A Discussion on Setting and the Attraction of Canada

On the subject of the attraction of Canada:

Being told that the country I live in isn't "sexy", and therefore does not sell products, is odd. Putting aside the triteness of the all-encompassing "sex sells" business maxim...this controversial statement spills over into my own self-image. Am I contributing to the lack of appeal in Canada? Guilt by association, theoretically if all Canadians were sexy then there would be no problem, website posts like these are boring, you're doing it to yourself without even noticing...

...Or is it the varied ecospheres of Canada? The flat prairies, the cold and uninviting north territories, the endless uniform trees?

Is it the fact that we're considered an integrated rather than an assimilated society? And based on that, the idea that we have no real identity of our own and rely on the US and the rest of the globe to further our own cultural progress?

Is it the notion that we're all considered docile and polite, with the exception of middle-aged Canadian women whom are thought to be loud and ignorant?

Is it how some artists based in Canada and trying to break into the US don't outwardly express their Canadian heritage? (which can actually work for Canada's benefit when the band is awful, even though the truth eventually comes out)

Or is it the lack of recognition as to what happens in a Canadian city? Our cities haven't been explored in art and media to the extent that cities like Tokyo or England have. And they lack the mystery which unknown cities like Antananarivo (capital of Madagascar) have. Canadian cities seem to be unknown, but who would want to know them?


On the subject of setting:

Robert McKee writes in Story that a precise setting in a story will give way to more possibilities and appeal, as opposed to a broad and unspecified setting which limits expression.
This is important when trying to write a story about Canada. In my opinion - the crucial aspects of setting are how appealing and relatable it is. The problem is, how do you write about a certain Canadian setting if people won't find it appealing?


My thoughts on these two matters:

The problem of writing an appealing Canadian setting has plagued me for awhile. Of course it's possible to write within a specific, unknown, seemingly boring Canadian setting - Alice Munro has done it repeatedly to great success.
The issue of setting doesn't limit her simply because her stories are so complex and absorbing that people pay the setting no real mind, not thinking to themselves of all the conceptions about Canada which I listed above.

Still, it seems that the odds are weighed against Canadian writers. The Life of Pi for example is considered a Canadian book but describes Canada as full of people with bad haircuts, and not really much else. It takes a lot to have the talent which Alice Munro wields, or yields, I don't know which. To base a story in a boring Canadian landscape and not have it reflect that boredom could be a difficult task. Of course it's a battle.

But it's not impossible to imagine a great love story based in the prairies of Saskatchewan or Alberta. Just because the audience doesn't have an awareness or interest in the prairies, that doesn't mean it can't be instilled if the story is written well enough. To say there's no sexual appeal in the Canadian prairies is inherently ridiculous just because of how it looks on the surface. Canadian authors who base their work solely in, New York City because it's well-known and everyone wants to go there, is weak to me. Of course a Canadian author can base stories in New York, but to try and capitalize on it without any mention of their own country/background is fake.

Any setting can be attractive. It's based on how the characters perceive and interact with it. But - I would argue that a setting doesn't need to be the central part of a story, because if a story focuses too much on a setting which no one really knows, it will eventually become tiresome and alienate the reader.

Of course an author may think, "What can I really do with this setting? What goes on here which is different and dangerous? How can I make this setting something which people will take a step back and re-consider, and actually get into?" It's something I struggle with...trying to write a story in Toronto while not thinking it's only going to appeal to Canadians. That's where research and imagination come in.

Lynx

The lynx, one of my favourite animals.

Elusive and stylish.

I was surprised to find out that in inhabits areas in both western Canada and Spain (the Iberian lynx), two very different climates.

I wonder if this scene ever happened: a young man walking around the outskirts of Ibiza as the sun begins to rise, after the most hedonistic, devastating and fortunate party experience of his life. He sits on the ground, and sees a lynx staring at him from far away. The lynx stares, then leaves, and the young man watches it go...and then starts running, chasing it.

The difference between Toronto and Ottawa

Specifically, the rivalry. The clash, which runs deeper than drunken hockey shouting matches and brawls and Leafs graffiti sprayed in public parks in Ottawa.

Having lived in Ottawa from 2006 - 2008 (as well as spending my childhood there, yet I didn't notice the rivalry at that time) and currently living in Toronto, I've sensed a divide between the two Ontario cities. It could be easy to say that the rivalry stems from basic differences such as Ottawa having the status as Canada's capital whereas Toronto is only Ontario's capital, and the Canada Day celebration in Ottawa is way better, but that's not the deepest it sinks.

Toronto's obviously larger population equals more opportunity. And when I worked as a dishwasher in Ottawa I repeatedly heard people talk about what there really is in Ottawa - what oportunity could be capitalized on, and what room for growth there is aside from the governmental avenues. I remember reading an issue of the Ottawa Xpress wherein an artist was defending his move from Ottawa to Toronto, with the article praising the artist's seemingly imminent rise to fame. I haven't heard of him since moving here, but then again I haven't been paying attention to the art scene that closely. I never really was, though. All I remember was that the article seemed to be aware of the hostility which would be lobbied against the artist for moving.

When I was living in Ottawa a friend of mine said that she would move to Toronto because she wanted to see life at all hours of the night, to see people and vibrancy. And she said I could go anywhere and do anything, that I didn't have anything holding me back. And Ottawa has been compared to Winnipeg, where the small size of the city makes people know each other indirectly. Whenever I visit Winnipeg I almost always see people I've met or seen before. Although a smaller city, like a smaller college or university, can also lead to less impersonality between people since it's more tight-knit. Some people like that. I like that, but I don't think it's impossible to find a tight-knit group of people in a large city. The idea of pursuing artistic endeavours to the extent where you lose your desire to get to know and appreciate other people is disturbing, even though a necessary trait of any art is solitude.

The standard of living is also an important factor. Just as Toronto is thought to loook down on Ottawa, people from NYC or LA probably look down on Toronto. But I met people from NYC and they said Toronto is much better, and I've heard from an intelligent former native Californian that it's every liberal American's dream to move to Canada. As as enticing as living in NYC is, I wouldn't want to deal with mice, cockroaches, bedbugs, thieves, pollution, overly crowded streets, expensive items and living expenses, being looked down on for being Canadian, and other issues that would continually arise in order to live in NYC or LA. How much of my personal well-being would I have to sacrifice in order to say "I live in New York City" ? That's where I see Ottawa as having an edge over Toronto - the allure of a large city doesn't always match the toll it takes on your body and mind. I get stressed out here...but I got stressed out living by myself in Ottawa as well.

At different literary events I've heard the speakers make odd allusions to Ottawa which has sent the audience chuckling. I mean odd in the sense that they weren't being insulting. I can't remember what they said, unfortunately - all I remember is the vibe they created.

But this was the first sign that tipped me off about the tension between the cities: when I first moved to Ottawa I was walking around the Byward Market and saw a large banner that said TORONTO APPRECIATION DAY, but in front of this banner there was only a single little man hitting a small drum in a discordant manner. There was also a guy with a large camera filming him and also people's reactions.
Most people were just puzzled, but I saw the humour in it - the man hitting the drum represented the amount of appreciation people living in Ottawa (Ottawan, though I don't like that term) held for Toronto.
I laughed as I walked by and took it in, and the cameraman smiled and filmed me. I wonder where the footage went. Ruminating on it now, I wonder if the battle is continuing in the same media format, or different.

What was I going to achieve by continuing to live in Ottawa? What would've happened to me if I'd have stayed there? Walking through the Rideau Centre (this is another trait of Canadian cities - they all have a mall which marks the downtown core, somethng that Ottawa and Toronto share), I remember seeing a large poster for nuclear power, touting its benefits. This unnerved me slightly, like seeing a gun shop in the States for the first time.
Did/does Ottawa rely on nuclear power? I didn't know and still don't. But I felt that Toronto held more literary opportunity, and so I moved here. The city of Ottawa is laid out perfectly, its architecture, museums, streets, the parks, Hog's Back Park, the way to Hull...despite the fact that Ottawa was originally built on top of a swamp, it's lovely. I didn't have good luck with people there though, which was also part of the reason why I left. Yet Toronto held more allure for me and still does, even though I'd feel off wearing a Blue Jays cap.

Edit: but now, on April 9th, 2013, I'd feel comfortable wearing the cap. It is a great city.

I - the Play, SummerWorks Festival 2011

I have a role in the play I, which is part of the SummerWorks Festival here in Toronto for 2011, and it's been great to have been a part of it so far. The Pulse Theatre Collective produced the play - written and directed by David Hersh and starring Emannuelle Zeesman - and their website can be found by clicking here.


The play is about a young female writer named Eugenia who moves to Paris (leaving her family and friends behind) to write her magnum opus. She meets the ghost of the playwright, who goes by the name of I, whom she's looked up to since childhood and he proceeds to become her mentor, although he quickly becomes tiresome and then eventually a threat.

My role in the play is small - I'm part of the Chorus and we represent I's mind. Which is a great concept, representing a ghost's mind. We're the ghosts within the ghost, it could be said.

I (the play) is metafictional and intertextual as it's based on a play by Eugène Ionesco. What appeals to me about the play is the role of I himself, who's played by David Macniven. I (the character) is self-aggrandizing, self-unaware and uninformed of basic concepts such as different religions, and cannot treat Eugenia with the respect and intelligence she bestows on him, instead baiting her into allowing him to play more games with her. Although this is interlaced with humour (and the play is very witty and funny, with an Abbot and Costello wraparound style)it still reflects on the character of I in a greater sense.

Because I gives Eugenia advice which is fundamental for success in writing, yet due to the nature of his character it wouldn't seem as though Eugenia would be apt to take it. I tells Eugenia that writing is a discipline, and that it needs to be done continuously - which reflects the advice I stumbled upon from the artist Chuck Close not too long ago.
Yet with all the stress Eugenia has to endure through I's mentorship, and his lack of real knowledge, it would be easy to cast aside his advice and just to do what she wants and feels.

To me this ties in closely to a parent-child relationship, where a parent might not know everything and can repel their children against their (maybe hard-fought) advice. And it also relates to the general idea of an author, and how some people look to them for the answers to all their questions.

Sometimes the artist is better off not known. There can be a transformation from an icon to a human being. Autonomy. I delves into this, albeit in a humorous fashion. Just throwing away all of our impressions and forging our own path is what Eugenia and I represent and also showcases the parent-child relationship where a growing child can decide not to follow the path of their parent. The rebellious artist, not knowing what will come of their endeavours. But if they stick with it, as I advises to, they can succeed.

I also tells Eugenia of what it takes to separate literature (wheat) from books (chaff). How a book has to either be someone cherishes or despises. And what would an author really want to create? One or the other or both? So these opposite ends of the spectrum graduate a book into literature. Which I think is sound advice to give to a young author because reading is only worthwhile if it sparks emotion and intellect.

Modeling

I've been doing some modeling recently, and I'm represented by the Fulcher Agency here in Toronto.

My modeling website can be found by clicking here.

Modeling and writing don't seem to go hand in hand. One is considered vapid and the other intellectual (or for some, pseudo-intellectual). And I wrote earlier that I don't post too many pictures of myself here because it makes me feel self-ingratiating and self-absorbed.

But I've decided to try out modeling for a change of pace in jobs. After so much manual labour I'd like to make some money doing something fun. And do I really have to justify myself when it comes to this? I know what the boundaries of good taste are when it comes to modeling, and I'm not going to do anything embarrassing which people can look to in the future and ridicule and call me out on. I'm well aware of how someone's image can be tarnished and how public opinion can be swayed.

And it could be argued that there's no potential for literary growth in modeling. That it doesn't add breadth of experience which can contribute to a solid story. But I personally believe that all the arts should be interconnected. I act, I take photos, I play guitar, I paint. Although modeling might not be considered an artform, it relies on artforms in order to grow.

Modeling is not a question of narcissism. I know I'm not the best-looking model. I'm grounded. But it's all cool.

Opinions...

It was recently mentioned to me by a good friend of mine that "All writing is opinion."

I don't fully agree with this, but then that's just my opinion.

We all know what opinions are like. So then everyone has one, and everyone is entitled to one. Which reminds me of the case against vanity publishing, wherein people will freely publish what they want and there won't be any filter of quality. Who's to say that my opinion is better than yours, however researched and polished it may be? It's yours, because the events in your life have moulded it to be so. A person's opinions could be said to play an integral part in who they are, and why should someone's identity (and stability as a result) be compromised to adopt an opinion which will force them to re-think and take steps backwards?

These are all questions I have as well.

Literature wholly comprised of opinion is a disturbing thought to me. What about the stories which were meant to function solely as stories without morals or what the author thinks? Is that possible?

If the question is what kind of literature do I value, that which is rebellious and subversive or that which isn't challenging and depicts common everyday aspects of life in clever and poignant ways which I previously haven't thought of...the answer would be both.
Both can be based on opinion and both can allow readers to glean their own meanings from the texts. But would they be better without?

Throughout this post I've gotten very tired of discussing something which has no answer and only leads to more dead-end questions. Which I suppose is the apotheosis of bad writing. So it would be best to stop now...

...on style and practicality.

...and instead point out various elements of society which, in my opinion, shouldn't exist. Is this necessary? Does memorable literature tie into a blog post about bad trends? Most likely not. Should I overthink it? I feel like writing about it, so I may as well get it out of my system. I'm human, and this is the age I was born into, and in media-saturated times it's important to have a critical edge.
But still - for me, people can do and wear what they want. If they're judged by someone else, does it matter? No. Do what you want, live for yourself. Is true wisdom found in the strict classification of people who do certain things - how their entire future and entire output in life can be determined solely by certain little things they do or what they wear?

Some would say so. Some would also say that wisdom entails knowing all the characteristics of a certain ethnicity, knowing exactly how and why a person will act as a result.

But nevertheless there are still things that irritate me. To wit:


I saw someone wearing these on the subway some time ago. I along with other passengers were just staring. Because these shoes look absolutely ridiculous. There seems to be a push in today's world (or at least in North America) to be "futurized". I've previously discussed how authors (journalists) make attempts to create new words that sound stupid in order to "progress". Ugly shoes like this are the same thing.


Don't drink bottled water. Please don't. Buy a water filter and a water bottle and fill it up.
The sad part is that I've only just done this recently in terms of using a water bottle when I go out to exercise or skate. I rarely buy bottled water but when I do I feel like I've degraded the world just a little bit more. Which of course I have because bottled water is detrimental to the globe as a whole.



Not only Christmas music...
...but all music played in department stores and grocery stores.
I don't have social anxiety disorder. I'm comfortable in public. But I have to take my MP3 player with me when I go into these places because it's very uncomfortable to have to listen to the story of a lover's broken heart told through trite guitar riffs and high-pitched warbling singing as I'm looking for a mop and bucket. There's something wrong with that to me.
The emotion that these songs attempt to convey do not translate into a run-of-the-mill shopping experience at all. Not that the music I listen to is about run-of-the-mill shopping experiences whenever I enter Zellers. But I don't think people who enjoy the music or find something in it as they shop are wrong for doing so, I just find it personally uncomfortable.



I don't see the fixed gear bike (I hear they're fun) or plaid long-sleeved lumberjack shirt on here.
I can't stand being thought of as fitting into the hipster persona. I'm not trying to follow trends anymore, I'm not a teenager. I wear what's classic. I wear old-school Vans and I drink PBR sometimes. I wear hoodies rarely; they're more sporty than trendy though. I wear a painters cap with a Kansas City Royals logo on it and wear V-necked white shirts. Does this all mean I'm a hipster? Or is it separate elements combined with my youth which could make people label me as a hipster? Isn't it sad when people automatically fit you into a corner based on their assumptions and don't want to slightly try and see you as a human being? Or worse, they get to know you and still fit you into a corner despite your three-dimensionality?



The word "your" does not replace "you're". It doesn't matter. Right? Extinction of grammar through technology, it doesn't matter. Is the internet dumbing us down and reducing our attention spans? That's how it feels at times, but we can make the internet what we want it to be. But going with the flow and dumbing yourself (not you'reself, the way people mistake it) down in order to be in tune with the majority should not be the preferred choice. Neither should putting oneself on a pedestal and claiming to be better than most of the world due to not going with the flow, either. I just prefer to have things tighter than looser. Keep it tight, keep it focused.

And that's it for now.

Memories of the homeless asking for change

Back when I was nine, I visited Toronto for the first time with my mother during the summer of 1994 and saw a Native homeless man asking for change on the street. A black man came up to him and said "Of course" and gave him some money and I was struck at how polite and gracious he was. Later on that same trip I rode the subway for the first time and saw two kids sitting opposite myself and my mother, with one of them shaping his fingers into a pistol, pointing them to everyone around him including the two of us, and going "bang bang bang".

When I was eleven and living in Winnipeg I bought a Big Gulp from a Seven-Eleven, but I couldn't drink all that soda. There was a man sitting on the curb outside of the store, and I gave the drink to him. He responded by saying "It's too big, it's too big" and my mother laughed but I was genuninely angry with how he responded - that he wasn't thankful and instead critical of getting something for free. If he was joking, I couldn't tell at the time.

When I was nineteen I drove to a beer vendor and bought a 12-pack case of PBR beer in bottles. The bottled beer didn't taste good to me but there was nowhere else to buy PBR in the city. I didn't know what to do with all the beer I'd bought. I didn't have anyone to drink it with and I couldn't bring it home. Driving through Osborne Village, downtown Winnipeg where I lived, there was someone sitting on the sidewalk asking for change; after I saw him I parked the car behind a building on the street, then brought the entire case of beer and gave it to him. I said something like "It doesn't taste that good" but he was so appreciative of it that he didn't care. I saw him a couple of days later on the street and he smiled and gave me a nod of thanks. I was always charitable, I still am.

A story of a story - back when I was a teenager, two kids I knew told me of a window-washer on the corner who had a sackful of change sitting in a bus stop. He told them that he had to keep running from thugs who would chase him with bats and steal all the change he'd received.

The homeless in Ottawa are rampant and when I was living there it felt like a parallel to Washington D.C.. A couple of years ago I came out of a Giant Tiger close to the city centre and two destitute men asked me for change. I responded by saying I didn't have any money, and they insisted that I did. So I insulted them and walked away while they came up with weak insults to fire back with. A little later on I saw a man become angry with a pedestrian because she wouldn't give him money.

A little while ago I was here in downtown Toronto walking past Union Station with a girl who'd later fight me and try to pull my hair out. We passed a homeless man sitting on the street asking for change and she looked into her purse. I told her that homeless people choose their lifestyle - there's a better way to live but they've made the choice to ask for change and live off of other people. By giving them change we only promote them to no go out and try to make a better quality of life for themselves. But I didn't try to stop her from giving him money, I only said it to give a new perspective.

There've been times where I've wanted to request a dance in exchange for the money, and the homeless man or woman and I would perform a spontaneous, perfectly choreogrpahed dance through downtown. Of course I never have.

"You can always depend on the kindness of strangers". This phrase should never become archaic. But it shouldn't justify panhandling.

Syllogism

A equals X

X equals Y

A equals Y : definition of a syllogism.


Logic and order. You don't read a book backwards. Sentences shouldn't have words that are unnecessary. Paragraphs shouldn't have sentences that are unnecessary. Just like with music - there shouldn't be notes that don't have to be there. Everything is focused. The craft of writing can be understood, but not the soul of writing. Nadine Gordimer, a South African writer who focuses on apartheid, mentioned that creative writing classes did nothing for her because the soul of an artist can't be taught in a classroom.

I've taken a creative writing class before. I sparodically attend a writer's group. I never saw either of these as necessary for my work, I just believed and still believe that it's comforting to be around people who are in some respects the same as me.

Good music -

Old Wives' Tales

* If you still get pimples after 30, you have the skills to build a lawnmower.

* If you're renting a new apartment and the previous tenant is a friend of someone you've seen before but haven't introduced yourself to, you'll eventually break a mirror.

* The best way to cure a broken arm is to start running everywhere you would normally walk to even if you're not in a hurry.

* You will give birth to octuplets if you won a surfboard in a Pepsi under the cap contest.

* A nine-year-old girl can cure chicken pox by trying to drive her parents' vehicle.

* The way to make leaves bloom early in the spring is to start smoking (19th-century logic)

* If you slightly burn yourself on a hot frying pan, an attractive older woman will smile at you someday.

* The best way to find a great new pair of sweatpants is to start pronouncing your "r"s as "w"s. (such as Wingo Staww)

* If you enjoy telling white lies, one day while singing karaoke you'll be ridiculed so badly by a group of teenagers that you'll want to be a teenager. And if you already are a teenager, you'll want to be friends with the teenagers ridiculing you.


Whispering and still, the wives wove the superstitions that we hold close. (but not really)

This is what I look like. There aren't any photos on this website demonstrating that. I honestly don't want to post too many photos of my face or me in general because it gives me a feeling of self-absorption, but one can't hurt.


There are times when writing reminds me of how as children we would place one hand or fist on top of one another to see who would go first in a playground game, like Four Square or Mr. Wolf.

I was nineteen and twenty years old when I wrote Disassociation and I had it published when I was twenty-one. And since then, the range of people's reactions has been fascinating - from people who absolutely don't care to people who want a copy strictly for the purpose of selling it on eBay in the future.

And through it all it always feels like there's a sense of intimidation (an oft-cited word nowadays, like intense and confident - I wonder why that is) that's carried with me whenever the subject's brought up. It feels like because I wrote it, there's a level of expectation that people attach to me and it never feels like I'm fulfilling it. Expectations like having an unmatchably quick wit, having incredible stories at my fingertips to tell whenever I like, of looking into my eyes and seeing innumerable points of wisdom, having a certain swagger, a je ne sais quoi. That certain something that just draws people towards you...which I don't believe in and never will.

Once when I was volunteering in a rest home an elderly woman said "Your eyes, they seem to have so much in them...".

But then again, when I was volunteering in a different rest home I walked by an old man who looked at me and kept saying "It's all your fault. It's all your fault."

What I feel I've cultivated with publishing Disassociation is intimidation...and jealousy, which is what I never wanted to follow me. This is why I don't immediately bring it up in conversation - I've noticed how it creates a barrier between people. I can't have any more barriers, but at the same time I don't want my writing life to become a secret identity. This is yet another dichotomy in my life that I've had to contend with.

There's no doubt that the novel is juvenilia, which people generally don't want to read. I don't take offense to people who say they'll buy the book or read the book and then don't - I have my reservations about empty pleasantries but they're par for the course in our society. Even the title itself is challenging - the word 'disassociation' exists but it isn't normally used, the word 'dissociation' is used. I like the challenge of the title, but people could easily see it as a huge spelling error when it wasn't meant to be.

And I've changed since publishing it. I've greatly changed from being a teenager. But I haven't changed drastically.

The life I live has always been lonely, and writing feels like it only increases that pressure. Where the girl whom I'm in love with and is two years younger than I am thinks I'm too sophisticated for her. Where writers are expected to be lonely in order to continually create. I've had to fend off the ugly premonition that I've been alone for so long, I've become too used to being alone.

And people might think I'm revealing my weaknesses, and therefore can't be an artist of any worthwhile measure as a result - with the word 'artist' not conforming to the higher-status platform that others use it for. But this is real.

One of my flaws is that I dwell on the negative too much, and this post reveals that. I've had a lot of support from a lot of people in my life as well. I won't lie, I need people's support in order to maintain my work ethic and drive. Even though I've had to depend on my own resolve a lot more than others, I can't say that all I need is myself. I don't find that healthy.

Rumination on Television

"IT ROTS THE IMAGINATION DEAD" - lyric from an Oompa Loompa song about Mike Teavee's obsession with television, Charlie and the Chocolate Factory

"Television is the opiate of the masses." - Bill Watterson spoof on Karl Marx's famous saying "Religion is the opiate of the masses."

But this is not a rant. None of these posts will ever be rants.

I don't watch TV anymore. Of course I used to until I was about nineteen, but I never set aside a certain amount of time to watch TV except for The Simpsons on Sunday evenings. Then I pretty much stopped because I didn't get cable and the two channels available were fuzzy. When I moved out by myself a year later it was the same deal.

When I was twenty-two I moved into a place with free cable. I watched a couple episodes of Friends and then unplugged the cable, gave it to my landlord, and said I didn't want it in my place because it was distracting.

A year ago when I was working in a bread factory I told a kid I knew, a co-worker, that I didn't watch television and he responded, "So what do you watch when you're high?" I don't get high any more, so I didn't have an answer.

I still think there's value in some television programs, but not for the majority of it. Shows which aren't a variation of philosopher Robert Nozick's Pleasure Machine Thought Experiment, wherein cables are inserted into a person's brain and stimulate the person's neural activity to do nothing but receive pleasure, essentially making the person immobile and lifeless save for the continual feelings of pleasure.

That's not the kind of life anyone sane would want to live...
...and that's not how I view television.

The reason why I stopped watching television is simply because I felt I didn't have time for it any longer. I know for a fact that wanting to create effective literature is not an easy task. It takes a lot of consideration, research and development of style. It's a different discipline than a lot of other facets of life. I stil watch movies, and clips of older TV shows on Youtube. I have a few DVDs of TV shows I liked. I don't watch them that much any longer, but I still have them.

And sometimes I think I should keep watching television due to how it's a meter for current times. But then again the internet can serve as the same.

I can't really imagine what my life would be like now if I hadn't watched television when I was younger. If my parents hadn't let me watch TV at all. I don't know exactly who I'd be - I'd look the same (presumably) but it seems logical that I hypothetically wouldn't be as "in tune" with the rest of the world.

By in tune I mean, for all the years that I abstained from watching TV while my peers did...and going through the motions of dying to watch it in order to fit in as a child, and eventually accepting how I didn't need it, and then becoming very critical of it...it seems that I would be more wary and cynical about developed world culture than I am now. But that's only my initial, unresearched opinion. (And this isn't 'concrete' as William Strunk Jr. and E.B. White would say)

I asked a friend of mine once if he would give up buying a brand-new TV in order to donate the money to an underdeveloped nation and he said no. But before you think my friend is evil, countless other people all over the world have responded the same way, just not out loud.