|
|
Thursday, October 2nd, 2003
|
9:28a - i got it out of a book.
"which book?"
so, sadly, the west wing and angel were more or less phenomenally disappointing last night. i really need to stop building things up in my head. anticipation can turn out to be such a buzzkiller. angel was okay but nothing spectacular. it really lacked the oomph that one normally associates with a season premiere. storyline was weak, dialogue uninspired. david boreanaz kept that ugly vampire face on for most of the show and that's just irritating. oh, AND, i had to wait the entire episode to get a glimpse of spike.
all i can say about the west wing is that yeah, the ratings were falling while sorkin was writing, this i accept...but replacing that sorkin/schlamme team with less-talented writers...that's not going to work. am i the only one who sees this, am i? even if the ratings go up, that emmy sure as shit isn't going to be headed back their way. apparently, one of the problems besides the ratings was that with that team at the helm, the show was just too liberal and they needed to mix it up. what? the west wing? too liberal? the president and his entire staff (with the exception of matthew perry's assistant counsel) are fucking democrats! and not the moderate kind either, man, what do they expect? they do the occasional show where gay congressman matt skinner supports bills that create a federal definition of marriage as an union between a man and a woman or a show where ex-assistant counsel ainsley hayes explains why she thinks the ERA is demeaning to women and whatnot. isn't that enough? hollywood scuttlebutt is that the pressure the second bush administration is putting on the media/entertainment industry is what led the producers to request that the show be more balanced. by "pressure," i mean "anything that criticises the government or the republican party is un-american so shut the fuck up you liberal assholes." correct me if i'm wrong, but isn't that sentiment totally un-american? aren't we the ones who are supposed to argue with what you say but argue for your right to say it?
sometimes i hate everyone and everything i swear to god.
"the little red book."
current mood: capricious
current music: the walkmen
|
12:13p - kiss...hand...diamonds...best friend
so here's the thing. i get along great with the guys here in the old office. i talk to them about all sorts of things, from happy bunny to hillary clinton (on whom, by the way, i have an enormous crush) to soccer to GATT to the re-fi boom to everything else, you know? i get along okay with the women in the office. we have bathroom chats, that type of thing, but with the women, we NEVER talk about anything that has any real bearing on the world. topics covered today: my shoes and where i got them (nordie's); my shirt--where i got it and who made it (barney's and ella moss); what size in seven jeans jenn, kylee and i wear (31, 27 and 29 if it's rigid, 30 if it's stretch); where we're getting lunch (that sushi place in the lobby); and what lip gloss i'm sporting (lancome juicy tube in grade escape). all we ever talk about is clothing, lip gloss, food and sometimes, the weather.
what i want to know is...is it me? or is it them? i know full well that i can have conversations that don't sound like an issue of jane magazine with other women. why can't i do it with these women? is it like we are so different that girl stuff is the only level on which we can relate? or am i doomed to turn into these women? will i wake up one day and be 30 years old with frosted hair, bleached teeth and a fake tan?
i shudder to think.
"your run-on sentences have gotten less pointless..."
|
3:34p - you have selected ritual sarifices! for animals, press one now.
you know what i hate about The Onion? they always manage to make me realize that i am a lazy slacker fuckwit, much like the rest of the country. the headline reads:48-Hour Internet Outage Plunges Nation Into Productivity. the worst part about this story is that it's fucking true. for the most part, my actual work takes a total backseat to my internet adventures. when i walk into work, the first things i do are as follows:
1. check my work email. (yay me!)
2. check hotmail account (boo)
3. check friendster account. (hiss)
4. visit cnn.com. (double boo)
5. visit slate.com. (double hiss)
6. visit nerve.com. (etc.)
7. check out various blogs.
8. check out my blog.
without fail, i do this everyday BEFORE i start in on my work. this is true. if i lost internet access, i'd have no idea what to do with myself.
current mood: lazy
current music: the reverend horton heat
|
3:55p
--i find these things everywhere...on my hard drive, on old discs, on a scrap of paper somewhere. i must have a million first paragraphs of stories that i decided to make myself write and never finished...never got beyond that first paragraph, even. it's weird because when i'm writing larry a speech on whatever it is i write speeches for larry (i think i want to petition to have my job title changed to "sam seaborne of my division."), i can do one of those start to finish non-stop no problem. strange.--
I’d like to be able to present this all as an orchestral masterpiece, complete with a wind ensemble, but it looks like I’m going to have to settle for four-part harmony. Very traditional, naturally—soprano, alto, tenor, bass. Perhaps I can muster up a flautist as time permits, but I promise nothing. I also do not promise that what is to follow will necessarily be a merry madrigal. In fact, it should probably be something of a Gregorian chant. And also, I shall be performing every part, which will make harmony slightly difficult, so you’ll just have to imagine all the voices together, keeping in mind the fact that four-part harmony is really only a metaphor and there will be no actual singing involved here. There will also be no harmony, per se, “harmony” being defined as a musical arrangement in which more than one instrument, or in this case, voice, performs simultaneously, thus producing a more rounded, full sound. This is a story, so each “voice” is comprised of text, which must be accessed visually, unlike music, which may be accessed aurally. As I’m sure you know, one may hear multiple voices at the same time, but reading multiple texts is nigh-impossible.
--i don't even know what story was to follow. no idea. could be anything, i guess. give me a plot and i'll finish this up.
|
|
|
|