| %%USERNAME%%    %%ACCWORDS%%
%%ONOFF%%
|
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
  |  SoCalScribe's Diatribe
A blog for my assorted thoughts and rambling inner monologue. |
|
Welcome to my blog! I would make some sort of clever introduction here, but most of us already know how blogs work; if you like me and like my writing, you might also enjoy my personal ramblings. If you don't like me, you're probably not reading this anyway... and if you're undecided in your opinion of me, I'd invite you to read as much or as little as you like and decide for yourself. Please read on and, if you find something worth discussing, feel free to submit a comment!  NOTES:  The wonderful yellow ribbon that adorns this blog is courtesy of my dear friend Gabriella  . I'm docked at "Blog Harbor from The Talent Pond"  , a safe port for bloggers to connect. |
| Temporary Vegetarianism |
So I'm about six days into a two week trial run as a vegetarian. My wife and I watched a documentary last weekend about how Americans have too much processed food, animal protein, and animal byproducts in their diet... and how reducing consumption of those foods in favor of a whole food plant-based diet can dramatically decrease blood pressure and cholesterol, as well as increase energy and the flavor of foods. Since my doctor recently told me I have to work on lowering my cholesterol anyway, I figured why not give this a try. I'm not going to lie; it's been really, really tough. I just don't like that many fruits and vegetables to begin with, so I'm having a much more difficult time sticking to the diet than my wife. I dearly love meat and dairy and I didn't think I could cut out both cold turkey, so I decided I would try a vegetarian diet rather than going full vegan... or full "whole food plant-based," whatever the term for that is.  My goal is to reduce the amount of dairy I consume and make vegan options as often as possible.In the past week, here's what I've learned from the diet: Almond milk (vanilla, sweetened) is an acceptable substitute for regular milk. It tastes almost the same and doesn't have the texture I dislike about soymilk, or the cardboard aftertaste I dislike about unsweetened almond milk. My wife has being doing all the cooking this week (she's a saint), and I fully admit there are vegetarian recipes out there that are actually pretty tasty. Will I be a lifelong, no-exceptions vegetarian or vegan? Probably not. But I think I could definitely cut a significant portion of meat and dairy out of my diet by not having it with every meal. A vegetarian meal (or two) each day isn't such a bad thing. Fake meat is stupid. Whether we're talking about tofurkey (turkey lunch meat made out of tofu), soy burgers, or seitan (meat substitute made from gluten, usually wheat), it does not taste the same as regular meat, no matter how much hardcore vegetarians/vegans claim it does (and how would they know???  ). If you want to eat meat, eat meat. If you want to be a vegetarian, be a vegetarian. But being a vegetarian and eating fake "meat" is just depressing. It's a less flavorful, constant reminder of what you used to enjoy eating. I don't feel any appreciable difference in my taste buds or my energy level. If anything, I have lower energy because I'm hungry all the time. There's a pro and con to this; as someone who could afford to lose some weight, I'm not snacking when I'm bored because my only snack options are things I don't particularly enjoy (fruits and veggies). On the downside, it feels strange to eat regular meals and never feel full or satisfied. The biggest upside to the diet, though, is that I definitely haven't felt that "gross" feeling that comes from eating too much meat, dairy, or processed foods. With an unrestricted diet, I would sometimes have meals where I overindulged or generally had that "Oh, I shouldn't have eaten all that" feeling that takes a couple hours to subside while my meal digests. That hasn't happened at all in the last week; I feel the exact same before and after every meal. None of that "wait 30 minutes after you eat" stuff... I feel like I could hit the gym five minutes after clearing my plate and not feel any ill effects. Another downside is my temptation to eat processed foods. Since I've cut out meat, which is something that I really enjoy eating, I find myself much more tempted by processed foods. Chips, candy, and other snack foods are so much more tempting to me now (and I admit to giving into those temptations a few times this week), and I honestly wonder about the benefits of a diet that, at least for me personally, trades one "bad" food (meat) for something that's just as bad (processed foods that are technically vegetarian), if not worse for me. The biggest downside is that I honestly don't enjoy food as much. I'm someone who truly thinks that food should be appreciated and savored and enjoyed... not just shoveled into your body to fuel and sustain it. And with this diet, meal time is definitely leaning toward the latter. I'm eating when I have hunger pangs that I need to satisfy. I'm eating when I need something in my stomach. But the things that go in my stomach aren't very appetizing to me. I've tried to be a good sport and - all due credit to my wife and her cooking - nothing has tasted bad this week. But it's hard get myself excited for a salad, or a veggie burrito, or a bean casserole. It's entirely possible that I just need to give it time to figure out the stuff I do like and build a menu around that... but with this first foray into vegetarianism, every item on the menu sounds pretty unappetizing at first blush because all I can think about is adding some sliced flank steak or shredded chicken on top of it.  Overall, this has been an interesting experiment, and I'm going to try it for another week to see how it is after the initial shock is over. I'm not entirely convinced that it's going to stick or that I'm going to be able to cut meat and dairy entirely out of my diet. But if there's one takeaway from this experience, it's been that there are definitely ways to cut down on the meat and dairy in my diet. I don't need meat and cheese or milk with every meal, and there's no question that it's healthier for us and a better ecological choice to reduce or cut those things out of our diet. We watched a second documentary over the weekend about several New Yorkers who decide to become vegan for six weeks and measure the results. While the documentary itself seemed more like an anti-meat/dairy argument than a pro-vegan argument, the one thing I noticed is that at the end of the trial, while there was one who became a vegan and one who completely reverted, the others admitted to being "mostly vegetarian" or "mostly vegan." And that appealed to me for a couple of reasons. First, I think it's absurd to assume that any kind of diet is an all-or-nothing thing in the absence of any kind of health or moral reasons for the restriction. And second, I hate the idea of labels because I think they encourage guilt for going outside their specific guidelines. If you call yourself a vegetarian and someone walks in on you stuffing your face with a cheeseburger, there's an inherent sense of guilt/shame that you're somehow failing, like a reformed alcoholic or smoker who, in a moment of weakness, takes a drink or lights up a cigarette again. And unless you object to eating meat/dairy on a moral basis, why should you feel bad about eating a cheeseburger? I think it's more akin to an athlete than an alcoholic; you're disciplined and have a strict regimen most of the time... but there's no reason to feel bad because you want a day off every once in a while. We'll see what happens after another week, but my inclination after the past few days is that I could definitely make an effort to consume less meat and dairy. I can have vegetarian meals on a daily basis and it won't kill me. I can swap out a few staples with healthier alternatives (like milk for almond milk) But I'm not going to feel bad about myself for wanting to order a steak or enjoy an ice cream cone every once in a while. Assuming nothing radical changes in the next week, I think I can safely call myself "mostly vegetarian." Or at least (and probably more likely), "partly vegetarian." |
| Another Visit Home |
I took a couple days off work this week so that my wife and I could go home and visit family. We're at the end of our first stop; two days in Sacramento to visit my wife's sister, my brother, and my parents and grandmothers. This is where my wife and I spent our formative years, so there's always the occasional high school friend to meet up with as well. Tomorrow morning we're off to the Bay Area where we'll see my wife's father, grandmother, and assorted aunts, uncles, and cousins. What strikes me most about these trips home is how much my hometown has changed... and at the same time, how nothing's really changed at all. The last time I was in Sacramento was last July for my brother's wedding, and in those seven months an entirely new shopping center has been finished and countless stores have cycled in and out of local storefronts. It still has the same look and feel of the town I grew up in, even if the Borders is now a Famous Footwear and the Ralph's grocery store that's been empty for years is now a Fresh & Easy... but the experience of being here hasn't changed. I grew up in a very consumer-driven area; shopping, dining out, and entertainment are the main pastimes, and even if the Dimple Records in the old part of town is long gone, there's a relatively new Best Buy to fill that niche. The Century Theaters where I spent years hanging out and watching movies has been all but replaced by a brand-new theater in the brand-new shopping center. And the family-owned coffee shop that was struggling to keep its doors open is now a Starbucks. People in my hometown are still doing the things they've always done; shopping, eating, and looking for entertainment. The only difference is that the shopping centers where you can do these things have been renovated or replaced, and the establishments you can find are more and more often national chains and huge conglomerates rather than locally-owned shops. Perhaps most depressing of all, because of the current state of the economy, even when they do put in a new shopping center, half the storefronts are empty because they can't find anyone who can afford the lease rates that make the center profitable for its investors. Back when the center was in the design phase, they figured a new center in a prime location would net premium rental rates. But few businesses can afford to pay premium rental rates anymore.  I'm not really sure what I'm trying to say with this blog post. I spent part of today driving around my hometown and seeing what was new, and felt a pang sadness being there, seeing the brand new shopping center and the new big box stores that have replaced the former big box stores that had to close their doors. I was driving through a town I barely recognized for all the new construction and new businesses springing up... and yet it felt like nothing had changed in the ten years since I've lived here. It's a strange feeling when you visit a place that looks like home, acts like home, and even used to be home... and yet also feels so different. |
| Thirteen Reasons Why |
||||||
Well, I found my first "must read" book of 2013. I've read a few good ones already, but this is the first one that I completely and unreservedly recommend that you read, especially if you are of high school age or have children of high school age. Fair warning; the book does deal predominantly with the theme of suicide, but it's a fascinating look into the mind of a teenage girl who decides to end her life, and what led her to ultimately make that decision. The book is:
SYNOPSIS (from Amazon): Clay Jensen returns home from school to find a strange package with his name on it lying on his porch. Inside he discovers several cassette tapes recorded by Hannah Baker - his classmate and crush - who committed suicide two weeks earlier. Hannah's voice tells him that there are thirteen reasons why she decided to end her life. Clay is one of them. If he listens, he'll find out why. Clay spends the night crisscrossing his town with Hannah as his guide. He becomes a firsthand witness to Hannah's pain, and learns the truth about himself-a truth he never wanted to face. In a word, this book is heartbreaking. As Clay listens to the tapes and you hear Hannah explain the events that led to her decision to end her life, there are times when you just want to cry because of the way so many small things caused such a tragic outcome. The thing about the thirteen reasons is that most of them are relatively innocuous and the people who did these things to her at the time would probably have no idea how much their actions affected her if they hadn't heard the tapes. I won't spoil too much for you, but the first two reasons are the guy she shared her first kiss with spreading a rumor that he also let her feel her up... and the second was another juvenile classmate putting her on a list as having the "best ass" in the freshman class. What's so poignant about this book is that it's little things like that, and the ripples they cause later in the story, that are at the root of Hannah's depression. It's not some manufactured melodrama centering around deep psychological issues like sexual abuse or neglectful parents; it's the story of a lonely girl who decides to end her life because rumors and jokes and childish behavior and the betrayal and inaction of people she thought were friends led her to believe that life was just going to be a series of hurtful disappointments. And it's truly heartbreaking because, as you follow Clay and the progression of the tapes, you realize that all it would have taken to convince Hannah not to kill herself was a kind word here, or a ray of hope there. A kind word or a ray of hope she never received. This is easily the best book I've ever read about the issue of teen suicide and depression. It so clearly shows how even the little things can have a huge impact in another person's life. You don't know what that person is going through, or the other things that are happening in their life, so you'll never truly know if that rumor you spread or that note you pass around or that time that you could have stood up to someone being bullied and didn't is just another day, or if it's the day another kid decides that there's no reason to continue living. It's a heavy book, and I sat in my car (I listened to this one on audio) for a good twenty minutes after the book ended just reflecting on what I'd just read/heard. If you want a better understanding of why suicide is such a concerning issue, especially among youths, and how even the smallest things can have a disastrous impact on the mental well-being of a teenager... all told within a compelling narrative... I highly recommend you check this one out. |
||||||
| Separating Fact From Fiction |
I'm reading a fascinating book right now called Supergods: What Masked Vigilantes, Miraculous Mutants, and a Sun God from Smallville Can Teach Us About Being Human: ($12.35 from Amazon.Com) by Grant Morrison. In case the extensive title isn't enough, the book is about the history of comics and the influence they've had on people since their inception. Grant Morrison is an accomplished comic book writer and playwright who wrote this analysis of the comic medium in 2011. In the book, it talks about Dr. Frederic Wertham, a German-American psychiatrist who was an outspoken opponent of violence and perversity in mass media. His criticisms of comic books resulted in a Congressional inquiry, which resulted in the Comics Code of 1954 which was a particularly restrictive set of creative limitations on comics to protect the innocence of readers in the same way that the Hays Code "protected" movie audiences in the 1930s-1960s. Among many of Wertham's accusations were that Batman and Robin (and Alfred) condoned and celebrated a homosexual lifestyle, and that Wonder Woman's island paradise home of Themyscira perpetuated a BDSM lifestyle, especially since a strong, independent female character clearly promoted lesbianism. Ultimately, Wertham's argument (however ridiculous his individual accusations) is the same argument that many people still make against video games and other forms of media today... that violent or "perverse" imagery is harmful to children because they don't have the capacity to fully determine right from wrong, or fact from fiction. When there's a school shooting or a suicide, it's the music, or the video games, or the movies, or some other kind of form of media that's scrutinized for contributing factors to the tragedy. In Supergods, though, Morrison offers a counterpoint to that argument: "I tend to believe the reverse is true: that it's adults who have the most trouble separating fact from fiction. A child knows that real crabs on the beach do not sing or talk like the cartoon crabs in The Little Mermaid. A child can accept all kinds of weird-looking creatures and bizarre occurrences in a story because the child understands that stories have different rules that allow for pretty much anything to happen. Adults, on the other hand, struggle desperately with fiction, demanding constantly that it conform to the rules of everyday life. Adults foolishly demand to know how Superman can possibly fly, or how Batman can possibly run a multibillion-dollar business empire during the day and fight crime at night, when the answer is obvious even to the smallest child: because it's not real." I have to agree with Morrison. When I was a kid, there was a very clear distinction between fact and fiction. When I saw Aladdin in the theater, I didn't go home and start rubbing all the lamps and teapots in our house trying to conjure a genie. When I played the Goldeneye video game (and watched the movie), I didn't think I was a secret agent that could go around shooting people and participating in car chases. The things I watched and the games I played were entertainment... and when they were over, I went on about my business. Maybe I imagined what it would be like to fight alongside the Teenage Mutant Ninja Turtles, but the closest I ever got was taking martial arts classes in the safety of a dojo under the supervision of an instructor. I honestly didn't expect anything to jump out of a sewer grate outside and attack us. Now that I'm an adult and work in the entertainment industry, I do think about things like realism and logic. I read a story and ask myself, "But how did the protagonist learn to be a black ops soldier?" Or, "How can they expect us to believe that an encounter with radioactive toxic waste could give someone superpowers instead of killing them by means of horribly unpleasant radiation poisoning?" Or, "How many times can this same serial killer/arch-villain escape from prison before people lock him up and throw away the key?" Somewhere along the way, I lost that part of myself that I had as a kid, where I didn't need any explanation or a direct link to the real world in order to accept that incredible things were possible. As adults, we can still suspend our disbelief... but it'll never be as easy as it was as a kid to just say, "Hey, I accept that ludicrous premise or explanation because it's supposed to be fiction." Obviously, there's an exception for those mentally ill, damaged, or imbalanced people who legitimately can't distinguish fact from fiction or reality from imagination, but if we're talking about the same average audience that Wertham is so concerned with protecting, I have to agree with Morrison that kids aren't the ones who have difficultly distinguishing fact from fiction... adults are. |
| Getting Older & A Thank You to WdC |
Hard to believe that on the 15th of this month, I'll have been a member of Writing.Com for 10 years.  I'm amazed at all the things that have changed in the past decade. For Writing.Com itself, the The StoryMaster  and The StoryMistress  have managed to consistently and impressively update the website to keep it updated and fresh. I remember a time (and boy, it doesn't feel like all that long ago!) where there were no such thing as cover images, or notebooks, or even the nice dynamic way our portfolios can expand folders to show us what's inside. Once upon a time, us old folks had to click on the folder and open a new page to see what was inside the folder!  What the SM and SMs have done with the site over the ten years I've been a member has been nothing short of remarkable.For me personally, though, I'm more astounded by the things that have changed in me. I spent a lot of years lurking around the site, really uncertain about how to jump in and get involved. At that point, I was just a college kid who enjoyed creating stories and had been told by a few English teachers that he had a knack for writing. It wasn't until I started getting involved with Writing.Com that I really started to develop my voice as a writer. I entered dozens - possibly hundreds - of contests over the years, writing anything and everything I could. I read and reviewed other stories, including my competitors and the winning entries. Over the years, I worked on my craft and learned to be a better writer. During those years, the staff also saw fit to promote me from a Registered Author to a Preferred Author, and again from Preferred Author to Moderator. I remember being surprised (and nearly getting into an accident) when I checked my email on the way to work one morning and saw that shiny new yellow case. And almost falling out of my chair at the communal internet computer at our hotel in Paris when I absconded downstairs to check my email and realized that my case was now blue. Those were two of the most memorable surprises of my life, and I've been trying to live up to the honor ever since. By running contests, organizing groups, reviewing thousands of items, donating to activities and the account upgrades of fellow members, etc., I've done my best to give back to an online writing community that's already given me so much. Still not sure I'm doing enough to live up to the trust they've put in me, but I'm never going to stop trying. Thank you, Writing.Com, for the past ten years. For making me a better writer, and for giving me an online community to call home. I plan on being here for a very long time... and if the past ten years are any indication, the next ten are going to be even better! |
| Argo |
I'm going to go on record right now and say that if ARGO doesn't win Best Picture, I'm going to throw a fit. That might sound strange coming from someone who works for a company who has two films as other nominees in the same category, but ARGO was seriously that good. I have no idea why Ben Affleck wasn't nominated for Best Director, and it's a freaking crime. It's easily one of the best films of last year, if not the best. I think I'm going to read the screenplay this weekend because I'm curious to see how it translated from script to screen. If anyone's looking for a great film to see, I can't recommend this one enough. And between ARGO and THE PERKS OF BEING A WALLFLOWER last week, I'm on a two-movie hot streak. Both movies were excellent. |
| Whelmed |
One of my favorite movies of all time is 10 THINGS I HATE ABOUT YOU. (If you haven't seen it yet, please check it out... it's wonderful!) Among the many, many clever lines in the movie, there's a brief moment between best friends Biana (Larisa Oleynik) and Chastity (Gabrielle Union) where Chastity asks, "I know you can be overwhelmed, and you can be underwhelmed... but can you ever been just whelmed?" To which Bianca replies, "I think you can in Europe." Well, as luck would have it, the word-of-the-day email in my inbox this morning was indeed for the word "whelmed." And here's a little trivia about the origin of the word: "It is not overwhelming and it is not underwhelming. You leave the production feeling merely whelmed." Thus wrote Michael Phillips in the Los Angeles Times, February 6, 2001. Contemporary writers like Philips sometimes use "whelm" to denote a middle stage between "underwhelm" and "overwhelm." But that's not how "whelm" has traditionally been used. "Whelm" and "overwhelm" have been with us since Middle English (when they were "whelmen" and "overwhelmen"), and throughout the years their meanings have largely overlapped. Both words early on meant "to overturn," for example, and both have also come to mean "to overpower in thought or feeling." Around 1950, however, folks started using a third word, "underwhelmed," for "unimpressed," and lately "whelmed" has been popping up with the meaning "moderately impressed." So there you go! You can indeed be whelmed... and not just in Europe! |
| A Tale of Two Spaces |
I'd just like to go on record with saying that, while everyone has a preference for one or the other, anyone who actually lets the issue of one space or two spaces after terminal punctuation dissuade them from reading something is completely and utterly insane. I ran into this problem over the weekend when one of my wife's grad school professors returned a paper and insisted that she fix the "technical problems" in the paper, among which was the fact that my wife only spaced once at the end of every sentence rather than twice.  I'm not going to get into a debate about which is right and which is wrong, mainly because there is no right and wrong here. People who advocate for two spaces usually either say it's the way they were taught is proper, or cite that it makes the beginning of new sentences clearer and more distinct. Opponents who advocate for one space usually cite the fact that the publishing industry (go ahead, grab a book or magazine and see how many spaces they use) hasn't double-spaced published work since the invention of variable-width (proportional) fonts more than half a century ago. So I get that there are people out there who fall on one side of this issue or another. But to actually let it prevent you from reading the content of the sentences... or worse, to be in a position of authority and to tell students or other subordinates that there is an absolute right or wrong, is appalling. One of these days I'll write a full newsletter about this kind of stuff, but for right now I just wanted to vent. I was so mad at my wife's teacher for not just handing back the paper and saying that it can't be graded... but for having the nerve to say that choosing to use one space instead of two is somehow grammatically incorrect and wrong despite the fact that every book and article they read in class uses one space.  |
| The Perks of Being A Wallflower |
Had a chance to watch THE PERKS OF BEING A WALLFLOWER at the theater last night. Not only was it great to see it for only $2 at a second-run theater my wife and I found, but the movie itself was excellent. I still haven't seen a lot of movies from last year, but I would easily put this in my Top 3 from 2012. It was written and directed by the author of the novel, and I definitely have to read the book now. Stephen Chbosky did a remarkable job of capturing the awkwardness of adolescence, especially for those of us who had difficulty relating to others and who felt socially awkward. I highly recommend this movie and will report back once I finish the book. |
| Musicians And Film Scores |
Lately I've been listening to a lot of film scores. I've found that instrumental music is great for helping me get into a writing mindset; lyrics are distracting because I get the song's narrative in my head rather than thinking about my own story, but I've found that listening to film scores, classical music, jazz, and other instrumental compositions is a great way to get my music/tonal fix without distracting myself. One of the things I'm really excited about is that a lot of musicians are starting to get into the film scoring arena. Trent Reznor of Nine Inch Nails won an Oscar for his scoring of "The Social Network," and did an excellent job on the American remake of "The Girl With The Dragon Tattoo" as well. Last year, Mike Shinoda of Linkin Park scored "The Raid: Redemption," and this year it was just announced that rapper Jay-Z will be scoring Baz Lurhman's upcoming adaptation of "The Great Gatsby." I really like the music of both Nine Inch Nails and Linkin Park, and it's not surprising that I enjoyed the industrial rock vibe of their film scores. I'm kind of curious to see what Jay-Z will do with a film score and how he'll work his own sound into a period piece set in the 1920s. At the very least, it should be an interesting project! |
| 2012 Reading List |
Another year has come and gone, and although I fell short of my goal of reading 50 books, I did reach my other goal of reading more nonfiction than fiction. I ended up listening to quite a few other things during the commute besides audiobooks (mostly podcasts), so I think that took a big chunk out of my "reading" time on the road. So my goal for this year is the same as last year... 50 books in 2013. Here are the ones I read in 2012: FICTION: 50 Shades of Grey by E.L. James Adventure of the Blue Carbuncle, The by Sir Arthur Conan Doyle Clash of Kings, A by George R.R. Martin Club Justice by Mara ♣ McBain  Divine Comedy, The by Dante Aligheri Keeper of Lost Causes, The by Jussi Adler-Olsen Neverwhere by Neil Gaiman Requiem: Book of the Fallen by Adriana Noir  Screwtape Letters, The by C.S. Lewis Special Topics in Calamity Physics by Marisha Pessl Strange Case of Dr. Jekyll and Mr. Hyde by Robert Louis Stevenson World Out of Time, A by Larry Niven NONFICTION: Autobiography of Black Hawk by Black Hawk Belief Instinct, The: The Psychology of Souls, Destiny, and the Meaning of Life by Jesse Bering Black Swan, The: The Impact of the Highly Improbable by Nassim Nicholas Taleb City of Falling Angels, The by John Berendt Civil Disobedience by Henry David Thoreau Common Sense by Thomas Paine Crack in the Edge of the World, A: America and the Great California Earthquake of 1906 by Simon Winchester Defining Moment, The: FDR's Hundred Days of Triumph and Hope by Jonathan Alter Field Guide to Demons, A by Carol A. Mack Ghost in the Wires: My Adventures as the World's Most Wanted Hacker by Kevin Mitnick Guns, Germs, and Steel: The Fates of Human Societies by Jared Diamond Heartbreaking Work of Staggering Genius, A by Dave Eggers How to Win at the Sport of Business by Mark Cuban How to Write a Movie Script with Kick-Ass and Awesome Characters by Michael Rogan Jesus Among Other Gods: The Absolute Claims of the Christian Message by Ravi Zacharias Manhood for Amateurs: The Pleasures and Regrets of a Husband, Father, and Son by Michael Chabon Nickel and Dimed: On (Not) Getting By in America by Barbara Ehrenreich Power of Myth, The by Joseph Campbell Simplexity: Why Simple Things Become Complex (and How Complex Things Can Be Made Simple) by Jeffery Kluger Steve Jobs by Walter Isaacson Whole New Mind, A: Why Right-Brainers Will Rule The Future by Daniel Pink Why Guys Need God: The Spiritual Side of Money, Sex, and Relationships by Michael Erre OTHER: COMICS - Batman: Arkham Unhinged #1-#43 COMICS - Grimm Fairy Tales: Beyond Wonderland (series) COMICS - Grimm Fairy Tales: Escape From Wonderland (series) COMICS - Grimm Fairy Tales: Return to Wonderland (series) COMICS - Witchblade #1-#62 PODCAST - Nerdist Writers Panel (13 episodes) PODCAST - Scriptnotes w/ John August & Craig Mazin (56 episodes) PODCAST - Slate's Political Gabfest (15 episodes) SCREENPLAYS - 57 Total 2012 Book Count: 34 Overall, my favorite books this year were Neverwhere and The Screwtape Letters for fiction, and Ghost in the Wires and Steve Jobs for nonfiction. City of Falling Angels was also very good. Looking back at the books I read though, I feel like the reading year was just okay. There are a lot of books that I enjoyed, but very few that I would rave about or wholeheartedly recommend to a friend. There were only a few books that I actually disliked, but fewer than I expected in terms of ones I would tell a friend, "You really need to check this out." So in addition to the 50 books in 2013, I'm hoping to be able to come back and report that each and every one of them is a must read! Happy New Year! I hope everybody reaches any reading and writing goals they may have in the new year. |
| 31 Ways I Blew My Marriage |
So my wife turned me onto a blog last night called "Single Dad Laughing," which is written by a single dad (twice divorced) named Dan Pearce. His writing is filled with humor, endearing moments, and experiences that he shares with everyone on the web. The post of his that really resonated, though, was the one called "31 Ways I Blew My Marriage." He started with sixteen things and eventually expanded it by adding another fifteen, but the idea came about when his family was giving marriage advice to his little sister before her wedding, and Dan couldn't think of anything except the reasons his marriage fell apart. The result was him creating a list of things he did wrong in his two failed relationships, and how he would have handled them differently. The entire list is filled with wise observations, wonderful humor, and excellent advice, but I think my three favorites would have to be: 12. DON'T STOP HAVING FUN TOGETHER. Age shouldn't matter. Physical ability shouldn't matter. Couples should never stop having fun with each other, and I really wish I wouldn't have gotten into so many ruts in which we didn't really go out and do anything. And, I've been around the block enough times to know that when the fun is missing, and the social part of life is missing, so also goes missing the ability to be fully content with each other. IF I COULD HAVE A DO-OVER: I'd make a rule with her that we'd never stay home two weekends in a row. BONUS! awesome stories and awesome memories come from doing awesome things. And so do cherished embarrassing moments. 23. DON'T STOP TAKING HER ON NICE DATES. When I was dating her, I'd have no problem paying a little more for nice dates. Twenty extra bucks for the ambiance of a nicer restaurant was no biggie when I wanted to charm her and make her feel worth it. I'd pay for nicer seats at the show. I'd get better seats at the basketball game. So why is it that after marriage, she was no longer worth it? Why was spending the money a waste instead of a valuable way to keep her feeling special Why did I stop going to shows and basketball games and everything else? IF I COULD HAVE A DO-OVER: I'd think she was special enough to spend a little extra cash on once in a while. I'd look at every extra dollar spent as an investment into our relationship. I'd keep apprised of her favorite bands and her favorite performing art shows and I'd surprise her with tickets before she even knew they were coming. BONUS! nice dates lead to nice pictures on her phone which lead to everyone on her Instagram and Facebook thinking you're the damned coolest hubby on the planet. 28. MOVE AWAY FROM HER FAMILY. AND YOURS. When we were first married, we would see my family all the time and her family almost as often. We spent almost every Sunday at my family's house, and a lot of weeknights and weekends at hers. We spent nearly every holiday with our families. And every special occasion, too. And while family is usually great, it really kept us from developing our own working family dynamic, our own traditions, and our own strengthened way of living and doing things. It drug us into unnecessary drama. And most of all, it kept us from learning to lean on each other during our rough patches instead of on our parents or siblings. IF I COULD HAVE A DO-OVER: I would move far away from both families for a year or two. I wouldn't come back until we'd been through at least a few big marital challenges on our own without the involvement of any family at all. That way, when we did come back, we'd be strong on our own and our families would be great supplements to our marriage instead of major players. BONUS! when you make your own traditions, you can finally add things in that your parents weren't cool with. "And after we open our Christmas pajamas... everyone has to eat a pound of chocolate. And then they have to stand on their heads while screaming. And then they have to jump on their beds." Stuff like that. The entire list can be found on his blog here: What really struck me about the things he mentioned on his list were how many of them were really simple things that, for whatever reason, a lot of married couples stop (or start) doing after a while. I fully admit that I'm guilty of several of these things myself, and when you combine a few (or a lot of them) into one relationship, I think it's suddenly not all that surprising how many relationships fail. Even if you promise yourselves to one another "until death do you part," it can be difficult for a relationship to endure when someone stops trying to look good for their partner AND labels their partner with negative labels AND skips out on the things that are important to their partner AND emotionally distances themselves after a fight AND... Everything on this list is, in the grand scheme of things, a relatively minor issue. He's not saying that he should stop beating his wife, or stop having an affair on the side, or start taking extravagant vacations that they can't afford. He's pointing out a lot of little things that, through routine or by some other means, find their way into our relationships and can cause a lot of harm. And I think that's the mistake that a lot of us make in relationships; thinking that those little things don't really matter all that much. Thinking that as long as you're basically a good person, working so many hours that you're never in the mood, or spending every weekend in front of the television, or pooping with the door open (yes, that's on the list) is something that you shouldn't have to worry about. What I love about this article is that it really made me realize several ways that I'm not being the best husband I can be. I've fallen into the trap of getting so comfortable in my relationship that I've stopped or started doing a lot of these things... and then convincing myself that I'm basically a good guy, so why is my wife so upset about [whatever it is she's upset about]?" For anyone who's interested in reading through his list... is there anything in there that you see in your own relationship? |
| Lakers Coaching Woes & Our Impatient Culture |
| I'm sure this will sound blasphemous (good thing I'm living in Orange County now!), but I've never been a fan of the Los Angeles Lakers. They may be one of the most successful basketball franchises in history, but I've always felt like the team carries itself with a certain level of entitlement. Many on the team (and many more of their fans) have this sense of indignation whenever the team fails to make it to the finals, win a championship, etc. And with the latest news, it doesn't seem like they've humbled themselves any. The sensational Phil Jackson (coached teams to 11 different NBA Championships) left at the end of the 2010-2011 season. They hired Mike Brown to replace him, and Brown coached the team to the playoffs in the 2011-2012 season and had a 1-4 start to the 2012-2013 season before being unceremoniously fired by the management. For having a losing record after only five games of an eight-two game season? I'm sure there were many other considerations that went into the decision, but it sure seems a hell of a lot like they didn't give the new coach a lot of leniency when it came to winning. After *only* making it to the playoffs last year and losing four of the first five games of the season, that's enough to give someone the boot?Basketball isn't my sport of choice anyway, so maybe that has something to do with it, but this seems like an incredibly rash decision made by panicked executives who worry that there's a possibility their team might *gasp* actually not win the championship or make the playoffs this year. Since the 1993-1994 season, the Lakers have failed to make the playoffs only twice (the last time was since 2004-2005). I know, I know... everyone wants to win... but they just fired a coach with $11 million left on his contract after only five games of the season? That's less than 7% of the total games they'll play this year! I've noticed the same thing in television series, something that's more aligned with my interests. Ever notice how shows will be canceled after two or three episodes? Or just as bad, moved around from time slot to time slot when they aren't instant hits that beat the ratings of every other network's shows? I don't know what it is with the currently level of impatience everyone has, but when did we start expecting success to the point that we start thinking about cutting our losses before anyone really has a chance to see how things play out? Fire Mike Brown if you've lost twelve of the first fifteen, or fifteen of the first twenty... not after losing four of the first five. Pull a TV show from the schedule when it's under performed most other shows on the same time slot for several weeks... not after it finishes second to AMERICAN IDOL two weeks in a row. Chastise someone for not calling you back after a day or two... not twenty minutes after you leave them a message. There's such an expectation of instant success or instant getting-what-you-want in this culture that I wonder how many good or even great things we're missing because we never give them a chance. I miss the times when networks would give a show a whole season to see if it was successful. Or the times when an employer would give an employee (and vice versa) a year of their time before writing off the job as a bad fit and jumping ship. I miss the days where people actually gave things a chance for a little while before jumping to the next thing... and I often wonder what could have been if people would just stay the course a little longer. Maybe Mike Brown would have been a total disaster this year. Maybe his successor, Mike D'Antoni, will give the Lakers their precious championship and will be the change they needed in the franchise. Maybe not. We'll never really know because Mike Brown wasn't ever given a chance to turn his season around. |
| Election Aftermath |
| Now that it's all said and done, here are my thoughts on the election (including California's ballot measures). Please note that these are my individual thoughts, which anyone is free to disagree with if they feel otherwise. PRESIDENTIAL RACE: Barack Obama re-elected I voted for Obama for three reasons. First, I didn't believe that Mitt Romney had a viable game plan. He talked a lot about creating jobs and fixing the economy and doing things differently that Obama, but I didn't see many concrete details. The economy is slowly recovering and while I agree that we haven't seen the change that we hoped to see by now, nothing in Romney's speeches, campaign materials, or talking points led me to believe that he has a clear and better plan for the direction our country is headed. I have no doubt where Romney wants to see us go, but I also don't feel like he communicated any specifics about how he plans to get us there. Second, even Romney's plan called for budget that would only be balanced after ten years... after even his second term. Obama's plan is slowly making progress and I don't see why Obama only gets four years to fix everything if even Romney says it can't be done in less than eight. Things aren't ideal yet, but they're getting better and are significantly better than they were in 2008, so I have to give the benefit of the doubt to the guy who wants to keep us on course rather than try something radically different. And third, I just don't trust Romney. He changed his position numerous times on key issues like abortion, foreign policy, the size and role of the federal government in disaster relief, etc. While I do think that the "Moderate Mitt" of the latter half of the election would have made a perfectly fine President, there's also that part of him during the primaries that was as a hardcore, ultraconservative right-winger... and I just didn't think we could be sure about which one would actually take office. All that said, I voted for Obama not because I think he's infallible... but because I think the country is slowly headed in the right direction and that he deserves the same eight years that every other candidate claimed to need in order for their plan to take shape. U.S. SENATORIAL RACE: Dianne Feinstein re-elected I actually like both of California's U.S. Senators, so I was happy to see Feinstein re-elected. PROP 30: Passed Quick Overview: Temporary income tax increase (for people making over $250K) and sales tax increase to fund public education and pay down state debt. I obviously support this proposition, especially since my wife is a teacher and the public schools in California desperately need money. What I don't like about this prop is the fact that we were basically blackmailed into passing it (if it didn't pass, $6 billion in additional cuts to public schools would have gone into effect), and that there is a provision which allows the funds to be spent on state debt as well. While I am all for raising taxes on those who make more than $250,000 and seeing a slight bump to our sales tax in order to pay for this education reform, I'm on board. But I'm also desperately afraid that Sacramento politicians are going to mismanage the funds like they've done for the past several years, repeatedly taking money out of education and funneling it elsewhere. I support the prop, but I pray they actually use the money for schools like it's intended. I don't think the state can handle another fiasco where voters think they're voting in support of education and then schools don't ever actually see any of the money.  PROP 31: Failed Quick Overview: Budget reform; would have required legislature to approve a state budget for a two-year period rather than current one-year period. Honestly, if we can barely keep the budget balanced as it is, I don't see how moving to a once-every-two-years budget requirement is going to help. We need more consistent oversight of how our budget is being handled, not less. The California legislature isn't exactly doing a great job of keeping our state funded... I think the budget needs to be more carefully managed, not less. PROP 32: Failed Quick Overview: Limited corporate and union political contributions. On the surface, this one made sense. No one wants employers taking their employees' money and investing in their own political agenda. But that's not what this proposition was about. Due to the way it's written, it exempts Super PACs and big businesses from the legislation, which really means that the only people affected are unions and other organizations who actually get their money from their members' income. This was largely an attempt for special interests to try and remove the ability of unions and other organized labor to fund campaigns and opposition and, thankfully, the voters saw through it. PROP 33: Failed Quick Overview: Auto insurance reform. Proponents of this proposition claimed that it would allow you to take your "good driver" discounts from one insurance company to another (you currently start from scratch when you change insurance companies and your driving history is not taken into consideration). However, there was also a clause that allowed insurance companies to raise rates if you've ever had a gap in your auto insurance coverage. So if you're a student getting their first car, or didn't have insurance for a period because you didn't need a car, your premiums would go up. An interesting fact is that this proposition was funded almost entirely (94% ... more than $16 million in total!) by George Joseph, the billionaire founder of Mercury Insurance. And as someone against the prop appropriately asked, "When was the last time the insurance industry did something in your best interests?" PROP 34: Failed Quick Overview: Abolished the death penalty in favor of sentencing for life in prison. For me, the death penalty has never been a huge issue. I don't fully support it and I don't vehemently oppose it. I voted for this prop because I do believe that, when you factor in the total cost of a death sentence (not just actually putting them to death but the entire legal appeals process that drags out and costs millions), it is cheaper to pay the costs to keep them in prison year after year. California isn't exactly an eager death penalty state like Texas either... the state has only executed three in the last ten years, and thirteen since 1976. A stark contrast to the 490 total executions in Texas or the 109 in Oklahoma or the 101 in Virginia during that same time period. Heck, Texas has executed the same number of people (so far) in 2012 as California has in the last 36 years! . I voted for this prop because I feel like these tax dollars could better be spent elsewhere than pursuing the death penalty in a state that really doesn't use the death penalty except in extremely rare circumstances.PROP 35: Passed Quick Overview: Increase in sentencing for human trafficking offenses including prostitution, sexual slavery, etc. Opponents of the bill cited its bad drafting and potential for abuse by prosecutors that won't actually provide a meaningful improvement to the lives of sex workers and those who have been a victim of human trafficking. But c'mon... the gist of the law is that it increases sentencing guidelines for people who engage in human trafficking. That's not a bad thing, and 81% of the state voters happen to agree. PROP 36: Passed Quick Overview: Amends the three strikes law to only apply in the case of "serious and violent" felonies. For a long time, California has had the toughest three strikes law in the country. People could be convicted of three strikes (after three strikes, you can be sentenced to 25 years-to-life in prison) for nonviolent or other felonies that aren't "serious." While I'd contend that all felonies are serious, it was concerning to see that the list of strike offenses included arson, carjacking, gang allegation, aggravated assault, criminal threats, and conspiracy to commit any of a long list of felonies. Which means that someone who steals a car, burns down their house for the insurance money, then threatens someone not to report him could get the same 25-to-life sentence as a murderer or other violent offender. I support the fact that they're amending the law to give them leeway when considering which felonies to treat under the three strikes law. I certainly don't want dangerous or violent people out on the streets... but I also understand that we don't all live in happy, safe suburbs. Some of us grow up around gang influences and other criminal activity and I hate to think of some eighteen year old kid spending the rest of his life in prison for a few mistakes he made in his youth that didn't ultimately pose a serious or violent danger to anyone else.  PROP 37: Failed Quick Overview: Genetically modified food labeling requirements. I'm at a loss when it comes to this proposition. The only thing I can say is that the big food and biotech conglomerates won by managing to convince enough voters that this additional labeling requirement would ruin small farms and cost the taxpayers millions. I'm not sure how adding the words "genetically engineered" to a package you're already labeling costs millions and millions (not to mention the fact that I don't know any small farms and local agriculture people who genetically engineer their foods), but somehow they managed to do it and we voted against requiring companies who use chemicals and other artificial products to label their products as such. Maybe one day people will realize that this kind of legislature costs practically nothing and doesn't deprive you of anything (you can still buy whatever you want at the grocery store)... but for now, score another one for biotech and them not being required to disclose whether the food you eat contains pesticides, chemicals, or other artificial additives. PROP 38: Failed Quick Overview: Raised taxes to fund public education. I'm really conflicted on this one. On the one hand, it's not nearly as vile as many opponents paint it to be. I posted a blog about this initiative early on and was shocked (okay, not really) to see that opponents grossly mischaracterized how much the average person would pay in additional taxes... but I also didn't like the way that this proposition locks itself in for the next twelve years, requires more infrastructure, and doesn't give us many options (short of another proposition to repeal it) to fix the new system in the event of corruption, mismanagement of funds, or flat-out failure to produce results. I was both happy and sad to see this fail; sad because I really think we need a ton of additional education funding and this one presumably couldn't be used to pay debt instead of finance schools... and happy because it was also a flawed proposition. PROP 39: Passed Quick Overview: Elimination of multi-state tax break for businesses. I don't think the majority of voters (myself included) have any idea how taxes work for multi-state corporations, but hey, it's supposed to close whatever loopholes they have and bring that revenue back in-state. PROP 40: Passed Quick Overview: Redistricting Considering the fact that the ballot information packet itself said the "No on Prop 40" proponents have changed their position and now support the proposition, I'm shocked that over 28% of voters still voted No. MEASURE B: Passed Quick Overview: Requires adult film actors to wear condoms I confess that I couldn't actually vote on this measure since it was for Los Angeles County and I'm now a registered voter in Orange County, but I thought it was worth listing. The adult entertainment industry has long been headquartered in the San Fernando Valley just outside of Los Angeles, and this measure now requires adult film stars to wear condoms when they engage in sex acts on camera. On the one hand, I support the idea that safe sex should be promoted (both to protect the health of the actors as well as show audiences that using protecting is important), but I feel like this kind of requirement will only make adult film companies (who did not want this measure passed) shoot their films elsewhere. They can literally move their production operations to another nearby county like Ventura, Orange, San Bernardino, Riverside, Kern, etc. and avoid this requirement entirely. It will be interesting to see how the industry adapts to this new "safe sex" requirement. |
| Follow-up on Awardicons |
||
After all the comments I received to my last blog post on the use of Awardicons, I thought I'd do a more formal survey of people's thoughts. To that end, I created an actual survey! It's ten quick questions for anyone interested in sharing their opinion on Awardicons.
Please take a few minutes and let me know what you think! |
| Pros and Cons of Awardicons |
| A recent talk with a friend got me thinking about the practice of offering contests with Awardicons as the ultimate prize. One the one hand, like any contest, there's a prize for winning. That prize - on WdC - often comes in the form of a snazzy Awardicon affixed to the item you submitted to the contest. But, on the other hand, what's a contest organizer to do when they don't think any of the entries merit an Awardicon? What happens when none of the entries, in your opinion, deserve to have a 100K or a 50K or even a 10K Awardicon adorning them? My first thought is to say "too bad, you have to award it anyway." Just because you're not happy with the quality of the entries doesn't mean that the contestants did anything wrong. Assuming the entries meet the minimum qualifications to enter, you've already promised the prize to someone and it would be unfair to suddenly say, "You know what? I didn't like any of the entries enough to give out the prize, so I won't. Sorry!" Not to mention the fact it would open the door to making the contest process even more subjective, and might elicit accusations of unseemly activity if a contest organizer is consistently refusing to give out the promised prizes because none of the entries ever measures up. However, I've noticed a number of items with Awardicons on them... some even with large-value Awardicons... that really aren't very good stories or poems. Not all of them are necessarily bad, but many - at least in my opinion - seem to have a stark discrepancy between the quality of the writing, and the size of the Awardicon that graces that item. After a brief and not-so-scientific bit of research, it seems these Awardicons are often given in situations where contest and activity organizers and donors are left with no choice. In order to avoid accusations of unfairness or not honoring their commitments, they have to honor the promise of giving out an Awardicon and place it on something. I am a bit troubled by the idea of being forced to award something and giving an item an Awardicon when every part of you is screaming that the item doesn't really deserve it. And I'll be the first to admit that I've run contests where I've felt like that. I've run contests and activities where I've been compelled to give an entry a huge awardicon or major recognition even while being completely unenthusiastic about the quality of those entries. Over my years on WdC, I've slowly developed a few bits of advice that I think will help anyone else who may be frustrated with the fact that Awardicons are being given to items that maybe don't quite measure up to the level of quality indicated by the award. There's nothing you can really do about other people's processes, but if you run your own contest or activity or are considering donating a prize package to an auction, raffle, or other fundraiser, I would encourage you to consider the following: Set a high enough minimum threshold so you have options. If you're running a contest, maybe insist on having a minimum of five entries in order to give out the prize (or more entries in the case of a larger Awardicon). You can always offer a consolation prize if that threshold isn't met, and if you require a minimum of five entries to give out a 50K Awardicon, for example, at least you've got choices and aren't stuck giving that Awardicon to the only item that's entered, or aren't stuck being forced to choose between only two entries of questionable quality. The more options you have, the more likely you are to be able to choose one that you're satisfied with. The same is true of prize packages you donate to raffles and auctions. If you're going to donate a prize package that's, say, a number of reviews and then an Awardicon for your favorite item, don't make the prize package only three reviews. Then you're stuck slapping an Awardicon on one out of three items when one out of five or one out of ten will give you more options. Or at least port-surf and try to find items in the winner's port that are of good quality so that you're not just reviewing the first three items you find and then indiscriminately putting an Awardicon on one of them because none really impressed you.Don't offer too many Awardicons all at once. A lot of contests will have an Awardicon for at least one place (like first place). Others might even have Awardicons for the top three places. But if you're also giving Awardicons out to honorable mentions, people who have submitted a certain number of entries to the contest, etc. then you're putting yourself in a position where, again, you're obligated to give an Awardicon for something that may not be deserved. If you limit the number of Awardicons you offer to give out, you reduce the possibility of having to give them out to people you don't think deserve them.The reason why I'm ranting about Awardicons is because they're attached to an item, and as such, are an indicator of quality. A Merit Badge is, in theory, a similar kind of award, but it's important to distinguish them because Merit Badges are given to an individual and not attached to an item. Additionally, they are a fixed amount (10K) and don't come in more valuable varieties. Thus, at least to me, it's easier to give Merit Badges when disappointed in quality of entries, because they can still be given to indicate an accomplishment (first place in a contest, congrats on entering every round of the contest in 2012, etc.) without tying it to a particular piece of writing. An Awardicon, on the other hand, can say the same thing, but also implies a certain level of quality for the item to which it is ascribed. I'm always trying to think of ways to improve the running of contests and activities. If anyone has any suggestions about how to solve this Awardicon issue (assuming you think it's an issue), I'd love to hear your thoughts. And if you think I'm crazy and that Awardicons are great in all circumstances, heck, I'd love to hear from you too. |
| Prop 38 |
| Okay, California. It's time to wake up. As you may or may not have noticed in recent years, our public school system sucks. Forget the talk about school board corruption, unions, bad teachers, and all that stuff; our schools are failing at a basic, fundamental level. Class sizes are ballooning at an alarming rate. Thousands of teachers are out of work, and the ones that are fortunate enough to find employment often find themselves subject to a "temporary" contract which all but ensures that each and every summer they'll be in job limbo, hoping and praying that the next year's budget will have enough money to bring them back or keep their class sections open. And lets not forget how many teachers are spending their own money to buy supplies for their classroom because budget cuts have necessitated schools becoming increasingly stingy with basic supplies like copy paper, dry erase markers, and pens and pencils for their students. This November, the election will feature Proposition 38 on the ballot which is a "Tax to Fund Education and Early Childhood Programs." I know, I know. Taxes. Eek! How dare they raise our taxes! {e:indignation} But here's the thing; our schools need money. It doesn't matter how or why or what the background of this issue is... schools need money right now. This proposition offers the following: Your state income tax will increase (depending on your income) by anywhere from 0.4% to 2.2%. The average single tax filer (assuming an annual income of $48,000-$100,000) would have their income tax rate increased from 9.3% to 10.9%. The average joint tax filers (assuming an annual household income of $96,000-$200,000) would have their income tax rate increased by the same (from 9.3% to 10.9%). Of that extra tax income, 60% will go directly to K-12 schools, 30% will go directly to repaying state debt, and 10% will go directly to early childhood programs for the first four years. After that, 85% goes to K-12, and 15% to early childhood programs. These funds are provided on a school-specific, per-pupil basis and are subject to local control, audits and public input to ensure that they are being spend appropriately. The state legislature cannot take this money and reallocate it to other areas.The biggest issue with this school fiasco is that the legislature keeps dipping into the education fund when it needs to move money around and cover other expenses. And call me crazy, but I don't think education should be treated like a rainy-day savings account for politicians to dip into and take money out of when they want to make adjustments to other areas of the budget. That won't happen here, because the money is specifically for schools. Any of you who have been hesitant to agree to tax increases without more transparency can rejoice; with Prop 38, you know exactly where your tax dollars are going. If you live in California and plan to vote this November, please, please vote YES ON PROP 38. Our schools, and by extension our teachers and our children, really need us to reinvest in education. We're one of the most populous and wealthiest states in the union, and yet we have one of the highest student-to-teacher ratios in the country, and we're in the bottom 10% of all states in reading, writing, math, and science performance. We can do better, but schools need the money to hire more good teachers, to reduce class size, to purchase up-to-date textbooks and equipment, and to do the thousand other things that need to be done to get our kids' education back on track. |
| Is Formatting Passe? |
| On his blog , screenwriter John August (Go, Big Fish, Charlie's Angels) recently interviewed author Michael Chabon (Amazing Adventures of Kavalier & Clay, Wonder Boys, The Yiddish Policemen's Union) about his writing process. Chabon mentioned that he's currently using a program called iA Writer . What struck me in particular about this program is that it embraces the idea of completely ignoring formatting. In fact, there are no settings for the program. You can't change fonts or double space or insert a header... the only feature it seems to have is an automated spell check that will underline a misspelled word in red, like with Microsoft Word. In the interview, Chabon said he loved the simplicity of that kind of interface and, on some level, I can appreciate that. But a larger part of me wonders when it became passe to actually format your work. Formatting, for me, has never really been a big deal. It's something you fuss with for a few minutes when you first open a document (and maybe later on when you're editing and want the pages to look perfect), but other than that, I've never really been bothered by the plethora of options and functions available through Microsoft Word when I'm in the middle of writing something. Is it just me, or is it strange to think that people will purchase a completely standalone writing program just so they don't have to take two minutes to worry about formatting when they're just starting a new document? More importantly, doesn't formatting become an issue eventually? At some point, your words have to leave the safety and confinement of your own hard drive. You have to send a manuscript to a publisher, or submit it to a contest, or self-publish and present it to the world. At which point, your work needs to be formatted appropriately. I wonder what users of iA Writer are supposed to do? Once their work has been assembled in the sterility and simplicity of a program with no formatting settings, does it then have to be exported to a program that will allow you to format it, so the work can be double-spaced, indented, paginated, fitted with a title page, etc.? For me, formatting is a minor inconvenience at the very start (and very end) of the process. It's not something that invades my waking thoughts when I'm staring at my computer screen, and it's not something I take into consideration when I'm writing my sentences and paragraphs. I'm tempted to give iA Writer a try, just to see what it's like (it's currently only $4.99 in the Mac App Store) - and to test out some of it's cooler features like working over iCloud for my iPhone and iPad - but I wonder if this whole idea of doing away with formatting isn't a bit shortsighted because most of us... at least those without assistants to do it for us... have to tackle the ugly format monster at some point. Has anyone out there tried iA Writer, or think it would be a welcome relief from the distraction of formatting-capable programs like Word or Pages? I'd be interested to hear other viewpoints on the idea of formatting and whether it's a concern to other writers (or not) at some point in the process. |
| 47% |
By now, most of you have probably heard about Mitt Romney's rather inelegant comment about nearly half the country's population, which he's apparently written off and doesn't have a whole lot of respect for. If you haven't heard about it (or heard the comment) yet, Romney was at a $50,000 a plate fundraiser dinner where someone surreptitiously recorded a portion of his speech, the video for which shows him saying: There are 47 percent of the people who will vote for the president no matter what. All right, there are 47 percent who are with him, who are dependent upon government, who believe that they are victims, who believe the government has a responsibility to care for them, who believe that they are entitled to health care, to food, to housing, to you-name-it. That that’s an entitlement. And the government should give it to them. And they will vote for this president no matter what. I have a couple of thoughts about this. The first is that I think I know what he intended to say. I think he meant to comment on the fact that there are some people in this country who feel like they should be taken care of... that want a free ride and choose not to work, pay taxes, or otherwise productively contribute to the economy. And because the Republicans have a "less government in your lives" platform, it's probably a foregone conclusion that they'll vote for Obama, the candidate with a platform of more government programs and assistance. However, one of the major problems with the comment is the breakdown of that "47%" he's quoting. If he did truly mean to say that there are deadbeats who are a drain on the economy and are getting tax breaks while also siphoning off precious resources from the rest of us, I don't think he's taken into account that the majority of those 47% get significant tax breaks because they're either receiving them for educational purposes (and will eventually pay income tax when they get jobs), unemployed (and will eventually pay income tax when they get jobs), retired (and have paid income tax during their working years), or get a tax break based on their income level, size of their family, etc. There's actually a great breakdown of the 47% of which Mitt Romney speaks, found here: The far greater problem, however, is the way in which he said it. I'll concede that everyone, at one time or another, inarticulately expresses themselves. And sometimes it makes them sound incredibly stupid. So maybe that's the case here. But Romney is fighting an image battle, where much of the nation finds him to be dull, impersonal, not particularly charismatic or passionate, and worst of all, suspect he may be an out of touch old rich guy. And one of the few candid comments we actually hear him make is to derisively dismiss people "who believe they are entitled to health care, to food, to housing, to you-name-it?" That sure sounds a hell of a lot like he thinks human beings in one of the wealthiest countries in the world shouldn't expect to have to basic human services like food and medicine and a place to sleep without earning it! Does that mean he thinks students, the elderly, veterans, the unemployed, the disabled and other people who may be unable to work should have to fend for themselves and don't deserve any kind of support?There are undoubtedly some people who want a free ride. Who try to capitalize on public assistance programs and choose not to be a productive member of society when they have every ability to be one. But I hardly think that category of people accounts for forty-seven percent of the American population. Does he really think that nearly every second person in this country is a freeloading loser who doesn't work hard enough to deserve basic human necessities like food and shelter? And he makes this comment at a $50,000 a plate fundraiser at the private estate of a billionaire constituent for a select group of ultra-rich supporters? With his history as a successful businessman in the investment world, Romney is already fighting an uphill battle to prove that he's not like the infamous 1% ... the rich fat cats who put the economy into a tailspin with their greed and shady business dealings. I'm not sure Romney's clearest path toward a better public image is to make a comment like this in a crowd of other one-percenters. |
| Commission |
Today I got an offer to come in for an interview with an insurance sales firm. I'm always skeptical of sales jobs, and this is why: THEM: "We saw your resume online and think you'd be perfect for this sales job! When can you come in for an interview?" ME: "Before I come in, I have to ask... is there a base salary, or is the job entirely commission based?" THEM: "Well, there's uh, some salary involved. But you can make up to six figures with commissions!" ME: "That sounds great and all, but what's the base salary?" THEM: "Don't worry, we'll train you and everything. Come on in for an interview, and we can discuss all your questions!" ME: "Tell me what the base salary is first." THEM: "Uh, it's $2,500 a month." I have to give them credit... at least they pay a base salary. A lot of sales places expect you to work 100% on commission. But come on, thirty grand a year before taxes? In Los Angeles? That doesn't even cover my rent... and I'm not going to gamble the roof over my head on whether or not I can convince people to buy an insurance policy. I get that sales is a numbers business. I really do. And I get that this is a tough economy and that companies can't afford to pay an army of salespeople if they're not generating the sales that will keep them in business. But to not pay someone a living wage for the area in which they're living is completely crazy to me. To make their ability to keep a roof over their heads... to put food on the table... to afford a doctor's visit or medication for their kids contingent upon whether or not they can sell a product (and how many products they can sell) seems incredibly dangerous to me. Maybe I'm just not a born salesman. Maybe I don't get the whole competition thing, or am not confident enough in my salesmanship to take a job like this. But the idea that I could lose my apartment or default on my car payment after a bad month or two of disappointing sales numbers is a terrifying prospect. I don't think I could handle the stress of working under conditions like that. I don't have kids yet, but I imagine when I do, that concern is going to be even more pronounced. If I'm going to work a day job, I need to make sure it's one that will pay the bills each month and every month. And if they're going to offer incentives for numbers-based sales, then that should actually be in the form of a legitimate bonus, not additional income that your family needs to survive. And if you are one of those people who by choice or necessity works a commission-based job and relies on that non-guaranteed income to support yourself and your family... my hat's off to you. You have a tough, stressful job and I admire the hell out of you for doing it. |
 Log In To Leave Feedback |
Static Items
Books
Forums
Groups
Interactive Stories
Audio
Campfire Creatives
Community Notes
Crossword Puzzles
Documents
Folders
Images
In & Outs
Madlibs
Photo Albums
Polls
Product Reviews
Quizzes
Survey Forms
Web Pages
Word Searches
