To memoir or not to memoir, that is the question

Don’t you just love it when someone else articulates something you’ve been thinking about / trying to say? Tayari Jones again, on whether writing a memoir is the right thing to do:


And it made more wonder if having the RIGHT to hurt someone makes it okay to do so.
…
In this piece I talk quite a bit anout my dad. Was it really okay for me to talk about him? Of course I have the right and desire to tell my own story, but I can’t really tell it without him.

She concludes:

I don’t know. I think I prefer the safe realm of fiction.

!!! I’ve thought a great deal about writing a memoir. This is always where I end up. Fiction does feel safe to me. I can write about more significant, weightier subjects in fiction than I can in memoir. The distance of fiction allows me to get nearer to the truth, if that makes any sense.

Writing a memoir would mean writing about my family, my childhood. That’s the key to the whole thing. Without that, there’s no point. But when I write personal non-fiction, even if I’m just testing it out, in a Word doc, I find myself hedging when it comes to my family. Who they are is crucial to who I am, hence I must write about them, if I am to write my story.

But the good daughter in me balks at hurting anyone. No one in my story is evil. There is no big bad.

It would be much easier if there was.

TCGN* Update

[*Tom Cruise Goes Nuts]

I’ve been confining my thoughts on this matter to Sallie’s ever-so-funny running commentary at So Anyway…, but I just had to share this tidbit.

Quite frequently, I’ll make an observation on something to myself or someone else, then later on I’ll hear someone else make the same observation in a more public forum. And then I’ll think, hey! I said that yesterday! (or whatever). I’m still trying to decide if this makes me a trendsetter or simply unoriginal.

Anyhoo.

Last Friday I commented on Eden’s post about TCGN’s appearance on Today:


You know back in the day (i.e. the 80s), I liked TC. That gradually wore down to neutrality. My feelings toward him remained pretty much neutral until the last, oh, how long would you say it’s been? two months or so? Now I actively dislike him. I may never pay to see another movie with him in it. And I can’t imagine I’m the only person who’s feeling that way.

Then last night I was noodling around TWoP and after catching up on the AC360 thread, I saw the Today Show thread, remembered Eden’s post (I didn’t actually see the interview) and thought I’d see what the TWoPPers had to say about it.

Just a few snippets:
ctygrltif2:

Between that and the “Matt, Matt, Matt” he was just so offensive. I hate the way he’s trying to force his cult on the rest of the world. I was never a big fan of his movies anyway so it’s no big loss that I’ll never pay money to see one again..

Damaris56:

Well, after this whole thing with Katie Holmes and Brooke Shields and this latest interview on Today, I’m boycotting his films. I’m never giving this guy a penny of my money. I had planned to see War Of The Worlds because Spielberg was directing it, but nothing will get me in to watch any movie with this idiot in it.

Lizziedrew:

Add me to the list of those who will be boycotting his movies in the future. That pompous asshat doesn’t need any more of my money, for damn sure.

BitchySmurf:

I never liked Tom Cruise. I never disliked him. But I never “got” the whole appeal. I’m never going to another one of his movies. War of the Worlds seems like the kind of thing I would enjoy too. But I won’t go.

So, heh. There are also links to transcripts of the interview wherein TCGN proves that he is, in fact, a crazy person. It’s funny (funny weird, not funny haha). The main reason my initial like of TC wore off was because I could never get a read on him in interviews. Maybe this is stupid, but if I find someone to be vacuous or annoying or assholey in interviews, I find it hard to like his/her work. Conversely, if someone comes off as bright or witty, I’m more inclined to enjoy his/her work.

Anyhow, to me, TC never came off as anything. He was like a robot, a shell. I got the impression that he had no personality of his own, he just filled this shell with roles, and when the role ended he was empty again. Now, I realize this was in part due to his publicist (you know, the one he fired) suppressing his urge to reveal that he’s a crazy person. But I also think that my instinct that he had no personality of his own is probably not that far off. That’s the kind of person that cults appeal to, after all, isn’t it?

One more thing: in all this frenzy, little mention has been made of TC’s children. I’ve been thinking about how they’re getting to that age (according to IMDb, they’re 12 and 10) where everything your parents do, regardless of how ordinary, is embarrassing. Can you imagine being a pre-teen and having to watch your dad behave as he has for the last while? I’m mortified for them.

Revisions

Writer Cody talks about changes to his novel ‘Ricochet River’

[T]his new version of the coming-of-age novel is missing certain sexual references and profanity that Cody thinks caused some high schools to ban it from their classrooms.

…

In one, the book’s main characters — all teens — spend the night in a hotel room in The Dalles. It’s a comic scene that has been one of Cody’s favorites for out-loud readings. But it involves alcohol and sex, and Cody understood parents’ and teachers’ discomfort with the messages the scene might send to high schoolers.

Cody removed this scene and toned down another that occurs in the woods near some mating salmon. He also replaced a few expletives.

Caveat: I don’t know this book.

That said, hmm. He says he did it because he understands teachers feeling uncomfortable with those bits in the classroom, not because of right-wing pressure / book banning.

Yeah, I dunno. Isn’t it the stuff that’s uncomfortable that’s most important to deal with–not avoid?

Alcohol and sex is the reality of high school for a lot of people. Aren’t we better off acknowledging and dealing with it directly that than pretending it doesn’t happen?

And seriously, profanity? Profanity is the reality for everyone.

A lot of people seem to want childhood/adolescence to be something that simply doesn’t exist. That never did exist. I think it must be true that when most people grow up, they forget what it was like to be 7, 10, 15.

In one of Madeleine L’Engle’s books (I think it’s Circle of Quiet) she talks about how when she’s writing about being 15 (or a character who’s 15), at that moment, she is 15. When I first read that, it was an “aha” moment for me. I realized that when I was telling a story of something that happened when I was 13, I’d go back there, I’d be 13 again, if only for a moment (people would sometimes comment on how worked up I could get about things that happened years ago, and I guess I wondered if I was weird for still being able to feel my 13yo pain). I think that ability is essential for a writer, but I guess not everyone has it.

Thinking…

I must be getting cooler (um, yeah, right) or at least more tuned in to the >cough< A-List, if I can read a list like this, and not only be familiar with five of them but have been so over one of the 5 six months ago (sorry, JB).

(The joke’s on me, of course, as he’s the one with the book deal.)

Continuing Sagas

Conspiracy Theories

“If you liked The Da Vinci Code, you’ll love the Downing Street Memo.”

Okay, so this article at Slate isn’t really about the Da Vinci Code. But I had to share anyhow, because it’s exactly what I’ve been thinking ever since the hype started and exactly why I haven’t read it yet (well, that and the hardcover vs. paperback thing).

A few weeks ago, at an airport in Europe, I saw Dan Brown’s Da Vinci Code staring at me across the bookstore bins. I had seen it many times before and averted my gaze, but I was facing a long delay, and I suddenly thought: May as well get it over with.Well, of course I knew it would be bad. I just didn’t know that it would be that bad. Never mind for now the breathless and witless style, or the mashed-paper characters, or the lazy, puerile reliance on incredible coincidence to flog the lame plot along. What if it was all true? What if the Nazarene had had issue, in fleshly form, with an androgynous disciple? The Catholic Church would look foolish but, then, it already looks foolish enough on the basis of the official story. “Opus Dei,” according to Brown, is a sinister cult organization. Excuse me, but I already knew this, so to speak, independently.

OPEN LETTER TO KANSAS SCHOOL BOARD

As previously mentioned, snarking at creationists? Always fun.

I and many others around the world are of the strong belief that the universe was created by a Flying Spaghetti Monster. It was He who created all that we see and all that we feel. We feel strongly that the overwhelming scientific evidence pointing towards evolutionary processes is nothing but a coincidence, put in place by Him….

We have evidence that a Flying Spaghetti Monster created the universe. None of us, of course, were around to see it, but we have written accounts of it.

…

It is absolutely imperative that they realize that observable evidence is at the discretion of a Flying Spaghetti Monster. Furthermore, it is disrespectful to teach our beliefs without wearing His chosen outfit, which of course is full pirate regalia.

…

I think we can all look forward to the time when these three theories are given equal time in our science classrooms across the country, and eventually the world; One third time for Intelligent Design, one third time for Flying Spaghetti Monsterism, and one third time for logical conjecture based on overwhelming observable evidence.

Bwahahaha.

The coolest Avon Lady on the planet…

…er, make that in the universe.

Hey, Klingons have feelings, too!

“Mrs. Jaworski, 8 has been suspended from school for one day.” She wore an arctic blue power jacket over black slacks, and I self-consciously tried to pull my hooded sweatshirt further over my pink pajamas.

“It’s Ms., please. And sorry for my attire, but I ran a marathon yesterday and I’m too sore to change this morning.” I tried to infect her with my smile, but she wore a tight-lipped expression as frosty as her jacket. “So, anyway. What did he do?” I picked at the hem of my sweatshirt, looked just to the right of her face. I couldn’t meet her eyes. I felt nervous. I felt underdressed. I wondered where 8 was.

So she told me what he did. And as she told me, I started to laugh. I didn’t laugh a little, either, but I belly-laughed and grabbed my stomach. My son stood with his class this morning, put small right hand over heart, faced the American flag, and recited his own personal pledge of allegiance:

I pledge allegiance to the flag of the United Federation of Planets, and to the galaxy for which it stands, one universe, under everybody, with liberty and justice for all species.

“Mrs. Jaworski. This isn’t humorous. The Pledge is an extremely important and patriotic moment each morning in the classroom. I am ashamed of your son’s behavior, and I hope you are, too.”

She had me at “Ms.” Then she threw in a marathon. Then she started to laugh at Principal IAmMiserable&ThereforeYouShouldBeToo (believe me, I know the type) and became the coolest mom ever. Also, she can write.

Religion is the root of all evil.

GOD AND COUNTRY

There’s a wealth of snark here, from students who think “their beloved” GWB doesn’t lie to the biology professor who teaches that “the earth was created in a week” — but I’m going to focus on the subjugation of women.

Keep in mind, these quotes refer to university students:

Brobst was wearing a cherry-red suit, Ross a peacock-blue one, with stockings and pumps�the uniform of Washington wives in waiting.

Power suits? Stockings? Pumps? Hello? Makes me want to say go west, young women, to the land of Birkenstocks, fleece, and year-round shorts.

Referring to du M�e, he said, �Maybe one day he�ll be the one standing before the Supreme Court, arguing to overturn Roe v. Wade.�

Oy. You know it’s one thing when a 60+ person holds certain, ah, “values” I disagree with. I think, okay, well, maybe their small-mindedness was due to the times they grew up, etc. I think they’re wrong, but I can see where/how their opinions developed. OTOH, I always find myself startled when I realize the person going all ballistic over “One Dad, Two Dads” is closer to my age than my parents’. I think, WTF? It’s like we grew up on different planets. That there are twenty-somethings who also hold such views is both perplexing and disturbing.

Ross would look for a job, but only to pay back loans. Eventually, [Ross & du Mee] want to adjust to living on one salary so that she can homeschool their kids.

In theory, homeschooling may have its merits. In reality, homeschoolers = crazy people. The fact that the students in this article were homeschooled in part explains how they can hold views the views they do. Public school is terribly flawed. However, it has the advantage of exposing you to people who are not the same as you and who don’t share your parents’ views/values. IMO, this compensates for a lot.

Ben Adams … sent out a nine-page e-mail to the entire student body before the spring formal reminding the girls to dress modestly. �Lust is sin,� it said. �It is sin for you to tempt us. It is . . . unloving. Unsisterly. Un-Christlike.�

Asshat. Blame the girl. It’s all the girl’s fault. Women are evil. etc. etc. etc. Hate that. This is why I couldn’t get past page 1 of the Bible (I did try to read it once, for its literary merits). Step up, Asshat! Take responsibility for your own actions. Also, the shame/guilt element here is disturbing. No one should feel that bad about sex–which, after all, is a natural biological function, while “sex only w/i marriage” is a mere social convention.

Girls talk about not �stumbling� a guy, the equivalent of tempting him, and resident advisers keep a close eye on them to make sure they don�t wear shirts that show any bra. If they do, they�ll get a friendly e-mail��I think I saw you in dress code violation,� followed by a smiley emoticon.

Phony niceness. Yeah, that’s a good value to encourage. I guess this is “hate the sin, love the sinner” again. Hate that message too. Anyhow, what I notice is that these “values” encourage people to be shallow, to focus on the external. It’s all about appearances, looking “good” to others. Bleh.

Matthew du M�e, who was an R.A., told me that if he saw a boy and girl sitting too close for too long he would pull the boy aside and tell him to stop, because �the guy is supposed to be the leader in the relationship.�

I’ve heard this one before. Newsflash: 21st Century. Speaking of which…

Even the most ambitious [girls], those who wake up at 3 a.m. to study, told me without reservation that as soon as they had children they would quit their jobs to raise them.
…
Elisa believes the Bible dictates that �there are different roles for men and women�; … But the expectation of most of the guys she knows at Patrick Henry�that wives should just �fade out,� that she should instantly take on the identity of a wife and mother �and consider it a blessing��is not something that she�s comfortable with.

This is simply sad. Honestly, people still believe this shit in 2005? Really? I mean, really, truly, deep inside, without the slightest bit of hypocrisy, they believe this? Doubtful. More likely the guys selfishly want it (who wouldn’t want their very own personal assistant who works for free?) and the girls delude themselves into accepting it in their eagerness to please everyone around them who is expecting them to be perfect. Ugh.

*

Soldiers of Christ II

In the parking lot outside the center, I come across a pickup truck with large hand-painted panels bearing anti-gay slogans and a round red circle with a line through the center superimposed on the faces of two men kissing. STOP THE INSANITY, it says across the top. I pick up one of the pamphlets in a metal box on the side of the truck: �Protect Your Family & Friends from the Dangers of . . . Homosexuality: The Truth!�

The truth. Riiiight.

Wright promises the audience that as the new president of NRB he will fight to block the passage of hate-crime legislation, something many Christian broadcasters fear might be used to halt their attacks on gays and lesbians.
…
�If we had to give equal time to every opposing viewpoint, there would be no time to proclaim the truth that we have been commanded to proclaim,� he says. �We will fight the Fairness Doctrine, tooth and nail. It could be the end of Christian broadcasting as we know it if we do not.�

Oh, darn. The end of hate-filled broadcasting. I weep.

I can�t help but recall the words of my ethics professor at Harvard Divinity School, Dr. James Luther Adams, who told us that when we were his age, and he was then close to eighty, we would all be fighting the �Christian fascists.�

…fascism, Adams warned, would not return wearing swastikas and brown shirts. Its ideological inheritors would cloak themselves in the language of the Bible; they would come carrying crosses and chanting the Pledge of Allegiance.

…too many liberals failed to understand the power and allure of evil, and when the radical Christians came, these people would undoubtedly play by the old, polite rules of democracy long after those in power had begun to dismantle the democratic state. …

Adams told us to watch closely the Christian right�s persecution of homosexuals and lesbians. Hitler, he reminded us, promised to restore moral values not long after he took power in 1933, then imposed a ban on all homosexual and lesbian organizations and publications. Then came raids on the places where homosexuals gathered, culminating on May 6, 1933, with the ransacking of the Institute for Sexual Science in Berlin. Twelve thousand volumes from the institute�s library were tossed into a public bonfire. Homosexuals and lesbians, Adams said, would be the first �deviants� singled out by the Christian right. We would be the next.

In all seriousness, though, this is scary shit. I strongly believe that organized religion just gives people an excuse to hate. Organized religion imposes a set of manmade “values” on its followers, which they must follow blindly or else they aren’t a good whatever and risk punishment (in some cases, the heaping on of guilt, in others, the heaping on of stones). It doesn’t encourage people to think for themselves; in fact, it does the opposite. It encourages people to be submissive, to let those who “know better” take charge and tell them what to do. People are exploited and hurt in order to feed the ambitions of the religion’s hierarchy. It’s all about power & money for the people at the top.

Please.

Javanomics 101: Today’s Coffee Is Tomorrow’s Debt

She just graduated summa cum laude , after three years of legal training that left her $115,000 in debt. Part of that debt, which she will take a decade to repay with interest, was run up at Starbucks, where she buys her lattes….

“A latte a day on borrowed money? It’s crazy,” said Erika Lim, director of career services at the law school.

I love how it’s the career services person who’s all aghast at the lattes. Shouldn’t she be doing something useful … like finding students jobs?!

Seriously, bigger issues here than $3/day spent on coffee.

I don’t want to associate my writing with guilt.

This resonated with me:


I think they key is this: I know that it takes a long time to write a good novel. It will take me at least two years, but probably three. I can’t beat myself up for missing these days. All I can do is promise myself that I will do better. …… Whatever happens, I don’t want to associate my writing with guilt. I have enough stuff to feel guilty about. …

Everyone has their issues. Guilt is mine. Should I ever write that memoir I’ve mentioned, it will be a major theme.

Marketing

Here, Tayari Jones writes about her publicity tour for her second book. What I found interesting was what a difference the marketing slant can have on a book’s success.

Anyhow, she writes:

My publisher, Warner Books, sponsored the dinner where they would be featuring one of their new writers: the author of a magnificent work of art called Redneck Nation.

What I found so… deflating, I guess would be the closest word, about this, is that I think when we (writers) imagine a publisher finally saying “Yes, we want to publish you!” we also imagine that this “yes” means they “get” you. They think your writing is cool, they’re on the same wavelength, etc. etc.

Which… really that’s silly, of course. They’re not picking your book because they think it’s the most brilliant piece of prose ever written, they’re picking it because they think it will sell. Which means their catalog will contain works of varying degrees of quality and competing philosophies. I’m a pragmatist. But still, it must be bizarre for a publicist to be promoting one book with the message “X” and then turn around the next day and promote a book with the message “not-X”. I guess this is why I’m not in marketing.

*

Anyhow, I liked Tayari’s writing there so, as you do, I clicked on the link to her own website, saw “blog” at the top there, and started reading.

I haven’t been doing much gushing or eking lately. *sigh* Well, I did write an AB article, but that’s not what I mean. I can’t say that I haven’t had time to write creatively this past month; I just haven’t been able to
focus. At least part of the problem is that writing query/cover letters is sucking my brain dry. Bleh.