Tuesday, March 28, 2006

Hello. This is the first document I am writing on our new macintosh computer. I have never had a macintosh computer before. The last apple I had was an apple IIC. That’s right, the one that looks like a little suitcase typewriter, you know the one, the one that that guy across the street threw into his garbage can in 1993 after finally realizing that pong was dead. Ok I made that part up. But I must say I enjoy and like, even though those words don’t mean the exact same thing but are still startlingly (!) similar, this apple macintosh computer. It is an eMac. They have been discontinued. I’m glad I was able to be a part of this line of fine computers (if fine they indeed are, time will tell) alive. I feel that throwing things into the deadwood of opposite of popular culture, well, not really opposite, but, you know, like the voidal side dish? Of that which is known and unknown, is not only despicable but should not be popular. Which leads to the whole argument of whether you should hate something or love something or intentionally be ambivalent about something because it is popular. When it comes to this topic I will admit that I have been in all three camps at various times in my life. The funny thing about such a concept as that is that you can think you are being one, yet are in actuality, especially when seen from the perspectives of others, definitely being another. It is fascinating while at the same time being quite boring. I really must sit down and analyze my predisposition to having to present both if not three or more sides to every story, or at least every concept, that falls from my fingers on this keyboard, up onto the screen, and eventually into your mind, whoever you are. It’s really quite efficient yet inefficient at the same time. And there I go again. Let me explain. Efficient in that it allows me to cover the bases of an argument, within myself, and thereby see other perspectives and fully (at least more than would otherwise be the case) invest myself in not just one side but the possibility of other angles. It is incredibly (ok, maybe not so) inefficient in that it wastes my time and yours by veering off into various tangents, when quite often interesting and informative writing is to the point and doesn’t dilly dally trying to sell you the farm and the cow, it just gets to the point and throws the weather stripping in your face, future weather patterns and corn prices in the stock index be damned. It pushes me into predicaments wherein I am neither definitively answering nor necessarily avoiding questions nor their answers, but simply presenting some mystic puzzle whereby the reader needs to go back in and find it, nay, or, as well, the writer, cuz I don’t know what the hell kind of answer, shit, I don’t know the question, to what the hell I was elucidating, and, you see, well, therein may really lie the problem. In any event, enjoy the rest of your (fill in time of day here) and don’t forget the ovaltine, cuz you always need a catch line to sneak out of painted dead end logical hallways of doom, whether by doom you mean the actual literal danger and fear, or something more cheery like boom and shaking the room but with a different letter. Please forget that last sentence. Yes, just focus on the ovaltine. That’s better. Gracias.