Just got home to see Mariano pull Yankees out of tight spot, Angels everywhere. I’m posting for good luck! Sorry for the repetition (but if Yankees repeat winning….)
Yea Mariano! – Go Yankees!
Posted October 19, 2009 by ManicDdailyCategories: Baseball
Tags: good luck, manicddaily, Mariano Rivera, Yankees
Robert Pattinson Unmasked, Carefully Carved
Posted October 18, 2009 by ManicDdailyCategories: Robert Pattinson
Tags: 1 Mississippi, Blogging, blogosphere, Edward Cullen, Huliq, Irish Central, manicddaily, Michelangelo, Pierce Brosnan, Remember Me, Rob-O-Lantern, Robert Pattinson, RPatz, Twilight, Twilight pumpkin stencils
In the blues of Sunday evening, I looked up two conflicting articles in the blogosphere. Both about you know who. (Hint—it’s not Voldemort.)
They present an interesting contrast. One is from an internet site called Irish Central, which has never liked Robert Pattinson because of all the attention he (inadvertently) stole from the Irish actor, Pierce Brosnan, in the filming of Remember Me in New York this past summer. Irish Central had a few articles back then (i) comparing the relative virtues of RPatz and Brosnan –you can guess who came out ahead, and (ii) saying how much friendlier Brosnan was to fans. (Of course, Brosnan was not the guy who was grabbed from every direction, chased into collisions with taxi cabs, and forced to stand in a seven foot high box during breaks in the on-street filming.)
In this weekend’s Irish Central article, focusing on bestselling Halloween masks (presumably in Ireland), the Central reports, snarkily, that the mask of the “pretty boy” vampire isn’t even in the top ten. It goes on to mock Rob: “if your halloween mask won’t sell, what kind of horror film movie star are you?”
Irish Central bases its snarkiness on one major misapprehension—the Twilight films aren’t horror films, they are romances. Since when do romantic heroes sell Halloween masks?
Never. What romantic heroes apparently sell at Halloween (or distribute in large numbers free of charge) are pumpkin stencils! I learned this from another, much smaller, internet site called Huliq, which reports on the popularity of free downloadable pumpkin stencils of RPatz as Edward Cullen. (You know the pose–it’s the same one used on the RPatz shower curtain–he looks angry/determined with criss-crossing eyebrows, and puffed- up hair.)
I took a look at these stencils, and frankly, you’d have to have the manual dexterity of Michelangelo to carve one into a pumpkin. (Although the directions helpfully suggest using toothpicks to hold the bridge of the nose in place.)
Which brings up another mistake in Irish Central’s whole put-down of RPatz. Who even wears big rubber cover-your-whole face Halloween masks? Not young women. Not ‘tween girls. Not even older, weird, women. Not, in other words, Pattinson’s primary fan base.
But who, one wonders, carves Robert Pattinson pumpkin faces?
Simple! People who want to win a Rob-O-Lantern contest!
What a world/internet.
P.S. If you want help with elephant-o-lanterns, check out 1 Mississippi by Karin Gustafson on link above or at Amazon.
Baseball and Life – Yankees-Angels Game 2 – The Blink Factor/The Not-Blinking Factor-Boom Boom Boom
Posted October 18, 2009 by ManicDdailyCategories: Baseball
Tags: A-Rod, A.J. Burnett, Angels, Aymer, Baseball, blink factor, Derek Jeter, elephant baseball, good luck, Hairston Jr., Izturis, Karin Gustafson, manicddaily, Mariano Rivera, Melky Cabrera, mouthful, paradigm of life, Stress, talismans, Yankees, Yankees-Angel Game 2
My good luck tricks seemed to have worked once more for the Yankees—i.e. last night during the second Yankees-Angels game, I posted my elephant baseball picture AND, at a certain critical juncture, stopped watching. (See earlier post re good luck “Talismans” and my personal effect on Yankees’ baseball.)
I won’t take all the credit for the victory—there was also Jeter, Cano, and Mariano, Jerry Hairston, Jr., A-Rod, and Damon (who made some really terrific catches), Melky Cabrera, Phil Coke, and Joba (who still seems a little pudgy boy to me especially when he celebrates), and Molina, who had a really hard job as catcher for A.J. Burnett, who also, as starter, deserves some credit, despite the way in which his wild pitches can drive a fan crazy. (The frustration he causes is frankly not completely redeemed by the whipped cream pies.)
Then, there was just the Yankee grit, that somehow, so frequently, manages to just hang on and on and on.
Watching the videos of the end of the game this morning made me think (yes, it’s a cliché) of baseball as a paradigm of life. Yes, again, yes, it’s a cliché. Still, it seems somehow a more appropriate paradigm than a lot of other big sports. (Which I have to confess don’t interest me enough to know much about them. Still, I hate to think of any sports in which (i) people are repeatedly tackled and concussed, or (ii) forced to chase around constantly with little chance of achieving many goals, as better paradigms.)
What is unusual about baseball is simply how fast everything moves when it does, finally, move at all. The replays of the last moments of last night’s October 17th game against the Angels are particularly striking. On the Yankees’ site, they show footage taken from nearly every angle, even one that simply shows Cabrera running, relatively quickly for a big guy, to first.
In case, you didn’t follow the game, in the thirteenth inning, with a man on first and second, Yankee Melky Cabrera hit a ball that bounced between first and second. The Angels’ second baseman, Maicer Izturis, stopped the ball, then, trying for a double play, threw it hard and fast to Angels’ short stop Erik Aybar, who stood at second, and who frankly seems like a really a surly, cocky sort of guy (if you are a Yankee’s fan), who missed it. The Angel’s third baseman, Chone Figgins, stopped Izturis’s throw, but bobbled the ball. In the meantime, Hairston Jr., who’d been holding on third before Izturis’s error, dashed towards home. Hairston was immediately overrun by the rest of the Yankees’ team and quickly assumed a fetal position on the ground as they all energetically patted him.
The long and short of that detailed explanation is simply that, although it takes a long time to write it all down, the play actually happened in an incredibly short period of time: boom (Cabrera connected with the ball), boom (Iztura stopped and immediately threw it), boom (it slid below Aymer’s glove), boom (Figgins bobbled it), boom (Hairston slid into home). When the footage that just focuses on Cabrera is shown, you see from the way that he turns, delighted, that the run has already been scored even as he makes it to first base.
The speed of it all is especially amazing because most of baseball is so slow. The pitcher stands and postures, eyes narrowing and re-narrowing, with little shakes or nods of the head to the catcher, the batter (if Jeter especially), re-tightens his gloves (two or three or four times), re-squares his shoulders, gently sways the bat, everyone constantly repositions their stances (usually spitting or blowing a bubble at the same time in a sort of homage to old-time multi-tasking). Everyone, pitcher, batter, catcher, batter, in and out fielders, both wait and prepares. Even the audience waits, though it doesn’t prepare so much as eats and drinks, crosses its fingers and yells. So much waiting, so much preparation, so much eating and drinking, finger-crossing and yelling. And then, boom, boom, boom, boom. The moment arrives and players are suddenly expect to act, react, not just to make decisions, but to carry them out – boom boom boom.
Okay, you get it. This is where the paradigm part comes in. There are obvious parallels to situations in the marketplace–buying and selling on the stock market, buying and selling anything, anywhere. And also to moving around a potentially dangerous world–driving a car, for example, especially in, or around, an accident. The way action unfolds in baseball parallels many emergency situations actually; an emergency, a threat, that can also turn into an opportunity (i.e. the near double-play that becomes a winning score for the opposite side.)
So many parallels: the need to be able to act even in the midst of a mouthful! The need to keep a mouthful going in order to be able to act! The blink factor! Or, maybe it’s the not-blinking factor! The waiting, the planning, the practice, and then the OMG moment, which never takes exactly the shape anticipated, and frequently involves both a solo effort AND team work, and if not exactly team work, at least the avoidance of collision. (A-Rod and Mariano were a great example of that in the tenth inning when they both ran towards a flying bunt, which was then caught by Mariano.)
Ah, Mariano….
Go Mariano!!!
Posted October 17, 2009 by ManicDdailyCategories: Baseball
Tags: Baseball, manicddaily, Mariano Rivera, Yankees, Yankees baseball
There’s nothing else to say at 11:01.
(Bottom of 8th, second game against Angels, October 17, 2009)
Just in Case – Go Yankees!
Posted October 17, 2009 by ManicDdailyCategories: Baseball
Tags: elephant baseball, luck, manicddaily, post-season, talismans, Yankees, Yankees baseball
Who Needs Water? Drilling the Marcellus Shale
Posted October 17, 2009 by ManicDdailyCategories: Environment, New York City, news, Uncategorized
Tags: Adirondack, Adirondack Beer, Coors, dairy, Karin Gustafson, manicddaily, marcellus shale, Mountains, natural gas, natural gas drilling, New York City, New York State, Upstate New York, Upstate New York drilling
Ten Reasons (That Anyone Can Understand) Why New York Should Say No to Upstate Natural Gas Drilling.
1. You need water to make beer.
2. Even a cold bath is better than one that leaves you with boils.
3. Casino-Resorts without (a) hot tubs (that don’t leave you with boils), or (b) good beer (I’ve heard Adirondack is infinitely superior to Coors) tend to go bust.
4. Milk is good for your teeth.
5. Mountains are good for your soul.
6. When the animals go, we’re next.
7. It’s hard to create jobs in a place where you can’t drink, bathe, feed animals, or wash clothes in the water.
8. It’s hard to keep jobs downstream of a place where you can’t—oops! Correction. It’s hard to keep jobs in a place whose reservoirs hold water that can’t be drunk, bathed in, or used for any human or animal purpose.
9. Wyoming was once a beautiful state.
10. And I haven’t heard that it’s become the jobs capital of the country.
Six Reasons Why New York Should Say Yes to Natural Gas Drilling
1. I can take my one-time drilling lease payment and rent a trailer (maybe) somewhere a whole lot warmer than Upstate New York.
2. Those stupid dairy cows really build up a stench.
3. Coors is okay by me. (Better not drill in Colorado.)
4. Mountains make me carsick.
5. Those stupid, rich, New Yorkers—don’t they just buy bottled water?
6. They don’t use water to make diet soda, do they? Regular?
Go Yankees! (Hoping for Luck)
Posted October 16, 2009 by ManicDdailyCategories: Baseball
Tags: Baseball, baseball play-offs, children's book illustration, elephant baseball, manicddaily, Yankees, Yankees baseball
Friday – Weekend Projects (The Creative Ones You Put Off) – Don’t Put Them Off
Posted October 16, 2009 by ManicDdailyCategories: writer's block
Tags: 1 Mississippi, Balloon Boy, creative blocks, Creative Projects, Friday, Karin Gustafson, manicddaily, Weekend creativity, Weekend Projects, Where the Wild Things Are, writer's block
Friday! Finally. The boy not in the balloon is safe and Where The Wild Things Are is primarily in movie theaters.
For those of you who like to do creative projects (write, paint, write some more), and have limited freedom and focus, now is the time to get going. (School has started, Halloween is not yet here, Thanksgiving/Christmas are still genuinely still far away.)
My primary immediate advice: take the time. Make an appointment with yourself, for yourself, time for your work. Schedule a slot in what may otherwise seem an inpenetrable weekend—10-1, Saturday–your work time. Don’t just pencil it in; write it in indelible ink. Then, don’t allow a conflict; don’t take on a chore; don’t slip into an accidental cancellation, don’t cut yourself short. (It may be best not to tell others what that Saturday appointment is for. You may also need to turn off your internet access.)
My secondary advice, before starting and before turning off your internet: check out the series of posts I wrote in July and August about writer’s block. Although these were specifically about “blocking writer’s block”, many of them can apply to other types of creative blocks as well, particularly those aspects related to taking yourself seriously. (These posts can be found by clicking the “category” on the side called Writer’s Block: some of the ones categorized under Stress may also apply, especially to less writerly blocks.)
If you have writer’s block (or some other creative block), I can’t guarantee that these will help you. But you may find something useful. Reading them may also give you that one more little justifiable delay (ha ha!), which (it is to be hoped) may serve as a springboard into a wellspring of creative flow.
Good luck!
(If none of that works, you can always go to Where the Wild Things Are, or check out another children’s animal book, 1 Mississippi, by Karin Gustafson, at the link to the side.)
The Twilight Amorality of Edward Cullen – What Does It Mean?
Posted October 15, 2009 by ManicDdailyCategories: news, Twilight Saga
Tags: Balloon Boy, Bella Swan, boy in balloon, Breaking Dawn, Cullens, Eclipse, Edward Cullen, fellow feeling, Goldman Sachs, Goldman Sachs' bonuses, Joe the Plumber, manicddaily, Mayhem, New Moon, Twilight, Twilight Saga, Vampires
Maybe it’s the stress of the bad news (that horrible moment when the balloon landed and the first responders realized that the six-year old boy was not in it), or relief at the good news (the wonderful moment when it was discovered that the little boy wasn’t ever in the balloon, that he had been hiding in a box in the garage)—
Or maybe it’s the fact that the Dow’s close above 10,000 and Goldman Sachs’ good earnings report have been called by some at Fox, the “Bush” recovery, and by others as no recovery at all (apparently Goldman would have done better if it had simply invested in an index fund and the economy is certainly not out of the woods yet)—
Whatever—it’s all made me decide to write about Twilight again, the phenomenally successful series of books by Stephanie Meyer – 70 million sold and counting.
Specifically, I want to write about the amorality of Twilight, and to wonder what this amorality, or really, the audience’s acceptance of this amorality, may mean.
First, for those who don’t know the series, the Twilight saga, written by Mormon Meyer (a graduate of Brigham Young University), has typically been considered to be an anachronistically moralistic series of books. This characterization has resulted primarily from the fact (spoiler alert) that the sexual consummation of the passionate love affair between vampire Edward Cullen and human Bella Swan (even full frontal nudity) is pointedly delayed until marriage. Then (double spoiler alert), once they do get married, Bella nearly instantly becomes extremely pregnant. (It was a good thing they waited!)
Edward is repeatedly characterized in the last three books, New Moon, Eclipse and Breaking Dawn¸ as a “perversely moral vampire” with very old-fashioned ideas. His “family” is also characterized as amazingly moral because, by and large, they feed only on the blood of wild animals. And, although they do seem to take particular pleasure in certain endangered carnivores, they try to avoid having an unduly negative impact on the environment. (At least it’s not Aunt Susie.)
A closer look at the books (which I must confess I’ve taken, repeatedly) shows the vampires’ morality to be very one-sided, i.e. it’s all about sex and very little about money. (Yes, the vampires, who are rich due to prophesy of stock market trends, do give their old clothes to the werewolves, but even they admit that they only wear things once.)
Not only are the vampires amoral, they are also incredibly solipsistic: they (Edward in particular) only care about their own (Bella.)
In scene after scene, mayhem occurs just offstage. In New Moon (the movie about to come out), a large tourist group is fodder for the “Voluturi”, the vampire leaders. Edward hurries Bella away so she won’t be upset by the sounds of the mass slaughter, but makes no effort to save even one tourist. (Okay, they’re tourists….)
Similarly, when vampire mayhem stalks Seattle (of all places) in Eclipse, Edward’s main concern seems to be the negative attention the slaughter may bring. In a hypothetical plane crash in that book, he talks, hypothetically, of reaching out to save only Bella from certain death. (Doesn’t he have two hands?)
In the fourth book, Edward and Bella even stand passively (if uncomfortably) by as their vampire guests roam the countryside feeding on humans (granted, the guests go out of State.)
I know, I know. There’s only so much a person…errr. ..vampire… can do. Maybe Edward is right to focus his energies. But what’s amazing to me is is the shift this represents from the classic romantic hero.
When did Superman even abandon a kitten up a tree to save only Lois Lane? In nearly every opera you can think of (Aida, Il Travatore, the Magic Flute), the hero must part from his love for the sake of Truth, Duty to family, society, or gypsy clan, and some really heart-wrenching singing. Romeo (yes, a hothead) forsakes Juliet to avenge Mercutio. Even Harry Potter (who is a classic, if modern hero) leaves Ginny to save Hogwarts.
Edward’s solipsism is especially misplaced since he is supposed to be a World War I kind of guy. It’s hard to imagine another generation so bound by duty.
So what does Edward’s amorality, and more importantly, fan inattention to it, say about modern culture? (And please don’t get me wrong, I still love both him and his portrayer, Robert Pattinson.)
Certainly, we live in a country with a lot of fellow feeling. I think about all the wonderful first responders who chased down the balloon today in which the little six-year old was, thankfully, not lodged; I think of all the millions of Americans who undoubtedly hoped and prayed for that little boy’s safety.
But then I also think of the health care debate, the intense furor over the “public option”.
And, forgive me, but I also think of the outrage over Obama’s comments to “Joe the Plumber”; the casual ‘spreading wealth around’ remark that drew so much ire and concern, and that were raised with such anger (and comparisons to Stalinism) by my taxi driver in Florida. (See earlier post re incredulity in Florida.)
Goldman Sachs’ outsized bonuses also somehow come to mind.
Hmmm…..
After the Sestinas–Why Bother?
Posted October 14, 2009 by ManicDdailyCategories: poetry
Tags: free verse, Karin Gustafson, manicddaily, orange, poetry, prosody, rhyming, sestina, sonnet, verse forms, villanelle, why bother writing formal verse, writing poetry
As I wrote down the rules for a sestina in the last couple of posts, I have to confess that the question “why bother?” went through my head with the regularity of the six repeating “end words” of that form.
Why bother writing formal poetry? (Much less blogging about it?)
Seriously, isn’t poetry supposed to be about free expression?
So why bother with all the restraints and requirements of a poetic form? Why not just write free verse all the time?
Ten reasons:
1. Writing formal poetry limits your choices. (If your form requires rhymes, you are limited to words that rhyme.) This is a big help if you don’t know exactly what you want to say (and if it doesn’t involve oranges.)
2. Writing formal poetry defines your choices (i.e. once you decide to write a villanelle, you know your poem will have two repeating lines that have to work as a couplet at some point, and will probably not end in “orange”.)
3. Writing formal poetry terminates your choices. (If you write a sonnet, you’ll be done by line fourteen.)
4. Poetic forms provide inherent music and, if you can manage it, rhythm. This is great if you don’t have a good ear; even greater, if you do.
5. Sometimes the music of a poetic form, and the cleverness of its dance, can substitute for profundity (which is wonderful if you never found out what exactly you wanted to say.)
6. Writing formal poetry is fun; there is a game-like quality to it. (It has rules!)
7. Even failing at the chosen form makes you more conscious of language, and, it is to be hoped, a more musical and adventurous writer. (Oh Orange!)
8. Even bare success at the chosen form puts you in the company of some of the greatest poets of all time. You, like Shakespeare, will have written a sonnet; like Dylan Thomas, a villanelle; like Elizabeth Bishop, a sestina. This sense of camaraderie, and the understanding that arises from even a brief turn in the trenches of prosody, will make you a more appreciative and attentive reader.
9. Finally, it must be understood, and grudgingly accepted, that a good sonnet, sestina, villanelle or pantoum is not good because it follows the rules, but because it’s a good poem. That said, it’s hard to write a good poem. Maybe you don’t have it in you one day, maybe not any day. However, if you follow the rules, which can be done by simple diligence (if not always inspiration), you can write what qualifies as a sonnet, or one of the other forms. You may not have achieved a good poem, but you will have achieved a sonnet, a sestina, villanelle or pantoum, which itself deserves a modicum of pride.
10. “Orange” is supposed to be one of the few words that, allegedly, has no perfect rhyme in English. But it works just fine in a sestina (or mid-line.) And, if you do manage to rhyme it, well….
If you prefer counting elephants to counting syllables, check out 1 Mississippi by Karin Gustafson at link above.

Recent Comments