Legacy

I had a birthday last week. I am now in the final year of my early-to-mid 40s, and I feel fine.

Occasionally, usually when my age ticks up, I allow myself to reflect on life and what it all means. I don't like to do this all the time because it's not super interesting, and also, who am I to wax on and on about things infinitely larger than myself? Nevertheless, I think we all learn things as we grow and age, and, every now and then, I think something that might just mean something to someone else.

To begin, I want to acknowledge that, for several years, I've actively engaged in naming and counting my blessings. It's not something I exclusively do when good things happen, and it's also not something I exclusively do when I'm feeling down and need a reminder of things that are going well in my life. I try to do this routinely, and with some intentionality.  It helps. 

Secondly, I readily acknowledge that I am too young to be "old" or "wise," so take anything I say with a grain of salt. This is just what makes sense to me, at this point in my journey. It could change, and it probably will.  Having said that, when I am mindful of the good things I have in my life, and I have many, I worry significantly less about dying. To be fair, I have rarely worried about my own death (wow, this got dark, kinda). I do worry about the impact of my death on other people, but I don't fear it for myself.

What worries me is leaving behind a world where I haven't been abundantly clear how I perceived my purpose and my priorities. I worry about leaving questions about myself that no one will be able to answer. A little mystery is fine, as is a level of privacy. But certain things should never be questioned, or left to interpretation. Tomorrow is not guaranteed.

So my third realization is how important it is to know that my message to the world is written and clear. I don't plan on dying anytime soon, but if I did, there's plenty that I'd hope to have said first. Among those:

- Brooke is the love of my life. She makes me want to be a better person every single day.

- I never thought I could love anyone as much as I love Brooke, but I do: both of my kids continuously redefine the limits of how much I thought I could love and care for other human beings. Everyday they do or say something new that just blows me away. They constantly show me how much they are like me, and, simultaneously, how much they are their own people, with their own interests, their own strengths, their own passions, and their own dreams. I tell them I love them in my own subtle ways, and I hope they understand that, "Okay you kids have a good time," and, "Have a good time with your mustache," both directly translate to, "I love you and I think the absolute world of you."

- My mom is the strongest person I have ever known, and I love and adore her.

- I love and respect my siblings, and their families, unequivocally.

- I'm not mad at anyone, but I have chosen to distance myself from some people for good reasons. I don't need to justify any of these choices, and I won't.

- Throughout my life, at every stage, I've encountered one or two people with whom I have forged lasting, meaningful connections. I never take this for granted. I have little doubt that all of these people know who they are and feel similarly. We find our people along our journey, and our connection to them will always bear deep meaning: they are the ones we needed, either at a specific time, or for all time, and sometimes for both. I hope I have given each of them even a fraction of what they have given me.

- I am sorry for ever hurting anyone. I know I have, it's part of life. I'm sorry for the times I was foolish and made mistakes, and I'm sorry for how hard it is to find the right words to make things better.

I think a lot of those things are things most people could say. What's new and unique in my perspective this year is thoughts about legacy: what we leave for the world. I spent the last year of my life really enjoying films far more than I ever have. I will watch just about any movie, period. I find I especially love movies that fall into these categories:

1) Movies that I missed because they came out during particularly busy times in my life

2) Movies that flew under the radar, but really have one or two redeeming qualities

3) Movies that are just truly bad: poorly written, poorly executed, or both
4) Movies from specific times, with which I have less familiarity
5) Movies that most people would simply skip over

Sometimes I find real diamonds in the rough. It helps that I am able to watch a movie without fully focusing in on it (i.e. they make great atmosphere when I'm working from home -- I get more work done with something playing than I do in silence). If something makes an impression on me, I can always watch it again and with greater focus.

Watching so many films brought me to this revelation:

A film is no small accomplishment: it takes years of planning and execution to make one a reality. It takes the coordination of a large number of people, each doing different and important jobs to advance the overall process. Someone wrote every movie, someone directed every movie, someone produced every movie, and someone performed in every movie. Thinking more broadly, some performers, directors, writers, etc. have achieved a level of success that eclipses everyone most of their peers. There are names that seem larger than life, and performances that change us.

Even so, the greatest actor/director/producer/writer may only have a career spanning several decades. Their entire existence is a flash when compared with the entirety of humanity. When they die, we remember them for a moment, and in the time that follows, we may return to their works and appreciate them again, but as time passes, we will collectively think of them less and less frequently. This should not diminish their accomplishments necessarily, but, effectively, it does exactly that. A person whose favorite movie is an action/adventure that came out in 2025 probably wouldn't have much appreciation for Charlie Chaplin, or Buster Keaton, and while that does not take away from Chaplin's or Keaton's work, it does move them incrementally more distant from the zeitgeist. 

No body of work could ever stand the test of time and hold up forever. That is the logical conclusion.

Influence is the next level: the ripples that emerge when an object of some heft disrupts the serenity of the water's surface, forever changing the way the water interacts with everything around it. An actor who grew up adoring the physical performances of the silent era bring an obligation to form that extends the influence of those who came before.

Yet, eventually, the waters will be calm again. The reach of influence is not wholly organic.  Case in point: an ancient Greek poem about war is still impactful, in part, because we make students read it and discuss it every year. Does that make it great? Or is it something to which we feel a collective obligation? Can it be both?

I have much more that I hope to creatively produce in my time, but as I have grown, my understanding of these pursuits has changed. I no longer feel compelled to create so that my name and work will be remembered; instead, I want to create so that I may influence, even if my influence is only that of a grain of sand plunging into calm waters.

My ripple may not be huge, but it will be good. That is my wish.

If you've read this far, remember: I'm not old or wise. There's no guarantee that any of this is right.

But I thank you for reading.





---DISCLAIMER--- 

I'm not depressed, don't worry. That's not what this is. I'm not now, nor have I ever been, suicidal. I've been through some dark-ass times in my life and made it through without endangering myself. I'm just reflecting and sharing what I'm feeling, and my focus is clear: I have plenty that I still want to do, so no part of this should have been read as a farewell. If that has made you uncomfortable, I apologize - not my intent. 

Did IU Beat anOSU?

Yes. 100%. 

The Indiana Hoosiers defeated an University of Ohio State.

There is this narrative circulating amongst anOSU fans that, "IU didn't win; we lost."

This is commonly followed up by, "Should we meet again, it won't be the same."

No, it probably won't.  Here's one big way it will be different:

IU will likely have Omar Cooper back at WR. He was hurt and didn't play in the B1G Championship game. That's kind of a big deal.

But even setting that aside, I'd be curious to know how, specifically, things will really be different.  IU dominated nearly every statistical category, and, more importantly, made big plays when the moment commended them. Clutch, if you will. When it was "put up or shut up" time, IU put up.

So really, I just needed to say this as clear as I can:  IU defeated OSU.  OSU lost, too, if that makes you feel better.

But using, "We lost, they didn't win," also implies that a choice was made: OSU chose to let IU win, and, if given the chance, they would not choose to let IU win again. And that's where the logic train derails.

Eat shit, Buckeyes.  Worry about your next game.

GO HOOSIERS!! WIN THE ROSE BOWL!!

A Bag of Hammers

I don't have a lot to say these days about politics because, honestly, it's all so shameful. There is absolutely no reason for things to be as chaotic as they are, unless chaos is the point.

And I suspect that it is.

Meanwhile, our "press" have grown accustomed to normalizing authoritarianism rather than challenging it, and the average internet user doesn't realize there is a better than 50% chance that the person they're arguing with is actually a bot. Read that again.

So it's no surprise that NO ONE is calling bullshit on Dear Leader's latest reversal, today saying that if he kicked 600,000 Chinese students out of US colleges and universities, half of the schools would go out of business. Tacit recognition that the revenue these students bring is very important, which EVERYONE was saying when he was starting shit with Harvard earlier this year. 

And it's not just the revenue: it's the value we all gain from educating people and then encouraging them to contribute to the US workforce and economy. This isn't even debatable: keeping the most knowledgeable and best-trained people in our country is a WIN for ALL OF US.

Yet the bots have coalesced around the idea that, hey, maybe we'd be better off without those students. Here's a smattering of things I've seen and heard:

- Colleges are just left-wing indoctrination farms
- College is overpriced because of electives
- College degrees are worthless anyway
- Let colleges fail, high school graduates can do most of the jobs anyway

If I did not have the ability to see that these are mostly bots, I'd be utterly despondent. But they're mostly bots, programmed by people outside the US. They're not the Cletus and Jughead they appear to be, for the most part. 

But Cletus and Jughead are QUICK to agree with the bots. If that matters.

It will never cease to gall me when people say colleges indoctrinate students with left-wing values. It's infuriating, to be honest. What they call "indoctrination," is merely exposure. Absolutely NO ONE is sitting at the front of a college classroom telling students what they should believe. It doesn't happen.

Instead, what IS happening, is students are hearing things that no one has ever told them before. Student who grew up in small towns, who spent their whole lives listening to a singular set of values, are suddenly hearing, for the very first time, something else. Yes, shockingly, the pastor at the small town church never spent much time talking about how hard it is to be a Black person, or to be an immigrant, or to be transgender, because those aren't ideals that really have much representation in those pews.

And it's not a lie to say that those groups have it harder than some other groups do. Moreover, it's HIGHLY RELEVANT in some classrooms. One of the most common general education courses taken by students is Introduction to Sociology, where it would be wholly relevant to discuss different types of people and how their experiences differ. 

Facts, presented in an unbiased manner, are about as far as you can get from indoctrinating students. Students are always still free to listen to those lectures, shake their heads, and say, "I don't agree with that." NOBODY IS PUTTING A GUN TO ANYONE'S HEAD and making them agree.

Nobody.

Meanwhile, back home in Anytown, USA, Reverend White IS threatening eternal damnation upon anyone who dares to think differently. 

That's the real indoctrination. I'll die on that hill.

College isn't indoctrinating kids, and anyone who is threatened by the truth needs to STRONGLY consider where that feeling comes from, and who it serves.

Truth is not the problem, nor is knowledge.

Expecting everyone to adhere to one religion's view is a HUGE problem, and DEEPLY un-American.

Absolutely no one can pretend to love America if they can't get on board with the idea that we are not all required to subscribe to one set of values.