An Interesting Prospect

So I am currently reading Dwight Okita's The Prospect of My Arrival, and it's good, but I am not far enough in yet for an actual review. What it HAS done though, is cause me some deep philosophical ponderance (which bodes well for the book), and it is those ponderances I actually want to talk about.

The premise of the story is the Pre-Born Project, in which is a a chance for embryos... souls... people who are pre-born, to have a chance to come before they are born, meet some critical people and have some experiences, and then decide whether or not they want to be born. The scientist involved believes this will make for happier people, if everyone is here by their own choice.

But that got me to thinking... what sort of people would and would not decide to be born? Truly?


The Resilience of the Human Spirit

I am going to start with the assumption that most of us would like our chance... that there is an error toward the yes vote because, even pre-born, SOMETHING has to look better than NOTHING.

So I think it is easier to think about maybe who WOULDN'T choose to give it a shot.


People with really horrible people for parents... this seems relatively obvious... Oh, no, I am not stepping into THAT.

People with biological depressive tendencies... though would these have manifested yet? Seems they usually appear in the teen years... But there is an opposite that is thought to be a trait (as opposed to a state caused by circumstances). Hardiness. Hardy people keep on plugging away and tend to be more resilient than more fragile people (who take things personally and are hurt easily and hold those negative feelings longer). Hardy people have better outcomes in terrible circumstances than people lacking in that hardy trait in the same circumstances, so low hardiness might mean those interviews are critical.


Competitive people seem to be MORE likely to choose to give it a try... Not sure how I feel about that. Competitive people make me tired.


Optimists seem more likely than pessimists to want to give it a go. Pretty sure someone like my husband, who sees every single thing that might go wrong and really hates uncertainty would say, “Nope. Not doing that.”


Now lets consider whether all this might be good or bad. Fewer depressed people in the world, fewer nay-sayers, fewer fragile souls all sounds well and good. But don't these personalities offer us some balance? In my personal circumstance, a delusional optimist married to a glum pessimist, he is my reality check. I have a lot of things I would just dive head long into without him pointing out all the things I really need to think about first. Now sometimes I still dive, but at least I dive with my eyes open because I have that balance. What ill-advised things might we dive into as a society without the nay-sayers stepping in?

Then again, what might be possible without all the obstacles?


And SOME pessimists might be born—those who have good circumstances or convincing referrals telling them the help there is to get through the difficulties.


Would it be good if children could opt out of lousy parents? I sort of think yes on this one... some people shouldn't get to be parents and who has more right to decide that than their children? But then who would the world be missing?

There is also the other side: much of what life is is the things and people and experiences we encounter. I mean sure, we bring some personality at the start, but those things that we go through shape us, so how much is honestly predictable before we ever start? How accurate can those decisions BE about whether to be born or not?

What do you think? Can you think of sorts of people more or less likely to opt in or out if they got to interview some people about what their life will be like before deciding to be born? Does the whole idea terrify you, or can you see some promise to it?

[and good on you, Dwight, for really getting us thinking]

The Truth About Guns

 This might be too soon. The wound too fresh. Then again, if it isn’t fresh in memory, people fall back on old attitudes, where when we are raw and aching, maybe we are open to new information. I am thinking this is the first of two important posts whereby I prove I should be ruling the world. Or not.

I am not anti-gun.

Okay, I AM, but for ME, not for people broadly. Exactly. I grew up in Idaho and come from a long hunting tradition. In 7^th grade PE we had gun safety because it was the belief (backed by statistics) that many YOUNG people who died in gun accidents weren’t the children of gun owners, but the curious friends who came over and didn’t know how dangerous the things could be.

We learned RESPECT. SAFETY.  And to load and unload, and SHOOT a rifle. I was good, actually. It just required a steady hand and the patience to line up the site. I have decent special skills. I didn’t just get a bulls-eye; I pierced the X at the very center of the bulls-eye, and ALL my bullets hit the target.

I’ve also shot tin cans off fences at my friend Tammy’s house, and then there were my b-b experience with cousins, but that was pre-gun safety. THAT I was bad at (having never been taught). My dad had guns and hunted. My step-dad had guns and still hunts.

My point? I grew up IMMERSED in gun culture. MANY of my friends are die-hard advocates.

But what I do, when I am not being naked and silly and ridiculous or writing (or all of the above), is statistics. That’s it. My day job is to run numbers and find truth in them. Not graphic, single-incident anecdote, but collective FACT.  THAT is what I am here to talk to you about right now.

First… A Lesson:  Philosophy versus Science

People use philosophy to guide what they believe. And that is normal and rational. But when a philosophy is DISPROVED by science, it can no longer be held by reasonable people. Take the flat world view of the middle ages. A lot of OTHER beliefs centered around the WORLD being the center of the universe.  Decisions and conclusions factored this in. When SCIENCE proved the SUN was actually the center, it undid ALL the stuff that posited the earth at the center.

I apologize here as I step into a sensitive topic, but it runs so perfectly parallel. Creationism and evolution: the former being philosophy, the latter being science… if someone sees creationism happening THROUGH evolution, they are good. If they see creationism as allegory (which was the intent of the authors, by the way—that is HISTORY, or rather anthropology of how lessons were taught—Biblical literalism only arriving about the 11^th century at the word of the Pope), they are good, but if they believe creationism means evolution is wrong?  Then THEY are wrong. Philosophy CANNOT EVER trump science. Science is testable. We see ACTIVE evolution in near lakes here and now. It HAPPENS. Faith in a particular philosophy is FINE, so long as it isn’t scientifically disprovable. But if it is, science trumps.

So now, while I’ve already offended some subset of my audience, though presumably the portion who was chased off long ago by my nakedness…

Applying Philosophy and Science to GUNS.

You know what makes science?  NUMBERS. Statistics. Tests, though honestly, in real life, randomization is hard… though there are a lot of ‘prisoner experiments’ and they aren’t very promising. (for an entertaining, yet still enlightening version of this, there is a Veronica Mars episode, season 3…) 

Most people evaluate on GUT. Something rings true, and they believe. And this is normal. But it gives too much power to the case study. Because of my background, I am far more inclined to look at collective data. YES, the individual examples are moving. But what should guide POLICY is the collective. The COLLECTIVE shows us what is most likely.

Let me delineate these for you, as they apply to gun themes.

If someone is determined, they can still get a gun. 

TRUTH:  Yes and no. They can, but it will be harder. And so a person set on SPECIFICALLY guns who has a long-retained determination can get them. But anti-gun laws mean they have to go through criminal routes (something not all people are willing to do—even murderers), and more importantly, this instills a ‘cool down’ time… so if a person is being IMPULSIVE, this will be an effective deterrent. Some portion will still get them, but another portion WON'T, so the events won't be eliminated, but lives will still be saved.

Sidenote:  THREE women from my high school have been shot by partners. In TWO of these cases, I believe the partner regretted it the minute he did it. Still abusive assholes, yes, but not having a gun present would have prevented the deaths.

Guns don’t kill people. People kill people.:  I suppose this is true. But a person with an automatic or semi-automatic weapon or even just a handgun can be much more deadly in far less time than a determined person with another weapon. Take the Chinese episode the SAME DAY as the US one:  man with knife in elementary school… attacks… wounds 23, 22 of them children, but not a single one is dead.

So a gun without a person can’t kill. Right on. Gotcha.  But a person with a gun instead of another weapon is FAR more deadly. That is just the truth of it.

The crazies and mad men can still get the guns:  (I know this sounds like the first, but I have another argument).  Yes.  They can. But if a crazy steps into a crowd with a gun, and someone ELSE pulls a gun, he will shoot MORE. After the Colorado Theater shooting one of my friends… spouse of a cop… said when a gunman appears the WORST thing to do is to ADD MORE GUNS. The body count amplifies VERY fast. The BEST thing would be to get the gun OUT of the situation (jump and disarm him).

“I feel safer with a gun.”  Feel away my friend. But that is an emotion that is actually contradicted by facts. Gun owners, FACTUALLY are far more likely to die by gun than non-gun owners.

Several years ago, there was a well-done blog post by BarryEisler--and here is a more recent update--that contrasted countries without guns with the US, acknowledging how the US probably COULD NOT give up our gun addiction, and so in the presence, it is reasonable to have certain attitudes, but people in countries where nobody has them are absolutely safer.

There was also a terrific article yesterday by NicholasKristof of the New York Times.  He proposed a number of ideas that put guns in a similar place as cars legally.  People can HAVE THEM, but there need to be rules about it.

I’ve heard some promising ideas. Re-enacting the automatic weapon ban that expired in 2004 for one. The most innovative is requiring gun owners to hold insurance for the damage the firearm might do—cost dependent on storage, who has access, how it’s normally used, and damage potential it has (so faster firing and larger magazine potential means more expensive.)

I really get that some people feel philosophically that they should be able to have guns. I just really wanted to make sure you all knew that IN REALITY, guns in our presence makes us LESS safe. I promise.

Mindfulness

So remember my Insecure Writer's post last week on positivity? The same retreat had a couple other topics, but I am not even going to go in the general AREA of organization. In fact I will go so far as to say when one women was explaining how SHE could be organized, the problem was all the slobs who lived with her (her husband and children) and my friend said, 'oh, I have your problem,' I had the forthright honesty to say, “I AM your problem.” I don't have any delusions of organization. In fact I'd go so far as to say I don't even really WANT to be organized. It looks like a lot of work.

But there WAS another topic that sort of hit home.

You know how writers have all these parties and meetings and relationships between imaginary people in our head? And we can wander through our days perfectly entertained without ever talking to another human being? How you drive from A to B and don't remember ANY of it because you are so engaged in recrafting the scene in your head?

Yeah. That.

Well, see... it turns out it would probably do us good be be PRESENT sometimes in our own life. Not analyzing it or rewriting it as we live it, but just EXPERIENCING it.

And I get the temptation to let your creative mind fly. I LOVE the worlds in my head. But chances are we are missing some real life experiences when we aren't really in the moment. And if we live some real life now and then, our writing can really benefit.

We did a little activity... Laura (the woman who led this part) handed out strawberries to each of us and told us to pretend we'd never encountered one before. She walked us through experiencing it for the first time, even though, presumably, every one of us had had a strawberry before.

The BIGGEST trick was to SLOW THE HECK DOWN.
Use all five senses. More than once even, for something you are going to eat.
Look at it. Describe it in words. What shape is it. What does it remind you of.
Touch it with your finger. How does it feel?
Hold it under your nose. How does it smell.
Touch it with your tongue—how does it feel now?
Take a bite and hold it in your mouth. How does it taste?
Now chew on it. What's the texture? How does it feel now?

Her point was even the simplest experiences can be really rich if we pay attention.

And there are times we should ALWAYS pay attention. Some of these I'm really bad at. Often I feel very interrupted when my family needs me if I'm writing, but for pete's sake, shouldn't THEY be my first priority? But I'm a bad person that way. I need to work on this.

But the exercise... pick something each day and REALLY experience it. With all our senses. With no competing STUFF in our heads... It can be a walk through a park or a meal. Anything. But practice being in the present once in a while. It's good for us!

IWSG: Positivity

So it is first Wednesday! Man, it feels like we had one of these just a month ago... erm... But what it means is today is the day for the Insecure Writer's Support Group post. And you know... I'm insecure! And I write! And I like to be supportive! I may not be a group, but three out of four is close enough, yes?

Now I normally take this opportunity to whine and complain, but why not shake things up now and then?

So here goes...

Positivity

A week and a half ago, on a Saturday, my friend Claire hosted an AMAZING women's rejuvenation retreat. It was smallish—a little party, all women, with some great breakfast foods, some get-to-know-you games and three great speakers, one on mindfulness, one on organizing (but not in an anal way) and the last (though she was actually the middle) on positivity.

Mary, the positivity presenter is a psychologist who studies HAPPINESS and how we can all be happier. And one of the strategies she gave—one that I think I can successfully extrapolate on to apply to writing—is a really simple little daily exercise with big results. In fact, she said if a person did this DAILY FOR A WEEK (not so much, really) their improved happiness scores are still present six months later.


So here's what you do... every night write down THREE THINGS that made you happy that day and why.

That's all. That simple.

See... how it works in the long run is you begin to NOTICE things more that make you happy, so you feel happy more often. And if you think about WHY, then those experiences stick with you longer, improving your happiness.


How I'd apply it to writing: When you get done with a sitting, whether it was an hour, a scene, a chapter... however you do it... take note of something you really liked about it. Did you nail the action? Did you give the reader great character insight? Was there ONE DIVINE SENTENCE? Take note of the things you do that really are fabulous. Because YOU DO THEM. I promise. We just tend to notice all the stuff we do wrong. So make a point of noticing something you did RIGHT. It will also reinforce the writing so you want to write more often, so that's a nice little side effect.



And just a brief election wind up (written BEFORE any results are in)--no matter who wins, lets make the best of it. Support the winners and urge them to work with the other side. We are in dire need of cooperation.

Be sure and get around to the other insecure people today!!! (link at top)

Bury the Hatchet Blogfest

Today is the last day of EJ Wesley's Bury the Hatchet Blogfest, but of course with my attention to detail, I saw the date October 19 and thought that was THE day instead of the LAST day. But never mind. Better late than never, eh?

Anyway, the blogfest is part of his book release for Blood Fugue:

What's BLOOD FUGUE about?

Armed only with an ancient family journal, her rifle, and an Apache tomahawk, Jenny must save her grandfather’s life and embrace her dangerous heritage. Or be devoured by it. Blood Fugue, by E.J. Wesley, is the first of the Moonsongs books, a series of paranormal-action novelettes.

So the BLOGFEST theme... you've heard the metaphor bury the hatchet, yes? Well that's all well and good, but SOMETIMES what you REALLY want to do is Bury the Hatchet in someone's HEAD... you know... horror story style... So we are to share something that drives us to murderous intent... what is making us CRAZY IRKED.

As my husband said when he picked me up last Friday from work: “If I'd have had a gun, there would be five people dead right now.” (leading to the logical reason I won't keep guns in the house, but I'm thinking it is best he doesn't drive with a hatchet, too) THAT kind of thing.


So where do I want to Bury the Hatchet? (aside from opposite party politics which I am only skipping because it is just too obvious)...

The Answer? STATUS SNOBS.

People caught up in the idea that a person's value has to do with their address, car brand, pedigree or the alphabet soup after their name. The people who treat waitresses like crap because 'they are only waitresses' (I've been a waitress, so I KNOW people do this)

There is nothing I'd like more than to prove to these smarmy, arrogant SOBs that they aren't worth the gum on the bottom of said waitresses shoe (that their own pampered child threw on the floor). People are not of value because of their money, their titles, or their bloody blue-blood last name or family membership in some secret society. People are of value if they are kind, creative, intelligent, funny... I need to mention kind again, because I think that is at least twice as important as any of these other things. People are of value because of their DEEDS. Especially the deeds they do on behalf of people who need some help. (making rich people richer? NOT a good deed—I left the asses in advertising to themselves because I just couldn't justify this as a worthy existence... certainly not worthy enough to kiss a lot of butts over).

That doesn't mean I think poorly of people who are wealthy, educated (heck, I'm educated) or prominent society members. As we strive to better ourselves, these things can happen and I am all for striving. But we should never think we are better than other people because we have the good fortune to succeed. And NOBODY EVER should think they are better if they are just born into it.

She's doing it right

JK Rowling was on the Daily Show this week and she BRILLIANTLY and WONDERFULLY reminded us all that she was a welfare mom for about three years when she was first divorced and her books had not sold. She knows what it is like to be treated like a leech on society. And now that she is richer than the queen (literally) she is staying put in Britain to pay her 70% tax rate because that is what you do—you give back. Britain helped her, and now this is their due. She also donates millions and is involved in tons of charities--all her little books? Charitable donations of all proceeds.  That is how to handle success with class in my book.

Damsels In Distress

You know... we are indocrinated with this... Disney's early stuff ALL was this. Snow White. Sleeping Beauty. Cinderella. I mean, sure, they had little animals giving them a hand until the man came around to do the job, but really, all of them had lousy lives sans MAN.

I'm glad Disney changed courses... Belle saves the Beast more than the Beast saves Belle... Mulan is tough. But still. Those FAIRY TALES...

Well... except Hansel and Gretel—Gretel thinks to make her brother look too skinny to eat and then shoves the witch in the oven, yes?

But mostly I think this indoctrination has led a lot of BOOKS to have damsels in distress too.

And you know what? I just can't tolerate that crap.

The first book that made me think... “HEY! I'd like to write books!” Was a Sidney Sheldon book I read in Jr. High where the heroine is counting on this marriage to this rich guy and then basically gets dumped, imprisoned and something else bad happens... I don't remember why... but while she is imprisoned she realizes SHE has it in herself to be her own hero. It was a bit Count of Monty Cristo, now that I think of it, though I read it before reading Count of Monty Cristo so I didn't know... but I loved the twist. [and it also explains the seeming non-sequiter pic of Emily Thorne]

And I have not been able to tolerate those dumb damsels since.

I mean SURE—everyone needs a rescue now and then...
And bad stuff happens to everyone—it makes for good reading.

But the damsel that needs the big strong man? No thanks. (I mean other than to dance like I like—we all need THAT kind of rescue now and again)


With the Garden Society Series I made a commitment early on—after reading one too many cozies that ended with the sleuth rescued by her hunka hot man crush, that MY HEROINE would be doing the rescuing, thanks. Not by herself. (She's not a ninja). And in the three books I've written she DOES get herself into a pickle now and then. But she is far more often on the other side of the equation.

In fact... Of the 14 books I've written, there is a female rescuing somebody in 12 of them... sometimes the rescuee is male, sometimes female (sometimes child)--the things they are rescued from range from abduction to bodily harm. I suppose they've needed rescues in probably six, but it doesn't seem as offensive to me when a person is on both sides of the equation in the same book.


Any of you have deep-rooted character peeves that you've carried through to most of your writing?

The Emotional Road Metaphor

First, a brief apology for being largely absent this week. I always feel guilty, but I am under dayjob crunch, so there you have it. I will get around as I can.

Pretty, but treacherous, this one...

And now the blog...

So it's like people are roads, right? And life is the car, driving along us. I know that sounds backward, but hear me out. Because honestly, I think that the PERSON is the less changing of the two and LIFE speeds up, slows down, changes gears, breaks down... and each of us sort of has a road style of how we are as life zooms over us.


This realization came upon me this weekend as I interacted with someone and realized they were a road with about an inch of standing water... life is ALWAYS a little harder, but if life gets too fast, then this person gets dangerous. (S)he needs to figure out a way to SLOW LIFE so the wheels can solidly rest again or that lack of connection to reality is going to cause a whole BUNCH of lives to crash all over him/her.

This is me. Not DULL, but not challenging, either.

Me? I am a nice four-lane through country that is enjoyable—so life isn't tempted to just speed through too fast, but I don't have a lot of ups and downs or twists and turns. Life can set cruise control and I'm not going to fell a log across the road or something. I'm probably a bit freaky in my evenness. One of my neighbors called me Job not long ago. (Job from the Bible, not to be confused with Steve Jobs which would make me happier—better uber creative than patient, but hey, you work with what you have)

Try to avoid being this... Though I have known people...

I know people who are gravel, always keeping life a little uncertain... people who are city streets, full of rules and predictability and order. I know a round-about or two. Most people are probably closer to two lane highways—good most of the time, but with occasional steep climbs that hold life back or twisting turns that make them slow down.

I'd even say some of my artist friends are more like canals—far more enjoyable on a nice day, but throw in a storm and HO-BOY!


So what kind of road are you? Your primary characters? Am I making sense?

Organizational Philosophy: The Chaotic and the Virgo

Battle of Order and Chaos (Talented source)

So today is a crazy busy day for me—two appointments, one legal, one medical, plus ANOTHER legal possessionary matter having to do with inheriting a car... So I am off work and off line. And spent yesterday getting my ducks in a row. A matter that ALWAYS causes battles with my resident Virgo who believes there is a single place for things and if you have not put things in that singular place, then life as we know it will come to a crashing end so you must be lectured the entire time you (which is to say I) organize and find your sh*t.

*rolls eyes *

All sh*t has BEEN found, because... being a NOT organized person ALL the time, I am REALLY good at repeating the steps (of not just me but every member of my family) that might have happened since said paperwork arrived and therefore tracking it down.

I submit that the PROBLEM with the Virgo... and by this I mean the specific Virgo, HWMNBMOTI... is that he has no adaptive capacity for anyone ELSE doing something with it. I am the only person in my household capable of systematically LOOKING FOR anything (and nearly always find what I'm looking for).

Tell me. How helpful is it to sit and lecture said item if it is not where it was meant to be?

Tell me also how many teenagers always put things where they go?

And tell me NOW who is the insane one? The organization freak or the chaotic adaptive-capable of looking for something person.

Opposites attract (source)

On many fronts we compliment each other well. This case though, is the madness of opposites reaching irreconcilable difference in this domain.

Of course afterward, we went to listen to a friend's band at a micro brewery and danced some, so he made up for it... it ended up good, but MAN...

Any of you have grand philosophical differences in your houses that cause you to threaten violence? (which I did, but me being me, I was mostly kidding to get him to lighten up)

I apologize for not being around today and hope you have a good Monday!

I will be back tomorrow!

The Diversity Conundrum

Where I get all deep and stuff.

I had a conversation at work yesterday that got me thinking (again) about a topic I think about quite a lot anyway... First let me premise this as... if I say anything offensive it is TOTALLY unintentional. I'm not trying to talk about ANY SPECIFIC group, so much as the ACT OF GROUPING and how this is sort of a moving target. I'm even going to end this projecting outward...


Human beings as wanderers were tribal. They recognized their own clan as SELF and other clans as OTHER, while to ALL of us now (short an anthropology degree that specialized on that area), we would not see there was any distinguishable difference. But human beings have something at their core that craves an in-group/out-group definition. Maybe it is the need to be a part of something, and in BEING part, there, by definition, have to be outsiders.

I have a few separate thoughts that I hope will logically tie together in the end, so bear with me.



Heritage: A West Coast Perspective

I grew up in the Pacific Northwest. Among my friends, if we'd talk about our heritage, we had people that were maybe a QUARTER this or that (I have two 'pure-blood quarters—added together I am full HALF Scandenavian)--but I didn't know anybody who was even HALF of anything at a country-level. I know, though, in that area on the Iowa/Minnesota border where my grandma grew up, there is STILL a dense Norwegian population. People today can still be found who are ALL Norwegian, in spite of being more than 150 years past the major immigration. There are cities in Michigan that are nearly all German or Dutch, or Pole. This was a strange finding, moving east as I did. That there are STILL people who stay 'in-group' at A COUNTRY level. People who moved west tended to do so in small family units, where people who stayed east (other than the cities) stayed closer to home and 'their own kind'.

In this melting pot (the west)... a REAL melting pot... nobody thought about the varying shades of light tan—I mean SURE, if somebody was black we noticed—that was pretty rare (TWO in my high school class... a whopping 1%)—but I had friends who were part Native or part Latino and it never crossed my mind other than just being interesting  (I have a good friend who is Chinese and that was a noticed but INCLUDED minority—those kids never had trouble getting a date, for instance)

The Italian/Irish 'Gentrification'

I want to pick on these two fabulous ethnicities a bit for a very specific reason. These groups arrived 'latish' to do 'undesirable work' and were heavily discriminated against for several decades. They were the foreigners nobody trusted who never got respectable employment in a bank or a high-end shop. They were the service workers and the laborers...

Until they weren't. Until there were other groups to fill in that low end of 'who can associate with us but only at the lowest level'... Until racism had a NEW target... with browner skin and a stronger accent. Now there are a LOT of people with mixed heritage that includes one or both of these, where at one time, it would have been scandalous.


The Case of XXXX Middle School: Detroit

When I first moved to Michigan I was part of a research team testing an intervention with 8th graders in Detroit designed to keep kids engaged in school. There were three middle schools involved. One of them was a middle class school with 100% black students. And it ran like a well-oiled machine. The kids were engaged, worked hard, academically striving. There was no smart-mouthing. It was a whole lot more orderly than any other middle school I've been in EVER. One school had a falling population so was actively recruiting expelled kids from other schools, so I will leave that one out of the mix, because DUH, and BOY HOWDY, of COURSE it had problems. But the 3rd school—one in Southwest Detroit had about 60% black, 30% Latino and 10% white kids. This is Detroit, so the black students STILL owned the achievement domain—those were the kids 'allowed' to work hard without getting crap for being suck-ups. The Latino kids had a large enough minority that they got to be the 'hip bad-ass' kids—sassy, but some were popular. The white kids? Full-on delinquent material. They were so disengaged, even in 8th grade, that I wanted to cry for them. Their long term goals for themselves were so measly—they didn't have real dreams for what they could be. The black kids wanted to be the lawyers and engineers. The Latino kids wanted to do construction or drive trucks. And the white kids wanted to be strippers—I'm dead serious—what do you DO with that goal when a pair of girls says that in full seriousness-- “The money is good.”

Do you see how the expectations are turned on their head from our normal stereotypes? Do you see how being a member of the MAJORITY plays roles most of us outside of the environment would never consider? Because we are busy applying NATIONAL minority stereotypes... and those DO have an impact... I mean Detroit is STILL an example of a city that is angry and full of attitude--because at a NATIONAL level it is a minority... but at the LOCAL LEVEL, individuals experience it differently.

But do you ALSO see how that one school with no diversity whatsoever had the biggest advantage of all? No distractions from the task at hand. ALL they had to worry about was educating.


The Case of Scandinavia and the Best Standard of Living in the World

Do you see how this might be? Just from my example. Now there is a little diversity in the Scandenavian countries, but... not a lot. It's like Portland. It is really easy to be magnanimous about racial diversity when you don't have a large enough set of any one group to cause any problems. Sure. We love everybody! (and they do—it's sincere—I lived there(Portland, not Scandinavia)—If I wanted to marry a person of another race, you can bet your bottom dollar that's where I'd go—because of course at a coupling level there is a layer of discrimination that lingers even after coworker and friend discrimination goes away)

What I'm saying is a little hard to say, as I admire so many of the policies of the Scandenavian Countries—I wish we'd adopt a lot more of them. So I don't want to take away from the achievement they've managed. But it really IS easier with less diversity.


The Other Very REAL Side of the Coin

We are ALL better off for knowing a lot of kinds of people. When we get insular, we get STUPID. People I know who've never really traveled and don't know people from very many ethnicities tend to just think their way is right and everyone else is wrong. THEY happen to be the wrong ones (and no, I won't qualify this--I know they may not know better, but they are ignorant and wrong to not respect other people having different backgrounds and allowing them to follow those and acknowledge for THEM it is right). There are a lot of right ways to live and a lot of positive approaches (and belief systems and habits). But only through a lot of intermingling can we learn UNDER it all are very basic similarities—behaviors and attitudes about what is decent: kindness, caring, helping; and what is rotten: hurting others, stealing, lying.

And it is through this SHARING that this transformation is made where we move up to the next level in 'in-group/out-group'--what now seems to be racial... or religious... let me give a religious example...

Small Town USA, circa 1970

My home town had... pretty much ALL practicing Christians... Seriously. WEIRD, religiously speaking... the groups that were 'out group' on that term... were the Catholics and Mormons—both significant groups... but both the only 'non-protostant Christian mainstream' groups.

I'd, of course, HEARD of Jews, but honestly, I didn't think about them religiously much... I thought of the WWII genocide as racial. I'd heard of a few others... but it never occurred to me other faiths were practiced in the US. By the time I lived in Portland, I had several Jewish friends, several Buddhist friends... knew a few Wiccans (I still didn't know any Muslims that I knew of—though in those days, the Arabic distinction was... you know... Arabic... and religion wasn't brought into it, many Arabs being Christian and all, I never thought to ask).

NOW, the great evil seems to be Islam, strictly because now we've heard of it and it seems strange and different. Anyone who wants to claim it is more radical than Christianity can look at the Christian tenets the Ku Klux Klan supposedly draws on—every religious group has their radical nuts and every religious book, abused hard enough, can justify it.

The Logical Future

When we are in space, living with peoples from OTHER planets, we are going to see the humans as the desirable in-group. Their race or religion won't matter at that point even a little bit, because the scope of evaluation will have gotten enough wider and there will be a new out-group grouping to focus our need for OTHER on.

But I wish we could all see our commonalities and just celebrate our differences sooner than that.

Kryptonite

So Superman is probably my least favorite superhero... I am not really a superhero fan anyway, and he's pretty much the Mary Sue of the bunch. A little sad, really—I think he is the only writer character I can think of who makes me think, “meh.”

But several years back when my daughter was maybe in kindergarten we ended up with a Disney Rocks or Rockin' Disney, or some such silliness—a CD with mostly current (at the time) songs that just happened to be used for the various Disney programming and there was the song from Three Doors Down, Kryptonite.

You can listen to Kryptonite here (the video is odd and sad at the same time).

But what I loved about the song was that whole love and insanity crossover I got into so much for the Sad Songs Blogfest.

Here are the lyrics:

It might help that he's adorable.

I took a walk around the world to ease my troubled mind
I left my body lying somewhere in sense of time
I watched the world float to the dark side of the moon
I feel there's nothing I can do

I watched the world float to the dark side of the moon
After all I knew it had to be something to do with you
I really don't mind what happens now and then
As long as you'll be my friend at the end

If I go crazy then will you still call me Superman?
If I'm alive and well, will you be there holding my hand?
I'll keep you by my side with my superhuman might
Kryptonite

You call me strong, you call me weak
But still your secrets I will keep
You took for granted all the times I never let you down

You stumbled in and bumped your head
If not for me then you'd be dead
I picked you up and put you back on solid ground

If I go crazy then will you still call me Superman?
If I'm alive and well, will you be there holding my hand
I'll keep you by my side with my superhuman might
Kryptonite

{repeat x 2}

You may not believe this, but I'm Barbara Hershey

You see... this song, at its core, is about being the sane one and loving and caring for somebody... holding up somebody... as they fall apart... wondering if they'd do the same for you.

And I've been here. More than once, actually. In fact maybe that is MY Kryptonite—the draw to save hopeless cases. The undying belief that I can. I think I have an underlying need to be not just needed as a loved one, but NEEDED. Maybe underneath it is a need to be important... more than important... vital.

There has been more than once that I've really resented that I never get to be the one who falls apart.

At the same time, there is nothing more amazing than realizing you were strong enough and you did it. That a person is a full contributing happy human being because you did what had to be done.

I will leave the rest of that a little cryptic for privacy reasons (not mine), but now you have my confession.


Literary Kryptonite

You know... heroes in stories need their kryptonite, too. They need something that will force them to act outside of their self-interest—force them to do something they normally don't think they could or would, morally, ethically or spiritually.

Look at Katniss Everdeen. Prim is her Kryptonite. To save Prim she volunteers to participate in something she believes is evil, that she is sure she cannot survive. Katniss KNOWS this, too... she's already HAD to be the sane one.

I think for Harry Potter, Draco is perhaps Harry's original kryptonite. I mean he hates Snape more, and Voldemort is his deadly enemy, but it is Draco that drives Harry to be truly irrational in books 1 and 6, anyway. He's a little that way about Snape, but he rarely acts on it—only re-acts. Oh... and then there's Sirius... but that was a lesson Harry had to learn...(It's a little beautiful that Harry is Voldemort's Kryptonite)


So what about you? Do you have a personal Kryptonite? Have you thought about the true Achilles heel for your MC? What is THEIR Kryptonite?

Youthful Rebellion.

It's TMI Tuesday...

So the latest CD in the car that all three drivers agree on is Airborne Toxic Event, and it has got me thinking... Well to start, maybe I should give you the lyrics

Airborn Toxic Event

from: The Kids Are Ready to Die

...
but punks like us we were always receiving instruction
and you could burn our cloths you could wash out the ink and the dye
but you can't look me in the eye and say you don't feel like a little destruction
and the kids are lining up on the wall and they're ready to die
...

and from: It Doesn't Mean a Thing

…
Now my dad says fuck the details
Just keep your head down hard
Ya got to find yourself alone before you'll find the eyes of God
You make broke and scared and out of jail
Out the flesh of your own heartstrings
But you were born to be a peasant not a king
So just stop acting like your running from something
Ya gonna leave the way you came without a thing
With your heart tattooed and your mind tied to a string
…


This all reminded me a little of The Living End, an Australian band I got very into because of one of my Aussie friends. Songs like Prisoner of Society...

And THAT got me thinking about punk... Punk was a rebel movement—labor class kids in England when labor JOBS had all but died... when hope was hard to come by. And so the music rebelled.


Which in the roundabout way things go in my head, got me thinking of rebellion in general. And rebellion of youth, specifically... and the eras in which youth rebelling have been so enormously prominent.

You see them across the world. And sometimes they are squashed (China, in Tiananmen Square), but sometimes they triumph. What I am most familiar with though, is US history.

I'm not sure we had rebellious youth en masse until the 50s. And I believe, though I have only really studied via pop culture, that part of what led to that was the relative comfort of the middle class... there was CRAVING for that among poorer kids, and TIME on their hands never seen before among the privileged... time to take up a cause maybe they didn't NEED. There were the greasers because that was the option... and the greasers because that was the culture... because THAT seemed to be the road to the future (independence, forward momentum).

This happened again in the late 60s with the peace, love, drugs stuff. This particular movement was actually not unrelated to the availability of birth control (free love being freed of permanent consequences and all), but was also related to the civil rights movement (a belief all people deserved representation) and protest against a war the young were fighting on behalf of the decision makers.

And then somewhere in there, young people lost the purpose of their rebellion. Rebellion became an individual or small group activity. Substance use (which admittedly always was a part) or clothes, but nothing meaningful or ideological. I mean the bigger movements weren't gone—I remember marching against Apartheid in college. But it didn't ever take on the entire young population again. WHY?

I have some theories:

1) The consumer age. During the Reagan Administration credit got cheaper and was given freely, even to college students (I was offered my first charge card in high school—just a Bon Marche card, but I have a suspicion I was the first generation who got it. Then in college, as a junior with no income, I was offered a Visa. Sure, it was only a $500 limit, but ALSO... debt with no income!? GADS!

What this really meant though, was an ease of the pang of want. People are less dissatisfied if they can buy their toys.

2) End of the draft. If the armed services are all voluntary, then the MASSES of young people no longer have to yell and scream when people are sent to war. I mean HECK, they signed on for it.

3) War funded on credit, starting with Reagan, instead of the entire population having to tighten their belts to pay for war we just charge it. This means that the population broadly barely notices. Now while there wasn't a major war between the Vietnam war and the first Iraq one, believe me, there was a heavy stream of military activity: Nicaragua, El Salvador... plus that bloody cold war that cost so much.


So with 30 years of nothing to do because we've been sedated with stuff and asked to give up nothing, we are out of practice. And worse, our kids have never SEEN protest. So at this time when they really should be fired up and fighting for their future, they are largely MIA. I find this sad.

I also hold the opinion that anybody who has never rebelled against something lacks critical thinking skills. If life falls into line, it means either lack of exposure to varied opinions, or lack of engagement in mental activity. Because everybody encounters something they disagree with at their core that comes from someone in authority--a parent, an education system, a religious institution, a government.  Both lack of exposure and lack of evaluation are dangerous, so I hope any children you have rebel at some point against SOMETHING. (that is a blessing, not a curse)

Slut Love

I figured TMI Tuesday falling on Valentine’s Day was a sign I ought to talk a little bit about my philosophy on love, sex, relationships, and values. So you’ve gotten a reprieve from Jungle Rot… You may want to hold off on rejoicing just yet though.



All That Purity Nonsense

I know there are a lot of people clinging to those Puritan values and all, and if you’re one of them, more power to you… which is to say, more to go around for the rest of us, eh?

I am not quite sure where my feminist leanings got their first big fuel burst, but it was well before I was political, and before my religious leanings got an overhaul from their Presbyterian roots. Basically I figured if BOYS are allowed to admit they like this stuff, what is wrong with GIRLS admitting it?

Now I ‘get’ the ‘save it so I have something to give my spouse’ thing on some level. But there is a conflict here… I don’t think anybody should wait until age 30 to become sexually active, or you end up stunted on that front (IMHO), but I ALSO don’t think people should be making such an important decision as who to spend FOREVER with until about that time. And I think the consequences of becoming sexually active pre-marriage are a lot less severe than marrying in the late teens or early 20s. People that age have no business making that kind of decision.

*cough*

And don’t you know… I had a boy or two in my past where things got… you know… intense… the first time I met them… and later they would act as if somehow I’D done something wrong. HELLO. I was not the only one there. Why do these goons think THEY get a pass, but I don’t? That definitely fueled that inner feminist and my belief that what is good for the gander is great for the goose. (even goosing)

Manipulation versus Honesty

See, the OTHER thing that has always really bothered me is the simultaneous attempt to woo and hold at bay of a potential lover. A person who WANTS intimacy but pretends not to because they are holding out for a long-term offer is just dishonest in my opinion. And I hold the value of HONESTY far above some silly notion of ‘virtue’. In fact the virtues I care about ARE honesty and integrity. NOT chastity.


Now I don’t mean to disrespect anybody who has made different choices or whose values line up differently. I’m just saying it isn’t in me to pretend I agree. I think that is what we all need to do—be honest with ourselves about what is important and why, and try to live that way.



Sluts are NICE

You know... people who really LIKE everyone, even if they are also willing to sleep with everyone, are really more fun to hang out with than uptight people. I mean I GET that some people are nice withOUT the slutty thing going, but I haven't met many self-righteous people who are all that nice. They are too busy judging everyone else for not living by their standard. Live and let live, I say. So long as people aren't intentionally hurting each other.


Yeah, I’d rather live with aspersions of ‘slut’, ‘tramp’, or ‘tart’, than 'proper', 'classy', or ‘tease’. (though my value of not hurting people DOES mean monogamy… so anymore, this is all just in theory).


So there you have it. More than you ever wanted to know about me...

Helplessness: An Analysis

In my coping (and not) this weekend, I've been pondering something that strikes all of us in various places in life and I thought maybe we should talk about it a little bit.

Damn if I'm not a little bit of a control freak. But never mind.

Helplessness source

This weekend has had me thinking a lot about helplessness. Saturday's blog confessed that I was useless in a crisis, but that is PHYSICALLY useless. I just don't know what to do do save somebody. I mean I've had first aid (half a lifetime ago) so if they were choaking... or possibly even if they were not breathing... (no CPR skills, though I've seen it enough that if we were REALLY alone, I'd give it a shot)... but all that in between stuff. USE. LESS.

So HWMNBMOTI is home and physically okay, but his sense of panic... of not-rightness... has not subsided. It has left me tense and worried, too. I am not worried his physical problems have not been dealt with, but rather that his stress and emotional worries are manifesting themselves physically and that this risk won't go away until we deal with the big hairy monster of anxiety.


Anxiety isn't new to us.

When our kids were small, HWMNBMOTI was a 'stay-at-home-dad' and PART of our reasoning was his earning power didn't cover childcare for two kids. But part of it was an anxiety issue that cropped up during my first pregnancy. It is related to myriad issues of self-worth (or lack thereof) and CONTROL issues that can't be controlled in work environments. The latter made jobs dissatisfying in the extreme and the former made it really hard to look for work... not feeling worthy and all.


See, though. In thinking about all of this, even my uselessness is not fully worthless if I PAUSE and think about it.


PIECES and PEACES.

Problems are not large hairy monsters. They are armies. They can be divided, and different people can conquer pieces of the problem, and most problems I am capable of handling some portion of.

1)  I am so calm I've been accused of being comatose. Especially at work, I am hard to rile. I don't buy into the group panic, and I can break out my responsibility and get to it. Coworkers seem to love this. (though I have found tears useful when expectations are unreasonable)

2  )I am REALLY GOOD at breaking apart problems into pieces.

3)  I am ALSO good at talking down panicking people, and at LISTENING (something 99% of men I know are singularly bad at, just FYI—men want to fix it and often will give unhelpful suggestions just to be GIVING a damn suggestion...)

4)  I am also a pretty good advocate. Some people don't really see where their rights lie, and need someone to step in and say to [the professional or source of help] 'look. This is what's needed and nothing less will work.']

So I have broken down HWMNBMOTI's issues and advocacy and calm are indeed what I bring to the table. I've taken Monday off work to make the calls because at the moment he doesn't feel he 'deserves' to be a priority. He does. People count on him. Personally and professionally. But that self talk is powerful, and when there are physical issues compounding it...

And you know what? I made that decision on my walk with Oliver's person last night and I felt SO MUCH BETTER at just that: take the day off to advocate. Finally I had realized what I really could do to help.

The PEACE Piece

There are things really out of our control. There are things none of us can do anything about. Whether it is another person or a situation, life has a lot of stuff that just comes down, no fault or responsibility of our own. There is a SKILL to letting this go.

Once upon a time I attended AlAnon meetings for a loved one who was an addict. And I learned MANY lessons that will stick with me forever there. Say it with me:

NOT. MY. STUFF. If it is in somebody else's control, you can't let it impact you emotionally. Sure, you can feel a little sadness over someone's bad decision, but there is no guilt, no lingering anger or sadness. It is NOT YOUR STUFF. Let it go.

CAN'T CONTROL IT. Publishing is huge here. We can write the best book ever, but can't control who we are competing against for attention, how many books a company is willing to produce in a year, what readers want to read... A huge portion of this is not in our control. So don't pretend you can. It will only make you feel inept.

We need to make peace with all that stuff not in our control. It's not like it is a malicious design. It is just the setting.

One of the things I found helpful early on, especially when I was mad, was to write down what I resented or regretted, and then burn it. (add a little sage if you want to make it spiritual—sage is a spiritual cleanser). The other trick was writing it down and closing it into my AlAnon book (a Bible or other spiritual book would work here)--releasing it to 'your higher power' was the point, so if you are on speaking terms with your higher power, it will probably work well.

Some people meditate.

I've been known to power walk...

WHATEVER WORKS. But you need a system to let go of the stuff you can't change. Because there is a lot of stuff you just can't change...

Stress Response...

So yesterday afternoon I got a call... HWMNBMOTI's number... not him. It was my wonderful Couch to Keg partner... she was at my house because she'd been asked to help... HWMNBMOTI was having dizzy spells... thought he needed an ambulance.

Crap.

So I said I'd meet him at the hospital (I work for the Med School, so it is just a string of buildings away).

Call 5 minutes later. Same number. PANICKED daughter... sobbing, scared... 'Dad has to go to the hospital'.

“I know sweetheart, but then they will figure out what it is and fix it.”

So I headed over and met him at the emergency room as the ambulance arrived.

His vitals were all stable and the ER was PACKED so we had to wait a fair while. I could tell he was anxious—wondering what was taking so long. But he was also worried about our upset daughter at home. He had me go call and check in, but she was even MORE upset then because he hadn't gotten in to see the doctor yet.

We finally got him in there and the nurse asked a ton of questions, measured all the things he needed to measure, but HWMNBMOTI was getting progressively MORE anxious. He insisted I go home to check on our daughter. So I called daughter (she has a car through a research project and since I walk to work and HWMNBMOTI arrived by ambulance, I was without, so I had her meet me back at my office to give me a ride home.

As it turns out, the treatable disorder is an upper respiratory infection. He was given a few rounds of breathing treatments, prescriptions, and a long list of instructions (including that he had to quit smoking from each of the 47 people who came through his cube). But the dizziness had been a confluence of 3-12 hour days without eating hardly anything, low sleep, a head cold and because of the cold an increased use of his inhaler which can CAUSE dizziness.

He will be fine. Hopefully this is the butt kicking he needed to really quit smoking. He quit two years ago for 3 months, but hadn't tried again since.


What I wanted to note though, was this:


[begin Digression] last week one of our neighbors came over—she'd just gotten home and there was a bicyclist sprawled across the road unconscious. (it was icy, and an apparent bike wreck) HWMNBMOTI went out to check. The man came to—a neighbor, but he was disoriented (and bleeding from a large head wound). He didn't know who HWMNBMOTI was or what day or year it was. He kept trying to wander off, but HMNBMOTI talked him into waiting for the ambulance.[/end digression]

The point of that was how CALM he stayed. He helped the neighbor and told the ambulance people everything he knew, called around to find out if any other neighbors knew how to contact any relatives, as he lives alone. He's really great in a crisis.

Unless it's his crisis. When it is HIM, he gets panicky, and I learned, he and my daughter feed off each other badly. He's worried about her but she's only worried because of how upset he is... but it spirals into both of them panicking.

[note: she is lifeguard and CPR trained and at school has actually helped a fellow student having a seizure and near her work called an ambulance for a person who really seemed disoriented who was hovering outside—she is good in a crisis, TOO, normally]

But that feeding off each other was HUGE.

Now me, I am hard to rattle. But I am also pretty darned useless. I don't know what to do, don't carry a cell phone, so can't call directly. I've been known to knock on doors and ask someone else to call and to stay with someone who has something happen, but I KNOW NOTHING.

Yet had I been home, I would have insisted on driving (no ambulance) and going to Urgent Care (not the ER)--I probably could have talked hubby down a little. I am a person who tends to downplay things though, so maybe that is a lot of it. I am optimistic to the point of delusional and just assume things can't be THAT bad.

So how are you? Are you good in a crisis? Bad? Does it depend on who is hurt? Do you know what you're doing?

Pondering Tart

At least some of you know I went to a funeral on Monday, and it got me thinking as only these life and death things can. For starters, I think it was the most beautiful, rich and meaningful funeral I've ever been to and I've been to a fair few. So part of my ponderances are about why that is... you know... in case any of you are planning a funeral or something. And part of it is... I don't know... how we congregate... families big and small and close and estranged, and all that stuff that we don't think about much of the year that suddenly comes home to roost for the holidays.



The Service

Without giving too much personal detail, this woman was very involved in church and community, and had been her whole life. There were four 'clerics' (since to say Minister, Reverend, Priest, Rabbi, etc. gives away a bit too much) involved—two from the church she attended most of her adult life, one from, a nearby one where she had been involved, and one from the church in my community where she came to live near her family who could care for her when she got sick. ALL of them wanted to be involved. She had touched their lives—they, the people meant to touch all of OUR lives with their teachings had felt taught.

And they all really knew her—this made an amazing difference in the quality of the service. There were stories to make us laugh. There were heart-touching stories. But I think the most telling one was this: She was a woman who could really see what somebody was capable of and pushed them to achieve it, but not so they could be their own best self. It was so they, in turn, could serve and make other peoples lives better.

I think that gets lost on us, anymore. I'm not sure if it has to do with scattering? When we move away from people we 'come from' and 'care about' and no longer feel compelled to give to our communities? Or we give, but only with a goal of glory? Or we (and I am guilty of this) plan to give when finally we are in a better position to do so?

But think about how much more fulfilling life is to pay it forward in whatever way we can. Think about thinking of your OWN GOALS in those terms—I want to be better so I can give more. It's big, isn't it?

random high school choir image

Back to the Service

The other really fantastic feature was the music. And you know what the music was? This woman had been involved in a private high school (one affiliated with her church) in a community where the public schools are pretty darned lousy. Her family had created a scholarship fund because in a poor community, many people need HELP to think about a private education, but where the public schools are lousy, that private school may be their best hope. So this choir of high school kids (who had so much talent it made me CRY) sang... and sang... and sang. A lot of singing—BEAUTIFUL singing. 'Near God' singing, and I don't say that easily. My own religious beliefs are less religion and more spirit and the way I think of God probably isn't one most of you would recognize, so I just don't throw out the word.

And I loved the HUMOR of the service. The cleric, after telling us this woman wanted us to be our best, then said if we weren't, she would haunt us. Which was EXACTLY her. She was spunk personified. I think that is how she touched so many—her approach was so APPROACHABLE. She never acted BETTER THAN anybody. She just inspired people to be BETTER. I wore a pair of reindeer antlers she gave me when we decorated our tree this year. I love a message that inspires us both to be better, and to play more... (you might know that playing thing is important to me.)



My Thoughts on Scattered Families

This particular family is NOT scattered. They've been scattered. They were a military family for many years, but they came back to their roots. Perhaps that makes the understanding of the core more precious.

MY family NEVER would have made us dress alike

My own family was always NEAR when I was growing up. My grandparents (both sets) were in my hometown and my maternal ones were only 3 blocks. I spent a LOT of time visiting my grandma. My extended family got together for every birthday and holiday. We walked into each others' houses with just a 'hello!' or in my aunt's case a 'yoohoo!'

My cousins aren't brothers, but they are most certainly closer than cousins normally are.

And I married a family I have met exactly three times. My husband's mom's funeral. His uncle's funeral. And our wedding.

He feels my family is stifling. I feel like his is... erm... not family. They are the blood relations like I know I have a big family in Iowa (my grandma's family)--I've MET many. I LIKE them. But they are relations, not family... you see what I mean? It is not the kind of thing you talk about before you merge... 'how do you like to be with extended family?'--who has that discussion?

And OTHER people build a family. My lifetime BFF always has a housefull, some 20-30% of whom are ACTUALLY related. But she adopts people. It's just how she is.

In our situation now, we are 2000 miles from my family, so while I'd love to see my family, especially those cousins, as I don't talk to them often enough, we will spend our small Christmas for four. To my husband it is the familiar way. To me it is always just a little bit sad.

The New Reality

So last week I shared a link on FB about the percentage of people below the poverty line being the highest since 1993, and in hard numbers this puts the US at the highest number of poor people ever. This led to a great debate among a couple of my FB friends—very civil and with lots of back-up sources—it was pretty cool, actually, to have civilized dialog from very different views, but then, I DO have fabulous friends.

Family living in car in Atlanta - source

One of the things brought up in this debate was the 'new oil boom'. Now I'd heard a little something on this, as one of my long-time friends has been unemployed (he's a civil engineer and cash-strapped states have badly tightened their belts, so a lot of the work that kept him going for 15 years has dried up), and HE mentioned the oil fields... at the time, I was 'say what?'--I just hadn't paid attention to that level of news.

Anyway, this oil boom has led to a housing shortage... in Eastern Montana, of all places. But then just that night I learn a 2nd degree relative (technically once removed... erm...) is MOVING to one of these fields in North Dakota. (in a 5th wheel trailer with a daughter—so yes, housing shortage... I can tell you, I'm not sure I'd want to winter in North Dakota in a trailer)


And it got me thinking...

Construction Grand Coulee Dam, Grand Coulee, WA

Digression: My Stepdad, the Dam Kid

My stepdad grew up in the 50s with his father, an electrician who specialized in the set-up of dams... you heard me, hydro-electric power—those giant things that block rivers in exchange for electricity... there was a TIME there weren't all that many, but post-WW2, America wanted MORE POWER... Anyway, he and his family moved all over the US as his dad worked on one dam and then another. He went to 3 high schools... for a while he and his dad moved on to the next place while his mom and sisters stayed (his older sister wanting to finish high school in a place she wasn't a stranger). I think it was hard on their family in some ways, but really developed character in others. And I think several families moved together—the same type of crew needed for each new location—almost like the military that way.

Back to My Story

So is this happening again? Or might it? I can see a reasonable application of this model in wind. Windmills can be built pretty much anywhere with open land... and there surely is some specialized skill in the building. Now oil is limited to where there are oil reserves, so the set up there isn't going to jump place to place to place. But it just seemed there may, in this economy, be a new, necessary mobilization.


I wonder how long this stuff will take to come to books. What comes to mind is Steinbeck's Dustbowl stuff, but maybe that is the pessimist in me. Still, can you imagine living in a normal city, leading a normal life, and being uprooted to move to a trailer in North Dakota. (don't get me wrong, North Dakota has some charm—I actually think Bismark is a charming little city, even if I only spent a lunch there on my drive moving here from Oregon). But MAN, those winters! And the emotional upheaval of moving to pretty much the middle of nowhere... what stories might there be?

You have any first or second degree experiences with the new realities?  You think any of them might make your books?