Book Review: Finn by Jon Clinch

Finn by Jon Clinch
My rating: 2 of 5 stars

In spite of a lower rating, this book was somewhat compelling and interesting. I had a few issues with it, however, that prompted the two stars. First, a stylistic critique. Clinch's prose has been suggested by other reviewers to be Faulknerian. I really can't agree. There are moments when Clinch experiments with dropping punctuation in a run-on fashion similar to what Faulkner does on occasion, but beyond that I don't see the resemblance. Perhaps it's the disjointed narrative that does not follow chronological order that reminds readers of Faulkner, but again I would argue for dissimilarity. With a novel like Absalom, Absalom!, for example, the non-chronological narrative adds to the layered nature of the act of storytelling, whereas with Finn I only found it confusing and distracting. If there was a higher purpose in telling the story in this manner, besides the attempt to be postmodern and cutting edge in some vague way, I must have missed it.


Second would be some of the more vulgar and "gritty" aspects of the story. Unfortunately I failed to see the higher purpose of those scenes as well, which again seemed to me to be mainly an appeal to postmodern sensibilities. Are they interesting and shocking? Yes. Do they belong in a story about a violent and vulgar human being? Probably. But particularly the scene involving the "preacher", which includes murder and child molestation and murder, in that order, seemed forced and unnecessary. They seemed almost obligatory, as if the author's own hands were tied in writing them, in order to produce a "shocking" book.


Third would be the treatment of race in the novel. According to the back of the book, this is "a novel about race." I don't really think you should be able to state in such a terse manner what a truly good book is "about," but more to the point, I don't think that writing about racists makes a book about race. There was no subtlety at all in the characterization of the various positions on race taken by the characters. The Judge is unrepentant in his racism. That's terrible, but it doesn't make him interesting. Finn is extremely conflicted in his understanding of race, but his vacillations are more confusing, from a characterization standpoint, than complex. I don't think Clinch adds much to the understanding of race in the antebellum period besides what has been well trod territory already.


Finally, the character of Finn himself. Yes, he's a drunk, a scoundrel, and not a great human being overall. But a murderer? I don't believe Finn's characterization adds up to such an extreme. Certainly he's morally and ethically challenged, shall we say, but the crowning point of his character is impotence. Of course, not literally, since he bears a son, but definitely figuratively. The Judge has so emasculated him, and set such an impossible standard of success and achievement, that Finn can never measure up. This much is clear. But Finn's response is always self-pity and self-loathing. Yes, these qualities (when mixed with copious amounts of whiskey) can turn violent. But Finn is an impulsive personality, not a "planner" in any regard, so the premeditated murders do not gel with everything else we know about him. His hallmark is retreat, and like a stray dog, will attack when cornered, but otherwise prefers to be left alone. Again, the murders add an element of excitement and shock value, but I'm not sure they can be validated from a coherency standpoint.


Overall, I don't regret reading it, but I would have preferred a more complexly woven tale.


View all my reviews

Judgment Day

There's always been a strong temptation to think that the end of the world is coming, and from a religious perspective, that it will be a Day of Judgment. I wonder why this is so attractive to the human mind and spirit. It seems that the end of the world is always just around the corner. This is supposed to regulate our behavior and increase the urgency of attempting to reach others with a particular religious understanding of existence. I want to call these people crazy, but I understand the temptation, I think. Sometimes I feel like I'm just waiting for the end, too.


But what I really think is going on is the desire for order in a universe seemingly without order. It's the longing for an immediate and pressing purpose for one's existence in a world where such meaning is not readily supplied. The Day of Judgment means that all the loose ends will be tied up. All those who have wronged us with get their just deserts. Of course, the thought rarely occurs that the inverse of that is our own payment for the wrongs we have committed against others. But again, that's not a very attractive idea, so we'd rather selectively filter what such a day might mean.


I skimmed a couple sites discussing the May 21st Judgment Day. One is an article from Business Insider, the other an electronic tract. The quickly upcoming May 21st date was achieved through hypothetical math derived from passages in Genesis and 2nd Peter. These seem to ignore the verse that should put an end to all such attempts to single out a date for Judgment: “But about that day or hour no one knows, not even the angels in heaven, nor the Son, but only the Father." (Matthew 24:36). 


Again, ignoring that verse, which seems extremely straightforward in its meaning, proves that this is not about fidelity to the Bible. It's about human longing for someone or something to break into our messy world and clean up our messy lives. It's about our longing, in a scientific age, to be awed and terrified again by forces greater than ours. Like children, we secretly wish to be put in our place, to have order and structure thrust upon us, because we obviously haven't been able to accomplish that ourselves. Novels like Conrad's Heart of Darkness remind us that our faith in civilization, and the human as an animal capable of being civilized, is always sorely misplaced. We are always just a few light steps away from savagery. Longing for the Day of Judgment is the desire to have this burden removed from us once and all, to become the ordered and civilized people we never could be on our own. 

Business Ethics

In case anyone noticed (I understand life gets busy) I haven't been posting as much the past two weeks, as I've been busy doing other things. It turns out that if you want to get a job you have to APPLY for jobs. I thought jobs came to me! Speaking of which I'm considering tattooing my resume on my forehead. Think it would make things easier, in the long run. Font would have to be pretty small, though.

Anyways, I've learned some interesting things about the business of applying for jobs. I've discovered that there is a plethora of para-legitimate companies out there "Looking to hire immediately!" In case you didn't know, "para" is from the Greek, meaning something like "to the side". Here's legitimate companies, and over there on the side, a series of other than legitimate companies.

What do I mean by this? Well, I've decided not to mention them by name, but they happen to be in the Atlanta area. I'm sure there are similar ones everywhere, but I'll stick to my direct experience. I applied to a couple positions that were billed as entry level sales and marketing. They didn't have any particular requirements, which should have been a red flag enough, but I've been scattering apps far and wide like buckshot, so to get an interview was a thrill.

I read something online about what a difference it makes to prepare for your interview, that so few people do this, so any sort of preparation will put you ahead. So I started to dig around the internet to learn more about these two companies. The weird thing was that I couldn't find hardly anything about them. Their websites were sparse, veneer-like. I couldn't for the life of me discover what these companies actually did. They were like the "papier-mache Mephistopheles" described by Conrad in Heart of Darkness (which is one of my favorite literary images of all time, by the way). I went back to Google, started typing the name of the company, and Google's search suggestion for the next most commonly typed word after the company name was "scam". Uh-oh.

That search revealed lengthy testimonies written by various former employees and those who had interviewed with the companies but decided not to accept the positions. They said pretty damning things, like the interviewer outright lying during the interview process about what the position actually entails, deceptive promises about promotion, and a failure to reimburse for mileage as promised, on and on. In this regard Glassdoor.com was helpful as well. I had never heard of it before but use it fairly extensively now.

This brings me to ask the same question I ask about a hundred times a day: what did people do before the internet? This information was absolutely crucial to me and my life. I would have figured out how maleficent these companies were eventually, of course, after working for them, but I'm so glad I was spared such a fate.

This brings me to a couple more interesting questions: How is it legal for businesses to operate this way? And if it isn't legal, how have they continued doing so? Some of the testimonials were pretty heartbreaking. Who is protecting us from organizations that seek to drain people of their time, energy and money? I guess the Better Business Bureau would be it, but I couldn't really tell you what they do. And it's not like I have evidence of them defrauding customers, only the people they hire, it seems. I know I am naive, but this should not be allowed to happen.

Unfortunately this leads me to toot that same old horn, that of the evils of capitalism. These companies obviously fill a need, or they wouldn't exist. I'm not saying I have a better economic system up my sleeve, but when people are desperate to work and will take any job they can, companies can treat them like the expendable chattel they are. That's not right.

I canceled both interviews. I need "practice" interviewing, but not like that.

My Big Dumb Brain

I like to try to think my way out of problems. I rely on my intellect to make up for what I lack in so many other areas. But the problem with my "big brain" (see Vonnegut's Galapagos) is that it can't conceptualize its own limits. By that I mean, it tricks itself into thinking it doesn't have limits, or at least that the limits don't apply to it. This places me in quite a difficult situation, it seems. The captain at the helm seems to think he (unfortunately my brain is definitely a he) can steer in any direction and still end up where he wants to go. The falsity of this is evident, but from a very abstract level. It's like thinking of looking at a map and knowing that certain directions matter, that objects have a more or less fixed position in space, but then getting behind the wheel and throwing it theatrically so it spins endlessly in one direction, then the other, like some high school Peter Pan production set ship, but always expecting to end up in a particular place on that map.

I really think Vonnegut is right regarding the thesis of his book: that our brains, from an evolutionary perspective, have outgrown their usefulness. They've come to be the greatest orchestrators of our mass extermination in a way that nature seems only to have been able to do once in 65 million years. We could exterminate everything at the drop of the hat. How useful can an organ be, really, that is capable of inventing its own destruction?

Unfortunately I don't have an answer for Mr. Vonnegut (can you tell I've been reading him often of late?). He points to problems that my "big brain" cannot hope to solve. All I know is I've stuck with my brain, despite it's many flaws (mostly its impossible-to-sate lust for bacon at all hours of the day and night.) I just want to craft some armistice with it at least. So, brain, here's my terms:

1. Stop telling me I can do whatever I want with my life, and that I'll succeed at whatever I do. This cannot be true. 
2. My childhood was probably in the top 1% of all childhood's in the history of the world (in terms of love, advantages, luck in place and time of birth, etc.). So, whining subconscious, GET OVER IT. 
3. Stop trying to make things harder for me constantly. I "know" I don't need an iPad or a sportscar or to live in NYC to be happy, so quit with the misinformation campaign, it's quite tiring. 
4. Start helping me by easing up on the criticism and the constant logic checks. Existence is totally illogical, at best, and absurd at worst, so please just let me plant my feet somewhere in that "happy" medium, please. 
5. Most important of all: I AM NOT WHAT I DO FOR A LIVING. I know, brain, that you value this idea perhaps above all others. But it is so maliciously defunct, so broken and dangerous and spiteful beyond all reason, that it's tearing me apart (Lisa). If you give up on any ridiculous notion, this one has got to be it. 

Bin Laden's Death and Vonnegut the Prophet

It's been really interesting to see the global community, and especially my Facebook and Twitter friends, processing the meaning of Bin Laden's death.

The responses can generally be grouped into 3 categories (because Cicero said so...tricolon anyone?):

1. Unbridled enthusiasm, fueled by the "I bleed Red White and Blue" sentiment of true patriots. 
2. Gratitude that a truly evil person is no longer alive, that "justice" has been done, but not overly enthusiastic because terrorism still exists and nothing can take away the pain of the many victims of Bin Laden's terrorism. 
3. Those whose moral or religious worldviews suggest that violence leads to more violence, and that we should pray for our enemies, and thus cannot support celebrating his death. 

I don't think any response is necessarily more "right" than another. Are you going to tell a family member of a 9/11 victim not to celebrate, but pray for the thousands of members of Al Qaeda still alive? I'm sure some religious figures might, but I wouldn't. That's just insensitive. That's a form of violence. 

Are you going to tell a pacifist or someone with intensely worldview-forming religious beliefs that they should be celebrating in the streets and quit with their unpatriotic whining? You might, but it won't change their mind, and they'll probably judge you for it. 

How about telling the middle-of-the-roaders to pick a side and get off the fence (it's probably really uncomfortable sitting there anyway). Maybe, but I think there's a certain attractive wisdom in the "golden mean," here as always. 

Those in the middle know that one less breathing (which is synonymous with hateful, murderous, ignorant, life-hating, death-worshipping) terrorist (of any nationality, ethnicity, or religious or ideological persuasion) is overall a good thing for the world. They may celebrate, but they're not happy about the fact that this is the kind of world in which we are put into situations in which we have to decide whether or not it is right to celebrate someone's death. They know that "justice" in this world is an offensive farce. They're not ready to let blind Justice put one terrorist's death on one side of the scales and the thousands of dead (and the millions of lives impacted by their deaths) on the other and see if they balance out -- because they know they don't, they won't, and they never will. 

This is why Kurt Vonnegut was a "prophet," in whatever sense you care to take that term. Why use prophet, a term that is loaded with sacred and religious meaning, to describe a self-professed "humanist" (as if that was antithetical to religious values)? A prophet is someone with more insight than the rest of us on the way things really are, and actually has the guts to communicate that insight. Vonnegut called a spade a spade. 

"Dwayne's bad chemicals made him take a loaded thirty-eight caliber revolver from under his pillow and stick it in his mouth. This was a tool whose only purpose was to make holes in human beings." 
— Kurt Vonnegut (Breakfast of Champions)

As a prophet, he unflinchingly exposed the rock-bottom absurdity and hypocrisy inherent in the human condition. I wonder how he would respond to such news as we have been obsessed over lately. I can only hope I would have the grace and sense of decency to have half of his love of humanity, as terribly messed-up 

as we all clearly are. 

God help us all. 

Thoughts?

Don't Buy Kids Toys

Like my life in general, I've learned a little too late that April is "Financial Literacy Month" to make much use of it. However, in its honor, I'd like to offer a financial tip based on something I've realized of late. It's a very simple rule that will improve the quality of others' lives.

Don't buy kids toys for their birthday or religious holiday where gifts are exchanged.

Buy them U.S. Savings Bonds instead.

Here's the thing: when you're a little kid, you're basically stupid. You don't know what you want, or need, for that matter. The adults in your life will try to guide you on what you should want and supply you with what you need, but they too can be shortsighted.

If you buy a kid a toy, they'll probably play with it for a week until they're entirely bored with it. If it's a great toy, maybe a month. If it's a stupid toy (even though kids are stupid, they know the difference between a good and bad toy) it won't last a day. Before you know it, you're taking boatloads of toys (toy boats?) to Goodwill or Salvation Army, while your kid moves on ravenously to the next toy.

Then they get to their 20-somethings in an economic downturn. Not only do they not use any of their toys from childhood (if they do, well, you've got different issues than financial advice to work on), they also don't have any money. They might even get nostalgic and go to Goodwill and buy back their SAME childhood toys with money they don't have (i.e. your money). So what's the solution to all this?

Buy them Savings Bonds. From their first birthday until whenever you decide to cut them off. No, they don't rattle, flash, blink, stack, or should be used for teething purposes. Yes, the kid might accuse you later in life of a desolate childhood, having grown up in a house without disposable, germ-infested, toxic toys. But they sure will thank you when those puppies mature and they cash them in and make bank. It might even be enough to end your estranged relationship.

No comments, please, this one's a freebie for ya'll. Here's to financial literacy!

What I Want Tells Me What I Should Do

Following close behind, on the heels of my last post (redundant much?), I wanted to come up with a practical list of the things I want. This seems so vainglorious, I know ("vanity, vanity, all is vanity"). I'm scandalizing myself by doing this.

But I'm thinking that if I have a clear picture of what I want, it can help me decide what to do, and motivate me to actually do it. I hope this kind of thinking/exercise might be helpful to others as well. This list is in no particular order of importance. Here goes:

What I Want

1. A dog. I love dogs so much. Whenever I see people walking their dogs, I think, that could be me. They make fantastic companions, and since I spend so much time by myself, a dog would really improve the quality of my life. Also, being responsible for the life of another living creature would be good for me, I think. I would feel so grown-uppy. Requirements: money to feed (don't have), time to walk (definitely have), living space (not for a dog, sadly)
2. My Own Apartment. This seems like a no-brainer. Of course I need my own space. But my income hasn't been consistent enough to make that happen. Requirements: steady income, with enough left over for food (for me and my dog). 
3. To Get Engaged. Stop it, you're making me blush. Also no-brainer. Requirements: Haven't chased the girl away with my dumb jokes yet (check!), but also need stable income to make it happen, preferably in a respectable field. No one wants to be engaged to a circus performer (sorry to the many circus performers who read my blog). 
4. A 13 in. Macbook Pro. I'm a creative guy. And Apple's marketing campaigns have unanimously informed me that all creative people need Macs. So fortunately that decision was made for me (whew). Seriously though, they do everything I want a computer to do. Enough said. Requirements: $$. 
5. An iPad. It doesn't even have to be the 2nd Gen, although it would seem a little silly not to be ahead of the curve and get one right before Apple releases the iPad 3. Requirements: $
6. Good Health Care. It shows what a backward country I live in that I even have to want this (because I don't have it). Requirements: full-time job, part-time Starbucks, $$ to buy my own. 
7. Get My Financial Life in Shape. Start an emergency savings fund. Start a retirement savings account. Pay off outstanding debt. Start investing in stuff. Requirements: $$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$

Honestly, that's pretty much it. Of course there's a million little incidentals I also want, like chips and beer and HBO and to be in shape. But it's crazy to think that I can just sit and make a list like that. 

So now, how does what I want tell me what I should/need to do? 

Well, basically all those things above require a steady income with full-time work. And I see two ways to accomplish that: getting an entry-level job somewhere, or starting my own company. 

Hm...which one will I choose? Food for thought (delicious). Has anyone else done something like this? How has it helped you? 

The Undesiring Midwestern Ethos

A friend asked me a little bit ago, "What would your dream job be?" I kind of stumbled to think of a response. "Well," I tried, and mumbled something that came to mind at the moment.

I was talking to another friend, and I said, "Man, it would be so cool to be a graphic designer." In jest, they said, "Oh, so that's what you want to be today." What's with this inability to claim what I want?

I blame it on the ethos of the Midwest. Where I grew up, it's not so much about what you want to do, as it is what you should do. That sounds bad, and it's not quite right. Don't get me wrong - my parents have been extremely supportive and always encouraged me to dream big and do what makes me happy in life.

But the overall Midwestern ethos that's been ingrained in me, that I'll never really know the full influence of but that I get glimpses of like this, whispers life's not about you getting what you want, it's about helping others get what they want. Ideally, you quietly go about your work, you don't try to be flashy, and you shouldn't expect much of things. You're a servant. You exist to make others happy.

Is this an entirely bad mentality? Of course not. We should all try to make a positive difference in the life of others. We should be responsible citizens, giving back with our time, talents, and other resources. But sometimes the pendulum swings way too far, and gets stuck. This mentality is bad when it doesn't allow a person to claim a sense of self. It can result in one only wanting to make other people happy, wanting to fulfill others' wants. Or only wanting for myself what others want for me - which causes the "making others happy" drive to kick in, until there's nothing left. At the end of the day, what do I really want?

This all sounds ethereal, existential, and almost whiny. But I mean it actually to be quite practical. I'm afraid this post is getting a little long already, so I'm going to split it into two. Please read on to the next post to read about me working this out.

Thanks for stopping by. Midwesterns - do you agree with this? Does it at least resonate with you or am I an alien? Others - does this make sense at all? Is it not a Midwestern thing after all? Comments welcome!

6 Tips for Students from a Substitute Teacher

I've seen a lot in my year as a substitute teacher. Experienced a lot.

Actually that's not entirely true. But I'll play to my strong suit and write authoritatively from my wealth of inexperience on a subject.

This is for all the high schoolers out there, none of whom read my blog.

1. When you ask to go to the bathroom, I know that the chances of you actually needing to use it are as tiny as my paycheck. I know that you instead will wander the halls aimlessly, just for the thrill of getting out of class and having "put one over" on the sub. Well, you didn't. There's just not an easy way to retrieve you. Sending another student out to get you is like sending a search party out in Sasquatch-controlled territory. They're just as liable to join you and not come back as anything. 
2. When you ask to go to lunch early, or leave class early at the end of the day, and justify it by saying that your teacher ALWAYS lets you, I know that they don't. Your teachers are there to put even a smidgen of structure into your rapidly-spiraling-out-of-control-mainly-digital lives. And the secret is, you don't know that you need it, but you really do need structure. It will help you in the long run. Even though now it seems oppressive and unfair, you will find soon enough that the trick to life is repeatedly forcing yourself to do things that you don't want to do. So better to start now.
3. Having computers in class all day every day is actually a huge disadvantage to you, because they don't make you more productive like they're supposed to. Sorry to pull out the old man card, but when I went to high school, no one had computers. Hell, I had a pager in 9th grade, and I wasn't even a drug dealer. Would I have wanted a laptop or iPad in class? Yes. But I'm glad I didn't have one. I can distract myself with a paper clip, and the only notifications it sends me is that it's too bent out of shape to return to it's primary function. Oh, Facebook can be used collaboratively to work on class projects, blah blah blah. So can meeting in the library face to face. I'm normally a huge proponent of doing as many things digitally as one can, but I see how much time is wasted, how much of your parents money, frankly, is wasted by you "surfing" the web. You don't use that terminology anymore, but there's a reason that most surfers are beach "bums". Close your laptop and read a book, for the future of the world's sake, please.
4. Your teachers are as stressed and overworked as you feel. By that I mean, you think you have it rough. And in a certain way you do. Especially with the sense of doom that every test and quiz is that one thing that might lower your grade and prevent you from getting into the college of your dreams and then you'll end up as a substitute teacher like me. But your teachers have so much more going on in their lives than you'll ever know. While they're at school, you're pretty high up on their priority list, but outside of that, you're relative to kids and family and actually trying to have a life outside of their jobs. The only reason I tell you all this is that you should do whatever you can to make it easier on them. By that I mean, do the sort of work that helps your teacher help you. Go out of your way to proofread your essays. Be the sort of student you would want to have. And trust me, this isn't just about them, it's about you. The better and more teacher-friendly your work is, the better you'll do. I had the wrong idea about that in high school - with a few exceptions I thought that my teachers and I weren't on the same side. But you're all in this educational endeavor together, so show some respect, and you'll see that respect returned to you. 
5. Don't wait until college, or after college like I did, to start thinking about what you actually, practically want to do with your life. The more work you do ahead of time on this, the more things you try out and decide aren't for you, the easier it will be to land in something you really want and that fits you well. Also, learn about personal finance. I don't care how rich your parents are, the only way you're going to feel positive about your eventual independence from them is to learn how to manage your own money and live within your means. I should have learned this much earlier. 
6. Always address your teachers by name, and say please and thank you. Duh!

Thanks for stopping by! Comments and additions to this list welcome below!

Earth Week Rant

It took me a while to figure out why the little "Versus" logo in the bottom right of my screen while watching the NHL Playoffs is green. I thought there was something wrong with my TV, perhaps, and it's not displaying red correctly, which is the normal color of the logo.

Then I realized -- it's Earth Week. Or something. It's at least the week that contains Earth Day. Why that makes it Earth Week I'm not sure, but bear with me.

Here's where the rant starts. There's a huge difference between genuine environmentalism, a true desire and interest to do whatever one can to care for our natural environment, and lengthen our tenure on our fragile world,  and jumping on a marketing bandwagon.

Now that I think about it, I HATE the "Green" movement. It's the equivalent of saying that consumers can make the same bad choices for the future of our planet that we've been making since the industrial revolution, only now we have the moral sanction to continue doing so.

O wow, this (fill in the blank) is made from sustainable materials! I should probably consume even more of it, because hell, it's not like it's BAD for the earth. Sure, I won't exactly recycle it and continue the cycle of sustainability, but the fact that I'm choosing it (and PAYING MORE to do so...I'm so morally superior than the people who choose the non-sustainable option) should make all the difference, right?

The "Green" marketing movement is the worst thing ever to happen to environmentalism. It's domesticated it. What happened to tree huggers? You're telling me they work at Walmart now? I'm not buying it (literally and figuratively). Yes, I love my solar lights. I rock them whenever I can. But I'm smart enough to know that if I was a true environmentalist, I would change substantial aspects of my lifestyle.

I hate to be a naysayer (do I?) but all the little things we think we're doing to save the environment are just drops in the proverbial ocean that will one day cover Manhattan when the ice caps melt. I'm not trying to point fingers. I'm as guilty as anyone else. But at least I know when I'm being manipulated by companies that only care about the value of their stock, and certainly not the environment (unless wetland protected animals are inconveniently squatting on some natural resources they desperately need). American Capitalism is not a "long-term" thing, friends. It's about profitability and valuation now.

Should we as consumers make the best choices we can for the environment? Of course. But we have to know that we have to think beyond the "green" marketing campaigns if we're really going to make a difference.

Going to shut down my computer now to save energy, but I would love to hear your comments.

Macro, Micro, and Starcraft II's Life Lessons

Now, I wouldn't call myself a "gamer". Not totally. I don't play enough, and consistently, to really fall neatly into that category. But I love video games. Growing up, my brother and I combined owned every major system, with the glaring exception of Sega Genesis. Fortunately, my bro rectified that by buying a Dreamcast. I've probably spent as many hours playing video games over my lifetime as bathing, which for some gamers is optional. But this post isn't about the games themselves, it's about the life lessons you learn from them.

I'm thinking of one big one in particular. The importance of managing macro/micro in strategy games, especially the Warcraft/Starcraft series.

Jim's comment on the last post, and my reply, spurred in my mind the idea that you always need to be focused on the little details of life, working as hard and concentrated as you can on the task at hand. But we all know that's not enough. You also need to simultaneously hold the big picture in mind, to think strategically and long term, all the while utilizing the work on the little details to build toward the ultimate goal of the big picture.

Full disclosure time: I'm not a Starcraft II player. But my brother is. He's played in national tournaments. He's a pretty good player, but not only that, he has a great mind for the game. He's able to speak very intelligently about the minutest aspects of the game, which is where I derive my understanding of the macro/micro concept.

As stated in the link above, micro is the proper and effective management of the little details: what your army is actually doing. Micro is each task that you must individually execute to work towards victory. It's what's right in front of you. You have to do this well or you've got no hope of winning.

Macro, on the other hand, is managing the big picture. It's making sure you have just the right amount of units, supplies, etc. It's making sure your overall efforts, micro, etc. are working in concert to produce the best overall strategy to ensure victory.

You need both to win. You can't focus on one and ignore the other. Both need to be managed constantly, and effectively, in order to win. Unfortunately, I don't think I learned this lesson early enough in life. I've always been good on the task at hand, and move quickly from one to another. But it's the overall strategy I've been lacking in. My macro is weak. I don't think I've done a good enough job thinking strategically about each and every action in my life, and whether it's building toward something or nothing. Of course, I know that not everything one does should be part of a grand scheme to build an empire. You need to have fun too. But there's something about the most driven, motivated, and focused people who relentlessly manage their micro and macro to such an extent that it all fits together and works together almost seamlessly. The best Starcraft players do this. The best life players do this.

It's interesting that we use "game" language to describe success in life. We label some people "losers," and others describe themselves as "Winning! Duh!" Game Theory is definitely something I want to learn more about. But in the meantime, I'm trying to boost my macro skillz. Any thoughts on how you manage these (either in game or in life)?

Comments always welcome! Subscribe and follow me on Twitter if you like what you see.

The Consumer Mentality is Bankrupt

I've been reading some interesting things lately, and I'm not sure how much they have influenced my thought on the topic of the day, but I thought it was important to mention them right off the bat.

First off, billionaire Mark Cuban's weblog. I think the idea of my blog referring to his is funny, because it would never happen the other way around (never say never?). He writes about the stuff he knows best - entertainment, business, success, etc. I love his account of his rise to success.

Second, Altucher Confidential, written by entrepreneur James Altucher. While he has many striking ideas that I appreciate because they seem to go against collective wisdom, the most fascinating thing about his blog is Altucher himself. He comes across as eccentric, which again is probably why I like him. He reminds me of me. Rough edges abound. Anyways, check him out. I guess his post on "8 Alternatives to College" sparked some thinking on the topic for today.

What I've realized lately is that my approach to life has been largely inadequate due to the hyper-prevalence of one major ideology - that of consumerism. I've approached life, people, education, the search for a career, everything, from a consumer mentality.

By this I mean, I have expected the "product," whatever that may be, to be presented to me, to be brought within easy reach for my easy consumption. In terms of life in general, this means that I've falsely expected to have the sort of life I want to live laid out for me like in a 30 second commercial, and all I would have to do is "sign up," purchase the product. As if my life was already out there somewhere, and I just had to select the correct one from a store shelf.

In terms of relationships, this has meant that people are largely there for my enjoyment, emotional satisfaction, etc. It means that I haven't given enough of myself (I realize I'm being overly critical, and many would disagree, but I'm trying to trace this out in stark terms).

I've viewed my education largely as the process of dumping as much merchandise into my mental shopping cart as I think I can manage. I've never been good at contributing to class discussion (often because I feel like I have nothing to say, which I know is wrong). But as a consumer, I'm not there to give, I'm there to take. If knowledge is a commodity, I want to purchase as much as I can (but hopefully get it for free). This consumer mentality has probably kept me from truly engaging with ideas, with texts, and with my classmates.

My search for a meaningful career has probably suffered most from this way of thinking. The right job, the right career, should present itself to me, with all the warm glow and feel-good sentimentality of an insurance commercial with soldiers and American flags. It's out there, it's just on a shelf I can't quite reach, or in one of those pricey warehouse clubs I don't have a membership to. The problem is with the marketplace, not my attitude. The "economy" has failed to plunk into my lap my next thing in life. I'm a consumer. This is what I've been taught to do, trained to do. I've been waiting for life to happen to me, to give me something to work on and with. The market will weed out any weak or bad options, and I'll only be left with the best, which will be presented to me in all its shimmering glory.

Clearly, this is all so wrong, so crippling. But it's hard to see the subtle workings of forces that inundate us, hammer away at our sub-conscious, and turn us into drones. If we're ever going to be anything more than the "hive-mind" (another post I want to write soon), we need to make the important leap that I want to make, which is the move from a consumer mentality to a producer mentality. And since I'm still working that one out, check back for subsequent thoughts on the topic. Right now I thought it was important to identify the problem before constructing the "solution".

What are your thoughts on this? Does this resonate with you? Do you have suggestions for moving to a "producer" mentality? Comments are most welcome.

Reader Request: Spaceships

I don't know what it's like at your house, but around here, it's whatever Jim wants, Jim gets. So I'm most happy to pander to one of my few readers and oblige his request that I write a post about "spaceships," as he so eloquently put it. Well, here goes.

Where to start? There's a lot of angles to this one. A lot of ins, a lot of outs, so to speak. But instead of making grand claims about broad topics and stuff I don't know about like I usually do, I'm going to write about my personal experience with spaceships, which is fairly extensive. Here goes.

When I was a youngin', whenever I saw a commercial on Nickelodeon or an ad in one of my Boy Scout magazines for Space Camp, I was like, man, I really want to go to Space Camp.

I never went to Space Camp.

Then, I saw an ad for a model rocket kit, and I was like, I want that. So I got one for a birthday or Christmas present, and then I opened it and took out all the pieces and looked at the instructions and I was like, wow that looks hard to put together. So it sat in pieces in that dust-laden box for some time, until my dad and my uncle helped me put it together. When it was complete, shining in its glory, launch day arrived. We went to a soccer field by an elementary school and my co-builders made me stand much farther back than I wanted. After the obligatory countdown, I pressed the button and that sucker launched. It was inspiring and patriotic, not unlike the 4th of July.

Somewhere around that time I saw Apollo 13, and I was like, man, being trapped in a failing spaceship is stressful.

But there were good times, too. Like Space Mutiny, a thrilling MST3K rendition about, you guessed it, mutiny in space. Yet as the gang is quick to note, most of the spaceship looks like parts of a giant warehouse/basement. In that same vein, there's Prince of Space, who flies around in a tiny spaceship, and cannot be harmed by weapons of any sort.

So all in all, spaceships aren't so bad, really. They can be fun, they can help you destroy asteroids hurtling toward earth, they can go into warp speed, they can basically help you travel through space. They can even travel through time to snatch up some humpback whales that you can take back to the future to solve earth's impending doom.

Originally I was going to discuss the ethics of funding a space program when there are millions without health insurance, but who's to say, really?

So Jim, that one's for you. Any other reader requests?

Still Questioning My Education

Hey ya'll (I can say that now, I'm legally a Southerner). Though in some ways this is a continuation of the thought I was working out last October in this post, I read a great article this morning that put another spin on the issue of the value of higher education.

Sarah Lacy profiles Peter Thiel, Paypal co-founder, who offers some profound insights on what he perceives to be the "bubble" of higher education, transferred most recently from the housing market. Lacy argues that the almost sacred power of our belief in higher education stems from a sort of pact we make with the universe, one which is ultimately based on our need for safety: "Do this and you will be safe." 


I couldn't agree more with Lacy and Thiel. I think they identify a potent root of my current vocational disorientation. I worked hard. I went to one decent school and one great school. I am entitled (another concept she argues is the result of our incorrect thinking about higher education) to some sort of meaningful work. Of course, we know this isn't true. No one is entitled to anything. But this is a middle-class American ideal that I find hard to shake. 


I think it also has to do, philosophically, with a love of causality. I want the universe to operate by rational principles, cause and effect. I have worked hard, therefore opportunities should miraculously present themselves. I know cognitively that this isn't true, but it hasn't reached my gut yet. I still feed on the illusion that my "hard work" should matter to others, and not just myself. I need to kick the habit, but it's ingrained pretty deep. 


Yet reading articles like the above help me to deconstruct the half-truths that can result in one's own person "stagflation" scenario. Whatever that means. It's a cool word, right? 


Anyways, check out that article, and comment on your own thoughts/feelings of entitlement and causality, and how you combat them. Happy Monday!

It's All About You, Faithful Readers!

Hello, thank you for visiting. This isn't so much a new entry as it is a desperate (okay not so desperate) plea for your comments and questions. I want to know what you'd like me to write about! Is there anything I've already written on that you'd like to hear more of? Do you have other random questions you'd like me to try to address?

What would make this blog more user-friendly, to you (the user)? What would keep you coming back and make you subscribe?

Unbelievably, I actually want to write about what interests other people, and not just myself, so any feedback you have would be most appreciated.

In the meantime, keep it real, and thanks in advance for your comments/questions.

Not Your Grandma's Solar Lighting

Well, it's Thursday, and you know what that means. Time to confess a horrible, dark (light?) secret about my life. I'm kind of obsessed with all things solar-powered, but especially solar lighting.

My obsession began in my youth, whenever I decided to turn off my video game system or the TV with the Nickelodeon logo burned into the screen, I watched it so much, and actually went outside. I noticed a bright glowing ball in the sky, and it felt hot. Little did I know then, that glowing thing can be used to power solar-powered things.

My first experience with solar power was building an awesome 4 foot tall (or so it seemed at the time) K'nex ferris wheel that turned with a motor powered by a solar cell. I'm not joking about that, guys. It was sweet.

More recently, however, with the "green" movement in full swing, major companies are getting on-board the solar bandwagon (hope they don't have leather seats, ouch!), which is great because hopefully higher demand for solar cells will create more innovation and cheaper prices (see here for an article on solar's amazing growth).

Sure, those goofy solar landscape lights are fairly cheap and ubiquitous these days, but they have some serious drawbacks when it comes to practical indoor solar lighting, which is what I'm most interested in. Their main issues are: 1. they lack an on/off switch, so you have to toss them in a closet and shut the door when you want to go to sleep, and 2. they come with the cheapest rechargeable batteries possible, so they don't really last long enough/output enough power to really count as indoor lighting.

And then Ikea came along, stole my heart, and rekindled my solar obsession. They have a wide range of indoor solar lighting solutions, but I'm just going to review one I actually own and have experience with. Hopefully as I add more to my collection I'll review them too.

In case you're getting bored and are about to click away, hang on, here's the good stuff. Ikea's Sunnan Table Lamp (I think Sunnan can be roughly translated as "solar power is great everyone should buy one of these seriously) is a great "gateway" product to get into the world of indoor solar lighting. It has an easily detachable solar cell/battery combo pack, which you can place either outside or in a sunny window, and then easily snap back into place when you're ready to use it. It's reasonably priced at $19.99. And it really is super bright, with white LED's. Adding to that, it's got a flexible neck, so you can position it however you want to light whatever you want. I use it as a reading light at night, but it also works well as just a general lamp. A great bonus is that it uses Ikea's own brand of rechargeable batteries, which they recommend requires replacement every two years or so. Not bad, folks! Not your grandma's solar lighting indeed - by that I mean actual sunlight, opening a curtain, you get the drift.

Feel free to comment on whether you think it's reasonable to incorporate solar lighting into your indoor space. Or if you think my obsession is weird and dumb.

One Name, Five Syllables

That's not funny. Or is it? I think humor is one of the most fascinating aspects of human culture and human existence generally. Like all aspects of what we like, which is an impossible science (cf. aesthetics), humor is so interesting because of the many variations in what people think is funny. Somehow, there are different genres of humor. There's "stupid humor," which is a misnomer because it's often so intelligently done that such a title is entirely ill-fitting. There's "dark humor," which is really those things that we're all thinking in the midst of life's most terrible moments, for the purpose of making the situation seem a little less bad, but have been socialized not to communicate generally. There's "oddball" humor, which is random and crazy and appeals to the more creative faculties of the hearer or viewer, because one must actively construct the ways in which the absurdity is meant to be funny, and then said content actually becomes funny. Of course, there are many other different "types" of humor. You get the idea.

People even draw the line on humor, saying that something "isn't funny" because it addresses a particular taboo we hold sacred. Jokes can come "too soon" after a tragic event.

But what I'm really interested in is how people construct their sense of humor. Of course, this is getting into a hairy "nature vs. nurture" debate, and I guess aesthetics overall, but I'm wondering if within a single (more or less) culture, something can be objectively funny, or if humor is entirely subjective, just like everything else we like in life.

A particular experience brought this question into focus. I recently watched Zoolander with some friends, and let me tell you, this is my favorite movie of all time. Many times you may ask someone, "Someone, what's your favorite movie?" and they'll equivocate six ways from Sunday (especially if that Sunday is the Oscars). "Oh, I don't know, I have a lot of favorites, I guess..." they might say. Not me. Zoolander. Forget the fact that I secretly want to be a male model, there are just so many things in that movie I find funny. I thought it was funny when I first saw it in high school, and I still think it's funny more than 10 years later. Maybe I have a "dumb" sense of humor, stricken as I am with extended "Arrested Development," producing a seemingly endless adolescence. And yes, things can become funnier over time (how does that work?) or after repeated viewings (I've probably seen Derek work his magic at least 20 times), but still. Some things are just funny, I propose.

Yet there was a member of the audience that night who just didn't think it was funny. Not having it. And even though I disagree, it made me more curious than defensive. How can this be?

I have more questions than answers on this one, so any funnymen/funnywomen out there who want to weigh in, please do. Give me your best Blue Steel, and if you think it's ready to let out of its cage, drop the Magnum on us. I hope it doesn't melt our faces off. Then again, I kinda hope it does.

Simplicity for Simpletons

This morning I'm pondering how writers avoid overwriting. I've been reading Einstein's Dreams by Alan Lightman, and while I'm struck with the weight of the ideas, I'm almost more enthralled by the simplicity with which he presents them. Simplicity is such a misleading term, in general but especially when referring to writing. I guess what I mean by simplicity is saying what needs to be said, communicating, in short, in the most precise yet meaningful way.

It seems that it's so much easier to err on the side of too much writing, garrulous word diarrhea. Overwriting is blatant, a flagrant foul against the sensibilities. I just don't understand how the best writers slim down their verbiage to create that stark impression of sweet simplicity. "Let the club do the work," I was always told when trying, and failing, to develop a solid golf swing. Well, just as I try to knock that little dimpled sphere screaming out of the park every time (ouch mixed sports metaphor), so too I find it so tempting to use more words than less to say what I need to say.

Take "The Love Song of J. Alfred Prufrock," by Thomas Sterns Eliot (T.S., to the uninitiated), for example. It's so "simple" that it seems like anyone could have written it. Of course, not just anyone did, which opens up the huge snarly gnarly debate about whether a work of art is good because it has merit somehow in and of itself or only because it was created by someone we have attributed cultural value to as being an artist who creates great art. Anyways, my point is - how did he do it, and others? How does one show restraint in the written word?

But all this is not to say that you can't be ornate and simple at the same time. Faulkner miraculously achieves this, and of course Henry James (I can't speak on Joyce - full disclosure - I've never read Ulysses). There's a balance somewhere in there that I can only point to as existing but can't really hope to describe. Somehow the layers upon layers of detail and description and probing inner worlds do not take away from the overall sense of simplicity they impart.

Perhaps I'm thinking of simplicity in terms of wholeness, a unity, a measured evenness that is consistent throughout and gives the impression that everything is in the right place, that everything belongs. Overwriting sticks out, stabs the mind, feels out of place.

Anyways, here's to those great artists who say what they say and do what they do and write what they write and do not overwrite for the sake of overwriting and keep things simple and always are true to their vision and never affront the reader by saying too much or too little but just say enough.

Career Advice from the Unemployed - Part 2

Here’s a continuation of my sagacious snippets of career wisdom, from me, a trusted source. My outsider’s perspective on this one is key, peering as I am at the prospect of employment from a comfortable distance.

      4. Look Busy, Your Boss (or Jesus) is Coming
       One day at a job I had once, I thought I would be an “energetic, independent self-starter” by “manning the phones” (such a sexist term, I know). Someone had to be close enough to the phones to answer them in a timely manner when a customer called - why shouldn’t that be me? I watched those ugly institutional phones, caked with sweat on the handle and slick with face-grease on the earpiece (is that what you call the part of a corded phone you hold to your head?). Surprisingly enough, it did ring a couple times and I did help the customer. But then there was a lull. A deathly silent void in which my own existence was called into question. I thought I was trapped in a Sartre play. All of a sudden, at the edge of my perception I heard the sound of high heels clicking murderously along the concrete floor, and my brain was screaming at me to get up and do something, that trouble was afoot, but it was as if I was lashed to my chair, forced to bear the burden of answering those phones like Atlas holding up the earth. It was too late. My boss appeared like a flash of malevolent rebuking fire, and I was chastised for just “sitting around”. But the phones! Could she not see the weight of their importance?

At any rate, from this I learned the easy maxim: make sure you just look busy at all times. Do a lap around your office. Pick up a pile of paper from one side of your desk, move it to the other, then move it back. Have a clearly discernible window with your work email client open and just type gibberish. It seems that the only thing worse than bad work is no work at all, so make sure you’re on the right side of that line.

      5. Take Rejection Easy - Blame It on Others
    Ah, rejection. Nothing twangs the heartstrings quite like it. I received an early primer in this most devastating emotion from the scores of girls I had crushes on in elementary and middle school...and high school...(okay fine!) and on into college. And it will happen as you search for an initial position and later as you try to advance your career. Many times, you just aren’t good enough or qualified enough for a position, and you must learn to take this in stride. But remember, it’s not you they’re rejecting, it’s just everything about you.

So how do you cope with such a soul-rattling blow? One great strategy is to blame it on others. God is a popular candidate, but I would avoid such a move, personally. It might come back to bite you (eternally). Instead there are plenty of viable options: Prospective employers who “didn’t even give you a chance to interview” are most definitely missing out on some amazing talent and therefore should definitely be ashamed of their actions. “The Economy” (whatever that is/means) is a super-popular thing to place blame on these days, and will usually bring you the most sympathy from family and friends, who are also getting screwed by “The Economy”. But lastly, never blame yourself. You are awesome, and you didn’t need that stupid job anyways. Keep repeating that until it sounds kinda true.

   6. “Live Like You Were Dying” - Tim McGraw
     This isn’t just great career advice, this is great life advice. If you were dying, would you spend every day at an unfulfilling dead-end job? Hell no, you’d go skydiving and take other needless risks. And as a side benefit you’d become a better person in the process. Note that this only applies to people who aren’t actually dying.


That’s all for now, but hopefully this entirely useful series will continue.

iBad 2?

Well, the Apple cult reconvened in Cali yesterday, as you might have heard. And though I haven't actually touched ("experienced" in the cult-lingo) one of these new-fangled "iPad 2's", that certainly won't stop me from weighing-in.

Some personal background on where I'm coming from. No, I don't own an iPad, but I have one of it's little siblings, a 2nd gen iPod Touch. You know where that is? In a drawer. The battery died, i.e. it will no longer hold a charge, and Apple wants to charge $80 to replace the battery. So I have a teeny-weeny bit of bitterness toward Apple, which I lay out in full disclosure.

But let's be honest, I pretty much lust after everything Apple makes. Much like I said in my Charlie Sheen post, Apple doesn't even sell products anymore, they sell an "experience," a mystique, a desirable sleek cool that says something about the person using their products. Of course, this carnal craving that I and others know all too well has helped developed the Apple cult and made Apple fanboys/fangirls out of so many people. But love is blindness. 

Apple does many things well, especially battery life, which I didn't appreciate the value of until I got an Android. But are they perfect? Can one find no flaws?
Whenever Apple explodes the marketplace with a new product (or new version of a product, in this case), which after all makes sense because they are a company and trying to make money, the problem is that the now outdated device, which has served you so well, now takes on the drab unpleasantness of middle age.

Apple somehow makes you feel unattractive, ugly, in the process. For some reason, this doesn't happen nearly at all in the PC market. Yes, I have an older Dell. So what? I don't feel belittled in a hipster coffee shop when I pop the top and fire it up. But if I had an older Apple product...Lord have mercy. Forget it. I'll make my brew at home and cower in my shame.

The twist here, of course, is that my next computer purchase will be a Macbook Pro. I know what they're doing to the world with their systematic uncool-making project. But I can't get away from the excellence of form and function. A Mac just does what you want it to, in short. PC's take a little more finessing, which once mastered allows one the freedom to mostly do what one wants. Still, though, Apple seems to take a few steps out of the process, and for that I'm grateful.

Wait, wasn't this supposed to be about the iPad 2? How would I know what to say about it? It looks cool and I want one.

Career Advice from the Unemployed - Part 1

What’s that, you might be thinking? Take career advice from someone who’s unemployed? Who do you think you are, Charlie Sheen? Look, it sounds crazy but I wanted to lay out what I’ve learned from my failed job searching of the past year. Learn from my wisdom. But mostly, just hire me, please?

1. “No One Cares About Your Career But Your Mom...and You” - Carol Bartz (http://academicearth.org/courses/tailoring-products-to-customer-needs-at-autodesk-growing-your-career)

I just recently picked up this little tidbit that helpfully summarized the truth it took me a while to learn. A few months ago I was reading a career book that suggested you should set up networking lunch meetings with people working in the field you’re interested in. What kind of blithely overly optimistic wacky tobacco was that person smoking when they wrote that? Here’s the truth. People are busy. And most people are selfish. Some are openly so, but others are in denial about this. In this economy (ha right it’s getting better?) the people who are established in their field don’t really care about helping others, and those who are becoming established and might want to help don’t because they’re worried about their own jobs and don’t want the competition. So, that pretty much leaves you. And your Mom. I guess the basic lesson I drew from this is: unless a relative’s name appears somewhere in the title of the business/firm/etc. you alone have to make everything happen. Or not. You could play on the internet all day.


    2. “Just Get Your Foot In the Door!” What door?
I’ve heard this one at least 1,196,493 times (the number of Twitter followers @charliesheen has at the time of writing). It’s like everyone is running around with an undiagnosed disease that makes them see doors everywhere. And they all happen to be open just wide enough for a foot to fit in. Here’s the reality: entry level jobs either don’t exist or exist purely to suck you dry and kill your soul. And I’m not talking about this in a pseudo-Jeff Bridges hippie hipster anti-consumerism way, like “yeah man, corporations rule the world, man, man”. I mean it in all seriousness. Starting out, you are totally expendable. You have no training or experience. In short, they don’t need you. By that I mean, they need someone to do whatever menial task is out there, but they don’t need YOU to do it. And being valuable is all about being needed. Without a specialization, without having a niche in such a way that NO ONE ELSE can do something exactly as well as you can, you don’t matter. Your name will fade from water cooler gossip faster than Charlie Sheen wins (sorry can’t help myself!).


    3. “It’s Not What You Know, It’s Who You Know.” Absolutely True.
Saying this as humbly as I can, because I’m just a schmuck like everybody else,  I would say I’m on the more educated side of the spectrum. I’ve had some amazing opportunities to attend some great schools, for which I’m truly grateful. I’m an avid reader of “The New York Times” (a major news publication you might have heard of...sorry of which you might have heard). I would probably do pretty well on Jeopardy and Cash Cab, based on my track record playing from home. But you know what? Nobody cares. Seriously, no one cares about any of the general stuff you know, your familiarity with current events, or your critical thinking skills developed by a liberal arts education. Why doesn’t anyone care? Because knowing the thesis of Max Weber’s The Protestant Ethic and the Spirit of Capitalism doesn’t help make anyone money. It might help make me money if I was worried about my salvation, but by itself knowing that fact doesn’t put a dime in anyone’s coffers. Employers don’t really value critical thinking skills because the more people think, as independent thinkers, the more threat there is to the corporate ethos and to management, which is bad for you. In addition, knowing stuff generally doesn’t help when it comes to knowing how to do specific things, which I guess is what a job is. The main point here is, lots of people are smart and work hard, but not a lot of people have the connections necessary to get in on the superb cronyism and nepotism running rampant in corporate America and the government. So get out there and start ingratiating yourself to powerful, important people. If you see a Mercedes in a parking lot, just start washing and waxing it. Whoever owns it will thank you profusely, albeit nervously, right before they call the cops.

Well, that’s all for now, but check back for more posts in this series! Also, get to work you lazy bums! No more government handouts!

Charlie Sheen: Marketing Genius

The whole world is laughing at Charlie Sheen. But I get the feeling that he's laughing at us, too. I've been doing a little research into marketing of late, and I'm telling you, the man's a master. He fired his publicist? Of course he did. He didn't need him!
Without endorsing or condoning Charlie Sheen's drug-fueled craze of the past couple months, you have to admit that it was a masterstroke in creating a "brand" for himself. He's now known as the celebrity walking the tightrope of sanity right before our eyes, and we love it. We love celebrities that act out because we live vicariously through their terrible decisions, as they do things we never really could but secretly want to.
All the delirious TV interviews, which piqued our curiosity trying to guess what drug(s) he was on at the time, only drew us in more. Was he acting out because of his altered mental state, or just because he doesn't care any more? This too we secretly desire and wish to emulate. And let's be honest, he was funny. His babble was intriguing and ludicrous had its own strange internal logic to it. Winners win, I guess. At any rate, he has remarkably built up the riveting sense of anticipation: what is he going to do next?
So what did he do with this "Charlie Sheen" brand of crazy? Well, he just made a Twitter account. Brilliant. When I started following him two nights ago, he hadn't even tweeted a thing and he had some 200,000 followers. Professional social media consulting firms would kill (probably literally, as a promotional stunt, perhaps?) to cull that many followers for a client...but it would probably take months, maybe years. Charlie Sheen did it in less than 24 hours.
At the time of writing, @charliesheen now has 505,990 followers. At this point we almost don't care what he actually says (partly because we know it will be the same gibberish about "winning"). We just know it's going to be crazy and funny. He's a phenomenon now, not even a man or a brand. What sort of marketing firm could produce an effect anything close to this? Of course, you might ask, what is the "value" of his brand, i.e., what can he actually do with it? The best answer is, whatever he wants. Genius!

Here I Stand

I just performed a splendiferous purge of my Google Reader feeds, and I'm feeling like a new man. It's interesting how many subscriptions I added because they were sources I thought I was supposed to be reading instead of things I actually want to read. It just reminded me how much baggage we all carry - the weight of other people's expectations of us, and most especially the often delusional expectations we place on ourselves. (On a current events note, for delusional cf. Charlie Sheen and Muammar Gaddafi, both of whom have wild misinterpretations of reality, or at least can't accept what they know to be true as reality.) Both others' expectations and our own self-imposed burdens are frequently out of touch with reality. I don't know why I struggle so often with accepting myself as I am and working from there, instead of making my ideal self the baseline of my personal expectations. I think such a baseline makes ever making progress toward that ideal self that much more difficult, because the reality of who I am now is ignored, so what I'm working on (and working with) is an almost alien superman self. It's probably so difficult because I have little tolerance for weakness in myself and others, which is ridiculous because it is just as much those places where we fall short as where we excel that make us interesting and vital. I want to work with myself as I am, and embrace those terrifically rough edges that no doubt make me who I am.
On a related note, I'd really like to learn how to care about what people think while simultaneously not caring what people think. I want to care about what people generally, and my friends and family particularly, think because they are people with a voice and a heart and good parts and bad who deserve my attention and my respect. Also, I know that others see the world in valuable and interesting ways, and have insights into me and my life that I can't see because they are blind spots to me. Yet there is a limit to this caring, when it supersedes my own shaping of the world, when I'm afraid of holding a particular position or belief because it might offend someone I care about. I know I have a healthy contrarian streak already, but this isn't about rebellion for rebellion's sake. It's about taking a stand, declaring meaning where I find meaning to reside, and living with the consequences of such a stand. It seems to me that the most insightful and wonderful and world-transforming people have this "double-consciousness," a terrible intimacy with humanity's deepest longings and fears, and yet also a singular vision that says, in spite of all that, this is who I am, who I need to be at this time and this place. I can't help but think of Martin Luther's oft quoted but simply beautiful "Here I Stand, I can do no other. God help me. Amen." Here's to the courage and inner fortitude such a stand requires, and creates in us when we take it.

Ennui and Memento Mori

It's rainy and cold out. No snow, though, my northern brethren and sistren. That and only one sub job this week inspires a certain ennui. What a great word, invented by the masters of listlessness themselves, the French. I realize the industriousness required to blog under such circumstances to be quite ironic, but hang with me.

The text of the day comes from Pink Floyd's 1973 album The Dark Side of the Moon. The lyrics are from the song "Time". The wiki author aptly labels the song a memento mori. Written by all the members of the band, all copyrights theirs, etc.


Ticking away the moments that make up a dull day
Fritter and waste the hours in an offhand way
Kicking around on a piece of ground in your home town
Waiting for someone or something to show you the way

Tired of lying in the sunshine staying home to watch the rain
And you are young and life is long and there is time to kill today
And then one day you find ten years have got behind you
No one told you when to run, you missed the starting gun

And you run and you run to catch up with the sun, but it's sinking
Racing around to come up behind you again
The sun is the same in a relative way, but you're older
Shorter of breath and one day closer to death

Every year is getting shorter, never seem to find the time
Plans that either come to naught or half a page of scribbled lines
Hanging on quiet desperation is the English way
The time is gone, the song is over, thought I'd something more to say


These words resonate with me strongly. As Cornell West and others have noted, we are a death denying culture. Memento mori used to be an extremely popular expression in Western art. But we're through with all that sad stuff, the stuff that reminds us that we are not immortal after all, in spite of all the gadgets and other shiny things we surround ourselves with. Our culture denies the depth element of human existence, the part that bristles beneath the surface. We've invented everything we can to keep the subterranean in its place. But we lose so much meaning by doing so. 


The other important aspect of memento mori is that it isn't designed to be depressing. The point is to inspire one to live in light of what's coming. We just automatically assume that thoughts of death have to be depressing. So let's not run from those little reminders of mortality when we come across them, but ponder them and resolve to live ever more meaningfully.