My friends say that I am a walking pall of gloom.  Not that I’m emo or anything, I just happen to not be the life of the party.  I don’t care if I use 17 less facial muscles whenever I smile.  Deadpan people, people knocked dead with a frying pan, and frying pans run over by exploding steamrollers have a higher emotional quotient than I do.  Cheery, bubbly, artificially-happy people upset me.

I was a McDonald’s at Katipunan when this cute, petite cashier started beaming as she took my order, and asked if I wanted to upgrade my large fries to that “Shake Shake” promotional thing for Kung Fu Panda.  “Sure,” I replied, knowing that I have four options less than what they sell at Potato Corner for a fraction of the price.  After taking my order of a cheeseburger, large Coke, and the bag of barbecue-flavored french fries, I sat sullenly on a table and, well, read the instructions:

For best results, shake in front of face.

The flux was that about?

I guess “The Million-Dollar Man” Ted DiBiase was right: “Everything has a price.”  A couple of months back when we had a road trip to Tagaytay City, there was this Flying V station by the highway where the gas boys, in the effort to attract customers, danced to the tune of “YMCA” by the Village People.  Pump price?  More than P50.  Sight of gas attendants dancing classic 1970s disco hit sans Indian headdress, sailor outfit, police uniform, and patent leather body suit at 3 PM heat?  Priceless.

*     *     *

On musical notes, there are three things that pissed me off this weekend:

• Annoying falsettos of Leona Lewis.  I don’t know what’s up with “Bleeding Love.”  It reminds me of the 1980s, Tiffany, and girls with the hiccups reaching a point of orgasm.
• “ABBA:” The Musical.  IKEA products, not ABBA, are the greatest cultural exports of Sweden.
• Apple bottom jeans (jeans) and boots with the fur (with the furr…).  ‘Nuff said.

*     *     * 

Notes from professional wrestling: I was in high spirits last week when CM Punk cashed in his Money in the Bank opportunity and became the new World Heavyweight Champion.  I’m a big fan of independent wrestling promotions (especially Ring of Honor, Combat Zone Wrestling, and of course, ChickFight), and I am a big fan of CM Punk’s ring ability.  There was this spoiler that Bryan Danielson of ROH had a very successful dark match win over Lance Cade.  Danielson is one of the very best in the world today, and he deserves to be thrust in the limelight.

My shallow expectation: CM Punk vs. Bryan Danielson in the very near future.

CM Punk’s win offset the worst pro wrestling news I had in years: the return of the Ultimate Warrior (25 June 2008, Nu-Wrestling Evolution).  Boy, if Warrior sucked before, he sure as hell sucks now.  If you can stand it, watch the match on YouTube… I wish he’d just tear down the cockpit door, get to the capsule he came from, and make his way to Parts Unknown.

(DISCLAIMER: This is going to hurt.) 

I am not a big fan of Jun Lozada, I am not an avid reader of his blog, yet I feel a need - call it a messianic urge - to step up, cast away some of my aspersions against the guy, and to come to his defense.  There are things I will respectfully disagree with, as far his claims on the NBN-ZTE deal go.  There are things I will respectfully disagree with, especially for his “blog launch.”  Make no mistake about it, there are a lot of things I do not like about Jun Lozada.  I am not a card-carrying member of the Jun Lozada fan club.  To pose with him and to post pictures on a Multiply account is completely beneath me.  So there.

Yet even for every disagreement that I have against what Lozada said, and for every disagreement I will have for what Lozada will say in the future, I’m giving him the benefit of the doubt.  Jun Lozada stood up for causes like “truth,” “accountability,” “transparency…” causes that very few Filipinos these days will stand for.  I may not necessarily like Lozada’s interpretations of those causes.  Hell, I may not even like Lozada because he gets more comments in five entries than I do in 500, to be perfectly honest.  But again, I’m giving him the benefit of the doubt.

This is not a “Mabuhay ka” defense of Jun Lozada.  Instead, this is an attack on every single lemming - you heard me right, I said “lemming” - who casts stones and aspersions against Jun Lozada, yet do absolutely nothing to act upon the crises and problems of this nation.

You demand nothing more than silence, consent, blind obedience, passivity, apathy.  We could debate on perspectives, if you had some.  We could debate on issues, if indeed you are truly affected.  I myself would rather have a better, more credible whistleblower than Lozada, but he blew the whistle way before you lemmings ever did.  Make sure you heed these words: you have no more stake on the very future of this nation than that very moment you surrendered - no, castrated - yourselves of the very demands and responsibilities of being a citizen.  Pardon my crooked Filipino: tinanggal ninyo sa sarili ninyo ang karapatan na makinabang sa kinabukasan ng bansang ito nang inyong isinuko ang inyong mga responsibilidad bilang mga mamamayan.

The hell with planting camote on your backyards to “help alleviate the food crisis,” to vote for “lesser evils,” and to cross pedestrian lanes.  Every problem and every crisis you confront today is anything but the fault of Jun Lozada.  It’s painfully obvious it’s not my fault, either.  Not only are you barking on the wrong tree, you’re pissing on the wrong one.

Let me ask you this: what exactly have you done to help this country get out of the mess that it is in?  What?  Speak up because I want to know.  I want you to show me how you - in all your bravado of representation, in all your claims of speaking for others, in all the infinite wisdom that comes from the passage of time - are taking steps to spare the Filipino youth of the indignity of living in the shadow of this political mess.  More than that, I want to know what you have done.

I’m 22 years old.  I’m just a kid.  I have plenty of time left to change this society for the better by the time I die.  And I believe I have already done my share.  I’ve wrote, I’ve blogged, and I’ve rallied.  I admit, it’s still not enough.  Not enough to “do something about it,” but it’s more than what you lemmings do on weekdays that you watch brain-dead game shows allowing yourselves to smile when you have absolutely no reason to.  And you are freaking twice my age!  And you have the gall, the balls, and the stomach to put the very responsibility of making a better nation while you engage in a witch-hunt against Jun Lozada?

And you can actually stomach calling yourselves Filipinos?  Taxpayers?  Citizens?  Taong bayan?  And you can actually stomach giving me a dramatic excuse that you did this all for me?  What in the blue hell did the youth ever do to you that you have saddled them with a future bordering on hopelessness, and expect them to make a shining beacon out of this country?

That’s why as much as I don’t like - fine, as much as I loathe - Jun Lozada, I have to give him the benefit of the doubt.  But unlike Lozada - unlike you - I will not wait until I have a family to feed until I start worrying about the future of this country, and doing something about it.  Like you, this country is all I have.

The only difference is that I want to make this country better, and I’m doing more than my own fair share to compensate for your inactions.  You lemmings, on the other hand, are proof that hope is indeed wasted on the hopeless.

More from Jun Lozada’s blog: a message for the youth.

I have my doubts - well, “doubt” is a nice way to put it - on Lozada, and I’m not exactly his biggest fan.  The day I have dinner with Lozada is the day I get invited, which is not going to happen anytime soon.  What I do have a problem with is that far too many people twice my age send me messages; messages that seem to be exhortations of the ought-to-be, what was supposed to be done.  If anything, the adult mea culpa would be a lot like a Cat Stevens song.

We, “the youth,” are the “future.”

I’d like to take off from that perspective: we, “the youth,” as the “apologists” of history.  It is possible to excuse yourself from history if you’re too old to make things right, to depend upon the mistakes of the past to build upon an edifice.  It seems that adults are wont to make mistakes, and pass them on to the next generation as “lessons.”  Yet it is impossible for the youth to excuse themselves from history: it’s either you’re idealistic or naïve.  After all, time heals all wounds.

I can’t help but be recalcitrant and impertinent, but I don’t see any reason why the youth should be challenged to “make something” out of a political impasse.  For once, it behooves grown-ups - yes, myself included in this case - to face the jury before the bar of history, and pay for the consequences of making that history.  What is inexcusable is for grown-ups to depend upon the youth for the redemption of the nation.

I do agree that the youth are the hope of the Motherland.  Yet to echo Aristophanes: “Youth ages.  Immaturity is outgrown.  Ignorance can be educated and drunkenness can be sobered, but stupid lasts forever.”  If grown-up Filipinos continue to excuse themselves from political action on the grounds of pragmatism and practicality, yet continue to chastise the socially-aware youth for their naïve idealism and courage to stand up for ideals that “would not feed them,” then there is truth in the words of Aristophanes.  Stupid lasts forever.

For once, after his rather outlandish and unbelievable stories, there is some merit in what Jun Lozada talked about.  The youth are next in line before the bar of history, and we will be judged for our actions in due time.  Yet, we are next in line.  The generations before me will be judged by history way before we, the youth, get our chance, our verdict, and our sentence.

I don’t know what exactly Lozada is fighting for, but I sure as hell know that the youth today are fighting for exactly those things that roll off the tongues of old men: justice, truth, freedom.  I think that it behooves Mr. Lozada not to speak to the youth, much less to “represent” the youth.  He should speak for his generation - those who are twice my age - who regard with suspicion even the most purest and the most sincere of virtues and actions.

To that generation I, a 22-year-old not-a-boy-not-yet-a-middle-aged-man-with-a-prostate-problem, pass a message: fix your mess.  Take responsibility.  Act with the same idealism that you expect of us.  Soon, your generation will pass before the bar of history, and it is your inaction, your selfishness, and your disregard for justice, that will be the better judge of the future you have already passed on to us.

Lozada may not be a hero, but he did something about it.

Sometimes, I can be so idealistic that I lose touch with the realities of life.  As I was reading Jun Lozada’s blog, recently launched through a Bloggers’ Kapihan event, I was a bit lost in thought.  I’m not a big Jun Lozada fan, but I sure am not a card-carrying supporter of the President either.  I’m lost in thought in that maybe even the pro-GMA bloc would be right on one thing - that we don’t really know what happens next after this.

Quo vadis?

These are the moments that I descend into my morose, pessimistic, cynical self.  It’s not that the Filipino is hopeless, it’s just that even justice is no longer a reward in itself if you fight for what you believe in.  Like, say, “motive.”  Political aspirations, monetary incentives, fame.  I guess the worst part is that we’re better off with the status quo than to make an effort to change our situation for the better.

I guess that’s what happens when you grow older, when eight-hour jobs start to become the norm and that you start complaining more about traffic than the legitimacy of the President.  It’s when skepticism takes over idealism, and inaction itself becomes “resistance.”  Even political participation - the most basic demand of citizenship - is no longer held with as much value as before.  It’s not about rallying or marching in the streets.  Instead, it’s about making a conscious effort towards political and social awareness, taking a stand on the issues of the time, and basically being a pain in the ass.

And yet we do need a motive.  We need piecemeal for taking a stand.  It’s a mentality of, “I’m not affected, so I don’t care.”  Or “I’m not affected, so I shouldn’t care.”  You hear that from a lot of people these days, that the only time you should act upon the situation in general is when you get affected.  Anything other than that is “bullshit.”

I guess when the basic demands of citizenship - heck, even the most basic demands of being a human being - take second banana to whatever problem is there to problematize, there really is something wrong with this country.  Quo vadis is not a question you ask if you do things in the name of your country.  Resistance is not about who should replace Gloria Macapagal-Arroyo, or what would happen if everyone who knew about NBN-ZTE came out and said what they knew.  For all the failings, the shortcomings, and whatever errors this country has committed towards a citizen, the Philippines is well worth taking a stand for.  Anything other than that is bullshit.

This is why I was a bit lost in thought reading Jun Lozada’s blog.  Connect the dots.

While I do read the occasional back-issue of FHM, I am not exactly into it.  If anything, women from classic Hollywood films appeal to me more than a Katrina Halili or an Angel Locsin.  While I do find myself crushing on some of the more current female celebrities, I look up to the women of classic films as stars.  It’s the kind of admiration that makes me wish I was there on film’s golden age.

Many of my friends say that I am extremely difficult to please.  Suffice to say, I am: I have to look at a girl I crush on and see some sort of classic Hollywood feature in her before I really fall.  I guess that explains it.

Everyone will have their own favorite celebrities… here are ten of mine.  Enjoy.

*     *     * 

Marlene Dietrich 

Marlene Dietrich is the classic Hollywood femme fatale.  In her Hollywood career, Marlene has always been considered an “outsider;” her foreign looks added more mystique to her image.  Marlene is, was, and forever will be a Hollywood legend: her presence in films like Morocco and Shanghai Express are most memorable.  If anything, what I really admire about Marlene is that glance - that look - that made her such an iconic image in popular culture, from The Beatles’ Sgt. Pepper album to Madonna.

*     *     *

Zsa Zsa Gabor

In the history of Hollywood intrigue, if you get married nine times, get divorced seven times, have one annulled marriage and are currently married to a rather strange guy, you must be a real legend.  Zsa Zsa Gabor is one of those legends.  There’s just something about old portraits of Zsa Zsa that speaks to why she really is that famous: those arching eyebrows, those high cheekbones, that socialite grace.  In this day and age of kikays who go clubbing on a Saturday night, they can always learn a thing or two from Zsa Zsa.

*     *     *

Rita Hayworth

I think that no other actress can wear the slinky red dress better than “The Love Goddess” herself, Rita Hayworth.  Rita can do it all: she can dance, she can act, she can sing, and she’s one of the sexiest sex goddesses of classic cinema.  Her enduring grace and passionate performances are the stuff of legend.  Who can forget Rita in Gilda, where that one glove she removed became one of the sultriest and most electrifying things that came off the silver screen?  I wouldn’t mind having a poster of Rita Hayworth a’la The Shawshank Redemption, although there would be more reasons for me to stay in prison than to tunnel out.

*     *     *

Marilyn Monroe 

There’s just something about Marilyn.  Far from being the stereotypical blonde bombshell, Marilyn’s tragic death only served to highlight her remarkable life.  That skirt-blowing scene in The Seven Year Itch is something to remember; so is her song “Diamonds are a Girl’s Best Friend.”  To be honest, the only reason why I read the plays of Arthur Miller is because of Norma Jean.  And there’s just something about how you say that name - “Marilyn Monroe” - that still reminds you of how much a superstar she is today as she was back then.  Then again, everything about Marilyn will always be a mystery… that’s why she’ll always be a star, a legend, and an icon of the silver screen.

*     *     * 

Lauren Bacall 

Ah, Lauren Bacall.  That penetrating gaze, that voice, those smart remarks.  In these days of “dumb bimbos” and all-out stupidity in weekend showbiz shows, our local celebrities can - and should - learn a thing or two from Lauren.  “Looking at yourself in a mirror isn’t exactly a study of life,” she says, and it still holds true today.  The many things she has to say about her ex-husband Frank Sinatra are stuff that should right now be on Friendster shoutouts.  A journalist once called Lauren: “Slinky as a lynx, hot as pepper, cool as rain, dry as smoke.”  Suffice to say, that’s a good way to describe Lauren Bacall.  Among other things, she is truly a legend of the silver screen.

*     *     * 

Sophia Loren 

“Everything you see,” said Sophia Loren once, “I owe to spaghetti.”  There must be more than spaghetti that explains why Sophia’s legs go on forever.  Whether or not she had an affair with Cary Grant is something we may never know, but if they ever did, Cary must be one lucky dog.  What exactly is in Sophia Loren, I do not know.  Millions of men would have had fantasies and dreams of Sophia Loren.  Even I did; to be perfectly honest, I fall ever-so-often for girls who have the eyes of Sophia.  Not too many girls could have the kind of figure Sophia Loren has, even at 73.

*     *     *

Greta Garbo

In this day and age of Paris Hilton’s, Britney Spears’s, and Lindsay Lohan’s, few celebrities will ever have that defining mystique that becomes Hollywood glamour at its finest.  Such is Greta Garbo.  She was intensely private; she didn’t sign autographs, she didn’t give interviews, she didn’t divulge much of her personal affairs.  Even in her silent films, her introverted disposition gave her a mystery that is the stuff of Hollywood legend.  As a star of silent films, Greta let her actions do all the talking.  Hey, nobody’s complaining.  When you are an actress the caliber of Greta Garbo, you don’t need publicity stunts.  If anything, Greta is the ideal actress.

*     *     *

Ingrid Bergman 

My favorite classic movie - period - is Casablanca.  Not only because of that painful heartbreaking story, but because of Ingrid Bergman.  While gin joints and piano bars are a thing of the past these days, Ingrid Bergman forever remains to be one of the best actresses of classic film.  There’s something about Ingrid: her voice, her presence on camera, her many award-winning performances, her timeless beauty.  Or that song she told Sam to play again is a good metaphor.  As time goes by, she is that legendary actress that few will ever match, much less surpass.  Then again, they’ll always have Paris… and we’ll always have Ingrid.

*     *    *

Grace Kelly 

No other actress possesses the kind of beauty and grace of the one and only Grace Kelly, Princess of Monaco.  Films like Dial M for Murder and On the Waterfront showcase her talents, and that statuesque, graceful, royal figure she has.  Not to mention that smile… how many times have I tried - and failed - to hold up on my stoic, unresponsive usual expression whenever I saw Grace smile on those pictures.  And those eyes… royal, yet at the same time ever-so-charming.  How many actors in Hollywood have fallen in love with Grace Kelly, I do not know.  One thing is certain, though: they had all a good reason to fall in love with her.

*     *     * 

Audrey Hepburn 

Breakfast at Tiffany’s is one of my favorite classic movies, and Audrey Hepburn is one of my favorite actresses of all time.  There’s something about Audrey and that little black Givenchy dress.  Audrey Hepburn set standards for fashion that to this very day are still emulated, repeated, but never duplicated.  Cuteness?  Timeless beauty?  Definitely understatements, for one of the greatest actresses ever on the silver screen.  Audrey was also a great humanitarian, which set the standard for almost every Angelina Jolie and KC Concepcion of today.  Yet it is her memorable performances - not just in Breakfast, but also in My Fair Lady and of course, Sabrina - that makes Audrey stand out as one of the greatest legends and most beautiful faces of cinema.  Besides, no one else can fit into that little black dress like Audrey.

 *     *     *

So there you have it.  There are definitely a lot more beautiful faces and potential timeless beauties in cinema today, but I think it would be hard to contest their beauty and grace.  I guess Lauren Bacall said it best:

I think your whole life shows in your face and you should be proud of that.  

So true.  So very true.

*     *     *

Credits

Marlene Dietrich’s image from (http://www.meaus.com/94-marlene-dietrich-poem.htm)
Zsa Zsa Gabor’s image from (http://www.garboforever.com/Garbos_Lovers-Friends-08.htm)
Rita Hayworth’s image from (http://www.divasthesite.com/Acting_Divas/Rita_Hayworth.htm)
Marilyn Monroe’s image from (http://www.nilacharal.com/enter/celeb/MarilynMonroe.asp)
Lauren Bacall’s image from (http://www.physicsforums.com/showthread.php?p=1479574)
Sophia Loren’s image from (http://www.flickr.com/photos/view-finder/1165633328/in/set-72157601532477672/)
Greta Garbo’s image from (http://pediafallen.blogspot.com/2008/03/greta-garbo.html)
Ingrid Bergman’s image from (http://www.ew.com/ew/gallery/0,,20041669_20041673_20152905_4,00.html)
Grace Kelly’s image from (http://www.biography.com/dead_famous/dead_episode_guide.jsp?episode=150123)
Audrey Hepburn’s image from (http://blog.pricegrabber.com/chicshopper/2007/11/27/film-fashion-breakfast-at-tiffanys/)