Crimes Against Suspension of Disbelief

Forgive me, Twitter followers, for I have sinned. I have become utterly and completely obsessed with the #hemyneumantrial, and have subjected you to weeks of endless prattling on about it, though the vast majority of you probably didn't give a crap. But now the trial is over, which means that you won't have to hear about it anymore. Unless there's an appeal. Or unless more information comes out. Or unless you keep reading this post, because I'm about to give you...

My Review of "EVERYBODY Has to Stand Up: the #hemyneumantrial" brought to you by Nyquil: the trial time sniffling, sneezing, coughing, aching, stuffy head, fever, so you can snooze right through relevant testimony before deciding a man's fate medicine!

by Kimberly Welsh, Exaggeratress in Chief

February 2012 saw the beginning of one of the most gripping dramatic web series murder trials in recent memory. Hemy Neuman was being tried for the November 18, 2010 murder of Rusty Sneiderman, a shooting which took place in the parking lot of Dunwoody Day Care just after Rusty had dropped his son off for the day. In the intervening year and a half, the community at large had learned that Neuman was Sneiderman's wife's boss (draw a diagram if you need to), and that he and Mrs. Sneiderman were potentially having an affair. Now that you're caught up on the background, let's look at the trial itself...

Leaving aside necessarily poor production values and disappointingly conservative camera work, the biggest obstacle between this trial and greatness was its inconsistency. Indeed, I believe this will be held up for generations to come as an example of what happens when two conflicting production teams are left to bicker over the same project, though we must give credit where credit is due - Judge Gregory Adams' direction was a valiant attempt at fluidity and effective pacing. District Attorney James and Assistant DA Geary handled Act I ("State's Evidence") and Act III, Scene 1 ("Prosecution's Rebuttal: the Revenge") with dignity and aplomb, giving them the feel of an expertly edited documentary. I attribute this to the fact that, by and large, they took the courageous risk of using real people who were telling the truth to tell their story. The notable exception here is, of course, Andrea Sneiderman (née Greenberg and hereafter referred to as such because it irritates me to use the same name for her and the innocent victim) with her scenery-chewing Bobble-Headed Unsympathetic Confrontational Sarcasm™ approach to her role, but the DA made even this dramatic abomination fit, through a graceful and seamless mise-en-abîme, by which the very fact that she was acting paradoxically added to the realism of the other testimony. Honestly, the only other fault I find with this portion was the ham-handed advertisement for Coldwell Banker on the witness stand - highly incongruous, in an otherwise very serious scene.

But in Act II ("Defense Evidence"), viewers were subjected to a jarring shift in tone, from the world of the sober, truthful documentary to a parade of spinning pyrotechnics and flashing lasers, framing a tale of passion, 12-foot demons in the guise of 80s pop culture icons, domestic violence, globe-trotting, and the sordid story of two people who made the perverse decision to watch "The Goodbye Girl" voluntarily! At times, I wondered if this was indeed the same mini-series murder trial! At best it was confusing, and for most viewers it proved downright disorienting. In addition to the lack of continuity, a remarkably inept casting made this portion all but unwatchable! I must've heard acting teachers say it a hundred times: if you cannot actually make tears come out of your eyes, DO NOT ATTEMPT A FAKE CRY ON STAGE! And if I ever doubted the wisdom in that, there was no shortage of poorly-acted defense witness testimony to drive home its point. Meanwhile, the majority of the witnesses called to testify on behalf of the defense came across as confrontational, indignant, arrogant, and (in some applicable cases) utterly biased and unprofessional. Overall, it was a disappointing mishmash that meandered aimlessly, though I would be remiss if I failed to acknowledge Dr. Marx's brilliant comic turn in Scene Two ("Cross Examination"). Well done, Dr. Marx!

What we saw in Act III was largely more of the same - gritty, believable reality from the Prosecution and an imaginatively written but poorly acted psychological thriller from the Defense. Act IV brought significantly more drama as the action mounted to its climax. The monologue of Attorney Doug Peters was difficult to watch, owing to the frustration of seeing a clearly accomplished performer with great potential so harshly constrained by the gaping holes in the plot he must advance. Thus it was ultimately District Attorney Robert James who stole what was left of the show after Andrea Greenberg's jaw-dropping performance. His speech, and his visual aids, were set to reveal the surprise ending: this was not a psychological thriller or a true-crime reality show, but an honest-to-God murder trial.

A man is dead. And all the belligerent witnesses, fanciful demons, and friendly Coldwell Banker agents in the world can't change that fact. I honestly think most of the people who watched this trial so obsessively (like me) did so because we were so appalled that anyone would expect Neuman's story to be taken seriously - that's what was funny. The death of Rusty Sneiderman wasn't funny. At all.

In his statement at sentencing, Hemy Neuman began by saying that no one had won; "everybody lost". I can certainly see where he was going with that, and there's no doubt he was standing in a room full of sad people, all of whom had lost something. But Rusty had lost more than anyone else, and there was only one thing anyone could still offer him: justice. And his family, with the help of the DA and his team, got that for him. It's a hollow victory, to be sure. But actually, Hemy: Rusty won.

So rest in peace, Rusty. And rest in peace, #hemyneumantrial hashtag. And rest in peace, this horrible, horrible story.

Unless...

Blah Blah 2012 Blah Blah New Leaf Blee Bloop Mud Wrestling.

Sorry I've been yadda yadda it was just that [YAWN!] (insert empty promise of more regular blogging here).

There! Now that that's over with, I can tell you about the thing I really wanted to tell you about, which is this:

As you can probably tell from the font and format, this is a Facebook ad. It has been shoved down my News Feed's throat for a couple of weeks now, though for the life of me I can't figure out why. But I might have a clearer idea of its relevance to my life if I understood what the hell it was advertising. I mean, they've employed the word "race" here, which means it's either some sort of speed-based athletic competition, or they're holding open registration for a new subset of humans which would ordinarily be determined by common heritable phenotypic characteristics/geographic ancestry/physical appearance/ethnicity*, but in this case will be determined solely by who gets in under the wire for open registration!

I'll tell you this much for free: I really hope it's the latter! Racial differences, whether real or imagined, define so much of our interaction in such a negative way, and people die every day in their name. It would be a massive improvement for humanity as a whole if we could all just sign up for whichever newly-made-up race we want to be. Then no one would be jealous of anyone else, someone's physical appearance would tell you nothing whatsoever about their racial affiliation,  and we'd all be far too busy inventing our own unique cultures to bother fighting with each other. And as the ad implies that there is a cap on the number of people who can be a part of this race, I'm guessing we could also cap all races at roughly the same number, thereby completely doing away with the concept of "minorities" altogether! We would all be equal! FINALLY!

...but it seems far more likely that this is, in fact, just an advertisement for some lame-ass trail running race that's been given a hefty helping of the oh-so-trendy messy/muddy obstacle course component that seems to be springing up all over the place. I never understood the appeal of that sort of thing, to be honest - it's bad enough being sweaty and nasty; why would I also want to be muddy and grimy? But this ad has cleared a lot of things up for me, as it chooses to advertise an allegedly serious athletic competition using a picture that makes it look like something between a wet t-shirt contest and some sort of bizarre solo mudwrestling exhibition. I still don't understand why anyone thinks this would be appealing to me, but I imagine there are a fair number of adolescent boys who'd love nothing more than to run a 5k through a field of writhing half-clothed women.

Sigh.

*Wikipedia for the win

Don't Speak. No, SERIOUSLY.

You know what really juices my rutabagas? People who talk for no reason. If you like to hear yourself talk, I can pretty much guarantee you that NO ONE ELSE DOES. It is my misfortune, however, that even though no one cares what you have to say, lots of other people very much want to hear themselves talk. And what do we have then? We have a cluster of people saying nothing, often very loudly. Sample conversation:
YAPPER #1: What's the weather like today?
YAPPER #2: I heard it was gonna rain.
YAPPER #3: Really? I thought it was supposed to be sunny!
YAPPER #4: I read on the internet that there was going to be a freak dust storm blowing in from the ocean!!!
YAPPER #1 AGAIN: Hey, [YAPPER #5], what was the weather like when you went out a couple of hours ago?
YAPPER #5: It was nice! There were a couple of clouds, but they weren't too big. Although I noticed some grey ones in the distance when I was coming in, so maybe it's gonna rain later.
YAPPER #3: I could've SWORN I heard it was gonna be sunny!

The problem with this conversation is that it is the dumbest thing to come out of Pointless Inane Dumbtown since Paris Hilton published her 365 Ways to Cook With Cheddar Cheese and Heavy Cream! cookbook*. The weather is the singular focus of about a billion different websites, all available free of charge 24 hours a day. I have 3 free weather apps on my phone, one of which came bundled in the operating system. We have windows we can look out of. We could go outside and see for ourselves. And at the point where anyone asks what the weather was like "a couple of hours ago", the conversation has lost any illusion of relevancy. WEATHER CHANGES. OFTEN. RECENT-BUT-NOT-CURRENT NONEXPERT EYEWITNESS ACCOUNTS OF WEATHER ARE POINTLESS.

In the presence of a conversation like that, this is what I hear:
YAPPER #1: HEY LOOK EVERYBODY I AM TALKING!
YAPPER #2: ME TOO I WANNA TALK TOO!
YAPPER #3: YOU GUYS ARE TALKING? COOL! NOW I AM TALKING AS WELL!
YAPPER #4: I AM SO DESPERATE TO TALK THAT I WILL MAKE UP ANY OLD CRAP JUST SO I CAN SAY IT AT YOU.
YAPPER #1 AGAIN: IT'S AWESOME THAT WE ARE ALL TALKING BUT LET'S GET SOMEONE ELSE TO TALK!
YAPPER #5: I WILL TALK! I'M HAPPY TO TALK! I LOVE TALKING!
YAPPER #3: CHECK ME OUT YOU GUYS I'M TALKING AGAIN!!!!

Please. I'm begging you. Think twice before you open your face.

*No such book. Made it up**
**But I would totally buy it if it existed.

How About I Occupy Your Face With My Fist?

If there's one thing I can't stand, it's a rotten joke that gets repeated ad infinitum by a bunch of people too lazy to figure out why it's not funny. I've talked before about my seething hatred for online comment forums, but I haven't yet learned not to read them, which is why I've spent most of my week reading coverage of the Occupy Wall Street protests, all of which is tailed by an endless stream of "Why don't they go occupy a JOB?"

HA ha ha ha ha! It was funny when a random assortment of 85-year olds said it the first time, and it's still funny when a bunch of bitter 40-year old idiots pick it up off their favorite FOX News commentator and repeat it to the amusement of their peers.

I don't usually relish ruining a joke, but this time...I'm OK with it. Here's why that sentence is not only unfunny, but completely ignorant: In the current economic situation, you can't just waltz into a job with a living wage and health care benefits. My personal experience with this would be enough - I have an excellent academic record including a Master's degree I completed with a 4.0 GPA. I have an excellent work record, glowing references from a variety of sources, fluency in a foreign language, decent social skills, certifications in a number of commonly used computer programs, a professional demeanor (no really - I do), and a positive attitude. Even with all that, it took me 3 years to find gainful full-time employment with health insurance and a living wage (a job I am both VERY fortunate and VERY grateful to have), and the only reason I got that job was because I happened to be temping there when someone decided to leave work and never come back. And I know lots of other people with good academic credentials (everything from science degrees to MBAs to PhDs), spotless employment histories, no criminal record, etc. etc. who have sent hundreds of resumes to no avail.

It's an employer's market, you see, and employers...how can I put this? Employers have lost their damn minds. I'll give you an example of the kind of thing an average job seeker faces in 2011...

Ann Q. Public has a Bachelor's degree in Chemical Engineering with a minor in English Literature. She graduated top of her class at Duke, was President of her sorority, and spent her summers interning at a variety of companies, including a pharmaceutical manufacturer and DuPont. Her references have nothing but good things to say about her, and she's a very personable young lady with a solid work ethic. She starts looking for jobs and sees the heading "Chemical Engineer" in her search. Imagine her surprise when she reads the rest...

CHEMICAL ENGINEER
Minimum 12 years experience overseeing a team of magical talking ferrets. Must be fluent in Farsi and Japanese. Submit letters from at least 3 references, one of whom must be a member of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints licensed to practice veterinary medicine in the Kyrgyz Republic. Members of the US Olympic Badminton team will be given special consideration. Salary $20k. Include writing sample (award-winning short fiction ONLY) when applying online at www.youcan'thavethisjob.com. WE ARE AN EQUAL OPPORTUNITY EMPLOYER.

You think I'm kidding.

The thing is, there are so many desperate, unemployed people out there right now that they can demand any ridiculous thing they want, and they'll get so many applications that they probably will find their ideal candidate in there somewhere. And of course, they will then offer him or her FAR less money than he or she is worth, and they'll get a Nobel Prize winner at a bargain basement price because there are so few decent jobs out there. (NOTE: to be fair to the employers, part of the reason they'll offer a terrible salary and horrible benefits is because they don't have very much money to spend either. They would have a bigger budget, but they've committed over 30% of their total profit to their CEO's ridiculous, astronomical, and unnecessarily inflated salary and another 30% is earmarked for political donations to ensure that you never get any rights and the "corporations are people" model stays in place forever.) Oh - and just to be clear: $20k is not a living wage when gas prices are nearly $4/gallon, rates for water and electricity are rising, and food is getting more expensive (because of increased fuel costs). It's not. It's really, really not.

So if you're lucky enough to have a well-paid, secure job, then good for you. If you're a stay-at-home mom whose life is funded by her husband's well-paid, secure job, then congratulations (and I am very, very jealous). But if you haven't actually been one of the millions of people that has fought tooth and nail to survive in this economy, then stop making this ridiculous, preposterous "joke". I try to watch my language on this blog, but that kind of talk is bullshit, and it shows a complete and total lack of compassion.

I apologize for the total lack of humor in this post, but I'm getting really sick of being condescended to by people who don't understand what they're talking about. I'll try to be cheerier (or at least funnier) next time. Thanks for bearing with me.

My Official Twitter Policy: Read It and Tweet

Everybody get your "Unfollow" fingers ready! Use the middle one, cuz I'm about to piss you off!

I love Twitter. I'm on Twitter, Google+, tumblr, and Facebook, but Twitter is my absolute favorite. That's why I refuse to let anyone ruin it for me. This includes you. If you aren't on Twitter and don't get what all the fuss is about, I'll explain it thusly:

On Facebook, you have a dedicated page that you have to curate at all times. I've had to delete offensive posts with which I didn't want to be associated. I've had to stop fights. I've been unwittingly dragged into fights. I've been flirted with against my will, had unflattering photos maliciously tagged, been forcibly added to groups about which I neither knew nor cared, had intimate details of my life revealed to distant relatives... Facebook is a full-time job, and you have to stay on top of it lest you wake up one morning and find that all 200 of your friends have been treated to a graphic photo of you vomiting, and you have been made "President" of the group "Racism not Placation!" It has its good points too, of course, or I would've deactivated my account by now. But it's a hassle nonetheless.

Twitter, on the other hand, is like a cocktail party. Your friends are there, and if you have something to say to them directly, you can find them and have a little chit-chat. But there are also millions of other people there, and if you hear something interesting going on, you can join right in! Play a hashtag game! Make a new friend with a fun accent! And Twitter has been the best means of finding new blogs, books, music, TV shows, etc. I don't care what the media thinks; Twitter has REAL people telling me what they GENUINELY like. As long as I've managed to find people who generally share my tastes (which is also pretty easy to do on Twitter), I have reliable opinions coming at me from all sides! It's fantastic! Sure, people can smack-talk about you if they want, but their word-puke won't be automatically broadcast to everyone who follows you.

I just joined Twitter earlier this year, so I'm a relative newbie. "No big deal," I thought at the time, "I'll follow some celebrities I like and some friends from the theatre. Cool!" And those first heady days were cool. God, they were so cool. My timeline was nothing but fun/funny tweets, and I stumbled on some strangers I quite liked, some of whom had blogs I quite liked, or YouTube videos I quite liked. It was a great way to find like-minded people and have a little burst of cheery sunshine in my life. Aaaaaah.

But now that I've been on Twitter for a few months and am pushing 50 followers, I'm older and wiser. I've learned that you have to be somewhat thick-skinned on Twitter. You just have to. No one has to explain why they follow, unfollow you, retweet you, don't retweet you, reply to you, don't reply to you...and you have to accept that.

I did the "follow back out of politeness" thing - where you follow anyone who follows you - for about 10 minutes, and suddenly my timeline went from a cheery ray of sunshine to a bile-inducing stream of shameless, repetitive self-promotion, vulgarity, and straight-up offensive hate speech. I was shocked. I didn't want to unfollow, of course, because I'm a nice person and I know that no one likes to be unfollowed. Instead, I invested $5 in a Twitter client for my iPhone that allows me to "zip" certain accounts so I can technically follow without having them raise my hackles (that's Olde English for "blood pressure") (not really).

But before I found TweetCaster (recommended!), I struggled to understand these people. In most cases, I ultimately just felt sorry for them. Sometimes, late at night, there would be a desperate-sounding tweet - you could almost hear the wailing sobs - from someone who had lost a follower and "needed" to replace him/her. To these people, I say: If that follower had any value to you as a human being, then they are irreplaceable. If they only had value as a number, then what you need are stronger meds, not additional followers.

I don't pity-follow.
I don't promo-follow.
I don't mention goods and services in exchange for money (*note: it shocks me how many bloggers are obviously being paid to endorse products in their Twitter feeds. It shocks me even more to see how graceless and heavy-handed they are about it.)
I don't pity-retweet.
I don't promo-retweet.

A lot of people (like, A LOT of people) will call this bad Twitter etiquette, and that's fine. I am well aware that literally millions of people believe very strongly in the pity- and promo- use of Twitter. But I adamantly do not.

As pertains to following: I am currently following nearly 120 people, and most of them are endlessly amusing, fantastic, kind, funny, amazing people. I truly, genuinely, honestly wonder what they're up to at various points throughout the day, and I love cranking up my phone to find out. Lisa started her new job! Jacque went out for ice cream! Drew went to Willy's for lunch AGAIN! Lauren and Grace had a witty and hilarious exchange about 90s-era raves! Bret booked another commercial! And both Nathaniel and James posted new videos in character as their alter egos! Those guys crack me up! If human beings were TV channels, Twitter allows you to tune into your favorites 24/7, which is amazeballs. Why the hell would I deliberately add commercials for things I don't want? Or random narcissistic whining? Answer: I wouldn't. As Grace Dent says in her brilliant book (see link in final paragraph): "I think life's too short to have people pissing you off in your timeline." I follow people who add value to my timeline by way of personal relationships, common interests, or because they generate content I enjoy. Those are the only reasons I follow anyone.

As pertains to retweets, #FFs, and other means of promoting friends: I assume that everyone else follows the same rules I do. I know that isn't the case, but I can't relate to using Twitter purely to harvest followers, so I can't adapt my behavior to accommodate that kind of person. SO: if we assume that all of my followers are following me for a reason (personal relationship, common interest, or because they enjoy my content), then I owe it to them to be true to myself and not fill their timeline with things that won't interest them.For example, I generally avoid politics and sports. It doesn't mean politics and sports are uninteresting or "bad". It just means I and my followers aren't the target audience. Comedy, Brit-centric things, etc., on the other hand, are pertinent, and I retweet them whenever I see something I genuinely like and genuinely think others will like too. People act like retweets should be reciprocal in the same way conversational compliments should be reciprocal. That's not true, and here's why:
Normal, polite conversation between two musicians who just played an open mic:
BOB: Hey man, great set! I told all my friends how great you were.
DAVE: Hey thanks, man - that's really cool of you to say! I liked yours too.
BOB: Thanks!

*fin*

Normal, polite conversation between two musicians who just played an open mic and obey the reciprocal retweet rule:
BOB: Hey man, great set! I told all my friends how great you were.
DAVE: Hey thanks, man - that's really cool of you to say! I liked yours too.
BOB: Great! Then you won't mind turning to face this camera crew I've brought and announcing to this worldwide video feed that you wholeheartedly endorse literally everything I did and said on stage, and also selling my stuff out of your booth. You know, since you liked it so much.

Bottom line: Don't tell me what to say/do/endorse in my feed. It won't end well for you.

As pertains to other people's egos: I don't want to hurt anyone's feelings, ever. I've been unfollowed, I've had nasty comments on my blog, and I've gotten nasty @mentions on Twitter. I wouldn't wish it on anyone. But I also know it's not my job to make sure everyone else in the world feels good about themselves. It can't be my job. I have insecurities of my own, just like everyone else does. I worry that the blog sucks. I worry that the sketch show sucks. I worry that my acting sucks, I'll lose my job, I'll never meet a decent guy, my condo will burn to the ground, my friends will abandon me, and it will ALL be because I'm too weak to say "no" to that second slice of pizza. But you know what? Those are my issues. I might go to a very close family member or friend for reassurance sometimes, but I DO NOT, nor will I EVER go to Twitter to publicly announce that "I think I'm a terrible failure and will be available to hear otherwise from the general public between the hours of 4-6." (You non-Twitter users think I'm exaggerating, don't you? You people don't know the meaning of the word "needy".) I don't leave nasty comments on blogs or make nasty remarks on Twitter because I'm not a troll and I think there's already enough animosity in the world to last us for the next few eons. But I categorically reject the idea that "not saying something nice" or "not retweeting something" is tantamount to being mean. It isn't. I don't owe you anything. Besides which, I like to think it makes it more meaningful when I do say something nice or retweet something. Because I only say nice things if I mean them. And I only retweet things if I both liked them *and* thought they would be relevant to my followers.

Obviously, if I intended to use Twitter *solely* as a promotional tool, I probably would do the mutual followback, promo-retweet, etc. etc. It's just good marketing. But the @kwerky_girl Twitter account is for me. Not my blog or my job or whatever else: just me. So I don't (and won't) run it like a PR department. I will run it as an exclusive club with me as the bouncer. You don't have to like it. That's what the Unfollow feature is for.

Also: if you want to read the absolute greatest summary of what Twitter is for, what kinds of people suck the fun out of it, and what makes it great in spite of those people, you HAVE to read Grace Dent's How to Leave Twitter: My Time as Queen of the Universe and Why This Must Stop, which is basically an expanded/funnier/more well-written version of my Official Twitter Policy. And I don't say that because anyone paid me money to say so, but because I read it and I liked it. That's the thing about me: if I recommend something, you know I mean it. I'm not just scratching someone else's back. It's this whole new concept. Happy tweeting, everyone!