Stream of Conscious Musings...
Nov. 29th, 2004 02:50 pm![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
shadowkatNow that I'm here, up on my little soap-box, I haven't a clue what I should talk about. Except how not to let this become a soap-box. Methinks I've been
doing that a tad too much of late. I'm not quite sure how to keep my words from sliding into pontification mode, except by well placing tons of qualifiers, informal slang, and lots of "I's" in the mix. The more formal I get, the more I slide into "pontification" mode. Always been a bad habit - since I was quite small in fact - my friends used to accuse me of "pontificating", actually they called it "lecturing", we didn't know the word pontification at the age of 7 and 8. Course, it's hard not to let livejournal become one's little "soap box" - it is after all sort of set up as one. Complete with little posting box, graphics, and the ability to attach the proper icon. How could one possibly resist the temptation? Good thing I suck at graphics, have yet to figure out how to make my own icons (hence the reason mine haven't changed in months - I swiped them from other livejournal users, sort of hard to do now considering that all the cool ones are way too user-specific to swipe. You'd know I'd swiped them and what's the fun in that? ), do not own photo-shop, and don't have paid account. (Not complaining. Really!)
Enuf of that.
So what should I write about tonight? Clearly feel this overwhelming urge to write about something or wouldn't be boring you with all this verbage, now would I? (Assuming you are reading this and haven't moved on to something more interesting - hey admit it, we all do this on our friend's lists, scan. "Nope.
Nope. Whoa that's way cool - click. Nope. Oh nice and short. Way too long, doesn't that person understand the notion of a "cut-tag"? Ooooh. Cool. Glad that person doesn't get cut-tag. Why did they friend's lock that post? Shrug. Oh, dang the html isn't working again for them is it? Nice icon. Ohhh, now I see why they friend's locked it, must go back and read that. Damn. They don't allow comments. Oh, that's so sad, wish I had their email address so I could send them a little gift." And so on. Have to say this much about livejournal - it has completely changed how one writes a journal entry. ) Hey, I warned you that this was Stream of Consciousness....which brings me to the question: have you ever done stream of consciousness writing as an exercise? What is it? It's basically writing down whatever comes into your head without editing it, which, ahem, is sort of what I'm doing now. Actually come to think of it most of my livejournal entries have a stream of consciousness feel to them - the entries where I'm not pontificating that is. Only question is, will I delete this entry before you get to read it? I have a tendency to do that too. Did that last night. I get self-conscious. Start seeing all the ways someone may interpret or misinterpret what I've written and well, freak-out, and delete. Which I can do here and couldn't on posting boards (unfortunately or fortunately depending on one's point of view) No one ever said writing was safe. Or easy.
Speaking of writing - I saw the flick Sideways on Friday with![[livejournal.com profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/external/lj-userinfo.gif)
cjlasky. I heartily recommend it with the following provisos (or is that advisories). 1) It is a GUY movie. And I mean GUY with a Capital G. If you watch anything through a gender filter or perspective, you might want to turn it off before seeing this film. OR pass on it. It may offend you, but keep in mind it is meant to be a "guy" movie sort of like those 1970s movies with Jack Nicholson - such as Five Easy Pieces, Carnal Knowledge or The King of Marvin Gardins. 2). It is a character film about two guys on a road trip through the Napa Valley. And yes, there is nudity, sexual content, and foul language. Not for kids. Very 30/40 something in it's appeal.
Why do I mention it in regards to writing? Ah..well, the main character, Miles, played by Paul Giamitti, is a frustrated writer. He wrote a novel (fits in two boxes) that he can't get published and has more or less given up on. Spent five years writing the thing. Now, as a divorced, childless, middle school prep boys teacher, he's wondering if there's a point to his existence.
This I completely sympathized with. Hey, I spent five - ten years writing and re-writing my monster, had it rejected multiple times, (ie. they'd reject it, I'd rewrite, send it out, they'd reject, I'd re-write, they'd reject - the third time? I sort of threw up my hands and decided okay maybe this is a sign that I need to write something else? Something that I can explain in one clear sentence and not in a rambling paragraph? ) Oh and Miles's character suffers the same malady I do - he can't frigging describe his book to people.
I love it when people ask me to describe my book to them. The conversation usually ends with me rambling incoherently about it and their eyes glazing over. This is the same thing that happened to poor Miles in the movie.
Hilarous scene. Recommend it to all my fellow frustrated writers. (Just shut off your gender perspective and you'll be fine.)
The other thing I did this weekend was go to CW's Birthday PArty, was nice to see CW again. And she reminded me of why I left evil company, which seems to keep getting worse. Evil Boss is now drinking on the job and has just become even more abusive. Old workplace is sounding a bit too much like the Dilbert cartoon for it's own good. I tell CW to leave, but she can't, she doesn't want to give up certain perks - ie. money (she's making more than I am), vacation time (has over 4 weeks), and the free books. I, on the other hand, went through two years of hell - after giving up pretty much the same perks. (Was making less there than at new company - so money was not one of them.) Am still gun-shy at new job though. Walking on egg-shells. Little nervous about things. But each day that passes, it gets easier. Will take me a while to get fully comfortable I expect, and longer than that to regain my confidence. Starting a new job is like that -- especially after being unemployed for two years or 21 months (which is pretty close).
Unemployment is a traumatic experience for someone. Especially if the person left their prior employment under less than savory circumstances. In my case, I left because my boss was a pathological liar and a serial bully who was out to get me. Didn't help that he was also a manic-depressive/alcoholic who'd begun drinking again and gone off his meds. Plus - the President of the Company didn't care and let the guy have full reign. I kid you not, this actually happened, is happening. How they've managed to avoid a law-suit, I don't know. Possibly because it is far more difficult to file an employment claim than one might think. Most of the time it costs the person filing the claim more than the person being sued. Why? Company's usually can hire better attorneys than individuals. And it's all about who has the best attorney, not who has the best case. Plus, you have to have documented proof. He Said/She said cases do not work. Ugh. I'm just glad I'm out of there and somewhere else.
The unemployment part though? Nasty. Talked to a guy at CW's party who had been unemployed for two months and was getting frustrated. I told him my story and oddly enough cheered him up - somewhat. I didn't get a job through friends, relatives, business contacts or networking. I didn't get one through cold calls or headhunters or recruiters. Career Counselors did zip to help me.
I got one the old fashioned way - I pounded the pavement and sent out targeted resumes and cover letters to advertised jobs. No, didn't find the hidden jobs.
Got the ones that were advertised. That's the hard way. And I got it from the internet. All the ways the frigging career counselors and specialists tell you that you won't get a job - ie. internet, advertised, resumes - is how I did.
And I had a lot of support and help from the online world. Much more actually than people I knew, who I'd known before I ever came online.
Oh reminds me - "Reprint this sentence in your livejournal if you count amongst your closest friends people that you would NOT have met if you hadn't come online." (Not exact, sort of did it from memory from aresthusa's livejournal.) Yep, that's me. I can name at least six people that I've felt close to and met in person that I'd never have known if I hadn't come online.
I had friends before. But these folks will always have a special place in my heart. The people I met online saved my life last year in more ways than I can count or ever repay, not that they are counting. I won't forget that.
And they may know more about me from reading this journal than many offline friends do (one's who've never read it), because I tend to say more sometimes through written words than spoken ones.
I also watched some of the Buffy S1 DVD that cjlasky loaned me.
He loaned me the Buffy DVDs leading up to S5. (Gave me S5 last year for my B-day.) Yes, after six or is it seven months of not watching a single BTVS or ATS episode, I decided to re-watch them sporadically from the beginning on DVD. Currently debating which BTVS DVDs to buy, if any. Leaning towards the latter seasons at the moment, partly due to the packaging. Is it just me or does SMG look a bit too sexy on the S1, S2, S3 boxes? Really don't like the graphics on those packages. IF I bought them? I'd throw out the boxes and put the DVD's in something else, I think. Partly due to the fact that cjlasky doesn't own them and can't lend them to me, so I have no way of watching them otherwise. And partly due to the fact that I'm still somewhat fascinated with the Spike character and how they wrote him, which I found to be ground-breaking at times and innovative and risky. I also found Marsters performance to be risky. Am enjoying the early Buffy episodes though. Miss this show. Crafty writing, layered characters, and fantastic actors. Rare to have a show that has such good all-around acting. No misses. Gellar was truly fantastic in this role, watching Gilmore Girls, Veronica Mars and Joan of Arcadia, reminds me exactly how incredible her acting was. Also enjoying the comedy. Laughed myself silly during Never Kill A Boy On A First Date - forgot how funny that episode really was.
Season 1 seems better than I remember it. Odd. I don't remember laughing as much at Witch or NEver Kill A Boy. I also remember enjoying the episodes Angel and the Pack much more. Very strange. I skipped Teacher's Pet and I Robot You Jane. But I may try those tonight. Since my tastes have clearly changed. Goes to show you - nothing is static. And how I look at TV or movies or books really is a mood/state of mind thing. Perhaps the reason the episode Angel didn't appeal as much this round is a)I've seen it too many times, b)there's no mystery to the character any more - I know who he is and what happens.
That said - knowing what happens lends a nice ironic edge to the B/A romance that it didn't have the first go around, making it far more interesting, and lending it much more depth. You also realize watching these episodes that the writers honestly did not know where they were going either when they started, but deftly and wisely allowed their characters to lead them. Staying true to ones characters is a tough thing, but I think Mutant Enemy more or less did it, at least better than any other show I've seen.
Okay, rambled enough for one night. Off for dinner, Buffy DVDs, and daytime soap operas. (Yeah, I know they are crap, but they are enjoyable crap - sort of like eating iced brownies courtesy of Betty Crocker. )
doing that a tad too much of late. I'm not quite sure how to keep my words from sliding into pontification mode, except by well placing tons of qualifiers, informal slang, and lots of "I's" in the mix. The more formal I get, the more I slide into "pontification" mode. Always been a bad habit - since I was quite small in fact - my friends used to accuse me of "pontificating", actually they called it "lecturing", we didn't know the word pontification at the age of 7 and 8. Course, it's hard not to let livejournal become one's little "soap box" - it is after all sort of set up as one. Complete with little posting box, graphics, and the ability to attach the proper icon. How could one possibly resist the temptation? Good thing I suck at graphics, have yet to figure out how to make my own icons (hence the reason mine haven't changed in months - I swiped them from other livejournal users, sort of hard to do now considering that all the cool ones are way too user-specific to swipe. You'd know I'd swiped them and what's the fun in that? ), do not own photo-shop, and don't have paid account. (Not complaining. Really!)
Enuf of that.
So what should I write about tonight? Clearly feel this overwhelming urge to write about something or wouldn't be boring you with all this verbage, now would I? (Assuming you are reading this and haven't moved on to something more interesting - hey admit it, we all do this on our friend's lists, scan. "Nope.
Nope. Whoa that's way cool - click. Nope. Oh nice and short. Way too long, doesn't that person understand the notion of a "cut-tag"? Ooooh. Cool. Glad that person doesn't get cut-tag. Why did they friend's lock that post? Shrug. Oh, dang the html isn't working again for them is it? Nice icon. Ohhh, now I see why they friend's locked it, must go back and read that. Damn. They don't allow comments. Oh, that's so sad, wish I had their email address so I could send them a little gift." And so on. Have to say this much about livejournal - it has completely changed how one writes a journal entry. ) Hey, I warned you that this was Stream of Consciousness....which brings me to the question: have you ever done stream of consciousness writing as an exercise? What is it? It's basically writing down whatever comes into your head without editing it, which, ahem, is sort of what I'm doing now. Actually come to think of it most of my livejournal entries have a stream of consciousness feel to them - the entries where I'm not pontificating that is. Only question is, will I delete this entry before you get to read it? I have a tendency to do that too. Did that last night. I get self-conscious. Start seeing all the ways someone may interpret or misinterpret what I've written and well, freak-out, and delete. Which I can do here and couldn't on posting boards (unfortunately or fortunately depending on one's point of view) No one ever said writing was safe. Or easy.
Speaking of writing - I saw the flick Sideways on Friday with
cjlasky. I heartily recommend it with the following provisos (or is that advisories). 1) It is a GUY movie. And I mean GUY with a Capital G. If you watch anything through a gender filter or perspective, you might want to turn it off before seeing this film. OR pass on it. It may offend you, but keep in mind it is meant to be a "guy" movie sort of like those 1970s movies with Jack Nicholson - such as Five Easy Pieces, Carnal Knowledge or The King of Marvin Gardins. 2). It is a character film about two guys on a road trip through the Napa Valley. And yes, there is nudity, sexual content, and foul language. Not for kids. Very 30/40 something in it's appeal.Why do I mention it in regards to writing? Ah..well, the main character, Miles, played by Paul Giamitti, is a frustrated writer. He wrote a novel (fits in two boxes) that he can't get published and has more or less given up on. Spent five years writing the thing. Now, as a divorced, childless, middle school prep boys teacher, he's wondering if there's a point to his existence.
This I completely sympathized with. Hey, I spent five - ten years writing and re-writing my monster, had it rejected multiple times, (ie. they'd reject it, I'd rewrite, send it out, they'd reject, I'd re-write, they'd reject - the third time? I sort of threw up my hands and decided okay maybe this is a sign that I need to write something else? Something that I can explain in one clear sentence and not in a rambling paragraph? ) Oh and Miles's character suffers the same malady I do - he can't frigging describe his book to people.
I love it when people ask me to describe my book to them. The conversation usually ends with me rambling incoherently about it and their eyes glazing over. This is the same thing that happened to poor Miles in the movie.
Hilarous scene. Recommend it to all my fellow frustrated writers. (Just shut off your gender perspective and you'll be fine.)
The other thing I did this weekend was go to CW's Birthday PArty, was nice to see CW again. And she reminded me of why I left evil company, which seems to keep getting worse. Evil Boss is now drinking on the job and has just become even more abusive. Old workplace is sounding a bit too much like the Dilbert cartoon for it's own good. I tell CW to leave, but she can't, she doesn't want to give up certain perks - ie. money (she's making more than I am), vacation time (has over 4 weeks), and the free books. I, on the other hand, went through two years of hell - after giving up pretty much the same perks. (Was making less there than at new company - so money was not one of them.) Am still gun-shy at new job though. Walking on egg-shells. Little nervous about things. But each day that passes, it gets easier. Will take me a while to get fully comfortable I expect, and longer than that to regain my confidence. Starting a new job is like that -- especially after being unemployed for two years or 21 months (which is pretty close).
Unemployment is a traumatic experience for someone. Especially if the person left their prior employment under less than savory circumstances. In my case, I left because my boss was a pathological liar and a serial bully who was out to get me. Didn't help that he was also a manic-depressive/alcoholic who'd begun drinking again and gone off his meds. Plus - the President of the Company didn't care and let the guy have full reign. I kid you not, this actually happened, is happening. How they've managed to avoid a law-suit, I don't know. Possibly because it is far more difficult to file an employment claim than one might think. Most of the time it costs the person filing the claim more than the person being sued. Why? Company's usually can hire better attorneys than individuals. And it's all about who has the best attorney, not who has the best case. Plus, you have to have documented proof. He Said/She said cases do not work. Ugh. I'm just glad I'm out of there and somewhere else.
The unemployment part though? Nasty. Talked to a guy at CW's party who had been unemployed for two months and was getting frustrated. I told him my story and oddly enough cheered him up - somewhat. I didn't get a job through friends, relatives, business contacts or networking. I didn't get one through cold calls or headhunters or recruiters. Career Counselors did zip to help me.
I got one the old fashioned way - I pounded the pavement and sent out targeted resumes and cover letters to advertised jobs. No, didn't find the hidden jobs.
Got the ones that were advertised. That's the hard way. And I got it from the internet. All the ways the frigging career counselors and specialists tell you that you won't get a job - ie. internet, advertised, resumes - is how I did.
And I had a lot of support and help from the online world. Much more actually than people I knew, who I'd known before I ever came online.
Oh reminds me - "Reprint this sentence in your livejournal if you count amongst your closest friends people that you would NOT have met if you hadn't come online." (Not exact, sort of did it from memory from aresthusa's livejournal.) Yep, that's me. I can name at least six people that I've felt close to and met in person that I'd never have known if I hadn't come online.
I had friends before. But these folks will always have a special place in my heart. The people I met online saved my life last year in more ways than I can count or ever repay, not that they are counting. I won't forget that.
And they may know more about me from reading this journal than many offline friends do (one's who've never read it), because I tend to say more sometimes through written words than spoken ones.
I also watched some of the Buffy S1 DVD that cjlasky loaned me.
He loaned me the Buffy DVDs leading up to S5. (Gave me S5 last year for my B-day.) Yes, after six or is it seven months of not watching a single BTVS or ATS episode, I decided to re-watch them sporadically from the beginning on DVD. Currently debating which BTVS DVDs to buy, if any. Leaning towards the latter seasons at the moment, partly due to the packaging. Is it just me or does SMG look a bit too sexy on the S1, S2, S3 boxes? Really don't like the graphics on those packages. IF I bought them? I'd throw out the boxes and put the DVD's in something else, I think. Partly due to the fact that cjlasky doesn't own them and can't lend them to me, so I have no way of watching them otherwise. And partly due to the fact that I'm still somewhat fascinated with the Spike character and how they wrote him, which I found to be ground-breaking at times and innovative and risky. I also found Marsters performance to be risky. Am enjoying the early Buffy episodes though. Miss this show. Crafty writing, layered characters, and fantastic actors. Rare to have a show that has such good all-around acting. No misses. Gellar was truly fantastic in this role, watching Gilmore Girls, Veronica Mars and Joan of Arcadia, reminds me exactly how incredible her acting was. Also enjoying the comedy. Laughed myself silly during Never Kill A Boy On A First Date - forgot how funny that episode really was.
Season 1 seems better than I remember it. Odd. I don't remember laughing as much at Witch or NEver Kill A Boy. I also remember enjoying the episodes Angel and the Pack much more. Very strange. I skipped Teacher's Pet and I Robot You Jane. But I may try those tonight. Since my tastes have clearly changed. Goes to show you - nothing is static. And how I look at TV or movies or books really is a mood/state of mind thing. Perhaps the reason the episode Angel didn't appeal as much this round is a)I've seen it too many times, b)there's no mystery to the character any more - I know who he is and what happens.
That said - knowing what happens lends a nice ironic edge to the B/A romance that it didn't have the first go around, making it far more interesting, and lending it much more depth. You also realize watching these episodes that the writers honestly did not know where they were going either when they started, but deftly and wisely allowed their characters to lead them. Staying true to ones characters is a tough thing, but I think Mutant Enemy more or less did it, at least better than any other show I've seen.
Okay, rambled enough for one night. Off for dinner, Buffy DVDs, and daytime soap operas. (Yeah, I know they are crap, but they are enjoyable crap - sort of like eating iced brownies courtesy of Betty Crocker. )
![[identity profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/openid.png){kind=small}
no subject
Date: 2004-11-29 05:57 pm (UTC)Honestly, I can't believe that if DB hadn't decided to walk his dog that morning, he never would've been called in for a reading, never would've got the part, and I would've been out one of the most fascinating characters it's been my privilege to salivate over ;)
They probably had no idea how big Angel was gonna be, but I'm so glad they went with it. I can understand how you feel about re-watching something so often it loses magic -- I've found that with a few eps, though if I take a break and come back, something new might strike me. But not with "Angel" -- I guess I'm just really that obsessed! "Angel" keeps giving me more. The Angel(us)/Darla relationship, in particular, is fascinating, even at its earliest, most cliched incarnation. The idea of family and home, of running from the past until you confront it ("history" is a big theme in this ep), of the internal war between good and evil that's fought in a man's heart. Man, I could blither on forever, but I'll spare you. *g*
Is it just me or does SMG look a bit too sexy on the S1, S2, S3 boxes?
Not just you :P Thankfully S1 is the worst of it. I guess as a newbie cult show, they wanted to press every advantage, including sexy pics of their star posing with a big phallic stake.
no subject
Date: 2004-11-29 07:29 pm (UTC)Wasn't it interesting that Miles had such a tough time describing his book but he could capture a wine so perfectly? His speech about pinot was so lovely, since of course it was the only way he could easily talk about himself.
no subject
Date: 2004-11-30 01:15 pm (UTC)The film is completely in Miles pov and Miles' isn't feeling all that positive about women or his relations with women at the moment. Yet, he does love women. He just has no clue how to relate to them. And Payne ensures we see that. There's two scenes that I can see someone with a gender filter cringing at - one is how Miles' friend relates to women throughout the film. Although to be honest? I didn't. I agree with you that Payne went to great lengths in this film to make the characters more human. More so than his other films, which I didn't enjoy nearly as much. This may be in my opinion his best film. Certainly his funniest.
There are scenes in this film that still made me grin, thinking about them long after it was over. The run down the hillside with the wine bottle is one.
Wasn't it interesting that Miles had such a tough time describing his book but he could capture a wine so perfectly? His speech about pinot was so lovely, since of course it was the only way he could easily talk about himself.
It was safer for him. When he talked about wine, he wasn't risking anything. He could show off his knowledge, his love. Reminds me how we talk about tv shows, BTVS, ATS - easier somehow. Safer to talk about yourself through something else.
The only drawback I had with the film was I never quite understood why Miles and Jake were friends, or why Miles put up with Jake's antics.
no subject
Date: 2004-11-30 01:42 pm (UTC)But that's all subjective opinion.
I re-watched I Robot You Jane last night and enjoyed it quite a bit. What is most interesting about the episode is how it depicts each character dealing with romantic relationships. Willow falls for someone's mind and soul, what is inside the person. She really doesn't tend to get hung up on looks that much. She has to get to know you first. Note - she has a crush on Xander who she has known forever, she falls for Moloch after spending lots of time talking to him. Buffy on the other hand is all about looks and actions.
She's the "love at first sight" type of gal. She asks Willow in the episode what the guy looks like. Willow is interested in what he's said and is annoyed by Buffy's emphasis on looks. In earlier episodes - Angel's dreamy good looks are emphasized, as are Owen's.
Note Buffy never dates a guy that isn't good-looking. Xander is the same way - he goes after looks. He falls for Buffy at first sight, moment he sees her. His relationships with both Anya and Cordelia are similarly based on sex and looks. Just as Buffy's relationships with Spike, Angel and Riley and even the Immortal are based on looks and sex and physical chemistry.
In which case, it is fitting that of the three the only one who ends up in happy or somewhat happy relationships is Willow. Granted Oz leaves due to being a werewolf and Tara is killed. But she is the one in a relationship at the end. Something Whedon insisted on. Re-watching I Robot You Jane, it occurred to me that the reason Whedon insisted on that - is out of all the characters, he felt Willow's relationship skills may have been the best - she fell for the person first, not the shell.