Unheeded

There was a little boy who loved walking down the river at night. His parents both told him it was horribly dangerous for him to do that because the river’s current was so strong and swift, but the boy always snuck out at night and did it anyways.

One night, the boy saw a shimmering by the side of the river from his window and decided to go and investigate. When he got to the riverside, he saw the shape of a beautiful woman form above the water of the river, about ten feet from the side. The woman beckoned him with a hand, her face so peaceful that the boy had no doubt that the water would hold his weight if he walked to the woman. As he stepped out over the water, his eyes were locked onto the shining face of this angelic being, so awe-stricken by her beauty and serene he was. Their hands met and the world seemed to melt away as the boy was overcome with a feeling of peace.

The parents of the boy and a large group of their friends managed to find the boy’s body a few days later, one hundred yards downstream and stuck under a fallen log, the flesh already peeling away from his body. He had drowned and the police did not suspect any foul play.

Michael Moore is an asshole

First off, Michael Moore is an asshole. That being said, he IS an adept storyteller. Unfortunately, he uses his abilities as a narrative creator to sensationalize what might otherwise be a worthy topic for acclaim and to further his own aims. I don’t necessarily have a problem with uses one’s own abilities to accomplish something, but if you’re going to do such a thing, try to do it with some professionalism or at least some class.

The film “Fahrenheit 9/11” is a prime example of the power of Michael Moore’s narrative art, delving into the more personal aspects of President George W. Bush’s “War on Terror” and the damage that the Patriot Act and similar measures to the human resources of the American military. The crux of his argument is that the elite of the country’s political system have persisting in colluding to abuse their power by creating a system that takes advantage of the poor and uneducated. He alleges that the American government abuses its power and profits from the blood and tears of the underprivileged. No shit, Mr. Moore.

How does Michael Moore exploit the fear of the American people to convince them that his, and only his, views on the state of our democracy are the correct opinions? More importantly, how does he utilize ambush tactics to produce the reactions and thoughts that improve his argument? He has a very keen knowledge of psychology and fear and how precisely to take advantage of the natural inclination of humanity to react poorly to surprise and fear.

All Things in Mulderation

So as I sit here watching the first five or six seasons of the X-Files, I begin to figure out what is wrong with television.

Most of the time, television shows either make their characters too perfect, or too flawed.

After watching the X-Files, I was struck by the well-crafted balance between Agents Scully and Mulder, a shimmering waltz of insecurities and talents moving together in free form complexity that flits from annoying to amusing to interesting at will. Granted, that sounds pretty fan boy right off the top, but I don't apologize. I don't think X-Files is the best show ever, or even think that those two characters are the most interesting to watch, but at times I find myself wondering how the pairing worked so well.

Beyond the intrinsic conflict between "Spooky" Mulder and Scully the skeptic, the personality flaws of the two become all the more endearing when pushed up against each other and shown as connected to their obvious talents as investigators.

Also, I wanted to punch that show in the dick when they got T-1000 to be the new leading man.

Artifact in the eye of the Spectacle

There is an overarching belief in the spirit of the civilized man as the pinnacle of life, a belief not shared by the tragic Texan writer Robert E. Howard. An avid athlete and lover of masculine physical activities, Howard frequently exalted the savage man of the wild as the ultimate heroic figure, untouched by the corrupting influence of the urban environment and a more able adventurer because of the strengthening effect of a hostile wilderness. This bestial figure was best exemplified by the character of Conan of Cimmeria, but Conan was not the only wild man to have adventures in the pages of Howard’s fictional worlds. Howard’s idea of the barbarian is in direct contrast to the cultured man of the city, but do the attributes he holds dear have significance in the modern era or are they an anachronism of a testosterone fantasy world?


The barbarian is a larger-than-life figure in Howard’s writing, with savage appetites and almost superhuman physical abilities fostered in him by a life shaped by tempest winds and ravenous beasts, towering peaks and shadowy jungles. He does not know much about the world of men but he does know the world of the claw, the sword and the thundering din of battle. His natural cunning was a match for the most erudite among the city dwellers of the Hyperborean world and was central to his ability to cut through the machinations of the villains that harbored ill will towards him. Most importantly though, he was able to function within the realm of society by sheer force of will, a power only supported by his physicality, but not dependent on it. His simple code of conduct led him to scoff at the weak and ignoble values held by the urban man, allowing him to stand in judgment of their decadent lifestyles and dishonorable way of life.


Considering the “civilized” environment in which most people reside, it could be enlightening to examine the pros and cons of such a value system. Does the barbarian know the peace of mind that the man of the city cannot seem to find? He lives a simple life with intense passion and hearty appetites and seems to enjoy himself in fairly inexpensive pursuits such as whoring, hunting and fighting. His disdain for complicated thought and accommodation to social norms allows him the freedom to act as he sees fit, not compromising his beliefs for anyone.
By examining Robert E Howard’s writing, one can get a sense of his opinion of the barbarian as a more able being, striding through the lives of weak-hearted city dwellers with impunity, sating his lusts where he finds them and squeezing enjoyment out of life at his own accord.

Brand new President?

Ok, so we have a new President as of noon today, eastern standard time, but how much does this actually change for the average American?

The answer in short; not much.

Although I am excited to see the change in our executive branch, this is the equivalent of an social sedative. The problems that existed at 11:59 AM will continue to plague the country and only the most trivial of these burdens will be alleviated. Our culturally ingrained stupidity will be the most significant issue facing a President seemingly in touch with a newer, more vibrant spirit of America.

Hopefully he will be able to find it in himself to question our standardization of retardation.

edit: I am listening to Bad Brains while I write, so I might be channeling something.

Holy shit, they found me

As a member of society, I am in a position to analyze and critique my surroundings in a way that is both unique to my own perspective and similar to others as a human being. While I know that everyone has an opinion, for the most part I could care less what the average citizen thinks about their situation in life. That being said, I believe that every person has their place in the hierarchy of civilized mediocrity, adding to the ever-increasing karmic burden that our species will have to deal with in time.

I see my role as a social critic as an illuminator of things that sit on the outside of our vision. Whether that means unveiling shadowy feelings of dread and discontent or revealing the truly beautiful phenomena that are forgotten is dependent almost entirely on my state of mind at the time of said critique. Normally I am the kind of person that sees the bad in people but the good in situations which makes for a strange combination, but this can also lead to interesting viewpoints through contrast.

There is a definite meaning I am trying to convey through my writing: I don’t really like people. Unfortunately, I find myself in a quandary very often because I am an optimist at heart but I am also a curmudgeonly asshole quite frequently. This air of disbelief in the retardation of humanity I cultivate tends to be palpable around certain individuals or while I experience some aspects of popular culture, i.e. emo kids, reality TV, Britney Spears. I like to think people inherently understand the things I tell them about their terrible lives and why their opinions are wrong, but I always get responses of “But Mike, opinions can’t be wrong.” See, wrong again.