JF make 200
JF Nav
JF Nav
Creation Date: 2002-08-22
Monday morning rolls along and I still have no job. I'm going to look for a job right after this short rant. This pic I drew that is so-so. It shows how amateur I am at drawing. I will list the ways that I lack in drawing:
  • Characters do not look like real people.
  • Characters are not consistent with previous versions.
  • Body movements are unrealistic.
  • Motion is left up to the viewer.

What am I supposed to do about all these problems? Am I supposed to spend money I don't have on drawing classes? Am I supposed to give up drawing until I can afford drawing classes? Am I supposed to practice for years and years until I can draw like a pro? Or am I supposed to invent a new artform that rids me of all these problems and creates new problems that I can tackle without artistic skills? Well, I chose the last one. Except this new artform has the problem that it requires a computer. My computer lit aflame a month ago. So Now I'm going with the second one. But in a week or so, I'll get a new mobo and CPU, so hooray. The lesson for today is to do everything. If you try to do everything, you'll fail and gain character, but you'll also be left with many options. but don't think I'm an advocate of trying everything once. No, no, no. You must formulate a list of things that are valuable, each with a rank or a time frame. You don't choose the one at the top. You choose all. There are pros and cons to each item. You weigh them and you spend your limited time and your limitless imagination on them. If one is better than another and they have the same pros and cons otherwise, you know what to do. However, that's rarely the case. Where computers win, pencil and paper are no good and visa-versa. You have to find which to do when and then you put the petal to the metal on each. But only when the time is right.

So, what computer am I getting? It's a 1.7 GHz P4 with DDR RAM and SDRAM slots. I'll have my old 40 GB HD, my old 128 MB PC133 SDRAM, my old GeForce2 64 DDR, and the rest. It'll be a speed demon or something like that. The RAM will be the major problem, I guess. But I'll replace it with 256 MB DDR in six months or so.

Two more ideas. The first is: no one wants to hear my rants. I like to read other people's rants, but not long ones and not useless ones. I finished reading Fountainhead and the socialist theatre critic said "in the future, there will be no theatre, critics will just survey people's amazing lives and write about them," or something to that nature. The truth is that there is something to be said for a good bit of prose. The anti-hero is cool, but it follows the norm of plot. In a story, you have: the hook, the conflict, the build up, the climax, and the close. In real life, it's more like: the let down, the conflict, the let down, the climax, the let down, the build up and the close. For example... ^_^ My childhood is the least dramatic on Earth. A book about it would be boring. We have youth, more youth, and suddenly I'm in college and I'm having fun. I'm learning for the first time in my life and I'm doing poorly. Now I need a job. I can't find one. I finish college, I get a job, the end. What's the conflict? Graduating? The epic struggle? Just living? Certainly life is an epic struggle, but hardly anything interesting. The people who have actual interesting lives have biographies after they're famous and it is still not as interesting as a good fictional novel.

The second thing I want to talk about is selfishness. Fountainhead is about the super-selfish egotist Roark and his bout to change the world with his buildings. He wants buildings to be 100% functional. The beauty is in the way it is. It doesn't need ionic columns that support nothing. So at the very end, he gets to explain exactly what selfishness is about. Selfishness is creativity, he says. The people that are inventors and thinkers have this awesome task laid before them: change the world for the better. Why? Because your life demands it. Others do not demand it, they don't even want it if it's given to them for free. So this person must fight for themself. People who are not creators are simply theives. They take the creator's product and use it to survive and do nothing more. They live for others approval and they have no view of self. He gives the example of the architect who only copies the Parthenon all his life. He also gives the example of the social worker who does no one any good. So, what's my take on this? He has a point that there's a different world between those who simply survive by copying others and those who create. I am a creator myself, having invented two artforms and created a cutting-edge e-commerce website by the age of 21. I plan for much more before 35. However useful creators are, they would not survive if not for people who survive for others. Sadly, Ayn Rand leaves very little room for those who keep creators alive. I live off noodles, tofu, frozen vegis, peanut butter sandwiches, oatmeal, and the like. If there were only creators, I would not be able to eat and thus I would be a dead creator. There is the possibility that these creators can also work wage earner jobs from time to time and still be creators. But for people who wish only to create, like Roark, there needs to be food. For creators like me, there needs to be shelter. For creators like Newton, there has to be a rich uncle. But there is another way that creators and wage earners can co-exist. That is isolation. The wage earners just work and allow the creators to survive also and the creators give the wage earners their creations. This requires a type of segregation as well as rich get richer and the poor get poorer. Those poor who are smart enough have a chance to be middle management. This is the world we live in. The creators like Ayn Rand talks about can often be found segregated. But there's a different class that claim to be creators: the exploiters. These losers exploit the creators and the wage earners using the system where creators must be wage earners 40 hours/week, but are segregated from wage earners, middle management, and the exploiters. The exploiters like Ayn Rand. Why? Because reading her books they came up with the same conclusion that I did and they were able to easily exploit this little fact to put themself at the top of the food chain.
  • Exploiters
  • Creators
  • Middle Management
  • Wage Earners

Large corporations started with the industrial revolution. Before that most people were artisans (craftsman) or sustinance farmers. The creators needed food. The exploiters can trade stuff for food. They give the creators food in exchange for their creations. The wage earner then mass produces the creation which makes the exploiter rich. Wage earners who work hard are rewarded by not having to do manual labor (middle management). So, these are the facts as I see them. Faced with such a situation, what does a person do? Everyone needs food. Earning a wage is honorable, but not satisfying. Middle management is easier, but not very honorable and not very satisfying. Being a creator is satisfying, but not very cool and is hard to start. Becoming an exploiter is the least honorable thing in the entire universe, but it is very cool, is satisfying if you like cash money, and is very hard to start if you aren't the son of an exploiter. As for me, I'm a creator (as was my father before me and his father). It's my duty to the Earth to create good things. It's also my duty to help others and it's also my duty to feed myself. My plan of action: feed myself -> create good things -> help others -> kick the arses of the exploiters as I go. You may choose whatever you like, but might I suggest that creator is the way to go.
JF Nav
Home Characters Making Of Technical Mail News Links |< First < Prev Next > Latest >|  bandwidth version Goto Scene