The Unbearable Lightness of Beverages

I’m sitting in my kitchen currently attempting to do some Real Writing(tm), which of course is impossible. I have a pounding headache, three cups of coffee and a double black tea (loose leaf) in my system, and all I want to do is play Singing Monsters on my tablet and nap like I got to nap on Christmas. Oi. Maybe another tea will help.

The husband and I are considering the purchase of a hot water dispenser (or, electric kettle, however fancy you want to be about it) because our tea and coffee habit is getting a little outlandish. We of course drink only loose leaf fragrant teas bought at the local Indian grocer, and we of course love French Pressing our coffee. The addition of an elite, Japanese, top-of-the-line water heater would be the pinnacle of caffeinated snobbery. We could even make noodles with it! You know, green tea needs to be served at a different temperature than black and certainly a different temperature than coffee or fancied up Ramen. If only we could make our chia-seed-steel-cut-oats-with-marionberry-sobpuss-compote with it. Then our lives would be complete.

If you haven’t yet picked up on the subtext: my own hispter yuppieness occasionally disgusts me.

But that won’t stop me from enjoying a cup of  black loose leaf tea at the precisely correct temperature thanks to a Tiger brand hot water kettle. I am actually very excited about this purchase. We live in a very, very crappy apartment, so the idea of not having to wrestle with the fifty-year-old stove in order to boil water is very appealing. It will save lots of time for tea drinking between running the recycling out and picking up the toddler from the university preschool before my husband gets home from his graduate school classes. My Gawd, everything I’ve just said is so yuppie whiteness. Mmmm, tea.


Excerpt from “He-who-wears-human-heads-as-earrings: Winnebago Hero Mythology”

In his 1948 book, Winnebago hero cycles: a study in aboriginal literature, linguist Paul Radin collected and translated stories directly from the people of the Winnebago nation, introducing previously unheard of mythological heroes to Western audiences. Among these stories is the Red Horn cycle, a series of tales that describe the exploits of the hero Red Horn, or He-who-wears-human-heads-as-earrings. These tales explore themes of identity, ritual, struggle, and transformation, and in many ways they can be seen to trace the separation-initiation-return formula presented in Joseph Campbell’s book The Hero with a Thousand Faces. However, not every facet of the Red Horn cycle fits perfectly within Campbell’s structure; the cycle is a distinctly non-Western narrative with a cultural agenda of its own. Nevertheless, the journey of Red Horn is a complex hero tale that both challenges and reinforces Campbell’s model of the monomyth.

To begin with, Red Horn is a hero of supernatural origin, and this marks him as a hero of monomyth despite the fact that his actual birth or parentage is not explicitly described. In Winnebago Hero Cycles, the supernatural nature of Red Horn is revealed when he clarifies his true name to his elder brother and sister-in-law:

Now the little brother stood up and said, “Those in the heavens who created me did not call me by this name, He-who-is-hit-with-deer-lungs. They called me He-who-wears-human-heads-as-earrings.” With that he spat upon his hands and began fingering his ears. And as he did this, little faces suddenly appeared on his ears, laughing, winking and sticking out their tongues. Then he spoke again, “Those on earth, when they speak of me, call me Red Horn.” (117)

Red Horn spends the initial stages of the cycle as an unnamed “youngest brother” who often is pelted with the lungs of freshly killed deer. His eldest brother Kunu appears to be the central figure for the first narrative in the cycle until Red Horn wins a footrace by magically turning himself into an arrow (Radin 116). The prize of the race is the hand of the chief’s daughter, which Red Horn gives to his older brothers because he is not of marriageable age; this indicates that, until he discloses his origins and goes on warpath, he is not yet a man. Having announced himself as from heaven and displaying the living human heads in his ears, Red Horn announces himself as a hero and is treated accordingly throughout the rest of the narrative. This is the way Red Horn, as a hero, separates himself from the rest of the population, preparing for his departure on his journey. This step can be correlated to the first step in Campbell’s “separation-initiation-return” monomyth formula.

After being recognized by his divinely given name, Red Horn departs on four warpaths; while the warpaths do not obviously fit the aspects of the monomyth, they do establish him as a cultural hero who illustrates Winnebago ritual. In this movement, Red Horn is called upon to go on these warpaths with his brother Kunu, his friend Turtle, and a hunter named Storms-as-he-walks (Radin 120). Red Horn is then invited by a “host” from a neighboring village who is interested in claiming scalps from other villages. There is no explanation of why this host wishes to make war or who the victims of the war might be. In the myth, the warpath is presented simply as a cultural function. Red Horn agrees to this call to warpath immediately, without any moments of refusal, and he and Storms-as-he-walks fly through the air to reach the enemy…


The stuff we’re not made of: Armchair Particle Physics

I’ve recently fallen in love with the Large Hadron Collider.

Well, I’m not sure I can say “fallen in love” because it’s not that kind of deep, comfortable kind of love one has with, say, a supportive spouse or long-running TV series. It’s probably more like the kind of love one experiences on their third drink in an empty basement bar–superficial but momentarily overwhelming. (Last summer, it was cognitive neuroscience that caught my fickle eye–but don’t get excited, I’m not that smart. I just love reading stuff that’s over my head. Armchair intellectualism, y’know.)

For the last two weeks or so, I’ve been puttering around on the very well written CERN website, checking out a few articles on the subject, and surveying various Wikipedia articles on the Standard Model and other particle physics related topics. I’ve probably spent a bit too much time reading the Wikipedia articles, as one click then leads to another click and another, and at some point I realize I am in a rabbit hole and can’t remember what I started looking for. Wikipedia scavenger hunts are tons of fun, by the way. Should you ever attempt it, I suggest starting with the Origin of Language or the Treachery of Images. Anyway.

So, I’ve been reading quite a lot about this particle physics stuff, and I can only say I understand it loosely. But of the concepts I think I have a tenuous grip on, the most startling is this: the particles that make up the atoms in everyday matter are, if fact, matterless. They have no mass. Mass is generated not by the mass of the things themselves but by the interactions of the particles with the Higgs field and the Higgs boson particle. Before I venture off too much farther into ideas I’m most likely going to get wrong, let’s pause for a moment and ponder this.

We are, essentially made from nothing.

Well, an actual physicist probably would disagree with me–massless particles are something, obviously. But their lacking of mass is what blows my mind. I’m not equipped to say what that may mean–whoever’s writing for the CERN site has a really great grip on this stuff (like check out the metaphor with the ants here), so maybe I’ll find a good paragraph that illuminates this concept better than I can. But, in any case, my mind is left to marvel at the universe, much like a drunk bar patron marveling at the swirly colors in her glass’ melting ice cubes. So pretty, so simple and so utterly mindblowing.

Also, it’s super hard to search for “Large Hadron Collider” without first accidentally typing Large Hardon. It’s true. Try it.


What I’m reading this winter.

I must be a fast reader because, sometimes, I’m amazed at how much I actually get read. Eventually, I mean. I tend to read more than a few things at once, hopping back and forth from book to book, so I can’t exactly be called the most disciplined book-o-phile. Blame college for my bad habits. So despite the massive piles of stuff for my classes (which are thankfully winding down–yay finals next week!) I have managed to pick at a few delicious word-morsels that have definitely expanded my horizons.

First, I’m on this Victorian Gothic kick, so I’ve been thumbing through Joyce Carol Oates’ BellefleurI say “thumbing through” because the book is so massive, so densely formatted, and such an accurate depiction of the original art form that it’s almost unreadable. A highly difficult book, one that I doubt I will finish in the next ten years, but it’s chock full of dirty bits and Oates’ beautiful language. Well worth the time.

Also, I discovered (rediscovered) Pioneer Women by Joanna Stratton, first published in the 80s and full of compelling stories of women on the Kansas frontier. I remember my mom reading this book when I was a kid (and living in Kansas), so it’s a bit like a homecoming. While the writing itself is sadly plain non-fiction narrative, it features first-person accounts of life on the untamed prairie, from women’s perspectives, and there’s lots of wolves and guns and starving to death. Exciting and poignant. I’m working on a prairie gothic/alt fantasy series of short stories, so this will be a fine inspiration.

Along with all that, I’ve got a horrible one-click habit on Amazon, so I just picked up Laird Barron’s The Imago Sequence and Other Stories and Shirley Jackson’s uncollected stories in Just an Ordinary Day.  So far, both have been amazing. Short-form literary horror is, and likely forever will be, my favorite thing to read, and it’s just perfect that I can squeeze in a story or two before bed or in between classes. And the contrast between the two is so fun–Barron is so deliciously masculine (in that great women-get-to-be-people-too kind of way) and Jackson so marvelously feminine (with men-as-people, too) that the two of them together just round out a perfectly whole, dark vision of a doomed universe. Great stuff.

And, after finals, I’ve got a pile of stuff on my reading list, including Douglas Unger’s Looking for War, Ursula K. Leguin’s Birthday of the World and Other Stories, and a literary Xmas present my husband got me (which I know he got me, but I can’t say what I know he got me.) Altogether, it’s pretty ambitious (and perhaps indicative of an addiction). I hope my eyeballs can keep up.


Left or right brains taste the same.

I love neuroscience. I only barely understand neuroscience, but I love it all the same. I have a great respect for the great brains that are puzzling out how exactly brains work (which is kind of creepy when you think about it–it’s an organ, in our body, that is trying to figure out itself. What if it wakes up one day self-aware? Oh, god–it knows it’s self aware already! Ahhh!).

Paranoia aside, I love this sort of stuff so much that I volunteered for a project at work, in which I read a pile of neuroscience books and articles in hopes of applying some of that information to education and tutoring. It was a fun time. Among the many (many, many, many) works surveyed (I’d put my reference list up here, but it would look like I was showing off), I found the best stuff in the book Mind, Brain, and Education: a comprehensive guide to the new brain-based teaching, by Tracey Tokuhama-Espinosa, PhD, and the Journal of Mind, Brain, and Education. Its an emerging field, this MBE, and Harvard even has a master’s program in it. Altogether, its just a evidence-based approach to education using neuroscience and psychology tinted glasses. I’ll probably be writing quite a bit about it, as it is my new favoritest academic thing evar.

One interesting thing to note (and I’ll write more about this later, as soon as I dig back up my sources, but it’s Sunday afternoon and that is not the time for digging up sources, and anyway, this is my blog, not my thesis. God, I always think I’m writing a thesis…) Anyway, notable is the fact that neuroscientists frikken’ hate the left-brain, right-brain thing. There is apparently no evidence to support that people are ruled by either hemisphere, and a vast wealth of information–particularly with studies involving victims of brain damage–shows that the brain is highly adaptable and often changes where it stores information.

Fascinating stuff, but even more fascinating is that, from what I read, neuroscientists will take every opportunity to bitch about it.

Article about the brain’s ability to form episodic versus semantic memories? Crammed in the middle is a paragraph about left-brained, right-brained. Book about developmental learning disabilities in traditional K-12 classroom environments? There’s a passage that says, by the way, that left-brained, right-brained thing is bunk. Literature survey on the history of cognitive neuroscience and psychology as it pertains to education? Whole chapter on that the left-brained, right-brained thing not being true. Hey–hey man. No, really–it’s totally not true. No one is ever just left-brained or right-brained. Really! It’s not–Damn it, why isn’t anyone listening to us?

So yes. After everything I’ve learned during my highly complicated reading, the main takeaway is: people really don’t listen to neuroscientists. It’s sad really–their brains are so self-aware. But, then again, I’m right-brained, so I may not understand anything unless its got a bunch of pictures in it.

I have made an astounding discovery.

So, in college (and in life, if I may be so bold to say), we are often forced to wrestle with stupid big tomes of Random Knowledge. In my case, my tomes are mostly composed of English literature, theory, and philosophy. These tomes are oftentimes so big, and the publishers so cheap, that the paper is this kind of pseudo-vellum saran wrap stuff that tears like an elderly diabetic’s skin and abhors all forms of pen, marker, or highlighter.

For ages–okay, the last year or so–I’ve wrestled with this paper of stupid delicacy in my urge to mark, highlight, and write in the margins. So far, my efforts have been met with despair. I’m not able to make a decent highlight in any of these books without the yellow/orange/green bleeding through to the other side of the page (and sometimes several pages underneath it) and forget using a red pen to add comments (or correct typos). But today, inspired by my darling toddler-beast who was trying to scribble in my Shakespeare, I had an epiphany:

Yellow crayon.

To my most voluptuous delight, it totally works.

highlight1To illustrate, Julius Caesar’s long-suffering wife Calpurnia has been lightly scribbled over with a Crayola brand “Yellow” crayon. Beneath is Brutus’ mettle-rich wife, drawn in a Sharpie brand accent neon yellow highlighter.

While of course the Sharpie makes a more vivid mark–me and all the other poor slobs in the English department who get this book will never again miss that Portia is Brutus’ wife–the Sharpie is so intense that it interrupts the narrative on the back of the page. As seen here:


The crayon, while visible, is not nearly as obtrusive as the Sharpie highlighter, meaning I can easily move through the subsequent pages without thinking I’ve highlighted mind-bending passages like “at the point of his” or “over the stage.”

While I am aware that this is one of those stuffy-white-intellectual problems–akin to “First World problems,” but for people who are opposed to using the colonialist monikers of “first-third” for designating hierarchies of civilization–I am still super pumped about it. When I go to class on Monday, I’m going to tell all my fellow students about it, and I feel that their worlds, too, will be blown. …They might even name me their hero-King among English majors and laud my name for generations to come!

Or, they might just all start bringing Crayons to class. Which would be fun, too.


What I’ve been reading this summer.

I never get to read as much as I want to – even when I have plenty of time, I’m generally too distracted by The Child, or by classwork, or with another stunning episode of Paranormal Home Inspectors to get much good reading done. It’s sad. I need a new prescription with my glasses anyway, which means I only get, oh, three or four good hours of reading in before my brain wants to explode. Reading is hard work.

Most (if not all) of my reading occurs either on the internet or on ebook. Yes, I am that terrible new species of reader – the one who has little patience for anything over 25,000 words and who prefers their fiction ambiguous, impermanent and frequent. Like lyrical shotgun blasts. I haven’t looked at a real paper book in a long time. (At least, not one that wasn’t required reading. The Norton Anthology of Theory and Criticism is still sitting by the couch like I’ve got an assignment coming up.) Some may brand me as a pariah for saying such things, but I, for one, welcome our electronic overlords. They charge less.

Anyway, my favorite shotgun blasts these days are online magazines that do weird fiction, speculative lit, offbeat literature, and various slipstream fruitcake combinations of stuff. Among the best I’ve seen are Lakeside Circus, to which I have just purchased a subscription. The stories at Lakeside Circus are beautifully styled, short, and transportive, and they’ve got a lot of nice science fiction slipstream and weird magic realism. Occasionally, some of their stuff is a little too genre for me (so much time travel), but I only get miffed at genre when it fails to be obtuse and convoluted enough. Clarity is so pedestrian!

…There’s a real possibility that I may be a lit snob.

As long as I’m fessing up to such things, I can also admit that I absolutely love Paper Darts and Smokelong Quarterly. Both very different publications, Paper Darts gives me such lovely doses of literary weird in prose and poetry format, while Smokelong gives me nice, heavy mouth-punches of dense lit in tiny packages (while making me miss cigarettes). I love dense literature, but around the 1500 word mark, I develop a driving urge to drop everything and just go watch a freakin’ cartoon. (I’ve tried James Joyce – I’ve really tried. But my kid was watching Backyardigans and, at the time, that just seemed like a much better way to spend my life.)

Along these lines of weird and challenging is a new magazine called Quaint, which has come up with some really awesome, visceral stuff so far. Plus, their editorial team has stats, which is of great importance. If the people at the Paris Review had stats, then I’d be much more inclined to put up with their pompous nonsense. Maybe I’m not that much of a lit snob, after all.