Tuesday, July 17, 2012

Circle of stupid

I read a blog post by one of the author's I like to read that sparked an overly long response from me. Her blog post can be found here: http://accordingtohoyt.com/2012/07/16/rebels-without-a-spine/. What sparked her blog was her thoughts on this blog post: http://www.theawl.com/2012/07/the-40-year-old-reversion. So if you continue what you are going to read is a blog post, sparked by a blog post, sparked by non other than a blog post. It a chain re-blog-action.

I have to agree with was seems to be the opinion of the author's post that it isn't about regression and more conforming to the idea of not conforming. However I think it goes beyond just that and beyond just an age group. It is the circle of stupid. It started in media that society decided to start reflecting so media started reflecting society. It comes down to two thoughts. That it is both the in thing and the fun thing to do. Many when asked say they do it because it is fun, but if they are honest they often don't find it fun at all. They have rather bought into the fact it should be fun. That because some people like them can find it fun it therefor is. That maybe they just are not trying hard enough. So they go out and drink, drug more, cheat more, because at some point it will be fun. And that fun will make up for everything that they've done.  They will hit that magical critical mass where everything beyond that point what follows is the fun it appears to be.

This has become more and more reflected in all media, but it is extremely noticeable in books. 50 shades of grey just being the top of the mountain to this point. From a UF reader perspective there seems to have been this push that a writer must follow a formula. That certain things will make a hit book and lacking these things means the series must change or will not make it. Not being a writer I'm not sure if these are coming from the publishing side or the writer side. Cheating, addiction, and a certain sense that if it is 60's -ish then anything done can't be a morel issue, but rebelling and that bad is the new good. Either outright (cheating, drug addiction, etc) or indirectly (it isn't cheating if you love the person your cheating with, various other substances drug like but not, etc). Entertainment came up with this and it has come full circle to where it now reflects some views instead. I vomit a little every time I hear or see reviews how romantic it was that character Y cheated with X because they are so much in love and how at the same time Y still love her/his husband/wife.

I mean we has humans have always had perception problems. However it has come a point to where it is more than just a few people, but many people where truth is only in how we perceive it. Only what I see as the truth is the truth. And then I gather around people that also want to see my truth. You can take for instances as was mentioned the punishing of a child. How all whipping is bad. How you are obviously abusing your child. Another example of perception at work I use to work support for a cable provider.

I got yelled at a few times because their child watched something they didn't want them to while they were not at home. How it was my/our fault. "I work till 8 o'clock at night and my kid is at home watching show X/ordering adult PPV/etc" Because they didn't want to set parental controls, hire a baby sitter, restrict their access to adult content, it was my/our fault. I was specifically told it was my fault more than once(not the companies). I guess I failed to hit the little red button on my desk that stops that sort of thing. My bad.

Another thing that left me speechless. I was listening to a radio show a few months back and they were interviewing some of the people a part of the first part of the Occupy Wall Street thing. They were talking to one of the organizers or a spokesman for one of the groups (I came in after the said who the person was) and couple of the other people. One of which I can call nothing but one of his followers. What really disturbed me was the attitude of them all especially the follower. She said she saw this sit in on the news and realized that what our country was going through was just horrible. I'll be paraphrasing a bit here and have to admit that my perception of some of this maybe incorrect.

She said that night she told her husband good night, went and tucked her two children into bed, and walked out to join the sit-in. How she had to do something. Any responsible person would. Went on to talk about how all the support from people was great(never speaking to the question about whether her family might have supported her or not). How it was tough, but they persevered. She and the organizer went on about it all. How it was so great that a few of them let her share there tent at night. How they even rented an apartment and the two of them would go there for an hour some times.

It is at this point you can hear the interviewers mental breaks slam and come to a screeching halt. He didn't say or imply anything, but he starts with the probing questions about the apartment. I can't remember the exact words that led up to the moment, but you can hear the point when her voice goes into utter panic when she starts to put together what the organizer and her had said in the last 15 minutes that pretty much sounds like she left her husband and kids to sleep around at a wall street sit in. I mean I could be wrong. She could have clued into the fact everything the both of them had been saying could be misconstrued into this fact. She could have had an utterly dumb blond(being blond I can say that) 15 minutes where no actual thought was put into what she was saying vs what was actually happening. After the mindless tripe they had been spouting the 30 minutes before that has me doubt though.

There was(or is?) a certain mind set that set out to, like with the tea party sit in, show a legitimate grievance in a passive aggressive way. Then there was this other mindset that wanted to live or relive the 60's "in all its glory" and fix everything that was wrong in the ways they thought it was wrong sure in the knowledge a problem is fixed only by complaing about it. The first I can laud their attempt whether I believe it was the right way or the wrong way to do it or if a better way may have been missed. The second need to just grow up.

I remember sitting around listening to my grandparents talk about what they saw as a decline in values.  I remember thinking that while what some of what they said could be true they just didn't get it.  Now I sit and see the same thing.  I don't know if it is the fact I can't understand the change(though I'm much younger than when they started) or if it is just that messed up.  There is a problem however in that while I could be wrong, I might be right.

Wednesday, July 11, 2012

Professionalism by any other name

It seems there is this debate that has been going around for a little while that has been labled "Librarians vs Bloggers".  The crux of it seems to have come out of a recent American Library Association Annual Conference.  Some of which has this blogger scratching his head.  First here are a few posts an articles to catch you up.



I have to say I came away with a very different view of the PW article than some did. It mentioned a problem some people are seeing. Maybe I'm wrong, but many seemed to have taken it more personally than the article seems intended for. Many a blogger seems to feel the martyred because of this whole issue. Which leave this little blogger scratching his head. Whether a blogger is or can be a professional is really totally beside the point.

I have to agree that bloggers can be important word of mouth outlet for Publishers. I also know there are a lot of other ways to get access to ARC's (Advanced Reader Copy) as well. It seems to me a convention like the American Library Association(I feel that people want to gloss over the importance of it by using the acronym) shouldn't be one of those places for bloggers to try and obtain them. Nothing against bloggers, but a convention designed specially for a group of professionals in the end is for those very professionals. It isn't very professional to over look that fact.

People in their righteous indignation seem to want over look that fact. As if the fact they are right in their mind(being right or not being aside the fact) excuses certain behaviors. It doesn't. Too many seem to think that being polite about something means they can be rude about something else. I've seen this on both sides and like many things people have been taking it to ridiculous lengths.

I also want to point out I don't see the Publishers failure to comment(in both the PW and in other places) supportive of the blogger view. I think it was nothing more than the sense to stay out of the argument. Whatever they decide to do, nothing positive could be gained from making a vocal stance either way. Even a moderate response could be used in a way that might not be intended just as no comment might be found supportive. Their best interest is to officially have no interest at all. In the end their only say is if they show up to something like the ALA and how many ARC's they decide to give out or not. Anything else is up to the event and attendees.

If what tLL said in a follow up blog post(linked above) was true then the video wasn't taken as intended, but the whole issue does bring up something that perhaps need to be resolved. The PW article to me does nothing but help point that out. I didn't come away from the PW article thinking less of some bloggers. I have come away from some of the responses to it thinking less though.