And the winner is...
Not me. And not anyone watching, really. Or at least that's how I feel about award shows. What a waste of human existence those shows are. Oscars, Golden Globes, Emmys, Grammys, Tonys, you name it. I hate that they're occurring, and I hate that people are watching.
I already know this is an unpopular opinion, believe me, so don't bother attempting to "awaken" me from my discontent. I've (apathetically) heard every argument for award shows that there is. But my mind can never be changed; award shows are meaningless, self-righteous affairs.
There is not a greater ego-stroking exhibition than the telecasted award shows. It's one giant four- to six-hour catwalk in front of ogling cameras and cardboard-cut nobody "journalists" foaming at the mouth for a sound bite from a bejeweled, Botox-infused douche, wrapped in sequined den curtains and hiding behind sunglasses at the darkest hour of the night, and on display on a stage abundantly saturated with overproduction, lame one-line endeavors at comedy, artificial live-yet-pre-recorded-and-lip-synched musical performances, and lengthy, trite soliloquies of thank-yous and meandering political commentary. It's a celebration of pompous nothingness.
And they're just crankin' 'em out, baby: People's Choice, Kids' Choice, Animals' Choice, Ghostly Spirits' Choice...
I can't blame the networks; I mean, they'll broadcast whatever people will watch (essentially and justifiably, this is their approach to anything they air). Nor can I blame the individual institutions/academies; likewise, they'll push whatever sells -- and more appropriately, whatever reinforces their own agendas. The people I blame are we. Us. The audience. The "Access Hollywood" viewers. The checkout-lane gossip readers. The dress-alike, look-alike idolaters. They'll only continue the madness if we continue to support it. Sadly, I think most of us want to.
My point is we laud and applaud the efforts of people we laud and applaud anyway. We intertwine our lives with theirs, and we don't even know these folks. Frankly, I'm not the least bit concerned with who wins Best Actor of the Year any more than I am with who wins Best Auto Mechanic of the Year or any other profession's coveted annual recognition of great achievement.
But lay me down a red carpet on my way to tackle an Excel spreadsheet and maybe I'll reconsider.
Thursday, March 26, 2009
Thursday, March 12, 2009
Headlights
Lots of distractions for the common driver these days, aren't there? Cell phones, GPS devices, iPods, DVD players, etc. -- all on top of what we've already been distracted by for years, like stereos/radios, billboards, passengers, eating... among several other attention-grabbers. Last thing we need is one more distraction for our focus toward safe arrival at our destination, right?
Yet we have headlights. Yes, headlights. "Hold on," you say, "headlights are essential to driving. They’re a necessity. They keep us safe!" When used correctly, sure. But so is radioactivity.
The distractive half of headlights is when folks throw the "brights" on in your face. You know what I'm talking about -- you're driving down the highway, you've got everything under control, until suddenly someone steadily approaches you from behind or oncoming with their bright headlights unknowingly on. Now the focus is on trying to awaken them to their blinding traffic infraction while also trying to find the asphalt and keep your car continuing between the painted lines. Personally, nothing boils my blood like some moron's "brights" blocking my vision. I mean, it would seem to me that there's no driving miscue that's more blatant to the offender than having your bright headlights on in a non-bright-headlight-warranted driving situation. (A blinker when not turning ranks a very close second.) This tells me the driver him/herself is obviously distracted. That or just too stupid to hold a driver's license.
But we'll chalk that instance up to inattentiveness -- or, rather, a distraction caused by a distraction. It's slightly more forgiving that way.
What are beyond unforgiving are the headlight bulbs new to the market as of just a few years: purposely discolored headlights (usually some hue of blue) and ultra-bright halogen headlights. When the shade of your headlights could easily be mistaken for a cop's emergency lights, I question their legality -- oh, and usefulness. But apparently I'm the only one as I've never heard them questioned legislatively. Look, people, headlights are universally urine-tinted maize. Not blue. Not white. Like taillights are universally red -- imagine if folks started switching those up ("Does that car in front of me have green taillights? Couldn't be. Probably a green light. I'll just give 'er some gas and -- wait a seco--" Broken glass everywhere.).
And these ultra-bright halogen bulbs I've seen advertised now, where the commercial explains, "Now you can see farther"... Hmm, care to know why? Because they’re brighter. So, while you're now able to see that deer rounding the bend four miles up, you're killing everyone else's vision, blinding us all into becoming the multiple helpless obstacles you were trying to avoid by installing these National Guard floodlights in the first place, and, in turn, leaving us to use shoulder grooves and street reflectors as Braille.
Yet we have headlights. Yes, headlights. "Hold on," you say, "headlights are essential to driving. They’re a necessity. They keep us safe!" When used correctly, sure. But so is radioactivity.
The distractive half of headlights is when folks throw the "brights" on in your face. You know what I'm talking about -- you're driving down the highway, you've got everything under control, until suddenly someone steadily approaches you from behind or oncoming with their bright headlights unknowingly on. Now the focus is on trying to awaken them to their blinding traffic infraction while also trying to find the asphalt and keep your car continuing between the painted lines. Personally, nothing boils my blood like some moron's "brights" blocking my vision. I mean, it would seem to me that there's no driving miscue that's more blatant to the offender than having your bright headlights on in a non-bright-headlight-warranted driving situation. (A blinker when not turning ranks a very close second.) This tells me the driver him/herself is obviously distracted. That or just too stupid to hold a driver's license.
But we'll chalk that instance up to inattentiveness -- or, rather, a distraction caused by a distraction. It's slightly more forgiving that way.
What are beyond unforgiving are the headlight bulbs new to the market as of just a few years: purposely discolored headlights (usually some hue of blue) and ultra-bright halogen headlights. When the shade of your headlights could easily be mistaken for a cop's emergency lights, I question their legality -- oh, and usefulness. But apparently I'm the only one as I've never heard them questioned legislatively. Look, people, headlights are universally urine-tinted maize. Not blue. Not white. Like taillights are universally red -- imagine if folks started switching those up ("Does that car in front of me have green taillights? Couldn't be. Probably a green light. I'll just give 'er some gas and -- wait a seco--" Broken glass everywhere.).
And these ultra-bright halogen bulbs I've seen advertised now, where the commercial explains, "Now you can see farther"... Hmm, care to know why? Because they’re brighter. So, while you're now able to see that deer rounding the bend four miles up, you're killing everyone else's vision, blinding us all into becoming the multiple helpless obstacles you were trying to avoid by installing these National Guard floodlights in the first place, and, in turn, leaving us to use shoulder grooves and street reflectors as Braille.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)