Next year's party

Happy Halloween!

I am not really doing a lot for it this year. 

There is some themed reading, but I am not visiting a lot of attractions, or dressing up, or carving pumpkins. I am not even doing that many Halloween songs, though there will be more about that Friday.

That's not all just being tired and poor; some of it was the sabbatical travel, which meant having less time.

However, we did still do our traditional family viewing: The 'burbs; It's the Great Pumpkin, Charlie Brown; Garfield's Halloween Adventure, and (of course) The Halloween that Almost Wasn't:

https://www.imdb.com/title/tt0316318/

This was a television movie from 1979 with Judd Hirsch as Dracula and Mariette Hartley as the Witch.

I am pretty sure that it aired on the Disney channel in the early '80s, and that's where we saw it. The point is that with possibly only one viewing at the time, this eminently quotable movie entered the minds and hearts of my sisters and I, and we love it!

It was not easy to find, but we eventually got a DVD copy. It is under the alternative title that is much less representative: The Night Dracula Saved the World. (The world is never in danger -- just Halloween -- and that is plenty compelling.)

Yes, the movie is silly and cheesy and for kids and all of those things, but we find it incredibly fun. Is it just because we saw it at the right age and time? Because I know a lot of people are into Halloweentown and Hocus Pocus and we are not them. 

There isn't any easy way of knowing if it's just us, because no one we have mentioned it to has seen the movie. 

Next year there is going to be a viewing.

If no one else gets it, the movie is half an hour and they will survive (though my respect for their taste my take a hit).

If others are into it, hurrah! We will have spread the love.

Obviously that is almost a year away, so this is not even at the save-the-date stage, but if you are interested, it's not too early to let me know.

And if you have seen it, leave a comment!

TERF Month

I had been thinking of this section of the reading as TERF month and counter-programming, except that seems to focus on the worst part of it. Splitting it up into the most logical division, there are two consecutive weeks of it that are frustrating. 

Even the terminology is frustrating: I am not sure that and of the authors involved are radical feminists by the most strict definition. For one definition I read, it seems like a Radical Feminist should not even be able to be Trans-Exclusive. Perhaps it was that conflict that led to the TERF acronym.

Probably a better overall term is transphobe.

Regardless, as transphobes became more aggressive over the past few years, I would find out that the authors of various books that I intended to read were transphobic. That made me more reluctant to read the books, but I did not feel quite right letting them go either. 

There were a total of five books that were in this category. I ended up (with some inspiration that I will go into later) deciding to put them together with some other books that were more pro-transgender in an attempt to maintain balance.

That was the counter-programming, and it ended up exceeding expectations. I started out with two books in mind and found some really strong additions. That number is at more like 11 now, though there are some books that it could be questionable to count... we'll go over all of that.

For this post, here are three books by authors that appear to be transphobic:

Invisible Women: Data Bias in a World Designed for Men by Caroline Criado Pérez

We Should All Be Feminists by Chimamanda Ngozi Adichie

In Search of Our Mothers' Gardens: Womanist Prose by Alice Walker

They are really good, each in their own individual way.

Invisible Women aggregates important patterns in bias that relate to health and safety and the overall well-being of not just women but society in general.

We Should All Be Feminists is brief but covers some important ground in terms of how so many times people try to define feminism into something different, probably because it is too hard and ugly to fight what feminism actually is.

In Search of Our Mothers' Gardens has a quote I saved that seems to relate to my life now. That probably makes it the one that touched me the most, though as a collection of essays the impact of each individual one varied. However, just the reminder that there was a time, even in my lifetime (though early) that Zora Neale Hurston was practically unknown, and Their Eyes Were Watching God was not even in print... there has been progress. Alice Walker is a part of that progress and it matters.

I just also wish they would get over their prejudices. 

I understand them to some extent; in many ways they are reflecting society. 

I can also imagine that for Criado Pérez -- where so much of her focus relates to general differences between male and female bodies -- that I suppose it could lead to being more gender-essentialist. Looking a bit deeper, though, those standards surely do not fit all male bodies. We can open up more in general, considering other differences without losing sight of gender bias. 

I believe we can do multiple things. 

That leaves this remaining frustration; why can't you be better? 

Which is a fair question for anyone. However, when you have managed to see the problems with gender bias, and often also racial and class bias, anti-immigrant bias... you've come so far!

Please let's work on this next step.

Focus

I wrote For now, last Tuesday's post, the night before. 

I usually try to write ahead anyway; I believe it increases the quality and I know it decreases the stress. My extra motivation was that I had an early morning doctor's appointment Tuesday, which was going to make the morning hectic.

I have been doing appointments early when possible because it is too stressful worrying about being able to get the time off after making the appointment, or scheduling the time off first and then not getting the appointment. I start at 9:30, so if I can drag myself in somewhere between 7:15 to 7:45, I can be done in time for work. 

I never love going to the doctor, but I was kind of dreading it more because my most recent A1c was not as good as I had been hoping. I had been doing pretty well, but when things went spiraling out of control in June/July, it threw my sleep off pretty badly. 

The most important variables for my blood sugar (assuming the medication is where it should be) are my water consumption and the amount of sleep I am getting; that's where changes make the most difference.

I may have written this already, but I had been doing pretty well getting to bed around 11:30. My sense was that if I could start getting to bed at 10:30, I would really have something. Unfortunately, my natural inclination is to be a night owl. It had taken effort to get to where 11:30 was regular, and I was going to put in more effort to get to 10:30.

Then came the stressful phone calls and the hospital trips and waiting for updates. 

I lost a lot of ground.

Even when that situation had stabilized (an overly optimistic term), I had not.

Oddly, no matter how much I berate myself for staying up late -- kind of worrying/kind of vegetating, and really quite pointless -- it does not get me into bed any faster.

I had started getting back on track, averaging 11:38 PM. My blood sugar scores were getting back into range, but I was still not happy.

As we were discussing it, I found myself telling the doctor that if I get my sleep under control over these next few months, I'll be set for life.

I had not thought of it that way before, but yes, if I can make it through open enrollment and garnished wages and holidays and my mother's decline and so much that I want to do in so little time... if over the course of that I can get on track where I am actually making myself/allowing myself to/managing my life so I can get enough sleep...

I can probably do it under any circumstance that comes along.

I feel like I need to do this. Maybe that's why.

Related posts:

https://sporkful.blogspot.com/2023/07/please-excuse-gina-for-not-writing.html

https://sporkful.blogspot.com/2023/08/the-new-stress.html

Classic Children's Books of Queer Representation

Next Friday I will post about the most recently completed reading "month". 

As I was starting it, it occurred to me that I should check out some kind of related books that had been quite notorious in their time.

Daddy's Roommate by Michael Willhoite (1990)

Heather Has Two Mommies by Lesléa Newman, illustrated by Diane Souza (1989)

And Tango Makes Three by Justin Richardson and Peter Parnell, illustrated by Henry Cole (2005)

I would say they are all very sweet and simple books with no reason to object, except that decades later people are still trying to ban books and preventing even the utterance of the word "gay".

(One note: the first edition of Heather Has Two Mommies references artificial insemination -- which did draw some objections -- but it was later removed and not in the edition I read.)

For my personal opinions, I like the artwork in Daddy's Roommate more that in Heather Has Two Mommies, but Heather Has Two Mommies is more broadly representative. When her classmates talk about their families, there are multiple different configurations, not only of gender and race but there is even some disability representation.

(And oddly, but it also seems appropriate, both of these books seem to be set in Boston.)

Newman wrote her book after being asked by some lesbian parents who did not see themselves anywhere. That may have caused her to approach it differently.  

Personally my favorite was And Tango Makes Three. I worry that is just so typical of a straight person, but I found the backstory really interesting and I love penguins.

I did try and find a little about the controversies at the time, though Wikipedia has some conflicting reports. 

On one page it talks about the library in Wasilla, Alaska refusing to shelve the books, but then in another it was that they did shelve the books, but councilwoman Sarah Palin objected and fired the librarian, who was rehired after an outcry. 

I am more interested in two other criticisms, both from the page on Heather Has Two Mommies. 

One was a concern that schools should not celebrate one type of family structure over another. The book is very clear that all families are valid, and includes some with straight, married, parents. I feel that is very much a case of reinterpreting equal rights as special rights. Mentioning is not automatically promotion, and certainly not automatically a competition either.

The other was a little more thoughtful, but still had some really wrong points.

One complains that the book is more about the kids at the preschool and Heather's relationship with her class, and that by showing Heather's family as equivalent to heterosexual families, it "dequeers" them. That includes a complaint about Heather being sad about not having a daddy, when some of the other kids do, because that makes it a bad thing. 

While this day of class is clearly the first time Heather realizes her family is not identical to all others, that would be an actual milestone. Then each child draws a picture of their own family, in all their diversity, and the teacher confirms that all of these structures are valid. 

Let me reference Sarah Palin again. When she was banning books and firing librarians, a fellow councilwoman asked her if she had read the book:

"I don't need to read that stuff."

I bet she says that a lot. Regardless, some of these criticisms do make you wonder if the critics really read the book, or just reacted to it. They seem to be missing the point.

There is another point, though.

A child learning that other family structures exist, wondering about it -- perhaps with strong emotions since they are a child -- and then reconciling with that, as well as a book that allows other children to understand that they will meet people with different kinds of families, and that's okay... that book fills a definite, necessary role.

It is not the only possible role. 

It was a reasonable one for Newman to write after being asked, but no one book can fill all needs, and it's great that there are lots of different books.

It is true that back then there was not a lot to choose from, but they filled a role. 

There was an episode of Modern Family where Mitchell has a story for Lily about her adoption. He and Cam briefly think about trying to get it published, for representation, but at the bookstore they find many books about gay parents, gay adoption, gay international adoption... That was 2011.

Things have gotten better. 

There are still people who find it a threat if someone different from them is called valid.

We need to stay on top of that.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Daddy%27s_Roommate

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Heather_Has_Two_Mommies

For now

When I posted "A Cheerful Receiver" there was a bigger question behind it. I was hinting at it, but I hadn't resolved it over the following week. "Text-cards" is something I'd been thinking about, and it relates, but it was also a punt because I didn't know what I wanted to say.

It appears that it is not time for the answer. 

Going back to those issues with receiving gifts and even asking for fair compensation... I had not been able to identify whether that is pride or unworthiness or other factors. 

The question came up -- and a conversation with a friend was again critical -- if I might not be blocking some financial success. 

To the extent that sounds like power-of-postive-thinking/the-secret/law-of-attraction, I have a certain amount of skepticism. Yes, I have observed self-sabotage and that can be a real thing, but I am also aware that especially in the realm of economics, there are factors that a positive mindset would not fix. There are so many people one missed paycheck away from disaster, not to mention all those who have actually been hit by the disaster, and saying they just aren't trying hard enough or being confident enough gets me kind of punchy.

My firmly believing that does not rule out that I might not be serving my own interests either. 

One thought that was really clear was that it is not good enough for only my problems to be solved. Okay. If I am saying that I can't have some financial security until everyone else does, though, that is almost certainly not practical.

The unanswered question is what can it be right for me to hope for?

It was bugging me that I couldn't figure it out.

Here's the other thing that I knew, though: I need to go through this open enrollment.

Open enrollment is roughly October through December when people on Medicare plans can change for the upcoming year. Calls get really busy. Not only is it hard to stay caught up with work, but I also can't just snap out of it at the end of a shift, so it affects my time off work as well.

I really didn't want to go through it again.

I was considering other possibilities, and none of them were right. I feel I need to do this.

I don't think I will know my next step until after. 

I do have lots of things that I need to read and think about, and my brain will be worked harder so I will need to show myself some grace over the next three months.

I do feel that need to reach out to friends more, and also to be more aware of how I am taking care of my body (see if I can get through it without my shoulder seizing up again). 

I need to find ways to feel like I am contributing and doing some good, without a lot of time and money..

It is quite possible that somewhere in here, my mother will die. 

It's a lot, but it feels necessary.

Good thing I'm stubborn when I'm committed.

Barney Miller: The Election

I was not going to write about this one.

Episode 5 of Season 3, "The Election" is set on Election Day 1976, when Americans chose Jimmy Carter over Gerald Ford. The episode aired (and was filmed) before the election, so the results were unknown. 

They focus instead on voting. 

One shoplifter still needs to get to the polls. He slips out of custody from the voting booth, but takes that time to pay for the stolen items before returning himself to the precinct. 

Wojo has proudly voted, and wants to know how others are voting. He is unable to get a satisfactory answer. Harris does admit to being a Republican, though he does not specify support for Ford. Dietrich does not discuss politics, Yemana is regarding the election mainly in terms of bets placed, and the secrecy of the ballot -- and a probable desire to avoid influencing the men he leads -- keeps Barney from being willing to answer.

Barney also acknowledges there are other races, though most people are focusing on the presidential one.

Luger is focusing on a local race, encouraging others to vote for the candidate he knows, a name familiar to the people he talks to for some corruption allegations while over sanitation.

I am fine with their desire to not commit further. It would be reasonable to guard against exerting undue influence. It also avoids alienating viewers who disagree, and having fictional characters back a real candidate with a chance of losing.

My issue is with the way they explored voting in the other plot.

A call comes into the precinct because a man was hit in the head with a toilet seat that appeared to have come from a third floor window. It had "HELP" written on it.

The seat was thrown by Edna Relkie (Brett Somers), whose husband locked her in the bathroom to prevent her from voting. 

The detectives take it very seriously as a violation of civil rights, which is good. 

Her husband is arrested and claims it was to prevent her vote from canceling out his, and that he has studied the issues and she is ignorant. That would be a typical attitude in a case like this.

There may be three ways in which they get it wrong.

First, they make him a Democrat, locking her up because she said she was going to vote Republican. There is a reason why that might work, but in general, locking women up so they can't vote and ruin things would be more of a Republican move.

Second, he then casts everything as her dominating him; he was considerate to lock her in the bathroom instead of the closet. His parting shot is that he used to be taller than her.

If she was the dominating one, it seems unlikely that he would have been inclined or able to lock her up. 

There is another aspect to that which makes it more important, but the part I initially hated was that then she was asking everyone how to vote, decided not to vote when no one would tell her, and Barney's solution was to close her eyes while choosing.

I suppose the backstory you could add is that the whole thing shook her confidence, causing her to doubt her initial inclination to vote Republican. I feel what they are really doing is playing into feminine stereotypes and giving into backlash against feminism. I do not appreciate it.

When I was writing about when Barney Miller gets women wrong specifically, I did not cite this episode, but I did think of it. Still, I hadn't thought it required any additional comment.

I just finished Survivor Injustice by Kylie Cheung Wednesday. 

It covers many types of interpersonal violence and abuse, but interfering with voting is a pretty common one and how it starts. However, it is generally only one part of the abuse. 

Where they may have gotten it right is that it is not limited to one party. The book did acknowledge that as a matter of policy support, there is some similarity to Republican policies, but there are abusers on both sides.

There were stories of canvassers coming upon women who were scared to talk, or not allowed to talk when their partner intruded on the conversation. There were women who could not register to vote so as not to allow their abusive ex to locate their new address. There was a woman whose husband accompanied her into the voting booth, telling the workers that she was slow and needed help. There was the woman who didn't vote because she was afraid of running into her abusive ex again.

While going to polling places does not affect us here in Oregon, if you live with someone who is abusive and controlling, they may not let you fill out your ballot and mail it as desired.

As I was reading that, I kept thinking of this episode and getting mad.

I understand they are trying to make it funny; they probably were not thinking about how terrible some women do have it, because again, there were the occasional wife-beating jokes. I don't think they really would think a woman getting beaten up is funny, probably, but it's that paternalism, where women don't really have it that bad, bless their hearts.

The episode bothered me -- despite my love for the series -- and now it bothers me more.

Text-cards

I think a lot about being connected more.

One of the ideas came about when we were in San Diego. My sisters were noticing that you don't see postcards now the way you used to. There are not as many for sale, and often more drawn than photographed.

I assume that is because people are buying them less, and that factors in that include people not sending as much mail in general, but also people taking photos with their phone and then uploading them... there would be less demand.

It occurred to me, though, that I could send text postcards: snap a photo and send it to a friend saying "Wish you were here!"

I tried that in front of the turtle enclosure, but the picture didn't go through.

It still seemed like the idea had some promise.

I got another friend's cell phone number to see if we might be able to get together while I was kind of in the area. I got the number late; we did not get together and I did not sent any pictures.

That was mainly timing, but the other issue is that when we go places, I am using a camera instead of my phone. I take lots of pictures, but not that way. Still, I could potentially whip the phone out, if I remembered.

I have since obtained one more friend's cell phone number, and texted that friend a picture that I thought she would like. Progress!

With a long way to go.

Barney Miller: The Child Stealers

It is hard to pick a favorite episode, but this one -- episode 15 of season 6 -- is right near the top.

Part of that is our love for Marty and Darryl, played by Jack DeLeon and Ray Stewart, but I would not write a post just for that. There is a dynamic in play that I think is really important, but that gets overlooked.

Marty and Darryl are both gay men. We first meet Marty as a purse snatcher and shoplifter, but Darryl always seems to have been well off financially. Reading one thing about this episode, the writer mentioned Darryl's clothing (a suit and overcoat) as a move away from the stereotype. Even when he is dressed more flamboyantly it is with excellent taste, including a handmade sweater from Italy.

I think the suit is because he is being business-like, wanting to be taken seriously; his ex-wife is no longer honoring the visitation granted in their custody agreement. 

Captain Miller is sympathetic, but that is outside of their jurisdiction. When Marty and Darryl try and snatch Darryl's son Jason from his school, that is very much in police jurisdiction.

For queer representation, this episode is more important for Officer Zatelli outing himself when tensions get high as Eleanor -- Darryl's ex-wife -- insinuates that her son should not be corrupted by exposure to the gay lifestyle.

That was not really her problem.

In fact, there had been a growing resentment that when Jason was with Darryl, his time consisted of going to Broadway shows and the ballet and the best restaurants, and then she had to be the one telling him to do his homework and go to bed and that they couldn't afford truffles.

The custodial parent having to be the heavy while the non-custodial parent gets to be the fun one is a common enough conflict that it has shown up in other television shows, and in real life.

While it was not discussed, it was also always more likely that the man was going to have more financial resources. We have been talking about gender-based pay disparity for years without much progress, and this was 1980.

Getting those issues worked out is not easy in the best of circumstances. As things get worked out, Eleanor asks Darryl to bore Jason once in a while. Maybe it would be nice if he gifted her tickets sometimes, or invited her to dinner. Once the worst of the tension subsides, you can tell there is still affection between them.

(That is one of the things I admire about acting: the performers having probably never worked together before, and yet you feel all of this unstated backstory.)

I would say that I know a surprising number of couples who have gotten married and then split up because one of them was gay, except it's not really a surprising number. I am Mormon, and my friends were largely getting married in the 90s. Things were starting to get better, but a lot of people were still remaining in the closet and feeling pressured to do so. They were not all from church either.

Who knew that getting married to someone of the opposite sex would not relieve the pressure?

Some of the eventual breakups were more acrimonious than others. I can only imagine the hurt and sense of betrayal. That so many of them have been able to successfully co-parent is a wonderful thing. 

That is worth thinking about, but here is the point that I really want to make...

It was easy for Eleanor to blame it on Darryl's sexual orientation.

Maybe it was embarrassing to admit that she was jealous and frustrated, but it was easy to not even mention that because so many people were going to be supportive. If there was still some sting from losing her husband because he was gay, maybe that's just gravy.

As long as we have groups that are marginalized, people will use that. 

Sometimes they are just being jerks, but taking those easy targets can keep us from really getting at the root.

Cutting Jason off from his father wasn't good for anyone. She might have been able to influence a judge to cut off visitation because of Darryl's sexual orientation, but who would that have helped? She would have been left with her resentment, her son would have one less person who loves him available, and Darryl would have been very hurt (which would only bring a temporary and wrong satisfaction to Eleanor).

The truth sets us free, but sometimes it requires digging.

A Cheerful Receiver

If asking to be paid for work was hard, simply receiving has its own difficulty.

Technically I have been poor since 2016. That was when I was laid off at the same time that my mother started to get worse. It was clear that the right thing to do was to stay with her, and that remains clear. 

That does not mean that I clearly understood how things would go.

From about that point, almost any time friends took me out they were treating me. I didn't feel great about it, but I do have good friends and it was also possible to believe it was temporary.

Well, it was temporary. I started working again and started to dig my way out of the whole. I even bought a friend lunch on one excursion.

Then the garnishment started.

No one is being terrible about it. Being open about it probably helps. I don't have any illusions that everyone reads my blog, but there is information out there, and I am certainly past the point of trying to hide a shameful secret.

That doesn't mean I am over it bothering me, which does seem like something to work on. How much of it is pride? How much of it is feelings of unworthiness? How much am I caught up in societal expectations despite all I know about the flaws of unbridled capitalism and the absolute fallacy of a meritocracy?

I am not sure. 

There are a few thoughts that keep bumping around on my path to wholeness.

One is a memory from three years ago. It feels like it's been longer.

At that point I had started getting some pay for caring for Mom, so I had some money but not much. I had $10, and I strongly felt that I needed to give it to someone. Remembering it, I remember it feeling awkward to offer it and worse because it was so little. I had kind of forgotten how big an offering it would have been for me. I was remembering only having $10 cash, but in fact that would have been a pretty big chunk of my available funds in any form.

I remember awkwardly tendering the offer, and her saying "I accept it with a good heart."

Which was what I needed to hear.

https://sporkful.blogspot.com/2020/04/re-becoming-somebody.html

I also keep thinking about some of the people who are always participating in mutual aid. They give to others, and they draw attention to the needs of others, but they also ask when they need it.

Is it hard for them? Is it easier because they do so much to help others? Does that help them know it's okay?

Are they just more evolved, where they not only intellectually understand the need for mutual aid but feel it emotionally as well?

I mean, given that my past baggage had a lot to do with having to take responsibility for everyone else first, and put others over me, I might be a little behind in getting there.

There's nothing wrong with wanting to help people, but sometimes it is also necessary to be helped. 

I'm still trying to work that out.

Classic television: Barney Miller

One sisterly project has been watching or re-watching classic television on DVDs so there are no parts missing. I use "classic" to mean that we like it, but they have mostly been from the '70s and '80s.

We just started Daria, which is more recent. Before that we finished seasons 1-5 of Designing Women. (The last two seasons of that series are not classic.)

Before that we finished Barney Miller. I have been wanting to write about it, but I wanted to finish a certain book first, and things just happen.

I really love the show, with a deep affection for most of the cast. I have to consider that such a positive portrayal of the police is fictional, but even in the context of the show, graft and racism and harassment are common not just in other cities but also in other precincts.

You can observe a deliberate effort to do good and create empathy. That is not just with a multi-racial cast but also with a wide variety of people passing through the precinct, as both crime victims and criminals, most of whom are at least somewhat sympathetic.

You can easily tell that the creative team was up on the current psychology and influenced by that.

That is where some of the weaknesses come in.

The creators were in contact with gay advocacy groups at the time, and worked with them to improve their portrayals. This led to some memorable gay characters, but there was also this attempt to work out why they were gay. 

This was true to the time. About ten years later, I still remember the sister-in-law of a young gay man telling us how he had 7 of the 8 traits that led to homosexuality, including a domineering mother. 

That's not how it works, but that definitely would have been the prevailing theory at the time, along with icebox mothers and smothering mothers.

It is worth noting that the great gay characters they showed were all white men. Diversity beyond that was harder to come by.

That still put them ahead of other shows at the time, but there were other ways in which they really could have used some conversations with women to improve those portrayals.

As it was, none of their attempts to introduce women officers worked well (Battista was the best, and may that was because being short and Puerto Rican gave her something besides being "the girl"), wife-beating was a not uncommon punch line, and they completely missed the point on marital rape.

That was probably also very much in line with the prevailing thoughts of the time, including if you spoke to psychiatrists; the psychiatrists they spoke to were almost certainly white men.

There are things that grate. 

Of course, sometimes the issue is that you are going for a laugh, and you seek it where it isn't funny.

This is where Dietrich becomes my least favorite character. Supposed to be an incredibly intelligent and informed person, he still will often say things that are completely inappropriate, simply for their comedic value. That turned out to be something racist at Yemana surprisingly often. They often made effective jokes about Nick being assumed to be Chinese when he was Japanese-American, but too often if it was coming from Dietrich it was something reducing Nick to his Asian-ness. 

Nick was so much more than that.

Dietrich was the worst part of "The Harris Incident", which covers some important ground, and still has some solid humor. 

His jokes too often ended up being cheap.

I don't intend for this to reflect badly on the actor, Steve Landesberg; it was the material he was given. It's fitting, really; Dietrich is good at annoying that Harris and this one.

This post is not just to say that the show was not perfect and that I know it was not perfect. It is worth noting that the weaknesses came from not listening enough to the marginalized, even when there was sympathy and intent to do good. This is a common problem. Even with more understanding of how racism is part of a structure, and not just a personal feeling, we often don't do enough to work through that.

I also wanted to go over the show in general before focusing on one specific episode that has a subtle but important point, and was also very funny.

Next Friday!

Related posts:

https://sporkful.blogspot.com/2023/06/7-television-shows-to-get-to-know-me.html

A hard ask

I don't like asking for things in general.

I'm sure some of that is feminine socialization. More of it might be the specific inferiority complex that I picked up from my childhood, where I knew that we were poor and felt like I was a nuisance. 

As much progress as I have made, a lot of that lingers. "Leaning in" would be difficult.

Obviously, being in worse financial circumstances now, that is going to come up more.

There were some battles with my sisters over the years, but we have worked through that, where I can ask them for help now, though I do try and limit it. They are going to get the brunt of the garnishment, especially Julie.

There was something else that I had to do. 

Somewhere between where I knew the garnishment was coming and before it started, I was asked to help a friend with updating his resume and generating a cover letter. He said he would pay.

I did not say that he did not have to pay, but I also did not set any specifics because I was not planning on charging him.

There are a few reasons for that. Certainly, if people need help job hunting, I am generally assuming they don't have money to spare. If you're my friend I want to help you. Also, I don't have any special expertise in job hunting materials. Any ability I have with that comes from my language skills and knowledge of psychology, but the last time I was actually taught how to do it was Personal Finance class in high school, meaning I always have to check current trends when starting a new one. 

Is it even reasonable to charge for that?

(Internet research also revealed that those who do charge ask for $125 to $175 for a cover letter. That seems high for the amount of effort required.)

Another development related to Maria often asking me to do things for her. They are usually more busywork or artwork for her classroom, and says she will pay. Historically I have not pressed, and often payment was forgotten.

Lately I have been having her pay. If it is actually worth something to her, why not?

So it occurred to me that I needed to ask for payment for the cover letter.

I hated doing that so much. Even just writing about it now -- when I have already received the money and spent it -- my stomach knots up thinking about it.

It's not his fault. He agreed, sent the money quickly, and would have paid more if I had pressed. (Obviously, I did not charge $175.)

I think it was important to do. I don't like it. I may have to do more of it.

I know some people have this philosophy that everything happens for a specific reason for you... I don't. A bunch of free agents crashing around within the structures that were built by previous generations creates plenty of opportunities. Sometimes the reason is that some people are just jerks.

However, I also believe in the possibility of divine intervention, and frequent guidance, and I believe we should learn things from our experiences.

I may have an issue I need to resolve.

Daily Songs 1995 - 1999

I do still like periodically exploring songs by decade. I do still remember some of these songs from back when they were new. 

Some of these I remember from movie or television ads, or in rare cases my sisters played them.

Real McCoy and Gin Blossoms were great discoveries when I got back from my mission and back into college. "Macarena" I know because they taught us how to do it at a dorm meeting, so I got in on that one a little early, while it was still mainly in clubs.

It was fun sharing "Barbie Girl" shortly after seeing the movie. If I'd seen the movie sooner, I might have used "Push" instead of "3AM" for 1996. I did use "Closer to Fine" for 1989, but that was over a year ago now.

The big difference I found this time is that I could not manage to go through and listen to all the unfamiliar songs. I tried.

It is not necessarily that there are fewer songs that I like during the second half of the 90s, though that could be an influence. It is more that I did not have the time and patience to make the effort. Life got too hard.

I don't know if I will ever get back to reviewing bands, let alone two a week. Maybe I don't need to know what songs were from what year, and be able to recognize all the hits.

I will still always be thinking about music.

Daily Songs

8/1 “Run Away” by Real McCoy
8/2 “Til I Hear It From You” by Gin Blossoms
8/3 “Roll To Me” by Del Amitri
8/4 “Gangsta's Paradise” by Coolio
8/5 “Kiss From A Rose” by Seal
8/6 “In the House of Stone and Light” by Martin Page
8/7 “I Know” by Dionne Farris
8/8 “As I Lay Me Down” by Sophie B. Hawkins
8/9 “Good” by Better Than Ezra
8/10 “Runaway” by Janet Jackson

1996

8/11 “Macarena (Bayside Boys Mix)” by Los Del Rio
8/12 “Give Me One Reason” by Tracy Chapman
8/13 “Counting Blue Cars” by Dishwalla
8/14 “Follow You Down” by Gin Blossoms
8/15 “Name” by Goo Goo Dolls
8/16 “Only Wanna Be With You” by Hootie & the Blowfish
8/17 “3AM” by Matchbox Twenty
8/18 “One Headlight” by Wallflowers
8/19 “Breakfast At Tiffany's” by Deep Blue Something
8/20 “Missing” by Everything But The Girl

1997

8/21 “MMMBop” by Hansen
8/22 “Semi-Charmed Life” by Third Eye Blind
8/23 “Barely Breathing” by Duncan Sheik
8/24 “When You're Gone” by The Cranberries
8/25 “Sonny Came Home” by Shawn Colvin
8/26 “Barbie Girl” by Aqua
8/27 “When You Love a Woman” by Journey
8/28 “Unbreak My Heart” by Toni Braxton
8/29 “Foolish Games” by Jewel
8/30 “Where Do You Go” by No Mercy

1998

8/31 “All For You” by Sister Hazel
9/1 “Truly Madly Deeply” by Savage Garden
9/2 “One Week” by Barenaked Ladies
9/3 “The Mummer's Dance” by Loreena McKennit
9/4 “I Don't Want To Wait” by Paula Cole
9/5 “How's It Going To Be” by Third Eye Blind
9/6 “Bitter Sweet Symphony” by The Verve
9/7 “Tubthumping” by Chumbawamba
9/8 “The One I Gave My Heart To” by Aaliyah
9/9 “Closing Time: by Semisonic

1999

9/10 “Kiss Me” by Sixpence None the Richer
9/11 “Every Morning” by Sugar Ray
9/12 “Slide” by Goo Goo Dolls
9/13 “Learn To Fly” by Foo Fighters
9/14 “Fly Away” by Lenny Kravitz
9/15 “Unpretty” by TLC
9/16 “She's So High” by Tal Bachman
9/17 “Amazed” by Lonestar
9/18 “Jumper” by Third Eye Blind
9/19 “I Will Remember You” by Sarah McLachlan

You got to have friends

The post title is also the title of Episode 12 of Designing Women Season 4, when some missed child support payments reduce Mary Jo to working at Burger Guy.

Despite the absence of Suzanne and only a brief glimpse of Charlene, the episode is well-written and funny. It should have been possible to still have funny, well-written episodes after Season 5, but I digress.

There are two things that have been causing me to think more about friendship, separate from my need for more money.

One was the death of a resident in Mom's facility.

Actually, he first stood out because he was so young to be so far advanced, but he was often sitting next to Mom when I would visit. 

Jeff died about a week after Mom was going in and out of the hospital and being admitted into hospice, so there was a lot going on. I looked for him out of habit, and he wasn't there. Then there was a different name on his door, and we found the obituary.

The staff won't really tell you things about other residents (which is reasonable), but I did mention finding the obituary to one of the staff. I said that we didn't talk much but we did some because he was often sitting next to Mom when I would come by. The worker did tell me one story. Once when Mom was crying, Jeff came over to comfort her and tell her it was going to be all right. He told her "Don't tell anyone, but you're my favorite."

I wonder if that was something he would tell his kids when they were sad.

Mom's roommate has told me how much she likes "Ju-Ju", and how sweet she is. Now, it is always possible to wonder how much any of the residents are clearly remembering, but saying how sweet Mom is... that's literally what everyone says about her, with or without dementia. 

It has also been said by the daughter and son-in-law of another resident, about whom Mom has said, with a big smile, "I like him!"

So yes, there are definitely things they don't remember and can't recognize, and yet these relationships do matter. That is touching and sweet, and also sad because they are all going to disappear. I don't know how well that will be processed, or how long or how much the gap will be felt.

The other thing was this article:

https://www.insider.com/how-to-make-new-friends-as-an-adult-arranged-friendships-2023-7

The article is worth reading, but briefly, a woman who had relocated shortly after having a baby had a hard time making friends in her new area. She did many activities and met many people, but those acquaintances did not turn into friendships. Eventually -- along similar principles to arranged marriages -- she asked some women whom she thought would be good fits to be friends, and it worked out.

As she talked about this more, other woman would ask her for advice. Frequently it was not so much about meeting new friends, but changing existing friend relationships, making them more intentional.

My dearest friends mostly come from shared circumstances. Maybe we went to school together or church together, but I have gone to school and church with a lot of people that I don't cherish, even if I have nothing against them. Something clicked where we built a stronger bond.

Otherwise, often my social life has been more about my coworkers. Sometimes there are ones I really love, but then when we don't work together we often lose touch.

There have been friends that I have had for shorter times, and that was okay.

There have been friends who meant more to me than I did to them, and probably vice versa.

Often, a lot of it happens by chance, and that is probably not ideal.

As it is, I do remember suggesting to one of my friends that we make a point of talking on the phone once a month, or something like that. We liked the idea and nonetheless failed to keep it up. I don't doubt the caring, but life is busy -- sometimes in very soul-crushing ways -- and it is hard. 

I believe one factor is proximity to other people. Most of my friends have husbands or children (or both) , and I have my sisters. That means if we don't see each other for a few months, we are not bereft, but it also makes it easier to let the months go by. 

People who live alone but rely on people in bigger households may end up more isolated, especially since the pandemic started.

I don't want to lose touch with the people I love, but it takes effort. Maintaining contact may end up lower on the list of things requiring effort, given that it is only something I want to do as opposed to something I am obligated to do.

I noticed in the article that these seem to be primarily friend groups, generally of around six people. That was the exact size of my main junior high group. Do the numbers matter?

I don't have any answers here; I am just thinking about it.

It may be hampered by a recurring reluctance on my part to impose. "Hey! We should be talking more!"

However, in the course of getting together, it may not hurt to ask if they would like more. Here are our patterns; does this work for you? We can be intentional.

As for asking in general, that will come up again.

Black Music Month + For the Birds = Charlie Parker?

Honestly, I find it hard to believe that I wrote all of those Black Music Month 2023 posts and completely ignored two books about "Yardbird" (or "Bird"), Charlie Parker.

But I did.

Chasin' the Bird: Charlie Parker in California by Dave Chisholm with Pete Markowski

Kansas City Lightning: The Rise and Times of Charlie Parker by Stanley Crouch

It would have made sense if I had remembered when I was writing about jazz, but Parker is not so avant-garde that he makes my skin crawl. 

I guess I didn't remember because I had not chosen to read them as part of the planned month.

Back when I was in college, I attended a conversation between Stanley Crouch and Wynton Marsalis, and I spoke to them afterwards. I have been interested in Crouch's work ever since.

The funny part is I think I remember even back then him mentioning researching Parker; did he spend over a decade researching the book? Not impossible.

I believe what happened is that I came across Chisholm's book -- a graphic novel -- by accident, and then decided it was time to read Kansas City Lightning.

From reading the two close together, they give very different views of Parker. 

This is partly inevitable, as they cover very different time periods. Crouch focuses on Parker's early life and musical development, while Chisholm's book focuses on an established musician spending time in California (as the title suggests).

It would not be impossible for similar books about a different person to feel like a natural, connected sequence, but that is not the case with Parker's life. The "Chasin'" may be the most important part of Chisholm's title. 

Using the analogy of the blind men and the elephant, Chisholm focuses on a few different people attending a show. They already know Parker, with various levels of complication in their relationships, and none of them are completely sure that he will show. 

Parker may be unusually hard to know. Whether that is a part of his genius, or his genius is just the reason people tolerate some of his inscrutability is hard to answer. Many of the glimpses we see are fascinating, and not mean-spirited, but also not reliable.

Parker is far from the only jazz player to be like that. He might be the most interesting, but then maybe if we could know more, that would look different again.

I often say that there is always more to know. That is true not just because as I take in more information I am aware of additional holes in my information, but also because reading more than one book on a subject shows different facets and interpretations where apparent conflicts are not automatically invalid. 

The point that becomes clear to me from just these two books is that there isn't always a remedy for what you don't know. Sometimes you can't know.

At least not on this side.

Good talks

The insight mentioned in the previous post would not have happened without conversations with my sisters.

We have gotten better at this, though it took a while. 

The first time I asked anyone about anything related to Mom's condition and eventual death, the answers I received ranged from no responses to "I don't know."

More recently, we were talking about visiting. I said that they don't have to visit Mom -- she does not really know if they are or not -- but one day she will die, and we may not get much warning; they will have to decide what will help them be okay with that. 

Julie told one of her friends about that, and got the response, "Wow, Gina's really mean."

Obviously, but I was just trying to be practical.

Still more recently, we were talking about some concerns that someone else was having due to an elderly relative in bad health. I had answers. I had researched all of that and had notes. That is the "Death List".

That led to talking about notifications. I have notes on that too. There are people I will call, and people who will get e-mail or Facebook messages. One point of contact can take care of telling people from church. For one friend, we will tell her daughter so she can decide if her mother is up to it, and would benefit from knowing. Our mother isn't the only one whose health is deteriorating.

There is an order that it needs to be done in, because there are some people who will proclaim it loudly and insensitively. Other people would be hurt finding out like that, and no one needs worse pain.

As we were talking about it this time, they thought of a friend of theirs who would be hurt if she did not hear it from them. 

I had never thought of that aspect. My thoughts went to family members and friends of Mom, but what about my friends?

I mean, it's been a few years since I made the Death List anyway; it's probably due for revamping. 

I momentarily got optimistic that some of those questions that were not answered back then could be answer now.  

They still don't know. That's okay, this is hard.

Still, seeing that we do talk better now, and that we have meaningful conversations way more often than we used to, and also being reminded that we have different perspectives so they will think of things that I would not... all of that let me know that I needed to run some of these ideas about my feelings about Mom by them. 

They did not immediately get what I was asking, but that eventually led me to see that I had been thinking about it in a way that wasn't quite right either. 

I had thought and written before we talked, and I did more writing and thinking after, but that conversation was needed.

We don't do this alone.

For the birds! (reading month)

It all started when my sister noticed a new exhibit:

"Celebrating Birds of the Pacific Northwest", at the Oregon Historical Society, through November 26th, 2023

https://www.ohs.org/museum/exhibits/celebrating-birds-of-the-pacific-northwest.cfm 

It's just photos of local birds, but we like birds and we like OHS, so we were definitely going to go.

It occurred to me, though, that I might get more enjoyment out of it if I read this other book on my reading list first: 

Must-See Birds of the Pacific Northwest: 85 Unforgettable Species, Their Fascinating Lives, and How to Find Them by Sarah Swanson and Max Smith

I know that was a good selection because one of the first photos I saw was of a Green Heron -- featured in the book -- and I recognized it instantly. Previously I had not been familiar with it. 

Also common between the book and the exhibit, while being new to me, were Townsend's Warblers, Lazuli Buntings, and Tundra Swans. They are all now in the spreadsheet of local places where one might see them.

There were some gorgeous photos. One might think that the Wood Duck was over-represented; whereas each other species appears in one shot, there are three of the Wood Duck. However, they are really good pictures. One shows the bird from the back, on the water, with wings spread, and it's almost abstract.

So I do recommend the exhibit, and it goes well with that book, which is available through the Washington County Library System.

However, I am the type to get easily pulled into things. I happened to remember these two other bird books that I also ended up reading before we went to the exhibit:

Gifts of the Crow: How Perception, Emotion, and Thought Allow Smart Birds to Behave Like Humans by John Marzluff and Tony Angell

The Thing With Feathers: The Surprising Lives of Birds and What They Reveal About Being Human by Noah Strycker 

The crow book is strongly grounded in neurology. That higher level of difficulty may not appeal to everyone, but Corvids are so charming that it creates a lot of appeal.

Strycker is a Eugene native, and his book is a collection of essays focusing on one trait, and one bird species used to explore it. Some of the essays are quite moving. 

While I was reading those, I remembered one other book. I did not get to read it until after we saw the exhibit, but I had already checked it out by then.

Feathers: The Evolution of a Natural Miracle by Thor Hanson

Hanson is also a resident of the Pacific Northwest, though a bit further North. He explores the design and features and functions of the feather, which is quite miraculous. 

It may have been the best of the books.

I don't know how much I was thinking of these other books while at the exhibit, but they were interesting and reading them closely together does seem to help the information settle in my mind.

This is why I also watched a webinar on the electric grid and bird issues:

"Birds and Transmission: West Region Webinar" by Audubon Rockies

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=07yE_8imVjA

(This was less bird-centric, but relates to sustainability which is important to me.)

However, if I am going to mention bird books I have read, I really need to mention one more:

Peterson Guide to Bird Identification --- in 12 Steps by Steve N.G. Howell and Brian L. Sullivan (2018)

Normally field guides are for a specific area and the expected species, but this is going back a step before, or maybe a step forward, to help you use those field guides more effectively. 

All of which may beg the question, am I a bird watcher?

No. I do not go out looking for birds. I do look for everything when I am out and about, and I want to know what I see. Therefore, when a Wilson's Warbler appeared in our yard and I could not recognize it, we made a trip to the Audubon Society on Cornell where a big part of my motivation was finding out what that little yellow bird was. (And it worked!)

Reading about those 85, they were all ones that could be seen in Oregon, but many of them could be seen right around here. I started not wanting to forget, which is why I started adding it to a spreadsheet. I thought that maybe I should start tracking at least the ones in the spreadsheet down.

That is probably a bit less than half of them, because some would be much harder to find, but I have about 40 that should be very doable, and yet...

I can see myself becoming totally obsessive about this. I don't really need that. 

I am not going to do anything with it right away.

For another point of interest, one of the Must-See birds was the Sooty Shearwater, which has a long migratory route. I started wondering if those were the birds we saw when we were on Phillip Island for the Penguin Parade. Apparently, though, those were Short-Tailed Shearwaters, which do sometimes end up on the Oregon Coast, but less commonly.

There are ways in which the world is both big and small.

The next mourning

Getting back to CODA... the title is an acronym for child of deaf adults. These particular adults have two children, a son who is also deaf, and the protagonist, Ruby, who hears and who also loves to sing.

One of the scenes that stuck with me was the family attending a choir performance. A friend tells them that Ruby is good, and they can see other people being moved, and they can clap when they see the other people clapping, but there is so much that they miss.

It occurred to me that they could have had someone signing as an accommodation, but it felt terrible to me that they could not share this important aspect of Ruby's life.

Then, that is not completely true either. Ruby's father is a fan of rap, loving the bass lines. Later, he is able to feel the vibrations of Ruby's singing by putting his fingers along her throat, and she does sign a song for them during her Berklee audition. 

Beyond that, they are a really connected family who love and support each other, as well as annoying each other in very normal ways. As the one who can hear, Ruby has a lot of responsibility, which grates on her, but has also given her confidence and growth.

It appears to have been the right film at the right time.

https://sporkful.blogspot.com/2023/08/black-music-month-2023-serendipity.html

Incidentally, I still cry at movies pretty easily, especially with home and family topics. There isn't that feeling of being overwhelmed to the point of hysteria, but the tears are still there.

Some of my frustration with my mother had been that I felt like she never really understood me. At least that was how I perceived it. 

There has actually been a lot of increased understanding there as recently as Saturday. It does still feel like it can be hard to explain. On the plus side, most of it ends up relating more to my father, which helps with some of the guilt.

I mentioned long ago how my sisters and I tend to over-explain things. We realized once while talking together that it was because of our father. He was easily offended so we would try and make it clear that we were not blaming or insulting or anything like that, but it never worked. That was because he was so determined that nothing could ever be his fault, and he was a jerk. 

Mom was not like that, but I still never felt understood by her. Some of that was probably that we were in fact pretty different, but that had its own similarities. 

Mom obsessed about cleaning the way I do about reading. There was a level on which I thought part of the problem with her not getting me was related to her not being interested in the intellectual, but it's not that she was unintelligent either. 

Those were very different interests, but I see now some similarity in how it functioned for us. I have kind of thought (and still do) that as I gain knowledge about everything, that is how I will be able to understand and fix things. That's how I try to establish safety and comfort. 

For Mom, housekeeping was something she knew how to deal with. She could not make her husband be kind or respectful or faithful, and she had limited control over her children, but she was an amazing housekeeper. I think it gave her a similar assurance. I can't blame her for that.

I know she worried about being stupid, and about not being a good mother, so she would hear those things even if they weren't being said; the same way I heard her nagging me for having a cluttered room and being fat more than she actually said it. 

That made it hard to face the lack I felt from her; it didn't make her a bad mother, but it related to her mothering of me. Then if it did come down to the intellectual difference, what an incredible jerk I would be to hold that against her.

She would want things from me that were hard to give, and not seem to acknowledge that. A lot of that was shortly after coming home from my mission and then after college, when I was newly working and the bulk of my money was going to family needs. It felt wrong to resent it, and I wanted to help, but it was so frustrating. 

Then, I remember once she was mad I was leaving on a vacation; I filled up three yard debris containers trying to get those stupid butterfly bushes (never plant those) into some semblance of order, and it wasn't enough.

The refrain that would come up in various family arguments would be whether I needed endless thanks or praise, which again, makes it sound like I am impossible, but honestly, there weren't many thank you's or compliments. Shouldn't there have been some?

But we were not a family that did that. We didn't really even say "hello" or "goodbye" as people came and went.

I knew that Mom's philosophy was that you correct your kids, but that they should know the good stuff about themselves and you don't need to tell them that. I also knew that was pretty common, and thought about it when observing her family. 

There's a limit to what you can know watching other people -- even extended family -- but it occurred to me that there was so much evident warmth and love that maybe they didn't state those things vocally, and everyone just knew.

My problem was that I didn't know. 

There was a level at which I liked myself and didn't want to be anyone different. I don't know how that happened, but I am grateful for it. 

There was also a deep sense of there being something wrong with me that I didn't know how to fix, except by trying to fix everything for everyone else first. Then maybe I would be worthy, except not if I didn't lose weight.

That mostly came from Dad, though certainly others contributed. 

The understanding I wanted from Mom was for her to fix that.

While I can see how thank yous and compliments could feel like they would help with that, I don't know that any compliment could have been big enough.  

I know she loved me and was proud of me, even if I didn't feel it. I don't think she could have fixed that on her own, and I can make peace with that.

I understand that might sound kind of horrific, but I swear I felt a weight lift off of me when I did realize it, like maybe the compression was removed on a few vertebrae.

We are not ideal people -- certainly no one with the last name Harris is -- but I believe in healing.

I also believe that emotional intelligence is worth pursuing.

Related posts:

https://sporkful.blogspot.com/2023/08/more-about-my-mother.html

https://sporkful.blogspot.com/2023/08/unlimited-carry-on.html

Black Music Month 2023: Final Thoughts

I can't help but feel like using that "final thoughts" is setting me up to have subsequent thoughts. 

As it is, there are things that I know I could include with this reading segment (which ended up spanning much more than a month), but I am not because I think they will go with other things better. 

Right to Rock: The Black Rock Coalition and the Cultural Politics of Race by Maureen Mahon
Black Diamond Queens: African American Women and Rock and Roll by Maureen Mahon
Rip It Up: The Black Experience in Rock 'n' Roll by Kandia Crazy Horse
Blues People: Negro Music in White America by Amiri Baraka 

First of all, let me say how much I enjoyed discovering Maureen Mahon, especially in the way it happened. I read Right to Rock (2004) which came from her student experiences, and then saw references to Black Diamond Queens (2020) and decided to read that. 

I enjoyed her writing anyway, but in that order, seeing someone still preparing for their career, and then more established, and knowing also that they are fairly young and that there could be new works coming... that was really cool. Often as I am reading something I wonder what they would think of later developments, but here there is the chance of continuing to learn.

These last four books are bound by a common thread. It would be easy to call it music snobbery, but there is more to it than that.

Chronologically, it would start with Blues People, where there is a divide between which Black people appreciate blues versus jazz, or other types of music. It is roughly a matter of highbrow or lower class. Blues can be very sexual, and so polite company might feel awkward about it, but there was an influence from what was perceived as white taste and respectability.

Moving forward, when we get into rock, then there is at times this sense that rock is for white people. Yes, white people are notorious for automatically classifying music as R&B or Hip Hop if the performers are Black, but sometimes that was reflected back at Black rockers, even though it was a craft that white people stole from Black people anyway.

Now, there is an interesting class distinction there too. Transcending race, "garage rock" requires a garage, or somewhere a beginning band can practice and play and be loud, which is easier to find when you have more space.

Then, of course (especially in Mahon's work) there is the sexism and misogyny and misogynoir that women get when they are trying to succeed in a "man's" world.

Those are not the only factors; one things that seems to be a real obstacle to acceptance is being too different from the other contemporary music. Having some similarities but putting a new spin on them can work well, but some sounds were so different they were outright rejected; a few years later they might have worked.

Often, though, race and gender were obstacles to success, or were held against musicians socially, and generally made life more difficult.

Obviously, tastes vary, and that's fine. There may still be great value in listening again, and examining that tendency to reject.

Sometimes it is racist or classist or sexist, or even all of the above.

We don't need that.

Unlimited carry-on

This one is going to be harder to explain. I may have to spread it out over multiple posts.

I think I mentioned earlier this series of dreams where my mother was gradually becoming more impaired and then disappearing, with more detail about her disappearance. They were getting progressively more horrible. That seems like pretty clear symbolism that as her dementia progresses, I get a clearer picture of that loss. 

There was recently a new dream that was much more positive. I was taking my mother back to see her family, and trying to remember my way to one aunt's apartment. This particular aunt died shortly after our last visit. Just as I remembered where to go, we got to a lobby and an elevator door opened and my aunt was there. 

I had not been worried about my aunt being dead, but I had been worried about whether Mom would recognize her and be happy to see her. They instantly embraced and were very happy and that was okay.

Yes, fairly clear symbolism there too, but this is good, and it corresponds to my beliefs, which still does not mean that event will be all happy feelings, I know.

One reason I hedged on accepting that meaning for the dream is that I was also traveling with my sisters and our father. 

Now, you can argue that my sisters and I are on this journey together, so it makes sense that they are there; not so for Dad! What was he doing there?

Another frequent dream occurrence that I don't believe I have written about is where I am trying to make my way into or home from work (and over a decade later, it is usually Intel), but I have my mother and I am trying to drag her along to my cubicle or get her situated, and it makes things harder.

She has not been my primary responsibility for a little over three years, but she was for a long time, and she still takes up a lot of my worry (and the hospice calls do come when I am working most of the time) so, yes, there is a way in which I am still carrying her with me.

I realized that my father is still always with me. I have made a lot of progress, but the impact of the years and the ways they have shaped my path are all still there.

This is why they call it baggage; it travels with you. Sometimes it is heavy.

For review, previously a lot of my baggage was this sense from before I can remember that there was something wrong with me, along with a sense of needing to try and fix everything and take care of everybody. I eventually was able to attribute that to misplaced responsibility for my father's own unhappiness with... himself, but it was always blamed on everyone else; I just took it more personally.

The way I dealt with that was trying not to feel anything, but there would be times (mostly during movies) when I could sense this deep pain, and it felt like it would just destroy me if I let it all out.

Sorting that out was important, and it has led to me feeling things more, without stuffing them down. This leaves room to feel other things.

What I am remembering now is my big frustration with my mother, from before all this, when her mind was still sharp. 

I'll feel more guilt for anything I say there, but I believe in healing, and I believe it requires truth. 

However, we have spent so much time on my father that I can wait and start with my mother next time.

Well, actually, I will probably start with a movie.

Black Music Month 2023: Other viewings

Let me start by saying that even though in last week's post I said I would probably have to give up on those last two movies for now, I was still trying to come up with strategies so I could somehow get them in this round.

It's just not going to happen.

Besides that, I got to see many cool things that I enjoyed a lot.

Slash: Raised on the Sunset Strip (2014)
Paris is Burning (1990)
Unsung: The Story of the Sylvers (2011)
Summer of Soul (...Or, When the Revolution Could Not Be Televised) (2021)
Reggae in a Babylon (1978)

Actually, I didn't enjoy Reggae in a Babylon all that much. The sound quality wasn't that great, and it didn't seem to have a strong point of view. What it did have was original footage from an important time, so there is an importance to it regardless.

The others all filled different places, but I liked each of them so much!

That previous post focused on serendipity, but the factors that made that serendipity possible were my having a lot of interests and frequently checking on those disparate areas.

(Actually, I believe a big help to my "book sense" is that I will periodically look though my entire to-read list, keeping the options fresh in my mind and allowing new associations to pop up.)

Anyway, The Sylvers and Slash both came up as suggestions on Youtube because of other things I had watched. I know the algorithms frequently lead toward white supremacy. Since I am often checking on things for research rather than taste, I also get a lot of suggestions that are irrelevant (no more jazz now!). However, sometimes things work out.

Slash was just a lot of fun. It certainly gives an idea of someone who must do music, but also it shows a whole Hollywood world of his childhood that I had no idea about. There is history of the band, but it's more than that.

Unsung is a whole series of episodes about various bands, many of which seem interesting. I hope to get to more eventually, but currently I have only watched two.

I had mentioned watching the one on Lisa Lisa and Cult Jam in a different post, but I knew about it because I had kept getting prompted to watch the episode on The Sylvers, singers of (among other songs) "Boogie Fever". 

Actually, when I combined Black Music Month plus Pride Month last year, as much as I knew Sylvester's music, I did not know him. My awareness of the artists who made the music was practically nonexistent until MTV (unless my parents played their records; that is a limited group). It has been enriching to learn more about music that is often so familiar.

That was one of the most intriguing things about Summer of Soul. It was great seeing the old footage, but especially touching to see new footage of people watching the old footage. Yes, that included Marilyn McCoo and Billy Davis Jr. seeing old footage of their performance. More than that, there was someone who had attended the concert, and remembered, but also kind of didn't trust the memory. Was that real? And it was. 

That moment was just really beautiful.

Part of looking at history is tracing the path between it and the present. I have been looking back at things that are peripheral in my memory and bringing them forward. 

I remembered reading a review for Paris is Burning back in the day, and maybe even knowing there was a connection to the "Vogue" song. With the contemporary vilification of drag and seeing occasional references to Willi Ninja, it was just time to watch it.

It is easy to just have this impression of drag as garish queens. That is one cross-section, but there was so much more to it. Your drag could be military or a student, or just anything else that you wanted to try on. There was definitely a competitive aspect, and in that way I guess shows like Drag Race make sense. What stayed with me the most was the vulnerability of some of the house members that we got to know better, and then learning that they often didn't live very long. 

Paris was probably the least musical of the movies; the music was there, but not as much the point.

The points it did have were good, and ones we might be getting back to fairly soon.