Today, I feel really grateful. Grateful for all the amazing people I know and for the ways in which they inspire and challenge me. I've always felt life is pointless without other people. Everything I am is that way because of the people I know and have known and will be shaped by the people I will meet. It's wondrous to me.
I don't pray much, and I'm not big on the idea of one deity, so I really don't pray to a god. The idea of this one being controlling it all doesn't make sense to me. But I do believe in this sort of huge conglomeration of something greater; that everyone and everything has something of that greatness in them. I have huge faith in everything that is. So sometimes I offer up a thought to the universe and hope that somehow it will be heard.
A few months ago I was lying in bed, worrying about the people I loved and this prayer came to me. Every night since, I've thought it every night right before I fall asleep. It's the purest expression of me I have ever thought, and so I've never shared it. I've never been one who's huge on prayers and appeals--well, I'm told I was when I was very young, that I used to offer up prayers like I was talking to a friend, but I stopped being that little girl along the way--but when this thought came to me I knew it was big. It was everything I ever wanted in life. It was me.
Look after those I loved whom I can't watch over anymore. Help me stay strong for the loved ones in my life. Keep the people I will love someday safe until I reach them.
I really do love everyone, even those I don't like, cliche as it sounds. Personally, I hate being told someone is praying for me, even though it's meant well; something about it feels wrong to me. I'm not praying for you. But I think about all of you, hope for all of you, and am grateful for all of you. You all inspire me to be better in every sense. I'm very humbled.
And so I say with all my heart, thank you for being you.
Thursday, September 29, 2011
Saturday, July 2, 2011
Baby Birds
This morning I started work on a scene which is very early in a new book and a couple of characters are talking about a girl named Mary, who one of them previously left to fend for herself.
"So, talk to me, Harper," said Henry.
"About what?"
"About why you didn't help Mary when you first met her."
"I did help her. I scared off the scruffs."
"After that. Why didn't you help her after that?"
"I don't bring strays home," said Harper.
"She's not a stray. She's too nice to be a stray."
"All the girls from Unity are nice, Henry. They can't help it just like you can't help being tall," Harper snapped. "Besides, I had hoped she'd take my advice and go home."
"You could have helped her get home," Henry pointed out.
Harper sighed. "Did you ever find a baby bird as a kid?"
"Sure," Henry said with a small smile.
"You know how your parents tell you not to touch it because if you do the bird parents will smell you on the baby bird and reject it? That's half of it."
"And the other half?"
"Natural selection. Survival of the fittest."
"I don't think I agree with that."
"Which part?"
"Both parts. Firstly, the smell thing is a myth, and Mom always helped me raise orphaned birds."
"That figures," said Harper. "And survival of the fittest?"
"Well, the girl is still here isn't she? You underestimated her."
"We'd leave her for the lions if we were gazelles," Harper grumbled.
"But we aren't gazelles, we're human. Gazelles can't pick each other up when they fall."
Harper shrugged. "It doesn't really matter, I guess. We're helping her now and that's that."
So, I've spent the last couple days thinking about Harper's motivations and worldview and what past experiences have affected her and this has all been very much in my mind. Then this afternoon Mom popped her head in the door long enough to call us girls outside. Sara stayed in the AC, but I went out to see what was wrong. A nest had fallen out of the tree in the front yard. I could hear the squawks as I approached it, and Mom called to me to ask how many there were. I knelt down and looked in the hole of nest, counting as a the baby birds scrabbled over each other. One. Two. Three. Four? No, three. No, definitely four. Four baby birds. We were quiet a moment, and I'm not sure which one of us asked, "So what should we do?" but one of us did and we both agreed that there really was nothing to do, but there was a deep urge underneath our conversation to do something. We knew, I knew, there was nothing to be done. The birds were too young to have a shot of making it. But that felt like an excuse to myself, even though I knew it was the truth.
I grew up watching Steve Irwin, Jeff Corwin, and the like. They'd come across nature taking its course, and they'd have to let it be, but it still wasn't easy for them. I got that more so from Jeff Corwin, I guess. At least, that's how I remember it. There was an episode of Crocodile Hunter where Steve and his wife, Terri, went out into the brush and rescued little creatures, like geckos and snakes, from the wildfires, taking them from smoldering trees to some area that was clear of the fires. There were emergencies, times when things went wrong in nature. When it wasn't nature taking its course, but us throwing nature off its course. Then it was all right to rescue.
But nests fall from trees, and baby birds get abandoned. Right?
"So, talk to me, Harper," said Henry.
"About what?"
"About why you didn't help Mary when you first met her."
"I did help her. I scared off the scruffs."
"After that. Why didn't you help her after that?"
"I don't bring strays home," said Harper.
"She's not a stray. She's too nice to be a stray."
"All the girls from Unity are nice, Henry. They can't help it just like you can't help being tall," Harper snapped. "Besides, I had hoped she'd take my advice and go home."
"You could have helped her get home," Henry pointed out.
Harper sighed. "Did you ever find a baby bird as a kid?"
"Sure," Henry said with a small smile.
"You know how your parents tell you not to touch it because if you do the bird parents will smell you on the baby bird and reject it? That's half of it."
"And the other half?"
"Natural selection. Survival of the fittest."
"I don't think I agree with that."
"Which part?"
"Both parts. Firstly, the smell thing is a myth, and Mom always helped me raise orphaned birds."
"That figures," said Harper. "And survival of the fittest?"
"Well, the girl is still here isn't she? You underestimated her."
"We'd leave her for the lions if we were gazelles," Harper grumbled.
"But we aren't gazelles, we're human. Gazelles can't pick each other up when they fall."
Harper shrugged. "It doesn't really matter, I guess. We're helping her now and that's that."
So, I've spent the last couple days thinking about Harper's motivations and worldview and what past experiences have affected her and this has all been very much in my mind. Then this afternoon Mom popped her head in the door long enough to call us girls outside. Sara stayed in the AC, but I went out to see what was wrong. A nest had fallen out of the tree in the front yard. I could hear the squawks as I approached it, and Mom called to me to ask how many there were. I knelt down and looked in the hole of nest, counting as a the baby birds scrabbled over each other. One. Two. Three. Four? No, three. No, definitely four. Four baby birds. We were quiet a moment, and I'm not sure which one of us asked, "So what should we do?" but one of us did and we both agreed that there really was nothing to do, but there was a deep urge underneath our conversation to do something. We knew, I knew, there was nothing to be done. The birds were too young to have a shot of making it. But that felt like an excuse to myself, even though I knew it was the truth.
I grew up watching Steve Irwin, Jeff Corwin, and the like. They'd come across nature taking its course, and they'd have to let it be, but it still wasn't easy for them. I got that more so from Jeff Corwin, I guess. At least, that's how I remember it. There was an episode of Crocodile Hunter where Steve and his wife, Terri, went out into the brush and rescued little creatures, like geckos and snakes, from the wildfires, taking them from smoldering trees to some area that was clear of the fires. There were emergencies, times when things went wrong in nature. When it wasn't nature taking its course, but us throwing nature off its course. Then it was all right to rescue.
But nests fall from trees, and baby birds get abandoned. Right?
Saturday, June 4, 2011
Why Sherlock Holmes Is Not Shawn Spencer
Last night, I was on Tumblr, browsing through some Sherlock related posts (I admit, I was looking for GIFs) when I came across one by a young girl who seemed to think she'd made some great discovery. "Watson is totally Gus," she proclaimed, adding that "Sherlock is like Psych." She went on to draw the parallels while I beat my head against an imaginary desk. (Let's be honest, we all have laptops now. Who uses desks?) Now, because I'm not an internet troll, I didn't say anything to this girl... buuut I did complain in a post of my own, and now I'm writing this. Whatever. I think there's something to explore here.
I read through all of the Sherlock Holmes stories a few years ago. Four novels, fifty-six short stories devoured in the matter of a couple months, if that long. I was consumed with the tales. After finishing them, I couldn't watch crime shows for a few months because they were all just copies of Sherlock Holmes. I think the reason Holmes and Watson became so popular in their day, and remain so to this day, is because Sir Arthur Conan Doyle tapped into a part of the human spirit that hadn't fully been explored in literature until that point in time. Yes, he revolutionized the ideas of deduction and detective work in fiction and made them into an art form but he was not the first to do work in that area. I posit that it was the relationship between Homes and Watson which he cultivated that has truly given this work longevity, and indeed, made it timeless, because it captured something of a truth about humanity as all great classics do.
Of course, when one taps into a truth of the nature of humanity, everyone after you wants to get on board too. They can't resist it, really. This is why I was so astounded last night by this girl's post. Everyone copies Sherlock Holmes and Watson. It isn't even just crime shows, it's everywhere. On House, M.D., House and Wilson are famously modeled after Holmes and Watson. I see it so often that I presumed everyone knew whence it came, but apparently not. I spent most of my insomnia last night pondering how it is that new, young fans are coming to the fandom and not realizing this.
Sherlock Holmes is one of the most portrayed characters of all time. Beginning in Sir Arthur Conan Doyle's lifetime with a stage production depicting the consulting detective's adventures, to the latest portrayal (Sherlock on BBC One... I think?) Holmes has been portrayed by hundreds of actors. Therefor, his companion, Dr. John Watson, has been portrayed just as often. It is through all these productions that so many misconceptions are formed about Holmes, Watson, and their relationship. Each couple brings some unique perspective to the dynamic, though in my opinion it is impossible for any of them to capture exactly what Doyle created when he wrote about Holmes and Watson. My conclusion last night was that because these new fans are only seeing one or two of these more famous portrayals and getting all their knowledge from those two things, that they have missed the magic of the relationship in the Doyle stories and therefor have missed the point. (Also, some people just really stink at thinking through the fact that Sherlock Holmes came long before Psych. I mean, I'm aware I am pretty much just overthinking this, but still.)
Keeping this all in mind, let's examine some of the more famous portrayals of the duo to pinpoint where some misconceptions could be made. (Keep in mind, these are ones I've seen, though most of them only once, and all opinions are my own and could be completely wrong. Or wrongish. Still, I would stand beside most all of them. If there are any major portrayals you think I've missed, let me know. I've seen some besides these, but they're kind of "off the beaten path" of Holmesiansand not very good.)
Basil Rathbone and Nigel Bruce (1939 film series)
These movies were interesting to me because they were set in modern day (of the time) in much the same manner as Sherlock (2010) was done. I really like Rathbone as Holmes because he captured that charm Holmes had at times, but I always somewhat lamented Bruce's dumbed down Watson. It made sense though. Tall, skinny man with lots of brains and and older, plump man who's a little slow on the uptake. It was a common comedic duo of the time, and there was a good amount of humor injected into the movies. While these two had great chemistry as actors, this version of the Holmes and Watson relationship was oversimplified for the sake of popular characterizations of the day. I think these movies contributed a lot to the misconception that Watson was a bumbling hanger-on who followed Holmes like a puppy dog. While I don't think this is a version most young, new fans have watched, it is the one which simply seeped into the cultural understanding of Holmes and Watson. I would say especially in America. I think Brett is more in the cultural eye in the UK, but Rathbone and Bruce were very much American visions of Holmes and Watson.
Jeremy Brett and David Burke, later replaced by Edward Hardwicke (1984 television series)
Robert Downey, Jr. and Jude Law (2009 film)
Alright, all that said, I think I'm going to continue on tomorrow with a bit of examination about different characters who are descendants of Holmes and Watson's legacy. Heck, I might even get into an actual triumvirate. (Props to whomever guesses this obvious trio before reading the second part.)
Later,
~Emily~
P.S. Pretty fantastic way to come back from a blog-cation, methinks.
I read through all of the Sherlock Holmes stories a few years ago. Four novels, fifty-six short stories devoured in the matter of a couple months, if that long. I was consumed with the tales. After finishing them, I couldn't watch crime shows for a few months because they were all just copies of Sherlock Holmes. I think the reason Holmes and Watson became so popular in their day, and remain so to this day, is because Sir Arthur Conan Doyle tapped into a part of the human spirit that hadn't fully been explored in literature until that point in time. Yes, he revolutionized the ideas of deduction and detective work in fiction and made them into an art form but he was not the first to do work in that area. I posit that it was the relationship between Homes and Watson which he cultivated that has truly given this work longevity, and indeed, made it timeless, because it captured something of a truth about humanity as all great classics do.
Of course, when one taps into a truth of the nature of humanity, everyone after you wants to get on board too. They can't resist it, really. This is why I was so astounded last night by this girl's post. Everyone copies Sherlock Holmes and Watson. It isn't even just crime shows, it's everywhere. On House, M.D., House and Wilson are famously modeled after Holmes and Watson. I see it so often that I presumed everyone knew whence it came, but apparently not. I spent most of my insomnia last night pondering how it is that new, young fans are coming to the fandom and not realizing this.
Sherlock Holmes is one of the most portrayed characters of all time. Beginning in Sir Arthur Conan Doyle's lifetime with a stage production depicting the consulting detective's adventures, to the latest portrayal (Sherlock on BBC One... I think?) Holmes has been portrayed by hundreds of actors. Therefor, his companion, Dr. John Watson, has been portrayed just as often. It is through all these productions that so many misconceptions are formed about Holmes, Watson, and their relationship. Each couple brings some unique perspective to the dynamic, though in my opinion it is impossible for any of them to capture exactly what Doyle created when he wrote about Holmes and Watson. My conclusion last night was that because these new fans are only seeing one or two of these more famous portrayals and getting all their knowledge from those two things, that they have missed the magic of the relationship in the Doyle stories and therefor have missed the point. (Also, some people just really stink at thinking through the fact that Sherlock Holmes came long before Psych. I mean, I'm aware I am pretty much just overthinking this, but still.)
Keeping this all in mind, let's examine some of the more famous portrayals of the duo to pinpoint where some misconceptions could be made. (Keep in mind, these are ones I've seen, though most of them only once, and all opinions are my own and could be completely wrong. Or wrongish. Still, I would stand beside most all of them. If there are any major portrayals you think I've missed, let me know. I've seen some besides these, but they're kind of "off the beaten path" of Holmesians
Basil Rathbone and Nigel Bruce (1939 film series)
Jeremy Brett and David Burke, later replaced by Edward Hardwicke (1984 television series)
Brett played a more middle-aged Holmes, and his portrayal explored the darker side of Holmes more than Rathbone's. Age wise, Burke and Hardwicke seemed both more equal with Brett, though Hardwicke leaned a little more to the older side. Admittedly, I like Burke best. The series came much closer to accurately portraying Homes' and Watson's relationship than the Rathbone movies. I did get from this series a strong "Period Drama" vibe, but it worked. Overall, it was a series which did a pretty decent job exploring aspects of the stories that hadn't been handled on screen much. It didn't capture everything that I think Holmes and Watson are, but I can't really think of anything to criticize it for either. Again though, I don't think this is one that the newest fans have seen. They should though. I mean Brett is a family friend of Cumberbatch, so that counts for something, ja?
Robert Downey, Jr. and Jude Law (2009 film)
Oh, me. I have the most issues with this film. But I'm going to keep my fangirl hat off for a second and try to think critically about it. *deep breath* All right, this film made a great effort to set the record straight on Watson. They cast a young, vibrant man as Watson (I don't care if Jude Law is balding and has a moustache in this movie. He still makes me drool a little.) and Law, to his credit, really did his research reading the stories and trying to capture the vitality of Watson. In that way, he was one of the better Watsons. However, as a whole, I think this movie did too much to glorify Watson. I get that the movie was supposed to show how it really happened, and from that you can examine how Watson editorialized and that makes you love him even more because he's really, really good friend when the editorializing is all said and done, but I think it overstepped its bounds. In trying to treat Watson with all this reverence, they pretty much pooped all over Holmes. There was some stuff they did with Holmes that was pretty neat, but on the whole, I was really not into it. The worst sin of the movie for me though, was that the writers tried to turn the duo into some kind of strange triumvirate by including Irene Adler in a larger role.
I don't really care about writers being loose with plot in adaptations, but writers being loose with characters and established chemistries and things like that really, really bothers me. That was the biggest sin of the movie, for me. I could have got behind the rest a bit more, but the Irene Adler stuff was just so wrong. Finally, this movie also had a sort of Victorian fetishism, which I'll circle back to momentarily.
Benedict Cumberbatch and Martin Freeman (2010 television series)
In the interest of full disclosure, this is by far my favorite version of Sherlock Holmes and Dr. Watson I've ever seen. I equally have to work to keep my fangirl hat off with this one as with the last, though for opposite reasons. So, Sherlock is set in our modern day. 2010 at the time. The creators, Steven Moffat and Mark Gatiss looked around at what Sherlock Holmes had become as a fandom and saw an increasing shift in the fetishism of the Victorian Era in new productions. They saw a story which is so timeless because of its characters being lost to the realm of period pieces. Period dramas are great and all, but you risk losing the life these stories possess. Holmes was very much a modern man in his time, so Moffat and Gatiss decided to make him a modern man in ours. They played around with plots (though staying mostly true) and time and extra characters, but what they kept intact was the relationship between Holmes and Watson. (Sherlock and John in this updated version.) In addition to the great writing, the acting is impeccable. The chemistry between Cumberbatch and Freeman is instant and almost physically felt. I think the only reason this show can throw off new fans about Holmes and Watson is because they see these characters in a modern setting and fail to make the connection or cannot fathom that they are just as vibrant and complex within the confines of Victorian society. (Also, all the slashers have a much easier time in a modern setting, but hey, whatever.) Yes, Sherlock is a touch more biting and neurotic, and Watson is a bit more PTSD-y, but you get the impression that it's more from them being unromanticised versions of themselves (I mean idealized, not romanticized as in shipped. God, people.) than because of any disregard for the spirit of the original body of work.
Alright, all that said, I think I'm going to continue on tomorrow with a bit of examination about different characters who are descendants of Holmes and Watson's legacy. Heck, I might even get into an actual triumvirate. (Props to whomever guesses this obvious trio before reading the second part.)
Later,
~Emily~
P.S. Pretty fantastic way to come back from a blog-cation, methinks.
Friday, May 27, 2011
Dreaming On The Getaway Mile
I am going on blog-cation. See you in a certain, but unspecified, number of days.
~Em~
Thursday, May 26, 2011
WAY TOO EXCITED FOR A TASK SO MUNDANE AS GIVING POSTS TITLES
Today was the day. *cue Hallelujah Chorus*
The bleach hurt, the orange hair was SCARY AS HELL, the blue dye had a warming sensation and I nearly fell asleep under the dryer, and OMG MY HAIR IS BLUE. (Turquoise, teal, whatever.)
Mom came down as the gal (shout out to Chop Tops!) was styling it and said "Well, you weren't born that way." MY MOM MAKES LADY GAGA JOKES. She's the best. We jammed to Gaga the whole way there. Judas is so amazzzzzzzinggggg.
Let's see, before the hair appointment, Sara and I hung out at Westport Coffee for an hour. I outlined eight chapters of my new story and Sara drew the most amazing picture of one of her friends. I mostly stared at her the whole hour. I'm truly shocked I outlined as much as I did.
Then hair happened. There was a little half-Asian baby there, who was freaking adorable. He stared at my hair and dribbled down his chin as his mouth fell open in amazement. BEST BABY EVER.
Every time I walk past a mirror I stop and go back and spend several minutes running my hands through it.
Okay. I have to go. I keep dying of excitement.
Byyyyyyyeeeeee!
~Em~
P.S. I can't leave without showing you this. I... I can't even process all the awesomeness of this music video. (It's kinda pg-13, but WHATEVA)
Mom came down as the gal (shout out to Chop Tops!) was styling it and said "Well, you weren't born that way." MY MOM MAKES LADY GAGA JOKES. She's the best. We jammed to Gaga the whole way there. Judas is so amazzzzzzzinggggg.
Let's see, before the hair appointment, Sara and I hung out at Westport Coffee for an hour. I outlined eight chapters of my new story and Sara drew the most amazing picture of one of her friends. I mostly stared at her the whole hour. I'm truly shocked I outlined as much as I did.
Then hair happened. There was a little half-Asian baby there, who was freaking adorable. He stared at my hair and dribbled down his chin as his mouth fell open in amazement. BEST BABY EVER.
Every time I walk past a mirror I stop and go back and spend several minutes running my hands through it.
 |
| Excited Emily is excited! |
Byyyyyyyeeeeee!
~Em~
P.S. I can't leave without showing you this. I... I can't even process all the awesomeness of this music video. (It's kinda pg-13, but WHATEVA)
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
