This may or may not be my final post of the year, I haven't decided. But, there's no time like the present, especially when you know how terrible you are with keeping up with blog deadlines. NOT ME, YOU.
Anyway, I've decided to do my own Year End Awards! In deference to tradition, I've decided not to do a "best things RELEASED in 2011" but "best things I FIRST EXPERIENCED in 2011". The reason for this is that I felt like it. Plus, I've never done one of these things before, and I didn't do much this year, so not restricting it to things experienced in 2011 is better.
I know the first comment here might be be, "YOU FORGOT/INCLUDED THIS MOVIE WHICH SUCKS AND YOU MUST BE GAY AND STUPID AND I BANGED YOUR MOTHER"
Says something about the collective intelligence of the internet. This is an opinion. If you disagree, good for you! Comment in a respectful way. Or don't.
MOVIES
Best Animated Movie
Toy Story 3- Somehow the Toy Story series managed not to jump the shark after over a ten year wait for the third installment, which I find incredible. 3D definitely wasn't worth it (like it ever is), but that didn't hamper the experience too much. I didn't cry at the end, but I sure as hell came close.
Honorably Mention
How to Train Your Dragon- I really liked this. Not much more to say then.
Worst Animated Movie
Despicable Me- so, so disappointing to me. I'm not a huge fan of Steve Carrel, but it didn't seem like his thing. Just goes to show that the Pixar art style doesn't guarantee a good movie.
Best Comedy
Scott Pilgrim vs. The World- So so so sad that this movie didn't do well fiscally. Really funny, really inventive, and has some of my favorite scenes in all of my movie-going history.
Honorable Mention
Breaking Dawn Part 1- Wait, that wasn't a comedy? Well, I laughed a lot...
Real Honorable Mention
Airplane!- Released in the 1980, this ridiculous movie mocks both horror films and comedy films, as well as itself quite a bit. Hilarious, hilarious film. And don't call him Shirley (Wow, a joke 31 years late)
Worst Comedy:
Break-Up Artist- My sister hijacked the television and put this on. Stale acting with really, phenomenally bad writing, it really impressed me in how terrible it was. At least you've never seen it, and probably never will.
Best Action/Adventure (For Lack of A Better Word)
Pulp Fiction- I really don't know why I love this movie so much. All I can say is I've watched this movie a bunch of times, and I took a while to memorize Samuel L. Jackson's Bible line because I loved it so much.
*MOVIE OF THE YEAR*
Honorable Mention
Die Hard- Alan Rickman as a villain? No movie like that could possibly be bad! Even if in the end he is revealed to have loved Bruce Willis's mother and his father was a muggle and- Wait, Die Hard: Really actiony, classic for a reason.
Worst Action/Adventure
The Last Airbender- In all honesty, I can't be sure how bad this movie is as a movie. As an adaptation of a beloved cartoon, it was tripe on a bike. Terrible, terrible, terrible. I could go on... so I will. They took over a fun-loving, youthful kid and stripped him down to a Keanu-Reeves-Level bland character. And the pronunciation of names? This isn't the adaptation of a book, these names were pronounced literally hundreds of times in the course of the series! How do they still get it wrong!?! Whatever, whatever.
Best Horror
Paranormal Activity- Became really popular for a reason. Slow building, oppressive horror rather than "OOH LOOK OVER THERE SOMETHING JUMPED OUT IT WAS SCARY ARE YOU SCARED"
Honorable Mention
I've seen only two really, so nothing goes here except filler text. So here's a link to a random forum post from a website I like ( I SWEAR THAT THIS IS COMPLETELY RANDOM. ON MY LIFE. WHATEVER, YOU WON'T BELIEVE ME. I HATE YOU.) http://tinyurl.com/cr59by7
Worst Horror
Piranha 3D- So bad that it was funny. Which is good in its own right, but still, not an ounce of scary.
TELEVISION
Best Comedy
Community- It's really sad that nobody watches this show. The funniest show on television, and has been for over a year. If this show gets cancelled and Whitney remains on the air, there will be blood.
*TELEVISION SHOW OF THE YEAR*
Honorable Mention
Bored To Death- This one was cancelled. This show was a peculiar funny, where I did laugh during the show, but when I thought about it later, it really made me crack up. This show made incest both funny and sweet, and I'm not sure I'll ever say that exact clause again.
Worst Comedy
Whitney- This one was really hard to choose, with a lot of really bad pilots this television season. But no show was quite as tiring and just flat out boring as Whitney. This is actually a shame, because Whitney seems like she might be a funny person, but the show is stifling her. Which is weird, because SHE writes it.
Best Drama
Game of Thrones- The pilot of this show made me run to the computer and finds out what happens next. This show is ballsy, and even after reading the books, is really interesting and extremely compelling. Check it out.
Honorable Mention
Unfortunately, I really haven't been keeping up to date with TV. I guess I'll put Mentalist here, because I genuinely enjoy that show.
Worst Drama
Friend Zone- As I type this list, this show is playing in the background. The same thing, show after show, of friends feeling "something more." Might be interesting if they tried to make it- well interesting.
Video Games
Finally, an area that I actually know things about! All right, let's get down to it!
Best Shooter
Infamous 2- Although not specifically a "shooter", the tight mechanics and interesting upgrades make this game really really awesome.
*GAME OF THE YEAR*
Honorable Mention
Team Fortress 2- Although also a first-person action game, there is a reason this game is still in the top 5 games played on steam daily, after almost 8 years.
Worst Shooter
I honestly can't think of one. Fundamentally, you point at things and they die. Kinda hard to mess up. I haven't played too many this year, but they've all been fundamentally sound. I think I'll drop Gears of War 3 here, not because it's bad, but because it felt kinda clunky. I only played for about 6 seconds though, so take that with a grain of salt.
Best Action/Adventure
Psychonauts- Really, really funny. Gameplay is fine, but the story is what you go for, and it is presented so well with so many funny characters, that it is hard to dislike.
Honorable Mention
Uncharted 3- So could have been perfect, but the story isn't as tight as Uncharted 2. By no no NO means bad, but a little disappointing.
Worst Action/Adventure
Minecraft- I know people love it, and I know that people build incredible things with it, but I don't really see it as a game. The complete lack of a tutorial is crippling for new players, and frankly, I felt little incentive to come back.
Best Platformer
Rayman Origins- Buy this game. Seriously. Right Now. If you own a console, click on this link, and buy the game right now. I'm serious! This game will sell virtually no copies besides being one of the most imaginative games of the year. Come on, I'll like you if you do!
(http://www.amazon.com/Rayman-Origins-Nintendo-Wii/dp/B0050SVFB0/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1325122051&sr=8-1)
Honorable Mention
Limbo- Would have been my game of the year in 2010, but unfortunately the Year of the Playstation dominated in. Still a great, great game. A little short for $10, but unforgettable
Worst Platformer
And Yet it Moves- Felt really clunky and uninteresting, even if it was visually cool.
Best Puzzle Game
Portal 2- Get. This. Game. But get Rayman Origins first. This game is like several barrels of monkeys. Co-op is a delight and some of the best writing in video games today.
Honorable Mention
Braid- Tricksy little beast that does clever things with time manipulation. Although the developer is extremely preconscious, the ending makes it worth it. Play the game just for the ending.
Worst Puzzle Game
Can't really think of one. Sorry!
Best RPG
Witcher 2- This one was really hard for me. If this was last year, Dragon Age: Origins would have come flying out of my mouth at the speed of light. I don't feel like I've played an RPG of that caliber this year, but the Witcher 2 was really fun, even if it was way too difficult at the start.
Honorable Mention
The Elder Scrolls V: Skyrim- Ah, Skyrim. Very good game, but the bugs and unplayability of PS3 is 100% unacceptable. It works for me, but Bethesda are being real jags about refusing to fix it.
Worst RPG
Dragon Age II: If you had asked me before I played it, this was to be my game of the year. Sequel to an amazing game, developed by an amazing developer, released soon after an amazing game. Alas, the game was totally rushed to get some money for Star Wars: The Old Republic (Which I've been hearing good things about, but I'd rather have a real Dragon Age Sequel). This game was really a huge disappointment, and I can't believe a developer as respected as Bioware would do this.
And that's it! Those are my 'Of the year's. I've decided this wasn't substantial enough to really count as a post, so you'll be seeing another one before years end. Cheers, and see you all soon.
Thanks for reading and considering,
-J.Valett
12.28.2011
12.17.2011
Life, or Lack Thereof (or Grim News)
I don't want to spend too much time addressing my absence, but I feel like I've got some explaining to do. I goofed. I meant to write about things for a while, but I put it off, and put it off, and I finally decided to man up and write a post. Not that it matters much, but I did write another post, but it wasn't submitted because I felt it was sub-par.
You might notice that this post is significantly longer than some of my others. Hopefully that will make anyone with vengeful feelings feel a tiny bit better.
Death, in many ways, defines life. If there wasn't the threat of death, how would we define life? Death is a lot less prevalent nowadays in our everyday lives, when life expectancies skyrocketed and most of us never see a corpse outside of the media. Media has desensitized death a lot, specifically video games, as death can be both a reward for a job well done, and a slap on the wrist for a job done horrendously. (But don't expect me to go on a tangent about video games being Satanic death and sex simulators. They are not. That's a topic for another time.)
Theoretically, we shouldn't have a problem with death. Without death, we wouldn't have another generation to teach, and to take over after us. Life would lose all sense of urgency, as things that you would have done today can be put off for years and years and years. Death is the great motivator, the force that actually gets us moving and gets us doing.
But it can't be that simple. Most people's problems with death stem from the unknown. We, as a species, have a fear of the unknown. It is the same pathological sense that gives us a fear of the dark, because anything can be in that blackness.
I don't want to believe that nothing happens. I don't want to believe that the heart stops, the blood ceases to flow, and that's it. But wanting doesn't mean a lot.
A lot of religions believe in an afterlife, one that rewards those who did well by others and punishes those who did not. A great incentive to be a nice person, which may or may not be the cause of the belief in the afterlife. People flock to comfort. I doubt many people would conform to a religion in which it was said that after death, everyone gets kicked in the face for the rest of eternity.
Furthermore, why is it assumed that humans are the only species that gets the afterlife treatment. What, according to the religions that advocate afterlives, happens to monkeys after they die? The concept of an afterlife just seems so human-centric that it doesn't make much sense to me. Are orangutans considered too filthy or too lowly to pass the entrance? Tough bouncer, I guess.
That leaves a couple other alternatives to what happens after you die. I won't get too much into those, as it is useless to spend much time speculating as to what happens after death, as there isn't much you can do to prove any of it.
But even if it could be proven, I don't think I'd want an answer. A single, final word on the matter would be utterly soul-crushing, one way or the other. I want to think about the pros and cons of each theory, I want to consider it. Mysteries lose all intrigue when we start to understand them. That's why Earth has become so boring. We know exactly where everything is and when it came there. That's why space is so exciting.
Just a note: I once conceived an idea that people's souls, or whatever you call them, stay in the body after death and just can't move or talk. All they could do was think. I wrote 4 short stories on them ( cleverly entitled Death: Part One, Part Two, Part Three, and Part Four), but I've long since lost them.
One of the aspects of death that really frightens me is how I will be viewed after death. It is tradition to kind of just forget everything bad that relatively good people have ever done. I don't like that. Glorifying people who have died doesn't change what they had done. By the same logic, people who are noted as bad have ever good action of their's wiped from their record. I don't like that.
When I leave this world, if I'm remembered in any significant degree, I don't want to be made a hero or a villian. I want to be remembered as a person. One who had done good things, one who had done bad things, one who said great things, one who did stupid things, one who was, in every sense of the phrase, a mixed bag. No one was or is completely evil or saintly.
Death may seem scary to some people, and it definitely is. To hang on the edge of the abyss and take a step (or more appropriately, have the cliff recede until you stand over nothing), not knowing how large the gap is or if there is anything at the bottom: terrifying. But we shouldn't obsess over it.
Death will happen whether or not we fight it. Immortality shimmers in the distance, but for now (which may only be the next fifty or sixty years, believe it or not) we are stuck with death at the end of our stories.
And I'm okay with that.
Thanks for reading and considering,
-J. Valett
You might notice that this post is significantly longer than some of my others. Hopefully that will make anyone with vengeful feelings feel a tiny bit better.
Death, in many ways, defines life. If there wasn't the threat of death, how would we define life? Death is a lot less prevalent nowadays in our everyday lives, when life expectancies skyrocketed and most of us never see a corpse outside of the media. Media has desensitized death a lot, specifically video games, as death can be both a reward for a job well done, and a slap on the wrist for a job done horrendously. (But don't expect me to go on a tangent about video games being Satanic death and sex simulators. They are not. That's a topic for another time.)
Theoretically, we shouldn't have a problem with death. Without death, we wouldn't have another generation to teach, and to take over after us. Life would lose all sense of urgency, as things that you would have done today can be put off for years and years and years. Death is the great motivator, the force that actually gets us moving and gets us doing.
But it can't be that simple. Most people's problems with death stem from the unknown. We, as a species, have a fear of the unknown. It is the same pathological sense that gives us a fear of the dark, because anything can be in that blackness.
I don't want to believe that nothing happens. I don't want to believe that the heart stops, the blood ceases to flow, and that's it. But wanting doesn't mean a lot.
A lot of religions believe in an afterlife, one that rewards those who did well by others and punishes those who did not. A great incentive to be a nice person, which may or may not be the cause of the belief in the afterlife. People flock to comfort. I doubt many people would conform to a religion in which it was said that after death, everyone gets kicked in the face for the rest of eternity.
Furthermore, why is it assumed that humans are the only species that gets the afterlife treatment. What, according to the religions that advocate afterlives, happens to monkeys after they die? The concept of an afterlife just seems so human-centric that it doesn't make much sense to me. Are orangutans considered too filthy or too lowly to pass the entrance? Tough bouncer, I guess.
That leaves a couple other alternatives to what happens after you die. I won't get too much into those, as it is useless to spend much time speculating as to what happens after death, as there isn't much you can do to prove any of it.
But even if it could be proven, I don't think I'd want an answer. A single, final word on the matter would be utterly soul-crushing, one way or the other. I want to think about the pros and cons of each theory, I want to consider it. Mysteries lose all intrigue when we start to understand them. That's why Earth has become so boring. We know exactly where everything is and when it came there. That's why space is so exciting.
Just a note: I once conceived an idea that people's souls, or whatever you call them, stay in the body after death and just can't move or talk. All they could do was think. I wrote 4 short stories on them ( cleverly entitled Death: Part One, Part Two, Part Three, and Part Four), but I've long since lost them.
One of the aspects of death that really frightens me is how I will be viewed after death. It is tradition to kind of just forget everything bad that relatively good people have ever done. I don't like that. Glorifying people who have died doesn't change what they had done. By the same logic, people who are noted as bad have ever good action of their's wiped from their record. I don't like that.
When I leave this world, if I'm remembered in any significant degree, I don't want to be made a hero or a villian. I want to be remembered as a person. One who had done good things, one who had done bad things, one who said great things, one who did stupid things, one who was, in every sense of the phrase, a mixed bag. No one was or is completely evil or saintly.
Death may seem scary to some people, and it definitely is. To hang on the edge of the abyss and take a step (or more appropriately, have the cliff recede until you stand over nothing), not knowing how large the gap is or if there is anything at the bottom: terrifying. But we shouldn't obsess over it.
Death will happen whether or not we fight it. Immortality shimmers in the distance, but for now (which may only be the next fifty or sixty years, believe it or not) we are stuck with death at the end of our stories.
And I'm okay with that.
Thanks for reading and considering,
-J. Valett
9.26.2011
SHHH! (or Who Said That?)
Yeah, that thing with the parentheses is back. Maybe just for this week. I don't know.
In other, pre-topic news, that "experiment" thing about writing two posts with separate foundations- that's not happening. I'll broadcast my thoughts, and people will have to deal with it. But certainly comment on my posts with what you like, dislike, agree with or disagree with!
We live in a fascinating time period. New and amazing things are coming up daily- did you know that the Singularity (the time when man melds with machine in order to supplement our lives) is predicted for only 2045? We could double or triple our lifespans!
One of the greatest, if not the greatest, things to come out of this Technological Revolution is the Internet. The Internet, which you are conveniently on right now, defies explanation. It is just the Internet, plain and simple.
Now, if you have as much free time as I do, you might explore the Internet more than the average person. And you probably made the discovery a long, long, long time ago that the Internet is full of terrible people.
People go out of their way to insult others, degrade what other people have said, and make less and less grammatical sense (has a semi-colon ever hurt anyone?). The main reason for this is the anonymity of the Internet.
I could create a Youtube account right now named Valettathon (challenge accepted!) and post a comment on any video and say what I like. I could use as vulgar language as possible, throw out stereotypes and elitism, and just go bananas!
And nothing would ever happen to me.
The anonymity of the Internet is one colossal shield. Nothing will come back to me if I say it on the Internet, because there is nothing to link me to that account (nothing to easily do it, I mean.) That's why you see hateful comments on Formspring you would never see on sites like Facebook; Being identifiable makes you liable for what you say and do.
Another thing about the Internet that I personally enjoy is the blank slate you are given. In a lot of places, younger people's opinions are looked down upon because they aren't 'old enough to make an opinion'. Effectively, on the Internet, I'm how old I say I am. You get notoriety for what you say and do, not how old you are or how you look.
That's kind of great. The Internet could be a venue for people, without bias, can discuss opinions without having any preconceptions about who that person is.
Now, I've a little bias in this area. Joshua Valett (spoilers) is not my real name. It is a pen name, one I've used for a while, just for kicks and giggles. But in reality, at the moment, it fools no one. One of the only ways I get people to this site is to shamefully self-promote (speaking of shamefully self-promoting, visit this awesome site I found! http://tinyurl.com/3ovnjjg)
Being nobody on the Internet is a rare experience that you literally can't have anywhere else. It's just a shame that no one seems to realize it.
Thanks for reading and considering,
J.Valett
In other, pre-topic news, that "experiment" thing about writing two posts with separate foundations- that's not happening. I'll broadcast my thoughts, and people will have to deal with it. But certainly comment on my posts with what you like, dislike, agree with or disagree with!
We live in a fascinating time period. New and amazing things are coming up daily- did you know that the Singularity (the time when man melds with machine in order to supplement our lives) is predicted for only 2045? We could double or triple our lifespans!
One of the greatest, if not the greatest, things to come out of this Technological Revolution is the Internet. The Internet, which you are conveniently on right now, defies explanation. It is just the Internet, plain and simple.
Now, if you have as much free time as I do, you might explore the Internet more than the average person. And you probably made the discovery a long, long, long time ago that the Internet is full of terrible people.
People go out of their way to insult others, degrade what other people have said, and make less and less grammatical sense (has a semi-colon ever hurt anyone?). The main reason for this is the anonymity of the Internet.
I could create a Youtube account right now named Valettathon (challenge accepted!) and post a comment on any video and say what I like. I could use as vulgar language as possible, throw out stereotypes and elitism, and just go bananas!
And nothing would ever happen to me.
The anonymity of the Internet is one colossal shield. Nothing will come back to me if I say it on the Internet, because there is nothing to link me to that account (nothing to easily do it, I mean.) That's why you see hateful comments on Formspring you would never see on sites like Facebook; Being identifiable makes you liable for what you say and do.
Another thing about the Internet that I personally enjoy is the blank slate you are given. In a lot of places, younger people's opinions are looked down upon because they aren't 'old enough to make an opinion'. Effectively, on the Internet, I'm how old I say I am. You get notoriety for what you say and do, not how old you are or how you look.
That's kind of great. The Internet could be a venue for people, without bias, can discuss opinions without having any preconceptions about who that person is.
Now, I've a little bias in this area. Joshua Valett (spoilers) is not my real name. It is a pen name, one I've used for a while, just for kicks and giggles. But in reality, at the moment, it fools no one. One of the only ways I get people to this site is to shamefully self-promote (speaking of shamefully self-promoting, visit this awesome site I found! http://tinyurl.com/3ovnjjg)
Being nobody on the Internet is a rare experience that you literally can't have anywhere else. It's just a shame that no one seems to realize it.
Thanks for reading and considering,
J.Valett
9.20.2011
Disappointment in the Flesh
To preface this post, I didn't make it into drama club. Yeah, I know it sucks. Why, you may ask, am I broadcasting my failures on the Internet? Because of my admiration for all of you wonderful readers who crave to know every last detail of my drastically dull life.
Disappointment has always been a hard thing for me to grasp. I'm a relatively smart guy, and I succeed in a couple key areas that I also happen to enjoy, so most of the time, I am not disappointed. I also have incredibly low standards for myself, just in case I fail.
But, every once in a while, I get up on my high horse and make an assumption about something. And 99 times out of 100, it comes back to bite me in the arse.
That's the funny thing about making these kinds of assumptions. You spend hours dreaming about reaching these incredible heights, doing these incredible things, and a single variable change can send you off course so damn fast that you don't even know it's changed.
To be fair, I'm not all that upset about Drama Club. I knew it was an exclusive thing when I started, but I chose to be an egotist and think that I had to get in. I didn't cry or anything, but I was severely bummed.
The biggest problem with disappointment is that you rarely learn anything from it, or at least I don't. You can't stop trying things, as that is actually impossible, and the expectations thing isn't something you can control. From my perspective, it is either a dangerously low self-esteem or a high expectation that is just begging to fall.
I know this post isn't as beautifully poetic as Let Go ( Disappointed? Good!), but I'm tired and sad.
A final thought: The worse thing about this kind of situation is the pity. It's kind of hard to be sad for your friend who didn't make it when you did. You can't be happy around this kind of person, for fear of seeming insensitive.
You know what? I think being around someone happy is exactly the right medicine.
Thanks for reading and considering,
J. Valett
Disappointment has always been a hard thing for me to grasp. I'm a relatively smart guy, and I succeed in a couple key areas that I also happen to enjoy, so most of the time, I am not disappointed. I also have incredibly low standards for myself, just in case I fail.
But, every once in a while, I get up on my high horse and make an assumption about something. And 99 times out of 100, it comes back to bite me in the arse.
That's the funny thing about making these kinds of assumptions. You spend hours dreaming about reaching these incredible heights, doing these incredible things, and a single variable change can send you off course so damn fast that you don't even know it's changed.
To be fair, I'm not all that upset about Drama Club. I knew it was an exclusive thing when I started, but I chose to be an egotist and think that I had to get in. I didn't cry or anything, but I was severely bummed.
The biggest problem with disappointment is that you rarely learn anything from it, or at least I don't. You can't stop trying things, as that is actually impossible, and the expectations thing isn't something you can control. From my perspective, it is either a dangerously low self-esteem or a high expectation that is just begging to fall.
I know this post isn't as beautifully poetic as Let Go ( Disappointed? Good!), but I'm tired and sad.
A final thought: The worse thing about this kind of situation is the pity. It's kind of hard to be sad for your friend who didn't make it when you did. You can't be happy around this kind of person, for fear of seeming insensitive.
You know what? I think being around someone happy is exactly the right medicine.
Thanks for reading and considering,
J. Valett
9.15.2011
Note To All Whom It May Concern
My blog, primarily, has been me arguing various points to you, the readership. I got good responses, with some posts being better recieved than others. One thing I didn't expect, however, was the uproarious response to my most recent blog post, which focused more on me and my feelings, rather than arguing a point. As eager as ever to bend to the wind of my possibly non-existant fanbase, I am doing an expirement: Between now and September 25th, I will upload two stories: Religify ( one like my usual ) and a yet-unnamed piece similar to Let Go. Please, Please, PLEASE comment on each of the stories about what you liked and disliked. It will be you, reader, who decides the blog's future
Thanks for Reading and Considering,
J. Valett
Thanks for Reading and Considering,
J. Valett
9.11.2011
Let it Go
Oh, God, it's been so long since I've been as content as I am right now. I know the feeling will fade, but for the next ten minutes or so, I'm going to document this.
Entourage ended (for everyone about half an hour ago, but I caught it on DVR) tonight. The ending was good, open enough for a sequel, closed enough to make me feel satisfied.
Just thinking about the ending makes me wonder how everyone got so misguided in life. Honestly, who cares about homework? Who cares about school? Video games? I'll sell my damn PS3 tomorrow if I feel like it, and I don't think it'd matter to me.
People matter.
Somehow, after thousands of years of love story after love story people still make stupid decisions that sacrifice this stuff. I was feeling so helpless, so hopeless twenty minutes ago, and now I feel so much more... well, I don't know.
There is a girl (and yes, I know, there is always a girl.) And I'm just sick of doing this, plotting and hoping, daring and thinking, dreaming and falling. Why is life always so complicated? Why can't I just be happy liking her, damned if she likes me.
I'm going to try.
We get so caught up in our day-to-day lives, stuff I can't even remember three days later. We can't just let go and be who we are, for fear of somebody finding out. What if they find out about my this, or that? Who cares?
I overthink things. I think I'm falling in love far too often. I procrastinate. I doubt whether I'm a good person. I'm a lot stupider than I seem. I'd like to be an actor, but think I lack the talent. I feel terrible about not feeling terrible more often. I don't like Harry Potter as much as I used to. I am not perfect.
And that is damn commendable.
Thanks for reading and considering,
J. Valett.
I know this isn't my usual, and it will probably look terrible to me tomorrow morning. But I honestly can't think of a single thing I care less about at the moment.
Entourage ended (for everyone about half an hour ago, but I caught it on DVR) tonight. The ending was good, open enough for a sequel, closed enough to make me feel satisfied.
Just thinking about the ending makes me wonder how everyone got so misguided in life. Honestly, who cares about homework? Who cares about school? Video games? I'll sell my damn PS3 tomorrow if I feel like it, and I don't think it'd matter to me.
People matter.
Somehow, after thousands of years of love story after love story people still make stupid decisions that sacrifice this stuff. I was feeling so helpless, so hopeless twenty minutes ago, and now I feel so much more... well, I don't know.
There is a girl (and yes, I know, there is always a girl.) And I'm just sick of doing this, plotting and hoping, daring and thinking, dreaming and falling. Why is life always so complicated? Why can't I just be happy liking her, damned if she likes me.
I'm going to try.
We get so caught up in our day-to-day lives, stuff I can't even remember three days later. We can't just let go and be who we are, for fear of somebody finding out. What if they find out about my this, or that? Who cares?
I overthink things. I think I'm falling in love far too often. I procrastinate. I doubt whether I'm a good person. I'm a lot stupider than I seem. I'd like to be an actor, but think I lack the talent. I feel terrible about not feeling terrible more often. I don't like Harry Potter as much as I used to. I am not perfect.
And that is damn commendable.
Thanks for reading and considering,
J. Valett.
I know this isn't my usual, and it will probably look terrible to me tomorrow morning. But I honestly can't think of a single thing I care less about at the moment.
9.02.2011
War! What is it Good For? (or Absolutely Nothing!)
Well here we are, again. Me putting off writing a new entry, and all of you, my masses of adoring fans, begging, sacrificing lambs to the thought that I may one day grace you all with a new writing. Well, that's a little extreme fans, but I'll roll with it.
I've been indulging in quite a bit of Team Fortress 2 recently, and that got me thinking about the wars that power such games, and ultimately war in general.
The country that I and most of my readers live it is, at best, a little trigger-happy, and at worst, devil-lovers who look for any excuse to kill anyone not believing what they believe. The type of cavalier attitude exhibited towards war can be reflected by the general public's answer to this question: how many countries are we in by force at the moment?
Yeah. Did you know we are in Yemen?
I used to be all for war, when I was like eight. The concept seemed cool to me, fighting for your country and to enforce freedom. Of course, no one died in these visions. They all just dodged bullets and the other side gave up when they saw we were right.
War now just seems barbaric to me. In a time when we can communicate over vast differences, no language barriers due to technology, and a way to tell everyone what you want, I don't understand why anyone would resort to stabbing.
And for another thing, war is no longer cool. Not that it ever was, but if I was to battle in any war, it wouldn't be this sneaky assassination type things we engage in now. I'd go for the Medieval sword-and-shield charge. It's more honorable.
I see people encourage war all the time nowadays, and to them I have one question: would you do it? Would you risk and potentially lose your life to invade a country that didn't ask nor want our intervention? I wouldn't. I don't know if I could kill someone for a valiant cause.
Now, this is rather idealistic (LIKE THE TITLE OF THE BLOG, OH MY GOSH) of me, as there are extenuating circumstances like dictators, people with a distinct lack of sanity, and genocide.
I'm not against war, per se. If violence is the only way to save innocent people, then it has to be what it has to be. But I am most certainly against the wars the United States are mostly involved in now.
And for the record, it wouldn't be considered a failure if we drew out of countries we shouldn't have entered in the first place: it's called not being a dick.
Thanks for reading and considering,
-J. Valett
I've been indulging in quite a bit of Team Fortress 2 recently, and that got me thinking about the wars that power such games, and ultimately war in general.
The country that I and most of my readers live it is, at best, a little trigger-happy, and at worst, devil-lovers who look for any excuse to kill anyone not believing what they believe. The type of cavalier attitude exhibited towards war can be reflected by the general public's answer to this question: how many countries are we in by force at the moment?
Yeah. Did you know we are in Yemen?
I used to be all for war, when I was like eight. The concept seemed cool to me, fighting for your country and to enforce freedom. Of course, no one died in these visions. They all just dodged bullets and the other side gave up when they saw we were right.
War now just seems barbaric to me. In a time when we can communicate over vast differences, no language barriers due to technology, and a way to tell everyone what you want, I don't understand why anyone would resort to stabbing.
And for another thing, war is no longer cool. Not that it ever was, but if I was to battle in any war, it wouldn't be this sneaky assassination type things we engage in now. I'd go for the Medieval sword-and-shield charge. It's more honorable.
I see people encourage war all the time nowadays, and to them I have one question: would you do it? Would you risk and potentially lose your life to invade a country that didn't ask nor want our intervention? I wouldn't. I don't know if I could kill someone for a valiant cause.
Now, this is rather idealistic (LIKE THE TITLE OF THE BLOG, OH MY GOSH) of me, as there are extenuating circumstances like dictators, people with a distinct lack of sanity, and genocide.
I'm not against war, per se. If violence is the only way to save innocent people, then it has to be what it has to be. But I am most certainly against the wars the United States are mostly involved in now.
And for the record, it wouldn't be considered a failure if we drew out of countries we shouldn't have entered in the first place: it's called not being a dick.
Thanks for reading and considering,
-J. Valett
8.14.2011
Haiku-Review #2: Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows: Part 2
Haiku-Review for: Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows: Part 2
Some cool fighting scenes,
Final scenes were good, not great
3D not worth it
Some cool fighting scenes,
Final scenes were good, not great
3D not worth it
Haiku-Review #1: Planet of the Apes
I'm starting a new segment on the blog!
*blows that thing with the strings, this-http://www.bikudo.com/photo_stock/255591.JPG*
It is called Haiku-Review, where I review movies with just a haiku. For good measure, I'll start it off with two, one in this post, and one in the next.
And yes I know there is a website like this
Haiku-Review for: Rise of the Planet of the Apes
This one is good if
You forget the other ones
Apes take down a plane
Thanks for reading and considering,
-J. Valett
*blows that thing with the strings, this-http://www.bikudo.com/photo_stock/255591.JPG*
It is called Haiku-Review, where I review movies with just a haiku. For good measure, I'll start it off with two, one in this post, and one in the next.
And yes I know there is a website like this
Haiku-Review for: Rise of the Planet of the Apes
This one is good if
You forget the other ones
Apes take down a plane
Thanks for reading and considering,
-J. Valett
Language or (Hoc tibi vere vultus sursum?)
No, I didn't forget you, I just needed two weeks to mull this one over. Or to play Team Fortress 2. Can't remember, definitely one of those two.
A few days ago, I was playing a game at the camp where I am a camper half the day, and get paid the other half. During a pivotal moment in a game, I was removed from the field, taking a chance to use my favorite expletives on the way out. A counselor turned to me and yelled out "Language!" I responded by saying, "Mine is English."
What's so wrong with certain words, that is fine with others? Why can I say "doody" to a child, and not say "shit"?
As a form of research, I watched a youtube video that may have less than 1% truth as to the origin of curses (http://tinyurl.com/cosyzr) That didn't give me much more of a clue. Why do people care which words are used and which aren't? Words are used to describe the world around us, and if you feel like someone is being a "bitch" as opposed to just "a meanie", wouldn't bitch be the more appropriate word?
Well, before I go much further with my More-Righteous-Than-Thou speech, I do restrict my swears around my parents, and to an extent, around everyone. Try as I may, I can't bring myself to say the C word or the N word.
These words, for the most part, are frowned upon when used because of what they mean. Authority figures, for some unholy reason, think that if they allow us to use these words, that we will start using them towards one another and fights and such will ensue.
The problem with this logic is that if you deny a teenager something, it is the only thing their heart is dead set on doing.
I don't see any problem with letting people use these words as long as they know what it means. That is also why I think that someone saying "I love you" to someone as a lie is worse than any slang word that can be thrown at someone else.
Words are a powerful tool. Use whatever words you will, because no one can restrict that (except for some caveat to the first amendment. Total bullshit).
Thanks for reading and considering,
-J.Valett
A few days ago, I was playing a game at the camp where I am a camper half the day, and get paid the other half. During a pivotal moment in a game, I was removed from the field, taking a chance to use my favorite expletives on the way out. A counselor turned to me and yelled out "Language!" I responded by saying, "Mine is English."
What's so wrong with certain words, that is fine with others? Why can I say "doody" to a child, and not say "shit"?
As a form of research, I watched a youtube video that may have less than 1% truth as to the origin of curses (http://tinyurl.com/cosyzr) That didn't give me much more of a clue. Why do people care which words are used and which aren't? Words are used to describe the world around us, and if you feel like someone is being a "bitch" as opposed to just "a meanie", wouldn't bitch be the more appropriate word?
Well, before I go much further with my More-Righteous-Than-Thou speech, I do restrict my swears around my parents, and to an extent, around everyone. Try as I may, I can't bring myself to say the C word or the N word.
These words, for the most part, are frowned upon when used because of what they mean. Authority figures, for some unholy reason, think that if they allow us to use these words, that we will start using them towards one another and fights and such will ensue.
The problem with this logic is that if you deny a teenager something, it is the only thing their heart is dead set on doing.
I don't see any problem with letting people use these words as long as they know what it means. That is also why I think that someone saying "I love you" to someone as a lie is worse than any slang word that can be thrown at someone else.
Words are a powerful tool. Use whatever words you will, because no one can restrict that (except for some caveat to the first amendment. Total bullshit).
Thanks for reading and considering,
-J.Valett
7.31.2011
The End (or We All Fall Down)
Two quick things before I start on my usual (or, more recently, not so usual) rant and escapade this time:
1. Happy birthday to Harry Potter! He turns 31 today. And also to J.K. Rowling, whose age I will hold back.
2. Yeah, I realize that it has been 29 days since I last posted. To that I say, whoops!
If you know me personally, as I assume most people who read this publication do, you know of my fondness (see: obsession) for the Harry Potter series. If not, refer to the 2nd sentence of this post. Since the ripe age of six, I have drooled over the adventures of this bespectacled hero, and have become famous among my peers for my knowledge of the series.
16 days ago, the final Harry Potter film was released. It was a momentous occasion, but it also marked the end of an era for me. No more books, no more movies, only Pottermore remains to me (and it doesn't look all too great.) I decided, before seeing the movie, that I would need to change who I am, or at least how the world looks at me.
This all got me thinking of the End. Not the End of the World, because we have until December 21st of next year to think about that, but rather Ends in general.
I'm not going to talk too much about the big End, death, because I hope to address that in a topic sometime in the next 29 days. Why are we so sad when something comes to an end, I thought to myself. We all know it will come, and it isn't a surprise, most of the time, so why are we so hung up over it?
Why was I so sad to see Harry Potter go? The old books are still here, the movies haven't gone anywhere. It's just new content that is gone, and if I really craved it, that is what fan fiction is for. No, the reason we all dread the end is because it is when we have to evaluate ourselves.
'Okay,' I thought to myself. 'Harry Potter is no more. I have to dump that image of the Harry Potter kid, or get left behind in the dust.'
People forget easily. Do you guys remember the end of TV shows like Ned's Declassified or Drake and Josh? Remember how hung up we all (or at least, I was) about it?
Three years later, I couldn't tell you what happened in the finale of Drake and Josh. Because the world moved on, and I was forced to.
One of my biggest fears is not being remembered after my death. Yeah, George Washington's name is still spewed about, but no one remembers Clive Davies. Once I come to my end, people will be sad, yeah, but no one will hang on to me forever.
We hate the end, because the end means we need to let go. We need to change who we were, what we loved, who we love, and how we do things. The end brings change, and change is scary.
The end of Harry Potter has come. I doubt a series, books or movies, will come around like that in a long time. It is time to let go. But not to forget.
Never forget.
Thanks for reading and considering,
-J. Valett
1. Happy birthday to Harry Potter! He turns 31 today. And also to J.K. Rowling, whose age I will hold back.
2. Yeah, I realize that it has been 29 days since I last posted. To that I say, whoops!
If you know me personally, as I assume most people who read this publication do, you know of my fondness (see: obsession) for the Harry Potter series. If not, refer to the 2nd sentence of this post. Since the ripe age of six, I have drooled over the adventures of this bespectacled hero, and have become famous among my peers for my knowledge of the series.
16 days ago, the final Harry Potter film was released. It was a momentous occasion, but it also marked the end of an era for me. No more books, no more movies, only Pottermore remains to me (and it doesn't look all too great.) I decided, before seeing the movie, that I would need to change who I am, or at least how the world looks at me.
This all got me thinking of the End. Not the End of the World, because we have until December 21st of next year to think about that, but rather Ends in general.
I'm not going to talk too much about the big End, death, because I hope to address that in a topic sometime in the next 29 days. Why are we so sad when something comes to an end, I thought to myself. We all know it will come, and it isn't a surprise, most of the time, so why are we so hung up over it?
Why was I so sad to see Harry Potter go? The old books are still here, the movies haven't gone anywhere. It's just new content that is gone, and if I really craved it, that is what fan fiction is for. No, the reason we all dread the end is because it is when we have to evaluate ourselves.
'Okay,' I thought to myself. 'Harry Potter is no more. I have to dump that image of the Harry Potter kid, or get left behind in the dust.'
People forget easily. Do you guys remember the end of TV shows like Ned's Declassified or Drake and Josh? Remember how hung up we all (or at least, I was) about it?
Three years later, I couldn't tell you what happened in the finale of Drake and Josh. Because the world moved on, and I was forced to.
One of my biggest fears is not being remembered after my death. Yeah, George Washington's name is still spewed about, but no one remembers Clive Davies. Once I come to my end, people will be sad, yeah, but no one will hang on to me forever.
We hate the end, because the end means we need to let go. We need to change who we were, what we loved, who we love, and how we do things. The end brings change, and change is scary.
The end of Harry Potter has come. I doubt a series, books or movies, will come around like that in a long time. It is time to let go. But not to forget.
Never forget.
Thanks for reading and considering,
-J. Valett
7.02.2011
Strictly Sexual (or Can't We Just Talk About Violence Instead?)
For the second week in a row, I'm going to address a topic from my first post, mainly sexuality in our country. I'll get around to the actual meat of the issue later on, but for now, let me talk about how our country views it.
Let's start out by looking at how movies deal with it. Here are the MPAA (Motion Picture Association of America, the group of people who rate movies) ratings for two movies, namely Avatar and Love and Other Drugs (which I admit I've never seen, but researched for this post). Avatar received a PG-13 rating for " intense epic battle sequences and warfare, sensuality, language and some smoking", while the other receives an R rating for "strong sexual content, nudity, pervasive language, and some drug material."
Similar rulings exist in video games, as reactions to the ban of a California law banning the sale of any violent games to minors. This country has the attitude of the 17th century when it comes to nudity, but men ripping each other's faces off is okay to show to children.
I think the world needs to chill when it comes to nudity. People freaked out to a huge extent when one of Janet Jackson's breast was shown blurry on a small TV, but were okay with watching people get shot in movies like Inception.
To throw in a disclaimer, this isn't a four-year-old's fit when he can't watch a PG-13 movie. I, very recently, complained to my friend about Jennifer's Body, for being little more than an excuse for Megan Fox to take off her clothes. I support movies and video games, but can't support the ratings association that holds attitudes that might have been okay when arranged marriages were.
The ratings boards are trying to hold on to a little piece of yesterday in a world that is revolutionizing very fast. THe problem is, its not even a good part of yesterday. Hold on to like, Pulp Fiction, or something.
Thanks for reading and considering,
-J.Valett
Let's start out by looking at how movies deal with it. Here are the MPAA (Motion Picture Association of America, the group of people who rate movies) ratings for two movies, namely Avatar and Love and Other Drugs (which I admit I've never seen, but researched for this post). Avatar received a PG-13 rating for " intense epic battle sequences and warfare, sensuality, language and some smoking", while the other receives an R rating for "strong sexual content, nudity, pervasive language, and some drug material."
Similar rulings exist in video games, as reactions to the ban of a California law banning the sale of any violent games to minors. This country has the attitude of the 17th century when it comes to nudity, but men ripping each other's faces off is okay to show to children.
I think the world needs to chill when it comes to nudity. People freaked out to a huge extent when one of Janet Jackson's breast was shown blurry on a small TV, but were okay with watching people get shot in movies like Inception.
To throw in a disclaimer, this isn't a four-year-old's fit when he can't watch a PG-13 movie. I, very recently, complained to my friend about Jennifer's Body, for being little more than an excuse for Megan Fox to take off her clothes. I support movies and video games, but can't support the ratings association that holds attitudes that might have been okay when arranged marriages were.
The ratings boards are trying to hold on to a little piece of yesterday in a world that is revolutionizing very fast. THe problem is, its not even a good part of yesterday. Hold on to like, Pulp Fiction, or something.
Thanks for reading and considering,
-J.Valett
6.26.2011
Nurture v. Nature (or Pummel v. Not-Pummel)
This editorial, of sorts, will be dedicated to the issue of parenting in today's society, introduced a little by my premiere writing piece, (You must be THIS tall to read this post).
Parenting, as we have it today, is a terrible system. Yeah, a lot of good kids come out of it, but so do a lot of rapists and serial killers and fans of the show Two and a Half Men. A lot of this has to do with parents actually parenting their kids.
I know this is going to sound a little odd to most of you. We grew up in a society where parents raised the kids, end of story. But why? How is their competency tested? By the actual acts of conception and childbirth, which over 100 billion others have done before them?
If not taking every child to a special facility to be raised by trained specialists, at least do some regulation of the parents. Do you know how many child molesters, kid-beaters, and rapists there are raising kid in their households? If there is only only one, that is one too many.
This also brings up the infamous topic of nurture vs. nature. This basically asks whether children should be raised roughly, learning the skills they need to survive, or gently easing them into society, making for a less unpleasant childhood.
Right now, we are living in a nurture society. A place where if a kid fails, it is okay, and (s)he'll just try better next time. But this isn't adequately preparing kids for adulthood, when they will fail and it won't be okay.
How it used to be was nature, and it worked pretty well. The self-destructive morons went and self-destructed themselves, and we were left with all of the productive smarties. This current system is leading to overpopulation, children never truly becoming adults, and TMZ. Do we really want any of that?
Thanks for reading and considering,
-J. Valett
Parenting, as we have it today, is a terrible system. Yeah, a lot of good kids come out of it, but so do a lot of rapists and serial killers and fans of the show Two and a Half Men. A lot of this has to do with parents actually parenting their kids.
I know this is going to sound a little odd to most of you. We grew up in a society where parents raised the kids, end of story. But why? How is their competency tested? By the actual acts of conception and childbirth, which over 100 billion others have done before them?
If not taking every child to a special facility to be raised by trained specialists, at least do some regulation of the parents. Do you know how many child molesters, kid-beaters, and rapists there are raising kid in their households? If there is only only one, that is one too many.
This also brings up the infamous topic of nurture vs. nature. This basically asks whether children should be raised roughly, learning the skills they need to survive, or gently easing them into society, making for a less unpleasant childhood.
Right now, we are living in a nurture society. A place where if a kid fails, it is okay, and (s)he'll just try better next time. But this isn't adequately preparing kids for adulthood, when they will fail and it won't be okay.
How it used to be was nature, and it worked pretty well. The self-destructive morons went and self-destructed themselves, and we were left with all of the productive smarties. This current system is leading to overpopulation, children never truly becoming adults, and TMZ. Do we really want any of that?
Thanks for reading and considering,
-J. Valett
6.23.2011
The Power of Power (or [in]Famous)
If you could have any super power in the entire world, what would it be? Would it be to fly, to shape shift, to read minds? Now imagine yourself with this super power. What next? What would you do with it?
Some may say, “I want to teleport to go to Hawaii everyday in a second.” Some might say “I want to read minds to see if that ‘special someone’ really likes me or not.” But why is it that no one says “I want to become super powerful to help the elderly cross the street”, or “to rid cities of gangs and drug cartels?”
If you were bestowed with the gifts of power, and you weren’t taking care of cities, or helping people, you may be considered irresponsible. Would this eventually make you a villain? Would it be your obligation to help people because you are the only one capable of certain tasks?
Now these terms of ‘super this’ and ‘super that’ are quiet drastic, but what if they were applied to real terms. The president of the United States can either choose to help America or use is power for swimming pools and corn dogs. He can choose to isolate the United States from war, or enter battle and protect the world for Democracy. The principles are the same.
Don’t get me wrong, everyone needs a little spoiling, and power simply helps one acquire this. But it seems that it is human nature to be selfish. The truly strong and wise are the ones to overlooks instinct, and care for others. So I guess what I’m saying is that “with great power comes great responsibility.” (Ironically this quote came from Stan Lee’s Spider-man, but that’s not the point).
Thanks for Reading and Considering
-N. Xavier
6.11.2011
Black Friday (or Party and Party and NO)
It has recently come to the media’s attention that Rebecca Black’s song Friday is one of the most horrid songs to ever hit the music industry. It may be for her uncanny lyrics, or her lack of talent for singing, but in truth the song is not so terrible.
It can easily be compared to Bruno Mars’s song, The Lazy Song, which simply outlines the boring life of a man. The same goes with The Beatles’s song, A Day in the Life. The lyrics compared side by side with one another are almost exactly the same as Black’s Friday.
http://www.forkparty.com/12198/song-similarities-rebecca-blacks-friday-vs-the-beatles-a-day-in-the-life
So does this in fact mean that by bashing the young Rebecca Black for her careless lyrics,
you are also bashing the great Beatles? Is this possible? Believe it or not, I have heard remakes of this same “horrid song” (as the public claims) and it wasn’t half bad. When good singing is added to this mixture of a media cake, it actually comes out of the oven tasting good.
So we are left with two questions:
1) Should Friday have gotten less slack from the media?
2) Who is Nathan Xavier?
Thanks for reading and considering
-N. Xavier
It can easily be compared to Bruno Mars’s song, The Lazy Song, which simply outlines the boring life of a man. The same goes with The Beatles’s song, A Day in the Life. The lyrics compared side by side with one another are almost exactly the same as Black’s Friday.
http://www.forkparty.com/12198/song-similarities-rebecca-blacks-friday-vs-the-beatles-a-day-in-the-life
So does this in fact mean that by bashing the young Rebecca Black for her careless lyrics,
you are also bashing the great Beatles? Is this possible? Believe it or not, I have heard remakes of this same “horrid song” (as the public claims) and it wasn’t half bad. When good singing is added to this mixture of a media cake, it actually comes out of the oven tasting good.
So we are left with two questions:
1) Should Friday have gotten less slack from the media?
2) Who is Nathan Xavier?
Thanks for reading and considering
-N. Xavier
Pushing down on me, pushing down on you (or Sucks to Soceity)
If you have an earring, or belly ring, or tongue ring, or nose ring, or any piece of non-surgical metal somewhere in your sack of flesh known collectively as a body, think about why you got it. Is it because it is pretty? Because you like how it feels? If so, you have just done what all of us have done: Succumbed to and been brainwashed by societal pressure. On the other hand, if you just like sticking metal into your body, then you should probably get some help, Zzasz.
Now, you may not agree with my assumptions regarding how society has treated all of us. But when you think about it, ninety-five percent of what you consider normal is society based, because that is what organized society is for. Why is wearing clothes normal? Because it is? Wouldn't wearing heating pads and cloaks keep us equally warm? Why then sweatshirts and jeans and socks.
I don't count myself exempt from society's crazy rules, as any of you who have met me have seen me wear such things as clothes and shoes. But I can look back on these things with a critical eye. Have you ever looked back and thought, "Why do I do this?" Think past what society has told you is right, and think of what makes sense. Does stabbing yourself with metal make sense? What about caking your face with powder and drawing on it with pencils? What about the entire idea of formal wear?
The reason I have realized these things is because I'm weird. I'm not like most people on Earth, in that the way that I think and act would confuse most people. I don't laugh or get freaked out by the subcultures that replace part of their jaw with wood or lengthen their necks with golden necklaces. Do you know why?
Cause if they met you, they might do the same damn thing.
Thanks for reading and considering,
- J. Valett.
Now, you may not agree with my assumptions regarding how society has treated all of us. But when you think about it, ninety-five percent of what you consider normal is society based, because that is what organized society is for. Why is wearing clothes normal? Because it is? Wouldn't wearing heating pads and cloaks keep us equally warm? Why then sweatshirts and jeans and socks.
I don't count myself exempt from society's crazy rules, as any of you who have met me have seen me wear such things as clothes and shoes. But I can look back on these things with a critical eye. Have you ever looked back and thought, "Why do I do this?" Think past what society has told you is right, and think of what makes sense. Does stabbing yourself with metal make sense? What about caking your face with powder and drawing on it with pencils? What about the entire idea of formal wear?
The reason I have realized these things is because I'm weird. I'm not like most people on Earth, in that the way that I think and act would confuse most people. I don't laugh or get freaked out by the subcultures that replace part of their jaw with wood or lengthen their necks with golden necklaces. Do you know why?
Cause if they met you, they might do the same damn thing.
Thanks for reading and considering,
- J. Valett.
6.04.2011
Due Monday (or Who Gives?)
I remember being in history class, not too long ago, and my teacher brought up teaching by rote. When questioned as to what it meant, the class discovered that it referred to a teaching technique where students just had to memorize a lot of things and were quizzed on it. My teacher then said that it was a good thing that that system has been discontinued.
It hasn't.
Classes like history and science, mostly, is just rote memorization. There is no formula you can plug into and say, "4x-3y to the power of 1920's speakeasies= who won the election of 1902". That leaves us with memorizing everything, and then losing anything that didn't interest us. That is not a very efficient system.
Math and English are better, to a degree, since you learn formulas and apply the knowledge into other examples. But once you reach sixth or seventh grade, you know everything you'll need to know if you aren't planning on entering that field. No acting job will ever require me to know the volume of a sphere.
This system didn't always suck however. There was a time when school was the only place to get this information, and that was why it was so vital. Nowadays, the Internet can be used to find literally almost anything you would need to know. Now you don't have to memorize the President in 1812, because Google does.
It isn't a good idea to get rid of school. I'm not going to even entertain that notion. But school needs to adapt to the times, not cling to old ways that no longer work or are no longer important.
Students all over the world are having information that is not important to them or relevant to society today shoved down their throat. It's time someone asked "Why is there a hand in my mouth?"
Thanks for reading and considering,
-J.Valett
It hasn't.
Classes like history and science, mostly, is just rote memorization. There is no formula you can plug into and say, "4x-3y to the power of 1920's speakeasies= who won the election of 1902". That leaves us with memorizing everything, and then losing anything that didn't interest us. That is not a very efficient system.
Math and English are better, to a degree, since you learn formulas and apply the knowledge into other examples. But once you reach sixth or seventh grade, you know everything you'll need to know if you aren't planning on entering that field. No acting job will ever require me to know the volume of a sphere.
This system didn't always suck however. There was a time when school was the only place to get this information, and that was why it was so vital. Nowadays, the Internet can be used to find literally almost anything you would need to know. Now you don't have to memorize the President in 1812, because Google does.
It isn't a good idea to get rid of school. I'm not going to even entertain that notion. But school needs to adapt to the times, not cling to old ways that no longer work or are no longer important.
Students all over the world are having information that is not important to them or relevant to society today shoved down their throat. It's time someone asked "Why is there a hand in my mouth?"
Thanks for reading and considering,
-J.Valett
6.01.2011
The Reading Curve (or A Dying Medium)
Hello resplendent visitors to ideasofidealists.blogspot.com! In a slight mix-up, I have a guest author tonight with a topic he/she/he is passionate about! So welcome Nathan Xavier!
On a side note, if you enjoy his/her/his writing style, comment below or email me and tell me so. Also, I am going to try to post more regularly, if possible.
On a side note, if you enjoy his/her/his writing style, comment below or email me and tell me so. Also, I am going to try to post more regularly, if possible.
I recently encountered one of my closer friends. She said, “Oh my gosh! You have to read this book!” So I asked her about it, got some information, and determined that this was indeed an ‘interesting read’.
This conversation occurred at the beginning of the month and to this day I have not read said book. The truth of the matter is, I do enjoy a good story, but I do not have the patience to sit down and indulge in a book. Honestly, I dislike reading with a passion.
Part of the reason I feel that reading is an enemy in my eyes is our schooling systems. At young ages, children are told that they must read at least 15 minutes a day, and then write about what they read. And in the beginning, children enjoy this task. I personally loved seeing how much I could read and remember in a short period of time. But as time went on, this task became more of chore, rather then reading for enjoyment.
Another reason I do not experience a thrill while reading a book is that there are other forms of art in the modern world that have equally compelling stories. People may argue, “But you can’t tell what the characters are thinking” or “A book can be longer and therefore more detailed,” but I see it that a movie can have many deep characters and allow the audience to relate to the characters. For example, Inception starring Leonardo DiCaprio, the movie experiences many emotionally challenging obstacles for the characters that they must overcome, and to this day, people are still pondering the ending (which will not be reveled in this writing because I care for my fellow readers and do not want to spoil it for those who haven’t seen Inception).
Yet another form is video games. Now don’t jump out of your seats or close out of this blog saying “Pacman doesn’t have a story!” If you do say this you would be right. But in my recent years I have encountered many games that have personally changed my life. Hours have been spent playing these games trying to understand certain characters motives and emotions towards a subject. Games like Resistance, Dragon Age: Origins, God of War and Uncharted have tested the very emotions of consumers.
All of these aspects of movies and video games are identical to that of books. Henceforth, you are not a bad person if you don’t read a book. However you choose to enjoy your free time is your choice. You may even enjoy something that wasn’t listed there….and that’s OK! I personally just dislike when others are forcing people to read, it defeats the purpose of free time and defeats the principles of enjoyment.
This conversation occurred at the beginning of the month and to this day I have not read said book. The truth of the matter is, I do enjoy a good story, but I do not have the patience to sit down and indulge in a book. Honestly, I dislike reading with a passion.
Part of the reason I feel that reading is an enemy in my eyes is our schooling systems. At young ages, children are told that they must read at least 15 minutes a day, and then write about what they read. And in the beginning, children enjoy this task. I personally loved seeing how much I could read and remember in a short period of time. But as time went on, this task became more of chore, rather then reading for enjoyment.
Another reason I do not experience a thrill while reading a book is that there are other forms of art in the modern world that have equally compelling stories. People may argue, “But you can’t tell what the characters are thinking” or “A book can be longer and therefore more detailed,” but I see it that a movie can have many deep characters and allow the audience to relate to the characters. For example, Inception starring Leonardo DiCaprio, the movie experiences many emotionally challenging obstacles for the characters that they must overcome, and to this day, people are still pondering the ending (which will not be reveled in this writing because I care for my fellow readers and do not want to spoil it for those who haven’t seen Inception).
Yet another form is video games. Now don’t jump out of your seats or close out of this blog saying “Pacman doesn’t have a story!” If you do say this you would be right. But in my recent years I have encountered many games that have personally changed my life. Hours have been spent playing these games trying to understand certain characters motives and emotions towards a subject. Games like Resistance, Dragon Age: Origins, God of War and Uncharted have tested the very emotions of consumers.
All of these aspects of movies and video games are identical to that of books. Henceforth, you are not a bad person if you don’t read a book. However you choose to enjoy your free time is your choice. You may even enjoy something that wasn’t listed there….and that’s OK! I personally just dislike when others are forcing people to read, it defeats the purpose of free time and defeats the principles of enjoyment.
Thanks for reading and considering,
-N. Xavier
5.31.2011
Can you hear me now? (or For the Love of….)
And with a total of 0/3 of the votes, the subject of God has won!
...what? Whatever, I'll do morals some other time.
Many a year ago, I went over to my neighbor's house. We did all the things two child boys do, fighting and playing and such. And eventually, we went to play video games, and that was when I discovered Age of Mythology. This was a game that had to do with Greek myths and their gods.
Long story short, I got it and loved it. I also went through a period of time when I believed that the Greek gods were real.
You may laugh, snicker, chuckle, snigger, chortle, crack up, shriek, titter, or any other synonym for laugh you can find on thesaurus.com, but I did. And why is it so ridiculous?
Think what the difference between the Greek gods and the God of Monotheism is. Come up with anything tangible? Both, in my humble opinion, were created to explain something in the natural world that wasn't previously explainable. And that is where modern science comes in.
I'm going to lay my cards on the table (An ace, jack, and three) and admit I am an atheist, as I may have done before. I don't know if there is a God, but I'm not going to pretend I believe in Him. I haven't seen any proof tangible enough to convince me.
But I'm not going to spend this whole post bashing God.
I think many people simply believe in God because what is the alternative? If there is no God, there is no grand plan for your lives, no assured happy ending or forever after. A lot of people wouldn't want to admit, not even to themselves, their lives are insignificant. And what is the point of this life is there is no next one to be rewarded for?
I'm not telling you to become atheist. I'm not telling you to worship God. I'm telling you to look at the world from your own eyes, and not that of any mother or father or priest or monk or atheist leader.
And if there is a God, I'm not sure I want to be in a Heaven where people are excluded for thinking differently than others
Thanks for reading and considering,
J. Valett
...what? Whatever, I'll do morals some other time.
Many a year ago, I went over to my neighbor's house. We did all the things two child boys do, fighting and playing and such. And eventually, we went to play video games, and that was when I discovered Age of Mythology. This was a game that had to do with Greek myths and their gods.
Long story short, I got it and loved it. I also went through a period of time when I believed that the Greek gods were real.
You may laugh, snicker, chuckle, snigger, chortle, crack up, shriek, titter, or any other synonym for laugh you can find on thesaurus.com, but I did. And why is it so ridiculous?
Think what the difference between the Greek gods and the God of Monotheism is. Come up with anything tangible? Both, in my humble opinion, were created to explain something in the natural world that wasn't previously explainable. And that is where modern science comes in.
I'm going to lay my cards on the table (An ace, jack, and three) and admit I am an atheist, as I may have done before. I don't know if there is a God, but I'm not going to pretend I believe in Him. I haven't seen any proof tangible enough to convince me.
But I'm not going to spend this whole post bashing God.
I think many people simply believe in God because what is the alternative? If there is no God, there is no grand plan for your lives, no assured happy ending or forever after. A lot of people wouldn't want to admit, not even to themselves, their lives are insignificant. And what is the point of this life is there is no next one to be rewarded for?
I'm not telling you to become atheist. I'm not telling you to worship God. I'm telling you to look at the world from your own eyes, and not that of any mother or father or priest or monk or atheist leader.
And if there is a God, I'm not sure I want to be in a Heaven where people are excluded for thinking differently than others
Thanks for reading and considering,
J. Valett
5.20.2011
We Gonna Party 'til the Rapture! (or My God Could Beat Up Your God)
Note: This entry will not deal with God specifically. I don't want to tread those waters until I have dipped my toes in. If I offend anyone, I am sorry.
Today at school, a child came up to me and told me that he wouldn't be in school Monday. When I inquired why, he responded by saying that the Rapture was May 21st and that all of the good Christians will go to heaven. Being Jewish, naturally, I would stay here. I told the kid that I would tell the anti-christ I said "whassup"
I don't have a problem with religion in general. As one very wise writer for a TV show put, "Religion is like Billy Joel. I see the appeal, and I wouldn't take it away from anyone, but I also wouldn't stand in line for it." My biggest problem with organized religion is the subtle touches of brainwashing. NOTE: This is the part where you will want to sharpen your pitchforks and oil up your torches.
Most people don't belong to the West Baptist Church. Most people disagree with their message, which includes condemning anyone who isn't them, picketing funerals of gay people and soldiers, and teaching their children to do the same. People moan and groan about them: The children should be taken away, they say, they are being brainwashed.
To a certain degree they are. To a certain degree, we are.
Most of the more accepting or more liberal religions don't do that kind of stuff. The only subtle touches of brainwashing you see is in things like Jewish kindergarten or Christian kindergarten. Where they teach you that God is God, he made everything, end of story. On the plus side, you could eat an Oreo and take a nap.
I was raised Jewish, but I was always free to believe what I wanted to believe. When I asked my parents what they believed, I got responses followed by, "but you can believe whatever you like."
Being the idealist I am (see the title of the blog) I intended to raise my kid religion free. When they were of age, let's say ten, I would present to them all of the religions that were prevalent or accepted, including atheism, and letting them choose what they believed. But of course, this is no idealized world. The presents would likely determine which side of the religion fence they ended up on.
Organized religion has a valiant message, even religions that seem perverse to some, like that of the West Baptist Church. Most want to get you into heaven, whether it be by blowing up a hospital or confessing your sins to a mystery man. Some just want you to be a good person.
But one of my biggest problems of organized religion is that it makes everyone think that they are better if they are in their religion. NOTE: Huge generalization.
When I tell people that I am atheist, to an extent, some try to convert me to their religion. Not a huge number, maybe three in my life. They wanted me to go to heaven, a valiant thought but ultimately meaningless.
Some people believe a lack of an organized religion makes someone a bad person. They don't have any governing forces, so they can do whatever they want. There are no Ten Commandments that tell them not to kill, so they can kill. But atheists kill, Christians kill, Buddhists kill, Jews kill, Agnostics kill, all religions house killers.
My big problems with organized religion lie here on the table. Comment if I am wrong (which I most certainly can be), or with your views.
The point that I'm trying to get across here is that a lot of kids don't have a choice in what they believe in. If they are taught and choose Christianity, fantastic. If they are taught and choose Daoism, great. But brainwashing is not something I can just stand by and watch.
Thanks for reading and considering,
J. Valett.
Today at school, a child came up to me and told me that he wouldn't be in school Monday. When I inquired why, he responded by saying that the Rapture was May 21st and that all of the good Christians will go to heaven. Being Jewish, naturally, I would stay here. I told the kid that I would tell the anti-christ I said "whassup"
I don't have a problem with religion in general. As one very wise writer for a TV show put, "Religion is like Billy Joel. I see the appeal, and I wouldn't take it away from anyone, but I also wouldn't stand in line for it." My biggest problem with organized religion is the subtle touches of brainwashing. NOTE: This is the part where you will want to sharpen your pitchforks and oil up your torches.
Most people don't belong to the West Baptist Church. Most people disagree with their message, which includes condemning anyone who isn't them, picketing funerals of gay people and soldiers, and teaching their children to do the same. People moan and groan about them: The children should be taken away, they say, they are being brainwashed.
To a certain degree they are. To a certain degree, we are.
Most of the more accepting or more liberal religions don't do that kind of stuff. The only subtle touches of brainwashing you see is in things like Jewish kindergarten or Christian kindergarten. Where they teach you that God is God, he made everything, end of story. On the plus side, you could eat an Oreo and take a nap.
I was raised Jewish, but I was always free to believe what I wanted to believe. When I asked my parents what they believed, I got responses followed by, "but you can believe whatever you like."
Being the idealist I am (see the title of the blog) I intended to raise my kid religion free. When they were of age, let's say ten, I would present to them all of the religions that were prevalent or accepted, including atheism, and letting them choose what they believed. But of course, this is no idealized world. The presents would likely determine which side of the religion fence they ended up on.
Organized religion has a valiant message, even religions that seem perverse to some, like that of the West Baptist Church. Most want to get you into heaven, whether it be by blowing up a hospital or confessing your sins to a mystery man. Some just want you to be a good person.
But one of my biggest problems of organized religion is that it makes everyone think that they are better if they are in their religion. NOTE: Huge generalization.
When I tell people that I am atheist, to an extent, some try to convert me to their religion. Not a huge number, maybe three in my life. They wanted me to go to heaven, a valiant thought but ultimately meaningless.
Some people believe a lack of an organized religion makes someone a bad person. They don't have any governing forces, so they can do whatever they want. There are no Ten Commandments that tell them not to kill, so they can kill. But atheists kill, Christians kill, Buddhists kill, Jews kill, Agnostics kill, all religions house killers.
My big problems with organized religion lie here on the table. Comment if I am wrong (which I most certainly can be), or with your views.
The point that I'm trying to get across here is that a lot of kids don't have a choice in what they believe in. If they are taught and choose Christianity, fantastic. If they are taught and choose Daoism, great. But brainwashing is not something I can just stand by and watch.
Thanks for reading and considering,
J. Valett.
5.16.2011
Chocolates and Flowers (or The Love of Love)
Love is a curious thing. You are taught from the day you are born that you love your family. You love your mother, your father, your sisters and brothers, your uncles and aunts, grandfathers and grandmothers. And for the most part, you get good little children who mimic what they are told and tell everyone that they love them.
But then there is the love of others, which is far stranger and a little less easy to talk about. Love is something that is hard to describe, but dictionary.com simplified it to "an intense feeling of deep affection"
As I travel the halls of my asylum (see: school), I hear the word love a lot. Thrown out casually for something that was just funny, or just nice, or just...average. And I personally have received a lot of flack for my one little issue:
I refuse to say 'I love you'. To anyone. Family included.
Why is this? I don't know quite honestly. And that is probably the reason I don't say it ever. I just don't know what love is. Sure it may feel good to hear someone declare their love for you, but in the end, it is the same as telling a fat women that she is skinny: At the end of the day, she is still a size 6 (or whatever is large for women. I honestly don't know.)
I think that love is a rare natural resource. And I plan to conserve mine, so I won't have to mine off the coast of Alaska for it. I don't say it to people, it isn't because I hate you: If I talk to you at all, it means that my disgust for you is slightly lesser than my disgust for others. I don't say it because when I do say it, I want it to mean something.
Thanks for reading and considering
-J.Valett
One could attribute the delay between posts as a deep consideration of the following topic. One would be wrong. I am lazy.
But then there is the love of others, which is far stranger and a little less easy to talk about. Love is something that is hard to describe, but dictionary.com simplified it to "an intense feeling of deep affection"
As I travel the halls of my asylum (see: school), I hear the word love a lot. Thrown out casually for something that was just funny, or just nice, or just...average. And I personally have received a lot of flack for my one little issue:
I refuse to say 'I love you'. To anyone. Family included.
Why is this? I don't know quite honestly. And that is probably the reason I don't say it ever. I just don't know what love is. Sure it may feel good to hear someone declare their love for you, but in the end, it is the same as telling a fat women that she is skinny: At the end of the day, she is still a size 6 (or whatever is large for women. I honestly don't know.)
I think that love is a rare natural resource. And I plan to conserve mine, so I won't have to mine off the coast of Alaska for it. I don't say it to people, it isn't because I hate you: If I talk to you at all, it means that my disgust for you is slightly lesser than my disgust for others. I don't say it because when I do say it, I want it to mean something.
Thanks for reading and considering
-J.Valett
One could attribute the delay between posts as a deep consideration of the following topic. One would be wrong. I am lazy.
5.02.2011
A Life For X Lives (Or Life in the Abstract)
The other day I came up with a problem that I think is a very good question in that not only is there no solution, but any answer that someone comes up with is automatically wrong in everyone else's eyes.
Let's imagine that you were kidnapped by someone. They gave you a choice, between your life and the life of X random people. What is the value of X for which you would sacrifice your life? Now keep in mind that you don't know these people. They could be serial killers, saints, or civilians plucked from their life that is as normal as yours likely is.
It brings up a question that no one really likes to adress, one about your self-worth. I haven't heard a single response in my time asking this question that someone said that a single life was worth saving if it meant giving up their own. I've heard 20, I've heard 2, but no one seems to be in agreement over the correct answer.
I put my number at three. I don't know why, but if 3 people's lives were on the line and I was on the other end, I would like to think that I would sacrifice my self for the greater good.
But I acknowledge that I am a coward and I would have trouble giving my life up for fifty lives, as much as I hate admitting it.
There is an interesting conondrum that this question brings to light. If you are a king or noble with a high sense of self-entitlement, you may choose a high number, 300 or 400 because of the position you command and the power you wield. A saint in the flesh would likely choose 1 however, as any life is a life worth saving. But wouldn't you rather have the saint who is selfess?
Thanks for reading and considering
-J. Valett
Let's imagine that you were kidnapped by someone. They gave you a choice, between your life and the life of X random people. What is the value of X for which you would sacrifice your life? Now keep in mind that you don't know these people. They could be serial killers, saints, or civilians plucked from their life that is as normal as yours likely is.
It brings up a question that no one really likes to adress, one about your self-worth. I haven't heard a single response in my time asking this question that someone said that a single life was worth saving if it meant giving up their own. I've heard 20, I've heard 2, but no one seems to be in agreement over the correct answer.
I put my number at three. I don't know why, but if 3 people's lives were on the line and I was on the other end, I would like to think that I would sacrifice my self for the greater good.
But I acknowledge that I am a coward and I would have trouble giving my life up for fifty lives, as much as I hate admitting it.
There is an interesting conondrum that this question brings to light. If you are a king or noble with a high sense of self-entitlement, you may choose a high number, 300 or 400 because of the position you command and the power you wield. A saint in the flesh would likely choose 1 however, as any life is a life worth saving. But wouldn't you rather have the saint who is selfess?
Thanks for reading and considering
-J. Valett
4.25.2011
Mustaches and Mustangs (Or you have to be THIS old to read this post)
This Passover weekend, like many other Jews out there, I traveled to a family member's house to spend some good 'ol quality time with my family. I had a ton of matzah, fought with my cousins, and had a good time over all.
But I left with this memory in mind:
My uncle was talking to my twenty-one year old cousin about a new HBO show. He described the main plot as a sort of fantasy/middle ages one, with executions, politics, and liberal amounts of blood. "Game of Thrones" I chimed in, not thinking. He replied in the affirmative, and went on to describe some other aspects of the show, namely the graphic nudity and "adult content". He concluded with the thought that this show was not for me.
I had already watched two episodes, and I rather like the show. And it goes beyond the "adult content" that teenagers so desperately crave (if pop culture is to be believed). It actually has a great story which I follow with interest.
This brought up a question to me of maturity and parenting. I'll start with the former.
When am I mature enough to watch such a program? On my eighteenth birthday, is it suddenly okay to see breasts on television, while the day before it would have been acid to my young, innocent, naive eyes? I don't see a standard for maturity. There are definitely some adults that I'm more mature than. And there are definitely people younger than me who are more mature than me. For this reason, I don't think anyone should be sorted into maturity groups by how long you've lived.
My second, and a little odder question, was about parenting skills in general. Isn't the goal of child-rearing to make a fine little product, prepare them for the world, and ship them off to improve the world somehow? By restricting my rights to watch these programs, they aren't preparing me for the real world, and as such (if I didn't do it on my own at this age) I might have been overwhelmed by the possibilities. The world is full of rape, murder, and horrible things, and closing my eyes to them won't make them go away. It will just make me more susceptible to them.
Am I saying show your six year old graphic footage of rape? Of course not. But I am saying that age has very little to do with maturity, and just because I am an adolescent doesn't mean I can't handle it.
Thanks for reading and considering:
-J. Valett.
But I left with this memory in mind:
My uncle was talking to my twenty-one year old cousin about a new HBO show. He described the main plot as a sort of fantasy/middle ages one, with executions, politics, and liberal amounts of blood. "Game of Thrones" I chimed in, not thinking. He replied in the affirmative, and went on to describe some other aspects of the show, namely the graphic nudity and "adult content". He concluded with the thought that this show was not for me.
I had already watched two episodes, and I rather like the show. And it goes beyond the "adult content" that teenagers so desperately crave (if pop culture is to be believed). It actually has a great story which I follow with interest.
This brought up a question to me of maturity and parenting. I'll start with the former.
When am I mature enough to watch such a program? On my eighteenth birthday, is it suddenly okay to see breasts on television, while the day before it would have been acid to my young, innocent, naive eyes? I don't see a standard for maturity. There are definitely some adults that I'm more mature than. And there are definitely people younger than me who are more mature than me. For this reason, I don't think anyone should be sorted into maturity groups by how long you've lived.
My second, and a little odder question, was about parenting skills in general. Isn't the goal of child-rearing to make a fine little product, prepare them for the world, and ship them off to improve the world somehow? By restricting my rights to watch these programs, they aren't preparing me for the real world, and as such (if I didn't do it on my own at this age) I might have been overwhelmed by the possibilities. The world is full of rape, murder, and horrible things, and closing my eyes to them won't make them go away. It will just make me more susceptible to them.
Am I saying show your six year old graphic footage of rape? Of course not. But I am saying that age has very little to do with maturity, and just because I am an adolescent doesn't mean I can't handle it.
Thanks for reading and considering:
-J. Valett.
An Introduction
Hello Blogosphere!
Who am I?
...does it matter?
I'm just here to vent some of my opinions about the issues of the days, and maybe throw a few stories in there for good will. I'll try to upload a rant/sermon/opinion at least once a week, but I don't have a LOT of ideas, so just email me at SammyJB17@gmail.com if you have anything you'd like me to talk about.
Happy Hunting!
Who am I?
...does it matter?
I'm just here to vent some of my opinions about the issues of the days, and maybe throw a few stories in there for good will. I'll try to upload a rant/sermon/opinion at least once a week, but I don't have a LOT of ideas, so just email me at SammyJB17@gmail.com if you have anything you'd like me to talk about.
Happy Hunting!
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)