Skip to main content

bodies at rest

i sometimes think that insomniac brains function on an entirely different plane than the rest of humanity. given the plethora of studies available on the subject, it seems reasonable to assume that we're all just so sleep deprived that we've actually started to break down and that signals are firing in ways that they never should be, but i prefer to think that we're just wired differently to begin with. as a result, people who tend to sleep at night have trouble realising the way that we're going to react to things, something i was reminded of last night.

as we were going to bed, dom happened to mention, during the course of a conversation about things that should never, ever return, that the band chalk circle was making a comeback, playing a show in montreal at some point in the near future. by way of background, let me explain that there was this thing called the eighties. it was responsible for a lot in the music world, including some cutting edge underground material, but also including the sorts of atrocities that should be banned under the geneva convention and a lot of music bland enough that you wondered why the artists bothered to do it in the first place. in canada, we had a lot of the latter, because our broadcast regulations require that a third of music aired on radio and on music television [which used to play actual music] be canadian. that meant that broadcasters were basically willing to play recordings of people singing in the shower as long as it helped them meet their canadian content obligations and therefore a lot of otherwise forgettable artists ended up becoming minor stars. chalk circle fall into that category.

since they were a sort of forgettable lot, when dom mentioned them, i remembered the name, but i couldn't really remember anything they'd actually done. he attempted to jog my memory by humming one of their hits, but, as we all know, that only ever makes things worse, because then i was left with a sort of musical fragment in my brain that i couldn't connect to anything i'd ever heard.

this is where the differences in brain function come in.

you see dom, being someone who can sleep fairly easily, figured the conversation ended there and dozed off. i'm assuming that the whole thing was far from his mind two hours later when the ed byrne comedy special i was watching ended and my dangerously unoccupied mind started sifting through its leftovers. regular, well-rested minds don't go through this so much unless there is something in particular that is preoccupying them. they don't understand the process by which some "silly" thing can suddenly take on a monstrous level of importance and how that can combine with the desperate boredom that sets in when you've been awake for too many hours and need to be entertained.

which is why dom didn't see the sophisticated humour value in being awoken by having my iphone thrust at him blaring the video for the song he'd been trying to hum. personally, i thought it was hilariously ironic and, yes, quite entertaining. instead, he just grumbled something about "needing" sleep and how i shouldn't be waking him for "no reason" because apparently the people at his work expect him to function in the morning or something.

i was going to point out to him that at least some of the blame for him being awake belonged to our siamese, who had taken lights and music as a sign that it was ok to jump up and demand affection from his dad, but that always seems to invite these arguments about "rationality" and "discernment", things i supposedly possess, but are evidently in conflict with waking someone up in the middle of the night to show them the video for a song they don't like when they were the one who mentioned it in the first place. personally, i think that hecubus gets off easy because he's covered in satiny fur, has adorably crossed blue eyes and makes a soothing rattling noise when rubbed [none of which, by the way, work for me]. this so-called rationality is just an excuse.

and so, without ever leaving the bed, dom and i went our separate ways, him back to the land of nod and me back to my churning thoughts, only now, i could at least focus on something other than a song. now, i could think about the blog post i was going to write about how no one understands me because i'm an insomniac.


Comments

as long as you're here, why not read more?

jihadvertising?

i keep seeing this ad for tictac candies:



am i the only one who finds the suicide bomber clown at the end a little unnerving? all the nice natural things like the bunny and the [extinct] woolly mammoth and the fruit get devoured by a trying-to-appear-nonthreatening-but-obviously-psychotic clown who then blows himself up. congratulations, tictac, i think this ad has landed you on about a dozen watch lists.

oh and by the way, showing me that your product will somehow cause my stomach to explode in a rainbow of wtf makes me believe that doing consuming tictacs would be a worse dietary decision than the time i ate two raw eggs and a half a bottle of hot sauce on a dare.

making faces :: hot stuff, comin' through

i don't even know what to say about the weather. the end of september saw temperatures at a scalding 36c/ 97f outside. this is especially annoying because we've had a moderate summer. most days it rained a little in the morning, the temperatures didn't creep into the 30s too often and there wasn't the normal stretch of a few weeks when it felt like we were living on the sun. now, we've receded into more normal fall weather, although it's still on the warm side for mid-october. that climate change thing is a bitch.

trying to think of something positive in the situation, it does put me in a perfect frame of mind to write about urban decay's naked heat palette. it's the latest in what appears to be an endless series of warm neutral and red eyeshadow palettes that have followed in the footsteps of anastasia's modern renaissance. [which i ultimately decided i didn't need after doing a thorough search of my considerable stash.] i do think that it'…

i agree, smedley [or, smokers totally saved our planet in 1983]

so this conversation happened [via text, so i have evidence and possibly so does the canadian government and the nsa].

dom and i were trying to settle our mutual nerves about tomorrow night's conversion screening, remembering that we've made a fine little film that people should see. which is just about exactly what dom had said when i responded thusly:

me :: i agree smedley. [pauses for a moment] did you get that here?

dom :: no?

me :: the aliens who were looking at earth and then decided it wasn't worth bothering with because people smoked even though it was bad for them?
come to think of it, that might mean that smokers prevented an alien invasion in the seventies.

dom :: what ?!?!?

me :: i've had wine and very little food. [pause] but the alien thing was real. [pause.] well, real on tv.

dom :: please eat something.

of course, i was wrong. the ad in question ran in 1983. this is the part where i would triumphantly embed the ad from youtube, except that the governmen…