Desire: More than a streetcar?

I’m currently reading the book Boys Adrift by Leonard Sax, MD, PhD. Though I will surely write a detailed review and critique of his work when I finish it, I found a statement in his book so intriguing that I believed immediate mention to be warranted. About halfway through the sixth chapter, which is about the “Failure to Launch” phenomenon in the United States, Sax includes a collection of emails, NPR-sponsored chat transcripts, and letters he has received from various individuals; some parents, some successful women with parasitic boyfriends, and some of the so-called “slacker[s]” themselves (2007, p. 147). The statement that I found so interesting was, much to my surprise, from a 27-year-old “married” man currently attending “grad school” for a “doctorate in medieval literature” (Sax, 2007, p. 148).

Given Sax’s overt position against video games and the use of pornographic materials as a substitute for real sexual encounters (about which you will have to purchase his book in order to find out more information), this individual felt compelled to offer an interesting–be it brief and unsubstantiated–opposing perspective. This man, who posits that video games can help people temporarily “feel like they’re doing something significant,” also discusses another interesting aspect of the reliance on virtual constructs (Sax, 2007, p. 149). He, when referring to the vivid scenery in many video games, states that “the desire for beauty is very strong–so strong that one might accept all sorts of false substitutes if one couldn’t find the reality” (Sax, 2007, p. 149).

This quote, in my opinion (and not backed by any empirical evidence), is fascinating in that it could potentially appeal to the common sense of many post-modern technologists, virtuosos, academics, and artists (myself included in that penultimate category). Many times I have found myself mesmerised by the beautiful pieces of digital artwork found on DigitalBlasphemy and DeviantART, as well as the work of other prominent and not-so-prominent artists. Many of these pieces are not inspired by actual photographs, or architectural / environmental realism, but rather are spawned solely from the imaginations of the individuals who created them. Further, I believe that this statement about the “desire for beauty” (Sax, 2007, p. 149) also includes beauty and desire that may be considered societally or socially taboo, or worse yet, simply inappropriate.

Without going off on a rant about the unfathomable atrocity of a larger society dictating what are and are not appropriate manifestations of beauty, I want to address the underlying premise that a social structure is capable of judging schemata as complex and intricate as human emotion. David Humes, in one of his many sociopolitical essays, says that “beauty is no quality in things themselves: It exists merely in the mind which contemplates them; and each mind perceives a different beauty” (1987, Part I, Essay XXIII, para. 8 ). If this statement, which has morphed from and into many different syntacies throughout the centuries, is held to be true, then society and other groups have neither the ability nor the power to decide what should and should not be seen as beautiful. That being said, the statement regarding “false substitutes” of beauty holds true even more so, given that the subjects one finds beautiful may not be available in reality without being accompanied by stigmatisation and persecution.

Again, this is merely one minute excerpt from a book full of information and insight (some of which is controversial), and a subsequent book review will follow in the weeks to come.

|:| Zach |:|

REFERENCES:

Hume, D. (1987). Essays: Moral, political and literary (E.F. Miller, Ed.). Indianapolis, IN: Liberty Fund. (Original work published 1742).

Sax, L. (2007). Boys adrift. New York: Basic Books.

Stunning story

I got this email from my brother (Jas) today, and I just had to share it with you.

<|~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~|>
<|~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~|>

Last weekend I saw something at Larry’s Pistol & Pawn Shop that sparked my interest. The occasion was our 22nd Anniversary, and I was looking for a little something “extra” for my wife. I came across was a 100,000-volt, pocket/purse-sized stun gun. The effects of the stun gunwere supposed to be short lived, with no long-term adverse affect on the assailant, allowing her adequate time to retreat to safety…. WAY TOO COOL!

Long story short, I bought the device, and brought it home. I loaded two triple-A batteries in the thing, and pushed the button. Nothing! I was disappointed. I learned, however, that if I pushed the button AND pressed it against a metal surface at the same time; I’d get the blue arc of electricity darting back and forth between the prongs. Awesome!!! Unfortunately, I have yet to explain to Toni what that burn spot is on the face of her microwave.

Okay, so I was home alone with this new toy, thinking to myself that it couldn’t be all THAT bad, with only two triple-A batteries, right?!! There I sat in my recliner, my cat Gracie looking on intently (trusting little soul) while I was reading the directions, and thinking that I really needed to try this thing out on a flesh & blood moving target. I must admit, I thought about zapping Gracie, (for a fraction of a second) and then thought better of it. She’s such a sweet cat. But, if I was going to give this thing to my wife to protect herself against a mugger, I did want some assurance that it would work as advertised. Am I wrong?

So, there I sat in a pair of shorts and a tank top, with my reading glasses perched delicately on the bridge of my nose, directions in one hand, and stun gun in another. The directions said that a one-second burst would shock and disorient your assailant; a two-second burst was supposed to cause muscle spasms, and a major loss of bodily control; a three-second burst would purportedly make your assailant flop on the ground like a fish out of water. Any burst longer than three seconds would just be wasting the batteries. All the while, I’m looking at this little device measuring about 5″ long, less than 3/4 inch in circumference; (pretty cute really, and loaded with two itsy, bitsy triple-A batteries) thinking to myself, “NO possible way!” What happened next is almost beyond description, but I’ll do my best…

I’m sitting there alone, Gracie looking on with her head cocked to one side as if to say, “Don’t do it master,” reasoning that a one-second burst from such a tiny little ole thing couldn’t POSSIBLY hurt all that bad… I decided to give myself a one-second burst, just for the heck of it. I touched the prongs to my naked thigh, pushed the button, and…

HOLY MOTHER OF GOD, WEAPON OF MASS DESTRUCTION! I’m pretty sure Jessie Ventura ran in through the side door, picked me up in the recliner, then body slammed us both on the carpet, over, and over, and over, and over again. I vaguely recall waking up on my side, in the fetal position, with tears in my eyes, body soaking wet, both nipples on fire, testicles nowhere to be found, with my left arm tucked under my body in the oddest position, and tingling in my legs. The cat was standing over me making meowing sounds I had never heard before, licking my face, and undoubtedly thinking to herself, “do it again, do it again!”

Note: If you ever feel compelled to “mug” yourself with a stun gun, one note of caution: there is NO SUCH THING as a “one-second burst”, when you zap yourself. You will not let go of that thing until it is dislodged from your hand by a violent thrashing about on the floor. A three second burst would be considered conservative. SON-OF-A-BITCH… that hurt!!!

A minute or so later (I can’t be sure, as time was a relative thing at that point), I collected my wits (what little I had left), sat up, and surveyed the landscape. My bent reading glasses were on the mantel of the fireplace. How did they up get there??? My triceps, right thigh, and both nipples were still twitching. My face felt like it had been shot up with Novocain, and my bottom lip weighed 88 lbs. I’m still looking for my testicles. I’m offering a significant reward for their safe return.

<|~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~|>
<|~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~|>

Isn’t that awesome?

|:| Zach |:|

Alternatives to AIR?

No, no, no, this isn’t going to be an article about some crazy new breathing apparatus. Rather, it regards some new technology related to the web-desktop interface that I discussed briefly in my article yesterday. I stumbled upon this new program known as Adobe AIR. Today, however, while perusing the Gentoo mailing lists, I found that there is a program called Mozilla Prism. This seems to be along the same lines as AIR, but is produced by the Mozilla foundation. While reading the write-up on Prism, I also found that Micro$oft has also released a similar interface called Microsoft Silverlight.

With the links provided, you are all free to read up on each of these new interfaces. I’m still having trouble realising why such interfaces are even necessary. However, I’m the type of computer user that enjoys having separate applications for tasks, and this type of integration seems excessive to me. Let me say that, having not experimented with any of these three programs, that my opinions are, at current, unsubstantiated. However, the interfaces do seem like they could potentially provide numerous local and remote security exploits. I’m hoping that I will get the time to try out at least Adobe AIR and Mozilla Prism sometime within the next couple weeks. I don’t really have any desire to try Silverlight, as it is manufactured by the empire.

|:| Zach |:|