Produce, Produce, Produce – Lettuce not Discuss Vegetables
Something is wrong with me. My brother has made this abundantly clear – though his criticism is a joke – I’ve noticed that something is “off” when I compared myself to others. I’ve come to this conclusion after multiple walks and conversations with friends that I differ from these people in certain regards. I want to create… nay, I am driven to create. I don’t write to pay my bills (it is actually a drain on my finances), but rather, I write because I love to generate something from nothing. With each dash of the pen, stroke of my fingers, key that clacks, I take my mind and provide it to you. And through that process, something that was only available to me is now available to you.
I cannot remember which philosopher discussed the two ways people create (Maybe Maron (Jean-Luc) or Romanov but they seem too contemporary to be correct). The goal of the philosopher’s analysis was to highlight that human beings are driven to create a legacy (as I read it): biological creation (making new babies) and intellectual creation (books, art, business). The point is that humanity needs to create and we choose different ways to achieve those goals; I personally am driven to leave my legacy via fiction.
So I produce and produce, I avoid revisions and move to my next project quickly. In order to publish, I have been dumping a lot of time into revisions (my most hated activity, but one I am beginning to respect (makes what I’ve pulled out of my mind less messy for the non-Theodore reader)). Nonetheless, I wish I could just be set in a room and left to create new universes and worlds to ad nausea. I don’t feel the need to be in a relationship, but I do feel the need to be writing. I don’t know what it is, but I do know this is a garbage pile of a blog post. Perhaps, I will wrestle with understanding the people who don’t feel a compulsion to create something intellectual, but I see the way they look at me, and I know they wrestle with understanding how I don’t feel a compulsion to create something biological.
Read MoreGuest Haiku – Matsuo Basho
viewing a mountain moon
rarely is it seen so clear
in dirty old Tokyo
~Matsuo Basho
Taken from Basho The Complete Haiku, translated by Jane Reichhold
Read More♪♫ My Girl ♫♪
Do you hear some music in your head? What about the chorus from a very specific song? I know you can hear it. Perhaps you’re seeing an iconic scene from a film. Or I could be making horribly wrong assumptions and simultaneously showing my age. Unfortunately, I am not here to discuss the song but the phrase; it is a fascinating grouping of two words to review. For the longest time the term: “my girl/boy/guy/lady/wife/husband/significant other” has fascinated me. The reason is simple, it is a possessive statement. The word my implies ownership or possession.
Give me my pencil back. In that sentence, we know who owns the pencil and that they want to have physical ownership of it again. Yet, we prescribe the same language in our communication about human beings. We cannot own human beings (anymore, thank god we sorted that mess out), but we can still be possessive of them. I dislike the concept of imposing my will on others, but I find it incredibly difficult to vocalize or write about a significant other without utilizing possessive terms. So let’s break down some alternative options:
Read MoreBuy That Television in Person
In a previous post, I discussed the paradox of decision in regards to shopping online versus in person. Here, I am going to argue that you should shop in person because of the economic ramifications. Now, I feel lot of people think that shopping at mega-corporation’s brick and mortar store is the same as shopping at their online store, but you are wrong (I apologize, but I assume two things: 1) you believe that all the profits go to the corporate headquarters so there is no difference between shopping online or at their in person store as all the money funnels to the same place, 2) the stores would stay open anyway).
Let’s tackle point two first: the store would stay open anyway. No one is going to keep a store open if there isn’t a semblance of profit. Not only that, these companies have some of the profit measuring models in the world. The moment a store stays in the red for an extended period of time, they will close it. Keeping a store open means that they have to pay: utilities, wages, shipping fees, and many other pieces. While, if they are making all the sales in the area online, they can cut that entire cost out and just ship from their distribution center (the place that supplies you your online purchases also supplies the store’s inventory). So no, stores will close and I think most people can see that as we see massive retailers shut down their storefronts and move to online only.
The second assumption was that all the profit goes to a central headquarters. I was tricky here, all the profits do go to a central headquarters but not all the revenue does (revenue is the total sales, profits are what is left over after expenses and all that jazz). So when you buy a television in person, it costs a little more (even though they will often price match online prices). However, the profit margins between an instore and online purchase are vastly different. That single in-store purchase now kept some of the capital of your city in your city (the money gets doled out to the utility company and their employees, the retailer’s employees, the landscapers, everyone in the city that supports that company’s brick and mortar store). So yes, all the profits do go back to the mothership, but an in-store purchase provides less to the company and more to the workers of your city. So buy locally, even buying at a mega-corporation store will provide some benefit to your community (but I suggest you try and find an independent store cause then all your money stays in the area).
Read MoreParadox of Decision – Commerce in Person
There is a phenomenon that is solely human (it could exist in other species, but I cannot communicate with my cat so I don’t know if she experiences regret); regret is the outcome that one experiences when they are thrust into the paradox of decision. As humans, we are often given decisions. The paradox of decision focuses on the feelings of satisfaction with a choice. The theory is that the more options you receive, the more likely you are to regret or be less satisfied with what you have chosen. This is a well documented outcome, as choices increase, the decision maker will be less satisfied with what they chose. The example is usually ice cream – if I offer six choices instead of a hundred, then the person is quick to decide and not feel regret as there was only one flavor out of the six that they truly wanted, but if there was a hundred, they may have three choices they would like so they assume they chose poorly after they make their choice. [click “Read More” for more]
Read More