Sailing Away with Music and Books

Posted January 22, 2010 by Helmsalee Manatee
Categories: Music, Sailing

Tags: , , , , , , , ,

Voyager, cruiser, sailor, reader …

My dream is to sail away, someday, with my spouse.

I want to go where the wind takes us, visit interesting new places, visit parts of this Earth slowly, tuck our boat away in secluded anchorages, and generally enjoy life from our floating home.

The dream includes a lot of reading, of course. Every sailor I know loves to read. Reading in the midst of paradise is just wonderful; when you have few ties — to land, place, deadline, interpersonal dynamics — it’s easy to suspend your own life and become absorbed into the life of the book. Reading is also useful to while away time during periods of bad weather.

Also — and I say this cautiously because I myself really, really hate hearing other people’s music breaking up the peaceful sounds of nature — I want to be able to listen to my own music when I want to — through headphones, or very quietly through the boat’s speakers if I’m not out on the open sea.

But there’s no room!

The problem is, our sailboat is only twenty feet long. There is a bookshelf, all right, but it will be filled with cruising guides, a first-aid book, engine manuals, piloting and sailing volumes, and other essential reference works.

Space that isn’t used for necessary written material will be filled with food, clothing, spare parts, and all of the sundry items that must accompany us wherever we sail.

I seriously doubt we’ll be able to find space for the number of books I envision wanting!

Enter Kindle and its ilk

Kindle DX

I’ve made a promise to myself: Amazon’s Kindle DX — or something very like it — is going to be my gift to each of us on the day we depart for our adventure.

This wonderful piece of electronica is about the size of an issue of Sail magazine, holds about 3500 books, works for about a week on one battery charge, and lets you download books anywhere in the U.S. (and many other places, too) because it’s connected to the 3G network.

Also, this item is able to accept pdf files, so I can load it with the pdf versions of my manuals, user guides, and other boat documentation, thus further relieving — or at least having a backup to — my overburdened bookshelf.

For two Kindles — because I hate to share — we would spend just under $1000, though I hope this price comes down as Amazon’s competitors introduce their own products.

iPod

My iPod has a sweet little gizmo that plugs into my car’s 12-volt socket to play my MP3 files through the FM radio.

My tiny sailboat also has a 12-volt socket, and a stereo system complete with pretty nice speakers and FM radio, in addition to its CD player.

Hmmm … why bring a stack of CDs when I can just bring my iPod and the gizmo? I’ve already tried it out, and it works just as well in the boat as it does in the car.

A 32 gig iPod Touch, which holds up to 7000 songs, currently sells for about $300 — that’s half the cost of the same item about a year ago. Not bad.

MacBook

I’ll admit that I am, and have always been, a fan of the Mac.

My cellphone would be an iPhone if I could afford the monthly fee.

But I won’t consider my cruising inventory complete without a laptop computer. As with the Kindle, I may use it to store redundant copies of pdf documents. But more importantly, it can be used in numerous ways for email, weather tracking, updates to our navigational charts, processing digital photographs taken during our adventure — and, of course, writing.

Apple is selling its latest laptop, the MacBook, for $1000.

Priceless

I have just talked about spending nearly $2300, which doesn’t even include the cost of book downloads for the Kindle (around $10 each), music files ($1.29 each), or software for the computer (thousands, probably).

Of course, I already own the iPod, and an antiquated laptop, but I may need to spring for new ones. I hope the prices will all come down.

All I can say to this immense outlay for electronic gadgetry primarily directed at our amusement is, consider the alternatives:

—≡—  1. We do not bring books or CDs, and slowly go psychotic from lack of reading or music to soothe the savage breast.

—≡—  2. We bring the books and CDs, and forfeit clothing, thus finding ourselves gravitating to nudist destinations.

—≡—  3. We bring the books and CDs, and forfeit food, thus committing ourselves to the peripatetic lives of mendicants — or, less elegantly, dock mooches who routinely crash parties and bum food off generous fellow sailors.

I think that any of the above alternatives will drive us back to life ashore prematurely, perhaps with the added expense of therapy. Life ashore is more expensive than life afloat, almost by definition. Throw therapy in, and you’re talking serious money.

My boat is my therapy, and hence worth the money. Priceless, in fact.

———————

What do you think? Feel free to post your comments below.

———————

I’m a little bit Country…

Posted January 1, 2010 by Helmsalee Manatee
Categories: General topics, Music, Writing

Tags: , , , , , , ,

Who am I, really?

A week ago, I needed to go somewhere a couple hours’ drive away, and I was listening to the local country music station during the trip.

All of a sudden, it occurred to me that I had heard at least three songs during the preceding forty minutes or so that described what it meant to “be Country.” That got me to wondering:

—≡—  Stereotypes. Do the Country songs describing what it means to “be Country” reinforce old stereotypes about Country musicians and their fans, or do they offer some nuanced insights?

—≡—  Who is Country? Are these songs describing what “being Country” means to the Country musicians, to their listeners, or both?

—≡—  Is Country a lifestyle? Is “being Country” simply a description of the themes and images appropriate to Country music, or is it a description of the lifestyle of those who love Country music?

—≡—  Do all musicians do this? Do the writers of other music genres — rock, punk, metal, folk, for example — talk about themselves this way?

What Country is, and is not

Two songs seem to be receiving a lot of play on the radio right now: “That’s How Country Boys Roll,” vigorously performed by Billy Currington, and “A Little More Country Than That,” a gentle love song offered by Easton Corbin.

Currington’s song has so far reached a rank of #14 on Billboard’s Hot Country Songs chart, with Corbin’s song not far behind, at #19.

“That’s How Country Boys Roll” presents a litany of tried-and-true stereotypes of “Country boys.” Currington’s Country boys live in a world of extremes, no half-measures — a world whose fixtures include bars, fishing, back roads, fast cars, baseball, and weekend barbecues.

They’re self-destructive, irreverent, and anti-authoritarian — they chew tobacco, soup up cars “just to see how fast they’ll go,” go drinking and singing in bars, and generally “spin their wheels.” But Country boys also embody the values of generosity, faithfulness, and work ethic — they “do everything heart and soul,” “love their woman one beat shy of a heart attack,” “work, work, work, all week ’til the job gets done,” will “give you the shirt off their back,” and “if you don’t know your way around they’ll draw you a map.” Paradoxically “humble and proud,” they “love Momma and Jesus and Jones.” Their needs are few — they “run on a big ol’ heart and a pinch of Skoal”; “all they need is a little gas, a few dollars to hold.”

So Currington defines “being Country” in terms of specific character details — attitudes about working hard, playing hard, and loving hard — and specific locale details — places and things found only in rural settings.

Corbin’s “A Little More Country Than That” seems at first to work against the stereotypes that people Currington’s song. The first two stanzas present the standard Country furniture. The rural features include “a dirt road full of potholes with a creek bank and some cane poles, catching channel cat,” “a small town with an old hound laying in front of the courthouse while the old men chew the fat,” and “Hank” songs — referring either to Country music superstar Hank Williams or to his equally famous son, Hank Williams, Jr.

But the concluding line of each stanza challenges the “Country-ness” of the preceding stereotypical images. When Corbin sings that he’s “a little more Country than that,” he is saying, in effect, “Those descriptions are not real Country, or not Country enough.” Authentic Country is an intensification, somehow, of the stereotypical images.

What content does Corbin offer to define or describe what it is to be “Country enough”? In this song, the only positive statement of what it means to be “just the right amount of Country” comes in the lines about how a man relates to the woman he wants to marry: “Girl, I’m not the kind to two-time or play games behind your back; I’m a little more Country than that.” “This ring ain’t some thing that I mean to give you and then take back; I’m a little more Country than that.” From this we conclude that being “a little more Country” involves a certain quality of character, a values system that includes honesty, faithfulness, and forthrightness.

Lest you think that Corbin is denying the legitimacy of the old physical, rural content of what it means to be “Country,” he includes one stanza near the end of the song that, perplexingly, wrenches the song away from the theme of Country-as-character, returning to the theme of Country-as-setting. He has already said that rural roads, fishing in creeks, and lazy town-green life are not fully Country. But he also sets up a boundary at the other end, so to speak. As if he is afraid of straying too far from the standard Country images, he includes a description of a setting that is unacceptably non-Country: “If you want a brick home in a school zone with the doors locked and alarms on, Girl, you’re way off track.” Be forewarned: I want you, I want to marry you, I promise to be faithful to you and be honest with you, but watch out — you’d better not stray too far from my expectations. The suburban lifestyle is not Country enough to suit me.

Country is a birthright

Another song receiving some airtime now, though it doesn’t seem to have ranked on the charts yet, is a sweet number by Luke Bryan. “What Country Is” is little more than a series of vignettes, a catalogue of dreamy images followed by the refrain, “That’s what Country is.”

The list, consisting of soft-focus snapshots of food, farmhouse, and landscape fragments, evokes a timeless rural setting. Houseflies, horse stalls, cantaloupe and buttered biscuits, box fans and cane fishing poles, sunset and moonlight — images like these create a whole fabric of Country-ness, an almost-fantasy world never touched by tragedy or difficulty.

Bryan works against the notion of Country-as-fantasy, however, in three lines that seem to have slipped into his otherwise unapologetically sweet picture. Around the middle of the song, he says that Country “ain’t a rebel flag you bought at the mall”; it “ain’t a John Deere cap that’s never fell in the cotton”; and near the end, that it “ain’t a jacked-up truck that’s never seen a pasture.” Clearly, authentic “Country” has something to do with appearance matching reality. Like Corbin, Bryan defines “Country” partially by what it is not — although, unlike Corbin, he spends a great deal of time describing what it is.

The final line of “What Country Is” (before the repeated refrain) takes the entire rest of the song — the whole idyllic tapestry he has built to evoke the images of Country — and constructs an impenetrable stone wall around it. Country, he sings, “can’t be bought; it’s something you’re born with.” In this single line, Bryan defines Country as a birthright, unattainable by those on the outside, the rightful property of those lucky enough to have been born on the inside. Country, evidently, has nothing to do with choice, with intention, with will, but everything to do with variables utterly outside one’s own control. You either have it or you don’t. Lucky you.

Hank Williams and Hank Williams, Jr.

In the songs under discussion here, “Hank” appears as an icon of what it means to “be Country.” I’d love to hear from students of Country music whether a simple reference to “Hank” authoritatively signifies either Hank Williams or his son, Hank Williams, Jr., but in the absence of better information, I have drawn the conclusion that “Hank” may refer both to Bocephus (Hank, Jr.’s nickname) and to his father.

The personal lives of both men mirror the rough lives depicted in their music — hard-driving, self-destructive, extreme, plagued by alcohol abuse and broken relationships. Other clues may yield insight into which artist is being alluded to in the songs currently playing on the radio.

Corbin’s song, “A Little More Country Than That,” refers to the “steel ride” in a Hank song sending “chills up your back.” The Drifting Cowboys, the band formed by the older Hank Williams, was known for its steel guitar sound.

On the other hand, the older Hank Williams, although extremely influential, died in 1953 at the age of 29. Bocephus, on the other hand, is still performing, and is more likely to be referred to when talking about playing Country music on the radio as you drive around town, as in the songs cited in this post.

Also — though this is a more vague form of evidence — the older Hank Williams is better known for his blues themes, songs about loss in love, heartache, and the struggles of relationships. Bocephus’s discography includes these kinds of songs, too, but — increasingly in the last couple of decades — contains more of the hell-bent-for-leather themes and images found in the songs I’m discussing in this blog.

In the end, I’ve concluded that it doesn’t really matter which Williams is being alluded to in these songs; and perhaps the songwriters are intending to evoke both of them in the single reference “Hank.” Together, their lives form a continuous thread of “the Life” of Country; together, they pretty much cover the themes under discussion — the internal and the external, the personal relationships and the physical settings. The fact that there is a third Hank Williams (aka Hank 3) rising in the Country music scene can’t hurt.

Nearly thirty years ago, Hank Williams, Jr. wrote a song that anticipates the songs I’m discussing today. “Country Boy Can Survive,” released in 1981, rose to #2 on Billboard’s Hot Country Singles chart. This song is more specific than the offerings of Currington, Corbin, and Bryan; and it offers even more stark contrasts between Country and not-Country.

Foremost, Bocephus defines “Country folks” as survivors — and what do they survive? Hank’s song covers everything from obtaining food to the apocalypse — unimaginable trials like “the end of time” and the Mississippi River running dry — national-scale trials like Stock Market declines and rising interest rates — and personal trials like being mugged, robbed, and facing starvation.

Survival, according to this song, comes from possessing the skills of the self-reliant — knowing how to use a shotgun, a four-wheel-drive vehicle, a plow, a fishing pole, and a trotline. It comes from a refusal to give up —  “you can’t starve us out and you can’t make us run.”

And, although authentic Country folks come from far-flung places like West Virginia, the Rocky Mountains, North Carolina, “south Alabam,” and “the western skies,” they most certainly do not come from New York City, where people don’t know “how to live off the land” and ultimately are defenseless against those who use switchblade knives to kill them in order to get forty-three dollars. A “Country boy” would, in that situation, use the skills he had brought with him into that foreign place, “spit some Beechnut in that dude’s eyes and shoot him with my old 45.”

Finally, Bocephus draws a line around what is Country in order to establish who is “inside” and who is “outside” — “We say grace and we say Ma’am, and if you ain’t into that we don’t give a damn.” The world is divided into “we” and “you” — and you can just stay outside our camp.

Why now?

Clearly, Country musicians have been thinking about what it is to “be Country” for at least thirty years. But why the noticeable revival of that theme, that introspection, now? The three songs receiving a lot of airplay right now do not represent a wholly new trend in Country music, but they certainly echo Hank Williams, Jr.’s song in more overt ways than they have for a long, long time.

Other songs in the last couple of years have laid the groundwork for the songs plying the airwaves today.

In 2008, “Country Man,” also by Luke Bryan, reached #10 on Billboard’s Hot Country Songs chart. Less specific and detailed than “What Country Is,” this song talks about the essential manliness of Country men — their muscles are developed as only those of farmworkers can be; they cure ham; they grow their food; they are handy, hotwiring vehicles with ease; they “wrestle hogs and gators.” They think a good pick-up line is “Why don’t you come and join me in my new deer stand,” and seek a “good ole’ country girlfriend” who will be attracted by this kind of line. This song, too, uses negative images to define what Country is not — iPods, Humvees, and the rock band Hoobastank are contrasted with tape players, Jeeps with camouflage seats, and Hank (again, either Hank Williams or Hank Williams, Jr.).

And in 2007, Canadian Country artist Paul Brandt offered “Country Girl,” a song seeking to define Country in its female form as a package of particular character traits — gold-hearted, tender, parent-loving, Jesus-loving, unafraid, independent, wild — and physical attributes — clad in overalls, hair braided, barefoot, and (repeatedly) attractive: “pretty as a picture”; “man does she look good”; “ain’t she beautiful” (twice); “she can’t help but turn the head of every guy.” Physical beauty is evidently one hallmark of a Country girl.

It’s possible to find other songs in recent years that comment on what it means to “be Country,” though they don’t seem quite as self-conscious about drawing boundaries and defining what is “inside” and “outside” the realm of Country.

My theory is that most of the last decade has been influenced markedly by the events of 09/11/2001. Popular music — not only Country, but Pop, Rock, Folk, and other genres — has offered a variety of songs containing patriotic themes, drawing the sorts of boundaries I’ve been discussing around what it is to be “American,” and talking about the character of Americans.

I think that Country artists are doing a similar thing, only on a smaller scale: there is a sense, in all the songs discussed here, that people who love and who listen to Country music are an embattled minority with turf to define and defend. They don’t speak with one voice, really — the values and character attributes they specify aren’t the same across all of the songs — but they seem agreed on the fact that there is a values structure which ought to be respected as a legitimate test of what is authentically Country.

As one might expect, “being Country” sometimes resembles a lifestyle, sometimes an intentional set of choices about how to approach life, and sometimes an inherent quality that can’t be earned, learned, or achieved. It reminds me of talk about immigrant versus native-born: some want to allow people within our borders if they promise to assimilate and become good citizens, while others are more isolationist and unwilling to recognize any legitimacy in the desire to come inside the circle. One wonders how far back in Country music history you’d have to go to find “native-born” Country folk. Because at one time, there was no Country music at all, and we were all immigrants to it.

———————

What do you think? Feel free to post your comments below.

Pirates

Posted December 1, 2009 by Helmsalee Manatee
Categories: Sailing

Tags: , , ,

WHAT SHOULD VOYAGING SAILORS DO ABOUT PIRATES?

≡≡≡≡  my sources for this post appear at the end of the post.  ≡≡≡≡

Two days after Thanksgiving, the British Royal Fleet Auxiliary ship Wave Knight delivered a most unusual cargo to the United Kingdom.

It had carried its significant burden around 6,500 miles (via the Suez Canal)  —  from approximately 60 miles west of the town of Victoria in the Seychelles to Portland, Dorset, in the UK.

The Seychelles are a group of islands just below the Equator in the Indian Ocean. Mahé, the largest island in the group and home to Victoria, is less than 20 miles long and around 6 miles wide at its widest point. Besides a couple of tiny islands nearby, the closest large land mass nearby is Madagascar, about 500 miles to the southwest. Somalia, Kenya’s northern neighbor on the east coast of Africa, is around 750 miles to the west.

What was this precious cargo?

If you had been on the dock in Dorset early in the morning of November 28, you would have seen a crane transferring a home from ship to shore.

An empty home whose owners have been held hostage in Somalia for more than a month.

Wave Knight was delivering Lynn Rival, a 38-foot sailboat, back to its homeland.

What happened to the inhabitants of Lynn Rival?

Somali pirates boarded Lynn Rival in the small hours (around 2:30 a.m.) on October 23, removing Rachel and Paul Chandler.

The Chandlers  —  or someone aboard Lynn Rival  —  activated their EPIRB (Emergency Position Indicating Radio Beacon) at 2200 Greenwich Mean Time. Soon thereafter the EPIRB was deactivated, it is unclear by whom.

The Chandlers had left the Seychelles less than two days earlier, and were sailing southwest toward Tanzania. They made it only a little ways offshore, into the middle of nowhere, when they were taken forcibly from their home.

The kidnappers transferred the Chandlers to the container ship Kota Wajar, a Singapore-flagged vessel that they had hijacked on October 16, 150 miles north of the Seychelles and about 550 miles from Somalia. On October 29, they permitted Mr Chandler to make a cellphone call to a news agency in the UK. Mr Chandler reported that the Kota Wajar was lying at anchor one mile off the Somali coast. The transcript reveals the approximate location of the container ship, but ends when Mr Chandler is asked how he and his wife are being treated.

One week after the Chandlers’ kidnapping, on October 30, their abductors demanded a ransom of 4.7 million Euros. That’s more than 7 million U.S. dollars, or more than 4 million British pounds. The kidnappers made their demand over the phone, and both Mr and Mrs Chandler were allowed to speak during the phone call. Both hostages claimed to be in good health physically but sounded terribly distressed.

The day after the ransom demand, the kidnappers moved the Chandlers to a hidden location on dry land in Somalia. Presumably, they are still there.

On November 18, the Chandlers were videotaped  —  their kidnappers pointing weapons at them in the background  —  presumably to encourage the delivery of ransom money. Both Mr and Mrs Chandler spoke, saying that they were healthy but under stress and believed that they would be killed unless the ransom were paid.

Other, unconfirmed bits of information have surfaced:
—≡—  On October 31, Islamic militia groups reportedly argued with the Chandlers’ kidnappers  —  they preferred to trade the Chandlers for seven pirates who had been captured earlier that week.
—≡—  On November 5, townspeople in the location where the Chandlers were being held reportedly engaged in an armed fight with the kidnappers  —  the residents didn’t want their town being used as a hostage hideout. The kidnappers reportedly left with the Chandlers for a new secret location.

A Royal Navy ship witnessed the kidnapping

Wave Knight, the British Royal Fleet Auxiliary ship that has delivered Lynn Rival home to the UK, stood by helplessly as the Chandlers were abducted from their home. Although the ship had a crew of 100 and a helicopter, it was not prepared to engage the kidnappers.

A spokesperson for the Royal Navy defended the inaction: “What you have got is a hostile situation with a bunch of pirates who are clearly unhappy; you have really got to be absolutely sure of what you are doing before you start trying to release hostages because you could end up with the hostages getting killed. . . . What you have got is a small open boat which is crammed full of pirates armed with AK47s and rocket-propelled grenades and two middle-aged yachties, all loaded into this small boat which is full of fuel. . . . [Wave Knight] has a helicopter and a helicopter crew and some self-defense weapons but she doesn’t have a crew of snipers. . . . [They didn't] have someone who is competent with a sniper rifle  —  and this is a very high level of competence  —  to start slotting pirates.”

If the Chandlers are ultimately executed by their captors, everyone will wish that the Wave Knight had intervened. The nearest warship was two hours away; by the time it arrived on the scene, the Chandlers were long gone.

But I think that the Royal Navy offers a reasonable defense. I believe that the commander of the Wave Knight had no prudent course of action other than standing by. Perhaps because the British ship was nearby, the kidnappers quickly removed the Chandlers to a fast skiff and made their getaway without looting or scuttling the Lynn Rival. This enabled the Wave Knight to take the Chandlers’ home as cargo and return her to the UK.

Lynn Rival is the Chandlers’ only asset, according to their relatives. The Chandlers sold their land-based home to purchase and outfit their seagoing home. If the Chandlers are lucky enough to be released from captivity, they will have something to come home to. Since the Wave Knight was powerless to prevent their capture, at least it was able to preserve their home and their only property in this world.

Why am I interested in this?

I worry about pirates.

The Chandlers were aware of the intense pirate activity in the Indian Ocean. They assessed the risks when devising their voyaging schedule. And, though aware of the risks, they chose to cruise in dangerous regions with their eyes wide open. Nevertheless, they did not deserve to be kidnapped.

It is also astonishing to me that a tiny 38-foot sailboat would be spotted, much less boarded, in the middle of nowhere, in the middle of the night. To locate a tiny dot in the middle of an ocean, hundreds of miles from the nearest large land mass and 60 miles from the tiny island from which they departed days earlier, is a feat that confounds the mind.

Tankers and container ships are large targets, and are targeted for obvious financial motives. But an ordinary, middle-aged couple was targeted for a possible, relatively paltry, ransom  —  with no guarantee that the ransom would ever be paid. The kidnappers couldn’t have known in advance whether the Chandlers had wealthy relatives (they don’t), or whether the British government would be willing to pony up for two regular citizens (they haven’t so far).

Part of me wants to argue that ordinary folks should deny kidnappers their ransom  —  or they will keep on abducting us ordinary folks to get more, more, more. Governments shouldn’t be coerced into paying for our safe return. We are, after all, plying the seas on our own chosen adventures, cognizant of the risks. That is not like ships, which need to travel the dangerous routes in order to deliver goods.

But if I were in the Chandlers’ shoes, I am pretty sure I would make the phone calls and videos trying to secure my own release. Even if I wanted to resist my captors’ demands and refuse to participate in their ransom demands, I think that an AK47 held to my head would persuade me to go along with their coercive schemes.

What are cruisers to do? Commit suicide rather than be taken captive by pirates? Resist making phone calls or videotapes, which is the same as committing suicide, only by a manner not of their choosing?

———————

What do you think? Feel free to post your comments below.

———————

S O U R C E S :

You can see a photo of the Chandlers’ sailboat being lowered from the Royal Fleet Auxiliary ship Wave Knight to a transport lorry in the United Kingdom at http://www.sail-world.com/USA/Kidnapped-sailors-yacht-arrives-Britain—alone/63823.

The transcript of the October 29 cellphone call with Mr Chandler can be found at http://yachtpals.com/yacht-pirates-7055. This is my most comprehensive source of the timeline, details, and unconfirmed bits of information on this story.

The October 30 phone call demanding ransom money is described at http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/worldnews/article-1224103/Paul-Rachel-Chandler-Somali-pirates-expected-make-ransom-demand-return-hijacked-Britons.html.

Details of the November 18 video are at http://yachtpals.com/pirate-chandler-7071.

Information about the Wave Knight standing by while the Chandlers were kidnapped can be found at http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/piracy/6560063/Royal-Navy-watched-helpless-as-pirates-kidnapped-yacht-couple-Paul-and-Rachel-Chandler.html.

Here are links to other sources that contain details used in this blog entry: http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2009/oct/27/somali-pirates-british-yacht. http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/england/kent/8327416.stm.

NaNoWriMo

Posted November 19, 2009 by Helmsalee Manatee
Categories: General topics, Writing

Tags: , , ,

What’s it like to be an author???

I have been busy with NaNoWriMo this month, so this blog, barely begun, was derailed almost immediately.

That doesn’t mean I haven’t been working or writing, however: besides my paying work, I’ve written a big chunk of my novel — 42,212 words — between November 1 and the end of the day yesterday.

That’s a lot of words! I need to have 50,000 words by midnight on November 30 in order to “win”; and at this point, I’m pretty far ahead of the daily goal (I should have written 31,667 words by the end of the day today) — but I feel like a winner already. I’m excited about the project, and the story is not awful.

I was talked into becoming a “Wrimo” and “doing NaNo” this year by Abigail, who did it last year. Though she began a week into the contest and didn’t top 50,000 words, she came close and had a lot of fun doing it. She’s doing great this year, ahead of schedule also. Kudos!

For the uninitiated, NaNoWriMo stands for National Novel Writing Month. It was started by a guy named Chris Baty and a few friends in 1999. It has grown annually from that handful of aspiring authors to more than 119 thousand in 2008. Not sure how many this year. The idea is to get into “writer’s mode” by writing swiftly and copiously, with as little editing as possible, so as to overcome writer’s block. Editing can come later. Hence the draconian schedule of 50k words in 30 days.

Under NaNo rules, you’re not allowed to write together. But my writing buddy and I have been comparing notes on our methods, and they differ quite a bit. She had done a lot of “pre-writing” — allowed by NaNo — outlining her book. She is much more methodical than I am, and says she feels comfortable writing her novel in linear fashion from the outline she constructed.

I, on the other hand, pre-wrote a set of character sketches that, altogether, would have fit on an index card. I had a sketchy idea of the plot, but nothing more. I’ve been writing “scenes” all out of order, taking whatever scene interests me at the moment. One of the results of this unplanned approach is that the characters have developed autonomous lives, making demands and behaving in unanticipated ways. I find this energizing but have to make continual adjustments and notes for later editing.

And you know what? It works. I’ve allowed myself to edit just a little bit — I allow myself about ten minutes at the beginning of each writing session to add details and dialogue to previously written material. I’ve found that if I don’t, I fret about forgetting material I wanted to add, or else I feel obliged to jot down notes on it so I won’t forget (which takes more time than just putting it in!). I figure that as long as I’m meeting the word count, so what? Believe me, there’s plenty of baaaad writing in this novel that I’ll have editing aplenty when the rough draft is done! But I love it! It’s very gratifying. I hope I can keep it up after December 1!

Right now, I anticipate that I’ll be writing well into December, long after I’ve hit the 50k mark. The book doesn’t seem as if it will be finished in another 8,000 words. Wish me luck!

———————

What do you think? Feel free to post your comments below.

———————

C H E C K    I T   O U T :

Find out more at http://www.nanowrimo.org. And plan to join me next year! You won’t be sorry.

The perils of posting on Facebook

Posted October 27, 2009 by Helmsalee Manatee
Categories: Social networks

Tags: , , , , ,

Student Suspended 180 Days for Facebook Message

≡≡≡≡  my sources for this post appear at the end of the post.  ≡≡≡≡

We are all aware that inappropriate posts to social networking sites can get you in trouble. My usual advice is to post only what you would not mind the whole world reading — imagine that you’re posting a note on a public bulletin board.

But who would believe that the post “You’re not gonna bust a grape” would get someone suspended for the rest of the school year?

Keyshaun Harley, an honor student with no history of trouble, posted this simple comment on a friend’s Facebook page. Apparently two female acquaintances were arguing about fighting. Harley’s comment can be loosely translated as “You’re so weak, you couldn’t even win a fight with a grape.” My source for this story is not entirely clear on whose page Harley chose to post his comment. But the source says that a parent reported the post to the principal of Harley’s school. The school then accused Harley of “cyber-bullying” and suspended him for 180 days, which amounts to the remainder of the school year.

Even with the murky detail of the original story, I just about went apoplectic when I read this. I am waiting for someone from the ACLU to step up, take Harley’s case, and sue the school board and, possibly, the parents (or the “friend”) who forwarded Harley’s message to the school principal. There are so many things wrong with this situation:

—≡—  “You’re not gonna bust a grape” could be seen as a dismissive comment intended to defuse the rising emotions and point out the foolhardiness of contemplating entering into a fight. I think this interpretation is more plausible than the school’s assertion that Harley was trying to incite (or “insight,” as author Danya Bacchus spelled it in the story) a fight.

—≡—  The post hardly amounts to “cyber-bullying” — there is no evidence that it is part of a pattern of behavior, or one in a series of comments, aimed by Harley at his Facebook friend.

—≡—  If the Facebook friend had been offended by Harley’s comments, she or he could have easily “un-friended” Harley with one click of the mouse … and never been bothered by Harley’s posts again.

—≡—  I am just speculating here, but doesn’t the parent reporting the post to the school principal smack of cheap vindictiveness and a desire to ruin Harley’s future by means of a raw exercise of power (parents and school board against a teenager)? The actions of the parent, and the chain reaction of events that followed, seem horrifically disproportionate to the original post.

—≡—  Harley did attempt to explain himself, saying that “really I was trying to tell everybody there is no reason to be talking like this because nobody is really going to fight.” The story doesn’t report any argument by the school board concerning why we should not accept Harley’s own explanation. And, because the six-word post doesn’t seem self-evidently bullying or hostile in nature, I wonder why the school board (and the parent) arrived at the conclusion that the post was an instance of cyber-bullying.

———————

What do you think? Feel free to post your comments below.

———————

S O U R C E S :

I first came across this story on http://www.detentionslip.org, which referred me to the account on the Memphis, TN channel 3 online news site at http://www.wreg.com/wreg-mcs-student-suspended-180-days,0,1325790.story.

Inaugural blog post

Posted October 19, 2009 by Helmsalee Manatee
Categories: General topics

Tags:

Welcome to my blog and the first post.

I created this blog because I wanted to keep a diary recording my reflections on events of the day. I enjoy the social aspects offered by the Internet and think it’s a great medium for shared opinions and discussion. I find the opportunity for visitors to opt in or out, to read or to ignore, very appealing.

I’m also intrigued by the paradoxically ephemeral-permanent quality of posted material on the Internet. No sooner keyboarded, zap! — it’s out there for anyone with a search engine to access. Another keystroke, zap! — it is removed. Another keystroke, zap! — someone has copied, forwarded, or appropriated it for their own use (or misuse), and it has gotten out of your control forever.

I hope you enjoy the blog. Feel free to comment below.