Coming Soon

[Director's/Producer's cut:

What the hell was I going to talk about with this goofy ass line? Apparently it began as the beginning of some kind of idea about order and chaos. So kind of "Fight Club" manifesto. (Btw, it's totally cool that I can use this reference now and know what I'm talking about. Chuck Palahniuk rules -- even if I spell his last name wrong every time.) Tyler Durden? Meet, almost Tyler Durden.]

In a world plagued by order systems, values, and traditions a battalion of brave men and women fight for the chaos.

No Really I'm TV'd Out

I can't even do a thorogh post about the rest of the week.

The summary verdict. Televison was essentially television. Entertaining as it's suppose to be.

Community: Silly in a good way.
Parks and Recreations: Also, silly in a good way.
The Office: No Michael-Still Okay
SNL: nice premier, gotta love Alec Baldwin
Animation Domination: Great

Now that that's over with, I'm thinking about doing a series. One on writing. What do you think about this, "Contemporary Horror Masters," I mean October is right around the corner...

I'll get back to you later with more. I want to start it ASAP, so I'll see you soon.

RoR

TV'd Out

Okay, so...I'm not going to do a "review" on the rest of the week's TV preimeres just yet. Getting stoked by all the other premieres in television made me think, Is SNL premiering, oh geez, it is isn't it? And what about Family Guy? But after that I've got to cut back, not many people have the time to watch every single new show that comes out--I sure don't. I sure don't.

I hate that I'm not going to be watching Prime Suspects on NBC this season--ladies in law enforcement have been doing it real big lately. This show made me miss In Plain Sight on USA--I hate that I stopped watching, I've missed a lot of shows, but I'm going to have to miss more. I can always watch with Netflix or buy seasons on dvd...

Anyway, I might come with a completed review of this weeks TV Monday. By the way, I'm pretty sure this has been said already, but Hulu has Family Guy airing on a Monday--It's supose to be Sunday, right? 25th, not 26th, check FOX.

If there only was enough time in the day to do everthing you want to do.

Oh well.

How About That Science?

I'm cutting in on my thoughts about this week of premieres. I'll continue them tomorrow after I check in with NBC tonight for The Office and Parks and Recreations.

But for right now, how about that science?

Over at CERN, a type of particle may have actually been discovered to have the capability to travel faster than the speed of light. Say it with me everybody, "time travel?" You can read all about in the article, "Particles found to break the speed of light."

And UC Berkley are now creating images from human thoughts. Yeah, cool, but a little scary too? They're getting closer to being able to see the images inside our head. Of course, they're only just begining, so they are not up on the crisper, clearer picture of the digital age, but I'm sure they're getting there. More on this in TGDaily article, "Brain imaging reveal the images in our mind." Looks like blogger Sommer Leigh's iThought is on the way.

There's also a satellite about to crash on our heads. So... I don't know, um...carry an umbrella?

Week of Premieres Thus Far

I almost forgot what I wanted to post about...it was television.

How could I forget about TV-- my love, my lady?

So far this week, though I have slacked off greatly from TV watching (for the past few months nothing but the Daily Show and the Colbert Report), I've been able to catch a number of television's fall premieres. My verdict?

Nothing truly amazing, interesting stuff though.

First, I caught CBS's, Two and a Half Men.

It was the first episode without Charlie Sheen and an episode to set up Ashton Kutcher as the shows new front man. My verdict?

They did okay. The shows obviously going to be much different. Kutcher's character seems as though he's going to be an unwitting playboy. He's suppose to be smart, but with a duncish quality about him. I think the show will still be interesting, just somewhat different.

Second, Kat Dennings is Max Black in 2 Broke Girls.

It's The Prince and The Pauper without the prince, a one way Trading Places, The Simple Life, but with a sassy poor girl. My verdict?

I sort of like it. It's been done before, yes, but I like Kat Dennings and the show went throwback with Garrett Morris.

Next up, Tuesday and I stayed with Fox's night of premiers.

First, I caught the second half of Glee. I'm not going to say much about it since I didn't catch the full show. No verdict, but it seemed like what you'd expect from Glee. Singing, some Sue Sylvester drama and a little teen drama.

Second, I watched the pilot/ premiere of New Girl.

It's a show about a quirky girl (Zoe Deschanel) moving into an apartment with three guy's guys. My verdict?

I don't know. I saving judgment until the show gets started. There were changes made, Damon Wayans Jr. replaced by Lamorne Morris, though I don't think this will affect the quality of the show they are both promising actors. The show itself did have a few problems-- it didn't blend well for me, if that makes any sense. Anyway Zoe Deschanel's character was cute, maybe a little annoying, but cute.

Lastly, a show I started enjoying a few months ago before it's hiatus, Raising Hope, premiered it's new season. My verdict?

Best show ever!!

I know I sound a little bias, but I like this show. The characters are all loveable, the jokes are hilarious and timed beautifully. The baby is "used" subtly and realistically, which may sound like a weird compliment, but some shows go overboard when trying to show off a cute baby. Babies are cute already; there's no need to try to cutify them more.

Well that's what I saw going on in TV thus far.

Today? Back to Fox for The X-Factor, then NBC for Harry's Law and Law and Order: SVU...Hold on I might check out Up All Night on NBC if I'm not feeling The X-Factor.

Chall-Unge!!!

The challenge is still on people.

I have been making changes on the blog and the content has become a little thicker. I really like it and hope you do too, but I haven't forgotten about the challenge.

100 books in a year

See, I remember.

I added three books to the "Books I've Read In 2011" tab.

Sometime tomorrow I will be a quarter of the way there. And I was worried when I first started out...

You know what?

I think I'm going to conclude the challenge sucessfully.

Just wanted to update ya. I'll catch you later.

RoR!!!!!!

Two Unrelated Matters.

Part 1: Contagion

Have you seen the movie?

You haven't?

Tsk, tsk. Drop everything and go see Contagion, right now!

Good God woman! Hurry before it's too late!

Oh...Or man. Good God woman or man, hurry before...

Naw seriously, it's a pretty good movie to watch in theaters, even though its not a action flick. Everyone's all about the action and Disney/Pixar movies these days. You can enjoy boring movies in theaters too. I'm kidding about boring. This movie is anything but boring. It's intense and interesting. Go see it.

There's something about the big screen that intensifies the hell out of everything on it.

I went to see the movie on Saturday and I have to say, it was a good show, block busting action or not.

Dr. Oz gave it his seal of aproval on his show Friday (reason why I went to see it, wasn't my idea though), he says, "it's one of the most realistic movies [he's] ever seen."





Part 2: How Did I Miss This?

Andy Levy V Chris Brown

This not-so-small exchange happened about a month ago and I had to write about it.

First off, hats off to Levy because when I read, "fakest apology ever," I was not expecting what I got...

Andy Levy tore into Chris Brown, hard. It was not a pretty sight.

I personally don't feel any sympathy for Chris Brown, but I don't think it's my job to necessarily feel or not feel sympathy for him. Chris Brown is a grown man who went through a flawed justice system and served his time. If the law didn't feel the need to hound him outside of what they did, then I don't believe it's his fans job, or anyone else for that matter, to do so*.

Therefore I believe what Levy did was completely out of line, whether Chris Brown is a Richard** or not. It's actually taboo in society to engage in vigilantism, not to mention bullying.

Yeah that's right, bullying.

If Andy Levy was picking on someone who was not a woman-beating fellon, the way he picked on Chris Brown, there would have been a problem. Not that it matters, we hand out bullying like it's noboby's business these days. Can we honestly do anything about that? Like Emory asks in it's contagion series, "How do you avoid something that's everywhere?" (I linked the two topics! Yes!)

The answer is I don't think so and you don't ( Emory probably has a different answer, I didn't watch the vid. Dr. Oz and the Movie scared me enough. I get it, I get it. I'm going to die). Not without becoming some sort of Orwellian society. You know: power to the state, Hail Big Brother!, and all that.

So, how about we try our best to be better people, even if the person you're being a better person to happens to have beat up his ex. He might have actually changed, may have been going through things we don't understand, considering we'd never do anything like that. There's never a good reason to do bad things, but that doesn't mean there isn't a reason behind it, albeit feable and unacceptable.

I don't know. Seems to me forgiveness is one of the highest (and one of the hardest) roads mankind can take.

And vindictive antagonism? Probably not on par with beating up a woman, but I do believe it's something a person should truly be pitied for engaging in.

Not much reading in this post, but Read On anyway.

Jeremie



* This is a bit sheepish; I don't mean it that way. I believe we should fight against injustice, but not with anger at one random figure. Martyrs don't work well in a negative respect. 

** Di-k

So On The Tails Of The Series

I've made a couple of changes to the blog.

1. The title has changed from Shuffled by JC to The Life Shuffle

2. The url has changed from chance-thelifeshuffle.blogspot.com to thelifeshuffle.blogspot.com


That's it for now. There may be more changes on the way.





*Wow, had to go back and fix a couple of links I broke, but I think we're good now.

Remember Plagiarism...Cont. Part B

When we last left our mild mannered amatuer blogger he was still prattling on about plagiarism after serving up a brief interlude to his readers.

Well, it's not over yet, but today I'm coming fresh wit it.

So far I haven't given you much in the way of a solution, to which I beg your understanding since according to this new article I found (and am extremely exicited about) tells us, "The law still struggles with this distinction," as well.

Let's start with the new article today and move to the other two.

It's called, " Lessons in Plagiarism From Przekrój, Poland's Oldest Weekly," an article for The Atlantic that also appears in Brain Pickings, written by Maria Popova.

It's about and artist, Noma Bar, being plagiarized by a magazine, Przekroj.
The magazine copied the artist's rendering of Hitler.

Now this article was really helpful, though it didn't completely solve the balance problem I ended "Remember P.... Part A" with, but it does fall somewhere in the middle. Popova tells us, "it's important to understand the line between remix and ripoff."

The "litmus test" in the article? If the potiential offender, "changes the original in a creatively meaningful way, or offers cultural commentary or critique on it."

Now that we've established this tally and found a middle with the article above let's see what we have so far.

Kevin Drum: A combination of internet and laziness increase plagiarism from college kids.
My View: I kind of agree, but don't completely buy it. Too easy. (Even thought this article on a Pew study agrees)

Anna Leach: The system used to determine plagiarism should change. What's that one, I don't know, saying? Reduce Reuse Recycle...something like that.

My View: Again I agree, but only if an uninspired free-for-all on creative material isn't the case. I didn't see any structure in this view.

Maria Popova: She's obviously against plagiarism, but only when plagiarism is done. She even talked about a litmus test for it.

My View: I believe litmus tests for this sort of thing can be highly subjective. It's hard to come up with a concrete view from relative questioning, like did you change the work enough? Though I think, out and out plagiarist are almost always easy to find. Couplla questions. Can the litmus test be made clearer? Is there a less tedious way to site sources in an academic paper? (I know the second question is random, but I hate citation, MLA, APA, etc... OK, I may not hate citation, but we are definately strangers and I was taught never to talk to strangers.)

**I was suppose to go over a third article which was actually really good. I got super convolute writing this, or at least I felt that way and needed to stop. So, for the sake of fairness, a quote from Jonathan H. Adlers article for The Volokh Conspiracy, "Plagiarism 2.0," that to me aids in the fight against plagiarism and for creativity, "The creativity and originality comes from finding the right source material and putting it to good use, not from denying the original source."--He agrees with the new article I found and Anna Leach a bit too.

Remember Plagiarism...Cont. Part A

Back to our regularly scheduled program...

We'll start with the ShinyShiny article, "Our Copy-Paste Culture and why plagiarism isn't such a problem anymore... " by Anna Leach and we'll see where that will take us. Okay?

This article doesn't take as hard a stance against plagiarism as the Kevin Drum article, as you can see by the title that may be a little more than an understatement.

Anna Leach argues the times are changing and "Mayber the academic world should catch up with this one..."  and she asks if it is, "so wrong to re-use, re-mix, re-write, or repost?"

To which we know Mr. Drum answers emphatically yes, and the internet is an accomplice to the crime.

To me, Anna Leach may have a point, but again it feels to black and white for me. It leaves out the harshness that Mr. Drum gives when it comes to plagiarism while describing "this brave new world of collaboration."

If academic writing becomes as informal as writing on a blog can be or collaborating on a Youtube video, how bad will it get? Will someone be able to get more than an arbitary thumbs up from work that was mostly mine? And macrocosmically, where would society be after the break down of the strict, or not strict enough depending on the side you're on, rules of academia on plagiarism?

I don't know the answers. But there's got to be some sort of middle ground that keeps us away from being needlessly ornery or having a free for all  on other people's work.

I'll continue this next time. Bring a little more clarity maybe. Because I like the idea of reform when it comes to plagiarism, but can't understand how that can be done without creative and academic anarchy.

Hmmm?
Until next time.

R. O. R!!!!

A Brief Interlude

I sorry about cutting in on the plagiarism "series" I started, I will get back to that soon.

And I''m stalling the "series" for a semi-personal note, no less, but I really, really have to do this because the subject called out to me. Well, it's not a subject per se, rather an amusing affirmation. I won't be long though.

Do you know the blog Wicked & Tricksy?

It's an awesome and helpful blog about writing in general and speculative fiction specifically. They have guest bloggers on Fridays.

I wanted to follow the blog at its genesis, but do to ill-defined reasons I could not, so I recently started reading back posts and plan on catching up when I get the chance to read from post one.

Anyway the point of this post is as a show of solidarity with this recent post by Claudia A. on Thursday, "The Power of Short Stories."

A while ago I was so in the mindset of the W&T post represents when it came to the daunting task of writing a novel v a simple short (though short stories are no walk in the park to complete either). To see it put forth by someone with ideas you didn't even think of is a great comfort.

This is also coming on the heels of reading a review on the Amazon site about a book from Amazon Singles. (I not sure how A-Singles holding up, but I actually like the idea of these shorts offered by Amazon. I have to expound upon this more later. )

The reviewer lamented, " 15 pages? Come on--get serious."

I'm down with the complaint to a certain degree, .99c for 15 pages certainly may be steep.

(I gave up my .99c for the short. That's why bad reviews aren't helpful to me, they make me want to check it out for myself, especially since the majority of reviews are weak in the content area.)

But for me content is key to price, not that I believe readers and retailers should start haggling for a fair price for a book, rather, I believe that when we read books, at least this is how it is with me, we can either come away with as sense of fulfillment as if we've gotten what we paid for, maybe more; or we can leave the author's world feeling as though they've stolen something from us.

It happens regardless of length of the work. Jeez, there's probably shorts out there that I'd pay "hardback" money for if I could... maybe.

Amazon Singles is probably trying to give the short story a chance the way it's currently giving author's under unfavorable conditions a chance. Or they're trying to make money.

N-E-Way, I've strayed, only slightly, from my original topic, so...

I'm going to leave you with a Stephen King quote that summarizes my tangent quite nicely, from the 2007 New Yorks Times article, "What Ails The Short Story," , "They do still matter, and here they are, liberated from the bottom shelf. "


And P.S. Wicked & Tricksy -- Writing -- Short Stories are awesome!

R.O.R!!!






*King, Stephen. "What Ails the Short Story - Stephen King - Books - Review - New York Times." The New York Times - Breaking News, World News & Multimedia. 03 Sept. 2011. Web. 03 Sept. 2011. http://www.nytimes.com/2007/09/30/books/review/King2-t.html.


*Reviewer. "Amazon.com: Customer Reviews: No Time Left (Kindle Single)." Amazon.com: Online Shopping for Electronics, Apparel, Computers, Books, DVDs & More. Amazon, 10 May 2011. Web. 03 Sept. 2011. <http://www.amazon.com/Time-Left-Kindle-Single-ebook/product-reviews/B004LB4FBE/ref=cm_cr_pr_hist_1?ie=UTF8>.

Remember Plagiarism...

I talked about PLAGIARISM!!! a few posts back. DA DA DUM!

Remember?

Well, I was intrigued to do a follow up post when I came across a top story on the Google news...Would it be called a ticker? No, let's go with with feed.

So, I go on the Google news feed to see what's going on around the world a couple of days ago and I see another plagiarism article. I can't remember "where" it was written, Reuters I think, otherwise I'd link it for you. But it had a couple of mini graphs, I didn't get to read it, but it did spark my curisosity. Since I have gone back to deliberately search the news for plagiarism articles.

I found a few good ones, my favorite is, "Why College Students Don't Understand Plagiarism," It asks, "Is our digital free-for-all culture triggering an ethical breakdown?"

(I have no idea how to cite this-- MLA, APA, Chicago Style--has been Greek to me since I was first thrust into those over charted waters in high school)

The question is similar to one Nathan Bransford, a blog I enjoy frequenting and that I've linked a few times before asked yesterday--Is the Internet Making Us Better or Worse?


You noticed the three different views they linked up in answer to the question?

I love multiple views on things because I'm a firm believer that most concrete things in this world are made in shades of gray.

The three different author's bring up great points and I'm inclined to believe many of them, but I want to play in the shades of gray with this post.

In Kevin Drum's article for Mother Jones, "The Economics of Plagiarism," he pointed out that the blame should be on the internet which makes plagiarism, "about a hundred times easier than it use to be," and lays blame where it rightly should be, the plagiarizers that, "do it because they're lazy."

I'm inclined to agree with his sentiments, but I believe the conclusions are a bit extreme. I mean, the internet does provide more information and an ease of access, but I don't believe it would give someone who normally cites their material when researching a topic through physical books at a library an incentive to take the easy way out and copy work without citing their source.

It's my belief that the original New York Times article have it closer to the truth. I think, "dag-nabit this internet contraption. Get off my lawn!! Lazy kids," is a little to black and white for my taste.

I'm think I'm going to have to continue this another day--it's gone on longer than I expected, but I'm really enjoying myself.

I wonder if Anna Leach of Shiny Shiny can give us more incite into solutions for this plagiarism epidemic (or is that pandemic? Maybe neither since I'm not talking about disease.) with her view. Anyway...

R.O.R!

*These are older articles (like last year old), but plagiarism persists to be thorn in creativitiy's side.