I’ve mentioned my abiding love for The Ramones before, and one of my birthday gifts was a new book by Joey’s brother, I Slept with Joey Ramone. I was looking forward to starting that, but then a friend posted something about February being Black History Month, and I thought “Yeah, I should do something for that.”
On the shelf next to my desk are several books that I think of as being on deck. They are books that I have bought and not gotten around to reading, and there are more than the ones on this shelf, but I hope that keeping these nearby reminds me to get to them. After I read one, I can bring something else out. Anyway, two of the books on deck were directly related to black history: Time on the Cross (Robert William Fogel and Stanley Engerman) and The Slave Community (John W. Blassingame).
Well, I decided to hold off on Joey, and read Time on the Cross instead, which was reasonable, and then I got really ambitious and decided to read both of those and Beloved (Toni Morrison) and I Know Why the Caged Bird Sings (Maya Angelou).
Let me give you some background on how big of a procrastinator I am. My first encounter with I Know Why the Caged Bird Sings was in June of 1991. I had just started college, and I was trying to stay in town over the summer and earn some money. That did not work well at all, but one hot day I was hanging out at the library. I saw a copy, and started reading and got drawn in, but I did not check it out. I had so much to do, and everything was so uncertain, that I just decided that I would need to get back to it.
After I came back from my mission I got a job at Clear Connections, and I worked there for a little bit after graduation too. I can’t swear as to whether this happened in 1994 or 1996, but sometimes if I had a little extra money I would end up at B. Dalton, or the Book Vault, or the PSU bookstore, and blow it. Actually, it was probably before graduation, because one of my impulse purchases (Soul Stealers) ended up being a required text in my Chinese history class. Anyway, I bought Time on the Cross and The Slave Community at the PSU bookstore. Some professor had them in his assigned reading. I bet Sweetness and Power was for the same class, and maybe even How Europe Underdeveloped Africa, though I can’t be sure on that one.
Beloved was the most recent one to come up, and even that was probably 1998. I just remember I was working with Rose at Intel, and she was reading it and saying how good it was. Actually, I know we were talking about it when the movie came out, so that was 1998. Basically, I decided to undo over a decade’s worth of procrastination in a month.
The library provided the two books I didn’t own, and that was fine. They were both well-written, and gripping. I did not like I Know Why the Caged Bird Sings as much as I thought I would. I was frustrated with the people, who made bad choices. There are some horrible choices in Beloved, but I didn’t feel the same way about it.
Honestly, there are very horrible things in Beloved. It does not feel as harsh as it could, probably due to the poetic dreamlike writing, but still, there is some pretty horrible stuff. At the same time, I just felt more compassion than judgment. I guess all of the horrible choices came out of horrible situations, whereas maybe I felt that in the other book, they really should have known better. Maybe we shouldn’t even be able to quantify everything about the emotional response a book gives an individual. Regardless, I couldn’t stop reading either.
That was totally not the case for the other two. I started with Time on the Cross, and I stopped reading it to read Beloved, just to get a break. I have not finished The Slave Community yet. I will, but I may need to take more breaks. It’s not that there isn’t good information. Maybe I am just out of the academic mindset. I’m not sure “pedantic” is a fair word, but I’m kind of leaning towards that.
To be fair, they both have different problems. With Time on the Cross, they are using cliometrics to analyze the various aspects of slave life, and it was a new technique at the time, so it is very figure-heavy rather than being a narrative. Also, because they end up coming with many positive aspects of slave life, I felt a little disturbed reading it. Slavery is bad, and they are never trying to say that it is not a bad thing, but there’s a disconnect that can be a little off-putting. In the end, I did learn a lot about slave life, and about ways of studying history, and it was a good reminder about how data can be misinterpreted and twisted, so that constant re-examination is good. I’m glad I read it.
The Slave Community seems very poorly connected. A lot of information is thrown out, possibly to the point of overkill, and then sometimes the information is contradictory so I don’t feel like I am really getting anywhere, except that here and there I have picked up on some things that I didn’t know and that make sense. Also, I am not done with it yet, and Time on the Cross improved as I was reading it—so maybe in another thirty pages I will get into The Slave Community, and regret badmouthing it here. I will finish it.
I will say, though, that the reason that I think it might be the same professor who assigned both of these and Sweetness and Power is that Sweetness and Power (which covered the sugar trade and so related to slavery in South America and the Caribbean) was so pedantic that I gave up on it, and gave it away without ever reading it. That would have been a rough class.
In retrospect, I am really glad that I did this. I think understanding history is very important, and understanding viewpoints other than your own is very important. If we also had an Asian history month, and a Latin American history month, and so on, it would start feeling like a bit much (though we would learn a lot). I think there is something to be said for having black history month specifically, and I will probably gum up explaining it.
Asian Americans faced prejudice and hardships, but they came here on their own, and often they were settling in groups where they maintained some cultural identity. It is the same for Latin Americans. The Europeans who came here basically became what we think of as American history. Africans were brought here by force, integrated in some ways but separate in others, and that relationship has been a huge factor in shaping American history. We should be revisiting it over and over again. The only other history month that it might make sense to have annually would be Native American history month. Maybe I should campaign for that. (But really what I will always be hoping for is people reading more history and more literature and more science and more knowledge, all the time.)
I do regret a little bit that it was so much focused on one period. Beloved occurs partly after slavery, but there are a lot of flashbacks to slave times, and everything is an aftermath of slavery. I Know Why the Caged Bird Sings was the only one that was at all modern, covering time during the Depression and World War II. Maybe next year I can spend some time with Garvey or Abernathy or Bunche. At some point I know I will want to read Haley’s book on Malcolm X.
For now though, we have other library books to finish before the due date. Maria reserved Playing the Enemy after we saw Invictus and The Blind Side after we saw that, and when a book is tied to a movie there are a lot of holds, and it was just dumb luck that we got both at the same time, but there are many more holds so we will not be able to renew and we need to read them now. Then I need to read Born to Run, because a friend lent it to me, and then I can get to Joey. (And then I think I will just need to catch up on magazines for a while!)
If you would like to increase your own black history reading, I do have a few recommendations. First of all, it is a big commitment, but Alex Haley’s Roots is just phenomenal. Yes, it is fiction, but it is more than fiction too. How Europe Underdeveloped Africa, by Walter Rodney, is a textbook, but it is a compelling and easy read (which is why it might not be from that one professor). From Slavery to Freedom, by John Hope Franklin, is the work on the subject, but it’s been so long since I read it that I can’t really remember it. I should probably re-read it at some point.
It’s not much of a list, but the faded memory is a problem. There was a great book on the Buffalo Soldiers that I read when I was doing my research paper on them, but I can’t remember the name. One the plus side, there was a collection of various papers and letters that I could not recall, and because of reading The Slave Community, I think it might have been Blassingame’s collection, so maybe I will be able to find it again. I just found this Spanish poem that has been haunting me since 1991 (Y yo me ire by Juan Ramon Jimenez), because someone finally posted it online. So someday, I am going to find those letters, and that other poem. But taking better notes back then would have been good too.
Sunday, February 28, 2010
Wednesday, February 17, 2010
The Others
Sometimes a news item weighs on me, and then I feel like I have missed the opportunity by waiting. Funny how things repeat, and the opportunity just keeps coming back. So, before we need another incident to come up, let’s just talk about relationships between Portland Police and African Americans.
It’s so much easier if I just type cops and blacks, but I want to keep a level of respect—there’s not enough of that.
I originally wanted to write about the bean bag incident, so we can start there. First off, the use of the bean bag on the thirteen-year old girl seemed completely appropriate to me. She got a bruise on her thigh but did not require further medical treatment, so that part certainly sounds right. She had been banned from Tri-met but was not complying with that or with police orders, so some action is necessary, but what else would you do? Using a regular bullet would certainly be worse, and excessive for the situation, and would anyone feel happier if the adult male officer tried subduing the teenage girl with his body? The action was appropriate and justified. It probably wouldn’t have even been that big of a deal if anyone else had done it, but it was Chris Humphreys.
One appropriate use of force does not mean that every use of force is appropriate, and there certainly do seem to be grounds for concern in the James Chasse case—not even necessarily that excessive force was used, but was any force necessary and could medical attention have been provided more quickly? Because of the way that incident was handled, people have concerns about police behavior and accountability, and again, that can be reasonable.
So, then between City Hall and the Chief, Humphreys gets put on leave, and the force rallies behind him, because due process was ignored and the move was political. Well, yes, that move looked extremely political. Of course, people who get elected to their positions, or appointed by elected politicians, will sometimes need to think and act politically, but it wasn’t the right action for that incident. I believe it was an attempt to make up for mishandling the death of James Chasse.
At the same time, it’s hard to feel good about the rally, or the vote of no confidence. The history doesn’t help. The last time a vote of no confidence occurred was when two police officers were fired for leaving dead opossums at a black business. You know, even if we assume that any potential racial overtones are strictly coincidental, that sounds like harassment, and really inappropriate, and a good reason to be fired. Plus, my understanding was that Sizer had been doing a good job, and its important to have a good chief, with the confidence of the officers, so that’s a lot of harm being done, and probably without much help.
At the same time, it is really the wrong time to be crying racism, because if anyone punches a cop and comes away with no injuries but a bruised thigh, that is not persecution. Yes, thirteen sounds young, but physically she was large enough to do some damage, and she was way out of line.
I guess the point of the above is that I don’t agree with anyone, so ha! Except that it is not “Ha!” because I really hate situations like this, where everyone is in conflict and maybe no one is completely wrong but certainly no one is completely right. My stomach knots up and I hate it.
So now we have something worse than a bruised thigh. We have a dead man, and possibly inappropriate action, and probably a traumatized cop, certainly a bereft family, and Jesse Jackson to top it off, whom I wish I believed would be helpful, and a different kinds of rally.
On one side, we have the Portland Police Bureau. Many of them are good men, and it is their job to take risks to ensure the safety of the city. They volunteer for that. Sure, they get paid, but not really that much and with a lot of risk. Especially lately, when there have been so many shooters targeting police, it is an act of courage to keep going out there day after day. They need our support.
On the other side we have the African American community. They have good reason to be afraid of cops. There are disproportionate traffic stops and sentencing, and a long history of conflict, and it’s not hard to understand that when an unarmed woman gets shot, or a young girl walking in the middle of the street ends up with her head under an officer’s knee, or a professor gets arrested in his own house, all of that adds to a sense of fear and distrust. They shouldn’t have to feel that way. (And by the way, yes, he lost his temper, but why couldn’t the guy have just given his name and badge number? Could that have maybe defused it? He had been responding appropriately until then, so having his name attached to it should have been fine!)
A few years ago, I was almost asleep, and then suddenly I was wide awake as several shots were fired. I listened in the dark, trying to figure out what was going on, and just as I had almost decided it was nothing, voices started up, and police radio, and I was listening to a standoff about two blocks away. A man who had been drinking and was upset, not necessarily in that order, took two guns outside, fired them both, then took the guns back into the house, and went outside to wait for the police to show up and shoot him. He was asking for it, but he didn’t get it. He was arrested instead.
Talking about it to a neighbor, she became very agitated. She was a white woman, but she had a black son, and just having that happen so near to her house gave her visions of the police showing up and shooting her son. (Incidentally, the guy trying to get himself killed was white.) To help bring her nerves down a little, I told her it was probably lucky for this guy that he wasn’t in Portland. Somehow, I have always thought of them as a bit more trigger-happy. (Our responders are the Washington Country Sheriff’s Department.)
For me, sure, I am a white female in the suburbs, and I am not likely to ever be hassled, but I have to worry about appropriate responses too. I’m diabetic, and my blood sugar can suddenly drop, and such an incident led to one diabetic getting tased. (Why the people with her, when she told them her blood sugar was falling, called the cops instead of feeding her, I have no idea. If she asked for juice, I know she didn’t mean electricity.) That was also in Portland.
I don’t feel good about feeling that way. I know there are many Portland officers who try hard, and heroically, to protect and serve and keep everyone safe. Maybe it only seems like more happens because it is a bigger city, with more happening. But maybe there is something to that perception, and then it needs to be dealt with. If somehow in the attitudes or training or traditions, something makes the them more likely to fire, or in other ways act inappropriately, that needs to be investigated and dealt with. If the problem is just that there are a lot of good cops and some bullies, those bullies need to be brought out, and not protected.
On cop shows whenever the Internal Affairs team shows up it is bad news, and they are despised and traitors, but that kind of oversight is really important. Isn’t the real traitor the one who shames the job? There is work for the police to do, but it is not all up to them.
.
We owe them a better world and a better citizenry. Yes, a lot of the scuffles involve people of color, but they also frequently involve the mentally ill. With the way resources have been cut, the streets are full of them, and that’s something we haven’t had the will to solve.
The black community needs to be addressing the issues of youth in gangs, who shoot each other, and cops, and the issue of wild thirteen year old girls roaming around and getting into trouble on Tri-met. That’s not to pick on them. I realize that there is a long history of problems that have affected African Americas, starting with slavery, and then Jim Crow and segregated housing and welfare rules and many things leading to the social problems today, and that those problems are not uniquely black and pretty much spread out and touch all poverty. I know that and have compassion on it.
It’s just that all you can ever really be responsible for you. Jackson can chastise the cops, and the cops can point out all the reasons that every perp deserved and needed deadly force, but all it does is create bad feelings. If instead everyone worked to correct their part of the problem, then we could actually get somewhere.
A major disappointment for me was reading Fixing Broken Windows. It talked about community policing (Kroker was a fan), and I expected it to be all about making connections between police and government and citizens. Instead it was about order management. Yes, you fix broken windows and paint over graffiti, but also you don’t allow jaywalking or fare jumping and then because everyone realizes that the man is breathing down their neck they get into line (basically).
Maybe that would work, but what if maybe it was just showing that somebody cared? People keep things repaired because they care about the community, and that caring can spread to include caring about people. There was an emphasis on beat cops, and those can be great. What if there had been outreach to the point that Chris Humphreys knew James Chasse, and recognized him right away and could see, okay, he’s off his meds, better call his sister? This teenage boy is Walter, and he is a high-functioning autistic and if he does not respond right away, it is not insubordination. It’s a lot of work, but it’s not impossible.
Everything is different when we know each other. Most of the time, we don’t, and so when one of your own is attacked you circle the wagons and defend, and put on a “Don’t choke ‘em; smoke ‘em” t-shirt, because it is supposed to represent your tough choices, but what it really does is make a joke out of a loss of human life. Or you get all righteous about how violent the police are when someone who talks to others about suicide while holding a gun has put himself in a pretty bad situation. Everyone has a point, but they are still missing the one that matters.
It’s so much easier if I just type cops and blacks, but I want to keep a level of respect—there’s not enough of that.
I originally wanted to write about the bean bag incident, so we can start there. First off, the use of the bean bag on the thirteen-year old girl seemed completely appropriate to me. She got a bruise on her thigh but did not require further medical treatment, so that part certainly sounds right. She had been banned from Tri-met but was not complying with that or with police orders, so some action is necessary, but what else would you do? Using a regular bullet would certainly be worse, and excessive for the situation, and would anyone feel happier if the adult male officer tried subduing the teenage girl with his body? The action was appropriate and justified. It probably wouldn’t have even been that big of a deal if anyone else had done it, but it was Chris Humphreys.
One appropriate use of force does not mean that every use of force is appropriate, and there certainly do seem to be grounds for concern in the James Chasse case—not even necessarily that excessive force was used, but was any force necessary and could medical attention have been provided more quickly? Because of the way that incident was handled, people have concerns about police behavior and accountability, and again, that can be reasonable.
So, then between City Hall and the Chief, Humphreys gets put on leave, and the force rallies behind him, because due process was ignored and the move was political. Well, yes, that move looked extremely political. Of course, people who get elected to their positions, or appointed by elected politicians, will sometimes need to think and act politically, but it wasn’t the right action for that incident. I believe it was an attempt to make up for mishandling the death of James Chasse.
At the same time, it’s hard to feel good about the rally, or the vote of no confidence. The history doesn’t help. The last time a vote of no confidence occurred was when two police officers were fired for leaving dead opossums at a black business. You know, even if we assume that any potential racial overtones are strictly coincidental, that sounds like harassment, and really inappropriate, and a good reason to be fired. Plus, my understanding was that Sizer had been doing a good job, and its important to have a good chief, with the confidence of the officers, so that’s a lot of harm being done, and probably without much help.
At the same time, it is really the wrong time to be crying racism, because if anyone punches a cop and comes away with no injuries but a bruised thigh, that is not persecution. Yes, thirteen sounds young, but physically she was large enough to do some damage, and she was way out of line.
I guess the point of the above is that I don’t agree with anyone, so ha! Except that it is not “Ha!” because I really hate situations like this, where everyone is in conflict and maybe no one is completely wrong but certainly no one is completely right. My stomach knots up and I hate it.
So now we have something worse than a bruised thigh. We have a dead man, and possibly inappropriate action, and probably a traumatized cop, certainly a bereft family, and Jesse Jackson to top it off, whom I wish I believed would be helpful, and a different kinds of rally.
On one side, we have the Portland Police Bureau. Many of them are good men, and it is their job to take risks to ensure the safety of the city. They volunteer for that. Sure, they get paid, but not really that much and with a lot of risk. Especially lately, when there have been so many shooters targeting police, it is an act of courage to keep going out there day after day. They need our support.
On the other side we have the African American community. They have good reason to be afraid of cops. There are disproportionate traffic stops and sentencing, and a long history of conflict, and it’s not hard to understand that when an unarmed woman gets shot, or a young girl walking in the middle of the street ends up with her head under an officer’s knee, or a professor gets arrested in his own house, all of that adds to a sense of fear and distrust. They shouldn’t have to feel that way. (And by the way, yes, he lost his temper, but why couldn’t the guy have just given his name and badge number? Could that have maybe defused it? He had been responding appropriately until then, so having his name attached to it should have been fine!)
A few years ago, I was almost asleep, and then suddenly I was wide awake as several shots were fired. I listened in the dark, trying to figure out what was going on, and just as I had almost decided it was nothing, voices started up, and police radio, and I was listening to a standoff about two blocks away. A man who had been drinking and was upset, not necessarily in that order, took two guns outside, fired them both, then took the guns back into the house, and went outside to wait for the police to show up and shoot him. He was asking for it, but he didn’t get it. He was arrested instead.
Talking about it to a neighbor, she became very agitated. She was a white woman, but she had a black son, and just having that happen so near to her house gave her visions of the police showing up and shooting her son. (Incidentally, the guy trying to get himself killed was white.) To help bring her nerves down a little, I told her it was probably lucky for this guy that he wasn’t in Portland. Somehow, I have always thought of them as a bit more trigger-happy. (Our responders are the Washington Country Sheriff’s Department.)
For me, sure, I am a white female in the suburbs, and I am not likely to ever be hassled, but I have to worry about appropriate responses too. I’m diabetic, and my blood sugar can suddenly drop, and such an incident led to one diabetic getting tased. (Why the people with her, when she told them her blood sugar was falling, called the cops instead of feeding her, I have no idea. If she asked for juice, I know she didn’t mean electricity.) That was also in Portland.
I don’t feel good about feeling that way. I know there are many Portland officers who try hard, and heroically, to protect and serve and keep everyone safe. Maybe it only seems like more happens because it is a bigger city, with more happening. But maybe there is something to that perception, and then it needs to be dealt with. If somehow in the attitudes or training or traditions, something makes the them more likely to fire, or in other ways act inappropriately, that needs to be investigated and dealt with. If the problem is just that there are a lot of good cops and some bullies, those bullies need to be brought out, and not protected.
On cop shows whenever the Internal Affairs team shows up it is bad news, and they are despised and traitors, but that kind of oversight is really important. Isn’t the real traitor the one who shames the job? There is work for the police to do, but it is not all up to them.
.
We owe them a better world and a better citizenry. Yes, a lot of the scuffles involve people of color, but they also frequently involve the mentally ill. With the way resources have been cut, the streets are full of them, and that’s something we haven’t had the will to solve.
The black community needs to be addressing the issues of youth in gangs, who shoot each other, and cops, and the issue of wild thirteen year old girls roaming around and getting into trouble on Tri-met. That’s not to pick on them. I realize that there is a long history of problems that have affected African Americas, starting with slavery, and then Jim Crow and segregated housing and welfare rules and many things leading to the social problems today, and that those problems are not uniquely black and pretty much spread out and touch all poverty. I know that and have compassion on it.
It’s just that all you can ever really be responsible for you. Jackson can chastise the cops, and the cops can point out all the reasons that every perp deserved and needed deadly force, but all it does is create bad feelings. If instead everyone worked to correct their part of the problem, then we could actually get somewhere.
A major disappointment for me was reading Fixing Broken Windows. It talked about community policing (Kroker was a fan), and I expected it to be all about making connections between police and government and citizens. Instead it was about order management. Yes, you fix broken windows and paint over graffiti, but also you don’t allow jaywalking or fare jumping and then because everyone realizes that the man is breathing down their neck they get into line (basically).
Maybe that would work, but what if maybe it was just showing that somebody cared? People keep things repaired because they care about the community, and that caring can spread to include caring about people. There was an emphasis on beat cops, and those can be great. What if there had been outreach to the point that Chris Humphreys knew James Chasse, and recognized him right away and could see, okay, he’s off his meds, better call his sister? This teenage boy is Walter, and he is a high-functioning autistic and if he does not respond right away, it is not insubordination. It’s a lot of work, but it’s not impossible.
Everything is different when we know each other. Most of the time, we don’t, and so when one of your own is attacked you circle the wagons and defend, and put on a “Don’t choke ‘em; smoke ‘em” t-shirt, because it is supposed to represent your tough choices, but what it really does is make a joke out of a loss of human life. Or you get all righteous about how violent the police are when someone who talks to others about suicide while holding a gun has put himself in a pretty bad situation. Everyone has a point, but they are still missing the one that matters.
Saturday, February 13, 2010
Liking and Loving
The other day I was talking to a friend, and I told her “I like you.” She responded that she loved me, and then I said that I loved her too, all of which was true, but the reason that I started off with liking her is that for me that is the bigger compliment.
I try to love everyone. I don’t always succeed, but my end goal is to have Christ-like love for everyone. I love many people that I don’t like. If I like you, I do love you too, but the point is that I also enjoy spending time with you.
It’s not completely unrelated. If I like you, it is easier to love you, because there isn’t anything getting in the way. It’s amazing how difficult it is to feel love when you are constantly irritated. At the same time, as I love you, it becomes easier to like you. Having a vested interest in you makes it easier to spot your good qualities, and excuse your flaws, and find you enjoyable.
I won’t deny that my loving you gets you farther. If you need help, it is love that makes me do it, but I will help the annoying ones too, if I can—it’s just not as gratifying. I guess my point is that I love you because of whom I am (or am trying to be), but if I like you it is because of you.
I do have a long way to go. First of all, there is the question of boundaries. If I love you, I want what is best for you, but that may not mean giving you money, or not calling the police on you, depending on the circumstances. It may even mean that if spending time with you would be bad for me, even if it might be good for you. I get that, but somehow maintaining love for people who do bad things can be difficult.
That is still not my biggest problem. The worst is loving those who annoy. My personal kryptonite is stupidity, especially combined with neediness. Since a persistent focus on getting others to pay attention to you interferes with your ability to accurately perceive the feelings of those around you, or pretty much anything anchored in reality, stupidity accompanies neediness more often than not.
At times I have justified my preference for other types of people in that those who are constantly seeking attention will probably get it, but it won’t be enough, and also, people who are not like that still need occasional support and encouragement, and you can make more of a difference there. The logic is sound, but my real motivation is probably just a desire to not be anywhere near the stupid.
Naturally, this is bad of me. At the same time, I believe that as I keep going, I will improve, and that it will get easier—I will find another level of love.
In some ways I have already seen growth. One interesting thing about Facebook is how greatly it exceeds the number of people you can be aware of, and care about. I have often found myself praying for multiple people in my personal prayers based on their statuses. It’s not that I wouldn’t want to know what was going on, and help, but before Facebook it was impossible to know what was happening with whom on that scale.
On a smaller level, I see it in our family prayers. Some time ago my sisters and I decided to start praying for a few people. We started with three guys in the ward whom we felt were fairly marriageable—no big issues stopping them—but maybe just needed a little push to move forward. (I know it sounds weird. We want to get out of the singles ward, but we know we are still needed there, so we are trying to pray other people out to the point where we are not needed anymore.)
Some months later, we are usually praying for about thirteen people, plus this family, plus other individuals who may have specific temporary things going on. No one has complained about the prayers getting too long, or the slowness of the process. In addition, sure, praying does not feel like much, but sometimes it is all you can do, and then sometimes we get ideas about other things we can do, and opportunities come up. As we open our hearts, they expand. (And two of the original three guys have serious girlfriends now too, so we feel good about that.)
I may have some hope in the stupid area too. One person I have a lot of difficulty with is my older sister, who is so focused on getting attention that there is nothing else to her. I used to be able to talk to her about this, and she would agree with me, but nothing would change. Now we can’t even have the conversations. I prayed for her to get better, but nothing was happening there. I tried feeling differently, and nothing happened there. Finally I decided all I could do was try and act nicer to her, so my behavior was at least more correct, even if nothing else was.
I made a point of exchanging a few responses with her each night, acknowledging what she was saying. She enjoyed it, and both Mom and Julie mentioned how I seemed to be getting along better with her. They thought I was feeling better about her, which I was not, so it was not everything I had been hoping for, but it was a small improvement, and maybe that was enough.
I say “was” because there was a big setback. She got mad at Mom about something, so didn’t come around for a while, and we got used to the peace. Then she came back and started trying to make up for lost time, talking twice as much and twice as pointlessly. I have had a hard time trying again, but I will have to, because she is family and I do love her, even if I do not enjoy her.
I know, we haven’t even touched on romantic love yet, and it is the right time of year for it, but I think it will kind of be the same. I suppose that will be more similar to liking, but more exciting. In terms of being kind and faithful and honest with someone, again, I will do that because of who I am—loving him will just make it more of a joy.
So that’s where I’m at—still perpetually single, but there is a lot of love in my life, and I am still working on improving the love that I give. I feel like I love pretty well now, but I intend to love brilliantly.
I try to love everyone. I don’t always succeed, but my end goal is to have Christ-like love for everyone. I love many people that I don’t like. If I like you, I do love you too, but the point is that I also enjoy spending time with you.
It’s not completely unrelated. If I like you, it is easier to love you, because there isn’t anything getting in the way. It’s amazing how difficult it is to feel love when you are constantly irritated. At the same time, as I love you, it becomes easier to like you. Having a vested interest in you makes it easier to spot your good qualities, and excuse your flaws, and find you enjoyable.
I won’t deny that my loving you gets you farther. If you need help, it is love that makes me do it, but I will help the annoying ones too, if I can—it’s just not as gratifying. I guess my point is that I love you because of whom I am (or am trying to be), but if I like you it is because of you.
I do have a long way to go. First of all, there is the question of boundaries. If I love you, I want what is best for you, but that may not mean giving you money, or not calling the police on you, depending on the circumstances. It may even mean that if spending time with you would be bad for me, even if it might be good for you. I get that, but somehow maintaining love for people who do bad things can be difficult.
That is still not my biggest problem. The worst is loving those who annoy. My personal kryptonite is stupidity, especially combined with neediness. Since a persistent focus on getting others to pay attention to you interferes with your ability to accurately perceive the feelings of those around you, or pretty much anything anchored in reality, stupidity accompanies neediness more often than not.
At times I have justified my preference for other types of people in that those who are constantly seeking attention will probably get it, but it won’t be enough, and also, people who are not like that still need occasional support and encouragement, and you can make more of a difference there. The logic is sound, but my real motivation is probably just a desire to not be anywhere near the stupid.
Naturally, this is bad of me. At the same time, I believe that as I keep going, I will improve, and that it will get easier—I will find another level of love.
In some ways I have already seen growth. One interesting thing about Facebook is how greatly it exceeds the number of people you can be aware of, and care about. I have often found myself praying for multiple people in my personal prayers based on their statuses. It’s not that I wouldn’t want to know what was going on, and help, but before Facebook it was impossible to know what was happening with whom on that scale.
On a smaller level, I see it in our family prayers. Some time ago my sisters and I decided to start praying for a few people. We started with three guys in the ward whom we felt were fairly marriageable—no big issues stopping them—but maybe just needed a little push to move forward. (I know it sounds weird. We want to get out of the singles ward, but we know we are still needed there, so we are trying to pray other people out to the point where we are not needed anymore.)
Some months later, we are usually praying for about thirteen people, plus this family, plus other individuals who may have specific temporary things going on. No one has complained about the prayers getting too long, or the slowness of the process. In addition, sure, praying does not feel like much, but sometimes it is all you can do, and then sometimes we get ideas about other things we can do, and opportunities come up. As we open our hearts, they expand. (And two of the original three guys have serious girlfriends now too, so we feel good about that.)
I may have some hope in the stupid area too. One person I have a lot of difficulty with is my older sister, who is so focused on getting attention that there is nothing else to her. I used to be able to talk to her about this, and she would agree with me, but nothing would change. Now we can’t even have the conversations. I prayed for her to get better, but nothing was happening there. I tried feeling differently, and nothing happened there. Finally I decided all I could do was try and act nicer to her, so my behavior was at least more correct, even if nothing else was.
I made a point of exchanging a few responses with her each night, acknowledging what she was saying. She enjoyed it, and both Mom and Julie mentioned how I seemed to be getting along better with her. They thought I was feeling better about her, which I was not, so it was not everything I had been hoping for, but it was a small improvement, and maybe that was enough.
I say “was” because there was a big setback. She got mad at Mom about something, so didn’t come around for a while, and we got used to the peace. Then she came back and started trying to make up for lost time, talking twice as much and twice as pointlessly. I have had a hard time trying again, but I will have to, because she is family and I do love her, even if I do not enjoy her.
I know, we haven’t even touched on romantic love yet, and it is the right time of year for it, but I think it will kind of be the same. I suppose that will be more similar to liking, but more exciting. In terms of being kind and faithful and honest with someone, again, I will do that because of who I am—loving him will just make it more of a joy.
So that’s where I’m at—still perpetually single, but there is a lot of love in my life, and I am still working on improving the love that I give. I feel like I love pretty well now, but I intend to love brilliantly.
Tuesday, February 09, 2010
I hate it when I am not logical
I am chagrined.
Lately, people have been doing a lot of themes on Facebook, and they have been getting kind of annoying. I loved the Thanksgiving status updates, but they were still highly individualized. I think the tide turned around the time that women were posting their bra colors for breast cancer awareness.
It’s not that there was necessarily anything wrong with that, mind you, but two thing combined to get me kind of irritated. One was an article about “slacktivism”, where some things you do for awareness or charity aren’t really that much work, and does that maybe cheapen some things. Believe me, I think about that a lot when I visit Green Patch and Sweet Shop. (It’s about the only way I can contribute now, but still, I realize its effects are limited.)
At the same time, there started just being a slew of status updates that were all, if you care about this, post this. It wasn’t exactly a new phenomenon, but a lot of new ones came out in a short period of time, and they seemed to be getting pushier. If you really care, you will post, and most people won’t.
I like finding out about things that are really going on with people. I like posting what is going on with me, even if it is just a movie quote that came into my head and made me laugh. That’s a big part of the fun of Facebook. So disrupting that with various causes, no matter how worthy, is a little annoying, and when it starts feeling like there is pressure and manipulation going on, it becomes really annoying. And it is trivial. I do love Jesus, but I will never honk because of it. It does not seem like an appropriate way of expressing my faith in the Savior. So I care about cancer and infertility and malnutrition, and many other things, but it will probably not affect my status updates.
At the same time, there were also new themes coming up for profile pictures. The first one that came up was Retro Week, where you posted old pictures. That seemed kind of fun, and I did it, and then people kept the old pictures up, and I started to see some issues with changing the profile picture, and then it got out of control too.
Retro Week was followed by Doppelganger Week, where you put up celebrities whom you resembled. There were some interesting ones, but I wasn’t going to participate because I am either going to be blatantly lying or putting up someone I don’t find that attractive, and I don’t like that choice. (We’ve covered my self-image issues.) Then it was Pet Week. Well, I love my pets, but I was annoyed again, and was not changing my profile picture. Besides, people really get out of sync, so it is never actually a week—any given theme sprawls out of time as it slowly makes the rounds.
Anyway, I was already non-participating, and I don’t know that I will participate in any profile picture or status update memes again, but then I saw one today—put up a picture of you and your significant other.
Much like my self-image issues, my love life has been covered. The coverage has shown that it has been basically non-existent. I have been attracted to many, and in love twice, and come close to love a few other times, but there has never been any known reciprocation ever. I’m sure when you have had relationships, being single is still hard, but there is something harsh about never having felt wanted by anyone.
The ridiculous thing is, I am usually okay with it, and yesterday I was great. I was feeling really grateful and joyful in church. In Relief Society we talked about loneliness, and I remember thinking that sure, anyone can have moments of sadness, but really, if you are focused on serving others it is not usually a problem. When you have a good relationship with God, you don’t need validation from other people, and you can enjoy it, but you don’t depend on it. That is huge. That ultimately, with my family and friends I have a lot to be thankful for, even if I am single for my entire life.
Maybe I was too prideful in thinking about those self-absorbed losers who are always waiting for someone else to prove to them that they have worth, so to speak. Anyway, I saw the thing about the photos, and knew it was impossible. Sure, I could put up a picture of my family or my pets, but there are a lot of dirty minds online, and besides, I am now against these constant changes in general. I couldn’t let it rest though, so I put up a smart remark, somewhat being sarcastic, but it is also perfectly true:
“But I have never had a picture taken with a significant other! Oh well, no reason to spoil everyone else’s fun.”
Again, this is completely true. The last time I was anyone’s girlfriend was for three days in sixth grade, and no photos were taken during that time. That being said, I don’t have anything against Valentine’s Day. My sisters and I will look for people we want to remember, but I don’t get depressed, or get into that weird rebel state at the other end of the spectrum where I would throw an anti-Valentine’s party. I’m just kind of mellow about it.
So explain to me then why after a few responses to the status update I found myself on the verge of tears. And that’s why I’m chagrined. It’s like, really? Now this is going to bug me? I guess it was posting the smart remark that did it, but if that’s a problem, well, I’m not ready to change that. I don’t think I have it in me.
Perhaps it’s for the best. I did sign up for the talent show, so I will be doing standup comedy in two weeks, and it’s no good without a little angst. Boys are so silly, and so am I.
Lately, people have been doing a lot of themes on Facebook, and they have been getting kind of annoying. I loved the Thanksgiving status updates, but they were still highly individualized. I think the tide turned around the time that women were posting their bra colors for breast cancer awareness.
It’s not that there was necessarily anything wrong with that, mind you, but two thing combined to get me kind of irritated. One was an article about “slacktivism”, where some things you do for awareness or charity aren’t really that much work, and does that maybe cheapen some things. Believe me, I think about that a lot when I visit Green Patch and Sweet Shop. (It’s about the only way I can contribute now, but still, I realize its effects are limited.)
At the same time, there started just being a slew of status updates that were all, if you care about this, post this. It wasn’t exactly a new phenomenon, but a lot of new ones came out in a short period of time, and they seemed to be getting pushier. If you really care, you will post, and most people won’t.
I like finding out about things that are really going on with people. I like posting what is going on with me, even if it is just a movie quote that came into my head and made me laugh. That’s a big part of the fun of Facebook. So disrupting that with various causes, no matter how worthy, is a little annoying, and when it starts feeling like there is pressure and manipulation going on, it becomes really annoying. And it is trivial. I do love Jesus, but I will never honk because of it. It does not seem like an appropriate way of expressing my faith in the Savior. So I care about cancer and infertility and malnutrition, and many other things, but it will probably not affect my status updates.
At the same time, there were also new themes coming up for profile pictures. The first one that came up was Retro Week, where you posted old pictures. That seemed kind of fun, and I did it, and then people kept the old pictures up, and I started to see some issues with changing the profile picture, and then it got out of control too.
Retro Week was followed by Doppelganger Week, where you put up celebrities whom you resembled. There were some interesting ones, but I wasn’t going to participate because I am either going to be blatantly lying or putting up someone I don’t find that attractive, and I don’t like that choice. (We’ve covered my self-image issues.) Then it was Pet Week. Well, I love my pets, but I was annoyed again, and was not changing my profile picture. Besides, people really get out of sync, so it is never actually a week—any given theme sprawls out of time as it slowly makes the rounds.
Anyway, I was already non-participating, and I don’t know that I will participate in any profile picture or status update memes again, but then I saw one today—put up a picture of you and your significant other.
Much like my self-image issues, my love life has been covered. The coverage has shown that it has been basically non-existent. I have been attracted to many, and in love twice, and come close to love a few other times, but there has never been any known reciprocation ever. I’m sure when you have had relationships, being single is still hard, but there is something harsh about never having felt wanted by anyone.
The ridiculous thing is, I am usually okay with it, and yesterday I was great. I was feeling really grateful and joyful in church. In Relief Society we talked about loneliness, and I remember thinking that sure, anyone can have moments of sadness, but really, if you are focused on serving others it is not usually a problem. When you have a good relationship with God, you don’t need validation from other people, and you can enjoy it, but you don’t depend on it. That is huge. That ultimately, with my family and friends I have a lot to be thankful for, even if I am single for my entire life.
Maybe I was too prideful in thinking about those self-absorbed losers who are always waiting for someone else to prove to them that they have worth, so to speak. Anyway, I saw the thing about the photos, and knew it was impossible. Sure, I could put up a picture of my family or my pets, but there are a lot of dirty minds online, and besides, I am now against these constant changes in general. I couldn’t let it rest though, so I put up a smart remark, somewhat being sarcastic, but it is also perfectly true:
“But I have never had a picture taken with a significant other! Oh well, no reason to spoil everyone else’s fun.”
Again, this is completely true. The last time I was anyone’s girlfriend was for three days in sixth grade, and no photos were taken during that time. That being said, I don’t have anything against Valentine’s Day. My sisters and I will look for people we want to remember, but I don’t get depressed, or get into that weird rebel state at the other end of the spectrum where I would throw an anti-Valentine’s party. I’m just kind of mellow about it.
So explain to me then why after a few responses to the status update I found myself on the verge of tears. And that’s why I’m chagrined. It’s like, really? Now this is going to bug me? I guess it was posting the smart remark that did it, but if that’s a problem, well, I’m not ready to change that. I don’t think I have it in me.
Perhaps it’s for the best. I did sign up for the talent show, so I will be doing standup comedy in two weeks, and it’s no good without a little angst. Boys are so silly, and so am I.
Sunday, January 17, 2010
Resolved
Maria is always looking for special events or days that she can incorporate into her lesson plans, and she saw somewhere that January 17th is Break your Resolutions day. That stuck with me because that’s my birthday. I wasn’t really sure what I wanted to do for resolutions this year, so I was taking my time deciding and I figured they could start on my birthday. So, I guess I will start while everyone else is breaking theirs.
As we know, the only one that stuck last year was the monthly picture, and I think it served its purpose. I don’t feel a need to do it again, though I will try and stick with an attitude of not avoiding pictures, and if I find that slipping, maybe I will start again.
For the one on writing one screenplay per month, well, yes, I did it once, but that one was absolutely ready to go. The ideas had been swirling around for a while, and then when Josh died it just crystallized everything, and I was completely ready to go. So I can write a screenplay in a month, but there needs to be prep time as well. Some things only get resolved as you write them, but (at least for me) there is a certain amount of thought that needs to go into it before you start writing. It’s not just to know the plot twists and turns, but also the tone. Like I think the next project will be Pen Pals, and that is basically a comedy, and the main plot and obstacles are romantic, but is it romcom, or farce, or dark humor? Some of the things I want to write need more research, like knowing more background information about the Great Depression, or about Alzheimer’s (no, not for the same things). So, it’s not exactly a realistic goal, though one every two months might be. I anticipate writing more about writing many times.
I probably should recycle the other two—keeping my thoughts pure and not playing with my hair.
In other ways, having resolutions seems kind of beside the point. I have largely switched to a project-based operating model. Back over those months when I was not blogging, I was doing journal writing exploring different options for my life, and the three main areas that I see as needing improvement. I was looking for clarity and I think I have it, but in the process of that I found smaller things I wanted to get done.
I have also found that I cannot function without making lists, and checking things off. Sure, I remember each thing at odd moments when there is nothing I can do about it, but that’s not really helpful. So, I have notebook pages filled with things to do, and then whenever I have some time, I can look over it and find something to work on.
I have been accomplishing more, which I like. At other times, I feel frustrated with how much more there is that is undone. Is it a paradox—the more you do the more you have to do? It feels a little unfair, and yet, I do want to be doing many things. I don’t really want to be lazy, no matter how fascinating television can be.
So that’s where I’m at. I wanted to finish the original checklist before the end of the year, and then before my birthday, neither of which happened, but some things are done, and others will follow.
I intend to get back into sort of a weekly blogging schedule, where I write one regular blog post and one travel blog post per week. (The preparedness blog will still just be an update of the monthly newsletter, unless good bonus material comes up.) The regular blog will go over my main area of focus, the two areas that I am not focusing on now, things that can’t fall to the side regardless of my main focus, and different checklist items, done or not done. I don’t know what order they will go in though, and by the time I am done with them, we could be getting pretty close to 2011.
Anyway, happy New Year. It is one for me.
As we know, the only one that stuck last year was the monthly picture, and I think it served its purpose. I don’t feel a need to do it again, though I will try and stick with an attitude of not avoiding pictures, and if I find that slipping, maybe I will start again.
For the one on writing one screenplay per month, well, yes, I did it once, but that one was absolutely ready to go. The ideas had been swirling around for a while, and then when Josh died it just crystallized everything, and I was completely ready to go. So I can write a screenplay in a month, but there needs to be prep time as well. Some things only get resolved as you write them, but (at least for me) there is a certain amount of thought that needs to go into it before you start writing. It’s not just to know the plot twists and turns, but also the tone. Like I think the next project will be Pen Pals, and that is basically a comedy, and the main plot and obstacles are romantic, but is it romcom, or farce, or dark humor? Some of the things I want to write need more research, like knowing more background information about the Great Depression, or about Alzheimer’s (no, not for the same things). So, it’s not exactly a realistic goal, though one every two months might be. I anticipate writing more about writing many times.
I probably should recycle the other two—keeping my thoughts pure and not playing with my hair.
In other ways, having resolutions seems kind of beside the point. I have largely switched to a project-based operating model. Back over those months when I was not blogging, I was doing journal writing exploring different options for my life, and the three main areas that I see as needing improvement. I was looking for clarity and I think I have it, but in the process of that I found smaller things I wanted to get done.
I have also found that I cannot function without making lists, and checking things off. Sure, I remember each thing at odd moments when there is nothing I can do about it, but that’s not really helpful. So, I have notebook pages filled with things to do, and then whenever I have some time, I can look over it and find something to work on.
I have been accomplishing more, which I like. At other times, I feel frustrated with how much more there is that is undone. Is it a paradox—the more you do the more you have to do? It feels a little unfair, and yet, I do want to be doing many things. I don’t really want to be lazy, no matter how fascinating television can be.
So that’s where I’m at. I wanted to finish the original checklist before the end of the year, and then before my birthday, neither of which happened, but some things are done, and others will follow.
I intend to get back into sort of a weekly blogging schedule, where I write one regular blog post and one travel blog post per week. (The preparedness blog will still just be an update of the monthly newsletter, unless good bonus material comes up.) The regular blog will go over my main area of focus, the two areas that I am not focusing on now, things that can’t fall to the side regardless of my main focus, and different checklist items, done or not done. I don’t know what order they will go in though, and by the time I am done with them, we could be getting pretty close to 2011.
Anyway, happy New Year. It is one for me.
Saturday, January 16, 2010
I’ve always had such a crush on you
One thing that never ceases to amaze me about men is that they do not realize that women talk to each other. We love to share, and hey, if we talk to each other, it can get you off the hook for some listening. The downside is that if you are a bad boy, it gets found out. More likely, if you are lame, that gets found out too. If you cast a wide net, where none of the various women in your life know each other, it buys you time, but it is just something to be aware of.
I mention this because there is a guy I went to school with who has been working his way through the class, telling each one, “I always had such a crush on you. I thought you were so cute.” I can’t remember if the count is at seven or nine girls now who have heard it. Sometimes they hear about it in conjunction with what a jerk I am. The last time it came up, I didn’t even get confirmation, because the girl was kind of sounding me out sneakily, and I suddenly realized she was trying to determine if the reason for the rift between us was thwarted love. (No.) I suddenly realized I was tired, and did not want to go down that road, and so I alluded to the crush/cute thing, and suddenly the conversation stalled.
Anyway, the point of this is not that someone needs a new pickup line (although that would be true), but because my mind churns on things and my thoughts follow strange paths, I have thought about that line.
For one thing, it is not impossible that he truly had crushes on each of those girls and thought they were cute. Sure, the repetitiveness (and apparently the presence of a girlfriend) makes it seem insincere, but it is possible to like a lot of different people when you are young. I seem to remember once making a list (while in junior high) of boys whom I found attractive in some way, and I think I came up with forty-eight. I should have looked around for another two to just make it an even fifty, but I don’t remember doing so.
Of course, there were different levels of attraction. Some were just good-looking, but it didn’t matter. Sometimes it was just exciting to talk to them, and nice being around them, but there were others that you would think about a lot, and maybe even find lame reason to call, or ride your bike by their house. Actually, I recently learned that my 7th-8th grade crush and my 9th grade crush were neighbors. That should have been so convenient, but I didn’t even know! Had I just outgrown that by 9th grade? I remember accompanying Danielle on a walk-by in 10th grade, but maybe I was just accommodating her. I mean, I didn’t have to do walk-bys with Mike anyway, because I would just go hang out with him platonically.
The thing that I really wonder about, though, is whether anyone had a crush on me. Certainly at the time I thought it was impossible, but my views were messed up. Looking back, I can see times when maybe there was something there. For example, one time I was wearing a rather flattering sweater, and I got a “Whoa” out of Gary, and I enjoyed that, but it never went anywhere. Kyle agreed to meet up with me at the 9th grade prom, but then Dave got grounded, and Kyle didn’t want to go anymore. He did tell me beforehand, and neither of them did show up at all, because Ann and I were there, and we would have noticed, so it could have been worse, but it’s not exactly a case of someone being excited to be with you either.
(And that Chris guy totally wanted to sleep with, well, anyone, but he tried with me. Slimy horny boys don’t build as much confidence as you would think.)
Mainly what I worry about was that I missed opportunities that I could have had. I believed that boys did not and would not like me, and boys never asked me out, which seemed to corroborate my fears, but because I was always so careful to cast myself as platonic, I never really encouraged anyone. What if I thought I needed to be don’t-be-scared-of-this-gross-girl-liking-you-she-is-totally-harmless, but what I really needed to be was flirt-a-little-he-likes-you-but-he-is-scared?
It’s largely a moot point, because I can’t go back and change anything, and all I can really do is try and be wiser now. However, a big part of my being wiser now is understanding how I was foolish before. This is why in journals, and then in blog posts, I have gone over my entire romantic history (in all it’s one-sidedness), and all of the events and experiences that developed the hang-ups that figure so prominently in my life, and all of the regrets that I have from my romantic life.
So I believe that understanding the past, and trying to get to the truth of it is important, and my knowledge of this area is a big blank. I didn’t think any boys were ever attracted to me, but I don’t know and I don’t know how to know.
I thought about setting my Facebook status to ask for input on that, but there are a few problems with doing so. It’s not really an effective way of reaching people. Some will see it, some won’t, and I will only know that someone has seen it if they answer. Certainly if people took the time to answer “no”, it would sting a bit, and be pretty unnecessary, because that was my assumption anyway. It’s probably more likely that I would hear nothing, and that would feel a little crushing too, even thought it might not mean that much. So, getting good data would be challenging.
On the other hand, asking the question and finding out the answer scares me, which right there seems to be an argument in favor of doing it. I should face fears. I just want to be productive when I do it, and I’m not sure that I could be for this.
Sure, it might be nice to focus more on current attraction, and I will write about that more in the future, but for now all of the guys that I think I could reconnect with or flirt with have a way of suddenly entering new relationships. Good for them, I guess, and it at least settles the question of whether, when you kind of like two brothers, you need to choose right away or can wait until you assess their interest in you, because really I was not sure. Still, it’s a little disappointing.
I guess all I can really say is that I would be interested in learning of any confirmed or suspected attraction to me at any point in the past or, heck, even now. How’s that for commitment?
I mention this because there is a guy I went to school with who has been working his way through the class, telling each one, “I always had such a crush on you. I thought you were so cute.” I can’t remember if the count is at seven or nine girls now who have heard it. Sometimes they hear about it in conjunction with what a jerk I am. The last time it came up, I didn’t even get confirmation, because the girl was kind of sounding me out sneakily, and I suddenly realized she was trying to determine if the reason for the rift between us was thwarted love. (No.) I suddenly realized I was tired, and did not want to go down that road, and so I alluded to the crush/cute thing, and suddenly the conversation stalled.
Anyway, the point of this is not that someone needs a new pickup line (although that would be true), but because my mind churns on things and my thoughts follow strange paths, I have thought about that line.
For one thing, it is not impossible that he truly had crushes on each of those girls and thought they were cute. Sure, the repetitiveness (and apparently the presence of a girlfriend) makes it seem insincere, but it is possible to like a lot of different people when you are young. I seem to remember once making a list (while in junior high) of boys whom I found attractive in some way, and I think I came up with forty-eight. I should have looked around for another two to just make it an even fifty, but I don’t remember doing so.
Of course, there were different levels of attraction. Some were just good-looking, but it didn’t matter. Sometimes it was just exciting to talk to them, and nice being around them, but there were others that you would think about a lot, and maybe even find lame reason to call, or ride your bike by their house. Actually, I recently learned that my 7th-8th grade crush and my 9th grade crush were neighbors. That should have been so convenient, but I didn’t even know! Had I just outgrown that by 9th grade? I remember accompanying Danielle on a walk-by in 10th grade, but maybe I was just accommodating her. I mean, I didn’t have to do walk-bys with Mike anyway, because I would just go hang out with him platonically.
The thing that I really wonder about, though, is whether anyone had a crush on me. Certainly at the time I thought it was impossible, but my views were messed up. Looking back, I can see times when maybe there was something there. For example, one time I was wearing a rather flattering sweater, and I got a “Whoa” out of Gary, and I enjoyed that, but it never went anywhere. Kyle agreed to meet up with me at the 9th grade prom, but then Dave got grounded, and Kyle didn’t want to go anymore. He did tell me beforehand, and neither of them did show up at all, because Ann and I were there, and we would have noticed, so it could have been worse, but it’s not exactly a case of someone being excited to be with you either.
(And that Chris guy totally wanted to sleep with, well, anyone, but he tried with me. Slimy horny boys don’t build as much confidence as you would think.)
Mainly what I worry about was that I missed opportunities that I could have had. I believed that boys did not and would not like me, and boys never asked me out, which seemed to corroborate my fears, but because I was always so careful to cast myself as platonic, I never really encouraged anyone. What if I thought I needed to be don’t-be-scared-of-this-gross-girl-liking-you-she-is-totally-harmless, but what I really needed to be was flirt-a-little-he-likes-you-but-he-is-scared?
It’s largely a moot point, because I can’t go back and change anything, and all I can really do is try and be wiser now. However, a big part of my being wiser now is understanding how I was foolish before. This is why in journals, and then in blog posts, I have gone over my entire romantic history (in all it’s one-sidedness), and all of the events and experiences that developed the hang-ups that figure so prominently in my life, and all of the regrets that I have from my romantic life.
So I believe that understanding the past, and trying to get to the truth of it is important, and my knowledge of this area is a big blank. I didn’t think any boys were ever attracted to me, but I don’t know and I don’t know how to know.
I thought about setting my Facebook status to ask for input on that, but there are a few problems with doing so. It’s not really an effective way of reaching people. Some will see it, some won’t, and I will only know that someone has seen it if they answer. Certainly if people took the time to answer “no”, it would sting a bit, and be pretty unnecessary, because that was my assumption anyway. It’s probably more likely that I would hear nothing, and that would feel a little crushing too, even thought it might not mean that much. So, getting good data would be challenging.
On the other hand, asking the question and finding out the answer scares me, which right there seems to be an argument in favor of doing it. I should face fears. I just want to be productive when I do it, and I’m not sure that I could be for this.
Sure, it might be nice to focus more on current attraction, and I will write about that more in the future, but for now all of the guys that I think I could reconnect with or flirt with have a way of suddenly entering new relationships. Good for them, I guess, and it at least settles the question of whether, when you kind of like two brothers, you need to choose right away or can wait until you assess their interest in you, because really I was not sure. Still, it’s a little disappointing.
I guess all I can really say is that I would be interested in learning of any confirmed or suspected attraction to me at any point in the past or, heck, even now. How’s that for commitment?
Friday, January 15, 2010
Giving thanks
I know, it’s feast or famine with me. Well, I wanted to get some things out of the way, because while I was doing journal writing I had things I wanted to blog about, and there is a whole new round of blogging that I want to start, but I am playing catch-up first. This particular post actually goes back to November.
Lately there have been a lot of status update memes going around Facebook, to the point where I won’t do any of them anymore, and it has nothing to do with whether I care or not—they’re starting to feel like those e-mail messages that promise good luck or bad luck based on whether you forward. (I always break the chain. Always.) Anyway, before it got so out of hand, some people had started posting something that they were thankful for every day through Thanksgiving. I thought that was a great idea. It’s still very individualized, and gratitude is important.
When I say that I know gratitude is important, it is not just that it is appropriate to be thankful for blessings, knowing that there are many blessings, but also that it improves your outlook. (For more on that, see http://preparedspork.blogspot.com/2009/03/october-2008-three-keys-to-happiness.html.)
That being said, I was still just amazed by how positive an experience it was. I can’t even say that I was more on the lookout for blessings that usual, because just hearing about the idea gave me lots of ideas for posts, and I never had to struggle to find something to post. In general, I think I am pretty aware of blessings. Maybe it was expressing things publicly that made the difference. I only know that I felt good doing it, and seeing other people’s posts on their own gratitude.
As the holiday approached, I ran out of days, so I did one final, long post with everything else, and it felt wonderful to be so blessed. It wasn’t enough, actually, so I went through my friends and pages and just posted different things. I couldn’t do it for everyone of course, but there ended up being about fifty different postings, thanking people for things they had done for me, or things we experienced together, and even thanking those who have served in the military or in the police for what they do.
Not all of the posts were serious—I thanked George Clooney for just being him, and I know he will not see that—but still, it lifted my heart. I felt practically exultant with gratitude. Those words don’t seem like they should go together, but I am not sure how to describe it. My heart was bursting with a hymn of praise.
Even then, that was not everything, because afterwards many of the people that I wrote to wrote back, and some of the posts were really touching, so I felt thankful some more.
Gratitude is a beautiful thing, and anyone can do it. It’s not that I don’t have problems in my life—actually I have quite a few. One of my posts was that I was grateful that my diabetes was under control and that I haven’t had a cellulitis outbreak for a while, even though I have been sick a few times, which is usually what triggers it. Well, that means that I have diabetes, and with it I have a compromised immune system, so the opportunistic infection that I picked up years ago can flare up at any time. That is not great.
And yet still, somehow, it has stayed dormant for a while, even though there were some really good opportunities, and that is because my blood sugar is behaving fairly well, and that is because after many doctors and experiments with different combinations, we did find a regime that works pretty well. Also, we did that experimenting while I was employed and insured, and even thought it was expensive then because it was not good insurance, it was better to do it then than it would be now where I am uninsured. And I am really grateful that there was a brief time when I had good insurance, and that when everything first came up, involving a hospital stay, IV antibiotics, and follow-up appointments and classes on learning to live with diabetes, it was when I had the good insurance and everything was covered.
There are horrible, horrible things in the world, and they hit everyone, but the world is also filled with beauty, friendship, and grace. Gratitude is really a choice to remember the good, and it changes everything.
Lately there have been a lot of status update memes going around Facebook, to the point where I won’t do any of them anymore, and it has nothing to do with whether I care or not—they’re starting to feel like those e-mail messages that promise good luck or bad luck based on whether you forward. (I always break the chain. Always.) Anyway, before it got so out of hand, some people had started posting something that they were thankful for every day through Thanksgiving. I thought that was a great idea. It’s still very individualized, and gratitude is important.
When I say that I know gratitude is important, it is not just that it is appropriate to be thankful for blessings, knowing that there are many blessings, but also that it improves your outlook. (For more on that, see http://preparedspork.blogspot.com/2009/03/october-2008-three-keys-to-happiness.html.)
That being said, I was still just amazed by how positive an experience it was. I can’t even say that I was more on the lookout for blessings that usual, because just hearing about the idea gave me lots of ideas for posts, and I never had to struggle to find something to post. In general, I think I am pretty aware of blessings. Maybe it was expressing things publicly that made the difference. I only know that I felt good doing it, and seeing other people’s posts on their own gratitude.
As the holiday approached, I ran out of days, so I did one final, long post with everything else, and it felt wonderful to be so blessed. It wasn’t enough, actually, so I went through my friends and pages and just posted different things. I couldn’t do it for everyone of course, but there ended up being about fifty different postings, thanking people for things they had done for me, or things we experienced together, and even thanking those who have served in the military or in the police for what they do.
Not all of the posts were serious—I thanked George Clooney for just being him, and I know he will not see that—but still, it lifted my heart. I felt practically exultant with gratitude. Those words don’t seem like they should go together, but I am not sure how to describe it. My heart was bursting with a hymn of praise.
Even then, that was not everything, because afterwards many of the people that I wrote to wrote back, and some of the posts were really touching, so I felt thankful some more.
Gratitude is a beautiful thing, and anyone can do it. It’s not that I don’t have problems in my life—actually I have quite a few. One of my posts was that I was grateful that my diabetes was under control and that I haven’t had a cellulitis outbreak for a while, even though I have been sick a few times, which is usually what triggers it. Well, that means that I have diabetes, and with it I have a compromised immune system, so the opportunistic infection that I picked up years ago can flare up at any time. That is not great.
And yet still, somehow, it has stayed dormant for a while, even though there were some really good opportunities, and that is because my blood sugar is behaving fairly well, and that is because after many doctors and experiments with different combinations, we did find a regime that works pretty well. Also, we did that experimenting while I was employed and insured, and even thought it was expensive then because it was not good insurance, it was better to do it then than it would be now where I am uninsured. And I am really grateful that there was a brief time when I had good insurance, and that when everything first came up, involving a hospital stay, IV antibiotics, and follow-up appointments and classes on learning to live with diabetes, it was when I had the good insurance and everything was covered.
There are horrible, horrible things in the world, and they hit everyone, but the world is also filled with beauty, friendship, and grace. Gratitude is really a choice to remember the good, and it changes everything.
Things more offensive than Harry Reid
I don’t actually consider Harry Reid to be all that offensive. Maybe I’m soft on him because it’s hard to find good LDS democrats, but I think I would be okay with his comment anyway. Sure, there was controversy, and I thought about writing on that, but I was busy, and plenty of other, more prominent people are defending him, so my voice wasn’t necessarily needed. But other stuff has come up that just bothers me so much more; so let’s just go for it.
First of all, on the comment itself, he’s not even saying that these are factors in how he would vote! He is assessing Obama’s odds of winning (accurately), which is a reasonable thing to do. With any candidate, even if they would be great at the job, they need to be able to get it. (What’s really horrible is when you have people who are bad at governing but good at getting elected. I’m still scarred.) There are really just two trouble spots.
One is Reid’s use of the word Negro, which has fallen out of common usage, but there is no reason for it to be offensive, unless we consider being Negro itself to be a bad thing. I think leads to the second issue, which is our great discomfort with talking about race. Reid admits that light skin and clean diction makes Obama more palatable to many voters. He doesn’t say that it should, or that it’s right, but that’s the way it is. It makes people uncomfortable to hear it stated so plainly.
I remember once in junior high trying to explain who a certain person was to another person. It was hard to do, more so because I was reluctant to state that he was black. I finally did give in and say it, and that cleared the issue up right away, because this was the suburbs in the 80’s. There were like six African Americans in the entire school, and that was spread out over my entire three years—so at any given time I think there were fewer. Mentioning the color really narrowed it down.
So why didn’t I go there right away? Well, it felt wrong to do so, like mentioning skin color at all would be racist. Well that’s ridiculous. Knowing that people come in different colors isn’t racist—defining their inside by the outside, on the other hand, would be.
We have made some progress since then, but I still think in large part we don’t know how to communicate effectively about race. Some people are too sensitive and easily offended, while others are too nervous, and worried about offending. The problem is that the idiots usually feel completely comfortable spewing their idiocy, so those whose hearts are in the right place are going to need to get their spine in the right place as well.
Now, there is actually an interesting topic in here about how loaded any types of physical description can become, and maybe I will get to that some other day, but this post is about airing my grievances.
First of all, I would like to express my disappointment in Michael Steele. Some of your other recent comments had led me to believe you were moving away from the rancorous partisanship and moving the party into a more enlightened (while still conservative) direction. Remember, I would like to see a republican that I could get behind. Alas, it is clearly not to be.
For all others attacking Harry Reid, you’re going to have to do better than the comparisons to Trent Lott. First of all, their records on racial issues are completely different. When your record shows you as having been against the Voting Rights Act, the Civil Rights Act, and the Martin Luther King Jr. holiday, it’s going to be harder for people to give you the benefit of the doubt, and that skepticism is justified.
Secondly, let’s look at the quote. On the one hand, we have Reid speculating on how racial issues will affect voters. On the other, we have Lott saying that all of the problems we have now are because the Dixiecrats, who were running on a platform of segregation, did not win in 1948, and that he was proud of having voted for him. Yeah, that’s totally all just a double standard for liberals.
And actually, I have given Lott the benefit of the doubt on this one. After all, he said “we voted for [Thurmond]. We’re proud of it.” However, in 1948 he was seven years old. He was speaking collectively, and I don’t doubt for one minute that he remembers his parents muttering about the country going to the dogs since Thurmond lost, and of course you want to say nice things about someone on their 100th birthday. I don’t think he realized he was saying that all of the nation’s problems come from integration. It is nonetheless a really bad thing to say. Sure, there are still people who believe in it, but they do not belong on Capitol Hill.
Anyway, I can’t feel too much sympathy for him. Yes, he lost his position as Republican leader, but he still served an additional five years, and he could have served longer if he had not wanted to get out in time to avoid rules that would have made him delay starting his lobbying career. That after a gaffe like that he can even be thought of as a political consultant is really kind of a success story.
If feelings are split along party lines for Lott and Reid, it looks like there is a lot more unity against Pat Robertson. Wow, Pat.
When I first read his comments, I thought, “That is amazingly ignorant.” Still, I wondered where he pulled it from, and found this:
http://withintheblackcommunity.blogspot.com/2010/01/haiti-and-deal-with-devil-setting.html
It’s fairly well explained there, but not following the worship practices of people who seem evil to you is a far cry from making a pact with the devil. Calling on God, and believing He is good and can help you, is just not a satanic ritual.
Okay, now, I do believe that as the world gets more wicked, more disasters will occur, and that these should be seen as calls to repent, so I can kind of see a point there. I also have said a few times that I think when all is revealed, we will be amazed at how much human actions led to human suffering (beyond the obvious ways), so, I am not saying I cannot see any point at all in his comments, and I guess that Robertson wants people to pray for Haiti, and that he wants good things to happen to them, is nice. And yet somehow, he still angers me. Hmmm.
I think it could be a combination of things. One, he got the story way wrong. He has a large audience, presumably he has some kind of a research staff for his show (I don’t know, maybe he answers medical and financial questions off the top of his head), and it shouldn’t be so hard to get the story straight. So what he said was not true.
Also, even if the story was true, and Haitians of over two hundred years ago did make a pact with Satan, what would be the point of repeating that story? None of the original people are there. It wouldn’t strengthen aid efforts in any way—it could turn some people off. Ultimately, it is not necessary.
Furthermore, God causes the rain to fall on the just and unjust. There is wickedness, but there are good people caught up with it, and innocent children and animals, and even bad people can have kindness in them, and something like this should generate compassion on them, and this feels very much like kicking people when they are down. So it is not kind.
Not true, not necessary, not kind—well, that would be enough to make some people shut up. But not everyone.
So the next target of my pique is probably not as serious as these two, but I’m on a roll:
http://www.wnd.com/index.php?pageId=97977
I know, I have already expressed my beliefs that if you teach your children well about God, and help them build a personal relationship with him, then you do not need every single aspect of their lives to reinforce that, so that if the Brownie meeting does not begin and end with prayer, that can be okay. Not everyone thinks so, fine. But really, you shouldn’t be buying Girl Scout cookies because you’re supporting the girls learning yoga? Isn’t that a bit of a stretch? (Which, since stretching is a part of yoga, gives it a sinister turn.)
Okay, of the examples of female role models given, there are a lot of lesbians, and I can see where that might cause some discomfort, but I have a sneaking suspicion that there are a lot of role models that did not get mentioned in this article because they were not offensive enough. Also, what’s wrong with pacifists and feminists? Yes, I believe that sometimes war is necessary, and feminism can turn into ugly misanthropy, but peace and equality for women are both good things.
To be fair, I saw this link because it was posted by my sister’s co-worker, who is a rather conservative Christian, and they do like their women submissive and in the home, so teaching them to demand equal pay is counterproductive to the end goal. I somehow hope his daughter will find many Girl Scout friends who will teach her to be assertive without being evil, and if part of that involves yoga, well, I don’t like it myself, but I know other people who do and they have managed to remain good people (and heterosexual too!).
I know, I may not have a right to any opinions, because I am childless (also a woman, so, you know, opinions bad), but I have friends with children, and they have had good experiences with both Girl Scouts and Boy Scouts, so I would try either. Also, I find the 1 out of 3 statistic highly suspect. So now because some idiots are slagging on Jane Addams, I need to go buy Girl Scout cookies, is how that is playing out.
Anyhow, I would just like to make an impassioned plea for thought—thinking things through, being thoughtful of others, and thinking before you speak. And don’t forget that research is an important part of thought. Like imagine poor Dick Cheney, saying Obama is in denial about war, and then after that seeing his acceptance speech for the Nobel Prize, where Obama addresses the contradiction inherent in receiving that prize while conducting and escalating a war. Can you imagine how embarrassed Cheney must feel? That kind of thing could stick you with a permanent grimace—okay, bad example, but yeah, something bad as a result of feeling terrible.
First of all, on the comment itself, he’s not even saying that these are factors in how he would vote! He is assessing Obama’s odds of winning (accurately), which is a reasonable thing to do. With any candidate, even if they would be great at the job, they need to be able to get it. (What’s really horrible is when you have people who are bad at governing but good at getting elected. I’m still scarred.) There are really just two trouble spots.
One is Reid’s use of the word Negro, which has fallen out of common usage, but there is no reason for it to be offensive, unless we consider being Negro itself to be a bad thing. I think leads to the second issue, which is our great discomfort with talking about race. Reid admits that light skin and clean diction makes Obama more palatable to many voters. He doesn’t say that it should, or that it’s right, but that’s the way it is. It makes people uncomfortable to hear it stated so plainly.
I remember once in junior high trying to explain who a certain person was to another person. It was hard to do, more so because I was reluctant to state that he was black. I finally did give in and say it, and that cleared the issue up right away, because this was the suburbs in the 80’s. There were like six African Americans in the entire school, and that was spread out over my entire three years—so at any given time I think there were fewer. Mentioning the color really narrowed it down.
So why didn’t I go there right away? Well, it felt wrong to do so, like mentioning skin color at all would be racist. Well that’s ridiculous. Knowing that people come in different colors isn’t racist—defining their inside by the outside, on the other hand, would be.
We have made some progress since then, but I still think in large part we don’t know how to communicate effectively about race. Some people are too sensitive and easily offended, while others are too nervous, and worried about offending. The problem is that the idiots usually feel completely comfortable spewing their idiocy, so those whose hearts are in the right place are going to need to get their spine in the right place as well.
Now, there is actually an interesting topic in here about how loaded any types of physical description can become, and maybe I will get to that some other day, but this post is about airing my grievances.
First of all, I would like to express my disappointment in Michael Steele. Some of your other recent comments had led me to believe you were moving away from the rancorous partisanship and moving the party into a more enlightened (while still conservative) direction. Remember, I would like to see a republican that I could get behind. Alas, it is clearly not to be.
For all others attacking Harry Reid, you’re going to have to do better than the comparisons to Trent Lott. First of all, their records on racial issues are completely different. When your record shows you as having been against the Voting Rights Act, the Civil Rights Act, and the Martin Luther King Jr. holiday, it’s going to be harder for people to give you the benefit of the doubt, and that skepticism is justified.
Secondly, let’s look at the quote. On the one hand, we have Reid speculating on how racial issues will affect voters. On the other, we have Lott saying that all of the problems we have now are because the Dixiecrats, who were running on a platform of segregation, did not win in 1948, and that he was proud of having voted for him. Yeah, that’s totally all just a double standard for liberals.
And actually, I have given Lott the benefit of the doubt on this one. After all, he said “we voted for [Thurmond]. We’re proud of it.” However, in 1948 he was seven years old. He was speaking collectively, and I don’t doubt for one minute that he remembers his parents muttering about the country going to the dogs since Thurmond lost, and of course you want to say nice things about someone on their 100th birthday. I don’t think he realized he was saying that all of the nation’s problems come from integration. It is nonetheless a really bad thing to say. Sure, there are still people who believe in it, but they do not belong on Capitol Hill.
Anyway, I can’t feel too much sympathy for him. Yes, he lost his position as Republican leader, but he still served an additional five years, and he could have served longer if he had not wanted to get out in time to avoid rules that would have made him delay starting his lobbying career. That after a gaffe like that he can even be thought of as a political consultant is really kind of a success story.
If feelings are split along party lines for Lott and Reid, it looks like there is a lot more unity against Pat Robertson. Wow, Pat.
When I first read his comments, I thought, “That is amazingly ignorant.” Still, I wondered where he pulled it from, and found this:
http://withintheblackcommunity.blogspot.com/2010/01/haiti-and-deal-with-devil-setting.html
It’s fairly well explained there, but not following the worship practices of people who seem evil to you is a far cry from making a pact with the devil. Calling on God, and believing He is good and can help you, is just not a satanic ritual.
Okay, now, I do believe that as the world gets more wicked, more disasters will occur, and that these should be seen as calls to repent, so I can kind of see a point there. I also have said a few times that I think when all is revealed, we will be amazed at how much human actions led to human suffering (beyond the obvious ways), so, I am not saying I cannot see any point at all in his comments, and I guess that Robertson wants people to pray for Haiti, and that he wants good things to happen to them, is nice. And yet somehow, he still angers me. Hmmm.
I think it could be a combination of things. One, he got the story way wrong. He has a large audience, presumably he has some kind of a research staff for his show (I don’t know, maybe he answers medical and financial questions off the top of his head), and it shouldn’t be so hard to get the story straight. So what he said was not true.
Also, even if the story was true, and Haitians of over two hundred years ago did make a pact with Satan, what would be the point of repeating that story? None of the original people are there. It wouldn’t strengthen aid efforts in any way—it could turn some people off. Ultimately, it is not necessary.
Furthermore, God causes the rain to fall on the just and unjust. There is wickedness, but there are good people caught up with it, and innocent children and animals, and even bad people can have kindness in them, and something like this should generate compassion on them, and this feels very much like kicking people when they are down. So it is not kind.
Not true, not necessary, not kind—well, that would be enough to make some people shut up. But not everyone.
So the next target of my pique is probably not as serious as these two, but I’m on a roll:
http://www.wnd.com/index.php?pageId=97977
I know, I have already expressed my beliefs that if you teach your children well about God, and help them build a personal relationship with him, then you do not need every single aspect of their lives to reinforce that, so that if the Brownie meeting does not begin and end with prayer, that can be okay. Not everyone thinks so, fine. But really, you shouldn’t be buying Girl Scout cookies because you’re supporting the girls learning yoga? Isn’t that a bit of a stretch? (Which, since stretching is a part of yoga, gives it a sinister turn.)
Okay, of the examples of female role models given, there are a lot of lesbians, and I can see where that might cause some discomfort, but I have a sneaking suspicion that there are a lot of role models that did not get mentioned in this article because they were not offensive enough. Also, what’s wrong with pacifists and feminists? Yes, I believe that sometimes war is necessary, and feminism can turn into ugly misanthropy, but peace and equality for women are both good things.
To be fair, I saw this link because it was posted by my sister’s co-worker, who is a rather conservative Christian, and they do like their women submissive and in the home, so teaching them to demand equal pay is counterproductive to the end goal. I somehow hope his daughter will find many Girl Scout friends who will teach her to be assertive without being evil, and if part of that involves yoga, well, I don’t like it myself, but I know other people who do and they have managed to remain good people (and heterosexual too!).
I know, I may not have a right to any opinions, because I am childless (also a woman, so, you know, opinions bad), but I have friends with children, and they have had good experiences with both Girl Scouts and Boy Scouts, so I would try either. Also, I find the 1 out of 3 statistic highly suspect. So now because some idiots are slagging on Jane Addams, I need to go buy Girl Scout cookies, is how that is playing out.
Anyhow, I would just like to make an impassioned plea for thought—thinking things through, being thoughtful of others, and thinking before you speak. And don’t forget that research is an important part of thought. Like imagine poor Dick Cheney, saying Obama is in denial about war, and then after that seeing his acceptance speech for the Nobel Prize, where Obama addresses the contradiction inherent in receiving that prize while conducting and escalating a war. Can you imagine how embarrassed Cheney must feel? That kind of thing could stick you with a permanent grimace—okay, bad example, but yeah, something bad as a result of feeling terrible.
Friday, January 01, 2010
Notes on the Rose Bowl
I guess the first point to make is that I am not a sports fan—I am a Duck fan. I like playing sports, though I liked it more when I was younger, and I can get into about any game, but I don’t feel compelled to watch unless it is the Ducks. Once upon a time I loved the Blazers, but Paul Allen and Bob Whitsitt blew it, and even though I know they have come a long way from being the Jail Blazers, I don’t think that love I once had will ever come back.
With the Ducks, it’s different. I don’t know that everyone is that way about their school, and I know there are people who are way more passionate about it than I am, but I always want the Ducks to win, and I always care. In actuality, if they win or lose it has nothing to do with me, but I don’t feel disconnected. I guess if you are a fan you get it.
My point in laying this out is that I am not necessarily unbiased as I share my thoughts on the LeGarrette Blount issue. It seems to have died down now, but a lot of nasty things were said about Blount and Coach Kelly, and the U of O sports faculty, and that’s where I want to go.
People calling Blount a thug, well, that’s not that surprising. Even knowing that there is more to him as a person, that was thuggish behavior, and he brought that one on himself. It’s more what happened after that bothered me.
Coach Kelly initially said Blount was permanently done. Some people agreed, some disagreed, but he did eventually change his mind. This is where it started getting nasty, as people became so sure that he was only reinstated because of the Stanford loss, and only put into the Civil War game after the Ducks fell behind, and that it is all about money.
I can’t say with any certainty that none of this is true, but I am willing to give them the benefit of the doubt, and here is why.
First of all, one loss and falling behind do not necessarily show that the Ducks need Blount. They played better after his suspension than they did in that first game, and while he could have played in the Arizona State game, he did not. He lost his place to LaMichael James, and apparently Blount has been nothing but supportive of James.
Would the Ducks have won the Civil War without Blount? I don’t know. He played well, but so did the rest of the team. Actually, it looks to me like his coming in energized the rest of the team—that maybe it meant a lot to the entire team to have their brother back. That would make sense. Michael Jordan-era Bulls aside, I think the best teams often have an esprit de corps where they do care about each other, and want success for each other, and in a case like that the reinstatement of the one player feels good and is inspiring for all of them, not just the one.
What it looks like to me is that Coach Kelly knew, and rightly so, that he could not have a thug on the team, so he said the suspension was permanent, but because Blount was making appropriate steps to make up for the incident and become better as a person and a player, it made the permanent suspension feel like a mistake. Well, it was his first game as head coach—a mistake is certainly possible, and if it is a mistake it is one that shows his head was in the right place. I think the reinstatement also shows that his heart is in the right place.
I believe if Blount had stayed angry and ready for violence, he would still be benched. He might still make the NFL draft, or have a chance of a walk-on, but that the Ducks would have been done with him. And for that, some people are still mad, but I’m glad that he wasn’t thrown away.
There was another player a few years ago who had been involved in a very serious fight (not on the field). He got his charges reduced and he got to play for the Ducks. That made a lot of people angry too, and it’s not necessarily wrong, but they were able to give someone a chance. I wish I could remember his name. Anyway, he was disadvantaged, he did have a rough life, and you could call him a thug. He didn’t even graduate, actually, which I think is a bit of a sign that he had some issues. At the same time, he is now a family man, employed, and still working on his degree. Maybe that would have happened without the football program, but I believe it helped, and I think that’s worth something.
With Blount, well, if he does make the NFL, he will be a little more visible, but if not, we may not learn how he turned out until some other Duck gets in a fight. (If that’s the case, I hope it’s not for a long time.) Regardless, I hope this helped. I hope the anger management classes helped, and going through the different apologies helped, and that the support of his coach and teammates helped. Even if it doesn’t, I still believe it’s worth the effort.
I guess this is weighing on me more heavily, because sometimes there are people that I want to help, and can’t. Three in particular come to mind, two with legal issues and one who is just slowly killing herself. I wish someone else would be able to do something. Do they deserve help? Not necessarily—they all should have known better, and probably did know better, even if they had to tune that out. Would someone else’s help work? Maybe not. I just know that I still care. They still have value. The worth of a soul is great in the eyes of God, and sometimes we mortals feel it too. I also know that they could do a lot of good if they could get their garbage sorted out. So if there is a chance to reach out and take a hand, do it.
Also, while the lack of self-control displayed was alarming, given the heat of the moment, the disappointment with the loss, and the taunting from Hout, it doesn’t seem like it really makes him a bad person—not like dog-fighting or more malicious things. It makes anger management classes really appropriate, but he did that. I’ll stand with the coach.
I don’t know Chip Kelly at all, but I got to listen to almost all of the football coaching staff when I was there (I took a class). I’ve gotten to listen to Ernie Kent too, and I know that even though they all want to win and work on that, they do seem to care about the men that they are churning out as well. (Coach Kent actually said he made them learn etiquette and public speaking too, which I think is brilliant. I wish someone had done that with Rasheed Wallace.)
I also have seen that the programs tend to have a lot of loyalty, keeping people around and promoting from within. (A part of me thinks that if Coach Monson had just had a better personality he could have stayed longer too, but I don’t really know—it was a pretty bad season.) It is possible for me to believe that their reasons were good and that they are trying to do right.
If we ever get a jerk coach like Lambright or Neuheisel, I will hate it, and if there is ever a really bad scandal, like bribes or criminal cover-ups, I will be devastated, and yet I will keep rooting for the team and hoping that they will become something better. Also, if they have a really miserable losing season, or lose another bowl game, it will sting. I know all that. I am a Duck fan. That being said, that is not the reason that I am okay with the Blount reinstatement. It feels right.
I’m not sure that I deserve some of the help I’ve gotten over this last year either, but I hope that I can live worthy of it. I hope Blount has the same sense of responsibility, and my good wishes go with him.
With the Ducks, it’s different. I don’t know that everyone is that way about their school, and I know there are people who are way more passionate about it than I am, but I always want the Ducks to win, and I always care. In actuality, if they win or lose it has nothing to do with me, but I don’t feel disconnected. I guess if you are a fan you get it.
My point in laying this out is that I am not necessarily unbiased as I share my thoughts on the LeGarrette Blount issue. It seems to have died down now, but a lot of nasty things were said about Blount and Coach Kelly, and the U of O sports faculty, and that’s where I want to go.
People calling Blount a thug, well, that’s not that surprising. Even knowing that there is more to him as a person, that was thuggish behavior, and he brought that one on himself. It’s more what happened after that bothered me.
Coach Kelly initially said Blount was permanently done. Some people agreed, some disagreed, but he did eventually change his mind. This is where it started getting nasty, as people became so sure that he was only reinstated because of the Stanford loss, and only put into the Civil War game after the Ducks fell behind, and that it is all about money.
I can’t say with any certainty that none of this is true, but I am willing to give them the benefit of the doubt, and here is why.
First of all, one loss and falling behind do not necessarily show that the Ducks need Blount. They played better after his suspension than they did in that first game, and while he could have played in the Arizona State game, he did not. He lost his place to LaMichael James, and apparently Blount has been nothing but supportive of James.
Would the Ducks have won the Civil War without Blount? I don’t know. He played well, but so did the rest of the team. Actually, it looks to me like his coming in energized the rest of the team—that maybe it meant a lot to the entire team to have their brother back. That would make sense. Michael Jordan-era Bulls aside, I think the best teams often have an esprit de corps where they do care about each other, and want success for each other, and in a case like that the reinstatement of the one player feels good and is inspiring for all of them, not just the one.
What it looks like to me is that Coach Kelly knew, and rightly so, that he could not have a thug on the team, so he said the suspension was permanent, but because Blount was making appropriate steps to make up for the incident and become better as a person and a player, it made the permanent suspension feel like a mistake. Well, it was his first game as head coach—a mistake is certainly possible, and if it is a mistake it is one that shows his head was in the right place. I think the reinstatement also shows that his heart is in the right place.
I believe if Blount had stayed angry and ready for violence, he would still be benched. He might still make the NFL draft, or have a chance of a walk-on, but that the Ducks would have been done with him. And for that, some people are still mad, but I’m glad that he wasn’t thrown away.
There was another player a few years ago who had been involved in a very serious fight (not on the field). He got his charges reduced and he got to play for the Ducks. That made a lot of people angry too, and it’s not necessarily wrong, but they were able to give someone a chance. I wish I could remember his name. Anyway, he was disadvantaged, he did have a rough life, and you could call him a thug. He didn’t even graduate, actually, which I think is a bit of a sign that he had some issues. At the same time, he is now a family man, employed, and still working on his degree. Maybe that would have happened without the football program, but I believe it helped, and I think that’s worth something.
With Blount, well, if he does make the NFL, he will be a little more visible, but if not, we may not learn how he turned out until some other Duck gets in a fight. (If that’s the case, I hope it’s not for a long time.) Regardless, I hope this helped. I hope the anger management classes helped, and going through the different apologies helped, and that the support of his coach and teammates helped. Even if it doesn’t, I still believe it’s worth the effort.
I guess this is weighing on me more heavily, because sometimes there are people that I want to help, and can’t. Three in particular come to mind, two with legal issues and one who is just slowly killing herself. I wish someone else would be able to do something. Do they deserve help? Not necessarily—they all should have known better, and probably did know better, even if they had to tune that out. Would someone else’s help work? Maybe not. I just know that I still care. They still have value. The worth of a soul is great in the eyes of God, and sometimes we mortals feel it too. I also know that they could do a lot of good if they could get their garbage sorted out. So if there is a chance to reach out and take a hand, do it.
Also, while the lack of self-control displayed was alarming, given the heat of the moment, the disappointment with the loss, and the taunting from Hout, it doesn’t seem like it really makes him a bad person—not like dog-fighting or more malicious things. It makes anger management classes really appropriate, but he did that. I’ll stand with the coach.
I don’t know Chip Kelly at all, but I got to listen to almost all of the football coaching staff when I was there (I took a class). I’ve gotten to listen to Ernie Kent too, and I know that even though they all want to win and work on that, they do seem to care about the men that they are churning out as well. (Coach Kent actually said he made them learn etiquette and public speaking too, which I think is brilliant. I wish someone had done that with Rasheed Wallace.)
I also have seen that the programs tend to have a lot of loyalty, keeping people around and promoting from within. (A part of me thinks that if Coach Monson had just had a better personality he could have stayed longer too, but I don’t really know—it was a pretty bad season.) It is possible for me to believe that their reasons were good and that they are trying to do right.
If we ever get a jerk coach like Lambright or Neuheisel, I will hate it, and if there is ever a really bad scandal, like bribes or criminal cover-ups, I will be devastated, and yet I will keep rooting for the team and hoping that they will become something better. Also, if they have a really miserable losing season, or lose another bowl game, it will sting. I know all that. I am a Duck fan. That being said, that is not the reason that I am okay with the Blount reinstatement. It feels right.
I’m not sure that I deserve some of the help I’ve gotten over this last year either, but I hope that I can live worthy of it. I hope Blount has the same sense of responsibility, and my good wishes go with him.
Thursday, December 31, 2009
A year in pictures
New Year’s has become one of my favorite holidays. It’s not that I generally do anything special, but I do feel a sense of optimism and renewal, if for no other reason than that I still haven’t learned that the next year will probably be just as hard and I will stay just as single. Well, it’s a fairly benign delusion.
Anyway, being a rather traditional sort, I made four resolutions for 2009. I wavered horribly on keeping my thoughts pure, and even if I am doing pretty well now, it in no way counts as keeping it. My borderline OCD habit of playing with my hair continues unimpaired, and I am just lucky that it is not full-blown trichotillomania. And while I did complete one screenplay (Past Present, formerly Dark Secrets) in one month (January), I did not keep that pace up for the rest of the year (though there are reasons why that is not so bad, which I may get to in another post).
I did manage to keep one resolution, but it was kind of the easiest. I did take and post a different picture of me every month. I ran a little late one month, and certainly many of the pictures are lame, but I did it.
The reason I made the resolution in the first place was because I really hate having my picture taken. I hate the way I look in pictures. I am not thrilled about the way I look in 3-D, and having it flattened and then saved makes it worse. Hate.
However, there are valid reasons for allowing your image to be captured on film, and possibly this distaste for one’s image can be unhealthy, so I went for it. The goal was to just become inured to it, I guess.
It was semi-successful. I do cringe less now, so I guess I have built up some immunity. I had also entertained this hope that I would somehow become better looking (re: thinner) over the course of the year, but I am about the same (that is another topic for a different day). Maybe I need to appreciate my current incarnation more before I can reach my full potential.
The primary benefit has been in seeing other’s comments. People are nice. They use words like “cute” and “great smile”. This has been weird for me, because what I see is more along the lines of “Egad, that stomach! And those thighs, and arms, and, for crying out loud! I don’t have trouble spots—I have a trouble body! And sure, I know I brushed my hair today because I remember doing it, but there is absolutely no evidence of it happening. I’m dressed like a ragamuffin, and why am I such a dork?” So there’s a bit of a disconnect.
In some ways this is not a surprise, because when I run into people they are always telling me that I haven’t aged, and I look exactly the same. In my mind I am thinking that I cut my hair short and grew it long again two or three times, and that I have gained at least five dress sizes since high school, and I know of the existence of fine lines, but really, the things that make people look like they have aged are weight gain and hard living, and I don’t live hard and I was already fat, so there is less room for people to notice decay. (Thinning hair can add age too, but that hasn’t been an issue for me yet, and some people really rock the bald look.) So, okay, I look good for me, because I didn’t have a lot to lose. But I don’t really think people are thinking this; I just think it might be a subconscious factor.
On another level, the niceness makes sense, because it would just be completely inappropriate for people to make mean comments. Social networking would probably be a lot less popular if people used it for personal criticisms.
Also, people are probably more kindly disposed, because after all, I know that I would never think as mean thoughts about someone else as I do about myself. (Well, I do think that heavy people wearing skimpy clothing is a bad idea, and no one needs to see the jiggling. Still, even when you’re skinny, bad skin can make it look unattractive, and even if you are one of the select few who can look good uncovered, you are ultimately just contributing to your own objectification, so give modesty a chance!)
Anyway, this is where it gets tricky. Any improvements that I should make require clear eyes, and a realistic take on where improvement is needed, and yet there is a line there where seeing that negative becomes destructive, and cruel. I’ve never been really good at that balancing act. I like myself a lot better now than I have at past times, and there are ways in which I am balanced, but I still have a mental block that attractiveness can ever exist in the presence of fat.
So I guess taking the pictures is in some way a step of trying to fit the behavior to the goal instead of the reality. I’ll give an example. Once upon a time, I would try and excuse away compliments, either explaining why it wasn’t really that good, or denying, or so on. I learned that this made people try and assert the compliment more. (The same thing happens with thanks—if you say “No problem” or “It was nothing”, they keep going. A good “You’re welcome” can nip that in the bud.)
Anyway, I started thanking people for compliments. Even though I believed they were wrong about whatever they thought that they saw in me that was good, I would just accept it. Although there were other steps that were needed before I could sincerely appreciate the compliment, it was a step in the right direction.
So, since I do not want to be the frustrating person who does not cooperate with the photographer, and since I do not want to hate the way I look, I have taken multiple pictures this year, and shared them on my profile. I do not love any of them (I hate the pictures someone else posted from a friend’s baby shower—I would completely eradicate them if I could), but I am dealing with them.
I am making some progress. With this last one, I could kind of see what people mean about the smile, at least. I usually do look happy. I generally am happy, so probably there is some sincerity to it. Also, I do have good teeth. Okay, I have always known that, but it’s nice to know that it counts for something.
Anyway, being a rather traditional sort, I made four resolutions for 2009. I wavered horribly on keeping my thoughts pure, and even if I am doing pretty well now, it in no way counts as keeping it. My borderline OCD habit of playing with my hair continues unimpaired, and I am just lucky that it is not full-blown trichotillomania. And while I did complete one screenplay (Past Present, formerly Dark Secrets) in one month (January), I did not keep that pace up for the rest of the year (though there are reasons why that is not so bad, which I may get to in another post).
I did manage to keep one resolution, but it was kind of the easiest. I did take and post a different picture of me every month. I ran a little late one month, and certainly many of the pictures are lame, but I did it.
The reason I made the resolution in the first place was because I really hate having my picture taken. I hate the way I look in pictures. I am not thrilled about the way I look in 3-D, and having it flattened and then saved makes it worse. Hate.
However, there are valid reasons for allowing your image to be captured on film, and possibly this distaste for one’s image can be unhealthy, so I went for it. The goal was to just become inured to it, I guess.
It was semi-successful. I do cringe less now, so I guess I have built up some immunity. I had also entertained this hope that I would somehow become better looking (re: thinner) over the course of the year, but I am about the same (that is another topic for a different day). Maybe I need to appreciate my current incarnation more before I can reach my full potential.
The primary benefit has been in seeing other’s comments. People are nice. They use words like “cute” and “great smile”. This has been weird for me, because what I see is more along the lines of “Egad, that stomach! And those thighs, and arms, and, for crying out loud! I don’t have trouble spots—I have a trouble body! And sure, I know I brushed my hair today because I remember doing it, but there is absolutely no evidence of it happening. I’m dressed like a ragamuffin, and why am I such a dork?” So there’s a bit of a disconnect.
In some ways this is not a surprise, because when I run into people they are always telling me that I haven’t aged, and I look exactly the same. In my mind I am thinking that I cut my hair short and grew it long again two or three times, and that I have gained at least five dress sizes since high school, and I know of the existence of fine lines, but really, the things that make people look like they have aged are weight gain and hard living, and I don’t live hard and I was already fat, so there is less room for people to notice decay. (Thinning hair can add age too, but that hasn’t been an issue for me yet, and some people really rock the bald look.) So, okay, I look good for me, because I didn’t have a lot to lose. But I don’t really think people are thinking this; I just think it might be a subconscious factor.
On another level, the niceness makes sense, because it would just be completely inappropriate for people to make mean comments. Social networking would probably be a lot less popular if people used it for personal criticisms.
Also, people are probably more kindly disposed, because after all, I know that I would never think as mean thoughts about someone else as I do about myself. (Well, I do think that heavy people wearing skimpy clothing is a bad idea, and no one needs to see the jiggling. Still, even when you’re skinny, bad skin can make it look unattractive, and even if you are one of the select few who can look good uncovered, you are ultimately just contributing to your own objectification, so give modesty a chance!)
Anyway, this is where it gets tricky. Any improvements that I should make require clear eyes, and a realistic take on where improvement is needed, and yet there is a line there where seeing that negative becomes destructive, and cruel. I’ve never been really good at that balancing act. I like myself a lot better now than I have at past times, and there are ways in which I am balanced, but I still have a mental block that attractiveness can ever exist in the presence of fat.
So I guess taking the pictures is in some way a step of trying to fit the behavior to the goal instead of the reality. I’ll give an example. Once upon a time, I would try and excuse away compliments, either explaining why it wasn’t really that good, or denying, or so on. I learned that this made people try and assert the compliment more. (The same thing happens with thanks—if you say “No problem” or “It was nothing”, they keep going. A good “You’re welcome” can nip that in the bud.)
Anyway, I started thanking people for compliments. Even though I believed they were wrong about whatever they thought that they saw in me that was good, I would just accept it. Although there were other steps that were needed before I could sincerely appreciate the compliment, it was a step in the right direction.
So, since I do not want to be the frustrating person who does not cooperate with the photographer, and since I do not want to hate the way I look, I have taken multiple pictures this year, and shared them on my profile. I do not love any of them (I hate the pictures someone else posted from a friend’s baby shower—I would completely eradicate them if I could), but I am dealing with them.
I am making some progress. With this last one, I could kind of see what people mean about the smile, at least. I usually do look happy. I generally am happy, so probably there is some sincerity to it. Also, I do have good teeth. Okay, I have always known that, but it’s nice to know that it counts for something.
Tuesday, December 22, 2009
Happy Holidays!
I am not offended by this phrase.
First of all, I remember people saying (and singing) Happy Holidays long before they worried about political correctness. It made sense. Over a relatively short span you have three federal holidays: Thanksgiving, Christmas, and New Year’s Day. Many people had additional work holidays on the day after Thanksgiving and eves of Christmas and New Year.
I suppose there was also a vague awareness of other events in there, like Boxing Day, Epiphany, Santa Lucia, and the official start of winter, but even if you only focused on Christmas, it was more than one day. There are parties and preparations where it really becomes a holiday season that lasts for a while. It is the holidays.
When I was pretty young schools started throwing token nods to Hanukkah, where we would sing one Hanukkah song amidst the twenty Christmas songs. I don’t remember singing any overtly spiritual songs, but one friend did remember singing Happy Birthday to Jesus in choir class, and did not feel completely comfortable doing so.
(I think if you are going to be religious in a public school, there are much better song selections than that. “Happy birthday to you” is overrated anyway, and throwing our Lord and Savior into a song that you would sing to a three-year old, and where people commonly add parts about smelling like a monkey, does not seem particularly reverent.)
Now it seems like there is controversy over everything. Certainly, I think some people carry it to far, like the school where the children learned two Hanukkah songs and no Christmas songs—okay, that does seem like overkill. But I am more concerned with the other side, where “Christian” people seem to feel like any attempt to refrain from shoving our traditions down the throats of others is a war on Christmas.
Really? Is Christmas under siege? The television is running Christmas specials and movies and commercials with Santa and elves. The stores are running sales, and have aisles full of cards and wrapping paper and decorations. Yes, there are a few small shelves of Hanukkah merchandise and maybe there are some Kwanzaa cards (the Kwanzaa focus tries to stay non-commercial, so Kwanzaa-themed merchandise would be kind of a Pyrrhic victory), but really, Christmas dominates the scene. Does the cashier wishing you “Happy Holidays” instead of “Merry Christmas” really victimize you that much?
And let’s remember that the separation of church and state does have the potential to make government better, but that is also necessary as a protection to the public. Do you really want the schools teaching your children about Christmas? Can’t you do it better? Because even if you take away the religious aspects, different families do different things with Santa Clause too.
I am sure that many schools get carried away, but let’s remember that most of them are making decisions not based on state law, but on what they think will work for their student body. If they go too far, get involved and try to make things better, but keep in mind that consideration of others could be considered a Christian value. If there are others who don’t share your beliefs, they are still your brothers and sisters, they have the right to their own beliefs, and making others feel persecuted and isolated is not a good path to conversion. Well, okay, isolation does work for cults, but is that the message you want to send?
I keep seeing various people saying that they don’t feel the holiday spirit this year. Let’s face it, the bad economy and the turmoil in the world has taken a toll. Just as we started to recover from the police shootings and domestic shootings, a new one happens that was both. These things are hard.
At the same time, our reactions and our behavior can rise above these things, or it can send us further below. Taking offense, trying to force your beliefs on others, and looking on sensitivity to the feelings of others as a weakness does not fit in there. Saying “Merry Christmas” with a sense of spite, like “Ha! In your face!” does not fit in there. As those sentiments spread through society over politics and religion and other areas, beyond Christmas, good feelings get pushed out.
And let’s remember, the trappings of Christmas often have very little to do with Christ. You can find Christian symbolism and tradition, but there are pagan roots. Many early Protestant denominations were very anti-Christmas as a Popish pagan remnant. Some Christian religions now still eschew holidays because of how they can distract from what is really important, and other Christian groups decry the commercialism of Christmas and encourage people to cut back. Are they the enemy too?
If the Christmas spirit is the spirit of Christ, then it follows that it is the Spirit. Well, “But the fruit of the Spirit is love, joy, peace, longsuffering, gentleness, goodness, faith, Meekness, temperance: against such there is no law.” (Galatians 5:22-23)
I am a true Christian. I don’t just believe in living Christian values, but I also believe that salvation comes through Christ, that He was literally the Son of God, and that angels and shepherds and wise men bore witness. I believe that He conquered sin by suffering and death by resurrection. I believe the words of the prophets, who foretold that He would come, and tell us that He will come again. I believe that obedience is necessary, including ordinances like baptism.
But, I also believe that God is no respecter of persons, and that there is a plan in place for those who do not believe or do not get a chance to learn in this life. I believe that we should share the Gospel, but we need to do it through love unfeigned, and not in a spirit of contention. And I believe in modern revelation, which lets me know that Jesus was born on April 6th, not December 25th. Some people will tell you that some of those beliefs prove that I am actually not a Christian, but it’s not their call, and I will try and maintain a spirit of love for them too.
You know what we added to our Christmas display this year? Monkeys. Nope, they do not have a thing to do with Christmas, but they were cute, and on sale, and cheaper than the penguin, which we also considered, and which also has nothing to do with Christmas.
If we had a giant manger scene on our front lawn, that might remind some people or teach some people about the true meaning of the season, and that could be good. If they saw me as a bad neighbor though—spiteful, judgmental, and easily offended—I would be bearing a false witness, and sending the wrong message.
If you feel it in your hearts to say Merry Christmas, great, I will say it back to you and wish you the best. If you say it to someone else, and it bothers them, apologize. Feel Christ-like love for them, so that they associate Christmas with love, and greater consideration, and with peace and good will.
If you are not particularly religious, but you do still celebrate Christmas, and you find that somehow your Christmas shopping, because it causes you to be thinking of others, softens your heart, and you like that feeling, great. Hold on to that. It does feel good to care about others, and to not be focused on your self.
If you don’t celebrate Christmas—I still wish you joy. Because whether you know it or not, I know that you are a child of God, and every year my heart becomes softer towards you.
Christmas used to be a lot of exciting buildup followed by a let-down for me. Now the holiday season feels a lot like the rest of the year, but the rest of the year feels like peace and love and celebrating small moments. I enjoy it, and it stays me with. It makes me happy.
Happy holidays to you.
Monday, December 21, 2009
Requiem for a mouse
Saturday morning my sisters said the computer wasn’t working. It seemed to be hanging on the simplest functions, and I was worried that the hard drive was going out. I tried different things, as you do, and realized that the problem was that even though the point function on the mouse was just fine, it had lost its ability to click. Thus ends the long saga of my special mouse.
My first two terms of college, I took a typewriter. Personal computers were still pretty rare. One roommate had a word processor and that was impressive. After a break for earning money, serving a mission, and earning more money, I returned to U of O for Spring ’95, and found that the situation had changed. PCs were becoming essential, and I was going to have to get one. As fall approached I went to Circuit City and purchased a Compaq 486 running Windows 3.1. This was a generation behind, but that made it cheaper.
Off I went to school, and all was going well until after a few weeks the mouse quit working. I called tech support and they said they would send out a new one, but what they ended up sending out was this remote control device that supposedly had mouse functions but was not working well—besides, I wanted a mouse. Rather than call back I walked over to the campus bookstore and checked out the offerings. I had no technical knowledge to go on. I still needed to be price conscious, but I thought getting the absolute cheapest ($5.00) one might be a bad idea, so I got the second cheapest, a Logitech. (I think it was about a $11.00, but definitely not more than $15.00.)
It worked great, but I didn’t really think about it much at the time. I finished college, took various jobs, and eventually landed at Intel, where I started to become more tech-savvy. I saw how frequently one could have problems with a track-an-ball mouse, but I never had problems with mine. Maybe this is why when Julie (who was now also an Intel employee, but I had gone from contractor to hired to laid off and then back to contractor) got a new HP through an employee program, well, it was a good computer and nice to have an upgrade, but I kept using the mouse, letting the HP one go with the old system. The Logitech kept chugging along.
Time went on and I built a PC (the clear acrylic case monstrosity), and as I was selecting all of the sleek new components I did buy a new mouse, but I couldn’t bear to switch it out, so I kept using the Logitech.
When the hard disk on the clear one started to go, and it was reinforced what a pain that case was to work with, it was time for an Antec, and I built an even fancier new computer. Sure, it could have made sense to change out the mouse, but at this point it was kind of a challenge—how long could it actually keep going? Well, that was 2007, I think, so I guess about two years.
That brings its total to fourteen years. Do you have any idea how long that is in technological time? Microsoft has released seven operating systems (assuming we count NT, which was not usually used on PCs, and 7 which is still not in large use, but still). Back then, people still used 5 inch floppies, printers connected through a parallel port, and USB didn’t even exist. People frequently had computers without even worrying about an internet connection. (The web started really becoming cool about three years later, if I recall correctly.) I can’t remember how large the hard drive on the Compaq was, but in 1998 or 1999m, I remember thinking how cool a 1 Gig hard drive would be—anyone care for a 200 Gig drive? Because that’s kind of small now. Shoot, you can put 1 Gig on your keychain and it’s nothing. The processors have changed so much, I don’t even know how to express it in a way that does it justice. Gordon Moore probably could. Also, the mouse outlasted Circuit City.
Julie’s first comment on the new mouse was to express pleasure that it had a wheel, because that makes it easier. Well, that is a fancy new invention, like optical mice with infrared wireless connections. Sure, my mouse was not fancy, but it was a trooper. It has seen me through a 20-page term paper (Historigraphy of the Buffalo Soldiers) that required an incomplete and bled over into the next term, my only ever A+ essay in French (on Moliere’s Dom Juan), and created the page layout for the History Department newsletter.
That mouse has navigated through submitting well over a hundred job applications while I was unemployed, helped me enter over 7500 names into Personal Ancestral File, and played way more games of Freecell, Minesweeper, Spider Solitaire, Diamond Mine, and various Netives applications than any productive person should.
With that mouse, I have written a novel, six screenplays, a children’s book, and the first episode and bible of a television series, as well as countless letters, blogs, and journal entries. Sure, there was always a keyboard there, but I am very much a mouse girl for navigation and commands. (Not to mention all of Maria’s chat and Facebook use, which is very mouse-intensive.)
So, it’s an impressive achievement, and there’s a part of me that feels like it deserves honorable burial, and more of me that gets—Hey, it is an inanimate object, and should be recycled. However, I do appreciate good craftsmanship and durability, so the real resolution is that Logitech has me as a customer for life (over the course of which I could purchase as many as four more mice).
Sunday, December 20, 2009
Where has Gina been?
Good question! I’ve been right here actually, and I have even been writing a lot. It just hasn’t been blogging.
At the time of my last update, I had been to the Writer’s Conference and looking for my next steps there, and I had just started a new job. Jobs take time—way more than forty hours a week—so that had an impact, but I will not complain because I needed the job, and it’s been a pretty good one.
For the conference, well, one person was supposed to get back to me, and did not, which was disappointing, but more to the point, I tried starting a new screenplay and it was not flowing at all. There were a lot of adjustments to be made to my new schedule, and I took other projects on, but also I felt kind of at loose ends. Every now and then, you need to make sure you are still on the right track.
Since the last post September 1st and today, I have written about 46 journal pages. Some of that is capturing e-mail exchanges and letters that I have written to other people, but a lot of it is me trying to figure out what I should be doing, and sometimes heading in the wrong direction, and then finally getting to where I am now, where I am not only ready to blog again but excited about it.
So, expect to be caught up on things over the next few posts, including what I am not focusing on as well as what I am. However, I think the next post will be a memorial.
At the time of my last update, I had been to the Writer’s Conference and looking for my next steps there, and I had just started a new job. Jobs take time—way more than forty hours a week—so that had an impact, but I will not complain because I needed the job, and it’s been a pretty good one.
For the conference, well, one person was supposed to get back to me, and did not, which was disappointing, but more to the point, I tried starting a new screenplay and it was not flowing at all. There were a lot of adjustments to be made to my new schedule, and I took other projects on, but also I felt kind of at loose ends. Every now and then, you need to make sure you are still on the right track.
Since the last post September 1st and today, I have written about 46 journal pages. Some of that is capturing e-mail exchanges and letters that I have written to other people, but a lot of it is me trying to figure out what I should be doing, and sometimes heading in the wrong direction, and then finally getting to where I am now, where I am not only ready to blog again but excited about it.
So, expect to be caught up on things over the next few posts, including what I am not focusing on as well as what I am. However, I think the next post will be a memorial.
Tuesday, September 01, 2009
More thoughts on the Writers Conference
I was worried that I may not have been clear enough on something in my last post. With the pitches, even though pitching to someone who is not interested is not at all fun, I don’t have any resentment about it. I know they are looking at the bottom line, and they should be. If the company that puts its trust in me goes bankrupt because they are not making sound financial decisions, that doesn’t do any of us any good.
In terms of whether they are right about whether it can make money or not, that’s truly anyone’s guess. In one of the workshops, a speaker was discussing the success of Gran Torino. The way it got made was that someone who read it knew Clint Eastwood’s lawyer, or something like that, and it got to Clint and he loved it. The fact that it should have been relatively low-budget probably helped with it get the green light, as well as having Clint on board. (And I have heard that Clint can basically get what he wants made, because he is very responsible, coming in on time and within budget, and so he has a proven track record beyond ticket sales.)
Anyway, his theory on the success of the movie is that someone taking control in a bad situation is resonating with people in this economy. In good times people flock more to darker movies, and in bad times they want the feel good movies. That makes sense, other than that I am not positive that Gran Torino counts as a feel-good picture. The main point from that though, is that from starting a screenplay to the time a film hits theaters, a lot of time goes by. There’s a limit to how much can be predicted.
So to some extent, a picture taking off and being successful is a matter of luck. It can be a great movie and flounder, and horrible movies can be wildly successful, and that’s not getting into all of the different levels on which movies can be good and bad. And that realization should bring a huge dose of perspective to anyone who wants to work in the industry.
Actually, I was chatting about this with a friend who also writes, and my philosophy is that writing is a lousy way to become rich and famous. It can happen, but there are lots more reliable methods. Writers do a lot of work that they may never get paid for. To get paid, you need to bring it up to other people, many of whom don’t really want to talk to anyone new. When you can get them to look, they pass judgment on this part of you, and they have to place a potential monetary value on something that is infinitely personal. Before you even get to that point there is the frustration of times when things aren’t clicking, and they don’t sound right, or when you have writer’s block and you are getting nothing at all. You would have to be crazy to sign up for that.
I write because I have to. I am not at peace unless I have written. Sure, what I wrote leading up to that does not sound peaceful, but in the journaling and blogging I get things worked out. I have a tendency to think in circles when I am leaving it in my brain. Putting it to paper (or keyboard and screen, actually), allows me to actually move forward and get somewhere. There is satisfaction in bringing out this order, and there is great satisfaction in having a story come to life, and reaching those moments where you find the solution to the problem, and it is brilliant. Occasionally there are bits of perfection.
And so if you have to write (and I do), well, then maybe it is worth trying to get paid for it. I am trying to sell for two reasons. One is so I can write more. If I am earning money doing what I enjoy, I can do more of it. It’s not that I don’t enjoy the other jobs I’ve had. Some are better than others, but ultimately, we’re workers in my family, and if you give us something to do we will do it, and we will make a good job of it, and there is satisfaction there, even when other elements of it may be soul-killing. Still, this other job takes time that could be spent on writing and researching and planning other projects. (It’s not a total loss. I never would have written Corporate Malfeasance without having spent time in the tech sector.)
The other reason I am trying to market my work is that it feels like it needs to go somewhere. I want to share it. I want other people to be excited and thrilled and satisfied with how things are resolved. More money would be nice, especially now after eleven months without working, but I don’t need to be wealthy. I’ve been pretty happy on my tech sector wages. I would be more comfortable making as much as an engineer, and a doctor’s salary would put me over the moon, but I don’t need millions. It’s really not about that. And frankly, that’s good, because I’m looking at something very unpredictable. If all I cared about was the money, I would be facing a lot of disappointment. It’s disappointing enough when people don’t like your ideas (or don’t think they can sell them), but there is still the gratification of the writing—finding the perfect words, finding the logic that justifies what you imagine happening (and it does actually make sense), and just getting all the dots to connect into something that makes you happy. I couldn’t stop that if I wanted to.
There were a couple of hopeful signs. The one producer did not get back to me, and I sent a reminder message, and there is still nothing, so that’s probably a wash. On the bright side, one pitch recipient did seem somewhat impressed by my ability to come up with different kinds of ideas. This is important. One fun thing about the panel was that people were asking what they look for and all they could say was that they know when they see it. You can’t give out a formula for writing a good script, even if there are some general guidelines you can provide. However, one thing that was important to the agents is that the person will keep writing. Delivering one good script is great, but they want someone who will keep producing new things. I can do that.
(I was also complimented on being able to convey the material well, which I admit I had doubts about, so that was reassuring.)
The other thing that was interesting to me was reading some pitching advice. It wasn’t about the pitch specifically, but related to picking material that can sell. As an example he mentioned historical dramas. Sure, every now and then they are successful, but they are not sure-fire, and they are expensive and complicated (great award fodder though), so when the studio does one, they are going to use a proven screenwriter. But I liked what he said. He said if you have a historical piece that you are itching to write, write it. Write what is in you, and then put it away and work on other things you can actually sell. Once you have made a name for yourself, and someone asks what else you have, then it can be the right time for your period piece.
I think he addressed the issue there nicely. It is a business, and you have to write what is in you. Somehow you have to balance those two sides.
I don’t think I have a single tent pole/blockbuster in my arsenal right now. I might have some nice indie pieces, but mainly I am writing what is in me, and just trying to make it good. Honestly, after Josh died, I don’t think I could have written anything other than Past Present. It needed to come out then. It may not have an audience at all, but I don’t regret writing it. The artist needs to write good stories, the businesswoman needs to network, and make sure there is variety, and have a clear-headed view of the less artistic side of the business.
And both sides need to accept that a lot of it is luck.
In terms of whether they are right about whether it can make money or not, that’s truly anyone’s guess. In one of the workshops, a speaker was discussing the success of Gran Torino. The way it got made was that someone who read it knew Clint Eastwood’s lawyer, or something like that, and it got to Clint and he loved it. The fact that it should have been relatively low-budget probably helped with it get the green light, as well as having Clint on board. (And I have heard that Clint can basically get what he wants made, because he is very responsible, coming in on time and within budget, and so he has a proven track record beyond ticket sales.)
Anyway, his theory on the success of the movie is that someone taking control in a bad situation is resonating with people in this economy. In good times people flock more to darker movies, and in bad times they want the feel good movies. That makes sense, other than that I am not positive that Gran Torino counts as a feel-good picture. The main point from that though, is that from starting a screenplay to the time a film hits theaters, a lot of time goes by. There’s a limit to how much can be predicted.
So to some extent, a picture taking off and being successful is a matter of luck. It can be a great movie and flounder, and horrible movies can be wildly successful, and that’s not getting into all of the different levels on which movies can be good and bad. And that realization should bring a huge dose of perspective to anyone who wants to work in the industry.
Actually, I was chatting about this with a friend who also writes, and my philosophy is that writing is a lousy way to become rich and famous. It can happen, but there are lots more reliable methods. Writers do a lot of work that they may never get paid for. To get paid, you need to bring it up to other people, many of whom don’t really want to talk to anyone new. When you can get them to look, they pass judgment on this part of you, and they have to place a potential monetary value on something that is infinitely personal. Before you even get to that point there is the frustration of times when things aren’t clicking, and they don’t sound right, or when you have writer’s block and you are getting nothing at all. You would have to be crazy to sign up for that.
I write because I have to. I am not at peace unless I have written. Sure, what I wrote leading up to that does not sound peaceful, but in the journaling and blogging I get things worked out. I have a tendency to think in circles when I am leaving it in my brain. Putting it to paper (or keyboard and screen, actually), allows me to actually move forward and get somewhere. There is satisfaction in bringing out this order, and there is great satisfaction in having a story come to life, and reaching those moments where you find the solution to the problem, and it is brilliant. Occasionally there are bits of perfection.
And so if you have to write (and I do), well, then maybe it is worth trying to get paid for it. I am trying to sell for two reasons. One is so I can write more. If I am earning money doing what I enjoy, I can do more of it. It’s not that I don’t enjoy the other jobs I’ve had. Some are better than others, but ultimately, we’re workers in my family, and if you give us something to do we will do it, and we will make a good job of it, and there is satisfaction there, even when other elements of it may be soul-killing. Still, this other job takes time that could be spent on writing and researching and planning other projects. (It’s not a total loss. I never would have written Corporate Malfeasance without having spent time in the tech sector.)
The other reason I am trying to market my work is that it feels like it needs to go somewhere. I want to share it. I want other people to be excited and thrilled and satisfied with how things are resolved. More money would be nice, especially now after eleven months without working, but I don’t need to be wealthy. I’ve been pretty happy on my tech sector wages. I would be more comfortable making as much as an engineer, and a doctor’s salary would put me over the moon, but I don’t need millions. It’s really not about that. And frankly, that’s good, because I’m looking at something very unpredictable. If all I cared about was the money, I would be facing a lot of disappointment. It’s disappointing enough when people don’t like your ideas (or don’t think they can sell them), but there is still the gratification of the writing—finding the perfect words, finding the logic that justifies what you imagine happening (and it does actually make sense), and just getting all the dots to connect into something that makes you happy. I couldn’t stop that if I wanted to.
There were a couple of hopeful signs. The one producer did not get back to me, and I sent a reminder message, and there is still nothing, so that’s probably a wash. On the bright side, one pitch recipient did seem somewhat impressed by my ability to come up with different kinds of ideas. This is important. One fun thing about the panel was that people were asking what they look for and all they could say was that they know when they see it. You can’t give out a formula for writing a good script, even if there are some general guidelines you can provide. However, one thing that was important to the agents is that the person will keep writing. Delivering one good script is great, but they want someone who will keep producing new things. I can do that.
(I was also complimented on being able to convey the material well, which I admit I had doubts about, so that was reassuring.)
The other thing that was interesting to me was reading some pitching advice. It wasn’t about the pitch specifically, but related to picking material that can sell. As an example he mentioned historical dramas. Sure, every now and then they are successful, but they are not sure-fire, and they are expensive and complicated (great award fodder though), so when the studio does one, they are going to use a proven screenwriter. But I liked what he said. He said if you have a historical piece that you are itching to write, write it. Write what is in you, and then put it away and work on other things you can actually sell. Once you have made a name for yourself, and someone asks what else you have, then it can be the right time for your period piece.
I think he addressed the issue there nicely. It is a business, and you have to write what is in you. Somehow you have to balance those two sides.
I don’t think I have a single tent pole/blockbuster in my arsenal right now. I might have some nice indie pieces, but mainly I am writing what is in me, and just trying to make it good. Honestly, after Josh died, I don’t think I could have written anything other than Past Present. It needed to come out then. It may not have an audience at all, but I don’t regret writing it. The artist needs to write good stories, the businesswoman needs to network, and make sure there is variety, and have a clear-headed view of the less artistic side of the business.
And both sides need to accept that a lot of it is luck.
Sunday, August 09, 2009
Writers Conference Update
Friday was a big day for me. I had arranged to have four pitches, and I had registered months ago. In that time, two of my selections canceled, and then one of the alternates canceled. Each time, I picked new people. Thursday night as I was double-checking the biographies and deciding what to pitch to whom, I saw that one more person had canceled. That was going to have to be fixed at the conference.
I had been reading various tips for pitching, and one thing that seemed to be very important was a one-sheet. This does have information about the film, but it also has your contact information, which is very important. At least at something like this, no one buys anything there. The best possible outcome is that they will contact you and ask for the screenplay, or give you their information to contact them.
Unfortunately, I could not find any sample one-sheets. I did find some descriptions, and they were talking about graphics and colors, and that was just not something I was going to pull off. I ended up just doing the film title at the top in 16 point font, the genre in parentheses right below, then a tag line, and then a short summary of the plot, with my contact information in the lower left. Apparently, I should also have come up with log lines. Well, next time I will know.
I have been having a hard time finishing Coulrophobia, but I really wanted to pitch it, and you don’t pitch unfinished things at something like this (someone with an established reputation could pitch a concept, but those people are buying pitches).
So the first point of business was to just push through and finish the script. I did that. Then I worked on one-sheets. I did them for Coulrophobia, Jade Mask, Hungry, and Dark Secrets, but I am calling it Past Present now, which I like better.
I was going to need to be up really early. I was only an hour later than originally intended for going to bed, which was not bad at all, but being glued to my chair, and concentrating, and nervous, left my thigh muscles really tight. That has not completely let up yet. That’s not usually where I carry my tension, but it might actually be better than in the back or the stomach. I have certainly had worse headaches.
I was worried about the logistics of getting to the conference, because Tri-met trip planner said there are no stops within walking distance of the Portland Airport Sheraton. I knew they had an airport shuttle, so I thought I could go to the airport and try that. As it was, I saw their sister hotel, Aloft, from the Max line, and got off at the next stop and walked down there, figuring the Sheraton would be within walking distance, because they share parking. Well, that wasn’t quite right, but there was a shuttle between the two hotels, and that got me there, and against all odds I had time to check in, and listen to some of a panel discussion before my first pitch.
The first pitch was the best by far. First of all, she was very kind and gave me good feedback. Also, she said she will contact me and request the one screenplay, so that is excellent. Still, it revealed definite weaknesses. One is that all of my careful selection was way off base. I thought Past Present would be the best for her, and it was not really something her company would do. However, she did like Coulrophobia, which was the last thing that I would have thought to pitch her. I only mentioned it because you have a strong female character, and she was really intrigued. For the rest of the day, I was wrong on what I thought people would like. (Though perhaps my instinct for picking producers was good, because she was one of my original choices, and almost everyone else was a reschedule.)
For my second pitch, I pitched Jade Mask. He didn’t want that because it was a CIA story, and there are tons of those since the Bourne Identity. The wheelchair aspect wasn’t different enough. I threw out Hungry then, and that was no good because everyone has vampire stories after Twilight. On the one hand, I was thinking that okay, but a vampire story can mean Twilight, or 30 Days of Night, or Underworld, or Let the Right One In, and those are all completely different, and Hungry is like none of them. For him, if you weren’t either something completely new, or taking an old genre and reinventing it, it was a pass. I believe in his case the issue is that he has access to lots of good writers who are known quantities, so an unknown has to offer something really different.
The third pitch was even worse. I guess I peaked too early. In this case, I pitched Coulrophobia, and his issue was that the stakes weren’t high enough. That a cop is trying to catch thieves who killed someone was not enough. His example was that if they were stealing nuclear warheads, where the earth was in danger, that could raise the stakes, or if her discomfort with clowns was because her father was a clown and was bad, that would raise the emotional stakes. Her life ending up in danger because of the case, and just her wanting to solve the case, was not enough. Honestly, I think those examples would both make kind of stupid movies, but he was thinking off the cuff. The point seems to be that he wants really big stories.
For those two guys (why, yes, I am avoiding giving their names), I don’t think I have anything at this time that they would be interested in. I don’t think I would pitch to number three again, but if I had the right kind of story, maybe I would for two. What was really bad though, was that it became clear very early that we were not going anywhere, but then I had to stick it out. It’s like having no chemistry on a date, but you still need to stick it out. Fortunately, it was speed dating.
The fourth was a little bit different. I pitched Coulrophobia, and he just didn’t think he could market it, because clowns means kids, but it’s not for kids, and he was just not sure he could find the right audience. I talked to him about Out of Step, which he agreed would be more marketable if I had a package. For example, if I knew Julianne Hough, and could get her attached, he probably would have taken it.
The interesting thing is that I talked about Out of Step with the first one too, and she did have some interest, but it did not sound developed enough to her. I think that was an issue not of the script being developed enough, though, but of my not being ready to talk about it because I had not planned on talking about it. So I think one key lesson is that I should have worked on one-sheets for everything I have, just in case. Because, again, I don’t actually seem to know who will like what.
That is one thing that I would hope to find in an agent—some skill in targeting pitches.
With number four, I can see that if I had tailored my pitch more like a trailer, it might have gone over better. With a big studio, they want to know that it will make a lot of money. With a small company, they want to know that they can sell it to investors, or it will never get made. Well, there’s a broader spectrum than that, but it makes a difference.
Overall, I feel good about it. I did learn a lot, and since I do have a job again, well, money will still be tight, but I should be able to get by a little longer. I hope things work out with the first one, and that she does buy Coulrophobia, but I have to be realistic. There’s a good chance it won’t sell, and if it does it could take several months.
For now, I should be employed through at least January. During that time, I want to focus on getting more written. I am getting better all the time, and having multiple different offerings available is important.
I do want to start making the agency calls again. A lot of it is fruitless, but it is dues-paying.
Those will be my main areas of focus through the end of the year. After that, I need to see where I am. Submissions will start to open up for the Nicholls fellowship, and I should have some choices on what to submit, but I might have made some money by then, in which case I would be ineligible. Maybe then I will need to switch my focus to networking, or even going back to school. Could I go to film school?
Anyway, I will work hard, and I will hope for luck. It’s like this job. I had no way of predicting or knowing that the position would open up, or that my resume would come up for it. However, by sending out dozens of applications, I increased the odds of it coming up, and by being a hard, smart working once, someone I knew making the decision was an advantage. There’s what you can control, and there’s what you can’t, but that’s just life.
I’ve handled life before.
I had been reading various tips for pitching, and one thing that seemed to be very important was a one-sheet. This does have information about the film, but it also has your contact information, which is very important. At least at something like this, no one buys anything there. The best possible outcome is that they will contact you and ask for the screenplay, or give you their information to contact them.
Unfortunately, I could not find any sample one-sheets. I did find some descriptions, and they were talking about graphics and colors, and that was just not something I was going to pull off. I ended up just doing the film title at the top in 16 point font, the genre in parentheses right below, then a tag line, and then a short summary of the plot, with my contact information in the lower left. Apparently, I should also have come up with log lines. Well, next time I will know.
I have been having a hard time finishing Coulrophobia, but I really wanted to pitch it, and you don’t pitch unfinished things at something like this (someone with an established reputation could pitch a concept, but those people are buying pitches).
So the first point of business was to just push through and finish the script. I did that. Then I worked on one-sheets. I did them for Coulrophobia, Jade Mask, Hungry, and Dark Secrets, but I am calling it Past Present now, which I like better.
I was going to need to be up really early. I was only an hour later than originally intended for going to bed, which was not bad at all, but being glued to my chair, and concentrating, and nervous, left my thigh muscles really tight. That has not completely let up yet. That’s not usually where I carry my tension, but it might actually be better than in the back or the stomach. I have certainly had worse headaches.
I was worried about the logistics of getting to the conference, because Tri-met trip planner said there are no stops within walking distance of the Portland Airport Sheraton. I knew they had an airport shuttle, so I thought I could go to the airport and try that. As it was, I saw their sister hotel, Aloft, from the Max line, and got off at the next stop and walked down there, figuring the Sheraton would be within walking distance, because they share parking. Well, that wasn’t quite right, but there was a shuttle between the two hotels, and that got me there, and against all odds I had time to check in, and listen to some of a panel discussion before my first pitch.
The first pitch was the best by far. First of all, she was very kind and gave me good feedback. Also, she said she will contact me and request the one screenplay, so that is excellent. Still, it revealed definite weaknesses. One is that all of my careful selection was way off base. I thought Past Present would be the best for her, and it was not really something her company would do. However, she did like Coulrophobia, which was the last thing that I would have thought to pitch her. I only mentioned it because you have a strong female character, and she was really intrigued. For the rest of the day, I was wrong on what I thought people would like. (Though perhaps my instinct for picking producers was good, because she was one of my original choices, and almost everyone else was a reschedule.)
For my second pitch, I pitched Jade Mask. He didn’t want that because it was a CIA story, and there are tons of those since the Bourne Identity. The wheelchair aspect wasn’t different enough. I threw out Hungry then, and that was no good because everyone has vampire stories after Twilight. On the one hand, I was thinking that okay, but a vampire story can mean Twilight, or 30 Days of Night, or Underworld, or Let the Right One In, and those are all completely different, and Hungry is like none of them. For him, if you weren’t either something completely new, or taking an old genre and reinventing it, it was a pass. I believe in his case the issue is that he has access to lots of good writers who are known quantities, so an unknown has to offer something really different.
The third pitch was even worse. I guess I peaked too early. In this case, I pitched Coulrophobia, and his issue was that the stakes weren’t high enough. That a cop is trying to catch thieves who killed someone was not enough. His example was that if they were stealing nuclear warheads, where the earth was in danger, that could raise the stakes, or if her discomfort with clowns was because her father was a clown and was bad, that would raise the emotional stakes. Her life ending up in danger because of the case, and just her wanting to solve the case, was not enough. Honestly, I think those examples would both make kind of stupid movies, but he was thinking off the cuff. The point seems to be that he wants really big stories.
For those two guys (why, yes, I am avoiding giving their names), I don’t think I have anything at this time that they would be interested in. I don’t think I would pitch to number three again, but if I had the right kind of story, maybe I would for two. What was really bad though, was that it became clear very early that we were not going anywhere, but then I had to stick it out. It’s like having no chemistry on a date, but you still need to stick it out. Fortunately, it was speed dating.
The fourth was a little bit different. I pitched Coulrophobia, and he just didn’t think he could market it, because clowns means kids, but it’s not for kids, and he was just not sure he could find the right audience. I talked to him about Out of Step, which he agreed would be more marketable if I had a package. For example, if I knew Julianne Hough, and could get her attached, he probably would have taken it.
The interesting thing is that I talked about Out of Step with the first one too, and she did have some interest, but it did not sound developed enough to her. I think that was an issue not of the script being developed enough, though, but of my not being ready to talk about it because I had not planned on talking about it. So I think one key lesson is that I should have worked on one-sheets for everything I have, just in case. Because, again, I don’t actually seem to know who will like what.
That is one thing that I would hope to find in an agent—some skill in targeting pitches.
With number four, I can see that if I had tailored my pitch more like a trailer, it might have gone over better. With a big studio, they want to know that it will make a lot of money. With a small company, they want to know that they can sell it to investors, or it will never get made. Well, there’s a broader spectrum than that, but it makes a difference.
Overall, I feel good about it. I did learn a lot, and since I do have a job again, well, money will still be tight, but I should be able to get by a little longer. I hope things work out with the first one, and that she does buy Coulrophobia, but I have to be realistic. There’s a good chance it won’t sell, and if it does it could take several months.
For now, I should be employed through at least January. During that time, I want to focus on getting more written. I am getting better all the time, and having multiple different offerings available is important.
I do want to start making the agency calls again. A lot of it is fruitless, but it is dues-paying.
Those will be my main areas of focus through the end of the year. After that, I need to see where I am. Submissions will start to open up for the Nicholls fellowship, and I should have some choices on what to submit, but I might have made some money by then, in which case I would be ineligible. Maybe then I will need to switch my focus to networking, or even going back to school. Could I go to film school?
Anyway, I will work hard, and I will hope for luck. It’s like this job. I had no way of predicting or knowing that the position would open up, or that my resume would come up for it. However, by sending out dozens of applications, I increased the odds of it coming up, and by being a hard, smart working once, someone I knew making the decision was an advantage. There’s what you can control, and there’s what you can’t, but that’s just life.
I’ve handled life before.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
Posts
