Friday, February 26, 2010

It's a Miracle! or, Exploding Watermelon Babies

Everyone knows how easy it is to humanize non-human objects. In Castaway Tom Hanks smeared the crude markings of a face into a bloody-hand stain on a volleyball and we all went along with him in loving it.

When Wilson slowly drifts away to his death, it’s one of the strangest, saddest moments in cinema. You probably cried when you saw it happen. I’m getting depressed just thinking about it.

Somewhat less known is just how easy it is to believe that a man is pregnant. If you were to ask me the following question—“What do you have to do to make a man look as if he’s actually pregnant?”—my answer would be, “not much.” That’s because the lumpy baby gut is such a striking shape that we have almost no difficulty believing that even someone as manly as the Governator himself is pregnant, so long as he is wearing a fat suit underneath his maternity-store power suit.

That’s why I can’t help but think the creators of this recent commercial from State Farm insurance misjudged the power of their own fantasy. Or at least they want to appear as if what they’ve done is misjudged. More on that in a bit.

Seconds 0:23 through 0:28 are probably the most tasteless of them all. (Note: I’m not against the untasty. In fact, I prefer it. I’m just saying is all.) First, for about 2 seconds, we see the shape of a probably-real pregger (she could be an impostor, like Arny) right in the middle of the frame. She looks like she’s about to pop. (And yet she never loses her good-natured charm or easy sarcasm. This is how pregnancy usually works, no?)

But then, without apparent transition, we are looking at a similarly-shaped man, framed by the camera in a similar way. We never completely forget that his stomach doesn’t actually contain what will very shortly become a partial-birth abortion (metaphorically speaking), but it’s hard to completely displace our suspended disbelief once he hides the watermelon underneath his shirt, and the fact of the watermelon belly becomes a memory rather than a constant visual reminder. He wants to see what it feels like to lug around a heavy precious cargo for a few hours, and we can’t help but partially enter that fantasy along with him.

But then OH CRAP the watermelon / baby falls out and explodes all over the cement, exposing a shattered, blood-red interior. This image is not meant to mortify, but it does. Since the transition between the mother and father is so quick, and their framing and shape so similar, it is just as easy, if not easier, to experience the similarities in the images more than their differences. And even if we never completely lose sight of the light-hearted humor of it all, never forget that we are meant to laugh at a joke where the line between fantasy and reality is at least intended to be clear (indeed, is part of the joke), it would be hard to say that the commercial doesn’t accidentally blur those lines—that, whatever the intended purpose, the end result is one where the hypothetical horrors of a possible world are forced to overlap with the perception of the actual world. Dude, that’s your baby’s exploded form all over there. Nah, it’s just a watermelon.

There are some other considerations.

For example, if it’s true that this commercial is not actually trying to get you to think about violent baby-breaking and its possible consequences, then it’s certainly an infelicitous coincidence that it tacitly asks you to consider how you would pay for such an accident. Insurance salesmanship depends on highlighting fear in order to sell peace of mind. If the shit hits the fan, or, in this case, if the watermelon bites the motherfucking curb, then we’ll pay for it. That’s what it’s all about. Since this particular insurance commercial only explicitly tries to sell a “plan for the future,” it has to rely on its more implicit dimensions to show you what you are actually buying. And look at that woman’s face—her easy-going placidity exudes, or at least implies, confidence. Her “plan for the future” is not in doubt. That’s why she can laugh pleasantly at her doof of a husband, instead of throwing a fit. (How would most extremely pregnant women react if you created a lookalike pregnant belly and then crapped out an aborted watermelon in front of them? My guess: not well.)

But here’s the rub. This woman’s “plan for the future,” the very thing that the commercial is selling, involves making bank after the “miracle” of birth goes bad. You wonder how much a shattered baby will run the insurance companies. Your guess is as good as mine, but I bet we both think it’s somewhere in the range of: a lot. So now there’s a new miracle! Now we can finally afford to take that Carnival cruise we’ve always talked about, and even get one of the really nice suites. Have you ever popped champagne on a plane? I wanna make love in this club. And so on.

So basically what I’m saying is this commercial kind of freaks me out. The insurance companies are inseminating our minds with little whispering homunculi, little nagging Nancy’s with their little tickly voices—they’re always getting up inside of you, hiding their sinister Easter eggs every which way, only when you open up the prize, instead of money or candy, all you get is fear.

Tell me I’m not alone here.

Monday, February 22, 2010

Ear Jizz

Let me begin by saying that you probably shouldn’t read this (it may actually be illegal in some states). And, just in case the title doesn’t give it away, this post is in no fucking way safe for work. Unless you happen to work in the porn industry. But, even there, as will soon become clear, what I have to say might be considered unacceptably shocking. In that way I guess you might say that the theme of this work, not unlike the theme of The Matrix movies, is to Free Your Mind. Popularly speaking, we tend to think of the goal of freedom as one that is reached only with significant, if noble, sacrifice. Any vaguely-jingoistic truck commercial will tell you as much. So will The Matrix movies, which imply that freeing your mind requires giving up the taste of yummy steak.



Oh, and also you have to completely give in to brain-in-a-vat skepticism.[1] But I digress. Because, the point I really want to make has to do with a different kind of sacrifice, for a different kind of freedom of mind. This sacrifice involves giving your ear over to (possible) infection.

The freedom? I don’t think any of us are ready yet.

Before we get to that, though, we need to talk about some things we already know—about the porn industry. I’m no expert, but it seems fairly uncontroversial to say that the porn industry has been so successful because it manages to enticingly film basically every perversion there is or even could be—ranging from the vanilla to the socially destructive. Everyone is perverse in some way, and, in whatever way you happen to be perverted, there very likely exists a massive catalogue of pornography suited especially to your needs. To many, that’s one of the true pleasures of modern existence.

Here, in no particular order, is a list of things that the pornography industry regularly depicts:

Straight Fucking

Gay Fucking

Animal fucking

Vegetable Fucking

Fat people fucking

Old people fucking

Virgin fucking

18-year old fucking

Mother fucking (as in MILFs, but also as in fucking your own mother, and other forms of incest)

All forms of specific ethnicity fucking (Asian, Hispanic, Black—though never, as far as I can tell, specifically white fucking)

Fantasies of fucking celebrities (or their closest porn lookalikes), or of fucking characters from popular movies (like when The Blair Witch Project became The Bare Wench Project—I’ve even seen The Simpsons and Family Guy fucking)

Themes such as: office fucking (to get a job, or to give a job[2]); school fucking (sometimes to get a better grade, sometimes just because the teacher has been seduced); car fucking (sometimes while the car is moving); cheating (on your wife, or with your best friend’s husband) and other rule-breaking fucks (fucking your sister’s friend); fucking strangers from the street who just need a ride but who also happen to be horny; secret fucking (one of the fuckers is asleep; sometimes they wake up); public fucking (sometimes in crowded spaces, sometimes in private public spaces, such as a dressing room); and so on.

I guarantee you I haven’t even begun to unpack to Thanksgiving-like cornucopia of pornographic variety that the porn industry has not only introduced, but also to a certain extent made acceptable, in our culture. We can debate about the social merit of this. My own position tends moderately to endorse porn and its social influence, going on the assumption that socially legislating proper sexual desire is fucking awful, and none of your god-damned business. That’s obviously just one side of it, though, and it’s not hard to imagine that the life of porn-performers is grittier than you might think (though, if you happen to be an alarmist, it might be less objectionable than you think).

In my own personal experience, both as an observer and as a participant, discussions of porn in America today rarely veer far from debating its social merit. Obviously that’s an important discussion to have, especially considering how quickly porn became an almost omnipresent part of social life. My interest, though, is a bit different. I just want to ask you one question:

Since it’s obvious that the porn industry is interested in showing people fucking in every possible position, in every possible location, in every conceivable (or at least legal) circumstance; and since it’s equally obvious that the porn industry, in an effort not only to capitalize on novel perversions as they emerge but also perhaps to inaugurate new ones, has been endlessly inventive about what they film and the manner in which they film it; and since this inventiveness has led porn directors to instruct their performers to aim their projectile sex juices not just at body parts but also at things like plates, martini glasses, onto the camera itself, the floor, into condoms that are then frozen and used as jizz-popsicle dildos, and so on; I say, given all this almost mathematically exhaustive variety in pornography, I have but one question:

How come you never see dudes jizzing into ears?

The answer, almost too obvious even to write, seems to be: because it’s gross. Yes, that’s right, but why is the ear canal where we draw the line? There doesn’t seem to be any other part of the body that is so rigorously excluded from the sexual gaze. Is it just that we haven’t yet embraced the perverse pleasure of the ear canal, or is it that we can’t embrace it—that somehow our psycho-cultural logic of sexuality, regardless of the seemingly endless variety of perversion that it readily acknowledges (or represses), works itself out such that we just can’t think of the notion of ear jizz as anything but what it manifestly is (that is, gross)? Think about it: we have porn that films things so inappropriate that society has responded by making it illegal (underage fucking, death fucking). We haven’t even gotten to the point where society could form a reaction to ear jizzing. In fact, it’s so completely off of the radar of everyone in the entire fucking porn industry (and the world) that when I google “ear jizz” I don’t get a single relevant hit.[3] What is going on here, people?? Doesn’t this call for an explanation?[4]

For me, I am capable of acknowledging that my preference not to see ear jizz is in one way or another ideologically determined. And yet, this ideological force seems to be so deeply embedded within a network of other beliefs that I take to be essential components of myself that I don’t even want to want to free my mind. Because it’s hard to think of a collective awakening into the sexiness of ear jizz as anything but an unpleasant state of enlightenment. To use a turn of phrase often in the mouths of conservative pundits and their peons[5] when opposing things like gay marriage: if we were to start desiring ear jizz, I think it might severely tear the very fabric of society. (And that shit is so hard to sew back up.)

And yet, I can’t help but wonder: what would happen if some upstart pornographer tried to sexualize (read: revolutionize) the ear canal? Would it work? Or would this disappointingly short-lived movement be remembered only by that time that there was a sudden uptick in ear infections across the porn industry? But, even then, who might (at first, perhaps, accidentally) consume the revolutionary material, and what seeds of perversion might be planted for the future generations? Are there people out there whose minds might yet be freed? I for one know that I am a lost cause. Whatever progress I might make towards enlightenment has been predetermined against the ear-jizz revolution. Obviously this revolution is not impending: as far as I can tell I’m the first person to think it might be necessary to complete the unfinished project of modernity. And, we don’t exactly see people taking to the streets to express exasperation and rage that their perversions are not being accommodated by the porn industry. For now, that is. There will always be “tomorrow, and tomorrow, and tomorrow.” Until then, I bid you good day sir.

I said good day.



[1] Although, now that I’m thinking about it, doesn’t it seem like after you stop believing in one form of reality that appears to be stable and real, that it would be pretty hard to just casually start believing in another form of reality that appears to be stable and real? I mean, once you’ve been convinced to the point that you no longer believe the world before your eyes is actually real, even though it continues invariably to present itself as if it were real, how could you ever believe that you’ve now awoken into the real real world? After all, the basic laws of physics, rules governing human social interactions, and even languages are the same in both worlds—wouldn’t a true sacrifice to skepticism involve awaking into something much more alien? To be always just waking up?

[2] For the first time in my life, I can’t tell whether the pun is intended here.

[3] “Relevant hit” defined as either (a) a depiction of ear jizzing, or (b) a sincere expression of desire to see ear jizzing. You do get a few casual jokey hits from Myspace or Facebook pages, as well as spam bots that specialize in putting together combinations of pornographic words in the hopes, I guess, that you’ll click on them and get a virus (to be honest I’ve never really been sure about how those things work). Though, interestingly there is an earjizz.com domain name that has been registered for 3 years, but there is no content on the website. Someone is anticipating the coming revolution, apparently. The oppressed may yet rise up.

[4] If I had press credentials I’d be making calls to leading pornographers to get their comments. Unfortunately, I don’t think the writer of a 2-week old blog merits comment from actual public figures.

[5] Or “ditto heads” as Rush Limbaugh’s followers gleefully call themselves.

Tuesday, February 16, 2010

Silly Shorts

I wanna talk about silly shorts.



These shorts are so silly. Why are your shorts so silly, Jonny Flynn?


I think your friend's shorts are pretty silly, too. But I still think yours are the silliest of all, for obvious reasons.


Like a baby in swaddling shorts. Your friend is a giant, who is also wrapped in swaddling shorts. He's the one whose neck you're screaming into. (I'm not really sure about that look of pleasurable release on his face, but I'm guessing it has something to do with your "wandering" left hand.) (Don't cry, #23, you're next.)

HEY JONNY

What'd you do with all that junk? The pros changed you man. They changed you.

Whatever, though, because the college game will never change, motherfucker.


Monday, February 15, 2010

The Nightmare and the Monster

Oh, just so you know, sometimes I scream bloody murder when I’m sleeping.

I have to tell you this because otherwise you might think that something is actually wrong. Nothing is wrong. It’s just what I do—sometimes. Now, I will have no memory of this alleged eruption of terror that occurs, say, two or three hours after we’ve fallen into peaceful sleep. But, since it’s been reported to me throughout my life with the kind of remarkable regularity and consistency that core scientific principles are built around, I have no reason to disbelieve that it’s something that actually occurs in this world.[1] Ever since the golden days of middle-school sleepover parties—what with their hours of playing Super Nintendo, two liters of Mountain Dew,[2] Doritos in a big bowl, and (hopefully) a late-night glimpse of Cinemax’s soft-core adult programming—people have been telling me about (let’s call it) my “peculiar habit.” And it’s not an isolated scream either, like the way that bare-chested men in movies wake up from their possibly-foreshadowing nightmares. I guess the only way to describe it would be as a screaming fit—but less like a childish temper tantrum, and more like a man who watches as his worst nightmares materialize into reality before his eyes.

It’s hard for me to describe in any detail what it’s like from my perspective, since whatever it is that happens eludes memory, and, for all I know, even direct representation in my consciousness. At best I hold onto lingering suggestions of terror, the same way we all do when we spend a day almost remembering a really powerful dream we’re pretty sure we had the night before. This explanation, as you might imagine, is not very satisfying to those who are shocked awake by the panic and fear that someone else’s gut-wrenching terror-screams can induce. Not unreasonably, these people want a window into my soul, to know what I saw. I guess it’s the same reason that most people stare at horrible car accidents as they slowly drive by them. I don’t and can’t do that, because it freaks me the F out. I don’t always want to know the seriousness of the truth; I’m plenty happy to relegate experiences of the inscrutably awful aspects of reality to my unremembered dreams.

Because even when they are bad, dreams are still also and essentially magical things: in them, you feel for real what you know for a fact it is impossible to feel. I know what it feels like to fly with my mind, because I’ve done it countless times in dreams more vivid than reality. Based on my experience of dreams that I can remember, it seems to me that the major difference between the good and bad ones is not so much their content (though obviously that matters), but rather the extent to which you are comfortable with how that content appears to you. We all have dreams of everyday life—ringing up customers, saying have a nice day, tidying our desks—but more often than not dreams take on aspects of the fantastical, the impossible. In situations like that, it makes a big difference whether you can take in the fragmentary, incomprehensible materials, and treat them as if they were the mundane, unremarkably comprehensible details of everyday life. The same is true of what we might call the highlights-reel moments in sports. Because, more often than not the highlights-reel of any day’s Sports Center is going to display something so manifestly unbelievable that for a moment you are completely fucking dumbfounded. Like, whoah, what did I just see? Call this the Neo-Effect.

This is why the experience of watching the most incomprehensibly stunning moments in professional sports can approach the type of psychological discomfort that bad dreams inspire you with.

What is so bad, and magical, about bad dreams, is that they involve vivid sensual immersion into something that defies comprehension. We look into the “palpable obscure” of the void, and see it the way we never could in waking life, because to see those things in everyday life would give rise to the type of skeptical reaction that is almost completely banished from dreams. Or, rather, if we do begin to feel the weight of skepticism, suspension of disbelief is shattered, and we either wake up, transition into a different dream, or, for the lucky few, become lucid-overlords of the dream world, controlling all aspects of the environment and personal sensation. When we don’t give in to disbelief, we instead experience something like absolute belief at the same time as we experience the denial of comprehension. It’s not quite a paradox—but that doesn’t mean it’s any less troubling.

If we don’t usually think of our experiences of watching sports in this way, it probably has more to do with the convenient shortcuts our conscious mind allows us to take in our everyday perceptions than it does with the actual nature of what we are watching. This, in fact, is one of the central contradictions of a culture that feverishly desires to see displays of excellence in sports as part of our everyday life: the more normal it is for individuals to channel their genius into sport, the more “normal” it becomes to see incomprehensible displays of skill; that is, the more likely we are to see the abnormal. But most people don’t want their everyday life—usually associated with things like domestic peace and middlingly mundane stability—to be assaulted by perceptions that significantly exceed the expected. Thus, in the same way that anyone adjusts to something new, we normalize the abnormal. But we do so at significant risk to our aesthetic experience of sports, because there is no one, or stable, way in which the best moments in sports display novelty. It’s not like moving away from home for the first time and adjusting as one set of stable social relations are displaced by another equally stable set of social relations. Rather, it’s more like watching as God created each new thing in the universe (which was itself also a new thing).

It’s not uncommon to think of God in creation in roughly the same terms as those we use when we think of an artist in creation: they each bring forth something totally new out of nothingness or chaos. Obviously, we’ve stopped caring much about the avant-garde developments of official art culture.[3] On the other hand, we don’t usually think about the artistic genius that true greatness in sports requires. That’s a shame, I think. And, it’s why I am so fond of this recent commercial by Nike called “Nightmares Never Sleep.”

This commercial reminds us of something that is easy to forget: sports, and their best athletes (like Dwyane Wade) are monstrous and terrifying. And not just to their opponents, but to their audience as well. We see this not only when the audience flees as if from a sudden explosion,[4] but also when the camera is pointed at the court from the perspective of the abandoned stands.

Even better is how the commercial transitions from normal to terrifying. First, it is not insignificant that Nike and the medium of television commercials are both at this point in human history completely normal things to experience. We expect to see them, and are usually not disappointed. Nike, unlike other stable brands such as Walmart and McDonald’s, has chosen to use their dominant cultural position not to give us bland advertisements that operate entirely within the comfortably known, but to take us to the darker places of human consciousness.[5] Second, the way the commercial looks in its first seconds is roughly approximate to the way that televised basketball normally looks. Perhaps it is more stylized, featuring somewhat impossible camera angles to capture the rebound and subsequent pass to Wade, but this augmented perspective is slight enough to barely register, if at all. Once the viewer’s attention is hooked, however, and their expectations about how basketball normally looks are at least partially activated, the commercial rapidly transitions to a more terrifying register. The framing becomes more cinematic; time slows, and seems to anticipate the coming action as much as the opposing players; Wade’s shadow grows in a way that both terrifies and transfixes those who don’t run; his eyes dilate, the floor boards shatter when he dribbles the ball, and blizzard-like winds rush over the court (even though the players remain loose and agile); skin bubbles like lava; the image of Wade (now a dream terror) moves down the court, and convulses into a Cerberus-like phantom before splitting into three actual, if shadowy, basketball nightmares; one of the three forms he takes is the jump man himself—MJ. You can only see this last detail for a second (actually less than a second), thus, it registers in consciousness the same way that all the materials of bad (or even good) dreams do: barely, and therefore with the greatest amount of suggestive force.

We move from the normal to the nightmarish in 60 seconds flat—and in half that time for most of the commercial’s television appearances. I’ll let you tell me how this is supposed to sell products. For me, I just feel vaguely uncomfortable, perhaps in a vaguely good way (like how you feel immediately after waking up from a nightmare—relieved that it’s not real, impressed by its magical force). Moreover, I feel the way I sometimes do (without recognizing it) when someone, say Dwyane Wade, fucking obliterates his opponents on a scoring drive to the net. Unbelievable I’ll say, probably out loud even though I’m watching the game by myself, when what I should be doing is screaming uncontrollably. Unfortunately I only do that when I’m completely unconscious.

Nike, apparently, is really interested in showing us just how strange and terrifying sports really are, because they’ve featured this aspect of sports in several of their recent commercials. Take, for example, this Adrian Peterson commercial, ostensibly released in order to sell Nike Pro Combat athletic gear.

Terrifying, right? It’s terrifying in the same way as an episode of Lost is (including its soundtrack, which reminds me of the loud low-brass slides featured prominently in the perpetual moments of confusion in Lost). Its “story,” insofar as there is one, operates at the edge of comprehensibility, and is comprised of mere suggestions and unexplained provocations. Here’s what I mean:

Our first sense that we are watching something stranger than a stylized black-and-white football battle hits at around the 5-second mark, when the mood of the music takes a turn for the eerie in the same moment that we catch a glimpse of a strangely-featured face, partially obscured behind the facemask of a football helmet. None but the most die-hard Adrian Peterson fan will recognize the man behind the mask at this point. That’s because this commercial depends on the power of hints. Our only visual hint about the strangeness of the strange thing we are seeing is displayed in a moment almost too quick to comprehend. From there, even though the soundtrack constantly forces us to question this perception, it’s mostly a recognizable football commercial, where one player distinguishes himself as the best one on the field. That is, until the end—which pays off our curiosity with some more unexplained hints.

As Peterson walks off the field, amidst the rage of disappointment of the losing home team, he pulls off his gloves, almost angrily, and casts them aside as if to say I’ve washed my hands of this. (Perhaps he has been coerced to greatness?) His unexpected mood is made more mysterious when in the locker room the camera stops to take an extended look at his face, which wears an expression that is both surprisingly rich and furtive. It’s not quite disappointment, nor is it meditative. It’s a look into the distance, the way you might look after being aggressively cross-examined by a hot-headed interrogator for 12 hours. His posture is stooped not just with exhaustion, but something that nearly suggests defeat. The total image appears to be one of despair, but also somehow more than that. We get the sense that a great deal of the story has not been given—which is to say that the commercial evokes a sense of a whole, even though we are only given a mysteriously fragmentary part (perhaps not even the most interesting part).

All of this is complicated, and made nearly incomprehensible, by the unexplained hexagonal skin pattern covering Peterson’s body. It seems as if it matches a similar pattern on his pants, but that barely explains anything. I’ve deliberately not looked into the actual product that this commercial is promoting. I want to understand the viewing experience as if it were separable from the profit motive that is clearly at the (however obscured) root of this commercial. So, from my perspective, supposing that the skin matches the pants because the commercial is trying to suggest that Peterson inhabits the product, or that the product has taken over his body the way a virus does a host, it doesn’t make me feel like buying technical athletic gear by Nike—it makes me wonder about the back story. How and why did all this happen? And why does Peterson seem to be so defeatedly distant from it? I feel bad for him, and interested in him. To invoke another TV metaphor, it’s like how you feel right as the first segment of an episode of The X-Files breaks for commercial. But that’s all this is—a commercial. There is no resolution, no plot development, no greater understanding reached or even suggested. With only 90 seconds to work with, the commercial has chosen depth of experience over breadth of narrative. It’s not a necessary result of the commercial form, but obviously this kind of suggestive fragmentation lends itself well to short intervals between regular television programming. Kind of like the short intervals of magic unconsciousness between waking life, when, sometimes we experience something so haltingly unknown that it short-circuits disbelief at the same time as it defies comprehension. In situations like that, it’s probably best just to scream apples and bananas, and forget about it in the morning.


[1] Unlike evolution and global warming, which are just theories.

[2] By the way, what the fuck is this?

[3] Somehow performance artists pulling sharpies out of their asshole as they force-feed themselves extra-large mouthfuls of Twizzlers has not caught on.

[4] Their terror seems to exceed the action on the court, a clever use of dream logic—what are they seeing that defies representation?

[5] And oh how I wish other companies would follow suit—the commercial can be a beautiful, and challenging medium, if taken seriously by gifted artists.




Tuesday, February 9, 2010

For People Who Don't Think Good

Office Depot, a large chain store whose business model depends on aggressively taking over markets serviced by small local businesses, is apparently in the business of helping small local businesses defeat large chain stores.



Is this an attempt to generate ideology, or is it simply an extraordinary instance of un-self-aware marketing? Could it be both? What other terms do we have to explain or describe this?

Monday, February 8, 2010

Variation on a Theme by Hemingway

FOR SALE

Used dick sleeve fr sale. $25 obo. Washed with good soap.

Wednesday, February 3, 2010

Notes From a Sports Outsider

I.

It wasn’t until the summer of 2009 that I really got the hang of watching baseball. And it’s not like I was trying either. I couldn’t stand to watch it on TV unless it glowed with an aura of Importance—like when the Red Sox play the Yankees, or when…well, that’s really about it; and even then what attracted me to the game was merely hype, the one aspect of sport that’s about as external to the nature of the game as you can get. When I did begrudgingly watch a game on cable (a concession to the lack of good sports programming during the summer), the relative unimportance of each game (what do they play like 150 regular season games?) kind of sucked the life out of what is basically already a lifeless game. Sure there are moments of brilliance in most games, but I don’t think it’s even close to controversial when I estimate that more game time is spent in a staring match between the pitcher and the batter than the time it takes to do literally every other thing in the game, including the time between innings, combined.[1] It gets old, ok?

Still, there’s something unique about living in a sports town. I moved to Baltimore for grad school three years ago, so it was only a matter of time before I ended up going to see a live Orioles game. I mean, they play like ten minutes from where I live, and tickets are relatively cheap. If it’s surprising, then, that it took me two years to go to a game, it should just go to show how little the whole sport mattered to me.

The time that I’m talking about—the time that I started to get the baseball-viewing experience—wasn’t my first Orioles game. I had gone once or twice before, and each time, though dazzled by the lights and impressed by the manufactured-nostalgia of Camden Yards, saw what turned out to be some rather forgettable baseball. This one time, though, this one fucking time, man, I saw what to this day continues to stand out as one of the most astonishing displays of casual greatness I have ever seen. The hope of having these experiences is what gets people into the stands in the first place. It’s the kind of thing that the HDTV viewer—with all the surprising clarity that his enormous TV screen is capable of displaying, surrounded by such modern conveniences as “comfortable couch,” “cheap beer that is actually cheap,” and “bathrooms that don’t inspire you with a vague but tenaciously unshakable concern about the non-sexual conditions under which STDs can be spread”—will never see. In other words, it was something that you had to be there for.

Well, enough foreplay already, here’s what I saw: I saw two dudes playing warm-up catch before the game started. Bam!

How could this most banal of occurrences transform me into the proverbial transparent eyeball (you ask)? How, indeed! I’ll fucking tell you how. I don’t know. Here, let me try to approach it with an analogy. It’s like you know how when you were a kid sometimes you’d play catch for an hour or two with your dad on a nice Sunday afternoon? You’d stand, what, 15, 20 feet apart? Let’s just say you stood 25 feet apart. After a few practice throws, you and your dad got into a rhythm, and you could get the ball to each other consistently, every time you threw it. Eventually, even the possibility of doubt—that the ball wouldn’t get to its intended target, that thought, or anything really, could step in and drive any distance between the act of throwing and the motion of the ball—grew ever and more slight. The ball just got there; and then you got it back. That’s the meditative rhythm of catch. It’s why you do it. The peace of this rhythm expanded into all the hitherto untrodden regions of your consciousness, until the two of you were completely immersed in it, bound, not forever, but undeniably, in that moment. Essentially, it was a powerful affirmation of the connection between a man and his son. The game didn’t bring you together; it pointed out what was already there—and when you both realized this, in the good-natured mood that only a game of catch can put you into, then you felt the bond strengthen.

Now picture this same scene, of a connection so absolute that it defied even the possibility of doubt, and transpose it onto a modern baseball field. And, instead of it being you and your dad in his back yard, it’s two pro athletes—one is standing just behind home plate, and the other is standing well beyond first base. So we’re talking over 100 feet between the two players. The difference, the key difference from my perspective as a budding sports fan, was not the lack of a profound connection (palpably, it was there right before my eyes), but rather the amount of time the baseball had to hang in the air as it traversed the enormous distance between the players, before it landed in the one player’s glove as softly as if your dad had lobbed an underhand toss to you from the other side of the lawn. That’s what I had never seen before, not really—I hadn’t seen it the way I saw it that day. It was astonishing.

I think my friend Doug, who was with me, and I were dumbstruck by this experience simultaneously.[2] It was the experience of, in Doug’s words, watching two guys “who are better at playing catch than we will be at anything we’ll ever do.” Only not at all as depressing as that sounds. It was a revelation, like with religion, only without the mist of dissatisfaction that surrounds belief.[3] Moreover, it was the feeling of finally seeing what was before my eyes. It was as if, in this moment, I saw what was really happening for the first time. These guys were really fucking good.

II.

Which brings me to college sports.

Growing up, way before I ever thought that watching sports wasn’t about the dumbest thing you could spend your time doing[4], I vaguely remember hearing from people—maybe it was just my friend’s dad—that watching college sports is a better experience than watching professional sports because, in some way, the college game displayed “actual play.” When pressed, these people (or, again, possibly just my friend’s dad), would say something to the effect of: “I’d rather watch a bunch of kids who actually want to be there, and actually want to play, than a bunch of prima donna superstars whose only love is of their huge paychecks.” Basically it came down to the notion that unspoiled passion only exists in the college game, and professional athletes can suck it. I’m paraphrasing.

Now, to me, in my brief tenure as a sports fan, this idea is manifestly false, and just dumb. First, let’s just be honest: most college teams suck. I mean, sure, they could beat me pretty badly, but then again, so could most high school athletes, and you don’t see them drawing millions of viewers and hundreds of millions in advertising revenue. Second, I’ve seen way more lackluster college performances than I have professional ones.[5] Which is not to say that you always see 100% effort in the pros, just that, on balance, the major difference between pro and college sports is not passion, but talent. (As an aside, let me ask you this: Have you ever seen anyone who wants to win more passionately than Kobe? Kobe mails it in sometimes, sure, but more often than not, you can’t not be drawn in by the undertow of his Ahab-like desire to win (for him, it verges on hatred).[6] There may be better examples (Jordan? Tiger?), but, like I said, I’m pretty new to the whole caring about sports thing. But back to my list.) Third, I’m just going to go ahead and guess that most people who idealize the college sport don’t spend an equal amount of time watching women’s athletics. Why is that? I bet it’s not because of a passion gap.

So please just spare me the fairy-land bedtime story about the purity of passion in college. Besides, there’s a much better reason to prefer, on any given night, to watch a really good college team over a really good pro team. And this reason is best summed up in two words: John Wall.

In slightly more than two words, let’s consider what John Wall gives to the viewing experience that you can’t get anywhere else right now. In case you’ve been living under a rock, or, like me, you don’t know shit about sports, freshman John Wall is the starting point guard for the University of Kentucky Wildcats men’s basketball team. But trying to explain John Wall in terms of his position or his skills is to miss the point so completely that I don’t think we can even really continue this conversation. Except that, like any good missionary, I feel compelled (come what may) to speak the truth: John Wall is a prophet. He is not so much a basketball player as he is a window into a world of greater truth and objectivity, an Emersonian poet who converts the unity of the Absolute into something just various enough to be perceived, thereby renovating life and Nature for the benefit of all.

And the reason he’s capable of occupying this transcendentally important position has everything to do with the fact that he plays on a college team, and is not yet a player in the NBA. When he gets to the NBA, his blazing speed will not seem so blazing anymore. He’ll probably be one of the faster dudes on the court, but he won’t be able to do the types of things he does now, like get to the net two steps before a defender, even though the defender was 30 feet closer to the net than Wall was when he got the ball. In this way you might even consider him as an ambassador for the NBA: he shows you what you actually see in nearly every game played in that league. The reason you can’t normally see it is the same reason you can’t really see how tall these dudes are. Everyone on the court is so freakishly tall that the players who are tall when compared to you and me, but not when compared to everyone else on the court, appear on television as if they’re babies (Rajon Rondo, Aaron Brooks), or midgets (Derek Fisher). That’s why it’s always so shocking when you see video footage of literally any player in the league when he’s around people who aren’t freakishly tall (i.e., when they’re around anyone who isn’t a pro basketball player). It’s shocking, but also kind of quietly affirming: now I don’t have to think of point guards as really talented babies or midgets any more; they do exist on a plane closer to the gods than anyone I know or will ever know. And this brings us to a truth that is both profound and obvious: the easier it is to believe that professional athletes are actually gods in disguise, the more pleasurable it is to watch them do heavenly battle every night during primetime. Because watching really talented babies or midgets do battle is amusing, and novel—but watching gods vie for the ultimate power is profound, important.

So, when I say that watching John Wall fly by a defender lifts the veil of obscurity from before our eyes, allowing us to see the truth of what we’re actually seeing, I hope I won’t be taken to be speaking in hyperbole.[7] It’s not like a transcendent experience—it is one. Wall’s speed compared to the collective power of any defense I’ve seen him embarrass is the equivalent of seeing NBA players standing next to normal Joes.[8]

The John-Wall experience is replicated, in lesser degrees, on many other college teams in an unpredictable, but regular enough pattern. Derek Rose did it the year he blew everyone’s mind as he almost led the University of Memphis Tigers in a fiery chariot all the way to the top of the Final Four Mt. Olympus; Cole Aldrich on the University of Kansas Jayhawks shows it to us from time to time[9]; and there are undoubtedly a number of other college players (past and present) that I personally haven’t seen, that have overloaded our categories until they burst—like at the end of James Cameron’s Titanic when (SPOILER ALERT) Captain Whitebeard (I might be mispronouncing that) watches dejectedly as the frigid waters of the northern Atlantic pour in around his captain’s cabin, pressing against the glass that separates him from the outer darkness (in this metaphor, we’ll call that outside realm THE REAL) until it cracks, and he is drowned by the frozen flood. These transcendent college players allow us momentarily to sacrifice our bodies to death so that we might be reborn in the “visionary gleam” of the Supreme. We, of course, have to return to our dim sublunary lives, while these college players continue on in their spiritual quest for the One.

That’s why watching college sports is sometimes better than watching pro sports. Because when the stars align we get to see the future greats as they begin to become great, in the moments that they begin to distinguish themselves from the rest of mankind. Call it a secular ascension, and it is all caught on camera.

III.

All of which is to say that there are some advantages to being a Sports Outsider. Your typical sports fan, let’s call him little Jonny Neidermeyer, can’t remember a time when he didn’t know something about sports. He grew up watching and caring about sports, figuring stuff out at the same alarming rate that kids learn language, and then, before you know it, little Jonny knows all about advanced basketball mechanics and he’s only 9. Little Jonny, like most American (and, for all I know, most human) sports fans, grows up immersed in, transfixed by, the cultural ethos of sports obsession. That means that many of Jonny’s foundational conceptions of the world, and his sense of his own relation to it, were set, at least in part, in terms of the shared experience of caring about sports. This is what makes being a sports fan so much more than just watching some extraordinarily gifted people pass a ball around for a few hours—but it’s also what makes it so difficult to clearly articulate the nature of the fan experience.[10]

Me? I didn’t give a shit about sports growing up. I fell asleep whenever games were on (that’s what my girlfriend does now). My Dad claims that we used to watch hockey together when I was a baby, but I’ve never really given a shit about hockey (more on that in a second), so there obviously wasn’t much traction there. My three favorite things as a kid were dinosaurs, astronauts, and digging holes in my yard. Surprisingly, none of these turned out to have a very deep hold on me, so I passed into my formative pre-teen years as a somewhat rootless wanderer in what seemed to be a rigidly fixed cultural landscape (welcome to South Jersey). Nonetheless, I eventually got really into not caring about anything, and you are all stupid. Thus, though already conditioned as somewhat of an outsider, I rejoined a more familiar current in the cultural stream.

Here’s the point: not growing up as a part of sports culture has frustrated my attempts to become a natural part of it now. I can’t talk right, can’t think right, can’t see right. As I move closer to the normal experience, I will forget my singular outsider perspective. This is not necessarily a bad thing—it’s the only way to enrich my experience. In fact, I think the goal is something like pure experience, or, at least, an experience where all the cultural ordering of information has occurred before I even perceive what’s before my eyes, so that what I experience is both purely my own, and yet shared. I’m not deluded enough to think that I’ll actually reach the point of pure experience, but, again, this is not necessarily a bad thing. Because, the closer I get to being able to share my experiences with my fellow man, the farther I get from experiencing the terrifying sublime of the sports REAL. Because, the sports REAL exists behind the curtain of obscurity, and this curtain is woven with the fabric of shared cultural experience. The ideal, the impossible ideal, then, would be to somehow occupy both perspectives. It will never happen. I don’t think anyone experiences one or the other in its purest form.

So it would be accurate, then, to describe my experience of the power of sports as a Sports Outsider as the feeling of being pulled in two directions simultaneously: towards a sublime outer darkness, and towards a comfortably situated cultural understanding. I don’t know where these adventures will take me, or at what point, if any, they will stop feeling like adventures and start feeling more like backing your car out of a windy driveway the same way you do every day (“recklessly,” but only to the uninitiated). In the mean time, while the dust is simultaneously being kicked up and settling, I continue to be drawn towards I don’t know where. But wherever I go, and whatever I see, my primary motivation for continuing is, quite simply, the experience of astonishment. About a million years ago (in an era that one of my students once brilliantly and unironically referred to as “back in olden times”), Aristotle claimed that the primary source of astonishment is the irrational.[11] It doesn’t matter if you agree with him, because from my perspective you couldn’t get any closer to a description of what I feel when I am made “silent with swimming sense” before the grand display of heavenly glory that is sporting majesty, forever and ever amen. It’s the feeling, not only of seeing something I never thought was possible (this is akin to how the world felt the first time it saw a massive, backboard-shattering dunk), but also of seeing something I didn’t know I didn’t think was possible (like when the town of Pleasantville starts seeing color). In fact, I’m going to go ahead and liberate that Pleasantville reference from its parenthetical prison, and pursue the comparison just a bit further.

Seriously, how jealous are you of what those people experience in that film? Unless your answer is some permutation of the phrase “really fucking jealous,” you are lying to me, but, more importantly, you are lying to yourself. They get to experience the pleasure of color and the pleasure of sex for the first time? I mean, come on! Look, all I’m saying is that there’s a lot to be said for not experiencing something that most people take to be essential components to their happiness (even if they wouldn’t say it that way) until you have already formed a notion of the absolute limit of where pleasure can take you in this world. So, in a way, I guess I consider myself to be experiencing a milder version of the Pleasantville-effect. Rather than wax poetic about it, I’ll let a much better poet than me do the poet-ing:

Then I felt like some watcher of the skies

When a new planet swims into his ken;

Or like stout Cortez, when with eagle eyes

He stared at the Pacific—and all his men

Look’d at each other with a wild surmise—

Silent, upon a peak in Darien.

Fuck yeah man. No joke, I love that poem.

But, back to what I was saying about astonishment. The experience of the irrational as something pleasurable goes a long way to explain my current preferences in sports viewing. For example, I just can’t watch hockey, and the reason is that I’m never not expecting the puck to reach the back of the net. Those guys skate so fast (what is it, 25, 30 miles per hour?), and hit that tiny little puck so hard, it’s just in no way surprising that it would result in a goal. And when it doesn’t, it’s not astonishing, it’s disappointing. Part of me knows that it’s much more complicated than that, but that’s not the part of me that cares about what happens when I watch sports. On the flip side, take a sport like football in the NFL. How does that game even work? Almost everything that can happen in it is astonishing to me: when a quarterback finds his receiver, when the receiver makes a catch, when a defender does or doesn’t intercept the ball, when the running back finds a seam and when the offensive line is able to force that seam—but also when the defensive line holds their line. Ok, I could go on, but you get the point. Football players are probably the closest things to gods in sports, which is why I came to the conclusion a few weeks ago that football in the NFL is the best sport there is. It’s like watching the ancient battle for heaven (you know, back when Satan got a little too big for his britches?), only the battle is waged not between the forces of good and evil, but by forces much less symbolically saturated. And yet, I consider it a distinct advantage for the sport that regardless of the outcome of the game, it has nothing to do with anything that matters[12]—because, let’s face it, the more that something matters, the more the powerful strangeness of your feelings are tamed, placed into predetermined categories of meaning and judgment. And please, don’t get me wrong: I’m not against things that matter. But when the outcomes of events are important (elections, wars, health care debates), your personal feelings about them are not. Nobody thinks that experiencing the irrational in international politics is pleasurable—we think of that with dread. But in football, you get to see someone that might look like a more beefed-up version of a regular dude performing the type of acrobatic violence that your rational capacities would only ever interpret as belonging to gods. And in that slippage between the expected and the unknown, astonishment emerges. Nothing matters so that the experience can be profoundly meaningful.



[1] Baseball demonstrates the transition between dramatic pause and awkward silence. Nobody likes an awkward silence, even when you are laughing at it.

[2] When watching sports with your friends, as I’ve come to learn, simultaneous experiences are less rare than you might think—and nowhere near as mythological as the simultaneous orgasm.

[3] You know this feeling of dissatisfied belief—it’s the same feeling you got when you kept believing in Unicorns for like two more years than you ever should have. If you want to remind yourself of what I’m talking about here, go for a treasure hunt in your mom’s attic. When you find your sister’s old Lisa Frank Trapper Keepers, spread them out before you in a majestic semi-circle, and just take them in, slowly, like a glass of fine wine: without fear, without judgment, and without attempting to press the blob-like mess of ambiguous feelings to which the experience gives rise into rigid logical categories—and you’ll know exactly what I mean.

[4] Playing D&D, and doing other “real” things was ok though.

[5] But maybe I just have a small, and therefore unfairly skewed, sample size.

[6] Just to be clear, I don’t like Kobe. Nobody can like Kobe. He’s a monomanical douchebag possessed by a desire so alien to me, that he might as well be an actual alien. I don’t give a fuck about his controversial past, his pretend smile, his faux-collegiality, or his sweat-soaked post-game interviews where he sounds like a less-comically-understated Bill Lumbergh talking to an employee about being a “team player.” But, what can I say? The man plays ball like a mo. The viewing experience for a Sports Outsider does not have any room for ideology: you only like what you like to see, even when you kind of hate it.

[7] Also, I hope you don’t take me to be speaking in tongues. That would just be weird, and you’re probably too drunk to be reading this. (It’s ok, I’m drunk too.)

[8] Actually, the same point holds for his speed relative to the rest of his team.

[9] And by “shows it to us from time to time” I mean that the other night when I was watching college hoops I saw Cole Aldrich peak behind the curtain of reality and show us the figures of the apocalypse and unspeakable doom that stand behind it. It was terrifying and wonderful.

[10] Footnote: It’s more than likely, though, that in the example I’m considering, the “fan experience” is so impossibly caught up in the cultural experience, that attempting to distinguish between the two is to pretend that the typical experience is like my own—that is, at least partially dislodged from the normal pattern of cultural development.

[11] I’m going to part ways with Aristotle as soon as he is invoked, however, because I am in no way interested in clarifying what he means by rationality. Hint: it’s more complicated than you think, and you absolutely do not give a fuck about it.

[12] Exception: when the Ravens are playing anyone, but especially when they are playing the Steelers. Ok, also back when we had to use boxing / hockey to defeat fascism and communism. I can’t hate on that.