the blog of david bryan

idleness is the devil's playground

2012-01-12T13:02:00.000-08:00

so, my gig working at a produce stand is on hiatus while the farmers’ markets are being organized for the winter. in an attempt to alleviate the financial burden this imposed on me, i went to the barnes and noble bookstore at columbia university to see if i could get a temp job for january. i was hired immediately, and was slated to work full time for the month. however, there was one caveat: they could not reinstate me at the rate of pay i was receiving when i left 4 years ago.

i worked part time for this store for close to 3 years. when i started, i was paid $9 an hour. a crime, to be sure, for someone as over-educated and talented as me, but a job that i needed at the time (before i was hired full time as a communications associate at my church.) after a stellar performance—which included devising a system of shelving books that was OFFICIALLY ADOPTED AS THE STANDARD FOR ALL EMPLOYEES IN THE STORE—i was given a sparkling review which included a whopping 30-cent raise. so, when i left the store in 2007, i was making $9.30 an hour. again, not great money, but helpful in meeting my monthly expenses. (by the way, the system of shelving i devised didn’t stick: the other employees couldn’t figure out how to do it as efficiently as i did.)

so, back to the caveat: when i was “given my old job back,” i was informed of the decreased pay: they can only pay me $7.50 an hour—a mere 25 cents above minimum wage (because, apparently, barnes and noble was bought out by barnes and noble, inc., and all temporary new-hires are started at this pay rate. how a corporation becomes 2 corporations and then buys itself out is WAY beyond my level of market comprehension, other than to think that it is ultimately based on economic and political sham, but that is another story altogether.)

ANYWAY, i needed the money so i said “no problem.” and, i really meant it. i figured i could do this crappy job for one month, during which i will hopefully get another market job, or land a teaching gig for the semester. so, i show up for work the other day and one of the supervisors sets me up with a team of coworkers to prepare prepackaged boxed sets for one of the larger introductory columbia classes: think plato, ovid, adam smith, john locke, freud, etc.

as the supervisor was explaining which books needed to be put in these boxed sets, referencing a posted list of said books, one of my co-workers started reading the titles off the list. now, i am generally not a judgmental person. the fact that this co-worker couldn’t pronounce plato’s name, or couldn’t pronounce the words “decameron” or “metamorphosis” correctly didn’t ultimately bother me, as i realize there is a vast range of education/knowledge in the general populace. this person is not dumb. he is simply uneducated. it’s a bookstore. what did i expect? i can work with this, i said to myself.

that was, until the fire alarm went off.

all of the employees got our coats and went outside, where we had to stand around idle for about 30 minutes while the building was evacuated and the fire department ascertained what the problem was, if there was a fire. maybe it was drill. who knows. who cares.

i had genuinely shown up for work ready to bust my ass, as i have always done at ANY job. but this 30 minutes of idle time was too much for me to handle. for someone as educated as me, who has a REALLY overactive and underutilized brain, this 30 minutes was a death knell.

my conversation afterwards with the textbook manager went something like this:

“i am sorry. i thought i could do this job for $7.50 an hour, but i simply can’t. i have 2 bachelors and 2 masters degrees. part of my master’s thesis has been published in a journal of academic essays. i have taught at hunter college and the college of new rochelle. i have worked in 4 different bookstores, including part-time in THIS store for about 3 years. i devised a system of shelving books here that was officially adopted as the policy for all employees. i think it is unfair that i am paid the same as someone who doesn’t know who plato is and doesn’t seem to have a grasp of basic english. i understand there are rules, but i am the exception to the rule. is there anything that can be done? i can do this job if you guys can reinstate the rate of pay i had when i left. isn’t there any kind of exception that can be made?”

manager: “sorry. not really. we have to abide by the corporation’s policies, and as a temporary new-hire, we can only pay you $7.50 an hour.”

in the rest of the conversation, i basically articulated a well reasoned argument which i can sum up as such: THIS IS ABSOLUTELY RIDICULOUS.

i mean, i understand “how it works,” but, come on. really? this is so fraught with the fodder of the current national #OWS conversation that it allows me a chance to examine some problems that i’m sure would resonate with quite a few protesters.

-----------------------------

problem #1: “the corporation just don’t care!”

those of you who have seen “fight club,” do you remember the scene about automobile accidents vs. out-of-court settlements vs. recalls? here is an abbreviated script (thanks to IMDB):

JACK
I'm a recall coordinator. My job is
to apply the formula. It's a story
problem.

A new car built by my company leaves
somewhere traveling at 60 miles per
hour. The rear differential locks up.

The car crashes and burns with
everyone trapped inside. Now: do we
initiate a recall?

Take the number of vehicles in the
field, (A), and multiply it by the
probable rate of failure, (B), then
multiply the result by the average
out-of-court settlement, (C). A
times B times C equals X...

If X is less than the cost of a
recall, we don't do one.

BUSINESS WOMAN
Are there a lot of these kinds of
accidents?

JACK
Oh, you wouldn't believe.

BUSINESS WOMAN
... Which... car company do you work
for?

JACK
A major one.

in paying slightly better than minimum wage, the barnes and noble corporation (or barnes and noble, inc., or barnes and noble college division, who the hell knows???) is “applying the formula” to the number of students, number of books sold, and chances that those books are the incorrect books. they are basically saying: we don’t really care if all of our customers get the correct books they need for classes. that is to say, if EVERY student got the incorrect books, then there is no way this store could stay in business, right? (at least one would hope this is the case!)

how this spells out, i don’t know. i’m sure the store makes a killing on general merchandise that students throw in the shopping basket with their textbooks: 3-ring binders, loose leaf paper, bluebooks, pens, pencils, calculators, clocks, dorm refrigerators, sheets and towels, sweatshirts, doormats, shot glasses and stuffed animals with the school logo, etc; and, ultimately, if your professors order their books from this store, then you HAVE to buy them there, so eventually, the store will get your money anyway! (with exceptions, of course. you might find your books online, but then you might be waiting for several weeks and will fall behind in the class reading. of course, those students who stocked up on beer mugs and shot glasses probably don’t care, but some students actually want to do the reading!)

these 2 examples (fight club and the columbia bookstore) illustrate a very simple yet very important fact: CORPORATIONS DONT CARE! THEY JUST WANT YOUR MONEY!

think about insurance. when is the last time you heard a conversation go like this:

person 1: our house caught on fire.
person 2: that’s terrible!
person 1: oh, it’s okay! we called the insurance company, and they immediately sent someone out to assess the damages and we had a huge settlement check by the end of the week! they were so understanding and compassionate, and everything was covered!
person 2: well, of course you did! that’s what insurance companies do! they really just want to help us in our most stated times of crisis! thank god they are so caring and compassionate!

person 3 (me): NOT!

-----------------------------

problem #2: unnecessary bottle-necking

considering the number of uneducated (or under-educated) employees hired by the store—who are basically given a 5-minute crash course by the managers and then set loose to help students find books for the semester—well, you can probably guess that there are quite a few students who will walk out of the store withOUT their correct books. (of course, mind you, this is an IVY LEAGUE INSTITUTION populated with QUITE a few folks who ostensibly got into the school on something OTHER than intelligence (daddy's coattails?), so maybe it serves them right, if they can’t figure out how a simple bookstore works. i was actually quite surprised at the level of downright cluelessness i encountered when working there several years ago.)

i pointed out to my manager that EVERY student who is handed an incorrect textbook will crowd not only the front of the store, seeking a refund or exchange, but also the back of the store, seeking the correct textbooks. (to give you an idea of the bottle-necking this causes, there are currently close to 28,000 students at columbia; and keep in mind that new york businesses and residences are not as spacious as other parts of the country.) wouldn’t it make everyone’s life SO much easier if we just made sure students got the correct books in the first place? maybe someone needs to devise a new formula: the amount of pay required to correct mistakes, versus the $1.80 more per hour that they could have paid someone like ME to help keep those mistakes to a minimum.

this also would cut down on the amount of angry phoning/tweeting/facebook ranting that will ensue, which will give the store a bad reputation—and this is not good marketing. you’ve heard this story before. you probably were one of those people at one time! you and your friends all had similar gripes: “that place is f***ed up! they can’t ever get it right!” (of course, this applies not only to whatever college bookstore you shopped in, but also the college administration, the phone company, your internet provider, that pizza company your ordered from, your insurer, the library, the post office, etc., get the picture?)

-----------------------------

problem #3: the general manager of the entire store is absolutely powerless (a woman, in this particular situation, so at least barnes and noble is willing to put women in managerial positions; oh, no wait... i forgot: as women demographically tend to make less than men doing the exact same job, maybe this is just another way for B&N to save a few bucks!) anyway, her hands are tied. she is constrained by the corporate rules. she couldn’t pay me my original rate of pay if she wanted to!

so, she is hired to run the store as smoothly as possible. and then has every possible obstacle thrown in her way by the parent company? does she stand a chance of losing her job if enough students filed complaints about the store? possibly so. and that would be an egregious crime, as far as i’m concerned.

have you ever been on one end of a phone conversation, trying to have some problem fixed, only to be told “sorry, the computer won’t allow me to do that," or "i just don't have the power to do that"? well, i have. in fact, it feels like i’ve heard that many times. i think we've probably all had this experience throughout our lives. it's called "bureaucratic nightmare."

this *thing* we have created has, simply put, grown too big for its britches. that sound you hear? that's the tearing of the national fabric. might get ugly.

but don’t fret for me. while i was outside during that 30-minute fire alarm thinking WAY too much, i also pulled out my phone and did some number crunching on the calculator. the prognosis: after taxes, that job really isn’t worth my time. i can make as much money playing and singing in the subway.

if you want to come throw a dollar (or two) in my mandolin case, i’ll be somewhere near one of the 42nd street stations.

conspiracy theories

2012-01-10T22:52:00.000-08:00

as usual, i am posting something that is WAY overdue. or dated, at least. this was written closer to when the frightful bed bug epidemic of 200? occurred. anyway, better late than never.

-------------------------------------------

i love a good conspiracy theory.

how’s this for one? new york is facing a bed bug epidemic right now. in addition to the nuisance it creates for residential buildings, actual businesses—even historic businesses—are having to shut their doors and clean out their establishments. now, in our current national financial state, it occurs to me that one way to stimulate the economy would be to have some kind of public occurrence in which there exists a state of panic and fear. the media blows the event out of proportion, and a solution is provided by the government—which usually involves going out and buying stuff, right?

i mean, in addition to plastic coverings for your bed and box spring, there are actually bed bug sniffing dogs for hire! (and this is only if you’re being overly cautious; for those who actually GET bed bugs—well, you know the cost involved. [kind of makes you wonder if, maybe, this wasn't accidental, maybe?])

my point is, SPEND MONEY! that’ll fix whatever the current panic is all about!

------------------------------------

for starters, think back a bit. think red scare. not only does the typical american family need to stock a full kitchen for a family of four (including not ONLY food, but also all the THINGS necessary to open, prepare, eat, serve and clean) but you also better have an emergency shelter stocked and ready to go as well! i mean, are you gonna have time to move everything from one kitchen to the other as mushroom clouds blossom on the horizon? your government—and your media—want you to know that no such time exists, so you will definitely need food and water to survive in your underground shelter. but, then we’re back to that ole’ open/prepare/eat/serve/clean impasse again... so, you’d better stock up on all that for the shelter too!

while you’re at it, just in case, why not make your potential new 24/7 living quarters actually pleasant and habitable? you can then host all your nuclear neighbors and fallout friends in a comfy environment! become the best interior shelter designer in all of town! amaze your friends! piss off your enemies!

have you seen our latest line of nuclear fallout furniture suites? they are currently 60% off!

a few of the colors/patterns to choose from:

*fallout blue(s)

*earthen oak (for those who can’t afford the radiation-resistant paneling, and are actually just living in a hole they dug in the ground, with maybe a steel door overhead; cause let’s face it, who the hell can keep up with the joneses anymore?)

*halcyon hue

*checkered red (like the apron grandma used to wear on the farm, back when people actually grew their own food!) (hell, back when food was even REAL!)

the point is, as long as you have everything that is on “their” official LIST, then you will weather any storm.

------------------------------------

great. the world will be repopulated by automatons who shop on command.

------------------------------------

think Y2K: the millennium bug (tonight we’re gonna party like it’s 1999!).

now, i have to admit, this one had me pretty convinced. (this was really my genesis as a slight conspiracy theorist and part-time apocalyptic nut, but hey, attention to this kind of stuff is more fringe [and more interesting] than, say, the current fascination with justin bieber’s hair, or who katy perry is sleeping with—and i would much rather dwell on the fringes....)

now, being an eagle scout, my preparation was minimal and efficient. i had a shit ton of matches, a pocketknife, lots of rope, paper, toothpicks, paperclips, shoestrings, weed, water purification tablets, a hammer, screwdriver, scissors, some random maps and a compass, and a big plastic bag ostensibly full of the most random useless shit that could actually probably come in pretty handy in an apocalyptic scenario. everything i needed fit in a 10x10x12 cardboard box. put me out in the woods with that and i think i’d stand as good a chance as most of us, with my vast wilderness experience. (boy scouts ain’t just about getting popped with wet towels by pedophile scoutmasters, people!*)

what did YOU buy? let me guess. gallons upon gallons of bottled water, an attic full of canned goods... what else? plastic covering for the windows? (which requires tape, right?) and didn’t “they” actually make quite a bit of profit on gas masks or some such nonsense? regardless, think of our panicked american public, driven to paranoia by the media and the government. YOU yourself may not have been that worried; but, this country is pretty big and pretty diverse, no? and those people have a lot of money when you put them all together, right? even poor people can buy bottled water and powered generators. would our economy not flourish with such an infusion of apprehensive and anxious apocalyptic spending?

------------------------------------

think swine flu. hand sanitizer: i would imagine that every church, school and hospital promptly went out and bought bottles upon bottles of hand sanitizer when this one broke in the headlines. now, how many churches, schools and hospitals do you think there are in the united states? WAY too many to count. and with bottles of hand sanitizer scattered liberally in each of these (better safe than sorry!), i imagine the shareholders for Purell made out quite handsomely. wouldn’t you?

------------------------------------

what else.... there was that one isolated incident where some crazy person was going to build an on-plane bomb from scratch with household bathroom items such as deodorant, lotion and toothpaste, right? and what was the result? anyone who wants to carry any of these things on the plane now has to put them in a ziplock plastic bag. however, the airport will NOT provide these for you; and they are not sold individually. so, how many millions upon millions of air travelers had to go out and buy ziplock bags for flying? (it is NOT fair to assume that everyone has these lying around in the kitchen. some folks don’t use them because they think this product wasteful. for some folks, this is a luxury item which their already-constrained budget precludes having. and some folks, like me, simply just don’t have them around.)

why not just say you can’t bring these personal items on board? wouldn’t this actually prevent someone from making a bomb through these means, which was the primary concern? doesn’t this make the most sense overall to you? not if your annual bonus depends on how well the S C Johnson Wax corporation does.

------------------------------------

flu shots. what’s in those anyway? EVERY year, we're told that we need to go out and get these! how much does it cost to produce these? what’s to keep them from stimulating the economy by just injecting saline into your arm and charging money for it? remember when there was going to be a supposed shortage of flu shots? quick! run out and get yours before they’re all gone!

who the hell knows WHAT they are injecting into your arm? you don’t! you’re not a scientist. your just afraid of germs. don't even get me started on the topic of vaccines.

------------------------------------

whatever the emergency du jour, the government has an official list of things you should have on hand—all of which precipitates a stimulation of the economy in one way or another.

here, let’s examine “their” official list (sorry, i don’t have the official site this is from. my bad. but, it is basically cut and paste from the CDC or some other government websites. i’m sure you can find them if you look):

“You may need to survive on your own after an emergency. This means having your own food, water, and other supplies in sufficient quantity to last for at least three days. Local officials and relief workers will be on the scene after a disaster, but they cannot reach everyone immediately. You could get help in hours, or it might take days. In addition, basic services such as electricity, gas, water, sewage treatment, and telephones may be cut off for days, or even a week or longer.

Recommended Items to Include in a Basic Emergency Supply Kit:
Water, one gallon of water per person per day for at least three days, for drinking and sanitation
Food, at least a three-day supply of non-perishable food
Battery-powered or hand crank radio and a NOAA Weather Radio with tone alert and extra batteries for both
Flashlight and extra batteries
First aid kit
Whistle to signal for help
Dust mask, to help filter contaminated air and plastic sheeting and duct tape to shelter-in-place
Moist towelettes, garbage bags and plastic ties for personal sanitation
Wrench or pliers to turn off utilities
Can opener for food (if kit contains canned food)
Local maps
Cell phone with chargers, inverter or solar charger
Additional Items to Consider Adding to an Emergency Supply Kit:
Prescription medications and glasses
Infant formula and diapers
Pet food and extra water for your pet
Important family documents such as copies of insurance policies, identification and bank account records in a waterproof, portable container
Cash or traveler's checks and change
You can use the Emergency Financial First Aid Kit (EFFAK) - PDF, 277Kb) developed by Operation Hope, FEMA and Citizen Corps to help you organize your information.
Emergency reference material such as a first aid book or information from www.ready.gov.
Sleeping bag or warm blanket for each person. Consider additional bedding if you live in a cold-weather climate.
Complete change of clothing including a long sleeved shirt, long pants and sturdy shoes. Consider additional clothing if you live in a cold-weather climate.
Household chlorine bleach and medicine dropper – When diluted nine parts water to one part bleach, bleach can be used as a disinfectant. Or in an emergency, you can use it to treat water by using 16 drops of regular household liquid bleach per gallon of water. Do not use scented, color safe or bleaches with added cleaners.
Fire Extinguisher
Matches in a waterproof container
Feminine supplies and personal hygiene items
Mess kits, paper cups, plates and plastic utensils, paper towels
Paper and pencil
Books, games, puzzles or other activities for children”

now, some of these make sense. but, come on. imagine facing a disaster if you live in a 3rd world country. don’t you think those folks might laugh at us, reading this list?

we really are ridiculously spoiled.

---

* regarding pedophile scoutmasters, i want to be clear right off the bat: MY scoutmasters were honorable, decent men, and this comment is not directed at them.**

** however, with the recent attention paid to potential (ha!) (oh wait, sorry. innocent until proven guilty! right?) sex abuse cases at both penn state and syracuse, this got me thinking about how the floodgates might be about to break open. (as well they should.)

(by the way, is it just me, or is it interesting how this current national scandal diverts attention away from the catholic church? just saying.)

it also got me thinking about my own past, and how there were 3 such “abbreviated” instances in my own life—abbreviated meaning i wasn’t sexually assaulted, but . . . well, there was just something not right about it:

one with a scoutmaster type (i don’t know what his “rank” was; this was a man i had never met popping me with a towel in the shower, for christ’s sake. in the presence of others, mind you, but bizarre nonetheless.) one with a “person of the cloth” (of a monastic order, i believe. not as bizarre, but several instances that just didn’t sit right.) one with a choral conductor. this was the most bizarre, as it wasn’t directed just at me, but several of us high school singer-types; the strangest thing he did was shower with the curtain 1/2 open, and, well, he just spent a LOT of time in the bathroom.

so—how many of us have had these unwanted sexual advances directed at us in our most formative years? geez, it’s no wonder our culture is so screwed up. (obviously, this is another post that needs attention at some point. so, put that on your to-do list and smoke it!)

anyway, um; ew?

TIME

2011-07-20T07:45:00.000-07:00

wow, i'm actually getting into some kind of rhythm. i've written in my journal 5 out of the last 7 days, and have posted something on here almost every day. however, the 2 don't / won't necessarily coincide; for instance, my journaling today was rather soporific, so for today's post, i'm digging into the old journals again__where, by the way, i'm finding LOTS of REALLY good stuff!
this one is from 6/23/05:

TIME.
lack of time.
why is there never enough of it?

living in NYC, even without full-time work, there is never enough time to do everything i want to. at least that's the way it seems. but, perhaps for too long i have been having a relationship with time in a negative sense. (father time?)

perhaps i need to expunge that timeless (ha!) and eternal cliche in parentheses above__of time as having a masculine quality. perhaps i need to start to embrace a new conception of time, as the schedulistic (?) embodiment of the feminine. that might work better for one such as myself: a libra; a devotee of eros; a lover of women. one for whom the masculine no longer represents my best interests.

(that's the end of the original post; i actually have quite a few new ideas coming to me right now; unfortunately, though, the people who call the shots in this culture [read: the people who cut the paychecks] are totally in line with father time, and i don't have time to write any more, as i have to get to work. one last question, though... they make grandfather clocks, right? is there such a thing as a grandmother clock?)

an open letter to the diocese of chicago youth, circa 1995-2000

2011-07-18T21:05:00.000-07:00

from around 1995-2000, i was a paid musician for church youth conferences in the episcopal diocese of chicago. not only did these years cultivate an intense love affair with deep-dish pizza (suck it, new york, you've got NOTHING), but it also proved fairly formative to my own spiritual development.

i watched many young people__literally hundreds__grow up; but i also watched many of them grow spiritually. and i know for a fact that I was instrumental in this for many of them. it is one of many experiences that i remember sometimes, once in a while, reminding me why i am here. i think the letter i spontaneously wrote them tonight speaks to this. i'm not here to work and to make money and to have things... i'm here to... well, just read the letter. you'll get the drift. i figured i'd post it here, so others can have a glimpse into a very important part of a particular time period in my life.

and, i'm really kind of diggin the fact that this makes like 4 days in a row that i've posted something!

i've already asked sue cromer, the director of youth & young adult ministries for the diocese of chicago, to send this to anyone who knows me.

a quick shout out to her: she has done great things up there.

----------------------------------------

hello old diocese of chicagoans-

i just wanted to say thanks to all of you. for memories. for friendships. for your singing. for your hugs. for your little jesus-love notes (some of which i still have in my guitar case!) for your tears.

for helping me to better understand what the whole christianity thing is all about.

you see, as you all have surely experienced by now, life is kinda nuts. the world is full of terrible people who do terrible things; but, then, it’s also full of good people who do terrible things, right? as i course through this short life at breakneck speed, i have seen quite a bit. i imagine you have as well.

at times, i have wanted to give up. and at other times i feel like i have been given up on.

i imagine i am not alone in such thinking.

i don’t know where most of you are now; geographically, physically, mentally, psychologically, spiritually. i have been all over the map myself. and, if any of you remained true to your episcopal roots, then you have had a similar path. one which involves thought. and action. and compassion.

but who has time for all of those things these days, anyway? hell, i sometimes go an entire day without thinking about the fact that i AM.

but, right now__tonight__i know that i am. you are all part of the reason why i can say that.

i hope that many__if not all__ of you turned out to be good people trying to do good things. if the world doesn’t have that, then what chance have we got? but that’s what faith is for me, when i can slow down and stop to think about it. faith is doing good things. it’s not about belief, as far as i’m concerned. it’s about spreading goodness, happiness, understanding, compassion, and love. my faith tells me that i have impacted each of you in a positive way__through my music, my listening, my camaraderie, my humor, my intellect: my total being. and, i hope that this impact impressed upon each of you enough that you, too, have gone on to impact others in similar fashion.

but, just so you know, in those times when i do think of all of you__and there are MANY of you__i don’t only think of the positive impact i had on you. i also think of how you all impacted me. you were all (well, most!) significantly younger than me, at least in episcopal years. ;-) the youth are what drive the spirit of the church. and as far as i’m concerned, if the church doesn’t have the youth, it is going to die. there are many other churches (and non-religious organizations) out there, inspiring their youth to hate and intolerance and bigotry and closed-mindedness.

so, i ask you, please take a moment, reflect on who you were, and ask yourself: is that still part of who you are? if the answer is yes, then the world will be a better place. because as far as i am concerned, as a whole, you were all golden.

i hope you still are.

much love and peace-
david bryan
p.s. i play mandolin now!
p.p.s. yes, i still sing songs about chicken

why the hell am i doing something productive so early??

2011-07-17T04:51:00.000-07:00

7/17/11 7:30 am, already at church, 45 minutes before i need to be!

just got to church__i was able to drag myself out of bed early enough to catch the bus. yes, i'm tired as hell (alarm went off at 6:20) but the payoff is that i'm here with enough time not only to write today, but to enjoy a leisurely breakfast. and i do always appreciate the slow pace of the city on a sunday morning.

there is a woman sitting on the steps who has recently taken up residence at st. bart's__one of the many persons we see here on a daily basis. she is unquestionably mentally ill__i would guess she is a paranoid schizophrenic (i have personally witnessed her screaming at passersby for no apparent reason; the police were even here just yesterday, attempting to ameliorate some situation in which she played a part.)

i am saddened by this woman. sad that she is ostensibly homeless; sad that mental illness exists on such a noticeable level in NYC, not to mention the entire country, even the world; saddened by the social ostracizing that typically surrounds such people.

i am saddened even more by the dog this woman always has with her__looking so lethargic, as if s/he hasn't had any food or water for days. i have wanted to bring this woman some water for her dog, but hear that others have tried, and that she yells at them, saying the water has been poisoned__even though it's bottled. yes, it makes me sad that this poor defenseless animal seems to suffer due to this woman's illness.

yet, who am i to even think such thoughts? maybe the dog, too, is mentally ill. does mental illness exist in animals? i don't know. should someone call the ASPCA? i can't answer that. what i feel i can answer is that if the ASPCA does take away this poor woman's only worldly companion, then her worst fears will be actualized, her paranoia vindicated.

perhaps it is harmful to leave things as they are. but i, for one, will not call the ASPCA, unless i see her physically beating the animal. that dog is the only thing she has. and we, as a society, have failed this woman. and her dog. just as we have failed so many__too many__others. all i can do is leave her alone with her mental illness. and her best friend (who is perhaps her only friend.)

i guess it counts for something__anything__that i simply care.

is this what progress looks like?

2011-07-16T07:03:00.000-07:00

well, it seems i finally have a bit of momentum in my life. 2 days out 3 writing in my journal; 4 or 5 resumes sent off for jobs out of the city; 3 consecutive daily posts here in my blog; biking with a bit more regularity; finding time to make it to the farmers' markets to get fresh healthy food and drop off compost; and, i just had my annual physical, and it seems my cholesterol has "improved significantly"! (which comes as a supreme shock, considering my unrestrained love of CHEESE)

good. all time well spent.

so, i'm announcing to the universe, that it is time for CHANGE. i'm sure there are a few more changes i could/should make, but BABY STEPS, right?? i can't do everything all at once.

i also can't do it all by myself. so, great spirit of whoever/whatever/wherever, how about a little helping hand? or, hell, at least stand on the sidelines, cheer me on, and hand me one of those refreshing, cool cups of water!

The Muse

2011-07-15T14:34:00.000-07:00

from 8/11/05

the muse.

the muse sleeps til noon; doesn't want to have to answer to anyone else.

lazy? marching to the beat of his/her own drum? or liberated? living/thinking/breathing/BEING outside of the box? outside of the realm of structure imposed by others__those who say "dress this way," "cut your hair this length," or "you must appear this way to your colleagues."

perhaps the muse is the only free spirit remaining in this moribund world__a world that can no longer hold up under all the structures that have been imposed by the forces that seek__through control of others__their OWN safety and security.

i want no part in such a world.

i choose to LIVE.

Casting my net

2011-07-14T08:53:00.000-07:00

okay, this is ridiculous. i absolutely love to write, and to share my thoughts with the world (the world being possibly only 5 people who follow this blog with any regularity), and yet i just can't seem to get into any kind of blogging rhythm.

after a conversation with a new friend last night, i realize that i need to start writing every day. and that i will attempt to do—definitely in my actual physical journal. but, also, in the meantime, i have a huge treasure chest of "3 minute morning" entries dating back many years.

so now, here i am, wanting to get out NYC, and i have been "casting my net" to see what transpires. i am mostly looking for jobs in youth ministry, education, music or the non-profit sector. however, it dawns on me today that i would also LOVE to be able to blog or write for a living (i have begun developing a full-fledged idea for a work of non-fiction; and, to my surprise, i also actually started a novel a couple of months ago!) SO, since i'm looking to move onto the next vocational stage in my life, it only makes sense that one of the nets i cast is that as a writer. to that end, i am going to TRY (yoda: "there is no try. there is do or do not.) to put something up on this blog EVERY DAY. i am so frikkin busy, that i imagine this will be a difficult goal—but one i must set nonetheless. SO, instead of having to create something new every day, i am simply going to delve into the treasure chest and type in some very old, short journal entries—at least the ones i feel i can share with the world. maybe someone in the publishing world will take notice, and i will haul in the big one!

here goes. this was from april 25, 2005 (i think), while i was singing at an opera house in stonington, maine. obviously from about 20 minutes before we were to start rehearsing, while everyone was warming up:

--------------

music. sound. noise. silence. a wonderful symphony of dissonances, consonances . . . . crescendo to forte—loud as hell at times; other times pianissimo. the crickets chirp; a pin drops.

holy shit it's loud when eight singers all warm up at the same time! reminds me of new york—broadway avenue at rush hour; harlem at night. an evil necessary? it is so unpleasant, so loud. i hearken to only even last night, when i was sitting in silence listening to the waves of water smooching the shore—playful little junior high school dance kisses, given by yucky boys to icky girls. sweet innocence. before the fall.

something to ponder at the beach this weekend....

2011-05-27T13:55:00.000-07:00

i was recently reading michael talbot’s book “the holographic universe,” and stumbled across the following:

“Bohm believes the same is true at our own level of existence. Space is not empty. It is full, a plenum as opposed to a vacuum, and is the ground for the existence of everything, including ourselves. The universe is not separate from this cosmic sea of energy. It is a ripple on its surface, a comparatively small ‘pattern of excitation’ in the midst of an unimaginably vast ocean. ‘This excitation pattern is relatively autonomous and gives rise to approximately recurrent, stable and separable projections into a three-dimensional explicate order of manifestation,’ states Bohm. In other words, despite its apparent materiality and enormous size, the universe does not exist in and of itself, but is the stepchild of something far vaster and more ineffable. More than that; it is not even a major production of this vaster something, but is only a passing shadow, a mere hiccup in the greater scheme of things . . . . Bohm concedes that there is no reason to believe the implicate order is the end of things. There may be other undreamed of orders beyond it, infinite stages of further development” (Talbot, 51-52).

this passage caught my eye because it not only truncates the supposedly known and proven “vast expanse of interstellar space,” (as the episcopalians have called it) but proposes even more far-reaching and entirely unimaginable possibilities. for me, at least, and hopefully for others, this thinking can serve to once again deflate the overbearing EGO. it should remind the individual of the fleeting, transient nature of life: the ephemeral existence of one tiny grain of sand on a beach that might only begin to comprehend the existence of billions of other surrounding grains of sand, and perhaps the water that occasionally ebbs and flows over all of it—not to mention everything beyond that awareness.

yet, following this analogy, how many humans—as ‘grains of sand’—are aware of even one grain beside us, on either side? it seems that even those who think themselves intelligent may be dumbfounded by such a proposition. to be sure, so many human beings think they know everything there is to know. how often we masturbate our minds, exercising our faculties, proclaiming and clinging to knowledge of various sorts. in my estimation, we seem closer to cogs or chips in a machine carrying out prescribed tasks of behavior and thought. how much of our thought is dictated by what we have been taught? what do we really “know”? what CAN we possibly know? to think that we really have even a clue about a mere corner of some cosmic puzzle seems impossible.

as i had personally discovered previously, it appears to me again that the more i think i know, the less i am capable of truly comprehending anything. perhaps true “knowledge”—gnosis—is grounded in a lack of any such grounding. without the secure foundation of what i think i know to be “true” or “possible,” i feel so much “smarter.” yet, my newfound enlightenment rests solely on my constantly unfolding and progressive—and possibly eternal—recognition of forces in thought, nature, creation, expansion and universality of which i cannot possibly conceive, and most likely NEVER will. not only has the metaphorical rug been yanked from beneath my feet; EVERYTHING has been yanked from me. i now again question ALL that has been handed to me as FACT.

talbot proposes theories which transcend—and prescind—all that we think we know. which is it, though? do we think, or do we know? and what basis for validity do we have in blindly clinging to either, when discussing the possibility of anything? for cannot the same be said of ANY given truth, belief, thought, image, rule, law, commandment, dogma, creed, etc.? therefore, what can we possibly hold as true and reliable in a world where EVERY SINGLE OPINION has a polar opposite (not to mention a spectrum in between), and every thought on any matter can be augmented/diminished/expunged/perpetuated/bolstered/criticized/proven/debunked in 6 billion+ possible different ways??

at the very least, i believe it necessary for each individual to recognize and become aware of this, such that the individual self—the EGO—will relinquish the reigns of the universe and allow others a say in the unfolding process. this is one possible goal of what i have spent some of my time preaching, singing, writing and/or teaching, whenever i have had the the chance (and am not completely braindead from my full-time job): to encourage the individual to step back from the self/ego, which can only be accomplished through the individual allowing the ego to collapse in on itself. only by gaining such self-awareness can the individual begin to realize ONE possible truth: that there might be no such thing as a self.

so, for those of you who find yourself at the beach this memorial day weekend, i hope you enjoy your time off from your work-a-day crazy life. leave it all behind, and try to spend some time imagining yourself as just ONE of those small grains of sand on which you are lying. we really are that small.

and then, just then, look up at the ocean. holy christ that thing is massive. and POWERFUL.

really, truly just think about how small we are. join me, suspend your belief, if only for one second. because in the grand scheme of time, that second might just be eternal. and THAT second, of selflessness, a moment free of ego, is where it’s at.

i hope to see you there.

volume control!

2011-05-17T22:43:00.000-07:00

i just left la negrita, one of my favorite bars, livid. the music volume was agreeable for a while. then somebody walks in, plugs in an ipod, and turns the volume up incredibly loud. okay, maybe the inevitable has happened—i’m officially “old.” but really, i’m starting to wonder if someone has been spiking my beer or coffee with crazy pills! at la negrita, there were about 10 people total. well, make it 9, cause i just can’t deal with the music anymore. but now at most places. it’s really becoming an epidemic. there’s so much of a push these days to talk about the health of the environment. so, maybe it’s high time that we address another environmental health problem—that of sound in public places.

many times i have found myself in places that are extremely loud. and i get the feeling more and more that i’m not the only person who feels this way. recently, i was at a private columbia party at a downstairs bar. i (as well as at least one other person) had to wear earplugs because it was to frikkin loud. many people i talked with that night said the music was too loud. so, why is this constantly a problem? i understand that folks are coming out to blow off steam/cut loose. but is this not possible without music blasting at 9.5 on the volume dial??

i go out to hang out with friends; to get out of the apartment. i also enjoy meeting new people. but this is impossible when i can’t hear them. many times i’ve seen an attractive woman and thought, “gee, i’d love to go talk to her.” but i DON’T. i can’t, because it’s too damn loud. how attractive is it when every time she speaks, i have to scream “what?!?” is it possible that my potential wife-to-be never got a chance to meet me, because i didn’t go up and introduce myself—because, what’s the point when i can’t hear a word she’s saying?

if EVERYONE in the bar spoke at a normal volume, that would be clear evidence that there was no volume issue. but, go into most bars and everybody is SCREAMING at each other. and also, they have to lean in to understand one another—which is probably sometimes potentially offensive, as the closer you get to someone, the easier it is to ascertain what they’ve been drinking, what they’ve been smoking, and maybe even what they ate for dinner. ew.

this is not even a problem only in bars. many department stores also blast their music, maybe in an attempt to attract a young, hip crowd, who seem to relish high volumes. for christ’s sake, i came to buy pants, not to party! it’s annoying! if the clothes you are selling are of no real worth, then music is not going to increase your sales!

okay, so, to backtrack: the person who started blasting the ipod at la negrita? THE OWNER. now, call me crazy (you can probably do this for many other reasons, by the way) but if you want to keep paying customers drinking in your establishment, then find something closely resembling a happy medium. not every person who goes out wants the music turned up to offensive volumes. i mean, is there some kind of underground aural masochism i’m not aware of?

music in public places should be in the BACKGROUND, and not the primary social environmental characteristic. it should be primary ONLY if it is the main reason why people gather there, such as at a concert, rock show, or dance club. otherwise, conversation—um, hello, human interaction?—should be the primary attraction. if it’s too loud to hear your friend, then something is wrong. and for those who think i’m just “old,” i’d answer: if you want to listen to loud music, feel free to stay and home and do so. just don’t infringe on my right to make new friends by demanding that the music be turned up—even if it’s YOUR song playing. because, if you think about it, EVERY song is SOMEBODY’S song. if we turn it up anytime somebody’s “song” comes up, then there is no respite whatsoever. we are bombarded by a relentless wall of sound that is simply NOT HEALTHY, no matter how you slice it. we were taught at a young age not to stare directly at the sun, right? that this will damage a particular sense—that of sight—and you will go blind, right? well, guess what? when you turn the volume to level 9 or 10, you’re doing the exact same thing to another sense—that of hearing.

so, if you’re telling me that i’m just old, or too sensitive, i would answer: listen to yourself right now. you are screaming this at me, and you can’t hear my reply. and look at your body language—leaning in, so that your mouth is right beside my ear (which may also not be good for overall posture, by the way.) does this whole scenario really conjure, in your mind, a “normal” social interaction between two intelligent, sentient human beings?

by the way, your breath stinks. i like mexican food, but not an hour later during a conversation over a beer! so, will you please go buy some gum at the deli next door?

take my earplugs, though. it’s even louder over there.

2010-08-12T17:07:00.000-07:00

what’s with “the critic?” where did this idea for a ‘job’ come from, and more importantly, how much money do these folks actually get paid for the ‘work’ they do? Man, I wish I could get paid to go see movies and concerts, or to eat food (ALL for free!) and get paid for it. what a life.

i was reading a newspaper the other day and noticed a review of the movie SALT, starring angelina jolie. [note to reader: i am IN this movie, singing in a choir, so my take on this issue is slightly biased. as opposed to all my other posts here. ;-) ] anyway, the movie reviewer’s expected headline reads, “salt adds little flavor to the action drama.”

immediately, i’m put off by this, as this might affect my residual check from columbia pictures. but, if i can remove myself from the equation and be slightly more objective, might i ask: why should we trust what this person has to say? i have never met this person before, and therefore know absolutely nothing about him. have any of you, my readers, ever read a review and been influenced by what the writer was saying? (p.s. i’m speaking of movies specifically from this point on, but this applies to movies/plays/concerts/food/etc. in general—whatever gets “reviewed” on a regular basis.

i would hazard a guess that if you have already been to the movie, you will either agree or disagree with the reviewer. for this scenario, i ask, why read the review? what’s the point? you can’t change this person’s mind if you disagree with him/her, and if you agree, well then congratulations on having your own opinion of the performance seconded. now you can speak your opinion to everyone and call it TRUTH! (“well, so-and-so reviewer from the so-and-so paper feels the same way as i do, so i must be right....”)

however, if you HAVEN’T been yet, then don’t you think you are taking a big chance if you trust what some random person has to say? i would think that you can trust a critic/reviewer if and only if you have seen many of the same movies, and realized that he/she is spot on for YOU most of the time. but, then wouldn’t we simply find ourselves gravitating only toward critics who like the same types of movies that we do, and shunning those who don’t? this is tantamount to only having political discussions with folks who share your views, and doesn’t really lead to the type of personal growth one can experience through dialogue with those who think differently.

why should we trust movie reviewers? or critics in general? is it because we need to be told whether or not to go see something? i have read 2 reviews of SALT this week. one was fabulous (giving it 4 out of 5 stars) and the other was dismal (giving it a C-). the C- was from the reviewer in the raleigh news and observer. so, an entire market of movie goers have now been told, in effect, not to go see this movie. i know that being a critic/reviewing is perfectly legal, but doesn’t this seem like a form of libel? i mean, this one individual, whose own soporific, predictable review (“a movie that’s so tiresome, i think it depleted me of iron”) seems bent on telling people not to waste their money on this film, is actually affecting the livelihoods of hundreds of actors and/or crew (those who might get a residual check from the film such as myself—for if this potential blockbuster lives up to the hype, many hard-working folks in the entertainment industry who AREN’T in the upper tax brackets would actually receive royalties, which might make the difference in whether or not the rent can be paid a few months from now. obviously, angelina jolie’s bottom line won’t be hurt so much, but i hardly think she needs the money as badly as some of the rest of us.)

in effect, if you trust a critic, there is a chance you will miss out on a movie you might really enjoy—or even a movie that might change your life! there are usually mixed reviews for most movies, right? which review will you come across? i heard very mixed reviews (both from critics and friends) for the movie “the matrix” many years ago. this movie absolutely changed my life, and became the philosophical foundation for my master’s thesis at UNCG. had i listened to my friends who said “don’t waste your money,” then i would have missed out on much intellectual, philosophical—even spiritual—growth.

the bottom line is this: don’t trust anyone to tell you whether or not you should see a movie. judge for yourself. you don’t have to spend $10 on it—eventually it’ll be on HBO or netflix or whatever. but do fancy yourself capable of forming your own opinions. otherwise, you might miss out on something that could have a profound impact on you.

as for the review of SALT in the news and observer? well, i called my mother to ask her if she still had the paper at her house (which i read there before coming to the beach for vacation) so that i could quote it directly. to which she responded, “no, i think i used that paper to drain bacon grease.” at least the review was good for something.

anyway, we found it online. to be fair, here it is, if you wish to read it:
http://www.newsobserver.com/2010/07/23/591859/salt-adds-little-flavor-to-the.html

i suggest you read it, so you can see what a ridiculous review looks like. if the “industry” won’t hire me to be a film critic (which i would, shamelessly, jump at the chance to do), then maybe i can make a living being a critic of the critics!

but then, to be fair to SALT, here’s a more favorable review—although equally ridiculous. aren’t they all?
http://www.nydailynews.com/entertainment/movies/2010/07/20/2010-07-20_jolies_salt_is_a_flavorful_spy_thriller.html

which reviewer do YOU trust to speak for you?

i’ll make up my own mind.

the insanity of the american worker

2010-06-29T19:18:00.000-07:00

i’ll start off by saying i’m so far removed from school, and—albeit contrary to the early tone of this posting—spend way too much time being a perfectionist at everything else that i do, that i am not going to heavily edit my postings anymore. it's been so long since i've been on here, and i just want to post. so, i’m entering the world of the true blogger. i’m just going to put it out there. do with it what you may. i really don’t care. *mwah*

-------------------------

let me tell you what absolute insanity is: FULL TIME WORK. i’m finally starting to realize, after only 2 1/2 years of "real" full time work, how ludicrous this really is. no, I’m not lazy. as a matter of fact, I work my skinny little butt off. but I’m starting to think that we really are just a bunch of suckers. i mean, really. just think about it.

but, if you want ANY kind of security, you have to play their game. be a cog in their machine. yet, how can these cogs help the machine to stay well lubricated when we ourselves can’t remain so? this is the reason why EVERY person, every system, every company, every administration, every bureaucracy is ultimately flawed. because cogs don’t take vacations. cogs just spin. turn the machine off for a bit at night, and maybe twice a year leave it off for a week, just so it doesn’t overheat. other than that, it just SPINS SPINS SPINS. turns. or feeds things to other things. or presses buttons. or attaches things. or delivers things.

let’s take a look at the “average” work schedule, to see how much “free time” we generally have as american workers:

one day = 24 hours. in these typical 24 hours, the “average” person likely uses up most of them as such:

sleep: the u.s. centers for disease control and prevention state that adults “typically need 7–9 hours,” so we’ll just take the average and say that sleep = 8.

wakeup/shower/getready. some folks can really just roll out of bed and go. good for them! hippies unite! that’ll buy them time for favorite extracurricular activities later in the day. (note: hipsters [vastly different from hippies, by the way] do NOT fall into this category, although they would have you believe as much. no, they spend a good amount of time cultivating their “not cultivated” look - are you aware of a product called “bedhead”? http://www.tigihaircare.com/consumer/en-NZ/bedhead/default.asp the idea is to get out of bed, take a shower, then make yourself look like you didn’t, in fact, just take a shower. what a waste of time! why not just skip the shower??) anyway, for those who can’t just roll and go, let’s say this time = 1 1/2 hours. this includes making and eating breakfast, coffee.

getting to work: we’ll be REAL generous here, and, just for the sake of balancing the wakeupshowergetready time and making an even #, say 30 minutes. however, many folks travel at least an hour BOTH WAYS every day! and as roads get continually more and more crowded due to the continual population explosion, poor civic planning and faltering public transportation services (as well as dillholes who create the inevitable highway stoppage because they’re too cool to drive less than 90 miles an hour), we’re going to up the 30 minute commute BACK HOME to an hour, so that each way = 45 minutes. so, total travel time = 1 1/2 hours.

work: (8 hour workday and 1 hour for lunch - although, let’s be honest, and say that probably MOST of america gets 30 minutes! (if that!) that’s 10 minutes to GO somewhere for lunch, 10 to GET BACK to your workspace. which leaves 10 minutes to shovel food into your mouth, which doesn’t even make it 1/2 way down your esophagus before you get back to the “office” - geez, no wonder efficiency/productivity declines in the afternoon hours, that is until we seek out more artificial stimulants in the way of coffee and chocolate to get us through the day.) so, work = 9 hours

(p.s. whatever happened to nap time? such a good idea. and not just for kids! ever heard of the siesta? it’s this little time, after lunch, throughout most of the rest of the world, to my understanding, when people REST. such a brilliant idea. but, america is not about brilliance. we’re about the good ole’ protestant work ethic. anyway, i digress.)

dinner? well, if you just happen to be the man of the house, you can go ahead and enjoy some of your leisure time while wifey cooks your damn food, you ungrateful ass. did you stop to think that she just worked a full-time job today as well, and got paid a lower wage for the same damn job? but, we won’t nit-pick between genders here. let’s just say that dinner = 1 hour. what’s that? you call this hour for dinner part of your “leisure time?” fine. i’ll give that hour to you for now, cause i don’t want to open a new can of worms just yet. but, i’m coming back to this soon, and with a vengeance. anyway, my point has been made. because out of those 24 hours, you’ve just lost 20 of them.

what will you do for yourself, and your pursuit of leisure, and your dreams and aspirations and goals and interests with your 4 hours?? (oh, and i should be clear, in saying that this very generous allotment of free time applies only to those who don’t have children. i can’t even begin to imagine where their free time goes....)

just try not to fall asleep in the recliner while you think about all the wonderful things you could be doing instead of watching reality TV because you are too brain dead to do anything else. it’d be a shame to miss out on how much weight someone just lost while dancing.

---------------------

i’ll be back soon to discuss our other “free” times: weekends and vacations (or lack thereof.)

A Wasteful America, Part One

2007-03-19T19:20:00.000-07:00

(note: this post is from a journal entry from last year... i am no longer working at the boosktore, as i have moved on to bigger and better things... i thought it would be fun to share this with "y'all" anyway...)

As many of you know, I work part time at a bookstore, in order to supplement my musician’s income. Whereas I have often had many gripes about the disorganization of this particular establishment, I have never really had any ethical problems with the way the company is run (that is, apart from our hourly wage, considering how much profit the store makes in a given day.) At least, not until one day this week.

Recently, I have been temporarily assigned the task of doing returns, which as you can probably guess, is sending overstocked books back to publishers for a refund. The process is quite simple: you scan the book’s barcode with a "PDT" (a fancy name for a REALLY expensive machine that constantly malfunctions), and the machine tells you which publisher the book comes from. You divide and conquer the books, separating them by publisher, then package and send them back. As a result, we not only bring money back into the store, but we also free up space for the relentless barrage of new books sent to us by the company’s home office. (No, really, if wars were fought with books, just think "shock and awe" and you’ll have an idea of how many books they bombard us with. The place really is a disaster area.)

Anyway, on Thursday, I was given the laborious task of returning the "mass market" books, which are generally paperback books printed in large quantities. The process for these returns is slightly different: you scan the book, strip the front cover off, and send all of the covers in a package to the company’s distribution center for the refund.

Passerby: "But, if you only send the covers back, then what happens to all the books?"

Well, passerby, I’m glad that you asked. WE THROW THEM ALL AWAY. Of any and all practices I have been privy to in my entire working life, this is by far the most detestable, primarily for two reasons – environmental and educational.

An Environment Going To Waste

So, let’s talk numbers. Now, I alone stripped and threw away 350 books on Thursday. (No, I did not take my clothes off! If you’re thinking that, then stop skimming and read a little slower, you naughty vixen!) When I returned to work on Friday, I asked the full-time "returns" guy how many books, on average, he throws away. He answered that every year he throws away at least 2000 books.

Are you kidding?

Think about this for just a second – we are talking about only ONE YEAR. This is probably more books than most academic scholars will own over the course of their entire life! One book for each year since the birth of Jesus!

Now think about this. I work for one of the "college division" stores of this company. Since it is a college bookstore, it is one of the smaller stores owned by the parent company. Therefore, it is very likely that the larger, non-collegiate stores are throwing away at least twice as many books per year, if not more than that. But, for simplicity’s sake, and since I haven’t been able to adequately research how many of these stores are part of the college division, we’ll give the parent company the benefit of the doubt and assume that each store is throwing away only 2000 books per year. Minimal research online will confirm that this particular company currently operates right around 800 stores throughout the US. Simple calculations therefore reveal that this company is throwing away a minimum of 1.6 million books per year. Multiply this number by each year the company is in operation and, well, you get the picture. This is not a good use of natural resources.

An Education Going To Waste

Now, let’s talk quality. Sure, many of these "striplist" books simply have not garnered any popular appeal during their short life span (for example, steamy romance novels, diet books, and works of obscure science fiction writers.) If I were only throwing away titles that nobody in their right mind would pay full price for, then I may not be as hesitant to toss them where I feel they belong. (But, then again, isn’t such a feeling entirely subjective in nature? If someone else were doing these returns, might they not keep certain books that I would quickly get rid of?)

However, I was quite astonished to see some of the titles that passed through my hands today. Some of the authors included Carl Jung, Sinclair Lewis, Victor Frankl, George Eliot, Walt Whitman and Umberto Eco. There were books by well-known Hispanic writers (such as Julia Alvarez and Isabella Allende) which might encourage non-English speakers to learn how to read in English. (Wasn’t there some recent debate about this very topic?) There were also books by accomplished African-American writers such as Maya Angelou and Alice Childress (which might somehow be used to encourage minority youths to turn to something other than drugs or gang violence, which seem so prevalent among inner-city populations.)

Some other books that I stripped and threw away:
Aesop’s Fables
SAT and LSAT Practice Tests
Foreign Language Dictionaries
Books on how to get into graduate school
Books on how to get scholarships & grants
Children’s books, including books by Maurice Sendak and Lemony Snicket
Merriam-Webster Vocabulary Building books
Books on World War II History
Health and Fitness books
And of course LOTS of fiction.

I hopefully don’t need to argue why these books belong somewhere OTHER than in a trash can. Wouldn’t these books be better off being donated to low-income school districts? Or to Goodwill Industries, or the public library? Hell, we could even just give them to the street vendors who sell books right down the street from our store!

In America, however, it’s not part of our corporate ethos to think this way. Somebody getting something for free without paying for it was never part of the plan, and will only encourage mass panhandling.

Better to throw away leftover food than give it to someone who is homeless and hungry. That’ll show ‘em.

2006-08-24T13:58:00.000-07:00

Ann Coulter, Ratdog, and deadhead Identity

{First set – Ann Coulter and Greek Culture}

Having just gone to see Ratdog at Radio City Music Hall several weeks ago, I started thinking about deadhead identity, which reminded me of a recent interview with Ann Coulter on jambands.com. I just re-read the interview, and wanted to respond to a couple of things… I do need to start off by admitting that, due to how busy (and sometimes lazy) I usually am, I really have not done a great job of keeping up with politics over the last few years – so I do not really know much about Coulter’s political views. However, there seems to be much animosity between her and persons that I have paid attention to and that I respect. Therefore, I am guessing that she and I would tend to disagree on many points….

The point that matters the most here: is Ann Coulter a deadhead? Whereas Taylor Hill, the interviewer, states, "there’s no doubting her tie-dyed credentials," the article does, in fact, leave me doubting her "credentials."
My primary response is to say that she is not really a "true" deadhead. Yet, what ARE the credentials for being a "deadhead?" I personally don’t believe that being able to claim attendance at a bunch of shows and knowing song titles makes one a deadhead. Since she grew up in a "preppie town," tends "to associate the Dead with lacrosse players," and hung out with fraternities, I’m guessing that she was in a sorority. Since she went to Cornell, and would go sailing before concerts, I’m guessing that she also has always had access to money, which often seems part and parcel of those involved in Greek culture (as well as politics).

In my personal experience, those involved in the Greek culture have a very identifiable appearance. Isn’t it quite easy to spot a "frat boy" or a "sorority girl," based on how they dress, talk, and act? Sure, there are folks in these groups who do not so easily fit the mold – but for the most part, there is almost a cookie cutter look to those involved in the Greek scene. Of course the same might be said of "deadheads," (or any group, for that matter) as entering a Dead parking lot is like traveling back in time. However, just as there were a few "true" deadheads who found their way into the Greek scene, it should not have surprised anyone that a few folks from that scene then found their way into the Dead scene. Cross-pollination has occurred – and naturally so, as these two groups need not be mutually exclusive.

However, in my personal opinion, those involved in the Greek scene have always had a tendency to be very fad-oriented. Even their very "uniform" gives them a distinctive look – most notably fraternity guys with their baseball cap turned backwards, the shades resting on the brim of the cap, etc… If I am right about Coulter being in a sorority, then she even displays in the interview this very tendency towards hopping on board with the fad. She says, "Truth be told I hated tie-dye, though I finally broke down and would wear tie-dyed Dead shirts to concerts solely as a tribute to my fellow deadheads." She follows this with several other "we were supposed to" statements, which further illustrate an almost BORG-like mentality about the deadhead subculture: "I even love ‘Alabama Getaway,’ which I gather deadheads are supposed to spurn for being ‘commercially successful.’ (Of course, we were also supposed to say, ‘Phil makes the band.’)" I’m sure there were many deadheads who liked this song. Likewise, I’m sure there were many that hated the song based solely on either the music or the lyrics (after all, don’t we all have certain songs that we love and hate?) And what the hell is this statement about Phil? Where did that come from?

So, is it possible to claim that at some point (probably before I even started going to Dead shows) the Dead became the latest fad for Greek culture? Is there any connection between this claim, the appearance on the top-40 charts and MTV of the hit song, 'Touch of Grey,' and the Dead’s rise to the top of the touring world? Please enlighten me on this, as I was not part of the touring scene before 1990. I heard that even through much of the ‘80s, it was a very relaxed atmosphere, and that much of that disappeared when the Dead started selling out football stadiums. Either way, at some point, it seems that the Dead became a de facto band of choice for Greek culture – not that it was the only band they listened to, but it surely became one of the bands that they ALL listened to. Does this mean that frat boys and sorority girls (including Coulter) are not "true" deadheads, but just folks jumping on the latest Greek craze?

{Set break – just a few visceral reactions to parts of her interview}:

Coulter: "Oddly enough, I like the music. No one believes that I never took drugs at Dead shows (except for the massive clouds of passive marijuana smoke) but I went because I really liked the music." WHAT? Oddly enough, she likes the music? As if the rest of those in attendance took drugs to compensate for the fact that they had to listen to the music? This comment alone convinces me that she really is not in tune with other deadheads.

Coulter: "Also there was a big deadhead Christian group that handed out terrific pamphlets at Dead shows. Admittedly, many of them found God staring into a puddle while high on LSD, but whatever the path, they were very serious Christians." This is just FULL of problems. First of all, MANY deadheads were raised Christian – and many still held some kind of faith in god long before they first experimented with drugs. Plus, the ritualistic feeling of Dead shows (as well as the religious experiences to be possibly found through attendance) was an obvious outlet for those seeking to continue some kind of positive communal experience without the rigid structure and often persecuting nature of churches. And, as Gertner points out in Weiner’s Perspectives on the Grateful Dead, there are also many Jewish deadheads. Coulter makes it sound like we were a bunch of godless heathens who just came to shows to take drugs and not listen to the music.

Coulter: "She might not like "Space", but no one who was not on drugs did." Okay, first of all (and correct me if I’m wrong), didn’t the wharf rats meet at the SET BREAK, and not during space? Second of all, I realized this was an interview, but her language almost suggests that however SHE (and her group of friends) felt about space was the agreed-upon feeling for all deadheads. Did she ask others about this? I guess I should not be surprised that someone with strong political leanings speaks, as just one part, on behalf of the WHOLE. I personally saw the Dead drunk, as well as on all kinds of drugs. But, I also saw them several times completely sober – and enjoyed drums and space at each show. All of these brazen statements, as well as others, lead me to strongly dismiss her "credentials" as a deadhead.

{Second Set – deadhead Identity)

So, at the Ratdog show, I was reminded of one of the things that used to bug me about shows: those persons who feel the need to sing EVERY word to EVERY song as loud as they can. Really, guys, (and it’s usually guys), I didn’t pay my hard earned money to hear YOU sing. I came to hear the band. (Keep in mind this is coming from a professional singer as well – so, maybe I’m also slightly judgmental about these guys because they really can’t sing.)

There was one guy in particular at the Ratdog show who not only did this, but he even sang the "sound bytes" of the songs (those lines that EVERYBODY knows and sings together in chorus) in anticipation BEFORE the musicians. It was as if he was saying, "See how well I know this song? I have memorized ALL the words!" Congratulations. You are in a class all your own.

I’ve often felt that people who sing all the words to all the songs were trying to prove something. Let’s face it – at some point in the history of the deadhead subculture, it became really freaking cool to be a deadhead. If you can gain entrance into a really cool group, and show that you can be as cool (and knowledgeable) as anybody in the group, then that must provide a strong feeling of acceptance and security.

Case in point: set lists. I honestly doubt that there was one particular point in deadhead subculture when one particular deadhead decided, "Hey, I wonder how cool I would look if I started referencing shows and set lists… like, ‘Hey man, remember 6/9/79? What a killer Shakedown that was! And into Scarlet – Fire ta boot!!’" No, I believe that this type of "language" evolved on its own, and became the norm of communication for deadheads to share the experience of the show with those who missed out that night. So, in order to be a "deadhead," hadn’t you better learn the lingo? Shouldn’t you get as many bootlegs as possible and be knowledgeable in what songs were played when? It seems like keeping set lists became more a matter of status than of practicality.

Hadn’t you also better go to as many shows as possible? Let’s face it – the number of shows one attended became a benchmark in the community, did it not? Of course, however, it’s not cool to know exactly how many you went to, as if you were counting. Coulter makes damn sure to make it clear that she does not know. (I, for one, do know how many shows I attended. But I’m not telling.)

So, is Coulter a true deadhead? Who is really qualified to say? I don’t believe that I, or anyone for that matter, regardless of how one feels about her, can truly say for sure, as the term "deadhead" is incredibly vague anyway. So I, for one, will say that it is not my place to say whether or not Coulter, or anyone else, is a deadhead. If she enjoys the music, then she should go to shows. I probably wouldn’t have much to say to her, but we ultimately go to listen to the music anyway, right? (Except, of course, for the majority of those in attendance, who go just for the drugs….)

However, Coulter states: "Apart from Al Gore, Al Franken is the most un-deadhead like person I know of who purports to be a deadhead." Even though we cannot say for sure if Coulter is a deadhead, I would say that as we attempt to label that which possibly could never be labeled, that somebody who thinks it is up for them to decide who is or is not a deadhead is, themselves, NOT a deadhead. (Although, by my own logic, I guess that statement makes me NOT a deadhead, right?)

{Encore – Comes a Time}

Perhaps there comes a time when we need to let go of trying to define what a deadhead is. Perhaps it is not up to anyone but the individual to accept or reject that label for themselves.

Coulter says, "There are various groups I get enthusiastic about for awhile, but of all the music I've listened to over the years, the Grateful Dead is the one band I never grow tired of." My good friend Matthew Hise (check out his work! http://www.matthewhise.com/), who was instrumental in turning me on to the Dead, one time categorized a deadhead as someone who can listen to the Dead at ANY given point… someone who will never grow tired of the Dead’s music. If Coulter wants to call herself a deadhead, then that is fine with me.

However, if folks are going to get into the business of whether or not they want to call themselves deadheads, then they need to recognize that they are part of a community that is greater than themselves. And if they want to take part in that community, I submit that they should adopt – and everyone should be encouraged to follow – Jesus’ mandate about praying found in Matthew 6 (which I strongly suggest for everyone to look up and digest), the gist of which is to do it in private, and not to do it openly to be seen by all. I would add to this that if any particular deadhead is an individual of national stature, then they should be very responsible and careful with what they say about the Dead and deadheads – because all it takes is ONE person who is well known to negatively color the minds and influence the opinions of the general public about this most beloved community of ours.

We can expect this from those outside of the community. The danger lies more with those on the inside who act irresponsibly.

You can re-read Coulter’s interview at:
http://www.jambands.com/Features/content_2006_06_23.06.phtml

Airports and Herd Mentality

2005-08-15T15:44:00.000-07:00

Two weeks ago, I traveled to Switzerland to sing the Verdi Requiem under the baton of James Levine. This was an incredible musical experience, as well as a fantastic trip for one such as myself who loves to travel – except where flying is concerned. That is to say, if flying is involved, I love the destination but not the actual journey. Call me a bad Buddhist. I try to apply the ‘in the moment’ approach to the rest of my life, but I sure do hate flying.

Now that I am in my "critique the world" mode, while on this recent trip I couldn’t help but notice something peculiar about human behavior when flying is involved. I cannot think of anywhere else that human beings act more like a herd of cattle (except maybe at a buffet), and it really is a sight to behold. Consider the two following examples…

LINES. In an airport, some waiting must be endured, and the check-in line in the airport lobby (as well as the security checkpoint line) is no exception. This type of line is similar to that found at rock concerts or sporting events, and is mostly unavoidable and necessary. However, while we were waiting at the terminal gate, an announcement was made that all passengers had to present documentation at another desk before boarding commenced. At this point, almost everyone in the terminal hurried to line up and wait to present said documentation.

Now, if you are thinking to yourself, "I’ll be cramped in the steerage compartment of this airplane for the next eight hours, so I’ll take this opportunity to wait in line and stretch my legs," then you are wise. However, I couldn’t help but wonder how many of these people rushed over to the line just because everyone else was rushing over to the line.

Another example of this action that begs scrutiny is the lineup to board the plane. Isn’t it bizarre that as soon as people hear the words, "Good afternoon, ladies and gentlemen," they grab their baggage and rush into a line? Listen, people, they are going to board those with special needs and first-class tickets before you, so just sit your economy-class self down and be patient.

As there is a plethora of seats in the waiting area, both of these types of lines are avoidable and unnecessary. In the first case, does it not make more sense to keep an eye on the line and to approach when there are just a few people in line, thereby producing a steadily moving small line? Or, in the second case, to wait until they are actually boarding the row in which you are sitting? If everyone took this approach, we wouldn’t all have to stand around waiting, constantly moving our carry-on baggage a mere 15 inches forward at a time. Alas, our herd mentality has conditioned us to participate in such unnecessary lines.
In itself, these lines are not a problem, save for two exceptions:

1. PEOPLE WHO COMPLAIN ABOUT LINES. If you are standing in a line when you don’t need to and you are the type of person who complains about waiting in lines, then shame on you. Sit down, keep you mouth shut, and wait until the line dies down.

2. The fact that a large group of people with lots of luggage creates a bottleneck in the terminal which is difficult to circumambulate. This is even more noticeable during boarding, as much of the line consists of those with seats in the front of the plane who are just in the way of those who are currently being boarded. This wouldn’t be such a problem if most people weren’t ostensibly oblivious to other people around them.

Personally, I just sat in my seat and complained about the lines (which you are allowed to do if sitting.)

BAGGAGE CLAIM. Why does EVERY passenger feel the need to stand RIGHT in front of the baggage claim conveyorbelt – even before the bags start circulating? The length of the conveyorbelt is not approximate to the number of passengers on a flight. This means that every person on a flight cannot all stand directly in front of the conveyorbelt at the same time. Which means that if EVERY person rushes to stand in front, there is once again a bottleneck, which gets worse with each piece of heavy luggage pulled off the conveyorbelt. Just stand back! You need to allow space for the luggage being pulled off!

This bottleneck also creates sight line issues. It is difficult to see if a bag is yours when there is a mob of people standing in front of you. Actually, it’s difficult to even see any bags! Does this sound familiar to anyone: standing on your tip-toes to see over the shoulders of the people in front of you, or peering through the small space in between two people to see the bags? And then there’s that rushed feeling of jerking up your luggage before it gets away from you, as you have little room to maneuver. I am a fairly laid back person, and don’t rush to get a good spot at the conveyorbelt. As a result, I always have to push through a crowd to get my bag, and then end up bumping into people with my luggage once I get my bag. I guess it serves them right. They should give a little breathing room.

How’s this for an idea… why don’t we all stand back away from the conveyorbelt. Then, EVERYONE will be able to see ALL the bags, and then when you see your bags coming through, you can move forward and easily retrieve them?

Ultimately, the problem is that in airports (and in many other public places), people seem to have the need to be first – first in line, first to get your bags – all at the expense of fluidity and order. This is a problem of either ego or impatience, both of which are problematic when you live in proximity to lots of other people. Maybe we all need to learn to get over ourselves or learn to relax. God forbid we have to wait an extra three minutes for our luggage to come around again.

The Problem of Over-Air Conditioning

2005-07-28T01:10:00.000-07:00

For the last few days, the New York Metropolitan area has experienced relatively high temperatures, even setting records in several nearby locations. We have been, according to the local newscasters, in an official heat wave. Now, as a southerner by birth, I do not really find it to be so incredibly unbearable up here. Sure, it’s hot. But that’s what summer is all about, right? After yet another bitterly cold winter, isn’t this heat just wonderful?

Several nights while I was in Stonington, I slept with the windows closed, covered by three blankets. We actually lit a fire in the fireplace one night - in the middle of July! Maine was a bit chilly for my tastes. I could not wait to get back to the extreme summer heat. However, now that I am back, I am already finding myself in an all-too-familiar scenario. Thus, let me introduce you to yet another problem I have noticed in America: The problem of over-air conditioning.

I really just don’t get it. I understand that not everybody shares my tastes for heat. When the temperature passes 85 degrees, I hear wailing and gnashing of teeth. But, honestly, America, do we need to make it that cold indoors? It often seems that the higher the temperature is outside, the more they blast the air inside. I thought I had finally learned my lesson about indoor air-conditioning, so when I went to a musical rehearsal tonight, I wore long pants and also took a long sleeve shirt. And, as many of you know, I have a full head of hair right now. Yet, I was still cold at points during the rehearsal. I’m sorry, but when it is 95 degrees outside, I usually don’t think about bringing a sweater and my winter hat when I walk out the door to go to work. However, my personal comfort temporarily aside, I would like to share two problems I see with air conditioning.

First, this is poor economic planning. Considering our current political and economic climate, it seems that everyone is concerned about finances, individuals and businesses alike. Does it not cost a lot of money to run air conditioning, especially in a large corporate building? The church where I am paid to sing, for instance, recently cut one of the choral services (due to budgetary constraints), causing numerous musicians to have to seek money elsewhere – one of the contributing factors to my current situation. Yet, every time I am in the building, I find it to be colder than necessary. Could they not save valuable economic resources by not blasting the AC? I know that churches are concerned about hell-fire and brimstone, but they really should relay this message through sermons, not through air conditioners.

Secondly, this is poor resource allocation. Right now, we should ALL agree that there is at least the mere possibility that we do NOT live on a planet that has limitless natural resources. (Unfortunately, I think there are probably people in this world who will not even grant that possibility). Considering the recurring power problems in the state of California, not to mention the memorable black out of the entire northeast two years ago, perhaps we should go on the offensive and start figuring out ways to tackle this problem before it gets out of hand. I believe one major way to contribute is to not use so much AC indoors. Let’s give the Power Company a break!

Now, of course, just as we do not all share the same tastes regarding heat, we likewise do not have the same reaction to air-conditioning. In fact, tonight, after mentioning to the guy next to me that I was cold, his response was one I have heard throughout my life: "You need to put some meat on your bones!" Fair enough. I will admit that I have a thin frame, which surely contributes to my being cold. (Which is why I dislike winter up here.) It’s really not my fault, though. I really do eat like a horse. Those of you who have seen me go to town on a buffet can attest. Honestly, if I devoted any more time to eating I would have to quit working altogether! (Which would not help my current financial situation.)

So, I am thin, and suffer through indoor air conditioning as a result. Still, it seems bizarre to me that a culture that is obsessed with health, that encourages personal fitness and places so much emphasis on the need to be thin, basically punishes all the thin people by setting the AC to unbearable levels for them. You’ll see what I mean if you will take notice of who is complaining about the building being cold.

So, ultimately, for those who love the heat of summer (specifically, the daytime heat), it is available for your enjoyment only if you have loads of free time on your hands (a category that I happen to currently fall under.) That being said, I’m glad that this period of under-employment can occur during the summer, as having a full-time job would be tantamount to winter for my skinny butt.

The Problem of Toilet Seat Etiquette in Public Restrooms

2005-07-26T15:38:00.000-07:00

So, I wonder… Have any of you males out there ever been chastised for "leaving the seat up" in the bathroom? Surely you have noticed that restroom etiquette, mostly according to females (starting with our mothers), dictates that the toilet seat should always be left down after finishing one’s business. Due to severe conditioning since a very early age, I have almost always blindly followed this feminine mandate like a good little soldier, even when I lived in the men’s dorm in college (well, okay, the boy’s dorm). However, there is an inherent problem with this mandate.

Dear reader, in case you haven’t noticed, in most public restrooms that men use (which encompasses countless establishments that have unisex restrooms), the toilet seats are NASTY. Why? I’ll tell you why: because they are COVERED IN URINE. Why are they covered in urine? Because some men are too stupid to lift the lid before they piss. Most of the time when I use a public restroom, I think that I’m the ONLY man who ever lifts the seat. I feel like I’m taking crazy pills here! Didn’t all men learn to lift the seat? Unfortunately, we men did not all grow up with Miss Manners.

Now that I think about it, a lot of men did not grow up with any common sense either. In retrospect, this toilet seat issue has ALWAYS confounded me because men occasionally have to sit down to do a "number two." And as every man (except those with bizarre fetishes) surely feels, it is absolutely disgusting to put your butt cheeks on another man’s urine. Can I get a witness on this one? Surely, we have ALL experienced the process of meticulously wiping off the seat (sometimes not so meticulous because business is calling rapidly) and have realized, in the process, how nasty it is that the seat – OUR seat in the present moment – is covered in human excrement.

SO, I have two pertinent questions:

1. Why in the world do some men NOT lift the seat? Guys, you ALL know that at some point YOU will have to sit for a #2 in a public restroom. So, WHAT ARE YOU THINKING by not lifting the seat for #1? You make me very sad. I try to tell my close female friends that men do not always have sex on the brain. But apparently, even as you are simply walking to the bathroom to do #1, you pass some hot woman, your brain shuts off, and you are unable to think about anything except how to get laid. I can’t think of any other possible explanation as to why you would urinate on a seat that you yourself might have to use in the future.

2. More importantly, why do women not only DEMAND that the seat be left down, but make such a BIG DEAL about it? "Oh my GOD, that’s so nasty – so inconsiderate – that man left the seat up!" Women, it makes me even sadder that your unceasing and unquestioning loyalty to convention, tradition, and standards has blinded your ability to think logically on this matter. I would think that in a culture full of men who urinate on your toilet seats, you would be THRILLED to see a man leave the seat up after using the toilet. You should encourage such behavior.

I would like to propose a solution: let’s make women do the work for a change. Let’s ALL leave the seat UP – let that be its natural resting position. If we can instill this idea nationwide, then we can all put the seat DOWN when we use the restroom (men, for #2 only, please) and it won’t be covered in urine, since the stupid, lazy, sex-always-on-the-brain man will not urinate all over the seat every time he goes to the john.

Pass this one on. Let’s see if this idea catches on. If it does, then it will merely be the first blow (of many) to convention, tradition, and standards that I intend to make over the course of these writings. Cause let’s face it. The world is messed up. It’s time to start fixing it.

Occupational Discrimination, Part I – "The 9 to 5 Breakfast Hierarchy"

2005-07-24T18:20:00.000-07:00

Today, I woke up at noon and went to the restaurant downstairs for an egg and cheese sandwich and coffee. It was quite tasty. It’s good to be back in New York – a city that has some advantages over many other places I have either visited or lived in over the course of my life. One such advantage is that in this city, there are numerous eating establishments offering breakfast food 24 hours a day. Due to the nature of the city and its millions of inhabitants (specifically, the countless different types of work of its inhabitants), not everyone works the same schedule. Some people work the so-called "normal" hours of 9 to 5. However, there are MANY persons who work 2nd or 3rd shift. There are even some who work what I will propose to be a 4th shift – that of artisans, musicians, writers, insomniacs, and drunks… those who have absolutely NO fixed schedule, but are always just going with whatever their schedule may be on any given day. So, in NYC, if Arnold the Artist, Mickey the Musician or Ian the Insomniac wakes up at 2pm (or even 6pm) there is always SOMEWHERE to get a bona fide breakfast: eggs, bacon, grits, toast – whatever suits your tastes.

I just finished a month of full-time work in the small coastal town of Stonington, Maine, singing in a world premiere of a new opera. One morning, when it was only 11am (which I, as a musician, still consider to be on the ‘early’ side), the only four eating establishments in town were no longer serving breakfast. "Sorry, we JUST stopped serving breakfast" was the recurring refrain.

Do all the eggs crack and run out the drain at 10:59am? Has the bacon gone bad? (Are pigs robbing banks?) Would it really be THAT difficult to scramble some eggs and toast some friggin’ bread for me before I begin MY workday?

This, my friends, is occupational discrimination. It suggest that the establishments of Stonington, Maine (thereby reflecting the attitude of the people who own, operate, and frequent these establishments) agree unanimously that there is a NORM (which shares the same Latin root as "normal") for when THE work day starts. And thus a norm for when the day ENDS as well – since the whole town shuts down at 9pm. Therefore, if you do not start your workday at the hours dictated by that NORM, then YOU ARE NOT NORMAL.

Stonington is the spitting image of many other places I have visited. In such places, if there is not a 24-hour diner nearby, then the assumption is that you should eat eggs, bacon, and grits when everyone else eats eggs, bacon, and grits. And if you do not agree with the assumption, then tough luck. You must eat eggs, bacon, and grits when everyone else does, or you will have to make your own (which assumes both that you can cook and that you have access to a kitchen, which may not be the case for every individual. Consider, for example, travelers passing through town or those with phobias of cooking.)

It is a shame that discrimination of others stretches this far into the social fabric of places such as that small fishing town full of early risers. Fine with me. If I lived there, I’d say that I would just get a 9 to 5 job and play according to ‘their’ schedule. However, if I can’t get a job in New York City, what kind of chance would I have of getting a job there? Oh well. Now that I’m home, I can get eggs and bacon at whatever time I wake up. So, I might as well sleep in tomorrow.

INTRODUCTORY BLOG: Greetings, cruel world! Now kiss my ass!

2005-07-24T18:10:00.000-07:00

hi folks, whoever you are. the time has finally come.

i recently applied for a job as a youth minister at an episcopal church. i was told that i do not meet their qualifications. this means that i have hit rock bottom in terms of my job search. since i have been involved in youth ministry in many different capacities for ALMOST 20 YEARS, let it thus be said:
if I am not qualified - based on my credentials, work experience, intellect, creativity, and passion - to be a youth minister (even after offering a letter of recommendation from the episcopal bishop of west virginia!) then i am not qualified to do ANYTHING.

if i told you the sheer number and scope of diversity of jobs for which i have applied (and been mostly ignored), you would probably stare blankly in disbelief and then break down into tears. it is absolutely amazing that nobody will consider hiring me for a full time job. but i have decided to stop feeling sorry for myself and stop doubting my abilities.

after almost a year and a half of searching for full-time work, with absolutely no luck; after becoming financially despondent as a result of not being able to find substantial gainful employment; after struggling with depression as a result of my financial problems:

i have decided to start writing. for several reasons.

reason #1. just for fun. i recently started "journaling" again, and have found that i not only love writing, but also think that i write pretty interesting stuff. so, i mostly just want to get my ideas "out there" in whatever way possible. i want to share them with people who take me seriously, since the people who do the hiring in New York City do not...

reason #2. perhaps this will help my job situation. IF you enjoy what you read (and i don't really care if you do), then feel free to forward it to your friends, family, or colleagues. especially if they work for a publisher, or can offer me a job as a freelance writer for a newspaper or magazine.

reason #3. life is short, especially in this age of terrorism. you do not know when 'your time' will come. if for any reason, 'my time' is to come soon, then I need to go ahead and start getting some of my ideas out there... out into the world. because, if I DON'T get these ideas out of my overactive and under-utilized brain (thanks so much for nothing, working world), then I AM GOING TO GO ABSOLUTELY CRAZY.

i don't know if anyone will actually read all this crap. this is more for MY benefit anyway. i just need to do something productive with my life after wasting the past year out of sheer boredom. so, enjoy the following entries, whenever they may trickle into the blog. (that sounds like good song lyrics...)