In What Ways Might We Find a Little Magic in Affirming Halloween?
Guy Fawkes Day, Bonfire Night and Firework Night, is a yearly remembrance on 5 November, in the United Kingdom. I was there twenty years ago, in 1999, and the festivities I saw that fifth of November delighted me. I drifted among village people carrying an effigy of the infamous Guy Fawkes in procession and then setting him ablaze, burned.
He had been a traitor. Here, back in Canada, on Halloween, 31 October, of course, I get a little remorseful that I have let some fine moments pass by since, without being in the same kind of high spirit that night in the English village I was visiting.
Years later, I continue to enjoy seeing the leaves change colour, and I like seeing candy on store shelves, and spooky house decorations. I always think I could get myself a few costume elements–maybe this year will be the year I make good on my promise. I experience occasional brief pangs of regret for having spent years with less beauty and sensation as I would have liked, in my youth.
Even with as much opportunity as we have in the West, fiscal and personal and soul-satisfying, too, the calendar pages keep turning. There could be so much in the world that invigorates. I can think of one example in particular.
On the off chance that you’re visiting Iceland in winter, you are most likely wanting to see the Northern Lights, or the aurora borealis. The Northern Lights can be seen from pre-winter to spring, with the most obvious opportunity being during the nighttimes of the winter months.
I think of a kind of magic there could be, viewing a sky like that. If I think of seeing that, but never, I can start to feel sad. If you have the calling, you may need to go somewhere like that, to feel as though you have lived properly.
Where I live, we enjoy Halloween candy and costumes. Halloween is not officially celebrated in Iceland, so it can be thought of a blessing that in this culture, in Canada, we celebrate Halloween, Americanized Halloween. In the United Kingdom, individuals hold Halloween parties where they take on the appearance of phantoms, skeletons or other frightening figure. In that respect, Canada’s the same as there.
I tweet occasional content that I think could be valuable for the right reader, lots of it trending and about my life and yours. If you want to share in these riches, click me up at https://twitter.com/findingenvirons
This post is intended as the conclusion to two earlier posts, written and published recently.
Not to say that video doesn’t have many, many uses, sometimes even critical, I have thought of some observations debunking video. Information learned from video research can be useful, particularly if it is assembled in a blog shared on Facebook.
I feel, historically, video research does not hold up given its artifice as evidence. With good editing, that difficulty is somewhat rectified. Here are five more ways that video research is overrated. These are ways that video does not provide any more substantive information than where is otherwise available.
Twitter’s Vine, now Periscope launched people with a genius for shooting six-second long videos, usually intended to be funny, meaning that if you were a creator with a knack for coming up with hilarious six-second videos. On Vine, you could build a reputation and attract an audience. The problem is that Vine came to an abrupt end because behind the scenes Twitter was continually working on becoming profitable and Vine didn’t enter the equation. Therefore the six-second video format of Vine left the Internet. This is an example how video did not work in a specialized format that was “cool,” new and stimulating.
Another way that video has failed the mainstream is the interesting but absurd idea that you can video-record phenomena, like Bigfoot, or UFOs. An idea of going on an expedition to get a video recording of Bigfoot in his natural habitat, or UFOs in the night sky, often gets debunked by skeptics as “hoax.” True experiences with phenomena of this kind go with a lot of excitement and potentially lasts only briefly. Videos of this kind are often derided, despite, of course, the additional risk that goes with trying to capture evidence of what’s alien and supernatural. Also, there is the problem of informing on mysteries which government authorities commonly downplay. If you want specifics about extraterrestrial astronauts, I think you will have a hard time procuring verifiable video recordings. It is not video research you can easily manage, despite popularity on television and on the internet. “NASA Astronauts Discuss Extraterrestrial Life” https://binged.it/2Ga1mXi Extraterrestrial Laboratory
Celebrity video recordings are not a reliable example of a video that can be examined for research purposes. A celebrity sells a brand. Observations made by the celebrity have an end goal in mind, not a general desire to be casually revealed. Researching the brand might be an approach, however, to video research that you could apply, but I think finding both a starting point and an endpoint could be difficult. It might even take researching techniques for analyzing a brand if you’ve never studied that. I doubt that you will find in a video the best information about analyzing a brand. That being said, I have no doubt you can earn the skill-set to analyze a brand as it’s represented in a video. I think the evidence for the success of the brand would be better extrapolated by looking at the brand in the market apart from its appearance in a video context. To be fresh, I think you would have to apply some expert touches.
Coaching lessons in packages of a student-ready video may turn out to be somewhat dull in comparison to more novel approaches to learning. A year ago I enjoyed completing a great WordPress course. I took photos over the course of a couple of weeks, learning a little about photography with each and making something out of each lesson. I liked learning like that. https://findingenvirons1.blog/2018/01/01/doggedly-capturing-developing-your-eye-themes-to-ring-in-the-new-year/ If you have an opportunity to do some organized learning, I tend to think it is more fun if you can find applications you can apply in real life. Try referencing research sources, perhaps some interactive, other than just video lessons, and I am thinking in addition about getting around the price of the video information, if it is part of a curriculum, belying how useful the information is. For example, a life coach offering videos to elevate your self-esteem could prove fruitless if you can’t make the lessons work, or if your intention falters and you no longer are acting in the manner required by the video curriculum. This is important to note. You can apply change only as much as you are mentally prepared to.
I want to wrap this up with the suggestion that video research could have you preoccupied and unfocused what with possibilities opening for you that are more and more seductive and complicated. You should remember your focus; you are not going to benefit by wasting time. Too much video and you are not getting done anything that’s worthwhile. I feel if you are a consumer of video from a small number of creators who have focused themselves on something relatable, the focus that puts you amid them is what will keep you thinking consistently. By that, I mean thinking in a way that organic learning, by a process of discovery, rather than by merely looking aimlessly, will be of some benefit to you. Your critical thinking may engage if you proceed this way. I would put it to you to learn in this fashion.
This has been a three-part post about video research and how video research is over-rated. If you enjoyed it, you’re welcome to like this post. You can follow and subscribe as well. Thank you again for reading me.
The International Day of Democracy is today, 15 September. I am curating my Conventional Wisdom post.
May 13, 2018
The Internet bid RIP to Margot Kidder, the sixty-nine-year-old actress who was Lois Lane for the seventies’ and eighties’ Superman films. For 1978’s film Superman, Kidder played Lois Lane near perfectly.
I have also watched a few random episodes of Krypton, the prequel TV series for the Superman universe. The design is quite appealing and the ideas are complex but interesting.
While there are no more new Discover Challenges for WordPress,I wanted to update this post for clarity.
In March I borrowed a box of comic books belonging to a cousin and reflected a touch on those stories that I remembered. It got me catching up on the Innerspace sci-fi news series on Space on cable TV. Reflecting on their launch of the Superman origins series Krypton, one of the hosts of Innerspace in an episode from earlier this winter reflected briefly but pointedly that Man of Steel is a bad movie.
I take it Man of Steel is regarded many times as such and to counter the perception that it isn’t a good retelling of the thousands of Superman comics available in print, I want to include here from Jun 2, 2014, Exploring Man of Steel on YouTube TWITTER ► https://goo.gl/koijhV which is a go-to for a review in detail about a maligned film.
It is now known that Henry Cavill will no longer appear in the film role of Superman. You can hear thoughts on Man of Steel in a brief discussion piece about Superman and the rest of the DC Comics Universe. Henry Cavill Leaves Superman
My thoughts on the conventional wisdom of Man of Steel are presented here.
This week’s WordPress Discover Challenge presents the trial of posting a different point of view than what other people have, whatever POV. This appealed to me because I thought of Superman, as a matter of fact, from the films of the nineteen seventies and eighties about the beloved comic book character, and also from the 2013 film Man of Steel, which is what specifically I have a different interpretation to write about than the casual interpretation it often gets otherwise (a great superhero film).
Christmas Eve last year, December 24 of 2016, late in the afternoon my younger brother and his son went with me to my parents’ house for dinner and the Christmas tree. My brother let me know that the two had been in the middle of complaining about Superman, in the movies, and I was surprised that they have this opinion, which is not the same opinion I have. We’re very different people from one another.
Man of Steel presents the Superman character as an alien, which I know he is, as in the story of his life told in the 1978 film about him (titled Superman, naturally). However, whereas in that film Superman is a very human character, who blends in with his peers quite easily, in Man of Steel (2013) Superman is almost an alien monster, considering that while he looks human, he has the mentality of an outsider. This is clear, for example, when he only takes his job as a reporter for the Daily Planet at the conclusion of the film (spoiler), which is unlike Superman (1978), in which his entire time in Metropolis is spent in the alter ego of Clark Kent, a reporter alongside Lois Lane.
What I think about Man of Steel is that Man of Steel is the story of an alien creature living among humans whose fate it is to help the human race. This is like how in ancient Egypt, Egyptian workers built enormous pyramids, which were probably tombs for their leaders once deceased (the Pharaohs).
It is unknown how the ancient Egyptians were able to build these pyramids because there is no evidence that the Egyptians of ancient times had technology which could have made building those pyramids possible. It is a great mystery.
One theory is that, as in history when impossible feats were accomplished without the benefit of technology, alien forces could have visited Egypt and helped the Egyptians build the pyramids with the help of the alien people’s technology. It is a popular theory among people who believe in life among the stars (Erich von Daniken is one scholar who argues that the theory is based on real history, of Ancient Egypt).
Given that the pyramids would have been nearly impossible to build without technology, consider that aliens visited and lent a helping hand, with an interest in contributing to the prosperity of human beings (as a species). Man of Steel is a little like that because Superman is an alien living among humans helping preserve the human race from dangers that are inherent to people encountering alien creatures.
What I think is that when Superman reveals himself to human authorities, when he is given the ultimatum to surrender by his enemies, it is noted that Superman may be a hazard for human folk merely because his body may contain a disease that could be inflicted on the humans. I say this because it is not immediately the fear of Superman’s powers as a superhero that bothers the authorities, or the details of Superman’s past in the Kansas town of Smallville, but whether Superman’s body could spread illness and death to the humans who meet him. I don’t think that the Egyptians meeting aliens who gave them help to build the pyramids, stopped their alien benefactors to question whether they would become sick from contact.
What I am thinking about Man of Steel, is what if the point of Superman’s existence among humans is that he doesn’t succeed at guiding human beings to a better existence? Every time it is questioned if humans in ancient times had visitors from other worlds among them, there is never evidence that the aliens caused devastation and ruin for people of the past.
What if Superman’s role as a visitor to modern-day people of the world demonstrates good intentions on Superman’s part, but poor planning for the man from Krypton that actually reduces the success of people to safely maintain conditions for life around the planet? When you sit down with Man of Steel, consider the possibility that while the strange realities that led the men and women of Ancient Egypt to construct pyramids, in this film, when Superman is battling and causing destruction in both Smallville and Metropolis, this could be the beginning of events that challenge human’s mastery of Planet Earth and undermine them in a way that will end in defeat and downfall. If Superman for once is the alien visitor closest to human beings in his physical form, could he likewise have the kinds of human weaknesses at the end of human’s reign over their blue and green planet?
Every other time in history that aliens might have come to help humans with the growth of their civilizations, are we, at last, to understand that there is no more? For however Superman feels about belonging to the human race, which is clearly passionate, considering the climax of the film when Superman is challenged by his nemesis how he feels about human life, if Superman is the final alien visitor to Earth, is it because he will eventually destroy us all? That is how I would understand Man of Steel, instead of interpretations that are more along the lines of a visitor from the stars who kindly brings the benefit of his superpowers to help us, folk.
Thank you for reading and good luck to you, whatever you do. Take care of yourself as always.