Bad Things Come In Three?

So this week(more like past two days, come to think of it), that whole theory that "Bad Things Come In Three" knocked on my door, in the form of things breaking or just not working properly. I'm thankful it wasn't anything major. If it had been my laptop (Gandalf) or car (McGyver D), I would probably have thrown myself off the JFT or something.

1.  I stepped on my favorite sunglasses. I know, my fault.
2. My phone not only decided that it wanted to turn off the ear speaker (thus I looked like an obnoxious fool talking on speakerphone for the past few days), but the charger also decided it wanted to split from its wires. Yup. I had to pull a Jason Bourne two nights ago, shedding the wires from the rubber casings and twisting them around the little nubs. (Maybe that counts as two?)
3. The water in my building decided it wanted to be defective, thus leading to campus turning off our water- and only OUR water- resulting in mass chaos from everyone. I felt so terrible for my residents- they couldn't shower or brush their teeth or (grossest part) flush their toilets for the majority of the day and the worst part was this was from 7 am to 1 pm, the time when they are normally getting ready for class. I had residents going to Hasbrouck to go to the bathroom and brush their teeth. Half of them didn't go to class because of it. The other half stopped me on their way to classes ("I couldn't brush my teeth this morning." "You know our water doesn't work?" "I didn't findout I couldn't flush my toilet until I had already went.") We had absolutely no notification. I'm not sure if that is even legal. Thanks New Paltz.

Sounds like quite a trip, eh? Quite exciting. And to top it all off, I planned to get some of my work done and I have not yet. I need to write about thirty pages of research in two weeks. Yay. Wish me luck.

Yeah, I did that.

Enjoy the new design and the tons of bullshitting that comes later. I was inspired by my color choices for the Academy Awards article. As much as I love the old one, I feel that I have grown up in the past few months- this really reflects it (books = English MA!), though I'm getting the impression from my colors, I should have waited till autumn. Or maybe I belong in Gryffindor. Wait, I'm a Slytherin fan.

I've also included some of the most important sayings I've found from a few of my favorite people- I attempt to live up to these every day (but probably fail).

Enjoy the numerous Facebook and Twitter plugs- everyone else shamelessly promotes themselves at one point or another. The nice thing about BlogSpot is that it's nice and simple, easy to use. I can do what I need to do quickly. (Insert dirty joke here?)

Would it be safe to say that I'm going to live up to my promise of new posts? Maybe. Blogging is much more handy and interesting than Facebook and I always enjoy seeing where my free-write takes me; gives me back my sense of style and place in the world as a wonderer, even if those posts are short and seem trivial... Believe me, nothing is trivial.

PS- Currently working on an idea for a book, but need to write a whole bunch more. If anyone feels like pissing me off/ screwing me over, you are welcome. But be warned- this will be put into the eyes of the public.

M.I.A.?

I'm alive. Been working on three fifteen page research papers (Holocaust: Maus, Spaghetti Westerns, and good old Quentin Tarantino). Ah, the life of a grad student. Should be back soon with some entertaining stuff, including letters to stupidity's population (not intended to ever be sent), reviews of random things, and perhaps stuff I have learned this semester. Also planning on coordinating this thing a bit more as far as aesthetics go. Yay.

For some insight to my life, I've been REALLY PISSED OFF lately. But I've been (mostly) humorous about it, because that's how I am. So you, reader, should have much to look forward to, reading-entertainment-wise. Don't be a stranger.

PS: Someone recently defined my writing as "really good stream-of-consciousness," which I'm both happy and not happy about. I'm getting compared to Virginia Woolf, but sometimes I really don't like Virginia Woolf. Maybe I'll go drown myself soon. Complete the circle. You dig?

Edit: Now just for clarification purposes, pulling A Brett Favre is simply coming back when you’ve retired or sending a picture of your genitals, with an intention of getting some, a via text message. Pulling THE Brett Favre is shitting on all the people who have stood by you for the past five years by going to the enemy and bad mouthing people. They all have very different contexts, so who ever you're talking to should have an idea of which one you're getting at. Just thought I'd clear that up because someone got confused.

Oscars, Oscars, Oscars 2010!

WHAT'S EDGY? AND INVENTIVE? Without bluntly saying it? King's Speech.

The Academy Awards are only a few weeks away. Here's my annual picks as usual. Listed from least important to most important and sub-genred by yours truly! Red means clear winner, Grey is dark horse. And for shits kicks and giggles, Blue will be what I think has a distinct quality, but won't win. You know the deal.

Films Categories: Don't Qualify for Best Picture

Short Film (Animated)

“Day & Night,” “The Gruffalo,” “Let's Pollute,” “The Lost Thing,” “Madagascar, carnet de voyage (Madagascar, a Journey Diary)”
... Right.

Short Film (Live Action)

“The Confession,” “The Crush,” “God of Love,” “Na Wewe,” “Wish 143”
... What?

Documentary (Feature)

“Exit through the Gift Shop,” “Gasland,” “Inside Job,” “Restrepo,” “Waste Land”
War in the Middle East. Enough said.

Documentary (Short Subject)

“Killing in the Name,” “Poster Girl,” “Strangers No More,” “Sun Come Up,” “The Warriors of Qiugang”
Nope.

Foreign Language Film

“Biutiful” Mexico, “Dogtooth” Greece, “In a Better World” Denmark, “Incendies” Canada, “Outside the Law (Hors-la-loi)” Algeria
Denmark has some amazing quality stuff. Biutiful has Javier Bardem. This is a toss up.

Animated Feature Film

“How to Train Your Dragon,” “The Illusionist,” “Toy Story 3”
It's Toy Story. It's animated. It's Toy Story. I'm pretty sure everyone cried like a baby when they saw this. How could it not win? I'm pretty sure the only reason why Despicable Me wasn't nominated was to give TS3 a clear path, because the more I watch it, the more wonderful it is.

How To Not Make Actors Look Like Themselves
Costume Design

“Alice in Wonderland,” “I Am Love,” “The King's Speech,” “The Tempest,” “True Grit”

True Grit and King's Speech are the two true contenders here, due to their dedication to history and detail. I'd be surprised if Alice or Tempest took it; but since Tim Burton's stuff is wacky and Julie Taymour is always on some sort of drug, Academy voters might be inclined to go for something a little more avant garde and Gaga- EDGY and INVENTIVE. However, Grit's fantastic use of accurate history fashion will really help it here.

Makeup

“Barney's Version,” “The Way Back,” “The Wolfman”
... I've seen Wolfman. It was terrible. This category is a joke this year.

Wait, what? We're in a film? Let's put on our 3-d glasses!
Sound Editing

“Inception,” “Toy Story 3,” “Tron: Legacy,” “True Grit,” “Unstoppable”
Inception or Toy Story 3. Really think Inception is this year's big blockbuster that Oscar voters love- hence all the nominations. Maybe Tron will win, because those motorcycles were cool.

Sound Mixing

“Inception,” “The King's Speech,” “Salt,” “The Social Network,” “True Grit”
Very Hitchcock and kooky uses of sound- quite EDGY and INVENTIVE- but more so clever and unique rather than IN YOUR FACE like Black Swan. Particularly love when Bertie puts the headphones on with the fade in and out of music.

Visual Effects

“Alice in Wonderland,” “Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows Part 1,” “Hereafter,” “Inception,” “Iron Man 2”
Because you can't count Tim Burton out of anything visual. There's nothing special about HP that the other HPs didn't do- so it won't. But Inception- They built their set. Little use of CGI compared to the others. Revolving hallway. Shoo-in.

Art Direction

“Alice in Wonderland,” “Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows Part 1,” “Inception,” “The King's Speech,” “True Grit”
Just in case they feel like not screwing over Tim Burton this year. I would say King's Speech, but it's just what's in England. Pwah. I love HP- looks exactly how I imagined it- but they won't distinguish this from the others. That would just be wrong. I would say that in this case, the visual effects go completely hand in hand with the art direction- Aside from Alice, there's nothing that truly uses CGI as a tool except for backing purposes.

Are We Off By A Millisecond?
Film Editing

“Black Swan,” “The Fighter,” “The King's Speech,” “127 Hours,” “The Social Network”
Because one is fighting and one is coding. On a more serious note, the King's Speech had some really stark shots that were simple, yet shocking and emotionally impacting. Black Swan had some as well, but its visuals were ruined by its attempts to make statements. Wouldn't be surprised/upset to see any of these win, but I'm going to gun for King's Speech. Because of one word: MONTAGE. Plus, they gurgled in it. Confused as to why Inception was not nominated, but whatever.

Cinematography

“Black Swan,” “Inception,” “The King's Speech,” “The Social Network,” “True Grit”
I mean, they had all those profile pictures to refer back to. If Inception really wanted to make an impact in this area, they would have cleverly found a really subtle way to distinguish the dreams and reality but that probably would have ruined the ending ("Is this real life!? RAAAWRRR.") Black Swan might walk away with this because of its INVENTIVE and SYMBOLIC and horrible IN YOUR FACE use of black and white (Oh my God! So creative! AND EDGY!). But for a simpler technique that should really be appreciated more, I'd say King's Speech.

That Stuff In The Background
Music (Original Score)

“How to Train Your Dragon” John Powell, “Inception” Hans Zimmer, “The King's Speech” Alexandre Desplat, “127 Hours” A.R. Rahman, “The Social Network” Trent Reznor and Atticus Ross
Desplat had a really enjoyable modern take on a typically classical, symphonic score; however, Reznor/Ross had a really amazing score for TSN; incorporation of both a classic film score as well as the technological side of things- very NIN, Fragile-esque. Love the synthesizers. I do love Zimmer (of course) and his references back to Edith Piaf is heaven for me. Thematically, both matched their pieces; however, I think Reznor deserves some recognition for his work outside NIN, in seeing that he is a truly talented musician and composer. And Zimmer, as much as I love him, pulled a James Horner and recycled Black Hawk Down and Pearl Harbor for this one. :( Step aside, sir.

Music (Original Song)

“Coming Home” from “Country Strong,” “I See the Light” from “Tangled,” “If I Rise” from “127 Hours,” “We Belong Together” from “Toy Story 3"
I love Menken, but everyone is on a Gwenyth Paltrow kick and only Cee-Lo and Glee know why.

"We All Want To Be Meryl Streep"
Actor in a Supporting Role

Christian Bale in “The Fighter,” John Hawkes in “Winter's Bone,” Jeremy Renner in “The Town,” Mark Ruffalo in “The Kids Are All Right,” Geoffrey Rush in “The King's Speech”
Renner = Space Filler. I LOVE that Hawkes is nomnated- it's about time he got some real, fleshy characters to play because he is so talented; that's enough for me right now. Everyone is ooh-ing and ah-ing over Bale; since he's so often not recognized, he will win; but Ruffalo is very popular in the cult, artsy community and Rush has a reputation behind him. That may propel one of them to win, but I doubt it.

Actress in a Supporting Role

Amy Adams in “The Fighter,” Helena Bonham Carter in “The King's Speech,” Melissa Leo in “The Fighter,” Hailee Steinfeld in “True Grit,” Jacki Weaver in “Animal Kingdom”
Steinfeld is superb in True Grit- she'll have more chances, but it would be great if she won here. Wouldn't be surprised if she stole it. Leo has won numerous awards and will win this one out; Amy Adams is getting HUGE and will win one someday. Bonham Carter should have been nominated for so many other things. She's going to be just like her husband and get overlooked for everything she does. It's great that she's getting recognized for her smaller, more subtle works when she's not yelling at Edward Norton or Johnny Depp, because people expect her to be crazy. Not that big of a shock.

Actor in a Leading Role

Javier Bardem in “Biutiful,” Jeff Bridges in “True Grit,” Jesse Eisenberg in “The Social Network,” Colin Firth in “The King's Speech,” James Franco in “127 Hours”

If he doesn't win, I'm rioting. He is incredibly talented and they just can't ignore this without getting truckloads of backlash if he doesn't. I can't wait to see him make his speech. (Har har.)

Actress in a Leading Role

Annette Bening in “The Kids Are All Right,” Nicole Kidman in “Rabbit Hole,” Jennifer Lawrence in “Winter's Bone,” Natalie Portman in “Black Swan,” Michelle Williams in “Blue Valentine”
What award hasn't Portman won? It's strange, because I've seen most, if not all her work and I really don't think she's all that fantastic and I believe Mila Kunis far outshone her, but whatever. Whenever she's on the verge of tears, I can't get Padme and the words "cheesy" and "overacting" out of my head. Bening has been nominated four times without a win, so I wouldn't be surprised if she finally stole this. (She won't win but Nicole Kidman? Le sigh. Back to where she was. So happy!)

Compensation for Not Winning Best Picture. Jessica Alba's Worst Nightmare.
Writing (Adapted Screenplay)

“127 Hours,” “The Social Network,” “Toy Story 3,” “True Grit,” “Winter's Bone”
There's no way Sorkin can't win this. As much as I disliked TSN, the script was very tight and well polished, as well as HIP and COOL. And EDGY. Who doesn't want to talk like Jesse Eisenberg aftter seeing this? Unless voters decide to reward the legacy of TS3. Which I would love.

Writing (Original Screenplay)

“Another Year,” “The Fighter,” “Inception,” “The Kids Are All Right,” “The King's Speech”
KAAR might win as compensation for not winning Best Picture and it is quite witty; same for Inception, however the script was mehh, not that strong. I expect that the King's Speech will snatch this one up.

Important Stuff.
Directing

“Black Swan” Darren Aronofsky, “The Fighter” David O. Russell, “The King's Speech” Tom Hooper, “The Social Network” David Fincher, “True Grit” Joel Coen and Ethan Coen
Fincher is just an amazing director. He did a great job with TSN. Aronofsky might pull this one out, but hype for Black Swan has died down. Hooper might get this one as well; however, he's not as tenured or reputable. It falls on Fincher. This is the closest Fight Club will get to being recognized. I'll take it.

Best Picture

“Black Swan,” “The Fighter,” “Inception,” “The Kids Are All Right,” “The King's Speech,” “127 Hours,” “The Social Network,” “Toy Story 3,” “True Grit,” “Winter's Bone"
Yeah, I'm going out on a limb to predict a split this year.  I'm really excited for King's Speech. British cinema really deserves to get recognized and rewarded, as it is so much more well made and thought out; they just care more about their films. They don't give us crap like Transformers. They don't have people like the Weinsteins or a Bruckheimer running the show. It's an incredible well paced, well thought out piece of work; beautifully laid out and intricate. Fincher deserves to be recognized; but TSN does not, even though it is relevant to this generation has has some really HIP moments. As I said before, Black Swan is losing a lot of its previous hype- it's also hurt by the fact that it's not nominated for Best Screenplay. And it's not as well rounded as TSN or King's Speech. As much as I love Inception, it's also not as well balanced and will not win, simply due for the fact that Chris Nolan is not recognized- the two usually go hand in hand. This year in general is really good for nominees.

Next Up: How Black Hawk Down Got Screwed Over In Every Way Possible.

Yikes, the Golden Globes!! Popularity ensues.

Wow, I suck. I didn't realize the GG were so close. Off my game. Will be back on for the Oscars. Letsa Go-a! I'll do the SAGs and DAGs in another post. Color codes are same as last year and have somewhat relevance. Red means Strong. Grey means Dark Horse. You know the deal.

I left out the TV portion, because here's what I think: Modern Family should win. Anything that has to do with anyone from Deadwood should win. And The Walking Dead too. SUMMED.

I should probably state that I have seen very few of these. So I'm shooting for all Hollywood Foreign Press politics, which is all glam and no substance. (You want to know why there's no technical categories? It's because the GG have no idea how to judge those.) And of course, the GG have a lot of "WHAT!?" entries. Expect some snarky remarks along the way. (I love those.)


Cecil B. DeMille Award

Robert De Niro

Yeah, I'm talking to you.

Best Motion Picture - Drama
Black Swan, The Fighter, Inception, The King's Speech, The Social Network
I'm glad no silly names made it here. The big battle here is between the artsy, dramatic tale of Black Swan or the generational narrative of the Social Network. I think either one has a chance at the Oscars, as well as the King's Speech; since the GG tends to be more of a popularity contest, I'll say the Social Network. I labeled Inception as the Dark Horse because it is this year's Avatar, with the exception of its originality and non-cheesiness (basically, just the blockbuster factor is the same). I wouldn't be surprised to see the HFPA go in favor of the bucks.


Best Performance by an Actress in a Motion Picture - Drama
Halle Berry – Frankie and Alice, Nicole Kidman – Rabbit Hole, Jennifer Lawrence – Winter's Bone, Natalie Portman – Black Swan, Michelle Williams – Blue Valentine
Natalie Portman is Hollywood's princess. She can do no wrong, even as the terrible Queen Amidala. Personally, as a viewer of a timeline of her works, I'm really not that impressed, but whatever, I'm a student so that doesn't matter. Halle and Nicole are popularity choices. I would love to see Michelle Williams pull this one out, but she won't. I don't know if you can tell, but I am not very enthused about this category.

Best Performance by an Actor in a Motion Picture - Drama
Jesse Eisenberg – The Social Network, Colin Firth – The King's Speech, James Franco – 127 Hours, Ryan Gosling – Blue Valentine, Mark Wahlberg – The Fighter
Jesse, Mark, and James are really really popular guys. That might do to outweigh the outstanding Colin Firth, but I don't think it well. He's long overdue, will probably win the Oscar, so HFPA will probably just hand it over. I'm pissed that Leonardo Dicaprio isn't here for Inception. What the fizzle.

Best Motion Picture - Comedy Or Musical
Alice in Wonderland, Burlesque, The Kids Are All Right, Red, The Tourist
Also known as the "Bullshit"  "We Don't Care" "Space/Time Fillers" category. First off, I had no idea that Alice and the Tourist were considered comedies or musicals. That's news to me. Second, I had no idea Burlesque didn't tank at the box office and should be an award contender (sarcasm inserted here). The Kids Are All Right is fantastically well made film that is relevant to this generation; I say Red is a contender simply because of the surprise win for the Hangover last year.

Best Performance by an Actress in a Motion Picture - Comedy Or Musical
Annette Bening – The Kids Are All Right, Anne Hathaway – Love And Other Drugs, Angelina Jolie – The Tourist, Julianne Moore – The Kids Are All Right, Emma Stone – Easy A
"Hey, let's shit on ourselves with more bullshit!"  I'd just like to state that half these nominees have no business here. I'm shocked that no one kissed Jennifer Aniston's or Katherine Heigl's ass this year. Julianne Moore is incredible talented, as is Annette Bening; but Moore is often overlooked and SHOULD win. Hathaway is just one of those favorites. So she might. Doubt it.

Best Performance by an Actor in a Motion Picture - Comedy Or Musical
Johnny Depp – Alice in Wonderland, Johnny Depp – The Tourist, Paul Giamatti – Barney's Version, Jake Gyllenhaal – Love And Other Drugs, Kevin Spacey – Casino Jack
What a great example of ass kissing. Just highlighting Spacey because he's awesome. Not that I don't like Johnny... But I don't think he deserves to be here. And that's why the GG are never taken too seriously. They should just nominate Bed Intruder, for the hell of it.

Best Performance by an Actress In A Supporting Role in a Motion Picture
Amy Adams – The Fighter, Helena Bonham Carter – The King's Speech, Mila Kunis – Black Swan, Melissa Leo – The Fighter, Jacki Weaver – Animal Kingdom
Let me explain. It SHOULD be Helena. But Amy and Mila are incredibly popular in their respective films. Carter is just so often overlooked- I hope she pulls it off this year, even if she is a home wrecker. (Where the hell is Marion Cotilliard for Inception!?)

Best Performance by an Actor In A Supporting Role in a Motion Picture
Christian Bale – The Fighter, Michael Douglas – Wall Street: Money Never Sleeps, Andrew Garfield – The Social Network, Jeremy Renner – The Town, Geoffrey Rush – The King's Speech
 Should be Rush, but everyone who doesn't work with Bale loves him. Renner is there because he was in the Hurt Locker. Douglas is there because 1> He's Michael Douglas and 2> He's married to Catherine Zeta Jones. Aaaand Garfield (as cute as he is) is a space filler. I'd rather see Joseph Gordon Levitt as a space filler.

Best Animated Feature Film
Despicable Me, How To Train Your Dragon, The Illusionist, Tangled, Toy Story 3
Toy Story 3 will win, because it's Pixar and is part of the Toy Story franchise. However, I do think Despicable Me was good enough to pull off an upset.

Best Foreign Language Film
Biutiful (Mexico, Spain), The Concert (France), The Edge (Russia), I Am Love (Italy), In A Better World (Denmark)
I'm saying Denmark just 'cause.

Best Director - Motion Picture
Darren Aronofsky – Black Swan, David Fincher – The Social Network, Tom Hooper – The King's Speech, Christopher Nolan – Inception, David O. Russell – The Fighter
Nolan has a huge chance of pulling an upset- just look at what he's done, and it will count as compensation for the Dark Knight. David Fincher and Darren Aronofsky are both names that have been around for a while and are long overdue with two immensely popular films, so either one will win. I'm going to say Fincher because of Network's mass appeal that has already stricken the public. But to be honest, I wouldn't mind if either of them won.

Best Screenplay - Motion Picture
Simon Beaufoy, Danny Boyle - 127 Hours
Christopher Nolan - Inception

Stuart Blumberg, Lisa Cholodenko - The Kids Are All Right

David Seidler - The King's Speech

Aaron Sorkin - The Social Network

Aaron Sorkin will win for his quick, witty dialogue that is sometimes ahrd to follow because Jesse Eisenberg spoke rapidly to come off as "smart." However, I really think it should go to the King's Speech or the Kids Are All Right- superbly paced and characters really fleshed out. Lovely.

Best Original Score - Motion Picture
Alexandre Desplat - The King's Speech, Danny Elfman - Alice in Wonderland, A. R. Rahman - 127 Hours, Trent Reznor and Atticus Ross - The Social Network, Hans Zimmer - Inception
I like Hans. No surprise there. But I also love Reznor. As much as I didn't feel too much for the Social Network, the music was definitely outstanding. Rez, you've come a long way.

Best Original Song - Motion Picture
"Bound To You" – Burlesque, "Coming Home" – Country Strong, "I See The Light" – Tangled, "There's A Place For Us" – Chronicles Of Narnia: The Voyage Of The Dawn Treader, "You Haven't Seen The Last Of Me" – Burlesque
I'm going to say Tangled, just because Alan Menken wrote it. I refuse to support Narnia because it's a blatent, meaningless, cheap rip off of West Side Story. And Burlesque, you just suck. Why is Country Strong here? That came out last week. And if so, I would much rather see that nominated than Burlesque.

I can't wait for the real awards to roll around.

Lately...

... I've been in a self reflective mode, probably due to a mixture of the following: finals week, final grades, the recent death of an acquaintance (which I will get into a bit later), the cleansing of my room (also a semi-cleansing of my past), random conversations, and finally a class I took on theory that I took maybe a bit too seriously. (All three term papers utilized theory and pretty much all focused of Feminism- yeah, I'm one of those. And I've randomly decided I am a Marxist. But not modern day/Red China Marxism, I'm talking about Marxism from the man himself.)

Uhh, this might be really long. And yeah, it's a bit more formal than what I usually write. Still in grad school-mode, I guess.

Theory classes, though frustrating at some parts, have really opened up my eyes to my own philosophies and gave me strong insight to what I was passionate about- I encourage everyone to dabble in it at some point, though it may not be for everyone. Most of it is old men that like to hear themselves talk, but there are some incredible thoughts and perspectives upon art, literature, and thus society. Hegel ("The Master-Slave Dialectic") was one of those "old men," but he had some interesting points to make concerning the Individual and the Other.

I disagree with him in the Other always taking the position of the antagonist- I strongly believe that there are multiple human perspectives and the cliched "two sides to every story" is absolutely true. To somewhat quote myself, every human being has their own beliefs and their actions reflect that- we cannot fully blame them what they think or have been led to believe that what they are doing is right. There are more factors than right or wrong. Everyone is an Individual and everyone is an Other. Life, humanity, cannot be so black and white. Unless you are Voldemort.

However, his assertion that the Individual identifies him/herself through recognizing what he/she is not through the other is correct- but only to a certain extent. I do not deny this; but I do think that our related characteristics and what connects us also has a say in our individuality- which he does not address. We cannot possibly be expected to learn all there is to know on our own; we cannot live without the presence of and avoid other humans; and therefore, we cannot survive without correlating to each other. What makes us alike and different both have their own hands in our identification.

Perhaps that opens up a bit for what I am about to get into. If you see no link whatsoever, then maybe it will just provide some insight to my perspective of humanity. Or confuse you, which I will assist. Hegel was pretty good at that. Onwards. Put your thinking cap ON.

Less than two days ago, an acquaintance of mine (her name was Noelle) was hit by a car and passed away. Given the disposition of Mother Nature and her rage of ice and snow, I expected there to be a few accidents- I did not expect it to be someone I was familiar with. Though I was not very close with her (we're not even friends on Facebook!), I knew several people who were. Mourning began instantly, via the Internet (I capitalize that because, yes, I think it's become such an integral part of society that it deserves it). People openly grieved, left her personal messages on her wall.

Interesting, for I have always felt that grief and extreme emotions were something to be handled in the private aspects of life. I'm not saying that they should not openly grieve- the exertion of emotion is sometimes necessary and cannot be helped. I just see things differently. Maybe I am an ice queen or am one of the few that believes in the public/private aspects. Not the men/women thing, but there are faces one displays for everyone to see and others that only a few get to see. I, for one, am not so comfortable with open emotions- I think extreme displays of sentiments for other people should be kept between those; they are incredibly personal and the feelings I have are meant for just those people- I don't need random people knowing my business and I don't need strangers knowing what I might be upset about. (Of course, I personally also dislike the idea of being publicly vulnerable or weak, or imposing myself on others. That's not what some people are for.) I don't think this makes me disagreeable; just selective of who I trust wholeheartedly; after all, there are only a few true people one can trust throughout life.

Friends, romantic partners, and such, really they come and go quite frequently, though some are too stubborn to admit or acknowledge this. It is natural for people to grow together, shift apart, and then come back, maybe leave again. We cannot hope to hold on to everything at once- that just hinders human progress. We can only wish that our experiences change us for the better. I'm not saying it is wrong to mourn or to try and keep our connections- but if the tide is moving one way, we cannot fully avoid being swept in its currents. I've taken on the role of a pessimistic optimist; basically, I'm always the one saying, "Yeah, that sucks, but what can you do? Just go with it/Just move forward." It is impossible to control everything around us; the best we can to is to take a hold of things we know we have power over.

Most people see this as indifference. That's fine. I like the idea of building, of growing, as a person. Case in point: If I have a crappy relationship, I'm not going to sit and cry about it because it happened. I can't pull a Time Turner and pretend it didn't. I'm going to use it to my strengths: what not to look for, what to look for, what makes me happy, what I need to find in another, what I can do to build with someone when I find him. And I've always been like that, even from a young age; deeply reading my earlier years, I had some really terrible things happen to me (more than the average seven year old), none of which I've kept or taken to heart. They have changed me and I've used these changes for the better. It's not an easy process to accept the bad for the good, but maybe I'm just more hard headed and stronger than the average person.

However, the subject of Death takes on a different perspective. By all means, mourning is not objectionable; sometimes it is necessary. When something is taken so suddenly, one cannot help but feel left wandering. But I think more people harp on the loss rather than thinking, "How did this person help me grow? Why did I keep this person in my life?" In focusing on these qualities, it makes us more determined to seek out those things later, providing a personal resolve to fill those holes; as much as we lament the loss of someone, we can always find something to replace/remind him/her. It is just a manner of taking on the responsibility to find it ourselves; people must seek out their own happiness. It may seem selfish, but it helps us reflect on the good things about that person; it takes a bit of the pain away.

Then again, this is coming from someone who believes that the purpose of human connection is to provide personal growth. People change us, even if we do not know them. Someone bumps into a man, who then spills coffee on himself, changes his day. A random act of kindness can affect someone for a whole week. We must use these to our advantages.

The strong belief in this progression always prevents my personal emotion. Yeah, I'm kind of heartless sometimes; but it's in favor of building myself. Not such a loss. At the ripe age of twenty two, I would say this self belief has truly molded me as a person; I am much more aware of myself and who I am than the average young adult. I can identify myself and take a hold of responsibility with much more perseverance and assurance than many of my peers. A good thing. I like knowing who I am. It makes life a whole lot less confusing and keeps goals in check. Not many people can say that, so booyakasha.


I'm done writing and somewhat lacking in conclusion, so I'll leave you with the top two of My Bucket List (or something like that):

• New Zealand, or traveling in general. Haven't done enough of that.
• Meet /Get in touch with Peter Jackson and tell him how he saved me (You jest, but it's true).

Right-o.

Philosophy on Human Happiness

When you sit down and think about it, at the end of the day there are only three things in the world that matter: the way you feel about others, the way others feel about you, and the way you feel about you.

For really, what other than human connection and emotion is there to drive us day by day? What else is the constant force behind all actions, thoughts, and words? What gives us a purpose or motive? What makes us want to be better people, and thus create a more significant society?

The people we choose to surround ourselves with echo what we think of ourselves. If we are to be with or care for people who consistently bring our spirits down, who degrade us into nothing more than a shell, who leave us wondering what bit of good is left in them, then we are choosing not to be content. We are choosing not to be loved, simply because we think we do not deserve it. To be surrounded by people who love and support us and our own morals and beliefs is to be where we belong.

That being said, the way people think of you does matter; and we can still go through life thinking of ourselves as individuals. Caring about how we impress upon people is not shallow or conforming. To be one’s own person does not mean we need to rebel, be rude, or challenge the norm. If we think the best of ourselves, do we not wish that others judge us the same way? Would we rather like people to think of us as kind and happy, not rude? Is there a person in the world that is happy to be thought of as offensive and impolite? Is there someone who is happy to be that person no one else wants to be around? If we are to be treated with respect and pleasantness, then it is not a crime to treat others the same and we should. No one deserves respect outright: it is worked for and earned through our own measures; we must give people a reason to think we deserve it.

Lastly, we cannot burden others with the duty of our own happiness. We must look within and depend on those tools to create an atmosphere of comfort. We cannot depend on the opinions of others to create our own image. Self-confidence, self-respect, delight in one’s life can only be ensured, stabilized, and guaranteed by one person, and that is yourself. We cannot make others happy without making ourselves happy first. It is not selfish to think of yourself highly; no one else knows you well enough to do so, thus the duty is left to yourself. If you have the confidence to believe you deserve happiness, then you will grasp it for yourself; you will work towards the people and things that make you smile. It is the formation of our own mindset that gives us the power to express upon others our own confidence and contentment with ourselves. The choice of working towards that happiness is a choice of power; and the decision to take that power is to become responsible for ourselves as adults.

How do we treat others? Behavior towards one another is a self reflection of ourselves. As human beings, we cannot think or believe that someone is mistreating another of intended viciousness or contempt outright. With the exception of spite and revenge, we should not believe that actions are done for the purpose of hurting the other. There are far too many people in the world to think someone can be purely malicious; in everyone’s head, each person is correct by their own right. Things cannot be so black and white in a world so vast. Therefore, do we take action without listening, understanding, and perhaps sympathizing? To be a human is to feel and to have the ability to express those emotions; if we react without thinking, there is nothing that separates us from the creatures whose lands we have overrun. To understand the other is the strongest form of human will and emotion.

(Nothing really that exciting, just some scribbles while I'm supposed to be doing work.  Must admit, though, it sounds quite pretty.)