When I listen to music, my mind makes its own images, crafts stories based on what it hears. Sometimes they are very clear, and other times they are mostly feelings. But when I watch a music video, it completely shatters whatever I had crafted from only listening to the music itself before.
Aside from the fact that most music videos are stupid as hell to me, they are different from my thoughts (which is jarring enough as is). There is something official to a music video; it seems like this is what was intended to be the visual to accompany the song. But in reality, it is just some person's vision (and probably some corporate meddling).
Unsurprisingly, I find movies ruin the original story, too (whether it be prose, graphic novel, etc.), for all the same reasons. In theory, a movie adaptation of a story can be good. But no matter how good it may be on its own merits, it cannot be the same as the original work. It is a person's vision (again with corporate meddling), and if that person isn't you, then they are probably going to ruin the story to you.
Tuesday, May 8, 2012
Sunday, May 6, 2012
Amateur vs. Novice
Although they are synonymous, I do place a distinction between an amateur and a novice.
An amateur, technically speaking, does something on an unpaid basis. It is the opposite of a professional. The root of the word comes from the Latin amat, which means "love". Truly, an amateur does something for the love of it. (If they aren't getting paid, there is little other reason than because they enjoy it.)
The term 'novice' also comes from Latin. The word novus means "new". And a novice is somebody who is new at something. They have little to no training or experience. My dad has a joke that the word was originally "no vice", because the person had not been doing the activity long enough to develop any bad habits.
It's a simple distinction, but it's one that is worth making, even if many people assume that they both mean "not very good in quality".
An amateur, technically speaking, does something on an unpaid basis. It is the opposite of a professional. The root of the word comes from the Latin amat, which means "love". Truly, an amateur does something for the love of it. (If they aren't getting paid, there is little other reason than because they enjoy it.)
The term 'novice' also comes from Latin. The word novus means "new". And a novice is somebody who is new at something. They have little to no training or experience. My dad has a joke that the word was originally "no vice", because the person had not been doing the activity long enough to develop any bad habits.
It's a simple distinction, but it's one that is worth making, even if many people assume that they both mean "not very good in quality".
Saturday, May 5, 2012
On Nobility
I've been thinking about the concept of nobility lately. I don't yet have a definition of what makes someone or something noble, so I've been taking it from the other direction - I'm thinking about the characters that we do call noble and identifying their characteristics.
Nobility seems to entail a certain kind of acceptance. Noble people accept that things function a certain way, and that they have responsibilities because of that. Along with this acceptance, there is a certain pride. I do not know if it is pride that they have to (or get to) carry out their responsibilities, or pride in being part of the system as a whole.
When a person does things because they must be done (especially when they are unpleasant), that person is noble. They can easily become heroes if they must fight against others who threaten the system (like the evil wizard who kidnaps the princess and the noble knight becomes a heroic knight because he is maintaining the status quo of the kingdom, but happens to be vanquishing evil and saving a distressed damsel in the process).
Most notably, noble people are humble. They work hard; they don't complain; they don't boast; they always stand straight and proud.
Nobility is a very admired quality in people. At times, it seems so unrealistic that it fits only in fairy tales. And yet, I think it is a realistic quality, and wonderful stories can be told of noble people who remain noble through their tribulations.
Nobility seems to entail a certain kind of acceptance. Noble people accept that things function a certain way, and that they have responsibilities because of that. Along with this acceptance, there is a certain pride. I do not know if it is pride that they have to (or get to) carry out their responsibilities, or pride in being part of the system as a whole.
When a person does things because they must be done (especially when they are unpleasant), that person is noble. They can easily become heroes if they must fight against others who threaten the system (like the evil wizard who kidnaps the princess and the noble knight becomes a heroic knight because he is maintaining the status quo of the kingdom, but happens to be vanquishing evil and saving a distressed damsel in the process).
Most notably, noble people are humble. They work hard; they don't complain; they don't boast; they always stand straight and proud.
Nobility is a very admired quality in people. At times, it seems so unrealistic that it fits only in fairy tales. And yet, I think it is a realistic quality, and wonderful stories can be told of noble people who remain noble through their tribulations.
Friday, May 4, 2012
Be Entertaining While Complaining
I'm reading a book called BAD Or, the Dumbing of America. Well, not so much reading as thumbing through it. The premise of it is that there are things which are bad, and then there are things that are BAD. The difference is that BAD things are obnoxious, miserable, vile monstrosities.
I really want to like this book because the idea of it is one that is readily agreeable, but I cannot stand actually reading through any section. Fussell ends up sounding like a crotchety old man who rants excessively about the things he doesn't like, with no rhyme or reason to any of it.
He isn't clever. He isn't witty. He isn't funny. He isn't poignant. In short, he offers nothing of any entertaining value whatsoever.
I have always firmly believed that we must be entertaining first and foremost. As I have experienced firsthand, if a story isn't entertaining, I simply won't read it. But if you can be interesting enough to keep people reading, then you can get them to believe most things.
Complaining is a horribly ugly thing to me. Criticism is not a bad thing, but if you do not have compelling points to make, then you're just barking at a tree. If you can crack a joke, you can at least keep me reading and keep getting me to listen to you and give your ideas a chance.
If you really have nothing nice to say, at least be entertaining while complaining.
I really want to like this book because the idea of it is one that is readily agreeable, but I cannot stand actually reading through any section. Fussell ends up sounding like a crotchety old man who rants excessively about the things he doesn't like, with no rhyme or reason to any of it.
He isn't clever. He isn't witty. He isn't funny. He isn't poignant. In short, he offers nothing of any entertaining value whatsoever.
I have always firmly believed that we must be entertaining first and foremost. As I have experienced firsthand, if a story isn't entertaining, I simply won't read it. But if you can be interesting enough to keep people reading, then you can get them to believe most things.
Complaining is a horribly ugly thing to me. Criticism is not a bad thing, but if you do not have compelling points to make, then you're just barking at a tree. If you can crack a joke, you can at least keep me reading and keep getting me to listen to you and give your ideas a chance.
If you really have nothing nice to say, at least be entertaining while complaining.
Thursday, May 3, 2012
I'd Rather Have. . .
"I'd rather have. . ." is an amazing phrase to me. It can show so many different ideas.
"I'd rather have an apple than an orange." This sentence shows preference of positives. Both are good examples, but given the choice, the speaker would choose the apple.
"I'd rather have dysentery than hepatitis." This sentence shows a reluctant preference. In this case, both examples are awful, but the speaker is in a situation where one of the options must be chosen, so he chooses what he considers to be the lesser of two evils.
If you start a sentence with, "I'd rather have. . .", you should eventually use the word "than". But you don't necessarily need to. Consider, "I'd rather have thinning hair." Nobody wants thinning hair, so we know that the "than" part is not, ". . .than have a luscious head of hair."
What I find interesting about that is that it is actually quite indicative of our culture. Hair is a prized thing, and the more lovely, the more it is appreciated.
Now consider the sentence, "I would rather have a thin beard." I have no idea what the "than" part is. Would he rather have a thin beard than no beard at all? Would he rather have a thin beard than a big bushy one? Would he rather have a thin beard than hepatitis? I just don't know, because I don't now his culture (or his personal beliefs).
I think the cultural aspect of this is the most fascinating part here. You can learn a good amount of a person and their latent beliefs by the things they'd rather have. The more you find out what somebody would rather have, the more you find out who they are and the kind of world they want to live in. It's a great way to solve characterization issues.
"I'd rather have an apple than an orange." This sentence shows preference of positives. Both are good examples, but given the choice, the speaker would choose the apple.
"I'd rather have dysentery than hepatitis." This sentence shows a reluctant preference. In this case, both examples are awful, but the speaker is in a situation where one of the options must be chosen, so he chooses what he considers to be the lesser of two evils.
If you start a sentence with, "I'd rather have. . .", you should eventually use the word "than". But you don't necessarily need to. Consider, "I'd rather have thinning hair." Nobody wants thinning hair, so we know that the "than" part is not, ". . .than have a luscious head of hair."
What I find interesting about that is that it is actually quite indicative of our culture. Hair is a prized thing, and the more lovely, the more it is appreciated.
Now consider the sentence, "I would rather have a thin beard." I have no idea what the "than" part is. Would he rather have a thin beard than no beard at all? Would he rather have a thin beard than a big bushy one? Would he rather have a thin beard than hepatitis? I just don't know, because I don't now his culture (or his personal beliefs).
I think the cultural aspect of this is the most fascinating part here. You can learn a good amount of a person and their latent beliefs by the things they'd rather have. The more you find out what somebody would rather have, the more you find out who they are and the kind of world they want to live in. It's a great way to solve characterization issues.
Wednesday, May 2, 2012
Sometimes You're Other People
People have so many disgusting habits: picking their nose, smelling their belly button lint, spitting, &c. What I find odd is when the people who choose at least one of those habits comments on how gross it is when people do it. When I confront people on their hypocrisy, their usual answer is, "It's gross when other people do it; it's not when I do it."
It doesn't surprise me that people view themselves specially. People always have their own rules when it comes to themselves. But what does surprise me is how people forget that the world doesn't revolve around them.
In the eyes of everybody else, you are "other people". The views you have of others need to be applied to yourself. Not just because it's fair, but because that is how you will know what other people think of you. After all, you're just "other people" to them, the way they're just "other people" to you.
It doesn't surprise me that people view themselves specially. People always have their own rules when it comes to themselves. But what does surprise me is how people forget that the world doesn't revolve around them.
In the eyes of everybody else, you are "other people". The views you have of others need to be applied to yourself. Not just because it's fair, but because that is how you will know what other people think of you. After all, you're just "other people" to them, the way they're just "other people" to you.
Tuesday, May 1, 2012
Hakuna Matata
I can identify the phases of my life by the catchphrase that I use on a daily basis. As of now, that catch phrase is, "it happens." It perfectly represents my outlook on life. Things happen. People often feel so alone or isolated in the experiences of their lives, but when you hear them all, you find that people's experiences are quite common. So when I hear another iteration of a common story, all I can say is, "It happens."
I find it interesting that six years ago, my catchphrase was, "no worries." Back then, I did not have the knowledge and experiences, but when people told me their problems, I still believed it wasn't worth getting upset over.
I suspect that at some point in the future, my catchphrase will be "hakuna matata", if for no other reason, just because I will get tired of saying the phrase in English.
I find it interesting that six years ago, my catchphrase was, "no worries." Back then, I did not have the knowledge and experiences, but when people told me their problems, I still believed it wasn't worth getting upset over.
I suspect that at some point in the future, my catchphrase will be "hakuna matata", if for no other reason, just because I will get tired of saying the phrase in English.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
