Things People Assume I Like But I Really Don't Pt. 4

Welcome to the Hodge Podge Edition of Things People Assume I Like But I Really Don't. It's a hodge podge because I really didn't have enough material to make full blogs out of each of these things, so I decided to mesh them together and make one blog. So here we go!

"I'm going to recall something from my childhood in a very intense way with a lot of body movement.

Isn't that funny?"

Yeah. I really don't like Dane Cook. He is second on the list of comedians who I just cannot stand to listen to, and he's only second because Jeff Dunham exists. Most people can understand my hatred of Jeff Dunham, or Larry the Cable Guy, or any of those other Blue Collar rednecks who keep their comedy low brow and rely on fart jokes for punchlines. However, few people can understand my dislike for Dane Cook, but I think it's easy enough to understand - his comedy is boring...plain and simple. If you really sit down and listen to his set there is absolutely no substance to it at all. There are a lot of obscenities, a lot of jocularity, and a lot of Dane Cook describing things or life situations in a very intense way. A prime example of this is his bit about the Price Is Right where he describes in intense detail watching the Price Is Right.

When I first heard this bit I thought it was amusing. Like Dane, that was a show I watched when I was home sick from school, and yes, all of those games were just the way he described him. After the bit, however, I thought "Well was that really funny? I mean, was there comedic value to this bit?" Because for me it was just intense recollections, and for me that just isn't funny. Then again I like some pretty weird comedy, so who knows? All I know is that Dane Cook is a comedian I don't like, and people are surprised by that.

I saw an elephant do this once.

I love the creative process. I write songs and draw pictures all the time. I have a tremendous amount of respect for the artist and the creative process. That is why many many many people are shocked when they find out that I don't like Jackson Pollock. "He painted energy, man. How can you not love that?" That's something someone once asked me after I told them I didn't care for Mr. Pollock's work. My response was somewhat pointed, "I saw an elephant do a painting like that once."

Art, like so many things, comes down to personal taste. Pollock may have had some sort of plan, or he may have really been into the passion of the moment artistically (which I can respect), but as viewers of art we are not privy to that kind of thing. All we have is the work in front of us and our own emotions to go off of. Many people connect with Pollock on some level. I don't. To me it just looks like the random splatters of an elephant painting. So for me, I echo the sentiments of Georgia O'Keeffe when she was asked in an interview what she thought of Jackson Pollock. "They can have him," she said. I for one agree.

Meh.

Okay, let me begin by saying I DON'T HATE BOOBS! I like them alright. I'm just kind of tired of them. Let me relate something to you that best illustrates me sentiments.

When I was a kid it was a rare treat to have shrimp for dinner. I lived in Carthage, and the grocery stores didn't have fresh shrimp. For that you had to drive to Joplin and go to Dillon's. We hardly ever went to Joplin for groceries, and even if we did it usually wasn't for shrimp. Shrimp was pretty expensive too, so we only got to have boiled shrimp and cocktail sauce once a year, in the summer, and that was it! So, as such, shrimp was one of my favorite things to eat for a long time. As I got older, though, my attitude toward shrimp began to change. Stores in Carthage began carrying shrimp. The production of domestic shrimp made them more abundant and cheaper to buy. Soon, shrimp began showing up in all manner of foods, in all manner of restaurants. My rare treat was establishing itself on the table of mediocrity. These days you can get shrimp anywhere. Hell, I could go to Long John Silvers and buy some right now. It's not that I hate shrimp now. It still taste good to me. It's just that when I go out to eat or I have dinner, I'd rather cook something else. My attitude toward boobs is pretty much the same.

When I was a young teenager, bursting with hormones, a boob was something I only got to see once in a great while: at a friend's house in one of his dad's dirty magazines, on a video my sister's forgot to take back to the video store, in my imagination as I thumbed through the pages of Victoria Secret. I had an old beta copy of the movie Colors with Sean Penn and Robert Duvall. There was one boob scene in it that I rewound until the tape eventually broke. It was hard to see an actual boob, but when you did manage to catch a glimpse of one it was well worth the reward. I have found as I get older, as television becomes more lax about the kind of content it allows, as the internet makes boobs more readily available to my attention, that they have become kind of boring to me.

I am reminded again of another time in my life that echoes this sentiment. My friend had his bachelor party at a local strip club (the only such party I've ever been to with strippers). I was on my third lap dance. A busty woman had my face buried a mile into her chest. I could feel the vibrations of her boobs on the side of my head. It was neat, but I couldn't help but think to myself, "You know, if this is the extent of the activity this evening I'm going to get bored really fast." And I was right. I can't recall leaving that place and thinking, "You know, I really think the boobs were my favorite part of the evening." For me that's boobs. They look nice. They feel nice. But ultimately, there are so many other things I find interesting about ladies that I could really take them or leave them.

So to boobs, I say "Meh."

Things People Assume I Like But I Really Don't Pt. 3

That's right. I don't like Kevin Smith. I'm not saying I virally hate Kevin Smith like I virally hate Dave Matthews Band...I just don't like him...and it isn't for lack of trying on my part. At one time I owned all the movies. I read some of the comics he wrote for. I even went and saw Kevin Smith live when he came to Springfield. And some of it I even liked. I laughed when Jay would make some grotesque sexual innuendo. I found his comic book writing style interesting. I even thought he spun a good yarn when I saw him live. But as much as I laughed I always came away from each Kevin Smith experience questioning myself. "Is this really that good?" I would wonder. "Is Dogma really as clever as I think it is?" I'd ask myself again. "Is Kevin Smith a genius?" I never gave these questions too much thought. I just went about my life thinking that Kevin Smith must be a genius or else everyone would hate him. Then two things would happen and all that would change.

One Sunday at Dungeons and Dragons, a conversation was hatched. We were discussing the recently released Clerks II (which I didn't care for). Two of my friends, who hated Kevin Smith anyway, were ragging about the film, saying it was the same Kevin Smith bullshit all his movies hang their hat on - dick jokes, fart jokes, and Jay and Silent Bob. Another friend, who was a Smith fanatic, loved the film and said the dick jokes, fart jokes, and Jay and Silent Bob were exactly the reasons why it and Smith were great. I listened to the argument unfold and at the end I had to side with my friends who hated Kevin Smith because I believe they were dead on with the Kevin Smith Movie Formula, that ultimately they rely on dick jokes, fart jokes, and Jay and Silent Bob.

Don't get me wrong. I like a good dick joke, and I love a good fart joke, but I don't necessarily think they make for strong comedy. Groucho Marx gave an interview on the Dick Cavett Show in 1971 and in it he talks about the use of vulgarity in Hollywood. Basically, Groucho says that anyone can go on stage and say something dirty and get a laugh, and that it takes a true comedian to get a laugh with a clean joke. Here's the interview:

I actually agree with this. I think there are a lot of great comedians who use vulgarity in their acts, but at the end of the day I don't think they're as strong from a comedic standpoint as Bill Cosby, or Steve Martin, or Red Skelton, or Justin Wilson, or Jack Benny (the list goes on). For me, Kevin Smith's use of vulgarity is good for a laugh, but it's a cheap laugh, and I can't call him a genius for that. As for Jay and Silent Bob...I see them as a crutch. Kevin Smith has said on many occasions that he would like to start making films without this duo, and in fact tried once with Jersey Girl which was a flop. So how did Smith follow-up his flop? Another movie with Jay and Silent Bob is how. I'm not against using gimmicks to make money. If you have a product that makes money and you want to exploit that product to make money then go for it! I would probably do the same if I had a gimmick that people were into. However, again, I can't call doing that genius because to me it goes back to that "too easy thing." It's too easy for Smith to throw Jay and Silent Bob into a film and give them a huge array of dick jokes and fart jokes. He knows their presence is going to bring people out to the theater and sell tickets. This is not genius...it's just savvy business sense.

So is Kevin Smith a genius? Is he one of the best directors in Hollywood? Well, I don't think so, but if you talk to any Kevin Smith fanatic, and ask them to name off the best directors in Hollywood, Kevin Smith's name will almost always come up next to names like Spielberg, Scorsese, Coppola, Kubrick, and others, and they get so mad if you disagree with their assessment. Ultimately, what I think wins the argument is Smith's own assessment of himself. He has admitted time and time again that he is just making movies about dick and fart jokes and that being compared with the best directors in Hollywood is probably a hasty judgment. Anyway, that about does it for my latest installment of Things People Assume I Like But I Really Don't. Now bring on the hate!

Things People Assume I Like But I Really Don't Pt. 2

So, I have a B.A. in English. In college I primarily studied poetry with 20th Century American poetry probably being my main emphasis. When people find out about my educational background, this thing happens - suddenly they want to talk to me about books and writers. I don't know why this is. Maybe it's because they feel intimidated by someone who has read a lot and is generally awesome in every way (I had to make that last sentence as condescending as possible). Maybe they want to prove to me that they are readers too and want me to tell them what they read is good like I'm some kind of judge in Reading Court (Danielle Steel? I sentence you to thirty years of tickle rape in Reading Prison). After they tell me about what they read, a round of assumptions begins where they automatically assume I like certain writers, and it's always the same ones, a list of four people who are considered some of The Giants of Literature (that should echo when you read it).

What's a Giant of Literature? Well, I'll start off by saying the study of literature is kind of silly. It takes something that is totally subjective and tries to make it objective. Literary critics love to divine things from writings that they can't possibly know with any degree of certainty, and above all, they love to put writers on pedestals. With a few exceptions (Bob Dylan...The Beatles...Robert Johnson) pedestals make me nervous, but literary critics love them. This writer is considered the greatest or the epitome of this style. When I say Harlem Renaissance then people think Langston Hughes. Italian literature = Dante. Literature is riddled with pedestals and writers who are on them. These are the Giants of Literature, and people assume I like them because I've studied literature. Indeed, some I do like, but some I don't. The following four are ones I don't like all that much or at all.

Is this the end of Zombie Shakespeare?

Shakespeare is THE GREAT BARD to many. His name transcends the field of literary study and is known in circles outside academia. Everyone has read Shakespeare at one point in their life. This makes Shakespeare one of the most revered writers in all of literature. The funny thing is, Shakespeare wasn't critically acclaimed during his lifetime. Sure, he received some praise as a playwright during his lifetime, but the critical reverence came much later. During the end of the 1700's some scholars praised Shakespeare's works and educators in England scrambled to add Shakespeare to required required reading. With the 1800's came Romanticism, and Shakespeare's stock soared because so many of the great Romantic poets were versed in his works. As time went on, Shakespeare's name and legend grew and now you would be hard pressed to find anyone in the world who doesn't know the name William Shakespeare. Of all the literary pedestals that exist, Shakespeare's is by far the tallest.

For me, Shakespeare is not THE GREAT BARD. He is Wilie the Shake or Bill. For an English major to say they don't like Shakespeare is a trespass that threatens excommunication in some circles. The fact is that I used to HATE Willie the Shake. You could say the name Shakespeare and I would spit. Someone once told me they thought there were no original stories to tell because Shakespeare had written them already. The cited Hamlet as their evidence and said, "That play has every element of storytelling in it." Fuck that, I say! If Joseph Campbell taught us anything it's that the kinds of characters and stories Shakespeare told were already established and dominate in the storytelling of cultures long before Shakespeare even took up the quill. We can reduce most stories into basic archetypal elements and trace those elements back to folklore, to epics, and to myths that existed long before Shakespeare did. Just because Shakespeare wrote Hamlet doesn't mean he invented literature. It just means he wrote a great play. I agree with the idea that know original stories exist anymore, but I don't think we can attribute that to any one writer. For the most part when people hear a story or see a movie they expect certain things to happen. When we see a damsel in distress tied to railroad tracks we expect to see the hero swoop to save her. It's a cliche', but when it comes down to it I believe all stories are just a variation of cliche's. And in addition, my views on Shakespeare have changed somewhat. I like him more than I used to. He was a great writer who did a lot of deliberate things in his work, but I still want to knock him off his pedestal.

I'm the guy that wrote that one poem from Dead Poet's Society

Walt Whitman occupies the pedestal "Epitome of American Poetry," and any time I bring up my love for American poetry, this is the guy people ask me about. I'm just not a fan at all. I have petty problems with Whitman - his poems are too long for my taste, it feels like he's just making a grocery list with the heading "America Is Cool Because," and a lot of other stupid reasons - but I have one main problem with his work. I don't think it was distinctly American. For one thing, America wasn't very old when Whitman started writing his stuff. Much of the way we approached a lot of different things including literature were imitations of what was going on elsewhere. Henry James and Herman Melville wrote fiction in the style that was dominate in England at the time. Whitman was no exception to this kind of emulation. His style is a massive echo of the Romantics. For me, American Literature didn't really become distinctly American until after The Adventures of Huckleberry Finn and the beginning of Modernism. The language became less heightened and the subject matter become more introspective and interest...just my opinion though. At any rate...I think Whitman needs knocked off his pedestal too.

I was a poet and nobody knowed it...tehehehehe.

My god I hate Emily Dickinson! And what's sad is I have no good reason for disliking her so much beyond a couple of really basic and superficial reasons. First, I think her stuff his fucking boring. I would rather find something interesting about wallpaper paste than have to read Dickinson's stuff. The other reason is (and I hope I don't ruin Dickinson for those of you who might like her stuff) that you can take the melody to "The Yellow Rose of Texas" and sing the lines of her poetry to it, and it syncs perfectly. Try it. Here's the first stanza from "I heard a fly buzz" -

I heard a fly buzz when I died;

The stillness round my form

Was like the stillness in the air

Between the heaves and storm.

Did I just blow your mind? It works with pretty much all her poems. I've tried it with dozens of them. Before I came to this realization I could read her stuff. I didn't like it, but I could read it. Now, I can't even read them because of "The Yellow Rose of Texas" thing. It forever ruined them for me.

Emo before it was cool...

I'm not going to discredit Poe for his writing. He was good at it. I just could never get into the mood or subject matter of his stories. I'm also not going to discredit Poe's contribution to literature by saying, "Well, he was more like the Stephen King of his time." I actually think Poe did some good things for literature. For instance, he really pioneered the short story. Before him fiction was relegated to novels. Poe came along and thought there needed to be something for someone who didn't have the attention span for novels. He conceptualized the short story and even wrote an essay defining what short story should be and how it should function. Poe is another writer I just don't like for no good reason. I just find his work uninteresting.

Things People Assume I Like But I Really Don't Pt. 1

Yep. I don't like Dave Matthew's Band, and most jam bands in general (this would include Phish, The Greatful Dead, and any incarnation of Bela Fleck), but really most of the dislike is pointed at Dave Matthew's Band (Many people are quick to point out that I was in a jam band - The Yooszh. They're right. I still don't like jam bands).

For me, my dislike of DMB boils down to two things:

1. Their sound. I'm a structuralist. I like songs to have a foundation. I don't mind some amount of variation so long as the foundation still remains. I like the music to adhere to some sort of structure, and the same goes for the lyrics and vocals. Every time anyone has ever played DMB for me to show me why they're so awesome it's always sounded like a mismatch of musical sounds. The drummer is doing his thing...the guitarists are doing their stuff...you got a guy honking some notes on his saxophone...and you got Dave sing some bibbity bobbity lyrics, and the entire sound just sounds like jazz fusion (which I also do not like).

2. The fans. There are a lot of things (as you will soon find out) that I don't like because of the other people who like them. DMB is definitely one. When you encounter a DMB fan DMB IS ALL THEY WANT TO TALK ABOUT AND LISTEN TO! Here's a typical conversation with a DMB fan:

DMB FAN: I see you're listening to All Along the Watch Tower.

ME: Yeah, I really like Bob Dylan.

DMB FAN: Ever heard Dave Matthews version of that song?

ME: Yes I have.

DMB FAN: Pretty awesome, huh?

ME: Uh, I actually prefer the Hendrix cover more.

DMB FAN: Wow really?

ME: Yeah.

DMB FAN: How about after we get done listening to this song we pop in some Dave Matthews and I'll show you some songs...might change your opinion.

ME: I'm kind of enjoying Dylan right now.

DMB FAN: Dylan's quite a lyricist.

ME: I think so.

DMB FAN: So is Dave. He had this one line "Everybody wake up, if you're living with your eyes closed." He's a real poet. Let me play you some stuff off Busted Stuff. That album really turned me onto Dave. You'll probably like it.

ME: I've actually heard it. Like I said, I'm kind of digging Dylan right now.

DMB FAN: How about when you're done you come over to my house. We can light up a J and throw in some DMB.

ME: No, I've got plans after this, but thanks for the offer.

DMB FAN: Wait, do you even like DMB?

ME: No, not really. I don't like the sound. I don't see what's great about them.

DMB FAN: (awkward silence...staring at me...rage filling in their eyes) How can you not like DMB when they're so good?

ME: I just don't.

DMB FAN: I'm sorry I bothered you. Have a good day.

That's a lot longer than I intended to write, but the I think I got the point across. The conversation ends with them either being insulted by the very notion that someone doesn't like this Jesus-like band they love or with them defending DMB thinking they're going to sway my opinion when in fact they never ever do...or will.