I am not a ladies man.
Whether or not that surprises you probably depends on how well you really know me. Let me explain.
LL Cool J is a ladies man. My wife adores him. Ever since I met her, including one of the first things I really knew about her, she swoons for L. Guys put pictures up on walls, too. Somehow, it is rather uncool for a guy to actually talk about being gaga over it, though. It usually is unimpressive to any woman you are trying to impress especially. As for other guys, well, they are most likely to respond by giving you endless grief about anything you say. LL, for his part, frequently mentioned both his prowess as a ladies man and his thus exploits.
If LL was anywhere within walking distance, I would be nervous.
Hugh Hefner is a ladies man. If Hugh was in the room, it would not bother me. If Hef was even in the same back seat of a Taxi, it would not bother me. I don't think my wife would go for Hef. He's just too old, I think. Plus, my wife is no fan of porn, of any kind.
But Hef is actually more my type of guy. It is entirely possible that the ladies love Hef for his money only. But, I am pretty sure they actually enjoy being around the guy. Hef is smart enough to be sensitive and a keen listener. He knows the right things to say and how to say them. I have no doubt Hef is seductive.
Not that I am interested in being seductive. Technically, I mean I am not interested in seducing anyone except my wife. I wouldn't mind being considered seductive. I would even be interested in learning and practicing seduction. But, all of my attention would be on my wife. Everything I already know and practice is directed at her.
It's just that I would rather talk to women than men. Does that make me a ladies' man? I know it disqualifies me as being a man's man.
I have a couple of male friends. I talk with them from time to time. I actually enjoy it. But, I don't make a great deal of effort or spend much of my time conversing with them. Nor do they, with me.
On the other hand, I enjoy conversing with women at any opportunity. Women actually talk. Women talk openly and at length about just about anything.
Clearly, if you are reading this you can understand my attraction to that.
One of my pet peeves, I have learned is a one-sided conversation. I may not know enough about everything that I can talk to anyone about anything, but I'm willing to try. Guys usually want to talk about a select few topics at best. These are the things they are interested in. Some guys won't even talk about that. Women are more agile in this way. I like that. I enjoy variety.
I will concede, however, that this is all hinged to talking itself. Guys may not like to talk, but they definitely enjoy doing. Every guy has his hobbies, and if you can get into doing something together, guys will enjoy the time... even without saying a word. Two guys can sit (side by side, of course, face to face is only for tables...with food on them) in a room and watch TV and look completely bored and boring, but describe the time together as, "Great! Look forward to doing it again, sometime." Same is true for fishing. Hours on a boat or in an ice house, but you never talk while fishing. That's why I fish with my daughter.
So, I'm not a ladies man... even though I spend way more time talking to and hanging out with the ladies. But, then, I live with two ladies and no other men (and a cat--also female.) They are my girls. I love my girls!
Wednesday, February 11, 2009
Monday, February 9, 2009
Hegel's Philosophy
Hegel’s Philosophy
I came across an old friend on Facebook who asked me, “Is this the Wayne that thought Hegel was a mad genius?”
Yeah, that‘s me. At least it was.
I was talking to a therapist once (well, there you go) who simply could not understand why The Matrix was such a popular movie. As I was explaining, it eventually dawned on me, “Oh, you don’t know anything about Hegel do you?”
If you study Philosophy, what the class is going to be like is a bunch of dudes who, in modern terms, just blogged about a bunch of crap that they thought explained the world. As useful as it is to understand the world, it is actually pretty difficult. So, it should not surprise you that all of their ideas are different.
What will surprise you is how anyone could actually stand this stuff for more than one semester, if that.
Philosophy is often difficult to read. For one thing, since even the dudes don’t want to give each other any credit, they feel compelled to justify their blather with logic. That is why Descartes came up with, “I think, therefore I am.” That was supposed to be the irrefutable starting point from which he could build upon to prove and explain the world as we know it. That is the kind of thing that makes a Philosopher famous.
Ok, except Paris Hilton is infinitely more famous, and not only has she done so without much evidence of thought, no one doubts that she exists. But, who the hell is Descartes, right?
So, I came across this guy Hegel in a Modern Philosophy class. Oh, did I mention that I have a Philosophy minor from college? Hegel had the audacity to suggest that it was just as plausible to explain the world and how it worked if you suggest that the world is basically a giant dollhouse for some great someone or something. Basically, some big child was just playing with play-doh, creating whatever it desired and then playing out whatever it imagined. Or, maybe more accurately some kid playing with an ant farm we call earth—not really controlling the ants, but impacting and toying with their world so that everything they do is reaction to or management of the kids antics rather than what they could be doing if the kid would just get an iPod already.
But, I was studying all that before The Matrix was a movie. For some reason, when I came across Hegel, I got really intrigued. Maybe it was temporary insanity. Maybe it was just that it was so different from the “I think, therefore…” type of logic puzzle that everyone else was proposing. In any case, it was much more fun. It was much more interesting to start thinking about, “Well, if that is true then…” which is pretty much what me and this friend of mine did. It was the most fun I had in Philosophy.
But, eventually, we came to our senses. It may have had something to do with a meeting we had with the instructor wherein he stared at us incredulously and basically replied, “Really? Hegel?”
And that is pretty much the problem with taking any philosophical idea too seriously. It eventually ends up more like science fiction fantastic fun than real world applicable.
But, The Matrix is essentially what Hegel was suggesting. So, imagine my shock when the movie came out and suggested that it could be, in a way. Imagine, further, that people like Prince (The Artist, or TAFKAP) took it kinda seriously and encouraged people to snap out of it. Of course, to do that you have to find Morpheus and swallow the red pill and get flushed. Hegel never mentioned that. I bet Prince knew, though.
Ok, let’s shift gears for a minute. A couple semesters later, I came across Hegel again. This time, the class was The Philosophy of History. Mind you, that is not the History of Philosophy, which almost makes sense even if you would never go to college if you fully understood that you would have to take such a class. But the Philosophy of History? Really? This is debatable? Apparently so. What’s it about? It’s a bunch of dudes blogging about the system by which History unfolds like some great novel, or the implicit shortcomings of trying to understand history from any one vantage point (begging the question of how many would be necessary). It’s as excruciating as it sounds.
Along comes Hegel. Hegel’s great contribution here is something he called the dialectic. This, actually, I find useful. It works like this: start with any cause or idea, and then what happens is that idea has an opposition, right. The “di” in dialectic means two. Got it? Ok, so the two ideas battle it out, side by side if you will and what results is either a compromise or an evolution or revolution of the two. This idea moves up, so to speak, forming a triangle. But, eventually, that idea will have its opposition beside it, they battle it out and a new idea forms… repeat. And that is how history happens, according to Hegel.
Just this week, I was reading TIME magazine and an article about stem cell research. It fits pretty well! Scientists discover the potential of stem cells (they are cellular blank slates that can be grown to be any necessary tissue needed in a body, either to create it or replace it.) But, this raised ethical questions primarily from how we obtain these cells which has been primarily from embryos (which God intended to be living babies, not scientific play-doh so to speak). So, one scientific reaction was to leave the US and continue researching in countries with less moral opposition. The other reaction was to stay, put on the moral straight jacket, and fumble along trying to make progress while still complying with the absurd restrictions and regulations. And what happened was one side discovered that they could make any cell into a stem cell by manipulating just four genes (so they could have stem cells without using embryos at all.) The other side discovered that they did not have to make blank slates anyway; they just need to reverse the cell back to where the problem started and then restart it again down the right path. And they started figuring out how to do that from the work of the other side realizing it was possible from any kind of cell. Hence, a dialectic model. It’s not that one side won or eliminated the other, but history moved forward (or up) as a development of both reacting to and with the other.
History may be interesting by itself. What I find much more interesting is the possibility of understanding where the present is going or what the future holds by understanding how history unfolds. I do not think people are meant to know the future entirely. But, I do think that anyone can use the dialectic model to gain a useful perspective on what may happen or is likely to happen.
It works for me.
I came across an old friend on Facebook who asked me, “Is this the Wayne that thought Hegel was a mad genius?”
Yeah, that‘s me. At least it was.
I was talking to a therapist once (well, there you go) who simply could not understand why The Matrix was such a popular movie. As I was explaining, it eventually dawned on me, “Oh, you don’t know anything about Hegel do you?”
If you study Philosophy, what the class is going to be like is a bunch of dudes who, in modern terms, just blogged about a bunch of crap that they thought explained the world. As useful as it is to understand the world, it is actually pretty difficult. So, it should not surprise you that all of their ideas are different.
What will surprise you is how anyone could actually stand this stuff for more than one semester, if that.
Philosophy is often difficult to read. For one thing, since even the dudes don’t want to give each other any credit, they feel compelled to justify their blather with logic. That is why Descartes came up with, “I think, therefore I am.” That was supposed to be the irrefutable starting point from which he could build upon to prove and explain the world as we know it. That is the kind of thing that makes a Philosopher famous.
Ok, except Paris Hilton is infinitely more famous, and not only has she done so without much evidence of thought, no one doubts that she exists. But, who the hell is Descartes, right?
So, I came across this guy Hegel in a Modern Philosophy class. Oh, did I mention that I have a Philosophy minor from college? Hegel had the audacity to suggest that it was just as plausible to explain the world and how it worked if you suggest that the world is basically a giant dollhouse for some great someone or something. Basically, some big child was just playing with play-doh, creating whatever it desired and then playing out whatever it imagined. Or, maybe more accurately some kid playing with an ant farm we call earth—not really controlling the ants, but impacting and toying with their world so that everything they do is reaction to or management of the kids antics rather than what they could be doing if the kid would just get an iPod already.
But, I was studying all that before The Matrix was a movie. For some reason, when I came across Hegel, I got really intrigued. Maybe it was temporary insanity. Maybe it was just that it was so different from the “I think, therefore…” type of logic puzzle that everyone else was proposing. In any case, it was much more fun. It was much more interesting to start thinking about, “Well, if that is true then…” which is pretty much what me and this friend of mine did. It was the most fun I had in Philosophy.
But, eventually, we came to our senses. It may have had something to do with a meeting we had with the instructor wherein he stared at us incredulously and basically replied, “Really? Hegel?”
And that is pretty much the problem with taking any philosophical idea too seriously. It eventually ends up more like science fiction fantastic fun than real world applicable.
But, The Matrix is essentially what Hegel was suggesting. So, imagine my shock when the movie came out and suggested that it could be, in a way. Imagine, further, that people like Prince (The Artist, or TAFKAP) took it kinda seriously and encouraged people to snap out of it. Of course, to do that you have to find Morpheus and swallow the red pill and get flushed. Hegel never mentioned that. I bet Prince knew, though.
Ok, let’s shift gears for a minute. A couple semesters later, I came across Hegel again. This time, the class was The Philosophy of History. Mind you, that is not the History of Philosophy, which almost makes sense even if you would never go to college if you fully understood that you would have to take such a class. But the Philosophy of History? Really? This is debatable? Apparently so. What’s it about? It’s a bunch of dudes blogging about the system by which History unfolds like some great novel, or the implicit shortcomings of trying to understand history from any one vantage point (begging the question of how many would be necessary). It’s as excruciating as it sounds.
Along comes Hegel. Hegel’s great contribution here is something he called the dialectic. This, actually, I find useful. It works like this: start with any cause or idea, and then what happens is that idea has an opposition, right. The “di” in dialectic means two. Got it? Ok, so the two ideas battle it out, side by side if you will and what results is either a compromise or an evolution or revolution of the two. This idea moves up, so to speak, forming a triangle. But, eventually, that idea will have its opposition beside it, they battle it out and a new idea forms… repeat. And that is how history happens, according to Hegel.
Just this week, I was reading TIME magazine and an article about stem cell research. It fits pretty well! Scientists discover the potential of stem cells (they are cellular blank slates that can be grown to be any necessary tissue needed in a body, either to create it or replace it.) But, this raised ethical questions primarily from how we obtain these cells which has been primarily from embryos (which God intended to be living babies, not scientific play-doh so to speak). So, one scientific reaction was to leave the US and continue researching in countries with less moral opposition. The other reaction was to stay, put on the moral straight jacket, and fumble along trying to make progress while still complying with the absurd restrictions and regulations. And what happened was one side discovered that they could make any cell into a stem cell by manipulating just four genes (so they could have stem cells without using embryos at all.) The other side discovered that they did not have to make blank slates anyway; they just need to reverse the cell back to where the problem started and then restart it again down the right path. And they started figuring out how to do that from the work of the other side realizing it was possible from any kind of cell. Hence, a dialectic model. It’s not that one side won or eliminated the other, but history moved forward (or up) as a development of both reacting to and with the other.
History may be interesting by itself. What I find much more interesting is the possibility of understanding where the present is going or what the future holds by understanding how history unfolds. I do not think people are meant to know the future entirely. But, I do think that anyone can use the dialectic model to gain a useful perspective on what may happen or is likely to happen.
It works for me.
Tuesday, February 3, 2009
25 Random Things...
1. I have done this maybe 100 times over the last 30 years in different ways either in my head (very frequently) in various forms of expression, on paper scraps only I will see, or in a blog. It's knowing someone else might actually read it that bothers me. I am introspective by nature. I am also extremely sensitive about being judged.
2. I read an article in Time magazine about borderline personalities. It described the condition as having no emotional skin (as opposed to people who have "thick skin" who are not bothered by the opinions of others.) I thought that just might be my problem. But, I have a habit of doing that-- learning something new and then wondering if it applies directly to me.
3. I love to write. I don't write professionally in any way for anyone or any reason other than I like to do it. I enjoy it very much when someone enjoys my writing, but I don't want the responsibility that goes with asking or suggesting someone read something I wrote. I have to know I can trust you first.
4. I don't trust people very easily. Maybe not at all. I am not a misanthrope. I want people to feel comfortable, entertained, and affirmed by being around me. But, when it comes to needing something, I'd rather just do it myself, be independent. Everyone has their limitations and imperfections and I am as bad as the worst of them. I'd rather not put anyone in a position where they can fail. Whatever you do or don't do is ok. You did your best. Thanks.
5. I hated being a salesman. See #4. There was a time when I thought it would be really great idea and I really jumped into the training. After a while, all the technique turned into manipulation and I couldn't see it any other way any more. That, plus all the pressure to sell more more more made the notion that I was trying to benefit the customer more than the company disingenuous.
6. I enjoy learning. I feel alive when absorbing information the way a "people person" in energized by interacting with people. On the other hand, interacting with people usually exhausts me.
7. I used to think I loved teaching. Close, but not quite. What I enjoy is answering questions. I would love to explain something to you, if you want. I probably can put it in terms you will understand and remember and even use. But, if you come in like most students do and sit there almost defiant to learning, I couldn't care less if we both just took a nap instead. I admire teachers because they teach anyway, and are skilled at drawing the students in.
8. I could watch movies all day, every day, I think. Part of it is the escapism, but the bigger part is being drawn in to another idea. It's related to the learning thing, just in a more relaxed form.
9. I love the beauty of nature. I can see beauty in many different settings. It makes me feel connected to the Creator. I believe in creationism.
10. The way I see it, I became a Christian only at about age 33. That all begs the question of how does one become a Christian which is a discussion I'm not going to get into here. I know this: it was life-altering-supernatural. Born again? Couldn't have said it any better.
11. There was time when I was so fed up and confused I couldn't explain whether I was an atheist or agnostic or anything at all. This attracted the attention of some well-meaning Christians who wanted to help me out. They couldn't even come close to answering my questions. Looking back, my heart goes out to them, along with a sincere thank you that they came along, but they never got through. Looking back, I am disappointed that they were so bad at answering important questions. Looking back, it was all part of a larger plan.
12. I am half-way through this thing and it seems like the worst idea I've had all week. If you are reading this, I am genuinely surprised I let that happen.
13. I was very successful in school. I am not as smart as people think I am. I doubt there is anything impressive about my IQ and I wonder if I will ever get a reliable number to reference there. I know my limitations with math, which seems to be a big part of it.
14. I am a slow reader. I know many people who can read a 200-page book in 2 hours. I would probably take 2 days or maybe all week. For one thing, I struggle to sit still reading for very long. But, even then after 2 hours I wouldn't be half done.
15. I don't type correctly. I try, but I have an old, bad habit. When I was taking typing class in junior high, I started doing this thing where I would type with only about three fingers from each hand and just move them as necessary to the closest key. Blame it on the speed tests. I learned a way to be faster, rather than correct-er.
16. I consider myself to be clever. That's my word for it. MacGuyver was clever, if that helps. It's the concept of seeing a solution in a situation. Some of that is drawing from the clues that the available resources present. Whatever. I enjoy figuring out a way to get it done. I just think and the idea pops into my head. It's not the same as memorizing solutions.
17. The problem with random is the randomness. I do much better with structure. I could blather on and on about mundane nothingness. On the other hand, I could also write 25 jokes or 25 rhymes, or 25 things far more interesting than this. Don't you wish I had?
18. Ok, I just going to finish this and let the chips fall as they may. In junior high I was totally into Breakdancing. The only thing I can really do is Moonwalk. I saw Michael Jackson do it on Motown's 25 Anniversary and thought it was the coolest thing I had ever seen. I thought it was an illusion at first. Do it right and it looks like walking, but moving backwards. Do it wrong and doesn't look like anything worthwhile. Eddy Murphy had a whole bit on that.
19. I am at least 6'1"... taller in shoes, etc. My wife (and her family) thinks I'm tall. I was always the shortest kid in class, or close. I didn't grow until my Junior year in HS. I knew I would eventually.
20. I enjoy my job. I drive a forklift. There is not much impressive about that and I don't care. I have no interest in moving into management. I thoroughly enjoy making the machine do things all day, with finesse! I thoroughly hate trying to make people do things.
21. I love my wife. It has taken great effort to learn how to do that. I am still learning. You remember Jerry MacGuire and that whole "you complete me" thing? Here's the deal kids: that means you have to be humble enough to admit you are incomplete. It means compromise. Mostly it means a whole bunch of really listening. It sounds great. It is. But, just try and do it.
22. I have a great memory. Unfortunately, it is sporadically selective. I can remember events with great detail from my early childhood and every year between. But, my wife can tell me something I have to do on Saturday while she is at work and by Thursday all I can remember is something important is happening Saturday. One of us has to write it down.
23. Lots of people say they are losing their mind. I just have more proof... and a prescription.
24. I have photographic evidence that the world used to be black and white. My daughter fell for that one anyway.
25. I would much rather answer your direct questions.
2. I read an article in Time magazine about borderline personalities. It described the condition as having no emotional skin (as opposed to people who have "thick skin" who are not bothered by the opinions of others.) I thought that just might be my problem. But, I have a habit of doing that-- learning something new and then wondering if it applies directly to me.
3. I love to write. I don't write professionally in any way for anyone or any reason other than I like to do it. I enjoy it very much when someone enjoys my writing, but I don't want the responsibility that goes with asking or suggesting someone read something I wrote. I have to know I can trust you first.
4. I don't trust people very easily. Maybe not at all. I am not a misanthrope. I want people to feel comfortable, entertained, and affirmed by being around me. But, when it comes to needing something, I'd rather just do it myself, be independent. Everyone has their limitations and imperfections and I am as bad as the worst of them. I'd rather not put anyone in a position where they can fail. Whatever you do or don't do is ok. You did your best. Thanks.
5. I hated being a salesman. See #4. There was a time when I thought it would be really great idea and I really jumped into the training. After a while, all the technique turned into manipulation and I couldn't see it any other way any more. That, plus all the pressure to sell more more more made the notion that I was trying to benefit the customer more than the company disingenuous.
6. I enjoy learning. I feel alive when absorbing information the way a "people person" in energized by interacting with people. On the other hand, interacting with people usually exhausts me.
7. I used to think I loved teaching. Close, but not quite. What I enjoy is answering questions. I would love to explain something to you, if you want. I probably can put it in terms you will understand and remember and even use. But, if you come in like most students do and sit there almost defiant to learning, I couldn't care less if we both just took a nap instead. I admire teachers because they teach anyway, and are skilled at drawing the students in.
8. I could watch movies all day, every day, I think. Part of it is the escapism, but the bigger part is being drawn in to another idea. It's related to the learning thing, just in a more relaxed form.
9. I love the beauty of nature. I can see beauty in many different settings. It makes me feel connected to the Creator. I believe in creationism.
10. The way I see it, I became a Christian only at about age 33. That all begs the question of how does one become a Christian which is a discussion I'm not going to get into here. I know this: it was life-altering-supernatural. Born again? Couldn't have said it any better.
11. There was time when I was so fed up and confused I couldn't explain whether I was an atheist or agnostic or anything at all. This attracted the attention of some well-meaning Christians who wanted to help me out. They couldn't even come close to answering my questions. Looking back, my heart goes out to them, along with a sincere thank you that they came along, but they never got through. Looking back, I am disappointed that they were so bad at answering important questions. Looking back, it was all part of a larger plan.
12. I am half-way through this thing and it seems like the worst idea I've had all week. If you are reading this, I am genuinely surprised I let that happen.
13. I was very successful in school. I am not as smart as people think I am. I doubt there is anything impressive about my IQ and I wonder if I will ever get a reliable number to reference there. I know my limitations with math, which seems to be a big part of it.
14. I am a slow reader. I know many people who can read a 200-page book in 2 hours. I would probably take 2 days or maybe all week. For one thing, I struggle to sit still reading for very long. But, even then after 2 hours I wouldn't be half done.
15. I don't type correctly. I try, but I have an old, bad habit. When I was taking typing class in junior high, I started doing this thing where I would type with only about three fingers from each hand and just move them as necessary to the closest key. Blame it on the speed tests. I learned a way to be faster, rather than correct-er.
16. I consider myself to be clever. That's my word for it. MacGuyver was clever, if that helps. It's the concept of seeing a solution in a situation. Some of that is drawing from the clues that the available resources present. Whatever. I enjoy figuring out a way to get it done. I just think and the idea pops into my head. It's not the same as memorizing solutions.
17. The problem with random is the randomness. I do much better with structure. I could blather on and on about mundane nothingness. On the other hand, I could also write 25 jokes or 25 rhymes, or 25 things far more interesting than this. Don't you wish I had?
18. Ok, I just going to finish this and let the chips fall as they may. In junior high I was totally into Breakdancing. The only thing I can really do is Moonwalk. I saw Michael Jackson do it on Motown's 25 Anniversary and thought it was the coolest thing I had ever seen. I thought it was an illusion at first. Do it right and it looks like walking, but moving backwards. Do it wrong and doesn't look like anything worthwhile. Eddy Murphy had a whole bit on that.
19. I am at least 6'1"... taller in shoes, etc. My wife (and her family) thinks I'm tall. I was always the shortest kid in class, or close. I didn't grow until my Junior year in HS. I knew I would eventually.
20. I enjoy my job. I drive a forklift. There is not much impressive about that and I don't care. I have no interest in moving into management. I thoroughly enjoy making the machine do things all day, with finesse! I thoroughly hate trying to make people do things.
21. I love my wife. It has taken great effort to learn how to do that. I am still learning. You remember Jerry MacGuire and that whole "you complete me" thing? Here's the deal kids: that means you have to be humble enough to admit you are incomplete. It means compromise. Mostly it means a whole bunch of really listening. It sounds great. It is. But, just try and do it.
22. I have a great memory. Unfortunately, it is sporadically selective. I can remember events with great detail from my early childhood and every year between. But, my wife can tell me something I have to do on Saturday while she is at work and by Thursday all I can remember is something important is happening Saturday. One of us has to write it down.
23. Lots of people say they are losing their mind. I just have more proof... and a prescription.
24. I have photographic evidence that the world used to be black and white. My daughter fell for that one anyway.
25. I would much rather answer your direct questions.
Sunday, February 1, 2009
Why I am not a Rock Star
Why am I not a rockstar?
I'm just not angry enough.
Dee Snider said the same thing. You remember him? He was front man for Twisted Sister. Now they were rock stars back in the day. You wanted to buy their music just because the cover was enough to freak out your parents. That's a good quality in a rock star. They sang songs like "We're Not Gonna Take It" which is a perfect example of that anger thing. But a person can't fake that or the audience will see right through it. If you are a happy, content, peacefull person, you can't get up on stage and get 30,000 fans screaming about angst.
One reason teenagers are such fans of rock stars is they know angst. When you are a parent, you just roll your eyes at such things. Yeah, kids have it so tough. Parents can only dream of how good kids have it-- free rent, free food, lots of spare time, few responsibilities if any, expendable income. Yet, the kids totally identify with angst-- oppression, futility, being stifled, bad hair.
P!nk is a rock star. Only a rock star would write So What! But, then, divorces have been known to make people angry. I don't think she needs much of a reason, though. She writes a song that says, "I just lost my husband... so what?" and then makes a video showing her getting the word VOID tattoed over her previous tatoo of her husband. She also has him appear in the video. Rock Star.
The Who became famous for smashing their instruments. Now, there you go! The Who were talented, many of their songs are classics that will be played for a long time yet. But, seriously, you could fire up a crowd of teenagers doing nothing more than wrecking stuff-- especially if you let them join in. Might be expensive, though. Booking could also be a challenge.
Speaking of wrecking stuff, some genius decided to re-create Woodstock a few years ago, except they neglected to order enough porta-potties and they created a monopoly of concessions that totally gouged their prices. So, Limp Bizkit gets on stage and "sings" one of their hits aptly titled Break Stuff. Which is exactly what the crowd did. Rock Star.
Tom Petty, Paul McCartney, and now Bruce Springstein were all old geezers and had been for a long time when they got booked for SuperBowl appearances, and then delivered in a big way. Rock Star.
Def Leppard drummer Rick Allen had a really cool, superfast Corvette. Big deal. But, then he got drunk and crashed it, getting his arm ripped off by the seatbelt. Drummers need their arms, as a rule. But, Rick figured out how to make his feet do double duty of what they always did in addition to what his arm used to do. Def Leppard continued to tour. Rock Star.
Wayne Winkler was last chair saxophone his Sophomore year in high school. The director needed a soloist for a particular song. He started at the first chair and went down the line. Miraculously, they all choked. Wayne could play this! He had been practicing. As the others tried, Wayne was doing the fingering. This was totally do-able. When Wayne's turn came up... the blood rushed out of his head, he probably did play some notes, but can't remember and it was all he could do to keep from fainting. Rock Star? No!
Not that I don't get angry, though. What I have learned, though, is that my anger almost always comes from unrealized expectations. When I get up in the middle of the night, I expect to walk through my house without stubbing my toe on anything. Doesn't always happen. What's the problem? The room is too small, the "whatever" shouldn't be there, I hate the layout, it wasn't my idea but I was "overruled" I hate that paint color and the curtains... But, then, I could have been more careful or used a light, too.
That's what growing out of the teen age years can do for you: it can make you smart enough to accept the things you cannot change, to change the things you can, and the wisdom to know the difference. It can also make you old enough to drink legally.
I'm just not angry enough.
Dee Snider said the same thing. You remember him? He was front man for Twisted Sister. Now they were rock stars back in the day. You wanted to buy their music just because the cover was enough to freak out your parents. That's a good quality in a rock star. They sang songs like "We're Not Gonna Take It" which is a perfect example of that anger thing. But a person can't fake that or the audience will see right through it. If you are a happy, content, peacefull person, you can't get up on stage and get 30,000 fans screaming about angst.
One reason teenagers are such fans of rock stars is they know angst. When you are a parent, you just roll your eyes at such things. Yeah, kids have it so tough. Parents can only dream of how good kids have it-- free rent, free food, lots of spare time, few responsibilities if any, expendable income. Yet, the kids totally identify with angst-- oppression, futility, being stifled, bad hair.
P!nk is a rock star. Only a rock star would write So What! But, then, divorces have been known to make people angry. I don't think she needs much of a reason, though. She writes a song that says, "I just lost my husband... so what?" and then makes a video showing her getting the word VOID tattoed over her previous tatoo of her husband. She also has him appear in the video. Rock Star.
The Who became famous for smashing their instruments. Now, there you go! The Who were talented, many of their songs are classics that will be played for a long time yet. But, seriously, you could fire up a crowd of teenagers doing nothing more than wrecking stuff-- especially if you let them join in. Might be expensive, though. Booking could also be a challenge.
Speaking of wrecking stuff, some genius decided to re-create Woodstock a few years ago, except they neglected to order enough porta-potties and they created a monopoly of concessions that totally gouged their prices. So, Limp Bizkit gets on stage and "sings" one of their hits aptly titled Break Stuff. Which is exactly what the crowd did. Rock Star.
Tom Petty, Paul McCartney, and now Bruce Springstein were all old geezers and had been for a long time when they got booked for SuperBowl appearances, and then delivered in a big way. Rock Star.
Def Leppard drummer Rick Allen had a really cool, superfast Corvette. Big deal. But, then he got drunk and crashed it, getting his arm ripped off by the seatbelt. Drummers need their arms, as a rule. But, Rick figured out how to make his feet do double duty of what they always did in addition to what his arm used to do. Def Leppard continued to tour. Rock Star.
Wayne Winkler was last chair saxophone his Sophomore year in high school. The director needed a soloist for a particular song. He started at the first chair and went down the line. Miraculously, they all choked. Wayne could play this! He had been practicing. As the others tried, Wayne was doing the fingering. This was totally do-able. When Wayne's turn came up... the blood rushed out of his head, he probably did play some notes, but can't remember and it was all he could do to keep from fainting. Rock Star? No!
Not that I don't get angry, though. What I have learned, though, is that my anger almost always comes from unrealized expectations. When I get up in the middle of the night, I expect to walk through my house without stubbing my toe on anything. Doesn't always happen. What's the problem? The room is too small, the "whatever" shouldn't be there, I hate the layout, it wasn't my idea but I was "overruled" I hate that paint color and the curtains... But, then, I could have been more careful or used a light, too.
That's what growing out of the teen age years can do for you: it can make you smart enough to accept the things you cannot change, to change the things you can, and the wisdom to know the difference. It can also make you old enough to drink legally.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
