Driving behaviors mirrors social behaviors?

I work in Sandy Springs, which is now its own city annexed from Atlanta. It's essentially considered a fringe city as it sits on the border of Atlanta city lines with Interstate 285 acting as a very obvious line. More often than not, the intersection points of I-285 to I-75, 85 and GA-400 in North Atlanta area is the target of many commuters' ires, as it is apparently one of the worst traffics in the US.

I try to leave a bit early, just leaving 5 or 10 minutes later can make a difference of about half an hour sometimes. On a good day, I can make the commute back home, about 12 mi or so, in about 20-25 mins. At other times, especially on rush hour Fridays, just covering the 0.25 mi or so from where I work to get on to GA-400S can take close t0 half an hour.

What makes it so bad is not that there are that many cars on the road. I can cover the topic of whether one should drive or not in another post, but to put it simply, bad public transportation in Atlanta doesn't help as an alternative. I've driven in many other parts of the country, but I don't think I've seen bad drivers make the traffic this bad in other cities across the country. I mean, Atlanta (and perhaps Georgia drivers in general?) are terrible. Terrible awareness of the road, poor judgment on lane changes, not using the proper traffic etiquettes, etc. I could go on and on.

I myself am very surprised and should consider myself fortunate that I've not gotten into an accident so far considering how many close calls I've encountered. I learnt how to drive in the suburbs of greater Chicago, but I didn't really drive in Atlanta during my college years (more so due to lack of a vehicle), but I started driving regularly when I moved to Western Massachusetts when I started working after graduation. Perhaps it was because of that, the 'MAsshole' got into me as I had to learn how to change lanes properly among aggressive drivers. That meant actually having to use my turning lights in advance (and even then, drivers will close the gap just so that you won't get to change lanes) and timing your lane change so as to not make those behind you slow down unnecessarily and such. It became even more crucial when it was snowing and the roads were slippery, having to leave enough gap in between cars in case your car slid on the snow and taking precautions to clear the snow off your car so that solidified ice chunks won't fall off or worse, fly off, into someone else's car. It was all the basic things you learn, it's not just your safety, but also those around you as well.

I'm sure I'm overgeneralizing some of the stuff I see around in Atlanta, but it's alarming (and honestly amusing at times) how other drivers seemingly think they can get away with ridiculous moves on the road. My biggest pet peeve on the road is someone coming in front of you without any notice. The point of turning lights is to notify the drivers around you that you are trying to change lanes. Preferably you should give them as much time, 2-3 seconds is good enough, but as I said, longer the better. What I see on almost all occasions is the driver changing lanes as soon as the turning lights are on as an after the fact indication. This doesn't give enough time for me to react and in turn, forces me to brake suddenly, which is obviously dangerous for me and the car behind me. If the said driver had given me enough warning, I may gradually slow down and leave enough space so that the said driver can change without much problem. If there are solid divider lines, it means don't change lanes. If I sense you trying to change lanes (and especially without turning lights), I'll intentionally close the gap so that drivers won't get to change lanes.

This brings me to the next issue in that drivers here tend to wait until really late to change lanes or to slow down to make an exit and such. Exits are marked clearly way earlier in advance, so it's not like drivers don't know when the exits are coming up. My general rule is to change into the exit lane about a mile before the exit. Or in the case of toll roads, there's ample signs that indicate that a toll booth is coming up and that the leftmost lanes are for those with wireless passes. What should otherwise be a smooth sailing drive on the leftmost lanes ends up being congested because drivers wait until the last 0.2 or even 0.1 mile to change into the cash toll booth lanes and holding the wireless pass drivers off.

Let me go off into the social context of these behaviors. Many a times, drivers' excuses will be that of 'Well, I don't have time to wait sitting in traffic' or 'I've got more important things to do.' Oh the audacity of that! How does one know if their time is more important or valuable than those who are patiently observing the rules of the road? It's not like you know who everyone else is on the road. To assume that your needs are above everyone else just is absurd. The worse ones are those that assumes that just because they drive a 'better' car (be it brand, type, etc) that others must acquiesce to their behavior. How does one assume that just because one affords to drive a sports car or a Benz, that others somehow can't? Other could very well do the same, but chooses not to for various reasons which are not important. It's essentially saying that because you chose to make decisions that are different from the decisions I've made, I've determined that you are lesser because your decision is poor or some other shit like that. Personally, I can afford a Benz or BMW if I want, but I see it as a sunk investment, the depreciation of the vehicle being higher than the utility value I place on driving and frankly I don't care so much about the driving experience, hence, I choose to drive a relatively cheap vehicle, but that's just me. Everyone has their own reasons and needs, but one should never assume that their needs and their decisions are above everyone elses. Some drivers are so selfish that they can't even sit in traffic for 5 more extra minutes? How much real difference can one really make in that 5 minutes or so?

This behavior is interesting precisely because these social behaviors are often reflected in person and not just in driving situations. I can't quite place if it's the X, Y or Millenia generation concept where individual values are placed above others and that it doesn't matter if others have to pay to benefit your decisions. If there are two lanes heading to an exit lane, the patient and obedient drivers will be in the exit lane long before, the supposedly 'superior' drivers will try to circumvent that by zipping past on the other lane and hoping to catch a gap to change lanes much later than sit in traffic. If there is a gap that one can legitimately turn into without causing inconvenience to other drivers, that's perfectly fine if you want to hedge on your chances. However, anyone can tell if that's a genuine possibility by just looking ahead to the road to determine how congested that lane is. If it's congested, chances are tougher and more than likely you're going to have to slow down somewhere to change lanes, holding those that are already on exit lanes to wait longer and possibly making the cars behind you to potentially slow down. It really irks me when cars literally come to a stop because they couldn't change lanes when they wanted to and holds the lane hostage. Worst is when in turning lanes the driver assumes that the lane will move along so that they can be accommodated when trying to beat a red light and ends up sitting in the traffic box or the driver gets to the very end and tries to sneak in to the ramp at the very last chance using whatever extra little space there is.

I apologize, I really needed to vent about this for a while and since I felt like blogging, this seemed like a good topic as I sat waiting to get on the highway.

Dumbing everything down

My last post ended up being an incoherent rant of sorts after starting out with some legitimate topics I wanted to address... Hopefully this one is more concrete.

I stopped listening to Top 40 stuff or 'mainstream' music when I got into college, thanks largely to the soundtrack to the movie 'Garden State' (that got me started into a whole new world of musical experience for me... so thanks, Zach Braff). I am however, not completely ignorant of what is going on, just because you can never quite escape the really popular tracks being played outdoors at festivals or fairs, at the bar and at parties, and many a times, being played on TV or the cinema. Now, I could go on and on about how generic music sounds these few years thanks to mass commercialization of the music industry, but let's leave that for next time.

However, I was dismayed recently, when talking with a colleague about a particular piece of song that's been making the rounds recently. The song in question is 'Look at Me Now' by Chris Brown, Busta Rhymes and Lil Wayne. As I said, I stopped listening to mainstream stuff, but some of these music are brought to my attention in various forms as explained above. What really struck me about this song was why people like this song. (OK, I'll admit, I've always enjoyed Busta Rhymes rapping really fast.) For someone like Chris Brown, the man who has been popular for a while, who brought hits (literally) such as 'Forever', 'Kiss Kiss', 'Run It!' and others, this song would be appropriate if this was his breakout song and a shout out to those who doubted his talent or never really gave him props. But he's been around for a while now, so what is he trying to say? Does he really need to reiterate the fact that now he's famous, rich and can be obnoxious about it?

Being obnoxious in hip hop is nothing new, so I won't pin the blame on Chris Brown. I'm sure I'm not the only one who came to that conclusion, so my question is, why do we as listeners or consumers, buy into songs like this that only propels him to feel entitled to be obnoxious? It's almost as if one's paying him to talk down to you (I don't judge if that's your thing), but when I raised this question, I was met with a hesitant admission of the situation, but ultimately dismissing the question because at the end of the day, it's a good song and they liked it.

The question about whether the song is good or not can be debated. The bigger question is that people recognize that they can like something that they fundamentally disagree with or even acknowledge the poor taste. I'm sure many others have met those that seemingly acknowledge watching their 'guilty pleasure' in watching trashy reality TV shows or liking trash music. Shouldn't everyone be alarmed that we're consciously lowering standards to meet some sort of a requirement or need to fulfill needs? When did we stop demanding artists to break new creative boundaries, push the limit of artistic achievement, seek various art forms that will cater to our enjoyment?

I myself have been guilty of this, though it was almost 10 years ago. My excuse is that I did not know to judge a quality of music, TV or film in a critical manner back then, but the point is, I have since learnt to do so (and still continuing), so I was able to recognize on my own. It's part of the experience to go through that, recognize what you went through and learn from it. When you're young, you can be excused since you don't know any better. The difference is, everyone grows, so that's another phase everyone should get past. It seems many have not completely grown out of that phase where music, TV shows, movies and even books are just shoved down our throats to be enjoyed.

Once I figured out that every form of entertainment I was seeking was rudimentary at best and pandering to those who lacks proper understanding of these art forms to meaningfully appreciate, I took a completely different approach to everything. I started paying more attention to lyrics - are they just reading out meaningless drivel or expressing something? Are the TV shows showing any generic setting or cross examining a particular topic? Are the books I'm reading just entertaining or is it expressing some idea that will stick with me?

My somewhat vague rule since then has been the question of longevity. Will the piece of music I'm listening to express something that still can be appreciated 5-10 years from now? Will the movie I watch stick with me down the years, instead of becoming irrelevant over time, will the books I read give me new perspective I'll internalize instead of being named Bestseller and being forgotten few years down the line? If it's not going to give any benefits like that, is it worth my time to 'consume' these forms?

I'll admit, I never learnt to play any instruments (though if I could, I'd love to play the drums), I don't claim to write well, considering English is the 3rd language I picked up. (Though I'm pretty proud of the fact that I got from not being able to converse in English at all to reading a 300+ page novel in about 3 years or so), I may sound like a pro in all these things, but I'm just an amateur appreciator of sorts, so I'm not in a position to be able to judge critically, but there are very basic things anyone can notice in inherent lack of quality or point to many things we 'consume.'

Acknowledging that something is bad, but yet enjoying it should be alarming to everyone. There are folks that are becoming 'artists' because of this and seriously undermining the true artists and creatives. It really doesn't say much about movies like 'Transformers' and such doing so well and being positively received by those who can't objectively and critically analyze what a movie should be. (Note: I maintain that a movie can be enjoyable while not compromising artistic integrity) I've heard some ridiculous excuses as to why some don't appreciate foreign movies, one of the best ones being that they don't want to read when enjoying a movie. When did reading become such a chore to do? Is it really hard to pay attention to what is going on in the movie and glance at the words below?

There's nothing wrong with enjoying these art forms to satisfy a short term need. The question becomes if it's something of worthy quality instead of a low level form that caters to the instincts.

All these talk often are received as being elitist or too demanding for everyone and that may or may not be true. I've also often heard complaints such as how one can't approach every art forms critically and that entertainment is not supposed to be taken so seriously. I do agree with all that, but since when did being entertained mean completely letting go of any standards and allowing yourself to be receptive to anything, be it good or bad? Why is 'thinking' regarded in such a negative light? What is the source of such attitude towards anti intellectualism?

I've said enough for the night, perhaps answering those will be for future posts...