Archive for the ‘Random’ Category

Los Olimpicos

Friday, February 19th, 2010

Like almost nobody I know, I am hugely into the Olympics. I think this is an either you-have-the-disease-or-you-don’t, a la the Academy Awards, and I’m a double-haver because I grew up watching both. (Thanks, Mom.) So every year, alone though I may be, I soldier through.

We all know that NBC’s Olympic broadcast is both shamelessly schmaltzy and shot through with commercials—not to mention delaying the highlights until midnight—so I’m going to blow past that and give men’s ice skating a big HELLS TO THE YEAH.

Though mostly I’m talking about the short programs, because the longs were…long. And a bit lackluster. And…Evan Lysacek? I mean: work ethic, degree of difficulty, Torino flu, comeback drama, check. But: artistry? Nee-yope. He seems  royally freaked out when he skates, whereas Plushenko is, like, Lord of the Dance. I know the Olympic pressure is mind-boggling, and I would myself be a pool of ooze, but I want my gold medalist to own the ice.

Sigh.

And did they not totally rob Johnny Weir? (Heh, just mistyped that as Johnny Weird. He must get that all the time.) I love you and every last tassle, Johnny!

Also, I have this to say about snowboard cross: I am against it. When luck is so heavily a factor, is it really a sport? I say no to any event where your four-year Olympic dream can end in a matter of seconds. There has to be time, people. You have to get do-overs. One of the great things about the skating is that even after a fall, some skaters come back in soul-stirring ways, whereas if you get knocked out of the snowboard cross course, you are roasted-chicken-done.

Stupid snowboard cross.

Half-pipe, on the other hand, is wonderful for this reason: the shrug. Have you noticed that when they fall, which happens so often that not-falling is the exception, they inevitably end the run with a shrug? They’re like, “Oh, well! That didn’t quite go as planned! Brewski back at the lodge?”

So Long, Farewell, Auf Wiedersehen Shalom

Wednesday, December 16th, 2009

It’s holiday time, peeps.

And you know what that means.

John and I are headed east on our annual holiday tour. We’ll be seeing some of you! And sorry to miss others.

In the meantime, you’ll have to live without my life-sustaining opinions and anecdotes.

Try to be strong.

I’d like to give thanks for a fantastic 2009. Thanks, Universe. And family and friends. And my gorgeous-in-every-way husband. I invite 2010 to be equally as excellent.

Love,

Melissa

Railing Against the Facts

Sunday, November 22nd, 2009

Every morning, I make myself a carafe of tea. Throughout the morning, I drink it. About half-way through the day, I make myself another carafe. Then I drink that.

The math: By the end of most days, I have drunk two carafes. Each carafe holds a liter. Ergo, I drink about two liters of tea a day.

M: How much is two liters? Is it a gallon?

J: No, it’s half a gallon.

M: Half a gallon? That’s it?

J: Yeah.

M: It always looks like so much more in those Coke bottles.

J: They’re clever that way.

M: But I drink more than that. I drink, like—do I drink 8 pint glasses a day? Wouldn’t that be a gallon?

J: You’d have to be filling up each glass to the tippy-top.

M: [Walking over to the tea carafe and examining it.] I just think, you know, this has to be more than a liter.

J: [Laughing.] You’re like me right now.

M: How am I like you?

J: I’m always trying to prove that facts are wrong.

M: [Laughing.] That is so true.

J: I know.

M: You’re always railing against the facts.

J: I’m a railer.

M: Rail, rail.

J: [Giggle.]

[Fade to hug.]

Drawbacks

Sunday, November 15th, 2009

In a dream last night, I was in an unidentified epic battle. At one point I advised my compatriot that she should go to [an all-powerful deity] and have herself declared the goddess of love.

“But first,” I yelled as she ascended skyward, “find out what the fucking drawbacks are!”

Good to know that my unconscious is taking precautions.

Nobel? Oh, Well

Friday, October 9th, 2009

On this odd and perhaps bewildering day for our president, I offer this: Chia Obama. It looks like an SNL spoof-commercial, right? It’s for reals. And maybe racist. With the hair.

Wonder if you can get chia-heads of any other Nobel Peace Prize Winners. Chia Mother Teresa? Chia Dalai Lama? Chia International Atomic Energy Agency? I’m thinking no.

On Presidents and Psychology

Friday, October 2nd, 2009

Did anyone else hear the Terry Gross interview with historian and FOB Taylor Branch on Monday? It was a little befuddling. At Clinton’s request, in 79 secret meetings over the course of Clinton’s presidency, Branch recorded interviews with Clinton about politics, policy, and occasionally personality. The purpose was to document an inside view of Clinton’s experience for posterity, although it’s obvious that since Clinton was the initiator and maintains control over the tapes, there’s inherent bias.

Still, from what I can tell, Clinton didn’t exactly expect Branch to write a book about the experience. Or did he? When Branch ran the galleys by the former president, Clinton didn’t say “WTF, Bro?” Instead he corrected a reference to the Premier of China, who is apparently actually the President. Weird, right? Wouldn’t you have said, “Hey, Buddy, could you have asked me about this a wee bit earlier? Just, I don’t know, because?”

What struck me most about the content of the interviews was Clinton’s reported response to Branch’s questions about Monica Lewinsky. Understandably, this was a painful topic, although one wishes it had been less awkward between friends. In any case, they did talk about it, and Clinton apparently said, “It happened at a time when I was feeling sorry for myself.”

To be explicit, it happened twice, at two different times when he was feeling sorry for himself, since he took up with Lewinski, then stopped, and then took up with her again about a year later. (Branch looked back at the tapes to see what was happening politically during the affair, and indeed, Clinton was going through difficult periods, either as a result of political losses or attacks by the Right.)

Okay, so. On the one hand, it makes sense that Clinton acted out when he was feeling sorry for himself. And it’s better than hearing that things were honky-dory and he went ahead and had an affair with an intern anyway, because who is he then? But when I’m feeling sorry for myself, I a) cry; b) talk to my husband; c) talk to my friends; d) talk to a therapist; e) journal; f) meditate, etc. You know, there are tools.

Yes, Clinton’s situation was unique in the world—nobody is under as much pressure as the President of the United States—and I don’t doubt that his feelings were large in response. I mean, in no way do I challenge his suffering. I’m just humbly suggesting that a therapist might have been a good idea.

As I muddled this on Monday, I realized something that every therapist must know: So much of history has been acting out. Perhaps if more of us had been given tools for dealing with feelings, fewer of us would be doing stupid things that have a huge impact on the world.

Nelson Lichtenstein: WTF?

Friday, August 14th, 2009

Yesterday on Fresh Air, Dave Davies interviewed Nelson Lichtenstein, a history professor at UCSB. The topic: Lichtenstein’s book, The Retail Revolution: How Wal-Mart Created a Brave New World of Business. It’s not the first book about  Wal-Mart’s nefarious business practices, but it sounded like a good one, and, having turned down Wal-Mart as a client on ethical grounds, I was interested to learn everything I could about what’s still happening there, even after some positive changes have been made–albeit in a preemptive move to ward off unwanted attention from the Obama administration.

Things at Wal-Mart, it turns out, are still pretty gnarly. Wal-Mart does everything it can to milk as much out of its employees as possible while giving them the fewest benefits; it pits them against each other in competition for hours; its salaried employees are not compensated for overtime, which they invariably work, since meetings are held on Saturday mornings. All this is to say nothing of its environmental practices, or its well-documented gender discrimination, or the macro-economic impact of sourcing most of its uber-cheap products from China, or the micro-economic impact of shutting down independently owned businesses in towns across the US.

So here’s my question. Why does Lichtenstein shop there? Here’s the final question of the interview:

DAVIES: Do you shop at Wal-Mart?

Prof. LICHTENSTEIN: Yes, when I can. I have no objection to shopping at a big firm like that. I buy cars through assembly  lines, and I buy products sold at the most efficient form of retailing. And I’d like the change the company, but I see no problem with, you know, shopping there.

WHAT?

Shopping at Wal-Mart is NOT the same as buying a car off an assembly line. First of all, you have to buy a car off an assembly line; they aren’t made any other way. Second, the problem with Wal-Mart isn’t mass production. It’s labor and environmental practices. And if there were a car company that treated its employees and the environment with the same disdain that Wal-Mart does, that company should be boycotted, too.

Maybe the book is more cogent on this point? Because Lichtenstein, WTF?

Hello, Big World

Monday, June 8th, 2009

Hello, world.

My plans for this space, and what will undoubtedly become its vast readership, are modest. I’m going to write about grammar, usage, punctuation, dogs, and rodentia. Plus anything else that pleases me, and, ideally, you. I’m also going to make up plenty of nonsense words, because it’s an addiction, and I don’t have the energy to go into treatment.

Another goal: short entries.  We’ll see how long that lasts.