truepenny: artist's rendering of Sidneyia inexpectans (Default)
1. There comes a point in every pro wrestling tag-team match where one of the Faces is in the ring alone with both Heels, getting the tar whaled out of him or her. That's what today is like, the Heel tag-team being Migraine and Fibro. I try not to give in to chronic pain (because once I start giving in, there's no good stopping point), but today I went back to bed.

2. Yesterday, I used 5calls.org to contact the relevant people about the Paris Climate Accord. I got voicemail at Senator Ron Johnson's office; talked to real people at Senator Tammy Baldwin and Congressman Mark Pocan's offices; and the EPA's voicemail box was full. I also used RESISTBOT to send this fax to Senator Johnson and Senator Baldwin:
Trump has already made the United States a global disgrace. Withdrawing from the Paris Climate Accord will make us--rightly--a global pariah. Trump has already done so much damage. If impeachment is what it takes to stop him, then we have to impeach him NOW. Because he isn't waiting. Please protect your constituents, your country, and your planet. STOP TRUMP.

I know that I'm, on the one hand, preaching to the choir, and on the other hand, trying to teach a pig to sing. For Senator Baldwin, all I'm trying to do is give her data: I am one of her constituents and I am vehemently opposed to Trump. With Senator Johnson, honestly, the best I can hope for is that I annoy the pig.

3. I have NEVER IN MY ENTIRE LIFE been as politically active as I am right now. I'm not actually happy about this.

4. The mayor of Austin, Texas, is made of awesome.

5. The Harriet Tubman Home is asking for donations so that they can participate in the bidding war for a newly discovered photograph of her.
truepenny: artist's rendering of Sidneyia inexpectans (writing: glass cat)
Slotkin, Richard. Regeneration through Violence. Hanover, NH: Wesleyan University Press-University Press of New England, 1973.

Chapter 2: Cannibals and Christians: European vs. American Indian Culture
In Europe all men were under authority; in America all men dreamed they had the power to become authority. )
truepenny: artist's rendering of Sidneyia inexpectans (writing: glass cat)
Slotkin, Richard. Regeneration through Violence. Hanover, NH: Wesleyan University Press-University Press of New England, 1973.

Chapter 1: Myth and Literature in a New World
myths reach out of the past to cripple, incapacitate, or strike down the living )
truepenny: artist's rendering of Sidneyia inexpectans (Default)
Professor Kater has put forward an extraordinary proposition:
Girls did not possess the same degree of herd instinct that characterized the males, which motivated them to join groups, gang up on others, and eventually made them complicit in crimes such as assault and murder. Girls had constituted only one-third of the total membership in the Weimar youth movement, which suggests a greater tendency to maintain their individuality rather than submerging it in a mass group.
(72)

While I certainly would like to believe that, by virtue of having two X chromosomes, I can count on my inherent rugged individualism to protect me against being enthralled by fascist demagoguery and mob rule, I can think of several other things that that information about female involvement in the Weimar youth movement might plausibly suggest, none of them a grossly overgeneralizing piece of sexual essentialism.

Harrumph.
truepenny: artist's rendering of Sidneyia inexpectans (Default)
Sigmund, Anna Maria. Women of the Third Reich. [Die Frauen der Nazis]. 1998. Richmond Hill, Ontario: NDE Publishing, 2000.



I don't know whether this book was poorly written or poorly translated or both (my money's on both). The language is clumsy; the scholarship is mediocre to poor (I grant that Leni Riefenstahl's post-WWII, self-exculpating memoir is not a trustworthy source, but when you're countering with Goebbels . . . um, maybe this needs a little more unpacking?); and as a historiographical endeavor, this is a set of eight biographical sketches, to varying degrees of sketchy, devoid of an argument even in those cases when an argument is absolutely crying out to be made. As for example, Geli Raubal. Or the fantastically hypocritical Gertrud Scholtz-Klink, who made a public career out of telling women to stay out of the public sector:
She wanted to communicate to other women her fervent conviction that fulfilling one's duty--quietly in the background and without demanding recognition--was an essential part of the female psyche.

"For mothers it is true that they come to a very quiet and understated power through service, whose sole purpose for ever and ever remains service."

Scholtz-Klink, of course, never served quietly, but traveled constantly from one congress to the next, giving speeches and putting her simple ideas down on paper. In 1938, when her husband started complaining about her numerous party duties, she divorced him.
(117)

And overarchingly, demandingly, the central question about Carin Goering, Magda Goebbels, Leni Riefenstahl, Gertrud Schotz-Klink, Henriette von Schirach, and even Eva Braun: what was it that made intelligent, ambitious women devote themselves to Nazism and to Hitler, who made no secret at all of the fact that he had no use, either personally or politically, for women who were intelligent and/or ambitious? Some of it is attributable to Hitler's legendary magnetism, but not all of it. Some of it is attributable to the Nazi habit of making exceptions: Leni Riefenstahl, for instance, was able to achieve extraordinary things with Nazi support, and Hanna Reitsch, who isn't covered in this book, is another example. But right at the center of the whole thing is this question that Sigmund doesn't even formulate, much less try to answer: why did these women devote their entire lives--and in the case of Magda Goebbels, her death--to an ideological cause that, from the beginning, utterly and unhesitatingly rejected them?
truepenny: artist's rendering of Sidneyia inexpectans (Default)
1. There's a new Submachine game: Submachine 7: The Core.

2. This is a lovely video of Zenyatta enjoying her retirement.

3. While I'm offering videos, the big cats at Big Cat Rescue really enjoy their Christmas presents.

4. There's a new octopus for the Octocam. Ursula is smaller than Deriq was, but she is every bit as fabulous.

5. I am not going to link to the story on the Republican state legislator here in Wisconsin who's trying to repeal the (new) state law aimed at abolishing "Indian mascots and other race-based team names and logos in Wisconsin public schools," nor to the story on the man in Toronto who pressured a twelve-year-old girl off his son's co-ed PeeWee hockey team, because impotent anger is bad for my blood pressure.* Instead, have some pictures of the lunar eclipse: here (wikipedia), here (National Geographic), and, oddly enough, here (DC Clubbing).

---
*This would be the rhetorical trick called praeteritio. The internet makes it particularly transparent.
truepenny: artist's rendering of Sidneyia inexpectans (ws: tempest)
So, Julie Taymor is directing The Tempest, with Dame Helen Mirren as Prospero. (I am ignoring the change from Prospero to Prospera, because honestly (a.) not necessary, (b.) what's wrong with some good old-fashioned genderfuck?, and (c.) to me it kind of suggests we don't think Dame Helen is up to the challenge of playing Prospero, which is nonsense. But if that's the worst mistake they make--and hopefully, this is really a very carefully thought out feminist statement that will persuade me of its rightness when I see the movie--we are all so very golden.)

The Tempest is not my favorite of Shakespeare's plays, nor even my favorite of Shakespeare's late plays, but I have to tell you, the trailer goes a long way towards persuading me to rethink that opinion:


Because:
1. Helen Mirren.
2. Alfred Molina.
3. HELEN MIRREN.
4. This, seriously, is what CGI is for (check out those hellhounds, OMFG), and if there was ever a Shakespeare play that could take the bling, THIS IS THAT PLAY. I am really almost deliriously grateful to see that here, finally, is a production of The Tempest that takes Prospero's magic seriously.
5. Hard to tell from the tiny clips we get, but it looks like they're also taking Caliban seriously. Which not all productions do.
6. And did I mention, HELEN MIRREN.


[livejournal.com profile] glvalentine has some excellent discussion of the costuming (which is where I lifted the still from). Zippered doublets FTW.

It also looks like, from the trailer, they understand what Stephano and Trinculo are in the play for (again, not all productions do, nor do all Hollywood versions of Shakespeare understand what the clowns are for. See Much Ado About Nothing, re: Michael Keaton.). The casting of Alfred Molina, aside from rocking my socks, is a good sign.

And, in conclusion, HELEN MIRREN.



ETA: if anyone else would like a very simple Helen Mirren icon, you may feel free to use this one:

And don't hesitate to add text if it pleases you. Currently, my only image-editing software is, um, Paint.
truepenny: artist's rendering of Sidneyia inexpectans (writing: fennec-working)
1.) I have 2100 words on a new Booth story, "To Die for Moonlight." My plan for today is to get as close to finishing it as I can. (Thirdhop Scarp has thrown yet another new wrinkle at me, and I have to assimilate it and work out a game plan before I can continue. This novella is NEVER GOING TO END.)

2.) Leftover notes from yesterday's acupuncture session:
(a.) I wasn't queasy last night. The real test will be tonight, since I've had random bouts of nonqueasiness before that don't correlate with anything, but it was just really nice to have a break.
(b.) That point on my left quadriceps that was agonizing when the needle went in was also agonizing when the needle went out. The 2nd Practitioner said that was a sign the point was still working.
(c.) I'd forgotten how much I like Viparita Karini.
(d.) In case you're curious, acupuncture needles look like this. They are very long and very flexible, and they go in to an astonishing distance.
(e.) I need better language to describe RLS, especially to describe the non-acute phase which seems, distressingly, to be my baseline. Because now that I'm paying attention and know what RLS feels like, none of it is at all unfamiliar. I think I've had symptoms, mostly very minor, for years.
(f.) Which is an argument in favor of getting a referral to a neurologist, just to see if there's some underlying something-or-other I should know about.

3.) If you haven't been following Pictures of Muslims Wearing Things, I highly recommend it. Both because it is very helpful in dismantling the Muslims = terrorists fallacy that the American government and dominant culture are so eager to promulgate, and because it's a magnificent reminder of how awesome our species can be when we're not too busy being assholes. I particularly love Robina Muqimyar and Sarah Khoshjamal Fekri, Olympians; Soraiya, Sami Yusuf, and Art Blakey, musicians; Ahmad Mustafa, calligrapher; and above all others, Anousheh Ansari, astronaut.

4.) On a not dissimilar note, French photographer Sacha Goldberger took these beyond marvelous photographs of his 91-year-old grandmother as a superhero. And there are ten more here. Super Mamika is, truly, super.

5.) And finally, since I have to walk to the pharmacy, I offer this Disapproving Rabbit as an indicator of my current mood.

3 things

Jul. 27th, 2010 03:06 pm
truepenny: artist's rendering of Sidneyia inexpectans (Default)
1. for those who are interested, this is the email I just sent to the Milwaukee Art Museum about the quilt exhibit:
cut for mercy )

2. for those who aren't interested in quilts, but do like animals, have a video of seven-week-old Pallas's Cats* (there are several other videos of these kittens if this one charms your socks off as it did mine).

3. If you don't like either animals or quilts . . . well, you probably like books, so here: Mary Robinette Kowal is having a caption contest in which she will be giving away two signed copies of her debut novel, Shades of Milk and Honey.

And now I really need to get some work done.

---
*I'd never heard of Pallas's Cats before this morning. They're like a cross between cats and owls, with some raccoon spliced in for good measure. ([livejournal.com profile] matociquala, wikipedia says they're native to the Asian steppes.)
truepenny: artist's rendering of Sidneyia inexpectans (Default)
I really don't want to pick on Bruce Seeds, because the fact that he came to my attention under inauspicious circumstances is no fault of his, but there's this thing in his FAQ:

Do you really make these yourself? Yes, the cutting, the piecing, the sewing and the ironing are all done by me, with one exception: the stitching process that binds the top, the batting and the back together requires special equipment. So I pay a service provider to do that step for me, in a pattern and thread color of my choosing. For most of my quilts, that service is provided by Patched Works of Elm Grove, Wisconsin.


Now, if you go to Patched Works' site, they do in fact have a special machine called a long arm, so what Mr. Seeds says here is not wrong. On the other hand, and the thing that's bugging me, "the stitching process that binds the top, the batting, and the back together" is called quilting. It's what makes something, you know, a quilt. The fact that he chooses to outsource this part of the process--while a totally legitimate choice with which I have no beef (although I'd prefer it if he'd phrased it slightly differently, so as not to give the impression that quilts cannot be made without special machinery)--really does reinforce the already somewhat more than subliminal impression that a divide has been created here between The Artist (design) and The Craftsperson (mere manual labor), and again makes the Milwaukee Art Museum's choice to showcase his work with their early American quilt exhibit--especially given the number of superb whitework quilts they had--almost painfully ironic.

Again, I think Mr. Seeds' quilts are lovely, and I do not think there's anything wrong with having one's quilts machine-quilted by a third party. (I love Rose Wilder Lane's comment in The Woman's Day Book of American Needlework about what nonsense it is to romanticize the non-technological past: her mother and aunts and grandmothers would have leaped at the chance to use a sewing machine.) My gripe is about semantics and self-presentation. And the valuation or devaluation of artforms created and practiced by women.

And now I really am going to shut up about this.
truepenny: artist's rendering of Sidneyia inexpectans (valkyries)
Dear Milwaukee Art Museum:

While I very much enjoyed your exhibit, American Quilts: Selections from the Winterthur Collectcion, and was impressed by the excellence of the quilts, there was one thing that gave me pause.

The quilts in the exhibit were from the eighteenth and nineteenth centuries (1760-1850), and they were, of course, made by women. I said to my husband, "This is the most women's names you will ever see in a museum exhibit," and that was something I particularly appreciated: seeing women's artwork taken seriously and presented as worthy of respect, even if it was evident that the curators were struggling to find the vocabulary to talk about the quilts as art rather than merely as social artifacts. That's okay; I understand how hard that can be, having encountered the same difficulty with science fiction and fantasy many times, and that did not detract from the quality of the exhibit. However, in the gift shop (the last room in the exhibit), there were three quilts on display by Bruce Seeds.

Let me be clear: I think that it is awesome that a twenty-first century man has chosen to take up quilting, and furthermore, I think that Mr. Seeds' quilts are indeed excellent and gorgeous and quite interesting in juxtaposition with the quilts in the exhibit. But by placing them at the end of this exhibit of early American quilts, without any acknowledgment of the fact that women continued to make quilts for the 150 years in between and are still making quilts, some of which are every bit as iconoclastic, if not more so, than Mr. Seeds', are you not perpetuating a particularly unpleasant canard: that women may be competent to make, in this case, quilts, but it takes a man to make real art out of them? In this context, I cannot help but feel that Mr. Seeds' slightly supercilious self-consciousness ("not your grandmother's quilts" indeed) is an unfortunate sidelight on the valuation of women's artwork--the very thing that I had found so striking and admirable in the rest of the exhibit. (Let me also add that I know that's being unfair to Mr. Seeds, since I wouldn't find that nearly as troublesome in a different context--and the context is not his fault.) And while I understand that the focus of the exhibit was on early American quilts, and thus it did not have the scope to explore the rich continuing tradition(s) of American quilting, if you could find space for one modern quilter in your gift shop, could you not either

(a.) have found space for two?

or

(b.) have made that single quilter1 a woman, so as to continue the celebration of women's arts that made the exhibit so moving?

It's not hard to find examples of contemporary women quilters doing fascinating work. Here's a fairly intellectualized example, but jeez. Just take a look at the Smoky Mountain Quilt Show 2009 and see the amazing and beautiful things contemporary women are doing in quilting.2

After a lovely, thought-provoking, and even inspiring exhibit, this sudden descent into patriarchalism left me feeling dissatisfied, and in fact a little bitter--as this blog post now attests.

Nevertheless, thank you for putting on this exhibit of early American women's quilts. It is far better to have a flawed exhibit than no exhibit at all.


---
1For that matter, I was puzzled by the degree to which the exhibit ignored the fact that quilting was a social art. The quilts were all attributed as much as possible to single quilters, even when those single quilters' names were unknown. I would have appreciated an acknowledgment that the paradigms of Western art did not apply comfortably here.

2When I was a kid, there was a woman who exhibited her quilts at the Children's Museum of Oak Ridge. Her quilts were astonishing in their combination of quilting, calligraphy, and feminism--obviously, since I remember them twenty-plus years later. I just wish I could remember her name.
truepenny: artist's rendering of Sidneyia inexpectans (writing: catfish)
What with the whiny princess feet, I've been thinking a lot about the Little Mermaid recently.

I should say clearly, btw, that I hate Hans Christian Andersen. Terry Pratchett is on record as hating Lewis Carroll, and the way he feels about Carroll, although completely antithetical to my experience of Carroll, is pretty much word for word the way I feel about Andersen: "I didn't like the Alice books because I found them creepy and horribly unfunny in a nasty, plonking, Victorian way. Oh, here's Mr Christmas Pudding On Legs, hohohoho, here's a Caterpillar Smoking A Pipe, hohohoho. When I was a kid the books created in me about the same revulsion as you get when, aged seven, you're invited to kiss your great-grandmother."

Except, of course, that Andersen has no particular sense of humor.

As alert readers of the Doctrine of Labyrinths will probably have noticed, there is one Andersen story I like: "The Tinder Box." But "The Steadfast Tin Soldier"? No. "The Girl Who Trod on a Loaf" Hell, no. "The Little Mermaid"? No no no.

I should also say that, while (having a weakness both for musicals and for animated films) I enjoyed Disney's Little Mermaid, I was aware from the beginning that it was a cheat--quite literally the Disneyfied version. In many ways, it's a more satisfying story than Andersen's, but Andersen seems to have been quite deliberate in his choice to tell UNsatisfying stories. (N.b., I am not and do not pretend to be an Andersen scholar; I'm only going on my memories of the stories of his I've read.) And, you know, I do genuinely respect that as a choice, but that doesn't mean I have to like it.

spoilers for Peter Straub's novels SHADOWLAND and THE THROAT )
truepenny: artist's rendering of Sidneyia inexpectans (valkyries)
[livejournal.com profile] yuki_onna has a good, chewy post about Realms of Fantasy's plan for an All Women-Authors Issue. What she says about it, of course, goes for any minority group: women*, African-Americans, GLBT writers, writers with disabilities, etc. etc. etc. I think there's a point in the process of opening a genre where the Very Special Episode Issue is a good thing, when what you're saying with it is, HEY! There are enough [women/African-Americans/GLBT writers/writers with disabilities/etc.] doing excellent work in our field to fill A WHOLE ISSUE! Maybe we should all be PAYING ATTENTION!

But, returning to the specific circumstances, that's really not where women SF writers are anymore, and hasn't been for, jeez, thirty years. Because, seriously, a whole issue of Realms of Fantasy (or any other magazine) is, what? Six stories? Seven stories? Ten if they're small? I guarantee you there are more than ten women writers doing excellent work in sffh. As Cat says, a Very Special Issue is tokenism. (It also suggests, subliminally, that women writers are fragile flowers and can't compete with men head-to-head, that our stories wouldn't be good enough to fill a whole issue without this special enclave, like we're a rare species of owl or something.) It neither causes nor promises fundamental change in the way a magazine is run or the way an editor makes decisions.

I should say here that I don't know what the motivations are at RoF. For all I know, this is a sincere attempt to cut through the male-dominated bullshit and champion the cause of feminism and women writers. And it's a very attention-getting way of doing it. I'm just not sure it's the best way.

[ETA: as [livejournal.com profile] jimhines kindly points out, Douglas Cohen explains some of the editorial thinking in the second comment to the announcement.]

---
*Not, of course, that women are a numerical minority. Tra la.
truepenny: artist's rendering of Sidneyia inexpectans (Default)
Freud is such a problem.

Partly this is because he was right, and partly it is because he was grossly, irredeemably wrong. Oftentimes in the same essay. And partly it is because his disciples and intellectual descendants have reified his ideas, transforming them from theories into universal truths. (Not that Freud himself did not contribute to that tendency with his pontifical--in fact, patriarchal--stance.)

And any truth Freud has to offer is most assuredly not universal.

But that doesn't mean he isn't thought-provoking and it doesn't mean he can't be illuminating. It just means you have to approach him with caution and an independent mind.

Case in point: I started reading Frederick Karl's biography of Kafka, Franz Kafka: Representative Man: Prague, Germans, Jews, and the Crisis of Modernism and very shortly thereafter posted a plaintive call for better biographies. Happily, [livejournal.com profile] perverse_idyll suggested Ernst Pawel's The Nightmare of Reason: A Life of Franz Kafka. I haven't finished Pawel yet, but I've found an oddly illuminating point of comparison which I think will demonstrate why I found Karl unreadable and Pawel compelling.

First, from Karl:
this is where I started yelling )

Compare with:
the analogous opening move from Pawel )

And then I go on talking for a while )

---
WORKS CITED
Karl, Frederick. Franz Kafka: Representative Man: Prague, Germans, Jews, and the Crisis of Modernism. 1991. New York: Fromm International Publishing Corporation, 1993.

Pawel, Ernst. The Nightmare of Reason: A Life of Franz Kafka. New York: Farrar Strauss Giroux, 1984.

Waterlog

Sep. 1st, 2008 11:35 am
truepenny: artist's rendering of Sidneyia inexpectans (valkyries)
TIME: 25 min.
DISTANCE 3 mi.
TOTAL: 43.4 mi.
NOTES: Shin splints. Ow, goddammit.
SHIRE-RECKONING: We've met up with the Elves. Tra la la lally.

Wells. Again.

Not that I have anything against Wells, but spending two separate lectures on him seems a bit much. Especially when the only women who are focused on are Woolf, Shelley, and Le Guin (yes, we're all shocked), and there is no lecture devoted to the works of a person of color. I understand that he talks about Delany (presumably in the "Cyberpunk, Postmodernism, and Beyond" lecture), but honestly--you could spend THREE lectures on Delany and not be done. Plus there's Octavia Butler and Toni Morrison and . . .

I should note, btw, that I'm not surprised by this distribution. Not at all. Just, you know, kind of sad.

Waterlog

Aug. 26th, 2008 09:50 pm
truepenny: artist's rendering of Sidneyia inexpectans (valkyries)
TIME: 25
DISTANCE: 3.1 mi.
TOTAL: 36.4 mi.
NOTES: Yelling at Prof. Rabkin again.
SHIRE-RECKONING: We're keeping off the Road now.


I disagree with my learned colleague on so many different points that I can't even list them. So let's just go with the one wherein he is conflating "phallocentrism" with "science fiction." Feminism, goddammit. FEMINISM. You can't be feminist and phallocentric, but you can be feminist and write science fiction. This definition is flawed.

Also, please, for the love of rocket ships, do not generalize from NATHANIEL HAWTHORNE to the genre of science fiction. Please.
truepenny: artist's rendering of Sidneyia inexpectans (Default)
[livejournal.com profile] coffeeandink links to an excellent post about the ways in which white feminists are failing pretty miserably at the whole "feminism" part when it is--or should be--applied to women who are not white.

And I say, despairingly, didn't we do this already? That was the big feminist revelation of the 90s--see, for example, Patricia Hill Collins' Black Feminist Thought--that women who were not white, straight, middle-class American women were still, hello, WOMEN, and that their concerns were not the same as ours (Yes, I am, in fact, white, straight, and middle-class. Rocking the suburbs, yo.), and that that meant, not that they should shut up and let the white, straight, middle-class women drive, but that the white, straight, middle-class women should let go of their deathgrip on the steering wheel.

Apparently, we white, straight, middle-class women don't learn very well. As DWF points out, we are employing all the same strategies against women of color that men have been employing against women since we started trying to speak up for ourselves over a century ago. We're protecting our privilege. And this when we know, as women and feminists, that privilege is toxic. That it's real--all too real, thank you--but it isn't true. You don't get privilege in our society because you deserve it--which I suspect is why people get so panicky when they think their privilege is endangered. It's awarded arbitrarily, so, in fact, there is NO REASON for it to endure. The emperor is bare-ass naked.

The opposite of privilege isn't disempowerment. The opposite of privilege is equality.
truepenny: artist's rendering of Sidneyia inexpectans (shalott)
  • Award: A Companion to Wolves won the Romantic Times 2007 Reviewers' Choice Award for Best Fantasy Novel. Congratulations to all the other winners.
  • Penguicon: I am abysmal at con reports, so I'm not even going to try. Despite some organizational issues, I had a lovely time and enjoyed every panel I was on.
  • Open Source Boob thingamajig: to which I am not even going to link because if you're interested, you can find it without my help. As a spontaneous happening among a group of consenting friends: good. Not something I would participate in, like, EVER, but other people are not me, and that's okay. As a public social "movement"? Doubleplus ungood. My body is not public domain, and I want it to stay that way. To be fair, the original poster has figured out his error (and I do believe it was an error, not willful or malicious) and retracted his manifesto.
  • Stuff to Read (Mine): Came home to two sets of contributors' copies, Weird Tales with "The Yellow Dressing Gown" (and the awesomest illustration in the history of ever--thank you, Vance Kelly) and Fictitious Force with "No Man's Land".
  • Stuff to Read (Also Mine): "A Night in Electric Squidland" is going to be reprinted in The Lone Star Stories Reader (TOC here).
  • Stuff to Read (Others): Young Men and Fire by Norman Maclean. I can't even find the words to explain how good this book is. I came to it the long way round, from Cry Cry Cry's cover of James Keelaghan's song "Cold Missouri Waters"--with which, as you may recall, I had a violent love affair while finishing Corambis. I love the book more.
  • Stuff to Read (Still Others): [livejournal.com profile] heresluck posts a poem every Monday. This week's offering is the reason I forgive Margaret Atwood for dissing the genre I love. Because ow.
  • Stuff to Read (And Still Others): [livejournal.com profile] jimhines has a lovely, angry, thoughtful post on men and rape.

Profile

truepenny: artist's rendering of Sidneyia inexpectans (Default)
Sarah/Katherine

September 2017

S M T W T F S
      12
34 56789
101112 13 1415 16
17181920212223
24252627282930

Syndicate

RSS Atom

Most Popular Tags

Style Credit

Expand Cut Tags

No cut tags
Page generated Sep. 20th, 2017 07:17 am
Powered by Dreamwidth Studios