Saturday Trendwatch

10. RHEUMATOID ARTHRITIS

WHY IT'S TRENDING: A recent study determined that people with rheumatoid arthritis were no less likely than non-sufferers to receive screening for various cancers.  These findings contradict those of an earlier study that found that RA sufferers did undergo fewer such screenings.  It was later determined that the original study suffered from a major design flaw: Instead of assessing people suffering from RA (rheumatoid arthritis), scientists mistakenly interviewed those suffering because of  RA's (resident advisors) at a number of northeastern colleges.  This not only explained the comparative scarcity of cancer screenings (among what was, after all, a generally young population), but also the abundance of respondents who referred to their "rheumatoid arthritis" as "a douchebag."

9. GAS PRICES

WHY IT'S TRENDING: Why wouldn't it be?  Gas prices are always a subject of discussion.  If they go up, it's news.  If they go down, it's news.  If they do nothing, it's news!  Might as well just throw darts at a wall with "Lower," "Higher," and "No change" signs taped to it.  This week, the answer is. . . .HIGHER!!!  HIGHER!!!  HIGHER!!!  At least in some parts of the nation.  In Massachusetts, gas prices have crept up nearly a nickel a gallon over the past week.  Blame Obama!  Of course, prices are still down significantly copmpared to this time last year.  Thank Obama!

8. BANKRUPTCY PROTECTION

WHY IT'S TRENDING: San Bernardino, California, has filed for bankruptcy protection.  Interim Mayor Andrea Miller worries that the city will be unable to meet payroll over the next three months.  Meanwhile, Pat Morris, the Mayor of San Bernardino, "said the decision was the beginning of a 'difficult conversation about the city's budget and the city's future.'"

I would humbly suggest that, if San Bernardino is in such dire financial straits, having two mayors could be considered an unnecessary expense.

7. JENNIFER LOPEZ AMERICAN IDOL

WHY IT'S TRENDING: Well, duh! If a major pop icon like Jennifer Lopez has decided to abandon traditional religion and worship Ba'al or something, I would HOPE it would make the news!  Millions of girls look up to J-Lo, and if she's turned to idolatry?!?  Look, I am all for the First Amendment, and I believe everyone has the right to pursue the religion of his/her choice, but a public figure has a certain responsibility to. . .

What?

TV show?  She's leaving it?

Oh.

Never mind.

6. MISSING MILLIONAIRE CASE

WHY IT'S TRENDING: Millionaire Guma Aguiar of Fort Lauderdale, Florida, has been missing since June.  Now, GPS data suggest that Aguiar may have abandoned his ship, which floated back to shore unattended, and jumped onto another one.  Frankly, this all sounds like a plot point from an episode of "Dexter."  Do we know if Aguiar ever got away with murder on a technicality?

5. CHEVY BUY-BACK

WHY IT'S TRENDING: General Motors has announced a new program, wherein buyers of 2012 and 2013 model year Chevrolets can bring their cars back for a full refund if they are not completely satisfied.  GM is introducing this strategy in order to compete with a newly resurgent Toyota.  Additionally, GM is promoting a "No Haggling" pricing policy, incorporating deep discounts on new cars to allow people to circumvent the negotiating process, which many people find the most unpleasant part of the whole car-buying experience.  If these plans don't succeed in allowing GM to increase or maintain market share, the company may consider other strategies, like giving away a free llama with every purchase of a Chevy Malibu.

4. SIGOURNEY WEAVER

WHY SHE'S TRENDING: Sigourney Weaver stars in the new USA show, "Political Animals," which premieres tomorrow night.  In the show, Weaver plays the ex-wife of a philandering American President.  After running for office herself, Weaver's character accepts the post of Secretary of State.  But it's not about Hillary!  Personally, we're looking forward to episode 3, where Weaver travels to LV-426 on a diplomatic mission to meet with a group of aliens who have taken over a terraforming community.  In space, no one can hear you negotiate.

3. MICHELLE OBAMA THREAT

WHY IT'S TRENDING: A Washington, DC, policeman has been suspended for making a threat against First Lady Michelle Obama.  The officer, who has not been publicly identified, has worked on motorcycle details involving Washington political figures.  Some have suggested the policeman may simply have been joking.  In which case, he should certainly be fired for sheer stupidity.

2. GAY COUPLE'S PICTURE MISUSED

WHY IT'S TRENDING: Brian Edwards and Tom Privitere are a nice married couple from New Jersey.  A picture from their engagement party

was photoshopped and used by a rabid anti-gay group as part of a campaign to defeat a Colorado Republican politician who supports gay marriage.  The Southern Poverty Law Center has requested that the hate group, Virginia-based Public Advocate, remove the picture from its publications, and Edwards and Privitere are considering a lawsuit.  In fairness, though: Look at that picture!  If those guys aren't a threat to everything that is good and pure, I don't know what is!

And the number one trending topic is. . . .

1. MOM SUING JUSTIN BIEBER

WHY IT'S TRENDING: Stacey Wilson Betts took her five daughters to a Justin Bieber concert where the Oregon woman claims she suffered permanent hearing loss.  Just to clarify, Betts is not claiming that the music itself was too loud--in fairness, any Bieber song played at a level to allow human perception could be said to be "too loud."  Rather, Betts is claiming that Bieber himself was showing reckless disregard for her hearing (and perhaps sanity), when he exhorted the arena full of screaming "Beliebers" to scream even louder.  His specific offense? "[W]aving his arms in an upward motion while riding over them in a heart-shaped gondola."

I kind of feel like screaming myself.

Serious Damage

WOS and I both enjoy the legal drama "Damages," and we were both disappointed when FX dropped it and it moved to some DirecTV channel.  Despite the fact that we get virtually every cable channel, we're on a different service and thus were unable to watch the continuing saga of Patty Hewes and Ellen Parsons until last night, when we picked up season 4 on DVD.

"Damages" revolves around the law-firm of Hewes and Associates, where mega-lawyer Patty Hewes (Glenn Close) takes on various and sundry malefactors of great wealth.  At the beginning of the series, Patty hires newly minted attorney Ellen Parsons (Rose Byrne); the evolving relationship of these two women provides the narrative throughline of the entire series.  While Patty is not a criminal lawyer, she operates within the even-more dangerous realm of Masters of the Universe, men with gobs of money and great power.  Each season features a complex plot filled with double-dealing, intricate machinations, and enough twists and turns to keep you hanging on for the next episode.

The show features strong performances.  In addition to Glenn Close (more on whom in a moment), Rose Byrne nicely fills the by-now-requisite role on American shows of Brit/Aussie who does an annoyingly perfect American accent.  Where Close's Patty is the well-established powerhouse attorney, Byrne's Ellen undergoes a steady development over the course of the series, from young and tentative to seasoned and confident: She is a budding Patty Hewes; it remains to be seen how much of Patty's ruthlessness she ultimately embraces.

Each season also features notable guest stars.  In season three, Campbell Scott plays the primary "villain."  In a storyline modeled on the Bernie Madoff scandal, Scott plays the scion of the Tobin family, whose patriarch, played by Len Cariou, has been exposed for running a multi-billion dollar Ponzi scheme.  Over the course of the season, Scott evolves smoothly and convincingly from an innocent pawn desirous to do the right thing to a murderous schemer determined to protect himself and his family at all costs.

Ted Danson has a recurring role in the first three seasons as Arthur Frobisher, CEO of a company patterned largely on Enron, who in season one is Patty Hewes' chief antagonist.  In a long and successful career, Danson has never been better.  The "likable villain" may be something of a dramatic cliche, but what makes Arthur Frobisher such an interesting take on this is that his main motivation is, in fact, to be liked.  Despite the fact that he has engaged in unethical, immoral, and criminal behavior, Arthur Frobisher needs to see himself as an admirable and honorable man.  And watching Danson portray Frobisher's constant wrestling with these internal contradictions is one of the show's great pleasures (I'm hoping Arthur shows up in season four).

The heart of the show, though, is Glenn Close, perhaps the best actress to have had the unfortunate timing to be a star in the era of Meryl Streep.  She's every bit as talented--plus she's a Mets fan, so she gets bonus points for that.  I've loved her since "Dangerous Liaisons," and it's not hard to imagine the Marquise de Merteuil reincarnated as Patty Hewes.  For there is one thing that Glenn Close undoubtedly does better than Streep--better than anybody, in fact--and that is. . . smile. 

I have seen some terrifying things in movies and television shows: aliens bursting out of people's chests; a serial ack.killer peeling off a man's face and wearing it as a mask; Michelle Bachmann.  None of these things is more frightening than the smile of Glenn Close.  When, as Patty Hewes, she smiles at an opposing lawyer, a defendant, her husband, you cannot help but feel sorry for that person, no matter what he or she has done.  Because you just know this person is in for some serious pain.

While not quite as good as "Breaking Bad" or "Game of Thrones," "Damages" has quite a lot to recommend it, if you haven't seen it and are looking for something to pass the time. For one thing, it's easier jump into than a lot of the other long-form dramas on TV. Each season is essentially a self-contained story, focusing primarily on one major case being handled by Patty Hewes' firm. It's probably best to start from season one, but you could just as easily watch seasons 2, 3, or 4 for starters. One caution, though: Whatever season you choose, start with the first episode, or you will be hopelessly lost.

Just Another Day at Solipsist Central

I'm thinking that someone should make a cologne for necrophiliacs.  They could call it "Tomb Essence."

. . .

WOS: Been working on that one for a while?

SOL: Kinda.

WOS: Proud of yourself?

SOL: Kinda.

"Help Desk"--You Keep Using That Word. I Do Not Think It Means What You Think It Means

My college has been going through some technological "upgrades" recently.  What follows is from an e-mail that staff received the other morning.  Please note: Previously, to reach the IT Help Desk, one simply had to pick up any phone and dial 1234:

Good morning,

Last night the District Office was successfully converted to the new phone system, therefore, if you are contacting personnel here at the District Office from another site please dial “8” then the new 5-digit extension of the person. . . .

The District IT helpdesk is now at the new extension 16888. As always if you have questions please let me know.

So, the phone number went from 1234 to 16888--well, 816888, to be exact.  This, in California, is what passes for progress these days.

I Did a Whole Five Minutes on "The Manchurian Candidate"

I know listening to people tell you about their dreams is about as exciting as watching soccer, so I won't bore you with details.  But last night I had this dream where I was on fire--metaphorically, that is: I was conversing with a group of people and firing off one-liner, after one-liner.  I was wilder than Wilde, sharper than Shaw, and if I say I was wittier than Noel Coward, I wouldn't be lyin'!  (Get it?  Coward?  Lion?  Same to you!) And in my dream, I remember thinking to myself that I would need to remember this stuff so I could use some of it in today's "Solipsist."

Now, ordinarily, in this type of situation, what would happen is, I would wake up and not be able to remember any of the things I had said that were so hysterically funny.  In this case, though, I do remember a bit of what I was saying.  And, if I do say so myself, the general level of wit holds up, even in the stark light of consciousness.  The problem is that most of the witty remarks I so easily tossed off had to do with the fact that, in the reality evoked by this particular dream, Chinese premier Hu Jintao was competing for the Republican presidential nomination.  Upon waking up, I realized that, as this was not the case, my jokes wouldn't really make much sense.

Yeah.

Why can't I just have sex dreams like a normal person?

The Joys of Teaching (Continued)

I don't remember whether it was "Sesame Street" or "The Electric Company"--or if it was a muppet thing or a cartoon--but on one of those shows, there was this little sketch featuring a man in a coffee shop.  The waiter comes up to the man and asks what he would like.  The man replies that he'd like a cup of coffee and a sweetroll.  The waiter apologizes: They don't have sweetrolls.  Oh, the man says, in that case, I'll have a cup of tea and a sweetroll.  No, Sir, I'm sorry, we don't have sweetrolls.  Oh, well, then let me just have a glass of orange juice and a sweetroll. . . . The scene proceeds in this manner for a few more rounds.  Finally, the waiter explodes: WE DON'T HAVE SWEETROLLS!!!

Oh, all right, says the customer.  In that case, let me just have a sweetroll.

I just want to say that, as a teacher, I totally sympathize with that waiter.

Happiness Is. . . .

The paper of record for the First-World Problems Set today featured a couple of articles on happiness.  In the first, we learn that money can't buy you happiness, at least not directly.  Specifically, Elizabeth Dunn and Michael Norton report on various research findings that suggest that, after a point, more money does not lead to greater personal happiness.  While living in poverty is generally associated with lower levels of glee, once one has reached a certain level of income (which, in the US, is about $75,000 per year), more money does not make one appreciably happier.  In other words, when it comes to happiness, the rich are not, in fact, substantially different from the rest of us--as long as "us" means those in the middle class.

Really, this is nothing new.  Back in 1943, Abraham Maslow formulated his "Hierarchy of Needs," a pyramid-shaped model that attempts to illustrate the levels of human satisfaction.  At the bottom of the pyramid are physiological and safety needs--the need for food, the need for shelter--that people must satisfy merely to survive.  Once those needs have been met, one can proceed up the pyramid towards the ultimate goal of "self-actualization"--what I guess the army would call as "being all that you can be" (although perhaps without so much automatic weaponry).  Maslow would no doubt look at the reports showing greater income uncorrelated with greater happiness and nod sagely, perhaps stroking his chin and chuckling.  Income provides for the needs at the bottom of the pyramid, but money can't buy you self-actualization.

Except, Dunn and Norton continue, maybe it can--if you use money correctly: not to purchase more stuff  but to purchase more experiences.  Vacations are better for the soul than big-screen TVs.  But an even better path to happiness lies in buying things for other people.  Subjects in a study who were given $20 reported greater feelings of satisfaction when they were told to spend the money on someone else than when they were told to spend the money on themselves.  Of course, $20 couldn't buy you a big-screen TV anyway, so maybe that's a flaw in the experimental design. 

So, generous people are happier than the stingy.  And according to a second article, conservatives are happier than liberals.  Again, I'm not sure this is surprising.  The author, Arthur C. Brooks, suggests that liberals may attribute this difference to the fact that "conservatives are simply inattentive to the misery of others."  Sounds reasonable to me.  But seriously, folks.  Of course conservatives are "happier."  By definition, conservatives tend to support the status quo: Not wanting things to change suggests a certain level of satisfaction with the way things are.  Furthermore, religious conservatives tend to be happier than non-religious ones.  If you're getting stoned on the opiate of the people, why wouldn't you be feeling good?

So, to sum up, generous religious conservatives are, as a group, a happy lot.  Which may explain why this stingy agnostic liberal is so often grim and depressed.  Still and all, though, maybe the best measurement of personal happiness is the comparative amount of time one can spend worrying about how unhappy one is.