Local teen to start his own taxi service after giving same friend a ride for the fourth time this week.

Young Entrepreneur: Nilay Kulkarni

Donning the keys to his mother's Prius, local teen Nilay Kulkarni  has reportedly begun to capitalize off of his friend's’ lack of mobility.   The new cab driver described his disposition as “fortunate” saying “my mom even pays for gas and the people are normally on my way so it's a really efficient way to earn some quick cash.”   The young individual said the idea came to him while driving his co worker to work;  “I was driving my friend to work, as I've done twice a week for months now,  and I thought ‘Yeaaaaaaahhh, I run a taxi service,  let me start the meter for for you sir, would you like a cool beveraaaaage!’ and from there I thought that's not a terrible idea, if I'm gonna keep driving this guy around I might as well get paid for it.”  Describing his policies, Kulkarni stated that “the windows must stay rolled up and I pick all the music?”  After convincing his skeptical mother, he has also decided to paint the car yellow to give it a more authentic look.   

When asked if he believed his new business may affect his friendship with his patrons negatively, Kulkarni told us “I don't see why it should, I mean if I'm gonna have to drive people around then they should at least pay me for the ride, I mean driving with me is cheaper than taking like an Uber, so they should be thanking me, actually, for not charging more.  Also, I mean, taxi drivers, I'm sure at some point in their careers they drive a friend or two somewhere, so why can't I?”

In American filmmaker Don Hertzfeldt's recent independent film, World of Tomorrow, he analyses analyses mortality, memory and a plethora of other heavy topics in a conversation between a young girl and her third generation clone from far into the future.  Hertzfeldt includes this monologue about Emily’s past (from clone Emily):

“My first job was supervising robots on the moon.  I enjoyed working with them.  I enjoyed the solitude.   The robots are solar powered and must always be kept on the light side of the moon’s surface.  To motivate them to constantly move within the drifting sunlight i programmed them to fear death and what lies on the dark side of the moon.  It was here, on the moon, that i fell in love with a rock.  I did not understand my mental and emotional shortcomings at the time and only knew that i found this rock to be immensely attractive- it was sparkly.  The economy on the lunar surface went through a recession and i was sent home after six cycles- my rock and i were separated.  But the robots were too expensive to move.  To this day they are still in perpetual movement across the sunlight.  With no work to do, no more tasks to accomplish, still living in constant fear of death and occasionally sending us depressed poetry.”

Emily supervising her robots

The narrative about the painfully self-aware robots can be analysed in the same way as David Foster Wallace analyzes the moral standstills involved in cooking lobster.  In the same way that Wallace contemplates the “totally subjective” pain felt by dying lobsters, the robot’s lucid awareness must be thought of.  For the sake of coherency we need to assume that the robots which Emily watches are (in the movie’s reality) as cognitive as Emily is herself- or rather the clone of a clone of the original Emily who narrates.  The lack of humanity- which is what makes a robot a robot- can only be described as homeostasis since it allows them to be removed from the turbulence of reality while maintaining their retreated sanity, or lack thereof.  Emily giving life to her robots is the comparative equal of the amature chef taking life from his lobster.  In both cases some essential part of some entity is ripped away from it for some capitalistic pursuit of comfort and ease.  Not only are they commoditized, but once they have served their purpose are digested or simply left to rot on the moon.  Emily admits to her “mental and emotional shortcomings”  which allowed her to so carelessly give life to things doomed to their “constant fear of death and occasional… depressed poetry.”  Regardless, of her infatuation with her  sparkly rock (which obviously represents the allures of wealth), she dooms her robots to their bleak melancholy which is “just complex”

Emily offers conflicting argument against this viewpoint by claiming that “Now is the envy of all the dead,” and that she herself is “very proud of [her] sadness,  because it means [she] is more alive.”  Emily doesn’t intend to glorify sadness, but rather insinuates that feeling sad is, in her mind, better than to face the mundane reality of her existence emotionless.  With just this in mind it is easy to justify bringing life to anything- unfortunately the moral implications and strict subjectiveness of the matter create some incomprehensible quagmire and muddle our perceptions and cloud our minds with guilt for choosing comfort over the life of some pathetic crustacean.

The piece, “The Company Man” by Ellen Goodman would have been an enjoyable and thought provoking read on Monday if it wasn't for the crushing self doubt and hasty analysis that accompanied its forty minute essay.  Goodman’s style was almost strictly ironic and matched her sardonic attitude towards the “Company Man” way of life.  

Goodman bases the event of the passage around the cliche of someone working himself to death.  By extending this cliche she creates a satirical fiction in which “Phil’s” heart attack is a testament of his hard work and dedication (to “the company”) to his boss.  Goodman’s description of Goodman as a “heart attack natural” is ironic as it implies that 1) a heart attack is natural and 2) that someone can be gifted (virtuosic) at heart attacks.  The irony is almost insulting to Phil’s recent death and brings up questions about the significance of Phil if his life, or not life, can be made light by some witty one-liner.  

Goodman uses the “boss” archetype in her portrayal of the company president who is shockingly similar to…... Mr. Krabs ( Mr. Krabs Example 1 ) ( Mr. Krabs Example 2 ). The president’s immediate search for Phil’s replacement adds to the surreal nature of Phil’s physical death by shifting the focus from what seemingly should be Phil’s broken life, to the company’s void position.  

The explicit irony undercuts the severity of Phil’s death and shifts the focus of the passage to  the reader’s own perception of “The Company Man”.  Whether we, the stressed out English kids, are supposed to empathize with Phil’s plight, or pity him and pray we don’t end up in his shoes is completely subjective.

Wrestling with my Father by Brad Manning is an exploitative essay which analyzes Manning’s “physical relationship” with his father.  Manning explains through his essay how their relationship developed over time and managed to transcend its physical limitations.  To compare different medias, i found this advertisement by Chevrolet which embodied a lot of the elements of Manning’s piece.

The ad starts out with a father taking his reluctant son on a manly camping trip in their “high-strength steel for high-strength dependability” “new [2015]Chevy Silverado”.  Manning’s relationship with his father is comparable since they both strive for communication and recognition through some mutual ruggedness: this is shown as Manning’s arm wrestling, and Chevrolet’s camping trip.

Another important comparison is how the relationships in each media develop.  In Manning’s piece, he shows how as the two mature (physically and mentally) they are able to overcome the barriers in their relationship.  In the commercial the boy and his father learn find common ground in their shared experiences.  Although both pieces show development, they do it in very different ways.  The ad suggests that through their experiences they can transcend the adversities in their relationship, whereas  Manning’s piece suggests that the father son relationship is more complex and genuine and personal development and incite is necessary for their relationship to advance.

Both medias end with the father and the son transcending their “physical relationship” and being more emotionally inclined.  Manning’s piece shows this and explains his conflicting uncomfortableness with the change.  The ad, on the other hand, shows their relationship as ending perfectly;  the validity of this is questionable.