Here in Connecticut, we have at least 4 seasons. Probably more. Plus some twilight seasons, such as now in late August, which has been blessedly cool. It's the season of mostly summer with a taste of autumn, known as Sumumn.
But this is an exception. August is a useless month. It adds nothing to the quantity of anyone's life, as far as I know. You name the month, I can tell you at least one good thing about it. I
can't think of a single benefit in August. There isn't even a holiday.
It's, in fact, the only month of the year without even a minor holiday. In my entire life, I can only think of one friend with a birthday in August. Who wants to be born then? School is out; no one is around to celebrate your birthday. Everyone's irritable. The cake melts before Mom has a chance to set it down. I'll grunt my way through Happy Birthday and then go home and crank the AC.
Reasons to get rid of August:
1-Brutally hot temperatures, exacerbated by humidity typically not seen in July.
2-Every business contact you need to speak with is out of town. No one is ever around in August.
3-The social calendar is in limbo because, again, no one is around.
4-Those that are still here are more irritable than at any time of the year. Probably jealous that they're not on vacation. Which I totally get, by the way.
5- Not only are we more irritable, we're also more incompetent. If one could quantify incompetence, August would rank the highest (or lowest, depending on how you judge these things)
6-For us easterners, watching hurricane paths on the Weather Channel. Which is kind of fun, actually. Unless it's headed your way, as was the case last year with Irene.
7-For those who love summer (of which I'm NOT one), sadness that summer is gone and the days of wearing white are over, which is a CT state law.
8-If you're a baseball fan, this is the month that reality sets in for your team that had a surprisingly strong first half. Such as my NY Mets, for example, who have free fallen since the All Star break. Same for you folks in Cleveland. August is, in fact, the sports doldrums, unless you're into that thrilling mini-season known as NFL pre-season when, for only 100 dollars, you can watch your favorite player make a cameo appearance in a meaningless game.
9- Finally, as a kid, August meant summer reruns.
But most of all, what I think I dislike most about August is that it ties into my natural impatience. August is molasses. Autumn is the pit stop on the NASCAR life circuit. If each month was represented by a living thing, August's would be a snail. Or if we were to go to partial living things, August's would be a zombie. Because that's what we all are. I want fall to get here so I can revel in our spectacular New England foliage. I want to take the AC out of my window and sleep with the windows open. Better sleep=better quality of life. Exponentially so, in my case.
If I were president, I'd issue a directive making July and September each 45 days long, thus eliminating August altogether.
Sunday, August 26, 2012
Sunday, August 19, 2012
I'm an expert
Maybe it's just me. But it seems everyone is now an expert on something. And the title "expert" has not been bestowed upon them. Rather, it's one they've bestowed upon themselves.
It seems to be especially prevalent in sports, usually the perfect match for those who like to self-promote. And it's not a subtle thing. Bloggers, their spouses and their pets all now have the explicit title of "(pick the sport) Expert". There's actually a group of political journalists who describe themselves as "power players". Essentially the same thing with a little machismo thrown in.
I hate to be left behind. So I now appoint myself an expert in the following areas:
1: Interstates. Give me two cities and I'll tell you what interstate highways connect them. In most cases, even the old US Highways.
2: Capitals: I can tell you the capital of almost any country in the world.
3: Rivers: I can also tell you what rivers run through what regions.
And, uh, as I read this, I notice two things:
1: All this stuff is geography, which is what I have a masters degree in. And it's useless for any practical purpose.
2: Which leads to my 2nd point, and a pattern I noticed many years ago, which is this: What I know and how much money it makes me have a perfect inverse relationship.
To put this in graph form:
As you can clearly see, my "bread and butter" is computer/IT work. Which I have increasingly less passion for. That's why I'm going back to school to become an LCSW/psychotherapist. (And by the way, isn't this a nice Excel chart? C'mon people, I'm begging for a compliment. Help me out here)
Back to my main point:
What I'm an expert on are not categories that will get me my own McMansion.
But that gives me an idea: I'm now an expert on experts. An "uber-expert", if you will.
If you want to understand experts and the whole expert industry, I'm your man. Just don't expect me to have any expertise.
It seems to be especially prevalent in sports, usually the perfect match for those who like to self-promote. And it's not a subtle thing. Bloggers, their spouses and their pets all now have the explicit title of "(pick the sport) Expert". There's actually a group of political journalists who describe themselves as "power players". Essentially the same thing with a little machismo thrown in.
I hate to be left behind. So I now appoint myself an expert in the following areas:
1: Interstates. Give me two cities and I'll tell you what interstate highways connect them. In most cases, even the old US Highways.
2: Capitals: I can tell you the capital of almost any country in the world.
3: Rivers: I can also tell you what rivers run through what regions.
And, uh, as I read this, I notice two things:
1: All this stuff is geography, which is what I have a masters degree in. And it's useless for any practical purpose.
2: Which leads to my 2nd point, and a pattern I noticed many years ago, which is this: What I know and how much money it makes me have a perfect inverse relationship.
To put this in graph form:
As you can clearly see, my "bread and butter" is computer/IT work. Which I have increasingly less passion for. That's why I'm going back to school to become an LCSW/psychotherapist. (And by the way, isn't this a nice Excel chart? C'mon people, I'm begging for a compliment. Help me out here)
Back to my main point:
What I'm an expert on are not categories that will get me my own McMansion.
But that gives me an idea: I'm now an expert on experts. An "uber-expert", if you will.
If you want to understand experts and the whole expert industry, I'm your man. Just don't expect me to have any expertise.
Monday, August 13, 2012
Lawyers, Guns, and Money
So I'm thinking about guns. All kinds of them. The kind that kill, the kind that protects, the kind that goes between Lawyers and Money and the warm kind that goes after "Happiness is". Even the water guns I used to have fun with.
I have many friends who own guns. Every single one of them is a responsible gun owner. If I thought he/she wasn't "right" (as they say in the south), then I probably wouldn't be friends with them. I haven't polled them about gun rights or what to do about our epidemic of gun violence. But I suspect most, if not all, of them would go all "2nd amendment" on me.
I have probably more friends who don't own guns, as far as I know. Most of them want to see legislation passed, of some kind, to address the madness that's afflicting us. There's no consensus on what they'd like to see. Just "something".
Me, I've never owned a gun in my life. Never intend to. If I do, then I guess I've given up on any hope of a civil society. I may as well build a moat and buy some gators.
I have a natural tendency to mediate things. In this case, to try and find common ground between my two groups of friends. And in fact, there is one important thing in common. That is, we don't want to see any more tragedies like the three we've encountered in about a week. How we address it however is where the common ground ends. On one extreme is my more liberal friends who think that they can take on the NRA. Ain't gonna happen. Just won't. Even Obama doesn't want to take them on.
On the other end are people who think that if everyone packed, then crimes like this won't happen. My gut feeling is that a mass tragedy like this is, in fact, less likely to happen. Simply because someone with a gun might kill the perp as soon as he loads. But...there are problems here that are far worse than the supposed solution:
1: What if the vigilante misses his target?
2: More importantly, what's to stop someone with a gun from killing someone while their head is turned? Or if they're sleeping?
3: If someone is packing and is drunk or otherwise impaired, think he'll be deterred by the possibility of someone else packing? I doubt it.
4: What about a serial killer who uses subterfuge to commit his crime? Think he'll care about the consequences? On the contrary, he'd probably welcome the challenge.
5: Most of all, what does this do to normal civil discourse? Are we now supposed to be scared of disagreeing because the person might blow our brains out? What about talking with strangers? Which is something I actually like to do. I know I'd think twice before having a conversation with someone I just met. You never know...maybe I'll say the wrong thing and get killed over it.
What do we do then? Well, here are three suggestions:
1: Flag people with certain mental illnesses (not enough knowledge to state which ones) so that they cannot own a gun. And make sure that this firewall applies only to this population.
2: Assure the overwhelming majority of law abiding gun owners that their rights are not being threatened.
3: Monitor anyone, mental illness or not, who buys certain automatic weapons and/or large quantities of ammunition over specific periods of time. Had this been done, perhaps the Aurora, CO tragedy could have been prevented. Same for Oak Creek, WI.
These suggestions won't stop all the insanity. But they could help. I challenge anyone who disagrees to come up with their own suggestions.
I have many friends who own guns. Every single one of them is a responsible gun owner. If I thought he/she wasn't "right" (as they say in the south), then I probably wouldn't be friends with them. I haven't polled them about gun rights or what to do about our epidemic of gun violence. But I suspect most, if not all, of them would go all "2nd amendment" on me.
I have probably more friends who don't own guns, as far as I know. Most of them want to see legislation passed, of some kind, to address the madness that's afflicting us. There's no consensus on what they'd like to see. Just "something".
Me, I've never owned a gun in my life. Never intend to. If I do, then I guess I've given up on any hope of a civil society. I may as well build a moat and buy some gators.
I have a natural tendency to mediate things. In this case, to try and find common ground between my two groups of friends. And in fact, there is one important thing in common. That is, we don't want to see any more tragedies like the three we've encountered in about a week. How we address it however is where the common ground ends. On one extreme is my more liberal friends who think that they can take on the NRA. Ain't gonna happen. Just won't. Even Obama doesn't want to take them on.
On the other end are people who think that if everyone packed, then crimes like this won't happen. My gut feeling is that a mass tragedy like this is, in fact, less likely to happen. Simply because someone with a gun might kill the perp as soon as he loads. But...there are problems here that are far worse than the supposed solution:
1: What if the vigilante misses his target?
2: More importantly, what's to stop someone with a gun from killing someone while their head is turned? Or if they're sleeping?
3: If someone is packing and is drunk or otherwise impaired, think he'll be deterred by the possibility of someone else packing? I doubt it.
4: What about a serial killer who uses subterfuge to commit his crime? Think he'll care about the consequences? On the contrary, he'd probably welcome the challenge.
5: Most of all, what does this do to normal civil discourse? Are we now supposed to be scared of disagreeing because the person might blow our brains out? What about talking with strangers? Which is something I actually like to do. I know I'd think twice before having a conversation with someone I just met. You never know...maybe I'll say the wrong thing and get killed over it.
What do we do then? Well, here are three suggestions:
1: Flag people with certain mental illnesses (not enough knowledge to state which ones) so that they cannot own a gun. And make sure that this firewall applies only to this population.
2: Assure the overwhelming majority of law abiding gun owners that their rights are not being threatened.
3: Monitor anyone, mental illness or not, who buys certain automatic weapons and/or large quantities of ammunition over specific periods of time. Had this been done, perhaps the Aurora, CO tragedy could have been prevented. Same for Oak Creek, WI.
These suggestions won't stop all the insanity. But they could help. I challenge anyone who disagrees to come up with their own suggestions.
Sunday, August 5, 2012
Mad Men and Laggardness
I confess to being a laggard. A laggard, for some reason, sounds like an insult. "Hey...you laggard." But I take pride in this. Let all the other suckers try that new car, that latest version of Windows, etc. After all the bugs are out and there's a good word of mouth, maybe I'll try it. That partially explains why I'm "I"-less. "I"e, I don't have an I-phone, I-pad, I-pod, I-mac, I-book, or even my own tropical I-sland.
I say all this to help explain why I'm so out of the loop on TV shows. I don't have TV. I still don't believe this little boxes will be successful. No, actually, I don't have TV because I don't want the temptation of having to watch it. Which I would do constantly. And at the risk of sounding like a snob, I really do believe that most of it is crap. Crap that I'd be paying upwards of 60/month for. Crap that I'd still watch, along with the commercials.
Therefore, I have missed some good shows. I know that. My son is a huge Dexter fan. I saw a couple of episodes online and I must say it's pretty good. The show Breaking Bad sounds fascinating. I miss Stephen Colbert, who I really do believe is a comedic genius. I also miss watching Mets games, especially since the Mets trio of announcers, Gary Cohen, Ron Darling, and Keith Hernandez is the best baseball team I've ever seen. And I don't say that just because I'm a Mets fan. Catch them sometimes and you'll be impressed.
I also miss the Weather Channel. But my weather addiction is for another blog.
No, the main subject, what I originally thought I'd blog about, is the much heralded show Mad Men. I borrowed the 1st season from my local library.
For those who don't know, Mad Men is a drama about a group of "Mad Men", which was the term for advertising executives, referring to the geographic epicenter of the industry, Madison Avenue in NYC. The main character is Don Draper, played by Jon Hamm. He's a fascinating character. Handsome, smart, alternately ruthless and kind, intimidating and always mysterious. Like a poker player who may have an inside straight. Or he may have nothing. Which explains much of his intimidation.
I've never seen a show with so much cigarette smoke. Everyone, and I mean EVERYONE smokes. Constantly. Most of the smokers drink. Most of the drinkers are drunk. Most of the drunkards are womanizing. (Or "men"-izing for the female characters). Most of the "izing" ends up in bed. And in this pre-Viagra period, everyone still seems to be a great lover.
I can see why it's racked up as many awards as it has. Interestingly, there's not a single character on the show that is likeable. The men are generally ruthless and crude. The women are generally submissive and powerless. Yet, I must confess, it's fascinating to watch. Completely destroying my rule of drama that in order for me to get into it, there has to be at least one character that I can empathize with. Not here.
Anyway, to get back to my original point. I'm such a laggard that I didn't realize the show has been around for apparently 52 years. No one ever told me about it.
Maybe someday I'll try one of those thingys that heats up food really fast.
I say all this to help explain why I'm so out of the loop on TV shows. I don't have TV. I still don't believe this little boxes will be successful. No, actually, I don't have TV because I don't want the temptation of having to watch it. Which I would do constantly. And at the risk of sounding like a snob, I really do believe that most of it is crap. Crap that I'd be paying upwards of 60/month for. Crap that I'd still watch, along with the commercials.
Therefore, I have missed some good shows. I know that. My son is a huge Dexter fan. I saw a couple of episodes online and I must say it's pretty good. The show Breaking Bad sounds fascinating. I miss Stephen Colbert, who I really do believe is a comedic genius. I also miss watching Mets games, especially since the Mets trio of announcers, Gary Cohen, Ron Darling, and Keith Hernandez is the best baseball team I've ever seen. And I don't say that just because I'm a Mets fan. Catch them sometimes and you'll be impressed.
I also miss the Weather Channel. But my weather addiction is for another blog.
No, the main subject, what I originally thought I'd blog about, is the much heralded show Mad Men. I borrowed the 1st season from my local library.
For those who don't know, Mad Men is a drama about a group of "Mad Men", which was the term for advertising executives, referring to the geographic epicenter of the industry, Madison Avenue in NYC. The main character is Don Draper, played by Jon Hamm. He's a fascinating character. Handsome, smart, alternately ruthless and kind, intimidating and always mysterious. Like a poker player who may have an inside straight. Or he may have nothing. Which explains much of his intimidation.
I've never seen a show with so much cigarette smoke. Everyone, and I mean EVERYONE smokes. Constantly. Most of the smokers drink. Most of the drinkers are drunk. Most of the drunkards are womanizing. (Or "men"-izing for the female characters). Most of the "izing" ends up in bed. And in this pre-Viagra period, everyone still seems to be a great lover.
I can see why it's racked up as many awards as it has. Interestingly, there's not a single character on the show that is likeable. The men are generally ruthless and crude. The women are generally submissive and powerless. Yet, I must confess, it's fascinating to watch. Completely destroying my rule of drama that in order for me to get into it, there has to be at least one character that I can empathize with. Not here.
Anyway, to get back to my original point. I'm such a laggard that I didn't realize the show has been around for apparently 52 years. No one ever told me about it.
Maybe someday I'll try one of those thingys that heats up food really fast.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)