Skip to main content

Say What You Mean

It was the March Hare who was pointed out to Alice that saying what you mean is not the same as meaning what you say.

Writers deal with this question all the time. Sometimes phrased as “What am I trying to say?” This is always a good thing to ask oneself. You start a piece or a script or an article thinking you have a clear idea of what you wish to express, but by the end, the meaning has leaked away. Or perhaps your powerful notion was only worth a couple of good lines; you can’t tell until you’ve done the work.

Sometimes I wonder what others are trying to express. I was driving behind a reasonably expensive, late model vehicle last week and the licence plate that read MBZZLD. Funny. I assumed it was meant, jocularly: “I got this car by embezzling funds from work”. Although, without knowing the context, the plate might have meant: “This is all I have left, after my money was embezzled from my business by my shonky accountant.”

Later in the week I saw a woman in the Woolstores Shopping Centre in Fremantle wearing a t-shirt that said ANGRY, YOUNG and BROKE. She was clearly middle-aged. Did she still think of herself as young? Or was she being some kind of ironic wiseacre?

As I was buying groceries this evening, I spotted a sign in a window looking for a lead singer for a band. The right candidate has to be “charismatic and hard-working”. I have seen both in the same package before, but not often. Is it because people with natural charisma often don’t learn a work ethic because they don’t have to? No, I’ve descended to sweeping generalisations yet again.

My favourite piece of writing for this week is the slogan: “Creativity Beyond Imagination.” This is the positioning statement for the chain of Australian bead stores named Beadsy Beads. That’s beyond my imagination anyway.

Elevate the Insignificant,

Mr Trivia


Popular posts from this blog

What's with George Eads' Hair? & David Edwards

Hey Zeitgeisters,

Bet you thought this blog would never top “What’s with Bradley Whitford’s Hair?” For those of you who weren’t part of that historical blog entry, it was the glittering moment where I wondered what’s with West Wing star Bradley Whitford’s hair. Good times.

However, tonight, while watching the current series (in Australia) of CSI :Original Recipe, I was forced to witness the unpleasantness of George Eads’ new(ish) 'do and I felt compelled to blog on’t.

George plays the part of Nick Stokes and has spent some 5 or 6 seasons with a haircut “you could set your watch to,” as Grandpa Simpson might say. It was always short; it always had that US Marine Corps vibe; it was always as dependable as the ebbing and flowing of the tides.

Now in something of an El Nino effect, I note that someone in Jerry Bruckheimer’s organization has decided to mess with the length of George’s crowning glory.

Although I chiefly watch CSI waiting for Grissom…

What’s with Bradley Whitford’s Hair?

Okay, Zeitgeisters, that’s as shallow an attention-grabbing start as one could ever want, but I really want to know. And sure, I’m really talking about Josh Lyman’s hair. (I’m like one of those people who insist on calling an actor by their character’s name – only in reverse. e.g. “Go Knight Boat!”)

Whitford plays Deputy Chief of Staff, Josh Lyman, in the Aaron Sorkin-created, NBC television series The West Wing. He plays this part to a tee and now he’s set to do great things in the new Sorkin drama, Studio 60 on the Sunset Strip. I know this last bit because the Angriest Ex-Video Store Clerk in the world told me.

Oh, and Whitford’s married to the awesome Jane Kaczmarek who plays mom, Lois, in the series Malcolm in the Middle. So Mr Whitford’s your regular pop-cultural icon and yardstick for excellence. We’re here in this, frankly, puzzling cultural landscape, because I’ve just finished watching season four of The West Wing on DVD. And Josh Lyman’s hair has bothered me throughout. It’s…

Institutional Memory

Note: If you’re here, you were connected with Perth’s Film and Television Institute at some point. The FTI in the form that we know it, is being wound up and some of its functions are being taken over by ScreenWest. This is my idiosyncratic tribute to the FTI as it was formerly.
I’m not someone who plans things. Depending on how well you know me, you might be saying “Amen to that” right about now. There was no plan to have anything to do with filmmaking when my friends and I entered our first efforts in the WA Film and Video Festival almost 35 years ago (forerunner of the WASAs). We made experimental films on Super 8 movie film; in-camera editing, falling down sand dunes, raw meat and tomato sauce representing the terrible effects of our filmic violence. Super-8 was the cheapest type of movie film. 8 millimetres in width. You could shoot two-and a-half to three-and-a-half minutes depending on your frames-per-second. We had no money, so shot “longer” at 18 fps. Our tiny epics, like “Mea…