Yesterday a co-worker walked into my office, handed me a sealed manila envelope, and announced that it was a belated holiday gift for me from Bill. When I remarked on the packaging, my colleague said, "You didn't think he would have wrapped it, did you?"
Well, no, I guess I didn't, now that you mention it. I'd worked with Bill (not his real name) for about 18 years, the last three as his supervisor, until he retired last spring. Bill was my nerd-friend, but I haven't stayed in touch with him, partly because he's not easy to stay in touch with since his retirement: he does not possess a cell phone, and up until very recently, did not possess a home computer or email account. Bill turned 60 last year, and has never lived anywhere but the house in which he grew up; his parents died many years ago, and he remains there alone. He is an active member of his local Dickens and Edgar Allen Poe societies, and he celebrates both of their birthdays. He travels frequently to New York to visit museums, libraries, and certain select bars, at which he claims to be a favorite of all the barmaids. He also occasionally travels to other countries, accompanied by his aunt. He haunts used bookstores, where he snatches up anything he can find about his particular interests: General George C. Custer and certain segments of classical Roman history. Bill's sexuality is undeclared and perhaps unknown, even to him. He prides himself on his ancient British lineage, his legendary stinginess, and his vast knowledge of esoteric subjects like the Battle of Hastings.
In light of all the above, you probably can understand why I approached this gift with a little trepidation. But I bravely opened the envelope, and found a pair of socks. In fact, this pair of socks:
Yes, previously unbeknownst to me, there evidently exists a House of Hotsox (hotsox.com, in case you want to look it up) that produces a "Famous Artist Series." Bill knows that Vermeer is my favorite painter. I'm sure that's why he bought me these socks; perhaps he thought they were beautiful. One never knows with Bill. But to me, these socks are truly disturbing. That's a reproduction of Vermeer's "Girl With Pearl Earring," by the way,
and I don't know whether you can see it in the photo, but the sock actually does contain a small 3-D "pearl" - it's that spot of light to the right of her jaw, just above the center of her collar. I don't want to impugn Bill's generosity by suggesting that it might not be a genuine pearl, but I do have my doubts. The price tag, which Bill neglected to remove, says $8.00, and I haven't priced pearls lately but that does seem on the low side for one, let alone two (yep, one on each sock. I just checked to make sure.) In any event, though, this sock-girl to me represents not so much Girl With a Pearl Earring as Undead Girl With a Pearl Earring. Can you see the ghastly colors, the sickly pallor of her skin, the blood-red of her lips? What, or whom, has she been eating to produce that garish hue? Even her turban is red instead of blue, as if to enhance the zombie motif. And instead of directly meeting the eyes of the viewer, as the original Girl does, the sock-girl has a fixed, unfocused look in her eyes, as if piercing the veil that separates this world from the next.
Do I dare wear these? Reader: would you? Or would you fear looking down sometime around midday and seeing blood seeping out of your shoes? Tearing the shoes off only to find you have a smaller complement of toes than you started the day with?
Maybe for now I'll just leave them in my sock drawer. And keep it very tightly closed.
p.s. A few updates 2 weeks later: I obtained Bill's newly established email address so I could write and thank him for the socks. From his response, I now know that: 1. He LIKED the socks. He said he wanted to get a pair for himself too, but they didn't have them in men's sizes. 2. His British lineage dates back way before I thought it did. He can trace his first patrilineal ancestor, the one who came from France to England, to the Domesday Book record of 1086. This information, and much more like it, was not solicited by me in any way. Evidently, knowing a thousand years of one's own family history tends to leave one slightly unhinged. Duh.
Saturday, January 17, 2015
Thursday, January 15, 2015
INSPIRING BLOGGER AWARD
Thank you so much to the lovely and talented Yvonne Ventresca for nominating me for this wondrous award! And I'm going to do my best to carry it forward, which means that I must
A. display the award on my blog (done!);
B. link back to the person who nominated me (done!);
C. state seven things about myself (not yet done); and (here's the kicker)
D. nominate 15 bloggers, link to them, and notify them of their nominations. (can't do)
The thing is that I don't personally know 15 bloggers, and it would be really embarrassing for me to "notify" people like A.S. King that I've nominated them, so here's what I'll do instead: list seven blogs that I really love to follow, and notify those of the bloggers whom I can claim to know, even slightly, and just recommend the other ones. Would that be okay? I'm sorry, but it's just going to have to be.
But first: seven things about me.
1. I'm the world's worst dancer. Seriously. When I was in eighth grade our class dance teacher choreographed a dance to be presented at our graduation by the whole class, and then took me aside to inform me that I would not be participating.
2. I don't watch television at all, with the only exception being Mad Men. When the last season of that show ends this spring, I will be bereft.
3. I can bend all of my fingers at the top knuckle joint without bending them anywhere else. This talent creeps my children out to a highly satisfying degree.
4. I live with the two best dogs in the world.
5. I have this thing about food textures. "Gooshy" foods turn my stomach. This category includes: cheesecake; meringues; custards; puddings; whipped cream; jellies or jams - basically, if it quivers, get it away from me.
6. Some 25 or 30 years ago, I used to act in community theater productions. Comic roles were my favorites. Once I was in a play with Blanche Lewis, Richard Lewis's mother. She was a very sweet, very ditzy older lady who more or less learned her lines, but would wander around the stage as if the concept of blocking did not exist. Richard attended one of our performances. He looked like he was undergoing a root canal. But then, isn't that how he always looks?
7. Math and I never got along. Sometimes (when no one's looking) I count on my fingers.
And now, on to the blogs!! Here are some of my true favorites:
- Janet Reid, Literary Agent - an actual agent answers actual questions from actual writers. Honest, funny, and right-on.
- Here's Me Using the Word Blog in a Sentence - blog of the inimitable A.S. King, in which she shares musings, opinions, personal stories, photos, news... it's pretty much the A.S. King General Store, and you just might want to move in.
- Holly Schindler's Character Driven - if you read my blog, you know of my boundless admiration for Holly Schindler. Read a little of her blog, and I bet you'll join me.
- Nerdy Chicks Rule - this is the playground and communication center for authors Kami Kinard and Sudipta Bardhan-Quallen. Informative and empowering.
- On the Verge - home of the amazing Jody Casella - look her up on my blog too, and then go check out her posts about life, writing, and the intersections between the two. Personal, funny, deeply human.
- Roughwighting - author Pam Wight has an incredible knack for making anyone who sets eyes on her blog feel like they've just made a smart, vivacious, warm new friend.
- Jennifer R. Hubbard, Writer - contemplative, wide-ranging posts on a variety of interesting subjects, including but not limited to the writing process.
Monday, January 12, 2015
I'M BACK...
... back from my trip to Israel. Back from the nightmare world of cross-stitched baby blankets. And no, I did not finish the blanket before I left so I could present it to my grand-niece while I was there. Nor did I finish it during my stay. Or during my 14-hour stint in the Tel Aviv airport on my way home. Or as soon as I got back on Thursday afternoon. I finished it yesterday
and mailed it today. FYI, the kit was entitled "Sleepy Bunnies," lest you think there's something seriously wrong with the two on the bottom. They're just very, very sound sleepers, okay?
So. My trip. I got to attend my niece's beautiful wedding. As did my mom, shown here in her apartment, all dressed up and ready to go:
Shouldn't we all look so good at 92? And the flights were long, so I got to read THE FUTURE HISTORY OF GLORY O'BRIEN on the way there (review and giveaway to follow once I get over my jetlag), and most of ALL THE LIGHT WE CANNOT SEE on the way back.
And here's a wedding placecard you don't see every day:
No, Zuck was not actually invited, but he could have been. And my nephew's wife, whose task it was to make up the placecards, decided to make one for him anyway, and seat him at a nonexistent table, because she thought it wasn't fair (to the rest of us, of course) that he hadn't been invited. Because after all, my niece's groom was Number Four. As in, the fourth person to sign up for Facebook. Because he was a suitemate of Zuckerberg's at Harvard - the only one not depicted in the movie, as far as I can tell, because he was the only one who never got involved at all in the enterprise and, hence, was the only one not to make a dime out of Facebook. Instead, as soon as he graduated college, he moved to Israel to study to be a rabbi. Yeah, so long, Mark. Good luck with that whole social media thing, okay? So my niece did not marry a billionaire. She just married a really nice man who never cared about money or fame because his priorities lay elsewhere. In other words, she married the perfect guy for her.
I have a lot of other things to blog about after my three-week hiatus, but it's all going to have to wait for another day. Meanwhile, I'm glad I went on my journey, and I'm even gladder to be back home.
and mailed it today. FYI, the kit was entitled "Sleepy Bunnies," lest you think there's something seriously wrong with the two on the bottom. They're just very, very sound sleepers, okay?
So. My trip. I got to attend my niece's beautiful wedding. As did my mom, shown here in her apartment, all dressed up and ready to go:
Shouldn't we all look so good at 92? And the flights were long, so I got to read THE FUTURE HISTORY OF GLORY O'BRIEN on the way there (review and giveaway to follow once I get over my jetlag), and most of ALL THE LIGHT WE CANNOT SEE on the way back.
And here's a wedding placecard you don't see every day:
No, Zuck was not actually invited, but he could have been. And my nephew's wife, whose task it was to make up the placecards, decided to make one for him anyway, and seat him at a nonexistent table, because she thought it wasn't fair (to the rest of us, of course) that he hadn't been invited. Because after all, my niece's groom was Number Four. As in, the fourth person to sign up for Facebook. Because he was a suitemate of Zuckerberg's at Harvard - the only one not depicted in the movie, as far as I can tell, because he was the only one who never got involved at all in the enterprise and, hence, was the only one not to make a dime out of Facebook. Instead, as soon as he graduated college, he moved to Israel to study to be a rabbi. Yeah, so long, Mark. Good luck with that whole social media thing, okay? So my niece did not marry a billionaire. She just married a really nice man who never cared about money or fame because his priorities lay elsewhere. In other words, she married the perfect guy for her.
I have a lot of other things to blog about after my three-week hiatus, but it's all going to have to wait for another day. Meanwhile, I'm glad I went on my journey, and I'm even gladder to be back home.
Sunday, December 21, 2014
QUICK ANNOUNCEMENT
I'm taking a very brief break from my self-imposed cross-stitching isolation booth just to share this fabulous N.Y. Times review of A.S. King's latest novel, GLORY O'BRIEN'S HISTORY OF THE FUTURE: http://www.nytimes.com/2014/12/21/books/review/glory-obriens-history-of-the-future-by-a-s-king.html?_r=0. As anyone could easily learn by scrolling through my posts, I'm a huge A.S. King fan and I think kudos like this are long past due for her. She is a true original, and I want to be like her when I grow up, except that I'm much older than she is and therefore, presumably, already more grown up, but I find that debatable. Sadly, I haven't read GLORY yet, but I'm going to order it as soon as I finish this post, and maybe someday (post-baby-blanket-from-hell) actually have a chance to read it! And if you're not cross-stitching a baby blanket, you have absolutely no excuse for not going out and buying this book for yourself right now, with extra copies for your favorite readers. Because A.S. King just keeps getting better and better.
Sunday, December 14, 2014
WHY I HAVEN'T BLOGGED IN 17 DAYS
This may be some kind of new failure record for me - 17 days! Holy shit! But I do have reasons. First I was absorbed in such a ferocious round of revisions to my book that I hardly did anything else except revise, go to work, revise, eat, revise, sleep, revise. And since I finished that at the end of November, I've thrown myself into finishing a project that I barely started a year ago and left lying dormant until now. Once of my nieces in Israel had a baby last January and I bought a baby blanket cross-stitch kit to make for her because I'm insane. Well, now that baby is almost a year old, and I'm going to Israel on January 1st to visit my mother and to attend my other niece's wedding, and so I am absolutely determined to get this thing finished before I leave, no matter what. So now, instead of obsessively revising, I'm obsessively cross-stitching, and I haven't even been able to think about anything else except, from time to time, about police in this country and their attitudes toward people of color. But this isn't a subject I don't think about often anyway, because it pretty much arises on a daily basis for public defenders. So mostly what I've been thinking about lately is: "Oh, so NOW do you people get it?"
Anyway. I know this is a short and lame-ass post, but I'm afraid that's the quality you're going to be getting from me until the end of the year because I'm going to be spending 95% of my non-work time cross-stitching maniacally and the other 5% trying to recover from it. So if there's anyone out there in the blogosphere that misses my more thoughtful and informative and amusing posts, I apologize, and I'll try to make up for this shameful period once I get home in 2015.
Anyway. I know this is a short and lame-ass post, but I'm afraid that's the quality you're going to be getting from me until the end of the year because I'm going to be spending 95% of my non-work time cross-stitching maniacally and the other 5% trying to recover from it. So if there's anyone out there in the blogosphere that misses my more thoughtful and informative and amusing posts, I apologize, and I'll try to make up for this shameful period once I get home in 2015.
Friday, November 28, 2014
TRADITION!
Yesterday was Thanksgiving, which we celebrated with just the four of us, and then my daughter's boyfriend joined us for dessert. And that was when I learned that - as perhaps I should have remembered from last Thanksgiving, but didn't - we now have a wonderful new Thanksgiving tradition at our house, thanks to my ever-inventive husband. While we eat dessert, we go around the table and take turns reading aloud from WALTER THE FARTING DOG.
It's a fairly straightforward narrative. Walter is adopted from the pound by an unsuspecting family. By the time his gastrointestinal disorder makes itself known, the kids have already fallen in love with him. Heartless Father, however, deaf to the heartrending pleas of his children, cannot tolerate the noxious fumes and is resolved to send Walter back from whence he came. Tragedy is imminent... and then wouldn't you know it, Walter saves the day in the very nick of time.
Naturally, this deceptively simple tale operates on many different levels. For example, Walter's farts - despite the graphic nature of their descriptions in the book - may simply be metaphors for any form of "difference," or deviation from the norm. And Father's desire to send Walter back to the pound may well be a euphemism for his belief in the practice of eugenics. Father is clearly a cesspool of repressed rage whose excessive degree of repulsion with Walter hints at a dark secret in his own past. I foresee many years of deep and meaningful family discussions as we plunge ever deeper into the postmodern symbolism of Walter and his "socially unacceptable" means of expressing his unconscious impulses.
Best of all, though, is the fact that we now have a family tradition of which we can be proud. Thanks to Walter, I have newfound confidence that, despite all my parental failings, my kids are going to be okay.
Monday, November 24, 2014
FERGUSON
I only have a couple of things to say about the grand jury's failure to return an indictment against Officer Darren Wilson; I'm too demoralized to write anything lengthy. But what I do have to say is based on my knowledge and experience as a criminal defense attorney for the past 27 years. Grand juries are the pawns of prosecutors, who are experts at manipulating the outcomes of grand jury proceedings. How do I know this? Because I've heard prosecutors boast about it, proudly repeating the aphorism that they "could indict a ham sandwich" if they so chose. Prosecutors are obligated to leave the voting to the grand jurors, but they treat this as a mere technicality; every day, in every county of every state, prosecutors knowingly and intentionally manipulate the grand jury system to achieve their own desired results.
You saw Prosecutor McCulloch. You saw his disdain for his own witnesses and their credibility; his pugnacious insistence that the essence of the case against Wilson was a twisted myth perpetuated by the media. I don't know whether he personally made the presentation to the grand jury or whether it was one of his minions, but here's something else I know from experience: prosecutors' offices are completely hierarchical in structure. The prosecutor calls the shots, and everyone who works for him or her falls into lockstep or risks getting fired. Can there be any doubt that the resentment McCulloch so openly communicated to the public tonight for the fact that he even had to present this case to the grand jury was unmistakably communicated to every person in his office? And can there be any doubt that the message was then passed along subliminally to the grand jurors themselves? The same witness can present the same testimony, but be viewed completely differently, depending on how the prosecutor presenting the case chooses to conduct the questioning: respectfully, neutrally, skeptically, or anything in between. Grand juries return indictments on ludicrously weak charges ALL THE TIME. Prosecutors have acknowledged to me that they routinely over-indict, submitting charges on which they know the grand jury will return indictments but which they themselves know they won't ever be able to prove at trial beyond a reasonable doubt, in order to have more bargaining chips when it comes time for plea negotiations. When grand juries do decide to no-bill cases, it's almost always because the prosecutors recommended that they do just that.
To me, there's no doubt whatsoever about what happened with the Ferguson grand jury. Any doubt I might have had was decimated by McCulloch's demeanor. In probably 98% of cases presented to the grand jury, prosecutors make sure to get the result they want. This case falls within that 98%.
You saw Prosecutor McCulloch. You saw his disdain for his own witnesses and their credibility; his pugnacious insistence that the essence of the case against Wilson was a twisted myth perpetuated by the media. I don't know whether he personally made the presentation to the grand jury or whether it was one of his minions, but here's something else I know from experience: prosecutors' offices are completely hierarchical in structure. The prosecutor calls the shots, and everyone who works for him or her falls into lockstep or risks getting fired. Can there be any doubt that the resentment McCulloch so openly communicated to the public tonight for the fact that he even had to present this case to the grand jury was unmistakably communicated to every person in his office? And can there be any doubt that the message was then passed along subliminally to the grand jurors themselves? The same witness can present the same testimony, but be viewed completely differently, depending on how the prosecutor presenting the case chooses to conduct the questioning: respectfully, neutrally, skeptically, or anything in between. Grand juries return indictments on ludicrously weak charges ALL THE TIME. Prosecutors have acknowledged to me that they routinely over-indict, submitting charges on which they know the grand jury will return indictments but which they themselves know they won't ever be able to prove at trial beyond a reasonable doubt, in order to have more bargaining chips when it comes time for plea negotiations. When grand juries do decide to no-bill cases, it's almost always because the prosecutors recommended that they do just that.
To me, there's no doubt whatsoever about what happened with the Ferguson grand jury. Any doubt I might have had was decimated by McCulloch's demeanor. In probably 98% of cases presented to the grand jury, prosecutors make sure to get the result they want. This case falls within that 98%.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)





