The Concept of Dreams and Aspirations I; Why "Being Yourself" is Not the Right Goal

Uh oh. Perhaps an edgy title? Oh gee. Perhaps I might offend someone here? Oh no!

First off, let me lead with my best card; what opinion I share here is what I believe to be true. I share it to help people, not to discourage them, for I am certain (if you understand my sometimes incoherent rambling) that what I will say will make sense one day to those who don't get it.

I once heard someone say in a class, "My goal is to always be myself." I don't have a problem with this goal; in fact, I think it's noble and a hell of a hard thing to do. There's one problem with it, though, and that is it's too empty. To say, "I'm always going to be myself," is like saying, "I'm going to act the way I want all the time." It's a bit selfish sounding when broken down as such, and it also highlights the glaring problem with that goal. You can't expect to ever "know" who you are. You can't. Your "self" is constantly and consistently changing. As The Flaming Lips put it, you just can't know yourself or what all you would do with all your power.

This is also totally skipping over the whole, "What if you were..." situation, where you certainly wouldn't be your outspoken self if your asshole boss told you to do something you didn't feel comfortable with, or else you would lose your job, putting your wife and five kids in harm's way.

There's also the concept of being the first one to state this dream, as people immediately think you are a deep thinker or a brilliant person. In stating that as your dream with that intention at all in your head, even just a little bit, you are ruining the noble concept of your statement, as you are using it for your personal gain. It's one thing to be sincere and state something meaningful. It's another to say it because you are referencing your favorite movie.

It's also not right to say this in a classroom setting as you saying that makes everyone else feel bad about their dreams. In saying this "dream" after other people have stated real, lasting dreams, you are destroying the very "dream" you believe in. "Being yourself," if that is your goal in life, should be limited to yourself. Being yourself should not prohibit others to be themselves either. If so, you take away their chance of being themselves, and destroying the concept of your dream to that one person, as well as those around you.

Finally, this statement is just not specific. The number one rule for any goal is to be specific. Specificity leads to success, as you know exactly what you want, and can therefore begin to look for the actions that are necessary to take to attain it. If you never know exactly what you want, you'll never know the steps or milestones to such a goal.

I am not here to say that being yourself is a bad thing. It's a great thing -- no one should be a character all the time. But in stating that it's your goal and aspiration to follow that characteristic, you already set yourself up for trouble. Set some short-term and long-term goals for yourself and find yourself along the way.

Donators and Dragons

So I'm attempting to make posting on this blog one of the consistent things in my life. Every day I usually think of an interesting topic or discussion point. Because I'm often alone in my thoughts, I don't really have anyone to discuss these points with. This blog will become that outlet.

This is going to be a bit of a difficult post.

I once went to a concert in the shady suburban area of the bad part of town in northern Columbus. Well, I should say that I went there with the intentions of doing such, but ended up scalping my tickets, as it was a very weird place. Not intending to get my money back, I just walked to the front of the building, where a rather obnoxious man was standing in line. He was the only one in line.

I was there to see the opener, Jukebox the Ghost. I love those guys. They were opening for a band with "Meat" in the title, and I lost all desire to sit through a band I didn't know. But this guy, oh boy! Did he love those Meat dudes. He was willing to pay almost double what I paid for the tickets!

Of course, being the nice (and completely stupid) person I am, it felt good to help him out, so I told him I wanted just the face value. He didn't really believe that the tickets were real, thought, so he dragged me inside to have the ticket counter scan them and verify. Seeing the stupidity in this, I verbalized that I was selling him the tickets. It was comical; the ticket counter didn't want it happening at all, so this fellow had to convince them that I wasn't selling the tickets to him.

Back outside, the man then took me over to the next door convenience store so he could break his large bills. It was in that store that I saw a man who was buying vodka and cat food. Attached to this man's hand was a telephone wire, and at the end of said wire, was a white cat, looking terrified.

I don't know what it was about that image. Something screamed "hilarious!" inside of me, but I just couldn't find the humor in it right then. I still can't find it--I've been considering telling this story for some time, but I can't.

I suppose that my heart went out to this lonely, skinny, husk of an old man, who spent what very little money he apparently had on his cat first, and himself second. It was very sad to me; those are the people I want to help.

This is probably going to sound dumb, but I used to keep a list of the people that I intended to give money to when I had enough to give away. One of my unknown beliefs is person-to-person charity. If I had money to donate or give away, I just couldn't choose a fund, or a charity or anything like that. I'm not against them at all. I just think it's an immensely easy and lazy way to feel good about yourself.

On the other hand, I would rather go out and meet someone in a poorer part of town. There is always someone who's willing to talk, and that is the exact person I want to have money I have worked for. Someone who granted me part of their time to talk to me about whatever, someone who wouldn't necessarily be looking for hand outs or anything. I understand what it's like to financially struggle and I would help myself out if I could.

It's not a crushing weight because of dependencies or desires. I really spend almost all my money on my fiancée and a few other people when I can. I just stopped caring about menial objects and materialistic concepts ever since I came to Ashland.

That's the kind of person I want to help. Someone like me; someone that could use the help, but doesn't really expect it out of society or anyone.

My biggest issue here is people like one of my family members. She donates to a charity monthly and holds herself to high-esteem because she does so. Shortly after, she complains about money, badgering me for the payment that I owe her. It's a fine study in contrasts, sure, but I can't imagine giving to charity when your own family struggles just 5 minutes away. Again, I don't have anything against charities. I think it's great they are in place and offer commendable deeds for those who can afford it. I just think some people donate for the wrong reasons.

Internet Interests

There is one thing I like the most about the internet: the sheer amount of creativeness compiled into a navigable channel of murky waters. What I mean by this is that there is a lot of stuff that holds no interest to me and that there is a great over-saturation of ideas as a result. This might turn some people off, but I find it kind of interesting. What does it say about a person who buys a webpage, and creates a terrible page dedicated to explaining the subtle nuances of the humor behind "The Goonies"? That they felt their information they had inside them was important enough to share with the world.

This is why a project such as Wikipedia is a phenomenal idea. Granted, opinion should be left out, but think about the possibilities! A massive website, where all you have to do is type is "giraffes," hit enter, and find out a trillion facts about the long necked bastards, straight from people who study them all day long! I understand how one-sided what I just said is, but the community surrounding Wikipedia is ridiculously dedicated to truth and unbiased information.

So, this brings me to my next point; why is Wikipedia not respected as an educated resource? Most every article has reference footnotes and each page is checked over by several people after each minute update. I don't think it has to do with the "possibility of false information" on the site anymore. I think people are just afraid of what it means. Books are becoming something totally forgotten about. I know this, because it's my generation that is doing it. I'm guilty of it. I used to read books and I loved fictional classics and nonfictional accounts of various psychopaths and shootings around the world (that sounds really bad, doesn't it?). Since then, I quit reading. It's been 2 years since I got through a full book. It's not something I'm proud of, however, it's something that's happened.

The point is, yes, I agree that there is no better research than the one you do with a real, physical book. There will be a day, however, when the internet, as well as Wikipedia, becomes understood as a "good source of knowledge". The day when it is okay to have more internet sources than book sources on a paper for a class that doesn't even relate to your major or minor.

I suppose this problem I have relates back to the generational mindset of "we want to be recognized for something other than all the responsibilities we shirk," but I stand behind my opinion here. Wikipedia can be a respected encyclopedia because every idiot can get on their computer and edit it. Just remember that there will be a lesser idiot right behind him to clean up his mess and make things right.

I wouldn't fight for the right to use Wikipedia for a source on a paper while still in school, because that's dumb, but I know that one day will come when I can say "I read up on all my dumb trivia about Ryan Seacrest and polar bears while listening to The Flaming Lips" and someone out there will shake my hand for it.

--B

Pre-Website Jitters

Hello. My name is Brad Eustathios. I'm making a website, while putting off my demo reel, and boy is it degrading.

I just cannot seem to get a good, professional idea made. It seems that every design I had in my head, I just can't put into play. I had a smoke-based concept that was trashed because it didn't make sense (I guess?), then I went to a stupid paint-splatter idea that I hardly even tried. All I could think was "what are these ideas advertising?" and since I'm not a smoke salesman, nor am I a graffiti artist, neither of those terrible ideas work.

I have a new idea that I'm working on, but I can't seem to get past the idea that I'm just not good at these concepts. I feel like I'm just using a brush and that's as far as I get. Dad-gum it!

I know that I'll solve it. I am trying to, right now, as I type, justify my current design. I think the root of all my problems lies in my problem with my color scheme. Right now it's black, but I always hated a dark, black-everywhere website. It doesn't give a great impression.

I think I'll move to a cotton-candy light perrywinkle. Tomorrow. I put most of my energy into creating a very advanced concept behind the conclusion of Adjusting Focus (my current project) and I'm proud of it. It's just managed to destroy my creative abilities.

Yeah, I'll go with that excuse. Sounds good.