Several years ago, when this site was popular enough to garner the occasional mention in photo-related publications, I decided to set up a Google alert for my own name. Silly? Probably. Self-absorbed? Most decidedly. But it was an effortless way to keep an eye on my online image — just in case something I photographed or wrote went inexplicably viral.
While a few posts did unleash some minor epidemics, my natural contrarianism insured none of them graduated into a full-scale pandemic. Eventually, as my popularity waned, the Google alerts became less about me and more about other unfortunate dudes who just happened to share my name.
At this point, had I any sense, I would have cancelled the Google alert. But no. I didn’t. I couldn’t. There’s just something so disturbingly irresistible about getting alerted to news stories that look like they’re about you, but aren’t.
Your name is all over that thing. Someone’s quoting you; arresting you; interviewing you; eulogizing you. Only it’s not you. It’s downright creepy. It’s as if there are parallel universes in which you’re living parallel lives, but thanks to the butterfly effect, your paths have diverged so substantially that only your name links you across worlds.
Recently, for example, one of my namesakes was praised in his city’s local paper for inviting a young boy to sit beside him while he played organ in church — even allowing the child to press a prescribed key at certain times during the performance! It was a news story without even the slightest hint of newsworthiness — the sort of reporting that’s so fluffy it makes dryer lint jealous. And yet I was riveted! Bizarro me, it turns out, is a musician too! And he’s interested in sharing what he knows with others! Attaboy, organ me! Apparently, not every butterfly impacts every event equally.
A couple months ago, I read about another of my doppelnamens who got ticked off, and took a sledgehammer to 12 police cars in a parking lot. Not that I’m condoning this sort of thing, but I must admit to having felt a modicum of pride at getting to “stick it to the man” without actually compromising my own spotless criminal record or moral code. I did, however, find myself somewhat mystified by the fact that my namesake caused only $4900 worth of damage. $4900?! With a parking lot full of cars and a sledgehammer in hand? “The real me,” I thought, “would have easily hammered his way north of $10,000!”
More often than not though, news of my doppelnamens is purely pedestrian and utterly banal. I’ve retired. Or I’ve been appointed chair of some horrifically boring committee. Or I’ve died. I do find the obituaries particularly unsettling — especially when the doppelnamen is the same age as I am.
I’ll be the first to admit that such behavior might just be a teensy-weensy bit voyeuristic. But I figure it’s nowhere near as bad as those people who stalk old friends and lovers on Facebook. At least I’m only creeping on myself… well, sort of…
I wonder though — have my namesakes also enabled Google alerts? And if so, how many of them saw some photograph I’d taken, listened to some song I’d written, or read some twisted essay about folding time or celebrating National Biplane Lady Day, and then panic-called friends and family members to assure them it wasn’t he who was responsible!
Life in the 21st Century. A little to love; a little to loathe… but oh so entertaining.
©2018 grEGORy simpson
ABOUT THE PHOTOS:
The match between an article and its photos usually occurs through one of two means: either the photos themselves suggest the topic of the article; or the article suggests a particular type of photo. When this second situation occurs, I simply go spelunking through my Lightroom catalog, and then repurpose previously-rejected photos into a new context. But this particular article, in spite of resting squarely within the latter camp, did not involve a descent into Lightroom. Fact is, after staring into a computer monitor since the early 1980’s, I sometimes feel a need to focus my eyes at a distance other than one meter — so I wasn’t overly keen to wade through thousands of photos searching for those in which my own image appeared distorted through abstraction. Instead I went old-skool, picked up a camera and walked out of the house for some fresh content. 60 glorious computer-free minutes later, I returned with three new illustrative shots for the article. Such swashbuckling tactics do violate my self-imposed dictate to let photos gestate for at least 1 year before publishing — but why give yourself rules if you’re not going to break them now and then?
REMINDER: If you find these photos enjoyable or the articles beneficial, please consider making a DONATION to this site’s continuing evolution. As you’ve likely realized, ULTRAsomething is not an aggregator site — serious time and effort go into developing the original content contained within these virtual walls.
Dear Gregory –
I have been cruising your site since January 5 2011. My wife was rightly mortified with me because I walked around with a bazooka of a camera (a nikon d3x, with that HUGE 14-24 lens).
I read your blog, and it made me laugh. I was also abroad at the time (in Geneva) and it was such a pleasure to read about a Canadian using a Leica . . .
A year later, I traded in ALL my nikon gear to get my hands on an M9, and i managed to stash the cash away to get a noctilux. I have them still.
I love your articles, and this one make me laugh.
I also just jumped onto google alerts to spy on myself too.
All the best in your writing and photography! I eagerly await your next post!
JC
Hi JC. I find it fascinating that you remember the exact date you first started to read ULTRAsomething. Funny how we humans tend to remember the dates and times at which we experience certain traumatic events… Thanks for sticking around for so long!
Another great article EGOR. Thanks for the Google tip, and thanks for the 3 appropriate images that accompany your story.
Hi Take: Nice to hear from you. It’s reassuring to know that a modern guy, with a popular Instagram feed and a YouTube channel with 32k+ subscribers, still takes the time to read the rambling thoughts of a dinosaur who prefers to hide behind the written word. 😉
Dude, we all look forward to your thoughts, whether in prose, music or photos.
Several years ago I got a taste of what it’s like to be famous and to be stalked. A man called my house looking for Tracy Adams, which was me, but the wrong sex. The Tracy Adams he sought was a well known porn star. The creep on the other end of the line went on about what a great body she had and that he was a big fan. He never did call back. I, of course, had to check out my doppelnamen, and upon seeing her wondered whether in another universe there is a porn movie called, Tracy on Tracy.
Yikes! You’ve just convinced me that “security” might be an ever better reason than “entertainment” for keeping my Google alert active.
And he takes the time to respond to comments on his YouTube channel also. I find you both to be class acts.
Thanks for the amusing story, I enjoyed it.
Yeah. Take’s a good guy. Though he did fail miserably at coercing me into finding my inner-extrovert and joining the YouTuber ranks. I figured I’d best stick to my strengths — even if those strengths are akin to being a farrier in the age of the automobile.
Reason #36 why I read every EGOR article. Every now and again you make me look up a word. Today’s EGOR word of the day is farrier.
I gave up on my doppelnamens because unlike yours mine were invariably smarter, more accomplished, and better looking than me. My self esteem can sustain no more damage.
Looping back to JC Chan above I can only wish that I had the gear to trade in for a Leica though you and Take would both remind me that it’s not the camera but the photographer who makes the shot. Great photos btw.
Wait a minute… you have 36 (or more) reasons for READING these articles?! I can’t even think of 3 reasons why I WRITE them! Nice to hear from you again, greycoopers.
Dear Gregory
You are hilarious and so corny and I love you for that. I only recently discovered your blog after looking for Leica m-a reviews and just returned to it to read it again. I figured I would read this entry first and I’m glad I did. Also I think you’re using the wrong form of ensure a lot. I think you mean to use ensure instead of insure. I hope you have a good day and I look forward to reading more of your entries.
Hi Nima. Thanks for taking the time to comment, and glad you enjoy the posts. I look at the insure vs ensure thing as one of those “oxford comma” deals – some style guides say one thing and some the other. Rather than taking sides, I usually switch it up, sometimes going one way and sometimes the other. That way I ensure I don’t get bored and I insure my noncommittal nature remains intact.