Just in time.

So this "work" thing seems to be working out all right for me. The one major difference that I have come to appreciate the most when compared to all the other jobs I've had in the past is the whole flexibility of scheduling in your day. Meal times are not mandated, breaks are not limited to a specific time, so if I want to run and grab a quick snack or something like that, I have a bit more freedom. I just have memories in the past of needing to get off my feet in some job but not being able to go because someone else was on a break, or being told when I "had" to take a ten minute break by supervisors. Best of all for me, with no clocking in or out, there isn't someone to gripe at me if I show up at 9:03 instead of 9:00. I have always been the type of person who is willing to put in a whole day's work regardless. If I show up late, I'm willing to stay late; if I can't get something done in a day's work, I'm more than willing to show up early or stay late until the job is done.

Yes, a little structure is great, but a little freedom is better. The big thing is, I think it's sad that tight schedule regulations have become a necessity at some jobs. I'm not even going to say that it has anything to do with the supervisors -- that is my personal issue, I don't sweat details like that, so a minute or two isn't a big deal to me. Could be why I had issues as a teacher. Still, I think it's sad that our new generation of workers take advantage of freedoms like that. If you have "half an hour to an hour" for lunch, it's wrong to take an hour every day. If you are supposed to be at work at 9:00, don't expect to be there at 9:15 "just because you can." Remember, gentle readers, we are given wiggle room out of convenience, not "at your convenience" - just try working in a career where your work day starts and ends (theoretically) at the ring of a bell. Also, don't forget that look on your old high school teacher's face when you sauntered in two minutes after the bell and they had to change the "A for absent" into a "T for tardy" in their roll books. Simply put, there is a reason we used to sprint to class back in the day. When did that all change?

Initial here, sign here.

Sorry kids, I've spent most of my evening after work today trying to wade my way through all the tax, benefits, insurance, and other assorted paperwork. My brain is swimming with withholding, flex accounts, beneficiaries, and clients that I couldn't possibly form a cogent sentence.

I already have a few ideas for tomorrows blog, however, so stay tuned for all that fun.

God save the scene.

What an interesting weekend this has been, and what a fascinating study in the two sides of Bill it has proven to be. I find it somewhat interesting that this weekend took place right before am starting my new job, but that is somewhat beside the point. More than a past versus present kind of thing, this weekend had more to do with my comfort level.

Friday night was exactly the kind of night I like to talk about with friends in order to boost my cred. I met some folks in the Mission for a dive bar happy hour, even though it was at The Elbo Room, whose dive status was questioned by many member of the aforementioned group. Still, after a beer there, I went with my friend Susan to the tenth installment of Literary Death Match, a reading series that pits readers against each other in front of a panel of judges who are every bit as witty and clever as the readers themselves (most are former readers) all in support of the local literary scene. After dinner and parting ways with my friend Susan, I met up with another crew of revellers in the lower Haight at Molotov's, a bar known by many as "that punk rock bar in the lower Haight." Everywhere I went, I felt completely at home, like I belonged, like I was part of a vast and wide reaching scene. This was helped, I'm sure, by the sheer happenstance that one of the friends had been at Literary Death Match as well, unbeknownst to me. I could look around and see people like me, people in hoodies and Chuck Taylors. People who drink like I drink, who catch the same references to movies, books, and music that I do. Call them what you want: hipsters, scenesters, indie kids, geeks, punks (but everyone who knows me realizes immediately that I'm anything but punk), or even the outdated term of "rockers". These were my kinds of people, and these were my kinds of bars.

Saturday night I was with a group collected for the act of wishing my best friend Sean a bon voyage as he ships off to the horizon we all call marriage. After dinner, I wound up surprisingly following the group of fun-loving bachelor party attendees to a bar/club on Broadway in SF's North Beach area. For most San Franciscans, I need to say nothing further, because the mere sight of me in a club in North Beach is enough to raise a suspicious eyebrow and draw a smirk or sneer to your face. For you non-SF readers, North Beach is where a lot of people from all over the Bay Area come together to grind up upon one another while buying ridiculously overpriced cocktails. I realized a long time ago that I would never be one of these people. So for me, this was a very unique experience. I haven't been to a proper "club" in probably a year and a half or two years, so this was an interesting reminder of just how the other half goes out. I found myself surrounded by guys in vertical striped shirts and designer jeans that look like they came from the good will. There were girls all over the place wearing rather "revealing" outfits. Granted, I will never complain about girls cutting down on the amount of clothing they wear (well, maybe some girls who really shouldn't...) but these are not the type of girls I consider my "type". I spent some two and a half hours or so in the bar and did not see a single pair of chucks or any girl donning a pair of chunky glasses.

So now the question pops into my head: am I going to grow up with my newfound employment and no longer be one with the folks I associate with in the Mission and its outlying areas? I am convinced that my personal tastes have been well refined over a decent length of time, and that my job will not really shape me in that sense. I'm sure I won't be out all hours on like Tuesday nights like I once did, but other than that, I don't think a new status of employment will keep me away from liters of beer at Gestalt House on Saturday nights like I'm used to doing.

Now, if you'll excuse me, I need to get some sleep before my first day of work. (eep!)

Come on, now.

I can't really believe this... I have never been much of a jeans guy. Generally speaking, I have one pair at a time, and wear it in somewhat even rotation with a few pairs of Dickies and whatever pants I happen to be fond of at the moment.

So my most recent pair of jeans met an ill-fated end in a Fourth of July game of kickball. Now, with my new found employment, it is time for a new pair of jeans. Over the last few years my standard M.O. is to go to Old Navy and buy as close to the same pair that I last had. In recent weeks and months, I have been considering a bit of an upgrade. Naturally, being of hearty proportion like I am, I have a bit more of a challenge in finding properly fitting jeans than most folks I know. So I decided to take the plunge and look online and see what I could find at the Gap team of websites. While I was excited to see a full line of styles and colors that I might actually fit in to, I was distressed by one thing: the fact that there were suddenly twenty six options to cover my ass in more amazing and stylish ways. Don't even get me started on what I found at the Levi's website.

When did this happen? I used to be able to go to stores, look for "a pair of jeans" and be pointed to a wall where I would choose between light and dark. How did we suddenly get "low rise skinny boot cut in distressed vintage wash"? I realize that fashion has come a long way since my younger days, but what the hell is next? Honestly, half of what I love about Dickies is that I know exactly what I am getting when I buy a pair. How in the world are you supposed to know without trying on what the difference between the Old Navy boot cut painter's jeans and the Gap straight leg regular fit jeans are? I realize there are variations between brands in how things fit, but come on.

In the meantime, I'm keeping my fingers crossed about the "Standard Fit Straight Leg Dark Blue Wash Jeans" from Gap.

Just one more for now.

I can't help it. I've been geeking out over Batman stuff almost all day, and I just had to do a little speculating here.

So far in the first two Christopher Nolan directed Batman movies, they have touched on a few of the very key Batman villains: The Joker, Two-Face, Ra's Al Ghul, and The Scarecrow. There are still a ton of villains that might pop up, and I thought I'd run down the ones that I would personally like to see the most. I will note three omissions right off the bat (punny pun pun): Harley Quinn, The Penguin, and Catwoman. Harley Quinn will just never appear because there's no way anyone will try to touch Heath Ledger's performance as the Joker, so that means the Joker won't be around Arkham Asylum to seduce Dr. Harley Quinzell. For the Penguin, I just don't think that much of him as a villain. He'd make for a good cameo performer, but I don't think he has what it takes to be a blockbuster villain. As far as Catwoman goes, as much as I'd love it, I don't see them being able to develop the complexity of the relationship between she and Batman well enough in one or two more movies.

So who's left?

Anarky: Super smart, an excellent costume, and a compelling story behind the double life. However, it's doubtful because not enough people know who he is, and the character is supposed to be a teenager, so movie executives might have issues with Batman whomping the living crap out of a kid on the big screen.

Calendar Man: Yeah, I know you don't know who he is, but he commits crimes to coincide with specific dates, often holidays, and he's creepy as all hell. He'd be a perfect side-villain to get involved.

Clayface: I am afraid he might not make it to the big screen because they just put The Sandman into the last Spiderman movie, but with the CGI capabilities of modern movie studios, he could prove to be one of the most badass villains of all time.

Killer Croc: Another guy who's more of a B-lister. Still, the possibilities for the visual effects team are infinite.

The Riddler: I've heard rumors of him appearing in the next movie. I'd love to see it. He's a perfect mastermind to hire/pull the strings for some of the lesser-known villains.

The Mad Hatter: Cast Dustin Hoffman, and you could have one of the most sinister villains you could ever ask for. Besides, what is more fascinating than a psychopath with mind control powers? He is the perfect pair to go with The Scarecrow. (who is still alive and kicking in the movies, btw)

Mr. Zsasz: Right, more fascinating than a psycho with mind control powers: a traditional old-school psycho with a love for knives who carves a tally of the number of people he's killed onto his own body. He can't carry a movie, but damn it, he'll have you peeing your pants.

Poison Ivy: Need I say more?

Mr. Freeze: Arnold ruined this character. I think Nolan could revive him to the complex and tortured character that the comics present. Without giving much away, I think he could be an ideal villain for the next movie because he is so very sympathetic.

Bane: This should be Nolan's swan song as a Batman director. He should give the public the whole badass Bane breaking Batman's back story in its entirety. People might hate him for doing it, but talk about slamming the door shut... Plus, come on, if you REALLY want kids to see the negative effects of steroids, give them Bane, not Jose Canseco. Actually.... that could be a compelling casting...

Great Ceasar's Ghost.

I'm not usually one to gush, but I saw The Dark Knight last night, and even now, some nine hours later, I remain as giddy as a little schoolgirl.

I went with an awesome group of peeps, we came close but not too close to getting in a fight over saved seats, and met a most amazing Scotsman later on at Tommy's Joynt.

But back to the movie. As most of you know, I'm a Batman fanatic. I'm silly with the stuff. I have more Batman comics than a person my age should really have. Therefore, when the older Batman movies started turning south (aka once Tim Burton stopped directing them) I was pretty bummed. Then all of a sudden Christopher Nolan brought things back in a major way. Now, with this, the second installment, he has finally made what I consider to be the best Batman film. It's dark. It's twisted. There are some gnarly deaths along the way. Bruce Wayne considers hanging up "the mantle of the bat" for good. Plus, Bruce Wayne is even more of a pimp in this movie than he has been in any other. Then there's the Joker. I don't want to say much for those of you who haven't seen the movie, but I will say this, in this one movie, he's made it official: he has proven for once and for all that he is the best Joker to ever grace the screen. Props to Cesar Romero for setting the bar and giving the public an effective role model for the Joker. Then there's Jack Nicholson, who really made it all happen. He brought the Joker to the masses and launched the Batman movie franchise. I was as duplicitous as the rest of you when I'd heard that Heath Ledger had turned down Jacko's offer of assistance. But all of a sudden, after seeing The Dark Knight yesterday, I can see exactly why. He has effectively eclipsed all others.

So, in short, go see the movie, but be warned it's not for the weak of heart. And if you need someone to see it with you, I'm just itching to see it again.

Another sign of the pending apocalypse.

In case you haven't heard, I got a job. While I am thrilled by this, and looking forward to the land of the employed, it is a somewhat strange feeling. Perhaps Pete put it best when he said "Bill and employment go together like oil and water." But all kidding aside, I am taking my blogging (and other assorted) skills and putting them to use for the benefit of ebates.com.
Fear not, gentle readers, this blog will stay as active as it ever has been because, come on, I'm going to be taking MUNI to and from work every day, and you know how much that's going to get my ire up.

In other news, I picked up the new Death Cab for Cutie album, and it's fascinating. They have really come into their own and are incorporating all kinds of new sounds into the already successful medium that they use. For any fan of the band, I'd definitely recommend it, and for any indie enthusiast, it's also worth checking out, as they seem to be working out some new sounds that could soon become more prevalent in the genre.

I'm sure other odd fancies will pop into my head over the weekend, and you can expect a more cohesive posting some time tomorrow.

Update FYI.

Hey folks,
You will notice a couple of new links over in the "Other Blogs" column. I have stumbled across a few here and there - one is the t-shirt blog "Preshrunk" that I swear by. The guy is a lot like me - somewhat... portly, but has a love for all things great t-shirts. He is rather lackluster in updating and writing new content, but the archives are chock full of great links to every manner of clever or artsy t-shirts.

The others are both San Francisco-based blogs. One is, quite simply, people reading - the woman strikes up conversations with folks she meets on the streets and finds out what they're reading and why. The only part I don't like is that she always includes a somewhat lame discussion or thought question, which is a little book-clubby for my tastes, but it still makes for an interesting read. The other is a newer blog from what I can tell, but it's all about proper deportment when riding the bus, and they have all sorts of links to other bus-related blogs, which I always find fascinating (especially if it's about San Francisco buses).

RSVP.

Sorry for the delay in posting, gentle readers, but as I sat in front of my computer last night, my mind was a blank slate. After being mocked for an hour or so by a blinking cursor, I decided to pack it in for the night and see if I felt a bit more inspired today. I blame the nearly five hours of All Star game I watched last night.

So, I have to give you a word of warning, I'm a little bitter today, so if you aren't interested in hearing me rant a tad about the shortcomings of my generation, you might want to look elsewhere. If not, I hope the following entertains you a little (as I always hope to) and makes you give a little look into a corner of manners that has fallen off the map. I'm talking, of course, about planning.

We live in an amazing world. Technology allows us to check our stock quotes while we're on the john, record our favorite programming by name instead of time so that it simply records whenever the name pops up, and even allows our military, pathetic and misguided though they may be, to drop bombs on unsuspecting foreign countries via remote control fighter planes from the comfort of a barcalounger. So, why is it that no one seems to be able to figure out when anything is happening, or keep any dates straight in their head? A reminder, folks: a cell phone is not an excuse for punctuality. If you say you are going to meet or do something at 3:00 on a Sunday afternoon, calling at 3:15 and saying you're just leaving your house does not make it all better. The recipient of the call is still sitting at the pre-disclosed location by themselves for however long it takes you to get there. It seems like such a simple concept: when you make a plan with someone, record it wherever it will do you some good, remember it, and, in the end, keep that plan. Show up where you say you'll be when you say you'll be there. How hard is that? People have been doing it for centuries. It's a sad commentary on our time and people when someone is praised for their punctuality. I am not saying that I'm perfect or blameless in this gripe, but I can say for damn sure that I have been on the other end of this issue many more times than I have been the offending party.

The other component to this is remembering dates. I'm not talking about the forgetting your significant other's birthday or something like that; I'm more concerned with the number of times people seem to need to check or verify a date that they have already confirmed for something: travel plans, dinner reservations, concerts, or just days to get together and hang out. In this advanced age of smartphones that synch up with your computer's planner and send you mobile updates, why is it that the guy who keeps everything written down on paper is the only person who knows what date things are happening?

These are amazing times, people, so why is it that our reliance on technology has only taught us to circumvent the time-honored traditions of punctuality and adherence to our word?

Getting older.

For some strange reason, dear readers, it seems that a lot of conversations I've been having with friends (especially this weekend) have been about aging and changes in lifestyle that accompany an increased number of birthdays. I feel that I have kept a fairly decent balance, in that I maintain the late night habits and a level of alcohol consumption that I have enjoyed for the past few years of my life, however I do find an increased desire to settle down a little bit, meet someone nice, and not feel so bad that the nights of wild partying are much fewer and further in between than they once were.

Still, I was having a conversation with a friend over dinner tonight, and she said that someone once told her that everything changes with everyone around you when you're twenty seven. As I am dangerously close to the halfway point of my twenty seventh year on this planet, I have looked around and noticed that while not all the changes have happened just this year, in the past couple of years, the stats on my friends are skewing a lot. Friends who read this, don't worry - I couldn't be happier for all of you. I wish you all years of happiness and well being. I consider myself honored to have you all in my life. Nonetheless, I look around and see that most all of my closest friends are either married or engaged. There is one baby (though not a baby anymore...) and one on the way shortly. People's bedtimes are now far closer to sundown than sunup, and even the weekend festivities that once took us to the not-so-wee hours of the morning are now breaking up before last call.

I guess there isn't a real point to this, no greater realization about myself of my general condition gained in the writing of this post, but as I stand here at 1:45 in the morning, looking forward to yet another day of this peculiar age, I am wondering when some of these changes will start manifesting themselves in my life, but as of this time and date, the right-here and the right-now; I can look upon my empty bed, my ringless fingers, and my cozy little hovel and say "better you than me."

Borrowed genius.

So here we go, I am saying this as loud and clear as I possibly can: I am posting these from Diesel Sweeties, a web comic that is awesome and hilarious. I did NOT come up with these, though they touch on jokes that are rather close to my heart. The first one is hilarious because "indie rock Pete" is looking for band mates, while in my life "Indie Rock Bill" realizes he may never have any. While the second one tugs at the heartstrings of my passion for facial hair. so, with no further ado, I give you the Diesel Sweeties strips entitled "It's Bad Form To Rub Your Chopsticks In Front Of Your Host" and "Facial Hair: Threat or Menace", and if you have a chance go to www.dieselsweeties.com and read the comics on your own, or even better, get one of their wonderful t-shirts:

Citizens, rejoice!

I don't know how many of you have heard about this yet, but Anchor Brewing is at it again. After the wondrous years of producing the "Old Potrero" straight rye whiskey, they've taken things up a notch. That's right, they've now started producing a specialty small-batch rye called "Old Potrero Hoatling's Single Malt Whiskey" which has been aged in old recycled bourbon barrels for seventeen years now, and I couldn't be more excited. Granted, I have no idea how I'm going to get some of this down my hatch any time soon, but I'll be damned if I don't find a way.

Why the enthusiasm? Simple. I have been a fan of rye for a while now, and often turn to it as a welcome change of pace from my beloved bourbon, but there's one problem: most liquor stores and bars only have Jim Beam. Now don't get me wrong, me and ol' Jimmy go way back, and the man (and his lineage) makes themselves a fine bottle of rye, but there is a whole world out there. So, by some divine happenstance, I wound up at a local bar just over a week ago that treated me to a lucky surprise. As a frequent orderer of rye on the rocks, I am used to seeing the yellow label of Jim Beam staring me back in the face as the bartender pours, or else being told that there is no rye to be had. But on this fateful night, the bartender pulled out a bottle and asked "Is this okay?" Nearly gape-mouthed, all I could do was nod, since he had produced a bottle of Michter's ten year aged rye. And boy was it phenomenal. However, after finally having this somewhat sought-after rye, my taste buds are clamoring for a taste of Anchor's rarity.

In an odd and almost completely unrelated side note, I will wind down this posting with a simple opinion: meats imitating as other meats are just wrong. You know what I'm talking about, when people make a type of meat out of something that it isn't supposed to be. What brings this about? Easy: a package of turkey pastrami that is in my fridge at this very moment. It goes against the laws of nature, but damn, it does go down smooth.

Hats.

Yes, I know this has been discussed before, but I spent much of the evening at the A's game tonight and on BART both to and from the game, so I had plenty of time to sit and stew about all this.

I have come to the point in my life where I realize that I can only wear a baseball hat in one manner: the generic white man baseball hat style. That means straight forward, with just enough curve to the bill to make it a tad more comfortable. Worn at an angle roughly parallel with the ground. I am fine with this. In some ways, I am even happy about it.

Now here are some of the abominations I saw today.

1) The Charlie Brown: This is the worst offender in my mind. I can't even link it to any particular ethnic or social group. But you all know what I'm talking about -- this is when guys insist on wearing their hat with an absolutely flat bill (usually with the stickers still on it to show authenticity) that is also a few sizes too big, so that they can tuck their ears in to the hat. I just don't get it. This cannot be, or at least should never be, cool. (my example is with the ears out, but y'all must have seen it somewhere)

2) The straight-to-the-side: This is tragically uncool unless you're a rapper from the '80s. Even then, it was borderline. Sadly, the cool rappers have all replaced the sideways hat with....

3) The cock-a-doodle: Also known as the gangsta lean, this is wearing the hat at an extreme angle, usually a bit off to the side, and often at a low slant. Some guys have switched it up and done the side-cock while wearing the hat far back on their head. Which leads me to....

4) The farmboy: This is the look popularized by many older men (my father included) in which the hat rides faaaar back on the head, exposing the entire forehead. Acceptable for those who are sixty-plus, but few others. This almost entirely negates the benefit of wearing a hat, which is to use the bill of a hat for shade. This leads me to...

5) The backwards hat: this is a socially acceptable for people who believe themselves to be cool. Generally speaking, most any male can rock this look through high school, but by the time college rolls around, especially for white males, this look get waylaid by frat boys. Which is why most people past about 25 shouldn't even bother attempting this look. It can sometimes slip by well enough if you are wearing a fitted hat, and don't have the awful sunrise of forehead exposed above the adjustable band of your hat. Whatever you do, NEVER wear a backwards hat in the farmboy manner. That look is reserved for dorks in the 80s and maybe beach volleyball players. Which leads me to...

6) The flip-up: When one feels the inexplicable need to flip the bill of their hat upwards, either in a straight-ish line, or possibly worse, to curl the bill of the hat up so that it curls over upon itself. This should pretty much never be done. I've never seen anyone look cool doing it. Except maybe Karch.

So, white males age 25 and up, I implore you, take a page out of the Book of Bill, and wear your hats like normal human beings. The world thanks you. So does Karch.

Oh so much.

Well well, the holiday weekend is winding down, and I have much to report and mull over.

First of all, happy first anniversary to Nate and Jen. One down, and here's to many more to come.

The fourth was great -- good time, good peeps, good eats, and I got to see a lot of stuff get blown up. It's a not too secret fact about me: I go crazy for fireworks. That being said, the fourth of July is one of my favorite holidays, even if it was in the 50s that night, and everyone was dressed in layers.

I spent a good deal of the day Saturday watching "Deadliest Catch". I don't know why, but it's one of my rare TV addictions. I can watch that program damn near all day, and that's pretty much what I did. Fortunately, the Discovery Channel does the marathons of it, so in those rare days when I do become obsessed with it again, I can pretty much watch an entire season in a single sitting. Watching it, I got to thinking, though. These guys absolutely love what they do. For most of the guys on the program, crabbing is a family tradition, but still. Think about your job for a second, think about what you hate the most about it, then think about these Alaskan crab fishermen. Literally every day they could easily die as a result of one little thing going wrong. They work in frigid temperatures, and the average day's work is in the neighborhood of eighteen hours. They are away from their families for weeks, sometimes months, at a time. But still, when they start doing what they do, they are really caught up in the moment, and once that first big catch is brought in, they pretty much go apeshit, regardless of if it's their first year on the ship, or if they've been on for twenty years. I watch these guys, and I don't honestly know if there is anything that I love enough to want to it for the rest of my life like that, let alone something that puts you into stage on hypothermia as part of the job from time to time.

Tonight I went with the fellas to see We Are Scientists play at the Independent. Amazing show, and even the opening band "Cut Off Your Hands" was pretty damn respectable. I suppose seeing the show kind of coincides with the news that my new band is finally beginning to take shape. Everything is still in that awkward "we all want to be in a band together but don't know any of the same songs" stage, but that's just part of the game, really. I've got some stuff I'm working on, but here's the big problem that I have faced for a number of years: how the hell does one go about writing lyrics? I guess that's a reasonable part of the reason I have been playing instrumental music all these years, but still, I would think that I listen to enough music that I could pick out some themes in the bands that I like and sort of hope to emulate, but the main common thread I can find is that none of them really make a lot of logical sense. And that is absolutely no help to me. So I'll close this up with a question for you, and I hope to get response from musical folks and non-musical peeps as well. When you're listening to music, what makes the lyrics "good"? Is it more a matter of the melody or the words? Are harmonies a major factor? Because I have to be honest with you all for a minute here: I really feel like that is a big barrier to my songwriting at the moment. Any help or advice would be greatly appreciated.

Television.

Most of you, dear readers, know me. That is probably at least part of the reason that you read this here blog. So it is no news to any of you that I'm not much of a TV watcher. Yes, I have my weaknesses, and I try my best to miss as few Jeopardy matches as possible, but in general, I don't follow a lot of programs or anything like that. Hell, for the last three months I have been getting by just fine without any type of television in my little basement hovel.

Having said that, I find myself in a very interesting position: for the first time in my life, I have a television in my living space that actually gets channels. I'd say that I have cable, but basic network television, ten Spanish channels, the Discovery Channel, and Sci-Fi network hardly qualifies as cable. Still, this is the first time that, from the comfort of my own bed or desk chair, I can switch on the television and be certain that anything that is being broadcast at that moment will be completely visible on my television set.

So here's the thing: now that I have so much of this television, I realize just how awful television has become. In cruising channels to test the capabilities of my new-fangled television connectivity, I happened upon an episode of WifeSwap. All I can say is wow. It's not new to me or anything like that, I've even seen bits and pieces before, but man, I think it's gotten worse. It didn't help, of course, that nearly every other network that I stumbled across was showing some form of reality programming. I realize that there is wonderful and amazing programming out there on "real" cable (which I'd have to consider just for The Daily Show, The Colbert Report, and The Soup) but I really wonder what the hell happened to television. I wrote a seminar paper this past semester on how the computer is altering the entire concept of television, and I'm going to be so bold as to say this: if I could pay a reasonable fee to get a DVD in the mail once a week with whatever programming I really wanted to watch, I'd never watch live TV again. Think about it... if you could subscribe to a certain number of television shows, kind of like a podcast, would you give a damn about having other options? I mean, these days, I catch probably seventy percent of my television watching either via internet streaming or else from the purchase of a box set.

I realize I'm biased, and I'm sure if I had a bit more "real" programming to choose from, rather than reality programming, this might well be a completely different posting. But in the meantime, I am going to flip on a DVD and ignore all the other crap that might show up on my TV screen.

Hardy har har.

So, FoxSports.com, how does it feel to come in second? Alas, you poor saps are hopping on the train just a tad late. You're like those poor kids who arrive at the party immediately after everyone says they're "over it" and begin to pack up with the hopes of making it to a liquor store before closing.

Why do I gloat so?

This is why.

Damn it feels good to be a gangsta. And a connoisseur of fine facial hair.

A few things.

So it's July, which means it's thesis time for me. Alas, my summer is (kind of) over just as soon as it began. In some ways, it will even be good to have a little academic discipline to give some direction to the listing ship that is my brainpower this summer. Then again, there's a chance (Hector, if you're reading this, this is my not-so-subtle hint) that I may even be employed in a few weeks. But we'll see about that.

In the meantime, I want to give everyone a little recommendation -- watch Clone High. It was on MTV for a very brief season, maybe thirteen episodes, and never seen again. I take a little time here and there to spend a day or so watching it all, and I tell you, I'm never let down. A lot of the show is up on YouTube if you want to take a little time out of your "busier than mine" days and check a little bit. I hope you enjoy it even a fraction as much as I do. If you do, those crazy Canadians released it on DVD through one of their networks, and you can pick it up on Amazon for cheap.

Finally, the burning question that arose from a phone conversation with Courtney tonight. We Californians have a rich and exciting history. In part, that is why it makes sense to spend the duration of fourth grade studying California History. For you proud graduates of the California State University system, you also know that there is a California History component that has to be satisfied in order to get your diploma. So here's the burning question that gave rise to much debate: do all states study their own history so vigorously? For instance, my sister's fella is from New Hampshire. Is there enough NH history to account for an entire year of grade school history? What about Kansas? Besides the band that brought you "Carry On My Wayward Son", is there much to know about Kansas?

Smirk.

I'm trying here folks, I'm really trying. I do my best to be tight-lipped about academic stuff. I fully realize that everyone has their own learning curve and their own level of comfort when it comes to learning, or more specifically, reading. I know I have moments of weakness, but I try to not let my scholastic and literary snobbishness get in the way, and I'd like to believe that I do a pretty okay job at it most of the time.

Tonight, I just have to let a little bit out.

As usual, I was at the coffee shop. I am currently reading a book (borrowed from my buddy Nate) called The Dumbest Generation. I won't necessarily recommend it unless you have particular interest in media studies, teaching, or literacy, as it is really the equivalent of a doctoral thesis written on those topics by a college professor. (Complete with 20+ page bibliography...) Still, it's a compelling read on how perceptions of this generation, who finally has been given a legit label "Generation DotNet". I like it. Anyhow, it discusses the perceptions of the involvement of the computer and media in our lives and if we (I'm talking basically people who are thirty and younger) are indeed as dumb as people make us out to be. The jury is still out on the answer to that theory, but right now, it doesn't look especially promising.

So, with that in mind, I sat near a trio of folks probably in their laaaate teens or early early twenties tonight as I was reading. There were two females and their exceptionally gay male friend (not that there's anything wrong with that). They sat around the entire two hours or so that I was there and were generally very well contained, but then again, I did have my headphones on. At one point, they struck up a conversation with another woman in the cafe who was wearing a polo shirt from a local high school. I won't name it, but for you San Franciscans, it's a Jesuit school located in the Sunset district. For you non-San Franciscans, it's a VERY expensive private Catholic school known for its over-achieving preppy grads (and for keggers in a local park almost every Friday night).

So I'm sitting there reading about how the new generation hates reading (I find it ironic that I'm sitting there, a Lit master's student, trying to take serious a guy who is claiming that my generation couldn't give a damn about physical books or actually reading) and how multi-task reading via the internet is the wave of the future. As I'm reading this, I'm getting a tad indignant because, with the exception of a very select few people in my life (most of whom are blood relatives), I am surrounded by readers. Even friends who had nothing at all to do with literature in their studies are still avid pleasure readers. But I digress...

So as I'm packing up, I was inspired to hear the aforementioned trio discussing reading. I was even surprised to hear some major works get thrown around, like Lolita. Then all faith was lost. The one girl said "You know what book I've always felt like I should read? Don Quixote. It's supposed to be like, great and all, but really, I mean, come on - have you seen that book? It's like, I don't know, a thousand pages or something. Who has ever read a book that long? Who would want to? That would be like, torture to me. I guess I could maybe get it on audio book, but still, do I have like five hours to hear some person sit around and read a book to me? No. Oh well, I guess I can just read the synopsis on Wikipedia or something."

Ouch.

I appreciate that she has the curiosity to want to know more about the book, and I know that for some people a thousand page book can be a grueling endeavor. That's not quite the issue I take, though I did smirk a bit. But really... wikipedia? Really?? It's great for pop culture stuff. It's an easy way to get a lot of simple information and facts. But reading a summary on a book instead of even getting the audio book? This from a kid whose parents spent somewhere between forty and fifty thousand dollars to put their child through high school so she can get into her choice of the nation's most expensive universities. Now I've never read Don Quixote myself. Perhaps one day. But until that day come, you can bet for damn sure that I'll never go to Wikipedia to read a summary with the hopes that I can bring up some minor plot line in class or anything like that.


One final gripe, completely unrelated to all this. Fuck you, California legislature, for this hands-free law. You've managed to successfully turn me into something I hate - a weirdo with a bluetooth earpiece. See, my phone pretty much sucks monkey nuts, and I hope not to have it much longer, so I decided that rather than dropping like twenty or thirty bucks on a hands-free apparatus that I will disregard when I get rid of my sad excuse for a cell phone, I would shell out forty-something dollars and get a hands-free headset I can use with any phone I happen to next buy. That doesn't make it any easier to strap on that little blue-blinking doo dad to my ear.