Waiting for more Fun!

Well, there it is. I’ve been reading a lot about folks who resent that people get unemployment checks and seem to be enjoying their “time off.” The newest term is funemployment. Funemployment? I mean, yes, I am doing things during my days that are not related to job searches. I mean how much time does it take to go through the employment ads in the paper, check the state website for job listings there, search Monster and CareerBuilder, and send out resumes? At most that is a half hour, other days it can be ten minutes. There aren’t many jobs out there that I am qualified for, and some of those jobs I have applied for and am over-qualified.

So on to the “fun” in unemployment. The state allows me to make up to a certain amount of money part time before that impacts my unemployment check, but they don’t allow me to work on self-employment. That’s against the rules. I also can’t work at anything that involves getting a 1099. The part time work has to be “traditional” employers, so I can’t get part time work writing for E-Lance or GURU, or try to drum up some “one time” work scenarios, like acting gigs or whatever, because that’s considered self-employment. No matter that I only make a couple hundred a month (max) on things like that.

So all the fun has to be extremely budget-friendly. But if you are working on less than half of your former rate, believe me, you are limited in your discretionary spending.

Vacation? That’s out. Day trips? Depends on how much gas it’s going to take. Dining out? Extremely limited.

So unemployment is not really funemployment. It’s a temporary state that you endure, and try to make the best of. If you envy or begrudge people without jobs, you should try walking a mile in their shoes. But be aware, the shoes have seen better days.

~~~~~

Don’t get me wrong here. I am making the best of my time on the dole. Life isn’t miserable, it’s actually pretty good, but a lot of that has to do with love, family and mental state, not cash in hand.

Evil Dead, The Musical

I have “It’s Time” floating around in my head. Unfortunately I am at the point in the show where I don’t know the lyrics to the ensemble numbers yet, so all I have is “it’s time for you, Ash, to die, It’s time for us, demons, to rise” over and over again. I don’t even know if those are the right words.

I guess I should start over again since this is the first entry on this subject. I auditioned for Evil Dead, the musical, and got cast as “Jake” which was really the only role I was truly interested in, although I would have accepted any part. The show is based on the Bruce Campbell movies of the same name and is a slashy bloody zombie musical comedy. Sounds like fun, right? And it will be and actually already is. I lie when I say this is the first post I wrote, but it’s the first public one. Once the show is done there may be a number of posts which suddenly become public, but for now, I will reserve some of that stuff for a private blog, for my eyes only. There has been some drama and I have pontificated and written and will continue to reflect on that.

This show is directed by David Mote, who gave me my first ever part in a show, When Pigs Fly, many years ago. I was cast as the lead in that show and there was also some drama there, as it was a gay musical review and everyone in the show was gay, but me, and we all played gay characters. I was very flamboyantly gay in the role, and that may have confused people about my 99% hetero orientation. (I refuse to believe that anyone doesn’t have some suppressed gayness about them, and when that percentage exceeds a certain amount then you are truly bi-sexual. Exceed another level and you are homosexual. It’s just my theory, but it’s supported almost everywhere.)

So, getting back to the Evil Dead, I am thrilled to be working with the near famous make-up artist Ben Ruth, who is also a fabulous artist. 

We are also lucky enough to have the amazing Kat Brannon doing tech, and we’ve already started experimenting with the 350 gallons of stage blood which will be used over the run of the show in late October.

We had our first read through on Tuesday night (8/24/10) and it went pretty well considering that two cast members couldn’t be there. Such is the way with community theater and non-paying roles. We have a strong cast of singers and comedic actors (me representing both groups, [Thank you very much, I’ll be in the building all night] my modesty overwhelms me from elaborating more on my greatness. lol) Wow, did I just type lol? That’s odd.

Anyway if you are unfamiliar with the show it is littered with blood, profanity, dead bodies, zombies, blood, great rock and roll numbers, blood and special effects. And I do mean littered. The first few rows are a designated splatter zone, so if you are really into being belted by theatrical blood and being immersed (ha ha) (isn’t ha ha better than lol? I think so.) in the show, that’s the place to be.

What is going to make this show even more fun is that my youngest daughter, Stephanie (luv ya Sweet Pea) is also in the show. She got cast as Shelly, the drunken slut. I am hoping playing the role is a stretch for her. (just kidding, I know it is) And my lovely wife Deb (I love you Sugar Bee!) is stage managing.

I am also looking forward to getting to know Adam Gastonguay, member of the Mad Mechanicals, and husband of my improv mate Andi. He’s awesome – quite funny, dry humor, as Bugs would say “droll, very droll” He’s playing Evil Eddy, the bit part demon.

I’ll post more on this as I see fit. You better believe that I am reliable. Don’t question that.

Can't we all just get along?

I guess I am jumping on the bandwagon and giving my unsolicited opinion on the so-called “ground zero mosque. What I am going to write here is going to piss off more than a few folks, and it doesn’t really parallel anything I’ve read, so I think it needs to be said.

This is about religious freedom. We aren’t the land of the free and the home of the brave Christians. We, as defined by our constitution, are a place where religious freedom is guaranteed. Read that last word again, guaranteed. The particular religion is not defined. You are not given religious freedom for the following religions only “Insert insipid list here” It’s all religions.

So here we are at the somewhat unique part of the post. Some people are upset at a ground zero mosque which is not located at ground zero at all. What is the definition? How many blocks from ground zero is still ground zero? Is religious freedom limited to certain parts of the United States or is it the entire United States? If they were building a shrine to Bin Laden at ground zero, there would be serious reason to be upset. It would never fly. (pardon the verbiage there) But we are talking about crucifying an entire religion because of a small percentage of nuts that are loose.

Do you remember David Koresh? Are you pissed off about Fred Phelps and the Westboro Baptist Church protesting gays at military funerals for veterans killed in our wars in Iraq and Afghanistan? How about most of the mutant para-military militia groups that are scattered about the United States, most of which are odd-branch Christians only. Groups like those  supported the Oklahoma City Bombing by Timothy McVeigh and Terry Nichols. (Also Christians)

What I’m saying is that if you are going to judge all Muslims by the actions of fringe groups like Al Queda, shouldn’t you hold other religions to that same standard? These same groups who are protesting this mosque should be protesting any Christian churches as well. The Sufi sect of the Muslim religion is as similar to the Qutbismic beliefs of Osama Bin Laden, as Quaker beliefs are to extremist Christian sub-sects.

So why all the controversy? Fire brands in the conservative movement (way right conservatism, which is generally avoided by most GOP’ers) are trying to lump all Muslims into one large death mongering group by quoting verses from the Koran (generally out of context) and saying “See, looky here. They have to kill us all. It’s in their holy book.” Well, get a grip folks. There are plenty of violent passages you can quote out of any ‘holy book.’ All the “wackos” of any religion can find justification for the actions somewhere amidst their teachings. It’s all open to interpretation and that’s where is all turns into a sticky mess.

Take the religion out of this discussion, or better yet insert your religion into it. If you take any article regarding this whole mosque debate, and insert your religion where you see Muslim, and insert your place of worship wherever you see mosque and see how you like the shoe on the other foot.

Try to put this into perspective and think with your brain, instead of letting misguided “leaders” steer you into a position on this issue.

I am pretty happy to say I completed the HAHD Challenge, which was to write 100 plus articles in 100 days. All original content, all at least 400 words, most much longer than that. Check out my author page, if you’d like to see more…

The waffle has often been viewed as more of a breakfast curiosity than anything else. It is a side dish that has been little more than a side thought in a diner on a side street. Then came the advent of the waffle house. The waffle house is a marvelous invention that has recognized the amazing possibilities behind (and in front of) the pastry-like dough concoction pressed between two plates of intricately cubed steel that makes the crispy golden brown treats what they have become – nirvana on a mortal plane, available to people the world over.

Do we dare delve into the history of the waffle? Dare to delve I say, so I will. Waffles originally were mined in the small Dutch village of Wafele de Coup, which interestingly enough roughly translates into the English phrase “overthrow the biscuit.” This would soon be recognized as a possibility once the secret of manufacturing waffles rather than mining them, was unearthed. (Sorry, no pun intended. Sorry again, the pun was intended and the sentence prior to this one was a lie.)

A marriage of sorts happened shortly after the historic merger of the hotdog and the bun, at the world’s fair in St Louis in 1904. It was, in fact, a German butcher named  Johann Georg Lahner who developed the prototype hotdog on a roll, but he called in a “Dachsund sausage” as a tribute to the dog of the same name. How that ended up translating as hot dog, no one really knows, but the fact remains. That world’s fair was pivotal in a few devices including the belt worn change machine and the ice cream cone, which directly relates to our main topic of waffles. The original waffle cone was in fact a rolled waffle, shaped like a funnel, which was used to contain ice cream.

This in turn led to the waffle ice cream sandwich and the rest, as we say, is history. But it is not very well known history. Waffles were often the butt of jokes at bread conventions – they were the ugly step-sister to their refined cousins the ryes and wheats which dominated the world market for years. (I refuse to include the word “white” in the same sentence as “domination” for fear of cries of racism, although to be truthful whites did outsell wheats for many years, so there was a bit of white domination there. Oops. didn’t mean to say that. sorry)

well, do ya?

A breakthrough (of sorts) occurred when a small French boy (whose name has unfortunately been lost in history) placed a piece of roast beef between two waffles that had been used as props for a comedy bit for a baker’s convention in Marseilles. The boy fished the discarded waffles and a bit of spoiled beef out of a garbage bin and declared, “Comte de baiser de sandwich mon extrémité arrière” which translates as “Earl of Sandwich, I have triumphed.” Sadly the roast beef was past its “best eaten by” date and the boy contracted salmonella and died.

Yet his invention lives on in the hearts of millions. Invention may be too strong a word, but you do know what I mean. That was the moment in time that was like a hinge. The dead boy’s immortal words have spawned an industry that would be king. To tell you any different would be waffling.

Reading..still part of my life..

People don’t read much anymore. They scan and skim and digest bits and pieces and perhaps make note of things but don’t really delve into the heart of the articles and books and certainly don’t embrace the details as once happened. What does this do to our mental processing? It means that intuitive leaps are less likely to happen.

Think about the thought process as a whole. It really isn’t known exactly how we think or what fires off in your mind as you are problem solving. We know that certain synapses become more strongly bonded as we think the same thoughts over and over again, and others become weaker as we think about them less. This is demonstrated by the ability to speak multiple languages. If you have learned English as a second language, you have built a new map in your mind.

The highways and byways become strengthened as you use a language more and more, and if your native tongue falls into disuse, those pathways become less serviceable. Think of a path through a forest that was once a popular route to a destination. A different, better trail becomes available and the first path becomes overgrown. It is still usable, but you have to chop your way through the undergrowth.

This is more applicable if you learn a foreign language, live in a country that speaks that language primarily, and then you move back to your native land. The pathways of the foreign tongue dwindle and your vocabulary disappears and soon you can only speak a pidgin version. You could recapture that language if you spent the time and rebuilt the pathway — strengthened the synoptic pathways involved.

So those pathways become overgrown and the leaps to verb conjugation are now struggles instead of being intuitive. Now, imagine that instead of ever learning a foreign language you have to communicate with someone from Germany by looking up words in an English-German dictionary. This is hampered because they also are constricted by the same barrier/bridge. Add in the possibilities of mispronunciation and colloquialisms and the task becomes daunting indeed.

I’ll apologize because that was a long way to go to get to this point: aren’t we doing the same thing to ourselves by using external storage devices instead of using the gray matter between our ears? Anyone under the age of 40 is using the internet and/or computers as a means to access information without having to memorize it. Think about knowing the capital of Venezuela or the distance from the Sun to the earth. Do you know those facts off the top of your head or is it not worth memorizing? Maybe some facts aren’t worth memorizing.

What difference does it make to know the capital of a foreign country or the amount of corned beef the United States exported in 1982? Perhaps it makes no difference at all. But suppose you are trying to figure out why a process in a manufacturing plant or in a classroom doesn’t work. If you have studied classroom behavior and can do a statistical analysis on how tweaking certain factors impacts student behavior, you may be able to find a solution. But the factors you may decide to tweak have to come from somewhere.

That somewhere may be years of experience dealing with students. You have worked with cohort after cohort and you have thought about how the different classes interacted with faculty. The classes acted different ways even though the material was the same and perhaps the teaching methodology was similar. It’s the psychological profile of the group. Individuals will act different ways, but the group dynamics should be similar one group to the next. So what changes? Time of year, temperature, the teacher’s state of mind and social situation, etc, etc.

But, and here is the key, you can’t think about all of these factors unless they are in your memory to start with.

Does that sound like an obvious statement? It is and it isn’t. The problem is that many of us don’t keep information in our brain anymore. We may not even read through books that are relevant to our profession, even if they deal specifically with a situation that would be of immense help to us. We skim and take note of certain points that are made, and then we have a mental reference of where to find more information (the book, perhaps, or the author’s website or a discussion board) and we go about our day.

The danger is that we go about our lives like this and so do most people in the world. There was an interesting segment in a book by Napoleon Hill, “Think and Grow Rich,” where Hill talked about Henry Ford being put on a witness stand in a trial. Ford was asked a lot of questions and eventually he snapped. He said that he didn’t need to know the answers as long as he could access the information through experts that he kept on staff and specialists that he could call in to do consultations. Ford’s line of reasoning was that he didn’t need to clutter his mind with the information if he could access it.

But here is the downfall. Unless you have the information in your head, you cannot make intuitive leaps. You aren’t going to be accessing information in a database or on a website and intuitively jump to a different database or website and magically make two plus two equal five. That only happens when your data is stored biologically, not digitally.

So given all that (and I know even that is a lot to digest, and in our pick and choose society, not many people may bother to wade through the previous paragraphs), how does this impact people who solve problems innovatively versus people who solve problems adaptively? Does this favor one style of problem solving over another? I would propose that it does.

Quite simply put, intuitive thinking through biological data storage is more an innovative characteristic. Finding and applying pieces of data through digital storage is very much a step-by-step process and seems to favor the adaptive problem solver.

What does this mean as we move forward in time? Are the adaptive thinkers likely to have the advantage in the field of problem solving as information doubles every few years and is stored “out of brain?”

I had the great pleasure of being the feature interview on the Get Inspired! Project Today. Take a listen, if you like. Here’s the link…

Facebook

I really enjoy Facebook. There. I’ve said it. I like getting a glimpse into people’s lives and I don’t know if that makes me a mass stalker, or if I am a “creeper” as my youngest daughter says or what it makes me. I think there are a lot of people out there that are in the same boat.

I see a post from a friend, click on their profile to see what else they are up to and suddenly I find myself looking at their vacation photos and then their wedding pictures and every album they’ve got. Generally these are actual real life friends that I just like getting to know a little better, but it might be people I’ve invited to do interviews on the Get Inspired! Project, or “friends” I have on their that I really don’t know at all. (some of those folks I sort of wonder how we got hooked up, and mostly it’s just that we have lots of other ‘friends’ in common, so we connected.)

I’m not really stalking in any real sense, just curious, but some people are stalking. Divorce lawyers and private investigators, for example. It’s amazing what you can learn about people, and lots of folks don’t have their account private at all. They chat with friends and don’t even consider that other people could be following that conversation. Sometimes it’s innocent, but sometimes a “wow, you look great in this photo” turns into “would you like to get together to talk about old times??” and that leads them down a trail. But it’s a trail that professionals can easily follow and then there is evidence to bring up at the divorce settlement.

What are people thinking? And it’s not limited to Facebook. It can be LinkedIn, MySpace or any of the other social media. It could even be Twitter, but who has time to delve into all that 140 character drivel. I post there all the time and  I doubt many people read every post I have there, and I don’t even post about the mundane.

But what I am saying here is, think about what you post. Think about what you write. Pretty much anyone can read it and it can be held against you in a court of law or an argument with someone you may care about.

How difficult is it to add things up? Suddenly we see “you” in group pictures, and you are always standing next to that same person, and your spouse is no where in sight.  There are innocent but cryptic messages floating between you and that person. Or maybe, hey a group of people is going to location X. Are you going too? The signs are written in big letters and people are reading them and gossip is flying. Don’t think it goes unnoticed.

Social networks are great, but they can lull you into a false sense of security when there is none. Think about what you post and know that if you are not thinking about it, someone else is.

(before you read into this post, I read an article on Facebook privacy and it just got me to thinking.)

The power of books, computers and the internet has unburdened our minds from “knowing” things. All we need to do is know how to find things. How has this affected our thinking?

Off-Brain Storage

There is a certain amount of irony in this article. The ironic part is that people don’t read much anymore; they scan and skim and digest bits and pieces and perhaps make note of things, but don’t really delve into the heart of the articles and books and certainly don’t embrace the details as once happened. What does this do to our mental processing? It means that the answers to all the questions may be out there, but no one has bothered to read past the third paragraph in a hundred essays and thesis papers, so the parts of the puzzle haven’t surfaced and been interfaced.

Is anyone with me still? It’s doubtful that more than a handful of people will read past that first paragraph, and only some of them will skip to the last part to read the conclusion, and that’s what I am trying to emphasize right now. So they’ve missed it, but you haven’t.  (or maybe they’ve clicked on a link that’s off to one side, and likely you may do the same thing before too long. Such is life in this century and I won’t dwell on the near ADHD mentality that makes us all too distracted. (That’s another paper for another time.)

On Napoleon Hill’s classic book, Think and Grow Rich, he talks about Henry Ford being in a courtroom and Henry was being questioned about all matter of things. Henry said that he didn’t bother learning or memorizing all aspects of his business practices or many of the things that impacted him. He said he could merely push a button and get an expert to give him an answer to any question he might have. The internet has given us all that same ability. The real trick to finding answers on the internet (or anywhere else) is knowing the right question to ask. That is the problem with search engines and that also is the “holy grail” of companies such as Google or Yahoo. How can you make searching more intuitive so people find what they are looking for?

But I think the real problem as we store all of our information off-brain, so to speak, is that we can’t make the leaps of intuition when the information is not stored in the gray cells. If you’ve got a problem, and you’ve noodled on it, and wrestled with the facts and tried to rearrange them to come up with a solution, you often find that moving away from the question will give you an answer. How many times have you decided to “sleep” on a problem and in the morning you have come up with an answer? It happens pretty frequently. More likely it will be some sort of trivia or nonsense. You couldn’t recall the name of a movie you’d watched a few days/weeks/years before and then you wake up at two in the morning with the answer.

This example tells you two things. One you had the answer (and the knowledge) in your brain, and some sub-conscious process brought it to the surface while you weren’t trying to access it. So taking that analogy to the internet (or your computer or your library of <gasp> books) you can’t find the answer if you don’t know the question and don’t have that knowledge at hand (in brain.) So the problem becomes one of your brain’s synapses being unable to fire and give you the answer because the information is stored off-brain.

Your brain is not going to make that quantum leap because it can’t. You (and I – don’t think that I don’t realize that I am in the same boat. We all are.) haven’t mentally ingested the information. It’s out there, we just haven’t assimilated it and we probably never will.

I wish I had an answer to write as the conclusion, but I don’t. The answer may be out there somewhere, but I don’t know where and thus this essay ends up being cyclical. All I can offer is this: Try to stop skimming. Try to read a book. Try to reprogram your mind to know that unless you integrate knowledge inside your brain you can’t make those intuitive leaps that take mankind forward.

So what are the steps you need to take to achieve whatever you are looking to accomplish? Amazingly enough when I started breaking this down, it really didn’t matter what your goals are; the steps remain the same.

What Steps Are You Taking?

Step One: Find someone who is doing what you would like to be doing and research how they are doing it and how they learned to do it. Nothing is a better teacher than experience and the cheapest lessons you can learn are ones that you don’t have to actually do yourself. Reading about someone, or better yet talking to them, can help you to avoid the potential pitfalls that could be along your path. Don’t assume that someone won’t want to share information. Almost everyone is flattered when someone approaches them and wants to hear all about them.

Think about it…Aren’t you one of your favorite subjects? The most welcome guest at a party or at a networking event is usually a good listener. Additional advice on this step – take along a small digital recorder and record your conversation. In review you will get information you missed the first time around, and you won’t have to make the person repeat themselves. Always ask permission to record, and if you include the phrase “I value your input and don’t want to miss anything you have to offer” people generally won’t mind. On the other hand taking notes during a casual conversation can be very off-putting, so the recorder is a great tool.

If you take the right approach to this person, they may take an interest in what you are trying to accomplish and may become something of a mentor to you. Don’t limit yourself to talking to just one person who has “made it.” If you are doing something that no one else has done before (unlikely, but possible) certain aspects of what you are attempting may be similar to aspects of what someone else has done. “Frankenstein” your success by piecing together parts of the puzzle from a few different models.

Step Two: Take Action Every Day. Most of us are so busy trying to pay the bills and keep up with life that our dreams and plans for the future often take a backseat to the rigors of the day and the “fire fighting” of the moment. Nothing gets done “tomorrow.” All any of us have is the moment and that moment is today. If you keep putting off your action steps until “tomorrow” you never will achieve your goals. What do you have to accomplish to get to where you want to be? You should be able to make a list of these steps from the information you have gleaned from the person or people you are modeling your success after. Make that checklist and make sure you work on some aspect of it every day. Success doesn’t take weekends off either.

Dedicate some specific time to your future. You may be able to say, “I will work one hour a day” or maybe something even more specific life “I will work on this from 10am to 11am every day until I achieve my ultimate goal of ‘X’.” Whatever you do decide, stick to your commitment and every day you will be that much closer to what you desire.