Parking My Brain

Am I weird, or is it just part of being alive that every so often you just feel a little "crummy", just different in a way that you don't like, not always for any particular reason, or at least not for ones you are really aware of or can figure out?

Headache, tummy ache, these all take a variety of forms.

For me, it's often triggered by either working too hard without rest and/or not taking adequate sustenance. Or maybe gamma rays.

It's weird, but the job I have now is the only one I haven't really gotten paid more that a pittance to do, but I find that I work harder and longer there than any job I've ever had. Maybe it's because I'm pretty much only doing things I find enjoyable in some way. I'm not sure why I find them enjoyable, many or most of them are rote, brainless computer chores.

Go to a web page, download something. Take that and open it in an "editor" of whatever kind, and do obvious, simple things that are mostly a version of another common task. You might do 7 things, but they are versions of the same 2-3 things. Enter metadata, and save the files. Yaaaawwwwwnnnnn........

But I go in 10:30-11 I'd go earlier, and one day a week I show up at 7, but mostly I aim for parking "sweet spots" in time: parking is VERY tight I got a mean note on my car today for having parked "too close" to another. Imagine taking the time to write a note like this. People sound all bitter and threatening ("I wrote down your license number!"), but no one seems to get to the point of what THEY would've done. I mean, how many people are there that plan to go someplace and do something--usually with people depending on you--get there, drive around, and can only find one spot, but it's really TIGHT...so they just go home? I have calculated the exact number, and it is NONE.

"Your car was VERY CLOSE and COULD HAVE damaged my car..." Really? How? Might my car just get an impulse and lash out? 

I am definitely one of the most thoughtful parkers you'll ever find, because I think a lot about how I place my car. For example, I try to position my car so that another might be able to fit, whereas clearly many people just pull in and split, bisecting a giant space, depriving you of a space where you might have wiggled in. People aren't thinking on this level, but I'll get to that.

On he other hand, I am also one the the most skillful parkers you'll ever encounter. I have parked in spaces so small that I took photos to impress people. I drive a 98 4runner, not the bulkiest nor the most nimble car, and I've parked it in spaces that measured considerably less than a foot longer than the car itself! I checked because a folded-in-half dollar bill (6" long) would not fit in either the gap in front or behind my car! In person, it doesn't even seem possible.

This close job freaked me out so much I actually went back down (elevator down, walk a block and a half, and back, not just peeking) to check on it, as if there were anything else I could have, or should have, done. It was almost as if I had aligned it and just pushed it straight sideways into the spot, it was crazy. But I felt a little BAD about the position I put others into.

I thought, "will people be angry?" And if they are, so what? I have something I have to do and I need to leave my car someplace. If I got it in, then the others almost certainly could've gotten theirs out, even if it took some maneuvering. 

And I think that if makes people mad, it's too bad. You take your car in public, you can leave it in any legal spot it fits in. Have you ever heard it said that you must make sure there is a foot in front and in back of your car? Have you ever seen anyone MEASURE? Of course not. A "place" is where your car will fit, that's all.

It's not usually a problem because overwhelmingly I find people have a very poor conception of how big their cars actually are, and mostly need at least double the required space to do ANYTHING. I don't get it. Parallel parking is a necessary and common evil, why wouldn't you pay attention on trying to be GOOD at it? I do...I visualize approach path and angle, imagine where my rear wheel is compared to the curb so that I can turn at the exact right moment, etc. Mostly, I just back in, and my car is perfectly positioned, about an inch from the curb. I'm that good, but in get a lot of practice. There may be parallel parkers as good as me, but not better.

So today this person was so irate, she wrote me a pissy note. (I mostly don't see guys doing this for some reason, perhaps because it's kind of humiliating.) When I first left I checked, and she had a solid three or more feet in front of her to get out. I figured she could just have driven straight out. But maybe someone came later, and then parked right on her front bumper. Ok, I would have felt angry too. But it's a rough and tumble world out there, what with car bombs, kidnapping school girls, beheading journalists...and challenging parking, well...it can get vexing! Sometimes you just have to CLENCH.

I liked the way s/he (could've been a guy) made sure to mention they had my license number so that in the FUTURE, well...I'd clearly be FUCKED! "Your Honor, on this date I made a note that this same car was also...parked DANGEROUSLY close. What if a CHILD...." Really? The knowledge that a stranger has my license plate and a memory of my bumper being close but not touching his...how will I sleep tonight? "So...what got YOU into Gitmo...?"

But best of all to me is the idea that people somehow think that their cars will remain pristine and untouched by any vehicle or object FOREVER. Just how does that sound in court?

"I believe, You Honor, this resulted in a SCUFF on my...BUMPER!"

"Um..." The learned justice interrupts, "...on your...WHAT?! 'Bump-er'? Doesn't the very word logically parse to declaring a designed function of...BUMPING?!"

"Court finds against plaintiff and assesses a fine for clearly having been intoxicated while driving, otherwise such stupidity could never be explained!"

My car is COVERED with dings, some of which I put there myself, but most not. If you are walking up to your car, and the person in the car next to you gets out and lightly, carefully dings your door while getting out, there is but one single, solitary acceptably gracious response: a smile! 

One person is thinking, "Oops, I was trying, sorry, hopefully it's not noticeable..." And the other is thinking, "hey, it's a CAR! That you took effort gratifies me. Go forth from this point and don't let this incident diminish from your overall joie d'vivre in even a theoretical way!"

When I bought my last car (this very one), I made good and sure that it was covered in thick metal and paint, and even maybe some strips, thinking that, along with safety, comfort and economy (and coolness), small impacts would then have fairly trivial effect.

You know what you call a person who is fretful about a ding in the paint of their car? A DICK.

It was dark when I read the note, and I felt physically crummy from pushing myself too hard at my free job. I spend an inordinate amount of time trying to convince people that working with me is one thing that they'd rather do above all others. And it mostly works. Some mornings a staffer will walk by and say, "Oh thank goodness--you're here! I've got some recordings or tasks and I'm always glad to see that YOU are here, because I know you'll do them right."

I am the guy who takes almost suspicious care in whatever I am asked to do. I suggest things--in a gentle and deferential way--to help others produce something they'll be just a little happier with. I record people reading promos, and I direct them..."that was great, but what if you put just a little more on the word 'today'..." and demonstrate...and usually they say, "oh yeah, definitely, lets do it again."

I'm surprising good at little things most people don't think you can be good at. I'm good at promos. I might have been a great actor, but the hassle!

Of course, this all comes at a significant personal price. There is a clinical term in psychology, "perfectionism". It doesn't mean that you think that what you do tends to be more perfect, it means that you have a certain constant low-level awareness of the requirement of doing everything PERFECTLY. Walking. Breathing. Picking something up. And more complicated things, but really, absolutely, everything.

The huge problem is that the definition of "perfection" carries a connotation of unreachability. It's Xeno's Paradox: each shot can be twice as close, but theoretical perfection is definitively ruled out.

You wouldn't BELIEVE my suicide plans, Dan describes them as my "design projects".

It makes for a somewhat torturous life, and if think that all of us have suffered from it considerably more than most others. But it's not really volitional. It's the ultimate perverse defect. But it's best to be aware of it, to remember to cut yourself the slack you need to survive. 

So I read the note, felt a little anger, a touch of what I'd say in return (they write everything but their name and number on the note, so THEY get to vent, but your humanity is NULLIFIED because you can say nothing). Then I thought, "at least it wasn't a ticket!"

When I got home I felt crummy and didn't know what to do. Too late to eat, watching a show would worsen my headache...I took some pill I had handy, and just lied down. 

I tried to find a position, overall attitude, position of limbs, not too much pressure on anything, making smaller and smaller adjustments. And when I found a physical spot I could accept, I kept doing...something. Thinking in a certain way, trying to see what firing patterns of my brain felt less crummy, and finding microscopic but detectable improvements.

And then a little physical adjustment, and then the whole process, to approach that feeling where it just doesn't psychically GOUGE me. And it gets a tiny bit better, but never fully "better". ("Better" and "better": one of the greatest defects of English. Larry David did a great bit on "Curb" where he made a bet with his acupuncturist about feeling "better". The guy was of course a savvy Asian, and laid the trap perfectly. "So Mr David, are you feeling better?"

Larry admitted that yes, he was feeling a bit better.

The acupuncturist declares, "I win--you owe me $5000!" And the scene closes with Larry fretting in his classic way, "better, not BETTER! There's a difference! I feel better than I did, but not as if my problem had been eliminated, not ALL better." Grrrr...

As you immediately sensed, because I know you to be particularly insightful that way, I only started writing this once I felt "better" enough, the fact that I'm willing to write is a sign of feeling better. Still don't feel BETTER better though.

While all better is best better is still always better than not BETTER better.

But the REAL notion that kicked me off was the thought of what I was actually DOING, lying there, trying to feel less crummy. It had to be SOMETHING. But it's like detecting a neutrino, or Higg's. (It's always good to say "Higg's" when appropriate because it certainly establishes you as someone of great knowledge and fine discernment. And leaving off "boson" is kind of like referring to Scorsese as "Marty"--it's important, but a little ordinary to people like US.)

I was lying on my side, shifting my arms so there wasn't too much weight on my right wrist, and then trying to find the greatest amount of STILLNESS I could, and focus on THAT. is the smallest thing I can feel seeming like even less? Oh no...that's a little worse, maybe 1/1000th the width of a Higg's worse, but it's the wrong direction.

When you're just lying there, focusing, tuning, trying to find all the ways you can control, and how to nudge them, what is it exactly that you are doing? In that astonishing web of impulses flashing across your brain, a weird, gooey muck in your skull, something is happening, you are finding the controls, and figuring out how to nuance them, like the perfect cello performance: you know it's better, but you can't ever really say how.

Parking my brain.

Changed my mind about "Girls"

Not about girls, "Girls". I still have no idea what girls are. But that is a different, long, dangling essay I will resist penetrating this one with.

Girls. "Penetrating". Ha.

After a brief fascination, I decided to HATE the trendy HBO series "Girls", but, running short of things to watch I decided to give it another chance and found that actually, it's quite interesting and well-written television. 

For awhile I was put off by the "girls in your face" attitude, and the fact that all the characters are such "characters". Look! Girls go for a grungy fuck just like guys! And she's cashing in on it!

Some things I still don't like, it's a personal thing but I don't like seeing the dumpy little Lena Dunham naked or having sex. And it used to bother me that she wrote episodes that had people describing her as "beautiful" when she's really just a kind of stubby, dumpy little chick. 

But then I grew up a little and remembered that most of the time people are beautiful in context--surely very few of the women I've been intimate with would be generally described by strangers as "beautiful" (sorry, ladies, but I also don't imagine me people generally saying "now THERE'S a handsome fella!" about me), but they seemed much more attractive to me at certain times.

Some of the writing seems artificial and arbitrary, but then, it's art; there is no requirement for full "realism" even when SOME of the aspects are fairly realistic. Each scene really seems like a little play unto itself, everything starts and stops on just the right note. And as weird as they are, the characters are engaging. Even Chris O'Dowd, brilliant comic actor of "The IT Crowd" fame) does a great job in a recurring comic/dramatic role as a kind of puzzled outsider who manages to penetrate the youngster crowd he's aged out of.

I still hate Dunham's bruise-like tattoos though. She looks like she slept naked in the black and white funny papers. That tattoos have gained such universal popularity is one of the great tragedies of modern culture. Thank god it didn't happen in the Renaissance!

Unfortunately for those of you without HBO, it is not part of the Amazon Prime HBO collection, although you CAN purchase it on Amazon, and maybe iTunes, I don't know, I never use iTunes.

Another TV note while I'm at it: HBO's "Boardwalk Empire". Critically acclaimed, unquestionably beautifully done period piece with lush cinematography and exquisite attention to detail, about a time and place that is surely fascinating...I just can't get into. I tried, I want to. 

It has nothing to do with the bizarrely inappropriate opening sequence featuring strange fuzz-tone rock guitar for a show about the 1920s, trying to make the whole show seem like an acid flashback. The problem is Steve  Buscemi, the star.

Buscemi is a GREAT character actor who is fantastic in even the worst stuff you see him in, he always makes it better.

But the thing is...he's a SIDEKICK. In everything he's a fantastic sidekick character to someone else, and no one can do it like him. And maybe there are starring roles that would work for him. But to me, seeing him as a mob boss...he just doesn't have it. He has no mass, no "central" presence, like James Gandolfini in "Sopranos". I hate using the word "gravitas"--I even hate people who use it--but he lacks it, and the role requires it.

If he played the secondary character next to the boss who it turned out REALLY ran things, I would totally buy into it. But every time I see him trying to pass himself off as the boss I think of him as a kid playing dress up, walking around in daddy's shoes. 

He's not immature, he has a very world-weary sense he can call on. I know other people don't feel this way. But no matter how good you are as an actor, that doesn't necessarily mean you can play ANYTHING.

And to ME, Buscemi just can't pull this off, and it makes me sad, because I love him.

The lucky thing for those that disagree is that the show IS available on Amazon Prime, so if you pay the monthly fee, you can watch it, in the one amazing gift HBO gave the world.

But honestly, if you haven't watched every single "Sopranos" yet, why is your TV even ON?

And if you get full HBO/hbogo, watch "Girls".

Plan Your Cause of Death

People always seem far too focused on determining ways to lessen certain causes of death than is logical.

If you exercise a lot maybe you'll avoid heart disease, but that just means you're going to die of cancer or Alzheimer's. 

Please do correct me, but aren't we all going to die of something? If so, wouldnt the smartest strategy be to determine the most personally noxious form of death and do everything you can to die of something else FIRST?

Maybe eating a lot of fat will make my heart fail more quickly....in that case, GOOD! I'd rather get fat and die of a heart attack than slowly loose my sense of who I am or slowly perish as excruciatingly painful cancer cells multiply in my body.

According to Apple and all the new arbiters of what we are supposed to be interested in, "Health" is the next "killer app". 

Lets get a start on picking and living to actively pursue dying from what we each consider to be the least objectionable way of dying we can.

Starting tomorrow: no more seatbelts while I'm texting at the wheel, slurping a giant mocha with extra whip!

The Law Against Being a Creep

You have to hand it to reality that we now have a high-profile conflict between guys named "Sterling" and "Silver".

If you're not aware, Sterling owns the NBA team the LA Clippers. ("Silver" is NBA commissioner Adam Silver, who is leading the persecution of Sterling as owner of an NBA team. But that's as far as this joke goes, so you can forget it now.) There's a big controversy because he was apparently caught on tape in a telephone call to his girlfriend in which he expresses some pretty creepy racist sentiments. None of them are really threatening or inflammatory, he merely says he objects to his girlfriend publicly being involved with blacks. He didn't say they, or her, should be beaten up, or even hassled.

With the "tinder box" ideological climate of this country right now, and the increasing realization that racism is still a very serious problem, not even close to being "solved" as many seem to assume.

So the NBA IMMEDIATELY jumped up this guy's ass and slapped a lifetime ban from the NBA on him (he not only isn't allowed to control or interact with his own team in any way, he's not even allowed to ATTEND a game).

I hate racism probably more than the average American, but the other issues surrounding this I think are very troubling and worth far more attention than they are getting now, which is approximately NONE, even by the liberal media and action groups like the ACLU.

FIRST...in a country where people are increasingly riled up and sensitive about personal surveillance, why isn't anybody saying, "Where did this recording come from?" Since we have to allow neo-Nazis to march in Skokie to demonstrate our complete commitment to free speech, why is nobody standing up and saying, "This guy is very clearly a racist pig. [He's been caught being racist before.] But why is someone recording his private phone conversations and leaking them to the press? What happened to his fundamental right to privacy?"

You have to hate this guy, but the right to privacy isn't content-based, it's ABSOLUTE. Even if he were caught making threats (eg: "if those darkies don't move out of my apartment building I'll try to see that they start getting hassled by the cops more often" or, "someone should burn them out!") the issue would still be worrisome: EXACTLY HOW IS SOMEONE RECORDING PRIVATE PHONE CONVERSATIONS? It is expressly illegal to do this, yet since this Sterling guy is so reviled, all concern for his civil rights seems to have vanished.

But according to the fundamental American perspective on rights and law, if someone is allowed to record HIS phone calls, then someone might also be allowed to record MINE. The actual content of the call is irrelevant, unless law enforcement had probable cause to get a wire-tap warrant on this guy, which is clearly not the case or we would have been told.

The right to privacy is the right to privacy, and fundamentally the NBA should have said, "we don't like this one bit, especially since most of our players are black. But in truth we don't feel we have a legal or ethical basis on which to proceed. This information was acquired ILLEGALLY and, as such, we shouldn't know it, and therefore must act as if we DONT know it."

And as if that's not troubling enough, there's the issue of punishing someone for unpleasant ideas. Again, no one wants to stand up and defend this racist asshole in any way, but although racism is discouraged in this country and certain functional expressions of racism are prohibited by law (eg: you cannot deny someone housing or a job based on race), simply HOLDING racist opinions, or even just expressing them personally, most certainly CANNOT be considered basis for punitive actions against someone.

Again, it goes to a fundamental American principle: if we allow this guy to be persecuted for having certain (admittedly noxious) opinions, then who is to say that maybe someday someone will decide that one of YOUR opinions is "unacceptable" and move to strip you of your right to access, control, or even own the personal property you own.

"I really don't like the way Sally said maybe we shouldn't have gone to war in Iraq, so maybe we should take her car away."

Obviously the analogy isn't perfect, but it's close enough. This man Sterling is very clearly being attacked by the dreaded "Thought Police". If you are like me and sick of people excusing racism on the grounds that seeking to limit it amounts to "political correctness gone mad", well I hate to say it, but this is undeniably a case of political correctness gone mad.

By illegally taping this guy's private conversations and then upholding punishment against him just for holding an obnoxious opinion, we are acting just like the people that we condemn.

This is one of the best tests of the genuine commitment Americans have to the right to privacy and the right to hold unpopular opinions without risking serious harassment that we've seen in some time, and we are very obviously FAILING the test.

There are thousands of self-professed white supremacists--why are we not allowing them to be persecuted?

Some people call an "exception" based on the idea that the NBA is a private organization, not a public or government one, and they have the right to discriminate in any way they see fit.

Really? If it came out that they made black players use separate, inferior locker room facilities there would be a huge outcry--and there should be.

As a corollary, no organization should be allowed to act to deprive someone of their own legal property because they don't like his opinions--it's just WRONG.

It's EASY to follow your ideals as long as you agree with what they support or protect. The REAL test is when you find the other person's views sickening.

Decades back, against considerable complaint and outcry, the authorities admitted that they were obligated to allow neo-Nazis to march in a highly-Jewish suburb, and even to use the police to protect their right of free expression from private threats.

But it seems like today we no longer have the capacity or understanding to truly stand by our most important ideals. As bad as a racist owner of a basketball team is, the people rising to support action against him are worse.

I Love It When...

I love it when...people say, "pneumonic device"!

What is this, an air-powered memory aid?

Why don't people have better mnemonic devices for remembering how to say "mnemonic device"?

Whenever I head somebody say "pneumonic device", I always think that their head must be full of air.

"Nuh-monic", not "noo-monic." It's not all that hard.

Wouldn't it be great if people this dumb really WERE "dumb"? It makes you realize that helping the "dumb" to talk really isn't such a miracle after all. Jesus!

Also...how did everyone get the idea that the word "nuptials", which basically means "wedding", is pronounced "nup-shoo-wuls"? If you look at the word, or know how it's spelled, it's clearly meant to be pronounced "nup-shulls". Is "karate" a "marshuall" art?

On the other hand, why isn't the process of "pronouncing" words called "pronounciation"?

And a long-time concern of mine is why isn't the process of "maintaining" something called "maintainance"?

It makes you despair that the English language is so often driven by pure laziness.

But then there's nothing lazier than French. Like half the sentences are two words with "eh" in between. You can spell it "e" or "est" or "et", but it's always pronunced "eh" or "ay". "Eaux" is pronounced "oh". I can understand why the French are so into wine, because people speaking the language always sound drunk! Itsoundslikeeverywordissmashedintothenext.

Once when I was in Paris a guy in a striped shirt and beret with a baguette in a small bag, said to me, "C'est la vie!" And so I said, "la vie!"

I don't think he got it.

Four Letter Weirds: "Left"

"Left" is a word that has sinister connotations in many languages and expressions. (You probably caught the example that I slipped in there, the word "sinister" is derived from words tracing back to Latin and originally meaning "on the left, which is the BAD, side".

In various cultures it's considered very bad manners to gesture or touch someone with your left hand. One of the origins of this was sanitary. If you didn't have much access to soap and running water then you'd always use your left hand for "dirtier" tasks (use you imagination), thus leaving your left hand relatively hygienic for shaking, or handling food.

But English has even deeper meanings for the word left. For instance, "When that guy sitting on your left left, he left his coat behind, the last thing he had left!" Four "lefts" in a one sentence, each with largely separate meanings.

In English, "left" means "opposite of 'right'", but is also a past tense for "leave". So in the example it's first a direction, then a verb, then a DIFFERENT verb, and finally an indicator of state, in a part of speech I actually don't know.

Mostly simply, "The guy on your left left and left all he had left."

Also, "izquierda", which is Spanish for "left", at least in the "directional" sense. I don't believe that it's used as in English, no one says, "Pablo izquierda la casa," people would shake their heads at that. You'd probably use a form of "deportar", "to depart", or even a tense of "var", "To go".

But I like "izquierda, it just seems like such an exotic word for such a mundane concept. "El Mano Izquierda" (gender may be wrong, Im not that good at Spanish) sounds like it should be the name of a Spanish superhero, not "left hand"!

Four Letter Weirds: "That"

"That" is of course one of the most basic and necessary words in the English language. But once it occurred to me that it was one word unlike others in that it can be CHAINED almost infinitely and still make sense.

If some says, "I like the phone that that guy had," that's two in a row. But if you make references you can loop indefinitely, and still make sense.

Example: "The 'that that' that that guy said made complete sense!"

To which someone could reply, "True, but that 'that that that that' that YOU just said ALSO makes sense!

A fully comprehensible, meaningful and grammatically correct sentence with a string of six "thats" in a row just seems incredible to me, but them I'm kind of a "weird word" aficionado. And since you can make direct references without requiring any change in the words you use, it's also completely meaningful (if pointless) to say, "Even that 'that that that that that that' that that guy just said was correct"--NINE "thats" in a row!

At this point someone usually suggests that I "get a life." But then I ask, "what, a life like that that that other guy has?"

You do have to take care not to get caught in a "that" loop. After all...
that "that that that that that that that that that" that that
other guy said was just ridiculous!