Category Archives: Writing
Why do you have the right to be happy?
Happiness
Having worked many different style jobs, and gathered at least a fair share of life experiences, I have come to one simple understanding. Anyone who tells you that you deserve to be happy, or have a right to happiness, is a liar.
Expectations of happiness and entitlement.
That does not mean abandon all hope. Everyone should have a general expectation of cordiality in a civilized society; from my experience however, once the average person feels that they have been, in some way infringed upon, either by chance, happenstance, or even their own doing; their sensitive ego’s become so cornered in their entitlement of happiness, or satisfaction that they thrash out, immediately causing a domino of negative karmatic influence for every other person they encounter.
Ultimately, you are responsible for your own happiness. But those small doses of happiness: that piece of cake, cigarette, or fuck. Why do you think you deserve it? Under what pretention do you feel you warrant another treat? Our lives are addiction, and addiction will never get what it wants.
So what causes the problems; the mean, nasty people that spread like a dark cancer over our lives and impede upon our happiness? They’re people like you, and me, they just believe it more. They believe everything they want is more important, and they are willing to sacrifice you for it. So, congratulations, they’ve sacrificed you for what they feel they needed. Sadly, in general; your sacrifice was in vain, because it didn’t get them what they actually wanted. Someone else to think they are as important as they do.
So how do we fix it? It’s actually very simple. Accept, unconditionally that maybe, in the end, you don’t deserve to be happy. It’s Ok, and it’s perfectly fine to not be Ok.
Everyone else has his or her own problems to go through throughout the course of the day and just because you have to live with yourself through all of it, there’s no reason that the person you encounter for a moment of it should have to put up with it. Short of that, don’t treat anyone like anything; stop exercising your almighty introverted id upon every human you encounter. Just because you have to hear your own addictions for comfort, nagging at the back of your mind like a child denied candy, doesn’t mean everyone else needs to experience it as well. What have you done today that makes you so deserving? We are not entitled to anything, and your success need not be at the sacrifice of those around you.
“Men of Match.com”, a Brief Response
In response to ‘the men of match.com’
I stumbled upon an article on wordpress entitled “Meet the men of Match.com”. Well written, obviously thought out and produced by a talented writer, explaining her difficulties and observations having perused a singles website while nearing her 30th birthday. While I can not, nor would I, defend men as a gender; specifically those on a singles website, I can offer some brief observations about the opposition.
I am currently an account holder at OKCupid and Plenty of Fish. I’m not proud of it, and I realize that 
they may not be up to the prestige of Match.com (I can only assume, as they don’t have a commercial I’ve yet to see); but they are prolific in my area, which tends to be limited on the mainstream sites. Delaware simply does not have many members on eHarmony, Match, et al.
I feel I should also point out; I am no longer seriously looking, so this is not driven by bitter anguish, the singles apps on my phone have turned into a source of humor, rather than actually trying to find a connection It’s not that I can’t find anyone, quite the opposite, I have found many beautiful people in my time that I still talk to, both in the “real” world, and a few from dating sites; Moreover, I have simply given up looking because put into perspective: I don’t need someone else to complete me, and I’m perfectly happy and comfortable alone. There’s more to that, but I digress. My experiences with most dating sites have ultimately not helped dissuade that decision.
For example, when loading up the Plenty of Fish homepage to research this response, I am confronted with 16 of “My Matches”. Five of them are pictures of either kittens, cats or dogs. At this point I should note that I am on a dating site that is ostensibly, for adults.
The proliferation of puppy dogs, kittens and the starting characteristics of “crazy cat ladies” plentiful enough to populate the eastern seaboard is enough to scare most of the fabled “good guys” to the hills. In looking for a mate, cat litter and lint rollers before work are not a good sell point, and nothing sells a quiet night at home quite like cleaning up furballs hacked into the kitchen hallway halfway through dinner.
“But my cat doesn’t get furballs”
Yes it does. They all do. Except maybe those hairless ones, I’ve never actually met one, but it probably finds fur too.
“I’m an independent woman, I don’t need no man” (but I’m on a singles site)
That’s like riding a bicycle into a car lot, browsing, then yelling at the salesperson.
Quickly: just because you may be single does NOT make you an independent woman. It means you’re single; you’re independent because you have to be or you’d die; if it were a choice you made on your own you wouldn’t be on a dating site desperately seeking someone. Sorry.
Let us mention weight for a moment. I realize that not everyone has time, conditioning or resolve for a five-day exercise regiment. I also realize that everyone has an ideal “type”, and some may pursue those with a bit more “fluff” than others. I also have a pretty strong opinion that if I love someone, I’d like them to be survive for a while, and the type of self mutilation-by-BMI that is so common in the current female population (also, possibly an East Coast thing?) is not conducive to long lives. Beyond that, there is a stunning, I repeat: STUNNING amount of self-confidence displayed in the dozen or more self portraits these wildebeests so happily post, flaunting their wares, while looking for their “other half”, but obviously showing they already possess their 200% in body mass alone.
From my experience, and as usual, your mileage may vary; there are 3 common types of women I have seen on dating sites:
These are my children, they come first
They already have kids, and the kids come first. Yeah, they should. It goes with the territory, and you don’t get points for doing what you’re supposed to be doing (taking care of your children.) That’s fine, I would fully expect, should there be a house fire- you’ll wake them up first (unless you need something heavy lifted, or a spider killed first: in which case I’ll probably be the first on your list). Telling an anonymous with whom you may be trying to start a relationship about it on a dating website before they’ve even messaged you is simply aggressive. It’s just rude. I don’t want anything to do with your kids, especially before I’m sure I can stand you, let alone your children. I’d imagine, in general; telling me they come first means you don’t get a lot of messages anyway, save the few Neanderthals that made the connection that children means you’ve put out at LEAST that many times…
Also, unless their father is dead or incarcerated; having children means that your possible suitor needs to understand there may come a time when an uncomfortable meeting may occur. It’s not out of the realm of possibility to say that should “Contestant #1” be around, or introduced to your children, there may be some type of drama in the future, perhaps its in your best interest to be a bit more understanding, and approach new people in a romantic environment with a bit more dignity.
While we’re on the subject, greater than 50% of your pictures should not be of your children. This is a dating site, if the man is that interested in what your children look like- that’s creepy. A simple “I have children” will suffice. Thank you.
Pictures of just the pets
Really? No, honestly, WHY does anyone think that’s a solid decision? Aren’t you here to tell about yourself, show what you’re looking for, your interests etc? No one cares what your dog looks like, unless you need someone to fuck the dog…
I writs lyke diz and uz kant stop me cuz
These people are in their 30’s. They vote. They’re raising the next generation of single people.
Finally, in regards to profile pictures, please: have a friend help you select them. If it’s a mirror shot of your butt, your profile should have zero comments about how you’re not looking for sex. That ad should be on craigslist, not a dating site. It should not be from 6 miles out, and it certainly shouldn’t be a closeup of your eye. I would assume the picture you’ve posted, especially the profile shot, is the best of the bunch; it should clearly show what you look like, or what someone could expect on a first date. Some look like they were taken at the base of Mount Doom, have horrible lighting, or ran through Instagram filters a dozen or more times. That doesn’t help anyone get a clear impression of what you may look like. What YOU may look like, if the picture is of seven people, for the love of God the caption should point out which one is you…
In closing, while I understand online dating is frustrating, and trust me, I’m sure men are frauds online and in person, it’s a two-way street. Ultimately, the decision to be single is not a forbidden one, and the advancement of ones biological clock is not a reason to put yourself in a position to choose from a flock of suitors that have had the time to present themselves in the best light their imaginations could create while sitting in front of a keyboard. They suggested zip-lining because it sounds fun, dammit, most of them have probably never done it! Find the ones that can speak clearly, present themselves as well as possible, and give them a chance.
Les Misérables
Les Misérables
Four Golden Globe nominations, eleven Critics Choice awards, four Screen Actor’s guild nominations, and the NationalBoard of Review winner for best ensemble cast (to name a few). An accolade list with this much praise would imply a movie that may have completed its theatrical run, and be headed to DVD. However, in this case, as of this writing, the film is not yet released. This film is Les Misé
In our time, movies are created and destroyed in the minds of critics. Their reviews, before the movie has even hit the public eye, create a prepackaged buzz that can guarantee a film’s success weeks or even months before its first ticket is sold. In this particular case, winning awards before the general public has even viewed the introduction, the Victor Hugo novel turned musical turned Christmas event of 2012 seemingly has its position secured.
For those uninitiated; the story told a thousand times over: spanning from 1813 to the French June Rebellion of 1832, on its surface tells the story of Jean Valjean, a French convict released from the prison system after 19 years for a string of infractions rebuilds his life; and in doing so, we see a myriad of subplots surrounding the heart of Les Misérables. The film focuses solely on Valjean, and his pursuit by police inspector Javert, played by Russell Crowe. True to the original, the surrounding stories of commoner Fantine [Anne Hathaway], Cosette [Amanda Seyfried], Marius [Eddie Redmayne], and Éponine [Samantha Barks] are not left out. Repopulating Hugo’s original masterpiece.
Possibly the most interesting bit of this film, is a brave new approach to the on-screen musical. Past stage musicals turned film, such as Moulin Rouge or more recently Sweeny Todd, were created by bringing a cast into a studio. Their vocals were recorded, machined and produced to create a pitch perfect, tempo regulated experience of the original works. However, with Les Mis; the vocal tracks are recorded with the film. Each actor can control their own tempo, and speed. The sounds of their actions remain true with the vocalizations during the movie; giving a more realistic, to-the-moment response and reaction more often experienced in a stage performance. Only after the final performance is recorded, is the finished film produced with a full orchestral composition. The actors are given the freedom to act- change their emotional response based upon their situation, and not have to assume or judge months before they’re in costume, or sometimes before having even met, with their costars.
As so much is homogenized and sterilized in the creative works of our society, it is refreshing to be able to experience media without having a team of experts take out every bit of the human element that made it in the first place. While there is certainly a time and a place for the computer perfected aural performance, the decrepitude and absolution of revolutionary era France, surrounded by the squalor of poverty and hunger; a perfectly packaged scene seems almost disingenuous. As carefully crafted characters pour their hearts upon the stage, without the emotion- the audience could easily be lost of the distraction of perfection. Ultimately reminiscent of period films of the early 1990’s, trying desperately to convince the audience of a filthy vagrant, with perfectly white teeth, plump with craft services; or warriors, fresh from battle, in machine hemmed blues and gold. The performance is accepted, but ultimately safe, and not imbued with the gravity it deserves.
Les Misérables was screened on November 23rd, 2012; and closed with standing ovations. Originally slated for a December 14th public release, postponed to Christmas Day due to the conflicting release of blockbuster film, The Hobbit.
Budgeted at $61 million, with a total running time of 2:40. Les Misérables hit US theaters Christmas Day, 2012.
Cloud Atlas
“Our lives are not our own. From womb to tomb, we are bound to others, past and present; and by each crime and every kindness, we birth our future.” This is the tag line seen on ambiguous commercials and adverts for Cloud Atlas. It doesn’t seem to tell you much about the general feel or message of the film. After the first viewing it becomes clear, there is no more succinct way to describe what this film is trying to say.
At its core, Cloud Atlas is six separate story lines, concurrently interwoven to convey the same message. While it may sound convoluted or difficult to follow, in execution it stays clear throughout. This is achieved by the stark contrast of the visual styles utilized by the Wachowskis (The Matrix series, Speed Racer) and Tom Tyker (Run Lola Run, The International) directing each piece independently. Each section is so visually different, the audience is immediately aware of the shift. From a voyage in the Pacific in 1849, to a post-apocalyptic Hawaiian island, each shift is like watching a separate film entirely. Muted browns, and creams in 1973 San Francisco jump to vibrant blue’s and sun-swept reds of the South Pacific seas in the 1800’s, that may then open the door to deep technical blacks and greys of Korea, 2144.
That is not to say this film is all art and story. At just under three hours, total running time, the filmmakers certainly are asking for an investment from the viewer; but that amount of time is completely necessary to not only weave such a movie together, but also let you watch how it is built. Like a magician doing a card trick for you, slowly; showing you every move of the cards without knowing the prestige at the finale.
An ensemble cast compliments the intricate story telling. Tom Hanks, Halle Berry, Susan Sarandon, Hugo Weaving, and Hugh Grant are among the credits; each playing several different roles throughout, breaking through race and gender roles.
The same cast is utilized in each story, but they are not the same lineage in each time line. Villain, hero, love interest, antihero, misanthrope- while intentions may seem apparent at the onset, most often they don’t play out as expected. This is not a story of reincarnation. This isn’t a story of fixing the wrongs a person may have committed in their lifetime. This is not karma, justice, man versus man, or man verses environment, but it is a flowing stream of consciousness of how each person may experience the effects of every time before; and ultimately, something bigger than themselves.
It would be overly simplistic to say the movie begins as many tales: with a very old man, scarred and tattooed, resting by firelight; introducing a tale in the darkness. Immediately we are introduced to our timelines, each one visited only long enough to get comfortable; then seamlessly transitioned into the next storyline.
Chatham Islands, South Pacific seas, 1849; an American is conducting business, when he is confronted by the violent whipping of a Moriori slave. Cambridge, England, 1936; a young musician is on a quest to compose his masterpiece (the eponymous Cloud Atlas Sextet). San Francisco, CA, 1973; a reporter gets a unique lead on global conspiracy. United Kingdom, 2012; a publisher falls under an extreme set of circumstances brought on by a client. Neo Seoul, Korea, 2144; a clone is giving a final interview after the tumultuous conditions that lead her to trial. Lastly, a post-apocalyptic Hawaiian Islands (revealed in the credits as 2321), the remnants of human civilization learn the conditions that lie at the core of their beliefs.
None of the stories told seem to have any relevance to one another; and therein rests the wonder of the original storyteller’s vision.
Cloud Atlas has currently finished its theatrical run, is available from the right sources now, but will ultimately be released on Blu-Ray, Ultraviolet digital download, and DVD on February 5th,.
ArtistApart.com 