Orginally written on October 15, 2011.
Part two
of a three part weekly series. Before working on the neurotic character essay, I was assigned to write a 3 page argument on a subject of my choice and I couldn't resist tackling the controversial issue about video games and whether or not they've dumbed down society. As a gamer, I understand both the positive and the negative aspects of gaming, how it could isolate you from the real world if you play for a long time(24 hours is my limit) but how it could also be a way to experience a brand new world and interact directly with the environment. That sounds a bit outlandish but I can promise you that the essay is very clear. To be honest, this paper was something I could only dream of writing in high school and I can't find any problems with it although there are probably a few. One more negative thing about gaming: it is one of the few things that can set me off more quickly than annoying jerkasses. Like always, let me know what you
think/how the argument could've been improved in the comments.
Video games have faced numerous controversies and accusations of being a wasted form of entertainment. Many people believe that video games have caused us to become more spastic, less able to focus on tasks, and diminished our capability to think. Video games simplify our impulses into objectives that range from getting from point A to point B to killing as many people as we can in a time limit, but as with any genre that we don’t really understand, we tend to generalize video games of still being this simple. In the year 2011, video games have advanced far beyond anyone’s expectations, and while enjoying the game is significant to its quality, so are the story and characters. Video games are capable of giving us enough control that they stimulate our behavior other than radically weakening it.
Video games have evolved from the basic arcade games, as they promote critical thinking as an incentive to completing the game. One of the most famous video games released in the modern era is Portal. The game begins with a simple premise: you are a lab rat in a science experiment, testing out a device called the portal gun, supervised by an artificial intelligence computer system called GlaDOS. Once the player absorbs those details, the game begins. Video games usually have time limits that increase tension and can make someone unnecessarily anxious when playing. Portal has no such time limit, and gives the player all the time in the world to complete each puzzle. The only distraction is GlaDOS who encourages you, the test subject, to complete each “impossible” puzzle, as well as quitting in order to get cake… that you will never get. The game also doesn’t pressure you into completing every single object at once; in fact, your impatience grows from either having a compulsory need to complete every single puzzle quickly, or from making brash decisions that only impede your progress. Portal’s many puzzles encourage you to slow down and make rational decisions in order to solve each puzzle, like solving a Rubik’s cube.
Portal is an innovative game not in only in gameplay, but also in story development that makes the experience more thought-provoking than others want to give it credit for. Portal plays normally up until a certain point where the game tests out your survival skills against gun turrets. You see a cube that can be used as a shield or a weapon, but it’s been precariously placed in between a malfunctioning wall panel. By removing the cube, you see a hallowed, rusted room that is the exact opposite of the testing labs; the game doesn’t force the player to see the room. It is only the player’s own curiosity that makes them cross into the hallowed shadows of the Aperture Science Testing Facilities where the player discovers some disturbing “holes” in the testing labs. Unlike most video games that force your attention, this is a moment you can choose to encounter or ignore.
The game makes a witting remark on how most people view gamers as mindless drones who only complete objectives, but this humanizing moment demonstrates how conscious gamers, or everybody else, can and have always been. A pivotal moment in Portal is when GlaDOS suddenly gives you a companion cube to use as a part of the experiment. The cube, despite being a lifeless object, becomes essential in completing the puzzle and you begin to grow attached to the object or accept it as just another tool at your disposal: it depends entirely on the player’s reaction. You arrive to the end, and hope to bring your cube along with you, but GlaDOS asks that you take your “new” friend to the incinerator for proper disposal. If you are the mindless drone GlaDOS expects you to be, you’ll destroy the cube and move on to the next portion of the game, but if you had any attachment to the cube whatsoever, you will hesitate, only be pressed on further by GlaDOS to destroy the cube. Evidently, the cube’s destruction is the only way to progress. Your attachment to the cube is spurred further when you discover some unusual wall markings that praise the cube, almost sanctifying as a holy object. Either way, Portal demonstrates that mental thought and understanding can be relevant in video games, as well as being a vehicle for advancing the story.
Now why does it matter? As I mentioned before, video games are currently a misunderstood medium. At one point, every medium we relate to today was lambasted by the majority for being useless and over stimulating until enough people made it acceptable in our culture. What these people don’t realize is that a sophisticated medium has existed for 40 years, and is much more engaging than a currently respected medium like film, for example. Usually, it takes a small group of craftsman who truly understand their craft to create glorious works of art much like the geniuses at Valve Corporation did in making Portal, but video games have always been an integral part of our culture, even if it has only been a small portion of it. As the medium continues to advance into new unexplored territories, people’s perception of games as an important medium will continue to grow, but even games like Portal shouldn’t be singled out as the only major advance in video games. Even goal-oriented games like Super Mario Brothers and Sonic the Hedgehog, made in 1985 and 1991, respectively, were innovative in their time for being bright, colorful games that also valued the player’s attention and mastery of the games’ diversifying locations much like Portal. Video games have always been relevant and in time, it will be as respected as the one of the most treasured literary devices of our time.
Works Cited:
Portal Version 1. October 9, 2007. Bellevue: Valve Corporation. October 14, 2011.
Support the blog by joining the group on Facebook, following Harold Howardson on Twitter, and checking out the Tumblr page and dedicated YouTube channel.
Tuesday, November 13, 2012
Wednesday, November 7, 2012
Everybody’s looking at me: The Neurotic Character in Literature
Originally written on December 7, 2011.
This is the first of a three part weekly series. I've thought about posting this since the day I've finished it but I've held off on the idea for several reasons, the most important one being: NO ONE COULD CARE LESS ABOUT READING AN ACADEMIC PAPER I WROTE. I'm currently majoring in Spanish and one of the things a Spanish major has to know is writing long papers. I made a joke in high school about how long papers would have to be in college. I should slap my past self for being a smug bastard. Despite this, the following academic papers that I will post for the next three Wednesdays are about topics that matter a great deal for me and as such, I tried to make the papers sound very personal, not like the stilted, template-based ones we wrote in high school. This first paper is about something I wanted to investigate ever since I began to appreciate comedy. What are the origins of the neurotic character and why have we begun looking up to it as a modern archetypical hero? So, even though this is technically an academic paper, I still consider it as a kind of creative work since I can rationally argue on the significance of my biggest cultural influences and that has to count for something. Due to certain restrictions (such as only being 5 pages long), I could only pick out several important cultural figures that could be considered as neurotic although a more consise paper would much longer, way too long for this blog, even. Like always, let me know what you think/how the argument could've been improved in the comments.
The neurotic character is the unspoken hero of our modern lives. When at once we looked up to the strongman who could overcome any obstacle, suddenly we revere the character whom does everything wrong. The neurotic character, at one glance, is the living, breathing archetype of everything conceivably wrong with the world, but due to the character’s inexplicable popularity, absolute hatred toward the character isn’t common. The neurotic character is believed to be a modern invention, or a comical contrast to the more serious archetypes, but in fact, the neurotic character has been an integral component of literature for centuries. The neurotic character, within the text, is despised by everyone but beloved by everyone outside of the text.
The neurotic character everyone relates to is George Costanza from Seinfeld. George is a relatable character from a well-established sitcom. George behaves unlike most people, obsessing over pointless trivialities, taking advantage of everyone and everything, and being at the blunt of every moment of misfortune that comes his way. George, for a sitcom character, is very depressing, and constantly ponders the necessity of life, wondering if the mistakes he continues to make are worth minimum wage or even life; his behavior is a definitive trait of the neurotic character who“…suffers from easy fatigability and irritability. He is dissatisfied with everything including himself”(1). The center of his problems is his failed love life. George does not know to keep a relationship together, and constantly makes destructive or impulsive decisions that ruin the relationship. Nothing could be more tragic or hilarious than acknowledging that George’s fiancé died from licking poisonous wedding envelopes he had picked out. George is a character with no realistic prospects; his reason for getting up in the morning is “to get the Daily News”(2). Even after hearing a friend’s harsh argument about George’s laziness and encouraging George to mature, still George questions him with a comic “Why?” as though his friend’s words of wisdom flew right over his head, and George still refuses to accept reality, that there is more to life than getting the local paper.
Larry David, a “fictional” character from Curb Your Enthusiasm, is the apex of the neurotic character in pop culture. Larry is a character who has always been looked upon a weird misanthrope in the eyes of the other characters who simply cannot rationalize his actions. Larry talks of many unspoken rules that others are not aware of, although the rules are morally based at their core, even if they are ridiculous. Larry makes terms of each “rule” in order to get the point of the rules across to the other characters that consider the rules as something shortsighted and pointless. Larry also works under his own understanding of others, even if at times, he can be fairly off, usually, he knows how to manipulate others for his own means, such canceling appointments and using his mother’s death as an excuse. At the very center of Larry’s behavior is an unmistakable core that has a sense of justice. Larry and his wife go to the grand opening of their restaurant; all goes well until the chef, who has Tourette’s, spews out several curses that halt everyone’s conversations and leaves the room in complete silence. Ever the good spirit, Larry recalls seeing high school students who shaved off their heads in support of a fellow classmate who is going through chemotherapy, and does what any good-hearted soul would in that situation: he screams “Scum-sucking motherfucking whore!”(3) Shortly after, his manager curses, and eventually the entire classy restaurateurs invoke in loud profanities. The clip ends with Larry in the middle of the ruckus he causes, arms folded, proud of the moral obligation he made for the chef. It is an unusual solution, one some people would have trouble understanding, but it’s a truly daring act to risk the reputation of your restaurant if only to spare the feelings of a chef suffering with Tourette’s. Though Larry’s behavior is unusual, ultimately it becomes understandable and relatable.
Notes From the Underground, a famous novel from the early 19th century, is an example of the development of the neurotic character. The narrator with no name begins his “novel” by the narrator’s voice “exist[s] in our society, when we consider the circumstances in the midst of which of our society is formed,” an indication that someone with the narrator’s opinions undoubtedly exists within the norm(4). The norm is questioned by the narrator and at times, may seem even more deluded and mistaken than the narrator’s own conceptions. The narrator’s “intense self-consciousness causes him to be vain at one moment and self-loathing the next,” and seething with bitterness towards the normal man, although his criticisms and observations are undeniably truthful towards the folly of people. The narrator’s observances are very similar to George Costanza’s character in that both of them are very pessimistic towards the outcome of the world, and through their pessimism exists a moment of truth. Also, both characters are aware of their inadequacies and uselessness in the scale of everything in the universe, and both of them question their reason to live. Dostoyevsky’s narrator falls upon the themes made important in modern times, and many literary critics “identify the [narrator] as the archetypal modern antihero,” or the neurotic character(5).
Don Quixote goes back even further back in the early 16th century, with a neurotic character that has become timeless. Don Quixote is a lowly man living in an impoverished village, but due to his love of chivalric literature, believes himself to be one of the characters from his books, a valiant knight. Throughout the novel, Don Quixote causes much mischief in his travels with his squire, Sancho Panza, as he tries to save a beautiful princess who is actually a prostitute, and fight a dragon that is actually a windmill. Kashdan’s analysis remarks on traits neurotic characters embody: becoming “self-absorbed” in their own world, and ultimately being rejected by society, traits worn proudly by both George and Larry(6). In Don Quixote’s case, his behavior is purely chivalric and highly respectable, and with no actual malicious intent. For Don Quixote, being a knight with principles and values is more worthwhile than living the simple life of a villager, and ultimately, it is a reminder that even the world of the normal individual can be distorted by cynicism, repetition, and fear of change. It is remarkable on how much more sense Don Quixote’s actions are compared to the values of normal life. Bringing back Larry’s example, Larry swearing in the restaurant may not be the most appropriate solution to the chef’s unexpected swearing, but it was the right thing to do, despite the circumstances or consequences.
The neurotic character is the embodiment of our unforeseen behavior, and the most truthful voice in our society. When at one point we looked upon the valiant hero or the confident one, now we look at the neurotic character as the antihero; despite their values and customs, ultimately what each character wants is justice for all people, and some kind of rational understanding for the world’s mysteries, including the production of characters like the narrator, and how such characters emerge from a seemingly normal environment. When we are able to recognize our own faults, develop them, and ultimately improve ourselves with this long, ongoing process, we cannot stop but recognize the bumbling characters of Don Quixote and George Costanza for taking that first step.
Works Cited:
This is the first of a three part weekly series. I've thought about posting this since the day I've finished it but I've held off on the idea for several reasons, the most important one being: NO ONE COULD CARE LESS ABOUT READING AN ACADEMIC PAPER I WROTE. I'm currently majoring in Spanish and one of the things a Spanish major has to know is writing long papers. I made a joke in high school about how long papers would have to be in college. I should slap my past self for being a smug bastard. Despite this, the following academic papers that I will post for the next three Wednesdays are about topics that matter a great deal for me and as such, I tried to make the papers sound very personal, not like the stilted, template-based ones we wrote in high school. This first paper is about something I wanted to investigate ever since I began to appreciate comedy. What are the origins of the neurotic character and why have we begun looking up to it as a modern archetypical hero? So, even though this is technically an academic paper, I still consider it as a kind of creative work since I can rationally argue on the significance of my biggest cultural influences and that has to count for something. Due to certain restrictions (such as only being 5 pages long), I could only pick out several important cultural figures that could be considered as neurotic although a more consise paper would much longer, way too long for this blog, even. Like always, let me know what you think/how the argument could've been improved in the comments.
The neurotic character is the unspoken hero of our modern lives. When at once we looked up to the strongman who could overcome any obstacle, suddenly we revere the character whom does everything wrong. The neurotic character, at one glance, is the living, breathing archetype of everything conceivably wrong with the world, but due to the character’s inexplicable popularity, absolute hatred toward the character isn’t common. The neurotic character is believed to be a modern invention, or a comical contrast to the more serious archetypes, but in fact, the neurotic character has been an integral component of literature for centuries. The neurotic character, within the text, is despised by everyone but beloved by everyone outside of the text.
The neurotic character everyone relates to is George Costanza from Seinfeld. George is a relatable character from a well-established sitcom. George behaves unlike most people, obsessing over pointless trivialities, taking advantage of everyone and everything, and being at the blunt of every moment of misfortune that comes his way. George, for a sitcom character, is very depressing, and constantly ponders the necessity of life, wondering if the mistakes he continues to make are worth minimum wage or even life; his behavior is a definitive trait of the neurotic character who“…suffers from easy fatigability and irritability. He is dissatisfied with everything including himself”(1). The center of his problems is his failed love life. George does not know to keep a relationship together, and constantly makes destructive or impulsive decisions that ruin the relationship. Nothing could be more tragic or hilarious than acknowledging that George’s fiancé died from licking poisonous wedding envelopes he had picked out. George is a character with no realistic prospects; his reason for getting up in the morning is “to get the Daily News”(2). Even after hearing a friend’s harsh argument about George’s laziness and encouraging George to mature, still George questions him with a comic “Why?” as though his friend’s words of wisdom flew right over his head, and George still refuses to accept reality, that there is more to life than getting the local paper.
Larry David, a “fictional” character from Curb Your Enthusiasm, is the apex of the neurotic character in pop culture. Larry is a character who has always been looked upon a weird misanthrope in the eyes of the other characters who simply cannot rationalize his actions. Larry talks of many unspoken rules that others are not aware of, although the rules are morally based at their core, even if they are ridiculous. Larry makes terms of each “rule” in order to get the point of the rules across to the other characters that consider the rules as something shortsighted and pointless. Larry also works under his own understanding of others, even if at times, he can be fairly off, usually, he knows how to manipulate others for his own means, such canceling appointments and using his mother’s death as an excuse. At the very center of Larry’s behavior is an unmistakable core that has a sense of justice. Larry and his wife go to the grand opening of their restaurant; all goes well until the chef, who has Tourette’s, spews out several curses that halt everyone’s conversations and leaves the room in complete silence. Ever the good spirit, Larry recalls seeing high school students who shaved off their heads in support of a fellow classmate who is going through chemotherapy, and does what any good-hearted soul would in that situation: he screams “Scum-sucking motherfucking whore!”(3) Shortly after, his manager curses, and eventually the entire classy restaurateurs invoke in loud profanities. The clip ends with Larry in the middle of the ruckus he causes, arms folded, proud of the moral obligation he made for the chef. It is an unusual solution, one some people would have trouble understanding, but it’s a truly daring act to risk the reputation of your restaurant if only to spare the feelings of a chef suffering with Tourette’s. Though Larry’s behavior is unusual, ultimately it becomes understandable and relatable.
Notes From the Underground, a famous novel from the early 19th century, is an example of the development of the neurotic character. The narrator with no name begins his “novel” by the narrator’s voice “exist[s] in our society, when we consider the circumstances in the midst of which of our society is formed,” an indication that someone with the narrator’s opinions undoubtedly exists within the norm(4). The norm is questioned by the narrator and at times, may seem even more deluded and mistaken than the narrator’s own conceptions. The narrator’s “intense self-consciousness causes him to be vain at one moment and self-loathing the next,” and seething with bitterness towards the normal man, although his criticisms and observations are undeniably truthful towards the folly of people. The narrator’s observances are very similar to George Costanza’s character in that both of them are very pessimistic towards the outcome of the world, and through their pessimism exists a moment of truth. Also, both characters are aware of their inadequacies and uselessness in the scale of everything in the universe, and both of them question their reason to live. Dostoyevsky’s narrator falls upon the themes made important in modern times, and many literary critics “identify the [narrator] as the archetypal modern antihero,” or the neurotic character(5).
Don Quixote goes back even further back in the early 16th century, with a neurotic character that has become timeless. Don Quixote is a lowly man living in an impoverished village, but due to his love of chivalric literature, believes himself to be one of the characters from his books, a valiant knight. Throughout the novel, Don Quixote causes much mischief in his travels with his squire, Sancho Panza, as he tries to save a beautiful princess who is actually a prostitute, and fight a dragon that is actually a windmill. Kashdan’s analysis remarks on traits neurotic characters embody: becoming “self-absorbed” in their own world, and ultimately being rejected by society, traits worn proudly by both George and Larry(6). In Don Quixote’s case, his behavior is purely chivalric and highly respectable, and with no actual malicious intent. For Don Quixote, being a knight with principles and values is more worthwhile than living the simple life of a villager, and ultimately, it is a reminder that even the world of the normal individual can be distorted by cynicism, repetition, and fear of change. It is remarkable on how much more sense Don Quixote’s actions are compared to the values of normal life. Bringing back Larry’s example, Larry swearing in the restaurant may not be the most appropriate solution to the chef’s unexpected swearing, but it was the right thing to do, despite the circumstances or consequences.
The neurotic character is the embodiment of our unforeseen behavior, and the most truthful voice in our society. When at one point we looked upon the valiant hero or the confident one, now we look at the neurotic character as the antihero; despite their values and customs, ultimately what each character wants is justice for all people, and some kind of rational understanding for the world’s mysteries, including the production of characters like the narrator, and how such characters emerge from a seemingly normal environment. When we are able to recognize our own faults, develop them, and ultimately improve ourselves with this long, ongoing process, we cannot stop but recognize the bumbling characters of Don Quixote and George Costanza for taking that first step.
Works Cited:
(1)Price, Antoinette. “Understanding the Neurotic.” The
American Journal of Nursing, Vol. 37, No. 8 (Aug., 1937), pp. 878-881. JSTOR.
Web.
(2)KrsONE305. “Kramer Talks to George About Life.”
YouTube. Web. July 13, 2009.
(3)
Sujeetwearsvests. “Curb Your
Enthusiasm. Season 3, Episode 10: Restaurant Grand Opening.” YouTube. Web. Jun. 23, 2010.
(4) Dostoyevsky, Fyodor.
Notes from the Underground. Trans. Constance Garnett. Indianapolis: Hackett Publishing, 2009. Print.
(5) Nielson, Keith. “Notes
from the underground.” Masterplots, 4th ed; November 2010, p1-4. Literary
Reference Center. Web.
(6)Kashdan, Joanne G. "Don Quixote de la Mancha." Masterplots, 4th Ed.; November 2010, p1-5. Literary Reference Center. Web.
Be sure to check out the RS(TBTT...E) group on Facebook, or on Tumblr for images, videos, and more (but not much more). Also, Harold from The Presenters has his own Twitter account now! Yeah...I'm running out of ideas.
(6)Kashdan, Joanne G. "Don Quixote de la Mancha." Masterplots, 4th Ed.; November 2010, p1-5. Literary Reference Center. Web.
Be sure to check out the RS(TBTT...E) group on Facebook, or on Tumblr for images, videos, and more (but not much more). Also, Harold from The Presenters has his own Twitter account now! Yeah...I'm running out of ideas.
Saturday, October 6, 2012
Awkward Arley [Ep. 1] - "The 100th Episode Spectacular!!!"
Oh, god. What is this?
Why, thank you for wondering, fellow blog reader. Remember this blog post? Unfortunately, this project is going through many, many changes and until I have a clearer idea of what I'd like to do, I'll be postponing this particular short film until later. What "this" is supposed to be is a "brand"-new web series called Awkward Arley. Produced by Case Western Reserve University's Ignite Television and co-directed by Nabeel Malick and I, this is our first official project and technically my very first short film. Being a comedy, it was much more easier to write about than my other more abstract project and even though it took a while to complete (about 5 weeks), we're already diving in headfirst into the next episode which we'll try our best to improve on the quality from the first. What I can promise is that it will be 5 minutes longer than the pilot. Below this block of words is the original outline we used when we were filming the episode. We made several changes when we started to film only for the sake of coherence. Awkward Arley is an improvised program, very much like Curb Your Enthusiasm. With future episodes, we'll try to distance ourselves from the Curb foundation although with a show called "Awkward Arley", it'll become our own challenge. One warning: this is an awkward program, designed by our disturbing minds to make you squirm in your seats so...NSFW. Watch at your own discretion. Also, we apologize for the ending.
Why?
You'll know it when you see it.
Arley holds a cue card with the title of the show on it. Dudley Dickface floats by and slaps the card off Arley’s hands. He holds “100th episode Spectacular” in front of the camera. Fade out.
Fade in. “Previously on Awkward Arley” appears on the screen, followed by the Ignite logo and annoying beeps. “Now back to our show…”
First scene: bedroom (find location, afternoon, sun’s still out) Arley has just finished a paragraph for his article for the Daily. Dudley Dickface comes in, pushes the door open, soda in his hand, “Arley!!”
“Oh, hey dude.” says Arley, with some hesitation.
“ How’s your writing for the Daily Show?” says Dudley. Camera goes to Arley, looking at the screen that says “The Daily”, whose expression changes from pride to discontent in a millisecond.
Dudley mentions he’s been at the Susan B. Anthony Clinic, looking for dates. Arley opposes the idea immediately. Dudley mentions how some of them have “blue waffles”, to which Arley makes his first mistake: “what’s a blue waffle?”
Dudley charges to the labtop, getting in front of Arley and looks it up. Arley immediately close his labtop. Dudley makes a snarky remark which Arley can’t respond to.
Second scene: Black “Later that night…”, fades into Arley asleep in bed, Arley mutters blue waffle as (obviously-photoshopped) images of blue Crayola and waffles. “bru waffle, blue waffle, THE HEADCRABS ARE GONNA GET ME!!”
Third scene: Flora Mather Center (filmed in Ignite Office) Arley interviews a Flora Stone Mather Center representative. Representative remarks on Arley’s fantastic work on the article about the “Susan B. Anthony Center”. The interview goes well except for Arley writing down “blue waffle” every so often and scribbling it out. After she answers the first question, Arley blurts out, “Okay. Second question Blue waffle. Um…”
“What did you say?” says the representative.
“Nothing. Nothing. So, how’s things?” says Arley in a moment.
“What’s a blue waffle?”
“It’s nothing. Don’t worry about it.”
“What is it?”
“Fine, I’ll tell you.”
Arley explains what it is without being explicit. The representative doesn’t understand the vague explanation so she looks it up. Arley demands that she doesn’t. She does anyway and is disgusted, as Arley expected. They get into an argument. Camera slowly pans to the tape recorder.
Fourth scene: We’re in a dark room. Only the desk lamp illuminates Awkward Asian’s face. We notice that he’s wearing headphones and can hear the conversation. He is doing something that everyone does but no one talks about. He says, “Louder. Louder.”
Black out. “Awkward Arley Theme” plays in the background with the credits.
And while you are at it, join the "official" RS(TBTT...e) group at facebook.com/groups/randomscribblings/ for images, videos, and more. Message me directly if you have any pressing questions.
Why, thank you for wondering, fellow blog reader. Remember this blog post? Unfortunately, this project is going through many, many changes and until I have a clearer idea of what I'd like to do, I'll be postponing this particular short film until later. What "this" is supposed to be is a "brand"-new web series called Awkward Arley. Produced by Case Western Reserve University's Ignite Television and co-directed by Nabeel Malick and I, this is our first official project and technically my very first short film. Being a comedy, it was much more easier to write about than my other more abstract project and even though it took a while to complete (about 5 weeks), we're already diving in headfirst into the next episode which we'll try our best to improve on the quality from the first. What I can promise is that it will be 5 minutes longer than the pilot. Below this block of words is the original outline we used when we were filming the episode. We made several changes when we started to film only for the sake of coherence. Awkward Arley is an improvised program, very much like Curb Your Enthusiasm. With future episodes, we'll try to distance ourselves from the Curb foundation although with a show called "Awkward Arley", it'll become our own challenge. One warning: this is an awkward program, designed by our disturbing minds to make you squirm in your seats so...NSFW. Watch at your own discretion. Also, we apologize for the ending.
Why?
You'll know it when you see it.
Arley holds a cue card with the title of the show on it. Dudley Dickface floats by and slaps the card off Arley’s hands. He holds “100th episode Spectacular” in front of the camera. Fade out.
Fade in. “Previously on Awkward Arley” appears on the screen, followed by the Ignite logo and annoying beeps. “Now back to our show…”
First scene: bedroom (find location, afternoon, sun’s still out) Arley has just finished a paragraph for his article for the Daily. Dudley Dickface comes in, pushes the door open, soda in his hand, “Arley!!”
“Oh, hey dude.” says Arley, with some hesitation.
“ How’s your writing for the Daily Show?” says Dudley. Camera goes to Arley, looking at the screen that says “The Daily”, whose expression changes from pride to discontent in a millisecond.
Dudley mentions he’s been at the Susan B. Anthony Clinic, looking for dates. Arley opposes the idea immediately. Dudley mentions how some of them have “blue waffles”, to which Arley makes his first mistake: “what’s a blue waffle?”
Dudley charges to the labtop, getting in front of Arley and looks it up. Arley immediately close his labtop. Dudley makes a snarky remark which Arley can’t respond to.
Second scene: Black “Later that night…”, fades into Arley asleep in bed, Arley mutters blue waffle as (obviously-photoshopped) images of blue Crayola and waffles. “bru waffle, blue waffle, THE HEADCRABS ARE GONNA GET ME!!”
Third scene: Flora Mather Center (filmed in Ignite Office) Arley interviews a Flora Stone Mather Center representative. Representative remarks on Arley’s fantastic work on the article about the “Susan B. Anthony Center”. The interview goes well except for Arley writing down “blue waffle” every so often and scribbling it out. After she answers the first question, Arley blurts out, “Okay. Second question Blue waffle. Um…”
“What did you say?” says the representative.
“Nothing. Nothing. So, how’s things?” says Arley in a moment.
“What’s a blue waffle?”
“It’s nothing. Don’t worry about it.”
“What is it?”
“Fine, I’ll tell you.”
Arley explains what it is without being explicit. The representative doesn’t understand the vague explanation so she looks it up. Arley demands that she doesn’t. She does anyway and is disgusted, as Arley expected. They get into an argument. Camera slowly pans to the tape recorder.
Fourth scene: We’re in a dark room. Only the desk lamp illuminates Awkward Asian’s face. We notice that he’s wearing headphones and can hear the conversation. He is doing something that everyone does but no one talks about. He says, “Louder. Louder.”
Black out. “Awkward Arley Theme” plays in the background with the credits.
And while you are at it, join the "official" RS(TBTT...e) group at facebook.com/groups/randomscribblings/ for images, videos, and more. Message me directly if you have any pressing questions.
Sunday, September 9, 2012
"Mental" Notes: The Composer
The short opens in empty space. Absolutely nothing can be seen. A spectral figure appears, wearing a long cape almost the same size as his body. Only bits of him are shown with quick cuts, one cut reveals his gleaming eyes, sparkling with ambition and arrogance. He raises his arm and suddenly points it dramatically in the opposite direction. He creates a note (resembling the bells from the opening of John Lennon's Mother) and simultaneously creates a slow and gradual explosion of color. He repeats himself with the other arm, some of the paint balls receding into the others. He (doesn't actually have a gender but just for the purpose of typing) raises both arms and makes an another circle of color. Realizing the perfection of his composition, he begins flinging his arms out in different directions, creating many explosions of color and making a painful reverberation of the bell tone that almost pierces the fabric of space. His composition now complete, the composer puts his arms into himself and recedes hastily back into the emptiness of space. The short ends with the last paintball shrinking and disappearing into space.
Be sure to check out and join the "official" RS(TBTT...e) group at facebook.com/groups/randomscribblings/ for images, videos, and more.
Tuesday, August 7, 2012
The Coffeehouse Routine
A few weeks ago, I showed one of my closest friends the stand-up routine I performed in high school. He told me that it teleported him back to those days when we would spend minutes or hours talking about pop culture figures, relationship issues, and nostalgic withdrawal. It had the same effect on me. Other than the muttering, the stuttering, the joke premises that didn't work, the only other thing I thought about was the laughter made by people I haven't seen in a year. If I was a more sensible man, I would make the effort to communicate with each and every one of the members of the audience again. The following is a stand-up routine I wrote for the 2nd coffeehouse event we had at our school, technically a charity event, and I was the only "comedian" performing. I was originally going to talk about love in excruciating detail comparing it to a bike chain and a sledgehammer; I worked on the premise for two months until I reconsidered the whole routine, a week before the performance. As I was on stage, I remembered how I once kicked a chair when the audience wasn't laughing. I made sure not to make that mistake again. The overall theme was how I was confessing to everyone how I was no longer funny, treating it like a medical condition with symptoms such as not being able to hear the punchline, and laughing at unfunny things. I kinda wished I took advantage of trying not to be funny and saying ironic statements regarding my "epiphany". It was very painful to listen to this again, understanding that the idea of becoming a comedian was an elusive fantasy that I had the chance to try, at least once. (Words in parenthesis are actions.) [Words in brackets are from the original routine/edited for clarity.]
(walk up to mic, grunt exasperatedly) Hello, everybody. It's nice to see you all. You look very nice and pretty, I guess. I have, um, a tale to tell you all. It's [like] a tapeworm: stringy, flexible, and possibly life-threatening. It’s, um, not really the easiest thing I have ever admitted to anybody. It’s probably less simple than when my brother told me that he was going to be a baseball star, a [testosterone-fueled] baseball star and I told him I was going to be a writer, and then he told me the reality of a writer is basically ten years of making sure that you can, you know, get something published in a magazine of some sort; and my hopes and dreams were crushed that day.
I’m no longer funny. (audience will disagree or agree; expect both) I know what you're saying. It’s not possible. It, it’s not even conceivable. And yet it is. Oh, yes it is. I saw the signs, they were as clear and present as a teacher’s pet, you know who usually sits at the front row holding a polished red apple or a building on fire. Only I didn’t tell the student to swallow his apple or get a fire extinguisher. I just let them be. See, senior year hasn't been one of the worst years; It's actually been one of the most relaxing, enjoyable of all the [academic] years I've yet experienced and nothing like the holy grail of all years that surpasses all other years. I don't even know where that, okay, there's the whole "We're leaving. We'll never see you guys again." Isn't that a little depressing, though? I mean, "I'm never going to see you again. I'm going to have a different life. I'm gonna go have some kids. I don't feel like ever talking to you ever again. I'm going go associate myself with people, who are more impressive than you." Okay, fine, in that case, senior year is a wonderful year. But actually, I've been having a lot of interesting conversations with a lot of people, mostly about falling. We really like to talk about the drop. We enjoy talking about people who suffer from the drop. People in general, people in the quad, me falling, Kramer from Seinfeld falling, have you seen this guy? This guy has the most amazing falling I've ever seen. It's almost as if he's on a frictionless floor that just defies all reality. It's amazing, a masterpiece of falling. So, if you want a good example of falling that isn't embarrassing, that's more of a [performance art piece], go, go see Kramer. He's pretty good at that.
It's actually been one of the more easier years. Times have been much easier, believe it or not. All those nightmares of seniors (older students) ripping their hairs out over all the stress were greatly exaggerated. We lost most of it during junior year. And the rest [working] on college aps. Recently, someone asked me if I was working on my applications this weekend and I stared at her for a few more seconds. A, applications? Applications? Does anyone say applications? Does anyone have enough patience TO SAY applications? The process [itself] is long, hard, you know, almost completely stressful and that's for the little bittest of hair. You know how hair is all over the place, it's on certain parts of the body that can't really be exposed at this moment? That would be the time period where you RIP those hairs OUT because there's no other kind of pleasure than getting those hairs, the invisible hairs, ripped-out! I mean, why [would] we ever need an elongated term like applications to remind us of the long, hard work that we just slave over only to receive a letter, only to wait patiently for a letter written by someone we don’t even know. It makes no sense to me. It makes no sense to me how paper can make someone's life-Like this! (takes out routine from your pocket) This (slap the sheet) piece of paper! It's made me suffer for the past two months! Paper. It's deadly. That's why there's paper cuts. That's why people complain about paper cuts because paper cuts-are deadly! We have to watch out for those.
Well anyway, senior year's been wonderful; I've had a chance to analyze a lot of things: movies, paintings, mental states, it’s all been very relaxing and easygoing. And I've actually had the opportunity to listen to many jokes, a lot of, a lot of really great jokes. Some very little knock-knock jokes, very little, 'orange you glad I said banana' kind of jokes. They've been very great, consistent jokes that are really masterful, even though the humor itself is more spontaneous than anything else. It's not exactly like a [registered] joke that someone's planned a long time for. It's more like one of those jokes that come out of nowhere, it's like popcorn popping. The joke is this little, tiny ball of kernel that just (POPS). It's almost amazing. However, there has been one crucial element to the joke that's omitted. The punch line. The thing is that I can see the punchline every time someone makes a joke, I can see [it] very clearly; it's out there in the distance. It waves to me and I wave back. (wave to the crowd) It has that moment like in those movies where there's an expectant smile, that really long face that's just full of emotions. "(in a high pitched voice, somewhat breath-taken) OH! Where have you been all my life?! I've been waiting for you for such a long time." And all I can say is, "Me too!" And I'm not the only one, I mean of course I'm not the only one who's listening to the joke; there's a lot of other people behind me in the crowd who are also waving. They're holding signs and back-up jokes to keep the joke alive. However, suddenly as someone tells the joke, "Knock knock. Who's there? Orange. Orange who? O-" (mouth out the rest of the joke). (sarcastically monotone) HAHAHAHAHAHA! Their mouths become mute. I hear nothing. I hear no vocal chords. There's nothing going on there, and I can't help but tell them, "Wait, say that again? Can you say that again? I couldn't hear that one. Could you say it again?" But, you know, people get so caught up in that one little moment. They don't even care about what you're thinking, about you missing the joke. You know, it's the strangest thing. Don't you wish you had a pen near you and you made sure that if someone could write down the joke, you could laugh at it; but it's a depressing thing, it's not even the same person telling the joke. It's basically someone's writing the joke on a piece of paper and you go back to your bed and you read it and you're crying and laughing at the same time. "(blubbering miserably) This is so-funny!" It's really depressing. But it's happened so many times since that I [don't really care.] "Oh, there goes another one of those jokes. Words spoken by sophisticates. (I made that word up, by the way.) Those people who think there's so much more comical than me. You know, another one just comes and goes."
However, and we always go back to the 'however', don't we? The 'however' changes the meaning of life because suddenly you hear someone talking about Luke Skywalker being Darth Vader's son. [Then,] they say, "However…" "However what? Tha, that's it." "However, it's also possible that he's a transvestite." However, recently, I was on the bus. It's a good bus, very good bus seats, comfortable. It's enjoyable looking out the window and seeing the road [shift] into different forms. No one's ever really looked at the road before and I don't see why. It's amazing, it's a part of our history. We see the flatness of the road and then the cracks, and then we see the more damaged cracks and then the flatness. It's amazing. There's yellow, there's white, and there's green. Sometimes, there's red. When there's red, I actually get kind of concerned; I don't think I want to look at the road anymore if I see red. In any case, I'm on the bus and there's some sophomores telling a joke and I listened attentively because there's nothing else to listen to; my MP3 player's broken. It was one of the most disturbing, horrific, ghastly, [most disgusting] jokes I’ve ever heard in my life. And it was funny. Immediately, I decided to receive medical attention. I was kicked out of the hospital the [following] day. Apparently, they thought it was all in my head. Like all of THIS (draw an imaginary circle around your face) isn't already in my head.
Well, it has been a loss, no longer being funny. [Life happens. I’ve decided to accept the inevitable with my head up high, see the advantages of no longer being the life of the party, family, etc. I make comments, after all being funny doesn’t necessarily mean you can’t talk, it’s just that instead of laughing, people look at me with concern. This is not funny. This whole thing is not funny. See how far it’s gone? In any case, I’ve decided that it’s too much pressure trying to be funny, too many obstacles to cross. If you’re a funny guy like I used to be, you know exactly what I’m talking about. You know? (point to eyes) These things? The eyes are the funny person’s most dangerous obstacle. In a venue like this, eyes can double an audience. When the funny person makes a joke, it’s not the face he looks at, it’s the eyes, those blank, obtuse, globby, rounded things that observe your every move.] It seems that I'm out of time. Well, if you want to hear more about it, just talk to me and I'll tell you all about not being funny. Thank you very much, everybody. (walk offstage. Frown.)
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)