Bryce Moore's Blog, page 244

The UK Story I'm REALLY Interested in Today? Porn Bans, not Babies

I get it. A princess had a baby. Great. I'm glad mother and baby are fine, but I just don't care beyond that. Why a royal baby matters these days is beyond me, but if you want to go buy a commemorative cup or something to remember the occasion, go you.



However, I've been following another story since I heard about it yesterday: the UK looks poised to restrict pornography across the country.



Good on you, UK. To me, this is something that's been a long time coming.



Society today has sort of looked at the online cesspool that is internet pornography and just shrugged its shoulders. It's there, it's everywhere, so why bother fighting it? And I understand the logic behind that. It truly is a complex international problem. And yet arguing "It's hard" isn't a good enough reason to just not do anything about it.



When did the right to pornography become sacrosanct?



I understand that it's a free speech issue. One man's porn is another man's art (arguably), and having the government get involved in what can and can't be shown to the public at large is a murky area with some big potential pitfalls. But it doesn't have to be an either/or situation. There can be filtered access to the internet, and then ways for adults to get through those filters if they so choose.



I also understand that those filters aren't 100% accurate. Smut will still get through, and innocent material will be filtered by accident. It's a constantly evolving process of refining the filter. But to argue that "it can't be done perfectly, so it shouldn't be done at all" is just plain weak, in my opinion. We have laws against children drinking alcohol. Do the laws work 100% of the time? No. So does that mean we just give up and don't try to have those laws at all? Of course not.



Will such a ban make parents less strict on monitoring internet access of their children? For some parents, sure. But here's the thing, people--right now, a ton of parents don't monitor at all. I can almost guarantee it'll be a net gain of monitoring and filtering for children, and that's a big plus in my book.



Will children get around the ban? I'm sure they'll be able to. It'll likely take all of a day or two for ways of circumventing the ban to be spread online. But again, that only works if the kid is dedicated and set on finding porn online. In which case, no ban would work at all. But there are plenty of children who aren't intent on finding porn who stumble across it by accident. A law and ban like this will help those children immensely.



I get that my views may be old fashioned. But I believe society should do what it can to protect children from harmful influences until the children are old enough to decide for themselves if they want those things in their lives or not. We don't have free cigarette dispensers littered across the country, or open bars in elementary schools. And yet we have free unfiltered internet access across the country, and we think nothing of it.



Don't get me wrong. I don't want to ban the internet. I don't want to put a muzzle on it. But the default setting doesn't need to be set to FULL PORN. Google image search, for examples, defaults to a filter. People can turn the filter off if they so choose. But it should be a conscious choice.



I hope the UK's experiment is successful, and that the approach is adopted by other countries, as well.

Why Do We Tell Stories?

I took the kids on Friday to go hear Joseph Bruchac and his son Jesse speak at my university. Joe is a fellow Tu Books author, and I had the chance to visit with him when I was at ConnectiCon. He's a great guy--has written a plethora of books, and is a first rate storyteller--he's headlining the National Storytelling Festival this year, if that gives you any idea. To have the chance to hear him at a small venue, and I don't have to drive more than 5 minutes?



Yes, please.



The performance was fantastic. I loved seeing how enraptured TRC and DC were with the stories, and they've been talking about them since. They were a variety of scary stories from Native American folklore, along with some traditional songs, flute playing, and drums. If you get the chance to hear Joe in person, you should leap at it.



One of the most interesting things to me during the evening was the explanation Joe gave for why Native Americans told scary stories to children. It wasn't just for shock value or thrills--it was to teach lessons. When you tell a child not to do something, often they're more interested in whatever you just told them not to do. If they say they want to go play in a dangerous swamp, and you tell them not to, chances are they might go off and do it anyway.



But if you tell them of the old crone named Toad Woman who lives in the swamp and lies in wait to pull them under and suck the skin off their bones, they might seriously reconsider. And even if they do finally go anyway, they're much more likely to be cautious and careful--which is what you want them to be in such an environment.



This makes such sense to me, but it's not something I'd ever really heard put into words before. Speaking from experience, there are STILL some things I won't do (or don't like to do) based purely on the fact that I heard bad stories about it from someone a long time ago. If this kind of psychological weapon works on me, imagine what it can do to five year olds. :-)



I know one thing--one of the stories Joe told was about the tree people who lie in wait to steal little children who don't go to bed right away. DC has been remarkably better about going to sleep promptly for the last few nights.



In any case, it made me look at modern horror movies to see if some of this same principle is at play. In some it seems to be--the "rules" horror movies seem to follow, which Scream played off of, for example.  Cabin in the Woods dealt with this principle, too. Though at the same time, it seems to me that the focus is changing from being instructive to just plain scaring the socks off you. I'm a fan of the one. The other? Not so much.



Just my bit of food for thought for you on this fine Monday. Anything to add?

Guest Movie Review: Pacific Rim

I mentioned earlier this week that I'd seen Pacific Rim and would be reviewing it soon. Well the day has arrived! But I actually saw the film with my agent, Joshua Bilmes. He also reviews movies on his blog, and so we agreed to do a review swap. My review is over there, where you can also find rock solid analysis of publishing trends, tennis games, and comic books. His review is right here, presented without further ado.



Pacific Rim Shots

I have grown very crotchety in recent years about same-old same-old Hollywood blockbusters, with the use and abuse of CGI, with overlong ending fight scenes void of emotional impact, about the destruction porn of having cities devastated and tens or hundreds of thousands of people killed where it isn't earned and then doesn't have appropriate consequence to the film or the characters.

And I liked Pacific Rim.  I liked it a lot.

And this is a movie I was surprised even to have seen.

Man of Steel?  That's a movie I should have gone to, and yet the more I heard about it either from critics or friends or clients who have seen the less I wanted to see it, the more content I am with my decision not to.

Pacific Rim?  Reviewers said it was fun, that the effects weren't overdone, that it was kind of enjoyable.  People in the office wanted to see it, clients wanted to see it, I found myself warming more and more.  So Bryce Moore and I had some free time, showtimes worked out, there we were, and I enjoyed myself.

There is no origin story, no pathos or bathos, no encrusted traditions or lore.  We get all we need to know in two lines of caption at the beginning and two minutes of exposition.  Big monsters came from the sea, destroyed cities, and we quickly built giant robots so big they needed two people to work them to fight the monsters.  If you are willing to enjoy that for what it is, it is there to be enjoyed.

You can't have giant robots battling giant monsters without a giant effects budget, but this isn't "real" fighting so CGI'ed that it seems fake.  This is clearly fake fighting that looks plausibly real enough.  Too modern to be an homage to Harryhausen, but maybe what Harryhausen would do if everyone else were using some gazillion dollar Pixar mainframe and he was working a Moore's Law cycle or two behind.  A giant countdown clock is delightfully retro, with flipping numbers like an old clock radio or train station departure board.

Other aspects of the fight scenes worth commenting upon:  A lot of the fights were depicted as in very muddy lighting, where it wasn't always easy to see what was happening.  Is that a fault, a charming throwback, cheaper pixels without bright light?  For all the fights, the total screen time devoted to them might have been less than any recent superhero movie with a never ending scene at the end, or at least it seemed that way because the film has an understanding of pacing.

The movie is never pornographic in its depiction of violence. In fact, considering that it is giant monsters vs giant robots it is downright modest.  Sydney Harbor is invaded and the monster passes behind the Opera House instead of stomping on it. Even though the robots and monsters would in "real life" be too big to do this, the movie often has them running along wide boulevard streets without destroying buildings as they go.  Oh, trust me, plenty of buildings are destroyed with gleeful abandon, but never gratuitously.  Compare this to the Star Trek movie which has a spaceship plowing through San Francisco destroying buildings and lives in its wake with no underlying story purpose or benefit.

It is easy to find fault win a movie like this.  The story is utter hokum. Maverick and Ice wouldn't get lost in this one, they could come in just the way they are and feel at home. There aren't a lot of star turns in the cast.  At around 2:10 the movie could clearly be a minute or two shorter. The male leads look so much alike that I couldn't tell who was who if they weren't talking. There are logic holes.

But a movie can be judged on its own terms, and Pacific Rim delivers a lot more relative to its intentions than a lot of other bloated Hollywood tentpoles I have stumbled across in recent years.

What About Bob: The Solution to Life's Problems

I've been in a contemplative frame of mind for the last few days, so you're stuck with a bit of philosophy today. I realized as I was writing this that I already touched on some of it in an earlier post. Deal with it. This one has What About Bob, so it's automagically more awesome. In any case--on we go.



One thing I've noticed as I follow the daily lives of some 500 or so friends on Facebook and other social media sites is how quickly our lives can change. Jobs lost. Sickness. Death. Crappy things happen to great people, and there's rarely any real "heads up" that crappy is on the way.



As with most things in life, when faced with deep philosophical dilemmas, I turn to pop culture for my answers. (Well, maybe not my answers. But to explain my answers in a way that other people will understand them? Pop culture works for me. As long as the people I'm explaining those answers to are cool enough to have watched the same awesome things I have. But surely every single person in the world has seen What About Bob, right? RIGHT?)



So let's put this in context. There are times when I see what's happening around me, and I totally feel like Siggy, the boy in the movie. Here's the relevant scene (sorry for the bad quality at the beginning--finding good clips can be hard sometimes. Oh woe is me.)







It can be overwhelming. The knowledge that any moment, tragedy may strike us. Knowing that we're helpless to avoid it. I think it's the helplessness that upsets me the most. I like to think that I'm in control of my life. That the choices I make matter, and that if I make good choices, my life will be better for it. And while that's often true, the sad fact is that all of us are swimming on top of a deep, deep ocean. We can choose where we want to swim and how. We can make sure we're the best swimmers possible. Heck--we can even build boats and stock up on food and supplies so that we feel like we're ready for anything.



Why is that a sad fact? Because at any moment, this might happen:







(Sorry. There are no good Kraken scenes in What About Bob.) Yeah. All the good swimming, all the boat building, all the anything--it all just gives us a thin veneer of control. There are monsters in those deep oceans. Tragedies waiting to happen. And when you're there in that moment, and you see the enormity of the problem that has just risen from the depths, and there's nothing. you. can. do? How can you not feel helpless and hopeless?



You can't. Yes, you can turn to God or to meditation or to other ways you may have found to deal with difficulties. But there's still that unavoidable deer-in-the-headlights moment of sheer panic, and that might last for a day or a week or a month. So how do we deal with this?



We deal with it by building the best boat we can, spending time with the people we love, doing the things that bring us joy, and basically patterning our lives after Bob. Case in point:







Bob is living in the moment. He's enjoying that chicken to the point where you start to wonder if he's breaking a few laws in the process. Just because the Kraken totally rips that boat apart doesn't mean that boat was worthless up until that point, ya know? But Bob doesn't just stop there. Bob shows us other ways to deal with tragedy and life, as well.







Sometimes we have to acknowledge our fears, but live with them anyway. This is me every time I have to get on a plane. I really truly deeply loathe flying. But I do it anyway, because it's the pathway I need to take to get to other things that I really truly deeply enjoy. Sometimes we have to let ourselves be strapped to a mast so that we can live life and get over our fears.



Bob starts out the movie afraid of everything. Literally. And by the end of the film, he has conquered those fears and become a better human. Here's a lovely scene that both is hilarious and true at the same time. (It's from the end, so I guess I'm spoiling the movie for you, but if you haven't seen this movie yet, you really should have.)







Compare that Bob to the one from earlier in the film:







And how does he get there? He takes all these different things I've discussed so far, and he boils them all down to baby steps, one of my favorite clips from all time.







Yes, there are monsters in that ocean. And yes, we could spend our lives worrying about them surging up from the depths to swallow us whole at any moment. But that won't help us at all. Not to be happy. We've got a thin veneer of control, it's true--but we if we use that veneer well, we can get by just fine. More than fine.



Have bad things happened to me in my life? Yes they have. Will they continue to come? Yes they will. But even monsters give up eventually. They move on. You might be scarred from the encounter, but you pull the pieces back together, and you move on, too.



And that's all the philosophy I've got in me today, folks.

On JK Rowling's New Book and the Perils of Self Publishing

I used Grammarly to grammar check this post, because yay technology.



While I was off gallavanting around Connecticut, apparently the news broke that JK Rowling had written a new book and published it under a pseudonym. The book (a thriller called Cuckoo's Clock, written by "Robert Galbraith") came out in April and was well-received, getting starred reviews and some excellent blurbs. It was even Library Journal's Mystery Debut of the Month.



It had also sold only 1500 copies in England since it debuted in April.



If you follow publishing at all, you realize that books normally debut to their largest sales numbers, and then go down quite quickly from there. Of course, that isn't the case this time--now that she's been "outed," the book has shot to the top of the charts. But I want to focus for a moment on those first 3.5 months of sales she had when she was still anonymous. Let's put in perspective.



The book wasn't doing well. You hadn't heard of it. It wasn't "the next big thing." It was on a trajectory for obscurity. Think of that. A book with a good marketing push, great reviews, solid blurbs, from a major publisher, great editor--you name it. Slipping away into obscurity with few people batting an eyelash.



Until the author is revealed to be JK, and then it explodes.



I'm fine with her publishing under a pseudonym. More power to her. This isn't a post about me grousing about how unfair the world of publishing can be, even. This is a post about self-publishing, and the perils therein.



JK Rowling's book was disappearing into the ether, with a ton of professionals working on it, and a ton of visibility through reviews and the other channels not easily open to people trying to go it on their own via the self-publishing/e-publishing route.



This isn't to say that you can't be a success in the e-publishing revolution. But I think it should be eye-opening to anyone considering trying to break in. I have a book I've been considering e-publishing. It's a strange little duck of a novel, and I love it, but my agents have rightly pointed out they think there's likely little market for it. Why haven't I just thrown it out there yet?



Thanks for asking. Here are my main reasons:




I'm just too busy. This is the biggest one. What with all the other things I have going on in my life, I have no time to even just convert the word file to the appropriate e-format. Time spent doing that means time not spent writing something new. Something my agents like and try to sell. What's the point in having professionals involved in my writing career if I ignore their advice?
Putting it out there isn't as simple as cutting and pasting it and then hitting publish. Not to do it right. I'd have to line up a good cover. I'd need to reread the book and re-edit it. I'd ideally want to workshop the novel again and get it in fighting shape. Then there's copy-editing. You stick a shoddy product out there, and you're only hurting yourself in the long run. I'd either have to do it right or not do it at all.
If I did put it out there, I'd feel obligated to market the thing. And that takes time. Lots of time. And even if I was marketing it non-stop, there's still a very good chance it would flop. And that's the cold hard truth. No matter how many people you hear about who are making thousands or tens of thousands or hundreds of thousands of dollars through e-publishing, there are many many many more making nothing or worse--investing lots to make nothing back.


Can anyone be published today? Yes. Can anyone be read today? No. It's one thing to be published, it's another thing to have people read your book. Don't mean to be a downer here. Just trying to keep it real. This isn't to say don't self-publish. It's to say understand what the water's like before you jump in.




Look no further than Robert Galbraith vs JK Rowling.

Dear Guillermo Del Toro: Please Don't Use Racial Slurs Throughout Your Films

Who was the genius who decided to give the main robot in Pacific Rim the name "Nygger Danger"?



Did that catch your attention? I hope it did, and I apologize if it offended, but I really want to make a point here, and it's an important one. The main robot doesn't have that name. It's called "Gipsy Danger." I cringed the moment I heard the name, hoping I'd misheard it. But they said it often enough and flashed it on the screen enough that I quickly knew there was no mistake.



Folks, "Gypsy" is a racial slur. It's still a racial slur if you spell it with an "i"--especially when you're talking about a movie, where pronunciation is really all that matters.



In America at least, I think a lot of us like to think of ourselves as enlightened. We try not to discriminate against other people. We try to be understanding of what they want, what their worldview is. We go out of our way to make laws that level the playing field. In light of the George Zimmerman trial, clearly this is something we're working our way through still--but the goal is there. The ideal.



Which is why I continue to be appalled that Americans have no problem throwing around the g-word like it's no big deal.



Do we only care about minorities if they're a big enough group? Isn't that kind of the whole point of watching out for minorities? Because their voice gets drowned out?



I'm no idiot (most of the time). I understand that Roma (the preferred term) are almost a non-issue in America. There are approximately 1 million people of Roma descent in the US, but by and large, Americans don't even understand that Roma are a people and not a profession. Case in point? I did some internet searches to see what people were saying about the racial slur plastered all over Pacific Rim. Hardly anything came up. There was one post actually making fun of people who were upset about it, explaining that:

Gypsy isnt an ethnic group. Gypsy is a lifestyle. I worked in retail. When there are groups that go around and steal by deceptoion and distraction. Retailers refer to them as gypsys. They come in all sorts of race and colr. Black, White, Asian. It dont matter. ()

This right here? This is the problem. Because it's 100% wrong, but it just shows how ignorant Americans are of the problem. Do me a favor and read this article to become better informed. And that's just about the experience of Roma in America. Don't get me started on what they face in Europe, although I can give you a brief example from my own experience.



You all know I wrote the book VODNIK. It's YA fantasy that takes place in Slovakia and is based on Slovak folklore. Its main character happens to be 1/4 Roma. He moves to Slovakia and discovers just how real the racism is against Roma in Europe. But that's not what the book is about. It's a YA fantasy/adventure, and the main character happens to be Roma.



My agent has been shopping it around European publishers. They're all interested in the book--until they find out the main character is part Roma. It's a deal breaker, it seems. As soon as they hear that, they lose all interest. Publishing this book in Europe would be like publishing a book about an African American in the deep south fifty or a hundred years ago. Roma are literally ghettoized. They are beaten and killed, and it's happening today. Now. Not fifty years ago. In such obscure places like France--that's an article that was published a month ago.



This is real, people.



Gypsy is a racial slur. Fact. It's used against a group of people so marginalized in America that Americans are convinced they're make believe. They're just a made up fantasy, and arguing for their rights would be like arguing for Leprechaun rights or Werewolf rights. Americans complain about being "gypped" when they get a bad deal, and they don't even understand they've just used a form of that racial slur.



And Guillermo Del Toro decided to have his main robot be called "Gipsy Danger."



I'm not Roma. I don't have Roma family. I don't have Roma friends. But that name in Pacific Rim pissed me off enough that it spoiled what was otherwise a fantastic film. (I'll be posting a review tomorrow or the day after.) Roma already face severe discrimination abroad. Is it too much to ask Americans to start paying attention to what's happening elsewhere in the world? Scratch that--to what's happening even here in America?



Apparently, it is. Apparently, minorities are only worthy of notice if there's enough of them to be politically relevant.



And that's just enormously disappointing.

ConnectiCon Report: Another Weekend of Awesome

I got back from ConnectiCon yesterday, late. Around 1am, actually. It was another whirlwind of a trip, and I’m very glad that I’m not doing any more for a bit, because my brain feels like it’s turning into mush. I have a hard time remembering what I did where. So let me take a moment and try and document some of what went on this time.

For one thing, it was an easier conference because I didn’t have to wear all those hats I had on at ALA. I was here as Bryce Moore, author extraordinaire—though I took some time to do some purely fun things, as well.

ConnectiCon is a very large con. Not as big as some, but the largest fan con I’ve been to so far. There were tons of costumes. More than tons. A plethora of costumes. Zombies, Minecraft, manga, video games, Star Wars, Star Trek, Firefly, Waldo, books, Buffy, Game of Thrones—you name it, I saw it. It was actually quite a bit of fun—you had no idea what you might come across next. Some of the costumes were extremely ornate. I gotta give props to the people who have the skill and attention to make those things.

Some highlights from the trip:

A panel with 70 people in attendance, focused on how to write interesting, unique characters. I was there with Brandon Sanderson, Shana Mlawski (a fellow Tu writer) and Leona Wisoker. Lots of good questions, and some great conversations about how to keep characters vibrant and alive.

One with 100 or so people on the basics of writing fantasy. It was completely full—it likely would have had more, but the con runners stopped letting people in. This was another with Shana and then Margaret Killjoy, a very nice steampunk author and editor. Again, great questions. I ended up moderating this one in addition to participating, and I feel like it was interesting and helpful to the people in attendance. It helped that I have a fair bit of experience talking about the subject, and plenty to say.

One with around 150-200 people—I didn’t have time to count. It was on advanced worldbuilding, and I was there with Brandon and Margaret. This was one I was kind of terrified on. Brandon is a world builder. He makes elaborate worlds and cultures and languages and magic systems. Me? I write mainly contemporary fantasy. I didn’t really know what I’d have to offer and contribute to the conversation, and if you’re looking for a good way to start stressing out, try sitting up in front of 200 people who have come expecting to be enlightened by you, and you’re not sure if you have any light to give. Thankfully, it turned out really well. It helped that I realized VODNIK essentially does the same sort of things Brandon’s approach aims for: present a new culture as completely and accurately as possible. I got to talk about everything from Communism to Jar Jar Binks. Yeah—it was one of those panels. But I ended up having people come up to me afterward to thank me for my contributions, so I think it was mission successful.

Better yet, after those panels, I had the second of my two signings. I was very happy to see a number of people who had been in the audience show up to buy my book and chat with me for a bit longer. Even cooler? The autograph line up on either side of me. You had Marina Sirtis (Deanna Troi from Star Trek: The Next Generation), Neil Grayston (Fargo from Eureka), Michael Trucco (Anders from Battlestar Galactica), Tahmoh Penikett (Helo from Battlestar), Brandon . . . and me. And I even had a line in front of my booth for a while. A line for me. That’s a good feeling. :-)

I got some Magic in while I was there. Tons of gamers at the con. I did a prerelease on Saturday evening and a draft with Brandon and some of his fans on Friday evening. It meant that I didn’t get back to my hotel until 1 or so each evening, but it was worth it.

There was more than that, of course. I also had the chance to meet Joseph Bruchac, a fellow Tu author, and he’s an accomplished storyteller, blackbelt, and all around awesome guy. I had lunch with Brandon and Joshua (my agent). Breakfast with Stacy (my editor), Joe, and Shana. Pacific Rim with Joshua (review to come soon!). Touring the Mark Twain House with Joshua. Dinner with the whole Joshua Bilmes family and Brandon. A free Paul and Storm concert. The fun never stops!




All in all, a fun time was had by all. I hope to be able to go back again. A very well-run con.

West Wing Season 2 Commentary and Thoughts

(Continuing my harder trivia. What's the connection between this movie (Ang Lee's The Ice Storm) and this post? Answer at the bottom.)



Denisa and I have been totally binge watching The West Wing. We just finished season 2, and we're still thoroughly enjoying it. There's plenty of drama and back room shenanigans, and it makes me really wish this is how politics actually worked in our country. Unfortunately, I really don't think it is. A few thoughts:



The show is definitely slanted to the left. I'm okay with that, mainly because I think any president's people are going to be slanted one way or another in today's day and age. To have a truly centrist party in power, I think it would just lose all believability. That said, I dislike how the show tends to demonize the right from time to time. They don't do it outrageously (most of the time), but there's this constant undertow message that anyone on the conservative side is one step away from a troglodyte. Dismissing an entire side like that is foolish and cheap, and whenever they go too close to it, I bristle.



Then again, this is politics, and passions run hot in politics, so I suppose a show that managed to not make me bristle would be a failure of a show. I wonder if the show made Democrats bristle as often as it did Republicans. Something tells me it didn't.



Another thought: These people are all so good. So idealistic. They run because they believe they can make a change for the good of the country, not because they want to keep getting a paycheck. That said, I think it's very easy to start focusing on keeping your job because that keeps you in power. At first, you do that because you want to keep doing good, but you can switch over to staying in power just for the sake of staying in power.



The show makes it seem like real things can happen every week. Like politics actually gets stuff done. I don't feel like that's what I see in reality. If things are actually getting done, our government does a really poor job of communicating what those things are. So sometimes I watch the show and sort of roll my eyes.



But I still watch the show.



In the end, I keep watching because I wish politics were like this. I wish people were more steadfast in their beliefs--whatever they may be. I wish it would be about ideas and not about personalities and grudges and parties. I hope it gets to be like that someday, but part of me really wonders if it ever was like that to begin with.



In any case, on to season three! Very curious to see how they handle 9/11 . . .



(Answer to the trivia? The Ice Storm stars Kevin Kline and Sigourney Weaver, who also starred opposite each other in Dave, the movie about the guy who becomes president for a limited time. Was that too difficult? I'm trying to tune these trivia questions a bit.)

On Being Busy

(Okay--people are getting my trivia questions too easily, but I enjoy giving them. How's this one? Bonus points if you name the movie this is from AND how it connects to the topic of this post.)



So I was noting yesterday how busy I was. And as I reflected on just how busy I was, my first reaction was to think, "Sheesh. I sure miss the days when I wasn't this busy."



But you know what? I think I've been busy for a very long time.



It's easy to point at things in my life that I'm doing now that I wasn't doing before, and to start making the argument that my life has been getting progressively busier. It's easy to look at families with fewer children and scoff at their claims of being busy. Or to look at couples with no children. Or people who aren't married. But I think when you do that, you lose sight of certain key things.



First up, there are things I'm NOT doing now that once made my life incredibly busy. I'm not going to school full time. I'm not writing papers. I'm not working on a thesis. So yes, things are added to my schedule, but things are also taken away. Let's not forget that when the unmarried college student is complaining about how busy he is and how he can't keep track of everything he has to do.



Second, we get better at dealing with things in our lives. It takes practice. Would a concert pianist make fun of a person learning to play the piano, just because they miss some notes? Well, maybe--but that guy would be a real jerk. That couple with one child? This is their first time encountering all those problems a parent of three or four (or twelve) can already deal with in their sleep. Is it any wonder they feel really busy and on edge?



Third, I am as busy as I am in large part due to the decisions I have made. To complain about being busy is really just to complain that I can be a crappy prioritizer, or that I'm bad at saying "No" to things. If I'm feeling overstressed or too busy, I always have the option of starting to trim down on other things I'm doing in my life. My first nominee? Mowing the yard. But something tells me that's not a valid candidate.



Anyway. This post is really more inward focused than it is outward. I'm not hear to tell you all to not worry about being so busy. I'm telling myself. You just got to come along for the ride. I'm nice like that.



And speaking of busy, I'm off to ConnectiCon tomorrow morning. Say hi if you're in the area. It should be a fun time!



(Oh--and the answer to the trivia question? It's from Shawshank Redemption, of course. The connection? This is the scene where the famous line is spoken: "I guess it comes down to a simple choice, you know: Get busy living, or get busy dying."

Juggling Kittens

(Bonus awesome points to naming the movie this is from.)



You ever have one of those days when you're just doing your best to scramble around, keeping all the different balls (or kittens) you have in the air at once from falling?



This is one of those days.



And some of those kittens seem hell-bent from splatting on the floor as soon as possible.



So for now, here's one kitten that's going sailing back up into the air: Blog post for today. Done.



Catch you all tomorrow.