dear nica,
my question regards roommate etiquette. my roommate and i have lived together for a year and get along great. we both decided 4 or 5 months back that we were both going to move out at the end of this may… neither of us was sure where we were gonna go but that moving out by june 1st was our understanding. time went on and i’ve decided to stay in the apartment into the summer, on april 24th my roommate told me she’s only gonna be in the apartment for the first two weeks of may, and since she’s only going to be there for half the month she thinks she only has to pay half her rent. this gives me less than a week to come up with half of her rent. she and i get along great and i don’t think she realizes she kind of screwing me over here. i know there’s no law i can say she’s breaking, but i just want to ask and make sure that this isn’t something a roommate would normally get a way with and that i would be justified in asking that she pay her full rent.

thanks for any advice in advance,
- high and dry in milwaukee

Dear High and Dry

Speaking from experience of moving 6 times in the last three years, and having had 12 roommates in that same time period, I would have to say that the protocol is, she has to give you a month’s notice, AND if it’s before the lease is up she is responsible for finding someone to take over until the lease expries (never mind the fact that there are only two weeks left on it, in fact that is all the more reason why it is her responsibility to find a subletter, since I imagine it would be hard to find someone for that short a period, unless you are open to the option into turning bedroom # 2 into a homier version of a no-tell motel and charging by the hour). I would also say that as your friend she should be expected to honor the agreement the two of you made to stay in the place through the end of May. But at the very least it is her duty as a roommate to cover the rent through the 24th, and make some sort of arrangements to take care of things until the 1st. One month is standard, there’s no way around that, to act otherwise will result in bad roommate karma, which, depending on your inclination, you can give her a preview of in your remaining weeks together. If you need creative suggestions in that regard, let me know.

Nica

Dear Nica,
Over the past several years I have become increasingly
hypersensitive about how offensive I may be to other cultures/ethnicities
simply by my social/historical/cultural/etc location.
This has manifested itself in a complete inability to travel anywhere for
fear of exacerbating peoples contempt for me (not me as a person but me as
a constructed entity that represents x, y, and z which doesn’t depend on
whether i *personally* do represent those things) or at least having to
face it directly (and of course
in certain places there *are* palpable anti-american undercurrents). I
refer to this condition as pomonoia because i suspect it stems from the
postmodern rhetoric that is unaviodable combined with certain neurotic
behaviours. Help! How do I combat this?
sincerely,
rooted in place

Dear Rooted In Place

(I was going to acronymize your name, but that seemed too creepy, both in terms of traditional meaning, and the Eminem tattoo interpretation).

First of all, I’d like to make the optimistic argument that by your very awareness of your predicament you automatically become less likely to cause contempt. Because it’s doubtful that you will be getting locals to take “exotic” pictures of yourself, clad in produced-for-tourism-and-globalization-market beads and feathers draped over your Nike: Just Do It sweatshirt, explaining to them that they have to “clicko on the el camera” and littering the streets with McDonalds wrappers. You are also probably unlikely to try and buy a bootleg CD of Shakira, referring to her as “that blonde chick from the Coca-Cola commercial with an Indian name who sometimes sings in Spanish on Latin MTV.” People hate dumb Americans, but probably not so much the people who are ashamed of dumb Americans.

Having said that, of course there are palpable anti-American sentiments, especially now, thanks to Governor Bush and his homies in da White House. But as America withdraws into cultural and political isolation thanks to the PNAC manifest destiny expansionist doctrine gone to hell (well, further and deeper than ever before, in keeping with the new war-porn-religion discourse), it is important to overcome our natural feelings of embarassment for our nation-at-the-moment and do our part to show that we are not all part of the Bush-Bud-mullet-Chosen-by-God-to-colonize-all-countries-ending-in-”stan”-starting-with-”Iraquistan” metonymy. Pomonoia is a perfect word for the predicament, but in a lot of ways pomonoia is the flip side of the common ironic m.o. at home, where displaying kitschy Americana items on one’s person and at one’s house, in the context of a hipster neighbourhood/college/city is an ironic statement on the evils of American-led globalization. Since our sense of irony has been the main mode of resistance for so long, and since irony is not very exportable outside its national context, it leaves understandable guilt and pomonoia to inform international interpersonal relations. But irony is dead, and pomonoia is no longer a luxury we can afford, as representatives of our culture-how-we-want-it-to-be. I guess the empirical question of all of us now, is does xanax help against fears of xenophobia? Can a Cause with a capital C of changing the world’s imaginary of America be the metaphorical upper to release us from the impasse with our own culturally abject senses of ourselves? I am getting off the soapbox now, I swear.

Dear ‘Nica’: I’m a bit befuddled by everything that’s going on. Would you please critique the following article from the New York Times? It’s about a pro-war rally in New York City.
Sincerely,
Anxious in Albequerque

Dear A.A.:
Surely. I have inserted my comments in italics in the text below.
Sincerely,
‘Nica’

‘Support Our Troops’ Is This Rally’s Call

Bearing American flags and placards saying “Support Our Troops,” more than 1,000 people gathered in Times Square yesterday for a rally supporting the war in Iraq.

The rally was about 1 percent the size of an antiwar rally that snaked down Broadway to Washington Square Park on Saturday. But Morton A. Klein, national president of the Zionist Organization of America, one of the sponsors of yesterday’s rally, said the disparity was not surprising.

“This is not going to gather huge amounts of people, because we’re already at war in Iraq,” he said. “We won the argument.”

Yup. Congratulations. This reminds me of when I went with a group of protestors to Washington, D.C., on the day of George Bush’s inauguration as U.S. President in 2001. Our goal was to raise awareness of poverty in North Philadelphia’s Kensington district, and our signs were about redressing the massive imbalance of wealth in the United States. We were not protesting, as many were that day, Bush’s narrow confirmation as President by the Supreme Court. Still, inauguration-goers mocked us. “It’s too late,” they said. “We won.” We thought this was sadly funny. It was as if they were saying: “It’s too late. We won. Resistance to social injustice is futile. Read ‘em and weep, you unwashed hippies.”

Still, Mr. Klein said, “We felt that there’s so many other rallies around against the war that this could be demoralizing to troops who read about it in Iraq, and even demoralizing to politicians who support the war.”

Sarcasm: My heart goes out to those poor politicians. That God-fearing Americans would have the temerity to speak their minds in a way that might demoralize hawkish politicians is unforgivable. We elected these politicians so that they might resolutely do what they want without being incumbered by nuisance of public opinion. Stinking rat-bastard hippies.

Some of the people at the rally were members of the groups that organized it, including the Zionist Organization of America and the Christian Coalition of America. But others did not know who the sponsors were. They were just New Yorkers who had reached for their car keys or MetroCards after hearing on television or the radio that supporters of the war were gathering at 42nd Street and Broadway.

Sarcasm: See? War fosters unity. Whoever would have thought that the Zionist Organization of America and the Christian Coalition could be brought together over an issue. God(s) bless America.

Several hundred others attended a rally on Staten Island to show support for the war.

Moments after Dameon J. Reid, 30, heard about the Times Square rally while watching television at home in Harlem, she and her 7-year-old daughter, Aijalon, were on their way. Ms. Reid, who served seven years in the Army, was disappointed with the turnout, she said, particularly after hearing how many people attended the antiwar rally the day before.

Gee, where are all the people who love slaughter? (Hint: watching TV and eating pork rinds in the back of their Lincoln Navigators on the way to soccer practice in Midland, TX).

“If you’re going to fuss, fuss before the war,” she said. “But now that the war is going on, stop and support the troops.”

Resistance is futile! We won, you lost. Support the troops so that they can go die with the knowledge that we ’support’ them. And by the way, stop fussing all the time, you smelly, tofu-eating, hairy hippies.

Maria Clara, from Port Chester, N.Y., held up photographs of her daughter, a Marine reservist, and her son-in-law, a marine who she said was stationed in Jordan. “Don’t get me wrong,” she said. “I’m against war. But they are supporting us.”

What?

“People have to see,” she said. “These are our sons and daughters.”

Ohhhh. Wait, what?

Ashley Hope, 26, a painting student at Hunter College who lives in Park Slope, Brooklyn, said she had lost friends over her support for the war.

Ms. Hope, who wore a sweater decorated like the Union Jack and sunglasses on top of her long hair, carried a sign reading, “Does it look like I own oil stock?”

Duh, I dunno. What do people who own oil stock look like? These people do not yet have the knack of making good signs. Acid-tripping, ferret-owning hippies fuss all the time and have, by trial and error, gradually learned to make clever signs.

Eugenio Fernandez, 39, a school bus driver from Queens, said he hoped the rally would lift American troops’ morale — and weaken that of the Iraqis.

“If they see that we’re 100 percent behind our troops,” he said, “they won’t be encouraged to keep fighting.”

Perhaps. Leave aside for a minute the fact that protesting a war does not indicate lack of support for troops (or that it might actually indicate the opposite). The fact is that we are not 100 percent behind this war, despite what Fox News polls show. In fact, judging from the respective sizes of the two rallies, one would think that we are exactly 1 percent behind this war.

But, of course, that’s because the silent majority is too lazy to get out on the streets.

Dear Nica

Almost a year ago, my boyfriend broke up with me to be with this other girl. She is nothing like me or him–he is a law student, I am in an MBA program, we are both very motivated, go-getter types. She is, like, this blonde dancer, hippie, crystal freak (stones, not meth). Anyway, seven months later he sought me out, told me that he wanted to get back together, that this girl was just an infatuation, that he was going through a phase, but she was not right for him, and now he had left her because he realized I was the one he wanted to be with. Because I was still in love with him, I took him back. Things were fine for the next couple of months, until I found out, through a friend of his friends (it’s complicated) that he did not leave her; she had broken up with him, and then he told me all those things about wanting to be with me. I have know for a few weeks now, and I don’t know what I should do. Should I confront him? Should I leave him? Things are fine now, he seems happy, but I just feel confused and horrible. And I don’t want to ask my friends, because they all told me not to get back together with him.

Miserable All Over Again

Dear Miserable,

If I had an ounce of cheerleader spirit towards your relationship with your boyfriend, I would blah-blah about how maybe the lifestyle of law school is not fulfilliing him, and he was looking for some sort of escape in an “other” whose lifestyle is exotic, and thus liberating to him, and how you both together could try to broaden/diversify your interests and activities, that is, if you were interested in doing so, but then a) I would sound like Cosmo, and, more importantly, b) I would be giving advice that might prolong your relationship with this person.

Your boyfriend is a creep. And you should dump him. First I am going to tell you all the reasons why he could have lied about getting dumped that you could theoretically use to justify his behavior, but then I will insist, time and again, that he is still a creep. And that you should dump him. So that’s my thesis statement, my 10th grade English teacher would be proud, and here it is point-by-point.

1) It’s possible that he lied about getting dumped because he thought that unless he made it sound like he *chose* to leave that girl to go back to you, then you would not take him back. There is a reason for that; I suspect that that is the case, otherwise you would not be so perturbed at discovering the truth. Now, you may justify his behavior and say that it is sweet that he would lie to win you back, but the fact of the matter is, he probably knew you would not have him under existing circumstances, so he misrepresented them, which, in my opinion, nullifies your decision to take him back as having been made under false pretenses. Dump him.

2) It’s possible that he lied about getting dumped because he has an ego problem that does not allow him to admit something verbally, even when it is a fact, if it threatens his manhood/ego/self-esteem/whatever metonymy you want to engage in here. It’s like when Dubya was trying to get out that quote “fool me once, shame on you, fool me twice, shame on me,” but he just physically could not pronounce that second part, he was incapable of actually sounding out the words “shame on me” even in the context of a quote. It sounds like your boyfriend has a hangup similar to our Dubya. There is really nothing positive about that. Also, you would be wise to remember that quote in its original phrasing, before it got mangled by Dubya’s jaws. Dump him.

3) It is possible that he lied to you about getting dumped because he is a pathological liar, and has an undifferentiated vision of reality, in which truth, facts, lies and interpretations are all fused together into this lumpen mass from which the arbitrary narrative is spun. Or perhaps he engages in a Baudrillardian simulacra of truth, whereby the signifier (what he tells you) claims to represent the signified (what actually transpired), but in reality only represents itself (i.e. him, in the given moment, telling you what you want to hear). Dump him.

At the end of the day, it does not matter why he lied, not really. The gamut of reasons runs from being weak and cowardly in the best case scenario to being a cold, calculating, manipulative asshole in the worst case scenario. There is no way of you to find out whether what he tells you now is the truth, even if you confront him, because the lie is at the core of any discourse you can have; whether he admits to it, or explains it, or denies it, *it*–the lie–is already there, and it’s not going anywhere. Right now he has you where he wants you, and he is smugly reaping the benefits of his morally and ethically challenged behavior. By letting him get away with it, you are acting into his image of you, in which you are obviously not particularly respected. Dump him.

-Nica

Dear Nica,
Here’s my problem. I have a job. That’s not much of a problem, but the problem is it is not for me. I am not passionate about it, and I simply dont enjoy it. I check the classifieds from time to time, but with the economy the way it is, the chance of me finding something better seems really slim. But I feel kind of dishonest keeping what I have. I dont commit myself to doing my best, and I feel like the people I work with, who are dedicated, deserve a coworker similarly devoted to their job.
So do I do the honest thing and just quit? Or do I coast until something better comes along? From a money perspective, I cant really opt for the former, so I guess what I am really asking is how bad should I feel that I am holding a job I dont want, and somehow holding it securely, while people all around me (and many in my workplace) are getting laid off?

Feeling Reams Of Guilt

Dear FROG

So you are keeping your eyes peeled for a better lily pad. There is nothing wrong with that. However, it sounds like you are having some Hamlet workplace blues and feel like a hypocrite because you are not as devoted to your job as your coworkers are. At this point you need to engage in some rudimentary self-analysis. First of all, are you a perfectionist? If you think that you are, or your friends always tell you that you are (or you can take this online quiz http://www.queendom.com/tests/personality/perfectionism_access.html), then it might be the case that you are just struggling with your own very high standards, in which case you need to examine the situation in that context, and not worry about the fact that you are letting your coworkers down, because you are probably just projecting your anxieties onto them; just because you are not passionate about it, does not mean you can’t do a good job if you are skilled and responsible. However, if you feel like your work has objectively been slipping in quality because you are bored/not interested/whatever, then you need to take stock of all the pros and cons. Think about why your coworkers are really into it? Do they have more creative/authoritative input? Do you feel alienated from your labor a la Marx in comparison? Is it possible that your coworkers also feel alienated, but either have a better false consciousness, or are good actors? Can any aspect of the work you are doing be tweaked so that you enjoy it more while you are figuring out what to do next?
The financial aspect is definitely something to consider, especially in terms of what your responsibilities are; I don’t know what your living situation is like, but since it sounds like you hold yourself to high moral standards, you don’t want to trade in feeling guilty at your job for feeling guilty because you can’t pay rent, or mortgage, or whatnot. The economy does suck at the moment, but maybe you could line up some liminal interim job while you are figuring out what you will do next. It’s all good and noble to quit on principle, but having some sort of a safety net does not hurt.
As for the moral aspect of all of this, that’s the most important one. Unless your job is really, directly about saving lives (i.e. if you are a heart surgeon or a suicide helpline counselor who does not care about his/her job, that’s a serious and immediate problem), you really have to figure this out in terms of your own values and what you are willing to live with. If the kind of person you want to be would unequivocally quit a job they were not dedicated to, and it’s an issue of self-respect in terms of measuring up to your sense of your ideal self, then maybe you should quit. If you really *want* to quit, and you are justifying it in moral terms, vis-a-vis your coworkers, because you can’t just say that you *want* to quit because you have Protestant work ethic guilt, or something of the sort, you should quit too. However, if you can mediate between necessity and compromise with relative ease, it might be a good idea to stick around, at least for the time being. If you start looking for other jobs, that might resolve your moral crisis, because it will give your predicament a frame of potential, upcoming change, it will make you feel proactive, and hopefully resolve your moral impasse by making the subject of it temporary and alterable, and thus, ultimately, more manageable. Finally, if you are still feeling excessive guilt towards others who are getting laid off, go read yourself some Ayn Rand.

Nica

Dear Nica, here is a question for ‘Ask Nica’:

My friends and I have an online magazine, but nobody reads it. When we try to get our friends interested, they tend not to react. When they do respond, it goes something like, “nice site. Hey, did you watch the football game on Sunday?” I can’t understand why they don’t ‘dig it’. How can we get people interested in our website without sacrificing our artistic integrity? I mean, seriously.

Signed,
Befuddled

Dear Befuddled,

I don’t know what the contents of your magazine are, but it sounds like there might be a mismatch in supply and demand between the producers (you and your friends) and the target demographic (your other friends). If they are really into football, or sports, chances are they would be interested in content relating to that. Or, since everybody is a narcissist at the core, if there is a section about them (even if it is making fun of them for watching football every Sunday, instead of reading your magazine, implying that they can’t, in fact, read, and posting a link to Hooked On Phonics), that might attract their readership (it may also result in their subsequent kicking of your ass). The important thing to remember is that it’s not the content that can compromise the artistic integrity, it’s the execution; so you can use whatever content you think will get people interested, without compromising your artistic goals, as long as you frame it in a way that fits in with your mission statement. A way to get people who are not your friends to read it is to post on boards and forums whose content is related to your content, and direct people to your website, preferably while engaging in conversation with them, so that they don’t think it’s spam. Finally, I’d like to look at your online magazine, so if you email me a URL link, I’ll check it out.

Best of Luck,

Nica

This is imported from the forums, and gets a warm new home here in the Q and A format.

Question from Hilbelle:
I am currently sharing my living quarters with a very presentable and well-mannered male German who speaks boarding school English and has impeccably preppy taste in clothes. He is generally very respectful with my things, and has never manifested any notable peculiar quirks, but last night I came home quite late and was using the bathroom before bed and I noticed in the bidet (it’s a toilet-level sink that people in Europe use to soak tired feet) there was a copy of the most recent New Yorker (which I had not yet taken out of its plastic cover) as well as two half-eaten packets of crackers. Obviously there was no water in the bidet at the time, yet I found the location of these items to be slightly disturbing and not a little bit curious.
How should I approach this situation? I do not want to come across as anything other than the easy-going and relaxed (I am from California) kind of girl that I falsely present myself as, but I do live in Europe where the cover price for a New Yorker is $9 and I don’t really like to think of them ending up (or in this case, starting out) in the bidet. Also: where do the crackers fit in? I’ve heard Germans can have a rather dark side: is there something shady going on? Shall I find another arrangement?

Answer from Nica:

Dear Hilbelle

Following in the steps Bruce Lionhart’s “fallacy of the undistributed middle” logic, I have to start out by saying that since the New Yorker (the abused property in question) does not have an advice column, it follows that your cracker-eating, feet-soaking, publication-abusing roommate would not welcome any advice with regard to his understanding of personal property, or his notions of appropriate locales for processed foods and the printed word. Of course, it is completely understandable that the situation is frustrating to you on a psychological and financial level.

As far as dealing with your roommates, your options are:

1) The passive-aggressive approach: “______! (insert some German agglutinative swear word here). My magazine got all wet. And it has all these crumbs in it. I don’t know how this could have happenned!” This could be augmented by guilt-tripping either via “the martyr framework” (i.e. “Stuff like this always happens to me. It’s like the time I bought the first edition of “Alice In Wonderland” off of Ebay, and these pigeons I was feeding shat all over it”) or “the saint framework” (i.e. “Well, I guess I can’t read it now, since the pages are all stuck together and it smells of feet. There go my plans for the evening. I was planning to take a candlelit bath with my New Yorker, but now I won’t. I guess I will make you cupcakes instead. Do you like chocolate?”). This could be effective, but could also backfire in a number of different ways–a) making him think you are psycho or b) beaming at you and telling you that yes, he would love some cupcakes.

2) The falsely ignorant, non-confrontational approach: “Have you seen my copy of The New Yorker? I haven’t even opened it yet, and I don’t know where it went.” This is constructive, because he will be forced to reveal its location, and hopefully saying out loud “it’s in the bidet” will resonate with him as a bit weird, and will become a lesson learned for the future.

3) The subtle confrontational approach, which addresses the issue but downplays the “leaving the $9 magazine in the fucking bidet” part: “I don’t mind if you borrow my New Yorker, but you have to wait till I am done reading it first.” This will alert him to the fact that you noticed his transgression, and that he did something wrong, but it will not conflict with your identity as an easy-going person, especially if you say it casually and light-heartedly.

4) The direct confrontational approach: “I was in the bathroom and noticed that my New Yorker was in the bidet. Can you please not leave it there in the future?” This would also work but could put him on the defensive, so this approach has to be practiced with the most gentle, friendly demeanor possible.

5) Fighting fire with fire. Misplace his things. Leave them in inappropriate places. Put his slippers into the fridge. Unplug his laptop, and plug it in instead of the toaster in the kitchen. Put two slices of wonderbread with cheese on top in between the keyboard and the screen; if he asks what you are doing, tell him you are making a grilled cheese sandwich. This will demonstrate to him, through a hyporbolic exaggeration, that his behavior is shady and insane. Of course, it can also backfire by a) disorienting him and driving him crazy, much like Ingrid Bergman in “Gaslight” or b) making him think that you are psycho (albeit in a different way than 1-A).

And in conclusion, a moralistic coda: good roommates are born, not made, and it does not sound like he is part of that species. At the same time, trading a questionable roommate for an unknown one is a big gamble that should be approached keeping in mind “the devil you know” adage. Otherwise, you might end up with a roommate that uses your New Yorker for toilet paper, or one that sleepwalks and plays the Theramin ((badly) personal experience), or one that speaks in tongues and projectile vomits, or one who will do his own reinterpretation of Trading Spaces and will turn your house into a crack den. I’m just sayin’. If you get along fine with this guy, the cracker-magazine-bidet notwithstanding, talk to him. Just because you are not totally zen about him mishandling your property, does not mean you are not easygoing. Best of luck.

Nica

Dear Andrew W.K.,

“There is no such thing as adventure and romance, there is only trouble and desire. When you desire something you immediately get into trouble and when you’re in trouble you don’t desire anything at all”. This is one of my favorite quotes from a movie. I was wondering do you have a favorite quote from a movie? Thanks!!
—Chompers321

Dear Chompers, That is a very interesting quote. It really made me think. I wonder if that’s always the case. Romance—wow! What does that even mean? I love what I think romance is. Being romantic is being unafraid. I really love “Lord Of The Rings” very much, and in “The Fellowship Of The Ring” there is a scene which goes something like this: Frodo is talking to Gandalf about his troubles while they are in the mines. Golem is following them and Frodo wishes that Bilbo would’ve killed Golem when he had the chance. Gandalf reminds Frodo that Bilbo spared Golem’s life out of pitty. Frodo then goes on to wish that the ring had never come to him. Gandalf says something like, “So do many who live to see such days. But it is not our choice. We can only choose what to do with the time we are given.” I know that’s not word for word, but it is close enough. Many things will happen that are not fair. Many things will happen that we wish would not. All we can do is act upon them. What are you going to do? Be strong. Frodo remembers what Gandalf had said again, just as he’s about to throw the ring into the river. He realizes - What is it to lead a life without resolve and courage? What kind of life is lead without risk or bravery? He will be true to the situation that he has come into, and he will not back away in fear. I love that movie with all of my heart, and I feel wonderful just thinking about it now. Your friend, Andrew W.K.

Dear Andrew W.K.,

May I call you Andy?
—Derek WK

Dear Derek,

You can definetly call me Andy! Please do! All my good friends and the guys in the band—they all call me Andy. It’s funny because for a long time no one called me anything but Andrew. When I was younger my Mom used to tell me “Don’t let any one call you anything but Andrew”, and I said “O.K.”. But bit by bit, the nice nick names took their places, and no one could do anything about it. I like nicknames and I like Andy. I also had a job where I was called Drew. The landlord at where I was called Drew. The landlord at my old apartment and all the neighbors called me Andy, and that’s kind of how Andy really started. Jimmy Coup (who plays guitar with us), he calls me Andy ever since he heard the landlord call me that. It’s cool! CALL ME WHATEVER YOU WANT!!! But don’t call me late for dinner! Thank you!

Your friend, Andrew W.K.

Dear Andrew W.K.,

why do you feel chocolate as drugs?
—nmii

Dear Nmii,

Chocolate is like a whipped, over covered, smoothed silk sweet snack. When it’s fresh out of the oven, a baker’s pride is sensed for miles. And while I don’t claim to know a lot about chocolate, I’ve heard that chocolate has some druggie doubles: flavor with fall outs and co-co with caffeine. I think it’s supposed to be good for your blood and your heart, of course it’s got a lot of sugar and that can build up into insulin spike-drops and the resulting fat-flow. Most of all, I think chocolate tastes good, so good in fact that it gives me a rush and a flow, and when it flows I go! Burst it!!!

Your friend, Andrew W.K.

I wish, I wish, I could make this stuff up. All of this is totally genuine.

This week it’s Zorbax’s turn!!

Your questions answered by Zorbax XII the Dread, Scourge of the Centurions, the Marked One, the Fate of Our Race, the Nine-Armed, the Center of the Four Suns, the Great Uncle, the Ragged Spear-Tip, the Many-Eyed, the Terrorlord of Ragg, Primus Pilus of Zangan.

Dear Zorbax,

Philip
Albuquerque, NM

Dear Puny Human,

Even now, Zorbax’s bejeweled fingers clutch at your feebly shining sun, and his mighty heel hovers above your flimsy cities. A great shadow will fall across the land, a shadow to terrify man and animal alike, a shadow to drive you into your homes, your livestock into their barns, and your souls into the deep recesses of your being. An all-devouring, all-blackening shadow that will stretch across your putrescent world like a great flood, invading every cave and crag, every mountain and monastery, every home and haven. Crouch to avoid it and it will surge over you like a vast ocean of snakes; climb for safety and the shadow swoops down like a murder of crows. There is no avoidance, no evasion, no shelter. There is only foul, stinking blackness made more foul by the scraps and leavings of your ragged souls. Thanks for writing.

Dear Zorbax,

Carl
Carson City, NV

Dear Puny Human,

Zorbax the Ever-Growing, the Belly and Mind, the Whale and the Wave. Zorbax!—the proud note of the French Horn. Zorbax!—the cry of the prey-bound falcon. Zorbax!—the hail of souls against the walls of the world. Zorbax has arrived. He rises from the depths of your swamps, your sewers, your fresh- and salt-water marshes. He descends from your trash piles, your slag heaps, your high rises. Zorbax is under the tongue of the crocodile and in the throat of the egret. He nourishes and wastes, raises and razes. When the walls of your cities and crumbling, when your pitiful machines collapse into a desperate tangle, when the sound of the sky raining fire is a reprieve from the howls of your neighbors, then will you know that Zorbax no longer sleeps.

Dear Zorbax,

James
Ms. Smithins Third Grade Class
Philo City, NH

Dear Puny Human,

Zorbax. Zorbax has teeth like the cold at the poles of your world. He has breath like the the heat in the core of your planet. His hands grasp sea and sky and what his eyes see is what his eyes destroy. Zorbax is here and when Zorbax strikes he will be like a great, dark column in the center of your world. And you will be drawn to him; or ye shall be repulsed by him. And those that are drawn to him will be sucked in by a powerful feeling; and those that are repulsed by him shall be worried and made miserable by his legion followers, the wolves and weasels, vultures and Bull Sharks. And those that are drawn to him shall travel from moon to moon, from star to star, undergoing the unspeakable rapture of our dread lord Zorbax. Just remember: keep reaching for that rainbow. No one can can stop you if you keep your eye on the prize and work to make your dreams come true.

Zorbax has spoken.

As we trudge along in our dating (mis)adventures, we all develop screening abilities, designed to hone in on qualities that may cause problems down the road. Some of them are fairly obvious and corporeally evident: i.e. perseverance of uniformly black clothing (unless they are in mourning), track marks on the arms and other more interesting places, a portable collection of Nietzsche’s collected works, propensity to start sentences with a defensive “it’s NOT a cult,” etc. However, there is one truly insidious category of potential partners that is less evident, but may prove to be detrimental–the ex-Catholics. These are the men raised within a cosmological framework that pivots around guilt as modus operandi. These men, subsequently, go to college, or read too much Camus, or Ayn Rand, or whatever, and consciously reject the theological cornerstones on which they were raised, and consider themselves “cured.” However, while the theological elements go out the window, the practice of Catholicism as a constructive and interpretive framework, with the perpetual dialectic of guilt and redemption as its central axis, remains imbedded in the subconscious, and WILL affect your relationship.
With that in mind, I designed a sure-fire questionnaire, designed to identify the lapsed Catholics early on, because, well, forewarned is forearmed.

1. Ask them if they have ever seen the film Magnolia. Ask them if they loved it. Lapsed Catholics tend to think that it’s the best movie ever, and that it truly speaks to them. Ask them what their favorite scene from the film was. If their favorite part involved the cop and the drug-addicted girl, then it’s serious.

2. Ask them if they have ever read “Kissing in Manhattan” by David Schickler. If their favorite story in the collection is “Duty,” run for the hills (this subcategory of people may also feel an overidentification with the work of Bret Easton Ellis, and a hybrid of American-Psycho-type alienation fused with remnants of Catholicism is not pretty to behold).

3. Ask them if they ever do things on purpose to make themselves feel guilty, so that they know what they are feeling guilty about, and can in some way redeem themselves. Ex-Catholics tend to feel guilty all the time, so they will often do certain things so that they will at least be able to assign and project the guilt onto something specific.

4. Attempt to identify if they have a madonna/whore complex. Ask them if they mentally divide women into women they can date, and women they can sleep with. Ask them if they will think the girl is “easy” if she sleeps with them early on. Ask them if they ever cheat on their girlfriends, and if they have better sex when they cheat than when they are in the relationship. Ex-Catholics usually have good sex only in the context of flings or affairs–i.e. with “whores,” and the sex with girlfriends, aka “madonnas” is mediocre.

After administering this questionnaire, you will have a better idea if your date is a lapsed Catholic, with all the accompanying accouterment. Beware that they tend to find their issues and ways of conduct mysterious and unique, so engaging them in this conversation may make them feel like you Truly Understand them, and that you see into their soul like no one else has been able to. This may make them want to date you. Don’t–if they are a true ex-Catholic, stick to a non-conventional relationship. At least that way you’ll get good sex out of it.