Monday, September 24, 2012

On 'On Writing'


-->
My father-in-law sent me ‘On Writing’ by Stephen King early this summer. I told him I would read it right away. Unfortunately, I lied. To be perfectly honest, I was intimidated by Stephen King and still am. He is a legend in the writing community. Heck, I still remember a Saturday Night Live skit where they were interviewing him (Jon Lovitz playing him) and during the interview he was typing away at a typewriter! It is still funny to watch, and still intimidating.

I finally got to reading it this month. What can I say except I am still intimidated. My favorite part of this book has to be the first part called CV. That stands for curriculum vitae or as we lay people like to say, resume. This was the autobiographical part of the book and gives us a view into his childhood and early adulthood. One of the few things Stephen King and I have in common is that we both have a hard time remembering childhood. His did sound a lot rougher than mine, growing up with a single mother. This seemed to toughen him up and give him perspective. Some thing different between us is he knew he wanted to be a writer from an early age. I was in my mid-thirties before I decided to take a crack at it.  Some of his stories and advice about submitting to magazines as a stepping stone to getting published seems quaint and outdated.  The past five years has brought a strange new publishing world, and we are in the wild west still finding out what works for publishing.  One nice thing is he does not say anything about marketing, and he never will have to say anything about that, his name sells the books.

The second section is called the Toolbox. It talks about the tools writers need to write well. These are useful tools, such as grammar, usage, less is usually more, tell your version of the truth, and read. This last piece of advice is the easiest for me to follow. I love reading, it is the easiest part of this job! Less is more means being conservative with your writing, add too much and you will bore the reader.  Being truthful in my writing is also easy for me because I am a painfully truthful person.  My writing friend, Chris Godsoe, recently wrote a blog about lying to your readers.  Yes, in writing fiction you lie, but you need to do it truthfully or the readers will not buy the story.  

The third section is called On Writing. This was the hardest section to get through. It would be great if I could do all the things he suggests. Some of these are having a writing room where I could shut the door when I am working on a first draft or write two thousand (or ten pages) a day, even on holidays and birthdays. It is just not possible right now. If that makes me a lightweight, so be it.

I do have to say that the second half of this book feels uneven. That can easily be forgiven after reading the last section called On Living. During the writing of this book Mr. King was run over by a van driven by a complete idiot, a person who should not have the privilege of driving. He probably is still terrorizing the roads of Maine today. It is a miracle that Mr. King was not killed, and that he can walk now after this horrible accident.  He often displays candor but never as much as when he says “...it occurs to me that I have nearly been killed by a character right out of one of my own novels.  It’s almost funny.”

I cannot help but call him Stephen “the” King.  Like J.K. Rowling, he had done what many of us would like to do.  He is living the dream.  After that accident, he could have retired and not written another word and he would still be a legend.  But he healed and has since then written a ton according to his bibliography.  That probably does not include the things that he is still knocking around in his head.  

When I was a teenager, I read a lot of his work:  The Shining, The Dead Zone, Firestarter, Cujo, Misery, and The Stand, just to name a few.  But his first published novel, Carrie, really resonated with me.  He really captured teenage anxiety and anger very well.  While I was not made fun of in high school, I was ignored, I still could relate to Carrie’s life.  Characters you can relate to (especially as a teenager) can get you into a lifetime of reading.  

Lastly, I should say that he gives the best and most unusual description of what good writing is...”Telepathy, of course.” If it is done well, writing communicates what the writer is thinking to the brain of the reader.  There is some translation, but that gives the reader the chance to flex their imagination and with good writing you give them a universe to visualize your story.


Monday, September 17, 2012

He's A Mac, She's a PC, and I Really Don't Care...


Technology is wonderful. It gives us so many convenient ways to communicate. With all these convenient methods comes opinion. This computer is better than that one. That one may be better but it is really expensive. It goes on and on. It becomes like politics where people seem to have a party in mind. Like politics, when it comes to computers, I am an independent.

Some people are in the cult of Apple while others are in the cult of Microsoft. Often they say PC. But really aren't all home computers personal computers? There is also the outlier, Unix. Many don't know know or understand it but it is becoming the latest in smartphone and tablet technology. I am writing this on our new tablet. I am trying to get used to the touch screen but I still love and miss my keyboard. This is a test for me and my mobile writing ability.

A few days ago, I accidentally dropped our "Mini-me", and which is our little name for our net book. That little computer was where I wrote most of my blogs and book and where I was working (slowly) on the next one. In dropping Mini-me, I a broke its screen and the therefore its mobility. We can still use it but we need to hook it up to a monitor. So here I am outside while my daughter rides her tricycle around trying to write this blogs on our new nexus tablet. It is a cute tablet and like mini me we have christened it “Tab.”

Tab has a jelly bean operating system which is based on Unix. Unix is family of open (free) software that anyone can edit and make their own. It does take an extensive knowledge of computer language skills that most people don't have, and like me. Our computer expert in our house is my hubby. He has our home computer and mini-me running Ubuntu Operating System, which is based on Unix and as a lay person, I can say it runs quite nicely. I would put my hubby in the Microsoft /Unix group which sort of makes him an independent like me. Except he does have a rather intense loathing of Apple.

To be a true computer independent, and you need to see that each system has its good points and it's bad points. To say that one is superior to another, and which the cult members often do, is silly because there is often a counter argument.

I think a persons preference can be skewed by a bad experience. My hubby's distaste for Apple came from trying to write a thesis on a Mac that gave him a whole lot of trouble. I am not crazy about Gateway to computers because of a bad experience I had in college. Just like a liberal getting mugged can make you a conservative, a bad computer experience can make you love one type over another. I still like to call Gateways the Gateway to Hell. Do they even sell those anymore?

Back in my previous working life, I worked in science. Let me tell you, when it comes to computers and scientists, very few of them are true independents. They are biased to their systems, thank you very much. In working for different scientists, I have had to work with Macs, Windows and even Unix. All had their good points and bad points and that has reinforced my computer independence. I will work with what you give me, unless it is a Gateway. Just kidding. :)

Monday, September 10, 2012

I Reject The Beauty Is Pain Myth


Women are supposed to be beautiful. Evolutionarily we are to attract mates and so we work on our appearance to make it pleasing to potential mates. Then we will have offspring who will continue our genetic line. But in doing so do we really need to hurt ourselves for that mate?

If you don't think it hurts to be a woman try wearing a corset or high heels. Either you cannot breathe or you have to adjust your balance so you will not fall over with every step you take. These items are supposed to “enhance your silhouette” or some such nonsense. As long as we buy into these lies, and buy these products this myth will persist.

I have a daughter, whom I adore. I do not want her to suffer to be beautiful. The thing is, she already is beautiful. Why try to improve on perfection? I will try to instill in her a sense of self esteem and help her realize that some of the most hurtful people out there say they want to try to help. Her friends who make fun of her, the friend who steals a boy she likes, we women and girls can be very cruel.

A good example of that lately is Gabby Douglas, the gymnastics Olympian. She was criticized for her hair during what should have been a high point of her life. She is a wonderful example to our daughters and others just want to cut her down. Do you know what is done to straighten hair? It can be astoundingly painful. Watch the Chris Rock documentary “Good Hair.”

As for me? I will continue to wear sandals and flats instead of heels (usually) and if I do wear heals, believe me, they are comfortable. I am usually in jeans (comfort) and a t-shirt. If I want to dress it up I add lip gloss and a “nice” shirt. I do wear makeup, just not everyday. It is better for my skin. My hair is wash and wear unless I decide I have the time to do it and that will take as little of time as possible. My hair stylist, Joe, makes sure it will work that way. There are times I do get more dolled up for a date with my hubby or going to the Opera with my Mom. Just not everyday and I try to keep things as comfy as possible.

And my hubby? He does not seem to mind. He wants to be comfortable as well. Not quite the metro-sexual, and I do not mind that, either.

I will sign off with the famous Billy Crystal SNL character “Fernando” saying very tongue-in-cheek “It is better to look good, than to feel good.” Well, that may be how some women see it but I would rather comfortably laugh than try to compete in something that you will never win.

Monday, September 3, 2012

Anti-Intellectualism 201: Historically Speaking, We Revise, Revise, Revise.



Facebook is fun. You get to keep in touch with friends, family and possibly meet people who are kind of like you. You share interests, laughs and most definitely opinions. Those memes are cute.  They usually give us a good laugh. Then opinions are thrown in, then political opinions, and gentle (and not so gentle) insults are given and received. Then Facebook is not so fun. I got into a FB fight about health care recently. Boy, what a mistake that was. The guy kept using blogs as sources. I give everyone permission NOT to use my blog as a source. Blogs are opinions, like memes.

Those memes are like the new t-shirt or bumper-sticker. They boil down an opinion to a phrase, sentence or paragraph. The picture below is of bumper-sticker you can get from the good people at zazzle.com and I have seen this meme around Facebook.


I would like to say definitively, no, President George W. Bush, I do not miss you. I do not miss much about the economic mess that was your presidential career. People who do miss you are revising their memories and cutting and pasting your screw ups to President Obama. Hence the above meme. I am not saying President Obama has done a perfect job, but he had to steer this country away from an economic catastrophe. That is not an easy thing to do.

The word revise is an interesting one. Dictionary.com defines it as:

re·vise

   [ri-vahyz] Show IPA verb, re·vised, re·vis·ing, noun, verb (used with object)
  1. to amend or alter: to revise one's opinion.
  1. to alter something already written or printed, in order to make corrections, improve, or update: to revise a manuscript.
  2. British . to review (previously studied materials) in preparation for an examination.

My husband (since he is British) often uses the last definition and that throws me off a bit. I think of our interpretation of history is more like the first and second definitions. Not usually in a good way.

It is said that history is written by the victors. Well in our democracy, I would say that history is revised by both political parties until you cannot remember what the truth happened to be. To improve the history till it fits your beliefs.

Remember President Reagan? He is now the banner boy and meme star for conservatives. I find it rather funny because Reagan would be considered a moderate in today's political landscape. He did do an AMNESTY for illegal aliens. That would be political suicide today in the Republican Party. But never mind, he is a conservative god.

Remember President Clinton? He is also a moderate in todays political landscape. He did sign the repeal of the Glass-Steagall act which then helped the country to build an economic banking bubble. The act separated commercial and investment banking. I think that did fuel budget to our first budget surplus in a long time. Then George W. Bush spent it all and threw us right back into the red, then, surprise surprise, the financial crisis happened. Should have Clinton not repealed Glass-Steagall? Well, all we can do is reenact the provisions that would separate commercial and investment banking again.

I think Clinton's intentions were good (he was always concerned about the economy), but we always think that mistakes of the past (the Great Depression) will not happen again because we are so much smarter now. That thinking put us in a Great Recession. My point is that Clinton was not so left-wing and I think his signing this (as well as Don't Ask Don't Tell) puts him in a territory that seems to be no-man's land now.

Life, history and politics are always more complicated than what can be put on a postcard, bumper-sticker or meme. To intelligently vote, you need to do research, lots of it, and then make up your mind for yourself.

Let us all try to interpret history as accurately as possible. Historical revisionism is like any other fraud. One that comes to mind is faking results in science. It may help one person get fake kudos and recognition but it holds back what the real result is because it is not reproducible. Revising history helps one person or party but it holds us all back.

Speaking of fraud, have you heard that there is a movement of Representatives running for the Senate that want to repeal the 17th Amendment? Leaving all that decision making to our state legislatures. I don't trust my state legislature (of Arizona) to much of anything so why would I want to give them my vote for senator. This is yet another example of historical revisionist thinking. The reason for the 17th Amendment was to take away the rampant corruption from the process.

I am an independent because of all the corruption I find in both parties. Why would I “trust” the state legislature to this important decision? Let those rich politicians do the thinking for me? NO WAY!

I actually started a Facebook political “discussion” about this very topic. This idea was defended by my Uncle David as resembling the Electoral College. I am also not crazy about that idea from our Founding Fathers. But it does seem that this process is not too corrupt. That we know of... Actually we got some very interesting ideas such as 6 year single terms for Presidents (no more lame ducks) or go the whole FDR route of no term limits. I like the first idea, as for the second one I agree with my friend Joni who said “Too royal.” My cousin John thought it would be a good idea for the loser of the election to get “2nd place” and become the Vice-President. I then joked that we would have a do nothing executive branch. It is a good idea, except for all the divisiveness. This actually happens in other countries where there is a President (1st place) and a Prime Minister (2nd place). Zimbabwe comes to mind. It does not work, due to the rampant corruption...

We all dread the political season, except for those who seem to revel in it. I for one cannot wait till November 7th, 2012. The day after the election.

Then a few days ago a friend posted this meme of a poster which is a representation of our discussion above:


I like it (along with 24 other people) and completely agree: Then after 15 shares and 4 positive comments, we get this from someone who I will not share their name but will guess that they are a GOP operative:

“There can be no debate if only a war will decide the victor. Politics and voting was designed to stop killing wars when word wars fail to get results. Like gay marriage. Without politics and voting, bullets would be used. We are polarized and it will never change. Why do you think Democrats want socialism under a dictator? If they were honest, they could never win. If they were open to dialog, they would never win. So it must be low life because republicans would never win. If the plan is domination why have a dialog? Dems want domination nothing else. So names, Lies, and underhandedness is the only way... who on the left can have an honest dialog? Exactly. No one. So ... capitulate or fire with fire.”

What can you say to that? I would say “This way to the loony bin.” But I don't think that person would appreciate humor. That person is ITCHING for a fight. So I said nothing.

So, I have to add this, because if a friend of mine put that out there I would at the very least have to do this:


But I am not going to, because everyone is entitled to their opinions. That does not mean I won't think they are a GOP operative that are desperately trying to shake that etch-a-sketch.