Saturday, December 11, 2004
Astounding karmic cartoon
A couple of nights ago, I saw a show on the Comedy Channel called "Jump Cuts" that featured a series of animated shorts (including the gift-related one I mentioned in a recent post), and there was one that, although the artwork was primitive, totally blew me away:
It started out with 2 bugs stuck on the windshield of a car; the 1st bug, who just has a leg trapped under the wiper, points out to the 2nd bug that its guts are leaking out onto the windshield. The 2nd bug says, "Oh man, I had so much I wanted to do; I'd always hoped to make some sort of contribution, you know, to the bigger picture, give some meaning to my existence," and the 1st bug says, "Maybe you have and you just don't know it yet; God knows how many hurricanes my flapping wings are responsible for"; they exchange a few more lines, and then the driver of the car turns the wipers on, smearing the entire windshield with a layer of opaque green goo (yeah, that's gross, but stick with me for a minute, it's worth it). The driver belatedly tries to squirt on some washer fluid, but there isn't any, and because he can't see and is too stupid to hit the brakes, he goes roaring off of the road and crashes headlong into a tree, wrecking the car. We see the 1st bug flying away from the scene, and I was starting to snicker about what great "revenge" the 2nd bug had gotten, and was wondering if they'd show the surviving bug laughing or cheering or some such thing, when the trunk of the car popped open... and a little girl with tape over her mouth stood up inside of it.
!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
I was in absolute AWE; never in a million years would I have guessed that ending. The idea that the death of a bug could lead to a child escaping what we can only assume would have been a horrible fate at the hands of a man who was a pervert or killer or both is utterly stupendous, as is the message that, if you want to make a contribution and have a meaningful existence, you CAN do just that, although not always in the form you would have wished; karma, and therefore life, is often that way, which is why we have that saying about being careful what you wish for.
Update:
This series only lasted 4 episodes, and hasn't been shown since its cancellation as far as I can determine; there's no longer even a mention of it on the Comedy Central website. In case they ever decide to show it again, this clip was in Episode One, it's called "Bumble Beeing," and it was described as "Two bugs confront meaninglessness and a windshield." You don't need to wait for that to happen, though, because the creator of the animation (which it turns out was featured in the 2003 Sundance Film Festival), Billy Blob, has put it on his website in its entirety (including bits that didn't make it to the TV show) here:
http://billyblob.com/cartoons/bumble-beeing/
I didn't originally see the part of the cartoon with the radio news talking about the missing girl, and I don't know whether that part was cut out of the version shown in "Jump Cuts" (along with the driver's nose-picking), or if I just noticed the clip being shown well after it started; in a way, I'm glad I DIDN'T see that part the 1st time I saw it, because it might have tipped me off... either way, it's a brilliant piece, so do go and see it.
It started out with 2 bugs stuck on the windshield of a car; the 1st bug, who just has a leg trapped under the wiper, points out to the 2nd bug that its guts are leaking out onto the windshield. The 2nd bug says, "Oh man, I had so much I wanted to do; I'd always hoped to make some sort of contribution, you know, to the bigger picture, give some meaning to my existence," and the 1st bug says, "Maybe you have and you just don't know it yet; God knows how many hurricanes my flapping wings are responsible for"; they exchange a few more lines, and then the driver of the car turns the wipers on, smearing the entire windshield with a layer of opaque green goo (yeah, that's gross, but stick with me for a minute, it's worth it). The driver belatedly tries to squirt on some washer fluid, but there isn't any, and because he can't see and is too stupid to hit the brakes, he goes roaring off of the road and crashes headlong into a tree, wrecking the car. We see the 1st bug flying away from the scene, and I was starting to snicker about what great "revenge" the 2nd bug had gotten, and was wondering if they'd show the surviving bug laughing or cheering or some such thing, when the trunk of the car popped open... and a little girl with tape over her mouth stood up inside of it.
!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
I was in absolute AWE; never in a million years would I have guessed that ending. The idea that the death of a bug could lead to a child escaping what we can only assume would have been a horrible fate at the hands of a man who was a pervert or killer or both is utterly stupendous, as is the message that, if you want to make a contribution and have a meaningful existence, you CAN do just that, although not always in the form you would have wished; karma, and therefore life, is often that way, which is why we have that saying about being careful what you wish for.
Update:
This series only lasted 4 episodes, and hasn't been shown since its cancellation as far as I can determine; there's no longer even a mention of it on the Comedy Central website. In case they ever decide to show it again, this clip was in Episode One, it's called "Bumble Beeing," and it was described as "Two bugs confront meaninglessness and a windshield." You don't need to wait for that to happen, though, because the creator of the animation (which it turns out was featured in the 2003 Sundance Film Festival), Billy Blob, has put it on his website in its entirety (including bits that didn't make it to the TV show) here:
http://billyblob.com/cartoons/bumble-beeing/
I didn't originally see the part of the cartoon with the radio news talking about the missing girl, and I don't know whether that part was cut out of the version shown in "Jump Cuts" (along with the driver's nose-picking), or if I just noticed the clip being shown well after it started; in a way, I'm glad I DIDN'T see that part the 1st time I saw it, because it might have tipped me off... either way, it's a brilliant piece, so do go and see it.
Friday, December 10, 2004
Karma strikes again, in a BIG way
You might remember hearing a few months ago that a woman who had donated a kidney to a total stranger had won a half million dollars from a lottery scratch-off ticket in Virginia; I posted about it on June 17. Yesterday, my buddy Haws, whose fine blog is here:
http://www.hawspipe.blogspot.com/
posted (in the comments to his recent essay about karma) the URL to an equally astonishing story; Debi Faris-Cifelli, who helped get California's safe-haven law (which allows parents to leave unwanted babies where they'll get care without risking criminal prosecution, the idea being to keep babies out of dumpsters) passed, and who has dedicated herself to spreading the word about it to save babies, AND to giving babies that are found abandoned and dead a decent burial, has won a California lottery jackpot of $27 million... with only the 3rd ticket that she and her husband had ever bought. You can read the full story, and about more of her extensive do-gooding, here:
http://ap.tbo.com/ap/breaking/MGBHW69JG2E.html
That 2 women who were so overwhelmingly deserving of karmic rewards won the lottery within a few months of each other blows me away. To those who'd point out that most lottery winners are NOT so heroic, I'd point out that only a minuscule % of people are that good, and only an equally minuscule % of people who play the lottery win, so the amazing thing is that those 2 groups EVER had any overlap. much less that it happened twice within such a short period of time. Could it still be a coincidence? Sure. Will I ever believe that it was? Nope. :-)
http://www.hawspipe.blogspot.com/
posted (in the comments to his recent essay about karma) the URL to an equally astonishing story; Debi Faris-Cifelli, who helped get California's safe-haven law (which allows parents to leave unwanted babies where they'll get care without risking criminal prosecution, the idea being to keep babies out of dumpsters) passed, and who has dedicated herself to spreading the word about it to save babies, AND to giving babies that are found abandoned and dead a decent burial, has won a California lottery jackpot of $27 million... with only the 3rd ticket that she and her husband had ever bought. You can read the full story, and about more of her extensive do-gooding, here:
http://ap.tbo.com/ap/breaking/MGBHW69JG2E.html
That 2 women who were so overwhelmingly deserving of karmic rewards won the lottery within a few months of each other blows me away. To those who'd point out that most lottery winners are NOT so heroic, I'd point out that only a minuscule % of people are that good, and only an equally minuscule % of people who play the lottery win, so the amazing thing is that those 2 groups EVER had any overlap. much less that it happened twice within such a short period of time. Could it still be a coincidence? Sure. Will I ever believe that it was? Nope. :-)
Thursday, December 09, 2004
Picking out Christmas gifts
It's always amazed me how difficult this is for most people; if you know someone, even a little bit, you should have SOME idea what they like, and as a human being with a brain you should be able to figure out what they will NOT like. For example:
No one likes gifts the hidden message of which is "You need to change, you're not good enough as you are now"; unless specifically asked for, therefore, things like gym memberships and exercise equipment are OUT (no matter HOW overweight or out of shape the proposed recipient is), as are cookbooks or pots and pans for someone doesn't cook (no matter how horrible you think their diet of microwave meals is), and clothing of a radically different style than the recipient wears (no matter how sure you are that they need to dress better)... these sorts of proddings are disrespectful enough during the rest of the year without poisoning Christmas with them.
Just as bad are gifts which are intended to make the recipient do something that you think they "should be" doing; art materials or musical instruments shouldn't be given to people who've expressed no interest in exploring those avenues, however talented you think they are or might be, embroidery or stamp collecting kits shouldn't be handed out just because other members of the family are into those things, and books on baby care are out of the question for those with no kids and no current desire for any, no matter how desperate you are for grandkids... it's not your job to force or manipulate people into "improving" their lives.
Because no one wants a gift relating to an interest they don't have, don't give bubble bath to the woman who's never mentioned taking tub baths, or wine to the man who's never mentioned drinking anything but beer, or books to someone who doesn't read anything other than the listings in TV Guide, or a marmalade of the month club membership to someone whose idea of breakfast is a power bar... even if the gift is objectively nice, it's worthless to the recipient. (Note: a weird short piece just came on the Comedy Channel... an animated thing with a guy who was listing all these freaky, inappropriate gifts he might buy for this woman... coincidence?)
People also don't like gifts that are contrary to their preferences; don't give a green shirt to the guy who only wears black, or a fleece jacket to the woman who always wears cardigans, or a dog figurine to a cat lover, or perfume/cologne to a person who doesn't wear scent... when picking a gift, ask yourself honestly if it fits in with what the person already has and therefore likes.
Another mistake is using a gift to pull a fast one, by giving the victim something YOU want (but they would NOT) as an indirect way of giving it to yourself; I saw an example in an ad today, where the husband gives the wife a fishing pole that she obviously has no clue how to use, but that HE'S all excited about. My husband has slipped up with this one, bypassing the wifely approval process for Christmas decorations by giving me some hideous ones that HE liked as "gifts." The most common example of this trick is the man giving the woman lingerie; sorry, fellas, but the woman does NOT get any pleasure from the lingerie, and she DOES know that it's really a gift for YOU, so save the lace teddies for your birthday. Another sadly common one is the man getting a household appliance as a "gift" for the woman; unless you really love sleeping on the couch, you should just buy appliances as they're needed throughout the year (with full spousal input, of course), and avoid the appliance department entirely when looking for a gift for the better 1/2... head to the jewelry department instead, and maybe she'll wear that lingerie you tried to pass off as a gift to her on Valentine's Day.
A related version of this problem is letting YOUR preferences influence the purchase of an item that isn't for you; when you find a shirt that you know will be perfect for your sister, if your favorite color is red and her favorite color is blue, buy the BLUE one, no matter how much better you like the red one... that old gift-giving rule about buying people stuff that you'd like to receive yourself is only meant to keep you from giving people garbage, not for you to deliberately choose an item the recipient will like less because it's what you'd prefer.
Parents of preteen kids are famous for faking the kids out with what LOOK like gifts, as they're wrapped up and under the tree, but end up being pajamas, underwear, or other clothing items... and they either don't notice or don't care that their kids are badly disappointed every time this happens. Parents, until your kid gets old enough to ASK for clothing, clothes do NOT count as gifts; just buy what they need and put it in their rooms like you do the rest of the year, and make sure that everything the kids unwrap on Christmas are things they WANT.
The final category of gifts that people don't like are those so awful that NO ONE would ever like them; you know perfectly well what sorts of things I mean here, and there's no excuse to buy them, or for "recycling" them if they're given to you, either.
Getting presents that people WILL like is easy; use the information you have about their personal style, hobbies, collections, sports, pets, and favorite music, colors, movies, foods, and anything else they've ever said about what they like, want, or used to have and wish they had again, as purchasing guidelines. You can mess up an otherwise good, well-intentioned gift by ignoring important details, though; for example, your nephew has been begging for Spiderman pajamas, and you get him some... in the size he wore 6 months ago... and 5 other relatives got them for him as well. You know your aunt always wears perfume, so you get her some wonderful-smelling stuff in a beautiful bottle... but it's a musky scent and she only wears floral scents. You know who your brother's favorite author is, so you get him the hardcover edition of that writer's latest book... but your brother got a copy for himself as soon as it was released. You remember your friend saying she wanted a new lamp for her nightstand, and you find a lamp in a style you know she'll love... but it's orange, and her bedroom is yellow. It's easy to get so excited about finding a great gift for someone that you rush blindly to buy it, but taking a few minutes to think it through, and to maybe check with parents or spouses about what loved ones that don't live with you have or prefer, will save you alot of returns and exchanges.
Using these simple guidelines, you can pick out gifts that you can be PROUD to give... and don't be surprised if you get some good "gift karma" in return.
No one likes gifts the hidden message of which is "You need to change, you're not good enough as you are now"; unless specifically asked for, therefore, things like gym memberships and exercise equipment are OUT (no matter HOW overweight or out of shape the proposed recipient is), as are cookbooks or pots and pans for someone doesn't cook (no matter how horrible you think their diet of microwave meals is), and clothing of a radically different style than the recipient wears (no matter how sure you are that they need to dress better)... these sorts of proddings are disrespectful enough during the rest of the year without poisoning Christmas with them.
Just as bad are gifts which are intended to make the recipient do something that you think they "should be" doing; art materials or musical instruments shouldn't be given to people who've expressed no interest in exploring those avenues, however talented you think they are or might be, embroidery or stamp collecting kits shouldn't be handed out just because other members of the family are into those things, and books on baby care are out of the question for those with no kids and no current desire for any, no matter how desperate you are for grandkids... it's not your job to force or manipulate people into "improving" their lives.
Because no one wants a gift relating to an interest they don't have, don't give bubble bath to the woman who's never mentioned taking tub baths, or wine to the man who's never mentioned drinking anything but beer, or books to someone who doesn't read anything other than the listings in TV Guide, or a marmalade of the month club membership to someone whose idea of breakfast is a power bar... even if the gift is objectively nice, it's worthless to the recipient. (Note: a weird short piece just came on the Comedy Channel... an animated thing with a guy who was listing all these freaky, inappropriate gifts he might buy for this woman... coincidence?)
People also don't like gifts that are contrary to their preferences; don't give a green shirt to the guy who only wears black, or a fleece jacket to the woman who always wears cardigans, or a dog figurine to a cat lover, or perfume/cologne to a person who doesn't wear scent... when picking a gift, ask yourself honestly if it fits in with what the person already has and therefore likes.
Another mistake is using a gift to pull a fast one, by giving the victim something YOU want (but they would NOT) as an indirect way of giving it to yourself; I saw an example in an ad today, where the husband gives the wife a fishing pole that she obviously has no clue how to use, but that HE'S all excited about. My husband has slipped up with this one, bypassing the wifely approval process for Christmas decorations by giving me some hideous ones that HE liked as "gifts." The most common example of this trick is the man giving the woman lingerie; sorry, fellas, but the woman does NOT get any pleasure from the lingerie, and she DOES know that it's really a gift for YOU, so save the lace teddies for your birthday. Another sadly common one is the man getting a household appliance as a "gift" for the woman; unless you really love sleeping on the couch, you should just buy appliances as they're needed throughout the year (with full spousal input, of course), and avoid the appliance department entirely when looking for a gift for the better 1/2... head to the jewelry department instead, and maybe she'll wear that lingerie you tried to pass off as a gift to her on Valentine's Day.
A related version of this problem is letting YOUR preferences influence the purchase of an item that isn't for you; when you find a shirt that you know will be perfect for your sister, if your favorite color is red and her favorite color is blue, buy the BLUE one, no matter how much better you like the red one... that old gift-giving rule about buying people stuff that you'd like to receive yourself is only meant to keep you from giving people garbage, not for you to deliberately choose an item the recipient will like less because it's what you'd prefer.
Parents of preteen kids are famous for faking the kids out with what LOOK like gifts, as they're wrapped up and under the tree, but end up being pajamas, underwear, or other clothing items... and they either don't notice or don't care that their kids are badly disappointed every time this happens. Parents, until your kid gets old enough to ASK for clothing, clothes do NOT count as gifts; just buy what they need and put it in their rooms like you do the rest of the year, and make sure that everything the kids unwrap on Christmas are things they WANT.
The final category of gifts that people don't like are those so awful that NO ONE would ever like them; you know perfectly well what sorts of things I mean here, and there's no excuse to buy them, or for "recycling" them if they're given to you, either.
Getting presents that people WILL like is easy; use the information you have about their personal style, hobbies, collections, sports, pets, and favorite music, colors, movies, foods, and anything else they've ever said about what they like, want, or used to have and wish they had again, as purchasing guidelines. You can mess up an otherwise good, well-intentioned gift by ignoring important details, though; for example, your nephew has been begging for Spiderman pajamas, and you get him some... in the size he wore 6 months ago... and 5 other relatives got them for him as well. You know your aunt always wears perfume, so you get her some wonderful-smelling stuff in a beautiful bottle... but it's a musky scent and she only wears floral scents. You know who your brother's favorite author is, so you get him the hardcover edition of that writer's latest book... but your brother got a copy for himself as soon as it was released. You remember your friend saying she wanted a new lamp for her nightstand, and you find a lamp in a style you know she'll love... but it's orange, and her bedroom is yellow. It's easy to get so excited about finding a great gift for someone that you rush blindly to buy it, but taking a few minutes to think it through, and to maybe check with parents or spouses about what loved ones that don't live with you have or prefer, will save you alot of returns and exchanges.
Using these simple guidelines, you can pick out gifts that you can be PROUD to give... and don't be surprised if you get some good "gift karma" in return.
Wednesday, December 08, 2004
The importance of letting go
When somebody screws you, whether in personal or business dealings, you should stand up for yourself, for your rights, and try your best to get satisfaction, to right the wrong done to you; few would disagree. The hard part, especially for someone like me who was raised to fight like a mad demon, is to accept that sometimes things will get to the point where it's not only not worth the effort to keep fighting, but where it's actually detrimental to your blood pressure and your karma to keep fighting... the point where the negative energy you're generating from your tension, stress, anger, upset, etc will overwhelm any likely amount of positive energy you might produce if you eventually won.
I finally reached that point with an eBay seller; I won a very unusual clothing item from her, and if I told you the full story of what we went through with her you just plain wouldn't believe it... *I* can barely believe it, and I lived it. We went through many different avenues to try to come to an end to the situation that wasn't a disaster, but not only did they not pan out, her behavior was inexplicably belligerent for someone who was, let's be blunt, a crook who'd been caught out and should have been trying to smooth things over, and erratic and weird as well; we're quick to label someone as crazy or psycho these days, but I honestly think this woman qualifies as majorly unbalanced to have acted as she did.
The whole thing had caused me a great deal of stress, and we'd gotten to the point where all I could do was use the Federal mail fraud laws to try to get her, which wouldn't have guaranteed that we'd get our $ back even if they went ahead with it and ruled against her, and I'd already put in too many hours of effort over an item that wasn't remotely expensive to begin with, so... much as I hate to see an evil person not get what's coming to them, I decided that at Thanksgiving I'd simply drop it; delete all the emails, pack up the paperwork, and never think of it again.
As always, karma came through to "reward" me for doing the correct thing (aka send me positive energy to fill the void left by the negative energy I'd just eliminated, and in the form that I'd been focused on); although the clothing item I'd lost out on is so unusual that it rarely comes on eBay, and when it does it always goes for far more than I'm willing to pay except for that one time, since I officially dropped the issue I've won THREE different versions of it, and in every case I got it almost embarrassingly cheaply.
Coincidence? Not a chance.
I finally reached that point with an eBay seller; I won a very unusual clothing item from her, and if I told you the full story of what we went through with her you just plain wouldn't believe it... *I* can barely believe it, and I lived it. We went through many different avenues to try to come to an end to the situation that wasn't a disaster, but not only did they not pan out, her behavior was inexplicably belligerent for someone who was, let's be blunt, a crook who'd been caught out and should have been trying to smooth things over, and erratic and weird as well; we're quick to label someone as crazy or psycho these days, but I honestly think this woman qualifies as majorly unbalanced to have acted as she did.
The whole thing had caused me a great deal of stress, and we'd gotten to the point where all I could do was use the Federal mail fraud laws to try to get her, which wouldn't have guaranteed that we'd get our $ back even if they went ahead with it and ruled against her, and I'd already put in too many hours of effort over an item that wasn't remotely expensive to begin with, so... much as I hate to see an evil person not get what's coming to them, I decided that at Thanksgiving I'd simply drop it; delete all the emails, pack up the paperwork, and never think of it again.
As always, karma came through to "reward" me for doing the correct thing (aka send me positive energy to fill the void left by the negative energy I'd just eliminated, and in the form that I'd been focused on); although the clothing item I'd lost out on is so unusual that it rarely comes on eBay, and when it does it always goes for far more than I'm willing to pay except for that one time, since I officially dropped the issue I've won THREE different versions of it, and in every case I got it almost embarrassingly cheaply.
Coincidence? Not a chance.
Tuesday, December 07, 2004
You know it's love when
I can't tell you how many times I've heard someone claim that their romantic partner REALLY loves them, when in fact that person treats them with indifference or even contempt... what exactly do they BASE these claims on? When someone says something like, "(S)he treats me bad, sure, but (s)he loves me," what mental process have they gone through to convince themselves that this love exists without proof, and with ample proof to the contrary? Do they think that WANTING to be loved somehow substitutes for actually BEING loved, or do they just have no idea what love actually looks like? If YOU know someone like this, here's an example to pass along to them, to hopefully help them to get a clue:
Last night, as I was eating my dinner, I gradually became aware that my feet, which were bare in a chilly house, were so cold that the toenails were blue; not wanting to go to the other end of the house and dig out a pair of socks, I asked my husband to come over and warm up my feet. He made a joking comment about my lack of socks, but he came right over to, I first assumed, hold my feet in his hands and maybe rub them a little to get the circulation going; he sat on the floor next to my chair... and then slid his legs and lower body UNDER the chair, lifted up his sweater, and put my icy feet under the sweater and against his bare skin. My feet were quite pleased with this, as it was VERY warm in there; my husband cringed and grimaced as one would expect a man in his circumstances to do, but he stayed there until my feet were warmed through.
Now THAT'S what love looks like. :-)
Last night, as I was eating my dinner, I gradually became aware that my feet, which were bare in a chilly house, were so cold that the toenails were blue; not wanting to go to the other end of the house and dig out a pair of socks, I asked my husband to come over and warm up my feet. He made a joking comment about my lack of socks, but he came right over to, I first assumed, hold my feet in his hands and maybe rub them a little to get the circulation going; he sat on the floor next to my chair... and then slid his legs and lower body UNDER the chair, lifted up his sweater, and put my icy feet under the sweater and against his bare skin. My feet were quite pleased with this, as it was VERY warm in there; my husband cringed and grimaced as one would expect a man in his circumstances to do, but he stayed there until my feet were warmed through.
Now THAT'S what love looks like. :-)
Monday, December 06, 2004
Joel Osteen makes an interesting point
In tonight's sermon, Osteen told a story about a man who was trying to travel through the mountains, and got to a place where a huge boulder completely blocked his way; the man asked God to move the boulder so that he could pass by, but God told the man that he must move it himself. Although sure that he couldn't do it, the man tried, and tried... all day long, every day, for 6 months (this story is so grim that it's probably Old Testament). Finally, God sent a big storm that swept the boulder away, and the man asked why He had waited all this time to do it, and caused him so much sweat and struggle for nothing; God replied by telling the man to look at his legs, his shoulders, his arms, and see how big and powerful he had become in his battle with the boulder, and by assuring him that he'd be glad of this muscle mass in the times to come, and be greatly benefited by it... and that's why He had set the man to that dreadful task.
The point of the story, clearly, is that when we have struggles and suffering, even when they seem pointless and fruitless, what in fact is going on is that God is making us stronger so that we may triumph later on; although I don't believe in God (nor do I deny His existence, as I can't prove He doesn't exist), I DO think that this story has meaning, because it often seems clear to me that my sufferings, and those of people I know, DO end up benefiting us, making it possible for us to endure, understand, achieve and triumph far beyond what we otherwise could have.
There's no doubt that hard times toughen us up and allow us to learn many important lessons, but I think there's more to it, at least some of the time; karma tends to place in our path whatever we need to reach our goals, whether that be the people who'll help and teach us, the urge to take beneficial actions, or hardships to bring out our finest qualities. If, as Osteen points out, we can keep working at our goals with a positive mindset, we can use everything that's happened to us to accomplish more than we ever thought ourselves capable of.
The point of the story, clearly, is that when we have struggles and suffering, even when they seem pointless and fruitless, what in fact is going on is that God is making us stronger so that we may triumph later on; although I don't believe in God (nor do I deny His existence, as I can't prove He doesn't exist), I DO think that this story has meaning, because it often seems clear to me that my sufferings, and those of people I know, DO end up benefiting us, making it possible for us to endure, understand, achieve and triumph far beyond what we otherwise could have.
There's no doubt that hard times toughen us up and allow us to learn many important lessons, but I think there's more to it, at least some of the time; karma tends to place in our path whatever we need to reach our goals, whether that be the people who'll help and teach us, the urge to take beneficial actions, or hardships to bring out our finest qualities. If, as Osteen points out, we can keep working at our goals with a positive mindset, we can use everything that's happened to us to accomplish more than we ever thought ourselves capable of.
Sunday, December 05, 2004
Odd stuff in "Alien"
I saw "Alien" tonight for about the billionth time; do you remember the line from the ads, "In space, no one can hear you scream?" This was meant to be scary, and it IS, but it's also scientifically accurate, as sound doesn't carry in a vacuum; since they KNEW that, why then did they have SOUND accompanying the various things the spaceship did when our point of view was out in space? When the jets fired up, when stuff exploded, it should have been in absolute silence, but they went along with what every other scifi movie and program does and gave us sound effects for all of it.
Another lapse in common sense came when they had a crewmember smoking; they have a limited amount of air that has to be recycled endlessly for months, so would they be burning oxygen and spewing pollutants into the air by smoking? What was even worse was when they were charging around with flamethrowers; wouldn't a fire on a spaceship be a BAD thing, for reasons beyond the wastage of oxygen and the strain on the air filters?
And then there was Jones the cat; who would ever be stupid enough to let an animal roam freely around a spaceship? Not only are there all sorts of controls and such that you KNOW a cat would make a beeline for, cat hair gets everywhere, which, when you have sensitive computer components on which your LIFE depends that can't even tolerate a speck of dust getting on them, would be a BAD thing.
The reason for having the cat, though, is to allow them to have several rounds of the classic horror movie maneuver, chasing after the cat as it ignores the human character that's about to become monster-chow or a slashed-up corpse and keeps running away, leading the unwitting human right into danger; the pet HAS to be a cat for this suspenseful scene to work, as a DOG would run obediently to the human the first time it was called, and would bark and growl at the monster/killer AND would attack it ferociously if it tried to kill the human... whereas a cat would trip the human up and leave him/her for dead in its mad dash to escape.
Perhaps the dopiest thing in the movie is the elaborate and time-consuming procedure necessary to arm the self-destruct mechanism; since it would likely be a screaming emergency when this had to be used, wouldn't that sort of defeat the purpose? The procedure to shut it off is just as bad, and it seems sort of silly to risk the entire ship and everyone on it on whether or not a panicked crewmember could jump through all the hoops fast enough to stop the countdown. Silliest of all, they showed Ripley, who's the 3rd in command of the ship, reading the directions for the mechanism... um, wouldn't she already KNOW such an important procedure?
Don't get me wrong, I think that the movie is conceptually brilliant, and the moment when the alien bursts out of the man's abdomen is one of the all-time classic horror moments, but, you've gotta admit, some of the fine points leave a little to be desired.
Another lapse in common sense came when they had a crewmember smoking; they have a limited amount of air that has to be recycled endlessly for months, so would they be burning oxygen and spewing pollutants into the air by smoking? What was even worse was when they were charging around with flamethrowers; wouldn't a fire on a spaceship be a BAD thing, for reasons beyond the wastage of oxygen and the strain on the air filters?
And then there was Jones the cat; who would ever be stupid enough to let an animal roam freely around a spaceship? Not only are there all sorts of controls and such that you KNOW a cat would make a beeline for, cat hair gets everywhere, which, when you have sensitive computer components on which your LIFE depends that can't even tolerate a speck of dust getting on them, would be a BAD thing.
The reason for having the cat, though, is to allow them to have several rounds of the classic horror movie maneuver, chasing after the cat as it ignores the human character that's about to become monster-chow or a slashed-up corpse and keeps running away, leading the unwitting human right into danger; the pet HAS to be a cat for this suspenseful scene to work, as a DOG would run obediently to the human the first time it was called, and would bark and growl at the monster/killer AND would attack it ferociously if it tried to kill the human... whereas a cat would trip the human up and leave him/her for dead in its mad dash to escape.
Perhaps the dopiest thing in the movie is the elaborate and time-consuming procedure necessary to arm the self-destruct mechanism; since it would likely be a screaming emergency when this had to be used, wouldn't that sort of defeat the purpose? The procedure to shut it off is just as bad, and it seems sort of silly to risk the entire ship and everyone on it on whether or not a panicked crewmember could jump through all the hoops fast enough to stop the countdown. Silliest of all, they showed Ripley, who's the 3rd in command of the ship, reading the directions for the mechanism... um, wouldn't she already KNOW such an important procedure?
Don't get me wrong, I think that the movie is conceptually brilliant, and the moment when the alien bursts out of the man's abdomen is one of the all-time classic horror moments, but, you've gotta admit, some of the fine points leave a little to be desired.
