Tag: Isabel Swift

Home > ArchivesTag: Isabel Swift

Self-brainwashing…

June 24, 2017 by in category From Isabel Swift tagged as , , ,

 

Brainwashing | Isabel Swift | A Slice of Orange

from my favorite paper: Funny Times

I know, most of America drives around in their own cars, but those city dwellers who find themselves in the back seat of a taxi or other hired conveyance may sympathize with the situation. Many people that drive for a living have the radio on: talk radio, music, endless news, NPR.  I have to confess, I am a big advocate for silence, and feel there should be a bi-partisan movement for the right to not have to listen to stuff (on airplanes, in elevators, in malls, etc.).

Sure, I could get (and indeed have) earphones.  But I don’t want to block out the world, I want to hear it, just not endless marketing jabber or musak or whatever. But I am particularly unhappy with having to listen to endless news or much of talk radio.  There are a few talk radio stations whose goal is to be entertaining or informative.  But most lure their listeners in with conflict, outrage, fear, danger, scary information, etc. like a fish with a dangler lure….

These kinds of shows—TV, radio, whatever—wind listener’s clocks, pull their chain, and give them some frisson of energy, hate, fear, anger, which seems to be far more addictive and universal (clearly part of one’s “lizard brain“) than a feeling of peace, happiness, learning or engagement. It exhausts me to listen to the streams of exhaust!  And I don’t have adequate shields to effectively block out noise.  Yes, I freely confess, I can’t pack with the TV on.  It’s just too distracting.

Propaganda works if you hear information over and over again, it wears away at your critical faculty (if you have one).  It’s convincing, even it it’s patently untrue and utterly ridiculous.  If you see it, hear it, read it, talk about it it gets truthified through endless repetition.  So I now not only ask the drivers to turn off the radio, but tell them to stop listening to this endless, depressing stream of fairly useless information. It isn’t good for their outlook on life.

It’s all a creepy, voluntary self-brainwashing.

I now feel much more charitable towards endless sports!  But really, they should be reading romances….

Isabel Swift

0 0 Read more

Romance Writer’s “Research”

May 30, 2017 by in category From Isabel Swift tagged as , ,

Romance Writer's "Research"Can we address the absurd queries about romance authors doing “research,” nudge, nudge, wink, wink?  Does anyone ask mystery or horror writers how many people they had to disembowel before they could write their story?  I don’t think so.

(And of course, there is the fact that if they answered, they’d have to kill you).

It’s also delightfully contradictory, as others often accuse romances as being utterly unrealistic stories–that also apparently must be based on personal experience.  Hmmmm.  You must choose one or the other, but you really can’t have both those complaints simultaneously.

There is a dictum: write what you know, but luckily, it’s not a requirement.

Write what you can imagine.

Write what you think about, care about, fantasize about, dream about.

Write to explore what you don’t fully understand.

Write to open minds, to touch hearts.

It’s called fiction because you make it up…

Isabel Swift

1 0 Read more

Zombies!

September 24, 2016 by in category From Isabel Swift tagged as

You know how myths and legends are actually early stage psychiatry?

They are stories that illustrate behaviors, offer life lessons and explore the dynamic between certain personalities.  They demonstrate the impact of misunderstandings, the consequences of acting hastily and the importance of not dismissing people because they don’t meet your assessment of being a valuable player.  They remind us of the need for courtesy to all (really, you just never know), and countless other helpful guideposts to better understand and survive in this complex world.

Jealous Hera, mischievous Loki, the old beggar woman asking for alms, the simple son, witches, goblins, vampires, werewolves, zombies….
Zombies! Yes, it sounds a bit ridiculous.  Despite Haitan folklore, Vodou, Voodoo, or whatever spelling or incantation you choose—or even the possibility that the Undead do indeed walk—our present Zombie craze is highly stereotyped and stylized.

But you perhaps never thought of the Undead as a valuable life lesson—an accurate explanation of what life is actually like.

Think again.

It all starts innocently enough, you’re living your life, hanging out with your classmates, co-workers, colleagues, spending days, months, often years together, cordial, close, connected.  You chat, share meals, share stories, share your life, your dreams, your experiences.
You think you are surrounded by humans, but all it takes is a change to clarify who in your group are the living dead—surviving off flesh or brains—and who are actually human.  You graduate, your kids go to different schools, you move, you change jobs, you retire.  Suddenly, you no longer have a brain or flesh worth eating—you have nothing to offer.

In fairness, you can’t stay friends with everyone & the drifting apart is often mutual, but it’s still an odd feeling to achieve invisibility with people you may have seen every day for years.

Retirement may be the most challenging adjustment, as other changes often just trade one group of the Undead for another.  Opting out of the workforce can often eliminate your usefulness to others quite dramatically.  Suddenly, you have nothing worth eating….

Visiting the old workplace you realize you are a ghost in the machine—invisible to most.  Though it can sometimes be quite surprising who you are visible to, and to whom you have disappeared.

Just like in a Zombie film the humans are often not the ones you would expect.

0 0 Read more

It’s easy to criticize

August 24, 2016 by in category Columns tagged as
…but I wish there were rules—at least with any public criticism—that required the critic to present a viable alternative (and “viable” is a key word here!). A sort of Thumper-like commitment that if you are going to say something negative, you have to provide a reasonable positive alternative.  That would certainly shut a lot of people up (yours truly among others!).
Is there a better way of doing it?  Is there a better choice? Think about it. Actually think.
If you do, you may determine that the results you are complaining about (sub-optimal as they may indeed be) are the really the best alternative.
Every day we all experience the complex algorithms we work with in daily life to get something accomplished.  It could be the choices we make in getting our kids up, dressed, fed and out the door to school or it could be a business merger.  We balance encouragement, threats, incentives (bribery), etc. to get the job done as well, as quickly, as effortlessly, as humanely (or not), as possible to motivate behavior and get the results we want or need.
That can make for a lot of complex juggling of timing, personalities, personal values, choices, priorities, mood, costs, external pressures etc. The end result often may not be ideal or what we had hoped for. But that’s part of being an imperfect person in an imperfect world.  Life doesn’t usually give us “do-overs.”
The situations we and others face are rarely black and white.  But especially with technology, we can make a judgment without any knowledge or context and we actually expect to be taken seriously.
Complaints—especially now about politicians and the political process—display a startling naïveté, absence of thought and a shocking lack of awareness of history.
I have to admit to being Kinseyan in my assessment of human behavior—if most people have been doing something for centuries, it is unlikely that any person, belief-system or rhetoric will be able to airbrush that behavior out.
It’s not that change can’t happen, it can.  But it’s a slow and hard fought battle and all the incremental gains can be easily lost. There needs to be a realignment of incentives (and there’s usually no incentive to realign them) so it takes real thought and effective politics to get something done.  If you can’t read actual history, watch Lincoln or All the Way for an understanding of what it actually takes to get something done.
As a female, the history of women’s suffrage is depressing—it’s been less than century (19th Amendment was August 18, 1920) in the USA, something to remember as Americans finger-point other countries’ lack of gender equality. That’s about 150 years into our nationhood, and there are still a fair number of Americans who are feeling a bit sad about it & would like to turn back the clock. Change takes time.


Yes, it’s easy to criticize. But it’s far less appealing to be criticized, so before dishing it out, consider if there is a viable alternative (and “viable” is a key word here!) before excoriating the stupidity of others.  

Judge something on its own merits/demerits: don’t blame the peacock for its tail or wish it were a chicken and provided eggs.

Isabel Swift 

0 0 Read more

Criticism…

May 24, 2016 by in category Columns tagged as

I just read Anthony Lane’s 5/16/16 review of “Captain America: Civil War” and “The Lobster” in The New Yorker. And, to semi-quote Peter Finch in Network, I really just can’t take it anymore!

Clearly, Mr Lane has not gotten the excellent advice a friend gave me in college when I asked him (a little desperately): “What do you say when a friend asks you to read something they wrote and tell them what you think? What if you didn’t like it?  Do you risk the truth? Or lie for the sake of the friendship?”

I’m not comfortable with a polite lie; it seems to denigrate the friendship.  Yet very few really want to hear the unvarnished truth about something they have created, labored over and are taking the risk of sharing with you.

What do you say?

The advice, which I have internalized in assessing all creative work was: “Liking or not liking is not at issue. When you read something, think about what the creator was trying to accomplish.  Did they achieve their goal?”

This opened a door to looking at any material and considering it in its own right.  Not against my personal opinion, but against itself, and if I have the background, in its context.

I would always laugh (quietly) when people would comment on series romances and say: “Well, it’s hardly literature!”  And I would think Why are you making this absurd comparison? Neither is The New York Times, but you probably read it every day.  Assess something in its own right, or against its peers, in its own context.

Of course everyone is entitled to their personal taste: I like this, I don’t like that.  I don’t even have to have a reason.  But that doesn’t require any critical faculties or judgment, really.  It’s just your feeling, your opinion.

True criticism, in my opinion, is to put aside your personal tastes, your possibly narrow and judgmental vision of what is ‘proper’ or ‘acceptable’ or ‘intellectually validated’ and open your mind and heart to what the work itself is trying to achieve, how it relates to the history of material trying to achieve similar goals, and how it may succeed, fail, or break new ground.

Mr Lane seems deeply respectful of the surreal, science fiction and absurdist vision of “The Lobster,” but childishly, rudely dismissive and disrespectful of an comic-book based action adventure film (which, full disclosure, I very much enjoyed).

I realize that many critics and their readers delight in creating a polarized world of Good and Bad, but it lacks humanity, offers little insight, and seems…well, small.

Isabel Swift

0 0 Read more
1234

Copyright ©2017 A Slice of Orange. All Rights Reserved. ~PROUDLY POWERED BY WORDPRESS ~ CREATED BY ISHYOBOY.COM

>