A quick report on the Neil Young concert. Sadly, it was not “Acoustic Sensitive Neil” that showed up for the concert. It was “I am the Grandfather of Grunge Rock Neil”, so the music was a little, shall we say, grungier than for what I had hoped. He played a couple of his acoustic pieces, but I cannot say that it was my favourite concert of all time. After the opening band managed to whip the crowd into a stupor, we did have the added benefit of sitting just down from the world’s stupidest stoners. These guys made Harold and Kumar look like Rhodes Scholars. In a facility where smoking is not permitted, they had their lighter turned as high as it would go, and yet could not mange to keep the joint lit. Several tries down the road (and producing just enough smoke that we could tell what they were doing), security noticed the repeated flame and relieved them of the troublesome marijuana. Off to drink more beer! There was also a woman sitting on the other side who was talking yelling on her cellphone through a couple of songs, shring the concert with a friend, so the experience was somewhat less enjoyable than it could have been. (This was a circumstance when Twitter would have been a good idea. Much quieter.) Now, they’ve just announced that Fleetwood Mac is coming back, but without Christine McVie, so now we have to decide if that’s a dealbreaker or not. Mike thinks that Lindsay Buckingham is more important than McVie, but all my favourite songs they do are hers, so I’m not sure I want to go. Other opportunities coming to town: Leonard Cohen (who’s been getting rave reviews) and Celtic Thunder. I’d like to see Celtic Thunder, but I’d have to go alone, since they’re “too produced” (Mike’s words). (Like Riverdance wasn’t produced?) Anyways, there are always opportunities to separate us from our money in the name of damaging our hearing entertainment.
We interrupt this blog to bring you a special opinion piece: (and really, aren’t my opinions always special?) Our local Talk Radio channel calls Thursday morning’s call-in show Bug’s Day: the Hour of Rage. I would like to take this opportunity to Rage about something that Bugs me. Yesterday’s show featured the question: Could you do without televeision? After listening to some of the pompous people calling in, I pose the question: Why do people claim moral superiority just because they choose not to watch TV? Is it not just a choice? I am not weak just because I choose to watch TV with my husband in the evening; I am knitting at the same time, we are enjoying what we are watching, we talk about it afterwards, we still find time to walk the dogs. ***We do both read, but usually when the other person is elsewhere.
All this being said, we don’t just watch whatever is on. There are maybe a half-dozen shows that we watch regularly, dramas and sitcoms mostly, and Mike tapes a lot of movies that we may or may not watch somtime down the road. There is precious little “reality” television (it’s only on a long as it takes us to change channels or turn off the box), although Mike does have an affinity for anything with a scoreboard in one corner and a timeclock in the other, and I kind of like the nature and science end of things.
What I’m trying to say is that I do not consider watching television a sign of mental weakness or reduced intelligence. I have learned a lot from watching TV, and it has opened my mind to a lot of subjects that I otherwise would have dismissed. If you choose not to have a TV, that’s great! Just don’t look down your nose at me because I choose to spend time watching Star Trek reruns and the National Geographic channel in high definition. You do your thing, I’ll do mine.
We now return you to your regularily scheduled program.