An Open Letter to Usher

Dear Usher,

Stop. Killing. The. Planet.


As it is that I work at a high fashion magazine, my boss, the Editor-in-Chief, is invited to pretty much any event involving fashion. That being the case, the time is upon us for the release of Usher's new fragrances for men and women. Today my boss received her invitation for what is sure to be a star-studded-face-fest, and after getting my hands on this...thing...I have concluded this: it is not global warming, it is not the oil industries, it is not we non-recycling humans who are destroying he planet. No, it's USHER. OK, well actually it's the fashion industry and their flagrant insistence on spending too much money and too much material on ridiculous invitations and press materials for their bullshit products. And after receiving the invitation to Usher's "evening of elegance, glamour and theater," I can be silent no more.

I went to reception to pick up a bag for Robbie thinking it was just another gift from another designer. I get the bag, note it's shape and weight, and realize that, because no one gifts jewelry, the box in the bag is probably what I think it is. I open the bag and this is what I find:



The circular emblem of text reads "IT IS NOT HOW FAMOUS UR - IT IS WHAT UR FAMOUS FOR."

"Dear God," I think. I open the box. It gets worse:



"Please, please tell me this includes a book, a CD, candy, gold...something," I continue.

Alas, it does not:




"Usher, you stupid stupid pig fucker," I finally bemoan. Inside this leather bound box was an inch-thick, hard plastic, ornately decorated invitation that could easily kill someone if aimed at the head correctly. Not only that, but you will notice it was pretentiously placed in a velvet inlay that required the pull of a satin ribbon to remove....

WHAT. THE. FUCK!

I mean, seriously...tell me you are kidding with this shit! First of all, ur Usher and ur releasing a fragrance; not a new fashion line, not a new store, not anything remotely deserving of such wastefulness as say, I don't know, ur own wedding? No, you make this obscene, trite, regretfully tacky invitation for the launch of a women's and men's scent that will presumably smell like a floral car freshener and a concoction of those ingredients which you consider manly such as pine, vanilla, musk, aviators, fur coats, bling and your own nymphomaniacal sweat. I just need one good reason--besides, of course, that ur the almighty Usher--that it is even remotely necessary to waste so much on something that will be thrown away in a week? It goes without saying that you have to invite a good handful of people because, ya know, ur Usher, but shouldn't that make you a little more reserved with your chosen invitation? In a Hollywood society that has latched onto the idea of "going green" like a fat girl to a corndog, it amazes me that Usher would blatantly present something so improvident.

Usher, however, only serves as another notch on the let's-waste-money-because-it's-fashion post. I can't tell you how many times I've received press material from designers or jewelers about their new lines. In fact I've got a press kit from Pom Pom in my cubicle right now that rivals Usher in wastage. Now I'm all for saving the polar bears and what not, and I don't portent to be the most bio-friendly person on the block, but I will say I am becoming more aware of what needs to be done, and it truly has become offensive what these PR companies and fashion houses will do to promote their shit. We know it's out there. We have computers. We have Style.com and we read fashion magazines. I don't need your 40 pound book ensconced in a plastic case, Gucci.

So, Usher. If it truly is not how famous ur, but what ur famous for, I think we've got you pegged. Lead on, Wasty McWasters, lead on.

Seth

How to Save the Polar Bears

By now most of you are probably aware that I am on a big "save the polar bears" kick. I've posted the heart wrenching video from Planet Earth in which a male polar bear swims 60 miles to find food, only to come upon a hoard of walruses that he cannot overtake for food. Beaten, gored and tired, the polar bear digs a shallow hole in the ground, lies down and dies. I've cried every time I've watched it, but I only have myself and my fellow humans to blame. Because of shrinking polar ice caps, food is isolated and spread out, making the fight for survival that much more difficult for a species that will likely be extinct in less than 50 years.

Need a reminder of the tragedy? Here ya go:



Now, what are we going to do about this? Through a number of discussions with fellow polar bear sympathizers, I have come up with two plans. OK, well two besides the obvious plan of just being more aware of what we do to our planet. Post-Al Gore, Leonardo DiCaprio and Captain Planet I don't need to sit here and tell you what we have to do to try and save the Earth and all the amazing things on it. But, if I can offer a couple of plausible, albeit "unconventional" alternatives, allow me to do so:

1. Monthly Food Rations for the Polar Bears

But where will such food come from you might ask? At the brilliant suggestion of a one Mr. Benjamin Pryor, it has been proposed that every month a boat is sailed to the poles loaded with murderers, rapists and pedophiles. Seedy politicians and Britney Spears are welcomed as well. Starting with the most severe of offenders, they will be given proper rations and supplies to survive for a number of days until they are eventually mauled and eaten by polar bears. They will of course be given no weapons or anything available to use as defense. Their clothing and supplies will be sprayed with some sort of odor, perhaps beef bullion or eau de seal to attract the bears. Considering the state of the polar bear food situation, it shouldn't take long for the bears to become adapted to the monthly delivery, ensuring that these criminals will be dispatched in a timely manner. Also, it was favorably suggested by Andrew Heim that the delinquents' hands be removed to not only safeguard baby polar bears from pointy fingers, but also keep potentially crafty individuals from gaining an advantage over the polar bears.

2. Walrus Handbags

Confused? Let me elaborate. And please forgo any barbaric allusions, as I am simply trying to save the goddamn polar bears. If you noticed in the video posted above, one of the toughest obstacles for the polar bear to overcome in his attempt to kill a male walrus was the walrus' extremely tough, impenetrable skin. Their epidermic state being as such, my collegue, Dontre Conerly, noted how fantastic their skin would be for handbags. "That shit would last forever!" he exclaimed. And he is right, it would last forever, and would also aid in the polar bear food crisis. Let's point out the obvious: there is no shortage of walruses in the world. That being the case, human intervention--with all our arbalestic ingenuity--could easily neutralize a walrus, take its hide, and leave a healthy meal for one or two polar bears. Now, I'm not talking about a mass poaching of the walrus; only enough to a) provide food for struggling polar bears and b) create a new fashion craze that would take the heat off of other valuable, but overused hides. By carefully rationing the amount of harvested walrus skin, it would ensure a degree of luxury to the subsequent bags, meaning they would be elusive and prices would be high. With a hefty price tag attached to the bag, it would translate into large profits from which portions could be donated to the save the polar bear cause. Basically the creation of the handbags would continue what nature started ages ago before the ice caps started melting. We have interfered with and disrupted the hunter-vs-prey process, therefore we have no choice but to become a part of the process to ensure a restored balance. Humans become the symbolic ice bridges that the polar bears use to get back to their food.


I think with careful planning and government support, either of these entirely tenable plans would work. Because polar bears need our help. And all it takes is a little sacrifice to make it happen. I mean, the polar bears are making sacrifices for us, right? It's only right that we do the same.


Seth

Eric and Seth: Book and Book-ability

I had quite an interesting Facebook Wall conversation today with my good friend, Eric Mueller. It's funny, yeah, but also sort of interesting if you think about it. Enjoy:

Eric Mueller (Santa Fe) wrote
at 12:47am

If you read a book online does that still count as reading a book?

Hmmmmmmmm...this is going to keep me up tonight

Eric Mueller (Santa Fe) wrote
at 12:51am

Like, you can read the news from a newspaper, and you can read the news online...but you cant read the newspaper online

Eric Mueller (Santa Fe) wrote
at 9:58am

You can however "bookmark" web pages

The plot thickens...(pun?)

Seth Plattner wrote
at 10:18am

Hey, take it easy over there. I've already got enough on my plate without the conundrum of the validity of cyber literature.

But, one must also consider: what constitutes the reading of a book and/or newspaper? The physical act of turning a page? Or simply the intake and organization of words? And if it comes down to just page ingestion then we could easily argue that, if a book is read online, we are still in fact reading webPAGES....

Good God look what you've done to me...

Eric Mueller (Santa Fe) wrote
at 10:44am

Yes, yes I came across that same theory earlier on as well
But the internet is a little different. In the real world, what is and what is not a book is quite clear.

However, online I'm afraid is quite the opposite. How can you tell the difference from a book online and just a long typed story? Is it a book just because it says it is a book?
Does actual physical publishing in the real world validate it's..."book-ness" online?

If you pay to view it online does that make it a book? If so then are blogs and forums, that you pay for to view, books? To go further, books can have multiple authors, as well as editors. Forum moderators and admins have to power to edit what is said on blogs and forums…

Eric Mueller (Santa Fe) wrote
at 10:44am

Then you have the Public Domain to take into mind. Centuries of Literature, ancient libraries composed of thousands upon thousands of authors; everything from that written world can be digitized on a single webpage…for free. Is it then one book, or many, or is it just a series of long written stories?

Now here comes the big brain twister. Is it, in this digital age, that a page now consists of books rather than a book consisting of pages?

Seth Plattner wrote
at 10:53am

But, in following your argument, if pages may now consist of books, we are lead right back to your previous observance: books can now be compiled on pages, but do those pages, though made up of books, in turn become books (again)? Of course, as you pointed out, it simply depends on what defines a book. I'm afraid we've found ourselves in a dialogue of circularity.

We need to publish and essay on this. Are we revolutionaries?

Eric Mueller (Santa Fe) wrote
at 2:31pm

I think I have come to the conclusion that a book is the name of the physical object of the complied story in the physical world.

If you read a "book" online it is not a book, because it is only the digital manifestation of the story and not the physical object - a book.

So in short: Online, it should be called a story/fiction/non-fiction/

or whatever else genre it is, not a book.
For example: “Oh man I just read some really good fiction online today.”
Not: “Oh man I read this really crappy book online today.”
For a mixed example, (using both the digital and physical world) “Wow that was such a great story online. I think I’m going to buy the book later on today.”

Does that fit?

Seth Plattner wrote
at 2:34pm

I believe we are settled.

That was intense...

Eric Mueller (Santa Fe) wrote
at 2:42pm

So therefore, if someone asks me, "How many books have you read recently?" I will have to say none...

Great