Wednesday, July 25, 2012

TO WORK OR NOT TO WORK | shut the fuck up

By Mister Mooks

I’ve started an experiment at work this week. Actually, “experiment” is probably the wrong word. That implies I’m testing a hypothesis, unsure of the results that will follow. In this case, I know exactly what the conclusion will be. Namely, this:

Out of the several hours I spend at my desk in the office each day, only about thirty minutes in total could be considered true “work.” This week, I’m cramming all of those isolated minutes into one complete half-hour (is “complete half-hour” an oxymoron?), which means – that’s right – I’m going to conscientiously abstain from doing my job for the rest of the day.

I know this is not a novel idea. I’m certainly not the first to do this. And yes, I’m ripping it straight out of the pages of Tim Ferriss, that efficiency douche who also claims you can get jacked by working out for only four hours each month. (Actually, I don’t really think he’s a douche. But it’d make me a douche if I didn’t give him shit like everybody else does. Right?)

So here’s how it works. After arriving in the office, I log in to Skype so my colleagues know I’m “here.” Then I look at how many new emails are waiting for me, ignore them, and then…that’s it. Until noon. Then, in a mad rush, I send off all the necessary responses and do the bureaucratic robot processes that make up my job, and go to lunch. Then I come back and don’t do anything until 4:00, when I repeat the procedure, and then get the fuck out as soon as the clock hits the mark.

So now we’re talking about something like seven hours of “free time,” Monday through Friday. That’s 35 hours a week, 140 a month, fresh for the pickin’. In theory, I should have The Next Great American Novel written in no time. All those half-written screenplays of mine should practically finish themselves. Oh, and I’ll finally get through all the lessons on Codecademy, read the complete works of William James (Henry, too – why not?), and do all of the other enriching, educational, and worthwhile things that I’ve been putting off for…well, years.

Right.

Instead, I’ve been catching myself reading articles about the heaviest woman on the planet losing weight through “marathon sex,” waiting for friends to answer me on Gchat (come on, guys…guys?), and watching Youtube videos of shit like a politician shooting himself in the middle of a press conference. And here I am, acknowledging the problem, fully aware not only of the real disservice to myself but also of the simple solution to the issue, and yet…not doing anything about it whatsoever.

This smacks of the worst kind of bullshit, and this self-deprecation crap smells even worse. Excuse me while I spiral into a recursive vortex of variations on hating myself. Or, better yet – join me!

Because I know I’m not alone in this. After all, some of those friends on Gchat are actually responding, which means they’re not doing their work at work either. And it means they’re certainly not doing the “Good Work” at work. And how many times have we had that old conversation: “Hey man, you know what we should do? We’re all creative types…we should get together and have some kind of, like, salon, like Gertrude Stein and shit.” “Yeah!” “Great, I’ll write something.” “I’ll write something, too!” “Awesome!” And then you high five and shake hands and bro-hug and go your separate ways, only to find yourself remembering that conversation months later, when you’re at work watching all the trailers on apple.com for the second time, and you haven’t written a single goddamn word of that one-act play you were gonna have everyone read aloud while sipping whiskey and smoking cigarettes and listening to Django Reinhardt.

Christ, even this piece (of shit) of writing is meant to appear on one of those “collaborative blogs,” and if it does, it will be the inaugural entry in an otherwise barren wasteland of abandoned ideas. More time was spent on theorizing what the blog could become than on the actual production of content – and by “more time,” I mean infinitely more time, since no time has been spent on actual writing at all.

But enough bitching. There’s gotta be some optimistic way out of this piece, and I intend to find it. Hell, I guess I could say, “Well, look, I’ve spent these morning hours well, and now I’ve got a whole 750 943 words to show for it!” And then I could end in that call-to-action voice, saying, “You, too, can turn your ideas into tangible content – won’t you join me in the crusade for self-improvement by contributing to our collective blog as originally idealized?”

I dunno, maybe that’s too hokey. Here’s the more accurate version:

All I did was throw a bunch of words together, without thinking too much about it, and somehow got you to read all of them. And that’s pretty satisfying. So maybe the real ending to this is a threat. If you don’t contribute, then mine is the only voice you’ll hear coming out of this place, and that’s not gonna be good for business. That’s not gonna be good for anybody. But I’ll be having a ball, and feeling good about how I spend this newfound free time at the office. Plus, it looks a lot more like work when I have a Word document up on the screen instead of the Wikipedia page for Frotteurism.

For now, I gotta get back to being a mindless drone of bureaucracy. Don’t worry - I’ll be back in a half hour.

#LATENIGHTPROBLEMS | the two-pronged struggle of snl

By Brian Kenney
 
Statement: The "Best of Chris Farley" ranks alongside The Matrix and The Lord of the Rings Trilogy as one of the best selling DVD's of all time.

Statement : In March of 1995, Chris Farley, the standout cast-member of SNL and rapidly rising television star, was chosen to be on the cover of New York Magazine to represent that month's centerpiece article written about a week "behind the scenes Saturday Night Live".  The cover of the magazine read "The Inside Story on the Decline and Fall of Saturday NIght Live" and the article was titled "The Death of Comedy".

Water is wet. The sky is blue. Saturday Night Live isn't as funny as it used to be. Some things change, and some don't. 
And it would be a waste of time for me to write, or you to read, something that tries to defend or criticize the quality of the current Saturday Night Live. The common consensus seems to be that the current show 'is pretty funny sometimes' and I think I agree with that.  

The show will always be faced with 'golden age' comparisons (Bill Simmons with Eddie Murphy, my Mom with Bill Murray, me with Will Ferrel) that are a little unfair both because of the way 'Best of' DVD's make these past era's seem more consistently funny than they really were and because of the unfairness of any kind of  'golden age' comparison.  As Owen Wilson said in his character's (self-admitted) minor revelation from Midnight in Paris, it's not helpful to think that the present doesn't compare to some past era because, "That's what the present is. It's a little unsatisfying because life is a little unsatisfying."

And to try and prove whether something is 'funny' or 'not funny' is...kinda...yeah. Listen, I watched Tim and Eric's Billion Dollar Movie last weekend and that movie wacked me out so thoroughly I don't think I'm going to be able to clearly think about the difference between funny and not-funny for a few months. (Don't ever ask me what Shrim is. Please.)

But there is something that's becoming more apparent every time I watch the show: Saturday Night Live is fundamentally disadvantaged in it's ability to do topical humor.

This is through no fault of the show's writers or cast; it's just a product of having to compete with the world wide superwebs. This won't be news to anyone, but if something happens  on Sunday, the topic will be run through so many times, and you will here dozens of jokes through so many mediums (Twitter, The Onion, Facebook memes, Conan, e-mail's with your friends, any of the pop-culture blogs) that the topic is usually tired and dry by Thursday.  I don't think there is a way to measure how many jokes it takes for  a news piece or topic reach its comedy saturation point, but that point does get reached somewhere.

Then it's Saturday, and Tina Fey is hosting SNL. She runs through her monologue and makes a joke telling her soon-to-be-born daughter to "stay away from that Charlie Sheen".  

And, again, I don't want to try to make a case that the jokes made on SNL are good or bad jokes. Tina Fey might be one of the single funniest people now or ever.  It's just that the 55th and 56th jokes you've heard on about Tim Tebow or Rick Santorum are never likely to get the same reaction as the 2nd and 3rd. 

To sum up: How do we get Kel on this show over Kenan? Am I alone on this?