Do you ever wonder about the stupid things we practice as kids? I don't mean underage drinking or trying to skateboard off our school, those are a given. I mean the stupid traditions we have, especially when it comes to making choices. How many of us have played rock, paper, scissors to decided who does what? Or have flipped a coin? And lord knows we've all done the nose-goes game. You know what bugs me? There is one place that these kind of last person is the loser games should not have a place.
Why does the "loser" pray?
This isn't a deep spiritual question, though I'm sure I could spin it as such. My question is simple. I know that we do this, my youth group has. No one wants to volunteer to pray, so someone starts this game, to the loser goes the responsibility of prayer. Oh no, someone has to talk to their loving God now. How embarrassing.Now the rest can sit back and not worry, pay little attention, and let someone else talk.
I realize that my analysis might be harsh, but I hope it gets my point across. Why are we so afraid to pray? I believe that this fear comes from two problematic mindsets. The first part is that we feel judged by others. I know that "public speaking" isn't a strong point for some people. But should that mean we can't pray in front of our friends? God isn't the one judging us, he knows we might trip over our words, and that we might not be able to articulate what we're trying to say. He's looking at the heart of our prayer. The fear we have comes from other Christians.
My other point is just that. Other Christians put such unreal expectations on prayer. There are so many people who would probably consider themselves "good" at prayer. They know all the things to say, all the right buzz words and fancy titles, flowery praises and stock Christian phrases (something I'll get into later.) The kind of people that leave a mini-sermon in their prayers, and that keep on talking, long after everyone else has nodded off in boredom. There is this proceeding mentality that we need to know exactly how to pray, especially if we're doing it out loud, or else we're bad Christians. These people, these wild expectations and unrealistic prayers are the reason so many people are reluctant to pray in public.
Let's be honest about what prayer is. At its bare bones, prayer is talking to God. It doesn't matter how, how well you speak, what words you use, how elegant your phrases are. All that matters is that you are talking to God, and they two of you converse. I know that I don't pray like so many "Super Christians" that I have known pray. I'll start a prayer with "Yeah God, its me..." because I feel that I can be the most honest and real with God. I think that this is something people need to do in their own lives. Cut through all the Christian crap that we heap onto the foundations our our beliefs. All that matters is having a sincere open prayer. If that comes from the elegant language, awesome, but if it comes from saying "God, today sucked," then let each of them be just as meaningful.
Seriously though, I've nodded off in some people's prayers before. Can we get a time limit on some of those? Please?
Just something to chew on.
Saturday, September 17, 2011
Friday, September 9, 2011
Nazis, Russians, and Martians
I've been ranting about music a bit these past few posts, so I've decided to get back to ripping apart something that I love more, i.e. video games. My floor tends to bond a lot with First Person Shooters (FPS to those of you who don't have a degree in Kill/Death Ratios). We'll stay up late playing TeamFortress 2 or Borderlands, or some other time sink. We like these ridiculous games. I know for me, it's there style. This update is devoted to a FPS trend that annoys me.
Why are we always killing Nazis or Russians?
I never really got into Modern Warfare or Battlefield: Bad Company. These games strive for realism and, in my opinion, sacrifice lots of potential to do it. Many FPSes (FPSi?) revolve around one of two ideas. Either the Nazis are still causing trouble, as in most World War 2 games and Wolfenstein, or the Russians have invaded or attacked America, like in Modern Warefare 2. Both of these entities are super powers that have had massive impact on the world, and both of them have been in two many games. Did you know that the Metal of Honor series has been going on since 1999? It's literally been in production longer than the actual WW2.
I understand the idea that fighting Nazis and Russians are great for war games. How else could you make a WW2 game without Nazis? See, my problem with FPSes now is that they all try to be war fantasies. Everyone seems to have this dream about being the hero of the war, personally ending Hitler's reign and ending the war. What I want to know is how uncreative are these game studios? There are only some many times we can go through the battle of Normandy, or drop in on D-Day. After a while it gets really dull.
One of my favorite FPSes is the Serious Sam series. Serious Sam is one of those mob shooters that spawns waves of enemies and lets you deal with them what whichever of the hundred guns you're allowed to carry at one time. In SS you get to shoot headless kamakazes, scorpion men with Gatling guns, and three story molten lava monsters that split into smaller versions. These games are ridiculous on so many levels, and that's what makes them fun. TeamFortress 2 is by far my favorite FPS, and with good reason. IT has charm and style that you don't see in most modern games. When I compare TF2 to Modern Warefare, I am amazed at how much faster and engaging the game play in TF2 is.
Realism, I believe, tacks away from the potential of games. No matter how good it looks, how indepth your gun mechanics are, how real the game seems, if the developer doesn't capitalize on its potential, then it can fail. Why is it that companies restrict themselves to war games that try to be real. I would love to see someone take the mechanics of Modern Warefare and put it into a game about a time-traveling Kight from King Arthur who shoots Aliens on some planet in the depths of space, with guns that shoot diamond peacocks. As long as the story and the mechanics fit together well, I believe that great games can be made from obscure ideas.
Essentially, however, FPSes are just point and click adventures. You point your gun, click, and move of in your adventure.
Just something to chew on.
Why are we always killing Nazis or Russians?
I never really got into Modern Warfare or Battlefield: Bad Company. These games strive for realism and, in my opinion, sacrifice lots of potential to do it. Many FPSes (FPSi?) revolve around one of two ideas. Either the Nazis are still causing trouble, as in most World War 2 games and Wolfenstein, or the Russians have invaded or attacked America, like in Modern Warefare 2. Both of these entities are super powers that have had massive impact on the world, and both of them have been in two many games. Did you know that the Metal of Honor series has been going on since 1999? It's literally been in production longer than the actual WW2.
I understand the idea that fighting Nazis and Russians are great for war games. How else could you make a WW2 game without Nazis? See, my problem with FPSes now is that they all try to be war fantasies. Everyone seems to have this dream about being the hero of the war, personally ending Hitler's reign and ending the war. What I want to know is how uncreative are these game studios? There are only some many times we can go through the battle of Normandy, or drop in on D-Day. After a while it gets really dull.
One of my favorite FPSes is the Serious Sam series. Serious Sam is one of those mob shooters that spawns waves of enemies and lets you deal with them what whichever of the hundred guns you're allowed to carry at one time. In SS you get to shoot headless kamakazes, scorpion men with Gatling guns, and three story molten lava monsters that split into smaller versions. These games are ridiculous on so many levels, and that's what makes them fun. TeamFortress 2 is by far my favorite FPS, and with good reason. IT has charm and style that you don't see in most modern games. When I compare TF2 to Modern Warefare, I am amazed at how much faster and engaging the game play in TF2 is.
Realism, I believe, tacks away from the potential of games. No matter how good it looks, how indepth your gun mechanics are, how real the game seems, if the developer doesn't capitalize on its potential, then it can fail. Why is it that companies restrict themselves to war games that try to be real. I would love to see someone take the mechanics of Modern Warefare and put it into a game about a time-traveling Kight from King Arthur who shoots Aliens on some planet in the depths of space, with guns that shoot diamond peacocks. As long as the story and the mechanics fit together well, I believe that great games can be made from obscure ideas.
Essentially, however, FPSes are just point and click adventures. You point your gun, click, and move of in your adventure.
Just something to chew on.
Friday, September 2, 2011
Fifi the Freshman
Last Friday we had our influx of freshmen into Taylor. Swallow Robin has somewhere around twenty new faces getting used to our wacky home. I have come to notice an odd occurrence among the upperclassmen, something that I noticed when I was a freshman. It's actually rather annoying, I think; and it doesn't give our new friends their fair due.
Freshmen are not pets.
I guess the latest "in" thing is a freshman tote, like the ones you put a little dog in. It seems to me that many upperclassmen decide it is their sworn duty to guide these naive little children into the brave new world that is college. Heaven forbid that they have some time on their own to set themselves up comfortably and get into things at their own pace.
Essentially what I'm getting at is that so many times it seems like freshmen are treated like they are incredibly young. The way I hear some people talk about the freshmen is almost patronizing. Is it impossible for a freshman to find their own class? Or pick their own table at the DC? They're not as needy and dependent as some try and make them out to be. When I was a freshman, I wasn't allowed to sit by myself in at a meal. Someone would always come over to sit by me and talk at me. I believe there are days when we all want a quiet (as quiet as a cafeteria can be anyway) meal alone with our thoughts. Solitude is not a bad thing.
What amazes me about this mindset is that most of the freshmen aren't that young. We'll say that eighteen is a base age for them. Many sophomores are only a year older, if that. Some freshmen are non-traditional, like my roommates, who are twenty-two and twenty-three. Yet still people insist on treating them like they can't handle their own affairs. They're as mature as we were our first year, give or take (I realize that isn't always a positive thing). We had a group prayer over our dorm's freshmen, and it made me rather cynical (more so anyway). I can't judge the intent or the affect of the prayers, that isn't fair but I will say that the words I heard were more along the lines of "Let these poor ignorant children get it" than the "Let these men and women establish themselves in our community."
I've thought a bit about how I interact with freshmen, and I'm pretty proud about it. I feel like I've treated them as I treat everyone else in my dorm, regardless of age. In college, age matters much less than it did in high school. I can be just as solid friends with the senior who is twenty as I am with the freshman that is twenty-two. Age and grade don't amount to much, it's who they are as people that we need to pay more attention to. Being real, and treating them like equals is the best way, I believe, to help anyone adjust to a new situation in life.
It is, however, always Joe's fault.
Just something to chew on.
Freshmen are not pets.
I guess the latest "in" thing is a freshman tote, like the ones you put a little dog in. It seems to me that many upperclassmen decide it is their sworn duty to guide these naive little children into the brave new world that is college. Heaven forbid that they have some time on their own to set themselves up comfortably and get into things at their own pace.
Essentially what I'm getting at is that so many times it seems like freshmen are treated like they are incredibly young. The way I hear some people talk about the freshmen is almost patronizing. Is it impossible for a freshman to find their own class? Or pick their own table at the DC? They're not as needy and dependent as some try and make them out to be. When I was a freshman, I wasn't allowed to sit by myself in at a meal. Someone would always come over to sit by me and talk at me. I believe there are days when we all want a quiet (as quiet as a cafeteria can be anyway) meal alone with our thoughts. Solitude is not a bad thing.
What amazes me about this mindset is that most of the freshmen aren't that young. We'll say that eighteen is a base age for them. Many sophomores are only a year older, if that. Some freshmen are non-traditional, like my roommates, who are twenty-two and twenty-three. Yet still people insist on treating them like they can't handle their own affairs. They're as mature as we were our first year, give or take (I realize that isn't always a positive thing). We had a group prayer over our dorm's freshmen, and it made me rather cynical (more so anyway). I can't judge the intent or the affect of the prayers, that isn't fair but I will say that the words I heard were more along the lines of "Let these poor ignorant children get it" than the "Let these men and women establish themselves in our community."
I've thought a bit about how I interact with freshmen, and I'm pretty proud about it. I feel like I've treated them as I treat everyone else in my dorm, regardless of age. In college, age matters much less than it did in high school. I can be just as solid friends with the senior who is twenty as I am with the freshman that is twenty-two. Age and grade don't amount to much, it's who they are as people that we need to pay more attention to. Being real, and treating them like equals is the best way, I believe, to help anyone adjust to a new situation in life.
It is, however, always Joe's fault.
Just something to chew on.
Saturday, August 27, 2011
Wistful
I write this latest entry from my throne in Swallow Robin lounge. If you can't read between the lines in that last one, I'll spell it out: I'm back at Taylor. Being back at school means a lot of new experiences and people. There have been a variety of new freshman showing up, and I'm working through my new responsibilities as the theater's master electrician. With greeting all this new challenges comes an interesting opposite, however. What I'm talking about is saying good-bye.
Why do we romanticize leaving so much?
Like I've said before, I'm not a big movie guy. I do, however, know enough about movie cliches to point to all those moody romantic movies that invariably have a scene were someone is either walking away and causing tension and angst, or someone is walking away with serious hope and a new found sense of purpose. While I realize that only little kids and autistic monkeys might think their lives will end up like movies, I also feel that we try to create such emotion in our good-byes.
I worked at a camp in New York all summer. I met a lot of great people out there. And then I had to go back to school. Thus I had to go through the long process of saying good-bye to as many of my friends as I could. A midst all the hands shakes and hugs and general good feeling, I couldn't help but feel that you never see anything like this in a movie. My good-bye sequence didn't have the same emotional weight that you can get on film. It wasn't that I didn't care about my friends as much as some fictitious floozy from a New York fashion industry, but that I wasn't trying to impress anyone with any emotional response. When we say good-bye, we do it to communicate to each specific person that they are important, and we want to leave on the right foot.
I think that this romanticized view that we get can often hamper our relationships. We get caught up in the idea that our farewell has to be some heart rending process that we sometimes forget to even see some people. I know that there were people who left before me, and I also knew that I saw very few of them to say good-bye, even though they had been a friend while working. I'm not saying that they hate me, just that they may have gotten so caught up in a proper good-bye to others that I slipped through the cracks.
I also believe that our flair for the dramatic is also an issue. I'm a theater guy, so I know what it means to be dramatic, and I've seen some very good actors in my short run. With that, I feel that I have seen some of the same type of acting in how people say good-bye. They want to make the best impact they can. Whether it is an unexpected going away present, the perfect sentimental words, or a meaningful kiss on the cheek (wanted or otherwise), we try so hard to make an point in our good-bye. I feel that this mentality can trivialize a friendship somewhat, that you don't think your friendship with the other person is all that they need, that they need some movie style farewell to really call you their peer.
Lastly, all the crying is an issue with me. My mom cried when I went off to college, I cried when I left my parents of my mission trip in Australia back in eighth grade. People cry when the move, when a boyfriend or girlfriend leaves, or just when there is something new that they have to leave for. We get so sad over having to leave. When I left camp, I was excited to get back to school. Sure I was going to miss people, but I can't say I was sad. when one of my friends was leaving (he came to see me) I told him that we have at least one more guaranteed time that we will see each other. That's the beauty of being a Christian. When we die, there will be a gathering of us all in heaven. We will see each other again and never have to worry about good-bye. That is a hope I live with. The German's have a term, auf wiedershen, meaning "until we see each other again." I have always liked that phrasing more. Good-bye sometimes seems hopeless, but auf wiedershen is a term that means you both have hope for seeing someone, and a desire to as well.
I don't mind the celebration, however, when i don't have to see certain people again.
Just something to chew on.
Why do we romanticize leaving so much?
Like I've said before, I'm not a big movie guy. I do, however, know enough about movie cliches to point to all those moody romantic movies that invariably have a scene were someone is either walking away and causing tension and angst, or someone is walking away with serious hope and a new found sense of purpose. While I realize that only little kids and autistic monkeys might think their lives will end up like movies, I also feel that we try to create such emotion in our good-byes.
I worked at a camp in New York all summer. I met a lot of great people out there. And then I had to go back to school. Thus I had to go through the long process of saying good-bye to as many of my friends as I could. A midst all the hands shakes and hugs and general good feeling, I couldn't help but feel that you never see anything like this in a movie. My good-bye sequence didn't have the same emotional weight that you can get on film. It wasn't that I didn't care about my friends as much as some fictitious floozy from a New York fashion industry, but that I wasn't trying to impress anyone with any emotional response. When we say good-bye, we do it to communicate to each specific person that they are important, and we want to leave on the right foot.
I think that this romanticized view that we get can often hamper our relationships. We get caught up in the idea that our farewell has to be some heart rending process that we sometimes forget to even see some people. I know that there were people who left before me, and I also knew that I saw very few of them to say good-bye, even though they had been a friend while working. I'm not saying that they hate me, just that they may have gotten so caught up in a proper good-bye to others that I slipped through the cracks.
I also believe that our flair for the dramatic is also an issue. I'm a theater guy, so I know what it means to be dramatic, and I've seen some very good actors in my short run. With that, I feel that I have seen some of the same type of acting in how people say good-bye. They want to make the best impact they can. Whether it is an unexpected going away present, the perfect sentimental words, or a meaningful kiss on the cheek (wanted or otherwise), we try so hard to make an point in our good-bye. I feel that this mentality can trivialize a friendship somewhat, that you don't think your friendship with the other person is all that they need, that they need some movie style farewell to really call you their peer.
Lastly, all the crying is an issue with me. My mom cried when I went off to college, I cried when I left my parents of my mission trip in Australia back in eighth grade. People cry when the move, when a boyfriend or girlfriend leaves, or just when there is something new that they have to leave for. We get so sad over having to leave. When I left camp, I was excited to get back to school. Sure I was going to miss people, but I can't say I was sad. when one of my friends was leaving (he came to see me) I told him that we have at least one more guaranteed time that we will see each other. That's the beauty of being a Christian. When we die, there will be a gathering of us all in heaven. We will see each other again and never have to worry about good-bye. That is a hope I live with. The German's have a term, auf wiedershen, meaning "until we see each other again." I have always liked that phrasing more. Good-bye sometimes seems hopeless, but auf wiedershen is a term that means you both have hope for seeing someone, and a desire to as well.
I don't mind the celebration, however, when i don't have to see certain people again.
Just something to chew on.
Friday, August 19, 2011
A Score to Settle
I've never been a big movie guy. I like some, but all in all, I'm not a huge fan. I do have friends, however, who are major movie addicts. I think, actually, that a great portion of people are really into movies of late. With that, I've noticed an trend in how people appreciate movies away from the silver screen. I have a bit of an issue with this latest trend.
I don't get why people like movie soundtracks.
I suppose what I mean by that is the score of a movie rather than that crappy CD that gets released with unrelated pop music slapped on it. What I'm talking about are the orchestral pieces by guys like Hans Zimmer (Inception, The Dark Knight), Michael Giacchino (Mission Impossible, The Incredibles), and Atticus Ross (The Book of Eli, The Social Network). These are those dramatic, mood-setting works that usually play in the background of pivotal scenes.
Let me start by saying that I am not criticizing the music itself. These composers are very good, they create works that really add to the movie. The performers are phenomenal on their instruments. And of course, the sound guys do great work in their editing and perfecting. There is loads of talent in these scores, no one can deny that.
Here's the thing about scores. They are meant to add to the movie by subtly creating a feeling. The dark and dramatic battle music could create some excitement, the light, airy castle music sets a care free mood, the soft, mysterious theme of a villain adds to their presence. All of these are background music, however. The action by actors and other visual elements are the real draw. The ironic thing about scores are, if they are good, then you shouldn't notice them, but if they are bad, then they stick out like a sore thumb.
I don't see the draw in listening to the scores separately. I have in my possession the scores from Lord of the Rings, Pirates of the Caribbean, and Transformers. I already covered the talent behind them, so with that said, there not that special. I usually skip over them if they show up on shuffle. If I want to listen to some orchestra music, I have enough classical music to last me for a long while. I also think that my classical is better than these scores. Scores aren't meant to stand alone, that is my conclusion.
I do, however, differentiate between scores and theme songs. If you start humming the Star Wars theme, or the Indiana Jones theme, other people know these songs. They are incredibly memorable. That is something that I think is lost on many of the new soundtracks that play. There are a few songs here and there that people recognize, but nothing that is as iconic as some of these older ones. To me, so many of the different pieces sound the same, or at least incredibly similar. Certain sounds and combinations create feelings and emotions, so it isn't surprising that common elements are used in many scores, but I do believe that with some risk taking, composers can find new ways to create the same feelings in interesting and exciting ways.
On the other hand, Daft Punk had an awesome soundtrack for Tron.
Just something to chew on.
I don't get why people like movie soundtracks.
I suppose what I mean by that is the score of a movie rather than that crappy CD that gets released with unrelated pop music slapped on it. What I'm talking about are the orchestral pieces by guys like Hans Zimmer (Inception, The Dark Knight), Michael Giacchino (Mission Impossible, The Incredibles), and Atticus Ross (The Book of Eli, The Social Network). These are those dramatic, mood-setting works that usually play in the background of pivotal scenes.
Let me start by saying that I am not criticizing the music itself. These composers are very good, they create works that really add to the movie. The performers are phenomenal on their instruments. And of course, the sound guys do great work in their editing and perfecting. There is loads of talent in these scores, no one can deny that.
Here's the thing about scores. They are meant to add to the movie by subtly creating a feeling. The dark and dramatic battle music could create some excitement, the light, airy castle music sets a care free mood, the soft, mysterious theme of a villain adds to their presence. All of these are background music, however. The action by actors and other visual elements are the real draw. The ironic thing about scores are, if they are good, then you shouldn't notice them, but if they are bad, then they stick out like a sore thumb.
I don't see the draw in listening to the scores separately. I have in my possession the scores from Lord of the Rings, Pirates of the Caribbean, and Transformers. I already covered the talent behind them, so with that said, there not that special. I usually skip over them if they show up on shuffle. If I want to listen to some orchestra music, I have enough classical music to last me for a long while. I also think that my classical is better than these scores. Scores aren't meant to stand alone, that is my conclusion.
I do, however, differentiate between scores and theme songs. If you start humming the Star Wars theme, or the Indiana Jones theme, other people know these songs. They are incredibly memorable. That is something that I think is lost on many of the new soundtracks that play. There are a few songs here and there that people recognize, but nothing that is as iconic as some of these older ones. To me, so many of the different pieces sound the same, or at least incredibly similar. Certain sounds and combinations create feelings and emotions, so it isn't surprising that common elements are used in many scores, but I do believe that with some risk taking, composers can find new ways to create the same feelings in interesting and exciting ways.
On the other hand, Daft Punk had an awesome soundtrack for Tron.
Just something to chew on.
Sunday, August 14, 2011
Worthless
Praise music is a big deal many Churches and groups out there. I know there have been fights in my church over the music and what we play. People have probably heard me complain about a lot of Christian music before (And if you haven't, it'll be showing up in an entry at some point). Anyway, one thing that really bothers me is a recurring theme in so much of the music.
You are not worthless.
I hear a lot in Christian music how tarnished, broken, and generally worthless the singer thinks they are in God's eyes. They're deeply ashamed of sin, or have no value compared to God, they're unworthy of love, or they shouldn't be forgiven. All these things are true enough. There is no reason for us to get a big head over God's mercy, my complaints come from a lack of sense.
One main fact with being a Christian is that we are adopted into God's family, we are sons and daughters of God. This isn't the "red-headed stepchild" status, we are a part of the family and loved by God. That means we are valued members of the family, sharing in the wealth of the Father. We have worth. Our pitiful existences that we lived before being saved has been redeemed.
I hate to hear people always focusing on their shame. I see that as them looking for pity because of their old life. Whatever sin they had, they're still trying to use to gain some sympathy. I might be exaggerating things here (small chance) but I still think that focusing on past sins and failures isn't healthy. You can learn from your mistakes and move on.
Maybe I have an over inflated sense of self-worth, but I refuse to think of myself as dirt in God's sight. I know that He cares and that I am valued by God. Whatever I feel, however I sin, and whenever I fail, I know that God forgives me and that ultimately, that will outweigh any of my meager problems.
And if you're going to whine about me not putting in any verses in here, shut it. This is some musing, not a sermon.
Just something to chew on.
You are not worthless.
I hear a lot in Christian music how tarnished, broken, and generally worthless the singer thinks they are in God's eyes. They're deeply ashamed of sin, or have no value compared to God, they're unworthy of love, or they shouldn't be forgiven. All these things are true enough. There is no reason for us to get a big head over God's mercy, my complaints come from a lack of sense.
One main fact with being a Christian is that we are adopted into God's family, we are sons and daughters of God. This isn't the "red-headed stepchild" status, we are a part of the family and loved by God. That means we are valued members of the family, sharing in the wealth of the Father. We have worth. Our pitiful existences that we lived before being saved has been redeemed.
I hate to hear people always focusing on their shame. I see that as them looking for pity because of their old life. Whatever sin they had, they're still trying to use to gain some sympathy. I might be exaggerating things here (small chance) but I still think that focusing on past sins and failures isn't healthy. You can learn from your mistakes and move on.
Maybe I have an over inflated sense of self-worth, but I refuse to think of myself as dirt in God's sight. I know that He cares and that I am valued by God. Whatever I feel, however I sin, and whenever I fail, I know that God forgives me and that ultimately, that will outweigh any of my meager problems.
And if you're going to whine about me not putting in any verses in here, shut it. This is some musing, not a sermon.
Just something to chew on.
Friday, August 5, 2011
Circles of Life
Two decades, twenty years, two hundred forty months, 87,605 days, 2,102,520 hours, 126,151,200 minutes, or 7,569,072,000 seconds. However you look at it, I've been alive for a good stretch of time. There are lots of people older than me as well (obvious I know.) Life goes on for all of us, day after day, the same twenty-four hours for all of us. I've been thinking a lot about getting older and growing up, and I've come to at least one conclusion.
Life isn't too short.
I've heard a lot of people say that life is too short for this or that. Regret, waiting, or whatever, people seem to think that if they don't do it now, they never will. There is this overriding idea that opportunity will never come to you again, that a door or window will be shut and never be opened again. Life lived without taking every opportunity is a life wasted, or so they think.
I've only been alive for twenty years, that's not much compared to others, people who are more experienced than me. The older men in women that I know have lived their lives, had their experiences, and taken what opportunities they wanted. I have also had more chances to do things than those younger than me. I still feel, however, that the years I have lived have not been quick.
Life is bursting at the seems with opportunity. There is so much that I can do, so many chances to take. If life was so short, there would be so fewer opportunities for me to do anything. To think that I have missed an opportunity, that I will never be able to enjoy something like it again is ridiculous. I believe that if I "missed" something now, that I could have another chance later in life. It wouldn't be the exact situation, considering I will be older, possible a different man, but I will still have that chance.
I'm not advocating being lazy, or ignoring something exciting. Take every chance you get to enjoy yourself, and to learn about yourself. I am saying, however, not to stress or feel regret for something you didn't do. Maybe it's the idea that life goes in circles, that there will always be another chance to enjoy whatever life has to offer. Don't worry about missing out on life, there is always tomorrow and what it will bring.
I bet someone could make a really hope-filled love song with this idea...don't.
Just something to chew on.
Life isn't too short.
I've heard a lot of people say that life is too short for this or that. Regret, waiting, or whatever, people seem to think that if they don't do it now, they never will. There is this overriding idea that opportunity will never come to you again, that a door or window will be shut and never be opened again. Life lived without taking every opportunity is a life wasted, or so they think.
I've only been alive for twenty years, that's not much compared to others, people who are more experienced than me. The older men in women that I know have lived their lives, had their experiences, and taken what opportunities they wanted. I have also had more chances to do things than those younger than me. I still feel, however, that the years I have lived have not been quick.
Life is bursting at the seems with opportunity. There is so much that I can do, so many chances to take. If life was so short, there would be so fewer opportunities for me to do anything. To think that I have missed an opportunity, that I will never be able to enjoy something like it again is ridiculous. I believe that if I "missed" something now, that I could have another chance later in life. It wouldn't be the exact situation, considering I will be older, possible a different man, but I will still have that chance.
I'm not advocating being lazy, or ignoring something exciting. Take every chance you get to enjoy yourself, and to learn about yourself. I am saying, however, not to stress or feel regret for something you didn't do. Maybe it's the idea that life goes in circles, that there will always be another chance to enjoy whatever life has to offer. Don't worry about missing out on life, there is always tomorrow and what it will bring.
I bet someone could make a really hope-filled love song with this idea...don't.
Just something to chew on.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)