We Don't Walk Slow

Chuck Klosterman’s 23 Questions – Question 5

5. You meet your soul mate. However, there is a catch: Every three years, someone will break both of your soul mate’s collarbones with a Crescent wrench, and there is only one way you can stop this from happening: You must swallow a pill that will make every song you hear—for the rest of your life—sound as if it’s being performed by the band Alice in Chains. When you hear Creedence Clearwater Revival on the radio, it will sound (to your ears) like it’s being played by Alice in Chains. If you see Radiohead live, every one of their tunes will sound like it’s being covered by Alice in Chains. When you hear a commercial jingle on TV, it will sound like Alice in Chains; if you sing to yourself in the shower, your voice will sound like deceased Alice vocalist Layne Staley performing a capella (but it will only sound this way to you).

Would you swallow the pill?

This one is a little tricky for me. I can’t stand the way Alice and Chains sound. I think all of their songs sound the same and I really have clue how people find them so great. So telling me that every single song I’m going to hear for the rest of my life is going to sound like them is a bit disturbing. Almost too much to handle. I really enjoy music and this would essentially eliminate listening to music for pleasure and turn any song into a torture session.

Knowing this, I have to put a lot of emphasis on “soul mate”. Do people really believe there is a soul mate out there specifically designed for you? People who get married find their soul mate… Yeah right. Case in point, people who were high school sweet hearts are really soul mates? You mean that out of the 6 billion people on this Earth, your soul mate just happened to be put right in your location where you went to school? Not very likely. I think there are probably plenty of soul mates out there and ruining music for my life doesn’t seem like a realistic sacrifice. If every song would be to the Beatles tune, I’d probably have a different opinion but Alice in Chains really bother me. I’ve forgone the wrench idea but I wouldn’t wish harm on anyone.

By Tom Stortz|2016-11-03T15:28:19-04:00May 18th, 2011|Books|2 Comments

Chuck Klosterman 23 Questions – Question 4

4. Genetic engineers at Johns Hopkins University announce that they have developed a so-called “super gorilla.” Though the animal cannot speak, it has a sign language lexicon of over twelve thousand words, an I.Q. of almost 85, and–most notably–a vague sense of self-awareness. Oddly, the creature (who weighs seven hundred pounds) becomes fascinated by football. The gorilla aspires to play the game at its highest level and quickly develops the rudimentary skills of a defensive end. ESPN analyst Tom Jackson speculates that this gorilla would be “borderline unblockable” and would likely average six sacks a game (although Jackson concedes the beast might be susceptible to counters and misdirection plays). Meanwhile, the gorilla has made it clear he would never intentionally injure any opponent.
You are commissioner of the NFL: Would you allow this gorilla to sign with the Oakland Raiders?

In 2004, I’m just going to assume the Raiders are one of the worst teams in the league. Is this Gorilla going to make the game completely unfair? Better put, can offenses out maneuver a 700 pound beast? Considering he’s nearly unblockable, he’s going to put pressure on the QB nearly every passing play and alter every single game plan of every team. He’s really dumb though and probably can be outsmarted easily so I think you could put together game plans to work around him. That being said I think there are 10 other guys on the field and one dumb, 700 lb gorilla isn’t going to change the entire landscape of the game. You just alter your game plan and adapt.

By Tom Stortz|2016-11-03T15:28:08-04:00May 9th, 2011|Books|0 Comments

Chuck Klosterman 23 questions – Question 3

I read an answer by someone to question two about the beating of a horse and political prisoners and they wrote “No, because a political prisoner should be freed because it is proven that they were wrongly jailed, not because I kicked the shit out of some horse.” I think that’s a tad better then mine.

3. Let us assume there are two boxes on a table. In one box, there is a relatively normal turtle; in the other, Adolf Hitler’s skull. You have to select one of these items for your home. If you select the turtle, you can’t give it away and you have to keep it alive for two years; if either of these parameters are not met, you will be fined $999 by the state. If you select Hitler’s skull, you are required to display it in a semi-prominent location in your living room for the same amount of time, although you will be paid a stipend of $120 per month for doing so. Display of the skull must be apolitical. What option do you select?

The obvious choice is to take the money and show Hitlers skull. Since it’s a skull, you really can’t tell whose it is anyway. Plus there’s no political meaning which just makes you a nut job for keeping a skull in your living room which is a little bit off putting but for 120 a month, I could live with it and accept people questioning my sanity. The turtle option is immediately not worth mentioning because it requires work whereas the other situation is a no lose, win win. Plus I don’t like taking care of pets.

Just to clarify in case there is another interpretation of “Hitler’s Skull”. If it was Hitler’s head preserved instead of a skull, I’d still take that over the turtle. There is no pleasure derived from watching and feeding a turtle. Add the idea of a fine and I would just take the money and live with Hitler’s head in my living room. Anyone who comes over would think I’m a Nazi and I’d probably lose all my friends, so I would just have to be really careful of who I let over my house. It’s only two years and I just don’t really have strong feelings towards symbols. I know I don’t agree with any part of Hitler’s beliefs so all it really is to me is a head that lives in my living room that pays 120 bucks a month in rent, sweet deal.

By Tom Stortz|2016-11-03T15:21:36-04:00May 9th, 2011|Books|0 Comments

Chuck Klosterman’s 23 questions – Question 2

Let us assume a fully grown, completely healthy Clydesdale horse has his hooves shackled to the ground while his head is held in place with a thick rope. He is conscious and standing upright, but completely immobile. And let us assume that -for some reason- every political prisoner on earth (as cited by Amnesty International) will be released from captivity if you can kick this horse to death in less than twenty minutes. You are allowed to wear steel-toed boots. Would you attempt to do this?

I think there is some more thought that has to be put into this question then just could I kick a horse to death in 20 minutes. Let me first address this question assuming I want political prisoners released. It’s going to be really hard to kill the horse in 20 minutes. If I just kept kicking it in the belly, I have a hard time figuring this is going to be a quick death. It reminds me of the cow scene in Me, Myself and Irene. I wouldn’t really be able to jump kick its head so easily either which limits the amount of damage I can do. I’m not even sure if I could physically make this happen in 20 minutes. Take 30 kicks a minute, 600 kicks in 20 minutes to a motionless horse, I think if I could stomp its head I’d kill it but without that access I probably would just be damaging its internal organs. This would just be something to consider before embarking on a nearly impossible quest.

So that current scenario is assuming I decided to go ahead with the physical process rather then questioning can I morally kick a horse to death. For something as dumb as freeing political prisoners, I wouldn’t waste my time kicking a horse. I’m sure people out there are die hard freaks and freeing political prisoners means something, but I don’t see it changing anything in my life and this doesn’t rank up there on my priority list. Plus, generally political prisoners are in there for a reason and they seem like very opinionated people, and whose to say they don’t find themselves right back in prison a couple weeks after my amazing horse beating. If you said I had to kick the horse to death if my immediate family’s lives were at stake, I’d turn into Van Damme quickly and would have no problem trying to off a horse. I don’t know whether Klosterman used the political prisoners to help determine how much political events mean to you but I really couldn’t care less.

The other part of the question could you kill a living animal under certain circumstances, I fathom I could. It would be against my belief system but when push comes to shove, my morals can easily be twisted. Plus I can rationalize it’s only one time and I’m not going to become a murdering psychopath kicking Mr.Ed’s to death on a daily basis. I personally don’t think the reward is big enough for something that I do believe to be nearly impossible. It would also be something that wouldn’t be so easy to forget like the dead body coming up from the lake in the end scene of Deliverance.

By Tom Stortz|2016-11-03T15:21:44-04:00May 8th, 2011|Books|0 Comments

The Girl Who… Trilogy

I’m going to dedicate an entire post to this series because I just finished the final installment and wanted to sum up my thoughts. First off, Laura, I’m going to have to disagree with your assessment that the last novel wasn’t very good. I just spent the last 3 hours, uninterrupted, finishing the last 150+ pages. It was the first time in a very long time I read a book, finished the last line and said “I liked that.” The ending really brought the books together and aside from the mystery of her sister, I liked how it all came together. It’s funny too because in the last couple pages I was thinking what ever happened to…

The books had you had you genuinely liking the protagonists and felt the relationships among them. The first book was an introduction to the characters and a story. The 2nd got more personal amongst the characters and set up the 3rd book which really tied things up in entertaining fashion. I can’t think of a more satisfied feeling of a book then finishing that series. I don’t know how the series is geared to but the as a 27 year old guy, I was captivated throughout. I found the reading to be really easy, basically a page a minute with nothing difficult to understand. Sometimes character names were tough to identify, Ekstrom and Edklinth come to mind. It wasn’t a real issue but not American names just took some getting used to.

I found them making Blomkvist a little too suave but I just pictured him as Daniel Craig and everything worked out. I think they gave Lizbeth a little too much physical power but it comes with the novel. All the other characters were pretty much secondary and the Figuerola-Blomkvist love interest at the end seemed completely unnecessary. The truth of the matter is though that in the last two books I spent straight hours finishing them because I didn’t want to put it down. Not only that but now I get to feel like a part of popular culture because I’m in tune with Steig Larsson and the Girl Who… Chicks dig it.

By Tom Stortz|2016-11-03T15:21:52-04:00January 24th, 2011|Books|1 Comment