The Science Building of Perpetual Twilight

Twilight seemed to hang over the Science building at Georgia College in Milledgeville. Some sort of perpetual gloom that I never quite understood.  Even when my Chemistry 101 classes were held at noon, I went inside the building and felt it was always dusk.  Perhaps it was the colors of the walls and the seats, oranges and dull yellows from the 70's when they were popular, or maybe it was the slowness of the elevator, one of the slowest ones I had seen. And in my Astronomy 101 class,

the labs we took were located in the basement, on computers from the 1980's, old Apple IIe clones, and this was 1996.  It was as if someone had taken the whole science building and stopped time around it, making it obsolete and rickety. Even the newest of technologies were out of date.  I witnessed my first laserdisc player there. And only. I've never seen one in use. 

I say all this because in the last magazine published from GC&SU, it was all about the revamped Science building, about the futuristic architecture, the white walls and plenitude of glass. About the new equipment and the benefits that new science research would do for the college.  That, along with Allan Bloom's book The Closing of the American Mind, made me think about the old rickety building and the uses for Science in a university  mainly driven toward the Liberal Arts, as well as the sudden change of ideas that the college seemed to have during the beginning of this new economy.

One of the main highlights of Bloom's writings was the perception of the student riots at the university level during the 1960's.  While some, such as at Kent State, became deadly, there were others, such as the student strikes at Cornell, that had a drastic effect on the university system, especially those in the northern United States.  What struck me as fascinating was his view of the professors in the Humanities areas versus those of the Natural Sciences.  The ideas of Cultural Relativism (which I talked about earlier) were very much understood by the professors of the Liberal Arts (while perhaps not always agreed with). But the Science departments remained out of the conflicts between teachers, students, and the administration, because there is no relativism in science. It is either one way or the other. And no one can argue with this, as the scientific method had be held as divine for many years.  So the chasm between the study of man and the study of nature widened.It's my belief that this is exactly what happened at Georgia College & State University during the period between the 1960's and the present day. But to take a look at this more closely, we have to see why the leftover supplies were relegated to the science building while the English department received a brand new, state of the art (at the time) building. To answer this question, we have to, as Bloom did, look at the function of the University to the State and to the people. 

The university system does two things, train citizens for future jobs, to be competitive in the job market, and to bring forth the best people to drive the economy of this nation.  Secondly, they are used to further the education of people who wish to know more than just the basic knowledge.  The university serves as the bank for knowledge for those who have been outside of Plato's cave and wish to pursue self-enlightenment through the wisdom of ancestors. And between the two, therein lies the chasm of knowledge versus a skill set. Both are valuable, both are vital, but unfortunately, it's hard to get both in 4 years of college, combined with all the social things that usually occurs with going to an institution of higher learning.

And so it is, much like every other paradigm, that the pendulum swings back and forth depending on the circumstances.  With the launch of Sputnik by the Russians and the Cold War escalating after World War II, skill sets in science and engineering were needed for the competitive drive to send man to the moon. I think that it was at this point where the university system became a training ground for workers in the "field." People wanted to get degrees that would earn them money, quickly, efficiently, without the need for pausing to contemplate the philosophical aspects of mankind, or the inner thoughts of the mind, the subconscious...etc...  And this rush to fill America with highly qualified workers resulted in economic growth in the 1980's and 1990's, so much so that the need for skilled workers declined, even as money and income increased.  So, there were many wealthy families with children who could go to college, but had no need to get their hands dirty. Aside from the exploding computer industry, the fields of nursing and science (I'm sticking with these two because of the applicable examples they have at Georgia College), among others, declined in people, in funding, and in prestige.  When I arrived at Georgia College, the Nursing program was in a small building on the corner of the campus, almost invisible from the street.  And the science building was as I have described it.  The attention had shifted from science to the liberal arts, the Humanities, as they call them, so that students could learn, spend four years of their lives contemplating the vast meaning of everything, and earn a degree in something that basically does nothing in the work field.  I am not saying that the degree I received, a BA in English, isn't valuable, or that I wouldn't have done the exact same thing if I had to do it all over again, but the skill sets that I learned are significantly less, and will earn less money, than those degrees in computers, or medicine, or science. 

I have long argued that students in High School and in college need to learn both a skill set to provide them the necessary income for the rest of their lives, as well as learning art, philosophy, music, literature.  There needs to be a balance.  A worker that can work with his hands as well as his mind is much more capable of adapting to any situation.  Unfortunately, that is not the case in today's world (for various reasons that are political as well as sociological, which would take a whole other blog to do), and so people have their diplomas, their degrees from college, and they are working either at a part time job not doing anything with their degree, or they are simply unemployed, while those that have a skill set, like fixing cars or assembling computers, are providing a living for themselves and happily watching reality tv at night (that statement is generalized, and an explanation would again take a whole other blog). 

In my dreams, I have seen a university system, a community coming together to learn, to train their skill sets and become experts in many fields, as well as discussing the various aspects of the humanities.  I think one needs to come with the other, with the time saved from the skill sets invested in the humanities.  Let us build a society that relies on science, technology, medicine, business, to make time for us all to enjoy the ideas brought on by the liberal arts. For every invention that saves an hour out of every person's life, that hour can be invested back into pushing humanity forward, both in the technological realm, but also in the realms of music, art, philosophy, and the inner workings of the human mind.  Think of what we could achieve if the ideas that are implemented from the science building in Milledgeville (and elsewhere) could save us enough time that we could go to functions during the week and further our education in areas that we enjoy.  There would be nothing that we couldn't do.  I know that when I return to Milledgeville next (whenever that may be), I will see a science building not in perpetual twilight, but in a sunrise that will fill the skies of that town.  Let the graduates offer the skills that bring us all a little more sunlight into our lives.  We all need it right now.

The Obligatory July 4th Post: The Making of a Pencil

I plan on doing very little writing on this, as it has already been done. Leonard Reed was the founder and president of the Foundation for Economic Education, and in 1958, published an essay entitled "I, Pencil," which is truly remarkable. It follows along the lines of the Jeep commercial I used in my Thanksgiving blog. As we drove to our daily chores this week, we passed by make shift tents selling fireworks. That along with the grocery store sales and the grills offered at Lowe's and other things, the Independence Day holiday is a prime example of the best thing about our country, the Free Market system. Capitalism isn't perfect. It has its flaws, Its corrupt users of the system who fill their pockets while emptying others, but in its purest form, that which is shown in Leonard Reed's essay, in the making of a pencil, it gives me a hope that mankind can live and abide by the rules of democracy and the free market. That each individual builds a part of this great country of ours, from the giant nuclear reactors, to the databases storing the data in this blog, to the pencils that 1st graders use to fill in their standardized tests. We all are a part of the system which creates the world we live in, and by that, this world forms and shapes our lives. I am proud to be a part of that system, even if it is just selling books. But those books might just help future creators of such miracles as are seen in science-fiction novels, just as the things today were put together by millions of individuals to form cell phones, computers, cars...etc...

For instance, take the tallest skyscraper in Atlanta, the Peachtree Tower. My dad was responsible for designing the sprinkler systems that keep the structure safe from fire. But he was just one of hundreds of people responsible for constructing that building. Likewise, the metal pipes stretching throughout the Oklahoma City Botanical Gardens were designed, by hand, by my father. We took a tour of the underside of the structure before it opened so we could see the fruits of his labor. By the time the Peachtree Tower was made, my dad had become one of the countries best sprinkler designers on the newly made AutoCad system.

So... here is this essay, written by Leonard Reed. I will include the link, here, to the original essay, but I find it much easier to listen to. It was read, in its entirety, by Mark Levin, talk show host and conservative author of Liberty and Tyranny.  Members of both ideological persuasions will enjoy the essay, while conservatives will love the comparisons Levin makes to President Obama in his editorial afterwards.  To me, it is all wonderful stuff.  Just what I wanted to hear coming home from work on a 4th of July

. 

Book Review: The Search for WondLa

It's one of the rare science fiction books written for children nowadays. Today's books are either half-comic diaries written for 3rd graders (I'm gonna write one too, it'll be called The Diary of a Blimpy Kid), or it's teen angst filled vampires and goth boys with dark eyebrows. Very little is what you would call speculative fiction. I have been impressed with the resurgence of "dystopian" worlds in the Young Adult section, although I have been a little hesitant to read them. The problem with writing most futuristic fiction is that you have to resist the urge to relate current political views with the outcome of mankind. It irks me when authors who are writing for entertainment decide to stick a platform from either party into a character. It usually sticks out like a sore thumb, turning an otherwise sympathetic character into a mechanical airhorn for a political party. And there have been some doosies in my reading. For instance, the Communist dragon in Alan Dean Foster's Spellsinger series. I stopped reading the book because of that. Or when Queen Amadala says, "And this is how freedom ends, with thunderous applause," during the newest Star Wars movies. And sometimes whole movies, like Avatar, are nothing but a platform for Environmental zealots, who are all anti-business and all for the government regulating everything. There are some recent books, like Brave Story, which I read a few months back, which has a little of that in it, but it's easy to overlook.

It's one of the main complaints I have with The Search for WondLa, as Rovendeer, the traveling Jimmy Cricket that accompanies Eva Nine on her journey, sometimes becomes a chorus that says general statements about the bad guys that are actually supposed to be about us.

The book itself, though, flows along quite nicely, with good plot twists and the usual "to be continued" thing at the end, as it's the beginning of a series. I read it quickly and easily, and would recommend it to any kid who liked Avatar, for instance, or Wall-E, which it was quite similar to, in theme. I always kept wondering, what would Orson Scott Card have done with this book? How much more depth and natural flow it would have had, even with the themes that were put in. As usual with children's books, it had a lot more potential. Of course, that's me talking, as the works of Card are books for adults that are about kids, and this book is a book for kids. How wonderful are those in which a balanced is reached.

Smoking and Half Dollars

I remember once, while returning from Bethany, from my Aunt Oyita's house, that I promised my dad I would never smoke. It shouldn't be a surprise that I kept that promise, as, except for a decent addiction to Dr. Pepper, that's about all I'll allow. I want to keep my inhibitions in check, my self-control (what I have of it) in balance, so all that other stuff is out of the question. That's why I don't like hearing Milledgeville being talked about as just a whole town of bars. And I've seen the hoops that smokers have to jump through when it comes to having a cigarette. Going outside, in the rain, in the snow, the cold, down flights of stairs, through security, just to smoke. I'm too lazy to do all that.

But what I don't agree with are the laws that state legislators have passed forbidding smoking in x,y, and z areas. Public buildings, like city halls and such, I have no problem with. The government owns the buildings, and they can do whatever they want. For privately owned businesses, I feel they can do what they feel will help their profitability. They are owners of private buildings, and they have the right to govern their area however they want. To say that smoking should be outlawed in all privately owned buildings just because it is harmful to one's health, it's silly. Now, managers and owners of businesses should certainly know the health problems caused by second hand smoke, and areas should be made for smokers. Everyone has a free choice, especially when it comes to places like stores, restaurants, bars...etc. The manager has a choice whether to allow or forbid smoking, and the customer has a choice, knowing what the regulations are, whether to visit that establishment. No government regulations are needed. And if they want to endure the effects of second hand smoke, then so be it. It's their choice.

What really got me interested in this topic was the recent passing of laws in New York City by the City council which outlaws smoking in public parks (such as central park) and public beaches. There is no way that second hand smoke is going to affect anyone else in an open area like that. It is a violation of the freedoms of the citizens of New York, just because picking on smokers is an easy target and popular with the politicians to gain poll points.

It is a popular notion for Libertarians to support the legalization of drugs, prostitution...etc... and they get wildly criticized for this. The overall point is that the deregulation of such items comes from individual freedom that we all should enjoy. We should be able to regulate ourselves, using discipline to enjoy our freedom while not harming or inhibiting the freedoms of anyone else. Thus it is that smoking falls under this realm. It should be up to the individual to regulate themselves on whether smoking in an area would be appropriate.

***
My mother's birthday was the other week, and I got her one of those maps that we use to keep Quarters in. The National Park Quarters are really cool looking, and especially since Oklahoma's quarter, that of the Chickishaw National Recreational Area (Platt National Park of old) will be issued at the end of the year.

While looking for all the quarters I had to put into the map, I found tons of the old coins I had from working at the grocery stores. Among them is a 1923 half-dollar, which I got one night as I finished counting my till. I guess the value of such things is different to other people. What I would consider valuable because of its old age, someone else just saw 50 cents they could use. Probably for cigarettes, which is why this blog connects with the other one.

How much treasure would one throw away just for the satisfaction of a vice? A habit? What lifestyle changes would they accept just to fulfill their addiction? I think these are rhetorical questions, as it's easy to see just what one will do. Take the recent rash of former governors who have brought their mistresses along for the ride, destroying families and creating quite the stir in the process. That list keeps growing every day. And this is something that does harm other people, so the idea of self-regulation should come into play. I guess its the power that one wields that makes them blind to the consequences of doing the wrong thing.

And it's those vices that create other afflictions to society. Madoff wasn't stealing money from thousands of people just to get money, but rather he was using it to keep himself in the height of luxury. And when the greed of those people reflect on all the honest, rich investors at Wall Street, they all look bad. Then the government steps in with regulations ad nauseum. Self-regulate, and this won't happen. But any vice that won't hurt other people, as long as you can afford it without compromising the absolute morals in which this world is based, I don't see a problem with. But there are many idiots out there that don't regulate anything, except through the absence of reason and the impulsive pursuit of one's addictions. And there are idiots out there that will pay for cigarettes with a 1923 half-dollar, which I will be more than willing to trade for.

Needles, Blood, and Wide Screen TVs

Once a year, when my prescriptions run out, I have to make a pilgrimage to the neighboring town to beg for refills. I have to go in, sit in a chair while some nurse uses a manual blood pressure device to take my blood pressure. All the while someone is sticking a thermometer in my mouth and then not telling me at all what the results are. My mom tells me that she can reduce her blood pressure by just relaxing. Yeah... right...

Let's take a look at my doctor's office, shall we? First off, coming in, you see bright white walls, not the calming green hues that one sees in a Chiropractor or a funeral home. I'm gonna have my next doctor check up at a funeral home... at least I can relax there. And in the middle of the waiting room is a large screen flat LCD TV projecting, loudly, a medicine centered rotating version of CNN. Filled with the information that you just have to know about obesity and heart disease and cancer and DEATH!! Such a relaxing atmosphere. I want classical music or something that says, "You're in a safe place." Air Supply or something....

Then you go to the little room with the not big enough bed (If I wanna sleep during my wait for the doctors, I should be able to put my feet someplace.), and you see posters of the inside of your intestines, or the clots of a blood artery that leads up to a cardiowhatchamacallit, or the colors of a malignant skin tumor. Again, with peeling wallpaper, white, and not a single poster that's not paid for by some drug manufacturer. There's not a single relaxing thing in the whole place.

Then, they stick me with a needle, a couple of times, cause they can't find an artery (I told them I didn't have any blood. Should have told them Dr. Pepper runs through my veins.), and they send it off to Quest Diagnostics, all to tell me information I already know. Yes, my liver enzymes are high, and I pee just fine. Then Quest bills me for $50 dollars and I pay for it for about 6 months until I get stuck again.

Doctors should use common sense, should provide a safe, relaxing environment, and should pay more attention to the customers then the drug manufacturers. My mom goes to a doctor that does that, but my insurance won't pay for it. Oh well...

So this is a blog rant, to make me feel better. And maybe it'll lower my blood pressure.

The Afterlife

The songs that buzz over our heads in the grocery stores or the malls, do we ever actually listen to them?  Sure, the idiots that put in commercials always seem to interrupt the best songs.  Cut off a Crosby Stills and Nash song, but let Michael Bolton go by unscathed. Honestly, I've always listened to the music while I worked, as it made the day go by quicker.  A song can take up 3 minutes of time, or more, and while working, it makes those minutes seem less stressful.  You tend to forget about the ticking of your watch and forget about what you want to be doing.  That, of course, is the reason, as it provides pleasure into an otherwise silent room.  Allan Bloom compared music to instant ecstasy, orgasm if you will (and that's for a later blog), and there have been studies that make disciplined decisions harder to make while in a sexual mood. See the book Predictably Irrational, Chapter 3, I think, for that study.  So people, hopefully, buy more because the music is on.  But I have digressed from the intent of this post.

***

Recently, we have been playing Paul Simon's So Beautiful, So What and k.d. lang's newest album.  Both have songs on them that describe Heaven. I found it odd that two recent albums would have such descriptions of the Afterlife, given that these are not Gospel albums at all.  Further, the depictions of the hereafter are much different than that of conventional Christian belief.  Paul Simon's take turns out to be a long line where you wait to see God, after filling out a form, much as you would at a voting station. In the song, the main character starts hitting on a woman in line, who, knowing that she was dead, just shakes her head.  Reminds me (as a sidebar) of the lines in Bob Dylan's "Talking World War III Blues," where the man fins a woman, suggests they go play "Adam and Eve," and the response is "You saw what happened last time that started."  Anyway, life is mirrored in the line that Paul Simon has us wait.  And yet when we get to God, someplace high in space, we have lost the words we were going to say, as if we had any to begin with.  Instead, we have a snippet of a song.



In k.d. lang's track, Heaven is a bar. A bar everyone wants to get to. One where everyone knows your name.  Now, as much as we want Heaven to be like Cheers, Lang states in the chorus that "Heaven is a place where nothing ever happens." Heaven is then compared to a party, where, after everyone gets there, the same thing happens over and over, and when the "party is over, it starts again / exactly the same."  This doesn't sound like a Heaven I would want to go to, and both images are frighteningly familiar.  They have created Heaven in the image of man's world, just as the images of Mount Olympus and the jealousies and tantrums of the Greek Gods parallel the actions of man.  What Paul Simon and k.d. lang forget is that God created us in His own image, not the other way around. 


Take Stargate SG-1, for instance. The place where the Ancients go as they are ascending looks a lot like a restaurant, where the papers report on the goings on of Anubis and other bad guys.  In Star Trek: Voyager,, the Q Continuum looks like a shack on some road in a western state.  Again, nothing ever happens in these places, and it all repeats itself for all eternity. 

A couple of other examples.  In Rick Riordan's The Lightning Thief,, the underworld, guarded by Cerberus, is basically a long line in which people wait in to get into the world of Hades.  How pleasant. In Pullman's The Amber Spyglass , the afterlife is a bog full of dead zombie like people, colorless, lifeless.  Of course, for Pullman, God is the bad guy, and Heaven is another dimension which is working on controlling the rest (see the episodes of South Park in which Heaven starts a war, and Kenny is the hero.

These are not the Heavens of the Christian faith, although there are other ideas that are positive.  Look at the afterlife talked about in Final Fantasy VII, where all life joins the undercurrents of power and song that flow through the Earth, giving it beauty and life.



While this has no comparison to Heaven, I believe it could be compared, given the harmonies and music that are discovered in the strings of molecular particles such as Quarks.  I talked about this before, in my blog post here. 

There are so many other images of the Afterlife that are used in modern day works of culture.  Take the waiting room in Beetlejuice, or Heaven in the movie Defending your Life. In these depictions of what comes after, it is a mirror of today's world, where waiting and defending are all that is done.  There is no enjoyment of the passage of time, which is of the utmost importance since time is eternal.  In fact, that is the main point of this blog.  When we look at Heaven, we think of eternity as a linear time model.  But the Bible depicts God as being outside of time, the Alpha and Omega, so we surely cannot expect Heaven to be in a linear time frame.  Thus the idea of a waiting line doesn't work. We would exist in a time aspect that is far different from the model we understand today.  It would be more like the Prophet's universe on Star Trek: DS9.  Past, present, and future mean nothing in this time frame, but song and vibrating emotions do. 

People spend so much time thinking about what happens after you die.  I think more time needs to be spent living.  Even for Christians, there's a whole lot of livin' goin' on (Ernie Haase song) between the Cross and Heaven.  If we accept death, which we must, then life is so much easier to deal with.  And if we see the afterlife as some gloomy bog or an endless line, then there's no point in dying, no point in living. What would living morally, toward the virtues of some loving God, what would that matter?  We should try and live by our own beliefs, our own morals, those that we have adapted from our faith, from the lessons our parents and other elders have taught us, and then, believing in what we do, when we die, whatever happens, will happen.  Jesus was assuring us life after death, but was also assuring us life before that death.  Let's not worry about what it looks like, and make this life the best we can.

Where the Wild Pixels Are.

It constantly amazes me how people identify with the Maurice Sendak book  
Where the Wild Things Are. I always keep copies behind the register for the times we are holding book drives for charitable organizations. Time and again people will come up, point at the book, say, "I remember that book!" and immediately add it to their order for donation. All this for a book in which nothing happens! The kid misbehaves, is sent to his room, in which, ostensibly as a dream, it turns into a forest, with a boat, with an island, with Wild Things on it. He plays, jumps, hangs from vines (on pages with no words) and then gets unhappy for whatever reason, and goes home.  With his supper still hot.  And yet so many people love this book. It's odd, because I don't remember ever reading the book as a child, and when I read the book, it really didn't stick with me as something major, like, say, Harold and the Purple Crayon, which is an amazing book and speaks volumes about the children's imagination. And yet something has connected in the psyche of the people reading it, for it won the Caldecott Medal for picture books. It must be something special.


So I go see the movie in the theatre, walk into the cinema room, and I'm the only one there. I loved it!!  I sang with the songs, howled with the Wild Things, cried at the end. It was an utterly spectacular movie, my favorite now, and it comes from a book that is empty of most literary devices. See here for a review of the movie.

To round out the multimedia trilogy, I finished the video game for the PS3. And I (big shock here) loved it, too. I loved it for the same reason that everyone hated it.  The platform game is simplistic, with few weapons or items to use. It is offline only, for one player, and the enemies consist of bugs and shadow gunk things. But it's a return to the Island where the Wild Things live. And the programmers make the Wild Things just like those in the movies, with the exact same personality, but they further them into the archetypes that they have been built around (on that later). It is escaping into a world where you (as Max) are completely alone with these giant furry thingees, and you get to experience the wonderment of this world without having to worry about PKers or other crap from the outside world. Every time KW or Carol gets stuck, I was emotionally drawn to freeing them from the gunk and the monsters, and achieving the "trophy" that had me not save them hurt. I had to turn off the sound while they sank into oblivion.  Because the Wild Things are, as an entire set, part of Max's total psyche.  That's what makes them archetypes.  So let's look at who the Wild Things actually are.


I will freely admit that I did not come up with the idea of the Wild Things as Archetypes, although I respect greatly those that did, and will give credit where I can.  It is not the first time that characters can be identified with the universal types of people in this world.  A.A. Milne's Winnie the Pooh, with the characters involved, are similar in behavior to Carol, Alexander, DW, and the rest. They are analyzed in Benjamin Hoff's The Tao of Pooh (see here for a look into that book.Jacob Kreuger talked about WTWTA and the Wild Things being archetypes in his review of the screenplay. He does a great job of reviewing the uniqueness of the plot, of the characters, and what makes the movie so different from any other movie made currently.  He also explains why people either love the movie or passionately hate it. Personally, I think those that hate the movie don't understand the underlying ideas, that namely, the movie is not supposed to be a "kid's" movie, nor is it supposed to have a nice warm, fuzzy ending.  Max's life goes on, much as the hero archetype would in Joseph Campbell's Hero books, and we leave the theatre having watched him grow up, at least a little. 

The Wild Things, then, are personifications (or archetypes) of the inner self of Max (and therefore, of all of us). Kreuger goes into a little of this, but he doesn't personify all of the Wild Things.  I found another source that does this, although I don't have a name or a link for it, I thank him for sharing his thoughts on the matter. 

These descriptions fit the video game as well as the movie.  Carol is raw emotion, the ADD version of Max. Quick to love, quick to anger and react, with no thought as to the consequences. K.W. is the caring, feminine influence, which according to Krueger, also represents his mom and sister, who have developed new friends (the owls/or the sister's friends and mom's new boyfriend), and have left Carol/Max behind. Douglas is Jimmy Cricket, or the conscious that helps Carol/Max along. Alexander is the insecure, victimized Max, who is sure that he's being ignored and overlooked, who acts up sometimes just to get attention (ADD again). Then there's the couple. Ira who is the teddy bear, and Judith, who is jealous, confrontational, and represents the immature Max, who wants his mother to make him feel better and play, even when she doesn't want to.

Then there is the Bull.  You never see him in the movie, except for grunts and growls inside huts. And for being on the front cover of the book, you'd think that he would be an important character. He is the one on the beach at the end of the movie, and he says one line, "Hey, Max. When you go home, will you say good things about us?" Bull is transformed here, from the Eeyore type mopey figure to the wise voice of omniscience. In the movie (and the game), the Bull peeks around corners, on the periphery of the scene, and when you look in his eyes, he's a little scary. In how this was explained to me, the Bull represents the future Max, his masculinity, calmness, wisdom, Max as a man.  He is saying to Max, "How will you remember your childhood? What will you say about it?" But I think, most importantly, he is telling Max, "Remember."  It is so vitally important to remember the island in times when the adult world becomes overbearing.  I think that's why, above all the other Wild Things, the Bull is my favorite.  He is the guardian (at the end of the video game, he most certainly is), the watcher over Max's childhood. And he says, when necessary, "Remember." I know I will.