Cinemorphosis

Tag: books

  • If You Only Watch One Black Mirror episode, Let It Be “Joan Is Awful”

    If You Only Watch One Black Mirror episode, Let It Be “Joan Is Awful”

    If you only watch one episode of Black Mirror, let it be Joan Is Awful—especially if you have a low tolerance for tech-dystopian fever dreams involving eye-implants, social scores, or digital consciousness uploaded to bees. This one doesn’t take place in a dark tomorrow—it’s about the pathology of right now. It skewers the Curated Era we already live in, where selfhood has been gamified, privacy is casually torched, and we’re all trapped in the compulsion to turn our lives into content—often awful, but clickable content.

    Joan, the title character, is painfully ordinary: a mid-level tech worker trying to swap out one man (her manic ex) for another (her milquetoast fiancé) and coast into a life of retail therapy and artisanal beverages. Her existence—Instagrammable, calibrated, aggressively average—is exactly the kind of raw material the in-universe Netflix clone Streamberry is looking for. They turn her life into a show called “Joan Is Awful,” starring a CGI deepfake Salma Hayek version of Joan, who reenacts her life with heightened melodrama and algorithmically-optimized awfulness.

    This isn’t speculative fiction. It’s just fiction.
    Streamberry’s vision of a personalized show for everyone—one that amplifies your worst traits and pushes them out for mass consumption—is barely an exaggeration of what Instagram, TikTok, and YouTube are already doing. We’ve all become our own showrunners, stylists, and publicists. Every TikTok tantrum and curated dinner plate is an audition for relevance, and the platforms reward us for veering into the grotesque. The more unhinged you become, the more “engagement” you earn.

    “Joan Is Awful” works both as a laugh-out-loud satire and as a metaphysical gut-punch. It invites us to contemplate the slippery nature of selfhood under surveillance capitalism. At its core is the concept of “Fiction Level 1”: the dramatized version of Joan’s life generated by AI, crafted from data scraped from her phone, her apps, her browsing history. Joan doesn’t write the script. She doesn’t even get to protest. She’s just the original dataset—fodder for narrative extraction. Her real self is mined, exaggerated, and repackaged for mass appeal.

    Sound familiar?

    In the real world, we all star in our own low-budget version of “Joan Is Awful,” plastered across social media feeds. These platforms don’t need deepfakes. We willingly create them, editing ourselves into marketable parodies. We offer up a polished persona while our actual selves starve for air—authenticity traded for audience, spontaneity traded for algorithmic approval.

    You can enjoy “Joan Is Awful” as slick satire or you can unpack its metafictional mind games—it rewards both approaches. Either way, it’s easily one of Black Mirror’s top-tier episodes, alongside “Nosedive,” “Rachel, Jack and Ashley Too,” and “Smithereens.” It’s not science fiction. It’s just a very well-lit mirror.

  • Headphone Mode: How We Rewired Ourselves to Escape Reality

    Headphone Mode: How We Rewired Ourselves to Escape Reality

    In the summer of 2023, during a family odyssey through Las Vegas and the Grand Canyon — a trip defined by heat, dehydration, and regrettable buffet choices — I noticed my then-13-year-old daughter entering what I can only describe as her Headphone Phase.
    Once she slipped on her wireless headphones, she ceased to be a participant in family life and transformed into a sealed capsule of teenage autonomy.

    The headphones weren’t just streaming music — they were constructing a perimeter, a force field against the chaos of the outside world and the more treacherous chaos within.
    Wearing them allowed her to filter reality through a private soundtrack, to shrink the overwhelming noise of adolescence into something manageable and rhythmic.
    For those six months, she was rarely spotted without them, a small island of basslines and daydreams moving among us.

    By fifteen, she abandoned the habit. Now the headphones make rare appearances, the way childhood toys do after the magic has leaked out of them.
    But that long season of constant headphone use stuck with me — especially yesterday, when I slipped on my own new pair of Sony noise-canceling headphones for a nap.
    The experience was ridiculous: pure luxury, pure oblivion. I was catapulted into a faraway world of softness and distance, so relaxed I half-expected to wake up with a boarding pass to another galaxy.
    I understood at last how Headphone Mode could become addictive — not just helpful, but a crutch, or worse, a replacement for unmediated existence.

    This thought kept circling as I recently lost hours reading headphone reviews online.
    At first, I encountered the usual suspects — audiophiles earnestly parsing treble decay, bass extension, and soundstage geometry.
    But then I fell into a stranger subculture: headphone reviews written not as technical evaluations, but as love letters to support animals.
    Some reviewers described wearing their headphones all day, every day, as if they had permanently grafted the devices to their skulls, forming a new biological organ.
    These weren’t mere tech accessories anymore — they were portable cocoons.

    The reviews lavished obsessive praise on tactile details: the pillowy yield of the earcups, the tension of the headband, the specific heat footprint generated after six hours of wear.
    Weight, texture, elasticity — it read less like consumer advice and more like audition notes for adopting a service animal that hums quietly in your ear while you disappear from the world.

    It made me think of my old satin blanket from toddlerhood, a filthy, beloved scrap of fabric I once clung to so fiercely my father eventually hurled it out the car window during a drive past the Florida swamps.
    He didn’t consult me. He simply decided: enough.
    I wonder if some of these headphone obsessives are at the same crossroads — but with no father figure brave enough to wrest their adult security blanket away.
    They may have crossed a threshold where life without permanent auditory sedation has become not merely unpleasant, but unthinkable.

  • From Sunbathing to Suffering: Surviving Roland Beavers

    From Sunbathing to Suffering: Surviving Roland Beavers

    A poolside pestilence was Roland Beavers. He was the type of poolside companion that nightmares are made of. Imagine, if you will, a pudgy man in his early thirties with dishwasher-blond hair clinging lifelessly to a scalp that seemed perpetually annoyed at its presence. His physique was more doughy than daring, his chin seemingly having taken an early retirement. And yet, this fine specimen insisted on strutting around the pool in a pair of lava-red terry cloth trunks so undersized that they clung to his hips for dear life, revealing a set of stretchmarks that looked like they’d been painted on by a vengeful graffiti artist. Roland, of course, had an explanation ready for anyone who dared make eye contact long enough to hear it. Those stretch marks? Oh, they weren’t the result of his love affair with powdered donuts. They were the battle scars from his days as a world-class daredevil, hurling himself off the cliffs of Acapulco. You could practically hear the collective eye-roll from the pool regulars every time he regaled them with his tales of high-flying heroics. But Roland’s true calling wasn’t acrobatics; it was unsolicited public broadcasting. Armed with a crumpled newspaper, he’d park himself by the pool and provide live commentary on every “news bit” that caught his eye, apparently under the delusion that everyone within a 20-foot radius was breathlessly awaiting his next headline. His audience, meanwhile, mumbled curses under their breath, desperately wishing he’d take up a hobby that didn’t involve public speaking. Maybe knitting—somewhere indoors. Roland’s social cluelessness reached its peak when playful couples would toss a football or frisbee in the water. For Roland, this wasn’t a game he could just watch; it was an invitation. He’d leap into the pool with all the grace of a boulder, wading into their game like an uninvited ghost at a family reunion. The couples, now robbed of their carefree fun, would give him the kind of look reserved for people who talk during movies before stomping off in search of a Roland-free zone. 

    And heaven help the women trying to sunbathe in peace. Roland, ever the gentleman, took it upon himself to offer his “services” to any woman within spraying distance. Whether it was spritzing their backs with a pump bottle of water or offering to rub sunscreen on their shoulders, Roland never missed an opportunity to “help,” oblivious to the fact that his mere presence was enough to ruin their entire tanning experience.

    Of course, these endless days at the pool weren’t just for Roland’s entertainment; they were an extension of his bizarre domestic life. His mother, Nadine, a woman who looked like she could bench-press a Buick, frequently leaned over the balcony of their apartment—muu-muu billowing in the desert wind—barking orders at Roland to “slather on more sunscreen.” With her hair twisted into tight curls that looked like they might pop loose at any moment and neck veins throbbing like they were signaling an SOS, Nadine’s concern for her son was a constant, vocal presence. “Get inside and eat something, Roland! You’re wasting away!” she’d holler, seemingly unaware that Roland had about 40 extra pounds he could “waste away” without anyone noticing.

    You’d think with all this doting and nagging, Roland might be motivated to get a job, maybe contribute something to society—anything to give the rest of us a break. But alas, Roland and Nadine were comfortably cushioned by the settlement from a lawsuit stemming from Roland’s failed attempt at flight school in San Diego. Apparently, the other students in the dorm took one look at Roland’s face and decided it needed to be rearranged, leaving him with a fractured skull and a big fat check to sit around and bother the rest of us for the rest of his natural life.

    And so there he was—our unwanted poolside companion—who, thanks to his mother’s coddling and that lawsuit cash, was free to spend his days lounging in his ridiculous red trunks, delivering headlines no one asked for, and making our lives just a little more unbearable, one stretch mark at a time.

  • Cork Dorks and the Road to Nowhere

    Cork Dorks and the Road to Nowhere

    In the mid-1980s, I funded my so-called college education as an English major by slinging bottles at Jackson’s Wine & Spirits in Berkeley, strategically nestled near the ritzy Claremont Hotel on Ashby Avenue. The job itself was an exercise in absurdity, not because of the work, but because of my coworkers—an ensemble of walking encyclopedias who were grossly overqualified to stock shelves and ring up Chardonnay. We’re talking PhDs in linguistics, anthropology, chemistry, physics, philosophy, and musicology—each degree worth less than a tenured spot in a clown college, yet brandished like medals in an intellectual arms race. These were people who read Flaubert in the original French and practically spat on anyone who dared pick up an English translation. The mere thought of working for a corporation or any institution that might impose a dress code or, heaven forbid, expect them to “synergize” was beneath their dignity. Selling fine wines and imported beers became their ironic playground, a place where they could cultivate a sense of elitism thicker than the crust on a neglected wheel of Brie. Their unofficial motto? “Service with a smirk.”

    These intellectual peacocks, not particularly rich or buff, took immense pride in flexing the one muscle they deemed worthy: the brain. Their idea of a power pose wasn’t a bulging bicep but a razor-sharp quip delivered with surgical precision. For them, intellectual one-upmanship was the true path, with the mind as the muscle to be sculpted. Their version of bodybuilding legend Sergio Oliva’s “Myth Pose” was a finely tuned discussion about Adorno’s critique of culture or a multi-hour debate comparing two French Beaujolais, all sprinkled with quotes from Camus. They taught me that flexing didn’t require dumbbells; it just needed the right amount of pretension and a willingness to alienate everyone around you.

    During slow hours, we gathered near the cash registers like a cabal of cynical sages, dissecting the philosophical curiosities of Nietzsche, the overwrought bombast of Wagner, and the labyrinthine despair of Kafka. The job became less of an occupation and more of a sanctuary for delusional self-importance. I found myself believing that I was somehow smarter than most, despite the glaring fact that I was working in a retail wine store with zero career prospects. But who needed money when you could live on the heady fumes of intellectual superiority? The longer I marinated in that environment, the more I realized I was becoming gloriously, irreparably unemployable.

    While shuffling between dead-end teaching gigs at various colleges—where my enthusiasm quickly flatlined—I always found solace in returning to my wine snob cocoon. There, surrounded by these proud misfits who’d traded ambition for esoteric chatter, I could pretend that debating the nuances of Hegel was more fulfilling than climbing any traditional career ladder. Truth be told, I might’ve happily stagnated in that dead-end job forever if fate hadn’t intervened in the form of an administrator at Merritt College who inexplicably liked my teaching style. He pulled me aside one day and whispered that there was a full-time gig open at some desert outpost called Bakersfield. He and his colleagues were prepared to write me “sterling letters of recommendation” to ensure I got the job.

    “What’s Bakersfield like?” I asked, a vague unease bubbling up as memories of my family stopping there to gas up our station wagon drifted into my mind like a bad smell.

    “Don’t worry about that,” he replied, his tone thick with the kind of unearned confidence that only comes from never having to live in a place like Bakersfield. “Just move your butt down there and take things as they come.”

    And so, in the span of a few short months, I traded intellectual elitism for a one-way ticket to the middle of nowhere, chasing a full-time paycheck while my wine store days—and the delusions that came with them—slowly receded into the rearview mirror.

  • Beauty Without Performance: The Quiet Legacy of The Sundays

    Beauty Without Performance: The Quiet Legacy of The Sundays

    Harriet Wheeler and David Gavurin of The Sundays gave the world my favorite song of all time: “You’re Not the Only One I Know.”
    I didn’t just fall for that song — I tumbled headfirst into their entire body of work across three albums, each one a quiet masterclass in melancholy and grace. I saw them live twice, but the 1990 show at Slim’s in San Francisco left a scar on my heart that never quite healed. Somewhere between the ringing guitars and Harriet’s bittersweet voice, I understood something about beauty that hurt — the way only true beauty can.
    I bought a Sundays T-shirt that night, and decades later, my teenage daughter wears it like a badge of honor as if carrying the torch for a band she never saw but somehow still feels.

    Wheeler and Gavurin, true to form, refused to play the roles we demanded of them.
    After making their brief, brilliant splash on the music scene, they disappeared — not in disgrace, but in quiet triumph.
    No messy social media fade-outs. No tragic reunion tours at casino amphitheaters. Just two people choosing domestic obscurity over the ceaseless meat grinder of public performance.
    Rumor has it Harriet became a schoolteacher. I hope that’s true. There’s something magnificent about the idea of her trading in the spotlight for a chalkboard, living in the kind of real, unperformed life that fame devours.

    Meanwhile, their fanbase — myself included — obsessed for years, combing through blogs and Reddit threads for any sign of a comeback that never arrived.
    But the more I think about it, the more I admire Wheeler and Gavurin’s refusal to extend the brand of themselves indefinitely.
    The same beauty that made their music shimmer with timeless sadness likely steered them away from the terminal exhibitionism that seems to consume so many artists.
    Their art wasn’t a ladder to fame — it was a lifeboat out of it.

    They should know this much:
    The same Sunday’s T-shirt I once wore to death now lives on, worn proudly by my daughter, proof that real magic — the kind you don’t sell, the kind you don’t explain — doesn’t need an encore.

  • Obscurity Without Shame: The Enduring Beauty of the Trash Can Sinatras’ “Obscurity Knocks”

    Obscurity Without Shame: The Enduring Beauty of the Trash Can Sinatras’ “Obscurity Knocks”

    It was 1990, and there I was — strutting down Hollywood Boulevard with my girlfriend, a walking cliché in a secondhand leather jacket, pretending to be too jaded for the tourists but secretly hoping to be discovered by a roving talent scout. We ducked into some grim little shrine to adolescent misery, shopping for Smiths T-shirts and anything else that might broadcast our manufactured melancholy.

    That’s when the store’s sound system offered up “Obscurity Knocks” by the Trash Can Sinatras — a song I was too full of myself to recognize as a direct warning shot.
    At the time, I was a preening, would-be screenwriter and novelist, drunk on my own imaginary press clippings, convinced that obscurity was a fate reserved for lesser mortals. I didn’t realize that the bright, bittersweet melody washing over those racks of ironic despair was, in fact, my personal horoscope: You, sir, will toil unseen. You will remain a hidden draft in life’s file cabinet. And — shocking plot twist — it will not kill you.

    Decades later, “Obscurity Knocks” still sits at the top of my all-time favorites list, not because it flatters ambition, but because it gently demolishes it.
    It’s a hymn to living for the work itself, to making peace with invisibility, to resisting the cheap, sugary high of external validation.

    It is one of those rare songs that manages to be both wistful and liberating at once — a graceful acceptance letter to a life lived outside the gravitational pull of fame. Far from being a bitter anthem of failure, it’s a clear-eyed celebration of choosing the harder, more honest road: living for one’s art rather than living off it.

    At first listen, the jangly guitars and breezy melody almost betray the lyrical gravity beneath. The music is light, but the words carry the weight of a reckoning. The narrator stands at the border between youthful ambition and mature resignation, surveying the life he has actually lived versus the life he once imagined. And yet, there is no rage, no tantrum, no grasping for lost relevance. Instead, there is something far healthier and more beautiful: an elegy without self-pity, a conscious decision to stay faithful to the things that matter.

    The song’s real bravery lies in its refusal to dress obscurity up as defeat. It suggests that real integrity means loving what you do even when the spotlight points elsewhere — when the record deals dry up, when the critics stop caring, when the audience forgets. In an era addicted to metrics — clicks, likes, views — “Obscurity Knocks” remains a defiant refusal to reduce one’s life to a scoreboard.

    Mortality hums quietly underneath the entire track. It’s not explicit, but it’s there, felt in the weariness behind certain lines, the subtle wear and tear of a life measured not by trophies but by quieter, richer achievements: loyalty to craft, private joy, the bittersweet pleasure of simply carrying on. It accepts the inevitable fading without collapsing into nihilism.

    There is longing, yes — the song aches with it — but it’s a clean, unsentimental kind of longing. It isn’t the longing for public adoration or manufactured relevance; it’s the deeper human longing to matter, to create something true before the clock runs out. In this way, “Obscurity Knocks” isn’t just about a music career. It’s about the universal experience of learning to live meaningfully in a world that will not give you a standing ovation for it.

    The Trash Can Sinatras don’t rage against the dying of the light; they tip their hats to it, shrug, and keep playing. And in that shrug, that beautifully unvarnished acceptance, they find a kind of glory that fame could never offer.

    Do the Trash Can Sinatras have a song more beautiful than “Obscurity Knocks”? Technically, yes — but only one, and finding it is like trying to locate the Holy Grail in a used CD bin. It’s a B-side called “My Mistake,” a painfully perfect little anthem about a young fool so drunk on love he trips over his own heart like it’s a barstool in a dark room.

    It’s a song that captures, with ridiculous precision, the exquisite humiliation of thinking you’re the protagonist in a grand romance when you’re actually just a blip on someone else’s radar — a mistake you won’t stop making until life has finished sanding the delusions off your bones.

    Postscript:

    After writing this post, I felt compelled to listen to “Obscurity Knocks” on YouTube and someone asked in the comment section: “Any other songs like this?” I answered: “Yes, ‘My Finest Hour’ by The Sundays.”

  • Velvet Fists: Sentimentality, Violence, and the Lie of the Crappy Love Song

    Velvet Fists: Sentimentality, Violence, and the Lie of the Crappy Love Song

    In the early ’90s, screenwriter Dennis Potter—whose haunting 1980 film Blade on a Feather once grabbed my imagination by the throat—sat across from Charlie Rose, passionately defending one of humanity’s most derided cultural artifacts: the “crappy love song.”

    Potter’s argument was simple and oddly noble:
    In a world where we grovel like pigs at the trough of materialism, even the cheesiest love ballad points, however clumsily, toward something higher—a yearning for transformative love, the kind that rattles the soul and redeems our miserable existence.
    And that, Potter insisted, should be celebrated, not sneered at.

    I see his point.
    But I can’t quite choke it down.

    What happens when the music is even crasser than life itself?
    Forgive the offense, but Kenny G springs to mind—a man whose saxophone emits what can only be described as the ambient soundtrack of lobotomized love.
    Millions swoon to his treacly squeals, convinced they’re tasting transcendence.
    But what they’re really swallowing is sentimentality in its most lethal form: syrupy, infantilizing, and vaguely unhinged.

    While I love Potter for wanting to defend the human need for transcendent emotion, I can’t ignore the underlying rot.
    These “crappy love songs,” much like Kenny G’s ambient anesthesia, often peddle not real love, but an emotionally stunted counterfeit—sentimentality, a soft mask stretched tight over something far uglier.

    Sentimentality terrifies me because it is not benign.
    It is childish emotion weaponized.
    It is the refusal to mature, to engage with the complicated ambiguities of real love, real pain, real life.
    And because these stunted feelings are defended with the ferocity of a cornered child, sentimentality often harbors its dark twin: violence.

    Saul Bellow, with his characteristic unsparing clarity in Herzog, nailed it:
    It’s the most sentimental people who are the most violent.

    Why?
    Because sentimentality is a velvet carpet stretched precariously over a tiger’s claw.
    It’s the illusion of sweetness clinging desperately to a subterranean rage—the rage of people who cannot tolerate having their fragile, maudlin dreams challenged.
    To question sentimentality is to trigger a defensive violence, a panicked fury at the idea that real adulthood demands something sterner, braver, and infinitely less sweet.

    So no, Dennis Potter, I can’t fully join you in your defense of the crappy love song.
    Because too often, beneath that soaring key change and saccharine lyric, I hear not the longing for transcendent love—
    but the faint, snarling growl of a soul that refuses to grow up.

  • Streamberry, Self-Loathing, and the Algorithmic Abyss: How “Joan Is Awful” Skewers the Curated Life

    Streamberry, Self-Loathing, and the Algorithmic Abyss: How “Joan Is Awful” Skewers the Curated Life

    In Black Mirror’s “Joan Is Awful,” Charlie Brooker offers more than a dystopian farce—he serves up a wickedly accurate satire of the curated lives we present online. It’s not just Joan who’s awful. It’s us. All of us who’ve filtered our flaws, outsourced our personalities to engagement metrics, and whittled ourselves down to algorithm-friendly avatars. The episode doesn’t critique Joan alone—it roasts the whole rotten architecture of social media curation and shows, with brutal clarity, how the pursuit of digital perfection transforms us into insufferable parodies of our former selves.

    First, let’s talk about performance. Joan, like any good social media user, lives her life as if auditioning for a role she already occupies—one shaped not by authenticity but by optics. She performs “relatable misery,” complete with awkward office banter, fake smiles, and passive-aggressive salad orders. Social media rewards this pantomime, demanding we be palatable, aspirational, and vaguely miserable all at once. The result? A version of ourselves designed to please an audience we secretly resent. Joan is what happens when your curated self becomes the dominant narrative—when branding overtakes being. Her AI-generated counterpart doesn’t misrepresent her; it distills her curated contradictions into a grotesque caricature that somehow feels… accurate.

    Second, there’s the fact that Joan—like all of us—is under constant surveillance. In Joan Is Awful, it’s not just the NSA snooping in the background—it’s the entire viewing public, binge-watching her daily descent into algorithm-approved degradation. This is what we’ve signed up for with every “I accept” click: to become content, voluntarily and irrevocably. Our data, behaviors, and digital crumbs are fed into the algorithmic sausage grinder, and what comes out is a grotesque mirror held to our worst instincts. The AI Joan is not a stranger; she’s the monster we’ve been molding through every performative tweet, selfie, and humblebrag. In a world where perception is currency, she’s our highest-valued coin.

    Then comes the psychological shrapnel: identity fragmentation. Joan can no longer tell where she ends and Streamberry’s Joan begins, just as many of us can’t quite remember who we were before the algorithm gave us feedback loops in the form of likes, retweets, and dopamine pings. This curated self isn’t just a mask—it becomes the default setting. The dissonance between public persona and private truth breeds an existential malaise. Joan’s real tragedy isn’t that her life is on TV—it’s that she’s lost the plot. She’s a passenger in her own narrative, outsourced to a system that rewards spectacle over substance.

    Let’s not forget the moral rot. Watching your AI double destroy your reputation while millions tune in might seem horrifying—until you remember we do this willingly. We doomscroll, rubberneck scandals, and serve our digital idols on platters made of hashtags. Joan, sitting slack-jawed in front of her TV, is no different from us—addicted to her own collapse. It’s not the horror of exposure that eats her alive; it’s the realization that her own worst self is exactly what the algorithm wanted. And that’s what it rewarded.

    Ultimately, Joan Is Awful is a break-up letter with social media—if your ex were a manipulative narcissist with access to all your personal data and a flair for psychological torture. Escaping the curated self, as Joan tries to do, is like fleeing an abusive relationship. You know it’s toxic, you know it’s killing you—but part of you still misses the attention. The episode doesn’t end with a triumphant reinvention; it ends with Joan in fast food purgatory, finally unplugged but still wrecked. Because once you’ve sold your soul to the algorithm, the buyback price is steep.

    So yes, Joan is awful. But only because she reflects what happens when we let the curated life take the wheel. In the Streamberry age, we aren’t living—we’re streaming ourselves into oblivion. And the worst part? We’re giving it five stars.

  • Kleptobite

    Kleptobite

    When I was six years old in 1968, I lived for a year with my grandparents in Belmont Shore. One day after school, a distraught neighbor, a 79-year-old widow named Mrs. Davis, said she locked herself out of her house. Could she borrow me to climb through her bedroom window and unlock the front door for her? With my grandmother’s approval, I did just that. I pretended to be a cat burglar, slithered through the ajar window, and walked through her house. With great curiosity, I examined the interior of the living room.  The floor was covered with a plush, floral-patterned rug. The centerpiece of the room was a large, floral-patterned couch. It was flanked by two wingback chairs, upholstered in a velvety red fabric. Each chair had a lace doily draped over the backrest. A coffee table with spindly legs sat in front of the couch, its surface crowded with an assortment of knickknacks: a porcelain figurine of a ballerina, a small crystal bowl filled with wrapped candies, and a couple of framed photos. The walls were adorned with family portraits, framed cross-stitch samplers, and a large, oval mirror with a gold frame. A grandfather clock ticked methodically in the background, its pendulum swinging with a steady rhythm that made me feel lost in time. Something came over me. Being alone, I felt possessed with a transgressive spirit, and I lifted the candy jar’s lid and, even though I disdained hard candy, I stuffed a butterscotch candy in my pocket before opening the front door for Mrs. Davis. I felt guilty for my act of theft because Mrs. Davis proclaimed me to be her newly-minted hero and handed me a crisp one-dollar bill, which I would later spend on Baby Ruth and Almond Joy Bars. I had difficulty sleeping that night. I worried that Mrs. Davis might feel inclined to take inventory of her candies and discover that one was missing, prompting her to demote me from hero to villain. My career as a thief had come to a quick end. On the other hand, I had a glimpse of what it was like to be a superhero entering houses and saving people in distress. I convinced myself that my career as Superman was just beginning. 

    My act of thievery points us to the lexicon term: Kleptobite–the act of stealing a food item not for its flavor or nutritional value, but purely for the electric thrill of transgression. A Kleptobite is less about appetite and more about theater—the petty larceny of a Werther’s Original lifted like a crown jewel, the pilfered peppermint filched under the nose of a trusting septuagenarian, not for the tongue, but for the adrenaline. Often committed in plush-carpeted living rooms with doilies and ticking clocks, this culinary crime wave is fueled by a cocktail of boredom, childhood hubris, and vague superhero delusions. Side effects include guilt-induced insomnia, paranoia about candy audits, and overcompensating acts of heroism.

  • The Cake and the Crumbs: A Toddler’s Origin Story of Maximalust

    The Cake and the Crumbs: A Toddler’s Origin Story of Maximalust

    I was a bright-eyed two-year-old growing up in the surreal surroundings of VA housing in Gainesville, Florida. My home, a repurposed army barracks known as Flavet Villages, was nestled near an alligator swamp where the air was thick with the smell of low-tide alligator dung, a stench so potent it could knock out a grown man. Yet, amidst this pungent atmosphere lay an enchanting routine: visiting a Mynah bird perched on the same tree branch in a nearby forest. This mystical bird, almost a local deity, engaged in nightly conversations with my father and me, its wisecracking voice echoing in the twilight. On my second birthday, my father, ever the hero, carried me on his shoulders for our evening visit to the Mynah bird. As we journeyed through the swampy landscape, the scent of celebration wafted from our small apartment, where my mother was busily preparing birthday decorations. In the distance, the melancholic tune of “Bali Ha’i” drifted from a neighbor’s radio, adding a cinematic touch to our adventure. We returned home, greeted by the excitement of neighbors and the promise of birthday cake. The neighbor’s child, a frail wisp of a boy who looked like he might be blown away by the next strong gust of wind, sat in his high chair, a throne of pity contrasting starkly with my robust presence. I, the towering giant of toddlers, was presented with a slice of cake so large it could double as a life raft. The cake, an Everest of chocolate decadence, was all mine to conquer. Then, I glanced at the poor child beside me. His mother, apparently convinced he was a baby bird rather than a human toddler, meticulously pinched off cake crumbs and fed them to him out of the palm of her hand. Each crumb, delivered with the precision of a jeweler setting a diamond, highlighted the stark disparity between my cake feast and his crumb diet. My eyes widened in disbelief. Was this real? Was I witnessing a Dickensian nightmare unfold at my birthday party? My horror magnified as I chewed through my colossal slice of cake, each bite a triumphant celebration of my toddlerhood. Meanwhile, the other child nibbled at his crumbs, a tragic figure resigned to his fate. In my young mind, the situation escalated to epic proportions. I envisioned myself as a benevolent king, feasting on a banquet, while the other boy was a destitute peasant, scrabbling for scraps in my opulent court. That moment, seared into my memory, became a symbol of the great injustices of the world. How could a child, on my birthday no less, be subjected to such cruel cake inequity? The image of his mother, delicately inserting crumbs into his mouth, haunted me like a ghost of birthdays past. It was as if I had witnessed the greatest travesty of my young life, a Shakespearean tragedy played out in frosting and crumbs. Years have passed, and many birthdays have came and went, but the memory remains vivid. I have tasted many cakes since then, each one a reminder of that fateful day when I first encountered true pity. In my exaggerated recollection, the event has grown more fantastical. The crumbs have became smaller, my cake slice grander, and the emotional weight of that moment ever heavier. So here I stand, a veteran of countless birthday celebrations, carrying with me the bittersweet lesson that not all cake experiences are created equal. And perhaps, in my heart of hearts, I’ve learned to savor every slice of cake with the gratitude of one who knows that somewhere, someone might be living on crumbs.

    The deeply embedded, early-life memory resulted in the belief that more food is always better—more validating, more righteous, more deserved. Born in toddlerhood and fed by birthday cakes the size of rafts, Maximalust is not just a craving—it’s a worldview. It equates abundance with virtue and scarcity with shame. It’s the toddler id that sees a normal portion and thinks, “Who hurt you?” It’s the pathology that makes buffets feel like moral high ground and crumbs like moral failure. Maximalust is the primal belief that to be loved is to be laden with frosting.

    In addition to Maximalust, I discovered the notion of Crumbpassion–the emotional dissonance that arises when your plate is Mount Olympus and theirs is a cautionary tale. It is not kindness—it’s existential discomfort wrapped in frosting empathy. The crumb-fed child becomes a Dickensian ghost, a living allegory of restraint, and you, the overfed protagonist, must reckon with the unfairness of cake distribution and your own frosting-fueled privilege.

    Together, Maximalust and Crumbpassion form a tragicomic framework of early appetite mythology—a toddler’s origin story of food, power, and pity that lives rent-free in your adult relationship with dessert.