Candy, Capitalism, and Costumes: An Anthropological Reflection on Trick-or-Treating

As a child, one of my favorite holidays was Halloween. Before I proceed, I must note that I am writing based on my observations that took place in America, for that country is the subject of this paper. Though my interest in this celebration gradually declined as I became older, it has just been reignited. This sudden resurgence of interest was not for the sake of nostalgia, nor was it even for a revival of my past youthful ways; it was due to my new approach. Rather than participating in Halloween like I had in the past, I decided to play the role of the observer for the first time, and that is how my interest in this holiday became sparked. With a recently acquired anthropological lens, I paid specific attention to the activity of “trick-or-treating.” This anthropological lens, which is based on the ideas of Karl Marx and Clifford Geertz, is what I will use to analyze the observations that I made. Having that in mind, I will first analyze trick-or-treating from a Marxist perspective, and then I will follow with a separate analysis from a Geertzian perspective.

 Before I jump into my two-part analysis, I will first describe my method of observation. The location of the Halloween event was Berkeley, California. The date was October 31, 2012. My observation began around 6PM and ended around 10PM. I roamed around Russell Street, making this street the primary site of my observation. I will once again note that I did not participate in trick-or-treating. I did not conduct any interviews, or even engage in any form of interaction with the trick-or-treaters. I limited my activity to strict and close observation, and I tried to be as mobile as possible. By constantly changing locations within Russell Street, I was able to observe more people than I would have if I stayed in one location. It is important to note that the trick-or-treating process itself was two-sided. Not only did it involve those who collected candy, but it also involved those who gave candy. The interactions that took place, between and among these collectors and receivers, are what I observed. With those details set forth, I will now move on to the first segment of my analysis. Under a Marxist perspective, the various interactions among collectors and givers that take place - which are an integral part of trick-or-treating - are reflections of capitalism, and are thus subject to critique.

The first interaction that I observed was competitive accumulation. Those who were collecting candy were attempting to collect more candy than others. Candy collectors often bragged to other candy collectors about how much candy they had, but more importantly, how much more candy that they had. At sites where candy was distributed, candy collectors attempted to obtain as much candy as possible, without a concern for what the intricacies of each candy were. Sheer amount and volume - as opposed to quality - was enough to appease these candy collectors. Their heist for candy sometimes even prevented other collectors from being able to receive any candy at all. The acts of deliberately garnering as much candy as possible, garnering more candy than others, and garnering candy in a way that hinders other people from garnering candy, are together a reflection of capitalism; candy is a symbol for wealth. By collectors competing to acquire candy, they embody the capitalist values of mass accumulation, and individual self-interest. Marx would likely criticize this as a practice that pits the younger generations – who make up the majority of candy collectors – into the capitalistic system.

The second interaction that I observed was the facilitation of the candy distribution process. The subjects of these interactions are the candy givers, since they are the ones who distribute the candy to the candy collectors. I noticed a trend among many candy givers, and this trend lies in a common type of candy that they had given out. This common type was candy that was small and plentiful. An example of this type would be tootsie rolls. By having lots of small candy, candy givers can save money since they will have enough candy to last many collectors, including the competitive ones that are on a heist. Some givers even limited each collector to one small piece, thus minimizing their distribution.  These same givers also tended to treat the distribution process like a factory line. Candy was given out as fast as possible, and communication was rote and repetitive (i.e. the same greetings and expressions were repeated)[1]. These methods of efficiency, saving, and minimizing, are direct and fundamental capitalist practices. To some extent, Marx would likely criticize these aims as dehumanizing to both the collectors and givers because human interaction is weakened and displaced.

The last interaction that I observed was the commodity fetishized trading of candy. Candy is a commodity, and Marx notes that a commodity is “a mysterious thing, simply because in it the social character of men’s labour appears to them as an objective product stamped upon the product of that labour” (Marx 1978: 320).  And as soon commodities are exchanged or traded, “we equate as values our different products, [and] by that very act, we also equate, as human labour, the different kinds of labour expended upon them” (Marx 1978: 322). These two ideas are the foundation of commodity fetishism: the idea that the perceived market value of a commodity appears to be inherent, and that as a result, the labor that went into the commodity’s production becomes forgotten and obscured, especially during a trade. Again, the commodity in question here is candy. When collectors were trading candy with each other, they often based their trades on how much they thought each candy was worth in real money value[2]. Collectors shared an underlying concern for fair and equal value trades. Some candies even had price tags on them; this made it easier for collectors to compare the ‘value’ of each candy, and furthermore, engage in trades based on these ascertained values. By exchanging candies purely based on their determined or perceived real money value, the different and specific types of labor that went into each candy are overshadowed and lost. The human aspect of production becomes disconnected from the final product – candy. Similarly, the special characteristics of each candy (e.g. shape, color, taste), which are the results of different and specific forms of labor, also become discounted. If candy is again taken to be a symbol for wealth, this style of trade reflects the capitalist ideals of striving to preserve wealth and following the market forces, both which underlay the commodity fetishism of candy. Marx would probably critique this style of trade as yet another mechanism that pits the younger generations into the capitalistic system.

I will now proceed onward to the second segment of my analysis. For this segment, I will adopt a Geertzian perspective by using his style of interpretive anthropology. The following passage by Geertz captures the core of his style:

The culture of people is an ensemble of texts, themselves ensembles, which the anthropologist strains to read over the shoulders of those to whom they properly belong. There are enormous difficulties in such an enterprise...but to regard such forms as “saying something of something” and saying it to somebody, is at least to open up the possibility of an analysis which attends to their substance (Geertz 1972: 29).

I plan to use this style by examining trick-or-treating like a text: a text that stands alone as one text out of a plethora of texts, and a text that can be deeply analyzed by uncovering hidden symbolism. However, I will not engage in reading “over shoulders” or meta-meta social commentary as Geertz would normally do. I will only analyze my aloof observations. By doing this, I still hope to emulate Geertz style: “As in more familiar exercises in close reading, one can start anywhere in a culture’s repertoire of forms and end up anywhere else” (Geertz 1972: 29). Using this as my motivation, I will now leave the topic of candy and capitalism and move on to the topic of costumes.

           
 In addition to collecting and giving candy, there exists another crucial aspect of trick-or-treating: wearing costumes. Costumes attempt to model the appearance of some fictional or non-fictional character, object, or idea. The possibilities of what costume one can wear are almost infinite.  But the specific costume the trick-or-treater wears is less important than what the costume enables the wearer to do. Wearing a costume allows the trick-or-treater to take on an external identity - an identity that is different from the one he or she has every other day of the year. Some of my observations depict this concept. At one moment, I noticed a squad of trick-or-treaters - disguised as the Avengers - targeting another trick-or-treater disguised as Loki[3]. At another moment, I noticed a disguised ninja who was attempting to perform martial arts, even in crowded spaces.  I also noticed a disguised Harry Potter who was waving his wand at other trick-or-treaters and shouting chants, all in attempt to produce some sort of magical effect. In all of these examples, the trick-or-treaters were taking on the identity of the character they were disguised as - an identity that is different from their own identity and is therefore external. Having established that costumes allow trick-or-treaters to take on an external identity, I will next suggest a relevant symbol.

            
The behavior displayed by trick-or-treaters - in their external identity - reflects family dynamics and points to symbolism. It is important to again note that the majority of trick-or-treaters are kids, who are normally subject to their parents’ authority. But on Halloween day, this dynamic changes. Kids take on the identity of their costume, and leave behind the identity that they normally have every other day. No longer are they mere subjects of their parents. Their external identity entitles them to engage in an independence and freedom that they do not normally have. Their rush to gather and trade candy is an effort purely driven by them, and not their parents. The fact that the givers are mostly parents shows that the parents themselves endorse the project of trick-or-treating. But even the non-giving parents appear locked to following their masked child’s bustling ambition to “trick-or-treat.” It as if power has shifted from the parents to the children, and the family dynamic has been inverted. With the children’s free-willed independence that comes from wearing costumes and gathering candy, and the parents’ endorsements of trick-or-treating and willingness to follow their children’s actions, tricking-or-treating shapes to be a symbol of freedom for children, and a symbol of power inversion for families. 

           
 Here marks the end of my two-part analysis. In order to synthesize, it is best to first revisit my original purpose. My purpose was to observe trick-or-treating through an anthropological lens, and then use that same lens to analyze my observations. To do this, I employed the anthropological styles of Karl Marx and Clifford Geertz to create a two-part analysis. In my first segment, I analyzed givers’ and collectors’ interactions with candy from a Marxist perspective. This allowed me to show how these interactions were reflections of capitalism, and furthermore, to apply the idea of commodity fetishism to candy trading. In the second segment, I took on a Geertzian perspective, and utilized his method of interpretive anthropology. Using parts of this method, I analyzed trick-or-treating like a text: I arrived at the idea that costumes allowed wearers to take on an external identity, and at the idea that tricking-or-treating is a symbol of freedom for children and power inversion for families.

References

Geertz, Clifford. 1972. “Deep play: Notes on the Balinese Cockfight.” Daedalus, Vol. 101  (No.1) : pages 1-37

Marx, Karl. 1978. The Marx Engels Reader. New York: W. W. Norton & Company

---

[1] The most routine phrases were “Hello,” “Happy Halloween,” and “Take one only!”

[2] One observation that illustrates this was a collector trading one pack of sour patch kids for two packs of M&M’s.

[3] The movie The Avengers stars a group of heroes formally called the Avengers and a major villain named Loki.

Grade deflation

Here I sit down in front of this "college" laptop, with a hanging fist full of fury, and a mind clouded by frustration. Let's see where this present anger takes me. A rant about grades, failure, capitalism? Perhaps. But before I proceed onward, let me note that I'm a college freshman, so my viewpoints are worldly and dignified. Everything that I will say concerning school, society and things that matter is backed by experience and divine wisdom.

So why am I angry? Well what drives anyone to be angry? For some it might be failing to capture Pidgey, or having erectile dysfunction. For me, it's failing to achieve desired grades, but moreover, failing to see how stupid I am for caring too much. Now I won't say what university I attend, but I will hint that it is indeed famous for its abundance of homeless people, squirrels, noble laureates, flier givers, hippies, pride for giant brown killing machines, professors who champion the ethics of Sesame Street, and GRADE DEFLATION.

What is grade deflation? Simply put, it describes a system in which grades are 'deflated' or set forth in a way that makes getting "high" grades (As!) extremely difficult. Under this system, it is thus challenging for one to obtain a 'competitive GPA' - relative to schools that have a system of grade inflation. Why do grades and GPA matter though? Why do many (me included) care oh so much about these numbers? The broad answer to this question: because we're capitalists, and we care about measurements that put us ahead of others. Having high GPA is necessary for admission to graduate school, and employment in certain careers.

Okay, GPA isn't everything. But it is something, and there is often a threshold for that something. An example of that something not meeting a threshold would be a person whose application to a graduate school immediately gets screened out because he doesn't have X.YZ GPA. Grade deflation makes it difficult to achieve X.YZ GPA, especially when graduates schools and employers don't consider the rigor of Grade Deflation University A! They treat Grade Deflation University A and Grade Inflation University B as equal; GPA's from both institutions are thus evaluated with the same lens. Is this a fair system of evaluation? Yeah sure! Why the fuck not?

Now it is time for me to continue being penetrated eat cupcakes and romanticize about how whimsical my day was!

Love,
A happy student

Beneath the Writer's Block

As I sat in front of my computer with writer’s block – the cruel inability to articulate one’s thoughts, if any – not a single useful idea was being formulated in my young mind. A minute had passed and I still had not written anything relevant to this psychology assignment, for I have only talked about my misfortune. Helpless and downtrodden, I immediately begun to frown, for all that lied beyond me was a sea of white on this Microsoft 2010 Word document. But suddenly, I felt a sense of relief. A fiery warmth had taken over my facial muscles and quickly changed my crestfallen frown into a flossy smile.  I realized that within that brief period of time – that sudden painful moment when I looked at the computer screen - laid a plethora of biological and psychological phenomena ready to be explored. In this paper, I deeply explore the phenomena that occurred during the formation and destruction of my writer’s block through a biological and psychological lens. For the first segment, I will focus specifically on the macro-scale processes of sensation and perception. After establishing a macro-scale framework, I will then delve into the micro-scale process of neurotransmission in the brain.

Sensation and perception are two macro-scale processes that play an important role in vision. In my brief haunting sight of the empty Microsoft Word document, sensation and perception played a direct role in what I detected in my vision and in how I reacted to what was visually presented to me. But before I proceed on further, it is important that clear definitions of sensation and perception are set forth, for they are different but interconnected. James Kalat defines sensation to be “the conversion of energy from the environment into a pattern of response by the nervous system” but perception to be “the interpretation of that information” created by sensation (Kalat 97). Thus, perception is dependent on sensation, so I will first dig into sensation with regards to what I saw at the midst of my writer’s block before I venture into perception. Vision itself is a sensory process that begins with the detection of visual stimuli –light energy. A stream of light particles or photons strike an object and then reflect off of it. Our eyes – the sensory tools of vision – detect these reflections of light energy through an intricate process. However, these reflections have different wavelengths which are only a part of the entire electromagnetic spectrum. From the ones that lie between the length of 400 and 700 nanometers, our eyes make visual sense of these varying wavelengths by matching each one to a specific hue that we perceive as a certain color. As I peered at my computer screen, I was able to see multiple colors, albeit mostly white. This seemingly instantaneous and unconscious process was the direct result of my eyes at work- the detection of differing wavelengths of light that were spurred from the strange environment that I live in. But the detection of reflected light is only one part of the sensation of sight. The reflected light passes through an intricate visual pathway - a “bio-maze” of structures – in order to get to the brain, the final destination that gives us vision.  The journey through the eye begins at the iris, a colored structure that reveals our eye color; but more importantly, it controls how much reflected light can pass through the pupil, a structure within the iris that acts as a gate. After passing through the pupil, the light gently travels through a jelly-like substance called the vitreous humor to reach the back of the eyeball where the retina is located. The retina is very important because it contains a layer of visual receptors – rods and cones - that detect the light and translate it into neural signals. The transmission of these signals from the detected light marks the end of the detection phase and the start of the neural phase. These impulses travel toward the center of the eye, where they enter the optic nerve. And finally, the optic nerve channels these impulses to the visual cortex of the brain where vision is beautifully created. This complex process, which actively occurs, is the reason why I was able to see the blank word document on my computer screen. But sight is merely a sensation. My reaction to that horrifying sight was a result of perception, an interpretation of that visual sensation.  One avenue of perception relevant to my experience is pattern recognition. I immediately made sense of what I saw by noticing that the black colors formed a pattern in the form of textual sentences. I also perceived that the white that continued beyond those sentences marked an incomplete pattern that needed to be filled with more black. Through pattern recognition, an interpretation of my visual sensation, I was able to discern that there was an incomplete pattern, and this instance of perception is what evoked my momentous sadness. With an understanding of sensation and perception, it is now possible to go even deeper by exploring what happens on a micro-scale during these essential processes of life.

On a micro-scale, it is the intercommunication between neurons that makes sensation, perception, and all the functions of our body a possibility. Neurons are essentially the working cells of our nervous system, and they played a marked role in my writer’s block experience. After the reflected light passed through my brown irises and made its way to the retinas of my eyeballs, it was translated into neural signals. These signals were actually the product of specialized neurons – rods and cones. Neurons also made a strong appearance in the visual cortex of my brain in which vision was created. So neurons were definitely there during my experience (and they still are hopefully), but how do they actually communicate with each other? The answer to that question lies in the structure of the neuron. Neurons primarily consist of a cell body and an axon. The cell body contains dendrites, which are essentially branches that can receive signals from other neurons. These signals may instigate an action potential, which is the creation of an impulse. The axon, connected directly to the cell body, acts as tunnel to transmit the impulse. The impulse travels to end of the axon, which consist of branches that form a synapse with the dendrites of another neuron. Thus, neurons can easily communicate with one another by means of synapses. These synapses between neurons are extremely important, for what lies within them is the heart of neural communication. The axon side of the synapse contains neurotransmitters, chemicals that can “excite” or “inhibit” the dendrites of the other neuron depending on what type of neurotransmitter is released. If the neurotransmitters excite the dendrites, then that neuron will conduct its own impulse to possibly continue the chain of neurotransmission to another neuron and so forth. If an inhibitory one is sent, then the chain of communication is stopped. This “stop-or-go” system is how neurons communicate. As the moment I gazed at the blank word document, visible light was detected by special neurons in my retinas and then transmitted as impulses to the visual cortex of my brain. Within that visual cortex, neurons were activated by those impulses; these activated neurons then worked together in large chains of neurotransmission to give me vision. And this is only one tiny instance of neural communication. Though primarily in the brain, they are the gears of our nervous system, the system that regulates all other systems. Thus without neurons actively communicating with each other, life would not be possible, and neither would be the smiling at the defeat of writer’s block.

And here marks the end of what I once felt was an unconquerable foe. When I saw the boundless white, I was left empty, saddened, and insecure. But when I instantly made the realization that psychology was ingrained in my writer’s block, all my hope was happily restored. Through a biological and psychological lens, I explored how sensation and perception were instrumental to my vision. And with those macro-scale processes in mind, I delved into their inner micro-scale workings – neurotransmission. Looking back on this seemingly insignificant and rudimentary life experience, I am glad to have found a treasure chest of biological and psychological gold beneath its surface. 

The First Job

There comes a time in every young human's life where one decides to leave one's safety bubble, and dip one's feet in the waters of reality. Over the summer before college, I applied to my first job. I didn't get the job, but at least I got to write this blog post. 

Dear Apple store manager,

            

             I recently graduated high school and am seeking a part time retail job here at your Apple store. And here is my story: with college starting in the near future, I was naturally seeking some type of employment in order to make cash to help pay for my tuition, especially since the cost of UC tuition is rising. Eager to work, I thought of all the possible part time jobs I could have, but none seemed to interest me one bit. I didn’t want to be sorting papers in some warm and musty room on the third story of some office building. I didn’t want to be taking orders hastily in front of a line of angry looking customers, while getting yelled at because I won’t accept their expired coupons. I wanted something engaging, yet not rote and routine. I wanted something that would force me to have to adapt to new situations, and something that would expose me to something fun and new. But I just couldn’t wrap my head around any job like this that could possibly even exist. But this changed. As I was walking around in *censored* Mall, I saw it, emanating in its bright white glory: the Apple store.

Why am I interested in working here? Well for one, technology is something that has fascinated me ever since I was born. It has brought me great joy to watch how the technological innovations of our day would facilitate the many aspects of our lives like transportation, communication, and leisure. And today, Apple technology is no exception, for it facilitates two of those three aspects (no Apple cars yet). I love Apple products especially. The iPhone is honestly a beautiful device. And so is its software, such as iTunes, which is only 7 years less young than I am. But the bottom line is that I think Apple products are great, and I have a pleasure using and learning about them. And my other reason (besides money): I have hardly any work experience, and this would be what I consider my first real job. Everyone has to start somewhere, and this might be the coolest place for anyone to ever start. I genuinely think that it would be a great opportunity for me to get real hands-on experience by working with other employees and customers. With my strong interest in Apple technology, and my excitement that could drive me to interact favorably with other employees and customers, I believe that I am a legit candidate for a job here. It may also interest you to know that I live extremely close to the store, so close that I can walk there in only a few minutes (check out my resumè if you don’t believe me), so my working hours are very flexible.

Thanks for your consideration!

Best regards,

Fake Name

________________________________________________________________________________

They call me Frosty...

These past weeks have been great. Ahh, the weather was so, so perfect. I felt like the statue of liberty, just gazing upon humanity and all of mother earth's creatures frolicking near me. With this broom in my hand, I felt unstoppable. I felt an inner urge to scream "come at me bro" whenever I saw a rabbit pass by. But on the other hand, I felt a sense of responsibility. I felt that I had been chosen to protect these beautiful creations. Maybe I was a protector. Either way, I felt powerful, and I was at the threshold of my life. But now, things have changed.

No longer do I like the weather. The dominance of Winter has subsided, only to be conquered by the almighty Spring. Alas, I see my fate. My body can't cope with this new atmosphere! Ahh, I think I'm melting! Why am I slowly starting to feel "liquidy?" This is absolutely embarrassing. Those rabbits over there are laughing at me. What did I do to deserve this? Am I just a creature meant to exist only during the periods of the cold? What is that God forsaken bright yellow hunk of mass in the sky? Ahh, it burns my eyes. The amount of pain I'm experiencing is directly proportional to how much I've shrunken. Oh, cruel fate! I feel powerless in the face of nature.

6 hours have passed since the beginning of Spring. All that is left of me now is my nose, a bright orange carrot gifted to me by mankind. At least the melting has stopped. However, I don't feel as powerful as I used to be. Look what I have been degraded to! Is that a rabbit over there? I can't tell. Why is it running towards me so quickly? Maybe he wants to be my friend. Wait a second! Hey! Stop that! This is unfair! I think this was one of the rabbits who was laughing at me earlier. Now I know why.

~They called me Frosty...

What Lies Inside a Pokeball?

You're probably mildly familiar with a show/game series called Pokemon. The word Pokemon refers to the creatures themselves, like Pikachu for instance. Pokemon live in a world where they can run freely, or accompany a person. The formation of a human-to-person relationship usually begins with a pokeball. A pokeball is a device used to capture pokemon. Now this can be seen as positive and negative. Negative in the sense that it limits the pokemon's freedom, but positive in the sense that it fosters a human relationship. Once a pokemon is in a pokeball, it can only be called out at the discretion of the human owner. I'm not here to criticize the mechanics of this practice, but I'm here to ask a question: what happens when the pokemon is inside the pokeball? Does it just disappear, does it become matter-less? The makers of this show/game series never answered these questions, so that leaves room for me to present a theory.

Once in the pokeball, the pokemon doesn't just disappear. It enters another dimension where it is free to pursue its passions. It exists in a shared alternate reality with other pokemon, without a trace of humans (think of it like the world's population living in the same dream). So now what? Is there some type of pokemon hierarchy or source of governance? Is there some sort of control? I imagine that they fall victim to a process that Thomas Hobbes writes about in his Leviathan, a process in which pokemon become ruthless, selfish individuals on the hunt for power. These competing ambitions would result in an array of violence, chaos and destruction. Without humans to hold back pokemon, they can finally live out their selfish and violent nature. However, at absolutely anytime, a pokemon can be called by its human to go back into the human-pokemon world. They are usually called out to battle with other pokemon, and I imagine that they would be rearing to fight after being exposed to so much violence in their alternate reality. If this was truly the case, I feel bad for pokemon. They have to fight both in and out of two worlds, with almost never a moment of a peace. But maybe pokemon enjoy this long life of violence and pressure. Maybe they thrive on it.  

Maybe pokemon do not even share the same emotions and ambitions that we humans do. Maybe the shared alternate reality models a Utopian society, or some sort of world of pure happiness and peace, where pokemon big and small, blue and yellow, hard and soft, can get along. If THIS were to be the case, then I say humans in this series/show are assholes. Pokemon, with a peaceful nature, and which live peacefully, are forcefully brought under the capture of a device. Even though this device grants them a free world, they still get called to battle, a practice which their nature repels, but they still do it. Maybe they want to win or lose the battle quickly so they can get back to their world of freedom. I do know one thing for certain: humans in both possible types of alternate realities and natures are selfish and violent, like Hobbes prescribed. I can assert this because according to the show/game series, there is no government, just a freaking huge chain of 'law'-enforcers who are practically vigilantes. Their status as defenders of peace is questionable at best. With no reliable source of governance or order, pokemon trainers are left alone to control their own destinies. And what do they do? They capture pokemon, and use them for their own purposes. They reflect the violent nature prescribed by Hobbes because they constantly feel the need to battle with other pokemon trainers, possibly to assert their presence as the alpha male (female). They do not need to worry about losing an actual physical fight, they have pokemon to protect them. With their violent tendencies, and desire to be dominant over all the other trainers, Darwin's principle of "natural selection" comes to play. Dominant trainers thrive, and weak trainers become ostracized. Females want to the fuck the successful trainers. Competition ensues, and as a result, the weak is Weedled out, This marks a continuous cycle of violence and competition. 

Okay. I presented a strange theory, or whatever the hell that was. Nothing has changed, and questions that tv show makers of pokemon left unanswered are still unawnswered. Our minds are left to wonder, but from the observable behaviors of the pokemon trainers, we can see how Hobbe's and Darwin's ideas may come to play. As a child, I never really thought about the feelings and lives of pokemon. I accepted that they merely just went into a pokeball, and came out when needed. I didn't care that they were treated like machines for carrying out the violent and Darwinian + selfish nature of pokemon trainers. And I don't think any child will care about the emotions and desires of pokemon. They're too busy trying to beat the Elite Four to even give them a consideration, or obtain that almighty Rattata. But are we just as bad as the pokemon trainers? Are pokemon symbols for animals, creatures that society unanimously deems as inferior organisms? Perhaps, perhaps, perhaps. But I cannot answer that question right now. I have to run to the grocery to buy some eggs, which are solely products of strenuous human suffering.

Rubber Duckies

 You probably arrived here because you were google image searching "rubber duckies". Well that's great, because rubber duckies are great, and because you searched for them, that means you are great too. Just to enhance your viewing experience, let me tell you a little about rubber duckies. I like rubber duckies. They embody badassery (yep that's right, I just invented my own word to describe rubber duckies). But a rubber ducky with SUNGLASSES? Now that's a whole new level of awesome. Staring into its dark shades, as it floats gently along serene and calm water, just makes me feel like a better human being. I hope you do too. By mere discovery of this image, you have already made your life a tad better. But how? Well you have just seen one of the greatest images bestowed upon mankind, in the history of planet earth.  As a result, you are awesome. And what did it take? Just a few mouse clicks and a burning desire to google image search rubber duckies. Well consider it done.  I hope you have a great day, and I hope you continue being awesome.