Action: Figure It Out

I am a big fan of "looking before I leap," that is, thinking and analyzing the hell out of things before I get to doing them. Unfortunately, just because I am a fan of something doesn't mean it's the right way to go. Otherwise there would be a lot more Mt. Dew, bacon, people wearing superhero outfits, and babies.

Back to the question at hand: should we think things through beforehand? The answer is a definitely, but not. Let me explain. Most often when I think things through, I do so in order that I won't make a mistake in whatever action I choose to take. This is legitimate. That being said, because 97.65% of the time (exact statistic), the answer is not black-and-white obvious, and even if it is, the "thinking before acting" is just an excuse to come up with justification for choosing the wrong choice. Agreed? Agreed. Good then.

In my own life, (and I don't think I'm alone in this), the "thinking" process lands me in a place where I struggle with choosing how to act for an indefinite amount of time, leaving me doing nothing about the issue at hand. I wrote this line a while back, and have yet to formulate some poetry to surround it: "My inaction's action enacts the law of my heart." Again, let me explain. When we do not act, that, in and of itself, is an action. That's right, you heard me: Inaction is an action. And when we don't act, we are making a choice without the control of actually making a choice.

Many times, this seems like a very freeing experience: essentially I don't have to deal with the stress of making a choice because if I don't choose then the choice will be made for me. But in the end, this is everything but freeing, because I am thenceforth (heck yeah I used that word) bound to the choice my lack of choice choose. Make sense? Awesome.

Oh Potter, You Rotter

I have been prompted to write this because of the literal threat of a slow and painful death by a friend of mine. I was quite terrified. Almost as terrified as the time that basilisk attacked me at the urging of the memory of a dark lord who was contained in a diary.

Speaking of dark-lord-memory-induced-basilisk-attacks, I just finished the second book of the Harry Potter series: The Chamber of Secrets. You must understand: I am someone who all but swore to never read them, or in the very least decided to put every other book ever written in

front of Harry Potter on the "list of books to read." That's right, that includes Twilight and Joel Osteen's Become a Better You.

And yet, I took The Sorcerer's Stone with me to Summer Conference and then followed it up with The Chamber of Secrets, which I finished last night. I must say I have thoroughly enjoyed both of them. As a writer, I can appreciate the overall storyline, the epic and destiny-driven plot that does not overshadow the everyday experiences of Potter and his friends. The one bit of criticism I do have is that it is reminiscent of the TV show 24 in that there is a single major conflict each and every book. It may get repetitive. It hasn't yet, just the prospect of it is not great.

Other than that, I have highly enjoyed a thorough romp through Ms. Rowling's created world. I am not and have never been opposed to the concept of magic, wizards and witchcraft. At least, that was never my reason for not reading them...because it is fiction, after all. About 45% of the reason I never desired to read them was the fans. They tended to annoy me on a Twilight and Jonas Brothers level. Oh, yeah. The other 55% was that I had always disliked the prospect of witnessing the plight of an angsty teenager and his magical world. I wasn't wrong, per sé, but we'll just leave it at this: that which kept me away has drawn me in.