I suppose this is getting to be a little old…two rant-oriented posts in a row. Such is the way of things. Sometimes there’s a lot of stuff that rubs you the wrong way in a short period of time. The rant du jour:
I don’t have HBO at the apartment, but I do at my house. I really like to watch the Sopranos, but I have no means of doing so at my pad. Fortunately enough, there’s a handy Tivo at my parent’s house and, believe it or not, they have HBO. How nice for me. I don’t get a lot of time to watch the recorded episodes when I get home (I feel a little guilty going back only to sit in a dark room and watch episodes of a show my parents don’t watch). Consequently, I have a backlog of about 9 or 10 episodes.
I really like the Sopranos. It’s like my show. I’ve been watching since way before it was a media darling ala Sex in the City or the Osbournes. Each episode I watch is like a gradual unfolding of something that I’ve been invested in for a long time. It’s more than a movie because I’ve invested numerous movie-length viewing periods into this show. Each season is a continuation of a huge arc…things you see 20 episodes before has payoffs in the current season.
Well, everyone and their mom (unless their mom is squeamish) are always talking about the Sopranos these days. It’s all over entertainment news; people talk about it in the office, at school, everywhere. I generally try to avoid it, because I’m effectively a season behind. I don’t want anything to be given away prematurely. It seems like common courtesy to avoid giving away major plot points in an open forum, but hey, where has courtesy gone these days?
Twice in the last month or so (the latest being tonight), major media sources have ruined MAJOR plot points in the Sopranos. I don’t want to go into details, but it’s absurd. One I caught unintentionally in a Letterman interview and the other I just read on Relevant magazine. The Relevant one just kills me because I love that site. They have this great headlines thing on there…it has lots of small tidbits about what’s going on in the world, in culture, etc and I always skim over it first thing. If you feel like venturing to the site (beware the spoilers), you can see what I’m talking about. The first three words on the news thing is “Warning: Spoilers ahead,” but the rest of the line proceeds to deliver the spoiler. Because I was skimming, I hit the ruinous information first and it registered before the warning.
Why couldn’t the spoiler be a link? Why did it have to be there right in front of me? Who thought that was a good idea? Greg and I had a big argument about it…he thinks it necessary so people who don’t watch the Sopranos can be briefed on what’s going on, so they can be in tune with culture, have something to talk to people about. I can see that, but why does it have to be RIGHT IN THE OPEN?
On a completely unrelated note…well not really, because it involves Greg and I discussing something…
Is it morally wrong to time travel into the future to kill yourself? I say it is because that’s essentially suicide. Greg says it’s not because future you doesn’t even exist yet, plus it’s you that you’re killing. I asked if it was wrong to go into the future and kill other people and he said that, yes, that was indeed wrong. That’s basically future homicide…doesn’t it make sense that if homicide is wrong and homicide in the future is wrong, and suicide is wrong, then future suicide is wrong? If killing yourself in the future is ok because when you go back in time future you won’t exist anyway, then wouldn’t it be ok to kill people in the future because they would cease to exist similarly when you go back in time. I guess Greg has a burning desire to justify the murder of his aged, future self. Some sort of strange Dr. Kevorkianism working in his mind? Hard to know. I say they’re both wrong, but what do I know. Temporal ethics make my head hurt. I just want to go back in time and prevent this whole conversation from ever happening.