Three doozies.

Dr. Sunday,

is it better to be good at a lot of things, or great at just one thing?

is it better to make things happen, or to let things happen?

what happens when we die?

-Inquisitive in Illinois

Dear Inquisitive,

All excellent questions, and I appreciate the multi-level challenge.

Regarding Question 1: "is it better to be good at a lot of things, great at just one thing?" That depends on your perspective, but also on how willing you are to apply yourself to life. I'm "good" at a number of things, a "jack of all trades," if you will-- but that's mostly because I rely on natural ability rather than proper training or discipline. For example-- I'm a visual artist, but I never had the patience to learn techniques beyond what I gave myself, so I'm decent and can rely on quirkiness to make people smile, but I can throw a rock at my AIM buddy list and hit the screen names of at least three people I love and know personally, who would make me look like a paraplegic infant with a crayon.

By the same token, I'm a guitarist, but I've never taken a proper lesson (on that instrument, anyway). I rely on my willingness to experiment, and I get compliments for being "innovative" at the instrument, but in many, more technical respects, I'm about as big a joke as you can tell without needing to change your briefs. Could I get better at these things? Sure. Would I be willing to try harder? Only when my passion drives me that direction.

There are a lot of people in the world who walked face-first into their magic gift/talent/etc. These are people who knew their deepest passion, and followed it. Some of them work hard to achieve, and some achieve seemingly without effort-- but it's not about what it "costs," it's about what that says. You always have to follow your heart. I'd trade at least one pinky toe, possibly both, to achieve the elegant, lyrical virtuosity on the guitar of say, Slash (of Guns N Roses fame), but at this point in my life, I don't know that I'm willing (at least not right now, when my new music has little to do with that sort of thing) to take the kinds of training that would require, assuming I can ever get these fingers of mine to move so astutely.

The point is-- and you'll forgive me, I hope, for answering your question with a question, but what do YOU think? Therein lies your answer. Do know what you'd love to do most? Is there something in your life to which you would be willing to devote yourself? Bear in mind, many disciplines are related, and one skill-set by nature/aptitude may lead you to others you had not considered. The world is wide open for the mind willing to question itself.

Question 2: Is it better to make things happen, or let things happen?

EXCELLENT question. I think it depends on the circumstance. While normally, I can say that I believe in taking the reins of your own fate, and choosing the things you desire, I can just as easily point out that statements like THAT one are an oversimplification. I could say, tonight, "I need a new job, something, anything, more money to be the rad person I know myself to be." Now, I could just wait for Fate to kiss me in my sleep, and find that someone I know has a nice new gig out there for me, or I could take steps proactively to choose the career I desire.

Still, let's use that example to go further-- what if I realized that my best bet to get the job I wanted was to go through a very specific friend, someone I don't know that well, perhaps? So I ask this person, but I don't want to ask too often or press too hard, because I don't want to alienate them. Now, I send my suggestion, a phone call, an email, what have you-- and then I wait, because it's the best thing to do. I could make a move, but I risk losing the ground I've gained, and perhaps closing the door for good. Or, I can play it cool, be a pal, and just let it happen as it happens, while hoping for the best. It's a dodgy balance.

The same rules work in romance, if you think about it, and in many other pieces of life. Sometimes, "to let things happen" IS "to make things happen." My advice here, then, is to keep your eyes open and your mind sharp-- have the motive power to act when you must, but have the maturity and wisdom to simply abide, or "let things happen," when the course requires it. Just know yourself, and know your world. You won't fail.

And to your last question: what happens when we die?

Well, according to the tea leaves I just finished reading, and the auguries provided by my cat purring while the candleflame dances in the breeze from my window, there are a few possibilities.

The tea leaves state that there is an afterlife, but it is based on your own beliefs. The universe is a blank canvas, on the other side, so as you believe, so shall you be.

[Reliable and delphic, my cat ponders...]

The cat's purring states that if a soul has a quantifiable existence, then it must endure, and while science has yet to reach the point where it can make a claim on the matter, the fact of existence serves as proof in its own right.

The candleflame says you either turn to dust, go to Heaven or Hell, or we all wind up on the Big Rock Candy Mountain, whatever that means.

Still, it was a very good question. Since I've only died like twice, I usually miss the floor show while I try to find a table near the stage. I can tell you that the drinks are good, but the shrimp is hit-or-miss.

I hope this has helped you. If you have any further questions, you know where to reach me.

Always Listening,
Dr. Sunday

BC13, my take on the great debate of our time.

Dear Dr. Sunday,

I don't know how old you are, but I presume you're similarly-aged to a friend of mine, whose age-inappropriate superfandom of the band Brokencyde both amuses and perplexes me. From what he's described/coaxed me into hearing, they are a screamo crunk band from New Mexico (also known as BC13) that is popular with the kids these days. I have attached a photo for reference.

Also: http://www.myspace.com/brokencyde



The media HATES THIS BAND. Like, EPICALLY. Which obviously only makes their fans love them more; their latest opus is named "I'm Not A Fan, But The Kids Like It", and what do teenagers love more than an solid in-joke? I get that. My own personal opinion is that they are fine, not my thing as they seem to already know, certainly not worthy of hatred and occasionally provide me with genuine amusement. They sing about getting wasted and being players in a not particularly offensive way. You will have to try harder than that to offend me, Brokencyde.

Anyway so what with you being a man of the world and all, I was curious to hear your take on all this, both on the phenomenon that is Brokencyde, and why my friend (whom I should probably mention is also smart, employed and doesn't live with his parents) might be so taken with them.

- Blasé about BC13

Dear Blasé,

As a worldly man of 31 years who enjoys reaping from the vast Sargasso that is the modern internet, it is simple enough to state that among the detritus dredged from those dark depths, I have encountered the inexplicable Brokencyde phenomenon.

I will go ahead and admit that my reactions to this band span a spectrum from "upturning of the nose in derision" to "vicious, spiteful commentary more for the fun of crafting innovative insults than to ACTUALLY denote an active and consuming hatred." On a visceral level, what we have in BC13 is a group of young men, creating music as boring, tacky, and uninspired as their fashion sense. These are kind of people who would draw the eye just long enough to evoke usage of the term "douchebag," even were they spotted in the kind of environment where dressing like the worst bits of the 1980's just vomited neon colored slushies all over an American Apparel catalog in a men's room at the mall is considered tolerable.

I was exposed initially to the group via that bizarre side effect of social networking; the "dude, check this out WTFLOL" sharing that comes as a necessary result of access to such a broad range of fast and free information. I was relieved, initially, upon receiving the link to their video ("Freaxxx," here provided for your perusal, should you desire), only in that I was not being sent any sort of diarrhea porn, animal porn, amputee porn, or porn in general; but I failed to even make it through the video. I hated it. I hated the song, I hated the music. I hated the group before the one skunk-haired tool screamed his first, or the other skunk-haired tool started spouting the auto-tune vocals. As I've stated elsewhere I'm very sensitive to aesthetics, especially in the context of band names and other sorts of identity-based marketing. So, having provided a link to the context of the statement, let me relate that a group spelling their name "Brokencyde" and offering a song called "Freaxxx" makes my skin crawl, even before I decide to give them a chance. Add to that, then, an MTV-friendly combination of mallrat children co-opting tired "big money" hip-hop cliches, somehow made "fresh" by the addition of judiciously flagellating the deceased equine of emocore/screamo in one big ball of novelty candy, sharted from the bum of pop culture boredom.

Now, here's the key point, after I've exercised my love of vitriol: I stopped caring. I don't think about them, until someone mentions them, in which case I take delight in voicing my distaste. The truth is, I find them guilty of only one unpardonable sin: the joke isn't funny. It's one thing to go through such troubles to create a novelty act, market it, foster an internet presence, all that, but if the joke isn't funny, the whole thing is just sad. The teenage version of me wants to rail here, and start spouting about how this is insulting to "real" music/musicians, and that this music fails to act as a cultural catalyst for a true philosophical change, and that I'm going to go smoke a cigarette behind my parents' shed with the Velvet Underground on my walkman-- but the teenage version of me also wore flares, and took himself far, far too seriously.

I believe that the ease with which the media finds hate for BC13 is a clever aspect of their marketing. I believe that they knew fully well when sitting in the studio that their laugh riot would incite vehement, virulent and vicious disgust among the internet world-- a world known for its excesses in spewing hatred. Of course, unless I give them too much credit for savvy, this would also then indicate the polarizing power of such hatred basically guaranteeing them a stronger loyalty in their fanbase, exactly as you stated in your question.

So, why, then would a man in my age group, such as your friend, have any reason to enjoy, let alone even voluntarily listen to Brokencyde? I can only think of a few possibilities. Perhaps your friend respects their (as he sees it) clever marketing and use of the internet to generate "buzz," and sees them as Machiavellian figures, forward-thinking geniuses manipulating the internet and culture to their advantage through innovative planning. Or could it be, perhaps, that he is merely facing some sort of early-onset midlife crisis, where by attempting to identify with the trappings of youth (through music marketed to children), he believes he can achieve some sort of second adolescence, thereby reclaiming the vitality he feels he has lost as the years begin to take their toll?

Or maybe, just maybe, you simply have a friend who has inexplicably bad taste in music, where this one group is concerned.

Regardless, I hope these thoughts have been enlightening and useful for you. My perspective, such as it is, is merely opinion, except for when I say I'm right. And I'm ALWAYS right [citation needed].

Always Listening,
Dr. Sunday

OMG shoes.

Dr. Sunday,

Simple one for you, I'm looking into a new pair of shoes; something classy yet able to be beaten on. I was first thinking those semi-boot shoes, well I think of them as such. Always shied away from them really. So I think more like a high top dress shoe. What is you thought on stylish shoes for men?

Fuddled over Fashion

Dear Fuddled,

This is indeed an easy question. Speaking strictly from a personal standpoint, my tastes in footwear for men are as much based on functional utility as they are on style. The ideal footwear in a man's closet should be as follows: Something casual, for daily wear, particularly outside of the office, but something that can be utilized in a multitude of circumstances (in my case, a pair of Diesel trainers, or my low-top Converse). Something "worn-in" or "get-dirty" appropriate is also key, typically something you've retired from daily, public use (I have a pair of Vans prison-issue velcro shoes, for running outside really quick; an elderly pair of Chucks, for when I know I'll get muddy/dirty/grass-stained/etc; and a beaten to hell and back pair of Vans low-top skate shoes, for when I know I'm going to get splattered in paint or things of that nature). A pair of boots is vital, as is something dressy-- of course, the clever and dapper young man can combine these two pieces in any number of ways to the greatest possible effect.

To give you an idea, and bear in mind, I receive absolutely no compensation for any products I mention by name, I own one pair of dress shoes. They are basic black loafers, of a brand I can't even name. I am pretty sure I inherited them from my dad when I had to go a dance in high school, or when someone died. I never wear them, because they are old man shoes-- and not in that fun and quirky vintage "old man" style, they're merely outmoded and pointless. When I need to have my feet dressier, I take the opportunity to make myself presentable while still maintaining my personal style.

I own two pairs of boots, which serve, variously, in the offices of dress footwear as well. They are stylish and functional, simple and utilitarian, yet they state by context that I am no mere office lackey or pencil-pushing d-bag. Pair of boots number one, of course, is my precious and well-loved Dr Martens. They're black, steel-toed, and rise well enough above the ankle that I could wear them without fear that I will be mistaken for the kind of person who voluntarily owns a hackey-sack, but also not so high that I might be mistaken for the kind of person who has questionable piercings in even more dubious locations on my body. They are simple, which is key, yet I keep them well-polished enough to wear under even basic slacks to the office, while still being able to wear them on the streets, under jeans, while presumably spoiling for some sort of fisticuffs, I don't know. They're perfect, and moreso, they came to me as a gift from my lady love, so I feel even better about wearing them.

The second pair of boots, I also utilize, even more regularly than the Docs, as dress footwear. These are a pair of basic black "engineer boots." No laces, just a chrome buckle off to the side. I've removed the brand tags so long ago that the name eludes me, but I've owned these boots for over a decade. They, too, are steel-toed, which I find useful on a number of levels, and typically earn me compliments as they are an unexpected yet flattering addition even to my more professional wardrobe. Of course, I've also regularly worn them onstage, as wicked and imposing accessories to my already sometimes sinister aspect. Frye makes a decent version of these in a more fashion-oriented context, though I acquired mine literally from a store specializing in work-footwear. They rise to just below midcalf, and absolutely kick ass.

While I don't suggest you copy my suggestions directly, I will state that the important message here is not to necessarily purchase as I have purchased, but rather to consider multi-functional utility, and to always remember, in building personal style, regardless of your venue, that true STYLE, whether for a man or woman, comes from making it YOUR OWN, rather than following some idea of what is fashionable or trendy. It's not about fitting in with your culture, subculture, or the magazines you read-- it's about being yourself, no matter what, and making sure the essence of who you are is represented in everything that you do, and indeed even to the shoes on your feet.

I hope this helps. Best of luck shopping.
Always Listening,
Dr. Sunday