Since I got one pseudo-angry phone call yesterday from someone demanding details about my new gig, I will share some here. Starting Jan. 11, I will be working at a large, Hartford, CT-based nonprofit organization called the Community Renewal Team (or CRT). They have about 750 employees and serve nearly the entire state of Connecticut.
Their repertoire includes providing basic needs (such as Meals on Wheels, food banks, school lunch programs, elder services, shelters, heat assistance, etc.); financial literacy education programs; employment assistance (case mgmt., training, financial assistance, job placement, etc.); policy and advocacy; youth education and mentoring; wellness; drug and alcohol education and rehabilitation; criminal reentry; and a whole bunch more. Looking at this program list will get you started.
My job in the communications office will be to help tell the stories of all of those programs, to work with the media and other publics to help raise awareness of the organization as a whole.
The CRT is nearly all grant-funded, working with a fiscal budget of somewhere around $60 million. It is the oldest community action group in America, having started much smaller in the 1950's. That's about all I know for now. I haven't seen where I'll be working yet, but I presume I'll be in a cubicle. Wish me luck!
Tuesday, December 15, 2009
Wednesday, December 9, 2009
A Tremendous Theory
Thanks to being snowed in to my apartment all day this past Saturday, I was able to unabashedly catch up big time on my LOST re-watching. (I watched probably 10 episodes or so in one day!) Rarely leaving my couch, I finished up season three. With the LOST s6 premiere just under 2 months away now, speculation from fans and major media alike is picking up.
One of the bggest names in the LOST media world is Entertainment Weekly's Doc Jensen. Since the beginning of the series, he has offered his own thoughts on the show's future as well as shining the spotlight on some of the fan community's biggest fanatics. He just posted a new column that gets very deep into demons (or daemons, or daimons) and their possible role on the Island. I found it very dense and boring, and skipped most of it. However, he also featured an interview with an amateur LOSTie named Andrew Wilmar, aka Eye M. Sick, who has run a LOST-related blog for a while. In the interview, Jensen highlighted Wilmar's Three Black Swans theory, which he posted this past summer. And it's a doozie.
In sum, it proposes that there have been three unexpected Black Swan events that were not "supposed to happen" but did thanks to various characters, that have kept the Valenzetti equation from causing the end of the world. We've seen the first two of these events -- the Incident from last season's finale and Desmond's turning the fail safe key.
In both cases, the energy contained in the Island would lead to the end of the world if not halted in some way. In the 1977 Incident, the normal course of events would be that DHARMA's drilling into it would have unleashed the energy with Apocalyptic results, had it not been for the LOSTies and Juliet detonating the nuclear device first. Essentially the same is true when Des turns the fail safe, keeping the energy from being unleashed after Locke prevents the pushing of the button. The LOSTies and Des are the Black Swan variables that changed the normal course of events.
**This part I am embellishing a little: Faraday's mother knows this, and that is why she is so insistent on making sure Des and everyone else important back to the Island, to keep the delicate balance of the loop in place. We can postulate that Des, when unstuck in time after turning the fail safe, had the ability to change history (whatever happened, happened is wrong), could have married Penny and never gone to the Island, and therefore never would have turned the fail safe. Bam. End of the world. Thus, because of the two events, there has been a loop 27-year loop btw 1977 and 2004 going on for who knows how long (Note: The Valenzetti equation calls for a 27-year period before the world ends if not changed). That is also why Faraday's mother does not hesitate to send her son to the Island, even though she knows his end will come there at her own hand. This also adds to the 'loophole' idea spoken by the Man in Black to Jacob.
The third we shall see in the final season. It's a little too deep to try to summarize here, but it ties in my discovery of the Omega Point motif and essentially states that the two children of the Island that have been born, Aaron and Yi Jeon, must get married before 2031 to restore balance, or order, or Yin-yang, etc. to the Island, and therefore the world. I know that sounds dumb right now, but read the whole theory, and it's actually pretty amazing, when supported with evidence from events we've seen on the Island so far.
One of the bggest names in the LOST media world is Entertainment Weekly's Doc Jensen. Since the beginning of the series, he has offered his own thoughts on the show's future as well as shining the spotlight on some of the fan community's biggest fanatics. He just posted a new column that gets very deep into demons (or daemons, or daimons) and their possible role on the Island. I found it very dense and boring, and skipped most of it. However, he also featured an interview with an amateur LOSTie named Andrew Wilmar, aka Eye M. Sick, who has run a LOST-related blog for a while. In the interview, Jensen highlighted Wilmar's Three Black Swans theory, which he posted this past summer. And it's a doozie.
In sum, it proposes that there have been three unexpected Black Swan events that were not "supposed to happen" but did thanks to various characters, that have kept the Valenzetti equation from causing the end of the world. We've seen the first two of these events -- the Incident from last season's finale and Desmond's turning the fail safe key.
In both cases, the energy contained in the Island would lead to the end of the world if not halted in some way. In the 1977 Incident, the normal course of events would be that DHARMA's drilling into it would have unleashed the energy with Apocalyptic results, had it not been for the LOSTies and Juliet detonating the nuclear device first. Essentially the same is true when Des turns the fail safe, keeping the energy from being unleashed after Locke prevents the pushing of the button. The LOSTies and Des are the Black Swan variables that changed the normal course of events.
**This part I am embellishing a little: Faraday's mother knows this, and that is why she is so insistent on making sure Des and everyone else important back to the Island, to keep the delicate balance of the loop in place. We can postulate that Des, when unstuck in time after turning the fail safe, had the ability to change history (whatever happened, happened is wrong), could have married Penny and never gone to the Island, and therefore never would have turned the fail safe. Bam. End of the world. Thus, because of the two events, there has been a loop 27-year loop btw 1977 and 2004 going on for who knows how long (Note: The Valenzetti equation calls for a 27-year period before the world ends if not changed). That is also why Faraday's mother does not hesitate to send her son to the Island, even though she knows his end will come there at her own hand. This also adds to the 'loophole' idea spoken by the Man in Black to Jacob.
The third we shall see in the final season. It's a little too deep to try to summarize here, but it ties in my discovery of the Omega Point motif and essentially states that the two children of the Island that have been born, Aaron and Yi Jeon, must get married before 2031 to restore balance, or order, or Yin-yang, etc. to the Island, and therefore the world. I know that sounds dumb right now, but read the whole theory, and it's actually pretty amazing, when supported with evidence from events we've seen on the Island so far.
Monday, December 7, 2009
Sad News
Greta Goldfish Armstrong passed away sometime between 5 p.m. Friday, Dec. 4 and 8 a.m. Monday, Dec. 7, at her residence in the James Madison University Office of Public Affairs.
Burial services took place Monday morning, at sea. She will be missed.
Memorials should not be put toward buying me another fish. Thank you.
Thursday, December 3, 2009
Late Photos
So I know I'm a little late on posting about my travels and Thanksgiving weekend. Suffice it to say that the trip was terrific as was the Turkey Day meal. Aside from a minor flat-tire-at-the-Hartford-Airport snafu, most everything went off without a hitch. I flew, cooked, ate, drove, interviewed, slept, changed a tire, flew again, rested, ate, bowled, ate again, won several board games, ate again, slept, and so on and so forth. It was nice. Here are a few photos I took on my phone. The first two are repeats of ones on Sarah's blog.
One of the days, Sarah and I traveled to Brattleboro, Vermont. Read her entry for a better description of the trip. We ate at a Thai restaurant, visited several used book stores, a few thrift stores and stopped at the unhappiest place on earth on the way back. This is a picture I took too late of the "Welcome to Vermont" sign.
Sarah enjoyed her meal at Thai Bamboo.
Sarah did not enjoy my antics.
The nail which, upon entering Sarah's tire head-first, caused our flat; costing $25 to repair plus $4 for the 10 minutes we were "parked" in Bradley International Airport's garbage-riddled Economy Parking Lot D.
Sarah enjoyed her meal at Thai Bamboo.
Sarah did not enjoy my antics.
The nail which, upon entering Sarah's tire head-first, caused our flat; costing $25 to repair plus $4 for the 10 minutes we were "parked" in Bradley International Airport's garbage-riddled Economy Parking Lot D.
Wednesday, November 11, 2009
TV Time
So, it's been a while since I last posted, but in my defense, these have been by far the busiest weeks of the year for me at work, and I've been spending a lot of my free time exploring my new TV. It's not the snazziest, top-of-the-line behemoth I could have gotten. No, I was sensible, did lots of research and settled on a nice mid-range set. It's a 32", 780p LCD TV. If you know what that means, or care about more bells and whistles, comment and I will answer more, but since most of you probably don't know and don't care, I will leave it at that.
The one feature I wanted to highlight is that fact that it has an input port solely reserved for computers. Unfortunately, it's a VGA (15-pin) input (a somewhat outdated technology), not the best for streaming digital video, etc. My laptop has a DVI (29 pin) output port. Thankfully, my computer did come with a DVI-VGA converter, but I still had to buy a VGA cable to hook it into the TV. I ordered one, and it came last week. The result:
Having purchased a 10' cable, I can place my computer under my coffee table, run the cord along the floor and into the TV, and watch programs on Hulu with comfort. The quality is actually very good, at least from my viewing distance. However, to get sound, I would have had to buy another cable and adapter to have sound output from the TV, so instead I bought some computer speakers on sale for $5 at Target, and simply listen to sound from the computer using them. It's not the classiest setup, but it suits me. Lately, the flavors of the month for me have been "Andy Barker, P.I." a comedy starring Andy Richter as a mild-mannered accountant-come private investigator, co-starring Tony Hale of "Arrested Development" that lasted only 6 episodes; and "Kitchen Nightmares," a show where enfant terrible and uber-chef Gordon Ramsay visits struggling restaurants in America and turns them around in a week (it's disingenuously edited and probably mostly scripted) but it's still hilarious.
In other TV news, apparently AMC is planning on running a 6-episode miniseries beginning this Sunday that is essentially an updated version of the 1960's cult sci-fi classic "The Prisoner." This version stars Jim Caviezel, a favorite just sub-star-level actor of mine, most famous for playing Jesus in Mel Gibson's "The Passion of the Christ," as the central character No. 6; and Sir Ian Mckellen as his nemesis, No. 2. Some other details have been modernized. Read all about it here in the NY Times. http://www.nytimes.com/2009/11/11/arts/television/11prisoner.html?_r=1&partner=rss&emc=rss
The one feature I wanted to highlight is that fact that it has an input port solely reserved for computers. Unfortunately, it's a VGA (15-pin) input (a somewhat outdated technology), not the best for streaming digital video, etc. My laptop has a DVI (29 pin) output port. Thankfully, my computer did come with a DVI-VGA converter, but I still had to buy a VGA cable to hook it into the TV. I ordered one, and it came last week. The result:
Having purchased a 10' cable, I can place my computer under my coffee table, run the cord along the floor and into the TV, and watch programs on Hulu with comfort. The quality is actually very good, at least from my viewing distance. However, to get sound, I would have had to buy another cable and adapter to have sound output from the TV, so instead I bought some computer speakers on sale for $5 at Target, and simply listen to sound from the computer using them. It's not the classiest setup, but it suits me. Lately, the flavors of the month for me have been "Andy Barker, P.I." a comedy starring Andy Richter as a mild-mannered accountant-come private investigator, co-starring Tony Hale of "Arrested Development" that lasted only 6 episodes; and "Kitchen Nightmares," a show where enfant terrible and uber-chef Gordon Ramsay visits struggling restaurants in America and turns them around in a week (it's disingenuously edited and probably mostly scripted) but it's still hilarious.
In other TV news, apparently AMC is planning on running a 6-episode miniseries beginning this Sunday that is essentially an updated version of the 1960's cult sci-fi classic "The Prisoner." This version stars Jim Caviezel, a favorite just sub-star-level actor of mine, most famous for playing Jesus in Mel Gibson's "The Passion of the Christ," as the central character No. 6; and Sir Ian Mckellen as his nemesis, No. 2. Some other details have been modernized. Read all about it here in the NY Times. http://www.nytimes.com/2009/11/11/arts/television/11prisoner.html?_r=1&partner=rss&emc=rss
Sunday, October 25, 2009
Mind Trap
Sid Shady and Sam Sham are sitting at a bar. Both order a double shot of Johnny Walker Red Label Scotch. Sid offers a wager to Sam: Sid tells Sam to place his shot on the solid oak bar and place a solid glass bowl completely over the shot. Sid then bets Sam $1 that Sid can drink Sam's shot without touching either the bowl or the shot glass, and without the use of any other person or object. Should Sam take the bet?
Note: This is a paraphrased (and probably improved) version of a question from a substandard mind-problem/trivia game from the early 90's called "MindTrap." I purchased an unused copy of the game from Goodwill today for $1.95, and played it for a while with Greg and Sarah, with semi-hilarious results.
Please post your answers (Yes or No, with explanation either way) in the comments, and I will post the correct answer sometime tomorrow (Greg and Sarah obviously excluded).
Note: This is a paraphrased (and probably improved) version of a question from a substandard mind-problem/trivia game from the early 90's called "MindTrap." I purchased an unused copy of the game from Goodwill today for $1.95, and played it for a while with Greg and Sarah, with semi-hilarious results.
Please post your answers (Yes or No, with explanation either way) in the comments, and I will post the correct answer sometime tomorrow (Greg and Sarah obviously excluded).
Tuesday, October 20, 2009
Aqua Man
I've not updated about the gold fish for a while. Greta is still doing well, and seemed to be happy in her vase/bowl contraption I had set up in my apartment. However, winter is approaching the Valley rapidly, and along with it, serious cold. Greta is a Betta fish, whose native climate is tropical. I've read form various sources that the species thrives in temperatures in the mid-to-upper seventies, though they can survive in waters as cold as 65 degrees Fahrenheit.
My apartment does not have central heating and cooling, but rather two wall units in the front and back of the space. This is economical for me and the environment, as I spend no energy or money heating an empty apartment while I am at work during the day, or even heating the other side of my apartment when I am in my bedroom.
Unfortunately, this means the temperature can get downright frigid during cold days and nights, which is not good for the fish. The other night was a chilly, but not horrible temperature, and Greta's water registered at just 67 degrees. That is probably too cold for her. And the temperature fluctuations between day and night and at the whim of my personal comfort are even worse for her.
So, rather than spend about $20 on a heater to maintain the temperature for my $0.13 fish, I bought a $10 decent-looking aquarium for her and moved her into my office at work. As much as we at work complain about the inconsistency of our building's heating system, it does manage to maintain a fairly stable temperature in the low 70's, which is much better for her. The new aquarium also has a self-filtering system and bubbler, which means changing water less frequently, and more space for her to explore (I even ponied up for a nice little fake plant). Here's a picture of the new digs:
She survived the first night, though I think it took her some getting used to the sound of the bubbler and the direct light from the aquarium lid. She seems to be enjoying the new space, plant and attention.
My apartment does not have central heating and cooling, but rather two wall units in the front and back of the space. This is economical for me and the environment, as I spend no energy or money heating an empty apartment while I am at work during the day, or even heating the other side of my apartment when I am in my bedroom.
Unfortunately, this means the temperature can get downright frigid during cold days and nights, which is not good for the fish. The other night was a chilly, but not horrible temperature, and Greta's water registered at just 67 degrees. That is probably too cold for her. And the temperature fluctuations between day and night and at the whim of my personal comfort are even worse for her.
So, rather than spend about $20 on a heater to maintain the temperature for my $0.13 fish, I bought a $10 decent-looking aquarium for her and moved her into my office at work. As much as we at work complain about the inconsistency of our building's heating system, it does manage to maintain a fairly stable temperature in the low 70's, which is much better for her. The new aquarium also has a self-filtering system and bubbler, which means changing water less frequently, and more space for her to explore (I even ponied up for a nice little fake plant). Here's a picture of the new digs:
She survived the first night, though I think it took her some getting used to the sound of the bubbler and the direct light from the aquarium lid. She seems to be enjoying the new space, plant and attention.
Tuesday, October 6, 2009
Sorry, another LOST post
This entry is merely a response to Pops' post after finishing up Season Five of LOST. I would have just left a comment on his blog, but it would have been too long. So here, goes.
-Jacob's meddling in the previous lives of the LOSTies is absolutely an important facet of the entire show. Particularly, the writers have not-so-subtly hinted that his physically touching each of them in the flashbacks is important. What I am left questioning afterward is the significance of when he went to each: Locke, Jack and Sawyer, Sun and Jin years before Flight 815 (Sawyer in the 70's); Sayid and Hurley after leaving the Island; and Ilana, who knows? Is it significant that Jack, Kate, Sawyer and Hurley were the original four names the Others told Michael to bring them in exchange for Walt? If so, why also Sun/Jin and Ilana now? Or is it only these characters we've seen Jacob touch so far?
-Are we to believe that it is Charlie's guitar Jacob gives Hurley? Or is it a guitar at all?
-Indeed, was Jacob responsible for Nadia's death (intentionally or not); or was he responsible for saving Sayid? Did he raise Locke from the dead? If he did so, did he have foreknowledge of his own demise? If so, why did he allow the events leading to his demise conspire? Or is he even truly gone for good?
-Is the fish Jacob dismantles and cooks in the silent first scene a "red herring"? If so, in what way are we being misled? My guess is that Jacob is actually the "bad" one.
-All signs are now pointing to Rose and Bernard being "Adam and Eve."
-I don't think it definitively hurts or helps the "reset" theory of the bomb detonation, but seeing Chang hurt/lose his arm in 1977 and having previously seen him with a prosthetic/slinged arm in the Orientation videos in 1980 is neat.
-I will post again tonight rehashing my original master-development in the who/what is Jacob thread I previously shielded.
-Jacob's meddling in the previous lives of the LOSTies is absolutely an important facet of the entire show. Particularly, the writers have not-so-subtly hinted that his physically touching each of them in the flashbacks is important. What I am left questioning afterward is the significance of when he went to each: Locke, Jack and Sawyer, Sun and Jin years before Flight 815 (Sawyer in the 70's); Sayid and Hurley after leaving the Island; and Ilana, who knows? Is it significant that Jack, Kate, Sawyer and Hurley were the original four names the Others told Michael to bring them in exchange for Walt? If so, why also Sun/Jin and Ilana now? Or is it only these characters we've seen Jacob touch so far?
-Are we to believe that it is Charlie's guitar Jacob gives Hurley? Or is it a guitar at all?
-Indeed, was Jacob responsible for Nadia's death (intentionally or not); or was he responsible for saving Sayid? Did he raise Locke from the dead? If he did so, did he have foreknowledge of his own demise? If so, why did he allow the events leading to his demise conspire? Or is he even truly gone for good?
-Is the fish Jacob dismantles and cooks in the silent first scene a "red herring"? If so, in what way are we being misled? My guess is that Jacob is actually the "bad" one.
-All signs are now pointing to Rose and Bernard being "Adam and Eve."
-I don't think it definitively hurts or helps the "reset" theory of the bomb detonation, but seeing Chang hurt/lose his arm in 1977 and having previously seen him with a prosthetic/slinged arm in the Orientation videos in 1980 is neat.
-I will post again tonight rehashing my original master-development in the who/what is Jacob thread I previously shielded.
Friday, October 2, 2009
To Do List
As I continue rewatching LOST, I recall some issues that I believe need to be addressed in season 6. None, I guess, are that glaring that if they weren't, it wouldn't be the end of the world...OR WOULD IT?
1) Libby's backstory: I just watched "Dave" again. It's the Hurley-centric episode that recounts his mental illness, time at Santa Rosa and ?hallucinations? of his pal, Dave. It's not an epic episode in terms of the series, but it does matter-of-factly introduce the "Snow Globe" theory that everything is just in his head. Thankfully, the writers have vehemently denied that that is the case. And Libby becomes a larger figure as Hurley's love interest/counselor. But it is her uber-creepy appearance as a mental patient at Santa Rosa as the capper that adds the biggest piece of intrigue to her character. In a later episode, we see her giving Desmond the boat he uses to reach the Island. Theories abound that she is more intricately connected with the Island/Widmore than we know (e.g. could be Widmore's off-island child that led to his getting the boot as leader; could be working for him; or a Hurley stalker!) Anyway it shakes out, we need to see it.
2) Kelvin Inman's story: We've seen Kelvin in the Hatch as Desmond's mentor and as a U.S. military officer in Desert Storm, where he served alongside Sam Austen (Kate's non-biological father) and Sayid the Torturer. I recall the producers at some time responding to a fan question that we would see how he got to the Island (presumably through Dharma), and I hope we do. If for no other reason than I like Clancy Brown, the actor who plays him.
3) Problems around Ben: Why was Ben wandering alone in the jungle when he was first caught by Rousseau, and why did Rousseau allow him to leave (she didn't recognize him as the one who stole her baby?). She didn't tell her story to anyone when he was caught. That's probably more an oversight b/c Ben was only planned for 3-4 episodes originally, but it is an annoying omission. It ties into another omission, about why Ben's Others presumably didn't know about the Hatch. They used all the other Dharma stations, but apparently didn't know about that Swan, which seems ridiculous. And if they did know about it, they apparently didn't know its importance. I believe later in season 3 we see that Ben can spy on the Hatch from another station, so somewhere something doesn't add up.
4) More importantly, I want to see how/why the real Henry Gale got to the Island in the balloon. (I presume Ben or another Other interrogated him and then broke his neck.) There are indicators on the balloon plaque and in Ben's false story that Henry may have ties to Widmore/Hanso Foundation, and I hope they revisit it at some point.
1) Libby's backstory: I just watched "Dave" again. It's the Hurley-centric episode that recounts his mental illness, time at Santa Rosa and ?hallucinations? of his pal, Dave. It's not an epic episode in terms of the series, but it does matter-of-factly introduce the "Snow Globe" theory that everything is just in his head. Thankfully, the writers have vehemently denied that that is the case. And Libby becomes a larger figure as Hurley's love interest/counselor. But it is her uber-creepy appearance as a mental patient at Santa Rosa as the capper that adds the biggest piece of intrigue to her character. In a later episode, we see her giving Desmond the boat he uses to reach the Island. Theories abound that she is more intricately connected with the Island/Widmore than we know (e.g. could be Widmore's off-island child that led to his getting the boot as leader; could be working for him; or a Hurley stalker!) Anyway it shakes out, we need to see it.
2) Kelvin Inman's story: We've seen Kelvin in the Hatch as Desmond's mentor and as a U.S. military officer in Desert Storm, where he served alongside Sam Austen (Kate's non-biological father) and Sayid the Torturer. I recall the producers at some time responding to a fan question that we would see how he got to the Island (presumably through Dharma), and I hope we do. If for no other reason than I like Clancy Brown, the actor who plays him.
3) Problems around Ben: Why was Ben wandering alone in the jungle when he was first caught by Rousseau, and why did Rousseau allow him to leave (she didn't recognize him as the one who stole her baby?). She didn't tell her story to anyone when he was caught. That's probably more an oversight b/c Ben was only planned for 3-4 episodes originally, but it is an annoying omission. It ties into another omission, about why Ben's Others presumably didn't know about the Hatch. They used all the other Dharma stations, but apparently didn't know about that Swan, which seems ridiculous. And if they did know about it, they apparently didn't know its importance. I believe later in season 3 we see that Ben can spy on the Hatch from another station, so somewhere something doesn't add up.
4) More importantly, I want to see how/why the real Henry Gale got to the Island in the balloon. (I presume Ben or another Other interrogated him and then broke his neck.) There are indicators on the balloon plaque and in Ben's false story that Henry may have ties to Widmore/Hanso Foundation, and I hope they revisit it at some point.
Monday, September 28, 2009
Two recappers of note
Today has been slow so far, so I've been spending some time surfing through various LOST blogs and theory pages, and I happenstance-ily happened upon two good blogs. (WARNING: Both are chock-full of spoilers for those who haven't finished S5).
One is Fishbiscuitland. Aside from having a great name, it is unique among journals I have seen. He posts fairly infrequently. In fact, his recap of the S5 finale wasn't posted until 2-3 months after it aired. He's just recently begun recapping S1 episodes. His recaps cover 2-6 episodes per entry, based mostly on the continuity of the stories, intriguing points and what he feels appropriate. His vast knowledge of the show is apparent, and his pseudo-narrative entries show depth in highlighting the literary aspects of the show. But what is more apparent is the amount of time he must spend on compiling any single entry. The entries are LONG, made up of several short (1-4 line) paragraphs, separated by appropriately elucidating or funny images, most of which are screencaps from specific episodes. He claimed he hasn't re-watched any episodes since their first airings, so his memory of specific visual moments is incredible, or he is just re-watching with a very keen eye. He doesn't mince words (he wasn't a fan of S5), and there may be a dash or two of vulgarity in a few of the entries, but nothing obscene. Really fascinating, and worth the (considerable) time to check it out.
The second is Broadcast Depth. This isn't a wholly LOST-dedicated site, nor are the insights or style superb in any unique way. It's more of interest to me because it happens to be authored by a guy who works for JMU's Parking Services. He is also an alum, and I have had to work with him on a few occasions. He's a fairly interesting guy (far more than his current occupation would suggest) with a background in art, music and film. I would advise skipping the entries about his personal life (weird), and just stick to his takes on the show (he's also not a fan of S5).
Credit for the hilarious and barely-related GIF (click it to view with sound) goes to YTMND. Check out their Web site, or this lostpedia list of more hilarious LOST YTMNDs.
Tidbit: In the above YTMND, the original Shawshank guard whose face has been replaced with Tom Friendly's is played by Clancy Brown, also portrayer of LOST's Kelvin Inman.
Sunday, September 27, 2009
The Long Con
I just rewatched "The Long Con," one of the best LOST episodes of Season 2, and perhaps of the entire series. It is a Sawyer-centric episode that details two of Sawyer's long cons, one on-island to get control of the guns (and therefore, the group) and one from his past, where he steals $600k from a woman named Cassidy.
The episode is noteworthy simply for the entertaining and twisty plot lines. Of course, with foreknowledge of how the episode turns out, the deft foreshadowing placed throughout the episode by the writers becomes much more apparent. In fact, in retrospect, the on- and -off-island actions mirror so closely that we should all feel like fools for not seeing it coming the first time. But my second watching also revealed some greater significance.
Two insignificant notes first:
1) Sawyer's associate, Gordy, is played by IWU alum and my Commencement speaker Kevin Dunn. It's a small role, and not really that noteworthy. The only real element of the character I have deeper thoughts about are what his role was after Sawyer got the money. My best guess is that the song-and-dance about loving Cassidy Sawyer gave Gordy at the diner was to throw him off, so that Sawyer may keep all the money. We don't know how it turns out, and I don't remember seeing any resolution in a later episode, though I could be mistaken.
2) Speaking of the diner, the waitress is Dianne Jansen, mother of Kate. There's no real significance to that tidbit, at least in this episode. Just another neat interconnection placed in by the writers.
Now to the more meaty stuff. "Cons" (actions, not people) are a significant motif throughout the series. But a few things about Sawyer's in this episode are noteworthy.
1) Whatever we make of Gordy, it appears that he at least was in some sort of position of pulling Sawyer's strings. We have seen many times throughout the series characters manipulating others for what appears to be personal gain, but later is revealed to be done at the beckoning of some larger power. To avoid any spoilers, I'll leave it at that.
2) I don't believe it's insignificant (I know, I know, double negative) that John Locke is (one) target of the con. How many times have we seen Locke conned? (His mom, his dad x2, Benry in the Hatch to name a few). But what really struck me is Sawyer's dialog with Charlie at the end of the episode, when he notes "Johnny Locke has a nemesis." That slapped me in the face, as I had not remembered it at all from the first time I watched it. Again, I'll leave it at that until I've received assurances that everyone is done watching season 5.
3) Both Sawyer and Charlie's desire to "stop taking orders" from those in power and want of revenge/"to make a fool" out of them mirrors Ben's rebellion near the end of season five. Again, I'm leaving it there. But Sawyer's half-fire-lit face throughout much of his dialog is reminiscent of many other "dual" characters.
4) When Hurley and Sayid are listening to the radio at the end, Sayid says the radio signals could be coming from anywhere, to which Hurley responds with the throwaway line "or any time." Clearly that foreshadows "future" developments, but in an undeveloped way. But now, I am going to pay attention to the music in future episodes just to see if "Moonlight Serenade" is played somewhere/time else. That would be fun.
5) When explaining his motives to Charlie, Sawyer says he is not a "good person." You can read the entry on Lostpedia about Good and Bad People for the significance of that.
The episode is noteworthy simply for the entertaining and twisty plot lines. Of course, with foreknowledge of how the episode turns out, the deft foreshadowing placed throughout the episode by the writers becomes much more apparent. In fact, in retrospect, the on- and -off-island actions mirror so closely that we should all feel like fools for not seeing it coming the first time. But my second watching also revealed some greater significance.
Two insignificant notes first:
1) Sawyer's associate, Gordy, is played by IWU alum and my Commencement speaker Kevin Dunn. It's a small role, and not really that noteworthy. The only real element of the character I have deeper thoughts about are what his role was after Sawyer got the money. My best guess is that the song-and-dance about loving Cassidy Sawyer gave Gordy at the diner was to throw him off, so that Sawyer may keep all the money. We don't know how it turns out, and I don't remember seeing any resolution in a later episode, though I could be mistaken.
2) Speaking of the diner, the waitress is Dianne Jansen, mother of Kate. There's no real significance to that tidbit, at least in this episode. Just another neat interconnection placed in by the writers.
Now to the more meaty stuff. "Cons" (actions, not people) are a significant motif throughout the series. But a few things about Sawyer's in this episode are noteworthy.
1) Whatever we make of Gordy, it appears that he at least was in some sort of position of pulling Sawyer's strings. We have seen many times throughout the series characters manipulating others for what appears to be personal gain, but later is revealed to be done at the beckoning of some larger power. To avoid any spoilers, I'll leave it at that.
2) I don't believe it's insignificant (I know, I know, double negative) that John Locke is (one) target of the con. How many times have we seen Locke conned? (His mom, his dad x2, Benry in the Hatch to name a few). But what really struck me is Sawyer's dialog with Charlie at the end of the episode, when he notes "Johnny Locke has a nemesis." That slapped me in the face, as I had not remembered it at all from the first time I watched it. Again, I'll leave it at that until I've received assurances that everyone is done watching season 5.
3) Both Sawyer and Charlie's desire to "stop taking orders" from those in power and want of revenge/"to make a fool" out of them mirrors Ben's rebellion near the end of season five. Again, I'm leaving it there. But Sawyer's half-fire-lit face throughout much of his dialog is reminiscent of many other "dual" characters.
4) When Hurley and Sayid are listening to the radio at the end, Sayid says the radio signals could be coming from anywhere, to which Hurley responds with the throwaway line "or any time." Clearly that foreshadows "future" developments, but in an undeveloped way. But now, I am going to pay attention to the music in future episodes just to see if "Moonlight Serenade" is played somewhere/time else. That would be fun.
5) When explaining his motives to Charlie, Sawyer says he is not a "good person." You can read the entry on Lostpedia about Good and Bad People for the significance of that.
Saturday, September 19, 2009
LOST: Season 2, Take 2
I am now halfway through rewatching season 2 of LOST, and I thought it a good time to share some of my thoughts thus far on the season I have numerous time claimed to be my favorite. I'm not yet ready to make a solid determination on whether that assertion remains true, but some of my other previous thoughts have remained certain, and some have changes slightly.
1) Charlie is still one of my least favorite characters. He is 100 percent worthless and 95 percent annoying. His drug use storyline is absolutely unsympathetic. He is whiny, needy, physically unattractive and serves only to screw things up for other people. It is certainly necessary in a show with as many twists and turns as LOST to have several people and/or events that impede other characters' progress toward the larger goal of the series (i.e. finding rescue, solving the Island's mysteries), but Charlie's impediments to others' progress is insignificant in the long run and stupid. Some things/people, like Ben, the Others, and the Island's slowly revealed mysteries help change the course of the action in awesome, diabolical or intriguing ways. Charlie is just ultra lame. I care nothing about his and Claire's 'relationship,' which is a shame, because Claire would be an intriguing character, if she weren't reduced to a caricature of the needy mother and foil to Charlie's patheticness.
2) Eko is one of my favorite characters. Rewatching Eko's seminal episode, "The 23rd Psalm," made me appreciate its nuances much more than the first time around. I think the issue lies with the fact that Eko's character was still fairly new, and that the plane just happened to be the one that held his brother, Yemi. It all just seemed like an overwrought coincidence, because, I think, it was one of the series' first such cases of extreme coincidence, or fate, as it may be. With five seasons worth of hindsight and an appreciation for the role of such coincidences/fate to the larger show, it seems now much more appropriate and interesting. Also, Eko re-cemented his badass status when he stared down Lil Smokey while Charlie cowers in the tree, saying simply, "I was not afraid of it."
3) I found Ana Lucia's seminal episode, "Collision," better than the first time, and I felt more sympathy for her character during it. But I still firmly maintain that she altogether sucks. It was as if a few episodes into the season, the writers decided they needed to inject a big dose of annoying, negative energy into the show and decided to come up with the least sympathetic and flattest character they could conceive. There was no niche that needed to be filled by a character such as hers. Both the character and the actress who portrays her (Michelle Rodriguez) just never blended in with the rest of the cast as well as Eko and Libby did.
4) Jack's indignant (and usually illogical) rage is far more annoying than when I first witnessed it. His heavy-handed motivation to "fix everything" is grating, as is his voice and puckered expression whenever he feels the need to spring into ill-advised action. I think the first season so clearly set Jack up as the clear, classic protagonist, that we were all blinded by how dumb he actually is.
5) At times, I have found Michael less annoying and Kate more annoying than in the past. In the Michael/Walt centric episode, "Adrift," I found myself feeling the sympathy for Michael I had been able to resist the first time. I felt sympathy for his helplessness. I think it mostly came from the contrast of his problems in that episode, which really weren't his fault, against the problems he has later, which result only from his own rash actions. As the series moves along,I also realized that Kate serves mostly just to screw things up. Everything she does screws up something for someone else (leaving a septic Sawyer alone to chase her symbolic horse; being taken hostage by Mr. Friendly after following Jack, Locke and Sawyer like an idiot; killing Wayne and getting Tom killed). Again, like Jack, the first season set her up as the main female protagonist, side-by-side with Jack, and blinded us to what she was really doing right in front of us, which was being an idiot.
6) Expectedly, much of the intrigue surrounding the Hatch is significantly lessened the second time around.
7) I still like Sawyer a lot, but it is clear that Josh Holloway really isn't a great actor. He has only three modes -- blind rage, sarcastic nicknaming, and flirting with Kate. I suppose the character is written this way, and may serve only to appreciate his transition to a more well-rounded character later.
8) The Tailies-centric episode, "The Other 48 Days," cheats us with the unexplained and blatantly misleading focus on Nathan, the guy A.L. puts in the pit while being wrongly suspected of being an Other. There's no explanation for why he wouldn't just tell them where he was and continue to be uncooperative. Though Goodwin is subtly foreshadowed at being the real Other, it was still a transparent mislead by the writers, without logic. That's cheating in my book.
There may be more updates on this subject as I continue rewatching. You've been warned.
1) Charlie is still one of my least favorite characters. He is 100 percent worthless and 95 percent annoying. His drug use storyline is absolutely unsympathetic. He is whiny, needy, physically unattractive and serves only to screw things up for other people. It is certainly necessary in a show with as many twists and turns as LOST to have several people and/or events that impede other characters' progress toward the larger goal of the series (i.e. finding rescue, solving the Island's mysteries), but Charlie's impediments to others' progress is insignificant in the long run and stupid. Some things/people, like Ben, the Others, and the Island's slowly revealed mysteries help change the course of the action in awesome, diabolical or intriguing ways. Charlie is just ultra lame. I care nothing about his and Claire's 'relationship,' which is a shame, because Claire would be an intriguing character, if she weren't reduced to a caricature of the needy mother and foil to Charlie's patheticness.
2) Eko is one of my favorite characters. Rewatching Eko's seminal episode, "The 23rd Psalm," made me appreciate its nuances much more than the first time around. I think the issue lies with the fact that Eko's character was still fairly new, and that the plane just happened to be the one that held his brother, Yemi. It all just seemed like an overwrought coincidence, because, I think, it was one of the series' first such cases of extreme coincidence, or fate, as it may be. With five seasons worth of hindsight and an appreciation for the role of such coincidences/fate to the larger show, it seems now much more appropriate and interesting. Also, Eko re-cemented his badass status when he stared down Lil Smokey while Charlie cowers in the tree, saying simply, "I was not afraid of it."
3) I found Ana Lucia's seminal episode, "Collision," better than the first time, and I felt more sympathy for her character during it. But I still firmly maintain that she altogether sucks. It was as if a few episodes into the season, the writers decided they needed to inject a big dose of annoying, negative energy into the show and decided to come up with the least sympathetic and flattest character they could conceive. There was no niche that needed to be filled by a character such as hers. Both the character and the actress who portrays her (Michelle Rodriguez) just never blended in with the rest of the cast as well as Eko and Libby did.
4) Jack's indignant (and usually illogical) rage is far more annoying than when I first witnessed it. His heavy-handed motivation to "fix everything" is grating, as is his voice and puckered expression whenever he feels the need to spring into ill-advised action. I think the first season so clearly set Jack up as the clear, classic protagonist, that we were all blinded by how dumb he actually is.
5) At times, I have found Michael less annoying and Kate more annoying than in the past. In the Michael/Walt centric episode, "Adrift," I found myself feeling the sympathy for Michael I had been able to resist the first time. I felt sympathy for his helplessness. I think it mostly came from the contrast of his problems in that episode, which really weren't his fault, against the problems he has later, which result only from his own rash actions. As the series moves along,I also realized that Kate serves mostly just to screw things up. Everything she does screws up something for someone else (leaving a septic Sawyer alone to chase her symbolic horse; being taken hostage by Mr. Friendly after following Jack, Locke and Sawyer like an idiot; killing Wayne and getting Tom killed). Again, like Jack, the first season set her up as the main female protagonist, side-by-side with Jack, and blinded us to what she was really doing right in front of us, which was being an idiot.
6) Expectedly, much of the intrigue surrounding the Hatch is significantly lessened the second time around.
7) I still like Sawyer a lot, but it is clear that Josh Holloway really isn't a great actor. He has only three modes -- blind rage, sarcastic nicknaming, and flirting with Kate. I suppose the character is written this way, and may serve only to appreciate his transition to a more well-rounded character later.
8) The Tailies-centric episode, "The Other 48 Days," cheats us with the unexplained and blatantly misleading focus on Nathan, the guy A.L. puts in the pit while being wrongly suspected of being an Other. There's no explanation for why he wouldn't just tell them where he was and continue to be uncooperative. Though Goodwin is subtly foreshadowed at being the real Other, it was still a transparent mislead by the writers, without logic. That's cheating in my book.
There may be more updates on this subject as I continue rewatching. You've been warned.
Tuesday, September 8, 2009
Several Thousand Words
Here is a post-trip log on my travels over the past week. The itinerary included a flight from Richmond to St. Louis, a series of car rides to Bloomington, an Amtrak to Chicago, Metra train to the 'burbs and a long 2-day road trip to Massachusetts, culminating with flying back to Richmond, with a connection (and 3-hour layover) in Cleveland in between. I had lots of opportunities to take photos, and I took advantage of some of them while traveling east.
Departing from the northern suburbs of Chicago, we passed through part of the city before crossing into Indiana. I'm sure everybody has been to or through Indiana at some point. It looks a lot like rural Illinois, except for Gary, which looks and smells like the underside of any old, rotting jalopy, times 100,000. The highlight was listening to Jon McLaughlin's song, "Indiana," which we made a point of doing before stopping at a Bob Evans for breakfast. I took no photos of this state.
Ohio is home to several interesting urban centers and communities which house some of the nation's most renowned academic and medical institutions, restaurants and cultural attractions, juxtaposed fascinatingly with some of the most iconic images of old, Rust Belt America. Unfortunately, our path took us to none of these interesting places. I took no photos of our long, horrible drive through this state, which stands out most in my mind only as one of the eight whose names are never abbreviated in news copy, per AP Style.
This is where I really started taking photos. The Western part of the state is supposed to be the pretty part, so I've been told, but I think I preferred the Eastern. Here are some photos:
This was, I think, my first entry into New York. We only passed through the southeastern nub of the state, which actually is quite beautiful, and came within some 50? miles from the City That Never Sleeps. I missed the "Welcome to" sign, so I took some other shots of signs that said 'New York.'
Our 48th largest state is a small and densely populated though beautiful one.
I took few photos on the way back to Virginia, due to exhaustion and a severe lack of interesting subject matter. The best I found were these birds, which along with several others, flew freely for at least the entire three hours I was at Cleveland Hopkins International Airport.
UPDATE: For a corollary on our travels, see Sarah's new blog.
Indiana
Departing from the northern suburbs of Chicago, we passed through part of the city before crossing into Indiana. I'm sure everybody has been to or through Indiana at some point. It looks a lot like rural Illinois, except for Gary, which looks and smells like the underside of any old, rotting jalopy, times 100,000. The highlight was listening to Jon McLaughlin's song, "Indiana," which we made a point of doing before stopping at a Bob Evans for breakfast. I took no photos of this state.
Ohio
Ohio is home to several interesting urban centers and communities which house some of the nation's most renowned academic and medical institutions, restaurants and cultural attractions, juxtaposed fascinatingly with some of the most iconic images of old, Rust Belt America. Unfortunately, our path took us to none of these interesting places. I took no photos of our long, horrible drive through this state, which stands out most in my mind only as one of the eight whose names are never abbreviated in news copy, per AP Style.
Pennsylvania
This is where I really started taking photos. The Western part of the state is supposed to be the pretty part, so I've been told, but I think I preferred the Eastern. Here are some photos:
Here is the requisite shot of the state's "Welcome To" sign, just over the Ohio-Pennsylvania border.
Pretty road, somewhere in Western Pennsylvania.
These, I thought, were pretty trees, somewhere in West-Central Pennsylvania.
What was a breathtaking Eastern Pennsylvanian landscape in person is less impressive in low-quality digital renderings.
Apparently, local ordinance bans people from Clarion, Pa. We risked arrest and entered the town to dine at Taco Bell. The community is also home to Clarion University, one of 11 state-funded universities in Pennsylvania. I could not positively determine what, if any, connection exists between the name of the town and the low-to-mid range hotel chain.
These people allowed their dogs to relieve themselves all over the McDonald's lawn in some Eastern Pennsylvanian hamlet where we stopped in an unsuccessful attempt to pirate a wireless internet connection.
The back of a cheap picture frame on my desk, taken just now. This represents the literally mean streets of Wilkes-Barre, Pa., which fluctuate between single- and three-car widths, with no paint or other indications of lanes. We drove at least 5 miles off the interstate all the way to the downtown square of WB in search of a Ramada Inn, which was advertised as being "just ahead." Frustrated by lack of sleep and mild stress, we turned around and headed to a Comfort Inn in an unincorporated area some 20 miles from the NY border. Unfortunately, our frustration also led us to miss the opportunity to recreate part of the opening sequence from television's "The Office" by filming a "Welcome to Scranton" sign.
At the Comfort Inn, I was bewildered by the initial burnt, musty aroma of our room. I was more bewildered that I stayed at yet another hotel which apparently had need to warn its breakfast patrons about the dangers of microwaving hard-boiled eggs. Seriously, has anyone ever heard of anybody microwaving a hard-boiled egg? Must be an Ohio River regional specialty.
Pretty road, somewhere in Western Pennsylvania.
These, I thought, were pretty trees, somewhere in West-Central Pennsylvania.
What was a breathtaking Eastern Pennsylvanian landscape in person is less impressive in low-quality digital renderings.
Apparently, local ordinance bans people from Clarion, Pa. We risked arrest and entered the town to dine at Taco Bell. The community is also home to Clarion University, one of 11 state-funded universities in Pennsylvania. I could not positively determine what, if any, connection exists between the name of the town and the low-to-mid range hotel chain.
These people allowed their dogs to relieve themselves all over the McDonald's lawn in some Eastern Pennsylvanian hamlet where we stopped in an unsuccessful attempt to pirate a wireless internet connection.
The back of a cheap picture frame on my desk, taken just now. This represents the literally mean streets of Wilkes-Barre, Pa., which fluctuate between single- and three-car widths, with no paint or other indications of lanes. We drove at least 5 miles off the interstate all the way to the downtown square of WB in search of a Ramada Inn, which was advertised as being "just ahead." Frustrated by lack of sleep and mild stress, we turned around and headed to a Comfort Inn in an unincorporated area some 20 miles from the NY border. Unfortunately, our frustration also led us to miss the opportunity to recreate part of the opening sequence from television's "The Office" by filming a "Welcome to Scranton" sign.
At the Comfort Inn, I was bewildered by the initial burnt, musty aroma of our room. I was more bewildered that I stayed at yet another hotel which apparently had need to warn its breakfast patrons about the dangers of microwaving hard-boiled eggs. Seriously, has anyone ever heard of anybody microwaving a hard-boiled egg? Must be an Ohio River regional specialty.
New York
This was, I think, my first entry into New York. We only passed through the southeastern nub of the state, which actually is quite beautiful, and came within some 50? miles from the City That Never Sleeps. I missed the "Welcome to" sign, so I took some other shots of signs that said 'New York.'
One of several scenic landscapes we passed in New York.
The Hamilton Fish Bridge over the Hudson River is named for Hamilton Fish, the handsome former governor and Senator from New York who later served as U.S. Secretary of State.
Hamilton Fish.
I did not take this photo. It is from Wikipedia.
The Hamilton Fish Bridge over the Hudson River is named for Hamilton Fish, the handsome former governor and Senator from New York who later served as U.S. Secretary of State.
Hamilton Fish.
I did not take this photo. It is from Wikipedia.
Connecticut
Our 48th largest state is a small and densely populated though beautiful one.
We were unenthusiastically welcomed by this uninspired sign.
Left unimpressed by the initial welcome, we decided to bypass this rest area.
A nameless, though scenic, Connecticut river.
The skyline of Hartford, Connecticut, taken from a distance.
Headquarters of the Hartford Courant, a struggling former giant of the newspaper industry.
This large tower did not fit in well with Hartford's otherwise moderate skyline.
This large cathedral was one of several visible in downtown Hartford from the highway. I don't know if that is an indication of a large Catholic population or fondness for old-world relics, or anything else. I just took so many photos of Hartford because I was excited because it is only some 45 minutes from Northampton, Ma., our final destination.
Left unimpressed by the initial welcome, we decided to bypass this rest area.
A nameless, though scenic, Connecticut river.
The skyline of Hartford, Connecticut, taken from a distance.
Headquarters of the Hartford Courant, a struggling former giant of the newspaper industry.
This large tower did not fit in well with Hartford's otherwise moderate skyline.
This large cathedral was one of several visible in downtown Hartford from the highway. I don't know if that is an indication of a large Catholic population or fondness for old-world relics, or anything else. I just took so many photos of Hartford because I was excited because it is only some 45 minutes from Northampton, Ma., our final destination.
Massachusetts
You'll have to trust me that this says "Welcome to Massachusetts." The border snuck up on me quickly, and I had to rush to snap this shot.
Entering the home stretch.
Clearly, I was ready to be out of the car at this point. Wonderful company aside, I was stuck with a mountain of stuff behind me restricting my leg room, with my bulging briefcase between my knees for some 15 hours.
.jpg)
Anyone who visits should remember to take this exit. Obviously, it will take you toward Smith College, which is some 2 blocks from the apartment.
The final exit sign.
Finally in Northampton, I took some photos of recognizable landmarks. This is the infamous Knight's Inn, formerly known as the Norwottuck Inn. The hotel actually is located in Hadley, Ma.
The Norwottuck's neighbor, Wing Wong Chinese Restaurant.
I thought Sarah's mother would appreciate this license plate, which espouses the driver's appreciation for Bruce Springsteen. Clicking on the thumbnail to view the larger photo will reveal an "E Street Band" plate holder.
Exhausted after our long trip, we rewarded ourselves at the grocery store by springing for some of this high-quality cheese food.
I'm not sure in which state this photo was taken, so I put it here.
This photo of downtown Boston, and the following one, were taken during our previous trip to Massachusetts a few weeks ago.
The only photo of Fenway I could finagle was this one from behind, which most prominently features a moderately unclassy gun show sign.
Entering the home stretch.
Clearly, I was ready to be out of the car at this point. Wonderful company aside, I was stuck with a mountain of stuff behind me restricting my leg room, with my bulging briefcase between my knees for some 15 hours.
.jpg)
Anyone who visits should remember to take this exit. Obviously, it will take you toward Smith College, which is some 2 blocks from the apartment.
The final exit sign.
Finally in Northampton, I took some photos of recognizable landmarks. This is the infamous Knight's Inn, formerly known as the Norwottuck Inn. The hotel actually is located in Hadley, Ma.
The Norwottuck's neighbor, Wing Wong Chinese Restaurant.
I thought Sarah's mother would appreciate this license plate, which espouses the driver's appreciation for Bruce Springsteen. Clicking on the thumbnail to view the larger photo will reveal an "E Street Band" plate holder.
Exhausted after our long trip, we rewarded ourselves at the grocery store by springing for some of this high-quality cheese food.
I'm not sure in which state this photo was taken, so I put it here.
This photo of downtown Boston, and the following one, were taken during our previous trip to Massachusetts a few weeks ago.
The only photo of Fenway I could finagle was this one from behind, which most prominently features a moderately unclassy gun show sign.
Back to Virginia
I took few photos on the way back to Virginia, due to exhaustion and a severe lack of interesting subject matter. The best I found were these birds, which along with several others, flew freely for at least the entire three hours I was at Cleveland Hopkins International Airport.
They bathed in the drinking fountains.
UPDATE: For a corollary on our travels, see Sarah's new blog.
Thursday, August 27, 2009
Re: Pops' blog
Trying not to spoil anything, I will respond to a few of Pops's thoughts in his last post. Most of these thoughts I've probably shared at some point, but in reference to Pops' comments, they may be refreshed in significance.
1) As I've stated before, I think Season 2 was my favorite. I plan on restarting my re-watching in earnest shortly, so I'll reevaluate at that point. But the bizarreness of the Hatch and the introduction of some of my favorite characters, including Desmond and Eko.
2) I agree (as do most LOST fans) that season 3 was the weakest of the five. It was a slight (though probably unavoidable) cop-out to introduce a large cast of additional characters, living unnoticed, in a fully formed and civilized community nonetheless, just miles from the survivors. Some of them I did grow to like. In particular Ben, who thanks in large part to Michael Emerson's brilliance, was formed into one of the most important characters, a role he has continued up to the current time. Juliet was a frustrating character for me at first; her mysterious teetering character was overwrought at the onset, but has also grown to be a favorite and important character. But most of the Others failed as interesting characters with me and other viewers, so it's no surprise that few of them were left after the season. The first episode, I agree, was a complete shakeup and effectively done.
3) Season 4 again introduced a new host of characters, but most of them ultimately succeeded more than most from season 3. The main reason, I believe, is their interconnections with each other and the past lives of characters we have already known. They seemed a more natural fit to the overall arc of the series, with a sense that the writers had a better idea of their importance to the series as a whole from the onset. Daniel Faraday in particular, also brilliantly portrayed, catapulted almost immediately to the top of my favorites list.
The slow unfurling of the Widmore-Ben saga was effective, and seemed to set the stage for many future reveals, instilling an unshakable sense that something much larger than the sum of the individual characters' lives was in play the whole time. I also grew to enjoy Charlotte's character, and after seeing him morph through season five, Miles as well has become a well-loved character in the LOST community. Season 4 also contained what still believe to be the best episode of the series, "The Constant."
The use of flash-forwards was an innovative solution to keeping the intrigue of the series up, without relying on the same largely doomed techniques of season 3. Michael's 'reincarnation' (not literal) as Kevin Johnson was an ok twist, but his whole arc rang hollow to me; he just isn't interesting. Also, I wholeheartedly agree with Pops' assessment of "Ji Yeon"; it was a transparent and crass attempt at engendering sympathy and surprise, an entirely forgettable episode. All in all, a successful season, for it's well-formed and fully-committed delving into time travel, successful integration of characters, and explosive yet measured action; a great setup for season 5.
1) As I've stated before, I think Season 2 was my favorite. I plan on restarting my re-watching in earnest shortly, so I'll reevaluate at that point. But the bizarreness of the Hatch and the introduction of some of my favorite characters, including Desmond and Eko.
2) I agree (as do most LOST fans) that season 3 was the weakest of the five. It was a slight (though probably unavoidable) cop-out to introduce a large cast of additional characters, living unnoticed, in a fully formed and civilized community nonetheless, just miles from the survivors. Some of them I did grow to like. In particular Ben, who thanks in large part to Michael Emerson's brilliance, was formed into one of the most important characters, a role he has continued up to the current time. Juliet was a frustrating character for me at first; her mysterious teetering character was overwrought at the onset, but has also grown to be a favorite and important character. But most of the Others failed as interesting characters with me and other viewers, so it's no surprise that few of them were left after the season. The first episode, I agree, was a complete shakeup and effectively done.
3) Season 4 again introduced a new host of characters, but most of them ultimately succeeded more than most from season 3. The main reason, I believe, is their interconnections with each other and the past lives of characters we have already known. They seemed a more natural fit to the overall arc of the series, with a sense that the writers had a better idea of their importance to the series as a whole from the onset. Daniel Faraday in particular, also brilliantly portrayed, catapulted almost immediately to the top of my favorites list.
The slow unfurling of the Widmore-Ben saga was effective, and seemed to set the stage for many future reveals, instilling an unshakable sense that something much larger than the sum of the individual characters' lives was in play the whole time. I also grew to enjoy Charlotte's character, and after seeing him morph through season five, Miles as well has become a well-loved character in the LOST community. Season 4 also contained what still believe to be the best episode of the series, "The Constant."
The use of flash-forwards was an innovative solution to keeping the intrigue of the series up, without relying on the same largely doomed techniques of season 3. Michael's 'reincarnation' (not literal) as Kevin Johnson was an ok twist, but his whole arc rang hollow to me; he just isn't interesting. Also, I wholeheartedly agree with Pops' assessment of "Ji Yeon"; it was a transparent and crass attempt at engendering sympathy and surprise, an entirely forgettable episode. All in all, a successful season, for it's well-formed and fully-committed delving into time travel, successful integration of characters, and explosive yet measured action; a great setup for season 5.
Sunday, August 23, 2009
One Fish, Two Fish
I won a live goldfish last night at the Rockingham County Fair, at the insistence and using the money of Sarah Mac. The game was simple: toss a ping pong ball into a little cup, win a fish. I won.
We then went to PetSmart to get some fish food and a companion fish for the one I won. Today, I made a trip to Target and Goodwill, found a new, larger vase and some decorative stones to put in it. I also found some fairly unattractive accouterments to complete the aquatic landscape for my two new friends, a semi-creepy ceramic bear holding a watering can, and a small dish reading "MAN'S BEST FRIEND" on its side. Each cost about 35 cents. Here is a picture of the two fish:
The orange one is from the fair. The dark one is from the store. They are both female, we think. I have not named them yet, so if you have suggestions, please leave them in the comments. My ideas so far are Sasha and Malia and Franny and Zooey, but I don't love either of those.
I had planned on keeping them in my office at work, but that's probably not a good idea as they would be in the dark basically everyday after 5 p.m., and I would have to go in on weekends to feed them. Probably too much effort. So guess they'll live here, for now anyway.
So far they seem ok. I think I fouled the original water with too much fish food, so I bought a gallon of purified water and changed it out. They appear to be enjoying the new toys, too. I believe they are using the toy dog dish as a swimming pool. Here's the entire landscape:
UPDATE: The gold fish est muerto. She must have been diseased and/or mishandled by the carneys. :(
We then went to PetSmart to get some fish food and a companion fish for the one I won. Today, I made a trip to Target and Goodwill, found a new, larger vase and some decorative stones to put in it. I also found some fairly unattractive accouterments to complete the aquatic landscape for my two new friends, a semi-creepy ceramic bear holding a watering can, and a small dish reading "MAN'S BEST FRIEND" on its side. Each cost about 35 cents. Here is a picture of the two fish:
The orange one is from the fair. The dark one is from the store. They are both female, we think. I have not named them yet, so if you have suggestions, please leave them in the comments. My ideas so far are Sasha and Malia and Franny and Zooey, but I don't love either of those.
I had planned on keeping them in my office at work, but that's probably not a good idea as they would be in the dark basically everyday after 5 p.m., and I would have to go in on weekends to feed them. Probably too much effort. So guess they'll live here, for now anyway.
So far they seem ok. I think I fouled the original water with too much fish food, so I bought a gallon of purified water and changed it out. They appear to be enjoying the new toys, too. I believe they are using the toy dog dish as a swimming pool. Here's the entire landscape:
UPDATE: The gold fish est muerto. She must have been diseased and/or mishandled by the carneys. :(
Friday, August 14, 2009
Tangled Up With Boys In Blue
Apparently, Bob Dylan was stopped the other day by two police officers in a community in New Jersey, wandering through a low-income, minority neighborhood a few hours before he was scheduled to perform a show.
That's pretty cool unto itself, that the Father of Folk Rock (and megamillionaire) would rather wander aimlessly through a rough New Jersey neighborhood than party or take part in other showy business while on tour. But what makes the story amazing is that neither the first officer who responded to a call that an unknown white man was wandering through the 'hood nor the second officer who arrived for backup knew who Dylan was, even after he identified himself!
Nothing came of the incident, as the officers returned the singer-songwriter to the hotel where he was staying and having his identity confirmed by employees there (he wasn't carrying any ID).
No definitive word was given on Dylan's purpose for being in the neighborhood. Reported weather conditions may indicate that he could have been seeking shelter from the storm, and unnamed witnesses alleged his jacket may have been blowing in the wind. The reported dialogue between Dylan and the officers was abbreviated for press, though anonymous sources have speculated that upon identifying himself and seeing the young officer struggle to place the name, Dylan may have responded cordially, "Don't think twice, it's all right." The exact location of the incident was also unreported by police, and media members failed to confirm the address as being positively 4th Street.
Here's a link to the real story. http://www.stumbleupon.com/s/#2wXIst/www.npr.org/blogs/thetwo-way/2009/08/bob_dylan_stopped_by_cops_whov.html?ft=1&f=103943429/
That's pretty cool unto itself, that the Father of Folk Rock (and megamillionaire) would rather wander aimlessly through a rough New Jersey neighborhood than party or take part in other showy business while on tour. But what makes the story amazing is that neither the first officer who responded to a call that an unknown white man was wandering through the 'hood nor the second officer who arrived for backup knew who Dylan was, even after he identified himself!
Nothing came of the incident, as the officers returned the singer-songwriter to the hotel where he was staying and having his identity confirmed by employees there (he wasn't carrying any ID).
No definitive word was given on Dylan's purpose for being in the neighborhood. Reported weather conditions may indicate that he could have been seeking shelter from the storm, and unnamed witnesses alleged his jacket may have been blowing in the wind. The reported dialogue between Dylan and the officers was abbreviated for press, though anonymous sources have speculated that upon identifying himself and seeing the young officer struggle to place the name, Dylan may have responded cordially, "Don't think twice, it's all right." The exact location of the incident was also unreported by police, and media members failed to confirm the address as being positively 4th Street.
Here's a link to the real story. http://www.stumbleupon.com/s/#2wXIst/www.npr.org/blogs/thetwo-way/2009/08/bob_dylan_stopped_by_cops_whov.html?ft=1&f=103943429/
Thursday, August 13, 2009
VOTE
It's been a while since I've posted on here, and even my facebook and Twitter output has been almost nil over the past two weeks, due to my nice vacation, which I suppose I will end officially tomorrow by attending a university event for two hours. I think that will be a nice way to ease back into work, right before the weekend.
But the last time I checked my Twitter feed for any significant length of time, I found a link to a Guardian poll asking people to vote for their favorite TV show of the "Noughties", or 2000-2009. I did vote, for LOST, but the poll is now closed, and the results were ridiculous. At the time of my vote, LOST was doing respectably, with 3-4 percent, and my second choice, The West Wing had a few percentage points as well. They both trailed a show called QI, which I'm guessing must be British (I've never heard of it) and long-time BBC favorite Dr. Who. So, clearly the poll reflected the tastes of UKers, which is ok, since the Guardian is a U.K. publication. But the final results were absurd, clearly becoming a personal battle between fans of two shows with which I am not familiar, The Wire and Top Gear, which finished 1 and 2 with each pulling in more than 40 percent of the vote. So what was once an interesting poll was ruined.
I'm much more interested in what the smaller group of people that reads this blog thinks. As I mentioned, I would have to pick LOST as my number 1, though TWW is second only in a veritable photo-finish. The only other show that was within a whiff of those two for me is Arrested Development, which is hands-down the best comedy of the 2000s, but due to its relatively short run and comedic genre, in comparison, it just lacks the epic gravitas the first two carry so strongly for me.
Coming up with even a Top 10 list would be difficult, but other favorite shows from the past ten years that come to mind immediately would be Weeds, The Office, The Daily Show, Colbert Report, Late Night with Conan O'Brien, Chappelle's Show, Good Eats, Iron Chef (original), House M.D., Friends, This Old House, The Simpsons, Family Guy, Survivorman, Man vs. Wild, American Dreams and Dirty Jobs. I might even have to throw Alias in there, though I may be slightly biased from having watched that entire series within the past few months.
I'm probably pretty well defined by my demographic, a male who was in either high school or college for eighty percent of the 2000s, with picks such as LOST, The Office, the late-night shows, FOX cartoons and the hour-long documentary segments of masculinity defined that are Dirty Jobs, Survivorman and Man vs. Wild. But I've got at least one PBS show there, a brainy food show and a couple respectable dramas, so I don't feel too fratty.
I was going to put a poll up with some TV shows to vote on, but that would be way insufficient. Just leave your thoughts in the comments.
But the last time I checked my Twitter feed for any significant length of time, I found a link to a Guardian poll asking people to vote for their favorite TV show of the "Noughties", or 2000-2009. I did vote, for LOST, but the poll is now closed, and the results were ridiculous. At the time of my vote, LOST was doing respectably, with 3-4 percent, and my second choice, The West Wing had a few percentage points as well. They both trailed a show called QI, which I'm guessing must be British (I've never heard of it) and long-time BBC favorite Dr. Who. So, clearly the poll reflected the tastes of UKers, which is ok, since the Guardian is a U.K. publication. But the final results were absurd, clearly becoming a personal battle between fans of two shows with which I am not familiar, The Wire and Top Gear, which finished 1 and 2 with each pulling in more than 40 percent of the vote. So what was once an interesting poll was ruined.
I'm much more interested in what the smaller group of people that reads this blog thinks. As I mentioned, I would have to pick LOST as my number 1, though TWW is second only in a veritable photo-finish. The only other show that was within a whiff of those two for me is Arrested Development, which is hands-down the best comedy of the 2000s, but due to its relatively short run and comedic genre, in comparison, it just lacks the epic gravitas the first two carry so strongly for me.
Coming up with even a Top 10 list would be difficult, but other favorite shows from the past ten years that come to mind immediately would be Weeds, The Office, The Daily Show, Colbert Report, Late Night with Conan O'Brien, Chappelle's Show, Good Eats, Iron Chef (original), House M.D., Friends, This Old House, The Simpsons, Family Guy, Survivorman, Man vs. Wild, American Dreams and Dirty Jobs. I might even have to throw Alias in there, though I may be slightly biased from having watched that entire series within the past few months.
I'm probably pretty well defined by my demographic, a male who was in either high school or college for eighty percent of the 2000s, with picks such as LOST, The Office, the late-night shows, FOX cartoons and the hour-long documentary segments of masculinity defined that are Dirty Jobs, Survivorman and Man vs. Wild. But I've got at least one PBS show there, a brainy food show and a couple respectable dramas, so I don't feel too fratty.
I was going to put a poll up with some TV shows to vote on, but that would be way insufficient. Just leave your thoughts in the comments.
Thursday, July 30, 2009
A few more Comic Con LOST tidbits
Here are a few more interesting things from the LOST Comic Con presentation I didn't include in my last posting.
The above video is a clip of an episode from a faux-ABC TV series from the 80's called "Mysteries of the Universe." According to an ABC press release I found today, the video is the first of five such episodes that will investigate the shadowy Dharma Initiative. From the release:
Once thought to be Lost, this all-new explosive documentary project provides a full-scale investigation into the so-called "Dharma Initiative." Through interviews, research, eyewitness accounts and more, the short-form series attempts to uncover the truth behind this shadowy organization, including the possible existence of a secret society with links to covert locations around the globe, including a South Pacific island, which is the subject of intense speculation, but whose whereabouts have never been confirmed.
The other parts will be released and viewable at abc.com/lostmysteries one per month through November:
*Episode 2 Tuesday, August 4, 2009
*Episode 3 Tuesday, September 8, 2009
*Episode 4 Thursday, October 15, 2009
*Episode 5 Monday, November 16, 2009
Those will be interesting to watch. There were a few other neat faux-promo videos played that some speculate reveal the answer to the big question after the season 5 finale, but I personally don't read too much into them. I think they're more for fun.
The above video is a clip of an episode from a faux-ABC TV series from the 80's called "Mysteries of the Universe." According to an ABC press release I found today, the video is the first of five such episodes that will investigate the shadowy Dharma Initiative. From the release:
Once thought to be Lost, this all-new explosive documentary project provides a full-scale investigation into the so-called "Dharma Initiative." Through interviews, research, eyewitness accounts and more, the short-form series attempts to uncover the truth behind this shadowy organization, including the possible existence of a secret society with links to covert locations around the globe, including a South Pacific island, which is the subject of intense speculation, but whose whereabouts have never been confirmed.
The other parts will be released and viewable at abc.com/lostmysteries one per month through November:
*Episode 2 Tuesday, August 4, 2009
*Episode 3 Tuesday, September 8, 2009
*Episode 4 Thursday, October 15, 2009
*Episode 5 Monday, November 16, 2009
Those will be interesting to watch. There were a few other neat faux-promo videos played that some speculate reveal the answer to the big question after the season 5 finale, but I personally don't read too much into them. I think they're more for fun.
Tuesday, July 28, 2009
Comic Con
For the past several years, the producers of LOST have been one of the most popular exhibitors at the Comic Con Convention in San Diego. The audience of that convention dovetails nicely with their hardcore viewer base, so it's no surprise ABC pulls out a lot, if not all, the stops to make sure their presentation doesn't disappoint. Yesterday I read this New York Times piece about how much planning they put into their panel this year, equating such efforts with campaign rallies to prime voters to get to the polls in September.
Below I'll put some videos that should capture most of the presentation. NOTE: These will contain major spoilers for anyone who's not yet surpassed season 5.
But perhaps the best part of the presentation was edited out of the above links--a montage of fan-created videos the producers showed. It's the embedded video at the top of the page, and the last part is hilarious. It shouldn't reveal too much in terms of spoilers.
Monday, July 20, 2009
Wonder Bob
I had a mild case of insomnia last night. I just wasn't tired. Possibly from over-stimulation from staring at electronic (computer, TV and movie) screens most of the weekend, or just not being tired from lying around watching golf all day. In any case, I was searching the late night tube for something to ease me off into sleep.
Passing up such terrible offerings as "Ace of Cakes," Fox News' "Redeye" and "Dance Your Ass Off" (or whatever it's called), I landed on a ceremony held to honor Michael Douglas with a lifetime achievement award. This in itself seems so ridiculous as to merit a blog post unto itself. Perhaps I'm just too young to appreciate Douglas's work. I know he's won two Academy Awards before my time, but I know him best as President Andrew Shepard from Aaron Sorkin's "The American President," a movie most distinguished in the fact that its leftovers led to Sorkin creating "The West Wing."
That was actually one of the films they mentioned in honoring him (Martin Sheen made some speech about it, which was fitting as he played Douglas's number 2 in "TAP" and later President Josiah Bartlet in "TWW.") It was an ok film, but not the stuff lifetime achievement awards are made of. Another film of his cited was the 2000 box office flop "Wonder Boys." Now, I have not seen the film, and it carries a more-than-respectable 83 percent fresh rating on rotten tomatoes. Certainly, box office success is not always an indicator of a film's quality, and "WB" may very well be a good one. But after having read a summary of it on wikipedia, I was struck by its similarity to a film I have seen, the critical and commercial flop "Smart People." Both focus on washed up writers on the faculty of Carnegie Mellon University in Pittsburgh.
While honoring "Wonder Boys," Bob Dylan made a surprise appearance playing his song, "Things Have Changed," which he apparently penned at the special request of the film's producers. The video above is the performance, which at least in my late night stupor, seemed almost incomprehensible. I think I caught a rhyme of the words "shogun" and "son of a gun" in there somewhere, but I'm not sure. I haven't rewatched it to verify. His almost complete lack of annunciation combined with an extra-gravelly growl made it nearly impossible for me to tell what he was saying, which was disappointing, as the director of "WB" said in a taped interview that the lyrics had significant meaning to the film. Oh well. The more entertaining part of the clip is seeing the slumpy old Douglas try to nod his head (side-to-side) in rhythm with the happy-Nashville-hop of the song while his young, pretty wife Catherine Zeta Jones sits comfortably upright next to him. Silly all around.
Tuesday, July 14, 2009
On The Merits of Routinaeity
After recently being diagnosed as suffering from a moderate case of blog fade, I am attempting to get back to the routine of semi-regular posting. I just returned home from the office, as I do five days a week, and have done for the past ten-and-a-half months. Today, I left at around 2 p.m. These summer days, I typically depart around 2 or 3 in the afternoon, due to my limited remaining fiscal hours, and the limited remaining worthwhile PR work to be done.
I walked to my car, parked in the same spot on top of the same parking deck it is five days a week, and as it has been for the past eight-and-a-half months (we moved downtown 2 months after I arrived). Heading south down the left side of Liberty Ave., I passed on the other side of the street the same young woman I passed at the same time yesterday. I know (of) her; she is a bartender at the coffee-shop-by-day/bar-by-night located just steps from the front door of our office on Court Square. She is young and pretty, though she wears heavy, dark eyeliner and has a large and conspicuous tattoo on her right arm, made evermore noticeable by her proclivity to wear sleeveless black tank tops, routinely.
I reached my car and as I sat felt the same rush of heat I did while entering my car yesterday. I flipped on the radio and heard the same song, Katy Perry's "Hot N' Cold," that was on at the same time yesterday. (It is a recognizable song, if forgettable in quality.) I turned my head to back out and felt the same crick in my neck I felt yesterday. I drove home, taking the same route I take five days a week and have taken for the past seven-and-a-half months (it took me a few weeks to determine the quickest path). I arrived at my apartment complex, stopped by my mailbox and retrieved a bill from the Harrisonburg Electric Commission, as I have done once a month for the past 9-and-a-half months (my first bill didn't arrive until my first full month of service).
I walked in and immediately changed clothes. In the winter, I would trade my dress pants for sweatpants; in summer, I tend toward gym shorts.
Yes, I've got a pretty good routine going.
The routinaeity (invented word) of my immediate post-work life is one reason why my at-work existence appeals to me. In my PR job (basically working as an in-house reporter) and my immediate previous newspaper job (basically working as a reporter in a medium perhaps most valuable for use in an outhouse), I have encountered quite a bit of variety.
I've interviewed art professors, science students, higher administrators and administrative hires; a Surgeon General, general surgeons, a major general and general studies majors; police and fire chiefs, fired police chiefs; athletes: foot-ballers and scratch bowlers; actors, musicians, stage-coaches and truck drivers; and a guy who harvested a strange-looking Siamese cucumber from his home garden, among many other interesting and different folks.
But even so, routinaeity invades. Anyone with intermediate training in literary analysis could pick up structural and thematic similarities threaded throughout most of my "news" and feature articles, especially the ones in PR. My leads are usually somewhat snappy, sometimes tangential and often form around a "this...but this" assertion.
I'll often use a little wordplay, a subtle pun here or there, and similar patterns of periodic and loose sentences. I insert words, or at least connotations, from the institutional mission statement throughout the piece, usually before ending with a nice two-paragraph shift, bringing the theme home--very similar to a couplet ending a classical sonnet. Thus, even stories so different in content as high-tech biology research and student political engagement leave a similar lingering impression (or at least that's the point).
Some would recognize it as skillful writing, at least for a PR person. I tend to view it more as a mere aptitude, (the word skillful seems to me to imply a certain degree of challenge to be overcome, which I find absent from most of my assignments.) I'll give myself credit for typically conducting a decent amount of research, or familiarization, with the material before an interview, a decent interpersonal manner and questioning style which usually can extract a soundbite similar to that which I seek, solid note-taking and a good ability to make connections between the specific information and the "bigger picture" of the mission/messaging. But none of those things are particularly difficult, nor do they require much training to master.
I hope you don't infer too much of a negative tone toward routinaeity in everyday life from this post, though. In fact, I think it's a) mostly inevitable and b) not necessarily a bad thing.
Though various theories and laws of entropy generally state that worlds, environments and societies tend to move toward a state of increasing disorder, often human behavior tends toward homogeneity (I know that many of you will probably take to task that overgeneralization, or in some other way tangentially riff upon that sentiment; such an act would follow the routine of our typical blogversations [another invented {and poor-quality} word]) And it makes sense.
Psychologically, we feel comfortable in familiar situations, because we can expect comfortable outcomes. Whether it's knowing that my parking spot will be devoid of puddles should it rain, or that my boss will heap praise upon me for a "good" story, or that I can look forward to a generally entertaining hour of low-stress entertainment on "Top Chef: Masters" every Wednesday night at 10 p.m., it's nice that a lot of things in life are relatively certain. Call it Pavlovian, call it safe, comfortable or just reassuring.
Without such common tasks falling into some kind of order, people, I think, would begin to tend toward a state of entropy. If I didn't take the same route and park in the same spot most work mornings, I could get stuck in unexpected traffic, or my car could be stuck in a low spot on the parking deck. In such cases, I might be late to work, displeasing my boss, or my shoes might get wet, displeasing my toes. Innumerable more examples exist all around us.
But also apparently innate to humans, in addition to a tendency toward familiarity, is a small part of the spirit that yearns for excitement, a break from routinaeity, adventure. Call it thrill-seeking, pioneering, broadening one's horizons. I see little logical explanation for such a phenomenon. If a creature has all its biological needs met in a certain environment, it would have no reason to leave it. So why do humans wish to explore?
Please weigh in with your thoughts. You know the routine.
I walked to my car, parked in the same spot on top of the same parking deck it is five days a week, and as it has been for the past eight-and-a-half months (we moved downtown 2 months after I arrived). Heading south down the left side of Liberty Ave., I passed on the other side of the street the same young woman I passed at the same time yesterday. I know (of) her; she is a bartender at the coffee-shop-by-day/bar-by-night located just steps from the front door of our office on Court Square. She is young and pretty, though she wears heavy, dark eyeliner and has a large and conspicuous tattoo on her right arm, made evermore noticeable by her proclivity to wear sleeveless black tank tops, routinely.
I reached my car and as I sat felt the same rush of heat I did while entering my car yesterday. I flipped on the radio and heard the same song, Katy Perry's "Hot N' Cold," that was on at the same time yesterday. (It is a recognizable song, if forgettable in quality.) I turned my head to back out and felt the same crick in my neck I felt yesterday. I drove home, taking the same route I take five days a week and have taken for the past seven-and-a-half months (it took me a few weeks to determine the quickest path). I arrived at my apartment complex, stopped by my mailbox and retrieved a bill from the Harrisonburg Electric Commission, as I have done once a month for the past 9-and-a-half months (my first bill didn't arrive until my first full month of service).
I walked in and immediately changed clothes. In the winter, I would trade my dress pants for sweatpants; in summer, I tend toward gym shorts.
Yes, I've got a pretty good routine going.
The routinaeity (invented word) of my immediate post-work life is one reason why my at-work existence appeals to me. In my PR job (basically working as an in-house reporter) and my immediate previous newspaper job (basically working as a reporter in a medium perhaps most valuable for use in an outhouse), I have encountered quite a bit of variety.
I've interviewed art professors, science students, higher administrators and administrative hires; a Surgeon General, general surgeons, a major general and general studies majors; police and fire chiefs, fired police chiefs; athletes: foot-ballers and scratch bowlers; actors, musicians, stage-coaches and truck drivers; and a guy who harvested a strange-looking Siamese cucumber from his home garden, among many other interesting and different folks.
But even so, routinaeity invades. Anyone with intermediate training in literary analysis could pick up structural and thematic similarities threaded throughout most of my "news" and feature articles, especially the ones in PR. My leads are usually somewhat snappy, sometimes tangential and often form around a "this...but this" assertion.
I'll often use a little wordplay, a subtle pun here or there, and similar patterns of periodic and loose sentences. I insert words, or at least connotations, from the institutional mission statement throughout the piece, usually before ending with a nice two-paragraph shift, bringing the theme home--very similar to a couplet ending a classical sonnet. Thus, even stories so different in content as high-tech biology research and student political engagement leave a similar lingering impression (or at least that's the point).
Some would recognize it as skillful writing, at least for a PR person. I tend to view it more as a mere aptitude, (the word skillful seems to me to imply a certain degree of challenge to be overcome, which I find absent from most of my assignments.) I'll give myself credit for typically conducting a decent amount of research, or familiarization, with the material before an interview, a decent interpersonal manner and questioning style which usually can extract a soundbite similar to that which I seek, solid note-taking and a good ability to make connections between the specific information and the "bigger picture" of the mission/messaging. But none of those things are particularly difficult, nor do they require much training to master.
I hope you don't infer too much of a negative tone toward routinaeity in everyday life from this post, though. In fact, I think it's a) mostly inevitable and b) not necessarily a bad thing.
Though various theories and laws of entropy generally state that worlds, environments and societies tend to move toward a state of increasing disorder, often human behavior tends toward homogeneity (I know that many of you will probably take to task that overgeneralization, or in some other way tangentially riff upon that sentiment; such an act would follow the routine of our typical blogversations [another invented {and poor-quality} word]) And it makes sense.
Psychologically, we feel comfortable in familiar situations, because we can expect comfortable outcomes. Whether it's knowing that my parking spot will be devoid of puddles should it rain, or that my boss will heap praise upon me for a "good" story, or that I can look forward to a generally entertaining hour of low-stress entertainment on "Top Chef: Masters" every Wednesday night at 10 p.m., it's nice that a lot of things in life are relatively certain. Call it Pavlovian, call it safe, comfortable or just reassuring.
Without such common tasks falling into some kind of order, people, I think, would begin to tend toward a state of entropy. If I didn't take the same route and park in the same spot most work mornings, I could get stuck in unexpected traffic, or my car could be stuck in a low spot on the parking deck. In such cases, I might be late to work, displeasing my boss, or my shoes might get wet, displeasing my toes. Innumerable more examples exist all around us.
But also apparently innate to humans, in addition to a tendency toward familiarity, is a small part of the spirit that yearns for excitement, a break from routinaeity, adventure. Call it thrill-seeking, pioneering, broadening one's horizons. I see little logical explanation for such a phenomenon. If a creature has all its biological needs met in a certain environment, it would have no reason to leave it. So why do humans wish to explore?
Please weigh in with your thoughts. You know the routine.
Monday, June 29, 2009
Philosopher - Addendum
While at work on the previous post ranking the episodes of the first season, I came across this hilarious Urban Dictionary entry for "John Locke." Thought I'd share it:
John Locke
1. A charachter [sic] in the tv series lost that is one kickass guy. Part woodsman, part mystical sage, part fighter (suck it charlie) and 100% dude. Even though season two makes him a little sissy b****, you know he's gonna kick it old skool [sic] soon.
2. A philosopher who believed in tabula rasa (clean slate) and anti authority. It is believed from a lot of strong evidence, that this man did not kick so much ass while saying wise things as his namesake tv charachter [sic].
1. John Locke after being told that red shirt people always die in star trek [sic] missions: "Sounds like a piss poor captain."
2. "Every man has a property in his own person. This nobody has a right to, but himself."
Classic.
*Source: http://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=John%20Locke
John Locke
1. A charachter [sic] in the tv series lost that is one kickass guy. Part woodsman, part mystical sage, part fighter (suck it charlie) and 100% dude. Even though season two makes him a little sissy b****, you know he's gonna kick it old skool [sic] soon.
2. A philosopher who believed in tabula rasa (clean slate) and anti authority. It is believed from a lot of strong evidence, that this man did not kick so much ass while saying wise things as his namesake tv charachter [sic].
1. John Locke after being told that red shirt people always die in star trek [sic] missions: "Sounds like a piss poor captain."
2. "Every man has a property in his own person. This nobody has a right to, but himself."
Classic.
*Source: http://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=John%20Locke
The Shape of Things To Come
Over the weekend, I worked up the beginnings of two drafts for future posts--a list of my favorite/least favorite LOST characters, and a top 10 list of my favorite episodes. Both may need some refinement as I continue my re-watch, and both contain information that could amount to spoilers for those who have not caught up to LOST Standard Time.
I'm not sure what the best way to proceed would be. I suppose I could start by ranking the episodes of the first season, and encouraging others to submit their lists as well, for comparison. Crowdsourcing!
I guess that sounds like the best way to go. So, here I'll go ahead and throw in my two cents about each of the episodes from Season One. Any such exercise for Season One will be difficult, due to the general format of the episodes, and determining how much weight to place on the competing qualities of the single-episode arc and their significance to the series larger. For example, "Pilot, Parts 1&2" could be considered one of the greatest episodes of television of all time, due to its sheer enormity, the cinematic wonder that is the opening scene and the metaphorical Pandora's Box it opens up, setting the stage for every episode thereafter. On the other hand, the main arc of the episode revolves mostly around fixing and using the transceiver, which proves to be of little consequence to the rest of the series.
Most of the rest of the season's episodes function as introductions to the back-stories of individual characters. All are more or less equal, therefore, in larger purpose, so judgment must be made on the crafting of the storytelling and a fair amount of subjective like or dislike of that particular character. And there is always the conundrum of season finales, which inevitably leave you on the edge of your seat, burning for more. Depending on your personal outlook, this could be incredibly thrilling or incredibly frustrating, and such reactions either way could cloud one's judgment of the episode as a whole. Anyway, let's make our best effort and get to it.
1. "Walkabout"
-As I discussed at length in my post on Locke, this episode is one of my favorites of the series. Locke's backstory is well-crafted and unfolds beautifully, building to one of the biggest reveal moments of the series. A perfect, poetic model for flashback episodes that follow, though none do it quite as well.
2. "Exodus, Parts 1&2"
-I know it's a bit of a cop-out to put the season finale this high, but this one is extremely well done. The convergence of all of the impending conflicts--the alleged coming of the "Others" and the black smoke, the launching of the raft and approaching monsoon season, the struggle for dynamite and unveiling of the Hatch, as well as the comedy-drama of the scene at the Black Rock and the juxtaposition of the hopeful departure of the raft against true impending doom on the Island is poetic. The real reason the episode rules, though, is the total WTF moment when the raft is encountered by the mysterious ship of Others. Seriously an epic, jaw-dropping, eye-exploding moment.
3. "Deus Ex Machina"
-It may show my bias to put another Locke-centric episode this high, but again, I think it is justified. Finding the Beechcraft and hearing the mysterious radio transmission is intriguing unto itself. But the true genius is in the absolutely gripping and heart- (or more appropriately, kidney-) wrenching story of Locke's father ruthlessly conning him out of an organ. Brilliant. The sealer is the moment when Locke is pounding on the Hatch, defeated, when the ethereal light shines from below and toward the heavens. Compelling, and rich.
4. "Pilot, Parts 1&2"
-Again, slightly cop-outish, but less so than putting the season finale so high. This was one of the most highly impactful pilot episodes in the history of TV. The classic opening eye shot, the immediate jump to the chaos of the crash scene, brilliantly set up and filmed. The other snippets of foreshadowing I find less amazing--the polar bear, the "monster," Charlie's heroin issues--but the moment of Sayid's recognition that the French woman's distress call has been on loop, unanswered, for 16 years, is chilling.
5. "All the Best Cowboys Have Daddy Issues"
-Jack's flashback storyline of struggling with a decision to rat out his father for malpractice, essentially ending his father's career, is compelling and emotional. On the island, the revealing of Ethan in the storm and then his manhandling of Jack is shocking, scary and awesome. I am less impressed than others with the heart-pounding scene when Jack revives a hanged Charlie by beating on Charlie's chest and rather prefer the dialogue between Boone and Locke while on the hunt. I especially like when Boone describes his feeling like a red-shirted ensign from Star Trek, explaining to Locke that on the old show those insignificant figures were always lost to dangerous missions led by the heroic captain. Locke's reply: "Sounds like a piss-poor captain." And, of course, the ultimately important development is the discovery of the Hatch.
6. "Numbers"
-Hurley, apparently, has my second-favorite flashback story. It is probably the case that such a preference is based on my personal liking of the character and the actor who portrays him, Jorge Garcia. I care less about the events that Hurley thinks occur due to his "curse" and more about the story of how he came to the numbers and what they mean. Generally, the setting of a mental asylum as a place from which significant information comes is a tired technique for fiction, but it still works for this story. It's really the sheer weirdness of the idea of the numbers and the intrigue posed by figuring out their true nature, which is continued throughout the series, that makes this episode appealing.
7. "Confidence Man"
-Sawyer's backstory is interesting. This episode provides insight into how he used to operate, his trade, and also reveals his first moment of real humanity, calling off his con when the couple's son walks in. That, of course, foreshadows the revealing the true source of his torment, when Kate reads his letter. The torture sequence with him, Sayid and Jack is appropriately disturbing and gritty. We see the entire complex aura of Sawyer in this episode, from vile manipulator to vulnerable victim, nails-tough misanthrope to charismatic charmer.
8. "Outlaws"
-As I was writing this list, I had this episode much lower, but after going through nearly the entire exercise, I moved this up at least five spots. I think the main reason I initially had it so low is the heavy-handed metaphor of the boar that Sawyer chases, the demon he is trying to exorcise. Meh. Upon re-examination, this truly is a formative episode, as we witness the very powerful scene from his childhood that changed Sawyer's life forever, from his perspective under the bed. But it's really two other scenes that are iconic to me from this episode--the drinking game he plays with Kate, revealing their similar rough-and-tumble pasts, and the flashback to Sawyer sitting in the Sydney bar with Jack's father, a mental realization Sawyer makes at the end of the episode. As for seeing Sawyer being conned into killing the wrong man, I don't like it much other than the poignancy inherent in realizing that it was Jack's father who ultimately gave him the last push to pull the trigger.
9. "White Rabbit"
-I also originally had this episode lower, but similarly, upon re-examination, it became tighter and more pleasing. I think it initially was Boone's lameness in stealing the water and his lifeguard FAIL that turned me off. Matthew Fox (Jack) turns in a better performance here than I originally gave him credit for. And the mysterious appearances of his father are creepy and interesting, though Jack's tumble down the hill and clinging to a root off the edge of the cliff is silly. Of course, it is significant that Locke appears, angelic above, to save him, and later to encourage him to "finish what he started." Finding his father's coffin empty is also an interesting point. The culmination in the famous "live together, die alone" speech is ok, but a little corny too.
10. "Raised By Another"
-The on-island action of this episode takes a different slightly pace from the previous episodes, more to a pyschological thriller, with Claire's (imagined? real?) attacks, and the ultimate revealing that Ethan is not one of them. The real winner of this episode, though, is Claire's backstory and the ultra-creepiness of psychic Richard Malkin. This storyline has never been flushed out to the extent that I'd hoped, but perhaps it will resurface in some way in the final season.
11. "Tabula Rasa"
-The revealing to some of the other LOSTies that Kate is the criminal paired with her backstory with farmer Ray Mullen is generally a nice match. More importantly, we see the beginnings of the bonds formed between Jack and Kate, Michael and Sun, and Locke and Walt. I don't care for the mini-arc of Sawyer's failed attempt to euthanize the marshal and Jack's being forced to finish the job, though it is significant in pitting those two against each other. I also like the unspoken explanation, later flushed out, that Sawyer possibly missed with his shot due to his hyperopia. The most significant conversation, which set off rampant blogosphere theorizing that the LOSTies were in purgatory, or heaven, or hell, is between Jack and Kate, when he tells her, metaphorically, that they all died in the plane crash. The closing, hopeful montage featuring Joe Purdy's "Wash Away" is a nice, if classic, J.J. Abrams touch.
12. "Solitary"
-This episode, clearly, is most significant in introducing Rousseau, the first character seen on-island whom we know is not one of the survivors. This obviously makes her a point of intrigue, and Sayid's torturer past makes a nice counter-story, but in all, I was less moved by this episode than others. It makes the top twelve for its significance to the series larger.
13. "Whatever The Case May Be"
-Kate's flashback in robbing the bank is New Mexico is truly well-done, and took me off-guard the first time I watched it. If I was drawn in more by the action on-island in this episode, it would rank higher on this list. I remember watching this initially and finding the struggle for guns off-putting and Kate's obsession with the toy plane trite. There are some nice scenes, namely the comedic interlude of Sawyer's struggles to open the case and the clever interplay between Kate and Jack in retrieving the key from the buried marshal. The ending with Rose and Charlie adds an aftertaste of stale cheese.
14. "Hearts and Minds"
-It's a little amazing that a storyline prominently featuring Boone and Shannon isn't in the lowest level of the basement for me, as both of them are fairly lame characters. But this story actually made me feel for the first time something other than ambivalence toward Shannon. Of course, that feeling is near-hatred for her when she cons Boone out of $50k. The better part of the episode is Locke's friggin' sweetness in forcing Boone to hallucinate, again showing his divine, sage awesomeness.
15. "...In Translation"
-This is the bookend to the earlier episode "House of the Rising Sun," which is even lower on this list. I like this one better for providing context to the scene, shared between the two episodes, when Jin comes home to Sun frazzled, angry and bloody, now seen to come after he "delivered a message" for Mr. Paik. On island, Sun finally reveals to Jin that she can speak English, to save his life, ultimately leading to their split. I find this almost wholly unmoving, as she could have done it sooo long ago and avoided further conflict between her and Jin, and among Michael, Jin and her. The ending with Sun venturing into the water freely in just a bikini is fine, but just way too straight-out-of-The-Awakening for me. Once again, Locke, briefly, shows his awesomeness in both counseling Shannon to get over Boone and revealing to Walt that he knows Walt actually burned the raft.
16. "Born To Run"
-This episode is technically well-crafted, with several mini-storylines wound through it that are tied up neatly at the end, but all of them failed to reach me on a personal, emotional level. The time capsule scene and hospital tragedy including Kate's ex, Tom, just doesn't get there for me, leaving me mostly with a distaste for Kate, when I should be feeling poetic sympathy. On island, I find Kate and Sawyer's struggle to get the last spot on the raft petty and uninteresting. The closest thing to interesting drama comes when it is revealed Sun poisoned Michael, accidentally, in trying to prevent Jin from leaving. Again, it's just so-so for me.
17. "House of The Rising Sun"
-This is the ultimate episode in establishing Sun's lameness to me. It shows the dramatic scene of Jin coming home, bloodied, with the reason why later revealed in "...In Translation," and that is fine. But the fact that she was ready to leave her apparently abusive husband at the airport and changes her mind because he shows her a flower is ultra-lame. Again, she could have avoided the meteorically insignificant Jin-Michael battle over a watch by simply revealing that she can SPEAK ENGLISH! I think the scene when she finally does so in "Translation" might have been better if we, the audience, didn't already know she could. What is significant and good from the episode is the discovery of "Adam and Eve." What is further lame is Charlie re-emerging as a "serious artist" (gag) and the conflict over going to the caves because some people don't want to leave the beach and the possibility that a boat comes. Why don't you just post people there to tend a signal fire in shifts? Wow, that was difficult.
18. "Do No Harm"
-While I do kind of like the scene between Jack and his father at the hotel pool on his wedding eve, the whole Jack's marriage thing doesn't touch me in any significant way. His wedding vows, ending that 'he didn't fix his wife, she fixed him' is especially stomach-retching. I was similarly unmoved by both Boone's death and Say-annon's romance. The juxtaposed medical-drama scenes of Jack trying to save Boone with his own sweat and blood with Claire's giving birth is ok. But the ending with Jack's indignant rage against Locke, calling him a "murderer," is ultra-lamezore.
19. "The Greater Good"
-The flashback story with Sayid being forced to turn on his terrorist friend, though predictable, is decently powerful. The actor portraying the naive, unstable friend puts in a very notable performance. It is poetic that the reason Sayid is on flight 815 is because he had to take a later flight to claim his friend's corpse, but in all, it really just left me feeling sad. On island, the action quickly devolves into a hate/doubt fest against Locke, which, as you can probably guess, I find irritating. It is reminiscent to me of every episode of House, M.D., when it is patently clear that House, as always, is right, yet everyone else stupidly doubts and tries to thwart him, before eventually having their faces drenched with several omelets' worth of egg.
20. "Homecoming"
-The most prominent theme of this episode is that Charlie is an idiot. The flashback shows him being an idiot. On island, he once again proves his idiocy. I am left wholly unmoved by a flashback which might else have been ok because of the fact that the object he steals from his innocent victim is, idiotically, THE MOST obviously prominent piece in her father's entire collection. He then proceeds to ruin a perfectly good scene when Sayid, Jack, Kate and Sawyer trap and subdue Ethan by idiotically shooting and killing him. Revisiting he and Claire's revolting peanut butter fetish at the end is unnecessary.
21. "Special"
Despite its being well-received by critics and significant foreshadowing, I find this episode boring and unpleasant. Harold Perrineau, portraying Michael, is struck with another flare-up of his chronic overacting condition. On island, Michael is again shown to be stupid, far-looking and unobservant, coming down on Locke again for being around Walt. The polar bear scene is made farcical by the cartoonish appearance of the CG animal. It is stunning, though, when Claire emerges from the jungle.
22. "The Moth"
-This is a mostly throwaway episode, showing Charlie's initial delving into the world of illegal drugs. It does an ok job at establishing his initial innocence, but I feel no sympathy for his own stupid actions later. While Locke is again shown to be friggin' sweet in his counseling and rehabbing of Charlie, the metaphor of the moth and cave-cocoon is absolutely overbearing. And I do not think that Charlie's "saving" of Jack from the cave is redeeming for his earlier childish, annoying tantrum, which causes the cave-in to begin with. Entirely forgettable.
*Image credit: http://xfe.xanga.com/3f4c16e233233146716650/z108848393.jpg
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
Posts
