Skip to main content

I will treat this entry as though it were in a journal.

It is easy for a TV series to lose me.  When House became more interested in poorly written interpersonal relationships than silly practical jokes and Holmesian medical mysteries, I stopped watching.  When Burn Notice focused several episodes on its incredibly talented spy lead (who had handled murderers, con men, gangs, the FBI, and a host of foreign operatives) having trouble because a cop was harassing him, it took me a year to decide to give it another chance.  When Dexter botched its second season, killed its best character, and then opened its third with Dex acting like an idiot for the convenience of the writers, I dropped it.  When Madmen slowed down in the middle of the third season, I simply lost interest.  These are shows I loved at one point.

A lot of people won't just let go of such things.  Even those sympathetic to my reactions will usually have just kept watching.  I've been trying to figure out why my reaction is different for a while now, without easy excuses like 'refined taste' or 'snobbery', which I think miss the point, anyway.  Today, it hit me, I think of most of my entertainments like I do a novel.  If it's the sort of thing you pick up and put down again, only to come back to later and continue the process, I have little problem just stopping.  And why shouldn't I?

Comments

  1. Man, if you haven't seen the fourth season of Mad Men, you've missed out on some seriously great teevee. Best one yet, in my opinion.

    As for season three, granite, the Ballad of Betty & Henry is less than riveting, but hey--"I'm Peggy Olsen, and I want to smoke some marijuana!" Don beaten up by longhairs! Lawnmower-related violence! Lots of fun.

    ReplyDelete

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

More Political Notes

-Rick Santorum seems a somewhat likeable guy who believes several crazy, distasteful things. It may not be helpful to say his ideas are nuts, but it still is less useful to fashion him an evil man because his discriminatory views don't jive with the left, centre, or centre-right in America.

-Calling a person a 'front runner' before votes are counted is just plain wrong.  Calling one a front-runner after some votes are counted is slightly misleading.  The race isn't about who the media thinks is ahead, and it is only indirectly about who gets the most votes.  What really matters is accruing the most delegates.  In the race for a major party's nomination for POTUS, the guy with the most delegates-who-will-actually-vote-for-him-at-their-national-convention is ahead. If no delegates have been awarded, there isn't really a front-runner, no matter what polls might say.

-I doubt the primary process will hurt the eventual Republican nominee for POTUS all that much.…

Pointless Ruminations on the Absurd

The world around us is in no way required to conform to our expectations, beliefs, or desires. Rather, it is all but guaranteed to disappoint us, at least once or twice a lifetime. The loftier (or more deeply felt) our ideals, the more this may be true.

When we accept this incongruity and are keenly aware of it, but cannot change our thinking, absurdity steps in. The world no longer quite makes sense. It is untethered from rational or moral concerns, adrift in a bizarre joke told by no one.
Desire for normative order is often irrational and misplaced. Placing ethical constraints on amoral matters makes no sense. Yet these appear (sometimes, seemingly) inescapable conclusions. Hence the sensation of absurdity.

We can apply these incongruous demands to anything and anyone. But this is not a universal philosophy. It is a philosophy of the self, a diagnosis.

Well now.

I think I'm going to try to revive my online writing habits, outside of Facebook.

And what have I been thinking or feeling in the interim, across the last couple years or so? Well, I'm glad you asked.

In part, this.