November 2010 I went through a BBC list of 100 novels and marked which I had read or not.
Why not do it again. Not putting in enough effort to confirm that the list is the exact same as the first one though.
*Pride and Prejudice – Jane Austen - Have not read, may read someday. 0/1
*The Lord of the Rings - Have read. 1/2
*Jane Eyre – Charlotte Bronte - Have not read, may read someday. 1/3
*Harry Potter Series – JK Rowling - Have read. 2/4
*To Kill a Mockingbird – Harper Lee - Have read. 3/5
*The Bible - Have partially read, may completely read someday. 3.5/6
*Wuthering Heights - Emily Brontë - Have read. 4.5/6
*Nineteen Eighty Four – George Orwell - Have read. 5.5/7
*His Dark Materials – Philip Pullman - Read the first book in the series. 6/8
*Great Expectations – Charles Dickens - Have not read, may read someday. 6/9
*Little Women - Louisa May Alcott - Have not read. 6/10
*Tess of the D'urbervilles - Thomas Hardy - Have not read or heard of. 6/11
*Catch 22 – Joseph Heller - Have read. 7/12
*Complete Works of Shakespeare - Another 'series' sort of entry. Have read several. Changing half credits to full credits for the Bible and His Dark Materials. 9/13
*Rebecca – Daphne Du Maurier - Have not read or heard of. 9/14
*The Hobbit – JRR Tolkien - Have read. 10/15
*Birdsong – Sebastian Faulks - Have not read or heard of. 10/16
*Catcher in the Rye – JD Salinger - Have not read and a chance or reading. 10/17
*The Time Traveler's Wife – Audrey Niffenegger - Have not read and may read someday. 10/18
*Middlemarch – George Eliot - Have not read and have not heard of. 10/19
*Gone With the Wind – Margaret Mitchell - Have not read and chance of reading. 10/20
*The Great Gatsby - F Scott Fitzgerald - Have read. 11/21
*Bleak House – Charles Dickens - Have not read, may read someday. 11/22
*War and Peace – Leo Tolstoy - Have not read, may read someday. 11/23
*The Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy – Douglas Adams - Have not read, may read someday. 11/24
*Brideshead Revisited – Evelyn Waugh - Have not read or heard of. 11/25
*Crime and Punishment – Fyodor Dostoyevsky - Have not read, may read someday. 11/26
*The Grapes of Wrath – John Steinbeck - I do not think I have not read, may read someday. 11/27
*Alice in Wonderland – Lewis Carroll - Have read. 12/28
*The Wind in the Willows – Kenneth Grahame - Have not read, may read someday. 12/29
*Anna Karenina – Leo Tolstoy - Have not read, may read someday. 12/30
*David Copperfield – Charles Dickens - Have not read, may read someday. 12/31
*Chronicles of Narnia – CS Lewis - Have read. 13/32
*Emma – Jane Austen - Have not read, may read someday. 13/33
*Persuasion – Jane Austen - Have not read. 13/34
*The Lion, the Witch and the Wardrobe – CS Lewis - Have read, but this was already included with the entire series. I'm still going to take a full point for this. 14/35
*The Kite Runner – Khaled Hosseini - Have not read. 14/36
*Captain Corelli's Mandolin – Louis De Berniere - Have not read or heard of. 14/37
*Memoirs of a Geisha - Arthur Golden - Have not read, may read someday. 14/38
*Winnie the Pooh – AA Milne - Have not read, may read someday. 14/39
*Animal Farm – George Orwell - Have read. 15/40
*The Da Vinci Code - Dan Brown - Have read. 16/41
*One Hundred Years of Solitude - Gabriel Garcia - Have not read or heard of. 16/42
*A Prayer for Owen Meany – John Irving - Have not read or heard of. 16/43
*The Woman in White – Wilkie Collins - Have not read. 16/44
*Anne of Green Gables – LM Montgomery - Have not read, may read someday. 16/45
*Far From the Madding Crowd – Thomas Hardy - Have not read or heard of. 16/46
*The Handmaids Tale – Margaret Atwood - Have not read, may read someday. 16/47
*Lord of the Flies – William Golding - Have not read, may read someday. 16/48
*Atonement – Ian McEwan - Have not read or heard of. 16/49
*Life of Pi - Yann Martel - Have not read. 16/50
*Dune – Frank Herbert - Have read. 17/51
*Cold Comfort Farm – Stella Gibbons - Have not read or heard of. 17/52
*Sense and Sensibility – Jane Austen - Have not read, may read someday. 17/53
*A Suitable Boy – Vikram Seth - Have not read or heard of. 17/54
*The Shadow of the Wind – Carlos Ruiz Zafon - Have not read or heard of. 17/55
*A Tale of Two Cities – Charles Dickens - Have not read, may read someday. 17/56
*Brave New World – Aldous Huxley - Have read. 18/57
*The Curious Incident of the Dog in the Night-Time – Mark Haddon - Have not read, may read someday. 18/58
*Love in the Time of Cholera – Gabriel Garcia - Have not read or heard of. 18/59
*Of Mice and Men – John Steinbeck - Have read. 19/60
*Lolita – Vladimir Nabokov - Have not read, may read someday. 19/61
*The Secret History – Donna Tartt - Have not read or heard of. 19/62
*The Lovely Bones – Alice Sebold - Have not read, may read someday. 19/63
*Count of Monte Cristo – Alexandre Dumas - Have not read, may read someday. 19/64
*On the Road – Jack Kerouac - Have not read, may read someday. 19/65
*Jude the Obscure – Thomas Hardy - Have not read or heard of. 19/66
*Bridget Jones's Diary – Helen Fielding - Have not read, may read someday. 19/67
*Midnight's Children – Salman Rushdie - Have not read or heard of. 19/68
*Moby Dick – Herman Melville - Have read. 20/69
*Oliver Twist – Charles Dickens - Have not read, may read someday. 20/70
*Dracula – Bram Stoker - Have read. 21/71
*The Secret Garden – Frances Hodgson - Have not read. 21/72
*Notes From a Small Island – Bill Bryson - Have not read or heard of. 21/73
*Ulysses – James Joyce - Have not read, may read someday. 21/74
*The Bell Jar – Sylvia Plath - Have not read, may read someday. 21/75
*Swallows and Amazons – Arthur Ransome - Have not read or heard of. 21/76
*Germinal – Emile Zola - Have not read or heard of. 21/77
*Vanity Fair – William Makepeace Thackeray - Have not read. 21/78
*Possession – Byatt - Have not read or heard of. 21/79
*A Christmas Carol – Charles Dickens - Have not read, may read someday. 21/80
*Cloud Atlas – David Mitchell - Have read. 22/81
*The Colour Purple – Alice Walker - Have not read. 22/82
*The Remains of the Day – Kazuo Ishiguro - Have not read. 22/83
*Madame Bovary – Gustave Flaubert - Have not read. 22/84
*A Fine Balance – Rohinton Mistry - Have not read or heard of. 22/85
*Charlotte's Web – EB White - Have read. 23/86
*The Five People You Meet in Heaven – Mitch Albom - Have not read. 23/87
*Adventures of Sherlock Holmes – Sir Arthur Conan Doyle - Have read. 24/88
*The Faraway Tree Collection – Enid Blyton - Have not read or heard of. 24/89
*Heart of Darkness – Joseph Conrad - Started to read but did not finish. 24/90
*The Little Prince – Antoine De Saint Exupery - Have not read, may read someday. 24/91
*The Wasp Factory – Iain Banks - Have not read, may read someday. 24/92
*Watership Down – Richard Adams - Have not read, may read someday. 24/93
*A Confederacy of Dunces – John Kennedy Toole - Have not read. 24/94
*A Town Like Alice – Nevil Shute - Have not read. 24/95
*The Three Musketeers – Alexandre Dumas - Have read. 25/96
*Hamlet – William Shakespeare - Have read. 26/97
*Charlie & the Chocolate Factory – Roald Dahl - Have read. 27/98
*Les Miserables – Victor Hugo - Have read. 28/99
Not exactly 100 novels. But 27/99 isn't awful. Over six years ago it was 24/98.
Changes since 2010:
*Have now read Moby Dick and Cloud Atlas. I'm not sure what the others are.
*I don't think I ever finished Hitchhiker's Guide, although now I am doubting myself.
Books listed as maybe to be read someday:
*Pride and Prejudice – Jane Austen
*Jane Eyre – Charlotte Bronte
*The Bible
*Great Expectations – Charles Dickens
*Catcher in the Rye – JD Salinger
*The Time Traveler's Wife – Audrey Niffenegger
*Gone With the Wind – Margaret Mitchell
*Bleak House – Charles Dickens
*War and Peace – Leo Tolstoy
*The Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy – Douglas Adams
*Crime and Punishment – Fyodor Dostoyevsky
*The Grapes of Wrath – John Steinbeck
*The Wind in the Willows – Kenneth Grahame
*Anna Karenina – Leo Tolstoy
*David Copperfield – Charles Dickens
*Emma – Jane Austen
*Memoirs of a Geisha - Arthur Golden
*Winnie the Pooh – AA Milne
*Anne of Green Gables – LM Montgomery
*The Handmaids Tale – Margaret Atwood
*Lord of the Flies – William Golding
*Sense and Sensibility – Jane Austen
*A Tale of Two Cities – Charles Dickens
*The Curious Incident of the Dog in the Night-Time – Mark Haddon
*Lolita – Vladimir Nabokov
*The Lovely Bones – Alice Sebold
*Count of Monte Cristo – Alexandre Dumas
*On the Road – Jack Kerouac
*Bridget Jones's Diary – Helen Fielding
*Oliver Twist – Charles Dickens
*Ulysses – James Joyce
*The Bell Jar – Sylvia Plath
*A Christmas Carol – Charles Dickens
*The Little Prince – Antoine De Saint Exupery
*The Wasp Factory – Iain Banks
*Watership Down – Richard Adams
That's a lot of books, and mainly listed there for my benefit later. Maybe I'll do another one of these with a different list.
Thursday 23 February 2017
Friday 27 February 2015
Updating
In relation to the previous post - writing all massive amounts of to dos has helped quite a bit. There is now a framework to be built upon, items to check off, areas of the list to further clarify and break down. It feels good.
Other thoughts - I don't like my job anymore. But I also do not dislike it. It just is. I don't enjoy going to work every day.
Other thoughts - I don't like my job anymore. But I also do not dislike it. It just is. I don't enjoy going to work every day.
Friday 6 February 2015
Broken
I am broken and I don't know how to fix myself.
Actually that's not exactly true. I know what I should be doing - what I want to be doing. I just seem incapable of doing it.
Maybe that's the problem. There are so many things that I think I should be doing - improving myself, organizing things, labeling things, scheduling things, doing things. There are so many things and I'm just overwhelmed. Or maybe it's because there is no plan, no prioritization of these self-improvements, so instead of having a single thing to start on, I'm faced with everything at once and of course it doesn't work.
That's a thought. Collect all of these meta-things, organize and prioritize them. Try to change a single thing a week. Identify everything that is broken, all the ideas for fixing myself, and instead of trying to fix everything - fix one little thing. I'll still be broken, but just a tad less broken. Which is an improvement. Which is something.
Actually that's not exactly true. I know what I should be doing - what I want to be doing. I just seem incapable of doing it.
Maybe that's the problem. There are so many things that I think I should be doing - improving myself, organizing things, labeling things, scheduling things, doing things. There are so many things and I'm just overwhelmed. Or maybe it's because there is no plan, no prioritization of these self-improvements, so instead of having a single thing to start on, I'm faced with everything at once and of course it doesn't work.
That's a thought. Collect all of these meta-things, organize and prioritize them. Try to change a single thing a week. Identify everything that is broken, all the ideas for fixing myself, and instead of trying to fix everything - fix one little thing. I'll still be broken, but just a tad less broken. Which is an improvement. Which is something.
Monday 2 February 2015
Musings to Write
I feel like I should start using this blogger thing more. I have so many issues and talking about things here would probably be good for me. I could do something similar on my twitter, but that is associated with my real life, and this blog on the other hand is much more anonymous. Which is great for things I don't want people to connect with me.
At work today some people were talking about parts of this event that I am no longer able to be a part of. And not the 'Too busy with other things to be a part of' but a 'Disagreements with higher ups on the totem pole and forced out' not a part of. I was in fact in charge of the event, and all the people actually involved with it agreed with my views on things, and the higher ups who didn't actually do anything with the event were on the other side. But that's not the focus of this complaint. There was discussion about how cool it was that the event now had a twitter and was doing things on facebook and whatnot. But I was the one who made the twitter account and the facebook page and even a website several years ago when I was still involved. The social media things they were gushing over were only a part of what I had started when I was involved, and the specific things they were discussing were all things I had started. They weren't involved in any of that back then and weren't now, so they were simply ignorant of the history of those things, but it was still hard to hear people praising others for things I had done. Especially because I am still not over the whole being forced out. One and a quarter years trying to get over it and I'm not sure how much I've actually done.
At work today some people were talking about parts of this event that I am no longer able to be a part of. And not the 'Too busy with other things to be a part of' but a 'Disagreements with higher ups on the totem pole and forced out' not a part of. I was in fact in charge of the event, and all the people actually involved with it agreed with my views on things, and the higher ups who didn't actually do anything with the event were on the other side. But that's not the focus of this complaint. There was discussion about how cool it was that the event now had a twitter and was doing things on facebook and whatnot. But I was the one who made the twitter account and the facebook page and even a website several years ago when I was still involved. The social media things they were gushing over were only a part of what I had started when I was involved, and the specific things they were discussing were all things I had started. They weren't involved in any of that back then and weren't now, so they were simply ignorant of the history of those things, but it was still hard to hear people praising others for things I had done. Especially because I am still not over the whole being forced out. One and a quarter years trying to get over it and I'm not sure how much I've actually done.
Tuesday 31 December 2013
Over-Extended Metaphor for the day By Charlie Stross
Original at http://www.antipope.org/charlie/blog-static/2013/12/metaphor-for-the-day.html#more
There is one true religion in operating systems, and it is UNIX. Or maybe it's not the one true faith: there's an earlier, older, more arcane religion with far fewer followers, MULTICS, from which UNIX sprang as a stripped-down rules-deficient heresy in the early days of the epoch. Either way, if MULTICS is Judaism (and the metaphor is questionable at this point, for unlike MULTICS, Judaism is still alive), then UNIX is Christianity.
In the early days, the UNIX faith spread underground among nests of true believers; but they evangelized their friends and neighbours and gradually it began to spread in strange communities. And with the spread came the great split. By the mid-1970s there were two main sects: AT&T UNIX, which we may liken unto the Roman Catholic Church, and BSD UNIX, which we may approximate to the Orthodox Churches. And then lo, there were many schisms.
In an attempt to control the schisms, the faithful formed learned congregations who at major conferences defined a common interoperating subset of the one true religion that all could agree on—the Nicene Creed of UNIX is probablyPOSIX, but let us not forget the congregation of the X/Open Portability Group and others. The bishops and cardinals of UNIX were fierce in the defense of their own particular schismatic sect, and formed alliances to develop credos that excluded their rivals while cunningly embracing their temporary peers: thus was the holy war prosecuted.
Today, the biggest church within the Orthodox community—possibly the biggest church in the whole of UNIX—is Mac OS X, which rests on the bedrock of Orthodox BSD but has added an incredible, towering superstructure of fiercely guarded APIs and proprietary user interface stuff that renders it all but unrecognizable to followers of the Catholic AT&T path.
But in the late 1980s, the Catholic Church succumbed to the sins of venality and simony, demanding too much money from the faithful. And so, in 1991 or thereabouts, Linus Torvalds nailed his famous source code release to the cathedral door and kicked off the Reformation. The Reformation took the shape of a new, freely copyable kernel that all the faithful could read with their own eyes. This Protestant heresy spread like wildfire among the people but was resisted with acts of vicious repression by the high priesthood of Corporate IT (arguably in connivance with the infidel invaders from the Caliphate of Microsoft). The Linux wars were brutal and unforgiving and Linux itself splintered into a myriad of fractious Protestant churches, from the Red Hat wearing Lutherans to the Ubuntu Baptists.
Reformation came at a price: another wave of religious conclaves that tried to hammer out a common ground between the various reformed churches. (See also the Linux Standard Base, and also the internecine war between packaging systems such as RPM or DPKG—the correct way to print and bind a Bible. This was, arguably, won by DPKG, which should therefore be considered the King James Version of the Linux holy scripture.)
More recently, a deviant faith has sprung from Linux, grafting an entirely newuser interface revelation atop the same kernel: Android, which true adherents of the UNIX faith (even die-hard reformed Church Linuxers) mostly deny the UNIX-dom of. Android is the Church of Latter Day Saints of UNIX: hard-working, sober, evangelizing the public, and growing at a ferocious rate. There are some strange fundamentalist Mormon Android churches living in walled communities under the banners of Samsung and Amazon, but for the most part the prosperous worship at the Church of Google.
Friday 5 April 2013
BSA considering removing ban
If you haven't heard the news, the BSA is considering ending their national ban on homosexuals in Scouting. The proposal, from this media release, will leave membership requirements of sexual orientation up to the individual charter organizations. The policy will be formally discussed and considered at the National Board Meeting next week.
If you did not know, I am heavily involved with the BSA. And if you didn't realize it based on all of my Cato links, my opinion on homosexuals is that they should be treated like everyone else. Of course, I also believe that the BSA has the right to whatever stupid membership restrictions it wants and the government can't force them to not be idiots. It's up to the people within the BSA and those with relationships with the BSA to pressure the organization into better policies. And that's what seems to have happened. From outside the BSA you have organizations like UPS, United Way, and Intel that have stopped their financial support because of the discrimination. From the top of the BSA, you have two National Board members promising to fight the discrimination policy. You have several large Councils proposing to change the policy. You have individual Councils enacting non-discrimination policy in the face of the national policy and getting reprimanded by National. You have units and Districts ignoring the policy and recommending gay Scouts for the Eagle rank. And each one of these events was followed at public outcry against the BSA.
I can only hope that the Mormon power bloc steps down and the proposal passes.
at Tuesday, January 29, 2013
If you did not know, I am heavily involved with the BSA. And if you didn't realize it based on all of my Cato links, my opinion on homosexuals is that they should be treated like everyone else. Of course, I also believe that the BSA has the right to whatever stupid membership restrictions it wants and the government can't force them to not be idiots. It's up to the people within the BSA and those with relationships with the BSA to pressure the organization into better policies. And that's what seems to have happened. From outside the BSA you have organizations like UPS, United Way, and Intel that have stopped their financial support because of the discrimination. From the top of the BSA, you have two National Board members promising to fight the discrimination policy. You have several large Councils proposing to change the policy. You have individual Councils enacting non-discrimination policy in the face of the national policy and getting reprimanded by National. You have units and Districts ignoring the policy and recommending gay Scouts for the Eagle rank. And each one of these events was followed at public outcry against the BSA.
I can only hope that the Mormon power bloc steps down and the proposal passes.
at Tuesday, January 29, 2013
The Guardian's Great American Novels quiz
The Guardian has an eleven-question quiz asking you to identify classic American novels from their first lines:
1. “Boys are playing basketball around a telephone pole with a backboard bolted to it. Legs, shouts. The scrape and snap of Keds on loose alley pebbles seems to catapult their voices high into the moist March air, blue above the wires.”
2. “The Swede. During the war years, when I was still a grade school boy, this was a magical name in our Newark neighborhood, even to adults just a generation removed from the city's old Prince Street ghetto and not yet so flawlessly Americanized as to be bowled over by the prowess of a high school athlete.”
3. “To the red country and part of the gray country of Oklahoma, the last rains came gently, and they did not cut the scarred earth.”
4. “Jewel and I come up from the field, following the path in a single file. Although I am fifteen feet ahead of him, anyone watching us from the cotton-house can see Jewel's frayed and broken straw hat a full head above my own.”
5. “124 was spiteful. Full of a baby's venom. The women in the house knew it and so did the children.”
6. “He was an old man who fished alone in a skiff in the Gulf Stream and he had gone eighty-four days now without taking a fish.”
7. “On a January evening of the early seventies, Christine Nilsson was singing in Faust at the Academy of Music in New York.”
8. “He speaks in your voice, American, and there's a shine in his eye that's halfway hopeful. It's a school day, sure, but he's nowhere near the classroom.”
9. “On Memorial Day in 1867 Daniel Lewin thumbed his way from New York to Worcester, Mass., in just under five hours. With him was his young wife, Phyllis, and their eight-month-old son, Paul, whom Daniel carried in a sling chair strapped to his shoulders like a pack.”
10. “A screaming comes across the sky. It has happened before but there is nothing to compare it to now.”
11. “In my younger and more vulnerable years my father gave me some advice that I've been turning over in my mind ever since. 'Whenever you feel like criticizing anyone,' he told me, 'just remember that all the people in this world haven't had the advantages that you've had.'”
It is multiple choice, otherwise I would have only gotten one correct instead of four. And of the answers (and my incorrect guesses) I've only read a single one of the novels. And I only got that question right because it was multiple choice.
at Saturday, November 10, 2012
1. “Boys are playing basketball around a telephone pole with a backboard bolted to it. Legs, shouts. The scrape and snap of Keds on loose alley pebbles seems to catapult their voices high into the moist March air, blue above the wires.”
2. “The Swede. During the war years, when I was still a grade school boy, this was a magical name in our Newark neighborhood, even to adults just a generation removed from the city's old Prince Street ghetto and not yet so flawlessly Americanized as to be bowled over by the prowess of a high school athlete.”
3. “To the red country and part of the gray country of Oklahoma, the last rains came gently, and they did not cut the scarred earth.”
4. “Jewel and I come up from the field, following the path in a single file. Although I am fifteen feet ahead of him, anyone watching us from the cotton-house can see Jewel's frayed and broken straw hat a full head above my own.”
5. “124 was spiteful. Full of a baby's venom. The women in the house knew it and so did the children.”
6. “He was an old man who fished alone in a skiff in the Gulf Stream and he had gone eighty-four days now without taking a fish.”
7. “On a January evening of the early seventies, Christine Nilsson was singing in Faust at the Academy of Music in New York.”
8. “He speaks in your voice, American, and there's a shine in his eye that's halfway hopeful. It's a school day, sure, but he's nowhere near the classroom.”
9. “On Memorial Day in 1867 Daniel Lewin thumbed his way from New York to Worcester, Mass., in just under five hours. With him was his young wife, Phyllis, and their eight-month-old son, Paul, whom Daniel carried in a sling chair strapped to his shoulders like a pack.”
10. “A screaming comes across the sky. It has happened before but there is nothing to compare it to now.”
11. “In my younger and more vulnerable years my father gave me some advice that I've been turning over in my mind ever since. 'Whenever you feel like criticizing anyone,' he told me, 'just remember that all the people in this world haven't had the advantages that you've had.'”
It is multiple choice, otherwise I would have only gotten one correct instead of four. And of the answers (and my incorrect guesses) I've only read a single one of the novels. And I only got that question right because it was multiple choice.
at Saturday, November 10, 2012
Jesus Hates Figs
Matthew 21:18-22
Early in the morning, as he was on his way back to the city, he was hungry. Seeing a fig tree by the road, he went up to it but found nothing on it except leaves. Then he said to it, "May you never bear fruit again!" Immediately the tree withered.
When the disciples saw this, they were amazed. "How did the fig tree wither so quickly?" they asked.
Jesus replied, "I tell you the truth, if you have faith and do not doubt, not only can you do what was done to the fig tree, but also you can say to this mountain, 'Go, throw yourself into the sea,' and it will be done. If you believe, you will receive whatever you ask for in prayer."
=================================
Mark 11:12-14, 19-25
The next day as they were leaving Bethany, Jesus was hungry. Seeing in the distance a fig tree in leaf, he went to find out if it had any fruit. When he reached it, he found nothing but leaves, because it was not the season for figs. Then he said to the tree, "May no one ever eat fruit from you again." And his disciples heard him say it.
When evening came, they went out of the city.
In the morning, as they went along, they saw the fig tree withered from the roots. Peter remembered and said to Jesus, "Rabbi, look! The fig tree you cursed has withered!"
"Have faith in God," Jesus answered. "I tell you the truth, if anyone says to this mountain, `Go, throw yourself into the sea,' and does not doubt in his heart but believes that what he says will happen, it will be done for him. Therefore I tell you, whatever you ask for in prayer, believe that you have received it, and it will be yours. And when you stand praying, if you hold anything against anyone, forgive him, so that your Father in heaven may forgive you your sins."
=================================
Jeremiah 29:17
Thus saith the LORD of hosts; Behold, I will send upon them the sword, the famine, and the pestilence, and will make them like the vile figs, that cannot be eaten, they are so evil.
at Tuesday, June 19, 2012
Early in the morning, as he was on his way back to the city, he was hungry. Seeing a fig tree by the road, he went up to it but found nothing on it except leaves. Then he said to it, "May you never bear fruit again!" Immediately the tree withered.
When the disciples saw this, they were amazed. "How did the fig tree wither so quickly?" they asked.
Jesus replied, "I tell you the truth, if you have faith and do not doubt, not only can you do what was done to the fig tree, but also you can say to this mountain, 'Go, throw yourself into the sea,' and it will be done. If you believe, you will receive whatever you ask for in prayer."
=================================
Mark 11:12-14, 19-25
The next day as they were leaving Bethany, Jesus was hungry. Seeing in the distance a fig tree in leaf, he went to find out if it had any fruit. When he reached it, he found nothing but leaves, because it was not the season for figs. Then he said to the tree, "May no one ever eat fruit from you again." And his disciples heard him say it.
When evening came, they went out of the city.
In the morning, as they went along, they saw the fig tree withered from the roots. Peter remembered and said to Jesus, "Rabbi, look! The fig tree you cursed has withered!"
"Have faith in God," Jesus answered. "I tell you the truth, if anyone says to this mountain, `Go, throw yourself into the sea,' and does not doubt in his heart but believes that what he says will happen, it will be done for him. Therefore I tell you, whatever you ask for in prayer, believe that you have received it, and it will be yours. And when you stand praying, if you hold anything against anyone, forgive him, so that your Father in heaven may forgive you your sins."
=================================
Jeremiah 29:17
Thus saith the LORD of hosts; Behold, I will send upon them the sword, the famine, and the pestilence, and will make them like the vile figs, that cannot be eaten, they are so evil.
at Tuesday, June 19, 2012
Philmont Preparation
**Even though I worked at Philmont for several years, this is just my opinion, not to be taken as Philmont policy. I do still think I make some good points.**
Having tried helping some Philmont crews in their preparation for their summer trek, I found myself quite frustrated in the end. I had been asked to help out and give advice, but I felt that my advice was being completely ignored. It turns out that most participants at Philmont have a different idea of what preparation is needed when compared to the thoughts of a Philmont Ranger.
One part of their preparation was a big focus on backpacking 'skills'. These are things like cooking, cleaning, bear bags, etc. With some of the things, I was asked to teach/explain the specific Philmont policy. With some of the others, one of the adults would decide to teach his preferred method of doing it. The latter can be a problem when the method is forbidden by Philmont policy, but the big issue here is that 'skills' preparation is not absolutely required. Especially because participants may not know the Philmont policy for certain things and will end up being taught the skill again once they get out to the Ranch. I'm not saying that this was a complete waste of time. If the participants have a good backpacking background, it certainly eases the teaching workload on their Ranger. But their are groups that come out with little or no backpacking experience, so being taught all those skills at the Ranch definitely happens. (Groups like crews that have gotten grants to send kids to Philmont, or kids on Mountain Treks, who all generally have much less experience than the average crew)
Surprisingly they never really went over navigation skills. If anything, that's the preferred skill to practice before coming out to the Ranch. But then again, I still maintain that it is very difficult to get truly lost at Philmont. Groups may take the occasional wrong turn (I love when my crews did that), but it only really results in a longer hike. Granted, it may be a whole lot longer, but they will generally eventually make it to their destination. The trails at Philmont are awesome (Great job Cons Dept) and if you stay on the trail, you'll make it to some camp, and then you'll know exactly where you are on the map.
The other big part of their preparation was physical conditioning. This is something that I completely agree with. Especially with the adults, physical conditioning needs to start months, if not years, before the trek. Being physically able to hike for hours while carrying all your gear is absolutely necessary and it's not something people can cobble together the week before their trek.
That pretty much sums up their preparation, in my opinion. But what I feel us a very important part of Philmont preparation was greatly neglected. The group dynamics and other 'soft skills'.
If anyone has seen the Philmont Movie (Which I highly recommend [http://www.philmontmovie.com/]) you may recall Heidi describing the job of the Ranger as teaching the 'hard skills' and the 'soft skills' that they will need on their trek. The 'hard skills' are the backpacking skills that I mentioned above. The 'soft skills' are quite a different matter, and in my opinion, the Ranger can only do so much with 'soft skill' development during their three days with the crew, and a lot of that depends on the willingness of the crew.
One of the key things of a Philmont crew (And Boy Scouting in general) is that the youth are in charge, not the adults. So the Crew Leader and the other youth need to be the ones making all the decisions during the trek. The adults are there to sit back, relax, enjoy a little vacation, and only need to step up for matters of health and safety. This is a hard thing for almost every adult. When the crew decides to take a wrong turn on the trail, the adults shouldn't step up and correct them. Some adults realize that they shouldn't be so active, but instead do things like drop their pack at the intersection, or start walking really slowly - trying to passively get the youths' attention. I don't agree with that approach either. If it's only going to be a relatively short detour or if they will shortly run into a camp that's not on their planned route, I say just shut up, go with it, and keep hiking. But if it is going to be a long detour, ask general, leading questions - 'How far until [destination]?' [Youth stop and pull out the map] 'About 3 miles.' [Casually walk up to map] 'So that means we're .... [look at map]' - the goal should be to let the youth stumble onto the issue on their own.
The point is that adults need to learn to step back. While the Ranger can do their best to keep the adults back, telling them that the Crew Leader is the final decision maker and not them, if the crew has been practicing with the adults being too involved, it's easy for the crew to revert back to that once the Ranger leaves. Tying this back into my Philmont crews from the first paragraph; I think that two of the crews are going to have real problems with the adults stepping on the Crew Leader.
The other big 'soft skill' thing in my opinion is simple group dynamics - does everybody get along and work well together? You improve this by spending time working with each other. This is the biggest reason for practice treks, in my opinion. If you do a bunch of them before coming out to the Ranch, you've spent lots of time working together in a backpacking environment. All of the potholes of learning to work together happened on the practice treks, so the crew is a well oiled machine when they get to Philmont.
The thing is, you can get through Philmont even with over-involved adults and some group dynamic issues. You can even have a great time even with those problems. But getting rid of the over-involved adults issue makes the trek into a greater learning and leadership experience for the youth. Over time, on the trail, group dynamics will congeal and improve. Even if you had a great time with bad dynamics, if there were good dynamics, the experience would be even more amazing, even though you didn't feel like you were missing something before.
I was disappointed in the group's preparation, but it's not something that will ruin their trip and make everything unbearable. They're still going to come back and say they had a great time. But it could have been better, and they won't realize that.
Wednesday, July 13, 2011
Having tried helping some Philmont crews in their preparation for their summer trek, I found myself quite frustrated in the end. I had been asked to help out and give advice, but I felt that my advice was being completely ignored. It turns out that most participants at Philmont have a different idea of what preparation is needed when compared to the thoughts of a Philmont Ranger.
One part of their preparation was a big focus on backpacking 'skills'. These are things like cooking, cleaning, bear bags, etc. With some of the things, I was asked to teach/explain the specific Philmont policy. With some of the others, one of the adults would decide to teach his preferred method of doing it. The latter can be a problem when the method is forbidden by Philmont policy, but the big issue here is that 'skills' preparation is not absolutely required. Especially because participants may not know the Philmont policy for certain things and will end up being taught the skill again once they get out to the Ranch. I'm not saying that this was a complete waste of time. If the participants have a good backpacking background, it certainly eases the teaching workload on their Ranger. But their are groups that come out with little or no backpacking experience, so being taught all those skills at the Ranch definitely happens. (Groups like crews that have gotten grants to send kids to Philmont, or kids on Mountain Treks, who all generally have much less experience than the average crew)
Surprisingly they never really went over navigation skills. If anything, that's the preferred skill to practice before coming out to the Ranch. But then again, I still maintain that it is very difficult to get truly lost at Philmont. Groups may take the occasional wrong turn (I love when my crews did that), but it only really results in a longer hike. Granted, it may be a whole lot longer, but they will generally eventually make it to their destination. The trails at Philmont are awesome (Great job Cons Dept) and if you stay on the trail, you'll make it to some camp, and then you'll know exactly where you are on the map.
The other big part of their preparation was physical conditioning. This is something that I completely agree with. Especially with the adults, physical conditioning needs to start months, if not years, before the trek. Being physically able to hike for hours while carrying all your gear is absolutely necessary and it's not something people can cobble together the week before their trek.
That pretty much sums up their preparation, in my opinion. But what I feel us a very important part of Philmont preparation was greatly neglected. The group dynamics and other 'soft skills'.
If anyone has seen the Philmont Movie (Which I highly recommend [http://www.philmontmovie.com/]) you may recall Heidi describing the job of the Ranger as teaching the 'hard skills' and the 'soft skills' that they will need on their trek. The 'hard skills' are the backpacking skills that I mentioned above. The 'soft skills' are quite a different matter, and in my opinion, the Ranger can only do so much with 'soft skill' development during their three days with the crew, and a lot of that depends on the willingness of the crew.
One of the key things of a Philmont crew (And Boy Scouting in general) is that the youth are in charge, not the adults. So the Crew Leader and the other youth need to be the ones making all the decisions during the trek. The adults are there to sit back, relax, enjoy a little vacation, and only need to step up for matters of health and safety. This is a hard thing for almost every adult. When the crew decides to take a wrong turn on the trail, the adults shouldn't step up and correct them. Some adults realize that they shouldn't be so active, but instead do things like drop their pack at the intersection, or start walking really slowly - trying to passively get the youths' attention. I don't agree with that approach either. If it's only going to be a relatively short detour or if they will shortly run into a camp that's not on their planned route, I say just shut up, go with it, and keep hiking. But if it is going to be a long detour, ask general, leading questions - 'How far until [destination]?' [Youth stop and pull out the map] 'About 3 miles.' [Casually walk up to map] 'So that means we're .... [look at map]' - the goal should be to let the youth stumble onto the issue on their own.
The point is that adults need to learn to step back. While the Ranger can do their best to keep the adults back, telling them that the Crew Leader is the final decision maker and not them, if the crew has been practicing with the adults being too involved, it's easy for the crew to revert back to that once the Ranger leaves. Tying this back into my Philmont crews from the first paragraph; I think that two of the crews are going to have real problems with the adults stepping on the Crew Leader.
The other big 'soft skill' thing in my opinion is simple group dynamics - does everybody get along and work well together? You improve this by spending time working with each other. This is the biggest reason for practice treks, in my opinion. If you do a bunch of them before coming out to the Ranch, you've spent lots of time working together in a backpacking environment. All of the potholes of learning to work together happened on the practice treks, so the crew is a well oiled machine when they get to Philmont.
The thing is, you can get through Philmont even with over-involved adults and some group dynamic issues. You can even have a great time even with those problems. But getting rid of the over-involved adults issue makes the trek into a greater learning and leadership experience for the youth. Over time, on the trail, group dynamics will congeal and improve. Even if you had a great time with bad dynamics, if there were good dynamics, the experience would be even more amazing, even though you didn't feel like you were missing something before.
I was disappointed in the group's preparation, but it's not something that will ruin their trip and make everything unbearable. They're still going to come back and say they had a great time. But it could have been better, and they won't realize that.
Wednesday, July 13, 2011
Charmed and Alias
Right now I'm going through all of Charmed, Holmes on Holmes, and MASH for completion, and through Alias, Cowboy Bebop, QI, My Little Pony: Friendship is Magic, and Tom Baker's Doctor Who all for the first time. As well as going through Burn Notice again to write down the spy tips.
I've gotten through two seasons of Charmed and one of Alias. Charmed is a fun, sort of casual, show to watch. Reruns are on the TV all the time, and it's more a monster-of-the-week type show, so big story arcs aren't that important, so it's pleasant and possible to just watch whatever is on TV. But I like big story arcs, hence going through them all in order. For me, it feels like a guilty pleasure show. It doesn't always have good stories, and at times the mythology of the show can just seem a bit stupid. I mean, gaining a witch's powers through blood injection? Leo not recognizing the Four Horsemen of the Apocalypse one second, and then rattling off all the things other Four Horsemen have done in the past 50 years? Or monkeys mastering their powers in a day when it took the Charmed Ones several episodes to come even close to that? But even with all of that (those were only from the 2nd and 3rd to last episodes of the second season) I still enjoy watching the show. It is still fun enough to cover for it's flaws. And speaking of flaws, how about free will. They make a huge point about humans having free will and blah blah blah. Good couldn't step in and help because of free will and they needed to make the decision to be good on their own. But they also harp on 'everything happens for a reason' which just screams predestination. Everything is going to be alright now because you were predestined to make the right choice through free will. Although my personal opinion on free will is that it doesn't matter at all. But that's a subject for another blog post.
Alias is a totally different type of show. It is very heavy on mythology and long story arcs. It reminds me a bit of Whedon shows. The characterization is quite amazing. Every character that is introduced has the feeling of a fully fleshed out person, and seems quite unique. And if they aren't killed off by the end of the episode, it starts delving into the character, showing new sides and revealing insights into different aspects in totally unexpected ways. I've heard that by the end of the show's run, Alias has countless organizations and betrayals and such. At the moment, it seems like that sort of thing could be pulled off in a very good way. Everyone has such rich motivation and backstory, as well as having resources to work on their own goals, that is seems plausible, or even likely, that everyone goes off in there own directions, instead of static 'teams' all working together on everything. This is why I am loving this show right now. What I'm not loving is the pacing. It seems like every commercial break is brought on by a huge revelation that feels like the end of an episode. Except it feels like the end of the episode around three or four times during the episode. And the cliffhangers that do end episodes have a different sort of punch. They seem less fulfilling, generally Sidney in peril from some threat that she'll be able to deal with in the first two minutes of the next episode. So the ends of episodes seem like lame breaks in a longer action scene, while commercial breaks are big plot and character revelations. The commercials leave me wanting more, and the ends just make me say 'meh'. It seems like such a silly thing, but (if you couldn't tell by how I've been rambling on about it (hey - rambling - like the blog title)) it just really bugs me. But the characters bring me back wanting more. Even if the plots can be kind of stupid. The whole Rambaldi storyline is a bit ridiculous. The characters going after each of the pieces in the puzzle is quite entertaining, but the puzzle itself just seems stupid. Crazy prophet that saw the future, and now governments and secret organizations are all clambering over the pieces and hinged on Rambaldi's every dead word. That's the other thing that really bugs me. 'She shall rend down the highest power' Your run-of-the-mill vague prophecy. When that was first revealed, there were three options where it could go - 1. The highest power is the US and by accusing Sydney they brought it on themselves. 2. The highest power is actually the bad guys that Sydney will eventually bring down. 3.Sydney isn't the she. It looks like they're going with Sydney's mother and the US as the two people in the prophecy, but my money is still on Sydney and the bad guys. It makes for the more compelling story and is really the only option if you're going with Rambaldi is right about everything. Because the woman mentioned is unstoppable, so either Sydney loses or Rambaldi is wrong. Sydney losing would be a great option in my opinion (heroes are way to successful, so it's fun when they lose), but the show would never end with that. They'll play with the idea all the time, but they'd never have it be final. Rambaldi being wrong just messes up their whole mythology. It's a stupid mythology, and actually, I would only be slightly surprised if they went with that. In the long run, Sydney is bound to win and Rambaldi, who may seem to be wrong for a time, will have actually been right all along.
Some of the other shows may get a write up in due course, and Charmed and Alias may get mentioned again when I get further along. But for now, it's time to make some more spy notes.
*edit* Holy crap. I just skimmed over the post after posting this and couldn't believe how long those paragraphs were. Hopefully, the blog title warned you. I am quite prone to rambling. If you actually did read through the whole thing - congratulations.
at Sunday, July 03, 2011
I've gotten through two seasons of Charmed and one of Alias. Charmed is a fun, sort of casual, show to watch. Reruns are on the TV all the time, and it's more a monster-of-the-week type show, so big story arcs aren't that important, so it's pleasant and possible to just watch whatever is on TV. But I like big story arcs, hence going through them all in order. For me, it feels like a guilty pleasure show. It doesn't always have good stories, and at times the mythology of the show can just seem a bit stupid. I mean, gaining a witch's powers through blood injection? Leo not recognizing the Four Horsemen of the Apocalypse one second, and then rattling off all the things other Four Horsemen have done in the past 50 years? Or monkeys mastering their powers in a day when it took the Charmed Ones several episodes to come even close to that? But even with all of that (those were only from the 2nd and 3rd to last episodes of the second season) I still enjoy watching the show. It is still fun enough to cover for it's flaws. And speaking of flaws, how about free will. They make a huge point about humans having free will and blah blah blah. Good couldn't step in and help because of free will and they needed to make the decision to be good on their own. But they also harp on 'everything happens for a reason' which just screams predestination. Everything is going to be alright now because you were predestined to make the right choice through free will. Although my personal opinion on free will is that it doesn't matter at all. But that's a subject for another blog post.
Alias is a totally different type of show. It is very heavy on mythology and long story arcs. It reminds me a bit of Whedon shows. The characterization is quite amazing. Every character that is introduced has the feeling of a fully fleshed out person, and seems quite unique. And if they aren't killed off by the end of the episode, it starts delving into the character, showing new sides and revealing insights into different aspects in totally unexpected ways. I've heard that by the end of the show's run, Alias has countless organizations and betrayals and such. At the moment, it seems like that sort of thing could be pulled off in a very good way. Everyone has such rich motivation and backstory, as well as having resources to work on their own goals, that is seems plausible, or even likely, that everyone goes off in there own directions, instead of static 'teams' all working together on everything. This is why I am loving this show right now. What I'm not loving is the pacing. It seems like every commercial break is brought on by a huge revelation that feels like the end of an episode. Except it feels like the end of the episode around three or four times during the episode. And the cliffhangers that do end episodes have a different sort of punch. They seem less fulfilling, generally Sidney in peril from some threat that she'll be able to deal with in the first two minutes of the next episode. So the ends of episodes seem like lame breaks in a longer action scene, while commercial breaks are big plot and character revelations. The commercials leave me wanting more, and the ends just make me say 'meh'. It seems like such a silly thing, but (if you couldn't tell by how I've been rambling on about it (hey - rambling - like the blog title)) it just really bugs me. But the characters bring me back wanting more. Even if the plots can be kind of stupid. The whole Rambaldi storyline is a bit ridiculous. The characters going after each of the pieces in the puzzle is quite entertaining, but the puzzle itself just seems stupid. Crazy prophet that saw the future, and now governments and secret organizations are all clambering over the pieces and hinged on Rambaldi's every dead word. That's the other thing that really bugs me. 'She shall rend down the highest power' Your run-of-the-mill vague prophecy. When that was first revealed, there were three options where it could go - 1. The highest power is the US and by accusing Sydney they brought it on themselves. 2. The highest power is actually the bad guys that Sydney will eventually bring down. 3.Sydney isn't the she. It looks like they're going with Sydney's mother and the US as the two people in the prophecy, but my money is still on Sydney and the bad guys. It makes for the more compelling story and is really the only option if you're going with Rambaldi is right about everything. Because the woman mentioned is unstoppable, so either Sydney loses or Rambaldi is wrong. Sydney losing would be a great option in my opinion (heroes are way to successful, so it's fun when they lose), but the show would never end with that. They'll play with the idea all the time, but they'd never have it be final. Rambaldi being wrong just messes up their whole mythology. It's a stupid mythology, and actually, I would only be slightly surprised if they went with that. In the long run, Sydney is bound to win and Rambaldi, who may seem to be wrong for a time, will have actually been right all along.
Some of the other shows may get a write up in due course, and Charmed and Alias may get mentioned again when I get further along. But for now, it's time to make some more spy notes.
*edit* Holy crap. I just skimmed over the post after posting this and couldn't believe how long those paragraphs were. Hopefully, the blog title warned you. I am quite prone to rambling. If you actually did read through the whole thing - congratulations.
at Sunday, July 03, 2011
Current Shows or Old Shows?
Which is better - watching an old TV show that's already off the air, or watching a TV show that's still on the air?
With an older show, you're able to watch it all at once, at whatever intervals you want. With new shows you have to be appeased with only one episode a week, and one season a year. But with an old show you can get to the end so quickly, and there will never be any more. A current show is still ongoing, and you can hope for many more seasons to come.
But such an ongoing show isn't necessarily a good thing. Somebody may have an amazing idea for a TV show. But can they make it work for 100 episodes? And after a while, things have to end. I'd rather have a show end strong and definitively, than stumble on for more seasons slowly spiraling downwards. There are plenty of shows that take the latter route. Las Vegas was a very enjoyable show in my opinion. It's not the kind of show that had epic storylines, but it was just really fun to watch. But eventually, things start going downhill. I didn't even watch the fifth and final season because the internet tells me that things went pretty downhill at that point. Similar thing with That 70s Show. The only episodes I watched from the final season were the first and last episodes. It just lost something. And when you lose major cast members, and try to continue the show as usual, that's a pretty good indications that you're stretching a show on too long. And a benefit to older shows being watched all at once: you know ahead of time if the final season is disastrous and you should just skip it. If you're watching it while it is still ongoing, you will end up suffering through it, until it receives a mercy canceling to put it out of its misery.
Some of the best shows I know are only one or two seasons long. Actually, that's mostly because I like weird shows that don't do well with the general public. And then they get canceled. But it is great when they get enough warning to write in a good ending. The show obviously didn't drag itself on too long because it's only one or two seasons old, but it has a definitive ending. No cliff hanger that will leave a question in the air forever. Dollhouse was able to wrap itself up quite nicely in my opinion for the second season finale. Firefly was a show that didn't get a chance to end with a good ending episode. Luckily we got a movie to cap it off. Freaks and Geeks is another show that was able to end well. And what makes this type of ending even better, is that it was able to serve as the end of the entire series. But if it had been renewed, it would not have been out of place. It would have worked just as well as a season end. It wrapped things up, gave some direction as to what was happening afterwards, but not enough to make it a real cliffhanger. I wish more shows ended seasons like that.
I am not a big fan off cliffhangers. Especially for season finales. If you only have a week to wait until everything is resolved, that's fine - it can be make to work rather well. But several months before resolution is just silly. By the time it comes back on, things are forgotten and people care less. And in most cases, the cliffhanger is resolved in that one episode and it gives some direction of where this new season is headed, but not enough for it to be a cliffhanger. Which is the same thing I said about Freaks and Geeks's superb ending. For such a long wait, there are too many specifics left in the air. And to have such a big thing be resolved in a single episode makes it seem as if it wasn't that big of a deal. But if you leave a season finale with some general directions of how things will go from there, I think it works much better in the minds of people waiting for the new season. That and you don't get canceled and end on an unresolved cliffhanger. The thing that people are wondering about for the entire offseason isn't resolved in a single episode. The general foreshadowing they are left with is something that will play out in the entire next season.
Watching old TV shows can be fun. You watch a bunch all at once, and you only watch the best of the show. But then it ends and there is no more. And if the show was pretty popular when it was on the air, you may feel like you're behind the times. But watching a current show, you deal with drawn out airing schedules, bad season ending cliffhangers, and possibly even the apprehension waiting to see if the show will even be renewed for another season. Or it could keep getting renewed, but the storytelling is slowly but surely headed downhill, with perhaps a feeling that things are being dragged on much further than they should be.
Of course, I watch old and current shows. You get a nice mix of the good and bad of each that way.
at Friday, February 18, 2011
With an older show, you're able to watch it all at once, at whatever intervals you want. With new shows you have to be appeased with only one episode a week, and one season a year. But with an old show you can get to the end so quickly, and there will never be any more. A current show is still ongoing, and you can hope for many more seasons to come.
But such an ongoing show isn't necessarily a good thing. Somebody may have an amazing idea for a TV show. But can they make it work for 100 episodes? And after a while, things have to end. I'd rather have a show end strong and definitively, than stumble on for more seasons slowly spiraling downwards. There are plenty of shows that take the latter route. Las Vegas was a very enjoyable show in my opinion. It's not the kind of show that had epic storylines, but it was just really fun to watch. But eventually, things start going downhill. I didn't even watch the fifth and final season because the internet tells me that things went pretty downhill at that point. Similar thing with That 70s Show. The only episodes I watched from the final season were the first and last episodes. It just lost something. And when you lose major cast members, and try to continue the show as usual, that's a pretty good indications that you're stretching a show on too long. And a benefit to older shows being watched all at once: you know ahead of time if the final season is disastrous and you should just skip it. If you're watching it while it is still ongoing, you will end up suffering through it, until it receives a mercy canceling to put it out of its misery.
Some of the best shows I know are only one or two seasons long. Actually, that's mostly because I like weird shows that don't do well with the general public. And then they get canceled. But it is great when they get enough warning to write in a good ending. The show obviously didn't drag itself on too long because it's only one or two seasons old, but it has a definitive ending. No cliff hanger that will leave a question in the air forever. Dollhouse was able to wrap itself up quite nicely in my opinion for the second season finale. Firefly was a show that didn't get a chance to end with a good ending episode. Luckily we got a movie to cap it off. Freaks and Geeks is another show that was able to end well. And what makes this type of ending even better, is that it was able to serve as the end of the entire series. But if it had been renewed, it would not have been out of place. It would have worked just as well as a season end. It wrapped things up, gave some direction as to what was happening afterwards, but not enough to make it a real cliffhanger. I wish more shows ended seasons like that.
I am not a big fan off cliffhangers. Especially for season finales. If you only have a week to wait until everything is resolved, that's fine - it can be make to work rather well. But several months before resolution is just silly. By the time it comes back on, things are forgotten and people care less. And in most cases, the cliffhanger is resolved in that one episode and it gives some direction of where this new season is headed, but not enough for it to be a cliffhanger. Which is the same thing I said about Freaks and Geeks's superb ending. For such a long wait, there are too many specifics left in the air. And to have such a big thing be resolved in a single episode makes it seem as if it wasn't that big of a deal. But if you leave a season finale with some general directions of how things will go from there, I think it works much better in the minds of people waiting for the new season. That and you don't get canceled and end on an unresolved cliffhanger. The thing that people are wondering about for the entire offseason isn't resolved in a single episode. The general foreshadowing they are left with is something that will play out in the entire next season.
Watching old TV shows can be fun. You watch a bunch all at once, and you only watch the best of the show. But then it ends and there is no more. And if the show was pretty popular when it was on the air, you may feel like you're behind the times. But watching a current show, you deal with drawn out airing schedules, bad season ending cliffhangers, and possibly even the apprehension waiting to see if the show will even be renewed for another season. Or it could keep getting renewed, but the storytelling is slowly but surely headed downhill, with perhaps a feeling that things are being dragged on much further than they should be.
Of course, I watch old and current shows. You get a nice mix of the good and bad of each that way.
at Friday, February 18, 2011
Machete
The movie 'Machete' is pretty amazing. It is in the same vein as the other Grindhouse movies; simply an excuse for awesome stuff to happen. When Machete cut into a mook's gut and used his intestine to jump out of a window and swing back into a lower floor it cemented the awesomeness of the movie for me. This movie wasn't going to take itself seriously and was just going to take the viewer on a wild ride.
The plot is the kind of thing you'd expect to find in a low budget action film. Some guy came up with this absurd story and got some guys together with some money and made a cheap film. Except with Machete, the guy is Robert Rodriguez and the movie is a big budget feature film.
I feel like everything I have to say about the film spoils some part of it. Which is kind of funny because I've kind of been saying that the plot's just some excuse for all this crazy stuff to happen. And it is. But it is also entertaining in itself. Rodriguez and Rodriguez wrote an amazing script. And I seem to write awful movie reviews. But if you enjoyed Planet Terror and Death Proof and you've enjoyed the Machete trailer, then you know what to expect, and I imagine it will blow your expectations away.
Coming up next time, my horrendously written review of NBC's Las Vegas.
at Sunday, January 30, 2011
The plot is the kind of thing you'd expect to find in a low budget action film. Some guy came up with this absurd story and got some guys together with some money and made a cheap film. Except with Machete, the guy is Robert Rodriguez and the movie is a big budget feature film.
I feel like everything I have to say about the film spoils some part of it. Which is kind of funny because I've kind of been saying that the plot's just some excuse for all this crazy stuff to happen. And it is. But it is also entertaining in itself. Rodriguez and Rodriguez wrote an amazing script. And I seem to write awful movie reviews. But if you enjoyed Planet Terror and Death Proof and you've enjoyed the Machete trailer, then you know what to expect, and I imagine it will blow your expectations away.
Coming up next time, my horrendously written review of NBC's Las Vegas.
at Sunday, January 30, 2011
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)