This story amused me slightly. It's a sort of bizarre mind set this article reveals, as if things are always private even if you are in public. Can't you just hear the indignity of "We weren't doing anything wrong!" and the unspoken desire to sue a 'big brother' government? I hate to say it, but in public, people can take pictures of you. Additionally, anti-war protestors, in the middle of a war, are just BEGGING the government to look in on them. This doesn't have to be nefarious, but when you have people actively undermining you, you keep an eye on them. Oh the humanity! I talk bad about someone and they watch me!
Sorry, that wasn't kind, but it is how this comes accross to me. Americans are SO obsessed with this idea of privacy, that they expect to have it even while in public. They expect to be doing anythign they want and as long as it is illegal, for the government to stay completely away. Well, it just seems silly to me. After all, if you're doing something illegal, you think you'll advertise it? And if not, how in the world is the government supposed to stop it? Now, there is a line, but I think most people expect the line to be much to far over. If it was as far over as the ACLU wants it, there'd be a field day on criminal activity.
I think another reason this amuses me is living here. For about a week my roommate and I were being cased by the FSB. It was pretty obvious. Everytime I left and every time I returned the phone would ring. We saw guys who did not live in our building habitually around and in our building, occaisionally knocking on our door. It was as if they didn't care if we knew. And here americans are whining about photos being taken in a public place of an event they were doing to TRY and effect the government? Boggles the mind.
Wednesday, March 15, 2006
Tuesday, March 7, 2006
Comics
If you didn't know, I'm a fan of the comics. Or rather, of some comics. I notice everytime I look at the comics pages in the newspaper, I actually dislike a big number of them.
For instance, let's look at Blondie. There hasn't been an original joke in Blondie for as long as I can remember. It's all about how dagwood eats, sleeps, and runs late. Recycle and repeat. Why is that in the paper? It was barely funny the first time, why is it funny the 100th time.
Then there's Garfield. If you buy the orignals they're funny. It's really funny. It's so funny you actually can see why it got so popular. Read them now, and you wonder why they're printed. It's like a Robert Jordan book I think. People read it hoping it's going to be good like the first ones were. Instead they feel like the author and newspaper cheated them and they owe them their 5 seconds of life back, because it really was like having that 5 seconds sucked out of you. I've heard rumors about a paper saying garfield is actually funny if you remove the cats speech, but then it's not garfield anymore.
Peanuts...I really don't know what to say. It's an undead freak of nature, resurrected in the name of the almighty dollar-I mean the family keeps it in print for the sake of good ol' grandpa chuck. Or at least that's what they say. Really, why can't you let it die. Peanuts was good (less so in recent years, but not quite as bad as garfield has gotten), but it's not worth preserving in newspapers for eternity. Let some up and coming artist have the space, let people have laughs not small smiles of recollection. Heck, *I* recognize most the peanuts they're re-printing.
Family Circus. Not funny...never has been...never will be. It might have a short cutesy factor, but really, it's jsut a waste of ink. It's like it's trying to be funny with kids, but the author really just doesn't know, and so just puts his old home videos to ink. But they're the sort of homevideos that only the parents appreciate.
Oooh, 1 more...Beetle Bailey. Never been funny either. It's like garfield, but without the element of having been humorous at one point in time. Here's the whole plot line: Every man is an idiot and has a big flaw. There you go, no need to read anymore.
I know these are cultural icons. My argument is that if they are such, then they belong in a museum! Hello, the comics is about humor, not about the world of yester-year.
For instance, let's look at Blondie. There hasn't been an original joke in Blondie for as long as I can remember. It's all about how dagwood eats, sleeps, and runs late. Recycle and repeat. Why is that in the paper? It was barely funny the first time, why is it funny the 100th time.
Then there's Garfield. If you buy the orignals they're funny. It's really funny. It's so funny you actually can see why it got so popular. Read them now, and you wonder why they're printed. It's like a Robert Jordan book I think. People read it hoping it's going to be good like the first ones were. Instead they feel like the author and newspaper cheated them and they owe them their 5 seconds of life back, because it really was like having that 5 seconds sucked out of you. I've heard rumors about a paper saying garfield is actually funny if you remove the cats speech, but then it's not garfield anymore.
Peanuts...I really don't know what to say. It's an undead freak of nature, resurrected in the name of the almighty dollar-I mean the family keeps it in print for the sake of good ol' grandpa chuck. Or at least that's what they say. Really, why can't you let it die. Peanuts was good (less so in recent years, but not quite as bad as garfield has gotten), but it's not worth preserving in newspapers for eternity. Let some up and coming artist have the space, let people have laughs not small smiles of recollection. Heck, *I* recognize most the peanuts they're re-printing.
Family Circus. Not funny...never has been...never will be. It might have a short cutesy factor, but really, it's jsut a waste of ink. It's like it's trying to be funny with kids, but the author really just doesn't know, and so just puts his old home videos to ink. But they're the sort of homevideos that only the parents appreciate.
Oooh, 1 more...Beetle Bailey. Never been funny either. It's like garfield, but without the element of having been humorous at one point in time. Here's the whole plot line: Every man is an idiot and has a big flaw. There you go, no need to read anymore.
I know these are cultural icons. My argument is that if they are such, then they belong in a museum! Hello, the comics is about humor, not about the world of yester-year.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)