Writer's Blog

You know? Like writer's block, but blog instead of block. It's funny. It really is. Not writer's block. Writer's block is not funny at all. Even jokes made about writer's block are not funny. The only reason that this title is funny is because it is a pun, and not a joke.

But writer's block. No. That's just sad. It is people who sit at their desks (or tables, or laptops (if they have enough money for a laptop) or on the back porch, or balcony (if they have enough money for a balcony)) And drink their hot cocoa (or coffee (if they have enough money for cofee)). But I don't have enough money for coffee, nor do I even like coffee. And why am I talking about this when it was in a parenthetical. I mean, you don't talk about things in parentheticals. That's why you put parenthesis around them, to keep them out of the discussion. But here I am talking about my parenthetical and I haven't even put brackets around it. I didn't even put "quotes" around it. But really, finger quotes are an entirely different subject. In that case, I should have put parenthesis around my "quotes". (just imagine me doing the two finger thing right now.)

But, no, writer's block isn't funny. I mean, I have just laid out what may possibly be one of my most beloved pieces, but after the outline...nothing. I didn't have a single idea about how to write it. But that's ok. Writer's block, after all, is only temporary. And mostly what I do to get past it, is write. Or go do something else. But either way, I get something done. But writing is generally the better option. Because I can always go back and edit. And it's better to go back and edit that part when I have a whole lot after that. Because I probably won't need to edit the stuff that comes after, and I'll just be that much ahead. And when the inspiration comes, I will apply it to the rest of the story whether I have applied the edit or not. Because In my mind it has been edited.

So, do we change or mind, or do we edit it?

There's this guy...

Imagine, if you will, a man who has the ability to create music through movement. Not just dumb noises, and not exactly through singing either. I guess it could be a woman too. But imagine it.

As you watch he stands still on the stage. He begins by tensing and relaxing his body. A low beat flows out from him. He tenses his arms and a slightly higher note is struck. He tenses his legs and the note drops. But as long as he moves the beat is continuous. The music draws you in. There is no real melody yet, just a beat, but every single sound serves to draw you into his dance.

Soon, he moves his whole body in a circle. And the melody begins. His arms swing up from his sides and then back down again, but as they come down his waist bends and his hands touch the ground. He starts to bang his hands on the ground. You notice that the sound from his hands drumming is completely different. It complements his music, but it doesn't come from within him.

Then he jumps. The music peaks as he tenses his muscles for the jump, then pauses as he leaves the ground. He travels through the air without moving. He holds his pose, and there is a sense of timelessness that comes from the silence. As he reaches the apex of his flight, he prepares his body for the landing. There is a high, anticipatory strain in the song, and the he lands. From here the music and dance become frantic, frenetic. He moves quickly from point to point on the stage flinging his hands, legs and head in amazing directions. You can't take your eyes from his art. You watch in amazement, and listen in wonder.

As the performance continues you notice that his body is starting to tire. The notes sound less clear. As he frames his arms, they seem to lack the strength they had at the beginning. Everything sounds off key.

Then in one final motion, he pools all of his energy, and the music swells to a finale and he collapes on the floor. The music has stopped. You look at him, waiting for more, but the piece is over. Then he slowly rises.

There is a faint music in his movement, but it is so soft that you can barely make it out. He smiles and bows. The crowd around you erupts in applause, but all you can do is stare. Remembering the dance and the music. After the rest of the show has concluded, you find him and shake his hand. He thanks you kindly, and then you leave. Somehow you are changed. Somehow you know that you could make that kind of music, but the days pass, and the years fly by. All you have is the memory of the man who could sing through movement.

End.

Ok, I know this is a little wierd. But I went to a little show yesterday, and part of it was a dance recital of sorts. There were excellent dancers, and there were less proficient performers. But as I watched, I could feel something. When the dancers were lax, and their whole being was not a part of the music, I could feel it and see it. I could just imagine how the dance was connected to the music, and even more so when the better dancers would move. Their whole body seemed connected, and electric. It wasn't just, "Put you feet here, and you arms like this." Their whole being seemed created for each single move.

Then I had this thought. A good dancer controls the music. Even though in real life we can't make music in quite the same way as the man, a good dancer will make us think that it is true.

I have taken some dance classes, and I just sat there thinking, "What if I could do that?" It's pretty amazing. Our bodies are wonderful.

Now, you can make any connection you want from this little story. It has to do with life, with dreams, and all sorts of things. Or you may think that it's just a wierd little story.

But I learned something by writing it, and now I am a little better than I was.

This post is not about sleep deprevation

Have you ever had one of those days? I mean the type of day that you are just tired, and you don't know why? When everything drags, and you can't stay awake in class, and things just take longer to sense make...er, make sesne...er, sense. Well I can honestly tell you that I have not just had one of those days.

Yes, I am here to tell you that I know exactly why I had trouble staying awake during class (the real amazing thing is that I actually did stay awake). I am sleepy today because I stayed up most of the night two days ago playing a video game. Yes, I am one of those people...but I haven't gone to the meetings yet.

It's always like that though. You don't sleep one night, and then two or three days later you are still freaking out even when you do get enough sleep the next night. Well, I guess I should replace all of the yous in the last few sentences with I, but I won't.

I have heard that your sleep habits today, or tonight, affect your sleepiness for three days. Or in three days. I am starting to believe that. My grandpa (grandpa is a very wise man, although he has a harder time getting around a lot now-a-days he still means a lot to me) on my mother's side once told me that the sleep you get before midnight is much more effective than the sleep you get after. I guess that is how he made it ok to get up early every morning. That, or the fact that he lived on a ranch.

Anyway. I am pretty sure that grandpa was right. You should always listen to your elders. I...even if you don't do what they say, they usually know enough that they are worth listening to anyway.

I have my own little theory though. I think that our bodies work on a schedule. In effect, an adequate and regular sleep schedule does more to affect our sleepiness than anything else. At least for me. I find that I can easily train myself to wake up early, if I do it for a long enough time. I usually don't even get tired during the day when I do. But when I start to wake myself up, or go to sleep at the wrong times, then I really feel it.

Of course, I am generally sleepy anyway. I fell asleep in class all throughout high school. I sleep sitting up. I sleep lying down. I have even slept while marching...now that is a good Air force training camp story. So, my theories about why other people get sleepy are not even theories. Not in the scientific method sense of the word anyway. They are more like conjectures.

But I think you get the picture.

Voterific

Well, I can safely say that I have heard many people telling other people to vote. There's a hidden message there I think. As a society we don't really turn out voters. It may be a problem with our system, it may be human nature. I don't know how to get (insert current population of the United States) to care about the issues. I agree that it is quite important to vote responsibly, but is a real democracy really that practical...?

I guess that someone else thought the same thing, because we don't have one. We have a representative democracy (that's not the real name, but it'll work). I guess the founding fathers realize that their progeny would be pretty inept when it came to political issues. Actually, come to think of it, even the average joe in 1776 didn't know what was going on politically.

This means that even if we did have one hundred percent of our population voting, a large percentage of the votes would be bunk because of the general ignorance of the people. Then add in the fact that we campaign...Whoah, now that can sure throw a monkey wrench in the gears of our nation.

My best guess is that campaigning would work if it were a simple matter of educating the public about the issues, or people running for office. But it's not. Mudslinging, money, and just general popularity contests are the soup du jour. It turns out that most people who listen to the campaign ads gain a false sense of political knowledge (especially if they only see the loudest person's campaign).

"I watched that thirty second spot and now I will vote with confidence that I am making a very difficult choice correctly."

Even people who talk it over with their friends generally only have part of the story...but that's much better than not knowing anything.

So we vote for the people who will actually make the decisions. Now this can work. We vote for the person who we feel will represent our personal and political beliefs most accurately, and then we can go about our jobs creating an economy and working society while we leave the policy making in the hands of someone else...who we trust...hopefully....unless we didn't vote...or we didn't know who to vote for.

So is it better to tell people not to vote if they don't know the issues, or should we just push for a mass voting and hope that people really think about the politics and people involved.

Well, obviously we want every single person to vote responsibly (you know, study it out and then make an informed decision). Whoa, that sounds surprisingly like the end of an alchohol commercial. Drink...er, I mean, Vote resposibly. Because if you think about it, someone who is voting blindly, or without thought could do a lot of damage to society. It's almost better for them not to vote. Luckily we do have political parties that stand, generally, for a single set of standards. That makes party votersa little better.

I mean if you tell someone to vote, they might do it. So lets tell people to vote responsibly. Because really, it is important. Especially when the people we vote for will make the decisions that affect our entire country.

And besides, the last episode in the second season of Lost was interesting and extremely tense. It wasn't mindblowing, but it did give us a lot more than the end of season 1. I'm not trying to convince you of anything. It just gets me thinking a little. That's all I'm saying.

Montessori is for the poor kids.

My wife has found a job at a local pre-school. It is a Montessori school. For those of you who are unfamiliar with Monessori schools, it is based on the educational theory of constructivism. For those of you who aren't familiar with constructivism, it is the primary method of teaching at Montessori schools.

I'm glad that I could clear that up. (I attribute my circular logic to my older brother who gave me my circular logic.)

So, my wife is going to teach at a Montessori school. We shant be getting any more money than we get now, because my son will be attending the school. And since we don't have any more money, we can't afford a pre-school, so this works out fine. It is exciting after all to know that my child may be smarter than I am someday. In fact, he may be smarter than I am right now. He often seems to think so. But since I am of an extremely adult centered societey, I usually win anyway. And since he is only three years old, I don't feel too bad when I tell him, "I am sorry. No matter how many times I explain the evaporation/condensation/precipitation cycle it will become no clearer. So let's stick with 'rain comes from the sky because there's more room up there.'"

Actually, I have never discussed the rain with my children. But I have discussed clouds, and the sun (Which incidentally goes to sleep in China. And yes, you do have to go to sleep when the sun goes to sleep. Except in winter, and I'll let you know when that comes around.)

So, as I was saying. I like to drive my car. It really doesn't go fast. But it goes. And, like most americans, that is the main purpose of a car (I use the term 'car' here as a generic name for all automobiles). Some people get fast cars, or powerful cars because they like to drive. Those people are generally called Italians. Most americans, even those who have enough money to drive fast cars, think of a car as merely a mode of transportation, and they would generally like to spend as little time as possible in it. Hence the inordinate amount of traffic related violence and road rage.

My goodness people. Get a hold of you'se'f!

Peace out.