Matthew Dicks's Blog, page 576

People are actually buying this. I checked.

For just $499.99 you can own the complete series of Law & Order on DVD.

Twenty seasons of the show.

Why would anyone ever want to own this?

Isn't that show on all the time anyway?

My daughter thinks fall sucks, and justifiably so.

"What did you learn at school today?" I asked my two-year old daughter at the dinner table last night.

"Fall," she said.  "I don't like fall."

"Why?"

She went on to describe how the leaves change colors, becoming orange and and yellow and pink, and then how they fall off the trees.

"So why don't you like fall?" I asked again.

"It's messy," she said. "It makes a big mess."

Clara still puts herself in time-out rather than picking up her toys, but maybe… just maybe… there is hope.

A slightly obsessive compulsive neat-freak hiding somewhere underneath those toddler tantrums. 

Dont swing hard!

Any golfer will tell you that the harder you swing the club, the worse the result.

Not always, but often enough. 

And yet we continue to swing hard, because it just seems to make sense.  We want the ball to go farther, so we try to hit it harder. 

It seems to work out just often enough to keep us trying.

Then I watched this TED Talk, which has nothing to do with golf, and yet it explains perfectly why golfers should not swing hard.

Today I took this advice and shot a 46. 

My best round ever.

A coincidence?

Probably. And it's November.  I'm sure I'll forget this lesson by spring.

Im actually a gentle, peace-loving, rather agreeable person.

In describing a recent confrontation between me and a fellow human being (too benign to go into detail here), I said to my wife, "I don't understand why these things always seem to happen to me."

She laughed.  "Matt, you're always looking for a fight. You want to fight with everyone. Other people try to avoid these confrontations."

I was surprised by her response. 

"I'm not looking to fight with everyone," I said.  "I just want everyone to agree with me."

I know it sounds ridiculous, but wanting to fight everyone and wanting everyone to agree with me are two entirely different things. 

Right?

I want this list, too, but I am too lazy to make it.

JK Rowling, author of the series of Harry Potter novels, recently revealed that she considered killing off Ron Weasley midway through the series. 

"Funnily enough, I planned from the start that none of them would die. Then midway through, which I think is a reflection of the fact that I wasn't in a very happy place, I started thinking I might polish one of them off. Out of sheer spite."

While I am glad that Ron survived, I'm happy to know that I'm not the only author who is occasionally motivated by spite. 

This revelation has launched an interesting online debate about whether or not Rowling's series would be better if Ron had died.  

Jeff O'Neal at BOOKRIOT argues that Rowling missed an opportunity to elevate her series in allowing Ron to live. 

Characters that are at the center of readerly interest and value don't always die in adult literature, but they always can. I'm not sure if this is the central thing that separates children's literature from adult literature (or if there really is anything tangible at all), but it sure feels that way.

I'm not sure if I agree with O'Neal.  While I am not surprised that Rowling's three protagonists survived, I wouldn't have been surprised if Harry died in the process of defeating Voldemort. 

In fact, I thought he probably would.

O'Neal also requests a list that I would also very much like to see someday:

List I Want: Secondary Characters Who Die To Give A Story "Emotional Depth" Without Having To Kill The Main Characters. Such characters from here on out are to be known as "Fred Weasleys".  

The only character that I can think of to start this list comes from film:

Goose in the film Top Gun dies for reasons that could only be characterized as providing the story with emotional depth. 

Anyone care to add to this rather pathetic attempt to launch this list?

Julie Andrews trumps the Patriots

I missed my first Patriots home game in three years yesterday while attending the final performance of our rock opera, The Clowns.

Don't get me wrong.  I couldn't have been more thrilled to see my work performed onstage, but missing the game was tough on me. 

The fact that the Patriots lost their first regular season home game in almost three years made my absence infinitesimally more palatable.

But my friend and fellow Patriots season ticket owner, Shep, made no attempt to make me feel better about missing the game. 

In fact, he actively tried to make me feel rotten about it.

Only after he was in the stadium did he divulge that his girlfriend, who was sitting in my seat, was a fan of the Giants, the Patriots' opponent. 

Had I known this earlier, I would never have given her my ticket, which I suspect Shep probably knew.

He also sent me texts and photos from the pre-game tailgate party, including this exchange of texts and photos which illustrates how my day went rather well:

Shep:  Norwegians (friends of ours), ribs and cornbread in the parking lot.

Me: Men talking about Julie Andrews. Literally.

Fear not. There is a perfectly legal means for students and teachers to bully students different than them.

A new bill requiring public schools to enforce anti-bullying policies passed through Michigan's Senate on Thursday.

Good news. Right?

But at the last minute, Republican lawmakers added an extra line to the bill saying that bullying on religious or moral grounds is exempt from punishment.

Seriously. This actually happened. 

The bill allows students, teachers, and other school employees to use "a sincerely held religious belief or moral conviction" as legal justification of their harassment.

As long as the bully took place on those grounds, it cannot be punished, regardless of how many times it happened or even if it continues. 

The bill was already seriously flawed before this unconscionable line was added.  Republicans only agreed to bring the bill to a vote if it did not require school districts to report bullying incidents, did not include any provisions for enforcement or teacher training, and did not hold administrators accountable if they failed to act.

But by effectively legalizing bullying on religious and moral grounds, they have taken a law originally designed to protect children and turned it into a perfectly legal means of harassing a homosexual student by hiding behind Leviticus 20:13.

Had I included something like Michigan's new law in the plotline of one of my novels, I suspect that my agent and editor would have scoffed at such an implausible notion.

But this isn't fiction.  And yet it's real. 

How could something like this happen?

Fear not. There is a perfectly legal means for students and teacher to bully students different than them.

A new bill requiring public schools to enforce anti-bullying policies passed through Michigan's Senate on Thursday.

Good news. Right?

But at the last minute, Republican lawmakers added an extra line to the bill saying that bullying on religious or moral grounds is exempt from punishment.

Seriously. This actually happened. 

The bill allows students, teachers, and other school employees to use "a sincerely held religious belief or moral conviction" as legal justification of their harassment.

As long as the bully took place on those grounds, it cannot be punished, regardless of how many times it happened or even if it continues. 

The bill was already seriously flawed before this unconscionable line was added.  Republicans only agreed to bring the bill to a vote if it did not require school districts to report bullying incidents, did not include any provisions for enforcement or teacher training, and did not hold administrators accountable if they failed to act.

But by effectively legalizing bullying on religious and moral grounds, they have taken a law originally designed to protect children and turned it into a perfectly legal means of harassing a homosexual student by hiding behind Leviticus 20:13.

Had I included something like Michigan's new law in the plotline of one of my novels, I suspect that my agent and editor would have scoffed at such an implausible notion.

But this isn't fiction.  And yet it's real. 

How could something like this happen?

You cant just say its art

In honor of his passing, one of my favorite Rooney rants.

And Andy's right.  As usual.

There comes a time when we all have to acknowledge that the twisted piece of metal at the center of a park ain't art, regardless of who twisted it or how much was paid for it. 

Translation #2

Another translation of an overly diplomatic tweet and another overly diplomatic tweet from the local police department:

Original tweets:

If in an area that does not have power, continue to contact CL&P. If your area is energized but you have no power they need to hear from you.

Re-report your outage to CL&P multiple times per day. If your area is energized but your street is not, this is how they determine problems

Translation:

Keep calling the bastards until we all have our power back! It's been a week, goddamn it!