Can't Make This Shit Up

Today

Student: Yo Mista, how long did you have to go to school to be a teacher?
Me: After college I went for two more years to get a master's degree.
Student: Maybe I'll go for that.
Me: To be a teacher?
Student: Yeah, you guys make that good money. What's your network?
Me: My network?
Student: Yeah, I'll bet you make a lot of money. What's your network?

(a pause for my brain to translate this)

Me: Oh, you mean my net worth?
Student: No, I mean network. Like how much money do you have?
Me: No, you don't. You mean my net worth.
Student: No, I think it's network.
Me: It's probably not.

'Citizen Kane' had a good run

You might say I'm eager to see this upcoming motion picture:

Read This Fascinating Letter

This is a letter from an executive at AIG to the CEO of the company in which he offers his resignation. It was published in the New York Times op-ed section. I don't really have anything interesting to add, except that I found it pretty fascinating in the sense that it offers an interesting perspective on the whole bonus issue.

The Top Four's Top Five

In honor of our second birthday, also known as the two year anniversary of the day blogging changed forever (who?), let's take a look back at our contributors' top five posts of the past two years. This is the top 5 as determined by me, and, as such, is highly subjective. PS - picking only 5 posts proved much harder than I originally thought, but switching to a top ten seemed like a lot more work. Plus, make sure you get all the way to the bottom in order to reach the single greatest achievement in Wheeere's Luke history, the ultimate post.

Notorious LJT - proving the theory that quality and not quantity is the secret to life...and blogging.
5: Wear Sunscreen

4: Shitequette, Jeebus, that picture still makes me want to puke.

3: Sigh, in which LJT breaks up with the Knicks

2: Music Soothes The Savage Beast Part I: Kodachrome and
Music Soothes The Savage Beast Part II: Lola Meets Natashka

1: September Eleventh, Two-Thousand and One

Side Bar - He'll be mad that I didn't include Boner Nomenclature, and in looking at the archives, I'm fairly certain he had a little thing for Sarah Palin.
5: Social Networking Sites are Stupid

4: Return of the Red-Eye, followed by
I'm All Thumbs, along with
Thumbs Up, Thumbs Down

3: 199T(eaneck)

2: Play Ball! - in which we get the greatest line in our blog's history (naming rights, ha), a King's Quest screen shot, and an eerie prediction about Barry Bonds and the home run record. And all this in his first post. The Kevin Maas of blogging.

1: The Toilet Bowl 2007: A Short Story

Open Bar - the progenitor of this blog, and in many ways the glue that holds it together.
5: Open Bar's man-crush on Nate Silver, plus some stuff about sabermetrics, and yet another sneaky insult of Side Bar

4: Study by NASA says: Doing three things at once less convenient than doing each one at a time - I really like the tone of this post.

3: Things that are overrated: Joe DiMaggio's 56-game hitting streak

2: God, I hope that's the sun coming

1: You know what's fuckin' awesome? America. Part III.a
You know what's fuckin' awesome? America. Part III.b
You know what's fuckin' awesome? America, part III.c

ChuckJerry - the heir to the Massengill fortune
5: Joe's Wedding

4: Cartesian Impasse

3: Hey Kids, If You Like Bruce Springsteen, You Might Like Jackson Browne Too

2: Fuck You, The Mets

1: Important Music

In an honorable mention way, I really liked the team effort of analysis that went into the last episode of The Sopranos. First by Side Bar, and then by ChuckJerry.

And finally, the greatest moment in Where's Luke history, less so for the quality of the post, than for the ensuing comment barrage.
No Static, Got an Automatic. Too Much of Anything Makes You an Addict.

Happy Birthday II Us

Believe it or not, it's been one year since we turned one year. Wheeeeeeeeere's Luke officially enters its "terrible twos" today.

It's been quite a year, and I like to think we matched, nay, exceeded the high standard that we set for ourselves from March 07 to March 08. Sure, our first year was filled with accomplishments like:

single-handedly orchestrating the election of the nation's first smart President of the 21st century;

an intellectual debate on race and culture surrounding the Don Imus fiasco;

a wistful memoir of lost youth; and

a series of first-hand homages to this great nation

But March 08 to March 09 was filled with such gems as:

self-made crossword puzzles (by far my single (only?) greatest contribution to the blog; go back and look at that shit again, and what is spawned. Fuck. Ing. Priceless);

some fart jokes; and

three more posts with the tag "dogs raping children --- funny?".

What a year.

Really? The First Thing, Captain Kirk?

Ok listen, I am a nerd. I will happily admit that I am a fan of Star Trek and I enjoy watching the various series and movies. I love the original. I love the Next Generation. I like Voyager. I've seen most of the movies, and I do not begrudge anyone who is a bigger fan than I am. If you want to dress up like a Vulcan and go to conventions, that's cool. If you want to learn to speak fluent Klingon, fucking go for it. If you want to build a replica of Captain Kirk's original captain's chair based on things like the "Starfleet Technical Manual" and the "USS Enterprise Bridge Blueprints", like the people in this article, and then put that chair in your living room, then build away, friend.

But then there's this:

"Mr. Veazie, a manager at Underwriters Laboratories, built the chair himself last year, and has been gratified to find, since installing it in the living room in May, that 'when someone comes in, it’s the first thing they comment on.'"

No fucking shit, dude. So you're saying that no one comments on your fucking normal couch in the living room? No one comments on your tiny bookshelf with your super sweet DVD collection sorted in color order and pictures of your family? The first thing the eye is drawn to in your living room is the elevated replica of the captain's chair with the buttons and everything? I'll bet that's gratifying.

What's Your Final Four?

I'm inviting all of my blog mates to post their Final Four selections so then someone will have bragging rights at the end of the tournament (probably Open Bar, who's got far more time to handicap this stuff).

ChuckJerry's Final Four
Louisville, Memphis, Pittsburgh, Oklahoma
Pitt over Memphis in the final
Cinderella team: USC I'm going with VCU aka Virginia Commonwealth (I wanted to pick Gonzaga, but they're a 4 seed, and 10th in the nation)

Open Bar's Final Four
Um, weird, but Louisville, Memphis, Pittsburgh, Oklahoma (though until the first game begins, I'll be checking espn.com constantly for updates on Ty Lawson, which may alter my fourth choice)
Pitt over Louisville in the final
Cinderella team: Western Kentucky

Notorious LJT's Final Four
Kansas, UConn, UNC and Duke
Duke over UConn in the Final
Cinderella Team: The Teaneck Highwaymen

Side Bar's Final Four
Pitt, UConn, Kansas, UNC
Pitt over UConn in the final
Cinderella Team: Marlyand

The New Messiah?

Today

Student: Yo, Mista, we got our first softball game today.
Me: Oh yeah, who are you guys playing?
Student: I don't know. Some Catholic school. I'll look at the schedule.
Me: Ok.

(a few minutes later)

Student: Oh, here it is, Mista. We're playing Chris the King.
Me: Chris? the King?
Student: Yeah.
Me: Chris is not the king. You're playing Christ the King.
Student: Oh, yeah ok.

Point / Counterpoint: I Quit 24

I'm hoping by making this initial point, Side Bar will chime in and give a counterpoint as to why he is still watching, and apparently as engaged as ever.

The point here is that I quit watching 24 this season. When 24 didn't air last season because of the writers' strike, I didn't really miss it. I had watched every season up until then and I was certainly a fan of the show. I had felt, however, that the last couple of seasons had really left something to be desired.

In the last few seasons they had really gone overboard with these terror scenarios and while I concede that what happens in each of their seasons is plausible, it just got less and less believable. At one point in their 6th season there was a nuclear bomb detonated in downtown Los Angeles, and that was in like the 6th episode. It just got more and more ridiculous after that. I really felt like they were stretching for new plot contrivances by the end of that season.

As great as the first 3 or 4 seasons were, was as bad as the 5th and 6th were. I felt like I knew what was going to happen at the end of every episode, because the arc of the show never really changed. I mean, how many different ways can you tell the story? Imminent threat, no leads, ooh we've got a lead, he won't talk, we'll threaten torture, we'll blur the line between interrogation and torture, he talks, we save the day despite some necessary casualties. Those necessary casualties were indeed shocking, weren't they?

And I didn't just quit the show this year because I thought it would suck. I watched the first 4 or 5 episodes. Then the next 3 or 4 episodes started building up on my DVR and I just didn't have an interest in watching them. It's just the same thing over and over again. Terrorist threats diffused at the last moment, Jack Bauer ruminates over his lot in life, so on and so forth.

I assume this season picked up after I stopped watching, Side Bar? Please to explain.

Things That Are Overrated: On The Road

I struggled for a moment trying to decide wether to put this in the overrated category, or just to make an arbitrary post about the book, but since my general conclusion was that the book is fairly overrated, I decided to use the pre-existing theme of the blog. I read this book last week, which also speaks to the lack of posting for those few days, for several reasons. Obviously it's highly regarded, so I figured it would be good. Also I'm into the classics, and this seemed like one of them. It's also just a good pop culture reference and I take my pop culture responsibilities seriously.

I'm not really certain where to begin. This book is one of the more influential works of the 20th century. There are plenty of songs and books, poems and movies that owe their existence to On The Road, but I can't really say that I connected to it. I think when the book was released it was met with praise about there being an underlying truth to it that transcends the time it was written in, but I don't think that's the case. I think the book immediately influenced people in the time it was written, but today it's pretty dated. Additionally, I'm not really in love with the prose that seems to be the defining trait of this novel.

A (very) short summary. This guy Sal is trying to make it as a writer and his not being tied down to a job or anything allows him to go all over the country to visit acquaintances who are spread all over. He hithchikes, takes buses, drives, and eventually works his way all over the country. At the same time this other dude, Dean, accompanies him a lot of the time. They rarely have a specific agenda other than to go around, listen to jazz, and pick up girls. There's a bit more to it, but that's the gist.

The summary is necessary in pointing out that the book is essentially autobiographical. Jack Kerouac sat down to write the book with the idea that he was telling his wife about his life in the years before he met her. The original manuscript had the real names of the people he encountered and everything, and were later changed during editing. I mention this because this wasn't a story that was created. There's no particular genius in just telling about things you did. With that being said, presenting that material in a way that's insightful or that leads to larger conclusions about life would certainly be a worthwile venture. But this isn't that. There is no analysis, there is no grand conclusion, it's all just exposition. This type of work could lead one to really analyze each scenario and decide what lessons one might have learned, especially given that the plot has essentially written itself.

As a result, the whole thing is really just kindof empty. The only time the prose really sings is in three separate sections when he's describing himself watching live jazz performances. Those sections are loaded with purple prose and captivating metaphors and are easily the highlight of the book. Outside of that, he might as well just be telling you about last night's episode of American Idol.

Now I think maybe the point of the book is that the whole thing is kindof empty. The book, life, and everything else. It is the defining work of the "beat" generation, so named because, in one respect, they are beaten down by life, and have, in one way or another, lost their way. But I didn't get the beaten down by life thing from the book. What I got instead was that this was a book about a bunch of losers who shirked thier responsibilities and allowed themselves to be easily swayed by thier ids, and drugs, and one guy who they all knew was a loser, but who was fun to be around until he no longer needed them at which point he would leave without a second thought.

There's an underlying sadness in this book. The main character, Sal, apparently a thinly veiled version of Kerouac himself, has no goals, no ideals, no plans, and no ideas of his own. And this is a book about a lost soul, in the same way that The Catcher In The Rye is about a lost soul, but it's completely different. These two books remind me of each other in the aforementioned lost soul wandering around looking for meaning type of way, but at the same time, On The Road is a far inferior version. What is great about The Catcher In The Rye is that there is a definite universality in the Holden character. We are not exactly the same as him, but we can identify with him and his journey. The style that Catcher is written in is similar to this one, though it is interspersed with Holden's interesting philosophy on life. And even though he's a lost soul, and even though he may never find his way, we at least know that he's striving toward something. The Sal character in on the road doesn't offer any of that. The one thing I know he's passionate about is jazz. Other than that, I can't say anything more about him other than the fact that he took these various road trips.

This is really where the book falls short for me. There is no underlying anything, other than sadness. I wish there was more beneath the surface and there really just isn't here. It's just a retelling of events. If we gave MMG 6 beers, he could recount an On The Road type of story about a fraternity party or a ski trip.

In conclusion, this book is overrated. It feels dated to me and the references feel stale. The Catcher In The Rye is just as old, but doesn't feel dated, and offers more than just a surface story. What's missing in On The Road, then, is that universal element, that timeless piece, the marrow.