(first written 12-18-2006)
I’m usually not one for long, standing ovations, but I’ve been thinking about the process and the idea of clapping in general. I filed this report:
I’d like to start with the different types of claps. But I can’t, so I’ll get to that later. First I’d like to explain when something is even worth applauding. The most important reason to clap is that the person/action is present. This automatically gets rid of people clapping in movie theaters, on planes, or in front of their own TVs (two things: even though the pilot is actually there, they are in the cockpit and are not being viewed by the clappers. Second thing is that I am indeed audacious enough to tell people that they shouldn’t be clapping in front of a television even if it is in their own home. Deal with it). Second necessity for obtaining merit for applause is an action. Sorry to all stones or art pieces (artists are fine to clap for while they are presenting their product), but to deserve applause you have to have done something. I’m even pretty relaxed about this rule too. It doesn’t matter what they do, as long as it is indeed an action. Hell, sometimes I clap for people who have done mediocre tasks for comedic effect. The third and final part only comes into play after clapping has been initiated. It’s simply that it has to end. Each action deserves a different amount of time, but they must end in a timely fashion. Some of us have boring e-mails to waste their friend’s time with.
Now I can get on to the types of clapping. For reasons I haven’t made up yet, I’m only going to explain three of the most common forms. The first is the ‘amateur stroke’. This is taking both hands, putting them together, and pulling them apart and putting them together again repeatedly. This type of clap is good for short efficient applauding, but can and will make your hands hurt if used for marathon applauses (examples include graduation, endings of plays, or a long game of ‘Ms. Mary Mack). I call this the ‘amateur stroke’ because it is the simplest one to perform and can be used anywhere anytime if you don’t mind a little wear and tear now and then. On to the second one: the ‘pro-clap’. This is done (similar to making good armpit farts) by turning one hand so that they are almost perpendicular to each other and trying to capture a small amount of air to be crushed all at once. This makes for a louder, more impactful sound. If you want to be the person whose claps are heard by everyone, practice this one. Once you find the right position of your hands, you will notice the difference. The benefits of this clap are in speed. Since you have to concentrate on the proper positioning, you are allowed to slow down, thus making it so your hand experience less activity, saving them from soreness. The louder sound also helps the reasoning for less of them. I dubbed this the ‘pro-clap’ because of its difficulty. I have found people who still cannot do it, despite my multiple efforts to explain it to them. The last clap is reserved for people of prestige and honor. I’m going to call it ‘spinal clap’; just a play on spinal tap… a more accurate nape when be ‘queen’s tap’. This is done by lightly tapping your left wrist with the tips of your fingers of your right hand. Be warned though: though easily the easiest to perform, it is often rude to use such a clap. It implies that you are too good to use the full potential of your hands to cheer for their actions. Nobles have used this clap to show respect without bringing themselves to the level of, as they called it, peon clapping. So if you try to use it, you will be seen as mocking the performer, unless, you are in fact, royalty. That being said, this clap can be used as a sarcastic action when you are NOT impressed with someone’s (hopefully someone you know) actions.
Now take this knowledge and make it so I never have to hear bad clapping (or any clapping) at a movie theater.
That’s my report on clapping. Check please!
-The Big Sleazy “keeping you from your child since 1999!”
Friday, July 18, 2008
important issues 11
(first written 1-13-2007)
Todays are hard times. The new reason is because fake anger and violence are becoming closer and closer to real anger and violence.
My typical example involves a cop walking down the street when he sees two people (Whom he does not know are friends. How could he?) facing each other shouting in one another’s face. The following comment is said by one of the friends: yeah? Well I’m going to rip off your nipple rings and then put a canvas next to your breasts so that when the blood pours out it will make modern art. Immediately, the cop would be troubled by this, as anyone would. He/she is faced with a tough decision. What’s the context? In the time it takes for the officer to walk by (which could be a long time because of the recent trend of cops weighing a minimum of 900 pounds) they have to use contextual clues to figure out if this person is a threat to their friend. We have the benefit of knowing that it is in jest, otherwise I would not have written that they were friends; I would have used something else (trust me). But the cop is not so fortunate as to have a writer on his belt or behind his badge. And the cop can’t win here either; there is no right answer for them. If they decide that it’s harmless and it does escalate to death, the cop could have prevented it and is degraded for not doing their duties. On the other hand, if they decide to take action, the friends could protest that their privacy is being invaded and make a big deal about the first amendment and etc… you see where that goes. And if the cop lets it go, and nothing happens (as is most likely in the presented circumstance) well than the cop wasted all that energy and stress worrying about nothing.
Another, more likely scenario is brought up with the genius invention of the energy drink ‘Cocaine’. Talk about making an officer’s job difficult! How are they going to decipher when someone is selling cocaine the drink from cocaine the drug. And any dealer who’s smart is going to sell both so the cops can never be right when they make their accusations. Poor poor coppers.
I guess the moral of this issue is that everything is not what it seems. Brothers fight all the time, but (hopefully) make up at the end of the day. Marriage is a tumbly road which can lead to the use of couches as beds, but love can and does prevail. Lets all take some time and asses not just our position, but another (preferably and opposing) position; look at the wheel and not just the spokes.
Or build a time machine and use that. That should work just as well.
-The Big Sleazy “keeping you from your child since 1999!”
Extra features: alternate ending for conversation between friends:
Yeah? Well I’m going to rip off your nipple rings and use the blood that pours out to make a stew! Don’t worry, I’ll add onions.
Special photo of Sam’s face after he rereads this and realize it doesn’t have a point, and the point it doesn’t have, doesn’t make any sense (interesting background though).
Todays are hard times. The new reason is because fake anger and violence are becoming closer and closer to real anger and violence.
My typical example involves a cop walking down the street when he sees two people (Whom he does not know are friends. How could he?) facing each other shouting in one another’s face. The following comment is said by one of the friends: yeah? Well I’m going to rip off your nipple rings and then put a canvas next to your breasts so that when the blood pours out it will make modern art. Immediately, the cop would be troubled by this, as anyone would. He/she is faced with a tough decision. What’s the context? In the time it takes for the officer to walk by (which could be a long time because of the recent trend of cops weighing a minimum of 900 pounds) they have to use contextual clues to figure out if this person is a threat to their friend. We have the benefit of knowing that it is in jest, otherwise I would not have written that they were friends; I would have used something else (trust me). But the cop is not so fortunate as to have a writer on his belt or behind his badge. And the cop can’t win here either; there is no right answer for them. If they decide that it’s harmless and it does escalate to death, the cop could have prevented it and is degraded for not doing their duties. On the other hand, if they decide to take action, the friends could protest that their privacy is being invaded and make a big deal about the first amendment and etc… you see where that goes. And if the cop lets it go, and nothing happens (as is most likely in the presented circumstance) well than the cop wasted all that energy and stress worrying about nothing.
Another, more likely scenario is brought up with the genius invention of the energy drink ‘Cocaine’. Talk about making an officer’s job difficult! How are they going to decipher when someone is selling cocaine the drink from cocaine the drug. And any dealer who’s smart is going to sell both so the cops can never be right when they make their accusations. Poor poor coppers.
I guess the moral of this issue is that everything is not what it seems. Brothers fight all the time, but (hopefully) make up at the end of the day. Marriage is a tumbly road which can lead to the use of couches as beds, but love can and does prevail. Lets all take some time and asses not just our position, but another (preferably and opposing) position; look at the wheel and not just the spokes.
Or build a time machine and use that. That should work just as well.
-The Big Sleazy “keeping you from your child since 1999!”
Extra features: alternate ending for conversation between friends:
Yeah? Well I’m going to rip off your nipple rings and use the blood that pours out to make a stew! Don’t worry, I’ll add onions.
Special photo of Sam’s face after he rereads this and realize it doesn’t have a point, and the point it doesn’t have, doesn’t make any sense (interesting background though).
important issues 10
(first written 10-27-2006)
I guess this entire thing is about the rapid advancement of entertainment technology and the unnecessary-ness of it.
Rarely is money an issue when it comes to buying video games. I’m not saying they aren’t expensive, but if they are truly wanted by the entire family, something happens to get them. More often however, is that the parents do not want to have their kids wasting their time playing video games. I think there is a second truth also. If the family only has one TV, the video games control it. And if a parent wants to watch TV, they have to kick their kids of their games, a difficult task in its own right.
Someone on PBS openly admitted that their support came from viewers who are dependant on television. Why not be blunter and say funding comes from fat-asses.
There is a song called ‘throw away your television’ that can never have a music video.
It’s true that we have become insanely dependant on TV for all sources of life including news, sports, entertainment, and stupidity. Sadly, all the former things come from the FOX network and you still have 6,000 different channels. Worse still, some channels only play music. Do you understand that? They only play music? No video, no picture of the artist, or pictures of anything. Just a blank screen! There used to be something very similar that was very popular through the 30s up until about 1968. I forgot…. Oh wait, It’s called a radio! So now we have TV stations that are trying to be radios. And if you’ll notice, you don’t see radios trying to do the opposite. You rarely see a radio trying to show you the singers and their over the top videos. You know why you don’t see it? Because it doesn’t exist!
There is entirely too much reliance on television. As a wise man once said: my life may be boring, but at least I’m content to live it. I guess what I’m trying to explain by making up my own quote is to stop living vicariously through the people you only know by image and continue your own life. It misses you.
-Sam D.
I guess this entire thing is about the rapid advancement of entertainment technology and the unnecessary-ness of it.
Rarely is money an issue when it comes to buying video games. I’m not saying they aren’t expensive, but if they are truly wanted by the entire family, something happens to get them. More often however, is that the parents do not want to have their kids wasting their time playing video games. I think there is a second truth also. If the family only has one TV, the video games control it. And if a parent wants to watch TV, they have to kick their kids of their games, a difficult task in its own right.
Someone on PBS openly admitted that their support came from viewers who are dependant on television. Why not be blunter and say funding comes from fat-asses.
There is a song called ‘throw away your television’ that can never have a music video.
It’s true that we have become insanely dependant on TV for all sources of life including news, sports, entertainment, and stupidity. Sadly, all the former things come from the FOX network and you still have 6,000 different channels. Worse still, some channels only play music. Do you understand that? They only play music? No video, no picture of the artist, or pictures of anything. Just a blank screen! There used to be something very similar that was very popular through the 30s up until about 1968. I forgot…. Oh wait, It’s called a radio! So now we have TV stations that are trying to be radios. And if you’ll notice, you don’t see radios trying to do the opposite. You rarely see a radio trying to show you the singers and their over the top videos. You know why you don’t see it? Because it doesn’t exist!
There is entirely too much reliance on television. As a wise man once said: my life may be boring, but at least I’m content to live it. I guess what I’m trying to explain by making up my own quote is to stop living vicariously through the people you only know by image and continue your own life. It misses you.
-Sam D.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)