"User generated Television. Create your life"

If you're my age, then your grandparents witnessed the birth of television. It was, in most ways, an upgrade to the old version of entertainment: the radio. Capitalizing on the usage of TWO of the five senses was enough to make it a marvel. It not only changed the face of entertainment, but of media and politics (see Kennedy V. Nixon debates 1960). If you're parents are as old as mine, they probably witnessed the next big improvement: the remote. No, no, I'm just kidding. I'm actually speaking about the first color televisions. Ultimately, this only enhanced the quality for one sense, rather than adding a new one. Yes, someday we'll have TV commercials where you can actually smell the greasy hamburger and corporate america will have one more way of brainwashing us. I mean, because they say smell is linked to memories and..........oops, there I go getting off topic. What I was trying to point out is that color TV was an improvement for the eyes, but it didn't really change HOW you experienced TV.

Anyone around today knows that we continue that train of advancement with televisions. We have LCD screens so we can see details. We have surround sound so we can hear a pin drop. We even put it in a lighter weight packaging, called the flat screen, so people would buy bigger TVs without fear of not being able to lift or move them. What I'm trying to illustrate is that the change from radio to television is much more monumental than HD or a plasma screen.

What I find to be the most intriguing change since the TV is the WAY we watch media today. Movie theaters have always been a sinkhole for money but with today's technology, many people have the equivalent in their living room. Forget Blue Ray; most cable companies offer viewing of brand new movies in full HD without the hassle of any shiny, metal frisbee. What about DVR? That has got to be considered a bigger change over than the color TV. No longer are people forced to sit down and watch shows when the network tells them to. Competition between "Chuck" and "House" are no longer an issue. Not to mention that ad rates will have to go WAY down because people can now skip past the commercials. 

And it's not just DVR that revolutionized how we watch, but also the internet. Most shows are viewable via Hulu.com and/or the channel website. In fact, this allows me to be watching one show on my TV and another on my computer...AT THE SAME TIME. Ok, I'm not saying I do that, but I am saying that it frees your TV up for other things. Like video games. No seriously, follow me on this one. I can exercise with my Wii Fit on my big screen TV, while watching the new episode of "Castle" streaming from my laptop. Talk about multitasking. So wait, with the increased technology we should all be a lot thinner...hmmm. Anyways, you catch my drift. DVR and the World Wide Web have altered WHEN, WHERE, and HOW we watch TV.

But what about WHAT we watch. We used to live in a two toned world. There were "television shows" and "movies." That was it. Ok, ya there were mini series, but who counts those anyways. Though our TVs are more colorful, the different types of things we watch has become grayer. Those of you younger fans know what I mean. They're called web series, webisodes, and video blogging. Bloggers like Natalie Tran do regular video postings on funny musings. Think sexy female version of Dave Barry. "The Office" (the U.S. version) posts side story webisodes that are only viewable online at NBC.com. Web series such as "The Guild" and "We Need Girlfriends" gain huge followings just like any normal TV shows would. Some web series, like Dr. Horrible's Sing Along Blog (created during the writer's strike) even harness the power of celebrities such as "How I Met Your Mother" star Neil Patrick Harris, "Castle" namesake Nathan Fillion, and "Big Bang Theory" actor Simon Helberg. But the internet has also created stars from viral videos such as "Tron Guy," "Star Wars Kid," "Chocolate Rain," "Leave Britney Alone," "Numa Numa," and "David After Dentist" (just to name a few off the top of my head). I think you know you're a star when you are not only being parodied on the internet, but on TV shows such as "South Park."

So if the switch from TV to Web wasn't confusing enough, now many internet based media is crossing over into television. These hybrids include web series such as "Qurterlife" (NBC 2008) and "FRED" (Nickelodeon 2010). Do we still call them web series if we see them on TV? Noun aside, I think many people view the information superhighway as a major invention but they forget just how much it has transformed our entertainment industry. 

Ok, so maybe the radio adding a second sense to the mix is a bigger deal than changing the what, where, when, and how we partake in our shows, but it has to be a close second. All I know is I'm going to go watch some more "A Very Potter Musical."*

"User generated Television. Create your life" -Quarterlife

*As well, "A Very Potter Musical" lead Darren Criss has crossed over into television as a recurring role on Fox's "Glee." This was originally my topic for this blog but it somehow got left out so I leave it here in the footnotes. 

Walking the Dog

"After all the shows,
after all the boys of summer had gone,
amid all the confusion
and friends I've been losing
I always thought from the start
I'd be the one moving on.
I guess I'll never know
Where all the boys of summer will go
but I'll miss what we made
and the days were not wasted.
There are some things I may never know."

3 months later. I am finally able to revisit the craziest summer of my life. I have bittersweet feelings about the whole ordeal but felt the best thing to do was focus on what I can take from it. So what I have learned this Summer is listed below:

• If he acts nervous and can't put on a condom, he's probably a virgin
• The best part of a leap of faith is not the safe landing, but the free fall
• The Summer of '10, like Ke$ha, may have seemed good at first, but you soon realize it's nothing but fake sentiment, lowered inhibitions, and void of all intelligence. 
• It doesn't matter if you're 19 or 41. Men of ALL ages act as immature as a 16 year old. 
• I must have good taste because every one's after my sloppy seconds
• If you're too mature to work you problems out via a phone conversation, rather than text messaging, then you should reeducate yourself on the definition of the word "mature."
• Stick with people who have your back, not a knife to your back. 
• Hold strong to your morals. If someone is really your friend they will respect you for that, not turn you away.
• Fool me once, shame on you. Fool me twice, shame on me....but after that, don't try to fool your job.
• You don't have to say too much....
• The scars from the rocks will always remind me to live for the moment but also remember that every action has a consequence. 
• Sometimes, paradise is closer than you think. Mine was Lake Fontana. But I've also realized that nirvana comes with a price.
• Blind dates are awkward as hell and some people REALLY shouldn't play match maker.
• I don't know what idiot invented the two-person kayak but they should have known, it's really a solo sport for lonely souls.
• If you know your Achilles' Heel, then why don't you work to fix it?
• A rum cake can feed a small African nation but the money some people spend on a pair of designer sunglasses can feed a large one.
• Irony is when the creator of the NDC is the person who thrives on drama

I learned that this Summer has made me the most jaded I've ever been about people. I am feeling that I really can't trust anybody anymore. This is painful because, although I was always cynical, I did like the part of me that gave people the benefit of the doubt. But now I am learning the hardest lesson of all. That people's actions rarely make sense and even if they have a valid reason, they will never tell you. It's like an episode of unsolved mysteries. "There are some things I may never know..."

Lose the English Language

Even when I lived in NYC, I always felt like I was behind in social trends such as fashion, music, technology, and slang. So the newest idiocy...er I mean idiom to catch me ear this Summer is "Lose My Number." I did some research and found a very fascinating article from The Independent, talking about how the phrase was the top Twitter trend (#losemynumber) in November 2009. Of course, our current younger generations don't have time to type such a long phrase so it has been abbreviated lmn (according to Urban Dictionary). The issue I have with this new pop acronym is the paradoxical hilarity. 


Let me back up with a few definitions. Urban Dictionary defines lmn as: "If someone you really don't want to talk to, ever again, keeps calling or texting you and blowing up your phone, Tell them LMN." 
***(on a side note, "blowing up your phone" is another phrase I can't stand, but that's a tangent I wont get into here.) *** 
The dictionary defines lose as: "To be unsuccessful in retaining possession of." I don't know about you, but to me that translates to "accidentally." I can "unsuccessfully retain my house key" by accident, but I can't purposely lose them. I can intentionally delete or erase a phone number from my phone or address book, but I can't intentionally lose it. Do you see where I'm going with this? Now if I went to a club, got a guys number on a coaster, and then accidentally left the coaster on the table, that would be "losing his number." But if I get the guys number, go home and throw it out cause I have no interest in calling him, that's not "losing" but getting ride of his number. 


It is another common misuse of a word in the English Language. What worries me most is what it says about the up and coming generations who create and perpetuate these moronic phrases. Maybe its a parapraxis that shows a deeper feeling of loss and lack of control over someone else "deleting your number." Maybe more people need to go to a college English class instead of just going to bars and hooking up. Maybe they lost their brain and I'll find it with their number somewhere. Until then, don't bother losing my number, I know you're not that talented. As Chad always says, "Peace Out, Sucka!"

Shattered Conflict

Both Kurt Vonnegut and Margaret Atwood have written amazing essays about storytelling. I would be kidding myself if I thought I could write anything even close to that caliber. Yet I felt that some sort of comparative between plot structure and real life is inevitable for my blog so here it goes...

In high school English we were taught about plot structure. this is the classic story arc we all remember: It starts with the exposition till a major problem hits (also know as the "conflict"). From there we get the rising action, the climax, the falling action, and then the denouement. We all know this is an over simplified version of any story, and even more so of real life, but it is an easy way to section a narrative. then again, maybe we are kidding ourselves in thinking that life is not that simple.

A couple weeks ago at work I experienced a similar plot structure. It was an average day. The characters and setting were introduced via the normal evening shift change. People checked in, found out where they would be working, and standard activity commenced. that is, until Aidan dropped the glasses. It really was like out of a movie. I'm standing there doing my job and then, as if in slow motion, I see 50 glasses crashing to the floor. The dolly had hit a drain and that rut was the beginning of a negative spiral to to rock bottom. the details about the rest of the night are not really important. Simply put, one by one my fellow co workers crashed either physically or mentally. I found myself spending the night picking up the shattered pieces while trying to salvage what was still whole.

Perhaps I am over using this metaphor, but this instance made me think a lot about that initial conflict often cited in a plot narrative study. As I delved deeper into this idea, it made me wonder if I could place the initial conflict in my own life; that one instance where everything started to spiral out of control. that moment in time when my life went into the rising action that's fit for the silver screen. Did I have my own breaking glass incident that started the drama of my life or is the model truly too basic to apply to one's life? Personally, I think it is impossible to analyze a story until you've finished reading it. That being said, I myself will never be able to realize where my initial conflict occurred until my denouement is complete. Maybe it's better that way.

Your Move...Check Mate

I was never very good at chess. Whenever someone would say "it's your move" I would tense up. So much pressure mixed with a total lack of skill for the strategy. We've all been there. I mean we can't be good at everything. So what do you do when the game you are less than confident about is the dating game? I've always been a timid one when first meeting a prospective mate. I feel awkward, self conscious, and over all clueless. But just recently I finally sat down and tried to analyze an often under discussed issue: who's job is it to make the first move?

No one wants to look like the fool; no one wants to be rejected. Yet ultimately, someone has to step up to the plate and get the ball rolling. The question is Who. So I went on a mission to discover how society felt on the subject. Most people gave me the easy, I mean generic answers: "I donno" and "depends on the situation." To me that proved that most people were just as lost on this issue as I was. So I kept probing and received a couple of interesting answers. One guy admitted his response was old fashioned, but he still put the responsibility on the guy. I had a handful of girls say the same thing but I believe that is do to their lack of nerve more than anything else. It's always easier to pass the buck. I asked people if age or experience played a factor. If someone is older, are they expected to make the first move because they've been in that situation more? When given this prompt, a lot of people agreed but since it was fed to them I consider that framing bias. When I asked my best friend who should make the first move, he gave me most interesting response. He said it is the responsibility of whomever wants it the most. While this is clearly the most logical answer, most people do not not approach the situation that way.

As always, I tried to apply this concept to my own life. I looked at my past and realized 99% of the time I waited for the other person to make the first move. I assume this stems from my lack of self esteem more than anything else. Yet, that justification did not make me feel any better about my prior actions so I looked to change this vicious cycle. Recently, I started playing the game again. A guy and I had hit the stalemate point; nether of us moving for fear of exposing our most prized piece: our king of pride. I ran through all the scenarios of my research trying to determine who's job it was to make a game changing move. Unfortunately, my findings landed me with conflicting conclusions. He was a guy so maybe it was his responsibility, but I was older so maybe it was mine. How could I determine who wanted it more? Perhaps this was the catch-22. 

I wish the moral of this blog could simply be: forget the rules and take matters into your own hands. There's no time like the present. Seize the day...etc etc. But that would make me a hypocrite because I did no such thing. I told myself I would and yet I subconsciously found a a middle man to negotiate the draw. Then again, maybe there's nothing wrong with that approach. If fear of rejection is taken out of the mix, both players can relax and not care who's Queen takes King. 

So lets just check and mate. 

 

You Know What Thomas Wolfe Says...

Don't ask me to repeat the famous quote; I've talked about it a million times on blogs and I don't want to be repetitive. Instead, I want to write something short about my newest revelation from last night.

Home
"Home is where the heart is"
"Home, is this the quite place where you should be alone?"
"Where thou art, that is home"

There are many different quotes and phrases that discuss the notion of home. But for me, I have learned that "Home" is a concept that only resides in the past. You remember what Cinderella said, right? No, not the girl who can't keep her shoes on; the band. They said "Don't know what you got till it's gone." Ignoring the obvious grammatical errors, Tom Keifer has a cliché but valid point. In my experience, I have never felt at home anywhere. It wasn't until I moved to NYC that I found myself missing "my home" (Asheville). But that home was in the past. Yet when I moved back to Asheville, I found myself missing NYC, and feeling "homesick" for it. Now that I'm gone, I think of NYC fondly as a home I once had. 

Maybe this is just me. Maybe you are saying to yourself "I've lived in this house, in this town for 5 years. I'm married, with kids, a good job, and a settled life here. Of course I call this my home, and that's in the present tense." I'm not going to argue with you because I've never felt that way so maybe I can't relate. But, I do think this idea is rooted into our culture somewhat.  Take Facebook (or any networking site) for example. One of the fields you're asked to fill in is "Hometown." Does anyone actually know what this means? Although people may differ in the definition, I think everyone will agree that this field is populated by a city you used to live in. This is clearly illustrated by the fact that there is another field titled "Current City." So here we see society reaffirming my notion that a home can only be in the past; or at least a hometown. 

Maybe it's just me, but I think it is impossible to realize I feel at home somewhere until I've moved on.  "Now I know what I got, It's just this song, And it ain't easy to get back, Takes so long." Cinderella knew you could never go home again. Oops, there I go being repetitive....

Born in the USA

Sorry readers, it has been a while since my last post. Part of it is because I haven't been inspired. The other part is because blogging is a dangerous activity that people try to use against you. But rather than live in fear of what I say, I am back blogging about my newest quandary: "American Idol"

The name alone sparks issues. It is said that more people vote for "American Idol" than president of the United States. Whether or not that's true, the concept of the show brings about one main assumption: the public votes for who they want to see as the new Music Star. Although this sounds simple, the concept itself is very flawed. the idea is that people are voting for the next big thing. As history has proved, it doesn't work out that way. I am not trying to say that Idol winners have not reached a level of fame otherwise unachievable. Yet I do think it is hard to argue that they have become the "Idols" that you would think with the amount of votes/American support they receive. The easy example is Ruben Studdard. He beat out Clay Aiken whom we all know has become way more successful. Even people like Fantasia have had to resort to VH1 reality TV shows to keep her fame and payroll. I am not denying that each and everyone of these Idols are talented. I am trying to make an observation about the voting public

Remember high school elections? Remember how the most popular person won, rather than the best qualified? I think that is sort of the case here. The contestants of Idol are not allowed to compete with their own music. Instead, week after week, they are told to sing a song that fits the day's theme. Therefore, the voting public never gets a real sense of the singer's music, but rather how they sound singing other genres and classic tunes. Once an artist gets out into the recording world, his/her sound differs greatly from the famous music they were forced to sing on Idol. Quickly, the American public realizes they have no interest in this singer's "sound" and record sales decrease. This has nothing to do with the talent of the artist, but rather the design of the system that has propelled them to fame. People aren't voting for the musician they like best, but rather the singing voice and personality that appeals to them. How many people go into a record store (or iTunes for this day and age) and base there purchases solely on those 2 criteria?

Maybe I'm bias cause I don't watch the show but I really don't see the logic in it. I spend 3 days a week riding around in my best friend's car with the radio blasting. Can you guess how many times I've heard a Taylor Hicks song? And in case you think I've been living under a rock, I just youtubed him and more videos from American Idol showed up than his actual singles. What does that tell you? But let me know how you think.