GOD IS NOT MOCKEDINTRODUCTION
Welcome, gentle reader! As your new columnist, it will be my
pleasure to guide your erudite and cultured mind through the
scintillating and altogether arousing world of LIFESTYLES! Those of you
familiar with this word only through the backs of condom boxes and those
of you who have become hermits to escape the ravages of modern culture
may ask, "What, exactly, is a lifestyle?" A bit of history, then, is in
order. In the beginning, back when men still smoked cigars without
worrying about the phallic implications of such an act and women wore
corsets in order that they might better approximate the figure of the
Barbie doll, people lived lives, wherein the men went to work and feared
communists, the women lived a variant of "Kinder, Kuche, Kirche" that
involved buying fashionable kitchen appliances, and they all lived the
post-war dream together. Wealthy industralists and their families, who
had the money to hire people to do their jobs for them, could devote
their time to a wide array of enriching activities such as golf, riding
horses, and consuming expensive alcoholic beverages, given journalistic
immortality in a newspaper's "Society Pages".
However, with the advent of greasy long-haired pelvis-gyrators like
the Dave Clark Five and the infiltration of rogue weirdo intellectuals
like Adlai Stevenson all that changed. The youth of America (and
probably other countries too, but as an American, I am required by the
cultural ethos of this great nation to systematically ignore historical
occurances in foreign lands) started running amuck in motorcycle gangs,
growing their hair to egregious lengths, spending their money on birth
control pills instead of washing machines, and generally engaging in
activities they characterized as "changing the world". Under the
mesmerizing spell of cunning linguists like Noam Chomsky (well, maybe
not him, but he's the only linguist I've ever heard of), they came to
the conclusion that the terminology of their parents was entirely
inadequate for the purposes of bringing about a new beautiful planet,
plus they could really confuse their parents with all these new words,
and so it was they replaced the word "life", which they perceived to be
staid, dull, and altogether too monosyllabic, with "lifestyle", which
they believed was vibrant, energetic, and full of zest.
In the end, however, these brave young prophets of a new age realized
they smelled sort of bad and really ought to have washing machines after
all, stopped smoking pot, and became respectable decent citizens. By
the time this had happened, however, the media, which if you recall your
cultural studies courses from college, is run by the ponies, had decided
the young idealists were really on to something with that language, and
by using it could remind them forever of the fun times of their youth.
As market studies showed that people were more likely to buy stuff when
they were in good moods, this worked out extremely well. So it was that
every newspaper gained a column labelled "Lifestyles", usually right
before the sports section, where they would print the slowly shrinking
comic strips and tell you what you could watch on TV. The "Lifestyles"
section has also slowly absorbed the function of the Society Pages in
the local newspapers, with the privileged classes turning to other
methods of circulation to advertise their business gatherings and
cocaine parties.
This leaves us in the new and entirely modern (or perhaps
supra-post-modern; the eternal philosophical question "What time is
it?" has taken on deepened significance in this clime of approximated
schizophrenia) era of the '90s with a vexing question: What exactly
*is* lifestyle? Is it a successor to the societal functions of the
1950s? Is it what TV shows we watch, what church we attend, what we
eat, who we fuck? Well, for the purposes of this column and for the
benefit of befuddled journalists everywhere, "Lifestyle" shall be
defined as "The study of the development and practice of trends."
Trends, as defined by the definitive lexicon of 20th century cultural
hagiography, "The Adventures of Greggery Peccary" by Frank Zappa, are
exemplified by "the Twist.. or Flower Power"; in other words, a
prepacked culturally approved way of spending time not occupied by one's
job, "rejuvenating the national economy and providing for bored,
miserable people everywhere some great new THING to identify with."
("Greggery Peccary" again).
The "Lifestyle" moniker, of course, comes with the associated buzzword
(buzzword is, of course, itself a buzzword, an oddity I would dwell on
further were I William Safire) "alternate lifestyle" or "alternative
lifestyle". There is again some dispute over what qualifies as
"alternative", especially considering the fact that some things still
considered "alternative" are in fact favored by a huge segment of the
general populace. For the purposes of this column, we can generalize
that an "alternative lifestyle" consists of anything Jesse Helms would
not do in his spare time.
Whew! That was a great deal more complex than I anticipated, and it
looks like we're out of room for this time. No matter. Next time,
we'll talk about SISKEL AND EBERT.
--
GOD IS NOT MOCKED
Well, despite my firm intentions last time to write a mildly
engaging and vaguely time-occupying Lifestyles Article about
the gut-wrenchingly serious theme of Siskel and Ebert, I
attempted instead to work on a second topic on the theory that
the Siskel and Ebert one would occupy insufficient space.
In such situations I usually do one of two things: change the spacing
and margins, which obviously isn't applicable in this case, or
pad out the article with stuff that is pretty much completely
irrelevant to the purposes of the article but sounds damn
neat. However, my tangential meanderings happened to usurp
the ostensible topic in this case, and in sheer joy at having
written something vaguely coherent, this is what will be
submitted.
The UK is currently suffering the final weeks of that dreaded
disease known as "the electoral campaign". In years past, I
have been blithely oblivious to this sort of thing, holding
the cherished belief that the continent of Europe was actually
spelled "Yurip" and consisted mainly of Greeks such as Mr.
Papadopolous from "Webster". However, what with the
globalization of the information economy, the fact that the
library where I work only carries reputable newspapers
concerned with important world trends, and the fact that
demographically speaking, the UK is the second most populous
country on the Internet, I find it tragically difficult to
ignore their political foibles.
Now, some of you might think that a political campaign is
definitely outside the range of my duties as a Lifestyles
columnist, but upon closer examination it indeed holds up to
scrutiny. First off, what with the virtual elimination of all
policy-based initiatives in the modern political campaign,
elections have indeed become a venue for entertainment,
albeit (judging from polls of Concerned Citizens everywhere)
not a very effective one. Entertainment has been the
tantamount priority of voters everywhere since the days when
campaigners made up idiotic folk-songs to promote their
candidate. Secondly, any residual political aspects of the
race are more than compensated for by the fact that most
foreign elections have absolutely no bearing on any facet of
life in this great stinking cesspool of a country I'm
stationed in (the USA, for those of you taking notes). Third
and finally, while it may not be as scintillating as
scurrilous gossip about the Royal Family, the British election
involves many well-known entertainment archetypes.
Having observed the events surrounding the upcoming election,
as I usually do, through a haze of media-induced filtering,
half-formed gossip, and nearly total ignorance on my part, I
am struck by several things. The first is how similar it
seems to the pathetically banal electoral event we in the
States finished suffering through last fall and four years ago.
A conservative leader, not facing any major crises, but
generally regarded as a pathetic shadow of the tart-tongued,
hard-assed, and charismatic '80s party leader, loses
popularity fast because of a perceived lack of leadership
qualities. All his political points are usurped by the leader
of the ostensibly liberal party, who, though not exactly a
great leader, nevertheless comes across as a much better
conservative than leader of the conservative party. In
desperation, the conservative leader takes a stand he doesn't
really agree with, but which will distinguish him from the
leader of the other party, at least. He decides to come down
hard on foreigners.
I hope to God (or a reasonable fascimile thereof) that these
countries aren't looking up to us as a paragon of successful
electioneering. I had always had the impression that British
politics had some redeeming qualities, despite the
interminably dull exploits of the Royal Family and their
tendency to welcome utter twats like Andrew Fucking
Lloyd-Webber and Paul McCartney as members of the "ruling
class", though considering the track record of the "ruling
class" perhaps it was well in keeping with their standards.
For one thing, they at least had the decency to curse each
other out on the floor of the lawmaking house, calling each
other "dreaded ungulates", "wankers", and other such endearing
terms. We haven't had that kind of action in our lawmaking
bodies since the renowned "Bloody Sumner" incident of the
1850s, which is one of the only things I recall about American
history. This veneer of false civility is extremely
disingenuous to me, if only because I'd very much enjoy
seeing, say, Sen. James Exon (D-Neb.) and Sen. Jesse Helms
(R-NC) attempt to beat each other to a bloody pulp. However,
those halcyon days seem to be numbered, as the six-limbed
beast that passes for "American Culture" creeps across the
horizons of the world. As Frank Zappa said on British
television in 1968, "Something's gotta be done, before America
scarfs up the world and shits on it."
In any case, at least the current electoral campaign has some
salient features which, while not exactly enjoyable in a
straightforward sense, can be cruelly mocked as indicators of
the downfall of civilization in general. First off, the
chicken incident. This was brought to my attention by a
poster to the alt.slack newsgroup. While this may seem
woefully unprofessional, given the propensity of posters to
disreputable Usenet groups (which is, in fact, nearly all of
them) to claim things such as the death of Ernest Borgnine
from child molestation and the suicide of Xuxa, both of which
are completely untrue, my reliance on such a medium might be
considered highly suspect and/or completely unoriginal.
Nevertheless, this is completely in line with the methodology
employed by Modern Media Experts, so I feel completely
justified in this. C'est la vie ("La vie!") Unfortunately,
Americans suffer from a peculiar disease whereby the identities
of people from foreign countries are rendered indistinguishable,
so I can't precisely identify the person in question. The
"chicken issue" in question revolves around the fact that the
Tories, who represent, roughly speaking, the "right wing" of
British politics, have sent a giant chicken out to follow
around Labor (representing, roughly speaking, the "left wing"
of British politics, though they seem to have moved away from
supporting organizations that claim to support the workers, as
nobody really wants to think about work during a political
campaign) MP (which is an inscrutable political title,
somewhat akin to "Whip" in the US system, though I have not
once in my life seen Newt Gingrich in dominatrix gear. Not
that I want to. It might stand for "Prime Minister" in
metric.) Tony Blair, apparently to signify that he's bought
and paid for by the amusement park greeters' union. This is
notable for several reasons. The first of these is the
similarity of this ploy to the Democrats' usage of a guy
dressed up like a cigarette who followed around Bob Dole,
indicating that Mr. Dole was beholden to "Big Tobacco". This
is nicked from an idea by alleged political cartoonist Garry
Trudeau, who has cute ways of representing politicians with
breakfast foods and Macintosh icons. Personally I find this
to be an exemplary attempt to make politics a thing of
interest to all and sundry. Labor can dress protesters up
in autoerotic asphyxiation gear in salute to the time-honoured
Tory practice, mummies, vampires, and zombies could be hired
to follow politicians around for political effect; there could
be an entire entourage of freakish cartoonlike exaggerations
of the perceived faults of the would-be "leaders". And for
those without the funds to pay for an entire costumery, one
could simply hire real winos to follow around the
politicians! What could work better?
The second area of appeal of the chicken suit leads to its use
as a time-hallowed piece of burlesque in not only Britain, but
also here in the States. In fact, the chicken suit was
instrumental in halting a federal investigation into the
identity of the Unabomber. Back in the 1980s, before the
Unabomber had been given his cool superhero name, the federal
agency responsible for investigations was looking very closely
at college students, apparently primarily because they played
role-playing games. This is of course a trend on the
resurgence in America nowadays, what with two sets of idiot
Kentucky residents going on pseudo-Satanic/Role-playing game
inspired killing sprees in the last year, and is no doubt
somehow linked to the "goth" trend, wherein it is believed
that wearing large amounts of pancake makeup will put you in
touch with occult powers. So it should not be too hard for
the contemporary observer to see why pretending to be an
orc-slayer equated in the minds of the nation in general, and
these federal agents in particular, with being a violent felon.
However, the canny students caught onto this, and in a
brilliant tactical act one of them went down to Langley,
dressed in a chicken suit, and demanded to speak to the
investigating officer. When faced with this spectacle, the
agency apparently concluded that anyone with the insight,
wisdom, and time-honored collegiate sense of humour to wear a
chicken suit could not possibly be a psychotic killer, and
moved their worthy efforts elsewhere. Despite the fact that
this has been reported by major news-magazines, no
corresponding rise in the sales of chicken suits has been
noted since that time, which is a shame, since as this article
has hopefully demonstrated, they are truly worthy to have the
label "trend" affixed to them.
In further attempts to appeal to the people, the British have
brought out Margaret Thatcher again. As she is not suffering
from a degenerative memory disease, this is generally
considered a good move, especially as charismatic leaders have
even MORE pull if they are not put in positions of great
power, where they attract pesky criticism which must then be
suppressed so as to preserve the fond memories of them for
posterity. She's even been endorsed by Britain's greatest
singing sensation since progressive rock group Frankie Goes to
Hollywood, the Spice Girls. Again, this shows a move towards
celebrity endorsement that can serve politics well in the
future; George Bush benefitted from endorsements by
body-builder Arnold Schwarzenegger. Indeed, if we combine the
celebrity endorsement theme with the puppet theme, we can
expect to see political endorsements by the Muppets in the
near future. This move will be made even more effective by
the fact that polls show Sesame Street enjoys a strong degree
of popularity among the Youth Market, for whom possession of
past media commodities is both a chance for cultural
integration and a chance to show off ironic media-savvy
sophistication.
Whew. I keep having this tendency to talk about Serious
Issues, don't I? Maybe next time I'll talk about some
lightweight fluff like the allegations that among the sexual
fetishes Tom Cruise will be acting out in the next Kubrick
film will be not only transvestitism, but forced auditing. Or
Carl Orff. Or something. I can't promise you anything.
--
GOD IS NOT MOCKED
(Note: The rate of serious depression in Paris is 15.4%, if you
find this significant.)