Any friend of the Horny Wordsmith knows my disdain for Michael Bloomberg having been employed in his gulag on Park Avenue (a story for another time). Lately, it appears the old blowhard has been running his mouth off. For one thing, he has been going around accusing the New York State Senate of trying destroy the city schools, and in fact used the term "destroy us," which is a bit of an over-statement of what the buffoons of Albany seem to be accomplishing.
Yet the worst of his tyranny was seen a few weeks ago on May 28, 2009. The mayor reacted quite sorely to a legitimate question from a member of the press. The City Room blog has a transcript:
At a press conference in Queens on Thursday, Mr. Bloomberg was asked if an economic turnaround would undermine his initial reasoning for rewriting the city’s term limits law and seeking a third term, which was that a city in financial turmoil needed his steady hand and business background.
Mr. Bloomberg interrupted the question, from the New York Observer reporter Azi Paybarah, having deemed it unworthy of his time, and even called the reporter “a disgrace.”
Here’s how the exchange began:
Mr. Paybarah: If the economy is turning around, as you said, does that mean that the rationale for extending term limits–
Mr. Bloomberg: I don’t know why … why don’t we just get serious questions here …
At this point, Mr. Paybarah tried to finish his question, but he was cut off by the mayor.
Mr. Bloomberg: The rationale for extending term limits is, the City Council passed it and the public’s going to have a chance on Nov. 3 to say what they want. And I don’t think we have to keep coming back to that. When you have a serious question about the economy I will be happy to answer it. Anything else?
After that, the mayor concluded his press conference, looked directly at Mr. Paybarah and said, “You are a disgrace.”
Mr. Paybarah asked a legitimate question, and certainly did not deserve to be classified as a disgrace. My theory as to why this question elicited such an angry, despicable answer from the mayor is thus: the mayor has never demonstrated that he is better at dealing with the economy in the city than any other politician, and this truth is the greatest threat to the mayor's continued grip on the city. The fact is that New York City's government has been in a financial decline since 2001, and the mayor has yet to prove he can turn circumstances around. Year after year city agencies struggled with budget problems, including such important agencies as the New York Police Department and the District Attorneys in Manhattan, Brooklyn and Queens. The real disgrace is the mayor, who for whatever reason maintains he is the economic savior of this city all the while allowing his beloved town to slip into decline. His only luck is that there is no suitable contender to replace him, and frankly this situation is more a disgrace than anything else.
Wednesday, July 1, 2009
A CULTURAL CRISIS OF A PERSONAL NATURE
Last week The New York Times reported that today’s young adults are in danger. Apparently, because of one cultural shift or another, our youth are no longer impressed by the ultimate tale of teenage disillusionment, and have added to their roster of irreverence J.D. Salinger’s masterpiece, Catcher in the Rye.
This, to be sure, is a tragedy of elephantine proportions (Mrs. Wordsmith shares this opinion). The novel’s main character, Holden Caulfield, embodied the absurdity of adolescence with such depth that generations were forever changed after a single reading of the novel. Apparently, that time has passed, and as the Times reports, young readers identify with Holden less and less.
To understand why I find this trend so troubling, the Horny Wordsmith must share with my readers my own experience with Catcher in the Rye. I read this novel at the transformative age of 15. So great was this novel’s effect on my personality, that I credit it with setting my intellectual life on the trajectory it still follows today. Further, it initiated an identity crisis where my mental state hit the rock bottom Erik Erikson describes as the basis for rebuilding oneself into a great man of history.
Age 15 was a tumultuous time in my life. The Horny Wordsmith, like Holden Caulfield, had led a life where there was little to complain about. The byproduct of this relative ease was that everything in life as a child appeared so simple. It was easy to fall into idealism. Every problem had a solution. Anything wrong or evil could be stopped. Ugliness could be excised. Honesty, excellence and love are easy to achieve. These are the ideals the adult culture communicate to children, and until some jarring circumstance comes along to disrupt these virtues, one continues to function oblivious to the true ugliness, complexity and unhappiness adulthood carries.
At some point around the time I read Catcher in the Rye I started to become aware of these complexities. There was no great jarring event, but I recall that in discovering the fact that my peers began experimenting with drugs, alcohol and sex I started to see some of this adult ugliness. I also began to feel the weight of obligation that comes with adulthood, and that produced a certain amount of anxiety.
In the novel Holden makes excessive use of the word “phony,” which looking back I recognize I gave my own meaning. Phonies were those that tried to mask harsh reality from others, either through obfuscation or inanity. My initial reaction was that of Holdens. I met this phoniness with scorn. I resented others, felt helpless and sunk into depression because I did not know yet fully understand what I was confronting. Like Holden, I kept hoping I could run away to a place where I would be away from the phonies and the ugliness and I could be happy once again.
One day, however, I returned to the world. I was no longer upset, and I began to have a more nuanced view of society. I realized it was possible to have complex emotions, to be happy and unhappy in the same moment and thrive on the complexity of terrifying circumstances. I dare say my whole life has now been built on confronting the dreadful, first in my study of journalism and history and later as a criminal defense attorney. Everyday of my working life I meddle in the complexities of truly horrifying events, and I am in part ready to do so as a result of that identity crisis I suffered when I was 15.
So upon reading that similarly situated young people either do not understand or do not identify with Holden Caulfield pains me because I wonder if they have missed that wallowing, pitiful experience that could make them stronger human beings.
On the other hand, these youths may understand the novel without understanding it. Holden’s attempt attitude and attempt should be ultimately rejected. But without the extensive emotionally crushing experience the whole novel is lost on them. At least they have Harry Potter.
This, to be sure, is a tragedy of elephantine proportions (Mrs. Wordsmith shares this opinion). The novel’s main character, Holden Caulfield, embodied the absurdity of adolescence with such depth that generations were forever changed after a single reading of the novel. Apparently, that time has passed, and as the Times reports, young readers identify with Holden less and less.
To understand why I find this trend so troubling, the Horny Wordsmith must share with my readers my own experience with Catcher in the Rye. I read this novel at the transformative age of 15. So great was this novel’s effect on my personality, that I credit it with setting my intellectual life on the trajectory it still follows today. Further, it initiated an identity crisis where my mental state hit the rock bottom Erik Erikson describes as the basis for rebuilding oneself into a great man of history.
Age 15 was a tumultuous time in my life. The Horny Wordsmith, like Holden Caulfield, had led a life where there was little to complain about. The byproduct of this relative ease was that everything in life as a child appeared so simple. It was easy to fall into idealism. Every problem had a solution. Anything wrong or evil could be stopped. Ugliness could be excised. Honesty, excellence and love are easy to achieve. These are the ideals the adult culture communicate to children, and until some jarring circumstance comes along to disrupt these virtues, one continues to function oblivious to the true ugliness, complexity and unhappiness adulthood carries.
At some point around the time I read Catcher in the Rye I started to become aware of these complexities. There was no great jarring event, but I recall that in discovering the fact that my peers began experimenting with drugs, alcohol and sex I started to see some of this adult ugliness. I also began to feel the weight of obligation that comes with adulthood, and that produced a certain amount of anxiety.
In the novel Holden makes excessive use of the word “phony,” which looking back I recognize I gave my own meaning. Phonies were those that tried to mask harsh reality from others, either through obfuscation or inanity. My initial reaction was that of Holdens. I met this phoniness with scorn. I resented others, felt helpless and sunk into depression because I did not know yet fully understand what I was confronting. Like Holden, I kept hoping I could run away to a place where I would be away from the phonies and the ugliness and I could be happy once again.
One day, however, I returned to the world. I was no longer upset, and I began to have a more nuanced view of society. I realized it was possible to have complex emotions, to be happy and unhappy in the same moment and thrive on the complexity of terrifying circumstances. I dare say my whole life has now been built on confronting the dreadful, first in my study of journalism and history and later as a criminal defense attorney. Everyday of my working life I meddle in the complexities of truly horrifying events, and I am in part ready to do so as a result of that identity crisis I suffered when I was 15.
So upon reading that similarly situated young people either do not understand or do not identify with Holden Caulfield pains me because I wonder if they have missed that wallowing, pitiful experience that could make them stronger human beings.
On the other hand, these youths may understand the novel without understanding it. Holden’s attempt attitude and attempt should be ultimately rejected. But without the extensive emotionally crushing experience the whole novel is lost on them. At least they have Harry Potter.
Wednesday, May 13, 2009
ON THE SCOURGE OF OUR SOCIETY
I am dismayed of late. A group functions amongst us without receiving the persecution at our hands to which they are do. This class represents the worst sort of knaves, villains and deceivers. This group, of course, is actors.
Actors, dramatists, thespians, players or performers may delight us with their trade, but they have historically held one the lowest positions in society. These scoundrels have benefited from the ascendance of Hollywood, and have convinced the rest of the populous they contribute more to our society than the facts bear out.
There is, of course, the well known fact that it is almost unbearable to be in the presence of those who fashion themselves actors. The actors believe they have reached some level of higher existence that we non-actors could not possibly comprehend. Yet these actors know little more than the gypsy beggar in the street. Despite this harsh reality which they actor has carefully avoided recognizing, the actor looks at his fellow man as lacking insight. The actor speaks to others with the utmost condescension, and cannot help but laugh, sneer or mock another who is infinitely more deserving of respect than the actor is prepared to admit.
Perhaps the more frustrating fact is that there is a class within the class of actors that deserve praise. I am not know prepared to say what percentage of the overall group this represents, but this percentage is certainly miniscule. The majority uses the achievements of the few to establish their significance within the culture. We must take steps to halt this dangerous current.
Furthermore, unlike any other profession that requires some modicum of training and examination to receive a credential, any oaf or lay-about may call themselves an actor. Our society is so accustomed to actors not working as actors, that we accept someone as being an actor despite the possibility the individual in question has not acted in the artistic sense in a long time, or perhaps never acted at all. All I ask is that the actor admit he is not really an actor, but is ordinary, and accept that he or she is a waiter, hair-dresser, cab driver, house keeper, baby sitter or garbage collector.
I also marvel at how often most of these supposed actors actually do not act. I have often found that stage actors are under the misapprehension that acting is merely projecting ones voice while speaking lines in a rhythm. Instead of emoting, they plead with each other on the stage. The actor claims they inhabit a role, get to the core of the character or unlock the key to this or that character’s motivation. Putting aside the fact that these phrases are meaningless claptrap, most actors do no such thing. Seldom does one encounter an actor who is adept enough to truly understand human interaction.
I was once heard of an interesting discussion between several young ladies, where it was determined amongst them that if they were to meet a man who fancied himself an actor, such declaration would be a “deal breaker” in the modern parlance, and such a male would be deemed undesirable. I am of a similar opinion when it comes to actresses, but as a man I will admit that many of the slender ones are physically appealing.
Actors, dramatists, thespians, players or performers may delight us with their trade, but they have historically held one the lowest positions in society. These scoundrels have benefited from the ascendance of Hollywood, and have convinced the rest of the populous they contribute more to our society than the facts bear out.
There is, of course, the well known fact that it is almost unbearable to be in the presence of those who fashion themselves actors. The actors believe they have reached some level of higher existence that we non-actors could not possibly comprehend. Yet these actors know little more than the gypsy beggar in the street. Despite this harsh reality which they actor has carefully avoided recognizing, the actor looks at his fellow man as lacking insight. The actor speaks to others with the utmost condescension, and cannot help but laugh, sneer or mock another who is infinitely more deserving of respect than the actor is prepared to admit.
Perhaps the more frustrating fact is that there is a class within the class of actors that deserve praise. I am not know prepared to say what percentage of the overall group this represents, but this percentage is certainly miniscule. The majority uses the achievements of the few to establish their significance within the culture. We must take steps to halt this dangerous current.
Furthermore, unlike any other profession that requires some modicum of training and examination to receive a credential, any oaf or lay-about may call themselves an actor. Our society is so accustomed to actors not working as actors, that we accept someone as being an actor despite the possibility the individual in question has not acted in the artistic sense in a long time, or perhaps never acted at all. All I ask is that the actor admit he is not really an actor, but is ordinary, and accept that he or she is a waiter, hair-dresser, cab driver, house keeper, baby sitter or garbage collector.
I also marvel at how often most of these supposed actors actually do not act. I have often found that stage actors are under the misapprehension that acting is merely projecting ones voice while speaking lines in a rhythm. Instead of emoting, they plead with each other on the stage. The actor claims they inhabit a role, get to the core of the character or unlock the key to this or that character’s motivation. Putting aside the fact that these phrases are meaningless claptrap, most actors do no such thing. Seldom does one encounter an actor who is adept enough to truly understand human interaction.
I was once heard of an interesting discussion between several young ladies, where it was determined amongst them that if they were to meet a man who fancied himself an actor, such declaration would be a “deal breaker” in the modern parlance, and such a male would be deemed undesirable. I am of a similar opinion when it comes to actresses, but as a man I will admit that many of the slender ones are physically appealing.
YOU ARE WELCOME FOR MY EXISTENCE
As the sign above indicates, this is The Evil Dreamer Pub, and it is my hope you have already indulged in the absolute brilliance of the initial explication below of the now world-famous Tension Theory. Without any delay, let us continue with an explanation:
I place human personalities into one of two over-arching categories, the schemer and the dreamer. I must ask you not to associate good or bad or positive or negative with those terms.
The schemer is familiar and many readers probably fall into this category. They are focused on the present with its difficulties and challenges. They develop a plan or scheme, an attempt to map out some number of steps they would have to conquer in order to accomplish a major goal. They can conceive of at least some of the risks associated with any given choice.
On the other hand there is the dreamer. A person in this category allows their mind to dwell on the abstractions of a situation rather than the concrete steps that the person has to take to move ahead successfully. They look to some theory they develop about the meaning of people’s behavior that has no practical effect on resolving a particular problem. They let themselves be distracted by optimistic or pessimistic glosses of situations that have little or no basis in reality, and ignore information that conflicts with their fantastical conclusions. They ignore practical meanings behind another person’s behavior like motive, bias and self-interest (which are not necessarily negative), in favor far-fetched theories.
What if, peradventure, one could scheme and dream at the same time? What if someone, perhaps with the aid of a computer and the internet could take dreamer like theories that have some application? What if a person, like you in fact, could go to a website and read the brilliant, enlightening, hilarious, entertaining and sometimes frightening musings of a genius who schemes when he is not dreaming, and dreams when he is not scheming. I have heard your yearning for knowledge and I now lift the vale that has previously cloaked the mind of an EVIL DREAMER.
I place human personalities into one of two over-arching categories, the schemer and the dreamer. I must ask you not to associate good or bad or positive or negative with those terms.
The schemer is familiar and many readers probably fall into this category. They are focused on the present with its difficulties and challenges. They develop a plan or scheme, an attempt to map out some number of steps they would have to conquer in order to accomplish a major goal. They can conceive of at least some of the risks associated with any given choice.
On the other hand there is the dreamer. A person in this category allows their mind to dwell on the abstractions of a situation rather than the concrete steps that the person has to take to move ahead successfully. They look to some theory they develop about the meaning of people’s behavior that has no practical effect on resolving a particular problem. They let themselves be distracted by optimistic or pessimistic glosses of situations that have little or no basis in reality, and ignore information that conflicts with their fantastical conclusions. They ignore practical meanings behind another person’s behavior like motive, bias and self-interest (which are not necessarily negative), in favor far-fetched theories.
What if, peradventure, one could scheme and dream at the same time? What if someone, perhaps with the aid of a computer and the internet could take dreamer like theories that have some application? What if a person, like you in fact, could go to a website and read the brilliant, enlightening, hilarious, entertaining and sometimes frightening musings of a genius who schemes when he is not dreaming, and dreams when he is not scheming. I have heard your yearning for knowledge and I now lift the vale that has previously cloaked the mind of an EVIL DREAMER.
THE ONLY ADVICE YOU WELL EVER NEED
All gentlemen wonder at one point in their lives how the infuriating female mind operates. The Horny Wordsmith has been studying women (at a safe range) and can now declare that he has developed an operating thesis that will land every male thick and thin his very own Suzy Poon Tang.
The enlightened (friends of the Horny Wordsmith) know this theory as the Tension Theory, and it will save the would-be fool from becoming the “nice guy,” “best friend,” “great-listener” or such other embarrassing yet all to common frustrating circumstances many men experience at one point or another. Do not mistake, I have had many fulfilling friendships with women, but let us face the truth. At some point friendship is insufficient, and we need to satisfy our base desires.
So with an eye towards helping humankind fulfill every erotic desire, the man must let loose his preconceived notions of pleasantry and chivalry and accept that one must be somewhat of a “dick” in the wooing of a female. I do not propose being an all out knave, but we must all walk a careful line between villainy and honor if a woman is to be had. This theory works no matter what is the goal, whether the male is looking for meaningless physical encounter, or a significant long term relationship. In fact, it may surprise some of our female readers that the Horny Wordsmith has been involved with the same woman for a number of years now.
The foundation of this theory is simple: a female’s natural inclination when she first encounters a male is to put up a series of safeguards to protect her physical and especially emotional well-being. Most romantic pursuits occur in contexts where the subtext is wholly focused on consummating in some sexual behavior. Clearly, for every location one could name I am certain that a successful pick-up has occurred there: a bar, a concert, a party, a library, a comic book convention, a dentist’s office, a bus station or a county jail. Thus, at all times a woman is at least considering sub-consciously that the man she is confronted with wants to have sex with her. AMC’s Mad Men illustrates this point perfectly.
In response to this precarious state of affairs women develop protections against us. These safeguards come in the form of immediate judgments about the male. Women form a first impression, and if that first impression is that the man is threatening, he is finished. If that impression is that the male is not at all threatening, he is also finished (see below). Thus, the key is to forestall a determination that man is either a threat or not, and the means to do that is to prevent a first impression from forming so as to prolong the pursuit to the moment of success.
To understand how this task is accomplished we must consider what sort of behavior makes a man threatening and what sort of behavior is completely innocuous. The man who fails because he is too threatening usually leaves the female with no doubt that he is there for intimacy, romance or sex. Typical patterns include nonsense pick-up lines, obvious attempts to be cool, or pure, abject douche-baggery. In communicating so clearly the terms of the encounter, the situation quickly becomes creepy or awkward, and the woman is either way made uncomfortable, and failure is guaranteed.
On the other hand, one who establishes no threat is also doomed to fail. This is a situation that fully lacks sexuality, and may be accompanied by bumbling, nervousness, and an indifference to the cues presented by the woman. Many of you know this individual as the friender. The friender has allowed himself to become a friend and not a lover in part because he allowed the interaction to continue devoid of any sexual energy.
Males operating at both of these extremes assume a complete falsehood, that no matter what they do, if the girl likes them the situation will end in their favor. The Horny Wordsmith wants to assure these fellows that 5% of the population can operate under this assumption, and the rest of us, Horny Wordsmith included, must make an effort if we are to succeed.
That something is tension. This Tension I speak of is not the sort of conflict one may associate with uncomfortable and unpleasant conflict. Tension as used here is a term that describes the acts necessary to prevent a woman from forming the initial impression. It is a mix of charming flirtation, subtle sexuality and teasing. The key, the absolute crux of this approach is to keep the lady guessing as to the motives of the male until the male starts to escalate the encounter towards some type of sexual collaboration.
Unfortunately, the Horny Wordsmith cannot give hard and fast guidelines to achieving the tension. The focus is not on a formula, but on training one’s instincts to recognize the cues displayed by the female while moving the situation along towards the ultimate goal. The tension is certainly not the making of a rude or offensive statement. It is a judgment based on all the circumstances as to what is appropriate flirtation to maintain the tension. Do not be disheartened, as some develop these skills earlier in their skirt-lifting careers than others.
As the Evil Dreamer Pub proceeds, the Horny Wordsmith looks forward to discussing this theory further. The Evil Dreamer permits a comment suggestion where you readers are encouraged to engage in discussion of this theory. From time to time I shall respond to the criticisms of the theory, in which I promise to prove my critics wrong.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
