Archive for 2010

I discovered a manifesto and a poem today....

10:11 PM 0 Comments A+ a-

IX

There are some people who explain, because there are others who learn. Abolish hem and all that's left is dada.
Dip your pen into a black liquid with manifesto intentions - it's only your autobiography that you're hatching under the belly of the flowering cerebellum.
Biography is the paraphernalia of the famous man. Great or strong. And there you are, a simple man like the rest of them, once you've dipped your pen into the ink, full of
PRETENSIONS
which manifest themselves in forms as diverse as they are unforeseen, which apply to every form of activity and of state of mind and of mimicry: there you are, full of
AMBITIONS
to keep yourself on the dial of life, in the place where you've only just arrived, to proceed along the illusory and ridiculous upward path towards an apotheosis that only exists in your neurasthenia: there you are, full of
PRIDE
greater, stronger, more profound than all the others.
Dear colleagues: a great man, a little one, a strong, weak, profound, superficial one,
that's why you're all going to die.
There are some people who have antedated their manifestos to make other people believe that they had the idea of their own greatness a little earlier. My dear colleagues, before after, past future, now yesterday,
that's why you're all going to die.
There are some people who have said: dada is good because it isn't bad, dada is bad, dada is a religion, dada is a poem, dada is a spirit, dada is sceptical, dada is magic, I know dada.
My dear colleagues: good bad, religion poetry, spirit scepticism, definition definition,
that's why you're all going to die,
and you will die, I promise you.
The great mystery is a secret, but it's known to a few people. They will never say what dada is. To amuse you once again I'll tell you something like:
dada is the dictatorship of the spirit, or
dada is the dictatorship of language,
or else
dada is the death of the spirit,
which will please many of my friends. Friends.
~ Tristan Tzara

Painting Pictures

3:17 AM 0 Comments A+ a-

   It is always easy to paint a picture of what you want others to see by cropping out certain details, highlighting others, exaggerating and hyperbolizing what you believe to be the main attraction, and so forth.  With such tools and techniques, you can take a photo of a giant crowd of people and make it appear as if the camera was zeroed in on one face only, and that none of the other people really exist. Welcome to Photoshop.
 Apparently, facts of real life can be edited too. For instance, the general public is constantly told about how giant corporate big-shots are evil and greedy. Who could disagree, when they're making so much money, and selfishly using it for their own luxurious lifestyles... right? Please. The people claiming this non-sense are generally people who wish they were making just as much, and who would end up spending it just like these "awful, selfish" people. Let's all get down from our "oh so generous and big hearted" high-horse and realize the facts of the situation.  These big-shots obviously didn't get there selling a bad idea. They have made, and keep making money because they're clearly providing a service that we need, or think we need.  Our own misconceptions about necessity is not their fault. Nobody tells me that I absolutely have to spend money on stylish clothes, but I do because I don't particularly enjoy looking like a homeless bum with poor fashion taste.  But is it right for me to then turn around and point fingers at the people who brought me the wonderful faux fur vest that I just bought? That would be silly~ and so is blaming somebody for earning money and spending it how they want.  
   In reality, I think the biggest problem that many people have with others making more money is the "work : income" ratio that is unavoidably noticeable.  One frequent argument is how it is not fair that CEOs sit around in comfy office chairs making billions while the average minimum wage worker's body is probably deteriorating from the labor they are putting into making barely enough to survive on.  However, this is easily explained. Robert Kiyosaki does a great job to explain the difference between selling your time (laboring away for hourly pay) and selling your comparative advantage (being paid BANK for something you're good at), in his New Rules of Money.  Watch the whole thing and you may learn a thing or two!


   Ok, ok, enough of this silly digression. Basically, what really gets me, is that people in a position of media power have no shame in adding to this problem of pointing fingers at the wrong people. Instead of asking the real questions, these people are just fueling the fire with images that have been cropped to create the most outrage and "shock" effect from the general, ignorant public, who go to see movies like The Other Guys.  I thought that movie was absolutely hilarious… until the end credits.  There, I had cause to lift one of my finely groomed eyebrows in utter disbelief.  See if you can guess why:






   If you are outraged, you should be! How could these bloated, self-righteous clever little buggers leave out the very important detail of WHERE THESE CEOS ARE GETTING THE BAILOUTS?! It is so easy to point fingers at how lavishly people are spending money- especially when so many people are struggling during this economic strife America has spiraled into, but it is completely unacceptable to lose sight of the real problem.  Don't kid yourself into believing that you wouldn't just love it if the government gave you an obscene amount of money and didn't even hold you accountable for its proper distribution. I would bet you anything that a huge chunk would somehow find its way into your little pocket! And let us not forget how much money the producers of this movie and the actors involved, are getting paid. Oh, we're not picking on all people who make obscene amounts of money... just the ones you can't watch on TV.... right. Why is it that we revere beautiful people who only bring us entertainment, and tear down not-so-beautiful people who actually give us some of the most useful inventions and services in our lives? More importantly, if we hate them getting money so "unfairly," why don't we just have the government stop giving it to them? Hmm.. problem solved? You can't leave the cookie jar open, teach the kid to take one and then reprimand them after they've already eaten it... You should have just put the cookies away. The real problem here is not that these people get their cookie fix.  The real problem is that we have no say in the fact that the government decides to take away our personal cookies, and then shower these people with them.

   The people who made the end credit animations have cropped out and exaggerated a completely irrelevant part of the bigger picture. They attempt to manipulate the minds of the general population, essentially, photoshopping important facts of our lives. Sure, pointing out that AIG planned on giving $1,200,000,000 to its executives does indeed seem shocking to we little folk, but highlighting these corporations is just a distraction in order to cover up something bigger.  Isn't it smarter to focus on where the T.A.R.P bailout came from so that these "horrible" executives could give themselves these bonuses? You don't have to dig deep before you find the root of the problem.
Subscribe to: Posts (Atom)