I picked up a book by George Carlin in Booksale. One hundred and forty pesos. It's called Braindroppings. I bought it because I thought it would be funny. George Carlin always makes me laugh when he guests on Leno or Letterman. But right on the first chapter, right on the Preface, I knew I wouldnt like this book. It's a book of rants. I never liked reading rants simply because most rants are ranting about what I myself would be ranting about and who wants to hear himself rant? Rants are probably the most boring reading anyone could come up with. Some people like it though. Somehow they find in reading rants a validation that what theyre ranting about is worth ranting about. So they applaud heartily about rants on the horrendous EDSA traffic, or the runaway corruption in government, the insipid fare on local TV. If someone else is ranting about what theyre ranting about in real life, then somehow they feel better because theyre not alone in the universe. Which is a nice feeling, I have to admit, but personally I wouldnt want to read a rant about what Ive been ranting about. Iba naman, pare. Echoes are interesting at first, but they get tired really, really fast. I would love to read someone rant about something original; about something no one has ever thought of ranting about. A rant about Mother Teresa for instance would be interesting, and if done well, could be hilarious. But why write a rant about someone ahead of you in a supermarket line who uses his credit card to buy gum? It's so... normal to rant about that. Come on, George.
Writing an entertaining rant is so difficult to pull off I would think, but I could be wrong. I know Im wrong. I think the vast majority would welcome the validation of their inner rants by hearing someone famous rant publicly about the same things that piss them off. It gives them a sense of community in the ever-increasingly impersonal world they live in. The angst generation in the Brotherhood of the Rant.