The following is a piece by one Paul "Ajax" Brodie. Enjoy!
Have you seen the movie Superman Returns (Bryan Singer, 2006)? In this new sequel to the Superman saga we find the Man of Steel returning from a vacation, or something. While he was away, saving someone I suppose, Lois Lane (Kate Bosworth) turned against him and wrote a newspaper article entitled "Why the world doesn't need Superman (Brandon Routh)." Or something to that effect, I might not have it word for word. She won the Pulitzer for the article. I thought the Pulitzer was reserved for investigative journalism, not op eds, but what do I know, really? Nothing when it comes to journalism.
Lois wins the award for her therapeutic venting, perhaps scathing vengeance was a part of it as well, but she recants her opinion when Superman returns (hence the name of the movie, nice work keeping with the basic naming structure for Superman movies: Superman, Superman II, Superman III, etc) and saves her family fromannihilation. Oh yeah, and she finds out (or did she already know?) that her son is Superman's son too. You know what that means. It means that Cyclops (James Marsden) isn't the boy's father. Amorality has infiltrated the world, sadly. Where is Superman when you really need him? Setting a bad moral example for children everywhere. If that had been the crux of Lois' argument then I'd be on board. But now I'm just being judgmental over fictitious characters. I digress.
Having given you this background information, and before I write the article "Why the world doesn't need Facebook" I want to say one more thing. If Pulitzer prizes are given to writers of opinion pieces, and my anti-Facebook thesis warrants reception of one such prize, I will gladly receive it. I am not requesting, expecting, or banking on winning the prize, or even being considered, but I will accept if it is offered. If Lois Lane gets one for an opinion, which is so ridiculously one-sided, vengeful, and wrong, then why not give one to me for an opinion that is sound and beneficial?
As I was driving home from work today I saw a teenager walking down town. He was wearing skinny jeans, and wearing them low. I didn't think it was possible for the emo-band-style skinny jeans to sag. They look so dreadfully tight, hugging out every chance of air between fabric and skin, that I would never have imagined they could sag. But sag they did. Why would I relate such a story? Because it was different. It struck me as being out of place. It was new to me. I found it humorous. I wasn't laughing at the boy, just the trends and styles of his generation. Which perhaps is my generation, I don't know when a generation starts and stops in regards to trendy clothing. The kid is probably half my age, you make the generational call. Anyhow, I saw it and I wanted to share it.
I first thought about texting my friend Christal, because I thought she would get a similar sense of enjoyment out of it. Then I thought I could post it on her Facebook wall. This is when I realized that we don't need Facebook. The wall is just a text message for everyone to see. It was at this point that I asked myself why I needed everyone to see this text message. What was it about that message, and in turn, all messages, that I need to have become public knowledge? I could only come up with two reasons for making private messages public: childish revenge and selfish indulgence. And then I realized that that's what blogging is for! I don't need Facebook because I have a blog! And you could have a blog, too.Facebook is a public way to communicate with your friends, and their friends, and their friends and their friends and their friends. Eventually I guess it gets back to you and you are reading your own wall post and laughing at the poster's misfortune and then realizing it is actually your own. According to an episode of Law and Order that I watched yesterday, no e-mail message is safe and private, so maybe the privacy issue doesn't matter, but I still think an e-mail or text message or phone conversation is the best way to go for security and to avoid being a childish, selfish, attention-seeking wall-poster (one who posts on walls, not one who hangs on walls as a display item). But don't take me seriously, I'm just trying to make a joke and indulge in my attention seeking.Facebook, like Superman who leaves us high and dry, is obsolete. I will not retract my statement unless Facebook comes to my rescue when an super villain has sloppily left me to die in a slow and tedious process that nearly begs for my safe escape. I don't see that ever happening, however. No, I think I will always think of Facebook as obsolete. Whether or not it was ever of great use, I don't have an opinion. I know it has been influential in the world. I'm sure it has changed the lives of many people. Well, when you get right down to it it has changed the life of everyone who has ever heard of it in some way. Once you hear of it you are different from what you were before you heard of it, when you existed without knowledge ofFacebook. But that's a little more stupidly philosophical than I want to be right now. I say stupidly, but I mean uselessly. No, I don't hate on everything, although it seems to be a common occurrence with this blog lately. I guess I just have a lot of complaining to get out of my system. This is my psychotherapy.
I don't know that I have made any sound argument for why the world no longer needs Facebook, so I'll try to sum it up now. Everything that we can do with or through Facebook we can do without Facebook. If there is an alternate way to do it, then it isn't necessary. That is a rash generalization that probably doesn't hold water but I'm preventing myself from thinking about it so that I don't have to go on for another three paragraphs to explore it. I'll let you do that in the comment section below. As for me, I am finished with this post. I haven't accomplished anything with it as far as having a thesis and offering support of it. But I have typed many words, some of which might induce laughter when strung together as I have strung them together. Perhaps not. Regardless, Superman Returns was an okay movie. Iron Man (Jon Favreau, 2008) was better.
Lois wins the award for her therapeutic venting, perhaps scathing vengeance was a part of it as well, but she recants her opinion when Superman returns (hence the name of the movie, nice work keeping with the basic naming structure for Superman movies: Superman, Superman II, Superman III, etc) and saves her family fromannihilation. Oh yeah, and she finds out (or did she already know?) that her son is Superman's son too. You know what that means. It means that Cyclops (James Marsden) isn't the boy's father. Amorality has infiltrated the world, sadly. Where is Superman when you really need him? Setting a bad moral example for children everywhere. If that had been the crux of Lois' argument then I'd be on board. But now I'm just being judgmental over fictitious characters. I digress.
Having given you this background information, and before I write the article "Why the world doesn't need Facebook" I want to say one more thing. If Pulitzer prizes are given to writers of opinion pieces, and my anti-Facebook thesis warrants reception of one such prize, I will gladly receive it. I am not requesting, expecting, or banking on winning the prize, or even being considered, but I will accept if it is offered. If Lois Lane gets one for an opinion, which is so ridiculously one-sided, vengeful, and wrong, then why not give one to me for an opinion that is sound and beneficial?
As I was driving home from work today I saw a teenager walking down town. He was wearing skinny jeans, and wearing them low. I didn't think it was possible for the emo-band-style skinny jeans to sag. They look so dreadfully tight, hugging out every chance of air between fabric and skin, that I would never have imagined they could sag. But sag they did. Why would I relate such a story? Because it was different. It struck me as being out of place. It was new to me. I found it humorous. I wasn't laughing at the boy, just the trends and styles of his generation. Which perhaps is my generation, I don't know when a generation starts and stops in regards to trendy clothing. The kid is probably half my age, you make the generational call. Anyhow, I saw it and I wanted to share it.
I first thought about texting my friend Christal, because I thought she would get a similar sense of enjoyment out of it. Then I thought I could post it on her Facebook wall. This is when I realized that we don't need Facebook. The wall is just a text message for everyone to see. It was at this point that I asked myself why I needed everyone to see this text message. What was it about that message, and in turn, all messages, that I need to have become public knowledge? I could only come up with two reasons for making private messages public: childish revenge and selfish indulgence. And then I realized that that's what blogging is for! I don't need Facebook because I have a blog! And you could have a blog, too.Facebook is a public way to communicate with your friends, and their friends, and their friends and their friends and their friends. Eventually I guess it gets back to you and you are reading your own wall post and laughing at the poster's misfortune and then realizing it is actually your own. According to an episode of Law and Order that I watched yesterday, no e-mail message is safe and private, so maybe the privacy issue doesn't matter, but I still think an e-mail or text message or phone conversation is the best way to go for security and to avoid being a childish, selfish, attention-seeking wall-poster (one who posts on walls, not one who hangs on walls as a display item). But don't take me seriously, I'm just trying to make a joke and indulge in my attention seeking.Facebook, like Superman who leaves us high and dry, is obsolete. I will not retract my statement unless Facebook comes to my rescue when an super villain has sloppily left me to die in a slow and tedious process that nearly begs for my safe escape. I don't see that ever happening, however. No, I think I will always think of Facebook as obsolete. Whether or not it was ever of great use, I don't have an opinion. I know it has been influential in the world. I'm sure it has changed the lives of many people. Well, when you get right down to it it has changed the life of everyone who has ever heard of it in some way. Once you hear of it you are different from what you were before you heard of it, when you existed without knowledge ofFacebook. But that's a little more stupidly philosophical than I want to be right now. I say stupidly, but I mean uselessly. No, I don't hate on everything, although it seems to be a common occurrence with this blog lately. I guess I just have a lot of complaining to get out of my system. This is my psychotherapy.
I don't know that I have made any sound argument for why the world no longer needs Facebook, so I'll try to sum it up now. Everything that we can do with or through Facebook we can do without Facebook. If there is an alternate way to do it, then it isn't necessary. That is a rash generalization that probably doesn't hold water but I'm preventing myself from thinking about it so that I don't have to go on for another three paragraphs to explore it. I'll let you do that in the comment section below. As for me, I am finished with this post. I haven't accomplished anything with it as far as having a thesis and offering support of it. But I have typed many words, some of which might induce laughter when strung together as I have strung them together. Perhaps not. Regardless, Superman Returns was an okay movie. Iron Man (Jon Favreau, 2008) was better.
