Liquid Plummer

Archive for November, 2009|Monthly archive page

Cocco Puffs Gave me A.D.D.

In The State of Now on November 25, 2009 at 1:23 pm

“Coco Puffs gave me A.D.D.”

FADE IN

INT. CONFERENCE ROOM – DAY

Four executives are standing talking in conference room. There is a company logo on the wall that reads “HealthCore Pharmaceuticals”

DAVE
Ok, everyone let’s get started. First of all I’d like to thank CHRIS AND SHELLY the (Generic Cereal Co.) people for fighting the midtown traffic to come down here and meet with us today.

SHELLY
(Cheesy Chuckling)
It’s our pleasure.

CHRIS
(Cheesy Chuckling)
Hey, anything to get us out of the office for a couple of hours.

SHELLY
(Cheesy Chuckling)

DAVE
I know the feeling.
(Cheesy Chuckling)
O.K. well, I know what all of you must be thinking. Why do the pharmaceutical people want a meeting with the Cereal people?

Chris and Shelly shrug their shoulders and look perplexed.

DAVE
Well, I think we can all agree that, what both our industries have in common is the health and well being of the American public.

Chris and Shelly nod and agree

DAVE
That being said, I think we all know how certain fads can have a serious detrimental affect on our respective industries.

CHRIS
(exasperated)
Oh God, the low carb thing nearly bankrupt us.

DAVE
Yeah. That whole Low Fat thing in the early 90’s, all but shut down our heart disease and high blood pressure divisions.

CHRIS
(Sympathize emphatically)
Oh yeah, wow, that was a real boom time for us.

DAVE

Well we here a Healthcore think we’ve come up with a plan that will help both our industries stave off any of these fads in the future.

(Presses a button on the conference table phone)

MICHELLE, bring them in please.

The confrence door opens.

Michelle enters the room accompanied by five children. The children sit at the conference table. They are each given a bowl of cereal.  The children bsgin to eat.

DAVE
Our market research shows that 2 out of 3 children who ate a breakfast consisting of one of your higher sugar content cereals, exhibit behaviors which include,
(flipping though his notepad)
fidgeting or squirming, inability to focus, and easily distracted. What we refer to as Attention Deficit Disorder

Chris and Shelly look confused and perplexed.

DAVE
Here, let’s observe.

A man dressed as a teacher enters the room. The kids have finished their cereal. They get up from the conference table and go to a small classroom setting with a chalkboard and some chairs. There are also three holding clip boards and observing. The teacher begins a history lesson is very monotone boring voice.

TEACHER
(Pointing to the chalkboard)
The American Revolutionary period era began in 1763, when the French Military threat to British North American colonies ended.
(con’t)

One of the kids begins rocking from side to side in her chair.

TEACHER
Adopting the policy that the colonies should pay an….
(con’t)

One of the kids begins bouncing up and down in her chair.

Back at the conference table Dave nods his head as if to say. “See what I mean”

Chris and Shelly look at each other as if to say. “Can you believe what this guy is trying to pull”

TEACHER
(con’t)
…..increased proportion of the costs associated with keeping them in the Empire….
(con’t)

One of the assistants pulls out three rubber balls and begins to juggle.

TEACHER
(con’t)
…..Britain imposed a series of taxes followed by
other laws…..

All the children watch the assistant juggle.

Back at the conference table.

DAVE
(Writing in his pad)
Inability to focus

SHELLY
What, you’re using that for your research evidence.

DAVE
Yeah, why.

SHELLY
That’s completely biased. Any kid would be distracted by someone juggling.

DAVE
Let’s continue.

TEACHER
(con’t)
…..intended to demonstrate British authority that proved extremely unpopular.
(con’t)

Outside on the ledge there is a window cleaner dressed as a clown. All of the kids run over to the window to see the clown.

The assistants all write in their clipboards.

DAVE
(writing on his pad)
Difficulty remaining seated.

CHRIS
Wait a minute, that’s ridiculous, the guy is dressed as clown. You can’t expect
(Interupted by Dave)

DAVE
Hold on now, there’ll be time for questions in a moment.

The assistants escort the children back to their seats.

Each of the lab assistants gives each child a small plastic cup. The kids eat the contents of the cup.

SHELLY
Wait, you’re giving these kids drugs.

DAVE
(mesmerized by the proceedings)
Wait for it.

SHELLY
I don’t believe this.

The children immediately become docile.

DAVE
Bingo

Even the teacher is surprised and is not quite sure what to make of what’s occurring.

DAVE
Well, go ahead, teach.

TEACHER
(hesitant, watching the children over his shoulder)
Because the colonies lacked elected representationin the governing British Parliament
(con’t)

Dave pulls out a noise maker and starts to spin it.

The children are not distracted at all. They keep their attention on the
Teacher.

DAVE
You see.

CHRIS
Wow, they really look attentative.

TEACHER
(con’t)
Many colonists considered the laws to be illegitimate and a violation of their rights……
(con’t)

One of the assistants begins to juggle. The children are not distracted.

One of the children starts develop a tick and begins to jerk his head.

CHRIS

Now what’s going on with that one.

DAVE
Oh, we’ve got that covered.

One of the assistants notices the boy twitching, steps in and gives him a different drug.

The child settles down.

SHELLY

Wow, that’s impressive

Another assistant pulls out a torch and begins to blow fire. The children are not distracted

TEACHER
(con’t)
………as Englishmen In 1772, Patriot groups began to create committees of correspondence………
(con’t)

The clown on the ledge tries so hard to get the kids attention. He falls off the ledge to his death. We hear him scream on the way down.

DAVE
I always hated clowns.

Dave, Chris and Shelly laugh it up.

DAVE
Allright, we’ve already made generous donations to federal legislatures and the teacher’s unions that give teachers and administators jurisdiction to make medical diagnosis that will be enforced by the parents or they lose custody of their kids

DAVE

(to Chris and Shelly)

Now, about packaging, all kid’s cereals still have a prize inside right.

Chris and Shelly agree

DAVE

Allright, so here’s what we do…………..

THE END

Add to FacebookAdd to DiggAdd to Del.icio.usAdd to StumbleuponAdd to RedditAdd to BlinklistAdd to Ma.gnoliaAdd to TechnoratiAdd to FurlAdd to Newsvine

Advertisements

The State of Now: Is Beauty in the Eye of the Beholder?

In The State of Now on November 19, 2009 at 3:00 pm

First, I have to establish that this discussion will focus on the aspect of the ideology of liberalism as it pertains to art.

To establish this discussion we must first agree that in the United States and other liberal countries that allow for artistic freedom have at their discretion the power to choose what they consider to have artistic value, hence, what we determine to be meaningful or beautiful, and the power to choose what we consider to be ugly or what we do not consider to be meaningful or beautiful. If there is one phrase that symbolizes the very essence of this perceived freedom of choice, it would have to be this: beauty is in the eye of the beholder.

I would like to put forth the proposition that not only are the perceived freedoms of liberalism false, but that in fact, the statement beauty is in the eye of the beholder makes the notion impossible to implement.

If we examine the statement, Beauty is in the eye of the beholder, we have to acknowledge and state as fact, that we are using the word beauty to identify aspects of our world and our reality that is defined by the OED as “the quality or aggregate of qualities in a person or thing that gives pleasure to the senses or pleasurably exalts the mind or spirit.” And so, if we are to establish and state as fact that we have a system of measurement where a person or thing can be defined as beautiful and therefore has an actual or implied higher aesthetic value, than we must inevitably conclude that this classification has at it’s polar opposite – the concept of ugliness, which possesses the lowest aesthetic value.

If you are going to state that there are things in this world that have beauty, then you are creating a standard for which everything that does do not fall within the established definition of beauty must be allocated to a lower level of consideration. Everything has a flip side, and this is beauty is no different.

If we establish a system of measurement for artistic value where beauty is placed at the top and given the highest artistic value, then we must immediately conclude that at the bottom of this system of measurement of artistic value is ugliness, which is assigned the lowest artistic value.

Throughout our society as a whole and within individual subcultures, there is embedded within the artistic environment a standard which uses a system of evaluation and measurement as it pertains to what we accept as valuable and what we do not. As a basic component of this reality we label, accept, enforce and even regulate what we consider to be beautiful. These decisions ultimately establish an implied, intrinsic truth as it pertains to a particular discipline, giving a particular piece or even an entire movement a label that identifies that piece or movement as one that retains the highest value in reference to it’s artistic aesthetic.

Classical dance, music, and art, all have works that stand out and are the very definition of what the world has agreed to label as the most meaningful or beautiful example for each respective discipline.

Contemporary dance, music and art also have works that stand out and are the very definition of what the world has agreed to label as the most meaningful or beautiful example for each respective discipline.

The statement “beauty is in the eye of the beholder” not only abandons any system for measuring the level of quality of a particular piece of art, it deems any system of measurement to be irrelevant and ultimately ignores the fundamental reality within every genre of artistic expression. This reality is that there is a value system that arranges any and all works within that genre on a scale from beauty to ugliness.

If we agree that as part of our decision to accept or deny the validity of a particular piece of art, that we are inevitably accepting or denying its value as well. Then we are using a system of measurement which assigns values to things we consider beautiful and to things we do not.

This is the exact system of measurement used by classical art and is in direct contradiction to the ideology of liberalism, which at it’s very foundation espouses the belief of artistic freedom, which allows the artist ultimate discretion outside any established rules or system that would dictate or influence how or what truly holds artistic value.

The difference between liberal and classical art forms is that in the world of classical art there is an agreed upon standardized unit of measurement referred to as aesthetics, against which all art is held to measure it’s validity and beauty. In the contemporary art world there can be no system of measurement because there is no agreed upon standard of aesthetic beauty. The individual or subculture determines for themselves what will be assigned the label of validity and beauty. In doing this they are dislocating themselves from the world of reality where standards have already been established, discarding any real or implied standard of measurement or value by maintaining that, to them, beauty is in the eye of the beholder.

We must conclude that unless you use the standard of aesthetics to judge what you accept or deny has value, and therefore beauty, you are simply denying reality and are therefore delusional. In addition, as soon as you make a value judgment on a particular piece of art that falls outside of what you consider to have value you are ultimately refusing to allow artistic expression which is in direction contradiction to liberalism.

The world of liberalism insists on deciding for itself what is beautiful while simultaneously rejecting any standard for which to judge what will retain this label. The world of liberalism states that each individual shall enjoy ultimate artistic freedom, but within this implied environment of freedom there remains a system of measurement where the individual or group assigns value to a particular piece, therefore eliminating implied artistic freedom and holding the piece up to the new established from of measurement within that subculture.

The existence of a system which creates an evaluative standard of beauty within a system that demands to decide for itself what is beautiful, while rejecting anything that does not fall into this created definition, precludes and eliminates any and all artistic freedoms and is an exercise in fascism and the ultimate example of ideological hypocrisy and is therefore invalid.

Add to FacebookAdd to DiggAdd to Del.icio.usAdd to StumbleuponAdd to RedditAdd to BlinklistAdd to Ma.gnoliaAdd to TechnoratiAdd to FurlAdd to Newsvine