I don't know what to say really, but it's 1:30 in the morning and I've been watching Jon Stewart clips on YouTube for over an hour now (because I am too cheap for cable) and thought, I should make some sort of personal update on my blog. Lately, for those of you who come by for a read--and I thank you kindly for doing so--I've been a bit distraught. Angry is what most people might call it, and bitching and complaining about pretty much anything that pops into my head when I sit down to write. This happens from time to time and if you check in with me on a regular basis, you're likely to hear me say some pretty petty and ridiculous stuff. But who doesn't have their pet peaves. Some people complain about their own life, some people complain about the people in their life--I prefer to bitch about broad mostly unchangable ideas and customs that frustrate me.
Here's the thing. I think most of the civilized world is pretty silly. I realize that this is not something that a lot of people can relate to, but I have spent literally hundreds of days (adding up to close to a full year) of my life in the backcountry of the United States. This means no phones, no TV, no news, no institutions of any kind (save whatever park service runs the land I'm on); just me and trees and rocks. This is how it goes. On the first week you're out it's a little uncomfortable; there's rain, there's bugs, your body hurts at night when you fall asleep on the ground, but then a change happens. You start to realize that you are biologically created to survive in this environment. Soon your nerves are calm, your mind is relaxed, you feel very comfortable and organic--the truest you one might ever experience. No more appointments, no more phone calls, no emailing, no sensory overload from blinking lights and abbrasive advertisements, no alchohol or coffee to help you deal with the stress, no religion to escape life with thoughts of things to come--nothing--just pure life (Pura Vida!).
So in this blissful state one can begin to look down from a high peak at the city lights and say, "What a friggin' racket". As humans we've created this entire world that is completely seperate from what our bodies and minds are engineered to survive in and then we wonder why we're all so stressed out and unhappy all the time. So if I seem bitter or disillusioned in my blogs, it's because I lived a pretty spoiled life for over two years. I was getting paid to backpack and I gave it up for something more. The thing is, although I think civilization is mostly ridiculous with all of its stereotypes and institutions and holier-than-thou individuals that couldn't wipe their own asses in God's actual creation (if you believe in that sort of thing) for a week, I'm still a big fan of the cultural elements that the woods can't provide. I love music, I love art, I love literature, but when I tell people this I sound like a snob. I've been called a hippy, a bum, a liberal, and any other term Americans can conjure up for a person who doesn't care much for getting rich and wasting his life away on things that don't amount to a small pile of crap when it's all said and done.
That being said, I'm trying to make it here in the "real" world now, and those organic feelings are all but forgotten. I'm anxious all day long and over-stimulated. My mind races, and if I let my guard down for half a second some advertiser plays on my human weakness and I feel the urge to spend money I don't have. I have stereotypes placed on me as a man and as a husband and people expect that you are doing what everyone else in the world is doing. If you aren't, they can barely hear what you are telling them. It simply doesn't register that someone in 21st century America might spend his or her days in the woods. I assure you when you step outside it all for a couple of weeks, it seems like a gigantic cosmic joke. Sometimes I feel like the only "real" life that is happening is out in the woods and I'm walking around in some kind of ridiculous circus.
Anyway, this is my one and only explaination for my comments and cynicism about "civilized" life. I will now recommence my satirical badgering and other such outlashings. In the meantime if you care to go for a couple weeks in the mountains with me, for the sake of enlightenment, drop me a line.
Tuesday, May 23, 2006
Thursday, May 18, 2006
The Four Letter Word
I heard a sound-bite the other day from Hillary Clinton saying that, "Kids today don't know what work is. They think work is a four letter word. They think they should go right to the top making fifty or seventy thousand dollars a year and they have TVs and I-pods and computers...I hope we get back to the old way of doing things. I hope we all start thinking some very old fashioned thoughts in the future."
So upon hearing this my first reaction was, yeah, she's right. I've thought this very thing before and even alluded to it in a previous blog. Then I let it roll around for awhile and thought, what older person hasn't thought this about the upcoming generation? Of course we have a better life, supposedly because that's what our parents were working for. And of course our higher level of comfort is going to bring about a more liberal attitude toward work (among other things). But I'd like to give us more credit than just being a generation of Trustifarians (spoiled kids). Despite some of the things I've said before, I think that my generation is starting to wake up a little bit. I think we're looking at our parents--two-thirds of whom are divorced, many of whom are on anti-anxiety and depression meds, most of whom hate the jobs they're working but keep doing it for the sake of money--and we're saying, what's the point? So we work some mediocre job and we live in some cookie-cutter neighborhood and we try to be good people (whatever that means anymore) and when the dissonance gets to be too much we look around at all our nice things and say, "Well, I can't complain too much." Why would we want to repeat this? More importantly, why would we want to one-up this?
I think my generation is finally saying enough is enough. We're saying it quietly-- it's definitely not the grand cosmic turn-around that people predicted of the Gen- Xers, but if you look at the big picture, a change is happening. People my age don't want forty-hour a week jobs. Some of us still work them, but we're looking for something with some flexibility. We want to have control over our lives Senator Clinton. We're tired of being miserable just because our parents were. We're not down with the Puritan work ethic. Let's face it America, we're not Puritans. I can't even check my email without seeing some twenty-year-old in a bikini trying to sell me car insurance. Why? Because sex sells and we just don't care anymore about whether it's right or wrong. Those are questions the Puritans would have asked, not Americans. Not in a country that wants to believe that what we're doing is okay so desperately that we create our own news station (Fox News) that agrees with the government and will tell us everything's going great despite a huge anti-American sentiment throughout the entire world. But I digress.
On the topic of work, my feeling is that it just doesn't matter all that much. So some of us would rather be hanging out and working part time jobs or jobs with flexible schedules, or getting higher degrees in something we enjoy. Would it be so horrible to have a more educated America? Maybe some of us just want to enjoy life a little bit before we bite it. Or maybe I'm just out of touch with my own generation. I can't be too far off if it's coming up in politics. So if you're a Gen-Xer, don't fret. I say we move to the thirty-hour work week right now. Let's all build more moderate houses and drive little hydrogen powered cars. Let's throw away our anti-depressants and give a big middle finger to this arrogant, bigger is better attitude our seniors have passed on to us. Let's start using our heads a little bit. We have to start thinking about social responsibility in this country or we're going to be passing on a time bomb to the next generation. Slow down. Breath. Go for a walk. A long walk. Or a bike ride. Just chill out because you're driving me crazy. And if chilling out means I'm not a good Puritan-American, well, I think I'll sleep okay tonight (without the aid of sleeping pills).
So upon hearing this my first reaction was, yeah, she's right. I've thought this very thing before and even alluded to it in a previous blog. Then I let it roll around for awhile and thought, what older person hasn't thought this about the upcoming generation? Of course we have a better life, supposedly because that's what our parents were working for. And of course our higher level of comfort is going to bring about a more liberal attitude toward work (among other things). But I'd like to give us more credit than just being a generation of Trustifarians (spoiled kids). Despite some of the things I've said before, I think that my generation is starting to wake up a little bit. I think we're looking at our parents--two-thirds of whom are divorced, many of whom are on anti-anxiety and depression meds, most of whom hate the jobs they're working but keep doing it for the sake of money--and we're saying, what's the point? So we work some mediocre job and we live in some cookie-cutter neighborhood and we try to be good people (whatever that means anymore) and when the dissonance gets to be too much we look around at all our nice things and say, "Well, I can't complain too much." Why would we want to repeat this? More importantly, why would we want to one-up this?
I think my generation is finally saying enough is enough. We're saying it quietly-- it's definitely not the grand cosmic turn-around that people predicted of the Gen- Xers, but if you look at the big picture, a change is happening. People my age don't want forty-hour a week jobs. Some of us still work them, but we're looking for something with some flexibility. We want to have control over our lives Senator Clinton. We're tired of being miserable just because our parents were. We're not down with the Puritan work ethic. Let's face it America, we're not Puritans. I can't even check my email without seeing some twenty-year-old in a bikini trying to sell me car insurance. Why? Because sex sells and we just don't care anymore about whether it's right or wrong. Those are questions the Puritans would have asked, not Americans. Not in a country that wants to believe that what we're doing is okay so desperately that we create our own news station (Fox News) that agrees with the government and will tell us everything's going great despite a huge anti-American sentiment throughout the entire world. But I digress.
On the topic of work, my feeling is that it just doesn't matter all that much. So some of us would rather be hanging out and working part time jobs or jobs with flexible schedules, or getting higher degrees in something we enjoy. Would it be so horrible to have a more educated America? Maybe some of us just want to enjoy life a little bit before we bite it. Or maybe I'm just out of touch with my own generation. I can't be too far off if it's coming up in politics. So if you're a Gen-Xer, don't fret. I say we move to the thirty-hour work week right now. Let's all build more moderate houses and drive little hydrogen powered cars. Let's throw away our anti-depressants and give a big middle finger to this arrogant, bigger is better attitude our seniors have passed on to us. Let's start using our heads a little bit. We have to start thinking about social responsibility in this country or we're going to be passing on a time bomb to the next generation. Slow down. Breath. Go for a walk. A long walk. Or a bike ride. Just chill out because you're driving me crazy. And if chilling out means I'm not a good Puritan-American, well, I think I'll sleep okay tonight (without the aid of sleeping pills).
Monday, May 01, 2006
Thought Train (or Ethics 101)
More times than not I use this blog as a means of ranting and raving about my world views, or for passing moral judgement on American apathy, or for keeping my family and friends posted on what I'm up to. It's pretty easy for me to sit here at my computer, in my house, alone, and write whatever I want on this screen; sometimes forgeting that I'm publishing very personal things for whomever should wander into my blog to read. That doesn't bother me so much. My passion is writing, and writers must share parts of themselves that others may choose to keep very private. After awhile, what I have found, is that most people aren't all that different. However, many of us are putting on airs.
What I mean is, some of us (myself included), at times like to try to act like we aren't humans. We like to put ourselves on this higher level than the rest of humanity, whether it's morally or intellectually or physically or spiritually or all of the above. We don't want to be like everyone else. We want to be our own special snowflake. Which is great, except, when push comes to shove, we've all felt depressed, we've all felt elated, most of us have felt what we thought was love (or maybe even the real thing), we all think about sex, we all have been pushed to the thought of violence, we've all felt a sense of accomplishment...we're all living things. It's natural. We can't escape it. What we can do is evolve.
So where is the line? If one is trying to evolve (and by evolving I mean making a conscious effort to grow in some or all of the areas above) and others are not, when is it okay to say, "I am just beyond this as a person"? Is it ever okay? It's a pretty shitty feeling to be on either end. If you're trying to have a conversation with someone who knows more than you, or is more physically fit than you are, or thinks on a deeper level than you, holds themself to a stricter code of morality, etc. you don't want to be talked down to. But then if you are the person who knows more, you don't want to be snubbed off as someone who doesn't know his toe-nails from his earlobes. So where does the responsibility lie to show respect of one's achievements or one's evolution (stay with me here cause I'm working this thought out as we go). Let's say someone with a Ph.D. in Anthropology meets a priest. And let's say this isn't one of your kindly parish priests, in fact, let's make him a bishop; someone who is very serious about his faith and considers his spirituality and morality to be superior to the average person. Now the Ph.D. in Anthropology couldn't care less about this achievement; she's an atheist and strictly an academic person. And the priest couldn't care less about her having a Ph.D. because he is judging her purely on her level of faith. Likewise, if it were say a tri-athelete judging either of them on their physical ability. Do we consider this a miscommunication? Do basic manners take care of this issue?
I only bring this up because in this temp job I'm working there is a wide array of people; everyone from post-doctoral scientists to farmers, and I've been noticing that everyone seems to make judgements on each other based on very different standards. The woman who runs the program dresses very nicely and carries herself with an air of confidence that demands respect. Some of the people take this as she's trying too hard, others think she's a bitch, and others (myself included) respect her position as the leader of a group of educated adults. My question is, if everyone could respect that she has to play the role of the leader, would she still have to dress in a way that commands respect? Or is she really compensating? What if she just wore jeans and a t-shirt, but was obviously smarter than everyone in the room? What if a priest was Joe nobody that sat in the congregation like an average person? Would we still be able to tell he was morally superior? I was offered a promotion at this temp job, and I'm of the belief that the only reason I was singled out was because I put on a collared shirt every morning and tried to look professional. Is that a fair way to choose? Cause if it is then you have to get into the whole issue that not everyone can afford nice clothes, etc.
I'm losing the thought train here, but my point is this. Humans are humans on a basic level. Some of us choose to evolve. Others are fine with where they are. Some of us are opportunistic, others of us think opportunistic people are slimy for trying to get ahead. A farmer may consider some of the three-syllable words learned in graduate school to be snobbish and unnecessary. A lawyer may think raising your own chickens is a waste of time and money. Who should respect whom and why? Or is this all a matter of playing nicely and talking behind each other's backs?
I think this issue has a lot to do with the culture wars going on in this country and why everyone wants to find a niche and pretend they're in some kind of gang. What do you all think? Comments? Elaborations?
What I mean is, some of us (myself included), at times like to try to act like we aren't humans. We like to put ourselves on this higher level than the rest of humanity, whether it's morally or intellectually or physically or spiritually or all of the above. We don't want to be like everyone else. We want to be our own special snowflake. Which is great, except, when push comes to shove, we've all felt depressed, we've all felt elated, most of us have felt what we thought was love (or maybe even the real thing), we all think about sex, we all have been pushed to the thought of violence, we've all felt a sense of accomplishment...we're all living things. It's natural. We can't escape it. What we can do is evolve.
So where is the line? If one is trying to evolve (and by evolving I mean making a conscious effort to grow in some or all of the areas above) and others are not, when is it okay to say, "I am just beyond this as a person"? Is it ever okay? It's a pretty shitty feeling to be on either end. If you're trying to have a conversation with someone who knows more than you, or is more physically fit than you are, or thinks on a deeper level than you, holds themself to a stricter code of morality, etc. you don't want to be talked down to. But then if you are the person who knows more, you don't want to be snubbed off as someone who doesn't know his toe-nails from his earlobes. So where does the responsibility lie to show respect of one's achievements or one's evolution (stay with me here cause I'm working this thought out as we go). Let's say someone with a Ph.D. in Anthropology meets a priest. And let's say this isn't one of your kindly parish priests, in fact, let's make him a bishop; someone who is very serious about his faith and considers his spirituality and morality to be superior to the average person. Now the Ph.D. in Anthropology couldn't care less about this achievement; she's an atheist and strictly an academic person. And the priest couldn't care less about her having a Ph.D. because he is judging her purely on her level of faith. Likewise, if it were say a tri-athelete judging either of them on their physical ability. Do we consider this a miscommunication? Do basic manners take care of this issue?
I only bring this up because in this temp job I'm working there is a wide array of people; everyone from post-doctoral scientists to farmers, and I've been noticing that everyone seems to make judgements on each other based on very different standards. The woman who runs the program dresses very nicely and carries herself with an air of confidence that demands respect. Some of the people take this as she's trying too hard, others think she's a bitch, and others (myself included) respect her position as the leader of a group of educated adults. My question is, if everyone could respect that she has to play the role of the leader, would she still have to dress in a way that commands respect? Or is she really compensating? What if she just wore jeans and a t-shirt, but was obviously smarter than everyone in the room? What if a priest was Joe nobody that sat in the congregation like an average person? Would we still be able to tell he was morally superior? I was offered a promotion at this temp job, and I'm of the belief that the only reason I was singled out was because I put on a collared shirt every morning and tried to look professional. Is that a fair way to choose? Cause if it is then you have to get into the whole issue that not everyone can afford nice clothes, etc.
I'm losing the thought train here, but my point is this. Humans are humans on a basic level. Some of us choose to evolve. Others are fine with where they are. Some of us are opportunistic, others of us think opportunistic people are slimy for trying to get ahead. A farmer may consider some of the three-syllable words learned in graduate school to be snobbish and unnecessary. A lawyer may think raising your own chickens is a waste of time and money. Who should respect whom and why? Or is this all a matter of playing nicely and talking behind each other's backs?
I think this issue has a lot to do with the culture wars going on in this country and why everyone wants to find a niche and pretend they're in some kind of gang. What do you all think? Comments? Elaborations?
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
