E.A.R.full

Sookie, Sookie, Nah!

2010-08-18T20:27:00.002-04:00

In an attempt to keep current and hep, I decided to jump on the bandwagon and read Charlaine Harris' Sookie Stackhouse series. In essence, it's a definitive genre series blending fantasy, mystery/thriller, and romance. Fear not, the romance aspect is surprisingly endearing with a nice healthy portion of sexiness.

The gist: Sookie Stackhouse, a telepathic barmaid from Bon Temps Louisianna falls for her new neighbor Bill, a Vampire, and is subsequently drawn into the newly public existance of the Vampire world. Her association with Vamps and her "disability," as she deems it, leads her further into the supernatural by placing her smack dab in the middle of Were Politics--as in Werewolves, etc.--Witch schemes, Fairy medling, and so on and so forth. All of which, I might add, she deals with in the very endearing sassy southern cliche. Did I mention she also has to beat off an influx of supernatural suitors?

The fantasy aspects are, obviously, the existance of creatures of the night. Harris, however, treats the supes as nothing more than, say, newly recognized minority groups or, perhaps, individuals immigrating from other countries. The mystery/thriller and romance are your basic sort of dead-guy-ends-up-in-a-parking-lot-naked mysteries and caught-between-two/three/four-lovers romance.

In general, the series is a simple yet lively read carried mostly by the dynamic nature of it's characters, most especially Sookie. That being said, I would highly reccomend not reading the series in rapid successioin. Take a break either in-between books or, say, after DEAD TO THE WORLD. The pace which, at first, keeps you anxious to find out what sort of trouble Sookie will find herself in at the beginning, begins to grate on the brain. Like Sookie, you'll end up wishing for a chapter or two of nothing more than her sitting around trying to wash the blood stains of her clothes.

A Bad Romance

2010-05-24T23:27:00.000-04:00

I've decided that, once I'm settle in Las Vegas, I'm goint to start dating.

Yup, that's right folks, Edgar A. Rios is finally going to step into the dating pool instead of lounging on the side sipping cocktails and judging everyone in it.

Why? Well, to put it simply yet as melodramatically as possible....I don't want to get old alone....wah wah...

I don't neccessarily have a fear of being alone in my dotage but I really want to be able to share it with somebody. You know? In the cafe I work for in VB, I see all these older couples come in--partners and friends--and think how awesome it is that have that. Not just that but I see so many people come into my store just to sit with each other and read a magazine, have tea, or talk about trashy magazines.

For so long I've upheld a sort of non-traditional conceptualization of relationships that has focused on companionship and support rather than romanticalness. From such, I have experienced the kind of relationship with certain people that many seek but often lose sight of due to the complications of romance. I believe I have found my soul-mate and it has nothing to do with romance.

That being said, I feel like I have just started to hear something tick inside of me, like the crocodile in Peter Pan. Despite my closeness with friends, there is only a certain vulnerability that can be shared with a lover/partner. Frankly, it is this vulnerability that has always kept me away from romance.

Well, I think I'm ready to be vulnerable, folks. Also, I think I'm ready to allow someone elses vulnerability into my life.

I made a sort of pact with myself that I would not attempt romance until I felt everything was right with me. As you can see, presuming that something was wrong. Well, everything is not particularly right with me but I've realized everything will never be and, frankly, that's the way I like it. This realization, is really, what I had been seeking all along.

I now understand that I am not the type of person to "settle down" in any traditional way, I enjoy the roller coaster that is my life. This understanding has also allowed me to understand that, despite or because of this, I will find somebody who is willing to go on the ride with me.

Pop Goes Gaga

2010-05-12T20:50:00.002-04:00

It seems we are getting to the point in Gaga's career where the naysayers are beginning to be heard through the din of her fans. In essence, her critics call her the unoriginal of the unoriginal, a "mimic" as one M.I.A. has stated.

I'm not one to defend her because, well, honestly, her music isn't particularly innovative. In fact, when I first heard her I shrugged her off due to her 90's "everybody dance now" sound. Part of this shrugging off, however, came from a personal attempt at being musically elitist which requires one to have a healthy aversion to pop music unless, of course, it's totally ironic. Like Gaga evolved from girl about town with awkward fashion sense to all out avant garde warrior, so too has my opinion of her and, really, pop in general.

Frankly, I've always been a closeted pop fan. In my musical development I shunned it in an attempt to garner a more elitist cred with the alternative people I hung out with. I never did grunge but I got into the Alt Rock of the 90's, but never really the whole College Rock thing. I have a love/hate relationship with Punk; I dig some country, mostly the older stuff; and I dabble in other genres. I'm still pretty into hip-hop and have been totally turned on to the Reggeatton sound.

I didn't find my swagger, however, untill I participated in the Electrclash scene of the early aughts that, frankly, was the turning point in music. Of course, it had to get mainstreamed before it really made an effect but it did. Now you can't throw a stick out of your car window without hitting some electro synth riff. Pop, however, I felt neccessary to keep at bay no matter how much I secretly loved one or two Brittany Spears songs.

I have come out of the Pop closet and hold Lady Gaga as an example of why I am comfortable doing so. Again, the claims of her unoriginality are not unfounded but, it does not matter. Pop, for the most part, has never been a genre that has boasted originality. Pop is about performance, one way or the other and Gaga is an exceptional performer. Pop is a genre in which you are not supposed to sit around pondering the depth of the lyrics or the meter of the music. Pop is meant to be clear and unadulterated gratification and the best form of gratification is the instant and basic kind.

I don't care who you are, a deep baseline will want to make you move, a catchy chorus will get stuck in your head, and an over-the-top performer will keep you talking. That's what Pop is about. It's not meant to be intellectual, it's not meant to be purposefully socially significant, it's not even meant to be particularly original. It's meant to get you moving using the tried and true methods of music.

So, Gaga may not be putting out anything that has not been put out before but, the thing about Gaga is that she's putting it out there without pretention. She's putting it out there as Pop, 100% Pop. She understands that beyond the music it's about the performance and boy does she provide.

She said it best in an interview for SPIN magazine, "I like to have unprotected sex with my music." She sure does, and we can't get enough of listening through the walls.

The End Of An Era

2010-05-03T21:55:00.000-04:00

Well, it's the end of an era. My brother-in-law is coming back from Japan after two years away and my time is up in Virginia. I couldn't be happier.

I've loved my year here because it was a sort of reimmersion process between my relatively cushy life in Ithaca (despite the fact that I was practically destitute the whole time I lived there) and the reality of the rest of the country. It was just what I needed to jump start all my mechanisms that had started to rust from under use.

Although I can technically leave any time I want now, I am holding out until September. I turn thirty and a close friend of mine is getting married that month so I need to stay on this side of the country so I can afford to go. It will also provide some closer to my time on the east coast, I think.

My next move is still a bit undefined but far more purposefull than any move I have done to date. I'll be going to Las Vegas and, although I've never really considered Las Vegas as a place to live, it somehow feels right to me. It's a million times closer to friends and family on the west coast; it's a center of food, music, and entertainment; and yet still provides a sense of solitude and intensity only a desert can.

Also, I can be assured that all my friends from all over the country will eventually be drawn there cuz, well, who doesn't want to go to Vegas at least once.

Basically, Virginia, I came, I saw, and now I need to get the hell out of dodge. Virginia, outside of allowing me to give back to my family that has given me so much, has shown me that the world is not the nice and easily defined world we like to think it is and yet, it's also not as bad either. There are ways our society has progressed so far beyond anything anyone can imagine but also ways in which it has not budged and inch.

When Age-Old Adages Attack

2010-04-30T21:56:00.000-04:00

A couple of weeks ago, a co-worker of mine walked out of her job--full-time, benefits, cake hours--because she had an interview for a job the following week and was so sure she was going to get it.

She didn't.

It's really a sad state as she has two children, one of which has mental issues, and now is unemployed. She may return to work but to AN INTENSE amount of chagrin as she was partially/mostly to blame for it all. Although my GM is not the easiest person to deal with and probably, had he been a more understanding person in general, this situation would not be as dramatic as it is.

Despite feeling bad for her overall circumstance, I can't help but feel it's warrented.

In general, she was a Negative Nancy. Ninety percent of what came out of her mouth was negative even when the situation was so minor it was rediculous. Also, her sense of entitlement was far too much.

I mean, she had left this job before because of her conflicts with our GM but then came back and HE LET HER come back and still she carried a chip on her shoulder. Like I said earlier, our GM is not the easiest person to deal with but, bottom line, he still gave you a job despite the fact he didn't actually like her.

I don't know, this whole situation, frankly, my entire experience at this store, has been showing me just how entitled and dellusional some people are. Anybody who expects and REAL respect from working in retail is seriously disturbed. Retail is the worst working environment on the planet. The only way to extract any enjoyment out of it or, at least, not let it suck the life out of you is by simply not giving it that power. Be gratefull you have a job, do your job well, not for them but for sheer pride of doing a job well, and go home.

So many people get caught up in the notion that once they're in somewhere they can't leave but, really, you can. Retail jobs are a dime a dozen, even in these hard times. There is always something you can find if you're willing.

Time, is like a sort of runic rhymn

2010-04-20T23:45:00.001-04:00

In our post high school time, my friend Christy and I, made one of those if-by-the-time-we're-thrity type pacts. I think we said we'd get married to each other if we weren't in some uber fullfilling reltionship by thirty. Then, thirty was almost ten years away and something so unfathomable to us that it was easy to designate it as the deadline; concret enough to matter, far enough away to not really have to worry about.

Well, it's that time. In just five months I will turn thirty.

I've never been one to place any real significance on age. I mean, I've lived my life as I've desired and, although it may not reflect the sort of mainstream ideal and expectation of what one should be doing at thirty, I have few to no regrets about my life.

That being said, I've started to construct this upcoming birthday as a marker for change. Whether it's my age-turning or simply ye olde circumstances I have under my belt, I've begun to feel a sense of urgency in achieving various personal goals I have yet to achieve. I'll admit some of those goals encompass the mainstream notion of age requirements (home, career, money, etc.) but they're secondary to my more altruistic ones.

I am finally in the mindspace where I want to fully commit to doing things versus thinking about doing things. Up to this point, I've been satisfied with simply experiencing life and letting it take me where it will. Well, I've gotten over that. I've enjoyed it and have taken SO MANY things from living like that but it's, pardon the pun(ish), gotten old.

I'm ready, if not particularly capable, to tackle many of the things that I have always felt I still had plenty of time to do later down the line. Well, it's later down that line and my approching birthday, not to mention my student loan repayment plan, have impressed upon me that ten years gets here sooner than you think and it's hardly enough time to get shit done.

Giving And Recieving.

2010-04-18T21:14:00.001-04:00

I went to a birthday party today. It was for my niece who turned nine last week. She was in NY on the actual date so she didn't get a chance to celebrate it with any of her VA peeps.

In general, I have issues with giving and recieving gifts. Mostly, I wish people would realize that giving gifts should not just be about getting some expensive electronic toy, or the current fad, or even impersonal gift-cards. I know, I know, gift cards can be great but too often they are the recourse of people who simply don't want to make the effort and think about what to get someone.

I, being the person I am, when buying gifts for my nieces and nephews have always found myself overly conscious of gender. From my youth, I've surrounded myself with people who, if not outright defy gender concepts, at least question the assignations that contemporary culture places on sex and gender.

My niece here in VA has always been a particular concern because she has grown up to be a girly girl. Frankly, I blame the Disney channel because that's all she watches. Anyhoo, I'm dreading/looking forward for the time when I can have actuall conversations with them about it.

They are not, to say the least, being exposed to any form of alternative perspectives. To them, boys do this and girls do that and they are often perplexed when they see/hear examples of gender-flexing individuals. I'm not even sure how much they've been exposed to sexuality. That is to say I'm not really sure if they now I am a "fortunate homosexual man" (sorry, couldn't help it) and/or what that even means and when/if we will ever have to discuss it.

You Better Work.

2010-04-14T21:50:00.001-04:00

Throughout my working life, I've had several opportunities to become a supervisor or assume leadership roles. In just about every job I've had I was looked upon as the go-to guy to get the job done. I've avoided officially assuming said roles, however, because I don't like dealing with other people's bullshit. I like to work, get shit done, and then be on my way.

In my current job, I went for a supervisor role and got it. I went for it simply because, work-wise, it is a cake job and I do little but order product and clean. I don't ever really work with the three people I under me and, for the most part, everyone else in the store ignores my department.

This week, however, I've had to deal with an employee situation that has me regretting it all. Really, it's not that big a deal but, in the end, it's a lot of bullshit that should not be happening. Anyway, that's my vent.

In general, my constant confoundment at any of my jobs has been the difference in work ethic and sense of entitlement people bring to the table. There's always those few people who just don't seem to understand the concept of employment and think management is supposed to kowtow to THEM and cater to all their needs. Sure, management is supposed to have their employees' backs but, often, especially in retail, that is hardly the case.

I just want to tell people to either take it or leave. It's as simple as that. I know it's not really that simple to just up and leave a job but, really, if you are so unhappy at a place, I would think your happiness is worth more than working minimum wage and getting shafted all the time.

Also, I've come to despise people who are constantly negative about every single thing in their life. I know what it is to have it rough, but you only make it worse by constantly focusing on how bad everything is, especially when it ain't all that bad.

There are those who have it worse. That's what I always tell myself when I start to become negative. There are those that have it WAY worse than any of us.

Drunken Bloggin'.

2010-04-13T22:57:00.001-04:00

Several years ago, while picking fabric in JoAnne's Fabrics with my mother, I had a epiphany. Caffeine definitely stimulates the creative process. I was much younger then and now, in my fast approaching dotage, booze is the new caffeine.

Actually, the previous anecdote was a bit of a non-sequitor but, I've drank almost two bottles of wine, and I feel some juices a-flowin besides the bile that will eventually make me regret tonight.

To say the least, the past year and a half, has been the most drastic time of my life after the incident of 2003 and, actually, said incident was actually part of it. Among many of the things that have happened to me and have been going on in my head, first and foremost among them was my fear that I had lost my edge.

In Virginia, I have yet to really meet any people with whom I can relate to or even hold a good conversation with. I work, then come home and spend hours on facebook playing stupid games and coveting the lives of others. I do nothing of note here and I had begun to feel like I was nothing of note. Well, this weekend, my confidence was given a boost.

I made a rather impromptu visit to dear old Ithaca. Sure, I've talked a lot of trash about it in the past year and I wont say I take anything back, but being around the people whom I've grown to love and, well, have grown to love me, was EXTREMELY gratifying.

First and foremost, was Lifey. You know, you know you really love someone (in any way shape or form) if you look forward to simply sitting around and talking to them about absolutely nothing and everyting all at once. Well, Lifey, I love ya! I've never been good with romantic relationships but I'll be damned if anyone has as fulfilling a reltionship with someone as I have with Lifey.

And, I'll stop there cuz that shit is getting too sappy.

Long story short, this weekend helped remind me of why I am special and, although I still managed to be astounded by it, that I am loved by so many people.

Race, Class, and Politics. Oh My!

2010-03-31T23:50:00.000-04:00

Two topics I avoid having casual conversations about are politics and religion because they ultimately turn conversations to anything BUT casual. Also, the majority of people are not particularly interested in simply having a conversation about these things but to win you over/explain to you why your opinion is wrong.

The other day, at work, a conversation that started with Ricky Martin's recent gay-claration ended in a debate on healthcare reform. I know, WTF!

It began with simply discussing his gayness, then to Barbara Walters badgering him about his sexuality on national televison, then into Elton John coming out to Barbara on national television, then into a coworker letting us know how enraged his conservative uncle was about Elton John, then another coworker saying "what does him being conservative have to do with it" and it deteriorated from there.

Once it got to that point, I just kind of sat there and was like, yeah, okay, sure, uh huh. I won't go into details about the conversation except to say that it was enlightening in several ways.

I heard an opposing arguement for healthcare reform that, frankly, was not at all unreasonable. It was an issue of money and the place political/social idealism has during a financial recession. I was with them for the most part until they revealed that their interests lay with military and big business.

Even at that point, I could not begrudge her her opinion as they were motivated from similiar stuff as mine. Namely, the affect on the people and individuals she is persoanlly connected to. She comes from a long line of military families and several of her friends have/will lose their jobs because of this bill.

Also, it was impressed upon me that people are far more connected by class than they are race. You see, this coworker was Latino/a as am I. As such, I naively assumed (as I seem to always do) that her interests stemmed from a similiar place as mine.

To me, healthcare reform, is literally the first type of political/governmental change I can tangibly relate to the people I care and love. So many individuals that I grew up with and am with currently live/have lived most of their adult lives without insurance simply because they could not/can afford it. These are hard working, educated, and good people who are not given the right to healthcare simply because of their class. Many of these people are hispanic immigrants or first or second generation citizens.

I guess I always assume that, despite the various Latino ethnicities, all Latinos in this country understand and support the plight of every other Latino ethnicity. This assumption led me to naively assume that my Latina friend would see healthcare reform as I do. She does not.

She comes from the same sort of privilege that so many who are against this bill come from. To them, it's merely politicing and partisanship that is the issue, not the health and lives of thousands of hard working, educated, and good people who are not given the opportunity, the right, of healthcare.

Cheater, Cheater, Pumpkin Eater.

2010-03-30T23:05:00.000-04:00

Ever the fan of critical analysis of pop-culture, Sandra Bullock's recent marital woes have had me thinking a lot about cheating. No, not cheating on someone but on the phenomenon of cheating in general.

Usually, when the infidelities of a celebrity get aired for our viewing pleasure the circumstance usually allows us to judge quickly, enjoy the mayhem, and then move on. You know, it seems to always be someone "giving a ride" to a transvestite street walker, or bangin' the nanny, or keeping 20 mistresses; situations that we can, beyond capture our own moral guage, look upon and give the unanimous appeal of "what were they thinking?!"

I find the James and Bullock debacle to be something different.

I choose to maintain the belief that Sandra is a genuinely "nice" person (as far as celebrities go) who has never been about dating all her costars and running to the chapel. Also, judging by her sincere comments in her acceptance speeches about James, I think we can agree that some genuine affection was had. By both parties.

Yeah, yeah, many of you will run off to say well he obviously didn't love her enough to not cheat. Well, true, but cheating is often more than just a reflection of the love someone may or may not have for the other person. This particular celebrity break up, has had me wondering about this last statement quite a bit.

What role does lifestyle play in the motivations and, perhaps, rationality behind people who cheat?

It seems pretty obvious that James' lifestyle was a lifestyle distinct from Bullocks. Lifestyle, of course, does not dictate character but it does provide insight into the psyche of a person. Namely, James' is comin' from the tattooed, biker, I used to be married to a porn star side of the tracks and Bullock from the Hollywood A-list, red-carpet premiere, interviews with Oprah side. I wonder how much of their distinct lifestyles affected his cheating.

I had a friend who swore that she and her fiancé were steadfast believers in polyamorous relationships. Of course, once they actually began to explore polyamory, they soon broke up fighting for the affection of the same person. As much as we westerners like to tout the sacrosanct morality of monogamy, there are many cultures that don't.

Cheating, of course, is not really an issue of polyamory but of betrayal of trust, but if, as a culture, we embraced polyamorous relationships would Jesse and Sandra be making any sort of waves? It seems Jesse, despite or, perhaps, in spite (what do I know); of his genuine affection for Sandra attempted to find a way to participate in a sexual life that he could not have with Sandra?

Again, take away all issues of trust, I firmly believe that sex is not synonymous with love or any form of emotional affection. It can be one of, if not the most, intimate acts we can share with a person but that is wholly contingent on what the other person means to us already, not in the act of sex itself.

So, my ultimate question is, is cheating always a "deal breaker" when it comes to relationships? Agreed, violations of trust and deception most definitely are but, does having sex with other people while in a committed relationship always constitute said violations?

In the inimatable words of Tina Turner:

What's Love Got To Do With It?!

You don't have to DRAG it out of me.

2010-03-26T17:11:00.000-04:00

So, I've been marginally obsessed with RuPauls Dragrace on LOGO. I've always been a fan of the drag scene and, yes, have contemplated it a time or two. Well, on the website, they have this thing called the Dragulator in which you upload a picture of yourself and drag yourself out. I've done this several times. Here are a few for your viewing pleasure. Due to the nature of the program, the lips aren't actually mine but I think they are close. Also, well, the bodies aren't mine but drag IS an illusion after all...

SUSHI FIERCE

SIN D. RELLA

LATINA SMITH

Back In The Saddle Again.

2010-03-25T21:23:00.001-04:00

Well, after a prolonged hiatus in which I chose to hold back on the self-indulgent diatribe that I found this whole blogging thing to be, I've decided to come back to it. Why? Well, for one, I do not keep well in contact with those whom I, perhaps niavely, believe read this blog. I am quite a nut to crack on a casual basis and, lately, find little instance to have deep and meanigful conversations about the things I see, hear, and live through with individuals who are inclined to have such conversations intelligently.

I suppose, what I am trying to say, far more diplmotically than I should, is that I'm surrounded by individuals who cannot step outside the nitty gritty of the "everyday" to apply any form of critical thinking to said "everday."

I must say, it's rough, to not have at least one person with which I can have an extended conversation about socio-cultural phenomenon in which I do not come off as an over-analytical snob. I mean, I kind of am one but, as they say, snobbery loves company.

Ironically enough, although most of my distaste for my current circumstance stems from my immersion in the mundane and domestic, if you will, it is precisely the mundane and domestic that I have come to respect and appreciate if still be completely against being included in.

I have a newfound respect for the tedious tasks involved in maintaining a life completely outside abstraction. To those who have followed me in the past, it is rather obvious that I am often too enamored of the abstract and can, perhaps, be said to exist too much in it to the neglect of the aforementioned nitty-gritty. It has been both enlightening and rejuvinating to have been pulled out of the clouds and brought back to life, back to reality.

That being said, said newfound respect and appreciation has further reminded me why I chose to distance myself from such a life. Sure, at first, I went about it in all the wrong ways but, surely, I find myself precisely where I have always hoped I would be. I mean, I haven't won the lottery but I've managed to experience, embrace, and prefer to be part of the "outskirts" of society and commit to it in a way I didn't really before.

You know, it's easy to commit oneself to certain ideologies when everyone around you maintains similiar ones. It's quite another to be able to commit to those self-same ideologies when few, if not any, of the people you are around agree with you/it.

Labelicious!

2010-01-21T17:59:00.000-05:00

I work in a bookstore. Didn't you know? Ever been in one? You have, well, I'm sure you've noticed that a bookstore is nothing if not a house of labels. We love to make distinctions between "literature" and "genre/popular" fiction and adjust categories to reflect a politcal correctness such as changing "self-help" to "self-improvement."

Mostly, these categories are non-problematic but there are some that pose some serious questions. I've written before about my reservations with the "ethnic" lit categories and, this blog, is an offset of that.

The other day, a young black lady came in asking for "Urban Fiction." I was pretty sure I knew what she was talking about but didn't want to make assumptions so I asked her to clarify. Currently, there is no category called "urban fiction," at least not in the bookstores. What she was referring to were the various authors whose storylines revolve around what, apparently, is only and urban phenomenon: thugs, drugs, strippers, crime, etc...

Currently, all what is unofficially labeled urban fiction is currently in, you guessed it, African-American fiction because, you know, apparently only Black individuals are "urban." You see my problem?

What is labelled African-American fiction is already questionable in that why should it be so catogrized just because it is written by African-Americans? Now, the whole notion that anything "urban" is automatically black is also disturbing to me. Last time I checked, although a vast majority of African-Americans can be found in said urban settings, more than just an issue of race it is one of class. Not only blacks, but all races can be found in urban communities as well as whites.

I suppose, in terms of fiction goes, all the "white" crime that deals with almost the exact same thing is considered "true crime" or just, hey, fiction.

Frowney Face

2009-12-12T10:31:00.000-05:00

I just finished reading Barbara Ehrenreich's new book, Bright Sided: How the Relentless Promotion of Positive Thinking has Undermined America. Firstly, I am not a fan of Ms. Ehrenreich. I tried to be but, by only reading a chapter or two of her (in)famous investigatory piece, Nickel and Dimed, I developed a healthy dissaproval of her methodology.

I'm not a fan of academics and journalists "going undercover" to find out how it really is living as somebody they are not. In her case, she joined the seemingly destitute hoard of minimum-wage earning middle-class Americans and discovered that (insert sarcastic gasp here) many can barely support themselves living paycheck to paycheck. Regardless of whatever valid points she may have made I found the entire endeavor patronizing and intrinsically flawed.

The biggest, most crucial part of those who are "(not)getting by in America" is the notion that they really have no chance/choice in overcoming their curcumstance. It's a fatalistic consciousness internalized from (in my humble opinion) many local and national societal, cultural, and racial discourses. Many people grow up believing that they really CAN'T expect to do more with their lives than work themselve to death. After all, there are so few instances in which "people like them" actually "succeed."

More than anything it's this internalization--that they don't have an out--that dominates their existence and I find it extremely offensive that someone like Barbara Ehrenreich would presume to have ANY IDEA what it is like to live as they do because, bottom line, this is NOT her circumstance and she most definately has an out.

Anyhoo, back to the book at hand. I picked up Bright-Sided both because I always look forward to have another excuse to dislike Ms. E but also because I was intrigued by her title/premise. I began to read it and found myself really liking it and, of course, hating her a little bit more because of it! I hate it when people I am less than approving of do something that I genuinely enjoy/find interesting.

I enjoyed it because her critical inquiry was derived from personal experience rather than some over-idealized notion of social justice. Her research developed out of her experience with being diagnosed with breast cancer and, thusly, being inducted into its pink-ribbon culture. Ultimately, she was astounded by the extent to which women with breast cancer were directed toward, or as Ms. E would suggest, coerced into a mindset that leaves little to no space for negativity.

Ms. E was not just intrigued by the fact that women with breast cancer were almost not allowed to wallow in any sort of dispair but that pink ribbon culture propagated the notion that individual women, more than doctors, medications, and treatments were responsible for overcoming the cancer. More so than that, however, was the unsaid but everpresent notion that if their cancer was not cured the fault would ALSO fall on the women. They were just not positive enough.

Bright-Sided is fueled by Es experience with the positivist ideolgies of pink-ribbon culture and efficiently goes on a crusade to uncover from whence it came. In her campaign for pessimism, her biggest adversaries are the myriad self-help gurus whom advocate the faux-scientific methodology of positive psychology. Among the hoard are individuals like Rick Warren, Norman Vincent Peale, Joel Osteen, and, yes, even Oprah gets a shout-out in her book.

She traces the roots of positivism to a backlash towards the unforgiving and unrelenting harshness of Calvinist dogma and documents its path from becoming simply a lifestyle choice to the practial mandate it has become today. A large chunk of her research is done on the affect of positive psychology on corporate mentality and, adversly, the corporate mentality of positve psychology. The latter being a critique of perhaps the largest propagators of positivism, the evangelical mega churches that have sprung up in the past 15 years or so.

More than anything, "Bright-Sided" is carried by the notion mentioned earlier, that there is an unsaid but ever-present message being relayed by positivist rhetoric that YOU are to blame for anything bad that happens in your life; from being laid off to being poor. It's not until the last few chapters of her book do you finally and fully understand why Ms. E would feel so strongly about positivist ideology.

She sees within the doctrines of positivism an almost complete and unaffected advocacy for denial and lack of civil justice. Ultimately, her argument is based somewhere along the lines that positivism promotes a sort of social darwinism by claiming that only the worthy, the positive, will succeed and that everybody else, the negative, are seemingly unworthy. Also, according to E, it undermines any form of civil, social, and political justice by stating that "curcumstance" is such a minute part of overall happiness/success that to attempt to create any form of society, cultural, or political change really isn't important.

Are You There Ayn? It's Me, Edgar.

2009-11-13T20:54:00.000-05:00

Lately, I've been casually encountering Ayn Rand much more than I'm used to. Perhaps it is my current residence in a far more conservative state than I've ever lived or perhaps it's the new biography done by Anne C. Heller. Whatever the case, it has incited some converstions with co-workers about her philosophies and her literature. My experience with Ayn goes a little like like this.

One day, in my "post-adolescent idealistic phase" I happened across "The Fountainhead" by Rand. I can easily and unabashedly say it was one of the most influential pieces of literature I have ever read. In truth, my experience with this book is the clearest example of how meaning often lies in the reader instead of the author. The story of Howard Roark spoke to me about artistic integrity and non-conformity as nothing else I had ever read or seen. As a young person who railed against such things throughout his life it was the most empowering story I had ever read.

Of course, I didn't know anything about Ayn Rand at the time I just read into the book what I read into the book. Well, the book affected me so much that I did a little research on Ayn and let me just say I was SHOCKED to see how different, yet somehow in line with, my reading of the book was to the actual underpinnings of all her works and personal philosphies. Being young and still rather egocentric, I still latched on to her concepts but eventually dropped them like I did most ideologies I had followed in my youth.

I also read "Anthem" by her and, despite knowing more of her intent, I still was able to construct her themes as empowering. I could not, however, manage to ever read "Atlas Shrugged." I have tried, really tried, several times and simply cannot do it. Mostly it's because in AS her themes are applied to business and, well, it is much easier to see where her ideas are altruistically defunked when applied to businnes. The FH revolved around artistic expresion which lends itself easier to support notions of indivualism.

I still recommend "The Fountainhead" but make sure and tell people to read the book outside of Ayn's philosophies. I don't think most people can really do that but, either way, it's still a great piece of literature.

Ethnicity Now!

2009-10-11T10:17:00.000-04:00

Over the past few weeks, I've read two of what you would call "ethnic" books. The first was SENDEROS FRONTERIZOS by Francisco Jimenez and PUSH by Sapphire.

First, let me start by saying I don't particularly approve of books that are relegated into ethnic genres like Latino, African-American, or (I would argue to include) Queer. Mostly, my reservations lie in the fact that it is often only authors within these three ethnic/social groups whose novels, almost automatically, get categorized as such simply because they are Latin, African-American, and/or Queer. I suppose it is ultimately a question of why their writing has to be catagorized a such when everyone else's writing is not. A lot of individuals who draw heavily on their backgrounds/family histories (ie Irish, Jewish, etc.) are not relegated into an individualized category.

What I read from all this labeling is that readers need to be "warned" that certain books draw too heavily on Latin, African-American, and/or Queer culture in the assumption that they will find the content at the very least not interesting or, at worst, distasteful. Frankly, I believe these non-genres (as I think of them) were created because their content often questions, if not openly challenges, dominant ideoligies. But hey, that's just me.

SENDEROS FRONTIZEROS:

This book, above all things, was milestoner for me in that it is the first book in spanish that I have read. I've always been able to read in spanish but I've never done it because I simply cannot interact with the words and pharses the way I can with english. It's a sad thing because, really, spanish is such a fluid and beautiful language.

I bought this book on a whim from a dollar sale bin at a bookstore expecting a reaccurance of previous attempts to read in spanish but hey, it was a dollar. When I picked it up, however, I couldn't put it down. Warrented, it was relatively a small book and I kind of had to glaze over certain parts because I didn't fully grasp the subtlties, but the story kept me hooked.

It was,perhaps, your typical Mexican immigrant narrative. A Mexican family risks coming into the U.S. illegally in hopes of having a better life and lives under the constant anxiety that they will be found out and deported. The book, begins, with this precise incident. After several years of living as such, they are found out and taken by immigration and are deported. The author and his older brother are allowed to return to the U.S. under working Visa's but the rest of the family has to stay in Mexico until they can come back legally.

The driving force of the story is Francisco who strives so hard to educate himself and aspire to something more than the life that he is expected to live as a Mexican Immigrant. The story is poignant in its simplicity. What really drew me, outside of being able to COMPLETELY relate to Francisco, was the blissfull acceptance Francisco relays.

Too often, these narratives are dripping with a sort of self-pitying or indignant tone throughout. Although Francisco definately expressed these feelings in the story, his account of his life was simply that: an account of his life. They lived in poverty and experienced a lot of suffering but, they had each other and, ultimately, lived a life like any other family.

PUSH

PUSH by Saphire is an "African-American" fiction. I've never really read African-American fiction because, well, I've been conditioned to not be particularly aware of it because I am not, in fact, African-American. Despite all the opinions about the whole genre thing expressed above, I don't typically seek out this genre. My one defense/excuse, is that I don't really read FICTION in general. So there.

Much like SENDEROS FRONTIZEROS, I only got the book because it was an advanced reader at work but once I started reading it, I didn't put it down until I finished it. Again, it was a relatively small book but still.

The story is about Precious Jones, an illiterate girl who suffers through a lot, and I mean A LOT, of abuse and overall injustice. Despite it all, she is an inquistive girl and ends up in a pre-GED class after she has already been kicked out of several schools for, of all things, being pregnant. This class, more than just helping her to learn to read, exposes her to a whole new way of thinking; about herself, others, and the world in general. It really is an awesome read, if many of the situations are extremely disturbing.

More than the content, the writing style lends so much to its impact. It writing in first person and the book progresses from the writing of illiterate Precious--misspelled words, awkward phrasing, innappropriate wording--to a literate, although not perfect, Precious.

Anne McCaffery: Science Fiction AND Fantasy

2009-09-25T00:00:00.014-04:00

Whenever somebody asks me what I read, I begin by saying SciFi/Fantasy, because that what everyone knows, but I make sure to say "mostly fantasy." You see, although both are often categorized as one genre, they are most definately two.

The key in the distinction is in the use of the word fantasy as merely a definition for subject matter or a category of content. As simply a defintion, yes, SciFi is definately fantasty but, I would, so is any other form of fiction. The defintion of fantasy is imagination unrestricted by reality and in essence all fiction is such. Sure, the genre that gets the official title of fiction is based on reality, it is no more real than and involves just as much imagination than any other genre. Judge SciFi and Fantasy by their content and it is unwaveringly evident that they are different from each other.

Simply, science fiction is, what I like to say, scientific conjecture at its highest degree. You'll often find that SciFi authors take what we know as "real" science and simply take a leap into the what if. While we physcially send rovers into mars to look for life forms which require to only be living organisms, Science Fiction authors take it to what if these living organisms were just like us, or like insects, or more than cellular organims. SciFi, also, is often conceptual in nature.

Fantasy, on the other hand, often deals with what most people would consider the opposite of science: magic, and myth, and folklore, and fairytales. In fantasy, Sorcerrers abound, fairies exist, witches live next door, and Gods truly do exist. Some believe that magic and myth are as real as science. That, however, is a topic for another day. Sometimes, all it takes for a work of fiction to be considered fantasy is to be set in a time in which such things are still believed to be real.

In my travels through the lumpe together genre, I have leant toward fantasy because SciFi does not always give me what I want. It is often too conceptual and lacks a certain connection with the real world which, ironically enough, I find more in Fantasy. Also, despite SciFi/Fantasy having been fused to represent one genre, most authors tend to stick with one or the other. An author who masterfully blends the two, however, is Anne McCafferey. (You thought I'd never get to my point, right?)

McCaffery is one of the most well know SciFi/Fantasy authors and she deserves all the recognition. The single most characteristic that makes her worthy of her reknown is how well she blends both genres. In her works, most of what we consider fantasy is based within science. A common theme is a sort of regression of a technological world or, an abondonment of it. In some of her pieces, we were forced to abondon our technology and survive in wholly different environments which, over time, allow us to develop into the fantastical beings with powers and such. In others, said technolgies tap into our own minds and beings and bring out said powers. In essence, they are usually based on both science and fantasy.

The Dan Brown Code

2009-09-18T00:00:00.010-04:00

This week has provided for us another book release which has people in a tizzy. Dan Brown's latest concoction, THE LOST SYMBOL, hit the streets on Tuesday to much to-do. I, luckily, did not have to work on Tuesday as it was my birthday. Thank You. Combine that with O's big reveal on Friday and we're going to have us a heck of a couple weeks in book sales.

Let me just say that I am not a Dan Brown fan. I ain't a hater, I'm just not a fan. I will read the book but I can hold out until I can get it at the library or loan it out at work. I did read the Da Vinci code, just cuz, after it created such a storm in the world. I won't say that it was a "good" book but it definitely fell under the page-turner category.

I literally read it in a few hours simply because the action was so fast paced I couldn't put it down and wanted to find out what was going to happen next. I don't think the writting was particularly advanced but, I suppose, it did the job of giving people what they want and, as a bonus, create such a hubbub in the real world about the controversy/blasphemy of his "theory".

A word about the theory he proposed in the book. Frankly, I was inclined to lean more towards accepting it. I, myself, have dabbled in several pagan spiritual paths and, not for nothing, am usually at odds with christianity. I won't say his logic and "evidence" is really what won me over but it is not so much of a stretch for me to believe that such an awesomely patriarchical institution like the christian church would go to so much length to cover up something that threatened its authority. If nothing else, he played well with most people's distrust of the church and included enough of "truth" to make you, at least, understand where he was coming from.

That being said, it is just fiction folks! To this day I cannot understand what in the hell (ahem) made the actual church and all its supporters get so adamant about trying to discredit him. Again, no matter how much he may or may not have derived his theory from reality, as far as his books are concerned, they are just fiction.

All in all, I think he make the mystery/thriller genre work by providing such a thrill ride for his readers. I, personally, am not inclined to read books that keep me reading simply to find out what happens next because, well, once you find out that's it. His stories hinge so much on the suspense of finding out that you don't even have the time to really connect with any of the characters.

I was also rather surprised, but not really, that they would make the book into a movie. All the story had going for it, really, was the element of suspense and if you had already read the book, the movie kind of boring. The acting was sub-par and it stuck so closely to the book that, again, you already knew everything that was going to happens so it was damn near torture to have to sit through a three hour adaptation of it.

On Youth And Media: I Digress

2009-09-14T00:00:00.002-04:00

Currently, our country, dare I say culture, is caught in a youth-centric loop. A lot of what is being produced on the big screen, in books, and on television is being driven by the arguably newly invigorated teen demographic. I consciously leave music out as it has always been a form of media that spoke succinctly to youth unlike a lot of the other media that never quite caught on, until now, how fanatical--therefore lucrative--youth can be about various forms of media.

I, in particular, have always been drawn to a sort of youth media studies. Being a person who constructed, or misconstructed, a good portion of life expectancy from media (mostly television), I've a constant critical impulse to understand the current interaction of youth and media. Although youth media has been around for a while, it has never been as directly targeted or produced as it is today. It's easy to see that pop-culture is being practically dominated by it.

The problem that any person that looks onto media with a critical eye is that we easily fall into a critical loop similar to the proverbial chicken vs. egg saga. The ultimate question being is whether the media are simply reflecting the popular culture of the time or constructing it?

I recently watched the first few episodes of the new show GLEE. It is, perhaps, a very typical television format in which a group of socially ostracized highs choolers find solace, and perhaps a chance at high school fame, through the glee club. Your typical sort of high school antics ensue in that, by recruiting the high school quarterback into the club, the high school caste system is thrown into turmoil. It's a tried and true formula and, frankly, still works; the show is thoroughly enjoyable.

It is precisely this tried and true formula which sucked me into the critical vortex that I currently find myself in. Adding Glee to things like High School Musical, and not being in high school anymore, I found myself wondering if it was still really like that and, if so, was the constant tongue in cheek assurances by the media that it is allowing it to continue? You can see why that particular question got me all caught up.

My high school experience was nothing like that portrayed in any of the typical high school oriented productions. Sure, I was well aware of the whole clique thing and, yeah, transgressing it was rather unusual but, really, it wasn't that big a deal. I knew several people that intermixed through several social groups without anybody really caring.

Ultimately, I don't really have an answer to it and don't think a conclusive one is out there to be had. I firmly believe that media and what is represented impacts the real world construction of the young, but I also believe that media often really is a reflection of society and culture. I am comfortable, for now, simply asking the question.

Oprah: We Love To Hate Her

2009-09-11T00:00:00.003-04:00

On Sept. 18, Ms. Winfrey will be picking another book to add to her behemoth of a book club. Since 1996 when "O" picked THE DEEP END OF THE OCEAN by Jacquelyn Mitchard, her picks have run the gamut of already established classics from the likes of Conrad, Steinbeck, and Tolstoy to not as well known authors--whom quickly became well-known thanks--like Carson McCullers, Jeffrey Eugenides, and David Wroblewski; the most recent. Of course, who could ever forget the whole James Frey debacle. Her book club suggestions began as being only a nice little revenue boost for each pick, several of which have been adapted as films, to an outright guarantee that the titles will be akin to bibles for her readers.

Here's the thing: as much as I, a lover of books who also works with books, appreciates what she has done to the culture of reading--making it far more popular and mainstream than it ever was--I secretly, okay, openly loathe the fact that people would/will not take the personal incentive to make their own reading choices. Granted, the titles she picks are usually worth the attention but, still. It's simply awful to have the feeling, the damned near certainty that had the ineffable Oprah Winfrey not told people to go out and read this book, there is a large percentage of people who would not have.

It really is a no-win situation for the likes of me and people like me. As much as I want to loathe her book club for being yet another driving factor towards the homogenization of culture, I can't because she brought books and literature to so many people that would have otherwise never learned the pleasures of the writen word. If I am to be honest, there is also a certain amount of envy and jeolousy involved. that a person, who is not myself or people of my choosing, is able to weild that literary power and does so is agonizing! Were I in her position, I truly would be no different. Of course, my selections would be very different, but the effect would be the same.

RANGER'S APPRENTICE: THE SIEGE OF MACINDAW by John Flanagan

2009-09-04T00:00:00.002-04:00

Book six in the the RANGER'S APPRENTICE series promptly takes us back to the story that was abrubtly, and frustratingly, cut short in book five, THE SORCERER OF THE NORTH. Thankfully enough, book six is so full of action and great interplay between all the characters that the previously mentioned frustration is completely forgiven. Once again Will Treaty, our hero, with the help of similarly heroic people, satisfyingly devises a way to save the day.

What's great about Flanagan's stories is the equal amount of time he focuses on the development of Will's relationships as well as the driving force of the action. It is so well balanced that while you are anxiously caught up in the sword clanging and head bashing, you're just as anxiously investing is seeing the interaction of all the characters. Of course, the almost singular reason I prefer Young Adult and Independent Reader fiction to other fiction is how character driven the stories are.

In the post-Harry tsunami-like wave of girl oriented fiction brought about by the immense popularity of Stephenie Meyer's TWILIGHT series, it's great to have a series like the RANGER'S APPRENTICE series that young boys can unabashedly be fans of. In a perfect non-gendered world, popular youth literature would not cater to ideologies of gender but, as it stands, it still does. This series, however, does feature strong female characters that young girls are sure to find appealing.

Follow Your Gut.

2009-08-30T23:59:00.003-04:00

Let me begin by saying that, outside [M]academia, I tend to avoid non-fiction books of this nature. I genuinely enjoy enlarging my brain with such heady topics but, it has been my experience, that most books like this would have been best served in a shorter format. My instincts, or rather, gut feelings are usually correct which, ironically, is the sole topic of this book.

"Gut Feelings: The Intelligence of the Unconscious" by Gerd Gigerenzer is written to inform you that, despite what we are being told by dominant schools of thought--science, math, logic--what we consider gut feelings, or more esoterically intuition, are more than whimsy.

Gigerenzer throws a lot of heavy words around like recognition heuristic to ultimately say that although making decisions based on our gut feelings may seem groundless, there are actually a lot of things we are drawing from in order to make them. Our brains simply processes the information given almost instantaneously and instinctively. The main claim is that we don't always need a plethora of information or choice to make the best decisions. Less is more, he claims. Not always, of course, but often.

Gigerenzer is the director of the Center for Adaptive Behavior and Cognition at the Max Planc Institute for Human Development in Berlin, Germany. The more popularly known author, Malcolm Gladwell, drew heavily on Girgerenzer's research for his book "Blink."

Bottom Line: It's a very interesting subject but, really, you get the point after the first few chapters. The rest of the book is nothing more than example after example of what was already proven. If you were at all inclined to believe that gut feelings often work better than reasoning to begin with, you won't be able to avoid acquiring an "tell me something I didn't know" attitude even though you've never set eyes on any of the research.

History, Myth, and Magic? Oh My!

2009-08-26T23:59:00.003-04:00

One of the problems with working at a bookstore is that you're mental checklist of books to read grows exponentially on any given day. Either a certain book is flying off the shelves and you're curious to know why, or another book's dustjacket design is just too cool to pass up, or you happen to read a snippet of the description while putting it in its place. You're list grows and grows and grows but, sadly, you don't always get to everything because by the time you're up for another read, something completely different sweeps you off your feet.

Micheal Scott's "The Secrets of the Immortal Nikolas Flamel" series had been one that I've kept pushing back simply because something shinier and new would come along. My interest in it fell under the first and second categories of interest; kids kept asking for it and the covers always drew my attention. I didn't even know what it was about until I finally decided to pick up the first book, "The Alchemyst," this past month to read the description. The name Nikolas Flamel sounded familiar and I soon realized that his name also came up in the Harry Potter books as the creator of the sorcerers (or philosophers) stone. This little tid-bit did the trick and I soon took it home to read.

As it turns out, Nikolas Flamel was an actual person, an alchemist from back in the day who was rumored to actually have discovered the secret of life because, upon discovering his empty tomb, people believed he had faked his own death. Like most fantasy authors, Scott draws upon myth, legend, and folklore to populate his world with monsters, gods, spirits, and immortals. What sets him apart, however, is his use of actual historical figures, like Flamel, and their real-life exploits as elements of his story. At the end of every book, he gives a brief historical account even!

In Scott's books, figures like Flamel, Machiavelli, John Dee, and even Shakespeare show up as human immortals that have either pledged themselves to gods or found their own ways to stay alive. Scott veers away from the Greek/neo-western mythology that is so popular now-a-days and delves into Egyptian, Norse, Celtic, Mayan, and even a dabble into Native-American myth and lore. My personal favorite was Hecate!

The story is good, even if a tad on the typical side, but definitely a recommend, especially for fans of the "Percy Jackson and the Olympian" Series. Sadly, it is also a series which is only on its third book, "The Sorceress," and it's that book where you know the next book, "The Necromancer," is going to be the last because the time of the prophecy--did I mention it involves a prophecy--is getting closer and closer, both figuratively and literaly. Unfortunately, it isn't slated to come out until April of 2010 so, if you decide to pick these books up now, be warned that you'll have to suffer the wait for the last book for at least half a year.

A FORTUNATE AGE by Joanna Smith Rakoff

2009-08-24T14:42:00.001-04:00

One of the few perks to my job is the ability of getting advanced readers editions of books. I would say seven out of ten times the copies we get are from publishers looking to create more publicity for sub par authors. Every once in a while, however, we manage to get books that are from little known authors but extremely well written stories.

"A Fortunate Age," by Joanna Smith Rakoff is one of those books. The story revolves around a group of Oberlin grads in New York City dealing with that thing you always hear about while in college, the real world. Ultimately, it's about the comprimises we soon begin to make when we realize that the idealism of youth does not always hold up to the reality of life. We see how their individual lives change as well as their relationships to each other.

The characters and the storylines are thouroughly enjoyable if a bit over-thought. It resonates with anyone who took too many theory classes in college and hung out with too many activists. I think it should be a required read for all Ithaca College students.

Short And Sweet Pre-Revamp Reviews

2009-08-23T22:56:00.001-04:00

THE MAGICIANS by Lev Grossman - An anti-fantasy fantasy story. Perhaps this will be a stretch for some, but it reminded me of Watchmen in its attempt to portray a "real world" scenario for magic/magacians. Three quarters into the book an exasperation sets in with the characters but, in a way, that adds to the story. It's definitely worth the read, especially for adult readers of young adult fantasy.
A LITTLE BIT WICKED by Kristin Chenoweth w/ Joni Rodgers - A memoir of Ms. Chenowith of her life as a devout christian working her way through the theatre scene. Quite frankly, this was an unusual read for me. I had no idea who the heck she was but her book was so aggressively marketed that, out of mere curiosity, I picked up the advanced reader lying around in our break room. Although the main topics of her life, being christian and theatre, are of little interest to me, her light-hearted and sassy southern tone kept me wanting to find out more. As it turns out, she's a pretty big deal in Broadway, playing Glenda in Wicked and a decent size personality on television having a recurrent role on the West Wing. I even appreciated her approach to her Faith in an industry that is not known for being Faith full.
THE LAST OLYMPIAN by Rick Riordan - The last book in the Percy and the Olympian series is just about what fans of the series were anxiously awaiting to read. An independent reader series driven by Greek mythology, the premise lies in fact that the greek Gods have not gone away, they have simply relocated throughout the years following the heart of western civilization. Currently, that is the U.S. and the way to Mt. Olympus is through the Empire State building. Percy is a demi-god, the son of Poseiden, and the whole series follows him and other demigods in misadventures and heroic quests. It's great series to simply read for fun or to get kids to relate a bit more to Greek mythology.
BLOODHOUND by Tamora Pierce - The second in Pierce's new series set in Tortall, many many moons before we encountered it in the Lioness Rampant series. It is about Beka Cooper, an ancestor to the lovable rogue George, who happens to be one of Tortalls legendary law keepers. If you're a fan of the Allana series, you'll love this one!
CITY OF GLASS by Cassandra Clare - The last book in the Mortal Instruments series about shadowhunters, the demon-fighting decendants of angels. Jace and Clary, the main characters, finally get to the bottom of things and we, the reader, can finally stop holding our breaths over the slightly awkward, yet interesting, relationship between the two. One of the pest series I've read in a while.
ENDER'S GAME by Orson Scott Card - A neccessary read if there ever was one. Outside of the intense social commentary, it is a fascinating story.
THE MAGIC CIRCLE AND THE CIRCLE OPENS by Tamora Pierce - I love just about everything that Pierce writes. This series is my second favorite. The characters are great and relatable.
SORCERER OF THE NORTH by John Flanagan - The fifth installment in the YA series RANGER'S APPRENTICE continues to follow Will Treaty (now) as a full fledged Ranger. As good as the others but a bit frustrating at the end.
UNACCUSTOMED EARTH by Jhumpa Lahiri - Well written and, despite it's tendency to be a bit of a downer, a worthwhile read.
DROWN by Junot Diaz - More about being Domican but in short story form. Easier to handle (and enjoy) than THE BRIEF AND WONDEROUS LIFE OF OSCAR WAO.
CITY OF EMBER by Jean Duprau - a young hero and heroine in a postapocalyptic underground world in peril! Way exciting.
The "Study" Series by Maria V. Snyder (POISON STUDY, MAGIC STUDY AND FIRE STUDY) - Good ol' fantasy with an interesting concept on where magic comes from.
THE BRIEF AND WONDEROUS LIFE OF OSCAR WAO by Junot Diaz - The life of a Dominican kid that represents everything that is not Dominican.
CONCRET REVERIES: CONCIOUSNESS AND THE CITY by Mike Kaldwell - Lots of theory, lots of philosophy, lots of big words. What more could anyone ask for?
WATCHMEN by Alan Moore and Dave Gibbons - Jump on the bandwagon and give it a read. It's well worth it.
THE BELGARIAD AND THE MALLOREAN by DAVID EDDINGS - A four volume set of one of the best fantasy series out there. Great characters, great action, and just an all around great story.
THE JADE THRONE by Novik - A nice little twist on Dragon culture in China
HIS MAJESTY'S DRAGON by Naomi Novik - Dragons in the time of Napoleaon? What's not to love!
A GREAT AND TERRIBLE BEAUTY, REBEL ANGELS, THE SWEET FAR THING by Libba Bray - The classic tale of young, turn-of-the-century, British schoolgirls traveling through different realms of reality while learning to become proper English ladies.

Dear Readers (The Elite Few)

2009-08-23T10:00:00.000-04:00

In life, I've thrived on keeping a bit to myself and thus maintaining an air of mystery. I have come to realize that the extent to which I, we, feel the need to maintain a mundane connection with our "social networks" through myriad sites (Facebook, MySpace, etc) and also wax poetic on various blogs, is counter-productive to, well, production. We seem to have put so much significance on the trivialities of our existence that it seems to have leeched the life out of some of the more meaningful, i.e. purposeful, things that we do.

So, in an attempt to make a stand against the gratutitious self-indulgence that contempory media allow us, I've decided to curtail, or rather redirect, much of my online activity. As of late, I've lost a sense of purposefullness. I still maintain the sense of purpose but the physical expression of that has lost something. I want it back and thus I have decided that the first step is to reconstruct how I interact with the interweb and hope that, in doing so, I will reconstruct how I interact with life in general.

As of today, this particular blog will be different. It's main conceit will still be the expounding of various opinions, observations, and judgments by yours truly, but through a new focus. It is my intention to assume a more traditional role of a critic and thus post on here my encounters with the world of books. Mostly, I will do book reviews with an occasional film or music review thrown in, but I also am inclined to write about incidents and observations I come across that revolve around the literary. So much of my life has revolved around books and the art of storytelling and writing that I shall further embrace it by bringing it further into the forefront of my life.

E.A.R.

Romancing The Mainstream.

2009-07-30T08:44:00.005-04:00

I feel I must first offer up a sort of disclaimer. I am not as miserly and heartless as I like to let on. I do believe in Love although I am somewhat suspicious of what it has come to mean and signify in our modern culture. In essence, I wholeheartedly believe in the intense connection between beings just not so much in how our current culture says it is supposed to be expressed. That being said, I feel I have stepped into an alternate universe in which I am surrounded by romance. ROMANCE!

In general, I can't stand the commonplace expressions of romance. I don't like giving or [ahem] receiving flowers, I don't hold onto cards, and any gift you might give me, unless it is super special and personalized, may someday be discarded. Sorry. Over the years, as I have moved around quite a bit, I've learned to not be attached to things and, too often, expressions of romance are weighed down by things. Anything truly thoughtful and considerate is romantic; the more personalized, the better.

Since being in Virginia, my social network (or lack of SN) has turned out to be the complete opposite of the one I had in Ithaca. In particular the fact that the people I find myself surrounded by are far more, I don't know, mainstream? Don't get me wrong, I don't hate. I respect and enjoy the company of my sister and co-workers, it's simply that, compared to my peeps in Ith, their tastes are so mainstream it's taking me while to adjust. In one aspect that I find myself really having to adjust is in the reading tastes of my co-workers.

Several girls at work are avid romance readers. Now, if there's one thing that I thought united the often over-educated and elitist bookseller was the derision for the entire romance genre. It's hard to pin-point why, there is just so much that is wrong with it. Again, it's not a distaste for romance itself, simply the representation of it within said books. I mean, having read a few in my youth, I can say that the sex scenes are pretty good, if a bit melodramatic, but the messages they send about gender roles is disturbing. I don't know, maybe the genre has changed in the past decade or so but, I doubt it.

Currently, this alternate universe has had me evaluating the merit of disdaining mainstream culture as much as I have done in the past years. As a student of culture and media, it's hard not to develop a healthy hate for all thing mainstream and traditional. When you look at it all in perspective, the messages it relays about various social roles and the adherence to them, is more than just disturbing. In studying it thus, however, you rarely have an opportunity to experience it on an individual level and, as such, you forget that not all people are the same.

It seems that, in attempt to be champions for freedom, identity, and individuality, we end up lumping people into far more categories than we presume to be fighting. To be sure, there are so many wrong things with the messages being sent by mainstream media but is that enough to imply that the mainstream populace is taking it all in at face value?

I suppose this is the ultimate question and perhaps the asking is far more important than the answer.

Let's Talk About (Teenage) Sex.

2009-07-23T09:41:00.003-04:00

As some of you may or may not know, I work in a retail establishment that sells those square/rectangular things with pages, i.e. books. Although still very much a corporate retail job in many aspects, it is one of the best I've had and, believe me, I've had plenty o' retail jobs. I love books and to work around them suits me but also because the customer base are individuals who enjoy reading if not love books as much as I do. That's not to say that they are ALL good customers but the ratio of good to bad is definitely higher than in my other jobs.

As primarily a reader of young adult fantasy, I've developed a sort of niche within that genre. I enjoy young adult literature because the emphasis of the majority of the books are character driven. Sure, all fiction is character driven to some extent but young adult fiction puts the emphasis on the characters because if young adults cannot relate to the characters, then they will most likely not continue to read.

Like so many things in young adults' lives, much of young adult fiction is driven by trends. There was Harry Potter (although technically a different category, I consider it young adult), perhaps the biggest reading craze ever and currently, the Twilight series is giving Harry a run for his money. The secondary trend started by Twilight has been any series having to do or about Vampires, of which there are many.

Vampire fiction has always existed within a very sensual, if not outright sexual, world. In a most symbolic sense it's about penetration, the exchange of bodily fluids, and an intimacy between sucker and suckee that is most comparable to, you know, IT! Vampires have always been portrayed as having their souls replaced with an almost insatiable lust for the human body. Does that sound like any other creature that roams this earth? Yup, you guessed it, TEENAGERS!

Sure, although times they are a changin', not all teenager are actually sexually active but they do spend a decent amount of energy in the contemplation of sex and sexuality in general. That's just how they roll and, on a fundamental level, teenage sexuality is not something to be qualified as good or bad. Sex and sexuality are simply something we all must go through in order to mature into adults and it behooves parents, educators, and mentors to allow teen to explore and discus it rather than attempt to shelter them from it.

The other day, a parent came up to me at the store and asked if we had any other teen reading that was not in the young adult section. I wasn't exactly sure what she was asking so I asked her to elaborate. Well, it turns out that she was uncomfortable with the disclaimer we had posted in the section that some titles contained "adult" content and that parental discretion is advised. Honestly, I didn't know exactly how to proceed.

All I could say was that the sign was put there because some of the books/series in the young adult section dealt with sex and sexuality but not all of them. I provided a couple of examples of which ones I knew for sure did but, not having read every young adult book, I didn't know all of the books/series that had "adult content."

She seemed so overwrought that her teenage son would even come in contact with sexual content. In that instant I was torn in many directions. I was glad that, as a parent, she took the time to question what was available for her teen to read but, at the same time, I felt like telling her to relax. He's a teenage boy. He thinks about sex and, at least, the majority of young adult books that are sexual in nature are not without merit, except perhaps the whole Gossip Girl series. I left her, still rather uncomfortable in the section, and later saw her and her son walking around with a copy of Brisingr by Christopher Paolini.

My point: parents, educators, and mentors you need to both relax your grip on your children and yet get a better grasp on them. Sex and teenagers go hand in hand (no pun intended) and the only wrong thing to do is attempt to delude yourself that you can shelter them from it. It's a natural and necessary process. Instead of attempting to ban any sexual content from their lives, take the time to read, watch, and listen, or at least get informed about, what they are reading, watching or listenting to and, GASP!!, discuss it with them. Teens, for the most part, aren't dumb about that stuff, they are just anxious to know what it's all about and there are an inordinate amount of ways for them to dig stuff up, with or without you.

Self-Aware Cinema

2009-05-31T12:19:00.005-04:00

In the past several years, movie screens have been nothing if not nostalgic. We've been given reinterpretations of favorite films, additions to franchises of somewhat ago, and new offerings of stories and characters we've all wished that some day would be made into films. For the most part, the nostalgia circuit has satisfied. We've been given more Indiana Jones and Terminators; Star Trek and Batman; X-men and Transformers, all movies that those of a certain generation connect to vividly whether they be comic book fans or Saturday morning cartoon fans. As I mentioned, most of these kinds of films have delivered, but some just didn't do it for me. The one that seemed to somehow not get through to me was Indiana Jones and the Crystal Skull.

I LOVED the Indian Jones movies growing up. Although my BFF disagrees with me, The Last Crusade was my favorite. I may have a far more emotional attachment to this film simply because it was one of the few films my father took me to see but, regardless, I consider it to be my fave. I do love them all, however. Up until the Crystal Skull, I never really stopped to fully evaluate why I liked them, I just did. My dissapointment with Crystal Skull, however, left me a bit confused and, in an attempt to figure out why, I had to figure out what it was I liked about the first three installments.

Ultimately, what it came down to, was that Indiana Jones and the Crystal Skull was too self-aware. There was an effortless rougishness to the first three movies that was lacking in the fourth. I don't know, I can't even give you specifics as to why I feel this way, maybe there were just too many seemingly casual homages to the other films. To me, the film, as a whole became a little like Tom Hanks. Yep, that's right, Tom Hanks.

I don't like Tom Hanks. Why? Well, because there came a point in his career where he began to take himself way too seriously and became a characiture of himself. The movies he was in were no longer The Movie featuring Tom Hanks but Tom Hanks in The Movie. His internal persona has gotten so big that I can no longer convince myself, while watching him act, that he is not Tom Hanks. The Crystal Skull gave off a similiar vibe to me.

It's like the makers of the film spent so much time and energy making "the next Indian Jones movie" that the film, at least to me, lacked that crucial debonair attitude that made the previous films what they were. Also, I believe that part of the reason I walked away feeling like this was because of the excess of special effects.

Again, part of the reason Indi was so appealing was because he was just a rough and tumble kind of guy with a PhD and the predicaments he found himself in were mostly carried by the reality of his situations: runing and jumping, fighting, speeding trains, horse chases, whips, etc. There were only a few overly CG moments (the ants and the whole spaceship thing) but they were two too many. If I wanted an imensity of CG, I would have gone to see The Mummy.

Last night, I went to see Terminator: Salvation and it was also a bit too self-aware for my taste. I liked it better than the Crystal skull but it still was afflicted with Tom Hanks Syndrome. I think part of my unease about it was that it was too much like a modern-day action movie instead of like the other Terminator movies. You know, the other three were really, lets be honest, about blowing things up and killer robots and occasional sex etc. That's what was great about it. They were unapologetic action films. Now, it's as if studios want to taper the violence of action films with overly intense emotionalism.

One of the reasons, if not the sole reason, I say this is some of the romantic angles they included in the movie. Sure, the entire franchise is built, after all, on two people hooking up but the romance of it all was never particularly on the forefront. It was a casualty of circumstance as all things in this particular world are. In Salvation, it was too much of a focul point for me. Don't get me wrong, I'm not a hater of the romance but when I go to see a movie about robots, and explosions, and guns, and trucks, and the annihialation of the human race, I prefer if it didn't focus too much on the dreaminess of the main character and the chick who falls in love with him within a two-day period.

My Own Personal Fears

2009-04-01T20:28:00.002-04:00

You may not be aware of this but, we are currently experiencing some economic hardship. You didn't know? Well, now you do. In an attempt to educate myself a little on the economic mind, I subscribed to an economics podcast. I can proudly say that, although I'm still far from understanding how the economy really works, I'm not as clueless. Because of this podcast, I've come to appreciate economics more. It's far more socio-cultural than I ever thought and, well, you know, I'm all about the socio-cultural.

Throughout this whole economic crisis, I've been asking myself what it means to me? The conclusion is that, right now, not a whole lot. I don't have any more or less money than I have ever had and, although the company I work for is in dire straits, it's still kicking. I'll be leaving soon and will have to face the job market, which will surely be a whole new scenerio, but were I to stay where I am I wouldn't really have to worry.

Ultimately, I'm not much of a worry-wort. I like to think, however naively, that things always turn around. Hard times are unavoidable and to be expected. The only time hard times should ever be seen as disastrous is when they are not learned from. This country is young and these things happen. That's what it's all about.

The one thing that I find myself truly being worried about is non-mainstream/alternative culture. History has shown us that, when this country finds itself in a pinch, it is quick to break out the bandwagons. The rhetoric of relief becomes one of conformity. The powers that be begin to tell us that the way to help make things better is to support them rather than question them. At the very least, people put differences aside and try to give said support. At its worst, anyone who speaks aqainst the status quo in any way become terrorists. I truly believe that we will not revert to such an atmosphere of chaos but I can't help but fear it.

My fears are mostly drawn from recent consumer trends. I work in retail and, I would say, within the past year I've watched the atmosphere change drastically. Where once we prided ourselves in offering a greater selection to our customers despite, or in spite, of mainstream trends, we are now unwilling to take that risk. I can't say I don't understand why it's happening but it still makes me kind of sad.

We now cater to the mainstream, top 40, popular crowd. As much as that crowd is as legitimate a crowd as any other, it's sad to see everyone else be pushed aside because, although they have made us what we are, they are not where the money is.

WATCHMEN

2009-03-13T17:08:00.006-04:00

I saw Watchmen a few days ago but had to take time to fully understand how I felt about it.

I am a recent fan of the graphic novel, only having read it this past summer, but I was definitely a fan. Although I was a pretty big comic book fan, I've never been too fond of the graphic novel format. There's just something about it that I can't fully embrace. Watchmen, however, I loved.

Graphic novels often get lost in an art-for-art's-sake kind of mentality (at least I think so) in that they spend too many frames setting up scenes rather than having each frame be a scene unto itself. To me, Watchmen did not do that and combined with it's non-linear storyline, I fully enjoyed it.

Now, the movie. I think I have to admit that I was a bit disappointed with the movie. Visually, it was great and what was included from the GN was very faithful. The characters were also very well done. My main gripe is that they chose to put too much emphasis on the whole Ozzy scheme. What made the GN for me was the smaller plot-points like the Newsstand guy and the boy reading the comic, the psychologist evaluating Rorschach, and The New Frontier part. Those smaller storylines made the GN more than just another "save the world" kind of storyline which, the movie, taking those out, made it into.

In a sense, it made it TOO MUCH about the Superheroes and not enough about the "little" people.

Bottom Line: I liked it but I didn't feel that it really captured, what I felt, was the essence of the graphic novel.

Also, there was a whole lot of Big Blue Penis. I'm just sayin'...

EW = Edgar Weekly (at least this week)

2009-01-10T22:32:00.004-05:00

This week, Entertainment Weekly seems to have been written just for me.

A major feature this week involves none other than Telenovelas! That's right folks, spanish soap-operas are finally getting the attention they deserve. Some of you may read "soap opera" and roll your eyes. Well, if you do, you're most definitely have not seen a Telenovela.

Telenovelas are something that U.S. soaps aren't...entertaining. The drama is so over the top, the people are FAR more attractive, the characters out of this world, and, most especially, they last only for a few months. Telenovelas don't drag on for a bajillion years rehashing the same old tired stories or try to shake things up with demon possession (Marlena, can you hear me?).

EW's article reveals that Telenovelas are finally being noted because they manage to rake in more viewers than many of the popular English shows like Smallville and the like. Gee, I guess that might mean that the spanish speaking population in the U.S. is (GASP) actually worthy paying attention to when it comes to demographics.

Case in point: Ugly Betty.

UB has managed to become an extremely popular show. Why? Well, because it tapped into the Latino/a comunity who grew up with the telenovela from whence it came.

The entertainment industry is just SOOOO dense sometimes.

The other piece, the more important piece to me, in EW was the Oscar recount they managed to make. They sent out ballots to many industry insiders and asked them to reconsider 5 different Oscar years to see whether or not they would still give the little gold guy to the same people.

Most actors got to keep their little guys but some, well, didn't fare so well. The recount that mattered to me was the recount of Oscar's 98. For years, YEARS, I've never gotten over the fact that Gweneth Paltry won Best Actress for Shakespeare in Love over Cate Blanchette for Elizabeth. Paltry was good in Love but didn't hold a candle to Cate in Elizabeth.

Well, it seems I was not alone. EW recounted the vote and 61% of the voters picked Cate over Paltry. Sure, GP still gets to have the official win but CB, at least, gets a much belated nod. Not that CB really needs it because, unlik GP, all of the roles she plays are stupendous.

Nick Sagan stole my idea, or is gonna....sigh....

2008-12-06T21:03:00.003-05:00

I live in the Fingerlakes region of NY. In this area, the town of Trumansburg exists. Locally, it has a relatively undecent reputation and yet several people of national note choose to live there. Whoopi Golberg lives there or at least has a home there, that guy who played Candyman lives there, and so does Nick Sagan.

Nick Sagan, if you don't know, is Carl Sagan's son. Yes, THAT Carl Sagan. Like, yet not like, his father he writes about space and stuff but mostly as fiction. He comes into our store a now and again looking much like how you would expect the son of a science/space obsessed behemoth who, in turn, has followed suit: slightly awkward, hair awry, a bit frazelled looking.

I offered to help him find something the other day, not knowing it was him. His topic of inquiry was the fictional realm of Star Trek and how it has constructed reality by inspiring individuals to attempt to do the things they have read/seen in it. Namely, MY idea.

I, myself, had wondered a similiar thing many moons ago. It was not Star Trek specific but a general impulse to ask how much fantasy constructs reality. My impulse arose from reading an article in W.I.R.E.D (or perhaps SEED) magazine about the Virgin Billionare Guy spending lots of money in trying to build a commercial space travel port. You know, something that any schmoe could buy tickets for simply to take a little cruise on the milky way.

His endeavors were inspired by being a sci-fi fan--not to mention having the financial werewithall to drop that kind of money on a whim. Regardless of it all, he is attempting, and perhaps will succeed, in making something of fantasy into a reality. The same goes for all those scientists out there attempting to understand time, find life on other planets, creat Artificial Intellegence, and so forth.

So kids, you heard it here first and, if Mr. Sagan does, in fact publish something of the sort, know that I too shared the same creative impulse.

Bottom Line: I have great ideas and I often like to keep them as such.

Talkin' 'bout: Pop, Pop, Pop music.

2008-12-03T09:01:00.008-05:00

Once you get to know someone, really get to know them, you are allowed glimpses into their psyche. You learn that some of their most basic desires are often in opposition with the persona or ideologies they publicly embrace. The self-righteous born-again craves debauchery and sin, the angry homophobe dreams of playing touch pee-pee with his drinking buddies, and the self-proclaimed hipster music afficionado secretly loves all things Pop.

Such is the stuff of guilty pleasure, a concept which implies the undeniable attraction of basic fodder by the culturally elite. Frankly, I find it to be nothing but snobbery and the maloderous lingering of victorian ideology. Some pleasures are unhealthy, for sure, but there's nothing wrong with wanting to become part of the rhythm nation.

So, ladies and gentlemen of the jury, in an attempt to make you feel a little better about knowing more than a few Backstreet Boys lyrics, I offer an argument or two in defense of pop.

When you go to a good live performance, the one thing you are most likely to hear is "Wow, they put on a great show!" and there in lies the rub. Any musician must also be a performer. An impassioned musician playing music he/she loves is often enough but everyone needs to put on a good show in order to connect with the audience. Pop acts are usually pooped on simply because they rely too heavily on the performative aspect. To that I say, so what?!

Ballet or any other type of dancers are not usually disparaged, nor are stage actors. Pop acts, if anything, are nothing but a similar type of animal. Many pop acts have genuine talent in terms of vocals, dance, choreography, and in putting on a show. Simply because they don't write their own music or produce their own songs does not automatically relegate them into the realms of the talentless. Not for nothin' but the ability to put on a good show is a talent in and of itself and requires an immense amount of energy to pull off.

Mostly, though, the #1 argument in defense of liking pop music is, well, it's just fun. The songs are often very catchy and, despite the fact that the people singing them are not the ones who wrote them, sometimes good songs. The music is often basic but still resonant whether it's thumpin' to a dance beat or pulling strings in a ballad. Ultimately, it's enjoyable and, regardless of where it falls in the caste system of the music world, it's not always the vacuous and immaterial trash that many make it out to be, even if it might be, so what!

Bottom Line: Stop being a snob! Just shut up and download that Rihanna song you've been coveting!

Here's a little Pop tart:

I ♥ Books

2008-11-18T22:55:00.006-05:00

A co-worker of mine, studying to become an English teacher, asked me what my first reading memory was. I gave it much thought but couldn't actually recall one. I remember the first book I took out of the library in Kindergarten: Little Brownie, the riveting tale of a calf who gets separated from his mother (I still have it, P.S., as I refused to take it back to library when I was young).

Frankly, I don't remember ever being without books and yet I can't really say where it is my love of them came from. I don't recall ever being read to as a child or really being encouraged to appreciate books in any way outside of school. Books and reading have been a constant in my life and I am hard-pressed to recall a time in my 28 years when I did not have a passion for books.

In said 28 years, I've amassed a short list of books that I just HAVE to read again every few years or so.

Jean M. Auel's "Earth's Children series is probably my number one pick. So far there are five books in the series, the first being Clan of the Cave Bear which was so dastardly adapted for film with none other than Daryl Hannah as the protagonist, Ayla. In short, Ayla is a Cro-magnon girl living in a Neanderthal world.

She is presented as a reluctant revolutionary in that she sows the seeds of cultural (?) evolution. She is the first to domesticate animals, the first to conceive of human reproduction as sexual vs spiritual, the first to discover, at least inspire, innovations in weapons and tools, and so on. Not only that but she becomes a quasi missing link character in that she comes to represent the best qualities of both neanderthal and cro-magnon people.

The narrative is made even more poignant by the fact that Auel does extensive reasearch of the era and bases her narratives on the actual theories of those who study such things (I don't really know what they call themselves, paleontologists? just scientists? don't know)

As much as I enjoy these books myself, I tend to refer to them as old lady reads because, well, they are books that you would envision old ladies reading. I, however, believe that we should all embrace the little old lady inside of us.

The second on that list is Tamora Pierce's "Song of the Lioness Quartet." In truth, I usually am inclined to reread most of what Pierce writes.

This is the story of Alanna, who becomes the first woman Knight in the realm of Tortall. Disguised as a boy, she works her way through training to become, of course, one of the best Knights of the realm. The king's champion even. She also has an extremely powerful magic gift (again, of course) and goes head to head with sorcerers and soldiers alike. It's perhaps a relatively basic young adult fantasy storyline but Alanna has yet to lose her appeal.

Third is David Eddings' "Belgariad and Mallorean" series. This series has it all: tons of great characters, a complex yet graspable world construction, magic, creatures, gods, and just an all around great story.

At its tip, it's the story of Garion. A young boy raised by his Aunt Pol on a non-descript farm in the imagined land of Sendaria. He soon learns that, in actuality, he is the sole heir to the Rivan throne, the bearere of the all-mighty Orb of Aldur and the Child of Light, the one person that is meant to embody the essence of the universe in order to fullfill an ancient prophecy to right what was wronged during the creation of their world....oh my! The narrative is driven by their need to fulfill the requirements of the prophecy by gathering a motley crew of individuals at the destined time. It's hardcore fantasy, through and through.!

Honorable mention goes to John Irving's, The World According to Garp; Anne Rice's Vampire novels; Ayn Rand's, The Fountainhead; Anne McCafery's Rowan series; and Raymond E. Feist's Riftwar series (the first two and the most recent) which, although I don't get the urge to reread as much as my top three, they are always close at mind when I think of the favorite/most impresionable books I have read.

Oh Michel...

2008-11-06T11:01:00.005-05:00

I met a man in college. His name was Michel Foucault. He was french and inclined towards philosophical thought although I referred to him, endearingly, as a theorist. He talked a lot about discourse, power, structure, and discursive power-structures, a great many things that, although rather fatalistic, were enticing.

We started off only having a class or two together but, as we ran into each other more and more, we grew inseparable. He'd show up in my classes even though he was not enrolled and every book I read, film I watched, or paper I wrote I could hear him whispering sweet nothings in my ear.

Our relationship, although passionate, was inexplicable. I often found myself trying to bring him down, or up, as it were, from his depressive theories by introducing him to other, more idealistic, guys. I tried to get him to talk existentialism with Heidegger and Sartre or, at the very least, ideal speech situations with Haabermass. Alas, as ravishing as those conversations were, he could never escape his power-structures, there was always some way he could negate any sort of idealism.

Most of my close friends had trouble dealing with him. All, except one, would get that glazed look in their eyes as soon as he was introduced into the conversation. Only Liz, another college friend, could spend hours if not days on end with Michel. Truth be told, I often was afflicted with jealousy at the sight of their interactions. As much as the relationship between Michel and I was special, theirs was an understanding that often positioned me as the outsider.

In the end, after college, Michel and I grew apart. More and more I had trouble going along with his utter refusal to provide a way out and, I'll admit, other theorists began to catch my eye. We have since gone our separate ways but he will always hold a place in my heart. I often find myself thinking of him when I'm spending time with someone else.

Oh Michel...

Latin Beats

2008-11-03T17:49:00.007-05:00

Since moving to the northeast, central NY to be exact, I've gained a lot of things: a degree, great friendships, and personal growth in loads. Sadly, the one thing that has slowly wilted away from lack of attention, is my latin rhythm. Oh that's right, despite my fair-complected exterior I, dear friends, could dance to those latin beats like nobodies business.

The irony of it all is, since moving here, I've become so much more aware of my cultural/ethnic/racial persona and yet can barely manage to shake my bon bon when the occasion arises, which it rarely does. I've also missed being connected to Latin music.

Growing up, I was never what you would call a fan of Latin music, preferring to assimilate into more American musical tastes, but I was immersed in it just like any other Mexican living in So Cal. Mexican music was never too innovative, at least I never thought so. Usually, they attempted to simply incorporate some American trend or another with little success. The whole Spanish rap scenario during the early to mid 90's was FRIGHTENING! Latin music's main tenet was traditional music like cumbia, salsa, serenata, along with pop and pop rock. Rock en Espanol wasn't bad but I felt for it then what I feel for college/modern rock now: meh.

In the five years I've lived in central NY, latin music has progressed in a way that I think can only be attributed to the advancement of communication media. Innovative Latin musical artists have transcended borders, and let us not forget all those musical immigrants like Ricky, Shakira, Paulina, and Cheyanne who hopped on over to the states to wow sedate Americans with their awesome latin-ness (I have reservations about the whole "Latin Explosion" but, that is for another time perhaps). The one musical genre which I have been most impressed with--and was the inspiration for this blog--is Reggeaton!

I, in my triteness, have dubbed Reggeaton the music of polyculturalism*. It is truly an polycultural blend of Latin music genres, hip-hop, and rap. Any Latino who grew up around Latin music, or any other non-Latino aficionado, will instantly recognize how many musical influences are contained within the Reggeaton banner. To provide a point of reference here are some well known artists who fall under the Reggeaton banner: Daddy Yankee with his ode to Gasolina, Pitbull sometimes is considered although he leans more towards hip-hop/rap than anything else and....honestly, I can't think of others that would be easily recognizable to the masses.

In any given Reggeaton song you will hear a bit of salsa, some bachata, some merengue, along with an occasional dancehall/carribean swing, and then some rap/hip-hop sound, usually in the dirty south, or crunk, sensibility. Tie it up with an array of both English and Spanish lyrics and you have yourself a whole lot of music. It's Latin-American in a way that Ricky Martin and J-Lo would never understand.

*the term polyculturalism is a critical-cultural term intended to directly confront multi-culturalism. Multiculturalism, despite it's attempt to champion diversity and tolerance, is still a term which glorifies difference over similiarity. It does not attempt to irradicate racial lines but to simply say that we should all accept that we are all different beings (read: separate) and to just be nice to each other. Polyculturalism attempts to blur concepts of race and ethnicity by making them maleable, undefined, and, in its most extreme interpretation, non-existant. In essence, it's a post-modern attempt to break down modern racial/ethnic/regional categorizations of the human race. OH SNAP!

All Immigration Is Not Created Equal

2008-10-24T00:03:00.002-04:00

I've currently taken a break from reading young adult fantasy to read fiction. My mind isn't equipped to digest fiction, at the moment, so I figured I'd start off small by reading some short stories. I picked Junot Diaz's, Drown, and Jhumpa Lahiri's Unaccustomed Earth.

In an attempt to broaden my literary horizons, I've chosen to read ethnic authors (whatever that means) but, more specifically, immigrant authors. In reading both works, by authors who definately fit the bill--Diaz is originally from the Domican Republic and Lahiri from India--you get a sense of how the immigrant experience is not the same for every person.

Diaz's characters, settings and narratives are uninspiring, to say the least. Rape, beatings, murders, tyranny, poverty, drugs, aggression and so much more is the name of Diaz's game. His immigrant imagery is far from subtle. Lahiri's imagery, on the other hand, is nothing if not priviledged. Her characters almost always are highly educated and stable (at least in a worldly way), her settings involve Ivy League campuses, London flats, and New England suburbs, and her narratives are so deep and nuanced that you can't help but sigh at the end of a story. One author makes you hold your breath while the other beats it out of you.

Both perspectives are extreme forms of the immigrant experience but I think it's safe to say, as an immigrant myself, that most immigrants find themselves caught somewhere in the middle, neither having lived a life of utter abjection nor one of priviledge.

On a technical standpoint, it's also interesting to compare and contrast these writers stylistically. Lahiri's character stories are so involved that they span lifetimes. At the end, despite being given such a thorough glimpse into their lives, you want to know more, you want to see what else will happen. Diaz is quick, rough, and to the point. They're about instances, moments, and actions, not giving you the time to think in abstraction. In the end your left reeling from what you've just experienced but you got what you came for, if you will.

Ultimately, they are both interesting reads, if anything, to compare and contrast.

Another suggestion: Amy Tan's Memoir. I forget the title but it's also an interesting perspective on the immigrant experience in the U.S. I've never actually read her fiction, but I love her memoir.

A Good Person Is Easy To Find

2008-09-21T23:15:00.003-04:00

Generally, most people try to be nice. Somebody casually says something to us, or acts a certain way and we take offense, then we try to rationalize their behaviour by saying that, deep down, they're "good people."

Bullshit! That's not an excuse.

Common courtesy, consideration, manners, and an overall awareness of the effect what we say or do will have on others is not something that we are born with. It is learned. Some people are better at it than others but, overall, a proper education on the matter is essential. Sometimes, we are lucky, and are provided with a bit of guidance by more experienced people but, also, we often are force to take our education into our own hands. Being a good person at heart does not excuse from being rude, inappropriate, obnoxious, and an all-around jackass. People who interrupt private conversations, demand attention from others, monopolize situations, and so on, do not qualify as good people in my book. I don't care if you've found a cure for cancer, shut the fuck up!

Another overly used excuse, and it IS an excuse, is the concept of social awkwardness. Again, there are some people who are genuinely socially awkward. These are the people that laugh at the wrong time, make irrelevant comments, tell you personal things about themselves while still in the introductory phase of an acquantance, and, yes, can often be creepy. It's true, they're out there. These Social Awks, however, don't usually act like asses.

A huge part of maturity or, at the very least, advanced social development, is being able to evaluate your life and self and make conscious decisions about both. It's easy to sit around and call out others on their shit, it's a lot harder to call yourself out. If, after careful evaluation, you notice that a lot of people often get offended about things you say or do or HOW you say or do things, then you have to make a choice. Either embrace your offensiveness and tell people to fuck off or change the way you say or do things.

You onlookers, however, must also make similar decisions. Again, just because a person "has a good heart," shouldn't mean you have to put up with their shit. Don't make excuses for the way they are or, more importantly, why you consider them friends. If your friend's a shit then be willing to admit that you are friends with a shit. The end.

Bottom Line: Stop being "nice" and just be honest. What does "good" really say about a person anyway?

The Art Of Being Inappropriate

2008-09-17T19:12:00.003-04:00

About a year ago, a friend sent me a message on MySpace. It was a very typical MySpace thing to send. It was a picture of a small child, a toddler, in a diaper with a caption that said "I love you this much." Innocuous enough, right? Well, the one thing that made it wholly different was the fact that the child had no arms. That's right, no arms. How did I react? Well, I put my hand over my gaping mouth and....laughed hysterically!

Was it crass? Was it inappropriate? Yes and YES! I, however, am a big fan of the inappropriate.

Frankly, I think our concept of impropriety is based on puritanical and victorian ideologies that, despite our seeming societal progression, we simply refuse to get rid of. Certain topics have remained taboo in our culture that, even in the most liberal circles--and I use the word liberal in a non-political sense--a room will come to a dead halt when such subjects are breached. All this aside, however, my main interest is impropriety for the sake of getting a few laughs.

There's nothing better than being able to laugh at something that, realistically, is no laughing matter. It makes everything seem just, easier. The ability to laugh at something makes that "something" much easier to deal with. There is, however, an art to do it correctly.

You must know when, where, and with whom it can be done. Some people, most really, do not adhere to the belief that a little uncouthness is okay. Some people are, how do you say, so UPTIGHT that they wouldn't be able to find humor if it was fucking them in the face (how's that for inappropriatness). If these people mean nothing to you then, by all means, bust out those dead baby jokes. If they do hold a certain amount of sway over you, then, keep the dead babies at bay. Timing is also everything.

I you become acquainted with a person or group of people whose primary laugh mechanism is the inappropriate, you must still bide your time before you can participate. This is a general truth that must be taken to heart in all things. As a newcomer, you cannot and should not expect the same reactions as everyone else. Sure, you can keep them interested by making a good Micheal Jackson joke, but don"t pull out all the stops too soon. Despite how crass any group of people are, there are still levels of ettiquette that should never be breached. Mostly, people have to be sure that the comments being made are completely in jest. If they don't know you well enough to know this for sure, just like that song about the white horse says, DON'T DO IT!

Ultimately, the key to being inappropriate, in a good way, is knowing your audience. Any good rhetorician will tell you that a keen understanding of your audience will take you a long way. Adjust your comments to who you're around, where you're at, and what is going on in your immediate location and in the world in general. But mostly, always be aware of what you're saying. If people understand that what you're saying is meant to be inappropriately humorous, try as they might, they will inevitabely have a little chuckle, even if it does involve a toddler without arms.

On Being Cool

2008-09-07T10:55:00.003-04:00

No matter how much is said to the contrary, everyone wants to be it: Cool. Some people try hard to seem cool, others try hard to make themselves believe that they don't care about being cool when they really do, and then there are some, the majority, I would argue, who actively attempt to claim coolness by acting like they could care less.

You know who they are. All those hipsters whose biggest accessory is that nonchalant air that surrounds them, like an aura. That air that says "Whatever. This old thing? I don't care about looking cool. I'm just being myself." In itself, that would be fine, except for the fact that you know they spent hours upon hours carefully assembling their hipster outfits or doing their hipster hair.

C'est la vie.

Everyone attempts to do it in their own way, depending on what particular scene one is trying to break into because, to be sure, coolness is a subjective concept completely relative to the group of people you hang with or want to hang with. The indie-rock kids roll their eyes and talk their derisive over-articulated talk about the jocks. The jocks scoff and ridicule the indie-rock kids' skinny jeans and over-swept hair. Each believing that their concept of coolness is wayyyy cooler than the other. It's always been thus and will always be.

Here's a little advice. Everybody, no matter what group, hates a person who tries too hard to fit in or, at least, has not mastered the skill of trying hard without seeming to be trying hard. It's one of those ironies of social groups. You HAVE to try real hard to get into a social group but you can't let it show.

Here's a tip. Stop trying, seriously. Instead of trying to give off the impression that your just "being yourself," actually be yourself. Don't worry about what other people will say, think, or react to you. Do what you love, dress how you like, go where you please, and, before you know it, you will have become part of scene.

You'll go to a certain show, or dance party, or bar just because and strike up a random conversation with someone. They'll say they like your shoes and you'll reciprocate with a similar compliment. A friend, while getting coffee, will introduce you to someone they go to school with, or work with, or met at a dance party the previous night. At a work barbecue you'll meet your co-workers roommate who is into a lot of the things you are. And this goes on and on and on and, before you know it, you're rubbing elbows with the coolest kids in town and you didn't even have to try.

Being social is crucial, however. You can't sit at home all the time watching C.S.I. and just expect to find coolness. It's not about getting wasted all the time, or going to parties all the time, but you have to be out and about. Also, you can't just rely on professional acquaintances. Some of us work like slaves to make ends meet and, often, the only people we can interact with are the people we work with. As a part of your social spectrum, this is fine. Work acquaintances are a rich resource but they are extremely exhaustible. One must always be conscientious and be socially sustainable.

Bottom Line: Like is drawn to like. Don't be afraid to enjoy yourself and do what you like, wear what you like, and be how you like. The only person you can control is yourself and as soon as you stop trying to be cool, you'll find that you've become it.

The Personal is NOT Professional.

2008-09-04T10:09:00.003-04:00

There are various professions that not only allow but require a certain amount of personal issues to be brought into the proverbial office. These professions are ones in which the lives of others or various other soci0-cultural factors are at risk. Retail, my friends, is not one of those professions.

Like so many others, I've spent a good chunk of my life in retail. I've done department stores, grocery stores, food service, and gas stations. I currently work in a bookstore and, although better than all the rest in terms of work environment and quality of co-workers, it is still a retail place.

In my lengthy travels on the retail highway I've learned many things. The one that was the hardest to learn, but the most important, was to leave your personal life at home. This is not to be confused with keeping yourself isolated from co-workers, but to avoid bringing in all your worries and woes and laying them out on the break room table for everyone to know, judge, and ultimately resent. That's not to say that genuinely close relationships cannot be formed at work but careful consideration must always be employed.

The key to knowing when a genuine friendship can be made is having an out-of-work connection. It's all fine and good to go grab a couple drinks with co-workers and bitch about work but to only have that as a common bond makes life dull really fast. If you can't seem to have a conversation with someone that is not about work, well then, you may not want to saddle yourself with their friendship. Adversely, if, when at work, a co-worker can only seem to talk about their personal life (as in relationship problems, etc.) my advice is to steer clear of them as well. If someone is so free with deeply personal information at work, you can be sure that hanging out with them will be the most grueling time you will ever have.

All of this must, really, be learned first hand. We often get so caught up with the people at work that it's hard not to construct weird relationships with them. Some places not only make it easy to form real relationships but almost require it. Again, retail is not one of them.

My number one tip: Don't get romantically or sexually involved with someone you work with. Sure, it can sometimes pan out but the potential for disaster is tremendous. If you do decide to get involved, keep your relationship low key at work. Nobody wants their lunch ruined by being force to watch their co-workers making out.

Confessions On The Salesfloor

2008-09-03T22:29:00.004-04:00

Why hello there, fair readers. It's been several weeks since our class was in session but I hope you have used the valuable insights I've imparted to make the lives of your retail staff that much more tolerable..

Let's talk about families. Most retail spaces embrace and encourage the entire family to come in and spend their hard earned money on meaningless things that will make your life no better or worse than it was before. Retail workers know and understand this and are more than capable, perhaps not so willing, to tolerate the family unit. One thing must be clearly understood, however, before you step into any retail setting with your five kids, in-laws, and your obnoxious partner.

First, take care of your own children. The retail staff is there to provide good customer service, not day care. If your children are old enough or mature enough to be respectful of other people and the merchandise, maintain appropriate voice levels, and not run up and down aisles then, by all means, lend them a bit of freedom. If your children are not, then please assert your parental role and mind them. Subsequently, don't blame the establishment you're in if, say, you catch your child in the sex section or some such thing. The only person at fault here is you, only you, for believing that you could leave an adolescent alone and not expect them to seek such things out.

Second, don't pretend to be keeping your kids in line by hollering at them from across the way.

Third, don't take your entire family into the checkout line with you if you are the only one paying. Tell them to wait patiently and quietly for you to make the transaction somewhere where they will be out of the way.

There are many more things that, had we the time, we could add to these three thing but, for now, this is enough.

Here is one general idea for everyone to embrace. Although most cashiers are perfectly amenable to having a short exchange about your purchase or your day or your health or current events, the word to focus on is "short." We neither have the time, nor the inclination, to spend 20 minutes discussing anything. Don't talk a person's ear off when there is a line waiting to be rung out. The one's who are usually blamed for the pace of the line are the cashiers, not the customers. Don't make the life of your friendly cashier worse by holding up the line and then subjecting them to the ire of the people behind you.

Also, for the most part, cashiers are not allowed or, in corporate terms, not encouraged to sustain inappropriate conversations. Such inappropriateness usually entails controversial topics of conversation such as politics, religion, corporate/consumer culture etc. Make as many snide and off-hand comments you want, we will always smile and nod at you, but don't seek to engage us in conversations of that nature.

Have A Nice Day!

Defining Moments

2008-09-02T12:54:00.002-04:00

I'm not as bad a word snob as that obnoxious college girl who is pursuing a degree in English but I do like words to be used properly. So today, fair ready, I am going to clarify some terms that are often viewed as interchangeable but, in reality, are very different:

Trendy, Fashionable, and Stylish.

To be sure, all three are used to describe an individuals mode of dress but they are not all in the same and each, respectively, reveal certain characteristics about a person that should not be confused for the other.

I shall begin with the lesser of the three, Trendy. I consider this the lesser of the three because it is the one that does not require much, if any, individual thought to maintain. As the word so clearly states, to be trendy is to do nothing more and nothing less than follow trends. Trendy folk are easily spotted because they look just like the cool kids on the gap commercials or, to be trite, like everybody else. Trends are not without their merits but they are not meant to be used thoughtlessly and mindlessly. The egregiousness of those who seek the halls of trendiness is that they do it without thinking about it. It is a proverbial jumping-off-bridge scenario; just because everyone is wearing it, doesn't mean you have to.

The next rung is being fashionable. To be fashionable is to trendy what maturity is to being an obnoxious teenager. It's not a completely different animal but it's far more developed. To be fashionable is to understand what looks good and what doesn't. It's knowing that sexier does not always mean baring midriff and looking professional does not always mean power suits. Being fashionable goes beyond being trendy into a sort of classic knowledge of styles. There are certain styles that never go out of, well, style. The little black dress, for example, is one such thing that no matter how many trends come and go will always be there. To be fashionable is to apply the ultimate concept of "the little black dress" to everything.

Then there is stylish. In my opinion, this is the best of all three. To be stylish is to be both fashionable and trendy but also something completely different and all your own. Stylish people are the people that, when they walk into a room, everyone turns to look. They can be bold and subtle at any given time or all at once. To be stylish requires a confidence that being fashionable and trendy cannot even understand. The stylish are often the trendsetters, the ones who cause fashions and create trends.

So, fair reader, whenever you're sitting at yea old coffee shop applying labels to people strictly by the way they dress, remember to use the proper ones. The only thing worse than labeling people, is improperly labeling people.

Versus Party: Being Honest vs Just Being An Asshole

2008-08-31T11:16:00.003-04:00

We all say we love honesty. It is either something we supposedly like to give, or say we like to receive. Let's be honest folks (he he), that's perhaps one of the biggest lies told to us or that we tell ourselves. Sure, when it's beneficial to us it's swell but, when it's something we don't particularly want to hear, well then, it's a whole 'nother ball game.

There are a lot of people out there who stake their entire reputation on being honest with people. For the most part, they are essential people in the lives of their friends, families, and anyone else with whom they cross paths. To some, their honesty is refreshing while, to others, it's the most off-putting thing. A line must be clearly drawn, however, between being honest and just being a big jerk.

Honesty is about good intentions. It's about telling people what they need to know about any particular situation in order for them to make better choices or, at the very least, understand the consequences of the choices they make. It's also about helping them avoid pitfalls and traps. It as simple as letting your friend know that no, they don't really look so hot in that outfit, or as intense as telling your best friend that their significant other is spreading their "significance" all over town.

Just like everything else, honesty must be used wisely. Sometimes, keeping people in the dark, at least for a certain time, is the best course of action. You know, sometimes, it's just none of your damned business so stay out of it. Just as honesty can resolve situations, it can also make them worse. Some people just prefer to live deluded lives and, if you are someone who cares about them, no matter how frustrating it is, you have to respect that. It also takes a certain amount of tact in order to work. With that in mind, lets discuss people who are just jerks but like to pass it off as "being honest."

You can usually spot these people by the fact that they maintain the belief that being derogatory is being honest. They will call friend and foe alike that they are stupid, fat, childish, obnoxious, lame, boring, dumb, etc. Its as simple as telling a friend that what they're wearing makes them look fat after they leave the house or as intense as relaying unfounded rumors to your best friend about their significant other.

These people refuse to understand the concepts mentioned above and would rather their friends wallow in sadness, despair, anxiety, suspicion, etc. than maintain certain delusions that, in the long run, don't hurt anybody. If your friend looks a little fat in that outfit but thinks they look great, unless you can be 100% sure that telling them won't shake their self-confidence, keep it to yourself. If they feel good about themselves then that's usually enough to make them look good in the eyes of others.

Bottom Line: Honesty is a virtue but ignorance is bliss. If you're going to call yourself an honest person, learn to recognize which one of these two fundamental human concepts is called for in any given situation. Oh yeah, and don't be jerk.

Is That Your Political Consciousness Raised, Or Are You Just Happy To See Me?

2008-08-29T18:29:00.004-04:00

Last night was a first for me.

The crew and I were pre-gamin' it at the 410. Popping PBR cans resounded left and right as we attempted to get a bit tipsy before heading on up to PIXEL Lounge for dance party. We commiserated over Jen and John's breakup--just when you thought she was finally over Brad--drooled over Jake Gylenhal's Prince of Persia bod, discussed the literary prowess of Chuck Plahaniuk, and anxiously awaited Big Trouble In Little China to end so we could watch . . . . Barack's nomination acceptance speech!

Oh, that's right. Nothing gets the blood ready for a good ol' dance party like the wild and crazy antics of the Democratic national convention. We're cool, we're hep,....yeah!

In case you don't know me very well, the part which was a first for me was actually watching anything to do with political speeching.

Confession 1: I've never voted.
Confession 2: I've never even registered.
Confession 3: I have dry scalp.

Don't get me wrong, I understand the importance of it all, I really do, but it took me a very long time to truly believe that my vote/my voice or that of all the other under or just "un" represented communities from whence I come really makes a difference in it all. My recent acquisition of knowledge through college has raised my political consciousness quite a bit but, honestly, I still don't believe that the government of this country truly has the concerns of my people in mind.

In Obama's speech he said that this election is America's chance to keep the American promise alive. When those words were uttered, I couldn't help but wonder what exactly is this American promise/dream that even the best of politicians hold over our heads whenever an election is at stake. I've lived in this country for 28 years and have seen people live and die for this supposed promise and, frankly, I've yet to be convinced that it really exists.

I support Obama, not for any particularly political reason but because he is the first candidate that has given people hope that this country which is supposedly of and for us, actually is.

Just about every single person I love has lived or lives on the edge of a society that still refuses to allow them full access. Obama, I'm sure, is a politician like all the rest but by the sheer act of him becoming president, regardless of whether or not he lowers taxes or gets us out of Iraq, he will have openned up a space for the people that I love, and every other individual who lives on the edge of this society, that was not available to them, to us, before.

Will I vote? I'm still not really sure but this is the first election in which I've actually wanted to.

Sucker

2008-08-26T22:58:00.004-04:00

That's me, a sucker. For what, you ask? Feel good and inspirational films of overcoming.

It may surprise many who know me but I'm rather easily brought to tears by overly sentimental plot-lines about individuals, specially kids, who overcome obstacles to succeed. Read into that what you will Dr. Freud. Sure, I also cried when the mother died on Independence Day but that's neither here nor there. Here's a few on the list of films that make me weep like a wee little lass.

Billy Elliot. A young boy from a northern England mining town wants to be a dancer. Instead of taking the boxing classes his father signed him up for he lingers to watch a ballet class. The feisty ballet teacher finally gets him to step out from the shadows and put his toes to work. He keeps it all secret from his family but, when a spot in the Royal Ballet Academy is at stake, his family sets aside their preconceptions and helps him do it. Of course, he eventually becomes the lead dancer and life is great.

Girlfight. An angry girl from Brooklyn decides to take up boxing to deal with all the aggression inside her. It turns out that she has genuine talent and boxing allows her to cope with the day to day miasma of inner city life. It rough, it's aggressive, but if you can get past the fact that the lead also came out in The Fast And The Furious, it's way motivational.

Little Women, the one with Winona, not the original. Allcott's novel about a family of mostly women coping with society as progressives while simultaneously trying to keep food on the table. The scene where Jo (Winona) cuts her hair to give her mother money to go visit her father in the hospital brings a lump to my throat. The scene where Beth (Claire Danes) is on her death bed and tells Jo that "she doesn't mind staying home, but not being left behind" is a sure way to get those waterworks a goin'.

And the one that got this blog a rollin', Akeelah and the Bee. A young girl from South Central L.A., with the support from teachers and thugs alike, makes it to the national spelling bee in D.C. The prerequisite fish out of water storyline ensues as Akeelah begins to spend time with kids from the suburbs and watch her friends from home get upset. I've never seen this movie but boy did it have me crying my heart out. It's a good thing I was alone.

Here are some films that, to a lesser degree, make me sigh at the closing credits.

Pretty Woman. You can never go wrong with a prostitute with a heart of gold story.

Sabrina. The remake with Julia Ormond. Rags to riches and a makeover story? Come on!

Hope Floats. Sigh....so melancholy and with one of the best country soundtracks EVER!

....sigh....

Who Watches The Watchmen

2008-08-25T15:56:00.004-04:00

I'm always particularly interested in trends of all sorts and what drives people to follow them and also the historical context(s) behind their popularity. My desire to understand such things stems from being one of those people who would always avoid trends simply because they were so popular.

My prime example was the Harry Potter series. Although young adult fantasy has always been my thing, I refused to read the Harry Potter series until last summer. Honestly, this refusal was based out of some adolescent need to rebel against collective and mainstream culture believing, like so many other adolescents and some adults, that in doing so I was making a statement about my own individuality. Everybody liked it and that was enough evidence to convince me that I would or, at least should, hate it. This resistance soon gave way to curiosity. Instead of being irrationally resistant, I started to wonder what was behind it all. Why was Harry Potter so big. So I read them. This started a whole new era for me. I soon began to get completely caught up in such cultural inquiry, my main focus being young adult media.

Working in a bookstore which also sells a lot of multimedia, I have firsthand knowledge of particular trends in media. When, about a year and a half ago droves of pre-teens and just teens started coming in requesting High School Musical paraphernalia, I made it a point to find out what it was all about. In my strictly intellectual, ahem, investigation of HSM I began a small quest into youth consumer culture and the immensity that is Disney Corp. I also developed a schoolgirl crush on the dreamy Zac Efron but, that is neither here nor there.

But really, most trends are groundless and pretty predictable. People become interested in the things they feel they should be interested in or, are told to be interested in by various socio-cultural institutions. It's sad to say but many of our fellow homosapiens lack a certain sense of free-will. The number one example for this has been, at least for me, The Da Vanci Code. Like a hot air balloon, it rose to such heights because it was propelled by a lot of, well, hot air.

My current endeavor into understanding the driving forces of trends has been reading Alan Moore and Dave Gibbons' graphic novel, Watchmen. Since the release of The Dark Knight, and the airing of the trailer for the upcoming Watchmen movie, we've been hard pressed to keep copies of the graphic novel on the shelves. My roommate has been a fan of the GN as long as I've know her and, frankly, I've always meant to pick up the copy she has on her bookshelf and give it a read. Like so many other things I mean to do, I somehow get waylaid by other things. Because of it's recent mainstream popularity, I decided the time was now.

I've never been a huge fan of the graphic novel format. I was a decent sized comic book reader for several years and thought that graphic novels were just the same thing but bigger. Well, they're not. They are an entity unto themselves and were hard for me to wrap my mind around.

My first attempt was reading Neil Gaiman's Sandman series and I just couldn't deal so I wrote the entire genre off as a whole. Watchmen, however, was thoroughly fascinating. Not only was the entire premise very good, the mixture of formats was interesting and, ultimately, helped keep me on board throughout the whole thing.

It provided an interesting look into what makes a superhero a superhero and, also, how could superheros become realities in our real world? If I had to put a label on it I would classify it as a realistic superhero story. It will be interesting to see how the film is executed because, although it does have on overarching storyline, there is a lot to contend with and it's all very relevent.

Three Cups of Cancer

2008-08-23T21:32:00.002-04:00

We live in an unhealthy world. Just about everything that's manufactured that we eat, drink, sleep on, wear, use to wash ourselves and so on probably contains some sort of not-so-nice chemical. It's an established fact. Deal with it or move on. It's there and, sort of like when my grandmother used to tell me that the devil was in everything so I just stopped being scared of him, I choose to live my life anyway. Every other year some new research comes out that tells us that something we always believed to be safe actually will cause cancer. Cancer!CANCER!!!

Cancer is a very real and serious condition and, frankly, it offends me that researchers use it so casually. I can forgive researchers, however, because they know what they speak of. I cannot and will not offer the same concession to lame people who, as soon as they hear something on the news, do not get tired of lording it over people.

When I buy iced coffee at our cafe in Borders I like to put soy milk in it. It's not for any real reason outside of liking the taste of soy milk in my iced coffee better than real milk. In april, a new study came out on the effect of Biosphenol-A (BPA) which is known to cause, you guessed it, cancer in lab animals. It does this mostly because it somehow is able to replicate the estrogen hormone and throws your body out of wack. Soy contains this compound. So now, every time I ask for the soy milk from behind the counter, a certain girl always insists on telling me "that causes cancer, you know?"

Yeah, I know. I knew it before you did. You know what else causes cancer, smoking, of which she does on a regular basis. Also, BPA's claim to carcinogenic fame is no different than that of cell phones, and sacharin, and who know what else. Also, BPA can be found in polycarbonate plastics, like nalgene bottles. Whenever I go get iced water in my nalgene bottle guess what I get the priviledge of hearing from people. Yep, cancer. Honestly people, if you're going to freak out about something, at least know what your freaking out about.

The biggest possiblity of BPA leaching into your food or water is not so much the bottle itself but the conditions in which the bottle is in. It usually takes extreme heat to make BPA leach to the amount that it is harmful and still, you need a lot of it. If you make a habit of leaving water in your nalgene bottle in full heat for several hours and then drinking it, yeah, you're at risk. Frankly, you have more risk of BPA exposure from heating things up from tupperware in the microwave.

Come on people, we are exposed to tons of things in our daily lives which will inevitabley corrode our health. Don't be a follower and freak out just because somebody tells you to. I'm more concerned with getting heart disease from processed foods than drinking in a bit of BPA here and there.

Reedeming Qualities

2008-08-23T00:19:00.003-04:00

I'm not a judgmental person, not horribly. I can shrug off the most unsavory character traits of an individual in the name of comraderie. There are very few moral values that I will use against anyone but I am also a bit of a snob. Sure, I'm not judging you, personally, but I still don't want be your friend.

One thing I cannot stand, however, is bad parenting. I'm not a kid person. I'd rather dole out ultimatums than explain. If you don't wanna eat what there is, starve. That's how I play. In truth, it's not that I dislike kids, it's simply that we coddle kids way too much in this culture. Kids should have their own rights and a certain amount of say in their life but, until they hit a certain age, they can't and shouldn't be making their own decisions. Don't stand in front of the line at a food counter and spend ten minutes asking your child what he or she would like on their bagel. Give them a choice, allow them a minute to think, and if they don't decide by then, then order for them. Or hey, here's a thought, decide all of that before you get in the line. Whoa! Who'd a thunk it!

Mostly, however, I do not look kindly on irresponsible parents. Now, by irresponsible I don't mean parents that are never there, necessarily. Many parents, especially single parents, have to work very hard to raise their children and often are away from them. That does not always matter if the time they are with them is well spent. A little bit of QT goes a long way. Also, there are a lot of parents out there who spend a lot of time with their children and don't take care of them well.

Usually, the simple reason is that the parents put their needs before their childs. Sure, parents need to have their time too but not at the expense of your children. You know, if you have a child, you really shouldn't be going out all the time, or having people over to your house all the time to get drunk and smoke pot, or otherwise live the lifestyle of an irresponsible single person. More than just attention, kids need the proper care in order to lead healthy lives.

I write this because a certain person I had the unfortunate pleasure of crossing paths with has a child who is very sick right now. As much as I don't want to go there, I can't help but blame it all on this person. The little time I spent with them, and all that I've heard since then, it was made abundantly clear to me that they are irresponsible with their own life. I can only imagine what kind of life their child has led. Some of you who read this might guess who I write about, others might not, I frankly don't care.

No offense, but BIG MUTHAFUCKIN' offense!

Competing Realities

2008-08-21T10:59:00.006-04:00

"Reality" shows have overtaken our televisions. At first it was a mere studio executive ruse to fill air time during the Hollywood strikes of the late nineties. It all began, or at least the first show I remember was Survivor. Sure, we had had reality TV before with the likes of MTV's The Real World and Road Rules but these shows preceded the R-TV free-for-all that is today and were, arguably, more inclined to actually capture real moments than create them through manipulative editing/production.

R-TV went from trying to catch a curious glimpse at how people, placed in unusual circumstances, would interact and react with each other to following the lives of inane people who have little going for them except that they eat Drama for breakfast, lunch, and dinner. Not all of it is reprehinsible, however. A bit of descrimination goes a long way.

Stick to the competition shows. Some are more drama than others but, in the end, there's something else to focus on than people being snarky and vile with each other. Shows like Project Runway and Top Chef are great shows because it's more about seeing the creative process at work than anything else. Sure, the Queen factor on PR is through the roof and the 'tudes on TC are phenominal but they are side dishes to the main course.

If you can't control your R-TV addiction and MUST watch shows about the random lives of random people, at least watch ones about people that are worthwhile. It boggles the mind as to why anyone should care about real estate agents or housewives. Sure, sure, they live supposedly lavish lifestyles and run in powerful social circles but, so what. Their claim to fame is selling houses and being at home? Please!

On the flip side, however, shows about seemingly random people can pan out. In its heyday, The Real World was worth watching. The people were random and it was interesting to see how these people acted when, as they said, they stopped being polite and got real. Now, however, it's nothing put drunk, spoiled, middle class brats who want to hook up with each other.

The ultimate sham in R-TV, however, are the shows in which people attempt to find love. You know, Flavor of Love was worth a watch simply because Flava was such a character himself but everthing else that has come along is just too much. Hearing Brett Micheals try to tell the world that he was looking for real love with the fake-breasted, leather-faced, white-trashy ho's he had on that show was the last straw. All he was looking for was a good lay. What would really be worth watching is a reality show about all the contestants dealing with the STD's they got from each other while on the show.

After all this, a few concessions must be made. There are some R-TV shows out there that, like a bad car wreck, our sight cannot tear away from. America's Next Top Model, otherwise known as America's Next Tyra Banks, is numero uno on that list. There's just something about watching people treat modeling as if it was gonna cure cancer that intrigues the mind.

Small Town Fashion

2008-08-20T10:50:00.003-04:00

We all know that small town livin' is rife with issues: there's nothing to do, everyone knows your business, you're always running into people you'd rather avoid, etc. The one thing small towns are good for, is making people stick out like sore thumbs. Any one individual who has the gall to wear something other than mall store fodder, is guaranteed to be stared at and speculated about while buying groceries at the local market. I, for one, have always enjoyed that particular aspect.

I'm not an attention whore, I don't have to be. Being an individual and not revolving your life around the opinions of others is a sure way to always keep eyes on you. The whole mysterioso bit is kind of my thing. More than that, however, I loathe the idea of looking like everyone else. I've always puposefully steered clear of trends or picked them up a couple years after they are no longer trendy. I don't buy clothes with logos on them or overly used designs. Some articles of clothing, like a nice solid color polo, doesn't really adhere to any trend and I use them all the time.

Despite my partiular sense of fashion, I don't spend to much energy trying to go one way or the other. I buy cheap and comfortable. You don't have to spend hundreds of dollars on an outfit to look good. Being fashionable is not in the name brands of any article of clothing, it's in the person.

So what's the point of all this?

I bought a t-shirt several months ago at Old Navy that I really liked. It had wide horizontal stripes with very bold solid colors. It was cheap, comfortable, and incorporated some style elements that I like. Well, that shirt must have gone on clearance pretty soon thereafter because I started seeing it EVERYWHERE. I'm not so image obsessed that I change four dozen times before going out but, I am enough image obsessed that the thought of being somewhere and wearing the same thing as somebody else is a poignant phobia of mine.

I've circumvented this, however, by using these shirts as undershirts. Under an open, or partially open, solid color button down they make for a nice little splash of style.

Bottom Line: Edgar is stylish.

No Offense but...

2008-08-19T00:02:00.004-04:00

Whenever this phrase is used before any statement, prepare to be offended. If you really don't want to offend anybody don't tell them something that you know will offend them, as is made evident by the fact that you begin by telling them NOT to be offended by what you're about to say. Also, this phrase is also abused. Many people think that, as long as this is said, they can say mean and hateful things about anyone and it's okay. It's not okay. There's nothing wrong with being mean and hateful if that's how you're going to be but, at the very least, own up to it.

I, personally, like to say "No offense but, offense."

I sometimes enact entire scenarios and conversations in my head that I know I will probably never have but wish that I would. Today, on the ride to the apartment I'm sitting on from the place that I actually live, I went through a conversation in which I was attempting to tell a certain person why I don't really care to hang out with them so much. The ultimate reason was, well, that they were boring and I wondered whether there was a way to tell someone this and not have them be totally hurt by it. At a certain point in this imagined conversation there came the time when the "No offense," line would have been said. I'm sure it would have worked because, well, why would anyone get offended by one of their friends telling them that they don't want to hang with them because they're boring. Right?

So there you have it.

Bottom Line: If you're going to tell someone something that you are sure is going to upset them, then deal with it. Don't try to worm your way out of it by adding meaningless phrases that, in the end, just add insult to injury. So the next time you're going to tell a friend you hate the very air they breath, don't delude yourself into thinking that you're going to be able to salvage any part of your relationship. That, no offense, is just STUPID!!!

Home Decor

2008-08-17T16:56:00.002-04:00

As someone who has made relocation a habit, somewhere along the way I lost interest in home decor. It was a statement against impracticality and the useless acquisition of "things" that would only make my next, inevitable, move worse. When I moved to the east coast from the west, I even left behind my books, the only things I couldn't really part with.

I've lived in Ithaca longer than I have lived anywhere else since I flew the nest. It was mostly driven by the need to finish school but also because I was actually able to construct a kind of life that had eluded me everywhere else. This vague sense of home allowed me to reconsider my distaste in decor and reintroduce it, albeit sparingly, into the places I have lived. I still avoid big things, like collecting coffee mugs (which I used to do) but I don't pass over the small things as much as I used to.

Having had the opportunity to be in other people's homes recently, I've come to fully appreciate home decor a bit more. Sure, it's mostly impractical and unnecessary but why must everything we own be practical? It's ultimately about creating a space that is your own and being able to come into this space and be surrounded by things that comfort, stimulate, or simply make you smile. One's personal space should be a reflection of oneself and it's through the seemingly inconsequential tid-bits we pick up here and there that this can be done.

On that same note, I cannot fathom why someone would pay another person to decorate their home. I suppose that that in itself reflects something about the individual but, really, why would you want to live surrounded by someone else's idea of who you are? Home decor can be anything you want it to be, sparse and minimal or grand and full of things.

It's not about having the latest things from pottery barn or what's featured on the New York Time's home section, it's about having the things you enjoy. Make it personal and meaningful. That's all you really need to know.

Conversations: You're Either In, or You're Out.

2008-08-15T23:43:00.000-04:00

I love having conversations with people but I rarely seek them out. I use conversations as a social filtering system: those with whom I can have them with get to go through, those with whom I can't get left behind to live a boring life without my friendship. Luckily, the crowd I meander about is full of smart interesting people with whom conversations are easily had. Being around other crowds is usually a different story.

I'm kind of the odd one out in my family. I get along great with everybody in a family situation but when I have to socialize with their individual social circles I spend most of the time nodding and smiling. One sister is married to a cop and, having lived with them for a couple years, I've hung out with their friends here and there. Everything is usually cool with them except that, at a certain point in the night, the sexes split off. Married, single, or whatever, it always happens. The guys gather into a group to talk about stuff that guys talk about-work, mostly-the girls are then pushed into their own group. I, perhaps not surprisingly for some, often end up in the girl group. It really has nothing to do with sexuality, I swear. It's simply that the women usually talk about a variety of subjects that everyone, even an outsider like me, can participate in. The guys, who are usually all cops, just talk about their jobs or some other hard-to-participate-in topic.

Some might find this hard to deal with or even feel left out or something like that, but I don't. I've always been the "quiet" type and never one to care about fitting in with any crowd. If there is someone in any given crowd that I can get along with then, I believe, we will inevitably run into each other. If not, I'm perfectly fine next to the snack table and/or bar.

I can scmooze, if I really have to, but I usually opt out of it. There's nothing worse than trying to maintain inane conversations just for the sake of politeness or something of that nature. I also enjoy seeing people squirm a little in that awkward moment when they can't seem to find anything else to talk about.

Irrelevent Me

2008-08-09T00:14:00.000-04:00

One of my favorite things about children is their imagination. The fact that they will often toss expensive and culturally vacuous toys their parents buy them out the window--sometimes literally--and spend hours playing in an empty box or a clothes makes me happy to live in such an ironic existence. It reaffirms to me that pleasure, enjoyment, and quality does not equal expense. Also, it shows that it's often the seemingly offhand things in our lives that end up being far more important than anything else.

Like many other Americans, I have dug myself deep into a hole of debt getting educated. I love learning and school and, frankly, would give everything I own in order to do it but, at the same time, it angers me that people have to spends thousands of dollars simply to learn about themselves and the world around them. Getting educated, however, is just like the kids with the box.

You pay thousands of dollars to go to class and have a professor tell you the proper names of people you should know, the proper times when things happened, and so on and so forth. Ultimately, however, the most important lessons are not learned in the classroom or, if they are, they stem from the seemingly offhand things your professors do or say.

A professor of mine, telling a story from her own experience, gave us a small piece of advice that didn't really pertain to the coursework. It was a research methods class for communication criticism and she was telling us about her graduate school years. She was accepted into an upstanding and well-known school and she spent every waking minute studying and worrying about staying on par with her other colleagues whom, she believed, to be so much smarter than her. She never went out to see a movie, or have a drink, or just enjoy herself. In a particularly frustrating period, she went to her adviser and layed out her woes. The advisor looked at her and gave her one piece of advice. He told her to go out more and enjoy herself. Go watch a movie, go have a drink somewhere, go to some show. After all, if you're going to be a critic of culture, you have to be immersed in it.

She told us this story briefly and casually. Most of us didn't really give it much thought but, as the years have passed, I find that it was the most important thing I retained and learned from.

While sitting on house, I watched the new Hairspray. Being a fan of the original John Waters film, watching the new one got my critical impulses pumping. I won't bore you with the intricacies of my theoretical ramblings, suffice it to say that I found it immensely interesting to see a film which began very cult, underground, and deviant in the delightful way that all John Waters films are, get Disneyfied. Had I watched it when it came out, all the critical ideas I had would have been great but, seeing as how it's already quite beside the point, my ideas are no longer particularly relevant.

Bottom Line: Being irrelevant and/or irreverent on an everyday level is often fun but, professionally/intellectually, it is deadly, like nightshade.

Gossip vs Trash-talk

2008-08-04T21:24:00.000-04:00

Observation lead to conversation.

Anyone prone to an observational lifestyle is similarly prone to a conversational lifestyle. In essence, we like talking about what we see and hear with others. This serves many purposes. Firstly, it allows us to share information so as to properly piece together a story and/or come to a more appropriate consensus about its significance. Several eyes and ears are better than one, as are minds. Others would look upon such sessions with distaste, categorizing them as instances of "gossiping" or "trash-talking." In truth they are neither but, even if they were, there is a tremendous difference between "gossip" and "trash-talking." It's all in the intent.

Trash-talk, ultimately, is malicious. It is succinctly characterized by a clear dislike of the person, place, or thing being discussed. It's prime directive is not true discussion but to tear something down. Such discussions tend to only focus on the negative with a distinct refusal to see even the slightest of merit. There's no "other hand," period.

Trash-talk also involves a lot of rhetoric and potential energy. What I mean to say is that it often is meant to convince others and oneself, whether consciously or otherwise, towards a certain opinion of the item at hand. If you think someone is a douche bag, you want everyone else to think he or she is a douche bag in order to change the way people think/treat this person or simply so you don't have to be alone in your opinions. Even if you're not really stating a case but simply "venting," there still is a lot of potential for someone else's mind to be swayed to your position. All in all, it's not very nice. Whether you conciously intend for others to think badly of a person or it just happens, trash-talk is trash-talk.

Gossip, on the other hand, does not really involve ill will. In its purest form it is simply talking, no trash. The intention is not to bad mouth anyone but simply to discuss, and debate, the actions of others. One thing that also distinguishing gossip from trash-talk is that it often includes the proclivities of the people doing the gossip. In essence, gossip is truly an information gathering event. One person tells what they know, another person says their piece, and, like a jigsaw puzzle, a picture is formed that allows for better understanding of any given situation. Gossip, really, is beneficial to all involved, those being gossiped about and those doing the gossiping. It's sort of like therapy.

Gossip allows for people to work through things in the same way therapy allows for it. You put stuff out there, everyone kind of throws ideas back and forth about it, and, often, insight is had.

Bottom Line: There is a BIG difference between talking about people for the sake of causing trouble/drama and simply talking about people.

Let's talk about shorts: Tacky is not the new Casual.

2008-07-30T23:50:00.001-04:00

The roomies, our lovely neighbor, and I took a little trip down to the lake, to the market. Aside from the burritos at Solaz which, despite my attempt to hate, I've come to love, I enjoy putting on my badge and being a self-appointed fashion marshal.

I'm not a designer ho. I don't squeal like a little girl over designer doodads, nor can I distinguish between a Gucci and a Versace. I may get overly excited by a nice handbag but, I digress. I DO maintain, however, the conceit of having a well-tuned eye for style and fashionable-ness. The market is always a good place to see who makes Ithaca stylish and who should be thrown into the lake.

Today's style topics shall be Hip Hop style and Beach style by way of shorts.

There is a certain sub-genre of hip-hop style which I shall call b-ball style. It's the sporty version of HH style which tends to include mesh shorts. The shorts are usually paired with a form fitting or baggy athletic top and accessorized with cloth head- and/or wristbands. Now, I'm not big on sporty style, in general, because it's far too limited. It tends to be more about how many Nike sneakers you have and, lets be honest, a sneaker, is a sneaker, is a sneaker. It suits some people and they pull it off well. Other's don't.

Attempting to sport a sporty style is not an excuse to wear the unwashed outfit you wore the Y last week in public. Contrary to popular belief, sporty style, despite it's tendency to be casual, must still incorporate certain elements of style, like coordination and taste. Casual does not mean thoughtless, aka tacky. Also, wear an appropriate size, please. Sure, the whole look is supposed to be baggy but if your barely 5 foot, don't wear shorts that go mid-calve. It's just not right.

On a similar note, let's talk about board shorts.

First of all, if you don't live near a beach or are from a beachy place, I personally believe, you should not wear them. Let me specify. You should not wear them outside of a practical need such as going to the pool, the lake, or some other similar location where you are likely to get wet. As a fashion statement they are just not okay, in my book, unless you are from the aforementioned beachy background. If you insist, however, on wearing them just because, let me give you a tip.

Wear some that actually look good.

The same fashion concepts must be employed to board shorts that are employed on Hawaiian shirts. Board shorts and Hawaiian shirts, in my snobbish opinion, are not mutually exclusive. Again, just because the overall style is meant to be casual, does not mean anything will do.

Bottom Line: Casual style does not mean careless style. Taking style concepts out of the court or the beach is forgivable if done properly. It does not give you and excuse, however, to walk around town--or the farmers market--like you stepped out of the house wearing the beat up old rags you wore to bed.

The Other Hand: Casual style must, um, be casual. This means that too much thought cannot be put into it. Don't spend hours before the mirror, asking your friends for fashion advice, and fretting over whether your new skinny jeans look "too new." Just put something on, give yourself a quick once over to make sure you won't assault the eyes of innocent bystanders, put on your shades, and go. Someone who looks like they tried TOO hard is worse than someone who looks like they didn't try at all.

Equal Opportunity Entertainment

2008-07-29T10:03:00.001-04:00

When I was in high school, I started reading Entertainment Weekly. I grew up poor--don't cry for me, Argentina--so we never had cable and, at the time, I longed to have the connection with the world that only pop culture allows. Reading about films, shows, books, and music, even if I couldn't watch, read, or listen, provided me with the cultural connection I desperately desired.

In the beginning, like all new relationships, EW was my life. I couldn't say anything bad about it and took every witty word or quipy phrase as Truth. As I got older and was able to experience pop culture instead of just read about it, my desire for EW lessened but it has always remained near and dear to my heart.

So, as I relatively avid follower of the entertainment industry, it never ceases to amaze me how dumb Hollywood executive's are when it comes to movies. The most recent film which is another case-in-point is Dark Knight.

The Dark Knight has broken so many records--box office, demographic, etc--that Holly-execs are yet again thrown for a loop. Why are they baffled? Well, they are surprised that so many people actually went to go see it. Actually, their surprised that so many people that aren't self-professed geeks or, namely, males made it a point to go see it. I mean, Mamma Mia! also opened that weekend.

Hollywood heads are always baffled when women go see things blowing up, or guys go see women talking about sex, or that adults will sit through talking fish. They never seem to get the point that, when a movie is made out of a genuine desire to be artistic/creative/truly entertaining and is not made under the shadow of catering to demographics, except of course people with good taste, a film will be a success, as the Orbit lady says, no matter what!

Bottom Line: Our culture is no longer as gendered as it once one. There is still inequality and genuine obsession with trying to reinforce traditional gender roles, the refusal to see beyond gender assumptions, especially in the entertainment industry, is a sure way of getting nowhere fast. Sure, if you go see 27 Dresses on opening night, you can expect a certain kind of crowd but, when it comes down to it everyone, regardless of age, race, or gender, will go see a movie if it's good. Period.

Drunk ______ing

2008-07-26T08:26:00.000-04:00

A friend of mine from Rochester loves to receive texts from me while I drink in excess. I know that part of it stems from her relishing the idea that I too fall prey to such things. She thinks far too highly of me and is deluding in thinking that I am above all that. The messages I send aren't overly funny or witty or gay but simply a nice little hi-how-are-ya prefaced or followed with the phrase "I'm drunk."

"I love getting drunk texts from you because, if it weren't for the fact that you always tell me you're drunk, I would never know, you always spell and punctuate everything correctly," she said to me a couple days ago. I took it to heart, as a compliment.

You see, I believe that the things people do while drunk are the things that they are truly good at or, at the very least, enjoy doing the most and should be pursuing while sober. Now, by "things people do" I don't mean sleep with strangers, get into fights, or call exes to tell them how much they miss and/or hate them, although it all comes, I believe, from the same place.

I cook. Just like the compliment on my drunk grammatical skills, my ability to cook while drunk makes me appreciate it even more. Unlike others, however, I do not reserve my interests to late nights or early morning. My love of both writing and cooking are well known to all who are close to me. That's just me.

And my point?

It saddens me to think that many people can only arrive at a certain sense of self-confidence or, at the very least, a lack of self-loathing, when drunk. That only when too drunk to be fully conscious can they feel comfortable enough to do things that they enjoy or simply express themselves truly. The magic of inebriation does not change a person one bit. That whole, it was the (insert alcoholic beverage of choice) talking, is nothing but a way for us to remain blissfully delusion about what truly makes our heart tick and toc. If you become a blithering asshole when you're drunk then, no matter how nice you may be sober, you're probably a blithering asshole, period. Likewise if you get overly mad, depressed, or jubilant. It isn't anyone or anything else talking but you, phenomenally you.

That being said, there is a TREMENDOUS difference between being inclined to do something out of a deep seated drunk appreciation and making decisions from impaired judgment. Just because I am warmed by the fact that I cook when I'm drunk doesn't mean handling knives, hovering above open flames while having imbibed flammable fluids--probably excreting them through my pores--and craving hot sauce, habanero hot sauce, is anywhere near something called safety.

Based On A True Story

2008-07-22T01:29:00.000-04:00

The slew of screen adaptations of novels, and comic books, and true stories, and who knows what else has had me shaking my head in frustration. I've never deluded myself into thinking that most, if not all, films on that big ol' screen probably originated from the same places but having people just forgo the whole "interpretive" part and jump to adaptation just isn't the same, especially when it has become obvious that studios are just throwing random books at screenwriters in order to have the next blockbuster.

Today, after watching The Dark Knight, I was reminded just how awesome screen adaptations can be. It was so well done, so loyal to the comic books themes, and yet so much more. The two films thus far--Batman Begins and Dark Knight--have reclaimed the integrity of the comics that the previous films destroyed. The first two films were good, my favorite is Batman Returns, but the rest were just god awful.

It's heartening to see an adaptation that truly is about making the imaginations of so many come to life on screen, not just a studio attempt to make money by taking the easy route and simply making a film of a book or general story that everybody has already proven to enjoy.

Bad Kisser

2008-07-21T10:47:00.000-04:00

I disapprove of Katy Perry's song "I Kissed A Girl." Although I like it in a poppy catchy song kind of way I don't like the particular message it relays.

She's basically catering to the straight mentality on lesbians. In essence, that kissing a girl is just something wacky and crazy you do while getting drunk in college or to get your boyfriend all hot or simply just for the hell of it. Don't get me wrong, I'm all for the random make out session while frolicking under the bottle but don't pretend it's something it's not.

If you're going to make out with someone, boy or girl, while drunk, fine, but don't sensationalize it into some big ol' gay thing. I find it demeans gay people and feeds into the whole idea that being gay is just some random thing people choose to do for the hell of it and that eventually every gay person is going to sober up one day wanting to be "normal" again.

This mentality is no different than when people use the term "That's gay" as a derogatory phrase to express how dumb, lame, stupid, etc. something is.

Bottom Line: If you ain't lickin' pussy, don't pretend your gay, bi or otherwise. Katy, that means you.

Personal Fear

2008-07-16T10:11:00.001-04:00

My intended graduate study program has had me thinking. I want to go into an American studies program which basically questions what it is that makes a person in this country American. It's ultimately a critical cultural question intertwined with race and ethnicity, among other things.

My attraction to American studies is the ability to use the theory I have learned in Culture and Communication to actually DO something with it. I love theory but, it often proves to be nothing more than big heads chasing each other around like little kids at family picnics. Applying theory to the study of race and ethnicity within America seems to be a place where change of some sort can truly be wrought. This idea of creating change has had me thinking about my position in life and, honestly, nervous about the future.

I grew up in circumstances that could be easily shelved under textbook disadvantage and underrepresentation. As I was telling my roommate, I have a large deck from which to pull many o' cards: race, single parent, low-income, immigrant, sexuality, etc. Because of this, however, I've always fought against it all to claim my own space within the dominant culture and refuse to believe that, just because I came from such things, I would not achieve some sort of greatness. Well, I've recently begun living in such a space, or at least I feel I have, but now that I'm going into this new phase of my life I wonder whether it's where I should be.

Working towards changing dominant ideology and overbearing power structures is fatiguing work and having made it to a place where I don't have to deal with it at every waking second is a welcome respite. I feel guilty, however, sometimes precisely because I can take a rest from it all. Many people can't.

I've never been one to blend in with the crowd and this has caused me both duress and pleasure my entire life. I've learned to embrace it and claim my difference as a prize. Even so, I'm always more than a bit nervous when I enter new environments, unsure of how people will react to me and/or what I will be forced to endure. I can't help feeling this way towards wherever it is I will go to study.

I want to be out there on the streets interacting with people but I'm very nervous about putting myself out there. I suppose that, more than getting a graduate degree, this will prove the biggest hurdle yet provide the biggest return.

Girls Gone Wild: Second Floor

2008-07-15T23:43:00.000-04:00

I won't deny the fact that I'm somewhat of a partier. I like to dance, drink, and have a general good ol' time on any day of the week. I care little for what others will think of my antics and yet, I have trouble understanding certain people, girls, whom I like to refer to as "Girls Gone Wild."

You know their type. You've judged them before.

They're the ones who are out on a Monday night, by themselves, getting trashed and acting as if they were on spring break in Cancun. They're usually the only girls in the bar, dressed to the T in late-night summer attire--skirts up to there, tops downs to here--and proceed to be overly suggestive about every single thing they do. My favorite is when they've chugged too many Corona's and proceed to dance to the randomness of townie bar playlists with a supposed seductiveness completely out of place. Oh yeah, and then they dance with each other, much to the pleasure of all the skanky ass men ogling them.

Like I said, I can enjoy getting wasted and making a fool of myself, but never for the sole purpose of drawing attention to myself. Enough attention is drawn to you if you simply act out of confidence and with complete disregard for what others will think of you. In an attempt to be progressive in thinking I suppose that the antics of the Girls Gone Wild in this world can be credited to a general sense of female liberation. I really want to believe this but I can't. Everything they do REEKS of male attention-seeking.

As much as I laugh at these girls while drinking my own share of Coronas, in retrospect, I am saddened.

Firstly, I am saddened by people who cannot enjoy themselves without alcohol or any other substance. It's a cultural thing as much as a personal thing. American culture teaches us that when happiness is not found, look for it outside yourself in, ultimately, meaningless and empty things. Shopping, drinking, doing drugs, watching T.V. etc. All those things are all fine and good but they are not things to live for. They are just things. If you need to drink to enjoy people, places, or things, you need to rethink all the people, places, and things you surround yourself with.

Secondly, I am saddened to see how so many girls think that they need to be overly sexual to attract attention or that sexual attention is what they should be striving to attract. They get so easily duped by so many things in our culture into thinking that sexuality is arrived at through objectifying themselves and attracting men.

Bottom Line: Our external worlds are simply a reflection of our internal worlds. By directing all efforts at happiness inwards, everything else comes along for the ride. If you can't be happy while sober, you most definitely will not be any closer to happiness by getting trashed at your hometown bar on a Monday night.

Lets Get Critical

2008-07-14T07:10:00.000-04:00

In my research methods class, a.k.a. "The Uses and Methods of Communication Criticism", we were introduced to the term critical impulse. Quite simply it refers to that, well, critical impulse we get when we see/hear/experience something on our day-to-day travels that raises a question in our minds.

Why is it that music channels will play non-mainstream music on their promos and commercials but never air any of the videos? How come the majority of commercials on Logo, the gay network, are for penis enlargements, sexual enhancers, and alcohol? Why do women really read romance novels or, for that matter, "weird" kids manga or sci fi/fantasy?

Our professor impressed upon us that this critical impulse was the most important thing for us as academics and intellectuals. Sure, at first, it's just a small little blip in our minds that we throw out randomly in conversation to make ourselves seem smart but, through a bit of time and research, could end up being a full-fledged inquiry on society and culture.

The past three years, I've been forced to use my critical impulse like it was going out of style. Paper after paper I've had to find something in my world to take beyond the "Hmm, isn't that interesting" and, frankly, it was quite exhausting.

Everything I read had to be done with such critical inquiry that I longed for school breaks so I could just sit back, read fantasy books, and lose myself in the highly imaginative and far less critical worlds. In truth, I used every opportunity available to ditch my critical impulse like a bad date.

I'm starting to realize, however, that this was not really a good thing.

Much of what drives our intellectual selves lies precisely in these everyday, seemingly menial, experiences, what we derive pleasure from. The ultimate, most powerful, and simplest question to be asked is why. What is it about those things we enjoy that draw us? Attempt to uncover the answer to this and you begin to see so much about our society/culture/world, not to mention ourselves. The next big step is to try and uncover why other people like the things they do? This is even more exciting and revealing!

Now that I'm not being forced to overuse it, I'm finding it to be quite pleasurable and easier to decipher. I can be a bit more selective and decide which ones are more worth my time instead of grabbing at every straw. I'm also beginning to readjust my mentality about it all.

I can no longer think about academia and scholarly pursuits as something reserved for Fall, Spring, or Summer semesters. I cannot, and should not, keep shutting off my critical impulse as I have done. It won't do. After all, most of my drive to get educated was to learn how to understand my own life by uncovering everything that lies beneath it. Just because I have a degree and can throw around Foucault's name like what, doesn't mean I've figured it all out.

It just means I owe a lot of money and can talk about discursive formations and post-modernism while getting trashed at parties.

Confessions on the Salesfloor (pt. 2)

2008-06-29T04:04:00.000-04:00

And we're back, fair readers, on our path to greatness. How are you're peds in the borrowed shoes? Comfy? Alas, they're no ruby slippers but, one hopes, serve a similar magical purpose.

Let us review. We left off last class with the challenging prospect of treating our jovial customer service staff as nothing more and nothing less than people. Again, they can't read your thoughts, move any faster than naturally possible, nor have visions of the future, perhaps visions of love (like Mariah), but not the future. If they did, well, I'm sure they would find other forms of gainful employment, like at a carnival or hanging out with an Arquette sister or Jennifer Love Hewitt.

Today we will, once again, challenge your mind into thinking outside the counter. I warn you, this next one may bring into question the very core of your existence but, fear not my children, I shall not lead you astray. The lesson is:

Read!

Take a moment. Breathe; inhale, exhale. That's right, you're doing fine.

Being the best customer you can be entails employing that crazy skill we call reading. Most retail establishments make it a point to try and facilitate your shopping experience by putting up a plethora of reading material around all products in order for you to make well informed decisions. The most basic are appropriate pricing and sale/promotional info.

In general they make a habit of putting any particular item in an appropriate location correlating to it's sign. Sometimes, however, things aren't always where they should be and, frankly, dear sirs and Madames, that is usually your fault rather than theirs. You see, customers have the lovely habit of picking up something and, oh yes, not putting it back where it belongs. It's true, it happens. This is where you must use those beautiful peepers of yours and read.

You see, often, along with pricing, tags usually have information like size, brand, or some other descriptor that allows you to identify what goes with what. It takes but a second to make sure if that new DVD player is actually 2.99. Most retail locations tend to own up to mistakes and, if something is out of place or tagged incorrectly, give you the lowest price but this does not usually apply to anything electronic or discrepancies over ten dollars or so. So, don't try to be clever and think you'll be able to take a one to two hundred dollar item home for a mere pittance. All you will do is hold up the line by making the cashier call a manager over to verify, which they will, and, in the end, you will not get your way.

Also, other than pricing, there are many more signs put up in order to offer some guidance. Usually, they are placed in the most appropriate spots like, right in front of your face, in the hope that customers, that means you, have been raised properly to pay attention to what is, right in front of their face. Such signage is usually quite succinct and direct. For example:

Front of line/end of line.

This whole reading thing, also applies to promotional things like coupons and sales and such. There's a lot of fine print to be had in the retail world and it's in your best interest to read it. Let's be real and come to terms with the fact that sales and promotions aren't really intended to help you save money but to ensure that, in the future, you will spend more money. Also, although you are actually saving some money in some way, it is rarely as great as it is made to seem. Do yourself a favor and take the time to read through promotional items and, if you still have some confusion, ask. Remember, retail staff are consumers just like you and just because they're working for the man doesn't mean they are not willing to tell you the nasty truth about things.

So, again, just read.

Avoid wasting your time and that of the poor schleps who run registers by taking a few extra seconds to take in your environment so that you make well informed purchases. But also, remember that there are some things that retail establishments assume you, in your worldly experience, already know and therefore are hardly ever posted. One of these things is sales tax. Sure, some states don't have it but, for the most part, it's always there. Don't be shocked when something turns out to be 1.08 versus the .99 cents it was marked as. That's just the way it is, some things will never change.

Tax happens.

Chaos vs. Order.

2008-06-25T09:53:00.000-04:00

I took a science-fiction/fantasy writing course my last semester of college as the single creative writing course required for my writing minor. I chose an expository kind of life in school or, rather, it chose me.

In all honesty, there wasn't much of thought process behind my decision to take this course outside of being a reader of sci-fi/fantasy, therefore believing I could take the next step and be a writer of it. How hard could it be, right? Well, it was the hardest course I took that semester.

Mostly, the difficulty was in coming to terms with the particularities of the the creative writing process vs the expository kind. All writing is creative, for sure, but attempting to construct and maintain an entire universe to the smallest of details is very different than trying to turn a quick alliterative trick. If I were to characterize the processes through my own experience, they would be akin to the age old paradigm of chaos vs order.

Expository writing, at least to me, is order. It's about thinking, organizing, and structuring. You have a point, a purpose. The creativity involved is figuring out how to get it across in the clearest way possible while, hopefully, making it interesting, entertaining, and fun read as well. You draw mainly from personal experience and observation of the world around you. Not hard to do if you are at all inclined to introspection.

Creative writing, on the other hand, is completely volatile. You can plan, structure, and organize until you're blue in the face but that wont necessarily do any good. The best moments are when you finally let yourself go to writing and let it control you. It can't be rushed or pushed into anything it's not. Often, even when you think you've got it all figured out, something comes along and changes the thing completely. It's a bit frustrating, but mostly exhilarating because such twists are usually for the best.

Ultimately, it's all good. The key is to embrace both processes in the same vein of attempting to regulate both sides of the brain because, really, that's probably the root of it all.

Confessions On The Salesfloor

2008-06-24T00:24:00.000-04:00

Retail, it sucks.

As a lowly peon you work too hard for too little. As a slave-driving supervisor or manager you are given too much responsibility to go with being overworked and underpaid. This being said, everyone should do it.

Why? Well, because, in so doing you will gain an awesome and intense knowledge. A knowledge so powerful that Eve's damning nibble pales in comparison. That knowledge, fair readers, is the ability to be....a....good customer!

*gasp*

Walk a mile in someone else's shoes, they say. Luckily, I've a penchant for spending my hard earned, less-than-living--undead perhaps--retail wage on shoes and thus have several pair to spare.

So, kick up your feet in some old kicks, and take a walk with me. You've much to learn, young paduan. Take my hand, I will show you the way.

LESSON: Treat the person behind the counter like, well, a person.

Like you, they have aspirations, hopes, dreams, and various other things that do not revolve around bagging your groceries, steaming your milk, or swiping your credit card. They don't posses the power to read minds, see the future, move at the speed of light, or change corporate policies for your convenience.

They just work there, lady, paying their way through school, feeding hungry children, saving up for a bone marrow transplant or some other such thing. Give them a break. Despite popular belief, retail workers are only human.

Next time you hit the Payless summer strappy sandal sale, put yourself in their place. No, no, better yet, put a dear friend, a loved one, a son or daughter, anyone for whom you care dearly for and treat them as you would like said loved one to be treated. Unless you make a habit of treating those close to you with utter disdain and disregard, in which case your retail habits are the least of your dysfunctions, this will put you on the path to glory.

_____________________

I leave you with this tid-bit to fill the empty spaces or your mind. Fear not, it is but a taste of the delicious fruits of knowledge currently available and half off. It is but a beginning.

In the end you will thank me for saving you from a life of ill will for, believe me when I say, there is no greater wrath than retail staff scorned.