Cheek and Bluster

It has come to pass that my friend Todd has seen fit to mock me in the comments section of my last post for my lack of new content. He is lucky enough (or unlucky enough, depending on one’s personal taste) to have caught me in a particularly sarcastic mood.  I might even call it a particularly snark-castic mood, but that would just be too fucking precious.  Anyway, the following is very likely going to sound much more surly than usual for me; rest assured that I mean it to be tongue-in-cheek.  I’m feeling a little Denis Learyish.

That’s correct, Todd, I haven’t posted in awhile - and my, aren’t you a keen observer of detail.  Wanna know why? Here’s why - I’ve been busting my ass building this site for the theatre company I’m in.  Don’t want to click through? Fine, here’s a couple of screenshots:

Not exactly a slapdash half-hour-with-FrontPage kind of a job.  Put it this way: in the last month alone, I’ve spent enough time building and administrating that site to fulfill my Theatre Neo volunteer hours requirements for the next three years.  That is, if we were allowed to carry over extra hours to the succeeding year, which we’re not.  But it doesn’t matter, because as long as I’m running the website I’ll never have to wonder if I’ve done enough volunteer hours.

So then Todd informs me that I’ve been “tagged in a meme,” and to find out the meaning of this memeing I need to visit his site.  Deciding to play along for the moment, I click over to his blog post and find the answer to be as follows (grammatical corrections are mine, and included for no good reason):

1. Link back to the person who tagged you
2. Mention the rules on your blog
3. Tell about 6 unspectacular quirks of yours
4. Tag 6 following bloggers by linking [to] them
5. Leave a comment on each of the tagged blogger’sbloggers’ blogs letting them know they’ve been tagged.

As I said in a comment to Todd’s post: oh, jaysus.

First of all - and I don’t fault Todd for not knowing this - here’s the thing about me: I don’t follow memes.  I start memes. I am the natural source from which memes flow; that’s why I call them MEmes. If somebody else came up with it, then by definition it is not a meme - it is a THEMe.

To be completely honest, I’m usually not even aware of it when I start a meme.  I never set out with the purpose of producing the latest Thing on the Web You Have To See, the internet-touchstone-du jour, the virtual face that launched a thousand forwarded emails. I don’t wake up in the morning going, “Let’s see… I think I’ll have some breakfast, feed the dogs, shower, and set the zeitgeist aflame.”  It just happens.  Such is the nature of being mightily influential.

That aside, I find this so-called meme’s question thoroughly mediocre. Six “unspectacular” quirks? It’s such a mediocre question that it specifically calls for mediocre answers!  And not just one, but SIX of them.  Well, be careful what you wish for.  After two or three of anyone’s unspectacular quirks, it’s a sure bet that the rest of the list is going to get more and more unspectacular.

One or two spectacular quirks - now that would at least be worth forwarding to your MySpace friends.  Who cares if you prefer crushed ice to ice cubes or whatever - I want to read about your quirkiest, weirdest foibles.  Like, say, if you perpetually emit static electricity, no matter where you are.  Or how you have one toenail that grows four times faster than normal.  Or perhaps, how you smashed your genitalia between two handheld freeweights while doing standing flys, and now the brand “Everlast” is permanently embossed on your penis.  You know, that kind of thing.

I know it’s the internet, but holy shit, people - aim at least a little higher.  So, I’m sorry, Todd. I won’t be tagging six other bloggers and perpetuating this chain-letter posting thing.  Whatever, call me Ebenezer.  I’m taking a principled stand for the cause of better content.  Demand more from your internet questionnaires! …Or, don’t. Seriously, do whatever you like. I like to agitate for a better internet, but, you know, that’s just me.

Over at the august hypertext confines of McSweeney’s there has appeared a new piece by one Sarah Schmelling, entitled “Hamlet (Facebook News Feed Edition).”  A sampling:

The king poked the queen.

The queen poked the king back.

Hamlet and the queen are no longer friends.

Marcellus is pretty sure something’s rotten around here.

Hamlet became a fan of daggers.

- - - -

Polonius says Hamlet’s crazy … crazy in love!

Rosencrantz, Guildenstern, and Hamlet are now friends.

Hamlet wonders if he should continue to exist. Or not.

Hamlet thinks Ophelia might be happier in a convent.

Ophelia removed “moody princes” from her interests.

Hamlet posted an event: A Play That’s Totally Fictional and In No Way About My Family

Click on over there to read the whole piece.

 My brother and his cohorts bring forth the funk:

For more about this performance, check out his post over at …nwood….  The tune they play is called “Sweetheart,” and is apparently unrelated to my friend Chelsea’s eponymous forthcoming book… except in my blogroll, baby!

Excerpted from The State of the Web - Summer 2008, a clever commentary in illustration form by web designer Matthew Inman:

If you don’t get all of the web-geeky references in the picture, you’re not alone (anyone want to fill me in on what the “Rick/Never gonna give you up, etc.” thing is?). I’ll own up to my penchant for Facebook, but I have been cutting way back on the SuperPoking.

That’s it - I am through with dumbing it down for you people.