Things I Do Not Understand, Part V

Name speaks for itself: These are topics I hear people talk about all the time or have actually consumed people's lives or, sadly, are television channels and I do not understand why anyone talks about these topics at all. Please comment. :-)

Part V - Anderson, Dick, Bradbury and...Rowling...what the %&*#^*@^R!$%@!?!

I do not fully understand much of the universe and the phenomenal existence that is creation about me. However, very few of those things blatantly confuse and irritate me. Obviously I am disappointed but a LOT of things human society does, but I truly am not too irritated by many of the absolutely ridiculous things in the world, specifically American society, to the point where I think everything I disagree with is destroying the world. However, there are three things above all things that bother me to no extent, to which I truly cannot even convey anything of even acceptance towards. At least the worst moments of Avatar and Star Wars II are still interesting in video game form. On this planet there truly are but three things I am appalled by and I truly feel every one of these things is hurting the human race for the worse. Now I do not mean to say I have proof of that assertion beyond all reasonable doubt, since that does not really exist, and I realize I might be sounding overly dramatic just for show purposes. I just cannot foresee any of the components of the three things I truly despise being even benign in the development of the human race. Simply put, what I dislike are parasites to human civilization...hint, hint, hint politicians, CEOs and Communication Majors...and I am about to discuss the first one (and yes, I will get to the other two eventually).

What could be so deplorable? Glad you asked, and I have no intention to extend the plot on these subjects. Expect for these posts to get straight to the point, as there are another two to come. Object of my spite number one: the commercialization and simplification of education.

First and foremost, I have never been shown evidence that American education was anything to ever be particularly proud of and I do not think there is a statistic of gains or losses over time that could convince me the system was much better off thirty, forty, fifty, sixty, etc., etc. years ago, but it has certainly not been improving. A flat line is still a flat line. I just would love to know when it was more useful to put out a liberal arts major than it was a scientist? I do not mean to completely debase any subject of study, but the world and human civilization was not much better off at the height of the philosophical periods of grandeur. Teaching people how to think is important, but you should have covered that by ten, not hope to cover it by twenty.

What eats at the very core of my essence as a living being is how students are introduced to education. Hey, every moron out there who is scratching your head wondering why your kids do not like school, did you ever think it was because the education system is one step away from useless and does not teach anyone anything. I honestly do not believe I remember anything any teacher ever said to me before fourteen; oh, and I was the "smart" kid. How can anyone learn in our school system anymore? You could probably count on your fingers how many kids get out of high school and had to read Ulysses, The Communist Manifesto, The Great Gatsby, Waiting for Godot, The Wealth of Nations, Fahrenheit 451, or any other book of merit at all. To anyone who thinks that education is anything more than a commodity any longer in this country, I am sorry to inform you, but you are an idiot, you have zero talent at assessing the particular attitudes of your students, you lack any connect with that little thing called reality, you probably think American kindergarten is useful and you have convinced yourself of that line of reasoning more or less, from what I can see, to spout off to students who come for Candidates' Day.

I realize this might be "cruel" and "unfeeling", but who in their right mind would think that a book like The Picture of Dorian Gray or The Doll's House is not capable of adequate representation of the idea of "repressed self"? Not to mention, that is real literature from great authors who wrote for the purpose of expressing true ideas. A diary entry from a closeted homosexual fourteen year old...yeah, a lot of education can be found from that...hint, hint I just rolled my eyes. I do not care why a white kid whose parents believe in imaginary spaghetti monster vengeance is angry. There are tons of sociological studies on this issue. Why not read something by Wilson, or Massey or Hyde to introduce this idea to the class and have a discussion that matters to the topic? Believe it or not, there are some fifteen year old people who want to be educated, you just do not know how to help them.

How do I know that the education system has not a clue what it is doing? I just need to look at the books it uses to try and get kids "hooked" onto reading. No, do not use anything that could stimulate intellectual thought or exploration or anything. No, no we cannot do that. No, what do we use...Harry !@#$^&*() Potter...UUUUUUGGGGGGHHHHHH! I just groaned so loud I think I killed someone. A chance to educate people and instead our education system shoves at them bland and completely droll stories that as far as I am concerned do not promote any notion of education envelopment, moral maturity, personal proliferation or enlightenment on any level, and is as backwards, corrupting, chauvinistic, pig-headed, mind-numbing, conservative, impersonal and downright deplorable as any show on Fox News and MSNBC combined.

I must be incredibly naive, because I thought reading and education and all of this was adequately described by Francis Bacon when he said "Read not to contradict and confute, nor to believe and take for granted, nor to find talk and discourse, but to weigh and consider." The education and general system of dissemination of literature is so far removed from that statement it is not comical, it is not sad, it is just disappointing.

Just an aside, for anyone who did not get the title, the names before Rowling are authors who won the Hugo Award for best science fiction themed novel, all of whom are amazing writers and authors who thankfully passed away or left writing before Rowling ruined it.

I am not complaining because I think the English language is failing, or commenting on how the excessive literary tradition has degraded into a bland nothingness and any social conversation has turned into 'debatologue' that is just useless, or even that now writing really is about nothing but the money. None of these things help, but they do not have to affect the stories that flow from the literary tradition, and there is a far more central issue. I am not even attacking Rowling alone. No, she is but the queen of the morons. This is an issue of a culture of useless, uninteresting, lacking garbage that is described as educational. The issue is that these stories are made for one reason: because they can be sold to a group of average worth, intellectual hating, tobacco spiting, crass, gaudy, selfish and immature morons in order to make a bizillion dollars, and nothing more. Wendell Berry and Alan Moore write some pretty interesting stories still, and neither of them are gabillionaries. They are no James Joyce and Walter Lippmann, but they are not horrible, and at least I was pleasantly surprised to find stories that would never sell out for stock value. I think my second biggest problem in this issue is that literature is dying and a James Joyce would never survive in today's publishing world. My biggest problem: publishers know their market, and they know how to exploit it well, and think they are actually helping literary tradition and education. Here, I will help with the answer to that question...no, you are not helping.

I would make a metaphor but there truly is no comparison for such parasitism in the universe - I am left speechless.

Look, reading does not equal education. Why does anyone think that these two things are equivalent? Our problem is not an illiterate populace any longer. Our problem is that our literate populace is more likely to read Sports Illustrated and a pop-up book than anything written by Hemingway, Melville or Twain. I can only vomit in my mouth at the fact that no one cares, but in the end that is not a huge problem. The fault lies in whatever moron equated reading and education. Hey Mr. Lacking electrical connection in neural cells, go ahead and just read through a book on Organic Chemistry and then tell me how much you learned. Here, let me answer for you: "I did not learn anything, derp de derp de derp."

Fine, so people can read. If they read nothing of merit and do not study anything of the developmental fields, what does it matter? Even if all you do is equate reading to education, how about we expand upon that premise and see how well you are actually fulfilling even this ridiculous and pathetically low standard.

I am pretty sure no one thought 'See Spot Run' was a masterpiece and good for education because it was "so intriguing" and easily read. It is not better because it can keep someone's attention. No one thought it was a masterpiece, and people thought it was good for education only because it is so simple an American collegiate sophomore could read it, so it is a great place to start kindergartners off. Now, apparently, if you appeal to twelve year old girls and/or fourteen year old guys and you can get them to read for more than two hours at a time you are "amazing", and that is the more highlighted quality, not the fact that some good lessons could be taught from such an effect or that the literature in general develops an interesting form of literary structure. Why? Why are these things important at all? Okay, your book might be effective, if spreading gossip and worthless commercial diarrhea can be described as effective, but amazing? On what level or basis are you making this claim?

The stories, pretty much across the board, are not unique in structure or premise, the characters are moderately interesting but they are not engaging, the plots are more cliched than a George Washington namedrop in a political speech, and you add nothing to language or literary tradition. In fact, speaking specifically to Ms. Rowling, your stories tend to completely masticate certain languages, notably Latin. Come on, 'to have a dead body' is the 'Killing Curse'. Wow, that is just so original and interesting. Let me guess, the one to get girls to sleep with you is "Pierna Abierta" (or 'open leg' to save you the translation). And do not tell me it did not come from Latin or some other early Phonetician dialect because we both know it did and you are not that smart that you actually came up with something original.

In all seriousness and with a tad of humility, I am at least glad there is a lot of free education in Western Society, and I suppose if a book does have some power to interest children to read it is not terrible, in the sense that it is not the manifestation of the spaghetti monster's neighbor who left fecal matter on his doorstep. People should just teach themselves that reading is necessary, again referencing Bacon, but I am not that stupid and naive to believe that is going to happen anytime soon, especially with the pig slop that is human culture and society. If I have to be one hundred percent fully honest I would rather read the tales of 'Hairyyyyy Powtter' than have food poisoning. I am not saying it is "I would rather chose death." terrible. Please do not confuse my irritation with what I like to call 'Christian Irritation'; you know, as in when someone does not agree with you, they then proceed to club you over the head until you are dead. This is not a holy war against commercialized society, since I do not fight for unobtainable victories, and it is not a diatribe to burn all "Harry Potter" and "A Walk to Remember" merchandise (sorry, but those pieces of trash do not deserve bold face script). All I am saying is that the success of these stories baffles and irritates me and I am convinced the general social conditions they embrace in order to be successful are slowly killing humanity and all education along with it.

About these kinds of stories and writings themselves, I do my best to look objectively. My only comment on that is even the most objective person cannot help but find a cache of criticism. The writing is not horrendous and the characters are mildly interesting, I will acknowledge that. It is not the worst piece of commercial diarrhea ever written, but the whole plot and structure is just so uninteresting and not engaging at all. At least in Epic Movie I knew when to laugh and what to feel. I am not sure what the tone is in half of the books because either the tone is unintelligible or, from the Harry Potter model, the lengthy detail at times takes me to the point where emotional investment is no longer viable. I am not saying something like Dan Brown style chapters is the best idea, but in a novel where, oh I do not know, let us say maybe a scene where someone was just murdered in cold blood by one of the arch-nemesis characters, I expect the next showdown to be like a page, maybe two away, especially when they were all in the same room that did not sound like it was particularly large.

I think, if memory serves, the difference between Sirius Black's murder and when Harry finally catches up with Voldemort was nearly an entire chapter. What are we pausing this for? I do not even remember most of the interlude. All that happened was a long drawn out emotional outburst that seemed so forced and unreal it was comical, a conflict with Beatrix, who I still do not care about at all and was so confused by her character it was unnerving and frankly I am unsure when we were introduced to her, something about how your emotions affect the "Torture Curse", a lengthy and boring chase sequence to the atrium and something about how the transportation method through fire works as 'disapparition' or something. Do you really think I care? I cannot imagine most people took away from that scene more than I just did...and I did not learn anything. All I did was read a page of writing that would serve better as toilet paper so more trees do not have to be murdered. Why am I reading this novel at all?

For all the interest of the characters and the overall premise, nothing feels real or above the level of connection I could garner from staring at a dead pigeon. It is not enough that these characters do not feel like real people, and believe it or not fantastical characters can feel real and cause emotional attachment, cue Lord of the Rings. Then to add to the hysteria the books have to extend into unparalleled detail about not just everything that is happening in the scene, down to how many caterpillars are molting in the background, but then the story goes on and on about places and people we either do not care about, or that serve only as a setting to the momentary story or very ancillary roles. I do not need to know who built every building in Meade Village, because frankly I do not care. Notice how I only know of three kings of Minas Tirinth in The Lord of the Rings, not ten and the person who first started building the well and the butcher shop, but then lost the stock and had to settle with working for his brother in the bakery, and they have a constant feud going on with the candlestick maker. If you would like to know why I do not know those things Ms. Rowling, it is very simple: Tolkein knew I would never care! He saved me the trouble of writing another four lines of pointless detail that I would have to read through and forget four seconds later. He focused on developing the characters that would teach me lessons and make me feel like I was there. I learned about friendship, about sacrifice, about meaning, about honor, and I felt like I was there at the Black Gate. All I learned from Harry Potter was how to cast an imaginary killing curse and that apparently everyone in a story needs to end up married to someone of the opposite sex and have kids...I think Victoria Cobb just wet herself.

If you are going to do the long drawn out sequences, do what The Iliad and The Lord of the Rings do. Have chapters all about the details and issues and actually develop them so when we get to the battles and the action scenes we are not confused and it can all just go forward. At one point I remember Dumbledore arrived and helped the Phoenix Order or whatever, and honestly a line later I caught myself asking, 'Wait, when did he get here?' and being lost as to what was happening. I am not confused in The Lord of the Rings when Helms Deep is going on because there was a chapter of explanation for just where everyone was lined up. This gave me a perfect picture of the battle, so as the action proceeded I knew exactly what was going on.

Worst of all the story is just so cliched and simplistic, and then it has to extend for seven novels. If the story was two novels deep I would understand, but seven novels...you realize Lord of the Rings was three novels in total, and James Joyce in his entire career wrote three novels (pattern developing...), all of which could beat your seven novels with seven random pages? From everyone ounce of these stories I took away something meaningful and important, something that made me feel a part of the story. The only part of me that yearned for Harry Potter was when my bowels moved and I need something to wipe myself with.

What exactly is the ultimate point of these novels? What am I supposed to take from them? Honestly, is the whole "good versus evil" tag line your entire plot? Really, that is it? Come on, they had that one in Gilgamesh. Where is the lesson about friendship, or overcoming assumptions, or how cruelty will eventually consume those who use it? All that happens to all the bad guys is the good guys shoot them with the "Killing Curse"...oh boy, such an interesting finale. I would say that is a worn plot device but I think I would insult the word worn. If that is what you are going for I think all you were really doing is playing out a wet dream George Bush had once about him conquering, I mean "liberating", the Middle East. Seriously, is this how the entire plot line could go: Harry fights to rid himself of a personal demon, and conquer the incarnation of destruction, hatred and suffering that opposes him through his own self sacrifice and determination for protecting others. Got it...did we need to set that up over seven novels, three of which make War and Peace look small and inadequate? I would say plot convenience equals story suck, but I am pretty sure the four million pages of this story qualifies that statement far more than I ever could.

I honestly could go on for days on end about why education is not teaching anything when this is what it holds up as the golden standard. It is not enough that we have the ridiculous chastity-based sex education, no national curriculum, private corporations in our lunchrooms, halls, classrooms and now textbooks, on top of all the exposure already seen, unfriendly, segregated and unsafe environments, lackluster teachers, uneducated populace and a lack of funding, but on top of it all you shove this garbage, this commercial diarrhea, in the face of every student and say this is good.

I leave my final comment to the words of the brilliant biochemist, Dr. Edmond H. Fischer. "Education should be exercise; it has become massage."

And I just do not get it...