Twenty Years!

 I was gonna begin the anniversary post with a photo of Old Steve Rogers sittin' and ruminatin'. 

But Old Blogger wouldn't let me.

Is that because Blogger is itself too old? Or is the Old Steve pic so fresh and new (?) that the lawyers won't let me meme it for my self-promotional purposes?

Still, there has to be an acceptable (legal) way to celebrate that Why Won't You Grow turned 20 years old yesterday. And unlike Steve Rogers, it shows its age.

For one, it still sits on Blogger--the Hammer Tech of blog platforms. But I guess I'm ride or die at this point. I'm pot committed. All of my very important thoughts over the last two decades is here--for better and very much for worse.

It will all evaporate someday. Maybe an EM pulse will shut everything down. (No one will more the loss of WWYG?! but a small spec of individual expression will be gone.  . . . Right?)

How to celebrate 20 years of random flotsam? (Other than the simple acknowledgement that is happening now?) Well, last night I was sitting with Grace, enjoying a few episodes of her first self-directed LOST Rewatch and what episode appeared?

It’s not even my birthday! pic.twitter.com/vMXerghlJx

— David (@dtm1971) August 13, 2024

If only I have reached that point in my own LOST Rewatch/repost.

But anyway . . . Happy Anniversary to me!

COV14D-19

Everyone has more time to watch movies--or so they keep saying--so I'm going to focus on one of my favorite movies today. This was prompted by (and the content in this post is very likely influenced by) The Rewatchables podcast I listened to today.

I'm placing a photo here that makes it seem like you can click to listen to the podcast within this post. But alas Spotify won't let me embed. So, click on the image to launch the Ringer Web site where you CAN listen to the audio. Or better yet, subscribe to The Rewatchables on your favorite podcast app. It's a good one.

This movie is, of course, the sequel to the Ocean's 11 film starring George Clooney, Brad Pitt, Matt Damon, and a host of eight other actors. They were teaming up to pull off the most elaborate casino heist in modern movie history. Besides that, this movie was a remake of a Rat Pack movie from the late 1950s/early 1960s? (I could look it up, but I'm not going to.)

Ocean's 12 brings the gang back together to pull off another heist that is even bigger, even more complicated, and with twice the location shooting and cinematic verve. I've always heard that most people didn't like this sequel--though they did seem to enjoy Ocean's 13. But while I like Ocean's 11 quite a lot and while I also like Ocean's 13 just fine, I really, really like Ocean's 12 much more than the average person seems to.

What do I like so much about it? (In no particular order.)

1. The Julia Roberts Rome museum scene is great. The first time I watched it I was so struck by the oddballness of having all of the cinematic walls broken. It is my favorite scene in the movie to rewatch.

2. The reveal of the bag switch in the last 25 minutes of the film upends all that you thought you saw in the movie. And I like the way that the movie changes your perspective so quickly.

3. Everything about the movie is so relaxed and so scrambled. The actors seem like they are genuinely having a great time. And I don't know how they wrote the script for this film (assuming that much of it wasn't ad-libbed), because the dialogue as performed is so scattered and choppy and interwoven. I just can't imagine how you see the conversations and then write them. But it is so fun and fizzy to listen to. And the plot--such as it is--is very scant and there is not a lot of connective tissue that tells you what you are supposed to be understanding. It is a confusing story--but I like it because the confusion has such style.

4. Matt Damon's character is so desperate and lost.

5. The random Topher Grace scene at the start is a very good mood setter for the rest of the movie that comes. (I won't call it a cameo because I'm not entirely sure that he is actually supposed to playing himself or just someone who happens to be named Topher Grace who is an actor. Yeah, I"m overthinking it.)

6. The music in Ocean's 12 is just great. It's a tonal mood rather than songs. But they are memorable and quite fun.

So--that's it.

Do you like Ocean's 12? Or do you like any of these movies? If so, what is your favorite character?

50 Greatest Celebrities of All Time

As a way to celebrate the fifteenth anniversary of Why Won't You Grow, I'm going back to a bread and butter topic of this blog that I used to write about lots and lots of time in the past.

Celebrity and fame.

Using work already started by The Ringer Web site, I've got "a" list of the greatest celebrities of All Time provided below, along with a podcast focused on this debate. If you've got the time and interest, I suggest you listen.

But if you want to skip that, I've reproduced their list below--ranked from No. 1 to No. 50. And I'll try to provide my own reaction to each choice . . . if I recognize them.

Happy reading!



1. Oprah
I guess I'm not surprised by this. Everyone is always saying that Oprah is successful and rich and influential and famous and stuff. If all of that doesn't add up to you being the best celebrity, what is it all for?

2. Beyoncé
I guess I'm not surprised by this either? But there is a part of me that chalks this up to recency bias. And maybe that part of me just doesn't care that much about her music?

3. Muhammad Ali
My children's generation will have no connection to Muhammad Ali whatsoever. And I'm sure that when they are in charge, he would never get ranked in the top twenty, and absolutely never within the top 5. I have no direct connection to Ali personally. But I know enough to know what a pivotal cultural role he played at a tumultuous time.

4. Princess Diana
Come on. I reject this. But even so, I can't deny she matches up with the notion of "celebrity" which is being famous for being famous.

5. Tom Cruise
If the Top Gun: Maverick trailer had not come out two weeks ago, would Cruise's ranking have slipped further down the top 10?

6. Madonna
This is the opposite of recency bias, I guess? What has Madonna done in the last twenty years that justified such a high ranking? Or am I simply discounting how BIG she was in the 1980s? But then . . . what about Michael Jackson? He was definitely as influential as Madonna--as well as being controversial. But maybe it is the nature of the controversy that priviledged Madonna?

7. David Bowie

8. Rihanna
I don't get it.

9. John Lennon
I do get it.

10. Jesus Christ
I see what you did there. And I cannot fathom that Rihanna is ranked higher than Jesus H. Christ!

11. Marilyn Monroe
Perhaps the embodiment of the modern media celebrity?

12. George Clooney
It is so much harder to be a celebrity if you aren't i.) handsome/good looking and ii.) charming. Take those two things away from George Clooney and what is he? Mark Ruffalo?

13. Cher
Okay. Cher has been famous for a long time.

14. Brad Pitt
See George Clooney, but subtract a significant amount of the charming part and bump up his acting skill level.

15. Leonardo DiCaprio
What makes him famous? "Titanic"? His man-about-town status?

16. Jack Nicholson
True fact about me. I always have to mentally pause and think Jack Nicholson . . . the actor? Or Jack Nicklaus . . . the golfer? Nicholson is definitely the bigger celebrity of the two--thanks to Nicholson's own personal and professional choices, for sure. But don't sleep on Nicklaus. He's been a damn good, historically great sports figure for all of his adult life.

17. Prince
No way am I okay with Prince being so much lower than Rihanna here.

18. Arnold Schwarzenegger
It's naht a  misprint! (And Stallone must be really angry about this.)

19. Lady Gaga
If you are willing to wear a meat dress in public, you get inside the top 20, I guess.

20. Elizabeth Taylor
What is the contemporary equivalent of Elizabeth Taylor? My mind immediately went to Anne Hathaway. What say you?

21. Jennifer Lopez
Too bad it wasn't made of meat. (If you're reading this on mobile, go to the Web version and click the link.)

22. Joan of Arc

23. Michael Jordan
Being the unquestioned best at the top-level achievement of your profession is not--apparently--as significant as being famous and media-worthy. Skill does not equate to fame.

24. Bruce Lee
At the risk of offending people, this feels a bit like tokenism and also . . . if "Once Upon A Time . . . In Hollywood" wasn't just released?

25. Ariana Grande
The highest-ranking Disney Channel kid? Or Nickelodeon kid? Promise you that the Ringer staffers who made up a lot of this list have an average age of 25.

26. Will Smith
Big Willy Style can't be more historically inspirational than being guided by voices, right Joan? And it helps to be a martyr. If Joan had avoided being burned at the stake, she would have been eventually penalized for the historical equivalent of "Wild Wild West." (Never outlive your fame, I guess.)

27. Napoleon Bonaparte
I know at least one person that is going to be salty about this number.

28. Aretha Franklin
Let me be the millionth person to make the joke that Aretha ain't getting enough R.E.S.P.E.C.T. on this list.

29. Kanye West

30. Elvis
Southern tokenism

31. Paul Newman
Deserves to outrank Ariana Grande on the basis of "Cool Hand Luke" alone. PLUS his post acting charity work. AND for the fact that he may have the only good Hollywood marriage in recorded history.

32. Drake
Canadian tokenism? And if he'd been a child actor on an American network . . . what then?

33. Tom Hanks
Probably ranks lower than he should because he is also hit by the Michael Jordan issue (fame trumping actual skill). But maybe also Hanks benefitted from having incredibly good timing? He was in the biggest, most influential movies at a very specific and intense time in Hollywood history. Is he that skilled of an actor is you are being brutally honest? Rember that Hollywood success is driven a lot of networking and timing--and if the timing isn't right the networking won't work at all.

34. Nicolas Cage
See? Based on a pure evaluation of fame (but not acting skill, mind you), I think that Cage edges out Hanks. Cage is just willing to play the celebrity bizarre card more than Hanks ever has--or will.

35. Michelle Obama
This is just a straight-up insult to First Ladies. Michelle Obama has tried to do more to help people with her recognition and her notoriety than Nick Cage EVER. Stop it.

36. James Dean
Your grandfather's celebrity of choice. But why not John Wayne? (Left Coast bias, Ringer staff?)

37. David Beckham

38. Meryl Streep
Again, it's pure Jordan Rules that ended up pushing Streep below David freakin' Beckham here. And truthfully she'd probably be ranked even lower if not for her recent run as the Academy Awards audience meme lord.

39. Jane Fonda
Barbarella gets no love. And has America already forgotten that she taught us how to aerobicize?

40. Frederick Douglass
Wow. Unexpected and insulting simultaneously.

41.Shaquille O’Neal
Well, at least the great abolitionist reformer and historical influencer outranked the Diesel Shaq Daddy.

42. Michael J. Fox
He did more for puffy vests than anyone!

43. Mariah Carey
Go peddle your vocal flourishes somewhere else.

44. Dwayne Johnson
This low ranking will only propel him to more insane bicep dimensions. You've all made a terrible mistake.

45. Diplo
Definitely, Lego is better.

46. Sophie Turner
Without Instagram, she would be nowhere on this list.

47. Joan Didion
I wonder how she feels about being ranked below her son Diplo?

48. Cara Delevingne
I cannot begin to explain this position for Cara. Is being a former friend of Taylor Swift + getting a John Green bump matter THAT much?

49. Guy Fieri

via GIPHY

50. Jamie Foxx
???

Presumably John Green's Favorite New Internet Article

Today I read an article entitled "How to Quit Your Phone and Change Your Life By . . . Doing Nothing." 

It profiles Jenny Odell, who is one person advocating for humanity's race away from technological immersion before it is too late for all of us.

It was well researched and made a good argument for why digital addition is a real problem that might be the end of us all if we don't admit the fact of its existence and do something about it. And so it is similar to the Climate Change problem as well . . . something that lots of people argue about, something that lots of people don't want to deal with, and something that lots of less fortunate people don't have the luxury of indulging either.

Halfway through reading it, it occurred to me that this might be--as the title suggests--YA author John Green's new favorite long-form read. Heck, he might even have been reading it when I was reading it this afternoon, as we both prepare to experience the live show taping of Harry Potter and the Sacred Text in his hometown of Indianapolis. If there is a Q & A time during the live show, maybe I'll even try to get to the mic and remember Odell's name long enough to describe the article.

See what I mean?

Now, it is clear that John and I don't have dovetailed views on all things, but I bet he's had some time to read this article and he shook his head in agreement while going through the paragraphs.

***

I keep telling myself (probably with lots of naivete) that I do a pretty good job of keeping social media and digital interaction at a reasonable level. It is true that I take more time watching old media (television) than lots of people still do, so I'm certainly not without my own addictions. But when I use social media, I do it--comparatively?--sparingly? And I certainly don't spend lots of time cycling down comment rabbit holes and getting into arguments.

I think I use the Internet superficially. And so I hope I hold it a bit at arm's length. I used to have grand designs for the Internet and me (read between the lines of almost every WWYG?! blog post between 2004 and 2010 . . . or later). But I got older, didn't change at all, and internalized my fate. The vast gaps of updates on this very Internet location speaks to that truth in my life more eloquently than anything I might try to type right now.

***

Finally, as good as the article is, I couldn't help but criticize--and internalize--the second to last paragraph. The author wraps everything up in a nice bow by sitting quietly with Odell, unplugging and absorbing the world beyond our screens. It is a nice mannerly scene but I couldn't help but think that were I to be the author, my mind would be running ceaselessly to mentally capture all of the wonderful details that are described. How is prewriting the article in my head a better use of time? Wouldn't it be even better to switch the brain off entirely and maybe not have a good memory of what transpired?

Best of 2018

Hey, no one asked, but I'm going to give you a list of the things that I liked most in 2018--and I'm not going to divide things out into categories such as movies, television, performances, or whatever.

I'm lumping everything together into a single list of the things that I liked the most and try my best to give them a ranking of worst to best--or maybe just from least worthy to most worthy (because all of this stuff is great.)

Let's get this started!

10. SHAVING MY BEARD (personal facial choice)

I've surprised myself with how much I've enjoyed being clean-shaven in the last few months of this year. Sure, it is more work to tidy up in the morning than it used to be. But getting that grey off my face has improved my inner outlook about myself.

9. EMMA STONE (actress)

I felt like Emma Stone did five different things this year. But that is probably because I stop flipping channels whenever I see her and stop to watch. I really did enjoy Maniac on Netflix. (It felt like a weird cousin to the already weird Legion, even though neither had anything to do with each other.) And I caught up on 2017's Battle of the Sexes this year and really liked her performance as Billie Jean King.

I put her here because I think I've decided that I just like her lots and wanted to spend a bit of time celebrating her in 2018.

8. BLACKKKLANSMAN (Spike Lee movie)

As a placeholder, I had Incredibles 2 and Spiderman: Into the Spiderverse as two movies that I anticipated and enjoyed greatly this year. And these two movies are definitely On Brand for me. But when I did a quick search for 2018 movies, I was reminded that I saw Spike Lee's movie BlackKKlansman this summer. And it's no feel-good movie. But no other movie made me cry for its final ten minutes either.

HARRY POTTER PODCASTS (a. Mallory Rubin and Jason Concepcion, The Ringer podcast network & b. Vanessa Zoltan and Casper ter Kuile, formerly on the Panoply Network and now moving to Patreon)

7. (b) Harry Potter and the Sacred Text  

The Sacred Text podcast team has also been a favorite of mine for several years. In 2018 they finished Goblet of Fire and have been walking through Order of the Phoenix chapter-by-chapter. Their divinity school training, textural and spiritual interpretive practises, their compassionate insights, and guests make each episode something new.

6. (a) Binge Mode: Harry Potter Binge Mode first hit the scene a few years ago when Mallory and Jason went through every episode of the HBO series Game of Thrones and also expounded on how much they loved George R.R. Martin's novels. Once they were done with that marathon, they teased listeners with the equally gargantuan task of diving into their deep love of J.K. Rowling's novels as well as their views on the growing movie franchise. The HP focus started this summer and as the end of the year approaches, they still aren't done. But their insights and fun are worth the time and the wait.

5. ATLANTA (FX, hiatus between season 2 and season 3)

If you spend any time watching quality television, you don't need me to tell you how good Atlanta is. Always great storytelling. Frequently great photography. Excellent, surprising acting. If you haven't seen the Teddy Perkins episode, give yourself 45 minutes to get really creeped out by one of the most unexpected episodes of television you'll never be able to imagine.

4. HAVING KIDS (perpetual commitment)

As you probably know, Sarah moved out for college this fall. And even though we see her quite often (she's only 15 miles downtown), it is nice to watch her explore this new space and search for herself more directly. It's nice to catch up on the weekends and get a glimpse of the good (and sometimes bad) things that she is facing on her own.

And that is only her! Grace is so busy with school, extracurriculars, and a bevy of friends. She makes me so proud every day for how she sees and moves in the world. She is simply excellent.

And then there is Hannah, who doesn't deserve to be listed last every time because she is always challenging my parental comforts--reminding me to not be complacent with my parenting, to stay engaged, to respond to her curiosity and her energy; reminding me that this is HER first time through these challenges and I need to treat them with the same level of commitment and excitement that she deserves. She's still figuring out who she is and she's helping me remind myself of who I want to be.

3. KILLING EVE (BBC America, season 2 going on right now) 

Full disclosure on this one. I didn't start watching the first season of this show until Last Night. Other media critics told me that it was really good and once I finally got around to verifying it, I could not have been happier. I knew very quickly that it was going on my list right away. I have a fondness of spy shows and I definitely like shows with a sense of humor. This show handles both elements so well. And I can't highly recommend it more strongly. You should watch it.

2. ADVENTURE ZONE (The McElroy Brothers, Maximum Fun podcast network, biweekly)

I knew of the McElroy's before this year and even before I started liking their content. But I didn't really become a fan until sometime in the spring or summer of 2018. And while I'm about a decade behind on their flagship MBMBAM (My Brother, My Brother, and Me) podcast I entered the 'verse by binding through The Adventure Zone--first the Balance arc and now listening to the Amnesty arc. The McElroys are first and foremost funny. But they are also sweet and humane and likable guys. They are creative and energetic and just fun to experience. Really, really great!

1. KIDDING (Showtime, hiatus between season 1 and season 2)

I tweeted a lot about this show when I was watching it. So you might not be surprised to see this one high on my list. I can't think of another show or media experience that so surprised me this year. I knew that I liked the pairing of Michael Gondry and Jim Carrey (Eternal Sunshine of the Spotless Mind) and I was intrigued to see Carrey back in the spotlight after I had watched the documentary about his struggles in recent years. And I liked the idea of him playing a Fred Rogers-esque children show host. What I wasn't ready for was the heart and the compassion that was shown in this show, even when it was wrapped around a lot of individually-bad behavior and choices. There are several flawed people on this show--definitely including Carrey's Mr. Pickles. But the way that Pickles tries to make others see the good in each other and find the good in himself was really touching.

Thoughts On Evil (because Tracy asked me to)

Sometimes when you ask the Internet for help, you get back answers you weren't expecting.
But here goes . . .

What is evil? Some would say that evil is this:

Credit: cowcaholic, on Deviant Art.com

But, I try to remember that he once began as a lonely, abandoned boy in an orphanage. Or some might say that evil is more closely related to this guy:

Credit: Lucasfilm, & badassoftheweek.com

 But . . . he too was an abandoned boy who didn't get all the help he needed and was given the wrong tutelage by the wrong people.

(And then, there is this version of him, which might be evil or hilarious, depending on your particular point of view.)

And for some other people, maybe this is the most evil thing of all.

Credit: Diet of Worms

Maybe you don't like this style of painting. Maybe you don't like Godzilla. Maybe you're not in favor of Godzilla unleashing its wrath upon this simple hut bathed in such beautiful light. But is Godzilla being evil here? Can we truly know what is in Godzilla's mind?

As one of my favorite YA authors suggests, we need to try and imagine others complexly and accept the fact that life resists simplicity. So, I'm not sure about the true nature of evil. Even that "legitimate rape" dude isn't evil . . . he's just terribly misinformed and perhaps willfully ignorant and misguided. In our fevered media culture all of our positions must be rock solid and we must all be true believers. That rigidity is dangerous, certainly. Counterproductive, absolutely. But even that is not evil.

Maybe evil is focused, determined selfishness. An unwillingness to consider that our actions have consequences outside of ourselves . . . to fail to notice that we are not the center of any universe, not even our own personal ones that we wrap up in every day. There are others--people who struggle with their own problems. And we can help them if we are willing to imagine that their lives are just as worthy of consideration as ours. To refuse to do that is evil.

Nerd Out Saturday

So, as I teased on Tumblr this morning, today was a nerd-filled day.

After lunch, Sarah (one of her friends) and I went to see the Hunger Games movie. It was an excellent adaptation of the books (which I enjoyed very much). It strayed very little from the story clearly presented in the novel . . . which is why I find it odd that I liked it so much, considering I find the movie version of Harry Potter and the Sorcerer's Stone at fault for doing the same thing.

Still, the movie was well acted, well-shot, and didn't stray away from the grim reality of what the story is really all about. I've not seen Jennifer Lawrence in anything else, but I found her to be a very convincing Katniss. If I had to pick nits, I'd say Lawrence was too emotionally vulnerable in a few spots that Katniss would never have been while being viewed on screen (her character said as much in the book). But I know that, without the benefit of internal monologue, Lawrence went for a human moment.

Another change that was a bit surprising, but--again--understandable, was the portrayal of Woody Harrelson's Haymitch. This movie version of the former District 12 victor was not taken directly from the pages of Collin's first novel. Harrelson's Haymitch was more forthright, more willing to help, and far less of a besotted stumblebum.

I won't go into details on other stuff that were all smart cinematic adjustments to make a movie more approachable. It was well done and definitely tense when it needed to be tense. I feel certain that a sequel (based on Catching Fire) will be green-lit. But I am, at least for now, less excited about them. The Hunger Games has always been my favorite of the three books.

After we got back from seeing the movie, I knew I had to set some time aside to be with Grace. She had been disappointed that I would not let her go see the movie. (She hasn't read the books yet and is a bit young still to be dealing with the violence of the movie imagery.)

As luck would have it though, we had another nerd-tastic option available to us. So, we sat down and watched the online premiere of Nickelodeon's new Avatar: The Last Airbender sequel--The Legend of Korra. Even though the TV show doesn't premiere until mid April, I knew that the first two episodes were being unlocked this weekend. So I held that in reserve to ensure a special time for Grace and myself.

I've found that I need to balance my time with the girls and make sure they are both given special attention from time to time. And especially I should not single one out above the other. So, it was good for me to have these two distinct options that I could turn to for them . . . and for me.

As I've said before, they are only going to grow older and progressively away from me--as they rightly should. But . . . for now, the odds are ever in my favor.

Away

I'm going to be travelling with the family for the next week and a half.

First will be my brother's wedding down in South Georgia.

Then we'll keep on going down South and land in Orlando for several days of visiting Walt Disney World and the Wizarding World of Harry Potter.

There will surely be lots of exciting details, observations, photos, and much much more.

But I won't be sitting at a laptop very much to do long-form blogging.

So, you really (REALLY) need to be following me on Twitter to stay abreast of all the fun.

If you simply WON'T consider joining up on Twitter, you can come back here and click on the WWYTwitter?! tab at the top of this page, which shows you my most recent tweets.

If you are already a Twitter fan, why not follow me and get all of my amazing insights thrown right at you as soon as they come out of my head? Just hit Twitter and search for my handle http://twitter.com/#!/dtm1971).

You'll be glad you did.

I apologize for my looong absences . . .

. . . but work has really been getting in the way of my leisure time for the last many weeks.

I am, however, looking forward with great anticipation for my brother's upcoming wedding this next weekend and then my family vacation down to Walt Disney World and the Harry Potter theme park.

I will certainly be taking pictures, tweeting when I can, and maybe throwing together a blog post or two during this next several weeks. But I expect to be tired, frazzled, and quite, quite busy.

So you may have to wait a bit longer for me to catch up.

*****

Yesterday the family went to Inniswoods Gardens and enjoyed a brief walk in the afternoon sunlight. The trees are quite beautiful right now (as was evidenced by the great many people here, there, and everywhere). Photographers, wedding parties, engaged couples, other families. Everyone wanted a piece of autumn to take home with them and we were no exceptions to that. Lynda took some very nice photos of all of us wandering around.



(Hopefully you can click on this photo to get to more photos from yesterday's jaunt.)

 *****

In other news, I think this thoughtfully written post between one of my favorite authors, Maureen Johnson, and her advice seeker is quite a nice birthday present, even though no one but me sees it as such.

BEDAu Day 17: Most atypical song?

So, as I was driving down to Louisville over the weekend--alone, remember since Lynda and the girls had leaft a day earlier--I was flipping around on the radio, testing out the "repaired" satellite radio in the van. And for the time that the Sirius was coming through nicely, I flipped over the the "80s on 8" channel and the "90s on 9" channel and I alternated back and forth between the two as mediocre songs forced me to switch.

And, at some point, midway to Louisville on I-71, I flip back over the "90s on 9" to avoid some terrible 80s song that even nostalgia can't redeem . . . and I get House of Pain.

And when you hear House of Pain, that can (most likely) only mean one song.

"Jump Around."

And as I always do, when "Jump Around" shows up . . . I listen.

I've got it on my iPhone. It's in my iTunes. I just really enjoy that song.

And as I listened, I thought to myself whether it would surprise others to know that I really, really like "Jump Around." Does that fit whatever image of me they have? Would they consider this atypical of David?

So, here is my question to you tonight (or whenever you get around to reading this). What do YOU think is a song that you believe is something at odds with how you believe others perceive you? Is there a song that you absolutely love, but you think others would be surprised to learn of it?

Leave me a comment describing how you would answer these questions.

Read me first, then check out my friend

Last week you may have seen my video post in which I nearly disrobed in an attempt to get you to vote for my good friend Greg's organization CASA. And you may have noticed that I did a pretty lame job of explaining exactly what CASA does or why you should have spend the time voting for them so that Chase bank can give them money . . . so that they can continue doing the good work that they do.

Well, regardless of how unprepared I was in my video script, the Internet must have loved looking at me in a wife-beater because Coastal Plains CASA got enough votes to win $20,000 from Chase Community Giving and now 41 more foster kids in my home region of Georgia are going to be better served.

And that is great. I always knew that my biceps could be used for the forces of good.

Wait . . . you think international country star Tricia Yearwood's Facebook support had much more to do with it than my home-grown manliness?

Well, you can think whatever you want.

I choose to think that Greg's clever pledge to eat as many green salads as he got votes from his Facebook friends was a crucial element in the charity drive's success. (As you may remember--if you are a recurring Why Won't You Grow?! reader--I am a fan of food-based stunts as well. I just hope Greg's stamina & resolve turns out to be more impressive than my earlier attempt.)

So, please follow along as CASA Greg Goes Green. Read about his foray into healthier eating. And get to know a guy that I'm happy to say I've been friends with for many, many years. We're all rooting for you Greg. I'll send along my own salad recipes soon.

I'm adding his blog to my list of sidebar items. Or you can sign up to follow him. The more people that put eyes on him, the less likely he'll be to backslide.

Spoiler alert! The Ferris Bueller Fight Club Theory

You might not have ever watched David Fincher's Fight Club movie or read the book by Chuck Paulhinuk. But I bet you've seen Ferris Bueller's Day Off, perhaps Matthew Broderick's best movie ever and certainly in the top three best John Hughes movie lists.

But are you aware of the Ferris Bueller Fight Club Theory?

(Aww, who am I kidding? Most anyone who answers that question is probably going to say yes. If I just heard about it today, then it was probably old news a year ago.)

Still . . . as a public service to you, I am offering up these nice bits of Internet-y goodness for your edification and enjoyment.

First, read the post.

Then, enjoy the video.



And if you haven't seen Fight Club, don't say I didn't warn you.

Challenge . . . Accepted!

Earlier today I was posting this most important thought on Twitter and I noticed that my program was not responding as I confidently struck the ENTER key. Naturally, I thought it might be a problem with my ancillary Twitter-related program, so I CRTL-C'ed the tweet, shifted over to the Web and signed in to Twitter.com.

The non-responsiveness continued and when the tweet in question did not load, I got an error message saying that Twitter was OVERCAPACITY.

Because I thought it was funny, I OVER-REACTED to this and breathlessly told my cube/row-mates that TWITTER WAS OVERCAPACITY. (Much arm-waving ensued.) As I designed, they thought this was funny . . . but the (to some degree, at least) miscalculated my sincerity. Because they immediately challenged me to a weekend challenge.

The terms of the challenge are:

1. The duration of the challenge is from this Friday at 5 p.m. until Monday at 9 a.m.
2. I am not allowed to view any Web sites.
3. I am not allowed to use any social networking, i.e. Twitter or Facebook.
4. I am not allowed to read emails.
5. I am not allowed to play any online games.
6. I am allowed to use my iPhone for phone calls only.
7. I am not allowed to use my iPhone to listen to music or podcasts.
8. I can listen to music on the radio or from CDs, but not from iTunes.

If I successfully make it through the challenge (and I presume Lynda is responsible for verifying that I do so, since my Challenging Colleagues don't live with me and are therefore not positioned to effectively monitor me), my Challenging Colleagues agree to come and baby sit for us so that Lynda and I can go on a much-needed date.

If I do not succeed, I must provide an assortment of delicious, homemade baked goods for their exclusive enjoyment.

 Really, though, the not succeeding bit is only academic because there is no way I'm losing this bet. First, they think it's gonna be harder on me than it will be and B.) did you see the part about the "much-needed date?"

Seriously . . . it's needed, okay?

I'd walk through fire to get a babysitter these days.

But ANYWAY . . .

as I said at the beginning, my friends are overstating my "dependence" on Twitter. Sure, they've made noise this afternoon that I immediately tweeted a teaser to this post. But I'm only using the tools that are available to me. And I can quit anytime.

Just watch and see.

A few new tweaks

I've made a few more adjustments on WWYG the last few days. And since I don't want to go to bed yet, lets spend a few minutes together thinking about them.

1. I simplified my URL, by registering Why Won't You Grow and ditching "blogspot." I'm unreasonably excited by this actions and for some reason now conclude that I've dropped the blogging training wheels or something. Even though I know there is no reality in that belief, I'm happier about it now. I like the way it looks; I like the way it sounds; it sound right, like it was something I should have done a long time ago. Do you have any sort of opinion?

And don't worry. The original URL should redirect you here. If it doesn't, PLEASE let me know with an email.

2. I've added another page to the list of pages below the title header--one for formspring.me. I heard about this service from some other bloggers and media people that I follow on Twitter and other various networks. As you can see if you click on it, it is a pretty simple interface. You ask questions and I provide answers. It's another attempt by me to inject a bit more interactivity into my dabblings.

I promise to take your questions seriously . . . unless I think you are asking a joking question--and joking questions are welcome also. (I love a good joke, as I hope you know.)

It may take me a bit of time to adjust to any questions that come in. I'll need to adjust to having this in my digital routine, so I can't guarantee that I'll jump on questions right away. And I don't (honestly) expect that I'll be inundated with questions . . . if past efforts are any indication. But hope springs eternal. It seems like a bit of harmless interactive fun, so let's see where it takes us.

Did the world change? Well . . . no

I hope you realize that last night's breathless post about the (then unnamed) Apple tablet was hyperbolic and tongue-in-cheek.

But today . . . TODAY . . . things got real.

People have been reacting all day to the announcement of the iPad--and YES, most people have confined much of their reaction to the name itself (negative reactions by almost all women I've spoken to and some men as well). Personally, I don't mind the name choice. I think it speaks to a conscious connection to Star Trek: The Next Generation's ubiquitous PADD device. If Apple designers and hardware engineers weren't thinking of this fictional thing when brainstorming what their own iPad would be . . . well, then I think I could get a job there.

Now . . . is it a GOOD device that Mr. Jobs has presented to the conspicuous consumption crowd?

On the face of it, yes. (I'll not bother to put links to the details of the device here, as you probably already know where to go to learn about it--both negatively and positively. It is historically short-sighted of my blogging not to trace my thoughts to the source material, but in the future when a digiarchaeologist tries to decipher who I was from WWYG?! the links would all be broken anyway.)

Back to the thought at hand. Yes, it seems like a good device. Works intiutively and leverages the experience of all those who have used an iPhone. Nothing new to teach there. But that is also the source of its greatest set of weaknesses. By not making it anything more than a larger iPhone, the iPhone's limitations are simply magnified and made MORE visible:

• no multi-tasking
• no Flash support
• no USB connections
• __________________

Those first two limitations are, frankly, amazing to me. How could Apple produce this product and continue to allow its mobile competitors to hammer away on these very obvious weaknesses? I just can't believe that this should continue down the road.

I am still worried that the virtual keyboard won't be as easy to type on as claimed, but I was cheered by the option of a dockable keyboard.

And most of all I was surprised by the (reasonable?) prices. Anything with only three digits is more than I was expecting. And that's all I've got time to devote to the topic tonight.

Say Goodbye to Everything You Thought You Knew About Anything!!

I am taking this Gizmodo story, "Pondering the Apple Tablet's Print Revolution," and providing it verbatim as today's post. You see, the good folks at Gizmodo have been pondering, positing, rumor-mongering, researching, writing, and doing everything they can to spread the word about tomorrow's expected announcement of the Apple iSlate, iTablet, iWhatever.

I am quite certain that everything writer Matt Buchanan said in the article is completely true and it will revolutionize everything forever.

(I, for one, welcome our new digital--paperfree!--overlords.)




"The Apple tablet could change everything. That's what people are hoping for, revolution. But revolutions don't actually happen overnight, especially if you're talking about turning around an entire diseased, lumbering industry, like publishing.
The medium is the message, supposedly. 


The iPod was a flaming telegram to the music industry; the iPhone, a glowing billboard about the way we'd consume software. The Apple tablet? Possibly no less than the reinvention of the digital word. If you look very generally at the content that defined the device—or maybe vice versa—the iPod danced with music, the iPhone's slung to apps and, as we were first in reporting a few months ago, the tablet's bailiwick might very well be publishing.


Since then, the number of publishers—of newspapers, magazines and books—reported to be talking to Apple has exploded: NYT, Conde Nast, McGraw Hill, Oberlin, HarperCollins, the 'six largest' trade publishers, and Time, among many others, are making noise about splaying their content on the tablet. A giant iPod not only for video, photos and music, but for words. That's what they're lining up to make ritual sacrifices for. Publishers want this, whatever it is.


I say 'whatever it is,' because, for all of the talk and pomp and demos, they haven't seen the Apple tablet. They don't know what it's like. They don't know how to develop for it. As Peter Kafka's reported, neither Conde Nast (publisher of Wired) nor Time will be ready to show anything for the tablet on Wednesday, much less a mindblowing reinvention of the magazine, because Apple's keeping them at arm's length. (Why? Secrecy, which matters far more than launch partners. All the leaks about the tablet have come out of third parties, like the goddamn publishers, so Apple's not telling them much more than they are the rest of us.)


The sole exception, that we know of, is the New York Times. The Gray Lady has a team of three developers embedded in Cupertino. This makes a certain kind of sense, given the content the tablet is framing, and which publisher is currently best suited to delivering that content in a new experience.
When it comes to experimenting with the display and digestion of the digital word, the NYT has aggressively been the most innovative major publication on the web: Just look at the incredible infographics, the recently launched NYT Skimmer and the NYT Reader. Logically, they're the print publication perhaps most able to realize the early potential of a device that's essentially a window for displaying content. And it doesn't hurt that Apple loves the NYT.


The tablet might just be a big iPhone, but the key word is 'big.' What defines the tablet in opposition to the iPhone is the screen size, less than any kind of steroidal shot to processing muscle. A 10-inch screen will hold 10 times the screen real estate of the iPhone's 3.5-inch display. That's room for ten fingers to touch, navigate and manipulate, not two. Real estate for full web pages, for content apps that are so much more than news repackaged for a pocket-sized screen. The ability to really 'touch what you want to learn about' is an 'inflection point for navigation,' that is, the potential to truly 'navigate serendipitously,' as the NYT's media columnist David Carr put it to me.


Think of it as a more tangible version of the force that drives you from a Wikipedia page about gravity to one about the geological history of the planet Vulcan, touching and feeling your way through everything from a taxonomy for Star Wars fanboys to the Victoria's Secret catalog.


The Wikipedia example might be particularly apt, actually. If we use iPhone history as a guide, given that the tablet is likely to be an evolution of the iPhone software and interface, it's likely these publications will be content 'apps' that will be islands unto themselves: So it might be easy to wander all over the NYT's island via the tips of your fingers, but not so easy to float off to the WSJ's abode. At least to start, we assume it'll much like iPhone apps. For all of the very whizzy Minority Report wannabe demos from Sports Illustrated, we don't know what the content apps are actually going to look like, or what they'll be able to do on the tablet. In particular, what is it they'll be able to do that they couldn't do on the web right now, given how powerful the web and web applications have become over the last couple of years? (Look at everything Google's doing, particularly in web apps.) The question, as NYU Journalism professor Mitch Stephens told me, is whether the tablet's capabilities can 'actually get the Times and Conde Nast to think beyond print?'


If you think the newspaper and magazine industry is slow, the book industry is prehistoric. As whipped into a fervor as HarperCollins and McGraw Hill may be about jumping aboard the full color Apple tablet express to carry them into a new age of print with 'ebooks enhanced with video, author interviews and social-networking applications,' past the Amazon schooner, they take years to move. And they're likely in just as in the dark as everybody else.


There's also the macro issue that it just takes time for people to figure shit out. Think about the best, most polished iPhone apps today. Now try to remember the ones that launched a week after the App Store opened. It's a world of difference. New media, and how people use them, aren't figured out overnight. Or fade back to the internet circa 2006. Broadband wasn't exactly new then, but so much of the stuff we do now, all the time—YouTube, Twitter—wasn't around.


The apparent readiness to yoke the fortunes of the sickly publishing industry to Apple, and its tablet, oozing out of info scraps and whispers, like a publishing executive telling the NYT that, versus Amazon, 'Apple has put an offer together that helps publishers and, by extension, authors,' is deeply curious. The publishing industry wants the iPod of reading, but they've clearly forgotten the music industry's traumatic experience when they got theirs. Apple basically wrested control of legal digital music, and the music industry got far less than they wanted to make up for it. Hollywood, in turn, played their hand far differently, scattering bits of movies and TV shows across tons of services, so no one had any leverage, especially not Apple. (Hence, Apple's negotiations for a subscription TV service with Disney or CBS always seem delicate at best.) I don't know why Apple would be any more magnanimous with publishers than record labels, given the chance to be gatekeeper.


The gatekeeper matters, because it dictates the answer to publishing's current crisis: 'How we gonna get paid?' The NYT is bringing back metering to its website; book publishers weep over the fact that Amazon has decided books are worth precisely $9.99. Publishers want to control their financial destiny. Apple wants to control every element of the experience on their devices. (Apparently, they'll get to.) I want to be able to read the NYT, WSJ, The New Yorker, Penthouse and Wired, in all of their dynamic, interactive, multitouch glory easily and cheaply. Ads might be the secret to making that possible. Ultra targeted, innovative ads designed just for the tablet. At least, in the future—Apple's acquisition of mobile ad firm Quattro, and its CEO's ascension to VP, have happened too recently to bear much fruit yet.
Point being, there's a lot of stuff publishers have to figure out, from the big stuff to the little stuff. Apple hasn't exactly sped up the process by giving them much to work with, either, but for one publisher that we know of—and maybe a couple we don't. The tablet might change the digital word the way the iPod changed digital music. But it'll take some time.


Thanks to Joel for that awesome render; original CC printing press image from JanGlas/Flickr

The first day of Twenty10

Nothing has yet happened in the new year, so let's take a few sentences and review what DID happen in '09.

I dove into the digital world with both feet this past year (even more than last year) by joining up on Twitter, Facebook, and using YouTube even more. Amazingly, my wife didn't divorce me and my kids continue to like me (most of the time).

I started out 2009 by pledging to write something on Why Won't You Grow?! every day . . . and for the first quarter of the year, I actually did it. Go back through the archives and just take a look at the daily posts in January, February, March. I think the wheels started to go off in April and by the end of the year the postings are spotty at best. But when you consider that I was tweeting and on Facebook all the time, I suspect not more than two days went by in 2009 where I didn't put a little piece of myself out there on the Internets for people to ignore.

The other major digital project for 2009 was, of course, Soup for a Year. And while I didn't even become Soup for a Month, it was a very interesting 15 days of soup-filled fun. Mike, Brie, and I learned more about eating liquid-based meals and money was actually raised for the Mid-Ohio Food Bank.

I was heavily involved in digital work at my office job as well, but I don't usually go into those kinds of details here on WWYG?! so I won't talk that much about it now. As new things develop, I usually provide links to things and discuss them in oblique ways . . . and that is the way I'm keeping it. But the future looks pretty good for me at work--all things considered. There was certainly lots of ups and downs during the end of the year and many things have changed and are changing still. But I am excited about what may come.

So far today I've gone to the grocery store, played with the kids, started some laundry, and read some of a book on my iPhone. I hope I can continue to do all of those exciting  things in the year to come.

What you didn't know about the 'Aughts

I know this is likely old news to most people who frequent the Internet (and I should consider myself one of them, except that this video was NOT old news to me). But, the content of this video is relevant to end-of-year type posts that I sometimes provide here on WWYG?! during this time in the planet's transit round the orbit.
And since I haven't found time (or much knowledge) to do any other sort of year-end lists, perhaps this will suffice?

The decade according to 9-year-olds from allison louie-garcia on Vimeo.

Vlogbrother Christmas facts

It's Christmas Day! And since I am busy keeping an eye on Hannah while Lynda puts toys together, I present to you these interesting Christmas-related facts from John and Hank Green--the Vlogbrothers.

Here is a Team Edward I can support

If you don't know what I'm talking about, this link might help.