On Sequels

"Call no man happy ... until he is dead." - Neil Gaiman, American Gods

"Obla di, obla dah, life goes on, bruh! La-lala-lala-la!" - The Beatles

Sometimes we accomplish something and feel great about our victory. Sometimes we lose something and despair. Never is it the end. That's what I like about the Pirates of the Caribbean movies and the novels of Brian Jacques: the adventures continue, as in life. Now I don't mean to contradict my older post "The Serial Killer" - Hollywood certainly does not know when to stop with sequels and remakes and so on - but if done properly, a second story and so on can be great. Not necessarily a continuation of where the last one left off; it can also be an entirely different story in the same universe.

I was very happy when I got out of middle school, but it was not the end. New adversities popped up, and t obe quite frank I am glad they do. Life's no fun without a bit of spice, and while the outcome might not always be favorable, if it was I'd get bored. Olivia posted a while back about the novel Things Fall Apart and how just because Okonkwo dies at the end, that doesn't make it less of a story. (Spoilers, sorry! Too late.) And I agree wholeheartedly.

Life does not end until death. And perhaps not even then.

In Which I Thank People for Ruining Stuff

Ironic title, but it serves its purpose. Sometimes things need to be ruined to ward off false impressions. For example, I thank the person who permanently ruined April Fool's for me. Not sarcastic. I thank my father for ruining Ayn Rand: I actually thought she was interesting until he made the analogy (another one, but not initially mine) of stop signs. If they were invented during Rand's life (were they? Doesn't matter, it's a theoretical example), she would say "This is a good invention, but what if we had stop signs every three inches? THAT wouldn't be good!" We do not have stop signs every three inches, and as far as I know nobody plans on it, so there's no need for a serious warning. In other words, she made outrageous scenarios by stretching thin basic concepts. and of course that is considered philosophy by some.

One thing I always change my mind about is The Chronicles of Narnia. I didn't like it at first because animals died (I was huge on animals), then I liked it when I saw the movie in 2005, then shortly after the Prince Caspian film, Pam (a friend) pointed out how predictable they are, what with Aslan always coming to the rescue. I am thankful to her for ruining it for me, although I'm now pretty OK with them because of the fantasy stuff. I do plan on finishing the books.

So while by no means is ruining always good, it can be, it seems.

Comment or whatever,
Lewis

Things versus Reasons

I don't recall if I heard this somewhere or if it came to me of its own, but here' the quote: "He/she did the wrong thing for the right reason."

Or vice versa. Does it really matter what the thing is, if you do it for a different reason than many would? For example, since I'm super into Harry Potter right about now, [SPOILERS] when Snape killed Dumbledore, he appeared to have done wrong. Normally he would have had done so, but he did it to (as I recall) gain Voldemort's trust. It's been a while since I read the books, and I plan to reread them, but for now I'm left to my memory. Anyway, it can also work to the contrary: If you do the right thing for the wrong reason, I would not count that as the right thing.

What I guess I'm trying to say is, does it really matter what you do, so much as the reason for which you do it? If anyone reads this, please tell me what you think.

Farewell,

Lewis