Is Seth McFarlane funny?

Many people absolutely adore the television show known as Family Guy. Personally, I don't understand it: the jokes seem to be utterly random and possess no real punchlines. South Park had a great example:

• "Peter, did you do the laundry?"
• "No, but let's not forget my date to Mexico with Gary Coleman!

...Um, what? Did I just hear that correctly? Because I thought this show was supposed to be comedic. Of course I am referring to Family Guy, as South Park is quite hilarious, if a tad foul. If someone enjoys McFarlane's work, then I won't hold it against them. I just don't see the appeal.

Yet in a recent trailer review for Seth McFarlane's new movie Ted, which to me looks like a similar strain for comedic attention, which it somehow receives, the YouTube comments absolutely blew a fuse when the reviewer said it didn't look good, and claimed that "no one can match up to Seth's bad-ass jokes" and that "anyone who doesn't like [his works] has no sense of humor." The sad thing is, many people are of this rigid closed-mindedness and similar forms of it, and yet a good deal of them are far less vicious in person, when there's no computer screen behind which they may hide as they type trollish spam to other users. In addition to that, it would be a miracle if more than an eighth of them passed basic English classes. It still makes me cringe when people type things like "im gud, u?" If they're in a rush, that's one thing, but people now use text language all the time just out of laziness and stupidity. One of my biggest pet peeves is when a person writes the possessive pronoun "your" in the place of the contraction of "you are" - in other words, I want to add an apostrophe and an "e" along with "an idiot." "You're an idiot." And I have Mr. Nantz to thank for that example, although I was no stranger to the urge then either. But this seems to have become a grammatical tangent. My main point is still that people have a right to opinions, and while I do not always respect the opinions, I generally try to respect the person.

That's Mister Winter to You!

"Do unto others as you would have others do unto you." - Jesus Christ (I think)

"Sticks and stones may break my bones, but words can never hurt me." - Old saying

"All animals are equal, however, some animals are more equal than others." - Animal Farm by George Orwell

"...but when you're stupid, there's nothing that can be done." - Eric Idle

"Call me Ahab." - Moby-Dick by Herman Melville, which I need to read

---

Hey guys! It's time to talk about respect. You may call me Lewis or whatever; the title was coined via sarcasm. Where did this whole name-address thing come in? I always intend to have people address me casually. I mean, really. Say I meet President Obama (which would be pretty cool; he's a good man). Realistically I would call him Mr. President, Sir, etc. But in my ideal world (one I highly doubt will ever fully bear fruit) Barack and I would be equals, at least on a human level and on a verbal. I cannot fathom why first names are so bad! I'm not calling anyone a moron. Even my own parents have been zombified by this restriction. They are family! Take the famil root and insert it to create the term familiar. Atticus Finch comes to mind here. Brilliant man; we need more people like that in the real world. I understand that teachers are most likely not allowed to become familiar with students. But neighbors and "friends" who insist on being Mister-Missus-Whatblah instead of simple names? It baffles me on both the basic and deep levels. Where did this start? Why? When? How? Why??

I chuckle at those who think they are my superiors. Forsooth, they might have more life experience and perhaps a few college degrees they may or may not have earned properly, but does that make them humanly better than we "minors"? Not only is it arrogant, it's also insulting. I do not take offense - I only scoff at their ignorance - but I would not blame a child for becoming annoyed at such preposterous statements. Age itself does not elevate one over others. All people are people, and while moral codes do apply in my view to determine true scrupulous mettle, everyone is equal in one way or another. I have literally, honest-to-the-gods been told by one adult that he was my superior, and by another that she was smarter than I. Very unprofessional in both cases. Not that I'm particularly ruffled: sometimes it is best just to not interact with idiotic people, but to either avoid them or to watch them fumble about in a metaphorical fish bowl. As I say, pride is the sage's ascension and the fool's downfall. I have no net to hold when they fall.

And I regret naught.

Good-day!

- Lewis

09/11/11

"Today, we are all Americans." - A lady in France ten years ago (translated)

"United we stand, divided we fall." - Abraham Lincoln, I think?

"Nobody wins a war." - My friend in elementary school

"A soldier will fight long and hard for a bit of colored ribbon." - Napoleon Bonaparte

"Fear leads to anger. Anger leads to hate. Hate leads to suffering." - Yoda

"I know not with what weapons World War III will be fought, but World War IV will be fought with sticks and stones." - Albert Einstein

"Love is the flower you've got to let grow." - John Lennon

---

Sorry about all the quotes; I was in a bit of a quoting mood. So ten years ago I was in first grade and the World Trade Center was bombed. I remember coming home and seeing the news, but I don't think I fully grasped what had happened at the time. Today I mentally weep for humanity, for as much as it is expanding, it is also eating itself up. While we might be the most intelligent race in terms of technological advancement, we seem to have the worst judgment. While there are certain types of fauna which take the lives of their own kind, we ought to know better. We knowingly torture, kill, lie, steal, rape, cheat, and so on. If there is a God, [He] must have lost control of us, or perhaps it is [His] plan to have us end the world. Perhaps the Big Crunch will be our mortician or janitor, to sweep away a barren world.

Osama Bin Laden, the man responsible for the bombings, was recently assassinated by our troops. I do not agree with what the man did. I don't miss him. And yet, does killing a killer reduce the number of corpses? Very unpatriotic. George Washington must be spitting from heaven. It's like if a child gets into trouble for fighting and the parent hits him to teach him violence is wrong. Or saying "Do not swear, dammit!" [see "Bad Words" - a recent post of mine]. This makes us no better than anyone else. If a police officer shoots a criminal who draws a gun first, that's one thing. But putting the criminal away and executing him or her? Murder is murder, no matter what clothes it wears.

This is one of many reasons I won't join the military. I am willing to defend who I love, but I don't go looking for trouble. It finds me. (And yes, I just quoted Harry Potter.) And to quote Ringo Starr:

Peace and love!!!!

- Lewis

Book Review: Fahrenheit 451 by Ray Bradbury

Indeed, this is a rather famous novel. Like Orwell's Animal Farm, I should have read it in my freshman year, but the county school system is awful and due to a scheduling mishap (which they did nothing to fix), I was placed in average English I instead of Honors. However, I have now read both of them on my own time.

For those of you who do not know, Mr. Bradbury's novel is set in a dystopian future in which reading books has become illegal. Guy Montag, a fire-starting fireman who burns books, meets a teenage girl named Clarisse McClellan, with whom he speaks of books and becomes interested in them. He begins to stash books secretly and is eventually caught. I won't give away too much.

What threw me off about this is that it was very unclear what happened to Clarisse: did she die? Did she escape? The author never really explained that. Other than that sort of issue, it was a wonderful book, and scarily prophetic. It was published in, I believe, 1953, and while we do not have book-burning laws, people are turning to slop without reading or other stimulation. A great number of humans sit on their asses and watch the telly but do not read great books such as Fahrenheit 451. It worries me.

Final grade: B

I'm Not Applauding!

There's this acting program (I believe it is called Applause! Cary Youth Theatre), and while they put on good shows, they seem not to want anyone to see it. Sure, they probably let people come to it, if those people can actually find where the deuce it is. But once it's over, it's over: no recordings, no encores, no nothing. I did enjoy Dracula, but I would have liked to be in it another time. The problem is, they do not bring back old plays. EVER. Not only is it unjust; it is also illogical. If they only perform old, classic-novel adaptations, then they will run out eventually. And I - or someone similar - will overtake them.

Don't point at me for trying to join - I still am - for it might be fun. It has upsides. And I would not have made this post if Pam (an old friend) had not told me that Kendra (her granddaughter) tried to get in, but could not. Apparently they use the same exact actors over and over. I like Johnny Depp, but if he was in every dag-blasted movie on the planet, I'd be sickened. And I'm not harping on them for giving actors multiple opportunities. No, I'm saying that I hear they rarely use any new actors.

I have a friend at the moment who was in Dracula and, more recently, The Little Prince. I wanted to see it! This friend claimed to have told me the information, and later admitted that he put it on his Facebook and expected me to find it there. I asked if they made recordings (for they did with a non-Applause! play, Alice in Wonderland), and he said the writers don't like people watching the recordings. So.... If they call themselves writers, and writing is an art, making them "artists," then why not let anyone see their masterpiece? Not a good way to gain favor.

I am going by trustworthy sources. I have not directly spoken to these people, but that's part of the problem. It's like trying to catch smoke. I have some inside friends, who try to defend this and other groups (Honours Society, other acting places, et cetera) and do a crappy job, meaning that they say it's good, but describe it differently. I would leave them to rot if it weren't for my greatest allies being in them. Another thing is the whole "You must be homeschooled to join, 'cause they're better than everyone else" joke, which I understand parts of. But the thing is this: Honours Society is said to be full of religious nuts who don't want to be marauded by kids who have been taught about evolution. Whether I support Darwin's theory or not (I do), I'm not the one teaching it.

Sorry to blow off so much steam, but I think I need to. I love my friends to death, but I feel separated from them. That's my point: separation. If people didn't shut ourselves off from each other, then they'd be happier. I think humanity is bound for warfare until its demise. I'm not generally a downer, but it's true.

Anyhow, I need to read.

Farewell,

Lewis