The Cutting Room Floor II

Back by popular demand (and because we couldn't think of anything else): More outtakes!

From "Sunday Paper Recap" (10/25):

In all the reportage on swine flu, we're getting pretty tired of hearing constantly about the major at-risk groups: children, pregnant women, the elderly.

What about the Solipsist?

Sure, we bloggers holed up in our dimly lit rooms, subsisting on energy drinks and salty snacks (mmmm. . . . Funyuns) may not seem to be at risk of contracting a communicable disease, seeing as how that generally requires a minimum of human contact.

But still: Is it a risk we as a society are prepared to take?

At Solipsist Central, we man the frontlines in the neverending battle to protect our democracy. If we fall ill, then the blogosphere will be bereft--bereft, we say! Just take a look at the "Blogs of Note" to see what passes for non-Solipsistic commentary. (Yes, we're still bitter about this.) Would you entrust your children's future to these people?

Quick, get us some Tamiflu!

*********************************************

From "Time for the Boys of Summer to Begone" (October 26, 2009):

In New York, in mid-October of the year 2000, you could witness a strange phenomenon: As the Mets played the St. Louis Cardinals in the National League Championship Series, you could find a small percentage of Mets fans secretly wishing for a Cardinals victory. Probably very few would admit to this, but it was there.

Understand, this was no act of disloyalty. Rather it stemmed from the following reasoning:

The Mets were playing the Cardinals.

The Yankees were playing the Seattle Mariners.

If the Mets beat the Cardinals, they would go on to play the winner of the Yankees-Mariners series.

If the Mets played the Mariners and won, great!

If the Mets played the Mariners and lost, undesirable but acceptable.

If the Mets played the Yankees and won, Nirvana! Heaven on Earth! Paradise teeming with virgins and Funyuns! (Mmmm. . . . Funyuns.)

BUT:

If the Mets played the Yankees and lost? The ninth circle of Hell would be an upgrade.

So, in the calculus of the Mets fan, since we suspected deep down (correctly, as it turned out) that the Mariners wouldn't beat the Yankees, we had to wrestle with the question of whether it would be better to make it to the World Series and possibly lose to the Yankees or just fall to the Cardinals.

In retrospect, we're glad the Mets made it. We're just thankful that the whole Bush v. Gore thing came along to distract all the Yankee fans from their otherwise neverending gloating.

*********************************************

From, "Why Aren't We 'Grammar Girl'?" (October 28, 2009):

You have to understand, grammar is our life! If anyone should be "Grammar Girl," it should be us!

What's that, WOS? Oh, yeah (blush). That sentence doesn't exactly sound right, does it?

If anyone should be "Grammar Girl," it should be we!

**********************************************

From "Happy Halloween" (October 30, 2009):

(Commentary from "Drop the Halloween Mask! It Might Scare Someone")

At one school district, "costumes depicting animals and food (preferably carrots or pumpkins) are in favor."

Yeah, because okra and kumquats are just way too scary.

One parent is quoted as saying, "The fact is, if parents are too stupid to not send kids to school with hockey masks as Jason, they are probably too stupid to read this memo [sent by the school]."

Is that sentence incoherent, or are we just too stupid to understand it?

The guidelines at Riverside Drive Elementary School "discourage fake weapons, costumes that mock race or gender and anything too sexy; French maids are explicitly discouraged."

Well, there goes our plan to send the five-year old to school as a gun-wielding, paraplegic Cambodian prostitute!

Happy Halloween

"The Saudi authorities, fearing that the hajj could turn their holy city into a petri dish for viral mutations and a hub for spreading a new pandemic wave around the world. . . . have asked some worshipers, including pregnant women and the elderly, not to make the trip" ("Saudis Try to Head Off Swine Flu Fears Before Hajj")

As Edward G. Robinson might growl, "Ehhhh. . . . Where's your Muhammad now?"

Seriously, isn't there something more than a little ironic about the idea of people being exposed to highly infectious diseases through the exercise of their devotion to God?

We're not picking on Muslims, by the way. As you may have ascertained from previous posts, we have issues with pretty much all organized religions, especially when their essential messages of peace and love inevitably get co-opted by their more violent fringe elements. But this latest news from Saudi Arabia gets at the heart of what must be the central question to all religious leaders: Why do bad things happen to good people?

The question of evil is at the heart of many an argument against God. If God is omniscient, omnipotent, and benevolent, then why does He allow evil to exist and occasionally triumph. The theological response generally involves some reference to free will. Fair enough, but how does that argument account for devout worshippers falling ill (with a presumably God-created virus) while completing an obligation laid upon them by that same God? Shouldn't He confer upon them some immunity?

***********************************

On the lighter side of the news, we were tickled by an article on the attempts by school districts across the country to make Halloween less scary. ("Drop the Halloween Mask! It Might Scare Someone") Basically, at various school districts, Halloween prohibitions have been extended from the perhaps understandable ones against toy guns, knives, or other weaponry, to anything that might be considered "scary," including such time-honored costumes as vampires, zombies, and Smurfs.

OK, we made up the bit about Smurfs, but WE find them scary--or at least downright creepy.

Aaaaaaaaaahhhh!!!

(Image from yourfunplace.com)

And isn't that the problem? Isn't scary subjective? Just as children need to be taught to hate, don't they also need to be taught that a leather-faced, chainsaw-wielding man in a butcher's apron is something to be afraid of? Where adults see Jason Voorhees, might not a child just see a hockey player? Pity the poor tween who simply wants to dress as a goalie: Sorry, kid, you can be a forward or a defenseman, but that's it! And put away that stick!

Hallowhen (A Brief Post)

It's become a cliche to complain about ever-earlier Thanksgiving and Christmas displays. We're no longer shocked to see Rudolph lighting fireworks, and soon no doubt turkeys will compete with rabbits for Easter symbolism (at least then the eggs will make more sense). But we fear that these premature exhibitions of holiday spirit are starting to cause confusion among celebrants of lesser holidays.

Today, as a quick glance up will show you, is October 29th. By our reckoning, that is still two days before Halloween. Why, then, is our campus overrun by costumed hooligans? We nearly bumped into a hockey-masked serial killer on our way to class.

(Digression: While it was somewhat adorable, we found it thoroughly discordant to have Jason Voorhees apologize for nearly knocking us over. EOD.)

The entire math faculty went a bit loopy and dressed as clowns (which they assure us is NOT their everyday garb). And all manner of witches, zombies, and Spidermen made their way around the quad throughout the afternoon.

Now, you might argue that these folks were simply bringing some holiday spirit to their school TODAY because the actual holiday falls on a weekend. Fair enough, except we would point out that today is THURSDAY. Why not wear costumes tomorrow? Or is Halloween now a multi-day festivity like Hannukah or Ramadan?

(Digression: If the Solipsist gets jihaded, we expect Sloppists to avenge our death. EOD.)

Is 29 the new 31?

We hope not. That would make 40 something like the new 45. And that's a Halloween horror we don't even want to think about!

Why Aren't We "Grammar Girl"?

The Solipsist is upset.

Yesterday, as we were driving to work, listening to the KFOG morning show (104.5 FM in the Bay Area), the DJ announced that, after the commercial break, they would be joined in the studio by "Grammar Girl."

We nearly plowed into a hedge.

Grammar Girl is one Mignon Fogarty.

(Digression: When she was introduced, we thought her name was Min Yon Fogarty. Briefly, our loathing and envy was replaced by a grudging admiration that a Korean-American had achieved such heights of English fluency as to become Grammar Girl. Then we found out that her name isn't Korean--it's just stupid. EOD.)

(Additional Digression: You don't suppose Grammar Girl will read this, do you? Fingers crossed! EOAD)

Anyway, Fogarty is a podcaster who podcasts from the "Quick and Dirty Tips"site--which, we gather from minimal research, is a cyberbrothel where chronologically-heavyhanded experts from various fields (dog-training, nutrition, "modern manners") offer easy-to-digest advice to the wondering masses. Fogarty is the go-to gal for such talmudic questions as, "Can 'podcast' be used as a verb," and "Is she 'a podcaster who' or 'a podcaster that.'

But who needs Grammar Girl--that podcaster witch! (See what we did there?) You have the Solipsist.

A) Yes, you can use "podcast" as a verb: We just did!

B) It's "a podcaster who": You use "who" when referring to people and "that" when referring to things--although (cool your jets, Grammar Girl!) there is a movement now to use "that" in cases when referring to a non-specific person or group of people: "The baseball player that wins the MVP award will earn a hefty bonus." So, in the above example, you could probably say "the podcaster that," but we encourage the more elegant "who."

See? We could be Grammar Girl!

We want to know how she got her gig. Where did she sign up? Or, if we wish to avoid sentence-ending prepositions, "Up at where did she sign?"

Sloppists, you have a mission: Call your local radio stations, TV executives, podcasting pimps, speakers' bureaus--just, y'know, call anybody!

Equal time for Grammar Boy!

You Never Forget Your First Time

The Solipsist has been teaching for nigh on twenty years. He has taught junior high school students, high school students, community-college students, private college students, and university students. He has taught writing, literature, and even, on occasion, math. In all that time, in all those classes, one thing has never happened. (Well, SEVERAL things have NEVER happened--we've never been bitten by a sloth while explaining subordinate clauses, for example--but we are speaking here of one fairly common occurrence.) We have never had to kick a student out of class.

Until today.

We are disappointed in ourselves, but we feel we had no choice: A small group of students simply would not stop talking--in comparatively loud voices--having been warned repeatedly that this was unacceptable. Finally, we asked one of the louder students to leave. He got up and moved to another seat in another part of the classroom--having been asked to do this on at least one occasion by the Solipsist's co-teacher. "No," we explained. "Out."

We know we did the right thing. After all, some 25 other students are in the class actually trying to accomplish something. It's unfair to them as well as to YNSHC to tolerate constant disruptions. Still, we can't help but feel that on some level we've surrendered.

Whenever the Solipsist conducts interviews of potential faculty members, a standard question is, "How do you handle disruptive students." The stock answer includes some reference to having a private conversation with the student and emphasizing the importance of mutual respect. But we've never really understood the question. This is college. Students' attendance is optional. There are no truant officers to deal with. It has never been much of a problem for us to make the case to students that, if they are disruptive, ultimately they are only wasting their own time and money.

Indeed, after "Gabby" left the classroom, we paused and said, "Anybody else?" Not a threat or angry comment, but a sincere invitation. "Look, folks, you have to understand something. We really don't mind whether you show up or not. It makes very little difference to us. If you don't want to be here, you literally--seriously--do not have to be here. But if you choose to be here, then. . .well, then BE HERE." Nobody took us up on our offer.

We like to believe that there's a solution to every problem. Apparently, there is, but the solution may be undesirable. Still, 20 years is a good run before our first intolerably annoying student. And we suppose there's a first time for everything--maybe even for getting attacked by a sloth.

A friend of ours once said that, once you get past a certain age, the opportunity to have "firsts" doesn't come along that often. We suppose we''ll accept that and chalk this up to experience. Here's to another twenty fairly tolerable years.

Time for the Boys of Summer to Begone

The Yankees return to the World Series; the Solipsist yawns. This represents progress. Time was we would have spent World Series week muttering imprecations at the cruelty of the baseball gods. Now, we're relatively indifferent. Probably has something to do with no longer living in New York, and thus not being exposed to self-congratulatory Yankee fans.

It's irrational. We understand why Red Sox Nation hates the Yankees, having suffered at their hands for nearly a century. The Solipsist, of course, is a Mets fan, which means his hatred stems more from envy than any direct sense of injury. Sure, 2000 was painful, but we took it in stride: We knew the Mets were unlikely to prevail, and we mostly just enjoyed the ride.

We can't stomach the Yankee fan's sense of entitlement. Consider Joe Torre: a consummate gentleman and arguably the most successful manager in the history of the Yankees franchise. When he fails to make it to the World Series for a few seasons (NOT failing, it must be emphasized, to reach the playoffs), he is rather unceremoniously dumped.

We harbor no illusions. We know the Mets have acted less than competently with some of their players (see the trades of Nolan Ryan and Tom Seaver) and less than nobly toward some of their other personnel (see the midnight firing of Willie Randolph--although, as he was a former Yankee, that may just have been residual karma). Still, the joy of Mets fans--and, indeed, of every other non-Yankee fan--at the success of their team represents a joy in achievement, accomplishment.

The joy of the Yankee fan is that of someone opening a bank statement and seeing that their CD has matured. It's thoroughly uninspiring.

Sunday Paper Recap

Check out the picture on the front page of the New York Times, from an article about the M.D. Anderson Cancer Center in Houston:

Looks like cancer is the new Beatles.

Also, we want to provide a heads up to Sloppist Nation about another front-page article: "H1N1 Widespread in 46 States as Vaccines Lag." The headline in the print edition is more alarming, "Obama Declares Swine Flu Outbreak a National Emergency."

Scary, right? Don't panic. The presidential declaration of an "emergency" is more of a technical, legal measure than a statement of objective fact. By declaring an "emergency," the President has empowered hospitals and local governments to take certain measures--like setting up alternate treatment sites and triage centers--if they become overwhelmed with swine flu patients. Note the "if"; this hasn't happened yet. In other words, this is what is known to rational people as a precautionary measure.

We point this out (a) to reassure Sloppists that they are in no more danger of contracting swine flu today than they were yesterday and (b) to gird Sloppists for the inevitable:

Dick Cheney: This is just further evidence of President Obama's limp-wristed, liberal attitude toward public health. His willingness to surrender to H1N1 emblematizes his approach to national security. No doubt if the President has his way, Al Qaeda will be put in charge of the immunization efforts!

Rush Limbaugh: Comrade Obama yesterday declared a "Swine Flu Emergency." Folks, this is just one more example of the lengths the White House, along with Nancy Pelosiskaya and Harry Reidovich's politburo, will go to slip us a dose of socialized medicine.

Glenn Beck: (Weeping) America, we must defend ourselves against Obama's swine flu epidemic the way the Founding Fathers intended! With guns!

Sarah Palin: Gee willikers! We never had a swine flu emergency when Republicans were in charge! Where did this come from, anyway? China? I can see China from my bathroom window! I could have told Barack and Joe that this was coming.

Be prepared.