Skip navigation

Category Archives: observations

darthvader.jpgI sense a strange disturbance in The Force. Something I’ve not felt since…

Actually, I have no idea. Something feels “wrong” this evening, and I don’t know what it is.

Advertisements

Have you ever noticed how Maccas is like casual sex? Well, more like a one-night stand actually.

You see it there, so full of potential. It’s not an every day thing. You recall those days when you were younger and it was a ‘special occasion’ thing, even if now you can have it whenever you want. And it’s enticing. On the posters, it looks so desirable, so delicious.

So you drive thru, and buy your favourite items. And then you indulge.

But afterwards, you can’t help thinking “Meh, why did I bother?”

Ever noticed that?

Nah, me neither.

I got broadband through work around October 19. Unfortunately, that same day, one of the greatest websites ever, TV Links, stopped working. Don’t bother with the link, it doesn’t work anymore. Its loss though soured the happiness I felt having a new unlimited broadband account.
It forced me though to begin exploring something I hadn’t done up to then, this whole torrenting game. Right now, I’m torrenting all seven seasons of The West Wing. The painful process of how torrenting makes its own mind up as to what order to download the data makes it very difficult to watch episodes in order. So I’m slowly making my way through.

I was watching The Lame Duck Congress tonight (Season 2, Episode 6) and something struck me. Jed Bartlett is a short-arse. And this stops me being able to see him as President.

George Bush is tall. So was his dad. As is Clinton. Reagan was. Ford too. I not sure about Carter and Nixon – does anyone know? Was Kennedy? Johnston was tall. Eisenhower definitely was. As was FDR. Truman may have been short. I not sure. Does America ever elect a short man as President? What does that say about them?

I have just watched The Godfather. I’ve never seen it before, and in actuality, I still haven’t. Because the last few minutes on the DVD copy I watched were borked, so I’ve not seen from where they cut to Michael in Sicily.

imperialnavalaux.jpgWhile watching it though, I began to think about those small characters, the foot-soldiers who spend their whole life working for the big man, and never climbing to the top. No doubt some of them believe they are getting something back for the effort they put in. They’ll make powerful friends and allies, or good money and in exchange, they serve loyally.

But my mind was cast back to maybe two decades to the Timothy Zahn books that picked up the story after Return of the Jedi. While I was reading those books and following the battles between the New Republic and Admiral Thrawn, I thought then about the little guys. (By the way, I shant link to them, because the books are shite. If you need the proof by reading them, ask me, I’d gladly give you my copies). About those henchmen, bodyguards etcetera though who lay down their lives for their employer. Because that’s all he really was – Admiral Thrawn – he was an employer. Just like Don Corleone I suppose.

While many of us would go above and beyond the call of duty for an employer we liked, and we’d be loyal to a leader we respected, would we really go as far as to lose one’s life for them? Even though I have had some bosses I would have – and did – cop a lot for, I doubt I’d go quite that far. But what would I go that far for? A belief? An idea? What would you do it for?

target.jpgI knew someone once who would often write blog posts and then delete them. The ones he deleted were the ones that were the most raw – the ones where his soul was on display to his readers. Of course, this was the very reason he’d delete them. Having your soul in the public domain isn’t an easy way to live. I told him “the ones that are the most painful are the best posts”. He interpreted my words as saying that I liked reading about him in pain. I didn’t. I just liked the vividness of his words when he wrote such pieces.

This highlights something that has been on my mind a lot recently – that how words are received is about the reader more than the writer.

In earlier incarnations of my blog, I argued constantly with various readers. I’d write something, they’d put their own spin on it and turn it into something it wasn’t, and then I’d be expected to defend their mis-interpretation. I never realised how much of what I wrote was caught up in this maelstrom. Last week, I was reading the archives of some of my previous blogs. I was surprised how much of a dominant theme it was. And how many times I was ignored when I said “I write, you read” or “Try only abusing me for what I wrote, not for the words that aren’t there”.

I realised though when I was reading the earlier posts (and more particularly some comments that have been left) on the current incarnation. When I wrote this post, I didn’t respond to the comments, and I just remembered the comments as critical of the idea. So I thought I’d put the idea away for a while, and think about it some more. But when I went back recently, I discovered the comments weren’t critical at all. So maybe at the time, I was misreading what the commenters were saying?