By Daniel B. Kline
Lost in a sea of melancholy, crushed by responsibility and just generally overwhelmed, I sat listening to Bill Janovitz play a sparse, acoustic version of "Your Stripes," an obscure favorite of mine from Buffalo Tom's Sleepy Eyed. It was a Sunday morning and a rare off day had given me the opportunity to slow down, take stock and let the wave of everything left undone wash over me.
Whereas I once had little more than a computer, some clothes, a crappy car and a short-term rental apartment, I now have the mixed blessing of responsibility. In addition to my wife and son, I have a dozen or so staff members who look to me for both professional and personal guidance. I also have my boss' family which has shown enormous faith in me -- a faith which I want to reward -- as well as my parents who have needed more of me in recent years then in the past.
Add that to a just-high-enough-to-scare me-mortgage that seemed like a good idea in the ten minutes before the housing bubble burst, not to mention two car payments, plus a host of other bills and, well, sometimes I miss the simplicity of not having people rely on me. Normally, I never sit down long enough to listen to music ("Your Stripes," segued into Buffalo Tom's "Porchlight" and Janovitz doing a cover of The Replacements classic "Little Mascara") but for some reason the vast emptiness of Sunday mornings tend to make me reflective in a self-pitying sort of way.
Parenting and retailing share the fact that they never stop. Your child may sleep (a big maybe during the early years) and stores do shut down for the night and maybe the occasional holiday, but the demands of each never really recede.
Normally, I handle the complicated balance I have built between being a workaholic store manager, a reasonably involved parent of a fairly difficult (albeit incredibly endearing) child and an almost-successful, sort-of-known nationally syndicated columnist reasonably well. In the past few weeks though, my edges have started to fray a bit as a mix of professional and personal punches to the face have left me a bit shaken.
An optimist in the long run, I tend to see disaster in the short-term. I believe that with hard work everything always works out, but that has not stopped me from obsessively worrying about the journey. I know I'm going to get there, but I don't sleep at night because I'm not sure which rest stop to eat at along the way.
The current atmosphere in the country in general has made constant optimism a challenging attitude to maintain. I believe the nation on a grand level and my tiny piece of the world (consisting of my family, my friends and my store) will emerge stronger from this. But on this indulgent Sunday morning (Janovitz is covering Husker Du's "Hardly Getting Over It" now) the weight of the problem seems a little heavier than I'd like to carry.
If on Sunday I'm allowing myself to wallow in worry while my favorite musician plays in the background (he's doing Blondie's "Dreaming" now) then on Monday I'll be putting the acoustic interpretations away and turning the proverbial rock song up. You've only lost if you're behind when the final buzzer sounds and, well, we're not even at halftime yet.
(Soundtrack for this column courtesy Janovitz's excellent "Cover of the Week" project which can be found at PartTimeManOfRock.com.)
Daniel B. Kline's work appears in over 100 papers weekly. When he is not writing Kline serves as general manager of Time Machine Hobby New England's largest hobby and toy store, www.timemachinehobby.com. He can be reached at dan@notastep.com or you can see his archive at dbkline.com or befriend him at facebook.com/dankline.
Monday, February 22, 2010
Friday, February 19, 2010
Sorry NBC, the Olympics no longer matter
By Daniel B. Kline
With enough pomp and circumstance to make Lady Gaga raise an eyebrow, the Winter Olympics have returned to ruin television for two weeks. Once an eminently watchable sporting event punctuated by the occasionally dramatic real-life stories of its competitors, the Olympics has devolved into a made-for-TV event that plays like a Lifetime movie.
Because actual sports fans only watch the Olympics sparingly and most don't watch the Winter-Olympics-only events like luge or bobsledding, NBC must find a way to reach non-sports fans. That means that the competition takes a backseat to the melodrama of the competitors.
Not content to merely let real-life drama happen when it happens, NBC feels the need to shoehorn personality and back-story into every event. For NBC, every athlete offers a storyline whether or not they actually have a compelling history or are just some kid who managed to get incredibly good at something ridiculous.
Instead of sports laced with drama, we get "The Real World: Vancouver." Nobody ever bothers to explain how the made up scoring works in figure skating (extra points if you're famous seems to be the most peculiar rule) but we do get to hear about every faux dramatic stop on the major competitors' road to the Olympics.
Admittedly, sometimes an athlete has a story that makes them sympathetic. I might root for the Haitian bobsled team or get excited about a country that has no ice winning a medal in ice dancing, but mostly, I want the drama to come from the actual sport.
By building every event around the personalities and histories of the competitors we dilute the impact of the truly special stories. If NBC stopped trying to make every competitor a sports movie cliche (underdog, comeback, impossible odds, etc.) maybe we would become captivated by someone instead of bored by the whole lot.
Unfortunately (at least for NBC), for every figure skater whose cancer-stricken parents work nine jobs so she can skate we get a dozen rich kids whose folks shipped them off to private training facilities. Some athletes have incredible tales worthy of being made into movies where Dennis Quaid plays the coach who believes in them when nobody else will. Most don't and maybe the competition should sometimes speak for itself.
Whereas we once got Dan Jansen and his crushing failure to secure a medal for his five-hours-deceased sister followed by his ultimate redemption six years later, we now get downhill skiers who also manage to be good-looking. While we all remember the incredible triumph of the 1980 "Miracle On Ice" hockey team, nothing can make us deeply care about professionals barely interested in being there playing together after a few days of practice.
And, perhaps the most ridiculous pushed dramatic aspect of the Winter Olympics is the feature story done every four years about how captivating curling is. We get it, Canadians love their ridiculous non-sport because fat guys can play and you can drink beer during the game as a player.
There's a weird giant puck with a handle, lots of bad mustaches and people sweeping away with a broom. If this sport belongs in the Winter Olympics then Skee Ball should be in the Summer Olympics and I'd watch that because, well, Americans would always win.
Daniel B. Kline's work appears in over 100 papers weekly. When he is not writing Kline serves as general manager of Time Machine Hobby New England's largest hobby and toy store, www.timemachinehobby.com. He can be reached at dan@notastep.com or you can see his archive at dbkline.com or befriend him at facebook.com/dankline.
With enough pomp and circumstance to make Lady Gaga raise an eyebrow, the Winter Olympics have returned to ruin television for two weeks. Once an eminently watchable sporting event punctuated by the occasionally dramatic real-life stories of its competitors, the Olympics has devolved into a made-for-TV event that plays like a Lifetime movie.
Because actual sports fans only watch the Olympics sparingly and most don't watch the Winter-Olympics-only events like luge or bobsledding, NBC must find a way to reach non-sports fans. That means that the competition takes a backseat to the melodrama of the competitors.
Not content to merely let real-life drama happen when it happens, NBC feels the need to shoehorn personality and back-story into every event. For NBC, every athlete offers a storyline whether or not they actually have a compelling history or are just some kid who managed to get incredibly good at something ridiculous.
Instead of sports laced with drama, we get "The Real World: Vancouver." Nobody ever bothers to explain how the made up scoring works in figure skating (extra points if you're famous seems to be the most peculiar rule) but we do get to hear about every faux dramatic stop on the major competitors' road to the Olympics.
Admittedly, sometimes an athlete has a story that makes them sympathetic. I might root for the Haitian bobsled team or get excited about a country that has no ice winning a medal in ice dancing, but mostly, I want the drama to come from the actual sport.
By building every event around the personalities and histories of the competitors we dilute the impact of the truly special stories. If NBC stopped trying to make every competitor a sports movie cliche (underdog, comeback, impossible odds, etc.) maybe we would become captivated by someone instead of bored by the whole lot.
Unfortunately (at least for NBC), for every figure skater whose cancer-stricken parents work nine jobs so she can skate we get a dozen rich kids whose folks shipped them off to private training facilities. Some athletes have incredible tales worthy of being made into movies where Dennis Quaid plays the coach who believes in them when nobody else will. Most don't and maybe the competition should sometimes speak for itself.
Whereas we once got Dan Jansen and his crushing failure to secure a medal for his five-hours-deceased sister followed by his ultimate redemption six years later, we now get downhill skiers who also manage to be good-looking. While we all remember the incredible triumph of the 1980 "Miracle On Ice" hockey team, nothing can make us deeply care about professionals barely interested in being there playing together after a few days of practice.
And, perhaps the most ridiculous pushed dramatic aspect of the Winter Olympics is the feature story done every four years about how captivating curling is. We get it, Canadians love their ridiculous non-sport because fat guys can play and you can drink beer during the game as a player.
There's a weird giant puck with a handle, lots of bad mustaches and people sweeping away with a broom. If this sport belongs in the Winter Olympics then Skee Ball should be in the Summer Olympics and I'd watch that because, well, Americans would always win.
Daniel B. Kline's work appears in over 100 papers weekly. When he is not writing Kline serves as general manager of Time Machine Hobby New England's largest hobby and toy store, www.timemachinehobby.com. He can be reached at dan@notastep.com or you can see his archive at dbkline.com or befriend him at facebook.com/dankline.
Don't ask, don't tell, does not work
By Daniel B. Kline
Aside from wanting Congress to pass legislation deeming me too cowardly for the military, I find it absurd that we make laws keeping willing participants out of our armed services. As a nation, we currently have two ongoing wars and not enough soldiers to fight them yet we won't let openly homosexual people take up the fight.
Technically, we do allow gay people to join the military as long as they don't mention they are gay. This would be like if we banned women from voting but chose to not ask any touchy questions to women dressed up as men who attempt to cast a ballot.
"Don't ask, don't tell" was a compromise forged out of political necessity. Republicans could not be seen supporting gay rights (you know because god/the religious right would get mad) and Democrats could not be seen backing down on the issue (might anger Barbra Streisand).
So, instead of a common sense policy based on providing equal rights for all citizens, we have one that discriminates a little less blatantly. Like all political compromises, this one left neither side happy but it protected the status quo and did nothing to loosen any incumbent's grip on his seat in Congress.
We currently ban openly gay people from the military due to a mix of ignorance, prejudice and an overt willingness to stereotype (the Rush Limbaugh cocktail). Those who oppose letting homosexuals serve would have you believe that gays want into the service so they can paint the foxholes pink while seducing "normal" god-fearing soldiers.
They would also have you believe that if we let gay people into the military then they would ruin our wars by constantly having sex with each other instead of doing their jobs. Instead of attacking the enemy, our newly mixed sexual orientation army would then be distracted by Elton John songs and Broadway musicals or so the reasoning goes.
If we're going to let stereotypes govern our nation then why not keep blonds out of the Army because, well, everyone knows they're dumb? Redheads are out too because we all know you can't trust them. I'd probably keep black-haired people out as well because they might be of Italian descent and are most likely in the Mafia.
The argument to keep gays out of the military can only be made by people that consider being gay deviant behavior. These ignorant folks don't make a distinction between a same sex relationship and pedophilia or other illegal behavior.
This ignores that most sex crimes get committed by straight people (by a wide volume) and being gay makes you no more likely to commit a crime. That is, of course, unless your church forces you to deny your sexuality and repress it until you're a grown priest stuck with the sexual desires he denied as a teen boy.
Gays in the military -- like most soldiers -- would simply do their jobs. They would have no higher a percentage of sexual misconduct issues then we already have in our straight, co-ed Armed Services today.
I salute anyone willing to put his or her life on the line for our country. I also respect that same person's ability to follow the military's regulations while in the service and to act within those parameters.
We need to let the gay people already in the Armed Services stop having to deny their true selves. We need to stand up and welcome all Americans who want to defend our freedom the freedom to do so.
Daniel B. Kline's work appears in over 100 papers weekly. When he is not writing Kline serves as general manager of Time Machine Hobby New England's largest hobby and toy store, www.timemachinehobby.com. He can be reached at dan@notastep.com or you can see his archive at dbkline.com or befriend him at facebook.com/dankline.
Aside from wanting Congress to pass legislation deeming me too cowardly for the military, I find it absurd that we make laws keeping willing participants out of our armed services. As a nation, we currently have two ongoing wars and not enough soldiers to fight them yet we won't let openly homosexual people take up the fight.
Technically, we do allow gay people to join the military as long as they don't mention they are gay. This would be like if we banned women from voting but chose to not ask any touchy questions to women dressed up as men who attempt to cast a ballot.
"Don't ask, don't tell" was a compromise forged out of political necessity. Republicans could not be seen supporting gay rights (you know because god/the religious right would get mad) and Democrats could not be seen backing down on the issue (might anger Barbra Streisand).
So, instead of a common sense policy based on providing equal rights for all citizens, we have one that discriminates a little less blatantly. Like all political compromises, this one left neither side happy but it protected the status quo and did nothing to loosen any incumbent's grip on his seat in Congress.
We currently ban openly gay people from the military due to a mix of ignorance, prejudice and an overt willingness to stereotype (the Rush Limbaugh cocktail). Those who oppose letting homosexuals serve would have you believe that gays want into the service so they can paint the foxholes pink while seducing "normal" god-fearing soldiers.
They would also have you believe that if we let gay people into the military then they would ruin our wars by constantly having sex with each other instead of doing their jobs. Instead of attacking the enemy, our newly mixed sexual orientation army would then be distracted by Elton John songs and Broadway musicals or so the reasoning goes.
If we're going to let stereotypes govern our nation then why not keep blonds out of the Army because, well, everyone knows they're dumb? Redheads are out too because we all know you can't trust them. I'd probably keep black-haired people out as well because they might be of Italian descent and are most likely in the Mafia.
The argument to keep gays out of the military can only be made by people that consider being gay deviant behavior. These ignorant folks don't make a distinction between a same sex relationship and pedophilia or other illegal behavior.
This ignores that most sex crimes get committed by straight people (by a wide volume) and being gay makes you no more likely to commit a crime. That is, of course, unless your church forces you to deny your sexuality and repress it until you're a grown priest stuck with the sexual desires he denied as a teen boy.
Gays in the military -- like most soldiers -- would simply do their jobs. They would have no higher a percentage of sexual misconduct issues then we already have in our straight, co-ed Armed Services today.
I salute anyone willing to put his or her life on the line for our country. I also respect that same person's ability to follow the military's regulations while in the service and to act within those parameters.
We need to let the gay people already in the Armed Services stop having to deny their true selves. We need to stand up and welcome all Americans who want to defend our freedom the freedom to do so.
Daniel B. Kline's work appears in over 100 papers weekly. When he is not writing Kline serves as general manager of Time Machine Hobby New England's largest hobby and toy store, www.timemachinehobby.com. He can be reached at dan@notastep.com or you can see his archive at dbkline.com or befriend him at facebook.com/dankline.
Monday, February 1, 2010
Inconsistency may not be the path to fame
By Daniel B. Kline
Getting emails from readers who love one particular column and thereby assume they will always agree with me inevitably leads to heartbreak. This person might enjoy the next one, even the next few, but ultimately, I will write something that does not agree with what he or she assumes I believe and the love affair will end.
The easiest path to popularity would be to have clear views that fit alongside the accepted norms. Most people like to have their opinions reinforced by others who think the same way. The public also seems to crave consistency.
That's why "Two and a Half Men" gets away with telling the same jokes every week. And, it's probably why Jay Leno gets more viewers with his mild, but consistent humor than Conan O'Brien did with his sometimes unpredictable act.
The obvious path to increased readership, more fans and the inevitable riches that would follow involves picking a side and sticking with it. Gaining this popularity would also require avoiding criticism of things most people like and instead focusing on stuff everyone already dislikes.
Unfortunately, just to name a few, I've never cared for Michael Jackson's music, have no interest in seeing "Avatar" -- probably because I disliked "Titanic" -- and I do not enjoy "American Idol" in any fashion. I'm also not a fan of either Rush Limbaugh or Barack Obama and, come to think of it, I'm pretty much not a fan of anyone who rigidly defines themselves as a conservative or a liberal a Democrat or a Republican.
The list of stuff I don't like and people I find hard to listen to runs a lot deeper than the list of things I find enjoyable. This greatly hampers my ability to be a nationally-known, widely beloved columnist because while people pretend they like to be challenged, most just want to be told their ideas are correct.
I could play Glen Beck or Rachel Maddow if I wanted to. Having clearly defined, unwavering beliefs makes it a lot easier to write because you always know your opinion. Keith Olbermann or Bill O'Reilly never have to think about what to say because anyone could tell you their opinions on any issue.
The same can be said when it comes to entertainment. It would be much easier if I disliked everything popular and could preach to the indie crowd about how I only watch IFC, listen to unsigned bands and see movies in art houses.
Unfortunately, I like Tom Petty and Buffalo Tom. I love gritty coffee houses with menus written on blackboards but I also love Starbucks. Sure, I like some entertainment outside the popular mainstream, but I also cry everytime Bill Pullman gives his big speech at the end of "Independence Day" and I've seen every episode of every "Law & Order" series.
In general, people like reading, watching and listening to people who either think like them or think exactly the opposite of them. With the battle lines clearly drawn, it's easy to have a rooting interest. When the columnist you agree with on the economy disagrees with you on gay marriage -- well, then it gets tougher for most people.
I, however, prefer when people have complex opinions and aren't so easily pigeonholed. I also enjoy when people passionately defend something they like that I don't (Pixar movies being the most recent example).
I've loved books by P.J. O'Rourke (a middle aged male, conservative humorist) and just finished reading a book I liked by Cheryl Peck (a 50-something, overweight lesbian humorist). I don't agree with either one on everything and I would not be that interested in them if I did.
Sometimes it's fun to read someone who agrees with you and sometimes it's fun to be outraged by what someone says. I read and watch opinion givers with hopes of experiencing both and I would never flip the channel or turn the page just because the view expressed was not the same as mine.
Daniel B. Kline's work appears in over 100 papers weekly. When he is not writing Kline serves as general manager of Time Machine Hobby New England's largest hobby and toy store, www.timemachinehobby.com. He can be reached at dan@notastep.com or you can see his archive at dbkline.com or befriend him at facebook.com/dankline.
Getting emails from readers who love one particular column and thereby assume they will always agree with me inevitably leads to heartbreak. This person might enjoy the next one, even the next few, but ultimately, I will write something that does not agree with what he or she assumes I believe and the love affair will end.
The easiest path to popularity would be to have clear views that fit alongside the accepted norms. Most people like to have their opinions reinforced by others who think the same way. The public also seems to crave consistency.
That's why "Two and a Half Men" gets away with telling the same jokes every week. And, it's probably why Jay Leno gets more viewers with his mild, but consistent humor than Conan O'Brien did with his sometimes unpredictable act.
The obvious path to increased readership, more fans and the inevitable riches that would follow involves picking a side and sticking with it. Gaining this popularity would also require avoiding criticism of things most people like and instead focusing on stuff everyone already dislikes.
Unfortunately, just to name a few, I've never cared for Michael Jackson's music, have no interest in seeing "Avatar" -- probably because I disliked "Titanic" -- and I do not enjoy "American Idol" in any fashion. I'm also not a fan of either Rush Limbaugh or Barack Obama and, come to think of it, I'm pretty much not a fan of anyone who rigidly defines themselves as a conservative or a liberal a Democrat or a Republican.
The list of stuff I don't like and people I find hard to listen to runs a lot deeper than the list of things I find enjoyable. This greatly hampers my ability to be a nationally-known, widely beloved columnist because while people pretend they like to be challenged, most just want to be told their ideas are correct.
I could play Glen Beck or Rachel Maddow if I wanted to. Having clearly defined, unwavering beliefs makes it a lot easier to write because you always know your opinion. Keith Olbermann or Bill O'Reilly never have to think about what to say because anyone could tell you their opinions on any issue.
The same can be said when it comes to entertainment. It would be much easier if I disliked everything popular and could preach to the indie crowd about how I only watch IFC, listen to unsigned bands and see movies in art houses.
Unfortunately, I like Tom Petty and Buffalo Tom. I love gritty coffee houses with menus written on blackboards but I also love Starbucks. Sure, I like some entertainment outside the popular mainstream, but I also cry everytime Bill Pullman gives his big speech at the end of "Independence Day" and I've seen every episode of every "Law & Order" series.
In general, people like reading, watching and listening to people who either think like them or think exactly the opposite of them. With the battle lines clearly drawn, it's easy to have a rooting interest. When the columnist you agree with on the economy disagrees with you on gay marriage -- well, then it gets tougher for most people.
I, however, prefer when people have complex opinions and aren't so easily pigeonholed. I also enjoy when people passionately defend something they like that I don't (Pixar movies being the most recent example).
I've loved books by P.J. O'Rourke (a middle aged male, conservative humorist) and just finished reading a book I liked by Cheryl Peck (a 50-something, overweight lesbian humorist). I don't agree with either one on everything and I would not be that interested in them if I did.
Sometimes it's fun to read someone who agrees with you and sometimes it's fun to be outraged by what someone says. I read and watch opinion givers with hopes of experiencing both and I would never flip the channel or turn the page just because the view expressed was not the same as mine.
Daniel B. Kline's work appears in over 100 papers weekly. When he is not writing Kline serves as general manager of Time Machine Hobby New England's largest hobby and toy store, www.timemachinehobby.com. He can be reached at dan@notastep.com or you can see his archive at dbkline.com or befriend him at facebook.com/dankline.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
Posts
