October 2007
Me And TV: We’ll See
Until recently, I didn’t have cable; I only had CBS. That was okay because I wasn’t so interested in watching television. That hadn’t always been the case, however.
I used to be a "television-aholic;" a real TV junkie. Most evenings I had three VCRs taping three different shows while I watched a fourth each hour of prime time. My entire weekends were spent watching all the shows I’d taped all week. I was bad; all of them were "must see" for me. Each week I eagerly awaited the arrival of TV Guide (before they totally ruined it and once my subscription expires in October 2008, I’m not renewing). I would go through the TV Guide and highlight what I would tape that week, aside from my regular series. E-gads!
Eventually, as my life and I changed, television stopped having such an importance to me. I began realizing how much I was missing by sitting in front of the television; I was missing LIFE. So pretty much cold turkey I dropped my TV addiction. I discontinued cable after I’d stopped watching so much. That was several years ago. After all, I’ve got eight video cabinets filled with videos of movies, television movies, series and specials.
Lately I’d been toying with the idea of getting cable again. Some evenings I’d watched the CBS shows and rather liked many of them, though not to the extreme that they were all "must see" and I had to see them. When I saw what CBS was advertising for the fall line-up, I was mostly unimpressed. I’ve also cleaned up my living a bit by deciding that drinking a twelve-pack of beer each evening was not necessary. So, I’d been considering getting cable for more variety in my evenings. My problem was that I didn’t want to pay $37 a month for 60 channels of which I’d watch five; that seemed like a waste of money. I certainly didn’t want any of the other alternatives that offered more channels and movies and cost two or three times more. I just wanted the basics: each major network. I don’t watch sports, I won’t spend an evening watching the news, I’d rather chew tinfoil than watch nothing but the weather channel and I don’t want six shopping channels.
I’d been talking about this with one of my sisters one day after work. She and her husband have our local cable company, which is what I would choose if I chose to get cable again. My brother-in-law mentioned that this company offered what they called "Mini-Basic." Intriguing. I wondered what all it included. My sister offered to call the cable company the next day to get the information and she’d let me know what and how much it was. The next day after work I went to her house and was surprised. She said, "Let me tell you what your brother-in-law did. He bought you cable." HUH??? They found out that Mini-Basic included two local CBS channels, one local NBC channel, one local ABC channel, FOX, an independent Pittsburgh channel, EWTN (the Catholic channel), one home shopping channel and Pittsburgh PBS and West Virginia PBS. I discovered later Discovery as well. Obviously I was not expecting this. My sister said that they had wanted to get me cable as a Christmas present last year but I’d not seemed interested; which was true, I had still been wearing my beer-goggles. So they bought me cable as an early Christmas present, just in time for the new fall season.
For the past few weeks, I’ve been enjoying watching television again. I’d actually forgotten how much I’d watched PBS. This past week was "premiere week" for many shows. Of the new shows I watched, here’s what I like:
The Big Bang Theory (CBS) – I’d seen previews for this and I thought it looked cute. I laughed so hard when I watched it I actually guffawed! It was really funny. But then again I guess I’m just nerdy and geeky enough (though incredibly cool) to get it.
Private Practice (ABC) – Obviously I’d never seen "Grey’s Anatomy" before the past few weeks of reruns; however I’d heard about it. I think you’d have to be headless NOT to have heard about it. So I watched a few episodes of GA and without knowing anything about the characters I liked it. I decided to try the spin-off "Private Practice." I was delighted. Amy Brenaman ("Judging Amy"), Tim Daly ("Wings") and Audra MacDonald (big Broadway mucky-muck) and the rest of the cast are terrific.
Dirty Sexy Money (ABC) – This is like "Soap" meets "Dallas." Filthy rich, spoiled family and their earnest attorney who isn’t sure whether he loves or hates them but tries to do his duty to them. It’s loaded with sex, farce, over-the-top characters and most surprising at the end of the first episode: one of them may have had a hand in the attorney’s father’s death.
Back To You (FOX) – Kelsey Grammar and Patricia Heaton as Pittsburgh news anchors who are reunited after years when his career is takes a dump and he’s forced to return to where he started and she never left. Oh, he’s also the father of her child that she never told him about. The first episode was funny but the second episode seemed to fail to hold my attention. I’ll withhold judgment on this one for now.
Kid Nation (CBS) – Controversy surrounds this reality show. I watched the first episode just out of curiosity though I’m not a big fan of "reality shows." These kids aren’t without adult supervision at all; there are the cameramen, director and the "moderator" who is present for the challenges and "town meetings" among many more adults. I wonder what the purpose of this show is, however. Putting eight-year-olds with fifteen-year-olds seems to me inappropriate if the adults do stay of it as they say they do because older kids do tend to bully younger kids (we’ve all been in school and on the playground, haven’t we?) Parts of the show are rewarding, like the challenges; each team does its best to work together to win and often the winning teams cheer on the others. Mostly, I think it’s exploitative.
Of course what may be returning favorites to everyone else are new to me and I’ve enjoyed some of those shows as well and some I’ve been disappointed with after hearing about how great they are. Unless I really hate a show, I don’t like to pronounce "hit" or "miss" after just one episode. I also don’t want to get back into the constant taping that consumed my life at one time.
I’m enjoying my early Christmas gift and I’m very thankful. Television need not be my entire life and reason for breathing, but it is enjoyable to escape into television fantasy for a few hours in the evenings. Maybe in the future I’ll talk about other shows; I think in a former life I MUST have been a TV critic. LOL
A STATE OF DISTRESS
We’ve all heard the phrase or some people who say, "Nothing surprises me anymore." I cannot say that, I am continuously shocked. Sometimes shocked to the extent that my faith in people and humanity is shaken to its core.
Through the media, the news, we learn of outrageous affronts and offenses against others personally and society as a whole much sooner and with more detail in the past thirty years than ever before.
Since the beginning of humans there have been crimes, brutalities, abuses, murders, tortures against other humans. With the advent and organization of government and religion, these actions became sanctioned and acceptable. Time and people moved on and rules and laws were set in place in an effort to achieve an orderly and free society.
In our "enlightened" society today, we condemn inhumanity toward our fellow man then we condemn our fellow man when convenient or appropriate to our way of thinking or believing. We are far more accepting of another’s thoughts and beliefs as long as they don’t conflict with ours or cause disruption to what we think or deem appropriate.
Abortion is wrong regardless, however a mother who murders a child through neglect should be understood; race is no longer an issue as long as those of color suffer consequences more severe than white criminals; a murderer has rights and should be treated with dignity and respect even though that murderer showed neither of those for the life he or she ended. Religion is personal and deeply part of a person; religion has no place in government except those people in government have or can have deeply religious beliefs which do affect their way of seeing things. Can one separate one’s beliefs from who they are? Everyone has rights, but only if those rights don’t interfere with anyone else’s thoughts about what rights should be.
In our "enlightened" society, we are a mixture of hypocrisy, arrogance and steadfast ignorance. We cannot claim to be "loving of all" when we criticize and demean those who think or believe differently; we aren’t supportive when we actively seek ways to ignore and dismiss those who have given us opportunities for the sake of money. We aren’t so democratic when we force our beliefs on others and intervene just because we think we are "right" and they are "wrong." We aren’t so Christian when we pronounce judgment upon others because of our religious or political beliefs; Christians should KNOW theirs is NOT to judge others.
We aren’t as enlightened or progressive a society as we think we are. What we are is discriminatory, mean and nasty to others; fearful for our own ideas without regard to the fact that anyone else’s ideas are just as important or valid; self-centered and self-consumed and self-righteous.
Why aren’t we surprised anymore? How can we see all that we do with a complacent nod of the head saying, "Yeah, that happens, what a shame"? Are we so desensitized to the realities of whom and what we are because we’re just so used to seeing it that it fails to affect us anymore? Has "The Golden Rule" been completely eradicated from our consciousness? I guess we aren’t surprised anymore because of our own arrogance and self-righteousness; our inability to see anything except how it affects our political beliefs, our religious beliefs or us personally. One cannot "do unto others as you would have done unto you" when one considers himself or herself to be the only one that matters; one who considers his or her own ideas and beliefs to be correct and beyond reproach.
In 1975 the music group War asked the question, "Why Can’t We Be Friends?" It wasn’t the most prolific song rife with significant words; the title though was a nice idea, but is it possible? In my own little world, I’d like to think so; when I look at society and the world though, it doesn’t really appear that it’s an idea held as important. That is a distressing thought; we all share this time and space with one another and instead of making the best of the gift of life we seem to choose to attack and demonize one another.
At the risk of sounding like a pseudo-hippy, we choose hate over love. We choose ourselves over humankind. We choose discord over harmony.
Children often renew my faith in humanity, however. Children aren’t bogged down with all the "issues," "reasons," "discriminations" that affect our society.
At least, not until they are taught how to hate.
Middle-Aged Crackpot
I think I’ve turned into a crackpot. You know the picture of the single old man who spends his time writing letters to the editor of the newspaper? Well, I’ve apparently become him.
It all started in February 2006. The Westboro Baptist Church had been protesting at the funeral of a local man who had been killed while serving his country in the military. The editor of the newspaper had written an editorial about it. I’d not seen the article in the newspaper nor had I heard about what was going on; neither had I ever heard of Rev. Phelps or the Westboro Baptist Church. One day at work, a couple of my co-workers were talking about it. After they explained to me, I found myself quite distressed over the whole situation. I mean how could a Christian group, a church, do that? There must be something I’m missing.
So I went to the Westboro Baptist Church’s website. What I found there was even more distressing and disturbing to me; not just as a West Virginian and a gay man but as a Christian as well. After a few emails back and forth with a member of the church, Rev. Phelp’s wife, I realized that these people were not only NOT Christians they were frightening and dangerous.
I spoke to one of my co-workers about it and how it really bothered me. She innocently said, "Well, why don’t you write a letter to the editor of the newspaper about it." I’d never really read the newspaper much (I can’t take all the bad news) and thought only "crackpots" wrote letters to the editor. Though after considering the suggestion, I did just that. I sat down and wrote about my experience with the Westboro Baptist Church.
A few days later I was going to the office and someone said, "Joey, was that YOU in the newspaper last evening?" I’d not seen the newspaper so I wasn’t sure what they were talking about. I never dreamed in a million years that what I’d written would actually be printed in the newspaper; yet it had been.
That was only the beginning. Since then, 109 letters to the editor that I’ve written have been printed in the newspaper. I’m not really sure why exactly I write them other than to purge myself of thoughts and feelings I have about certain topics and issues. I never thought it would become "a thing" with me; I certainly never expected the reaction I’ve gotten from others.
I’ve received phone calls from people who left messages on my answering machine just to say, "Thank you, I loved your letter", "Keep up the good work!" or "If you could call me back, I’d like to talk with you." In fact one evening there was a knock at my front door. It was the Lion’s Club doing their yearly fund raising selling light bulbs, brooms, etc. After I apologized for not being able to purchase anything at the time, the lady at my door said, "Are you Joey?" A bit suspicious I replied that I am. She said, "I’ve been wanting to meet you for the longest time. I read your letters in the paper all the time and I LOVE them! I look forward to reading them. I’m <name withheld>, your councilwoman." One of my sisters has told me that people have approached her about my letters to the editor, all complementary comments. Just this morning after I got out of the shower there was a message from someone who asked me to call back because he "loves reading my letters to the editor."
In the beginning I was a bit worried about how my family, my father especially, would feel about it. I was worried that they’d be embarrassed by what I said and what was printed for all to read. My fears were unfounded. My father particularly seems to enjoy them; he may not necessarily agree with what I say all the time, but he is tickled to see my name and my words printed in the newspaper. He also seems to enjoy when others mention my letters and me to him in such a glowing fashion. My father jokes, "My son never knew he HAD an opinion until he turned 40."
It’s been the funniest thing. Certainly I never dreamed that day I wrote about the WBC that I’d become a regular in the "opinion" section of the newspaper; I never imagined that others would read them and enjoy them. One of my sisters said to me once about it, "You are making a name for yourself."
I’m not foolish enough to believe that everyone likes them. There is one person who tells me that I am not controversial enough. Well, I don’t know exactly why I write to the editor but I do know it’s not about trying to "stir it up" or pissing people off. Instead of writing about one political side or the other, black or white I try to write about common sense. Neither side is "absolutely right" any more than either side is "absolutely wrong." As someone once told me years ago, "Joey, you redefine the meaning of gray area."
Several months after my first letter to the editor, I became a regular contributor of West Virginia’s Queer News. At one point, for a few months, I wrote two columns each week. The invitation to be a part of the magazine’s staff was as delightfully surprising as the newspaper printing my letters; the fact that for a time I was allowed to pen two columns was a compliment and leap of faith of which I’d rarely experienced.
Sometimes I worry about running out of words; sometimes I question what I think, how I feel and whether it matters. Then someone will make the effort to approach me to say a kind word about what I’ve written. It isn’t the compliment that pleases me as much as the fact that something I wrote moved someone, stirred someone, caused someone to see a situation from another angle that they’d never considered.
That’s the point, though, isn’t it? It’s all too easy to jump on the popular prevailing bandwagon of the day, politically and in regard to society. What’s more difficult is to not follow the crowd just because; more difficult, but infinitely more fulfilling, is being true to oneself, rather than accepting what is expected or demanded by others, being honest and responsible, using common sense, understanding that no one person is more important than another, no one viewpoint is more valid than another’s, realizing that just because two people disagree doesn’t make either one "right" or "wrong."
Imagine the kind of world in which we could live if we all not only tolerated (dreaded word these days) but accepted each other’s differences. Instead of the arrogant condemnation of each other that we do, mutual respect, honesty, responsibility and actually trying to get along instead of trying to change others, we could very possibly be the kind of human race of which we could be proud.
MY NEW ADDICTION
I have a problem; an illness really. Actually, it’s more like an addiction; a new addiction. They say the first step is to admit that you have a problem. Okay, I admit it. I stand here (or sit here) and acknowledge my addiction. I’m not proud of it nor of the lack of control I have over myself in feeding my new addiction. I cannot turn my back on how it’s affecting my life. The more I feed my addiction, the more I need. More is never enough so I find myself seeking quick indulgences to achieve the high and excitement. I need it; I think about it all the time; I dream at night about it; I cannot wait for it.
Hello. My name is Joey. I am a "Dancing With The Stars" –aholic
CAN WE TALK???? (See, I’m channeling Joan Rivers…. THAT’S how bad it is!!!)
I’d not seen the previous installments of DWTS until this fall and its new season. With my new opportunity to watch network television other than CBS though I’d heard others talk about it. Now, I’m not a fan of so-called "reality shows." I mean, seriously, throwing a group of people together with cameras recording their every move and word is NOT reality. When MTV began this whole "reality show" thing with "The Real World," it was admittedly interesting and intriguing; that interest and fascination lasted all of twelve weeks or so; and every subsequent installment of the series as well as every rip-off series that followed became predictable and cliché. It’s NOT "reality", it’s more or less people showing off the worst sides of human nature in an effort to experience their proverbial "fifteen minutes of fame."
When this season of "Dancing With The Stars" began, I’d heard and read that Marie Osmond was going to be a participant in the competition. Well, I LOVE Marie Osmond. (Oh, who am I kidding? I love ALL the Osmonds.) Then, of course, there was Jennie Garth and Jane Seymour competing as well. Even though I was skeptical about the show, I watched it.
OH MY WORD!!!!! It’s amazing. There are so many aspects of it that I love. For anyone who doesn’t watch it or know much about it, I’ll summarize. A celebrity is teamed with a professional dancer and they compete in ballroom dancing. That’s it in a nutshell; actually, that’s IT. On the surface, it may not seem to be ‘all that much’ until you really think about it and consider it.
First of all, this isn’t "street dance" or "getting out on the dance floor of a bar" dancing. This is BALLROOM dancing. The dances are everything from waltzes to tangos; serious, complicated REAL dancing. Second, the professional dancer teamed with a celebrity is a real dancer. Each week this man or woman choreographs a dance and teaches it to his or her assigned celebrity and then must make this "star" a dancer. That in itself is quite impressive: to be assigned a dance to create and to teach someone not only the steps to take but also HOW to dance and make it appear effortless and beautiful. Third is the celebrity or "star". Here we have people who have no experience with ballroom dancing. To some extent these people who are used to being pampered because of "who" they are; that’s not to say they don’t work hard or haven’t earned what they’ve achieved, but in this DWTS competition, their "stardom" or "celebrity" doesn’t mean squat.
That’s the thing about this show. No amount of money earned per performance or movie, no amount of money earned in business, no amount of success in individual endeavors, no amount of celebrity or stardom or fame or "who’s who" in the public eye matters. The "stars" are reduced to being real people who must leave "the who and/or what" they’ve become, check their egos and work really hard to NOT be the one in command but to give themselves over to the professional dancer charged with making the ‘star’ into a dancer.
What most of us do that we call dancing is for the most part just moving our bodies to the rhythm of music while having a good time. Ballroom dancing is something completely different. Each dance has its own moves and rhythms; each has specific motions, body movements and attitudes; in other words, so to speak, there are rules and a structure for each kind of dance. What makes it deceiving is when it’s done right it looks so easy, so natural, and so effortless. A professional dancer can make the dance appear just so but only after years of training and practice.
So here we have trained, dedicated professional dancers trying to make a novice, the "star", into a dancer. IN ONE WEEK…get that? ONE WEEK. In one week, seven days, a new dance is choreographed, taught, learned, practiced and, hopefully, perfected.
"Dancing With The Stars" is different from other "reality shows" in my opinion because it takes skill and dedication on the part of the competitor. I also think "The Amazing Race" is much the same kind of "reality competition" in that the competitors are left to their own devices, their own skill. Most other "reality competition" shows are more about who can be the most underhanded, the most deceptive, the most proficient at securing one’s own standing and status regardless of whatever conniving means reach the end. Those are really less competition in the spirit of competition than they are platforms for people to show the worst of humanity: greed, arrogance, intolerance, and meanness for the sake of winning.
Anyway, I am addicted to "Dancing With The Stars." I need a twelve-step program, I think. I love the Monday edition watching the performances. (I’ve even dreamed about them in my sleep.) I’m humbled, exhilarated and excited to watch the dances knowing that each one had only one week to learn the dance and then performs it on LIVE television before millions of viewers. It’s so exciting! The Tuesday elimination edition is more stressful for me. I want them all to win but it is a competition and there can only be one winner. Well, only one can win the competition, but anyone who commits themselves to such learning of new things and dedicates themselves as best they can and does their best is a winner.
Marie Osmond: I love her and it’s really a joy to watch her in this new experience. She has impressed me each week with her dancing and with her performances in each dance.
Cameron Mathison: A gorgeous man, a soap actor; he was a bit tentative in the beginning but he’s proving himself each dance.
Melanie Brown: A "Spice Girl", well who knew? She’s really terrific.
Sabrina Bryan: I don’t know what a "Cheetah Girl" is; I’m THAT uninformed. What I do know is this woman is an incredible dancer!
Helio Castroneves: A racecar driver and winner. I don’t know anything about that but he’s one of my favorites; he’s quite fun to watch dancing and one of the best in this competition.
Mark Cuban: He’s a billionaire and entrepreneur. He is slowly improving in his dance; his enthusiasm has never faltered.
Jennie Garth: Who would have ever thought that our little "90210-girl" would be such an amazing dancer? She is fierce and beautiful to watch. After the unfortunate fall she and Derek had, the next week’s tango proved that she is truly committed and she came back (as Bruno said) with a vengeance. Beautiful woman, beautiful dancer.
Jane Seymour: Elegant, sophisticated; lovely. At 56 years of age, she’s proven herself to be a woman ready to tackle challenges. The loss of her mother was heartbreaking, her continuing with the competition inspirational. However, last week when the judge reprimanded the "lift", Jane’s arguing with the judge and her indignant attitude showed poor sportsmanship. Instead of taking the licks, she chose to argue and become defensive. (Jane, I’ve got it on tape and yes your feet did leave the floor.) Jane lost points from me by her insolence.
Yes, I need help. I’m addicted. It’s not enough that I tape the dances on Monday nights; I actually watch them over and over again throughout the week. In fact, I even took my tape to my sister’s with me and she and I watched the dances as we ate dinner in the living room. She enjoyed watching but what she enjoyed more, I think, was my stupid grinning and bouncing up and down on my seat while balancing my dinner plate; she enjoyed the dances, but she enjoyed most my exuberance.
Oh, I’m not well. I can’t take it; but I can’t leave it! Okay, I need to calm down. I guess this addiction is better than, say, an addiction to crack. My sister isn’t really surprised by my addiction to DWTS, I’ve often become invested and personally involved in things. When "thirtysomething" ended its run on ABC I was depressed; my friend said to me, "Don’t worry Joey, you’ll make new friends."
Oh, but the dancing on "Dancing With The Stars" is something of which I’ve never experienced. It’s beautiful; fluid motions one body with another; fun exciting fast dances with fast footwork and the smooth flowing glide of two people flowing in dance with each other. I envy that talent to be able to be so beautiful in movement. It’s a wonderful thing to see. It makes me happy. Sometimes I picture myself in a tuxedo dancing just like that with a man in a tuxedo. It isn’t the gender of the dancers but the movement, the emotion, the love of the dance that inspires me.
bravenet.com