It's so much of it, isn't it? The press of the day and hours against what comes next, neither wishing to dismiss it but also, not quite claiming it the way it ought, because the savoured hour waits.

And what a day it is.  The air is cool, rushing, the light changes from gold to white to blue on a whim.  All of outside feels like the ocean.  I stepped out this morning, on to the front step, the damp from the rains the night before soaking into my socks, and I spread my arms to it.  Soon, too soon, the hot summers will come, heavy breathed and and in some element, relentlesss.  But these flickering seasons, fall and spring, which seem to be growing briefer and briefer here in my small corner of the world as the the big blue marble warms, are precious to me.  Fall always makes me restless, makes me long to run long distances, to move, to migrate. Spring drives me out, into the fresh, into the air, filled with ideas and moments.  I throw open the doors to the cool moodiness of it just as I put on a sweater to guard against the intermittent chill.

Tonight, I want to lose myself in music and motion.  I don't want to drag my expectations and run into those curdled, half formed feelings of frustration.  What is that anyway?  It's not an expectation anyone has crowned me with, it's the thing I do for me.  And yet inside me is that part that will always drive harder, want the extremes, want to do well, do well, and it's never enough.  It's why I think I will never be a winter or summer person, but always a fall and spring, enamoured of the changes, fascinated by the most ardent, difficult parts of process.

*********************************************************************

I haven't had the sensation of falling in love in a long time.  Too long. But this return to something I care about has all the hallmarks.  I am at the sixteen week mark and I find the milkman is coming up the stairs, waking me.  I find the coffee cooling in the cup, I find that progress is more difficult now that base skills have been regained.  I will have to work harder, attend to the growth part of things.  I'm old enough but not so old I don't remember the pain of growing quickly as a teenager, the way the bones stretched and the muscles screamed to catch up.  There's a bit of that now. But pretty masochist that I am, certain kinds of pain are not a deterrent.  I hate being conqueored but I long for a leadership that is stronger than mine.

So I fight against what I don't know, what I can't master.  I don't feel fear or self consciousness, as the fight is so genuinely with myself and always has been.

*********************************************************************

For all of this, you'd think I was good at this already.  Had some mastery.  I am not, like many things I'm forgettable as a sound once it's ended.  I don't stand out in any way in my skating, nor do I expect to.  However, there are private things I wear and do just for me and this is in many  ways, part of that small garden of things I keep that give me joy, regardless of skill.

I'm evangelical about this feeling.  I want you all to have it too.  I want to urge you to find the way life feels like this but it's a tidal wave, it's always too much - I am so frequently too much- that I come here and leave it on the page.

*********************************************************************

My life is rioting around me as I write this.  It is time to go, time to slip into that liquid sunlight, time to tend to the children, time to attend to the very big project.

But each night, the door opens and I go through a forest of gold, of silver, of diamonds. I dance all night and I am sleepy in the morning and it may be that my slippers through but I have no desire to wake or be saved.  

Don't save me from the dreams that give me the fire to do my other work so well.  I would never have wanted the Beast to change into a man.  I'm the mother who hunts the wolf that ate her mother and scared her child. 

I'm the woodcutter who heard the call and answered, with his axe.

I need these things to feel alive.

I suspect you do, as well.

yours, verbatim,

Queen

MORE
5/16 '17 1 Comment
[Reconsitutes ABBA for the sole purpose of turning this post into a single]
 

Honest, sincere question:

What does a news article or report need so you'll consider it "not fake"?   I imagine some folks may just dismiss any news they disagree with as "fake news."  But I'm trying to assess what criteria need to be satisfied in order for someone to accept that what is being presented, whether they agree with the article's viewpoint or not, as "reported accurately."

I acknowledge that humans are gloriously imperfect, and that it is physically impossible to report something without imparting some molecule of bias/slant.  But anyway.

If you are left-leaning, are you capable of reading an article from Breitbart or PrisonPlanet and evaluate it with the mindset that it could potentially be accurate? If the Washington Post cites a source "who only spoke on the condition of anonymity," would you be more apt to believe it's "real" and not "fake?" What if Breitbart cited an anonymous source? Would you instantly think, "This is bullshit" and roll your eyes? What if they interviewed Comey directly?

If you are fervent Trump supporter, is it even possible for you to read something on The Huffington Post or even the Washington Post and believe it's within the realm of possibility that it may be accurate? What if they cite an anonymous source? What if they cite a primary source? What if they interviewed Comey himself, for example? 

What criteria need to be met for you to feel satisfied that the reporter is reporting accurate information?  Do you need unedited video from Trump himself? If he were incriminating himself, would you dismiss it as doctored video? 

I'm struggling with this.


(x-posted to DW.)

MORE
5/16 '17 44 Comments
Conditions of anonymity have to be respected. If the news the anonymous source reports is specific enough, the source might not matter.

"A Mar-A-Lago source speaking on condition of anonymity said that after Mr. Trump was served roasted beet salad by an elderly waitress, he said, "No servers over the age of 30 willever be hired in America again, that's it, final, only 25 year old waitresses with big sparkly tits."
Yep, I definitely respect those anonymous sources. But I see myself nodding in perfect, blind, this-is-totally-factual agreement whenever it's printed in the NYTimes, slightly less but still in the high 90th percentile when it's cited by WaPo... but if Breitbart quoted an anonymous source I'd laugh and roll my eyes. Which is... I guess... dumb?

I used to get this thing from the NYTimes that said "Here are some well-written, well-researched articles from the right that you might wanna read to get out of your lefty echo chamber." I found it immeasurably helpful... until it stopped automatically arriving to my inbox. (Must investigate.)
Please let us know if you rediscover this. I would like to check it out.
Seconded. I am too much in the echo box or just taking a break altogether. This is no-goodnik.
Here's today's NYT round-up of good writing from both sides:

Writing From Right and Left: Reactions on a Special Counsel, and More https://nyti.ms/2qvqL4o
I would also like to know how to get my tits to sparkle. Are the tits themselves sparkly, or are they just wearing a disco-ball bra?

WE DISCUSS THE IMPORTANT SHIT HERE.
Fortunately for you, I have a bag of breast sparkles RIGHT HERE. Just fly on out.

Happy to be of service.
Sometimes sparkle is in the eye of the beholder.
These are excellent questions. To be honest, I take everything with a huge-ass grain of salt these days, no matter the source. This comes from (my perception of) what happened during the primaries, with Bernie being systematically left out of many of the sources I used to trust. When I say this, I am often met with backlash but... it is what it is. Everything you raise in this post deserves a lot more good, hard thinkng.
Yeah, it's definitely easy for me to point the fingers at the "dumbasses on the alt-right." But they're doing the same thing to lefties, and we all think we're right, and we all cannot comprehend how the other side can feel the way they do.

*shrug*
The much-bashed MSM has a lot of motivation to get the story right.

For one - their subscribers and advertisers demand it.

If the NYTimes made up stories and got busted - and they will - they kill their own integrity. It's devastating - subscribers to the Times, the Washington Post, watchers of the evening news and CNN, etc. are expecting the stories they read/see to be accurate. The more stories they botch, the more subscribers and advertisers they lose. To most media outlets that actually make money, journalistic integrity isn't just a plaque on a wall - it's the core of their survival.

In other words: they have accountability.

Super-partisan outlets, from Fox News to PoliticusUsa, care less about accuracy and more about making their readers happy. Their audience wants to be told they are right, and so the stories will be skewed in that direction. Accuracy isn't as importance as obsiquiousness. (That's why I don't consider Fox News a news outlet.) Still, they have advertisers too, and if they're humiliated repeatedly with bad stories, even people who pay their bills will rebel.

Sure, the Times, Washington Post, etc. are going to make sure Trump takes a punch or two in their stories. It's only fair - he started it. But there's a reason the Times has started the much-derided practice of "positive stories about Trump every Sunday" - they need to show to the dunderheads that "liberal bias" doesn't define them. It's easy to find cases where the NYT uncovered stories that hurt the "left" - they broke the story about Hillary's ill-fated email server, after all.

Now, none of this is to suggest that the MSM doesn't get it wrong sometimes. It happens. Reporters manufacture stories (sup, Stephen Glass) or get fooled by bad intel (the final season of The Wire was based on the true story of cops "inventing" a serial killer in order to direct funding to the department; this really happened). Sometimes the reporters misunderstand the information in front of them. Or sometimes, they're simply lied to - this happened to the Wilmington News Journal, who retracted an entire dynamic story based on the subject's delusional lies. (I know the subject. She lied.)

But reputable media sources point out their errors and clean up the story, and make it clear they were wrong. "Alt" media doesn't bother - they justify their error by saying "well, it COULD have been true."

I think it's our responsibility to take stories at face value. The recent story about Trump spilling a crucial piece of intel to the Russians was carefully parsed by the Times; they framed it as "our sources say this." But it's clear they have FAITH in their sources, and that's the crux of Jill's question: should she have faith in their sources, too?

To decide, look at the track record. Look at their win/loss record. That's your best bet. It won't be 1.000, but the MSM is still doing a bang-up job.

By now, the Times story been corroborated - by Trump himself - and several sources claim Israel is the country that has been providing us with great intel. Israel is reportedly quite furious about Trump's leak.

Is that true? We'll see. If so, it's a feather in the MSM's cap - and another reason to trust them.

Here's the thing, though. The Trump campaign really did change the rules. Before him, truth mattered. But he proved you can absolutely lie, contradict yourself, and lie again and it doesn't matter WITH A CERTAIN CROWD. (What motivates that crowd? Everything from extreme right politics to a need to feel like their memes actually make a difference.) Truth doesn't matter - an effective lie is as desirable as just telling the truth. But THEY HAVE NO ACCOUNTABILITY. If they're wrong, they ignore it and move on.

BUT. These people in Washington? The ones with jobs who have to deal with the NYTimes reports? When reporters ask them to comment on a story they know is damaging, they're in a tough spot. If they deny it and it turns out to be true, their credibility gets damaged - at best. Look at McMaster - his first statement was a bit of Nathan Thurm wordplay, but then he was more blunt in his denials. There's a consequence to that. McMaster is now widely considered a liar. That's not a great look for a Trump staffer at this moment.

And that's the final step on the circle of journalistic life. Real people are asked to confirm the news. In the real world - er, rather, DC - people take a huge political risk denying what they know to be true. Especially when there are so many staffers who WANT to leak Trump's Follies to the press. (Along these lines - WaPo and NYT have both said they've dealt with lots of deliberate fake "intel" from people who want to discredit them. It's a tricky business. Everyone thinks they're the Joker.)

Oh - and sources have been anonymous since the inception of American journalism. They HAVE to be. Their bosses don't want people talking to the press. But they do it, because they need the press to get the word out there and stop the madness. People who cry "reveal your sources or GTFO!" can be defined in one word:

Un-American.

So Buzzfeed is that site that makes you answer questions about tacos to tell you what narwhal you are. But they are actually great for long-term stories - Ben Smith is widely respected for his political journalism. And yes, they lead the way in clickbaity headlines, but I think that's just the way of the present - it's a fight to the death for clicks out there. So get used to it. But Buzzfeed is no joke when it comes to reporting that makes a difference - look how they raised the hood on the alt-right dogwhistling of Million Dollar Extreme Presents: World Peace, causing Adult Swim to cancel them. The author got heavily attacked and threatened by the sniveling fans of the show (and ultimately, geez, who cares), but it was excellent, informative, sourced journalism.

There are many "journalists" who don't answer to anybody. They have no accountability. That doesn't make them always wrong - sometimes they have sources too (Mike Cernovich has "his people" inside the WH, after all). But it literally doesn't matter when he's wrong. He loses nothing. Not like the MSM.

This was a long and serious post. Sorry about that. Let me make it up to you: An old woman goes to the doctor. "Doc, I have a problem with gas. I fart 10 times a day. Fortunately they're silent and don't stink - in fact, I've farted twice and you have no idea." The Doc says "I see. Take these pills and see me next week." Next week: "Doc, my farts are still silent, but now they stink! What the hell?" Doc says "Great! Now that we've cleared up your sinuses, let's work on your hearing."
You're like smart and stuff.
I think all investigative journalism should end in a joke as a reward for getting that far.

A follow up question : You say the MSM has accountability. But to whom? By whom? Who stands up to the Times and says "You got this wrong" (or "LOL cuck libtard fake news!")? Who watches the watchmen?
Two little old ladies run into each other at the supermarket.
One says to the other, "Barbara, you've got a suppository in your ear!"
Barbara says, "What?" After several rounds of negotiations, Barbara says, "Great, now I know where my hearing aid is."
I could give you an answer to this, but why reinvent the wheel? UW offers an entire university course on the subject now.

The syllabus, all of the lectures and homework, and a bunch of additional resources are all available for free online.

http://callingbullshit.org/index.html

I also found this fascinating and highly helpful:

https://www.amazon.com/dp/B0074VTHH0
Oooh! Thank you!
I love my smart friends. Daaaang.
Well, looky here! Thank you!
(Love the URL, BTW.)
There's also the idea of emotional appeal. For example, WaPo and NYTimes don't care about feelings, just facts. If the facts evoke an emotional reaction, great. Click bait news sites tend to hyperbolize with emotionally charged language.
Ya know? I used to think that, too.

If we're talking about The Times, I agree with your assessment of facts over feelings. But WaPo's headlines are increasingly BuzzFeedy / clickbaity and I'm starting to seek out the more even-handed companion article on the NYTimes after I read the waaaaaaay biased article on WaPo. (And don't get me wrong, I am WaPo's target audience. I agree with their leftiness. I love them. But maaaaan, those headlines are getting soooo annoying (or at least how they're summarized in my 3x-day emails I get from them).

Here are some examples from today (because it's the first one I grabbed):

--Trump doesn’t embody what’s wrong with Washington. Pence does. The president is crazy. What’s everyone else’s excuse?

-- The experts were right: Trump isn’t fit to be president

-- ‘I was in total shock’: Ohio police officer accidentally overdoses after traffic stop

-- Bill Gates told new grads to read this book. Now it’s surging on Amazon.

-- Paul Ryan might regret having said this about Hillary Clinton

I mean, I'm surprised those headlines don't say "Hosted by Outbrain" or "Zergnet" after them. I get that newspapers need to sell subscriptions and ads... so I bought subscrptions to WaPo and NYT right after the election. The NYT just feels fairer to my eyeballs.
Yeah, sometimes I have to search out the same story on multiple news sites and let my brain sift it a bit. I like getting American news from British sites (BBC, The Independent, The Guardian) because the distance means they talk in broader terms. It's calmer.

Avoid The Daily Mail.
Daily Mail = NO NO NO.

I do occasionally dabble in The Guardian, but seem to recall maxxing out on free articles and forgetting the incognito window trick. Thanks for the reminder!
Okay, before I go clicking around in the darker corners of the intarwebs, what's with Daily Mail?
It's basically the UK's version of the New York Post, mixed with a little National Enquirer.

By way of example, they're the ones who doxxed the grad student in one of my labs who was auctioning off her virginity online a few years ago. One of their reporters showed up at her lab to harass her ("don't you want to tell your side of the story?") and I had to run him off.
BUT, and this is probably bad, they ran the story about Sean Spicer's college nickname, verifiably.

Broken clock, etc.
Yes. They're not particularly fake news. More just sleazy shitty news.
Got it. No Daily Mail.

(Thanks.)
Daily Mail is great for shitty gossip, not so much for news. Sometimes I read it as a guilty pleasure!
Have you seen that things going around from Oatmeal about beliefs &changing your mind? ... Thing thingy (I googled it for ya) http://theoatmeal.com/comics/believe


Yeah. I love that.

I love the Oatmeal in general, but that hits extra hard these days.
Oooh! I hadn't seen this! Thank you! I typically like how the Oatmeal boils stuff down.

((Clicks through))

OMG OMG LOVE THIS LOVE THIS SO MUCH THANK YOU!
I instinctively eye roll for pretty much everything from the Right. I don't _want_ to. For a while, I looked for a source that I could 'trust' and get some balance. I wasn't able to find one. I'm uncertain how much of that is a failure on my own part to not respond with a knee jerk reaction as soon as I started reading.

For a little while, I got really high on my horse about it though. This seemed like 'proof' of the wrongness of the Right. "They can't even write a simple article anywhere that just states facts. It's all emotional bullshit."

But in the end, I'm not that naive. "We're" doing it too.

Even valued papers like WaPo and NYTimes. Because here's the thing: their job isn't to be unbiased. It's to sell newspapers. In a world where that's getting harder and harder to do, even they are succumbing to the 'cheap shots' that are click bate-y headlines and emotional wording. Leading their audience to an emotional response. Because people who get worked up about something link to their articles.

One of the podcasts I listen to This Week in Google ( https://twit.tv/shows/this-week-in-google ) or TWiG has a regular contributor by the name of Jeff Jarvis. He's long been a journalist and is doing work on a number of things involved with the theme of "How do we 'fix' journalism and hold news sources accountable in the digital age?" He's a bit curmudgeonly (in a way that I think you would adore) and while I don't always agree with him, I give him extreme props for being well thought out and forward thinking.

Bottom line is that I don't have a good answer, unfortunately. My own 'solution' is completely unacceptable. Burying your head in the sand does nothing. It helps nothing. It improves nothing.

So I commend you for trying to figure out a set of criteria for more valid sources. It's a great goal. I'm going to do some more thinkin' on the subject and if I come up with anything, I'll let you know.
This seems of value, so I tossed them a few bucks. I hope it launches:
https://www.wikitribune.com
Podcasts: Left, Right and Center (discussion of current events/politics between three people with said POV, some change week to week).
Democracy Decoded: ex-lobbyist tells you how Washington really works, helps explain current events, more fact-based than opinion-based.
But you will love Science Vs. it analyzes political issues that are science-based, like fracking and climate change and the podcasters are from Australia.
These sound perfect-- thank you! Podcasts aren't a regular part of my media consumption, but it looks like maybe it should be.
Podcasts are good for boring car rides and plane rides (for plane, download your episodes before you take off).
These sound great - thanks!
I look for specificity and source citations.

Bad example: "A source close to the White House said that a sealed envelope containing personal information was delivered to the Russian consulate."

Good example: "Wendy Higgerton, White House chief of flatware, said that she sent a thank you note to Sascha Bierlislubovitz of the Russian Consulate, for their gift of seven oyster forks."
I love you SO MUCH.
I live to serve. :)
Yeah. That was a pretty great set of examples. (Why does that sound dirty?)

Also, I will just say that I think it pretty solidly covers what I look for, though I too am struggling. A lot.

In fact, my greatest fault right now is that I'm playing Ostrich and burying my head and 'hiding' because I can't really read ANY article without immediately punching holes in it and coming away thinking "that was completely biased bullshit" - even from the side I agree with.
My podcast habit is hurting. I used to listen to about 3-4 hours a day of podcasts- smart, dumb, weird, and Whatever Happened To Pizza At McDonald's?, but right now I haven't been able to feed that habit enough.
 

Sometime, about two years ago, an important part of me was hit in a storm.  The way trees suddenly sheer off branches, the way a cliff suddenly becomes a muddy stew of rocks, pine needles sludge.

I am built for recovery.  I'm not simply, strong, I'm adaptive in the heathiest sense I can ascribe to that word.  As long as I've had memory, reaching back to the smallest parts of me, back when I remember how hard it was to climb on a chair, or reach a doorknob, I have had hope.  It's not a delicate, golden, flitting thing, it's inside me, as strong as the as the ocean, and it batters to get out of me when the world becomes difficult.

Some people say "Derby saves," and there are varigated meanings of that, of course.  I think many things can save you.  

But most of all, you are going to have to save yourself.  Even if, even if we all get by with a little help from our friends, sometimes.

It's up to you.  I try to never forget this.  It's why loving yourself and loving your friends as hard as possible feels like the most important thing to me.  

And yes, this has everything to do with skating.

*********************************************************************

I am passionately devoted to Valentine's Day. It has never bothered me to be unpartnered, I've never felt constrained to express my love only by traditional discourse, and Valentine's is the perfect day to celebrate the indulgences that feel native to my being: chocolates, glitter, elegance, perfume, jewelry, lingerie, paper, pens. I can't imagine a holiday that more exemplifies the contents of the first two drawers of my antique dresser.  

 I do not know what tipping point I reached when I lost my restraint for loving myself.  

When I realized that the important she was a person that I lived inside and that she was, for lack of any other better word, fun.


When I lost my restraint for loving myself, I lost it for loving other people too.  Now when I meet people they can either flee from the tidal way of my full force of energy or affection.  Or they can step in and be bathed in it.

*********************************************************************

I was scrolling through messages to find pictures of my new Lolly Skates by Moxi.  And here they are.  When I first opened them, the day before I left for Europe to go on tour with a client, they were without wheels and laces.  I felt uncertain, I could not see the full vision.  I hadn't had time, see, to daydream the wheels, to contemplate the laces, to envision the toe stops.  I had only hours, to pack, to do those thousand small organizational things that make up a successful tour.  But my friend showed up and carefully wrapped my skates for me, assuring me that he'd take care of them while I was gone. 

When I came home I was startled a bit he offerd to get me from the airport.  Our friendship has been, primarily, in the dark and at the rink, but I was worn flat by the trip and ready for some discourse that did not relate to professional matters.  When he opened the trunk of the car, they were there, in their box.  I was hesitant.  I wasn't quite ready to think about them just yet. 

But I unwrapped them and there they were.  He'd listened carefully, and taken a few risks.  Risks that paid off because the moment I put them on they were perfect.  They held my foot and supported my ankle.  The nerve damage in my faulted left foot was less than barefoot.  I could not believe it.  

I have wonderful friends.  He's a newer friend.  I realized though, it's like the way I give Valentine's.  It's the point that you reach where all the restraint and careful navigation has become simply dull.  No one wants a compass and a map to friendship.  You might as well say what you mean and mean it.

"I'm not too much?" I said.

"Not scared by it at all," he said.

I'm pretty sure we are going to be friends for a very long time.  I would have hugged him but I was hugging my skates and I know that was just exactly what he wanted.

"Hey," he said, "I'm glad you are my friend."

And in a day and age when Woody Allen ruined it for those of us who absolutely fucking can be friends with members of the opposite sex by asserting we can't, that naming of me as friend is like someone put the most beautiful crown on my head.

Friends. 

They are the best thing this world has to offer.  Don't argue with me on this.

*********************************************************************

The nerve damage in my left foot is a dull burning reminder of the dues I've paid.  Hours on set of long miles walked, sometimes as long as the Bering Strait.  Stairs and trucks, time on my feet, time paid.  Time unpaid.  I think of the Little Mermaid, how the burning steps she took were punishment for wanting beyond her means, for longing for a life that was, by Anderson's measure (or someone's) sinful.  My burning foot is from duty. And it now interferes with the step I want on the inside.  I need my foundation, I need my feet.  

This body belongs to me.  I make a doctor's appointment, I step up eschewing the pretty bag of spoils from Europe: real honey, creamy chocolates, apricot brandy.  The ability to step, to glide, to dance, is more desired.

I had to write about skating, and it's the silliest thing and I keep saying that, but who dedicates an entire blog to happiness?  Happiness is now a project, a thing that we are supposed to build and construct.  I don't and I can't.  Joy I can find, happiness is the result of unrestricted joy.  I don't want to read about it as it walks backwards anymore.  You don't fall in love by doing it right, just as you can't tickle yourself or give yourself a great hug.  Communion, action, reaction to without dreading the consequences.

*********************************************************************

Someone asked recently about my name. I used to have a shirt, "I taste of glitter... and rock n roll."  And I do.  I'm not a faint impression, that's okay though. 

I am Queen because my entire life, I was the princess.  The princess that knew she wanted to grow up to be Queen and take over the world.  Who was never bothered that sometimes one might be saved by a prince or menaced by the dragon.  Princes after all, only become consorts in your own kingdom, so really they are just helpers after all.

Queen.  Queen of my own destiny, queen of the world, Queen of Air and Darkness, Queen Mab.  

Everything that is ridiculous, over the top, and too much that lives in me is in that name.  

I'm not saying this right.  The words won't come out of the air and sit down and play nicely on the page.


But I'll keep trying, that's the reason I write here.


Q.R.C.

MORE
5/13 '17 7 Comments
1. Bad ass skates.
2. Delightful post as always.
3. "I am Queen because my entire life, I was the princess. The princess that knew she wanted to grow up to be Queen and take over the world. Who was never bothered that sometimes one might be saved by a prince or menaced by the dragon. Princes after all, only become consorts in your own kingdom, so really they are just helpers after all."

You know something? I've struggled with the opposite side of this vantage for some time now. I consider myself a somewhat enlightened human male in the modern era. I don't really want to rescue a damsel in distress because I want and appreciate the concept of her being strong enough to do it herself.

But also? I kinda do. I'm self aware enough to know that part of this is intrinsic to my nature. I _always_ want to help. Sometimes though, that's not what others want.

This just seemed like a really great way to look at it from the other side.
I always think... ha! Per my icon... that it's up to us to save ourselves but the flip side is that we can only get by with a little help from our friends.

There have been times in my life when the pieces of me had to be picked up from the scattered parts of my little world and stitched back together by those who loved me. Forces are big and strong, we can all be torn to pieces or knocked sideways. It was part of the bonding process, actually, learning to accept help or rescue is the moment when we say to someone, "Yes I might need you. I love you, I've been part of your world, but now I have a need, are you my person?"

If that person is male, and that's his impulse, I don't assume he's doing it out of a complex or a need to control. Because I am female and that is always my first instinct. It hurts me when people think I'm doing it to control them. The truth is that I have deep resources and I want to share, be a part of things. It's lashed into my spirituality and the part of me I want broken and shared, like bread around the table.

So princes can rescue away, so long as they don't mind that I come in on small cat feet and do my own rescues for the things that they cannot master, but I can.
(and I hope this reads clearly. Someone discovered MemMem at the computer and decided to create a chaotic storm, lest she write a complete sentence without toddler supervision)
*nods*

Control is a cage.

Let it suffice to say that for me? That's the last thing I would want for anyone or anything. Critters need the great wide open and we? We're just critters no matter what kind of airs we put on.
Helping and being helped are wonderful so long as it's not one person in the same role all the time.
I am love those skates
You should see the toe stops he ordered. I mean... it's to die for. I hopefully get them tonight!
 

A post, written in parts.  So some of this is several weeks old old and some is new.

That said... on with it!

*********************************************************************

I went to a derby bout this past weekend.  It was delicious.  When you are mid bout it feels so fast, a flurry of arms, legs, glimpses of faces.  Jamming makes your heart pound so hard against your chest.  But watching it is such a different experience. It can be easy to think that it's simple to remain on one's feet during it.

I love derby.  I really think that with some focus I could be damn good. But my heart is far more in dance skating right now.  I'm so frustrated that it's been thwarting this week.  I've scarcely had rink time, once on Thursday.  The rain comes down and while I can skate, I'm always half an eye on my knee high that she doesn't shove her precious toes underneath one skate pounding down.

My friends on my deep secret OPW will tell you I am somewhat obsessed with systems of organization and belongings.  This week, related completely to everything, we began to deconstruct my front garage.  My house is a wreck and that's saying something. 

What I keep thinking about is this: why this?  I mean you have eight hours to work, eight to sleep and eight to play ... in theory.  Why, in the full life of a solo mother of two, with a strong career swing, would I choose this as my play and what cost?

No, for real, everything has a cost.  A minute flies by, another replaces it, but that's a minute gone and that new fresh one is only there for sixty seconds.  Life is precious. 

So I organize, structure.  The things I love, I try to give a lot of space to to breathe. Including skating.

*********************************************************************

Two nights a week I slip out the front door with my skate bag.  My friend picks me up and we drive off down along the waterfront.  The first part of the conversation is usually about skating as is the middle parts and the end parts.  My entire week I am other things, but starting in the darkness of the car, our faces only lit by the dash lights or the lights of passing vehicles, we are just this part of ourseleves.   For three or four hours, twice a week, I can narrow my focus down to a few things: my skating, my technique, the music and myself.

*********************************************************************

I return from a long work trip.  My skate friend picks me up with one thing in mind: In the trunk of his car are my new Moxi Lolly Skates.  When I left they were without wheels, full of potential.  In his hand they have taken on pink wheels, pink toe stops, and on deeper inspection, tiny teal nuts hold the wheels on, constrasting sweetly in a personal way that only I would notice.  Finding friends to skate weekly with you can be a challenge, and these details are a love letter to a shared passion we have that is by some measure, silly, but as I've said before, a necessary balance for me.

I am jet lagged.  Two countries, three time zones, but the next night I am at the rink and lacing up my  new skates.  I'm so tired I am still lurching standing still on my own feet, much less wheels, but I can't resist.  The skates are everything I thought they'd be.  Moving in them, across the light speckled floor, is like unicorns and glitter, like the smell of a brand new Lisa Frank sticker book, like Hello Kitty purses, Zebra bubble gum, cream soda, blanket forts and drawing rainbows.  It's like the first thick line you draw on paper with a new box of crayons.  It's the first time you see someone at your front door and that strange feeling in the bottom of your heart, that is hopeful and shy all at once, that knows, "We're going to be best friends."  For all the movies and songs that catch the bad ending of things, the lurching moment where you realize that everything you believed and loved is not real, skating is the opposite.  It's about the things that are real, that are always fun, that make you smile.  

It's easy to lose these sensations, my daily responsibilities are so big, so large, the spaces I move in are so fantastic.  But sometimes I want to be in that simpler part of me where the magic starts, where things grow and change, where my default is always, always, happiness.  I was born a happy person and despite or in reaction to all, I am always happy eventually. I'm a lucky penny with two sides, and I live a wonderful life.  

Skating is just an extension of that. 

Covered in glitter and smelling of rock n roll,

Queen Rage-Crush

MORE
5/12 '17 7 Comments
I have a crush on your writing brain.

"I am jet lagged..."

That paragraph. All of it.

Also? Dropping into / separating the "Two nights a week..." portion - nice touch.
Aww, thank you. That means a lot as I actually was just dropping words on the page.

But I'm so glad some of how I feel comes across.
Also - I keep meaning to post this for you. I'm guessing that you've probably already seen it given your love of skating, but on the off chance you haven't: https://youtu.be/hi4pzKvuEQM
I love that video, I also just love Chet Faker. The dancing in the video Drop the Game is fantastic. (https://youtu.be/6vopR3ys8Kw).

Skating for me is so much about the motion to the music. I loved derby but the bone rattling shake of hits was more than I could sustain over a long period of time. What drew me initially was the way the body can shape to a song or a concept and the fluidity of that on skates.

If you like that video, those three women also skate under the tag LA Roller Girls.

They are all very good but the woman in the middle?.... she's crazy sexy amazing.
Yeah. I was oblivious to Chet Faker before a buddy introduced me to him via this video and his version of No Diggity.

Pretty sure he just showed me this video because of the girl in the middle because you're absolutely right. Dayam.
I loved your analogies and the chance to understand them in reverse, since skating is something I do get.
Thank you!

I'm so excited. I get to go again tonight. It's like looking forward to a first date, every single time. :P
 

So a friend recently said "I'd like to feel a burning need for the next experience more often."

That really got me thinking about things in my own life. I've often thought about myself as a passionate guy. I feel things very strongly. There has been laughter and tears - both in abundance.

But here's the thing: it always seems to come after the fact. Leading up to and even generally during a moment / decision / experience in my life, I feel very, very 'meh'.

This, in turn, got me wondering: "How many other folks are like me in this regard? Do my friends feel strongly about concepts leading into their decisions? Before their experiences?"

Obviously no one can feel strongly about something they have zero experience with or information about. One can't feel super strongly about the quality of the sand on Pluto over the sand on their local beach.

But I wonder.

MORE
5/11 '17 6 Comments
I'm the opposite. I tend to give up in the middle of what I'm doing coz I am thinking too much about the next thing. I don't care for it.
Yup. I get that. (He said, mourning all of his LONG list of started and never finished creative projects.)
Great question.

I think I'm doing well at "being here now," but I'm not especially feeling "being there next" at the moment, in part because I'm kind of at a local maximum. Or maybe simply where I belong.
Yeah. I hear you. If presence was a test, I would ace the 'here and now'. It would be accurate to say that I feel like this is one of my super powers. That is, until (like Adams) I'm just done. All at once.
as a fellow AD(H)Dude, I suspect you'll understand what I mean when I say that my usual arc is diddle-farting around getting started with new experience, followed by a massive burst of enthusiasm and energy once it gets started, followed by a bit of a lower plateau, then a precipitous drop where I have like zero focus or finish-a-shit left.

I find that the initial diddle-fart period has gotten more difficult to push past as I've gotten older - but the mostly-functional plateau also lasts longer - so that's not a bad trade-off.
Yeah. That's me too. Just all at once there's a drop off to Zero Giveafrack.

It's kinda a problem since now I'm completely 'on my own' and not in any kind of a standard 'must live in accordance with everyone around you' scenereo.
 

Sometimes when people start to write something (this is something I've heard  many, many times), "I hesitate to get started because I don't want to compromise what's in my head." 

I worked on Jarnsaxa Rising for a while yesterday. I printed out my outline and carried it to bed with me, re-read it, and re-read it again while the coffee brewed this morning. I have a clear idea for the next scene, but it's not going well.  I took the page for the scene I was working on and rewrote the outline in what I call "turns:" X wants Y but hits obstacle A, D wants N but hits obstacle Y. And then I write short sentences of how those stumbles toward goals over or around obstacles succeed or fail. 

As I was scrawling this, I came to what I thought was a weak end. In my head it was this:

ERIC: Why didn't you tell me?

SIF: You had to find out for yourself.

(Cue "Somewhere Over The Rainbow." It's the Wizard of Oz all over again.)

As I was scribbling, it cleared up, and I was pleasantly surprised. This came out. I'm transcribing my scribbled notes. 

ERIC: Why didn't you tell me? 

SIF: I can only make you grow, but not change, either you choose your form or something else chooses it for you. (Jarnsaxa has to learn this.) When a tree grows, its leaves turn toward the sun and bend with the wind, roots go to water. 

The line, "its leaves turn toward the sun" came from a theatre design class I had as an undergrad. We were talking about how if you design a forest, you have to consider that the sun will cause that forest to look a certain way, you have to take science into consideration, not just "what looks cool on a stage." 

My point is, you might think you know in advance every detail about your story, and that's good, you should. But there is a lot of room for discovery in the process of pencil, paper, scribbling and time, and those discoveries will improve what you think you have now. 

EDITED TO ADD: Sassy thinks that if she sits in my lap while I type, my job is to gently pet her. If I type, she bites my hands. BYE SASSY.

MORE
5/7 '17 2 Comments
"SIF: I can only make you grow, but not change, either you choose your form or something else chooses it for you. (Jarnsaxa has to learn this.) When a tree grows, its leaves turn toward the sun and bend with the wind, roots go to water. "

How about cutting that first line, so you get:

SIF: Either you choose your form or something else chooses it for you. (Jarnsaxa has to learn this.) When a tree grows, its leaves turn toward the sun and bend with the wind, roots go to water.

Either way, I love it. And you.
Thank you.
In the context of the scene it needs some fine-tuning. That's what drafts are for.
 

If your screen is very, very good and your eyes are sharp, maybe you noticed the actual "delete my account" button. Fawkers.

But I don't get to criticize. Because ya know what OPW doesn't have? A "delete my account" button. Shame on me.

I'm publicly shaming myself here because I need a little motivation to release this feature, which is completely coded and ready to go — I just need to test it a little more.

Cue Neil Gaiman quote.

MORE
5/5 '17
 

I need a recommendation for a quick-and-easy video editing program for Windows.  I shot some video on my phone of a rehearsal, and I'd love to be able to slice the 33 minute video into individual songs... BUT I also want to be able to mess with the audio track if need be.

I will only use this once or twice, so cheaper is better, but whatevz.

Any recommendations?

(*cough* Matt Lichtenwalner ​​​​​​​*cough*)

Gracias!

MORE
5/5 '17 1 Comment
My first thought is Camtasia, but now that I'm thinking about it, I seem to remember you saying that it wouldn't do audio editing?

Windows Movie Maker works on some later versions of Windows (you still have 7?) - if you can find it. Some (minor) audio editing (cutting / moving) is built in.

I love Premiere Elements - it's pricey (but still < $100) and it does most everything I want when I have a Windows Machine to use and/or don't have my Creative Suite (and thus Premiere). Check the PatchoJillo dropbox folder.

Which leads me to: do you not still have CS3? (or was it 6?). Premiere is in that and is the industry standard 800 lb gorilla. That said, the learning curve isn't tough for the basics. Cut, slide, paste etc.

Okay, you didn't want War an Peace. Let me know if you run into issues.

Also (and unrelated) I'm going to be in L.A. tomorrow. :)
 

I am grateful for union-mandated breaks that allow me time to use the toilet, drink water, stuff half a protein bar in my face, and go outside to fart. 

FART JOKE! WOO HOO!!!!!!!!

The Internet needs an "is this worth it?" calculator. Buzzfeed needs a quiz. 

MORE
5/4 '17
 

On the way to breakfast, I found myself thinking about the concept of Loyalty. I've been called (more than once) 'loyal to a fault'. It's accurate. I stick with people, places, and things well past the point that it's healthy for me.

Then I found myself thinking about it from a logical standpoint. I feel that this is one of my greatest strengths in life - taking emotion out of a situation and reviewing it. Sadly, I don't always ACT on those reviews, but it helps.

So the logical perspective of the concept of loyalty: I get it. Once upon a time, we needed loyalty as a species. Tribalism allowed us to survive. But haven't we evolved past that need? I mean shouldn't I love everyone equally? (He asked, cringing at how hippy-dippy it sounds.) Or, perhaps more accurately, shouldn't I review people in a more unbiased by past interactions?

If I have a friend who has taken to burglary to support a crack addiction, shouldn't I look at him in the same light that I do a stranger with the same issues?

Or is there some value to past interactions that creates a benefit to taking the bad with the good in the present and/or future? It's not really occurring to me at the moment, but then I haven't had any coffee yet.

What do you think?

ETA: I should point out that I wasn't bitter or upset when I posted this. I was just trying to think things through without emotion tied to it. I also was not thinking specifically of people (though that is certainly an element) and even less any specific person or people. Again - just the concept and whether or not it has value in our modern society.

MORE
4/26 '17 22 Comments
I used to have a friend who was a bit of a powder keg.

we had a lot of fun times together for several years and got to be very, very close, but he would frequently get monumentally pissed off at something I said or did (or failed to say or do).

being a bit more irascible myself in those days than I am now, I often gave as good as I got, but I think any objective comparison would have found that, on balance, my snits toward him were less frequent and a bit more reality-adjacent than his toward me.

in any case though, over time our friendship started becoming pretty asymmetrical - with me doing a lot of favors for him and frequently having to mollify his snits, and not getting a heck of a lot in return.
at a certain point, I noticed this and decided to stop trying to placate or otherwise go very far out of my way for him. this improved my life considerably and made me enjoy his company a lot more. I never announced this transition to him, however, because I didn't feel that I needed to - it was an adjustment in my own thinking and attitude, not something that required any action or input from him.

and I didn't want to fight about it.

I suspect most people have had at least one or two interpersonal relationships where one person changed their outlook on what type of relationship it was while the other person kept right on thinking it was the same as it always had been. this was surely such a case but since the two people involved in this one were real oddballs, it led to some (perhaps atypically) entertaining situations.

case in point - we took a trip to France together a year or two after my "not taking any more shit" decision. from my perspective, we had an awesome time - one of the best we ever had as friends, and one of the best travel experiences I'd ever had full stop. we saw some great cathedrals (he sketched each one, I wrote about each one), we ate some great stuff, we found a barely marked ruin of a roman amphitheater in the middle of a cow-pasture, we had an awesome 3 or 4 hour conversation about existentialism and nihilism (one that changed my overall approach to life and ethics in ways that have lasted to this day) in the car ending with a visit to the cathedral at Chartres at like 3 AM. and our next to last night there, I met a nice Catalan woman in a gay dance club, who decided to make out with me for a couple hours, despite my nearly unintelligible French, on a park bench in the rain. (ooo la la.)

so anyway - we get back to the states and I go on about my life. my friend goes on about his, but in a SEETHING RAGE over how insolent and insufferable I had been during our "argument" in the car on the way to Chartres. he doesn't tell me about this, though. he decides that the best way to communicate his displeasure is to refuse to speak to me until I ask him what's bothering him and (presumably) make amends.

...except the first I hear of this is 8 months later when I invite him to Thanksgiving dinner at my house...at which point he explains that he hasn't been speaking to me and is by then pretty much apoplectic because of my failure to notice.

it only made him angrier that I found the situation hilarious.

we made up, of course, but were never really close friends again and have gradually drifted further apart over the years. nowadays, we exchange an email or a text every few months when one of us spots something relevant to the other's interests, or we run into each other on the street and chat for a few minutes, or we meet up for an hour of pinball every year or so. I think that suits us both fine.

I guess where this comes together with your inquiry about loyalty is that I think there's often a lack of willingness to acknowledge that interpersonal relationships have life cycles. they're born, they live, and then they die. occasionally that death is a catastrophic heart attack, but much more often it's a long, slow, quiet fade to a golden-hued tail.

and that's all ok.
Beautifully well put sir. Arguably, my little analysis of loyalty could be said to be a "should I allow relationships to grow old and die?"

Then again, it _feels_ a little more like your description of the 'aha moment' that you had with your friend. That, in turn, I see as a kind of parallel to the way I described my thought that perhaps I should judge people, places, and thing more in the moment than based on our combined past.

Which, I guess, is basically just another way of saying: "I agree with you."

Unrelated: what's the inspiration behind your profile pic?
it's a Bobrick brand c fold paper towel dispenser!
comes in white or in silver!
Well, clearly.
[Has one industrially powderpainted blue, installs it, waits for Chris to visit and flip out when he can't find it on the website]
what's not to like?
it's 3 rows of 8!
Seriously, loyalty is not a purely binary thing. We are more loyal to those in whom we are more invested. Or should be, anyway.

Sometimes it's OK to be loyal to a memory, to treat a comrade who is no longer kind and no longer reciprocating with a certain decency in recognition of the love they showed you once. Then again, you can also be loyal to the person they used to be, and what they'd think of their present behavior.
Interesting. It sounds like you're coming from a similar place to Leela above. An almost altruism-like stance. Loyalty as a 'repayment' for the kindness of the other (or the business, or the... noun.)
I don't think we should ever evolve bayond loyalty, although I think in a lot of ways we already have. I am also very loyal and I also see it as a great strength. Look at the state of the world? Look at how people fuck each other left and right, look how folks treat marriages, and friends, and business partners as disposable? To me, our disposable culture is part of what is destroying humanity. (Yes there are good reasons to discontinue relationships too, but that's not what we're talking about here).

The older I get, the more I'm realizing that what I value most in my friends... is the fact that they show up. To take that a step further, the friends I value most are the ones who show up. I am beginning to prioritize those friends who show up consistently more than those who don't. Mind you, that has little do to with love, and everything to do with me having limited energy to expend as a human. Life is scary, and lonely. What makes it worthwhile, for me, has everything to do with human connection, and a great deal to do with those loyal folks who keep showing up, through everything. What good is human connection that is fleeting to the point where it only exists out of convenience?

If your loyalty is holding you back, then maybe it's a problem. (I know other people have told you your loyalty is getting in your way, but is that YOUR experience of it as well?) But if you don't think it is stopping you from living your life, I think it's an increasingly and wonderful quality that is to be honored.

As for regarding strangers the same way you'd regard friends... you're human. It's impossible to separate our past experiences with people from our assessments of them. That's just a human fact I think. And if our pst actions had no bearing on our friendships well, then there is almost no point? I mean... hats how I see it.

That's my two cents about the matter!
You make some interesting points, but (forgive me - this isn't any kind of 'attack' - I just want to know if I missed anything) you don't seem to make any arguement for the "why loyalty is good". I appreciate that you value it and I think most of us do to one extent or another, but that's different than being able to say "It has an innate value because it allows us to... X, Y, Z."
Loyal shows us we aren't alone. Loyalty shoes is we are worth more than our mistakes. My most loyal friends are the ones who fortify me when I am scared in life, especially when it comes to taking risks. When I know I have people behind me no matter what, it allows me to feel less small and alone, and it helps combat my paralyzingly fear of what will happen should I "misstep" in any way. Loyalty stands in stark opposition to our ever-increasingly disposable society. Maybe some of why this is so important for me is that I have indeed been treated as disposable by more people than I would like to admit, and it has damaged me a great deal. So, I find it incredibly important and good to BE LOYAL myself, because I like to think I am paying forward the same gift that others have given me. Does that make sense?
Now that's an interesting point. Being the narcissist that I am, I wasn't thinking of the loyalty of others and the way that it benefits me.

So (if I understand correctly) you could almost argue that loyalty is a form of altruism. Your being loyal to a person is a form of altruism which you stand behind because someone else was loyal to you. A way to 'generate goodness' for lack of a better turn of phrase?

Does this change at all if we're not talking about a person that you're being loyal to? What if it's a business, or a favorite flavor of ice cream? (I know that sounds weird, but I'm really trying to get at all different angles.)
I don't think it changes, interestingly. Ben and Jerry's New York Super Fudge Chunk has always been there for me, in good times and bad, and it always tastes just as fucking good as the last time I had it. It shows up when I need it (for lack of a better way to say it), so, so do I. Same goes for businesss. If a business has been good to me, I'll be good to it.
Is it weird that I like the idea of an ice cream flavor 'being there' for you? :P
It's probably weird, but I like the idea of it too! In fact I've got some in the freezer right now...
I've been using the term "legacy friend". A person I would not likely be friends with if I met them now. I may even dislike a lot about them now. But at some point in the past we were friends, and now we have history.

I find it somehow easier to manage when I've categorized it as a legacy issue. And when current friends are like: sheez, why are you friends with that dude/dudette? I say "legacy friend" and everyone gets it.
Technical debt.
I may represent that remark!
but seriously - good concept.
That does seem like the perfect term / bucket. I think I'm going to steal that.
Evolving past loyalty? Please. We haven't evolved past tribalism or voting for Donald Trump.
I'm beyond sad that this is an accurate statement.