In the wake of tragedy…where do we go from here?

I can safely assume that many people across the nation have one thing on their mind: the Connecticut shootings at Sandy Hook elementary.  Over the past many years, we have seen our fair share of mass shootings, but this particular one hits a little too close to home for many.  The shooter (I refuse to utter his name, for the media glorifies killers too often) targeted children…children.  This unthinkable tragedy is so difficult to articulate; there are no words to express how this tragedy affects us all.  When I first heard of this, I was shocked, appalled and disgusted.  11 days until Christmas, a joyous and highly anticipated holiday for many children, a sick individual takes the lives of children and adults without remorse.  Innocence has been taken, not just the children who lost their lives but also those who were witnesses to this event.  They will never recover from this day; their lives are forever changed. 

When tragedies like this occur, we quickly turn from shock to sorrow and finally, to anger.  We so easily want to point a finger at who to blame: the mother of the shooter for having the guns and taking her son out to practice, the media for glorifying killers, the doctors for not always accurately diagnosing mental illness, the violent video games that children are exposed to, the NRA?  We so badly want to blame someone, because that is how many of us are able to cope with a tragedy of this magnitude.  I have chosen not to blame one thing, but to question our society and how is it possible something like this can happen. 

I am not fond of guns, in fact I hate them; I do however understand the need for some people to feel protected by having a gun in their home.  But in this particular case, should parents allow their children access to guns even though they train them on how to shoot?  Did the mother know that her son had a mental illness, one that would lead him to take her guns and execute a mass shooting?  These questions stir an already ongoing debate about guns in the home and a child’s access to them.  Another question bothers me: did the mother know her son had a mental illness, and if so, why would she teach him how to shoot?  There are so many questions that unfortunately will remain unanswered. 

The question that we need to now focus on is how do we prevent this from happening again.  Repealing the second amendment, in my opinion, is nearly impossible.  America is a gun-loving country, in which the second amendment is highly praised.  The NRA is one of the biggest organizations, and going up against them would be a long, arduous fight that will never reach any sort of conclusion.  I think that discussing gun control is not really the issue in this case, for I believe that the real issue is mental illness.  How do we learn the warning signs of mental illness?  How do we distinguish mental illness from a quirky, eccentric personality?  How do we treat mental illness?  Is medication really the answer for treatment or should parents spend money on therapy?  What do we do to help those that are suffering from a mental illness?  What if parents don’t have the means to financially support the costs it would take to treat mental illness?  What then?  I think these are the questions that we must now address.  We need to put political party affiliations aside and come together to find preventative measures that will effectively work to protect innocent people.  Now, I know that violence and crime will continue, but we are now in a time where action must begin.  We cannot sit by and allow tragedies like this to continue.

Having said that, in order to begin change, the right questions must be addressed.  Fighting amongst each other on issues of gun control will not help our situation.  We must get to the core of what is wrong with our society and begin rebuilding a better society in which our children do not fear attending school, or theaters, or malls or any other public place.  I believe we are not completely free, because our freedom has been caged in fear. So many of us are so fearful of stepping out of our homes.  We take a risk each and every time we leave our homes, but should our fears be so heightened that even going to school—a place that should feel safe for students—cause panic and anxiety for students and parents?

This tragedy has shaken this country and others.  We cannot describe the horror of what unfolded at Sandy Hook.  And as if this horrific crime couldn’t be worse, one of the most hated groups in America--the Westboro Church--will be picketing the school and the funerals of the victims.  Luckily, there is a light at the end of this very dark, grim tunnel—many people have decided to come together to create a human shield of love against the Westboro Church.  For more information regarding this, you may visit their Facebook page: http://www.facebook.com/events/450301351697761/.  This page also offers an address in which people can send donations and letters of support for the families that lost a loved one. 

In the wake of this tragedy, I think it is clear that evil does exist and that we must, at this time, put our differences behind us and find a way to prevent these tragedies.  As the days go by and we begin to reflect on this tragedy, how do you think we should approach preventative measures?  Is there any hope that we can eventually stop mass shootings and maybe alleviate some of the fears that now plague us?  Should we attack the NRA and demand stricter policies?  Should people be psychologically evaluated before purchasing a gun?  So many questions will continue to be discussed, I can only hope that for once, we will take action and finally do something. 

Faithfully,

Cristina

Paragraph Format: Is there a wrong way to write paragraphs?

A couple of weeks ago, I learned about a writing format known as the “Schaffer paragraph” started by Jane Schaffer.  This particular format is taught in schools to help students with formulating a paragraph.  The Schaffer paragraph includes the topic sentence, 1 concrete detail (also known as a fact), 2 commentaries (analyses on the fact) and a conclusion.  Though this format is meant to help students design paragraphs, it limits critical thought and context.  I talked to a student who learned this format, and she informed me that she was taught to write her essays using this paragraph format.  What resulted from using this format is that it didn’t focus on the context of the essay, but rather the individual paragraphs; that is, the essays produced did not have a connected focus. 

This format is only taught in some middle schools and high schools afterwards, in college, it is an undesirable format.  However, from what I have learned, this particular format can sometimes be deeply embedded in the student’s learning that they have trouble letting go of it.  This becomes problematic when a student, who has only learned this format, goes to college and discovers that the way they write is not acceptable in higher education.

I was appalled when I heard about this kind of formatting and the fact that it is still taught.  I feel very lucky for not having been exposed to this kind of technique, yet I worry about students that are taught to write in this manner.  The Schaffer paragraph is also easy for teachers to teach and to grade.  The format is designed in such a way that it makes the grading process simple and from what it seems, linear.  This kind of attitude towards teaching and grading contributes to the lack of critical thought and the coherent flow and focus needed in papers. 

Because I am just learning about this format now, I still have much to learn about the Schaffer paragraph and how it is applied in the classroom.  Has anyone ever learned this format or know anyone that has?  If so, is it helpful?  Does this particular formatting device seem linear, in that it steers away from the context and focus of the entire paper?

Teaching Virtue

Can virtue be taught?  When I look up the word virtue, this is one of the definitions that come up from Wikipedia: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Virtue

Virtue (Latin: virtus, Ancient Greek: ἀρετή "arete") is moral excellence. A virtue is a positive trait or quality deemed to be morally good and thus is valued as a foundation of principle and good moral being. Personal virtues are characteristics valued as promoting collective and individual greatness.

The definition “moral excellence” baffles me.  What is “moral excellence”?  How can we measure what is moral?  Morality is different for everyone at least that is how the Sophists believe.  I believe this too; so how can we judge what is excellent morally and what is not? 

As I am nearing the end of my History of Rhetoric class, this question of whether virtue can be taught comes up regularly in the readings.  Isocrates believes that virtue couldn’t be taught, but teachers could help students to get close to being virtuous.  Is this true?  I believe that teachers can lay down the fundamentals of virtue, but it’s up to the students to decide to be virtuous or not.

This idea of teaching virtue as a focus during the ancient Greek era is so relevant today.  Many students are being subjected to so many tests that there is little room left for analytical, critical thought.  I believe that if we can come close to teaching virtue or how to be virtuous, it is through critical thought: giving students the skills to think for themselves, therefore gaining the confidence to make good, rational decision on their own.  But with all these tests and teachers focusing their time primarily on testing, are our students getting further away from learning the fundamentals of how to be virtuous?  Is education pulling away from helping our students gain moral and ethical skills through critical thought?  Just some questions I have been pondering over this past quarter…

Go MOOC Yourself

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eW3gMGqcZQc

New York Times has deemed 2012, “The year of the MOOC.”  So what exactly is a MOOC?  The acronym stands for Massive Open Online Courses, and many universities and schools have become very interested in it.  They are online courses for students to take to continue their education.  So what is the difference between the MOOC and other online courses?  MOOC is free, but credit-less classes and apparently it is huge and continues to grow in the academic world.  Students can take courses that are designed like actual courses in a school, but they do not have to pay.  However, if they want the credit for the course they take, they then must pay for it.  The work is also shared amongst the students/participants and the facilitator and everyone can keep the work in the end.  MOOC refers to the course as “participatory,” this sense of engagement with everyone else in the course.  There aren’t any assignments; the courses are more focused on engaging with one another and building up network connections. 

The courses are distributed, meaning that videos, social networks, blogs, etc. are all connected and work together to create this shared network of ideas.

Though MOOCs is becoming more and more popularized within the academic spectrum, the controversy questioning the validity of internet classroom connection compared to face-to-face lectures continues to ensue.  Can online courses be just as effective as face-to-face lectures?  It’s difficult to say considering that I have never taken an online class.  However, I have known people to take online courses and they felt that from them, they learned a great deal.  There is a discipline needed to be maintained in a classroom, however, taking an online course requires a particular different kind of discipline.  Students must keep up with their course, and not succumb to procrastination and laziness.  It is a tough discipline, one that requires a great want and desire to learn and be a part of an online, academic group. 

So, I wonder, is MOOC the next step in education?  Is this the future of education?  So many people do not have the time, money, or drive to attend school, yet they have the thirst for knowledge and to be a part of a larger community in which they can share that knowledge.  MOOC offers that experience and allows for people to be a part of a growing network of shared information. 

As a professional student who is only used to face-to-face interaction and the occasional blogging for specific classes, I find this source of education fascinating and will most likely investigate it more, watching as it continues to flourish.

I am interested to know how you all feel about this growing phenomenon.  Is it a valid source in the educational field?  Will this replace other online courses?  Will it offer the same challenges that regular school courses offer?

Though face-to-face interactive classrooms will continue to be an integral part of our education, MOOC seems to offer an alternative for the accessibility of taking courses online.  It will be interesting to watch as this continues to progress…

Faithfully,

Cristina

The creative process

Blogging seems to be my only outlet for any sort of creative writing lately.  Since I have been spending the majority of my time studying for my upcoming finals and working on two research papers, I have absolutely no time for anything else. 

Although, I cannot spend time writing creatively, I have been writing a lot due to all my schoolwork and have found that the creative process I used has transferred from fictional writing to discovering a solid thesis for my rhetoric paper.  It is difficult when given a research paper to write, having to come up with a thesis that you find interesting enough to spend the great amount of time researching.  I always thought that when it came to writing a research paper, there was very little room for creative energy.  However, there is a certain creativity that does result from finding a thesis and being able to argue it well. 

The Rhetoric class that I am currently taking has shown me that creativity lies heavily in arguing, whether through orality or literacy.  Even though fictional writing, poetry, etc. requires an artistic approach to the discourse, writing a thesis has its moments of creativity.  My research paper will focus on the rhetorical analysis of war speeches and their effects on the audience.  I came up with this thesis because I have always found an interest in war speeches and how they are used to rouse the audience to either persuade the troops or the citizens. 

The process of creativity for writing my paper relies on the fact that I can argue for the validity of these speeches and their ability to succeed in gaining the support of the audience.  Of course, I would prefer to spend my time writing short stories or poetry, but I surprisingly am excited to begin my paper, to attempt to persuade my audience with the importance of war speeches. 

Creativity in writing is needed for research papers; without it, you are left with a dry, poorly argued paper.  Trying to be creative while writing my paper is not easy; I find that I want to focus more on the flow and pattern of my words rather than the actual argument itself.  But as I continue to research for my paper and discover new facets of rhetoric through war speeches, I realize that creativity is present in my argument.

Creativity does exist outside the fictional world of writing.  Since school has left me without any time to write stories or poems, I am taking advantage of my creative energy in researching and writing my paper…and of course, these blogs.

One Scribble at a Time

It seems like all I'm talking about these days is schoolwork. It makes sense. It’s consuming my life and will continue to be my main focus until December 5^th. Yes, I have the date memorized. I've already started planning what I’m going to do once I’m set free. These daydreams are dangerous, but sometimes I need them to get me through the most taxing assignments.

 Regretfully, I haven’t been doing any creative writing. In place of actual poems I have scraps of paper with strange scribbles and random rushed thoughts. As I was cleaning, I found all sorts of note cards,  old receipts, and paper bag remnants with single words or phrases scrawled in barely legible pencil (it’s my preferred writing implement). I've now relegated my scraps to a bucket. But I’m awfully concerned that when I try to go through the bucket and draw some inspiration from my disjointed thoughts I will have completely lost access to that fleeting spark. Another thing I've started doing is writing passing thoughts on the notepad on my Iphone. I know…pretty gross.

I've always favored the organic process of writing by hand, but out of convenience, or survival, I'm resorting to technology. It’s creating a self-conflicting disgust. On the one hand I don’t want to stop writing completely. On the other hand I feel silly. I feel like my words mean less.There is just something about looking at your words on a miniature glowing screen with a yellow notepad background that is absurd.

What I want to know is what method do you use for writing? Do you notice a difference in the quality of your work when you switch from typing to handwriting? It will be interesting once the quarter is over to return to my scrap bucket and see if those ideas have been incubating in the recesses of my mind, or if they were merely superficial flights of fancy. I'll be sure to fill you in and continue cataloging my strange move to the fast-paced world of technology.  Or I may drop out of college, retreat to a cave, and start chiseling all of my poetry.  

Hyggelig

Remember those several years of a foreign language you took in high school?

Of course you do. You remember how difficult it was to learn an entirely new way of perceiving, naming, and structuring thought that was entirely distinct from and seemingly illogical compared to your mother tongue.

For those of us with a native English tongue, it often seemed nonsensical and a little bit sexist that some objects and ideas had a male gender and other a female or even neutral gender. When we, as English speakers, look at chairs, trees, or historical movements and talk about them, we don't change our articles and our word endings to reflect any kind of innate gender. Not only is the language itself foreign to us, the very central concepts of the language are foreign and, in the opinions of far too many who attempt to learn French, Spanish, German, Chinese, or others, unnecessary and arbitrary.

Many of us who speak English fluently see little point in learning a foreign language because many of us pass through life only needing this universal language, and many of us also rest upon the arrogant opinion that others around the world should learn English because almost every corner of the world is familiar with and employs English over its own native language as the lingua franca (or should we say lingua angla?) of business, economics, art, literature, communication, science, etc.

For those who transitioned into English from one of these or the thousands of other languages that populate the entire world, some declaring two or more languages as a standard language for the media, publication, and interpersonal relationships, this opinion is shallow and limiting. Yes, it is very realistic and possible for someone living, for example, in a Southern California suburb to only speak English to his or her friends, family, coworkers, and colleagues and never utter a word of another language his or her entire life.

But if you think English is enough, listen to the people around you.

In Southern California, in the United States, and around the world, you will rarely hear your own language exclusively. In fact, the Anglophone world, including the United States, Canada, England, and others where English is the dominant tongue, is unique in its lack of diversity in its citizens' knowledge of languages other than English.

If you think English is enough, then you are cheating yourself of truly understanding one of the most beautiful aspects of humanity: our countless ways of expressing ourselves. You are cheating yourself of understanding writers, poets, scientists, and culture makers in their own untainted method of conveying their perceptions, knowledge, and wisdom.

As an illustration, imagine Shakespeare, the English language's literary cornerstone. Though he is taught almost ad nauseum in average middle school and high school curriculum, many students dread tackling plays like Romeo and Juliet or Hamlet because they find much of it incomprehensible to their own form of English and often ignore the text itself, seeking Spark Notes' emotionally-gutted commentary or, perhaps worse, using a side-by-side "translation" better suited to their understanding as students removed from Shakespeare's "English" by over 400 years. What's more frightening is that most of the Shakespeare editions we use in school that we find difficult to understand are themselves "translations," wiped clean of Elizabethan colloquialisms and archaic spellings that would make even the most fluent English reader woozy.

Shakespeare himself even reinterpreted these plays from authors of other tongues, liberally borrowing from Scandinavian, German, Italian, and Latin texts, and even though he may have read many of these in English translation, hundreds of multilingual scholars were arguably responsible for the success of the English language's greatest figure.

But what made him truly great in the English tongue was his depth, his insight, his wisdom, and his unmatched characterization of human beings at their most noble, their most evil, their most obedient, their most rebellious.

Now, imagine how much of our own culture and idiom we are depriving ourselves of when we refuse to read forms of English that do not line up with our contemporary expression. If we treat our own language this way, imagine the multitudes of languages and words we ignore simply because we see it as "not useful."

Furthermore, some of the most significant movements in the history and literature of English were inspired by poets, writers, and philosophers of other cultures.

The Enlightenment, out of which emerged a new respect and priority for the ideas of science and inquiry, was brought into Anglo-American culture through a multilingual interaction with the French, the Germans, and the academic use of Latin, which was inspired centuries before by the Italian Renaissance and the Catholic Church.

Without a familiarity with other languages, our English-speaking forefathers and mothers may never have brought democracy and a thirst for learning from the European melting pot to the new worlds through figures such as David Hume, John Locke, and the founders of the United States themselves.

Before I start sounding like a textbook, what I'm getting at is that we, as Americans, as Anglophones, as citizens of a global society, as readers, as writers, as poets, as lovers, as friends, are limiting our potential to understand the world in its most profound element.

Language existed for thousands, perhaps millions, of years before an inventive homo sapien thought to record his or her inexpressible musings on the wall of a cave, and to extend ourselves into the realms of other linguistic cultures and perspectives is to come closer to understanding the origin of this artistic urge to speak, to name, to declare, to encourage, to write, and to articulate unspeakable emotions to which one's mother tongue simply cannot do justice.

The title of this entry illustrates the expressiveness of other languages to emotions for which we have no expression. "Hyggelig" is a Danish word that implies coziness, openness, community, and a welcoming atmosphere. The entire Danish culture perceives itself using the nuances of this term...and some people have written thousands of words about it.

http://www.hackwriters.com/Denmark.htm

And here's a collection of some more expression-bending words and phrases:

http://betterthanenglish.com/

Danke, Merci, Farvel!

Schoolwork...for pleasure

I have been reading many of the blogs on here and some of them discuss taking time out to read for pleasure.  After I read these blogs, I feel motivated to read for pleasure; I get up from my desk and scan my collection of novels, but then that little voice in my head reminds me of reading that must be done for school.  I retreat back to my schoolwork and let the novels on my bookshelf collect dust once again.

I try to make time to read for pleasure, but then I look at my calendar and realize that the quarter is flying by and I have 2 research papers to work on.  As a graduate student, it is so difficult to find the time to read for fun, to have a social life or to even focus on certain favorite TV shows.  Either I am taking the program too seriously by putting in more studying than I need or this is just something I need to suck up until June (when I am officially done with the program!). 

As a solution, I have decided to look at my readings for school as reading for fun.   Not to say that reading for school isn’t fun and I have to force myself to enjoy them, I am just choosing to look at the readings as more than just a necessity in order to do well in class.  Since I am mastering in Rhetoric and Composition (completed my Lit emphasis last year), I have taken quite an interest in the ancient Greeks.  Though the writing at some points is difficult to get through, the ideas that were presented during that time is so relevant today.  I have found that I do thoroughly enjoy reading the ancients and consider it pleasurable reading. 

During school, I may not be able to choose what I want to read, but I have enjoyed the readings I have done thus far.  Schoolwork can be enjoyable and can be considered reading for pleasure.  The novels on my bookshelves will continue to collect dust, but for the time being, I will continue to view reading the ancient Greeks as a pleasurable read.

My novels will have to wait to be read…until winter break, of course! 

Faithfully,

Cristina

Figure out what you need

In this week’s blog I mostly want to take a minute to mirror a sentiment Alli expressed a couple of weeks of ago: we must make time for reading.  This sentiment was made real and relevant to me last night when I decided to carve three hours out of my schedule to spend the evening re-reading Ray Bradbury’s The Halloween Tree.  The last time I sat down and read a book straight through was earlier this year with The Great Gatsby (and it helps when it’s roughly your 500^th reading of a novel) one hung-over Sunday morning.  But before that I have no idea how long it has been since I’ve had the opportunity to do such a thing.

And the effects of last night’s journey into the great beyond of Ray Bradbury’s imagination? Similar to those of a drug, like eating chocolate after abstaining for too long- you find it difficult to stop yourself.  All day, while teaching early this morning, and while trapped inside a tutoring center for 8 hours after that, in the back of my mind has been one thought: I can’t wait to read again. 

It’s exhilarating to be excited to do something that you’ve been doing for most of your life and that has been a significant part of your life, but there is a disappointing side to this story, a side to which I’m sure many of you can relate.  It doesn’t matter how excited I am to really start reading again, and it doesn’t matter that I’ve spent all day at work anticipating starting Tender is the Night again; at the end of the day, I’m often just too tired to do it.  Hell, I can barely write this blog, let alone indulge in an enjoyable reading experience. 

So many nights I find myself sitting on the couch or in my bed (come to think of it, maybe location is my problem) after a long long day, with book in hand, and what feels like two seconds later, I’m out.  I didn’t let this problem bother me too much until now- until I’ve now rediscovered the joys of making time for reading, I’m suddenly saddened that it can’t happen more.

But it is also a matter of choice. Every Sunday night, Jack and I watch at least two hours of television together. Not bad compared to the average American, right? Plus, it’s HBO, so it’s only making us smarter. But it’s two hours nonetheless, and those are two hours, if last night is any indication, that could make a significant dent in a novel. 

Now, to be honest, I’m not saying I’m going to give up the Sunday night ritual of Boardwalk Empire to silently read a book next to Jack- I don’t want to do that. I’m not willing to. But that is precisely the point: 

I’m not willing to. I like the things I’ve chosen to spend time doing.  And when I realize I want to do more of something else, it’s a question of learning to balance and to eliminate some of the things you don’t care as much about. It’s very rarely the case that we truly don’t have the time.

So, as I confessed, I don’t choose to take time out of my HBO schedule, but I would be happy to take some time from Facebook Time and deposited it into the Reading Time account. And I would be happy to take some Downton Abbey on Netflix time (yeah, the obsession with that show was brief), and I would be more than happy to take the break time that I spend idly staring at my cell phone. And the time that I would normally spend surfing the internet when I finish this blog. All of that can willingly go into the Reading Time bank. Why not?

We all think we don’t have enough time, and to some extent, we’re all right because we don’t spend much time trying to figure out how to better incorporate the things that matter. Yes, we all need downtime where were just not doing anything, and don’t let anybody tell you that you should listen to audiobooks as you drive if you feel that you truly get something out of the downtime of listening to music instead.  But that’s the thing- take a minute and figure out what is actually adding to your life and what, in the end, is just a time suck. I trust you to know the difference.         

5 Reasons Halloween is Awesome

5. The History – if you want to do something vastly entertaining on Halloween approach 2 grad students (any major will do but history and theology are the most diverting) and start asking about the origins of Halloween and which religions it’s based in. They’ll get into a huge stinky argument that you can laugh at for a couple of hours. The origins and history of Halloween are tied up in Pagan celebrations and Christian feast days and can probably never be accurately untangled – but who gives a shit? Folklore is part of Halloween and talking about whether or not the Celts influenced the Christians or vice versa is splitting hairs – we’re just hoping to hear stories about human sacrifices on BOTH sides of the argument.

4. The Sexy Costumes – sexy Halloween costumes are Loki’s gift to internet comedians. Pre-made sexy Halloween costumes are idiotic, obvious, cheaply made and far too expensive for the amount of material and workmanship presented in packages labeled “saucy pirate” and “hot devil’s helper” and “sexy Big Bird.” There are only two kinds of people who buy sexy Halloween costumes from Party City or Super Halloween Discount Warehouse or the internet: people who are energetic enough to go to the gym regularly and want to show off but are too lazy to put the effort into a real costume, and people who are so stupid that they’re the reason that Q-tips come with safety warnings and that every class of kindergarteners has to be reminded that paste isn’t food. Every Halloween party you go to after the age of 14 will feature a Sexy Female Ninja Turtle fucking a Sexy Mario in the closet while a Sexy Princess Peach alternately cries and vomits into the kitchen sink, or some variation thereof, and that kind of tragedy is so chock-full of schadenfreude that every hipster in a 12 block radius will be masturbating furiously beneath his cravat. On the other hand everything terrible that could happen to someone at a party is substantially more hilarious based on the sexiness of his and/or her costume. This relationship is inversely proportional, so if at some point this Halloween you find a Sexy Chester the Cheetah (ears, bra, thong, heels, Cheeto dust) covered in the explosive beer-shit of a Sexy Bull (horns, nose ring, banana hammock, blank expression) my data indicate that you will stop laughing in mid-June 2014.

3. The Candy – you don’t need any more explanation that that. Motherfucking candy. Stuff it in your face and get sugared up like a kid at the drugstore with four bucks burning a hole in her pocket.

 2. The Freedom - when was the last time you got to wear a cowboy hat to work? Unless you're a cowboy, a bouncer at a Country Western bar, or a douchebag my guess is last Halloween. Some of you reading this know the intense, creeping sadness that is Casual Friday; you have to wear stuffy clothes that you hate Monday through Thursday, and on Friday you get to wear polo shirts, dockers and terrible shoes. This is one of the biggest ways that working in an office will fuck with your head: acceptable office attire is more narrowly defined than acceptable clergy attire, and it doesn't include awesome hats. If you work in an office and show up wearing a T-shirt on Friday you'll get more  glares and angry whispers than Nadya Suleman at a contraceptive convention. If you show up in jeans on a Tuesday it had better be to pack up your desk because you'll never live down the day that your Luckys were your only clean laundry. Unless that Tuesday happens to be October 31st. Regular people, those who don't work in offices (I think they're called "happy" people, but it's been so long since I've laughed that I can't say for sure) enjoy the benefits too - but there's no feeling like leaving your jacket on it's hanger in the morning and getting out the corset instead. Besides that the reaction you get carrying a sword on Halloween is a lot more "oh, dude, that's awesome," than the running and screaming you'll get for the rest of the year.

1. The Creativity - Halloween, as it is celebrated in America, is the most day on the calendar. What do we do to prepare for Halloween? Sure there are a lot of off-the-shelf costumes and decorations, but the people who get the most credit and who are talked about the most on Halloween are the folks who carve gorgeous pumpkins into brilliant sculptures dedicated to fear or laboriously create costumes from scratch or practice movements and accents and dialogue to act out their vision. What are the things that you remember from your childhood Halloweens? The history barely comes up, the slutty costumes don't register 'cause you were a kid, the candy is cool but gone in a couple of days, and the freedom doesn't matter so much when adults expect you to wear your underwear outside your clothes at least once a week. But you remember making things. You remember hollowing out a pumpkin and carefully tacking a pattern on the skin, the feeling of a parent guiding the safety saw in your hand, and the satisfaction of seeing your design come to life lit up from the inside. You remember making a costume out of odds and ends in your closet, choosing and discarding accessories for it and choreographing your superhero moves. Even if you used pre-made patterns and costumes as a kid you got to make choices - which ghost pattern you used on the pumpkin, which Disney princess you wanted to be or whether Spider-Man or Batman was cooler. Halloween is about expression, and the fact that it's okay to express yourself publicly (at least some of the time.) Halloween rewards creativity with candy for kids and attention for adults, soothing us and reminding us annually that we were made to make things. That's why Halloween has so many stories attached to it. There may be one or two Christmas movies that come out every year, but there are usually close to a dozen movies fighting for the box office on Halloween weekend. That's why there are approximately 4000 different "sexy" costumes out there - because even if the only thing you want to do on Halloween is show off your tits you want to choose the best way to express yourself creatively while doing so.

Anyway. Happy Halloween. Here's my creative contribution to the surreality of the day, if anyone's interested: It's an angler fish.

Cheers,
Keep making awesome stuff,
     - Alli

Racially-Based Education: What is wrong with Florida?

Florida passed a law in which they will place students in specific expectations based on their race.  The article is below:

http://tampa.cbslocal.com/2012/10/12/florida-passes-plan-for-racially-based-academic-goals/

For example, in reading, 90% of Asians will be required to read at or above their grade level and only 74% of black students will be expected to read at or above their grade level.  The fact that the Board of Education is placing expectations on students based primarily on their race is discouraging and disgusting.  Students, already, are being categorized based on test scores, now with the enactment of this new law it will narrow their possibilities and expectations more.  I always thought that the fundamentals of education was to not segregate, but to recognize that all students, no matter socio-economic or racial backgrounds, have the potential to succeed beyond expectations, and as teachers, we should encourage that.  The Board of Education states that while they are ambitious, they are also realistic.  This “realism” that the Board claims, to me, is a cover-up for their willingness to give up, to throw in the towel; this reflects their lack of trying to figure out how to fix the education problem and to help our students succeed.  This law is proof that the Board of Education has given up on students. 

With this in mind, the day we start to give up on our students and their ability to succeed in school is the day they begin to give up on themselves.  Too many times I have read stories and statistics on students not finishing even high school and too many times have I read about students not being given the proper education to fuel their cognitive development.  This law will only perpetuate the problems that exist in the educational system.  Placing race as a means of viewing and expecting success suggests that we are going backwards in time, viewing the outcome of education of students as demonstrative of the color of their skin.  How will this affect students?  Well, for the students that are placed in the lower percentage, they will think that if even the Board doesn’t have much faith in their academic ability, then why should they.  This is a kind of attitude that so many teachers attempt to draw away from their students, urging them to know that they have the ability to succeed.  If we narrow the expectations of our students, they will not try to succeed, thus they will not be able to live up to their potential.  This will, in turn, add to the already low educational success of our students.  Right now, literacy is low and due to standardized tests taking away from the critical thought that must be embedded in our students, education is suffering.  By implementing this socially and racially demoralizing law, Florida is attributing to the already down slope of education.  By separating students based on race only widens the gap between those who can succeed and those who can’t and in turn, segregation becomes the focus. 

How this law was able to pass is unbelievable due to the fact that it discriminates based on race.  How is this acceptable?  How do those who helped this law pass not see this as a potential danger to certain students?  How do they not view this as a way of contributing to the failures of certain students, never knowing their full potential?  What will happen to the future of these students who fall at a lower percentage?  I fear the inevitability of this law.  I fear the gap will grow and segregation will once again rear its ugly head.

Faithfully,

Cristina

Resurrect the Dead

My grandfather and I used to have reading time. He never read to me, rather, we sat in the same room and read our own books. He was a very insular man, short on affection, long on inappropriate humor. The Korean War, a failed marriage, and an orphaned childhood made him appear intimidating to most. I was always an inquisitive child but most of the questions I posed to him were left unanswered. He was a fan of vague responses that signaled you were poking your nose where it didn’t belong. Don’t get me wrong--he cared for me a great deal. His unspoken love was demonstrated through home cooked meals, a hand crafted dollhouse, and hours upon hours spent together in our private time kept away from the rest of the world. We had an unspoken understanding that we were each journeying through literature--albeit, in a solitary, yet, conjoined effort. Everyone in the family knew I was his favorite, but even I didn’t have access to any of his private memories or thoughts.  He died soon after I graduated high school and I immediately set to having a sort of internal script to turn to. When I would describe him to others I had a catalogued list memorized. I retold the same memories so many times that I began to feel like he existed in this finite role that I had assigned him. It made it easier. My feelings were less muddy. He was this, that, and the other. He did this, that, and the other. No room for ambiguity, no room for unresolved emotions.

 

 Then I found an old box of his books. I found the unopened card I had left for him when he entered the hospital. I found endless Charles Dickens’ novels. Strange relics from the past began flooding me with memories. Recently I’ve started reading his copy of A Tale of Two Cities. What I am discovering is astonishing. He wrote in the margins and even bracketed his favorite passages (which is something I’ve always done). Through this text I am able to relive a journey taken years ago. I am able to unveil intimate emotions and reactions from a private man who rarely spoke a word. I am able to once again recognize that he was a man of magic and not just the tough guy with the gruff exterior. My point, which echoes Alli’s most recent blog, is READ! I’ve often had paralyzing dreams where I ask him if he is proud of me. I suppose we all have that vanity that is searching for some sort of resolution and approval. But dreams go unanswered. Instead, I now look to tangible evidence. To all the naysayers that write reading off as escapism I provide an alternative. Reading can help you confront reality. It can bridge time and transport you to the past while still allowing you to relish in the moment. That’s all, for now.

Take a break for a book

Hello writers, students, professors, bloggers (i.e., readers.)

We are all spectacularly busy people here; the editors of AFLM all work, try to run a magazine, blog regularly, and make an attempt at having some sort of healthy social life, and I'm sure the same is true of you. You're a busy person and it's a busy world we live in, full of distractions and a thousand things a day that can suck away your time. So why not give into one of the most edifying time-sucks around and read a book?

I haven't been reading much recently and I've been worse for not picking up one of my favorites and re-reading it for the simple joy of getting out of my head.

I've been buying books, collecting them into neat little stacks, occasionally re-organizing them either alphabetically or by the order in which I'd like to read them, looking at them and thinking about them, but not reading them.

All of us here know that books are fantastic, but it's easy to skip reading the literature that you like when you have to read 600 pages a week to keep up with your classes, or when you know that there's a stack of ready-to-grade essays sitting at home.

Sometimes the other stuff can wait. Sometimes it's more important to pick up a book that's as well worn and known as your favorite pair of jeans and sinking into it like a hot, scented bath for your brain.

I had a lot of plans last weekend, plenty of things to get ready for this week, and a pretty heavy schedule planned for Saturday. I had to get my oil changed, my car smogged and registered, take cash out of one bank and put it in another, meet with friends for dinner and prepare for an impromptu dessert party.

Most of that went straight out of the window when I impulsively threw Chuck Palahniuk's Rant in my purse as I was heading out to Jiffy Lube. I started reading while my oil was being changed and never really stopped. A few things on my schedule stayed on target but a lot more got brushed off, and you know what? It wasn't the end of the world. Looking back I realized that reading the latest Stephen King instead of finishing class reading didn't herald the apocalypse either. Nor did rereading LOTR cause the heat death of the universe, even though I did so when I was supposed to be studying for finals and planning my wedding simultaneously. Reading Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows at my friend's son's 6th birthday party did cause a few problems, but who cares when a 6-year-old calls them a nerd?

Reading a book - good or bad doesn't matter - for the sake of the pure joy of reading is a better balm to my mental bruises and a better boost to my productivity (after I've finished, of course) than anything else I can think of.

It's a busy world. We're all busy people.

Read something you love anyway - the stars will keep their places in the sky, I promise.

If anyone is interested in a fantastic place to pick up reading (or procrastinating) material, try checking out Thrift Books online - fair selection, great prices, and (typically) free shipping make it pretty easy to always have an escape route from reality on hand.

Cheers,
Stay sane,
     - Alli

Strange Sounds

I was recently introduced to these Youtube videos from across the world documenting a strange sound coming from the sky.  One of the links is below:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XNVOnGGbaFU

There are many videos of these strange sounds all over Youtube, and many people, of course, have come up with their own assumptions of what they might be.  Many think that it is the trumpet of Gabriel coming down for Judgment Day.  The fact that we are nearing December 2012 (Mayan calendar ends December 21, 2012), many think these sounds are the markings of the end of the world.  Others, however, believe that the sound is documenting an alien presence.  Whatever the assumption might be, people who have been watching these videos feel that it is something bad.  However, there are many who say it is one elaborate hoax that gained international appeal because of the accessibility of Youtube.  One man posted a Youtube video debunking the strange sounds, saying that it is a hoax.  People are just recycling the sound in their videos and using footage of a landscape or neighborhood as the backdrop.

This got me interested in hoaxes and why people do them.  In 1938, an episode on the radio for H.G. Wells’ War of the Worlds was broadcast as a series of news bulletins narrated by Orsen Welles.  Because the bulletins sounded so real, the broadcast actually instilled panic and fear into a lot of people.  Although, this wasn’t intended to be a hoax, it has been claimed one due to the reaction of many of the listeners believing that an alien attack was occurring. 

Why hoaxes?  What is appealing about them?  Why do people play them?  I think one of the reasons is this fascination with documenting.  With the accessibility of the Internet, especially Youtube, and video use on our cell phones, it is easier these days to be a documenter.  We used to rely on what we saw on TV to document strange occurrences and events, but now we have that ability and as a result, some people abuse it.  This love of documenting and reporting leaves viewers with a lot of ambiguity as to the authenticity of the footage.  Many of us, so badly, want to believe some of the things we see on these videos, like alien sightings, etc. because it could answer many ultimate questions that reside in all of us, whether alien or religious.   With that in mind, these kinds of videos are posted to feed on people’s beliefs, to help them continue to believe or to change them. 

So many want to believe and to be proven of their beliefs that these videos are used to facilitate and entertain them.  However we react to them, they will continue to be posted for our amusement and maybe even to open our minds a little further to the possibilities that might exist.

Watch the link I have posted…is it real? 

Faithfully,

Cristina

End of an era or the next step of a critical evolution?

Newsweek announced this morning that it is closing its print doors at the end of the year. This announcement is made just months before what would have marked the magazine's 80th anniversary.

On one hand, this announcement is an unquestionably big deal, one that signals what can only be the first of many because if Newsweek, one of the most established and well respected newsmagazines, does it why wouldn't anyone else? And a move like this helps to disqualify the oft-repeated head- in-the-sand claim that print journalism will continue on because there will always be a demand for it.  At this point, that notion seems to simply be an unsupported one. All those people up in arms about the potential death of print journalism a few years ago? Where are they now? I can tell you this much: their numbers, not to mention their influence on the industry, are small.

And while some may be saddened by and/or nostalgic about this news, the depth of their emotions are likely to be begrudgingly overshadowed by the fact that Internet news and column-style journalism just makes too much sense. If anything should be online- the ultimate accelerator of easy communication and info sharing- isn't it the news? And isn't it global perspective and commentary? The foundation of journalism is firmly based in utilizing the available means of communication. To hold onto a model that is quickly becoming outdated is to become complacent and to lack innovation. For journalism to survive and thrive, it must move forward.

Besides, I can't remember the last time I waited to read what Andrew Sullivan or Jessica Bennett had to say in print when it was already online.

But also I hate the idea that I'll never be able to read another Newsweek, and soon to follow another newspaper of any kind, on anything other than a backlit screen. But the fact that we spend all our time staring at things that are glowing will have to be the topic of another blog.

I have more to say on this matter... but I'm reluctant to do so after a long day of work and without further forethought. So for now, stay turned.

Illness

It’s October, which everyone knows means that shelves in shops, gas station countertops, and the decorative flag your grandmother hangs out of her front window will all be emblazoned with pink ribbons and the words “Support Breast Cancer” until November. I don’t want to shit on curing cancer here, but I’ve got something of a problem with the way we’re trying to go about it. 

First off there’s the fact that dedicating a whole month to the process of raising awareness is actually hugely counterproductive when it comes to actually making money to cure cancer. Because you can, in October and November, purchase batteries with pink ribbons printed on them and cookies that look like moustaches, and because you can shell out a dollar at the drug store for rubber bracelets that say things like “I heart boobies” and “Movember,” you’re not going to donate any money to any groups that actually cure cancer. People support awareness campaigns because it’s easy to be “more aware” than it is to make a donation and we, as humans, get an endorphin high from feeling like we have accomplished something without actually getting anything done.

After you’ve dealt with the problems of awareness-based rather than donation or researched campaigns you come to the question of where the money generated by these campaigns is going. Well, in the case of Breast Cancer Awareness it’s largely going to breast cancer, which is a good thing except that breast cancer is the third leading cause of death for women (and then only for women over fifty) coming in behind heart disease and lung cancer. Sure, there’s a Heart Health Awareness month, a Sudden Cardiac Event Awareness month, and so on, but can anyone tell me when they are? Without peeking? I didn’t think so. This might not seem like such a big deal except that because of Breast Cancer Awareness there’s a disproportionate amount of fear in young women that they’ll die of breast cancer. This leads young women to get unnessecary tests and, because they think they’re taking care of themselves by focusing on the biggest, scariest monster out there in the world of health, ignoring things like high cholesterol and high blood pressure right up until they start having a heart attack (the symptoms of which they’re misinformed of because popular media typically sees heart attacks as a men’s health issue and tends to only portray men’s heart attack symptoms.) 

The other place where money goes during Breast Cancer Awareness month is to the companies who partner with various pink ribbon organizations. Companies like Coca Cola and KFC and Avon, all of which either produce or promote products (or in the case of Avon, product ingredients) that have the potential to increase breast cancer risk. Yeah, that sounds sensible, right? Companies whose products increase breast cancer risk make a buttload of money by selling those same products in pink containers every October. Oh, and in case you didn’t read the Forbes article I linked up there, take note that actual cancer survivors have trouble fitting and finding support in to a lot of the pink ribbon events since the events are so positive, peppy, and full of we-can-beat-it spirit that people who have survived or who are fighting cancer bring down the party for the only-in-October crowd.

Okay, so I've bitched a lot about breast cancer and Breast Cancer Awareness - why? Because last week was Mental Illness Awareness Week and I had no idea. Which is pretty terrifying considering that suicide is the 4th leading cause of death for adults between 18 and 65, with approximately 40,000 deaths by suicide in the US each year, a number that in itself is widely considered underestimated since many suicides are reported as accidents or complications of accidents or drug overdoses. And that number doesn't take into account the rising number of deaths among schizophrenics, cardiac deaths in female anxiety sufferers, or all of the early deaths caused by complications of mental illnesses.

I was diagnosed with clinical depression, compulsive and anxiety disorders in 2004. I've been living with mental illness and all of the problems associated with it since I was 17 years old, and so have a lot of people I know.

School has just started back up at Cal Poly and there are hordes of students wearing pink bracelets and advocating mammograms (about 30 years too early for most college students) all while being surrounded by people who are at risk TODAY for all of the dangers of mental illness.

Breast cancer is terrible, and it kills too many people - we should work on fixing it, and we are researching cures and causes, which is a very good thing. But mental illness is largely unrecognized and stigmatized - after ally, you've probably never heard someone with breast cancer being told to "snap out of it" or "just get over it" or "grow up."

So my rant about breast cancer awareness isn't really about breast cancer, it's about mental health and our attitude toward it as a culture.

And it's a way for me to tell anyone out there who is coping quietly with mental illness that you're not alone, it's nothing to be ashamed of, and that seeking treatment isn't weakness - it's okay to ask for help.

Here are some links; be safe, and be kind to one another.

Suicide Prevention Wiki
.GOV Resources

Cheers,
Alli

What Does it Mean to Be a Man?

From the desk of Tim Jewell...

From my oldest memories, I remember being raised by my mom and observing every day how strong a woman she was. She pulled herself out of a family situation that nearly destroyed her will to achieve her ambitions but, instead of living up to the low standards that her family expected her, she went back to college late in her adult life and fulfilled her lifelong dream of becoming a teacher and an expert in education and classroom instruction.

Why do I detail her life? Because I grew up in a household that had a woman as the primary breadwinner and inspiration to her children. My brother and I grew up following her example both intellectually and emotionally and developed ourselves based on the support and resources that she gave us, and each of us grew into men that, I say with pride, are very different than the average American male, and very much distinct from the social standard to which many men in American and worldwide are held and expected to imitate. My brother and I grew up in a home that was structured around what I would consider feminine values, at least judging by the perspective that America has applied to its expectations of men and women both.

You know very well what I'm referring to. Men are, and have been, expected to be the head of the household for millennia and, even in a society where gender roles are seeming to become blurred, are expected to be tough and emotionless. The closest that our society allows men to true honesty is humor - though this goes far beyond simply the male role in America, it is especially noticeable in the dynamics of dating in the teen and twentysomething world - and the ultimate ideal for a male's self-development is expected in the culmination of his body into a muscular, sports-toned, sexualized machine.

Think of it this way, both male and female readers: when you step out in public and observe people walking by at a quick glance, who do you notice?

If you say you noticed the not-quite-skinny nerdy girl with glasses who is reading Charlotte Bronte by herself on a bench and gazing contemplatively at the crowd passing her by, or the tall scrawny kid wearing running shoes focusing intently on his schoolwork with only a brief glance up to watch the leaves, then you're probably lying.

The men and women who turn heads are the toned, athletic, fashionable, sexy types. And when I say sexy, I don't just mean slightly attractive or cute: I mean the Ryan Gosling types who turn heads with merely a thin V-neck shirt and a vague motion of their hands in your direction. I mean the Beyonce types who wear their cleavage and short dresses like a uniform and perform nuanced and lithe movements that make your body react in ways you didn't think possible.

There is something fundamentally disturbing about this occurrence:

The men and women who turn heads are idolized and noticed and fawned over for the way they appear, the way they move, and in some cases, the way they talk or joke or laugh or act during even brief conversations.

And this seductive first glance from the voyeur to the person being viewed can often carry over into the more personal and intimate aspects of a person's daily life: they might pass this person often or notice various people on various days who make them swoon at a simple raise of the eyebrows or half-cocked smile. Their attention to strangers and potential romantic interests begins to focus on the looks and the demeanor of everyone they meet who vaguely seems like a good prospect.

This is dangerous.

Building a friendship, or a relationship, or a casual dating situation, upon the foundations of attractiveness or humor or an arbitrary association of that person with "masculinity" or "femininity" is threatening to the possibility of happiness in the future of that relationship for both involved.

I'm not saying that any of us are at fault for this fascination with surface characteristics, and in the end, there is nothing inherently wrong with these qualities in a person. Everyone loves to laugh, to feel deeply intimate sexual desire, and to fit in with categories that ensure a person's comfortable conformity with society at large. These are innate human needs and, to a great extent, we need these to survive and succeed in a world that values these things.

But these traits are only the surface.

There are many incredibly essential and necessary human qualities that are thrown to the side in favor of the traits that I've mentioned. You know what I'm talking about. When was the last time you did a double-take towards someone who spoke eloquently, who recited an obscure poem from memory, who was able to keep you interested in a conversation about serious topics that had nothing to do with Facebook or Instagram? When was the last time someone's taste in music, books, or film swept you off your feet? And when did you last eagerly say yes to someone who asked you to accompany them to an art gallery or a bookstore?

Very basic examples, of course. But what I'm getting at is that hardly anyone looks beyond the surface to the characteristics that truly make us human. What sets us apart from the rest of the animal kingdom is our intellect. Humanity did not survive for tens of thousands of years warring with our neighbors and picking fights with assholes who looked at us the wrong way. Obviously, war and violence are facts of existence, and the body count left behind by ignorance and arrogance is undeniable.

But warriors, fighters, weightlifters, bodybuilders, airhead sex symbols, pop star divas, and teen idol actors and actresses did not carve out the most substantial aspects of society that we love and value today.

So let me get back to my original point before I continue firing ammunition.

What does it mean to be a man? Or a woman, for that matter?

A man is someone who steps out of his comfort zone and takes risks. A man is someone who confronts challenges without fear and uses the best of his skills, knowledge, and ability to solve problems and deals maturely with failure or consequence, without taking out his rage and frustration on others. A man is someone who thinks before he acts and considers issues with foresight, research, and contemplation. A man is someone who is interested in what someone has to say and handles the conversation with the appropriate emotional or mental gravity, not lightening the situation with jokes when unnecessary and not reacting with impulsive remarks.

A man is not just someone who can deliver a knockout punch in a ring or bench 500 pounds.

The poet or author who risks his livelihood to pursue his passion for his craft is just as much a man.

The boyfriend or husband who listens attentively to his girlfriend or wife and treats her with respect and commitment is just as much, if not more, of a man.

The father who respects his children and earns their obedience through his honesty and integrity, allowing himself to be available when they need him, is just as much of, and represents some of the greatest qualities of, a man.

Once again, there is nothing wrong with being a fighter or a weightlifter or an actor or actress with a six-pack or enormous breasts and lips or the life of the party. But physical substance and the ability to entertain are far, far, far less important than emotional, mental, and intellectual substance. If you focus on your physical appearance or public persona at the sacrifice of your mental strength, you are destroying your own possibility of happiness.

When someone truly becomes your friend or decides to pursue a relationship with you, your buff exterior, trendy wardrobe and tattoos, or endless repertoire of movie quotes will no longer matter. What will matter is how you take care of them, how you respond to their good moods and bad moods, how you reciprocate their generosity and love, and how you endure trials alongside them beyond simply offering support and sympathy. These are all qualities of intelligence and mentality, and the happiest individuals living today and in the past and in the future were and are those who deeply understand and emphasize these qualities about themselves.

When you die, the legacy you leave behind will not be founded upon your attractiveness or your humor. The tastes of humanity change at the slightest whim, and if these are the qualities for which you are remembered, then your memory is doomed to obscurity. But humanity always remembers courage, intellect, innovation, individuality, kindness, love, and resisting the shallow and arbitrary social standards of the time imposed on the people of every era.

Hundreds of years from now and more, civilization will develop based on the precedents that we set in our own lives and decisions. How do we want to be remembered? What values will we transmit to our children and the emerging generations? Think carefully about your answer, and do not be afraid to search profoundly within yourself for the right one.

Finish Something...

As I was going through my screenplays and short stories, I noticed they all had one thing in common: they were unfinished.  I find that it is easy for me to begin a story or screenplay; setting up the scene, introducing the characters and slowly pacing to the plot.  However, once I get to the plot, I stop.

How do writers keep going with their stories?  How do they finish?  I realized that a major reason I cannot finish is because I don’t lay out my story before writing it.  I am so quick to just begin writing that when I get to a certain point, I don’t know where to go.  My ideas for the story cease, I get angry and I move to another one.

I believe that if high school taught me anything about how to write well, it taught me how to organize my thoughts.  I think that my problem when writing fiction is that I don’t organize my thoughts ahead of time, so when I do get to the plot, I am stumped; not sure of where to go.  I wonder how many writers have had this problem, and how many of them have had to overcome it. 

I find that as I get older, the desire to be a writer and get published grows, along with the frustration that I cannot finish one story.  I once was told that to be a successful writer, one must write every day.  Whether one writes for a few minutes or a few hours, writing consistently will help greatly; and who knows, it could lead to something great.  But as I busy myself with school and work, it is difficult to dedicate a good amount of time to writing freely. 

I read David Lynch’s book, Catching the Big Fish, in which he compared ideas like catching fish and sometimes in order to have a big idea, you need to catch a small fish first to let it grow into a bigger idea.  Trying to think of this while figuring out a story to write frustrates me because although I don’t usually disagree with what David Lynch has to say, this idea is so simple yet the process is way more complex.  Ideas are like catching a fish, but I don’t always catch them and when I do, they never really grow into anything that I consider worthwhile.  It is so easy for me to get frustrated with my unfinished work that I easily dismiss it and move on to another.

I guess my main goal is to finish a piece.  Don’t dismiss it early on.  And for the sake of having a clear, focused story: organize!

Reagan-Era Necrophilism

While doing some research for a paper I’m writing about Robert Browning’s Porphyria’s Lover, I stumble upon what seems to be GOLD! While aimlessly wandering through JSTOR I find an essay that seems to make a connection between Porphyria’s Lover and David Lynch’s television series Twin Peaks. Relevant to my paper? Absolutely not. Mind blowingly interesting? HELL YES! But alas, much to my chagrin, the essay turns out to be so skewed and wrought full of paper-thin conclusions that I turn away in disgust.

According to the critic, mostly men have praised Twin Peaks.

 Hmmm…problematic seeing as I am an avid fan of both Browning’s poetry and David Lynch’s work and I am indeed a woman.

Also, according to the critic, Robert Browning and David Lynch strongly encourage incest and necrophilia at the expense of the safety of young women.

Hmmm…do I find necrophilia sexually stimulating? No….But yet I am a fan…Ughhh. I just don’t even know who I am anymore!

Side rant--I wonder if she has ever read about the dynamic relationship between Robert Browning and Elizabeth Barrett Browning? You know, one of the first women poets bold enough to write a nine book semi-autobiographical epic poem about the struggles of being an outspoken woman writer. You know, the whole I refuse to live a caged bird life thing?...Hardly sounds “dead” to me. I guess not. I guess it is appropriate to misread Robert Browning’s poetry and reduce him to a necrophiliac.

Ok…so she isn’t an expert on 19^th century Victorian poetry. I can maybe let her irresponsible reference to Browning’s poetry slide. But when she links Lynch’s Twin Peaks to right-wing Reagan era politics all I can do is shake my head.

Getting to my point: PLEASE—Use theory responsibly! Am I saying that people should stop using feminist theory? Absolutely not. It is relevant and much needed. That being said, it is highly irresponsible to focus on a limited aspect of an artist’s work and do your “thing” all while ignoring the rest of the work that boldly contradicts your argument. I understand you want to get published, but be ethical. By the way- I am not just standing on my soapbox and saying this to the rest of the public.  This is advice I continually give myself when I get some wild idea. Point is, sometimes you need to talk yourself down a little and think through your argument and if and only if you can provide a persuasive case should you move forward.

 

And yes, my title is misleading, disturbing, and just plain incendiary. Now you know how I felt.

Robert Browning is probably turning in his grave. That’s hot.