Those Dang Brits! *Well ok, it’s really the Irish but…
11 May 2011 6 Comments
No, I’m not posting about the royal wedding, I didn’t watch the wedding, I know nothing about the wedding. I’m going to go a different direction. I’m going with death*.
Well, not really.
I’m actually going to tell you about “Skulduggery Pleasant” which is the title of a book and of a series of books and also happens to be the name of one of the characters in the book and the series of books, although, oddly enough, not really the main character. That would be Stephanie Edgley. Or Valkyrie Cain. Or…
What it all comes down to is that they’re charming books and you should all rush right out and buy them (yes, buy them, don’t just rent them from the library, I need you to increase the sales in the US so that they’re easier to get. We sent a gal to England to get the last two books for us but she says that she probably won’t be going again and there are two more books to come and…)
The point is that they’re good, funny and interesting and if you’re into audiobooks you should definitely do these in audio because they’re set in Ireland and they’re read by an Irish (I assume) guy and that accent is just so fantastic that I might cry for you if you miss it.
So there you have it, Skulduggery Pleasant. Get on it.
*Skulduggery also happens to be dead (see the skeleton) so see, death. I wasn’t kidding.
Crossing Over
03 Mar 2011 4 Comments
You know you’ve reached a whole new level of geekdom when you find that you can’t put down the book on the flu virus that you got to use as a reference on the paper you have to write for your microbiology class.
Drive It Like You Stole It
06 Feb 2011 5 Comments
The coolest person in the world sent me this book.

I read it yesterday.
Yes, the whole thing. I had to occupy myself somehow between the commercials (actually I didn’t even watch the commercials, I don’t care that much.)
It was good, quite good. It made me want to write.
Something that I keep telling myself that I don’t really want to do, something that I can’t do. But then I think maybe, between when I’m done dicing tomatoes and when the quinoa is ready I can get a few minutes of writing in. Other people do it. Lots of people have told me how they did it (and by told me, I mean written it on their blogs or something… I know I’ve heard that anyway) I could do that too, right?
Sort of, but ultimately, nope.
I could write a book that way but I can’t make one up that way. In order to make up a story I have to have the characters walk around in my head for a while and in order for them to walk around they need a little space. And unfortunately for Emery and Jack and Justin and the whole gang, all space in my head is currently being taken up by bacteria with lophtrochus flagella and standard deviations, there’s just not any extra to spare.
I could probably write in snatches but I can’t plot in snatches. To really plot I’d have to let Jane and her enormous dog wander around in my head at the very least, while I did the mindless things like washing dishes or making dinner. But even that time is currently taken up by a mental review of the electron transport chain.
The thing is that, as much as I like to think I am good at multitasking, I am not good at multitasking. I am spectacular at prioritizing. (By that I mean that I’m really good at establishing an order and going through my tasks in that order, not that I always put my life in the correct order.) And at the moment right trending plot lines and the intererptide bridges of peptidoglycan cell walls have priority over Emery glowering at Jack while the female med student giggles up at him in an adoring way.
Most of the time I don’t mind it, really I don’t. I find the synthesis of bacterial spores surprisingly interesting (scatter plots not quite so much) I LOVE learning new things, I love the possibilities that I have before me. It’s just when I read a book with well written interesting characters that I’m a little sad that, while I may become the next Dr. Quinn, medicine woman, or that with all this microbiology and organic chemistry and statistics under my belt I may single handedly cure cancer, those possible futures don’t also include best selling author.
Not for a while at least.
The Dangers of Reading Aloud
31 Jan 2011 6 Comments
in Feeding My OCD, The Stuff I Read
I find it problematic when reading aloud that the description of how something is said comes after the words that were said. I find myself reading lines in a loud voice only to find that that line was said in a whisper. It bothers me.
Nice Weather We’re Having isn’t it?
23 Sep 2010 6 Comments
in Overthink Much?, The Stuff I Read
I’m not good at small talk. I never have been. Unlike Mr. Darcy (who at least professed to have the same problem) I know exactly why that is. It’s the same reason he wasn’t any good at it, I don’t practice.
The thing is that I have no interest in it. The thing about small talk, about nearly any conversations with strangers, is that it’s just the same conversation over and over and over again and it’s talking just to talk. I have no interest in that.
I get bored by the same story over and over again. Bored enough by them that often when something happens that’s blog worthy, I’ll save it for the blog. Meaning that I won’t go to work, 15 minutes after having eaten a huge plateful of salad with dishwater salad dressing on it and tell my friends at work about the stupid and disgusting thing that I just did. I have to save it if it’s going to be of any use to me because if I don’t I’ll just get bored with the whole story and be unable to tell it even one more time.
I remember becoming aware of my conversational boredom in high school. You remember high school, when the answer to “how are you?” is always “tired” and then we try to out tired each other. We go into the details of why we’re so tired “I was up until midnight catching up on my homework” or, “I totally forgot about the paper due in History until, like, 10:00 last night so I was up all night working on it.” And I realized what a boring conversation this was. We were all tired, we all thought we were the tiredest (although the truth of the matter was that I was the tiredest since I had to get up at 4:30 every morning to deliver newspapers and then go to early morning seminary and then go to a show choir class all before the normal school day started) when the truth was that we were all tired because we were all teenagers and were too stupid to go to bed. (I frequently am still too stupid to go to bed, I just recognize that as my own problem and refuse to complain about it.)
So I quit having that conversation. I stopped being “tired” when I was asked how I was. (It’s possible that that that was the origin of “fantastic” which is currently my go to answer for those sort of mundane greetings.) Maybe this is the origin of my inability to make small talk, maybe if I had carried on with it in high school I would have developed a talent for the inane. As it is I don’t really talk to people I don’t know and often, even with people I do know, I have an “unsocial, taciturn disposition, unwilling to speak, unless [I] expect to say something that will amaze the whole room…”
I think I may have missed my mark here. I guess it’s time to shut up.
Mockingjay
26 Aug 2010 6 Comments
I made a point of not including spoilers in this post. I hate it when I’m told what’s going to happen so I’m not going to tell you what happens. Have no fear, read on. If you want to.
I (started and) finished Mockingjay yesterday. I thought it was pretty good. I know at least one person who was hoping that it would make a bigger final political statement, but I thought it was just about right. I had other problems with it, with the whole series.
I get the political aspect of the statement, I get that we need to be free. That aspect of the books is not lost on me (how could it be, the books practically beat you over the head with it).
But I have some questions about the social atmosphere. I have some questions about a society that watches teens killing one another as their (societies, not the teens) entertainment, but I also have questions about a society that watches “adults” hit one another with chairs a la Jerry Springer, or pull out one another’s hair a la the Real Housewives of wherever. Is violence as entertainment universal? Prevalent, absolutely, and disturbing as a concept, but I’m just as guilty as the average person of watching the house explode on the movie, TV show, what have you and thinking it’s cool or awesome or whatever.
There’s also a lot of discussion of the outrageous hairstyles, body makeovers etc. as an indictment of the people in the capital. How different that is than what we see today (I don’t know who would do it but it’s my understanding that there are a lot of people out there who are dying their hair un-natural colors) most of us are not as extreme as they are in the books but I’m not sure that my time spent with the girl who waxes me is really all that different than Effie Trinket’s. Are we only worthy if we look just the way we did at birth?
Is the difference that I worked for it? That can’t be all of it, the people in the capital worked, it just wasn’t very difficult or dangerous work but I’m sure that the fluffy, stylist team thought that they were working hard. Is it only work if it gets you dirty? If you break a sweat?
Is it ok to work as little as possible as long as you don’t glut yourself on someone else’s harsh or unfair work? That sounds good, but I shop at Walmart. It’s my understanding that at least some of those great deals are a result of poor labor policies in other countries. I don’t have details but I doubt that my ignorance exonerates me.
What’s my point? I’m not sure that I have one. Maybe I just need to stay away from books with a message, maybe I should stick with Janet Evanovich and let the rest of you figure out the bigger social and moral issues. Because me, I’ve got nothing.
Incidentally Mormon
22 May 2009 12 Comments
in How I Spend My Sundays, Overthink Much?, The Stuff I Read
I just finished reading a book called Zippedby Laura and Tom McNeal, it was pretty good, and I’d recommend it to anyone looking for fairly lightweight teen fiction, but that’s not the point. (If that were all it was, I wouldn’t bother mentioning it.) The reason that I bring it up is that there’s a Mormon character in the book. It’s not LDS fiction, it’s set in New England somewhere (I imagine that it said specifically but it wasn’t crucial enough for me to retain) not Utah, and it’s just this one girl and her mother that are Mormon.
And as soon it was mentioned that she was Mormon I was on alert.
Was this going to be anti? Was she going to leave the church and realize that she had been brainwashed? (I have other objections to the whole “brainwashed” designation but that’s something for another post.) Was she going to be some sort of wooden characeture rather than a fleshed out person? Or some kind of holier than thou, miss priss?
And she was none of those things. She was a real girl who liked and apparently believed in her religion. She was slightly conflicted but she was a teenaged girl, as teenagers weren’t we all at least slightly conflicted?(Aren’t we still?) She had a crush on a missionary, he had a crush on her, they chatted, even acknowledged the crush, she made him a plate of cookies, they even were as daring as to hug once. It’s not the kind of behavior that is recommended in the mission handbook but it’s not going to get anyone ex-communicated either. They wouldn’t even send him home for that. (Transferred sure, but not sent home.) And they didn’t.
The girl wasn’t the main character of the book, she was the girl that the main character liked. So even the thing with the missionary was really just to add a little conflict. End of story. She didn’t leave the church, she didn’t even have a big crisis of faith. She was just a girl.
I’m pretty sure this is the first time I’ve run into that in fiction, and the more I think about that the weirder it is. I mean, there’s a lot of us, we’re all over the place. You expect that in Utah of course. I can’t imagine that anyone would write a book set in Utah in which there were not Mormon characters (but then I’ ve never read a book set in Utah that wasn’t Mormon fiction) but it’s not like there are only Mormons in Utah. I grew up in Virginia. I was one of maybe 20 Mormons in my high school, not an overwhelming majority by any stretch but I think it’s safe to say that everyone in the school knew a Mormon. Probably most of the kids in the school would have counted at least one of us Mormons as a friend. We were characters in their lives who just happened to be Mormon, not necessarily good, not necessarily bad. We may have been having big religious crises but for the most part probably not, we were just going about our lives.
I don’t see that in the books that I read.
It turns out that at least one of the authors is probably Mormon. She graduated from BYU anyway, I haven’t looked up her church records or anything so I’m just extrapolating here but it seems a reasonable assumption. It’s harder to tell but my gut feeling is that her husband, the other author, is not. (The girl’s father is not Mormon, and … I don’t know something about it just makes me think that that part is somewhat autobiographical.) But I digress.
The point is that it’s a little sad to me that as soon as I run across a character who is Mormon, I’m immediately afraid that somehow the book is going to say something negative about the church. I was surprised and, I have to say, delighted, to read a book with a character who was just incidentally Mormon.
Bloggy Book Tour
18 Mar 2009 1 Comment
I recently read Annette Lyon’s new book Tower of Strength. It was pretty darn good.

Tower of Strength is the story of Tabitha Chadwick (Hall), a widow in her mid-twenties. She was married for all of about three months. Ending up with a son and a grumpy mother-in- law. For the first seven years after the death of her husband she lived away from her family (including in-laws) going to school and learning to support herself and her son.
And then she gets the chance of a lifetime, one that she can’t pass up but one that takes her home again.
The story is interesting and parts of it are very fun, but what I loved was watching her work through her feelings about her husband. For most of us the thought of having our spouse die is devastating. And it was for Tabitha too. At first. But the story that you read takes place seven years later. It’s the story of the woman that that young widowed bride became. She still loves her husband but the person she’s become is so different from the person she was when she was with him and from the person she would have been if he had lived. Add to that the fact that she only actually spent a few months with him and well, she’s conflicted.
Annette wrote a fantastic scene in the cemetery, the first time Tabitha goes to visit her husband’s grave after all those years. Tabitha is sad, sort of. What she seems to feel even more is guilt that she doesn’t feel sadder. Mostly she’s at a loss as to what to do. Her days of really crying over him are behind her. But she did love him, he was the father of her son. It’s very poignant.
Throughout the story Tabitha has to work out a lot of her feelings about her husband. And about her life, about how to move on and what to move on to.
There are two other characters in the book who have lost loved ones. Mother Hall, Tabitha’s mother-in-law has never gotten over the loss of her son and seems to resent Tabitha for the fact that she did (among other things) and Samuel Barnett, a widower of only a few months.
Watching the different ways all these characters deal with their loss and how their stories intersect is enough to make Tower of Strength worth the read.
And then Tabitha goes and buys a wild horse.
The book’s out now, you really ought to pick it up.
A Movie, a Book, and an Announcement
19 Feb 2009 17 Comments
in Cash, Green, Moolah, Lettuce, Pesos..., The Stuff I Read
I’m not pregnant.
Let’s just get that out out of the way right now, because apparently that’s the only news a married Mormon woman in her 20s or 30s can have, but that’s not my news.
Moving on.
I watched “the Pursuit of Happyness” last night. It wasn’t my first time through but I found that I was bothered by the same thing this time that bothered me on my first watching (That isn’t always the case you know, sometimes those things don’t bother you the second time through or sometimes you realize that you missed something the first time or…) first of all, it’s one of the more depressing movies ever made. A single father with his kid spending the night on the floor of the subway bathroom, give me a break! But that’s not my real problem with the movie. The thing is, he doesn’t spend the movie pursuing happiness, or even happyness, he spends the movie pursuing money.
Now I get that while we all know that money doesn’t buy happiness it does actually contribute greatly to it when you’re to the living in the bathroom in the subway station kind of poverty. But well, they wouldn’t have been living in the bathroom in the subway station if he’d have g gotten a job. I’m pretty sure that McDonalds was hiring, even in the 80s.
Of course then we couldn’t have all the touchy feely follow your dreams lessons that we get from the movie, never mind that it would be a really crappy boring movie, but a lot of me thinks that when you have a kid to feed and clothe and protect from pedophiles, maybe your dreams aren’t quite as important as all that.
Anyway, what I’m saying is that he meets this guy who drives a nice car and that’s all he knows about him. He doesn’t know if he’s happy, he doesn’t know if his wife just left him because he was sleeping with his secretary, he doesn’t know if he’s contemplating suicide (rich people do you know) all he knows is that he drives a nice car. So he puts himself and his son through hell so that he can too. Doesn’t that make you all warm and fuzzy?
Speaking of money-
I recently finished reading “How To Debt-Proof Your Marriage” by Mary Hunt. I loved loved loved it for the first three quarters of the book.
The first third of the book is really a lot more about marriage than it is about money and while it wasn’t information that I particularly needed (a lot of her suggestions were things that I was already doing (Dangit, I’m a good wife!)) it was pretty good and she made some really good points. (Why is it that we’re more comfortable talking about anything, ANYTHING in our society than we are money?) Seriously, sex v. money, which would you rather discuss?
After the marriage advice she started talking about how to manage your money.
First- Give away 10%. Oo, I like this. It sounds sort of… familiar. Now she’s not Mormon, the book was written from a non-denominational point of view (if I had to guess, I’d say some sort of protestant, not quite praise Jesus enough to be baptist, maybe episcopalian) but she does say that the first 10% belongs to the Lord and so you ought to give it back, not necessarily to a church but to some sort of charity or worthwhile cause. I can get behind that, I thought, go on.
Second- Save 10%. She says that we should have saved somewhere in a fairly liquid account, enough money to live on for 3 (it should be 6) months. This one’s a little harder for me. It’s advice I’ve heard millions of times (including in the sealing room just before I was married (and from a really rich guy, no less)) and it’s even advice that I follow. Sort of. Unfortunately, the money that I save for two months inevitably goes to covering the power bill in the third month. Still, hearing it again and seeing her put a number on it (she says $10,000 although the book was a bit dated and I don’t think that is very reflective of 3 months income for most families today) helped me to rededicate myself to this idea and resolve that I WILL DO IT!
Third- Bills. You’re supposed to compile all your bills. Regular monthly bills like water and power are easy, irregular bills like car repairs and home improvement expenses are harder. Monthly bills should be reduced if possible but then paid as usual. A separate bank account should be opened for irregular bills (she calls it a freedom account and while that’s fairly descriptive, I also think it’s pretty lame so I’m going to call it … something cool) and then money should be regularly deposited into that account for those things. Figure out how much you spent on car repairs last year, add a few dollars (your car is another year older after all) and divide by 12. That’s how much you should put aside for car repairs. The same goes for clothing, gifts, Christmas, whatever. Ingenious.
Yes, I know it’s obvious but some of us need it spelled out in a little different way. Shut up.
There’s also a plan in there for paying down debt, pay exactly what you’re paying now on all cards regardless of how the minimum payment go down and once you have one paid off apply that amount to the next card and so on, you’ve heard it before. It’s a good plan.
This is the point where the book sort of fell apart for me. Part of it, of course, is that I had unrealistic desires. What I wanted, what I think everybody who picks up a book like this wants, is for her to give me some magic formula for spending less money without my actually having to, you know, spend less money. Instead she talks about reducing spending. WHAT?! I’ve got to say, at this point I was not much of a fan of Ms. Hunt’s.
Luckily I stuck with her long enough to read that we should not over-pay our taxes.
Again, this is something that I’ve heard countless times before. And I flatly ignored it. I viewed income tax as my involuntary savings plan. And it worked, sort of. Every year when I do the taxes we get money back. A lot of money back. and that money nearly always goes to paying off a credit card that we had to use because we had to have the car fixed a month earlier. (Maybe I should have mentioned up-front that we really don’t carry much debt, it’s just the unexpected car problems or plumbing bill that isn’t a part of our normal spending that we end up putting on credit cards. And we usually pay it off within a few months.) She also made a big point throughout the book of telling you that you do not need to make more money, you just need to live within your means. Whatever?!
The final chapter is called something like “finding money you didn’t know you had” but it really should be called “just don’t read this chapter because it will turn you off to my whole system because here I’m going to teach you how to be really cheap which involves a lot of self deprivation which obviously you’re not a fan of or you wouldn’t be in so much debt in the first place, stupid”.
No really, it’s comprised of some, I’m sure, great money saving techniques but to anyone who actually needs the book to get out of serious debt it’s going to be a tough pill to swallow. It includes things like, scour the grocery ads every week and buy only the stuff on sale. (Who has time to really study that stuff and then go to three stores?) She devotes a paragraph or two to getting cheap internet (dial-up what? Not a chance, you saw what happened to me when I needed a cord, can you even imagine what I would do if I needed a phone line?) She talks about spending less on groceries, spending less on cleaning supplies, spending less on your car … by getting rid of it, or, buying a used domestic car (used, I can get behind, domestic not so much (she argues that domestic cars are cheaper to repair. She may be right but for my money my Honda or Toyota requires fewer repairs than her Dodge.)(said the girl who drives a Mazda.)) be patient, save the money first, go without, crazy stuff like that.
In all honesty I think that the last chapter in the book was a mistake on her part. It’s all good advice but a little, no a lot, distasteful to someone unused to focusing on saving, and maybe slightly offensive (not a good idea to tell people that they’re crazy/stupid to want to buy a brand new car) and it’s liable to kill any remaining desire the possibly newly financially responsible person has to actually be financially responsible. It almost did that for me.
But her ideas kept rattling around in my head. (There’s not much more in there after all.) Until I put together the fact that I get a lot of my own money back when I do the taxes (enough that in theory we could have had an extra $750/ month last year) and if I had all that money all year then the credit card to buy the tires would not have been necessary.
So I think we’re going to try it.
Hey, speaking of making more money, even though I was assured I didn’t need to, I keep looking at my three little boys and thinking that before too long they’re going to be three teenaged boys and somebody’s going to have to feed them. So, I’m going back to school.
Does This Pan Come With a Handle?
26 Aug 2008 16 Comments
Stephen King wrote a short story in 1997 called “Blind Willie” about a guy who lives in a big ol’ house in the suburbs who has a lovely wife and has the neighbors over for dinner and the whole shebang. Then we find out this guy panhandles for a living.
We’ve all heard this story about how there are people panhandling who are making enough money to put kids through college or some such.
I’ve decided that’s an urban legend. Here’s why.
Arthur Conan Doyle wrote the same story. In 1891. “The Man With the Twisted Lip” tells the story of a newspaper reporter who spent a week panhandling to write a column. He earned more panhandling that week than he did writing so a month or so later when he needed a little extra cash he headed out again. Until eventually he quit writing and took up begging full time. So that by the end which is really the beginning of the story he has a big ‘ol house in the suburbs and a wife. And there’s no mention of having folks over for dinner but I think it comes with the lifestyle. Naturally Sherlock Holmes figured it all out.
But it just makes me wonder if there’s any truth to it. Do you think people really can make a good, I mean a good living at it. I’m not sure.
Oh and, please send money.










