|
|
|
|
|
|
| smokey: "only you..." | 02.23.2004 | |
|||
|
|||||
 recently, california was ignited into quite a mess of flames. wildfires ravaged through the mountains and valleys surrounding los angeles county. as houses in the ultra-dry, “just asking for it” brush-yard areas became endangered, the fast-thinking men of kindling, california offered up their women and children first while they bravely stayed behind to try to conjure up some course of action against the advancing flames. where, you may ask, was the famed “smokey: the bear” during this connecticut-sized inferno? on the third stop of his european tour where he was opening up for mcgruff the crime dog. man, the figurehead can’t leave us alone for one minute, can he? but, could smokey, armed (as always) with a shovel (?), have actually prevented the wildfires had he been stateside? possibly, pending the following: 1. smokey is actually a bear. a popular purple-hazed dispute pits smokey the bear against smokey-the-man-dressed-as-a-bear. obviously, bears would have a strong, vested interest in their forests not being towering, hellish conflagrations. however, a man in a bear suit—working nine to five—with a wife and four small children to provide and care for... yeah, you do the math. 2. smokey is not an all-out activist. similarly, smokey’s responsibilities aren’t conducive to a time clock. you can’t be “on” or “off” duty. preventing forest fires isn’t just another gold star to attach to a decorated portfolio of activism or well-intentionism. granted, whether or not smokey is a vegan is of little relevance. whether he is a feminist, a humanist, environmentalist, and/or an anarchist is of little consequence. and, although i’m sure smokey wouldn’t discriminate against the equality of people of different religious or sexual preferences... there are two things called “the time” and “the place.” prevent the fires... set aside saving the world. 3. in the event of a forest fire, that shovel transforms into something useful. 4. smokey has some sort of vague qualifications. ok, you’re one of those crazy directors of parks and recreation for national parks. you stumble upon smokey... an eloquent, outspoken, photogenic bear that just has “a way with children.” at the same time, you have a rash of careless forest fires being lit from california... to the new york island. from the redwood forests... to the gulf stream waters. now this... is a bear trap made for you and me. under these circumstances, it’s understandable that a person in authority would jump the gun, but honestly, a bear... forest ranger... on the speaking circuit?? i guess... dalmatians do work for the fire department. and big, scary dogs do work with narcotics officers. lets just hope that smokey—if not actually a forest ranger—has some sort of suitable training. even if not to the webelos tier, at least cub scout level. however... earlier this month, i attempted to contact smokey’s publicist, which is on file as being an agent at the william morris agency. my phone calls weren’t returned. so, i decided to dig—the proverbial dirt—a little deeper. two things of note turned up: one, smokey was never represented by the william morris agency. hmm. interesting. and, upon further review... it appears that smokey’s real agent actually holds office at philip morris, inc. which, needless to say, is a far cry from legit representation. also, two, the name that smokey lists from william morris, d.j. tanner, isn’t even a working agent. nor, is it even a real person. d.j. tanner, a character played by candace cameron on television’s full house, may very well have grown up to be an agent (lord knows the doors she’s opened on her own career). and, ms. tanner may also be a smoker. but she is not listed as an agent on either industry’s dossier. these developments are intriguing, no? and we all thought that the extent of smokey’s dark side was simply being the bi-racial cub of a brown bear and a black bear. all in all, it now appears apparent that these new findings have punctuated smokey’s storied existence with quite a few question marks. but, the question still stands as to whether smokey could have prevented the california forest fires of late 2003. smokey the bear is, by nature, an animal. and thus, targeted at children. why? because everyone knows that when adults need to talk to children about something serious... they usually rely on some sort of animal or mascot or something to do it for them. inherently, children place a higher esteem to the wise words of animals than adults during their rebellious, pubic-fur-growing years. so what better than a bear that qualifies not only as an animal, but a big-ass, scary, james-earl-jones-voiced one at that! so, smokey “prevents” forest fires by scaring the shit out of kids (ages 8-14). who, obviously, are the leading instigators of state-sized forest fires. it's a good thing kids at this age are still impressionable... so that when they’re adults, hunting squirrels, and smoking marlboro lights in forest preserves that haven’t seen a drop of rain since 'full house' was anchoring t.g.i.f.—they’ll think of what “smokey” said before ashing at the base of a 300 foot tall sequoian dry-wick. “remember, smokey said only [we] can prevent forest fires!” plus, saying those things to children like “only you can prevent forest fires” or “don’t play with matches” have a sort of “in one ear”/“abstinence is fun” way of being chewed, swallowed, digested, excremented, and flushed. not to tread on smokey’s fertile ground, but things like “if you play with these goddamn matches one more time, your hands will smell like sulfur until you’re thirty” will work better. talk about a consequence even kids can understand. conclusion? contrary to rampant disbelief, smokey the bear cannot prevent forest fires. |
|||||
|
|||||
| 5:45 am | sui generis said this. | |
|||
|
|
|
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
 |
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
 |
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||