"A Serious Man" Review

"It's a Coen brothers movie."

That was Brian's pitch to me. We had spent a good portion of our afternoon looking for movies at BuyBacks Entertainment in Erie, PA. Now, I'm not nearly the consumer of film that I used to be, but when Brian is in town, and when we decide to go to Erie, BuyBacks is almost always a stop. They were featuring a "buy three get one free sale," which I always find a good opportunity to catch up on some films that I may have missed. The problem I find is that it is often difficult to decide on that last movie. That day I was having a particularly tough time, because a used DVD store does not often have every film you could want for the price you want it for. I couldn't decide on the last film, and it was starting to get late in the day, so I told Brian that he could just pick one more movie and I'd use up one of my freebies to get it. To that end, he chose A Serious Man, which is a film written and directed by Joel and Ethan Coen.

Who are the Coen brothers?

I really don't know much about the Joel and Ethan Coen, other than they have directed some of the best movies that I've ever seen (Raising Arizona, The Hudsucker Proxy, The Big Lebowski, et al), and my favorite movie of all time, O Brother, Where Art Thou? In short, they're excellent directors with an eye for detail and memorable characters. But my first response to Brian was, "Yes, but it's a Coen brothers movie that you've never heard of." You see, I found out long ago that while the Coens have a history of pitch-perfect films, they occasionally churn out a forgettable yarn. Such was the case with The Man Who Wasn't There starring Billy Bob Thornton years earlier when we rented it. After suffering through two hours of a character actor that I happen to like waste his talents on a completely disengaging film noir knockoff I was amazed that I had found a Coen brothers movie that I hated. Oh, it was competent, just not entertaining. This was the warning I gave Brian.

A game of chance

When we got back to Brian's parents' house, we realized that we only had enough time to watch one movie. I presented Brian with The Town (also known as that movie that saved Ben Affleck's career), which neither of us had seen, and Brian presented A Serious Man. We couldn't decide, so we left it to a coin toss. One could infer from the fact that I wrote this article and not a review of The Town as a pretty good indicator of which film won. We popped A Serious Man in and began watching.

The plot

The movie starts with a tale about a Jewish man who after a spot of bad luck of not getting full value for his wares and losing a wheel from his cart is helped by a kindly old rabbi, who is a friend of his wife's family. When he goes home and tells his wife the tale, she tells him that the person in question died of fever three years ago, and that what he met must have been a dybbuk (a Hebrew word for a dislocated spirit. Yes, I looked it up.). He tells her that he invited him to dinner, whereupon the cheerful yet otherworldly is announced at their door. The man invites him in, and the old man refuses some soup. The woman takes this as a sign that he is a dybbuk and stabs the old man with her paring knife. At first he laughs, and his identity as a dybbuk is revealed! No, wait... the old man starts bleeding and says he feels ill, then leaves (presumably to go off and die in the snow). That's the first five minutes. What does it have to do with the rest of the movie? Not much.

In conclusion

What? What's that? What's the rest of the movie's plot?

Oh very well. 

The rest of the film focuses on Larry Gopnik, played by Michael Stuhlbarg, an actor who has been in many movies that you've seen, but never in any role that you'd remember. This is a period piece, and judging from the technologies that the characters use (and the fact that one character is obsessed with F-Troop) it must be the mid to late 1960s. This tidbit of information isn't really crucial to the plot, but then again, neither is anything else in this film. Larry is a professor of physics and a family man who... look, it's not really that important. All you need to know is that the movie is very Jewish (not like in the Woody Allen sense, but more like it is steeped in American Jewish culture and norms), bad things happen to Larry, every single one of which is exacerbated by the fact that he won't stand up for himself when the film's cast of detestable, selfish, self-centered individuals take advantage of him. Things start to go bad for Larry the moment his wife (played by Sarri Lennick in a makeup job so unsettling that she looks like every stereotype of a "Jewess" and succubus mashed together into one beautiful and terrifying hell-spawn) demands a divorce because she's into another man, widower Sy Ableman who is many years her senior. Have I mentioned that not one of these characters is likable? Not one? It's meant to be seen as a dark comedy (kind of like Fargo) I think, but the characters aren't particularly memorable, most of the "jokes" are just mean-spirited jabs at Larry's cuckold status, and the entire plot just slogs along at a snail's pace, so much so that Brian actually stepped out for a lengthy phone call and still didn't miss anything important (although he did miss the film's funniest moment BY FAR, when "the second rabbi" tells Larry a rambling story about a dentist's search for God. You really have to watch the film for context. But don't though, it's not that funny).

A seriously bad movie

I hated this film. No, there's really no way to sugarcoat it. I LOATHED it, and I really don't know the reasons why. The film is shot beautifully, with perfect set pieces that really give someone the sense of what Minnesota suburbs in the 60s might have been like. The main character is a wishy-washy idiot who won't take ownership of his own life, and every other character just uses him for personal gain or to make themselves feel self-important. Scenes start, scenes go nowhere. Interesting parts are merely dreams and recollections, everything is random and nothing gets resolved. But you know what the strangest thing is?

This movie is a phenomenal critical success

I can't figure this one out. It scores 79% out of 35 reviews on Metacritic.com. It scores 89% on Rotten Tomatoes. That's the same score as The Imitation Game, an actually entertaining period piece with actually entertaining characters that actually has something to say. I really don't know how this detestable piece of film stays so high up. Am I missing something? I'm not saying that I haven't - I had to watch No Country For Old Men twice before I got something out of it, but I never want to watch A Serious Man again. Hell, I don't even want to be in the same room with it. Adam Arkin couldn't even save it, and I like me some Adam Arkin!

Let the conspiracy theory commence

You know what I think it is?  I think that this film gets a free pass. That's all. Everyone likes The Big Lebowski, right? No Country For Old Men sure was deep. Okay, so I don't understand this movie, so it must be good -- on the level of the other Coen bros. films, I reckon. Maybe the 1960s setting appeals to aging film critics, hungry for a glimpse of their bygone youth. Or maybe it's more than that. Perhaps it's inflated by a community of Jewish critics so starved for works of cultural reference (if not significance) that the moment one comes along directed by Jewish filmmakers with a conscious effort to include as much Jewish periphery as possible, they jump for joy, kind of like the way evangelical Christians support all of their (unbelievably incredibly shitty) movies. That's all that I can figure out. This horrid film just gets a free ride. Please note film critics, that style on its own is not substance, good acting on its own is not good writing, and artistic merit on its own is not entertaining.

Keybored

Sorry if you're too young to get the reference

An open letter to the staff at Piano Nanny

Hello!

I recently attempted to use your Piano Nanny website to learn how to play a keyboard I recently acquired. I say attempted, because I hit a brick wall at "Starter Studies" Lesson Eight: Page 1.

Now, maybe you've been playing piano long enough to make the natural transition from Lesson Seven to Lesson Eight, but as the most raw of beginners I have to tell you, in no uncertain terms, Lesson Eight is a deal-breaker. Anyone who gives up learning to use a piano, organ, or keyboard will give up at Lesson Eight, and I can tell you why: The transition from Lesson Seven is way too steep.

Allow me to explain: you literally go from, "tap this one note to the beat," to, "play these two notes, then these two notes," to, "Use one hand to play these five notes, then the other to play these five notes, then switch the positioning of both hands and play these notes using different fingers simultaneously." The average, uncoordinated oaf (such as myself) can't do it even after an hour of practicing over and over. It might be simple to you, an experienced pianist, but to the rest of us it is too much too fast. There has to be a better way to teach it (or perhaps some people will just never learn to play the keyboard no matter how much they try). In any event, all excitement that I had about learning using your system died with Lesson Eight.

I am looking for alternative teaching methods at the moment, but I will probably not be coming back to your site, and will not be recommending it to any other beginners that I come in contact with. So as someone who makes a living creating instruction manuals I'm going to give you some tips:

1. Be more basic. The problem with the "sink or swim" method is that most of your students are going to drown. You'll get a few that will keep going, but you're going to lose your audience if you expect far too much too soon.
2. Don't be as basic. You know what "play one note in time with the beat for three minutes" really teaches your students? That music is boring. Give them a little credit -- work on coordination with multiple fingers and notes BEFORE tedious muscle memory exercises.
3. Focus on one thing before moving on to the next. Which is more important, learning to move your hands to play higher notes, or learning to use both hands at once? I know that you want to break people of the "leave your hands in one place" method of playing as soon as possible, but most of us aren't coordinated enough to press two keys at the same time let alone two keys with two different hands even if we're using the same fingers, let alone two different ones without substantial practice. Figure out which is more important (or better yet, which is easier for your students to learn) and teach that before combining them into a key-smashing bout of frustration.
4. For Pete's sake make sure the media is easy to use. The MP3 files on your site start IMMEDIATELY on the first note and then have a substantial rest towards the end that makes timing on the loop EXTREMELY difficult to anticipate and compensate for. A simple edit to the timing (and even a longer loop) could fix this and make the loop less likely to throw the beginner, well, for a loop. 
5. Enforce the language before moving on. I can't read music.  I have never been able to link the sound of "C" to a note on the staff. After studying musical notation in preparation for this project, I have concluded that musical notation is dumb. It is needlessly complicated and too gated to be understood by the layman. I know that you, as a musician, are used to it, but to someone with a background in say, computer programming it is obtuse. We use strings and symbols to differentiate, and mere upticks on the scale are not easy to identify or visually helpful. I understand the basics of what it is trying to accomplish, but I'm not sure that it is enough for beginners. You should make more substantial notation on your sheet music to compensate.

Not being a music student or teacher, I'm not really sure what the best method of teaching people this incredibly inefficient skill is, but I do know one thing: It's not the method on your website.

Thank you anyway for trying.

Does The World Need A Superpower?

Calm down, "Avengers" fans

The scope of this article has nothing to do with gamma radiation or Norse gods (although I'd be happy to have that conversation in the future). No, I'm using the term "superpower" in a geopolitical sense (i.e. "The United States is the world's only remaining superpower") which might not be sexy, but is at least a little more grounded in reality. Perhaps some background is in order:
I am a regular listener to NPR (and I really hope to one day be able to donate to them again, but when you're struggling just to have enough gas to make it to work that's not really an option -- and I feel terrible about it) and in particular the program "On Point" which is usually hosted by Tom Ashbrook. "On Point" is an interview call-in show where Mr. Ashbrook fronts a panel of one or more guests, and takes viewer calls to put questions to them. I like the show because he frequently has guests that are more than a little informed about the topics they cover, but it is not a microphone for strictly liberal ideas. Anyone can make a case, and Mr. Ashbrook leaves the judgement up to the audience. If you have any interest in current events, check it out, I highly recommend it. Lately there have been a LOT of programs about the state of the world and the role of the U.S.A. in the grand scheme of things, and more than a few about the state of our domestic economy and ways to improve it. These realities are not mutually exclusive, and I am in no way, shape, or form a political scientist, but from a historical standpoint I think that there are some frank discussions we need to have.

Defense spending is out of control

When were we spending the most on our defense budget? Why, World War II, of course. The decades following "the war to end all wars," the so-called Cold War was no slouch either; every decade saw a solid increase in our defense spending to build up our nuclear arsenal, radically expand our standing military, and to manufacture all of the weapons and vehicles needed to fend off an incursion by the USSR. It's no secret that the Reagan strategy was simply to out-spend the Soviet Union, bankrupting them by forcing them into a war of virtual attrition that their communism-based dictatorship could not support. And we won, so defense spending had to be reduced, right?
Not so. This 2012 Washington Journal article by Dan Matthews is pretty damning. It alleges that defense spending is higher than it's ever been, even after discounting the Iraq and Afghanistan wars. That leads to my big question: Who are we trying to outspend now?

No returns

The sad truth is that during World War II and the Cold War, we were war profiteers. I'm not saying that the ultimate goal wasn't noble (though I think that could be argued as well), but we extended credit to our allies for real material protection against an impending threat, and we made a fair amount of profit from it. With the biggest military threat (the USSR) defeated, there's no real profit to be made from that kind of defense network. As much as the Balkans and Russians might squabble, we aren't directly involved and we wouldn't even attempt to provoke a military conflagration. Our key pressure now is economics in the form of sanctions, but that might be coming to an end sooner than many could predict.

Our strength is our weakness

The most powerful economic country in the world is rising. It hasn't emerged fully yet, but the displacement of economic water as it lifts itself out of the sea is palpable even on this side of the world. It is not the United States. While we spend a good chunk of our blood and treasure trying to remain the world's only military superpower our infrastructure crumbles. The coffers of cities and states across our land are running on empty. Millions of people in the world's last superpower go without healthcare, the ability to buy a home, or even feed themselves. Despite some recovery, jobs are scarce and the most well-paying require a level of education and experience that makes them out of reach for even the most qualified individuals. It's truly a terrifying time for those of us on the bottom of the economic pile. Why are we spending so much to police a world that doesn't want or need a military superpower anymore?

Patriotism starts at home

(AUTHOR'S NOTE: Buckle up, this is going to get a little preachy from this point on) You know what I admire most about the so-called "greatest generation?" You know, the people who lived and fought during World War II? It was their, "We're all in this together" attitude. Okay, so it was only white people who were invited to participate in this particular sentiment, but it was a grand sentiment nonetheless. That's not where we're at now. If you're poor, you're equated to worthless. If you're not racially white, you have no political representation. If you're an employed citizen in the United States, you have given up the right to a livable wage and to drive to work without the threat of bridge collapses, power outages, or potholes big enough to swallow your whole car. Your water well might be poisoned by hydrofracking waste, or an oil or coal company could cause an economic disaster simply by not paying for the minimum safety equipment despite record-breaking profits (and because they've lobbied to keep their legal recompense cap disgustingly low). These are America's REAL problems, because they're happening to REAL people. A $160,000,000 fighter jet that will be obsolete in a few years thanks to new drone technologies isn't going to pay for your grandmother's prescription medication, and it isn't going to dissuade religious zealots from car-bombing a school for girls. It helps no one and hurts everyone. We need to bring the focus back to the US -- back to us.

Where to start...

So rather than elect another Tea Party politician who wants to cut your taxes by literally letting this country rot from the inside out, why not look to people who want to put the government's (read: OUR) resources to the good of its citizens. You want to remain the world's only remaining superpower? Fine -- just cut the defense budget by half. It's no secret that we spend more on defense than the next eight countries combined (a distant second is China). That will free up over a quarter of a trillion dollars of money over the next year alone. And EVERYONE wins -- the US will have to reduce its presence overseas and close military bases, which means that we'll have to take a more diplomatic role in the world, we free up money that can be used to fund building new infrastructure and subsidizing new public works projects, which will lead to more brick-and-mortar jobs and architectural technologies, which we can in turn sell to other developing countries for profit.

Why building is better

Hey, you know what everyone in the world needs? Reliable Roads. Affordable Homes that can protect people from the elements. Clean, disease-free water. Steady electrical power. Schools that can offer education. What are we offering instead? Tanks. Rocket-propelled grenades. Missile defense systems. What if -- and bear with me here -- instead of blowing up Afghanistan we were actually trusted enough to go in, and help them to build an actual infrastructure. Something that they could be proud of and might consider protecting, rather than arming one group of religious nut-jobs over another group. Would it be expensive? Yes, though arguably no less expensive than trying to police an entire state while building a temporary infrastructure. What would the difference be? For one, they would have a hand in building their own country back up. One day those disenfranchised masses of Afghan people might finally start to stand up and get mad at the people who are wrecking all of their stuff and destroying their works, rather than throwing up their hand like they couldn't do anything about it. National pride is built by people who have something more to lose than just freedom. That's kind of the problem here in the States: We don't build anything anymore. We don't take the initiative. We only maintain what we have, we don't look to replace or improve it because we don't have the money. And why don't we have the money? Because we're trying so hard to protect what we have. This is a stupid, sick cycle that will continue until we get over ourselves and instead of professing patriotism actually do patriotic things for our country's people. All of those people.

And you know what the worst part of this is? Anyone that makes this argument will be painted as a biased liberal rather than a rational human being. We have the power America, why not use it for something good?

Rabies In Warren, PA? - UPDATED

It started as a gray day, an "off" day.

Saturday, November 29th, 2014

This morning I awoke to the very distinct smell of skunk in the living room. It wasn't the concentrated smell of a skunk spray, more like the lingering odor of something having been in contact with it.  I thought it was odd, but I didn't say anything. By the time I came out of my room in the morning my mom had already left for work.

Normally I let the horses out of the barn around 7:00 A.M., but I was instructed to leave them in this morning as one of the boarders was going to take her horse to a parade in Frewsburg, NY and she didn't want to have to chase it through the pasture. She came to the house around 9:00, and I observed her walking through the yard towards the barn. At around 9:30, I saw her shooing an animal of some kind out of the barn, but I couldn't see what it was. My mom's little cat recently had an injury and wasn't very mobile, so if there was something around that could threaten her inside the barn I wanted to know what it was.  I put on my denim and my mud boots and went out to see what the commotion was.

"there was a skunk, and it had tried to bite her leg"

As I approached the barn our boarder, Lil, informed me that there was a skunk, and that it had tried to bite her leg, though it couldn't get through her boot. As she was informing me of this, the skunk came back around and started moving threateningly towards us. While I was taking this in, my cat (not the injured one) came out of the barn while the skunk was trying to get in.  Upon seeing the cat, the skunk chased him nipping at his flanks but not actually getting in contact. I ran up to try to distract the agitated animal, and told Lil to get away, but she just stood there dumbfounded.  My cat raced up to her, and the skunk came in pursuit. I hustled my cat down to the house while my dad stood on the front porch, asking what was going on. After urging him to get in the house and pushing my cat inside I ran downstairs to get my semi-automatic BB gun and my dad's .22 rifle. While my dad searched (in futility, as it turns out) for his ammunition I went outdoors to see if I could drive it away. I shot the thing from about 10 feet away to drive it off (at that distance, I can guarantee you that I didn't miss), but the BBs didn't seem to make a difference - this animal was in pain and had no fear. 

I ran back to the house to check on my dad's ammo and to reload, thinking to myself that I had to get the injured cat out of her bed in the barn, when I looked out the window and saw the skunk chewing at something tan-colored in the gutter near the barn. It was then I knew that I was too late to save the cat.  I ran outside in a rage, unloaded an entire clip of 15 BBs into the skunk and at least one of them must of hit something the skunk could still feel, because he took off running towards the barn again, squeezing into the gap of the lean-to where my dad's tractor is stored. 

I went around to the barn's main entrance and entered the lean-to from the manure spreader access door, grabbing a pitch fork as I did so.  The stench of the angry creature's debauchery penetrated every inch of the barn, but I was too angry to care.  I peered into the dark, seeing a shadow move quickly against the light that peeked through the barn's wooden planks. The skunk raced around the tractor, at first trying to attack, but upon seeing that I was newly  angry and armed tried to run away. I picked up the pitch fork and ran him through, shouting obscenities at the wounded skunk, and putting the full brunt of my not-inconsiderable weight on the pitchfork, pinning him to the earthen ground.

"snarling, immobile, and dying -- but not dead."

He kept snarling, immobile, and dying -- but not dead. I left the reek of the barn and yelled to my dad to call animal control. I stepped out to get some fresh air, though there wasn't much to be had, and went to examine the remains of one of the cutest and most lovable cats I had ever known. I went back in the barn, bleary-eyed, to find the skunk using its remaining strength to pull the pitchfork out of the ground. I pushed it so hard into him that the metal base of the tines squeezed his middle, making his struggle in vain.  I knew that I couldn't let him out to threaten the other animals on the farm. I picked up my dad's firewood wedge, which is like a pointed sledge hammer, and walloped the animal's neck with it until he stopped moving.

My dad informed me that the game warden was on his way. I went to the garage, grabbed a shovel and went behind the barn, digging a grave for the fallen kitty cat. I cursed the earth, so wet and muddy, but just rocky enough to make hole-digging a chore. I returned to the barn and took some hay from the feeding area, passing by the little hay bed that the cat had slept in. I closed the door that we had kept open to help her during her recovery, and went on my way. I put a nice even coat of the hay at the bottom of the muddy hole. Then I returned to the house.

I went to my room to grab an old sheet that I was going to throw out anyway, and I exchanged some not-kind words with my dad when he yelled at me for wasting it. 

Returning to the yard, I wrapped up the cold corpse of the cat in the sheet. being as loving as I could. It's silly - I knew she was beyond feeling. The gashes in her head were telling enough.  I carried her out to the little grave and laid her down on the hay. then I covered her with more, spread it out, and lit the little pyre. It burned pretty well, but it wasn't going to be enough, so I went to the garage to get an accelerant.  When I did, the game warden arrived. I told him the story and showed him the skunk.  He asked me for a bag and some bailing twine to wrap it up so that he could go to get it tested.  He was very professional given the circumstance and asked us some very basic questions. After tying the skunk to his deer-carrier. He told us that we would know the following Friday what they found out during the testing.

"It was then that I realized just how cold I was."

I carried the fuel up to the smoking hole, losing my boot in some mud along the way. I pulled the footwear out, stumbling with the liner in the mud, and put it on.  It was then that I realized just how cold I was. I poured some of the foul-smelling liquid on the fire, noting that I could still smell the skunk's stench over the smell of burning petroleum. After about half an hour, satisfied that there was little left to do I filled in the hole, making sure to put the rocks tightly on top. And that was the end of Cream, the cat.

I will update this as soon as I know what the results are, if any. All in all, it was a very terrifying experience and one that I hope you, dear reader, will never have to go through. 

UPDATE 

Tuesday, December 2nd, 2014

The game commission called. The skunk (to no one's surprise) tested positive for rabies. I hope that it's the last one we have up there for awhile.  We'll have to keep an eye out for strange-acting animals.

Not a Fan of the Brand - Confessions Aging Enthusiast

A Recent Article Showed Me The Light

I happened upon a slideshow on Rant Gizmo (which your can find HERE) this morning when I was looking for the best graphic practices for mobile themes for some up-and-coming projects at work. In this brief piece, the author, Michael Peckerar, posts thirteen reasons why the iPhone is better than any Android phone, which fit the range of, "You have to pay over $299 for a good one," to, "You can screw it up if you try to customize it." After laughing at the author's decidedly one-sided approach to the argument (for those uninitiated, most new iPhones cost upwards of $500 and you can't really customize them beyond desktop backgrounds), it got me thinking:

What's up with fan-boys these days?

My confession:

Now in my youth (and for some of my adult life) I was an unabashed video game fan-boy. First it was Nintendo over Sega, then Sega over Sony, then Microsoft over everyone, and on, and on... Over the years, I've realized that by choosing one brand's hype over another that I've missed out on some truly amazing products over the years because I was too stubborn to accept the one truth that fan-boys can't seem to fathom:

All brands, regardless of marketing hype, are just companies trying to push a product to market.

Brand loyalty needs to be earned, sure, and once it is it can give that brand an advantage in future purchasing decisions. My love of the Super Nintendo Entertainment System shaded many of my video game purchases, getting me to buy inferior products like Virtual Boy and the N64 out of the hope that my favorite brand wouldn't let me down, despite the fact that Nintendo has been hopelessly out of its depth since the 16-bit era. Maybe it's because I'm older and wiser, or maybe it's the marketing-saturated world that we live in, but I find that I am less enthusiastic about "brands" and more enthusiastic about "products" and actual value.

The undesired result

Far from Michael Peckerar's point, I find that his misguided attack against one brand in favor of another is as much as a turn-off to me as anything. His misleading obfuscated opinions are actually making me LESS enthusiastic about Apple's iPhone and its products in general -- if this is how the brand's adherents feel and act, resorting to lies and half-truths simply to push a product's user base, I don't think that it's an ecosystem that I want to be a part of. I have taken up this view on many brands in recent times, and I avoid purchasing until they produce something with the features and cost that I find desirable.

For example, I no longer buy brand name clothing unless there is a definite cost-to-feature benefit. I like "toe shoes," and the Vibram Five fingers in particular. Are they the only "barefoot" shoes on the market? Absolutely not, but out of the ones I've tried I like the feel of them, and they are within my means, so they are the ones that I purchase for now. As soon as they become scarce, or change in some way that I don't feel is to my benefit, I will shop around again. I won't continue to wear shoes that I don't find comfortable just because it's the brand that I always buy. I own a couple of iPods, but now that I have a phone that can play MP3 music I rarely use them. Nothing's perfect, but there's no shame in recognizing a different brand's achievements.

Fan-boys do the opposite -- they continue to buy products based on a frothing loyalty to a brand regardless of cost or features, and are hurt - HURT, when someone doesn't share their narrow view. It often takes something like the Playstation 3's disastrous launch to shake off all but the most hardcore adherents. Apple is very steadily falling behind in desired features and innovation, but they still make a good product. When Apple finally does release its own "Playstation 3" (which is quickly becoming more likely in it's current rudderless post-Steve Jobs era) a good number of these people will be disillusioned, and when they are I will welcome them to the plateau of meaningful product discussion.

Michael Adams is a technical writer and graphic artist for CJ's Home Decor & Fireplaces, LLC
His current phone of choice is an HTC One Max (Android)

Help Me, Internet!

The problem:

So, there's this girl that I like.  I have (really) liked this girl for a long time.  We've been pretty good friends for awhile, and I never wanted to ruin that friendship by admitting that I had feelings for this girl (well, I guess that technically she's a woman, but I digress), so I kept it to myself.

So during one of my spells of boneheaded insensitivity I criticized something this girl said, and we got into an argument, and then I did something unbelievably stupid:

I told her how I felt about her.

This is not something that I normally do with women.  I am an emotional coward, and my tendency is to usually just wait until they find someone else that has better looks, more money, or a nicer personality and then to write it off as "c'est la vie." If I stay away I can usually stay friends for a very long time, which to me is better than nothing, which is what I usually have after I ask a woman out.

Now, she's a nice person, to be sure.  She talked to me after I told her this (two days ago).  She told me (before) my confession that my most unattractive trait was my negativity.

Hard pills:

Now it's true that I have a predisposition towards the negative.  I'm no optimist, quite frankly.  But over the last few years I've actually started to come out of that funk, but unfortunately she only knows me by reputation beforehand.  I am still very self-deprecating, and I have a weird need for positive reinforcement that comes from growing up with excessive negative reinforcement.  I understand this, and it's one of the things I've been trying to change.  This has been helped by (of all things) supplementing my diet to keep me from the deep lows that I have fallen into in the past.  I haven't had any for awhile, but old habits are hard to break. On her end she's been going through a tough spell of late, and I also fear that my advances have come off as predatory.  This wasn't my intention, but I wanted to comfort her in her time of need. 

How I handled it:

I made her a music video.  It's really just me singing badly but it does have several layered special effects and I'm not ashamed to say that it took me a while to make (and several crashes of the software messed up some effects) but it was nothing if not funny.  No, I'm not going to show it to you.  It's private.

I've been trying really hard not to text her, but since that day she's barely said two words to me.  My fears are confirmed today:  she is avoiding me.  I opened Pandora's box, but after the monsters flew out there doesn't seem to be much hope left. I'm out of ideas.

Help me, internet!

I'm probably just going to give it time, even if she ends up stomping on my heart I can't change the way I feel about her. I'm still looking for advice, no matter how crazy or boneheaded you want to be, I want you to share your stories, I want you to tell people that you're hurt and you're not even sure why, or that you overcame the odds.  I want to hear your comments, so that I can find camaraderie and maybe even a little hope!

Oh, okay. Here it is. Yes, I am a dork!

RACISM!

Good old fashioned CORPORATE racism!