We all have to encounter people we absolutely have a deep hatred for at some point in our lives. Like Times New Roman, you know the type. They torment you over a long period of time to the point where their name is a curse word. I have a few names that are like that for me and therefore, when I do my writing, I won’t use them when I’m introducing characters to my stories. Who knows? I may use those names for Complete Monster villains that are going to get their comeuppance eventually in my story, but it’s highly unlikely. Until somebody somewhere makes the name “cool” again, the name will go completely ignored in my stories. For instance, I used to have an aversion to the name Aaron because I got beat up in high school by a kid with that name. But when I started watching MMA and I started hearing about people named Aaron Simpson, Aaron Rosa, and Aaron Riley, the name was cool again and I started using it more often. I have characters named Aaron Jackson “AJ” Rollins and Aaron Edge, the former being a psychotic mercenary and the latter being a dark comedian. I also used to have an aversion to the name Cody because in middle school I had an aggressive bully with that name. Ever since purchasing a copy of Final Fight for the Super Nintendo and playing as a boxer named Cody, the name stopped being forbidden. You see where I’m going with this? If the name becomes used in a positive way, then I won’t have an aversion to it and I’ll use it for my characters. The most noteworthy character for Cody is a female MMA fighter who has an I at the end of her name instead of a Y. Her last name is Oliveira, by the way, and she’s a Brazilian Jiu-Jitzu ace. But then there are some names out there that have no redemption value whatsoever, mainly because nobody names their children that anymore. The most prominent example of a name that will never be cool to me is Art. I had a step-father named Art who was verbally abusive to me and my mom, so that hits close to home. I know there are people out there with the name Art that I can like. I like Art Evans (the crazy old man from the third story of Tales From the Hood), Art Wicks (an English teacher I had in college), and Art Dent (the main character from The Hitchhiker’s Guide To the Galaxy, which is on this blog). Despite three perfectly cool people with the name Art, the name Art itself isn’t very pleasant sounding. If I ever use it in my stories, it’ll be as a last name such as Arthur or McArthur. The second and final example of a name beyond redemption is Cindy. I had a senior social studies teacher named Cindy who like Art was verbally abusive. As of today, nobody in my current life has made the name Cindy cool. I guess I should cite Cyndi Lauper as an example of someone who did, but her music sucks, so no. The only time I’ve ever used the name Cindy in a story was for someone who was a bitchy girlfriend to a comedian named Marcus Edge (Aaron Edge’s brother). As of today, the only two names that have no redemption value to me are Art and Cindy. I’ve had a lot of people express hatred toward me, but their names were made cool again, so I don’t worry about that anymore. In the words of Mike “The Streets” Skinner, do you understand or do you need an interpreter?
***LYRICS OF THE DAY***
“Did you hear the one about me giving a shit? ‘Cause if I ever did, I don’t remember it!”
-Five Finger Death Punch singing “Under and Over It”-
Saturday, September 28, 2013
Thursday, September 26, 2013
Barbie and Ken
When I was a kid growing up in Chehalis, Washington, commercials would constantly come up on TV for Barbie products and my mom would jokingly suggest that she should buy them for me. You know what my answer was? “Nooooooooo!!” Now that I’m an adult, it seems as though I’m not the only one who thinks this way. Somewhere along the leaden path, being called a Barbie or Ken doll became an insult. It’s constantly used as a slur against WWE Divas and any other female wrestler who happens to be skinny and pretty. Ed Schultz loves to refer to Sarah Palin as “Caribou Barbie” whenever she comes up in conversation. On the flip side, Erick Erickson once called Wendy Davis “Abortion Barbie”. So basically, this insult can work with anybody as long as they have something to attach the slur to, such as a profession, a hobby, or a belief. I don’t want you guys to think I’m actually using these insults on people, but somewhere along the way, some nut job out there could refer to Danica Patrick as “NASCAR Barbie”. Somebody could also put it out there that Bill O’Reilly is “Conservative Ken”. And yet another example could be that Mary Kay Letourneau is somehow referred to as “Statutory Rape Barbie”. I keep having to ask myself where all of these Barbie and Ken references come from. What does being a Barbie/Ken doll imply about that person? That they’re perfect in every way? That they’re plastic and fake? That they’re shallow? Or maybe there’s this stigma going around about how Barbie dolls are anatomically incorrect and that if somebody actually looked like one, they’d be fucking dead. Well, as far as I know, Danica Patrick can still walk around without breaking her ankles, so there’s no way in hell she could be “NASCAR Barbie”. You’re probably asking yourself what all this talk about girl toys has to do with literature. Well, the same thing could be applied to popular books. For example, someone could call Bella Swan “Vampire Barbie”, which would most likely be attributed to her Mary-Sue qualities. So is that what it takes for someone to be a Barbie doll? Mary-Sue attributes? I’d have to say so. If that’s the case, then the outside world is just one big doll house. But maybe if I actually ventured outside my room and into the real world to meet some of these people, it’ll be even less likely that a giant pink convertible will pick me up for a trip to the Silverdale Shopping Mall. People are Barbie and Ken dolls until you actually get to know who they are, all their faults, all their pains, and all their love. Maybe that’s why it’s so hard to be a writer: because we have to work so diligently to acquaint the reader with our characters so that they don’t become Barbie and Ken dolls.
***BUMPER STICKER OF THE DAY***
“Normal people scare me, but not as much as I scare them.”
***BUMPER STICKER OF THE DAY***
“Normal people scare me, but not as much as I scare them.”
Sunday, September 22, 2013
Charging For Autographs
If you’re lucky enough to have met a celebrity, you’ve probably had this conversation before:
“Hey there, Mr. Fancy Pants Celebrity! Can I have an autograph?”
“Sure thing, little buddy! Fifty dollars!”
“What?!”
Can you believe that? Fifty dollars for a little bit of ink. With authors, it sounds ironic at first. The average book costs anywhere from 10 to 20 dollars on Amazon (if it’s brand spanking new). These books can be anywhere from 100 to 400 pages long, which means god knows how many words. For 40 to 50 dollars more, you could have a pen signature on a piece of paper that you could read in one second flat with a grade schooler’s effort. Something doesn’t seem right here. Why pay a high price just for a little blot of ink? How exactly does a celebrity’s hand turn that little splotch of ink into gold or silver? There are easier ways to get a celebrity’s signature onto a piece of paper. You could just Google the person’s name and then print a copy of said autograph. So that probably means you would be rich by virtue of having all of these autographs that are “authentic”. But what if these signatures are forged? Then get a real one from the celebrity when he signs a restraining order against you. You can thank the Big Bang Theory for that last tip. Is all of this rambling going to lead somewhere, you ask? I know it normally doesn’t whenever somebody rambles, but trust me, I have a point to make. If it’s a celebrity who’s already making tons of money with movies, book deals, TV appearances, and whatnot, then why exactly does he need to charge $50 for a splotch of ink? If the proceeds were going to charity, then I could understand. But even so, I refuse to pay that much money for a little pen splatter despite the fact that the money might be used to help a cause I care about such as the ASPCA or schizophrenic research. If I’m going to pay $50, I want to get something in return such as cookies or T-shirts that are actually my size, which I probably won’t find if I buy too many cookies. I’m happy with donating a small amount of money, but not to a celebrity’s personal bank account (even if I idolize the celebrity like a tribal god). Maybe if the celebrity was down on his luck, I might be more sympathetic. But until then, I see no reason for the rich to continue getting richer while poor people like me continue to get poorer. Sue me. Actually, don’t do that, because the rich actually will get richer while the poor actually get poorer.
***LYRICS OF THE DAY***
“Life is like a penis, most people don’t know it: most people suck, so they usually blow it.”
-The Bloodhound Gang singing “Take the Long Way Home”-
“Hey there, Mr. Fancy Pants Celebrity! Can I have an autograph?”
“Sure thing, little buddy! Fifty dollars!”
“What?!”
Can you believe that? Fifty dollars for a little bit of ink. With authors, it sounds ironic at first. The average book costs anywhere from 10 to 20 dollars on Amazon (if it’s brand spanking new). These books can be anywhere from 100 to 400 pages long, which means god knows how many words. For 40 to 50 dollars more, you could have a pen signature on a piece of paper that you could read in one second flat with a grade schooler’s effort. Something doesn’t seem right here. Why pay a high price just for a little blot of ink? How exactly does a celebrity’s hand turn that little splotch of ink into gold or silver? There are easier ways to get a celebrity’s signature onto a piece of paper. You could just Google the person’s name and then print a copy of said autograph. So that probably means you would be rich by virtue of having all of these autographs that are “authentic”. But what if these signatures are forged? Then get a real one from the celebrity when he signs a restraining order against you. You can thank the Big Bang Theory for that last tip. Is all of this rambling going to lead somewhere, you ask? I know it normally doesn’t whenever somebody rambles, but trust me, I have a point to make. If it’s a celebrity who’s already making tons of money with movies, book deals, TV appearances, and whatnot, then why exactly does he need to charge $50 for a splotch of ink? If the proceeds were going to charity, then I could understand. But even so, I refuse to pay that much money for a little pen splatter despite the fact that the money might be used to help a cause I care about such as the ASPCA or schizophrenic research. If I’m going to pay $50, I want to get something in return such as cookies or T-shirts that are actually my size, which I probably won’t find if I buy too many cookies. I’m happy with donating a small amount of money, but not to a celebrity’s personal bank account (even if I idolize the celebrity like a tribal god). Maybe if the celebrity was down on his luck, I might be more sympathetic. But until then, I see no reason for the rich to continue getting richer while poor people like me continue to get poorer. Sue me. Actually, don’t do that, because the rich actually will get richer while the poor actually get poorer.
***LYRICS OF THE DAY***
“Life is like a penis, most people don’t know it: most people suck, so they usually blow it.”
-The Bloodhound Gang singing “Take the Long Way Home”-
Friday, September 6, 2013
Vilification
On my Deviant Art page, I told everyone that I was going to do a blog entry on author vilification and mentioned that Stephen Chbosky wasn’t vilified himself. I was wrong. Dead wrong. The main complaint about “The Perks of Being a Wallflower” was the way the author portrayed teen sex and drug use. He made it sound so prolific that it normalized it in a way. Well, I hate to break it to his critics, but that book they’re complaining about is a cult classic. It’s been that way since its publication in 1999. But even though he’s riding a hype train that isn’t going to derail anytime soon, I’m sure Mr. Chbosky would love to get away from it all and let the dust settle. I’m sure there are authors out there who would love to do the same if they’ve generated too much controversy. Controversy isn’t necessarily a bad thing, but when it makes your anxiety level rise beyond normalcy, then you’re knee deep in shit. There are several things you can do if you as an author are vilified and it’s ruining your life. Firstly, it doesn’t hurt to stay away from the internet for a few days until the dust settles. If you’ve got a Twitter account, it may blow up with hateful remarks. If you’ve got a DA account like I do, it may also blow up with a nuclear strike of loathing. The dust will eventually settle and the wave of comments will sooner or later become old news. When that time comes, do not under any circumstances Google your name. I made this mistake when I Googled by Deviant Art username at the time Cybador and found a hideout, I repeat, a hideout of trolls in a website called Portal of Evil. Behind my back, they’d been trashing my drawings of animal warriors and for the next few days, I had a combination of depression and anger going on. There were times when I felt like I didn’t need a DA account anymore, especially in December of 2009 when I was vilified for an educational black comedy routine I wrote called “Class of ‘13”. I wish I could have taken my own advice of staying away from the computer for a few days. It would have brought the combat level and heartache to a bare minimum, that’s for sure. Thankfully, I’ve had many years of peace and quiet ever since those bad days and it continues to be that way. I hope you, the controversial author, can find your own peace simply by abstaining from internet combat. It’s not worth it. Take it from me. I’m battle-tested, but brokenhearted.
***LYRICS OF THE DAY***
“I feel like running away. I’m still so far from home. You say that I’ll never change, but what the fuck do you know? I’ll burn it all to the ground before I let you win. Please forgive me. I can’t forgive you now. I remember everything.”
-Five Finger Death Punch singing “Remember Everything”-
***LYRICS OF THE DAY***
“I feel like running away. I’m still so far from home. You say that I’ll never change, but what the fuck do you know? I’ll burn it all to the ground before I let you win. Please forgive me. I can’t forgive you now. I remember everything.”
-Five Finger Death Punch singing “Remember Everything”-
Wednesday, September 4, 2013
"The Perks of Being a Wallflower" by Stephen Chbosky
Instead of the traditional one long paragraph format I’m accustomed to, I’m going to answer questions straight out of the back of this book as clearly and as effectively as I can. Starting with…
Q: Why do you think Chbosky chose to use letters as his narrative structure?
A: Writing a letter is much different from writing a chapter in a traditional novel. Letters don’t require gory details and make for a quicker reading pace, which is what every young adult reader secretly loves.
Q: How did this structure affect the book, both in terms of the story and in terms of your reading experience?
A: In terms of story, it lets us know that Charlie is still alive by the story’s end (otherwise he wouldn’t be writing letters) and that he didn’t resort to suicide in order to cope with the losses in his life. In terms of reading experience, it made it possible for me to blaze through reading this book without tiring my eyes as quickly as I do.
Q: How would the book have been different if Chbosky had written it in first-person or third-person narrative? Without the letter format, we wouldn’t be firmly in the head of Charlie, which is a beautiful place to be as evidenced by the way he writes.
Q: Who do you think Charlie was writing to?
A: Anybody who would listen. I’m even inclined to say that these letters went to a complete stranger since they’re all addressed to someone who went nameless throughout the entire story.
Q: Does it ultimately matter whom, or even if he is, writing to someone? Why or why not?
A: I think that if he wrote the letters to actual characters in this story, it would help him “participate” in life as opposed to watching on the sidelines. He would be open and honest with whoever he was writing to and that person would be closer to him because of it.
Q: Who do you identify with the most? Did you see parts of yourself in any one specific character?
A: To be honest, I didn’t identify with anybody in this book (which doesn’t mean I couldn’t relate to the story as a whole, don’t get me wrong). Despite the many obstacles these characters go through, they had a pretty magical adolescence full of socialization and wonder. I had no such childhood. Mine was full of blunt affects and social barricades. In a way, I’m a tiny bit jealous of the adventures these kids go through.
Q: What do you think kept Charlie from “participating” when he entered high school? What held him back? Have you ever felt this way before?
A: In the beginning, Charlie suffered from something that I’m currently suffering now as an adult: social awkwardness. He wouldn’t participate because initially nobody would let him. I feel this way every single day of my life.
Q: Who is Charlie’s greatest ally? Who is his worst influence?
A: His greatest ally is Sam, because she was the first to let him know what true love really feels like. She made him feel like he could have a social life when he grew up instead of being confined to his family all the time. Charlie’s worst influence is Mary Elizabeth, because she tried to dominate his life by smothering him. Charlie is in many ways an introverted character and to have that lack of control over his own life hurt him badly.
Q: From Naked Lunch by William B. Burroughs to Harold and Maude to the Beatles’ song “Dear Prudence”, Charlie references numerous pieces of literature, film, and music. How did these references shape your reading? Why are they so important to Charlie?
A: While I was only familiar with one reference throughout the entire book (Pink Floyd singing Another Brick in the Wall, Pt. 2), the multitude of references led me to believe that Charlie was soaking in as many influences as he possibly could so that they could shape him into a wonderful human being. Having influences is ultimately what drives a person to pursue his dreams.
Q: When Bill invites Charlie over for lunch Charlie observes, “He was talking for real. It was strange.” What do you think Charlie means by “real”? How does he discern between what is real and what is not real?
A: When he says real, he means that Bill was being honest about his thoughts and emotions with no filter of any kind. Anybody who squanders opportunities to speak their mind and be open with their fellow humans is not real in Charlie’s mind.
Q: Sam confronts Charlie before she leaves for college, pleading: “You can’t just sit there and put everybody’s lives ahead of yours and think that counts as love. You just can’t. You have to do things.” Do you agree with Sam? How does this exchange relate to their relationship on a grander scale?
A: I agree with Sam because relationships are two way streets. If one person isn’t happy, neither is the other person, which is why the relationship between Charlie and Mary Elizabeth fell apart so easily. Sam felt like Charlie had a filter between his mind and mouth and wasn’t always honest about what he felt about her.
Q: Discuss Aunt Helen’s character and presence in the novel. Were you surprised when the truth about her relationship with Charlie was revealed? In what other ways did seemingly positive aspects of Charlie’s life turn out to be negative?
A: Everybody has demons in their lives in one way or another. The fact that Aunt Helen’s demons of being molested were revealed doesn’t shock or surprise me, because I’ve seen a lot of horrible things in my life and I’m numb to everything. Another positive that turned into a negative was Charlie discovering that his relationship with Sam wasn’t unbreakable. She was hurt badly when Charlie betrayed Mary Elizabeth and wasn’t inclined to forget about it for a long time.
Q: After watching the art film with Mary Elizabeth, Charlie says: “The movie itself was very interesting, but I didn’t think it was very good because I didn’t really feel different when it was over.” Do you agree with Charlie that in order to be “good”, creative works must make you feel differently? Who did you feel after reading The Perks of Being a Wallflower?
A: Even in minor ways, yes, creative works have to make you feel differently. If you’re watching an action movie, you should be excited. If you’re watching a romantic movie, you should learn to believe in love again. In terms of this book, I did feel differently. I felt jealous that I couldn’t have the same romantic relationships as Charlie had when I was a teenager. It inspired me to write a heavy metal song called “The Language of Fire”, which doesn’t need much explaining as to what it’s about.
Q: Discuss the following passage: “Maybe it’s good to put things in perspective. Sometimes I think that the only perspective is to really be there.” How has Charlie’s outlook shifted from the beginning of the story?
A: In the beginning, he allowed his parents to tell him that his problems weren’t comparable to a starving child in China. By the end of the story, he realized that despite other people having it worse, the problems still remain and still need attention.
Q: The Perks of Being a Wallflower grapples with a complex, universally difficult stage in life. What reflections did it inspire about your own life? What parts of the story resonated most deeply with you?
A: Considering that most of my childhood was riddled with bullying, the part of the story that hit me the hardest was the cafeteria fight scene where Patrick had to be rescued from the homophobic football players. The ratio of my childhood of bullying to friendship weighed heavily in favor of the former, so anytime Charlie discussed how great his friendships were, I got jealous.
And there you have it! Ballgame!
***PARODY DIALOGUE OF THE DAY***
FLOYDIAN TEACHER: Poems, everybody! The laddie reckons himself a poet!
ME: You’re damn right I do!
-Pink Floyd the Wall-
No, I wasn’t actually in that movie (it came out before I was born), but that would have been me if the teacher accosted me the way he accosted Pink.
Q: Why do you think Chbosky chose to use letters as his narrative structure?
A: Writing a letter is much different from writing a chapter in a traditional novel. Letters don’t require gory details and make for a quicker reading pace, which is what every young adult reader secretly loves.
Q: How did this structure affect the book, both in terms of the story and in terms of your reading experience?
A: In terms of story, it lets us know that Charlie is still alive by the story’s end (otherwise he wouldn’t be writing letters) and that he didn’t resort to suicide in order to cope with the losses in his life. In terms of reading experience, it made it possible for me to blaze through reading this book without tiring my eyes as quickly as I do.
Q: How would the book have been different if Chbosky had written it in first-person or third-person narrative? Without the letter format, we wouldn’t be firmly in the head of Charlie, which is a beautiful place to be as evidenced by the way he writes.
Q: Who do you think Charlie was writing to?
A: Anybody who would listen. I’m even inclined to say that these letters went to a complete stranger since they’re all addressed to someone who went nameless throughout the entire story.
Q: Does it ultimately matter whom, or even if he is, writing to someone? Why or why not?
A: I think that if he wrote the letters to actual characters in this story, it would help him “participate” in life as opposed to watching on the sidelines. He would be open and honest with whoever he was writing to and that person would be closer to him because of it.
Q: Who do you identify with the most? Did you see parts of yourself in any one specific character?
A: To be honest, I didn’t identify with anybody in this book (which doesn’t mean I couldn’t relate to the story as a whole, don’t get me wrong). Despite the many obstacles these characters go through, they had a pretty magical adolescence full of socialization and wonder. I had no such childhood. Mine was full of blunt affects and social barricades. In a way, I’m a tiny bit jealous of the adventures these kids go through.
Q: What do you think kept Charlie from “participating” when he entered high school? What held him back? Have you ever felt this way before?
A: In the beginning, Charlie suffered from something that I’m currently suffering now as an adult: social awkwardness. He wouldn’t participate because initially nobody would let him. I feel this way every single day of my life.
Q: Who is Charlie’s greatest ally? Who is his worst influence?
A: His greatest ally is Sam, because she was the first to let him know what true love really feels like. She made him feel like he could have a social life when he grew up instead of being confined to his family all the time. Charlie’s worst influence is Mary Elizabeth, because she tried to dominate his life by smothering him. Charlie is in many ways an introverted character and to have that lack of control over his own life hurt him badly.
Q: From Naked Lunch by William B. Burroughs to Harold and Maude to the Beatles’ song “Dear Prudence”, Charlie references numerous pieces of literature, film, and music. How did these references shape your reading? Why are they so important to Charlie?
A: While I was only familiar with one reference throughout the entire book (Pink Floyd singing Another Brick in the Wall, Pt. 2), the multitude of references led me to believe that Charlie was soaking in as many influences as he possibly could so that they could shape him into a wonderful human being. Having influences is ultimately what drives a person to pursue his dreams.
Q: When Bill invites Charlie over for lunch Charlie observes, “He was talking for real. It was strange.” What do you think Charlie means by “real”? How does he discern between what is real and what is not real?
A: When he says real, he means that Bill was being honest about his thoughts and emotions with no filter of any kind. Anybody who squanders opportunities to speak their mind and be open with their fellow humans is not real in Charlie’s mind.
Q: Sam confronts Charlie before she leaves for college, pleading: “You can’t just sit there and put everybody’s lives ahead of yours and think that counts as love. You just can’t. You have to do things.” Do you agree with Sam? How does this exchange relate to their relationship on a grander scale?
A: I agree with Sam because relationships are two way streets. If one person isn’t happy, neither is the other person, which is why the relationship between Charlie and Mary Elizabeth fell apart so easily. Sam felt like Charlie had a filter between his mind and mouth and wasn’t always honest about what he felt about her.
Q: Discuss Aunt Helen’s character and presence in the novel. Were you surprised when the truth about her relationship with Charlie was revealed? In what other ways did seemingly positive aspects of Charlie’s life turn out to be negative?
A: Everybody has demons in their lives in one way or another. The fact that Aunt Helen’s demons of being molested were revealed doesn’t shock or surprise me, because I’ve seen a lot of horrible things in my life and I’m numb to everything. Another positive that turned into a negative was Charlie discovering that his relationship with Sam wasn’t unbreakable. She was hurt badly when Charlie betrayed Mary Elizabeth and wasn’t inclined to forget about it for a long time.
Q: After watching the art film with Mary Elizabeth, Charlie says: “The movie itself was very interesting, but I didn’t think it was very good because I didn’t really feel different when it was over.” Do you agree with Charlie that in order to be “good”, creative works must make you feel differently? Who did you feel after reading The Perks of Being a Wallflower?
A: Even in minor ways, yes, creative works have to make you feel differently. If you’re watching an action movie, you should be excited. If you’re watching a romantic movie, you should learn to believe in love again. In terms of this book, I did feel differently. I felt jealous that I couldn’t have the same romantic relationships as Charlie had when I was a teenager. It inspired me to write a heavy metal song called “The Language of Fire”, which doesn’t need much explaining as to what it’s about.
Q: Discuss the following passage: “Maybe it’s good to put things in perspective. Sometimes I think that the only perspective is to really be there.” How has Charlie’s outlook shifted from the beginning of the story?
A: In the beginning, he allowed his parents to tell him that his problems weren’t comparable to a starving child in China. By the end of the story, he realized that despite other people having it worse, the problems still remain and still need attention.
Q: The Perks of Being a Wallflower grapples with a complex, universally difficult stage in life. What reflections did it inspire about your own life? What parts of the story resonated most deeply with you?
A: Considering that most of my childhood was riddled with bullying, the part of the story that hit me the hardest was the cafeteria fight scene where Patrick had to be rescued from the homophobic football players. The ratio of my childhood of bullying to friendship weighed heavily in favor of the former, so anytime Charlie discussed how great his friendships were, I got jealous.
And there you have it! Ballgame!
***PARODY DIALOGUE OF THE DAY***
FLOYDIAN TEACHER: Poems, everybody! The laddie reckons himself a poet!
ME: You’re damn right I do!
-Pink Floyd the Wall-
No, I wasn’t actually in that movie (it came out before I was born), but that would have been me if the teacher accosted me the way he accosted Pink.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)