Your #1 Match: INFP |
The Idealist You are creative with a great imagination, living in your own inner world. Open minded and accepting, you strive for harmony in your important relationships. It takes a long time for people to get to know you. You are hesitant to let people get close. But once you care for someone, you do everything you can to help them grow and develop. You would make an excellent writer, psychologist, or artist. |
Your #2 Match: ISFP |
The Artist You are a gifted artist or musician (though your talents may be dormant right now). You enjoy spending your free time in nature, and you are good with animals and children. Simply put, you enjoy bueaty in all its forms and live for the simple pleasures in life. Gentle, sensitive, and compassionate - you are good at recognizing people's unspoken needs. You would make a good veterinarian, pediatrician, or composer. |
Your #3 Match: ENFP |
The Inspirer You love being around people, and you are deeply committed to your friends. You are also unconventional, irreverant, and unimpressed by authority and rules. Incredibly perceptive, you can usually sense if someone has hidden motives. You use lots of colorful language and expressions. You're qutie the storyteller! You would make an excellent entrepreneur, politician, or journalist. |
Your #4 Match: ESFP |
The Performer You are a natural performer and happiest when you're entertaining others. A great friend, you are generous, fun-loving and optimistic. You love to laugh - and you like almost all people equally. You accept life as it is, and you do your best to make each day fantastic. You would make a good actor, designer, or counselor. |
Your #5 Match: INFJ |
The Protector You live your life with integrity, originality, vision, and creativity. Independent and stubborn, you rarely stray from your vision - no matter what it is. You are an excellent listener, with almost infinite patience. You have complex, deep feelings, and you take great care to express them. You would make a great photographer, alternative medicine guru, or teacher. |
Saturday, April 30, 2005
Wow! I'm great, I guess!
Sunday, April 24, 2005
Friday, April 22, 2005
Girls! Girls! Girls!
Last night I was at a casting session for 2-5 year old little girls.
(I was there to start training on how to run a camera for these things since it's my friends' business and they're run off their feet at the moment.)
I don't know if these auditions were for a movie or for TV but I do know one thing....piles of little girls dressed up and eager are really really funny.
I ~could~ tell you a ton of stories about what each little girl did that was cuter than the last...but everyone within a 10m radius of me has heard/is hearing/will hear those yesterday, today and probably tomorrow, so I won't do it here. However, I will tell you that if I have a little girl that is in a performance situation, I will put her in pants as it's much more difficult to pull those over your head when you're nervous. I will tell you that now instead of a puppy, I want a daughter...but I realize they're harder to chain up in the backyard. I also will tell you that little girls really enjoy saying 'shit' when their dad says they're allowed.
Can you imagine what my bf had to deal with when I got home?
But most of all, I just wanted to mention this:
The woman who was directing the casting session was quite brilliant at eliciting the response she wanted from each of the little girls. Not all of them did what she asked, but she achieved a much higher success rate than I would....so I call it 'brilliant'.
For instance, each little girl was asked to perform a song. If they seemed they would sing with a little bit of encouragement, the casting director would start singing (ABC, Itsy Bitsy Spider, or even songs she didn't know) wrong and the girls would not be able to help correcting her by singing the song in full. So it would go like this:
CD: "oh! Itsy Bitsy Spider is my favourite song! It goes like this:
Itsy Bitsy Elephant
Went down the wall
And it started to rain..."
kid: "nooooo! It's like this..."
And she would stand up and sing the song as well as she could...~with~ the actions.
Watching this, it finally hit me.
I've never grown past that stage of development.
Jesus, I've only ~just~ grown past the lifting my dress when I'm nervous phase!
(I was there to start training on how to run a camera for these things since it's my friends' business and they're run off their feet at the moment.)
I don't know if these auditions were for a movie or for TV but I do know one thing....piles of little girls dressed up and eager are really really funny.
I ~could~ tell you a ton of stories about what each little girl did that was cuter than the last...but everyone within a 10m radius of me has heard/is hearing/will hear those yesterday, today and probably tomorrow, so I won't do it here. However, I will tell you that if I have a little girl that is in a performance situation, I will put her in pants as it's much more difficult to pull those over your head when you're nervous. I will tell you that now instead of a puppy, I want a daughter...but I realize they're harder to chain up in the backyard. I also will tell you that little girls really enjoy saying 'shit' when their dad says they're allowed.
Can you imagine what my bf had to deal with when I got home?
But most of all, I just wanted to mention this:
The woman who was directing the casting session was quite brilliant at eliciting the response she wanted from each of the little girls. Not all of them did what she asked, but she achieved a much higher success rate than I would....so I call it 'brilliant'.
For instance, each little girl was asked to perform a song. If they seemed they would sing with a little bit of encouragement, the casting director would start singing (ABC, Itsy Bitsy Spider, or even songs she didn't know) wrong and the girls would not be able to help correcting her by singing the song in full. So it would go like this:
CD: "oh! Itsy Bitsy Spider is my favourite song! It goes like this:
Itsy Bitsy Elephant
Went down the wall
And it started to rain..."
kid: "nooooo! It's like this..."
And she would stand up and sing the song as well as she could...~with~ the actions.
Watching this, it finally hit me.
I've never grown past that stage of development.
Jesus, I've only ~just~ grown past the lifting my dress when I'm nervous phase!
Wednesday, April 13, 2005
Lord of the Flies
The newest sensation from those who brought you Riverdance...
kidding
I just finished reading William Golding's excellent book Lord of the Flies...after months and months. It didn't take that long because it's at all a bad book...on the contrary, it's a great book. It took that long because I've developed into quite a lazy reader these days.
There were even times I was as gripped by it as I have been by WoW. Believe it.
At any rate...if you've read it, test your knowledge with this.
kidding
I just finished reading William Golding's excellent book Lord of the Flies...after months and months. It didn't take that long because it's at all a bad book...on the contrary, it's a great book. It took that long because I've developed into quite a lazy reader these days.
There were even times I was as gripped by it as I have been by WoW. Believe it.
At any rate...if you've read it, test your knowledge with this.
Maradiaga (Honduras) to win...
...Germany to place and Italy to show.
Looks like someone's beat me to it.
Anyone else got any bets? That's mine above.
Looks like someone's beat me to it.
Anyone else got any bets? That's mine above.
Thursday, April 07, 2005
I guess you could call me a misanthropope...
Lauren Bacall recently made a statement:
We live in an age of mediocrity. Stars today are not the same stature as Bogie (Humphrey Bogart), Jimmy Cagney, Spencer Tracy, Henry Fonda and Jimmy Stewart.
How true.
She, of course, was talking about entertainment. But the truth in that statement extends far beyond.
I'm sure she knows that.
Perhaps it's crass to bring this up before the poor old man is even carried to his final resting place, but *shrug*. More and more as famous and important people waltz off this mortal coil, the reaction has become less actual mourning as much as it has been made into a cultural event in which ~everyone~ wants to say they played a part. And, more and more as we move deeper and deeper into the age of communication and information, we are able to use television, radio and the internet to whip ourselves up into a froth of anticipation, sorrow, or commiseration faster than you can say, 'papal election'.
There are simply not as many real mourners out there as there is people making a show of mourning.
Currently, I am thanking whatever omnipresent being there is that allowed me the foresight to not have access to television for this event. It's all I can take seeing as much as I have. The media circus started days before he even died -my god- and reported to the world every cough and wheeze that escaped him. There's only so many candlelight vigils a person can watch before you either want to tear your hair out or book a ticket to Rome. And millions of people chose the latter simply because they were told others were doing it.
Now (what prompted my writing this) what I hear is rumblings he ought to be named Pope John Paul II 'The Great'. 'The Great'? The only 'great' thing he did was to survive the Vatican for 26 years...which ~was~ a feat considering his predecessor lasted only 33 days. Of course, it's not as insane as when Diana died and people were calling for her to be sainted in the Church of England, but it's still pretty insane.
(That's where my comparisons of the Pope and Diana will end since the Pope was an infinitely more important and influential person than a silly jet-setting princess.)
Anyway, John Paul II was not a 'great' pope.
As a man, he was unusually ambitious, academic, and committed. He would have to be, they don't pick you if you're not. The top banana of the Holy See is a position of unique power and authority. Mediocre men do not reach this position as they can as heads of other governments and royalty. But the title then affords you the ability to ~not~ grow, to not cater to the needs of your people, to meddle where you like and not not respond to situations to which you don't want to respond. Once you're there, you're there...
So, he was not a great pope, nor was he a great man. And I'm not saying that disrespectfully, there are very few real 'great' men and women. That's why they're great...because it's rare. He simply was not one of them. He did some good work, but not enough for me to fall to my knees clutching a rosary and trying to get through to Air Canada on my cell.
(He was also not a holy man. As an ex-Catholic, I cannot see one shred of connection between the Vatican and anything that is ~actually~ holy. But...that's me.)
'Great' as a title can only come to men and women who have gone above and beyond the call of duty. John Paul II did not. To 'splain:
One of the main jobs of the Pope is to promote the Catholic Church. A pope travels, meets people, performs mass all over the world in a grand scale attempt to keep Catholics catholic and make non-catholics catholic. The pomp and circumstance that surrounds the Catholic church and it's rituals is one of the world's oldest forms of propaganda and advertising. Check an art history text.
It is true that JPII was directly involved with the fall of communism in Europe. He worked up the people so that Lech Walesa could do his thing so that Mikhail Gorbachev could do ~his~ thing. It was important and changed the lives of millions upon millions. But, it wasn't altruistic. As pope it was his job to sniff out the opportunity to regain millions of Catholics lost to communism. He was the right nationality, in the right place at the right time. Good job, but it would have happened with or without him.
So, yeah...but no.
A truly great man and a truly great pope would reform the church. He would try to drag it closer to the 21st century and address the issues of today in a more rational manner. It's relatively important to us in North America and Europe, but we forget the grip the church has on third world and developing nations and how it's absolutely vital to the people of those cultures that it act with logic and caring. The pope was vocal in STILL condemning birth control and masturbation as mortal sins while these countries sink under the weight of the problems brought about by overpopulation and HIV.
And of course, a truly great pope would have tackled the issue of rampant pedophilia within it's clergy and tried to save thousands of children from it's own predators. Instead, he allowed these men to be nuzzled within the safety of the Vatican, moved from parish to parish with no regard for the children they were to meet next. As Christopher Hitchens referenced Maureen Dowd:
I should say now that I think she put it best of all. A church that has allowed no latitude in its teachings on masturbation, premarital sex, birth control, and divorce suddenly asks for understanding and "wiggle room" for the most revolting crime on the books.
But, in this age of communication at the speed of light, media as the center of everyone's attention, and news of events that can now reach almost anyone in the world, it is easy to forget all the important things a person ~hasn't~ done and lift up their achievements so that they seem to have reached such heights that the world almost deifies them. We seem so badly want ~something~ and we rush toward whatever we can to lose ourselves in it.
Whatever.
I, for one, am very curious as to who's up next. I'm thinking of putting bets on it. Anyone with me?
We live in an age of mediocrity. Stars today are not the same stature as Bogie (Humphrey Bogart), Jimmy Cagney, Spencer Tracy, Henry Fonda and Jimmy Stewart.
How true.
She, of course, was talking about entertainment. But the truth in that statement extends far beyond.
I'm sure she knows that.
Perhaps it's crass to bring this up before the poor old man is even carried to his final resting place, but *shrug*. More and more as famous and important people waltz off this mortal coil, the reaction has become less actual mourning as much as it has been made into a cultural event in which ~everyone~ wants to say they played a part. And, more and more as we move deeper and deeper into the age of communication and information, we are able to use television, radio and the internet to whip ourselves up into a froth of anticipation, sorrow, or commiseration faster than you can say, 'papal election'.
There are simply not as many real mourners out there as there is people making a show of mourning.
Currently, I am thanking whatever omnipresent being there is that allowed me the foresight to not have access to television for this event. It's all I can take seeing as much as I have. The media circus started days before he even died -my god- and reported to the world every cough and wheeze that escaped him. There's only so many candlelight vigils a person can watch before you either want to tear your hair out or book a ticket to Rome. And millions of people chose the latter simply because they were told others were doing it.
Now (what prompted my writing this) what I hear is rumblings he ought to be named Pope John Paul II 'The Great'. 'The Great'? The only 'great' thing he did was to survive the Vatican for 26 years...which ~was~ a feat considering his predecessor lasted only 33 days. Of course, it's not as insane as when Diana died and people were calling for her to be sainted in the Church of England, but it's still pretty insane.
(That's where my comparisons of the Pope and Diana will end since the Pope was an infinitely more important and influential person than a silly jet-setting princess.)
Anyway, John Paul II was not a 'great' pope.
As a man, he was unusually ambitious, academic, and committed. He would have to be, they don't pick you if you're not. The top banana of the Holy See is a position of unique power and authority. Mediocre men do not reach this position as they can as heads of other governments and royalty. But the title then affords you the ability to ~not~ grow, to not cater to the needs of your people, to meddle where you like and not not respond to situations to which you don't want to respond. Once you're there, you're there...
So, he was not a great pope, nor was he a great man. And I'm not saying that disrespectfully, there are very few real 'great' men and women. That's why they're great...because it's rare. He simply was not one of them. He did some good work, but not enough for me to fall to my knees clutching a rosary and trying to get through to Air Canada on my cell.
(He was also not a holy man. As an ex-Catholic, I cannot see one shred of connection between the Vatican and anything that is ~actually~ holy. But...that's me.)
'Great' as a title can only come to men and women who have gone above and beyond the call of duty. John Paul II did not. To 'splain:
One of the main jobs of the Pope is to promote the Catholic Church. A pope travels, meets people, performs mass all over the world in a grand scale attempt to keep Catholics catholic and make non-catholics catholic. The pomp and circumstance that surrounds the Catholic church and it's rituals is one of the world's oldest forms of propaganda and advertising. Check an art history text.
It is true that JPII was directly involved with the fall of communism in Europe. He worked up the people so that Lech Walesa could do his thing so that Mikhail Gorbachev could do ~his~ thing. It was important and changed the lives of millions upon millions. But, it wasn't altruistic. As pope it was his job to sniff out the opportunity to regain millions of Catholics lost to communism. He was the right nationality, in the right place at the right time. Good job, but it would have happened with or without him.
So, yeah...but no.
A truly great man and a truly great pope would reform the church. He would try to drag it closer to the 21st century and address the issues of today in a more rational manner. It's relatively important to us in North America and Europe, but we forget the grip the church has on third world and developing nations and how it's absolutely vital to the people of those cultures that it act with logic and caring. The pope was vocal in STILL condemning birth control and masturbation as mortal sins while these countries sink under the weight of the problems brought about by overpopulation and HIV.
And of course, a truly great pope would have tackled the issue of rampant pedophilia within it's clergy and tried to save thousands of children from it's own predators. Instead, he allowed these men to be nuzzled within the safety of the Vatican, moved from parish to parish with no regard for the children they were to meet next. As Christopher Hitchens referenced Maureen Dowd:
I should say now that I think she put it best of all. A church that has allowed no latitude in its teachings on masturbation, premarital sex, birth control, and divorce suddenly asks for understanding and "wiggle room" for the most revolting crime on the books.
But, in this age of communication at the speed of light, media as the center of everyone's attention, and news of events that can now reach almost anyone in the world, it is easy to forget all the important things a person ~hasn't~ done and lift up their achievements so that they seem to have reached such heights that the world almost deifies them. We seem so badly want ~something~ and we rush toward whatever we can to lose ourselves in it.
Whatever.
I, for one, am very curious as to who's up next. I'm thinking of putting bets on it. Anyone with me?
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
