I’ve learned some doggy psychology (the hard way).

So, I wake up Saturday morning with an entire day of productivity ahead of me, and, instead, I end up making an emergency trip to the vet with my 10lb. Jack Russell Terrier, Belle. She had to be put under to have her head sewn shut and her ear put back together. She’s sitting across from me right now with a sad face…looking through her transparent lampshade apparatus (think they call it a collar).

What happened? I’ll tell you what happened. Belle decided to put her head in her brother Benny’s bowl as he was eating. And the rest, as they say, is history. Benny got angry and struck back. Now, before anybody gets all out of control, understand that I am not happy with Benny’s violence towards his sister dog, but the vet explained to me that there is little danger here. What’s going on is a little question of social order in our household. Belle has been acting as the alpha dog this whole time (eight years without sibling rivalry) and, finally, after years of torture from her, Benny realized that he is big enough and strong enough to dominate Belle. So, he has begun to try to dominate, but Belle disagrees. Thus, an argument ensues and Belle gets the shit end of that stick.

My part in all of this? I am now going to have to help Benny assert himself as the alpha dog and return things to a more natural order (with the “in charge” dog being the one who can physically take charge). That means that I will have to feed Benny first, pay attention to him first, let him out first, etc., etc., so that Belle gets the signal from me that Benny is higher up on the chain of command.

The problem? Well, Benny does not have a take-charge personality. He is calm and docile by nature, so he is not very convincing in his alphadom. But we’re trying. Don’t worry. Benny and Belle are both fine. They normally get on very well. It’s just that things are changing around here (apparently) and it’s up to me to make sure that the transition is as painless as it possibly can be.

So, instead of being super productive on Saturday, I spent all day caring for  my wounded little doggie. What mom’s will do for their pups!

I’ve learned that “show condition clean” means sterile.

So, I’m selling my house. Yep, it’s up on the market as of today! Of course, you don’t just list your house and let fly…or at least I don’t. Many of us have seen those home improvement shows about selling, buying, and searching for homes. Well, that’s me on all ends right now. I’ve applied for pre-approval on a mortgage (all done online now–pretty fancy!), we’ve begun our search for a home in Virginia, we’ve even done a good portion of packing.

But, by far, the most amount of time and energy has been spent on tightening up the house…getting it into SHOW CONDITION. As of today, there will be no dishes in the sink (EVER), no blankets on the couch (they’ll be folded neatly and placed in their leather bin), no dust or doggie hairs ANYWHERE, no unmade beds, no exposed laundry, no jackets over chairs, no shoes anywhere but in the closet (or on my feet), no disorganized closets, no junk mail in view, no books left unshelved, no toothbrush by the sink, no brushes on the vanity. None of it. No blinds out of plumb, no mirrors smudged. Well, you get the point. Not that my house was a disaster area before we decided to sell, but, well, let’s just say it was lived in. There was evidence of life in every room in the house. Now? NOTHING. Sterile rooms. It looks like the body snatchers came and plucked the inhabitants right out of the house just as spring cleaning was completed. Crystal clean house. No sign of life.

 Oh, well, we do what we can to ge by, I guess. Hope the house sells, anyway. It’s really nice, ESPECIALLY NOW!

I’ve learned that some people are shameless racists.

Today, when I went to log on to  my wordpress blog, I noticed that the featured blog posting was from the blog entitled ”Stuff White People Like.” (You can look for the blog, but I refuse to provide a link to this garbage). I’ve seen this blog before, and I’ve even posted a comment regarding the blogger’s discussion about white people’s affinity for bottled water–about how I don’t think that bottled water is, was, ever has been, or ever needs to be a black/white issue and the general racist nature of clander’s posts. Today, the blog posting is about white people and music piracy.

The “About” page of this blog simply explains, “This blog is a scientific approach to highlight and explain stuff white people like. The are pretty predictable.” Now, I don’t care who is writing the blog, what race, nationality, gender, age, religion, etc., etc., etc. The blog, just the concept of the blog, is unapologetically racist to the core. The blogger, too, is a shamelss racist. Oh, and surprise, so are many of those who frequent the blog and post comments.

 Why is this okay?How many steps backward are represented by an entire blog of blatant generalizations, judgements, and stereoptypes? No matter who is the blogger, the nature of the blog is offensive to all races. How very, very shameful that a blog like this even exists, never mind the fact that it is so popular.

Okay, so let’s say that the blogger is after popularity. Popularity at what cost? I will do my best to avoid this racist’s blog from now on. I will neither comment on the blog nor discuss it in further comments. I have half a mind to disassociate with wordpress.com altogether, but then I guess that wordpress.com is not in the business of censorship. It’s just hard to come to terms with the fact that a person like clander (the racist blogger) even exists. UGH. Sorry, world.

Am I wrong?

I’ve learned that it’s okay to be wrong, as long as something really cool is happening while you’re busy being wrong

I think I’m suddenly into long blog titles. Today’s little bit of entertainment, I guess.

Okay, so here goes me, admitting that I was wrong about the course readings for my Rowan University graduate course, Writing for Electronic Communities:  I was wrong, weeks ago, when I said that I wouldn’t keep LudwikFleck’s book on my nightstand. Dead wrong. Fleck’s theory about discoveries and modes of thought not gaining momentum and exposure until the universe is good and ready is one darned theory that comes up over and over and over again in our course readings and, well, in the world. Okay, Mr. Fleck, you just relax there on my cozy little nightstand, then.

Now we are reading a book whose subtitle and book cover leave MUCH to be desired, The Wealth of Reality: An Ecology of Composition. Go ahead, roll you eyes: I did! But, alas, I was wrong about how horrific this reading experience would be. Margaret Syverson, the book’s author, discusses the concept of complex systems and sets out to prove that composition studies, regardless of the fact that for so long we have considered writing to be a solitary act, can be informed by applying the study of complex systems to the act of composition. Hmmmm…Still not convinced that I was wrong about the book’s stimulating nature?

Try this: Early on in the book, Syverson quotes Waldrop as saying, “The edge of chaos is where life has enough stability to sustain itself and enough creativity to deserve the name of life.” HA! The book is about my life, after all! Yes, yes, yes. My life, then, as chaotic as it has become, is really just a complex system.

In chapter 2, Syverson discusses the implication of complex systems on composition studies  in relation to poet, Charles Reznikoff. Reznikoff was known to be a solitary soul, and so to impose a study of complex systems on him was rather interesting (even daring?). But, by the time Syverson is done with him, Reznikoff can be seen as a deeply social human being who composed his writing, you guessed it, within a complex system. And, if you think about Reznikoff’s social nature when you read his supposed solitary compositions, you can immediately notice that much of his writing is based on the interactions and relationships of people! Not so solitary, after all, huh? This Reznikoff couldn’t even keep his nose out of the business of his personal maids, of passersby, of people on the street!

Ready for more Fleck? Syverson says, “I think the perception of Reznikoff as a solitary soul is based on our inability to acknowledge the deep and varied social interactions in which his life was embedded, and upon which his texts depended, simply because so many of those interactions did not reflect the conventional expectations of his time (or  ours).” Duh! So, Reznikoff was an extremely social being, but because he went out for walks by himself and/or and had very small social circle, we saw him as a solitary man. Let’s see: I think, now that we are mentally and emotionally ready to do so, we can admit that social beings are not always those who regularly surround themselves with mobs of people. There are lots of ways to interact socially, even from the privacy of your own home! (Conventionality–UGH. That’s for Fleck!)

As for those pesky undergrads in chapter 3, I was intrigued by their conversations and the methods by which they composed collaboratively. I have written curriculum for my district with three other teachers, and had many of the same conversations, especially regarding interaction with technology and physical writing spaces. On page 119, Syverson writes (in relation to the undergrad collaborative writing assignment), “The composing process was compressed by one writer’s visit home and another writer’s trip out of town…” My comment: Isn’t the composition process ALWAYS compressed by one constraint or another? (deadlines, due dates, timeliness of topic, etc. etc.). I guess the only time the composition process is not compressed is when we have absolutely NO plan to share our work. Is a work of writing EVER truly finished?

And so, you see, even a book and boring looking and with such a tasteless subtitle can be interesting and relevant to our lives.  That’s our lesson for today. Sorry so windy. 

Brinkmannship UNDER CONSTRUCTION

Okay, so I’m ready to break out, to start having my say, to stop being afraid. I’m fairly certain that I can even speak my mind in mixed company–you know, mixed as in writing in the presence of the people of THE WORLD–and not get into too much trouble. It’s amazing that concept of free speech (listen to me calling free speech a concept when it’s an actual right) is alive and yet I contemplate being free with my speech via my blog.

 Soooooooooooooooo, now I have some big decisions to make. I need to focus my blog which,  to this point, has been all over the place and has not necessarily had people banging down its cyberdoors to respond.

 Here are my ideas:

Brinkmannship - “Musings of a post combat military wife” (I would say what I need to say about global affairs, post my pride in military service, and talk about the way my husband and I now live as a result of him having literally survived a war)

Brinkmannship - “What’s right is right!” OR “Ever wonder why it’s okay that…” OR “What’s going on here?” (I would focus on what I feel is going right and wrong in the world–not that I’m an expert, but I certainly have some pretty strong opinions. That way, weighing in on controversial issues would be completely appropriate.)

Brinkmannship - “Day in the life of an unknown rock star” (It’s no secret to the people who know me that I live like a rock star…Of course I don’t have the coin that rock stars have and I’m not famous AT ALL. Yet, I keep late hours, spend money like it’s my job, live for spontaneous adventures, and complicate what could be a very simple life. It’s difficult to live like every day is a party, but I do my best.)

Brinkmannship - “Whatever floats your boat…” (Here, I would focus my postings on my efforts to live my life doing what I want to do. So many people live their lives for their jobs, for other people, for the sake of earning money, because they feel obligated, etc., etc. I seek to live with and for that which fulfills me. That way, should anything cut my life short–sorry, how morbid–I will be able to die without regrets. Of course, this translates into Saturdays of watching movies while the dust bunnies procreate in the corner and allowing two years of leaves to remain scattered in the yard, killing what grass we could have. So, I guess my focus would be on me doing what I want and leaving many pesky and supposedly “responsible” tasks simply undone for the sake of fun and relaxation.

Brinkmannship - “Learning as I go…” (Is it too cheesy to have a blog about approaching life as a learning experience? A daily lesson? Could I even keep up with that? Maybe a weekly lesson? No, that’s not enough. Well, how about “Everything I’ve Learned, I’ve Posted on my Blog”? I might be onto something.

Now, it’s time to vote…I vote  on the last option and calling it “Everything I’ve learned, I’ve posted  on my blog” or “Everything I learn, I  post on my blog.” I could still discuss controversial issues on that type of blog, right? Here, let me try: I’ve learned that, suddenly, people are realizing that gun control laws are an infringement on one of our given rights, that being the 2nd Amendment!…and then my discussion would follow.

 ANYONE WILLING TO WEIGH IN HERE? VOTES AND SUGGESTIONS WELCOME!

Iraq five years later…the media today

There was a report on the World News (ABC news) tonight that was brought on by the 5 year anniversary of our military operations in Iraq. The tone of the report was completely offensive to me, as reporters spoke to family members of deployed military personnel…family members who were publicly sad and regretful. Family members who expressed a sense of despair as a result of their sons’ and daughters’ combat service. Community members who lamented the “loss” of military personnel who are not dead, but deployed.

 Of course people are saddened by situations of combat deployment. Of course it is scary to have a military family member serve in a war. There are tears and anxiety. I was there this time last year–I mean, I was here…and my husband was in Iraq.

I am offended by the negative tone of the report. What about pride? Where is the face of support? A family with three presently combat deployed soldiers (all brothers) was highlighted and at no time was the word pride mentioned. From my perspective, that family absolutely deserves press and attention for having three young men who are willing and able to serve our country so proudly!

 Remember, before we regret their combat service and feel sorry for our deployed military personnel: Ours is an ALL VOLUNTEER military. Those people for whom the media shows sadness and regret have volunteered. Our military men and women are brave and proud. Let’s be supportive, not sad, that there are people in our country who are ready and able to step up, even if “stepping up” means going to war. Let’s celebrate, not regret, military service.

Why are we debating a given right?

As found on Cornell University’s Law School website…

“Amendment II:  A well regulated militia, being necessary to the security of a free state, the right of the people to keep and bear arms, shall not be infringed. “

 My questions/comments:

How did the states ever even get to the point of having “legally” taken away our right to keep and bear arms? Do we really just turn the other way when state laws completely disregard our rights? Do people really believe that breaking our basic rights as U.S. citizens is the perfect way to keep guns off the streets? (News flash: Those who are killing people on the streets are NOT, for the most part, the same people who are trying to protect their rights to bear arms. Hunch: Criminals and sociopaths are not necessarily concerned with whether or not their arms bearing is legal.)

Hands off my hypertext (3.0)!

In the last chapter of his book, Hypertext 3.0, Landow quotes a testimony that was given before a congressional committee regarding the protection of intellectual property. In his testimony, Steven W. Gilbert said, “‘It may soon be technically possible for any student, teacher, or researcher to heave immediate electronic access from any location to retrieve and manipulate the full text (including pictures) of any book, sound recording, or computer program ever published–and more.’”

For a public educator in such a disgustingly litigious society, the notion of anyone manipulating anything that I write, post, etc. (let’s not even get into the whole picture thing–scary!!!) is a absolutely horrifying! Along with manipulation of  my carefully crafted words and censored pictures could quite possibly come the loss of my job, ruination of my personal and professional reputations…heck, even legal and criminal implications.

So, although I can certainly appreciate all that Landow says about the enrichment of texts (He uses Milton’s Paradise Lost as an example of a text that could be made more accessible and meaningful through hyperlinked notes, etc.), I am truly in fear of the concept of somebody altering my hypertext, or any of my text for that matter. YIKES! Paranoid much?

Hypersensitive to hypertext

Okay, so “The Unknown” was one thing, but “The Jew’s Daughter” (another hypertext) is quite another trip. I think I am too much of a control freak to enjoy the trickery behind this particular kind of hypertext. I don’t know what the technical language is for this flavor of hypertext (I have been reading George Landow’s Hypertext 3.0 and should well know my techy vocab, but, to tell you the truth, I’m a bit overwhelmed by they hyper-talk about hypertext–muddled is my mind.) Sorry, off topic.

 Okay, so where was I? That’s right: In hell with “The Jew’s Daughter” hypertext. Here’s how it works: You’re reading along and you finish reading a page. To get to the next “page” (lexia?), you must click on the highlighted/underlined word (a link, of course). Oh, okay, so the link brings me to the next page, right? WRONG! Well, sort of wrong. The link simply changes SOME of the text on what is essentially the same page–no difference visually, no indication of any forward progress, nothing except for just what you were looking at but with some of the words changed.

For me, time is money, so my natural tendancy is to skip over the parts that I’ve already read. Been there. Done that. (unfortunately, the site does not give out tee-shirts…okay, bad joke). What I’m saying is that I experienced neither success nor enjoyment while reading (or trying to read) “The Jew’s Daughter” because I was too busy obsessing over that which I had already read and that I was being asked to read the same words over and over again. Of course I get the concept: With every slight change, the entire idea of a page or a paragraph or a sentence, etc., etc., can change drastically. I get that. I just don’t appreciate the Groundhog Day feeling that I get from reading the same words over and over and over and over again.

 I hate complaining about course material. But I also hate spinning my wheels. Which do I hate more? Nah, not gonna be Dr. Death today. Not gonna have a hatred contest right here on my very own blog. Not today, anyway.

My friend, the Admiral, resigns…

Four Star Admiral William J. Fallon announced his resignation today because he is right. Right about the White House often making comments that do not help our diplomatic relations. Right about Afghanistan having suffered for our country’s dual military roles in Iraq and Afghanistan (I most certainly support both efforts, but to deny that fighting two wars puts a strain on our military personnel and resources is simple foolishness). Right about wanting to approach any and all world affairs FIRST from a diplomatic standpoint. And right about not being able to serve our country in the way he thinks is best if he has fundamental and irreconcilable differences with his commander.

The Admiral is right. And he is respectable. And he is quite possibly the most amazing military commander and diplomat this world has ever seen.

I write as if I know, personally. Well, I do know. I know Bill Fallon. I’ve known about him through my father for years; they were high school classmates. And I know, first hand, because I met and spent the day with Admiral Fallon back in October 2007. We talked about all kinds of things and on that day I realized that I was in the presence of greatness. This man, Admiral Fallon, was and is our world’s greatest shot at world peace.

Congratulations to the Admiral for always standing up for what he thinks is right, even to the extent that he sacrificed his own career rather than selling out, compromising his beliefs. I just e-mailed my family’s love and congratulations to the Admiral. I can only hope that he feels my support and that my support is echoed by his colleagues and friends worldwide.

 UPDATE: The Admiral’s resignation is being billed as a problem of perception, perception of irreconcilable differences. I say that even if it is a matter of perception, how amazing that Admiral Fallon would resign over what he considers to be a distraction. Make no mistake: Admiral Fallon will NOT, under ANY circumstances, sacrifice the safety and well-being of our military personnel, our mission(s) and our country. Thanks, Admiral!