Wednesday, October 29, 2008

Catching the Bullet




There are innumerable reasons why the Roman Empire grew and just as many for why it collapsed. It is very difficult to back up simple reasons for the things that happened. For example the birth of empire came from the young Republic’s interest in securing peace on its boundaries. That is one argument. I could expound or counter argue that if this were a thesis of some kind instead of a blog post, but that is what it is and I will continue. Indisputably the Romans over-extended their reach and had to rely on conquest for the plunder to support a failing system and an army made up more and more by mercenary tribesman who were more loyal to their own than to any ideology of Rome. Some immigration issues never change.

For administrative reasons the Empire was given two administrative centers, Rome and Constantinople, with the latter taking precedence after Constantinople renamed the city-fortress of Byzantium for himself and set up shop there around 330AD. The Western Roman Empire fell to Germanic invaders while the Eastern Roman Empire waged a thousand-year two-front war. A losing war.

The tide ebbed and flowed, but the trend inexorably led to shrinkage of the Empire, whose people considered themselves Romans until the very end even though the young nations that grew from the corpse of the west considered them Greeks. By the time the end came in 1453, the Byzantine Empire resided completely within the walls of Constantinople, besieged by the Ottoman Turks to whom they had been losing their lands for two-hundred years.

How did it happen? Almost two-thousand years of culture and strife and in the end it came down to a handful of people manning the walls. Was it overextension? Did the leaders fail to look ahead? Did the people place their momentary success and comfort over supporting policies of long-term viability? Was it six-hundred years ago so who gives a damn?

I have complained about the super-corporation that I work for many times here. I even have a label for Corporate Life. A misspelled link that I will correct if I ever figure out how. In the seven years I have worked for this company I have somehow survived three location closures and a dozen layoffs as they have “managed our footprint.” Almost all of those were close calls. Elyena and I started to feel like we were playing Russian roulette. We finally got the loaded chamber. Recently my employer closed almost a hundred operations eliminating three thousand jobs. 3000. 3K. My department, purchasing, has been on eggshells waiting for to see how that would affect us . . . how many of us would be reduced. Yesterday morning my supervisor called a meeting and announced that our entire office is being eliminated with no hope of relocation.

It has been an interesting seven years. In my working lifetime, starting at the age of fourteen, this was the first big corporation that I worked for, and I owe a lot of my education and understanding of the way the world works to it. My previous employers were all family businesses. They left a lot to be desired. One shaved a little off of my time cards like I was too blind to see the eraser marks or too ignorant to know that taking a little off of everyone’s time week after week resulted in saving thousands of dollars a year. Quite respectable for a family business. And there was the one that almost got me killed by taking penny-pinching shortcuts like disconnecting the safety sensor in the seat of an industrial trencher, the end result being that even after I was ran over and had to have knee surgery that I sat in my leg brace and watched while they sent the same machine in the same condition back out on the job.

Through all of this I maintained that it was the family businesses that were so flawed. It is in large part thanks to my expiring employer that instead of the big business loving Republican that I grew up as I am the unrepresented fighter of the invisible aristocracy of America. I used to have the idea that Human Resources are there to look after the employee. The years have helped me to recognize that resources are there to be exploited by the company, human or otherwise, and HR is the vehicle propaganda. I sat in an HR meeting where our rep announced some heinous change the company was making “for our stockholders,” whatever the hell that means.* “The company is not out to screw you,” she said. No it isn’t. It’s not vindictive. It’s just completely apathetic. It’s just business.

Our industry is cyclical and instead of getting ready for the downswing my employers kept gobbling up smaller companies in order to look good to “the stockholders.” It was corporate imperialism at its worst and it left us wide open to the massive collapse of our empire. Their empire. Their influence has helped me become a closet commie. That’s beside the point, though. They were too busy posturing to be ready for the economic situation we are facing. And their employees are paying for it.

It may sound like I am going postal, but I am not. As long time readers know, as well as friends and family, I have long considered my relationship with this company as much a liability as an asset. As of December 5th I will be a free agent. I will find a new job and will have no long-term employment ties to keep me from going to graduate school. So here’s to change: may mine be the only company that tanks in the economy to come, and I promise not to turn this blog into a whining forum. Unless I have another dang clever historical analogy to go with it. Only time will tell.

R.

*I don’t believe in stock holders. I think it is a myth used by boards of directors to do whatever they like. The stockholders are millions of Americans who are dumping money into their 401K plans. So when a company says they are doing something for their stockholders they are at best blowing sunshine but more likely taking advantage of the ignorance of their employees.

Monday, October 27, 2008

Absentee

I have been writing a story that pushes beyond anything I have done before. The story is about a man who's been living a normalish life when all of a sudden things start happening to him because of someone he knew growing up. That person has not made (in what I've written so far) nor will he make an appearance in the story. His influence will be throughout the story (or stories). I don't know how well it will work. Have any of you tried such a thing?

R.

Sunday, October 26, 2008

Fiction or Non-Fiction

I’ve decided to do an edition of “Or What?” that deals with what we read. I’ve noticed differences in the way I handle fiction and non-fiction works and that has led me here to ask about reading patterns.




When I crack open a novel I find that I can burn through it in a matter of days even with work and writing and whatever else I’m doing. Some go faster than others; I blasted through Card’s Empire in no time flat, but I’m slogging my way through Madame Bovary after months. I didn’t enjoy Empire, so my reading pleasure isn’t a factor; I suppose it could be the translation factor on a two-hundred year old text. I had the same problem with War and Peace so it is quite possible. However, those are exceptions. Most fiction flies by for me whether I would wish it or not.

Non-fiction is another story. I tend to read a lot of it because being a historian is on my list of aspirations. I’m currently reading The Rise and Fall of the Third Reich. Still reading it. It is a monster of a book dwarfing Robert Jordan-sized novels and sporting that tiny text publishers seem to cherish for non-fiction. I think I am a third of the way through it. It is a revelation as to how fast a constitutionally protected nation can in the space of a decade become a dictatorship and police state by the will of a determined person who has cultivated the loyalty of the right thugs. That is all beside the point, though. I read a lot of history and a lot of geography works, along with whatever subject I find I am lacking but need for my stories. It always takes so long to get through, even if it is worth it in the end.

There isn’t much that I don’t read; if I have one area that gets ignored it is contemporary standard fiction. I usually don’t pick up contemporary fantasy or sci-fi either. I don’t have patience to wait years for the next installment only to have the author keel over before completing the series; I’m thinking of Robert Jordan and George RR Martin here. Only Jordan is dead, but everything else applies to Martin. By the time his next volume is done I will have to reread the series to remember what is going on and I’m not sure I’m emotionally up for that. I would have been better off waiting until he finished or died, but it’s too late for that. I tend to lean towards British Lit from the Romantic and Victorian periods. Some of my favorites are pre-WWII American works like All the King’s Men and anything by Willa Cather.

So what kind of things do you read? Is it strictly fiction? Specific genres of fiction? Do you have noticeable patterns when you switch types or genres?

Write On,
R.

Saturday, October 25, 2008

Movie Buff

Okay,I'm not particularly buff and I don't watch that many movies, but if you do I highly recommend the blog A Noble Experiment: Like Prohibition or "The Village". You don't have to enjoy movies either, just have a penchant for dry dark humor with a touch of irony. The author, Gretchzilla ((as in the high end musical instrument manufacturer) or Zilla for short), has a Manga Monday, Theatre Thursday, and numerous observations about life, work, and college in between. So check it out.

R.

Thursday, October 23, 2008

Beavis or Butthead

I felt like doing a presidential "Or What?" so I am slapping down a post I put on my family blog along with my associated comments. Feel free to add to and expound upon it.

Bad News

I can't hold it back any longer. I've seen the future, and it doesn't look good. After the elections this fall . . . politicians will continue running our country. I use the term "running" loosely. Very loosely.

R.

A family member talks about LOTR and how we should remain hopeful.

riotimus said...

Hope for the Presidency would be much easier maintained if it were Aragorn vs. Sauron instead of Grima vs. Denethor. Alas, a lot of us survived the seventies somehow, so who knows what may happen.

R.

A family member comments about being prepared for anything.

riotimus said...
It is good to be ready. Ready for anything. To throw out my analogy again from another angle, I wish that the options were Agent Mulder vs. the Cigarette Smoking Man. But what we've got is Agent Spender vs. Alex Krycek. And some people survived the Holocaust, so we'll probably be fine in the loosest sense of the word.

R.

riotimus said...
Expanding on that even more, I'd like to see Simon Snowlock vs. King Elias instead of Earl Fengbold vs. Skali Sharpnose. But then a lot of people lived through that California trainwreck a few weeks ago, so we'll probably be fine.

R.

Tuesday, October 21, 2008

Linkin Park or Mansfield Park

For this installment of “Or What?” I will be offering up California nu-metal rockers Linkin Park up against Jane Austen’s Mansfield Park. On the one hand you get that unique amalgamation of pop, rap, and metal that is Linkin Park, and on the other you get one of Austen’s least popular books, maybe the least.

Several years ago I saw a televised performance of Linkin Park. To say that they were sucking it up is an understatement. Chester (blonde guy, does all of the singing and most of the screaming) was all over the place trying to find some semblance of pitch. I was thinking that digital sound manipulation was a handy thing for them. That didn’t stop me from enjoying a lot of their recorded material, and I have heard enough of them sounding good live to think that the sound guy must have forgotten to turn on Chester’s ear plug monitors. I bet he woke up in a dumpster. At least that’s where I fancy I would have put him after being televised with no idea where in the hell my vocals were in the mix. I’ve made a little mix of LP songs for your listening because I know you come here planning to spend a half hour listening to the music I’ve chosen for you.




Mansfield Park was an interesting story listening experience for me. I’ve found that I have a love for Jane Austen books on audio that I never had on paper. It must be the accents. This was a hard one for me though. From the criticism I’ve read of the novel I’m not unique in despising Fanny. I found her to be annoyingly timid and I couldn’t abide all of the cringing. Of course the salt in the wound came at the end of enduring Fanny’s suffering when Austen says that Fanny is the ultimate example of womanly virtue. I would like to have seen what would have happened if Austen had stuck Elizabeth in Mansfield Park. It would have been a much more interesting story. If any of you are suddenly slammed with inspiration and decide to write that story be sure to send me a copy for my reading pleasure.



As far as redemption goes for the Fanny factor there is a little. The amoral Crawford siblings provide some interesting dialogue and intrigue to the book. I think Henry Crawford must have provided Oscar Wilde with at least some inspiration for the illustrious Dorian Gray. There are also some very touching moments, some joyous and some heartbreaking. I have to admit to feeling a lot of satisfaction when the evil Mrs. Norris takes it upon herself to leave Mansfield Park to stay with the shamed slattern Maria. It has quite a happy ending for some of the characters, the ones that aren’t evil.

So . . . would you listen to Linkin Park or read Mansfield Park? Or would you listen to Linkin Park while reading Mansfield Park? That possibly could add a lot to both experiences. Until next time, Write On.

R.

Thursday, October 16, 2008

Eye of the World or Eye of the Beholder

I am listening to Eye of the World at work. What a thrill to get paid to slog through Robert Jordan. I say that because I'm not afraid of tainting your view one way or the other. So I'll weigh them in.




In his first volume of the Wheel of Time series, Robert Jordan throws down some blatant Tolkienisms (thankfully free of Hobbits or any of their renamed ilk) and starts the ball rolling on about a billion loose ends that will have to wrapped up by some guest author since trying to keep them all straight killed him. That was quite irreverent, I know, but it is mild compared to how I felt when I read volume 35 and found him still creating threads instead of tying them off. So we have the collection of stereotypes that make up the cast all in their immature and untried state, though as Aestril once pointed out the woman never stop folding their arms under their breasts no matter how much of the world they see. I'm digressing though. There is occasionally a moment of sincerity between characters that causes my heart to swell. As much as I kvetch about Jordan and his books I'm not sure why I'm listening to this, but I am.




Eye of the Beholder is the first Metallica song that I liked and started the long relationship that I have in the past call "the problem of Metallica." The fade-in intro is beautiful and being the jingoistic patriot that I am I love to hear Hetfield growl, "I hunger after independence, lengthen freedom's ring." Of course he was prophetically speaking about a rights-trampling future government at a time when the W Administration hadn't even been imagined and not aggressive foreign policy as the result of extreme patriotism. But who am I to mince words. Some one crank the Metallica and lets read some Robert Jordan.

R.

Wednesday, October 15, 2008

Or What?

I'm going to throw in some posts that I will think of as "Or What?" posts. They will give some eclectic comparisons and readers can sound off or roll their eyes as they will. There will probably never be anything as simple as apples or oranges. But who knows?

I also am seeing more and more of the Word Count Buddies who followed me into hiatus returning to the quill. I'm shamed. Not quite shamed enough to get up and write yet, but shamed none-the-less. So welcome back former slackers; I hope to join you soon.