Bieber vs. Sinatra (Rant)

I hate these memes.  First off, it implies that Justin Bieber is today’s equivalent of Frank Sinatra.  Second off it pretty much says that the world has lost all sense and good taste because Justin Bieber is so popular.  “What has the world come to?!”  You know what, it’s not the world, you’re just old.  You have become old and rigid… that is what the world has come to.

Let’s break this down.  The Sinatra song lyrics here are from “The Way You Look Tonight.”  It won the best original song in 1936 as performed by Fred Astaire.  It was written by song writers Dorothy Fields and Jerome Kern.  Mr. Sinatra covered this song in 1964, nearly three decades later.  Sinatra was 49 years old when he recorded this ballad.

The Justin Bieber song lyrics are from a song titled “Baby” (clever, yea).  Bieber wrote this song with four other song writers and I imagine with the simple nature of the track it’s not out of line to imagine he actually had some input in it. Bieber was 16 when the song was released. Baby debuted at #5 on the Billboard 100.

We should be comparing Justin Bieber to 1964 teenagers… one of whom was Millie (age 18) with her big hit; My Boy Lollipop

(Bieber fairs pretty well against her)

Big downgrade for the Beebs however if you count in the fact that Sir Paul McCartney was doing rather well with his little band by age 18,  however if you look at the songs the Beatles were releasing at the beginning of their career (when they were Justin’s age they were still calling themselves “The Quarrymen” but let’s fast forward a bit to the early Beatles proper)

 “Please Please Me” Lyrics include

Last night I said these words to my girl

I know you never even try girl

Come on

Come on

Come on…

Please, please me, whoa yeah

Like I please you

You don’t need me to show the way, love

Why do I always have to say ‘love

Come on

Come on

Come on…

So it’s not terrible, but it’s not terribly clever just yet.

 “Please, Please Me” is a much better song than “Baby” but it’s not as far off as the old person telling ‘those damned kids to turn down that noise’ would have us believe.

Sinatra on the other hand was fairly well established in 1964, was in the middle of reviving his singing career in the midst of his successful movie career.  So we should be comparing him to someone like that in 2012… The music industry is drastically different, there aren’t more than a handful of actors who are taken seriously as singers or vice versa, so as far modern singers with amazing acting chops to boot, I would like to nominate (although currently 62 years old) Tom Waits as the modern Frank Sinatra.

Pick a Tom Waits song  (oh except that he actually writes his own songs and Sinatra did not)  any song and it will probably blow Sinatra out of the water.  That’s right I choose Tom Waits for my dodgeball team while Frank can wait for the next round.

"All the world is green" lyrics;

I fell into the ocean
When you became my wife
I risked it all against the sea
To have a better life
Marie you're the wild blue sky
And men do foolish things
You turn kings into beggars
And beggars into kings

Basically the memes that like to point out that the world is going down the drain don’t take into consideration the filter of time or context.  1964 had some amazing music that we still love today but it also had crap that we’ve collectively let settle into the dust of oblivion.   Also I am curious as to how many pre-teen girls in 1964 were into Frank Sinatra (that is Bieber's main audience.)  Someday Justin Bieber will either improve or be forgotten and everyone who thinks it’s cool to rag on a 16 year old teen heart throb needs to take a long hard look at the celebrity they had a crush on at age 12 and chill out.  Really, who was it?  David Cassidy?  New Kids on the Block?  Wesley Crusher (yea that was mine)... 

This guy;?

Corporate Disaster.

Recently a friend of the blog, The Bummer Free Zone, held a survey about the employees ** who are least likely to be helpful in the wake of a natural disaster.  Somehow the pole results chose Starbucks over Jo-Ann's fabrics.  This result was clearly derived from voters who don't know how to sew but do know how to drink coffee.  As someone who can both sew and drink coffee I heartily contest this result.

In defense of Starbucks employees; They know how to make the crazy-named drinks they are trained to.  If you tell them to make you a Grande-mocha-carmel-extra-fudge-macciato with extra whip, that is exactly the syrup laden acrid tasting beverage you are going to get.  They take you in order, they take your credit card for minuscule amounts and manage to not have a judgmental look on their faces.  These facts lead me to believe they can 1. follow direction 2. retain information for longer than 3 minutes (or at least read the code scrawled on the cup) and 3. mind their own business (Yes I lack the planning to carry $1.35 for a tall coffee, so what?!).  In the face of a natural disaster they will have access to a stock pile of coffee that may not be the tastiest but will be preferable to no-coffee. Even to the non-coffee-drinker the access to coffee may be valuable as a trade commodity.  Their ability to read code will make them useful message carriers as our internet and technology will have crumbled with our sources of power and their ability to stick to the task will be a boon with the many distractions of crumbling buildings and increasing chaos (when the Starbucks is full, they keep their heads about them and keep people moving out).

Jo-anns however... you are lucky when there is someone at the cutting table who knows how to sew.  They have this 'take a number' system that they rigidly follow.  If you are the only person standing in front of the table holding fabric they will look at the number over their head, and look at you to ask
"number 86?"
 "I didn't take a number."
"Oh, well you need to take a number so we don't lose track."
I pull a number, it is 94... chaos ensues despite the total lack of any other customers.  The employee will then need to fumble with the number counter to forward it all the way to 94.  If the employee doesn't know how to use the number counter, a supervisor will be called.
Standing at the table I hand the bolt of fabric to the cutter,
"Three yards please"
Then the cutter will marvel over the fabric,  the color, the texture, tell me how much it costs (clearly marked on the bolt BTW) and ask me what I am making.
"pit gussets" or "fetish wear" or "a giant yellow bird"
Who the f*** cares?
"uh how many yards did you say?"

The Jo-Ann's employee will be distractible in the face of change.  Despite the access to fabrics that may be useful for blankets (hello stockpile of polar fleece) most employees will be unable to create the clothes of the apocalypse due to total lack of knowledge.  Their basic glitter glue skills and ability to find the scrapbook aisle will be inapplicable as the dystopia of the future will be unpredictable.  The few employees with basic sewing or knitting skills are the few that we can keep in our stronghold designed to keep the hoards out, but for the most part I attest that the company tries to hire employees who lack the skill-set of your average Halloween enthusiast and will be a deadweight for our survival.

**Correction; The BFZ asked about the clientele, not the employees... new factors are to be considered for this question.

A sewing question?

There is a question I hear all the time... the question really is "would you sew this thing for me because I have no idea of what I am doing?"  Unfortunately this question usually is posed as a series of circuitous questions that make me crazy.
Example; "I was wondering about this cute skirt I bought... I'd just a wee bit small and I was wondering if it would be possible to make it bigger..."  
To which I answer " I suppose it would depend on if there is any seam allowance inside"
Although really the person asking wants me to say "I don't know, perhaps you should bring this glorious skirt in so that I can sew it for you!"
 Inevitably the  answer I give is followed up by something like " I just don't know how you do it... I have a hard time with buttons"

Which reinforces the fact that a simple alteration like letting seams out would be far beyond the asker's scope... Why ask stupid questions like this?  Do you go up to your plumber and ask "gee, I'm thinking about installing a new sink in my bathroom but I just don't know how to make the water go through the pipes..." or do you mention to your chiropractor friend that you're thinking about readjusting your spine but can't quite figure out which vertebrae to crack...? 

Tip #1; just because your grandmother could do this task does not mean it is easy. Don't act like it's something you can just pick up if you only had five minutes and the slightest desire to.  It is insulting to me and to your grandmother and you know it's not true... go practice sewing some buttons.

I just want to tell those who seem to think that I live to sew things and am dying to help with all sewing related problems, that in fact this is how I make my living.  I am a highly trained specialist and it has taken me over ten years to be able to sew as well as I do.   Sure I'll explain to you exactly how to alter whatever you want... but don't expect me to take pity on you because you're clueless and cheap.  If you want me to sew something, just ask me.  I suggest you bribe me with money, food or whiskey... possibly all three.  Even with the lack of money, food, or whiskey I think that someone just asking for help is better than them hoping to entice me to volunteer... it just irritates me to no end.

The fashion police open up a whole new can of worms.

 (This is not a post about fashion.  This is a post about wearing clothes that fit you; physically, personally and mentally)

"Don't be judgemental"
"There are all kinds of beauty"
"Don't feign to be so superior"!

How DARE I judge on appearance?!

I am a sartorial sociologist. All day, on most days, I observe people and think about what they are wearing, why they are wearing it, what they look like in it, how they might feel wearing it, how long they've had it, where they might have obtained it.   I consider the fashion trends and designers that came together in one look, or perhaps the methods of construction, draping, aging... the cultural background of the person, aesthetics, color choices... That's right, you feel like you're being watched?  It's me. (I am Jacques Cousteau and you are all beautiful little fishes)

I do not make these observations out of a catty need to criticize.  It is a main reason that I am a costume designer and not a fashion designer. I am interested in variety, tatters, textures, odd choices. I like mud and grit and the bizarre turns of human experience. If I were a fashion designer I would be more interested in form than in context.  If you know me, you know I am no fashionista.

In my profession I interact with people on a rather intimate level. My first encounter with an actor will usually begin with me and a tape measure. It is the truth teller. It is the enemy. Everyone has some preconceived idea of what they should be or what they were and it seldom is the same as reality. People also have horrible preconceived ideas of what "size X" should look like (so wrong!). My first interactions involve collecting information, reassuring egos and discussing or dodging deep insecurities.

Consequent interactions are a negotiation of my vision of the play and the actor's bravery to go along with it and trust me (or not). I will make them look as much like their character as possible, sometimes that means making them more beautiful, and sometimes it means making them look old, sick, slovenly... purposefully so.

Throughout this process I learn about everyone's body issues. Everyone has them. Most people (women more often than men) think that "Nobody makes jeans for me". You would not believe how many times in a week I can hear "I just have a weird body". Maybe 5% of the time I meet someone who truly has a "weird body" with such odd proportions I double check measurements.  (Not just actors either, I do alterations for every day people who may not be scrutinized as often as actors are but still carry around the same insecurities.)

Fun Fact I learned in fashion school; Every fashion brand hires "fit models" of a variety of sizes in what that brand deems to be 'ideal proportions'. These are the people that are used to check how a clothing line will look on 'real people', not just runway models.  Only 8% of the population qualifies to be a fit model. That is why Nothing fits you off the rack, that's why tailoring is your friend. It also accounts for the popularity of stretchy clothes, because they have a lot more forgiveness in fit.

The trouble with the standardization of beauty is that most people are walking around feeling like they are the weird one. They do not see the great variety of people because they never have to shop for other bodies. No it's "just me". Worse yet are the people who think that they are nothing special, that they shouldn't care about their appearance because they can never look like what 'beauty' is supposed to be.

There are many things that are more important than appearance but from what I have observed in both others and in myself; when we say that appearance does not matter at all, it is giving up on the possibility of being beautiful. It is throwing your hands in the air and saying "eh F** it!"

(hang on I'm coming to my point )

My glib denouncement of stretch pants was the tip of the iceberg in what is a somewhat shallow blog (Postcards isn't a forum, it's a quick hello/goodbye... usually).

Rejecting fashion and the current mode of beauty is fine. That is not a problem. That is having an aesthetic and a will. The problem is accepting fashion and beauty as it is fed to you and letting its unattainable nature wound your self worth.

Why wear clothes that don't fit? From my experience it is from a sense of 'should-be's. You think you should be a size 8, but can't handle the scrutiny of the fitting room mirror and the truth that you are a size 12... this is how muffin-top happens. This is when the shopper falls in love with a pair of pants that will fit "if I just lose 5 pounds"
(because I can't have beautiful things until I look the way I imagine I should)
--I'm sorry I keep using examples of fat, there are also people in denial of breast size, belly size, lack of hips, excess butt, flabby arms, long torso, short arms, age issues... such a kaleidoscope of human variety... I just relate to the weight issue first so that is what I am using--

What I am Offended by are the people (and yes, mostly women) who live in denial. I want to scream at the women who look at the magazine and shop for what they want to look like rather than what they do look like. I want to hold an intervention for the women who leave the house without looking in the mirror, because it's too painful, because it's too much work, because "I'm not worth it, don't look at me"
... because I have been guilty of All of these sins.

Why should you not wear these fashions that do not look good on you? Because you can look good, you can do better. If you think you look good in fat rolls and see-through pant/tights, we have a difference of opinion.  From my experience such fashion mishaps are not because the wearer thinks they actually look good in these clothes, rather because they think the clothes look good and that they themselves are therefore inconsequential.

Is that judgmental?  Probably.

--I'd like to thank Lizz for the provocative link that prompted this post.

Hide your shame... Please.

(this blog post is rated PG-13 for strong language)

I've got to say it... what's with all of the spandex/ lycra/ skin tight clothes?  Tights are Not pants.

I look around and it's sometimes like living in a nudist colony with spray paint.  Sometimes someone can really pull it off with a great body that will look good in anything, but people please! Fat people Please!  Hell, moderately fat people... Please!  Just say no to the skin tight from head to toe look. 

New Rules;

1. no super skinny jeans may be manufactured in a size larger than 10 (and for the record, my fat ass is in this category.  Nothing personal, It's just wrong)  Gentlemen larger than a 34 waist (and I mean really you think you're a 32 but pull out a tape measure...) no skinny jeans for you!

2. Super-mini skirts over your nasty celulite showing (and obviously too small) tights do not fool us.  They do not make you look cooler or thinner, I don't care if you are 18 years old... step away from the mini skirt. 

3.  If you can look down and see the freckles through your clothes, turn around and put some damn pants on!

4. Rule; If we can see the fat above and below your bra or waistband; Your clothes are TOO SMALL. Go buy a bra with a bigger band size, a shirt in the next size up, pants with a larger waist  ... and those Spanx that you think are helping so much... they are just squishing your fat up.   

If you follow these simple rules, we will all be happier.
Thank You. 

Cake rant

Recently two links have popped up on my Facebook feed... both related to the propaganda of dieting.  It's odd how there seems to be stock photography about diets that I never really noticed.  It's all aimed at women and it seems to assume that women all have similar eating problems... clearly it is cake.  It is chocolate.  It is eating that one delicious thing that Every woman loves... we are offered cake at every turn and find we must resist. Did you not notice this?

Oh OH! it is so hard to turn the corner and not find a cake. You know what would cheer me up?  It's salad.  Salad is apparently the funniest meal of the day.  It's awesome.  And you can eat it alone because well, men do not think salad is as funny as we do...

I know there are other stock photography examples out there... the woman lifting weights on the beach, the happy yoga on a rock... on a rock!  Have you ever done yoga on top of a bolder?  As soon as you try a new balance pose and fall out of it at best you're going to scrape up your feet, and at worst you're going to fall off.

The larger problem in all of this is the way that it simplifies problems.  You are fat because of cake.  If you're not eating cake... well there is no real solution for you but you should laugh over some salad and lift some weights.  You should eat some salad and lift weights, but most diet magazines are not going to tell you why.  They are also not going to tell you that fast food, and soda are making you fat because then Mickey D's is going to sue them. They will tell you the "healthier" foods to buy at the fast food joints. They are not going to tell you that you need to eat less, because that's not profitable. They talk a lot about things to buy but not quantity to consume.

They aren't going to tell you how to really understand your nutritional needs... you need to eat more energy bars and take more special diet pills and spend Money! Even the FDA has its hands tied by food lobbyists about what they can or cannot tell you (check out Food Politics by Marion Nestle). How is it fitness magazines are going to push past that?  "Make healthier choices" is the creed but when you get down to it they clearly think that cake is the most delicious thing on earth... yes they even try to tell you to eat yogurt instead of food... knowing that yogurt (at least diet yogurt) is kind of vile.

(You'll be back on cake and fat in no time)  You need to stay frustrated and continue to pick up their diet magazines with slightly repackaged advice that never really gets you where you want to be... just closer when you are very very good.

...and when you resist cake.  Of course.

Dear Joe, I'm not sure this relationship will last...

I have a problem with Trader Joe’s. The more I shop at Berkeley Bowl and the Farmer’s Market, the more it bothers me. They ask you to bring in your own shopping bags but then almost everything in the store is severely overpackaged and nothing is local.

Roma tomatoes come in hard plastic boxes, zuccinis come shrink wrapped on styrofoam trays, Carrots that have been pre-peeled and sliced come in plastic tubs and cost three times more than a 2 pound bag of unprocessed carrots. You can buy delicious Indian lunches that come in sealed bags that have been packed in boxes and portioned just enough for one person. All manner of frozen veggies are available with little globs of seasoned butter included, also in serving sizes for one or two people… because throwing a handful of greenbeans in a sauce pan with water, rosemary and butter is too hard!

This brings me to the second problem I have with Trader Joe’s… everything that has been pre-packaged three times over is all ready to heat and eat. So much of it is little more than a glorified and improved TV dinner. It is helping to perpetuate the helplessness of the urban dweller. It encourages shoppers to think “I don’t have time to cook” “I don’t know how to cook, it’s too hard”. Seriously! I am not a gormet chef but from the need to eat economically I’ve learned how to make a few really good meals. Salads are not difficult but you can still buy those in a bag. Is it because it’s too time consuming to wash lettuce, and chop up a few veggies?

There are so many Americans who just don’t cook for themselves, they have no idea about what they are shoveling into their mouths, there is too little thought about food and nutrition. There is too much thought about calories and suppliments. TJ’s also has an amazing array of cheap vitamins by the way, because after all eating a balanced diet is just too hard… you will need to be ‘healthy’ and add these pills to your diet. Despite the good things about TJ’s I just can’t deal with how much of it is fully pre-packaged and designed to allow consumers to feel good about their ignorance.

I’m torn. On the one hand they do sell a lot of tasty things that I enjoy, but when I went in yesterday I wound up leaving with my bottle of cheap wine, a pint of sherbet and a seltzer water. All of the overpackaged produce in number 5 plastic containers (my city only recycles numbers 1 and 2 plastic) just made me ill.

Be sure to bring back your canvas bag to carry home all of the small plastic bags that your food comes in… you don’t want to kill the earth do you?

Book shops

To purchase a book at a local bookseller;

1. locate book (oh look a section for Drama)
2. take book to counter
3. cashier will usually comment on the book such as
"oh good book", "I haven't read this one" or will ask you "Did you need anything else?"
4. pay for book
5. leave


To purchase a book at a large national chain book store;

1. walk in store to realize that they've swapped everything around and you've just spent the last five minutes walking to the complete opposite end of the store.
2.locate employee to tell you where Shakespeare is...
3. Walk past African American history, turn left at poetry into "Literature" (don't get me started on how I don't believe plays qualify as literature)
4. Locate book
5. Take book to counter
6. cashier will ask you
"do you have our discount club card?"
no
"Would you like to sign up for one they have all sorts of fantastic bla bla bla"
no
"can I have your email address?"
no
"can I have your zip code?"
Could you just sell me the damn book?!
7.pay for book
8. leave store


---ugh I hate giant business.

The Closing Hand

"...we need to appreciate three important facts about money:

1. It is symbolic, not real

2. Its function is to homogenize.

3. It is a means, not an end."

--Philip Slater, Wealth Addiction

If I had a fleet of meter maids who could site everyone I met for crossing the line or waiting around just a little too long, I might be tempted to do it. As a person, it would make me a jerk, but a city is not a person, this is their way to maintain services without raising taxes (for now).

We dug this great hole and now slowly understand its depth... it's familiar, it's like taking on student loans with no true knowledge of the value of money; not understanding how hard it might be to pay those loans off. However the state of California is not an 18 year old with shoddy math skills... the state of California has been run into this hole by many adults with great math skills. It has people running it with accounting degrees, and CEO's who have successful businesses, lawyers who went through years of hard study... you can blame whoever you like but there were a lot of hands (including voters) who got us all here today... perhaps the problem is that we need more training in science.

What we've been running on here is an assumption that our economy can work like a perpetual motion machine...

For such a device to work implies that this machine will generate more energy than it consumes and go on indefinitely. We have been working on the assumption that we can continue to consume and grow and expand indefinitely despite the fact that resources are finite.

Housing value cannot continue to grow forever, consumption of goods cannot be sustained, disposal of goods must be accommodated, eventually all the oil in the world will run out (I don't know when but it's a resource that is not renewing itself so eventually if we keep consuming it we will have used the very last drop). In the machine, friction and gravity (or say, crooked businessmen, droughts and earthquakes...) will wear it to a stop and energy must be spent for the device to continue.

We're living in a broken machine; the laws of thermodynamics tell us the machine needs energy (work) to keep going. Right now the big mistake is to think that money = work. Resources are "work". Resources of human labor and ingenuity, and natural resources are what we need to keep going. In order to make our resources work for us we need to stop burdening the system. Our culture of over-consumption cannot be supported.

All of the money grabbing and finger pointing in the world is not going to help us out of this bind.

Research and the summer of What the hell?!

I've just got to get this off my chest. This month a certain university to which I am an alumnus put out this publicity poster:

Seriously? Where did they get their research? Possibly from a photo like this:

It's a bit insulting to Real hippies and to anyone who's ever been to a Phish concert, or anyone who has lived in Berkeley or San Francisco (to present day), to Ben and Jerry... For one thing there's no facial stubble, hell there's no body hair! Their nails are spick and span, and their fake fake wigs are rather too well groomed...

Here are Real hippies;
Please note the grime, the nappy crazy hair, the mismatch clothing, the lack of neon colors... and look at that facial hair! Screw razors man... hippies don't shave when 'the man' says they should. Below, look at this woman's unibrow, she doesn't care... that's the freakin' point!
Real hippies; Look at their muddy feet, look at the lack of bras (the one in the publicity shot is so obviously a foam bra I want to puke on it... come on Ohio... Mark Twain always said that you were a good ten years behind the times, so in theory this should all be more current to you.
I hope that the publicity shot was just put together in haste because if the whole show looks like this I'm going to have to go get a new piece of academic paper from Yale or somewhere that I can point to and say "I trained There!"

It's Complicated

You know what bugs me? It's Complicated... no really, what I mean is on Facebook the Relationship status of "it's complicated". Perhaps it's because I'm not a big drama queen about dating. In my eyes there are the following options; single, married, engaged, in a relationship or it's none of your damn business. If it is complicated why put anything down at all? Is it so that we know that your love life is a hot mess? Is it to say that you have a love life but are unwilling to commit to being with someone or not with someone. Perhaps That is why it's Complicated. Perhaps your inability to say "Yes, This is my boy/girlfriend! and I'm crazy about him/her" is why your love life *probably* causes you conflict. Is it just a way to feel like you're letting everybody know that you're not socially dead? It's lame. What's also lame is when one partner puts down "In a relationship" and the other puts "It's complicated". Seriously? This is drama creation.

In fact while we're at it I don't think that single or dating people should put their status down either. If you're single and you're fishing for a date... ok maybe then. If you're in a relationship and it's pretty stable... maybe then... but still it means that when you change your status all of your friends will see the message "Jane Smith is no longer listed as in a Relationship" "Jane Smith is now Single" aww Poor Jane Smith, now all of your 276 friends know that you've been dumped.

Still if you feel the need to share that information, I can be ok with it. At least you are "Single" or "Taken". Be one or the other or nothing at all... It's Complicated is just too sad. If you're getting divorced, if you're in some complicated polyamory, if you're having an imaginary affair with Johnny Depp, just leave the space blank. Your close friends, the ones you talk to Offline, are the ones you can tell this tale to. Why the need to share with your co-workers and friends from the past?

a rant about rain.

Why is it when weather happens everybody looses their mind? In Cincinnati every year it would snow and panic would ensue as though it had never snowed before "ahh run in circles, haul out the massive amounts of salt, where is the ice scraper? Do we have an ice scraper? It's the end of the world!!!"

Here in Berkeley it rained today and everybody lost their freakin mind!
It rains here, all the time, all winter, every year. Somehow today everyone seemed to forget to use their eyeballs and pay attention to everyone else around them.

I had one vehicle stop in the middle of a three lane street, no notice, no emergency lights, nothing... just to let their passengers out in the middle of the road while ten feet from a green light, making all of us behind him stop and wait for the next cycle. About two blocks later I was following a different vehicle, we turned right on a green light and (I am not exaggerating) within ten feet of the corner that car stopped, stranding me in the crosswalk with pedestrians walking around me (illegally I might add) and another car behind me holding up cars behind him. I had to load my car in the rain about thirty feet from the door because three (THREE!) cars decided to park in the "5min at all times" zone directly in front of my theater... (in wet shoes but that is of corse my own stupidity...) So I got my car loaded with a full trunk plus backseat worth of costumes and I drove to the end of the street where there is a crosswalk and a stop sign, but instead of using the crosswalk pedestrians were just meandering a good distance into the road, laughing and stopping wherever. I was getting a bit peeved at this point and reflexively yelled "Use the %$^%*$ Crosswalk!" a woman looked up and with great astonishment realized that there were cars in front of her.

Now why is it that because it's a Little wet, everybody decides that the rules do not apply to their special ass?
GRRR!

Smile!

Dear Random Dude on the Street,
When you tell me empirically to "Smile." it has the exact opposite effect. In fact it really pisses me off. You don't know me, you don't know what kind of day I've had... am I offending you with my face? You know what, that's too bad. This is what it looks like. I'm not crying, I'm not frowning, and I'm not smiling... but really who walks around smiling all day? Not you. You weren't smiling, you just seem to think it's ok to order a stranger to "Smile." Well F-You. I'm not going to smile. In fact I Was fine and now you've pissed me off. Mind your own buisness and if you want me to smile how about saying something clever or nice or even really freakin' weird!  How about next time I meet you I tell you to "Duck." and then swing my fist at your bossy face! Grr!

A call to Arms!

I must say I am tired of the state of environmentalism these days.


What concerns me though is the way that some people are going overboard about the doom of the planet.

If every Sunday you go to church and are told that you are going to hell and there is nothing you can really do about it, you'll probably stop going.
If every time you go to the gym you are told that you're wasting your time and you'll never really get into shape before you die... really why not just head over to Ben & Jerry's for some instant gratification instead?
If every book you read about the state of the environment tells you about how everything is falling apart and dying and it's doing that so rapidly that our efforts aren't doing enough, why bother?

On one level it is important to see the state of things. We need to understand that resources are not unlimited. There is too much waste, the oceans are suffocating, the glaciers are melting, extinction is increasing... Yes there are a lot of problems. But you know what, we are not living on a giant ball of decay. Doom and gloom environmental zealots are making Earth sound like a giant leper colony that we must try to make better but probably won't and everything will fall apart and die and it's all our fault... what a freakin' bummer!
I want people to see the Joy that is the Earth. I want people to go out into their local nature (forest, desert, savanna, ice cave...) and just take a look at what there is. If everybody just spent some quiet time with nature, breathing the air, feeling the ground, watching the bugs and the birds... they could remember that Earth is Beautiful. "Saving" the Earth is not a chore. It is just what we must do. We don't need to cry and moan about it, we just need to fix it.

Earth is not just beautiful. It is our home, our health. Earth is our family. Earth renews spirit... Even with a supposition of an afterlife and a heaven, we're not there folks, we are Here and Now. Right now we have the privilege to live in 'Creation'. We are not dead yet, Earth is not dead yet, so let's stop all the crying about what is wrong and let's get excited about fixing it up. Let's not think about what a bummer it is to live here in the ruins of Eden, but look around and see what we do have.

It's amazing.