Between the ages of 5 and 7, all I wanted for Christmas were life-size Barbies, Giga Pets, Yikes! pencils, Silly Putty, Garfield comic books and a Gameboy. I still look back at those gifts with glee and nostalgia. What cool toys. Kids nowadays don’t know what they’re missing.

I have two nieces and three nephews whose Christmas lists I have thoroughly judged. Four-year-old Taylor wants something calls Squinkies — little figurines trapped in plastic balls. Lame. Austin, who’s 11’ typed his Christmas list in alternating green and red fonts, wants Halo Legos … and a pocket watch.

I decided to do my own research — scratch that, Rachel Pyle asked me to do research —  to see what kids these days are requesting for Christmas. I thought maybe my nieces are nephews are just weird anomalies. They’re not. It turns out kids across America are asking for the weirdest toys this year.

Here are a list of some of the top gifts for Christmas 2011:

My Keepon
Picture a snowman. Now picture a yellow snowman (gross, right?). Now picture that snowman on a pedestal, dancing to the beat of your music. If you can picture this, then you can picture My Keepon, one of the hottest toys for grade-schoolers this holiday season. I haven’t figured out why this is the case. It reminds me a lot of a Ferbie, only creepier!

Fijit Friends
If you want a dancing robot but are totally creeped out by My Keepon (more like Kreepon!), get a Fijit friend. This robot dances to music like the Keepon, but it also says more than 150 phrases and responds to more than 30 keywords. Plus, it’s a robot just for girls! Each Fijit Friend has its own girly name and personality, and they talk to other fijit friends — again, like a Ferbie.

You and Me: Hide and Seek Friend Dolls
When I saw these dolls I immediately thought, “Cool! Dolls you can never lose!” You throw one in a closet and it beeps or giggles till you find it. Or maybe you lose one and the other one finds it — creepy but cool. But it turns out, after reading the product description, these dolls do nothing like that. You can feed them, brush their hair and when you lay them down, their eyes close. So, they’re pretty much like every other baby doll on the market, except they have a misleading name to trick you into buying them.

Crayola Color Studio iMarker
This is the gift for any future child of Nick Graham: a Crayola marker for the iPad. The iMarker works like a stylus, only it’s the size and shape of a marker for tiny hands to grasp. Instead of coloring on paper, kids can borrow Dad’s iPad and scribble away. (This means next Christmas, Billy’s asking for his own iPad. Start working overtime, Dad.)

I Am T-Pain Mic
Kids need role models, right? Well, good thing they have T-Pain. The folks at JAKKS Pacific created a recordable, auto-tune-able microphone in honor of the rapper. According to iamtpainmic.com — which you should definitely check out for laughs — the mic has three original beats, a T-Pain Effect button, and another button with a picture of T-Pain’s face. (I haven’t figured out what that does.) After little Jimmy records his rap jams, he can plug the mic into his computer to save the mp3s. The microphone comes in three designs: black, black with flames and white with skulls for girls.

A Sojourn staffer takes on the challenge of listening to Justin Beiber’s new Christmas CD track-by-track.

Going into this piece, I was challenged to rid my mind of all the biases I had against Justin Bieber. Really, I’d never heard a complete song by the artist until listening to his Christmas album. The only thing I could hold against him was the fact that I used to be told I had a “Bieber haircut.”
Anyway, here are my first reactions to Justin Beiber’s Christmas album, “Under The Mistletoe.”

Only Thing I Ever Get for Christmas
Nice little intro with acoustic guitar strumming accompanying Bieber’s voice.
Also, a choir singing “ooohs” in the background. Cue the electronic drums and melismas that lead into the the chorus!
Psychedelic synthesizers add a really cool feel to the bridge. I really wish there were more synthesizers in the entire song and less drum machine.
So many vocal tracks!
Intimate, slow ending with Bieber singing about mistletoe: “I’ll be waiting, kiss me there.”

Mistletoe
Jingle bells count the rhythm, then Jason Mraz-style acoustic guitar and finger-snaps come in.
The lyrics are all about evoking imagery of Christmas.
Bieber keeps singing about things he should be doing, but instead he’s under the mistletoe with “yooo-ooo-ooo-ooo-oou.”
There are some pretty weak lyrics going on here. “Don’t you buy me nothing / ‘cause I am feeling one thing / Your lips on my lips.”
This song may as well be a Christmas cover of Mraz’s “I’m Yours.”

Christmas Song (Chestnuts Roasting on an Open Fire)
Spacey intro of acoustic guitar, piano and some weird-but-awesome synthesizer in the back drenched in reverb.
This is a nice, slow and swanky version of this song. Finger snaps keep the rhythm, again. There is a pretty cool effect on the vocal echoes.
Anytime Bieber sings a high note, the auto tune becomes pretty obvious.
Hey, it’s Usher!
So many harmonies are happening right now.
I can hardly take the male-diva love going on right now.
Holy ‘80s guitar solo, Bieber! This is so cheesy.
I think the production of these songs is really hurting more than helping.

Santa Claus Is Coming to Town
Funk! That is fun.
Bieber shouting, “Santa’s coming, girl! Whoo!”
This is what Christmas music is all about! Having fun and being happy in the season instead of trying to pick up girls!
There’s a choir in the back, a really appropriate organ, and Bieber almost sounds like he’s a member of the band instead of a celebrity who records his vocal tracks at a different time than the other musicians.
Did he just say it’s the time of year to, “Shake it, baby”? I’m not going to let that ruin this song for me.
Fun track.

Fa La La
Electric piano, drum machines and Bieber saying, “This is the time of year we can give it, give it, give it, give it all.”
Boys II Men is serving as Bieber’s backing choir?
The track so auto tuned, but I can’t tell whether or not it’s intentional. It’s kind of like Bon Iver’s “Woods,” except there is a ton of additional instrumentation. There’s a lot of cool counter-rhythms going on, too.
Man, that last little vocal solo was long. Awkward too.
Side note — the a cappella version of this song on the deluxe album is much more rewarding to listen to.

All I Want for Christmas
Strings, French horn and bells are the first thing you hear before Mariah Carey and Bieber enter.
Lots of wordless singing going on here.
Drums come in really strong and Carey begins singing.
This is upbeat! What a relief; I don’t know if I could handle another power ballad.
This is pretty enjoyable.
Wow, that was a really cool soul-infused bridge. Carey does some really cool whistle-tone stuff at the end.

Drummer Boy
Such a dramatic intro.
I feel like I’m trapped in a futuristic Christmas dream. Oh my, cue the dance party.
Bieber’s rapping. It’s not terrible.
What is happening?! Now Busta Rhymes is shouting.
Now Busta Rhymes is rapping. His lyrics are terrible, but there was just a huge swell of synthesizers and everything but his voice and drums dropped out after that.
It sounds really cool, but his lyrics are still lame. He just gave a shout-out to his Twitter followers, haha.
Oh, another chorus, then Bieber raps the last verse about donating to charity and thinking about less fortunate families. A good message? Yes. A good verse for a rap song?
No way, Biebz. That song just blew my mind.

Christmas Eve
Nice, pretty piano introduction. Of course it can’t remain that way.
Drum machines and hand-claps come in after. “I don’t need presents / girl, you’re everything I need.”
Apparently, that message wasn’t delivered enough in the first few songs?
Maybe it’s just because it follows “Drummer Boy,” but that song was painfully boring.

All I Want is You
Two fake intros? Bieber, you jokester. It’s a sappy, lonely winter ballad.
“Sitting here all alone watching the snow fall / looking back at the day we through them snow balls / I can’t believe I’m putting the tree up by myself / I need you and nobody else.”
It’s not bad. It’s pretty much the same idea as the first song on this album, but this song does a much better job of evoking the desperation of missing a loved one.

Home This Christmas
Immediately I can tell this is going to be a country ballad because of the big piano, mid-tempo and twangy country guitar.
The Band Perry’s presence is obvious.
Bieber and the Perrys’ voices compliment each other well. Maybe Bieber should do more country stuff. This is a really solid track.

Silent Night
Just Bieber’s voice and piano.
Pretty and relaxing. I’m really glad the second verse didn’t add any drum machines or other instrumentation. It would have tainted a classic.
In general, this Christmas album wasn’t too bad. There were too many ballads and all the original songs that Bieber helped write were sappy love songs that all revolved around the idea of kissing girls under the mistletoe or only wanting a girl’s love for Christmas. The covers were fun and most of the guest musicians attributed nice variety to the songs.

You have no idea how many times a fictional personae would have come in handy in my life.

Awkward social situations? Boring family get-togethers? Unfortunate work shifts? Sorry. I can’t make it. My, uh, cousin Blake needs help moving.

No, I don’t actually have a cousin Blake, but maybe if I had a little more gall I would put him to use.

This is exactly what happens in Oscar Wilde’s “The Importance of Being Earnest.” John Worthing, played by Phil Herbruck (sr), has a fake brother named Earnest and Algernon Moncrieff, played by Adam Fike (so), has a fake friend by the name of Bunbury. Both characters use their faux personas to get out of unpleasant or uncomfortable social situations.

The Indiana Wesleyan University Theatre Guild presented “The Importance of Being Earnest” in the Black Box theatre last weekend.

Upon entering the Black Box, I was impressed by the set design just as I have been with every show I’ve seen in the venue.

For this play, the set was “in the round,” meaning there is audience seating on all four sides of the stage. Sometimes performers’ backs are to you; sometimes they look right at you while they speak.

This made the body language of the performers infinitely more important.

For some scenes, you would hardly see the actors faces. Although you can still hear them speak, audiences are forced to listen in a different way than what they are used to in a typical set design.

Act I

The play began with the introduction of Algernon and his servant Lane, played by Gardy Darbouze (fr). Soon after, Worthing is introduced, as he and Algy share witty conversation about flirting wives, engagement, truth and Worthing’s various names being Earnest, Jack and John.

This portion of the first act was tense. Fike’s lines seemed rushed and lacked vocal variety, making the chemistry between him and Herbruck stale. Because the actors were tense, the audience was tense.  There were jokes delivered within the dialogue that were hardly acknowledged by the audience because the tense actors didn’t match the comedic script.

Worthing confesses to Algy that he plans to propose to Gwendolen Fairfax, Algy’s niece. Soon after, Gwendolen, played by Justine Schaefer (fr), and her mother, Lady Bracknell, played by Emily Wyse (sr), enter the stage.

Wyse and Schaefer nailed their characters perfectly. Wyse played the perfect fear-inspiring mother.

Schaefer was magnificent. Her confidence as Gwendolen was enthralling.

Worthing proposes and is “accepted” by Gwendolen. Their chemistry on stage was impeccable.  Schaefer’s confidence and Herbruck’s nervous infatuation were wholly natural and believable.

Lady Bracknell intervened and shuts down plans for marriage until she knows more about Worthing. It is revealed that as a baby, Worthing was found in a handbag, causing him to not to know who his parents are or what his true identity is.

It wasn’t until a joke was made by Lady Bracknell about how Worthing was “careless” for losing both parents that the audience laughed freely. It was as if the entire Black Box relaxed with a sigh of relief.

Act II

The second act opens with Worthing’s charge, Cecily Cardew, played by Lauren Crane (so), and her governess, Miss Prism, played by Kylie Disher (so), studying German in the garden outside the Worthing country house. Both actresses give strong performances. Crane was cute and funny while Disher’s mature, scholastic demeanor made her a convincing governess.

Two more romantic relationships were introduced: one between Prism and Rev. Canon Chasuble, played by Paul Mishler (so), and the other between Cecily and Algy, who is now pretending to be Worthing’s brother, Earnest. The attraction between Cecily and Algy resulting in another engagement.

The rest of the act features catty confusion between Gwendolen and Cecily, as they both claim to be engaged to Earnest. It also consist of arguing between Worthing and Algy, who are determined to be christened under the name “Earnest” to please their respective fiancés.

You can imagine how entertaining it was to watch this play out on stage.

The way the women often kept a smiling face while scheming against each other was executed flawlessly by both Crane and Schaefer.

The lack of emotion from Fike came across as an even more ornery attitude in the argument between he and the flustered Herbruck.

However, whenever things got too tense, Braden Hunt (fr), playing the butler Merriman, offered comedic relief with his untimely entrances to the stage exclaiming, “Ahem!”

Act III

The last act was full of the making and breaking of wedding engagements. Lady Bracknell wouldn’t allow Worthing to marry her daughter. This led Worthing to not allow Algy marry Cecily, who he was in charge.

When Miss Prism arrived, Lady Bracknell began angrily questioning her about a certain infant who was lost in a handbag many years ago, leading to the shocking revelation of Worthing’s true identity.

The deception, irony and jokes of this play cannot be fully appreciated by reading a review.  They create a web so intricately spun that one must see it unravel before his or her own eyes.

Showings of “The Importance of Being Earnest” continue this weekend.

Friday Night Live: a review of the concept
Before I begin this review, I must quote Dr. Greg Fiebig, professor of communication and theatre, who on top of every syllabus types: “Effort does not equal excellence.” And though I want to believe that it does — I spent six hours on that presentation, and you gave me a B-?! — in the real world, effort never equals excellence. It’s all about the results.

This year’s Friday Night Live, though the result of months of hard work, was not excellent. At all.

I’ve attended six FNLs in my time at Indiana Wesleyan University, and I’ve never seen a worse production. Even two years ago when the FNL cast openly mocked me and The Sojourn in its entirety — at least I laughed.

It does you no good if I just say “FNL was bad” and leave it at that. So I want to look at why it was so awful, and why most FNLs are bad as well, using the three questions I asked myself during last weekend’s show: What is the purpose of FNL? What is comedy, and how does FNL exemplify it (or does it)? And, what is the purpose of the “spiritual punch”?

What’s the purpose of FNL?
When I was a senior in high school, an IWU recruiter came to my school to, well, recruit. About 10 of us sat in Carroll High School’s small auditorium to hear a well-dressed man talk about the university. He spent the majority of the time talking about FNL. In fact, that’s the only concrete thing I remember from that meeting.

Recruiter: “Students sit outside the auditorium for hours, waiting for the doors to open! It’s always sold out!”
I thought, “Man, I need to get my tickets now!” The sharp-looking recruiter had me convinced that FNL was the event of the year. It may even be the reason I chose to attend IWU in the first place. (Just kidding.)

From the way this recruiter sold the idea of FNL it made me believe that the event was significant, that it was essential to campus life at IWU.

But is that true? Are we a university that’s all about … funny? Even if FNL were always well done, is that what IWU wants to be known?   FNL is strictly an extra-curricular activity; there are no academic advantages to it. No one’s getting class credit for acting. No one’s getting chapel credit for attending.

FNL is advertised more than theatre plays, productions that do give participants class credit with subjects that expand the mind.

How many posters of “Tuesdays with Morrie” did you see around campus? OK, now how many FNL posters did you see? And how many FNL cardboard cut-outs?

What do you learn from FNL, except what to laugh at: the IWU ratio, wedding-crazed girls, the dancing policy, etc.? Who comes out of FNL feeling inspired (except by the spiritual punch)?

That leads me to believe that FNL is just meant for laughs. It may benefit its contributors — helping actors act and writers write — but it does nothing extensive for the audience. It’s strictly entertainment. That wouldn’t be such a big deal if it weren’t promoted more than academic events like plays and guest speakers.

What is comedy?
But is FNL really funny? I learned the definition of comedy from Dick Van Dyke. He said comedy is when your expectations are foiled; you expect one thing, but something else happens.

As a member of the audience, I don’t want to predict everything that’s going to happen in a skit. Sure, there are times when that is funny. With FNL, there’s a certain amount of expectation involved, such as how you expect IWU inside jokes. But when it comes to the plot of a sketch, no one wants to be able to predict everything that will happen.

Take the “Dating Game” skit. No one was surprised by how weird the bachelors were. That was funny in itself, of course. But when the bachelors’ personalities became the focus of the plot, it became less and less funny, especially as the skit dragged on for 14 minutes. The sketch didn’t foil any of our expectations.

Maybe the skit would have been funnier if less emphasis had been placed on the contestants of the show, and more on how they were taken prisoner and subjected to experiments.  That was unexpected.

The “Sesame Street” skit was very similar. Characters were slightly neurotic, and that became the focus of the skit. But like the dating skit, the 13-minute “Sesame Street” skit lasted way too long. The audience hoped something would happen, but nothing did. That’s why FNL skits seem to fall so flat at the end. There’s that anticipation for something unexpected, but there was no follow-through.

The best sketch at FNL was the “Engagion” video, created by Steve Floro (sr) and Laura Snyder, because it both met and exceeded our expectations. Those of us who’ve been to several FNLs know how popular the “ring by spring” sketches are. Floro’s version foiled our expectations by approaching the IWU cliche in a new way. Engagement is not just common on this campus — it’s a disease.

What is the purpose of the “spiritual punch”?
My guess: to give FNL real purpose.

Right before the closing number, an FNL cast member steps out onto an empty stage and gives a “spiritual punch,” a mini-sermon or testimony. This year’s lasted about 10 minutes long, the average length of a sketch.

The audience is left a little confused. For nearly two hours people witnessed funny-funny-funny-funny, then an interlude of serious, ending with another dash of funny. The spiritual punch seems so misplaced — and is it even necessary?

FNL is not an evangelistic production, or it wouldn’t rely so heavily on IWU-themed skits. Who, besides a Wildcat, would find the Grandparents’ Day sketch amusing? Who would get it? FNL is clearly directed toward an IWU audience.

We Christians do not need a sermon whenever we go to an IWU-related event. There aren’t sermons after plays or sporting events. FNL shouldn’t stop its production to remind you that the cast and crew are Christians and that its audience members are Christians. We already know that.

As Christians we do everything to the glory of God (1 Cor. 10:31); we don’t need to proclaim that we do — especially when it confuses the whole mood of a production.

The problem with FNL isn’t a lack of effort; it has more to do with its approach as a whole. If FNL’s purpose is truly just to be funny, then it needs to be funny. If that’s the case, nix the “spiritual punch.”

If, however, FNL is supposed to be beneficial to its crew and audience alike, then it needs to be so holistically. A mini-sermon at the end can’t redeem the production from its frivolity.

I hope next semester’s production is better than this one’s. (Don’t worry, FNL apologists, this is my last review.)