Religion and New Age Books

I like being honest, but I do tend to become silent occasionally when I feel insecure, when I'm afraid of aggravating a situation or hurting someone. I'm a bit hesitant to discuss this topic because it's something that isn't quite solid in my own mind yet and I'm a little afraid of bein made fun of. Despite that, as I've mention I use this blog as I way to work through ideas in my own mind, vent about things, and feel as if someone's listening, so be prepared for some rough honesty and undeveloped thoughts.

I've written a couple of blog posts quite awhile ago on some of my struggles with religion, but I've kept them to myself as of late for various reasons. I've found comfort in something that I'd like to keep to myself for now, until I feel secure in my beliefs. I'm glad to report that I feel very little bitterness regarding Christianity now and am happy for those who fall under that banner. I don't think I'd ever return to being a Christian, even though I enjoy reading the bible and some of its ideas, because I can't quite reconcile some of my personal beliefs with it and some of those who practice it. I have no issue speaking to others about it or using the word "God" since it's what most understand. 

I've read a lot of book about religion, read a few blogs and met people who think it's the cause of all evil in the modern world. I don't think I'll ever not believe in something, simply because it gives me comfort and helps to calm my mind when it gets a little out of control. I find satisfaction in having something to honour and prayer allows me to give up some control, plus I've always loved the action of praying. 

The hardest thing for me was trying to reconcile my personal beliefs, the beliefs I grew up with, and science. At first it was fear of what my family and friends would think that caused me to hide my views, and once I'd passed that checkpoint, I then was stuck fearing what other logical and intelligent people would think about me still deciding to believe in something so outlandish. During that time I read nearly any book that captured my interest and found my curiosity leading me to the new age section of the library. Most of those books were smuggled into the house and hidden in my room, because my mom would freak and my dad would laugh at me. My dad's reaction worried me the most because I really respect his opinion and, although his attitude often helps to bring me back to reality, I was starting to determine my own views. 

Although there are definitely some far fetched ideas over in new age, I'm going to say something a little controversial and tell you that they're not just for the crazies and some do have a lot of value. A lot of the ideas they're grappling with are the same ones that nearly every culture has grappled with, but without the structure of traditional religion or science, since a lot of them science has no answer for. Sure, you may come across a lot fluff, but you find it in the feel-good books of traditional religion as well.

For example, let's talk about the idea of what happens to the human soul when we die. Science says that we don't really have one (although it's still a bit unsure) and once our physical body fails, we cease to exsist, Christianity says either go to heaven or hell based upon our actions on earth, or whether we have accepted Christ, and Hindus and Buddhists both say that the soul reincarnates multiple times until we reach enlightenment. Obviously this is very over simplified. 

Now let's say that you didn't have a traditional religious structure to help you define things and weren't very satisfied with the scientific answer, what would you do? A lot of new age writers are faces with that problem and will search nearly anywhere for an answer they find adequate, often melding two or more beliefs together. 

What new age is, isn't just books by whack jobs, but books written by individuals that are trying to make sense of things in a very personal way. They work with ideas in a way that's almost rebelliously outside of society's rules and in a completely different direction than traditional approaches. The biggest thing reading those books have taught me is that everything is extremely personal, even religion, and unique to an individual. Although several individuals can share simpler beliefs and can be grouped together, each of them are distinctly different. That knowledge has allowed me to think personally about my beliefs and gave me the freedom to decide for myself what I think, even if it isn't the most mainstream and accepted idea. 

Just Meh

I've been having one of those blah weeks; I'm not stressed or anxious, I'm just feeling a bit dissatisfied again. It kinda revolves around work, but unlike my previous job I don't feel stressed or angry. I guess I just have a problem with keeping myself busy, because it feels like I'm drained due to work and yet if I wasn't working I'd just be extremely bored and unproductive. At the same time, socialization at work can energize me and make me feel great. I just need to find a way to balance out the two or learn to how to work at home. 

I feel completely drained and almost like my brain has given up and just accepted the way things are. Although there's a part of me that wants to rant about having to need a job and being unable to work the way I want to, there's another (more successful) part that just wants to suffer in silence and shut the hell up. 

Which is probably why this post is going to be such a short one. I wanted to get it out there, but I've just given up on trying to figure shit out... at least today. 

Co-Worker Rant

So after whining yesterday about my doubts regarding university, I thought I should take the time out of my day to whine about a different aspect of my life: work. 

There is nothing quite as frusterating to me as someone who denies they're at fault and refuses to stop blaming someone else. I had this today at work when a key disappeared after I'd given it to a co worker. He said I didn't give him the right key, although I did double check the tags before giving it to him and am pretty sure it was the correct one. So after a few minutes of arguing I figured I'd  try to restore the peace and gave a couple of no-one-at-fault senarios that he all shot down and then continued to blame it all on me. 

Even after several hours, he would throw in a "you gave me the wrong key" comment and remind me that he had seniority and I'm still new. Worst of all, I can't even talk to my boss about it since she and this guy are good friends.

Now, he's a very odd fellow to begin with and one that I find to be quite unprofessional and isn't the best communicator ever. He will skype chat with old friend during work hours, goes to the bathroom almost once an hour and will just disappear without telling anyone for 15 min at a time. My first or second week on the job, he told be I was being bossy and he still had seniority because I tried to rush him. He probably was right, but the tone and words he used sounded rude. I did tone it down and went out I my way to be super polite when I needed him to do something, and all was well until today.

The way he communicates with people is a little rude and condescending; I had already noticed he need to be right. He also will gladly gossip behind your back to people and loves to gossip to me about who was being rude to him. I usually play along, but I'm always taken aback when someone mentions what he's said about me. 

I have a feeling he'll prove to be a valuable teacher, even though he frustrates me, because he'll help me to learn what not to say to people and how to suck up to your boss. Unfortunately not all your life teachers will be ones you like, and often you discover what irritates and learn to do the opposite. It's immensely aggravating. 

University Doubts

I constantly go through cycles of feeling confident and of dissatisfaction with aspects of my life. My lows have thankfully been brought to a relatively stable level that doesn't completely throw me off balance, which means I don't feel as desperate for radical change and can work through them rather than have them run me over. 

My confidence in myself has drastically increased in the last month and with the aid of medication I don't feel as anxious all the time. I don't feel as if my agoraphobia is a problem, I'd even so much as say that it has disappeared and most of the anxiety I do feel is normal.

Because of this, I feel like I can say that my hesitance to go to university is not currently caused by social anxiety, although I don't doubt that as the time grows closer I will definitely be feeling it. Perhaps it's a subconscious anticipation of anxiety that causes my doubts, but  I really don't know. Like most of my posts, I'll be using this one to work through my thoughts, so don't expect me to have a good answer or even a decent argument. 

I've been doubting going to university before I applied, blaming my doubt on social fears and worries regarding trying to find the right classroom or feeling awkward, but now that I find myself at a stable and manageable level, I still have doubts that it's the right decision. I find that I'm now pinning them on my absolute hatred of high school (although some of the classes were ok) and am not looking for a repeat experience. 

I love learning, especially listening to a lecture, and love to think and write about it, but my inner hippie detests homework and tests because I think intelligence and understanding goes far beyond the two. I don't like being graded, somewhat because I'm a procrastinator and will find great stress in doing homework, and because the percentage I get does not at all reflect my understanding. Essays, which I prefer to a certain degree, are very subjective to the teachers personality. There are of course exceptions, but think of reading an online article and scrolling down to see the comments. There are inevitably some asshole ones, but even the intelligent reviews of it will have widely deferring opinions. 

A teacher disagreeing with certain word choices or a writers style (usually I get blasted for having too much personality) or even having a different opinion than the writer, might score it far lower than another equally qualified individual who thinks it portrays the idea well. To a degree, knowledge is very debatable. Even in science, you get multiple theories and have different individuals vying for each one. Knowledge is constantly changing and is rarely solid, there are many people in the same field with very different ideas and having my intelligence graded by just a single one irritates me.

I think it's just another one of my "why is society the way it is" problems. I don't know how to fix it, I just know I don't like it. 

Confession time; although getting a low level job was supposed to teach me that I need an education, I don't feel that way. I think I'd rather have a less stressful job that may pay less and use my knowledge in my writing than to have a job with more money. The only exception being if I find something I truly have passion in and enjoy working at. Although I find that I already have a passion for writing and expressing my opinions, even though I may not have a large audience. 

I do love to learn and I would gladly go sit and listen to lectures all day, then write about it or debate with people. I'd read nearly any book on any subject and maybe even look up workshops to help me with the more hands on stuff. It's not the learning about things that is a problem, it's being graded on it that causes me stress.

The Usual Stuff

Back to usual! I'm here to complain to you about my problems. ;)

I have to start my first day of work tomorrow and I'm beyond nervous. I've been having mini panic attacks for three days now. All it takes is a word or thought that sends my heart pounding, luckily it doesn't last long, but when you get one every hour it kinda ruins your day.

This time I'm really not sure I can do this. For once I really, really don't want to fight with myself to go somewhere. I just want to give in and not be so worried. Just to feel all this stupid stress dissipate. Even if I make it through tomorrow, I'll have to fight again the next and the next. Why can't I find something that I actually want to do enough to fight? I just fight out of responsibility, not because I want to have this job or because I'd like to learn something.

I'm tired of guilt being my motivation. There has to be something other than obligation that compels me to do something.

The Problem With Book to Movie Adaptations

This is kind of an extension from the post I wrote yesterday, simply because I have opinions that need to be shared; for what reason, I don't know.

I wrote a bit about how switching mediums as a way to breathe new life into a previously done idea. Each medium has a different way of telling a story, so you can actually take a story and plop it into a different medium to show different aspects within the story. For example, books allow a reader to create their own setting using their imagination, so every reader will essentially make the story their own. How they envision a character's appearance can be party due to a writer's description, but the reader also fills in a lot of blanks themselves based on their own experiences.

A movie is a more visual format. Costumes, scenery and characters are viewed by the audience rather than created in their minds. Movies usually have to fall within a certain time range, roughly an hour-and-a-half to two hours, with a few variances. They're usually completed in one shot, whereas a book can be put down and read during the course of several days.

There are a few things that make book to movie adaptations difficult. Just like I wrote yesterday about originals or classics, they already have a fan base. When someone decides on a book to turn into a movie, it's usually a pretty popular one. Which means a bunch of people have read it and enjoyed it in the original book format.

When you switch mediums, you have to alter the story. You can't fit as many details in two hours on screen as you can in a couple hundred pages in a book. That's usually the number one complaint a reader will have when viewing the movie. The second would be any changes in the plot. They alter the plot, usually to create more excitement, romance, etc for viewers because that's what viewers want. For people who didn't read the book, it makes the movie more entertaining.

There's a couple of things you can do to really make a book-to-movie adaptation successful, and the most important rule (in my own personal opinion, since I am a bookworm) is to treat it like a classic. This means follow some of the guidelines I posted yesterday:

• Wait a Generation: Wait for the hype to die down a little before trying to adapt a book into a movie. An example might be Lord of the Rings. When the movies came out most of the viewers who would be interested probably didn't read it before watching the movies. This is obviously a generalization, but I think LotR inspired a lot of people to pick up the books after watching the movie. 
• Add to it Don't Re-Do It: Rather than try to copy the original plot, do a prequel, sequel or have it focus on different events going on at the same time. Unfortunately, I can't really think of an example for it, although personally it's my favourite choice. 

Both of these rarely happen because often studios like to borrow the popularity of the original book to draw attention to the movie. In my opinion, this means that the quality isn't there. The worst they can do is break up the plot by trying to stretch it over multiple movies. There is a way you can do this, but every movie must have its own separate plot with rising action, climax and falling action under the major plot line that will span over all the movies. If you don't, you risk a movie that does nothing but build up and then its over. It's a big disappointment to viewers who now have to wait another two years for its sequel. Think of it being as disappointing and hated as the "she woke up and realized it had all be a terrible dream" line. 

I think remakes/adaptations should generally be avoided, with some exceptions. Going from a play to the big screen works due to the similar format that is just elaborated on. Going from book to tv show allows for a lot of detail, think Game of Thrones. If you are going to switch mediums, please choose to simply add on. It's a lot more interesting and it allows for creation rather than to simply reuse other ideas to death, plus you still get to use a bit of the original premise or world.

Why Movie Remakes (Almost) Always Suck

Ok, guys. Check this out. I'm not going to rant about my life today. I know! First I start being positive and then won't rant about my life, what kind of trauma have I been through lately?

Anyway, because I have opinions and currently have no one to share them with (except my dog who just sticks his tongue out at me and mocks me with his clueless brown eyes), therefore I shall pretend that you care about my opinions.

So, anyway, movie remakes! Actually, let's scratch that and put remakes of any kind of popular media including books, music, etc. Remakes generally occur when technology advances, and someone looks back at their favourite old movie/tv show/book/song and thinks "imagine what this would look like with todays technology". It's a valid thought, one I have often pondered myself. Could you imagine something like Star Wars with the technology that Avatar used? I'd love to see that!

Here's the problem, though. The favourite movie usually tends to be many people's favourite or a "classic". That's great, but that means that the original movie has a huge fan-base that have every second of that movie memorized and consider it a part of their childhood or what have you. That's a big issue because generally these fans do not like having someone mess with a classic.

One of the things you could do to avoid this, is wait until a new generation grows up; one who doesn't really remember the original. A good example of this would be Evil Dead. Evil Dead came out in 1981and became a cult classic. In 2013, a remake was released. For those less mathematically inclined, that's a 28 year period from the original to the remake. Now, the age range targeted for horror movies is approximately 13-30 years. If you're paying any attention, those 28 years means that the people who are likely going to see this movie probably didn't watch the original or experience the hype that followed, which could be why the remake ended up being successful.

However, that doesn't always work. Sometimes a film is such a classic, that even being generations apart doesn't work. Take Alfred Hitchcock's "Psycho". It's probably one of the most popular movies to date. Did you know that in 1998 there was a remake? It flopped, big time. Unlike some remakes change the plot a little, it was a scene-to-scene remake, but it used modern (at the time) equipment. The reason it flopped was because the hype never died. It's such a classic that it's nearly everyone understands what you're talking about if you reference the famous shower scene.

Now, let's look back at Star Wars, simply because it's one of my favourites and the first thing that comes to mind when I think of a classic. Also, because it has been messed with over the years. The original trilogy was a huge hit, that fans are still geeking out about decades after it first hit theatres. Then the second trilogy came out, which didn't hit nearly the popularity the first did. Although to be honest, I don't have a huge issue with it. Jar Jar Binks probably wasn't needed, but I kinda liked the movies and they did moderately well in the box office.

Then came the sacrilege that was the editing of the original trilogy years after it was released. Just check out some of the amazon pages for the movies and you'll really see the disappointment and anger people feel towards it. You just can't mess with a classic.

The other way you can avoid a lacklustre remake, is by doing what Stars Wars did with the second trilogy. Take inspiration from the original and take part of it, but change the perspective by either making it from the view of a secondary character, filing in background story by doing a prequel, fast-forward into the future to view the repercussions of the original story's events, or by setting the focus on an alternative event occurring at the same time or a different world/country/etc. You still get to play around with the wonder of the world created by the original, but you're not replacing the original in any way, just adding to the story.

That kind of adding rather than replacing is why the second trilogy didn't completely fail. Buffy the Vampire Slayer changed the focus of the main character in Angel; which wasn't as much of a classic, but did manage to last for 5 years.

Another thing you can do is switch mediums. Buffy the Vampire Slayer was originally a tv show, but is currently being continued in comic format. You see that a lot when a book becomes a movie. Harry Potter and Star Wars both have continued their stories through approved fan-fiction. If you like Star Wars, you need to check out their comic omnibuses; if you love learning about back stories as much as I do, they're enjoyable.

Something to remember about switching mediums is that you can't keep the exact same story when you switch over. It's one of the things readers hate about when their favourite book becomes a movie (you've heard it, "The book is always better!"). They liked the book because of all the little added details, but whereas a book doesn't really have a time or page limit, a movie does. Condensing what took you days to read into only a couple of hours requires taking some stuff out and editing to allow it to work in its new format.

I could go on, but I think this post is long enough already. Long story short, I'm smarter than most of the people in Hollywood and they should really pay me millions to tell them how to do things. Remakes aren't always crap, but they are trickier to pull off when you're toying with a successful original. The easiest way to pull one off is to pick a shitty movie that didn't make a ton of waves but has a decent plot and turn it into a classic.

 Thanks for satisfying my need to converse (my favourite conversations have always been the ones where only I talk, blame my dad). I'm sure I'll wind up giving you another rant in the future. :)