celery. we recently brought this wonderfully crunchy cradle for soy butter back into the house (it wasn’t ‘kept out’ for any reason). it got me thinking about brent celek, philadelphia eagle’s tight end, and then of course i thought about tom selleck, and invariably these thoughts led me to the vision of a piece of celery that looks like tom selleck. anyone with the ability to make this vision a reality? i would be forever in your debt.

critics, critical, constructive criticism – more words on my “c” journey. it seems that being critical, rather than accepting (or creating our own) has become the approach/reaction upon discovering something new. it goes like this – a company comes out with a new product (director with a new movie). first adopters say ‘yah I got it, it’s cool, but…’ then others get it/see it and say ‘yah some nice features, but…’, then the world adopts it/watches it, and the first adopters say ‘it was better back in the day’ and everyone is using it happily, but no one wants to admit they like it until years later when it’s ironic and cool to be retro. how’s that for being critical?

i read three reviews of ‘extremely loud incredibly close’ – all were not glowing the way i have about this movie, which is fine, but then i went to the comment section of the reviews – you know, the area where us ‘common folk’ can weigh in on the topic at hand, where somehow, even if the discussion starts with a debate about hand soaps, it turns into a name calling feast for r’s and d’s – and as i scanned the comment sections this time, expecting to read raves about the film, i ran into a number of complaints, the number one being that it wasn’t at all like the book, that the ‘film adapter’ missed huge parts, and that the actors were not what they thought of in the book and blah, blippity, blah, blah. no. movies, that are based on books, are not going to be the book – things will be left out, the characters you saw in your mind will look that way on film ten percent of the time, dialogue between characters may be different, and so on – if you can’t handle this – hire someone to read you the books (in the comfort of your own home) and use hand puppets, that you create, to bring ‘your book’ to life. sorry, i cringe when i hear ‘it wasn’t like the book’.

now, criticism and being critical are important. to me, those words have undo negative connotations. being critical means that you are examining something – not putting it down. the problem i see is that people act like they are being critical, and in reality they are either 1) proving how much they know about something by being a critic of it 2) they don’t like anything that is mainstream (i fall into this camp from time-to-time) or 3) they are angry about everything and use products and movies to unleash their pent up aggression that spawns from being the last one on their block to get the nintendo entertainment system (nes). ‘yah i heard mario was stupid anyway’

i think about this with the girls, family members, and friends too. i can be critical, mostly constructive, but sometimes i am critical of things that are inherently who they are – do we need to point out everything in the name of honesty? no. be critical of things and people, but do it in a way that is offering something other than your ability to use google or misdirected angst for being stood up at prom. or write a blog and unleash all your anger and thoughts in a semi-coherent way – leaving others confused and some inspired.

i’m not sure what i am trying to say. i guess it’s more of an observation. it seems as though we have all become critics, and perhaps in that shift, we are failing to enjoy things for what they are. food (holy bologna does food get criticized), technology, sports, movies, everything – we are critics. perhaps my struggle is this – being a critic implies that you are an observer, and i want to be a participant – i want to be criticized. i want to criticize myself. it’s how we grow.

so, around in another circle i go – hope you are all well.

20120130-133833.jpg

Advertisements