Time, Treasure

Saw an episode ages ago of one of the Twilight Zone reboots which, I’m pretty sure, starred Mark Hamill as this weird kid who collected toys. All this kitschy stuff from the ‘50s and grew up collecting them — and thus stayed weird and for the most part apparently lonely for his life entire.

Of course he wasn’t necessarily — alone isn’t always lonely — and it’s unlikely 22 minutes of then-TV wd’ve been able to convey the nuance of such a thing.

So let us say at least that he was alone and when we see him after the second commercial break or so and we know we’re coming to the reversal or at least the dinger at the end of TZs.

Hamill’s character is driving around in an old convertible — he loves, well … everything from his childhood so the car is a 1950s somesuch or other, perhaps a T-bird or at least a Galaxie or something.

The back seat is stuffed with toys and — to our eyes – twaddle, and he is driving in … is it Las Vegas? That wd fit the kitsch angle. I know, well … I remember, anyway … that it was least something with a ‘drive’ of some kind, a strip that one cd tool up and down — and slow-like, if only bec of the heavy traffic.

And someone, a pedestrian — is Hamill’s aficionado pulling out of some hotel? — sees one of the toys and exclaims something like, ‘Omigosh! A genuine Thingamabob! Mint condition and in its original package!’

And now the writer in me is really making stuff up — the story itself, in the reboot — bec I want there to be some kind of … conference he is at, vintage toy collectors or something. And I want to solve the issue of why the heck wd Hamill’s character be driving into the desert, with his treasures … piled in the back seat? And how come he never took the thing out of its package and played with it? He wasn’t ‘collecting’ at the time of acquisition …

Some of this may’ve been dealt with in the episode but I don’t recall.

And it gets worse.

He sells the toys.

All but his last one, goes my tale, which may also have been the show but perhaps not. The last one had been his first and his favorite — a Christmas morning? A birthday back in the day?

But really — wd he have sold them, any of them … at all?!?!

Anyway, he does, and he grows fabulously wealthy. Gets the vintage T-bird if he didn’t have it before. I think he’s wearing a cowboy getup of some kind, all tassels and rhinestones or something.

+

This episode, this memory, this fictional memoir of that moment in my life past — tho nothing ever really is, said Faulkner. Which I have I guess now proven, or at least illustrated by telling of it.

This, well … story has become a synecdoche … or a metonymy; I’m still working on remembering the difference. This story is either part of a whole or associated with it, the ‘whole’ I refer to being this —

discovering that all I have sensed — tasted, touched,
smelled, seen, heard — and everything sensed in that
other way as well, and we’ll include any level of
transcendence we’re comfortable with in that,
now comes together ‘over and over in myriad …
little unsexy ways, every day’ as David
Foster Wallace said of sacrifice
… a
thing definitely involved in, no
crucial to story. I now ‘do’
these things all the time
not least of which in
what I write. It
has come to a
point and
this is
it.

Collecting toys and treasures — noticing and remembering and sometimes incautiously saying some stuff about those first two — then being seen as odd for doing so [perhaps something all do in one way or another?], well, there comes the time, or has come for me, where this is found to be fabulous wealth.

Which I always thought so but have oft been chagrined to confess.

It’s the story of a memory of a mostly forgotten entry of a generally sorry reboot of a now-classic show. Which in its day we might do well to remember ran for only five seasons. And Serling’s first script for something like it was rejected, unseen as awesome until two years had passed. Tho now it’s in all the ‘greatest shows’ lists.

The original Star Trek, lore has long noted, ran less than the crew’s ‘five-year mission’.

We shd also recall that in Hamill’s character’s case it’s not that he grows fabulously wealthy. He gains fabulous— as the reversal, and the dinger is he always was.

And of course writing this I see I’ve done it — rifled the collection in the truck bed of my mind — with that Twilight Zone wannabe itself. Something recalled from decades ago and now I’ve found a place for it, in something I wrote.

 

Thanks for reading.

 

Image Credit:
Disney Pixar

 

Follow-up

Leave a Comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Recent

Coyotes and Christians

I am not saying Christians are like coyotes. [For that, some could cut caustically to coyotes are like Christians — tricksters, roaming in the dark, feeding on the dead … ] Simply noticed — somewhat in passing, as it’s said, having attained, apparently … achieved? … some kind of state where nearly anything I hear,

Read More »

And Did Dostoevsky Say ‘Beauty Will Save’

Short answer: he did not. Neither did Prince Myshkin, that we know of. Likely both believed it. Beauty — in the person of Christ — will do so. And clearly D wrote of M in The Idiot to explore art and beauty and ugliness and salvation. But did he say it, and did he believe that

Read More »

What I Recalled Watching Netflix

[Television is educational.]   One Saying the same stuff over and over looks like you have different things to say. Two If you’re ever in a below-average film or streaming series, and you beat the tar out of a guy, in a house, and you gaze down in both some shock as also a certain

Read More »

Seeking the King

A line everywhere misattributed to Chesterton reads thus: The young man who rings the bell at the brothel is unconsciously looking for God. This line is not from the great [several senses of the word] man who recently celebrated his 150th birthday, but the mid-century most unmodern novelist Bruce Marshall. The words — which do

Read More »

Random

Inglorious Bastards

This is a post borne of a recent article in Leadership Journal, by a guy who’s been meeting with Ted Haggard. I don’t usually write on stuff like that — it is cheeseball to even appear to piggyback for one’s own benefit on somebody else’s popular post, or to try and capitalize on an au

Read More »

Time, Treasure

Saw an episode ages ago of one of the Twilight Zone reboots which, I’m pretty sure, starred Mark Hamill as this weird kid who collected toys. All this kitschy stuff from the ‘50s and grew up collecting them — and thus stayed weird and for the most part apparently lonely for his life entire. Of course

Read More »

Less Is More

I don’t know. What happened next? So, so beautiful. This is why. You like me. This is it. Red White Blue What the fuck? What if we … Why should I? God is love. Show me how. I love you. See you later. Yes, yes, yes! I’m leaving you. Please don’t go. I was wrong.

Read More »

Finding Level

Relationship finds its own level. Generally it looks like we [and others] choose — a boy’s entreatment rejected, an attorney makes partner, 158 million of us vote — but there is a finality to much that we ostensibly do. This is how such absurdities as determinism gain purchase, how authors can talk and be misunderstood

Read More »

Related

Of Love

We like lists. Here’s one. Love is a song Love is the greatest song Love is integral Love is alive Love is gospel Love is power Love is work Love is desire and fulfillment Love is suffering Love is free Love is true to reality Love is accurate Love is simple Love is individual Love

Read More »

Talks With A Duck

Obscured in the kerfuffle over Mr. Robertson’s coarser comments on the Fairer Sex is a simple fact that any five-year-old can tell us: Adults say the darnedest things. This has since been confirmed by the comments of many other adults, critiquing the original notes on the female form offered by the “Duck Dynasty” patriarch — responses

Read More »

Lyric Lent

Mostly I gave up meat for Lent. Or to put it another way, I gave up meat (mostly) for Lent. And this is how Lent often goes and the difference I think isn’t usually that it doesn’t go that way but that it’s OK when it does. Not that it’s OK to give our word

Read More »

Jesus FAIL

They killed him yesterday and it was awful, as you might expect. Crucifixion, like a common criminal — but he wasn’t common, though now he’s a criminal. He broke their laws, which I guess are our laws. No. He confirmed our Law. Justice: fulfill the Law. But the Romans didn’t want justice; they wanted quiet.

Read More »