Yes, indeed, it's the proper year for my high school class's 20th year reunion. I'm actually interested in going, not necessarily because I'm still close with anyone in my class but because I'm very curious to see how people are, who they have turned into, etc. So far, I haven't gotten any information about it yet, but I expect it's coming.

Of course, I'm doing the life evaluation in my head as I contemplate going to this shindig. Oddly enough, I'm finding I have some patience with myself this time. We're not where i had hoped we would be in some degrees of life, but I guess I'm realizing slowly that life isn't a race to keep up with the status quo. Yes, there are some goals that I would like to see the wife and I accomplish soon, and that others have already hit these goals, but that's okay. The process, if you will, has been the important thing and we are actually coming along and making progress. (or so I think)

I went to the 10 year reunion, and it was strange to see people group together like they did in high school, almost instinctively. Yet it was clear that some of these people had changed, and the fit wasn't nearly as good as it was. I'm wondering if the same thing will happen this time. I also wonder how much people really do change over time...in some ways I'm not the person I was in high school, but in some ways I still see myself in those lights. No doubt this internal processing will be going on for a while.

I guess we'll see how things go.

 There are days when I don't wonder if I wasn't born too late in the timestream. I say this today because of  what I've watched so far on On Demand this day off, and how it's exemplary in some ways of my taste.  Earlier I had watched Russell Mulchay's "The Shadow", and now as background noise I have "Flash Gordon" on. These are both guilty pleasure movies of mine, not that I mind admitting that I like them...it's just how -much- I like them that's a little goofy. 

Part of it is my upbringing; my dad really enjoyed older movies; both the comedies and the pulp sci-fi stuff. I developed an appreciation of the Marx Brothers, W.C. Fields, Abbott and Costello, and even Laurel and Hardy. UHF channels were a favotite on Saturday television, no doubt where I fell in love with Japanese monster movies and Kung Fu theater shows as well. A refined palette of film education, I understand, but still it's what I cut my teeth on...no doubt like many others out there. 

Don't get me wrong, I can watch a movie like "The Godfather" and appreciate why it's considered a movie classic. (I have yet to see Citizen Kane, it's one of those things I keep telling myself I need to do but keep postponing.)  Occasionally I watch some "cinema", just to keep myself sharp, but I break out in hives when some reviewers equate "entertaining" with "lowbrow". I'm not saying there aren't lowbrow movies, but it's like some of the problems I have had with English professors in the past...the act of telling a story has got to mean something politically, or be an artistic statement of some variety, to certain perspectives. I don't agree; sometimes a good story is just a good story. If it can make a statement as well, wonderful.

As for whether or not I'm a pulp era person in the wrong time; my love of Internet and videp games are very modern so probably not. :-)

This post is a result of reading another lj post and pondering on a side topic it raised, albeit possibly inadvertently. The question is: why do people use LiveJournal?

Personally, it's primarily a means of communication for me to keep up with a small number of people that I don't get to see and let them know how the general tone of my life is running. While that number could stand to grow, I'm not really worried about having an audience as it were. I'm not famous (or at least not at this point in my life), and I'm actually rather glad that this blog doesn't have the burden of having to be entertaining, or brilliant, or peculiar 100% of the time. I can be and am all these things from time to time...peculiar being the most common...but I am also occasionally mundane, bitchy, or any of the other states of existence that mankind is capable. I like the flexibility.

Secondly, there is something very therapeutic for me to be able to try and take what goes on in my mind and give it more of a structure in words. Words have more weight, and often the hunt for the right word can help me figure out with precision what I'm actually thinking or feeling. Some people need to talk things out, I'm a person who ofttimes needs to -write- it out.

I expect that most people just use LJ to help keep in touch, which is part of why we have all of this technology these days in the first place. The trick has become whether or not we actually -communicate-  at times with all the texts, blogs, IMs, and other things we have. One, the medium loses certain aspects: tone of voice and facial expression being the two most most obvious examples. How often does an attempt at humor go seriously astray? Two, people can talk all day long and say relatively nothing. I have mastered this art myself, and have used it to hide from people while talking to them. 

That last bit goes astray from the central question somewhat, but I find it often ironic that the Communication Age occasionally seems the most isolating for people. If we use LJ to stay connected, are we really connecting? I will say that for me, even hearing the most humdrum post (point of clarity: I'm not thinking of anyone in particular...just making my stand clear) from people I don't see beats hearing nothing from them. 

That's all for now.