Skip to content

lazyandhazy

Your Best Guest

The other day I was on the checkout line of the local 99 cent store – one of those places with a garish pink sign outside proclaiming I was in “Discount Heaven” (except it’s missing lights so it reads more like “Disco  Heave”) – when I struck afresh by the absurdity of something I’d been accustomed to for so long I’d forgotten how stupid it was.

Lulled into half-sleep by the sluggish movement of a single register line, with both my eyelids and the bag of chips I was clutching starting to slip, I was jarred to attention by a shrill shout of “Next Guest!”

I was startled as much by the word “guest” as by the abrupt loudness. I had gotten used to being a “guest” in Starbucks and J Crew ages ago, but I didn’t remember ever being one in here. It hit me just how ridiculous it was to be referred to as a “guest” for the purpose of a thirty second transaction over a fifty cent snack bag in this dusty little place, with it’s leaning-tower-of-carton  cluttered aisles and nonexistent helpful salespeople. 

“Guest” obviously sounded as ridiculous to the weary looking employee ringing up my small purchase. She may have been instructed to use the word but her tone implied that I was just the beginning of another blister on her tired feet, for all the enthusiasm she displayed in her asking me to come on down and visit her at the ol’ register.

We’ve become so used to the title of “guest” everywhere we go that we don’t even notice it anymore. Once upon a time we were just plain old customers. Only occasionally, like at the hairdresser, we became “clients”, implying some sort of longer term commitment.

Back then the term “guest” was reserved for visitors to the homes of friends and relatives, and hotel stays. Over the past several years the word has spread like the plague among retailers and it seems like, any minute, NYC hot dog cart vendors will start addressing us like we’ve dropped in for a weekend stay and they’ve made up their best room and put out the monogrammed hand towels.

Why have we changed from customers into guests?  Shifts in language can be naturally occurring, but in this case I’m pretty sure  the spread of “guest” is a deliberate and diabolical scheme by the retail industry to shift the burden of customer service off of their shoulders and onto those of the paying public.

The word “customer” is rooted in the concept of custom, or habit, the idea being that you were habitually giving your business to the local grocer, tailor, eatery, etc. Salespeople used to say things like “Good day and thank you for your custom, Moddom,” (and still do on bad Britcom reruns). If you made a habit of spending your hard earned cash in a certain place, you expected to be rewarded with consistently good service. Remember the saying “The customer is always right.” Many a retailer would like to forget it. The downside of the word “customer” for businesses is that it can be followed by that other pesky word “service.” 

With the emergence of the guest, there is no longer any such thing as a customer. It follows that there’s also no longer any such thing as customer service, which, as we know, is a lost art that has disappeared into the murky void of “Please press 1” phone menus and website dropdown lists that never have the choice you want.

Good customer service requires well trained employees who care (or can at least pretend to care) about pleasing customers, which means they usually have to be paid reasonable rates or commissions. It isn’t easy to provide good customer service in an environment that’s understaffed with the under-paid, as more and more retail establishments have become. It’s absolutely impossible in places that now feature the “convenience” of self checkout. In theory, self checkout is supposed to be a streamlined, time-saving process but, in practice, it involves standing around staring at a screen stuck on “One moment please – system processing” and waiting for the one available human salesperson to come and press the right buttons for you.

Unlike “customer,” “guest” has the advantage of dual implications, which  retailers have cleverly figured out how to exploit. On the one hand “guest” implies a welcoming “put your feet up; can I get you something to drink” sense of hospitality. On the other hand (if the voice in your head is my mother’s) it carries a “sit up straight, keep tour voice down, get your feet off the table; remember you’re a guest in someone’s home” message to mind your manners. Therein lies the proof that the whole guest trend is just another sneaky bait-and-switch tactic by the retail industry – crowd control disguised as hospitality.

But how did this happen? Who is responsible? The answer can be tracked down to an upbeat, show-stopping tune foisted on us by that master of corporate marketing – Disney.  That’s right, it was the fiendish folks at Disney who sparked the whole “guest” movement with a lovable little cartoon candle called Lumiere in the 1991 film Beauty and the Beast.

In Beauty and the Beast, a cartoon princess-to-be named Belle is invited by Lumiere and a chorus of  cutlery to “Be Our Guest” at an enchanted castle. Frankly, the song always annoyed me because Belle is starving and comes downstairs for a lavish meal but barely gets a bite to eat what with all the singing and dancing.

The song was a big hit and won an Academy Award, and Disney began using it as a marketing tool (a move no doubt planned before the first sketch was inked onto the paper), with ads inviting visitors to come and “Be Our Guest” at their various theme parks.

Last year, I went on a trip with my family to be their “guest” but things did not go as expected. While cartoon heroine Belle received, at the conclusion of her stay with the Beast, a castle, a crown and a handsome prince, all I got was a photo with Mickey and a frighteningly large Visa bill. True, Belle had to spend a brief moment or two in the dungeon before being granted access to the fabulous library/ballroom and wardrobe of fancy gowns, but I think my wait on the line to ride Pirates of the Caribbean should have qualified as equivalent dungeon time.

The Disney ad campaign gave out the impression that “guest” at Disney World meant being catered to in  royal fashion, but my experience had more of a mind-your-ps-and-qs-careful-of-the-knickknacks-visit-to-Aunt-Marion’s house feeling.  Having taken on the title of “guest” I felt intense pressure to obey the unwritten rules of the mouse governing the “happiest place on Earth.”

The number one rule for all  Disney guests is that grinning like an idiot is a requirement no matter how hot the hot sun, how endless the queue, or how screwed up the dinner reservations. Requiring everyone to stand around with smiles plastered on their faces makes it virtually impossible for a guest to complain irately to Dopey that an unruly mob of 30 kids from the local day camp just cut in front of her on the line to Dumbo, because – God Forbid! – such negativity might spoil the magical Disney experience of the other guests. This places the burden for ensuring each others’ magical holiday experiences firmly on the guests, rather than the theme park. What a racket!

This is why, over the past 15 years, every retailer under the sun from Target to Taco Bell to my drab little discount store has hopped on the guest monorail, putting the the responsibility for smooth service on the shoulders of their customers – and we’ve all accepted it uncomplainingly.

We’ve also accepted the inverse relationship of the level of service we are supposed to provide for ourselves to the amount we’re charged. We barely notice anymore that the cafes with most exorbitantly priced mocha-lattes are the ones that require us to put in our own milk and sugar. Customers get served. Guests are expected to fend for themselves as if they’re standing around their best friend’s kitchen.

I have decided it’s time to reclaim the word “guest” and re-interpret it to mean that, when I am your customer, my wish is your command. If I must be a guest everywhere I go, I’m sticking strictly to the “put your feet up” implication, spreading myself out and making myself at home.

I have made up my mind that I will be revolting. (Like “guest,” “revolting” can be taken two ways, and I don’t mean it in so much in the revolutionary as in the disgusting sense of the word.)

Look out retailers – when this guest drops in to your establishment you can expect messes to be made so forget about Beauty and the Beast and get out the line of Sorcerer’s Apprentice mops and buckets.

While I’m spilling things and sneezing loudly all over your other guests, I will demand whatever it is you’ve just run out of and make you go find it in the depths of your stockroom. I will overstay my welcome, leave towels on the floor of your bathroom, empty your fridge, and run up your phone bill. I will make it my business to get hold of small, screechy children with excessively runny noses and I will bring them with me when I grace your place of business with my presence and let them run around doing whatever they please. So what if you’re a clothing store and not a restaurant. You will still be expected to fetch me a sandwich and a cup of coffee. After all, I’m your “guest.”

Until…whenever

Lazy and Hazy

Surprise!

Even the haziest among us (myself included) have noticed that we recently had a Big Presidential  Election, the results of which were a surprise – to the winners, the losers, the pollsters, the media, the cast of SNL, and even the guy who won.

Of the many millions of people in America who were paying attention to the election on November 8th, 2016 and might have woken up on November 9th, 2016 to find themselves either surprised or not surprised by the outcome, only 3 were not surprised – Michael Moore, Bernie Sanders, and Dora the Explorer.

Dora, being a cartoon character, cannot technically be counted as a member of the population, but she deserves kudos for including a warning about the very real possibility of a Trump win on practically every episode of her show. Unfortunately, given the demographics of her viewing audience, it is unlikely any of them possessed the cognitive skills to make the obvious connection between Swiper, the big orange fox, and Donald Trump, the big orange candidate (or El Grande Naranjissimo) who swiped Hillary Clinton’s anticipated Electoral College votes – which leaves us with a grand total of 2 real live, non-cartoon Americans (out of a possible 242.2 million) who were not surprised by the election results.

That 242.2 million number is a reasonable estimate based on the current estimated U.S. population of 346 million. Roughly 6.5% are in the under-5 age group. This group was not paying attention to the election, being otherwise engaged in playing with blocks, spilling Cheerios on the floor, or watching dangly mobiles over their heads. Some of them may also have been tuning in to Dora the Explorer but, as explained above, they lacked the sophistication to grasp the socio-political message of the show even while they were chanting “Swiper, No Swiping!, Swiper No Swiping!, Swiper No Swiping!”

Another 2% of Americans are people at the opposite end of the age spectrum who, due to mental health conditions associated with the aging process, also weren’t paying attention to the election, being otherwise engaged in playing with blocks, spilling Cheerios on the floor, or watching dangly mobiles over their heads.

I think it’s safe to assume that many of the approximate 20% of the population in grades K-12 were also paying relatively little attention to the election.  Lastly, there were  some miscellaneous members of the remaining population who weren’t paying too much attention to the election for some miscellaneous reason, because there are always miscellaneous people who do things for miscellaneous reasons – I’d put their number at about 2% of the population.

A generous rounding off gives us 30% of 346 million Americans (or 103.8 million people) who were paying minimal or no attention to the election and, consequently, could not be surprised by its results. That leaves about 70% (approximately 242,000,000) who were paying attention to the election, 241,999,998 million of whom were surprised by the result.

In percentages, this means only an infinitesimal 8.264462809917355e-9% were not surprised and a whopping 9999999917355372% were surprised, which is  quite a deviation from the usual percentage of surprised vs. non-surprised people in situations likely to result in a some number of a group being shocked into state of surprisedness.

In a typical situation, such as a surprise party, the percentages would be nearly reversed – with wither just 1 or 0 people being surprised, and all but 1 or all  (including 1 faking being surprised) being unsurprised. For an average party size group of, say 50 people, let’s take that rare occurrence where the recipient of the party actually did not suspect a thing. In that case, a party of 50 people would yield 98% unsurprised and 2% surprised party guests.

Most well-known events in history also differ dramatically from this election in terms of surprisedness outcomes. The famous Trojan horse incident comes to mind. Most historians estimate the total number of people involved in that incident to be about 180,000 – the approximate 140,000 members of the Greek fleet (including 40 hiding in the horse) and an approximate 40,000 others inside the citadel of Troy. The event resulted in a total of 40,000 out of 180,000 (or 22%) being surprised, and 140,000 (or 88%) unsurprised.

Let’s review all of this this on a blurry yet helpful pie chart comparison diagram:

SURPRISEDNESS OUTCOMES

Many things in life can result in being surprised, pleasantly or not. A relatively small win on a lottery ticket will result in a pleasant surprise. Seeing the entire payout go to cover the unexpected cost of the fender bender incurred while speeding over to the lottery office to claim your winnings will be an unpleasant one.

The election results were naturally a wonderful surprise for pro-Trumpers and an awful one for anti-Trumpers. Given the popular vote, we can assume that most of those who were surprised thought it was a “Yuge” surprise and also a Bigly unpleasant one. What is more surprising, this Bigly Surprise came on the heels of another Bigly Surprise – that Brexit thing – but that happened in across the Atlantic in a land so far away out on the periphery of the American consciousness that it might as well have happened in Narnia. No doubt, some Americans think it did.

 

Those Americans who actually knew what Brexit was and where it happened were likely to be more horribly surprised, but only for a moment before returning to their Walking Dead marathon or Candy Crush Level 1,006. So, Brexit was not especially help in preparing them for the shock of electing a President who might be likely to shout things like “I know you are but what am I?” or “I’m rubber and your glue, so whatever you say bounces off me and sticks to you!” at foreign dignitaries just prior to pressing a certain red button.

What with the cries for recounts, concerns about election promises being kept or not kept, accusations of Russian meddling, and plans for impeachment in the works, there is no doubt that we will be in for more surprises and shocks. I believe, as Americans, we should ready ourselves for this by taking part in Surprise Preparedness Training.

Most parents or caregivers already conduct simple Surprise Preparedness Training exercises with babies and small children. You probably know them by their other names – Peek-a-Boo and Hide-and Seek. The trouble is that we do not build on these critical life skill drills and continue them into adulthood. I believe modified versions of Peek-a-Boo and Hide-and-Seek, and similar routines can prove exceptionally helpful preparing us, as a nation, for the continued horrible surprises we may be facing over next 4 years. I have, in anticipation of this need, developed the following useful Surprise Preparedness Training exercises:

Modified Peek-a-Boo for babies

Once babies have become used to the game of Peek-a-Boo, it is time to step up their training by introducing a modified variety of this drill. The modification involces the introduction of surprise face masks that can be worn by the adults while yelling “Boo!” as the child uncovers his or her eyes. Instead of mommy or daddy’s face, with which the child has already become familiar and which no longer provides any shock value, he or she will be startled to see the face of a scary circus clown mask covering a parent or caregiver’s face. This may result in tears at first, but it is essential that the child become used to uncertainty and discord. After several sessions of surprise switches between mommy or daddy or a favorite babysitter and the clown, additional masks – such as a dragon or the Grim Reaper- can be added.

 

 

This is good preparation for the adult experience of discovering the very people we rely on to support protect our rights and freedoms may instead trample all over them as carelessly as Godzilla rampaged across the city of Tokyo.

Hide and Seek but Don’t Find

This is a follow-up exercise for children to the familiar game of Hide-and-Seek, where the child searches for a friend or family member but never finds them as they have disappeared altogether. In this simple exercise, the child as the “seeker” will be asked to count to a number such as 50 or 100 with his or her eyes closed and “no peeking.” During this period, the adult in the role of the “hider” should leave the premises (having readied a small suitcase for a brief stay elsewhere). A day or so later, when the child has given up all hope of the adult friend or family member ever returning, the “hider” should magically reappear, offering no explanation (or an unintelligible one) as to the disappearance. This game, when repeated at regular intervals, has a dual benefit of providing a parent with an excuse for a fun getaway, while training children not to get too comfortable with the comforts of their daily lives – just as adults should not get too comfortable with comforts such as healthcare or Social Security, which could vanish from our lives at a moment’s notice. Please keep in mind when engaging in this exercise that it is inadvisable to allow the child to take on the role of “hider” unless they are of legal age and financially independent.

 

Guess Who for Adults

This is a new guessing exercise developed for groups of three adults, specifically to help them minimize the traumatic effects of unexpected election outcomes. Participants take turns being the “voter,” the “pollster” or the “counter.” The pollster spins a pair of dice (only using sides with 1 to 5 dots) to determine an expected percentage outcome of the “election” and presents the voter with two choices, represented by one-sided pictures of faces attached to popsicle sticks. The pollster then assigns the percentage outcome to either choice and places a bet on that candidate to be the winner. The voter then casts a vote for one candidate by placing a folded piece of paper into a bag. The counter takes the bag into another room where he or she has the option to either count the vote, change the vote, or to add his or her own votes to the bag. The counter returns and holds up the two sticks representing the candidates. With a flourish, the counter turns the sticks so that the picture of the winning candidate faces front and the loser’s picture is turned to the back and shouts “You win!” or “You lose!” at the voter. If the voter has chosen correctly and the pollster’s prediction was incorrect, the voter gets the money that the pollster bet. If the voter chose wrong and the pollster correctly predicted the winner, the pollster gets the money. If both are wrong, the counter takes the money. The voter has the option to “bribe” the pollster by promising a percentage of their bet winnings before each round and may also organize protests against the results in between rounds.   

 

Expect the unexpected

This is an exercise that can be incorporated into a morning routine for adults. Upon  waking up, before doing anything, simply set aside about 10 minutes or so to repeat possible random things relatives or friends may or may not do, such as: Aunt Mabel may call me this morning, or Aunt Mabel may be hit by a car and the morgue may call me. Or: Mary may pick up ice cream on the way home or Mary may cheat on me tonight and not come home. Or: Dave may serve me a delicious dinner or Dave may charge at me with a kitchen knife while making dinner.

After a time, this can be extended to a variety of other people and circumstances, such as: My boss will fire me at this meeting. Or: The person on line behind me may be a robber about to steal my wallet. Or: This plane I’m boarding may crash upon take-off. Those who practice these exercises  faithfully will be able to maintain a constant state of readiness for any unpleasant surprises, but should be warned that overdoing them may lead to side effects including: paranoia; delusions; fear of loud noises;(phonophobia); fear of leaving the house (agoraphobia); and fear of crowds (enoclophobia). These side effects should not come as a surprise.

Nor should the gargantuan total nationwide cost of therapy sessions over the next 4 years for those who neglect their Surprise Preparedness Training and find themselves adrift in a sea of shock waves without a life preserver. Such therapy may or may not be covered, depending on (Surprise!) cuts to Medicare– or (Surprise!) no cuts to Medicare.

Until…whenever

Lazy and Hazy

Boo!

 

 

Very Delayed Theater Review: The Second Half of The Addams Family

The Broadway show The Addams Family closed at the end of 2011, but since the movie was on TV the other day I thought that now, well into 2016, would be a good time to review the show. Also, it closed long enough ago that someone might get the bright idea to revive it any day now.

I remember fondly how, when this show was in its last season, I was subjected to repeated, almost desperate ads for it on the taxi cab screens. This was funny in a sad sort of way and made me realize two things – an ad for a Broadway show can be better than the show itself, and I take way too many cabs.

I happened to see The Addams Family (well, part of it) thanks to a free ticket from a friend, which is probably the only worthwhile way to see a live musical based on a movie series based on a TV sitcom based on a comic strip. I did not see the final version of the show starring Brooke Shields and… other people. I suppose it was her last hurrah before settling comfortably into the twilight of her career on a La-z-boy.

I wish I had seen that version instead of the one I did see – which was with the original cast starring Nathan Lane and Bebe Neuwirth. Ms. Shields strikes me as a much better fit for a show like this as she possesses a familiar enough name to draw an audience without the staggering talent that might accompany it, thus avoiding the shattered expectations of seeing very good actors perform in a very bad musical – although there is a sadistic rubberneck thrill of witnessing the slow torture of talented people trapped onstage in a horrifically lame production with no hope of escape.

 

I will be reviewing only the second half of the show, which is mostly what I saw. Time and again, when reading Broadway reviews, I see that “after a promising start” a show “fell flat in the second act.” Like determined little trains chugging up a hillside, many productions lose their steam halfway to the top. They are the little engines that couldn’t.

With everything riding on second acts nowadays, it has become unnecessary to review first ones (unless it’s a one-act production). There’s no need to see the little engine off at the station. You need only wait at final stop the bottom of the hill to see if it arrives in one piece.

This makes life a lot simpler for theater critics. What does it matter if you’re running late and miss the opening scene? The curtain probably went up as planned. Who cares if you had a few too many last night and dozed all through the first big dance number? It was bound to have been performed energetically, compared to later numbers when the performers are all tired out. Restroom breaks are also not a problem. Spending a scene in a bathroom stall serenaded by flushing toilets instead of in the balcony serenaded by dueting lovers, you can rest assured that the pair managed to display adequate chemistry, since this is long before the end-of-the-first-act kiss  and “How could you forget to use mouthwash again!” intermission argument. And, even though the scenery may move around, it will probably repeat itself, so you won’t miss much there.

There is a wonderful, unintended, cost benefit to skipping first acts. We all know nobody checks your stub after intermission so you don’t even need a ticket to get a gander at whatever it is and give a full, accurate and insightful review, which is just what I did with the Addams Family.

To begin, let me say that the show probably opened with a promising start, but everything fell flat in second act. I must admit that I did sit through part of the first act, though not on purpose. I arrived too early and it wasn’t yet intermission. Still, by the time I got settled in my seat, and my friend and the rest of her group finished glaring at me and muttering about how they could have given the ticket to someone else if I wasn’t going to bother to show up on time, and I’d finished rifling through my Playbill and rustling around in my pockets for a mint, intermission had arrived. During this time, I was aware of a vague swirl of sound and color in the general direction of the stage, but I promise I didn’t see a thing.

 

 

Many theater critics neglect to review intermission; a key part of the overall theater experience. I think it’s crucial to know how long the line to the bathroom is, if they are likely run out of Raisinets at the bar, and if, from snippets of conversation, you can tell the audience is packed with a lot of slowpoke tourists who are going to block your way to the exit after the show and increase your wait time for a cab. I’m happy to say that at The Addams Family there were plenty of toilets in the ladies room and there was time enough to use the restroom and grab a box of candy. There was not enough time to order a drink, too (unless you were with a male companion who never has to wait for the bathroom). The crowd was a healthy mix of fast-moving natives and languishing tourists, indicating that a quick getaway might not be out of the question.

The chimes sounded, the crowd made its way back into the theater, and it was time for the all-important second act. This began with a musical number, followed by several other musical numbers. There was a fair amount of music. Sadly, I don’t remember any one tune standing out (in fact I can’t recall any of the tunes at all). The better ones were probably in the first act. From what I could gather, the silly plot involved Wednesday Addams’ plan to marry a boy from a nice, normal family and the miscalculated interference of Uncle Fester, and various ghosts and undersea monsters. Give the subject matter, the plot really couldn’t have been anything but silly. Bebe Neuwirth and Nathan Lane clearly had a tough time rising above the lackluster second-act material. Lane seemed to put somewhat more effort than Neuwirth into getting cheap laughs but that may have been due to the confinement of her skintight Morticia gown. The scenery was impressive and it moved around a lot.

The second act of the Addams Family suffered mostly from being a musical without really wonderful music, which is sort of a must-have ingredient in a musical. What it lacked in quality it tried to make up for in quantity, with quite a lot of totally mediocre and unmemorable songs. When will people learn that more of a not-good thing is not a better thing? I’m sure you know that sense of camaraderie you feel when everyone walks out at the end of a wonderfully inspiring show singing the tunes.

There was none of that at the Addams Family. Nor was there that pressing urge you feel, when you hear a great song, to run out and immediately download it to your ipod (or whatever people use these days) so you can hear it over and over again, as with those enduring Rogers and Hammerstein, Porter, or Sondheim scores, or even Annie. This was not a best-selling cast album kind of show and I felt no concern whatsoever that I might not hear any of these songs, ever again.

When the show was over the audience gave the actors a standing ovation. Standing ovations are much more deserved when fine performers make it through three hours of humiliation without suffering a nervous breakdown onstage. I never understand why we all stand up and cheer  when they’ve had an easy time of it in a great play with sharp, witty dialogue and divinely catchy musical numbers.

The curtain came down, the lights came up and it was over at last. Exiting the theater was not the log-jam it might have been, since even the tourists were grateful to see the end of the show and wanted to hightail it out of there. In fact, from the speed of the stampede you’d have thought someone was handing out hundred dollar bills to the first ten people to make it to the door.

For me, the highlight of the show was the end, not just because it was over, but because I got an awesomely cool Addams Family water bottle. A bad musical can make a good water bottle seem very exciting. Most of us don’t go to the theater often and when we treat ourselves to one of these special outings, we are determined to come away with something for our trouble.

My 4-year late review in a nutshell: great actors; lame material; mediocre songs; tolerable intermission; satisfyingly quick getaway; awesomely cool water bottle.

Until…whenever

Lazy and Hazy

Time Management Bulk Book Review

Countless drab and lengthy books have been written on the subject of time management and it’s role in stress reduction. The exact titles of these books don’t matter because what is written inside them is always the same. That’s why I am doing a bulk review of all of the time management books that have ever been written, which makes the review itself an exercise in time management.

You may have, as I once did, turned to one of these books in search of help in better managing your time to create less stress about getting things done. What I have discovered from these books is that reading them is a good way to waste the time you are supposed to learn how to manage. I discovered this pretty much from just skimming through their tables of contents.

Books on time management invariably advise you to break down large tasks into a series of smaller steps and tackle them one at a time. This is poor advice, as it does nothing to address the root problem, which is that you have to do all the tasks.

The real solution is obvious. The easiest way to reduce your stress about getting things done is to not do them. If more people did less things we’d be a lot happier as a society. Think about your job, assuming you have one. When you are assigned a project at work it creates stress. Consider what it is about the project that creates the stress. It’s that you have to do it. It’s all those pesky deadlines and meetings and drafts and re-drafts and updates and reports.

Time management books tell you that there is a wonderful sense of accomplishment in finishing things. Don’t fall for this lie. When you finish things, it doesn’t make you happy – it makes other people happy – like your boss or your significant other.

Let’s say you finish a gargantuan project you were assigned at work. Who did you do it for? Yourself? No, you did it for your employer. And what was your reward when you finished it? Did they send you on a paid, month-long trip to the Bahamas to lie in a hammock on the beach and recover from the horror of it all and promise you you’ll never have to go through that nightmarish experience again? No – they probably said something like “Impressive job, Sheila – you handled that so well I’m going to give you something you can really sink your teeth into,” and assigned you an even more time-consuming project with more steps, more reports, more meetings, and more deadlines.

 

Back when I didn’t know any better and gave my all to those projects at work, they pulled that trick more times than I can count. I felt like I was climbing an endless series of Mount Everests. With every summit, another, larger peak loomed in the distance. I learned the hard way that hard work gets you nothing but harder work.

After years of these endless mountain treks with far too few hours spent in the idyllic village below, I stumbled onto the real secret to time management and here it is:

The key to managing your time better is to have as few things as possible to spend your time managing, and the key to reducing the stress associated with getting things done is to stop doing things before they are done.

Having made this discovery, I gave up my former job and went to work in  a government bureaucracy. Bureaucratic jobs are low-stress because bureaucrats rarely, if ever, get anything done. Bureaucracy builds non-accomplishment right into the system. I’ve been amazed at how many projects I can let fall by the wayside, knowing they will get scrapped sooner or later anyway due to a “shift in priorities”, a “redistribution of resources” or a “reorganization.” The elimination of tedious projects at work means I can spend more time doing the stress-free things I really enjoy, such as coming up with mottoes about not doing tedious projects at work like “Well done is never begun.”

That would make an excellent title for a book of my own on time management, though It’s unlikely that I would ever finish writing one, and it would be hypocritical to finish a book about the importance of not finishing things. I would be like a hip-hop artist writing a song about the struggles of life in the hood from a poolside lounge chair in my McMansion in Dubai. I came up with the idea for the book and, from just that, I have achieved a wonderful sense of accomplishment, but endured no stress whatsoever to get it.

I have decided it’s better to stick to blogging, which is like starting on a Chapter One of a book with each new post, but without stressful deadlines or the need to ever get around to Chapter Two. So, fear not, dear readers, I won’t be abandoning this blog – which I know would be a devastating blow to you – to write a time management book. Go ahead and breathe a sigh of relief and put that little bottle of pills back in the medicine cabinet. Talk about stress reduction!

In keeping with the theme of this post, I am ending it here with no intention of finishing my review of books about time management after veering off on a tangent about writing my own book on the subject.

Until…whenever

Lazy and Hazy

Shakespeare the Man: Was He Annoying?

Welcome to my fourth blog post ever. Isn’t it all just so exciting? My teenage son left his English Lit 101 books lying around the living room and now, after having a good, hypocritical screaming fit about people throwing their stuff around the house anywhere they damn well please, l’m in a literary mood.

I’d like to launch right into today’s topic on Something Literary. I’ve been trying to come up with that something for the past two hours, but I got involved instead in eating cookies and looking at clothing catalogs, and then I took a nap. At this point I’m trying to find something to write about without having to get up from my chair or navigate away from the screen, which doesn’t leave a lot of options. Really, it leaves only one option, which is to sift through the my previous posts on the off chance that something in there would make a suitable topic for today’s discussion. In other words, you’ll be getting “blog leftovers.”

Looking back at my introductory blog about starting a blog, I wondered how anybody could get through even a few sentences of such ghastly, mindless drivel. I nearly gave up on finding Something Literary until I got to an embarrassingly bad take-off on a line from a Hamlet soliloquy in the second paragraph, so I thought why not go all out and write about the most literary subject of them all – The Bard himself.

There is no bigger fish the in sea of literature than old Bill Shakespeare. As Shakespeare is one whale of a topic, I’m going to cut out all the blubber and avoid any discussion of his plays and poems, as that would require me to look up a lot of quotes and things. Instead, I’d like to take a look at Shakespeare The Man. He lived so long ago and few personal records of his life exist, so this area is wide open to speculation and I can just make stuff up.

In considering Shakespeare the man, I’m sure the first question that comes to your mind is the same one that came to mine. It’s the same question I ask myself whenever I consider any person I might encounter, which is: Is he or she going to be really annoying? Naturally, in this case, we must rephrase the question in the past tense, giving us our blog topic for today: Shakespeare the Man: Was He Annoying?

It is a question one could ponder throughout the ages. Yet I came up with an answer very quickly and it’s Yes. I think Shakespeare probably was very annoying. While I lack any personal experience of what it was like to be around old Bill on a daily basis, I think I can still conclude he was annoying, simply because most people are annoying in one way or another.

I know it may seem unappreciative of Shakespeare’s greatness as a historical figure to imagine he could possibly be annoying, but the generally held opinion that The Bard was a genius and the greatest playwright that ever lived in no way precludes his being annoying – quite the opposite. His genius implies that he may have been, as many geniuses are, a totally neurotic, self-absorbed, insecure, whiny pain in the butt who drove his friends crazy by talking incessantly about himself and his stupid plays and asking them for the hundredth time “Art thou sure the whole balcony scene doth not seem too cliché and over the top? Thinkst thou I should cut it?”

Seeing as how he churned out over 30 plays, as well as a bunch of sonnets, I believe that Shakespeare was consumed with his work. Being so devoted to his little theater productions, he very likely paid no attention to other things, like personal grooming. This would have been annoyingly repulsive when you consider how revoltingly smelly even those individuals who made some attempt at whatever passed for hygiene were back in Shakespeare’s day, given the lack of plumbing and dental floss. Shakespeare may also have had a number of disgusting habits, like picking his teeth or cleaning his toenails in public, which would have been excessively annoying to his friends and family.

 

Also, unlike today’s movie stars, people in the theater have always believed themselves to be artists and artists believe in starving for their art – unless, of course someone else is footing the bill for their meals. Therefore, The Bard may have been quite a cheapskate – the type of guy who goes to dinner with his friends, orders the most expensive frothy brown drink on the alehouse menu and then runs off and sticks them with the check.

In light of these implications, I think we can be rather confident in theorizing that Shakespeare, at some time in his life, was considered to be annoying– probably by more than one person – maybe by a whole lot of people who, if they were alive today, wouldn’t go see any of his rotten plays, just on principle, because he annoyed them so much.

Still, perhaps we shouldn’t (as Sherlock Holmes would caution) theorize in advance of the facts. Let’s see if we can discover any facts to support our theory that Shakespeare was annoying. We can accomplish this by examining whatever information we have from common knowledge, gathered from hearsay, movies and television about William Shakespeare the man.

For starters, we know that his name was William Shakespeare and that he was a man and he wrote plays and poetry. Although, some people believe that it’s entirely possible that his real name wasn’t William Shakespeare, or that he wasn’t a man at all but a woman in disguise who had to hide her identity because it was all so sexist back then and women weren’t even allowed to perform in plays (as depicted in the film Shakespeare in Love), let alone write them. Others believe that he (or she) didn’t even write those plays and poems himself (or herself) but stole them from someone else. The fact that we cannot say conclusively that Shakespeare was Shakespeare, that he was a he, or that he wrote the plays and poetry himself (or herself) is really very annoying, which provides us with our first bit of supporting evidence that Shakespeare was annoying.  But what else do we know about this man or woman who may or may not have been William Shakespeare and may or may not have written any plays?

One thing many people probably know (perhaps from visits to England or just leafing through travel brochures) is that William Shakespeare was married to someone called Anne Hathaway, though not the same Anne Hathaway who was in the movie The Devil Wears Prada with Meryl Streep. From this, we can then deduce that Shakespeare never met Meryl Streep at a film premiere or a cast party because the Anne Hathaway who would have attended these events, and could have introduced them to each other, is the wrong Anne Hathaway. This is a shame because Shakespeare surely would have wanted to cast Meryl in one of his plays, although Meryl probably would have had to pretend to be a man to be in the play if Shakespeare really did write the play (a fact we still aren’t completely certain about). This leads us to an important question: If Shakespeare was really a woman pretending to be a man in order to write plays and Meryl Streep also pretended to be a man in order to be cast by Shakespeare in a play, what sort of crazy mix-ups, zany situations, and hilarious high-jinks would have taken place backstage in that Globe Theater dressing room? Certainly some of those incidents could have been the inspiration for an entirely new Shakespeare play. Since this didn’t happen, we are left with one less Shakespearian comedy than we would have had if it did happen, which is annoying – and further evidence that our theory that Shakespeare was annoying is correct.

 

 

Still more evidence of The Bard’s annoyingness can be found in the many fictitious movies and PBS dramas set in the Elizabethan Age, the period in which Shakespeare is supposed to have lived. Some of the more popular things from this period which you may have seen portrayed on TV or in films are: Sir Walter Raleigh, the Spanish Armada, the bubonic plague, and alehouses. Let’s examine each in turn:

  • Sir Walter Raleigh was a swashbuckling soldier, explorer, statesman, philosopher, etc. (in other words, a Big Show-off). He was also one of Queen Liz’s faves until he secretly married one of her Ladies-in-Waiting without asking permission and got sent off to the Tower. He also wrote some poetry, which wasn’t nearly as good as Shakespeare’s. Given what huge ego Walt probably had as a fave of the Queen, he wouldn’t have taken kindly to someone being a better poet than he was and undoubtedly would have found Shakespeare annoying. In fact, he probably started that old rumor that he really wrote Shakespeare’s plays.
  • The defeat of the Spanish Armada, a great fleet of ships sent by King Philip of Spain to conquer England, was a huge event in English history and one of Queen Liz’s great triumphs. Phil and the other Spaniards were probably pretty miffed about the whole thing, which means they must have continued to be annoyed by anything or anyone English for quite some time, which would have included Shakespeare, so we can safely assume that King Philip of Spain would have found Shakespeare exceptionally annoying.

 

  • The bubonic plague, also known as the Black Death (in retrospect, the above description “popular thing from this period” probably isn’t quite right here) was a dreaded disease spread by fleas, rats and other delightful creatures. It resulted in the closure of the Globe Theater and killed a lot of people, including reportedly some of Shakespeare’s relatives. It’s pretty obvious that theatergoers with tickets to a Shakespeare premiere at the Globe when it was shut down would have been annoyed when he failed to refund their money. His relatives also would have been posthumously annoyed that they, rather than Shakespeare, were struck down by the Black Death.

 

 

  • Going to pubs and alehouses in Shakespeare’s time was like going to a fast food joint today, and only marginally less disgusting. Alehouses were where people spent the very little free time they had, so everyone was always going down to the alehouse. Just try and find some movie about the time in which Shakespeare lived that doesn’t have an alehouse scene in it. We all have to eat , so we can therefore confidently leap to the conclusion that Shakespeare would have spent plenty of time wolfing down mystery meat pies in an alehouse, topped it off with mugs of foamy brown liquid. The picture of Shakespeare greedily stuffing his face with a crusty, drippy, meat-filled slab of dough is no doubt offensively annoying to vegetarians (despite it’s occurrence in a pre-factory farming era), and is additional proof of his potential to a register a Ten on the annoy-o-meter.

 

 

Our last piece of proof, and something I know with a fair amount of certainty about William Shakespeare, is that we probably know less about William Shakespeare than we would know if I had bothered to look William Shakespeare up on Wikipedia or some other unreliable source. And, we would probably  know less about William Shakespeare if I looked William Shakespeare up on Wikipedia than we would if I looked William Shakespeare up on some reputable, accredited university site. The very thought of having to go on a dreary, bothersome hunt for information on any internet site at all is nothing if not annoying, giving us our final piece of evidence and absolute, incontrovertible proof that Shakespeare the man was, and still is annoying.

In conclusion, without doing any real research whatsoever, we have amassed a wealth of evidence to support the idea that Shakespeare the man was annoying. To sum up:

  • He might not have really been William Shakespeare at all; annoyingly fraudulent.
  • He might have been a woman masquerading as a man; annoyingly confusing.
  • He might not have written any plays or poems at all, despite taking credit for them; annoyingly sneaky.
  • He might have been a neurotic nut who generally ignored his own personal hygiene, got his friends to pay for all his pub grub, and possibly engaged in a number of other unseemly  personal habits and behaviors in public; annoyingly gross.
  • He lacked the necessary connections and lifespan to meet Meryl Streep at a celebrity gala, causing a possible play inspired by comedic dressing room antics to never have been written; annoyingly disappointing.
  • He may have been gotten on the nerves of number of individuals of his time including Sir Walter Raleigh, Philip of Spain, and his own dead relatives for being too good a poet, being English, and being alive, as well as disliked by future generations of vegetarians for  probably having eaten lard-infused pies washed down with foamy beverages; annoying existing.
  • He could be looked up, if I felt so motivated (which I don’t) on either unreliable or reliable internet sites, which would require extra work; annoyingly draining to even think about.

I don’t know about you, but I’m dizzy from the sudden accumulation of knowledge. I feel like I could run right out and teach a course about Shakespeare if I was inclined to run anywhere. Deep discussions about classic literary figures tire me out, so I’ll have to stop writing now and take another nap. You may be one of those people who has the opposite response – wide awake, energized, pulse racing, and brain reeling. This makes you nearly as annoying as Shakespeare. Feel free to continue reflecting, dissecting and discussing (with other people, on your own, away from here) everything you’ve learned here today about Shakespeare the man. There are limitless possibilities for other totally speculative follow-up discussions of Shakespeare’s life and personality which you can conduct without involving me. For example:

  • Shakespeare with his actors: Constructive Critic or Abusive Bastard – Talking points could include such things as: If Shakespeare had lived to see it, what would he have said about Sir Lawrence Olivier’s performance in the film version of Hamlet? Would he have cried out “Sir Lawrence, thou hast moved me to tears when you spoke of Poor Yorick. You are indeed the definitive Hamlet for all time.” Or, would he have said, “Ham it up a little more there, why don’t you Larry? And what the hell do you think you’re doing in that bedroom scene? I hope to God that wasn’t your tongue I saw. She’s supposed to be your Mother, for Chrissake!”

Until…whenever

Late and Lazy

How to Blog Part 3

As promised in my last post, here it is:

LAZY AND HAZY’S TWELVE STEP QUICK PICTORIAL GUIDE TO STARTING A BLOG (FOR MILLENNIALS AND OTHERS WITH SHORT ATTENTION SPANS)

Step 1

 

Step 2

 

 

Step 3

 

 

Step 4

bookstrash

 

Step 5

 

 

 

Step 6

 

Step 7

 

 

 

Step 8

 

brainstormcappuccino2

 

Step 9

 

 

Step 10

 

Step 11

 

Step 12

 

 

 

Congratulations!

You are now a:

 

 

Until…whenever

Lazy and Hazy

How to Blog Part 2

fortune cookie

As promised in my last post, here it is:

LAZY AND HAZY’S TWELVE STEP PROGRAM FOR STARTING A BLOG

Step 1

Decide to start a blog. Once you do this, you will need to do absolutely nothing to move forward with it for about two years. As I discovered, with tasks requiring several steps to complete, you can coast along for quite awhile on just the deep sense of accomplishment gained by completing Step One.

Step 2

Brag about your exciting new blog to everyone you know at great length. Drag this out for as long as possible before moving on to Step 3, which will inevitably require some sort of researchy, paperwork-laden chore (this is why I rarely make it to Step 3 of anything). Be prepared with answers to inquiries like “Cool! What’s your blog called? What’s it about? Can I read it?”  I found it best to answer these questions one of two ways, either: “It’s abou…oh! I think that’s my cell. I have to get it. I’m expecting a really important call from my (broker, lawyer, doctor, etc.). No, I had it on vibrate – so you wouldn’t have heard it ring.” or “Oops. I am so sorry! What a shame you’re wearing white. You’d better go wash that out right away before it sets.”

Step 3

Consult the experts. Amazingly, in this case I did get around to Step 3 of the painful process and read (well, skimmed) through a number of publications on blogging by so-called blogging experts for general bloggy tips. According to these experts, who have written pages and pages of dreary prose the subject, it’s important to: find a niche; determine the theme of your blog; provide a welcoming atmosphere; adopt a friendly tone; write in a clear style that avoids run on sentences; and include lots of pictures, videos and links. 

Step 4

Decide to follow none of the expert tips above and just do whatever you come up with yourself because the experts’ way involves way too much dull reading.

Step 5

Face the biggest challenge of all – a decision about that single, all-important, critical thing that can make or break the success of your blog: The Title. In writing, the title is the most important thing. Other people may tell you that it’s the content that matters. That’s nonsense. Blog experts unanimously agree that a blog title should be clear and simple to easily convey to readers what your blog is about. It’s obvious that they never came across the book “Moby Dick” which is widely considered to be one of the great American novels, but sounds a lot more like cheap porn than a deeply reflective work of immense complexity, fraught with metaphor and symbolism, and a nifty first line to boot. At least that’s what I’ve heard about it – I haven;t read it myself. Or, what about “To Kill a Mockingbird.” I read that one and there were no birds in it of the mocking or any other variety or instructions on how to do away with them. The acknowledgement that titles are incredibly important but also incredibly misleading counts as facing the decision to decide on one and also as the completion of Step 5.

Step 6

Begin the agonizing process of brainstorming for a title. Since the blog experts are wrong and, in reality, people expect misleading titles, you need to come up with the perfect, misleading blog title.  

Step 7

Continue brainstorming, which, I can tell you, is no walk in the park. Its months of walks in the park – with no time to notice the trees and flowers or that someone’s dog peed on your shoe. While you agonize painfully over this potential title or that one, minutes that can never be regained tick away – minutes that could have been spent eating chocolate, liking posts on Facebook, or eating more chocolate.

Step 8

Complete the brainstorming process. If it ends the same way for you as it did for me, what you will have produced are: no blog titles, a notebook full of unusable, swirly doodles and a very large (and hopefully deductible) folder of receipts for grande soy lattes.

Step 9

Take a break and do something relaxing that will not tax your mind. For a long time, what with the title being such a huge obstacle in my path to Blogdom, my brain was completely frazzled and I was in danger of having nervous breakdown. It took weeks and weeks of Candy Crush to get myself back to place where I could just barely cope with moving on to…

Step 10

Change your mind. It’s a blogger’s prerogative. If it takes this much time to come up with a title and you still haven’t got one, it’s okay to conclude that this was a big waste of time and the title isn’t that important after all.

Step 11

Depend on the kindness of strangers (or friends – whoever you see first). With the title no longer mattering so much, you can just ask the first person you see to come up with one for you. You may, as I did, have to ask a couple of people. Then you can just throw all of the suggestions into a bag and pick one.

Step 12

Conquer the final hurdle to building a blog. The blog experts are correct this time when they point out that, due to the disappointing inability of those who read blogs to also read minds, there must be a way to get all of your bloggy content out there into cyberspace to be read. They are wrong, however, in their belief that you must acquire a lot of horrifying technical knowledge in order to make that happen. All you need to acquire is this: Go to the nearest Chinese restaurant and stock up on lo mein, chow fun, and fried rice and find a geeky significant other, friend, or acquaintance with technical knowledge. Techno-geeks love carb-laden Chinese food as much as they do working on computery, internetish stuff. One of these is bound to get a whiff of goodies and will happily offer to take care of anything tech-related for your blog for nothing more than a quart of lo mein. It’s a fair trade so you can even slap a Fair Trade label somewhere on your main blog page to let everyone know how socially conscious your blog is so they can feel really good about reading it no matter what it says. Just don’t make the mistake I did and choose a spouse as your techno-geek helper. Unlike other techno-geek assistants, who will do as you tell them without wondering why, a spouse is likely to become too involved in areas of the blog that don’t concern them, throwing a lot of annoying comments and questions at you like “What are you using that picture of us for?” or “Are you writing about me?” and other things they have no business knowing. You will waste a lot of time repeating phrases like “Never mind that – just get the f…ing picture on the f…ing page!” This can slow the process down quite a bit. It’s one thing for you to take your sweet time with things, but the hired help should snap to it!

If you made it through this Twelve Step program, congratulations!  You have now become the proud owner of a blog in a mere 4 years time. For those of you who were unable to follow through, I have created a shorter Quick Step Pictorial version (perfect for millennials who communicate in texts and soundbites) of this program, which I will put in my next post. Keep in mind that the shorter time required to peruse the steps will not mean a shorter time for completing them.

 

Until…whenever

Lazy and Hazy

 

 

 

 

How to Blog Part 1

Here you are visiting my blog instead of enjoying a romantic dinner with someone special, socializing with friends at party, or having an invigorating run in the park. So, I assume you’re single, alone, and unfit. Sorry about that, and welcome to my very first blog post ever, where I’ve spent my very first paragraph ever discovering what a tedious chore it is writing a blog post. I’ve only written five sentences and I’m ready for a break. Let’s all take a short break. You can play phone games or eat cookies or do whatever it is people do when they’re alone, single, and unfit…

cookiephone

….And we’re back. Yes, here we are. Blogging away. Bloggity blog blog. That’s ten sentences I’ve written so far, including this one and what I wrote before the break. This one makes eleven. Now we’ve got twelve. Now thirteen. Fourteen. By now you may wonder why am I doing this. I certainly am. Why am I blogging? Why does one blog? To blog or not to blog? That is the question. Whether one is sober enough at the time to copy the links to narrow views of outrageous morons, or to take aim at a sea of tweeters and by composing, friend them?

I’d  like to tell you that I decided to start a blog out of a desire to inspire, motivate, enlighten, share, and give something of myself to others, but really I was just bored and needed something to do.

I’m not feeling inclined to come up with anything else to write about at the moment, so I might as well take you through the steps I followed to create this blog so that you  can appreciate all the trouble I’ve gone to for you – my readers.

I discovered that there are (surprise,  surprise) Twelve Steps to creating a blog. Since one Twelve Step program is pretty much like another, if you follow them all the way through you will likely find yourself thinner, cured of any drug addictions, and freed of all toxic relationships, in addition to being an expert on starting a blog.

Like all creators of Twelve Step programs, I suffered the consequences of doing everything wrong and made all kinds of mistakes, which I now know how to avoid. Once I generously impart my wisdom on the subject to you, you will be able to avoid them, too. I should be charging big bucks for this, but I’m in a benificent mood so I’ll let you in on my Twelve Steps for free out of the goodness of my heart. It will have to wait until I get around to my next post, though, because I think I’ve blogged enough for one day and I need to rest.

Until…whenever

Lazy and Hazy