News aggregator

Over the last two nights, The SciFi Channel has debuted two new reality shows.

Why The Science Fiction Channel feels the need to fill its schedule with the same reality show tripe (and professional wrestling) that other networks do, I don’t know. (Well, other than greed.) But they continue to insist on producing these shows. Past gems include Mad, Mad House (which was mildly annoying, but overall not bad at all), Who Wants to Be a Superhero (which could have been so much better than it was), GhostHunters (which is a real reality show, and, therefore, OK in my book), and Scare Tactics (which is just mean spirited).

The two newest additions are Cha$e and Estate of Panic. Neither has impressed me much.

In fact, they disgust me more than a bit. Just like most of the competition-based reality shows out there. There’s no question that the worst in people is brought out on purpose. There’s no encouragement to actual team-work, no reason to not screw everyone else over. (Mad, Mad House and Who Wants to Be a Superhero thankfully avoided those two major pitfalls most of the time.)

Here’s the thing, people are mean enough on their own–they don’t need any “help” to be any worse and the viewing public most certainly doesn’t need any more bad examples. Survivior has given us more than enough of those.

Cha$e is, basically, a big game of tag. Contestants get set loose in an area (the first episode was an industrial waterfront, the second looks like it’s going to be an arboretum of some sort), the money they win increases the longer they stay in, up to an hour. Before the end of that hour, they have to be the first to the exit in order to win. Oh, and while they’re running around, they’re being chased by “Hunters” and if they get tagged they’re eliminated from the game. There are gimmicks to avoid being caught and things to give them bonuses.

There’s also a camera crew and over-played Hunter characters. You want to make me a little more happy with the show? Wire the area with cameras and give everyone their own. Get rid of the camera crews. Really isolate the contestants and then maybe you’ll have something more interesting.

Estate of Panic is just about as bad. The ingredients are: 1 Creepy mansion, 1 over acting host, and a handful of easily scared and bravado-filled contestants. The challenge? Get in and out of different locations in and around the mansion, finding as much hidden money as possible. The catch? Don’t be the last one in the room and don’t be the one who gets out with the least money–those will both get you eliminated. Oh, and there’s going to be things like snakes, water, smoke and collapsing ceilings in these locations.

This game is pretty much straight on smash and grab. Not much skill needed. No time to form alliances or really backstab. No strategy in between rooms. Just pure adreanaline and stupidity.

Again there are a whole lot of little things that could make this show better. First, encourage teamwork, at least to a point. Then add in some actual strategy–let people bargin with the money they have collected in between rooms instead of counting it for all to know and instant elimination. Come up with some way for those eliminated early on to come back at the end.

Reality competition shows don’t have to be bad. They don’t have to bring out the worst in people. The Amazing Race and Kid Nation have shown that to be true. And yet, most of the shows out there sink to the lowest level possible.

So, while The SciFi Channel cancels more of their scripted shows more and more quickly, they keep proudcing sub-par reality television. I can’t say I’m at all happy about that.

Feel free to skip both of these shows.

This past week saw the premiere of a handful of U.S. remakes of shows originally done for other channels in other countries. Life on Mars, Eleventh Hour and Kath & Kim seem to be the three big ones currently being pushed. I caught all three. I also haven’t seen the original versions of any of them.

Life on Mars seems worth watching for three things: The Soundtrack, Harvey Keitel and Gretchen Mol. Not necessarily in that order. After the first episode, it feels an awful lot like Journeyman (or any of the other numerous Quantum Leap style shows that’ve been done since QL did it best) mashed up with TJ Hooker. Some of it is kind of like how I’d imagine CSI: The Past would be. The actor in the lead, Jason O’Mara, just doesn’t do it for me. Neither does the non-too-subtle bleed through of the present (especially the hospital sounds) into the past (or the future into the show’s present, as the case may be). I was hoping for a little more ambiguity than I’ve gotten so far. I don’t see it lasting, mostly because it’s so close in theme and execution as most of the shows that got canceled last season. Maybe in the next few episodes, it’ll do something to impress me. I’m not going to hold my breath.

Eleventh Hour was OK. I like the female lead, Marley Shelton, better than I like her counterpart in Fringe. The plot we have so far, though, leaves a bit to be desired. I’m OK with the big science mystery line, but Fringe beat them to the punch and has a crazier scientist character. If I could scramble the two shows together, I think we’d have a real winner. Until then, I’m on the fence with this one as much as I am with Fringe–it has potential, but I don’t know if it’ll get the chance to find it’s stride before it tanks.

Kath & Kim is utter and complete trash. Selma Blair, I love you dearly, but, damn girl, this show… why? You did your turn as trash in a John Waters movie, no need to revisit that as an inferior interpretation on the small screen. The really sad thing is that this show is even a waste of Molly Shannon’s talents. There isn’t a single likable character. They’re all dull and loud and oblivious. If I want that, all I have to do is hit the mall on any given day. Or, you know, watch news about the Republican vice presidential ticket. At most, this show’s getting one more half hour of my time to make me laugh and not groan. (And that’s only if I can fit it in between reruns of the original Addams Family.)

Of course, of these three shows, Kath & Kim will probably be the biggest hit.

As of this season of Smallville we have:

• Most of the stories taking place in Metropolis
• Clark working at The Daily Planet
• With Lois
• and an obvious romantic interest in him on her part

Is it just me, or does that make it Lois and Clark more than Smallville?

Also, no Lex or Lionel Luther to be had so far.

Makes me wonder why I still bother watching the show…

Continuing on with the look at the fall season, we slip quietly into October. (If you’re playing along with the home game, all this is coming from this TV Guide.com calendar which is exceptionally useful.)

Pushing Daisies (ABC, 8 p.m., Wednesdays)

This show really hit the spot last season. It was whimsical, quirky, uplifting and, at times, downright touching. It also carried through a perverse sense of humor and amazing visual style that left me really wanting more when it’s too-short season came to close. Who would have thought the tale of a pie maker and his once dead girlfriend could be so good for family entertainment? (Premieres Oct. 1)

Private Practice (ABC, 9 p.m., Wednesdays)

As much as I like Grey’s Anatomy, it’s spinoff just didn’t do it for me. At all. I’m actually almost surprised that it’s back for a second season. I say “almost” because it’s a show about pretty people having petty problems while screwing around with one another. It’s got “popular hit” written all over it. Well, you can have it. I’m sure I can find something better to do with this hour. (Premieres Oct. 1)

Dirty Sexy Money (ABC, 10 p.m. , Wednesdays)

Big egos, big spenders, dark secrets and a murder mystery, Dirty Sexy Money has it all. Plus Donald Sutherland. This show actually surprised me last season by being as enjoyable and engaging as it was. I’ve been eagerly awaiting its return–as much to see what the mega-rich Darling family will do next as to find out where the next set of clues in the underlying murder plot lead. (Premieres Oct. 1)

The Ghost Whisperer (CBS, 8 p.m., Fridays)

During its first season, The Ghost Whisperer left me in kind of a diabetic coma. Jennifer Love Hewitt was too cute and sunny for someone who had spent her life dealing with dead people. It wasn’t until a couple of seasons in when the show took a little bit of a darker turn that I came back to it. I haven’t been able to let it go since. Last season, with the discovery of the town beneath the town and impending doom around every corner, I think the show hit a high point. Now I’m curious as to whether they can keep the suspense and momentum going. It’s no Supernatural, but, thankfully, it’s also not Touched By An Angel. (Premieres Oct. 3)

Kath & Kim (NBC, 8:30 p.m., Thursdays)

Chalk up another notch in the “American version of a hit foreign show” column. This one looks to be a “revisioning” of an Aussie show (one of, what, three or four shows that whole continent produces?) The only thing bringing me to this with any hope is Selma Blair. She was one of the key ingredients in making Zoe, Duncan, Jack and Jane fun and watchable, I’m hoping she does the same for this show. And she’s got a lot to overcome, because none of the characters look that interesting (let alone sympathetic). (Premieres Oct. 9)

Life On Mars (ABC, 10 p.m., Thursdays)

Speaking of American versions of shows that there don’t need to be American versions of… Life on Mars (U.S. version) reportedly changes just about all the details of the BBC show it’s borrowing it’s title from. I’ve been told again and again that I should check out the original (and I will, I promise… it’s on my list!). That tells me the American version is going to have to work pretty hard to either a) dull itself down enough to get a prime-time following here in the states or b) die a quick death like every other time travel flavored show from last season (Journeyman, New Amsterdam). Guess we’ll just have to wait and see. (Premieres Oct. 9)

Eleventh Hour (CBS, 10 p.m., Thursdays)

Competing for the “strange hour of TV on Thursday” slot against Life on Mars is yet another re-tooling of a foreign show. Again it “borrows” plot and characters from the British. This time around Rufus Sewell replaces Patrick Stuart as a guy investigating strange goings on. A plot that sounds oddly like Fringe, which beat this show to air by a few weeks. It’s bound to be another CSI meets Twilight Zone, X-Files wannabe. But I’ll give Sewell a chance. It could be better than Fringe (which I still haven’t decided if I like or not). (Premieres Oct. 9)

Samantha Who? (ABC, 9:30 p.m., Mondays)

I stand firmly behind the idea that you just can’t go wrong with Christina Applegate. Ever since she broke out of the dumb blond role that made her famous, she’s done one good thing after another. The inaugural season of Samantha Who? took a tired concept (character gets amnesia) and brought a new life to it. A strong supporting cast certainly helped, but Applegate is the heart of the show. I’m curious as to whether her real-life battle with breast cancer will get worked into the plot. It wouldn’t surprise me and I don’t doubt it would fit well with the blend of humor and introspection the show has cultivated. (Premieres Oct. 13)

My Own Worst Enemy (NBC, 10 p.m., Mondays)

Speaking of characters who don’t know who they are, here we have Christian Slater playing a hit man and a family man. Two very different lives crammed into the same body due to some deep-cover, sleeper agent brain tweaking. I don’t know if it’s going to be good, but it will be entertaining. At least for a few episodes. I have my doubts if it can be sustained for a while, but I had doubts about Chuck, too, and that just kicked off its second season in a good way. (Premieres Oct. 13)

Eli Stone (ABC, 10 p.m., Tuesdays)

Just in case you don’t have enough quirky lawyers in your diet, Eli Stone apparently returns to life from his first season cliffhanger ending. Either that or this will be the shortest second season ever. The show never really grabbed me, but it was always entertaining. Most of the time, though, it felt like a low-rent David E. Kelley riff. There’s just something missing, which is a shame because Victor Garber is fantastic in his supporting role. Maybe this season will have more song and dance numbers… not sure how much that would help, but, again: entertaining! (Premieres Oct. 14)

Crusoe (NBC, 10 p.m., Fridays)

Hey! It’s the original Lost! come back in the form of an hour long drama. I really haven’t seen a whole lot on this show, but I’ll tune in just to see how far they’ll go to mash as many shows together as possible in the attempt to make a new hit. But it’s on Friday nights at 10 p.m., not much lasts there for long. I give it four episodes tops before it’s gone. (Premieres Oct. 17)

And there you go–your new fall season… or at least the things I’ll be watching or actively avoiding. Everything else, you’re on your own for.

Genetically engineered terrorists, superscience and heavy doses of corporate sponsorship from Microsoft, Cisco and Intel.

That’s what you get from Gemini Division, an online/On Demand series from NBC and Electric Farm Entertainment. Well that and a pretty good story starring Rosario Dawson as a NYC cop who gets drawn into an international conspiracy of secret organizations after discovering that her fiance may be keeping secrets from her.

I won’t go into deep details of the plot, but it’s at least slightly above average. It’s done using mostly virtual sets and the compositing varies from nearly imperceptible to “Do you seriously expect me to buy that?” Same with the rest of the effects in the show.

The format is good–told mostly from the perspective of Dawson’s character’s souped up smart phone in diary-like clips–and works perfectly for a show that is designed to be shown online. I’ve been watching it through On Demand on Comcast. They have week-batches tied together… which leads to three or four rounds of going through the credits.

Product placement and name dropping runs kind of rampant, but that’s to be expected. At least in the high-tech context of the plot it doesn’t seem too out of place.

It’s worth checking out, either online or On Demand. I’m interested in seeing where it’s going.

Tonight’s one of those nights my digital recorders will be doing overtime.

NBC is doing a three hour Heroes extravaganza starting with a catchup lead-in at 8 p.m. and then two hours of new episode. After faltering a bit last season, I still have high hopes for Heroes to wow me in those two new hours.

Of course, while I’m watching all of that, I’ll be recording (or otherwise time-shifting) four other hours of TV shows.

Season premiers of two of my favorite sitcoms drop at 8 and 8:30 p.m. on CBS–The Big Bang Theory and How I Met Your Mother. And over on Fox there’s a new episode of Terminator: The Sarah Connor Chronicles, which has consistently kicked ass this season.

The 9 o’clock hour isn’t bad as I can take or leave Two and a Half Men (which was infinitely funnier in its first few seasons than it has been the last few times I watched it) and have very little interest in Worst Week.

At 10 p.m. the DVR will kick back in to see what Shatner and Spader are up to on the new season of Boston Legal. There’s some question as to if the show will continue to slide deeper into self-parody and lose what charm it has left, but I know it’ll still be worth it for those David E. Kelley character tirades on current issues. Having Denny and Alan argue during an election year should be interesting.

As we move into October (the “official” start of the new season), there are going to be more nights like this–with multiple hours accruing on the DVR and in my online viewing queues. It’s all part of the challenge of keeping up with what very well be my most time-consuming (and alternately inspiring and frustrating) hobby.

The season premier of the new HBO series True Blood quite pleasantly surprised me.

After last season’s less than spectacular experience with Moonlight, I was really wary of another vampire series. Even if it was from the same guy who gave us Six Feet Under and starred Anna Paquin. Was it going to be a sappy love story? Yet another angsty bunch of worthless vamps? So campy it would make the original Buffy the Vampire Slayer movie look good?

Before the premiere, HBO ran two half-hour documentary/promo bits on vampires. Those were interesting. Not a whole lot of new info for me, but at least it proved that someone had done their research and knew what had piqued public interest in bloodsuckers before. That gave me a small bit of hope. Especially the interview snippets with Charline Harris, the author of the book series the show is based on.

And so, after an hour of indulging in vampire nostalgia (which, oddly, only had one reference to Buffy in it… during a montage of pretty much every vampire thing ever made), I was ready to sink my teeth into the new show.

It did not leave a bad taste in my mouth at all. In fact, it seems like it will be quite the breath of fresh air.

What makes it different? First and foremost, vampires aren’t hiding any more. They’re right out there in the open–”out of the coffin”, in the show’s vernacular–thanks to the invention of a synthetic blood that removes their need to feed on humans. Now they’re struggling for equal rights and being subjected to that awful novelty that any recently unveiled minority/fringe group experiences. Being set in the south, the tension between the species may run a little too close to mirroring the tension between races for some… but I think it’s just the right distance and difference to allow some interesting exploration of the subject.

Sociological analysis aside, the show is populated with characters that should prove to be quite interesting. Sookie Stackhouse (Anna Paquin) is a waitress in the Louisiana town of Bon Temps. She’s more than open minded about the whole vampire thing–she’s downright exuberant about it in the cutest/most annoyingly naive way possible. The combination actually works out to be kind of endearing with Paquin in the part. But if the tone of the show plays through like Alan Ball’s other big deal HBO show, there will be some big and tragic changes ahead for pure little Sookie.

Her apparent lack of understanding of just how dangerous people can be (let alone vampires) allows her over-active sense of justice (fueled by her ability to listen in to people’s thoughts–yes, she’s a psychic) to bring her to the rescue of new vampire in town Bill (Stephen Moyer) when he’s picked out at the diner and targeted to be drained of his blood (which has some powerful effects on humans, making it quite the lucrative drug to trade in).

Since half the fun is watching it all play out, I won’t spoil anything more than that. Just know that the supporting cast is is full of quirky characters that are bound to stir up trouble and interesting situations as the series goes on. Oh, and I’m betting we already have at least one werewolf in town.

Needless to say, I highly recommend checking out the show. For a pilot episode, this one was pretty solid. Some of the characters may have been a little  too cartoonish, but I’m expecting that they’ll flesh out and develop now that we know their broad strokes.

The show’s got teeth, that’s for sure. And it bites just the way a vampire show should–with style and intensity.

Whether it’s in regards to a crush, an actual relationship or any other facet of your life, being able to tell when you’re falling into a negative spiral is the first step in not getting stuck in a very bad place.

A negative spiral is a pattern of thought or behavior that is self-reinforcing and based on either faulty or a lack of actual information. It is triggered by risk-taking behavior and usually kicks in when the results or fall out from that behavior don’t occur quickly.

For example:

You shoot off a message telling someone you like them. Then you wait for a response. Maybe a day goes by. Now you start to think “Oh no! They’re not answering! They’re probably trying to figure out how to let me down easy. Or maybe I’ve scared them away entirely by coming on too strong.” Legitimate concerns, especially if you’ve had such things happen before, but no more probable than them being busy or their computer being down.

Another day goes by. Now the negative spiral kicks in full force. It begins to pick and choose all the worse case scenarios you’ve ever experienced or heard about. It finds connections from those to all of your previous interactions with this person you sent the note off to. “Uh-oh! This is just like that time my ex was cheating on me! She went a whole week without writing back!” Even though the only thing that negative experience has in common with the current experience is a lag time in response. It could just as easily be “just like that time dad’s computer died and he didn’t respond to that e-mail I sent.”

As the negative spiral progresses, it encourages you to act out–to preemptively apologize for things you haven’t quite done, for feelings you may (or may not) have hurt. It drives you to scrutinize ever more closely (and with more negative bias) any interaction you’ve had before. It encourages a negative self-image (”This is going bad, just like things always do for me.”)

If you give in to those urges, the situation almost always gets more complicated before it gets better. Now, the person who may have been flattered by your first letter (even if they weren’t interested) comes home from an unplanned trip to an in-box full of apologies (and sometimes accusations) that wash away that good feeling and just leave them seeing an insecure, hyper-sensitive and slightly crazy person who’s spent the last ten or fifteen messages holding a conversation with themselves.

Is that really the impression you want to give?

The bottom line is they are either going to respond or they are not. If they do respond, it will be in the affirmative (”Yeah, I feel that way too”), the negative (”Uh, no… and that’s kind of creepy, I don’t want to see you anywhere near me”) or, most often, in a neutral way (”That’s flattering, but I’m not looking for a relationship right now”). As long as you haven’t been completely outlandish in your initial contact, you stand better than a 50% chance of things being neutral or good.

When you notice yourself being pulled in to a negative spiral of thought fight very hard against taking action based on it. Stay away from your “send” button. Don’t dial her number on the phone (you’ll probably end up leaving a long, rambling voice mail message that would make any sitcom plot proud). Don’t go and camp out on her doorstep. Do not take any action until more concrete information comes your way.

Most of the time, if you can hold back the dark cloud of panic and depression that a negative spiral brings with it, you’ll hear back and things will be good (or, at least, neutral and mostly unchanged).

We all have responses that have become automatic over time. If we can recognize the bad ones for what they are, we can begin to change them. This makes us–and everyone we have to interact with–happier.

Along with what I would suspect was millions of people much younger than I am, I tuned in to catch the series premier of 90210 on The CW.

I have to say, it was a lot better than I expected.

Granted, I’ve got this huge nostalgia bank saved up from the first few years of the parent series. I was there on the Walshes first day at West Beverly High back in October of 1990 and stuck with them until a couple years after they graduated (unlike some other people, I didn’t stick with that show for all ten years… and I didn’t make the jump to Melrose Place). Even without that background, I think the new show was considerably better than I expected.

While it was good to see Kelly (Jennie Garth) show up and reference things that happened when she and new high school principal Harry (Rob Estes… who wasn’t actually on the original 90210… but was on Melrose as a different character than he’s playing now… trippy, man…) were in high school together, the real joy came from watching the new fish out of water get the feel for the good ol’ currents of the school.

Granted, this being the 21st century and all, they catch on a lot quicker than Brenda and Brandon ever did. Heck, they’re lying, cheating and zipping away on private jets. Yeah, this most certainly isn’t my 90210.

But that’s what I liked about it. It didn’t rely on the nostalgia. Instead, it did what any show should do: it made its own way. The characters, while easy to spot the correlation and commonalities with other “hip” new shows are individual enough to not get totally lost in the teen-drama shuffle that The CW caters to so well. And even with the Kansas-born Wilson kids successfully stooping to the shallow level of their West Beverly peers, they still manage to maintain the special mid-west wholesomeness that adds the necessary contrast and perspective that made the original show worth-while.

There’s even a bit of snark in the teen characters. Some of the action and dialog had the vague echoes of Veronica Mars to it. (And those of you who know me, know that echoing VM or Gilmore Girls is a sure-fire way to at least get me interested.)

For a pilot, it was a bit packed. A lot of blatant introductions. A lot of odd timing and seemingly contrived situations. (Like why was the new principal starting a week into the school year?) Maybe these things will be explored more in the episodes that come. I know we’ll be seeing more alumni of the original show. I predict a visit from Ian Ziering before the mid-way point this season. And I would almost pay for Luke Perry to show up, preferably while Doherty’s all grown up Brenda is still in town.

If you missed the premier, find a way to catch it. Dollars to donuts it’ll be up online somewhere… and probably rebroadcast anther time or two over the next week.

Don’t get me wrong, just because you grew up watching the original doesn’t mean you’ll love this one. But you may find it interesting how much has changed… and how much has stayed the same.

You know, just like any high school.

There are a lot of new and old shows on their way back. A lot of them, I’ve watched or am looking forward to watching. There’s also a bunch I’m dreading or that I’ve given up on. You can make your own plans using this handy dandy calendar of premieres over at TV Guide.com.

NCIS (Tuesdays, 8 pm, CBS)

As spin-offs go, NCIS has done quite well for itself. I’d be tempted to say it’s gotten even better than JAG, it’s parent show. As with every previous season, last season’s finale left me wondering how, exactly, the team would continue pushing on. Granted, over the years, a bit more humor and self parody have crept in. Hopefully the balance will hold and this season will be a good one. But, hey, as long as I get me some Pauley Perrette, all is good. (Premiers 8/23)

The Mentalist (Tuesdays, 9 pm, CBS)

The new show stuck in the middle of CBS’s crime-time Tuesdays looks an awful lot like the cable gem Psych, except with a little more class. Then again, Simon Baker always brings a little class to the shows he’s in. While that wasn’t enough to save Smith a couple seasons ago, he did manage to make The Guardian a pretty decent series (even if the premise was flimsy to begin with). Maybe The Mentalist will click, maybe it won’t. I’m not sure how I feel about it. But I’m willing to give it a chance. (Premieres 8/23)

Knight Rider (Wednesdays, 8 pm, NBC)

OK, so some parts of the recent TV movie that revived the Night Rider franchise weren’t totally horrible. But enough of them were to make me seriously concerned that this iteration of the idea will be as bad as those that have come before–like, as bad as the original, except without the fun. I’ve been of the opinion that they should have just gone for a total reboot of the series instead of tying it in to the original. And, y’know, stuck with the Trans Am. I’ve seen some possible leaks of script bits and the ads that have been running lately and neither of them do anything to increase my confidence in this doing anything other than tarnishing my golden memories of The Hoff and his sweet ride. (Premieres 8/24)

Lipstick Jungle (Wednesdays, 10 pm, NBC)

This show I tuned in to mainly for Brooke Shields. I’m a fan from way back… like when she showed up on the original Muppet show and stuff. I was suitably impressed by the rest of the cast to keep coming back. Last season progressed well through the lives of all the key characters. Yes, it’s got a bit of a Sex in the City vibe, but it’s also a little more grown up. And I, for one, will proudly keep watching to see where it goes this season. (At least I’ll keep watching until it starts to really suck… then it’s all on its own.) (Premieres 8/25)

Grey’s Anatomy (Thursdays, 9 pm, ABC)

Despite the fact that I keep wishing death on the title character, I keep watching. (Please! Can’t she just stay dead the next time it happens… there’s another Grey on the show now… I like her a lot better.) Overall, the show is pretty solid and a tremendous amount of fun most of the time. Last season was really a time for many of the supporting cast to shine. And all the guest bits over the years have been spectacular. The show has been generally well-written, so as long as the continues, I’ll probably keep watching. (Premieres 8/26)

ER (Thursdays, 10 pm, NBC)

This show is entering its 15th season. I stopped watching regularly at least five seasons ago. They’ve done every story they could do. In fact, they did that about ten years ago. All they’ve done now is stretch the bounds of reality to ridiculous lengths and swapped out old characters from the old plots. I say all this because it seems the network is finally putting this lame horse down. I will watch the last episode of ER with as much excitement as I watched the first episode back in September of 1994. If only to make sure it’s over.

Chuck (Mondays, 8 pm, NBC)

OK, I’ll admit, I consider this show a guilty pleasure. It’s generally light, fun and full of action and sexy sexy women. It was just announced that NBC has picked up another nine episodes of Chuck, giving it a lock on a full season before the first bit of ratings are even in. If this show is to really thrive, though, it’s got to get more creative and things need to expand in scope. Having two main jokes (”haha look at the geeky guy and the hot girl together, isn’t that cute and awkward?” and “Ooo! He’s got all sorts of stuff in his head but he doesn’t always read it right.”) is good for one short season. Much more than that and you need to grow your operating paradigm before it gets really silly. After all, Chuck’s not getting any new super secret information in that database he’s got in his head–that stuff’s getting old quick.

Life (Mondays, 10 pm, NBC)

Life is another one of the few shows that caught me off guard with just how good it was. The plot is interesting but the presentation by Damian Lewis of quirky cop Crews is what really seals the deal. One part zen master, one part vindictive, sadistic vengeance-seeker, one part damn fine cop… that’s a character I can get behind and be endlessly fascinated by. My biggest fear is that too many people won’t “get” the show and it’ll be bounced around the schedule a few times before being unceremoniously and quietly canceled.

And that more or less wraps up the new/returning stuff that I give a damn about in September. But, as seasons continue to become more amorphous, a good handful of show premieres have crept into October. More on those later…

There are a lot of new and old shows on their way back. A lot of them, I’ve watched or am looking forward to watching. There’s also a bunch I’m dreading or that I’ve given up on. You can make your own plans using this handy dandy calendar of premieres over at TV Guide.com.

House (Tuesdays, 9 pm, FOX)

From the first episode, I’ve loved this show. Last season, they shook things up a bit adding in a bunch of new cast members and moving most of the familiar supporting cast to the background. The final two hours of the season were mind-blowing and unusually emotional for the show. I’d be lying if I said I wasn’t terribly curious to see how those events effect our favorite heartless healer and his only real friend. (Premieres 9/16)

Smallville (Thursdays, 8 pm, CW)

I don’t know why I still bother with this show. It has proved again and again to be one of the most unevenly scripted, acted and directed things on TV. They’ve diverged far from the “normal” Superman cannon and introduced so many quirks and conspiracies that it gives The X-Files a run for its money. But the good episodes are incredibly good. And so I keep watching, suffering through the crap to catch those ever-fewer nuggets of gold (like last seasons Luther on Luther confrontations–those were fantastic). (Premieres 9/18)

Supernatural (Thursdays, 9 pm, CW)

Of course, Supernatural may be the reason I sit through Smallville. This show has consistently nailed the horror genre. There have been episodes that were more terrifying than half the R-rated horror films I’ve seen over the years. The Winchester brothers play wonderful off of one another, which is going to make this season particularly interesting seeing how last season (inevitably) ended. (Premieres 9/18)

The Big Bang Theory (Mondays, 8 pm, CBS)

I almost didn’t watch this show again after its premiere episode. I’m glad I did. It quickly became my favorite new sitcom… and one of my favorite sitcoms of all time (so far). Maybe I relate a little too much to the characters, but the dialog and situations are hilarious regardless of how much one can directly relate. If you haven’t seen it, tune in and watch it. (Premieres 9/22)

How I Met Your Mother (Mondays, 8:30 pm, CBS)

This show is one of the rare cases where a show I really liked has not only survived, but thrived. When it premiered, I tuned in mostly to see what Allison Hannigan would do not playing a Joss Whedon character. I stayed because of the rest of the cast. Again we have a very consistent series where the show runners and the actors know their characters well enough to keep the writers in line (or, at least, smartly pick the right writers for their show… a lesson that could be learned by a good number of higher-budget shows). HIMYM has the perfect mix of ridiculous situations, nostalgia, romance and Niel Patrick Harris. I just hope they end it before they run out of funny. I’d really hate to have to hate this show. (Premiers 9/22)

Heroes (Mondays, 9 pm, NBC)

The first season of Heroes caught me a little off guard by how tightly plotted and solid it was… and how seriously it took itself. Things floundered a little in the second season–some poor scripting decisions and character introductions cluttered things up and then the writers’ strike cut things short. Being cut short, in fact, is probably the best thing that happened to season two. It makes it more of a transition than anything else. The upcoming third season looks like it’s going to be a total blockbuster. The first season gave us a big-deal threat to worry about–now we’re getting something more. We’re getting the real conflict, internal and external, between heroes and villains. I’m kind of excited about it. (Premieres 9/22)

Worst Week (Mondays, 9:30 pm, CBS)

Yet another in a series of what I like to call “lowest common denominator” sitcoms. Everything about this show looks trashy and insulting. No need for wit, just debasing insult humor. It’ll probably be a big hit for a little while, then the novelty will wear off and, before the end of the season, it will be gone. When that happens, TV will be a better place. (Premieres 9/22)

Boston Legal (Mondays, 10 pm, ABC)

I love me some quirky lawyers–especially when they’re written by David E. Kelley. I do, however, worry that this show has gone about as far as it can without devolving into total self-parody (and it was already pretty far into “wink, wink, nudge, nudge, look we’re a TV show” territory). Hopefully, this season will continue to walk that fine line between comedy-parody and biting social commentary. And more Shatner actually acting would be nice… the serious episodes with Denny as the focus were some of the best last season.

Still more next time…

It’s that time again!

A handful of returners and a smattering of new shows begin showing up this week. TV Guide has a very useful little calendar, so you can plan your viewing (or time shifting) accordingly. As usual, I’ll be watching a whole lot of what shows up. But before that, I think there’s already some clear winners and losers out there.

Prison Break (Mondays, 8 pm, Fox)

When this show kicked off the early debuts a few years back, it surprised me greatly. Last season, after I had cheered the tense planning and execution of the escape (season 1) and sat on the edge of my seat while the escapees eluded capture and exposed the conspiracy that started the whole thing (season 2), it just got a little silly and I lost interest. Now that we’re heading into the fourth year of this, the show has long-outlived it’s basic premise and, coincidentally, it’s title. I’m far from caught up and I don’t plan on being. By all means, watch it for the eye candy (heck, maybe we’ll even see some more of that tattoo that’s spent most of the last two seasons covered up), but this is one of those shows that should have had a set story arc and then just let it all go. (Premiers 9/1)

90210 (Tuesdays, 8 pm, CW)

I grew up with the original Beverly Hills, 90210. I’m digging the fact that we’re going to get to see some old characters all grown up and a new batch of students at good ol’ West Beverly High. What I’m not digging is that the powers that be have decided to go the ultra-lame route of recycling the exact same basic plot idea of two new students–a brother and a sister (though obviously not twins)–from a non-hip and trendy middle-of-nowhere town who get thrown into the social web of the 90210-ers. But, the CW crew seems to know it’s target audience (which, admittedly, I’m not… having grown up on the original 90210 and all), and they’ve done a good job with other shows, so I’ll be tuning in and giving it a chance. (Premieres 9/2)

True Blood (Sundays, 9 pm, HBO)

This one looks interesting. It’s a vampire show, so it’s got some big shoes to fill but, well, I’m a sucker for vampires and I’ll give it a chance. The viral marketing/alternate reality game campaign they did was kind of neat. And it’s got Anna Paquin. Here’s hoping it’s worth the time. (Premieres 9/7)

Terminator: The Sarah Connor Chronicles (Mondays, 8 pm, FOX)

The short first season of this show rocked my socks. Yes, there was some unevenness and yes, it did take some work to get used to the new Sarah Connor, but overall, I think the show has a lot of potential and I’m eager to see where it’s going to go. Especially with a new Terminator movie on the way. (Premieres 9/8)

Fringe (Tuesdays, 8 pm, FOX)

One half of the highly anticipated new “spooky” shows that Fox will be rolling out (Dollhouse being the other). Some are setting this one up for a fall by saying it’ll be “the next X-files!” From what I’ve seen so far (which isn’t much), it has potential to be good and most definitely interesting. It all really depends on how the cast gels and how the writing quality pans out. There has been many a show in the past (including the X-Files) that managed to stab itself in the eye because it’s writing was uneven. (Premieres 9/9)

Do Not Disturb (Wednesdays, 9:30 pm, FOX)

Oh, look, Jerry O’Connell in another sit come. Because, you know, his last one (the awful Carpoolers worked so well last year). I’ll watch it, but I’m not expecting much. Especially since it sounds a bit like yet another import and change of a classic Brit-com. (Premieres 9/10)

Hole in the Wall (Thursdays, 8 pm, FOX)

Go read the description. Then join me in the chorus of “Why? Why? Why? Why? Why?”

More of these later…

Less than a year after the original Stargate series made the jump to direct-to-video movies, Stargate: Atlantis seems to have gotten the ax.

It won’t be completely gone right away, though. Thanks to the odd way the Sci Fi Channel breaks up its seasons, the current (fifth) season will run through January some time. Then there’ll be a two hour movie some time later in 2009. There may be other movies after that.

According to a quote over at Multichannel News:

“We’re excited to tell Atlantis stories on a bigger canvas,” Brad Wright and Robert C. Cooper, co-creators of Stargate SG-1 and Stargate Atlantis and currently executive producers on Atlantis, said in a statement. “The successes of the two original Stargate [direct-to-video] movies The Ark of Truth and Continuum have shown us the opportunities that the movie format offers. We have plans for both SG-1 and Atlantis to remain vital as we expand the franchise.”

I can’t exactly say I’m sad to see Atlantis go. I’ve always found it to be more than a little uneven as a show. There have been some really solid episodes, but there have been just as many that left me scratching my head wondering “How the heck did they no see how bad this was before they spent all that money making it?” Somehow, they managed to never get their characters quite as vibrant as SG1 did in the same time frame.

Which, I suppose, is one of the reasons SG1 lasted a decade and Atlantis only five years.

For those die-hard Stargate fans, though, there’s little reason to really despair. There’s already a new series that’s been pitched and it’s been promised to be bigger and better than either of its predecessors.

Stargate: Universe, while it has an unfortunately silly title, seems to be based on a good concept. According to the GateWorld website, the premise focuses on a project the Ancients (you know, the race that built the gates, fought the Wraith, created the Replicators, ascended into two warring camps and did all sorts of other questionably intelligent things) started and just kind of let run. That project? Seeding the entire universe with stargates using an automated ship. That ship’s been out there, bouncing along for thousands of years at this point. The second part of that project? A second ship following it to explore the areas around the new gates.

That could be interesting. Kind of a return to the Star Trek idea of “new worlds and new civilizations” being found using a starship. With the extra added bonus that, thanks to the gates, you could easily arrange cameos from favorite characters from the previous two series.

Of course, I’m not going to hold my breath on this show getting made, let alone made well. As a third generation derivative being run by the same people that ran the previous two incarnations of the franchise, it automatically has a lot of baggage to deal with. As we’ve learned with the Star Trek and Star Wars franchises the temptation to apply the same formulas to incompatible ideas is hard to resist. But I’ll wait to at least hear that the series has a green light before I fully rip into it.

In other SG news, it looks like the Stargate Worlds MMORPG is still on track. I can’t imagine it will do exceptionally well if there’s no series to tie into, though. I know I’d be willing to play it… if I had the time and money. And  maybe my own group of friends to put together into a solid SG team. (I’ve signed up to maybe get in on the beta of the game, just for fun.)

So, there you have it. We’ve gone from a little movie that got a big following to a series that started on a pay cable network, segued into syndication and then was picked up by a regular cable network and spawned a spin-off with a bigger scope to an online game and, possibly a third series with an even larger scope than its predecessors. Here’s hoping it doesn’t just leave a bad taste in a lot of fans mouths.

On a lazy Sunday, I’ve been going back through some things on the good ol’ DVR.

One of them is a History Channel documentary about the lost pyramid in Egypt, about five miles outside of Giza. Interesting bit of detective work to piece things together. But that’s not what I’m going to talk about.

The documentary runs about two hours, with commercials. We all know that at least 20 minutes or so are eaten by said commercials. There’s something else that eats a lot of time out of this documentary, too–the utterly ridiculous number of re-hashes done after every commercial break. They’re basically truncated “The story so far” bits. But they seem to be done after every commercial break. That eats at least another 15 minutes.

Add to that the fact that they’re utterly inane–usually reviewing things that were just discussed right before the just ended commercial break–and you have something that frustrates me (and people like me) greatly.

I’ll (grudgingly) accept the fact that people have ridiculously short attention spans these days. I’ll readily accept the fact that people tune in to things at odd times (though not too terribly odd–most shows out there still only start on the half-hour). But I have to wonder if the History Channel should be quite so concerned with those with the goldfish-sized attention spans. After all, we are talking about history and people who can’t retain focus and memory over a commercial break can’t possibly grok the concept of history let alone be all that interested in watching something about history to begin with.

If this were a show targeted at children, maybe I’d be more accepting of the “repeat everything as often as possible” tactic being employed. This documentary is most definitely not targeted at children.

That means either the documentary makers or the network decided that either they didn’t have enough actual content to fill the time or don’t understand that, yes, some of us (those interested in what you’re trying to say, in fact) can remember what we just watched three or four minutes ago. In fact, some of us can even pause our recorded show for a couple of hours and not need to start from the beginning when we come back–even if we’ve been doing other things!

Sad thing is, this isn’t the first time I’ve noticed this. It isn’t isolated to the History Channel, either. Even worse, it seems to be a growing trend all around.

People’s brains work more like muscles than most realize. If you’re not using it, it goes soft and, eventually stops working all together. This sort of incessant repetition actually encourages people to not retain knowledge from one moment to the next. We are generally lazy creatures, after all, and if we get stuck in the habit of knowing we don’t have to remember things from a few minutes ago because, if they’re important, they’ll be repeated right before we need to know them, we’re not going to bother making an effort to pay attention.

That’s a slippery slope to not paying attention at all, leaving the job of telling us what’s important and what’s not to the person telling us what to do. Or, at least, to lazy thought patterns and a great deal of difficulty having enough in our heads to draw our own conclusions.

Hopefully, this is only a temporary thing and will pass.

I’m not going to hold my breath, though. TV could have been something great for education, but most of that potential has been squandered at this point.

Anyone who’s been paying attention to things showing up in the movies or on their television over the last few years has probably noticed that everything old is new again–either through a re-make (or re-boot, or re-visioning) or through a sequel. Well, it looks like the coming film and television season won’t change that much.

AMC is producing a six-hour remake of the classic surreal and intriguing series The Prisoner. I’m a little excited about this. The cast is solid and the time is right for some serious commentary on government secrecy and authority.

ABC is taking the BBC show Life on Mars and moving it to America… and, apparently, changing major plot points, like the entire base reason the 21st century cop has found himself in the 1970s. The best thing about this show may be that Harvey Keitel has joined the cast (though he’s not listed yet on the IMDB entry). I still think we may have gotten lucky with The Office, since so many other “ported” shows haven’t at all lived up to their foreign originals.

There are others, but TV shows come and go… chances are most people won’t even notice these or know that they were once (possibly better) shows from other places.

Movies are another story. While there may still be some general ignorance of originals that get remade and there is definitely a lack of understanding on how things change from the first iteration to sequel n, some movies have made their way into the cultural lexicon. Right now, we’re looking at remakes of some of those “modern classic” films. And quite frankly, I’m a little worried.

Nightmare on Elm Street, Friday the 13th and The Rocky Horror Picture Show are all currently getting ready to hit the big screen as completely new movies, unconnected to the already existing films.

In all fairness, Nightmare and Friday have both been so transformed through their lifetimes as series that the most recent editions have only the most vague echoes of what originally made the films stick. There’s little question that they’ve lost their original focus and relevance. But while that’s true of the series as a whole, it is not true of the original films that started the series. The first two iterations of both Nightmare and Friday still stand up today, thematically. Yes, the hair and sets and cars and clothing are horribly dated (thank you 1980s), but the cores of the films are solid. In fact, in some ways, those films are more relevant today than they were when they first hit the screen.

What I worry about–what I always worry about when remakes hit the deck–is that they’ll be over produced, over thought and tweaked to meet marketing agendas more than anything else. You know, just like most new mainstream films. (I’m going to have to do a whole separate post about the horror genre and how it’s changed over the years…)

I’m willing to give the remakes a chance. I was happy with the redone Amityville Horror and Texas Chainsaw Massacre. So it’s not hopeless. But the originals of those films, while groundbreaking, suffered many technical problems that reduced their overall effectiveness. Nightmare and Friday don’t have a lot of problems in those areas.

By far, the scariest remake news is that MTV is the force behind Rocky Horror. If there was ever a film that did not need to be remade, it’s RHPS. It was a unique blend of camp and creative forces that made the original an accidental cult classic. Trying to replicate that on purpose is a recipe for disaster. The only “good” thing that may come out of it is that we might get to hear some of the songs that didn’t make it into the original. (Just to put “cult classic” status into perspective: RHPS has grossed about $140 million since it premiered in 1974–that’s less than what The Dark Knight made in one weekend.)

Thankfully, it looks like the new RHPS will be a TV release. So maybe it’ll go by unnoticed.

All is not bad news, though. It seems Disney is finally putting together a sequel to one of the greatest computer-focused films of all time: Tron. Some of us have been waiting decades for this… and were quite annoyed back in 2004 when what looked like was going to be a fantastic follow-up turned out to be a video game. Here’s hoping they don’t pull that again.

In the past thirty years, I’ve died at least three times.

These deaths I speak of are not a physical death. No, they are more of a metaphorical death followed by a glorious return to a whole new life. It is the death of one version of “I” and the beginning of a new “I”.

As I learned more about who I actually was, I discovered a great number of things I didn’t like about myself. More importantly, I began to develop a sense of who I could be.

Back when I was a miserable, isolated and lonely high school student, I made a lot of excuses for why I was the way I was. “I’m just different than everyone else,” I would tell myself. “It’s their loss for not taking the time to get to understand me.” I let my hopes become expectations and my personal delusions become my reality. I was depressed, constantly, and, to a lesser extent, angry with the world.

At the time, I didn’t know it, but that was all holding me back. Keeping me in my rut, steeped in an unhealthy darkness of mood and mind–blind to the similarities I shared with those around me.

That’s when I got my first glimpse of my Adversary… and of the beauty of the Universe.

In the gloom of my darkest hours, I began to notice things. I began to notice patterns in my life. To see that every time my life just plain sucked in one way, some other area would open up and be better than ever. Now, that other area wasn’t always my area of choice–which is why it was so hard to see back then–but when I did finally realize how interconnected everything was, the final pieces fell into place.

Before those pieces fell into place, though, they had to be shaken loose from the pile of crap they had been mixed in with.

In order to “deal” with all the pain and suffering of my middle school and high school experience, I had built up walls around myself. That’s a common defense against The Adversary that many use. The “Strange Me” I had cultivated was insulation against some of the suffering I felt I was subjected to. It was also a prison of my own creation.

The simple fact is, any construct–be it physical, emotional, mental or spiritual–that keeps something out also keeps something in.

As my walls built up, things piled up inside them. By the time I was graduating high school, I was up to my neck in crap. Crap that I had generated in my own mind. Crap that society had thrown on me (just high enough to get over the top of my wall). Crap that was very soon going to blot out any view I had of anything good in the world. Crap that began, in my internal wanderings, to take on a life of its own.

Without knowing it, I had given my Adversary the most fertile ground to thrive on it could ever hope for.

Within weeks of discovering the wonderful world of “not the place I grew up in” (also known as college), I had made some real friends and found a level of acceptance that I had never before known. I shared those first few weeks with a number of great people–most of whom had been outcasts in high school.

But inside, I was still the high school me. I was still almost over my head in crap, trapped inside the walls I had built. I could feel those walls becoming weak, being pressed well beyond their limits from both sides. I could feel the separation those walls were creating between the people I now cared about and myself. And on an even more terrifying level, I could feel something else within those walls struggling to get the best of me.

Like it or not, those walls were going to come down.

That’s when I got my first full view of my Adversary.

It was more than I could really handle on my own.

And so, a tentatively asked my new friends Chris and Sarah if I could talk to them for a bit.

They got to hear about everything that had been going on in my head. About all the dark things I knew I had running around inside me. About the little bits of Divinity I had glimpsed and the connections I felt among events.

I talked a lot.

To their credit, they managed to not look too freaked out. (I know I must have worried them a bit, though… it was pretty intense, even by my own standards.)

Suddenly, the world was a different place.

I was a different person.

Through telling the story–through sharing my burden–I dragged my Adversary out into the light. It was difficult to do. The thing wanted me to keep quiet about it, it’s power was mostly in getting me to isolate myself. Alone, it could taunt and tear one little bit at a time from my self control and happiness. The Adversary is always cunning and for a while I had been playing right into its twisted hands.

Once I got a good look at it, though, I could see how familiar it was. I could see that it was me.

In that moment of realization, I accepted it as a vital part of myself. My Adversary lost a lot of power that day… and I came out of the meeting a different person.

The old “I” was dead and gone. In his place was a completely different individual.

The walls that had been built up had collapsed and their rubble had settled into a new foundation. The useless, broken pieces were easy to discard after that break. I was able, for the first time since a weekend long hike in the mountains a couple of years earlier, to feel part of the Universe.

I had finally found stable, permanent happiness.

It lasted for a year and a half.

ShareThis

“You are your own worst enemy” is an old saw, without question. But like many of its ilk, it holds more than a grain of truth.

Nothing can mess with us more than our own mind. And here it is important to note that the mind is different from the brain in this context. The brain is the functional part, the mind is the thing that gets in the way. It drifts, it becomes fixated on certain ideas, it chatters incessantly about nothing, it jumps from idea to idea (generated by the brain or inspired by spirit). All in all, it’s more often than not just a whole lot of noise that needs to be filtered.

For most people, it doesn’t get much more serious than that.

For some, it gets a bit worse. Not only does the mind chatter incessantly, that chatter takes on a sinister tone. It becomes that voice in your head telling you you’re not good enough, the one that erodes your confidence by reminding you of all the times you’ve failed, by dredging up the most tenuous supporting “evidence” as to why you’ll fail again. Maybe that’s tone is being caused by a short in the brain (which can be treated in most cases). Maybe it’s being caused by a broken shard of your mind from past traumatic experience (which can also be treated, though not as surely as a physical or chemical problem).

For those who choose a spiritual path, things can go one step further.

As an initiate makes his way down the road of self-discovery, that voice can become personified. It can take on shapes and forms in visions. It can be reflected in those we interact with. And all the while it seeks only to undermine that desired progress.

It becomes The Adversary.

It can take many forms, an annoying trickster, a fickle ally, that dark voice in the back of your head telling you you’re not good enough. It can even show up as the main Big Bad who seems to be behind all things unpleasant. The Adversary is as cunning as it is insidious. It knows your every move, sometimes before you do. Always, it is there, waiting for a chance to muck things up. A chance to set you back.

The Adversary is everywhere at once. It lashes back at us when dealing with others who share our strengths and weaknesses. Using them, it reflects and amplifies everything we dislike about ourselves… and then clouds the actual source of the annoyance we feel at others.

It distracts us from our actual goals–by making us chase it, by presenting challenges that pique our interest more than the task we should be doing, by outright opposing us.

But there is no “us” against “them” here. The Adversary is a part of our whole self. It’s that dark part that we try to hide–and hide from. It’s those deep rumblings of untapped power and knowledge, looking to get out on their own.

It is an integral part of not just who we are, but who we could be.

For better, or for worse.

How we deal with our Adversaries can determine a lot. The natural reaction is to fight. To fight long and hard, expending tremendous amounts of energy trying to beat them into submission or to outright destroy them. Neither of those options is possible. The more you fight it, the more powerful The Adversary becomes.

The best you can do is use The Adversary as a guide. See it for what it is–a deep source of knowledge and insight into yourself. It can even be an ally, once you understand what it wants. Knowing it is part of you, you can assert some control over it. You can negotiate with it.

Encountering The Adversary for the first time during pathwork can be disconcerting. That encounter often happens unexpectedly and, sometimes, violently. If any encounter with The Adversary in the metaphysical realm goes poorly, things in the real world can also take a nasty turn. Because it is such a vital sub-section of ourselves–and because it so hates being hidden and suppressed in the background–it can sometimes “bleed through” into our own behavior, often without us realizing.

We become sullen, angry, quick to lash out. We lie, cheat and steal–sometimes going out of our way to hurt those around us. If that’s not what we normally do, it very well could be The Adversary’s influence coming through.

This is why we need to be cognizant of our actions, why we need to understand our patters. With that knowledge, we can spot changes in them. If those changes are taking a toll on our ability to function in the “real world”, then action must be taken.

What kind of action? It depends. For some, a deeper dedication to their spiritual path–more encounters and interaction with The Adversary as a separate entity–can help. For others, more “mundane” paths of analysis like therapists can help sort out the different threads that make us up.

The simple fact is, we all have a dark side… and even the most vile human out there has at least some small spark of light. The Adversary is always a twisted reflection of the person, the other part of the whole. Yin to Yang, Light to Darkness, when it comes down to it, The Adversary completes us. Balances us.

When we take control of that balance–when we accept the fact that there is no mythical purity within us–we have the power in the relationship with the Adversary. By accepting our faults and fears, we gain control over them. We become, consciously, a more whole person.

And The Adversary… becomes an ally.

ShareThis

I just came across a couple of articles–in Newsweek of all places–that seem to point toward an increased acceptance of psychics as legitimate business assets.

Now, I’m not going to get my hopes up too much just yet, but it does bode well for anyone hoping to earn a little extra money on the side by marketing their talents and abilities. That becomes much easier to do with a (slightly) decreased chance of immediately being laughed at. When you can cite the fact that Seagate Technology, Hollywood producers and other big-businesses tap into the metaphysical real and come out on top, people should be much more receptive to paying for your services.

At least that’s how I’m hoping it goes.

The first article talks about Patricia Day and others like her who offer their services to corporations and make a good living doing so.

It’s impossible to objectively judge psychic powers. Are psychics just good listeners who pick up enough clues from their clients to provide seemingly insightful answers? Are they making lucky guesses? “It’s kind of a dirty secret,” Day says of business people who use psychics like herself. She declines to identify most of her clients, and almost all who spoke to NEWSWEEK also requested anonymity out of concern for their reputations.

Day is one of a small but expanding cadre of corporate psychic consultants—the professionalized face of an occupation better known for hokey headscarves and crystal balls. Rebranded as “intuitionists” or “mentalists”—terms more palatable to mainstream America—psychic advisers in recent years have been crossing over into the world of legitimate business, where they are used by decision makers in law, finance and entertainment looking for an edge in a down economy. “I specialize in nonbelievers,” says Day, referring to her roster of “red-meat-eating, Barneys-shopping, Type A personalities.”

The second article is a little more snarky and less flattering, but equally interesting because it addresses the simple fact that no matter how much it doesn’t make sense, many people want to believe psychic abilities work.

Mayer’s quest took her into a world where the ordinary rules of time and space don’t apply—of dowsers like McCoy, who ordinarily searches for water underground but asserts he can find almost anything by tuning in to the “vibrations” that pervade the universe; of clairvoyants who claim to read minds over the telephone or to be able to see what someone else is looking at, hundreds of miles away; of laboratories where people stare at a pendulum, trying to slow it down with their minds. She compiled her research into a just-published book, “Extraordinary Knowing: Science, Skepticism and the Inexplicable Powers of the Human Mind,” that she finished just before her death in 2005, at the age of 57.

We do, indeed, live in interesting times. The world is, again, in flux with more possibilities being open and explored each day. Maybe soon we’ll be to a point where psychic phenomena can be better explained or quantified by actual science. (I’m not holding my breath for that, as it would require more serious scientific research into things many scientists just laugh at without thought.) More importantly, the people on the street and in the corner offices are starting to open up more to the possibilities around them. They do this out of necessity as their normal methods of coping and planning fail due to the chaos of the systems that surround us all.

Psychics thrive on the chaos. They are the ultimate pattern recognition systems, not being afraid to make those otherwise crazy jumps from point A to point B. They are the daredevils of cognitive process. And, even if what they do has no verifiable way of working, the simple fact is that it does work enough of the time for it to be useful.

ShareThis

We are all made up of a multitude of different parts.

I’m not talking physical parts here–I’m talking the ethereal parts that are just as, if not more, important than our physical base. We have different moods, different hopes, different fears and different attitudes. And we don’t always want or need to share all of them with everyone.

And so we segment. And hide. And choose what we will reveal to whom and when we will reveal it.

We put on masks, adopt airs and do whatever we deem appropriate to present what we want to who we want when we want.

There’s really nothing wrong with that. It’s human nature. In fact, it’s even pretty darn sensible and makes “polite society” possible. After all, everyone doesn’t need to know about the results of Aunt Mabel’s colonoscopy. I think we can all agree that most people wouldn’t even want to know.

There are also things we hide not because we want to, but because we are not aware of them ourselves. These are natural and ensure that we always have more to learn about ourselves. (Anyone who thinks they know everything about themselves is either lying, misguided or incredibly enlightened—and I don’t know anyone that incredibly enlightened.)

Then, and this is the most annoying part for most people, there are the things we don’t know about ourselves—but everyone else does. Or at least they think they do.

This is all basic communication theory. So basic, in fact, it has made it’s way into a bunch of management texts, workshops and pop psychology as the Johari Window. It is a simplistic, though eerily accurate, overview of how much we disclose to ourselves and others.

Dealing the the disparity between what we know about ourselves and what we show to others is a big part of spiritual development and, more generally, growth as a person. Delving into our own blind spots and taking in what others think they know about us—both very difficult things in their own right—require us to come to terms with unpleasant surprises about ourselves and how people see us.

And then we have to decide what to do with all that information.

This is where the idea of Reconciliation comes in. The particular type of Reconciliation I’m talking about isn’t the kind that occurs between oneself and others—it is an entirely internal thing. Until we can resolve, or at least quiet, the disparity inside ourselves, there isn’t much we’re good for when it comes to other people.

Three Big Questions

For those who have chosen to live to serve others and those walking a spiritual path, attaining a decent amount of Reconciliation is incredibly important.

We have to know three things:

1. Who were you?
2. Who do you want to become?
3. And most importantly, who are you now?

Who we were will always be important. Our past serves as either the foundation or the fertilizer for who we are and who will become. There is nothing about who we were that we should ever be ashamed of. After all, we are not that person any more. We learned from those situations (be they good or bad) and made choices to either continue on the same path or to change our direction.

Who we want to become is important only in that it give us a goal to reach for, a light to shine on the path we walk. Without an idea of who we want to become, we can very easily get distracted and end up walking in circles through the forest of confusion.

Who we are now is by far the most important thing to know. If we do not know who we are now, we can not put into perspective who we were and we do not know how far we have to go to become who we want to be. Who we are now is who we have to live our day to day lives as. It is who other people have to interact with.

If we are fractured and fragmented, bent, broken and twisted, we may not have a clear picture of who we are. It takes time to put the pieces together. It takes courage to ask the hard questions. And it takes balls of steel to own up to the stupid things we all do.

But if we want to find real, deep and enduring happiness, we have to do it.

Along that path, though, there is something waiting for you in the shadows. It will try to stop you, scare you, misdirect you or otherwise prevent you from reaching your goal. It is the most difficult enemy you will ever face. It knows everything you know about yourself—and more.

It is The Adversary and it is something that many people don’t know much about until they face it in their quest for reconciliation.

ShareThis

Fortune telling and prophecy are staples of any story that involves the supernatural.

The classic soothsayer predicting victory or death, the traveling Gypsy turning the cards and seeing the future, even the Biblical prophets passing on notes from the Divine to people who don’t always get quite what they mean at the time, these are all well known examples.

In the real world, things don’t always work out quite so nicely. True prophecy is a rare thing (which, really, is probably for the best). And fortune telling has gotten a bad rap due to both scientific scrutiny and a number of high-profile charlatans who more than happily take people’s money.

That negative frequently overshadows the positives that exist.

There is no denying that divination is far from an exact science, at least in the ways it is most commonly practiced and presented. In someone’s life, there is simply too much going on–too many variables–to account for them all. Humans, being the fickle creatures we are, can be swayed by the most nonsensical things, deflected from a planned course by some shiny object or random idea, completely breaking from any predictable pattern, oblivious to any destiny we may have.

What, then, are the positives of divination?

There is skill. A good practitioner of any form of divination, be it Tarot cards or casting the bones, spends years honing the skills and knowledge necessary to interpret the symbols of their particular method. That teaches focus and builds awareness. For the diviner, regardless of the accuracy of any given divination, there is the chance for deep personal growth. Without a doubt, that is a positive.

There is awareness. Interpreting the symbols of the tools is only one third (at best) of a good divination. Another large part is awareness. The practitioner must be aware–aware of their client, aware of their own state of mind, aware of how things are currently going in the world their client exists within. Without this awareness, there is no context. Without context, any information presented by the divinitory tools is virtually useless. There are few who would argue that increased awareness is a bad thing.

There is creativity. It is the sole responsibility of the practitioner to bring symbol and context together into a coherent whole that speaks to the concerns of the client. This requires creativity–an ability to connect disparate and sometimes contradictory bits of information into something more than the sum of its parts. A good practitioner tells a good story about the client and the forces he or she has at work in his or her life. Creativity works the mind in different ways than pure logic and opens the door for more creative thought. If that can be shared with someone seeking solutions–if they can become just a little more in tune with the idea of creativity–this is a good thing.

Notice there is no need for actual metaphysical intervention. There is no need for grand psychic powers or deep and dark magickal powers. There is only need for knowledge, awareness and creativity. Because of this, anyone can practice divination in it’s most basic–and generally useful–form.

At its root, divination is a way to gain perspective and a way to explore new solutions. With a moderate amount of training and solid ethics, anyone can begin helping themselves and others.

The real problems begin when a practitioner leaves those ethical concerns behind him. When they put their own well-being ahead of that of their clients, they can twist and manipulate the knowledge they have. They can use their awareness to cut deep and their creativity to warp and influence the decisions of their clients. They can, without a doubt, easily and completely take advantage of many, many people before being caught.

This is the double-edged sword of many skills.

This is why a key component of any metaphysical practice is deep thought on ethics and responsibilities.

When used properly and with good intent, divination can be a very good thing. The addition of an actual metaphysical component can add to awareness, but is not necessary to change people’s lives for the better.

Divination does not predict the future, it merely looks at that which is often ignored in the past and present and follows it to a possible outcome. The idea of that journey, when shared with a seeker, can be more powerful than any supposedly predestined event or preconceived notion.

That is where the true power of divination is: not in seeing the future, but in helping others to create the future they want.

ShareThis