And we're baaack!

I'm all moved in to the new place, and I'm liking it. If you'd like to see pictures, go here. (Think they're all captioned.) DSL got hooked up yesterday, so I'm back on the 'net.

On the one hand, I can't really do without internet. Too much of what I do requires email communication--emails are sent to my chair, my work communicates via email, and Steve and I use internet-based methods of communication a lot. (Plus we play games online with each other. I'm now playing a warlock in WoW.)

On the other hand, I think my internet fast was good for me. Now, I'm by no means a Carmelite in terms of asceticism. I'm attracted to the Trappists and Camaldolese, but I also realize that I (as a lay person) have different needs than they do. Knowing that I need certain things isn't pride. If anything, it can be a discipline in itself to use responsibly the things one has. (I believe this is a point Chittister makes in her commentary on the Rule of St. Benedict, which is still packed up.) For instance, I could've done without a good computer desk, but the one I have makes life so much easier, with as much work on the computer as I do. (I could really use a better chair, though. Ergonomics aren't negotiable.)

But as the week without regular 'net access went on, it became obvious to me that I was using the internet at home to fill my life with noise. Suddenly I had to be more organized, so I'd have time to head to a coffee house to check email first thing in the morning. I had time for the Divine Office because I didn't have the 'net to distract me. And I recovered some of the silence that had been missing from my life over the summer.

But I'm glad I've got the 'net back. It's cheaper to make coffee in the new kitcheny area and surf, for one. For the other, the Hoopy Frood and I need some sort of online communication, otherwise the phone bills get onerous. (for instance, I had almost 800 minutes on my phone at the start of the Great Internet Fast. At the end of it, I have 200 left.)

I keep thinking, though: Do I really need a nice place to live and DSL that's at T1 speeds? Sure, I could--and did--make do with a place that wasn't the greatest and with slower broadband, but after upgrading both places, I wished I'd moved and gotten faster DSL sooner. I mean, now, I can watch a YouTube video without it stuttering or loading all the way. (YouTube videos aren't necessary for life, but they're relatively small--it should give you an example of how slow my old DSL was.) New furniture--a bed, a desk, and a chair--wasn't optional. One good way of bringing bedbugs with you is to move furniture. Plus, the stuff I had was stuff that was hand-me-downs or garbage picked. I've since learned that's a great way to get bedbugs, as well.

As an aside, I so wouldn't wish bedbugs on anyone. Cockroaches, if you have them and don't live somewhere tropical, it's generally something you did or didn't do. Bedbugs? They're just an act of God. You get them, it's nothing you did or didn't do. they're pure chaos.

Sure, I could make do with less--we all can--but the things I have are concessions to make life a bit easier. I think what separates Benedictines from other orders is the attention to the ordinary. Caring for the tools you have is as much a sacred thing as caring for things used in the Mass, for instance. Your everyday work is a form of prayer. But what I think differentiates this from other organizations (say Opus Dei) is that it should be "nothing harsh or burdeonsome." That is, it should be something to give the stronger something to strive for and the weaker nothing to run from. (Paraphrasing a line from the chapter on the qualities of the abbot, since my copy of the Rule of St. Benedict is also packed.)

The Benedictine notion of asceticism isn't asceticism for the sake of punishing one's self, but for making it so that a person appreciates the things he/she has. (Merton makes this point in New Seeds of Contemplation. That book is also still packed.) Right now, I could use some coffee.

Hello. I'm alive. Big move just happened (I have awesome friends), and I have no internet at my house just yet. Blogging will return shortly.

Statement of Purpose

Word Count: 767
Summary: In which I opine over the similarities and differences between composing new music ("classical," if that word means anything anymore) and writing fanfic and their respective fandoms.
Warnings: Non-fiction, mention made to various academics in music and critical theory. This one isn't fiction, unless it's some strange Borgesian sense of the word.
Rating: All ages
Characters: a composer, a fanfic writer, and their fandoms.
Genre: Gen, meta
Author's note: This is what happens when I'm short on sleep and long on worry.
Disclaimer: Did I mention I haven't slept much the past few days?

My dirty little secret is out. I write fanfic, primarily for my own enjoyment. There could be some loose end in an episode that I want to explore or something I'd do differently. (Like bringing the Time Lords back.) There could be some scene-behind-the-scenes that needs poking into. And I could just need a Doctor Who fix.

Milton Babbitt, a composer, wrote a fairly famous essay that's been often misconstrued and misread. Originally published in 1958, it had the unfortunate title of "Who Cares if You Listen?" (It was an editorial choice made for him, not the one he wanted...or so I've been told by a couple of people who know the guy. Babbitt's on my short list of people I'd like to have a beer with.) But the upshot of his article is that the public isn't always the best judge of what a given work of art should be. In a sense, the composer needs some sort of solitude in which to work, otherwise he/she just winds up aping what's popular. Babbitt's article is much more nuanced and specific to composition than I'm summarizing. (It's well worth a read, just to see what he wrote, not what other people think he wrote.) Other theorists/composers I admire have elucidated other opinions. (Like Benjamin Boretz and friends talking about how composers write out of some deep need.) See also: Fredric Jameson's discussion on the parable of the oarsmen in his book on late Marxism.

I'm a fairly postmodernist girl, though, and I recognize that there's a place for pop. If that's your thing, cool, and I'll support you 100%. I most certainly wouldn't put my fic in the same creative output as I'd put my compositions, for instance. The two genres don't remotely occupy the same space in my brain or the same need. But I'd definitely argue that my fic does fill some sort of need. It's fun, for one. It's also a good way to relax, because I'm not concerned with my writing or creative output as I am with academic writing or with my compositions. Writing fic is a good way to cure creative constipation, of which, I've had quite a bit this summer.

And then you get fandoms. Doctor Who fic writers have their fans, and so do composers. Both fandoms get quite nasty. They'll spew a whole lot of vitriol in the guise of "concrit," which has very little to do with your work and everything to do with their own personal vision of your work. Now, I think personal visions are important--that's what keeps us writing, whether it's fic or music. But personal visions can conflict with others. What we learn in composition classes is how to either put that personal vision aside, or how to let it inform how we see other people's works. In theory. Fanbois and Fangirls in composition can be just as nasty--if not nastier--than in fanfic.

Now, note that I used the term "concrit." I'm not talking about constructive criticism. Good constructive criticism (paraphrased from a former composition teacher of mine, who was quoting Morton Feldman) answers two questions: Did the author know what he/she wanted? Did the author get it? Concrit's question, however, is: How does this diverge from my fanon? If it does in the slightest, then it's wrong. (Fanon, for the non-fic writers out there, is "fan canon," or canon that's created to fill gaps in the original canon. It's arguable if Doctor Who has a canon, at all. Not to be confused with the postcolonial writer.)

And a word about technique. It's one of the tangible ways of judging whether or not a piece achieves what it sets out to do and whether or not it's consistent with its own rules. (Then again, a piece of music could be about rule-breaking. In that case, it's important to judge how well the piece breaks its own rules.) Then again, a person might get good fanfic reviews for inventive craft in writing. Particularly deplorable grammar will most probably get mentioned in reviews, unless the author's fanon matches the reviewer's. In the same manner, composers will often get blasted for poor craft.

But good craft, alone, isn't the key to writing good music or good fic. There are a host of composers with good craft that never see the light of day. Writing good prose isn't the secret to writing good fiction, either. (I'm still figuring out what it is to write good fiction. Likewise, I'm still learning about writing good music. Both are life-long processes.)

Sorry about the last link. Here's the correct one:

http://linuxlock.blogspot.com/2008/09/wasted-on-idiot.html

May have to suddenly move places. Don't want to get into it (and the other things that've gone wrong this summer) where particular trolls can use it against me. If you want details, email me. Anyway, if I drop off the face of the earth, it's probably because I'm waiting for my DSL to be hooked up.

Prayers appreciated. Hate asking for them, when there are so many who're worse off.

Drive-by posting from me, but I thought this was too good to pass up sharing:

http://linuxlock.blogspot.com/2008/09/wasted-on-idiot.html

Is anyone else bothered by the anti-intellectual slant in the RCC these days? For instance, in the community on livejournal that everyone loves to hate, someone brought up the fact that the extraordinary rite was more theologically rich than the "novus ordo." (Funny how they can't bring themselves to use the term "ordinary rite.") What they really mean by this is, "I'm more refined than you felt banner-loving savages."

I guess what I'm bothered by is the anti-intellectual slant, unless it serves them. Then they bill themselves as intellectuals, when their reading is primarily of apologetics published before 1960 and Chesterton. They wouldn't dream of reading anyone who offends their delicate Catholic sensibilities. They decry the political bias of the university system, yet don't bother to see that they're just as biased as any professor. (Come to think of it, but my chair--who's one of those liberal professors from the 1970's--is a hell of a lot more tolerant of others than I am.)

Do I search out deliberately anti-Catholic stuff? No, but I've taken plenty of philosophy and critical theory courses. I've read plenty of books that would be banned by Opus Dei. I don't agree with everything I've read, and somewhere along the line people confuse appreciating an argument with agreeing with it.

I get the same thing with music all the time. For instance, I can't stand Enya. I think it's vapid trash. My opinions, however, shouldn't matter because I'm sure people will find some music they think is horrible that I absolutely love. Yet somehow people think that just because I'm getting an advanced degree in music that my opinions may matter more than someone else's. Sure, I may be able to articulate why I think Enya is garbage, but in the end I'm not out to convert anyone. I'm only trying to justify why I think the way I do and communicate what my experience is.

Likewise, I think people are disagreeing about aesthetics in liturgy. What our friend in that community is really saying is, "I don't get a high off of the ordinary rite." That's a perfectly valid statement to make, but where he goes over the line is saying that we all should have that experience, if we want to be as theologically sophisticated as he is.



Apologies to those who've seen this twice.

Yah, we'll take him.

So I'm still too wiped out to come up with something huge, and my brain isn't working well in the heat. But I found this take on Batman's religion. Interesting, if you're into obsessive analysis of fanwank. Their support is kind of weak, IMO, but it's something fun to read in air conditioning. And, hell, I'll always take cool Catholic characters. (Although considering the status of the Wayne family, I'd be more inclined to think they were Episcopalian.)

The Hoopy Frood and I saw "Dark Knight" last week and "Batman Begins" yesterday. I didn't expect to actually like "Dark Knight" at all, especially not after seeing it twice. (Once by myself when it came out and once with the Frood.) I'm really not a huge fan of superhero movies, namely because they always portray the superhero's love interest as this weeping princess to be rescued. (Why I hated the Spiderman movie with a passion.) I did like the fact that the token love interest (Rachael) was able to take care of herself in both movies.

So the Frood and I are ready to go a day early. What do we win? While there's nothing in my place, I sure wouldn't want to wish this on anyone. The uncertainty and phantom bug crawlies are worse than anything...

The Hoopy Frood and I have discovered that a better pre-Cana or Engaged Encounter marriage preparation program would entail locking the engaged couple in an apartment building with bedbugs. If they survive a week, they can get married. I'm thinking it would either be a good marriage prep program or new reality TV show. Or both. Pre-Cana is expensive as hell to the broke ass grad student types, and a little corporate sponsorship would go a long way.

That's one of the big reasons I've been so scarce lately. We're cleaning the everliving hell out of my place. *sigh* Neither of us have gotten bitten yet, but we're not taking any chances, either. Landlord knows and is on top of it. Past few weeks have been a nightmare, though.

Edit: They're taking care of bugs Monday. I will say something for my landlord/manager: they take care of catastrophes.

PSA

Catholics, this is a ciborium. It's used to reserve already-consecrated hosts left over from other Masses. Sometimes people will give out hosts directly from it.



Please do not try to drink from the ciborium. You won't like the result much.

Does anyone know anything about the TFP or these people? They look like your garden-variety right wing nutjob. I saw them mentioned in an article over on Vox Nova this morning. Before this morning, I can't say I knew anything about them. After digging a bit, I'm not sure I do. I think it's telling that the people who defended them never offered an apology for what happened to the woman in the article discussed on Vox Nova. Now, if someone of any group I belonged to (grad students, gamers, Benedictine oblates) hurt someone else, I think I'd apologize and make it known that the people who hurt another didn't speak for everyone.

Is anyone else creeped out by the proliferation of right wing groups like that out there? (TFP, Opus Dei, Legionaries of Christ.)

a p.s.

p.s. Tip #5: if you're single and male and don't want to be single? Learn to knit. Seriously. Good way to be a babe magnet, because the cool women won't give you grief about knitting and will actually encourage you. If you're not into women, well, we have gay friends.

This is actually David Demchuk's tip.

Dating do's and don't's for the single Catholic.

Okay, this one's culled from experience. Painful experiences dating.

1.) If you don't believe in the whole dating thing? Don't ask a woman out to dinner. No, this happened to me. I was at CalArts, and a guy there (also a practicing Catholic) and I hit it off. We were friends, and he asked me to dinner. I said what the hey and went. While there, we got talking about the whole grad school application thing. I'd gotten accepted to my school, and he hadn't gotten an acceptance letter yet. He proceeds to tell me that I should withdraw, because I won't need to go on to grad school when I start having his children. I ask him to clarify, thinking I didn't hear him properly. He mentioned that he only dates people he's interested in marrying. Check please.

I think the underlying problem, here, is that there is a segment of the population who doesn't view women as people. That is, they don't think that they should have dreams, ambitions, and goals like everyone else. If a woman is happy with a traditional role? Mazel tov, and I'll fight to the death for her right to be happy in that life. Me? It's not the best use of my gifts and talents. It also makes me wonder what kind of attitude that sort of a man would have towards his wife, should she not wind up being as perfect as he hoped.

2.) Don't belittle your SO, then wonder why he/she won't sleep with you. Come on, people, this is a no-brainer. For instance I just read on a forum where a man is denigrating his wife, shaming her publicly for getting a tubal, then wonders why she won't touch him. God, I have no freaking idea. I mean, wouldn't you really want to sleep with someone like that?

3.) Missionary dating rarely works. I think why the Hoopy Frood and I have gotten on so well is that we aren't out to convert the other. Seriously, if the whole different religion thing won't work out for you, it's probably better to break up than expect your partner to convert.

There will be differences. Every couple has them, it's just a matter of how you deal with them. Some differences are deal-breakers. (I wouldn't ever be happy dating someone who's fundamentalist in their beliefs.) Others aren't. (I can deal with the Hoopy Frood not being Catholic.)

4.) If someone creeps you out, don't feel obligated to be nice to him/her. I'm talking people who aren't weird, but raise your danger sense. I think far too often women (especially) are socialized to be nice all the time, which means being a doormat for those who prey on such people. Stand your ground, make a boundary, stick with it, and be loaded for bear (metaphorically speaking), if that doesn't work. People get killed for thinking they have to be nice to everyone. I think The Gift of Fear should be required reading for most people.

Drive-by posting, here. My life's chaotic (to say the least) with a bunch of things I don't have the time or headspace to deal with at the moment. But I found this response a friend from Livejournal wrote about the whole Cook/Meyers shindig. She's got an interesting take on the whole thing that's well worth reading.

Be the ball...

Okay, not that scene, per se, but I think we could all use some Bill Murray right about now.

Reading about things such as this? Does not make me want to finish my dissertation. I really don't get the hate people have towards the Eucharist. I mean, I don't go out of my way to kick Mormon missionaries and tie-dye their special undergarments. I've defended academe against the likes of the "lace and biretta brigade," as Jeff puts it, but things like what Meyer and Cook are doing aren't making it easy.

Here's hoping the criminal masterminds nieces don't read my blog...

So the two oldest are getting to an age where I thought something more adult would be cool to have. So I'm knitting them something lacy, namely scarves. This one is for Niece #2, who's a bit of a tomboy and likes greens/blues/turquoises:



Specifically it's the seascape wrap from knitty in a handpainted tencel laceweight yarn from Yarntopia Treasures. My stitch markers are from Office Max. (Don't laugh, they work great, and if I lose them, five bucks later, I've got 500 more.) I'm really loving the tencel yarn. I don't think it's going to need as much blocking as the silk or alpaca/merino lace yarns. (Which is good for the niece units, since I don't think they really want to take the time to pin out their things after washing them.) It's also great to work with in the summer, while another thing I've got going in baby alpaca wool is HOT. You wouldn't think yarn the thickness of fine crochet thread would be warm, but it is...

This is going to be another very rare political post from me. I need to get something out of my system. In short, a lot of Catholics on the internet are a bunch of freaks, and not in the good way.

http://rosaryarmy.com/forum/topic.asp?TOPIC_ID=9340

And I quote the post verbatim, since i believe one has to register. My comments are in brackets.

...because of my well known political leanings, many might take this as a personal attack on Sen Obama. I mean no such personal attack. [Oh bullshit. The whole post is one big personal attack. See also my comment at the end, that it's OK for "favorites" to post whatever they like.] I'm also not part of the Vast Right Wing Conspiracy(tm) or the Republican Attack Machine(R). [But he admits to having "well known political leanings," which are almost always right of center.]

As a military officer, I attempt to be as apolitical as humanly possible.[Which he most certainly isn't on the forums.]

The reason I am posting this is because I found it might be a piece of the puzzle about who this man is (and if you believe the polls, already elected), and what he believes, and wanted some other opinions. What he believes in important, because Sen Obama makes decisions based in his worldview and mindset, and presumably his faith.[So? I have a Buddhist mala a friend gave to me that was blessed by a lama. It doesn't mean that I'm suddenly Buddhist. It means that I have a friend, who knows I have an active prayer life and gave me a precious--to her--gift.]

Sen Obama has professed his Christian confession on multiple occasions, and I take him at his word...however, judging by his stance on the life issues and then little items like this...well, lets just say that I'm curious as to how a Christian might reconcile his/her faith with carrying a Hindu idol in his pocket (if not voting against the Born Alive Infant Act).[Yeah, and not every Christian believes what the Rosary Army holds to be gospel, thank God. And there could be a number of reasons why a politician would vote against that act, especially with the Bush administration's fondness for sneaking in pork.]

NRIs back Obama, thanks to Hanuman

WASHINGTON: The support of the Indian Americans to presumptive Democratic presidential nominee Barack Obama is steadily rising , thanks to his lucky charm Lord Hanuman, suggests a leading American daily.

REQUEST: please don't flame Sen Obama. He's a United States Senator, and his office deserves respect...[Unlike what the poster has shown.]I request you restrict any and all comments to the issue (mixing religious symbols), and how this particular thing might give a window into the worldview of the man, and not the man personally. [Gasp. I clutch at my pearls that a person would actually show some sort of religious tolerance.]

So...Harmless? Superstitious? [I call bullshit on the original poster.]

First off, the original poster is flatly endorsing a political candidate, and has been for a very long time. Secondly, having something doesn't mean belief in it. But if the original poster could see past his bias long enough to actually google Hanuman, he'd find that Hanuman epitomizes the essence of love and devotion. Yeah, that's a bad quality for a candidate to have. Third, I'm sure it was given to him by someone who sincerely believed he/she was doing something good by giving him that charm. I don't believe in the Hindu pantheon, but it's no different, were I to give a Hindu friend a rosary. (I've made rosaries out of Buddhist malas--a bunch were being sold in a bead store, and it felt wrong that objects once used for prayer would be sold as overpriced baubles. So I bought as many as I could to make rosaries out of, so they'd still be used for prayer.)

OK, we get it. The poster on the forum won't vote for Obama because of his voting record. Fair enough, and I can respect that reason. But to bring a good luck charm into it? Like Catholics don't do the same with various saints medals, miraculous medals, and scapulars? Come on and give me a flipping break. The whole thing reeks of a petty attack.

I wonder if part of the reason why people (read: some white, right-wing males) are so threatened by Obama as a candidate is because they're afraid to give up the white male privilege they've enjoyed for so long. I'd post all of this there, but I'm sure it would disappear, since the person making the post is one of the "favorites." Such people can do no wrong, and anyone who dares question them get censored.

Pair of really great posts about how not to talk to Catholics about religion, if you're from an evangelical tradition.

6 Tips on How Not to Witness to Christians
How not to Witness, Part 2

No clue what was up with commenting earlier. Seems to be back now.

So lately I've been trying to sort out what it means to be a contemplative. I think one of the things I keep running into is the rather Puritan/Protestant notion that one has to always be doing something. What good are the folks, who spend most of their days in some sort of community, dedicating most of their lives to prayer? Why do we need them, anyway?

In A Right to be Merry, Mother Francis discusses how contemplatives are really the backbone of the Church. (I'm holed up in a library on campus because it's air conditioned, so I don't have the reference handy.) She also discusses how they're usually the first under attack by enemies of the Church. Now, I'm not one to pull a Bill Donohue and claim injustice from everywhere, but there are people out there who, for whatever reason, do want to see the Church destroyed. (From both within and without.) Evil does exist, although humans are all too willing to do Screwtape's job for him.

So, yeah, I'm not out there working in soup kitchens or shelters. You won't ever see me out there protesting at a Planned Parenthood, either (for a number of reasons). It's not because I don't think social justice or pro-life issues are important, but it's because that's not where I'm called to be. No matter how I throw myself at those issues, no matter what I do, it isn't enough.

Contemplatives deeply care about other people and their issues, but we recognize that no matter how we throw ourselves at those problems, we aren't called to active ministry. Our lives are primarily one of witness, and by that I mean a a kind of sacred attention. We need to be alone with the Divine, and it isn't selfish longing. It's where our gifts are, and where we are called. It's only through union with the Divine that we can reach out to others.