NEVER BEE ASHAMED OF AN INSECTUOUS RELATIONSHIP

                                                           (Its a Free-bee)

Dreaming in the most American Fashion Possible. Also Abdominally fit gentlemen.

(OBLIGATORY DISCLAIMER)

       The American Dream, the driving force behind all our anxiety filled, sleepless nights. The golden hand that tirelessly motivates us to keep us working like massive fleshy cogs. The dream, dreamt by Europeans causing them to migrate West to this sweet succulent land of oppurtunity. Wait shouldnt it be the European dream then? I feel like everyones going to have a problem with that rather loose statement. ANYWAY. The American dream is described by Wikipedia members as:

a national ethos of the United States, a set of ideals in which freedom includes the opportunity for prosperity and success, and an upward social mobility for the family and children, achieved through hard work in a society with few barriers.

       I would agree with this large wall of pasted text, that the American dream is traditionally about working hard towards the golden gates of prosperity. The idea that any poor, potato peddling, ginger-nut (Irish stereotypes) can come to America, and literally work until his hands are just blunt nubs and he will strike it gold and live happily ever after.

Unfortunately, I dont think this is possible to the degree that it was in the "Good ol' days" (Im actually also skeptical of the whole legitimacy of the "American dream" idea even in the good ol' days but ill get to that later. Or maybe not if I dont remember) The reason?

After recently applying for college, looking at the bill (gasping) and having the student loans talk with my parents,(Arguably more uncomfortable than the Birds and the bees talk) I realize now that my generation is most likely going to be held down for years by the crushing weight of these student loans. Once we leave college, instead of having a fresh start and able to enter society with a financial blank slate (One of the requirements in order to qualify for beginning the process of the "American Dream") We will have to rush to whatever job is offered and spend all of our time earning money working in a Home Depot instead of putting our freshly-educationized(?)-juice-filled brains towards coming up with the next greatest piece of Software or inventing a new way to be more social while at the same time becoming less social (Im talking to you Zuck). For fear of the crippling credit repercussions that could arise from paying late bills/ not paying any bills at all.

      This fear, I think is strangling the minds, and abilitys of the selfie generation, and bottle necking the innovation process for the future. I could offer a solution by saying "look how great Europe is they pay for your University, Europes going to lead the world in innovation and Americas just going to be a bunch of middle aged Chipotle taco makers with master degrees. Why dont we follow that educational model??"

But due to my lack of knowledge on this well known and highly thought about subject, I am going to refrain from any statements such as this. also IRONY.

ANYWAY

MOVING ON..... Next question hmmmm (scrolls up) oooh Wealth!

Wealth in this day and age. From my teenage skeptical/vain perspective: A look at anyones Twitter feed will quickly clue you in to the typical teenage opinion of wealth. You see pictures of massive houses overlooking a stunning display of rolling waves with sweet boiling rays of sunlight caressing half naked, well shaven, abdominally fit gentleman relaxing with their well bosomed, toothpick, bronzed blonde female companion. There will probably also be a stereotypical rich guy car in the background.. Mercedes or Ferrari.. . . (whatever the kids are into these days) All this with the caption "#goals or (EMOJI FACE) "WANT" (EMOJI FACE)"

My point being is that a majority of teenagers my age, idolize wealth and have this unreal romanticized image  in their head and the mindset that they are just going to wake up rich one day in their Twenties. Now im about to step into uncharted territory here (meaning I have little knowledge, and its all based off of observation)

but these dreams are drastically unobtainable for a majority of the people who have them, especially the ones that get "turnt up" every weekend, and have their lives comepletely turned upside down over the fact that Jennifer is totally cheating on Brad with James.

    The funny thing about this is, that people can become rich by exploiting this romanticized image in order to promote their product (heres to you, Aber-Iamaslavetoyour Pitch) all in the name of marketing.

People are buying Jeans to look rich, when they actually make minimum wage at the local Best Buy. YOU ARE PAYING PEOPLE TO PRETEND TO BE RICH.

  

(Phwoo what a statement, got a little Fight Clubby back there.) (Also, before you write me off and dismiss me/ write a rap about big headed blonde hypocrites, I would like to add that yes, I am very much a part of the system, and I too have dreams)

All this aside, A majority of the people who are consuming these things, and posting these images to Twitter from their jewel encrusted IPhones are probably far wealthier than a majority of the human population already. (Pause)

    Ultimately, the point I have been trying to get to is that we have an unhealthy image of what "wealth" and by having these unrealistic images/dreams, we may never be contempt with and take for granted what we have currently. Unless you have nothing. Then maybe you can dream big. but not if your like sorta poor sorta rich. in the grey area. There should be a name for that, maybe grey group? grey tier? oh I got it! Grey class. 

Yeah,

In the Grey Class.

Meta-morphing all over your phosis

1.) This morning I woke up, stark clothed, birds were chirping, bugs were bugging, and bacon was beckoning (baconing?).

2.) This morning I woke up stark....clothed. the birds were, chirping. The bugs, bugging and bacon? was beckoning. baconing.

3.) This morning I woke up stark clothed birds chirping bugs bugging and bacon BECKONING. (baconing!!)

Did you notice a significant difference between the mood and message of these 3 sentences? Are you making psychoanalytic postulations about my mental state based on my diction? If so, this may be the post for you. Actually i'm assuming that all people that read this blog have probably done the same thing so this blog post is definitely for you. Unless of course someone from the future stumbles upon this blog post in the mass ruins of the internet after the cloud gets too heavy with data and slams into the earth wiping out all life as we know it. Have you started your psycho analysis yet? that last statement was a good place to start.

                                                Moving on:

Now for the meat, upon analyzing the different English iterations of the sentence:

Als Gregor Samsa eines Morgens aus unruhigen Träumen erwachte, fand er sich in seinem Bett zu einem ungeheuren Ungeziefer verwandelt.

                                                                      OR (In English)

                       As Gregor Samsa awoke (woke) one morning from uneasy (agitated, Troubled) dream(s) he found himself transformed in his bed (No bed) into a gigantic (Giant, Enormous, monstrous)  insect (Bug, Vermin)

ANALYSIS:

       1.) Uneasy vs troubled vs agitated

Uneasy: I found the use of the term uneasy gives off the vibe of Gregor having a bigger problem, but he is disconnected from it. The issue is a world issue or a societal issue (Like stop signs or crosswalks, whats the deal with those things)

Troubled: is a word that makes it seem as if Gregor has a problem with something in his life, something he is tossing and turning over that he is connected to.

Agitated: indicates that hes frustrated with something and just is clenching his fists over this event.

These 3 words give you 3 different impressions as to what Gregor is like.     

       2.) Bug vs Insect vs Vermin

     Bug: When you picture a bug, you picture a sort of cartoon image, drawn rather silly and lightheartedly, and sort of comedically.

     Insect: When you picture an insect, you picture a massive creature with bristling, hairy legs chirping away with its pincers and antennae twitching. menacingly. Oh lord just imagine a massive cockroach in your bed. sort of like that orkin commercial with the insects knocking on your front door trying to get in your house.

    Vermin: Vermin brings upon a far more striking and ominous image, like a massive dark rat scheming to lick your feet while youre sleeping. the word is also a mood word and it gives you an idea that he didnt literally "turn" into something. Its just a metaphor for his self hatred and body image.

        3.)  Bed vs No Bed

     Bed: With the mention of bed, its as if Gregor woke up immediately from his dream and immediately realized that hed became this creature overnight. OR he was just in bed contemplating about life and was just disguisted with himself. a metaphorical "Creature"

     No Bed: Without the mention of a bed, i can just imagine gregor getting up and doing all of his regular morning routines, having cereal, making the coffee, slipping the slippers on, brushing the teeth, trimming the nails, toasting the toast (not necessairily in that order) and then finally stepping out of the shower, and rubbing the mist off of the mirror and realizing he had transformed into a massive creature! (Cue Gregors scream). This could also be a sign of the absurd as he does this same monotonous, routine every. single. day.  

      4.) Giant vs Enormous vs Gigantic vs Monstrous

Giant: Giant is a word that gives the image of  something fictional, as if from a childrens book or a novel.

     Enormous: The word enormous is a word that is reserved for over the top, dinner stories told by your Dad. I can just see someone waving their hands about in an attempt to try and create the image to their audience.

     Gigantic: Gigantic is a scientific, almost "clinical" description. When you describe something as gigantic, i can see a pulsating tumor, growing in size.

     Monstrous: This is a rather terrifying description for something, probably a massive creature thats going around devouring babies and spewing racial epithets whilst painting phallic images. (Vulgar)        

After my detailed, highly objective analysis it seems that the different word choices can make it seem as if Gregor either turned into an actual creature, to whatever degree of horror or shock value the words imply. OR He metaphorically turned into a creature, meaning he just woke up and found himself disgusting and has absolutely poor self-image of himself.

These two different interpretations make for two very different reads. One that is rather fictional and shock based, and another that is rather philosophical about self loathing and body image.

As for book interpretations in general, Unless you can ask the actual author for the definition in English (or whatever language you are translating into) this could be a huge problem. I personally think that the multiple attempts at interpretating the book makes for a much more diverse read. Instead of one form of the book there are now multiple, all with their own meanings. This could be a brilliant concept for movie adaptions of books, that is different based upon which interpretation you read. (Also if you are still reading, thank you for sticking it through my mad ramblings.)  

                                          Congratulations! You made it to the end!

       

FREEBIE

FREE THOSE BEES

NOTICE: PLEASE WIPE YOUR FATE (thank you)

(WARNING: AUTHOR HAS NO IDEA WHERE THIS BLOGPOST MAY GO, SO PREPARE YOUR "IM OFFENDED" FACES)

        Thinking about it now, wouldn't it be fantastic if our lives were already pre-written? and there was a way we could find out exactly what was going to happen to us? I can just imagine it now.... (cue thought bubble) walking into your local fate clinic (similar to a doctors office),  Taking a seat in the colourfully painted, overly sanitary, crying infant-filled waiting room. Filling out your proof of insurance form (Im assuming fate would probably be some form of preventive care), and then waiting for your turn to see the fateologist. and waiting. and waiting. AND WAITING. Ironically wasting a good chunk of your life to see your future. Finally! The fateologist will see you now. This fateologist (probably some older man (or woman) with wrinkly but firm hands) hooks you up to the fateomotron via suction diddleys and doodleys placed on your chest, also perhaps an ice cream stick looking gadgeridoo that slides (uncomfortably) into your mouth. All in the name of accurate fate prediction. Suddenly, your fate appears on the large fateomotron ocular presentation device (also known as a screen) 

Oh my god!! its you waiting for your more predictions! What a future you've  got ahead of you!!

  Now that that extremely anticlimactic, and seemingly pointless intros over, time to move onto the meat of the post. 

       Fate is not something I think about often, but when i do, i get pretty heated about it. So be prepared. 

      The concept of Fate is something described in many different mythologies/ religions as some higher judgement (not implying that religion is mythology) (just trying to look out for my hide) but anyone can craft a fate for someone else. Take the witches in macbeth for example, they could just be some decrepit looking old hags that love toying with youthful, muscleheads. There was no evidence to their claim. So when they presented Macbeths so called "fate" to him (murdering king duncan), The docile Macbeth, who hadn't even thought of putting the sharp end of blade anywhere near, let alone murdering the king, was now convinced that he was going to murder the king and that it was unavoidable. The idea had become firmly "planted" in his head. 

The witches could have said anything at all from reading a good book, to eating a pile of cats for dinner, it doesn't matter. Once the idea of unavoidable fate was planted in his mind, he was inclined to go about making decisions towards fulfilling his pseudo-mind-implanted-fate. 

TL;DR Fate is not real, it is simply the very human power of suggestion

      Keeping my latest conclusion in mind, I do not believe that shakespeare believed in fate. True, he was from a time where witches, magic and all thinks supernatural existed. But in the story, while macbeth learnt of his crowny-throney-king of glamis-fate, so did banquos son. Why would two different people receive the same fate? Alright, alright that could happen maybe. but Banquos son never did become King. Surely if it was his fate and fate was 100% supernatural superstition (supernaturastition) He would've became king eventually. Conclusion? Shakespeare did not believe in fate.
(unless im missing some facts that may invalidate this entire paragraph, and if so, please leave some harshly worded criticism in the comment section)

(Youve made it to the last paragraph congratulations!)

    Well here it is, the personal connection paragraph. Time for my official stance on the matter. . But first, ill write this disclaimer just incase i go on a semi offensive tangent. (You never know) Is everyone disclaimed? Good.

    Moving on: As for me, I used to be a big chinese food eater (Actually that was a lie i still am) anyway, when ever my family and i would gather around the dining room table for the eating of said chinese we would make it a ceremony to read out our fortune cookies. Going around the table each of us would individually unwrap our fortune cookies and read for the rest of the eager beavers at the table. After each reading, my mother would immediately jump on each of the fates and relate them to your life, for example if my fate was "Money will be the way of lint this month" (in your pocket) She would say ooh! its so right! you'll be receiving pocket money soon! or ooh! your birthdays only in 8 and 3/4 months! She would also bring up the fortune every single time me or money was involved in anything. She thoroughly believed the fate prescribed by this almighty fortune cookie. I was along with it myself, truly some divine power with an omniscient knowledge of everything and anything had crafted this mystical cookie. But no fortune cookie could predict me, whilst strolling past a shop in asheville, witness a local man typing out fortune cookies on his macbook. Was this the conductor? the controller? the almighty omniscient being of lore?

Nope.
This was a just a person. A person who gets up every morning and (hopefully) puts on a new pair of underwear like me, a person that loves a good back-scratch like me, a person that thoroughly enjoys the movie "pulp fiction" (who doesnt) like me.

     Now i dont know if this man was a prophet scribe, or had some inside Nostradamus-esque visions, but this man was controlling people like my mother with these "fates" that he was prescribing. It made me realize that changing a persons view on their life is as easy as typing a prediction, and anonymously sliding it in a cookie for them to open, contemplate, and apply to their own life. This power, "the power of suggestion" is a brilliant thing in that way.

     Drawing upon my past conclusion from previous paragraphs, Yes, i beleive fate is a completely manmade construction. But that does not mean it is an all bad thing. When presented with a Fate, in the end, is what YOU make of it, if YOU are presented with a negative one YOU have two choices, either accept your negative prescribed fate and just let it happen. Or YOU try to change your fate for the better.

(drags soapbox slowly and clumsily offstage)

Give me a (paintbrush) long enough and a (canvas) on which to place it, and I will (paint) the world. - (ART)imedes (This is a blogpost about Art)

Step 1: walk through entire exhibit.

          As I walked through that entire exhibit (Which exhibit was not identified in the question so i'm just assuming the entire museum) (Btw NOT TRYING to make a dig on any of Mrs Gs instructions) I was astounded by the use of various mediums. Modern art can be expressed through so many different forms and technologies that new styles of art, much like a faceful of pubescent zits, seem to pop up almost overnight. I found many of the art pieces combining 21st century technology like video and live cameras and digital surround sound to be extremely entertaining and innovative, and serve as a brilliant way to captivate the minds of people (young children, angsty Teenagers not in class)  who arent necessarily interested in staring at a canvas or statue for more than 5 seconds. So congratulations columbian artists. 

       The feeling I got from this "entire exhibit" was not a jovial one. Like many modern-day-pieces of art depicting real life, there was a sense of being unhappy with the world around us. I think this is due to the self evaluating/reflecting nature of the current generation. Constantly examining the faults in the world (such as loss of cultural identity and assimilation or climate change) leaves you (anybody) feeling quite morose for the future. The use of washed out colours and grayscale emphasizes this.

Step 2: (If you havent bawled your eyes out yet)

     I chose to examine Stacey L. Kirbys PARTicipate. I found this to be by far the most interesting piece as it was an interactive, performance (interactaformance) piece (or performative interaction piece if your name is Stacey L. Kirby) 

Step 3: The Analysis

(BEN citation): PARTicipate - Stacey L. Kirby - furniture and performers (medium) - Varying depending on location (size)

          The "piece" is quite modern in style, making an attempt to emulate those bureaucratic offices that we know and love. Although it is "modern" it is not too modern. The multitude of technology used in the actual piece is from all different ages of bureaucracy. There are typewriters from the 50s and radios, clocks and time stamps from all across the 20th century. This makes pinpointing the actual time period of this piece quite difficult. So im just going to say its "modern" (in other words, its from the grey-office-building-cubicle-generation).
      The subject of the piece would be the declaration of your on-person belongings. To elaborate, The woman in the exhibit handed out notary slips that the "viewer" or "audience" (you) would then list their (your) personal belongings and place the slip in a well organized bureaucratic file cabinet.
The idea behind this declaration was to have people think about what they have on their person at all times. This could be your wallet, your socks, belly button lint, 2014 AFI list of the top 250 movies, and for someone who really wants to engage the main idea/concept. Something ideological.
This leads me to the main idea/concept. The main idea was to declare what ideas/ experiences made you unique from the rest of the people in that room.  (I realize that there were other things going on in the room at the time, with other main ideas but i didn't ask questions/partake in those. Also i dont want to write an E-book on this. Saying that, I should probably stop typing this side note)
This "style" of interactaformance involving the audience writing things on paper while actors act a part is not a new concept by any means (Just think about any theme park where people dress up in those less than sanitary character costumes) but it is an interesting and artistic take on it.

Step 4: (Final part i promise)

This piece seems to have many different layers of meaning to it, making for a rather wordy summarization. (hint hint) We all know about the concept of declaring our "personal belongings" making us consider our preconceived biases, our characters, our histories, and all other things we "bring" into the room. However, This concept is only one part of the big idea. Other aspects of this "big idea" include the entire look of the room. Its all bureaucratic and cubicle-y. This cubicalness serves as a bit of a protest against the common desk job and the loss of individuality. By having us declare our personalities in the most un-creative fashion possibleand assigning us a registry number to represent us, it illustrates how de-individualizing modern day business culture is. and therefore showing how unimportant and meaningless modern culture makes us. A thought that makes any modern day office-working, swivel-chair-sitting baby boomer shed an oh-so tiny tear from their dull, dull eyes.

So the message Stacey L. Kirbys trying to portray? All work and no play makes Jack (or Jill) a dull boy (or girl).
And on that jovial note, good night.

     

An AD-astrophic post.

CRS Crisis Relief - Feb 17 2014 - "Liking isnt helping"- AD - (BEN style citation)

(SPOILER: MORBIDITY) (DISCLAIMER: NARRATOR IS UNRELIABLE) Upon my formal examination of the ad (denotative analysis) I notice right from the gate that the picture has a grayscale filter, indicating that its going to be warming to the heart and will most likely leave us with the fuzzys-feels (Verbal Irony, this ad is clearly going to be one of a more morose nature). The ad features a legless child lying on a hospital bed, in a hospital that seems to be rather dilapidated.  There is blood all over his wound, so his leg was clearly just sliced off in some sort of medical operation. Sorrounding the hospital bed is a group of people with their thumbs up in the fashion of Facebooks "Like" icon (Likon). The childs face also plays a role into the picture. The face is not crying like what you would expect a hurt child to be doing. He is completely complacent and calm. Too calm. When a child or anybody has completely given up emotionally on a situation like this, especially a child, then you know you may have a problem.

Shifting to my deep, philosophical, IB-like examination (connotative examination) lens I instantly know that the hands are referring to Facebook "like to save this girl" type pictures. These pictures are abundant around the social media-verse. This ad points out the fact that simply liking a photo does not actually do anything for the people involved in the picture. These hands are physical representations of the deadly sin sloth. (slothiness). The sin sloth is essentially apathy, which is what this ad is trying to convey about modern "internet" society.

As I previously stated, the ad is clearly targeted towards internet using audience. Ironically, i can foresee this being shared on Facebook and other social media sites. While this is targeted towards an internet audience that is typically of a younger crowd, Using my knowledge of teenagers (of which I have a decent amount of) I don't think many teenagers would share this photo or do anything about it. They would view it probably say something along the lines of "thats messed up bruh" or "OMG Aw look at that baby!", and swiftly scroll on to a picture of a dog in a gangster outfit or something and completely forget about what they  just saw (Purely my opinion on the matter).  The people that would share and acknowledge this (Yet again my opinion) would be older, more experienced people.
I can just see my mother calling me into her room to have a lengthy discussion on what this picture means and having to explain the intended message as apposed to the message she got out of it. While talking about the picture is good and spreads awareness, it doesn't actually do anything for the amputated infants of the world. Proving the pictures point (and my point about Sloth)

Given that the intended audience are ones that spend a majority of their time on mobile devices and social media, i can infer that they would probably be of the first world variety. The picture and the company its from are targeting them in particular as they are the ones with the money (or their parents money) to fund the organizations future non-profit escapades.

The intended audience would probably understand that "no leg = bad for infant" and "poverty = bad for anyone" and cause them to sympathize. I think the tougher part to chew, swallow and digest would be the statement about today's society. When an ad makes a statement of this caliber, it doesn't give a way to solve it. So you are left sitting there with a grimace look on your face and no way to get rid of it. (Unless of course you go and do some charitable work instantly after and then you may feel better but then you wake up the next day and realize that there is still poverty, suffering and amputated infants in the world even though you spent 6 hours at a soup kitchen the day before)

Saying that previous paragraph, the ad really does take a cheap shot to the heart and deliberate pull at our heartstrings. Poverty exists, yeah. but again, we cant just solve it automatically. And calling people a bunch of sloths isn't exactly helping either.


Thanks for nothing, ad. (Unless you convinced someone to go out and donate to charity or provide wheelchairs for amputated infants. Then, in that case, good on you, ad).