Seriously, Folks...

A friend of mine tonight commented on an earlier post of mine, and presented me with this question:
"Don't You Want (Emily) To Take You Seriously?"

She tagged it as food for thought, and of course, I ate it right up. Rachel'll give me a hard time for saying this, but I do rather enjoy thinking, even when (typically) it turns down the dark corridors of my mind (dark as in uncomfortable, not unused ^_^). And so, being me (and you guys may find this hard to believe) I thought about it.

She was refering to The Letter, which may yet turn out to be not so regrettable as it appears, but one can never say. That's aside the point. She refered to the letter, asking if I wanted her to take me seriously in the matter. Granted, it's quite simply "yes" - I'd be a fool or worse if I wanted her to take it as a joke. And yet, I retain that, given the subject matter, I don't think it could be mistaken, though I could be wrong. That's as far as my thoughts went on that issue, but I didn't stop there. I never stop at an obvious ending point. No, not I.

Of course, the topic turned broader, from if I wanted HER to take me seriously, to wether I really wanted ANYONE to take me seriously. Again, it would follow that, yes, I do want to be taken seriously, but maybe that's not the issue after all. It may well be an issue of wether I want to....'seem' isn't the right word, but seems to fit well enough. Wether I want to seem serious...no, that's not even the right word.

I guess it's not so much "seriousness" that I'm concerned with. Or rather, maybe "seriousness" itself is what should be under scrutiny, as opposed to being TAKEN seriously. No one would argue the point that a stand-up comedian is nessisarily serious, though they may be BEING serious, to an extent, and one could alsoi take a comedian seriously. Comedians, like anyone else, typically have something to say, and comedy is their medium. Be it rediculous or exagerated, true humor revolves around truth - if there's no truth in it somewhere, even if it's a blatant LACK of truth (or perhaps, more an opposite to truth) that's where true humor is.

Which, of course, leads to an interesting observation. Much of what passes for comedy these days doesn't qualify, really, as humor. No, I would greatly argue that point, and it's my personal conviction that much of the comedy out there is rather insulting to my intellegence, and I should hope insulting to others.

A kid throws a brick at a robber's forehead, who subsequently staggers back onto a rollerskate and falls down the stairs and out through the front window. At first glance, yes, maybe it's almost humorous, but I would say it's humorous in the implausibility of the chain reaction, not in the act itself, and upon closer inspection, I would say it lacks most any humor.

Now then, many out there would argue with me. Or, at the least, disagree with me if they couldn't formulate an argument. They would try to show that throwing bricks at people is funny, but I digress, and so would they. The fact remains, as I asserted, that comedy revolves on truth. This argument sheds doubt on classic Roadrunner cartoons, which would earn me the animosity of many Americans today. I would almost argue with myself on that point - I grew up with those cartoons, as well.

And now here's another interesting observation - you have seen on a small scale how my thoughts flow. It seems to follow, like most anything else, and at the same time doesn't quite seem to fit. Ironically, also, I do believe this post began with me argueing that I'm not completely serious, ever, and yet I ended up with a reasonable debate within my own mind.

And yet, even at that, it's a debate on COMEDY of all things. Really, can one argue that a serious debate on the nature of comedy is wholly serious? Wheels within wheels, my friends. Wheels within wheels.

No, Really

OK, I think my judgement is being clouded by the knowlege that people are reading this. I have to recenter myself - forget that you people are here. So, that's what I'll do - forget. I'm good at that anyways, ne? ^_^

Now then, for my piece of mind, if I say something stupid that upsets you, don't just take it at face value, please. Write me, or call me, or something to let me know what's up. Likely I didn't mean quite what came out - I'm not as precise with expressing myself as one might think. And on to the news today.

Seriously, I mean todays news. At ABC.com (yes, i'm a technophile, I admit it) one of the headlines was "Want to protect yourself from a burst of AK-47 fire, but also like the feel of a custom leather captain's chair? This SUV might be for you." I swear, I'm not playing. Now THERE's an odd headline if ever I saw one.

Bought tickets today for the dance on Friday, which I'm taking Claire to. Sixty bucks for tickets! That's outrageous. Thirty dollars a piece, no wonder they aren't selling as well as one would like. It's absurd. Anyways, though, it should be fun.

I'm gonna needa pick Claire up at her Uncle's, it seems. ^_^; On the plus side, I like driving. On the negative side, it means that I have to drive in DC, and that she has to put up with my driving (^_^) and that we're gonna have to put up with that dam "Door Ajar" light-thingy. I swear the fuse is blown or something. She's a good car, but sahe's really starting to go to pieces, I think. I wonder if I'll getta drive Dad's car over Christmas break... ^_^

There was something else, but I guess, seeing as I've lost my train of thought, that's that. ^_^

Inconceievable!

Tonight I got to talking with Nifer, and as much as I like the girl, I must say that she bewildered me.

It's not easy to explain, simply because I find it hard to follow. I guess I should just describe the conversation...

First we started talking about music, and she said that she liked Disturbed, the group. Now, I like there music, to a point, but I said that it turns me off when a group digresses into screaming obscenities in the middle of a song. She said she liked it because of the message and raw emotion it conveyed - that it was art. I said it wasn't art because art should have style, class - art should be something redeaming, not uhm, the opposite there of. She asked if art should always be positive and light. I almost said no, not always, but after thinking for a moment, yes, is should. Art should reflect truth and goodness. There should be some aspect of beauty in it. This brings up interesting questions about whether some of what we call art really is, but I think I would have to argue the point, and I think it's much more complicated than it at first seems. I can't understand, really, how to explain it.

Anyways, we went on to general philosophies on the nature of humans. I personally believe that people are basically good. She said she believed people are basically selfish, and that every human action is selfish. As a counter-point I brought up soup kitchens, and she said that the people who set those up have a desire to relieve sufering, and so doing so makes them feel better - ie, it's selfish.

But wouldn't the actual desire to HELP someone other than yourself, isn't that desire itself selfless? And wouldn't having that desire make one a selfless person?

By Nifer's definition, a man who jumped infront of a small child to sheild him from incoming gunfire would be a selfish man, due to the fact that he was fulfilling a desire to save the child. I don't know, but it just doesn't seem to fit right to me.

Anyways, I got to the point where I KNEW that somehow my belief was right - I KNOW it is, the world doesn't make sense anyways, life doesn't make sense otherwise - I just couldn't find HOW, in light of her argument.

Sometimes I fear for the girl...