Saturday, July 16, 2005
EXCESS = SUCCESS! The current producers of TV programs seem to be convinced that success stems from excess. That's the feeling one gets as we are beset with "new" shows built roughly on the ultimate levels achieved by the dying season. How rough can we be and hope to get by with doing so? The American people, they insist, also equate excess with success. The idea of incorporating some "reality" in the sometimes fanciful TV programs of our times, was hardly a new idea, but it was one which served to arouse exciting potential in many areas. Most of them, merely in order to stay alive long enough to be counted, turned, from their start- up efforts, to excessive presentations of the worst aspects of every seamy facet of life they came to dwell upon. Initially, some of the better ones stayed "physical." They went to extremes in showing just how much the human body could withstand - hard work, unusual feats accomplished under the most soul-searing circumstances one might imagine . Those early shows set forth the idea that man surviving the worst Nature could throw their way by letting the cast of persons taken to what was supposed isolation on an always adequate and readily available topically-terrained and mountainous island haven which was biologically blessed with effusive animal, vegetable and mineral life in natural and mutated forms. Each episode proffered exotic and common worms, bugs, beetles, and other such wonders.. It proved to be amazing what a human will eat when money is set forth in sufficient quantities. It did not long remain "daring".It quickly proved to become disgusting. Other types of shows got with the changes quickly. Some well-established quiz and panel shows quickly upped their antes so contestants could get more take-home money and gifts. Home shows which had been redoing rooms, now took to remodeling entire homes for free in a frenzy of makeovers. Commercial mentions have increased, as well. Where you used to make-do with six or eight spots you now get ten or twelve spots padded expertly with public service and station romo spots telling of an excess of excesses forthcoming. Get ready. Over stock on your coffee(s), your pop-corns(s) and your sugar(s). A.L.M. July 16, 2005 [c390wds]
Friday, July 15, 2005
SAYING , "THANK YOU" When you have a pleasant experience in life, should say: "Thank You" to someone. I am happy to report that I find the old-fashioned bit of etiquette still being taught to children. Instructions in doing so start early and well before the child can talk. It is usually undertaken as a parental duty for two purposes: one is the seriously undertaken task of teaching the youngster to show appreciation for special treats afforded them by relatives - close and distant who have a marked tendency to hold it against a child unto adulthood if they did not say "Thank you" for a bar of smelly soap given to them in babyhood. The usual method for teaching an infant politeness in such cases is to grasp the gift in the child's hands and extend out toward the giver while, all the while urging the child to say "" Ta, Ta, Aunt or Uncle So-and-So!". "Ta,.Ta " was a favorite of mind. I always considered it to be strictly childish prattle until I found shipped to England during World War Two and hear "Ta" as a commonly used bit of English short-talk meaning -"Thank you very much." and other vaguely related and needly elongated expressions. The simply abbreviated word "ta" took care of a multiple number of linguistic needs. The child will respond in many cases by gurgling, cooing or by knocking the gift from your hand and send it clattering across the floor. You can expect some reaction most of the time and you can feel you are making progress. All of this tends to remind us of the many times we should have said "thank you" and failed to do so for one reason or another. Then, set about changing all that. Make yourself a simple list of all the good things which happened to you recently. The first thing that will be your discovery of how long such a list becomes - and quickly, too. We all have more good things happening than bad ones but the recognition factors are, perhaps, not as clear. It may be that you read a good book recently. That book was written by an author- a man or a woman - and they'd like to know how you felt about what they had set down for you to read. If you liked the book, why not write a simple saying so? If you did not like the book, don't write. That would be adding a harsh note to another person's day. Give a little more daily time to thinking about all the musicians, artists, actors, and supporting people for all of them, who work hard all their days to please you. Tell them what you like about what they do and oddly enough, they will try to do even better to supply you with such treasures. There are hundreds of people out there - the butchers, the bakers as well as he candlestick makers - who never hear a word of appreciation from those who thrive in their creative work. I, personally, have learned from doing that which I am now suggesting you might wish to try to do. I have learned from doing much of hat which I'm telling you now. Try to give a little more time and effort. It is a rewarding experience in many ways, especially as one grows old then, older and begins to marvel how it has come to be that so many people have been so good to you over the years. Start now. Say "Ta, Ta" to someone today! A.L.M. July 16, 2005 [c605wds]
Thursday, July 14, 2005
IS THERE AN END? The continued troubles we all continue to face daily throughout the Middle Eastern nations and, potentially, and several others in various areas around the world, make it seem that it is time for some basic changes in the manner in which we do things. If the factions concerned have not decided to call a halt to their disruptive tactics is up to this time, then, it seems highly unlikely they will ever achieve any lasting peace. Drastic changes are needed. It is true, of course, that these are not new problems and that the underlying causes are mixed into a complicated series of historical occurances far removed from the realities of our own day. It is difficult to re-do history. Some try it, but few are successful in any marked degree in such a dream project. When it is obvious that an incident is based on something which took place centuries ago, is it not possible to rewrite the basic ground rules so it can be dealt with as something of a freakish nature? Just because your Uncle Smedley wore a bow tie around his fat neck does not mean that his nephews must do the same thing today. Could be, I wonder, if "we" have miss-misinterpreted history and that some of the events said to have taken place, and conditions which are thought to have existed years ago were not as devastating as they may seem to have been? To assume, for instance, that the "Holy Land", belongs to one group or to another, depends a great extent on who is telling the tale and from what perspective. The truth is often left untold, as we trust in factional accounts. Certain such questions as this may be brought before a world court of some type for a "ruling" on the subject which might help the cause of peaceful co-existence. Is such world bodies as the United Nations organizations can not be used in such cases of what value are they to us? I agree that this sounds too much like our own "Special Prosecutors" setups to be practical if might prove valuable in bringing such problems before a world wide audience who are concerned in some way. Just because things are accepted, or tolerated, does not mean they are good. Just because people have had dreams of homeland dreams and aspirations does not give them a right to usurp lands claimed by others. We have far too many groups with us today who claim to merit national status just because they exist, but who are, in very few ways, ready or qualified for self-rule. The number of "nations" - so called - which now glut the UN roles is a disgrace. We may well take some steps toward defining what a "nation" must be to be called one and expect to act in accordance with such justification. It is time to put our international "think tanks" to work on problems of mutual concern to all of us instead of hedging them about narrow parochial concerns. A re-evaluation of international precepts is needed. We can no longer afford to make decisions based which are based on 18th or 19th century beliefs, theories and aspirations. A.L.M. July 14, 2005 [c553wds]
Wednesday, July 13, 2005
OTHER WORLDS Sooner or later someone is going to ask you if you believe there are other "civilizations" - somewhere out there in the expanse of the Universe? When they do, what will your answer be? I have already been asked the question many times and my answer is "Yes, I do." But, if I have the opportunity to add a thought, I say that so much depends on exactly how we define a "civilization". What we call by that name is much more than just the existence of human life - or, something close akin to it -.which some people mean, I suppose, when they ask the question. A civilization is a complex thing developed over centuries and never really perfected, I think, if we go by the examples we have set here on Earth. I also think that many of those asking about it really want to be told is that the civilization way out there in space is not as "good" as ours. A few would like to think of it as being "better", but that cuts off the brag instinct which comes so naturally to most of us. We tend to think that our version of being civilized is,naturally, a good thing,but since we have only our selves to compare it with - and no inter-galactic counterpart which which to compare or contrast it, we are never quite sure about our possible standing on a scale of, let's say, one-to-ten. We would like to think of our best as being better than anything the other side of nowhere has yet devised. We are a superior lot, we feel, by nature. Otherwise, we would not have been able to achieve what we have thus far. Wed often have a very narrow view of "civilization", too - and as we think or the American brand; the Englishman thinks somewhat differently, perhaps, as does the ancient Greek, Roman, Sumerian, Egyptian not to mention the Aztec, Mayans and an endless assorted of Oriental and African cultures. Since we have survived, (thus far) we feel we must be better than those which have gone before. We are plural, too, remember. As mankind's adventures down through the ages show, leaders were often at the head of things but the civilization was a group effort involving masses of people. Cultural divisions formed in a maze of , sometimes, conflicting ideas, and out of it came both advancements for civilization as well as set-backs. If you were called upon to describe our civilization, what you end up with could be far from flattering. Regardless of how well-formed much of it appears to be , there are flaws. Our "place" among civilizations, if others do exist, may not be as secure as we like to think it would be, and that worries some people who think along these line lines, perhaps, too much. Those who think of little else, end up writing books which scare the civilized pants off of the rest of us at times. Don't take it all too seriously. Our Creator never did or does anything without sufficient reason for doing so. A.L.M. July 13, 2005 [c531wds]
Tuesday, July 12, 2005
OSTEEN'S FUTURE Now that longtime favorite Billy Graham is hanging up the title, there is quite a semi-rough and tumble controversy going on as to who will be come our next national "chaplain" or "favorite evangelist", or whatever unofficial title you feel is comfortable. We are on the edge of prime national snit if the "None At All" factions get their bladders all a -bubble and refuse to allow even a quasi-official association of religious guidance being associated in any way with our government. It cannot be denied that the Reverend Billy Graham has for many years, through various administrations, been a profound influence on our leadership. I have always been assured of its positive, enduring and worthwhile values and rather pleased and puzzled, as well, to see that other faiths and protestant denominations could concede, one might put it, that Graham's Presbyterian and Calvinistic background - a provocative mix in itself - was generally acceptable. They did not take overt exceptions to any denominational views or historical accounts mar the relationship of church and state. How is it that when we keep those two words - "church" and "state" - in lower case lettering no one gets excited. But if the first letter are printed as "caps" - wow! - the feathers hit the fan and a real storm blows up! The determination of who will be our new, national religion rouser You have seen the polls. Vote for your favorite. Mine is Joel Osteen. I have just finished reading his latest book: "Your Best Life Now". It is a fresh, vibrant and very readable book centered, as one might expect, on the more cheerful aspects of the Christian life style. He enlarges on seven basic steps by which we can gain full control of our lives and realize our full potential. The book has been on the New York "Times" Best Sellers list for weeks. That is a recommendation in itself but not so monumental when you stop think about it. At best "best seller" means one-per cent of American have purchased a copy of the book. That's fine. It's a good start and generally taken to be a good sign of enduring quality of publication. Get a copy. Read it. Watch the wavering list. Your choice may be more difficult than you think it might be. There's a raft of impressive talent out there this time around, too. It is International this year, as well. In the latest poll I have seen the Rev. Franklin Graham, Billy Graham's son, has been running as the leading favorite and notice who is gaining on him in tally-after-tally? Right! My favorite - Joel Osteen. Make your choice and let your it be known. Stress why you think one might be better for the nation over all others. A.L.M. July 12, 2005 [c472wds]
Monday, July 11, 2005
NOT AS BAD AS... The comparative manner in which people are describing the season's initial hurricane is not the best way to start off the season along the Gulf Coast. To simply put it all aside by saying it was "not as bad a previous one" is not the best way to go. It depends on a large extent on who got hit! I have heard a beginning figure quoted which puts damage from "Dennis" at "around one billion." Excess water was still standing in the streets at that time and few people had ?not returned to their coastal property, so we had yet another case of estimates from afar according to what someone saw in TV. It is impossible to estimate the costs of such natural disasters. much of the "damage" inflicted upon residents this time were tissue temporarily covering wounds from last year's major hurricanes. For various reasons many sites have not yet been restored. Some beach front structures were simply too far gone to merit salvage; others were what might be called "Junior" portions of "Senior" losses and owners had not, as yet,had either time or money to get their property cleaned up as yet. Some suc unfinished clean-up job from last year were ready and waiting for "Dennis" to strip them apart again because of governmental red tape which had delayed relief funds. You may have noticed how frequently FEMA personnel or pushers worked themselves into conversatoions concerning how to get ready to face "Dennis" -the worst one yet!" That which has long been our prime example on survival under intense, repeated danger was echoed this week when we saw English men and women at Underground stations and in the the streets facing Terrorist's bombs. Perhaps you noticed their intense observance of authority; the common needs of all, and the necessity for teamwork - thinking and acting in unified groups. ? We learn as we are living out such moments. The very doing of it enables us, with experience, to get better at it, too. ? Teamwork - with someone, knowingly or not, also demands hate. We must know what we dislike. We must know how to hate and distrust those elements in the social mix which might lead us away from our goals. Teams, working together in many ways, do far better at that maneuver than individuals. With whom are you currently working? A.L.M. July 11, 2005 [c406wds]
Sunday, July 10, 2005
LOOK, MA! NO BUTTONS! Now, just when I have about become used to getting along very well in a "push-button" world the "Bose" boys bring out a fine new, home super audio system which features a total lack of buttons across the front. Not a button, lever, arm, toggle or touch area! All such operating aids are to be found on a "remote control" said to be about the size of a credit card assuming, of course, that you can find it. Merely calling a gadget a "control" seems to be enough to assure it being missing at the exact moment it is most needed? When was it you last lost a remote control unit for TV, music box or automotive door that was not immediately needed? I realize all this, of course, is deemed to be "progress and I'm in favor of that, but, as usual, I have some difficulty fitting progressive thing things into my rather static way of accepting things progressive. It takes a while, before I become accustomed to such changes. I think a great may people feel the same way; not opposed to change but comfortable for a time when established rules and regulations are being modified or expelled. I rather like having a bunch of buttons and dials to tend to went I'm showing how I do something. The more it looks like the control board of a B-747 the better I like it even though I may not understand all it can do. We, at one time, could enjoy toggles, switches, latches, and other means of bring about sudden exchanges or modifications. I remember quite well how our old Atwater-Kent table model radio with an imposing Bedouin round horn on or of its black, crackled-finished metal case case, would - at my bidding - keep right on playing a sprightly "Coon Saunder's Night Hawks" number,beer from Kansas City even after I had pulled the electricity plug form the wall outlet. It was a what was said to be self -regenerative, or something like that, but having knobs to turn, switches to throw and wheels to spin helped, put on a better show and making it all happen. That was much more impressive than the old, discarded oatmeal box old oatmeal carton of rounded cardboard which held the first crystal radio ever heard. We heard some fine static out of Schenectady and Philadelphia made possible as I recall gently sliding a short piece of wire along an extended wire strand. When push button mechanisms came in, we went wild for awhile. Yessirre, Bob! Them was the times! Dials, buttons, switches and now - we're back to nuthin'! But, it has happened pretty much the same in other fields of mankind's endeavors, as well. Take, for instance, the case of olden times when two primitive men happened to meet at the one log which had formed a bridge by falling across the creek, had to decide, by combat, who was going to cross first. Each selected[a sturdy stick from the forest and they violently would seek to flail each other other into the flood swept creek beneath them! We have made real progress in that one ever since "Star Wars". Now, we see our two men in deadly combat hitting at each other - not with heavy sticks but,rather light sticks. We have come a full cycle of some sort, it would seem. You just watch: control buttons will be back some day. A.L.M July 10, 2005 [c586wds]
|
