Just finished watching the latest episode of Eureka, and as interesting as the show may somewhat be, it’s beginning to get a little too predictable. You can pretty much bet that a central recurring character will somehow get involved with the incident-of-the-week that may result in serious injury or death, which they of course survive unless it’s a season finale in which they don’t to add to the suspense and salt to the waiting-for-next-season wound. 😛
Have you ever thought about predictability and dependability as being similar yet different? They both imply that someone or something will react in a certain way as they always usually would, yet somehow their connotations are different. You’d think better of someone who was “dependable” as oppose to someone who was “predictable”. In most cases, calling someone predictable meant that person was boring and has nothing better to do. And in most cases, calling someone dependable meant that person will be there at your side when you need it. So what if there’s someone out there who has nothing better to do but wait for your beck and call 24/7 just in case you need his/her assistance? Is that being predictable because the person has nothing better to occupy his/her time, or is that being dependable because the person will definitely be there for you *because* that loser has nothing else to do?
Why does being predictable feel like a bad thing to be? Do we need so much excitement and newness in our lives that every single time it has to be something different? In that case, should we not have dependable people who we can count on every single time, since that would mean the same old boring reliable thing over and over again?
Why oh why do I have to spend/waste my time thinking about such nonsense things. 😛