Friday, March 25, 2011
Words Fail Me
I need a word that describes when you've been thinking about a song all day and it suddenly starts playing randomly somewhere for you.
Wednesday, March 16, 2011
On the Whole Story
The internet can be a wonderful thing. There is so much information out there that at times it can be overwhelming. The sheer amount of information can often trick us into believing that it's more complete than it really is. Many of us use the internet as our main source. Our search to an answer may begin and end with a few keystrokes into our favorite search engine. There will be several times when what you find is the answer to your question, but is it the whole story? The world is moving so fast and information has become just another commodity so we take what we can get while we can get it and move on towards the next thing. We tend to forget that the internet isn't the alpha and omega as far as information is concerned. It's just another piece of it.
For all the millions of webpages out there that hold the minute details on seemingly any subject, there are millions more that just don't exist. Your favorite show as a child may have a dozen fan sites. That little-known painter has several blogs being written about their work. It seems that no matter how obscure something is, there is a webpage dedicated to it where someone believes it to be the most underrated thing in existence. The thing is though that no matter how detailed a website may be, there will always be pieces missing. No single location has all the information, regardless of the claims that websites like to make. The reason for this is simple. There are just sometimes that haven't been translated to the digital age.
I was at a used bookstore recently and there was a note on one of the shelves that stated ninety percent of all the books that have been written are no longer in print. In 2008 there were around 550,000 books published. Now ten percent of those still being in print is a large number, but it's obviously a small fraction of what was once available. The internet is able to keep information on those books that have long since been out of print, however, it's clear that not every book ever published in getting its own webpage. As the years go by it becomes more difficult to gather that information in the first place because the source is harder to find. Eventually the book written in 1984 that had a small publishing run will become all but forgotten except by those who had a part in it. For the rest of us it's as though it never existed. That small gap in knowledge may seem insignificant at first glance, but what if that book had the information you were looking for? What if it clarified an answer you had already found somewhere else? That's just a single book written in a single year that was overlooked. Think about what other holes are out there that the internet hasn't gotten around to filling because people simply don't know about them.
When I was young the internet was still a new idea so when I was in school and we had to research a topic it meant going to the library. You would look up every book or article on whatever you happened to be researching and used it as the basis for your project. Today you may be lucky enough to type something in and have a dedicated Wikipedia article written about it, complete with sources that most of us don't bother to check. In you look really hard you may even find the subject of your paper already written out in a way that requires very little work on your part. Strangely enough the differences between going to your local library and using the internet are small. There is a basic assumption that the information you're getting is both correct and complete. Using the internet as the sole source is the same as using your local library as singular place to get your information. While they both may be full of useful knowledge, it's hard to know what you're missing. The library may just be too small to hold all the books you'd need. Or the internet article you found may have been written by someone who only had access to their local library. Or the writer used the internet as their sole source and distilled down already watered down information even further. Using just the internet as the primary source is no different than going to the local library and figuring every book needed is within its walls.
True research is probably hard and time consuming. Reading every book. Viewing every internet page. Digging up dissertations and unpublished papers. Finding the book that has been out of print for decades. Talking to someone who has first or second hand knowledge of whatever you're looking for. All of these help to fill in the gaps, but there may always be that little bit of lingering doubt that something is missing. How can you ever know that you have the whole story unless you were there?
For all the millions of webpages out there that hold the minute details on seemingly any subject, there are millions more that just don't exist. Your favorite show as a child may have a dozen fan sites. That little-known painter has several blogs being written about their work. It seems that no matter how obscure something is, there is a webpage dedicated to it where someone believes it to be the most underrated thing in existence. The thing is though that no matter how detailed a website may be, there will always be pieces missing. No single location has all the information, regardless of the claims that websites like to make. The reason for this is simple. There are just sometimes that haven't been translated to the digital age.
I was at a used bookstore recently and there was a note on one of the shelves that stated ninety percent of all the books that have been written are no longer in print. In 2008 there were around 550,000 books published. Now ten percent of those still being in print is a large number, but it's obviously a small fraction of what was once available. The internet is able to keep information on those books that have long since been out of print, however, it's clear that not every book ever published in getting its own webpage. As the years go by it becomes more difficult to gather that information in the first place because the source is harder to find. Eventually the book written in 1984 that had a small publishing run will become all but forgotten except by those who had a part in it. For the rest of us it's as though it never existed. That small gap in knowledge may seem insignificant at first glance, but what if that book had the information you were looking for? What if it clarified an answer you had already found somewhere else? That's just a single book written in a single year that was overlooked. Think about what other holes are out there that the internet hasn't gotten around to filling because people simply don't know about them.
When I was young the internet was still a new idea so when I was in school and we had to research a topic it meant going to the library. You would look up every book or article on whatever you happened to be researching and used it as the basis for your project. Today you may be lucky enough to type something in and have a dedicated Wikipedia article written about it, complete with sources that most of us don't bother to check. In you look really hard you may even find the subject of your paper already written out in a way that requires very little work on your part. Strangely enough the differences between going to your local library and using the internet are small. There is a basic assumption that the information you're getting is both correct and complete. Using the internet as the sole source is the same as using your local library as singular place to get your information. While they both may be full of useful knowledge, it's hard to know what you're missing. The library may just be too small to hold all the books you'd need. Or the internet article you found may have been written by someone who only had access to their local library. Or the writer used the internet as their sole source and distilled down already watered down information even further. Using just the internet as the primary source is no different than going to the local library and figuring every book needed is within its walls.
True research is probably hard and time consuming. Reading every book. Viewing every internet page. Digging up dissertations and unpublished papers. Finding the book that has been out of print for decades. Talking to someone who has first or second hand knowledge of whatever you're looking for. All of these help to fill in the gaps, but there may always be that little bit of lingering doubt that something is missing. How can you ever know that you have the whole story unless you were there?
Thursday, March 10, 2011
On Missing the Point
I enjoy a lot of different things. In some cases though I enjoy the idea of something more than the actual implementation of it. For me I can see the potential of an idea and how for me it's fallen short of what it could have been. With things like movies and books the ultimate purpose is to make money. Sure it's also to tell a story, but without money being made it's unlikely anyone would be able to maintain telling them for very long. So I've decided to write down some of the things I wish had been done with various ideas out there. If you're not a fan of movies or comic books most of this entry will seem fairly pointless to you (it may seem pointless even if you do like those things), but it's my site and I get to decide what I randomly write about. With that, let's begin:
Darth Vader/Anakin Skywalker
When we were first introduced to Darth Vader we were shown evil personified. He was ruthless and powerful. Those around him were afraid of him because he had mythical abilities that allowed him to kill with a thought. As the story went on we learned that he was the tip of the sword for the Emperor, who may have been the only person more evil than Vader. In the end though we're shown that even the most lost soul has a chance at redemption. Granted Vader killed hundreds, probably thousands during his time as the Emperor's enforcer and a last minute attempt at salvation kind of mimics that of Christianity where as long as you ask for forgiveness then everything will be OK. The story of this character could have ended there, but instead we're thrown back in time so we can see what Vader was like before. Now when this is done it's generally a good idea to have a reason to show what someone was like before and how life turned them into a monster. With the prequels this was done with all the subtly of a sledgehammer through a plate glass window. Based on what Kenobi said in the very first film we got the impression that Anakin was a good person and was killed by Vader. At this point it hadn't really been established that Anakin and Vader were one person and that's fine. If you think about it they really should be considered two different people.
Instead of a whiny, reckless ingrate of a character, Anakin should have been more in line with what the young Kenobi was like. In addition to this Kenobi should have been more like Qui-Gon, a sort of loose cannon, who after a great failure becomes much more reserved and filled with guilt. Which means you could have done away completely with the actual Qui-Gon character as he wouldn't have been needed. So Anakin is young and inexperienced, but very powerful in the ways of the Force. By his very nature he is a good person who is trying to do the right thing. Incidentally there is no great prophecy about bringing balance to the Force. A single character doesn't need to be more mythical at every point in their life. This isn't Jesus we're talking about. Anakin should have been just a Jedi, granted a very good one, but nothing extra special about him that would have had the entire universe holding their breath to see what he did next. Kenobi tried his best to teach Anakin the ways of the Force in his own way, but it was Kenobi's recklessness that lead to situations where Anakin was ill-equipped to deal with the slow creep of the dark influence that was growing. There are points in everyone's life where we're given opportunities to do something selfish or just plain wrong. Our parents can only hope that they've taught us well enough that we make the right choice. It doesn't always happen and unfortunately for some once the wrong decision is made there is no recovery. Sometimes in life we're only given one chance to learn a lesson and if we fail then we only serve as warning to others. This is how it should have been with Anakin because unlike us he would have the added pressure of the dark side of the Force urging him along. I equate the usage of the dark side to be like a drug. Once it's used you're forever left with the knowledge of how it felt. Like a heroin user they're forever chasing that experience. Anakin being young and trained by someone who tended to cut corners only made him more likely to chase that feeling. It's true this could be seen as making Vader essentially a drug addict, but it would explain how the dark side took hold of his soul and twisted it so much that he ceased to exist as Anakin and become a creature who's only purpose was to travel further into the darkness.
Instead we were given a crybaby who was easily tricked into murdering children in some vague hope that he could stop those he loved from dying. It makes no sense because he killed or tried to kill everyone he cared about and the Emperor, who made the promise in the first place, never actually came through with his part of the deal. As far as we know they weren't spending their off hours reading books titled "Stopping Death: The Power In All of Us". No, they were busy crushing star systems and mind-choking people. At no point in all of what we are shown was it indicated that Anakin was stupid. Sure he was an idiot about most things, but surprisingly not dumb. So once he realized that he was duped into killing everything he cared about he should have taken out the Emperor. At some point during the twenty years he was wearing the mask he would have put two and two together. Besides at that point what's the worst thing that could happen if he failed? He was already burned and limbless. His wife was dead. His best friend was exiled and the Jedi order was completely destroyed. Vader became like a battered spouse who returned back his abuser because he couldn't break away. It kind of takes away the impact to the scourge of the universe.
Hellraiser
In the original Hellbound Heart novella we're shown the cenobites. They are these otherworldly creatures who blur the lines between pleasure and pain. In fact the whole point of the Lamentation Configuration is that it's found by those who seek the extreme in experience, good or bad. With the Hellraiser movie we're shown these mutilated humanoids who delight in torturing people for eternity. It's a horror movie so we're supposed to be horrified and all the blood and pain. There is a key element missing though and that's of pleasure. We've all laughed so hard it hurts. If you're lucky you've experienced such pleasure that it's bordered on painful. Hell in some cases a little pain just adds to the pleasure. Now take that concept and multiply it a million times to a point where pleasure and pain become a singular experience. I've heard of people who are suspended from hooks eventually transcend the pain and reach a whole other state. So it's possible to start on either spectrum and get to the other side. The thing is those people who are hanging from hooks in their flesh aren't torn apart because that's really just the pain side of things.
When we're young and we get our first taste of something sweet we want more of it. As we grow older our tongue's ability to perceive flavors diminishes so what was once sweet loses a little bit of its burst in our mouths. So we have to move onto something with a little more kick. Or to go into the gutter a bit, someone could pick up a magazine with pictures of naked people. Maybe that's all they need, but in some cases they take the next step. They want to see those naked people having sex. Then the sex gets more graphic. Sure the pictures of naked people are nice, but we've become desensitized to its impact and could need the more extreme images to achieve the same level of arousal as before. With those in the Hellraiser world they have spent a lifetime slowly ratcheting up what they need. They've seen and done everything in the worlds pleasure and pain. These creatures from another dimension would show a person a world where there is no in between. The experiences would last forever and given enough time a person would lose themselves to it completely. In the movie it's treated as hell because instead of lakes of fire people are flayed with hooks and knives endlessly. It's supposed to be this place of eternal torment and therefor might as well be hell. Instead it should have focused on how those who became trapped there no longer thought of themselves as trapped. They wanted and even needed those experiences. Plus the individuals who called the Cenobites weren't your every day person who drinks beer on the weekends and watches porn. These are the kind of people who have tasted human flesh. They've pushed their bodies to every limit they could think of. In a way this world has nothing left to offer them. The Cenobites would take them to the next level, whether they wanted to go or not. Hellraiser should be a story about the depths man goes to in order experience everything and not just another horror flick where a sadistic bad man slices people up so that we squirm in our seats at the sight of all that blood.
Spider-Man
I think it's pretty safe to assume everyone more or less knows the story of Spider-Man's origins. He's bit by a radioactive (or genetically modified) spider and gets spider-like abilities. At first he does what a lot of us would do and tries to use these new powers to get ahead. This quickly becomes a heavy-handed lesson on responsibility because in a moment of selfishness Peter Parker lets some random robber escape. Of course this being New York City that same exact robber makes his ways from Manhattan to Queens and just so happens to kill Peter's uncle. Oh if only he had used his powers for good then his Uncle Ben wouldn't have been shot. Driven by guilt Peter vows to never again be so irresponsible and makes it his mission to fight crime. Fast forward fifty years (yes it's been that long) and the character is still driven by that same event. Now each of us has moments in our lives that change us. There are choices we've made that we regret. Hopefully not too many of them result in the death of someone we care about, but still there are things that haunt us all. Let's face it though, few of us are defined by a single event. I'm not saying it's impossible, but our lives are a complex series of events that are constantly shaping us. Things that were once earth-shattering eventually fade and become just another memory. They are just another aspect of who we've become. It's not our only defining characteristic though, unless we choose to let it be.
Somehow though the writers of Spider-Man keep circling back over and over to the same general theme. No matter what great things may be for Spider-Man, he has to be knocked back down. It's all a variation on that first story where he's punished for not being a saint. I know it's a comic book, but it's a terrible message to be pushing onto people. Yes, he can stick to walls and has super strength. He's using the abilities that were given to him. Is that really any different from how each of us are born? People like to say "All men are created equal", but it's just not true. Some people are better at physical activities. Some people are smarter. Some people are born with money and opportunities. We take what we're given and make the most of our lives. You can't blame someone who has 160 IQ from going out and becoming rich by using their mind. Just like you can't blame someone for using their natural abilities in sports to make a living at playing a game. Now you might say that Peter was given his powers through an accident, but really that's how each of us gets our own abilities. We didn't get to chose to be smart or strong or a sexual dynamo. It was given to us. So why are readers constantly shown that any time something good happens to Spider-Man that it must be immediately followed up with him being shoved back to where he started?
The reason readers liked the character is that he felt somewhat real. They could relate to how a regular guy dealt with sudden power. We all like to believe that if we had his powers that we would suddenly be able to do so much more with our lives. The comic showed that while the powers were great, they also brought their own unique problems with them. Peter had all the same kinds of problems we had at his age, but he also had to worry about balancing his secret life with his normal one. The secret identity is a staple for the super hero genre. There is a constant struggle to hide who they are from everyone. They don't tell their friends because it could put them in danger. They don't tell their enemies for the same reason. So the main character is hiding from everyone. Some writers decide to get it out of the way and move onto other types of stories. They may gloss over the fact that the rich billionaire dresses up in a cape and prowls the city at night and no one seems to notice the bags under his eyes in the day. Or they may just come right out and reveal who they are. The main argument for a secret identity is that if an enemy ever found out they could attack a loved one. Yes that could happen, but police and government officials operate without secret identities. There is an element of danger from those who would be desperate enough to attack family. It doesn't stop police from doing their job though. Not every criminal is going to kill an FBI agent's family if given the opportunity so why would every super criminal automatically go attack Aunt May's house if they figured out Peter Parker is Spider-Man?
In a bold move Marvel actually had Peter Parker reveal himself to the world as Spider-Man. Sure he was attacked and general mayhem ensued, but no more than was expected for Spider-Man, who already was hounded by perpetual bad luck. At the time it seemed like an interesting new direction for the character. Like with many things in the comic book world, it was short-lived. Not only did they reverse his reveal to the general public, they made sure no one anywhere knew who he was. The genie was back in the bottle and the character was right back to where he was before. It's an endless loop of worrying about Aunt May, trying to sell pictures of Spider-Man, and hiding his secret identity. The writers keep returning to these basic ideas because they feel that by doing so it keeps the character accessible to readers both old and new. The thing is that Spider-Man is basically Archie. He never grows beyond his original incarnation and it's no surprise that most readers eventually grow tired of this predictable trend and go off to read something else, safe in the knowledge that they could not read a Spider-Man comic for years without really missing all that much. Imagine if television or movies were like that. By the end of the story you're right back at the beginning, meaning everything in between was pointless. It's an episode of Gilligan's Island, but in comic book form.
Darth Vader/Anakin Skywalker
When we were first introduced to Darth Vader we were shown evil personified. He was ruthless and powerful. Those around him were afraid of him because he had mythical abilities that allowed him to kill with a thought. As the story went on we learned that he was the tip of the sword for the Emperor, who may have been the only person more evil than Vader. In the end though we're shown that even the most lost soul has a chance at redemption. Granted Vader killed hundreds, probably thousands during his time as the Emperor's enforcer and a last minute attempt at salvation kind of mimics that of Christianity where as long as you ask for forgiveness then everything will be OK. The story of this character could have ended there, but instead we're thrown back in time so we can see what Vader was like before. Now when this is done it's generally a good idea to have a reason to show what someone was like before and how life turned them into a monster. With the prequels this was done with all the subtly of a sledgehammer through a plate glass window. Based on what Kenobi said in the very first film we got the impression that Anakin was a good person and was killed by Vader. At this point it hadn't really been established that Anakin and Vader were one person and that's fine. If you think about it they really should be considered two different people.
Instead of a whiny, reckless ingrate of a character, Anakin should have been more in line with what the young Kenobi was like. In addition to this Kenobi should have been more like Qui-Gon, a sort of loose cannon, who after a great failure becomes much more reserved and filled with guilt. Which means you could have done away completely with the actual Qui-Gon character as he wouldn't have been needed. So Anakin is young and inexperienced, but very powerful in the ways of the Force. By his very nature he is a good person who is trying to do the right thing. Incidentally there is no great prophecy about bringing balance to the Force. A single character doesn't need to be more mythical at every point in their life. This isn't Jesus we're talking about. Anakin should have been just a Jedi, granted a very good one, but nothing extra special about him that would have had the entire universe holding their breath to see what he did next. Kenobi tried his best to teach Anakin the ways of the Force in his own way, but it was Kenobi's recklessness that lead to situations where Anakin was ill-equipped to deal with the slow creep of the dark influence that was growing. There are points in everyone's life where we're given opportunities to do something selfish or just plain wrong. Our parents can only hope that they've taught us well enough that we make the right choice. It doesn't always happen and unfortunately for some once the wrong decision is made there is no recovery. Sometimes in life we're only given one chance to learn a lesson and if we fail then we only serve as warning to others. This is how it should have been with Anakin because unlike us he would have the added pressure of the dark side of the Force urging him along. I equate the usage of the dark side to be like a drug. Once it's used you're forever left with the knowledge of how it felt. Like a heroin user they're forever chasing that experience. Anakin being young and trained by someone who tended to cut corners only made him more likely to chase that feeling. It's true this could be seen as making Vader essentially a drug addict, but it would explain how the dark side took hold of his soul and twisted it so much that he ceased to exist as Anakin and become a creature who's only purpose was to travel further into the darkness.
Instead we were given a crybaby who was easily tricked into murdering children in some vague hope that he could stop those he loved from dying. It makes no sense because he killed or tried to kill everyone he cared about and the Emperor, who made the promise in the first place, never actually came through with his part of the deal. As far as we know they weren't spending their off hours reading books titled "Stopping Death: The Power In All of Us". No, they were busy crushing star systems and mind-choking people. At no point in all of what we are shown was it indicated that Anakin was stupid. Sure he was an idiot about most things, but surprisingly not dumb. So once he realized that he was duped into killing everything he cared about he should have taken out the Emperor. At some point during the twenty years he was wearing the mask he would have put two and two together. Besides at that point what's the worst thing that could happen if he failed? He was already burned and limbless. His wife was dead. His best friend was exiled and the Jedi order was completely destroyed. Vader became like a battered spouse who returned back his abuser because he couldn't break away. It kind of takes away the impact to the scourge of the universe.
Hellraiser
In the original Hellbound Heart novella we're shown the cenobites. They are these otherworldly creatures who blur the lines between pleasure and pain. In fact the whole point of the Lamentation Configuration is that it's found by those who seek the extreme in experience, good or bad. With the Hellraiser movie we're shown these mutilated humanoids who delight in torturing people for eternity. It's a horror movie so we're supposed to be horrified and all the blood and pain. There is a key element missing though and that's of pleasure. We've all laughed so hard it hurts. If you're lucky you've experienced such pleasure that it's bordered on painful. Hell in some cases a little pain just adds to the pleasure. Now take that concept and multiply it a million times to a point where pleasure and pain become a singular experience. I've heard of people who are suspended from hooks eventually transcend the pain and reach a whole other state. So it's possible to start on either spectrum and get to the other side. The thing is those people who are hanging from hooks in their flesh aren't torn apart because that's really just the pain side of things.
When we're young and we get our first taste of something sweet we want more of it. As we grow older our tongue's ability to perceive flavors diminishes so what was once sweet loses a little bit of its burst in our mouths. So we have to move onto something with a little more kick. Or to go into the gutter a bit, someone could pick up a magazine with pictures of naked people. Maybe that's all they need, but in some cases they take the next step. They want to see those naked people having sex. Then the sex gets more graphic. Sure the pictures of naked people are nice, but we've become desensitized to its impact and could need the more extreme images to achieve the same level of arousal as before. With those in the Hellraiser world they have spent a lifetime slowly ratcheting up what they need. They've seen and done everything in the worlds pleasure and pain. These creatures from another dimension would show a person a world where there is no in between. The experiences would last forever and given enough time a person would lose themselves to it completely. In the movie it's treated as hell because instead of lakes of fire people are flayed with hooks and knives endlessly. It's supposed to be this place of eternal torment and therefor might as well be hell. Instead it should have focused on how those who became trapped there no longer thought of themselves as trapped. They wanted and even needed those experiences. Plus the individuals who called the Cenobites weren't your every day person who drinks beer on the weekends and watches porn. These are the kind of people who have tasted human flesh. They've pushed their bodies to every limit they could think of. In a way this world has nothing left to offer them. The Cenobites would take them to the next level, whether they wanted to go or not. Hellraiser should be a story about the depths man goes to in order experience everything and not just another horror flick where a sadistic bad man slices people up so that we squirm in our seats at the sight of all that blood.
Spider-Man
I think it's pretty safe to assume everyone more or less knows the story of Spider-Man's origins. He's bit by a radioactive (or genetically modified) spider and gets spider-like abilities. At first he does what a lot of us would do and tries to use these new powers to get ahead. This quickly becomes a heavy-handed lesson on responsibility because in a moment of selfishness Peter Parker lets some random robber escape. Of course this being New York City that same exact robber makes his ways from Manhattan to Queens and just so happens to kill Peter's uncle. Oh if only he had used his powers for good then his Uncle Ben wouldn't have been shot. Driven by guilt Peter vows to never again be so irresponsible and makes it his mission to fight crime. Fast forward fifty years (yes it's been that long) and the character is still driven by that same event. Now each of us has moments in our lives that change us. There are choices we've made that we regret. Hopefully not too many of them result in the death of someone we care about, but still there are things that haunt us all. Let's face it though, few of us are defined by a single event. I'm not saying it's impossible, but our lives are a complex series of events that are constantly shaping us. Things that were once earth-shattering eventually fade and become just another memory. They are just another aspect of who we've become. It's not our only defining characteristic though, unless we choose to let it be.
Somehow though the writers of Spider-Man keep circling back over and over to the same general theme. No matter what great things may be for Spider-Man, he has to be knocked back down. It's all a variation on that first story where he's punished for not being a saint. I know it's a comic book, but it's a terrible message to be pushing onto people. Yes, he can stick to walls and has super strength. He's using the abilities that were given to him. Is that really any different from how each of us are born? People like to say "All men are created equal", but it's just not true. Some people are better at physical activities. Some people are smarter. Some people are born with money and opportunities. We take what we're given and make the most of our lives. You can't blame someone who has 160 IQ from going out and becoming rich by using their mind. Just like you can't blame someone for using their natural abilities in sports to make a living at playing a game. Now you might say that Peter was given his powers through an accident, but really that's how each of us gets our own abilities. We didn't get to chose to be smart or strong or a sexual dynamo. It was given to us. So why are readers constantly shown that any time something good happens to Spider-Man that it must be immediately followed up with him being shoved back to where he started?
The reason readers liked the character is that he felt somewhat real. They could relate to how a regular guy dealt with sudden power. We all like to believe that if we had his powers that we would suddenly be able to do so much more with our lives. The comic showed that while the powers were great, they also brought their own unique problems with them. Peter had all the same kinds of problems we had at his age, but he also had to worry about balancing his secret life with his normal one. The secret identity is a staple for the super hero genre. There is a constant struggle to hide who they are from everyone. They don't tell their friends because it could put them in danger. They don't tell their enemies for the same reason. So the main character is hiding from everyone. Some writers decide to get it out of the way and move onto other types of stories. They may gloss over the fact that the rich billionaire dresses up in a cape and prowls the city at night and no one seems to notice the bags under his eyes in the day. Or they may just come right out and reveal who they are. The main argument for a secret identity is that if an enemy ever found out they could attack a loved one. Yes that could happen, but police and government officials operate without secret identities. There is an element of danger from those who would be desperate enough to attack family. It doesn't stop police from doing their job though. Not every criminal is going to kill an FBI agent's family if given the opportunity so why would every super criminal automatically go attack Aunt May's house if they figured out Peter Parker is Spider-Man?
In a bold move Marvel actually had Peter Parker reveal himself to the world as Spider-Man. Sure he was attacked and general mayhem ensued, but no more than was expected for Spider-Man, who already was hounded by perpetual bad luck. At the time it seemed like an interesting new direction for the character. Like with many things in the comic book world, it was short-lived. Not only did they reverse his reveal to the general public, they made sure no one anywhere knew who he was. The genie was back in the bottle and the character was right back to where he was before. It's an endless loop of worrying about Aunt May, trying to sell pictures of Spider-Man, and hiding his secret identity. The writers keep returning to these basic ideas because they feel that by doing so it keeps the character accessible to readers both old and new. The thing is that Spider-Man is basically Archie. He never grows beyond his original incarnation and it's no surprise that most readers eventually grow tired of this predictable trend and go off to read something else, safe in the knowledge that they could not read a Spider-Man comic for years without really missing all that much. Imagine if television or movies were like that. By the end of the story you're right back at the beginning, meaning everything in between was pointless. It's an episode of Gilligan's Island, but in comic book form.
Wednesday, March 9, 2011
On Crazy
They say if you're crazy then you won't know you're crazy. You'll just assume that what you're thinking is perfectly normal. I doubt that's always the case, but it's probably strangely comforting to most people out there who have bizarre thoughts and hope they haven't crossed over into lunacy. Still it's probably hard to know exactly at what point a person goes sailing off the edge of sanity. Like many things in our lives, it's a subtle change over time. Just look at how you think about things now. You probably didn't always have the same exact thoughts meaning your current point of view could be a relatively recent development in the way your mind works. Sometime in the past you believed something that you don't anymore. You may not even know at what point you changed your mind. I'm not talking about something like the existence of Santa. It's usually something more fundamental in the way you perceive the world that shifts throughout your life. Next thing we know it seems like it's always been that way and we accept our new reality as fact and move on with our lives, hardly remembering how it was before.
The thing is we tend to take a lot of what constitutes reality for granted. Never mind the fact that reality itself is hard to define. So in a way reality becomes this mutually shared experience that everyone sort of agrees upon after the fact. While it's happening though it's different for everyone. The same event is viewed in diverse ways and after it's been processed by everyone we come to a general consensus about what happened. That is assuming everyone's perception isn't skewed in some drastic way. Imagine if you woke up tomorrow and everyone except you believed that the sky was green. Not only that, but in their minds it's always been that way. The idea of a blue sky is unheard of. Now for you you have memories of a blue sky and your personal reality is suddenly counter to the shared reality. In that situation who is right? How do you know you haven't taken the first step towards going crazy?
In movies there are those times when a character finds themselves in a situation that defies logic. They're talking to someone who isn't there. They feel insects crawling over their body, even though no one else can see them. While we're watching these scenes we can't help but ask the question "How would you not realize what you're thinking is crazy?" On the outside it seems obvious that what's happening isn't real. Why would aliens from the planet Zersus-7 be trying to read your thoughts through your toaster? When you say it out loud it sounds crazy. To the person it's happening to though it seems real. It may seem crazy to them at first, but it doesn't take long for something to become the new truth. Like I said at the beginning, we've all had beliefs change over the course of our lives. We believe that our thoughts are the truth. To someone else it may seem irrational, but for us it's our reality. Each of us knows a person who has done something that made no sense. Most of us know there have been times that we ourselves have done something that made no sense. At the time it seemed right. Later we come to our senses and realize that our thought process was off in the weeds. What if we don't ever come to our senses though? What happens if despite all indicators to the opposite, we continue down that chain of thought? The people around us my start to question our ability to navigate reality.
Of course there are times though when our brains try to put the brakes on something that seems to be bordering on false. Again in the movies they like to do this when some unbelievable situation comes smashing into a person's reality. The waitress is suddenly being chased by an evil cyborg from the future. Aliens have invaded and destroyed every major city in America. The dead have risen and have a taste for human flesh. These are all situations where initially the mind is going to reject the premise and try to find a more reasonable explanation. How do you know what you're experiencing is real? Sure you just saw robotic overlords set the ocean on fire, but the same brain that sees that could believe that you're actually Napoleon returned to life in order to finally win at Waterloo. How can we ever truly distinguish what's really happening compared to what's happening within our mind? We hope that someone else can confirm what we believe to be true and that more people accept it as fact. It's when someone's perception is in the minority that it gets labeled as crazy. We like to believe that the majority opinion is the right one when it comes to the acceptance of reality. If each of us is experiencing our own version of the world at any given moment then how can there ever really be one unified reality? Does that make us all a little bit crazy to someone else?
The thing is we tend to take a lot of what constitutes reality for granted. Never mind the fact that reality itself is hard to define. So in a way reality becomes this mutually shared experience that everyone sort of agrees upon after the fact. While it's happening though it's different for everyone. The same event is viewed in diverse ways and after it's been processed by everyone we come to a general consensus about what happened. That is assuming everyone's perception isn't skewed in some drastic way. Imagine if you woke up tomorrow and everyone except you believed that the sky was green. Not only that, but in their minds it's always been that way. The idea of a blue sky is unheard of. Now for you you have memories of a blue sky and your personal reality is suddenly counter to the shared reality. In that situation who is right? How do you know you haven't taken the first step towards going crazy?
In movies there are those times when a character finds themselves in a situation that defies logic. They're talking to someone who isn't there. They feel insects crawling over their body, even though no one else can see them. While we're watching these scenes we can't help but ask the question "How would you not realize what you're thinking is crazy?" On the outside it seems obvious that what's happening isn't real. Why would aliens from the planet Zersus-7 be trying to read your thoughts through your toaster? When you say it out loud it sounds crazy. To the person it's happening to though it seems real. It may seem crazy to them at first, but it doesn't take long for something to become the new truth. Like I said at the beginning, we've all had beliefs change over the course of our lives. We believe that our thoughts are the truth. To someone else it may seem irrational, but for us it's our reality. Each of us knows a person who has done something that made no sense. Most of us know there have been times that we ourselves have done something that made no sense. At the time it seemed right. Later we come to our senses and realize that our thought process was off in the weeds. What if we don't ever come to our senses though? What happens if despite all indicators to the opposite, we continue down that chain of thought? The people around us my start to question our ability to navigate reality.
Of course there are times though when our brains try to put the brakes on something that seems to be bordering on false. Again in the movies they like to do this when some unbelievable situation comes smashing into a person's reality. The waitress is suddenly being chased by an evil cyborg from the future. Aliens have invaded and destroyed every major city in America. The dead have risen and have a taste for human flesh. These are all situations where initially the mind is going to reject the premise and try to find a more reasonable explanation. How do you know what you're experiencing is real? Sure you just saw robotic overlords set the ocean on fire, but the same brain that sees that could believe that you're actually Napoleon returned to life in order to finally win at Waterloo. How can we ever truly distinguish what's really happening compared to what's happening within our mind? We hope that someone else can confirm what we believe to be true and that more people accept it as fact. It's when someone's perception is in the minority that it gets labeled as crazy. We like to believe that the majority opinion is the right one when it comes to the acceptance of reality. If each of us is experiencing our own version of the world at any given moment then how can there ever really be one unified reality? Does that make us all a little bit crazy to someone else?
Friday, March 4, 2011
On Divergence
There have been several movies where some mysterious stranger appears and gives the main character a chance to change a singular moment in their life. Then they get to see how different things would have been if they had gone left instead of right. What would life be like if they had married that girl they loved in college? How would it be if they had not chosen money over family? Usually in the movie it's done to help show the main character the importance of what's missing in their life or what they only think is missing. Each of us has those moments where it's very obvious that a choice was made and our life went down one path rather than another. Life is made up of nearly endless choices and it's hard to know how the seemingly little choices could have a big effect on our lives. Still there are those big choices that would have lead us to drastically different places, if only we had decided to choose something else. The thing is that those changes in what we choose could have erased the life we knew. Which also means that there are an almost unlimited number of lives out there that we never lived.
Now I suppose it's a moot point to even think about because none of us can ever really go back and take a different route. Even if we're given a chance to retry something it's already tainted by our knowledge of at least one potential outcome. In that regard we only ever get a chance to make a choice once. Anything after that is a different choice because not only is the situation technically different, so are we by that point. There are those that say knowing what they know now, they'd still do it the same way, but again that's only because we know that even when times are difficult that things will eventually work themselves out. Every one of our decisions and experiences create the person that we are at this precise moment. Changing even one of those is essentially changing us in some way.
At least for me I start slowly working my way backwards as I examine the various divergence points in my life. What if I hadn't taken that phone call a few months ago? I wouldn't be where I am now. What if I had never quit my job to move to the desert for school? I could be somewhere wondering what my life would have been like if I had taken a chance and ditching the known for the unknown. What if I had picked love instead of the practical? My life would be a million miles away from where it is at this moment. The questions can go on forever because there will always be those points where we're aware of the choice we could have made. Or no matter those choices I could have ended up where I am now. Granted I wouldn't be the same person I am now, but maybe we are where we're supposed to be and no matter our choices we end up in the same spot eventually, only the journey to that point is different.
If there are an infinite number of possibilities all existing at the same time, then it's possible that somewhere out there a version of yourself is wondering what life would be like if they had picked the choices you went with. That would mean you're living the life someone wishes they had but can never have.
Now I suppose it's a moot point to even think about because none of us can ever really go back and take a different route. Even if we're given a chance to retry something it's already tainted by our knowledge of at least one potential outcome. In that regard we only ever get a chance to make a choice once. Anything after that is a different choice because not only is the situation technically different, so are we by that point. There are those that say knowing what they know now, they'd still do it the same way, but again that's only because we know that even when times are difficult that things will eventually work themselves out. Every one of our decisions and experiences create the person that we are at this precise moment. Changing even one of those is essentially changing us in some way.
At least for me I start slowly working my way backwards as I examine the various divergence points in my life. What if I hadn't taken that phone call a few months ago? I wouldn't be where I am now. What if I had never quit my job to move to the desert for school? I could be somewhere wondering what my life would have been like if I had taken a chance and ditching the known for the unknown. What if I had picked love instead of the practical? My life would be a million miles away from where it is at this moment. The questions can go on forever because there will always be those points where we're aware of the choice we could have made. Or no matter those choices I could have ended up where I am now. Granted I wouldn't be the same person I am now, but maybe we are where we're supposed to be and no matter our choices we end up in the same spot eventually, only the journey to that point is different.
If there are an infinite number of possibilities all existing at the same time, then it's possible that somewhere out there a version of yourself is wondering what life would be like if they had picked the choices you went with. That would mean you're living the life someone wishes they had but can never have.
Thursday, March 3, 2011
On Sleep
As a little kid I hated going to sleep. No matter how much got done during the day it felt like I was surrendering the day by going to sleep. I think a part of me still feels that way. I find myself looking at the clock and calculating how much time I have left in the day before that good night. If I stay up another two hours I'll only get six hours of sleep, but it will be worth it because those two hours are spent awake. Somehow that's a victory against the losing battle we have with daily unconsciousness. In a way it's kind of strange that our bodies can't operate more than a few days without going into low power mode for several hours. We aren't the model for efficiency. While most of us get various amounts of sleep every night, we've all been in situations where we've simply gone without for extended periods of time. The longer we go without the more surreal the world becomes. Eventually no amount of fighting it will stop us from closing our eyes.
There are a lot of theories about what's actually going on when we sleep. The body obviously needs to recharge and does so by essentially paralyzing itself for hours. Our mind also needs rest and yet the brain never really stops working. We dream. What are dreams though? Are they just a random collection of thoughts being endlessly sorted by the mind? Some believe our brain works on thoughts even when we're not aware of it and dreaming is just an extension of that after hours work. That might be true in some cases, but it doesn't always explain the nature of our dreams. Is it possible our minds are operating on another level of consciousness while we're sleeping? If our bodies are paralyzed and our minds are running the show without us then where are we during all this? Everything that we are could be broken down to electrical impulses passing through neural pathways, but what if we're something more than the sum of our parts? What if during those hours that we're sleeping we escape this reality, even if it's only moments at a time? Since we're not really here while this is all happening then it may be possible that we're somewhere else.
If we actually do leave this place for another what's to say that wherever we end up isn't some place we could return to by choice? I've talked about reality before and we've come to assume that all this is the only reality there is. Maybe it is, but what happens to our reality when we're sleeping? We've all had dreams that feel real. Some of these stay with us long after we've woken up. They become as real as any memory. For us they are a memory even if they technically only happened within our mind. Maybe there's no difference as far as our mind is concerned. Whatever we perceive to be real is in fact real for us. So the dreamworld that we create is as real as Zimbabwe. Maybe the dream is more real because we've experienced it, while many of us haven't actually been to Zimbabwe, so that far off place becomes the dream. As I mentioned our bodies aren't the best examples of an efficient machine. We're forced to stop and rest and yet when we do things are still going. So maybe there is something more to our need to sleep. It could be that we sleep not for physical rest like we believe, but rather rest from reality. Is it possible our minds can only operate on this plane of existence for limited times before they're forced to go somewhere else? What if what we think of as reality is really just where our mind takes us to rest from something else? So which is the dream?
There are a lot of theories about what's actually going on when we sleep. The body obviously needs to recharge and does so by essentially paralyzing itself for hours. Our mind also needs rest and yet the brain never really stops working. We dream. What are dreams though? Are they just a random collection of thoughts being endlessly sorted by the mind? Some believe our brain works on thoughts even when we're not aware of it and dreaming is just an extension of that after hours work. That might be true in some cases, but it doesn't always explain the nature of our dreams. Is it possible our minds are operating on another level of consciousness while we're sleeping? If our bodies are paralyzed and our minds are running the show without us then where are we during all this? Everything that we are could be broken down to electrical impulses passing through neural pathways, but what if we're something more than the sum of our parts? What if during those hours that we're sleeping we escape this reality, even if it's only moments at a time? Since we're not really here while this is all happening then it may be possible that we're somewhere else.
If we actually do leave this place for another what's to say that wherever we end up isn't some place we could return to by choice? I've talked about reality before and we've come to assume that all this is the only reality there is. Maybe it is, but what happens to our reality when we're sleeping? We've all had dreams that feel real. Some of these stay with us long after we've woken up. They become as real as any memory. For us they are a memory even if they technically only happened within our mind. Maybe there's no difference as far as our mind is concerned. Whatever we perceive to be real is in fact real for us. So the dreamworld that we create is as real as Zimbabwe. Maybe the dream is more real because we've experienced it, while many of us haven't actually been to Zimbabwe, so that far off place becomes the dream. As I mentioned our bodies aren't the best examples of an efficient machine. We're forced to stop and rest and yet when we do things are still going. So maybe there is something more to our need to sleep. It could be that we sleep not for physical rest like we believe, but rather rest from reality. Is it possible our minds can only operate on this plane of existence for limited times before they're forced to go somewhere else? What if what we think of as reality is really just where our mind takes us to rest from something else? So which is the dream?
Tuesday, March 1, 2011
On Location
Have you ever noticed there are places in our lives that have a kind of gravity to them? In some cases this becomes so powerful that it borders on inescapable. What is it about these locations that gather up so much force that they can hold us in place? Just about everything in our lives are tied to a specific place. The people we know are associated with certain locations. Our memories are linked to where they happened so much that we can return years later and have them feel fresh again. It makes me wonder if the location is more important than the events that surround them. Granted the people and things in a specific place are important, but it's really where they happen that give it weight. It's that weight that grows over time in such a way that gives power to a certain location.
Usually our first experience with a special place is home. As children we may not realize how important it is until we have to leave it for that other place where we end up spending most of our childhood, school. It's at that point when we may start to see the world divided up into distinct locations, each with its own people and associations. We spend a lot of our early lives at school or at least doing things related to school. In some ways that's where we ourselves start our own division between who we are at home and who we become for the outside world. Sometimes it's a subtle change that we don't even realize is happening until our two worlds collide. While we may not become entirely different people, it's when we find ourselves in between that we see that the place can dictate who we are. Maybe in that way we take certain places with us no matter where we are.
We know a lot of people throughout our lives. Most of those people have come and gone. Some of them stay with us throughout our lives, even if we're not physically close to them the whole time. It's rare that we stay in a single place our entire lives and even the slightest relocation means a change in distance from someone in our life. So the place that we leave becomes something of a housing for a certain moment in our existence. The people, the memories, and the time spent all get rolled into this collection that's associated with one place. What's interesting is that a place doesn't always have to be a physical location. It can also be a point in our lives. Since time is always moving forward it's often something we can't return to. Some may try to hold onto it or keep looking for a way back to it, but it's usually just another place we used to be. For many of us that place exists only in our minds, endlessly shaped by our thoughts of what was or what could have been. If a place only exists in our minds is it real? If it's only in our mind maybe that's the most real it can ever be for us, regardless of what reality tries to show us.
Usually our first experience with a special place is home. As children we may not realize how important it is until we have to leave it for that other place where we end up spending most of our childhood, school. It's at that point when we may start to see the world divided up into distinct locations, each with its own people and associations. We spend a lot of our early lives at school or at least doing things related to school. In some ways that's where we ourselves start our own division between who we are at home and who we become for the outside world. Sometimes it's a subtle change that we don't even realize is happening until our two worlds collide. While we may not become entirely different people, it's when we find ourselves in between that we see that the place can dictate who we are. Maybe in that way we take certain places with us no matter where we are.
We know a lot of people throughout our lives. Most of those people have come and gone. Some of them stay with us throughout our lives, even if we're not physically close to them the whole time. It's rare that we stay in a single place our entire lives and even the slightest relocation means a change in distance from someone in our life. So the place that we leave becomes something of a housing for a certain moment in our existence. The people, the memories, and the time spent all get rolled into this collection that's associated with one place. What's interesting is that a place doesn't always have to be a physical location. It can also be a point in our lives. Since time is always moving forward it's often something we can't return to. Some may try to hold onto it or keep looking for a way back to it, but it's usually just another place we used to be. For many of us that place exists only in our minds, endlessly shaped by our thoughts of what was or what could have been. If a place only exists in our minds is it real? If it's only in our mind maybe that's the most real it can ever be for us, regardless of what reality tries to show us.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)