I don't want to come off as one of those assholes who find some strange sense of worth in saying out into the world that I never ask for anything (which I don't) so I won't. I'm a different sort of asshole. But in a strange, if not unexpected, turn of events, it's becoming increasingly difficult to put on that I'm fine and everything will be okay attitude when I wake up in the morning. Look, I think I'm a pretty realistic person, I really think I am, and perhaps that's where my naivetee comes from, my lack of maturity, my weirdly romantic notions about the world and life and people (which now sounds oxymoronic), so, realistically, I'm wondering how much longer this will all keep up.
Over the last three weeks, I've built up from walking to jogging 1-2 miles near daily (six days straight, on and off the others) because I've this need for something that is mine, you know. And counting on anything or anyone for it seems awfully difficult. My inbox and voicemail stay empty day in and day out and that gets to be really difficult to deal with given my family's and my situations. That's a huge piece I'm missing, really, daily work. The drudgery most working class folk complain about daily, I miss it. I accomplish things daily at work, frustrating as that may be. So, I run instead. If I could run for ten hours daily five days a week, really. But, please, that doesn't pay the bills.
When I talk to Corey, when I talk to my family, when I talk to my best friend, what can I say, this is a big part of it for me. Perhaps as Corey's intimated in the past, I am one of those people who define themselves by their work. It's become my life and without it, without that sort of structure and discipline, nearly everything else in me stops working properly. You see, it's happen a few times before. Details notwithstanding, I've been here before.
This is all the practical stuff. What's not necessarily the most important in life. But it makes life happen. Let's be real.
So fine, I just lay in bed trying to sleep, worrying about all this fucking bullshit, trying to ignore the slight pain in my knee, and I can't, and I fire up this computer, do some online looking and fill out more and more forms and at the end of each, after hitting the submit button, I think, foolishly, maybe futilely, this one will be it.
Anyway, a little venting and a little me cowering in some corner time is allowed I think. I'm all for a good attitude and all but I'm not made of stone. But while all of this happens, good and bad, I'm going for a quick run.
Good morning.
"I struggled to love and provide. How many of you know the true and bitter force of that simple word provide?"
- Don DeLillo, COSMOPOLIS
Monday, June 28, 2010
Wednesday, June 23, 2010
Hurt Yourself.
A couple months ago I wrote about my then-recent experiences at a couple restaurants. Corey's been having a go at some UPS customer service issues as recent as yesterday, but the issue is months old (I never buy anything online: I like going to stores and I have zero concern over shipping/delivery issues). And we're talking about customer service yet again and when it is absolutely abhorrent and when customers are plainly wrong.
As it happens, it seems this keeps popping up everywhere I read. A rant over at the New York times is the type of rant I like, from another customer no less, instead of employees of the place in question. Which Caitlin Kelly (who I normally don't read at TRUE/SLANT but saw the headline) then decided to comment on, and in her post's comments as well are examples of what can be argued to be self-righteous retail/customer service folk who're simply bitching about doing their job. The there's over at THE CONSUMERIST this little gem of stupidity by all parties, and the comments again reveal a few interesting tidbits (for me, how many folk seemed to think demanding something for free is ridiculous). Lastly, through FARK, I found this one, which, really, is my favorite, even with the ambiguous details.
I remember the worst of my experiences from years ago, when I worked at Target in Culver City: closing shift and another manager and I were closing --Lesley was his name -- and a customer was pitching a fit over not being able to return a bunch of unopened movies. At the time the policy was no electronics and movies and video games are returnable/exchangeable without receipt which he didn't have. Of course, I come over and reiterate that I won't return them and this man gets so irate he begins yelling he doesn't want them and they're new and why can't I take them back or exchange them. He says it's not about the money, that he has money, and he takes out an impressive wad of cash and begins to tear apart a little kiosk we used to have at the returns area. Lesley comes over after being called by one of the girls there (I wonder how scared they were? I wasn't at all calm myself). The man calls me racist because he's black and I just don't want to do it. Lesley, who's black, re-states our position. The guy knocks over the kiosk and yells that he's going to fuck us up as soon as we close, grabs his stuff and leaves. Eh.
So who is right? At what point is one's actions unreasonable? Were we wrong? Was he? What is it?
It's easy for me to bitch about customers left and right, and about folk who've served me poorly, and folk who're indifferent to their jobs and by extension, me as the customer. I think we've all had both good and bad experiences and the ones that're bad stick, that's customer service 101.
Of course, I think I'm right in my story. But then, I usually think I'm right.
One of the curious bits I find is what makes folk who're working so useless sometimes it's nearly painful. If I can, I avoid asking anyone anywhere anything unless I'm 100% stumped because I know what it's like being some kid with no training and passion for it. I usually don't go anywhere except restaurants for good service. I mean, let's keep some perspective. And usually, when I've had to deal with people in customer service, it's been positive except in restaurants. Why is there that difference for me? When I worked at Starbucks, that's when I got the worst customers, wanting stuff for free because they didn't like it, because they ordered wrong, because they wanted to return prepared food. And I don't think they were bad customers because they wanted to return anything but because it felt as if they were owed something because of a mistake they made.
I remember getting a call from my district manager at Michaels because customers were 'overcharged' and my boss wanted me to fix it (which is of course lingo for he didn't want more calls), and I did when the customers came in because I was told to. However, when left up to me, I had it on good authority, and the state department of weights and measures's authority, that I was doing my job when everything came up the right price. But that's not the point, one-upping each other, who's right when the customer is wrong? And then, what's a valid complaint? Customers should not hear curse words ever. Neither should employees. So who's right?
As a customer, I hate it when folk ahead of me in line are terrible to the cashier for two reasons, I'm being inconvenienced and their abusiveness. As an employee, I hate co-workers who simply hate their job and do it half-assed. I've told customers to leave my store or I'll call the police and escort them out, and I've fired employees for being useless to customers and me.
My biggest gripe about all this is pretty much shown in every article I've linked here: customer entitlement. Entitlement to goods or services or abuse. What is wrong with us that we feel some odd sense that we come first even when we're wrong? Where the reason and the common sense and plain courtesy anymore?
Of course, I'm going to end with the idea that expecting my waiter to come and offer me more coffee more than twice isn't unreasonable. It's his fucking job.
As it happens, it seems this keeps popping up everywhere I read. A rant over at the New York times is the type of rant I like, from another customer no less, instead of employees of the place in question. Which Caitlin Kelly (who I normally don't read at TRUE/SLANT but saw the headline) then decided to comment on, and in her post's comments as well are examples of what can be argued to be self-righteous retail/customer service folk who're simply bitching about doing their job. The there's over at THE CONSUMERIST this little gem of stupidity by all parties, and the comments again reveal a few interesting tidbits (for me, how many folk seemed to think demanding something for free is ridiculous). Lastly, through FARK, I found this one, which, really, is my favorite, even with the ambiguous details.
I remember the worst of my experiences from years ago, when I worked at Target in Culver City: closing shift and another manager and I were closing --Lesley was his name -- and a customer was pitching a fit over not being able to return a bunch of unopened movies. At the time the policy was no electronics and movies and video games are returnable/exchangeable without receipt which he didn't have. Of course, I come over and reiterate that I won't return them and this man gets so irate he begins yelling he doesn't want them and they're new and why can't I take them back or exchange them. He says it's not about the money, that he has money, and he takes out an impressive wad of cash and begins to tear apart a little kiosk we used to have at the returns area. Lesley comes over after being called by one of the girls there (I wonder how scared they were? I wasn't at all calm myself). The man calls me racist because he's black and I just don't want to do it. Lesley, who's black, re-states our position. The guy knocks over the kiosk and yells that he's going to fuck us up as soon as we close, grabs his stuff and leaves. Eh.
So who is right? At what point is one's actions unreasonable? Were we wrong? Was he? What is it?
It's easy for me to bitch about customers left and right, and about folk who've served me poorly, and folk who're indifferent to their jobs and by extension, me as the customer. I think we've all had both good and bad experiences and the ones that're bad stick, that's customer service 101.
Of course, I think I'm right in my story. But then, I usually think I'm right.
One of the curious bits I find is what makes folk who're working so useless sometimes it's nearly painful. If I can, I avoid asking anyone anywhere anything unless I'm 100% stumped because I know what it's like being some kid with no training and passion for it. I usually don't go anywhere except restaurants for good service. I mean, let's keep some perspective. And usually, when I've had to deal with people in customer service, it's been positive except in restaurants. Why is there that difference for me? When I worked at Starbucks, that's when I got the worst customers, wanting stuff for free because they didn't like it, because they ordered wrong, because they wanted to return prepared food. And I don't think they were bad customers because they wanted to return anything but because it felt as if they were owed something because of a mistake they made.
I remember getting a call from my district manager at Michaels because customers were 'overcharged' and my boss wanted me to fix it (which is of course lingo for he didn't want more calls), and I did when the customers came in because I was told to. However, when left up to me, I had it on good authority, and the state department of weights and measures's authority, that I was doing my job when everything came up the right price. But that's not the point, one-upping each other, who's right when the customer is wrong? And then, what's a valid complaint? Customers should not hear curse words ever. Neither should employees. So who's right?
As a customer, I hate it when folk ahead of me in line are terrible to the cashier for two reasons, I'm being inconvenienced and their abusiveness. As an employee, I hate co-workers who simply hate their job and do it half-assed. I've told customers to leave my store or I'll call the police and escort them out, and I've fired employees for being useless to customers and me.
My biggest gripe about all this is pretty much shown in every article I've linked here: customer entitlement. Entitlement to goods or services or abuse. What is wrong with us that we feel some odd sense that we come first even when we're wrong? Where the reason and the common sense and plain courtesy anymore?
Of course, I'm going to end with the idea that expecting my waiter to come and offer me more coffee more than twice isn't unreasonable. It's his fucking job.
Friday, June 18, 2010
Godspeed You! Black Emperor
It's been nearly ten years since the last proper Godspeed You! Black Emperor record (the verily beautiful YANQUI U.X.O.), and two years back, seemingly, there'd be no more. Really, a terrible situation if you're a music fan the way I am (I'm more of a nerd I guess). Tonight, while unable to sleep yet again, this.
Listen: EAST HASTINGS, ROCKETS FALL ON ROCKET FALLS.
Now: who's taking me when they return to the USA?
Thursday, June 3, 2010
Number Five With A Bullet
After erroneously asking someone who their favorite movie director is, and getting in return the, "So, like, what's my favorite movie?" answer, and exchanging a couple of tweets with Corey about it, it made me think of those lists I have, that I believe(d) we all have.
TOP FIVE FILM DIRECTORS
TOP FIVE MOVIES
TOP FIVE RECORDS
TOP FIVE BANDS/MUSICIANS
TOP FIVE SONGS (click here to listen)
TOP FIVE WRITERS
TOP FIVE BOOKS
TOP FIVE COMICS
TOP FIVE FILM DIRECTORS
- Christopher Nolan (MEMENTO, INSOMNIA, BATMAN BEGINS, THE PRESTIGE, THE DARK KNIGHT)
- Darren Aronofsky (PI, REQUIEM FOR A DREAM, THE FOUNTAIN, THE WRESTLER)
- Michel Gondry (HUMAN NATURE, THE SCIENCE OF SLEEP, ETERNAL SUNSHINE OF THE SPOTLESS MIND, BE KIND REWIND)
- David Fincher (FIGHT CLUB, ALIEN 3, SE7EN, PANIC ROOM, THE CURIOUS CASE OF BENJAMIN BUTTON, ZODIAC (the latter is far better than I think he's given credit for))
- Alfonso Cuaron (GREAT EXPECTATIONS, Y TU MAMA TAMBIEN, CHILDREN OF MEN, HARRY POTTER AND THE PRISONER OF AZKABAN)
TOP FIVE MOVIES
- Fight Club
- American Psycho
- High Fidelity
- Requiem For A Dream
- Star Wars (1977-1983)
TOP FIVE RECORDS
- Nine Inch Nails, THE DOWNWARD SPIRAL
- Tori Amos, BOYS FOR PELE
- Joy Division, HEART AND SOUL (boxed set)
- Godspeed You! Black Emperor, f#a#[infinity]
- Atmosphere, YOU CAN'T IMAGINE HOW MUCH FUN WE'RE HAVING
TOP FIVE BANDS/MUSICIANS
- Joy Division
- Nine Inch Nails
- Atmosphere
- Deftones
- Godspeed You! Black Emperor
TOP FIVE SONGS (click here to listen)
- Joy Division, DIGITAL (curious it was their and Factory Records's first release)
- Nine Inch Nails, GAVE UP (from the BROKEN EP)
- Nick Cave & The Bad Seeds, (I'LL LOVE YOU) UNTIL THE END OF THE WORLD (from the soundtrack to Wim Wenders's film UNTIL THE END OF THE WORLD)
- Kurtis Blow, THE BREAKS
- DJ SHadow, YOU CAN'T GO HOME AGAIN
TOP FIVE WRITERS
- Chuck Palahniuk
- Douglas Coupland
- Bret Easton Ellis
- Grant Morrison
- Warren Ellis
TOP FIVE BOOKS
- Chuck Palahniuk, FIGHT CLUB
- Douglas Coupland, MS. WYOMING
- Bret Easton Ellis, AMERICAN PSYCHO
- Nick Hornby, HIGH FIDELITY
- Alex Garland, THE BEACH
TOP FIVE COMICS
- Alan Moore & Dave Gibbons, WATCHMEN
- Grant Morrison & Chris Weston, THE FILTH
- Warren Ellis & D'Israeli, LAZARUS CHURCHYARD
- Warren Ellis & Darrick Robertson, TRANSMETROPOLITAN
- Neil Gaiman et al., THE SANDMAN
Tuesday, June 1, 2010
Present
Down in the dumps, earlier this afternoon, I meet up with Ricardo at the book store. This after a bunch of terrible legal hoopla and my car not starting and personal ambiguity. And, I don't know, my first instinct is not to leave the house. If I could've, then, as I read his text message asking me to meet him, I would've boarded up the house and sectioned off a part of the house that would leave me and my book cloistered for a good long while. Not a good day, you see, in every facet I could think of.
My best friend calls me after her two hour-plus job interview and as we're looking through the graphic novel section (Ricardo got the SCOTT PILGRIM 3-pack) at the book store and my cell phone's maybe about to die but it isn't for the tons of ringing it's making.
Afterward, Ricardo and I exchange a few little bits of life stories and I'm reminded of how very little I know about everyone I know. I mean, what's going on, what's happened, who's doing what now, what's upcoming. I don't really know a lot and, really, it's all due to the way I do things.
I've this weird sense of...I'm not sure, guilt? I feel like I've let everyone down. Everyone. My family, my boyfriend, my best friend, my ex co-workers, my friends. I'm not really too concerned over anything I do when it affects me. But the problem is I don't allow myself any room to breathe and see that none of these people think I've let them down, nor are they asking ME to fix all of it, or even none of it. Some of them have said so to me, and it isn't nearly enough to dissuade me from cowering in a corner in futile attempt in willing everything okay.
Yesterday, my folks are talking about going to Morelia for a few weeks and my niece, of all people, tells me her family's off to Las Vegas in a couple of weeks (her mom's brothers live there), and the first thought to cross my brain isn't at all productive. After talking with Ricardo for a couple hours I'm left thinking, why shouldn't they? All practical questions aside (frankly, I'm concerned where all this money for all of this is coming/going to come from), of course just because things aren't going well for me and mine doesn't mean they (and me) need to let their lives come to a stop. Easy answer. Why can't I do that?
I feel like everyone in my life is depending on me to make everything better. They're not, but it's the only way I can describe how it feels. And if I don't do it, if more time passes and more things continue to pile up (my fucking car didn't start this afternoon!), it's going to be more difficult to fix...life (?).
Ricardo asked me earlier, if I was back in January, around the time I'd said to him I was offered the opportunity to transfer to Santa Barbara, what would I've done then. Then, early January, I was all set, I really was. At the time, I couldn't imagine a single thing to stop me, you know. Hindsight's such trash. But is that what I want to go back to, would that make everything better? The real answer is who the fuck cares.
I found out today one of my friends' grandparents recently passed away. And I was too self-involved in either my own little pettiness or my drama to not even know and be present.
My best friend calls me after her two hour-plus job interview and as we're looking through the graphic novel section (Ricardo got the SCOTT PILGRIM 3-pack) at the book store and my cell phone's maybe about to die but it isn't for the tons of ringing it's making.
Afterward, Ricardo and I exchange a few little bits of life stories and I'm reminded of how very little I know about everyone I know. I mean, what's going on, what's happened, who's doing what now, what's upcoming. I don't really know a lot and, really, it's all due to the way I do things.
I've this weird sense of...I'm not sure, guilt? I feel like I've let everyone down. Everyone. My family, my boyfriend, my best friend, my ex co-workers, my friends. I'm not really too concerned over anything I do when it affects me. But the problem is I don't allow myself any room to breathe and see that none of these people think I've let them down, nor are they asking ME to fix all of it, or even none of it. Some of them have said so to me, and it isn't nearly enough to dissuade me from cowering in a corner in futile attempt in willing everything okay.
Yesterday, my folks are talking about going to Morelia for a few weeks and my niece, of all people, tells me her family's off to Las Vegas in a couple of weeks (her mom's brothers live there), and the first thought to cross my brain isn't at all productive. After talking with Ricardo for a couple hours I'm left thinking, why shouldn't they? All practical questions aside (frankly, I'm concerned where all this money for all of this is coming/going to come from), of course just because things aren't going well for me and mine doesn't mean they (and me) need to let their lives come to a stop. Easy answer. Why can't I do that?
I feel like everyone in my life is depending on me to make everything better. They're not, but it's the only way I can describe how it feels. And if I don't do it, if more time passes and more things continue to pile up (my fucking car didn't start this afternoon!), it's going to be more difficult to fix...life (?).
Ricardo asked me earlier, if I was back in January, around the time I'd said to him I was offered the opportunity to transfer to Santa Barbara, what would I've done then. Then, early January, I was all set, I really was. At the time, I couldn't imagine a single thing to stop me, you know. Hindsight's such trash. But is that what I want to go back to, would that make everything better? The real answer is who the fuck cares.
I found out today one of my friends' grandparents recently passed away. And I was too self-involved in either my own little pettiness or my drama to not even know and be present.
Friday, May 28, 2010
Wednesday, May 26, 2010
I Love You, Bret Easton Ellis
Yesterday, Xeni Jardin tweeted this link. In it, Bret Easton Ellis's feelings on why women aren't necessarily as good film directors as men are sort of criticized. Sort of because, well, where's the support in the criticism? Says the post's writer:
"Where to start? The part where he sounds semi-apologetic about his misogyny and then reclaims it all over again to claim that The Proposal is worse than say, Transformers: Revenge of the Fallen? How about the part where Ellis thinks a director is always responsible for the visual components of a movie, except for when that director is a woman like Sofia Coppola? Or that women don't have a visual sensibility because he thinks only men get one? Or when he says that all female directors are "emotionalist"?
It is tempting to go through one by one, and point out the absurdity of these claims. Then again, in addition to his printed and onscreen oeuvre, this is a man whose previous Tweets have included, "John Mayer in the March Playboy is one of the most interesting, funny and revelatory celebrity interviews I've ever read. He just gets it." In other words, his idea of revelatory is saying things that are deep-seated, prejudicial convention and protesting that everyone can't handle his edgy truth. So he really doesn't care if it's actually true or not."
I for one would've loved to hear the support against Ellis's absurd claims. Really. I'm not overreaching, I think, because a good argument is based on, well, arguing, but I think this little post doesn't do what I thought it might do, which is tear apart Ellis's comments with supporting claims of the writer's position. But there were none. It read to me the same way it sounds like when folk claim they're Mexican but don't know why.
And what about Bret Easton Ellis's comments regarding women as film directors? He says:
"Regardless of the business aspect of things, is there a reason that there isn’t a female Hitchcock or a female Scorsese or a female Spielberg? I don’t know."
And, just prior to this, Ellis states:
"There’s something about the medium of film itself that I think requires the male gaze...We’re watching, and we’re aroused by looking, whereas I don’t think women respond that way to films, just because of how they’re built."
"Where to start? The part where he sounds semi-apologetic about his misogyny and then reclaims it all over again to claim that The Proposal is worse than say, Transformers: Revenge of the Fallen? How about the part where Ellis thinks a director is always responsible for the visual components of a movie, except for when that director is a woman like Sofia Coppola? Or that women don't have a visual sensibility because he thinks only men get one? Or when he says that all female directors are "emotionalist"?
It is tempting to go through one by one, and point out the absurdity of these claims. Then again, in addition to his printed and onscreen oeuvre, this is a man whose previous Tweets have included, "John Mayer in the March Playboy is one of the most interesting, funny and revelatory celebrity interviews I've ever read. He just gets it." In other words, his idea of revelatory is saying things that are deep-seated, prejudicial convention and protesting that everyone can't handle his edgy truth. So he really doesn't care if it's actually true or not."
I for one would've loved to hear the support against Ellis's absurd claims. Really. I'm not overreaching, I think, because a good argument is based on, well, arguing, but I think this little post doesn't do what I thought it might do, which is tear apart Ellis's comments with supporting claims of the writer's position. But there were none. It read to me the same way it sounds like when folk claim they're Mexican but don't know why.
And what about Bret Easton Ellis's comments regarding women as film directors? He says:
"Regardless of the business aspect of things, is there a reason that there isn’t a female Hitchcock or a female Scorsese or a female Spielberg? I don’t know."
And, just prior to this, Ellis states:
"There’s something about the medium of film itself that I think requires the male gaze...We’re watching, and we’re aroused by looking, whereas I don’t think women respond that way to films, just because of how they’re built."
Is there any truth to what Ellis says? The knee-jerk reaction is he is wrong, as highlighted in the livejournal post. But as person who enjoys movies and film, I'm finding it very very difficult to disagree. I'd ask everyone, which are your favorite woman-directed movies and I'd wager a lot of us would need a moment or two of thinking to come up with a few. We can each come up with our favorite movies list in seconds, and I'd ask how many of these were made by women directors and I'd guess none.
It's very difficult to come up with a film that I love that features a woman at the helm. AMERICAN PSYCHO is one (of course, being that the source material is also a top three favorite of mine didn't hurt), and my favorite movie of all last year was THE HURT LOCKER. It isn't that I love these films because they were made by women, but because they're fantastic stories told with such fearlessness and with individual aesthetics that it would be hard to point out each films' flaws. But, personally, aside from these, what else do I get? My boyfriend and I were briefly talking last night about this. I read to him the bit where Ellis says that TRANSFORMERS is a better movie than THE PROPOSAL and Corey's reaction was that the TRANSFORMERS is trash and he really liked THE PROPOSAL. I asked whether or not us liking the movies made them any good (I also said that if given the option between the two, despite the terrible amounts of shit TRANSFORMERS is, that's the one I'd chose to watch), which of course lead us to the bigger question of what 'good' is, which to me sounds like what Ellis is saying: is a movie a good movie because a woman made it? If what I get from women directors are romantic comedies that don't really serve any artistic purpose, how can I not think women make bad movies? It's all in the evidence presented by the creators.
But, here's an example. Take THE PUNISHER: here you have a comics character in two movies made within a decade of each other, neither of which is spectacular film making. The first iteration was made by Jonathan Hensleigh and it's absolute trash. It isn't even fun. Everything about this movie makes me retch because it took what has been a good idea for action movies (revenge!) and made it a caricature that no one finds redeeming (he has a story credit as well). Four years later, Lexi Alexander made the second movie, and it's endlessly a much better-made movie that's not only more fun and violent and funny and exciting. Does it mean that the latter movie is better because a woman made it?
Like Ellis, I love the work Sofia Coppola puts out, even MARIE ANTOINETTE. I think her way of making movies each time has a clear vision and therefore genuinely brilliant artistic value. Kathryn Bigelow's STRANGE DAYS is also an incredibly brilliant film (but now a much dated story than I imagined back in the early 1990's). And I've loved all of Floria Sigismondi's music videos (I've zero interest in a movie about The Runaways, incidentally). So, the women who've access to making movies, how come they make such claptrap trash? What happens? It just seems that even just asking the question, or as Ellis did and sharing the opinion, labels you as sexist and misogynist. Okay. Fine. Just show me where the movies are and I too will re-think my opinion.
“…I’m just tired of being wrong all the time just because I’m a guy…I mean, a male chauvinist isn’t born, he’s made, and more and more of them are being made by women…Women are right. You’re wrong. You get used to the idea. You live down to expectations.” - Chuck Palahniuk, CHOKE
Sunday, May 23, 2010
Choice
Here I am.
There's a bit to be said for going into things half-cocked, you know. Probably, most of what can be said isn't very good because jumping in the water without knowing how deep it is could lead to brain smashing results. Anyway.
It's been difficult. It is difficult. All these things that are happening right now and the things that are not happening. Said to my brothers the other day how it is the first time in our lives that we're finding ourselves more alike than ever...in dramatically despairing ways. We kind of laughed about it for a moment. Before, last week or the week before, the entire family is having lunch and we're talking about my niece's schooling and we're talking about the paradoxism of parents telling kids to not do what they did even though they came out better people for it. We're talking travel and we're talking going back to school (my sister-in-law is currently in a Master's Program) and having kids (new nephew, exactly twenty-three days old today). We're this little group of people who, when the water's not been deep enough, has been there for each other. For me. And I look around at these people I love and wonder who can we, collectively, turn to now? There is no one you see. And I'm talking about pragmatism, because that's an out right now that none of us seem to have.
Neither of my brothers and I have been able to find work. For whichever reasons there may be, it's come to the point where, personally, I'm having a lot of difficulty thinking about anything but and feeling, not lost, but a huge sense of weight, you know. My father has three more weeks worth of work. There are two kids in my immediate family, my mother and I are in treatment for our respective illnesses. This is what I think about a lot. It's what's making me worry a lot. Literally, it's what's keeping me up at night.
Corey and I were talking before and we said how despite my own take on it, I do very much feel like part of what makes me me is that I feel the responsibility of being able to provide not for myself but for him, for my family. For everyone. And it's affects me when I can't. It really does. Noble or not, just or not, courageous or not, it's fucking driving me insane.
And it's making me very sad.
I don't want to rant on and on about these weirdly socio-econimic structures we're in, the plight of the poor, the battles of the middle class, our constant consumerist culture, the irrelevance of bits of the private/public sector.
When I left Las Vegas five years ago this coming weekend, things were dismal and low and shattered in very many places. And the cliche of history repeating isn't far from my mind, and just like then, doing something about takes so much damned time. It does. It's not the lack of doing or the lack of focus or the lack of attention. That's what gets me a little powered for something. It's the waiting, this interim, this space that makes it all seem overwhelming and very stressful and very, very terrible. And, honest, this interim, as terrible as it feels sometimes, I don't know that it's not entirely deserved, you know.
I've never been one to cast off blame to anyone or anything when something bad occurs to me because these things happen because of what I do or don't do, and blaming anyone and anything else other than myself is total bullshit. But my problem is I'm harder on myself than anyone else. I guess that applies to most of us, doesn't it?
So, I've spent the last few hours imagining how I'm going to tackle this upcoming week and after a quick talk with Corey the other night, and joking a bit with my two brothers earlier, perhaps it doesn't need to be so difficult. What's upcoming? Choice.
There's a bit to be said for going into things half-cocked, you know. Probably, most of what can be said isn't very good because jumping in the water without knowing how deep it is could lead to brain smashing results. Anyway.
It's been difficult. It is difficult. All these things that are happening right now and the things that are not happening. Said to my brothers the other day how it is the first time in our lives that we're finding ourselves more alike than ever...in dramatically despairing ways. We kind of laughed about it for a moment. Before, last week or the week before, the entire family is having lunch and we're talking about my niece's schooling and we're talking about the paradoxism of parents telling kids to not do what they did even though they came out better people for it. We're talking travel and we're talking going back to school (my sister-in-law is currently in a Master's Program) and having kids (new nephew, exactly twenty-three days old today). We're this little group of people who, when the water's not been deep enough, has been there for each other. For me. And I look around at these people I love and wonder who can we, collectively, turn to now? There is no one you see. And I'm talking about pragmatism, because that's an out right now that none of us seem to have.
Neither of my brothers and I have been able to find work. For whichever reasons there may be, it's come to the point where, personally, I'm having a lot of difficulty thinking about anything but and feeling, not lost, but a huge sense of weight, you know. My father has three more weeks worth of work. There are two kids in my immediate family, my mother and I are in treatment for our respective illnesses. This is what I think about a lot. It's what's making me worry a lot. Literally, it's what's keeping me up at night.
Corey and I were talking before and we said how despite my own take on it, I do very much feel like part of what makes me me is that I feel the responsibility of being able to provide not for myself but for him, for my family. For everyone. And it's affects me when I can't. It really does. Noble or not, just or not, courageous or not, it's fucking driving me insane.
And it's making me very sad.
I don't want to rant on and on about these weirdly socio-econimic structures we're in, the plight of the poor, the battles of the middle class, our constant consumerist culture, the irrelevance of bits of the private/public sector.
When I left Las Vegas five years ago this coming weekend, things were dismal and low and shattered in very many places. And the cliche of history repeating isn't far from my mind, and just like then, doing something about takes so much damned time. It does. It's not the lack of doing or the lack of focus or the lack of attention. That's what gets me a little powered for something. It's the waiting, this interim, this space that makes it all seem overwhelming and very stressful and very, very terrible. And, honest, this interim, as terrible as it feels sometimes, I don't know that it's not entirely deserved, you know.
I've never been one to cast off blame to anyone or anything when something bad occurs to me because these things happen because of what I do or don't do, and blaming anyone and anything else other than myself is total bullshit. But my problem is I'm harder on myself than anyone else. I guess that applies to most of us, doesn't it?
So, I've spent the last few hours imagining how I'm going to tackle this upcoming week and after a quick talk with Corey the other night, and joking a bit with my two brothers earlier, perhaps it doesn't need to be so difficult. What's upcoming? Choice.
Tuesday, May 18, 2010
Blue Sky
Last night, while on the phone with Golden, I needed to take one my meds, and did. And tried very hard to articulate to my best friend how I'd just had a little dispiriting moment. She said I better continue taking my meds and I tried to tell her that it wasn't that I wouldn't continue taking them, but that the fact that I had just then done it made me think, 'Shit, here we are, for life,' and she said I better. So, I tried again that it wasn't as if the medication was an option but that I was yet again reminded that I had to take them because it'll keep me a little safer for alittle while longer (Corey and I joke that they keep us alive (which is true but then I guess for someone who's not HIV/AIDS positive, they might think that's a fucked thing for anyone to say, but, hey it makes us laugh)), and my best friend just castigated me a bit that I better not consider stopping.
Sigh, right?
I've often wondered what goes on through my family's individual minds about me whenever this topic comes up, intentionally or not. I was on the phone with Golden, so I just verybalized what I thought, and I wonder if she did the same. Who really knows. Sometimes I just want to ask them straight out if they think I feel different physically, do they think I feel as if I'm ebbing away, are they constantly thinking that I'm dying, what do they see when they see me? Two years ago I began shaving my head, and my mother had a fucking fit over that because she and my father both said it reminded them I was sick. Now, so far removed, I call bullshit on that. At the time I didn't, but I did ask if they honestly thought that's what I looked like, a sick person. Neither really said so.
Yes, every so often I have pangs of, 'Man, I am seriously fucked and sick and shit,' and I feel bad about it for a moment but it passes more quickly than you'd think. Maybe feel bad is the wrong phrase. But for a brief moment, I'm taken back to three years ago and I'm thinking that I've this weird dark cloud over me that no one I love except for Corey really understand. The people in my life, how do you tell them that randomly, briefly, for just a moment, I realize I've a disease that could be killing me rightnowthisverysecond?
Sure, even a dark rain cloud passes over time, but mostly after it's left its mark on the rain-soaked ground.
Sigh, right?
I've often wondered what goes on through my family's individual minds about me whenever this topic comes up, intentionally or not. I was on the phone with Golden, so I just verybalized what I thought, and I wonder if she did the same. Who really knows. Sometimes I just want to ask them straight out if they think I feel different physically, do they think I feel as if I'm ebbing away, are they constantly thinking that I'm dying, what do they see when they see me? Two years ago I began shaving my head, and my mother had a fucking fit over that because she and my father both said it reminded them I was sick. Now, so far removed, I call bullshit on that. At the time I didn't, but I did ask if they honestly thought that's what I looked like, a sick person. Neither really said so.
Yes, every so often I have pangs of, 'Man, I am seriously fucked and sick and shit,' and I feel bad about it for a moment but it passes more quickly than you'd think. Maybe feel bad is the wrong phrase. But for a brief moment, I'm taken back to three years ago and I'm thinking that I've this weird dark cloud over me that no one I love except for Corey really understand. The people in my life, how do you tell them that randomly, briefly, for just a moment, I realize I've a disease that could be killing me rightnowthisverysecond?
Sure, even a dark rain cloud passes over time, but mostly after it's left its mark on the rain-soaked ground.
Sunday, May 16, 2010
Assembly
Early last week I turned on the television and browsed through the channel guide and saw that BBC America had a STAR TREK: THE NEXT GENERATION marathon on. And that's what I did last Tuesday.
And I'm watching it and it's still entertaining after nearly twenty years of not having watched it (although I have watched the movie iterations of this series several times). I still find that Data is my favorite and I've a newly-found crush on Marina Sirtis and Gates McFadden. It's pure cheap sci-fi escapism of course. But it's terrible. As a piece of work, it's bad. It's nothing to do with production values and maybe even the acting. But its structure as a television program makes it bad. The melodramatic beats are basically semaphored way in advance, the tension is only called tension because you want it to be over not because you want to see what happens next, the comedic bits are only there awkwardly to try and shoehorn in some semblance of humanity into this odd construct of television, the lack of suspense is pretty much guaranteed because STARK TREK - any of its derivations - is the basic good guys versus bad. I still enjoyed these few hours of television nostalgia, and I'm sure I'll enjoy it again at some point (if I could manage to get my hands on some DEEP SPACE NINE episodes that'd be sweet!). But it doesn't mean it's not bad television.
Yesterday, Corey told me about the latest episode of GLEE, a television program he enjoys very much, and is apparently very popular and I don't understand why. But then, it's not GLEE that I've a problem per se: I've never seen an episode and I don't think I will ever choose to [so I might watch it in the future]. No, my problem, I think is with the fact that GLEE, much like STAR TREK is bad because television is just a bad medium, and unfortunately, most people take television to be something so important and relevant and as art. This is my problem with television.
I used to plan my classes around FRIENDS and WILL & GRACE and ALLY MCBEAL. I remember it was because in the first case, of course I wanted to know what happened; in the second case, it was the first time I saw an openly gay (albeit, oddly unfamiliar) male on television; and in the third case, I thought the writing was so clever and Ally was so adorable, I just had to watch. But between then and now, nearly fifteen years later, something happened that made me stop. And I'm not certain what. Corey and I were talking yesterday and I said the same thing. I don't remember really having an aversion to television until I was well into my twenties, and I still watch television shows from time to time (more on that bit later), but it doesn't have any weight to it for me as means of information, as means of disseminating the culture, and definitely not as art. Why am I the odd man out here? I don't think I am.
So, I'm watching STAR TREK and I'm loving and hating it. Hating it because its basic structure for a one-hour drama is of course very evident. You know all the cues, for example, but I don't think you're aware of them. In a show like STAR TREK for example, you've four commercial breaks which means there must be four pseudo-cliffhangers that make you stay in tune so that itself defeats many of the emotional and dramatic suspense you might have, and because this is STAR TREK, regardless of what's happened in the story, you know the status quo will be the same and comfortably back to the beginning, you and the characters and the story are basically back to being where you were unchanged and unaffected. I know what you're thinking: this is fucking STAR TREK for crying out loud! Right. What about the television shows you watch, is this their basic structure? Of course it is.
Television is just bad entertainment not because of the stories it tells (cliches or not, a lot of television storylines are excellent, but are wasted in the medium) but because of how it chooses to tell them.
I looked up the most popular television program currently on network television, LOST, and watched its first half-season ever. The basic story is okay and a little intimidating from one point of view, but possibly too derivative to be taken fully seriously (remember, only seven episodes watched, alright?). However, the pilot episode works pretty well story wise, the acting's decent (actors trying to find their show-voices), and the direction is not bad nor good but, well, bland. But this isn't about story, it's about structure. And LOST, regardless of how good its story or acting or production is (frankly, after the third episode I decided LOST wasn't for me; if it was a book, I would've closed it and returned it to the store by page fifty-something), is pretty much what you'd expect a television program to do. Its use of music to give the audience emotional cues and attempting at ratcheting up drama via horrible camera work, and the little segments of story that just have to have enough information to keep you locked in for a commercial break because it MUST GO TO COMMERCIAL BREAKS, all of that make this program, regarless of story, unwatchable.
(I went with LOST due, really, just to all the fucking hoopla regarding its upcoming end.)
((If I were talking story-wise, LOST is useless, but that's a different and less informed (seven episodes!) opinion.))
Of course, this is the reason why networks like HBO and STARZ make original content because of this lack of 'rules'. Network television is a pop song while paid-programming is a concept record.
I don't recall when I couldn't get past this way of watching television. That decision is somewhere in my memory but I can't remember it. But network television still has two stand outs for me. Still not talking story, SEINFELD and THE SIMPSONS avoided these conventions not necessarily by mere story alone. I'd imagine these two shows' producers chose NOT to do what everyone else is doing (one argument for THE SIMPSONS has been the fact that it's an animated program to begin with) because when I watch them now, yes, they're still entertaining, but I also don't feel the need to disassemble them into their corresponding parts the way that I have LOST and STAR TREK. I get that it's a business model as well as a television program model, but that's where it loses me.
I think television stories can be better told in either film or comic book form in a much more effective and artistic way, but that's another post for another time (yesterday, Corey and I briefly discussed Y: THE LAST MAN, whose writer, Brian K. Vaughan, eventually became a writer on LOST, incidentally.).
I will probably watch GLEE at some point in the future. My boyfriend is a fan and I think his influence might have something to do with it. But when I do watch it, or any other television program, hopefully I can enjoy a story the same way I can enjoy a pop song without the need to recognize its parts and take it as whole instead. And if I can't, that's okay too. I've been okay without regular television for years. I'm sure I'd be okay without it for a few more years as well.
And I'm watching it and it's still entertaining after nearly twenty years of not having watched it (although I have watched the movie iterations of this series several times). I still find that Data is my favorite and I've a newly-found crush on Marina Sirtis and Gates McFadden. It's pure cheap sci-fi escapism of course. But it's terrible. As a piece of work, it's bad. It's nothing to do with production values and maybe even the acting. But its structure as a television program makes it bad. The melodramatic beats are basically semaphored way in advance, the tension is only called tension because you want it to be over not because you want to see what happens next, the comedic bits are only there awkwardly to try and shoehorn in some semblance of humanity into this odd construct of television, the lack of suspense is pretty much guaranteed because STARK TREK - any of its derivations - is the basic good guys versus bad. I still enjoyed these few hours of television nostalgia, and I'm sure I'll enjoy it again at some point (if I could manage to get my hands on some DEEP SPACE NINE episodes that'd be sweet!). But it doesn't mean it's not bad television.
Yesterday, Corey told me about the latest episode of GLEE, a television program he enjoys very much, and is apparently very popular and I don't understand why. But then, it's not GLEE that I've a problem per se: I've never seen an episode and I don't think I will ever choose to [so I might watch it in the future]. No, my problem, I think is with the fact that GLEE, much like STAR TREK is bad because television is just a bad medium, and unfortunately, most people take television to be something so important and relevant and as art. This is my problem with television.
I used to plan my classes around FRIENDS and WILL & GRACE and ALLY MCBEAL. I remember it was because in the first case, of course I wanted to know what happened; in the second case, it was the first time I saw an openly gay (albeit, oddly unfamiliar) male on television; and in the third case, I thought the writing was so clever and Ally was so adorable, I just had to watch. But between then and now, nearly fifteen years later, something happened that made me stop. And I'm not certain what. Corey and I were talking yesterday and I said the same thing. I don't remember really having an aversion to television until I was well into my twenties, and I still watch television shows from time to time (more on that bit later), but it doesn't have any weight to it for me as means of information, as means of disseminating the culture, and definitely not as art. Why am I the odd man out here? I don't think I am.
So, I'm watching STAR TREK and I'm loving and hating it. Hating it because its basic structure for a one-hour drama is of course very evident. You know all the cues, for example, but I don't think you're aware of them. In a show like STAR TREK for example, you've four commercial breaks which means there must be four pseudo-cliffhangers that make you stay in tune so that itself defeats many of the emotional and dramatic suspense you might have, and because this is STAR TREK, regardless of what's happened in the story, you know the status quo will be the same and comfortably back to the beginning, you and the characters and the story are basically back to being where you were unchanged and unaffected. I know what you're thinking: this is fucking STAR TREK for crying out loud! Right. What about the television shows you watch, is this their basic structure? Of course it is.
Television is just bad entertainment not because of the stories it tells (cliches or not, a lot of television storylines are excellent, but are wasted in the medium) but because of how it chooses to tell them.
I looked up the most popular television program currently on network television, LOST, and watched its first half-season ever. The basic story is okay and a little intimidating from one point of view, but possibly too derivative to be taken fully seriously (remember, only seven episodes watched, alright?). However, the pilot episode works pretty well story wise, the acting's decent (actors trying to find their show-voices), and the direction is not bad nor good but, well, bland. But this isn't about story, it's about structure. And LOST, regardless of how good its story or acting or production is (frankly, after the third episode I decided LOST wasn't for me; if it was a book, I would've closed it and returned it to the store by page fifty-something), is pretty much what you'd expect a television program to do. Its use of music to give the audience emotional cues and attempting at ratcheting up drama via horrible camera work, and the little segments of story that just have to have enough information to keep you locked in for a commercial break because it MUST GO TO COMMERCIAL BREAKS, all of that make this program, regarless of story, unwatchable.
(I went with LOST due, really, just to all the fucking hoopla regarding its upcoming end.)
((If I were talking story-wise, LOST is useless, but that's a different and less informed (seven episodes!) opinion.))
Of course, this is the reason why networks like HBO and STARZ make original content because of this lack of 'rules'. Network television is a pop song while paid-programming is a concept record.
I don't recall when I couldn't get past this way of watching television. That decision is somewhere in my memory but I can't remember it. But network television still has two stand outs for me. Still not talking story, SEINFELD and THE SIMPSONS avoided these conventions not necessarily by mere story alone. I'd imagine these two shows' producers chose NOT to do what everyone else is doing (one argument for THE SIMPSONS has been the fact that it's an animated program to begin with) because when I watch them now, yes, they're still entertaining, but I also don't feel the need to disassemble them into their corresponding parts the way that I have LOST and STAR TREK. I get that it's a business model as well as a television program model, but that's where it loses me.
I think television stories can be better told in either film or comic book form in a much more effective and artistic way, but that's another post for another time (yesterday, Corey and I briefly discussed Y: THE LAST MAN, whose writer, Brian K. Vaughan, eventually became a writer on LOST, incidentally.).
I will probably watch GLEE at some point in the future. My boyfriend is a fan and I think his influence might have something to do with it. But when I do watch it, or any other television program, hopefully I can enjoy a story the same way I can enjoy a pop song without the need to recognize its parts and take it as whole instead. And if I can't, that's okay too. I've been okay without regular television for years. I'm sure I'd be okay without it for a few more years as well.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
