When I first was hearing about Google's big scheme to digitize every book ever written, I was on the publisher's side--not in favor. Working in a job that required me to understand copyright laws to a certain extent, it seemed their goal was clearly in breach.
On the other side of the coin, though, I can't say that I would be entirely opposed to having every book available digitally. I don't think Google should take it upon themselves to do this without publishers' permission. Nor do I think they should have a monopoly. And this is not because I want to read whatever books I can for free, or have easy access to hack into them. I don't even want to read books digitally. I'd much rather read a book away from my computer.
However, there are great advantages to digital versions. For one, I've long wondered why there are never commercials on television for books. It seems such a shame, doesn't it? We get ads for all kinds of nonsense, but not for this. As I was contemplating this last night while watching a TV movie, it occurred to me that ads for movies include attention-grabbing snippets from the movie. This might be a little difficult to do with books. Sure, you could create mini visual scenes from the book, but the joy in the book for many people is the ability to imagine those things without having the media create the image for you. So it would seem more beneficial to advertise with readable snippets. How could this be done? Well, perhaps not so easily on television, but with a few digitized pages available on internet ads, it could be done.
Another reason I would love to have digitized books would be when it comes to writing a paper in which I have to quote books. I must say I would love to have searchable copies of all books available. The search engine is a fabulous invention.
Today, I am working on my thesis essay and have read a few of the books I'm using at least twice and flipped through trying to find the place where something happened on several occasions. I did this kind of thing quite a bit as an undergraduate, but not quite to the extent I have to now, I think--I mean for the same books, time after time. It does get kind of tiresome.
So today I am expressing my gratitude for Amazon because they have acquired rights to copy many books, including at least one that I have to use (found a second after the original post. Yea!). I searched Amazon for the book, then searched the book for some significant key words, and then opened my paper copy and read until I found what I needed. Ta da!
So, maybe now I'm a little torn about the Google thing. There are a number of books I'd like to quote from that aren't Amazon searchable. Could the publishers maybe possibly hurry up with digitizing everything?
Sometimes I'll write about my job, sometimes about my faith, sometimes about my hobbies, talents, miscellaneous interests. You'll see.
21 March 2009
08 March 2009
Professionally Speaking
For the past five weeks I've been temping at a medical facility, doctor's office type of thing--in the medical records department. It's customer service, but not entirely on the telephone, so a little better than some jobs I've had. My first day, I confess, I was really irritated with the situation having been burned from the last job I had, but it hasn't turned out to be too terrible.
I even had some interesting things to think about the last few days I was working there. See, one of the doctors in the Gastro-Intestinal department had dumped a large pile of old paperwork that needed to be prepared for scanning, which meant removing staples and taping xrays down against paper, and assuring the patients' id numbers were there as well as his signature. That part wasn't terribly interesting. I didn't particularly care to look at all of the xrays much either. Seeing people's innerds doesn't strongly appeal to me. Thinking that someone else found that fascinating, however, was interesting.
What intrigued and got me to thinking that this doctor really enjoyed what he did was seeing that not only did he have xrays, but he also drew little diagrams for his patients of the organs in a way people are a little more accustomed to seeing them, like in a health book. Of course, like his patients, I've seen the organ lay out a few times before, so it's not that that intrigued me, but that he drew these diagrams over and over. If it had bored him, he might have just found some picture from a health book to point things out to his patients.
So I got to wondering, what kind of a person thinks to himself as a child, "Oh boy, I can't wait to study more about people's bowels. Making sure people can poop less painfully is the most important thing I can see myself doing with my life." Maybe a small child, but after a certain point, some people might wonder if the child was stuck in the anal stage of growth a little bit too long. Yet obviously, seeing that he's a successful gastro-intestinal doctor now, obviously he wasn't. And many, many people are grateful he has a fascination with intestines.
Of course, maybe he wasn't like that as a child. Perhaps the specific interest didn't come until he was in medical school, or at some other point. Who knows. But still, to think that at some point, he chose that specific field. But then it extends beyond that. To think that so many women and men like him are needed around the country and around the world. And not only these gastro-intestinal people, but so many other specific fields of interest. The lungs, the feet, the liver, etc. Things that aren't as high profile as the heart or the brain, yet so very important. Isn't the diversity of interests in the world a testimony of God in itself?
I remember a cute Sesame Street sketch from when I was a kid where the monsters were going to have a potluck picnic, but they didn't assign anyone what they would bring, and so everyone brought potato salad. I'm sure it followed with two or three more trip-ups, as comedy sketches go, but I remember it was funny, and a good lesson about organization, communication and cooperation. Sometimes that is needed. So when it works out without everyone convening to decide who's going to do what, you kind of have to think, Someone else's hand must be in this.
I even had some interesting things to think about the last few days I was working there. See, one of the doctors in the Gastro-Intestinal department had dumped a large pile of old paperwork that needed to be prepared for scanning, which meant removing staples and taping xrays down against paper, and assuring the patients' id numbers were there as well as his signature. That part wasn't terribly interesting. I didn't particularly care to look at all of the xrays much either. Seeing people's innerds doesn't strongly appeal to me. Thinking that someone else found that fascinating, however, was interesting.
What intrigued and got me to thinking that this doctor really enjoyed what he did was seeing that not only did he have xrays, but he also drew little diagrams for his patients of the organs in a way people are a little more accustomed to seeing them, like in a health book. Of course, like his patients, I've seen the organ lay out a few times before, so it's not that that intrigued me, but that he drew these diagrams over and over. If it had bored him, he might have just found some picture from a health book to point things out to his patients.
So I got to wondering, what kind of a person thinks to himself as a child, "Oh boy, I can't wait to study more about people's bowels. Making sure people can poop less painfully is the most important thing I can see myself doing with my life." Maybe a small child, but after a certain point, some people might wonder if the child was stuck in the anal stage of growth a little bit too long. Yet obviously, seeing that he's a successful gastro-intestinal doctor now, obviously he wasn't. And many, many people are grateful he has a fascination with intestines.
Of course, maybe he wasn't like that as a child. Perhaps the specific interest didn't come until he was in medical school, or at some other point. Who knows. But still, to think that at some point, he chose that specific field. But then it extends beyond that. To think that so many women and men like him are needed around the country and around the world. And not only these gastro-intestinal people, but so many other specific fields of interest. The lungs, the feet, the liver, etc. Things that aren't as high profile as the heart or the brain, yet so very important. Isn't the diversity of interests in the world a testimony of God in itself?
I remember a cute Sesame Street sketch from when I was a kid where the monsters were going to have a potluck picnic, but they didn't assign anyone what they would bring, and so everyone brought potato salad. I'm sure it followed with two or three more trip-ups, as comedy sketches go, but I remember it was funny, and a good lesson about organization, communication and cooperation. Sometimes that is needed. So when it works out without everyone convening to decide who's going to do what, you kind of have to think, Someone else's hand must be in this.
What Might Have Been
With recent old friend findings on Facebook (ooh, like that alliteration!), as mentioned recently below, my mind has reflected to ye old college days wondering what would have happened if... I'd married so and so, if I'd realized so and so was more interested earlier, I had lived in this apartment instead of that one, I'd moved out of the complex all together where I lived most of my college years...in short, if I had gotten married while I was in college.The results of this line of thinking can be interesting to ponder. They can lead to gratitude for things one has been able to do instead. But since I never had much ambition about getting a fancy job or great travels, etc. (still haven't even travelled all that much)--I instead tend toward the line of thinking--maybe I wouldn't have this huge debt I have now, or maybe I'd have my own kids, maybe I'd have someone to cuddle with... in short, maybe my life wouldn't be so hard.
But, as a friend once told me, (not directly to me--it was a testimony, but I felt it was to me) life is actually fair. He was quoting some general authority, dont' remember the specifics, except that it made sense. If life weren't fair then God would not be just and merciful and loving and perfect, to make life easier on some than on others. Knowing of the disasterous circumstances some people live in, the shortness of some lives compared to some, it's an odd thing to consider. But we really don't know all of the facts about these lives, particularly their pre-mortal and post mortal lives or what gifts and blessings the Lord has given them to help them endure. Certainly people don't "deserve" hard lives, but at the same time, I think they will be blessed above what we are able to understand. There's another quote about God's filling our voids with blessings equal or greater to the size of the pain. Sorry, no specifics again.
But I do have one specific. I had actually been on the above line of thinking yesterday or the day before when this memory came into my head to help alleviate the downward spiral. In 1993, I was hit by a minivan while crossing the street on my way to work. I did suffer some, broke my first bone of record--the orbital bone in my right eye. I might have broken a toe or two before, but never had it verified because the doctor wouldn't have been able to do anything about it.
Anyway, I had felt particularly nervous about going to work that day, with no pinpointable reason, but I do remember feeling anxious about it, and feeling like I should get a ride or something. It was raining, but I had walked to work in the rain before. I even asked my roommate for a ride, knowing she didn't like to be the apartment cab company, and she, of course, said no. I think she had a good excuse, but I don't remember.
I even thought about not going. I don't remember the specifics of that time period, but I might have just been obligated to certain number of hours per week, rather than a daily schedule, but it was easier to go x number of hours per day. Anyway, I went anyway. And the rest is history.
After it happened, my mind had a tendency into the what might have been thinking, particularly given some comments one or two people made. Most people were sympathetic and compassionate, but there were a few who didn't understand some things, accusing me of not looking where I was going, and such like.
A new guy had moved into the ward, a nice guy, a cute guy, and I'd even talked to him a few times, and some friends had decided to do this girls-ask-guys thing, so I'd even gotten up the courage and asked him, which is really, really rare for me. Anyway, so with my little accident, that was, of course, cancelled. And before I was really well enough, he had found a girlfriend. So, how could I not help but wonder what might have happened if I hadn't left for work that day?
Well, fortunately for me, one of my professors, my grammar professor of all people, had encouraged us to read D&C 93. And these are the verses that stood out, 24 and 25: "And atruth is bknowledge of things as they are, and as they were, and as they are to come; And whatsoever is amore or less than this is the spirit of that wicked one who was a bliar from the beginning."
Where does "what might have been?" fall into this definition of truth? It isn't what is, what was or what is to come, so it must be more or less than that, and therefore a lie. Isn't that interesting?
I have brought this up to some people before and there is some argument that there are scriptures that talk about how life would have been better if so and so hadn't sinned. And that is truth. It is also true that President Monson likes to remind us of the whole picture of our lives, saying to learn from the past, live in the present and prepare for the future. So if we can learn from our sins, that life would be better if we didn't, then we can progress. But when no sin is involved, and even to a certain extent when it is, doesn't it make sense that we not dwell on what might have been but rather take those lessons and live in the present and prepare for the future? After all, we can't change the past, so it's a fruitless endeavor, and Satan is the master of fruitlessness.
01 March 2009
Another Story about Conversation
I think I'm doing a little trip on Memory Lane because of the recent finding of many of my college friends. But I have another story about conversation that's actually kind of funny and more critical of myself.
After my mission, so five years after the last story, I was still interested in conversation, not too surprisingly. But this time I did get someone to play along with me. A few people, actually. I had this funny idea, maybe it was a group effort with my roommate--she played along in any case and helped come up with the list--to see if we could get some people to answer some rather obscure questions in the course of a conversation. I don't remember all the rules, but it seemed like you got more points for more of the questions you got out. Mostly it was just for curiosity sake and not competition since we were usually together for the conversations.
Most of the people we got into these conversations with--yes I say "people," in a non-gender specific way, but the truth is they were all men--recognized it was a little odd but played a long for a little while. But Dale Caswell, my good buddy, let us play through to the end. He never even commented on how odd it was. What a good sport he was! He liked to talk and we liked to listen to his Connecticut accent anyway. Fun times!
So, if you want to play this game, I dare you! Think of a list of like 10 questions and have some fun. Or include something like this with characters in your book--it's a very young adult kind of thing to do.
Our questions I don't think I have any more, but they were something like this:
1. What's your middle name
2. Where was your third missionary companion from?
3. What was the name of your fifth grade teacher?
4. What did you do last Valentine's Day?
My mind is really blank, but we had about 10 or more questions. Have fun!
After my mission, so five years after the last story, I was still interested in conversation, not too surprisingly. But this time I did get someone to play along with me. A few people, actually. I had this funny idea, maybe it was a group effort with my roommate--she played along in any case and helped come up with the list--to see if we could get some people to answer some rather obscure questions in the course of a conversation. I don't remember all the rules, but it seemed like you got more points for more of the questions you got out. Mostly it was just for curiosity sake and not competition since we were usually together for the conversations.
Most of the people we got into these conversations with--yes I say "people," in a non-gender specific way, but the truth is they were all men--recognized it was a little odd but played a long for a little while. But Dale Caswell, my good buddy, let us play through to the end. He never even commented on how odd it was. What a good sport he was! He liked to talk and we liked to listen to his Connecticut accent anyway. Fun times!
So, if you want to play this game, I dare you! Think of a list of like 10 questions and have some fun. Or include something like this with characters in your book--it's a very young adult kind of thing to do.
Our questions I don't think I have any more, but they were something like this:
1. What's your middle name
2. Where was your third missionary companion from?
3. What was the name of your fifth grade teacher?
4. What did you do last Valentine's Day?
My mind is really blank, but we had about 10 or more questions. Have fun!
28 February 2009
Conversation
When I came back from a family vacation the summer after my freshman year, (I was still living in the same complex, Monticello in Provo) my roommate from the school year who had moved to a different apartment for the summer, told me she'd met someone she wanted to set me up with. She didn't say what it was about him that made her think of me, but I was intrigued and interested to get to know him when I did eventually meet him. She hadn't gotten around to setting us up, and I'm not sure I was too keen on being set up with someone who lived in my ward since it seemed I would more likely naturally meet him.
Anyway, so I did eventually meet him, playing games over at someone else's apartment--#1 in White Brick, I think. At first, he seemed pretty nice, and kind of cute. I thought I might not mind going out with him. Then, as we were talking, in a split-off conversation from the bigger group, but still with three or four people, he asked me what my game was. (I thought was kind of an odd question, I'll confess.) I told him conversation was my game. I think he thought that was pretty weird, and I can understand that. It does seem rather a weird thing to say, even to a weird question.
But it actually was true. I had a fascination with conversation. I payed attention to how people conversed and judged how well I liked a guy based on how he could talk to me, looking for certain things. I'm not sure what incited my interest--perhaps that too many people were telling me I was too quiet, and so I was trying to shift the blame, or find out why I was quiet, or figure out if they were really any better than me for not being quiet.
Well, to cut that story short, I'll just say this--our conversation was not successful. Within a few shifts of topic, it came out that he'd like to have 20 kids. I told him good luck finding a wife.
I don't know if he ever achieved it. I saw him a few years later at a concert, with a girl. She might have been his wife, or maybe just a girlfriend. In any case, he appeared to be making some progress toward his goal at that time. I was on a date that night, too, I think, but he was not my boyfriend. I think I didn't even like my date very much, but I don't remember who it was. In any case, I haven't yet found my perfect conversationalist. But this weekend/week (for reasons I'll refrain from discussing), I've been wondering how much progress I've actually made with the subject in general. Am I a better conversationalist than I was then? Have I improved in my ability to detect a good conversationalist or refined my demands?
See, both things are kind of hard to have as do or die goals--I mean, I don't know how long it took him to get married, or how old his wife was, nor how fertile or able to adopt they were, or if he's actually married! I have heard of families of 22 or more, but it is pretty rare and really hard to come by. That was obvious to me then. But I guess I wasn't quite as convinced at the young age of 19 of the difficulty of my own goal--finding a good conversationalist...
...Particularly as my ideas about what makes a good conversationalist were still in a lot of flux at that point. I don't think I expected perfection at that game. I was savvy enough to know that like any nebulous attribute, conversation is very near impossible to perfect in this lifetime. But it seems like there are enough people who have good friends, get married and seem to find that right balance of conversation between them that it wouldn't be absolutely impossible. But I'm also thinking that a lot of people find good matches for them because they don't care quite as much about conversational abilities. I mean, I've met a good number of people who have either been married, are married, or have had long term relationships and yet they have serious lackings in what seem to me as normal conversational abilities.
That probably sounds kind of critical, and it probably is, but I guess what I really want to know is two things--why is it hard to find someone with good conversational abilities and what's the best way to handle it when you're stuck talking to or listening to someone who has a lot of difficulty with basic conversation, such as someone who talks your ear off or who's never interested in anything you have to say, or who cuts down everything you have to say. What do you do? I want to be a charitable person, but I'm really struggling here.
Anyway, so I did eventually meet him, playing games over at someone else's apartment--#1 in White Brick, I think. At first, he seemed pretty nice, and kind of cute. I thought I might not mind going out with him. Then, as we were talking, in a split-off conversation from the bigger group, but still with three or four people, he asked me what my game was. (I thought was kind of an odd question, I'll confess.) I told him conversation was my game. I think he thought that was pretty weird, and I can understand that. It does seem rather a weird thing to say, even to a weird question.
But it actually was true. I had a fascination with conversation. I payed attention to how people conversed and judged how well I liked a guy based on how he could talk to me, looking for certain things. I'm not sure what incited my interest--perhaps that too many people were telling me I was too quiet, and so I was trying to shift the blame, or find out why I was quiet, or figure out if they were really any better than me for not being quiet.
Well, to cut that story short, I'll just say this--our conversation was not successful. Within a few shifts of topic, it came out that he'd like to have 20 kids. I told him good luck finding a wife.
I don't know if he ever achieved it. I saw him a few years later at a concert, with a girl. She might have been his wife, or maybe just a girlfriend. In any case, he appeared to be making some progress toward his goal at that time. I was on a date that night, too, I think, but he was not my boyfriend. I think I didn't even like my date very much, but I don't remember who it was. In any case, I haven't yet found my perfect conversationalist. But this weekend/week (for reasons I'll refrain from discussing), I've been wondering how much progress I've actually made with the subject in general. Am I a better conversationalist than I was then? Have I improved in my ability to detect a good conversationalist or refined my demands?
See, both things are kind of hard to have as do or die goals--I mean, I don't know how long it took him to get married, or how old his wife was, nor how fertile or able to adopt they were, or if he's actually married! I have heard of families of 22 or more, but it is pretty rare and really hard to come by. That was obvious to me then. But I guess I wasn't quite as convinced at the young age of 19 of the difficulty of my own goal--finding a good conversationalist...
...Particularly as my ideas about what makes a good conversationalist were still in a lot of flux at that point. I don't think I expected perfection at that game. I was savvy enough to know that like any nebulous attribute, conversation is very near impossible to perfect in this lifetime. But it seems like there are enough people who have good friends, get married and seem to find that right balance of conversation between them that it wouldn't be absolutely impossible. But I'm also thinking that a lot of people find good matches for them because they don't care quite as much about conversational abilities. I mean, I've met a good number of people who have either been married, are married, or have had long term relationships and yet they have serious lackings in what seem to me as normal conversational abilities.
That probably sounds kind of critical, and it probably is, but I guess what I really want to know is two things--why is it hard to find someone with good conversational abilities and what's the best way to handle it when you're stuck talking to or listening to someone who has a lot of difficulty with basic conversation, such as someone who talks your ear off or who's never interested in anything you have to say, or who cuts down everything you have to say. What do you do? I want to be a charitable person, but I'm really struggling here.
25 February 2009
Leven Thumps, book review
Leven Thumps and the Gateway to Foo by Obert SkyeMy review
rating: 2 of 5 stars
I couldn't finish it. It was really quite painful to get as far as I did. Is there a criticism for weight judgments? I mean, like feminist criticism and cultural criticisms--fields of study. In any case, almost all of the villains or even slightly bad guys were noted as being fat or large or worse, and all of the good guys were thin or had no mention of their weight proportions. One of the good guys was even a toothpick. Seriously, a literal toothpick. Perhaps it was all subconscious and not intended to offend people with weight struggles, but it was really too much. I also don't really appreciate repetitive physical punishments even to bad guys, particularly the kind where the audience is supposed to find the punishments funny. It just doesn't strike me as very charitable. Yes, some people need to have justice dealt to them, but it isn't funny.
View all my reviews.
Blink, book review
Blink by Malcolm GladwellMy review
rating: 4 of 5 stars
This was a little different from my typical read--an adult book, slightly different, though I still read a fair amount of those, but also a nonfiction, essay-type and not religious. My friend Valerie suggested it, and I actually was really pulled in by it. Those who know me know I don't really care for profanity at all, and there were places with a tasteless dose, so I stopped reading it for awhile, but eventually picked it up again, and overall, I think it was worth the read. Each chapter is pretty well organized, drawing back on a story he introduces at the beginning of the respective chapter to make some point. And also, drawing upon stories and points from previous chapters to build up to a conclusion. However, the concluding chapter itself was rather sparse and not as well connected as I'd expected, leaving me a little less certain about his ultimate intent. Still, it was pretty interesting. It reiterated some of my beliefs and promoted positive ideas that I haven't given as full credence to as I ought, about surrounding yourself with uplifting and positive ideas about all people because the daily, minute influences do contribute to general impressions that impact for the better or worse snap judgments that we can't avoid making on a regular if not daily basis.
View all my reviews.
24 February 2009
First Five
I responded to my old roommate Erin's blog, so I am now in the game. Here are the rules:
The first five people to respond to this post will get something made by me!
My choice of something for you. There are some limits and restrictions, which Erin tweaked for her needs and style, but her rules look good to me, so here they are
1. It will be sometime this year. Don't rush me:)
2. I don't know yet what it will be - it might not even be tangible. Maybe food or a massage or a bookmark or babysitting or a song or a movie... OOH, possibly a visit, depending on who or where you are.
3. Most importantly, you must offer the same deal on your blog - the first 5 people to comment on your blog (or if you do not have a blog, facebook) get something made by YOU! The first 5 people to do so and leave a comment telling me they did win something deLIGHTful by me.
The first five people to respond to this post will get something made by me!
My choice of something for you. There are some limits and restrictions, which Erin tweaked for her needs and style, but her rules look good to me, so here they are
1. It will be sometime this year. Don't rush me:)
2. I don't know yet what it will be - it might not even be tangible. Maybe food or a massage or a bookmark or babysitting or a song or a movie... OOH, possibly a visit, depending on who or where you are.
3. Most importantly, you must offer the same deal on your blog - the first 5 people to comment on your blog (or if you do not have a blog, facebook) get something made by YOU! The first 5 people to do so and leave a comment telling me they did win something deLIGHTful by me.
16 February 2009
The Real Valentine's Day
Just so you don't think I'm completely anti-Valentine's--the day itself wasn't too bad. We had a couple friends over and did some fondue-dipping, then watched some clips from a few romantic movies--Snow White's "Some Day My Prince Will Come" and the Sound of Music's "Sixteen." Plus a couple non-musical recent bits. Then after the friends left, we watched "Hitch" which actually did end in a wedding.
It was nice to have friends over. But I have to confess that it was interesting to watch the Sound of Music bit as well as Hitch in my critical frame of mind. (Not that I'm ever not in my critical frame of mind, but um, I guess now that it's out there.) Anyway, it was eye opening to see that in the Sixteen scene, the character was really being coy and didn't possibly believe the things she was sixteen. I think that's a very important part of the song, because otherwise the words are very subjugating of women--we all need someone at least a year older because he's wiser and can tell us what to do. It's also interesting to consider that song in context of the entire movie (which is one of my favorites!) because in the end, she was telling him what to do--leave the German army--and that is really what he should have done.
As for Hitch, well, that movie could have stood a few cuts--like the opening bit where you know Hitch has successfully hooked two people up because they wind up in bed, and then the little F bomb, and finally the date on Sunday morning, rather than Saturday morning. But otherwise, I was glad neither of the man couples had any insinuations, their conversations were about normal things--like siblings and family, and it ended in a wedding, allbeit for the secondary couple rather than the primary. But it's positive nonetheless.
It's ironic, I suppose, that I'm pro wedding ending since my novel doesn't end in a wedding. Just a first kiss, but I do have my reasons for that. But I'll just let you read it and surmise your own opinions about it. Who knows, I might even be wrong.
It was nice to have friends over. But I have to confess that it was interesting to watch the Sound of Music bit as well as Hitch in my critical frame of mind. (Not that I'm ever not in my critical frame of mind, but um, I guess now that it's out there.) Anyway, it was eye opening to see that in the Sixteen scene, the character was really being coy and didn't possibly believe the things she was sixteen. I think that's a very important part of the song, because otherwise the words are very subjugating of women--we all need someone at least a year older because he's wiser and can tell us what to do. It's also interesting to consider that song in context of the entire movie (which is one of my favorites!) because in the end, she was telling him what to do--leave the German army--and that is really what he should have done.
As for Hitch, well, that movie could have stood a few cuts--like the opening bit where you know Hitch has successfully hooked two people up because they wind up in bed, and then the little F bomb, and finally the date on Sunday morning, rather than Saturday morning. But otherwise, I was glad neither of the man couples had any insinuations, their conversations were about normal things--like siblings and family, and it ended in a wedding, allbeit for the secondary couple rather than the primary. But it's positive nonetheless.
It's ironic, I suppose, that I'm pro wedding ending since my novel doesn't end in a wedding. Just a first kiss, but I do have my reasons for that. But I'll just let you read it and surmise your own opinions about it. Who knows, I might even be wrong.
13 February 2009
Happy Valentine's?
You're noticing, perhaps, if you're not in a reader that is, that I'm skipping the pink/red background and moving right into spring. It's not technically spring yet, but we have had some really nice weather. I hope it continues, but it's always hard to say. I do like snow, though. I have to confess that. But we had some snow last week and now I'm ready for spring because I don't particularly like the cold.
But anyway, as the title suggests, maybe I'll write something about Valentine's anyway. It's tomorrow, after all, and it's been on my mind for about a week or so. Several stores tried to put it in my mind long before that, but I haven't done a lot of shopping the past few months, fortunately, so those attempts were not very successful. The television, however, had better aim.
I even caved in and actually watched one of the Valentine's movies some station was using in their Valentine's week long line-up--You've Got Mail. I don't know why. I guess I figured it's Valentine's week after all, and since I don't have someone to share it with, I can celebrate it in some way, but watching a related movie? Really warped thinking, I know. But my mind does work that way sometimes--Halloween is another holiday like that. I'm too big for trick-or-treating, so I'll just watch a holiday-related movie. Yeah. hm.
The weirder thing about it is that I don't even like You've Got Mail. And watching it again after so many years confirmed to me in a few more ways why I don't like it--and shouldn't like it. Like too many romantic comedies, it's just another example of envelope pushing. I'm reminded of the chocolate cake and red story in Ardeth G. Kapp's I Walk By Faith book that my leaders read to me when I was a youth. I have the book now, thanks to my Aunt Leah who got it for me for Christmas a couple years ago. Really, I like that book a lot, and that chocolate story is one that I think everyone needs to hear. Just to summarize, it's a short story within a story--about a happy, delightful people who couldn't wear red or eat chocolate cake or they would become weak. But they had an enemy who didn't like their happiness and so he gradually tried to weaken them to chocolate cake and red through subtle means, like glamorous advertising of people wearing darker and darker shades of pink and eating more cake and more chocolate until they were inevitably combined.
Why do we buy into that stuff? Oh, they only lived with people they didn't really love, and they never showed them having sex. And what was all that business of talking about cyber-sex near the beginning? "We won't have anyone doing real sex in the movie"="No one will eat any chocolate cake in the movie, but there's no reason why they shouldn't talk about eating it, or eating white cake with chocolate frosting."
Why were they living with people they didn't love? What's wrong with getting married first? It seemed more to the point of showing that living together is a natural step and that after a few years you might decide you don't love someone after all, so it's a good thing they weren't married. Seriously. Do romantic comedies end in weddings any more? How many movies are being made these days with happily married couples?
I'm essentially chastising myself here. I know what to avoid and yet I watch those things occasionally too. And I haven't written to any media moguls to change things, but I need to rant anyway. It really is harder and harder to find a good romantic comedy with any kind of values, so while I would like the genre--I'm even writing in the genre--it's actually one of my least favorites because there's always so much trash in them.
So much for Happy Valentine's Day.
On a brighter note, I did get some candy from a coworker today. Although the pay is a pittance, yes, I do have a little job now--temp job, but it's nice to have coworkers again, especially if they help you celebrate the holiday in a way other than watching a lame movie. Yeah for candy! (Don't worry, it wasn't chocolate cake.)
But anyway, as the title suggests, maybe I'll write something about Valentine's anyway. It's tomorrow, after all, and it's been on my mind for about a week or so. Several stores tried to put it in my mind long before that, but I haven't done a lot of shopping the past few months, fortunately, so those attempts were not very successful. The television, however, had better aim.
I even caved in and actually watched one of the Valentine's movies some station was using in their Valentine's week long line-up--You've Got Mail. I don't know why. I guess I figured it's Valentine's week after all, and since I don't have someone to share it with, I can celebrate it in some way, but watching a related movie? Really warped thinking, I know. But my mind does work that way sometimes--Halloween is another holiday like that. I'm too big for trick-or-treating, so I'll just watch a holiday-related movie. Yeah. hm.
The weirder thing about it is that I don't even like You've Got Mail. And watching it again after so many years confirmed to me in a few more ways why I don't like it--and shouldn't like it. Like too many romantic comedies, it's just another example of envelope pushing. I'm reminded of the chocolate cake and red story in Ardeth G. Kapp's I Walk By Faith book that my leaders read to me when I was a youth. I have the book now, thanks to my Aunt Leah who got it for me for Christmas a couple years ago. Really, I like that book a lot, and that chocolate story is one that I think everyone needs to hear. Just to summarize, it's a short story within a story--about a happy, delightful people who couldn't wear red or eat chocolate cake or they would become weak. But they had an enemy who didn't like their happiness and so he gradually tried to weaken them to chocolate cake and red through subtle means, like glamorous advertising of people wearing darker and darker shades of pink and eating more cake and more chocolate until they were inevitably combined.
Why do we buy into that stuff? Oh, they only lived with people they didn't really love, and they never showed them having sex. And what was all that business of talking about cyber-sex near the beginning? "We won't have anyone doing real sex in the movie"="No one will eat any chocolate cake in the movie, but there's no reason why they shouldn't talk about eating it, or eating white cake with chocolate frosting."
Why were they living with people they didn't love? What's wrong with getting married first? It seemed more to the point of showing that living together is a natural step and that after a few years you might decide you don't love someone after all, so it's a good thing they weren't married. Seriously. Do romantic comedies end in weddings any more? How many movies are being made these days with happily married couples?
I'm essentially chastising myself here. I know what to avoid and yet I watch those things occasionally too. And I haven't written to any media moguls to change things, but I need to rant anyway. It really is harder and harder to find a good romantic comedy with any kind of values, so while I would like the genre--I'm even writing in the genre--it's actually one of my least favorites because there's always so much trash in them.
So much for Happy Valentine's Day.
On a brighter note, I did get some candy from a coworker today. Although the pay is a pittance, yes, I do have a little job now--temp job, but it's nice to have coworkers again, especially if they help you celebrate the holiday in a way other than watching a lame movie. Yeah for candy! (Don't worry, it wasn't chocolate cake.)
Subscribe to:
Comments (Atom)