Saturday, January 31, 2004

"Many different herrings."

Well, this is the last post of the month. I don't really know what to write, but felt like I should some how celebrate the last post of the month. Is that weird? It probably wouldn't be if I did it each end of the month, huh? Oh well.

I guess it wouldn't be so weird if I did this each month, but I just never thought of it before today. So, here's to the end of one crappy month and the beginning to a new one.

I had my first "real" week of school this week. Two of the Design: Fundamentals classes. We cut pictures out of magazines and were given many different terms that I may or may not remember for the quiz that we may or may not have before the middle of the term. I also had the one Elementary Drawing and Comp class (it's four hours each Friday). In that class I got to draw three things. One in pencil (and I need many more pencils than the lady told me to get because I don't like pushing too hard on them), but I drew two things. One in charcoal, which I didn't care for, not enough control. And one in conte, which is sort of like charcoal, but isn't, but was easier to control than the coal was, for me. For home work, I need to do a picture in ink, joy. The teacher said that she's more interested in how we experiment with the uses of the media we use than if it looks a lot like it's supposed to, but I think she'd like it more if we could get it to look like what we are aiming for. Only Jebus knows what's going to be done next week, but I'm sick of terms and would rather just get to work, these are art classes after all.

It looks like The Producers is going to be turned back into a movie. I like the original a lot and have a great fondness for the musical. I hope they can pull it off as a movie. And I hope they're not squeamish about having Nazi pigeons.

Thursday, January 29, 2004


Understand, I have no good basis for telling you who I think should win at this years Oscars, but I'm gonna do it anyway, at least in the categories I think I understand. Oh, and I'm doing this as if I were the only voter, these are who I would pick based on the movies I've seen this year.


This one's simple, it should go to Bill Murray for being amazing and for not getting a nomination for Rushmore. This was not the Bill Murray from Ghost Busters or Groundhog Day, this is Bill Murray being brilliant. Sure, the other actors are amazing (although I haven't seen these movies, I've seen them in other things), but Murray was outstanding. It was the Bill Murray I've seen before, but only in appearance, the attitude and mannerisms had me completely mystified. I hope he's the winner.

Keisha Castle-Hughes - WHALE RIDER
Samantha Morton - IN AMERICA
Charlize Theron - MONSTER
Naomi Watts - 21 GRAMS

Keisha Castle-Hughes is my choice. Sure, kids rarely win, but she was great in Whale Rider and since I haven't seen the supposedly amazing performance by Charlize Theron, I'm sticking to my choice until I see Monster, probably on video in several months.

Alec Baldwin - THE COOLER
Benicio Del Toro - 21 GRAMS
Djimon Hounsou - IN AMERICA
Tim Robbins - MYSTIC RIVER

I haven't seen any of these movies, but I'm saying that I want Alec Baldwin to win just because I like the guy when he does interviews or when he appears on Saturday Night Live. Does anyone else remember the brilliant sketch "The Mimic"? Seriously, though, he's a great actor even if he's been in some horrible movies. Let's see him get the little gold man this year.

Shohreh Aghdashloo - HOUSE OF SAND AND FOG
Patricia Clarkson - PIECES OF APRIL
Marcia Gay Harden - MYSTIC RIVER
Holly Hunter - THIRTEEN
Renée Zellweger - COLD MOUNTAIN

I've only seen Thirteen out of these movies, and while I think Holly Hunter was good, I don't know if she is deserving of another Oscar. So, I guess I won't be making a choice on this, I'm just hoping that Renée Zellweger doesn't win. The only role she nailed was Bridget Jones, but she didn't win for that, now did she.


Part of me wants City of God to win because I kinda like to see foreign films take major Oscars away from American films, but if I have to be honest, which I like to be, I have to give this award to Sophia Coppola for her masterful work in Lost in Translation. Sure, she was a horrible actress, but the two films she's directed have been amazing pieces of work. I think, given time and opportunity, she's gonna outshine her dad as a director.


Many people out there are going to be saying that Howard Shore should win for his epic style music in The Lord of the Ring: The Return of the King, but I disagree. The winner should be Danny Elfman for the emotional score beneath Big Fish. Elfman is one of the most talented composers film has right now and he has earned an award with this film.


Simply, American Splendor is the best one in this category. If this film was in the Best Picture category, I'd have a tough time choosing a winner, but it's only in this one category and must be declared the winner.


While I don't think I had more fun at the theater last year than when I went and saw Finding Nemo, Lost in Translation is the better film and the better screenplay. It has everything that I want in a screenplay and more. Another Oscar to Sophia Coppola


Once again, Finding Nemo was an outstanding film, but not the best in this category. That goes to The Triplets of Belleville because it is a brilliant movie that uses many forms of animation to great effect. I'm pretty sure it'll be the winner. This is the only category I have faith in me being right because last year they choose Spirted Away last year rather than the normal American stuff.


Once again, Lost in Translation is the great winner. Go and see it and you'll understand why.


My comments are gone. It looks like that Klink person has eliminated BlogOut all together. I suppose it makes sense, considering that Krys person, the one in charge there, uses Movable Type. Bastard.

Waxing Witless While Waltzing With Wily, Wistful, Waffling Words

"The problem's all inside your head," she said to me.

Wish I was an English muffin
'Bout to make the most out of a toaster.


This is the third day I've tried writing this and, probably, the ninth time. Every other time when I was starting out I'd think lots of different things:

It has to be a story. Something interesting. Something that will make them want to read on. Something that will make them laugh and possibly cry. Something that can do both at the same time. Something that, in the future, they will look back at and say "Damn, that was the moment. That was the moment when he did the thing that he was always only talking about doing. Damn." Something that will grab them by their short hairs and when you yank they'll be glad to follow, in fact, they'll ask for more.

None of that was coming out in the crap I was writing, though. I stumbled over and over again. I thought about taking the easy way out and asking ~o for five questions, but I didn't feel right about that. I don't think that I would be totally honest in answering the questions. I wouldn't lie, (I don't like to lie if I can help it.), but I'd leave much out, or I'd write an answer like "Yes, but I don't want to discuss this here and now, that explanation's for a different situation entirely." and I don't think an answer like that is fair, do you? I am, however, looking forward to reading the answers from Johnny Logic and SlackBastard, if they ever get around to posting. (I suppose that one of them has an excuse, he goes to work very soon after waking-up, the other, I'm pretty sure, has had the time today.)

I caught something this weekend. Not the flu. No. I don't feel that bad. It's just a stubborn cold, I think. It started on Saturday with a sore throat. Moved into a stuffed-up nose on Monday. And they yesterday, Thursday for those not keeping track, it became a cough from my low throat, not the chest, fortunately. I hope it leaves soon. I don't like it. It's not helping me and when I cough at work, even though I turn around and cram my mouth into the cruck of my elbow, I get looks from customers like I shouldn't be there, even though I'm (probably) no longer contagious and I do my best to keep my spittle from flying into their drinks. Do they not see this? Jebus, how many of them go to work every day, even when they have a cold? And how many of them have a customer service job? And how many of them don't turn their head and cram their mouths into the cruck of their elbows when they cough or sneeze? Bastards.

Visited Friendster a couple of days ago (even with the new connections (DSL baby!) it all came up at the same speed as the dial-up I used to use) and found this web-site. Read through it and took the quiz. According to this stuff I'm a quirkyalone. I don't know what it means and I don't know if I like having a specific label for something that I am, but it was an interesting read, for me, and made some interesting, if misinformed, statements. I suppose I'd have to look at the book to really know what this lady is talking about, but I'm not willing to shell out any cash to read a book that tells me that it's okay for me to be me. What a waste.

Okay, I think I'm done here. I'd like to go to sleep, but there was a phone call earlier that told me people were coming over. I don't think that me sleeping is the best way to greet them.

Thursday, January 22, 2004


Has anyone else out there watched the Bush in 30 Seconds winners? They're pretty great. All of the finalists are good, really. My favorites are (in their low bandwidth settings) Leave No Billioniare Behind, If the Bush Administration Was Your Roommate, School Yard Politics, and Al Keyda.


Test! Again

You are a very special reclining, heated, massaging
lay-z-boy chair with a bar in the armrest and
inbuilt headrest. You can do no wrong and
nothing goes wrong with you. You are a prodigy.
We hate you cause you're so goddamn smart. You
seriously need a prescription for super-dumb

"You have an IQ of a chair!" What kind of chair are you?
brought to you by Quizilla

Wednesday, January 21, 2004


cuddle and a kiss
cuddle and a kiss on the forehead - you like to be
close to your special someone and feel warm,
comfortable, and needed

What Sign of Affection Are You?
brought to you by Quizilla


This is an interview I conducted on myself earlier today. I hope you enjoy it.

Josh the Interviewer: So, I've heard that you moved to Sacramento--

Josh the Answerer: Yep, I've moved to our state's capital, or as I prefer to call it the "cowcity." I figure that if where I was before was a cowtown, why can't this be a cowcity? I ask you, why? If you're gonna answer me, I'll need three good reasons for why this can't be a cowcity, and "because I think it's stupid" isn't a good reason.

I lived in Davis for two years of my life, but I didn't really care for it and now I'm in Sacramento, the big city by Davis. I can't say that I'll like it here anymore than I liked it there. I'm not a big city person. Sure, they're nice to visit, but I don't like living there. It's too crowded. Too many people. Too many buildings. Too many cars. There's just too much crammed into one place.

I probably don't like it because I'm not really a people person. I don't like people. They say that man's a social animal, but I'm not. I don't like most people that I've met and I don't going to large parties with people I've never met and I don't want to make lots of friend when I like the one's I've got very well, thank you very much.

But, overall, I think that moving to this cowcity will be good for me. Maybe I'll like more people. Or maybe I'll win the lottery and move into a cave in the mountain where I'll be left alone and my only human contact will be through the internet and that frightened child who'll bring groceries to my cave's entrance each week. At least I'll be able to see some good movies, even if the other things don't happen.

JtI: Okay... Well... You moved to continue to go to school, why--

JtA: That's right. I felt like there wasn't enough offered where I was. It was a good school, don't get me wrong, I liked it a lot, but there was no where that I could really go. I was stuck. I wanted to do this graphic design thing, but they didn't offer anything more than the basics, and I had nearly finished those. So, I didn't take any Photoshop courses, big deal. I know Illustrator inside-and-almost-out. I know InDesign, and that's going to challenge the industry standard of Quark. And I started to teach myself how to use the Flash animation, with some less than stellar results, but I'm trying, none the less.

The school I'm currently attending, my first class was today, American River College, which was named years before September 11th, is a decent one. I had my first class today, which is and will continue to be the fundamentals of design. I have to take it because everyone has to, who's interested in graphic design. What I really want to get into is the animation stuff. They offer a class that's on Flash animation and a 3D animation class. I can't wait. If I'm good enough, I should be able to start that stuff next fall, but I have to work over one of the counselors first, try to shmooze my way around some prerequisites and into the classes. Will it work? I dunno, but I hope it does.

I'm really looking forward to that animation stuff, you know? I've always wanted to be involved, but I'm not so good at the drawing by hand. I can draw something, but it'll never look remotely the same when I try to draw it again, unless it's a straight line, that is, and even then I have some problems, lots of problems actually. I don't know what's wrong. I like art. I enjoy going to museums. I want to be able to do that sort of thing, but I can't. I'm told that practice makes perfect in art and that everyone can do it, but that's really a load of crap. You need some innate ability to do it well and lots of that ability truly be one of the greats, even if you never sell a painting in your life time....

Sorry, I got a little off topic. What was the questions again?

JtI: I wanted to know why you are still going to school--

JtA: Didn't I just answer that?

JtI: Yes and no. That wasn't my whole question.

JtA: Oh.


JtA: You can finish you're question if you'd like because I'd really like to answer it.

JtI: Okay. I wanted to know why you're going to school, at a junior college, when you already have a BA in English?

JtA: Is that all? Well, there are a three reasons.

The first is financial. I don't want to pay my loans and as long as I'm in school at least half time, I don't have to. I don't have the money to really start paying those suckers off, so I don't want to. If paying 600ish dollars a school year keeps me from paying 80 dollars a month for the next twenty years, or whatever it is, then I'll do it.

The second has to do with work, which, I suppose, is sort of financial, if you want to pick at nits. Like you said, I graduated with a degree in English and while I love the stuff I learned about I have to ask, what the fuck can you do with an English degree? Teach? Well, I talked to some teachers and even the advisor for the education department at Stan State and in the end we came up with the fact that I wouldn't be so good at teaching high school because I have very little patience for people who don't want to be there and in a high school English class, that's like 90% of the students, if I was one of the lucky ones. I could go into journalism, but I took a couple of classes in that, and while I was told that my writing was strong, my interviews tended to be haphazard and unfocused. And I don't think that interviewing is something that a person should learn on the job. Part of me feels bad that I don't think I can do it, but if I don't think I can then I won't, right?

And the third reason is that I like this graphic design stuff. I like to take an idea and try to distill it down then slap it on paper. I liked making this logo and still enjoy looking at it. Do I want to do this the rest of my life? I'm not sure. Hell, I'm not sure that I'll even finish the program here. Maybe I'll actually start writing my novel, or go to grad school, or get married. Who knows? For now, though, I'm sticking to school because it's here and pretty safe.

JtI: Well, that it for this interview. If you have any more questions for Josh then put them in the thing below, he'll do his best to provide you with an answer that may or may not actually answer you're question.

Oh, and if you’re reading this, Dani, be sure to keep your pictures, Josh likes to see the things you draw. Thanks.

(This interview was written under the influence of, what I like to call, the Sweat Pants of Writing. I have yet to purchase a pair of Sweat Pants of Good Writing. Keep your fingers crossed.)


Margaret Cho has a BLOG? Why didn't anyone tell me about this earlier?

Saturday, January 17, 2004


I want to go to APE this year. No, I'm going to go this year. Anyone want to join me?

Friday, January 16, 2004


A request has been made for an update. Who am I to argue?

Yesterday was my last day at the Starbucks in Sonora. I made toffee for the people there. I figured I'd leave them with sweets made of butter and sugar, mostly. It was delicious, and I wasn't the only one who thought so. The day was long. Mainly because it was my tenth day, in a row, of work. Not fun, especially because there were four opening shifts and then four later in the day shifts. I did it all, though. And now I'm done... there.

Today was a trip from this cowtown to the cowcity I'm moving to. I visited the Starbucks I want to transfer to so I could talk with the manager. She was nice. After a few minutes of plesantries she told me that if I came to work there I couldn't be promised many hours and then told me that other stores are always looking for substitute workers. Thats fine with me, as long as I can find the fucking store. (I always get mixed-up driving in that city. Hopefully I'll get better, but I'm not holding my breath.) Keep your fingers crossed that things will work out well, if not at Starbucks, then at school.

In other news, I've been listening to way too much NPR (the best thing on today) and, of course, it started me thinking. Okay, one of the biggest problems facing all the candidates for any government office is money, the debt and defict. Most people think that the only ways to fix the money problems are by raising taxes (oh, dear God, NO!) or cutting spending (oh, dear God, NO!), but there is another way which would be to allow the government to supply goods and servises for a profit.

Am I suggesting that the government do the things that we now trust industry to do? Yes, I am. People out there will shout that Government has no right interfearing with private industry, but I have to ask, why? Industry has no goal except to turn a profit. Government, on the other hand, has to at least do some things that help the people of its nation like schools and roads and a bloated "defence" force that is used to bully a world.

I'm not suggesting that Government nationalize all the businness, but if we want it to do some good without having to take money through taxes, we have to give it the ability to turn a profit.

Of course, that's a far out idea, isn't it? The people of this nation didn't want a national bank in the 1820s, so why would people now want this nation to provide goods and services that corporations are already providing?

Ah, forget it.

Wednesday, January 14, 2004

Small Changes

~O is who green apron monkey was.

Wil was once known as WWdN.

Scott is Scott McCloud, a great person in comics. Coupled with his blog is the Morning Improv. Each day he adds a panel or two to a comic. My favorites are Meadow of the Damned: Part 1, Part 2, and Part 3; Zen Dating; Scott McCloud – I know you are reading this. Choose one of the many titles I have submitted.; Junk Bar; and The Accidental Dentist. Some have a bunch of pictures, but are worth the wait.

Wednesday, January 07, 2004

Visions of the Future

Today, while making a carmel Frappuccino, I had a vision. I saw myself as a ninty-year-old man, white hair, saggy skin, hunched over, and making a carmel Frappuccino.

I'm scared.

Monday, January 05, 2004

Politics Suck!

Over on Johnny Logics' site, I wrote my mind and now feel that I need to defend my statements in more than 400 words at a time.

The following are the comments from Saturday, January 03, 2004 as of 11:15 PM on Monday the 5th:


Robertson may be a loon, but I'm afraid that he's right about the election.



The latest CNN poll shows Bush beating Dean by only 5 points (51-46).

"Just to put that into perspective: in April of 1992, Bill Clinton trailed George H.W. Bush by 20 points."

Full report @

So things are looking much better than your comment implies.



Good to hear from you (good news too). Congratz on moderatorship over at


April of 1992 the democrats had their candidate, January of 2004 the democrats do not. Much will happen when the primaries and cacuses start, especially since Dean has very little support from the party higher-ups, regardless of Gore's endosments.

History has shown that this country doesn't like to change presidents during "wars," I hope that this is the exception, but am prepared for the other.


Thanks, Johnny.

Party high-ups are nothing if the people vote Dean into candidacy. Rest assured, once Dean is official, we'll get support from higher-ups (since they clearly prefer a Dem over Bush, even though they would have preferred Gephardt/Kerry).

History shows we dropped Bush Sr after a MidEast war. , so Bush Jr is in the same boat his pappy was.

Okay, so history does show that Bush Sr was dropped in '92, but his war was over for a year. It ended because his adversary withdrew much more quickly than he wanted and he at least had enough humanity in him to not outright invade a country and slaughter innocent people on a person to person basis (bombs were good enough to do that for him, and the next president as well). If Gulf War Episode One: Kuwait Invaded had lasted through the presidential election, I think Bush Sr would have been president for the next four years.

Why do I say this? Because in the history of this nation it no president has been voted out of office while a war (or "war") is going on. I'm starting with the American "Civil" War because it's the first war that I can find that runs through more than one presidential term.

American "Civil" War (1861-1865): Lincoln is the president (as we all know), but he was only elected with 40% of the popular vote. States want to leave the Union, the Union refuses to allow this to happen and declares war with parts of itself. 1864 rolls around and Lincoln is up for re-election, he won. True, he probably wouldn't have one if the southern states had exercised their right to vote (they were still part of the Union, right?), but the rest didn't want to kick out their commander-in-chief.

Spanish American War (1898-1902): War declared during McKinley's first term. Most of the fighting in Cuba was done by the end of the year, but the war continued in the Philippines and wasn't really over until after McKinley's death in 1901, but the man did get re-elected to a second term.

World War I (1917-1919): Okay, the U.S. wasn't involved in the fighting during Wilson's first term, but since it started in 1914 in Europe I have to count it. I mean, for the people who vote were following the war. They knew that the US was sending goods (including munitions) across the Atlantic. And they knew about the sinking of the Lusitania. It was gonna happen, they just didn't know when and they re-elected Wilson in 1916.

World War II (1941-1945): The war in Europe started in '39 and Roosevelt was re-elected the first time in '40 most likely because the economy picked up due to the war across the ocean. In '44, he's re-elected again (only president to do that, ever). Was it because he was a good president, or because the people of the nation were on a patriotic kick and put him back in office? Then Truman took over and unleashed a horrible, horrible devise on the world.

Korean "War" (1950-1953 or present, depending on how you look at it): Okay, this one didn't help anyone, but that's only because in 1952, Truman decided not to run for re-election. Would he have won? I'm not sure, but I think he would have.

Viet Nam "War" (1964-1973): First, let me say that this "war" was a small fucking mistake that became a huge fucking mistake which eventually led to the fucking mistake that President Jr started. Fucking Gulf of Tonkin Resolution. Okay, the Gulf of Tonkin Incident happened in August and Johnson was elected in November with 61% of the vote. He probably would have won even without the incident, but I'm sure it boosted his popularity. Even though the war was becoming unpopular, I bet Johnson would have won in '68, but he dropped out of the election, which let Tricky Dick into office for (almost) two terms. I'm sure that Nixon could have pulled out of Viet Nam earlier, but he didn't, he wanted to wait until the election was over. I'm sure that he would have won his re-election even if he hadn't cheated because he had a war to complete.

There's my history lesson for all of you out there. Because of those things, I think that this nation doesn't like voting out presidents during times of war (and "war").

I admit, Nihilo makes a good point in saying that "the recent Iraq war is now over." I believe it and I'm sure that much of the nation thinks that too, but President Jr doesn't. He says we're in it for the long haul, until it's over. He even said, "There's a variety of theaters. So long as anybody's terrorizing established governments, there needs to be war." (He forgot to add that it doesn't count if it is the US terrorizing established governments.) Besides, if most people in the US think the "war" in Iraq is over there's always North Korea, Iran, Palestine, or the sudden and remarkable capture then execution of Osama bin Ladin to help him win the day.

I hope he loses though. I don't want four more years of this Texas idiot. Please let it end.

Bye, Bye

Goodbye, Warren Ellis.

No, he's not leaving his many web-sites, but he's planning on leaving comics for a while, maybe forever. That's sad news for those of us who want comics to be more than just superheroes. I only hope that he's back sooner, rather than later.

Sunday, January 04, 2004

Lord of the Rings: Return of the King

I saw Return of the King a few weeks ago, but work and laziness prevented me from writing this. I liked Return of the King. If you liked Fellowship of the Ring and Two Towers, you'll like Return of the King. If you liked Fellowship of the Ring and hated Two Towers, you'll like Return of the King. If you hated all three, then why the hell are you watching these movies? And the only reason I'll accept is that you saw it with people (or a person) who really loves this stuff. And that does it for my review of the movie, lets get on with the nit-picking, shall we? I'll spoil parts of all the movies, but you few who haven't seen the last will still read on, won't you?

1. Where the hell is all the magic? Yes, I know that in Tolkien's world the magic is ambiguous, but that's no excuse. I remember the first time I watched the fight between Gandalf and Sauramon. I was so disappointed. Where was the magic? Staffs (staves?) were waved and men were thrown backward, but that wasn't exciting, for me. And then in Return of the King, Gandalf lit his staff (pervert!) to scare the dragon thing, once. Why didn't he do it later when they were attacking the city? Why didn't he hurl a fire ball at the army? Is it too much for me to ask to see a wizard hurl a fire ball in a movie I actually enjoy?

2. What's up with the so called "One Ring"? It turns people invisible. Wow, the most powerful ring in Middle Earth turns its bearer invisible. Gee, isn't that impressive. Ugh. My brother suggested that if Frodo had the ring longer, he'd have been able to do more with it. When I pointed out the Golem had the ring for hundreds of years and it only drove him mad, not any kind of powerful force in Middle Earth, just a pathetic creature that saves the world in the end. Then he pointed out that it was specifically made for Sauron and only he could use the true power. I asked for evidence, he said this is what his friends said and they are obsessed with Lord of the Rings. Okay, so I pointed out the "One Ring" wasn't the most powerful ring because it didn't corrupt the three the elves had, nor did it defeat the power of the elvish rings. Why? I thought this was the ring that would "find them / and in the darkness bind them"? But it didn't, and that suggest it couldn't. All powerful my ass.

3. Why a giant eye? My brother said, through his sources, that it is because Sauron is now merely a force and not wholly in the world, but if he got the ring back, he could reform his body and begin the work on conquering the world (would that include the land the Elves are going to?). When the eye fell, I kept hoping for a decrepit body to fall from the tower and shatter when it struck the ground, but I didn't. I just saw an eye flicker and a tower fall over. I was sad.

4. Where were the other wizards? In the first book, Gandalf visits with a wizard wearing brown robes who has a special rapport with animals. Wasn't he the one who set Gandalf up with eagle help to escape the Orthanc? Sure, I wouldn't have gotten anymore magic, but it's nice to know that the world wasn't just grey and white. Yeah, the movies were long, but making mention of help from another wizard to escape would have been easy.
4a. And why no wizard of all colors? I loved that Sauramon had taken on a robe made of threads of all wizard colors. It made him seem more powerful, like he had to defeat the other wizards to be able to get the colors. I believed more easily that Gandalf was taken down by Sauramon that quickly. Plus, I always like the idea that his robe appeared white at first glance, but shimmered other colors as he moved.
5. Why wasn't Frodo older? Frodo should have been older. Plain and simple. In the book, Frodo was 33 when he got the ring and in his fifties when he left on the quest. He wasn't a young Hobbit physically, like his friends, but he was as young as they were in every other sense. Yeah, they wanted a "heart throb" or whatever, and they found a guy who could make a worried face really well, normal for the movies. That's not a good excuse though. Anyone who can counteract my complaint, e-mail me the specific pages from the books where I can find it. Only from the trilogy or The Hobbit. I don't have the other books and don't want them.


[Lore: Uncle Jesse]

Saturday, January 03, 2004

New Year, Schmew Schmear

I hate New Year and all the bullshit that goes with it. I spent all of Thursday explaining to my coworkers that I did nothing for New Year's eve and that I didn't want to do anything. I watched an excellent movie, ate a chimichanga, watched one of the funniest TV shows ever, was in bed by 10, and was asleep at about 10:45. That's the New Year I wanted, it was perfect, for me.

I could have gone to a party, if I had wanted to. I was invited to the one my parents went to, but didn't go because I didn't want to pretend that I enjoyed talking with people who are nearly twice my age about what I plan on doing with my so called life. I was invited to a couple of "parties" by some coworkers, when I asked them about what would be going on the answer was always "drinking." "We're gonna get so drunk we'll forget what year it is and what year it's gonna be." Ugh. That's not what I call a good, or even decent party. I'm sick of most people near my age thinking that a good party is based around our ability to get so drunk we can't see at all. What is so exciting about that? I have never understood.

It's been nine years (I think) since I had a good New Year's eve (and I don't remember any really good ones before that). I remember sitting in an outdoor hot tub with snow falling all around. I remember watching lots of Twilight Zone episodes, even though the hostess protested loudly because she wanted to watch the ball drop. I remember many card games, most of which I lost. And I remember Risk being played, sovereign nations betraying each other, and curses being hurled across the board. There were many nights like that after, but none on New Year's.

Admittedly, that wasn't the greatest New Year's that ever was or ever could be, but it's the best I've had. And it had what I wanted: good friends, good games, and good conversation. I find that alcohol eliminates almost all of those things. Pot does it too, but it's so much more expensive, and 90% of the people at a party aren't smoking it.

Maybe I'm just a New Year's Grinch. I never wish people a happy New Year because I don't know many people who actually admit to saying that the last year they had was good. Each year, I swear more an more that the night is just an excuse for regularly sober people to get shit-faced as fast as they can and then, after screaming because a giant ball drops down a huge stick (What would Freud think?) taking another drink then driving home. It's a stupid holiday. If I took away all the alcohol, I don't think I'd find all the people singing and cheering at midnight, do you?

Thank God it's over. Thank God school will be starting soon so I won't have to explain the difference between a Vanilla Crème and a Vanilla Crème Frappuccino to prepubescent girls and boys who think that because they come into a coffee shop they're grown adults. (I can't wait to see how the next generation turns out.) Regular customers are bad enough, but these jack ass kids are even worse. When I transfer, I hope I don't end up in a mall.