Explore
Gaia Soulmates
 Advertising keeps Gaia free! Interested in sponsoring us?

Talent and Inspiration

Posted on Sep 1st, 2008 by Marmalade : Gaia Explorer Marmalade
I realized that I don't work tonight and so I stopped by the coffeehouse.  I thought I'd do a simple blog entry.  I was downtown and the students are back in town.  I noticed a hack circle and I hadn't hacked all summer.  I normally hackysack quite a bit when the weather is nice, but haven't felt in the mood this year.

I'm pretty decent at hackysack, and I know some interesting tricks.  I've been playing soccer since I was a little kid and picked up hackysack in highschool.  I enjoy it in some ways, but it brings out a side of me that I don't entirely like.  Hackysack isn't exactly a competitive sport (although there are competitions).  Even so, it allows for ample showing off.  I can show off because I'm usually better than those I'm hacking with which doesn't mean much since most people don't attempt to be very good at it.  Most people just sort of kick back and forth.  I love the challenge of figuring out a trick, but I dislike the feeling of showing off.  I don't know why that is.

Anyways, it got me thinking about talents.  I have many talents, but I don't do much with most of them.  If I had taken hackysack more seriously when younger and had met more talented hackysackers to learn from, I could've been really great at it... but to what end?  In the past, I've spent endless hours simply repeating a trick to get it down just right... but its not a highly valued ability in our society.  :)

I quit soccer in 11th grade because I didn't see the point.  I was a very fast runner when a kid, but I was never great at soccer.  I had some natural talent, but never practiced much.  In order to be really good at something, you have to spend enormous amounts of time doing it.  And I'm not that competitive and I can't say I've ever been a driven sort of person.  I was always a team player, but I didn't really care if my team won.  And maybe that was a good thing as I was always on losing teams.  When a little kid, soccer was the game everyone played and I just enjoyed running around as kids do.  But sports become more serious as you grow older, especially in highschool.

Overall, I've never been a motivated person and partly that has to do with my not liking school.  Only once in my life did I have an inspiring teacher that actually brought out the best in me.  He was an art teacher.  I had always taken art classes and enjoyed them, but this teacher was a really great teacher that encouraged innovation.  He was the first person who taught me to think outside of the box.  I took art classes later on in college, but I never did as good of work as I did in that highschool class.  Unfortunately, I never felt inspired when not in the presence of that teacher.  Art was something I was good at, but it just didn't capture my attention.  Just too much work and for whatever reason I never envisioned myself as an artist.

The talent I ended up focusing on is writing which isn't something I cared about when younger.  I liked reading fiction somewhat growing up, but I was never obsessed with reading.  There was one thing that foretold my future.  My childhood bestfriend and I would tell collaborative stories.  In highschool, I started journalling very seriously and in later highschool became very interested in reading books with deep themes, both fiction and non-fiction.  But I can't say I thought of being a writer at that time.  I really had no ambitions other than to understand life... which I'm still working on.

At this time, I had fallen into severe depression but hadn't yet recognized it as such.  My truly obsessive nature began to show itself at this point.  I just wouldn't let these questions go.  There had to be some kind of answer somewhere, but apparently older people were as clueless as me.  I found that a bit disheartening.  Back then, I actually still held the belief that with age came wisdom, but I came to realize most adults were even ignorant of the questions.  At least, my dad was always very honest about the limits of his understanding.  I like honesty.

I definitely had become more obsessed with non-fiction than with fiction, but I found few writers who actually inspired me.  Inspiration is a big thing for me.  I've always sought inspiration to counteract my apathetic nature.  By looking for inspiration, I was looking for my own inner motivation that tends to get lost with the years of conformity training that one gets in school.  I'm still looking for this inner motivation thingie, and I occasionally hit upon an ephemeral essence that feels true.  Give me another few decades and I think I'll have it figured out.

Anyways, I've slowly realized that non-fiction for the most part isn't what inspires me.  I'm inspired by imagination which is most often found in fiction.  On the other hand, fiction often lacks the depth of ideas that can be found in non-fiction.  What is a boy to do?  (Read Philip K. Dick is what. lol)

Okay, back to my life story.  I returned to my childhood home after highschool and reconnected with the aforementioned childhood bestfriend.  He also had become interested in writing, and so two aspiring writers were we.  This is when I started to take writing seriously and specifically writing fiction (because my friend was mostly into fiction).

So, after 20 years of my life, I finally found a talent that I cared about.  Unfortunately, it may seem, I found this talent at a time of my deepest depression.... not exactly a time of consistent motivation.

Over the last 10 or so years, I've slowly become more focused but its a struggle.  The internet has helped me to gain focus as online communities such as this give me the opportunity to play around with my writing.  I'm presently trying to get my mind back into fiction.  I even have a story I'm working on right now.

There ya go.  I could've been many things...
 ...but a writer is what I became.
Access_public Access: Public 11 Comments Print views (145)  

Good and Evil on TV

Posted on Sep 6th, 2008 by Marmalade : Gaia Child Marmalade
From some recent shows, I've noticed two specific types of characters.   The shows I'm thinking of all are based in a small town where normal social order is lacking or shifting. 

One character plays the role of a patriarch of the town, but not necessarily in a formal position of authority.  Even though this character is amoral in his behavior, he isn't evil.  He values loyalty, and he only hurts those who get in his way.  He isn't primarily interested in power nor in grand visions.  He just wants to keep the status quo and enforce a loose order.  He is confident in his ability and inspires other people's confidence in him.  He doesn't always have a clear plan, but he is a man of action that gets things done.

The other character plays the role of an opposing authority figure and maybe in a less political position.  He isn't interested in power or money.  He is trying to be a good person, but has personal issues.  He is somewhat a loner in that he feels that its up to him to figure things out, and there can be a conflict between his relationships and his sense of duty.

The two characters have to test eachother.  The latter character in particular doesn't fully understand the former character.  They have different motivations, but their purposes aren't always in conflict.  They' both value the town and are protective of it.  When other people seek harm to the town citizens, these two characters slowly develop an uneasy truce.  An outside threat creates a common enemy.

Neither of these characters play the traditional roles of good and evil.  In coming to a truce with eachother, they come to a more complex and nuanced understanding of morality.  Both characters are capable of good and evil, but the moral lesson is more about relationships than about individual behavior.  What is important is the life of the community.

The shows I have in mind as examples are Deadwood, American Gothic, and Invasion.  In Deadwood, the two characters are Al Swearengen (played by Ian McShane) and Seth Bullock (played by Timothy Olyphant).  In American Gothic, the two characters are Sheriff Lucas Buck (played by Gary Cole)  and Dr. Matt Crower (played by Jake Weber).  In Invasion, the two characters are Sheriff Tom Underlay (played by William Fichtner) and Russell Varon (played by Eddie Cibrian).

Of course, between these two men is a woman.  In Deadwood, its Alma Garret Ellsworth (played by Molly Parker).  In American Gothic, its Gail Emory (played by Paige Turco).  In Invasion, its Dr. Mariel Underlay (played by Kari Matchett). 

This female character is in the middle of the conflict and she is trying to define her own identity.  Her allegiance is uncertain.  She has experienced emotional struggle which might have involved the death of someone close to her.  She both mediates and exacerbates the conflict between the two male characters.
Access_public Access: Public 13 Comments Print views (171)  

The Dark Knight

Posted on Sep 14th, 2008 by Marmalade : Gaia Child Marmalade
The Dark Knight  

(My review is at the end.)  

Official Warner Bros. Dark Knight Website  

Wikipedia Dark Knight Movie Entry  

Rotten Tomatoes
95% rating  

IMDb
9.1 out of 10 stars
#3 of the top 250 movies as rated by users  

Metacritic
Critics: 82 out of 100 rating
Users: 9 out of 10 rating  

Box Office Mojo
Users have given it the highest rating of any movie.
Widest release of any movie.
Largest opening weekend gross and largest total gross.  

Review from The New York Times
  

http://movies.nytimes.com/2008/07/18/movies/18knig.html  

Viral marketing
  

http://www.ibelieveinharveydent.com/  

http://whysoserious.com/itsallpartoftheplan/  

http://www.thegothamtimes.com/page1.htm  

http://www.superherohype.com/news/topnews.php?id=6970
  

http://www.rotheblog.com/movie-reviews/the-gotham-times-now-online/
  

http://www.cinematical.com/2007/11/24/holy-dark-knight-viral-sites-batman/
  

http://www.firstshowing.net/2008/03/26/updates-on-the-dark-knights-viral-campaign-new-gotham-times/
  

http://www.firstshowing.net/2008/03/31/latest-on-the-dark-knight-viral-clown-travel-agency-and-april-1st/  

http://www.firstshowing.net/2007/12/05/the-dark-knights-viral-marketing-gets-very-real-cakes-cell-phones-and-all/  

http://www.firstshowing.net/2008/03/28/why-the-dark-knights-viral-marketing-is-absolutely-brilliant/  

History Channel Batman Unmasked: The Psychology of the Dark Knight  

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=U6MzqoubRAo
  

Interesting Blogs

The following blogs are from other blogging sites, but if you do a search you can find some blog reviews of this movie also here on Gaia.  

http://cielos.wordpress.com/2008/07/02/the-influences-of-the-dark-knight-part-1/  

http://cielos.wordpress.com/2008/09/03/the-dark-knight-westerns-film-noir-and-horror/
  

http://cielos.wordpress.com/2008/08/17/the-dark-knight-vigilantism-law-and-terrorism/
  

http://cielos.wordpress.com/2008/06/15/war-on-terror-of-chris-nolan%e2%80%99s-batman/
  

http://cielos.wordpress.com/2008/07/28/the-dark-knight-politics-strike-back/  

http://cielos.wordpress.com/2008/08/09/half-batman-half-two-face/
  

http://cielos.wordpress.com/2008/08/05/the-dark-knight-the-joker-the-devil-and-dogs/
  

http://seeker65.wordpress.com/2008/07/19/the-dark-knights-joker-is-a-mystical-trickster-not-mad-super-villain/
  

http://goatmilk.wordpress.com/2008/07/15/the-dark-knight-movie-review-the-dark-knight-ascends/  

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/tvshowbiz/reviews/article-1037123/Holy-Moly-Batmans-big-noise--loses-plot.html  

http://tpmcafe.talkingpointsmemo.com/talk/2008/07/the-politics-of-the-dark-knigh.php  

TV Tropes

This is the best site I've come across that analyzes the patterns found in various media.  

http://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Main/DarkKnightTrilogy?from=Main.TheDarkKnight
  

http://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/JustBugsMe/DarkKnightTrilogy
  

http://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/JustBugsMe/TheDarkKnight
  

Frank Miller's Comic Dark Knight

Here is an article that gives good background about Frank Miller's comic that the movie was based upon.  This movie is part of a larger storyline.  

http://comics.ign.com/articles/595/595592p1.html  

Cultural and Philosophical Origins of Batman

Here is a very interesting thesis titled The Mythic Symbols of Batman which describes the origins of Batman.  

http://contentdm.lib.byu.edu/ETD/image/etd2158.pdf  


 
Marmalade's Review of Dark Knight  

The first thing that someone should know about this movie is that its for the most part a typical Hollywood action flick.  I'm not a big fan of action flicks and I strongly dislike certain aspects of this movie.  Some of the scenes are quite contrived and some of the characters are extremely stereotyped.  Nonetheless, its relatively speaking a very good movie for an action flick.  I must admit, though, I prefer the movie Batman Begins, but Dark Knight definitely would be my second favorite of the Batman movies.  

I'm a fan of Christian Bale.  His acting in Batman Begins made Batman real to me.  Previously, I always connected Batman to the cheesy tv show that I watched as a kid and the cheesy Batman movies that came before.  In Batman Begins, there was actual character development.  It finally made sense to me why a rich white guy would want to wear a funny costume and beat up criminals.  

Some prefer Heath Ledger's portray of the Joker.  I admit it was entertaining, but I didn't think it was all that great... not to speak ill of the dead.  Heath Ledger didn't make the Joker seem real in the way that Christian Bale made Batman seem real.  Heath Ledger's Joker was a stereotypical madman.  This Joker lacked subtle psychological nuance and lacked character development.  This Joker was intended to be more of an archetype than a character, but even as an archetype I was left unsatisfied.  Heath Ledger does seem to be a good actor, but I wouldn't consider his acting in this case to be all that original.  His acting here seemed to be directly based off of David Tennant's portrayal of Barty Crouch Jr in Harry Potter and the Goblet of Fire.  The whole lip-licking thing became annoying after awhile.  To be fair, however, Heath Ledger was probably just playing the character according to script.  Comic book villains aren't known for their depth and complexity.  

As for Batman, his character also had its annoying aspects.  It seemed rather far-fetched Batman's unwillingness to kill anyone.  The Joker is willing to kill anyone and everyone, but Batman isn't willing to kill the Joker even to save innocent lives.  Batman has highspeed chases through crowded city streets and sidewalks.  In real life, this would lead to the injury and death of large numbers of bystanders.  Anyways, I find these kind of action flick car chases rather boring and predictable.  

Despite my criticisms, I did enjoy the movie.  Its quality entertaiment and the portrayal of Gotham is interesting.  Most of all, I liked the themes and ideas of the movie.  Joker's viewpoint of there being two types of people added an interesting context.  I appreciated the moral complexity of the film.  I very much prefer a comic book hero such as Batman over one such as Superman.  I've always been a fan of the tragic hero, and this movie adds a depth to the theme of the superhero's split personality.  

Basically, if you like superhero movies, then you'll like this movie.  Even if you don't like most superhero movies, I'd still recommend this movie as its much better than the normal fare.  Also, this movie has a lot to say about where our culture is and how our culture views itself.  Heck, go see it just to find out what all the hype is about.


  
* This review can also be found on the Community Film Picks (zFilms) Group.  Here is the link to the thread:  9/14/08 "OLD" -- The Dark Knight


Access_public Access: Public 2 Comments Print views (379)  

Tropes

Posted on Sep 16th, 2008 by Marmalade : Gaia Child Marmalade
I decided to start this thread because of one site that I like a lot.  Its called TV Tropes Wiki.  Its so named because it originally started off just being about tv shows, but has since expanded to cover any type of media.  So, what is a trope?

Tropes are devices and conventions that a writer can reasonably rely on as being present in the audience members' minds and expectations. On the whole, tropes are not clichés. The word clichéd means "stereotyped and trite." In other words, dull and uninteresting.

It has a bunch of entries about wikis and Wikipedia.  And, of course, Wikipedia has an entry of the TV Tropes Wiki.

It has many categories of tropes.  For this pod, here are the film tropes, and here are the tv tropes.

A while ago, the site got hacked and was destroyed.  Unfortunately, it wasn't backed up, but through the dedication of the contributors they re-created the whole site by copying from the cache function of search engines which sounds like a difficult process.  Its back up to normal again.  Its a popular site which is probably why it attracted a hacker.  They had a discussion forum, but the code of the forum was a risk for further hacking and so they got rid of it.

Here are the entries about forum tropes, and here are the entries about hacker tropes.

For OM, here are the tropes about violence, killing, murder, peace, and pacifism.  :)

There are some  Wikipedia entries that are about or related to the subjects found on TV Tropes.  There is the Narratology Category, and there is the Film Theory Category.  Tropes also relate to Comparative Mythology and Folklore Motifs.


  This was originally posted as a thread on the Community Film Picks (zFilms) Group.

  
Access_public Access: Public What do you think? Print views (434)  

Online World: Tropes, Types, and Trolls

Posted on Sep 16th, 2008 by Marmalade : Gaia Explorer Marmalade

I started this thread with a specific site in mind, but decided to expand upon it.  The aforementioned site is TV Tropes Wiki.  Its a great site that is about tropes of all kinds in all media.  For this thread I wanted to focus on the entries there that pertain to the online world.

  • Blog Tropes
  • Wiki Tropes
  • Friending Network
  • Online Personas
  •  First Post
  • Armchair Psychology
  • Double Post
  • Forum Pecking Order
  • Imageboards
  • Message Board
  • Play By Post Games
  • Sock Puppet
  • Flame War
  • Troll
  • Godwin's Law
  • Image Macro
  • Internet Backdraft
  • Internet Counterattack
  • Thread Hopping
  • Thread Necromancy


    There are some other sites that I was thinking about:

    Forum Member Types:

    http://www.10e20.com/blog/2008/01/17/7-types-of-forum-members-you-should-get-to-know/

    http://redwing.hutman.net/~mreed/index.htm

    Blogger Types:

    http://www.chrisg.com/what-type-of-blogger-are-you/

    http://blogs.msdn.com/clemensv/archive/2007/03/21/blogger-types-who-are-they-who-are-you.aspx

    http://www.highrankings.com/10-blogger-types/

    http://www.kuro5hin.org/story/2002/10/28/211050/43

    http://sitening.com/blog/what-kind-of-blogger-are-you/

    http://www.web-articles.info/e/a/title/Blogger-types/

    Trolling and Troll Types:

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Internet_troll

    http://tantek.pbwiki.com/TrollTaxonomy




  • This is also a thread on the God Pod.


      
    Access_public Access: Public What do you think? Print views (212)  

    What if everything you knew was wrong?

    Posted on Sep 17th, 2008 by Marmalade : Gaia Explorer Marmalade
    I noticed an interesting thread question in the QaR group.

    What if everything you knew was wrong?


    I must admit I didn't resonate with many of the answers.  That is a very profound question, but many of the answers seemed to take it lightly.  I don't get how people can answer with confident certainty to a question that asks about the possibility of the complete disappearance of the very foundation of all certainty in your life, in your very sense of reality.  Its quite obvious that I have a very different read on that question.

    I can only guess that anyone who answers with confidence is someone who has never had the type of experience implied by the question.  I have had experiences that undermined my sense of reality and my sense of self, and my experience is that there is no answer to this question.  Any answer would be a further claim of knowledge which according to the scenario would be wrong.  My sense is that most respondants in that thread weren't interpeting that questioning in its deepest meaning.  Some even seemed to just take it as a linguistic game rather than as a soul-wrenching inquiry.

    I'm not surprised by the responses.  As this is Gaia, it was unsurprising that they largely were typical New Agey viewpoints.  This makes me think of the research on optimism.  From my understanding, an optimist (almost by definition) can't take such a question seriously.  The question presents a non-optimistic scenario, and so the optimistic response to it is how to reinterpret the question.  The research I've looked at concludes that optimists tend to not accurately see reality as it is but instead as it might be.  There is a correlation between optimism and extraversion, and so an optimist generally desires to turn outward.  This question, on the other hand, offers us to turn within to the very ground (or rather groundlessness) of our being.

    I'm not saying that the answers in that thread are wrong, but they are quite different than my own view.  The main point of my writing all of this is about how much our experience determines our responses.  Experience comes first and the responses we give based on that experience come after.  In that sense, our verbal explanations always carry an element of rationalization.  We feel such a strong need to explain and justify our experiences to ourselves and to others, but ultimately our experiences are non-rational.  Our experiences can't really be explained or even communicated.  Our experiences seem to be at best their own justification, but the tricky part of the question is to consider that maybe our experiences aren't justified.

    I have felt frustrated by this recently.  The most deeply genuine experiences I've had in my life seem impossible to communicate.  In fact, they bewilder me to the point I hardly understand them.  As implied by the question, they undermine my very sense of being able to know anything at all.  I partly get annoyed at others' confident certainty because I lack it.  Then again, I'm grateful for my lack of confident certainty because it allows me to more easily see multiple perspectives.

    The real frustration comes because I do want to communicate.  I identify as a writer... and, yet, the most important experiences of my whole existence can't even be touched upon by words.  So, I spend a lot of time talking around in circles never coming to any satisfactory conclusion.  The reason I write so often about ideas is that I can write about ideas.  That is relatively easy.  However, related to the question, that which exists beyond all ideas forever nags at my awareness.

    I've been feeling a desire to instead turn to fiction.  In some ways, fiction can get at these non-rational experiences better than other modes of verbal expression.  But I don't know if even fiction can capture or satisfactorily allude to my confused sense of reality.  The challenge as I see it isn't how to answer the question.  What I want is to find a way to get beyond the question itself.
    Access_public Access: Public 26 Comments Print views (282)  

    Books On Tropes: Personality, Plots. and Cliches

    Posted on Sep 19th, 2008 by Marmalade : Gaia Explorer Marmalade

    Here is a nice page from the
    TV Tropes Wiki.  I own several of the books mentioned here.  I'm particularly interested in theories about plot structure.



    Books On Trope

    In case you didn't realize it: We here at TV Tropes are not the first to collect tropes and try to put them in some semblance of order. Of course, since few people would actually use the word trope to describe patterns in media, it may be difficult to find the various resources that exist. Therefore we now have this page. If you happen to run across a resource (a book, website, or other useful thing) that discusses a set of tropes, write up a summary page and stick the link on this index.

    Personality Profiles

    The most common trope collections are personality profiles. Many people have devised systems of sorting characters into a handful of pigeonholes (the Meyers-Briggs Type Indicator (MBTI), the Enneagram, etc.). Of course, they tend to think this works well for sorting people, whereas we're going to take the more sensible view that it works well for sorting fictional characters who aren't nearly as complex as your average real human. They're useful systems for the writer as well as for the reader, so eventually we'll get them up here.

    Basic Plots

    People have also tried to condense the wide and varied world of plots into a small and succinct list of possible plots. The most basic system says that all plots are about one of two things, love and death, but the list can go up to fifty or even more. Joseph Campbell tried to pin it all down to a single heroic version in The Hero's Journey, and while that doesn't cover every story, it works with a lot of them (and George Lucas decided to base Star Wars all around Campbell's work). It's when people start claiming that Schlindler's List has the same plot as Alice In Wonderland that we start to wonder if their systems make any sense, but hey, maybe they had a flash of inspiration. At any rate, studying plot archetypes can help writers to straighten out the odd kinks that are throwing them for a loop, and maybe to introduce elements that strengthen the overall story and underscore its thematic meaning. As for the reader... well, it's always fun to realize, halfway into the new blockbuster, that you're really watching a postmodern sci-fi version of Beauty And The Beast.

    Lists of Clichés

    Dead Horse Tropes can be surprisingly stubborn beasts, refusing to leave the media well after they've been discredited, disbarred, and run out of the country for being So Last Century. The more that writers recognize the possible clichés that exist, the more they're able to avert, subvert, and even invert the critters, allowing for the possibility that their viewers are not morons and just might enjoy watching something written with a little connection to reality. Then again, it's just fun to review all the oddities that make up our collected media history (laser printers that still sound like a Dot Matrix?) and then play drinking games over recognizing when they show up in our favorite sitcoms.



    Personality Profiles

    Basic Plots

    Lists of Clichés

    Resources That Don't Yet Have Their Own Pages

    Access_public Access: Public 4 Comments Print views (665)