Don’t forget the lyrics

One key inspiration for my musical odyssey started when I was carpooling to work. One of the great annoyances of that time period was the radio.

It was the K103 morning show, and I did not really have a problem with the crew--they seemed like nice enough people, and the Stump the Jock guy was clearly pretty knowledgeable--but so much of the music was just so crappy.

It wasn't all bad. They played a fair amount of Pink and the song you had to guess was often from the eighties, and decent, and then they would play the rest of it, so it could have been worse. In general, though, the music was mediocre, and played over and over again.

Where I would sometimes resent the crew is when they would say good things about the music. Sarah Bareilles is so rebellious! Taylor Swift packs so much meaning into her lines! No, and NO!

Refusing to comply with the requests of the people who are helping you make money, and silently ignoring advice while thinking bad thoughts about the person giving it, isn’t really all that hardcore. As for depth and meaning in Taylor Swift, where do I start?

You know a song that impresses me in its layers of meaning? Coldplay's “Viva La Vida”. First of all, they set up rhymes that are not completed, so they can move on to the next phrase while you still hear the phrase that was not completed.

For some reason I can't explain
Once you were gone it was never--

And they say "Never an honest word", but "Never the same" is still suggested, because that would be the logical rhyme. So it is conveyed both that the loss of the person changes things irrevocably, and that there is also a loss of honesty, sincerity, and possibly even comprehension of this new order of things.

People ask "But who is it talking about?" looking for someone specific who literally went through all of those things. That’s not the point. Usually the most powerful rulers end up dead when deposed, rather than sweeping the streets, but there are wealthy people who can end up in menial jobs, and fill that role. Probably the closest thing you have to a specific reference is that "Seas would rise when I gave the word" kind of sounds like a reference to Canute, only he gave the word for the sea not to rise and it did anyway, which was his point.

Anyway, what we clearly have instead of something literal is image after image that evokes an emotion of having lost and been overturned. The images are more for political power, but for someone who has felt in control of their life, and found out they weren't, or someone who has lost innocence, the emotions work. It can have emotional resonance for anyone.

I'm not saying that there are not many people who can relate to the line "And there's a drawer of my things at your place", but there’s not much poetry. Isn't the point of music that you don't have to be that literal? Music is exactly where it is appropriate to speak of the pompatus of love and not provide an answer key. I have as much fun looking for the symbolism in American Pie as anyone, but it's mental. The emotional resonance of the song does not change if you know that Bob Dylan had a jacket that looked like James Dean's.

And yet with saying all of that, I also have to acknowledge that I’m a punk rock fan, where the lyrics are often quite simple, and I’m not that big a Coldplay fan. I listen to “Viva La Vida” and sometimes “Talk”, and that’s about it. I do remember a quote from Chris Martin though, where he was saying something along the lines of they weren’t really going to get any bigger, so the goal that made sense was to try and be better—better at their instruments, work at the music harder—and work that way.

Taylor Swift is cute, and she writes her own songs and plays guitar and so right there she is way ahead of a lot of tween idols. At the same time, she comes off as a little shrill to me (Is that what they call “pitchy?”), so I think maybe some voice lessons aren’t completely uncalled for. Though also, that means she is probably not using Autotune. And sure, she is young, so there may be a limit to what sort of depth you can expect, but can’t you try a little harder? Yes still, she really tries harder than a lot of them, and still I reject her.

And this strikes at the heart of why my music post keeps expanding—there are just so many contradictions, and so much of it is not logical. We will keep exploring that.

Exposure

As I explained yesterday, I always want to know more about music, and sometimes I realize that there is a lot I am missing. Without going into the why and how of that, I am currently working on three things to broaden my knowledge of music.

The first one is that while I am scornful of music popular with tweens, coming from people with Disney shows or from American Idol, or where you might use the terms “pop princess” or “boy band”, it is not really an informed scorn. At times I have thought that I should force myself to listen to some of these things, so I could earn my disdain. Still, the thought of doing so was kind of horrible, and Maria was worried that it might leave me suicidal (whether from aggravation or from discovering I liked it; either way).

In addition, recently Greg Glover (94.7 Alternative Portland) pulled his 8 at 8 from Rolling Stone’s 100 Greatest Guitar Songs of all time. (It was when Jim Marshall, creator of the Marshall Stack amplifiers, died). I had not previously known of the existence of such a list, but that seemed like something worth checking out, especially since I have been remembering how much I love guitar lately. If I balanced listening to the dreck with classic guitar, maybe it would be okay.

Well, there are downsides and upsides. The downside is that I hate a lot of these guitar songs. I suspect the list is questionable, based on the comments if nothing else, so I will listen to the songs mentioned in the comments too. Still, it’s disappointing when you think you are going to rock out, and then you are just gritting your teeth. And some of these songs are so long! If you’re going to suck, at least get it over with.

On the plus side, when music does not really work for me, I tend not to retain it. I just have this vague sense of generic noise, and I can remember thoughts I had during it, so I know I was taking it in, but it did not stay. This is helpful for both the guitar side and the auto-tuned side (and seriously, do they all do that now?).

Also, remember I am getting really into My Chemical Romance now, and since our incentives came through (it’s like a bonus, but they don’t want to call it that), I bought their last three CDs and Pencey Prep’s CD (that’s Frank Iero’s previous band). I did not get their debut CD yet, because it was kind of expensive, but I will either buy it electronically or find it somewhere else. Without the Watchmen CD, I don’t have “Desolation Row” either, but one of the CDs got me a credit for one electronic download, so that will work out perfectly.

Now, bad music leaves me quickly, but music that I respond to haunts me, so my tendency is to listen to it over and over again until I have it memorized, looking up the lyrics if I can’t make them out, and just totally having them become a part of me so I can hear it any time I want to. (Yes, an MP3 player would probably be easier, and I will open up mine at some point, but I think I will still do this, more proof that I lean more towards OCD than ADD.)

Anyway, getting four CDs at once gives me a lot to listen to that I am responding to well, so I do have some balance there, and I don’t think that I will need to hurt myself. Also, I don’t think that I will abandon either of the annoying projects, because I am pretty stubborn. I’ll write more about all of those as I get closer to completion. I have to pace myself.

I should be fine, but it wouldn’t hurt to keep an eye on me. If I seem like I might be a danger to myself or others, pump in some Ramones. That usually fixes things.

Musical Journey

Lately I have been thinking a lot about music and talking a lot about music, reading about it, and definitely listening to a lot of music. I had started one blog post a while ago, but it was just getting too long and rambling too much. I had at one point thought I could divide it in two, but new heads kept sprouting up. I’m going to try and do a series of short posts, and see how it goes.

First of all, let me give you my qualifications. I took piano for a few years (6th through 10th grade, I think), and was okay at it but not gifted. I probably should have started earlier, and gotten those practice habits ingrained sooner. I learned shortly after graduating from high school that no matter how much I practiced I could not accompany people singing in any but the most rudimentary manner.

In 9th grade some friends and I started a band, sort of. Instead of doing the logical thing and having me play keyboard, I was going to be on guitar and vocals. I did not know at this time about all of the vocalists who have to give up guitar because doing the two simultaneously is too hard. It did not really matter, because I have no aptitude for guitar, and if you took Beginning Guitar at Five Oaks in 1987, you know it. (And at one point you probably tuned my guitar for me, because I never got the hang of that.) I peaked at picking out Ode to Joy. I know I have no credibility, because I never even tried Smoke on the Water.

Just before 11th grade I bought a drum kit, and was too self-conscious about how noisy they were. I did have some aptitude, but obviously the wrong personality. The other drummers I know are proud when a noise complaint gets called in. What I should have been doing was practicing on cushions, but I did not know about that option until later.

During this time I wrote music on a regular basis, but I always had to keep the tunes in my head because the ear issue that keeps me from being able to tune my guitar also keeps me from being able to figure out which notes on the keyboard match the ones in my head. I did record (portable tape recorder in the bathroom) a couple of songs I wrote in French for extra credit. Otherwise, I guess I’m just lucky to have a pretty good memory. This is actually the part that I would most want to fix, though getting back into piano would probably make sense.

So basically, I do not have any credentials. This is important, because I am unlikely to write anything that cannot be understood by a novice.

What I do have is a lot of passion for the subject. I am constantly amazed by how much I love rock, and other types of music, how much it means to me, and also how much I want to know about it.

I have written before that I know I am not a tech geek because even though there are some things that I can fix, I just get irritated by them, and the real geeks I know get excited when something needs troubleshooting.

I might be a music geek. For example, the other day I was listening to “Desolation Row” by My Chemical Romance. There was a segment in there that reminded me a little bit of a segment in “We’re Not Gonna Take It” by Twisted Sister, so I had to listen to that, but also it is reminiscent of Hendrix’s Star-Spangled Banner, so I had to listen to both of those, and then I wonder if the notes that reminded me of Twisted Sister came from the Geldof “Desolation Row”, and then since I was listening to 80’s rock and I brought up some Quiet Riot and Slade and I live for stuff like that. There are some Cars keyboard bits that really remind me of Iggy Pop, which is cool because Rik Ocasek’s son Christopher did a cover of Pop’s “Real Wild Child”. These things are probably silly, and I could be hearing things, but I love that.

However, I realize there is also a lot that I don’t know about music, and some of what I have been thinking about now relates to educating myself more about music, which has not been a totally happy experience, but I’ll explain that tomorrow. For now, just put another dime in the jukebox.

Letters to Aaron

Occasionally when I am writing about writing, I mention letter writing, and there is more story there, and I feel like I might as well explain that one now. Yes, I have a prison pen pal;no, it is not like that.

My sisters and I met Aaron at church. We got along well, but we did not get particularly close. At the same time, with our tendency to look out for people who might need someone extra looking out for them, he was one of them. We left him an Easter basket anonymously once, and we would remember his birthday, and once they gave him a ride home. (I was doing something else at the time.) He was always really appreciative and grateful, and glad to see us, but we didn't see him all the time, and we didn't really socialize outside of church.

We don't always know why we feel like we need to keep an eye on someone, but with Aaron there were some pretty good indicators. He was the only member in his family, and they were on the other side of the country, so he did not necessarily have the greatest support system to start with, he had money and employment concerns, and he had a bit of an attitude about racial issues. Aaron is black, and besides feeling isolated at times by the lack of diversity in the area, and having some anger about prejudice and some of those common issues (all of which is completely understandable), it often seemed that he found a conflict between honoring his racial heritage and honoring his religious beliefs.

He did end up in jail for about a month one year, and by the time we found out what had happened (we knew something was wrong, but were not sure what), he was out, and our card was returned.

Right around Christmas 2010 I was leaving to go visit my mother in the hospital (knee surgery), and the caller ID flashed on the television and said Washington County Jail, but it hung up after one ring. I knew it was Aaron. I worried about it all the way to see my mother and back, but when I got home I got confirmation, as I had learned a little about navigating inmate information from the last go-around.

I don't really want to get into the details of the criminal case at this time, but basically desperation for money caused him to do something stupid. It was not a malicious action, but he did know better and he should have chosen differently, and no one's denying that. At that point, all we could do was be supportive.

So we started writing. While he was in Washington County Jail, pre-sentencing, we could only send postcards, but I think it's been about a year now that we have been able to do actual letters once he was transferred into the state system. (I have also gotten pretty good and navigating prison mail rules.)

The entire household takes an interest in him, and Julie and Maria are pretty good about sending cards and postcards, as well as getting cards for Mom to send. Most of the actual letter writing ends up being me. This can be largely attributed to my always having more to say.

In terms of lonely single women writing to convicts that they have only read about, I don't think that's really healthy for anyone, but if every prisoner could have loved ones writing to them I think it would do a lot of good. There is a lot of loneliness and isolation and boredom. It's not supposed to be pleasant, but if we are thinking about what kind of person we want to have coming back out, the punishment should not rule out growth. There are a lot of different programs that you read about and whether it is a GED program or training troubled dogs, it seems like the article always mentions that it decreases the rate of recidivism. Maybe a lot of them just need something to care about.

I know we are good for Aaron, not just for the letters but also for the books. He had shared "Losing My Cool" around Washington County, and now everyone is Snake River is excited to read "The New Jim Crow". I've got to say, I feel really good about that.

Writing to him has also been really good for me. First of all, there has definitely been improvement in my discipline for that. As much as I need to write, it can be hard to make time, and I have never been a good letter writer in terms of frequency (though when I do write the letters are awesome). I am horrible about writing to my sponsored children, and I volunteered to write to a missionary a few months ago, and I'm just embarrassed about my frequency there. I have been pretty good about writing to Aaron though. How can I not be, when it means so much to him? (I think this is the point where I need to clarify that this is not romantic in any way. I don't think it sounds that way, but just in case, I he's like a younger brother.)

In addition, it has made me better about journal writing, because those letters are a big part of my journal. I will at some point update the travel blog, but currently the only reason I have recorded anything about our Mexico vacation is because I wrote to him about it. (And I wrote in exhaustive detail, knowing that long letters are better.)

Also, sometimes I end up writing to him about something first, and then blogging about it, and so I've had multiple runs at organizing my thoughts before they go out to the public. And sometimes I send him blog posts, if they relate. Oddly, he just asked about something that I had journaled about extensively, and will probably blog about, but by the time you get it, I will have written about it twice, and that should make it better.

I remember that first time, when he was only in for a month, but also there were two girls in the ward who had severe illnesses, and I started thinking about Matthew 25:35-36:

For I was an hungred, and ye gave me meat: I was thirsty, and ye gave me drink: I was a stranger, and ye took me in:
Naked, and ye clothed me: I was sick, and ye visited me: I was in prison, and ye came unto me.

It had never seemed so literal to me. Usually we think we are dealing with emotional and social needs, but there right in our ward there were members sick and in prison, and it made me wonder if there was anyone hungry or in need of clothes.

We were already trying to keep our eyes and our hearts open, but there is always room for more, and there are great gifts in it too. I am a better person for my association with Aaron.

Creative me

As promised, more on what I have been up to. First of all, you may have noticed that I am actually starting to blog on a regular basis now. I had gone quite a while where I kept meaning too, but ended up doing more journal writing or letter writing, because there were things I needed to write about privately before I could do it publicly. I thought the big blogging catch-up would be what would free up my story and screenplay writing self, but I need to catch up in the journal to free my blogging self.

One thing that I am doing differently now is that I am writing multiple posts at once, and so I don’t necessarily have to blog daily to post daily. It was initially mainly a decision based on time, but it has been working well in terms of having some time between writing and posting so that I can take a second look. If there are thoughts that were not clearly expressed, I can clean it up, and if I am running on so long that it makes the post less readable, I can separate it into multiple posts, like yesterday and today (I’m working on this post on music that has this hydra thing going on).

I am happy to say that it is working, and I am getting flooded with ideas for things to work on. A lot of it is more development on previously existing ideas, but I know things that I am going to do for screen plays and for television pilots and even old songs are coming back to me that I will work with at some point. It feels very exciting, and although I am not done with the blogging, I have started one new screenplay, sort of.

Now I generally don’t like to mix up different projects, and with a writer’s normal tendency towards procrastination and Attention Deficit Disorder, it is important to complete one project before starting the next one, or have some sort of framework to prevent scattering. In this case (blogging versus screenwriting), I don’t worry about it because they are different types of writing that I do at different times.
What about that “sort of”? You know, it’s a little embarrassing, and it is not anything that I will try and sell or share with anyone, but I am going to write about it happening, because it allows us to address some other things.

First of all, it started with some music videos. I am obsessing over My Chemical Romance right now, which will probably get its own post at some point, but they have a couple of videos (Na Na Na and Sing) that are very cool on their own, and very modern, and at the same time kind of reminiscent of the 80’s where many videos were set during post-apocalyptic dystopian futures with oppressive regimes (not always all at the same time, but sometimes).

I would often add plot and details to videos then. I would take off on movies and television episodes too, but music videos were ideal because they were short features, where there was a lot of room for embellishment, and then you have whatever emotional impact the music adds, and they were something I loved and watched a lot of.

I don’t know if it was the decline of the videos that caused the video channels to move towards other kinds of content, or as the channels moved more towards “reality” programming then labels put less resources into videos. Maybe the decline is because the music quality declined. Regardless, finding cool videos again is a plus, and MCR really does put a lot of effort into videos, and they come up with compelling ones. For these two, I found my mind returning to these videos again and again, turning them over and filling things out, and there was a story.

Like any person who does not want to be a narcissist, my first thought was why am I even doing this? They don’t need it. They’ve got their own material, and I think there might be a graphic novel coming out. But the thoughts keep coming, and it’s not like it’s hurting anyone so I was just going with it.

The next question to arise, which was more like a series of questions, is why was I taking it in the direction that I was taking it? I may blog about that at some point, but that part is quite personal, and still pretty raw. Basically there was this nagging why, and it led to a lot of journal writing and soul searching and some mourning, actually, but I dealt with some things that I apparently needed to deal with.

Yesterday I was writing about general creativity, and what I said there could be true for anyone. This one may just be me. Not just my career hopes, but my mental and emotional wellness and a lot of my recreation comes from this time I spend with the page. Months ago I wrote about how I cannot pass by a path or trail without wanting to go down it. Writing is like that for me, I guess, where I need to see how things turn out, and what else happens if one thing happens. That also leads me down inner paths. Why do I feel that way? How did I get this way? And off I go.

Having already had some major breakthroughs, it tends to beg the question of whether I now need to actually write the story out, or if I am done with it. I think I have more to learn from this material, so I’m sticking with it. Maybe this will be a good transition into getting at some of the other writing projects that I actually do hope to sell or produce. It has been fifteen months since I have even been actively using screenwriting software. There are technical skills to that, and there is skill to balancing a scene between multiple characters, and keeping the right pace.

There is actually a lot of good ground here, because we have different types of action scenes (fist-fighting, car chase, building raid) on different scales, family scenes, flashbacks, seemingly unstoppable villains (seriously, I have no idea how the good guys are going to eventually win; it’s really improbable), a love story, and a wide variety of things that I haven’t been dealing with since I became steadily employed. (Unemployment was scary and depressing, but I was really productive.)

So far I only have about nineteen pages down, but just to start with I have already had to deliver some exposition, and make it not clunky, and do that while you have three of the five people in the scene regaining consciousness, and not all at the same time.

Best of all, I am excited about it, and can’t wait to get back to it and write more. It feels good to be in the middle of something again, even if right now I am being derivative and unproductive. I mean, I’m basically writing fan fiction (except that none of them will be sleeping together). And yet that is almost exactly the point.

I have accidentally stumbled upon across a small amount of fan fiction on the internet (not for MCR, but for different video games and shows and actors). It’s probably not enough to consider myself an expert, but I’m comfortable with not doing anymore research. Anyway, the hang-ups of the writer clearly come through. Whether it is misogyny, or a need to be special, or a need to have someone stick up for you, you learn a lot about the writer without even having to read that much (certainly more than you would learn about the subject). Actually, that can be pretty true of other types of writing as well.

I absolutely don’t mean to denigrate any of these writers (except maybe the misogynists). Those are real issues, with real pain attached, and if the writing the story provides some comfort or relief then that’s great. Even better, though, might be to realize there is a hang-up, and that maybe there does not need to be.

That’s what I am going for. There is definitely the pure joy of writing (and the compulsion to do it), but also there is that search to polish my rough spots, till my weedy patches, and pull the skeletons out of my closet so they can bleach in the sun. It’s therapy with a rock and roll soundtrack—literally.

Creation

I have thinking a lot about creativity lately, for reasons which I will blog about in the next post. For now I want to write about creativity itself.

First of all, it is just an amazing thing for me how things grow. An idea comes, and often it does not even feel like you are making it up so much as that you are discovering it. There are things that feel right and that don’t. Often there are things that you want to happen or expect to happen, and then they simply do not work, so it changes everything, but then the change works and that brings a new satisfaction.

I know many people who do not consider themselves creative they are not inventing anything, but creation is not making up; it’s just making. It doesn’t matter if no one else has ever done it, or ever could.

Creation means that you are putting something new into the world. We think of stories and paintings and songs, but it can also be a musical performance, or a deck, or a batch of cookies. It could even be planning a new experience that creates a memory for someone.

To make something that is different (what people think of as creativity) might be more accurately called innovation, and it certainly has its place. The funny thing is that practicing creation makes you better at innovation. Now you know how something normally goes so you have a better idea of how it can be different. But even if all you do is make the same batch of cookies over and over again, cookies are good!

I used to really look down on latch hooking. I didn’t care for the texture, or the usual colors and patterns, and I felt like they were absolutely useless. I would not want to walk on one or hang one on the wall. Meanwhile, I was doing these embroidery patterns, which were way more practical because I would embroider pillow cases as wedding gifts. That way the newlyweds would have some nice pillowcases that did not match their bedroom set and were honestly kind of small for the size of pillows most people use. And I was not making anything up, because I was following patterns in kits.

However, I liked doing it. I thought they were pretty, and I liked watching it go from just a blue on white pattern to filling out with different colors and textures. Watching that progress was satisfying to me. So if you can get that with latch hook or macramé or paint by numbers, go with that. Or plant a garden or make a scrapbook, but put something there that was not there before, something that you find to be good. On your own level, you are doing the work of God.

Social Anxiety

Back around my birthday I posted about some goal-setting I had done, but I did not write much about the actual celebration. I had been feeling like I was ready for karaoke again, so going out the Saturday before my birthday (a Tuesday) made sense. I did not make it specifically for my birthday, but focused on getting schoolmates together, because those are good nights, and I did not want to focus on the birthday too much. I was going to Mexico for that.

Anyway, it was a pretty good night. Those who came had a good time, I think. Only two of us sang, both singing twice, but there were plenty of people from other groups singing, so there was always plenty going on, and if people can have a good time at karaoke without getting up there, cool. Also, I finally did attempt “I’m not okay”, and it went pretty well, though I did not anticipate how dizzy the head-banging part would make me, and I nearly fell getting back to my chair. Since I don’t drink, that may be the closest I have come to seeing how karaoke feels for a lot of people.

There were more people who wanted to come, but there was snow coming in, and especially for the people who lived farther away it was a concern. Now, this post is not in any way going after people who did not come due to weather or other commitments or a hatred for amateur rock stars—this is just a peek into my twisted little mind.

I love getting people together. I often have ideas for things that I think would make good get-togethers. Creating these get-togethers just happens to put me at my most neurotic.
Traditionally this is what happens with a Facebook invitation. Response options are Attend, Maybe, No, and to not respond at all. People who are not sure that they can attend but want to will put Maybe, or possibly not respond, and they do not come. People who fully want to attend will say they are, but you will not get all of these, because things come up. I do this too, and actually, it has never been a reflection on the event.

Bearing this in mind, I probably should not feel so much dread when positive RSVPs are slow to come, but it does not work that way. I always worry that the event will be a total disaster. No one will come except maybe one person, and then they will have a bad time, and I will have given them a sucky time because I had delusions of grandeur that people would actually want to spend time with me.

The thing is, once you are the organizer, you have an obligation. You can’t show up, realize you are a dismal failure, and then back away slowly, because if that one person who was foolish enough to come shows up twenty minutes late, and you are not there, your social transgressions have just been compounded.

Because of this, I have hung out by myself in a park for about an hour, but then one family did show up, and then another, and fortunately they had children of similar ages and we all got along, but it was a little stressful. And actually, there were only three people, including me, at the previous karaoke night that I organized. Again, it was not awful, but it doesn’t leave you feeling like a homecoming queen either.

(Speaking of birthday parties, I had them in 4th grade and in 9th grade, and in both cases most of the girls came, but only one boy each, leaving them in somewhat awkward positions. This is why only girls were invited to my 16th birthday party.)

This will generally lead to doubts about whether people even really want me at their events or they are just inviting me because they are being nice, and hoping that I either won’t make it or there will be enough other people there that it won’t matter. This has nothing to do with how anyone has treated me. It’s just me. (I realize this is pathetic—knowing when I am pathetic is one of my better qualities.)

This is why I really prefer to let other people organize social events, and will defer to others as often as possible (though this often means that things ended up occurring in locations and at times that are not conveniently accessible via public transportation, especially for a female traveling alone).

I also know, though, that at some point it will be my turn again, and I will do it again. I will plan, and try to accommodate, and I will completely stress out again, but I’ll do it. I don’t think I have a single regret that didn’t have something to do with fear. I don’t feel like accumulating any more.

A-Twitter

I have been on Twitter since February 6th. It’s been around since 2006, so that seemed like the right amount of lead time.

Seriously, from the start I thought Twitter sounded really stupid, and had no intention of ever getting on it. I was brought to it by the TV show Grimm.

As I would read posts in the Television Without Pity Forum, a lot of people would post things from Twitter, mainly from David Giuntoli (Nick), Sasha Roiz (Renard), and Reggie Lee (Wu). The posts were interesting and funny, and the show didn’t really seem to have a strong presence on Facebook, which is where I usually follow stuff that I like, so I finally decided to sign up.

Initially, I thought I would just follow the people from the show, because that’s why I was over there, but they keep prompting you for more until you have at least 14, I think, and then they want you to make a post. What had I had gotten myself into?

I have adjusted somewhat. First of all, I did end up finding other things I was interested in, and while the interplay between the Grimm cast is fun, I think maybe where Twitter has been most useful for me is in following the bands I want to see and my favorite political writers. Not everyone is Facebook. A lot of musicians have a strong MySpace presence, but MySpace bugs me in a way that Twitter does not.

So, sure, I have these exotic travel goals, but at the same time I could just decide that if the Gin Blossoms still aren’t coming to Portland, maybe I will just go see them in Indiana or something. At least I am getting updates.

For the political, I love Joe Conason (The National Memo), but the Oregonian hardly ever runs his work, and he posts good stuff, so following him works well for me. Krugman, Kristof, and Pitts are pretty good for posting their own columns on Facebook, but Krugman and Kristof also post a lot of interesting other things on Twitter. I had to un-follow David Sirota—he just tweets too much. I follow a few who will go through phases where you get twenty tweets in a few hours, but not all the time.

Ultimately, it seems like Twitter works better for people with public personas, while Facebook works better with friends. I don’t have a problem with that, so I am finding something useful in a new (for me) aspect of social networking. There have been a few issues. One is my username, sultryglebe.

Actually, it comes from an old hymn, The Lord My Pasture Will Prepare. We sang it in church, and the phrase stuck out to me, and I decided that the next time I needed a username, that was it. (Incidentally, a glebe is a cultivated plot of land, often owned by the church. I had assumed it was something more boggy, but that’s what dictionaries are for.)

I would occasionally attract new followers who, based on profile pictures and linked URLs, may have thought that the “sultry” part was saying something about me that it really wasn’t. That felt awkward, and then they would un-follow me a few days later, which felt kind of bad. I had not originally intended to accumulate followers, but then when I did I didn’t want to disappoint them.

I didn’t originally even intend to post that much, but then I felt like I should be doing something with it. So I would make posts, and then do I use the same thing for my Facebook status update? Okay, you can have that automatically post to Facebook, but then if you are doing something with the hash tags (I have participated in a couple of contests) it looks weird, but it still posts automatically because that’s your setting.

I was kind of thinking to just not post anything or be followed, and only use it for following, but then sometimes I can’t resist. Also, because I have been thinking about self-promotion as I work toward becoming a professional writer, as opposed to amateur, well, that would be a public persona. Could Twitter be helpful there?

Anyway, I’m trying something new. First of all, I have unlinked Facebook and Twitter. This is mainly because I am starting to put my blog posts on Twitter, and they already get posted on Facebook via Networked Blogs. With the URL, I will do a hash tag of the relevant topic, mainly after checking to see if it is relevant.
I guess the goal is to increase my blog readership, but it’s okay if it doesn’t.

Maybe my real goal is just to see if this is something that works, and then I will know something that I didn’t before. See, now I don’t just learn things by reading—I also conduct experiments! (I will be using Google Analytics to see page hits and referral sites, to see if anyone is linking from Twitter.)

And maybe I do want to attract more readers. I do feel that I have something to say.

I don’t know if I will do this with every single blog post yet, or how long I will do it. It’s kind of a work in progress, much like me.

Reinstating Ron Frashour

I thought I was going to take a break from politics for a while, but apparently I was wrong. However, this is local, and not largely theoretical, so it is a little different. It’s also a touchy issue, so if you are going to read, please read the whole thing, and give me a chance.

There was an article in the Saturday Oregonian about an arbitrator ruling that Ron Frashour should be rehired and granted back pay. I had not agreed with his firing, so I was glad that he won his case, but at the same time there was the mayor, Sam Adams, vowing to appeal.

I actually wrote a letter to the editor with my views, but it did not get published (no big deal—they get a lot of submissions), but then the Oregonian editorial was so off-base that I had to express something, and since the letter did not work I am using the blog.

Back to my confirmation bias issue, I think sometimes people can’t see a side because of the emotional impact. What happened was so wrong, it leaves no room for them to think of anything else, like whether the person being punished for the horrible crime is really the one who did it. So let me be clear that Aaron Campbell should not be dead, and it is awful that he is dead, and this should not have happened.

But it has also always been clear from reading about the investigation that what happened was not the fault of a single person. I don’t even mean the fault of a despondent person deciding that the best way to end the pain was to get the police involved. The issue is that there was a scene of confusion with no clear communication between the various officers and too much noise to facilitate understanding of the scene.

What was also clear in the reading is that this was not a coincidence. Other people involved in police training for dealing with the mentally ill and suicidal have said that they take experienced officers and run them through specialized training where they become part of a special response team, and those responders are the ones sent to the scene when this kind of situation comes up.

Here (at least at the time), this training occurred for every new officer as part of the general training. Everyone gets the training, but they get it at a time when all of the information is new, and no one specializes. The local response to that was that the officers followed their training, with no defense of the training methods.

It was a scene of confusion. A negotiator was texting with Campbell and got him to agree to come out. Apparently he exited with his hands on his head. Another officer wanted the hands over the head, so shot him with beanbag rounds. Campbell reached for his back, probably just as a reflex to being hit, and Frashour interpreted that as going for a gun and shot fatally.

If there had been good communication between the various groups, and everyone knew what was going on, then maybe things would have not transpired that way. As it was, the beanbag round seems to be the real issue. Yes, on its own it is nonlethal, but it set off a reaction that led to another reaction, and it seems unnecessary. Is it really so awful for the hands to be on the head instead of over the head? Maybe you want to make an adjustment, but is that the way?

Maybe, just as there was too much going on that night for anyone to hear clearly, we have that issue with the aftermath. A lot of the concerns are racial, because too many people of color have been shot by the police. That is a concern, and there probably is racism in the bureau among individual members, even if not in any kind of systemic way. That is bad, and difficult to address.

However, there is a much easier to identify issue with mental illness. Aaron Campbell and Keaton Otis were both black, but they were also, respectively, suicidal and mentally ill. Jose Mejia Poot was mentally ill. James Chasse was mentally ill. Jack Dale Collins was mentally ill. Actually, Mental Health Portland has a whole list. In some of those cases the death seems unavoidable, but in many cases a specialized response team of seasoned officers can make a world of difference.

The original article said the bureau has made some changes since the initial incident, though it did not specify what they were. It seems clear to me, though, that the issue is not the fault of any individual officer, but rather a collective failure. That can be not just a teachable moment, but a transformative moment, where we decide we are going to do this better. We are going to update our training, improve our response, and strengthen our safety net for the mentally ill. Nope, we’re going to fire the one guy.

This is the part in the editorial that appalled me: First of all, in the middle, it says this: “What the jury found was an appalling lack of communication among officers on the scene and that Frashour, by all accounts a decent and hardworking cop, was operating in an information void.” Everything is leading towards a systemic failure, not an individual failure, unless maybe you are saying that Frashour has sole or at least greater responsibility for the information void. Then it concludes this way, “That's why, unfortunate as it was, an otherwise good cop had to be fired, and that's why Reese and Portland Mayor Sam Adams must counter every challenge that would undo the firing. The credibility of the police force, and the city, depends on it.”

How does that follow? How do you put someone in a terrible situation where things are likely to go wrong, and then decide reason it went wrong is his fault? Yes, his step was the final step in the chain of confusion, but it was not the only step.
I feel like Frashour is being used as a sacrificial lamb the make people feel better, and Adams does not have enough of a track record of integrity or non-political decisions to have any credibility on that front. The credibility of the police force and the city is not at stake based on whether Frashour has a job or not. Their credibility comes from whether you can believe the things they say, and why they say them, and believing that they are committed to a well-run city that works well for its citizens over maintaining a positive image.

Unions can hurt their cause at times, like when they try and defend the jobs of the bus driver who seems to have at least one complaint for every week she works, or the cop who is having sex on the job, but this time they are exactly right. This is a time to defend.

I absolutely agree with the protesters that there are problems and they need to be addressed, but a false sense of security is in no one’s best interest, and that is all that can be accomplished by firing someone who even his detractors call a good cop.

A Cynical Look at Shameless Self-Promotion

Not too long ago, we kept seeing commercials for a new book, “Deep into the Heart of a Rose”. It was odd to see a commercial for a book in general. I usually only see them for James Patterson, and they never make me feel any desire to read the book, so I kind of doubt the wisdom of the whole television commercial for book concept.

This commercial was interesting because it was so odd. Patterson is a really popular author (I think), so you know how he gets the budget. Not only was this from an unknown (GT Denny), but it was in the fantasy genre, which a lot of people tend to avoid. That could be more of a reason to try something different, but it could also be a reason that the enterprise is more likely to fail.

I ended up being intrigued. I did read a lot of fantasy back in the day (Pern, Xanth, Shannara, and the Belgariad mainly, and of course Narnia and Middle Earth), but at the same time there was just something a little cloying about the text that was repeated, and yet it was so odd just that the commercial existed.

I went to Goodreads looking for more information, but initially there wasn’t a lot. There were four reviews. Two were from the author, using different but similar screen names. One was just a rating, but the one that had a quote merely said “The book I have read more than any other.”

Well that makes no sense at all. It’s a sentence fragment implying multiple readings for a book that hasn’t really been out long enough for years of history with going back to it, and with no real attempt to hide the identity by a cleverly-disguised screen name. What is it even saying? I spent a lot of time proofreading after the initial writing? I’m not much of a reader but I read this one twice? There aren’t even any complimentary adjectives!

Of the other two reviews, without proof, I got the distinct impression that one was from the person who did the artwork for the commercial, and then the other was a friend.

There is more information out there now, but the fascinating part is how many of them mention reading the book because they won it. That’s not to say that they don’t like it, because many of them are very positive. There are also some online reviews on other sites which are positive. Still, I feel like I would find it too whimsical, if for no other reason that the main characters are named Edward T. Cozzlebottom and Ezmerelda Wimbish. Between that, “the book I have read more than any other”, and the text of the letter that was read in the commercial, my alarm bells for annoyance keep going off. The whole thing just screams "twee".

I still remain fascinated by the whole campaign. I can’t really find anything on the publisher, Night Watch Fiction, so I can’t help wondering, did this guy just self-publish, and finance the commercial and contests—anything to get his book out there? And if so, will it work? The fact that I don’t want to read it should not be a factor. My aversion to Twilight hasn’t made a dent in book or ticket sales.

It’s interesting to me because even though I am in a writing phase now, I will soon be entering a phase where I really need to get someone to invest in me. Ideally this will involve acquiring an agent who is well-connected and aggressive and who believes in me, and then they can do the selling, because that is not my talent.
Even assuming that can work though, it still requires approaching agents and trying to convince them that ten percent of what I can produce is worthwhile.

First of all, I don't want to be bugging my friends for everything. I refuse to attend any "party" that's a selling event, and I love and admire many people who have become evangelical about their businesses, but I just can't.

Also, I do not do well at any kind of sales. I hate asking people for things, and selling myself is even worse because then I have to believe in myself, which I kind of do, in some things, but not everything.

So I am fascinated because there are things that I will need to do that appall me, and I don't know how they will turn out. I will have to figure something out, because I don’t have the budget for a television commercial.

You keep using that word. I do not think it means what you think it means.

In keeping with my habit of dredging up old news, one of the most disturbing aspects for me during the debt ceiling debate was the insistence, primarily from Republicans, on not hashing over who was to blame for the financial crisis. Sure, it sounds like an attempt to stay productive, rather than wasting time on the blame game, but even if the "who" was not important, the "how" and "why" could be really relevant, rather than forgetting the past so it could be repeated.

What bothers me, and it comes up on many topics, over and over, is the lack, not merely of intellect, but of intellectual honesty. People will say things that are, if not completely false, utterly twisted, and they don't care. I don't know if the mental process is a decision that the ends justify the means, or that it's close enough, or there is actual delusion. It may be a mix. For example, I don't think that Sarah Palin ever really believed in death panels, but I think that some of her listeners did. (And maybe I'm giving Palin too much credit.)

Anyway, one of the things that comes up a lot may actually be due to a lack of understanding, so I thought that I would take a crack at it. President Obama is not a socialist. The Affordable Care Act is not an expression of socialism. The Liberals are not socialists.

I realize I am going to be oversimplifying here, but even under the best of circumstances I tend to go on too long, so I think oversimplification is acceptable. Here we go.

Socialism derives its name from the means of production (farms, factories, etc.) being socially owned. This could mean that they are government-controlled, union-controlled, or maybe controlled by various collectives, but it is opposed to capitalism where generally speaking the capitalists (the people who have the money) control the means of production, and therefore are hiring and selling to the masses. (Again, this is super-simplified, but this is not even the important part, so just deal with it.)

The way this happens is that the masses rise up against their oppressors, be they government or private, and forcibly seize the means of production, and then eventually they move towards communism where everyone gives according to their abilities and receives according to their needs.

The end result of this oversimplification of Karl Marx sounds lovely, but never works. What tends to happen is that you end up with highly authoritarian states where everyone is poor, except for a select few at the top who do very well. Oddly, the socialist states often look very similar to the fascist states, even though they have different ways of getting there. This is one reason why past US policy of supporting any whack job fighting against the Communists has not gone well.

I don’t think the consistent failure of socialism is a coincidence. First of all, see my many previous posts about people being the problem. That one just never gets old. There’s more to it than that though. If your end goal is a society where everyone is unified and supportive of each other, the path to that does not start with the slaughter of other members of that society.

It’s not that you can’t make an argument that those greedy people are evil. We have plenty of evil capitalists around, and some of them may well deserve to be shot. However, once you decide that’s the answer, well, you are throwing away law and order, which has its own complications, and you have just become the tyrant.
And they rarely stop at the ruling elite. In Southeast Asia the royalty were targets, but so were people in the army that had served them, the Catholic priests and anyone who worked for them, and anyone deemed educated or intellectual, because we all know how dangerous thinkers are. I suspect there were other groups targeted too, but I’m just thinking of the refugees I knew, and why they had to leave. The point is, you are choosing hate and enmity instead of love and understanding, and for all the things that you can say against hippies, they are not likely to club you to death.

Now, does anyone really think that the President trying to make healthcare affordable is code for starting up a peasant rebellion against Koch Brothers and Kraft Foods?

Truly, socialism is now the code word for thinking that maybe the government should have some role in keeping life fair and bearable for those who do not fall inside of the 1%. (Yeah, the whole 1/99 thing is a total cliché now, but you immediately know what I mean and that’s what makes clichés work.)

Now here is the irony. This falsely labeled socialism, where there are safety nets and labor laws and regulations, is actually the best guard against the real socialism where the masses get miserable enough to start overthrowing their oppressors. The people who are coming the closest to promoting actual socialism are the Koch Brothers and Kraft Foods and Paul Ryan. How crazy is that!

(Koch Brothers is notoriously evil, but the reason I am picking on Kraft Foods is their participation in ALEC, which is a whole different rant, though certainly related.)

So here is my moderate request for some intellectual honesty. Okay, if you are going to choose evil, at least understand it and speak honestly about it. Don’t hold up signs requesting that the government stay out of your Medicare. And if you really do decide that your guiding philosophy is that you want the things you need, but you don’t want anyone else to have them, please quit trying to associate that with Christianity. That’s really not how it works.

You do what with the dead?

I did give up Hatchlings, and still struggling to find writing time. Unfortunately, the other big contenders, work and sleep, refuse to budge. I have had some good journal sessions, and letter writing, so it’s not that nothing is happening, but I still hope for more.

Here is that first hard topic I mentioned. It’s religious, and one thing that makes this more difficult is knowing the amount of context to provide—how much is necessary? Where my weakness is the tendency to provide too much exposition, and to not have enough time to finish, well, there’s a vicious cycle in there somewhere.
Anyway, there has been some news recently about Anne Frank being baptized posthumously by someone in the LDS church, and protests against that.

Here is where I try and give a brief background, as someone who is not in any way a spokesperson for the Church, official or otherwise. If you believe that baptism is necessary, as the Bible says, and that God is no respecter of persons, as the Bible also says, and you know that not everyone lives and dies on Earth even has a chance for that, it can seem very wrong, and it leads to weird theological explanations and disbelief.

What we know is that there is more than this life. People can continue to be taught and to make covenants after they have died, in the spirit, but someone physically needs to go through the ordinance of baptism for them. Christ preaching to the dead and baptisms for dead are both mentioned in the Bible (1st Peter 4:6 and 1st Corinthians 15:29).

Something that we do is research our family history and do this work for our ancestors, allowing them the opportunity to be baptized and binding the generations together. We believe that the promise in Malachi, chapter 4:5-6 is about this:
“Behold, I will send you Elijah the prophet before the coming of the great and dreadful day of the Lord. And he shall turn the heart of the fathers to the children, and the heart of the children to their fathers, lest I come and smith the earth with a curse.”

One thing we definitely believe is that it is each person’s choice. If they don’t want to accept the baptism, it does not matter how many times we do it, it does not count. Something that also logically makes sense is that we believe this is true, and that it matters, but if we are wrong, then what we are doing is really meaningless. My point there is that no one is becoming Mormon against their will.

Obviously, we are supposed to be doing this for our family members, but other people have had projects in the past where they have focused on Civil War dead or so on, and what really created the controversy is when some people strongly objected to Holocaust victims being baptized. After all, they were killed for being Jews, and some felt it was demeaning to detract from that. I do not agree that it is demeaning, but I understand the sentiment, and besides we are supposed to be working on our family lines.

Since 1995 the Church has routinely published reminders on that (we just got another round), and at first I found it somewhat irritating that it was necessary. I felt that anyone who was going outside of the norm was doing it out of ego—like it was not special enough to find great-great-grandmother like everyone else; I’m going to save Marilyn Monroe! (Seriously, I remember one person who was very proud of having baptized Moliere.)

With this last story, I ended up feeling differently, and what made the difference was reading that the latest time happened in a temple in the Dominican Republic. I started to feel like maybe it was not someone who knew the boundaries and just did not want to stay within them, but maybe it was a newer member who found this and thought it was great, and had read The Diary of Anne Frank and felt a connection to her (how can you read it without feeling a connection?), and just wanted to offer that gift.

I’m not saying that the restrictions should be raised, but it reminded me that people aren’t always just being bone-headed. There can also be kindness, and affection, and a desire to do good. And really, there is nothing wrong with this particular desire—we’ve just agreed to hold off on it because some people get offended by it.

I do have more to say about this at some point, both about discovering my own family, and doing work for a friend, which is its own story, but for now my point is just, hey, my church is made up of people. Yours probably is too. Even if you have no religion, and are atheist or agnostic, you are probably affiliated with other humans. It is worthwhile to have some understanding for that, and to have some compassion for good intentions and a desire to serve.

The Change I Wish to See in the World

I have been meaning to blog a lot more than I have actually been blogging lately. This is kind of always true, but less true in some ways. I have definitely had periods of less blogging activity than now, and I also have two posts started on two different topics, but I can't seem to finish, and in general I am feeling stalled. I am still dealing with the usual lack of time, but there are two other issues.

One was simply a matter of timing. I wanted to write about the move away from intellectual honesty--actually, any kind of honesty--in contemporary politics, but the news of Andrew Breitbart's death broke that same day, and posting that would have felt like I was dancing on his grave. If Shirley Sherrod can be classy about it, so can I. (That's another problem with procrastination really. I could have covered that months ago.)

Another issue has been a feeling of pointlessness, amplified by a recent blog post by Paul Krugman:

http://krugman.blogs.nytimes.com/2012/02/27/this-tribal-nation/?smid=tw-NytimesKrugman&seid=auto

In a nutshell, facts and logic do not penetrate ideology. This is especially true on the conservative side, but that's usually the one that I'm pecking at. Okay, my post on the occupy movement would be more anti-liberal (though it isn't, really), but generally a lot of what I want to write about is stuff that would not be believed by those who need to believe it, even if they were going to read it, which cannot realistically be expected. So why do I even bother ever writing about anything but shopping or weight loss or cute things my dogs do?

Well, because I can't give it up. I do care about music and television and movies and boys and cooking, but I also care about politics and education and psychology and environmental issues. And I'm glad I care. I should care. There's not just a great big world out there--there's an enormous universe! And it's interesting and important. There are no excuses for boredom or apathy.

I have still been debating about whether I should do anything differently, and I don’t really know, but here are a few thoughts that have been floating around.

1. I’ve seen this quote written different ways, but I will go with the one I like best, “You must be the change you wish to see in the world.” – Ghandi

I want people to be able to speak courteously and open their hearts and minds to good things. I am still ardently pro-thought. So, I should keep learning and thinking and pondering. Does that mean I need to write it though?

2. “If you can't explain it simply, you don't understand it well enough.” Albert Einstein

Possibly I do need to write it, just to know that I actually am making sense. Writing is still how I work out the buzzing thoughts crowding my head.

A friend was considering starting a new blog, but was wondering if people would read it, and I said it doesn’t necessarily matter. I get an average of six hits per post. That is not a lot (though I appreciate them all, and I love comments), but even if no one ever read it, I still get benefits from the mental process of organizing my thoughts and finding the proper words, and from opening myself up enough to put my words out there for the world.

3. Every now and then I get comments from people who agreed with me already (See?), but found my phrasing helpful. Maybe that’s the sort of thing that can eventually matter for point number one.

And again, I can’t give it up. I may never make a cent from screenwriting, but I can’t just stop it either. I must write.

So, the next two posts (I think), will be some really hard and controversial topics, and then they will be followed by other hard things, and then by some fairly trivial things, and then probably more deep stuff. But I need to quit procrastinating because then there is all this ground that I have partially written in my head, and I could have referred back to it if I had gotten it out of my head earlier.

I’m afraid that just from a time perspective I am going to have to give up Hatchlings.

Oscar Blog

I know, I have never done one of these before, and if I was going to, shouldn't I be doing it two months from now?

As it is, I have seen more of the nominees than usual, and so that had me a little more interested--not interested enough to watch them, mind you--and seeing some things that others have written, I thought I would weigh in myself.

Actually, I did have a Facebook post earlier that even though I felt like George Clooney had better odds for Best Actor than Brad Pitt, I kind of wanted Brad to win after hearing about their bet. Sure, it would only be for one night, but that's a lot of kids. Anyway, I thought it was most likely that Jean Dujardin would win, and that's what happened, and I have to consider it fair. He had to convey everything with facial expression and body language, and he managed beautifully. And he can dance!

I feel pretty good about The Artist winning Best Picture as well. We loved Midnight in Paris and The Descendents as well, but of those three, I would pick the The Artist. In the case of Midnight in Paris, it just feels a lot lighter, and that lightness is probably deceptive, and also the tendency of more serious films to win may not be fair, but that's just how it feels.

One thing that was great about Midnight in Paris was how tight it was. With the last Woody Allen film I had seen before, Scoop, it was clever and well-written and there were good scenes and acting, but it felt a little loose, and The Descendents had the same issue. It didn't make it a bad movie, and that it did a certain amount of wandering may be appropriate, but as far as cohesion goes, The Artist nailed it.

Because of my love for the other two, I am thrilled with their wins for Original and Adapted Screenplay. Unfortunately, I have not seen Moneyball yet, or read the book, and I suspect that turning a book about using statistics in team management into an enjoyable movie is a pretty slick trick, and maybe they deserved it more, but I am happy for The Descendents.

On the topic of cohesion and tightness, it's time to turn to Hugo. I was disappointed with Hugo. It's not that it was a bad movie. It was a good movie. The reviews tended to make it sound like it was a great movie, and I didn't find that, and I believe it was because of the way it rambled.

Let me be clear that I am totally down with three of the wins that it did get: Art Directions, Cinematography, and Visual Effects. It also won Sound Editing and Sound Mixing, and I don't remember anything special about the sound, but it seems like it may not have been the strongest field anyway. Visually, though, that movie was beautiful. From the blue color palette, the tracking through the secret recesses of the train station, and the opening shots where it looked like a pop-up storybook coming to life, that movie was gorgeous.

However, there is editing to make things visually look good, and there is editing to tell the story well. Hugo went beyond could have been tighter into just sprawling. The dream sequences were completely unnecessary, the scene where Isabelle falls in the crowd really made no sense in terms of how it happened and how it was resolved, and a lot of the chasing was unnecessary. Now, the shots were interesting, and I assume that's why they were included, and there are all these visual connections, where the dream of the train crash corresponds to the early film of the train scaring the viewers, and the climax where Hugo is on the tracks, and when he has to hide on the outside of the clock, it references the film seen earlier. I get all that, but the end result is that instead of getting lost in the film, the film kept losing me.

Add to that the enormous plug for film preservation, and the whole thing felt remarkably self-indulgent. In thinking that, I have to consider that maybe film-making in general is just remarkably self-indulgent, because to decide that some vision of yours is worth all the time and effort and manpower that goes into making even the simplest movie could be kind of egotistical, but then it can be so transcendent sometimes. Maybe the point is that given everything that goes into it, you owe it to the crew and audience to try not to let your ego cloud your perspective. Any good writer has had to cut things that they liked for the greater good of a piece, so maybe that needs to be true with directors and producers too.

I don't think I have strong feelings about anything else. I was supposed to see Pina Saturday, and had to postpone, so if it goes as I hope, I may come away feeling that it was robbed of Best Documentary, but without seeing the others, how would I know?

Lin-oleum

This is a stupid title, but it's deliberate.

About a week ago I tweeted "I wish people could get over Lin's heritage and just enjoy him as a good basketball player." This was in the wake of the "two inches" and "chink in the armor" issues, which is what brought Jeremy Lin to my attention. I know there have been other things, but it was really these two that caught my eye. I haven't really followed the NBA for years, but sometimes I will wonder about something and look things up (like that time Greg Oden got me wondering about Sam Bowie's draft year).

Anyway, a good player, coming apparently out of nowhere and revitalizing a team, is a good story, and so I am totally down with Lin-mania and Lin-sanity, and I would only have found out about them by accident if not for the other things.

For Jason Whitlock himself, without knowing anything else about him, I suspect that he is on the mean-spirited side, and doesn't understand that nasty and vulgar don't automatically equal funny. Actually, a lot of people get confused over that.

With ESPN, though, maybe it was just a lapse in judgment. Possibly the lapse was related to someone irritated with the hype who was glad to see a loss, or something like that, but probably not with an intention to offend. That's my guess, but that this compulsive need to somehow work in the reminder that "Hey! He's Asian!" is where it went wrong, and that's where my tweet came from.

I have sort of changed my mind after reading the following:

http://www.grantland.com/story/_/id/7601157/the-headline-tweet-unfair-significance-jeremy-lin

http://www.miamiherald.com/2012/02/21/2653567/lin-sanity-offers-lessons-for.html

Actually, it's kind of a demonstration of racial insensitivity. I am thinking of white people focusing on color, and wishing they wouldn't. It never even occurred to me that on the other side of the color line, Lin could be extra-inspirational.

That's normal. I'm in the racial majority--less so now in terms of sheer numbers now, but certainly still in power. I can remember precisely two times when I felt judged on race. My friends of color don't have it so good, and yes, the Asian-Americans do face less overt prejudice in many situations, but they do still get it, and often with less remedies in place. And even though I have heard them tell me about it, and I have seen other people demonstrate it, it still does not automatically come to mind for me, because I'm not the one living it. It's an oversight with no malice, that's just too easy to do.

Keeping that in mind, I could just look at it as okay, the focus on race can be reasonable, but the problem is that some people are being stupid about it. Ah stupidity, my old nemesis--I could be very comfortable with that as a scapegoat. It doesn't feel like enough though.

I think the reason for this is that because of all the stupid and ugly things in the world, there is something especially nasty about racism. It hurts my heart on an emotional level. It's hard for me to speak rationally about it because it hits me in such an emotional place. On an intellectual level I know racism is often used by the greedy and powerful to manipulate the ignorant against their own best interests (as well as the best interests of humanity), and that frustrates me to no end.

Becoming smarter people would help. Becoming kinder people would help. If you take away ignorance and spite, there shouldn't really be much left of racism, right? But getting people to change is hard, and probably anyone who reads this and agrees with it is not really a big part of the problem anyway. But stopping and thinking about things is helpful, right?

Not every racial story is inspiring. Clarence Thomas is a black man in a prestigious position, and I do not find it one bit inspiring. However, Lin's story is, and I'm glad that he did not let consistently being underrated stop him from pursuing his dream, and I'm glad that it paid off. If it can inspire other people to believe in themselves and keep going, great. If it inspires one blockhead to re-evaluate his understanding of who can be good at what, even better. I'm not sure why we didn't get over that with Yao Ming, but okay. Maybe there's a really good reason and I just wasn't paying attention.

On My Way Home

Yesterday was kind of an interesting journey from work, mostly in aggravating ways, but not all, so I thought I would write about it. There's a lot about stupidity in it, so that will tie in to some of my upcoming topics nicely.

I was walking down 2nd, as I do, and less than two blocks away from work I noticed a persistent blaring of a horn. Even before I could see what was going on, I remember thinking that it was excessive. There was no way the person being signaled had not noticed and the blast was not letting up at all. This was not honking--this was holding down the horn.

There were flashing blue lights further down the road, perhaps an accident or a traffic stop reminding us to all share the road legally and civilly, but the horn persisted.

The actual issue was at 2nd and Madison. I walked past the car with the horn, and noticed that the driver was indeed resting on the horn, and looking bored. My first thought was, Really, buddy? You think that's helping? This was quickly replaced, though, by my concern at noticing that there was an infant in a car seat in the back, and wondering about possible hearing loss. At least the baby wasn't crying.

On to the truck that was holding up Horn-guy. Once I could see past the corner the problem was obvious: Hawthorne Bridge was backed up all the way to the corner. Truck-guy needed to turn, but there was no room for him, and by the looks of things there wasn't going to be room any time soon.

In that situation, I probably would have given up on turning, gone straight, and figured out a different route, rather than leaving people trapped behind me through multiple light changes, so I do understand the frustration of Horn-guy a little, but Truck-guy is also in a frustrating situation, and again, the horn is just not helping.

I wondered if I should do anything, but the police station is right there, and there were people all around, so I kept going.

Suddenly the horn stopped and shouting started. Horn-guy had gotten out of his car (leaving an infant alone, in a running car, on a busy street full of frustrated drivers) so he could yell through Truck-guy's window.

Again, I wondered if I should intervene, but a police cruiser had emerged from the underground parking, and a guy who was on the sidewalk was talking to the driver, so it seemed covered. I kept walking.

The horn started again, so Horn-guy had returned to his car, but nothing else appeared to have changed. I did notice that the cruiser had not pulled out yet, which seemed odd. The left lane was moving--only the right lane was stalled.

I kept walking, but constantly looking back, and Horn-guy was angling out into the left lane, and other drivers were letting him. As soon as he made it through the intersection, the cruiser lit up and pulled him over--I am guessing for disturbing the peace or disorderly conduct or something like that. All the bystanders erupted in cheers. By then, everybody hated Horn-guy.

So there I was, really irritated with human stupidity, and obnoxiousness, especially with a baby in the back, and then I just see the most amazing rainbow. It made a complete arch across the sky, and was bright and vivid. There was a building blocking the middle, but I rounded that and could see the whole thing, and it was just amazingly beautiful, and it was perfectly timed as a reminder that not everything is ugly and stupid.

Of course then I got on the train, which was really crowded and some people were kind of jerks about that, but it smelled better than the day before, so that was nice.

Then when I got off the train, some guy started yelling at someone who got on his bike to ride away that he was not supposed to ride there, ("Screw you!" "Oh yeah? Come back here and say that!"), but the guy did not come back, so another fight was averted, and without any involvement by me or police.

I got on the bus, and the crowding was compounded by a family of three taking up twice as many seats as they needed, and making fun of the mentally handicapped person who complained about there being no seats again. However, someone else moved over for him, and I don't think he knew that they were mocking him, so that could have been worse. And then the one girl moved her enormous purse to let another person sit down, and I thought, okay, they're coming around, but it was someone they already knew. But you know, they had a rough day. They’d left at 6 AM to get to the plasma donation center, and then only two of them could donate, delaying plans for eating deep-fried shrimp.

Eventually I got off the bus, and was able to make dinner and enjoy it with my family while regaling them with stories of public transportation and thoroughfares. And today wasn’t nearly as eventful. There were seats, and the smell was only medium-bad. And I passed a guy who looked just like a Samurai, but he was not picking any fights.

I guess the moral is that people can really suck, sometimes things are cool, and nature is pretty. Maybe that’s why some people like camping.

Pre-Occupied

Those who cannot remember the past are condemned to repeat it. – George Santayana

I know I don’t usually start with a quote. Classy, huh? It seemed appropriate in this case though, because I am writing specifically about how my study of the past has affected my understanding of the present. Specifically, I am writing on how reading about the Civil Rights movement has affected my understanding of the current protests.

Actually, the full quote is: “Progress, far from consisting in change, depends on retentiveness. When change is absolute there remains no being to improve and no direction is set for possible improvement: and when experience is not retained, as among savages, infancy is perpetual. Those who cannot remember the past are condemned to repeat it.”

Progress then depends at least in part on remembering what has come before—not just as a way to measure, but also as a foundation to build upon. Failures of the past can be repeated by forgetting, but success from the past is unlikely to be replicated if it is forgotten.

Looking at the Civil Rights Movement, and specifically those programs undertaken by the Drs. King and Abernathy, there were a few factors that were always important to success: there needed to be clear goals, and there needed to be economic pressure exerted to motivate those who could accomplish those goals.

With the Montgomery Bus Boycott, they wanted to change the rules of segregation on the buses, and so they boycotted the bus company. To integrate the lunch counters, you hold sit-ins to disrupt business, yes, but also the stores were boycotted. That was the pattern over and over again. You deprive those in power of funds, because ultimately the business needs the consumer more than the consumer needs the business, and because you have clear goals you know when you are done.

The sit-ins and the marches had another purpose, in terms of image and publicity, and this was important. It garnered some financial support, as others from outside the key areas contributed funds for legal expenses and other things, like replacing shoes for the citizens of Montgomery who had to do so much extra walking during the boycott, and that was important.

Also, these efforts had an important effect upon the hearts and minds of others. It showed strength and gave outsiders a look into a world that they could not imagine. It wasn’t a multiracial paradise outside of the South, but I have talked to people who could not believe what they saw—they never suspected that things were like that. So I don’t want to take anything away from the protest side, but without clear goals and economic pressure, it would not have been enough.

With that being said, let’s turn our attention to Occupy Portland. Inasmuch as they have an ideal of more financially equitable society, I am in agreement. The growing gap between rich and poor is a big concern for me. I just don’t think they are doing any good.

Do they have clear goals? Not really. Are they applying economic pressure to a key area, in line with their goals? Even if they had a clear goal, the answer to that would generally be negative. There was a recent dock shutdown, which caused several laborers who would be part of the 99 to lose a day’s wages, but no corporations were harmed. Are their protests winning financial support, and the hearts and minds of those around them? They had been getting some financial backing, but for the most part no.

Occupy Wall Street might be accomplishing a little bit more, because maybe they are disrupting the lives of some of the people who led to the current financial issues through their greed and lack of integrity. I have doubts, but it’s possible. Occupy Portland? Not so much.

In other posts I have hinted at how it was important for the Civil Rights Movement in the South to go with non-violence, but haven’t really talked about why, because it is too ugly, and I don’t want to talk about it, but it may be instructive here. For years there was this idea of the Negro as an ignorant brute who needed to be kept in line (and down) or he would kill all the white men and rape all the white women, be bloody savages.

As the protesters stepped out of line, they were none of these things. They were well spoken, and well dressed, polite but firm. They suffered horrible indignities and violence and they did not return them. They were strong and intelligent and orderly. People could still try and cling to the old beliefs, but the facts were against them. (Yes, today ignoring facts is a national pastime, but more on that later.)

If the 1 percent thinks of the 99 as rabble, ignorant and uncouth, disorganized and incapable of making good decisions on how things should be, what has the current movement done to dispute that? Many participants can speak intelligently when given the opportunity, but there is no unifying message and their actions are often destructive. It’s nice that Portland has been able to avoid the violence of Oakland, but I’m not sure it’s sustainable under the current model.

The Civil Rights marchers could take police clubs and fire hoses and thrown items because they had workshops where they practiced being yelled at and intimidated and threatened. The only thing they were not prepared for were the police dogs, which even then did not lead to violence, but it did disrupt things for that day. Maybe our police force is more tolerant than Oakland’s (I’m sure the mayor is), but it’s playing with fire. And I don’t mind taking risks and causing or putting up with discomfort if it will do something good, and right, but that brings us back to no clear goal, and therefore no good plan.

I do have some sympathy for this, because I can see how it would be really hard to come up with a plan. With everything that has gone wrong since September 2008, with the financial crisis, or take it back farther if you want, where do you start? It is hard to pick a place. Much of what would be needed is legislative, and to get that done when corporate interests are so entrenched with government is hard, and there will be a little more on that in the next few posts.

However, if you can’t tackle the big problems, tackle a small one. One of the newer protests is a woman being foreclosed on. Okay, how about holding a fundraiser to keep her in her house? Or working to pair up people who are in danger of losing their homes so they can share expenses? Or starting a co-operative business to start some income going?

Not all of the Occupy problems are their fault. Their camp getting inundated with homeless people is a result of us not fixing the homeless problem, which is strongly related to us ignoring the mental health problem. So maybe get some mental health workers donating time, or get lawyers and financiers to help people with their economic problems.

One thing I’ve learned from junior high health class, and observation has borne out, is that letting anger out doesn’t get it out. It actually increases the anger. (This is why road rage is self-perpetuating.) Working anger out, however—resolving issues and taking action—does work. If you are concerned about social justice, be productive instead of destructive.

I know it could be discouraging, but here is an encouraging little piece:

http://www.nytimes.com/2012/02/05/opinion/sunday/kristof-after-recess-change-the-world.html

Black History Month 2011

No, that’s not a typo. I just recently finished the books I had intended to read last year for Black History month. You would think that this would mean that I could start on this year’s reading on time, but I am in the middle of Native American Heritage month 2011, and then I have a few books to try and make our pets happier and better behaved. I think I can finish Black History month 2012 in April, and really, for me that’s pretty good.

So let’s go over what was read, and I will do it in the order of the books I liked least to best, rather than order read. (I read the best one first, which in some ways made the rest of it kind of disappointing.)

My least favorite book was Race First: The Ideological and Organizational Struggles of Marcus Garvey and the Universal Negro Improvement Association, by Tony Martin. Now, if that title seems overly academic to you, that’s actually the root of the issue right there. The book is based on a doctoral dissertation, I believe, and while this type of work is necessary, it’s often a little too dry to make compelling reading.

It is dry, and also it breaks down into several topics where there is overlap between different sections, that makes the whole a little confusing and a little repetitive. Some of the other figures mentioned could truly use some more explanation. This topic is not well known, though it probably would be more so to the review panel that decided to grant the degree.

One thing that I really have to credit is that even though it results in dryness, the absolute seriousness with which the topic is handled is really important. I think it’s easy to view Marcus Garvey as a joke because of the uniforms and pomp and yes, because of the hat. Martin does not include a single picture of Garvey in the hat. Sure, he goes over the philosophies that led to the adoption of the more elaborate outfits, but he does not reduce Garvey to either his outfit or his failures, and that’s important.

Marcus Garvey did accomplish a lot, and his philosophies of why the independent endeavors were necessary were exactly correct. Going over the book, it really seems like if he had just left the Black Star Line alone, and concentrated on manufacturing and job creation, he might have been okay. While having the fleet was a huge mental boost, and it would have been important for migration, it’s greater level of complication became a huge vulnerability, leading to abuse over and over again that drained cash.

And of course he was being fought by people who shouldn’t have been fighting him. It’s amazing how often the NAACP comes off as the problem over the course of all of these books—usually just for being too conservative, but in this case being downright suppressive of other organizations that could have been viewed as allies but instead were viewed as rivals. This is especially an issue with W.E.B Du Bois, who does not come off looking well at all, either in terms of Marcus Garvey or Malcolm X.

That leads to my second-least favorite book, The Autobiography of Malcolm X, as told to Alex Haley. I was surprised at the negativity of the book. My understanding was that he had modified his views, and then as I approached the end, I realized that this was happening in real-time. I had not understood how little time passed between his break with the Nation of Islam and his death. Then it became kind of fascinating to think about, and ultimately very sad. It was clear that he did not really have enough time to find his new direction, and for a man with his abilities you can’t help but wonder. Where would he have gone?
The other thing common thread, besides the NAACP being useless, was how everyone knew each other. Malcolm X and Martin Luther King were viewed as opposites, but they had the same people at their funerals. That brings us to Ralph Bunche, for whom I read Ralph Bunche: An American Life, by Brian Urquhart.

Initially the book started out really slowly, and I felt like it was going to be a chore to read. Why is it second favorite instead of third-favorite then? Well, it really picked up. The author worked with Bunche at the United Nations, and so for the early life, and even later family life, he really was not doing a great job, and it kind of dragged. However, when he got to various UN endeavors, it was fascinating. I still feel like Urquhart could have done a lot of things better, like sometimes his decisions on which facts to include and which to omit seemed questionable, but there is some fascinating history there, and sometimes it is well told.

One overarching theme of all of the books is how easy it is for those with bad intentions, or even just ignorance, to destroy the work of those who are trying to do good. That has come up a lot, in many of my studies, and is one reason why I need to make sure to break up some of my more serious reading with lighter fare, just to try and keep from hating the world.

Another theme is that even though events might be interesting, or important, or people might be good, books don’t always match that. A book that is a pleasure to read is a joy regardless, and when it also covers important events, and teaches you something, well, that is a find. And that’s why I covered the books in order of how much I liked them, so that I can just gush over the last one: And the Walls Came Tumbling Down by Ralph Abernathy.

Seriously, it’s almost embarrassing how much of a fan girl I am for this book. I love it. It works on several levels. First of all, Dr. Abernathy has a rich, warm voice that really comes through in the book. He’s someone you want to spend time with. It would be good for that alone.

In addition, he lays out the Civil Rights campaign in such a logical and orderly manner that it is a joy to read. There is a natural progression in terms of what works, and what doesn’t, and why. He had the advantage of hindsight to review the events, and it is masterfully told. I could barely put the book down, and I would dream of it at night, finding myself in the middle of marches. It’s vivid.

Perhaps because I did care so much, the book took on a real heaviness as Dr. King’s assassination approached. This was somewhat true with Malcolm X as well (and I do have a friend who has not finished Autobiography because she can’t bear to get to that part), but more so here. I like Dr. King better on my own anyway, and Dr. Abernathy loved him so much that you share his grief.

One compensation for my constantly being behind schedule is that sometimes things will come up that tie in well that I could not foresee. For example, during my last Native American Heritage reading, I ended up seeing two plays (Ghosts of Celilo and One Flew Over the Cuckoo’s Nest) that related. This time a movie came up, Black Power Mixtape 1967-1975, featuring interviews with people from the Black Power movement. It was interesting and related well to much of the reading.

One benefit of reading these books together is that it affects how you think about it. First of all, we tend to associate the term “militancy” with violence now, but the SCLC considered themselves militant, as well as non-violent. For them it meant the level of organization, and the drilling (as they practiced being assaulted and being insulted and being arrested), and all of the other things that they did to prepare. Also, we think of Malcolm X as condoning violence, but it seems to be more that he did not rule it out. Now that does have an impact as you may have individuals feeling more justified in acting violently, but how much organized violence really happened? Later generations may have impressions that don’t fit the facts.

It was also interesting reading Dr. Abernathy’s explanation of why non-violence was so important, and in the context of the South, and how African-Americans were perceived, and what white fears were, it made total sense. In the urban North, dynamics were so different that the same approach would not necessarily have been best, though what would have worked is still open for debate. And it still totally relates to today.

So, that’s it for 2011. For 2012 I was feeling a desire to read the really old history of the Americas, like if I could read about Crispus Attucks (Boston Massacre), and Ford (Lewis and Clark Expedition), and Estebanico (Spanish expeditions in the early 1500s), but there isn’t really good information on them. Then I started thinking maybe I would read more about the Harlem Renaissance, and Du Bois, and see if he could redeem himself a little. I think I will be heading towards more medical history though. Likely candidates include The Immortal Life of Henrietta Lacks, Bad Blood, and King Leopold’s Ghost. We’ll see.

Facing 40

Well, it’s happened. I have turned 40. It has not been especially traumatic. It doesn’t really feel different. It is a reminder that time is passing, though, and that nothing has really changed significantly.

Back in the days when I was working at Intel, I remember thinking that if nothing had happened in terms of becoming a professional writer or getting married and having children by 40, then I would need to reevaluate, and maybe I would need to think about becoming a foster parent, or going into politics, or going back to school to become a teacher. I have still not ruled any of these things out permanently, but I am not changing making any of those changes right now. Instead I have set some long-term goals for things I would like to do when I am 50, so that I have a plan to guide me through the next decade.

It started with the thought that I would like to do a triathlon when I am 50. Now, setting a goal for that far off can easily be completely useless, because it’s like the procrastination is built into the goal already. That is not how this is going to work.

For me, part of it is that it will take me a while to reach that level of fitness. It would not take me a whole ten years, but it could take five. However, I don’t want to just get in shape, do an event, and then let it all go again. It’s kind of that I want to be doing a triathlon at 50 so that I know that I am entering my older years in a good way, that I might still be doing one when I am 60. It’s more about the kind of 50 year old that I want to be.

That has been part of the plan for a while now—I don’t even remember when I first decided it, but I have also put two other goals with it. One is that I will have visited all the continents, and also I will make a movie.

Obviously, for those things to happen, many things need to happen in between, and I have some ideas on that.

The travel one is the easiest, but it was originally a goal for when I was forty. As it is, I already have three continents down, so I really only need to do one new continent every three years, and then go to Antarctica when I am 50. Of course, that’s the one that’s melting, so I may just have to do that one sooner. Julie and Maria want to go on safari for their 40th anyway, which is 2017, so that will get Africa. The first one will probably be South America, and then Asia sometime after Africa. Travel fits well into my normal mode of life.

(Yes, I will do some more things in Europe and North America, even though I have already been there. Repeats in Australia are less likely, but not impossible.)

For making the movie, the first thing that happens is that I need to catch up in writing. That means catching up on all my pending blog posts (this would be easier if I quit coming up with new ones, but that’s not going to happen) and writing two more screenplays so that I do actually have nine of my own. Also, I need to rewrite the existing ones, adding more detail. I tend to write with very Spartan descriptions, because then the director can fill in their own looks, but sometimes it is more appealing if you give them some description. They’ll make the changes they want anyway. This process can take us much as two years, and it is all fine.

Afterwards, I will need to start filming things in different lights, indoors, outdoors, daytime, nighttime, human, animal, athletic, dance, panoramic, microscopic and so on, just to really develop a good working idea of how to capture the look that I want. World traveling will not hurt those efforts. I will also want to work on some film editing. I think a lot of this will come down to music videos. I can do tribute videos on Youtube with film or television clips, and shoot music videos for local bands.

This should give way to doing short pieces—maybe some stuff for funnyordie, or I could make my own Youtube channel. I have thought it would be good to do some demo videos for emergency preparedness. Anyway, this is how I will build know-how. I hope to be pretty competent with filming and editing within six years.

The other thing I should probably take some time to do prior to that is maybe taking a month or two and writing a bunch of six page scripts. There is a regularly running contest for 6-minute films, and a lot of people like doing films to show their ability to do special effects, but they are not writers, so I could have an opportunity to make some connections and be helpful there.

Certainly there are opportunities for networking, and maybe seeing if I can get some jobs or do some volunteer work locally on the independent scene, or even with some of the professional shows that film around here, but then it will also be time to start planning. I will need to pick a script, scout out locations, and get all those things ready. If I go super fast, maybe I can film it when I am 49 and then spend 50 entering it into film festivals.

Finally, what about that triathlon? Well, this is not an ambitious beginning, but the first thing I need to work on is sleep. I do not have good sleep habits, and that affects my eating and exercising and focus.

On the activity side, I have prepaid for four fencing lessons this year, and I want to bike to work at least five times this year. Not terribly ambitious, I know, but I am taking a slow approach. Also, if Forest Park has that thing for covering all the trails, I want to do that. I found out about it too late last year.

Other steps along the road will include taking swimming lessons, because I can paddle around okay, but I have no form, and that will make a big difference, and building up my endurance for all three events. I have been okay at swimming and biking before. I have never been anything but horrible at running, but I am a good walker, and I will start adding small runs to the ends of my walks, and as I start feeling more confident I will probably take a clinic. The good thing is I know a lot of runners, and I am fond of Foot Traffic, and there is just a lot of help for runners out there.

You may notice that I have no intellectual or spiritual goals there, but I find that those work better in the short term. I would not have any idea how to make a goal for my spiritual self for ten years from now that I would not think that I should get done sooner. I’m not worried about that.

Obviously, even these three goals could change, as unpredictable as life is, but I know they are okay, because they are things that I want to do, and that I will enjoy, and that will keep life interesting for the next decade.

Basically, I just intend to be awesome.