Elegantly Random

Hollywood has TOTALLY killed the dream I dreamed.

I love musicals. I grew up with them. I literally cannot remember a time in my life when I didn't sing songs from musicals. My mom has a rich musical background as both a performer and a musician, so it was second nature to her. My parents started taking me to see plays, musicals and operas in college and community theaters as soon as I was old enough to sit through them. My mom used to record movies for me when they aired on television, so I could watch them over and over till the VHS tapes stopped working properly. We always had a vast library of musical soundtracks. Lots of these musicals I had never seen, so I had the fun of listening to the music and imagining what the staging would look like. I have a great memory from when I was about 7 years old, and the filmed stage production of Peter Pan starring Mary Martin was aired on television for the first time I was ever able to see, and our whole family gathered in the living room to watch it together. I was so DELIGHTED, because I'd been listening to the cast recording since I was a tiny tot. And those of you who know me know that I've done my fair share of stage performing myself. I LOVE MUSICALS.

Having grown up obsessed with musicals and having probably 50 or more of them utterly memorized, I've been really disappointed with their fall from grace in the film industry. Movie musicals have been out of fashion for a long time now, and there are lots of popular theories about why this is. It would have been so much fun to grow up in the days when musicals won Best Picture at the Oscars year after year, instead of being an rarity like when Chicago won the award in 2002. In the past 20 years of cinema, I can think of only a handful of musicals that have even come out, and so few of them that I actually thought were decent to good. Rent was okay - at least they brought back most of the original cast, but the adaptation was on the corny side. Moulin Rouge, Hairspray and Sweeney Todd, along with the aforementioned Chicago, are the only three that come to mind that were really good, in my humble little musician's opinion. It's sad. If you count animated films, then you could add several more to the list - but animated films have always celebrated music, and I really don't think they count in the same vein as a "musical."

You're probably thinking, "But there have been lots more musicals in the past several years in addition to the ones you named!" True. But I was listing the GOOD ones. Most of the musicals that have come out have been on the meh-to-terrible end of the spectrum. Dreamgirls. Mamma Mia! And worst of all, Phantom of the Opera. Hooo-boy. Talk about a wasted opportunity. It was beautiful to look at, but just. not. good. Phantom's a great example of the problem plaguing movie musicals today - star power triumphing over talent in terms of casting.

It's true that filmmakers have always considered star power and ticket sales when casting a film adaptation of a musical. After all, Audrey Hepburn famously won the starring role in My Fair Lady over Julie Andrews, a star of the stage who had played the role on Broadway for years to much acclaim, but who was unknown in the film industry. In order to make Audrey work for the film, a voice double had to be hired - the very famous Marni Nixon, who also sang for Natalie Wood in West Side Story and Deborah Kerr in The King and I. You could argue that the tactic worked - all three of those films were nominated for Best Picture at the Oscars, and the first two I mentioned won the award. Both Natalie Wood and Deborah Kerr picked up Best Actress nominations, but neither won, while Audrey Hepburn wasn't even nominated. The winner in her year? Julie Andrews...for Mary Poppins (which has to be my favorite Oscar story of all time).

So in terms of critical acclaim, sure - sometimes you can cast a more-famous actor and the movie still does well. It worked in Chicago. Bebe Neuworth wasn't cast in the film, though she won the Tony for her portrayal of Velma Kelly in the Broadway revival - and Catherine Zeta-Jones did an incredible job and rightly won herself an Oscar. But the reason that worked? All the stars of Chicago could sing. Every. Single. One. And not only could they sing - they were appropriately cast in their respective roles. Another recent favorite of mine was Sweeney Todd, which is an interesting example, but in that case, instead of trying to replicate the feel of the Broadway experience and the big voices who made the roles famous, director Tim Burton went an entirely different route and created his own look and feel for the movie and also for the singing - and it worked.

Which brings me back to The Phantom of the Opera. I would argue that the film is almost one hundred percent miscast. The only person who was able to hold his own with the music is Patrick Wilson, who played Raoul. But Patrick Wilson is also a stage veteran, so really, it makes sense. The rest of the cast is completely off. Emmy Rossum was lovely to look at, and her voice had a purity that was nice enough, but she simply lacked the chops to sing the role. Minnie Driver didn't even try - they had to dub her entire performance. And Gerard Butler, while intensely sexy and appealing, was just one thousand percent wrong for The Phantom. His rock-style vocals were absolutely second rate, a far cry from the now-legendary Michael Crawford performance. Clearly, the filmmakers spent scads of money on the film's look and feel, but it flopped critically and at the box office - and it shouldn't have. It's one of the most successful stage musicals in all of Broadway history. Had they been true to the score, I believe the movie would have succeeded. The star power shouldn't have been in the actors' names, it should have been the musical performances - and the filmmakers totally missed the mark.

And the next movie poised to aim big and fall short? The upcoming film adaption of Les Miserables, the cast of which is being filled as we speak with BIG NAMES. But CAN THEY SING? That is the question. And to be more specific, is their vocal talent on par with the score? I'm guessing director Tom Hooper isn't going to make an "edgy" Les Mis in the vein of Burton's Sweeney Todd - so riddle me why on Earth someone like Russell Crowe would be set to star as Javert, the police officer obsessed with capturing Jean Valjean. Who will be played, FYI, by Hugh Jackman, the only part of the cast that currently makes any sense. Hugh Jackman is a very talented stage actor and singer. Though he's 44, he somehow seems young for the role made famous by Colm Wilkinson. But I'd say he's more than likely capable of playing the role, all in all, if they can age him properly. But Russell Crowe? I'm pretty skeptical. And please, PLEASE don't get me started on the travesty that nearly was - Taylor Swift almost landing the role of Eponine. OMG. The HORROR OF IT. It makes me throw up in my mouth a little bit. Not much better? Amanda Seyfried as Cosette. I have seen Mamma Mia! and it wasn't good. It pains me to see one of the best musicals of the modern era about to be demolished on the silver screen, just like its sister The Phantom, all in the name of STAR POWER!

Nothing would delight me more than to be wrong about this, because I would dearly love a good Les Mis. But I've learned not to get my hopes up. If I'm wrong, I will throw a party and go see the movie three times, but I'm usually not wrong about these things, unfortunately. And all I have to say is, Amanda Seyfried is NO Audrey Hepburn. 

The entitled consumer.

I'm back from haiatus, friends! And what better way to get my feet wet again than with a timely rant? I would like to talk for a little bit about something that's really been peeving me lately: the entitled consumer. Entitlement is quickly shooting to the top of my Most Awful Human Traits list, and nowhere is it more evident and prevalent than on the internet.

As many of you know, I work in communications, and I spend a lot of time on the internet. For the most part, I'm a big believer in social media and I tout the pros of online interaction with friends and strangers on a daily basis to earn my keep. Social media is awesome. The internet is awesome. But sometimes, it can also become a catch-all for some really unappealing human behavior - especially when it comes to entitlement and consumer griping.

Recently, I feel like half the things I read in people's Facebook streams are about how much they hate this or that business, organization, or website. And not just how much they loathe these businesses, but how these businesses are mistreating and abusing them. I understand that people like to share their experiences, good and bad, with their network of friends, and I do it too. It's just that lately it really feels like more than just complaining or "having a bad day"-type whining. It's this whole consumer attitude of, "How dare this company do X to me, personally, and wreck my first-world life?" And I have to say...I'm sick of it. 

For example, how about the whole Netflix/Qwikster debacle? First Netflix raised prices. While I agree that the way this change in pricing was announced was less than smooth, asking people to pay a few more bucks per month for an unbelievably underpriced service seemed fairly reasonable to me. But the people, how they moaned and groaned. Then, when the company announced it would split its DVD and streaming services into separate companies (Netflix and the unfortunately named Qwikster), it was anarchy. People swarmed the interwebs to let all their fans and followers know that THEY WEREN'T GONNA TAKE IT. They were ditching Netster, by god, for DARING to charge them more money and change their business model. I'm no fan of the name Qwikster, and I'm skeptical as to how long the company will stay afloat under this new business model, but for my money, I still can't watch movies any other way for a better deal...so I'm sticking around. And not complaining.

Then there was Bank of America, who announced that they will begin a monthly fee for debit cards. OH, HOW THE PEOPLE RAGED. "We're switching banks!" they hollered in anger. Now, let's stop for a second, kids. First of all, it's $5 a month. It's not like they're going to charge you per swipe (which really would be an issue). And banks are businesses, not free services for the people. So they're going to charge you money here and there. Paying $5 for the luxury of swiping a magical card doesn't seem so insane to me. - probably because I'm still amazed that I get to manage all my accounts and bills via BoA's fairly amazing online banking system. Also, people fail to see the value in time saved. It wasn't so long ago that people had to actually GO TO THE BANK to obtain cash with which to spend money...or, horror of horrors, WRITE A CHECK. Do you know how much TIME that takes? And guess what? You can run off to another bank, but I'd check the news first. Several other banks have mentioned that this fee may be in their futures as well. And let's not forget, changing banks is a GIANT PAIN IN THE ASS. I would say it's worth the $5 a month to not have to deal with the hassles involved in a bank change. Imagine if you went to all that trouble to avoid the $5 fee, and then your new bank started charging? Then you'd REALLY have something to yell about.

And last but not least, there's Facebook. People just love to bitch and moan about Facebook making tweaks and changes to their site that require users to spend all of 3-7 minutes learning something new in order to use the site, or even MORE dreadful, read the privacy settings and think for a minute about what they're posting. To all of the people of the world who are whining about Facebook, a reminder: Facebook is free. You don't have to use it. You can feel free to scoot on over to Google+ where things are simpler. Of course, you'll be very bored if you do.

If you don't like your bank, change it. If you don't want to order DVDs from Netflix, don't. And if you don't like Facebook's game-changing, innovative website, then by all means, LEAVE. But I am so tired of consumers going on and on and on about how this or that company has done them some sort of personal harm by changing their policies. This is America. These are FIRST WORLD PROBLEMS, and you have the power to fix them. You can CHOOSE your service provider. And, happily, if you can't seem to find a way to stop whining about how some company's updated business model ruined your life, I have the power to un-follow you. 

Cleanliness addendum.

Last month, I wrote a certain little post relating to my cleanliness (or lack thereof). Hoo-boy, did it ever start a riot! I think it's been my most contraversial post since the one in which I bashed Glee. (If you Google "Glee sucks" I'm the 9th result, hehehehe). I still stand by both posts, by the way, but I felt the need to touch base a month later and fill you in on a few things.

1) I had a lot of people send me private email, Twitter or Facebook messages confessing themselves equally or MORE dirty than I am in terms of bathroom habits.

2) This article was published on Cracked.com and I triumphed to find that bathing too much is bad for you. I knew I was a genius.

3) Several of my friends read my post and then took a stab at the whole not lathering up in the shower thing. I am delighted to tell you they have all told me their skin is in better shape as a result. 

4) One long-time follower of my blog and friend dating all the way back to elementary school was so disgusted by my post that she de-friended me on Facebook. At least, that's the only reason I can come up with for why she de-friended me. I was pretty freakin' miffed, but have gotten over it. I've been de-friended over my posts before, and it's always kind of like a slap in the face to think someone I know was so deeply offended...but what can you do? The most scathing part of her comment? "...more than anything, I can't believe you'd post this on a public blog and FB profile with hundreds of people. You never know when an employer could be reading your stuff. Some things are best left off the Internet."

Even though only a handful of people commented on the post itself, I had tons of messages and a huge discussion via my Facebook page, where the link was also published. Some of my favorite comments:

"I am roughly as "dirty" as you and I virtually never get sick. I like to think my immune system enjoys the workout. I think George Carlin would agree:http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gEyVvM4sTUc"

"I had NO IDEA people flush public toilets with their feet. XD Wow!"

"I've been wearing the same pajamas and haven't showered in 2 days. (I'm kind of sick, I have an excuse, but still.) I've never foot-flushed before either... I must be living in a cave because I had NO idea people did that!"

Well, I guess no one can call my blog boring, eh?

Brace yourselves...I watched The Notebook.

Up for mockery and debate today: my missing girly gene.

For a long time now I've known that I simply do not have the same agenda when it comes to entertainment as most Americans. Lots of people turn to books, movies and music for sheer escapism - to be taken out of their daily lives and whisked away to places where things are prettier, easier, more romantic, more exciting, and much more neatly wrapped than "the real world." Most people don't care if a movie makes sense, or is realistic or plausible, so long as it's entertaining. 

For me, the exact opposite is true. It's true that I like to be entertained, and I like to escape from my life for a bit when I read a book or watch a film. But because I'm a very analytical person, and because I'm also an extremely critical person, my ability to do this relies heavily on how well-crafted the story is. If dialogue is clunky, if plot points are cliche and predictable, or not possible, it distracts me from the story. It's not enough for me to just be told a story by pretty people, or with pretty elements. The story has to be interesting and also well-told or I'll become too focused on the glitches to enjoy the total package. This is true even in the sense of a fantasy story. While in the case of fantasy I can accept the impossible as possible, it still has to make some semblance of sense - there has to be order in the prescribed "reality" of the story, and it has to be well-told. Good examples? Inception, Lord of the Rings.

Now, I realize that a lot of this is objective, because taste in music and film and such always is. But nevertheless, I'm a huge movie/lit/tv/music snob. Although I have guilty pleasures like anyone else in the world (BRITNEY SPEARS!), I usually can't enjoy something that's not technically solid. I can't get lost in the vocal stylings of Christina Aguilera, because I'm too aware of the way she's grinding and damaging her vocal chords. I get distracted watching movies like 27 Dresses because there's no way Katherine Heigl's character could ever afford that apartment, or that wardrobe. And I can't get lost in the romance of a film like Twilight, because I'm too busy snickering at the dialogue and the cheesy, poorly executed special effects. Essentially, I really suck at suspending disbelief unless the thing I'm engaged in is so good I forget to think.

This makes it infinitely hard to talk to people about entertainment. Because I'm always that girl who doesn't like what everyone else likes. You don't know how many times I've been the rain on the "I love Glee" or the "Isn't The Hangover the funniest movie you've ever seen?!" parade. It's tiring, not liking the things normal people like. I say this with great sincerity - sometimes, I really, really wish I liked the things everyone else likes. But I'm a slave to Rottentomatoes.com - and worse, I tend to agree. 

In addition to this problem of being an epic entertainment snob, I think it's also important to note that I'm not girly in terms of the kind of books and movies I like to read. It's probably not shocking, since I'm also not into weddings or naming my future children. Note: This is not a slam on those who do enjoy weddings, chick lit or pre-birth baby naming. This isn't to say I don't like romance - I do. But I'm going to choose Sense and Sensibility or Atonement over your standard chick lit. This is also really lonely, because I can't go to the movies with a group of girlfriends who want to see something like He's Just Not That Into You, or The Last Song, because there's no way I can sit through it without adding my own personal Mystery Science Theater wisecrack track.

So, hilariously, a few years ago while living in North Carolina, I got tired of not liking what every other girl I knew liked. It's exhausting, man! So I was persuaded by a coworker to try reading a Nicholas Sparks book, because everyone loves Nicholas Sparks. And despite my disinterest in chick lit, I am interested in pop culture, so I thought, why not? I'll give it a whirl. If everyone else likes this, surely there's something about it that's good, yes? So I picked up a copy of The Notebook from my local library and read it in a couple of sittings. And I absolutely, positively loathed it. When I got to the super-sappy, emotional ending, I famously - and somewhat violently - chucked the hardcover book across my bedroom, and the thud it made as it collided with the wall woke my husband up. He still laughs about this.

So for years, I've been hearing about how the film adaptation of The Notebook is great, and even though I hated the book, I would probably enjoy it because it's so much better. I've been dubious about this, even though I do admit that I like the starring actors, Rachel McAdams and Ryan Gosling, quite a bit. But I just hated the book so much, I couldn't do it. Until last week. I'm not even sure what motivated me to want to see it, aside from the fact that periodically I do like to try and force myself to like the things everyone else likes. I tried to watch Glee, and I read the Twilight books (and disliked all of it). For whatever reason, I decided I would Netflix The Notebook and give it a whirl. If nothing else, I thought, it'll be a chance to sort of get people into my headspace in terms of how I think about these movies. So they can see the crazy in action.

And ladies, I tried. I really did. I know that most of you out there in the world love this movie, and cried buckets over it, so I REALLY attempted to get into it. And you know, Rachel and Ryan are so likeable and so good-looking and have such fabulous chemistry that I nearly did manage to enjoy the movie. Nearly. I'll say this - in the hands of a less likeable pair, I think this movie would have been nigh unwatchable, but those two got me through it.

I'm going to share with you the notes I took during the movie, so you can see the sheer madness that goes through my mind when I watch something like this. No, I don't always take notes, but had I watched this with a friend or my husband, I would have said all of this and more out loud. There would have been pausing to rant approximately every 10 minutes. I hope this is not offensive to all of you Notebook-lovers out there. Believe me when I say, I would rather be on your side of the line than mine.

 

The Notebook, aka Love & Alzheimers (warning: spoilers and profanity)

• Ryan and Rachel are the hottest couple ever. So the movie wins in that regard.
• Rachel's life blows. Ah, the classic fancy-pants rich girl with no say in her life falls for the rough and tumble but fun and big-spirited poor guy. We haven't seen THIS 9 million times. "But DAD, he dangled from a FERRIS WHEEL FOR ME! And then we lay in the street together!"
• I can't help feeling like the real-life version of this story is called Blue Valentine.
• "It was an improbable romance." Um, no, James Garner. It's totally and completely probable. Let's play "see how many movies you can name in which the rich girl falls in love with the guy from the wrong side of the tracks." Titanic, anyone? Shakespeare in Love. Wuthering Heights. Roman Holiday. Dirty Dancing. A Knight's Tale. Cocktail. King Kong? (I slay me). I'm not saying it's not a winning formula, but it is most certainly probable.
• Ohmygod. DADDY'S MOUSTACHE! There is no way I can take Rachel's parents seriously from this moment forward. BAHAHAHA.

• So, basically what happened here is this. Nicholas Sparks watched Titanic and then moved the action to the south.
• If it's summer in Charleston, why the hell are they wearing coats and hats? And why can I see their breath?!?!?!
• Allie's bathing suit/headgear just made me choke on my wine. You're a bird, I'm a bird, we're all birds. Drunk birds.

• The fight with parents/breakup scene started off great but then totally fizzled into hysterical cliche land.
• Am I the only one who finds the elderly version of them cheesy? and did anyone really not know it was them as old people? This is a legit question. Had I not read the book, as an audience member, am I to be surprised later on when it's revealed that these two are grown-up Ryan and Rachel? Also, do these two look ANYTHING like Ryan and Rachel? I do not accept these old people!
• If you need a stone cold bitch, hire Joan Allen!
• Wartime cheeeeese. Did we really need the 2-second shot of Ryan Gosling at war? I guess we are supposed to see his sadness at losing his best pal, but that guy was only in the movie for about 2 minutes anyway, so I'm left feeling a little bit manipulated.
• MARSDEN!!! I LOVE THIS DUDE! but isn't this yet another stretch that she meets a fabulously wealthy guy on his sickbed? If it's not a stretch, I clearly should have spent a lot less time working a job and more time as a volunteer hospital nurse. MARSDEN! That's it, I choose Lon. He's Marsden AND he's got cash.

• Um, Allie? You used to be cool.
• Restore the house and Allie will come back. Hmmm. Using her super-special lovers' ESPN, she will know that you have fixed up this house.
• Hey Noah. Don't knock this hussy up.
• Sure dementia is irreversible, but not for THESE TWO.
• The kids don't wanna deal with mom's demented ass! Yay, humanity! But bad writing - this scene gives away that Noah and Allie end up together, and she doesn't end up with Marsden. So I ask you - at this point, why should I continue to watch this movie?
• RAIN IS FUNNY!!!!!! Has anyone else noticed that this is at least the 3rd time, if not the 4th, in this film that Rachel has jumped up into Noah's arms and wrapped her legs around him? Do people really do this? Or is this just part of the 1940s mating ritual? Can I find info on this in some archive somewhere?

• And then there's sex!!!!! Long-awaited sex. Could we get some more light on these two? Ryan's abs are about the only thing getting me through this movie. 
• Dinner with Martha - awkward. Good-BYE, Martha! Also awkward - Allie's enormous ring. You'd think she could maybe take that off while she's shacked up with Noah.
• Aw, see that? he made her a room for painting and her fiance didn't even know she paints. Nifty! Because he gets her!!!!!!!
• Ohhhh riiiight. Mom has her own regrets, projects her unhappiness onto her kid...good. Very clever. Well played, Joan!
• This Allie is a slow, slow learner.
• FUCKIN' MARSDEN! this guuuy! Way to love Allie even though she spread it for another dude. Marsden, I will be your fiance. 
• Yes, crazy old Gena Rowlands. it was you. You're Allie. Genius. Gaaaaaaaaaawd. Gena, you deserve better. 
• Dude. This movie just took a totally messed up turn. Yowza. Now I'm remembering why I tossed the book across the room.
• Way to kill Old-Noah's ass with your incessant memory loss, Allie. Sheesh. But this is a Sparksian tale, so we still need our money Jesus/miracle moment. Wait for it...wait for it....
• This is about where I start feeling like an asshole, because I'm supposed to be touched, and in theory I am...but I'm too busy rolling my eyes at the crap-tastic dialogue. I have issues.
• THEY DID IT! THEIR LOVE TOOK THEM AWAY TOGETHER! HUZZAH! This is gonna be tough on their kids, man. Hey, writers! Nice touch, killing both of them together instead of leaving Noah old and single. I guess this means you won't be making The Wedding (Notebook sequel). Waiting for the icy Atlantic waters to come swishing up around their deathbed...

• Somewhere, Christopher Reeves is shaking his fist from the grave, wondering why the end of HIS tragic romance movie didn't turn out with a dual death ending (Somewhere in Time).

So, friends...that was my movie watching experience. Nary a tear was shed. Fortunately, I didn't throw my DVD player across the room. This is what happens when I watch these movies. This is why I don't do Nicholas Sparks. Period. There is something the matter with me. Who has a cure for this stone cold heart of mine?

Some movies that do make me cry EVERY TIME, withouth fail, which may or may not be ridiculous: Finding Nemo. In America. Dead Poets Society. E.T. The Neverending Story. Rudy. How about you? Which stories make you cry? Which books or shows does everyone love while you hate?

A question of earning.

If you haven't already read the fascinating article The Shadow Scholar on The Chronicle of Higher Education's website, you really need to go check it out right now. No, seriously. This isn't just some geeky something or other for those of us who work in higher ed, although that's how I first heard about it. This is an article written by a guy who works for a custom-essay company, making his living helping students cheat their way to bachelor's, master's and even doctoral degrees. And it is truly alarming.

I'd like to point out several things about this article. I attended a small liberal arts college in Ohio, where I studied English, music and theater. I knew almost all of my professors, and most of them I studied with repeatedly, taking as many as 5 or 6 classes from the same person. Those professors knew me, and they knew my writing. They would have known if I turned in a paper that wasn't my work. I whole-heartedly believe that. From the article...

"For those of you who have ever mentored a student through the writing of a dissertation, served on a thesis-review committee, or guided a graduate student through a formal research process, I have a question: Do you ever wonder how a student who struggles to formulate complete sentences in conversation manages to produce marginally competent research? How does that student get by you?"

I find myself pondering the same question. I can understand how, at a larger university where a student in a given class might be one of two or three hundred, a professor might not realize that an essay was plagiarized or ghost-written, but at least at my college, I am pretty sure this would have been tough to get away with. 

But for me, the blame shouldn't necessarily fall on the author of the paper, though I would question his or her sense of ethics. I don't believe it's actually illegal to write papers for someone. I'm not even sure that it's illegal to ask someone to write a paper for you, although it certainly would be a breach of most any school's honor code. But I wonder, if you are a doctor or a lawyer or hold some other title reliant on various advanced degrees, and you didn't actually do the work...is THAT illegal? Is it illegal for someone to collect money for services if they didn't really do the work that would prove they are competent to hold their job title?

Recently, I was discussing the whole issue of advanced degrees with several friends. We all agreed that nowadays, in many circles, just having a bachelor's degree is deemed inadequate - not just by employers, but by our peers. Those of us who haven't gone on to earn further degrees often feel judged or looked down on by our friends who have more than one plaque on their walls. But the members of the conversation were divided on the real merit of these degrees. Many of us felt that for those who aren't pursuing a career in a highly specified field, on the job experience and supplemental training can be just as valid, if not more so, than a master's degree. My husband and I both work in communications, and neither of us has ever felt the need for another degree, though we both love school. The return on investment is pretty small in our cases, and so it's unlikely that either of us will go back to school unless it's purely for our personal edification (re: getting a master's in English lit for fun).

I find this article really maddening when I think about the number of times I've gone around and around about graduate school, and wondered if I would be more respected, higher paid, happier, etc if I had an MBA - a degree I have zero interest in - or some other master's degree...and then I think about the number of people who have those degrees and do make more money than me who maybe didn't even write their own damned work. 

A fun anecdote - I've never cheated on a paper, but I remember a time during my senior year of college when I was extremely swamped - working on two plays at the same time and finishing up a very full semester - and I turned in an egregiously sub-par paper in one of my lit classes. The professor of that class was one of my favorites, and also my advisor, and he was a huge fan of mine. I had been too busy to really do a very good job, but I knew that he liked me and figured I'd get my normal A with very little effort, so I cockily turned in the assignment having spent about 25% of the time I normally would have writing it.

When I got my paper back a few days later, it had no marks on it. Unusual. Even though I always wrote A papers, this professor always made a point to highlight certain things he thought were very good, or ask me questions, etc in the margins. No marks. On the very last page, in red ink, he'd simply written a C- and the line, "If any other student had turned this paper in, I'd have given it an A."

I remember being so angry at the time, but not really at my professor - he was right. He was holding me to a higher standard - the standard I had set for myself. He was also teaching me a lesson - that if I wasn't willing to put any effort into my assignment, then neither should he be.

I'd just like to take a minute to say thank you to all the teachers who taught me so well over the years - Lucy Schall, Andy Price, Michael Olin-Hitt, Doug Hendel, Rudy Roggenkamp and so many more. Thanks for making me accountable to myself.

On democracy.

I was a bad girl this year and I waited till the last minute to vote. In Washington, we all do mail-in ballots, so I got my materials in the mail several weeks ago...and then they sat collecting dust on the couch in my craft den, unloved, unread. I don't know why I put it off for so long, but I did. Whatever, I've been busy. I have crossed the country four times since July, and I've been sick twice now. Who has time to research?

Ahem...most of America, apparently, judging by the shit-tastic turnout yesterday at the polls. What is UP with that, America? I tweeted this earlier, but the thing that grinds my gears more than anything about this election season isn't who won or lost yesterday, or how many Republicans now make up the Congress versus Democrats, it's the number of people who came out to vote in 2008 and for whatever reason couldn't be bothered to do so yesterday.

According to Michael Tomasky, 45 million people who voted in 2008 didn't show up to do so yesterday. That's INSANE. 

What is it about the Americans that makes us think it's totally fine to only give a damn about government when it's a presidential election at stake? Why is it that we repeatedly hang all of our hopes and cares on the shoulders of one human being, like some superstar can come along and erase all of our problems and put more money in our pockets? I've got news for you - that stuff has to start right in your own backyard, in your own town. If you're ignoring your local issues, you have no right to complain about anything going on in this country. Or the world. 

Everyone who reads this blog knows I voted for Obama, and most of you know I still support him. Has he made good on all his promises? No. But I am stumped as to why anyone thought he WOULD make good on all those promises. It was an election. It's like an elaborate stage show, where people put on costumes and use lots of smoke and mirrors and Auto Tuners to make everything seem sparkly and awesome. I do think Obama looked and sounded pretty good, but I was aware of what the problems were in this country and I was under no illusion that he would be able to fix all or even most of it. And CERTAINLY not in 2 years, or 4 years for that matter. It's crazy-talk.

I would like to thank my friend Martha and her friends on Facebook, though, for posting several articles this week about why we should still be rooting for our president. You can read them here, here and here. It's good to take stock of the things he's doing RIGHT, because we all know all the things that aren't going so great.

So anyway, I just needed to vent - to all the people who stayed home yesterday, shame on you. Shame on you for not taking the time to care about what happens in your city, your state, or this country.

And to all the people who DID vote but can't even begin to tell me what they voted for, EVEN MORE SHAME. It's the only thing you can do that's worse than staying home.

I do want to share a little happy moment from this week. On Monday night, as I was filling out my ballot (post marked by Tuesday, thank you very much, so it was on time), Jay and I were reviewing Washington State Initiative 1098 (read about here, scroll down), which concerns establishing a state income tax and lowering other taxes*. According to this proposed initiative, the state of Washington, which currently charges its residents no income tax, would require those who make more than $200k per year to begin paying income tax. This was a pretty hot topic around here, as you can imagine in a poor economy. 

Jay voted against the initiative, even though he wouldn't be affected by it, as he isn't in the $200k + income bracket. His thoughts are that if it starts with the wealthy, pretty soon everyone will be taxed. And he's probably right. I decided to vote in favor of the initiative, because as much as I enjoy not having to pay any taxes and having a larger paycheck, I believe that it should be the responsibility of all people to pay taxes in order to contribute to the betterment of our state. I actually think that everyone should have to pay taxes unless they fall below the poverty line, but that everyone should pay an amount that correlates in some fair way to the amount they earn (those who make more should pay more).

Jay and I clearly disagree on this issue, but I have to say, it was pretty cool to sit there with him and talk about it, not fight, but each share our concerns about the initiative, and in the end each mark different boxes on our ballots. Because THAT is what democracy is all about. We live in a country where we don't have to agree, and each one of us is given a voice. Not to use our voices is just such a waste of the extreme privilege we still enjoy in this country, and it is an insult to those who aren't granted the same freedom, whose voices aren't heard.

* For the record, the initiative was voted down.

One meal at a time.

As I've mentioned several times now, I've been reading Michael Pollen's The Omnivore's Dilemma for the past few weeks. It's a really heavy book - not so much in the sense that it's too dense to read, but the subject matter I find gets me really worked up and I have to take breaks. Breaks in which I read horrible, shitty sci-fi books. It is summer, after all.

So here's the deal with TOD and Michael Pollen. It's really disturbing. Like, it has the power to alter my mood and keep me up at night. I'm only about 1/3 of the way through the book, and I'm already so saturated with terrifying information that I've reached a point where it's hard for me to even express my thoughts about the book.

What's good about it is, Pollen manages to make some serious points about the food industry without writing a persuasive work of non-fiction. He uses the facts to show us how deeply screwed we are. The premise of the book is the simple question "What should I have for dinner?" Pollen follows the major food chains of industrialized and alternative food production to show us where our food comes from and how it gets on our plate. And it's upsetting on so many levels that I don't have time or space to share with you. 

But honestly, everyone should be reading this book, and his other book, In Defense of Food, because the fact of the matter is, plain and simple, the government and the food industry are keeping us obese and unhealthy because it is more profitable. And we should all be up in arms over our food - not just our meat, but all of our food - because it's laden with processed corn and other things that are horrible for us. Almost all of it. It's really disturbing to look into your cabinets and refrigerator and realize exactly how many processed foods you are buying - or rather, how few of your groceries are whole, unprocessed food.

And I think we generally know that processed food isn't as good for us, sort of? But maybe not. I'm here to tell you, if you had any doubts, it IS bad for you. And the more I read about it, the less I can ignore it. Just like with the meat industry, which is bad enough, but it's just a sliver of the overall bad scene we're dealing with.

That leaves me thinking I should cut out processed foods - right? But it seems absolutely impossible. Literally 70% of the things in my kitchen are in some way processed. And I'm a really healthy eater. How? Where would I even start? It's daunting, and that's why most people just shove it under the table and keep eating. But then, it occurred to me - what if I attempt it one meal at a time? It would take a while, and a lot of hard work, but what if?

So, that's what I'm proposing. A challenge, if you will, in which I set about attempting to cut out processed foods from my diet, one meal at a time. I realize that it will never be possible to do it entirely, but I feel like if I have looked very carefully at everything I eat and really made an effort, then the occasional squirt of ketchup or handful of M&Ms (things I can't really recreate myself) won't hurt me. I wonder if I will lose weight, have more energy? I wonder how much more money and time it will cost me? I wonder if the food will taste better? Will it help me with my cholesterol and acid reflux?

So the first meal is, of course, breakfast. I usually eat some cereal, but we already crossed over to making all our bread ourselves. I know this can be done. I don't like yogurt (believe me, I have tried it every which way, so don't suggest it), but I do like oatmeal and granola and the like. I also can't have a lot of dairy in my daily diet. With that in mind, I'd love your input. What should I have for breakfast? I am willing to cook things ahead of time, but not every morning.

Stay tuned.

Eerily stoopid.

The other day, I was flipping through my notes on my Blackberry - yes, I'm old, 30 years old to be exact, and I have to take notes and make lists or I can't remember anything - and I came across the following cryptic rambling. I'm almost too embarrassed to type it here, but you know this blog is really all about me making a total ass of myself, isn't it? So let's just proceed.

In love w a supernatural creature - vampire? and there is some sickness that will kill him and i both and we go home and walk into a trap that will kill him and save me - physical painting on floor that binds me to life so he will die. find out kristen did it and cheryl helped. ex boyfriends writing on book. note from kris says she did this to protect me and her powers have come back stronger than ever so i learn she's a witch. feel betrayed by friends for essentially killing him so i can live.

Now, I ask you...what the f$@k does that mean?

I have absolutely zero recollection of writing this, or dreaming about it. But I can only assume that what must have happened is, I dreamed this zany supernatural monstrosity and then got up in the night and wrote it down on my phone. And then passed out again and forgot all about it. Not only do I not remember writing this, but I don't know WHEN I wrote it.

Huh.

So that's weird, right? Was I sleepwalking? Was I drunk? Am I senile? 

I'll admit - I have been reading some cheap vampire smut lately, so perhaps that was a factor in this stupid story. But I have no idea what Kristen and Cheryl did to involve themselves in this tripe. I don't even know for sure WHICH Kristen and Cheryl I'm referring to, here.

Whatever. All I know is, this is JUST stupid enough to sound like a GREAT option for my eventual crap-tasmic bestseller. So just consider this a copyright statement, this is MY stupid-ass supernatural vampire story idea, you hear? Get your own loony tunes dream!

Stirring the pot a bit.

It seems like it's been way too long since I wrote anything that made people good and pissed off at me, right? Right. So here it is, folks. Healthcare. I want to talk about it.

I don't pretend to know every single detail of the new healthcare bill. I definitely read about the process along the way in magazines like Newsweek, The Atlantic Monthly, Time and Rolling Stone, which I think is probably a little leftist overall, but not too bad. I also have tuned in to news broadcasts from Fox News (yes, I watch it, though I despise it), CNN, MSNBC, NPR and of course the ultimate news broadcasting outlet, The Daily Show. Hehehe.

So here's the deal, as I see it. The healthcare system we have right now is one of the priciest in the world, and our people are some of the least-covered in the world. Compared to other countries like us, the United States does the least for its people in terms of making sure they can go to the doctor. The insurance companies and lobbyists who run our healthcare system are corrupt. And basically, unless you're rich in this country, the experience of getting medical care is pretty much terrible across the boards.

Under the new system, basically nothing changes at all for those of us who are fortunate to have healthcare coverage. Currently, my husband and I have money deducted from our monthly pay so that our companies can provide us with healthcare coverage. That would still be the case, and the amount of money that will be taken away from us is basically the same. This is true for most people in our situation. So why should people in our situation be upset by the bill?

For the people who own businesses - what does it matter if you pay money to greedy, evil insurance companies and healthcare corps, or to the government? You still need to provide care to your employees. And if that's what you're angry about - being forced to do so? I don't understand. Explain it to me like I'm a two year old, and use small words, because I'm basically not clear on the problem here. I'd like to know how being pissed that you have to give your employees health insurance makes you anything other than a giant asshole. Because I don't get it. Please, explain.

And for the people who don't have healthcare - are you angry that you're being asked to get coverage? Because that's just irresponsible, both to yourself, your family and to society at large. No one likes the guy who comes to work sick.

And to all those out there who think THEIR dollars shouldn't have to pay for RANDOM PEOPLE to get care, I say to you - it benefits you. This is the same argument I have with people who get angry about green stuff and saving the planet and carbon footprints. You might think it's stupid, but actually, it's better for YOU when you help the earth - or other people. If random people on the street are healthier, then YOU are healthier, every time you step out of your house and onto a public bus. Or go to work. You want the people around you spreading mad cow disease? I think not.

One of the things that most bothers me is this concept that people should just get off their lazy asses and get good jobs and take care of themselves. I can think of MANY people I know who work full time jobs and have either really bad healthcare coverage through their companies that ends up costing them a ton out of their own pockets, or no coverage provided at all by their employers. So explain that to me. People who work really hard shouldn't have to scrimp and save to go to the doctor.

When we were in Europe in March, it was really interesting to talk to all of Jay's coworkers who live in other countries where socialized healthcare is the norm. Someday I'll write about socialism and why it's not evil, but that's not today. The point is, to the Europeans, we are ass-backwards. They can't understand why our government doesn't take better care of us, because they get to enjoy it every day. They get sick, they go to the doctor for free. They get pregnant, they get a year, sometimes two years, paid leave. Husbands get this perk too. Sometimes you get a live-in maid to help you out.  A LIVE-IN MAID. 

I'd say not only is the new healthcare bill nothing that middle class Americans should be freaking out about, but the bill is really only the first step toward a way, way larger change that should be occurring. There are a lot of people out there who think the bill isn't a big ENOUGH change.

Last year I read an article that basically said, if you want to know the personality of a country, look at its healthcare system. Is this a country that cares for its people, that believes it's a basic right of every citizen to receive equal care when sick? Currently, it isn't. We are not the sort of country that reaches out to help a guy. What's even funnier about that is (sadder, rather) is that we're always arranging mission trips or funds to help people in third-world countries who just got whacked by a hurricane or tsunami...and yet we're not willing to help the guy who lives next door and is dying of some disease.

So...I'm confused. What's the matter with a government wanting to provide its citizens with healthcare?

Wherein I lose my cool.

Waiting sucks. Seriously. If there's one thing in this world I hate, it's waiting for things I have no control over. Enter the past 18 months. Waiting to move to a destination unknown for Jay's job - first Atlanta, which fell through, now Seattle. Consequently, waiting for a new job to unfold for me and reignite my creative fire. Waiting for more time to be able to pursue some of my own time-sucking passions - and I'm not just talking knitting. Waiting to figure out whether or not to reproduce. I hate all of it. ALL OF IT.

Those of you who don't know me might not know what a control freak I am. I'm pretty sure it makes my family crazy. Well, not my dad, because he's not one to talk. But my uber-calm mother and my uber-rational sister both hate this quality in me, because there's no reasoning with me when I get going. My brain starts whizzing with all the what-ifs and I commence planning for every possible scenario that might unfold, all so I can have a plan for any contingency. And what people don't understand is, all of this makes me MORE calm than I would be if I just heeded their simple yet well-intentioned advice and opted to "not worry about it." Hello - this is ME you're talking to! And poor Alien Husband actually has to LIVE with me while I'm like this.

So you can imagine that my life for the last six months has been building to The Perfect Storm of Insanity. Finding out we're moving in August, but not being able to tell anyone till our house was on the market in January, but meanwhile of course having to prepare for the house sale, and all the while trying to stay calm - not so good. I had a mini-breakdown right before the holidays and my sister bitched me out within an inch of my life and put my head back on straight. And then, miraculously, I was fine. In fact, I daresay for the past three weeks I have been FREAKISHLY calm and well-behaved about the whole thing. Even when we got an offer on our house after only a week, and entered into a contract, even THEN I kept it together. We aren't doing anything to set the move in motion till the appraisal (today) is done and we hear if their loan is a go (next week). I've been so amazingly calm, my best friend asked me today if I was on meds. Which I'm not, but aren't you IMPRESSED?

And then last night we had the weirdest sequence of events transpire. First, the buyers opted out of the home inspection which was scheduled for today, locking them into the contract and giving them no real out other than a failed loan (let's really hope that doesn't happen). Well, that was dumb on their part but WIN for us! And then, ironically, creepily, four hours later we discovered a leak in the pipes around our hot water heater and had to fork over $500+ to a 24-hour plumbing service to come fix it. Imagine if we hadn't found it and the inspection had happened!

So I broke down a little. But so did Jay, so I don't feel so bad. We were both like, ENOUGH! WHY CAN'T WE JUST CLICK OUR HEELS AND MAGICALLY END UP IN SEATTLE?

These are trying times, and I am fully aware the entire home deal hinges on this FDA home loan. I'm not a praying person, but I am praying this works out. I don't know who I'm praying to, but I'm begging the cosmos to please, please let my house go. Every finger, toe and tit on my body is crossed. I want to rent! I want to live debt-free! I want to skip through the rainy Seattle streets knowing I don't have to fix JACK SHIT if it breaks. Get me out of here!

Recommencing eerie calm in 3, 2, 1...