Wilson's (Bear Snores On) verse never misses a beat as Farmer tries to get his pigs to bathe, and the hogs make their opinions known in mud-spattered signage: "No hogwash for us today./ Pigs love dirt%E2%80%94so go away!" McMullan's (I'm Big!) pigs revel in muddy bliss as Farmer tries one ploy after another, finally filling his crop duster with water and shampoo and planning an aerial assault. GEORGE WOLFF: For peace and joy and happiness… and a higher purpose.Īnd, just like may fancy shampoo and other hair products: it is aspirational, if not always entirely reliable."One warm day in early May,/ Farmer had a plan/ To spring-clean all his animals/ Till each was spic 'n' span." Thus is the stage set for a contentious barnyard rebellion that's more Click, Clack, Moo than Animal Farm. So, for today’s project, I have decided to create my own, personal label. I have always attempted to be an optimist. Bowling once iterated, “ you don’t have to be sick to get better.” And I understand that… we must identify a problem if we are ever to solve it. Today, much of the impetus for our very being comes from what we are against. What if I chose to do the same in real life? What if I, as an individual, spent more time focusing on what I am “pro-“, than what I am “anti-”? If not entirely, even just in part. Is it possible to focus more on the solution without emphasizing the problem?Īnd that’s just social media. Now, I am not making an argument against calling out injustice. Think about this: What would my social media feed look like if I used it to promote what I was (individually) for. Which one am I? Do I present what is wrong, or what is right? Am I glass half-empty, or glass half-full? Maybe I should spend a little more time focusing on what I am “for.” But, shouldn’t it be clear or consistent?Īnd, it made me think. Kurznyek would be very proud of me.) Is it “for”people “with” dry, damaged hair? Or is it intended to “produce” dry, damaged hair? Of course, I know the intent. And, I must confess- it is a conundrum: Do you advertise the PROBLEM or the SOLUTION? Here’s what I mean.įANCYBRAND LUXURY SHAMPOO : For dry, damaged hairįANCYBRAND LUXURY SHAMPOO: For beautiful, silky hairĭo you see the issue here? We have a prepositional predicament. Hogwash.Īnd then there’s the descriptions of the product. Sometimes, the manufacturer will recommend finishing with “ a leave-in-mask,” or some other gooey substance that is just a sorry excuse for why the shampoo you just used didn’t really do the job. I have been known to adjust my shampoo use to try to keep their levels even. Therefore, we are constantly left with half-full bottles of conditioner. And, do you know what that means? The two bottles from the same manufacturer (one shampoo, one conditioner), empty in varying volumes. But only every third day, because I am aging, and my hair is more limp, and fine than it used to be. Also, can’t they just make it stronger, or more concentrated so I only have to do it once? Use a pea-sized amount and work into a lather.ĭoes anyone do this? I use at least a “quarter-sized” amount, or (to continue the metaphor)- a “very-ripe, plump, grape-sized” amount. Hahahaha… like we need instructions on how to use this puzzling potion. I love to use a different one every day… I have no idea why.Īnyway, I took a moment and actually read the instructions, or directions for use. Truth is, we have about three or four different shampoo and conditioner bottles in our shower. Today, while attempting to cleanse my hair, I actually noticed the variety of language on the shampoo bottle label- or, labels. Sometimes I have revelations in the shower.
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |