Today is the Academy Awards Show celebrating the best of the motion picture industry. The word "best" in the previous sentence is, of course, subjective
But whether or not the moving pictures and actresses and actors who are awarded the little golden idols are the best in their respective fields is, in the long run, meaningless.
The Oscar ceremony is really nothing more than a back-slapping festival put on by a group of rather emotionally needy and superficial people who are really not all that sure if their trade is of any real worth to the greater society. They, like professional athletes, are paid a lot of money and adulation that children do for free, or even have to pay to do.
Ask yourself this question: Is there an awards ceremony for the best in my trade or profession? A company my have an employee of the month, or even of the year, but that Starbuck's barista is not competing with other store's, or even those in the over-priced coffee world to receive that award. Who would be truck driver of the year? Or the engineer? Or the doctor?
We, outside of the motion picture industry, slog through 50 weeks a year (allowing for a two week vacation) expecting nothing more than a paycheck and perhaps a bonus of some sort. But in the entertainment industry there are awards given every time one turns around.
A violinist studies at Julliard for four years, at least, hoping to get a paying chair at any orchestra or symphony and working up o the first chair, receives not much more than a paycheck despite the fact that he has probably spent his life since the age of seven playing the fiddle. There's no chance nor expectation of walking down the red carpet in a trick tux accompanied by a quarter dressed babe. But an actor with good cheekbones and an ability to read, in a convincing way, the words written by another person, and who has probably not studied acting in the classical manner, is adulated and fawned over for pretending to be something that he is not.
John Donne, the English poet of the 17th century, despite his misspent and rascal early life, called actors "idiot actors." And Donne knew of what he spoke. He knew personally Ben Jonson and perhaps Shakespere. His son-in-law was a famous actor at the time. And he was right. Few actors are as smart as the people they portray and even fewer are as wise.
But they are eye-candy and that's what the populace seems to want. And that's rather sad.
Sunday, February 26, 2012
A Stolen Thought
What was once thought sinful or immoral eventually becomes accepted, and perhaps even mandatory.
Sunday, February 19, 2012
Huh?
Back when this writer was a young apprentice the shop in which he worked held a drive for the United Way. An hour during a particular work day was set aside for the employees were given the opportunity to listen to a presentation by a flack from the United Way attempting to separate them from their hard earned long green for various "charities."
The result of the drive was that during the set aside hour the only people in the room where the presentation was given were the United Way flack and the personnel manager.
Needless to say, the personnel manager was embarrassed and asked why nobody showed up for the presentation. The reply given was usually something along the lines of, "The United Way supports organizations I don't like." The PM said, "But you can direct your contribution to a particular organization." And the machinist would answer, "That means that I gave to the organization I don't like because the money will be shifted from the undesignated money. In one way or another I'm giving to such and such charity that I don't like. I'll just give my money directly to my favorite charity and make sure that it gets to where I want it to go."
Have said this, here's this:
Huh? - hitz53's Space
The result of the drive was that during the set aside hour the only people in the room where the presentation was given were the United Way flack and the personnel manager.
Needless to say, the personnel manager was embarrassed and asked why nobody showed up for the presentation. The reply given was usually something along the lines of, "The United Way supports organizations I don't like." The PM said, "But you can direct your contribution to a particular organization." And the machinist would answer, "That means that I gave to the organization I don't like because the money will be shifted from the undesignated money. In one way or another I'm giving to such and such charity that I don't like. I'll just give my money directly to my favorite charity and make sure that it gets to where I want it to go."
Have said this, here's this:
Huh? - hitz53's Space
Saturday, February 18, 2012
On Letter Writing and the USPS
For some years the United States Postal Service has been the whipping boy of conservative and libertarian politicians and commentators because the Postal Service, does not only not make money through its postal fees, but because it loses money. Said Solons suggest that the USPS be either disestablished and the delivery of First Class mail be taken over by private firms along the lines of UPS or Federal Express, or that private companies be allowed to compete with the Postal Service. They will even go so far as to say that First Class Mail is outdated and has been replaced by e-mail and on line payment of bills.
Unfortunately, the check of the mail box for many of us results in junk mail, bills and magazines. Perhaps we may receive a card or two at Christmas, on our birthday or Valentine's Day. Very rarely do we receive a letter from a friend, a postcard from a relative vacationing in the Bahamas or a tome from one's grade school teacher expressing what a pleasure it was to teach one despite the fact that one remembers one's self as being an awful brat.
Instead we punch on the computer and check our e-mails for personal messages and then delete them after a while.
All these things are all rather sad. It's sad that the USPS has become a joke for unimaginative comedians and cheap shot pols when one remembers that the United States Post Office was set up by Benjamin Franklin and was for many years a department of the government. The Post Office was considered so important and the mail so sacrosanct that to interfere with the delivery of the mail was a Federal crime. The delivery of the mail was a service that was expected by the citizen to be performed by a federal agency. Now there are voices calling for the delivery of the mail to be performed by private firms with no guarantee that said mail will be delivered or tracked. And as far as cost and convenience is concerned, this writer has sent packages via both the Postal Service and United Parcel Service and he has found the USPS much easier to deal with, and cheaper, than UPS.
And one wonders, if there were competition for the USPS one's mail would be delivered to one's house into one's mailbox. Not to mention the matter of stamps or where to post letters. From how many companies would one have to buy stamps and where would one post them?
All of the above is written with the understanding that the writer is not an employee of the United States Postal Service. But he posits that the main reason that the Postal Service has declined is because of us and we are all worse off for it.
Those who have read novels written in the late 18th century, the 19th century and up to the mid 20th century are aware of how important that proper letter writing once was, and who were alive and reasoning in the 1980s remember receiving letters and post cards from friends and relatives. To receive a proper letter from a friend, whether handwritten or typed, was usually a joy that went beyond the receipt of an e-mail. And to tell the truth, it probably still does.
Think of the times back in Regency England when people used to cross write (writing the length of the page and then turning the page ninety degrees and writing over the previous writing) their letters to save money on postage, the letters sent by Robert Browning to Elizabeth Barret Browning, the shoe boxes of letters sent by one's father's or grandfathers squatting in foxholes or trenches in World War One, World War Two, Korea or Vietnam that have been saved and cherished. Can one really cherish an e-mail printed out on a printer? A proper letter, written by hand or a typewriter, placed in an envelope and sent with a stamp on the envelope is to give the recipient a part of one's self. There is, on the paper, the handwriting, even if it's only a signature, part of one's self. One offers one's bad handwriting or bad typing (or good handwriting or good typing) to the recipient in a way that e-mail cannot. E-mail, for personal correspondence, is a fake. It is electrons. It is, no matter how heartfelt, the real deal. It does not have the DNA or a real person.
One wonders if in twenty years there will be books published containing the e-mails that are made up of e-mails from American soldiers in Iraq to their sweethearts.
Writing proper letters on paper with a pen, pencil or typewriter is hard work. It makes the writer slow down and think in a way that e-mail does not. In proper letter writing one doesn't use emoticons, memes or any of most popular e-mail abbreviations like LOL or ROTFL.
E-mails are quick for quick notes to friends, but do they really replace a letter? Imagine receiving an e-mail from a friend vacationing in Japan such as "Am in Japan. Having a great time" instead of a postcard of the NHK Tower saying the same thing. Which would you rather receive?
Unfortunately, the check of the mail box for many of us results in junk mail, bills and magazines. Perhaps we may receive a card or two at Christmas, on our birthday or Valentine's Day. Very rarely do we receive a letter from a friend, a postcard from a relative vacationing in the Bahamas or a tome from one's grade school teacher expressing what a pleasure it was to teach one despite the fact that one remembers one's self as being an awful brat.
Instead we punch on the computer and check our e-mails for personal messages and then delete them after a while.
All these things are all rather sad. It's sad that the USPS has become a joke for unimaginative comedians and cheap shot pols when one remembers that the United States Post Office was set up by Benjamin Franklin and was for many years a department of the government. The Post Office was considered so important and the mail so sacrosanct that to interfere with the delivery of the mail was a Federal crime. The delivery of the mail was a service that was expected by the citizen to be performed by a federal agency. Now there are voices calling for the delivery of the mail to be performed by private firms with no guarantee that said mail will be delivered or tracked. And as far as cost and convenience is concerned, this writer has sent packages via both the Postal Service and United Parcel Service and he has found the USPS much easier to deal with, and cheaper, than UPS.
And one wonders, if there were competition for the USPS one's mail would be delivered to one's house into one's mailbox. Not to mention the matter of stamps or where to post letters. From how many companies would one have to buy stamps and where would one post them?
All of the above is written with the understanding that the writer is not an employee of the United States Postal Service. But he posits that the main reason that the Postal Service has declined is because of us and we are all worse off for it.
Those who have read novels written in the late 18th century, the 19th century and up to the mid 20th century are aware of how important that proper letter writing once was, and who were alive and reasoning in the 1980s remember receiving letters and post cards from friends and relatives. To receive a proper letter from a friend, whether handwritten or typed, was usually a joy that went beyond the receipt of an e-mail. And to tell the truth, it probably still does.
Think of the times back in Regency England when people used to cross write (writing the length of the page and then turning the page ninety degrees and writing over the previous writing) their letters to save money on postage, the letters sent by Robert Browning to Elizabeth Barret Browning, the shoe boxes of letters sent by one's father's or grandfathers squatting in foxholes or trenches in World War One, World War Two, Korea or Vietnam that have been saved and cherished. Can one really cherish an e-mail printed out on a printer? A proper letter, written by hand or a typewriter, placed in an envelope and sent with a stamp on the envelope is to give the recipient a part of one's self. There is, on the paper, the handwriting, even if it's only a signature, part of one's self. One offers one's bad handwriting or bad typing (or good handwriting or good typing) to the recipient in a way that e-mail cannot. E-mail, for personal correspondence, is a fake. It is electrons. It is, no matter how heartfelt, the real deal. It does not have the DNA or a real person.
One wonders if in twenty years there will be books published containing the e-mails that are made up of e-mails from American soldiers in Iraq to their sweethearts.
Writing proper letters on paper with a pen, pencil or typewriter is hard work. It makes the writer slow down and think in a way that e-mail does not. In proper letter writing one doesn't use emoticons, memes or any of most popular e-mail abbreviations like LOL or ROTFL.
E-mails are quick for quick notes to friends, but do they really replace a letter? Imagine receiving an e-mail from a friend vacationing in Japan such as "Am in Japan. Having a great time" instead of a postcard of the NHK Tower saying the same thing. Which would you rather receive?
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)