Hi all!
Yep, I'm alive and well. This is just to update that as I've gotten married, it seems my thoughts have shifted from those of the perplexed single (gone, but not forgotten), to that of human-rationality arbiter. If you're interested, I've picked this up on my new(ish) blog:
http://factpinions.wordpress.com
Same guy, different focus. Hope you enjoy both!
RT
Showing posts with label about me. Show all posts
Showing posts with label about me. Show all posts
Sunday, February 13, 2011
Thursday, July 09, 2009
Thoughts @ 31
Turned 31 a couple hours ago. Some nice plans for the b-day: a show - one of 4 in a week(!), a planned "craaaazy" afterparty.. rehearsals, friends, music. stuff I like.
Had written a post on my 30th which I'd evidently forgot to publish (a little late now, so.. never mind), but in it I tried to describe major changes from the previous year, or just stuff that was on my mind at the time. Let's have a go this time round! So:
The first major change this year was the regular exposure to what had previously been relegated to a status worse than "false" - it had been plain uninteresting to me: religion. Nope, still the same atheist I've been for a while now, but found religious people, as well as the bible, interesting, for the first time. This through a group of friends who meet round the "parshat shavua" once a week, which I stumbled on pretty much by chance. Rather than being the pathetic-bachelor club I suspected it would be, all awkward and transparent, it proved to be a remarkably varied, interesting and intelligent group of people.
So first of all, I was making new friends. This on its own was a novelty because, though I hadn't thought about it, my core group of friends had remained staunchly rooted in my high-school years and my musical exploits. That was it. So the dynamics of becoming friends when you're older, more self-aware and more self-defined, proved interesting on their own. Won't bore with details.
The second aspect of these meetings, as I mentioned, was that religion as such suddenly became interesting. For one thing, just the wildly varying shades of observance and strictness, a terrific quality in Jerusalem, was fascinating. People modern in every way but...; people who look more closed but are actually budding open-ists; and of course people who just genuinely are who they are, different from me in some ways and so similar in others. Combined with this culture of ours, this man-made tradition that for me contains so many clues, pointing at a melting pot of historical circumstance, human psychology, economics, politics and, well, more human psychology, it becomes quite fascinating. The religious text we cover each week with tremendous variety in approach and appraisal, is in itself fascinating for its own circumstance and, yes, its constant drawing power. So that's one thing that's changed.
What's stayed largely the same is the existential realization that hit me so strongly just one year and two days ago. What are we doing here and, more importantly, what am I going to do about, remain in one way or another a preoccupation informing a lot of my perceptions of this world and my life. I'm fascinated by people, what drives them, their follies and their genius; but in all this I still can't formulate a cut-and-dry path that feels right for me.
Something that emerged a little more strongly this year was the focus on the individualistic (as opposed to the universalit) viewpoint. Anyone who tries to hammer out a single, one-size-fits-all doctrine for living - or what is "right" - will earn my immediate suspicion. We are all different people, with very different needs and even basic characteristics. There are totally different mentalities, interests and perceptions amongst people. The breakdown in cultural narratives (believe it or not, I'm not a sociology major), something that always felt a little bit of a shame, now seems more inevitable and plain sensible in today's world. Like it or not, we're no longer the small, nomadic tribes we once were. In fact, every nation on earth has gotten a little too big to be held together by cross-cultural dogma.
I don't say this angrily or with a chip on my shoulder. I'm not trying to violently tear down anything. I personally am not in any way a misanthrope - on the contrary, outside of some private music, pretty much all my lasting, deep enjoyment or contentment comes from people. So it pains me a little when these statements get pigeonholed and somehow make me out as a contrarian, rebel or heretic. I'm just saying - blind beliefs don't work for me. I'm trying to improve our collective future just as much as any socially-minded believer might, in saying these beliefs have to be tailor made. I'll cringe as much as anyone at the shallow, materialistic mentality so often on display (anyone seen the tv-series "Mechubarot"? kvetch kvetch kvetch! geez, when did whine replace personality?) but I'm a firm individualist.
Relationships? Mmm.. Had a few nice shorts, but if we're talking about thoughts and realizations, let's see... what's new, what's new.. Nothing, I think. Just as mystified as ever. Probably a bit more confused, if anything. No sweeping statements or ideas to be made this time around.
And another random update for posterity - this year got me more intellectually interested in trying to characterize and correct the tremendous amounts of plain bull in common economic, social and political thinking. I'm not talking about our leaders - everyone knows what they're full of. I'm talking about regular, otherwise intelligent people: I'm plain bewildered by all the hip-shooting, snap judgment, opinion-as-fact, dramatics-as-evidence, revisionism for its own sake, conservatism for its own sake, and willful ignorance of counterarguments that I come across in ordinary, web-bourne and face-to-face conversation. It's like "reasoning" isn't even in the lexicon...
Mood-wise it's been up and down, but at the end of the day, I'm still more up than down. Thank ? for small pleasures. ;)
Had written a post on my 30th which I'd evidently forgot to publish (a little late now, so.. never mind), but in it I tried to describe major changes from the previous year, or just stuff that was on my mind at the time. Let's have a go this time round! So:
The first major change this year was the regular exposure to what had previously been relegated to a status worse than "false" - it had been plain uninteresting to me: religion. Nope, still the same atheist I've been for a while now, but found religious people, as well as the bible, interesting, for the first time. This through a group of friends who meet round the "parshat shavua" once a week, which I stumbled on pretty much by chance. Rather than being the pathetic-bachelor club I suspected it would be, all awkward and transparent, it proved to be a remarkably varied, interesting and intelligent group of people.
So first of all, I was making new friends. This on its own was a novelty because, though I hadn't thought about it, my core group of friends had remained staunchly rooted in my high-school years and my musical exploits. That was it. So the dynamics of becoming friends when you're older, more self-aware and more self-defined, proved interesting on their own. Won't bore with details.
The second aspect of these meetings, as I mentioned, was that religion as such suddenly became interesting. For one thing, just the wildly varying shades of observance and strictness, a terrific quality in Jerusalem, was fascinating. People modern in every way but...; people who look more closed but are actually budding open-ists; and of course people who just genuinely are who they are, different from me in some ways and so similar in others. Combined with this culture of ours, this man-made tradition that for me contains so many clues, pointing at a melting pot of historical circumstance, human psychology, economics, politics and, well, more human psychology, it becomes quite fascinating. The religious text we cover each week with tremendous variety in approach and appraisal, is in itself fascinating for its own circumstance and, yes, its constant drawing power. So that's one thing that's changed.
What's stayed largely the same is the existential realization that hit me so strongly just one year and two days ago. What are we doing here and, more importantly, what am I going to do about, remain in one way or another a preoccupation informing a lot of my perceptions of this world and my life. I'm fascinated by people, what drives them, their follies and their genius; but in all this I still can't formulate a cut-and-dry path that feels right for me.
Something that emerged a little more strongly this year was the focus on the individualistic (as opposed to the universalit) viewpoint. Anyone who tries to hammer out a single, one-size-fits-all doctrine for living - or what is "right" - will earn my immediate suspicion. We are all different people, with very different needs and even basic characteristics. There are totally different mentalities, interests and perceptions amongst people. The breakdown in cultural narratives (believe it or not, I'm not a sociology major), something that always felt a little bit of a shame, now seems more inevitable and plain sensible in today's world. Like it or not, we're no longer the small, nomadic tribes we once were. In fact, every nation on earth has gotten a little too big to be held together by cross-cultural dogma.
I don't say this angrily or with a chip on my shoulder. I'm not trying to violently tear down anything. I personally am not in any way a misanthrope - on the contrary, outside of some private music, pretty much all my lasting, deep enjoyment or contentment comes from people. So it pains me a little when these statements get pigeonholed and somehow make me out as a contrarian, rebel or heretic. I'm just saying - blind beliefs don't work for me. I'm trying to improve our collective future just as much as any socially-minded believer might, in saying these beliefs have to be tailor made. I'll cringe as much as anyone at the shallow, materialistic mentality so often on display (anyone seen the tv-series "Mechubarot"? kvetch kvetch kvetch! geez, when did whine replace personality?) but I'm a firm individualist.
Relationships? Mmm.. Had a few nice shorts, but if we're talking about thoughts and realizations, let's see... what's new, what's new.. Nothing, I think. Just as mystified as ever. Probably a bit more confused, if anything. No sweeping statements or ideas to be made this time around.
And another random update for posterity - this year got me more intellectually interested in trying to characterize and correct the tremendous amounts of plain bull in common economic, social and political thinking. I'm not talking about our leaders - everyone knows what they're full of. I'm talking about regular, otherwise intelligent people: I'm plain bewildered by all the hip-shooting, snap judgment, opinion-as-fact, dramatics-as-evidence, revisionism for its own sake, conservatism for its own sake, and willful ignorance of counterarguments that I come across in ordinary, web-bourne and face-to-face conversation. It's like "reasoning" isn't even in the lexicon...
Mood-wise it's been up and down, but at the end of the day, I'm still more up than down. Thank ? for small pleasures. ;)
Saturday, March 21, 2009
Dreams Vs. Reality, Round 9
Welcome to the boxing match inside my head: On this corner, weighing in at 300 pounds, pummeling anything in its path - it's Reality! And on this corner, weighing it at [intentionally left blank], looking like the most incredible woman I've ever laid eyes on, it's Dreams! And what a sweet talker she is.. sometimes she can bring reality to it's knees with a few suggestive promises...
I've had this for years, actually. Leave an incredibly loud, chaotic rock show, attended by people 5-10 my junior, at around 3AM, get up for work, And wonder what the hell I'm doing. The next day I'll be fine.. but every once in a while I'll come home, and feel a twinge of longing..
Right now, there are several Israeli bands touring somewhere on another continent. One of them has made a proper "career" out of constant motion - a good 200 or so shambolic shows a year, alternately touring Europe and the States. I seriously doubt they're financially all that profitable; in fact, once they finally take a break - 3+ years and counting of constant touring, those crazy bastards - I wouldn't be surprised if they come back more or less breaking even. But they will have lived; made use of their time on this earth. Their reality is my dream. and every once in a while it completely kills me.
I was on a tour a couple years ago, and just thrived on the change of scenery, the disconnect from "normal" life, the parties, the little stories, the nighttime stillness at a truck-stop in Montana. An incredible adventure.
Standing between me and this is my own rationality, and my own penchant for - how ironic is this? - stability. I'm well and truly split. I do the day job thing well. It's not my favorite thing in the world to do, and I certainly don't define myself by it, but I do do it well, and there's a degree of comfort I've learned to appreciate. Still, out there is this chaotic, crazy existence beckoning me, where you literally live off your music and have no idea what tomorrow brings. Brilliant. To do it, though, I would have to poke a pretty big hole in my reality - really make some fundamental changes, and some significant sacrifices to boot...
Dreams and reality. As time goes on, one seems more and more to preclude the other. And as I move into my 30s it becomes obvious I have to take some kind of stand, do a leap of faith. I've got two polar directions to leap and two voices in my head battling it out in a long, on-again-off-again, grueling battle.
So far I'm still watching, but this fight is getting ugly...
I've had this for years, actually. Leave an incredibly loud, chaotic rock show, attended by people 5-10 my junior, at around 3AM, get up for work, And wonder what the hell I'm doing. The next day I'll be fine.. but every once in a while I'll come home, and feel a twinge of longing..
Right now, there are several Israeli bands touring somewhere on another continent. One of them has made a proper "career" out of constant motion - a good 200 or so shambolic shows a year, alternately touring Europe and the States. I seriously doubt they're financially all that profitable; in fact, once they finally take a break - 3+ years and counting of constant touring, those crazy bastards - I wouldn't be surprised if they come back more or less breaking even. But they will have lived; made use of their time on this earth. Their reality is my dream. and every once in a while it completely kills me.
I was on a tour a couple years ago, and just thrived on the change of scenery, the disconnect from "normal" life, the parties, the little stories, the nighttime stillness at a truck-stop in Montana. An incredible adventure.
Standing between me and this is my own rationality, and my own penchant for - how ironic is this? - stability. I'm well and truly split. I do the day job thing well. It's not my favorite thing in the world to do, and I certainly don't define myself by it, but I do do it well, and there's a degree of comfort I've learned to appreciate. Still, out there is this chaotic, crazy existence beckoning me, where you literally live off your music and have no idea what tomorrow brings. Brilliant. To do it, though, I would have to poke a pretty big hole in my reality - really make some fundamental changes, and some significant sacrifices to boot...
Dreams and reality. As time goes on, one seems more and more to preclude the other. And as I move into my 30s it becomes obvious I have to take some kind of stand, do a leap of faith. I've got two polar directions to leap and two voices in my head battling it out in a long, on-again-off-again, grueling battle.
So far I'm still watching, but this fight is getting ugly...
Tuesday, July 15, 2008
About me #3: Romance Is in the Mundane
["About me" posts, despite their name, are meant to have some relevancy to the reader as well. you can see my introduction to them here, though this now reads to me as somewhat out of date and borderline naive. But hey, tradition is tradition, right?]
A few days ago, I was sitting at a cafe1 and suddenly found myself in the throws of the aforementioned existential angst (just the angst, though - not the sweaty bit. :) ). Then, outside, a young woman walked by on the street2. Moderately attractive. Warm face, energetic gait.
As she passed by, for a split second, she gave me a wide smile - or so I thought. Her face quickly fell back to normal walking-down-the-street blank look. She must have mistaken me for someone else, or seen a passing acquaintance of hers behind me. Still, the effects on me were surprisingly powerful - in that split second, my heart swelled. I felt elated. It was amazing to me how one stranger's smile could snap me so quickly and easily out of what can only be described as a proper, 17th-century-philosopher-with-an-abusive-upbringing-and- undetermined-substance-abuse-problem style bout of depression.
This got me wondering. For one thing, it certainly gave kind of a ridiculous air to the mood I was in. There I was, allegedly grappling with all these difficult questions, feeling downcast, and one stranger's glance pops me right out of it!3 But this was more than just simple excitement at attention. It was exciting because it was unprompted. Her intent, in fact, had little to with it - as became clear a second later. It was a slight gesture that came about for no apparent reason, but it was glorious. There's a pattern here with me - I love the unprompted, small gesture. It's genuine.
I love spontaneous goofiness - as much as I love momentary impatience for it. Because, again, it's genuine. It isn't contrived. This comes across in other facets as well. Not long ago, I was in an unsure dating phase with someone. I was having a good time with her, but wasn't quite sure whether it could go anywhere. There would often be a somewhat formal air to the proceedings, and the conversation would hover around the obvious. The breakthrough moment came, ironically, when she revealed her doubts, as did I. That was the moment we both felt far more intimate, again - because voicing one's concerns is undoubtedly real. And there's something quite romantic about two people at that level of comfort with each other.
Let me spin this the other way: I've noticed I have a really hard time with planned events. I find the notion of a planned holiday, for example, quite stressful, because so much is at stake! It seems to me almost doomed to failure because we pin so many hopes on them, they can't possibly live up to the expectations! Same with weddings, parties etc. I'm not trying to say by any stretch that I don't enjoy planned events, occasions or travel; only that when I do, it's almost invariably not their planned aspects that I've enjoyed. It's the small stories that mean so much to me. Every wedding has had it's kooky little story, far removed from the official proceedings. Every trip abroad gave more insight at the trucker's stop than at the tourist attraction. and it's often the least planned events that turn out fun, because everyone has to improvise. It's real. It's not a preplanned Kodak Moment.
So I often find myself moved - truly moved, I'm not exaggerating - by the mundane. Not in the tree hugging way. I don't mean admiring the beauty of nature or the miracle of birth etc. - not that there's anything wrong with that.. - but simply appreciating small human moments. The idea of this person giving a total stranger a glance, practically moved me to tears. Meeting someone simply, falling in love with them simply, the notion of 90% of your time together being fairly routine - I actually find all that terribly romantic. I think not having some teriffic story about how you met, is just as good a story as a "good" one.
The other day, I was moved by the fact that a group of my close friends were genuinely excited to watch a film widely considered to be the worst of all time. It spoke volumes to me. I felt so fortunate to have friends like that, that are aware of - and actively voice - the absurdities of life, and are quite happy to swim within them. Obviously, there's no end to the examples but.. you get the idea.
The simplest definition I've heard for happiness is perceived reality minus expectation. When the latter is sky-high, it's going to be awfully difficult to be happy. I feel the film and television industries have really set the bar high for us. The one-upmanship in creating the most incredible on-screen action/suspense/extreme and, especially, romantic moments have made it so easy to (dis)miss the gems going on in our day-to-day lives.
I know he meant something else entirely, but when Ian Brown sang "Keep what you've got / by giving it all away", I like to think he wasn't talking about possessions, but rather about lofty expectations.
1 Yes, they actually have those in Jerusalem! In fact, we've got lots of them! Let it never be said this blog is without its educational merit. ;)
2 Some of you may be thinking, "really? Jerusalem actually has cafes with stylish full-glass walls facing the street? Not the gaudy styled ones, but the ones actually done in good taste? Isn't that too.. I don't know.. cosmopolitan for Jerusalem?" Well, yes we do and no it isn't, I'm glad you asked (thought?). Reputation aside, Jerusalem has some pretty cool nightlife (is my point).
3 DISCLAIMER - I'm a pretty normal guy. Really. This was just the sort of blue mood we all get from time to time. Don't want to be giving off the impression like I'm some manic depressive or anything..
A few days ago, I was sitting at a cafe1 and suddenly found myself in the throws of the aforementioned existential angst (just the angst, though - not the sweaty bit. :) ). Then, outside, a young woman walked by on the street2. Moderately attractive. Warm face, energetic gait.
As she passed by, for a split second, she gave me a wide smile - or so I thought. Her face quickly fell back to normal walking-down-the-street blank look. She must have mistaken me for someone else, or seen a passing acquaintance of hers behind me. Still, the effects on me were surprisingly powerful - in that split second, my heart swelled. I felt elated. It was amazing to me how one stranger's smile could snap me so quickly and easily out of what can only be described as a proper, 17th-century-philosopher-with-an-abusive-upbringing-and- undetermined-substance-abuse-problem style bout of depression.
This got me wondering. For one thing, it certainly gave kind of a ridiculous air to the mood I was in. There I was, allegedly grappling with all these difficult questions, feeling downcast, and one stranger's glance pops me right out of it!3 But this was more than just simple excitement at attention. It was exciting because it was unprompted. Her intent, in fact, had little to with it - as became clear a second later. It was a slight gesture that came about for no apparent reason, but it was glorious. There's a pattern here with me - I love the unprompted, small gesture. It's genuine.
I love spontaneous goofiness - as much as I love momentary impatience for it. Because, again, it's genuine. It isn't contrived. This comes across in other facets as well. Not long ago, I was in an unsure dating phase with someone. I was having a good time with her, but wasn't quite sure whether it could go anywhere. There would often be a somewhat formal air to the proceedings, and the conversation would hover around the obvious. The breakthrough moment came, ironically, when she revealed her doubts, as did I. That was the moment we both felt far more intimate, again - because voicing one's concerns is undoubtedly real. And there's something quite romantic about two people at that level of comfort with each other.
Let me spin this the other way: I've noticed I have a really hard time with planned events. I find the notion of a planned holiday, for example, quite stressful, because so much is at stake! It seems to me almost doomed to failure because we pin so many hopes on them, they can't possibly live up to the expectations! Same with weddings, parties etc. I'm not trying to say by any stretch that I don't enjoy planned events, occasions or travel; only that when I do, it's almost invariably not their planned aspects that I've enjoyed. It's the small stories that mean so much to me. Every wedding has had it's kooky little story, far removed from the official proceedings. Every trip abroad gave more insight at the trucker's stop than at the tourist attraction. and it's often the least planned events that turn out fun, because everyone has to improvise. It's real. It's not a preplanned Kodak Moment.
So I often find myself moved - truly moved, I'm not exaggerating - by the mundane. Not in the tree hugging way. I don't mean admiring the beauty of nature or the miracle of birth etc. - not that there's anything wrong with that.. - but simply appreciating small human moments. The idea of this person giving a total stranger a glance, practically moved me to tears. Meeting someone simply, falling in love with them simply, the notion of 90% of your time together being fairly routine - I actually find all that terribly romantic. I think not having some teriffic story about how you met, is just as good a story as a "good" one.
The other day, I was moved by the fact that a group of my close friends were genuinely excited to watch a film widely considered to be the worst of all time. It spoke volumes to me. I felt so fortunate to have friends like that, that are aware of - and actively voice - the absurdities of life, and are quite happy to swim within them. Obviously, there's no end to the examples but.. you get the idea.
The simplest definition I've heard for happiness is perceived reality minus expectation. When the latter is sky-high, it's going to be awfully difficult to be happy. I feel the film and television industries have really set the bar high for us. The one-upmanship in creating the most incredible on-screen action/suspense/extreme and, especially, romantic moments have made it so easy to (dis)miss the gems going on in our day-to-day lives.
I know he meant something else entirely, but when Ian Brown sang "Keep what you've got / by giving it all away", I like to think he wasn't talking about possessions, but rather about lofty expectations.
1 Yes, they actually have those in Jerusalem! In fact, we've got lots of them! Let it never be said this blog is without its educational merit. ;)
2 Some of you may be thinking, "really? Jerusalem actually has cafes with stylish full-glass walls facing the street? Not the gaudy styled ones, but the ones actually done in good taste? Isn't that too.. I don't know.. cosmopolitan for Jerusalem?" Well, yes we do and no it isn't, I'm glad you asked (thought?). Reputation aside, Jerusalem has some pretty cool nightlife (is my point).
3 DISCLAIMER - I'm a pretty normal guy. Really. This was just the sort of blue mood we all get from time to time. Don't want to be giving off the impression like I'm some manic depressive or anything..
Monday, June 02, 2008
Wednesday, March 12, 2008
Things I'd Never Ever Say
"Look, you and I - we're businessmen.."
"All this violence. Why can't we just get along?"
"I hear Brangelina.."
"Wow, you guys were great! Very Pink Floyd-meets-Madonna..."
"It's not what you say, it's how you say it. Seriously."
"Don't worry. I'm sure the government will take care of it."
Things I may (sadly) never say:
"I do."
"Funny, we've been asked that a lot lately - but I'm afraid you'll just have to wait for the next album..."
"It's got 4 wheels, it was made after 2000, and it's mine!"
"It's got 4 rooms, the location's great, and it's ours!"
"All this violence. Why can't we just get along?"
"I hear Brangelina.."
"Wow, you guys were great! Very Pink Floyd-meets-Madonna..."
"It's not what you say, it's how you say it. Seriously."
"Don't worry. I'm sure the government will take care of it."
Things I may (sadly) never say:
"I do."
"Funny, we've been asked that a lot lately - but I'm afraid you'll just have to wait for the next album..."
"It's got 4 wheels, it was made after 2000, and it's mine!"
"It's got 4 rooms, the location's great, and it's ours!"
Friday, February 01, 2008
Recovering Romantic?
I'm either a recovering romantic or a realist with a romanticism problem.
Scratch that - cliched as it may be, I think it's both.
Scratch that - cliched as it may be, I think it's both.
Wednesday, July 18, 2007
"That's the End of That" - by Resident Traveler
Introduction here.
(AKA "The Impossible Dream", AKA "She's a Frecha")
They say every pot has its lid. But whenever I look around:
She's a frecha* - and that's the end of that.
If she's not a frecha, she's a neo-hippie - and that's the end of that.
If she's not a frecha, nor a neo-hippie, she's either the over-driven career type, a scantily-clad, deathly-thin Mars-creature, or a sour-faced urban burnout - and that's the end of that.
If she's not (any of the above), she's not physically attractive enough (hard as I try to overlook it), and that's the end of that.
If she's still not any of the above, she lacks heart. Or any kind of joi d'vivre (joy of life), and that's the end of that. (Lots of these. Lots and lots and lots.)
ISSNAOTA, she's married, or has a long-term boyfriend. She does. Trust me. No "that" to end. (OODLES of these.)
ISSNAOTA, she's got serious emotional baggage from past relationships, can't shake it off - and that's the end of that.
ISSNAOTA, she's "going through a rough period in her life", turning hot and cold at the drop of a hat - and that's the end of that.
ISSNAOTA, she's intensely interested in fashion and/or new-ageism, excessive materialism, hip-hop, smoking or, god help me, "real men" - commanding, go-getting, impulse-driven, egotisitical, insensitive, stubble-faced men - and that's the end of that.
ISSNAOTA, she simply doesn't know what she wants. I give up! That's the end of that.
ISSNAOTA, she's insecure - which on its own is ok - but expresses said insecurity in an unwillingness to attach to anyone and will string me along like I'm a toy. Once reality finally seeps in - that's the end of that.
ISSNAOTA, she's just sort of apathetic. Has no burning interest in something - anything. And for me - that's the end of that.
ISSNAOTA, are you sure she doesn't have a boyfriend? Thought so. That's the end of that.
ISSNAOTA, she's rabidly anti-religion, anti-Zionist or anti-any form of capitalism, with a major chip on her shoulder, and that's the end of that.
ISSNAOTA, she's religious. Just a liiittle too religious to give me a chance because, after all, she wants to get married, so why waste her time with someone who isn't her particular micro-stream of orthodoxy? - and that's the end of that.
ISSNAOTA - and we're already talking about something rarer than an incorrupt politician - she doesn't give a damn about music and has no artistic interest (either would be surmountable). For me - that's the end of that.
ISSNAOTA, did I mention we're talking only about women here? Who are under 40? Without children? WHO LIKE MEN? Thought so. That's the end of that.
ISSNAOTA, This is it, I've found her. After years of searching, I've found my one-in-a-million. My holy grail, my lid. I'm ecstatic, and can now preach to my pessimist single friends not to lose heart; that despite all the potential pitfalls, they are out there.
But remember, all this has only been half the equation: she still has to like me. And guess what:
That's the end of that.
* - Frecha: the Israeli equivalent of whatever they call women overly preoccupied with an intensely juvenile fashion sense in your country.
This work is licensed under a
Creative Commons Attribution-Noncommercial-No Derivative Works 3.0 License.
(AKA "The Impossible Dream", AKA "She's a Frecha")
They say every pot has its lid. But whenever I look around:
She's a frecha* - and that's the end of that.
If she's not a frecha, she's a neo-hippie - and that's the end of that.
If she's not a frecha, nor a neo-hippie, she's either the over-driven career type, a scantily-clad, deathly-thin Mars-creature, or a sour-faced urban burnout - and that's the end of that.
If she's not (any of the above), she's not physically attractive enough (hard as I try to overlook it), and that's the end of that.
If she's still not any of the above, she lacks heart. Or any kind of joi d'vivre (joy of life), and that's the end of that. (Lots of these. Lots and lots and lots.)
ISSNAOTA, she's married, or has a long-term boyfriend. She does. Trust me. No "that" to end. (OODLES of these.)
ISSNAOTA, she's got serious emotional baggage from past relationships, can't shake it off - and that's the end of that.
ISSNAOTA, she's "going through a rough period in her life", turning hot and cold at the drop of a hat - and that's the end of that.
ISSNAOTA, she's intensely interested in fashion and/or new-ageism, excessive materialism, hip-hop, smoking or, god help me, "real men" - commanding, go-getting, impulse-driven, egotisitical, insensitive, stubble-faced men - and that's the end of that.
ISSNAOTA, she simply doesn't know what she wants. I give up! That's the end of that.
ISSNAOTA, she's insecure - which on its own is ok - but expresses said insecurity in an unwillingness to attach to anyone and will string me along like I'm a toy. Once reality finally seeps in - that's the end of that.
ISSNAOTA, she's just sort of apathetic. Has no burning interest in something - anything. And for me - that's the end of that.
ISSNAOTA, are you sure she doesn't have a boyfriend? Thought so. That's the end of that.
ISSNAOTA, she's rabidly anti-religion, anti-Zionist or anti-any form of capitalism, with a major chip on her shoulder, and that's the end of that.
ISSNAOTA, she's religious. Just a liiittle too religious to give me a chance because, after all, she wants to get married, so why waste her time with someone who isn't her particular micro-stream of orthodoxy? - and that's the end of that.
ISSNAOTA - and we're already talking about something rarer than an incorrupt politician - she doesn't give a damn about music and has no artistic interest (either would be surmountable). For me - that's the end of that.
ISSNAOTA, did I mention we're talking only about women here? Who are under 40? Without children? WHO LIKE MEN? Thought so. That's the end of that.
ISSNAOTA, This is it, I've found her. After years of searching, I've found my one-in-a-million. My holy grail, my lid. I'm ecstatic, and can now preach to my pessimist single friends not to lose heart; that despite all the potential pitfalls, they are out there.
But remember, all this has only been half the equation: she still has to like me. And guess what:
That's the end of that.
* - Frecha: the Israeli equivalent of whatever they call women overly preoccupied with an intensely juvenile fashion sense in your country.
This work is licensed under a
Creative Commons Attribution-Noncommercial-No Derivative Works 3.0 License.
Monday, July 16, 2007
"You're Single? How Come?" (AKA "That's the End of That" - Introduction)
It's moving season, and this time I decided I'd rent on my own (I'm 29, figured it's time). The hunt is thankfully over, but while I was searching, I noticed a pattern: the landlords, in their 50s and 60s, would ask whether I am, indeed, looking just for myself. When I'd answer in the affirmative, they'd give me a cockeyed look and ask, "you're single? Really? How come?" This happened several times...
While I was resisting the temptation to give an answer along the lines of "they ran out of my size at the girlfriend store" or "because I ate them all", they'd usually temper the question with a compliment - "I'm just saying.. good-looking guy like yourself..". Obviously they meant well, but this only underscored the assumption, still somewhat common amongst our parent's generation, that unless something's really wrong with you, the only thing separating the average single and a sustained, happy relationship is merely the decision to have one.
So, to try and properly answer the question, I've cooked up a little song/ditty/prose-poetry piece (not all based on personal experience, it should be noted) called "That's the End of That", which addresses this issue. It's being finalized as we speak (you read?), and I'll put it up in the next few days.
[...and, it's UP!]
Important clarification:
This post has been picked up by the good people over at Israelity, and I'm grateful for it. Looks like I left this somewhat open to interpretation, however, so let me clarify:
This post wasn't an expression of having chosen singledome, but rather of frustration over how impossible it is to find anyone! This should be made abundantly clear with my next post...
While I was resisting the temptation to give an answer along the lines of "they ran out of my size at the girlfriend store" or "because I ate them all", they'd usually temper the question with a compliment - "I'm just saying.. good-looking guy like yourself..". Obviously they meant well, but this only underscored the assumption, still somewhat common amongst our parent's generation, that unless something's really wrong with you, the only thing separating the average single and a sustained, happy relationship is merely the decision to have one.
So, to try and properly answer the question, I've cooked up a little song/ditty/prose-poetry piece (not all based on personal experience, it should be noted) called "That's the End of That", which addresses this issue. It's being finalized as we speak (you read?), and I'll put it up in the next few days.
[...and, it's UP!]
Important clarification:
This post has been picked up by the good people over at Israelity, and I'm grateful for it. Looks like I left this somewhat open to interpretation, however, so let me clarify:
This post wasn't an expression of having chosen singledome, but rather of frustration over how impossible it is to find anyone! This should be made abundantly clear with my next post...
Monday, January 08, 2007
About Me #2 - A College-Educated, Taxpaying Punk
["About me" posts, despite their name, are meant to have some relevancy to the reader as well. See my introduction to them here.]
I'm a punk. No, I've never worn a torn shirt with safety pins, nor contemplated a mohawk (and not just because I couldn't grow one if I tried). I've got a college degree. I didn't grow up "on the streets". I haven't touched a single (non-musical) drug in my life. I've never smashed a beer bottle in the street. Musically, alongside rock, I've played folk songs, disco and Mizrahi. I've covered the Sex Pistols, and I've covered the Beatles; I've covered Simon & Garfunkel and Nirvana. I pay my taxes. My police record is clean. I'm nearly ten years past my teens. I've worked at the same institution (in different capacities) for 6 years now. Rest assured these are all irrelevant to the subject at hand - I am, undoubtedly, 200%, a punk.
The word "punk" has gathered an incredible mishmash of meanings. For many, the image that still comes to mind is that of thuggery - ratty clothes, "fuck-you" attitude, outspokenness, smashing things, crudeness. "Punk politics" has come to include a grab bag of causes, from anti-authoritarianism to veganism to anarchism to fascism to extreme left-wing politics. So first of all, I have to clarify: I'm not talking about punk the musical form, nor the "fashion", nor the politics of punk. I'm talking about punk as a way of life; the ideology of punk.(1)
The pervasive, mostly negative image of "punks" I mentioned above, stems primarily from the more visible sections of its audience, rather than from most of its original musical founders - especially those in the US. To avoid a laborious history lesson, just take it from me: in 1975-77, when punk was still in its infancy, the only things the so-called "punks" in the States had in common were lots of energy and a critical thought process.
So what is the ideology of punk? Punk ideology combines anti-dogmatism with a simple imperative: think. As Jello Biafra, singer of the great Dead Kennedys, put so succinctly: "punk ain't no religious cult - punk means thinking for yourself". It discourages preconception - don't automatically reject an idea simply because it seems out of left field. Always question, but stay balanced. Don't automatically go with "the majority", nor be a reactionary for its own sake. A punk tries as much as possible to simply remove the common wisdom from the equation. Punks have a healthy disregard for norms and empty rhetoric as any kind of indication of "worth". Rather, they'll try to deconstruct a situation and put it back together themselves. If the conclusions coincide with extant norms, that's fine. If they don't, that's fine too. Needless to say, they will often fall somewhere in between.
Despite its uneven implementation among punks, punk ideology tries to avoid being auto-rejectionist. If someone doesn't agree with you, he/she is not "the enemy". By all means try to convince by way of rational explanation, but certainly don't catalog and otherwise reject out of hand the validity of others' opinions. Punk is not relativist, though. A common trapping of the aforementioned rejection-of-the-assumed is that it can lead to a paralysis of self-doubt. But the punk outlook is a positivist one: it encourages action, and it encourages forming a well-considered opinion. Yes, always be open to criticism of your opinion, be willing to revise, update or replace it entirely if need be, but first make sure you have one, and know why you do.
The next obvious question is why use the term "punk" and not just, say, "thoughtful person"? Without making an overly restrictive generalization, it's because punk ideology has one added tendency that's not intrinsic to a thoughtful person: the desire to simplify. This comes across in punk as the musical genre, but also as a way to make choices in life. A punk will look for a simpler way to do things, and appreciate functionality and practicality. It doesn't mean he/she is trying to live like a monk, nor that he/she must be free of any guilty pleasures; but by and large, the ornate, the overpriced and the extravagant are instinctively off-putting to a punk. This is why you will see some punks choose to live communally, shunting the job-car-house-family track(2), and why you will see a tendency towards simplicity and directness in the music. But this criteria is actually fairly flexible - one needn't be resistant to economic or social status advancement to be a punk; he/she should only not see them as the prime measures of "success" in life.
Last but not least, punk ideology requires being a civil human being. As Ian Mackaye, one of the first to actually sing and speak about these issues, said in an interview recently: "When I play music, there is no code of behavior beyond general humanitarian [values-R.T.]: you don't attack, assault people, or be ugly or intolerant.. but that would be the same if I invited anyone to my house for dinner, too."(3)
(1) I'm not trying to create an artificial split between punk the music and punk the ideology. Needless to say, punk began as a musical movement. But its ideology existed right from the start, and permeated the music in both its composition and its subject matter.
(2) Again, this too comes across in the music - see my mention of the brilliant economy of a certain punk band in an earlier post. This is also the principle driving many of the political strains mentioned above - anti-consumerism, environmental concerns and social justice - though the dogmatism that often accompanies them defeats the very purpose of punk as I see it..
(3) Available here. Be warned - while Mackaye shines (as usual), the interviewer doesn't really "get it".
I'm a punk. No, I've never worn a torn shirt with safety pins, nor contemplated a mohawk (and not just because I couldn't grow one if I tried). I've got a college degree. I didn't grow up "on the streets". I haven't touched a single (non-musical) drug in my life. I've never smashed a beer bottle in the street. Musically, alongside rock, I've played folk songs, disco and Mizrahi. I've covered the Sex Pistols, and I've covered the Beatles; I've covered Simon & Garfunkel and Nirvana. I pay my taxes. My police record is clean. I'm nearly ten years past my teens. I've worked at the same institution (in different capacities) for 6 years now. Rest assured these are all irrelevant to the subject at hand - I am, undoubtedly, 200%, a punk.
The word "punk" has gathered an incredible mishmash of meanings. For many, the image that still comes to mind is that of thuggery - ratty clothes, "fuck-you" attitude, outspokenness, smashing things, crudeness. "Punk politics" has come to include a grab bag of causes, from anti-authoritarianism to veganism to anarchism to fascism to extreme left-wing politics. So first of all, I have to clarify: I'm not talking about punk the musical form, nor the "fashion", nor the politics of punk. I'm talking about punk as a way of life; the ideology of punk.(1)
The pervasive, mostly negative image of "punks" I mentioned above, stems primarily from the more visible sections of its audience, rather than from most of its original musical founders - especially those in the US. To avoid a laborious history lesson, just take it from me: in 1975-77, when punk was still in its infancy, the only things the so-called "punks" in the States had in common were lots of energy and a critical thought process.
So what is the ideology of punk? Punk ideology combines anti-dogmatism with a simple imperative: think. As Jello Biafra, singer of the great Dead Kennedys, put so succinctly: "punk ain't no religious cult - punk means thinking for yourself". It discourages preconception - don't automatically reject an idea simply because it seems out of left field. Always question, but stay balanced. Don't automatically go with "the majority", nor be a reactionary for its own sake. A punk tries as much as possible to simply remove the common wisdom from the equation. Punks have a healthy disregard for norms and empty rhetoric as any kind of indication of "worth". Rather, they'll try to deconstruct a situation and put it back together themselves. If the conclusions coincide with extant norms, that's fine. If they don't, that's fine too. Needless to say, they will often fall somewhere in between.
Despite its uneven implementation among punks, punk ideology tries to avoid being auto-rejectionist. If someone doesn't agree with you, he/she is not "the enemy". By all means try to convince by way of rational explanation, but certainly don't catalog and otherwise reject out of hand the validity of others' opinions. Punk is not relativist, though. A common trapping of the aforementioned rejection-of-the-assumed is that it can lead to a paralysis of self-doubt. But the punk outlook is a positivist one: it encourages action, and it encourages forming a well-considered opinion. Yes, always be open to criticism of your opinion, be willing to revise, update or replace it entirely if need be, but first make sure you have one, and know why you do.
The next obvious question is why use the term "punk" and not just, say, "thoughtful person"? Without making an overly restrictive generalization, it's because punk ideology has one added tendency that's not intrinsic to a thoughtful person: the desire to simplify. This comes across in punk as the musical genre, but also as a way to make choices in life. A punk will look for a simpler way to do things, and appreciate functionality and practicality. It doesn't mean he/she is trying to live like a monk, nor that he/she must be free of any guilty pleasures; but by and large, the ornate, the overpriced and the extravagant are instinctively off-putting to a punk. This is why you will see some punks choose to live communally, shunting the job-car-house-family track(2), and why you will see a tendency towards simplicity and directness in the music. But this criteria is actually fairly flexible - one needn't be resistant to economic or social status advancement to be a punk; he/she should only not see them as the prime measures of "success" in life.
Last but not least, punk ideology requires being a civil human being. As Ian Mackaye, one of the first to actually sing and speak about these issues, said in an interview recently: "When I play music, there is no code of behavior beyond general humanitarian [values-R.T.]: you don't attack, assault people, or be ugly or intolerant.. but that would be the same if I invited anyone to my house for dinner, too."(3)
(1) I'm not trying to create an artificial split between punk the music and punk the ideology. Needless to say, punk began as a musical movement. But its ideology existed right from the start, and permeated the music in both its composition and its subject matter.
(2) Again, this too comes across in the music - see my mention of the brilliant economy of a certain punk band in an earlier post. This is also the principle driving many of the political strains mentioned above - anti-consumerism, environmental concerns and social justice - though the dogmatism that often accompanies them defeats the very purpose of punk as I see it..
(3) Available here. Be warned - while Mackaye shines (as usual), the interviewer doesn't really "get it".
Friday, December 22, 2006
About Me #1: Love
["About me" posts, despite their name, are meant to have some relevancy to the reader as well. See my introduction to them here.]
Yet another unexpected twist.. this was not what I had prepared as the first "about me" post, but regular readers (all, like, two of you) already know my best-laid plans consistently seem to combust before they've ever been made. In this case, I'll even say what triggered the sudden switcheroo: I was dumped today, though in rather frustrating, "you're basically great in every way. Goodbye" style. Liked her, too, dammit. So yes, I'm going to write some of my thoughts about love, no less - in hindsight, the best first "about me" I could have (not) planned for..
Up until not too long ago, I was in a fairly bad mental trap where relationships were concerned: For one thing, they were few and far between; consequently, this made being in one all the more fateful to me. Both combined - it's sort of a chicken and egg situation - meant that every new potential "match" underwent severe scrutiny for the extra long haul.. i.e. "is this the person I would want to be with? Do I really want to compromise? it's my friggin life we're talking about here.." I was ratcheting up cons faster than I could type the word "pro". I'm oversimplifying tremendously here, and doing myself something of an injustice, but overall I would have to admit I may have been a little trigger-happy on the ol' "abort" button. The basic outlook was as much testing her as just trying to enjoy time spent with her. I was disproportionally focusing on all the ways she differed from what I thought I knew I needed. Sounds long-winded, but read that last sentence again - if you're single and wondering why, I'll bet at least some of it applies to you as well!
Anyway, a series of events I won't go into, combined with some unlikely but gradual maturation, has brought me to (what I'd like to think is) a (healthy?) new attitude on the whole issue of relationships, what makes us tick, etc:
First of all, I'm a romantic at heart - I believe that true love exists. I don't, though, believe in a shopping-list of traits that make up the person who is somehow "right for me". I've dropped that one altogether. I believe everything you go through in life, including relations but not limited to them, changes you and (usually) brings you closer to a phase that's right for you. At different stages along the way, you're open to different types of people - all, of course, on their own journeys - with whom you're receptive and capable of real love. These changes are different from person to person and, more importantly, you can't know when you've hit the right phase for which person, nor how to induce or prolong it. When we're there we're there, and we won't know until we see its results in hindsight. Am I essentially talking about maturity here? yes, but not only. It's your maturity and your experiences that make you receptive enough for true love. Or if you prefer, it is all about maturity, but experiences help to build it.
Two important qualifications: this is still a two-way street. Whatever phase you're in, you still have to find someone who'se there as well, which is what makes it so evasive to many of us. Also, I'm not sidestepping the vitally important issue of physical attraction. If anything, I think physical attraction is the only glue that can sustain a relationship, especially in its early stages when a couple are still getting to know each other. Talk is nice but, you know, come on... ;)
Now, I know this is all a little unclear, so here are some of the ramifications of what I'm saying, that might help make it a little more tangible:
a) There's no "The right person for me", there's being in the right place for this person. love has as much to do with where you are as it does with the other person. You have to be receptive to it, and if you're not there, you're not there. It explains those situations when you wonder what's wrong with you: you think someone's a really teriffic person, charming, funny, engaging, smart, mature, exciting, responsible, good-hearted, whatever you like - elastic - yet the spark just isn't there. You're not (necessarily) a bad person for it.
b) Don't think in terms of trait checklists. Give him/her a real chance even if they seem very different to you on paper. You don't ever fully know who'se right for you. You don't know where you are on this route, so yes, go with your instincts, but be flexible with what you've been so sure is or is not acceptable. what you "need" in the other person is dynamic, changing as you do. Also, a lot of the stuff you're looking for in a meaningful relationship can only come out/be built over time. That really sucks - especially for us impatient guys - but it's true.
c) This isn't be-all and end-all. Noone's getting married. (Yet.)
d) Don't moan and groan about your "failed" relationships and stinging break-ups. In most cases they've taught you something, they've made you more mature. It was something you had to go through and, like I mentioned above, you'll only realize later how or why.
I'm aware this is all something of a leap of faith, that I can't prove any of it, but then that's what love is all about anyway. If you still believe it's out there, take this post as some friendly advice from a fellow romantic.
Yet another unexpected twist.. this was not what I had prepared as the first "about me" post, but regular readers (all, like, two of you) already know my best-laid plans consistently seem to combust before they've ever been made. In this case, I'll even say what triggered the sudden switcheroo: I was dumped today, though in rather frustrating, "you're basically great in every way. Goodbye" style. Liked her, too, dammit. So yes, I'm going to write some of my thoughts about love, no less - in hindsight, the best first "about me" I could have (not) planned for..
Up until not too long ago, I was in a fairly bad mental trap where relationships were concerned: For one thing, they were few and far between; consequently, this made being in one all the more fateful to me. Both combined - it's sort of a chicken and egg situation - meant that every new potential "match" underwent severe scrutiny for the extra long haul.. i.e. "is this the person I would want to be with? Do I really want to compromise? it's my friggin life we're talking about here.." I was ratcheting up cons faster than I could type the word "pro". I'm oversimplifying tremendously here, and doing myself something of an injustice, but overall I would have to admit I may have been a little trigger-happy on the ol' "abort" button. The basic outlook was as much testing her as just trying to enjoy time spent with her. I was disproportionally focusing on all the ways she differed from what I thought I knew I needed. Sounds long-winded, but read that last sentence again - if you're single and wondering why, I'll bet at least some of it applies to you as well!
Anyway, a series of events I won't go into, combined with some unlikely but gradual maturation, has brought me to (what I'd like to think is) a (healthy?) new attitude on the whole issue of relationships, what makes us tick, etc:
First of all, I'm a romantic at heart - I believe that true love exists. I don't, though, believe in a shopping-list of traits that make up the person who is somehow "right for me". I've dropped that one altogether. I believe everything you go through in life, including relations but not limited to them, changes you and (usually) brings you closer to a phase that's right for you. At different stages along the way, you're open to different types of people - all, of course, on their own journeys - with whom you're receptive and capable of real love. These changes are different from person to person and, more importantly, you can't know when you've hit the right phase for which person, nor how to induce or prolong it. When we're there we're there, and we won't know until we see its results in hindsight. Am I essentially talking about maturity here? yes, but not only. It's your maturity and your experiences that make you receptive enough for true love. Or if you prefer, it is all about maturity, but experiences help to build it.
Two important qualifications: this is still a two-way street. Whatever phase you're in, you still have to find someone who'se there as well, which is what makes it so evasive to many of us. Also, I'm not sidestepping the vitally important issue of physical attraction. If anything, I think physical attraction is the only glue that can sustain a relationship, especially in its early stages when a couple are still getting to know each other. Talk is nice but, you know, come on... ;)
Now, I know this is all a little unclear, so here are some of the ramifications of what I'm saying, that might help make it a little more tangible:
a) There's no "The right person for me", there's being in the right place for this person. love has as much to do with where you are as it does with the other person. You have to be receptive to it, and if you're not there, you're not there. It explains those situations when you wonder what's wrong with you: you think someone's a really teriffic person, charming, funny, engaging, smart, mature, exciting, responsible, good-hearted, whatever you like - elastic - yet the spark just isn't there. You're not (necessarily) a bad person for it.
b) Don't think in terms of trait checklists. Give him/her a real chance even if they seem very different to you on paper. You don't ever fully know who'se right for you. You don't know where you are on this route, so yes, go with your instincts, but be flexible with what you've been so sure is or is not acceptable. what you "need" in the other person is dynamic, changing as you do. Also, a lot of the stuff you're looking for in a meaningful relationship can only come out/be built over time. That really sucks - especially for us impatient guys - but it's true.
c) This isn't be-all and end-all. Noone's getting married. (Yet.)
d) Don't moan and groan about your "failed" relationships and stinging break-ups. In most cases they've taught you something, they've made you more mature. It was something you had to go through and, like I mentioned above, you'll only realize later how or why.
I'm aware this is all something of a leap of faith, that I can't prove any of it, but then that's what love is all about anyway. If you still believe it's out there, take this post as some friendly advice from a fellow romantic.
Wednesday, December 13, 2006
The Ultimate Open Challenge: the Two-Girl Fortress
OK, I know I said I'd post more about myself, but it's a fast-paced world out there. If something springs up urgently, well, damned if I don't write about it! Fear not (I'm sure you do..), the first "about me" post is under construction, awaiting my next stretch of concentration... Anyway:
I'm going to give you a puzzle to try to solve, and I welcome any and all attempts to crack it, ok?
here's the situation: I go out to a bar/restaurant-type place. As I enter, I notice a girl who catches my fancy. Great! now I'm psyched.. I sit at a table, with my good (male) friend. she's having a lively chat with her girlfriend. they're sitting two tables down from us, her friend facing me, "my" girl with her back to me. and now the question: what on earth do I do?
This is a TGF, Two-Girl Fortress*. It's impenetrable to me. And it exists virtually everywhere I go. Now, there are occasional circumstances that make it possible - difficult, but possible. At a bar, for instance, I might be able to sit next to her and start a conversation. Even table situations can sometimes work, if I can initiate eye-contact and see what the response is. If she sends enough of a "go ahead" smile, I might actually work myself up to doing something about it. But in this case - with no physical proximity or eye-contact - I'm dead in the water. I'd call it a UTGF (Ultimate TGF) if it weren't too long and cumbersome.
Here's my problem: I need a ruse. I cannot, under any circumstances, walk up to two girls in the middle of a conversation and say "hi", without having some reasonable excuse for doing it. I'm towering above them as they sit, I'm cutting into their lively conversation, and I'm still basically nobody to them. I don't care if she or both are single and looking; I don't care how many times you'll tell me it's "normal" and "expected" and "flattering"; I don't care if you've uncovered her secret diary expressly saying she wishes someone who looked just like me would walk up to her right in the middle of a conversation and start talking - I will never feel like anything other than an intrusive stranger butting in. My price for being civilized.
A priceless piece of advice I've heard is to ask to join the table. If you suggest that, you obviously haven't been reading. join the table? Are you kidding me?? Look, I'm aware this might not be nearly as unacceptable as it feels like to me, but I need a minimal level of truthfulness with myself, because I'm extremely transparent - I'm no actor. If what I'm feeling is that I'm an intrusive stranger, I can't try to exude this charming, nice guy who's confidently asking to join the table like it's perfectly natural for me. It ain't. Doing that is like trying to stab myself in the hand with a fork - just can't do it!
I've gotten all sorts of well-intended advice on this subject, but it's all regretfully immaterial to the basic problem: how do i interrupt two strangers' conversation with little or no acting ability? Solve this one, and you've solved one of (my) life's greatest mysteries!
* I know we've said we'll use "lady", but it really doesn't work in this context.
I'm going to give you a puzzle to try to solve, and I welcome any and all attempts to crack it, ok?
here's the situation: I go out to a bar/restaurant-type place. As I enter, I notice a girl who catches my fancy. Great! now I'm psyched.. I sit at a table, with my good (male) friend. she's having a lively chat with her girlfriend. they're sitting two tables down from us, her friend facing me, "my" girl with her back to me. and now the question: what on earth do I do?
This is a TGF, Two-Girl Fortress*. It's impenetrable to me. And it exists virtually everywhere I go. Now, there are occasional circumstances that make it possible - difficult, but possible. At a bar, for instance, I might be able to sit next to her and start a conversation. Even table situations can sometimes work, if I can initiate eye-contact and see what the response is. If she sends enough of a "go ahead" smile, I might actually work myself up to doing something about it. But in this case - with no physical proximity or eye-contact - I'm dead in the water. I'd call it a UTGF (Ultimate TGF) if it weren't too long and cumbersome.
Here's my problem: I need a ruse. I cannot, under any circumstances, walk up to two girls in the middle of a conversation and say "hi", without having some reasonable excuse for doing it. I'm towering above them as they sit, I'm cutting into their lively conversation, and I'm still basically nobody to them. I don't care if she or both are single and looking; I don't care how many times you'll tell me it's "normal" and "expected" and "flattering"; I don't care if you've uncovered her secret diary expressly saying she wishes someone who looked just like me would walk up to her right in the middle of a conversation and start talking - I will never feel like anything other than an intrusive stranger butting in. My price for being civilized.
A priceless piece of advice I've heard is to ask to join the table. If you suggest that, you obviously haven't been reading. join the table? Are you kidding me?? Look, I'm aware this might not be nearly as unacceptable as it feels like to me, but I need a minimal level of truthfulness with myself, because I'm extremely transparent - I'm no actor. If what I'm feeling is that I'm an intrusive stranger, I can't try to exude this charming, nice guy who's confidently asking to join the table like it's perfectly natural for me. It ain't. Doing that is like trying to stab myself in the hand with a fork - just can't do it!
I've gotten all sorts of well-intended advice on this subject, but it's all regretfully immaterial to the basic problem: how do i interrupt two strangers' conversation with little or no acting ability? Solve this one, and you've solved one of (my) life's greatest mysteries!
* I know we've said we'll use "lady", but it really doesn't work in this context.
Saturday, December 09, 2006
About Me - Intro
I'm really quite new to this whole blogging thing.. I've started reading a few to get a sense of how things work, and one nagging feeling keeps popping up: who are you? I never feel I know the person writing.. I don't mean I need to know anyone's shoe size or inclination on Nietzschean theories of Transgressive Ethno-Hippopotamy, but I'd like to know a little about the person who took the effort to write whatever it is I'm reading. Many of these bloggers seem to be writing essentially to their group of friends - though at the same time they obviously want as many readers as possible to comment on their trip to the ATM or how Gregory and Muriel are getting married. Others seem to write a strong opinion piece and then fade right back into the shadow of their own anonymity.
Needless to say, things come across between the lines - a touch of dryness in "Ex-Brooklyn-ite furious about our defeatist government"'s writing, some pop-culture saturation in "thought I left England behind but it followed me", a certain je ne sais quoi about "Religious Mom X's" - but overall, without a clue as to who these people actually are, they're writing missives without a source. The anonymity has a certain advantage to it for polemical/political-style blogs, where the writer may well prefer to leave her/himself out for "purity of argument"'s sake, but most of the more personal/anecdotal blogs seem strangely up in the air.
So I'm going to tell you, by drips and drabs, about myself, so far as I can tell. now, hold on.. I know this sounds like a practice in sheer vanity, but I'll try to keep it somewhat relevant to, well, people besides myself. So, to be continued. That is, if I stay on track long enough to follow through on this idea and not just write some more about Jerusalemgirls ladies. mmm....
----------- PS ------------
I'm working on it, I'm working on it.. The first part'll be up in the next day or too. Meanwhile, read my other posts. They're grrreat!
Needless to say, things come across between the lines - a touch of dryness in "Ex-Brooklyn-ite furious about our defeatist government"'s writing, some pop-culture saturation in "thought I left England behind but it followed me", a certain je ne sais quoi about "Religious Mom X's" - but overall, without a clue as to who these people actually are, they're writing missives without a source. The anonymity has a certain advantage to it for polemical/political-style blogs, where the writer may well prefer to leave her/himself out for "purity of argument"'s sake, but most of the more personal/anecdotal blogs seem strangely up in the air.
So I'm going to tell you, by drips and drabs, about myself, so far as I can tell. now, hold on.. I know this sounds like a practice in sheer vanity, but I'll try to keep it somewhat relevant to, well, people besides myself. So, to be continued. That is, if I stay on track long enough to follow through on this idea and not just write some more about Jerusalem
----------- PS ------------
I'm working on it, I'm working on it.. The first part'll be up in the next day or too. Meanwhile, read my other posts. They're grrreat!
Monday, February 13, 2006
Me? Blog?
It's gotten a hold of me! AHHH! get it off!
I'm 27 (in 2006), single, male, Jewish, am relatively not messed up by organized theologies or crashing, failed relationships (by which I mean there haven't been any), am completely incapable of bullshitting. You'll probably see that here. Love music of the more independent rock variety, and play in several bands. I find partisanship and deceitfulness to be the dumbest, most confounding signs of our time, am essentially an optimist, get excited about down-to-earth people, ideas and art, have a nasty lazy streak sometimes and am not as self-confident as these last few sentences would have you believe. But yeah, I guess I'm ok.
I've had an uneasy relationship with online interaction simulators/enhancers/userpers for a while... For example, I couldn't stomach the idea of online dating services - and I've stuck to that doctrine to this very day! - even at my loneliest. It just seemed like a final concede of defeat. And worse, it seemed to say our lives have gotten the best of us. That we're really too busy to get out there and meet in person, our standards are too high, let's now meet online where we can get loads of information on each other and make sure we're juuust the right temperature before we pop the potato out of the microwave.. It made perfect sense. it was clean, scientific and pragmatic. It was depressing. It meant no old-fashioned romance in my book, and that's what I couldn't take. Every day not succuming online dating sites, I'm quite proud of myself.
And blogging - what was that all about? What induced people to write all their personal crap? It seemed like the same sad story.. For me, stepping away from the screen and out of your house was and is the only reality. Not that I do it often enough, but I enjoy it through and through when I do. All the witty comments in the world, even when coming from very real people, can't hold a candle to meeting them! So why? why?
Here's the real, unexciting reason: I found that I have an unexplained tendency to spill every once in a while. I'd figure I ought to write an old friend in the States, ponder how there's nothing to say ("there's never anything to say!"), start writing whatever's in my head, and find a twisted, sprawling letter half an hour later. And I'd go back and look at it. And I'd see that it was good - not the writing ("uch! this could be worded SO much better! damn 'send' button") - but my feeling after writing it. Anecdotes would pile up, thoughts - some temporary and some reconsidered and revised to the point of doctrine - I had to write something. So here it is.
But people, I ask only one thing: sitting at home reading blogs can be fun/interesting/informative, but don't let it get a hold of you. Get out there and LIVE, BABY! This comes from el numero uno wild child on the block, I assure you all...
No idea what direction this blog will take - political, personal, romantic whining, music adulation, Fugazi call-to-arms - but heeere we go!
I'm 27 (in 2006), single, male, Jewish, am relatively not messed up by organized theologies or crashing, failed relationships (by which I mean there haven't been any), am completely incapable of bullshitting. You'll probably see that here. Love music of the more independent rock variety, and play in several bands. I find partisanship and deceitfulness to be the dumbest, most confounding signs of our time, am essentially an optimist, get excited about down-to-earth people, ideas and art, have a nasty lazy streak sometimes and am not as self-confident as these last few sentences would have you believe. But yeah, I guess I'm ok.
I've had an uneasy relationship with online interaction simulators/enhancers/userpers for a while... For example, I couldn't stomach the idea of online dating services - and I've stuck to that doctrine to this very day! - even at my loneliest. It just seemed like a final concede of defeat. And worse, it seemed to say our lives have gotten the best of us. That we're really too busy to get out there and meet in person, our standards are too high, let's now meet online where we can get loads of information on each other and make sure we're juuust the right temperature before we pop the potato out of the microwave.. It made perfect sense. it was clean, scientific and pragmatic. It was depressing. It meant no old-fashioned romance in my book, and that's what I couldn't take. Every day not succuming online dating sites, I'm quite proud of myself.
And blogging - what was that all about? What induced people to write all their personal crap? It seemed like the same sad story.. For me, stepping away from the screen and out of your house was and is the only reality. Not that I do it often enough, but I enjoy it through and through when I do. All the witty comments in the world, even when coming from very real people, can't hold a candle to meeting them! So why? why?
Here's the real, unexciting reason: I found that I have an unexplained tendency to spill every once in a while. I'd figure I ought to write an old friend in the States, ponder how there's nothing to say ("there's never anything to say!"), start writing whatever's in my head, and find a twisted, sprawling letter half an hour later. And I'd go back and look at it. And I'd see that it was good - not the writing ("uch! this could be worded SO much better! damn 'send' button") - but my feeling after writing it. Anecdotes would pile up, thoughts - some temporary and some reconsidered and revised to the point of doctrine - I had to write something. So here it is.
But people, I ask only one thing: sitting at home reading blogs can be fun/interesting/informative, but don't let it get a hold of you. Get out there and LIVE, BABY! This comes from el numero uno wild child on the block, I assure you all...
No idea what direction this blog will take - political, personal, romantic whining, music adulation, Fugazi call-to-arms - but heeere we go!
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)