Best Actor

Ten years ago, Matthew McConaughey literally wasn’t in anything.  If you asked someone who he was, sure, they’d know — he’s that guy in all those chick flicks.  His two most recognizable roles to date were in 2003’s How to Lose a Guy in 10 Days (as, presumably, the guy who gets lost), and in 2001’s The Wedding Planner, which is most memorable for being “that thing Jennifer Lopez was in that was neither a music video nor Gigli.”  His most “serious” role to date was probably in the illustrious Reign of Fire in 2002, which apparently also starred Christian Bale, presumably as a gravelly-voiced, masked hero who rids the streets of Gotham of its pesky dragon problem.  This is a movie that IMDB* suggests that if you enjoyed it, you will also enjoy all of the Underworld movies, Pitch Black, some Nic Cage movie called Next that no one has ever heard of, and the Edward Norton version of The Incredible Hulk.  No one liked The Incredible Hulk, which just goes to show that, as I have long suspected, no one liked Reign of Fire.

Of course, his best work to date would have to be his first “major” role as David Wooderson in Dazed and Confused, where he understandably gets top billing in the 22nd position on IMDB; you have to click through to the Full Cast and Crew page to find him.  Having not seen this movie I am surprised he has more than one line.

That’s what I love about high school girls…

Five years ago, not much had changed — he played himself opposite Seabiscuit in 2006’s Failure to Launch, the lead in We Are Marshall, co-starring Matthew Fox and getting slightly higher IMDB ratings than Reign of Fire, and Ebenezer Scrooge in 2009’s zany re-imagining of Dicken’s classic A Christmas CarolGhosts of Girlfriends Past.  And that was who Matthew McConaughey was — almost 20 years into his acting career, he was a romantic comedy lead.

This year, he continued that trend by playing Ron Woodruff in Dallas Buyers Club, a madcap romantic comedy in which he stars opposite Ghosts of Girlfriends Past‘s Jennifer Garner, about … a bigot who finds out he’s dying of AIDS at the height of the epidemic in 1985 and then does everything he can to help himself and his community find the care they so desperately need in the face of certain death, growing as a person in the process to find the fundamental value in every human life.  He won the Academy Award for Best Actor in a Leading Role (noting that Jared Leto won Best Supporting for his performance in the same film, and the film was nominated for Best Picture).

Starting 3 years ago with The Lincoln Laywer, which drew scorn and derision from the masses chiefly because it starred Romantic Comedy Lead Matthew McConaughey (“like that will ever work,” said a young, naïve me), but which was actually fairly well-reviewed, McConaughey pulled off a series of totally unexpected upsets, playing a complex lead character in Mud and ultimately scoring a role in not one, but two Best Picture nominees this year (Wolf of Wall Street and Dallas Buyers Club), plus a lead role and executive producer credit in the surefire lock for this year’s prestigious Emmy for Best TV Show Ever Created, Like Seriously How Is It Even Possible To Make a Show This Good, True Detective.  In the ~words of my inestimable brother, “If I found out that Matthew McConaughey started taking an herbal supplement in 2011, I would immediately begin taking that supplement.”  (I don’t actually remember what he said but it was something along those lines, only better — in the highly unlikely scenario that he is reading this, he should feel free to correct me.)  He has pulled off an incredible feat in the past three years, breaking out of his typecast role and establishing himself as a true actor in a way that is completely unprecedented in modern, mainstream American cinema.

… Or is it?

Image
Remember me?

That’s right — Tom Hanks, whom you may remember from his 5 Best Actor-nominated performances (and 2 wins), used to be a B-list rom-com star.  People in my generation tend to forget this — we came of age during his heyday.  The first thing I remember seeing him in was Forrest Gump, for which he won Best Actor.  If I had been older, I probably would have recognized him from Philadelphia, for which he won the prior year’s Best Actor award, playing, of all things, a man dying of AIDS… sound familiar?  (I, for one, can’t wait to watch McConaughey play a mentally challenged man bumbling his way through historical events later this year in search of his next award.)  In the ’90’s and early 2000s, Hanks would go on to play Jim Lovell in Best Picture nominee Apollo 13, voice iconic main character Woody in Toy Story (whose sequel, Toy Story 3, also starring Hanks, would be nominated for Best Picture in 2010); he’d be nominated again in 2008 for portraying Captain Miller in Best Picture nominee (and huge snub, if you ask me) Saving Private Ryan, play Paul Edgecomb in Best Picture nominee The Green Mile, and be nominated for his fifth (and, to date, final) time for his portrayal of main, and virtually only, character Chuck Noland in Cast Away.  In short, this is how he’s remembered by someone growing up in the ’90’s; not only as someone acting at an incredible level (joining the list of other 5-time nominees Gregory Peck, Jimmy Stewart, Robert De Niro and Daniel Day-Lewis, and 2-time winners Dustin Hoffman and Marlon Brando), but as acting in incredible films.

So it’s easy to forget that before he was in Philadelphia, he was in Splash, opposite a mermaid played by Darryl Hannah, supported by a living John Candy and Eugene “eyebrows” Levy.

Image
This is exactly the expression I would have if I were cast in a Tom Hanks movie.

After that, Hanks starred in The Money Pit, a movie which is synopsized as “A young couple struggles to repair a hopelessly dilapidated house” on its IMDB page.  Sounds exciting!  (Full disclosure, my parents love this movie for some reason.)  In ’89, he would go on to play the lead in a “Comedy | Horror | Mystery” called The ‘Burbs, and either Turner or Hooch in Turner & Hooch, before playing the male lead in the ultimate romantic comedy, Sleepless in Seattle in 1993 — the same year that McConaughey’s breakout role as “that guy who says that thing about high school girls staying the same age” in Dazed and Confused.  It wasn’t until the next year that Hanks would win his first Academy Award as a man dying of AIDS in Philadelphia.

Of course, this doesn’t paint the whole picture.  During his successful, if somewhat vapid, career as a comedy lead through the ’80’s and early ’90’s, he was nominated for best actor for his portrayal of Josh, a child-turned-adult-turned toy company genius in 1988’s Big, but I’d argue that Big isn’t of the same caliber material as PhiladelphiaSaving Private Ryan, or True Detective.  Maybe I’m not giving Hanks enough credit — not having seen almost any McConaughey work prior to this year, and barely remembering what pre-1995 Hanks work I’ve seen (A League of Their Own, SplashThe Money Pit), I don’t have the proper context to say that The ‘Burbs was or was not a better movie than We Are Marshall.  Hanks’ work prior to his sudden ascendency in 1994 maybe does seem more prolific, and perhaps of higher quality, both in terms of overall production value and individual range, than McConaughey’s pre-2011 work.  Regardless, Hanks’ case serves as some precedent for what we saw happen this year.

So what does this mean for McConaughey’s future?  Probably nothing.  Maybe he’ll go on a run like Hanks did; maybe he’ll fall back on his old typecast role.  I think the lesson to be learned here, though, is this — if McConaughey flops in his next role, or ends up in a movie in a few years that makes you think “what happened to him?  He came so far!  And now he’s back to this mindless crap?” just remember that, in between Toy Story and Saving Private Ryan, Hanks starred in That Thing You Do.  That in between Saving Private Ryan and The Green Mile, he starred in You’ve Got Mail.  And that since then he’s starred in not one, not two, but three Dan Brown adaptations.

I guess what I’m saying is, if you’re really hoping Matthew McConaughey will get back into the romantic comedy business, there’s still hope.

* Literally all of the “research” done for this post was done through IMDB.

The Art of Conversation, According to Me

 

– or –

An Idiot’s Guide to Saying Dumb Things

I’m not what you would call a “people person” (except inasmuch as I am a person and, much like delicious Soylent Green, I am made out of people).  I find that people, in general, are vapid and boring, and I don’t particularly feel the need to waste my precious, precious time hearing them use trite phrases like “people person”  — you can almost hear the air quotes as they say it –, listening to their stories, or hearing about their whiney, self-centered feelings of inadequacy because their mommy didn’t give them a pony when they were growing up or their father sold US nuclear secrets to the USSR and was executed for treason.  I think this, among other things (like my total lack of a license to practice), helps to explain why my career moonlighting as a psychologist went so poorly.

Image
So what if you were locked in a shipping container for days as a baby soaking in a pool of your mother’s blood? BOOOOOORING.

This isn’t to say, “it’s not me, it’s them” — I think the feeling is mutual.  Just like I don’t want to hear about some stranger’s Bachelorette fan fiction, no stranger wants to hear about my Bachelorette fan fiction, about which I will now go into great detail.  No!  I’m totally just kidding; the world isn’t ready for my creative genius… yet.  But seriously, as I’ve mentioned before, I’m not the kind of person to approach strangers; it’s not that I’m particularly private — you are literally, right now, reading a published-to-the-world account of my life and thoughts, you dolts — it’s that I don’t feel I have any particular right to intrude in other people’s lives.  I generally don’t talk to strangers, whether that be approaching the ladies at a bar or talking to my neighbors in the apartment elevator, not because I don’t want them to talk to me, but because I don’t want to force myself on them.  I assume everyone else has the same feeling about people that I do, and to them, I’m just another vapid, boring person they don’t want to have to deal with.

However, there are times when, for one reason or another, I am forced to interact with other humans — sometimes even strangers.  And sometimes, some rare, beautiful times, I find that I am on — I am, at least in my own mind, not just another boring, vapid person, but a Master of Conversation.*  This post is a guide for the rest of you, drawn from those times.

Avoid Foreign Entanglements

If you are like me, you do not have the stamina or the ability to contribute to, much less maintain, a conversation with a group of people.  Nobody wants to hear what you have to say, so your best bet is to corner some poor, unsuspecting sap and engage in a one-on-one conversation.  This guide does not cover group communication.

Bonus Material

If your friends (assuming you have any) are similar to you, it is possible to pull off the Group One-on-One Discussion.  This is an advanced maneuver and not for the faint of heart.  

With a group of friends, approach a potential conversation partner.  Ensure that your friends will in no way contribute to the conversation.  Immediately take control and lead the conversation according to the rules below.  Even though your friends are mere observers of this conversation, if done correctly, both the conversation target and the group will feel that they are a part of the discussion.  Better, the conversation target will feel that they have the attention of the entire group — what love! — and your friends will be subconsciously relieved they aren’t tasked with any real contribution.  Best, in a party situation, you will not look like two losers talking at the edge of a gathering — you will look like several losers talking at the edge of a gathering.

Talk About Them

This is the basics.  This is Conversation 101.  No, scratch that, this is 6th grade Conversation, and I’m your government-employed, took-the-job-as-football-coach-for-the-extra-booze-money public school 6th grade Conversation teacher lecturing you verbatim out of the book.  “Talk about the other person, not yourself,” I say, as I describe my rhetorical self and actions at length.  

The point here is to minimize the use of “I” and “me” and to keep the conversation focused on the other person — this makes the other person feel important and appreciated, which paradoxically makes them like you more (or makes them feel superior to you and get bored — it depends on the person, but in the latter case, you didn’t want to talk to them anyway).  Almost everything else in this article is implementation of this single, important tenet, which will explain how even someone who loves talking about themselves as much as I do is able to pull it off.

Bonus Material

Talking about the other person rather than yourself has a hidden bonus!  If you’re a private person or if you think you’re boring — or if you actually are boring — no worries!  You won’t be talking about your boring life or ill-formed opinions, so the other person will be shielded from your inadequacy in that regard.  Just make sure you never, ever talk to them again once they’ve run out of things to talk about, lest your secret be exposed.

Ask Questions

The best way to keep the conversation about the other person is to ask a relentless series of questions.  Don’t bother giving the other person time to respond, just rattle away anything that comes to your head.  By the time you’re done, they’ll be so exhausted from trying to remember all the inane BS you just asked that they’ll probably give up entirely.  Congratulations, you have won the conversation!  Now find your next victim.

No!  Totally do give the other person time to respond, but as their response winds down, be prepared with a fresh, poignant question — this stops them from hitting the awkward silence stage where they turn the question on you.  Here are some examples:

Incorrect:

You: “Do you have any pets?”

Them: “I have a cat.”

You: “…”

Them “… how about you?”

Correct:

You: “Do you have any pets?”

Them: “I do not have any pets.”

You: “Is that because you’re not emotionally or financially stable enough to care for another living being?”

Notice that in the first example, the question became about you.  Great, now they have to hear about your boring-ass hamster.  In the second example, you have furthered the conversation — now you get to hear about their financial and / or emotional instabilities!  That should keep them busy for awhile while you furiously analyze their response for further possible questions.

When relentlessly asking questions, it’s important to avoid the temptation to bring the conversation back around to yourself — I know you think you’re interesting, but trust me, you’re not.  This pitfall typically takes the form of answering your own question before the other person gets a chance to; it’s an easy out to finding common ground with someone, but it’s best to allow them to share their feelings on the subject before sharing your own, so that you don’t cloud their judgement or subconsciously force them to change their response.  Plus, it keeps you from becoming the Veruca Salt of the conversation.  Nobody likes Veruca Salt.

Do you love blueb’ries? I love blueb’ries.

Here, again, are some examples:

Incorrect:

You: “Do you prefer dogs or cats? I’m a cat person!  My cat is named Lana and she is black with a little fleck -“

Them: “Please excuse me while I find literally anyone else to talk to.”

Correct:

You: “Do you prefer dogs or cats?”

Them: “I like dogs; I have one, it’s a malamute…” blah blah blah blah

You: “Well, you’re wrong, cats are better.  Has your dog ever killed a man?”

You can still talk about yourself and find common ground, but do so after they’ve answered.  This way, you’ve shielded them from feeling awkward about their response as they answer just because it differs from yours and having to hedge (“Oh, I like cats too I guess, I just like dogs a little more.”).  Now you’ve exposed their true feelings and you can judge them accordingly!  It also gives you the opportunity to lie so that they like you better.  “Malamutes are adorable, tell me more,” you say, while imagining a mass malamute grave and your cat manning the bulldozer pushing the bodies in.  You smile disarmingly.

Finally, it’s important to adapt your questions to the conversation.  It’s often useful to mentally prepare a few questions to begin a conversation; if you’re meeting someone new, have a few standards that you can ask anyone: 

  • Where do you live / where are you from?
  • How do you know [mutual friend]?
  • What do you wear to sleep?
  • How many sexual partners have you had and how would you rate them on a scale from 1 to 10?  Please include names.

For acquaintances or friends you haven’t seen in awhile, have a mental log of older conversations — maybe they were prattling on and on about their New Year’s resolutions, so you can ask them how those are going.  Or maybe they gave you an in-depth rating of sexual partners; perhaps they’ve added a few since you last saw them?  A question that harkens back to a previous conversation will remind them of who you are and also let them know that you value them enough to remember that they met your mutual friend when he was the gimp at an orgy.  If it’s someone that you’ve seen recently enough that no new developments in prior conversations could have occurred, too bad — this guide doesn’t cover that scenario.

Once an initial salvo has been launched, you can keep following up with questions related to their responses until you feel you’ve exhausted that line of inquiry.  You should keep mental track of responses that lead to multiple questions (or conversational branches, as I’ll call them right now and never again), so that when you exhaust a particular line of inquiry you can revisit that branch.  Once all branches have been exhausted, you can always fall back to your initial list of questions.  Let’s see an example:

You: “Do you have any pets?”

Them: “Yes, I have a dog and a cat.”

You: [Oooh, a branch! Noted!] “Do they get along?”

[An hour later]

Them: “… and that’s an exhaustive list of every time my cat and dog have ever interacted.  Please, let me leave so that I can kill myself.”

You: [Oh no, they’re done.  Let’s revisit that branch!] “What kind of dog is it?”

Bonus Material

Ask opening questions that are so open-ended as to make the other person uncomfortable.  Here are some good examples:

  • “What’s new,” to someone you’ve never met.
  • “Tell me about yourself.”
  • “Interest me.  Go!”
  • “Why?”

Anyone who is not made uncomfortable and answers these questions well is either a pompous ass, and you should leave before getting sucked into the Vortex of Them, or too good for you and you should stop bothering them.  Anyone who is uncomfortable and has trouble answering is more your speed, but at this point never wants to talk to you again.  Leave the party/gathering, change your hair or make-up, and come back pretending to be a different person.  Attempt to engage these people with more straightforward questions.

Exiting Gracefully

Once you have exhausted your initial list of questions and all incremental questions, you have probably been talking to this person for a long time.  Congratulations! You are now Fast Friends.  Consider asking this person to be in your wedding as a [groomsman | bridesmaid] or, if this person is a member of the sex(es) you find most attractive and are legally able to marry in your state / county / country / province, as the [bride | groom].  Haha, just kidding! No one will ever marry you!  You are taking conversational advice from the internet and are destined to die alone.  

Sometimes you will find that you have exhausted your initial list of topics very quickly, and there is nothing that can be done.  Every response you get is negative and lends itself to no further conversation:

You: “Do you have any pets?”

Them: “No.”

You: “… well… do you… want any?”

Them: “No.”

You: “… so… where… do you live?”

Them: “Brooklyn.  I loved it there five years ago but it’s becoming too mainstream; all of the mom-and-pop coffee shops there are being replaced by other mom-and-pop coffee shops, but these ones have coffee-related puns for names; I swear it’s only like 15 more years before it becomes a Starbucks haven.  I’m getting out as soon as I can and moving to Porchland — no not Portland, God what is this, 2012? Porchland.  It’s a pre-industrial concept village of what Austin would have been like if running water had never been invented.  It has a population of 217 people and already has over 500 microbreweries.”

You have discovered a Boring Person.  This person is not worth talking to, and in this case, you must also find a graceful way to exit the conversation, lest you get stuck in awkward silence for the rest of the engagement or are made dumber by having to listen to their hipster BS.  

In either of these cases, the correct thing to do is to politely excuse yourself, preferably with an actionable excuse.  Finding someone else to talk to is always a good one, or perhaps getting a drink or performing other standard large-group-environment maintenance.  It is essential to have a real out, though.  If the conversation is done, don’t invite yourself back by saying “I’ll be right back” or offering to get the other party anything — simply indicate that you are departing and imply that they are on their own.

Incorrect:

“I am going to go grab a drink, can I get you anything?”

Correct:

“I’m going to go grab a drink.  It’s been ‘great’ talking to you.”

Ensure that third parties are complicit in the exit strategy — avoid indicating that you are going to talk to a specific person if that person is otherwise engaged or may not want to talk to you.  “Oh! There’s Bob!  I have to go ask him about his colonoscopy!” is a great way to get out of a conversation, provided that Bob is at the party and actually will talk to you.  Walking over to Bob and having a drink thrown in your face is not the most compelling excuse, and now you’ve invalidated the appreciation you’ve built up in the conversee, who has seen past your shallow attempt to extricate yourself from the apparent nightmare of conversing with them. 

“It was like this, but in my butt!”

If your exit excuse is something short term, like getting a drink, you must make sure that your partner has moved on to other things.  If, after your maintenance is complete, you find that your partner is still wandering aimlessly through the engagement — or worse, is looking right at you begging you to return — do not re-engage.  You have already run out of things to say, your conversation partner has a high opinion of you and your conversation skills, and re-engaging will only lead to disaster as that facade comes crashing down.  In emergencies, when all other outs are taken and your prior partner is looking in your direction expectantly, put down your drink, turn around, and leave the party.  It’s better this way.

Bonus Material

The Introduction is an advanced move that can get you out of talking to two people.  If you’ve exhausted your conversation with someone, find someone else that you know and introduce them, then make your escape.  This maneuver simultaneously solves the problems of exiting the conversation and of possible re-engagement therein.  If you’re leaving the conversation because it was boring, make sure you introduce that person to someone you don’t like — this also solves the problem of ever having to talk to that person, too! 

Extra bonus points if you set either person up with something from a prior conversation:

“Oh, Bill, get over here — You have to hear Jerry’s story about his goldfish.  It’s priceless!  I’ve already heard it, so I’m leaving.”

Humor

In the rare cases where you are actually forced to contribute to the conversation, using humor is a good out if you have nothing of substance to say, which, let’s face it, is always.  I’m clearly not an expert in humor, but here are a few tricks I find generally helpful, and yet are devoid of any subtlety or skill whatsoever.

  • Make outdated references so everyone knows you’re behind the times — bonus points if it’s a Simpsons reference, and extra double bonus points if it’s something you know no one has seen, like Battlefield Earth.
  • Substitute the phrase “[first letter of word] – word” for any noun in a sentence.  This works equally well for swears (“what an a-word-hole”) and non-swears alike; bonus points for employing this strategy with non-nouns (“And then we realized the c-word had b-worded, and that’s the story of our pregnancy scare.”)
  • Undergo your own personal vowel shift.  Why send text messages when you can send tooxt moosages?  Negative bonus points for swedifying — “ermahgerd” isn’t funny and never will be.  “Terxt merserges” is a little better, though.
  • Other purposeful mispronunciation; must be logical given the spelling.  Instead of “we are going to the theater in Annandale,” say, “we are going to the theater in Annandalé” (uh-non-duh-lay).  This only works well if you can do it without flinching, with a straight face; it works best in the middle of a sentence, because you can move in immediately.  Bonus points for making other people flinch.  Extra bonus points for correcting others instinctively if they correctly pronounce it.
  • Say something so outrageously offensive, yet utterly un-clever, about someone present in a manner that it can only be taken as a joke — call someone fat or ugly in your best idiot voice.  This is an advanced maneuver and should not be undertaken lightly, as it can backfire powerfully — it’s usually best to stick to things that are outrageously untrue, like calling a super model ugly.  Bonus points if it’s true and everyone else was thinking it, but it still comes off as a joke.

Bonus Material

Start picking up vapid phrases that are currently (or were recently) in vogue and peppering them into your speech:

“Oh man I had this totes awk meeting with my boss today where he accidentally pulled up porn on the projector.”

Bonus points if you include text message-isms in your speech, but pronounce them as words:

“I had this totes awk meeting with my boss today where he accidentally pulled up porn on the projector.  I lol’d” (lawled).

Extra double bonus points if you include retro slang that no one uses anymore in your speech:

“I had this rad meeting with my manager today where he accidentally pulled up porn on the projector.  I lol’d.  It was totes awk, but at the same time, pretty boss, because now I can hold this over him forever.”

Super negative bonus points if you start doing this ironically, but it gradually morphs into an everyday practice.

“I had this rad meeting with my manager today where he accidentally pulled up porn on the projector.  I lol’d.  It was totes awk, but at the same time, pretty boss, because now I can hold this over him forever, your honor.”

Conclusion

In order to be an excellent conversationalist (like me!), you need only follow a few simple rules — keep participants to a minimum, avoid talking about yourself, ask questions, exit gracefully, and use humor.  Those are basically the headers to this post, which indicates that I did a good job of choosing my headers.  Go me!  

Now get out there and start a conversation!  Practice makes perfect.

* Full disclaimer: There is no concrete evidence that anyone, anywhere, has ever actually enjoyed a conversation with me.  I did meet someone else who follows these principles and who employed them on me.  It was validating, invigorating, and terrifying all at the same time.

But Can We Fix It?

One of the upsides people are always touting about having friends is that they can broaden your horizons and expose you to ideas or concepts that would have been outside of your thinking otherwise; the various social media available to us these days make sharing those ideas easier by allowing users to post links to articles on Facebook or Twitter or Twitbook or Facechat or in their Gwitter stati or to taunt their foes with links in Slappy Fish or Candy Clans or … whatever the kids are doing these days.  Not having any friends, I managed to shield myself from this phenomenon for several years before finally breaking down and sending friend requests to complete strangers on Facebook and adding names that sound cool to my Gchat list, which has gone a long way to solve the problem of my crippling loneliness at the expense of opening me up to countless Buzzfeed articles that have finally confirmed that I was alive in the ’90s, finally putting to rest that haunting question forever.  Of course, amidst the interminable dross that appears on my in people’s posts, I’ve found a couple of articles worth reading.

Your Gchat status is like a dark, gothic Neil Diamond

This past week, a number of my contacts have posted links to this article from The Verge by Nilay Patel decrying the current state of the internet in America, which by now I’m sure everyone has read.  (If you haven’t, maybe do, at least so the rest of this diatribe makes sense.)  I’ll admit that I only started reading it briefly before I actually decided to write angrily in response to it, because I have the mental capacity of a third grader, but at this point I have actually read the whole thing.  I’ll also admit that I actually agree with a lot of the points in it — and it’s hard for me to admit that I agree with anything, but I’m sure we’ll get there — but at the same time, because it was posted and linked to by so many people, I’m going to take it to task.  Besides, that’s … sorta my M.O.

Pictured: Me in 20 years

I don’t mean for this to be really be a review of the article, although I’m sure it will come off that way in places.  It’s generally well-researched and makes good supporting arguments for its thesis that the current state of the internet is suboptimal.  (Actually, the thesis includes the idea that “we can fix it,” which we’ll get to later … in the business, we call that “foreshadowing.”)  In the meantime, I’d like to ask a more important question, which isn’t really addressed anywhere in the article: does it matter?

The article cites the recent landmark case (hereafter, “the Verizon ruling”) decided in the favor of ISPs that want to be able to discriminate against what data they carry on their networks.  Now, I’m no expert, and in the rest of this article I may say things that are blatantly wrong (cherish it — you’ll never hear me say that again), but from what I can tell, the case basically boils down to this: ISPs want to be able to charge content providers for carrying their services — basically, Comcast wants to be able to charge Netflix for allowing people to get Netflix; if Netflix refuses to pay, Comcast can refuse to send Netflix’s data to its customers.  Meanwhile, in 2010, the FCC, who theoretically regulates the ISPs, issued an order laying out a vision for “net neutrality,” built upon the Three Laws of Robotics four principles of open internet laid forth in 2005 and somehow invoking the First Amendment guarantee to free speech, basically saying, “You can’t do that.” This issue got taken to court, where (in an admittedly totally BS ruling) the judge basically said, “FCC I totally agree with you, but you argued your case in the wrong words, so ISPs, go do whatever you want.”  Reports then have him cackling maniacally and stroking the white Maine Coon on his lap before having the FCC lawyers fed to sharks for his entertainment.

People’s response to this has largely been to declare that “the internet as we know it is dead,” but I have yet to see a compelling argument for it — people seem reasonably frustrated about the ruling, but they’re blowing the result way out of proportion and doing so not just without supporting their argument but without even making one.   Reasonable articles like this one that try to shed light on the new world vs. the old steer clear of making pronouncements about how the internet will cease to function or how the changes will result in a severely restrictive internet in America, and we’ll be surpassed by the relatively free internet societies in Europe until we ultimately get invaded by the Sino-PanEuropean Alliance in the year 2028 and forced to wear panda costumes in China’s remaining bamboo forests to replace their extinct national bear while European visitors ooh and ah at the “pandas'” graceful beauty.  I want to be very clear before I continue, because I know that some of the people who will read this are opinionated on this subject, and others actually have intelligent insight they can provide — If I had to lean one way or the other on the issue, I would probably prefer a neutral internet.  I want to hear an argument for why this ruling is fundamentally bad on its own.  Please, if you have one, leave a reasonably thought out argument for it in the comments; text it, tweet it, or post it to Instagram — I want to know.

The argument that I hear thrown around, and that the article in question touches upon, is that the ruling is “uncompetitive.”  I would disagree — the argument that actually holds water with me is that the state of the internet, both before and after the ruling, is uncompetitive.  The net neutrality ruling actually has nothing to do with this, but is critically affected by it.  The real indication of monopoly in the marketplace is the merger of Comcast and Time Warner, which is mentioned tangentially to the Verizon ruling.  The figure that’s thrown around is that this new conglomeration will control traffic to 19 of the 20 largest markets in the U.S., which presumably gives them market power in those regions.  This is a problem for 2 reasons — the first is alluded to in the article, which is that there is no incentive to improve upon existing infrastructure; this is why internet is both slower and more expensive in America than elsewhere.  The second is that a captive market, coupled with the new ruling, spells real trouble for content providers — Comcast can basically hold Netflix (and any other provider) for ransom, because they are the only game in town; “if you want to reach your 100 million customers in [INSERT ALL CITIES HERE], you better pay up.”  This would become a huge problem if, for instance, Comcast also offered a streaming video service that got to use its network for free; it would put Netflix out of business.

Let’s step back for a moment and assume that the internet market of today were, if not perfectly competitive, at least more so — say, instead of one or two options for service in the major markets, there are five or ten.  What happens with a non-neutral internet?  Market forces dictate a reasonable price for Netflix to get their traffic to users — if company A is going to charge $1 / Gb of traffic, company B swoops in and offers $.50, Netflix goes with company B, and Netflix users abandon company A in favor of company B unless company A lowers its offer to match, and so on.  The end result for users is that the cable bill goes down (Netflix is now essentially subsidizing their cable bill), while the cost of a Netflix subscription rises.  In the current state, Netflix customers are increasing traffic and increasing the cost of service for non-Netflix users, while in the new system Netflix users are paying for their content, and non-Netflix users no longer have to subsidize them.

This also opens up an interesting prospect in a competitive environment — the legitimate market for people who actually don’t want Netflix.  This gives residential ISPs  the ability to offer their own services, like the hypothetical Comcast streaming video service, without having to deal with Netflix.  Think of this as the Apple vs. Android dichotomy.  I imagine that most of the people freaking out about the ruling are Android users; highly-educated (typically bearded) young people who prefer a high degree of customization.  I’m constantly hearing Android from people that they hate Apple products because an iPhone won’t let you install a Flash player and some of the things they want to do are in Flash, or because they need Blue Tube to put “Dog Party” on their phone.

“Cat Party?” Welcome to five months ago…

What these people are forgetting, looking down at people from their various high horses, is that 98% of people on this planet won’t run into the specific customization issues they face — they want a well-integrated package that will do the things they want without having to be exposed to installation nightmares and source code.  You necessarily sacrifice something to get that — maybe the iPhone doesn’t support Flash, so you can’t get the Homestar Runner app, and that’s a bummer!  But at the end of the day, everything that’s available to you is available through a single source, and each piece of content has been vetted by experts who have verified that it’s safe and runs appropriately on the system in question.  This isn’t to say the system is flawless — it has the same drawbacks as any autocratic system, including the additional bureaucracy of releasing an app and a panel of judges whose opinions may differ from the users’, or whose judgments of safety may prove incorrect — but that doesn’t mean there isn’t a market for it.  I can certainly see the appeal to someone who doesn’t know the first thing about the inner workings of their devices; it’s a classical division of labor.  Just as in Adam Smith’s example of the nail factory, where one worker fashions the point of the nail and passes it along to a worker who fashions the head, their combined expertise allowing the nail-making decreasing the time spent on nail making by orders of magnitude, the App Review Board determines which platforms are safe for watching cat videos, freeing the Apple customer to watch even more cat videos without having to worry about which platform to use.

The critical thing that makes this system work is that there is an Android market, which serves as a competitor and allows the customization and an escape from the autocratic authority of the Apple package; no one is subject to the arbitrary rulings of the App Review Board, because they can always leave the Apple market.  Similarly, one can imagine that, in a competitive ISP market, certain residential ISPs might begin offering integrated packages, providing support for proprietary or third-party platforms for accessing specific web content.  It’s not hard to imagine the appeal of such a service in a home with children, where having reliable content restrictions placed in the hands of a third party without having to set up complicated hardware or software (that will ultimately be circumvented by the kids, since they’ll understand it better than the adults) might appeal to a number of parents.  The key here is to ensure that the customizable market still exists — that people who know what they’re doing and can evaluate the tradeoffs they’re making can decide that they want their content to come from Netflix instead of Hulu, because the Netflix connection is routed through their hometown whereas Hulu is routed through China or whatever.  The terrifying thing about the net neutrality ruling is that companies like AT&T can block FaceTime and Google Hangouts, and then users are left with no way to get them back, because there are no competitors they can turn to to get that content — that’s the real issue with the ruling.

Having established that the real case for the internet being broken right now is the fundamental lack of competition for service providers, and that this factor is the real issue behind the net neutrality ruling, what can we do about it?  Remember, the article’s thesis includes that “we can fix it” bit, so what does the article propose? We should treat the internet like a utility and … actually, that’s it.  It offers no other solutions.  It does offer four clear problems with the internet, to quote, “So there’s the entire problem, expressed in four simple ideas: the internet is a utility, there is zero meaningful competition to provide that utility to Americans, all internet providers should be treated equally, and the FCC is doing a miserably ineffective job.”  It argues the last 3 pretty well (we’ll get to the first in a moment), but when pressed, not one of these is given a solution, including this priceless quote from Free Press president Craig Aaron:

“What we need right now is decisive action,” he says. “We can still unfuck the internet.”

Or, in other words…

Of the four given problems, I think three have solutions that, if not explicitly mentioned in the article, are at least obvious given the nature of the problem: Treat the internet like a utility, treat all ISPs equally regardless of the medium of their network, and strengthen the FCC.   There is no explicit solution given to competition problem, although the argument implied seems to be that strengthening the FCC should solve this as well, because a strengthened FCC could fight back against monopolies.

But before we get to that, we have to examine the central argument that the internet is a utility.  This is the central argument — well, actually, argument is a strong word, it’s more of an assertion in this article; the closest thing he comes to an argument is, “My friend Paul Miller lived without the internet for a year and I’m still not entirely sure he’s recovered from the experience,” which … I don’t think qualifies something as a utility?  Actually, what he’s trying to say is that the internet networks are common carriers — which is different from a utility, which maintains infrastructure for a public service, and until internet access is declared a public service, which could happen but probably won’t given how long it’s been in the works, ISPs will not be utilities — and that common carriers are subject to regulation by a regulatory body, in this case the Federal Communications Commission.  As it stands now, internet networks are in many ways treated like common carriers, but they aren’t technically classified as such, so the FCC’s authority is a bit murky, although if there is a regulatory body governing internet behavior, it probably is the FCC.  (As I understand it, this is basically the reason the FCC lost the Verizon case — they insufficiently argued that they have regulatory oversight over the internet backbone service providers.)

Establishing whether the internet backbone serves as a common carrier is essential for the framing of the rest of the argument, because it determines the manner in which the FCC regulates the internet.  The concept of the common carrier exists because of the high cost of market entry — the common carrier label is used in cases of natural monopoly, in which the cost of required infrastructure to enter the market is so high that, once an entity has established itself, it is infeasible for potential competitors to make the same investment.  In those cases, the theory goes, it makes sense for the government to allow the monopoly, and by doing so, the government encourages innovation and investment in infrastructure by allowing the company to profit.  However, the government also sets up a regulatory body, which has the authority to stop the monopoly from unduly exercising the market power that the government has allowed it to have — this system is what allows local competitor to rent out the infrastructure from the monopoly (hence, common carrier), and ultimately allows the local water company to spend millions of dollars building water pipes out to your house, but also stops it from charging you $10,000 a gallon once a city has been built and populated with the assumption that everyone will have indoor plumbing.

(Incidentally, this is an argument to me against the internet as a utility or a public good — utilities are essential public services.  The assumption of cheap access to water has revolutionized the way we build cities — the Empire State Building couldn’t exist if we still emptied our waste into the streets or couldn’t pump water up to the 81st floor.  Similarly, the assumption of cheap energy has revolutionized how and where we build — whether for the better or not.  The ability to cool a home with air conditioning in the summer or warm a home in winter with cheap natural gas has led to population growth in southern and northern cities that would have been simply unsustainable without them, while simultaneously allowing builders to eschew previous methods for keeping a dwelling livable, like natural ventilation or insulation.  When the water goes out or the price goes up, people die.  When the power goes out or the price goes up, people die.  Even telephones, which serve as the primary method of emergency communication, are essential — this is why calling 911 is free, no matter what.  When the price of your internet goes up, you pay more to watch House of Cards.  When your internet goes out, you read a book.  Sure, price gouging on the internet backbone would do irreparable damage to the world economy, but people wouldn’t freeze to death or die and rot in their own filth.)

The internet backbone certainly seems like it could be considered a natural monopoly — the fiberoptic cables laid down probably cost billions of dollars, which is presumably enough to keep all but the largest competitors out of the market.  This means that the FCC can regulate it (or at least, someone can), and certainly means that the Verizon ruling is no good, since one of the tenets of common carriers is that they cannot refuse (legal) service — this is basically the foundation of the net neutrality order that the FCC issued.

So, if the internet backbone is a common carrier, the FCC can enforce net neutrality — but what does this mean for competition?  Actually, it’s probably a bad thing.  If we assume that principal problem with the internet is lack of competition, maybe we don’t want the FCC involved.  We’ve already established that the common carrier model was created for the explicit purposes of markets where there isn’t competition — if we assume the common carrier model, we’re basically stuck with the existing internet backbone, and the only thing the FCC can do about it is make sure that they’re providing service to everyone and that they’re not price gouging, which are admittedly good things, but basically leave us where are now — we don’t see cheaper or faster backbone service, and there’s not much of an incentive for further investment.  The common carrier model still allows for local competition, and the FCC may be able to foster a competitive environment for residential ISPs using the common carrier backbone.  The article is basically asking for more regulation through a strengthened FCC as though that would increase competition in the backbone, as in the trust-busting at the turn of the 20th century and the Bell breakup of the ’80s, but it forgets that it was the Telecommunications Act of 1996, championed by and strengthening the FCC, that allowed for the baby Bells to re-conglomerate.

Regulation swings both ways.  Regulation can either be used to protect competitiveness — trust-busting — or, as is the case for public utilities, to regulate the exercise of market power in non-competitive markets.  As someone with literally ones of years of experience in power markets, it strikes me that we don’t want the FCC to act in the second way; in fact, it is the “deregulated” energy markets in certain areas (the mid-Atlantic, the northeast, the midwest, California, and Texas, for example), rather than the highly-regulated markets (as in the southeast), that provide a framework for efficient allocations of investment in public backbone infrastructure through competitive pricing mechanisms, determined by local energy supply and demand.  Instead, we want an FCC that busts the Comcast-Time Warner merger and looks for anti-competitive behavior in the market, essentially creating a market where the outcome of the Verizon case leads to more competition, rather than less.

The article asserts that the internet is anticompetitive, and that “we can fix it,” but I’m not so sure.  The issue is (obviously) complicated, and the FCC’s power to regulate is unclear.  Classifying the internet backbone as a utility — or even as a common carrier — lends credibility to the FCC’s powers at the potential expense of a competitive market, and a competitive market undermines the credibility of the common carrier model.  It strikes me that the real way to fix the internet, if it is even possible to do so, is to create that competitive environment through private investment in internet backbone infrastructure — eliminate the case for the internet as a common carrier, remove the FCC (and its apparent incompetence) from the picture, and allow market forces to determine net neutrality and drive Comcast, Time Warner, and Verizon out of business.  Seriously, I hate those guys.

Murder Most Fowl

As repeatedly promised, I’ve spent the last few weeks finishing up a new short story, which is posted below.  It’s probably not the greatest thing I’ve ever written — it’s probably not even the second greatest thing, if I’m being perfectly honest.  Well, if I’m being perfectly honest, it’s unreadable garbage, which doesn’t say a whole lot about its relative value compared to my other work.  But it is part of a larger collection of Dirk Danger stories that I began writing back in college (the first of which can be found here), which was the real reason that I resolved to write more this year.  As I’ve mentioned before, the real reason I’m even writing this blog is because I used to write terrible stories, and I missed doing it, so bear with me here as I pop out a new terrible story every few months.  I promise that next week I’ll get back to posting my stupid opinions on stupid things, which I’ll support stupidly.

In the meantime, please enjoy this story, which takes place during a lull in the investigation of the disappearance of flooring magnate Ed Heartwood; Dirk Danger has recently brought his childhood friend Sam O’Leary on board to aid in the investigation, and the pair are discovering that money’s as tight as the leads are scarce.  I don’t want to give too much away (God forbid, amiright), so without further ado, here’s the continuing story of …

Dirk Danger

in

Murder Most Fowl

At 11 on Thursday morning, Sam O’Leary sat in the altogether-too-spacious office adjoining Dirk’s, leaning forward in his leather chair with his forehead propped against his palms, his elbows on his mahogany desk, as he had been all week.  Through the frosted glass, he could see his boss’s outline, reclining in his own leather chair, and could envision his coat and hat sitting on the mahogany hat rack, as they had all week, and the half-smoked cigar sitting cold in the ashtray, as it had all week.  And the frosted glass door leading to their offices, bearing Dirk’s name in capital letters sitting unshadowed, as it had all week.

All-in-all, he reflected, it had not been an exciting week.

Nominally, the week had been spent on the Heartwood case, but they had run out of leads when the warehouse excursion turned out to be a dead end.  After that, Dirk had called up Detective McNally for further leads in the case, but the cops were busily looking into a string of recent robberies they were tying to an unknown perp (or perps) they were calling, somewhat over-dramatically, the “Cat Burglar,” due to the acrobatic nature of the crimes and the telltale image of Felix the Cat found at the various crime scenes.  Instead of making progress on the case, for the past three days the pair of private investigators been sitting in their offices, reading the paper and searching in vain for stories leading to the disappearance of the flooring magnate.  Each day O’Leary finished reading the paper by ten and would spend the rest of the day in the office thinking about whether they could charge their time to the case.  On the one hand, he was thinking about the case — or at least whether he could charge their time to it — but on the other hand it was a bit meta to charge Mrs. Heartwood for sitting in the office working out whether he could charge Mrs. Heartwood.  Too meta.  Granted, it was all moot anyway, since they weren’t going to solve the case, so they couldn’t charge her anything — the Dirk Danger guarantee stipulated that their services were free until the case was solved, but then Dirk had never failed to solve a case… yet.

Normally they’d have a few cases going that they could fall back on when one went cold, but the fee Dirk had extracted from Mrs. Heartwood when she’d come back that Monday, not to mention the absurd hourly rate they’d managed to negotiate, had been large enough — if solved — that he had decided to tie up his other cases as quickly as he could and even turned down a few new ones to clear time to devote to the disappearance of the flooring magnate.  Now it had been over a month since Ed Heartwood had last been seen, and word had gotten out that Dirk Danger wasn’t taking cases — or worse, that he was taking cases, but he couldn’t solve them.  What had seemed like a brilliant plan to clear their calendar, and therefore their heads, had backfired, and now O’Leary, in charge of the books, was staring down the rent on the office, his salary, and essentially no revenue.  They couldn’t even charge for incidentals related to the case (a.k.a., “lunch”), since they weren’t really working on it — it’d be like charging the Heartwood case for Dirk’s poor business acumen.  It wasn’t just the business, it was personal; O’Leary had just bought a place and was staring down a mortgage, and as far as he could tell Dirk was in the same boat — he was pretty sure he was getting paid in Dirk’s personal winnings from fluffy dog competitions.

Looking at the books, they were running out of cash, and fast.  O’Leary was thinking, for the third time that morning, about how they’d just spent the fee from the last case they’d wrapped up as part of their case close-out extravaganza — a hundred bucks from some poor kid trying to find out who ran over his bike, 3 weeks ago (spoiler alert: it was the mom) — to pay the stencil guy to stencil Sam’s name in capital letters onto the frosted glass window of the mahogany side door that led to his office (Why does everything have to be mahogany? It’s, like, the most expensive wood!) as the shadow beyond the door of his window, bearing his name in freshly-stenciled capital letters, stirred.

On the other side of the door, Dirk Danger had seen a shadow darkening his own window.  He pulled his feet off of his desk as the shadow grew, then knocked.

“One moment!” Dirk said in the slightly-too-loud, emotionless voice one reserves for speaking to people behind doors when it’s not clear how muffled the transmission will be.  He opened a drawer and pulled their most recent case file, then spread the contents across his empty desk — best to look busy.  He started to gather them back up from his desk before adding, “It’s unlocked, come in.”

The door opened, revealing a short, kindly-looking elderly woman with soft features and gray hair rolled into a loose bun on the top of her head.  She was wearing a white sweater and a high-wasted purple skirt that went down to the floor, with a locket about her neck and eyeglasses set low on her nose over which she peered with caring blue eyes.

“Excuse me,” she said in a soft, aged voice tinged with grandmotherly warmheartedness, “I’m looking for a Mr. Danger?”

Dirk was still busily gathering the files as he made his reply.  “What can I do for you, ma’am?  As you can see, I’m quite busy.”  He had brought the files into a big pile and was straightening them out on the desk when he realized which file he’d dumped out; the grisly pictures from the Voteri murder case were on top.  The old woman’s expression turned to one of kindly shock and he quickly put the files back into their folder.

“I can see that!  I didn’t mean to intrude.  It looks like you have far better things to do than to be caught up in the whims of a little old lady like myself,” she said, eyes twinkling.  “Have a wonderful day,” she finished, and with that she turned to let herself out.

Behind the side door, O’Leary experienced a wave of panic (oh God how could he turn her down) as he heard the conversation behind the door, but Dirk calmly reached into his pocket and pulled out his cell phone as she walked through the doorway.  He pressed 2 on speed dial and muted his cell phone as the office landline rang.

“One moment, ma’am, before you go — I’m expecting a break in this case and this might be it.”  She turned around as he answered the phone.  “Yes?”  Pause.  “Yes?”  Pause.  “Sam — that’s excellent!  It was the Cat Burglar all along? Great work!  Now that that’s wrapped up, we should have a bit more time for new cases.  Keep it up,” and he hung up the phone.  On his cell phone, the call ended.

To the elderly woman about to leave his office he said, “That was my assistant Sam O’Leary, he’s been working this case for me,” he waved the file fodler in his hand before dropping it back into his desk drawer.  “It looks like we’ve just about wrapped it up. I think we may have time to take on additional work.  Now, if you’ll just have a seat we can discuss what you came here to talk about.”

“Oh, how wonderful!” said the woman as she came back into the office, closing the door behind her.  “If you don’t mind, I’d like to keep this conversation behind closed doors — I don’t know who’s around, but this is quite sensitive business!”  Her eyes sparkled again as she said this, and she said it in the way that little old ladies say everything: slowly, endearingly, and with a bit of mischief, pausing after each word at the end of the sentence: quite. Sensitive. Business!

Dirk nodded and motioned to the seat across from his desk, as if to say, “Yes, yes, that’s fine, take a seat,” but what he actually said was “Just give me one moment to notify the proper authorities about that last case and we’ll be ready to go.”  He picked his cell phone up from the chair before sitting down and quickly shot off a text to Sam: Stay in office.  Make no sound.  If any little old ladies ask, you were wrapping up a very important case today — Cat Burglar.

“Now, that’s done,” he said, as he put his cell phone back into his pants pocket.  “I’m Dirk Danger.  Please, ma’am, what can we do for you?”

 —

An hour later, the pair of P.I.s were eating fish tacos at a picnic table next to the El Fishy Tacos food truck.  In between bites of hot, salty fried cod and cabbage, they were discussing the case the little old lady had presented.

“So, what you’re telling me is, this little old lady comes in, claiming she has a case that is, and I’m quoting, ‘quite serious.’  She then proceeds to tell you the cops won’t hear her case, and again I’m quoting, ‘probably because it is too dangerous to investigate,’ and that she’s willing to pay good money to anyone who will?  And this case, this ‘quite serious’ case that is ‘too dangerous to investigate’ is … her bird is missing?” O’Leary inquired skeptically.

 “First, she’s not some ‘little old lady,’ her name is Mrs. Webster and she seemed very nice.  Second, it’s not just a bird, it’s a canary.”  O’Leary was still pretty new to the job, and it was important for him to learn how to act professionally — including how to talk about clients.  It wasn’t the most important aspect of the job, but appearances mattered, even if you thought no one was watching.  “Also, she was quite sincere.  We’re going to help her out on this.”  He intended that to sound final.

O’Leary pressed the issue anyway.  “Fine, it’s not like we’re doing anything else, but what’s this gonna do for us in the long run?  This is no better than the kid with the bike — we’ll get another hundred bucks, and for what?  To find out that her bird flew out a window?  Then we’re back where we started.  We’ll barely cover these tacos and the gas we’ll use to drive out there.  We should be using this time to look for other work — whether that’s better cases or a new job entirely.”

“No, no, no, Sam, you’re missing the point.  ‘Canary,’ not ‘bird.’  And she was quite sincere.  Whether or not the cops tossed the case because it sounds ridiculous — which they did, I called Tyler, he apparently laughed her out of the station — she honestly believes something fishy-” Dirk looked at his taco and raised an eyebrow- “is going on.  And she is willing to pay good money — money you of all people know we need — to take the case.  Besides, you know that we can’t look for other cases; we might as well hang around our necks saying ‘Stumped by the Heartwood Case.’  Lady Heartwood will take her case, and her money, elsewhere.”

“Maybe she should.  We’re obviously getting nowhere on it,” O’Leary rebutted.

“She shouldn’t, and we can’t let her think she should.  We’re getting nowhere now, but I’ve never lost a case and I’m not going to fail on this one.  We’ll get there eventually.”

Sam rolled his eyes at this display of optimism.  “Yeah, but when? And what do we do in the meantime?”

As usual, Dirk seized the teaching moment.  “Exactly!  What we do in the meantime is take this case.  It was a misstep to clear our caseload; things have a way of tying together in ways you don’t expect, and staying busy stops you from getting caught thinking in a certain way for too long.  But if word gets out we’re taking cases again — not looking for them, just taking them — then we’ll start to see some more clients rolling in, and we can work on getting a break in the Heartwood case as we have time.  We won’t take a full caseload, but, hell, even this one case is enough to cover our bills through the end of the month.”

O’Leary was about to take another bite of his last fish taco, but at this he set it back down on his plate. “Wait, how much, exactly, is this little old — er, Mrs. Webster — how much is she paying us to find this … canary?”  Their bills for the month were considerable; after all, they had had to take out a loan for all the extra mahogany in O’Leary’s office.

“She’s agreed to pay five thousand for conclusive proof of how the canary got out, and double if we can locate it.  Regardless of our ultimate opinion as to the bird’s whereabouts, she’s agreed to incidentals for the duration of the case.”

Sam’s eyes lit up as he scarfed down the rest of his taco.  “This is gonna be the easiest money we’ve made,” he opined, his mouth full. He swallowed and finished, “We go in, point to an open window, and say ‘That’s how your bird escaped.’  We walk out with a brick of cash.  Worst case, she has a cat, and we have to figure out if the bird escaped or got eaten — but if it got eaten it’ll be a helluva lot easier to track down!  I’m gonna go grab a soda on this rich old lady’s dime.”

Dirk held up his hand to slow his partner down.  “Again, ‘canary,’ not ‘bird.’  And not exactly.  She confessed that what she really wants is proof that the canary was taken, rather than escaped.  I told her we’d arrive at an opinion based on the facts presented and the scene of the event, but we wouldn’t allow our judgment to be clouded by perverse incentives.”

At this fresh demonstration of professional integrity, Sam rolled his eyes, but Dirk continued.  “But what I really want to know is, why is the canary so important?  Who’s willing to pay thousands of dollars to prove that someone stole a canary — and for that matter, who steals a canary?  There has to be more to this than meets the eye, don’t you think?”  Dirk raised one eyebrow knowingly at his partner and finished his last taco.  “Maybe if we find it it’ll shed some light on the situation.”

“I don’t care, man, I’m just thinking about that cash.”  Ten large would go a long way.  “Maybe you do know what you’re doing, taking this case.”

“Of course I do. I was born for this.”  Dirk looked at his watch and wiped the last crumbs of fried breading from the corners of his mouth with a napkin.  “Now let’s go — I told her we’d be meet her at her apartment in half an hour to check out the scene.”

 —

Half an hour later, they pulled up to the address that Dirk had written on a slip of paper placed on the dashboard and parked out front next to a sign, which read “Palm Woods Apartments,” the letters in white raised off of a brown background and surrounded by two crudely-drawn cartoon palm trees.  The building didn’t look particularly nice from the outside, but was typical of many apartment complexes or condos in suburban Miami, with a central area dominated by a swimming pool, surrounded on three sides by three-story buildings arranged in a U, each with green-painted doors that opened to a concrete walkway with railings overlooking the pool area.  The roofs was covered in green, wavy terra-cotta tiles.  It wasn’t decrepit, nor did it seem particularly low-rent, but not even the most generous Brit would describe it as “posh.”  To its credit, the outside of the U had a number of shade trees ringing the property, and although Dirk knew nothing of civil codes, in places they seemed like they might be a bit too close to the building.  All-in-all, it looked like a nicer version of a Motel 6.

“I don’t see how anyone who lives here has ten thousand bucks to spare,” O’Leary offered, as he closed the door to Dirk’s brown 1986 Ford LTD Crown Vic.

Dirk shrugged and set off through the main gate, heading around the pool area.  “We’re looking for unit 2315 — looks like that one,” he said, pointing to the third floor of  the center building, which made the bottom crossbar on the U surrounding the pool.  “I know you think this whole thing is ridiculous, but let’s try to keep an open mind on this one, OK?”

They made their way up the concrete stairs to the third floor.  “I make no promises.”

“Yeah, and I can’t promise to pay you this month if this case doesn’t work out, so I guess we’re even,” Dirk replied as they reached the door to the unit, “2315” stuck onto the lime green door in separate stickers with black background and gold, serifed numerals.  He gave three solid knocks on the unit door.

The dim light of the peephole went dark for a second, then the door opened, revealing Mrs. Webster, who was wearing the same high-waisted skirt and white sweater she had been wearing in the office.  “Mr. Danger!  So kind of you to come here and entertain the flighty fantasies of an old lady!”

“Of course.  And this is my partner, Sam O’Leary, he’ll be helping me out here today,” Dirk said by way of introduction.

“Mr. O’Leary!  I hear you had a busy morning!  So glad to meet you!”  Her eyes sparkled with kindness over her glasses as she shook his hand.

“Yes, it was uh…” O’Leary gave an inquiring look at Dirk for a second, then continued, “the Cat Burglar all along?  It was a very important case.”  His statement lacked conviction.

“So exciting!”

The pair of detectives was still standing on the concrete walkway outside her door, wearing suits in the sweltering Miami heat.  “Oh, do come in!” she exclaimed delightedly, motioning them inside.  “But mind your shoes, please!  I do try to keep the place tidy.”

She did more than try; she succeeded.  Her apartment was small and sparsely furnished.  To the right as they walked in was a pink throw rug in front of a small gray sofa, more of a love seat, really, which was pushed back against the wall in the main room.  To the right of the sofa was a single end table, more a pedestal, upon which was perched a round brass birdcage, the kind with thin vertical bars that meet at the top, like a whisk turned upside down, with a closed door on the side and a small wooden perch hanging from the top like a trapeze in the center of the cage.  To the left was the kitchen, a simple U-shaped countertop with a sink against the left wall and a stove against the exterior wall.  Opposite the kitchen sat a small, round wooden table set with placemats and surrounded by 4 high-backed chairs; in the center of the table sat a half-eaten blueberry pie covered with a glass dome.  In the wall, in between the sofa and the kitchen, sat a single window looking out into a shade tree outside the apartment, and along the right-hand wall of the apartment was a closed door, presumably leading to the bedroom, and another door opening into an immaculate bathroom, tile gleaming in the natural light from the window.  In the entire apartment, not a single thing was out of place — the rug squared perfectly with the sofa, the kitchen counter free and clear of clutter, the hardwood floor sparkling and scratch-free, practically brand new.  Even the pie tin was devoid of crumbs — the pie just stopped halfway through, a perfect cross-section of pie, as though the other half had never even been there.  In fact, the only thing that didn’t seem exactly where it should be was the canary, the birdcage sitting empty on its pedestal.

The investigators were taking this in as they removed their shoes, placing them neatly by the front door, Dirk removing his hat and setting it on the table next to the half-eaten pie, as a muffled, other-worldly cry escaped the closed door.

“Mrrrrrooowwlll!”

O’Leary looked quizzically at Dirk, who forwarded on the emotion in the form of a question.  “I’m sorry, Mrs. Webster, but what, exactly, was that?”

Her eyes sparkled above her glasses as she clasped her hands in front of her waist.  “Oh, that’s just my little Sylvie.  He hears people and doesn’t like to be alone, but I wanted to keep him from untidying the place.  After all, you told me to keep the place exactly as I found it!”

“And Sylvie is…?” O’Leary prodded, uncertain whether to expect something sinister behind the closed door as the little old lady moved to open it.

“Why, my cat, of course!” she cooed, and with that she swung the door open, revealing a rather large tomcat with tuxedo coloring, mostly black, with white stretching from just underneath its eyes all the way through its underbelly.  Its paws were white, as was the tip to its long black tail. The only color on the cat, including its black eyes, was its nose, which was a dark pink bordering on red.  The cat looked up at Sam, standing behind Mrs. Webster, and gave a long hiss: “Hhhhhhttthhhhh!”  With that, it scampered back into the room and disappeared under Mrs. Webster’s impeccably-made bed.

“Sylvie!” admonished Mrs. Webster.  “Oh, he’s a sweetie underneath it all, he’s just upset I locked him in this room,” she said, apologizing to Sam and closing the door again.

O’Leary made a move to comment, but Dirk cut him off.  “Mrs. Webster, are you indicating that the cat was stuck in your room at the time of the incident?”

“Oh, no!  Sylvie was out and about all night last night.  I usually leave the window open for him to scamper about outside; there’s a tree branch just outside the window that’s perfect for him to climb out on.  He fancies himself a hunter, but he’s too big to really hide himself and most everything gets away.”

O’Leary continued the inquiry, “So you’re saying that the window, which is now closed, was open last night?”

“Oh, certainly!  I closed it this morning so the wind wouldn’t blow away any clues.”  The investigators gave each other a questioning look — yes, look at the footprints on your immaculate hardwood floor and the trail of breadcrumbs leading back to the canary that might have blown away had you not closed the window.  “I had left the pie on the windowsill last night to cool and Sylvie had gone out, so I couldn’t close the window and lock him out all night.  No, the window was certainly open overnight, and little Twitters was in her cage when I went to bed.  Then, when I woke up, she was gone!  I contacted the police, but of course they have more important things to think about than the kidnapping of some little old lady’s bird.  At least, I hope it was a kidnapping — it could have been worse…” her eyes sparkled mischievously.  “Perhaps it was murder!  Murder most foul!”

“Isn’t that what cats do?  Murder most fowl?” quipped O’Leary, under his breath.  Dirk shot him a cutting glare.  The junior investigator surveyed the room once more, with a look of mock focus, as though he was taking it all in and compiling it in his head.  “Boss,” he said, turning to Dirk, “I have a theory I’d like to run by you.”

Mrs. Webster’s eyes gleamed.  “Oooooh!” she squealed.

“Outside,” finished O’Leary, smiling in mock kindness at the grandmotherly figure bouncing in excitement.

The pair stepped back outside the unit, leaving Dirk’s hat and their shoes inside.  O’Leary spoke in a hushed voice, so that Mrs. Webster wouldn’t hear.

“This is the worst situation we could have hoped for — both a cat and an open window.  I’d love the extra money, but what say we just tell her it flew away and that’s that?  Then at least she doesn’t have to blame that enormous cat.  Although, hell, that cat practically burped up a big yellow feather when it hissed at me.  Speaking of which, was it just me, or did that cat have a lisp?”

“Can’t say I noticed, Sam.”

Dirk Danger’s mind was elsewhere.  Admittedly, a cursory glance suggested that the bird met its end in a conventional fashion, but something else was clearly going on here.  O’Leary had said it himself before — there was no way a little old lady living in this place had ten grand to spend on a wild goose chase like this (or a wild canary chase, as the case may be), especially not if the case was so open and shut.  She knew more than she was letting on.

“The birdcage,” started Dirk.  “Check it out — the latch on the birdcage was shut.  Find out if it was like that when she discovered the bird was missing.  Actually, find out everything — I want to know why this is so important to her.  Grab my shoes when you go back in, would you?  I have a theory — you may be on to something with that open window.”

Sam rolled his eyes and opened the apartment door to Mrs. Webster hopping up and down excitedly and clapping her hands.  “What do you gentlemen think?” she demanded expectantly.

“Unfortunately, ma’am, we’re not sure yet. I have a few more questions to ask you, while my partner canvasses the surrounding environs for clues.”  He was sure he had heard a TV detective say that.  As Dirk set off outside, O’Leary pulled out a small, top-bound spiral notepad and a pen from his jacket pocket and as she sat down on her sofa.

He began his line of inquiry with the birdcage, as the boss had suggested.  The cage had indeed been found latched in the morning — in fact, Mrs. Webster hadn’t touched it since the night prior, when she had fed the canary.  When pressed for details on what had happened, she had fed the canary as she did every night at 6 o’clock.  At 8 she had baked a pie, and by 9 set it on the ledge to cool while she knitted — of course she knitted — then at 10 she had retired for the night.  She woke up late this morning, since she was usually awakened by the canary singing, but this morning it was silent.  When she investigated, it was gone.

And what had she done for the rest of the day? She had called the police (“the non-emergency number, mind you!”), who had been unhelpful.  Then she had gone to the station to see if they wouldn’t help anyway, where she had been directed by one Officer McNally to Mr. Danger.

And what about the pie?  There was no way she had eaten half the pie herself.  It turned out that after Mr. Danger had agreed to help she had come back and sequestered Sylvie so as not to contaminate the scene of the “crime,” then gone to her weekly bridge club meeting, which was why she had baked the pie in the first place.

Maybe she could tell him a little bit about the canary?  This line of questioning was similarly unfruitful (“Twitters was small and yellow, with a  little band on one of her legs, I think carrying her registration.  I would feed her twice a day and occasionally, only when the window was closed and Sylvie was in my room, I would take her out of the cage and give her a few strokes on the head.”), until…

“And how old was Twitters?”

“Hmm, now that you mention it, I haven’t the foggiest!”

“OK, then how long have you had her?”

Her brows furrowed and she looked sideways toward the bird cage from where she was sitting on the love seat.  “Oh, she’s been with me for, for a little over a month now, almost a month and a half I’d say.”

Sam couldn’t help but notice that she seemed to be offering this information reluctantly.  She didn’t seem to be lying, but her mannerisms and her sudden uncertainty in something that had happened so recently tipped him off to press the issue.

“Where did you get her?”

“Oh, a friend of mine gave her to me.”  This she seemed much more certain of.  “Can I get you anything, dear?  Perhaps some iced tea, or a slice of pie,” she offered, rising from her seat.

She was obviously trying to change the subject — another sign to keep pressing.  “No thank you, I’m fine.  Which friend, ma’am?”

“Which friend, which?  I don’t follow.  Are you certain I can’t get you anything?  You look quite parched — and your partner, wearing that coat and hat out in all this heat!  Certainly he could use some of my homemade sweet tea?  Where did he get off to?”

“He’ll be fine.  Which friend gave you Twitters?”

“Oh, well, as it were, I’d … rather not say.  As I told your partner, this is quite sensitive business!”  quite.  Sensitive.  Business!

 —

As Sam was inside getting stonewalled by the very person who had hired them for the case, Dirk Danger stood outside the complex, examining the shade tree abutting the structure that Sylvie used to get in and out of the unit.  The tree was massive — towering above the building, but planted about 30 feet away, with thick hardwood branches that wound their way like oaken tendrils, just brushing against the building’s exterior, though in many places they appeared to have been cut back.  From its size, the tree must have predated the building by several years.  It looked to have done some damage to the building, including an area on the roof above and to the left of Mrs. Webster’s window, where the tiling was a slightly darker green, belying its youth compared to the surrounding tile, which had been bleached by the Miami sun.  The trunk of the tree was marked with scars, some deep cuts accumulated over the tree’s lifetime, others the result of day-to-day activities, acute and transient, perhaps the product of a squirrel’s or Sylvie’s climbing, that would heal within the week but be replaced hundreds of times over.

The lowest branch was a good ten feet off the ground, but there was what looked like the dried remains of a dead branch extending about eight inches out of the trunk some seven feet off the ground.  If someone was strong enough to pull themselves up and light enough that they didn’t break it, it might be possible to grab onto it and use it to get themselves up to the first living branch.  It would be difficult, but certainly not impossible.  Once they were into the branches, the climbing would be easy until they got near the building, where the branches got thinner, but here again, if a person was light enough they might be able to make it pretty close to the window.  After all, Sylvie walked right out onto the branch by the window, and the cat probably weighed 30 pounds.

No, someone small enough and nimble enough could definitely make their way up that tree and into one of the windows.  Probably not a child — a child wouldn’t be strong enough to pull themselves up — but who else would want to climb a tree and steal some lady’s pet canary?  O’Leary had a point, that pretty much had cat written all over it.  But then…

Dirk shook his head, turned back and headed toward the front of the building.  Before he knew it, he was opening the door on his exasperated-looking partner, who was holding a glass of iced tea in one hand and pinching the bridge of his nose in frustration with the other.  Mrs. Webster was sitting on the couch, blue eyes sparkling as ever, looking up at him over her glasses.

“All right boss, get this,” started O’Leary, as Dirk removed his shoes so as not to damage or dirty the spic-and-span flooring.  “I found out she got the bird a little over a month ago, from a friend.  She won’t tell me who gave it to her – ” he shot an exasperated look at her; her eyes sparkled mischievously – “and she don’t know a thing about what happened last night.  I got nothin’ out of her.”

“All right.  Mrs. Webster, if you don’t mind, I’d like to examine the cage,” said Dirk, who made his way to the pedestal next to the couch.  The latching mechanism on the cage door was fairly complex, with a pin that slid into a housing, not unlike a smaller version of the kind of latch you might find on a bathroom stall door.  There was no way that the cat or the canary had managed to get it open, much less shut again.

The bottom of the cage was lined with newspapers, which certainly hadn’t been changed since the discovery of the bird’s absence.  Although, looking closely, it appeared they had been moved — whether by the bird itself or something else was hard to say — but where two newspapers overlapped, the droppings had cracked rather than gluing the papers together.  Opening the cage and reaching in, careful to avoid the nastier sections of newspaper, like the Living section, Dirk lifted the papers up to peer at the bottom of the cage, where he was met with a tiny, minimalist cartoon caricature of none other than Felix the Cat.

Dirk replaced the papers and calmly closed the cage door, re-latching it.  O’Leary gave him a quizzical look as he purposefully made his way to the love seat and sat down gently next to the grandmotherly figure.

“Mrs. Webster,” he began softly, “Sam here has been asking you some questions, and I understand that you want to protect your privacy, and we respect that.  But right now, we need you to tell us exactly why the Cat Burglar would steal your pet canary.”

Mrs. Webster put on a playful smile.  “There’s more to people than meets the eye,” she began, eyes twinkling.  “Even little old ladies.”

O’Leary looked at her, incredulous.  “Who the hell gave you that bird!?”

“Watch your language, young man!” came the grandmotherly reprimand.  But then she softened, though her eyes continued their preternatural twinkling.

“Very well, I suppose there is some further information I could give,” she said, adjusting her position on the sofa to face Dirk, sitting beside her.  “Some time ago, probably two months, the ceiling in my apartment began to leak.  At first I thought it was a burst pipe, but on one of my daily walks outside I noticed that the tree outside the apartment was growing into the roof.  Now, I don’t need to tell you boys about civil codes,” she said knowingly, though being regular human people, neither knew the last thing about civil codes, “but it is certainly most illegal to have a tree branch in such close proximity to the building!  What if it fell down in a storm?  Imagine the damage it would cause!”

O’Leary gave Dirk an impatient look — where is this going? — but Dirk offered a patient, “Indeed.  Please, continue.”

“Well, I certainly didn’t want the apartment complex to be getting into trouble, and of course that tree is so old and beautiful, not to mention how convenient it is for little Sylvie.  But at the same time I had a problem!  I had a leak in my roof, and it looked so dreadful!  I do try to keep a clean home.”  Her eyes sparkled again.

“Well, I went into the office and told them that it would be fine, just fine, if they would go ahead and cut back that one branch and deal with the damage from the leak.  They dragged their feet and told me they’d do what they could, but they weren’t sure they could be held responsible for the leak — in fact, they implied it was my fault for not reporting the proximity of the tree branch, can you imagine!  So I told them that if my plan sounded disagreeable, I would feel compelled to take my business elsewhere, but, being old and frail, moving was simply not an option for me, so I would have no choice but to press charges for their blatant violation of civil codes.”  With this revelation came again the mischievous smile.

“Well, naturally they saw the error of their ways and promised to rectify the situation immediately; the branch was cut back, and the roofing redone.  They even repaired the ceiling damage and the damage to the walls, and they repainted the whole room to make sure the repairs matched the rest of the room.  They even paid for new flooring, since my carpet had gotten soaked and musty along the wall.  Since they were paying for the repairs anyway, I had them put in a nice new hardwood floor, which is so much easier to keep up than a messy carpet — much less vacuuming!  It looks quite nice, too, don’t you think?”

“It looks great, ma’am.”  Dirk liked where this was going.

“Well, the young man who put in my new floor — well, I say ‘young,’ but he was probably in his 40s, which I suppose to you must seem quite old — the man who put in my flooring seemed a nice fellow, and told me he was so thankful for the business — after seeing my floor, you see, the apartment decided to opt for hardwood in all third floor units — he was so happy that he would even compensate me for the referral.  However, he would require just one service of me; I’d have to take care of his pet canary for awhile.  If I took care of it while he was out of town over the next month or so, he’d give me twenty thousand dollars; all I had to do was keep it while he was away, and he would pay me when the canary had been collected upon his return.  That was a little over a month ago.”

O’Leary, still standing, stared down at her incredulously.  “Ma’am, a man offered to give you twenty thousand dollars” twenty. thousand. dollars. “to take care of a canary?  And you thought this seemed completely reasonable?”

Dirk egged her on.   “It does seem like something of a red flag.  Have you heard from him recently?”

“I’ll admit it,” she began, the twinkle fading from her eye, “I needed the money.  I’m getting older, and my late husband’s pension is running out, and here’s me trying to pay for my medicine and my rent with little to no income.  I assumed the man was up to something suspicious, although I really couldn’t tell what harm I ever thought would come from holding onto a canary; I’m still unsure, although with this Cat Burglar business I believe I may now be in over my head, so perhaps it is best to get it all out on the table.”

“So, ma’am, if you need the money, how are you going to pay for our services if we can’t locate the canary?” asked O’Leary bluntly.

“Well, that’s just the thing!  I received a wire transfer this morning for the full twenty thousand dollars.  I thought it would only be appropriate that I spend some of it trying to relocate Twitters, you know, paying it forward if you will; the very least I can do is try to help out after the grief that I’ve caused!  I thought that if I could prove that losing the bird wasn’t my fault, maybe I could at least keep some of the money.  You must admit I can’t be blamed for the Cat Burglar, but still, maybe I’d best do the right thing.  If the bird truly can’t be located, I’ll give back the money, but I attempted to contact the man today to let him know there had been a mistake, and he had wired the money too soon, but I couldn’t contact him.  The number he had given me had been disconnected, and his office says they haven’t seen hide nor hair of him since he left over a month ago.”

“I wouldn’t worry about trying to find him.  Who was this man, ma’am?” asked Dirk, though he already new the answer.

“Why, the very owner of the flooring company himself — again, it was so nice of him to come out to visit the worksite of a little old lady like myself.”  Her eyes sparkled.  “He said his name was Ed, Ed Heartwood.”

Dirk’s knowing look offset O’Leary’s astonished grin.  “I told you, Sam, I was born for this.”  Just like that, they were back in the game.

The End

DIRK DANGER WILL RETURN

IN

A Keen Sense of Destiny

What can I say?  Dialogue: it’s not my strong suit.  I promise the next DD story I publish will be both shorter and better (I wrote it in college, but I’ll publish it next month sometime).  In the meantime, please enjoy my continued ramblings on unimportant stuff, including the hipster garbage, the art of conversation (according to me), and the podcast review you didn’t know you needed, and while it turns out you were right, I’ll give it to you anyway.

Quick Update

This week’s post is going to be short and sweet, so I can spend a bit more of the long weekend sitting in my sweatpants and doing nothing at all.  No! I’m going to spend the time I would have spent writing something “witty” and “clever” here working on my next “witty” and “clever” short story, which I’ll post next week.  Or as soon as it’s done, whichever comes first (that’s right).

Over a month into the new year, here’s a quick update on how my New Year’s resolutions are going; I figure after spewing advice on the subject I should let everyone know that A) I practice what I preach and B) the gospel rings true (at least for me).  Below you’ll find a list of my resolutions, the grade I’m giving myself in each, and a blurb about how each one is going. … enjoy?

  • Work out 5x per week: A+. This afternoon I’ll have hit this milestone every week; I usually do Mon-Thurs at lunch and Saturday around 4.  Seems to be going pretty well, but hasn’t helped with…
  • 10% bodyfat by EOY: F.  This seems unlikely, but I’m blaming my scale.  Also, we’ll see how it goes when I give up drinking for Lent; I anticipate I’ll lose about 10-20 lb a week, which after 6 weeks should put me back below my birthweight.
  • Olympic triathlon: C. I went to a spin class this week.  It was hard.  My butt hurt afterward.  But once it’s not snowing 10-14″ every night, I’ll try to start biking into work.
  • Increase flexibility: F. I specifically pointed this out as a stupid goal, since it’s unquantifiable.  This continues to be a stupid goal.
  • 56 hours of sleep / week: F. This continues to elude me.  I will likely refocus my efforts here in March in an attempt to rededicate myself to it.  I have yet to hit this milestone.
  • Wake up earlier: A-. I’m batting about a weekly 50% on doing this 5 days per week, but the lowest I’ve hit is 4; I’m generally into the office by 8:00 or at least online and working in my apartment by 7:30 every morning.
  • 1 date per week: B. I touched on this last week, but I’m batting about 50% on this one too, currently at 4 dates.  That’s 4 more dates than I would have gone on otherwise!
  • Text / communicate with one long distance friend per day: A+. (There was a typo in the original post, I just noticed).  I’ve not missed a day!  It’s gotten easier as people have also started texting me out of the blue — it’s the gift that keeps on giving.
  • Take dance lessons: C. I’ve not signed up, but I’ve heard there’s possible dance lessons on a cruise I’m going on in May, which I would take advantage of.  Also, a friend has volunteered to go with me near home.
  • Write / blog on a weekly basis: A+. Obviously going well.  Readership has increased to the double digits (in that I’ve opened my blog 12 times now).  Also, I tweet now @Carscafmoo.  Followership there is also in the double digits, as I’ve created many fake accounts that follow that one.
  • Join / Form a band: C. Attempts to jam with friends have been stymied by time commitments.  Further action necessary, but first I need more practice…
  • Practice music 2 hours / week: A. This one is actually going really well.  I missed the first week, but I’ve been learning guitar ever since (huge shout out to justinguitar.com), and I can now play a few songs and I’m learning more chords and the like.  In a month it’s easily the most I’ve learned on probably any instrument.
  • 2 Coursera courses: B. I signed up for my first one last week (it starts in March) and I’m looking for others; possibly music related, possibly computer science, who knows?  I’ve also thought about signing up for the one taught by one of the dudes from my favorite podcast, Backstory, but it starts on Monday.  I’d need to check out the format before committing.
  • Survive: C.  Still tickin’!

So, of the 14 resolutions, I’m hitting 100% (A+) on 3, passing 9 others, and failing only 2. I’ll try to post another update in a couple of months (I know everyone’s dying to find out how this turns out…) ; hopefully we’ll see some of those F’s become at least D’s.  In the meantime, this initial report card seems pretty good, considering the ~10% average success rate we were looking at before.  And you doubted me — shame on you.

OK, Stupid

In the weeks running up to Valentine’s Day (or as I like to call it, “Single People Make You Aware of How Sad and Lonely They Are Buy Calling it ‘Single People’s Awareness Day’ Day”),  the marketing machine usually spins into high gear, shilling heart-shaped romantic nonsense and reminding everyone that a year’s worth of transgression and indiscretion can be cured with a sparkly gift, because women, like small mammals, have tiny brains and are easily distracted by shiny things.  For obvious reasons, we get reminded that “diamonds are forever,” “every kiss begins with Kay,” and “most of our products don’t fund terrorist activities or ongoing civil wars,” (™ Helzberg Diamonds) but we also get conversation hearts and heart-shaped donuts filled with pink creme; it’s even the one time of year when Hallmark is as relevant as when they were the only purveyors of Beanie Babies.  There’s chocolates, roses of all colors, and for those of us who are truly lonely, Valentine’s Day-themed pet clothing and accessories.  The combined spending for the day topped out last year at almost $20B (that’s B, with a “B”), putting it at #3 on the list of total spending per holiday, behind… Thanksgiving, for some reason?

The best beef may be grass-fed, but the tastiest turkeys are raised on consumer spending

This all just goes to say that Valentine’s Day is a lucrative business, and it makes sense for companies to advertise for it — it’s clearly working.  But this year, I haven’t seen a whole lot on that front.  Maybe it’s just that I don’t really watch TV or listen to the radio anymore (thanks, internet!), or maybe I’ve finally grown callous enough to completely ignore ads, but I can’t think of a single diamond commercial from this year, and the last time I went to the grocery store I didn’t see a huge display of chalk-flavored candy telling me to “b” its.  I haven’t heard people frantically discussing plans or worrying that they don’t have dates; the closest thing I’ve come across was my friend asking if I wanted to watch the NBA All-Star game and drink by ourselves that night.  It’s a time-honored tradition.  We’re very lonely.

Maybe I’m just running in different circles now that all of my friends are either married or cripplingly unloved, but the one thing I’ve noticed this year leading up to Valentine’s Day is a stark uptick in stories about online dating in the media.   Admittedly, looking at Google Trends, it’s more like a very slight uptick that is temporally correlated with, but does not necessarily imply causation by, Valentine’s Day, but as a member of the online dating community, I’m probably a bit more sensitive to it.  It’s kind of like all the happy people got together and decided that this year would be a charity case looking at those less fortunate than themselves.  To their credit, I have yet to hear a story that paints people who use online dating services in a negative light — it’s never about “look at this hilarious and sad person who is so inept at human contact they do their dating through a computer.”  Generally, the pieces I’ve seen have been interesting, if somewhat academic, looks into what they consider the world of modern dating.  Still, it can’t help but feel a bit… Band  Aid-y.

“Do they know it’s Valentine’s Day?”

As I literally just mentioned, I’m a (proud?) member of the online dating community — I’ve had an OkCupid account (more on that later) for well over a year at this point, but I only recently really started actively using it to fulfill a resolution to go on a date every week.  Since I’ve basically been advertising that goal (along with my other resolutions — come on, did you even read that post?) to anyone and everyone I meet, I naturally get the reaction, “That seems like a lot of dates!  How are you going to meet that many people?” so I end up having to tell people that I have an online dating profile.

The thing about telling people you’re doing online dating is that they immediately treat you like some sort of recently-persecuted minority.  At the advent of online dating, there was something of a stigma attached to it; it was new, and people didn’t understand it. I think it’s largely accepted now, but people still kind of acknowledge its stigma’d past.  People usually skip a beat while they decide to either totally ignore it or address the issue head-on in currently-acceptable terms (“Oh, I’ve heard that’s a great way to meet people, especially if you’re busy,” or “The internet is the single greatest human connectivity device ever created, why wouldn’t you use it to connect with people?”).  It’s like we reached that stage where people aren’t “retarded,” they’re just “mentally handicapped,” and everyone is trying to tiptoe around the issue without saying anything that’s politically incorrect.  It’s like when you meet the congenital amputee whose arms both stop at the elbow and you want to ask him how he does basic things like open doors or put on clothes but instead you stare straight at his face and talk about soccer or riding a bicycle, and you’re just thinking to yourself that if he had been born 50 years ago the Spartans would  have thrown him into the chasm of Mount Taygetus, but now even saying something like “You’re so brave!” would be a belittling acknowledgement that he’s something other than a normal human.  You just want to send all the signals that say, “Your people have a troubled history, but I’m past that — and so is the rest of the world.  You’re safe here!  I understand that people used to think that dating online meant you were socially inept and unfit to breed, but now I will tell you what you must be telling yourself to make it seem OK.”

Of course, in the online dating world it’s a different story — we’re still free to discuss the stigma.  I recently had a date who said something embarrassing about herself and then followed up with, “… and now you understand why I’m on OkCupid!” and we both had a hearty laugh.  And the truth of the matter is that, notwithstanding the fact that I’m batting about 50% for that resolution even with my OKC endeavors, I really wouldn’t be able to get a date without it, regardless of how busy I was.  This is partly because, as previously mentioned, I am an awful human being, and in person I would drive off any potential mate long before she accepted an invitation to be alone with me for any length of time suitable to drinks or dinner, whereas on my online profile I can fix that problem by just lying about myself.

My profile picture

It’s also because the world of online dating actually has a number of qualities that make it great, especially for someone like me.  The biggest problem that I face in the dating world is that I don’t know any eligible women, and I don’t have any friends who know any either.  Of the people in my generation  (or, from what I can tell, in my parent’s generation) who are married or in a committed relationship, almost every single couple met at work or in school.  I’m not in school, and I work at a firm that is 99.9% male (we employ 64 people, you do the math).  The rest met through friends of friends, but none of my friends know any attractive single women either, so that option is out.

This basically leaves the bar scene, and I have literally never heard a description of the bar scene that didn’t begin with “I’m so sick of…”   I have never been one to approach strangers (I wouldn’t order for myself in a restaurant until I was 12 because I was terrified of talking to the waitstaff), and I’ve certainly never been able to approach women I’ve never met and pretend to be interesting.  Don’t get me wrong, I’m fine talking to people — I have had several conversations with women at bars, but I’m also respectful of stranger’s privacy to a fault.  I don’t want to force myself on anyone, so I never make the first move for fear that it’s unwanted.  I don’t want to be that guy who hits on a girl who’s just there for a drink, so I end up just leaving everyone alone.  Plus, I’m terrified of failure — especially public failure.  The last thing I want is for people to find out my ladykillin’ rep is all a facade to hide my considerable insecurities.

That’s the brilliance of online dating — no one is just there for a drink.  Everyone is there for the same reason: they want to go on dates with strangers.  (When you say it like that it’s a pretty weird reason.)  For example, on OKC, right from the get-go, you’re asked about your sexual preferences and told explicitly it’s a dating site (not “a great way to meet people,” which is a somewhat ambiguous euphemism).

You’re cute — come here often?

But really, you never have to have that fear of “I wonder if I’m bothering this person,” because even if you are, even if they think you or your profile or your message is stupid, they don’t have to take the time to respond.  They’ve wasted, max, 30 seconds of their life reading your message and glancing at pictures of you, and then they can move on.  And, better, the online dating community accepts this as a social norm — nobody has to engage anyone.  You don’t have to send a “no thanks” message, you just don’t respond and the world moves on.  There’s no awkward “I have a boyfriend” moment, followed by rolled eyes and exasperated sighs from girlfriends.  Since nobody has to see you fail, it decreases the negative consequences from failure, which in turn encourages ongoing efforts — not hearing back from someone isn’t the end of the world, in fact it’s quite common.  And it could be for any number of reasons, none of which actually have to do with you (although let’s be honest, it’s probably because you’re lame).

At the same time, therein lies the issue — failure is incredibly common.  Of the messages I send, I probably get about a 10% hit rate on returns, which you could say is my fault for having a bad profile or writing boring messages, but it might even be above average.  Anecdotally, other men I know who are on OKC or similar sites suggest low response rates — I have yet to talk to a guy who does not refer to it as “a game of numbers,” or a girl who does not say that her guy friends refer to it as such.   The basic premise is that if you have low returns, your best bet is to blindly message hundreds of women, which leads to the problem of women on dating sites (especially free dating sites) getting tens or hundreds of messages that have no real content — just a “hey” or “sup” that might lead to a profile view.  I’ve been told this is really annoying for women, who basically get their inboxes flooded with inanity, and several profiles will say something to the effect of “Message me if: you have something to say other than ‘hey.'”

I refuse to send the blanket “hey” messages (and there are tons of tips out there advising against it).  Instead, I follow a general format of:

  • Joke about something in the profile (“‘Drinks: A lot’ — Love the honesty!”)
  • Honest question about something in the profile (“I see you’re a furry — what’s your costume?”)
  • Sign-off with a reference to something in their profile (“May the force be with you, “)

This (theoretically) shows that I’m fun, gives them an easy way to respond by answering the question or acknowledging my reference, and most importantly is 4 or 5 sentences max, so they don’t have to read a book report about their profile.  It also makes it seem less about me and more about her, because saying, “I’m also into gimp suits” makes it look like you’re talking about yourself.

The problem with these messages is that they take time to write — unless something immediately jumps out at me about their profile, I will spend about 20 minutes coming up with something witty to say or a question to ask.  Since I get a 10% return rate, and of those I probably get a 25% date rate, I end up writing about 40 messages per date that I go on.  At 20 minutes per message that’s 800 minutes (13+ hours) on OKC per date.  That’s an hour a night for 2 weeks to find the next person to go out with.  If that seems like an exaggeration, keep in mind I probably spend about an hour a day on the site, and I’ve been out with two people this year.

OK, 13 hours is about a half-day — maybe a half-day’s work isn’t so bad, if you’re going to find your soul mate.  After all, think of all the bars you’d probably have to go to, or the jobs you’d have to get or the school you’d have to attend to find someone compatible.  12 or 13 hours seems a pittance compared to that.  Of course, that assumes that you actually find your soul mate on the first date, so maybe it’s closer to 5 or 6 first dates, maybe 10?  That’s a week to find your match.  Still not bad!

The problem is, it’s not 10 first dates.  OKC and match.com (and presumably all the other major dating sites, too) have proprietary algorithms and questionnaires that allow them to generate a match probability, and they feed you people who have higher match probabilities, so you’d think these systems would be better than picking out at random from the general population.  Unfortunately, there’s two things that throw the system off-balance.  The first is that people lie — and not just posting profile pictures of supermodels, but in smaller ways that can throw a non-obvious wrench in the system.  For instance, I hedged my answers to make myself sound more interesting or more tolerant to the first 200 questions I responded to on OKC; when I looked at people who matched highly with me, they all liked to go clubbing and were super adventurous.  By trying to make myself more attractive to others, I had inadvertently made myself seem attracted to people I really wasn’t interested in.  Of course, those people were also matched with me, so if we assume that I had gone out with any of them, you can imagine they’d have been pretty disappointed — this happens too, where people create a profile that makes them seem a certain way that they perceive others to find attractive, it works, and then people have terrible dates when they find out you’re not into eating raw sea turtle from street vendors, or whatever the kids are doing these days.

The other thing that throws the system off is that it really only seems like you’re getting help from these matches.  I’m not saying the algorithms are wrong or that in the end there’s some human factor that trumps science — I love science, and if science had an online dating profile and we were both completely honest, it’d be a 100% match.  I’m just saying that they flood you with hundreds of people who are matches and it makes it seem like they weeded a bunch of people out for you and you’re connecting only with the top choices, when in reality we do this every day in our lives, and if we’re in an environment (for example, school) where we have the opportunity to meet hundreds or thousands of potential mates, we weed out the non-matches ourselves and gravitate toward those where there is mutual attraction, i.e., a higher match percentage.  The real service isn’t the weeding out (although without that component, the service would be unusable), it’s the introduction to an environment with hundreds or thousands of potential mates.

These two factors combine to mean that an online dating profile allows you to simulate an environment where you have hundreds or thousands of potential mates, but the weeding out process is warped.  You’re held captive to the persona that they put out without the ability to build up a backlog of human interaction, so you end up having to meet a whole bunch of people to weed out the people who should have been weeded out, but weren’t.

I’m not just complaining because neither of my first two dates ended in marriage — that media hype about online dating I mentioned earlier actually has some pretty interesting examples.  There’s a Cracked article about how OKC users ignore profiles and match percentages and message hot people no matter what, which would indicate that the weeding-out system is broken.  Then there’s the Freakonomics podcast “What You Don’t Know About Online Dating,” where they actually interview Alli Reed, who wrote that Cracked article.  I’m actually only about halfway through that one, but signs point to an economist telling someone how to make their profile better.

More telling is the intro to the recent Planet Money podcast “Dear Economist, I Need a Date,” which opens with a story about a producer’s experience with online dating.  The story begins with Lisa Chow deciding she’s going to “be more aggressive” about online dating; she actually describes herself through this process as being “efficient” and “focused.”  So, how long did it take efficient, focused Lisa to find a match (which I basically define as someone who precipitates an exit from the online dating market)?  It took her a year and a half, and she went on 50 first dates.  Ultimately, she met her husband, but in the meantime she had to create a spreadsheet to track her experiences so she could remember anything about the guys she had been on dates with.  Keep in mind, this is the efficient solution of a successful person who knows exactly what she is looking for.

Maybe more revealing is this story of how a math PhD at UCLA created an algorithm to determine not only the characteristics of women he was most attracted to but also how to create a profile that would make him more attractive to those groups.  He spent a couple of months setting up the profiles (including automating several accounts so he could pull data on the OKC users in the greater LA area), and then used those targeted profiles to try to find a mate.  This guy had already done months of work to target exactly the right group of women, and he had a profile that was specifically targeted to those women (i.e., it wasn’t a problem of getting dates), and it still took him 88 first dates to find a match.  It doesn’t say how long this took, but if we assume one date a day (again, let’s assume his profile made him utterly captivating), that’s still 3 months.  For a poor schmuck like me hoping for one date a week, that’s a year and a half; at 13 invested hours per date, for 88 dates, that’s 19 full days of OkCupid time.  

Again, this isn’t to say that I’m turned off from online dating or that that it can’t work — I really believe it can.  In both of the cases above, the people ultimately met a mate, and statistics show that online dating is become more acceptable, and marriages that began with online dating are on the rise, making up a growing portion of overall marriages.  I certainly am not about to quit OKC (again, it’s… basically my only option…), although maybe I’d switch to another site, if I could find any efficiency stats on online dating (seriously, I Googled for like an hour.  There is nothing).  But for something that’s billed as a way for busy folks to quickly meet new people, I’m hard-pressed to believe there’s not a more efficient solution.  It provides a great service of artificially creating a “target-rich environment,” as they say, but doesn’t substantially decrease the legwork — in the end, until the algorithms are refined or people stop lying about their preferences or they find some other way to capture that human factor, online dating will be less efficient and inferior option compared to meeting people in the real world.  Which, for me I think means… grad school, anyone?

PS Some other interesting stats or articles about online dating (OK, they’re not all interesting, but I skimmed most of them while writing this.)  Also, OKTrends is kinda cool sometimes.

PPS My “hilarious” pictures now all come with Alt text, which means one thing: more bad jokes.  Get excited!

Subtractvertising

Most people who know me know that I love going to the movies — not the movies themselves, mind you, but actually going to the movies.  It’s great to sit on your couch on the weekend and catch up on stuff you missed on Netflix or whatever, but in the end it’s not the same as being in the theater, which is why every weekend when the inevitable, “Anyone want to do anything?” group text comes out, I offer up “Sure — movie?”

No one ever takes me up on this because I’m awful to see movies with (seriously, I walked out at the end of both Gravity and Lincoln complaining), but also because we’ve recently been spoiled by the AMC Courthouse theater, which has assigned seating in reclining chairs.  I’m not making this up — if you want to see Harry Potter 8Deathly8Hallows in 3D at midnight on the night it comes out with 12 of your closest friends and all sit together, you can buy your tickets online and then waltz into the theater at 11:59 and not have to worry about getting stuck in the front row or splitting up the group.  Even if you bought tickets for the front row, you can recline, so it doesn’t matter.  There’s no bad seats in the house!  It is, without a doubt, the. single. greatest. development. in cinema history.

If you’re wondering if my glowing recommendation has monetary incentive, I would like to point out that my blog has literally ones of readers — you’d be surprised how little that kind of readership draws in the way of revenue (it’s even less than the $1.18 I have on my AMC card toward a free popcorn or cine-snack of my choice… which is my real monetary incentive).  However, I would also like to point out that the AMC Courthouse theater has the freshest popcorn, the friendliest staff, and showings starting as early as 9:30 AM on most weekends — tell ’em CCM sent you!

Anyway, the point is they only show half the movies that are out at a given time; the other half are shown by the competing Ballston Regal Cinemas, which I’m contractually obligated not to link to.  The problem is that it always seems like the Regal has the good showings, but it’s farther away, in literally the worst mall in America, and it doesn’t have reclining seats.  So if we want to go to a movie, we have to hope it shows up in Courthouse, otherwise we won’t end up seeing it.  This, in turn, means I don’t get to see movies that often, which means that when I do go to the movies, I want the whole experience — I like to get there a bit early for the pre-preview-previews (movie trivia’s the illest), the previews, the post-preview-pre-movie-announcements (otherwise how will I know where the exits are or whether my phone dreams?), and obviously the movie.  Then I stay until the end of the credits, because you never know what kind of post-credits-pre-rating-warning-(seriously, why do they end the movie by telling you what the movie you just saw was rated? Isn’t it a bit too late for that? “Oh I saw Saving Private Ryan with my 7-year old because I thought was the heartwarming tale of an integration-era Army basketball team learning to see past racial differences and triumph agains the all-white Navy squad, and now they tell me it’s an R-rated gore-fest!”)-teaser they’re going to show for the sequel to 12 Years a Slave (spoiler: it’s 13 Years a Slave, and it stars George Clooney, Matt Damon, Brad Pitt, and the rest of the gang!).

One thing I’ve noticed in my considerable time at the theater is that every winter, the good folks at Cougar Town buy out a bunch of pre-preview spots, ostensibly to convince people to watch their show.  I want to preface this by saying that I have heard great things about Cougar Town.  Abed from Community loves it (and has actually been on it), people I know who watch it say it’s either “hilarious” or “really not that bad? I guess?” and it’s by the same guys who did Scrubs, which is on the Official List of Best TV Shows of All Time*.  The largest criticism I’ve heard of it is basically that “it has, like, a really dumb name,” which is also true of such classics as Mork and Mindy and the zany hospital classic-mix-up sitcom, Er?.  Furthermore, it started on ABC, which is easily the least offensive of the major networks.  Compared to the doddering-old-man-trying-to-stay-hip-with-the-kids that is NBC (“kids these days hate 30 Rock.  Michael J. Fox is still relevant, right?  While we’re at it let’s move Scrubs to ABC and fire Conan!”), the laugh-track-laden CBS (“Let’s take the one original show we’ve had in years and drag it on for 14 seasons.  Maybe throw in a slap bet. Helloooooo, middle America!”), and Fox’s Animation Domination (I have nothing bad to say, I actually like Fox.  Plus Brooklyn 99 is easily the best new comedy on TV this season), stuff on ABC looks well-produced, well-written, and even if it’s generally vapid, at least it’s entertaining.  Now C Town is on TBS, which is the Superstation, so you know it’s … super…

My problem with Cougar Town is apparently that I’ve never watched it, and after being subjected to their ads, I don’t ever want to.  Check out this rad ad (r’ad), for season 4:

The entire ad is just the cast (I’m assuming it’s the cast, it could be random people, since no one speaks)  being drenched in wine.  The promo for this season at least has cast members talking, but isn’t much better — I guess they like wine a lot? That’s probably a thing in the show?  Maybe these ads are hilarious to people who watch the show, but I can only guess, because I haven’t watched the show.  I don’t have to guess that they’re not hilarious to people who haven’t watched the show, because again, I have not watched the show, and the ads are not hilarious.  From what I can tell, the show is about A) people drinking wine, and B) there is no B, because that’s all I can tell.  For all I know, it’s a show about a bunch of recovering alcoholics and Courteney “I have too many e’s in my name and my last name is hilarious, here check it out:” Cox plays an evil villain whose life goal is to get her “friends” to relapse, either by setting full glasses of wine in front of them and then telling them not to drink with a wink and a nod or by literally throwing booze at them.  Major selling points of the show appear to be, “Oh I remember her she was the bitchy chick from [Scrubs | Freaks and Geeks],” and, “Hey look they have a George Constanza type!”

Screen Shot 2014-02-01 at 11.56.53 AM
Jason Alexander was originally offered the part, but they reneged after finding a younger, balder him.

 The videos I linked are TV spots, because I couldn’t find any of the ads that run pre-movie, but know that the ones that run in theaters are longer.  Imagine the one where Courteney “seriously… my name is” Cox throws wine at people, but for like… 5 minutes.  They ran one in 2013 that boiled down to the annoying voiceover guy whose words are echoed by a sign for some reason repeating, “This season: more wine!” until a good Samaritan went to the projection room and held a flame under the tape to save future generations from ever being subjected to such torture.  (Theater security showed up, but instead of escorting him out they gave him a high five.  He got a standing ovation upon returning to the theater, and the manager gave him free popcorn for life.)  Sitting through the ad was almost enough to make me wish I hadn’t gotten to the theater early, but then I wouldn’t have gotten a good seat (this was prior to the advent of assigned seating).

The point of the ads is presumably to get people to watch the show.  I would think that the people who already watch the show … already watch the show.  It should be sufficient to do a quick “Hey guys, still on!” ad — something that doesn’t actively turn people off from watching it.  You could even do something that makes people who haven’t watched the show want to watch it, by showing funny scenes that aren’t just inside jokes, or, worse, one inside joke repeatedly.  The advertising should be relevant to the target audience, and I don’t think it is (or maybe I’m just super not the target audience, which is unlikely, because of how much I like wine).  The only thing about the ads that could possibly draw me into the show is the idea that if I start watching it, the ads might become bearable.  But I’m not about to watch 5 seasons of Wine Wars to make 5 minutes of my life less awful every other month, so they can count me out.

Congratulations, Cougar Town.  Your advertising lost you a potential viewer.

* There is no link here because I could not find any such list, since none of the lists I checked actually mentioned it, and I have yet to publish such a list… until now…

  1. Some stuff
  2. Scrubs
  3. Some other stuff

Everybody’s Working on the Weekend

One of my best friends in the entire world recently followed his PhD advisor when she moved from sunny, warm Durham, NC to the vast frozen wasteland that is Madison, WI.  For various reasons he made this move in between the fall and “spring” (read: winter) semesters this year, which apparently was precisely the absolute worst possible time to move to the midwest.  Since then, he’s endured 2 polar vortices and a grand total of 1 day where the high was above zero… Kelvin.  It is literally impossibly cold there.

Image
“My tauntaun froze to death again! Now how will I get to lab?”

In any event, his girlfriend is in town this weekend (she still lives in a Durham and so is not frozen in place), and she told me that the cold had forced him to run on an indoor track.  This kid did an ironman in September, so you can imagine that when he goes for a run, he really runs — he’s not going out for a jog and coming back ten minutes later.  He’s running tens of miles at once, and now he’s doing it on an indoor track.  Or at least he was doing it on an indoor track, until running on an indoor track gave him a stress fracture.  Now he’s running in a pool, which actually is kind of interesting because it implies they still have liquid water up there.

I bring this story up because in all the time I’ve known him, he’s never been happy; we joked about the fact that this is probably the most miserable he’s ever been and he probably loves it.  I don’t mean he’s been depressed or suicidal or whatever, he’s just not a happy guy.  There’s always something he could be working toward, and as soon as he gets there there’s something else.  He graduated from college? Time for a PhD.  He ran a marathon? Time for Boston. He ran Boston? Time for an iron man.  It’s not so much that he’s unhappy, it’s just that he derives satisfaction from working hard and achieving his goals, and not so much from social engagements or the like.

In this regard, I’m actually kind of like him — not to the same degree (I ran a marathon once and decided never to do it again… then I ran another one and now I’m unable to do it again), but I derive satisfaction from hard work.  In my first few years at my current job, I probably put in 70 or so hours a week; it’s not a whole lot, but if you include an hour+ a day of commute, 4+ hours a week to work out, and 56 hours to sleep, it meant that I spent most of my waking hours at work, and it didn’t leave a whole lot of time for other stuff.  There were of course weeks where I worked less or more (probably one week a month I had to work 9-hour days on the weekends), but in general I spent a lot of my time working, and not a lot doing other stuff.

This was especially true in my second full year with the company, when I started coming in around 7:30 in the morning and generally left between 9:30 and 10:30 at night, and I spent the vast majority of the time in between productively.  I think my production at this time directly led to my being promoted, but at the same time it was made clear to me in my interactions with management that there was concern I would burn out (which, come to think of it, is a weird metaphor; presumably candles have a finite amount of energy they can give off, and it’s not like if you limit the size of the flame the candle can somehow last forever or that it will give off more light over the course of its life).

So, to avoid burning out, I decided in early 2013 to try out a couple of new things.  First, I started working from home two or three mornings a week; this allowed me to completely miss traffic (which would mean a net increase in time spent productively, absent other changes), but also to take additional time in the morning for things like making breakfast, which I used to eat hurriedly at my desk and now could be prepared and consumed leisurely. I also started going home at a reasonable hour; no formal policy of mine dictated this, but basically if I hadn’t started to tackle a problem by 7:00, I decided I wasn’t going to get around to it that day and pushed it into the next one.  Finally, I started to delegate more and do fewer things myself; theoretically this was best for both me and the company, because it freed me up to think about and solve other problems and developed the skills of the more junior members of the team, not to mention developing me for a possible managerial role in the future.

These changes, plus some others I’m probably forgetting, basically netted me an additional 10-15 hours per week of personal time on average, and I should say that there was little to no pushback from my management about it; basically, I don’t know if anyone even noticed.  Over the year since I made these changes, I probably ate dinner in the office 5 or 10 times, compared to at least 100 the year prior.  I was able to come home and relax for a bit before going to bed; I could go out for dinner with friends; I developed a taste for scotch I never thought that I’d have, and I began infusing my own liquor — I got a hobby!  My work was less stressful, in part because it wasn’t all my work anymore, and I had more time to pursue extracurriculars that engaged me.  All-in-all, a huge success.

Except that what actually happened was I got home and watched TV or played video games.  I had more time, but nothing productive to do with it.  (Guess what doesn’t take a whole lot of labor?  Leaving stuff in alcohol for a month.)  I saw my throughput decrease by a factor of 2 — not only was I working less, but the time I spent working was less productive, since I was meeting with people about having them produce instead of producing myself.  Where I used to have a few productive hours in the morning before everyone else came to work and a few productive hours at night after they left, I now had an hour and a half to get stuff done, which I generally spent making eggs and having a leisurely breakfast.  What should have been a huge decrease in stress and a huge increase in happiness ended up with me getting stress-induced shingles (that’s a story for another day) and having what might be the least satisfactory year of my life; this is one of the reasons I’ve resolved to fill my time more productively this year.

I think what worries me the most isn’t that I’m unproductive or that I don’t have fulfilling hobbies.  It’s the fear that I’m slipping — that someday I’ll be called upon to work hard, put in the time, and produce on the level I know I’m capable of… but I just won’t be capable anymore.  I think that productivity is a muscle that needs to be exercised in order to stay strong, and I was just sitting there atrophying.    This morning I had to log in and do about an hour of work, and I was shocked at how many other people were online working, because I haven’t done had to in so long; worse, it peeved me so much to have to do it I wrote a blog post about it.

It’s funny, because one of the ways I’m trying to combat my atrophy is to fill my free time productively; learning guitar, writing this blog, etc.  But this almost makes it worse — I logged on this morning, and I resented it, because it’s Saturday, and Saturday is the day that I get to wake up and write my blog post.  It seems that filling my time with stuff I actually enjoy doing has sort of made me realize the stuff I don’t enjoy doing.

This morning, I looked around me and realized that everybody’s working on the weekend, and I just don’t want to do it anymore.

The Joke’s on You

Hey team,

Back again, this time with something a little new.  Below is a slightly-touched-up version of a story I wrote in college for funzies that was a riff on the Fluffy Dog Joke (which, if you haven’t heard it, I link to after the story).  It’s replete with dumb jokes that only I find funny, so I think its value is more as a window into my soul than as an entertaining story.  

Now, I know a lot of you are thinking, “posting something you wrote in college shouldn’t count for your resolution this week!” but not to worry — I’m spending the rest of the day writing another DD story, which I should have ready to post in the next few weeks.

Without further ado, please enjoy…

Dirk Danger

in

The Joke’s on You

 

It was eleven o’clock on a Saturday morning in late March, the kind of Saturday morning that comes in like a lion, but, luckily, you can sleep in and by eleven all that’s left of the lion are a few puffy white clouds against a pure blue sky.  Dirk Danger groggily rolled over to check the clock.  He could only go back to sleep so many times, and eventually he would have to overcome his personal inertia and get out of bed.  Wiping the sleep from his eyes and running a hand through his unkempt hair, he decided it was time.  After all, he had a big day ahead of him.  Today, Dirk Danger would make a new friend.  

His feet touched the cold hardwood floor, and he hesitated.  But hesitation was not Dirk’s strong suit, and he had soon finished his morning routine and was sitting down to a brunch of black coffee, bacon, and soft, not-too-toasted toast, covered with butter and jam.  He needed a good, strong foundation for his day, for today was a day of important decisions and unbounded potential, like all days in which Dirk Danger took part.  Finishing his meal, he placed the dishes in the dishwasher and breathed in the heady air of anticipation.  It was time.  

Dirk grabbed his keys off of the rack by the door and walked outside, locking the door behind him.  He crossed his springy green lawn and made his way to the driveway.  Climbing into his car, he wondered how his life might change after this journey.  He supposed it would be less lonely.  Not that it was lonely now, but sometimes a little… companionship could be nice.  He stuck the key in the ignition and turned, listening to the motor turn over and spring to life.  Without a second thought, he backed the car out of the driveway and proceeded south down North Street.  

He got stuck in traffic on the interstate, which was perhaps a little odd for a Saturday afternoon.  But they were always doing construction on Saturdays, and the radio  informed him there had been a minor accident that had been unable to remove itself from the road due to the construction (AM 1170 has traffic on the 1s and 6s).  He cleared the fender-bender and sped on to his exit, heading out of town and farther into the suburbs.

At half past noon he spotted the run-down sign that said “Animal Shelter.”  It was one of those signs that probably had all of its vowels burned out, so that at night it read “ n m l Sh lt r,” although he doubted it was ever turned on after dark, since the shelter closed at 5 o’clock.  It was, after all, a non-profit organization, and they had to keep from profiting somehow.  He pulled into the parking lot, and, as men are wont to due in such places and times, parked his car.  

An animal shelter is one of those places that is at once heartwarming and heartrending.  The shelter usually consists of one public room, which is inevitably painted a bizarre shade of off-white specifically designed to bring out animal-related stains.  It’s never a complicated shape — typically a rectangle, as in this case — and the walls are lined with cages, stacked floor-to-ceiling, each containing a single cat or dog (or a few kittens or puppies).  There’s always one weird animal in a cage that the staff shrugs about, as if to say, “Hey, what would you do if someone brought in an alligator?”  This is the room that makes children squeal with delight and parents wonder when their children will be old enough to understand what’s really happening.

That’s the public room, but the filled cages, the mysterious door labeled “Employees Only,” and the sounds coming from behind it belie a darker, grittier place — the Christopher Nolan version to the Tim Burton front room.  Behind the shelter is a small fenced area where, in theory, animals could go outside for some fresh air, but they never do.  The paid staff, emerging from behind the mysterious door, is composed of people who can’t stand animals because they are forced to clean up after them in their tiny cages every day, while the volunteers are just a little too into the creatures.  And although the place is called a shelter, no one is confused as to the stipulations attached to the title.  Sure it’s a shelter, but only for a limited time.  The lease agreement states that you have two weeks to get yourself into a home, and after that your time is up.  The whole concept of the shelter is just brimming with hope, but it’s largely a false hope and, don’t kid yourself, you know it when you walk in.  

Dirk Danger was thinking, if not exactly these thoughts, then riffs on the theme, but probably less bitter, for today he could be a source of real hope, and he knew it.  

He was greeted by a young, rather all-too-cheery looking brunette, who introduced herself as Jane.  Dirk could tell by her all-to-cheeriness that she was a volunteer, which was confirmed as she explained that she was in college down the road, but volunteered here on the weekends because she missed her dog Muffins back home so much, and they don’t let you have dogs on campus, but if they did let you have dogs on campus she wasn’t sure her parents would part with Muffins, but maybe she could get another Muffins, Muffins II (or maybe she could come up with a better name, haha), after all there sure were a lot of sweeties here that could use a good home, and, well, if she could be of any help he should just let her know.  She knew he could make one of these poor creatures’ day, and maybe some poor creature could make his day too, she was just sure of it.  

At this point, since there were no quotation marks yet in the story, Dirk answered, “Well, actually Jane, I was hoping you could show me what you might have in, say, the dog section?”  

“Oh certainly!” exclaimed Jane.  Dirk got the feeling she exclaimed a lot.  “We have just the cutest little guys right over here!  What were you looking for exactly?”  She led him to a wall with cages that were, you had to notice, too small for animals of any size, much less the animals contained within — pups and pooches of all types; Rovers and Rexes sat next to Mollies and Maxes, separated by thin walls of plastic or cross-hatched metal.  

Dirk examined the potential playmates.  “Well Jane, I was looking for something in a Beagle, really,” he offered.  

“Oh!  Well, let’s see, we usually keep the middle-sized dogs over on the end here, in these cages,” she explained exclamatorily.  (Excplaimned?)  Dirk noted that the cages were actually the same size; they just looked different because they were black, while the smaller dogs were housed in beige cages and the larger ones in green.  “Oh, dear!” she said.  “It seems we don’t have any beagles here today, mister…” She rose slightly on at the end, and Dirk became embarrassedly aware that he had failed to introduce himself amidst her exclamations.

“Danger.  Call me Dirk.  That’s okay Jane,” he added, noting her genuine disappointment at having let him down.  Then a rather peculiar dog caught his eye.  “How about that little guy there?” 

The dog was, in a word, fluffy.  It had shock white hair that accounted for at least two thirds of its apparent volume, hair that was actually sticking out of four of the six sides of the cage.  Yet when Jane removed the dog from its crate, Dirk was surprised to feel that it was a good-sized dog, not one of those toy Pekinese fluffy nonsense dogs, for which he had no truck. Nor was it a monster sheep dog or a St. Bernard.  It was roughly the proportion of, well, a Beagle, it was just covered in fluffy white hair.  It looked deep into Dirk’s eyes with an expression of unbounded hope and peered into his soul, practically begging “Adopt me!  Feel how fluffy I am!  Rub me right behind my ears, I’ll wag my tail and twitch my leg in appreciation!  It’ll be great!  Have I mentioned that I’m fluffy?” 

Not even Dirk Danger could resist.  “Aw, little fella, what’s your name?” he asked.  

“Well, he doesn’t have a name, but here at the shelter we call him–” Dirk cut her off with a wave of his hand.

“Let me guess,” he finished for her: “Fluffy.”  

“Exactly!  How did you ever know?” she asked incredulously.  

“Just a hunch.”  Dirk scratched Fluffy behind his ears, and Fluffy’s tail wagged and his leg twitched appreciatively.  That sealed the deal.  “Well, I’m not a man to call a dog ‘Fluffy,’ but I think I’ll have to go with it on this one.  Ma’am, I do believe I’m going to take Fluffy home with me today.”  Dirk found himself being down-homier than usual.

“Oh swell!” she exclaimed, as though this had all happened at a diner in the ’50s.  Maybe it was something in the hopefulness of this fluffy dog that brought it out in both of them.  “That’s so great!  He’s been here since the Monday before last, so we were really hoping he’d be taken soon!” The darker side of the animal shelter world creeped into her expression for a moment, then the fluffy hopefulness took back over.  “He’ll make a great friend, I know he will!  Look at him wagging his little tail.  It just makes me miss my Muffins back home so much!”  The girl was so full of exclamation points they were flinging themselves out through her mouth, Dirk remarked to himself.

“Well, Jane,” Dirk said, “it’s just a few short weeks until you see your Muffins again all summer long.  And until then, you have these friends to keep you company.  And I have Fluffy.  And for that, I thank you.”  

They chatted for a few more minutes while Dirk filled out the necessary paperwork.  Then he loaded Fluffy into his car, and the pair drove off to begin their life together.  

 —

A few weeks later, Fluffy was settling into the Danger household.  As it happened, all of those most difficult aspects of dog raising had already been taken care of by Fluffy’s previous caretaker.  He was house-trained, and in fact well trained in general; he could sit, stay, lie down, roll over, and shake hands.  All Dirk had to do was feed him and walk him, and it is on one of these walks that we rejoin our tale.  

Dirk was walking with Fluffy at a brisk pace on a Sunday afternoon.  It was one of those late April days that starts off nice and lulls you into a sense of complacency, then turns up the heat and leaves you parched and wearing too many clothes.  They rounded the corner of North Street, and paused near a telephone pole for Fluffy to take care of his business.  Dirk wiped the sweat from his brow and averted his gaze, thinking to himself that if he was hot, at least he didn’t have a ridiculous and permanent fluffy coat.  He’d leave Fluffy a couple of ice cubes in his water dish when they got back.  

Dirk felt the tug on the leash that meant Fluffy was done and started to head back to his house, but something caught his eye.  He noticed a peculiar sign on the very telephone pole Fluffy had recently, er, used.  It advertised the “ANNUAL FLUFFY DOG COMPETITION!  CASH PRIZES!” the very next Saturday.  Why not? thought Dirk.  He made a mental note to visit the website listed at the bottom of the flier.  

Arriving at the house, Dirk wiped his shoes extra carefully before entering, then prepared a dish of cold water for Fluffy, who lapped it up graciously.  Dirk pulled out his computer and signed Fluffy up for the competition, only a fifteen-minute drive away.  

“Who’s a good boy?  Who’s the fluffiest dog in the city?” he asked with a babying lilt, while scratching the appreciative Fluffy behind the ears.  “Who’s gonna win this competition?”

 —

Predictably, the competition rolled around the next week.  As they drove over, Dirk figured he really didn’t have all that much at stake in a fluffy dog competition, and he certainly wasn’t about to go out and hire a trainer or a groomer or anything.  This was a fluffy dog competition, nothing more — just some innocent fun with a chance for a little bit of the CASH PRIZES and a chance to bond with dog that happened to be unbelievably fluffy.  He pulled over to a street corner drug store to buy a brush, but that was all.  

They pulled up to the competition at half past ten; it was scheduled to start at eleven o’clock sharp.  The competition was held in a sort of outdoor meeting place, not quite a barn but not exactly a normal building.  The roof, if you could call it that, since it was actually just a series of crossbeams, was painted green and left the floor, if you could call it that, since it was actually just a pile of woodchips, completely uncovered.  Dirk walked in with Fluffy on a leash through a doorway, if you could call it that, since it was really just two posts and a crossbeam.  Inside, if you could call it that, since it wasn’t really a building, was a maze of cubicle-like stalls, about waist-high, each with a small wooden table, off of which dangled a number.  Dirk checked in and proceeded to his table, number 17.

Being a newcomer to the annual competition, Dirk hadn’t realized how seriously most people took it.  Dirk and Fluffy were easily the last pair to arrive at the competition; most other dogs had been there for well over an hour and were being given last minute groom-overs by anxious owners and impatient trainers.  Dirk had read the rules and knew there was no reason to hire a trainer.  The only criterion judged was fluffiness, and from the looks the other owners were giving him, he knew Fluffy had it in spades.  

When they arrived at stall 17 to await the commencement of the competition, Dirk idly brushed Fluffy up and made small talk with the nearby owners, who were friendly enough, even if somewhat miffed at this newcomer’s disrespect for the sanctity of the Fluffy Dog Competition.

“Dirk Danger, nice to meet you.”

“Hi Mr. Danger, I’m Holly!  Coming in a little late, I see.  What’s your dog’s name?  He sure is fluffy!”

“His name is Fluffy.”

“Oh my God!  So is hers!” Holly would say, pointing to her dog.  All of his conversations were the same, with women who were of a … certain age… and whose names were all Holly or Molly or Jolly.  This led Dirk to believe, perhaps correctly, that he should have named his dog anything other than Fluffy, if only for the sake of originality.  

Presently, the judge of the fluffy dog competition began working his way through the stalls housing the other fluffy dogs.  The Hollys and Mollys and Jollys whose dogs he was judging would put their best effort into looking presentable and might, if they were particularly confident in themselves, but not so much in their dogs, try to distract the judge from the matter at hand by donning looks that were anything but fluffy.  The judge would make brief comments along the lines of “well ma’am, that sure is a fluffy looking dog you have there,” write something on a clipboard, and move on to the next fur ball.

When he reached Dirk’s stall, the judge stopped, a look of utter disbelief on his face.   He looked back at the last dog, as if to check and see if his eyes were playing tricks on him and perhaps all dogs appeared twice as fluffy as they actually were, then back at Fluffy.  He poked and prodded Fluffy, pulled at some of his fluff to see if he was really that fluffy or if he was somehow cheating — evidently they had problems with people gluing cotton to their dogs.  

“Well, I say now,” began the judge, “I do declare that is the fluffiest gol’ durn dog I do believe I’ve ever seen!”  Dirk pondered whether the judge was putting on a ridiculous southern drawl simply because he had “judge” affixed to his name.  It seemed that no one who was actually from the south would put the word “do” before every verb, or else no one would ever finish saying anything.  He pulled Dirk close and said quietly, but excitedly, “I do have to judge the rest, y’see, but I’ll be a flappin’ Jack if this here dog don’t win the competition.” Then he circled something on his clipboard and hurried on to examine some more, less fluffy dogs.  

An hour after the judging commenced, an announcement was made that the award ceremony would begin. The contestants huddled into the center of the assembly area, away from the stalls in which they had been judged, in which stood a small clear space with a podium at one end.  The judge walked up to the podium and announced the third and second place dogs, which went to Holly and Molly.  There was much applause and general approval upon the sight of their two dogs, which were indeed quite fluffy.  

Then the judge paused and announced, drawling harder than ever before, “And the fuhst place, I do say the fuhst place dawg is the fluffiest flea-bitten lil’ mongrel eva to grace these fine halls, and hI’ve been a-doin’ this fo’ no less’n twenny-fow ye-uhs.  The winna, I say, the winna is Mister Dirk Dangea and his dawg Fluffa.”  He paused and added, drawl-less and to the side as Dirk approached the podium, “It is Fluffy, isn’t it Mr. Danger?” and nodded, as if to say, “It always is.”  

Dirk stepped forward to applause and disbelief from the crowd.  He could hear murmurs along the lines of “ooooooh look it’s sooooo fluffy,” and from somewhere in the back he heard the phrase “must be cheating.”  He couldn’t help but feel a tinge of pride.  

As he accepted his first place blue ribbon, the judge went on to the rest of the crowd, in his ridiculous drawl, “And it is with great honor, great honor I say, that I announce that Mr. Danger and Fluffy will be representing us at the State’s Fluffiest Dog Competition in one month’s time, I say four weeks from today.  With a dog like that one there, I see no reason why our fine city should not have the fluffiest dog in the entire state — the state, I say!”  

Dirk had been unaware of any State’s Fluffiest Dog Competition, but he was okay with going.  Fluffy seemed to be enjoying himself at any rate; Dirk couldn’t tell but he thought he could detect a newfound pride in the dog’s demeanor, and perhaps even a smile across the pooch’s face, though it was hidden behind a fair amount of fluff.  He decided to spend the CASH PRIZES, which it turned out were only $25, on a new fluffing brush to prepare for the next round.  

 —

The next few weeks passed by in a flash.  Business continued as usual during the weeks, but on the weekends Dirk paid extra attention to Fluffy, brushing him almost incessantly until his next competition.  And it came as no surprise to him that Fluffy won the competition in April, besting Hollys and Mollys and Jollys at the state level before advancing on to the United States Regional Fluffy Dog Competition and besting Hollys and Mollys and Jollys there.  Three weeks later he advanced to the United States National Fluffy Dog Competition, and won that on network television (broadcast at three in the morning, but re-broadcast at two AM the next night) with flying colors.  And then it was the World Northwest Quadrisphere Fluffy Dog Competition, and Fluffy won that too.  By September, Dirk’s weekends were solely devoted to Fluffy, who had become an increasing proportion, albeit still a small one, of his income. (The WNQFDC had a cash prize of a thousand dollars.)  He was preparing to enter the World’s Fluffiest Dog Competition in Paris. 

Dirk felt an incalculable pride in Fluffy.  The luck of finding him — officially the fluffiest dog in the northwestern quadrisphere! — plus the time invested in brushing him and traveling had built a sort of commitment – by – investment to the project.  And at this point, Fluffy had yet to see any real competition.  If Fluffy wasn’t the fluffiest dog in the entire world, then Dirk was prepared to see a dog that was actually made entirely of Egyptian cotton.  

When it finally came time, he stepped out of the plane in Paris with Fluffy in an extra soft cage, which Dirk had designed specially so as not to remove excess fluffiness from Fluffy’s coat during the long flight.  They had arrived an entire week early to ensure that Fluffy wouldn’t react poorly to the new atmosphere.  Frizziness would get points deducted from Fluffy.  The ten thousand Euro in prize money was good, but Dirk wasn’t about to let Fluffy or himself down by losing the competition, regardless of the prize.  He was playing for pride, now. 

Dirk continued to work as normal in Paris; after all, he had a case there.  But when the weekend rolled around, he was all business.  Fluffy business.  

The competition was held under the Eiffel Tower.  Not a tiny replica Eiffel Tower, or even a pretty big one, like in Vegas.  The real deal.  They only had an hour to get it over with since it was, let’s face it, a fluffy dog competition and the Eiffel Tower was a pretty important place.  But still, it was held under the most recognizable iron structure ever built.  And Fluffy seemed thrilled to be there.

As they walked underneath the arches, Dirk couldn’t help but remark on how the competition was stiffer than before.  Dirk expected there to be only 4 contestants, one from each of the World Quadrisphere Competitions, but local tie-ins and back-door deals brought the competition to over 50 dogs, most of them European. Still, Fluffy was clearly the fluffiest dog in the place.  His conversations, in whatever other languages he could understand, were all exactly as they had been before.  Some woman, now usually named “Fifi” instead of “Holly,” would invariably tell him that her dog was named “Fluffi” and that his dog was “extremement Fluffi aussi.”  

Dirk was getting a little bit nervous, and he didn’t like it.  He didn’t usually get nervous, and this seemed like a particularly ridiculous time for that to happen.  This was a competition to see whose dog was fluffier, not a fight to the death.  Only a few thousand dollars were on the line.  Still, Fluffy looked so confident, and Dirk had been feeding on that confidence.  He didn’t really know what would happen if that confidence disappeared or what would happen to Fluffy if he didn’t get the award.  That was unlikely, he told himself, Fluffy was by far the fluffiest dog here.  And if he was the fluffiest dog here, then he was certainly the fluffiest dog in the world.  Dirk Danger took a deep breath and reminded himself that he had the World’s Fluffiest Dog.  

As the judges began making their way around the base of the tower, Dirk’s nervousness eased.  The judges were moving quickly, yet taking painstaking care to judge each dog based on the criteria of fluffiness — volume, rebound, density, and fineness. Dirk watched calmly as dogs were checked three times each by three separate judges, who worked efficiently yet thoroughly.  They were rapidly approaching Fluffy.  

When the first judge arrived, Dirk put on his best smile.  And Fluffy did, if you could believe it, the same thing.  The judge gave Fluffy one look and called over the nearest of the other two judges — a huge breach in protocol, as the judges were required to give their marks completely independently.  Dirk smiled confidently as they began speaking rapidly in a language he didn’t understand.  He was used to this.  “This is the fluffiest dog in the world!” they were saying.

The first two judges motioned the third judge over.  He held up his hands in protest, then continued to examine his current subject.  The first two judges put on looks of exasperation.  Dirk knew they were thinking this contest was over.  Fluffy would win in a landslide.  

Finally, the third judge made his way over.  The three judges convened by Fluffy, casting glances in his direction and speaking rapidly and heatedly.  Dirk couldn’t help but notice how excited they seemed.  

Finally, the third judge addressed Dirk.

“Sir,” he began in a voice with a thick Eastern European accent.  “I am sorry to inform you that your dog?  He is just not that fluffy.”

The first two judges nodded and continued on their way.  Dirk put on a big smile, gave Fluffy a thumbs up, and walked him out of the competition.  Fluffy would never know; as far as he knew he was the Fluffiest Dog in the World.  But Dirk privately decided to change the dog’s name as soon as possible, and definitely give him a haircut.  

The End

HAHAHA I made you read that long story and there was no punchline! Joke’s on you!  As promised, here’s a link to the first rendition I could find of the Fluffy Dog Joke.  

Resolution Makes the World Go Round

Hey team!  Week two, and I’m still at it, ready to say more dumb things on the internet.  I’ll go ahead and apologize for this post — it’s going to be about a particularly boring topic: me.  I sort of started out this idea with the goal of not really writing a lot about myself, but then I realized that I’m pretty self-absorbed, and there really wasn’t anything I could do to stop myself.  Get prepared for a lot of “I” and “me” in this one.  EVERYONE LOOK AT ME I’M SO COOL.

Anyway, in last week’s post I mentioned that the whole reason I’m writing this blog (besides obviously to just talk about myself to no one in particular — hey, someone’s gotta spread the good word) was because I had made a New Year’s resolution to write something, anything, at least once a week.  But what I didn’t mention (or maybe I did? I don’t really know — I went back to my first post to check but man was that stuff boring) is that this isn’t my only resolution, nor is this the first year that I’ve had any.  In fact, over the past few years I’ve probably made upwards of 50 resolutions, with varying degrees of success.

One of the things that’s been driving me absolutely crazy over the last few weeks is the number of people or things that have come into my life telling me that, for one reason or another, New Year’s resolutions don’t work, or that they’re stupid, or that I’m stupid, and while other people can successfully resolve to change themselves in the new year, it is me, personally, who will fail.

I asked my officemate if she had any resolutions (we’ll get to why I asked in a minute), and she told me that resolutions are just “setting yourself up for failure.”  I asked her why and her response was basically “it’s ridiculous that you’d just set a date and then decide to start doing something on that date. You’re just going to slide back into old habits, and as soon as you fail, you’ve lost all motivation.”  I certainly see her point — it’s probably not that effective to sit down at work in late November after your 9th beer on a Tuesday afternoon and think “Man, I resolve to quit drinking.  In a month!” and then crack open your tenth beer.

But at the same time, nobody I’ve known has ever looked up one day and said “oh man I had no idea I needed to quit smoking but now that I do, no more cigs!”  Admittedly, the only habitual smoker I’ve known was my mom, but she had known she should quit since long before I was born, and she tried to quit frequently.  Her strategy was never “I’m just… quitting. Right now.”  When you quit, plans need to be laid; if you’re going to quit you probably need to know at least a few days in advance so you can nail down your strategy: cold turkey, patch, nicorette, decreasing volume, locked in a room for 3 weeks with only food and water and no sympathetic human contact.  You may need supplies (for instance, nicotine patches, or perhaps 3 weeks of food and water and a down payment on an apartment that locks from the outside).  There’s no difference between saying “I’m going to start tomorrow” and “I’m going to start January 1” (especially if it’s New Year’s Eve), it’s just a reasonable date to choose.

Quitting smoking or not, at the end of the day, isn’t there something to be said for looking at your life, deciding how you could make it better, and then picking a date to do it?  It’s not like it has to be January 1, it’s just that that’s a super convenient time to start — the whole point of the new year is that it’s new, and it hasn’t yet been tainted with your furry porn addiction.  In November 2013, it’s already obvious that 2013 can’t be the first year you didn’t look at furry porn (sidenote, how does that even work? Isn’t the whole point of furries that they’re in costumes? Maybe furry porn is just… regular furry pictures? And people are into that?), it can only be the year you stopped looking at furry porn, and that’s not nearly as exciting.  2014 is a clean slate — you can porn up them furries all the way through 2013-12-31 23:59:59 and still have a fresh start.

This post is now rated X

Also, apparently there are religious origins? (To New Years resolutions, not furry porn. That I know of.)

Now, as to the fact that people will slide back into old habits, I would posit that people can change.  I know for a fact they can, because my mother — the same one who attempted to quit smoking — hasn’t had a cigarette in 15 years.  Granted, she’s a pack-a-day cigar smoker now, but that’s just because cigars pair so well with her bottle-a-day scotch habit.  That said, there’s obviously some truth to the fact that people are going to backslide; various articles I’ve found have suggested a failure rate of anywhere from 54% through 6 months to 12% to 8%, which is obviously quite high.  And, to be honest, a 10% success rate probably seems about right — of the 50+ resolutions I’ve made, I’ve probably followed through on somewhere between 5 and 10 of them for a full year or more, and my mom probably tried to quit smoking 10 times before she finally kicked the habit.

OK, so admittedly a 90% failure rate is pretty high, and I guess it could be construed as setting yourself up for failure.  But at the same time, it’s a 10% success rate.  I would argue a 10% success rate is significantly higher than the 0% success rate of not resolving to make any change.  It’s a pretty touchy-feely argument, and so naturally I hate having to make it, but having a period of self-examination and identifying personal weakness is a valuable thing to do, even if your resolutions fail.  Wanting read a book every month is the first step toward reading more, and whether you actually read or not  you’re in a better place if you recognize you should.

Plus, there are ways to raise the success rate — many of which were mentioned in the articles I linked earlier.  Granted, I don’t agree with all of them, but there are certainly a number of commitment devices that can be employed to hold you to your resolutions.  (I specifically bring up the concept of commitment devices here just so I can bash the commitment device episode of the Freakonomics podcast, which failed to give any meaningful advice or draw any meaningful conclusion about what makes a good commitment device.)  Again, I have a lot of experience resolving — and a lot of experience failing — and I’ve gleaned a few tips from the resolutions I keep vs. the ones I don’t, some of which fly in the face of apparent conventional wisdom.

“Commitment devices, am I right?” – Stephen Dubner

Write Things Down

The first and most obvious one is to write the resolutions down.  Over the last two years, I’ve started writing mine down, as much to track my failure as to track my success (great tautology, me).  Really, though, it’s an insight into what I wanted to change about my life at any given time. Take, for example, my resolutions from 2012 — I was in my early-mid-twenties… or my late-early-twenties… or approaching my mid-mid-twenties… I’d turn 25 that year, which should provide some context (a mild quarter-life crisis, plus empirical confirmation of the extended adolescence epidemic) for the utter garbage I resolved to do that year:

  • “Work out 5x per week”
  • “Gain full range of motion in knee” — still haven’t gotten that back.
  • “F B’s, M M” — I don’t think I know what that means.  Let’s hope I succeeded
  • “Work harder, not smarter” — I … guess this seemed like a good idea at the time?
  • “Clone a dinosaur.  VELOCIRAPTOR!?” — This was more of a stretch goal; I would have settled for a brachiosaur or your run-of-the-mill parasaurolophus.
Not good enough. Take it back.

No, in all seriousness, I didn’t write anything down in 2012, and do you know what my success rate was that year? Neither do I! I didn’t write anything down. How are you not getting this?  The point of writing things down is not only to track progress, but to remember what it was you wanted to do in the first place.  I can say on January first that I’m going to eat scrambled eggs every day for breakfast because I need more cholesterol (or less cholesterol? What’s the official view on eggs these days?), but if I don’t remember why I started eating eggs for breakfast and I eat cereal one day in June, there goes my resolution.  The best solution here is to write them down in a place that’s highly visible — a post-it note on your desk, or the wallpaper of your computer.  Resolve to do it!

Publish Your Goals

This is another commonly-accepted commitment device. The idea is basically that if you tell people about your resolutions, you’re more likely to follow through on them, in part because you know that people will razz if you don’t.  Plus, this puts people into it with you — if you tell everyone you’re going to quit smoking, you’ve declared to the world that you don’t want to be a smoker, that smoking is essentially holding you hostage.  Next time your coworkers at  the Gulp-n-Blo see you outside the building next to the dumpsters on your smoke break, they’ll either shame you or provide encouragement — either one is more likely to get you to keep your commitment.

The other thing that tends to get overlooked here is a phenomenon I first encountered in Eric Greitens’s (Go Duke!) The Heart and the Fist: you’re much  more likely to let yourself down than to let others down. He talks about the fact that, in training to become a Navy SEAL, he felt like the enlisted men had it harder than he did — not because they had more responsibility, or their training was harder, or they weren’t getting the same meals as the officers were, but because they were worried about making it through training.  As an officer, Greitens, on the other hand, was worried about his men making it through training.  Rather than asking, “Why am I doing this?” or, “How can I make this end,” he was asking, “What can I do to get my men through this?” and, “Who needs the most encouragement right now?”  The hardest part of Hell Week for him was a single hour when he was alone and couldn’t fall asleep, specifically because it was the only time that he was worried about himself rather than others.  If you publish your goals and let everyone know what they are, you know you’ll be letting everyone who knows about them down rather than just yourself.  I think at its core it comes down to this: I already know I’m a useless schlub who’s good for nothing, but other people don’t.  I want to preserve that ignorance for as long as possible, and if I have to lie to them by being better than I actually am to do it, I will.

This begs the question of how, exactly, to broadcast your resolutions. Through years of experience, I’ve found that the best way to do this is not, in fact, to walk up to friends, acquaintances, or strangers on the street and declare, “This year I resolve to nail a hottie!”  For the most part, people don’t want to hear you talk about your resolutions — they didn’t ask, and they don’t care.  (Counterpoint: you’re still reading this.)  My back door into telling people about my resolutions is to ask them if they have any (hence asking my officemate).  Then, once they’ve told you that resolutions are for suckers and you’re setting yourself up for failure, at least you’re on the subject, so broadcast away!

However, since I can’t ask the readers, here are my 2013 (including some indication of success) and 2014 resolutions.  Mock me at will.

2013

  • Work out 5 Days / Week (Avg. 4.3)
  • 10% body fat by June (HAHAHAHAHAHA)
  • 1/2 marathon (SO CLOSE, but I was… “injured?”)
  • Play Work Sports (I played frisbee once)
  • Increase Flexibility (I went to a couple yoga classes)
  • Get a hobby (I started infusing my own beverages!)
  • Text 1 long distance friend per day (that lasted a week)
  • Take Dance lessons (Nope.)
  • Join / Form a Band
  • Survive (Hooray!)

2014

  • Work out 5 days / week
  • 10% body fat by EOY
  • Olympic Triathlon
  • Increase flexibility
  • 56 hours of sleep / week
  • Wake up earlier (target 630)
  • Go on 1 date / week
  • Text / Communicate w/ 1 long-distance friend per week
  • Take Dance lessons
  • Write / Blog (‘sup everyone) on a weekly basis
  • Join / Form a band
  • 2+ hours of music practice / week
  • 2 Coursera courses
  • Survive

If at First You Don’t Succeed

Notice anything about last year’s resolutions vs. this year’s?  They’re eerily similar.  Here’s another place where writing things down helps — at the end of 2013 I could look at my list and say “well, I didn’t do a lot of this stuff, but I still want to,” and I get to try again.  That may seem like failure, but remember that it took my mom 10 tries to quit smoking, but she finally did it.  Why? Because she kept trying.  She didn’t let the failure of one resolution affect her decision to make the same resolution twice.  The other thing is that I get to evaluate my goals from the previous year — do I really want to run a half marathon? Probably not — I don’t know that my knees can take it, and I don’t really get that much from it.  Instead, maybe I’ll try to swim and bike more to stay in shape; I bet doing a triathlon would give me a reason to do those things.  I guarantee you I won’t hit a 100% success rate this year, but if I keep rolling over my resolutions, on average I’ll hit all of them in the next 10 years.

Quantify Your Goals

I think this one is pretty mainstream too, but it’s essential to quantify your goals.  The resolution “eat less cake” isn’t particularly useful — how much cake did you used to eat? Can you consume cake at roughly twice that rate until June and eat no more cake thereafter and still pass?  Are you eating smaller slices, but at the same frequency? Diminishing frequency, but eating entire cakes?  How many loopholes are there where you could eat objectively more cake, but still succeed?  The goal should be none.  Rather than “eat less cake,” maybe “eat one or fewer slices of cake per month,” or better yet, “eat fewer than 100 grams of cake per month.”  The point is, you should know whether you’ve succeeded or not without having to make a judgment call.

Go Big or Go Home

Here’s where I differ from the conventional wisdom about resolutions.  A lot of authorities suggest taking baby steps or picking only one resolution (the 12% article linked above suggests both).  Hogwash, I say!  It’s harder to make sweeping changes in your life than to make small ones, but you’re more likely to slide back on small ones.  If you usually drink 45 drinks a week, sure it’s easier to drink only 40 than it is to give up drinking altogether.  But at the same time, you’re more likely to be 40 drinks in and forget that you made the resolution (this might be a bad example, because by nature of being 40 drinks into anything you have almost certainly forgotten all of your resolutions).  But the point, if you’ll stop interrupting me, is that smaller steps lead to fuzzier lines.  Plus, if you shoot for the moon and miss, at least you end up in the stars — would you rather come close to working out 5x per week and miss pretty big, and end up at 2.5, or try to work out once per week, just barely miss, and end up at .9 per week?

This also applies to the number — the article referenced above suggests picking exactly one resolution, which will keep it at the front of your mind and be easier to track.  Bollocks! If you have a 10% success rate and you want to make sure you succeed with something, you’re going to maximize your chances of success by having many resolutions.  In my experience, resolutions aren’t failed in bulk, they’re failed individually (Fore example, yesterday I forgot to text a friend, but I did get a workout in — we’ll get to this in a minute).  If you have 10 resolutions and a 90% failure rate, congratulations, one of your resolutions was successful! That’s better than the people who had one resolution and a 90% success rate.

Keep it Realistic

Obviously, you’ll never succeed if you pick something that’s wildly impossible — while I said “go big or go home” before, that has its limitations.  You’re never going to clone a dinosaur, don’t be ridiculous.  Unless your job actually is to clone a dinosaur, in which case WHY ARE YOU READING THIS EVERY SECOND YOU WASTE READING THIS IS A SECOND I DON’T GET TO RIDE A DINOSAUR.

Coming to a store near you in 2015

Failure is Nothing

It’s more than just not choosing absurd goals — it’s about realizing limitations toward reaching them, and keeping those in mind when defining metrics for success.  For instance, I have a two-week vacation planned for May.  Odds are, I’m not going to be able to go on a date during those two weeks, and I have to acknowledge that up front or I’m setting myself up for failure.  To that end, maybe my future girlfriend will go out of town at some point, or maybe she’ll live somewhere else.  If that’s the case, I can create a looser definition for “date” and stay true to the goal; maybe a 30 minute phone call counts.  Plus, I’m mentally prepared to miss a few weeks; if I hit about 40 dates, I’ll feel pretty good — that’s 40 dates I wouldn’t have gone on otherwise.  One way to deal with this is to think about it as a grading system; for recurring goals, how often do you meet them?  Maybe if you have a weekly goal that you hit 37 times, that’s 37 out of 52, which is 71% — you passed!  Granted, you got a C, but you still passed! Some goals may be graded on a curve — maybe 50% is a success, but there should be some non-binary passing threshold — even if 50% doesn’t pass, it’s better than 49%, and way better than 0%.

Another important aspect that I alluded to previously is treating each resolution separately.  If I resolve to limit my cake intake to one cake per day and also to say hi to one stranger per week, just because I eat two cakes on my birthday doesn’t mean I shouldn’t say hi to a stranger ever again — they’re completely unrelated, and failure of one should be treated as exactly that: one failure out of many successes.  Treating all of the resolutions as a group is basically exactly what happened to the housing market in 2008, only in reverse — those were highly correlated risks being modeled as uncorrelated, while this is uncorrelated outcomes being modeled as highly correlated.  Treating each resolution separately also reinforces the strategy of choosing multiple resolutions; of course it’d be a mistake to do so if I thought failure of one meant I should give up on all of them, but if I’m smart about it I won’t let the fact that I only got 55 hours of sleep allow me to write off a bunch of workouts.

This goes even beyond letting failure of reaching one goal stop you from reaching others; just because you missed a day, or a week, or a year doesn’t mean you should give up on the goal for the rest of the year.  Think about the idea of trying again year after year — this is basically that, writ really, really small.  The idea is that you want to make a habit out of your new goal.  If you want to work out 5 times a week, you have to engage the goal at its core: why do I want to work out 5 times a week? What does that get me? Typically, the resolutions are there because they reflect a path to a more abstract goal.  In this case, I want to work out 5 times per week because I want to be held accountable for my well-being — what I really want to do is get in the habit of taking care of myself and of working hard.  If I only work out 4 times one week, the worst thing I can do is say “well, that’s it — I guess I’m not doing this anymore!” and then each Cheetos for the rest of the year.  Instead, I should be working toward a place where failing to work out five times is an anomaly; I should be getting into the habit of succeeding at my resolution, and just like I don’t have a habit of drinking 12 glasses of scotch in a night, but occasionally I do, I should get in the habit of working out 5 times per week, but occasionally I won’t.  The point is that as long as your failures are anomalous, you’ve still basically succeeded in changing something about your life.

Track Your Progress

Once you’ve defined metrics for success, it’s important to track success.  It’s easy to give up on a goal that you think you’ve never hit — “I never work out 5 times per week, why even bother?”  It’s a lot harder to give up if you consistently come close to meeting it, or meet it frequently and don’t record it; you’re much less likely to give up on working out 5 times per week if you know you’ve worked out 4 times per week the last 3 weeks.  Plus, if you record successes for the entire month of January, then screw up in February, in March you can look back at January and know that you’re able to do it.

One other thing that I typically find helpful is to avoid resolutions to do a particular thing at some point that year, e.g., “This year I will go to Spain.”  (unless, of course, you already have a trip to Spain planned. Then you’re probably good).  The reason is that they’re hard to quantify where you are on that goal at any point — they’re binary.  I either have gone to Spain, or I have not; there’s no way to be like “well, I guess I have a B in going to Spain b/c I’ve hit that goal about 8/10 weeks so far in the year.”  Furthermore, you can put these off indefinitely; it’s hard to put a weekly goal off past Saturday before risking failure, but a year-long goal can be put off well into November before you start running into obvious, trackable trouble.  Recurring goals force you to engage with them; 1-off goals allow you to become complacent to their not-doneness.  The astute reader has noticed that “Join a band,” “Run an olympic triathlon,” and “Take dance lessons” all fit that bill, and they’re all on my list.  I’m aware of this, and this is a problem.  A better solution is to come up with intermediary goals (daily, weekly, monthly, for example) that can be evaluated on an ongoing basis — these are much easier to track, much harder to put off, and much easier to deal with missing.

Know When to Give Up

Finally, remember the point of the resolution — it’s to make yourself a better person.  If you look at a goal you’re not making, or even a goal you consistently achieve, and think it makes your life worse, there’s no reason not to give up on it.  So you thought giving up drinking at work was a great idea!  Then you realized you hate your job and it’s the only thing that allows you to function; or maybe you work in a creative department and everyone’s getting sloshed but you now.  Maybe you were that drunk dancing bear from King Joffrey’s wedding and now that you’re not drunk you can’t dance.  Knowing when to call it quits on certain goals can allow you to focus on the ones that still matter — you should be constantly evaluating your resolutions and whether they’re making you the person you want to be or holding you back in some way; if they’re holding you back, get rid of them.

Conclusion

That’s right, there’s a conclusion header.  Sucks to your cliché!

New Years is a great time to start fresh and try to make yourself a better person, but it’s not the only time.  If you identify some change you want to make in your life, it helps if you can come up with a solid plan of attack, quantifying the goal, and not letting temporary setbacks get in the way of ultimate success.   Get other people involved; they’re rooting for you, so don’t let them down.  Record your progress toward it.  Mentally contextualize the goal — remember why you created it in the first place, and stay true to that context; if that context changes, don’t be afraid to bail.

OK, at this point, I count 247 instances of “I,” “me,” or “my,” so I think I’ve done the job I set out to do.  Thanks for reading, and remember — statistically, you were probably switched with some other baby at the hospital and you’re not related by blood to the people you’ve called your parents your entire life.

– C