use four-letter words writing prose...Anything Goes." That's sad.
Some writers seem to select a vulgar word as a go to choice, inserting it randomly into sentences to give them "flavor" or "honesty". Let me tell you about "flavor". The more you are exposed to a flavor the less strength it has. The end of a lollipop is the least flavorful. Chewing gum's flavor is strongest on the first chew. A steak's flavor diminishes with each meaty bite. It's just the way the senses work. In the same way, vulgar languages loses its power the more it is used. People who are using vulgar language for flavor or honest should discourage its use. That means each individual use will have more impact. It will do the job even better. Vulgar language is more effective when it's scarce.
Because that's the thing, a lot of four-letter words (I'm thinking of one in particular) have lost meaning, because they are used indiscrimanitely to describe anything and everything. Too many connotations and a word is essentially junk. Vulgar words are falling into the literary company of words like "very", "stuff", and "things" and should be edited out in a similar fashion.
This would be a great point in the blog to drop a blue streak to make my point about impact, but I won't. Why? It would undermine the rest of my message.
The question to ask yourself is "Would removing the questionable language change the meaning of the sentence?" If not, let it go. it's not needed. If removing the language would change the meaning of the sentence then let it go, but replace it with a more descriptive word that restores the meaning. Writers might be forced to find adjectives that actually have dictionary definitions or strong nouns. They'll be on a search for Porter's "better words". It can only help their writing. A good vocabulary is essential for any writer, including the four-letter words.
And that's all I have to say on the topic. If you have a comment make sure it's profanity free. After all, the profanity laden rebuttal is obvious and immature. And it will just get deleted.
Sunday, September 8, 2013
About Books
My life runs on semesters. As a student, the semester schedule meant little. There was little in the way of routine. Each Fall would bring a different set of classes and requirements for success. So while some things were routine, by and large each new semester had it's own challenges and time requirements. However, as a teacher my semester schedule is fairly constant. My class loads haven't changed at all while I've been at CSI. Fall semester is six PSYC 101 classes and a PSYC 201. The times are the same. Even the classrooms stay the same. You would think, therefore, that I would be able to predict my workload for each semester.
I'm not.
As indicated by my earlier blog posts I had high hopes for getting a lot of writing done in the last five months of the year. However, as the semester started last week I find my time severely limited. I couldn't even find the time to edit my last blog post in a timely manner. It took the Labor Day holiday to find the time to edit that blog post and start this one. Now I'm editing this one on the day I'm supposed to be writing a new one. Sheesh.
But is it really a lack of time or am I just not spending my time well? Obviously (like the question of nature vs. nurture) the answer is both. I don't have enough time and I'm not spending my time well. I've been trying to analyze where I'm spending my time poorly in order to increase my productivity and get my writing back on schedule. I have come to a conclusion about one of the places I'm not spending my time well.
Librarians be warned: you might not like this part.
I read too much. Honestly, too much of anything can be bad for you, even reading. When my writing and other important goals suffer because of my reading it is time to ease back. I know several of my coworkers are jealous of the amount of books I read (and movies I watch). Generally I leisure read for at least an hour every day. Some days it can be 3-4. Weekends can sometimes reach more than 6. However, given how full my life is with other things (and potentially getting busier--stay tuned for future blogs) that might be too much. I might need to limit it to 30 minutes each day or less.
It can't be eliminated completely. A great writer needs to read. Books can inspire. Sometimes I pick up a book and the way the plot develops makes me want to rush to the nearest keyboard and begin typing. An authors use of words can make me start writing my own prose in my head as I try to adopt a similar voice. Writers need to be readers. The question is what is the perfect reading to writing ratio? Obviously, that's personal but it is still important.
Secondly, I have this deep desperation in my soul: I can't read everything. No matter how much time I have there will always be books that go unread, series I will not be introduced to, authors I won't have time to enjoy. Even if I cut back on reading time that list only grows. So what do I read? My to-read list is extensive. I don't limit myself much on genres. I read science fiction AND fantasy. Mystery. Classics. Non-fiction (especially focusing on psychology). Kids books. How-to. Anything that was adapted into a novel. So which books are worth spending my time on and which books am I just wasting my time on?
Yes! Some books are a waste of my time, but which? One of my current goals is to read all the Star Wars novels. This is a series of books that I largely consider fluff fiction. It used to be a small percentage of my reading selection, but because of this goal it has been almost 100% of my reading selection. Part of me has to wonder if I should abandon this goal. However, I'm over 100 books into the effort. Do I give up now? If I stay on track am I just committing the sunk-cost fallacy?
What about rereading old favorites? There are few books I'll read twice. Strunk and White's little book is the notable exception. I read it yearly. Mostly I reread books when the sequels come out and I need a refresher on what happened. However, every time I reread one book, that means another book I could have read doesn't get read. Do I have time for that with all the good books out there to read? The other day I was fondly remembering The Death Gate Cycle by Hickman and Weis. I'm considering rereading it, but that is seven books that I won't read because I chose to reread the cycle.
At times it feels like deciding to read a book or not is like being in "Indiana Jones and the Last Crusade". I'm surrounded by grails (books). Some are jeweled, some are plain. Some are wood, some aren't. I can only pick one. Watching over my shoulder is a knight. Sometimes, halfway through the book he gives me a satisfied smile and I hear his voice echo in my head "You have chosen...wisely." Other times I'm just a few pages in and he's telling me I've chosen poorly. I hate when that happens. What do I do?
I can't do much except accept the inevitable. No, I won't read everything. It's impossible to keep up. The best I can do is read books I'm truly interested in. Don't waste time on books I'm not. This inevitably collides with my Star Wars goal. Currently I'm reading one of the books and it suuuuuucks! Do I waste time on it for the goals sake? Unfortunately, yes, but I'm cheating. Instead of reading it I'm skimming it. It will take me a fraction of the time and I can then move on to more desirable books.
Other books of note: I never picked up "The Davinci Code" and probably never will, mostly because I'm not interested. Same for the Twilight Series. I might eventually get to the Hunger Games series, but probably not. It's not that they're not good books (though what a good book is can be highly debated), it's just that I don't care.
My wife would swear that part of my taste in books is a strong distaste for trendy books. She wouldn't be wrong. A book being popular is never a reason to read it. It seems so many people read things because "everyone" is reading it. If you don't read it, you risk being left clueless while the rest of the world talks about it. Do I read the popular books? Sometimes, but only if the story interests me. Most popular books don't.
A not so guilty confession: I judge books by their cover. How else are you going to pick a book out from the local library?
I also take recommendations from people who know me well. So...any recommendations for things worth spending my limited reading time on?
I'm not.
As indicated by my earlier blog posts I had high hopes for getting a lot of writing done in the last five months of the year. However, as the semester started last week I find my time severely limited. I couldn't even find the time to edit my last blog post in a timely manner. It took the Labor Day holiday to find the time to edit that blog post and start this one. Now I'm editing this one on the day I'm supposed to be writing a new one. Sheesh.
But is it really a lack of time or am I just not spending my time well? Obviously (like the question of nature vs. nurture) the answer is both. I don't have enough time and I'm not spending my time well. I've been trying to analyze where I'm spending my time poorly in order to increase my productivity and get my writing back on schedule. I have come to a conclusion about one of the places I'm not spending my time well.
Librarians be warned: you might not like this part.
I read too much. Honestly, too much of anything can be bad for you, even reading. When my writing and other important goals suffer because of my reading it is time to ease back. I know several of my coworkers are jealous of the amount of books I read (and movies I watch). Generally I leisure read for at least an hour every day. Some days it can be 3-4. Weekends can sometimes reach more than 6. However, given how full my life is with other things (and potentially getting busier--stay tuned for future blogs) that might be too much. I might need to limit it to 30 minutes each day or less.
It can't be eliminated completely. A great writer needs to read. Books can inspire. Sometimes I pick up a book and the way the plot develops makes me want to rush to the nearest keyboard and begin typing. An authors use of words can make me start writing my own prose in my head as I try to adopt a similar voice. Writers need to be readers. The question is what is the perfect reading to writing ratio? Obviously, that's personal but it is still important.
Secondly, I have this deep desperation in my soul: I can't read everything. No matter how much time I have there will always be books that go unread, series I will not be introduced to, authors I won't have time to enjoy. Even if I cut back on reading time that list only grows. So what do I read? My to-read list is extensive. I don't limit myself much on genres. I read science fiction AND fantasy. Mystery. Classics. Non-fiction (especially focusing on psychology). Kids books. How-to. Anything that was adapted into a novel. So which books are worth spending my time on and which books am I just wasting my time on?
Yes! Some books are a waste of my time, but which? One of my current goals is to read all the Star Wars novels. This is a series of books that I largely consider fluff fiction. It used to be a small percentage of my reading selection, but because of this goal it has been almost 100% of my reading selection. Part of me has to wonder if I should abandon this goal. However, I'm over 100 books into the effort. Do I give up now? If I stay on track am I just committing the sunk-cost fallacy?
What about rereading old favorites? There are few books I'll read twice. Strunk and White's little book is the notable exception. I read it yearly. Mostly I reread books when the sequels come out and I need a refresher on what happened. However, every time I reread one book, that means another book I could have read doesn't get read. Do I have time for that with all the good books out there to read? The other day I was fondly remembering The Death Gate Cycle by Hickman and Weis. I'm considering rereading it, but that is seven books that I won't read because I chose to reread the cycle.
At times it feels like deciding to read a book or not is like being in "Indiana Jones and the Last Crusade". I'm surrounded by grails (books). Some are jeweled, some are plain. Some are wood, some aren't. I can only pick one. Watching over my shoulder is a knight. Sometimes, halfway through the book he gives me a satisfied smile and I hear his voice echo in my head "You have chosen...wisely." Other times I'm just a few pages in and he's telling me I've chosen poorly. I hate when that happens. What do I do?
I can't do much except accept the inevitable. No, I won't read everything. It's impossible to keep up. The best I can do is read books I'm truly interested in. Don't waste time on books I'm not. This inevitably collides with my Star Wars goal. Currently I'm reading one of the books and it suuuuuucks! Do I waste time on it for the goals sake? Unfortunately, yes, but I'm cheating. Instead of reading it I'm skimming it. It will take me a fraction of the time and I can then move on to more desirable books.
Other books of note: I never picked up "The Davinci Code" and probably never will, mostly because I'm not interested. Same for the Twilight Series. I might eventually get to the Hunger Games series, but probably not. It's not that they're not good books (though what a good book is can be highly debated), it's just that I don't care.
My wife would swear that part of my taste in books is a strong distaste for trendy books. She wouldn't be wrong. A book being popular is never a reason to read it. It seems so many people read things because "everyone" is reading it. If you don't read it, you risk being left clueless while the rest of the world talks about it. Do I read the popular books? Sometimes, but only if the story interests me. Most popular books don't.
A not so guilty confession: I judge books by their cover. How else are you going to pick a book out from the local library?
I also take recommendations from people who know me well. So...any recommendations for things worth spending my limited reading time on?
Monday, September 2, 2013
Movie Night!
While hanging out with my friends Jared and Beth several weeks ago we hit on the great idea of having themed movie nights where we can force people to watch painful (and not so painful) movies from our past. Okay, the goal wasn't really to force people to watch bad movies but to see what movies people would bring when given a theme. The first theme we discussed was Natural Disasters. Beth piped up with Twister, and I put in with Dante's Peak. Then it became a game to see what bad natural disaster movies we could think of (I won't regale you with the list). Other themes discussed were Guilty Childhood Pleasures, Animal Movies, Space. The list went on; I can't remember them all.
I have a tendency to think big ideas, but to never let them come to fruition. For example, my sidewalk board game day. That one hasn't happened yet. However, I was motivated on this one and on the 16th of August Beth, Jared, Trian and I decided that movie night should move forward. Our first challenge was selecting a theme. We let fate play her hand. After creating a long list of themes we rolled a 10-sided dice (d10) and fate revealed our theme.
Theme: Actor/Actress
Bugger it all. That was less than helpful. Which actor/actress? Back to the drawing board. Selecting an actor wasn't difficult, but it did include some challenges. First, you need an actor who has been prolific. This allows for a large selection of films. Second, the actor needs to have done a variety of films. Some people might debate this criteria, but I think it adds to the excitement of the night if you don't know whether you're going to get a drama, an action, a comedy, or something else entirely. Third, we had to be able to agree that we could work with that actor as a theme. Who would you name?
Our list included Meryl Streep, Johnny Depp, Christopher Walken, and a short list of others. I don't remember all of them. I've lost the list. Another roll of the dice and the theme was...
CHRISTOPHER WALKEN!
Take a moment and think about what you would bring to a Christopher Walken movie fest.
Done? Good.
As part of our movie night we also attempted to guess what the other members of the party would bring. Here's my list:
Trina: "Stepford Wives" or "Wayne's World 2"
Jared: "Wedding Crashers" or "Balls of Fury"
Beth: "Kangaroo Jack" or "Catch Me if You Can"
Here's how it actually broke down:
Me: "Batman Returns." I also brought "A View to a Kill" as a backup.
Trina: "Wayne's World 2"
Jared: "Balls of Fury"
Beth: "Seven Psychopaths"
We only allowed ourselves time for two movies. Both couples have children who get grumpier the later they stay up. And I get grumpier the later I stay up. So, instead of voting on the movie to watch we returned to the power of fate. Fate this time equaled small children. We put the movies in a bag and let the kids draw them out. The first movie was "Wayne's World 2" (I had been about to abbreviate it as WW2, but that doesn't work out well). The second was Batman Returns.
Attention and interest declined during the second movie, but there was a lot more interaction and commentary. It caused a lot of reflection about younger years, differences in the Batman depictions. For example, who was the best Batman. And separately, who was the best Bruce Wayne? Honestly, Christian Bale did a good Batman, but I don't think he did a great Bruce Wayne.
We also discovered via this conversation that Adam West was not the first screen Batman. That honor goes to Lewis Wilson (1943) and then Robert Lowery (1949) before we get to Adam West in 1966.
One of the best parts of the evenings, besides the conversation, was the food. I like to cook when I have friends over. I made pretzels and mustard, my wife made chocolate ice cream; we hauled out our collection of homemade crackers. Jared and Beth brought a bag of butter flavored packing peanuts. (No joke, worst part of the evening right there. Gross).
Anyway, I could go on and on about this, but I won't. It was a delightful evening and something I look forward to doing again in the future. If you have a great idea for a movie night theme, please comment!
I have a tendency to think big ideas, but to never let them come to fruition. For example, my sidewalk board game day. That one hasn't happened yet. However, I was motivated on this one and on the 16th of August Beth, Jared, Trian and I decided that movie night should move forward. Our first challenge was selecting a theme. We let fate play her hand. After creating a long list of themes we rolled a 10-sided dice (d10) and fate revealed our theme.
Theme: Actor/Actress
Bugger it all. That was less than helpful. Which actor/actress? Back to the drawing board. Selecting an actor wasn't difficult, but it did include some challenges. First, you need an actor who has been prolific. This allows for a large selection of films. Second, the actor needs to have done a variety of films. Some people might debate this criteria, but I think it adds to the excitement of the night if you don't know whether you're going to get a drama, an action, a comedy, or something else entirely. Third, we had to be able to agree that we could work with that actor as a theme. Who would you name?
Our list included Meryl Streep, Johnny Depp, Christopher Walken, and a short list of others. I don't remember all of them. I've lost the list. Another roll of the dice and the theme was...
CHRISTOPHER WALKEN!
Take a moment and think about what you would bring to a Christopher Walken movie fest.
Done? Good.
As part of our movie night we also attempted to guess what the other members of the party would bring. Here's my list:
Trina: "Stepford Wives" or "Wayne's World 2"
Jared: "Wedding Crashers" or "Balls of Fury"
Beth: "Kangaroo Jack" or "Catch Me if You Can"
Here's how it actually broke down:
Me: "Batman Returns." I also brought "A View to a Kill" as a backup.
Trina: "Wayne's World 2"
Jared: "Balls of Fury"
Beth: "Seven Psychopaths"
We only allowed ourselves time for two movies. Both couples have children who get grumpier the later they stay up. And I get grumpier the later I stay up. So, instead of voting on the movie to watch we returned to the power of fate. Fate this time equaled small children. We put the movies in a bag and let the kids draw them out. The first movie was "Wayne's World 2" (I had been about to abbreviate it as WW2, but that doesn't work out well). The second was Batman Returns.
Attention and interest declined during the second movie, but there was a lot more interaction and commentary. It caused a lot of reflection about younger years, differences in the Batman depictions. For example, who was the best Batman. And separately, who was the best Bruce Wayne? Honestly, Christian Bale did a good Batman, but I don't think he did a great Bruce Wayne.
We also discovered via this conversation that Adam West was not the first screen Batman. That honor goes to Lewis Wilson (1943) and then Robert Lowery (1949) before we get to Adam West in 1966.
One of the best parts of the evenings, besides the conversation, was the food. I like to cook when I have friends over. I made pretzels and mustard, my wife made chocolate ice cream; we hauled out our collection of homemade crackers. Jared and Beth brought a bag of butter flavored packing peanuts. (No joke, worst part of the evening right there. Gross).
Anyway, I could go on and on about this, but I won't. It was a delightful evening and something I look forward to doing again in the future. If you have a great idea for a movie night theme, please comment!
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)