P.R.A.X.I.S. INDUSTRIES Launches Campaign
"Frieght Train Campaign" To Set Tone for Future

"Super Size Me" is Critical Hit and Message
Dispite attacks by Multi-nationals and Critical Thinkers

Reagan Mourning widespread
But many trying to ensure crimes not forgotten

"THAT DAMN DON!" GALA SCREENING SUCCESS
praxfilms works hard for official release

Canadians to go to voter booths
difficult election choices resound as enemy
regroup in force

Thursday June 26th 2003
    -My place of work (Nona MacDonald Visitors Centre) was closed early
yesterday so that the Premier of Ontario, Ernie Eves, could hold a press
conference on education. Now, there are several things to mention. First, there
were so many police, guys in suits, people making a fake setting etc, its amazing
how much tax payer dollars are wasted on a small press conference
to say our education is going well.

Also, to enter the building at one entrance I passed 10 cops
(UofT, Metro and OPP) and no one stopped me (I wasn't even
wearing a tour guide uniform).

Now here's the thing that ticked me off the most. Now I didn't stay
around (I got the afternoon off and went to see City of God (2002))
but what I found out about (other than seeing protesters on their way)
the conference was that the media didn't even care about the education
message, they were more concerned with the Environmental Minister's
comments on reducing smog by stop bbquing. BARBECUES AS THE
CAUSE OF SMOG???? AND Ernie even said he was doing his part
by ordering out from Swiss Chalet. Now I'm not even going to start
on the Coal Power plants and irresponsible industries polluting, but the
power required to run Swiss Chalet, get the food (or have it delivered) is
way more than a simple bbq. In fact, a bbq is better for the environment
because your outside, not using air conditioning, heating up a kitchen
etc.! These people scare me.

Friday June 13th 2003
    -the fight to save online music swapping is a battle that has not gone well.
     After Metallica betrayed the listeners out there by taking out Napster, and
     thus proving their love of money, online music
    fans have had to turn to other sites for the music.
 
    I do not accept the argument that swapping music makes the music have no
    value. There are many musicians out there who have embraced online technology. The record companies are afraid because The People are sick of paying soo much for a cd that has 2-3 good songs, and the rest is filler. And musicians still make a killing economically off of concert tickets. While some might
    say, "but what about movies - would you like it if people downloaded
    your movies off the net instead of paying to see them?" Although PI
    is not yet in a selling position, we here at PI know that even though
    online piracy is a problem, watching a movie on a computer screen
    will NEVER replace the theatre experience. And besides, the important
    thing is not how much profit a movie makes, its the experience that one
    takes out of it.

    Right now in the USA, Senator Orrin Hatch, a Republican representing
    Utah is trying to get a bill passed that would destroy an online "pirate's" computer
     if they downloaded music.These pictures seem to describe it so clearly.

Thursday April 24th 2003
      -AFTER almost an entire years hiatus we are back. So much has
happened over the past year. Most notably Space Shuttle Endeavor Explosion,
SARS, and most notable GULF WARS II: ATTACK ON IRAQ - and boy do
we have some pics for you!

To sum the war up quick:  Bush couldn't find Osama Bin Laden -
turned to good old enemy Saddam Hussein. Said Saddam Hussein
had weapons of MASS DESTRUCTION that threatened world peace.
The World, including Canadians, Americans and just about everyone
else said NO to war. Bush invades anyway. The mission into Iraq
then changes from Weapons of Mass Destruction to liberating the
Iraqi people and overthrowing Saddam. US, UK and Australia invade
Iraq. Can't find Saddam, that's ok, it wasn't an objective apparently.
Can't find Weapons of Mass Destruction, that's ok, apparently it
wasn't really an objective. Iraqi people liberated from Saddam -
go on week long looting spree, and tell US, thanks, but go home.

Lesson learned: MIGHT MAKES RIGHT.

A)B)

C)
D)E)

F)
G)H) 

A) Protests against the war. Thousands of people around the world rise up and say no to war
B) Chretien -  "The proof is the proof" - Canada stays out of the war
C)-F)  Images of 'precision' bombing in Iraq. Thousands of Iraqi's killed and injured. The military was hit as well.
G) Iraqi POW's
H) No one said Saddam was right. Evidence of his brutal dictatorship

-Pictures courtesy of BBC News and Eye Magazine
   

Sunday May 12th 2002
            -Saturday May 11th was one of the best days of my life. The day began with
tours with lots of questions and me with lots of answers. Then, I went scavenging
through rez as many students discard useful items, and came across a perfectly useful
umbrella, better than my own. I then spent most of the day doing a well needed cleaning
of my room. At the end of the day LJ and I then went to the movies. There at the movies
we saw several Star Wars fans, dressed as various characters. There was two girls giving
out Star Wars prizes, and LJ convinced me to try to win. I stood there and in a few
moments, I answered the questions "what is the name of the creature that attacked Luke
Skywalker on the planet Hoth?", I calmly answering amongst calls of "that hairy thing with the arms!",
"Wampa" and then I had in my hands the grand prize of two free passes to the Star Wars Premier.
Sweet. Yes I know, there's no ideological significance, but now I can say those hours and hours
of Star Wars have finally paid off. MTFBWY.

These are the passes back and front. My Pride and Joy.

Monday April 1st 2002
          -On Friday March 30th after suicide bombers attack various places, Israel declares that Yasser Arafat is an enemy of the state, storming his compound, opening fire on Palestinians, and rounding up and arresting many. The Palestinians blame the Jews, and the Jews blame the Palestinians. Both say the land is theirs, and both will continue to fight to the end. Many of the Palestinian suicide bombers sacrifice their lives because they have nothing to lose, and Israelis will continue to use harsh methods to try to 'pacify' their enemies. Its a cycle of hate. Palestinians must fight or face destruction, Israelis must fight or face destruction. What that land represents is Homeland. That is what we here in North America have forgotten.
Neither Canada nor the US have ever had to defend their soil in over 100 years. We have lost what it is like to feel the passion for the land. These people in the Middle East will continue to fight because they have no choice. Both need breathing room. Peace is not an option.

Monday February 11th 2002
            -Saw briefly on an episode of Opra (yes Opra) where the topic was internet crime, in
which many pedophiles and other adults soliciting for sex with Children. However, this is
not the topic of today. What I did want to centre on was those sex offenders, or attempted
sex offenders suffered nearly no punishment. The most any of the deviants got in the way
was a punishment was a year in jail. Most were first time offenders, and therefore got reduced
sentences. This is social injustice. Similarly in my own account, the individual that attempted to
break into my room was not only released the same day he attempted to break in, but also was
protected by the University. And when the police were recently questioned about the crime,
their records came up empty on any such incident occurring. Time and time again, our legal
systems are failing. People are being given the message the crime does pay. Our system is
not rehabilitating individuals. Perhaps some, but not enough. In the Canadian legal system,
Judges hold a demi-god role, answering to no one. There are so many minor crimes committed
that they get pushed aside for 'important' ones, and even those  get pushed aside. This is the
nature of the system however. Corruption, within our authorities and within our fellow citizens
is the result of a collapsing political/economic order. Society is on the brink.

We must change, or we will succumb.

Wednesday February 6th 2002
 

Picture Courtesy of  "The Varsity"
 

            -NATIONAL DAY of ACTION!!!  February 6th represents a day of
student protests as many object to increased tuition rates. Protests here were led by
various groups on campus here at U of  T, including SAC, various student unions, CUPE
reps, and pissed off students. The rally was incredibly large (several hundred) when
I saw the protest. Unfortunately, due to time, then work, I merely was a spectator of the
events, as the rally went from Simcoe Hall (UofT's President & Gov. Council offices)
to Sidney Smith, a march to Queen's Park and the Ontario Legislature, and back to
UofT grounds. Hopefully student voices will be heard, as they have been with Queen's
University denial of unrestricted tuition hikes, and UofT's joining of CFS
(Canadian Federation of Students - left-wing student org.). Only time will tell if the
rally was successful in it goal, but it certainly was successful in its support.

            -Incidentally enough, while I was at work, I was touring a student from Brazil
around. I was forced to try and explain not only the protest itself, why it is needed,
and why the use of protest as a model, but also the political rappers leading the rally.
In a Rage Against the Machine-like fashion, the rally was led by a large truck carrying
loudspeakers, rap music, and a variety of vocal artists rapping for the cause.

       -Another quick story about the protest, my Russian History professor described
her lecture earlier today (not my class). She was teaching the 1917 Revolution in Russia,
talking about how women and students entered the factories and institutions trying to
encourage workers to revolt. At that very moment, protesters from the National Day of Action
came banging on the doors, trying to encourage students to protest. The irony!
 

Monday February 4th 2002

          -Apologies to loyal readers. Last thurs it was stated that on the Friday I would re-attend REFLECT , however, it was OVER. So I am unable to bring more details. I was then delayed with FIREBALL, which pics will come up soon here on the site as soon as they are developed.
 

Thursday January 30th 2002
    -Went to an art show this evening put on by students at my school. Designated as REFLECT, which was to promote social awareness in the University community against oppression. There was a variety of art forms, including spoken word, song, sculpture, written etc. Some were well done, while others lacked . . . perspective. For the most part the message was received, with the alliance of social ills and art, the medium of suffering was very much apparent. Tomorrow I will return to the show with a clearer idea of the art, and present some
of it here.

Monday January 28th 2002
    -PREMIER of newly revised X-LOGS!!! WELCOME
        -Two issues today came to my attention.
        1) A student at Vic College (one of many collages at UofT) had a
student robbed at gunpoint. Now already my residence has been broken into
twice (once in an attempt into my room!), there was the whole 9/11 deal in New York,
the War in Afghanistan. Is this the beginning of the end? I'm not saying we're going to
have an apocalypse now,  but this certainly something to watch out for

        2)Watched as teachers in BC went on strike today. Thoughts go back to the teacher strikes here in Ontario in '98 '99. What did that accomplish? Students got their education's screwed with. I think back to my first year of university where we had a TA strike in 2000, much like York's strike of 2001.What did they accomplish? Students got their educations screwed with. I read a poster which has the Union Rep for TA's on it (incidentally enough a prof who is willing to help me personally) states 'our working conditions is student's learning conditions'. Now I agree with this, and I do agree with fighting for what you want. But I'm still left with the thought that those that are willing to strike are not just affecting them. Its not like a workers strike in a car factory. When educators go on strike, its not the institution that suffers, its the students. They take other's futures and gamble with them. My question to you, the reader, is what is more important?

 ALL WE ARE ASKING, IS GIVE PEACE A CHANCE
 By Jeff Brown

I wanted to let it go, really I did. I don't need to have the last word, I can get by. But the problem I faced was not that someone re-butted my article, but that my message apparently didn't get across.

When I wrote an article a few weeks back, I was attempting to highlight the fact that people (in particular young people) express a great deal of anger and intolerance. I was trying to bring this social "road-rage" to an issue, maybe even help try and fix things. ‘Can't we all just get along?' might be naive or simplistic, but is it such a bad thought? I hope not.

Now I do agree with some of what Jason Rabin said last week. Words do change, and fluctuate and so do their meanings. The word geek a hundred years ago meant someone who bit off the head of chickens, and we sure don't think of that meaning when we call someone a geek today. The point I want to make again (hopefully clearer this time) is that we have to question over and over what we think and say.

People in my high school, like Mr Rabin's, used comments like "gay" "faggot" and "homo" just as I'm sure that they do in many schools all over the world. And for some, maybe the original meaning of the word has been lost on them. However, I doubt it, simply because people use those words because to many people being something other than heterosexual is something to be shameful of. Just ask a bunch of thirteen year olds (of 21 or 51 year olds or whoever) if homosexuality is "right" or "wrong" and I'm betting you won't get an answer that doesn't understand the meaning. I also know that many of them know this because they often said "all gay people should die" which I should have included in the original article. But lets say they don't know the meaning, does that make it right for them to say such a thing? I don't think so.

As I said in my article, homophobia was the most common occurrence I came upon, however racism, sexism and a number of other social attacks did occur. Another of Mr Rabin's points was the use of the word "gyp." Now granted many people don't know the origin of the word and many people today even spell it differently. What Mr Rabin says though is that he has never seen a Gypsy, and that they "don't really play much of a role in my culture."  This said, the meaning is lost so I can use the word. Does that mean it is still right to use the word? Is it no longer a racist term against Gypsy's if used? I agree that not everyone is going to know what words mean, or why exactly we say them, which is why I say we must question what we say and become educated about people everywhere, not necessarily in our backyards. I know we can't become completely politically correct and that we can go over board with PC. But what cultural groups are allowed to be ‘protected' with political correctness and which ones can't? ***

I am bringing my point to simplicity. Question what you think and what you say. People are always going to take to offense over something someone says; you cannot avoid it. That doesn't mean we can't be respectful in what we say. All to quickly we take offense to things because we often live in an offensive world. Once again going back to my article, I mentioned that two things struck me as not good. We've obviously dealt with the discrimination here, but my other point was how quickly people do get angry at trivial things. Lashing out at others, and they lashed out using discriminatory language. What is it that makes them so angry? Besides that, why do they have to take it out on others? Just because someone insults you, doesn't mean you have to insult back. I can admit, I'm not perfect (as many of you can guess) and I can succumb to my own pride. That doesn't mean I don't want to change, or that I can't. I just have to work at it, by thinking about what I say and why I say it.

I'm not angry or upset with Mr Rabin; in fact I applaud him for questioning me. For one he partly proved my point about misusing language. For another he showed me that my first article did not make my point come across as a whole. I know not everyone will agree with what I say. Some may not have a problem with racism, others with homophobia and they will be proud of that. Everyone is free to their own thoughts and opinions. Perhaps though, we don't necessarily have to tell someone else "I hate you" or put them down. Just because you get called a name, do you have to call one back, even if it is only the Internet? Again I agree, we are not always going to know the meanings of what we say, or who we are talking about or whatever. That doesn't mean we can't stop saying the ones we know to be wrong. Take a moment, calm down,  and ask yourself: what you are saying and thinking? Question, and think. If we all do that, maybe there won't be a need for a PC dictionary. Maybe we can all just give peace a chance. Maybe not.
 
 
 

The following text is not of my own writings, but relates to the precusor os P.R.A.X.I.S.isan thinking. Read this, question it, and apply it.
February 4th, 2001

PARADOX

The paradox of our time in history is that we have taller buildings, but
shorter tempers; wider freeways, but narrower viewpoints; we spend more,
but have less; we buy more, but enjoy it less. We have bigger houses and
smaller families; more conveniences, but less time. We have more degrees,
but less sense; more knowledge, but less judgment; more experts, but less
solutions; more medicine, but less wellness. We have multiplied our
possessions, but reduced our values. We talk too much, love too seldom,
and hate too often. We've learned how to make a living, but not a life;
we've added years to life, not life to years. We've been all the way to
the moon and back, but have trouble crossing the street to meet the new
neighbor. We've conquered outer space, but not inner space; we've cleaned up the
air, but polluted the soul; we've split the atom, but not our prejudice. We
have higher incomes, but lower morals; we've become long on quantity, but
short on quality. These are the times of tall men, and short character; steep
profits, and shallow relationships. These are the times of world peace,
but domestic warfare; more leisure, but less fun; more kinds of food, but
less nutrition. These are days of two incomes, but more divorce; of
fancier houses, but broken homes. It is a time when there is much in the
show window and nothing in the stockroom; a time when technology can bring
this letter to you, and a time when you can choose either to forward this
message and make a difference... or just hit delete.
Smile and the world will smile back....
 

  The article of Jan 6 2001, "Freedom of Expression of Intolerance" was rebutted in UC's Gargoyle newspaper.

        In last week's Gargoyle, Jeff Brown lamented the blatant intolerance he experienced while persuing a Napster chat room. He even went so far as to declare that "those that wil inherit this world after us carry not only dangerous ideologies, but a means to distribute them." Perhapse this is true, but how Mr Brown could have come to such a conclusion based on his observations on the Internet is beyond me. As someone who hads been around the net once or twice, I can at least corroborate his account. It is correct to say that the kind of behaviour he described is common. However, his conclusions in my opinion, are simplistic and naive.

    Let us speak for a moment about the "hate-filled" words that Mr Brown claimse he observed in a chat room. the only examples he seemed to provide were directly related to homosexuality. Words like "gay" and its less PC variants seemed to be the focus of his complaints. I can't speak for everyone of course, but I do know that in my high school "gay", "faggot" and "homo" were words commonly employed as generic insults. If you wished to tear down the self-esteem of your enemy, or simply to attack a social inferior in order to bolster your own position, then these words were inevitable part of your arsenal. What better way to prove your own strength and position than to demolish someone else's? Certainly this kind of behaviour origionally stemmed from homophobia. After all, if there weren't some socially created shame in being homosexual, there would be little purpose in implying that your enemy is one. However I would argue that in most cases, it has virtually nothing to do with hatred or prejudice against gay people. The negative feeling or sense of the word certainly remains, but the source of that feeling is mostly lost. Since no one really knows whose gay and who isn't (at least in my high school) the attack becomes more about social status and dominance than any feelings about gayness or homosexuals. In the high school example, even the most dull-witted clod of a bully knows deep down that the poor sod he's verbally abusing probably isn't really gay. This goes doubly for an Internet scenario where people can't even see one another, much less determine their sexual orientation. The language has lost its orrigional meaning and become empty and powerless; a fitting vessel for any number of ideas the user may wish to conjure for his purposes. Another example of this phenomenon is the word "gyp", as in to swindle or cheat. This was orrigionally a derogatory refrence to gypsies, implying of course that this group was prone to thievery. Does it carry such a meaning any longer? I think not. When the average Joe says "what a gyp"do you honestly believes he's saying it because he thinks Gypsies are theives? I don't know about you, but since I've never even seen a Gypy in my life, and since they don't really play much of a role in my culture, its hard to imagine gathering any strong emotions about them. If their image had any cultural significance, it seems to have decayed long ago.

    You're beginning to see I hope how words don't really have any set intristic meaning. Rather, they are dynamic and fluid, changing their substance over time. Words are sometimes schizophrenic. One man's joke or casual slang can be another's hateful insult. Take the deragatory term "nigger" for example. If a white person uses this term, thee is a reasonably high probability that he is at the very least insensitive, or at worst a flat-out racist. If on the other hand a black person employs it (and anyone who has seen a rap video knows what I am talking about) it becomes something entirely different. (I won't presume to understand exactly what it pertains to, but I doubt it's intended as an expression of self-hate) Without knowing who someone is, it is impossible to determine the true nature of that individual's beliefs.

    It was on the Internet that I learned that people say all sorts of things, sometimes even blatantly racist things, and are not necessarily hateful or prejudiced people. For example, while participating in an online message board, I happened to make an innocent comment about cancer. Someone on the board misinterpreted me as implying that his grandmother deserved her fate (she had cancer). After wishing me a slow and painful death from cancer, he then noted my Jewishness ( I don't hide my last name) and all but called me a Christ killer. Is this man an anti-Semite? I don't think so. His anger was almost certainly triggered by his anxiety over his grandmother's condition, and he lashed out at an available target. I'm sure he picked up the anti-Semetic views somewhere, but clearly since we are now on very good terms with each other, they couldn't have held that much sway. If he hated Jews, by definition he would have to hate me, and since I have determined he does not, it suggests that he is probably not really a Jew-hater. Of course there are so many variables involved, and the Internet is a bastion of anonymity and deception, so I could very well be wrong about him.

    But that I suppose is the point I would emphasize. You cannot come to definite conclusions based upon a few words. Words change and fluctuate wildly from culture to culture and era to era. One many's hateful venom is another's nursery rhyme; without detailed inspections and conversation it is difficult to know. Language is unreliable and unstable, much like the Internet, which is after all nothing but language pixelized on your computer screen. Better to rely upon experience and intuition than the PC dictionary. Perhaps Mr Brown should keep that in mind the next time he goes for a chat.
   
 * - Note - The changes in font colour are due to points PRAXIS Industries wishes the viewer to take note, and did not occur in the orrigional text. And spelling mistakes are accidental and do not reflect the author.  

Freedom of Expression or Intolerance?
 By Jeff Brown
Jan 6th 2001
 
 During a three week vacation this past holiday season, unproductive free time presented itself in great quantity. One of the greatest places that I found to waste such time was the Internet. So low and behold I found myself many a late night on Napster downloading my favourite music. Well I became bored staring at the blue bar inch its way across the screen on my aging dial-up connection when I decided to find someone to talk to. ICQ was dead with people on N/A or AWAY, so I decided to seek attention on Napster Chat. What I found was a strange world that seemed to be the opposite of my teachings here at UC.

 This chat room was filled with people around the world, mostly American and Canadian, the majority all being under the age of 17. Now why would I want to talk to people more than 3 or 4 years younger than me? Well I don't really but what I read was interesting. Now in the utopian world of the Internet, people from around our globally connected planet could discuss world issues, trade ideas, or just learn about one another. However, what I found was a world of intolerance, bigotry, and antagonistic youth. The animosity and, what I could hardly call ‘debates', ranged from racism, sectionalism, sexism, agism, anti-religious, anti-LGBTQ (Lesbian Gay Transsexual Bi Queer) and just unbridled hostility. The thing that unsettled me the most, was that these were children - preteens and teenyboppers. Those that will inherit this world after us carry not only dangerous ideologies, but a means to distribute them.

 Now don't get me wrong, I'm not attacking the Internet and its free speech, or Napster chat or anything. What surprised me to great lengths was this intolerance. The youth in chats like Napster and other programs are often little cowards who can become ‘brave' warriors with the privacy of the Internet - as they are simply words and made up names. This is their chance to attack others and be something they are not. Now wether they believe what they are saying or are just using bigoted rhetoric I do not know.  Either way it is simply frightening.

 All it took in the chat was for one person to spark anger and it was often over something small or trivial. The most frequent of insults I witnessed was that of homophobia. One person would ask "what's a cool song to download" and someone would say (eg Eminem). Another person would say that song sucks. Then it escalated to so-and-so is "gay". Then someone else would join in and within a few moments, every homophobic derogatory term had been used. The victim, to defend his or herself would then use the same comments back to their attackers. There are two major things wrong with this: 1) Its just a song, calm down - its not something to explode about. 2) That LGBTQ society is used so frequently in our society as insults and a base of hatred.

 I know we don't live in a perfect world - far from it. Progression is very slow and always has been, in any case (perhaps with the exception of technology in our age of computers). Sometimes it seems that when we have come so far, that we really haven't. Perhaps we think we live in a tolerant world where these things don't happen, or at least not anymore or not here. Some know this isn't true. I lived in ignorance for so long that such things as the afore mentioned negativities didn't happen to the scale which they actually do. My old high school's creed was "Pride, Respect and Responsibility" and here at UC it seemed that the same creed applied here. The campus culture strives for inclusion in this mutli-cultural/religious/sexual etc society and although there is still intolerance among individuals, maybe idealistically I would like to think that most of us at UC embrace pride, respect, responsiblity. Maybe I'm wrong. What I do know is that I watched as many students possessed a great deal of animosity and a great deal of hate-filled words to express themselves. Whether through education or inclusion or diversity or even re- examining what we think, our way of life needs to change. As we become more and more connected to the people around the world, we must give way to old beliefs, stereotypes, and bias. We attribute these to the older generations, our parents and grandparents, but it exists at all ages. For our culture and society to progress, inclusion and tolerance must be adopted. But if you can't or won't question your ways, do as mother always said: if you can't say anything nice, don't say anything at all.
 
 
 

 Walking into Reality: Its Not a Movie
 By Jeff Brown
Mon Dec 4th 2000
Approx.
 1:45   - Buy and eat an Italian sausage outside Robarts
 2:10   - Get laundry money to do laundry
 2:12   - Walk up Yonge Street. Police car has blocked traffic going North
 2:12   - Notice Cable Pulse 24 truck on sidewalk.
           -People taking photographs of man in black on top of roof.
           - Must be a movie
 2:13   -My street is blocked off by police tape and cruisers.
  2:14   - Realize something is not right here, but can't put finger on it
           - Police tell me to take a walk
 2:15   - Go for a walk on Yonge
 2:30   - Finished with my walk
            - Police have now completely blocked off Yonge, and Parts of Wellesley and          Gloucester
 2:35   - ERT officers in full combat gear head down Dundonald (my street)
 2:38   - Nothing happens
 2:45   - Police given the ok and start removing tape and traffic/life resumes
 2:50   - Enter my building to do laundry
 

 The city of Toronto presents many different things to a small town guy like me. The biggest thing, would be blurring of reality (of course we can all ask what is reality, but just go with me on this). You never know what is real and what is not. One such example is actually well recognized. Toronto is full of film productions, causing whole streets to be blocked off with pylons, white trucks and even the presence of the police. Representations of life, action drama can happen right before us. That guy with the gun is an actor, and the explosions are pyrotechnics created by technicians behind the camera. We watch these things on TV and in movies and we get a general idea of how things work, right? How many times have you entered a real life situation and think it will turn out (naively enough) like on TV and film, and it doesn't? Or even how things that were once important are now trivial?
 In the past couple of weeks I have encountered two situations that I thought TV had prepared me for out of my everyday life. The first occurred only a couple of weeks ago in a local restaurant. As I was ordering my food, I noticed two individuals behind me. I quickly glanced behind me to see who they were and noticed that the guy (there was a guy and a girl) had an interesting cross on his jacket. I had seen it before, but couldn't remember where. As I got my food I walked to my seat and realized what the cross was. Well, the individual had a shaved head, wore several Nazi paraphernalia, and the cross I have seen on white-supremacists on TV and books before. His female companion wore a jacket that read in letters across the back "SKINHEAD."  I was shocked. This was my first introduction to open organized bigotry. Like many, I have seen it on TV and in movies, but not in ‘real life'. Well, I took everything that TV had taught me about neo-Nazi's and I waited. They came and sat down at a table beside me, and I eavesdropped. The contents of their conversation: the tolerance level of alcohol, and how the girl had refined her speech from "Fuck this and shit that" to using swearing only as emphasis. Stop right there. Wait a minute. This isn't what TV told me was supposed to happen. There was supposed to be some discussion on race and white supremacy, or some sort of fight or struggle between these two and some anti-Nazi's. What happened? A civilized lunch, and I went home. How could TV have taught me wrong?
 Well, today as I came home, I was confronted with another TV drama live and without the cameras, sort of.  As I came home (check time line) I noticed yellow tape and a CityTv truck parked on the sidewalk. Must be a movie I think; this is common in TO. I see people taking pictures of a man on top of a Yonge street building dressed in black. I try to go down my street, but the yellow tape and 4 officers block the way. Then I realize there are no camera crews for a movie. This is real life.
  I inquire as to what is going on, but I'm just told that its ok, and I should take a walk. I do so, but when I returned Yonge street itself was blocked.  I stand around waiting to see something happen with the growing crowd. People are mumbling, grumbling, and trying to figure out what is going on. Then a little bit of action. A number of ETF (Emergency Task Force) about 5 or 6 members in full combat gear, dressed in black fatigues, bullet proof vests and shields, helmets and machine guns walk somewhat casually down towards the direction of my apartments.  A moment later civilians leaving their homes on my street are escorted to ‘safety' by ETF.  People are attempting to proceed down Yonge where an officer stands behind police tape preventing people from going down the street. Two ladies ask me what's going on? What movie are they making. "Its not a movie" I say. "So this is real? It's not a movie?" one lady asks.
 Here was another event that TV perhaps had prepared me for. Something big was going down. Some sort of big gunfight was about to happen, just as all of my fellow citizens around me expected. Any minute now we would hear gunfire, maybe a getaway of cars: something. Maybe we weren't all safe behind this thin yellow tape. We all watched on. A girl beside me attempted to go to pass the officer on her way to work. He denies her. "I think it should be clear pretty soon" he says reassuringly. That's not what TV has told me. A moment later I hear over the officer's walkie talkie "It's all clear, everyone is ok" as well as some jumbled info. The officer proceeded to tear down the tape. "Thanks folks" he says. I can go home. TV??? You haven't failed me again have you??? No gunfight, no suspects, and as it turned out, there was nothing. Well, that was probably a good thing.
 From all this your probably thinking a couple of things. Maybe I live in a bad neighborhood. Well, I don't think I do (I could be wrong). Maybe you think I watch too much TV, well that might be true. Ok so I thought that something big was going to happen. A crescendo of events and then a climax. Nope. What kind of disturbed me was people's responses to the event. They weren't concerned for their safety or other's, or what was going on. Most either joked or were pissed at the inconvenienced. "How am I supposed to get to work?" "How am I gonna get home? Fuck!" "Shit, how can I get through?" One guy joked "hey, maybe they're finally cleaning up this area!" The people around me either wanted to get through, or see a show. For a while they got neither. The thing was, was anyone actually concerned?
 The realm of reality and fiction I think is blurred a little more each day.  Desensitization, objectivity, and average life don't seem to mean what they once did. Now for years TV, movies and I had a good relationship. They were kind of like my surrogate parents as I grew up with Cliff and Claire Huxtable, or the action films of Arnold and Sly. I don't think I was alone. Now I have to question what I have learned, on how I react. I know this isn't anything new to many people, or even to me for that matter.  TV shapes our lives, and life is not TV. It creates expectations out of ‘real life' that just don't happen, or at least not always. We need to start separating what is real, and what is fiction. There are no Ninja Turtles in the sewer, you can't fly like Superman, and you don't possess The Force. I'm sorry ma'am, this is real, and this isn't a movie.

 Film X (for lack of a better title at this time) is a form of film making in which the concept/theory as far as P.R.A.X.I.S. Industries is aware, holds the concept to. The X refers to the unknown variable of this particular form of film making. What makes it different from other genres, styles, forms etc is that Film X is made not merely by a dictated imagination, but a democratic approach to ideas which is combined with a dicatorship of resources, actors and props. To begin unpacking that, we shall look at traditional film.

 A traditional Hollywood film is a narrative that, for the purposes of this dissertation, is usually written by a screen writer and followed by a director, or the director is the heaviest influence in creating the film (which is part of Auteur theory). There is a story, where the director in a form of totalitarianism controls how the film is made: the actors, props, sets etc and the story itself. For good film, the director has a vision about how the film will be laid out and achieved. With a substantial budget a director is given a great deal of freedom and power to make a film.

 This is where most of the films of P.R.A.X.I.S. Industries is different. First, P.R.A.X.I.S. Industries has little to no budget to work with. This leads to many problems and creative solutions. It leads to the reverse affect of traditional cinema. Instead of the director holding the power, in Film X the director is dictated to by the actors, props, sets, locations, music etc. One prop (or lack there of) can change the whole film. For Film X there is no written script because it is all to easy for the film to be permanently disrupted by the absence of an actor, change in film location (ie weather, people) or a prop. The films takes on a Daoist flavour embracing The Way and that of water - water flows and changes as it is dictated by its environment. So too must Film X. If water flows down a creek and rocks block its path, the water moves accordingly. So too does Film X.

 Another element to Film X comes from the creation of the narrative. This is where a democratic element enters. As the director of the film has lost power, the film team takes over. Ideas come from not one source (like writer or director) but from the actors themselves. There is no strong plan followed, and shots are ‘written' and filmed scene by scene. In almost all cases, when the film is started, the creative team has no idea how the film will end. Each person puts in their ideas, and the group decides which way to proceed.

 Film X follows a loose plan which must be very flexible. If not, the film doesn't get made. Nothing is stable because there is no budget, contracted actors or even a working camera necessarily. Surprisingly enough, the democratic approach for Film X is unpopular, as is the whole creative aspect of the film. Film, by its nature, is dictatorial. For a film to be the best it can be, it must be written, edited, and it vision brought about by the director. When too many people are involved in thinking about what will happen, the films direction will suffer, and so too will the film as a whole. However, for most of P.R.A.X.I.S. Industries's films, Film X was not a voluntary choice, but had to be accepted. Like water, it must adapt and shape itself to its environment.