As I sit here trying to compose a post, my neighbor is singing "Kokomo" by the Beach Boys. I shit you not.
And yes, he's continuing with several lyrics. Not just the chorus then.
God help me.
When did people lose their concept of public versus private behavior? A bit of a loaded question -- he's not exactly posting his bits on the Internet over there, but our balconies are not but 2 feet away, and facing one another. He is facing me at this very moment, belting out a few bars of a substandard pop song with a video featuring a feather-haired John Stamos (ah, thank goodness he just stopped) while I type away on a keyboard. Really, is this some passive-aggressive thing? Or does he think I may appreciate the soundtrack?
Apologies for the Twitteresque post. It had to be shared.
This doesn't, but I'll do it anyway.
Do Not Want -- Kokomo
Tuesday, November 3, 2009
Kind of on the Fence About -- Top 5 Schadenfreude Websites
I love a good laugh at the expense of others as much as the next guy. And if you like laughing at strangers from the comfort of your own home then the Internet was made for you (Google's Do No Evil creed aside).
If you laugh watching people fall down stairs (who doesn't) or love making LOLCats-esque captions on found photos to send to friends, heh, I'm right there with you. I love that shit. I'll read your Tumbler blog devoted to bad mom jeans, and I was mocking mullets online when the Internet was in its diapers. It's just my own personal sense of vulnerability that keeps me from really loving all the new sites dedicated to pointing fingers at losers.
We're at a different place on the Web and in terms of technology, and because of this, any one of us could become the target of the scorn we heap on others from a distance. I'm well aware of the fact that I personally am getting older and am not the hep cat I once was. Who's to say the little number I throw together to go to the CVS at 3 am won't get cameraphoned by some high schooler and posted online because it makes my already-substantial rear look even more imposing? Or what if, after years of laughing at the poor, hamfisted, accidental Reply-to-Alls in various workplaces I make some embarrassing technological gaffe that is immediately captured as a screen shot to be shared across the Innertubes? What if I someday become a meme, a really bad meme!!
So it is with heavy heart, but still with a smirk, we ambivalently present IANOFT's Top 5 Schadenfreude Sites:
5. Lamebook -- Pretty funny Facebook blunders, made bittersweet when you consider the possible biological age/mental age of the people making the posts. The posts in which parents are calling out their youngsters within the discussion threads ("Who here's a virgin?" "Oh crap, sorry Mom, forgot I friended you") make me happy, though.
4. People of Walmart -- This site actually has a link for its hate mail (I love that), but really the haters have a weak argument. Are you being a big meanie if you post a picture of a 300-pound man wearing a thong and see-through bicycle shorts? Or are you chastising a very cruel and disrespectful 300-pound man and hopefully teaching him a lesson in social etiquette and manners. We should all consult our local priests and regroup on this important question.
3. This is Why You're Fat -- Oh, those people who occasionally eat shitty food. You're sooo much better than they are, aren't you? No, I'm not fat because I eat a cake made of 3 pizzas with Twinkies, ranch dressing, french fries, Rocky Road ice cream and bacon bits stuffed in between the layers. I'm just big boned. And this site made me totally crave a Monte Cristo sandwich, by the way.
2. The Dirty -- I don't club. And this site makes me glad I don't. If you looked at someone cross-eyed at a bar or dance club, chances are they put you on "blast, yo" on this site. The moderator/site owner (?) Nik seems like kind of a dick as he chimes in with insults (particularly regarding women's bodies), but there's some sort of needy Internet stardom the fake-baked, implanted and Ed Hardy-bedecked young people here are looking for. But there's also something weirdly intriguing about knowing who's a total player in your city. As I said, on the fence. Check here for your pics before job interviews.
1. Why the F Do You Have a Kid -- Honestly, this one will make you nervous for humanity. Even more so than you were before. Site NSFW, or a well-adjusted night-terror-free life.
If you laugh watching people fall down stairs (who doesn't) or love making LOLCats-esque captions on found photos to send to friends, heh, I'm right there with you. I love that shit. I'll read your Tumbler blog devoted to bad mom jeans, and I was mocking mullets online when the Internet was in its diapers. It's just my own personal sense of vulnerability that keeps me from really loving all the new sites dedicated to pointing fingers at losers.
We're at a different place on the Web and in terms of technology, and because of this, any one of us could become the target of the scorn we heap on others from a distance. I'm well aware of the fact that I personally am getting older and am not the hep cat I once was. Who's to say the little number I throw together to go to the CVS at 3 am won't get cameraphoned by some high schooler and posted online because it makes my already-substantial rear look even more imposing? Or what if, after years of laughing at the poor, hamfisted, accidental Reply-to-Alls in various workplaces I make some embarrassing technological gaffe that is immediately captured as a screen shot to be shared across the Innertubes? What if I someday become a meme, a really bad meme!!
So it is with heavy heart, but still with a smirk, we ambivalently present IANOFT's Top 5 Schadenfreude Sites:
5. Lamebook -- Pretty funny Facebook blunders, made bittersweet when you consider the possible biological age/mental age of the people making the posts. The posts in which parents are calling out their youngsters within the discussion threads ("Who here's a virgin?" "Oh crap, sorry Mom, forgot I friended you") make me happy, though.
4. People of Walmart -- This site actually has a link for its hate mail (I love that), but really the haters have a weak argument. Are you being a big meanie if you post a picture of a 300-pound man wearing a thong and see-through bicycle shorts? Or are you chastising a very cruel and disrespectful 300-pound man and hopefully teaching him a lesson in social etiquette and manners. We should all consult our local priests and regroup on this important question.
3. This is Why You're Fat -- Oh, those people who occasionally eat shitty food. You're sooo much better than they are, aren't you? No, I'm not fat because I eat a cake made of 3 pizzas with Twinkies, ranch dressing, french fries, Rocky Road ice cream and bacon bits stuffed in between the layers. I'm just big boned. And this site made me totally crave a Monte Cristo sandwich, by the way.
2. The Dirty -- I don't club. And this site makes me glad I don't. If you looked at someone cross-eyed at a bar or dance club, chances are they put you on "blast, yo" on this site. The moderator/site owner (?) Nik seems like kind of a dick as he chimes in with insults (particularly regarding women's bodies), but there's some sort of needy Internet stardom the fake-baked, implanted and Ed Hardy-bedecked young people here are looking for. But there's also something weirdly intriguing about knowing who's a total player in your city. As I said, on the fence. Check here for your pics before job interviews.
1. Why the F Do You Have a Kid -- Honestly, this one will make you nervous for humanity. Even more so than you were before. Site NSFW, or a well-adjusted night-terror-free life.
Monday, November 2, 2009
You Will Be Missed -- Richard Lawson's NYC Prep Recaps from Gawker
Ok, first off, could I be less timely with these posts? NYC Prep was on for a hot minute this summer and Lawson left Gawker before the season even ended. Despite that, I have to share. I told you this blog was random.
Like I said, this is super old news. But, the odd fantasy world Mr. Lawson has created within his recaps, which sometimes wander into Salinger meets Cheever meets Updike-like yarn-spinning narration, for the horrendous, borderline-irresponsible (join with me for the popular refrain of "Where are the parents?!) NYC Prep are worth returning to.
A little bit on NYC Prep: It's about a bunch of rich kids in New York who are held up for our ridicule. A little unfair in terms of a concept, no doubt. While we should have no compunction about mocking the frankly unbearable Vickies of Orange County or the vapidness of the bewigged Kims of Atlanta, the NYC crowd is underage, right? Is there some sort of Statutory Humiliation law in this country?
But Lawson's brilliantly observed tracts are littered with wonderful imagery, word choice (the lone public school girl in NYC Prep is named "Rags McTattershanty" in his posts)and insight that ameliorate one's shame at actually having watched this television abortion. And the feeling one gets in reading these pieces, that this gifted writer is battling with the idea that he is writing about frickin reality show teenagers to pay the billz, but still working to create something of value from this meaningless Bravo nonsense is at once inspiring and worthy of buckets of empathy for those of us contemplating our own cubicle-trapped days. And despite his mockery, his posts are never mean. In fact, his recaps recall the winsome turmoil of youth in a way the Bravo atrocity exhibition never did.*
So, Mr. Lawson, good on you sir. I will return to your Gawker archives with zeal.
*Disclosure: I will continue to watch whatever atrocities Bravo continues to churn out. It can't be helped.
Like I said, this is super old news. But, the odd fantasy world Mr. Lawson has created within his recaps, which sometimes wander into Salinger meets Cheever meets Updike-like yarn-spinning narration, for the horrendous, borderline-irresponsible (join with me for the popular refrain of "Where are the parents?!) NYC Prep are worth returning to.
A little bit on NYC Prep: It's about a bunch of rich kids in New York who are held up for our ridicule. A little unfair in terms of a concept, no doubt. While we should have no compunction about mocking the frankly unbearable Vickies of Orange County or the vapidness of the bewigged Kims of Atlanta, the NYC crowd is underage, right? Is there some sort of Statutory Humiliation law in this country?
But Lawson's brilliantly observed tracts are littered with wonderful imagery, word choice (the lone public school girl in NYC Prep is named "Rags McTattershanty" in his posts)and insight that ameliorate one's shame at actually having watched this television abortion. And the feeling one gets in reading these pieces, that this gifted writer is battling with the idea that he is writing about frickin reality show teenagers to pay the billz, but still working to create something of value from this meaningless Bravo nonsense is at once inspiring and worthy of buckets of empathy for those of us contemplating our own cubicle-trapped days. And despite his mockery, his posts are never mean. In fact, his recaps recall the winsome turmoil of youth in a way the Bravo atrocity exhibition never did.*
So, Mr. Lawson, good on you sir. I will return to your Gawker archives with zeal.
*Disclosure: I will continue to watch whatever atrocities Bravo continues to churn out. It can't be helped.
Favorite Thing -- Mad Men
Yep, not exactly stepping out on a limb with this one. Everyone loves AMC's Mad Men. You would be ostracized in some cocktail-sipping circles for not watching Mad Men.
It's a quiet, more deliberately paced television show than we've seen in a long time on non-premium cable (or ever?), and for some reason, the workplace-based show soothes me on Sunday nights as I fitfully think of the week ahead. And makes me yearn for a time when everyone had an office with a couch and could take 3-hour lunches. But that's another post.
The Atlantic has an interesting piece this month on why Mad Men works, and why it sometimes doesn't. I laughed at Benjamin Schwarz' comment that we like Mad Men because the New York Times' Style section tells us to (funny 'cuz it's true), but I don't buy into his theory that we like the un-PC elements of Mad Men because they make us feel a smug satisfaction, that we are so far beyond the implicit racism/sexism/classism of the early 60s. I think any other show would dwell on these elements, whereas Mad Men weaves the conventional wisdom of the time into the fabric of the show far better than other television dramas I've seen in the past. It serves to inform the characters rather than as a prop, or blunt reminder of the period setting -- I think it's a well-informed exercise in showing rather than telling, a mistake so many blundering narratives make. Just one girl talking. Anyhoo, his take on Betty Draper/January Jones' acting is spot on, though -- I hadn't been able to pin down what was off with her character but I've always thought Betty rang a bit false...
Head over to the Atlantic to read the whole piece:
It's a quiet, more deliberately paced television show than we've seen in a long time on non-premium cable (or ever?), and for some reason, the workplace-based show soothes me on Sunday nights as I fitfully think of the week ahead. And makes me yearn for a time when everyone had an office with a couch and could take 3-hour lunches. But that's another post.
The Atlantic has an interesting piece this month on why Mad Men works, and why it sometimes doesn't. I laughed at Benjamin Schwarz' comment that we like Mad Men because the New York Times' Style section tells us to (funny 'cuz it's true), but I don't buy into his theory that we like the un-PC elements of Mad Men because they make us feel a smug satisfaction, that we are so far beyond the implicit racism/sexism/classism of the early 60s. I think any other show would dwell on these elements, whereas Mad Men weaves the conventional wisdom of the time into the fabric of the show far better than other television dramas I've seen in the past. It serves to inform the characters rather than as a prop, or blunt reminder of the period setting -- I think it's a well-informed exercise in showing rather than telling, a mistake so many blundering narratives make. Just one girl talking. Anyhoo, his take on Betty Draper/January Jones' acting is spot on, though -- I hadn't been able to pin down what was off with her character but I've always thought Betty rang a bit false...
Head over to the Atlantic to read the whole piece:
What’s wrong—and what’s gloriously right—with AMC’s hit show
Sunday, November 1, 2009
Do Not Want -- Random people posting quotes by other random people
Okay, I'm pretty easy going, and I hate flaming other people on the Web for doing their thing. For God's sake, look at this blog. I'm not exactly blazing new trails on the information highway. There's one Web rule we all need to agree to and communicate out to our fellow time-wasters, post-haste:
A quotation is not a Status Update.
In it's very definition, a Satus Update is, well, and update on your status. What's going on with you today (or this minute, if you're one of those people who can't get your fingers off your Twitter)? What are you working on? A Mark Twain quote tells me neither of those things.
I'm not talking about the quote from a drunk friend the night before, or even the now-hoary-old-chestnut that is a Big Lebowski mention. I'm talking about those random, "Go get 'em, Tiger" quotes that are popping up everywhere I look. Listen, that's super-cool of you to want to motivate me and everyone else you tangentially know with a few inspirational words from somebody else. Super appreciate it. Yet, it's totally unnecessary. And I kind of don't want to see it anymore. Really. I can Google Bartlett's, too, if I have the urge.
I'm seeing fewer of these on Facebook (I think I unfriended most of the perpetrators in my circle), but I still see them on the roided-out MBA-having arrogance-fest that is LinkedIn. In case you don't use LinkedIn, it's basically Facebook for people who want something from you (a job, a fake recommendation that ignores their actual incompetence, etc) in exchange for the promise of a reciprocating action when you need something in the future. It's allegedly called networking, but we'll call it what it is. But I digress.
Kind of embarrassing, really.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)