*
2013
SURPRISES
Happy New Year!
*
December 31, 2012
November 08, 2012
September 08, 2012
August 17, 2012
The War Rages
By which I mean, I continue to struggle through my Masters' Thesis (or dissertation if you're talkin' from the UK) on 'The (Children's) Theatre of War' (clever, yes?) - seriously, sometime in the last 15 years I completely lost my attention span. Writing an intelligent, well-argued, well-supported 15,000-word paper didn't used to be this HARD. I have given myself one more week to finish, have proofread, revise, print, bind, and mail this sucker off to my school to make sure it's there in time. And then I'll be able to go on and find that perfect job (or three), pay those student loans, pay back my parents, buy a car, buy a new computer, and move out and be an adult! (Oh, and finally give internet dating another try. We're planning a family cruise next year, and it would be AWESOME to not share a cabin with my parents. Again.)
In the meantime, and completely unrelated to the actual work I SHOULD be doing:
This really struck me today. Historically, I have been awful about eating right and exercising, but honestly - I am HORRIBLE about talking to myself right. It's a wonder I'm not (more of) a basket case. Surely, I can do three such simple things. I really think I can.
* * * * *
I've made banoffee pie for my family since I've been home from England, and for a family reunion the other day I was attempting to create a Banoffee Pie Cake. Due to an unforeseen cake-baking-and-removal-from-pan incident, I instead came up with Banoffee Trifle. (Still so British!) It was fabulous, so remind to write down the recipe here. Later, when I'm not trying to write about societal perceptions of war and children's theatre. (Unless people were eating banoffee pie while attending a piece of children's theatre about the effects of war... I should probably suggest that to somebody.)
* * * * *
I've been browsing some blogs this morning, and I found a very interesting string of posts on modesty. Check it out:
http://borrowedlight.blogspot.com/2012/08/on-modesty.html
http://brittanyjmolina.blogspot.com/2012/02/my-love-note-post-went-viral-what-my.html
http://momtheintern.blogspot.com/2012/02/modesty-and-accountability.html
I really like Sue, the first link, finding her often insightful and always very funny. I'm still processing what she says in that post - but more, I'm trying to understand the motivation behind the Friend story and the Primary lesson. (One of her commenters mentions that her three-year-old daughter was called up in front of the entire Primary and told to 'put a cardigan on' over her sleeveless dress - and I, for some reason, flashed to Beyonce 'Single Ladies (Put a Ring On It)'. Not the modesty connection most would hope for, I'm sure... but there are some aspects of this discussion that are just that ridiculous. More on that in a minute.)
The second story is linked from Sue's, a girl who was 'called out' by a boy a BYU for immodesty who took the whole thing as a joke and uploaded his note and a picture of her outfit, and it all went massively viral. The third link is a response to the BYU girl's story.
First off, to start in the middle - Brittany (BYU girl) really seems to have handled the whole thing well. She's positive and upbeat, and is very kind in her writing and speaking about BYU boy. Good for her. Poor BYU boy - chances are he really was just trying to be polite and helpful and not report her to the Honor Code Office. His tone is a tad self-righteous, and his timing (Valentine's Day) was TERRIBLE, but it is not an inherently mean note at all. The problem comes down to his motivation, and since (hopefully) no one will ever know who he was, we won't be able to ask.
The argument seems to be coming down to a couple of different points: 1) Train them young; 2) Girls are responsible for men's responses to them; and 3) Covering up as much as possible regardless of style, comfort, or personal discretion seems to be the way to go.
I really like Jenna's (third link) discussion on modesty - in essence, that modesty is about respecting yourself as a child of God. And... there you go. Modesty is about you, your behavior and perception of self, and your relationship with your Heavenly Father. There are all sorts of offshoots there, such as a discussion of how appearance and behavior can often motivate/inspire/empower one another, and there is truth to that. There's also the realization that modesty is also about helping other people to feel comfortable in your presence, which is also true. There are guidelines the Church gives on appropriate dress, and those are important to review and apply.
HOWEVER: I really don't think we can apply blanket standards to all people in all places of all ages. The thing I dislike most about the Friend story is that there is no context given, other than that the 4-year-old's birthday dress is sleeveless - is it too big? Do the armholes and neck gape and show the girl's sides and chest? Does it have spaghetti straps? I don't understand how someone decides a 4-yr-old wearing a cherry-print sundress is 'immodest' without a few mitigating factors. I agree with Sue - a little girl's shoulders are not sexual, and should not therefore be covered up for that reason. If there is another reason, let's talk about it. If your three-year-old is wearing a sleeveless dress to church that fits properly, covers up her torso, and doesn't have Satanic messages printed on it, I'd be more inclined to point out how cute she looks than go screaming for a cardigan. If the little girl sees her mother and the other sisters and older girls in the ward wearing comfortable, well-fitted (not too big, not too tight) outfits that are appropriate to their age and their temple status, I'd say she'd be fairly likely to be fine with dressing that way herself when she arrives at those various ages and temple status. People do change - that's the whole point of why we're here. OF COURSE we can adapt and adjust to different standards as we grow older and move into new situations. We're selling our children (and ourselves) very, very short to assume that everything has to be learned and locked in immediately. Lead by example; explain things; be practical as well as spiritual; stop judging and keep loving; and I'm thinking the kids will be all right.
I loved this point in the debate: the Victorians got all riled up over a glimpse of ankle or wrist because it was forbidden and all covered up. Times and fashions change (due at least to some extent by major societal events, such as wars and the resulting shortages) and we (thankfully) are no longer required to wear corsets, gloves, long sleeves and longer skirts all the time. Men (evidently) no longer go giddy over the turn of a (naked!) wrist because they're used to seeing it. This doesn't mean I'm advocating we all walk around naked so that everyone gets used to it, because, hello, pockets, but if the Victorians are anything to go by then making something 'forbidden' is not the way to keep it safe. When young women and young men are taught to value themselves and to value those around them as children of God, when they are taught to acknowledge similarities and to appreciate (but not obsess over) differences, physical and otherwise, when they are allowed to honestly discuss thoughts and feelings without insisting that anyone else be judged or dictated to because of differing personal choices... Well, we'd have a lot less of the problems that plague us today.
It is not fair for any woman to be told that she alone is responsible for a man's reaction to her appearance. This completely negates his ability to choose! Remember how the world tells us that you 'feel what you feel' and that those feelings (and by extension, thoughts) cannot be controlled? Baloney. No matter how powerful the feeling is that you're experiencing, you alone control the actions you take because of those feelings. Young men swept with a biological response to seeing a pretty girl allow their thoughts and actions to follow - or they choose to re-direct those thoughts, and the resulting actions, which in turn changes, turns off, or otherwise alleviates the feeling created by that biological urge. Face it - men (young, old, nearly dead) are going to have biological urges (hint: women do, too) so the key is in controlling them, not in shifting responsibility to someone else. Of course, girls can help the men with that control by not dressing in ways that imply a particular type of behavior, and they should out of consideration. However, in the end the responsibility for a young man's behavior rests with him, not with the top or leggings a girl is wearing. It really does come down to personal responsibility and recognizing the worth of the self (for everyone) - when we teach children and youth not to dress a certain way because of the response it may garner from someone else we are also teaching them to objectify themselves to an alarming degree. Basically, we just have to chill out, teach correct principles (and by 'correct principles' I do not mean inch allowances on sleeve- and hem-lines), and expect that most people we will encounter will behave as, well, people... and not depraved sex machines.
I just decided I'm not going to directly address, point 3, because... please.
On BYU Honor Code and Other Types of Established Standards: I think that one of the reasons that we are instructed to "Judge not, that ye be not judged" is that we are simply NOT QUALIFIED to judge. We don't know. We don't have the bigger picture. We cannot expect that other people come from the same backgrounds, situations, teachings and standards that we do - we cannot assume that we understand exactly what's going on. The problem with BYU Boy was not that he commented on Brittany's outfit, or that her clothes disturbed him - it was that he made an assumption about the application of Honor Code standards, her digression from them, and the fact that other people were bound to agree with him simply because he believed his interpretation to be accurate. He shifted blame for his reaction to Brittany onto her and her supposed inability to live the Honor Code because he did not want to acknowledge his responsibility to curb his own response and resulting thoughts, or take the opportunity to consult with someone who WAS qualified to 'judge'. HE ASSUMED HE WAS RIGHT. This is why we have to control our thoughts, actions, and by extension, our feelings - we cause problems when walk around doing things that we believe to be 'right' when there are checks in place to determine whether we are, in fact, 'right'. We very often judge others vocally because we assume that people will agree with us, or in an attempt to persuade them to agree with us. BYU Boy's note made several incorrect assumptions, and it was for this that he was ridiculed across the Internet. If he had focused on his homework and forgotten about it, the whole circus wouldn't have happened. If he had counseled with someone on the Honor Code Board, the whole circus wouldn't have happened. If he had acknowledged to himself: 'Huh - something about that pretty girl is inducing a biological reaction. Interesting. It must be evidence that I am, in fact, a guy. I could ask her out, or I could give her a note that will probably make it less likely that she'll induce a biological reaction from me. That might be out of line, though - maybe I'll just go get a non-caffeinated beverage and meditate in front of a floor fan for a while instead...' The. Whole. Circus. Would. Not. Have. Happened.
I grant you that it's unlikely for youth and young adults to think things through quite this extensively. However, I do not think it's beyond the realm of possibility for us adults to teach them to TRY. And if we do, the clothing issues (real or imagined) are just not going to be that big a deal anymore.
That's my modest conclusion, anyway.
* * * * *
Follow-up notes: I had no idea the title of my post would apply to well to the whole post. Huh. I also had no idea I had so much to say about it.
- Just because I wrote all this down in a blog and was maybe slightly funny or a little bit clever does not mean I'm actually RIGHT. Just FYI.
- Also, I was thinking about doing a word count on this post, just because I count pretty much everything I type these days, then realized I didn't want to know just how much work I could have been doing on my paper while I was getting this all out instead. *le sigh*
*
In the meantime, and completely unrelated to the actual work I SHOULD be doing:
This really struck me today. Historically, I have been awful about eating right and exercising, but honestly - I am HORRIBLE about talking to myself right. It's a wonder I'm not (more of) a basket case. Surely, I can do three such simple things. I really think I can.
* * * * *
I've made banoffee pie for my family since I've been home from England, and for a family reunion the other day I was attempting to create a Banoffee Pie Cake. Due to an unforeseen cake-baking-and-removal-from-pan incident, I instead came up with Banoffee Trifle. (Still so British!) It was fabulous, so remind to write down the recipe here. Later, when I'm not trying to write about societal perceptions of war and children's theatre. (Unless people were eating banoffee pie while attending a piece of children's theatre about the effects of war... I should probably suggest that to somebody.)
* * * * *
I've been browsing some blogs this morning, and I found a very interesting string of posts on modesty. Check it out:
http://borrowedlight.blogspot.com/2012/08/on-modesty.html
http://brittanyjmolina.blogspot.com/2012/02/my-love-note-post-went-viral-what-my.html
http://momtheintern.blogspot.com/2012/02/modesty-and-accountability.html
I really like Sue, the first link, finding her often insightful and always very funny. I'm still processing what she says in that post - but more, I'm trying to understand the motivation behind the Friend story and the Primary lesson. (One of her commenters mentions that her three-year-old daughter was called up in front of the entire Primary and told to 'put a cardigan on' over her sleeveless dress - and I, for some reason, flashed to Beyonce 'Single Ladies (Put a Ring On It)'. Not the modesty connection most would hope for, I'm sure... but there are some aspects of this discussion that are just that ridiculous. More on that in a minute.)
The second story is linked from Sue's, a girl who was 'called out' by a boy a BYU for immodesty who took the whole thing as a joke and uploaded his note and a picture of her outfit, and it all went massively viral. The third link is a response to the BYU girl's story.
First off, to start in the middle - Brittany (BYU girl) really seems to have handled the whole thing well. She's positive and upbeat, and is very kind in her writing and speaking about BYU boy. Good for her. Poor BYU boy - chances are he really was just trying to be polite and helpful and not report her to the Honor Code Office. His tone is a tad self-righteous, and his timing (Valentine's Day) was TERRIBLE, but it is not an inherently mean note at all. The problem comes down to his motivation, and since (hopefully) no one will ever know who he was, we won't be able to ask.
The argument seems to be coming down to a couple of different points: 1) Train them young; 2) Girls are responsible for men's responses to them; and 3) Covering up as much as possible regardless of style, comfort, or personal discretion seems to be the way to go.
I really like Jenna's (third link) discussion on modesty - in essence, that modesty is about respecting yourself as a child of God. And... there you go. Modesty is about you, your behavior and perception of self, and your relationship with your Heavenly Father. There are all sorts of offshoots there, such as a discussion of how appearance and behavior can often motivate/inspire/empower one another, and there is truth to that. There's also the realization that modesty is also about helping other people to feel comfortable in your presence, which is also true. There are guidelines the Church gives on appropriate dress, and those are important to review and apply.
HOWEVER: I really don't think we can apply blanket standards to all people in all places of all ages. The thing I dislike most about the Friend story is that there is no context given, other than that the 4-year-old's birthday dress is sleeveless - is it too big? Do the armholes and neck gape and show the girl's sides and chest? Does it have spaghetti straps? I don't understand how someone decides a 4-yr-old wearing a cherry-print sundress is 'immodest' without a few mitigating factors. I agree with Sue - a little girl's shoulders are not sexual, and should not therefore be covered up for that reason. If there is another reason, let's talk about it. If your three-year-old is wearing a sleeveless dress to church that fits properly, covers up her torso, and doesn't have Satanic messages printed on it, I'd be more inclined to point out how cute she looks than go screaming for a cardigan. If the little girl sees her mother and the other sisters and older girls in the ward wearing comfortable, well-fitted (not too big, not too tight) outfits that are appropriate to their age and their temple status, I'd say she'd be fairly likely to be fine with dressing that way herself when she arrives at those various ages and temple status. People do change - that's the whole point of why we're here. OF COURSE we can adapt and adjust to different standards as we grow older and move into new situations. We're selling our children (and ourselves) very, very short to assume that everything has to be learned and locked in immediately. Lead by example; explain things; be practical as well as spiritual; stop judging and keep loving; and I'm thinking the kids will be all right.
I loved this point in the debate: the Victorians got all riled up over a glimpse of ankle or wrist because it was forbidden and all covered up. Times and fashions change (due at least to some extent by major societal events, such as wars and the resulting shortages) and we (thankfully) are no longer required to wear corsets, gloves, long sleeves and longer skirts all the time. Men (evidently) no longer go giddy over the turn of a (naked!) wrist because they're used to seeing it. This doesn't mean I'm advocating we all walk around naked so that everyone gets used to it, because, hello, pockets, but if the Victorians are anything to go by then making something 'forbidden' is not the way to keep it safe. When young women and young men are taught to value themselves and to value those around them as children of God, when they are taught to acknowledge similarities and to appreciate (but not obsess over) differences, physical and otherwise, when they are allowed to honestly discuss thoughts and feelings without insisting that anyone else be judged or dictated to because of differing personal choices... Well, we'd have a lot less of the problems that plague us today.
It is not fair for any woman to be told that she alone is responsible for a man's reaction to her appearance. This completely negates his ability to choose! Remember how the world tells us that you 'feel what you feel' and that those feelings (and by extension, thoughts) cannot be controlled? Baloney. No matter how powerful the feeling is that you're experiencing, you alone control the actions you take because of those feelings. Young men swept with a biological response to seeing a pretty girl allow their thoughts and actions to follow - or they choose to re-direct those thoughts, and the resulting actions, which in turn changes, turns off, or otherwise alleviates the feeling created by that biological urge. Face it - men (young, old, nearly dead) are going to have biological urges (hint: women do, too) so the key is in controlling them, not in shifting responsibility to someone else. Of course, girls can help the men with that control by not dressing in ways that imply a particular type of behavior, and they should out of consideration. However, in the end the responsibility for a young man's behavior rests with him, not with the top or leggings a girl is wearing. It really does come down to personal responsibility and recognizing the worth of the self (for everyone) - when we teach children and youth not to dress a certain way because of the response it may garner from someone else we are also teaching them to objectify themselves to an alarming degree. Basically, we just have to chill out, teach correct principles (and by 'correct principles' I do not mean inch allowances on sleeve- and hem-lines), and expect that most people we will encounter will behave as, well, people... and not depraved sex machines.
I just decided I'm not going to directly address, point 3, because... please.
On BYU Honor Code and Other Types of Established Standards: I think that one of the reasons that we are instructed to "Judge not, that ye be not judged" is that we are simply NOT QUALIFIED to judge. We don't know. We don't have the bigger picture. We cannot expect that other people come from the same backgrounds, situations, teachings and standards that we do - we cannot assume that we understand exactly what's going on. The problem with BYU Boy was not that he commented on Brittany's outfit, or that her clothes disturbed him - it was that he made an assumption about the application of Honor Code standards, her digression from them, and the fact that other people were bound to agree with him simply because he believed his interpretation to be accurate. He shifted blame for his reaction to Brittany onto her and her supposed inability to live the Honor Code because he did not want to acknowledge his responsibility to curb his own response and resulting thoughts, or take the opportunity to consult with someone who WAS qualified to 'judge'. HE ASSUMED HE WAS RIGHT. This is why we have to control our thoughts, actions, and by extension, our feelings - we cause problems when walk around doing things that we believe to be 'right' when there are checks in place to determine whether we are, in fact, 'right'. We very often judge others vocally because we assume that people will agree with us, or in an attempt to persuade them to agree with us. BYU Boy's note made several incorrect assumptions, and it was for this that he was ridiculed across the Internet. If he had focused on his homework and forgotten about it, the whole circus wouldn't have happened. If he had counseled with someone on the Honor Code Board, the whole circus wouldn't have happened. If he had acknowledged to himself: 'Huh - something about that pretty girl is inducing a biological reaction. Interesting. It must be evidence that I am, in fact, a guy. I could ask her out, or I could give her a note that will probably make it less likely that she'll induce a biological reaction from me. That might be out of line, though - maybe I'll just go get a non-caffeinated beverage and meditate in front of a floor fan for a while instead...' The. Whole. Circus. Would. Not. Have. Happened.
I grant you that it's unlikely for youth and young adults to think things through quite this extensively. However, I do not think it's beyond the realm of possibility for us adults to teach them to TRY. And if we do, the clothing issues (real or imagined) are just not going to be that big a deal anymore.
That's my modest conclusion, anyway.
* * * * *
Follow-up notes: I had no idea the title of my post would apply to well to the whole post. Huh. I also had no idea I had so much to say about it.
- Just because I wrote all this down in a blog and was maybe slightly funny or a little bit clever does not mean I'm actually RIGHT. Just FYI.
- Also, I was thinking about doing a word count on this post, just because I count pretty much everything I type these days, then realized I didn't want to know just how much work I could have been doing on my paper while I was getting this all out instead. *le sigh*
*
July 14, 2012
June 10, 2012
Eensey-Weensey Demon from H-E-Double-Hockey-Sticks
Why is it that spiders present their most obnoxious selves when you're at your most vulnerable? (By 'your' I mean 'me', of course.)
Like: snuggled up in your bed with a book, and the spider crawls right down the center of the book. And when you jump out of bed and run for the kitchen (so the spider will have a chance to get out of your bed), you sit at the table to read your book (you didn't think I'd leave the book behind with the spider, did you? Please.) it then crawls out of your nightgown sleeve and onto your shoulder.
Like: getting up in the middle of the night and reaching around a corner to turn on the light and feeling something furry on the switch. Discovering, after turning on the light from the next room, that brown wolf spiders are actually furry.
Like: after getting undressed to get in the shower, noticing a spider up on the wall. Retrieving a chair so as to kill the spider and shower in peace. Missing the spider and jumping back in surprise when it falls down the wall. (Jumping back is not good when standing on a twisty chair.) Landing on the corner of the bathroom counter and developing a MASSIVE bruise on the back of your thigh that, over the next week, turns yellow AND green AND purple AND...
Like: stepping into the shower and turning under the water to see a good-sized black spider hanging out on the shower curtain next to your head. Somehow managing not to slip in the tub and smoosh the spider against the wall with a handful of shower curtain without pulling down the curtain, but definitely while getting water all over the bathroom.
Like: sitting on the toilet, and noticing something twitching on the sleeve of the robe you've just hung up across from you. Realizing it's legs. Big, long, relatively thick spider legs. Thinking all at once that a) those legs are indicative of the largest spider you haven't ever yet seen, b) you were just carrying that robe and the spider was either already on it or it was on you and moved to the robe ACK, and c) the toilet paper is a lot closer to the spider than you are. (Also, d) it doesn't matter how big the spider is, as this is not a Harry Potter movie you're still bigger than it is so why ARE people afraid of spiders, e) are you really starting to hyperventilate? Not good in a bathroom, considering, and f) flushing and washing your hands are either idiotic under the circumstances, or an attempt to conform to routine in order to control the nerves. And no, you don't get to DRY your hands since you're about to use the hand towel to try to smash/capture/suffocate the monster, since toilet paper is CLEARLY not going to be sufficient.) Grabbing the hand towel and a couple of deep breaths to stave off the shakes as you attempt to 'handle' the destroyer of dreams and happiness that has coyly tucked itself into the sleeve of your robe. (Seriously, the next class of spider larger than this one is a tarantula or a small car, and in England those are pretty much the same thing.) Lunging at the robe, wrapping it in the hand towel, and smashing the beejezus out of it. Tossing the towel and robe out the bathroom door into the hallway so as to have more room to maneuver when it comes crawling out for revenge. Shaking the towel and seeing the spider corpse fall out, and realizing that in order to have the beejezus smashed out of it it really did have to be big enough to have beejezus in it in the first place. (The crumpled-up body and legs were as big as my thumbnail, and JUICY.) Taking the next five minutes to stop shaking, and get my breathing back to normal.
* * * *
I've got plenty of other less-traumatic spider stories - there's a kind of medium-large dark spider that I think lives around my house that is being pushed inside by the construction in the back, at a guess. I've found them crawling on the floor, over my pillows, down the walls, on the stairs, over the kitchen counter, and once starting to build a web between the edge of the cabinet door and the stack of dinner plates (I did jump a little when opening THAT cupboard.) I've managed. That... thing the size of the devil today was new, though.
I'm OK now, though the nervous starts at whatever I see moving out of the corner of my eye are getting annoying. Seriously, WHY are we so put off by spiders? Especially here - they haven't got any poisonous spiders in England (I think - I know there aren't any poisonous snakes - thank you, St. Patrick) and a paper towel or flip-flop usually does the trick. (Or a spray bottle of cleaning bleach; there was one living in the corner of the living room a while back - same corner as the 'Jumanji' vines - that would scurry into the radiator when I came near it with a shoe or flyswatter. The bleach worked.) Realistically, I don't think they actually jump onto people, as if that would do anything. So WHAT is this fear all about?
Until I figure it out, though, I'm going to deep clean my house, particularly the bathroom, and write a letter to... somebody... about how the British STILL haven't figured out screens. And start pricing exterminators.
Now if only there were something I could do about the bees climbing up the inside of the bathroom sink drainpipe...
(Do I need to mention to anyone just how happy I am to be moving out in two weeks?)
(I did not add an illustrative picture to this post ON PURPOSE.)
Like: snuggled up in your bed with a book, and the spider crawls right down the center of the book. And when you jump out of bed and run for the kitchen (so the spider will have a chance to get out of your bed), you sit at the table to read your book (you didn't think I'd leave the book behind with the spider, did you? Please.) it then crawls out of your nightgown sleeve and onto your shoulder.
Like: getting up in the middle of the night and reaching around a corner to turn on the light and feeling something furry on the switch. Discovering, after turning on the light from the next room, that brown wolf spiders are actually furry.
Like: after getting undressed to get in the shower, noticing a spider up on the wall. Retrieving a chair so as to kill the spider and shower in peace. Missing the spider and jumping back in surprise when it falls down the wall. (Jumping back is not good when standing on a twisty chair.) Landing on the corner of the bathroom counter and developing a MASSIVE bruise on the back of your thigh that, over the next week, turns yellow AND green AND purple AND...
Like: stepping into the shower and turning under the water to see a good-sized black spider hanging out on the shower curtain next to your head. Somehow managing not to slip in the tub and smoosh the spider against the wall with a handful of shower curtain without pulling down the curtain, but definitely while getting water all over the bathroom.
Like: sitting on the toilet, and noticing something twitching on the sleeve of the robe you've just hung up across from you. Realizing it's legs. Big, long, relatively thick spider legs. Thinking all at once that a) those legs are indicative of the largest spider you haven't ever yet seen, b) you were just carrying that robe and the spider was either already on it or it was on you and moved to the robe ACK, and c) the toilet paper is a lot closer to the spider than you are. (Also, d) it doesn't matter how big the spider is, as this is not a Harry Potter movie you're still bigger than it is so why ARE people afraid of spiders, e) are you really starting to hyperventilate? Not good in a bathroom, considering, and f) flushing and washing your hands are either idiotic under the circumstances, or an attempt to conform to routine in order to control the nerves. And no, you don't get to DRY your hands since you're about to use the hand towel to try to smash/capture/suffocate the monster, since toilet paper is CLEARLY not going to be sufficient.) Grabbing the hand towel and a couple of deep breaths to stave off the shakes as you attempt to 'handle' the destroyer of dreams and happiness that has coyly tucked itself into the sleeve of your robe. (Seriously, the next class of spider larger than this one is a tarantula or a small car, and in England those are pretty much the same thing.) Lunging at the robe, wrapping it in the hand towel, and smashing the beejezus out of it. Tossing the towel and robe out the bathroom door into the hallway so as to have more room to maneuver when it comes crawling out for revenge. Shaking the towel and seeing the spider corpse fall out, and realizing that in order to have the beejezus smashed out of it it really did have to be big enough to have beejezus in it in the first place. (The crumpled-up body and legs were as big as my thumbnail, and JUICY.) Taking the next five minutes to stop shaking, and get my breathing back to normal.
* * * *
I've got plenty of other less-traumatic spider stories - there's a kind of medium-large dark spider that I think lives around my house that is being pushed inside by the construction in the back, at a guess. I've found them crawling on the floor, over my pillows, down the walls, on the stairs, over the kitchen counter, and once starting to build a web between the edge of the cabinet door and the stack of dinner plates (I did jump a little when opening THAT cupboard.) I've managed. That... thing the size of the devil today was new, though.
I'm OK now, though the nervous starts at whatever I see moving out of the corner of my eye are getting annoying. Seriously, WHY are we so put off by spiders? Especially here - they haven't got any poisonous spiders in England (I think - I know there aren't any poisonous snakes - thank you, St. Patrick) and a paper towel or flip-flop usually does the trick. (Or a spray bottle of cleaning bleach; there was one living in the corner of the living room a while back - same corner as the 'Jumanji' vines - that would scurry into the radiator when I came near it with a shoe or flyswatter. The bleach worked.) Realistically, I don't think they actually jump onto people, as if that would do anything. So WHAT is this fear all about?
Until I figure it out, though, I'm going to deep clean my house, particularly the bathroom, and write a letter to... somebody... about how the British STILL haven't figured out screens. And start pricing exterminators.
Now if only there were something I could do about the bees climbing up the inside of the bathroom sink drainpipe...
(Do I need to mention to anyone just how happy I am to be moving out in two weeks?)
(I did not add an illustrative picture to this post ON PURPOSE.)
May 28, 2012
New Strategy
So I was reading a blog post today in which the writer had talked about having gastric bypass surgery and how worried she was about effectively communicating messages of positive body image to her daughter when she'd had a major medical procedure done herself. As I was trolling through the comments (I don't know if you've noticed, but the smartest, most interesting blogs usually have the smartest, most interesting commenters) one of them struck a chord with me: basically, the commenter said that it's pretty pointless to tell ourselves that we want to 'lose weight' or 'get thin' or 'have more energy' or whatever, as these things for the most part don't work. The thing that works, she says, is when we create a determination to GET HEALTHY, rather than skinny.
I like it. This makes sense to me.
I like having positive thoughts and ideas pulling me forward, rather than other things cutting me off. So, as is my wont, I made at list - these are the 'positive response' things that I'm thinking I can start doing to 'get healthy', instead of trying to 'lose weight':
-In bed by 11:00 (I CAN actually do this one)
- First response: drink water
- Try to do something active every hour or two (get a timer?)
- Veggies first (fruit second) ((anything else after))
- Daily scriptures (half an hour a day, first thing, works better than I thought it would)
- Sign up for a dance class
- Find someone to walk with daily/several times a week
- Schedule an 'exercise activity' once or twice a week
: hike
: swimming
: biking
: skating
: a new class (free trials?)
: (other suggestions?)
- Stretching morning and night
- Learn new meals and recipes, try them out
- Eat three regular meals, or 5 small every-two-hours meals
What else should I try? Anybody want in on this with me this summer? I think I need some water. And maybe some sugar snap peas.
I like it. This makes sense to me.
I like having positive thoughts and ideas pulling me forward, rather than other things cutting me off. So, as is my wont, I made at list - these are the 'positive response' things that I'm thinking I can start doing to 'get healthy', instead of trying to 'lose weight':
-In bed by 11:00 (I CAN actually do this one)
- First response: drink water
- Try to do something active every hour or two (get a timer?)
- Veggies first (fruit second) ((anything else after))
- Daily scriptures (half an hour a day, first thing, works better than I thought it would)
- Sign up for a dance class
- Find someone to walk with daily/several times a week
- Schedule an 'exercise activity' once or twice a week
: hike
: swimming
: biking
: skating
: a new class (free trials?)
: (other suggestions?)
- Stretching morning and night
- Learn new meals and recipes, try them out
- Eat three regular meals, or 5 small every-two-hours meals
What else should I try? Anybody want in on this with me this summer? I think I need some water. And maybe some sugar snap peas.
 |
| This is a 'happy' apple, not a 'Once Upon A Time' pass-out-and-DIE apple. That's not healthy. |
May 02, 2012
April 23, 2012
It's Not You, It's Me
It's time to take a breather.
Totally not your fault - I just need some time and space to figure things out... y'know, like formatting and content and what I actually want to say.
It's been a fun few years, blogging, but I think I'd better take myself 'off the market' for a while. Just to see. I might be back - probably will be. I'll let you know.
In the meantime, I'll leave my stuff and keep posting videos and other things that I want to keep track of... We're absolutely still friends, and you can come browse my e-bookshelf anytime. I'll also be trying a little harder to be consistent with my 'update' emails to friends and family - let me know if you want in on that list!
It's been great, really.
And there are plenty more blogs in the sea!
Watch out for falling turtles,
Cyd
*
Totally not your fault - I just need some time and space to figure things out... y'know, like formatting and content and what I actually want to say.
It's been a fun few years, blogging, but I think I'd better take myself 'off the market' for a while. Just to see. I might be back - probably will be. I'll let you know.
In the meantime, I'll leave my stuff and keep posting videos and other things that I want to keep track of... We're absolutely still friends, and you can come browse my e-bookshelf anytime. I'll also be trying a little harder to be consistent with my 'update' emails to friends and family - let me know if you want in on that list!
It's been great, really.
And there are plenty more blogs in the sea!
Watch out for falling turtles,
Cyd
*
April 18, 2012
Happy Birthday
It's someone's birthday... and this is an unashamed fangirly tribute to that someone.
 |
| Would you trust this man to lead you through time and space? Oh, ME TOO. |
 |
| Doctor Who specs in a library YES PLZ |
 |
| Hamlet played by David Tenannt and Yorik played by Tchaikowsky |
 |
| David Tennant, Doctor Who, and a kitten. And no, it's not MY birthday until January. |
 |
| I just... have no words. |
*
April 10, 2012
Puffy Face
In which we shall see: I get somewhat rant-y. And with good reason.
* * * * *
After a public spate of fairly vicious commentary about Ashley Judd's looks, particularly regarding the above photo, she posted a response - and it is fantastic. (Please, read the whole thing.)
When will we finally have had enough? When will we stop judging people for how they look RIGHT THIS MINUTE and start remembering who they actually ARE? We are damaging women, relationships, children, men, teenagers, our perception of ourselves, our view of the past and our view of the future, the very fabric of our society by our refusal to stop allowing the media to tell us what is attractive and what is not; to reject the overwhelmingly common belief that people are worth no more than what they look like. How is it that we continue to be so FOOLISH?
We must stop. We simply have to.
I've never thought much about Ashley Judd - I thought she was pretty, a good actress, interesting family, but that was about it. Now, after reading her letter, I respect and admire her so much - she's smart, clear-eyed, and responding in an articulate, appropriate, confident manner to a personal attack and serious issue. A friend and fellow blogger recently posted a very funny, satirical (or is she serious? You decide) write-up on our collective tendency towards jealousy, and I'm starting to see that she has a point. Is there any reason for malicious gossip and irresponsible 'journalism' other than jealousy? I don't think so - it's not like calling out someone's age or a perceived 'flaw' is in any way news.
It's interesting how often lately I've heard people reminding me that we must not judge others, and all the thinking I've been doing about the importance of not making assumptions. How can anyone look at the picture above and not see a beautiful woman? And if she looks different than she did a month (or a decade) ago, why doesn't anyone ask if there's a reason? (Have any of us NOT seen that illness can change a person's appearance?) And why isn't it OK/normal/accepted/appreciated that we change as we get older? The gleeful disregard for facts, healthy discussion, and common courtesy tells me that yes, these commenters and interviewers and 'reporters' are jealous - jealous, and invested in the false trope that we have allowed the media (and each other) to impose on our world that 'image is everything.'
IT'S NOT TRUE. We are all worth so much more than what we look like. Ashley Judd's measured response proves to me, for example, that she is much, much, more than just a pretty (puffy) face - and she shouldn't have needed to write about it for anyone to believe it.
"The insanity has to stop, because as focused on me as it appears to have been, it is about all girls and women. In fact, it’s about boys and men, too, who are equally objectified and ridiculed, according to heteronormative definitions of masculinity that deny the full and dynamic range of their personhood. It affects each and every one of us, in multiple and nefarious ways: our self-image, how we show up in our relationships and at work, our sense of our worth, value, and potential as human beings. Join in—and help change—the Conversation." - Ashley Judd (If you haven't, read the article.)
*
* * * * *
After a public spate of fairly vicious commentary about Ashley Judd's looks, particularly regarding the above photo, she posted a response - and it is fantastic. (Please, read the whole thing.)
When will we finally have had enough? When will we stop judging people for how they look RIGHT THIS MINUTE and start remembering who they actually ARE? We are damaging women, relationships, children, men, teenagers, our perception of ourselves, our view of the past and our view of the future, the very fabric of our society by our refusal to stop allowing the media to tell us what is attractive and what is not; to reject the overwhelmingly common belief that people are worth no more than what they look like. How is it that we continue to be so FOOLISH?
We must stop. We simply have to.
I've never thought much about Ashley Judd - I thought she was pretty, a good actress, interesting family, but that was about it. Now, after reading her letter, I respect and admire her so much - she's smart, clear-eyed, and responding in an articulate, appropriate, confident manner to a personal attack and serious issue. A friend and fellow blogger recently posted a very funny, satirical (or is she serious? You decide) write-up on our collective tendency towards jealousy, and I'm starting to see that she has a point. Is there any reason for malicious gossip and irresponsible 'journalism' other than jealousy? I don't think so - it's not like calling out someone's age or a perceived 'flaw' is in any way news.
It's interesting how often lately I've heard people reminding me that we must not judge others, and all the thinking I've been doing about the importance of not making assumptions. How can anyone look at the picture above and not see a beautiful woman? And if she looks different than she did a month (or a decade) ago, why doesn't anyone ask if there's a reason? (Have any of us NOT seen that illness can change a person's appearance?) And why isn't it OK/normal/accepted/appreciated that we change as we get older? The gleeful disregard for facts, healthy discussion, and common courtesy tells me that yes, these commenters and interviewers and 'reporters' are jealous - jealous, and invested in the false trope that we have allowed the media (and each other) to impose on our world that 'image is everything.'
IT'S NOT TRUE. We are all worth so much more than what we look like. Ashley Judd's measured response proves to me, for example, that she is much, much, more than just a pretty (puffy) face - and she shouldn't have needed to write about it for anyone to believe it.
"The insanity has to stop, because as focused on me as it appears to have been, it is about all girls and women. In fact, it’s about boys and men, too, who are equally objectified and ridiculed, according to heteronormative definitions of masculinity that deny the full and dynamic range of their personhood. It affects each and every one of us, in multiple and nefarious ways: our self-image, how we show up in our relationships and at work, our sense of our worth, value, and potential as human beings. Join in—and help change—the Conversation." - Ashley Judd (If you haven't, read the article.)
*
April 07, 2012
Things I've Learned About Exercise
1 - A high school reunion is an excellent motivator.
2 - Oddly, Lady Antebellum has a better walking/running rhythm than Daughtry.
Glee is good for interval training, though.
3 - The sillier you look doing a particular muscle group sequence, the more effective it is.
I hope.
4 - Lunges will never be fun, or even bearable for more than a few steps. (My lower back and pelvic tilt testify to this one loudly.)
5 - Alternating side squats work fairly well as a replacement for lunges, and fortunately they look even sillier.
6 - Other joggers will look at you, smile, exchange a greeting; people who are 'exercising' by walking their dog refuse to make eye contact on the off-chance that 'running' is as contagious as 'the plague'.
7 - My body has decided that exercise is a good thing. (Traitor.) My brain still disagrees, but goes along with my body grudgingly.
8 - Not much is worse than discovering you've forgotten your keys and locked yourself out of the house with no phone, no wallet, no open windows, and no access to your largely (and currently) absent housemate. Not much is better than realizing the keys were in your jacket pocket the whole time and were, in fact, the thing that was banging against your leg earlier when you were running.
* * * * *
Got any tips, additional lessons learned, or playlist recommendations?
*
2 - Oddly, Lady Antebellum has a better walking/running rhythm than Daughtry.
Glee is good for interval training, though.
3 - The sillier you look doing a particular muscle group sequence, the more effective it is.
I hope.
4 - Lunges will never be fun, or even bearable for more than a few steps. (My lower back and pelvic tilt testify to this one loudly.)
5 - Alternating side squats work fairly well as a replacement for lunges, and fortunately they look even sillier.
6 - Other joggers will look at you, smile, exchange a greeting; people who are 'exercising' by walking their dog refuse to make eye contact on the off-chance that 'running' is as contagious as 'the plague'.
7 - My body has decided that exercise is a good thing. (Traitor.) My brain still disagrees, but goes along with my body grudgingly.
8 - Not much is worse than discovering you've forgotten your keys and locked yourself out of the house with no phone, no wallet, no open windows, and no access to your largely (and currently) absent housemate. Not much is better than realizing the keys were in your jacket pocket the whole time and were, in fact, the thing that was banging against your leg earlier when you were running.
* * * * *
Got any tips, additional lessons learned, or playlist recommendations?
*
April 06, 2012
New and Old
I got a haircut this week (I know: 'What hair?!?' you're saying. 'She has NO HAIR to cut!') but I don't have any pictures - just trust me when I say it's now more 80's punk than PTA Mom, which is a huge relief. (Also, no matter how much - or little - hair I have, it always amazes me how much is on the floor at the end of the appointment. I think my hair may be coming in thicker now since it was all cut off. No complaints.)
What I do have pictures of is spring in the UK, which in Canterbury and London looks something like this (these are from the London Temple grounds):
The weather was gorgeous (if a little chilly) for Conference weekend, and since I was staying at the Temple accommodations I was able to go out and walk in the sunshine between sessions. It was the perfect cap to a fantastic Conference! (If you're not sure what I'm talking about - 'LDS General Conference' - or you missed a session or want to find that talk everyone's raving about, check it out here.)
Monday morning I headed in to London to get that haircut (LOVE!); and then to kill time until the show I was seeing that evening headed over to the British Museum. I'll be back. The place was mobbed with both school groups and half-term vacationers - this place is so cool that students come even when it's NOT a field trip.
I definitely plan to spend more time at the British Museum (and in the British Museum gift shops - I could bring home my own Rosetta Stone!!!). Still so much to see! London, you and I are friends again!
*
What I do have pictures of is spring in the UK, which in Canterbury and London looks something like this (these are from the London Temple grounds):
 |
| You can see even more beds of white and yellow daffodils in the background... |
There are beds of daffodils EVERYWHERE. In parks, along streets, growing right up to Roman walls... it seems like once they've bloomed, the plants are just mowed down and incorporated into the lawns, and the bulbs reproduce or something to create even more flowers next year. It's pretty amazing, actually.
 |
| Ev. Ry. Where. |
The weather was gorgeous (if a little chilly) for Conference weekend, and since I was staying at the Temple accommodations I was able to go out and walk in the sunshine between sessions. It was the perfect cap to a fantastic Conference! (If you're not sure what I'm talking about - 'LDS General Conference' - or you missed a session or want to find that talk everyone's raving about, check it out here.)
Monday morning I headed in to London to get that haircut (LOVE!); and then to kill time until the show I was seeing that evening headed over to the British Museum. I'll be back. The place was mobbed with both school groups and half-term vacationers - this place is so cool that students come even when it's NOT a field trip.
 |
| Imposing. Impressive. The British know how to do 'Epic' correctly. |
 |
| First stop - the Assyrians. I'm a sucker for winged, human-headed hatted-and-bearded beasties. (Didn't you know?) |
 |
| I actually took this picture for my neice - she's got a thing for horses and apparently, so did the ancient Assyrians. The detail is just gorgeous. |
 |
| Okay, so I sort of did get a picture of my new haircut - but I didn't MEAN for it to look like I was also wearing a stone turban. That was just lucky. |
 |
| I really wanted to round up four strangers to see if I could get them to imitate the poses... |
 |
| Awww... an ancient Egyptian valentine. Sweet. |
 |
| This is the fake Rosetta Stone, the one you can (as the sign below it encourages) touch. The real one is sealed behind glass and a mob of tourists. I'm actually nerdy enough to be a little star-struck that I was in the same building as the Rosetta Stone. Yep. |
 |
| Someday this shot will look exactly like a corner of MY library. I FEEL IT. |
 |
| The inner court is pretty amazing - under the curving glass ceiling near the entrance there's an installation of 49 steel cubes covered with Islamic prayers. |
 |
| I hear you, Lord Alfred. Preach. |
 |
| They've put the Canadian totem poles in one corner near the food court. As you do. |
 |
| Seriously. Just amazing. |
 |
| Also amazing? The banoffee gelato sundae I had at Rendezvous in Leceister Square before heading to the Royal Haymarket Theatre to see 'One Man, Two Guvnors'. (Notes: 'Banoffee' = bananas and toffee, normally on a cookie-crumb - biscuit - crust and with a cream filling. Oh, yeah. Also, how much do you love that there was actually a 'Royal' haymarket?) |
I definitely plan to spend more time at the British Museum (and in the British Museum gift shops - I could bring home my own Rosetta Stone!!!). Still so much to see! London, you and I are friends again!
*
April 03, 2012
The Hunger Games is Watching YOU
In which we shall see: First, a movie review. Second, some socio-political commentary (more on the socio, less on the political) with a healthy dose of self-flagellation. Seriously. (You never see a good flagellation these days.)
* * * * *
I'm not a huge fan of The Hunger Games trilogy - which is to say, I read and appreciated the books, but did not get particularly invested or Twilight-y about them. I think they've got some fascinating ideas and pertinent warnings, and that Suzanne Collins did an excellent job with the storytelling. They're also such a MASSIVE presence in the States that it was a bit of a surprise when the movie came out and I found that most of the people I know hadn't read and were even barely aware of the books, let alone the movie. (Most of my friends, to be realistic, probably fall into that 'between' zone that comes in the middle of 'teens'/'YA target audience' and 'older readers who've rediscovered/jumped on the YA bandwagon'.) After all the buzz and the generally good reviews that came with the opening weekend of the film, I decided to check it out. I wasn't really sure what to expect, as the books had been plenty disturbing on their own.* I headed over to a matinee with a friend who'd heard of but not read the books, and who asked (in his customary way) if I would 'sum up (the backstory) in a Tweet'. Surprisingly, I found that I could. This is one series that you don't need to have much context for (dystopian, autocratic government, yearly subjugation of population with fight-to-the-death reality TV) in order to follow along.
And I thought it was an excellent movie. (Although I thoroughly enjoyed this contrary review by someone who's opinion - and writing skills - I very much respect.) I liked the look of the majority of the movie, I thought several of the performances were excellent (although, Gale? Oh, dear. I hope Liam Hemsworth got at least some of the same acting genes and not just the 'bulk' genes that his brother got... fingers are crossed for the next movie). Even the shaky-cam didn't bother me after the first few minutes - I think I may have been desensitized by the Bourne films. Yes, it felt very true to the book, but in a way that acknowleged skillfully that a good movie adaptation is going to have to move and squeeze and cut some things in order to get the highly detailed world of the book onto the less-detailed (odd as that may sound) world on the big screen. No, it wasn't art, but there were some beautiful, effective shots; in part I think I appreciated the experience more because it was better than your typical summer popcorn flick. (I also think the music is pretty great.)
No, I didn't 'like' the movie, I wouldn't say I 'enjoyed' it - I was far too aware of the actual nature of the action and themes and content to enjoy it, and I am glad that I was engrossed in the experience without forgetting to be disturbed by it. I'm also glad that the movie wasn't more graphic - I read the books, after all, and I'm much 'happier' (if that's the right word) with my mental perception of the killings than I would be with seeing them acted out. Again, I was plenty disturbed already. Any more, and I would have shut off from all of it completely. I like that it wasn't glossy enough to lump me with the Romans cheering for the gladiators, and not 'gritty' or realistic enough to try to convince me it was reality TV or a documentary. For me, the balance was good, and I appreciated that.
However...
* * * * *
You ever have one of those moments when you realize you've been completely, stupidly naive? The older I get, the more they seem to happen - which in a way is a good thing, because it means you're really THINKING about things. I was shocked to hear, in a few different articles, about people who have been Tweeting their disappointment over the casting for a few of the parts in The Hunger Games; specifically, using black actors for the parts of Rue, Thresh, and Cinna. Bottom line, of course, is that these Tweeters are stupid. They're not complaining about lack of talent, they're complaining about skin color - and a few of them go on to sniffily try to justify their complaints by wondering if the movie production team actually read the book. The book, The Hunger Games, in which Rue and Thresh are described BY THE AUTHOR as having 'dark brown skin.' (Cinna, incidentally, is not given a biological - racial? Skin-based? description, so anyone complaining about the movie casting messing with the book is, again, just plain stupid.)
A few weeks ago I had a conversation with a friend of mine about an interview with Morgan Freeman that was making the rounds in which he says the key to ending racism is to 'stop talking about it'.** I agreed with him, and told my friend that I didn't think racism was such a problem anymore because the younger generation had grown up knowing better - or at least not knowing that it was an issue; that it WASN'T an issue because kids today didn't know to talk about it as if it were something that needed to be solved. People are people now, I argued - skin color is just a fact and not a point of concern. She disagreed with me. I was surprised then, but I'm not now. Now, I'm horrified and appalled and more than a little disgusted with those who think the movie was 'ruined' because the 'producer[s made] all the good characters black.'
First, I'm honestly disgusted that people would feel this way, regardless of how the characters were described in the book. (None of the Tweeters seem to be upset that blue-eyed English rose Jennifer Lawrence, described in the book with straight black hair and olive skin, which generally brings to mind Hispanic, Mediterranean, or Native American genotypes, was cast as Katniss - I'm not particularly upset, as I think she did a fine job with the part.) I don't understand how anyone can think that skin color affects talent or story-telling ability, I really don't. (In fact, I thought the main scene with Rue was the most emotionally effective - I cried - in the entire film. That little girl was fantastic.) Really, movie or book or job or guy sitting next to you on the bus - I don't understand how people can feel this way. I've understood that racism has to be taught; I'm shocked, but have to acknowledge that somehow, people are still teaching it. How is this possible?!?
Second, I am truly mystified as to WHY anyone who does have that particular belief would blog, Tweet, or publicly talk about it. I understand and accept that people are entitled to their own beliefs, repugnant as they may be to the general population, but you have to be a complete moron to express a bigoted perception in the Internet age and not know that others are going to pick it up, pass it on, and flail you alive. How can you NOT know that you are being racist, a bigot? And if you do know, why would you SAY it?!? I just don't get it. Seriously. You are as foolish and self-deceptive as those in Suzanne Collins' books who watch The Hunger Games for fun and entertainment. Of course the world is watching you. That is what the Internet IS.
So - I recommend the movie. I recommend the books. I'm going to go read them again, and think a little harder about what we don't want the world to turn out to be. I don't know what the answer is, the way to stop people teaching others to be racist - but at least now I'm more aware, now I will think about what I can do (since I've become a little less naive) - like blog, maybe - to try to make sure the world doesn't get stupider. Not on my watch.
Falling turtles ahoy! Pay attention.
Cyd
* It really is a credit to an author to have written a series of books that are socially and politcally relevant, full of unlikeable and completely disturbing content, and still totally compelling. (The Twilight books, for example, are two out of three, AND Collins is a better writer. Sorry, Stephenie.)
** The link is essentially a summary of the interview - there are other, more complete, versions.
*
* * * * *
 |
| Picture from The Hollywood News |
I'm not a huge fan of The Hunger Games trilogy - which is to say, I read and appreciated the books, but did not get particularly invested or Twilight-y about them. I think they've got some fascinating ideas and pertinent warnings, and that Suzanne Collins did an excellent job with the storytelling. They're also such a MASSIVE presence in the States that it was a bit of a surprise when the movie came out and I found that most of the people I know hadn't read and were even barely aware of the books, let alone the movie. (Most of my friends, to be realistic, probably fall into that 'between' zone that comes in the middle of 'teens'/'YA target audience' and 'older readers who've rediscovered/jumped on the YA bandwagon'.) After all the buzz and the generally good reviews that came with the opening weekend of the film, I decided to check it out. I wasn't really sure what to expect, as the books had been plenty disturbing on their own.* I headed over to a matinee with a friend who'd heard of but not read the books, and who asked (in his customary way) if I would 'sum up (the backstory) in a Tweet'. Surprisingly, I found that I could. This is one series that you don't need to have much context for (dystopian, autocratic government, yearly subjugation of population with fight-to-the-death reality TV) in order to follow along.
And I thought it was an excellent movie. (Although I thoroughly enjoyed this contrary review by someone who's opinion - and writing skills - I very much respect.) I liked the look of the majority of the movie, I thought several of the performances were excellent (although, Gale? Oh, dear. I hope Liam Hemsworth got at least some of the same acting genes and not just the 'bulk' genes that his brother got... fingers are crossed for the next movie). Even the shaky-cam didn't bother me after the first few minutes - I think I may have been desensitized by the Bourne films. Yes, it felt very true to the book, but in a way that acknowleged skillfully that a good movie adaptation is going to have to move and squeeze and cut some things in order to get the highly detailed world of the book onto the less-detailed (odd as that may sound) world on the big screen. No, it wasn't art, but there were some beautiful, effective shots; in part I think I appreciated the experience more because it was better than your typical summer popcorn flick. (I also think the music is pretty great.)
No, I didn't 'like' the movie, I wouldn't say I 'enjoyed' it - I was far too aware of the actual nature of the action and themes and content to enjoy it, and I am glad that I was engrossed in the experience without forgetting to be disturbed by it. I'm also glad that the movie wasn't more graphic - I read the books, after all, and I'm much 'happier' (if that's the right word) with my mental perception of the killings than I would be with seeing them acted out. Again, I was plenty disturbed already. Any more, and I would have shut off from all of it completely. I like that it wasn't glossy enough to lump me with the Romans cheering for the gladiators, and not 'gritty' or realistic enough to try to convince me it was reality TV or a documentary. For me, the balance was good, and I appreciated that.
However...
* * * * *
You ever have one of those moments when you realize you've been completely, stupidly naive? The older I get, the more they seem to happen - which in a way is a good thing, because it means you're really THINKING about things. I was shocked to hear, in a few different articles, about people who have been Tweeting their disappointment over the casting for a few of the parts in The Hunger Games; specifically, using black actors for the parts of Rue, Thresh, and Cinna. Bottom line, of course, is that these Tweeters are stupid. They're not complaining about lack of talent, they're complaining about skin color - and a few of them go on to sniffily try to justify their complaints by wondering if the movie production team actually read the book. The book, The Hunger Games, in which Rue and Thresh are described BY THE AUTHOR as having 'dark brown skin.' (Cinna, incidentally, is not given a biological - racial? Skin-based? description, so anyone complaining about the movie casting messing with the book is, again, just plain stupid.)
A few weeks ago I had a conversation with a friend of mine about an interview with Morgan Freeman that was making the rounds in which he says the key to ending racism is to 'stop talking about it'.** I agreed with him, and told my friend that I didn't think racism was such a problem anymore because the younger generation had grown up knowing better - or at least not knowing that it was an issue; that it WASN'T an issue because kids today didn't know to talk about it as if it were something that needed to be solved. People are people now, I argued - skin color is just a fact and not a point of concern. She disagreed with me. I was surprised then, but I'm not now. Now, I'm horrified and appalled and more than a little disgusted with those who think the movie was 'ruined' because the 'producer[s made] all the good characters black.'
First, I'm honestly disgusted that people would feel this way, regardless of how the characters were described in the book. (None of the Tweeters seem to be upset that blue-eyed English rose Jennifer Lawrence, described in the book with straight black hair and olive skin, which generally brings to mind Hispanic, Mediterranean, or Native American genotypes, was cast as Katniss - I'm not particularly upset, as I think she did a fine job with the part.) I don't understand how anyone can think that skin color affects talent or story-telling ability, I really don't. (In fact, I thought the main scene with Rue was the most emotionally effective - I cried - in the entire film. That little girl was fantastic.) Really, movie or book or job or guy sitting next to you on the bus - I don't understand how people can feel this way. I've understood that racism has to be taught; I'm shocked, but have to acknowledge that somehow, people are still teaching it. How is this possible?!?
 |
| A. Dor. A. Ble. |
So - I recommend the movie. I recommend the books. I'm going to go read them again, and think a little harder about what we don't want the world to turn out to be. I don't know what the answer is, the way to stop people teaching others to be racist - but at least now I'm more aware, now I will think about what I can do (since I've become a little less naive) - like blog, maybe - to try to make sure the world doesn't get stupider. Not on my watch.
Falling turtles ahoy! Pay attention.
Cyd
* It really is a credit to an author to have written a series of books that are socially and politcally relevant, full of unlikeable and completely disturbing content, and still totally compelling. (The Twilight books, for example, are two out of three, AND Collins is a better writer. Sorry, Stephenie.)
** The link is essentially a summary of the interview - there are other, more complete, versions.
*
March 28, 2012
Signs
I meant to post this video yesterday, and I forgot. Then I remembered.
Simple, direct communication (plus a few guts) - it's the way to go. Shakespeare's all very well and good, but when it comes to relationships let's just SAY IT, okay? (And have fun!)
(Linked via my new 'obsessing-over' blog: A Blog About Love. One of these days - ooh, Spring Break! - I'm going to sit down and go back through the entire blog - there are lots of posts, but they've actually only been writing since September - and take notes. AND APPLY THEM TO MY LIFE. Amen.)
*
Simple, direct communication (plus a few guts) - it's the way to go. Shakespeare's all very well and good, but when it comes to relationships let's just SAY IT, okay? (And have fun!)
(Linked via my new 'obsessing-over' blog: A Blog About Love. One of these days - ooh, Spring Break! - I'm going to sit down and go back through the entire blog - there are lots of posts, but they've actually only been writing since September - and take notes. AND APPLY THEM TO MY LIFE. Amen.)
*
March 25, 2012
Books and Blogs and (A and) B-Movies
I've been hearing and thinking about this quote quite a bit lately: 'Write the book you want to read.' And I think I have a related corollary: 'Read the books you wish you'd written.' There are so many books and so little time (relatively speaking) that we just can't afford to read things that are lazy, or stupid, or derivative, or just bad for us. I remember also hearing sometime ago that you should never read a book that's less than a year old - and while there are still some authors that I like and trust and whose work I'll buy the minute it's released, in general I think that waiting is a good strategy. That way there's time for hype to settle, and for something to pick up Amazon reviews (I'm also trying not to read things that have less than 50 generally positive Amazon reviews, as I do a whole lot of my reading through my Kindle these days - ooh, and if a novel that's only a couple of years old is free for the Kindle, there's generally a very good reason for that, with a few exceptions... TANGENT) and you can really make an informed decision about something you're about to commit a good chunk of your time too!
* * * * *
So I have this former student (well, she's not really my student, she's one of Phaid's students that I briefly taught and think is fabulous) who used to take a lot of teasing (PATRICK) for not believing in 'love'. It was really great, therefore, to see her post a link to A BLOG ABOUT LOVE: A Love Story with the preface: 'THIS. It's real, it happens, and I want my own.' She happens to be gorgeous, smart, talented, funny (obviously, we have a lot in common) and we have a similar taste in websites (particularly fashion commentary) so I figured this would be something extraordinary... AND IT IS. And she's absolutely right. That's what I want, too. (Kristen, if I stumble across any potential British candidates I will certainly send them your way - and if you run across any applicable older men let me know, -K-?)
* * * * *
I saw The Best Exotic Marigold Hotel, which was charming and delightful, with my friend Gemma last night, who is also charming and delightful. I'm fairly sure we were the two youngest people in the audience. (Also, The Decoy Bride, starring Kelly Macdonald and David Tennant, is not nearly as terrible as the critics made it out to be. It's not particularly good, but it's not horrific, either. And there are some good one-liners. And the scenery's great. And David Tennant.)
* * * * *
I wouldn't mind a good sheep-stealing raid every now and then, myself. (Sorry. You'll just have to watch the film.)
*
* * * * *
So I have this former student (well, she's not really my student, she's one of Phaid's students that I briefly taught and think is fabulous) who used to take a lot of teasing (PATRICK) for not believing in 'love'. It was really great, therefore, to see her post a link to A BLOG ABOUT LOVE: A Love Story with the preface: 'THIS. It's real, it happens, and I want my own.' She happens to be gorgeous, smart, talented, funny (obviously, we have a lot in common) and we have a similar taste in websites (particularly fashion commentary) so I figured this would be something extraordinary... AND IT IS. And she's absolutely right. That's what I want, too. (Kristen, if I stumble across any potential British candidates I will certainly send them your way - and if you run across any applicable older men let me know, -K-?)
* * * * *
I saw The Best Exotic Marigold Hotel, which was charming and delightful, with my friend Gemma last night, who is also charming and delightful. I'm fairly sure we were the two youngest people in the audience. (Also, The Decoy Bride, starring Kelly Macdonald and David Tennant, is not nearly as terrible as the critics made it out to be. It's not particularly good, but it's not horrific, either. And there are some good one-liners. And the scenery's great. And David Tennant.)
* * * * *
I wouldn't mind a good sheep-stealing raid every now and then, myself. (Sorry. You'll just have to watch the film.)
*
March 21, 2012
Ghent Over Here
Okay, I'm tired. That's my only excuse for such a terribly punny post title. Sorry. (I'm not changing it.)
It really is awesome to be able to say: 'Oh, I'm sorry I missed it. I was at a conference in Belgium.' BOOM. The academic community is a very funny place - the organizers were thrilled that around 200 people signed up for the dramaturgy conference, and many of those were intelligentsia who had actually published books on dramaturgy and theatre. The rest of us plebes in attendance were the ones who had purchased their books. (I think I may have made two of the speaker's months - maybe years - when I asked them to sign the book they had written. It was pretty funny, actually, how flattered they were. Now I just have to actually read the book!) The relative sense of things gets all out of whack in academics, as well - one of the speakers (the opening speaker, actually) is a noted long-standing expert on theatre theory, and all the other speakers clearly held him in awe - nodding to him when they referenced one of his works in their presentations, making weak jokes in his direction, generally gushing with big eyes and straight faces. The flip side is that he's actually one of my lecturers here in my program(me) at Kent, and He. Makes. Me. Crazy. SO MAD, every seminar. Such a big-wig 'expert', and such a lousy teacher! I'll just say it. I don't care if his teaching style is 'very French'; contradicting yourself regularly, asking a question and then not allowing students to answer it, forgetting to listen to actual contributions while supposedly 'encouraging' discussion - none of these are effective methods for running a stimulating classroom. The Germans have got it going on - Hans-Thies Lehmann, author of 'Postdramatic Theatre' and another recognized Very Big Theatre Deal, is ALSO a phenomenal lecturer/seminar leader. The French (name withheld, since he is in fact a very nice person) need to Step. It. Up.
Oh, wow, that was a nice little solar flare of a tangent - in other news, today was the last seminar of my program(me). It's all research and performance projects from here on out!
Anway, Ghent. Apparently it's 'Gent' in Belgium - I have no idea where the extra 'h' (or 'haitch', if you're British) came from. Possibly the same place as the extra 'i' in aluminium and the 'ta' in disorientated. Gent is a charming little city on a river with a castle, several cathedrals, a couple of universities, and a remarkable disinclination to feel claustrophobic even though the buildings are all piled on top of each other. It might have something to do with the fact that every house and shop is a painted a different color/uses completely separate decorating materials - the British have a tendency to make things look the same, but the Flemish seem to be pretty defiant about changing it all up.
Lots of houseboats on the canals, and it was interesting to think about living on one. For about five minutes, anyway.
The conference was fine - lots of very smart people talking about theatre, so that's always fun. Had a great time with the crew:
Thursday was just beautiful, so we went to the main 'square' to hang out with a few friends.
The food was a trip (and an intercultural experience, if you will):
And there was the castle: Gravensteen, the Castle of the Counts. (Dun, dun dunnnnnnn!)
And in an effort to be really cultural, instead of just touristy-cultural, I stopped by the Fine Arts Museum before getting on my train to London. Lovely, imposing, bristling with art and culture...
... and all I really saw was the TARDIS in tile on the floor of the front entryway. Honestly, how was anything inside supposed to top THAT?!?
As you can clearly see, we love Ghent/Gent. (I will NOT forget the chocolate next time.)
It really is awesome to be able to say: 'Oh, I'm sorry I missed it. I was at a conference in Belgium.' BOOM. The academic community is a very funny place - the organizers were thrilled that around 200 people signed up for the dramaturgy conference, and many of those were intelligentsia who had actually published books on dramaturgy and theatre. The rest of us plebes in attendance were the ones who had purchased their books. (I think I may have made two of the speaker's months - maybe years - when I asked them to sign the book they had written. It was pretty funny, actually, how flattered they were. Now I just have to actually read the book!) The relative sense of things gets all out of whack in academics, as well - one of the speakers (the opening speaker, actually) is a noted long-standing expert on theatre theory, and all the other speakers clearly held him in awe - nodding to him when they referenced one of his works in their presentations, making weak jokes in his direction, generally gushing with big eyes and straight faces. The flip side is that he's actually one of my lecturers here in my program(me) at Kent, and He. Makes. Me. Crazy. SO MAD, every seminar. Such a big-wig 'expert', and such a lousy teacher! I'll just say it. I don't care if his teaching style is 'very French'; contradicting yourself regularly, asking a question and then not allowing students to answer it, forgetting to listen to actual contributions while supposedly 'encouraging' discussion - none of these are effective methods for running a stimulating classroom. The Germans have got it going on - Hans-Thies Lehmann, author of 'Postdramatic Theatre' and another recognized Very Big Theatre Deal, is ALSO a phenomenal lecturer/seminar leader. The French (name withheld, since he is in fact a very nice person) need to Step. It. Up.
Oh, wow, that was a nice little solar flare of a tangent - in other news, today was the last seminar of my program(me). It's all research and performance projects from here on out!
Anway, Ghent. Apparently it's 'Gent' in Belgium - I have no idea where the extra 'h' (or 'haitch', if you're British) came from. Possibly the same place as the extra 'i' in aluminium and the 'ta' in disorientated. Gent is a charming little city on a river with a castle, several cathedrals, a couple of universities, and a remarkable disinclination to feel claustrophobic even though the buildings are all piled on top of each other. It might have something to do with the fact that every house and shop is a painted a different color/uses completely separate decorating materials - the British have a tendency to make things look the same, but the Flemish seem to be pretty defiant about changing it all up.
Lots of houseboats on the canals, and it was interesting to think about living on one. For about five minutes, anyway.
The conference was fine - lots of very smart people talking about theatre, so that's always fun. Had a great time with the crew:
 |
| Helen, part of our original Kent gang before she moved away for a semester in Gent; Phil the Sage; and the lovely Phoebe (just ask her about the 40 Belgian truckers and chips on the ferry. I dare you). |
Thursday was just beautiful, so we went to the main 'square' to hang out with a few friends.
 |
| So. Many. People. Evidently they don't see the sun in Belgium much more than they do in England! |
The food was a trip (and an intercultural experience, if you will):
 |
| This Italian pizza place specialized in Indian food with an extensive buffet. I didn't know that was an option. (At least the pizza was tasty!) |
 |
| I forgot to get myself some Belgian chocolates, but I managed the Belgian chocolate mousse! |
 |
| The smallest bar in Ghent - yes, that's the whole thing. FYI. (I had some really salad-y mint tea.) |
And there was the castle: Gravensteen, the Castle of the Counts. (Dun, dun dunnnnnnn!)
 |
| Welcome. Come on in. So homey. |
 |
| 'Well, we got the place for the view...' Towers and roofs and more towers, oh my! |
And in an effort to be really cultural, instead of just touristy-cultural, I stopped by the Fine Arts Museum before getting on my train to London. Lovely, imposing, bristling with art and culture...
... and all I really saw was the TARDIS in tile on the floor of the front entryway. Honestly, how was anything inside supposed to top THAT?!?
 |
| I am, symbolically, stepping inside. The TARDIS, not the art museum. |
As you can clearly see, we love Ghent/Gent. (I will NOT forget the chocolate next time.)
March 20, 2012
Sing With Me
Ever wondered what it's like to sing in the Canterbury Cathedral? Well, wonder no more! I provide you with video-on-the-spot snippets from our concert on March 10!
First up is the orchestra, warming the room, bringing order out of chaos (or so says Haydn. Go with it).
The next one is the most dramatic moment in musical literature EVER WRITTEN, which is awesome, and you can hear me pretty well (for which I apologize).
Okay, so as it turns out you can't hear me at all, because blogger wouldn't let me upload the actual video. But this is just like what you would have heard and seen, except that our conductor is female and we were singing in English and it was the Cathedral and not a rehearsal room. Also, all the altos were behind me, so the balance was a little strange. But other than that - just the same!
Let's see if you can hear a little of the soprano...
I don't actually know what that clicking sound was. My pacemaker, maybe.
Okay, here's some friends (orchestra types) hanging out in the green room (otherwise known as 'The Crypt' because it's, well, a crypt) before the performance:
I kept a close eye on the basses - we were standing on what seemed like a very rickety structure, and from that high up you definitely wanted to know who to aim for landing on should the choir take a tumble.
Seriously, Haydn's Creation is about as much fun as you can have with classical choral music. And if you can arrange to sing it in an 800-year-plus-old building (I took the tour, I forgot already), so much the better.
*
First up is the orchestra, warming the room, bringing order out of chaos (or so says Haydn. Go with it).
The next one is the most dramatic moment in musical literature EVER WRITTEN, which is awesome, and you can hear me pretty well (for which I apologize).
Okay, so as it turns out you can't hear me at all, because blogger wouldn't let me upload the actual video. But this is just like what you would have heard and seen, except that our conductor is female and we were singing in English and it was the Cathedral and not a rehearsal room. Also, all the altos were behind me, so the balance was a little strange. But other than that - just the same!
Let's see if you can hear a little of the soprano...
I don't actually know what that clicking sound was. My pacemaker, maybe.
Okay, here's some friends (orchestra types) hanging out in the green room (otherwise known as 'The Crypt' because it's, well, a crypt) before the performance:
 |
| Gemma on basson, Chris on viola(? I think?), and me being very hard on the vocal cords. |
I kept a close eye on the basses - we were standing on what seemed like a very rickety structure, and from that high up you definitely wanted to know who to aim for landing on should the choir take a tumble.
 |
| Right there in the corner? That's called 'context'. |
Seriously, Haydn's Creation is about as much fun as you can have with classical choral music. And if you can arrange to sing it in an 800-year-plus-old building (I took the tour, I forgot already), so much the better.
*
March 05, 2012
Sunday Snippet(s)
Last week (a week ago yesterday) was Ward Conference, and there were some good thoughts I wanted to share:
From the Stake President - The difference between being 'good' and being 'excellent' is in the ability to interpret the promptings of the Spirit, and to follow the guidance the Lord sends. We can generally be good and do good things, but when we really tune in and pay close attention to the direction the Lord sends, we can be excellent and do excellent things.
From the Stake President 2 - We must live now as they do in the Celestial Kingdom so that we will fit in when the time comes. Serve others not to get into the Kingdom, but to stay happily once you arrive.
We had a good day yesterday, as well (except for the outbreak of gangrene in my Sunday School class, but we got through it.) (Don't ask.) In Sacrament Meeting (I played - at least I was ready!) I waited for the 'push' to go up and bear my testimony... and then it occurred to me that I really didn't need to wait. I could bear my testimony whether driven to it or not, and it might be even better if I didn't wait. So I went.
The girl who spoke after me had a great way of putting things: she quoted Doctrine and Covenants 78:19 (“And he who receiveth all things with thankfulness shall be made glorious; and the things of this earth shall be added unto him, even an hundred fold, yea, more.”) and then added, 'Psst... I want to be glorious. Thanks, God!' She went on to say that while she was thankful for all her blessings, she was also thankful for the things that aren't so good because those are indications that the Lord trusts her to change and improve the not-so-good parts, to endure with faith, and to see it all through to something better.
And also to do Family History.
(I've got to get on that.)
And then I went home and watched Doctor Who, read my lesson for next week, and worked on my presentation for this week's seminar. Not bad.
*
From the Stake President - The difference between being 'good' and being 'excellent' is in the ability to interpret the promptings of the Spirit, and to follow the guidance the Lord sends. We can generally be good and do good things, but when we really tune in and pay close attention to the direction the Lord sends, we can be excellent and do excellent things.
BE EXCELLENT.
 |
| (Like I was going to miss a chance to post this. Please.) |
From the Stake President 2 - We must live now as they do in the Celestial Kingdom so that we will fit in when the time comes. Serve others not to get into the Kingdom, but to stay happily once you arrive.
We had a good day yesterday, as well (except for the outbreak of gangrene in my Sunday School class, but we got through it.) (Don't ask.) In Sacrament Meeting (I played - at least I was ready!) I waited for the 'push' to go up and bear my testimony... and then it occurred to me that I really didn't need to wait. I could bear my testimony whether driven to it or not, and it might be even better if I didn't wait. So I went.
The girl who spoke after me had a great way of putting things: she quoted Doctrine and Covenants 78:19 (“And he who receiveth all things with thankfulness shall be made glorious; and the things of this earth shall be added unto him, even an hundred fold, yea, more.”) and then added, 'Psst... I want to be glorious. Thanks, God!' She went on to say that while she was thankful for all her blessings, she was also thankful for the things that aren't so good because those are indications that the Lord trusts her to change and improve the not-so-good parts, to endure with faith, and to see it all through to something better.
And also to do Family History.
(I've got to get on that.)
And then I went home and watched Doctor Who, read my lesson for next week, and worked on my presentation for this week's seminar. Not bad.
*
March 03, 2012
Downton Abbey Rap
I couldn't think of a clever post title, and really, what it is says it all. I never thought I'd be linking a rap song here!
From the artist's website:
'Downton Abbey is the kind of thing that you hear about, and you’re all like, “That sounds terrible.” And then even one of your best friends won’t shut up about it, and then you have to fly to Seattle and see that the first season is only $9.99 on iTunes (God bless you PBS), and you watch it on the plane, and get completely obsessed with it. And then you’re calling your friend and saying things like “I’m at the part where Matthew Crawley is investigating the entail for Lord Grantham, and the Dowager Countess finds out about it,” and you realize you’re whispering because honestly, what the HELL are you even saying? Anyway, enjoy it.'
Good times.
From the artist's website:
'Downton Abbey is the kind of thing that you hear about, and you’re all like, “That sounds terrible.” And then even one of your best friends won’t shut up about it, and then you have to fly to Seattle and see that the first season is only $9.99 on iTunes (God bless you PBS), and you watch it on the plane, and get completely obsessed with it. And then you’re calling your friend and saying things like “I’m at the part where Matthew Crawley is investigating the entail for Lord Grantham, and the Dowager Countess finds out about it,” and you realize you’re whispering because honestly, what the HELL are you even saying? Anyway, enjoy it.'
Good times.
February 27, 2012
Nerd Alert
Frazz comic found here
February 17, 2012
Recents
News for the week: I auditioned for parts in various radio plays this week, and so far I've been cast in two different shows. In one I have two parts - I'm a completely psycho villain lady (kind of a no-brainer - my read for this was TOTALLY nuts) as well as a rookie-cop/novice vampire hunter (from somewhere in the US South, as apparently the directors liked the accent I pulled out on a whim). In the other I'm 'normal', just someone who works for a government agency that censors movies (pretty much all of them). Good times. I love radio plays, as there is minimal rehearsal time and a performance that lives forever... Evidently the plays are part of a contest, so it'll be fun to see how we do!
* * * * *
SO. CUTE. I went over to the table to find out how to get one, and walked away having agreed to pay a small monthly contribution for the care and protection of birds and tigers and rainforests and all kinds of other nature-y things. The last time I got a stuffed animal for signing up for something hasn't worked out so well - it was my first credit card (so young, so naive). I'm hoping that the much cuter tiger doesn't turn out to be nearly so dangerous. He should have a name. Anybody got any ideas? What does he look like to you?
* * * * *
I joined the RSPB. I couldn't help it, I was seduced into it by this:
SO. CUTE. I went over to the table to find out how to get one, and walked away having agreed to pay a small monthly contribution for the care and protection of birds and tigers and rainforests and all kinds of other nature-y things. The last time I got a stuffed animal for signing up for something hasn't worked out so well - it was my first credit card (so young, so naive). I'm hoping that the much cuter tiger doesn't turn out to be nearly so dangerous. He should have a name. Anybody got any ideas? What does he look like to you?
Besides, CUTE, that is.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)