February 26, 2009

taking cues from bartleby


today in my law and literature class (yes, i'm taking a class during my last semester of law school entitled "law and literature," in which we read books such as Oedipus, Saint Joan, Bleak House, and The Trial), we were discussing Bartleby the Scrivener by Melville, and the discussion took us to an interesting place i thought i'd share.

in this book, the attorney hires on bartleby as a scrivener in his office. things are going well for the first few days, and then, on the fourth day, the attorney asks bartleby to examine a document (which is the job of the scrivener) and bartley simply says, "i prefer not to."

the attorney is shocked and dismayed initially, but comes up with many varied reasons why bartleby would take such a departure from his usual head-in-the-books type of work ethic, and eventually just excuses him. unfortunately, this "i prefer not to" response becomes a trend to the point where bartleby is simply not working at all. the other scriveners in the office are getting upset, and the attorney finally attempts to fire bartleby and get him to vacate the offices. to this, bartleby says (predictably) "i prefer not to."

long story short, the attorney ends up moving his office to another location because bartleby (who has begun living in the office, and refuses the attorney's offer to come home with him) just won't leave, nor will he do any work. and when he still doesn't leave even after new tenants move in, the tenants call the police and have him arrested. the attorney visits bartleby in prison a few times and learns that he "prefers not" to eat anything, and eventually the attorney finds him dead by starvation. it's a lot...bleaker than how i'm describing it, but bartleby irritated me throughout the entire book so there you go.

in class, we were presented with the obvious question of "what is bartleby trying to tell us?" and the suggestion was presented that he exemplifies moral choice in a world where we have become obsessed with procedure. more specifically (and personally for those of us in the class), bartleby is pointing out the attorney that he (the attorney) has lost all contact with humanity. his life is his job, and his job consists of procedure he oversees in offices which have windows facing brick walls or air vents. he totally cuts himself off from the rest of common humanity for his job. the people he employ are no longer people, but have become nicknames like "nappers" and "ginger nut". he comes to work, and goes home just to wait until he can come back the next morning. he never discusses family or hobbies or life really.

bartleby represents the anti-attorney. he represents the humanity we lose to our ambition, our jobs, our careers.

and this realization led our class to begin discussing what law school has "done" to all of us. how, after our first year of school we found it hard to hold normal conversations with people in social settings and not discuss civil procedure, or that crazy case we read in crim, or how our contracts professor may actually be crazy. our relationships suffered. and i mean suffered. and most interesting to me was that a girl spoke up about how, this past summer, she decided that she wasn't going to get a legal position. instead, she got an internship with her "dream job". and found that she had changed so much because of law school that she couldn't function outside of a legal position. she wanted to treat her supervisor with the calm, cool, competent collection we treat managing partners with. she can't tap in to her creativity and ends up writing things that are rule-based when there are no rules. she doesn't get along with her fellow interns because they don't speak the legal language she's so used to communicating in.

and it just struck me, i guess. first as sad, because it pointed out that a lot of us sitting around that classroom (and a lot of my friends in general) have a dream job. and that dream job is most often not a practicing attorney. it's usually something creative or flexible and less demanding. and when we put that aside (for what we think will only be a little while) to establish ourselves and make the money that seems to be so necessary in our society, according to bartleby we're actually losing ourselves as well. but this conversation also made me thankful. thankful that i blog and i write somewhat regularly. that i exercise my creative muscle. and that i've more or less realized (before embarking upon a career) that i don't want to be a practicing attorney. because this means that maybe i haven't lost it, you know?

or heck, maybe bartleby is just full of it.

February 23, 2009

great ideas are born every day

the wonderful ashley over at writing to reach you has a great idea that some of you may be interested in, so i thought i'd share it. i'll definitely be participating, and am looking forward to seeing how it all goes! even if you're not interested in this particular project, you should check out her blog - it's one of my favorite reads!

Calling All Twenty-Something Writers

by Ashley on February 23, 2009

Last Friday when I said I had an idea, I didn’t mean to be such a tease. I was just excited and couldn’t keep my mouth shut. But, I can’t keep this a secret anyway, because I desperately need your help. You can skip right down to The Idea if you’re not interested in the background stuff.

The Evolution of the Idea

The idea started on Thursday night when I decided that I really wanted to start a podcast. I’ve been an avid podcast listener for years, and I’ve always wanted one of my own, but I’d never felt quite so inspired to actually do it. So, then I was thinking about what I could podcast about and with who.

I decided that I wanted to podcast about writing, and I really wanted to podcast with some of my fellow writing-dedicated bloggers. The problem was that I didn’t know how to podcast and I didn’t know if anyone would be interested in participating.

I spent some time on Friday trying to figure out how to podcast (I think I have it about half figured out now), but then it occurred to me that I really wanted to do something much broader than that, so that more people could participate.

I thought then of a group blog that could feature regular posts and possibly also video and (hopefully at some point) a podcast.

The Idea

I want to start a writing community for twenty-somethings that would revolve around a group blog. The point would be to encourage each other to write. We would do this mostly by talking about writing. I don’t imagine this blog being a How To Write kind of deal, but more about sharing ideas and holding each other accountable. It might include guest blogs or round table-like discussions via threaded comments. I hope it will also include other kinds of media. The question of what we would do is something I need your help with.

I want to do this not because I don’t think there’s anything like it already on the internet, but because I’m interested in more of a small group atmosphere and, well, I really like you all and trust your insight. I find I stay most motivated to write when I keep it at the front of my brain and get my ideas–about story, style, etc.–out there.

My original intent was that this would focus mostly on fiction, novel-length writing. But, I think it could be much broader than that. I know that I’m interested in all kinds of writing, so I think anything could be up for discussion.

So, I’m cool with leading things, especially at the start, but I don’t want to do this by myself. I’d like to encourage participation at all levels, but I’d really love if some of you would co-lead this with me. And, this is why I’m throwing the idea out there even though I’m not sure exactly where it will go. If no one is intersted, then I’ll probably put it on the back burner.

What I Need From You

1. If you are really interested and might consider co-leading this with me, please let me know. Also know that you’ll have my undying love. But, don’t worry, you’re not committing your life. You can always back out, and I don’t anticipate this taking over your life. But, I’d like your insight on the planning moving forward.

2. If you are intersted in possibly contributing at some point, but don’t want to be involved in the planning, please let me know.

3. If you are not interested, but you’ve already read this far, make it worth your while, and let me know if you have any ideas about things we might do on the blog or any feedback on the idea at all.

4. If you need me to clarify anything, please let me know.

5. If you’re interested in the idea and think your readers might be as well, spread the word on your blog.

I really want this to be collaborative, so please let me know what you think and if you are even midly interested in the idea. You can leave a comment here or email me at writetoreach [at] gmail [dot] com.

A final note: The only qualification for participating in this project is that you must be willing to talk about writing. This isn’t about how much formal training you have (I have very little myself) or how good you are or even how much time you spend writing. You only ever have to share as much as you want. What I’m saying is that there are many good reasons not to participate, but thinking you don’t have anything to say about writing is not one of them.

February 22, 2009

the most sought-after guy in hollywood

here's my blow-by-blow of the oscar's for all those who enjoyed my grammy's commentary!

the red carpet in all its glory:
  • kate winslet is beautiful, so vintage, and that dress is killing me (why is she always so perfect?!). i love that she's the youngest to be nominated for so many awards.
  • SJP looks very carrie bradshaw (which i now know after having my first SATC experience last night with the ladies). and matthew broderick looks very nervous.
  • tim gunn is about to drool all over mr. valentino.
  • comparing the oscars to the prom to make it relevant to vanessa hudgens and zack efron. hilarity.
  • okay, if people knock miley cyrus and her dress this time, i'm gonna kill someone. she looks awesome. it's young, fresh, appropriate, elegant, and people just need to get over themselves.
  • penelope is wearing serious vintage. like, a 60 year old dress vintage. proof that beauty is timeless, and i need to start shopping in thrift stores.
  • jeez, this award show is so...pompous compared to others.
  • so the red carpet was officially a disappointment. way too many movie stars sneaking in the back entrance so as not to show off their dresses before the main event. haters.
the main event:
  • oh, hugh. i love your accent. it's okay if you were an australian, playing an australian, in a movie called australia, hosting.
  • it takes some balls to perform show-tune style live. cheesy, but apt and quite funny, mr. jackson. and who knew anne hathaway could sing?!
  • meryl streep is a badass. plain and simple. bad. ass.
  • best supporting actress: penelope cruz. it was the dress. lol.
  • the milk acceptance speech will break your heart.
  • the uniform of the oscars this year seems to be the white, strapless, sparkly dress.
  • oscars are dragging.
  • costume designer for the duchess seemed like he just inhaled a very large xanax before his acceptance speech.
  • i love when winners say "'so and so' really should be up here with me..." and then just go on with their speech. because the rest of that sentence actually says: "...but i didn't want to share the spotlight so i didn't ask them to come up."
  • ROBERT PATTINSON IS AT THE OSCARS! and looking HOT introducing the romance movies of 2008 (including twilight! holla!). i wasn't feeling the short hair originally. it's growing on me (no pun intended). that was by far the [most unexpected] highlight of the oscars for me. is that sad?
  • natalie portman is rocking her pink dress. and ben stiller is out of control. i don't get it, could someone explain?
  • that's 2 for slumdog millionaire.
  • james franco. drool. massive, massive drool. (does anyone else think he's a dead ringer for jeff buckley?)
  • there goes beyonce, singing "at last" again. etta james needs to just punch her in the face and be done with it.
  • best supporting actor: health ledger. can i just start crying now? okay, crying.
  • the oscars needs some performances to break up the monotony. just saying'.
  • it's will smith. where has will smith been? besides making bad movies like "hancock"?
  • that's 3 for slumdog.
  • lol. that's 4 for slumdog millionaire!
  • omg. that's 5 for slumdog.
  • well, i asked for performances. i got performances.
  • i'm sorry, i may be the only one, but i can't stand john legend.
  • 6 for slumdog millionaire. should i just stop keeping track and assume they'll win every single one?
  • i have a huge crush on liam neeson. and the slumdog actress's dress is beyond words.
  • slumdog took best director. that's 7. so far. are we surprised? no.
  • did you know nicole kidman was born in hawaii? i loooove her. one of the most statuesque women.
  • the women presenting best actress blow my mind.
  • anne hathaway was nominated for a best actress oscar?! nice. she's made absolutely all of the right moves with her career so far.
  • halle berry is untouchable. but can i please have her boyfriend/baby daddy? lol.
  • best actress: kate winslet. so great. i should watch "the reader". and i love that she asked her dad to whistle so she could find him in the audience.
  • best actor: sean penn for milk. "yes, totally deserved it!" is the consensus in the room i'm in. best acceptance speech EVER.
  • update: rpatz is sitting behind mickey rourke. looking quite edward-ish if i do say so myself. smile for once, would ya?!
  • i'm going to guess best movie now before they present it: slumdog.
  • was i right? yep! slumdog millionaire takes best movie!
overall, a pretty good show. there are definitely some slow moments, but it didn't seem as long as the grammy's. sorry, too lazy to find the links! just google it!

news from hawaii

i thought this would be an interesting follow-up to my article, since it recalls a situation extremely similar to this one (and put on, in fact, by the same organization) some years ago. it was a success and, hopefully, this one will be as well. if you are in hawaii, i encourage you to participate. if not, it may just be a good opportunity (if you're interested) to be introduced to the kind of issues native hawaiians face on a daily basis, and to read more about it.

i'll post more regarding the supreme court when it comes out!

Aloha Kakou,
'Ilio'ulaokalani Coalition is gathering at the State Capitol Rotunda at 4 am on February 25th, 2009. (I know most of you are not doing anything at that hour) We encourage all native Hawaiians and supporters of protecting our ceded lands from being sold and/transferred to join us.

We will be sharing our pule, drumming and chanting every hour on the hour from 5 am to 4 pm. At 5 am Honolulu time, the US Supreme Court will be hearing the case brought by Gov. Lingle who is seeking the right to sell our ancestral lands. We need to send our pule to give strength and mana to those that are representing us.

Please bring your pahu, pu kani and/or pu 'ohe to assist in the calling of our people.
Bring your 'ohana, haumana and hoaloha.
Bring your own water, mea 'ai (food), chairs, hali'i (mats) for resting in between.

Kumu hula will be sharing/teaching oli between sessions so you can lend your mana and voices to this effort.

We encouarge you to visit your state legislators in between protocols to encourage them to support bills calling for a moratorium on the sale and transfer of ceded lands. Write and submit your testimony.

Talk story with our kupuna and find out more about these issues.

If you are on the neighbor island or on the continent, gather your own 'ohana and join us in spirit. If you have any questions, can kokua in any way or need more information please call Kaho'onei at 224-8068 or Vicky at 754-2301. And feel free to pass this information on to those you may know that should be participating.

Mahalo nui loa!
Vicky Holt Takamine
Kumu Hula, Pua Ali'i 'Ilima
'Ilio'ulaokalani Coalition

February 17, 2009

i'm published!

article synopsis:

For many years, Hawai‘i has been a favored destination of vacationers and adventurers, colonizers and usurpers. Its beautiful landscape and strategic placement lend itself for these purposes. However, there is another side of Hawai‘i that many do not see, and even less understand. When the sunscreen, ABC Stores, and hotel lū‘au’s are left behind, one will find that there is a part of Hawai‘i that longs for the return of its independence, its identity, its rights. This Hawai‘i no longer wishes to see its people impoverished or imprisoned. It no longer wishes to be forgotten in history books, and remembered only when it’s time to plan a family trip over the summer. This is the Hawai‘i being fought for by those in the Hawaiian sovereignty movement and is addressed in this article.

though i'm pretty sure i've emailed most of you with the link to the article, for those of you who want to read it and do not have the link, feel free to email me (dahlia_5365@yahoo.com) and i can send it to you. i'm hesitant to post the link/info regarding the publication on this blog because of the byline, etc.

February 10, 2009

vampire mania

so my bff twittered something earlier today (has twitter been verbed yet?) that i'm 100% sure she knew i would freak out about. here's the link.

my (very erratic and over-the-top) thoughts: now, for some reason or the other, i have always been obsessed with books about vampires and witches and werewolves, etc. (although, oddly enough, i could never really get into anne rice...maybe i'll try again?). and that obsession is reflected in my writing as well. most of my ideas and stories are in some way, shape or form about one of (or all of) those three things. fairies fascinate me. myth and legend grab me. forbidden love, magical powers, morality and crossed lines. they all have absolutely wrecked me for many other genres. what can i say, i love and live for fantasy.

so when i found l.j. smith in the seventh grade, i died. it was like finding a treasure chest where my friends and i could just get lost and stay lost for as long as we wanted. we came up with cast lists, soundtracks, fanfics, you name it, we did it. the secret circle. night world. the forbidden game. and yes, the vampire diaries.

so last fall, when my sister visited me and spent practically the ENTIRE time she was here reading a stupid book called twilight, i was like "what the hell, man?!" and then she told me i had to read it.

i'm going to be honest right now and say that i had absolutely no desire to ever pick up twilight. i thought that it was going to be absolute crap, and i had already read the best teen vampire romance books ever written, and why would i ever waste my time betraying my loyalty to l.j. smith for this new author i knew nothing about? (yes, i've always taken books extremely and dramatically seriously). in fact, i bought a copy and then let it collect dust on my desk for months before i was finally so bored one friday afternoon, had had enough of both my sister and my bff telling me i needed to get my ass in gear and read it, didn't want to start another book that i KNEW i wouldn't be able to put down (which would screw my entire weekend), and so picked up my copy of twilight...and fell in love all over again.

so now i've made room for stephenie meyer and her imagination in my very exclusive little vampire world. she's in good company.

BUT THEN, the CW apparently announces that they're going to be making a tv show out of the vampire diaries?! shut the front door. now i have to worry about real casting, and know that there's a good chance the music will suck, and wonder how they're going to change/ruin a perfectly good forbidden love triangle story. and, come on, the only reason the kiddies today even know about the vampire diaries is because of twilight, right? so now people will compare edward to stefan. they'll compare bella to elena. and really, who could they possibly cast for stefan that would be better than robert pattinson?!

AND, i just realized five minutes ago that there's a new installment of the vampire diaries that came out TODAY. after 17 years! so now i'm excited and flustered. this is a crazy day.

lol. i'm sorry for those of you who don't really know me personally, because i sound completely insane in this post. but just try and imagine your favorite book series when you were a pre-teen, and you thought it was over. then you realize that, not only is the author continuing the series, but it's being made into a tv show! hell, imagine if, 10 years down the line, stephenie meyer decides to add more books on after breaking dawn, when you thought it was all happy ever after and it's not. that's exactly how i feel right now.


February 9, 2009

a simple reminder i gave to a friend

i wrote this comment on a friend's blog a couple of weeks ago, and when i re-read it i realized that this was something i needed to constantly remind myself of. so here's my reminder.

i think a large portion of [the feeling of wanting drastic changes to be made in our lives -- because for some reason we are less excited about today and tomorrow than we once were -- while simultaneously missing the simplicity of what we had when we were younger] is also just growing up. when we're younger, we have more time to live in the moment and go from interest to interest because we don't have as many [real and large] commitments that we do now. (i.e. school loans, car payments, rent, looming marriage and children, future planning, 401K's, etc.).

because i often find myself feeling the very same thing you're describing, i think there are 2 things we should both remember: 1) it really is very important to change if you need that change in your life. while that change can be scary because of those very commitments i just mentioned, if we don't allow ourselves to take that leap, we ultimately end up unhappy. and 2) we have to accept that our lives aren't going to always be exactly the way we want them, and even if we work to make our lives that way, it won't happen right away. it's okay to have periods of your life that are less exciting than others. we need those times to fully appreciate the better times. we need those times because it's when things are less the way we want them that we grow as people and learn to [cope with all of life's differences].

i guess i just mean to say that every single season of life is meaningful. and while it's important to take control of your life and make it the life we want to lead, it's also important to realize that, because life can't always be the life we want it to be, we need to find things to appreciate in the life we're leading right now.

February 8, 2009

thoughts regarding the glitz and glam

so this post is gonna be a little different. i'm watching both the E! pre-show and the grammy's, and i thought i'd just post my thoughts as they come during the show. it'll be like you're all watching the grammy's with me!

*note: the links may not go to the right pictures after a while b/c they've been updating the photos and changing everything around online. sorry!*
  • is it just me, or is katy perry super cute? the bubble-gum pink dress and lipstick is working for her. as is the glam 'do. and does anyone else think she looks a lot like hilarie burton?
  • "you don't take sand to the beach" - paris hilton, whose dress is as short as her hair.
  • why was ryan seacrest being such a douche to taylor swift?!
  • uh-oh. did chris brown go ike turner on rihanna?
  • HOLY SHIT U2 OPENED! love love love love love. favorite. band. EVER. also, i love that bono feels he can act a fool just because he's bono. at least now we know that bono can't really dance.
  • i find it odd that no one really "hosts" the grammy's anymore. it's just really a bunch of different presenters. saves us the painfully unfunny jokes, i guess.
  • whitney's out of rehab?! too bad she can't sing anymore. what an american tragedy. and did she get plastic surgery?! wait, is she HIGH?!
  • al green, justin timberlake, keith urban, and boys to men as back-up. nice save, grammy's.
  • now, i love carrie underwood. but she needs a new album like ryan seacrest needs a punch in the face. but i gotta love her glitter mic's.
  • that's 1 for coldplay.
  • i muted kid rock. enough said.
  • alright, so am i the only one on earth who actually listens when miley cyrus sings? because she can't sing. she's cute, but homegirl cannot sing! and next to taylor swift, who sounds so delicate? omg. i may have to mute this too.
  • jennifer hudson is like a throwback to the singers of yesteryear. when talent mattered more than the size of your waist. she's so classy. and it's so nice to hear music being celebrated again.
  • stevie wonder and the jonas brothers?! i'm gonna be honest right now and say that i don't understand the whole jonas brothers thing. talk about a wannabe hipster version of a the boy band phenom. but i guess no one understood the nsync thing years ago either, huh? what goes around... but man, stevie...what were you thinking? superstitious would have been great all by yourself.
  • BLINK 182 REUNION ANYONE!? and how much do i love that mark hoppus just clowned the jonas brothers?
  • that's 2 for coldplay.
  • katy perry looked like a fruit basket during her performance. lol. but i think that was the idea. although she's not the best performer all in all. a bit disappointing.
  • over it, kanye. but damn, your songs are catchy as hell. your hair, on the other hand? killing me. all that jheri curl/fauxhawk needs in its beginning stages is some soul glo.
  • although i haven't fully boarded the adele train, i'm glad she won. she seems like a cool chick.
  • so morgan freeman and kenny chesney are bff's now? that's not weird.
  • robert plant (makes me want to write robert pattinson, but what doesn't? lol.) and allison krauss are owning the grammy's right now.
  • the fact that M.I.A. is at the grammy's, and is performing, on her due date is out of control. who does that? performance kinda killed it though, i'm not going to lie.
  • kate beckinsale is officially about an inch thick around the waist. is it okay to hate her?
  • for the life of me, i can't figure out why i don't care for john mayer's music very much. but he won best male pop vocal, so maybe i should jump on the bandwagon.
  • adele is performing barefoot, and she didn't do a costume change. that alone is commendable.
  • gotta give it up to the grammy's for all the creative/strange collaborations this year. timberlake, al green and company? mcartney and grohl? sugarland and adele? radiohead and the usc trojan marching band? lil wayne and robin thicke (the wannabe timberlake)?
  • so t.i. is my secret hip-hop crush (minus the arms dealing, obviously). just thought i'd put that out there. really loved his performance with justin timberlake. and how he is desperately trying to mitigate his sentence with his good-message songs and reality community service tv show.
  • more obama love/expectations. did you not expect it?
  • "sweet caroline...ba, ba, bahhhh! good times never seem so good...so good! so good...so good!" - neil diamond. why is this the perfect i'm-drunk-in-a-bar-in-a-foreign-country-with-a-bunch-of-my-drunk-friends song?
  • just fyi: i feel like this is the never ending grammy awards. every time i think it's over, some new performer comes on. i'm sleepy. end already!
  • new orleans still got it!
  • someone get t-pain and will.i.am. a mirror, stat.
  • zooey deschanel is adorable, but what is she doing at the grammy's?
  • i usually love allison krauss, but this plant/krauss song is putting me to sleep right now.
  • album of the year: like i said, plant and krauss killed the grammy's this year.
overall, a good show. ok, seriously, good night everyone!