Perhaps you've heard, Carmelo Anthony is going to New York. On an intellectual level, I don't begrudge anyone's decision to go where they choose. On a personal level, he's been pissing in a lot of folks' Cheerios for months. There's a dozen people who are going to have to move their lives and their families to make him happy. That's pretty selfish, but few people reach his level of success without that kind of self obsession.
This letter is for anyone who is excited about seeing Carmelo Anthony play in New York. As a former Nuggets season ticket holder, I can assure you that he's fun to watch. Sometimes. He'll probably make the Knicks a better team from the first game he plays. He'll make the games more exciting. Initially.
But if you look closely, you'll see things that are hard to quantify with simple or advanced stats. You may not notice on TV whose man just went to the basket unguarded because his defender left him alone. But if you go to a lot of Carmelo Anthony's games, they are often his. And you may see an increased frequency of open dunks for opponents because somebody half-heartedly fought through a screen. And then there's all the times the home team has to play a man down because Carmelo Anthony is upset because he didn't get a call.
And then, a few seconds later, 'Melo will send home an alley oop or drain an unguardable shot, and you'll say, it's all worth it.
Repeat.
He's an amazing player - an epic talent - but as frustrating as any sports figure I've watched.
Good look, Knickerbockers.
Wednesday, February 23, 2011
Monday, February 21, 2011
Entrepreneurialism ad absurdum
I'm jealous of folks, including this guy, who create their own business model out of nothing. Chris Guillebeau loves to travel and hates traditional jobs, and so he's made himself the expert on non-conformity. Perhaps it's inaccurate to say that he's the expert on professional non-conformity. Maybe that's Johnny Rotten or Neil Hamburger, but he's made a business out of it. He's made a job out of being himself. And that sounds pretty great to me.
On his blog, he advocates others doing the same thing. And while I appreciate the sentiment, my sense is that entrepreneurialism is almost by definition something that cannot be generalized. The entrepreneur is akin to the pioneer who risks his life to stake out a homestead. Once an area has been settled and it's safe, others come and want to live in the same area, but those folks have to pay for their land. If you can make a business out of telling the late-comers how to homestead, good for you. But them folks missed the boat.
Chris Guillebeau writes books and speaks on how to start your own business. There's a lot more people out there, like me, who want to start their own business, but don't quite have the guts to give up the comforts of a stable job, than there are people who are willing to risk their livelihood and career on it, just as there are many more attempted entrepreneurs who attempt to start their own business than there are people who make a living off it. It's kind of an entrepreneurial pyramid scheme. Great work if you can get it, and those who pull it off are to be commended. But the homesteaders who sell the hope strike me as a bit disingenuous.
On his blog, he advocates others doing the same thing. And while I appreciate the sentiment, my sense is that entrepreneurialism is almost by definition something that cannot be generalized. The entrepreneur is akin to the pioneer who risks his life to stake out a homestead. Once an area has been settled and it's safe, others come and want to live in the same area, but those folks have to pay for their land. If you can make a business out of telling the late-comers how to homestead, good for you. But them folks missed the boat.
Chris Guillebeau writes books and speaks on how to start your own business. There's a lot more people out there, like me, who want to start their own business, but don't quite have the guts to give up the comforts of a stable job, than there are people who are willing to risk their livelihood and career on it, just as there are many more attempted entrepreneurs who attempt to start their own business than there are people who make a living off it. It's kind of an entrepreneurial pyramid scheme. Great work if you can get it, and those who pull it off are to be commended. But the homesteaders who sell the hope strike me as a bit disingenuous.
Thursday, February 17, 2011
Iran's Perfect Timing
With all the excitement over democracy/anarchy spreading like margarine around the Middle East, I haven't heard many wankers wank about this just yet. Iran is deploying warships through the Suez Canal. Ho hum, right? Iran's always doing crazy shit.
True, but this is provocative, even by Iranian standards. It's a big, crooked, hairy Persian middle finger pointed at Israel. And Israel is a country known to be sensitive about middle fingers pointed in its direction. Particularly by countries that openly express hopes of turning their country into a sandlot.
So Israel might react. How much is hard to say. It's an escalation of tensions, for sure.
It makes me uneasy, but uneasy in a typical Iran sorta way. But the timing, well, that makes me scratch at my eyes a bit. A guy lights himself on fire in Tunisia, and a few weeks later, a dictator who'd been around since 1987, Ben Ali, gets run out of the country. Soon thereafter, protesters force another dictator, Hosni Mubarak, who'd been around since 1981, to give up his power. There's protests crackling in Algeria, Bahrain, Yemen, and Iran. All these autocratic countries start to get nervous. The "people" are upset, and they're starting to believe that this time, they might get what they want: a real chance at self determination. It's powerful stuff.
But if there's one thing the Muslim world hates more than their own corrupt and tyrannical governments, it's Israel. And if you're an Iranian dictator nervous about a coup d'etat, it's the perfect time to remind "the people" about their true enemy. The best way to make that happen is by provoking the beast.
Warships, anyone?
True, but this is provocative, even by Iranian standards. It's a big, crooked, hairy Persian middle finger pointed at Israel. And Israel is a country known to be sensitive about middle fingers pointed in its direction. Particularly by countries that openly express hopes of turning their country into a sandlot.
So Israel might react. How much is hard to say. It's an escalation of tensions, for sure.
It makes me uneasy, but uneasy in a typical Iran sorta way. But the timing, well, that makes me scratch at my eyes a bit. A guy lights himself on fire in Tunisia, and a few weeks later, a dictator who'd been around since 1987, Ben Ali, gets run out of the country. Soon thereafter, protesters force another dictator, Hosni Mubarak, who'd been around since 1981, to give up his power. There's protests crackling in Algeria, Bahrain, Yemen, and Iran. All these autocratic countries start to get nervous. The "people" are upset, and they're starting to believe that this time, they might get what they want: a real chance at self determination. It's powerful stuff.
But if there's one thing the Muslim world hates more than their own corrupt and tyrannical governments, it's Israel. And if you're an Iranian dictator nervous about a coup d'etat, it's the perfect time to remind "the people" about their true enemy. The best way to make that happen is by provoking the beast.
Warships, anyone?
Wednesday, February 16, 2011
Henry Kissinger and the Grammys
Over the weekend, I read the book, the Trial of Henry Kissinger, by Christopher Hitchens. With documents released by the US in the last two decades, Hitchens convincingly argues that Kissinger should be tried for murder and crimes against humanity. Not just for his role in Vietnam War, but for his role in effectuating murder and destruction in countries against whom the United States never declared war.
The evidence is piled up and dropped right in front of you. There's not that much innuendo or argument. Hitchens plows through a bunch of evidence that Kissinger was involved in coups, murders, and assassinations in just about every continent except Antarctica. This is not speculation or circumstantial evidence. The materials are self evident. Yet Kissinger is an honored figure. He shows up on the news from time to time. He garners more than $25,000 for a public appearance.
And he won the Nobel Peace Prize, in 1973, for his role in negotiating the end of the Vietnam War. He's one of the vilest, power hungry men in American history; a man who instigated war and assassination whenever he saw fit, causing irreparable harm to the US's reputation at home and abroad. Picking at random you could have done a better job. Hell, picking at random in a maximum security prison you would have found better candidates. Yet he was giving the most prestigious award award you can get for bringing about peace.
I didn't watch the Grammys. I haven't watched them in over a decade. But I hold their decisions regarding what's good in music in as high esteem as I hold the Swedes' decision to pick Kissinger as the recipient of the Nobel Peace Prize.
Lady Gaga and Ms. Antebellum aren't really even musicians, but rather musical entertainers. And that's fine. They're good at it. Bands like the Avett Brothers and The Arcade Fire have real musical talent. It's swell that they've been rewarded. But their presence at the Grammys doesn't make the award shows connection to music any more legitimate or a reflection of musical quality. The decision of whom to reward is a political and strategic attempt to stay relevant.
The decision to award the Lady Gagas and the Henry Kissingers is a decision to make sure people are interested in you. If you're looking to find good music, you're better off finding critics you respect (may I suggest the Onion AV club) or talking to a friend who knows music. And if you want to know who's working to create peace, you're almost never going to find them among those who dedicate their lives to cultivating their own power.
The evidence is piled up and dropped right in front of you. There's not that much innuendo or argument. Hitchens plows through a bunch of evidence that Kissinger was involved in coups, murders, and assassinations in just about every continent except Antarctica. This is not speculation or circumstantial evidence. The materials are self evident. Yet Kissinger is an honored figure. He shows up on the news from time to time. He garners more than $25,000 for a public appearance.
And he won the Nobel Peace Prize, in 1973, for his role in negotiating the end of the Vietnam War. He's one of the vilest, power hungry men in American history; a man who instigated war and assassination whenever he saw fit, causing irreparable harm to the US's reputation at home and abroad. Picking at random you could have done a better job. Hell, picking at random in a maximum security prison you would have found better candidates. Yet he was giving the most prestigious award award you can get for bringing about peace.
I didn't watch the Grammys. I haven't watched them in over a decade. But I hold their decisions regarding what's good in music in as high esteem as I hold the Swedes' decision to pick Kissinger as the recipient of the Nobel Peace Prize.
Lady Gaga and Ms. Antebellum aren't really even musicians, but rather musical entertainers. And that's fine. They're good at it. Bands like the Avett Brothers and The Arcade Fire have real musical talent. It's swell that they've been rewarded. But their presence at the Grammys doesn't make the award shows connection to music any more legitimate or a reflection of musical quality. The decision of whom to reward is a political and strategic attempt to stay relevant.
The decision to award the Lady Gagas and the Henry Kissingers is a decision to make sure people are interested in you. If you're looking to find good music, you're better off finding critics you respect (may I suggest the Onion AV club) or talking to a friend who knows music. And if you want to know who's working to create peace, you're almost never going to find them among those who dedicate their lives to cultivating their own power.
Friday, February 11, 2011
Egyptian Democracy and American Naivete
The facile triumphant attitude of some Americans with these Egypt revolutionaries is starting to get on my nerves. For anyone with a connection to Egypt, of course this is life-changing news. Celebrate and enjoy. Hopefully it will lead to better things. Now is a moment for hope.
But for Americans, perhaps now is a time for introspection, rather than celebration. The United States has been giving money and weapons to Mubarak for decades. And now we're cheering his removal from office? Wha? That's like cheering for a baseball team when they're winning, and then turning around and cheering when they lose. He's been our sonofabitch for three decades. Not sure we get to act as bastions of democratic principles in his departure when we have been the ones responsible for ignoring them on his behalf since 1981.
What's more, the United States still supports anti-democratic dictatorships throughout the region, most notably in Saudi Arabia. We have supported moderate to right-wing, pro-American dictatorships over anti-American democratic states since the days of Vietnam, Allende in Chile, Bangladesh, Iran, Iraq, Afghanistan, El Salvador, Nicaragua and Cyprus.
And these countries don't forget. So when they do depose their anti-democratic tyrants, they tend not to have a pro-American point of view. That's not a prediction. Rather, a point of logic and probability.
But for Americans, perhaps now is a time for introspection, rather than celebration. The United States has been giving money and weapons to Mubarak for decades. And now we're cheering his removal from office? Wha? That's like cheering for a baseball team when they're winning, and then turning around and cheering when they lose. He's been our sonofabitch for three decades. Not sure we get to act as bastions of democratic principles in his departure when we have been the ones responsible for ignoring them on his behalf since 1981.
What's more, the United States still supports anti-democratic dictatorships throughout the region, most notably in Saudi Arabia. We have supported moderate to right-wing, pro-American dictatorships over anti-American democratic states since the days of Vietnam, Allende in Chile, Bangladesh, Iran, Iraq, Afghanistan, El Salvador, Nicaragua and Cyprus.
And these countries don't forget. So when they do depose their anti-democratic tyrants, they tend not to have a pro-American point of view. That's not a prediction. Rather, a point of logic and probability.
Tuesday, February 8, 2011
Nonexistentiamalaise
Today was a difficult day at work, for no good reason. I'm not sad or depressed. I'm not particularly busy. No one has been mean or rude to me. No one's pestering me about anything. I'm disturbingly problem free right now.
I'm in a problem-free malaise. It's not a particularly existential malaise. It's a non-existential malaise. A nonexistimalaise, to coin a phrase.
I had some extra time at work, so I wanted to post something on this-here blog. But I couldn't think of anything to write. At first, I tried to write something about Carmelo Anthony, and the lack of parity in basketball compared to football, but it just seemed so damned dull I ended up deleting the damned thing. I mean, who gives a fuck about that? I don't. So why am I writing it. Good question. Delete.
And so I wrote this, instead.
One of the challenges I face in writing creatively now is that I don't want for anything in my life, except creativity. As a young hack, it was easy to rail against machines and parents and Universities. But now, I'm pretty much in charge of my own shit. What I do is a product of my own choices. Crap I elected to do freely, without coercion. It felt easier to get on a high horse and criticize, because so much of what was happening to me seemed out of my control.
But now the things I do, I control. That means it's harder to find a foil, or a contrast to my own experience that moves me and makes me want to rail.
And that's all I have to say about that.
I'm in a problem-free malaise. It's not a particularly existential malaise. It's a non-existential malaise. A nonexistimalaise, to coin a phrase.
I had some extra time at work, so I wanted to post something on this-here blog. But I couldn't think of anything to write. At first, I tried to write something about Carmelo Anthony, and the lack of parity in basketball compared to football, but it just seemed so damned dull I ended up deleting the damned thing. I mean, who gives a fuck about that? I don't. So why am I writing it. Good question. Delete.
And so I wrote this, instead.
One of the challenges I face in writing creatively now is that I don't want for anything in my life, except creativity. As a young hack, it was easy to rail against machines and parents and Universities. But now, I'm pretty much in charge of my own shit. What I do is a product of my own choices. Crap I elected to do freely, without coercion. It felt easier to get on a high horse and criticize, because so much of what was happening to me seemed out of my control.
But now the things I do, I control. That means it's harder to find a foil, or a contrast to my own experience that moves me and makes me want to rail.
And that's all I have to say about that.
Wednesday, February 2, 2011
Occasional occasions
I don't care about who wins the Super Bowl. I don't care about the football. I hope that both teams lose. I don't understand why Green Bay still has a professional sports team. The pomp and pageantry make a Thanksgiving Day Parade look understated and minimalist. The damned thing takes forever. It's a violent sport that gives its participants brain damage in droves. That may be a blessing in disguise, though, because, at least in my experience, the vast majority of football players are brutish, uninteresting people (with some wonderful exceptions).
I prefer to watch with the sound off during the game and the sound on during the commercials.
But, still, I'm looking forward to it. A lot.
It's some of the best people watching this country has to offer. Americans eat like hell. We're materialistic and easily tricked. Our consumer culture dominates everything we are and do. It's facile melodrama with no substance - something Americans have talent portraying. And it's on full display Sunday. In fluorescent lights.
For me, it's theater of the absurd. So I'm going to drink a lot on Sunday and have fun.
Go team!
I prefer to watch with the sound off during the game and the sound on during the commercials.
But, still, I'm looking forward to it. A lot.
It's some of the best people watching this country has to offer. Americans eat like hell. We're materialistic and easily tricked. Our consumer culture dominates everything we are and do. It's facile melodrama with no substance - something Americans have talent portraying. And it's on full display Sunday. In fluorescent lights.
For me, it's theater of the absurd. So I'm going to drink a lot on Sunday and have fun.
Go team!
Tuesday, February 1, 2011
Egypt
The opposite of an autocracy is not democracy. It's anarchy. And that strikes me as pretty much what's going down in Egypt. If what follows this mess is a peaceful election to a semi-secular transition government, then this will be a great victory for progress. But right now it's mob rule. And no matter how well intentioned in principle, the end product is an iffy thing at best. And if it turns into a theocracy along the lines of Iran (which is a very real possibility), then expect renewed ugliness throughout the region.
It's for them to decide. But it may be wise to reserve judgment on who the winners and losers in this will be.
It's for them to decide. But it may be wise to reserve judgment on who the winners and losers in this will be.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)