So, I’m reading The Makers right now. I’m 18.58% into the book, according to my iPhone. It’s the third book I’ve read by Cory Doctorow – the first two were Content and Little Brother (I tried to read Down and Out in Magic Kingdom, but I didn’t get very far – something about the book just didn’t interest me). Little Brother was good enough that I bought a physical copy of it.

I really enjoy the ideas in Little Brother (even if it’s for young adults) and Makers – the tech and lifestyles that seem only a few short years off, along with the ethics that go with them. Of course some people might say a story is just a story, but the “morals” in a story matter, especially in the case of a popular writer, because these stories help shape our morality.

Now, I’m not the pissed Harry-Potter-Hating Christian Mom who gets all up in arms about books, and for the most part I feel like Doctorow’s writing is a force for good, but there is one thing, just one thing, that I’m not sure I feel comfortable with. I’m not denouncing the guy – I really, really enjoy his writing, but I’m a little unsure of how I feel about this one thing, so I’m writing this post for two reasons: to sort out my thoughts in writing. But I also hope to get a little feedback from others who have read his books. I wanna know what YOU think.

Anyway, when I first read Little Brother, I noticed a section on page 62 (of the PDF version on craphound.com) where the main character and his friends go to a store to buy a bunch of merchandise printed with the new meme they’re supporting.

I thought it was weird – so much of the book was about information freed from corporations and government – that the main characters would embrace commercialism so openly. And in its most abhorrent form no less: capitalizing on a youth fad. Maybe I just have a bad taste in my mouth ever since I was a teenager and happened to be working at Toys R Us during the Christmas season Pokémon was all the rage (oh, god, I still wake up screaming some nights, sweaty from nightmaring about all those fat, sticky little American kids groping with their jam hands for the latest Pikachu WhatHaveYou), but I can’t shake the feeling that this type of blatant commercialism is, if not flat-out evil, at least in poor taste.

I let it go at first – I really enjoy Little Brother and didn’t want a silly few sentences about the main character buying a T-shirt ruin a book for me, especially a book that preaches so many other “morals” I see as quality. Plus, I chalk it up to Doctorow just understanding that teenagers don’t care about commercialism and will buy t-shirts with their favorite memes on them (I did, when I was a teenager). In fact, teenagers are still young enough to think that t-shirts are social statements, so they might actually believe that by buying t-shirts with subversive slogans they are sticking it to whatever man they hate (when it’s more than likely they are supporting that man by buying the shirt).

But now, whilst reading The Makers (which is pretty awesome so far, by the way) – I’ve started to consider the question again, if only because the book is all about selling stuff. It’s about an indie inventor company that invents stuff and moves units. Sure, it’s about other stuff too, like an indie blogger, and the homeless, and corporations, and so on, but fueled by my earlier interest in Doctorow’s economic viewpoint (or, at the very least, his characters’ viewpoints), I see it as mostly an indie business manifesto. Keep in mind, I’m only 18.58% through the book, so take that with a grain of salt, especially if the book turns into an action/adventure spy thriller ala James Bond (of the Hollywood Bonds) at 21.45% or something. But I doubt that’ll happen.

Does anyone else think that the free information ideal must go hand in hand with physical minimalism? Because it seems like they do go together. You know – it’s like we’re digitally rich so it’s okay to be physically minimalist. But Doctorow, a guy who seems to support free information, doesn’t seem to support physical minimalism, so I’m at a loss as to how to jive these ideas together.

I’ve been thinking a lot lately about physical minimalism because I have STUFF. I’ve made some recent purchases, such as a few graphic novels, video games, and a Playstation 3, and now I am feeling STUFF GUILT, even though life is pretty damn good and having STUFF is part of that.

But, now I have all this STUFF. And it seems like I shouldn’t want STUFF, since I believe information should be digital, or at the very least, cheap and easily digitized. But I have some STUFF, I like my STUFF, and I feel guilty for both of those things.

When I’m considering issues, I look for them in things I’m reading, watching, playing, etc, looking for the opinions about the issue I’m trying to figure out from people I respect. I respect Cory Doctorow, but although his characters and I believe many of the same things, we differ somehow, and it’s about STUFF.

So what the deal, people? Am I misinterpreting Doctorow’s viewpoints? Am I just too stuck up about STUFF and consumption? Am I wrong that the drive to make things digital (if they can be made digital – like movies, games, and books) conflicts with the desire to own physical property, especially media?

I live in Des Moines, Iowa, and the musical Rent was just here at the Civic Center. I’d seen it before, but it was some of the original cast this time, so I went again. The show was great.

But after the show, in the lobby, there was a table with a bunch of Rent STUFF, like t-shirts and lunch boxes. And all that seems like blatant commercialism, a bunch of crap people don’t need, but buy anyway. Because unless you’re in the market for a new lunch box, you’re only buying that lunch box because it says Rent on it. And then you’re going to get home and put it on your shelf, where it isn’t useful at all – it just collects dust until you finally throw it out to make space for the lunchbox you buy from the next fad.
Collections, especially physical media collections, piss me off, especially when the STUFF is available digitally, like DVDs and CDs. Even my books are starting to bother me, though the move from physical to digital isn’t quite there yet.

Now, t-shirts aren’t something you can get digitally – clothes have to be physical (at least, until we’re digital, anyway), so we have to wear them. They might as well be Rent T-shirts as they are plain white ones. But why does it feel to me that Rent is cheapened because there are t-shirts of it? If merchandising supports things I like, why do I hate it so much? And why does Cory Doctorow, who seems to support many of the ideas I do, create characters that I disagree with about STUFF?

What do you think? Please leave a comment here, or @mispeled on Twitter, or send me an email and let me know. My email address is in the button on the right sidebar. I’m serious about talking about this, so if you have a lengthy response, email it to me and I’ll put it up as a post.

Thanks,

-m.

So, I play video games, but the older I get, the less likely it is that I complete them. I’m like a goddamn video game tourist that comes to your overseas city and then stays in the hotel the whole time, only eats Chinese food instead of the local delicacies, and compares everything about the foreign culture to the country I’m from (yet profess to not particularly like). So here are several grains of salt for you to have – they go great with tequila.

Still, I try tons of different games. I game on the PC, the PS3, the iPhone, and the Nintendo DS. I like games. I like multiplayer and single player – they both have their merits. So, kind, generous, and slaving developers, please understand that I say this in the highest regard and with the greatest respect: PLEASE STOP PUTTING “QUESTS” IN SINGLE PLAYER GAMES.

Now, I like MMOs. And I understand why quests are necessary in those games. You want players to keep playing and take their time, to go through your content slowly, otherwise players could max out, get bored, and stop paying your subscription fees. More player time means millions of dollars spend on making the grind interesting, and an easy way to do that is through quests. I get that not every quest can be “go kill your arch nemesis who’s been flagging your progress for the fifty levels.” Sometimes it has to be “get me 10 grapefruit” and well you’re at it, “kill me ten bears.” I UNDERSTAND.

But in single player games, the goal should be a focused, tailored experience. Pinpointed, like shark’s teeth honed with freakin’ lasers. Multiplayer games have to be balanced so players have a chance to be equal to each other. But there’s no reason that single player games shouldn’t make the player feel like s/he’s the goddamn HERO, the Kwisatz Haderach, the Messiah, and at least one of the comings (preferably the second) all rolled into one.

The Kwisatz Haderach does not fetch 10 grapefruit or kill ten bears. The HERO pwns everything and doesn’t want to deal with a cumbersome quest log, or journal, or what-have-you that helps her deal with all the fruit fetching and wildlife slaying you’ve bestowed upon her. STOP IT. Write your games so the player is always doing something epic, and preferably isn’t doing more than three epic things at once.

It’s forgivable in a multiplayer game, but stop putting them into single player games. Nothing makes me leave a game faster (or worse yet, watch the review and decide not to buy your game) as quests in single player.

Maybe this is sacrilege, but I like short, linear, single player experiences. I like single player games that are paced by a master of the art to be exciting, heart-pounding, and able to be described with other overzealous adjectives. But once you put lameduck “quests” that make me collect 10 grapefruit and kill ten bears, I think your pacing is poorly thought out. I think your pacing sucks. I think you need better writers. Or designers.

Or maybe, you just need to stop being everything to everyone. Leave the quests for multiplayer. Please. It’s okay. Really, it is.

You know, it occurred to me when I woke up this morning that I have no idea what the acceptable procedure is (if any) for telling people that I dreamt about them. Maybe this is a silly Larry David style thing to wonder about, but how exactly do you tell people you dreamt about them last night without seeming like some creepy psychopath? Is there a way? Let’s consider this for a minute.

So, here’s the situation: you’re sleeping and you dream about someone you know. You and an acquaintance you kinda know, but not enough that you feel like you can safely tell them you saw them in a dream without feeling weird, are doing something in the dream. Let’s say: you’re bowling. Big Bird is probably there, too, since he cameos in a lot of dreams (or some I’m told).

So you’re bowling with your acquaintance. You only score a 236, which is unacceptable for a dream, since polar opposites are all that should ever happen (which means 300 or all gutter balls), but would be pretty damn good if you weren’t dreaming. Too bad.

Meanwhile, your acquaintance is dancing with Big Bird and wearing a funny hat. Plus, she’s reciting all the things she said the last time you saw her in a play, so mostly she’s saying lines from “Death of a Salesman.” And Big Bird is going along with it, except he doesn’t look like Big Bird, even though you know he is Big Bird, because, hey, well, it’s a dream and you know certain things.

And then you wake up. As the sleep fades from you and you walk to the bathroom to take care of business, you think about your dream. Your acquaintance, let’s call her Pam, is a woman you know from the local coffee shop. She makes your triple-shot latte every morning (and afternoon) and since all the caffeine she provides might very well be the inspiration behind all your strange dreams, you decide you’d like to tell her about your dream the next time you see her.

It’s like seeing someone at the supermarket and waving, but they don’t see you. Next time you see them, you mention it, don’t you? You say, “Hey, Pam, I saw you at the supermarket but you didn’t see me and I waved but I guess you didn’t catch it isn’t that funny ha ha ha let’s chuckle about it together then go on about our days because it’s not a big deal and you didn’t really care but I wanted to tell you so I am telling you ha ha ha,” or something like that, anyway.

Shouldn’t it be the same with dreams? So you saw Pam, dancing with Big Bird, who didn’t really look like Big Bird, but was, and reciting “Death of a Salesman” while you bowled a 236 – even if it wasn’t real, you’d still like to mention it, right? Right. Because even if she didn’t get a kick out of it, you did, and you like to share your kicks. You’re that kind of person.

BUT…it’s weird. Because dreams are supposed to be private things. The first rule about DREAM CLUB is we don’t talk about DREAM CLUB, right? But why? It’s not like you have any control over what you dream. It’s not like you were thinking to yourself, before you went to bed, “You know, that Pam from the coffee shop, by gum, I’d like to get her into a dream, if you know what I mean.”

No, before you went to bed you were thinking, “Man, I’m tired. When I was younger, I used to be able to stay up later. But not anymore. Now I go to bed on time. Jesus. It’s still so early. Oh well, who cares. I’m tired,” or some other mundane thing. And then you dreamt about Pam, woke up wanting to tell her, and are put into this awkward situation.

If you tell Pam, well, you look like a loser, a psycho, or at the very least one of her “weird” friends. Until you’ve built up enough “friend acceptance” points with Pam, there are certain things you can’t broach, and dream sightings are one of them.

But if you don’t tell her, it bugs you. Not tons, you’re sane and reasonable *people*, after all, but it bugs you about the same as if you see someone at the supermarket from afar and can’t decide whether to say hello or not.

If you flag them down to chat, you’ll have to talk to them, and you don’t really want them looking at the simply overzealous amount of vodka and cheetos in your cart (even if you explain they were just for cooking…YEAH RIGHT), but if you don’t wave and call them over, well, it’s going to get to you in the parking lot: “Man, I should have been friendly to so-and-so, maybe then I would have more social skills and wouldn’t stay home all the time eating cheetos and drinking vodka.” Or something like that.

So what do you do? I don’t know. But I think it should be okay to tell people you saw them in dreams and have it not be weird. I think it should be the same and seeing someone in real life and then telling them later.

So here goes. I’m gonna start. I dreamt about three people last night and they all have one thing in common: they all on my twitter timeline. I guess I was reading my twitter feed before bed.

So Neil Gaiman, Maureen Johnson, and Maggie – it was fun to see you in my dream last night. I hope you had fun at my Dad’s house playing lazer tag.

Neil, I’m sorry Amanda Palmer didn’t want to stay because I got arrested for shoplifting and so the macaroni and cheese burned and she hates burned macaroni and cheese.

Maureen, I know that it was you in the corner, even if you looked like Big Bird. I saw what you were doing to Bert, but I’ll keep quiet (FOR NOW!).

And Maggie, well, thanks for winning the lazertag game after I got hauled off by the cops. You scored one for the underdogs. When the Mighty Ducks carted you off on their shoulders in victory, I wished it was me, but you were the better sportsperson. I swear, I don’t even know how I could have been shoplifting in my Dad’s house, considering I was playing goalie the whole time.

But, hey, dream logic. What gives?

-m.