Despertar

too little or too much

1. Let us assume you met a rudimentary magician. Let us assume he can do five simple tricks--he can pull a rabbit out of his hat, he can make a coin disappear, he can turn the ace of spades into the Joker card, and two others in a similar vein. These are his only tricks and he can't learn any more; he can only do these five. HOWEVER, it turns out he's doing these five tricks with real magic. It's not an illusion; he can actually conjure the bunny out of the ether and he can move the coin through space. He's legitimately magical, but extremely limited in scope and influence. Would this person be more impressive than Albert Einstein?
About equal, no? Because Einstein was sort of a one-trick pony himself, I think. And if you're not really interested in quantum physics, I would think, once you maxed out Einstein's limited social prowess, he would have run his usefulness, just like that magician after a run-through of his five tricks. But this question is stupid anyway, because it doesn't offer a working definition of "impressive." I wouldn't want to have a drink with either one of them.

2. Let us assume a fully grown, completely healthy Clydesdale horse has his hooves shackled to the ground while his head is held in place with thick rope. He is conscious and standing upright, but completely immobile. And let us assume that--for some reason--every political prisoner on earth (as cited by Amnesty International) will be released from captivity if you can kick this horse to death in less than twenty minutes. You are allowed to wear steel-toed boots. Would you attempt to do this?
I think this question assumes all political prisoners are legally and morally innocent, which isn't true. Not that it matters, because I couldn't kill a living thing for the benefit of a bunch of faceless philosophical deviants, and I don't have a very strong kick, anyway, so the horse probably wouldn't die.

3. Let us assume there are two boxes on a table. In one box, there is a relatively normal turtle; in the other, Adolf Hitler's skull. You have to select one of these items for your home. If you select the turtle, you can't give it away and you have to keep it alive for two years; if either of these parameters are not met, you will be fined $999 by the state. If you select Hitler's skull, you are required to display it in a semi-prominent location in your living room for the same amount of time, although you will be paid a stipend of $120 per month for doing so. Display of the skull must be apolitical. Which option do you select?
Duh. Even if by apolitical you mean I can't claim political irony as an excuse for having Hitler's skull in my house, I see absolutely no downside to being paid a monthly stipend to do nothing. The only person in my life I can see being bothered by Hitler's skull, assuming I even decided to tell people that's whose it was, which the question doesn't say I have to, is my mother. And given the vagueness of "semi-prominent," I could probably get away with sticking on some high-up bookshelf where she wouldn't notice it. I don't want a turtle, and a skull is just a skull. Just displaying it wouldn't be an endorsement of anything its erstwhile owner stood for in life.

4. Genetic engineers at Johns Hopkins University announce that they have developed a so-called "super gorilla." Though the animal cannot speak, it has a sign language lexicon of over twelve thousand words, an IQ of almost eighty-five, and--most notably--a vague sense of self-awareness. Oddly, the creature (who weighs seven hundred pounds) becomes fascinated by football. The gorilla aspires to play the game at its highest level and quickly develops the rudimentary skills of a defensive end. ESPN analyst Tom Jackson speculates that this gorilla would be "borderline unblockable" and would likely average six sacks a game (although Jackson concedes the beast might be susceptible to counters and misdirection plays). Meanwhile, the gorilla has made it clear he would never intentionally injure any opponent. You are commissioner of the NFL: Would you allow this gorilla to sign with the Oakland Raiders?
You must be kidding. Who could this possibly benefit? (1) I wouldn't let the gorilla play for the same reason I think it's unconscionable for NFL teams to recruit high school seniors whose brains haven't finished developing (i.e. an inchoate sense of logic and consequence), and (2) as commissioner of the NFL, who assumedly bears some responsibility for the well-being of every other NFL player, I would probably lose my job for releasing a seven hundred-pound animal onto the field with a bunch of three hundred-pound humans. Just because the gorilla wouldn't "intentionally" hurt anyone doesn't mean he wouldn't accidentally crush the bones of every other player with whom he came into contact.

5. You meet your soulmate. However, there is a catch: Every three years, someone will break both of your soul mate's collarbones with a Crescent wrench, and there is only one way you can stop this from happening: You must swallow a pill that will make every song you hear--for the rest of your life--sound as if it's being performed by the band Alice in Chains. When you hear Credence Clearwater Revival on the radio, it will sound (to your ears) like it's being played by Alice in Chains. If you see Radiohead live, every one of their tunes will sound like it's being covered by Alice in Chains. When you hear a commercial jingle on TV, it will sound like Alice in Chains; if you sing to yourself in the shower, your voice will sound like deceased Alice vocalist Layne Staley performing a cappella (but it will only sound this way to you). Would you swallow the pill?
I guess I don't deserve a soulmate if I can't make this terrible sacrifice for him, but after conducting ten minutes of extensive YouTube research, I am seriously not sure I wouldn't just kill myself anyway if I ever had to listen to one Alice in Chains-sounding song from start to finish. Also, I feel like I should comment on the long-windedness of whoever wrote this survey. I got the gist of this question without all those heartbreaking examples, thanks.

6. At long last, someone invents "the dream VCR." This machine allows you to tape an entire evening's worth of your dreams, which you can then watch at your leisure. However, the inventor of the dream VCR will only allow you to use this device if you agree to a strange caveat: When you watch your dreams, you must do so with your family and your closest friends in the same room. They get to watch your dreams along with you. And if you don't agree to this, you can't use the dream VCR. Would you still do this?
No. My dreams are incoherent and panicky, if they're not downright terrifying. And I don't see what could be gained by the people in my life finding out I sometimes dream about having sex with random male relatives. And really, I always wonder about questions like these. This question is clearly based on the assumption that most people would definitely want to own this silly dream VCR, and I find that assumption, like the similar one that people ever want to hear or read about other people's dreams, fallacious.

7. Defying all expectations, a group of Scottish marine biologists capture a live Loch Ness Monster. In an almost unbelievable coincidence, a bear hunter in the Pacific Northwest shoots a Sasquatch in the thigh, thereby allowing zoologists to take the furry monster into captivity. These events happen on the same afternoon. That evening, the president announces he may have thyroid cancer and will undergo a biopsy later that week. You are the front page editor of the New York Times: What do you play as the biggest story?
Why would ANYONE care about scientists catching creatures who have gone out of their way to completely disregard all humanity since the beginning of time? And anyway, if I'm the front page editor of the New York Times, I would always feature whatever story Tina wrote that week, anyway.

8. You meet the perfect person. Romantically, this person is ideal: You find them physically attractive, intellectually stimulating, consistently funny, and deeply compassionate. However, they have one quirk: This individual is obsessed with Jim Henson's gothic puppet fantasy The Dark Crystal. Beyond watching it on DVD at least once a month, he/she peppers casual conversation with Dark Crystal references, uses Dark Crystal analogies to explain everyday events, and occasionally likes to talk intensely about the film's "deeper philosophy." Would this be enough to stop you from marrying this individual?
Dude, The Dark Crystal isn't even that good, definitely not good enough to deserve a pretentious category like "gothic puppet fantasy." But I guess I have no business writing anybody off on the basis of nerdy literary obsessions, especially considering just last week I called my roommate a Gelfling.

9. A novel titled Interior Mirror is released to mammoth commercial success (despite middling reviews). However, a curious social trend emerges: Though no one can prove a direct scientific link, it appears that almost thirty percent of the people who read this book immediately become homosexual. Many of these newfound homosexuals credit the book for helping them reach this conclusion about their orientation, despite the fact that Interior Mirror is ostensibly a crime novel with no homoerotic content (and was written by a straight man). Would this phenomenon increase (or decrease) the likelihood of you reading this book?
It would definitely increase the likelihood of me starting the book, but I've never made it all the way through a crime novel without getting bored. Anyway, I would definitely want to know what all the fuss was about, and I'm sure there would be a lot of buzz about it, and I'd want to be able to weigh in. And I'm sure it goes without saying that, while I certainly don't believe a book can turn anyone gay, I definitely believe at least thirty percent of the population is stupid enough to jump on a bandwagon of self-discovery.

10. This is the opening line of Jay McInerney's Bright Lights, Big City: "You are not the kind of guy who would be in a place like this at this time of the morning." Think about that line in the context of the novel (assuming you've read it). Now go to your CD collection and find Heart's Little Queen album (assuming you own it). Listen to the opening riff to "Barracuda." Which of these two introductions is a higher form of art?
I haven't, and I don't, but I looked them both up, and I don't much care for either one. I'm not sure what you mean, "opening riff," anyway. What struck me first about this song was the complete absence of any sort of intro.

11. You are watching a movie in a crowded theater. Though the plot is mediocre, you find yourself dazzled by the special effects. But with twenty minutes left in the film, you are struck with an undeniable feeling of doom: You are suddenly certain your mother has just died. There is no logical reason for this to be true, but you are certain of it. You are overtaken with the irrational metaphysical sense that--somewhere--your mom has just perished. But this is only an intuitive, amorphous feeling; there is no evidence for this, and your mother has not been ill. Would you immediately exit the theater, or would you finish watching the movie?
As with many of these questions, Aaron had to walk me through understanding what this one was getting at. Basically, do you place any stock in the intangible. Would indulging your own unreliable premonition be worth missing the end of a decent movie. Or whatever. But this question says "certainty"; it doesn't say you have "a feeling" your mom is dead. If I'm that sure about it, no, I can't stay for the end of this mediocre movie. I have to leave the theater, at least to call and make sure I'm wrong.

12. You meet a wizard in downtown Chicago. The wizard tells you he can make you more attractive if you pay him money. When you ask how this process works, the wizard points to a random person on the street. You look at this random stranger. The wizard says, "I will now make them a dollar more attractive." He waves his magic wand. Ostensibly, this person does not change at all; as far as you can tell, nothing is different. But--somehow--this person is suddenly a little more appealing. The tangible difference is invisible to the naked eye, but you can't deny that this person is vaguely sexier. This wizard has a weird rule, though--you can only pay him once. You can't keep giving him money until you're satisfied. You can only pay him one lump sum up front. How much cash do you give the wizard?
Probably however much I have in my pocket at the time. But at the same time, I wouldn't want to overdo it. At the risk of sounding conceited, I get a pretty satisfactory amount of physical attention anyway, and if a dollar is enough to make a perceptible difference, giving him twenty-five, or however much I happened to have, would probably change my impact altogether. I'd be a different person if I were that much sexier, and maybe Justin wouldn't like me anymore, sad face.

13. Every person you have ever slept with is invited to a banquet where you are the guest of honor. No one will be in attendance except you, the collection of your former lovers, and the catering service. After the meal, you are asked to give a fifteen-minute speech to the assembly. What do you talk about?
Probably I figure out a way to explain to certain members of the group why certain other members of the group have never come up in conversation. Or I conduct a bunch of obnoxious icebreakers, or sort them by embarrassing physical criteria, or something. No matter what I say, it's definitely the most awkward fifteen minutes in the entire history of the universe, especially since one person at this banquet hates me, so it really doesn't matter what I talk about, does it?

14. For reasons that cannot be explained, cats can suddenly read at a twelfth-grade level. They can't talk and they can't write, but they can read silently and understand the text. Many cats love this new skill, because they now have something to do all day while they lay around the house; however, a few cats become depressed, because reading forces them to realize the limitations of their existence (not to mention the utter frustration of being unable to express themselves). This being the case, do you think the average cat would enjoy Garfield, or would cats find this cartoon to be an insulting caricature?
I never assumed Garfield to be an overarching caricature of catdom. This question is like asking whether all humans should find Bill Murray's character in What About Bob? to be an insulting caricature of humanity. Garfield was lazy and sarcastic, but Nermal was earnest and loving. I think some cats would identify, and others would just want to keep shitting on Garfield's face.

15. You have a brain tumor. Though there is no discomfort at the moment, this tumor would unquestionably kill you in six months. However, your life can (and will) be saved by an operation; the only downside is that there will be a brutal incision to your frontal lobe. After the surgery, you will be significantly less intelligent. You will still be a fully functioning adult, but you will be less logical, you will have a terrible memory, and you will have little ability to understand complex concepts or difficult ideas. The surgery is in two weeks. How do you spend the next fourteen days?
This question didn't leave me the option of not having the surgery (because I probably wouldn't; my entire identity would crumble if I found myself suddenly irreparably stupid), so I guess I would spend the two weeks writing down everything I wanted everyone to understand about my life before the tumor.

16. Someone builds an optical portal that allows you to see a vision of your own life in the future (it's essentially a crystal ball that shows a randomly selected image of what your life will be like in twenty years). You can only see into this portal for thirty seconds. When you finally peer into the crystal, you see yourself in a living room, two decades older than you are today. You are watching a Canadian football game, and you are extremely happy. You are wearing a CFL jersey. Your chair is surrounded by books and magazines that promote the Canadian Football league, and there are CFL pennants covering your walls. You are alone in the room, but you are gleefully muttering about historical moments in Canadian football history. It becomes clear that--for some unknown reason--you have become obsessed with Canadian football. And this future is static and absolute; no matter what you do, this future will happen. The optical portal is never wrong. This destiny cannot be changed. The next day, you are flipping through television channels and randomly come across a pre-season CFL game between the Toronto Argonauts and the Saskatchewan Roughriders. Knowing your inevitable future, do you now watch it?
I do not. I immediately start setting my affairs in order, because the only way Canadian football could possibly feature so prominently in my future is if I suffered the brain tumor and subsequent loss of identity we discussed in the last question.

17. You are sitting in an empty bar (in a town you've never before visited), drinking Bacardi with a soft-spoken acquaintance you barely know. After an hour, a third individual walks into the tavern and sits by himself, and you ask your acquaintance who the new man is. "Be careful of that guy," you are told. "He is a man with a past." A few minutes later, a fourth person enters the bar; he also sits alone. You ask your acquaintance who this new individual is. "Be careful of that guy, too," he says. "He is a man with no past." Which of these two people do you trust less?
Um, have I somehow wandered into a Stephen King novel? Because only imaginary people in Derry talk that way.

18. You have won a prize. The prize has two options, and you can choose either (but not both). The first option is a year in Europe with a monthly stipend of two thousand dollars. The second option is ten minutes on the moon. Which option do you select?
Europe, not because I especially want to go to Europe alone, but because you couldn't pay me enough to go to space.

19. Your best friend is taking a nap on the floor of the living room. Suddenly, you are faced with a bizarre existential problem: This friend is going to die unless you kick them (as hard as you can) in the rib cage. If you don't kick them while they slumber, they will never wake up. However, you can never explain this to your friend; if you later inform them that you did this to save their life, they will also die from that. So you have to kick a sleeping friend in the ribs, and you can't tell them why. Since you cannot tell your friend the truth, what excuse will you fabricate to explain this (seemingly inexplicable) attack?
I would say I tripped and that my foot connected with her rib cage on accident. She would be mad, understandably, but anyone who knows me at all would believe that.

20. For whatever the reason, two unauthorized movies are made about your life. The first is an independently released documentary, primarily comprised of interviews with people you know you and bootleg footage from your actual life. Critics are describing the documentary as "brutally honest and relentlessly fair." Meanwhile, Columbia Tri-Star has produced a big-budget biopic of your life, casting major Hollywood stars as you and all your acquaintances; though the movie is based on actual events, screenwriters have taken some liberties with the facts. Critics are split on the artistic merits of this fictionalized account, but audiences love it. Which film would you be most interested in seeing?
Definitely the second one. (1) Watching myself in the bootleg footage of the former would probably make me want to die, (2) I'd get a huge kick out of learning which pieces of my experience Columbia Tri-Star deemed marketable, and (3) I take liberties with the facts all the time, if only so it makes sense literarily.

21. Imagine you could go bak to the age of five and relive the rest of your life knowing everything that you know now. You will reexperience your entire adolescence with both the cognitive ability of an adult and the memories of everything you've learned from having lived your life previously. Would you lose your virginity earlier or later than you did the first time around (and by how many years)?
God, who knows. I'd like to think I'd lose it earlier, and to someone different, but I don't regret not having sex as a teenager. It's too hard to say. If I had it all to do over, I'd have been in all different places at all different times, and I wouldn't have been such a retardedly late bloomer. Probably I'd have lost it around nineteen, instead of twenty-one. But not to Marcus.

22. You work in an office. Generally, you are popular with your coworkers. however, you discover that there are currently two rumors circulating the office gossip mill, and both involve you. The first rumor is that you got drunk at the office holiday party and had sex with one of your married coworkers. This rumor is completely true, but most people don't believe it. The second rumor is that you have been stealing hundreds of dollars of office supplies (and then selling them to cover a gambling debt). This rumor is completely false, but virtually everyone assumes it is factual. Which of these two rumors is most troubling to you?
The office supplies one. If I had sex with a married man, I don't deserve to get indignant about people throwing it in my face.

23. Consider this possibility:
a. Think about deceased TV star John Ritter.
b. Now, pretend Ritter had never become famous. Pretend he was never affected by the trappings of fame, and try to imagine what his personality would have been like.
c. Now, imagine that this person--the unfamous John Ritter--is a character in a situation comedy.
d. Now, you are also a character in this sitcom, and the unfamous John Ritter character is your sitcom father.
e. However, this sitcom is actually your real life. In other words, you are living inside a sitcom: Everything about your life is a construction, featuring the unfamous John Ritter playing himself (in the role of your TV father). But this is not a sitcom. This is your real life.
How would you feel about this?
Uh. I'm still trying to figure out how all the preamble about John Ritter was relevant.

***

I'm working on a list of ten of my own. Prepare yourselves: It might show up as my Leading entry.