Below are the 20 most recent journal entries recorded in Erin Danielle's LiveJournal:

[ << Previous 20 ]

Thursday, May 10th, 2012
10:57 pm	Unbeknownst to me until last night, a question I stopped asking two or three years ago recently and unexpectedly changed to a different answer. So, uh, I guess I'm getting married. Current Mood: surreal (14 Comments |Comment on this)
Wednesday, February 15th, 2012
8:57 pm	Mark Sanchez is lazy. An Asian American NBA breakout star is a zoo exhibit. (See: just about every mention of Jeremy Lin.) WTF, sports world? Did I miss when 2012 was designated super-special racism year? Current Mood: angry (1 Comment |Comment on this)
Sunday, December 4th, 2011
12:27 am	a somewhat uncomfortable introspective Sometimes what I miss the most about my friendship with C. was a specific flavour of squee. Being silly, fan-girly, indulgent, doting on romantic relationships we really liked - and the minutiae thereof - in books we had read (or that I'd read and directed her to read, in part so that I'd have someone to do this with). But only when it was just the two of us hanging out. Uncomfortable because I found myself getting very irritated earlier today reading reviews by female posters that engaged in some of those behaviours and language, and it made me wonder if I've got some misogyny, or specifically femme-phobia, going on. I feel like that kind of writing is inappropriate, especially as publically as that, and as if these women are letting the rest of us down for confirming stereotypes about female readers (or viewers). But these are not, to my knowledge, serious-minded review blogs; we're not talking The Hathor Legacy or Film Crit Hulk here. So my reaction was out of line. But why did I have it in the first place? I mean, I am the person who, with Katie, literally bounced up and down before our first Maiden concert. But never in my writing. Then again, maybe I just have a knee-jerk reaction to anything using wording from the Twilight phenomenon. But I'm not sure I can say that's all of it. (Comment on this)
Wednesday, October 12th, 2011
12:24 am	For anyone interested in genre fiction, discussions about fiction, and feminist discussions about fiction and fandom, there are some great recent posts from authors calling out reviewers on using the term Mary Sue. Starting with this terrific breakdown from Zoe Marriott: You Can Stuff Your Mary-Sue Where the Sun Don't Shine Additional comments by Holly Black: Ladies Ladies Ladies And the always-excellent Seanan McGuire: I know a little girl and her name is Mary Mac: The Misuse of Mary Sue. A related post that briefly mentions the Mary Sue issue from Sarah Rees Brennan: Ladies, Don't Let Anyone Tell You You're Not Awesome At this point I have to add Brennan to my next trip to the BPL: I have no idea whether I will like her books but this is the second completely awesome blog post of hers I've read (I bookmarked the other one back when I was linked to it, must get info off other computer) and I think that deserves giving at least the first novel a chance. Sorry this is kind of link-spam-y, but I never get tired of talking about writing and critiquing female characters. I've only rarely used Mary Sue/Gary Stu, but after this I think I will retire the words from my vocabulary entirely. (2 Comments |Comment on this)
Tuesday, April 26th, 2011
9:22 pm	I was remarking to saitou earlier that one never appreciates having opposable thumbs as much as when a) taunting the cat, or b) temporarily losing the use of one. On my dominant hand. And, just for good measure, the index finger of my other hand as well. I'd somehow never managed to injure both hands simultaneously before, and I'm quite hoping never to do it again. Another precedent: this is the first time in 28 years of stupid injuries that I've needed stitches. Not being able to grip anything is driving me nuts. That aside, the general situation is slowly improving - I'm able to type, if I'm quite slow and very careful, which, since it's me, I don't always remember to be. There's actually a downside to the stitches being small enough to be covered with band-aids - when I had huge gauze puffs before going to the doctor I got a lot of concerned questions from strangers, which wasn't terrific, but now that it doesn't look like my hands aren't really working, when I'm awkwardly fumbling trying to do basic things those same strangers stare at me like I'm developmentally disabled. Oh, my dignity. Here's hoping I can type normally by the time of my final exam. I'm going to class tomorrow even though I won't be able to take notes - the lectures are recorded so I'll just watch the video later with my laptop. Current Mood: grumpy (2 Comments |Comment on this)
Wednesday, April 6th, 2011
1:01 am	Feeling creatively stymied right now on this paper, so an interlude of musings on art. Music, poetry. Art is not always literal. Not even often literal. Figurative language seems to be the easiest concept for people, even if there's an awful lot of confusion over the differences between similes, metaphors, and symbols. (We won't even touch the difference between synecdoche and metonymy - although, truth be told, sometimes I have trouble with that one.) Irony, on the other hand, often seems to go by the wayside. Or double meanings, shaded meanings, meanings that depend on context, on a work being taken as a whole. Once I figure out the proper way to get there, I'm going to touch in this paper on the Eminem/Rihanna collaboration "Love the Way You Lie." I've read an awful lot of blog posts about that song in the past few days, and I'm bothered by the people who take Rihanna's refrain, which includes the title, literally. Saying it glorifies, romanticizes, and condones abuse - or the people who are even saying that the song is really talking about a BDSM relationship. Did they miss that the key word is lie? The lies we tell each other, the lies we tell ourselves, the lies we want to believe and the lies we tell ourselves we do believe. Especially when it concerns love. And none of them are actually "all right." If they were they wouldn't be lies. I've never been in an abusive relationship like that and I won't presume to speak for the experiences of people who have. But I spent two years on-and-off involved with someone who lied to me so often I don't know if anything he ever said to me was true. Some of it may have been, I just feel I have no basis on which to judge. And I lied to myself that it didn't hurt as much as it did, that there were sometimes reasons to excuse it, that it wouldn't happen again, that he'd change, that he had changed. I don't want to think about whether I could have done the same thing in a relationship like that song describes. I'm glad I've never had to find out. And even without an experience like that, I wouldn't take those lines literally. Reminds me of reading a Maiden message board a few years back and seeing the comments on "Afraid to Shoot Strangers." There was even one guy who said he stopped listening to Maiden for ten years after that song came out because it was jingoistic and supported the Gulf War. Ok, maybe you could think that if you stopped listening to the song halfway through. Sure, the narrator (a soldier) starts off conflicted about whether the war is justified and the verses end with the resolution that it is. The only lyric in the entire rest of the song - which is when it takes off instrumentally as well in that incredible guitar line - is "Afraid to shoot strangers." If the narrator is so settled that going off and killing these people is the right and necessary thing to do, why is he so viscerally unhappy about doing it? That reluctance shows that the speaker wasn't successful in convincing himself, even if he thinks he has. Context matters. Order matters. Anthemic electric guitars matter and irony exists. A famous playwright once quipped that if you wanted to send a message use Western Union. That's not entirely fair, you can certainly send a message through art - but don't sacrifice the art to do it. And as the audience don't demand that every message, every theme and subtext be literal, direct, and spelled out. Usually by that point you might as well have used Western Union. (4 Comments |Comment on this)
Monday, April 4th, 2011
9:28 pm	My latest paper assignment is about the ethical questions involved in covering celebrity "news." Which means for the first time ever I've gone on websites like TMZ and Perez Hilton, so I can actually know what I'm talking about before I start writing. I feel like I need to scrub my brain. With lye. (2 Comments |Comment on this)
Monday, March 7th, 2011
1:31 am	My computer has a new background. For those of you who know some of my quirks this is a fairly big deal - my wallpapers are all things that mean a lot to me and also stay parked on my screen for several years. Previously I've had Waterhouse, Trigun, Maiden, and the anomoly of the background my current laptop came with just because it was pretty and very green, but now it's Seanan McGuire's Toby Daye. I just discovered this series, and I couldn't love it more. I'm still getting started on my foray into urban fantasy and so far it's a mixed bag, but this is a treasure. Gritty-ish detective drama and the world of Faerie - think A Midsummer Night's Dream and other works and folktales from the British Isles as a starting point. There's some lyricism mixed with the grit, more than I've found elsewhere in the genre. The plot is fast-paced with appropriate tension, and I couldn't put the books down. Each novel passes the Bechdel Test with flying colours, and I love the heroine. Toby (short for October) is smart, funny, sarcastic, and believable. She's capable without being either 'too good at everything' or unwilling to accept help. She gets literally carried several times, but I never felt her agency was reduced. She has maternal aspects without that being the source of her strength or relegating her to a caretaker role. She can sometimes be a jerk, and sometimes seems almost deliberately obtuse about personal matters, and she's extremely stubborn. The books are first-person narration so Toby carries all the action, and she doesn't disappoint. The main love interest is also a fantastic character, and a brief glance around the Web confirms this is the prevailing opinion. This is a large part of why I love this series so much - it's one of the best literary romances I've read in a very long time, the pages light like fire when the characters interact. I am hoping for an actual, stable relationship, I am not one of those readers who prefer UST, love triangles, and drama (had enough of that in my own life, very glad it's long over and I just don't need to live any of it vicariously), but I'll just have to see how the next few books go. On the other hand, the under-emphasized love triangle does not include competition between the men or treating Toby like a prize. Who knew two of the most endearing characters would be teenage boys? That is a mark of a good writer :) (Really, it's just teenagers in general, I was no great joy either when I was 15.) The villains are evenly split between males and females, and in the fourth book we even see a (f/f!) queer couple. Here's hoping for more authors joining Tanya Huff in portraying actual bisexual characters. (Lynn Flewelling now is a qualified mention, since she has referred to Seregil as "gay" and also has not corrected readers who've done the same. Melanie Rawn has one bi character I can think of, if I'm missing anyone remind me.) The foreshadowing is well-done: subtle but clear, giving some information in advance if you think about it but not all, and the revelations have been well-timed. Overall the books are a bit more adventure than whodunnits, and Toby more of a hero than a P.I. I whole-heartedly recommend them: Rosemary and Rue, A Local Habitation, An Artificial Night, and Late Eclipses. I believe the author once played in an old WoD Changeling game, and the world does sort of have that feel, but done right. Talking about books involving this world and Faerie reminds me of Patricia McKillip's Solstice Wood, which I try to pretend didn't happen even though it's sitting in hardcover on my bookshelf. It would have been fine if it weren't a sequel to Winter Rose, but as such I have a hard time accepting it. Up soon is the most recent Donaldson, which I never got to read when it came out. Because I really do want to do the equivalent of putting my soul through an industrial car wash. I'm just kind of like that. (6 Comments |Comment on this)
Wednesday, January 12th, 2011
8:21 pm	I am soooooooooo tired of people not understanding the English language. As in native speakers who don't know what certain words mean, as evidenced by their use of said words. Like the people a few years back who thought the word "pivotal" is equivalent to "important" - instead of "something on which something else PIVOTS." Seriously. Or someone I saw posting earlier today (on a fairly respectable site, Politico, not a random blog somewhere) who seemed to think "polarizing" means "inspiring extreme dislike." The person was calling Obama a "polarizing" figure but saying that unlike other presidents who were also polarizing yet still great, Obama is deeply hated but not deeply loved. Now, I suppose you could argue that "polarizing" only needs to include one extreme, but if so I don't think I have ever heard it used in that fashion. So if you go by the normal (only?) meaning of the word someone can't be polarizing if public opinion doesn't gravitate towards TWO OPPOSITE POLES. If A then B does not equal if B then A. If a president is polarizing in terms of public opinion then s/he is hated, but if a president is hated that does not make him/her polarizing. Just, y'know, fyi. I think this phenomenon is basically people thinking, "I want to make a strong, attention-grabbing statement! Therefore, I will use a strong word. It does not actually matter whether that word means what I'm trying to state!" So either they're inexcusably careless - both of the above words are literal, for God's sake - or way too many people in this country are passing grade school. Current Mood: grumpy (10 Comments |Comment on this)
11:22 am	Grades from my fall semester class just went up: A. The class was titled Courts and Social Change, focusing mostly on Brown v. Board and its aftermath, and I told the instructor after the final he was lucky I didn't have time at the end because otherwise I would have been quoting Phil Ochs all over it. (And thanks to ladderrat for pointing out to me the recent documentary.) (5 Comments |Comment on this)
Saturday, January 8th, 2011
2:15 am	hullo To all of you and to 2011 - I realized tonight that I hadn't actually read LJ in over a week, which is unusual for me (I haven't touched Facebook, other than to confirm a request, in over two months), and probably indicative and whatnot, but here I am, I suppose. Here's something else I haven't done in quite some time: ( 2010 in review ) (9 Comments |Comment on this)
Monday, December 13th, 2010
12:26 pm	So, a pick-your-brains question that occurred to me as I am studying for this final: Clarence Darrow, Thurgood Marshall - who else, if any, would you say are the really famous and respected lawyers in US history? (Of course, only Marshall is relevant to me right now, but idle curiosity must have its place.) (I guess you could put John Adams in there because of the Boston Massacre trial, but you could also say that was overshadowed by the becoming president thing. Granted Marshall also went on to bigger and better by becoming the first black Supreme Court justice, but I think for good or ill he's still more remembered for Brown v. Board - feel free to disagree with me, though.) Also, sorry to everyone I haven't responded to in the last few weeks - class has been eating my brain, but after the final tomorrow I am done until next semester. Oh yeah - I had to tell Word to add "Thurgood" to its dictionary. Seriously, Microsoft? Current Mood: studious (3 Comments |Comment on this)
Monday, October 11th, 2010
9:02 pm	it's that day again Another October, another National Coming Out Day . . . . I'll be considerably less vitriolic this year. I think I'm more tired than mellow, though - if you really want the rant, I can go find the link to my best wording. The basics: I'm bi. Not straight. Not gay. Monogamous, but I am not "straight now," as someone once asserted. I still feel a lot more comfortable in social gatherings when I realize I'm not the only queer person there. For that matter, I also identify as gender-queer. Most human traits are divided into ones considered "feminine" or "masculine," and I don't feel I have a preponderance in one or the other. I'm not that butch, I'm not that femme; I'm proud of the fact that my writing style usually reads as masculine but I keep my hair long and I've come to like heels (although boots are still superior to all else, of course). I use female pronouns because I am physically female and I don't believe that determines my gender - I don't believe gender itself will disappear within my lifetime but I hold to hope that one day it will happen. If you want a refresh of a different rant, I'll describe how people misunderstand the concept that gender is a social construct. (O Smith College, how you disillusioned me regarding people "on my side.") I'd like to feel solidarity with gay people, both in the community and activists, but I don't always. Smith was hard sometimes, Boston Pride this year was fantastic. When discussing the marriage fight I make a point to always say "same-sex marriage" instead of "gay marriage," because it's not only gay people who may want to marry someone of the same sex. I'm used to hearing very little to indicate GLBT extends beyond the G and the L, but I also recognize I have privilege that they don't. Because I'm in a heterosexual relationship, I have to consciously out myself. It's easy in an on-line forum, like LJ or Facebook, but I'm still nervous sometimes in "real life," even when I was out in the Valley. It actually doesn't come up very often, but I think most of the time it does I face it. Other than that, there's this day every year in October. (4 Comments |Comment on this)
Saturday, October 9th, 2010
6:07 pm	Look, a post! (If I'm going to complain about the decline of LJ in favour of other "social media," I should probably write as well as read/comment.) Katie and I have plans to head to the Bella Morte concert this Thursday, which should be a good time. They're actually not quite as good live as in studio, since the motto seems to be 'speed up the tempo of everything and don't bother varying vocal style,' but previous shows have still been fun and I want to support the band. Their essentially self-titled album Beautiful Death is incredible (even if saitou thinks it's just a goth copy of Faith No More). I like the fact that they're solidly goth/metal but not symphonic metal - gives some variety to my playlist. On that note, I had the thought the other day that I would absolutely love if someone were to choreograph my favourite dance style, ballet, to a medly of symphonic metal (Within Temmptation, Epica, etc) - how would that not be the epitome of awesome? This is entirely unrelated, but I was browsing some links to various feminist blogs and was bothered by something that I've encountered on those kinds of sites (also those specific sites, I believe) before: while it's true that designating women as Other includes labeling typically feminine qualities as "bad" even if they're not, to quote Stephen Donaldson, "It's not that simple." I see a lot of bloggers viewing it only as feminine-qualities-equal-bad and not bad-qualities-equal-feminine, and that's an important distinction that's often not so much as glossed over as completely ignored. I know it's not always the simplest thing in the world to objectively evaluate which character traits are positive or negative, free of societal connotations (like gendered and racial links), but I don't think reducing feminism to such simplistic concepts really gets us anywhere. There are some terrific feminist theory essays that do explore this in detail, but I'm not feeling well and not going to dig through my books right now. It's possible the bloggers are being more nuanced and I'm just missing it, but this has been my perception. This is a more specific complaint, but I was also turned off by one site depicting women who describe themselves as "one of the boys" as unwilling to "seek out" friendships or connections with other women. Maria opened my eyes and knocked my ego down a few notches when we were 18 by pointing me to Adrienne Rich's exceptional woman theory, but speaking from personal experience that is not inherently an active refusal. I identify as gender-queer because I have many qualities that are usually considered masculine, and that probably was part of why as a child I more often connected with boys. This didn't always make me happy - I complained repeatedly when I was 15 about being the only girl in our group, and when Clare, Carla, and Lucy came along the following year it was fantastic. (Granted, generally any statement that includes "when I was 15" does not showcase my most flattering moments.) I also was too shy to particularly "seek out" friendships with anyone, usually they either kind of just happened or someone sought me out. Not that I didn't fall into the trap of the exceptional woman, but I really do not believe I was as misogynist as that site claims. Maybe I'm just being oversensitive - hey look, a 'feminine' trait! So yeah. And just to bring this full circle, the other day I successfully acquired tickets to the upcoming Bad Religion show - SO EXCITED. Er, hi. Current Mood: sick (Comment on this)
Tuesday, August 17th, 2010
11:50 pm	Reflection of the evening, talked about briefly with Chris: while there are some YA must-reads out there that won't make you bawl your eyes out, they're in the minority. Hello, teenagers/pre-teens! Coming of age does not have to be a heart-rending experience, but if it is we usually don't write about it. (Comment on this)
Thursday, August 5th, 2010
11:58 pm	Good God. The New York Times has a section up of responses to the Prop 8 decision from five different law professors, but one, titled Promoting the Ideal of Procreation just made me incensed. This woman is advancing the argument that same-sex marriages are inferior and needn't be recognized because they can't produce biological children. She calls any situation in which children are not raised by both their biological mother and biological father "tragic or regrettable," even stating the children won't know their "identity." She claims the state "tolerates" heterosexual marriages that do not result in children. Not only is this piece vicious and bigoted towards LGBT people, this is an insult to me, my family, my friends. So if my (male, even) partner and I ever marry for legal reasons, it's less valid? So my friends who are married with no desire to reproduce are essentially second-class citizens? So my grandfather, one of the most important and influential people in my life was not really my grandfather because he was not related to me by blood, was not really my father's father because there was no biological tie? (No "deprivation" there because my biological grandfather is also a part of my life, but to so discount such an important member of my family?) So someone I know and love has her priorities wrong when she says "my father" and refers to the man who raised her instead of the one who abandoned her? So my friend who is adopted just doesn't really know who she is as a person? My identity is not defined by my genetics. I'm sorry if that author believes hers is, but she has absolutely no right to pass judgement on me or anyone else. And I am glad a federal district court did not agree with her, no matter what happens in the coming appeals. (3 Comments |Comment on this)
7:00 pm	Just registered for my fall class. Little less pressure this time than last spring, but not by that much. I'm feeling pretty calm right now, though. I could be nervous because I'm taking a more advanced course instead of the intro one in a subject with which I'm not that familiar, but I've done that before and I'm not worried. Actually, it won't be the first time English was no longer English, either. Not that I think I can just sail into anything, but how bad can it be for only undergrad credit? Comprehension was never the problem. It may be an unfamiliar discipline, but I chose it because it utilizes the same basic skill-set I'm used to. And I just survived the weekend of Ben's wedding - the first time in nearly a decade both sides of my family were in one location. Anything is possible! (2 Comments |Comment on this)
Wednesday, May 26th, 2010
1:45 pm	I turned in the last paper for my class two weeks ago. I didn't do as good a job on it as I could have, and before that I'd been sitting on an A-/B+ (not counting class participation, also yet to be graded then). I was hoping for the A- overall, bracing for the B+. Grades were posted today. A. I keep wanting to go back to the page, check again to make sure it's real. It's been a long time. (8 Comments |Comment on this)
Monday, May 24th, 2010
4:12 pm	finally Britain just revoked the medical license of the doctor who first published the vaccines-autism claims. He can still practice outside of the UK, but it's about damn time. Edit: Another good article, from the BBC, here. Current Mood: satisfied (5 Comments |Comment on this)
Monday, March 29th, 2010
9:00 pm	A self-contained conversation: Erin's legs: Why do you hate us? me: I don't hate you. I love you. I want you to be flexible and strong again. Erin's legs: . . . Doesn't feel like it. Worst part is always the splits. Current Mood: tired (Comment on this)