1. "Hidden" tracks on CDs that are appended onto the last listed track with a long (sometimes minutes, literally) pause before the "hidden" track starts. It is usually a pretty lame song anyway. If it was so great, it would have been listed on the damn thing in the first place and played to death on the radio like any other decent song. So please, don't make me waste valuable time waiting for it. (The one exception to this rule that I can think of is "Big Yellow Taxi" off the Counting Crows' Hard Candy album) If you want to add some lame-ass song to the end of your album and call it a hidden track, just make a separate track at the end so when we rip the album to our MP3 players we can leave it off, since it blows anyway.
2. Spam (email). Seriously, if I want a mortgage I will seek one out from a reputable broker. It's bad enough to get raked over the coals legitimately. If I need Viagra, Cialis, or any other elixir to manage an erection for hours or to heighten my (or her) pleasure in any way, I will see my doctor or re-read the Kama Sutra. I mean, come on, how big a problem is ED in this world these days that we must go to illegal lengths to get the "magic pills"? It seems to be a very ineffective way to hawk a product anyway, as any internet user with the smallest clue employs a spam filter or deletes it without opening. I can't imagine much money is made this way anymore, but I could be wrong. Nevertheless, it's a boil on the collective backside of the internet.
3. Acronyms for every illness (real and "created") for which there is a drug specifically marketed. AD, ED, COPD, DVT, HBP, RLS, CDE (Chronic Dry Eye... This one is my favorite), SADD, etc. Yet another way marketing has been taken to a new level. Make a person feel special, afraid, or afflicted and you can sell them anything.
4. Spam (canned meat). If you can read a nutrition label, you know this stuff will only kill you quickly.
5. Crappy TV shows loosely based on a show that is a ground breaking hit. How dumb do TV execs think we are? You cannot "copy" a hit show in a few weeks time and expect it to garner the same buzz and staying power as the original.
Examples:
America's Got Talent (This is NOT American Idol.... not even close)
Show Me The Money! (Deal or No Deal, as banal as it is, is Emmy worthy compared to this)
The Benefactor (Donald Trump is a fun and whimsical caricature, Mark Cuban is just creepy)
Joe Millionaire (Evan who? Oh, and Zora looks great in her Nutri-System commercials)
You get the idea... (Oh yeah, Rob and Am-buh can just go away too.)
6. Celebrity romances, feuds and political views. No one cares. Really. NO ONE.
Thursday, April 26, 2007
Tuesday, April 24, 2007
Does Men's Restroom Etiquette Apply?
I am reluctantly coming to accept that this blog may turn into a litany of stories that mainly revolve around commuting. The good news is that many of you will be able to relate. The bad news is also that many of you will be able to relate, as I will typically focus on what pisses me off about my fellow commuters.
Take this morning, for example. Once I get off the train at Union Station, I catch a bus for a 10 minute ride to a stop near my office. There are the usual complaints about bus travel... sometimes over-crowded, nearly always rude people pushing their way in line ahead of you (like the bus is going to leave them behind unless they mow you over to squeeze their often too large backsides through the double-doors), bus drivers that give you permanent whiplash with their stomp on gas to go and slam on brakes to stop driving, potholes, and yes, traffic. However, this morning's trip has nothing to do with the usual suspects. This morning's trip reminded me of a situation far more sinister and disturbing.... a breach of the MRE (Men's Restroom Etiquette). Not to be confused with the more commonly known military MRE (Meal Ready to Eat). I would wager that the average American's life will be saved more times by the restroom MRE than the military one.
For the ladies and clueless men out there (you know who you are), here is a simplified breakdown of MRE.
(To save time, I am using an example provided by Dan Wallach's "Male bathroom rules" at the following URL: http://www.netfunny.com/rhf/jokes/90q3/urinals.html A funny and enlightening read in it's own right, it goes further with the etiquette than is required in this space. I recommend its strict adherence by all men.)
Given seven urinals, here are acceptable configurations:
. = empty
|X | . | . | . | . | . | . |
|X | . | . | . | . | . | X |
|X | . | . | X | . | . | X |
|X | . | X | . | X | . | X |
|X | X | X | . | X | . | X | <-- These are only acceptable when significant
|X | X | X | . | X | X | X | <-- "privacy" dividers are available. If the
|X | X | X | X | X | X | X | <-- urinals aren't divided, use a toilet.
You can see how this concept works. It's not revolutionary, and it's been around since men pissed in the woods (some still do), except stalls were trees/bushes. It's about being respectful of another man's space, if at all possible.
It is my opinion, and it has been my observation for the most part, that MRE transcends the restroom and applies to mass transit, except that now women are included. Obviously if you are acquainted with and are accompanying a member of the opposite sex, MRE does not apply, as travel can be a social function. By all means, sit together. However, while traveling alone, or even as a pair of acquainted males, MRE should be in full force until it is no longer practical.
Which brings us to this morning's bus ride....
I deliberately waited for one bus to leave because it was standing room only, and I saw another one coming immediately. I figured there was no sense standing when I could sit in a reasonably empty bus, in my own row of seats and actually attempt to enjoy the ride, taking in the bustling activity on the streets on the way. Things were going according to plan until about the third stop when, inexplicably, a MAN sat next to me! If MRE is applied to this situation, this man may as well have come up behind me while I was at a urinal and given my butt a shove.
So it begins.... the conversation in your head when a such a breach of etiquette occurs.
"What?! You gotta be kidding me... can you not see there are so many more appropriate places to sit right now?"
"I waited for the next bus so I wouldn't have someone sitting next to me! And now this?! WTF?!"
You've been there, I know.
Then comes the indignant resolve.
"Well I'm not moving! Then he'll think I'm intimidated or otherwise creeped-the-hell-out."
"If he so much as touches me I'm gonna knock him into next week..."
Then the superiority complex.
"Nice clothes dude.... Gray Dockers and a pinstripe suit coat... Mismatch much? Your bottom half looks like it's going on a picnic, while your top half looks like it's going to the opera!"
"He must have very little human contact outside this bus ride. How sad."
Finally, he gets off a couple of stops later and I postulate that he must have sat next to me because he's not very familiar with the city and needed to see his surroundings clearly. I assume he was looking for a landmark. For my own sanity, I'll assume it was the DC Public Library. Alone again at last, but not uninjured by the experience. He ruined my ride to work with his ignorance of proper MRE.
To illustrate my quandary, I submit to you the condensed configuration of seating this morning.
Here is the legend:
W = Woman
M = Man
. = Empty
Y = Me
Since you've read my account of the incident above, you know which seat my nemeses chose this morning. There were a lot of other empty seats and acceptable MRE options. But for purposes of this exercise, if you are a man that observes MRE.... Where do you sit?
Precisely.
I knew I had a smart audience.
For those of you who have no idea what I'm talking about, here is the correct answer. Legend:
W = Woman
M = Man
. = Empty
Y = Me
X = Man who has a clue and applies MRE
Forward
See what I mean? It's an easy transition in logic to apply MRE to mass transit.
Here are few thoughts to help ease the transition....
If there are empty rows of seats available, use them first.
If you are a man, sit next to a unknown woman before sitting next to an unknown man.
If you are a woman, you may sit wherever you like, but recognize that whomever you sit next to will assume you think they are attractive and may offer unwanted conversation or other advances. Conversely, your advances or attempts at conversation may be rejected forcefully. This will be a problem mostly if you sit next to a man, but may happen with other women as well. Children under the age of 12 are the exception to this rule.
If you are a child, you must sit with your parent/guardian unless there are no other seats available. If there is only one seat available, you must sit and your parent/guardian must stand next to you. Parent/guardian must ensure that you remain seated and do not bother people that work for a living. You are allowed to be entertaining to the people that work for a living, but you must remain seated. Do NOT incessantly press the "Stop Requested" button!
If you are a tourist, please do everyone a favor and stick to the tour buses. Don't get me wrong, Washington DC is for everyone. However, the MetroBus schedules, routes, and business-like (read: narcissistic and rude) atmosphere will only ruin everyone's day (yours included) if you try to schlep all of your crap and your four small children from point to point all day, while attempting to maintain the sense of wonder that is our nation's capital.
The Metro Rail is not synonymous to the Monorail (ala Disney World)! The tourist advisory above applies, as should MRE. If tourists do attempt to utilize Metro Rail and can only remember one thing, it should be this. WALK LEFT, STAND RIGHT! If able to remember two things, the second should be this. Do not stop to look at your map at the top, or the bottom of an escalator! There's a name for people like you.... escalumps.
Take this morning, for example. Once I get off the train at Union Station, I catch a bus for a 10 minute ride to a stop near my office. There are the usual complaints about bus travel... sometimes over-crowded, nearly always rude people pushing their way in line ahead of you (like the bus is going to leave them behind unless they mow you over to squeeze their often too large backsides through the double-doors), bus drivers that give you permanent whiplash with their stomp on gas to go and slam on brakes to stop driving, potholes, and yes, traffic. However, this morning's trip has nothing to do with the usual suspects. This morning's trip reminded me of a situation far more sinister and disturbing.... a breach of the MRE (Men's Restroom Etiquette). Not to be confused with the more commonly known military MRE (Meal Ready to Eat). I would wager that the average American's life will be saved more times by the restroom MRE than the military one.
For the ladies and clueless men out there (you know who you are), here is a simplified breakdown of MRE.
(To save time, I am using an example provided by Dan Wallach's "Male bathroom rules" at the following URL: http://www.netfunny.com/rhf/jokes/90q3/urinals.html A funny and enlightening read in it's own right, it goes further with the etiquette than is required in this space. I recommend its strict adherence by all men.)
Given seven urinals, here are acceptable configurations:
X = occupied
. = empty
|X | . | . | . | . | . | . |
|X | . | . | . | . | . | X |
|X | . | . | X | . | . | X |
|X | . | X | . | X | . | X |
|X | X | X | . | X | . | X | <-- These are only acceptable when significant
|X | X | X | . | X | X | X | <-- "privacy" dividers are available. If the
|X | X | X | X | X | X | X | <-- urinals aren't divided, use a toilet.
You can see how this concept works. It's not revolutionary, and it's been around since men pissed in the woods (some still do), except stalls were trees/bushes. It's about being respectful of another man's space, if at all possible.
It is my opinion, and it has been my observation for the most part, that MRE transcends the restroom and applies to mass transit, except that now women are included. Obviously if you are acquainted with and are accompanying a member of the opposite sex, MRE does not apply, as travel can be a social function. By all means, sit together. However, while traveling alone, or even as a pair of acquainted males, MRE should be in full force until it is no longer practical.
Which brings us to this morning's bus ride....
I deliberately waited for one bus to leave because it was standing room only, and I saw another one coming immediately. I figured there was no sense standing when I could sit in a reasonably empty bus, in my own row of seats and actually attempt to enjoy the ride, taking in the bustling activity on the streets on the way. Things were going according to plan until about the third stop when, inexplicably, a MAN sat next to me! If MRE is applied to this situation, this man may as well have come up behind me while I was at a urinal and given my butt a shove.
So it begins.... the conversation in your head when a such a breach of etiquette occurs.
"What?! You gotta be kidding me... can you not see there are so many more appropriate places to sit right now?"
"I waited for the next bus so I wouldn't have someone sitting next to me! And now this?! WTF?!"
You've been there, I know.
Then comes the indignant resolve.
"Well I'm not moving! Then he'll think I'm intimidated or otherwise creeped-the-hell-out."
"If he so much as touches me I'm gonna knock him into next week..."
Then the superiority complex.
"Nice clothes dude.... Gray Dockers and a pinstripe suit coat... Mismatch much? Your bottom half looks like it's going on a picnic, while your top half looks like it's going to the opera!"
"He must have very little human contact outside this bus ride. How sad."
Finally, he gets off a couple of stops later and I postulate that he must have sat next to me because he's not very familiar with the city and needed to see his surroundings clearly. I assume he was looking for a landmark. For my own sanity, I'll assume it was the DC Public Library. Alone again at last, but not uninjured by the experience. He ruined my ride to work with his ignorance of proper MRE.
To illustrate my quandary, I submit to you the condensed configuration of seating this morning.
Here is the legend:
W = Woman
M = Man
. = Empty
Y = Me
Forward
|W| . | |M|W|
-------- --------
| . | . | | . |W|
These
face
each
other
|Y| . | |
--------- | Door
|
Rear
Since you've read my account of the incident above, you know which seat my nemeses chose this morning. There were a lot of other empty seats and acceptable MRE options. But for purposes of this exercise, if you are a man that observes MRE.... Where do you sit?
Precisely.
I knew I had a smart audience.
For those of you who have no idea what I'm talking about, here is the correct answer. Legend:
W = Woman
M = Man
. = Empty
Y = Me
X = Man who has a clue and applies MRE
Forward
|W| . | |M|W|
------- ------
| . |X| | . |W|
These
face
each
other
|Y| . | |
------- | Door
|
Rear
See what I mean? It's an easy transition in logic to apply MRE to mass transit.
Here are few thoughts to help ease the transition....
If there are empty rows of seats available, use them first.
If you are a man, sit next to a unknown woman before sitting next to an unknown man.
If you are a woman, you may sit wherever you like, but recognize that whomever you sit next to will assume you think they are attractive and may offer unwanted conversation or other advances. Conversely, your advances or attempts at conversation may be rejected forcefully. This will be a problem mostly if you sit next to a man, but may happen with other women as well. Children under the age of 12 are the exception to this rule.
If you are a child, you must sit with your parent/guardian unless there are no other seats available. If there is only one seat available, you must sit and your parent/guardian must stand next to you. Parent/guardian must ensure that you remain seated and do not bother people that work for a living. You are allowed to be entertaining to the people that work for a living, but you must remain seated. Do NOT incessantly press the "Stop Requested" button!
If you are a tourist, please do everyone a favor and stick to the tour buses. Don't get me wrong, Washington DC is for everyone. However, the MetroBus schedules, routes, and business-like (read: narcissistic and rude) atmosphere will only ruin everyone's day (yours included) if you try to schlep all of your crap and your four small children from point to point all day, while attempting to maintain the sense of wonder that is our nation's capital.
The Metro Rail is not synonymous to the Monorail (ala Disney World)! The tourist advisory above applies, as should MRE. If tourists do attempt to utilize Metro Rail and can only remember one thing, it should be this. WALK LEFT, STAND RIGHT! If able to remember two things, the second should be this. Do not stop to look at your map at the top, or the bottom of an escalator! There's a name for people like you.... escalumps.
Monday, April 23, 2007
Anatomy Of A Verbal Altercation
I took an earlier train than usual on Friday, as it was a gorgeous afternoon and the very picture of a spring day. As is my luck, a lot of other people had the same brilliant idea. It's at times like these, I question the qualification of "brilliance". This train leaves about an hour and a half before the train I normally take home, so I was getting a decent head start on my weekend. I commute a total of about three and a half hours a day, so any chance to get out of town ahead of time is ok by me.
Things started out normally enough.... I was a few minutes early, which is not typical for me when trying to catch this particular run. I thought things were totally going my way. When I boarded the train, I immediately noticed there were a lot more people on than normal. "Nice afternoon... Friday... figures..", I thought. Everyone seemed to be in good spirits, buoyed by the spring weather, and many conversations were dedicated to weekend plans, gardening ideas and the intent of unabashed relaxation. I made my way to what is normally dedicated the "Quiet Car", as I do when I am not riding my normal train with my normal crew (A separate post on this at another time.). I noticed the sign that normally hangs from the ceiling denoting that you are now entering the "Quiet Car" was conspicuously absent, but thought nothing of it. This car too, is very full compared to normal, but I make my way to the very front of the car where there is an empty seat of two facing another empty seat of two. I know this will not last, but will be comfortable for as long as I can be. I then found some appropriate kicking-off-the-weekend music (Sheryl Crow, can't go wrong.) and settle into my seat to meditate or otherwise tune out my surroundings until I get to my destination.
Just before we pulled out of Union Station, I saw an acquaintance from my normal train wandering into the car looking for a seat. We had conversed several times, and are in the same line of work, so I waved hello and let her know there was available real estate across from me. She is somewhat dedicated to her craft, so she pulls out her laptop and begins tapping away at the keys once she got settled into her seat. We exchanged pleasantries and began a "Quiet" conversation about weekend plans, the weather... you know the drill. After a few minutes, she decided it was the weekend after all, and decided to have a full conversation with me about her resume, work issues, etc. I have no problem with this as she is a decent conversationalist and seems all in all like a good person. As we continued on our journey, more and more people piled into the car at each stop. Soon it was very crowded and there were no seats to be had. I noticed that the "Quiet Car" sign still was not hanging in its normal spot and figured the designation was lifted due to the heavy ridership that afternoon. My acquaintance (for ease of reference, we'll call her "Agnes") has a voice that, for lack of a better term, carries. Now, some people use that term politely to describe a person that is just loud and completely devoid of an "indoor" voice, but I am not using it in that context here. I assure you her volume was not excessive and no "adult" language was being used. In short, no reasonable person would consider this a violation of "Quiet Car" etiquette.
At one stop, a woman got out of her seat as she was getting ready to depart, and informed Agnes: "You may or may not know this, but you are sitting in the Quiet Car and there are not supposed to be any conversations, blah blah blah...". I rolled my eyes immediately. I'd heard of these Quiet Car Nazis but had never seen one in action. It is really a sad thing to watch. Now, Agnes has been riding the train for a while and knows all of the rules regarding "QC" (I'm tired of typing "Quiet Car") and retorts: "I understand the "QC" rules and we ARE allowed to have conversations quietly." The QCN (Quiet Car Nazi) stands firm in her contention that there are to be no conversations, until another rider and I corrected the QCN about quiet conversations being acceptable. The QCN, surprised her assertion was being challenged, was somewhat embarrassed. So she then admonished Agnes for her volume of conversation. For some reason, the QCN went out of her way to note that MY volume was acceptable, but Agnes' was not. (I mean, really, who elected this person to be the QC Police!?) In the interest of not escalating the altercation, Agnes (and I give her major props for this) apologizes. As the QCN turns to exit the train, I note to her that the QC sign is not hanging today and that perhaps she should lighten up. She turns to me indignantly, replies "Hmph", then exits the train. After she left, other riders around us agreed the QCN was out of line and our conversation had in no way bothered them or violated Quiet Car etiquette. The woman just wanted to screw with someone.... period.
An ironic observation for those who are unfamiliar with commuter trains.... Quiet Cars are typically situated just behind the locomotive, which are generally very noisy what, with their massive engine, 120 decibel horn, etc. That slightly defeats the purpose, doesn't it?
As I thought about this altercation more, it occurred to me that the QCN has definite control issues. There must be things going on in her life that she feels she can't control, so she controls what she can. This is probably the root of a lot of altercations. People try to tell other people what to do and not mind their own business more than likely because they CAN'T manage their own business. It is painfully obvious to me that this woman targeted Agnes because she's a bit overweight, a bit of a techno-geek, and young. By contrast, the QCN is middle-aged, wears a business suit, has her colored-but-still-graying hair conservatively styled and carries her weight as if she tirelessly struggles to maintain that size six. Maybe QCN was jealous of Agnes' comfort in her own skin, or that Agnes talked so easily about her career aspirations and family plans with her husband. Whatever the case, I hope QCN realizes someday soon that life is too short to bully others out of jealousy, disapproval or a sense of control. Take charge of your own life, and you'll be a happier person.
Things started out normally enough.... I was a few minutes early, which is not typical for me when trying to catch this particular run. I thought things were totally going my way. When I boarded the train, I immediately noticed there were a lot more people on than normal. "Nice afternoon... Friday... figures..", I thought. Everyone seemed to be in good spirits, buoyed by the spring weather, and many conversations were dedicated to weekend plans, gardening ideas and the intent of unabashed relaxation. I made my way to what is normally dedicated the "Quiet Car", as I do when I am not riding my normal train with my normal crew (A separate post on this at another time.). I noticed the sign that normally hangs from the ceiling denoting that you are now entering the "Quiet Car" was conspicuously absent, but thought nothing of it. This car too, is very full compared to normal, but I make my way to the very front of the car where there is an empty seat of two facing another empty seat of two. I know this will not last, but will be comfortable for as long as I can be. I then found some appropriate kicking-off-the-weekend music (Sheryl Crow, can't go wrong.) and settle into my seat to meditate or otherwise tune out my surroundings until I get to my destination.
Just before we pulled out of Union Station, I saw an acquaintance from my normal train wandering into the car looking for a seat. We had conversed several times, and are in the same line of work, so I waved hello and let her know there was available real estate across from me. She is somewhat dedicated to her craft, so she pulls out her laptop and begins tapping away at the keys once she got settled into her seat. We exchanged pleasantries and began a "Quiet" conversation about weekend plans, the weather... you know the drill. After a few minutes, she decided it was the weekend after all, and decided to have a full conversation with me about her resume, work issues, etc. I have no problem with this as she is a decent conversationalist and seems all in all like a good person. As we continued on our journey, more and more people piled into the car at each stop. Soon it was very crowded and there were no seats to be had. I noticed that the "Quiet Car" sign still was not hanging in its normal spot and figured the designation was lifted due to the heavy ridership that afternoon. My acquaintance (for ease of reference, we'll call her "Agnes") has a voice that, for lack of a better term, carries. Now, some people use that term politely to describe a person that is just loud and completely devoid of an "indoor" voice, but I am not using it in that context here. I assure you her volume was not excessive and no "adult" language was being used. In short, no reasonable person would consider this a violation of "Quiet Car" etiquette.
At one stop, a woman got out of her seat as she was getting ready to depart, and informed Agnes: "You may or may not know this, but you are sitting in the Quiet Car and there are not supposed to be any conversations, blah blah blah...". I rolled my eyes immediately. I'd heard of these Quiet Car Nazis but had never seen one in action. It is really a sad thing to watch. Now, Agnes has been riding the train for a while and knows all of the rules regarding "QC" (I'm tired of typing "Quiet Car") and retorts: "I understand the "QC" rules and we ARE allowed to have conversations quietly." The QCN (Quiet Car Nazi) stands firm in her contention that there are to be no conversations, until another rider and I corrected the QCN about quiet conversations being acceptable. The QCN, surprised her assertion was being challenged, was somewhat embarrassed. So she then admonished Agnes for her volume of conversation. For some reason, the QCN went out of her way to note that MY volume was acceptable, but Agnes' was not. (I mean, really, who elected this person to be the QC Police!?) In the interest of not escalating the altercation, Agnes (and I give her major props for this) apologizes. As the QCN turns to exit the train, I note to her that the QC sign is not hanging today and that perhaps she should lighten up. She turns to me indignantly, replies "Hmph", then exits the train. After she left, other riders around us agreed the QCN was out of line and our conversation had in no way bothered them or violated Quiet Car etiquette. The woman just wanted to screw with someone.... period.
An ironic observation for those who are unfamiliar with commuter trains.... Quiet Cars are typically situated just behind the locomotive, which are generally very noisy what, with their massive engine, 120 decibel horn, etc. That slightly defeats the purpose, doesn't it?
As I thought about this altercation more, it occurred to me that the QCN has definite control issues. There must be things going on in her life that she feels she can't control, so she controls what she can. This is probably the root of a lot of altercations. People try to tell other people what to do and not mind their own business more than likely because they CAN'T manage their own business. It is painfully obvious to me that this woman targeted Agnes because she's a bit overweight, a bit of a techno-geek, and young. By contrast, the QCN is middle-aged, wears a business suit, has her colored-but-still-graying hair conservatively styled and carries her weight as if she tirelessly struggles to maintain that size six. Maybe QCN was jealous of Agnes' comfort in her own skin, or that Agnes talked so easily about her career aspirations and family plans with her husband. Whatever the case, I hope QCN realizes someday soon that life is too short to bully others out of jealousy, disapproval or a sense of control. Take charge of your own life, and you'll be a happier person.
Thursday, April 19, 2007
Closing VA Tech thoughts...
Well tomorrow is "maroon and orange effect" day, as declared by the VA Tech Alumni Association. I plan to wear my maroon and orange in tribute to those killed, injured and otherwise affected by this tragedy. Cho's videos and manifesto bring no new light to the meaning of his rampage, only more questions that have no answers. I suppose I just have to raise my daughter to not be a victim.... to not go quietly into the night like Americans have been conditioned to do in situations like these. It seems the voices are getting louder with each 9/11, Columbine and VA Tech occurrence to fight back and take your destiny into your own hands. Well, no shit! We, as a society, have enabled these psychopaths for too long. The days of an expectation of compassion or mercy from these killers are long gone. Terrorists no longer hijack an aircraft and negotiate their demands, they fly planes into buildings and kill thousands of innocents. No longer does someone kidnap or hold a room hostage as a cry for help or as a means to a peaceful end... they are prepared to give up their lives to be remembered and send a message for future generations, however muddled that message may be. Once we, as a society, refuse to be complicit as victims, only then will these attacks cease.
Wednesday, April 18, 2007
VA Tech observations... questions...
As much as I hate to start the blog off with this subject, it is what I have.
Needless to say, it has been an excruciating couple of days for this country. By no means do I mean to equate what I am feeling with the pain and suffering of deceased victims' families, survivors and their families, and students of Virginia Tech. However, this particular event strikes me very hard, much as Columbine did in 1999. One tries very hard to look for meaning in acts such as these. Meaning that goes beyond the "he was a loner..", angry at rich kids and religion.... spurned by love interests. I mean, really, we've heard all of this crap before. Most of us have had to deal with these types of emotions at one point or another in our lives. Yet most of us find the mental capacity and fortitude to deal with such circumstances. Most of us ultimately discover this or that is really not what is appeared to be. This girl is not who I thought she was.... this religion holds no sway over me.... being rich is really kind of a pain in the ass! You get the idea.... So why, or perhaps a better question is how is it a bright young mind exacts this type of carnage, culminating in his own death, to express himself?
Obviously killing is the means by which he intended to express himself. The thing that always gets me in a lot of these cases is the incredible detail to which the killer plans his attack. He spends weeks or months thinking about how to do the maximum amount of damage in a short amount of time. Although, I must admit, I chuckled a bit when I read that Cho chained the doors shut at Norris Hall. No one in these cases did that before. It will be interesting to find out how effective that tactic was. Truthfully, I'm surprised, given his age and assumed intelligence, that we wasn't able to kill more. But I digress... As much thought that goes into the attack, there is little or no thought put into his message. A hastily written note... drunken ramblings on videotapes... how the hell is the world supposed to know what you took all of those lives for (including your own)! There will be some who say that Cho attempted to communicate this in his notes, but if you've read his plays, you could see how the message may somehow get lost. I just find it all very difficult to wrap my head around, as a rational person. I know rationale waves bye-bye to these guys to some extent... but if this type of thing is supposed to have a purpose... to send a message... what the hell is it?!
Needless to say, it has been an excruciating couple of days for this country. By no means do I mean to equate what I am feeling with the pain and suffering of deceased victims' families, survivors and their families, and students of Virginia Tech. However, this particular event strikes me very hard, much as Columbine did in 1999. One tries very hard to look for meaning in acts such as these. Meaning that goes beyond the "he was a loner..", angry at rich kids and religion.... spurned by love interests. I mean, really, we've heard all of this crap before. Most of us have had to deal with these types of emotions at one point or another in our lives. Yet most of us find the mental capacity and fortitude to deal with such circumstances. Most of us ultimately discover this or that is really not what is appeared to be. This girl is not who I thought she was.... this religion holds no sway over me.... being rich is really kind of a pain in the ass! You get the idea.... So why, or perhaps a better question is how is it a bright young mind exacts this type of carnage, culminating in his own death, to express himself?
Obviously killing is the means by which he intended to express himself. The thing that always gets me in a lot of these cases is the incredible detail to which the killer plans his attack. He spends weeks or months thinking about how to do the maximum amount of damage in a short amount of time. Although, I must admit, I chuckled a bit when I read that Cho chained the doors shut at Norris Hall. No one in these cases did that before. It will be interesting to find out how effective that tactic was. Truthfully, I'm surprised, given his age and assumed intelligence, that we wasn't able to kill more. But I digress... As much thought that goes into the attack, there is little or no thought put into his message. A hastily written note... drunken ramblings on videotapes... how the hell is the world supposed to know what you took all of those lives for (including your own)! There will be some who say that Cho attempted to communicate this in his notes, but if you've read his plays, you could see how the message may somehow get lost. I just find it all very difficult to wrap my head around, as a rational person. I know rationale waves bye-bye to these guys to some extent... but if this type of thing is supposed to have a purpose... to send a message... what the hell is it?!
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)