Full Head Friday

I should be writing, but my mind has been stuffed full of thoughts, making it difficult to concentrate on the moon (a major feature in my new book). So here they are:

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
I hate raking leaves. I have three fabulous maples in my back yard, and they carry a ton of leaves and drop them late. For three or four weeks in a row, we have to cart the equivalent of a pile ten feet long and three-to-four feet high to the front of the house for pickup. And every time I see one flutter past my window, I growl.

This fall has been uncharacteristically gorgeous, though. For several years we had whatever conditions mean uniformly yellow or brown leaves, and that's it. This year the trees are flaming orange and red and muted shades in between, and the weather has been lovely this week. I get happy every time I go out of the house.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
That happiness is short-lived, however. As much as I love fall (my favorite season), it's accompanied by a growing dread as the days get shorter and shorter. I don't suffer from true seasonal affective disorder, but my mood is definitely suppressed during the winter. I hope that will be different this year, since I won't be driving home from work in the dark.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Big football game this weekend! HUGE! There are currently two undefeated teams in the NFL right now, the Indianapolis Colts and the Chicago Bears. The team right behind them with only one loss is the New England Patriots, and they play both the Colts and the Bears in the next four weeks. Colts this Sunday night, a huge rivalry that has peppered the Super Bowl winning seasons of the Patriots. I like Peyton Manning a lot--he and Tom Brady are two of the classiest guys in the league, and they are both extremely talented. Which means this will be a fabulous game. I can't wait!

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
I started watching Veronica Mars on DVD. I'm two-thirds of the way through the first season, and I really like it. But it's weird. Usually when I like something this much, I don't see the flaws. I'm all about the pleasure of watching. Also, when I see as many flaws as I saw in the beginning of the season, I don't like a show as much as I do this one.

Maybe the first episode set me up with expectations that were less fulfilled as the season went on. For example, the show began with a cliche that I HATE: that she's never getting married, that the people you love always let you down. Wah wah wah. I thought the date rape was just going too far. She'd had enough piled on her, and that doesn't mesh with everything else. Maybe when they reveal who did it I'll feel differently, but so far, it seems like just another way for her to feel sorry for herself in voiceover/flashback.

I don't dislike those flashbacks, but I find it impossible to reconcile the Veronica Before The World Caved In with the Veronica of the present. She was a follower, mild, naive, and apparently blind to what assholes her friends were until they became assholes to her. At which point she became fearless, strong, and cynical. I understand the logic of the progression, but there's still too much disconnect for me.

The last thing I don't like is that every time she believes in someone, they turn out to be evil. There's Troy--sweet, funny, immune to peer pressure, afraid of her dad--and then suddenly he's 100% bad without warning. Fabulous Veronica figures it out, foils him, and never mentions or thinks about him again. Then we have her lecherous history teacher, a lovelorn client who's really Russian mafia...it's a never-ending parade of people out to strip her of hope forever.

The reason why it's okay is because it DOESN'T strip her of hope, not completely. She manages to hold on to it somewhere, even as her shell hardens and cracks repeatedly.

So that's enough of what I DON'T like. More than enough, because I like it enough to stay up to 1:00 a.m. three nights in a row watching it. I love Veronica's fearlessness and smarts and her ability to make friends with a very diverse group of people. I love Leo and Keith Mars and Weevil and Wallace and the mysteries and (oh, wait, one more thing--it really, really bugs me that her mother let her go out with Duncan, maybe have sex with him [she doesn't know, for sure, that they never did], when he could be her BROTHER).

Interestingly, my favorite character has become Logan. He was such a dick in the first few episodes, and they've slowly shown him to be very complex. Somehow, even with a totally cliched background (spoiled rich kid, physically abused, probably ignored by his mother, taunted by his sister, blah blah blah), he's managed to be very sympathetic. I give full credit to Jason Dohring, because even though the writing has to be good, the actor has to sell it. I really fell for him when he broke down in Veronica's arms in the hotel where he thought his mother had been staying after her "death."

So, the best thing about this show? I have 32 more episodes to watch!

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Speaking of shows that give me pleasure...

Supernatural was a bit of a disappointment last night. Surprisingly, it wasn't Jo who disappointed me. I liked the way she acquitted herself, and alone, I like her. I think the relationship drawn between her and Dean is more sibling-ish than romantic-tension-y, though, which made what could have been the best line of the show, "Should have cleaned the pipes," kind of stupid. There'd been no indication before that that she turned him on. No tension between them in the writing or in the chemistry between actors. So I'll be really happy if the writers don't take things in that direction.

But my biggest complaint is that in inserting Jo into the dynamic, they obliterated their strengths, the things that make this show so damned compelling. Sam was marginalized, and the brother-brother relationship totally ignored. I'm not saying I want them to address the demon storyline every week, not at all. I just want more interaction between Sam and Dean. More of the interplay of emotion and expression. Don't send Sam offscreen for ten minutes while Dean and Jo crawl through the walls. Give me:

"So I'm a freak now?"
"Dude, you've always been a freak."

I didn't buy the episode ending very well, either. If Ellen broke with John, what, 18 years ago, when her husband was killed, why did she call him four months before he died, acting like John not talking to her was on his side? She's all, "like father, like sons," and I can understand her fear for her daughter, but that doesn't explain why Jo would now be disgusted with Dean and Sam. It was HER plan to be bait, and blaming them for their father's mistake is just stupid.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Amber Quill Press has posted their October bestsellers, and every one of them contained male/male relationships or menage situations. I've long heard through the grapevine that those are the best sellers at other publishers, as well, and that the readership is overwhelmingly straight female.

Google Alerts recently added blog alerts, and my Supernatural alerts are full of "Wincest" fan fiction. You don't have to stray far to find Lex/Clark and other slash fiction, either (those are the two that connect to my own interests, so I'm not going to comment on anything else).

I am not into gay erotica at all, and I don't care to read or see details of male/male sexuality in general. But one of the powerful and evocative images for me in the last year was the scene in Brokeback Mountain where Ennis dragged Jack around the corner and kissed him.

I have a kind of half-baked theory about this, and I don't think the attraction for women is truly sexual, no matter how we present our reactions to it. For two decades (maybe longer, I don't know, I'm only 35 *g*) our society acted like men don't feel. They don't hug, they don't tell their kids they love them, they don't want to talk about emotions or relationships, and when they HAVE emotions and relationships, they are different from the same emotions and relationships from the woman's perspective.

I say bullshit, and it looks to me like a helluva lot of creative people in my generation are saying the same thing. Lex and Clark had extremely strong feelings for each other, as do Sam and Dean. They aren't sexual feelings, but they are extremely powerful. Exploration of the relationship between Ennis and Jack in Brokeback Mountain almost always talks about how the story was about the love they felt for each other, not the physical desire.

I think these powerful emotions are as strong to us as sexual desire is. They probably just stimulate the same hormones, but what we end up doing is equating the two, which is what leads to the slash fanfic and fantasizing as a more concrete way to get the fix. It's like...the smell of chocolate makes us feel good. Some people would be satisfied to just keep smelling it (like I'm satisfied to just see Sam and Dean be brotherly). Others would HAVE to taste it, and maybe add liquor to it, to increase the rush (or write sexual stories about the brothers).

I'm generalizing, and even if I'm somewhat right, I'm sure it can't apply to everyone. But I like my theory, and I'll be pleased if those-who-strive-to-entertain-us will give us more of the same.

NaNo Progress, Day 2

Well, apparently NaNoers have crashed Zokutou, so I have no progress bar. But day one I did 2926 and today I did 3115, so I'm not only on track to make the 50K, I'm on track to finish the book.

Go me!

And go, everyone else, whether you've gotten 15 or 1500 words. You're working hard, and that's all that matters!

I Don’t Do Dishes On Wednesday

When I first quit my day job to write full time, I was determined to have a set schedule to make sure everything got addressed. It worked pretty well during the summer, but now that we have so many more demands on our minutes, it all went to hell.

My plan was always to fit in (in no particular order):

Cleaning
Exercise
Writing
Family stuff
Marketing

My reality has been…inconsistent, to say the least. I’ve been lamenting my failure. Especially when it means the house is a hellhole and I have to spend all day Sunday cleaning it.

But I realized yesterday morning that it’s not as bad as it seems. Sure, I let the house go here and there. But that’s just because I hate cleaning, and I hate even more losing time I should be writing or relaxing to cleaning. And okay, I haven’t kept up my daily walking regimen. I didn’t walk Tuesday. Or today. In fact, I didn’t walk at all last week. But I haven’t given up totally, which is my normal MO.

The kids’ schedules dictate a lot. For example, I DO consistently do dishes all week. Except on Wednesdays. Every other day, I do them between putting kid #2 on the bus and putting kid #1 on the bus. On Wednesdays, #1 has to be at school early, which means I don’t have time for dishes, which means I don’t bother doing them when I get home. Because that’s writing time.

See? Schedule. :)

I am always telling writers that they need to find the methods that work best for them, which often means trying a lot of things, learning others’ methods, etc. So what I should do is embrace the chaos in my schedule and work around it, keeping the most important thing in mind:

Protect the writing time.

Hey, Browncoats! Get Over It

Let me preface by saying I am a dedicated Browncoat. I listen to Firefly Talk and The Signal podcasts every week. I bought nine copies of the DVD and gave them to everyone I could for Christmas last year. I talk about Firefly INCESSANTLY and constantly try to convert people who have yet to watch the TV show or the movie. I care. A lot. And I want another movie, at minimum.

I can't find much in the news about this; it's pretty much rehashing of the same six lines of text. Apparently, Universal, the movie studio who owns the rights to all things Serenity, has issued cease and desist orders to certain fans who are making money off of unlicensed merchandise. The report is that they have also demanded $9,000 in license fees from one party. The fans are, also apparently, WAY up in arms against Universal's "evil" act.

The main reason for the outcry is because Universal encouraged grassroots marketing/viral marketing when the movie came out last summer. Basically, that means they wanted fans to talk about it to non-fans and get them to see the movie. It failed. The movie made less worldwide than its very small budget of $39 million. A year later, it remains hugely popular among the cult (i.e. Browncoats) and we are constantly trying to increase said fanbase in an effort to get a sequel. The whiners are now saying Universal is slapping us in the face for doing what they told us to do.

But you know what? The whiners are wrong.

First, making money off of someone else's property is illegal*. Universal is not only way within their rights to stop it, they are OBLIGATED to do so. Part of trademark law is that you have to defend your trademark or risk losing it. There are DOZENS of ways fans have furthered the cause without financial gain, so crying that this is unfair because they are only marketing Universal's property is ridiculous. People buy shirts that say "Nike" and "Tommy Hilfiger" all over them and never ask for a marketing discount. So just quitcher bitchin.

Also, it should (and has) occur to people that it's a great sign that Universal feels this property is worth defending. It could just be because QMx officially licensed some Serenity products that Universal woke up to the possibility that more money could be made off this investment that failed, and in order to be able to do that, they have to make an effort to eliminate the unlicensed merchandise. But it could also be that they are seeing that the fanbase is growing, and the potential for a successful sequel is growing with it.

So instead of being childish whiners, let's rejoice.

*Please note that I am not a trademark attorney, my understanding of this stuff is rudimentary, and there's a possibility I'm not completely accurate.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Thank you to Tom, who provided this link with much more information. What I said stands regarding the outcry, but it sounds like the attorneys were a bit overzealous. I'm glad it's all resolved positively!

Creeeepy

I'm handing out Halloween candy--actually on Halloween for the first time in 8 years, thanks to Pennsylvania's whacked theories about Halloween--and something creeepy just happened.

My headstone shrieked.

Thunder crashed, lights flashed, the faux stone and the red-eyed skeleton popped out, accompanied by shrill screams.

Not the first time tonight, of course. But this time...

...there was no one on my doorstep.

The Possibility in Fantasy

There are all kinds of celebrity nowadays, and I find it very exciting. Not because I want to be a celebrity--I really, really don't--but because the ease and variety of the path to becoming one makes my greatest fantasies possible.

Well, okay, not the one where Matthew McConaughey, Orlando Bloom, and Nathan Fillion all fight over who gets me. That one is pretty unlikely. Especially 'cause of the whole "happily married" thing.

But the wall between "regular person" and "celebrity" is virtually non-existent. Sure, there are distasteful ways to become a celebrity. You can be rich and bored enough to do crazy things to get attention and attract cameras. You can go on a reality show to display your most negative traits to the world so later you can be recognized in Wal-Mart. But more than ever, regular people have opportunities to showcase their talents and their personalities to the world.

Celebrity is wider-ranging than it used to be. Now it's not just the people whose faces are on the screen, the "beautiful people." It's also the ones who put them there--writers and directors like Joss Whedon and JJ Abrams and Eric Kripke--and even the fans who love them.

Take the Harry Potter fandom. It's huge, and there are tons of web sites dedicated to discussing and disseminating information about the books and movies. Last year, JK Rowling invited the leaders of the top two sites, The Leaky Cauldron and MuggleNet, to interview her in her home the day after the release of Harry Potter and the Half-Blood Prince. What followed was an amazing year. PotterCast and MuggleCast became two of the top podcasts, winning awards and launching teenage boys from Kansas and young mothers in Ohio to stardom. They attended the premiere of Goblet of Fire in New York last winter, and in a three-month span this year did an SRO live podcast in Las Vegas, attended the reading/Q&A of JK Rowling, Stephen King, and John Irving in New York city, won Podcast Awards in LA, and visited the set of Order of the Phoenix in the UK. Every live podcast they do starts with fifteen minutes of screaming, cheering fans who are as excited to see them as they would be to see Dan Radcliffe and Emma Watson. These are just regular people doing something they love and being hugely rewarded for it.

And that's why I think some of my fantasies are possible. Like the one where my awesome agent, who has some solid Hollywood connections, brings Orlando Bloom to the RWA Readers for Life Literacy Autographing to pick me up and go to dinner where we'll discuss his interest in making a movie of my book, Soul of the Dragon.

Or the one where Jensen Ackles gets a mortgage from Countrywide in Dallas. My brother works there, and occasionally reads this blog, so he'll know about my interest in the very talented actor from the TV show Supernatural and the upcoming indie film Ten Inch Hero, and when his boss asks him to be the last-minute fourth in a round of golf with Jensen and his father, Andy will tell Jensen about my books, which will of course lead to Jensen (and Jared Padalecki, who's hanging out with him at home while they're on haitus) meeting me for dinner when I fly down to visit my brother and his wife. He'd be perfect for the role of the hero in my new book, which would also make a great movie.

See how possible that is?

Regression

I recently caught a glimpse of an essay that complained about Supernatural being the anti-Buffy, and basically a regression from strong female roles. It discussed that the only strong woman on season one was evil, and the two "good girls" were murdered early on and never replaced.

This kind of resonated with me, because lately the TV shows I've liked (since Alias was canceled, anyway), I've liked because of the men and not the women, and I've felt guilty about it. I worship Joss Whedon, who is all about the strong female characters and does them damned well. So liking Supernatural, after I skimmed this essay, made me feel disloyal to both my gender and a writer I respect and adore and aspire to be like (though I'll never come close to his wit).

I've been thinking about this a lot, and I've decided it's okay to like Supernatural the way it is. And not just because it's my favorite show and I hate feeling guilty.

First, they have added a strong female role, small though the part may be. There is evidence that another female character may be getting similar treatment (her debut was perfect), though I don't like her and don't want her to have a much bigger role in the show.

Also, I don't think EVERYTHING in life has to address every issue. Supernatural isn't about women and their roles in demon-hunting society. It's about two brothers and the journey they are on. The relationship between Sam and Dean is most important, and the biggest influence on them (besides their father) has been the absence of a strong woman in their lives. There's nothing wrong with their dynamic. It hasn't caused them to subjugate women, or dismiss them, or treat them poorly.

Okay, that last line is open to interpretation. Early in season one, Dean seemed to be a player. While Sam mourned his girlfriend's death, Dean encouraged him to get laid. He flirts with a certain type of woman--the type that seems open to short, meaningless encounters. He doesn't think a woman has a place in his life.

But things aren't that simple. When Sam has an interest in Sarah, Dean encourages him to develop it; and not just to have sex with her. Then we see that Dean had a girlfriend, loved her, confessed all to her--and was badly burned when she freaked out. He still has feelings for her, but it's clear that even though she believes him now, she can't live his kind of life.

See? Complexity.

I am thrilled when a show contains a heroine like Sydney Bristow or Zoe Washburn, a tough, powerful, confident, emotional woman. But not every show needs one.

Miss Sunny...Idiot?

It seems many topics on blogs I frequent have recently focused on the darker side of humanity on many different levels. I've been hopping all over, spreading my sunny naivete, giving tons of credit to my fellow humans, and I started to wonder if I'm just being an idiot.

Open any newspaper, turn on the TV...heck, walk across the street or drive down the highway, and there is evidence that we live in a world of mean, nasty, selfish, horrible people. I constantly contend that they are the loud minority, that most people are good and open-minded and caring and well-behaved. I also contended recently that people are no more vicious and horrible than they ever were, we just have more forums for them to be that way.

But am I wrong?

After I posted on Erica Orloff's blog, I went out, and no less than three people in 15 minutes displayed the kind of behavior that makes humans look like dirtbags. I started wondering if I'm totally wrong, and people like us are the real minority. Then Erica disagreed with me that people are just as vitriolic in person as they are on the Internet, and I'm not sure she's wrong. I want her to be. Desperately. But she knows more people than I do, and a much wider variety of people, as well. And just because I haven't SEEN it doesn't mean it's not real.

I started thinking about that, too. I don't see the viciousness of which she speaks, on the Internet, but I'm not LOOKING. Part of it is seeking people who are of a like mind as myself, and part of is it subconscious avoidance of more public realms where such things are displayed. Yet even as I admit I could be sheltering myself and therefore shading my viewpoint...well, it doesn't mean they're not a minority, does it? I mean, we have 300 million people in this country as of last Tuesday. Ann Coulter is only one person. We don't even have a majority population on the Internet yet (I think), and I still believe that if we could quantify the vicious idiots, we'd find they are a very tiny percentage of the population.

Erica says she has never in her life witnessed in-person vitriol like she sees on the Internet. I say the Internet just gives those people a forum for being vitriolic and they would be anyway. Can we both be right?

And why is it so important for me to believe what I believe? To deny that the Internet is making Americans as a group be worse people than they used to be? Is it because I love the Internet so much, and what it's given me, and I don't want it to be considered "bad"? So what if it is? It doesn't change the benefit I've gotten from it, and it's certainly not going to be taken away from me. Maybe I should just admit that Erica and others are right, and join in the despair and gloominess that knowledge gives us all.

Except I can't. I can't live that way. I have to believe the better of people as a whole. I think I have a fundamental belief that the more credence we give to negativity, the more power it has over us. In my sunny, idiotic way, I'm trying to balance that by spreading posts of hope and joy.

The bad gets enough air time. I just want to give some to the good.

My Favorite Day

For a really long time, Thursday has been my favorite day of the week.

Way back in the 80s, when I was in junior high and high school, was the advent of Must See TV, starting with The Cosby Show. It was family night--we'd sit and watch TV together, eating popcorn and passing around hand towels to wipe our buttery fingers.

In college my sophmore year, I had early classes on Tuesday and Thursday, but spent many a Thursday afternoon napping in the sun with my now-husband.

Once I started working, Thursday was my favorite day in every job because it was the quietest. No matter which company I worked for, it was the day we got the fewest calls and I got the most other work done.

Now I've come full circle, and Thursday is once again TV night:

That NOSE!

As I've been watching TV this fall, I've had a very hard time with noses. I'm pretty sure there are more than these five, but these are the ones I can remember.

There seems to be an epidemic of possible nose jobs gone bad. I say "gone bad" in the sense that they have had too much stripped from the sides, creating a pinched, "ew-I-don't-want-to-smell-THAT" look. At rest, the upper lip is pulled upward, as well, creating a sneer I don't think is intentional.

These still photos don't do the phenomenon justice, but if you watch Heroes, The Nine, or Six Degrees, you can see what I mean, as the actors attempt to emote around their noses. They all appear whiny and/or fretful at all times, no matter what emotion is in their eyes.

None of these are bad actors, and they're considered some of the "beautiful people." And obviously, I don't know whether they've actually had nose jobs or not. But I betcha anything they've all got a diminished sense of smell.

Be Like Him

Saved again--I'm still having a hard time thinking of things to post about, and I was actually going to compare the low-grade anxiety of growing up in the Cold War, where fear of nuclear attack was tempered by mutually assured destruction, with today's sharper anxiety of raising kids in an era of nuclear proliferation by unpredictable, unstable dictators who have no respect for cowboy governmental leaders. The alternative was MORE discussion of TV.

But Tedy Bruschi saved you from both.

ESPN repeated a feature from this summer, where Tedy Bruschi, an NFL linebacker who returned to the field after recovering from a stroke and heart surgery, hosted a six-year-old boy who was born with a heart defect and has had three surgeries. Tedy gave the boy a tour of the stadium, a uniform, a press conference, and his game ball from a playoff win.

At the end of the feature, my husband said that shows how important it is to hold our sports stars to a higher standard, because the kids are watching. Multiple drug infractions? They should be out. Fighting and extreme carousing should be met with zero tolerance.

It's too bad more people don't feel that way. There are some class organizations in the NFL, the Patriots being near the top (not that I'm biased or anything :) ). But there are too many fans, players, management, and owners who focus only on the bottom line. Performance feeds wins feeds income, and nothing else matters. I'd like to see more of that around the league, not to mention in other sports.

The league could also use fewer boneheaded plays like tackling a quarterback when he sits on his butt on purpose. When it leads to a Patriots touchdown, however, I won't complain. Woo hoo!

Saved!

I could think about very few good things to blog about this week, and couldn't go into a weekend with an OLD POST. So luckily, cyberwuzzle set me up (well, not me specifically, but...).

Please answer these in the comments. I'd love to know all about you all!

1.Your Middle Name:

2. Age:

3. Single or Taken:

4. Favorite place to hang out:

5. Favorite pet/animal:

6. Favorite Band/Artist:

7. Tattoos and/or Piercings:

HERE COMES THE FUN ... ... ...

8. Whats your philosophy on life?

9. Tell me one odd/interesting fact about you:

10. What is the craziest thing you've ever done?

11. Ever been arrested/ gone to jail?

12. Do you think I'm attractive?

13. If you could change anything about me, would you?

14. If you could change anything about yourself, would you?

15. What do you wear to sleep?

16. What is your favorite thing to do in the world?

17. Would you go on a double date with me if i asked you?

18. If I only had one day to live, what would we do together?

19. Will you post this so I can fill it out for you?

Funny Wedding

I went to my cousin’s wedding in Cape Cod a few weeks ago. I just got access to the wedding album online and remembered the funniest part of the ceremony, of which they did get a picture, thank goodness. :)

I don’t know my cousin’s wife or her family beyond the short time I spent with them that weekend. They’re lovely people and were wonderful hosts. They own a house on the Cape, and the reception was at the Wychmere Harbor Club. The ceremony was very formal and elegant, conducted in a truly solemn manner.

There were six bridal attendants and nine groomsmen. At first, they lined up along the steps in front of the altar area (is that called a nave?). After part of the ceremony, the minister and bride and groom went up the steps and into the nave-or-whatever-it’s-called, and stood in front of the altar. One by one, the attendants formed couples by linking arms, paused, went up the steps, separated, and entered pews that ran along the opposite sides of the nave-or-whatever-it’s-called.

They ran out of couples, and the three extra groomsmen stepped forward, paused at the top of the main aisle, grabbed each other’s butts, and proceeded up the steps.

Needless to say, the congregation lost it. It was the best moment in a wedding I’ve ever seen, and I would love for someone to send it to AFV.

NaNoWriMo

For the first time ever, I get to do NaNoWriMo this year!

For those who don't know, NaNo is National Novel Writing Month. Every participant is challenged to write 50,000 words in the month of November, which is either a very short novel or a huge start to one.

I wasn't going to be able to "officially" participate because my next project was to be a book I've already started, and the rules are that it has to be a fresh project. But an old idea that I only partly liked clicked on Sunday, and I'm all set to go with it.

I'm very self-competitive, and this is a challenge I've always wanted to undergo. I can't wait!

Fall TV Conclusions

I promise I am going to TRY not to talk about TV so much anymore. But I feel a need to offer my thoughts on all the shows I decided to watch/try this year, so here it is:

Monday

Prison Break
Not as suspenseful as last year. They fake us out a lot, enough that I'm delighted and annoyed whenever they do it. The characterization is breaking down, in that the characters are far less sympathetic than they were last season, and they're starting to do dumb things (Lincoln, you idiot, it's a TRAPPPPPPP!!!!!). But the hottie factor and the acting are still enough to keep me in.

Heroes
There isn't a single character on this show that is fully sympathetic to me. They either whine too much or are ugly people (inside, not out). My favorite is the younger brother who can fly, with Mohinder a close second, followed by Greg Grunberg, who I want to hug and cry, "Weiss!" every time I see him. Verdict's still out on this one.

The Class
It makes me laugh. I was pissed to see Richie is apparently married, to Darla of Roseanne, no less. If that's the case, I may not watch anymore. Some of the funnies are getting repetitive (with the Yonk Allen storyline and the neurotic reporter). But I love the snarky twin and Jason Ritter's getting a little rumpled and more interesting.

Studio 60 on the Sunset Strip
Still my favorite new show. Wonderful writing, great acting, excellent chemistry. It amazes me how gripped I am every week, and I can't wait to watch new episodes.

Tuesday

Eureka
Never a stellar show, it was nonetheless interesting, and I liked the up-ramping they had of the main romance in the alternate-timeline finale. Except SciFi had a timing issue and the show started about five minutes late, which meant I didn't get to see the very end. Pissed me off. I'll watch next summer--it's been renewed for a second season.

Veronica Mars
Recording this pending watching the first seasons on DVD, now that I'm done with Supernatural.

Wednesday

Lost
So far, least compelling season. First episode disappointed. Second was better. I'm very eager to see the third, which looks action-packed and full of funny.

The Nine
Not as good as I'd hoped, but I haven't shut it off yet. Not much else to say about it. Feels like they're going in circles already.

30 Rock
Totally unfunny. I deleted it from my Season Passes already. I loved Tina Fey on SNL, but the writing on this show was just DUMB. Tracy is on stage riffing on nothing and being lame and cliché, and Liz and Alec Baldwin are staring at each other like he's brilliant. It's just stupid all around.

Twenty Good Years
I want Lithgow to dial it down a notch, but it made me smile a few times. That was more than 30 Rock did, so I kept it. Doubt it will last long, unless it gets funnier, but I do love both actors.

Friday

Numb3rs
This is a nice, solid show that explores relationship dynamics well, while giving us really interesting cases every week. It's not at the top of my list, but it's a comfort viewing every weekend.

Thursday
I did this out of order on purpose. I now LIVE for Thursdays.

Six Degrees
Gone! Nothing good about it. Nothing horrible, but nothing good.

Ugly Betty
Extraneous stuff is stupidly caricature, but the relationship between Daniel and Betty, and the storylines that consistently prove that the superficial hurts a lot, but the substance is a lot more powerful, make it a good show.

Smallville
This show has never been great. The bad things are worse--Lana, Clark being dour, Lana, Lex simplifying, Lana--but Chloe rocks my socks, Jimmy is an adorable addition, I like the return of the Freak of the Week element that has an overarching connection, and Clark is just always someone worth watching. I like the Green Arrow storyline. This is my fun, mindless viewing.

Supernatural
Dean and Sam. Nuff said.

Also? Great writing and incredible chemistry. Best show on TV right now, if you can handle the horror-movie-every-week element.

Plus, there's Dean and Sam. And they don't even need to take their shirts off. :)

So, what are your thoughts on the fall season?

Self-Perception

Backstory in a novel is very important. People, whether real or fictional, are completely shaped by their pasts. Still, I get annoyed when I read a book where a character (usually the heroine) wallows in events of 20 years ago, using them to affect her actions and attitude now, and never refers to anything that happened in between. I think more recent events would temper the affects of past ones, most of the time, or at least impact them.

I've had a good life. How I live it now, and who I am, have been influenced by growing up poor, with parents who divorced when I was seven, and a mother who was ill much of her life in ways that were barely identified, never mind treated properly. None of that is part of my day-to-day living, though. I don't think about it much, and certainly don't blame most of my choices on my past. But there is one overriding theme of my childhood that has a huge influence on me, and not in a good way.

I had a dream last night. I have this friend, and we're so alike in so many ways that the differences hardly matter. We could be together non-stop for a week and not run out of things to talk about. In my dream, we were at a very elegant conference where she was a Big Deal--featured speaker, presenter of two workshops, hanging out with people who are far cooler than I am--and I wasn't a part of it. It was like I wasn't even there.

(Then the dream morphed and I was trying to get my second suitcase that held all my nice clothes, that I'd left on the baggage carousel, and the airline people were giving me a hard time because it was my own fault. But that's irrelevant.)

I woke up and imagined telling this friend about this dream. She'd be irritated. She's always irritated when I tell her I feel inferior. So I started thinking about why I feel that way. It's certainly not because of her.

I went to three different elementary schools, so I didn't have a lot of friends. I've always been introverted and shy, so it was hard to make new ones. In middle school I had a few, but in the last semester my lunch was different from theirs, so I sat with some other kids in my classes. Eventually, they asked me to sit somewhere else because I didn't talk.

In junior high there was a group of girls that bullied me. I had a new boyfriend who was pretty geeky, and they were picking on me about it. I don't remember the exact taunt it was in response to, but I yelled "Because he's nice!" back through a set of doors. One girl came charging up behind me and shoved me in the back. I went flying and skidded on my stomach across the carpet.

The two years I spent in that high school developed okay. I shared most of my classes with a particular group of kids, and in our junior year they were friendlier toward me. I got invited to my first party. Then, out of the blue, they told me I couldn't hang out with them anymore. My mother said the girls were probably jealous because I was getting attention from the boys (I always had more friends who were boys than friends who were girls). But they never told me why they didn't like me anymore. I was left to feel that I just wasn't worthy.

So I have an accumulation of things that contribute to how I felt in that dream. Things since have tempered it--I moved again before my senior year and went to a great school with kids who liked me, I made plenty of friends in college, I now have a fabulous group of friends through my writing associations, and for the most part, I don't let what happened in the past bother me.

But every so often comes this inferiority complex when I start wondering what the hell someone would see in me. Why I'm worthy of friendship with this amazing, funny, self-assured, adored person who could be friends with anyone. No one would understand why I'd feel this way unless they knew my backstory.

So I think the bottom line is flavor. A story has to be flavored with backstory rather than chunked with it, and even if there is one overriding event or series of events that dictate a character's personality and viewpoint, there have to be other things that either feed or alter it. If there weren't, it should be clear why.

Something I need to keep in mind as I revise my current book. :)

Invalid Statistics

I get really annoyed when people make a point using invalid statistics.

For example, I used to get this newsletter from a psychologist author about taming your inner brat. She cited a survey where 80% of motorists said they'd witnessed road rage, but only 20% admitted to committing it. She said the math doesn't compute, and either implied or stated outright that people must be committing road rage without admitting it. She was very gracious when I pointed out that the 80% could have been seeing the same 20%. I mean, when someone flips someone else off on the highway, three or four people could witness it, right?

Well, here we go again. Po Bronson had a really good column at the back of Time magazine last week. It was about how the media blows certain things all out of proportion, leading us to believe that all of our kids are spoiled brats who are overscheduled and on panic attack medication about college selection and go back to loaf and live with their parents after college (I'm paraphrasing, of course). [The funny thing is that every example he cited was from past Time articles.] His point was that there are actually very few parents who do too much for their kids, and the media is highlighting a problem in a small portion of the population but applying it to the nation at large.

The problem was, he made his point by saying Baby Einstein only made $200 million last year, while Barbie made $3 billion. This was meant to illustrate that parents are letting their kids play, instead of trying to instruct them into insanity. This false illustration ignores the facts:

• Baby Einstein targets a range of ages 0 to 2, maybe up to 3 or 4
• Barbie's target demographic is three to six times that age range, not to mention adult collectors

• Baby Einstein sells toys, books, DVDs, etc., and that's pretty much it
• Barbie's name is all over clothes, lunchboxes, bicycles, thousands of products

Extrapolating from statistics in this manner undermines a person's point and makes all their assertions suspect. It drives me nuts.

And I never even took a probability and statistics course.

P-p-p-p-p-procrastination

I had an idea of what to write here today, and then I was reading the posts on my LJ flist, and it totally disappeared.

So now I'm just procrastinating.

I have a galley to read, and that's, like, my least favorite task as an author. No, it's my least favorite task as a WRITER. Booksignings are my least favorite task. Standing at a table in the mall, begging people to come look at my book, trying to appear friendly and engaging (which I'm not) instead of desperate (which I am)...yeah, not so fun.

Anyway. Galleys. This is a novella, so it's not too long, only 83 pages, but it's a story I wrote, edited twice, proofread, and went through editorial revisions. I don't want to read it again! I tell myself it's okay not to bother, because between my attention and my editor's great eye, there is almost nothing to fix in galley stage. But then I do it anyway, because I must and I'm a good girl who does what she's supposed to, and there's always SOMETHING. Usually five or fewer, but enough to make it worth the time. And honestly, even if it's just one thing, it's worth the time.

So, I guess that's enough procrastination. I am off to do my galley.

Oh, and check out the status bar on the right! I actually finished on October 2 and kept forgetting to update my status bar.

Getting Myself in Trouble

I'm trying to write a letter to Fred Head. This is my first draft:

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Dear Mr. Head,

Because I am a published romance author, your parody regarding Susan Combs' book came to my attention. I would like to point out some things to you:

Click to read the extraxts from the Book

The word "extracts" is misspelled, and the correct term is "excerpts." This line should be fixed lest you are seen as less literate than your published author opponent.

Susan Combs is a two faced, hypocrite who was obviously more concerned with her literary career and seeing her name in print than the morals of the young People of Texas

Two-faced hypocrite is redundant, but it is also overkill, since that describes many politicians. More importantly, the novel she wrote was written about and for adults, and marketed to adults. Young people have nothing to do with it.

A Perfect Match, which has her name at the top of every other page - - - a clear testament to Susan Combs’ insatiable ego and desire to see her name in print.

This is what made me certain this page is a parody. EVERY fiction book published has the author's name on the top of every other page. Also, succeeding in one's chosen career is an honorable thing. Shall we call you an insatiable egoist because your name is plastered all over the state?

Excerpts of Susan Combs’ book A Perfect Match are posted on this website and can be accessed by anyone who wants to know the awful truth about Susan Combs.

Aren't you afraid your supporters will be appalled that you are peddling pornography on your web site, which, as far as I can tell, has no controls that would prevent children from reading those excerpts?

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
I was going to send a more professional, less sarcastic take, but then I read some more of his web site. He's obviously a fan of fantasy novels, because Every other Word on his Web Site is capitalized inappropriately. The whole site is poorly written, badly edited, and stark compared to Susan Combs' professional, well-written, detailed site.

I have to acknowledge that it's POSSIBLE he'd be a better comptroller than Combs, and since I don't live in Texas I didn't do more than read their web sites, which really seem to extoll the same values and goals. But if I lived there, I definitely wouldn't vote for him.

New Hope

I have a book that I wrote about five years ago. You hear all the time about the "book of your heart"--this was it for me. It was my first single title, my first paranormal, my first action-adventure. It was the first book I wrote that was easy. I was so exhilarated to write it, and I never had a "God I hate this book" moment like I did with all the ones that came before it. The sequel was just as much a joy, and so was the third one. At least, up until the moment I stopped writing it.

I shopped that first book everywhere. I got an agent, and she shopped it everywhere. I entered it in the Golden Heart three times. I revised the opening chapters, because the gap of time between writing the first sixteen pages and writing the rest caused a voice/tone change. I revised again, adding a prologue because the beginning had so much exposition, I thought it needed more action. My scores in the GH and other contests dropped every time I revised, though, and I won a critique from a top agent, who said "what if you did it this way?" and she basically described exactly what the original opening had been.

So I've revised it again.

So where's the hope? If every publisher has rejected it twice, what can I possibly do with it?

A few years ago, a new imprint and a new line were starting at Harlequin/Silhouette. The news was barely above the level of rumor, so we had no idea exactly what the editors were looking for. I called one of them, and she said to send it. She read it over the Thanksgiving weekend, called my agent, and said it wasn't right for the line but she'd pass it along to that other new imprint. That editor also said it wasn't right for the imprint, but she wanted to hold it for something she couldn't talk about, if that was okay.

That was the high point of my career so far. I've been heading into a big trough since, but you know how life can be so cyclical? That thing the editor couldn't talk about never came to pass, but her imprint is changing focus in such a way that my book MIGHT be right for it now. I sent a partial last week, so we'll see what happens.

I don't know why I'm doing this, because even if she loves the book, I have a feeling the sequels wouldn't fit. Too much romance. So I'd be back to square one with those, and I want them published as much as I want the first one.

I'm going to give the Golden Heart one last try, too, I think. The book deserves it. Everyone, cross your fingers for me!

Irrelevant Modifiers and Security Fears

Despite the fact that it happened about half an hour away from me, I've read and watched little on the news about the latest school shooting. What I *have* seen, however, seems to be putting ridiculous emphasis on an irrelevant aspect of the shooting.

"Amish School Tragedy"

"Amish School Shooting Funds"

"Fifth Victim of Amish School Massacre to be buried today"

"Amish bury their dead"

One news story says, "Charles Roberts IV didn’t choose West Nickel Mines Amish School because it was Amish."

I don't get the part where "Amish" is the most important element of the horror. When Columbine happened, everyone referred to it as Columbine. Why are we not calling it "West Nickel Mines school tragedy"?

Does the fact that they're Amish make the tragedy worse? As if murdered seven-year-olds isn't bad enough. I'm sure the media is playing up that angle because the Amish are believed to be pure, devout, simple folk, and somehow that does increase the horror.

Perhaps, though, they are emphasizing that element for other reasons. Because an Amish school is different, you know. They probably don't have the tight security an English school would have (English being the Amish descriptor for the rest of us). Right? It's less likely to happen in my kids' school, right? Reassure me with that one word.

The fact is, though, there is no reassurance to be had. This guy had no apparent connection to the school (from what I can tell from the one story I read), unlike Columbine or other school shootings. My kids' schools have "procedures" and anyone who comes in is supposed to go straight to the office. The problem with that is that the elementary school where my second grader goes was built 40 years ago, and the office is not near the front doors. Which they don't lock. She's about to move back into her regular school, which was undergoing renovation, and that office has a door into the entryway, and the inside doors into the building usually ARE locked. So that's better. Except in the office is one sweet secretary who would be no obstacle to a gun-toting madman, who could get inside the building itself in seconds. The situation in my sixth-grader's school isn't much different.

So what am I gonna do about it?

First, if I have occasion to talk about the West Nickel Mines school shooting, that's what I'm going to call it.

Second, I'm gonna do nothing. If someone is crazy enough to do something like this, there is little chance to stop them. There's no way to predict or prevent it. Even if we added security guards and alarms and vault-style doors to our tiny schools, they would not deter a determined person. More importantly, death is just around the corner for all of us, all the time, no matter where we are or what we're doing. Branches fall off of trees. E. Coli gets into spinach. Lightning strikes. School buses crash (and my GOD, that's a helluva lot scarier--I Googled bus crash 'cause I knew one had happened recently, and there have been NINE or more in the last week). We take normal precautions, and some a little beyond normal, and then we have to forget about the rest, or go insane.

And not the good kind of insanity that comes from being a writer or drooling over hot guys on TV all week.

I Lost the Nine

Well, I didn't really, but I wanted to combine the two titles and that's the lame one I came up with. :)

This week ends the season premieres of the shows I wanted to watch this season. Last night were Lost and The Nine, and I have to say, I'm not at all disappointed.

Lost had a quieter start than usual, with a low suspense level but LOTS happening. It appears this first six episodes before the way-too-long break will focus on the immediate aftermath of the abduction, but next week will include Sayid/Jin/Sun and not those from the hatch or beach. Which, of course, are who we are most dying to learn about.

The Nine lived up to my expectations. I'm really unhappy that Eva died, and I'm not thrilled with a couple of the relationships they're building (adulterous boyfriend with pregnant girlfriend--cliche, cliche, cliche) and I don't like Nick (the cop) with Catherine (the lawyer). But I'm dying to learn what happened in the bank. The best part of the whole episode, I think, was the skill with which they jumped us from the start to the end of the situation. All these strangers, with superficial interactions--and then, suddenly, they're completely bonded. They know each other intimately. There are extremely intense emotions that we only get hints of--just as we would if we were on the outside of that bank for 52 hours. That was well done. Remains to be seen if the long-term aftermath will be as compelling, but the flashbacks will be enough to keep me coming back.

Two Guys

Has anyone else noticed that so many current TV shows feature two hot guys?

I mean, "hot" is subjective, of course. And sometimes it's not "hot" in the physical sense, but more "appealing" or "attractive." But just take a look:

Clark and Lex, inspiring feverish slash fiction all over the Internet.





Jack and Sawyer. Or Sayid and Jin. Or Charlie and Locke. Or Desmond and Eko. Or any combination of the above, with more to come this Wednesday. This is the show for every woman!




I already talked about Supernatural. We've got the cocky, protective, no-fear sexy older brother, and the confident, reluctant-turned-driven, don't-call-me-little-brother. Both are smart and funny and cute.




These two are more in the "appealing" category, but they have excellent chemistry together, which I think is a driving factor in any TV show's success. Their friendship is so complex, yet so solid, it makes me want to be their friend.



Dichotomy--the absentminded genius professor who feels too much, and the take-charge FBI agent who won't let himself feel at all, which makes it worse.


What other shows contain two hot guys?

Edited to add:
Trish reminded me in the comments that I'd neglected to upload this pic and mention these guys--probably the hottest brother team on TV (at the least, tied with Dean and Sam):

The Most Appealing Comparisons

I was able to pick five celebrities who "match" my face. I picked the most gorgeous...I mean, most famous ones. There were several who were ugly...I mean, who I'd never heard of.

I Hate Central Pennsylvania

Thank GOD for Netflix.

I watched the first disk of Supernatural last night. It was SO good. The actors have tremendous chemistry, and the writing is smart and funny and scary without going overboard on the cheap flinches and gore.

Today my kids are at the inlaws so my husband and I can celebrate our 14th anniversary. We're going out tonight, but in the meantime I have the afternoon free so I went to Blockbuster to get disks 2 and 3 of Supernatural. You know how it feels to crash when you're really excited about something and then find out you can't have it?

Yeah. That's how I feel right now, because the Blockbuster near my house doesn't have it. Neither does the library, though that doesn't surprise me. What does surprise me is that the Blockbusters in Dillsburg and Camp Hill and Lemoyne and the West Coast Video and Hollywood Video don't have it, either. I finally asked, at the last place I called, why not. She said the owner doesn't feel it will rent well.

WTF??????

I hope they're happy, because every one of those stores has just guaranteed that they will never get my business again. I'll just have to learn a little patience and stick with Netflix.

All Hail Netflix.

Beach Evidence

I was at the Cape (Cape Cod, for those outside of New England) this weekend for a wedding, and we spent some time on the beach. Storms had washed hundreds of horseshoe crabs and thousands of pounds of gushy seaweed onto the shore. Most of the seaweed was attached to shells and rocks that also had dozens of cetaceans also attached. Above, on the left, is my biggest find ever on a beach--part of a conch shell covered with barnacles and all manner of other creatures. Shell upon shell upon barnacle upon shell. Very complicated, just like me.

On the right is my husband's favorite find. A very simple, dark striated rock and a piece of shell with a bit of purple at the tip. Simple, clean. Just like him.

So I made him take the picture with me, and let me show the Internet how different we are. Amazing how he can put up with me, huh?

Especially since most of those shells contained non-dead animals that are now stinking up my carport.

It's the Writing, Stupid

I'm sorry, I say that all the time, but it keeps manifesting in new ways. And I am a writer.

This time the context is new fall television. So far, I've seen Studio 60 on the Sunset Strip, The Class, Six Degrees, and Heroes. (minor spoilers ahead)

Six Degrees
This is a well-acted and nicely shot show. But it's dully written and as such, is likely to be my first Season Pass casualty. The characters are clichéd beyond belief:

• A straightlaced public defender who goes "nuts" over a quirky, fun-loving girl
• A gambling addict trying to live honestly, who gets sucked back into whatever by his criminal brother
• A mother grieving her dead husband
• A fast-track businesswoman ready for marriage who learns her fiancé is cheating on her
• A guy who had everything and destroyed it, who's trying to get it back

I found nothing compelling about anyone's stories, except Erika Christensen's, and I don't think what's in her box is going to be enough to keep me watching. Which is a damned shame, because this is a JJ Abrams property and I still love the premise. I'll just have to get my connections fix from Lost.

In contrast, there's...

The Class
I posted on the pilot before, and have watched one additional episode since. The performances are still stiff, the production very "sound stage classic sitcom." And I can't say the writing has NO clichés, especially as regards characterization, but they do follow my acceptability clause when it comes to clichés: If you're going to go there, twist it up.

So there's the slacker who lives with his mother and longs for the girl he let go--but is smarter than he sounds and apparently good at his job in construction. There's a gay man who's happy and in a committed relationship and even a TEACHER! And another gay man who apparently doesn't know he's gay (in a totally different way than Jonas of Arrested Development). The dialogue is funny without trying too hard (okay, sometimes it tries too hard, but it still gets me to laugh). My favorite character is Richie, a guy who's miserable enough to commit suicide but keeps getting interrupted. He meets Lina, thinks maybe he has a chance to be happy, but runs her over with his car and breaks all the bones in her feet. When she wakes up in the hospital, the first thing she says is "I met the nicest guy."

So this show has a chance. It doesn't make me run to the TiVo, but I'm happy to use it to fill in the gaps.

Heroes
This show is a surprise. It's darker, moodier, than I expected it or wanted it to be. I think the indestructable cheerleader tried to commit suicide, and that's how she found out she can't be killed. Her certainty that this has ruined her life is very annoying. I mean, come on! You can't be harmed. That seems pretty damned cool to me. Then there's a desperate mom with maybe a powerful second personality...a desperate geek who can teleport...a sweet, selfless guy who can maybe fly and loves his asshole older brother (and if it turns out only the brother can fly, I'll hate the show)...a hot Indian who's father was researching these genetic anomalies...a desperate painter who's predicting disasters (why, I asked my husband, do people with predictive powers ONLY predict bad things?)...and more desperation to come, from what I can tell.

It sounds like I don't like the show, which is weird, because I did like it. It was interesting and well done all around, even if I'm having a hard time connecting with any of the characters. I'm willing to give it a lot more time to grab me than I'm willing to give Six Degrees.

And finally, the pièce de résistance:

Studio 60 on the Sunset Strip
Funny, dramatic, unpredictable, suspenseful. This show has the best chemistry between actors of all the new ones I've seen so far. Relationships are complex. Humor is paramount but not at the expense of the drama. The filming is...geez, I'm gonna sound like a geek...compelling. Yes, the FILMING. There's one scene in the second show that follows Matt and Harriet through the set, and you feel the presence of it just like you do the spaceship Serenity when you watch Firefly. It feels more real than any of the other shows, which is ironic since it's set IN Hollywood, often considered the most UNreal place on the planet. :)

How about the new episodes of old shows?

Prison Break
Not as good as last year, but still decent. The yummy factor is still huge, and the speed with which the FBI agent has gotten on the trail is fascinating. It feels like it doesn't have much further to go, however, which is worrisome.

Eureka
Since this show started in the summer, I'm not sure how long it's going to go before its season ends. It's my first Sci-Fi Original Series. :) The gimmick still works for me. I like the "what if" element, and the characters are interesting enough to keep me watching. They seem to have dropped their overriding conspiracy, however, and that jars me whenever I see Beverly-the-shrink-who's-much-much-more.

Numb3rs
Season premiere in two parts, so far as comfortably good as it was last year. It's a quiet show, not as explosive and rock-music-driven as its bigger compatriots. It drops and picks up characters and their plot threads seemingly at whim. And I really doubt a single FBI team would cover soooo many different kinds of crimes (but I could easily be wrong). I like the people, I like the stories...a definite keeper, though again, I'm not driven to the TV to watch it.

Upcoming
I can't wait for Lost next week. I guarantee it will top my list again. Ugly Betty and 30 Rock are well reviewed, though I'm not too excited about either one. I just want something to make me laugh. The Nine starts next week after Lost, and tomorrow I get Smallville (yay!) and Supernatural (which I still have yet to watch on DVD, season 1). Twenty Good Years is my final test show, and I have a feeling I'll keep that one and drop 30 Rock and/or Ugly Betty. When Lost goes on early haitus after far too few episodes, I'll check out Daybreak, which, like Six Degrees, has a high concept that might not be borne out in the execution.

So, how do you all rate the new fall season so far?

FiOS Fantasy

I caved.

I called Verizon a few weeks ago to cancel our second line, originally installed when we moved in for Internet access and my fax machine. We've had cable Internet access for over three years now, and the one or two faxes I send and receive a year don't justify the second line, even at a cool six bucks a month.

So while I was on the phone, they very cheerily said, "we're now offering fiber optic Internet in your area!" I gave my usual response, "We're using cable," which never failed to shut them up because cable is faster than the DSL they used to try to get us to buy into.

"Oh, fiber optic is much faster!"

Hmmm. Turned out to be the same price as the cable, too, except we're also paying for basic cable we don't need (we've got DirecTV for the NFL Sunday Ticket), so it would be slightly cheaper. I told him I'd think about it.

They sent us a UPS priority mail envelope with the offer.

They sent direct mail postcards, and inserts in the phone bill.

THEN they got serious. Last week a sales rep came door to door, offering a $5 discount and 5/2 service that's $10 cheaper than our cable (plus the $9 extra for the cable we're not using). That's when I caved.

They're connecting the outside line now. Next Monday they'll come to hook up the house, replacing our copper wire and installing the box for the fiber optic telephone service and Internet.

Jim's nervous that it won't actually be faster than the cable. It's comparable, and Verizon says it will be faster because of cable's shared technology (i.e. the more people using it, the slower the speed). It's a simple upgrade to 15/2 if we don't like the 5/2, and the price will still be less.

What excites me most is that AOL is now offering free XDrive (5GB of storage)with automatic backup. It's now taking me several hours to back up 652MB of files. Since the REAL difference in speed between FiOS and cable is in the upload speed (2Mbps instead of about 724Kbps), I can't wait to see how fast it goes then.

So, any of you out there already have FiOS? Any advice, comments on the speed difference, thoughts on computer configuration? I'm having them configure Jim's computer, but I'm going to have to do mine on my own. Any tidbits are much appreciated.

Creepy

This week is going to be a tough one for me. Concentration is 95% elsewhere. I have a wedding to attend 8 hours away and tons of planning I haven't yet done. Plus a dozen everyday concerns. I apologize in advance (and after the fact, since it's been days... "Bastard's not gonna get days!"...ahem...sorry, Firefly flashback.) for not posting often enough here.

Sunday morning my husband and I woke up, and he cuddled me before we got up and told me he'd just had a horrible nightmare. The kids had died while we were away somewhere, and the gods had granted us a gift--we could see them for one more day, to say goodbye.

Horrible, horrible thing to dream about. But that's not the creepy part.

Guess what was on the cover of Parade, the magazine supplement in our Sunday newspaper?

If You Could Spend One Day With Someone Who's Gone, Who Would it Be? What Would You Do?

Yeah. Creepy.

I'm a Critic!

I got to view advance showings of two new TV shows! I feel so special.

Okay, I'm not that special. Anyone can join Entertainment Weekly's Front Row program. Usually, they just ask me to grade new movies I've seen (which haven't been many) and guess what the next cover of the magazine will be (Pirates of the Caribbean was a no-brainer. The rest, not so much.).

Tonight they asked me to view The Class and Shark, two new CBS TV shows premiering this fall. And because I like mouthing off, I'm gonna say what I think.

I was actually pleasantly surprised. I read about The Class (guy throws a third-grade reunion to surprise his fiancée) and thought it sounded really dorky. It was only partly dorky. The casting was interesting, with some familiar faces and some I never saw before. The acting was very stiff and blocky, like, "Now I walk over here, lift my hand like this, and state my next line." But it's a pilot, so it stands to reason that would relax out as the show goes on. But the thing that makes this show have a chance is...everyone say it now...the writing.

It was surprisingly funny. I BARKED with laughter. Yes, barked. Some dialogue was excellent, and there was a shocking development near the end. Not sure what will happen with it. The characters were refreshing, in that they were stereotypes that didn't fulfill their promise. The disdainful, says-what-she-means character has compassion, for example. I might TiVo this for a while and see if it holds my attention.

Shark is yet another legal drama, about a defense attorney who switches sides. I adore James Woods, but I wouldn't have watched this show without the advance video. Actually, I didn't finish it, because the feed locked up, three times, and I got sick of trying. Again, there are some refreshing elements. He's a divorced father with a good relationship with his daughter and ex-wife, a guy trying to do the right thing for them all. The process is kind of interesting. The acting was decent, though it looked like the production company got a 19-for-one Botox deal. The "team" assigned to Stark (Woods) seem like placeholders. They all seem to be the same age, like they're interns or something. But they're supposed to be full-fledged attorneys with varying levels of competence. It was interesting to see Clark Kent's psycho girlfriend playing a suck-up. Bottom line on this one was...I am so sick of legal dramas and I haven't watched one since LA Law...I recommend giving it a try, but I won't be watching it.

Next week starts the series of season premieres, so be warned, I'll probably be talking about them for a while. :)

When I Became a Writer

This is post 200 for me, a milestone of sorts, so it seems fitting that my topic today is based on Erica Orloff's post yesterday asking for the moment when you felt like a real writer.

I wrote stories as a child. I have one called "My Very First Book." I was about 5 or 6, and books were my life. (Well, books have been my life since I was 4. Ask anyone. :)

As an older child, my best friend and I constantly "made movies." We wrote short plot synopses and acted things out, "writing" them verbally as we went. I can still vividly remember what it felt like to be immersed in the worlds we created.

As a junior in high school, I got an "A"on a term paper about colonial food, from a teacher who was infamously stingy with her A's. I wrote the paper from the point of view of a tree.

In college (again, junior year!) I had two abstracts for term papers published in the Student Scholar. One was on deforestation, the other on the behavior of starlings. The one on deforestation won me $100 and the Ruth Davies Award for Excellence in Writing.

That same year I started a novel. It got erased and I waited years before trying again.

The summer between my junior and senior years, I had an article on fireflies published in the local paper, and a short piece published in a newsletter about Sarrett Nature Center, where I had an internship as a naturalist.

After graduation, I had an internship at National Geographic Society. I proofread field guides and edited 500+ geography abstracts, some written by native Mandarin speakers, for the 27th International Geographical Congress.

In 1993, I wrote 50,000 words on my first book before deciding it should be three shorter books and starting over. I took correspondence courses and attended workshops by Jennifer Crusie and Victoria Thompson. It was in the latter that I realized I could pinpoint the moment I REALLY became a writer.

I don't know exactly when it was, time-wise. But there is this very famous author who shall remain nameless. I'd been reading her books since high school, and sobbed over many of them. Somewhere along the line, I sobbed while thinking that I really didn't like the book, so why did it make me cry, anyway? A book or two after that, I stopped reading her. It was excruciating trying to, so I gave up.

In that workshop with VT, she said this particular famous author was a good storyteller, but not a very good writer.

I knew when she said that, that the moment I became a writer was the moment I recognized that and stopped reading the book.

For a lot of people, the difference between storytelling and writing is meaningless. It's why this famous author continues to sell books. It's why The Da Vinci Code was so big. It is even the secret to JK Rowling's success.

Storytelling wins over writing any day. Having both will serve you best, but storytelling will triumph more often than not.

Which scares me. Because unlike Famous Unnamed Author, I think I'm better at writing than storytelling. I'm working on it, but the writing is easier to learn. The storytelling is innate.

What about you? When was your moment?

And if you're a reader, do you notice the difference between writing and storytelling? Which do you prefer?

Doing the Circuit

I've been all over the place lately! Last weekend Cassie and the Silverettes joined Seth and the rest of Blue Silver to post on the Amber Quill Authors blog. Some very funny stuff over there!

Monday I launched The Gab Wagon with a post about the reality of romance.

This morning my analysis of romance in Pirates of the Caribbean popped up on Romancing the Reader, in addition to my frustration over choosing a hero, below.

If your weather is as dreary as mine, and your week had been as fatiguing, you're wanting to just veg for a while. Why not read blogs? :)

Difficult Choices

One thing I love about modern romance is that there is room for books that do not contain an obvious hero. The Stephanie Plum series by Janet Evanovich and the Pink series by Stephanie Feagan are the most popular examples. There's no obvious choice for Stephanie Plum between Ranger and Joe, or for Pink between Ed and Steve. And that is so much fun!

There's a new element of excitement in reading romance books, or books that contain romance, without knowing who the heroine will wind up with. It's even better in books that aren't part of a series because you get the gratification of her choice by the end of the book.

But boy, does it present a conundrum to the author! You see, as a reader, I can develop a preference and wait to be satisfied or surprised by the way the story pans out, or the choice the heroine makes (sometimes by the end it's no choice, if one of the heroes becomes less than heroic, or even villainous). A skilled author will make the reader agree with the resolution, even if it wasn't where she thought the story was going.

But when you're trying to be that skilled author, and you don't know who to pick, that can be a problem.

In my book Black Widow, which is currently homeless, the heroine has three potential heroes in the story. One is a police chief, and he's solid and good and unjudgmental. But she's been engaging in criminal activity, and when she finds the guy she's looking for, she's not sure if she'll do something that would be unforgivable to him. Then there's the agent. He gets her. He, too, can help her, and he won't care what she's done. But she has hopes for a normal life, and he would not fit into that. Finally, there's the PI she engaged when her husband's plane first crashed and she woke up alive but with a stunning power and the desire to find who had tried to kill them. He's been a partner, a guide, a friend. He doesn't deserve what she does to him, unintentionally, and might not have her even if she wanted him. In the end, she does what she has to do, finds a way to heal from it, and then makes her choice. In the end, there was only one choice for her to make.

But my current book...oy! Every time I think I know which guy she's choosing, the other one comes along and changes my mind. One is her mentor and her leader. His dedication to responsibility keeps him from letting her know how he feels, but when it gets too much, the result is explosive. The other is a new guy, one with an agenda he won't reveal. She's suspicious of him and drawn to him at the same time. Both men are worthy of her. Both are noble and heroic in the super sense as well as the literary sense (though only one has powers). I'm just under 3/4 of the way through the book and I'm going insane.

I'm dying to have someone read what I have so far and tell me who she should choose, but that would be cheating. The heroine has to make the choice. That's the only way it will work.

I just wish she'd give me a hint.

Lessons From Hot Men

I know a few of you watch Prison Break. Last night's episode has been sticking in my head, because of two small but powerful scenes. I have been reading, for some reason, a ton of blog posts and industry articles about showing emotion in your books, and these two scenes are excellent examples of how to do it. Except they're also problematic in terms of visual versus narrative media.

The Backstory (for those who haven't seen the show):

Michael Scofield has broken his brother, Lincoln Burrows, out of prison. To do this, he used a lot of people and a lot of planning. One of the people who helped him was Nika, an immigrant he married in exchange for her assistance. She's fallen in love with Michael, and of course he's totally oblivious to this. Another person was Sara, the doctor in the prison, with whom he fell in love, and who is in very deep trouble for leaving the infirmary door unlocked.

The Setup:

Nika brought a car to Michael and Lincoln, and in doing so was followed by two asshole just-fired prison guards (COs) who take them hostage for money. Nika plays Bellick, the head CO, to get them free, but as she's doing it, we the viewers are unclear who she is really playing. Lincoln doesn't trust her; Michael does. Linc says anyone he trusted betrayed him, anyone he loved screwed him. But she does get them free.

The First Scene:

Bellick taunts Michael about Nika and Sara falling for him, and it earned Sara an overdose and a prison sentence, which Michael did not know. After he kicks Bellick in the face (YAY!), he calls Sara. You can hear the rawness in his voice as he whispers his regret to her, his assurance that they are real, and that he will protect her. You can see his despair in the way he's leaning against the wall, in the tilt of his head, the shadows that hide him. In the background is Nika, unseen by Michael, feeling her heart break.

The Second Scene:

When parting, Nika hugs the men goodbye and takes the gun from Lincoln's waistband. She wants to call the police and turn them in. She's gotten nothing for all she's done for Michael, she loves him, and for what? Linc says she's not going to shoot them, and pulls the gun's clip from his pocket.

See the dichotomy? One scene powerful in its intensity, pain and need laid bare. The other just as powerful in its absence of emotion: Lincoln's bitter cynicism upheld, Michael's belief in people cracked.

"Emotionally compelling" is my weakness as a writer. I want very much to make people feel the way I felt when I watched those scenes. I said "poor Linc!" as he walked away from Nika, and my husband said, "You'd love him." I said, "I love them both!" and he laughed, but it's true.

Now how can I put that on the page? I struggle with this daily in the book I'm writing. In Michael's scene, if you're in his POV, you can describe his pain, but that's telling. There are only so many ways to describe how it feels, and describing his posture is difficult without interrupting the pacing and distracting from the dialogue. If you're in Sara's POV, you can't see Michael at all. You can hear the rawness of his voice, the desperation, but you can't use light and shadow to enhance it, and you can't see his body language. The best way to show it is from Nika's POV--she can see him, hear him, and highlight his feelings by her own. But she's a very minor character and would not have POV in my book. It would be easier, but it would be cheating.

The second scene is less difficult. You pretty much have to write the action and dialogue by themselves, though if in Michael's POV, he can see that his brother's view of the world has been affirmed, and wonder if Linc is lost for good. But the eyes are the best portrayal of everything they are feeling, and you can only say "the expression on his face" so many times in a book. Preferably, zero. I don't use that phrase, but I refer to "expression" 9 times so far in 260 pages.

Anyone else struggle with this?

Remind You of Anyone?

UNDER CONTROL
Coming in October from Amber Quill Press

Who does this guy remind you of?

Hint: He (the inspiration, not the actual cover image) is a celebrity.

Second Hint: The story is about a superhero.

If something happens to me...

...just know I love you all.

I've been going with my middle schooler (6th grade) to the bus stop, partly because she lets me, partly because there are two older boys (either 8th grade or really, really big 7th graders) there, and the kids in her grade are not taking the bus. I don't know if she's uncomfortable or just likes me. I'm not asking. :)

So yesterday, we get to the bus stop, and this woman comes out of the house on the corner, points at us all, and growls, "just so you know, the police are on their way."

Oooo-kay.

The boys said she came out screaming and cursing at them for being noisy and disturbing the peace. I have never seen that, but they get down there before I do. Still, it takes us a few minutes to get down the street, and I would hear/see them if they were loud enough to justify the police. They talked to the bus driver as they got on the bus, and that afternoon, she motioned me over (I don't generally go to the stop in the afternoon, but yesterday it was late and I was worried--forgot about the high school run once a cycle). She said she talked to the police, who she passed that morning, and let them know what was going on.

This morning was completely normal, but she motioned me over again, and asked me to tell her if anything happened.

Yeah, so now I'm an informant. And it's not like I'd be doing back alley informing. I'd be walking up to the bus, in plain sight of them, and trying to tell my tale with kids hanging over the front seat. Sounds cool! Sign me up!

Not.

I don't know anything about these boys, so I can't vouch for their character or anything. I can only report what I see. And so far, they're fine. They walk to the bus stop, they walk home. And they're never noisy on the way home, either. Still, they both outweigh me (hard as that may be to believe). So I'm just sayin'. You know, just in case.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

From today through Monday, the characters from the five Blue Silver novellas will be blogging at the Amber Quill Authors blog. So far, we've got excerpts, 80s music quizzes, note-passing, and IMing. Come join the fun!

The Gab Wagon

Four authors...four perspectives...one place.

We've got opinions, and we're not afraid to use them.

Join romance authors Cathy McDavid, Natalie Damschroder, Monica Burns, and Mackenzie McKade as they provoke the Internet into intelligent, respectful, yet raucous debate on everything to do with romance novels and the industry that births them.

The Gab Wagon

Why Viral Marketing Fails

Recently, I participated in an experiment by Dear Author, which was meant to investigate the viability of "viral blogging," where one person blogs something, and it expands to 100 (or 152, in this case), other blogs. The experiment was deemed a success because more people knew about the book than before. The verdict is still out if it has any impact on sales (and may never actually be in, given the small scale and the inability to track direct results of any marketing effort).

A slight bit less recently, the movie Snakes on a Plane was a huge informal (I assume) viral marketing experiment. Everyone from geeks on the Internet to Entertainment Weekly were talking about the movie. It had HUGE buzz. It was also a huge failure (in case you ignore the link, it had a modest $33 million production budget and made $31 million domestically). It didn't matter that everyone was talking about it, because most didn't go see it.

A year ago, Serenity suffered a similar fate. A short-lived TV show, Firefly, was beloved by its fans and treated badly by its network so that there weren't enough of them. One of the fans was a producer for Universal, who gave the creator, Joss Whedon, the ability to make the movie Serenity out of his original idea for Firefly. Marketing was mostly done on the Internet, catering to the existing fan base. Which was great, except I believe it had the effect of making people say, "I never saw Firefly so there's no point in seeing the movie." A fabulous, smart, funny, suspenseful, intriguing movie didn't get the audience it deserved.

On the other side, we have My Big Fat Greek Wedding. The Da Vinci Code. Harry Potter. What makes those successes when the others were failures? What's the difference between word-of-mouth and viral marketing?

I think the difference is timing and intent.

Viral marketing generally happens BEFORE the product is available, and is done with motivation. Usually, it's started to try to make something sell bigger, and perpetuated on a large scale because there's a reward for those who perpetuate it.

Word of mouth happens AFTER the product is out there, and is done because people really liked it. The product itself is the selling point, and it sells because, in some way, it's done well.

I'm no marketing expert, and I have no education, training, or background in the topic. I'm just saying what I see.

And I have this book that was just released...

Fall TV Squeeeee!

TV hasn't played a huge role in my life. Saturday morning cartoons, Must-See TV with The Cosby Show, and Superbowls are significant more for the people I watched them with and the times of my life they highlighted than for the shows themselves. There was always something else to do--read books, study, play Chase, work...and then AOL chat rooms and Internet surfing and kids came along.

Since my marriage began, there have always been a few shows my husband and I watched together. Usually we taped them and watched on Friday night. Our schedule was never dictated by the idiot box. Which, in fact, became an apt name around the turn of the century. John Doe was pretty good. Firefly was awesome but a victim of network idiocy. Friends was a habit. I took pride in telling people if I'd asked show A or X that I never watched TV. I even skipped over the Must Watch pages in Entertainment Weekly.

Ah, but then came Lord of the Rings.

I know that was a book, but it was also a pretty f-in fantastic trilogy of movies, and it was my first full-blown obsession. I was following everyone involved--not just the cast, but even the effects people and costumers!--into their follow-up projects. Yes, now you know where I'm going. Dominic Monaghan, one of my five favorite hobbits, was going to be on this interesting new show about a plane crash. I thought I'd check it out. And of course, it was FAN. TASTIC.

Alias was on after Lost, and I'd had a mild interest in that show since I write heroines like Sydney Bristow. So I started watching that, too, with season 1 simultaneously on DVD.

And oooh, how wicked that DVD/Netflix thing is. Watching several episodes of a show in a row is addictive, so I've done a few other shows on DVD since then. Shows I didn't get on TV (Smallville, Entourage) and shows I refused to allow to carve into my writing time (Arrested Development, How I Married Your Mother). I managed to balance the TV thing with the writing thing last year, doing the writing first, then staying up too late to do the TV. But now, I write during the day. My evenings are my own.

I've struggled recently--and by recently, I mean my entire adult life and much of my childhood--with a lesson I was taught by example from the women in my family and from society: A woman, especially a mother, should not do something for herself unless it also benefits others.

I say struggle because if I ever hear a woman say she can't do something because her family won't allow it or because it's just for pleasure, I will fiercely defend her right to it. But I have trouble doing it myself. The guilt causes constant justification. Case in point: The only reason it's okay for me to take the time to exercise every morning is because being fat and out of shape is a bad example for my kids and harms my sex life. I can only justify reading for pleasure instead of doing chores if the others in the household are also reading or watching TV or whatever. It's a disease.

So this TV thing is difficult for me. My husband doesn't watch with me anymore. He plays City of Heroes almost every single night. The one night he doesn't, he's playing City of Villains. But he makes fun of me when I turn on the TV. And I get annoyed because that prods the guilt over which I'm always laying sawdust, in an attempt to absorb it and sweep it out forever.

Anyway. Since that first 2004 season of Lost, TV has gotten better. Comedy is still trying to find new footing, but drama and dramedy are flourishing, with good writing (justification! I'm studying the craft!) and good acting. I have created...*deep breath*...I admit it, I have created a spreadsheet of the shows I want to record in the fall season. Some of them will drop off pretty quickly, I'm sure. I won't watch something just to watch it. It has to really GRAB me. But here's my list:

Red shows are ones I already watch from previous seasons.
Green shows are new ones.
Underlined are shows I'm skeptical about, but have them on the list for a specific reason.

Prison Break
I started watching this because Dominic Purcell was so hot and smart on John Doe, Wentworth Miller is also hot and smart, and the show's premise was intriguing. The show turned out to be, as well. I never dreamed I'd root so hard for such horrible criminals. It's less good this season, but still watchable.

Studio 60 on the Sunset Strip
I like all the cast members, and reports have been saying it's going to be a really good show. Aaron Sorkin did West Wing, which I never watched but would have enjoyed.

Six Degrees
One of my favorite things about Lost is the backstories, and how all the people on the island seem to be connected in both tenuous and solid ways. This show uses that premise, but I have no idea how well it will do it. It's a JJ Abrams show, though, and he rarely missteps.

Numb3rs
I don't like cop dramas. But this show had MATH. And Rob Morrow. And though it stretches my suspension of disbelief that the same FBI unit would investigate such a wide range of crimes, the writing, acting, and suspense come together to keep me interested. It's a good end-of-the-week show. Now if Don would only get a girl...

Heroes
I'm writing a book on superheroes. I love X-Men. That's enough to get me to watch the pilot. Varying reports on this show, though, so we'll see how it goes.

Ugly Betty
This wasn't on my list at the beginning, but it's getting enough good press that I'm gonna try the first show. There really aren't enough good comedies out there, and the loss of Arrested Development made me feel bad for not watching it.

Smallville
Tom Welling and Allison Mack rock. So does the portrayal of Clark, which stays true enough to the core of the character that I don't mind all the messing with canon. In fact, I LOVE the messing with canon. It's fun! In previous seasons, Lex Luthor was the most complex, intriguing character on the show. He's less so now that he's more evil, but I have one request: Now that he's Zod, can he please kill off Lana Lang? Or at least scare her back to Paris and off the show? Pretty pretty please?

Supernatural
A friend's report and Jensen Ackles, who was delish on Smallville, are causing me to give this one a try.

The Nine
This had echoes of Lost, as well, though as time goes on I'm less intrigued by the story idea. I loved Tim Daly in Eyes, and was really mad that show didn't get a chance, so we'll see how this one goes.

Lost
I'll be with this one until the end. Which could be this season, actually. All the stupid whiners last season--"why do we have to many reeeee-peats?"--have caused the network to premiere the show late (Oct. 4), go for about 8 weeks, then go on a three-month hiatus and run it to May, non-stop. I hate stupid whiners. They're stupid because Lost had NO MORE reruns than any other show. And I don't want ANOTHER three-month gap just when I'm getting into it again. But we'll see how THIS goes, too. Maybe it will work, and I'll be the stupid whiner. :)

Twenty Good Years
I saw a preview. Jonathan Lithgow and Jeffrey Tambor are both about as funny as you can get. If they get good material, this could be one of the rare comedies that makes it.

30 Rock
I want Tina Fey to make it. There are plenty of successful women in television, but still not nearly enough. And for some reason, the spotlight is on her big time. Otherwise, I probably wouldn't watch this.

Daybreak
This is one of those shows that has an intriguing premise that will probably fail in the execution, like Blind Justice. But reports so far are good, and Taye Diggs is hot. Djimon Hounsou is hotter, but he doesn't have a TV show right now. In fact, Djimon Hounsou is doing far too little. Two movies this year is barely enough to whet the appetite.

So there's my list. What are you looking forward to this season?

No Melting Pot?

Hope everyone had a good holiday weekend. Mine was okay. I spent all day cleaning yesterday (gah) and we were supposed to go to Hersheypark on Friday, a weekday, but it rained horribly so we went Sunday, the middle day of a holiday weekend.

Have I ever mentioned how much I HATE crowds? And lines? And inconsiderate people? Yeah. Fun.

But it's worth it for the end of the day, when we're leaving the park. Why?

Fresh. Popped. Kettle corn. Sold directly out of the cast-iron kettle. God, I love that stuff.

I didn't get any. Because we'd miscommunicated and run out of cash, and they won't take credit cards.

Gah.

~~~

TIME Magazine recently did an interview with Pat Buchanan, who is apparently violently opposed to immigration. He said:

The country I grew up in was culturally united, even if it was racially divided. We spoke the same language, had the same faith, laughed at the same comedians. We were one nationality. We're ceasing to be that when you have hundreds of thousands of people who want to retain their own culture, their own language, their own loyalty.

You all know the one subgenre of romance I don't write is historical, and it was never my interest. But what I do remember from my AP American History class tells me Pat Buchanan is completely delusional.

Maybe his tiny corner of the U.S. in the early 1950's was culturally united, but they laughed at the same comedians because they had one TV show a day. They were force-fed their so-called "national culture," and I bet there are millions of people his age who would dispute his sunny memories.

Shall we also discuss the fact that aside from Native Americans, we are all descended from immigrants? And there's even debate about whether their ancestors evolved here or migrated from elsewhere.

I may be completely wrong about this. I wasn't alive when he was growing up, never mind during the history of this country's growth, and shouldn't mouth off about stuff I didn't experience myself. But it just seems very easy to pick and choose the memories that support your beliefs and ignore everything else.

He also said:

What do we have in common that makes us fellow Americans?

Freedom, Pat. Freedom to embrace our OWN culture, or blend cultures of all our ancestors, or create a new culture. Freedom to let everyone else do the same, without judgment or insult or infringement. That's the commonality I see. It would be nice if certain people would stop trying to force their versions of the "right" culture on anyone else and just let us be what is celebrated in that great old Schoolhouse Rock song...

...The Great American Melting Pot

Wanna Be A Silverette?

The original members of the (fictional) 80s band Blue Silver fan club have
opened up membership in the Silverettes to ANYONE who wants to join!

Go here for details on how!

No idea what I'm talking about?

Start at http://www.bluesilverpax.com for the whole story.