Tuesday, December 17, 2024
More Than a Feeling
Monday, December 02, 2024
When Newspapers Were Newspapers
Wednesday, September 11, 2024
Remembering 9/11
Wednesday, June 05, 2024
Writers I'm Supposed to Love
When I was taking Advanced Placement English in high school (it was, in theory, college level English), I remember a little argument I had with Dr. Shots (she had a Ph.D. and insisted on the title) about the deconstruction of a piece of work.
Apparently, I had had enough of the "they used yellow here for sickness, green for jealousy, why do you think this lamp is placed here," because I told her I didn't think authors meant for their work to be analyzed in such depth and detail.
"Sometimes a lamp is just a lamp," I said. Or something to that effect.
You'd have thought I'd blasphemed the chin of God the way she came after me. Of course, every word was carefully chosen, every sofa, every lamp, every blade of grass, had a deeper meaning than just being a blade of grass. What was I doing in her class, telling her (with her Ph.D) that writers didn't always mean something else with what they wrote?
"Because I write, and I don't do that," I responded. "Not consciously."
"Then you're not a writer," she snapped, putting an end to the discussion.
She was the only teacher to ever say that to me.
After that, I kept my mouth shut and dutifully turned in my papers or spoke up in class saying that of course the lamp meant that the character had an idea or had seen the light about some issue. It wasn't put there simply so she could read the book in her hand.
Then I went to Hollins College, now Hollins University, which is a women's undergraduate degree school that is well-known for the writers it puts out. Think Margaret Wise Brown and Anne Dillard, just to name two. Or Lee Smith and Jill McCorkle.
There the poetry in particular was analyzed in great detail, even that which was written in the 17th century. I went on to read Virginia Woolf and numerous other writers while taking eight long years to get my bachelors.
And I always found the examination of works tedious, and I stubbornly (and secretly) held on to my conviction that sometimes a lamp is just a lamp. But I wrote the essays about the books secret meanings and dissected the poems as required.
Of course, sometimes imagery has double meaning, and of course sometimes the more literary authors put cute language in their works to add to the character. The book I'm currently listening to has a daughter of a woman who was dying of cancer eat a chicken pot pie with her mother and the hospice worker. What does the chicken pot pie symbolize?
Damn if I know. Dinner table scenes are great for conversation; they had to eat something. Maybe it symbolizes the daughter's fears about her mother's upcoming death (she's chicken, get it?). Maybe it was just there.
Barbara Kingsolver, Ann Patchett, Anne Tyler, Elizabeth Gilbert, and now Ann Beattie (whom I am listening to - maybe it's something to do with the name "Ann"), are among the literary writers that I am supposed to like. They use great turns of phrases and create deep characters. Every word has been carefully chosen. I imagine these writers spend days pouring over one sentence until they are utterly sick of it, trying to make sure they've chosen chicken pot pie instead of Thai food for the correct reason.
And I listen or read their books and find they do not move me. Occasionally they write one that I find intriguing and enjoy, but overall, they are not my favorite authors. They may have a good sentence or two that makes its way into my little "writer's notebook," but the stories seldom stick with me.
Who do I like to read? I like Janet Evanovich, Sue Grafton, Susan Wiggs, Kate DiCamillo, Debbie Macomber, Nora Roberts, Louise Penny, Kristin Hannah, etc. These are not literary giants, but they write well and have interesting stories that move along just fine. Sometimes they make me laugh and sometimes they make me think. I liked The Hunger Games and Harry Potter. I like a lot of fantasy writers, like Neil Gaiman, Tolkien, Ray Bradbury, Phillip Pullman, Ursula K. Le Guin, etc.
I wrote for newspapers. I wrote to educate and inform, not to puzzle people and have them wonder about the significance of someone eating chicken pot pie. I like my fiction to be straight up and to the point, anymore. I read Overstory and while it received rave reviews, I found it incredibly boring. Great concept, but my goodness, couldn't that have been put out into the world in some way that wasn't so long and drawn out?
It is good for me to listen to authors I do not like, to stories I don't always enjoy. I never know what I may find in such tales. I do it now as a part of my life's growth cycle, so I don't get stale. I listen to or read everything from memoir to nonfiction self-help to the aforesaid authors to Catch-22. I seldom listen to or read something a second time (Tolkien being the exception).
Life is a learning experience. This is part of how I live it. But sometimes it frustrates me, because I still think I'm right. A lamp sometimes is just a lamp.
Monday, May 27, 2024
Can You Hear Me Now?
I feel voiceless.
Silenced.
Quieted.
Not just because some football player told a graduating class that the women should have no thoughts and look forward to being mommies and wives. Not just because, all of my life, no one has listened to me, male or female. I have always been silenced, first by my parents, my grandparents, my uncles, my aunts, my brother. Then teachers, friends. Bosses.
No one wants to hear my side of the story.
They don't care about anything I have to say.
Society cares nothing about what women have to say.
This culture teaches young girls to shrink themselves, to stay quiet, to be small. That translates into someone like me, an old woman who is still small, even if she is fat, and still unheard, even when she talks.
Culture says to young women, go forth and be whomever you want to be, but don't expect too much, because you cannot have much, or we will judge you for it. You can be successful, but you will never be president. You will never be a CEO or a millionaire on your own terms.
Be a secretary, my mother told me, when I said I wanted to be a writer. Learn to do what the men say, just as she had done. She worked, but she had no ambition because she was not taught to have such. And when times came for promotions at her job, she told us at home she wanted those promotions, was qualified for those promotions, but she never, ever asked for them.
She was still labeled a file clerk after 30 years on the job when she retired. A file clerk from her first day to her last.
When I was 13, my father began planting peach trees. They would grow, he said, and the crop would put my brother through college. What about my college? I asked. You are just going to get married, he said. There will be no college for you.
My brother did not go to college. The peach trees did not grow.
I have three college degrees that I earned while I was also working a job. I also have a husband, but he was not my aspiration at the time. He was someone I fell in love with and wanted in my life. I did not seek him out.
But like other men, he does not listen. Men do not listen to women, not their wives, their daughters, their fiancés, their female friends, their female classmates, or their female coworkers. They simply do not hear.
And women do not listen to other women. Words may be heard, but they are not often understood. Other women come closest to listening to me, but even then, I do not often feel heard.
When I was listening recently to Liz Cheney read her book, Oath and Honor, and heard her warnings about the former president and the danger he presents to our country, I felt helpless yet again. Because I was listening to her, and I heard her.
That orange idiot has stated, multiple times, that he will trash the U.S. Constitution. He will surround himself with sycophants. He will not have elections again - all that talk about serving for 3 or 4 terms, does anyone think he will risk an election? He will undo the civil rights legislations of the 1960s, he will force suffering upon millions, remove Social Security for the old folks, and put women on a list so someone can keep track of their periods and possible pregnancies.
And Cheney warns of all of this, not in those words, but in better words, in good strong intelligent words, in her book.
And the people who need to read it are not reading it. They are not listening.
I watched the January 6 select committee hearings. I watched what happened on January 6. I reached my own conclusions about that day, and they mirror Liz Cheney's.
I know there are nearly 200 people in the House of Representatives who supported what happened on that day and are still in office. We've been in the midst of a slow-moving coup for eight years. It is not over.
But a woman wrote that book, that brilliant warning of what will be. And she is being, will be, and will continue to be, ignored.
There is no cure for what ails society when it has made half of its citizens voiceless. What are we to do, we who want to speak out, cry out, and scream into the night about all of the bad, not just political but personal, all of the very bad and evil things we have seen and suffered?
Wednesday, May 22, 2024
The State of Things
This is not something one can blame a president for, or Congress, or anyone in politics, really. This is a corporate problem. A business issue. A capitalism thing. A people thing.
Shrinkflation is real; I've watched everything get smaller from my Dove soap to my box of Cheerios. Batteries don't work as well as they once did and I am finding that newer ones corrode much more quickly than the old batteries used to, as well. Nothing purchased now seems to be properly made. It's more like it's tossed together by people who don't know what they are doing.
I have thought about this a lot. Is this because the corporations have fallen into using poor materials? Do the people who are working there now not know what they are doing? Is it a combination of both?
I suspect it is a combination of many things: greed, the need to pay stockholders in big companies, the higher cost of materials thanks to tariffs put in place by the former president and now also by the current one, as well as changes in personnel.
It's important to remember that over 1 million people in this country died during Covid. They weren't all 88 years old languishing away in a nursing home, either.
Also, Covid hit just as baby boomers were retiring, and Covid sent some 2.6 million more people than expected into early retirement, according to PBS. (My husband was one of those early retirees.)
So theoretically, that's over 3.6 million people no longer in the workforce. I know some of the older people who died weren't working, but for numbers sake, there you go. Millions of people no longer working.
Imagine the scenario. I don't know how batteries are made, or if they are even made in the United States but let's assume they are made here. There is a lot of automation in most manufacturing now. So a battery plant might employ something like 400 people. About 150 of those would be salespeople and upper management, because companies these days are a bit top heavy.
That leaves 50 more for support staff to upper management, so now I have 200 people doing the actual work of making batteries.
Then 2020 came, and Covid struck. On the floor with 200 people, the head floor manager dies of Covid. Fourteen of the oldest employees retire. Over the next two years, five more people die from Covid or something else, and three more leave. That's 11.5% of the floor workforce knocked out.
Maybe upper management decides not to replace them. So now there are only 177 people doing what was a 200-person job. Of course, some of those who died or left took expert knowledge with them. Maybe only the head floor manager knew that if you didn't flick this particular machine in just the right way, you would get too much alkaline or too little alkaline in the battery. Maybe nobody has figured this out yet.
Or maybe management hires new people. They have to be trained, but the person who usually trained new employees is one of the retirees. Someone else steps up to do it but leaves out a few crucial steps that the person who had been there for 20 years knew.
So, you end up with a poorer battery. Serviceable, maybe. Acceptable by whatever quality assurances the company has in place (if any), but still not as good a battery as one purchased in 2019. And now it costs more, too.
And people who don't stop to think things through blame the government.
The problems in this country go way deeper than just who is president or who is in Congress, although many of the issues start there. The problems start with us. With who we are and who we want to be. Do we want to be the best darned battery checker in the world, or just draw a paycheck? Do we take pride in our communities anymore? Do we volunteer for civic work, help the town council put out flower arrangements to make the entry way a pretty spot? Do we donate to the library, check on a neighbor, or just sit around and bitch, moan, and whine on Facebook (or a blog) about all the things we see wrong around us?
I am older now. I'm in chronic pain. I don't get out as much as I used to. But in my younger days, I volunteered for the ladies auxiliary in the volunteer fire department. I peeled potatoes to help them raise money at various events. I volunteered for the library. I volunteered for a historic preservation organization.
I did stuff. Some of it was important stuff. Maybe some of it wasn't, I don't know, but I gave it my best shot.
During all of this, I worked a job, kept a house, stayed sick a lot, and put myself through college not only for an undergraduate degree but also my masters. I never once did a job just for a paycheck. Sure, some of the places I worked I worked for the money, but I also did the very best I could at the job. Maybe my best wasn't good enough for some particular work, but it was my best.
Ok, I'm losing my train of thought, but I think the problems in this country can be boiled down to two things: you, and me.
We need to learn to get along and how to work together to bring about a better world. It can be done.
Let's get off of Facebook and get to the real world.
The solutions begin with us.
Saturday, March 23, 2024
AITA?
Monday, March 18, 2024
Where Are the Eagles?
Tuesday, January 23, 2024
Now Comes the Thaw
Thursday, October 05, 2023
No Common Sense
Friday, June 23, 2023
We Have a News Vacuum
1. Trust the source, not the sharer. A recent study found that in deciding what to trust and share on social media, individuals were more attentive to the sharer than to the original source of an article. This is a mistake. Reputable news sources have fact checkers and strong incentives to report facts accurately; they also have editorial practices that allow them to correct their own errors. They are, for the most part, trustworthy. Confused about a current event? See what the Wall Street Journal, the New York Times, or the Washington Post says.2. Remember that your reaction to an event isn’t the only one. In response to a political or social event, you might find yourself surrounded by a storm of outrage, or a warm glow of approval on social media. Researchers have found that networks of retweets and interaction about moral content on Twitter are highly segregated by political affiliation. These researchers also found that people are generally more likely to share emotional content. For this reason, social media is inadvertently selecting for the content that most drives polarization. Be wary when friends share highly emotional moral content, and remember that elsewhere in the social network, other perspectives are likely being shared and you are not seeing them.3. Fight confirmation bias. People tend to trust evidence that confirms beliefs they already hold and ignore evidence that pushes against these beliefs. If you find yourself only trusting and sharing things that you already believed, you may be falling into the confirmation bias trap. Along these lines, be wary of articles that report on a controversial topic, but where it is entirely unclear why anyone would hold the other position in the controversy. Such articles are designed to get clicks and shares by appealing to confirmation biases.4. Watch out for surprising scientific findings. In general, people have a bias towards novelty. We are fascinated by things that are surprising or new. This translates into likes, click-throughs, and shares on social media. And this means that journalists are incentivized to cover the surprising and novel, including in coverage about science. But in science, surprising findings are also often wrong or misleading. Not every study reflects a true effect, and some studies fail to replicate. Studies that fail to replicate, though, are more likely to be reported on, and more like to be shared on social media, presumably because they are more surprising. This unfortunately means that if you’ve heard about a scientific finding on social media, it is more likely to be false than one you haven’t heard of.5. Read and share science journalism that covers a whole literature, not a single study. One solution is to read, trust, and share scientific articles that report results from an entire literature, rather than focusing on a single study. Because scientific evidence is probabilistic, any individual study can be misleading. But an entire body of evidence, gathered by many scientists, replicated, and critiqued within a scientific community is less likely to mislead. Ignore sensationalizing articles about one study. (And no, wine isn’t better than exercise for your health.)6. Remember, the agents of unfriendly nations are out there. We are unfortunately in a media environment where we are regularly brought into contact with content created and spread by foreign actors trying to manipulate public beliefs. These agents are extremely savvy about what will be shared and liked. One major goal seems to be to polarize and divide the US electorate and to erode trust in the US democracy. For this reason, it is not safe to assume content created by sources you have never heard of is safe or reliable—even (or especially) if it tends to support beliefs or positions you already accept. Cultivate a skeptical attitude towards social media content, and use verified sources to check scientific and political facts before trusting, liking, and sharing.
Wednesday, February 22, 2023
When Fairy Lands Become Dumps
Monday, January 09, 2023
It Takes Just a Little While
Wednesday, January 04, 2023
If You Wake Up
One of the leftovers from last year (and previous years) was the use of the word "woke" as some kind of belligerent belittling of people, particularly people who are "on the left," if one must use such terms to describe a group. It seems we must do that these days.
For the longest time, I did not know what the word "woke" meant. Did it mean I had my eyes open? Did it mean I understood things? Did it mean I had been to college?
Merriam-Webster defines it thusly: "Woke is now defined in this dictionary as “aware of and actively attentive to important facts and issues (especially issues of racial and social justice),” and identified as U.S. slang. It originated in African American English and gained more widespread use beginning in 2014 as part of the Black Lives Matter movement. By the end of that same decade, it was also being applied by some as a general pejorative for anyone who is or appears to be politically left-leaning."
The origin of the word goes back decades, with no one quite sure where it originated with this use.
Given that it means to be aware of facts and issues, the word "woke" could have been used to describe me for my entire life. I've always been aware of social issues, racial injustice, the ineptitudes of capitalism, and the difference in classes, culture, and religion. I may not understand them all in great depth, but I have been aware of them.
I see nothing wrong with being able to acknowledge sexism, racism, misogyny, the dire restraints of the patriarchal system, and the crushing weight of religions of all shapes and sizes upon society. These are things we all live with. Most people, I have found, do not spend time thinking about them. They don't care, for example, if women make 30 cents less than men. They were raised to think that this was normal, and they see it as normal.
For me, it's an injustice that needs to be corrected.
Things become weird when people get stuff mixed up with their emotions - or with their pocketbook. For whatever reason, gender issues trigger many people. I strongly suspect this is because almost everyone is bisexual to some degree, and people are raised via their religions to beat this aspect of themselves into submission. Allowing gender issues to become open and part of society mixes up them up because the things they were taught are being challenged.
If it hits the pocketbook, as in, "my taxes shouldn't pay for the welfare queen's kid," then it triggers a different kind of angry emotion. To this I say, let your taxes pay for the military jets that I abhor; my taxes can pay for the child and mother to have something to eat.
Why being "woke" is an insult is beyond me, but the insult comes from people I tend to perceive as not very smart in the first place, and here is where the trouble comes in.
When we start lumping folks into categories, we begin to have problems. If thinking I'm woke also means I think the "unwoke" are idiots, or vice versa, well, of course dialogue breaks down. Nobody wants to talk to an idiot, whether they're awake or not.
I can't cancel people who don't want to accept my acceptance (which is what being "woke" is - a form of acceptance), simply because they disagree with it. I can, however, object to individuals who may want to argue with me or make my life miserable because they find me disagreeable. I don't have to allow myself to be harmed.
Being "woke" is a non-starter for me. I don't see it as insult. I see it as an acknowledgement that I understand that societal problems are many, and some of them can and should be changed, corrected, fixed, or improved. The world is not stagnant, and neither is society. Change is the one constant we can always count on.
Being "woke" means I know that things are wrong in the world, and they need to be changed.
I don't know what's so bad about that.