My friend and I filmed a goofy zombie movie our senior week of college at Cornell University a couple of years ago. We shot everywhere on campus - including in the chemistry building at midnight to three in the morning. But where did we get yelled at by the campus police? Standing on a bridge in the middle of campus where five million people a day take a photo of the beautiful waterfall behind us. They asked if we had a permit. Uh, no? Do we need one to lug around a video camera and tape each other running around like ninnies? I don't remember exactly what we said to them, but it was convincing enough to make them go away. I just remember thinking, "You have to be kidding."
Or to quote Dave in Narbonic, ...brains?
I was born in 1983. It's bizarre, because I thought at first that the earliest news event was the first Iraq War. My cousin was in it and I have a visual memory of praying for him to come home safe. I don't know if I would have remembered it otherwise. Then, when I looked through the Wiki articles, I think I might have known about the Exxon Valdez spill. Even at 6, I was interested in environmental stuff - I was a full-blown activist by 3rd grade. I don't have a visual memory of finding out about it, but I feel like I did know somehow.
Other people's comments then reminded me of other events I recall. I didn't think I remembered Bush I being elected, but I vaguely remember Ross Perot running. I thought he looked funny and was kind of crazy. I remember the LA earthquake, because my uncle lived in LA and we were worried about him. I recall him telling us that his fridge almost fell on him.
Personally, my earliest memory is of visiting Disney's Magic Kingdom when I was 3. Despite begging to go on the ride, the elevator on the Haunted Mansion scared the hell out of me and I refused to open my eyes for the entire ride.
#129, Salom!, and later others - I was vaguely relieved to read your posts, because I was afraid I was the youngest person on here. I felt so young reading most other people's! I forget that most people on Making Light are significantly older than I am.
One thing which people born say, twenty years later may not appreciate is the degree to which "The Bomb" dominated the consciousness of my generation's first fifteen years.
Listening to my parents talk about that era always made me feel extremely grateful not to be growing up then. I never felt that unsafe growing up. And despite all of the terrorist hoopla now, the Cold War still seems to me a far more terrifying time.
As we've been discussing, how we see the world in color differently from others isn't an issue most of the time. In high school, I had one friend who I knew was color-blind, but it was a fact that didn't seem to affect anything. Except for one day when we sat down to play Uno. I think he agreed to play because normal Uno was fine for him - the bright colors distinguished themselves enough that he could make out differences between them. But we were playing Extreme Uno, which has different cards. The colors are set against a black checked background, making it extremely difficult to him to see which color was which. Unfortunately, he didn't inform us of this until more than halfway through the game. I think our universal thought was, "No wonder he was losing!"
It was a moment I still remember because it reminded me at how differently we perceive the world and how easy it is to forget that.
In terms of graphic novels, I'm surprised no one has mentioned Ghost World (although Dan Clowes was more generally mentioned). I don't think it's the end-all-and-be-all of comics that some of its fans think it is, but it's a sharply funny look on what it means to be a teenage girl. Especially one that's weird.
In terms of webcomics, I love Shaenon Garrity's Narbonic, second the Something Positive recommendation, and for the more politically-minded here, A Girl and Her Fed. It's got odd, charming art, is about a government conspiracy, and has a talking, genius-smart koala. Ozy and Millie and Count Your Sheep also have a lovely way of capturing the oddness of childhood.
Sorry for such a long posting. I just came back to this thread after a while and found a lot to respond to. It’s a subject close to my heart, sadly.
461: You got told that too? My mother told me that. I agree with you: it's a lie. It -might- work, possibly, if you've never reacted, but once you've reacted even once, they know they can get a reaction again - if they just keep trying.
I know this to be complete truth. On the other hand, if I didn’t keep reacting so badly, it might not have escalated. But try telling that to a 2nd grader, which is when it started. And then once you have that reaction, and people know you have that reaction, it gets passed on. It also kills your self-esteem, which never goes up so long as the teasing keeps going on.
477: If you demonstrate that every time they beat you up, they will take at least some damage themselves, they're likely to lose the taste for picking on you. … the real problem was my own inability to process social cues which made me unable to separate friendly joshing from nastiness.
Unfortunately, when I tried to “hit back†verbally, my own nerdiness only exposed itself further. “Your words are laced with sarcasm?†What kind of insult is that? Yikes. Icy silence would have been my best defense, but I was never good at keeping my mouth shut. As for being able to separate our social cues and joshing, most of the time in high school it was legitimate teasing. You can usually tell from the tone. But scars from back then still arise when people do mildly tease me. I’m usually fine, but I can get a rather defensive a little too quickly.
478: Speaking of useless parental advice, my mother picked me up after school most days and asked me 'How was school today?' and I said: 'They hate me. Everybody hates me.' Her advice? 'Just be friendly!'
It’s better advice than you think. I think being genuinely nice to everyone – to the point where the teasers realize they are having no effect – might be the best defense of all. And in the process, you’ll probably gain some real friends as a result. Even some people you might never think to be friends with otherwise. Because it’s unlikely that the nerdiest, most outcast people hate you. And they could be the one who count – the man I married and several of my current friends were in that nerdy group. You could even gain people's admiration. I remember the one girl who I admired the most wasn’t the prettiest, wasn’t the smartest (although she was damn talented), but she was incredibly kind to everyone. Even me, the outcast. And when I disliked a lot of other people, including some of her friends, I respected her.
485: But I never unlearned to respond to attack by turning to stone.
It wasn’t until my senior year of college that I realized how emotionally hardened I had become as a result of that social pain. It wasn’t helped by an organization I was in that had some remarkably similar behavior to high school cliques, either. But with support from good people, it is possible to break down those walls. I credit God's grace and healing too.
531: My high school days were a nightmare, but I actually did have a decent "prom" experience.
I think that the prom experience is much of what you make it. I went to a similar anti-prom party for my junior year at my friend’s house and had a terrific time. By the time senior year came around, our group of friends all attended prom together. We were the weird nerds, but no one cared and we had a hell of a time. So it all depends on context.
541: I think the thing that saved my sanity was that mom sent me to summer camp for a week or two each summer starting at age 12
I think one of the things that was most discouraging to me was that the teasing extended beyond high school. One of my worst periods of social outcastness were on a YMCA trip where one kid – who had the choice between the trip and hard-core summer school – took his main goal as making me as miserable as possible. Thankfully, the rest of my outdoor activities were far more positive. I think they usually are – I just had horrible luck.
586: enemies are a lot easier to deal with than friends.
I think until I met my good group of friends during sophomore/junior year of high school, this was what really rubbed salt in the wound. Teasing is okay if at least your friends were supportive. But I think with girls, it’s such a horrific social ladder in junior high/middle school, that you think by putting anyone down, you’re on your way up. I know I felt that way at times. And my friends definitely did. My best friend from that time actually sent me a letter two years ago apologizing for all the nasty stuff she did to me. I did a lot to her too, and I was glad we could forgive each other. We’ll never be as close as we were, but it was good to reestablish that bond with her.
Bacon number of 1, if just meeting the person counts, as I met John Cleese. I lobbied the Oxford Member of Parliament in person, so anyone he’s talked to (probably at least Tony Blair and Gordon Brown) means I’m a 2 away from them.
I remember a Far Side cartoon showing the aliens zipping aroung space in their flying saucer, on the side of which one could see the alien version of a fish. That was years before the FSM. I wonder...
Well, there's that great Ray Bradbury story (The Man) about a pair of astronauts that come to a planet that a Jesus-like figure has just visited. I always maintained that belief in aliens and Christianity were compatable just as long as you weren't a literalist. I've always taken the idea that God created man in His/Her image to mean that it was in the image of the Son, as God the Father doesn't have a bodily form (at least not the Christian God). So if different versions of the Son visited planets in their form, would they not be too in God's image? I think the most respectful image of God that a Christian can have is the one with the most room for imagination! Heck, maybe there's even a planet of spagetti-monsters... (Although that could cause problems if we ever met them.)
Speaking of celebrations of Guy Fawkes Day, according to this New York Times article, many English towns/cities aren't even participating in the traditional festivities. They've even canceled fireworks on Bonfire Day! Apparently, it's way too expensive to fund what the English government requires for health/safety measures. Rather ironic that the bureaucracy has led to sparing Guy rather than destroying him.
If you want a real person who is beyond belief, check out the world's most Compassionately Whacked Out Liberal Libertarian (TM). At least at Slacktivist, we all think he is a real person - hard as that might be to imagine at times, he has a distinctive style all his own.
Wait a minute! "Never," are you "Scott" on Slackivist? Because that explains a lot in terms of tone and attitude. And honestly, I can only imagine Scott calling Fred (Slackivist) by that sort of ridiculous title. (For those who don't read Slackivist, Scott is a mega-libertarian who brings up points completely irrelevant to the thread with a similar snide attitude.) Of course, Scott only seems to use one name, so perhaps not. But please don't pollute Making Light with your rudeness either way. Even if your points are valid, your attitude in making them is quite condescending, even to people outside of this thread. There was no reason to bring Fred into this.
#143: Fool on the Hill is about Cornell University; and, unless one went there, one misses a fair amount of the in-jokes. (And, if one did not live in the dorm that Ruff - and I - lived in, one misses yet another level of in-jokes.)
Those in-jokes were precisely one of the reasons I loved Fool on the Hill so much. I bought the book from the Cornell Campus Store on a whim after reading the back cover, and then read it a year after graduation. I knew a lot of people at the arts dorm he talks about, so I got some of those jokes, although I think some of them may have since replaced by new in-jokes. Plus, I adored Ithaca as a setting.
157: that one should persevere in one's area of talents, regardless that one's community may not value those particular talents; that such a community can stifle those whose talents don't fall in line with their values; that sometimes one has to seek out or build a new community that does value one's talents.
It's funny, because I think the story that best illustrates the tragedy of a stifling community is Vonnegut's Harrison Bergeron. And how that community can not only deny people their talents, but drive them truly crazy. I would say Vonnegut was quite philosophically far away from Rand, but they do share a deep respect for human gifts.
As for The Fountainhead, I had to read it for a philosophy/literature class in high school. One of my friends summarized it as such:
Dominique to Roark: Rape me!
Roark: No.
Dominique: Rape me!
Roark: Okay.
Not exactly a summary of the philosophy, but seems to express Rand's views on women pretty well.
Regarding childhoods -- I was/am a natural coward, but when I was in my teens my parents took me to plenty of rock shows at the Fillmore and Avalon, and enjoyed them nearly as much as I did. (We ignored the pot smoke, except as a pleasant background aroma.) No rampant paranoia in those days.
I went to a bunch of rock concerts with my parents, and I was born in 1983. Most of them were in stadiums, and Billy Joel never attracted a dire crowd, but I don't think it ever crossed their mind that I wouldn't be safe. Although the first concert I ever smelled pot at (or at least recognized what it was) was when I was 16 at a Santana concert.
Now I'm envisioning a crowd of rockhounds gently swaying on their feet as they admire the mini-Stonehenge on the elevated stage before them, with everyone holding up little ultraviolet lights to make the minerals fluoresce.
Derek Smalls: Can I raise a practical question at this point? Are we gonna do "Stonehenge" tomorrow?
My husband actually quoted this to my friend while they were visiting Stonehenge. And I would totally love to see a rocks and gems concert.
I'm going to graduate school (does anyone say graduate university?) at Oxford, and have met lots of different people from around the world. I've become quite familiar with the guess-the-accent game, when you can't quite remember where someone is from.
In terms of Kiwis and Aussies sounding different, I can tell that they sound slightly different. But then, the two Aussies I know come from opposite sides of the continent, so they have different accents from each other as well.
As for Canadian/American, I'm American and I can't distinguish between the general, broad, midwest/Northeast American accident and the Canadian one besides the "ehs?" But maybe that's because I'm from relatively close to the border in the US.
The first time I heard the South African accent, I was really confused because it sounded British, but not quite right. When I found out that my friend was from SA it all made sense.
In terms of British words, I think there are a few that sum up entire phrases brilliantly that I think I might continue to use back home - queueing, posh, twee, alcopop, busking, dodgy (which I use in the same way as "sketchy" with the use of both them probably being wrong). And I use the verb mail/post interchangeably now for some reason. I also think it's funny that "muppet" became a widely-used insult in Britain, even though the show originated in America.
In terms of the usage of the word "wanker," I've heard it used several times in one drunken rant by a British person to mean "obnoxious, posh/pretentious idiot." My friend was referring to an obviously rich undegrad who said some rather demeaning words to us (graduate students).
Since coming abroad to study (England), I've had more weird coincidences than I can count. I've met someone from Utah who worked with someone I worked with previously in upstate NY. I met someone whose sister was in my program in my undergraduate university. And in Dublin, within 10 minutes , I met two girls who were students at a university 15 minutes from my home in upstate NY, and a guy who went to the next high school over at the same time I was in high school.
But this story is exceptionally weird.
The beauty of playwriting (and, I suppose, screenwriting) is that the story must be carried entirely by voice: if the conflict is not in the voice, if the business is not in voice, then it's not definitively there.
This is certainly true with comics as well. The pictures and dialogue tells everything (unless it's a journal comic like Maus, but those are rare), and so if it isn't expressed in one of those places, then it isn't expressed at all. That's one of the hardest things I'm learning while writing my own graphic novel - how to make the voices distinct without being cliched. In my semi-Roman Empire-era fantasy, I have a young teenage character whom I tried to give a distinct voice. Unfortunately, she came out sounding like a 13-year-old from the 1970s. Sigh.
He takes a trip to Russia, and comes back with a bride. For real.
The short time period, situation described and his bride's age (she's a senior in college - he's got to be pushing 55) undermines my opinion of him almost as much as his ridiculous rhetoric. Everything about that relationship screams "Guy obviously taking advantage of his power." Perhaps that's prejudiced towards him, but certainly no more so than his prejudice against homosexuals.
I celebrated Thanksgiving yesterday in England with my husband (Chris) and about 5 other students. We did a pot luck as well - my husband made the turkey, stuffing and apple pie, I made cranberry jello mold and everyone else brought the rest. We had loads of amazingly homemade food, a lot of wine, and a great time sitting around and talking. It was especially unique as we had three non-Americans celebrating with us - a Brit, a Canadian, and a Croatian.
Also, in terms of free-range, local turkeys, we had one and it came out really well. This is despite the fact that Chris had never prepared a turkey before and our student accomodation oven heats rather unevenly. It was expensive and Chris had to baste it every half-hour or so but it was great.
As for American education, I learned little about WWI except for the setup of it. Even from that little, without knowing the devestating casualities, I realized it was incredibly stupid. I remember thinking, "The whole world was at war for this?" I always assumed that my education was rather poor in that area because my high school European history teacher was apathetic and about to retire and as a result, barely left any time to discuss anything post-1900. I wouldn't blame it on the general system though. We had to take European history and I suspect the other teachers did a much more comprehensive job of it.
As for WWII, we did Holocaust units in both 6th (12 years old) and 8th grade (14 years old), crossing over between history and literature classes. Even though I may not have totally understood what the troops went through, I even now hold a very viseral understanding of the Holocaust because of those units. As someone said earlier, they brought about a loss of innocence. During both years, I was fascinated by the era, particularly the contrast between horror/evil and bravery. We read Anne Frank's diary, Number the Stars (excellent young adult book), and a number of similar novels. I even wrote a short story from the perspective of a young girl in a concentration camp. The individual stories burned themselves into my mind, and I think that they would have for WWI as well if we were exposed to them.
Sheesh. Here I thought Wallis was one of the good guys. Okay, I guess he still is, compared to, say... Dobson... but that's not exactly high praise. Did he just have a brain fart, or is he always this irritating and I just failed to notice?
I thought God's Politics was a pretty good book (although not saying anything I didn't already believe in), but his and the Sojourner's blog have some surprisingly harsh stuff. It seemed to me that God's Politics said that we needed a religious voice in politics at least in part because that's what most Americans are. And allowing noisy uber-conservative Christians do all of the talking doesn't do anyone justice. However, unlike this post, I didn't take the book as saying "Politics should just be liberal Christians because everyone else is just stupid." And that's how a bunch of the posts on the Sojourner's blog are - just way too many broad generalizations that don't foster any sort of productive discussion. Instead of complaining how other people are ignoring the issues, I wish they would just work on them more.
I think a lot of this broad generalizing is a result of liberal Christians feeling defensive for so many years. As a liberal Christian, I've felt pressure from both sides. I've dealt with both criticism from my politically liberal friends as to why I'm Christian and disapproving looks from religious people when I say I'm a hippie liberal. Now that the religious left is "cool" (or at least in the media), I think they're seeing a chance to take the spotlight and criticize everyone else. Which is unfair, pointless, and a bad excuse, but I think it might explain a bit.
As for religious social commentary, I think The Wittenburg Door is my favorite - they use humor, so they can never be too terribly self-righteous.
| Year | Number of comments posted |
|---|---|
| 2008 | 3 |
| 2007 | 12 |
| 2006 | 13 |
| 2005 | 2 |
| 2004 | 2 |
Total: 32 comments. View all these comments on a single page.
The most recent 20 comments posted to Making Light by Shannon:
Show all comments by Shannon.