howl_at_the_sun

From Freedom & Necessity by Emma Bull and Steve Brust.  "I'm doing this mostly because it's opened wide a door to a room inside me that before I could only guess at by the light along the sill and through the keyhole. It's a room in which all those things in me that, living the normal life of a well-bred woman, I could never use--strength and speed and hardiness; command over my mind and body; respect for the language of my senses; a certain ferocity of the spirit-- are not only useful but essential. In that place life is lived as if in mid-air over an obstacle, between leap and landing, with everything committed and nothing certain. Everything happens fast enough."

Finding a good tea cozy is a tricky proposition.

Edited to add: I mean, look at the sort of thing that I'm working with! http://www.etsy.com/view_listing.php?listing_id=12249921&ref=sr_gallery_1&&ga_search_query=tea+cozy&ga_search_type=handmade&ga_page=19&includes[]=tags&includes[]=title

5) The "Just One More Source" stage
a) You are lying to yourself. It's time to admit it.
b) You already have twenty pages of notes.
c) Synthesis is not that scary. You can do it!

6) The "Talk to People Who Link You to Comics On the Web But Not Webcomics" stage
a) Damnit, Richard.

1) The "I Will Solve the Fundamental Difficulties of Multiple Viewpoints and Experiences in my Brilliant Narrative" stage
a) First of all, no, you won't.
b) Second of all, the assignment doesn't call for that.
c) Finally, you are making this so much harder than it needs to be.

2) The "Proliferation of Theses" stage
a) In theory, this is necessary part of the process.
b) In practice, writing that paper would be a lot easier if you didn't keep changing your mind about what you were writing about every paragraph.
c) See point 1c.

3) The "Listen to Weird Finnish Music Video Over and Over and Over" stage
a) Do you even like the video?
b) Then why are you listening to it?
c) Staring at youtube videos is not writing.

4) The "Write A Livejournal Post" stage
a) Oh, uh... Damn.

What a strangely coyote like occurrence: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/worldnews/article-1223087/Pictured-The-coyote-hit-car-75mph-embedded-fender-dragged-600-miles--SURVIVED.html

Not thinking of various other papers when I am supposed to be writing three and only three!

In the spirit of the holiday (the agnostic culturally-Jewish spirit, from my family's perspective), I am sitting in my room reading about Victorian eugenics until I shamble off into the midst of 40-odd relatives for conversation and dinner. Actually, I will only ostensibly shamble off for these things. I will, in reality, engage in them briefly and then steal off to the barn to give various little cousins rides on the ponies in Entirely inappropriate clothing for horseback riding.

I will also eavesdrop on my dad's phone conversation with his brother and post it on livejournal. To wit:

"Jeff, the horse is doing you. You're not doing the horse. No vaseline either."

Edited to add: I don't know, and I'm not asking, either.

Via  Feminist Law Professors: 

Please distribute this list.  Put it up in your place of work, in your university’s library or wherever you think theymight be read:

1. Don’t put drugs in people’s drinks in order to control their behavior.

2. When you see someone walking by themselves, leave them alone!

3. If you pull over to help someone with car problems, remember not to assault them!

4. NEVER open an unlocked door or window uninvited.

5. If you are in an elevator and someone else gets in, DON’T ASSAULT THEM!

6. Remember, people go to laundry to do their laundry, do not attempt to molest someone who is alone in a laundry room.

7. USE THE BUDDY SYSTEM! If you are not able to stop yourself from assaulting people, ask a friend to stay with you while you are in public.

8. Always be honest with people! Don’t pretend to be a caring friend in order to gain the trust of someone you want to assault. Consider telling them you plan to assault them. If you don’t communicate your intentions, the other person may take that as a sign that you do not plan to rape them.

9. Don’t forget: you can’t have sex with someone unless they are awake!

10. Carry a whistle! If you are worried you might assault someone “on accident” you can hand it to the person you are with, so they can blow it if you do.

Right, then. I went to four readings today: Among them -- unexpectedly! -- Vylar Kaftan, who was standing in for her friend. 

Ohmygosh this summary is getting long. Three posts now! (what else are you doing, though, Amanda?) I am avoiding the party scene and did not manage to drag anyone back to my room for any of the many good reasons that one might drag another person back to her room, so I might as well post on livejournal. Also, I am sick to my stomach and have been so all day. This does not bring out my inner social butterfly.

Anyway, Kaftan! Because her stuff was Really Good and also not stuff I thought that I'd like (rereading this: I am so suspicious. But I think this is because I am so picky). She read three stories. One was flash fiction, one was horror (granted, it had a bowie knife named President Polk and was set in a gold-mining camp, and I can overlook a lot for that sort of historical fiction), and the last was ... surreal and creepy and probably horror too come to think of it. Why did I like it instead of going, "Hm, you are trying to unnerve me, and that makes me not like you or your writing very much?" Part of it was her utterly cheery manner as she read. Another part of it was her.. judicious use of horror elements. No gratuitously squicky descriptions. No mua ha ha how horrible. Just clear, cutting language. Also, characters who were people. Characters who are people works very well for me.

Earlier, I attended Coarse Dialog and Graceful Description – The Balancing Act,
with Deanna Hoak (moderator), James Frenkel, Guy Gavriel Kay, Ellen Kushner, and Patricia McKillip

I discovered to my vast surprise that Kay seems to have something of a Boston? accent, which shocked me. Also, while I'm completely not discussing the subject of the panel: James Frenkel and Ellen Kushner were bickering at each other (possibly amiably) through a lot of it, which did not shock me. This is at least a little because a significant portion of my extended family consists of opinionated Jewish women, and Kushner seems to be one of those. She is much milder than my aunt, of course. 

Two things related to content also stood out to me: One, Kay observed that writing dialogue To Rules tended to create dialogue that sounded as though it had been written to rules. I wonder about this. My writing "accent" is formal and academic. I deviate a little bit from it, but even my deviation is... a deliberate deviation. Every time I write a fragment, every time I use wordy language, (almost) every time I break a grammar rule, I am aware of it. If I were to write in a different sort of accent, the same would probably apply. I am a very rule-aware person, however. I suspect that in actual writing, I would in fact write in my normal accent, and then do some tweaking later, because the think-as-someone-else and think-of-different-rules are probably not mutually inclusive.

Kushner talked about how to make characters sound different. Basically, alter the rhythm of the language to more closely resemble the dialect you wish to imitate, and throw in the occasional word from that dialect. Voila. Sounds doable (I am pleased by how doable this sounds; writing is scary enough without problems of dialect). Also, I think some especially careful word choice is useful for conveying the sense of a different culture. In Lee and Miller's Liaden books, for example, the Liadens only *rarely* apologize. Instead, they say, "Forgive me." Thus, they are not accepting guilt. In their culture, not accepting guilt is a highly important thing. So, word choice. 

Lastly, I also went to Lies and the Lying Liars Who Write Them, with Sharyn Novermber, Mark L. Van Name, Ellen Klages, and a man with the last name of Grimwood who doesn't seem to be on a program. Essentially, the panelists  answered questions about themselves. The audience could hold up a dollar in order to claim that the panelists lied. If the panelists were caught in a lie, they paid ten dollars. All money went to Variety Children's Charity. Highly entertaining evening, as you might well imagine. Van Name's secret talent, for example, was the ability to pick up things from his toes. The audience demanded that he prove this talent. Sharyn November squinted and grimaced and said, "No!" Ellen Klages proceeded to throw candies on the floor. Van Name picked one up with his foot and put it in his hand. Clapping! Klages threw more candy. Van Name picked up said candy with his toes, and ALSO with his toes threw it at the audience. And so on.

I am definitely a pumpkin now. I really have meant to fangirl at Delia Sherman and Ellen Kushner over The Fall of Kings, but so far they've been around people all the time, and I have been particularly shy about randomly striking up conversations. I think all will be well if I don't manage it. Now it is time for some reading and winding now. 

Today was pleasant, as far as the pleasantness went. I went to all panels and no readings (so far!). I accidentally went to Improv Storytelling rather than the panel I meant to go to, but I was wearing a pirate costume, and it wasn't polite to just *leave* after I'd come in a shade late and sat down. So I remained.

Both Mary Robinette Kowal and Jay Lake were amusing. David Levine was amusing until he decided to have a prostitute say, "If you don't pay me, it's rape." That fell well into the realm of Not Amusing. It was not a good story. It was a frustrating story, in fact, as the characters kept changing and the plot got entirely lost. However, it was decidedly fun (most of it). The fun lay mostly in the grave storyteller tone that the panelists adopted; Kowal was especially good at this. She is a neatly turned out person, and spoke with the sort of precision I tend to associate with English teachers. This precision she directed to describing a six foot duck that had begun to "fester" in its vinegar bath. Complete with dramatic pauses, lowering and raises of voice -- a great deal of fun. Jay Lake was also a great deal of fun. He was particularly helpful in providing visual effects to accompany the story while the other panelists were speaking. If you want to call it helpful. Watching the three of them play off each other was very cool.

Then I listened to Nancy Jane Moore, Keffy R. M. Kehrli, Grá Linnaea, Malinda Lo, and Doselle Young discuss homosexual characters in fantasy and how they ought to be included. This panel was excellent. I was wary of a trainwreck, but no! It was a good discussion. Trying to remember the exact content post-discussion is hard. There was some talk of, if the author points out that a character is homosexual, then then readers might expect there to be a reason that the author had pointed it out. I rather like how Grá answered that one: "Homosexuality is not a smoking gun." I think, though, that whether or not something is a smoking gun depends on the story. In a world where people have no problem with homosexuality, it isn't a smoking gun. In a world where homosexuals are actively being persecuted, then it's.. perhaps not a smoking gun, but an aspect of that character that bleeds into other aspects.

I am going to wander off to some readings, now. Cannot take the loudness and parties at all, by this point, but reading should be fun! More later.

I am doing the con thing, which is not the sort of con thing that I am used to. Certainly not the sort of fantasy con that I am used to, anyway. It is all very professional. Yikes! I am used to people wandering around in costumes and cloaks. Frankly, I do not see why one cannot be professional in a cloak. Still, I refrained from wearing mine. O social pressure!

I have gone to readings: Joseph McDermott, Sharon Shinn (squee!), Garth Nix, and Michael Swanwick. I am so spoiled. I love hearing authors read their work. Much as I love written words, I love voices better. Sharon Shinn has a certain.. mischievous? way of reading which is especially charming. Especially as she stopped reading at a cliffhanger! Tch.

The reading-aloud-is-better is especially true with poetry. Thursday night I shambled to a poetry reading. I continued on my general theme of "I wonder what that was about" in terms of understanding some of the poems (actually, most of them were relatively straightforward, so not too much of this), but much of the enjoyment was in the sound of them. Sort of like singing, only not.

I am generally pleased, if exhausted. People are everywhere! And loud! My introvert soul is crying for mercy (truly, it is more specific than many people being loud. it is many people doing many things being loud. Focused, quieter groups of people are much more agreeable to my soul). Tonight involved much hanging out with Emily, Shweta, and Nathaniel, though, which was a fine thing. I don't think I will be doing much in the way of networking, though it's the sort of con for it. My current plan for writing is to Have It Be Fun. Once this is firmly established, I will ease into the business side of things.

Just read the program for WFC. Highly excited. I was getting sort of worried as I spent this weekend teetering between fatigue and nausea, but sitting around and listening to awesome people talk? I can do this. And there are so many likely looking people to sit around and listen to. 

And right now? I have Fledgling to read.

I lost my temper tonight. Not good! I am distinguishing, between losing my temper and being angry. Losing my temper is not good. Being angry is good. Many, many things in the world are worth being angry about, and my family debating whether or not Roman Polanski *really* raped 13-year-old Samantha Geimer is one of those things, especially when my uncle felt the need to point out that Chinatown was a great movie, after all.

However, my raised-voice observation that "rape is not fucking dinner table conversation" was not politic, under the circumstances. Certainly I was provoked; the discussion was horrifying. The burden of "making people uncomfortable" is not mine. Still, my response was, perhaps, unhelpful. I suspect that a cold-as-ice set down would have been far more effective in achieving my goal, which was the acute realization of how vile the subject and handling of it was.

Sorting out what actually happened is important in these circumstances. I do not need, or want, to become uncentered and upset *with myself* because of someone's else's piss-poor behavior. I am glad I was angry, and I am glad that I acted on it. Next time, I would like to act a bit differently, but that is the only complaint I have with myself. 

The day before upcoming deadlines is not the time for a lengthy self-reflection (probably private) post. I still have not quite figured out the cognitive mechanism that makes everything other than what needs to be done now Ever So Interesting. I do know that it exists and that I have dismantled bits of it.

I do want to mention that I am not feeling well (thank you, medication side-effects) and that graduate school and working on top of that is a fairly exhausting endeavor. It is a happy, happy endeavor, but my mental and physical resources are a bit scarce at the moment. Really, I think graduate school and work would be somewhat exhausting even if I were feeling 100%. So, if I seem fuzzy (as compared to my normal fuzzy?), I probably am!

I got called a "happy little puppy" today, after I agreed to stand in for the person-our-receptionist-gives-a-hard-time-to.

Tutoring is somewhat awful in that I am systematically ripping apart another person's creative efforts. This is a useful, necessary process, but it is not a nice process, so I try Very Hard to curb my impulse toward dry, sordid humor. I am pleased, on one level, that my efforts have been so effective. On the other hand...

Well.

Archaic Torso of Apollo (translated by Stephen Mitchell)

Rainer Maria Rilke

We cannot know his legendary head
with eyes like ripening fruit. And yet his torso
is still suffused with brilliance from inside
like a lamp, in which his gaze, now turned to low,

gleams in all its power. Otherwise
the curved breast could not dazzle you so, nor could
a smile run through the placid hips and thighs
to that dark center where procreation flared.

Otherwise this stone would seem defaced
beneath the translucent cascade of the shoulders
and would not glisten like a wild beast's fur:

would not, from all the borders of itself,
burst like a star: for here there is no place
that does not see you. You must change your life.


I have never understood this poem (this is nothing new with poetry), but I have always liked it, and tonight I wanted to read it. Poetry is strange like that, for me. I read it, I go "what the fuck," I move on. Sometime later one line from the poem flickers in my mind. I generally go and find the poem. Then, there is something in it that I want to hear. Sometimes I even think I understand a little better what is going on in the poem.
 

I have difficulty being a woman around men. This is to say, I find compliments that are gendered ("pretty," "beautiful") almost offensive. I have difficulty talking about sex around men. I *really hate* flirting if I'm not interested, and I'm usually not. I am also upset, by the time I am writing this, so I might be exaggerating my reaction. A week ago I was ready to venture forth from my bedroom and make like an Amazon. Sex, in of itself, seems like a good idea. Sex with appealing sorts of people seems like a good idea.

I had a really bad time with a friend of mine the other day. He's an older guy, smart, charming, funny, etc. I usually like talking to him, as he is full of interesting ideas and is receptive to hearing the same.

I also met him when I was in a period of my life where my response to being uncomfortable with any interaction with men was to wonder, "Would another guy be uncomfortable discussing this?" If the answer was no, then I would grin, laugh, and try to come up with something more outrageous than whatever the person I was talking to had said. If the man in question happened to be flirting with me and thus making comments about my body or activities, I would pretend I was some guy talking about me instead of me. I would talk about things that I wasn't really comfortable discussing, in this fashion.

By the same token, I hate being treated "like a girl." Like men have to walk on eggshells around me. Like they can't say silly sexual things. Like some basic level of bonding they have with their male friends (talking about people they think are attractive) can't be there.

I keep reading (full of triggers) Another Post About Rape by Harriet Jacobs. I wonder if I am running into some of the problems she discusses. Specifically, it isn't okay for women to enforce their boundaries. If they do, they are called mean. That isn't quite what I'm talking about, though. I think if I enforced clear boundaries ("I don't want to talk about sex with you. I don't want to flirt.") etc., they would be respected. My problem, rather, is with the level of ease and openness that would be lost as a result.

People are a problem.

This is Amanda, a.k.a. Oath_of_Feanor. I decided that some change was in order. Feanor's story is still one of my favorites, but I think I am done naming myself after it. I am now Howl_at_the_Sun.

I have been hemming and hawing over where to locate a short story involving photography and Doing Research. There are good ways to do research, there really are, but Doing Research is probably not one of those ways. Anyway, one town I was researching only had a single store: Shiman's Store. As you can see from the link, Shiman's was not very impressive. One point of contention about setting the story in a small town was the Lack of Technology (photography) in a town that barely had a single store. I wrestled around with this for a while.

I have just now realized that while I was doing that, I was looking at a photograph of that store.