Erm, hello there internet

It's...been a while. Um. How have you been? How are the....kids? They're fine? We'll, that's fine. I'm fine too.

Been home a week and a half. Good results on exams ("all that studying" clearly paid off :) ) and a good flight home, so that's all dandy. Lots of beach times, lots of good times, a little boredom for spice. The usual, really. So, skipping the last couple weeks, here is TODAY:

Mom wakes me up for gyros at noon. Life is good. After that finished Voltaire's Candide, which was just a fun, good read. Interesting after having done a bit of Modern European philosophy this year, since its a satire of the idea of cause and effect and the idea that a perfect God must have created the best of all possible worlds. My favourite passage is in the first chapter, a wonderful description of sex:

"One day Cunegonde was walking near the house in a little coppice, called 'the park', when she saw Dr. Pangloss behind some bushes giving a lesson in experimental physics to her mother's waiting-woman, a pretty little brunette who seemed eminently teachable. Since Lady Cunegonde took a great interest in science, she watched the experiments being repeated with breathless fascination. She saw clearly the Doctor's 'sufficient reason', and took note of cause and effect. Then, in a disturbed and thoughtful state of mind, she returned home filled with a desire for learning, and fancied that she could reason equally well with young Candide and he with her."

The close second to this is that same Doctor's description of how his STD can be traced back to Colombus' discovery of the New World and therefore must be a good, because had it not been brought back to Europe we would not have chocolate either. There is a wonderful economy of words, partly, surely, because it is comedy, but it is something I think I can learn from.

Later in the afternoon, Mom and I went to see Pixar's "Up", a great film about a cantankerous old man who turns his house into a blimp and finally goes on adventures. It's quirky with a great eye for detail and comedy and at the same time really touching. I think all of these are aided by the fact that it is made as a children story but with the crabby antagonist as protagonist, taking the time to understand his motivation and really get a sense of the good in him and the dreams he is finally realizing--or not. It's a film about loyalty and friendship and courage and the usual, but also about age and dreams--the ones we have, the ones we had, the ones we finally prioritize and realise, the ones thrust on us, and the ones we have to give up. Heavy stuff for a kid's film. I'd definitely see it again, as I'm not sure I was able to process everything that was going on in one viewing.

The night was capped off with dinner with the Narrie family and going to go see "Our Town" at the Actor's Gang. Three acts and as many hours long, the first act could really have been cut without losing much and the third was visually stunning but cliched--the second was the only place where the characters felt really human and connected. But they definitely connected, and I'd say the play all-in-all was a success. Again a lot about growing up and expectations, what we want and what we get in life. It was more serious than I anticipated (a good thing), though still with a heavy dose of comedy.

And next week I turn twenty. So the themes of all of the good art I 'consumed' today are very much on my mind. Its scary. A fair number of people I knew in High School are leaving university, some are having kids, and I just generally feel my entrance into a more adult world. Part of it is nice--I don't feel like I'm 'trying' anymore, I'm just doing. But that also implies a lack of safety blanket; you can always 'try' again, but once you do something it is done. Also thinking a bit about art and artists--today certainly I felt that the people I interacted with (in an entirely one-way sense) first and foremost were artists. Bookmakers, movie theatre attendants, road builders, car builders, bankers, politicians, etc ("the machinery") were all, of course, necessary, but they were part of a means to an end that was art (or, let's take it broadly, 'culture', whatever the hell that means). Is the artist also part of the 'means'? Sure. But if the 'end'--the purpose, the goal, or just "that thing that takes up most of my time"--is some form of art or storytelling, I think that re-casts my perspective of the artists role in society. Rather than lampreys on society that provide an 'other' to banking and bussing every once in a while, something not really needed but kind of nice, they take a central role. If life is about stories and people are social animals, artists are both creating a context or backdrop for life to be carried out in or in front of, and providing a necessary good that in the end is as essential as food. This view of art is a delusion that I think it may be helpful to carry into the future!